STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
-
Upload
deepak-kumar-mallick -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
1/48
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT
FOR
PROPOSED SHORT TERM PARKING GARAGE EXPANSION AT
CLEVELAND HOPKINS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIOJ&L PROJECT NO. JL10773
PREPARED FOR
C&S ENGINEERS, INC
PREPARED BY
J&L LABORATORIES, INC.215 Rainbow Street
Wadsworth Ohio 44281Tel (330) 335-0606 Fax (330) 335-0908
August 1, 2010
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
2/48
August 1, 2010
Mr. Matthew J . Wenham, P.E.C&S Engineers, Inc.One International Place20445 Emerald Parkway, Suite 100Cleveland, OH 44135
Tel: (216) 619-5449 fax (216) 619-5453Email: [email protected]
Ref.: Geotechnical Exploration for Parking Garage Expansion
Cleveland Hopkins International Airpor t (CHIA)
Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio
J&L Proposal No.: JL101309
J&L Project No.: JL10773
Dear Mr. Wenham:
Enclosed, please find the Subsurface Investigation Report for the above referencedproject. Our services included field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, andrelated design and construction recommendations. These services have been provided inaccordance with our proposal prepared on April 27, 2010.
We appreciate the opportunity of working with you on this project and we invite you tocontact us at (330) 335-0606 when we can be of further assistance.
Respectfully,
J&L Laboratories, Inc.
J ohn Xu, P.E.Project Manager
J X:lcEnclosurespc File: 10773r1.doc
J&LLABORATORIES, INC. 215 RAINBOW STREET ph. (330) 335-0606WADSWORTH, OH 44281 fax (330) 335-0908
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
3/48
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................11.1 Project Description.......................................................................................................11.2 Authorization................................................................................................................. 11.3 Scope of Services.........................................................................................................1
2.0 RECONNAISSANCE .............................................................................................................22.1 General Geological Setting........................................................................................... 22.2 Known and Probable Karst in the Site Area.................................................................22.3 Earthquake...................................................................................................................32.4 Underground Mines......................................................................................................3
3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION...........................................................................................33.1 Planning........................................................................................................................33.2 Exploratory Test Boring................................................................................................ 33.3 Sample Analysis...........................................................................................................4
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...............................................................................................44.1 Subsurface Soil and Rock Conditions..........................................................................44.2 Groundwater Conditions...............................................................................................5
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................65.1 Conclusions and Foundation Options...........................................................................6
6.0 Limitations ...........................................................................................................................7APPENDIX....................................................................................................................................8
Site Location MapApproximate Test Boring LocationsKnown and Probable Karst in Ohio - MapEarthquake Fault Lines in Ohio - MapEarthquake Epicenter in Erie County, Ohio MapSeismic Wave Testing Report
Test Boring LogsSummary of Laboratory Test ResultUnified Soil Classification System
Laboratory Test StandardsDescription of Soil and Rock
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
4/48
Proposed Shor t Term Parking Garage Expansion at CHIACleveland, Cuyahoga County , Ohio
Page 1
J&L Laboratories, Inc.10773r1.doc /8/1/2010
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project DescriptionThis report has been prepared for a developed site in the northern portion of the City of
Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio. The report represents the intent of the project owner, City
of Cleveland, and the project design engineer, C&S Engineers, Inc. (the client), to secure
subsurface information at selected locations which will aid the project design engineer in
preparation of the STG Expansion Facility Study.
The City of Cleveland is planning to expand the existing short term parking garage (STG)
at Cleveland, Hopkins International Airport (CHIA) in Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio. The
site is located between the exiting short term and long term parking garages next to Park Road.
The potential site for horizontal expansion is currently used as overflow parking. The site is
generally flat with asphalt pavement in most of the areas. According to our past experience
working in the general area, bedrock including shale, silty Shale or sandstone may be found at
depth more than 100 feet in the area and depth of rock becomes shallower few miles on the
northwest of the site.
The purpose of the investigation is to sample and test soil and rock and to provide
additional subgrade information for the project design. The scope of services is limited to a
geotechnical investigation and preliminary design parameters.
1.2 Authorization
C&S Engineers requested a proposal, for the above-mentioned project, from J&L
Laboratories, Inc. on March 23, 2010. We submitted proposals on April 14 and April 27, 2010
for the geotechnical exploration. The proposals were approved and written authorization to
proceed with the project was given in writing by C&S Engineers on May 18, 2010.
1.3 Scope of Services
The detailed scope of services for this project was outlined in J &L proposal No. P101309dated April 27, 2010. J &Ls scope of services for field investigation included advancing six (6)
test borings to depths ranging from 40 to 100 feet, installing 100 feet PVC casing, conducting
seismic shear wave velocity measurements in the casing. Laboratory tests and a brief
exploration report were included. Preparation of detailed geotechnical recommendations is
beyond our scope of services for this project.
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
5/48
Proposed Shor t Term Parking Garage Expansion at CHIACleveland, Cuyahoga County , Ohio
Page 2
J&L Laboratories, Inc.10773r1.doc /8/1/2010
The scope of services did not include any environmental assessments for the presence or
absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or
air, on or below or around this site. Any statements in this report regarding odors, colors or
unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for the information for the client.
2.0 RECONNAISSANCE
J &L personnel performed site and in-house reconnaissance prior to field exploration for
the project. The reconnaissance consisted of reviewing of available project information,
geological information, our past project experience in the vicinity of the site area, and our
cursory site visits. The following paragraphs outline the information obtained from the
reconnaissance.
2.1 General Geological Setting
The project site lies on the glaciated, relatively smooth but dissected Mississippi Valley
Plain, bordered on the west by the Rocky River, at an approximate elevation of 750 feet. The
Wisconsin glacier passed over the area but in general left only a thin coating of drift, averaging
less than 25 feet. Bedrock in the area consisted of mainly Devonian age shale or siltstone.
Depth of bedrock in the general area varies from 13 to 200 feet. Due to the projects location at
the airport, fill materials can be found in the vicinity of the general site areas.
According to the Cuyahoga County Soil Survey Report dated December 2007, soils in the
site area consisted of mainly Urban Land-Mahoning Association. Generally, these soils
consisted of poorly drained, silty and loamy glacial till, on uplands and lake plain. These soils
may be classified as CL, CL-ML, ML, SM, and SC according to Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS).
2.2 Known and Probable Karst in the Site Area
Information obtained from Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), Division of
Natural Resources, no known Karst topography (i.e. sinkhole areas) in the vicinity of theCuyahoga County area was found. A map of Ohio Known Karst Areas is attached in the
appendix of the report.
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
6/48
Proposed Shor t Term Parking Garage Expansion at CHIACleveland, Cuyahoga County , Ohio
Page 3
J&L Laboratories, Inc.10773r1.doc /8/1/2010
2.3 Earthquake
The site is in the vicinity of recorded earthquake epicenters according to Ohio Earthquake
Epicenters Map. The Ohio earthquake fault line map also indicated that one fault line was
noted in vicinity of the site area. According to Ohios Building Code (2007), Table 1615.1.1, thissite may be in Site Class D with estimated Shear Wave Velocity Vs of 600 to 1,200 (ft/s). This
estimation is done only based on Standard Penetration Test Result and general soil type. Since
a seismic wave measurement field test was performed done on J uly 9th 2010 in boring B-2 on
this site, more accurate information is outlined in the attached report.
2.4 Underground Mines
Information obtained from Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), Division of
Mines, no known underground mines are located in the vicinity of the project site area.
3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
3.1 Planning
C&S Engineers selected the test-boring locations and investigative program. A total of six
(6) test borings were planned for the soil study. The client provided preliminary site plan and
staked all test boring locations in the field. These test boring locations are shown on the
attached figure - "Approximate Test Boring Locations" in the appendix of this report. All test
boring locations were mapped by the client. Grade elevations of these test borings were not
provided to us presently. Therefore, depths are used in our report and each boring log. The
project site is occupied by existing parking lots or landscaping grass or trees. Due to the site
conditions, an ATV drilling rig was used for the site exploration.
J &L personnel contacted Ohio Utility Protection Services (OUPS), Oil & Gas Producers
Underground Protection Services (OGPUPS), project owner, and utility companies whose
names were made available to us prior to commencing test-boring operations. The field drilling
operation was delayed nearly a month due to the underground utility clearance process.
3.2 Exploratory Test Boring
The field explorations were performed in accordance with applicable ASTM Specifications.
A CME D-750 ATV-mount drilling rig was mobilized to advance the test borings on May 20,
2010, J une 22, 2010 through J une 30, 2010. Representative disturbed samples of soil were
collected at center-to-center interval of 5.0 (or 2.5 at few sampling depths) feet and a Standard
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
7/48
Proposed Shor t Term Parking Garage Expansion at CHIACleveland, Cuyahoga County , Ohio
Page 4
J&L Laboratories, Inc.10773r1.doc /8/1/2010
Penetration Test (ASTM D-1586) were performed at each sampling interval. Undisturbed thin-
walled, Shelby tube sample (in accordance with ASTM D-1587) was attempted in boring B-1. A
2 ID schedule 40 PVC casing was installed in the boring B-2 for Seismic Wave measurement
purpose. The Seismic wave measurement was conducted in the field on July 9, 2010 byGrumman Exploration, Inc.
Test borings were monitored for the presence of groundwater during and upon completion
of the drilling operations before filling the borehole. Long term groundwater monitoring was not
planned for the project. The test drilling logs, included in the Appendix of this report, show the
SPT resistance (N) values for each soil sample obtained in the test borings, and present the
classification and description of soils or rock encountered at various depths in the test borings.
3.3 Sample AnalysisA geotechnical engineer visually examined all soil and rock samples obtained during the
field investigation. The engineer selected representative soil samples to be tested in the
laboratory for assistance in soil classification and determination of engineering properties of the
soils. The tests consisted of Moisture Content Determination, Particle-Size Analysis, Liquid
Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index Determinations, and One Dimensional Consolidation
tests. All tests were performed in accordance with ASTM, AASHTO or other standards listed in
a table located in the Appendix. The soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System (USCS). A description of the classification system and the results of the
laboratory tests are included in the Appendix.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
4.1 Subsurface Soil and Rock Conditions
Very similar subgrade conditions were encountered in all six (6) test borings. All test
borings were advanced through soil outside pavement or sidewalk concrete areas. A thin layer
(2 to 3 inches thick) of topsoil was found in boring B-1 and B-2. Fill material was found in the
upper 3.5 feet in boring B-1, in the upper 5.0 feet in boring B-2, in the upper 7.5 feet in boring B-
5, and in the upper 3.5 feet in boring B-6.
Relatively consistent subsurface conditions were encountered in the test borings. The
subgrade soils found from all borings predominantly consisted of Silty Clay, Lean Clay with
Sand, Sandy Lean Clay with Sand, Sandy Lean Clay with Gravel classified as CL (according to
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
8/48
Proposed Shor t Term Parking Garage Expansion at CHIACleveland, Cuyahoga County , Ohio
Page 5
J&L Laboratories, Inc.10773r1.doc /8/1/2010
the Unified Soil Classification System-USCS). Silty Clay Sand (SC-SM) was found between
depths of 35.0 to 40.0 feet in boring B-1. Silt with Sand (ML) was found between depths of 20.0
to 25.0 feet in boring B-6. Bedrock was not encountered in any test borings.
Consistency of the cohesive soils was found to range from stiff to hard, but was
predominantly very stiff to hard. Relative density of one non-cohesive sample found in boring
B-1 was found to be dense. According to the soil density (or consistency) profile, it appeared
that SPT blow count N values were consistently high below approximate depth of 25 (in most
borings) to 30 feet (in boring B-2). Whether or not the trend was resulted from man-made filling
construction is unknown. We think the soils in the upper 25 to 30 feet might not be as
consistent as in the lower portion of the subgrade.
A summary of laboratory test results is included in the appendix of this report. The
laboratory test results indicate that the natural moisture contents of the tested cohesive soils
ranged from 7 o 25%, but most of them are less than 15% (or equal to or less than their plastic
limits). When CL soils have a moisture content less than 15%, the moisture content is normally
within (or slightly less than) the optimum moisture content range. These moisture contents are
typical for the CL soils in moist condition. Normally, soils with moisture contents greater than
their liquid limits are in a liquid condition and have no shear strength. Soils with their moisture
contents less than their liquid limits and greater than or equal to their plastic limits are in a
plastic state, and have a potential for volume change. When natural moisture content of
cohesive soil is less than its plastic limits, the soil is in a semi-solid state and has low potential
for volume change under certain loading pressure.
One (1) consolidation test was performed using a sample obtained between depths of 8.0
and 9.0 feet from test boring B-1. This test indicated that an over consolidation ratio of 2.0 was
found from the tested soil sample. The test result is attached in the appendix of the report.
4.2 Groundwater Conditions
Water was only encountered in test boring B-2 during and upon completion of drilling
operations at depths of 77.5 and 60.3 feet, respectively. It is possible that granular lenses exist
between the clayey soils, and seepage water flowed inside the boring hole. It is common that
dry hole condition can be found in stiff to hard clayey soils.
The water level readings were conducted during a short period of time. The water level
readings are listed in each boring log. More accurate water level readings may be obtained by
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
9/48
Proposed Shor t Term Parking Garage Expansion at CHIACleveland, Cuyahoga County , Ohio
Page 6
J&L Laboratories, Inc.10773r1.doc /8/1/2010
the installation of groundwater monitoring wells and conducting water level readings over a
longer period of time or from other available records if it is required. The water level is subject
to seasonal fluctuations and may be encountered where previously not recorded. During
construction, the contractor(s) should pay more attention on surface water flow and plan propersurface drainage (especially in low-lying areas) according to weather and seasonal factors.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions and Foundation Options
Based on the above findings, we provide the following preliminary recommendations for
the proposed foundation design.
The subgrade soils in the upper 25 to 30 feet may be involved different staged glaciations
or human construction activity. The relatively similar density profile in all six borings seems
reveal this pattern. However, we dont have enough evidence to confirm this assumption. A
hard stratum was found below 25 to 30 feet (the top layer).
Conventional spread footing may be used to support the proposed column or wall footings
if consolidation settlements are within the tolerable range. However, the total of six test borings
drilled for mainly the purpose of preliminary study, and these borings are not considered
sufficient for the final foundation design (to reveal possible strata changes between borings).
Additional test borings in the middle portion of the site should be considered (unless previous
investigations reveal more information on the site) in the future.
End bearing drilled shafts can be used to support the heavy column load and provide very
reliable foundation support if conventional spread footings are questionable, however, the cost
can be much higher. As an alternative, we believe the GeopierTM foundation system can be
considered as a suitable subgrade improvement system. The system has been used in many
similar projects, and improved the seismic site class and greatly increase the soil bearing
capacity (reduce the foundation cost). GeopierTM foundation system is invented to improve the
subgrade soil density in the upper 25 to 30 feet. This site appeared to have the need for
improvement mainly in the upper 25 feet of the subgrade. According to information provided by
GeopierTM Foundation system, they have installed GeopierTM foundation to support a heavy
column load of 5,000 kips.
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
10/48
Proposed Shor t Term Parking Garage Expansion at CHIACleveland, Cuyahoga County , Ohio
Page 7
J&L Laboratories, Inc.10773r1.doc /8/1/2010
We also discussed with the client and other team members the need for additional
Seismic wave measuring inside the existing garage STG. Our drilling crew is capable of using a
skid rig if the head space is more than 12 feet. We can keep searching lower profile drilling
equipment for head space less than this vertical dimension.
6.0 Limitations
This report is developed based on the field exploration program, laboratory soil and/or
rock testing, and information secured for design studies. It should be noted that the site
exploration identified actual subsurface conditions only at those locations where samples are
obtained. The data derived through sampling and the subsequent laboratory testing program
was reduced by geotechnical engineers and geologists who then render an opinion regarding
the overall subsurface conditions, and their likely reaction on the site. Information regarding
project foundation design (such as foundation type, size, recommended CBR values etc.) is
preliminary information that is developed and based mainly on geotechnical data to aid the
project design engineer. This report is not prepared for potential construction contractor(s)
since on-site testing was only performed at limited locations for preliminary site study purpose.
Project design engineers should conduct additional analysis to finalize their design. The overall
subsurface conditions may differ slightly from those inferred on the basis of drilling and
sampling.
The subsurface conditions described are based on an examination of the soil or rock
samples obtained at the sampling intervals. The soil deposits or rock formations, including fill
material, may vary between the sampling intervals and between the test boring locations.
Variation in subsurface conditions from those indicated in this report may become apparent
during the earthwork and/or installation of the foundations. Such variations may require
changes and/or modifications in our recommendations. Such changes may cause time delays
and/or additional costs. Owners must be made aware of these limitations and must incorporate
them in the design budget and scheduling of the project. This report has been prepared for the
exclusive use of the project owner, Cleveland Port Authority, and the project design engineer,
C&S Engineers, Inc. for the specific application to the proposed Short Term Parking Garage
Expansion in Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio.
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
11/48
APPENDIX
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
12/48
Site Location Map N
J &L ProjectNo.
Project Location Client Scale
JL10773 CHIA Parking Garage Expansion Cleveland, Cuyahoga Co., Ohio C&S Engineers (No Scale)
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
13/48
FORDOWNHOLESEISMICTEST
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
14/48
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
15/48
_
_
_
_
_
_
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.!.!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
90
76
80
71
271
77
680
480
277
490
77
4801955
1955
19511943
19401940
19401940
19291906
1899
18881886
1885
1883
1868
1858
18501836
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2009
2009
2009
2008
2008
2008
2007
2007
2007
2007
2006
2006
2006
2006 2006
20052005
2005
2000
1998
1998
1995
1995
1990
1989
2003
2003
2002
2002
2000
2000
1998
1991
1991
1988
1986
MUCO
LECO
LCCO
KSUO
CLEO
ACEO
AKRON
CLEVELAND
LORAIN
PARMAELYRIA
YOUNGSTOWN
EUCLID
LAKEWOOD
GREEN
AVON
HUDSON
SOLON
STOW
AURORA
NORTON
WARREN
KIRTLAND
STREETSBORO
STRONGSVILLE
KENT
BRECKSVILLE
MEDINA
NILES
NORTH RIDGEVILLE
NORTH ROYALTON
TALLMADGE
BRUNSWICK
TWINSBURG
VERMILION
AVON LAKE
ALLIANCE
GIRARD
SALEM
WILLOUGHBY
BARBERTON
AMHERST
RITTMAN
WADSWORTH
WILLOUGHBY HILLS
PEPPER PIKE
RAVENNA
BEDFORD
OBERLIN
CANFIELD
FAIRLAWN
CORTLAND
LYNDHURST
NORTH CANTON
NEWTON FALLS
CANAL FULTON
HURON
810'0"W
810'0"W
820'0"W
820'0"W
420'0"N
420'0"N
410'0"N
410'0"N
EAR
0 7 14 21 28 35 Scale in Miles
DISCLThis product of the Ohio Department of Natural Resourcegeneral information only and should not be used for any otsite-specific investigations. These data were complied by tthe publication rights to this material. If these data are usdistribution or publication, this source must be referenced.
Recommended bib2002 (Revised 2008), Earthquake epicenters in Ohio andMap EG-2, Internet Mapping Service, http://www.dnr.
0 8 16 24 32Scale in Kilometers
EXPLA
Instrum
Magnitu
!.
!.
!.!.
~dp~
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
16/48
254
10
2
17
237
252
291
254
237
252480
90
71
6
20
42
CUYAHOGA
LORAIN
DOVER TWP. ROCKPORT TWP.
OLMSTED TWP. MIDDLEBURG TWP. PARMA TWP.
AVON TWP.
BROOKLYN TWP.
RIDGEVILLE TWP.
CITY OF CLEVELAND TWP.
CLEVELAND
PARMA
LAKEWOOD
WESTLAKE
NORTH OLMSTED
BROOK PARK
BEREA
AVON
ROCKY RIVER
BAY VILLAGE
FAIRVIEW PARK
BROOKLYN
PARMA HEIGHTSMIDDLEBURG HEIGHTS
AVON LAKE
OLMSTED FALLS
AB
DISCLAIMERThis product of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological Survey is
intended to provide general information only and should not be used for any other purposes.It is not intended for resale or to replace site-specific investigations.
These data were complied by the Ohio Division of Geological Survey, which reserves thepublication rights to this material. If these data are used in the compilation of other
data sets or maps for distribution or publication, this source must be referenced.
0 0.75 1.5 2.25 30.375
Miles
0 0.75 1.5 2.25 30.375Kilometers
Ma
h
Legend
!< Air{
Dri
45Ve
45
Inc
Min
Un
Aff
PeUn
Un
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
17/48
Page 1of 1
5/8/2010http://img.geocaching.com/cache/795bdee -51f6-4c03-9417-041d919784c6.jpg
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
18/48
Grumman Exploration, Inc.2309 Dorset RoadColumbus, Ohio 43221
(614) 488-7860 tel; (614) 488-8945 fax
Non-destructive Subsurface ExplorationNear-surface Geophysics
July 15, 2010
John XuJ&L Laboratories, Inc.215 Rainbow St.Wadsworth, OH 44281
RE: Report of Downhole Seismic Testing for the Proposed Cleveland HopkinsInternational Airport Short Term Parking Garage Expansion Project Located atTerminal Drive and Park Road in Cleveland, Ohio; GEI Project No. 01-30046
Dear John:
Grumman Exploration, Inc. has completed the downhole seismic testing at the abovereferenced project site located at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. This letter-reportsummarizes the field procedures used and results of the tests performed at this site. Theattached spreadsheets and plots summarize the estimated seismic velocities and derived
parameters for the borehole tested.
Project DescriptionJ&L Laboratories, Inc. is engaged in geotechnical investigations at the Proposed ClevelandHopkins International Airport Short Term Garage Expansion project site. Downholeseismic testing of a single borehole was requested to assist in the evaluation and design ofstructures proposed for this project. Among the requirements and assumptions of thedownhole testing procedure are: homogeneous isotropic subsurface materials, consistentannular space material, filling and diameter, and minimal ambient noise. The test borehole,B-2, is located in a grassy parkway area near the southeast corner of the existing short termparking garage complex.
Field ProceduresGrumman Exploration, Inc. conducted downhole seismic tests on borehole B-2 (renamed B-2) on July 9, 2010 as specified by J&L Laboratories, Inc. The borehole was lined withapproximately 99.5-ft of 2" diameter PVC casing and was grouted in-place using a cementbentonite grout.
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
19/48
Report of Downhole Seismic TestingProposed Cleveland Hopkins International Airport Short Term Garage ExpansionTerminal Drive and Park Road, Cleveland, OhioJ&L Laboratories, Inc.July 15, 2010 Page 2
The following field equipment and procedures were used to conduct the tests:
Geometrics, Inc. SmartSeis S-12, 12 channel, digital signal enhancementseismograph,
Two (2) triaxial downhole geophones, 5-ft geophone separations with mechanicalsidewall clamping mechanisms, and
Sledge hammer source, steel plate and weighted wood plank.
Tests were performed at 5-ft intervals using a 5-ft geophone separation. The seismographsampling rate was 62.5 microseconds (0.063 milli-seconds) with a total sweep time of 128milliseconds; This resulted in a total of 2048 samples per channel for each test. The testpreparation procedures consisted of lowering the geophones to the desired test depth. Threetests were performed at each test interval using multiple impacts from a sledgehammerstriking a steel plate. The plate was struck from three positions on the plank: top (P-wave)and opposite sides (S wave, opposing polarities). The impacts from opposite sides of theplank were used to help identify the onset of the shear wave by observing the reversal inwave polarity. Between 1 and 3 impacts were stacked to help enhance the compressional(P) and shear (S) wave signatures and cancel spurious noise effects. A 4WD vehicle wasused to weight the plank.
The data were observed and recorded in the field during acquisition and later returned to theoffices of Grumman Exploration, Inc. for further review and analysis. The analysisconsisted of estimating the earliest onset of the P-wave and S wave for each depth leveltested. The compressional and shear-wave arrivals were estimated using the results fromthe string of three geophones at each test depth.
A computer program developed by Grumman Exploration, Inc. was used to extract,compare and display the P and S-wave traces for the geophones used for each test interval.Using the arrival time estimates, P and S wave velocities were calculated for each depthinterval. The velocity calculation was based on the difference in arrival times and straight-line travel distances to each geophone using the in-hole depth to each geophone and theground-level offset distance of the seismic impulse. Apparently erroneous or unrealisticallyhigh or low velocity estimates were eliminated from the data summary tables. Because
three geophones were used for each test, multiple velocity estimates were available for someof the geophone positions.
Downhole Seismic Testing ResultsThe attached spreadsheets summarize the downhole seismic testing results for the testborehole B-2 at the proposed Short Term Garage Expansion site located at ClevelandHopkins International Airport in Cleveland, Ohio. The spreadsheet includes a summary of
Grumman Exploration, Inc.2309 Dorset Road, Columbus, Ohio 43221
(614) 488-7860 tel, (614) 488-8945 fax
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
20/48
Report of Downhole Seismic TestingProposed Cleveland Hopkins International Airport Short Term Garage ExpansionTerminal Drive and Park Road, Cleveland, OhioJ&L Laboratories, Inc.July 15, 2010 Page 3
the shear wave velocity (Vs) and compressional wave velocity (Vp) estimates. Plots of theestimated compressional and shear wave velocity profiles are included on Figure 1. Figure
2 illustrates a composite of some of the seismic waveforms used in the analysis of the testresults. The table below presents the estimated compressional and shear wave velocities forB-2.
Test
Estimated
Velocity
Interval (ft/sec)
Depth
(ft) Vp Vs5.0 4656 340
10.0 8712 508
15.0 119020.0 9637 982
25.0 8137 1301
30.0 8196 1391
35.0 9878 1226
40.0 4953 1201
45.0 1235
50.0 7100 1375
55.0 7107 1459
60.0 1307
65.0 9964 1308
70.0 9969 1555
75.0 8311 2074
80.0 262285.0 6237 1384
90.0 7130 1278
92.5 8319 1187
95.0 8319 1173
The estimated shear-wave velocities (Vs) from the ground surface to a depth ofapproximately 10-ft are low and may reflect a zone of poorly consolidated shallow fill.From approximately 25-ft to 70-ft, Vs is estimated in a fairly narrow range of 1200 fps up to1400 fps, with occasional Vs estimates slightly higher or lower. A stratum of higher Vs isobserved between approximately 70-ft and 85-ft, while Vs returns to a levels close to 1200
fps from 85-ft to the end of the boring. The Vs waveforms were reasonably well developedthroughout the test hole making the shear wave velocity estimates more reliable. Thecompressional wave velocity (Vp) estimates were consistently in the 7000 fps to 9000 fpsrange over most of the test hole, with a few locations exhibiting higher or lower Vp values.Note that for saturated materials, Vp cannot be lower than ~ 4,900 fps, which is theapproximate acoustic wave velocity of fresh water. The P-waveforms were less welldeveloped throughout most of test borehole compared to the S-waveforms. This in turn
Grumman Exploration, Inc.2309 Dorset Road, Columbus, Ohio 43221
(614) 488-7860 tel, (614) 488-8945 fax
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
21/48
Report of Downhole Seismic TestingProposed Cleveland Hopkins International Airport Short Term Garage ExpansionTerminal Drive and Park Road, Cleveland, OhioJ&L Laboratories, Inc.July 15, 2010 Page 4
makes the Vp estimates less relaiable, although a range of 7000 to 9000 fps is consistent forsome of the denser, more consolidated materials noted in the boring log.
Bias in the arrival time picks and consequently the velocity estimates could result from oneor more possible circumstances including: difficulty in estimating the S and P wave arrivaltimes, irregular or incomplete borehole annular space filling, refraction or multi-pathingeffects (non-straight line or multiple travel paths), limitations on the resolution of thedigitized signal, and the presence of interfering noise and other wavetrains. These resultsshould be reviewed by the geotechnical or structural engineer or consultant that will beperforming the foundation and structural design analysis for this site.
General QualificationsThe downhole seismic data presented herein represent estimates of subsurface properties in
the immediate vicinity of the boreholes tested using the measurement procedures describedabove. No warranty, certification, or statement of fact, either expressed or implied,regarding actual subsurface properties surrounding the borehole tested is contained herein.If questions or uncertainties exist regarding the actual parameter values, supplemental in-situ or laboratory tests or other invasive explorations should be conducted to documentactual subsurface material properties. No inference of subsurface properties can be madefor depth intervals not tested.
Grumman Exploration, Inc. has appreciated this opportunity to be of service to J&LLaboratories, Inc. If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please feelfree to contact us.
Sincerely,
Grumman Exploration, Inc.
David L. Grumman, Jr.President/Geophysicist
Attachments:B-2 Downhole Seismic Summary.xlsB-2 Velocity vs. Depth Plot (Figure 1)B-2 Downhole Seismic Test Waveforms Plot (Figure 2)
Grumman Exploration, Inc.2309 Dorset Road, Columbus, Ohio 43221
(614) 488-7860 tel, (614) 488-8945 fax
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
22/48
FOR DOWNHOLE SEISMIC TEST
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
23/48
S Project: Cleveland Hopkins Intl Airport - Short Term Parking Garage Expansion
Location: Park Rd. & Terminal Dr., Cleveland, OH
Borehole: B-2 Wave Type : Shear
Ground Offset 7 ft
Test ID (5-ft test interval) Velocity
Depth A B C Avg (fp Depth0.0 0.00.5 0.51.0 1.01.5 1.5. .
2.5 23.20 2.53.0 3.03.5 3.54.0 4.04.5 4.55.0 340 340 5.05.5 5.56.0 6.06.5 6.5. .. . . .
8.0 8.08.5 8.5
9.0 9.09.5 9.5
10.0 508 508 10.010.5 10.511.0 11.011.5 11.5
. .
. . . .
13.0 13.013.5 13.514.0 14.014.5 14.515.0 1190 1190 15.015.5 15.516.0 16.016.5 16.5
. .
. . . .18.0 18.018.5 18.519.0 19.019.5 19.520.0 982 982 20.020.5 20.521.0 21.021.5 21.5
. .
. . . .
23.0 23.023.5 23.524.0 24.024.5 24.525.0 1301 1301 25.0
25.5 25.526.0 26.026.5 26.5
. .
. . . .
28.0 28.028.5 28.529.0 29.029.5 29.530.0 1391 1391 30.030.5 30.531.0 31.031.5 31.5
. .
. . . .
33.0 33.0
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
24/48
33.5 33.534.0 34.034.5 34.535.0 1226 1226 35.035.5 35.536.0 36.036.5 36.5
. .
. . . .
38.0 38.0
38.5 38.539.0 39.039.5 39.540.0 1201 1201 40.040.5 40.541.0 41.041.5 41.5
. .
. . . .
43.0 43.043.5 43.544.0 44.044.5 44.545.0 1235 1235 45.045.5 45.546.0 46.046.5 46.5
. .
. . . .
48.0 48.048.5 48.549.0 49.049.5 49.550.0 1375 1375 50.050.5 50.551.0 51.051.5 51.5
. .
. . . .
53.0 53.053.5 53.554.0 54.054.5 54.5
55.0 1459 1459 55.055.5 55.556.0 56.056.5 56.5
. .
. . . .
58.0 58.058.5 58.559.0 59.059.5 59.560.0 1307 1307 60.060.5 60.561.0 61.061.5 61.5
. .
. . . .
63.0 63.0
63.5 63.564.0 64.064.5 64.565.0 1308 1308 65.065.5 65.566.0 66.066.5 66.5
. .
. . . .
68.0 68.068.5 68.569.0 69.069.5 69.570.0 1555 1555 70.070.5 70.5
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
25/48
71.0 71.071.5 71.5
. .
. . . .
73.0 73.073.5 73.574.0 74.074.5 74.575.0 2074 2074 75.075.5 75.5
76.0 76.076.5 76.5. .. . . .
78.0 78.078.5 78.579.0 79.079.5 79.580.0 2622 2622 80.080.5 80.581.0 81.081.5 81.5
. .
. . . .
83.0 83.083.5 83.584.0 84.0
84.5 84.585.0 1384 1384 85.085.5 85.586.0 86.086.5 86.5
. .
. . . .
88.0 88.088.5 88.589.0 89.0
. .
90.0 1278 98.80 1278 90.090.5 90.591.0 91.091.5 91.5
. .
. . . .93.0 93.093.5 93.594.0 94.094.5 94.5
. . .
95.5 95.596.0 96.096.5 96.597.0 97.0
. . .
98.0 98.098.5 98.599.0 99.099.5 99.5
Notes: Shaded cells are geophone locations w/ est'd arrival times (msec), Red values are velocity estimates (fps) for depth interval
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
26/48
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 5 10 15 2 0 2 5 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
0
0.4
0 5 10 1 5 2 0 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
0
0.4
0 5 10 15 2 0 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
0
0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.8
-0.4
0
0.4
0.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-1
0
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-1
0
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-1
0
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-0.4
0
0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-1
0
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-1
0
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-20
-10
0
10
20
0 5 1 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30
-40
-20
0
20
40
Project
Client
Location
Date
ProjectNo.
By
Scale
Checked
Grumm
anExploration,
Inc.
2 3 0 9 D o r s e t R o a d
, C o l u m b u s , O h i o 4 3 2 2 1
Near-surfaceGeophysics,Non-destructiveSubsurfaceExploration
B - 2 D o w n h o l e S e i s m i c T e s t i n g D a t a P l o t s f o r L o w e r G e
o p h o n e : 5 - f t t o 9 5 - f t ; T e s t I n t e r v a l s a t 5 - f t i n
c r e m e n t s
C l e v e l a n d H o p k i n s S
T P G a r a g e D o w n h o l e S e i s m i c
C & S L a b o r a t o r i e s
d l g
7 / 1 4 / 1 0
01-30046
P a r k R d .
& T e r m i
n a l D r . C l e v e l a n d ,
O H
Geophone/TestIntervalDepth:
97.5
to
52.5
( f t b e l o w
g r o u n d s u r f a c e )
Geophone/TestIntervalDepth:
47.5
to
7.5
( f t b e l o w
g r o u n d s u r f a c e )
8 7 . 5
3 7 . 5
7 7 . 5
2 7 . 5
6 7 . 5
1 7 . 5
5 7 . 5
7 . 5
9 2 . 5
4 2 . 5
8 2 .
5
3 2 . 5
7 2 . 5
2 2 . 5
6 2 . 5
1 2 . 5
5 2 . 5
90-ft 40-ft
80-ft 30-ft
70-ft 20-ft
60-ft10-ft
95-ft 45-ft
85-ft 35-ft
75-ft 25-ft
65-ft 15-ft
55-ft
E s t i m a t e d s h e a r ( S )
w a v e a r r i v a l
E s t i m a t e d c o m p r e s s i o n a l ( P )
w a v e a r r i v a l
A s s h o w n
L e g e n d :
C o m p r e s s i o n a l - w a v e ( P ) , v e r t i c a l g e p h o n e
S h e a r - w a v
e ( S ) G e o p h o n e L 1 ,
P o l a r i t y 1
S h e a r - w a v
e ( S ) G e o p h o n e L 1 ,
P o l a r i t y 2
S h e a r - w a v
e ( S ) G e o p h o n e L 2 ,
P o l a r i t y 1
S h e a r - w a v
e ( S ) G e o p h o n e L 2 ,
P o l a r i t y 2
Notes:
G e o m e t r i c s S - 1
2 1 2 C
h a n n e l s e i s m o g r a p h
2 t r i a x i a l 2 8 H z g e o p h o
n e s ,
5 - f
t s e p a r a t i o n
5 - f
t t e s t i n t e r v a l
T e s t d a t e :
J u l y 9 ,
2 0 1 0
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
27/48
LegendP-wave Velocity (fps)
S-wave Velocity (fps)
Poisson's Ratio
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Estimated Velocity (fps) B-2
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Depth(ft)
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
P o i s s o n ' s R a t i o
Project
Client
Location
Date
Project No.
By
ScaleChecked
G r u mman E x p l or a t io n , I n c .2309 Do rset Ro ad, Co lumb us, Oh io 43221
Near - sur face Geoph ysics, Non- destr uctive Subsur face Explor ation
Figure Title
Cle ve la nd Ho p kin s STP Ga ra g e Do wn ho le Se i smi c
J & L L a b o ra t o r i es dlg 7/13/10
01-30046 ntsB-2; Estimated Velocity vs. Depth1
P a r k R d . & Te r m i n al D r. , C l e v e la n d , O H
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
28/48
Downhole Seismic Testing Summary Table
Test/Well ID: B-2 Gru
Project: Cleveland Hopkins Intl Airport - Short Term Parking Garage Expansion 2309
Location: Park Rd. & Terminal Dr., Cleveland, OH Test Date: 7/9/2010 Colum
Client/Owner: J &L Laboratories, Inc. Calc. Date: 7/25/2010 (614)
Field Staff: dlgWell Descr.: 2" PVC, grouted, ~99.5' depth BGS Data Proc by: dlg Eqp: Geom
5-ft Geophone 3 tria
Test Spacing Velocity Poisson's sledg
Interval (ft/sec) Ratio
Depth (ft) Vp Vs Depth (ft) Material Descr/Class5.0 4656 340 0.497 5.00
10.0 8712 508 0.498 10.00
15.0 1190 15.00
20.0 9637 982 0.495 20.00
25.0 8137 1301 0.487 25.00
30.0 8196 1391 0.485 30.00
35.0 9878 1226 0.492 35.00
40.0 4953 1201 0.469 40.0045.0 1235 45.00
50.0 7100 1375 0.481 50.00
55.0 7107 1459 0.478 55.00
60.0 1307 60.00
65.0 9964 1308 0.491 65.00
70.0 9969 1555 0.488 70.00
75.0 8311 2074 0.467 75.00
80.0 2622 80.00
85.0 6237 1384 0.474 85.00
90.0 7130 1278 0.483 90.00
95.0 8319 1173 0.490 95.00
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
29/48
Project
Client
Location
Date
Project No.
By
ScaleChecked
Grumman Exploration, Inc.2309 Dorset Road, Columbus, Ohio 43221Near-surface Geophysics, Non-destructive Subsurface Exploration
Figure Titlents
DOWNHOLE SEISMIC TESTING EXAMPLE
dlg 5/01/02
Notes:Geometrics, Inc. S12, 12-chan seismograph5-ft triaxial geophone spacing, 4 geophonesSledge-hammer impulse source
Schematic Downhole Testing Procedures and Results
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
-4
0
4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
-8
-4
0
4
8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
-8
-4
0
4
8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
-8
-4
0
4
8
S-wave arrivalP-wave arrival
Seismograph
Vibration Sensors(geophones)
Compressional
wave (P) Shot
Shear wave
(S) Shot
PVC cased
borehole
A) Field Operation
B) Sample Waveforms C) Velocity vs. Depth Plots
Geop
hone
#1
(sha
llow
)
Geop
hone
#4
(deep
)
DEPTH
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
EstimatedVelocity (fps) B-##
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Depth(ft)
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5Poisson's Ratio
LegendP-wave Velocity (fps)
S-wave Velocity (fps)Poisson'sRatio
Grumman Exploration, Inc. 2002
TIME (msec)
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
30/48
FIELD BOREHOLE LOGBOREHOLE NUMBER
PROJ ECT NUMBER:
PROJ ECT NAME:
LOCATION:
DRILLING CO:
DRILLING METHOD:
DRILLERS:
GEOLOGIST:
DATE BEGUN: DATE COMPLETED:
STATION:
TOTAL DEPTH: SURFACE ELEVATION:
DEPTH DESCRIPTION
OFFSET:
TYPE
CLIENT:
WATER LEVELS:
DURING DRILLING:
UPON COMPLETION:
AFTER COMPLETION:
W% ELEV.DEPTHNO.
SAMPLE INFORMATION
N60N
J &L-ENG5 LOG (rev. 01/14/02) PAGE 1 OF 2
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
3-1/4" HSA
JL10773
CHIA Parking Lot Expansion
Cleveland, Cuyahoga Count y, OH
MOD
Tuttle, Gregory
LC
6/30/2010 6/30/2010
N/A
N/A
71.5'
N/A
C&S Engineers, Inc.
N/A
Dry
Dry
(ft) (ft) (ft)
B-1
BLOWS/0.5 (ft)
0.3
3.5
24.0
35.0
40.0
TOPSOIL: 3"
FILL: Brown, medium dense SILTY CLAYEY SAND,trace gravel, asphalt, slag, moist.
CL: Brown/gray mottled, stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SANDto SANDY LEAN CLAY WITH GRAVEL, moist.
NOTE: Shelby tubes were pushed at 8.0 and 18.0 ft.Hydrulic pump peak reading was 1000 and 1500 psiduring tube pussing at 8 and 18.0 ft, respectively.
NOTE: Shelby tube was pushed at 18.0 feet. Norecovery due to possibly rock fragments in soil. SPTimmediately was followed.
CL: Gray, hard to very stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND,trace gravel, moist.
SC-SM: Gray, dense SILTY CLAY SAND, trace gravel,moist.
CL: Gray, very stiff to hard LEAN CLAY WITH SAND,moist.
NOTE: It took much longer time to drill through the hardsoil layers. The driller was running out of time to competethe bore hole to originally planned depth of 100 ft before
1
2
3
4
5A
5
6
7
8
9
10
SS
SS
ST
SS
ST
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
16
9
--
14
--
10+
32
34
28
47
31
--
--
--
13
17
13
10
9
10
10
9
11
6-8-8
3-4-5
REC: 19"
4-6-8
REC: 0"
9-10
8-15-17
13-14-20
9-12-16
16-22-25
9-13-18
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
31/48
FIELD BOREHOLE LOGBOREHOLE NUMBER
PROJ ECT NUMBER:
PROJ ECT NAME:
LOCATION:
DRILLING CO:
DRILLING METHOD:
DRILLERS:
GEOLOGIST:
DATE BEGUN: DATE COMPLETED:
STATION:
TOTAL DEPTH: SURFACE ELEVATION:
DEPTH DESCRIPTION
OFFSET:
TYPE
CLIENT:
WATER LEVELS:
DURING DRILLING:
UPON COMPLETION:
AFTER COMPLETION:
W% ELEV.DEPTHNO.
SAMPLE INFORMATION
N60N
J &L-ENG5 LOG (rev. 01/14/02) PAGE 2 OF 2
45.0
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
-45
-50
-55
-60
-65
-70
3-1/4" HSA
JL10773
CHIA Parking Lot Expansion
Cleveland, Cuyahoga Count y, OH
MOD
Tuttle, Gregory
LC
6/30/2010 6/30/2010
N/A
N/A
71.5'
N/A
C&S Engineers, Inc.
N/A
Dry
Dry
(ft) (ft) (ft)
B-1
BLOWS/0.5 (ft)
dark. After didcussion with the driller, J &L decided toterminate the bore hole as dep as possible before dark.In order to avoid the possibility of auger freezing in theground, J &L did not recommend leaving the auger in thebore hole overnight.
TERMINATION DEPTH: 71.5'
11
12
13
14
15
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
25
20
27
50+
48
13
13
13
9
12
6-11-14
7-9-11
9-11-16
17-25-50
15-20-28
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
32/48
FIELD BOREHOLE LOGBOREHOLE NUMBER
PROJ ECT NUMBER:
PROJ ECT NAME:
LOCATION:
DRILLING CO:
DRILLING METHOD:
DRILLERS:
GEOLOGIST:
DATE BEGUN: DATE COMPLETED:
STATION:
TOTAL DEPTH: SURFACE ELEVATION:
DEPTH DESCRIPTION
OFFSET:
TYPE
CLIENT:
WATER LEVELS:
DURING DRILLING:
UPON COMPLETION:
AFTER COMPLETION:
W% ELEV.DEPTHNO.
SAMPLE INFORMATION
N60N
J &L-ENG5 LOG (rev. 01/14/02) PAGE 1 OF 3
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
3-1/4" HSA
JL10773
CHIA Parking Lot Expansion
Cleveland, Cuyahoga Count y, OH
MOD
Tuttle, Gregory
N/A
6/29/2010 6/29/2010
N/A
N/A
100'
N/A
C&S Engineers, Inc.
N/A
60.3'
77.5'
(ft) (ft) (ft)
B-2
BLOWS/0.5 (ft)
0.2
5.0
28.5
TOPSOIL: 2"
FILL: Brown, medium dense to loose SILTY CLAYEYSAND, trace gravel, asphalt, slag, moist.
CL: Dark brown to brown/gray mottled, stiff SANDYLEAN CLAY WITH GRAVEL, moist to very moist.
NOTE: This boring was drilled for Seismic testingpurpose. 2" ID Schedule 40 PVC casing was installed inthe borehole after completion of drilling. Grouting andcasing installation were done according to ASTM D-7400 Specification - Downhole Seismic Testing. Waterwas filled in the casing immediately after casinginstallation to counterbalance buoyancy. Water wasbailed out after the casing was set in the following day.
CL: Gray, very stiff to hard LEAN CLAY WITH SAND toLEAN CLAY, trace gravel, moist.
NOTE: Water found in the borehole was most likely fromwater perched in the upper 28.5 feet soil layers wheregranula lenses were found.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
SS
SS
ST
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
12
5
10
15
12
13
29
30
29
23
7
24
16
13
17
21
9
11
1
16
4-6-6
3-2-3
3-4-6
4-6-9
3-5-7
3-6-7
9-12-17
9-14-16
10-13-16
6-9-14
-
7/28/2019 STG Geotech Report 8-1-10
33/48
FIELD BOREHOLE LOGBOREHOLE NUMBER
PROJ ECT NUMBER:
PROJ ECT NAME:
LOCATION:
DRILLING CO:
DRILLING METHOD:
DRILLERS:
GEOLOGIST:
DATE BEGUN: DATE COMPLETED:
STATION:
TOTAL DEPTH: SURFACE ELEVATION:
DEPTH DESCRIPTION
OFFSET:
TYPE
CLIENT:
WATER LEVELS:
DURING DRILLING:
UPON COMPLETION:
AFTER COMPLETION:
W% ELEV.DEPTHNO.
SAMPLE INFORMATION
N60N
J &L-ENG5 LOG (rev. 01/14/02) PAGE 2 OF 3
45.0
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
-45
-50
-55
-60
-65
-70
-75
-80
-85
3-1/4" HSA
JL10773
CHIA Parking Lot Expansion
Cleveland, Cuyahoga Count y, OH
MOD
Tuttle, Gregory
N/A
6/29/2010 6/29/2010
N/A
N/A
100'
N/A
C&S Engineers, Inc.
N/A
60.3'
77.5'
(ft) (ft) (ft)
B-2
BLOWS/0.5 (ft)
83.5CL: Gray, very stiff to stiff LEAN CLAY, moist.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
23
36
35
26
28
21
27
16
16
11
11
11