We have completed the geotechnical investigation for the above-referenced project. Our findings and recommendations are summarized below.

Transcription

1 Foundation Engineering, Inc. Professional Geotechnical Services Memorandum Date: September 7, 2017 To: Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis c/o Chris Bentley From: Subject: Project: James K. Maitland, P.E., G.E. Erin J. Gillaspie, P.E. Geotechnical Investigation - UUFC Addition Project We have completed the geotechnical investigation for the above-referenced project. Our findings and recommendations are summarized below. BACKGROUND The Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Corvallis (UUFC) is planning to expand their facility located at 2945 NW Circle Blvd in. The expansion includes a single-story, ±4,000 SF addition located north of the existing facility and an extension of the parking lot in the northeast corner of the property. The planned addition includes a social hall, kitchen, and storage area. The site location is shown on Figure 1A (Appendix A). UUFC retained Foundation Engineering to complete a geotechnical investigation and infiltration testing for the planned addition. Per the Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC), the occupancy of the addition does not require a site specific seismic hazard study. Our scope of work was outlined in a proposal dated August 15, 2017, and authorized by a signed purchase order dated August 25, FIELD EXPLORATION We dug three exploratory test pits (TP-1 through TP-3) near the footprint of the planned addition using a Hitachi 60 USB mini tracked excavator. Two additional test pits (TP-4 and TP-5) were dug north of the addition for infiltration tests. The approximate test pit locations are shown on Figure 2A (Appendix A). The test pits extended to depths of ±3 to 9 feet. Representative soil samples were obtained at selected depths for possible laboratory testing. Where feasible, undrained shear strength measurements were made using a Field Vane shear device. At most locations, the soil was too dry and stiff for vane shear tests. 820 NW Cornell Avenue SW Cirrus Drive, Bldg 24 Beaverton, Oregon

2 At each test pit, the soil profiles were logged and the absence of ground water was noted. The soil profiles, sampling depths, and strength measurements are summarized on the test pit logs (Appendix B). Upon completion of the excavations, the test pits were backfilled with the excavated materials and the surface was graded relatively smooth. No topographic information was available to estimate ground surface elevations at the test pits. DISCUSSION OF SITE CONDITIONS Site Topography and Surface Conditions The proposed addition will be built immediately north of the main building. The site slopes gently uphill to the north and is covered with grass and scattered trees. We estimate a ±4 to 5 foot difference in the ground surface elevation within the footprint of the proposed addition. The parking lot addition is planned at the northeast corner of the parcel, adjacent to the existing parking that encompasses the northwest portion of the property. The parking lot addition will be constructed over an area that is presently covered primarily by an existing lawn. The Benton County GIS office has prepared a map of historic streams that have been filled in or altered. The map available online indicates a stream ran diagonally through the parcel and crossed the footprint of the addition. Therefore, we expect to find fill within the foundation area of the addition, once the site excavation is completed. Subsurface Conditions A general discussion of the soils encountered in the test pits is presented below. A more detailed description of the subsurface conditions is provided on the test pit logs (Appendix B). Topsoil Topsoil was encountered in test pits TP-1, TP-3, TP-4, and TP-5 to a depth of ±4 to 6 inches. The topsoil consists of very stiff to hard, dry silt with scattered organics and gravel, and trace sand. Site Fill Site fill (or possible fill) was encountered to depths of 2.5 to 6 feet. The fill typically consists of brown, very stiff to hard, dry, low plasticity silt with scattered small gravel and trace sand. The appearance of the site fill was similar to the underlying soil, possibly because it was generated from on-site grading. Therefore, the contact between site fill and native soil is inferred and approximate. The site fill may have been placed when the historic stream (described above) was filled in. UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 2. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

3 Fine-Grained Alluvium The native soil consists of brown, very stiff to hard, low to medium plasticity silt. A vane shear test recorded at 3 feet in TP-1 indicated an undrained shear strength of 1.5 tsf. However, the soil was typically too stiff for vane tests. Residual Soil At TP-2, a 2-foot thick layer of residual soils was encountered at ±4 feet. The residual soil represents material that has weathered in place from the underlying parent formation. The residual soil consists of brown, hard, low plasticity silt with relict sandstone/siltstone structure. Bedrock Extremely weak (R0), highly weathered to decomposed sandstone was encountered in TP-2 at ±6 feet. The sandstone is part of the Spencer Formation, which underlies much of the Witham Hills area. We anticipate it underlies the entire parcel at relatively shallow depths. The upper portion of the bedrock could be readily excavated with the small excavator. Ground Water No ground water or seepage was observed to the maximum depth of the test pits. However, the soils moisture increased with depth. The mapped historic stream now buried by site fill may be a conduit for subsurface seepage during periods of prolonged wet weather. LABORATORY TESTING The laboratory work was limited to index tests (natural water content and Atterberg limits) to classify the soils and estimate their engineering properties. Laboratory index test results are summarized in Table 1C (Appendix C). Field vane shear test results are summarized on the test pit logs. INFILTRATION TESTING Infiltration testing was performed on September 2, 2017 using the Encased Falling Head infiltration test procedure outlined in Appendix D of the City of Corvallis Stormwater Design Standards (2015). The tests were completed in TP-4 and TP-5 at a depth of ±3 to 3.5 feet. Upon completion of the infiltration testing, the test pits and trenches were backfilled with the excavated materials. The results of the infiltration testing are provided in Appendix C and summarized in Table 1. UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 3. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

4 Table 1. Infiltration Test Results Test Designation Test Depth (feet) Soil Description at Test Depth Infiltration Rate (inches/hour) TP-4 ±3.0 Very stiff to hard silt ±0.72 TP-5 ±3.5 Very stiff silt ±0.72 Notes: 1. Tests based on Falling Head Infiltration Test as outlined in the City of Corvallis Stormwater Design Standards (2015). 2. Tests were conducted on September 2, 2017 in pre-saturated test pits. 3. See Figure 2A for approximate test locations. 4. All test results are unfactored. The test results were consistent for both locations. Based on the observed soil conditions, we believe the infiltration rate will be relatively consistent across the site at similar depths. The 2015 Stormwater Design Standards recommends applying a factor of safety of 2, resulting in a design infiltration rate of ±0.36 in/hr for facility design. We did not encounter a permanent water table with the limits of our exploration (±9 feet). However, a perched condition could develop during periods of sustained rainfall. SEISMIC ANALYSIS Seismic Response Spectrum A site response spectrum was developed for the parcel in accordance with the Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC 2014), which is based on Section 1613 of the International Building Code (IBC 2012). The design maximum considered earthquake ground motion maps in the IBC (2012) are based on modified USGS (2008) maps with a 1% probability of exceedance in 50 years (i.e., a ±4,975-year return period). The modifications include factors to adjust the spectral accelerations to account for directivity and risk. The site is underlain by relatively shallow bedrock (Spencer Formation), which is known to extend to great depth. Based on these conditions, we recommend a Site Class C (i.e., very dense soil and soft rock) for seismic design. The seismic design parameters and OSSC response spectrum are shown on Figure 3A (Appendix A). Liquefaction Liquefiable soils typically consist of saturated, loose sands and non-plastic or low plasticity silt (i.e., a PI of less than 8). These conditions are not found at this site. The risk of liquefaction is negligible due to the stiffness and plasticity of the near-surface soils and the presence of shallow bedrock. UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 4. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

5 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Proposed Foundations and Loads The planned addition will be a single-story, wood-framed structure with a slab-on-grade concrete floor. Conventional continuous and spread footings are planned. Foundation loads were not available at the time this report was prepared. For the purpose of this report, we assumed maximum column loads would be in the range of ±25 to 50 kips. Bearing Capacity The foundation soils were relatively dry and very stiff at the time of our exploration. For these conditions, a very high theoretical bearing pressure could be calculated. However, we believe the soils could soften during wet weather. Therefore, we have recommended a presumptive (allowable) bearing pressure of 2,000 psf based on assumed conditions during the winter and spring. This value assumes the base of the foundation will be set at least 18 inches below the surrounding grade and will be underlain by at least 6 inches of Select Fill extending at least 6 inches beyond the footing edges. We have also assumed any unsuitable fill encountered during construction will be removed and replaced with compacted Select Fill (defined below). Settlement A formal settlement analysis was not performed. However, due to the limited thickness of existing site fill and native overburden, and the stiffness of the existing foundation soils, we anticipate the total settlement of the building footings will be less than ±½ inch, if foundation preparation is completed as recommended herein. We estimate the maximum differential settlement between building footings will be approximately half of the total settlement, or ±¼ inch. Sliding Coefficient and Passive Resistance for Footings We recommend a coefficient of friction of 0.5 between the base of the footings and the crushed rock fill for sliding analysis. An equivalent fluid density of 150 pcf is recommended to represent the potential passive resistance against the vertical face of the footings. This assumes limited horizontal movement (i.e., less than 1 inch) for service-level design. This presumptive (allowable) value assumes all footings will be backfilled with compacted Select Fill extending at least 6 inches beyond the edge of the footings. Pavements Pavement design was not part of the scope of work. We have provided the below recommendations for subgrade preparation beneath the new parking lot expansion. However, we assume the pavement section will match the existing one. UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 5. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

6 RECOMMENDATIONS UUFC indicated they would like to start construction of the planned addition in the spring of 2018, but construction is more likely to occur during next summer. Therefore, we have assumed site preparation and foundation construction will occur during dry weather. We should be contacted if wet weather construction is anticipated so we can make appropriate modifications to our recommendations. General Earthwork and Materials Specifications 1. Select Fill as defined in this report should consist of ¾, 1, or 1½-inch minus, clean, well-graded, crushed gravel or rock. We should be provided a sample of the intended fill or a gradation curve for approval, prior to delivery to the site. 2. Granular Site Fill as defined in this report should consist of 3 or 4-inch minus, clean, (i.e., less than 5% passing the #200 U.S. Sieve), well-graded, angular, crushed quarry rock. A material gradation should be provided to us for approval prior to delivery to the site. 3. Fine-grained soil generated from on-site grading and demolition debris should not be placed beneath new slabs or foundations, and should be hauled from construction areas. 4. Drain Rock should consist of 2-inch minus, clean (less than 2% passing the #200 sieve), open-graded crushed gravel or rock. The actual gradation and maximum aggregate size will depend on availability by local suppliers. We should be provided a sample of the intended fill and gradation curve for approval, prior to delivery to the site. 5. Filter Fabric as defined in this report should consist of a non-woven geotextile with a grab tensile strength greater than 200 lb., an apparent opening size (AOS) of between #70 and 100 (US Sieve) and a permittivity greater than 0.1 sec The Separation Geotextile (if required) should meet the minimum requirements of an AASHTO M geotextile for separation and have Mean Average Roll Value (MARV) strength properties meeting the requirements of an AASHTO M Class 2, woven geotextile. We should be provided a specification sheet on the selected geotextile for approval prior to delivery to the site. 7. Moisture condition and compact all imported granular fill in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches. Thinner lifts may be required if light or hand-operated equipment is used for compaction. Compact the subgrade (during dry weather only) and all fill to a minimum of 95% relative compaction. The maximum dry density of ASTM D 698 should be used as the standard for estimating relative compaction. UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 6. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

7 Field density tests should be run frequently to confirm adequate compaction. The completed subgrade and building pad should be proof-rolled using a loaded, 10-yd 3 dump truck or another approved vehicle. Adequate compaction based on proof-rolling should be confirmed by a Foundation Engineering representative. Areas of pumping or deflection observed beneath the truck wheels should be reworked, or overexcavated and replaced with compacted Select Fill and proof-rolled again. 8. Shoring should be provided in trenches according to OR-OSHA Standards to protect workers from sloughing or caving soils. The site fill and native overburden correspond to OR-OSHA soil Type B. However, the soil may degrade to Type C during the winter or in the presence of perched ground water. Shoring and worker safety are the sole responsibility of the contractor. Site Preparation and Foundation Construction 9. Strip the site to remove surface vegetation and roots. Deeper grubbing may be required to remove roots from larger bushes or trees. Haul all stripping from the site. 10. Excavate to the required grade. The extent of unsuitable fill (if any) due to the filling of the original stream is not currently known. Therefore, the depth and limits of the required overexcavation should be confirmed by Foundation Engineering during construction. Replace the over-excavated site fill with compacted Granular Site fill or a combination of Granular Site Fill and Select Fill. We recommend a line item in the bid documents for any overexcavation and replacement with granular fill under the footprint of the building. 11. Compact the exposed subgrade as specified in Item 7 (dry weather only). A Separation Geotextile is not required during dry weather, but is recommended if slab and foundation construction extends into wet weather. 12. Place and compact a minimum of 12 inches of Select Fill to create the building pad. The building pad thickness may need to be increased to 24 inches in areas used by construction traffic or during wet weather conditions. 13. Provide a minimum of 6 inches of compacted Select Fill beneath building footings. Select Fill should extend at least 6 inches beyond the edge of the footings. Overexcavation will be required for footing excavations terminating in soft material or unsuitable fill. The limits and depth of any overexcavation should be confirmed by Foundation Engineering. UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 7. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

8 Foundation Design Drainage 14. Design all footings using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. 15. Assume a total settlement of up to ±½ inch and a differential settlement of ¼ inch between adjacent footings. 16. Use a coefficient of friction of 0.5 for new footings bearing on Select Fill for sliding analysis. 17. Use an allowable passive resistance of 150 pcf if the building footings are backfilled with compacted Select Fill extending a minimum of 6 inches beyond the edges of building footings. 18. Design new structures using the response spectra, Site Class and seismic parameters summarized in Figure 3A. 19. Use a modulus of subgrade reaction (Ks) of 250 pci for slab design. This value assumes the slab will be underlain by at least 12 inches of compacted Select Fill placed over a compacted subgrade. 20. Install foundation drains along the perimeter of the new addition. The drains should consist of 3 or 4-inch diameter, perforated or slotted, PVC pipe wrapped in a Filter Fabric. The pipe should be set at the base of the perimeter building footing. The pipe should be bedded in at least 4 inches of Drain Rock and backfilled full depth with Drain Rock. The entire mass of Drain Rock should be wrapped in a similar Filter Fabric that laps at least 12 inches at the top. 21. Provide clean-outs at appropriate locations for future maintenance of the drainage system. 22. Discharge the water from the drain system into the nearest catch basin, manhole or storm drain. Water should not be discharged directly onto the sloping terrain to the east of the facilities. Pavement Construction We have assumed pavement construction will occur during dry weather. If pavement construction extends into wet weather, we should be contacted to offer revised recommendations. Wet weather construction will likely require 24 inches of Select Fill over a Separation Geotextile to support construction traffic through the wet construction season. UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 8. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

9 Subgrade preparation and pavement construction during dry weather should be completed as follows: 23. Excavate to the required subgrade elevation. Compact the subgrade during dry weather as recommended in Item Place a Separation Geotextile on the prepared subgrade. The geotextile should be placed as recommended in Item Provide a pavement section matching (at a minimum) the base rock and asphaltic concrete thicknesses of the adjacent, existing parking area. DESIGN REVIEW/CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION/TESTING We should be provided the opportunity to review all drawings and specifications that pertain to site preparation and foundation construction. Site preparation will require field evaluation of the soil conditions during excavation and the extent of any unsuitable site fill. Construction observation should be provided by a Foundation Engineering representative. Frequent field density tests should be run on all compacted subgrade and Select Fill. We recommend that we be retained to provide the necessary construction observation. VARIATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS, USE OF THIS REPORT, AND WARRANTY The analysis, conclusions and recommendations contained herein assume the subsurface profiles encountered in the test pits are representative of the site conditions. No changes in the enclosed recommendations should be made without our approval. We will assume no responsibility or liability for any engineering judgment, inspection or testing performed by others. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis, and its design consultants for the UUFC Addition project in. Information contained herein should not be used for other sites or for unanticipated construction without our written consent. This report is intended for planning and design purposes. Contractors using this information to estimate construction quantities, production rates, or costs do so at their own risk. Climate conditions in western Oregon typically consist of wet weather for almost half of the year (typically between mid-october and late May). The recommendations for site preparation are not intended to represent any warranty (expressed or implied) against the growth of mold, mildew or other organisms that grow in a humid or moist environment. Our services do not include any survey or assessment of potential surface contamination or contamination of the soil or ground water by hazardous or toxic materials. We assume that those services, if needed, have been completed by others. Our work was done in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Attachments UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 9. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

10 REFERENCES AASHTO, 2006, Geotextile Specification for Highway Applications: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), M , 21 p. IBC, 2012, International Building Code: International Code Council, Inc., Sections 1613 and OR-OSHA, 2011, Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 437, Division 3 - Construction, Subdivision P Excavations: Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division (OR-OSHA). OSSC, 2014, Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC): Based on the International Code Council, Inc., 2012 IBC, Sections 1613 and USGS, 2008, National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project, US Seismic Design Maps: USGS website: UUFC Addition September 7, 2017 Geotechnical Investigation 11. Project Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Corvallis

11 Appendix A Figures Professional Geotechnical Services Foundation Engineering, Inc.

12 NO SCALE SITE Note: Base map obtained from Oregon Department of Transportion website

13 TP-2 TP-5 TP-1 TP-3 TP-4 SCALE IN FEET

14 IBC 2012/OSSC 2014 Response Spectrum Spectral Acceleration, S a (g) Period (seconds) Notes: 1. The Design Response Spectrum is based on IBC 2012 Section The following parameters are based on the modified USGS 2008 maps provided in IBC 2012/OSSC 2014: Site Class= C Damping = 5% S S = 0.97 F a = 1.01 S MS = 0.98 S DS = 0.66 S 1 = 0.48 F v = 1.32 S M1 = 0.63 S D1 = S S and S 1 values indicated in Note 2 are the mapped, risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake spectral acclerations for 1% probability of exceedence in 50 years. 4. F a and F v were established based on IBC 2012, Tables (1) and (2) using the selected S S and S 1 values. S DS and S D1 values include a 2/3 reduction on S MS and S M1 as discussed in IBC 2012 Section Site location is: Latitude , Longitude FIGURE 3A IBC 2012/OSSC 2014 SITE RESPONSE SPECTRUM UUFC Addition Project

15 Appendix B Test Pit Logs Professional Geotechnical Services Foundation Engineering, Inc.

16

17

18 Surface: grass. Comments Depth, Feet Sample # S-1-1 S-1-2 S-1-3 Location C, TSF Elev. Depth Symbol Soil and Rock Description Very stiff to hard clayey SILT, some organics (ML); brown, dry, low to medium plasticity, organics consist of fine roots, (topsoil). Dense silty GRAVEL, some sand (GM); grey-brown, dry to damp, low plasticity, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse subangular to subrounded gravel, (fill). Very stiff SILT (ML); brown, damp, low plasticity, (possible fill). Very stiff SILT (ML); light brown and iron-stained, damp, low plasticity, (possible fill). 5 S S Stiff to very stiff SILT (ML); brown, moist, low plasticity, (alluvium). No ground water or seepage encountered to the limit of exploration. 8 9 S-1-6 S Stiff silty CLAY (CL); brown, moist, low plasticity, (alluvium). BOTTOM OF EXPLORATION Project No.: Test Pit Log: TP-1 Surface Elevation: Date of Test Pit: N/A (Approx.) August 31, 2017 UUFC Addition Comments Surface: duff/bark chips. Depth, Feet 1 2 Sample # Location C, TSF Elev. Depth 0.8 Symbol Soil and Rock Description Very stiff to hard gravelly SILT, some sand (ML); grey-brown, dry, low plasticity, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse angular to rounded gravel, (fill). Very stiff to hard SILT (ML); brown to light brown. iron-stained, damp, low plasticity, (fill). 3 S S-2-2 > Hard SILT (ML); light brown and iron-stained, damp, low plasticity, relict sandstone structure, (residual soil). No ground water or seepage encountered to the limit of exploration. 6 7 S Extremely weak (R0) SANDSTONE; light brown, highly weathered, fine sand, (Spencer Formation). BOTTOM OF EXPLORATION 8 9 Project No.: Test Pit Log: TP-2 Surface Elevation: Date of Test Pit: N/A (Approx.) August 31, 2017 UUFC Addition

19 Surface: grass. Comments Depth, Feet Sample # S-3-1 S-3-2 Location C, TSF 2.00 >2.5 Elev. Depth Symbol Soil and Rock Description Very stiff SILT, some gravel and organics, trace sand (CL); brown, dry, low plasticity, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse subangular to subrounded gravel, organics consist of roots up to ±½-inch diameter, blocky structure, (topsoil). Very stiff to hard SILT, some gravel, trace sand (ML); brown, damp, low plasticity, (fill). Hard SILT (ML); light brown to brown, iron-stained, damp, low plasticity, (alluvium). 4 5 S-3-3 No ground water or seepage encountered to the limit of exploration S-3-4 S Very stiff SILT (ML); brown and iron-stained, moist, low plasticity, (alluvium). BOTTOM OF EXPLORATION 9 Project No.: Test Pit Log: TP-3 Surface Elevation: Date of Test Pit: N/A (Approx.) August 31, 2017 UUFC Addition Surface: grass. Comments Depth, Feet 1 2 Sample # Location C, TSF Elev. Depth 0.3 Symbol Soil and Rock Description Very stiff SILT, some organics (ML); brown, dry to damp, low plasticity, organics consist of fine roots, blocky structure, (topsoil). Very stiff SILT (ML); light brown to brown and iron-stained, damp, low plasticity, (alluvium). No ground water or seepage encountered to the limit of exploration BOTTOM OF EXPLORATION Project No.: Test Pit Log: TP-4 Surface Elevation: Date of Test Pit: N/A (Approx.) August 31, 2017 UUFC Addition

20 Surface: grass. Comments Depth, Feet 1 2 Sample # Location C, TSF Elev. Depth 0.3 Symbol Soil and Rock Description Very stiff SILT, some organics (ML); brown, dry, low plasticity, organics consist of fine roots, blocky structure, (topsoil). Very stiff SILT, scattered organics (ML); brown, damp, low plasticity, organics consist of roots up to ±1-inch diameter and wood debris, (alluvium). 3 No ground water or seepage encountered to the limit of exploration BOTTOM OF EXPLORATION Project No.: Test Pit Log: TP-5 Surface Elevation: Date of Test Pit: N/A (Approx.) August 31, 2017 UUFC Addition

21 Appendix C Field and Laboratory Test Results Professional Geotechnical Services Foundation Engineering, Inc.

22 Foundation Engineering, Inc. UUFC Addition Project Sample Number Table 1C. Natural Water Contents and Atterberg Limits Sample Depth (ft) Natural Water Content (percent) LL PL PI USCS Classification S ML S S S S S S ML S S

23 Foundation Engineering, Inc. UUFC Addition Project Test Hole Number: TP-4 Trial Number: 1 Time: Timer Interval Measurement Drop in water level Infilteration Rate Remakrs (min) (feet) (feet) (in/hr) 7:17 AM Filled with 6'' of water :17 AM Adjusted to 6'' level for Trial 2 Trial Number: 2 Time: Timer Interval Measurement Drop in water level Infilteration Rate Remakrs (min) (feet) (feet) (in/hr) 9:24 AM Filled with 6'' of water :24 AM Adjusted to 6'' level for Trial 3 Trial Number: 3 Time: Timer Interval Measurement Drop in water level Infilteration Rate Remakrs (min) (feet) (feet) (in/hr) 11:27 AM Filled with 6'' of water :27 PM Test Infiltration Rate

24 Foundation Engineering, Inc. UUFC Addition Project Test Hole Number: TP-5 Trial Number: 1 Time: Timer Interval Measurement Drop in water level Infilteration Rate Remakrs (min) (feet) (feet) (in/hr) 7:23 AM Filled with 6'' of water :23 AM Adjusted to 6'' level for Trial 2 Trial Number: 2 Time: Timer Interval Measurement Drop in water level Infilteration Rate Remakrs (min) (feet) (feet) (in/hr) 9:23 AM Filled with 6'' of water :23 AM Adjusted to 6'' level for Trial 3 Trial Number: 3 Time: Timer Interval Measurement Drop in water level Infilteration Rate Remakrs (min) (feet) (feet) (in/hr) 11:28 AM Filled with 6'' of water :28 PM Test Infiltration Rate