HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3752 Lot 4 Preliminary Soils
.~
e
e
1\Z 31::S"" L
~4.
w. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
39281 VIA PAMPLONA
MURRIETA, CALIFORNIA 92563
(909) 696-7059
Date:~ober4,2000
Project No: 00079-1
1 Mr. and Mrs. Griffin
i 4812 Gardenia Street
: Oceanside, California 92057
: Subject:
Preliminary Soil Engineering Evaluation, Slope Stability Analysis
for Proposed Grading and Residence Located at Lot 4,
Tract 3752, De Portola Road, City of Temecula, California
: Dear Mr. Griffin,
: Pursuantto your authorization and a requirement by the City ofTemecula, a limited soil engineering
: evaluation and slope stability analysis was conducted on the subject lot to determine the distribution
: and engineering characteristics of earth materials present. The results of field exploration, together
I with the results of the laboratory tests, are summarized in the attached appendix.
iAdditional information provided herein includes preliminary foundation design for proposed
. residential construction.
IAccompanying 'Maps and Appendices
iAttached Appendix A, Summary of Laboratory and Field Test Results
iAttached Appendix S, General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
iAttached Appendix C, Slope Stability Analysis Calculations
: Plate 1, Section for Stability Analysis
iScope of Work
IThe scope of work performed for this study included the following:
11. Observation of a previously graded lot,
l
:2.
Excavation of exploration trenches into the subject site to observe the existing soil conditions
and recover samples.
:3. Laboratory testing, and;
:4. Preparation of this report including conclusions and recommendations pertinent to the
proposed construction.
\
--
e
e
IMr. and Mrs. Griffin, Lot 4, Tr. 3752, De Portola Road, Temecula
: Project No: 00079-1
Page: 2
i Site Description
'The site is rectangular in shape, fronting 265 feet along the north side of De Portola Road and
! extending 395 feet northward. The site is partially graded with a pad roughly in the center ofthe site.
: The site slopes to the south with varying gradients and a small ravine collecting water and disposing
: onto De Portola Road. The pad is reported to be approximately 10 years old, however, no records
:of documentation for grading and or fill placement can be obtained. Comparing the current
: topography with the original topography, a cut slope was created above the existing pad and the fill
,was placed to create the pad and fill slope. Presently, the site is covered with a nominal growth of
,weeds and grasses that were recently cut. No visible signs of erosion were noted on the pad or the
: fill slope, however, substantial erosion has taken place in the lower section of the cut slope. Much
:of the rilling is from 3 to 6 feet deep below the original cut slope face. This is a result of no
i landscaping and no maintenance for at least 10 years.
I Field Work
: Field work on the site consisted of observation excavations made by backhoe for the purpose of
, recovering samples of representative earth materials for laboratory testing. The results of these tests
! are contained in the attached Appendix A. Additionally, a reconnaissance of the nearby area was
i conducted in order to obtain information pertinent to the site.
: Observation and testing of the excavation indicated that the existing fill materials in the pad area are
'moderately dense to loose. An excavation placed at the presumed deepest location of the fill
I indicated thatthematerials were very loose and the top soil had been left in place below the fill. Other
i areas, such as the eastem end of the pad, had fill that was moderately dense with a sharp contact
:at the base of the fill on the native ground. The density of the fill in general is quite variable with work
:quality ranging from good to poor. The toe of the existing fill slope was also observed along the
ieastem end of the pad and found to be founded with a key into existing earth materials. Samples
,were recovered for both existing fills and native earth materials for testing in the laboratory.
I Laboratory Testing
IThe maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the soil was determined in accordance
,with ASTM test designation 0 1557-82. The expansion index testing should be conducted on a
'representative sample at the completion of rough grading in order to determine the expansion
: potential of the near surface soils in the vicinity of proposed foundations. The expansion index test
,was conducted in accordance with UBC 29-2 and is not expected to vary significantly from the final
'results at the completion of rough grading. A shear test was conducted to obtain the strength
:characteristics of the native earth materials so that a slope stability analysis could be performed on
:the proposed slope at the northem side of the pad.
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
2.
.-- -
,
(-~ ~
e
e
IMr. and Mrs. Griffin, Lot 4, Tr. 3752, De Portola Road, Temecula
: Project No: 00079-1
Page: 3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I Conclusions
'The development of the site for single or multi-story residential construction is both feasible and safe
:from a geotechnical standpoint provided that the recommendations contained herein are
,implemented during design and construction.
, 1. The site contains a graded pad and associated slopes normally found in hillside grading.
; 2. The fill soil is observed to be loose in place with the exception of the eastem end of the pad
area. Native materials are found to be dense in place.
:3. Observation, classification, indicate that the near surface soils have a low to moderate
expansion potential.
: 4. Ground water was not encountered in any of the excavations.
'5. Slope stability analysis indicates an adequate factor of safety for 1.5 to 1 cut slope at the
northem side of the pad to heights exceeding 50 feet. Slope stability was calculated using the
program PCSTBLE 6, by Purdue University.
I Recommendations
IThe recommendations contained herein are contingent upon W. C. Hobbs, Consulting Engineer or
'his assigns providing the services listed in the Construction section in order to confirm design
,assumptions and review the field conditions of any excavations for possible anisotropic properties.
: If observation indicates that the conditions are different than those indicated in this report, additional,
lor modifications to the, recommendations may become necessary.
iSite Grading
,In order to provide proper support for building foundations, remedial grading will be required.
: Proposed grading consists of creating a driveway, pad and foundation areas and or the balance
: placement of fills on the site for a pad area in the vicinity of the proposed residence and driveway.
: Grading also consists of creating a new cut slope at the rear of the existing pad at a slope ratio of
11.5:1. This is designed to increase the overall pad area and mitigate the existing erosion damage
:that has occurred on the non maintained slope face. All grading and retaining wall backfills should
: be placed in accordance with minimum standards presented a the back of this report, Appendix B,
:Standard Specifications for Earthwork Construction.
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
.3
/-'1
l. _ J
e
e
'Mr. and Mrs. Griffin, Lot 4, Tr. 3752, De Portola Road, Temecula
'Project No: 00079-1
Page: 4
IRecommendations, continued
: Remedial grading shall consist of the removal of the fill and the associated underlying colluvial soils
:in' the pad area. This removal area should extend into observed and competent native earth
'materials. The depth of removals may range as high as 13 feet below the existing surface on the
,westem edge of the pad to less than 2 feet on the eastem edge of the pad. Final determination for
:the depth of excavation shall be made in the field during grading operations. It is possible that
,additional excavations may result in more or less excavation in the building area. Pursuanttocreating
:a foundation embedment into like materials with similar settlement characteristics, additional over
!excavation to a depth of 4 feet may be required in the cut area of the building. Final determination
!shall be made in the field during rough grading operations and based on the quality of fill and native
'materials found in the building area.
iBearing Value and Footing Geometry
!A,safe allowable bearing value for foundations embedded into native bedrock materials or properly
:compacted fill is 2000 psf. This value may be increased at the rate of 100 psf per foot of depth and
1100 psf per foot of width over the minimums, but should not exceed 2500 pst. Continuous footings
Isho~ld have a minimum width of 12 inches and depth of 18 inches and conform to the minimum
:criteria of the UBC for single and or multistory construction for moderately expansive soils. The use
:of isolated column footings is not discouraged, however, where utilized, should have a minimum
:embedment of 18 inches below lowest soil grade. The minimum distance of the bottom of footings
'on the outside edge and the native slope face is 8 feet.
iSettlement
IThe bearing value recommended above reflects a total settlement of 0.5" and a differential
!settlement of 0.5". Most of this settlement is expected to occur during construction and as the loads
:are being applied.
:Concrete Slabs
tAli concrete slabs on grade should be 4 inches thick. They should be underlain by 2 inches of sand
lor gravel. Areas that are to be carpeted or tiled, or where the intrusion of moisture is objectionable,
Ishould be underlain by 6 mil visqueen properly protected from puncture with an additional 1 inch of
Isand over it. This arrangement of materials would result in a profile downward of concrete, 1 inch of
Isand, 6 mil visqueen, 2 inches of sand and subgrade soil. Contractors should be advise that when
:pouring during hot or windy weather conditions, they should provide large slabs with sufficiently deep
'weakened plane joints to inhibit the development of irregular or unsightly cracks. Also, 4 inch thick
islabs should be jointed in panels not exceeding 12 feet in both directions to augment proper crack
idirection and development.
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
4
e
e
IMr. and Mrs. Griffin, Lot 4, Tr. 3752, De Portola Road, Temecula
: Project No: 00079-1
Page: 5
I Recommendations, continued
I Reinforcement
: Continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of one number 4 steel bar placed at the
,top and one at the bottom. Slabs should be reinforced with a minimum of number 3 steel bars
: placed at the center of thickness at 18-inch centers both ways or welded wire fabric equivalent to
: 10x10 10/10 may be used. It is understood that the sectional values for the two schedules are
: different, and is of no design concem. The steel bars have been proven to have a better
: performance history and selection is up to the builder. Additional requirements may be imposed by
: the structural engineering design.
I Retaining Walls
: Retaining walls should be designed to resist the active pressures summarized in the following table.
: The active pressure is normally calculated from the lowermost portion of the footing to the highest
: ground surface at the back ofthe wall. The active pressures indicated in the table are equivalentfluid
: densities. Walls that are not free to rotate or that are braced at the top should use active pressures
: that are 50% greater than those indicated in the table.
RETAINING WALL DESIGN PRESSURES
Slooeof
adiacent around
Active Pressure
Passive Pressure
2:1
30 pet
40 pet
300 pet
200 pet
LEVEL
, These pressures are for retaining walls backfilled with noncohesive, granular materials and provided
,with drainage devices such as weep holes or subdrains to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic
1 pressures beyond the design values. It is imperative that all retaining wall backfills be compacted to
: a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction in order to achieve their design strength. Failure to
1 provide proper drainage and minimum compaction may result in pressures against the wall that will
i exceed the design values indicated above. Surface waters should be directed away from retaining
, wall backfill areas so as not to intrude into the backfill materials.
W, C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
~
.' ---
.:..........,-J
e
e
'Mr. and Mrs. Griffin, Lot 4, Tr. 3752, De Portola Road, Temecula
: Project No: 00079-1
Page: 6
I Recommendations, continued
I Lateral Loads
'The bearing value of the soil may be increased by one third for short duration loading (wind,
!seismic). Lateral loads may be resisted by passive forces developed along the sides of concrete
; footings or by friction along the bottom of concrete footings. The value of the passive resistance for
I level ground may, be computed using an equivalentfluid density of 300 pel for level ground. The total
;force should not exceed 3000 psf. A coefficient of friction of .40 may be used for the horizontal
isoiVconcrete interface for resistance of lateral forces. If friction and passive forces are combined,
; then the passive values should be reduced by one third.
I Fine Grading
: Rne grading of areas outside of the residence should be accomplished such that positive drainage
i exists away fromall footings. Run-off should be conducted off the property in a non erosive manner
I toward approved drainage devices at the street or the rear of the property per approved plans.
I Construction
I A soil engineer should be present during the excavation of the foundations, as well as earthwork
: construction, to test and or confirm the conditions encountered during this study. It is recommended
: to have the foundation excavations observed by a soil engineer prior the placement of construction
'materials in them as consequential changes and differences may exist throughout the earth
, materials on the site. It may be possible that certain excavations may have to be deepened slightly
: if earth materials:are found to be loose or weak.
I FOtlndation Plan Review
; the foundation plan should be reviewed prior to construction to verify that the recommendations of
: this report are implemented. This review is additional and beyond the scope of this report.
w. c. HOBBS. CONSULTING ENGINEER
6
'i... _1
e
e
'Mr. and Mrs. Griffin, Lot 4, Tr. 3752, De Portola Road, Temecula
: Project No: 00079-1
Page: 7
iSlopes
.It is clear the left unattended, slope in these materials have a high potential for erosion. Slopes
: constructed as proposed are expected to perform in a normal manner when appropriate landscaping
: and care are taken for the slopes. Slopes should be planted with drought resistant landscaping and
,irrigated with caution. Good vegetation coverage all slopes is a serious responsibility and the property
: owner should pay particular attention in this area. This is not intended to be a control of nature,
'however, good performance can be achieved by regulating moisture content and vegetation in a
'responsible way on slope faces. Drainage devices should be kept clear of debris and obstruction that
,would otherwise cause water to collect and be concentrated on to the slope face.
CLOSURE
IThis evaluation was performed in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices. The
: conclusions and recommendations contained in this report were based on the data available and the
I interpretation of such data as dictated by our experience and background. Hence, our conclusions
'and recommendations are professional opinions; therefore, no other warranty is offered or implied.
'The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Should questions orcomments arise pertaining to this
: document, or if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to call our office.
: Respectfully Submitted,
,w. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
: Bill Hobbs, RCE 42265
:CMI Engineer
: Distribution:
I Attachments:
Addressee (4)
Appendix A - Summary of Laboratory and Field Test Results
Appendix B - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
Appendix C - Slope Stability Calculations
Plate 1, Section for Slope Stability Analysis
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
1
'; --'
e
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS
e
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
8
,
.,
e
e
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM DENSITY TEST RESULTS
Curve
Letter
Soil
Description
Maximum Optimum
Densitv oct Moisture %
A
Silty SAND, fine to med.
Tan to Grey Brown (SM)
128.1 10.1
Maximum density and optimum moisture determined in accordance with
test method ASTM D 1557-78.
SUMMARY OF EXPANSION INDEX TEST
Expansion
Index
Expansion
Classification
Test
Location
Trench 1 @5'
18
LOW
Expansion index test conducted in accordance with UBC 29-2.
SHEAR TEST RESULTS
Internal angle of friction
cohesion
31 degrees
320 pst
w. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
<1
~
I"
e
APPENDIX B
e
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
\0
,.
e
e
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIRCATIONS
1.0 I GENERAL INTENT
These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as shown on the approved grading plans,
including preparation of areas to be filled. placement of fill, installation of subdrains, and excavations. The recommendations contained in the
geotechnical report are a part ofthe earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case
of conflict. Evaluations perfonned by the consultant during the course of grading mayresu~ in new recommendations of the geotechnical report.
2.0 1 EARTHWORK OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Prior to I the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnica consultant (soils engineer and engineering geologist, and their
representatives) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork and testing the fills for confonnance with the recommendations
of the geotechnical report and these specifications.
It will be necessary that the consultant provide adequate testing and observation so that he may detennine that the work was accomplished
as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so
that he may schedule his personnel accordingly.
It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with
applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. if in the opinion of the consu~ant,
unsatisfactory conditions, such as questionable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resu~ing in
a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that
construction be topped until the conditions are rectified.
Maximum dry density tests used to detennine the degree of compaction will be perfonned in accordance with the American SocietyofT esting
and Materials tests method ASTM D 1557-78.
3.0 I PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED
3.1 Clearing and Grubbing: All brush, vegetation and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise disposed of.
3.2 Processing: The existing ground which is detennined to be satisfactoryfor support offill shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches.
Existing ground which is not satisfactory shall be over excavated as specified in the following section.
Scarification shall continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably
unifonn and free of uneven features which would inhibit unifonn compaction.
3.3,Overexcavation: Soft, dry, spongy, highlyfracturedorotherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such adepththatthesurface processing
cannot adequately improve the condition, shall be over excavated down to finn ground. approved by the consultant.
3.4,Moisture Conditioning: Over excavated and processed soils shall be watered, dried-back, blended, and/or mixed, as required to attain
a unifonn moisture content near optimum.
3.5.Recompaction: Over excavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed and moisture- conditioned shall be recompacted
to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent.
3.6,Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertical units). the ground shall be stepped
or benched. The lowest bench shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide, shall be at least 2 feet deep, shall expose finn material, and shall be
approved by the consultant. Other benches shall be excavated in finn material for a minimum width of 4 feet. Ground sloping flallerthan 5
: 1 shall be,benched or otherwise over excavated when considered necessary by the consultant.
3.7,Approval: All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas and toe-of-fill benches shall be approved by the consultant
prior to fill placement.
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
It
1
e
e
4.0 IALl MATERIAL
4.1 General: Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and shall be approved by the
consultant. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics shall be placed in areas designated byconsullant or shall be mixed
with other soils to serve as satisfactory fill material.
4.2 ,Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not
be buried or placed in fills, uniess the location, materials, and disposal methods are specfficaliy approved by the consultant. Oversize disposal
operations shall be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completeiy surrounded by
compacted or densffied fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet verticaliy of finish grade or within the range of future utilllies or
underground construction. uniess specfficaliy approved by the consultant.
4.3,lmport: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material shall meet the requirements of Section 4. 1.
5.0 :ALL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION
5.1 Fill Lifts: Approvedfill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receivefill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted
thickness. The consultant may approve thicker lifts ff testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being
achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread eveniy and shall be thoroughiy mixed during spreading to attain unffonnity
of material and moisture in each layer.
5.2iFiII Moisture: Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed, and wet fill layers shall be aerated by
scarification or shall be blended with drier material. Moisture-conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall continue until the fill material is at a
unffonn moisture content or near optimum.
5.3,Compaction of Fill: Aftereach layer has been eveniy spread, moisture condllioned, and mixed, II shall be unffonniy compacted to not
less than 90 percent of maximum dry density. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either specfficaliy designed for
soil:compaction or of proven reliability, to efficientiy achieve the specffied degree of compaction.
5.4'Fill Slopes: Compaction of slopes shall be accomplished, in addllion to nonnai compacting procedures, by backfilling of slopes with
sheepsfoot rollersatfrequent increments of2t03 feetinfill elevation gain, orbyother methods producing satisfactory results. Atthecompletion
of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent.
5.5 .Compaction Testing: Reid tests to check the ill moisture and degree of compaction will be perfonned by the consultant. The location
and frequency of tests shall be at the consultants discretion. In general, the tests will be taken at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical
rise and/or ,1 ,000 cubic yards of embankment.
6.0 !SUBDRAlN INSTALLATION
Subdrain systems, ff required, shall be installed in approved ground to confonn to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans
or herein~ The subdrain location or materials shall not bechanged ormodffied without the approval of the consultant. The consultant, however,
may recommend and upon approval, direct changes in subdrain line, grade or material. All subdrains should be surveyed for line and grade
after installation, and sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrains.
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
\2-
,
"
e
e
7.0 1 EXCAVATION
Excavation and cut slopes will be examined during grading. If directed by the consultant, further excavation or over excavation and refilling of
cut areas shall be performed, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall be performed. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, unless
otherwise approved, the cut portion 01 the slope shall made and approved by the consultant prior to placement of materials for construction
of the fill :portion of the slope.
8.0 :TRENCH BACKRLL
8.1 ,Supervision: Trench excavations for the utility pipes shall be backfilled under engineering supervision.
8.2,Pipe Zone: After the utility pipe has been laid, the space under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with clean sand or approved
granular sail to a depth of at least one foot over the top of the pipe. The sand backfill shall be uniformly jetted into place before the controlled
backfill ~ placed over the sand.
8.3 Fill Placement: The ons~e materials, or othersoils approved by the engineer, shall bewatered and mixed as necessarypriorto placement
in lifts over the sand backfill.
8.4 ,Compaction: The controlled backfill shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density as determined by the
ASTM compaction method described above.
8.5,Observation and Testing: Field density tests and inspection of the backfill procedures shall be made by the sail engineer during backfilling
too see that the proper moisture content and uniform compaction is being maintained. The contractor shall provide test holes and exploratory
pits as required by the soil engineer to enable sampling and testing.
W. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
l3>
..
e
APPENDIX C
e
SLOPE STABIIlTY ANALYSIS AND CALCULATIONS
w. C. HOBBS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
\~
..
e'
/,f; e
~
"
i
VL./:,W \..
S'l7:>P.l,\..lrY /oN/.:.'/""I"J ":;€C-lloN .
rN' OC07'H
~: \D l '\ \ fJ..C(O
, n~~ LDuna-l.
i
BROW DITCH PER DETAil THIS SHEf
SPECiAl NOTE: EASTERN END OF BI
DITCH TO BE CONNECTED DIRECTli
TERRACE DRAIN,
...-
/'
,/
....
....
......
"'"
'.',
~~
/"
\
/'
/'
"
e
e
OC67'1-1
0
0
0
0
rrl
I)
2 0
:}
~ III
C\J
lD
C\J
~ 0
t"- O
III
II C\J
If) C\J
~
0 .........
<1: III +J
Z~ ! i' 'I-
CD -
Olfl ':J.. --'
Hi>- j
1---1'"
U<1:g 0 (f)
WZ <I' 0
lfl <1: .... H
J 0 X
III
ZU ~ --' <(
HH ~ ~
LL I- 7.
LL<1: 0
HI- III
ITlfl 1\ \t C\J X
(!) --'
I~ \ s --'
~
~ 0
~ 0
~~ III
i'
~~ ~
. S 0
~~ ~~ III
~ i'
~ II ., " rrl
>- '><f' -B-u
0
Og.L8~ oO'Og~ Og'2~~ OO'gL Og'LE 0
(:l. :l- ) SIXV' - ^ \/P
e
e
** PCSTABL6 **
by
Purdue University
--Slope Stability Analysis-.
Simplified Janbu, Simplified Bishop
or Spencer's Method of Slices
Run Date:
Time of Run:
Run By:
Input Data Filename:
Output Filename:
Unit:
Plotted Output Filename:
10/2/2000
PM
WCH
GGA.IN
GGA.OUT
ENGLISH
GGA.PLT
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 3752/4, SECTION A
BOUNDARY COORDINATES
9 Top Boundaries
9 Total Boundaries
Boundary X.Left Y - Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type
No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd
1 0.00 111.00 100.00 111.00
2 100.00 111.00 142.00 138.00
3 142.00 138.00 148.00 138.00
4 148.00 138.00 1B4.00 162.00
5 1B4.00 182.00 188.00 162.00
6 188.00 162.00 213.00 175.00
7 213.00 175.00 223.00 180.00
8 223.00 180.00 235.00 1B5.00
9 235.00 185.00 300.00 1B7.00
ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS
1 Type(s) of Soil
Soil
Type
No.
Total Saturated
Unit Wt. Unit Wt.
(pef) (pef)
Cohesion
Intercept
(psf)
Friction
Angle
(deg)
Pore
Pressure
Paramo
Pressure
Constant
(psf)
0.0
piez.
Surface
No.
125.0
135.0
320.0
32.0
0.00
A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random
Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces) Has Been Specified.
\1
,
e
e
Janbus :Empirical Coef. is being used for the case of phi=O
30 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
30 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of
Along The Ground Surface Between X
and X
Points Equally Spaced
100.00 ft.
100.00 ft.
Each Surface Terminates Between X 185.00 ft.
and X 300.00 ft.
Unless -Further Limitations Were Imposed) The Minimum Elevation
At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00 ft.
10.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface.
,1
FOllowing Are Displayed The
Failure Surfaces Examined.
First.
Ten Most Critical Of The Trial
They Are Ordered - Most Critical
* * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Janbu Method * *
Failure Surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
X-Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.99
119.98
129.92
139.73
149.34
158.69
167.71
176.34
184.52
192.19
199.30
205.79
211.63
216.77
219.32
...
1.758
V-Surf
(ft)
111.00
110.45
110.73
111.85
113.79
116.55
120.09
124.41
129.46
135.21
141.63
148.67
156.27
184.39
172.97
178.16
...
Individual data on the
20 slices
Slice Width
Weight
Water
Force
Top
Water
Force
80t
Tie
Force
Norm
Earthquake
Force Surcharge
Hor Ver Load
Tie
Force
Tan
~8
.. e e
INo. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 10.0 4349.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 10.0 12546.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 9.9 19561.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
4 9.8 25216.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5 2.3 6574.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6 6.0 17022.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
7 1.3 3704.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
8 9.3 27688.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 9.0 29188.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
10 8.6 29217.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
11 7.7 26124.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
12 0.5 1756.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
13 3.5 11015.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
14 4.2 12158.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
15 7.1 18548.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
16 6.5 13881.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
17 5.8 9080.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
18 1.4 1558.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
19 3.8 2888.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
20 2.6 625.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Failure Surface Specified By 15 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 110.00 110.74
3 119.98 111.39
4 129.86 112.93
5 139.56 115.35
6 149.00 118.63
7 158.12 122.76
8 166.82 127.68
9 175.04 133.37
10 182.72 139.77
11 189.79 146.84
12 196.20 154.52
13 201 .89 162.75
14 206.82 171.45
15 207.02 171.89
... 1.781 ...
Failure Surface Specified By 15 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
X-Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.83
119.80
129.80
139.68
149.33
158.63
167.45
175.69
V - Su rf
(ft)
111.00
109.16
108.43
108.83
110.35
112.97
116.66
121.37
127.04
\9
" e e
10 183.24 133.60
11 190.00 140.96
12 195.89 149.04
13 200.85 157.73
14 204.79 166.92
15 206.15 171.44
... 1.830 ...
Failure Surface Specified By 13 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
'1
X-Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.94
119.94
129.84
139.48
148.72
157.40
165.38
172.54
178.77
183.95
188.02
188.25
...
1.842
Y-Surf
(ft)
111.00
109.88
110.02
111.43
114.07
117.90
122.87
128.89
135.87
143.70
152.25
161.38
162.13
...
Failure Surface Specified By 21 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
X-Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.99
119.99
129.98
139.93
149.83
159.64
169.34
178.91
188.32
197.55
206.58
215.38
223.93
232.21
240.20
247.89
255.24
262.24
268.88
Y-Surf
(ft)
111.00
110.45
110.40
110.85
111.79
113.24
115.17
117.60
120.50
123.88
127.73
132.03
136.78
141.96
147.56
153.57
159.97
166.75
173.89
181 .37
zo
-----
. e e
21 272.73 186.16
..* 1.875 ***
Failure Surface Specified By 21 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 110.00 110.68
3 119.99 110.82
4 129.98 111.42
5 139.92 112.46
6 149.81 113.96
7 159.62 115.91
8 169.33 118.30
9 178.92 121.13
10 188.37 124.39
11 197.67 128.08
12 206.78 132.19
13 215.70 136.71
14 224.41 141.63
15 232.88 146.94
16 241.11 152.63
17 249.06 158.69
18 256.73 165.10
19 264.10 171.86
20 271. 1 6 178.95
21 277.86 186.32
*** 1.904 ***
Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
18
17
X-Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.79
119.69
129.66
139.66
149.65
159.59
169.44
179.17
188.74
198.10
207.23
216.08
224.63
232.83
240.66
248.09
V-Surf
(ft)
111.00
108.97
107.55
106.76
106.59
107.04
108.12
109.82
112.14
115.05
118.56
122.65
127.30
132.49
138.21
144 .43
151.13
zt
" e
e
18 255.08 158.28
19 261.61 165.85
20 267.65 173.82
21 273.19 182.14
22 275.56 186.25
... 1.971 ...
Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf Y.Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 110.00 110.73
3 120.00 110.86
4 129.98 111.38
5 139.94 112.31
6 149.85 113.63
7 159.70 115.35
8 169.48 117 .46
9 179.16 119.96
10 188.74 122.84
11 198.19 126.11
12 207.50 129.75
13 216.66 133.75
14 225.66 138.12
15 234.47 142.85
16 243.09 147.93
17 251.49 153.34
18 259.68 159.09
19 267.62 165.16
20 275.32 171 .54
21 282.76 178.22
22 289.93 185.20
23 291.38 186.73
... 2.008 ...
Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
X.Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.99
119.97
129.92
139.84
149.71
159.53
169.28
178.95
188.54
198.04
V-Surf
(ft)
111.00
111.35
112.02
113.00
114.29
115.90
117 .81
120.03
122.56
125.39
128.53
2Z.
, e
e
12 207.43 131.96
13 216.71 135.68
14 225.87 139.70
15 234.90 144.00
16 243.78 148.59
17 252.52 153.45
18 261.10 158.58
19 269.52 163.99
20 277.76 169.65
21 285.82 175.57
22 293.68 181.74
23 299.96 187.00
... 2.062 ...
Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.05 106.75
3 118.45 103.34
4 128.12 100.79
5 137.98 99.12
6 147.95 98.34
7 157.95 98.47
8 167.90 99.50
9 177.71 101.42
10 187.31 104.22
11 196.62 107.87
12 205.57 112.34
13 214.07 117 .60
14 222.06 123.61
15 229.48 130.32
16 236.27 137.66
17 242.37 145.59
18 247.72 154.03
19 252.30 162.92
20 256.05 172.19
21 258.95 181.76
22 259.78 185.76
... 2.069 ...
y
A
X
I
s
F
T
0.00
37.50
75.00
112.50
150.00
187.50
x 0.00 +---------+-.-------+--------.*---------+---------+
z..~
>>
e
e
37.50 +
A 75.00 +
*
0
X 11.2.50 + 12
..031..
..0
731
.0 7312 ..
*
I 150.00 + 0 .7312 *
...0 312
.7 5 4
...0 7 5312
..... .0 312
.7 59 324 .4 *
S 187.50 + .....0 .7 5 1 32 .. *
...... .0 1 32
.7 5 1 32
. .. .0 .7 5 1 .32
........ .0 5 1 *
.7.6
225.00 + 0.7 85. *
...... .. 0 7 5
......... 08 5 *
796
.. .. . .. . .7865
.. . .. . .. ..7 5 0 0
F 262.50 + ..... ..... 8 7 5 0
.. ... .. ..8 7 5..
.... . .. .. .. 98 .75
.. . .... ... .8..
.... .... .9.8.
...... .9 8
T 300.00 + *
2-1
"
e
e
(X{)71- I
0
0
0
0
(l'J
0
LD
C\J
lO
C\J
0
0
LD
C\J
C\J
0 ........
<l:(f) LD +J
ZH r-.. 4-
o(f) CD '-'
H>- '<"1
I-..J
u<l: 0 (f)
wZ 0
(f)<l: H
0 X
ZU LD <(
\'CI '<"1
HH I"-
LLL ""
LL<l: - 0
HZ " LD
er>- d C\J X
t!)o '<"1
'<"1
0
0
LD
r-..
o
LD
r-..
(l'J
Og"Lm
OO'Og~
og'cn
OO'gL
Og"LE
o
o
('+:l- )
SIXV - ^
~
,>
e
e
** peST ABL6 **
by
Purdue University
'1
--Slope Stability Analysis--
Simplified Janbu, Simplified Bishop
or Spencer's Method of Slices
Run Date:
Time of Run:
Run By:
Input Data Filename:
Output Filename:
Unit:
Plotted Output Filename:
10/2/2000
PM
WCH
GGAE. IN
GGAE.OUT
ENGLISH
GGAE. PLT
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 3752/4, SECTION A
BOUNDARY COORDINATES
9 Top Boundaries
9 Total Boundaries
Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type
No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd
1 0.00 111.00 100.00 111.00
2 100.00 111.00 142.00 138.00
3 142.00 138.00 148.00 13B.00
4 148.00 13B.00 184.00 162.00
5 184.00 162.00 188.00 162.00
6 lBB.OO 162.00 213.00 175.00
7 213.00 175.00 223.00 180.00
B 223.00 180.00 235.00 185.00
9 235.00 185.00 300.00 187.00
ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS
1 Type(s) of Soil
Soil
Type
No.
Total Saturated
Unit Wt. Unit Wt.
(pef) (pef)
Cohesion
Intercept
(psf)
Friction
Angle
(deg)
Pore
Pressure
Paramo
Pressure
Constant
(psf)
Piez.
Surface
No.
125.0
135.0
320.0
32.0
0.00
0.0
A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient
Of 0.150 Has Been Assigned
u.
.
e
e
A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient
Of 0.100 Has Been Assigned
,1
Cavitation Pressure =
0.0 (psf)
A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random
Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified.
Janbus .Empirical Coet. is being used for the case of phi=O
30 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
30 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of
Along The Ground Surface Between X
and X
Points Equally Spaced
100.00 ft.
100.00 ft.
Each Surface Terminates Between X 185.00 ft.
and X 300.00 ft.
Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation
At Which A Surface Extends Is V = 0.00 ft.
10.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface.
Following Are Displayed The
Failure Surfaces Examined.
First.
Ten Most Critical Of The Trial
They Are Ordered . Most Critical
* * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Janbu Method * *
Failure Surface Specified By 20 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
X.Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.98
119.98
129.97
139.90
149.75
159.49
169.07
178.47
187.66
196.60
205.26
213.61
221.63
229.28
236.55
243.40
249.81
V-Surf
(ft)
111.00
110.38
110.35
110.90
112.04
113.75
118.04
118.89
122.30
128.26
130.74
135.74
141.24
147.21
153.65
160.52
167.81
175.48
2..7
..
e
e
19
20
255.76
257.18
183.52
185.68
**.
1.273
***
Individual data on the 26 slices
Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake
Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge
Slice Width Weight Top 80t Norm Tan Hor Ver Load
iNo. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 10.0 4388.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 658.2 438.8 0.0
2 10.0 12831.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1924.7 1283.1 0.0
3 10.0 20504.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3075.7 2050.5 0.0
4 9.9 27307.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4096.1 2730.7 0.0
5 2.1 6585.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 987.9 658.6 0.0
6 6.0 18806.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2821.0 1880.7 0.0
7 1.8 5476.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 821.4 547.6 0.0
8 9.7 33485.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5022.8 3348.5 0.0
9 9.6 37602.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5640.4 3760.3 0.0
10 9.4 40640.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6096.0 4064.0 0.0
11 5.5 25330.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3799.6 2533.1 0.0
12 3.7 16706.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2506.0 1670.6 0.0
13 0.3 1522.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 228.3 152.2 0.0
14 8.6 38311.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5746.7 3831.2 0.0
15 8.7 38413.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5762.0 3841.3 0.0
16 7.7 33583.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5037.5 3358.3 0.0
17 0.6 2605.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 390.8 260.5 0.0
18 8.0 33157.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4973.6 3315.8 0.0
19 1.4 5463.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 819.5 546.3 0.0
'20 6.3 23796.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3569.5 2379.7 0.0
21 5.7 19622.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2943.3 1962.2 0.0
'22 1.5 4880.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 732.0 488.0 0.0
,23 6.9 17972.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2695.9 1797 . 3 0.0
,24 6.4 10992.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1648.8 1099.2 0.0
.25 6.0 4501.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 675.2 450.1 0.0
.26 1.4 188.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 18.8 0.0
Failure Surface Specif ied 8y 19 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.91 109.67
3 119.90 109.11
4 129.89 109.32
5 139.85 110.30
6 149.69 112.04
7 159.37 114.54
8 168.83 117 .78
9 178.02 121.74
10 186.87 126.40
11 195.33 131. 73
12 203.35 137.69
13 210.90 144.26
14 217 .91 151.39
15 224.35 159.04
16 230.18 167.16
17 235.37 175.71
2.-8
~ e e
18 239.88 184.63
19 240.10 185.16
*** 1.275 ***
'1
Failure Surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.84 112.76
3 119.63 114.83
4 129.34 117.22
5 138.97 119.91
6 148.51 122.91
7 157.95 126.22
8 167.27 129.83
9 176.48 133.73
10 185.56 137.92
11 194.50 142.41
12 203.29 147.17
13 211.92 152.22
14 220.39 157.54
15 228.68 163.13
16 236.79 168.98
17 244.71 175.09
18 252.43 181.45
19 257.25 185.68
*** 1.287 ***
Failure Surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Points
Point X.Surf Y.Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.99 111.35
3 119.94 112.42
4 129.78 114.21
5 139.46 116.70
6 148.94 119.88
7 158.17 123.74
8 167.09 128.25
9 175.66 133.40
10 183.84 139.15
11 191.58 145 .48
12 198.85 152.35
13 205.60 159.73
14 211. 80 167.58
15 217.42 175.85
16 218.53 177.77
2<:{
~
e _
...
1.305 u*
'1
Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.99 110.65
3 119.99 110.75
4 129.98 111.28
5 139.93 112.25
6 149.83 113.65
7 159.66 115.49
8 169.40 117.75
9 179.04 120.44
10 188.54 123.55
11 197.90 127.07
12 207.10 131.00
13 216.11 135.33
14 224.93 140.05
15 233.53 145.15
16 241.90 150.62
17 250.02 156.46
18 257.88 162.64
19 265.45 169.17
20 272.74 176.01
21 279.72 183.18
22 282.66 186.47
... 1.339 ...
Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
X-Surf
(ft)
100.00
109.93
119.83
129.68
139.48
149.23
158.90
168.51
178.03
187.46
196.80
206.03
215.15
224.16
233.04
241.79
250.41
258.88
267.19
V-Surf
(ft)
111.00
112.16
113.59
115.30
117.28
119.54
122.06
124.85
127.91
131.23
134.81
138.65
142.74
147.09
151.68
156.52
161.60
166.92
172.47
30
.
...
e
20
21
22
275.35
283.35
288.27
178.25
184.26
186.58
**.
1.346
.**
'1
Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf Y - Su rf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.95 109.96
3 119.93 109.43
4 129.93 109.42
5 139.92 109.92
6 149.87 110.93
7 159.75 112.46
8 169.54 114.49
9 179. 22 117 .02
10 188.75 120.05
11 198.11 123.56
12 207.28 127.55
13 216.23 132.01
14 224.94 136.93
15 233.38 142.28
16 241.54 148.06
17 249.39 154.26
18 256.91 160.85
19 264.08 167.82
20 270.89 175.15
21 277.30 182.82
22 279.99 186.38
... 1.346 **.
Failure Surface Specified By 14 Coordinate points
Point X-Surf Y - Su rf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 110.00 111.12
3 119.95 112.15
4 129.76 114.09
5 139.35 116.93
6 148.64 120.63
7 157.55 125.17
8 166.00 130.50
9 173.93 136.59
10 181.27 143.39
11 187.96 150.82
12 193.93 158.84
13 199.15 167.38
14 199.43 167.94
e
3l
of --; ~
e
*** 1.351 ***
'1
Failure Surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.62 108.28
3 119.50 106.72
4 129.49 106.34
5 139.46 107.16
6 149.26 109.16
7 158.75 112.30
8 167.80 116.55
9 176.28 121.85
10 184.08 128.12
11 191.07 135.27
12 197.16 143.20
13 202.26 151.80
14 206.31 160.94
15 209.24 170.50
16 209.75 173.31
... 1.380 ...
Failure Surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf V-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 100.00 111.00
2 109.50 114.11
3 118.96 117 .37
4 128.36 120.79
5 137.70 124.36
6 146.98 128.08
7 156.20 131.95
8 165.36 135.97
9 174.45 140.13
10 183.47 144.45
11 192.42 148.90
12 201.30 153.51
13 210.10 158.25
14 218.82 163.14
15 227.47 168.17
16 236.03 173.34
17 244.50 178.65
18 252.89 184.09
19 255.17 185.62
... 1.395 ...
e
.32.
i .. ,. ~ e
e
t
\
y
A
x
I
s
F
T
0.00
37.50
75.00
112.50
150.00
187.50
x .0.00 +---------+---------+---------*---------+--...----+
37.50 +
A 75.00 +
*
X 112.50 + 13
. .9143.
.92130
... .21430.
*
I 150.00 + ... .. . .91 430 *
92430..
71 0..
21643
2 6 30.
7519 480. . *
S 187.50 + 7516 3 8.. *
163408.
75 9 94.. 8
7512 3 49
1 30 49*
75 12 3 O. 4
225.00 + 5 6 2. O. *
... ...... 7561 32
1 302 *
75 6 1 30.
756 130
5 6 l'
F 262.50 + 5
.67
.567.
.55
6
T 300.00 + *
--
3~
--