MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE ADDITION GEOTECHNICAL ... · MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION...

MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE ADDITION GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

434 ADSUM DRIVE WINNIPEG, MANITOBA

Prepared for:

Maples Recreation Association c / o Wolfrom Engineering Ltd.

Winnipeg, Manitoba

February 2014 File #133656

MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE ii

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................ 1

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................................... 1

4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION .................................................................................................................. 2

5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................ 3

5.1 Clay Topsoil and Fill ............................................................................................................ 3 5.2 Clay ..................................................................................................................................... 3 5.3 Silt ....................................................................................................................................... 3 5.4 Silty Clay ............................................................................................................................. 3 5.5 Silt Till .................................................................................................................................. 3 5.6 Groundwater Conditions ..................................................................................................... 4

6.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 5

6.1 General ............................................................................................................................... 5 6.2 Foundations ........................................................................................................................ 5

6.2.1 Cast-in-Place Concrete Friction Piles ................................................................ 5 6.2.2 Precast Prestressed Hexagonal Concrete Piles ................................................ 6 6.2.3 Foundation Inspection and Dynamic Testing ..................................................... 7

6.3 Pile Caps and Grade Beams .............................................................................................. 7 6.4 Below Grade Walls.............................................................................................................. 8 6.5 Floor Slabs .......................................................................................................................... 8 6.6 Soccer Field ........................................................................................................................ 9 6.7 Exterior Pads ....................................................................................................................... 9 6.8 Pavements and Sidewalks .................................................................................................. 9 6.9 Excavations ....................................................................................................................... 10 6.10 Other Considerations ........................................................................................................ 10

7.0 CLOSURE ...................................................................................................................................... 11

List of Figures and Appendices

Figure 1 – Test Hole Location Plan Appendix A - Test Hole Logs

MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Dyregrov Robinson Inc. (DRI) has undertaken a geotechnical investigation for the proposed addition to the Maples Community Centre (MCC) which is located at 434 Adsum Drive in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions to provide recommendations for foundation design and other geotechnically related aspects of the development. The work was authorized by Mr. Eric Dearscey, MCC Complex Manager, on October 16th, 2013.

2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

We understand that the proposed new addition will be an indoor soccer complex. The complex will consist of a two-storey masonry building and a long span engineered steel building. The two-storey masonry building will have a steel structure, structural floor, and a partial basement. The complex will be attached to the east and north east sides of the existing Maples Recreation Association Rink as illustrated on Figure 1. We understand that the approximate maximum factored point loads are estimated at 300 kN for the masonry building and 600 kN for the long span steel building. It is also understood that the existing Community Centre will be demolished to facilitate construction of the new indoor soccer complex.

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS

The area of the proposed development is located in Adsum Park. The park consists of a multi-sport playing field comprised of soccer fields, basketball courts, outdoor hockey rinks, a baseball diamond, and a playground area. The Maples Recreation Association Rink, the existing Community Centre, and the Seven Oaks Pool are located in the park. The Maples Collegiate is located directly east of the park.

The proposed indoor soccer complex will be located over portions of existing asphalt paved parking lot and access roads and the grass covered field south of the Maples Recreation Association Rink and the existing Community Centre.


4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

Three test holes were drilled on November 8th, 2013 at the locations shown on Figure 1. The test holes were drilled by Subterranean (Manitoba) Ltd. using a truck-mounted Soilmec STM-20 drill rig equipped with a 400 mm diameter auger. The test holes were drilled to auger refusal which occurred at depths ranging between 16.5 and 16.7 m below the existing site grade. The subsurface conditions, including the soil profile, groundwater seepage and sloughing conditions, were logged by DRI during drilling of the test holes. Both disturbed (auger cuttings) and relatively undisturbed (Shelby tube) samples were recovered at regular intervals. The test holes were backfilled to grade with auger cuttings.

All soil samples were taken to our Soils Testing Laboratory for additional visual classification and testing. The testing consisted of the determination of moisture contents on all samples and measurement of bulk unit weights and undrained shear strengths on the Shelby tube samples. The soil profile, laboratory test results and drilling observations are included on the test hole logs attached in Appendix A.


5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The general soil stratigraphy encountered from site grade generally consists of clay topsoil overlying layers of clay and silt and deposits of silty clay and glacial silt till.

5.1 Clay Topsoil and Fill

A layer of clay topsoil was encountered at the ground surface in all test holes and it ranges in thickness between 75 and 100 mm. The clay topsoil is silty, black in color, dry, and contains trace organics.

In Test Holes 1 and 2, a sand and gravel fill layer was encountered below the topsoil. It is about 300 mm thick, brown in color and dry. The moisture content of the sand and gravel fill ranges between 8 and 14 percent.

5.2 Clay

A thin clay layer was encountered below the topsoil or the sand and gravel fill layer. It is 0.2 m thick in Test Hole 3 and about 1 m thick in Test Holes 1 and 2. The clay is silty, brown in color, stiff, dry to moist, and of high plasticity. The moisture content of the clay is around 32 percent.

5.3 Silt

A silt layer was encountered in all test holes below the clay layer at depths ranging between 0.3 and 1.5 m below ground surface. The silt is about 1 m thick in Test Holes 1 and 2 and 2.7 m thick in Test Hole 3. It is brown in color, loose, moist to wet, and contains traces of clay and sand. The moisture content is around 22 percent.

5.4 Silty Clay

Lake Agassiz lacustrine silty clay was encountered below the silt layer at a depth of 2.4 m in Test Holes 1 and 2 and at a depth of 3 m in Test Hole 3. The silty clay is about 11 m thick and extends to depths of about 13 to 14 m below ground surface. The silty clay is mottled brown and grey in color and moist to about 5 m below which it is grey and wet. The clay has high plasticity and a firm to stiff consistency becoming firm below a depth of about 7 m. The undrained shear strengths range from about 20 to 95 kPa with an average of around 45 kPa. The moisture content of the clay is generally in the range of 50 to 65 percent to a depth of 10 m below which it varies from about 40 to 70 percent.

5.5 Silt Till

Glacial silt till was encountered beneath the silty clay at depths of about 13 to 14 m. The glacial till in Winnipeg is known to be a heterogeneous mixture of sand, gravel, cobble and boulder size materials in a silt and / or clay matrix. The glacial silt till encountered in the test holes contained trace to some clay, trace sand and trace gravel. Cobbles and boulders were also encountered in the test holes. The silt till is brown or grey in color, loose and moist to wet with moisture contents ranging from 10 to 16 percent. The


silt till extended to the depth of the test holes which were drilled to auger refusal. Auger refusal occurred at depths of 16.5 and 16.7 m below grade and is suspected to have occurred on bedrock or boulder(s).

5.6 Groundwater Conditions

Minor amounts of groundwater seepage and sloughing of the silt layer were observed in all three test holes.

Significant groundwater seepage from the glacial silt till layer occurred after drilling to depths of 14 m, 14.9 m and 16.5 m in Test Holes 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Upon completion of drilling, the water level in the test holes was measured at depths of 6.7 m, 9.0 m and 5.8 m below grade in Test Holes 1, 2 and3, respectively. The rate of seepage and the water level measured in the test holes suggests that limestone bedrock maybe present at or near the bottom of the test holes.

Groundwater levels should be expected to vary seasonally, from year to year and possibly as a result of construction activities.


6.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 General

We understand that the proposed new addition will be an indoor soccer complex. The complex will consist of a two-storey masonry building and a long span engineered steel building. The two-storey masonry building will have a steel structure, structural floor, and a partial basement. The complex will be attached to the east and north east sides of the existing Maples Recreation Association Rink as illustrated on Figure 1. We understand that the approximate maximum factored point loads are estimated at 300 kN for the masonry building and 600 kN for the long span steel building. It is also understood that the existing Community Centre will be demolished to facilitate construction of the new indoor soccer complex.

6.2 Foundations

Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the test holes and our understanding of the proposed development, both cast-in-place concrete friction piles and driven end bearing precast prestressed concrete hexagonal piles are considered to be feasible foundation alternatives.

6.2.1 Cast-in-Place Concrete Friction Piles

Cast-in-place concrete friction piles can be designed in accordance to the current Manitoba Building Code using a service limit state (SLS) shaft adhesion value of 13.3 kPa and for the ultimate limit state (ULS) case the pile capacity can be evaluated using a factored shaft adhesion value of 16.0 kPa and a factored ULS end bearing pressure of 125 kPa. A resistance factor of 0.4 was used to calculate the ULS shaft adhesion and end bearing pressure. Under the SLS loads, the pile settlements are expected to be around 6 mm with differential settlements between piles around 3 to 6 mm.

When determining effective pile lengths, the upper 3 m of the pile shaft below existing site grade and / or 1.5 m below the basement level, whichever is greater, should be ignored to account for the presence of fill and silt layers and the potential for clay shrinkage away from the pile. The piles should not extend deeper than 12 m below existing ground to avoid penetrating into the glacial till. Concrete should be placed as soon as possible after drilling.

Piles should have a minimum spacing of 3 pile diameters on centre, including separations from the existing foundations of the Maples Recreation Association Rink. Where this spacing cannot be achieved DRI should be contacted for additional input. Small groups and pairs of friction piles can be considered for heavier column loads.

Temporary steel sleeves should be on site and used where sloughing (caving) of the pile borings occur and / or if groundwater seepage is encountered.

Piles that are subjected to freezing conditions must be protected from potential frost heave effects by using minimum pile lengths of 7.6 m and full length reinforcement. The use of flat lying rigid insulation,


such as Styrofoam HI, can also be used to prevent or minimize frost penetration into the soil around the piles if the minimum pile length cannot be achieved.

6.2.2 Precast Prestressed Hexagonal Concrete Piles

Driven end bearing precast prestressed concrete hexagonal (PPCH) piles driven to practical refusal into the glacial silt till or on bedrock may be designed using the SLS and factored ULS pile capacities provided in Table 1. Under the SLS loads, pile settlements are expected to be around 6 mm with differential settlements between piles around 3 to 6 mm. The depth to practical refusal will likely vary across the site and may be deeper than indicated on the test hole logs. Some piles may be driven out of alignment and/or damaged during driving if boulders are present in the glacial till.

Table 1: PPCH Pile Capacities

PPCH Pile Size

Pile Capacities SLS Unfactored

ULS Factored ULS Capacities

ϕ = 0.4 ϕ = 0.5 ϕ = 0.6 (mm) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) 300 445 1100 440 550 660 350 625 1560 624 780 936 400 800 2000 800 1000 1200

We recommend that a resistance factor of 0.6 be used for design provided that dynamic load testing with CAPWAP analysis is performed during foundation installation. Dynamic load testing will provide data on the driving energy delivered to the pile and the driving stresses (tensile and compressive) in the piles. The CAPWAP analysis will utilize the data collected to provide a mobilized static pile capacity that can be compared to the unfactored and factored ULS pile capacities. The details of the dynamic load testing program can be finalized once the foundation layout has been established. Approximately 2 percent of the piles should be tested during pile installation under restrike conditions however; the number of piles to be tested will depend on the size of the building area and the number and sizes of piles to be installed. The piles to be tested will need at least 1.2 m of pile shaft above local grade around the pile to facilitate the testing.

The piles can be driven with diesel pile hammers having a rated energy of not less than 40 kilojoules. Hydraulic drop hammers can also be used provided they have a rated energy not less than 19.5 kilojoules. The rated energy for hydraulic drop hammers is less than for diesel hammers due to the high efficiency of this type of pile hammer. The driving stresses (compressive and tensile) in the piles should not exceed the limits specified by the pile manufacturer.

The pile driving criteria should be confirmed once the type of pile hammer proposed for use on this project is provided. Conventionally, practical refusal has been defined as final penetration resistance sets of 5, 8 and 12 blows per 25 mm (or less) for the 300, 350 and 400 mm diameter pile sizes, respectively. At least three consecutive sets should be obtained for each pile. If followers are used, the final penetration resistance should be increased by 50 percent; that is, 8, 12 and 18 blows per 25 mm for 300, 350 and 400 mm diameter pile sizes, respectively.


Construction practice in Winnipeg normally includes preboring be done at driven pile locations. The prebore holes are usually drilled to diameters that are 50 mm larger than the pile size and to depths of about 3 m. Preboring is effective in reducing pile heave and contributes positively to pile verticality.

Pile spacing for these piles should not be less than 2.5 pile diameters, centre to centre. No reduction in individual pile capacity is necessary for reasons related to group action provided that pile heave is monitored, measures are undertaken to minimize pile heave (i.e. preboring), and redriving is completed when pile heave greater than 6 mm is measured. Redriving of all piles in groups or clusters should be specified along with the requirement to monitor for pile heave.

The existing Maples Recreation Association Rink may require additional consideration in regards to the installation of PPCH piles which can result in some ground vibrations and heave during installation. Piles installed near the adjacent rink may result in localized ground heave which could affect some of the existing nearby foundations, grade beams, and floor slabs. The amount of heave, if any, will be related to the clear distance between the new and existing foundations, the density of the new foundations, and the depth of prebore used for the new piles. The prebore depth can be reviewed during detailed design if there are concerns about the potential for ground heave. The existing building should be monitored for signs of heave during pile installation.

6.2.3 Foundation Inspection and Dynamic Testing

Based on Sub-Sections 4.2.2.3 Field Review and 4.2.2.4 Altered Subsurface Condition (ref: NBC 2010 Section 4.2 Foundations) and as the Geotechnical Engineers of record for this project we recommend that the deep foundations be inspected on a full time basis by geotechnical personnel from our firm who are familiar with the subsurface conditions at this site, the foundation design considerations and the installation of major foundations.

If driven PPCH piles are to be installed based on a resistance factor of 0.6, dynamic testing and CAPWAP analysis should be performed by DRI.

6.3 Pile Caps and Grade Beams

A void separation of at least 200 mm should be provided under grade beams and pile caps. A vapour barrier should be provided below grade beams and pile caps to minimize the potential for long term moisture changes within the underlying clay soils.


6.4 Below Grade Walls

Any permanent below grade walls which are required should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures that are derived on the basis of the following conventional relationship which produces a triangular pressure distribution:

P = K D

where P = lateral earth pressure at depth D (kPa) K = at rest earth pressure coefficient (0.5) = soil/backfill unit weight (17 kN/m³) D = depth from finished grade to point of pressure calculation (m)

The base of the wall should be provided with a filter-protected positive drainage system to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure against the wall. The selection of backfill materials should be reviewed during the design and their impact on the foregoing pressures assessed.

6.5 Floor Slabs

In areas where there is no partial basement, we recommend the use of structurally supported floor slabs over a void space. This will avoid slab movements which are normally associated with slabs on grade due to the non-uniform subgrade conditions and the presence of high plastic clay soils at this site. A void separation between the slab and soil should be at least 200 mm thick. A vapour barrier should be provided below all floor slabs to minimize the potential for long term moisture changes within the underlying clay soils.

Floor slabs-on-grade are not recommended for this project. Heave or swelling movements will occur with slabs-on-grade and it is possible that the total heave could amount to as much as 100 mm in the long term. A major factor impacting the magnitude of floor slab movements, which will ultimately occur, are the climatic effects during construction which might impact changes in the subsoil moisture conditions. For this reason, it is not possible to assess the amount of heave which will occur with any degree of accuracy.

If a slab on grade is selected, the Owner must accept responsibility for the consequences of floor slab movements, and the floor slab should be isolated from fixed building components (e.g. grade beams) to allow movements without affecting the structure and other building components. The floor slab should not be placed against frozen soil. A minimum 150 mm thick leveling course of free draining gravel (e.g. 19 mm down crushed limestone compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density) beneath the slab is recommended. The granular base materials will need to be placed on a prepared subgrade.

Clay topsoil, deleterious materials, existing pavements and silt should be stripped from the sub-grade surface prior to preparation. The sub-grade should be uniformly compacted to at least 95 of the standard Proctor maximum dry density before the granular base material is placed. The presence of the shallow silt layer may present some difficulties with compacting the subgrade. The subgrade should be proof rolled with a fully loaded tandem gravel truck to check for soft areas. Areas identified as being weak or


soft during proof rolling should be stabilized by additional re-working and compaction or removal and replacement with suitable material. Silt can be bridged with a woven geotextile to provide separation and reinforcement. The geotextile should meet the requirements of the City of Winnipeg’s Standard Construction Specifications, CW3130 for the Supply and Installation of Geotextile Fabrics.

6.6 Soccer Field

If the recommendations for floor slabs in the previous section are not suitable for design of the soccer field playing surface, DRI should be contacted to provide additional recommendations to best suit the local subsurface conditions and the performance requirements for the playing field.

6.7 Exterior Pads

Where exterior pads are required to support equipment, the pads can be a slab-on-grade design or a structural pad supported on cast-in-place friction piles. Friction piles should be used if seasonal movements on the order of 50 mm, some of which may be differential in nature, cannot be tolerated.

If a slab-on-grade pad is selected it can be designed with an SLS bearing pressure of 100 kPa and a factored ULS bearing pressure of 150 kPa. The pad should be placed on a 300 mm thick (minimum) layer of crushed limestone (19 mm down gradation) compacted to 95 percent of the standard Proctor dry density. The crushed limestone should extend at least 300 mm beyond the perimeter of the concrete pad. The subgrade should be prepared by removing the topsoil, existing pavement materials and other deleterious materials down to stiff native clay.

6.8 Pavements and Sidewalks

Given the dry conditions in the upper 1 to 2 m of the soils at this site, some heaving of paved parking surfaces and sidewalks should be expected due to natural increases in the moisture content of the clay soils. The amount of heave cannot be predicted with any accuracy, however, we suggest that overtime it could be in the order of 50 to 100 mm. The impact of these movements will be most noticeable where there are pavement surfaces and sidewalks adjacent to the building. Some maintenance work may be required in the future.

Light duty asphalt pavements can be designed using 50 mm of asphalt placed on 200 mm of crushed granular base material. If heavy duty traffic is expected in some areas of the site the pavement section could consist of 75 mm of asphaltic concrete placed on 380 mm of crushed granular base course. For heavy duty traffic areas, such as refuse pick up areas, the pavement section should consist of 200 mm of reinforced concrete over 200 mm of crushed granular base course. All of these pavement sections should be installed on a prepared subgrade.

The granular base material should consist of 19 mm down crushed limestone material compacted to 98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density and should be placed over a uniformly prepared subgrade. Clay topsoil, deleterious materials and silt should be stripped from the sub-grade surface prior to preparation. The sub-grade should be uniformly compacted to at least 95 of the standard Proctor


maximum dry density before the granular base material is placed. The presence of the shallow silt layer may present some difficulties with compacting the subgrade. The subgrade should be proof rolled with a fully loaded tandem gravel truck to check for soft areas. Areas identified as being weak or soft during proof rolling should be stabilized by additional re-working and compaction or removal and replacement with suitable material. Thick layers of silt are not practical to remove but can be bridged with a woven geotextile to provide separation and reinforcement. The geotextile should meet the requirements of the City of Winnipeg’s Standard Construction Specifications, CW3130 for the Supply and Installation of Geotextile Fabrics.

Sidewalk design and construction should meet the requirements of the City of Winnipeg’s Standard Construction Specifications, CW3325-R5 for the Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk. The concrete should be 100 mm thick with at least 50 mm of compacted granular base installed over a prepared sub-grade.

6.9 Excavations

All excavation work should be completed by the Contractor in accordance with the current Manitoba Workplace Health and Safety Regulations to suit the planned and expected construction activities and schedule.

6.10 Other Considerations

It is recommended that all concrete in contact with clay soil should be of high quality and manufactured with sulphate-resistant cement.

Positive site drainage away from the structure should be provided at a gradient of at least 2 percent where ever possible.


7.0 CLOSURE

This report was prepared based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the test holes drilled for the

geotechnical investigation and our understanding of the proposed development. Subsurface conditions

are inherently variable and should be expected to vary across the site.

This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the Maples Recreation Association, Wolfrom

Engineering Ltd., and their agents for the proposed Maples Community Centre Addition located at 434

Adsum Drive in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The information and recommendations contained in this report shall

not be used by any third parties for other projects. The findings and recommendations in this report have

been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practise.

No other warranty, expressed or implied, is provided.

DYREGROV ROBINSON INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS

MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE ADDITION TEST HOLE LOCATION PLAN

SCALE: NTS

MADE BY: CR

CHKD BY: GR

PROJECT NO. 133656

DATE: DECEMBER 2013

FIGURE 1

TEST HOLE (TH) LOCATION

TH-3

N

TH-2

TH-1

APPENDIX A

Test Hole Logs

DYREGROV ROBINSON INC. 1 Terms and Symbols

EXPLANATION OF TERMS & SYMBOLS

Description TH Log Symbols

USCS Classification

Laboratory Classification Criteria

Fines (%)

Grading Plasticity Notes

CO

AR

SE

GR

AIN

ED

SO

ILS

GRAVELS (More than

50% of coarse

fraction of gravel size)

CLEAN GRAVELS (Little or no

fines)

Well graded gravels, sandy gravels, with little

or no fines GW 0-5

CU > 4 1 < CC < 3

Dual symbols if 5-12% fines.

Dual symbols if above “A” line and

4<WP<7

10

60

D

DCU

6010

2

30

xDD

DCC

Poorly graded gravels, sandy gravels, with little

or no fines GP 0-5

Not satisfying GW

requirements

DIRTY GRAVELS (With some

fines)

Silty gravels, silty sandy gravels

GM > 12 Atterberg limits below “A” line

or WP<4

Clayey gravels, clayey sandy gravels

GC > 12 Atterberg limits above “A” line

or WP<7

SANDS (More than

50% of coarse

fraction of sand size)

CLEAN SANDS

(Little or no fines)

Well graded sands, gravelly sands, with little

or no fines SW 0-5

CU > 6 1 < CC < 3

Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, with little

or no fines

SP 0-5 Not satisfying

SW requirements

DIRTY SANDS

(With some fines)

Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures

SM > 12 Atterberg limits below “A” line

or WP<4

Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures

SC > 12 Atterberg limits above “A” line

or WP<7

FIN

E G

RA

INE

D S

OIL

S

SILTS (Below ‘A’

line negligible organic content)

WL<50 Inorganic silts, silty or clayey fine sands, with

slight plasticity ML

Classification is Based upon

Plasticity Chart

WL>50 Inorganic silts of high

plasticity MH

CLAYS (Above ‘A’

line negligible organic content)

WL<30 Inorganic clays, silty clays, sandy clays of

low plasticity, lean clays CL

30<WL<50 Inorganic clays and silty

clays of medium plasticity

CI

WL>50 Inorganic clays of high

plasticity, fat clays

CH

ORGANIC SILTS & CLAYS

(Below ‘A’ line)

WL<50 Organic silts and

organic silty clays of low plasticity

OL

WL>50 Organic clays of high

plasticity OH

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Peat and other highly

organic soils

Pt Von Post

Classification Limit Strong colour or odour, and often

fibrous texture

Asphalt

Glacial Till

Bedrock (Igneous)

DYREGROV ROBINSON INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS

Concrete

Clay Shale

Bedrock (Limestone)

Fill

Bedrock (Undifferentiated)

DYREGROV ROBINSON INC. 2 Terms and Symbols

FRACTION PARTICLE SIZE

(mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS

(by weight) Min. Max.

Boulders >300 Percent Descriptor

Cobbles 75 300 >35% main fraction

Gravel Coarse 19 75

35 - 50 “and” Fine 4.75 19

Sand

Coarse 2.0 4.75 20 – 35

Adjective e.g. silty, clayey

Medium 0.425 2.0

Fine 0.075 0.425 10 – 20 “some”

Silt (non-plastic) or Clay (plastic)

< 0.075 mm 1 - 10 “trace”

Soil Classification Example

Clay 50% (main fraction), Silt 25%, Sand 17%, Gravel 8%

Clay – silty, some sand, trace gravel

TERMS and SYMBOLS

Laboratory and field tests are identified as follows:

Unconfined Comp.: undrained shear strength (kPa or psf) derived from unconfined compression testing.

Torvane: undrained shear strength (kPa or psf) measured using a Torvane

Pocket Pen.: undrained shear strength (kPa or psf) measured using a pocket penetrometer.

Unit Weight bulk unit weight of soil or rock (kN/m3 or pcf).

SPT – N Standard Penetration Test: The number of blows (N) required to drive a 51 mm O.D. split barrel sampler

300 mm into the soil using a 63.5 kg hammer with a free fall drop height of 760 mm.

DCPT Dynamic Cone Penetration Test. The number of blows (N) required to drive a 50 mm diameter cone 300 mm

into the soil using a 63.5 kg hammer with a free fall drop height of 760 mm.

M/C insitu soil moisture content in percent

PL Plastic limit, moisture content in percent

LL Liquid limit, moisture content in percent

The undrained shear strength (Su) of cohesive soil The SPT - N of non-cohesive soil is related to is related to its consistency as follows: compactness condition as follows:

Su (kPa) Su (psf) CONSISTENCY

<12 250 very soft

12 – 25 250 – 525 soft

25 – 50 525 – 1050 firm

50 – 100 1050 – 2100 stiff

100 – 200 2100 – 4200 very stiff

200 4200 hard

References:

ASTM D2487 – Classification of Soils For Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System) Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual, 4

th Edition, Canadian Geotechnical Society, 2006

N – Blows / 300 mm COMPACTNESS

0 - 4 very loose

4 - 10 loose

10 - 30 compact

30 - 50 dense

50 + very dense

END OF TEST HOLE AT 16.5 m IN SILT TILL (AUGER REFUSAL)Notes:1. Auger refusal on suspected bedrock or boulder(s).2. Some sloughing and trace seepage observed from silt layer.3. Seepage from glacial till observed after drilling to 14.0 m. Water level measured at 6.7 m below ground surface after drilling.4. Test hole backfilled with auger cuttings.

CLAY ( Topsoil t=75 mm) - silty, black, trace organicsSAND and GRAVEL (Fill) - brown, dryCLAY - silty, grey, stiff, moistSILT - trace sand- brown, loose, moist to wet

CLAY - silty- mottled brown and grey- stiff, moist, high plasticity- trace silt inclusions- grey, wet below 3.9 m

- firm below 9.1 m

- trace till inclusions below 10.6 m

SILT (Till) - some clay, trace sand, trace gravel- grey- loose, moist to wet- trace boulders below 13.4 m

- compact to dense, moist below 16.2 m

G1

G2

G3

G4

T5

G6

T7

G8

T9

G10

G11

G12G13

G14G15

G16

G17

DE

PT

H (

m)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

METHOD: Soilmec STM-20 - 400 mm Diameter Auger

TESTHOLE NO: 1PROJECT NO.: 133656ELEVATION (m): 99.514

BULK

PROJECT: Maples Community Centre AdditionLOCATION: 33 m south and 50 m east from the southeast corner of the existing ice rinkCONTRACTOR: Subterranean Ltd.

CORE

SLOUGH GROUT

SHELBY TUBE

CUTTINGSGRAVELBACKFILL TYPE SANDBENTONITE

SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SPLIT SPOON

Page 1 of 1

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

99

98

97

96

95

94

93

92

91

90

89

88

87

86

85

84

LOGGED BY: CRREVIEWED BY: GRPROJECT ENGINEER: Gil Robinson

COMPLETION DEPTH: 16.46 mCOMPLETION DATE: 11/08/13

NO RECOVERY

CLIENT: Maples Recreation Association20

13

1336

56)

MA

PLE

S R

EC

AS

SO

C.G

PJ

DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E -

AU

GU

ST

2, 2

013.

GD

T

04/0

2/1

4

Consulting Geotechnical EngineersDYREGROV ROBINSON INC.

.

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOIL DESCRIPTION

SPT N blows/300mm

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Unit Weight kN/m³

12 14 16 18 20 22 24

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

LL PLM/C (%)

Unconfined Comp. (Su) kPa

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Torvane (Su) kPa

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Pocket Pen. (Su) kPa

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

SA

MP

LE #

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

END OF TEST HOLE AT 16.7 m IN SILT TILL (AUGER REFUSAL)Notes:1. Auger refusal on suspected bedrock / boulder(s).2. Slight seepage and sloughing observed from silt layer.3. Seepage observed after drilling to 14.9 m. Water level measured at 9.0 m below ground surface after drilling.4. Test hole backfilled with auger cuttings.

CLAY (Topsoil t=75 mm) - silty, black, trace organicsSAND and GRAVEL - brown, dryCLAY - silty, black, stiff, moist, high plasticity

SILT - trace clay, trace sand- brown, wet

CLAY - silty- mottled brown and grey- stiff, moist, high plasticity- trace silt inclusions

- grey, wet below 6.0 m

- firm below 9.1 m

- trace boulders below 12.5 m

SILT (Till) - trace clay, trace sand, trace gravel, tracecobbles- grey- loose, moist to wet

G18

G19

G20

T21

G22

T23

G24

T25

G26

G27

G28

G29

G30

DE

PT

H (

m)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16



BULK

PROJECT: Maples Community Centre AdditionLOCATION: 70 m south from the southeast corner of the existing ice rinkCONTRACTOR: Subterranean Ltd.

CORE

SLOUGH GROUT

SHELBY TUBE



Page 1 of 1

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

99

98

97

96

95

94

93

92

91

90

89

88

87

86

85

84

83



NO RECOVERY


13

1336

56)

MA

PLE

S R

EC

AS

SO

C.G

PJ

DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E -

AU

GU

ST

2, 2

013.

GD

T

04/0

2/1

4


.

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOIL DESCRIPTION

SPT N blows/300mm

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Unit Weight kN/m³

12 14 16 18 20 22 24

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

LL PLM/C (%)


10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Torvane (Su) kPa

10 20 30 40 50 60 70


10 20 30 40 50 60 70

SA

MP

LE #

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

96

END OF TEST HOLE AT 16.7 m IN SILT TILL (AUGER REFUSAL)Notes:1. Auger refusal on suspected bedrock / boulder(s).2. Slight seepage and sloughing observed from silt layer.3. Seepage observed after drilling to 16.5 m. Water level measured at 5.8 m below ground surface after drilling.4. Test hole backfilled with auger cuttings.

CLAY (Topsoil t=100 mm) - silty, black, trace organicsCLAY - silty - blackSILT - trace clay- brown- loose, moist to wet

CLAY - silty- mottled brown and grey- stiff, moist, high plasticity- trace silt inclusions- grey below 4.8 m

- wet below 6.0 m

- firm below 8.0 m

- trace till inclusions below 10.6 m

SILT (Till) - trace clay, trace sand, trace gravel- brown- loose, wet- trace boulders at 14.0 m

G31G32

G33

G34

G35

T36

G37

T38

G39

G40

G41

G42G43G44

G45

G46

DE

PT

H (

m)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16



BULK

PROJECT: Maples Community Centre AdditionLOCATION: 26 m north and 42 m west from the northeast corner of the existing ice rinkCONTRACTOR: Subterranean Ltd.

CORE

SLOUGH GROUT

SHELBY TUBE



Page 1 of 1

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

99

98

97

96

95

94

93

92

91

90

89

88

87

86

85

84

83



NO RECOVERY


13

1336

56)

MA

PLE

S R

EC

AS

SO

C.G

PJ

DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E -

AU

GU

ST

2, 2

013.

GD

T

04/0

2/1

4


.

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOIL DESCRIPTION

SPT N blows/300mm

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Unit Weight kN/m³

12 14 16 18 20 22 24

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

LL PLM/C (%)


10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Torvane (Su) kPa

10 20 30 40 50 60 70


10 20 30 40 50 60 70

SA

MP

LE #

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE ADDITION GEOTECHNICAL ... · MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION...

Documents

Transcript of MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE ADDITION GEOTECHNICAL ... · MAPLES COMMUNITY CENTRE 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION...