Analisis Estudio de Suelos PMRB - 2!10!14-105.003-268

Tolunay-W o n g Engineers, Inc.
10710 S. Sam Houston Pkwy W., Suite 100 / Houston, TX 77031 / 713-722-7064 / Fax 713-777-0341
(J Houston, TX J Beaumont, TX J Corpus Christi, TX J Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX J Gonzales, LA J Gainesville, FL)
COVER
SHEET Email
To: Mr. Peter Tam From: Arthur J. Stephens, P.E.
(peter_tam@fwhou.fwc.com) Phone: 713-722-7064
Foster Wheeler USA Corporation Fax: 713-777-0341 / 713-722-0319
Cell: 832-741-2179
Mr. Andres Contreras Email: astephens@tweinc.com
(Andres_Contreras@fwhou.fwc.com)
Cc: John Brown (jdbrown@tweinc.com) Date: March 16, 2011
TWEI #: 10.14.105.003
Pedro Velandia (pivelandia@gmail.com)
Fouad Hammoud (fhammoud@tweinc.com)
Ref: Subcontract No.: 13-123939-02-CH503
Subcontract Name: Geotechnical Engineering Consulting Services; PMRB
TWEI Ref: PMRB-CH-503.6-135
Subj: Settlement Estimates - Priority 1 Borings C-2, C-3, C-6, C-7, C-10, C-11, C-12, C-14, C-15, Subj:
C-17, C-19, C-20, C-23, C-25, and C-40
Introduction
This report presents our settlement estimates based on the data provided for fifteen Priority 1 Test
Borings: C-2, C-3, C-6, C-7, C-10, C-11, C-12, C-14, C-15, C-17, C-19, C-20, C-23, C-25, and C-
40. This report supersedes three previous settlement reports issued by TWEI:
1) Boring C-19 (BFW Package) issued December 23, 2010; and,

2) Boring C-12 (Unit 8500) issued January 11, 2011;
3) Six Priority 1 Borings C-2, C-3, C-6, C-7, C-11, C-17, and C-25 issued January 20, 2011.
Soil parameters used in our settlement analysis for the Priority 1 borings were compiled from
consolidation tests and correlations to index tests. Settlement was not calculated for boring C-40
because existing ground surface elevation is approximately +76 m, which is equal to design final
grade elevation.
In preparing the settlement estimates, we assumed that the in-place total weight of the fill materials
is approximately 120 pcf. If the total unit weight of the fill materials is less than assumed, the
settlement will be less. The locations of the Priority 1 test borings and the planned Units are shown
on Figure 1. The rough grading and final grade elevations for the various Units are shown on
Figures 2 and 3.
T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

Mr. Peter Tam
Mr. Andres Contreras
March 16, 2011
Page 2
Soil Properties
The following outlines the analysis parameters used. These parameters were compared with the
information from previous borings A-8, A-10, A-13, A-14, B-16, B-18, B-21, B-24, and B-28. The
locations of the fifteen Priority 1 borings and the nine previous borings considered in this report are
shown on Figure 1. The recent test boring logs are shown in Appendix A. Boring logs from the
previous site investigation performed by Gomez, Cajiao y Asociados (GCA) are presented in
Appendix B. Consolidation test results from the Priority 1 test borings are included in Appendix C.
Photographs of the locations of the fifteen Priority 1 borings are included in Appendix A. The SPT
blow counts (N-value) corrected to N60 and total unit weights from the test borings are profiled with
depth and shown on Figures 4 through 33.
Soil stratigraphy generally consists of alternating layers of sands, silts and clays of varying
thicknesses extending to the top of the conglomerate (Alluvium), which was encountered at
elevations ranging from 51.6 m to 43.3 m. Soil stratigraphy and consistency/relative density are
detailed on the boring logs and are summarized on the SPT and total unit weight vs. depth profiles
in Figures 4 through 33. Selected Ground surface elevation at the boring locations varied from 76
m to 72 m msl.
The Alluvium layer, as interpreted from the boring logs presented in Appendices A and B, is
comprised of fine to coarse size gravel, sub-rounded, with a primarily sand matrix. Clayey gravel
lenses were also encountered within the Alluvium. Table 1 lists the elevation of the top of the
Alluvium for the Priority 1 and selected CGA borings.
Table 1
Elevations of Alluvium and Competent Soil
Top of Alluvium Top of Competent Soil
Unit Area Borings (m msl) (m msl)
8200 C-2 49.1 55 (med. dense to dense sand)

C-3 51.4 56 (med. dense to v. dense sand)
B-18 45.0 55 (med. dense to dense sand)
B-21 43.5 56 (med. dense to v. dense sand)
B-24 Not Reached (T.D = 18.5m) 56 (med. dense to v. dense sand)
8600 C-6 45.3 --
8700
8900
9000
6300 C-7 43.3 55 (very dense sand)

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 3
Top of Alluvium Top of Competent Soil

Unit Area Borings (m msl) (m msl)
8400 C-10 42.0 52 (dense to v. dense sand)

8300
C-11 44.0 52 (m. dense to v. dense sand)
A-10 45.0 52 (m. dense to v. dense sand)
A-13 43.9 54 (dense to v. dense sand)
8500 C-12 51.6 54 (dense to v. dense sand)
9100 C-14 43.2 --
9200
9400
9500
Sulfur C-15 40.8 --
Storage Area
7100 C-17 50.8 --
C-25 45.8 --
A-8 45.0 --
B-16 45.0 --
6100 C-19 49.3 --
9700 C-20 46.5 53 (v. dense sand)
7300 C-23 Not Reached (T.D. = 43.0m) --
6000 C-40 47.6 --
A-14 46.1 --
Competent sands were identified in Units 6300, 8200, 8300, 8400, 8500, and 9700. The elevations
at the top of the competent soil are shown in Table 1. Medium dense to very dense sands were
encountered above the Alluvium in Priority 1 borings C-2, C-3, C-7, C-10, C-11, C-12 and C-20,
and GCA borings A-10, A-13, B-18, B-21, and B-24. The compactness of these sands is evident in
the N60 vs. depth plots on Figures 4, 6, 10, 12, 14, 16, and 26.
During detailed design, the data regarding the elevations of competent soils developed by the
Priority 1 and Priority 2 test borings should be reviewed. It is likely that piling driven in to the
competent soils will be feasible, which will reduce the need to extend the piles into the deeper
alluvium.
Compressible layers comprised of soft to firm consistency, low to high plasticity lean clays (CL)
and fat clays (CH), and loose elastic silts (MH) were identified in the Priority 1 borings. These soil
Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 4
layers are shown on Figures 4 through 33. Compressible layer composition, thickness, elevation,
and maximum drainage path for each boring are tabulated in Table 2.
Table 2
Compressible Layer Thicknesses
(m)
Thickness Elevation Maximum Drainage Path,
Boring Compressible Material (m) (m) H/2 (m)
C-2 Soft Lean Clay (CL) 2.07 70.7-68.5 1.035

Loose Elastic Silt (MH) 3 61-58 1.5
C-3 Soft to Firm Fat Clay (CH) 2 74-72 5
Firm to Soft Lean Clay (CL) 3 72-69
Loose Elastic Silt (MH) 6 62.4-56.4 3
C-6 Soft Gray Fat Clay (CH) 4 72-68 2
Loose Elastic Silt (MH) 2.7 61.5-58.8 1.35
Firm Lean Clay (CL) 3 58.8-55.8 1.5
Firm Lean Clay (CL) 3.8 49.1-45.3 1.9
C-7 Soft Sandy Lean Clay (CL) 3 73-70 1.5
“FILL”
Loose Elastic Silt (MH) 2 61-59 1
Firm Sandy Lean Clay (CL) 1.5 58.5-57 0.75
C-10 Soft Clay (CL/CH) 2.5 71-68.5 1.25
Firm to Stiff Clay 7 63-56 3.5
Very Stiff Clay 3 45-42 1.5
C-11 Soft to Stiff Lean Clay (CL) 2.9 72.4-69.5 1.45
Very stiff Clay (CL) 1.2 65.8-64.6 0.6
Very Soft Clay (CH) 6.2 64-57.8 3.1
Stiff Lean Clay (CL) 1.4 47.2-45.8 0.7
C-12 Soft Clay (CL/CH) 2.4 73-70.6 1.2
Loose Elastic Silt (MH) 4.5 61.5-57 2.25
C-14 Soft Clay (CH) 4.8 69.8-65 2.4

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 5
Thickness Elevation Maximum Drainage Path,

Boring Compressible Material (m) (m) H/2 (m)
C-15 Very Soft Clay (CL) 4.6 69.6-65 2.3

Stiff Clay (CL/CH) 5 61.5-56.5 2.5
Stiff Clay (CL) 5.7 45.5-40.8 2.75
C-17 Soft Clay (CL) “FILL” 2.4 73-70.6
4.0
Soft Clay (CL/CH) 1.6 70.6-69
Firm Clay (CL) 7.1 58.2-51.1 3.5
C-19 Very Soft Clay (CL) 3.1 71.6-68.5 1.55
Very Soft Clay (CH) 4 64-60 2
Organic Clay (OH) 0.5 60-59.5 0.25
Soft to Very Soft Clay (CL) 10.3 59.5-49.2 5.15
C-20 Very Soft Clay (CL) 7.5 73-65.5 5.2
Soft to Firm Clay (CH) 7.7 65.5-57.8
Very Stiff Clay (CL) 1.2 47.4-46.5 0.6
C-23 Soft Clay (CL) 1.6 71-69.4 0.8
Soft Clay (CH) 1.5 58-56.5 0.75
Stiff Clay (CL) 3 47.6-44.6 1.5
C-25 Very Soft Silty Clay (CL-ML) 3 73-70 1.5
C-40 Very Soft Clay (CL) 3 73.6-70.6 1.5
Firm Fat Clay (CH) 2 65.5-63.5 N/A
Loose Elastic Silt/Organic 6 63.5-57.5 N/A
Clay (MH/OH)
Very Soft Lean Clay (CL) 4.5 57.5-53 N/A
Elastic Silt/Organic Clay 2.1 53-50.9 N/A
(MH/OH)
N/A = Not analyzed
Consolidation test data from borings C-2, C-6, C-10, C-11, C-12, C-14, C-15, C-17, C-19, C-20, C-
23 and C-25 were used to develop soil parameters for compressible soil layers. Consolidation test
results are attached in Appendix C. Soil parameters for settlement analysis were also obtained

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 6
using empirical correlations based on the Atterberg limit (ASTM D 4318) and moisture content
(ASTM D 2166) test data shown on the boring logs enclosed in Appendix A.
Settlement Analysis
The settlement analyses were performed using the program FoSSA. This program considers
various layers, differences in soil properties for each layer, and can simulate the effects of staged
embankment loading. For our analysis and based on correspondence with Foster Wheeler, we
assumed two site fill schedules.
A. Fill Schedule No. 1 – Schedule No. 1 assumes rough grading and final filling will be
completed on a unit-by-unit basis.
Stage 1 Fill – initial fill placement and surfacing from El. 72 m/73m to El. 74.5 m over
a period of 70 days.
Stage 2 Fill – EPC contractor will commence final filling to El. 76.0 m 590 days after
completion of Stage 1 (660 days after Stage 1 start). Final fill will be completed 30
days after that (690 days after Stage 1 start).
B. Fill Schedule No. 2 – Schedule No. 2 assumes fill placement for rough grading and final
site grade will be performed across all units simultaneously.
Stage 1 fill and surfacing will be completed from El. 72/73 m to El. 74.5 m over about
390 days.
Stage 2 fill will commence 510 days after completion of Stage 1 (900 days after Stage 1
start) and will be completed to El. 76.0 m 930 days after start of Stage 1.
Fill Schedules 1 and 2 were analyzed for rate of settlement using drainage paths equal to one-half
the layer thicknesses, as shown on Table 2.
Analysis Results and Discussion
The locations of Borings C-2, C-3, C-6, C-7, C-10, C-11, C-12, C-14, C-15, C-17, C-19, C-20, C-
23, C-25 and C-40 are shown on Figure 1. Figure 1 indicates the locations of existing roadways
which bisect 7100 (Material Storage), 8200 (Delayed Coker) and 8400 (Hydrocracker and Naphtha
Hydrotreater). There is also an existing road that borders the west perimeter of Unit 8500. The
total settlement within the vicinity of the existing roadway areas will be less than the balance of the
unit areas. There is also a large stockpile in Unit 8200 where settlement resulting from site grading
will be minimal once the stockpile of fill and construction debris is removed. The existing stockpile
is approximately 10m high and has plan dimensions of about 200 m by 250 m. Priority 2 boring C-

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 7
35 was located at the western edge of the stockpile; the driller’s log indicates variegated fill material
comprised of sands/gravels/clays with concrete/asphalt debris to 5 m depth, followed by alternating
clay and sand layers to 32m, underlain by gravel (Alluvium).
The Ecological Lake was probed by Solingral to assess the depth of water and depth to hard bottom.
The survey was conducted in a boat manned by two people using a ¾ inch steel rod marked every
20 cm. The probes were made in a 30 m x 30 m grid pattern. At each point, the rod was lowered to
the lake bottom and then pushed manually through the sludge/muck layer. At some locations the
rod could not be inserted below lake bottom due to the presence of gravel deposits. Cross sections
prepared by Solingral of the lake indicate a water depth of 2 m to 2.4 m and a very thin to non-
existent muck layer on the lake bottom. Survey grid layout and lake profiles were prepared by
Solingral and are presented in Appendix D.
The time rate of settlement results are shown on Figures 34 through 61. These figures illustrate the
time vs. primary consolidation settlement for Units 6100, 7100, 7100, 8200 through 8700, and 8900
through 9500 under the various assumptions shown. Table 3 quantifies the settlement results for
each unit based on Figures 34 through 61. The ability to predict the time rate of consolidation is a
function of small and discrete drainage paths within the soil column and generally settlements occur
at a faster rate than predicted based on the test borings.
Table 3
Estimated Settlement
Time to Attain
2.5 cm
Differential Differential
End of Stage 1 End of Stage 2 Settlement, Stage Settlement After
Unit Fill Settlement Settlement 1-Stage 2 End of Stage 2
Boring Area Schedule (cm) (cm) (cm) (Days)
C-2 8200 1 5 12 7 <300
2 2 12 7 <300
C-3 8200 1 5 23 18 <300
2 5 23 18 <300
C-6 8600 1 35 52 17 <300
8700
2 35 52 17 <300
8900
9000
C-7 -- 1 6 11 5 <300
2 6 11 5 <300

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 8
Time to Attain
2.5 cm
Differential Differential
End of Stage 1 End of Stage 2 Settlement, Stage Settlement After
Unit Fill Settlement Settlement 1-Stage 2 End of Stage 2
Boring Area Schedule (cm) (cm) (cm) (Days)
C-10 8300 1 21 32 11 <300
8400
2 21 32 11 <300
C-11 8400 1 16 31 15 <300
2 16 31 15 <300
C-12 8500 1 24 36 12 <300
2 24 36 12 <300
C-14 9100 1 52 75 23 <300
9200
2 52 75 23 <300
9400
9500
C-15 -- 1 30 46 16 <300
2 30 46 16
C-17 7100 1 13 28 15 <300
2 13 28 15 <300
C-19 6100 1 35 57 22 <600
2 35 57 22 <600
C-20 8700 1 27 60 33 <600
2 27 60 33 <600
C-23 7300 1 20 27 7 <300
2 20 27 7 <300
C-25 7100 1 1 2 1 <300
2 1 2 1 <300
Settlement analysis was not performed for boring C-40. The existing ground surface elevation at
boring C-40 is 75.96 m and final design site grade elevation is +76 m; therefore, settlement in the
vicinity of boring C-40 will be negligible. As shown by Figures 34 through 61, the consolidation
settlement resulting from the placement of fill to El. 74.5 m is nearly completed before the second
stage filling begins. The additional settlement which occurs as a result of filling to El. 76.0 m will
generally be differential with respect to the equipment and structures supported on deep

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 9
foundations. The anticipated differential settlement as shown on Table 3 and Figures 34 through 61
ranges from about 1 cm to 33 cm. However, as shown on the figures, the additional settlement as a
result of final filling will occur relatively rapidly after completion of the Stage 2 fill, except at Units
6100 (Boring C-19) and 8700 (Boring C-20). Table 3 shows that differential settlement in all but
two units will reach tolerable limits of 1 inch (2.5 cm) or less within 300 days after end of Stage 2
filling. Allowable differential settlement within Units 6100 and 8700 will be achieved after
approximately 600 days, respectively, for Fill Schedule No. 1 and Fill Schedule No. 2.
This provides a scheduling option to reduce post-construction differential settlement between

shallow foundations, equipment, slabs, and equipment or structures supported on deep foundations.
A schedule which begins filling to El. 76.0 early in the unit development sequence and allows as
much time as possible after filling before slabs or shallow foundations are installed will reduce the
differential settlement with respect to equipment and structures supported on deep foundations to
less than 2.5 cm.
In Unit Areas 6100 (Boring C-19) and 8700 (Boring C-20) the increased time to reduce differential
settlement between pile supported equipment and equipment supported on shallow foundations is a
result of soft compressible layers extending from about El. 64.0 to 49.2 m at Boring C-19, and about
El. 73.0 to 57.8 m at Boring C-20. At these locations, it is likely that there are additional thin seams
which will provide shorter drainage paths than assumed, which will reduce the time required to less
than 600 days. In addition, the actual time rate of settlement should be monitored during fill
placement as outlined below.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
It is critical that the settlement be monitored prior to fill placement through initial fill placement and
during and following completion of final filling. The monitoring of settlement will provide the
basis to evaluate the site response and provide data for assessing when shallow foundations and
slabs could be constructed.
More detailed comments on the importance of the quality assurance and control observations
follow.
The site preparation activities will affect the EPC contractors’ bids. The EPC contractors will
expect that the site preparation is conducted in strict accordance to the plans and specifications. As
a result, the QA/QC data for the site preparation will be important to the follow-on phases of the
project.
In our opinion, the Owner should consider maintaining the overall responsibility for the QA effort
for this project. Routine QC testing activities can be provided by the site preparation contractor.

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 10
The following are critical items for each unit area. Separate reports should be prepared for each
major unit.
Confirmation of the site preparation performed prior to fill placement including stripping,
handling of vegetation, placement of geotextiles and geogrids, and settlement plate
installation;
Details for each settlement plate placed including accurate locations, initial elevations prior
to site filling, and frequent settlement observations as the fill materials are placed and
following completion of the filling. These records should include date, elevation of the fill
at the time of the settlement observations, and total plate settlement since fill placement
began. The records should be presented in tabular and graphical plots of time vs. plate
settlement. These records will be critical to provide the basis for evaluating the post-
construction settlement which could occur between equipment and structures supported on
deep foundations and those bearing in fill.
The settlement plate monitoring should continue during the EPC phase and following the
completion of final site grading.
Documentation of on fill material quality (gradation, Atterberg Limits, CBR, etc.) and the
results of field and laboratory compaction testing.
The final QA/AC reports for the site preparation should include details of earthwork
materials, fill placement, and compaction including drawings showing the elevations and
locations of all field density tests performed for each unit area.
In our opinion, the responsibility for this documentation is too important to be left to the site
preparation contractor.
Summary
This report outlines our settlement estimates for Units 6100, 7100, 7300, 8200, 8300, 8400, 8500,
8600, 8700, 8900, 9000, 9100, 9100, 9400 and 9500, and provides general comments regarding the
expected settlement at Borings C-2, C-3, C-6, C-7, C-10, C-11, C-12, C-14, C-15, C-17, C-19, C-
20, C-23 and C-25. Secondary compression was not considered in our analysis but could be a factor
at some units because of the presence of organic clays, decomposed wood and peats of varying
thicknesses observed within the test borings. Secondary compression is a rearrangement or
breakdown of the soil skeleton due to sustained heavy loads (creep) or decomposition of organic
material. The time rate and magnitude of settlement produced by secondary compression is difficult
to quantify and to predict over time. Ecopetrol should consider performing annual elevation survey
at all critical structures supported on shallow foundations to monitor long term settlement.

Mr. Peter Tam
March 16, 2011
Page 11
Our analysis did not assess liquefaction potential. Liquefaction mitigation will be addressed at
completion of the microzonation-liquefaction study currently being performed by Solingral.
We hope this information proves satisfactory and we are looking forward to the opportunity to
discuss our findings with you.
Sincerely,
Tolunay-Wong Engineers, Inc.
TBPE Registration No.: F-000124
Arthur J. Stephens, P.E.

Executive Vice President
Art/jdb/dee
Attachments: Figure 1: Locations of Priority 1 Borings, Previous Borings, and Planned Units
Figure 2: Rough Grading Elevations
Figure 3: Final Grading Elevations
Figures 4-33: N60 and Total Unit Weight Profiles for Fifteen Priority 1 Borings
Figures 34-61: Time vs. Settlement for Fifteen Priority 1 Borings
Appendix A: Logs of Test Borings w/ Photographs C-2, C-3, C-6, C-7, C-10, C-11, C-12, C-14, C-
15, C-17, C-19, C-20, C-23, C-25, and C-40
Appendix B Logs of CGA Borings A-5, A-8, A-10, A-11, A-13, A-14, B-15, B-16, B-18, B-21, B-
24, B-27 and B-28
Appendix C Consolidation Test Results
Appendix E Ecological Lake Survey Report

TWEI
Figures

Figure 2
Figure 3
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003
SPT Profile : C‐2, B‐18
75
Fill: Silty Sand w/ Gravel
70
Soft to Firm Clay
Loose to Medium Dense Sand
65
60
Loose Fine Sand
Elevation, m
Loose Elastic Silt
55
Loose to Dense Clayey/ Silty Sand
50
45 Alluvium
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
C‐2 B‐18
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 4
Total Unit Weight : C‐2
75
Fill: Silty Sand w/ Gravel
70 Soft to Firm Clay
65
60
Loose Fine Sand
Elevation, m
Loose Elastic Silt
55
Loose to Dense Clayey/ Silty Sand
50
Alluvium
45
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Total Unit Weight, kN/m3
Figure 5
SPT Profile : C‐3, B‐21, B‐24
75
Fill: Soft to Firm Clay
70 Soft to Firm Clay
Very Loose to Very Dense Fine Sand/ Silty Sand

65
60
Loose Elastic Silt/Very Soft Organic Clay
Elevation, m
55
Medium Dense to Very Dense Sand/ Silty Sand
50
Alluvium
45
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
C‐3 B‐21 B‐24
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 6
75
Fill: Soft to Firm Clay
70 Soft to Firm Soft Clay
Very Loose to Very Dense Fine Sand/ Silty Sand

65
60
Loose Elastic Silt/Very Soft Organic Clay
Elevation, m
55
Medium Dense to Very Dense Sand/ Silty Sand
50
Alluvium
45
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 7
SPT Profile : C‐6
75
70
Soft Clay
65
Medium Dense to Loose Silty Sand
Firm Clay
60 Loose Elastic Silt
Elevation, m
Very Stiff Lean Clay
55
Very Dense Sand
50
Firm Clay
45
Medium Dense to Very Dense Alluvium
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 8
75
70
Soft Clay
65
Medium Dense to Loose Silty Sand
Firm Clay
Elevation, m
Very Stiff Lean Clay
55
Very Dense Sand
50
Firm Clay
45
Medium Dense to Very DenseAlluvium
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 9
SPT Profile : C‐7
75
Fill: Silty Clay
70
Loose to Medium Dense Sand w/Silt
65
Elevation, m
Loose Sand w/Silt
Firm Sandy Lean Clay
55
Loose to Very Dense Sand w/Silt
50
45 Medium Dense Sand w/ Silt
Alluvium
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 10
75
Fill: Silty Clay
70
Loose to Medium Dense Sand w/Silt
65
Elevation, m
Loose Sand w/Silt
Firm Sandy Lean Clay
55
Loose to Very Dense Sand w/Silt
50
45 Medium Dense Sand w/ Silt
Alluvium
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 11
SPT Profile : C‐10
Fill Material
70 Soft Clay
Medium Dense Sand
65
60 Firm to Stiff Clay
55
Elevation, m
Medium Dense Sand
50
Dense to Very Dense Sand
45
Stiff to Very Stiff Clay
40
Alluvium
35
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 12
Fill Material
70 Soft Clay
Medium Dense Sand
65
60
Firm to Stiff Clay
55
Elevation, m
Medium Dense Sand
50
45
Stiff to Very Stiff Clay
40
Alluvium
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Figure 13
SPT Profile : C‐11, A‐10
75
Fill Material
Soft to stiff Clay
70
Loose to Medium Dense Fine Sand
65 Very Stiff Clay
Very Stiff Clay
Dense Fine Sand
60 Very Soft Clay
Elevation, m
55
Loose to Very Dense Sand
50
Stiff Lean Clay
45 Medium dense to Very Dense Sand
Alluvium
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
C‐11 A‐10
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 14
75
Fill Material
Soft to stiff Clay
70
Medium Dense Fine Sand
65 Very Stiff Clay
Very Stiff Clay Dense Fine Sand
60 Very Soft Clay
Elevation, m
55
50
Stiff Lean Clay
45 Medium Dense to Very Dense Sand
Alluvium
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 15
SPT P fil C
12 A 13
75
Soft Clay
70
Very Loose Silty Sand/Silt w/ Sand
Very Loose Silty Sand/Silt w/ Sand
65 Medium Dense Sand
60 Loose to Medium Dense Elastic Silt
Elevation, m
Loose to Medium Dense Silty Sand
55
Dense to Very Dense
Sand
50 Alluvium
45
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
C‐12 A‐13
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 16
Total Unit Weight Profile ‐ C‐12
75
Soft Clay
70
Very loose Silty Sand/ Silt w/ Sand
Medium Dense Sand
65
60
Loose To Medium Dense Elastic Silt
Elevation, m
evation, m
Loose to Medium Dense Silty Sand
55
50
Alluvium
45
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
T l U i W i h KN/ 3
Total Unit Weight, KN/m
Figure 17
70 Fill Material
Soft Clay
65
Loose to Dense Sand
60
Medium Dense Elastic Silt
55
Elevation, m
50
Medium Dense Sand
Loose Elastic Silt
45
Stiff Clay
40
Alluvium
35
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 18
70 Fill Material
Soft Clay
65
Loose to Dense Sand
60
55
Elevation, m
50
Medium Dense Sand
Loose Elastic Silt
45
Stiff Clay
40
Alluvium
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Figure 19
70 Fill Material
Very Soft Clay
65
60
Firm to Stiff Clay
55 Loose to Medium Dense Sand
50
45
Firm to Very stiff Clay w/ Gravel
Elevation, m
40
35
30
25
Alluvium
20
15
10
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 20
Fill Material
70
Very Soft to Soft Clay
65
60
Stiff Clay
55 Loose to Medium Dense Sand
50 Dense to Very Dense Sand
45
Firm to Very stiff Clay w/ Gravel
Elevation, m
40
35
30 Alluvium
25
20
15
10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 21
SPT Profile : C‐17, B‐16
Fill Material : Silty Clay
70 Soft Silty Clay
65
60
Elevation, m
55
Firm Clay
50
Alluvium
45
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
C‐17 B‐16
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 22
Fill Material : Silty Clay
70 Soft Silty Clay
65
60
Elevation, m
55
Firm Clay
50
Alluvium
45
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 23
Total Unit Weight Profile ‐ C‐19
75
Fill: Loose Sandy Silt w/ Gravel
70 Very Soft to Firm Clay
Medium Dense Sand
65
Soft to Very Soft Clay
60
Organic Clay
Elevation, m
vation, m
55
Very Soft to FirmClay
50
45
Alluvium
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 25
70
Very Soft Clay
65
60
Elevation, m
Medium Dense to Dense Sand
55
Alluvium
50
Very Stiff Clay
45
Alluvium
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 26
70
Very Soft Clay
65
60
Elevation, m
Medium Dense to Dense Sand
55
50
Alluvium
Very Stiff Clay
45
Alluvium
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 27
70 Soft Clay
Loose Sand
65
Dense Sand
Medium Dense Sand
60
Soft Clay
Elevation, m
55
Dense Sand
Dense Sand
50
Stiff Clay
45
Medium Dense Silty Sand
Firm to Stiff Clay
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 28
70 Soft Clay
Loose Sand
65
Dense Sand
Medium Dense Sand
60
Soft Clay
Elevation, m
55
Dense Sand
Dense Sand
50
Stiff Clay
45
Medium Dense Silty Sand
Firm to Stiff Clay
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 29
75
Very Soft Silty Clay
70
65
60
Elevation, m
55
50
Loose Elastic Silt
Hard Clay
45
Alluvium
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 30
75
Very Soft Silty Clay
70
65
60
Elevation, m
55
50
Loose Elastic Silt
Hard Clay
45
Alluvium
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 31
75 Fill: Very Loose to Loose Gravel/Clay/Sand
Very Soft Clay
70
65
Firm Clay
Loose Elastic Silt
60
Elevation, m
55
Very Soft Clay
50 Stiff Sandy Clay
Loose Sand
45
Alluvium
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
C‐40 A‐14
N60, Blows per Foot
Figure 32
75
Fill: Very Loose to Loose Gravel/Clay/Sand
Very Soft Clay
70
65
Firm Clay
Elevation, m
55 Very Soft Clay
50 Stiff Sandy Clay
Loose Sand
45
Alluvium
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 33
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 1, Maximum Drainage Path = 1.5 m
Boring C‐2
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End Stage 1 Startof Stage 2 End of Stage 2
70 Days 660 Days 690 Days
0.02
0.04
Settlement, m
0.06
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0 m
0.08
0 08
0.10
0.12
0.14
Figure 34
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 2 Max Drainage Path = 1.5 m
Boring C‐2
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
End Stage 1 930 Days
390 Days
0.02
0.04 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
Settlement, m
0.06
0.08
0 08
0.10
0.12
0.14
Figure 35
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 1m Maximum Drainage Path = 5 m
Boring C‐3
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.05
Settlement, m
0.10
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.15
0.20
0.25
Figure 36
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 2, Maximum Drainage Path = 5 m
Boring C‐3
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.05
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
Settlement, m
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
Figure 37
Boring C‐6
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.10
0.20
Settlement, m
0.30 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.40
0.50
0.60
Figure 38
Boring C‐6
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.10
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
0.20 Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m

Settlement, m
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
Figure 39
Boring C‐7
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.02
0.04
Settlement, m
0.06 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.08
0.10
0.12
Figure 40
Boring C‐7
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.02
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
0.04 Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m

Settlement, m
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
Figure 41
Boring C‐10
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.05
0.10
Settlement, m
0.15
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.20
0 20
0.25
0.30
0.35
Figure 42
Boring C‐10
Startof Stage 2
Days 900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
0.05 390 Days
0.10
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m Stage 2 ‐ 76.0 m
Settlement, m
0.15
0.20
0 20
0.25
0.30
0.35
Figure 43
Boring C‐11
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.000
0.050
0.100
Settlement, m
0.150
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.200
0 200
0.250
0.300
0.350
Figure 44
Boring C‐11
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.000
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.050
0.100 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
Settlement, m
0.150
0.200
0 200
0.250
0.300
0.350
Figure 45
Boring C‐12
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.05
0.10
Settlement, m
0.15
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
0.20
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
Figure 46
Boring C‐12
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
0.05 390 Days
0.10
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
Settlement, m
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
Figure 47
Boring C‐14
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.10
0.20
Settlement, m
0.30
0.40 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
Figure 48
Boring C‐14
Startof Stage 2
Days 900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
0.10 390 Days
0.20
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m Stage 2 ‐ 76.0 m
Settlement, m
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
Figure 49
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 1, Maximum Drainage Path=2.75 m
Boring C‐15
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.05 70 Days 660 Days 690 Days
0.10
0.15
Settlement, m
0.20
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
0.25
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
Figure 50
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 2, Maximum Drainage Path= 2.75 m
Boring C‐15
Startof Stage 2
Days 900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
0.05
390 Days
0.10
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m
0.15
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0 m
Settlement, m
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
Figure 51
Boring C‐17
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.000
0.050
0.100
Settlement, m
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
0.150
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.200
0.250
0.300
Figure 52
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 2, w/ Maximum Drainage Path = 4 m
Boring C‐17
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.000
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.050
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
0.100 Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
Settlement, m
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
Figure 53
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 1, Maximum Drainage Path = 5.15m
Boring C‐19
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.10
0.20
Settlement, m
0.30
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.40
0 40
0.50
0.60
0.70
Figure 54
TWEI Project No. 10.14.105.003 Settlement ‐ Staged Fill Placement, Schedule No. 2, Maximum Drainage Path = 5.15m
Boring C‐19
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.10
0.20 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
Settlement, m
0.30
0.40
0 40
0.50
0.60
0.70
Figure 55
Boring C‐20
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
0.10
0.20
Settlement, m
0.30
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.40
0 40
0.50
0.60
0.70
Figure 56
Boring C‐20
Startof Stage 2
Days 900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.10
0.20 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0 m
Settlement, m
0.30
0.40
0 40
0.50
0.60
0.70
Figure 57
Boring C‐23
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000

0.00
End Stage 1 End of Stage 2

Startof Stage 2
70 Days 690 Days
660 Days
0.05
0.10
Settlement, m
0.15
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
Figure 58
Boring C‐23
Startof Stage 2
Days 900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.00
End of Stage 2
930 Days
End Stage 1
390 Days
0.05
0.10 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0 m
Settlement, m
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
Figure 59
Boring C‐25
Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.000
0.005
Settlement, m
0.010
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
0.015
0.020
0.025
Figure 60
Boring C‐25
Startof Stage 2
Days
900 Days
1 10 100 1000 10000
0.000
End of Stage 2
390 Days
0.005
Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m
Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m
Settlement, m
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
Figure 61
TWEI
Appendix A
Logs of Test Borings w/ Photographs
(C-2, C-3, C-6, C-7, C-10, C-11, C-12, C-14, C-15, C-17, C-19, C-20, C-23, C-25,
And C-40)

TWEI
Appendix B
Logs of CGA Borings
(A-8, A-10, A-13, A-14, B-15, B-16, B-18, B-21, B-24, And B-28)

TWEI
Appendix C
Consolidation Test Results

TWEI
Appendix D
Ecological Lake Survey Report

Analisis Estudio de Suelos PMRB - 2!10!14-105.003-268

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analisis Estudio de Suelos PMRB - 2!10!14-105.003-268

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tolunay-W o n g Engineers, Inc.

1) Boring C-19 (BFW Package) issued December 23, 2010; and,

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

8200 C-2 49.1 55 (med. dense to dense sand)

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

Top of Alluvium Top of Competent Soil

8400 C-10 42.0 52 (dense to v. dense sand)

C-2 Soft Lean Clay (CL) 2.07 70.7-68.5 1.035

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

Thickness Elevation Maximum Drainage Path,

C-15 Very Soft Clay (CL) 4.6 69.6-65 2.3

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

Analysis Results and Discussion

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

This provides a scheduling option to reduce post-construction differential settlement between

Quality Assurance and Quality Control

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

Arthur J. Stephens, P.E.

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

Very Loose to Very Dense Fine Sand/ Silty Sand

Very Loose to Very Dense Fine Sand/ Silty Sand

Total Unit Weight Profile ‐ C‐12

Total Unit Weight Profile ‐ C‐19

0.04 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

0.30 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

0.20 Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m

0.06 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

0.04 Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m

0.100 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

0.40 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m

0.20 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m

Stage 1 ‐ 74.5m Stage 2 ‐ 76.0m

0.20 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m

1 10 100 1000 10000

End Stage 1 End of Stage 2

0.10 Stage 1 ‐ 74.5 m

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

T:\HIG\Projects\2010\10.14.105-003\10-14-105.003-268(135)-Priority 1 Settlement Report.doc

You might also like