PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

1. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-1
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 0.5-5.5 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/10/17
Test Id: 403874
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, dark olive brown silty sand with gravel
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 3/1/2017 12:05:05 PM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
2
in
1.5
in
1
in
0.75
in
0.5
in
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
23.4
%Sand
63.6
%Silt &Clay Size
13.0
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
2 in
1.5 in
1 in
0.75 in
0.5 in
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
50.00
37.50
25.00
19.00
12.50
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
97
93
91
87
85
77
65
48
35
28
21
13
Coefficients
D =9.9214 mm
85
D =1.5588 mm
60
D =0.9391 mm
50
D =0.2883 mm
30
D =0.0893 mm
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Stone Fragments, Gravel and Sand
(A-1-b (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ANGULAR
Sand/Gravel Hardness : HARD
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 70

2. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-2
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 1.1-6 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/13/17
Test Id: 403876
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, dark olive brown silty sand with gravel
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 3/1/2017 12:05:06 PM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
3
in
2
in
1.5
in
1
in
0.75
in
0.5
in
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
20.1
%Sand
47.1
%Silt &Clay Size
32.8
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
3 in
2 in
1.5 in
1 in
0.75 in
0.5 in
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
75.00
50.00
37.50
25.00
19.00
12.50
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
98
97
93
91
88
86
80
73
65
60
57
53
33
Coefficients
D =8.6163 mm
85
D =0.4395 mm
60
D =0.1344 mm
50
D =N/A
30
D =N/A
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Gravel and Sand (A-2-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ANGULAR
Sand/Gravel Hardness : HARD
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 71

3. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-2
Sample ID: S-1
Depth : 5.5-7.5 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/07/17
Test Id: 403879
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist,, olive gray sandy silt
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:49:06 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
0.0
%Sand
42.2
%Silt &Clay Size
57.8
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
100
100
100
98
87
58
Coefficients
D =0.1422 mm
85
D =0.0790 mm
60
D =N/A
50
D =N/A
30
D =N/A
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Soils (A-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ---
Sand/Gravel Hardness : ---
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 72

4. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-3
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 1.1-6 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/10/17
Test Id: 403873
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, olive brown silty sand
Sample Comment: Sample contains organics
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 3/1/2017 12:05:07 PM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
3
in
2
in
1.5
in
1
in
0.75
in
0.5
in
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
7.9
%Sand
58.6
%Silt &Clay Size
33.5
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
3 in
2 in
1.5 in
1 in
0.75 in
0.5 in
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
75.00
50.00
37.50
25.00
19.00
12.50
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
98
97
96
95
94
94
92
90
86
79
73
58
33
Coefficients
D =0.7530 mm
85
D =0.1591 mm
60
D =0.1190 mm
50
D =N/A
30
D =N/A
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Gravel and Sand (A-2-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ANGULAR
Sand/Gravel Hardness : HARD
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 73

5. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-4
Sample ID: S-4
Depth : 6-8 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/07/17
Test Id: 403877
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, dark brown sand with silt and gravel
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:45:50 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
1.5
in
1
in
0.75
in
0.5
in
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
46.1
%Sand
47.3
%Silt &Clay Size
6.6
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
1.5 in
1 in
0.75 in
0.5 in
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
37.50
25.00
19.00
12.50
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
86
74
67
62
54
45
35
22
15
10
6.6
Coefficients
D =24.1710 mm
85
D =7.9143 mm
60
D =3.2681 mm
50
D =0.6572 mm
30
D =0.2528 mm
15
D =0.1449 mm
10
C =54.619
u C =0.377
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Stone Fragments, Gravel and Sand
(A-1-a (1))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ANGULAR
Sand/Gravel Hardness : HARD
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 74

6. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-4
Sample ID: S-6
Depth : 15-17 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/07/17
Test Id: 403878
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, brown silty sand with gravel
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:45:51 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
1
in
0.75
in
0.5
in
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
19.1
%Sand
62.0
%Silt &Clay Size
18.9
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
1 in
0.75 in
0.5 in
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
25.00
19.00
12.50
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
90
87
85
81
76
67
53
39
29
19
Coefficients
D =9.4480 mm
85
D =0.6098 mm
60
D =0.3815 mm
50
D =0.1603 mm
30
D =N/A
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Gravel and Sand (A-2-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ANGULAR
Sand/Gravel Hardness : HARD
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 75

7. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-5
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 0.5-6 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/12/17
Test Id: 403875
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, very dark grayish brown silty sand with gravel
Sample Comment: Sample contains asphalt
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 3/1/2017 12:05:08 PM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
3
in
2
in
1.5
in
1
in
0.75
in
0.5
in
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
40.7
%Sand
46.0
%Silt &Clay Size
13.3
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
3 in
2 in
1.5 in
1 in
0.75 in
0.5 in
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
75.00
50.00
37.50
25.00
19.00
12.50
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
93
89
81
77
73
69
59
50
39
30
24
19
13
Coefficients
D =30.2836 mm
85
D =5.0041 mm
60
D =1.9889 mm
50
D =0.4317 mm
30
D =0.0917 mm
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Stone Fragments, Gravel and Sand
(A-1-b (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ANGULAR
Sand/Gravel Hardness : HARD
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 76

8. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-5
Sample ID: S-3
Depth : 14-16 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/07/17
Test Id: 403880
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, dark olive brown silty sand
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:45:52 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
0.5
in
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
1.1
%Sand
80.2
%Silt &Clay Size
18.7
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
0.5 in
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
12.50
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
100
99
99
99
99
98
87
50
19
Coefficients
D =0.2422 mm
85
D =0.1718 mm
60
D =0.1495 mm
50
D =0.0962 mm
30
D =N/A
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Gravel and Sand (A-2-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ---
Sand/Gravel Hardness : ---
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 77

9. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: TP-1
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 0.3-6 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/08/17
Test Id: 403869
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, olive gray silty sand
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:45:53 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
0.0
%Sand
73.2
%Silt &Clay Size
26.8
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
Particle Size (mm)
0.0361
0.0234
0.0137
0.0096
0.0067
0.0048
0.0034
0.0014
100
100
100
100
99
85
27
Percent Finer
6
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
Spec. Percent Complies
Coefficients
D =0.1520 mm
85
D =0.1117 mm
60
D =0.0991 mm
50
D =0.0779 mm
30
D =0.0493 mm
15
D =0.0412 mm
10
C =2.711
u C =1.319
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Gravel and Sand (A-2-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ---
Sand/Gravel Hardness : ---
Dispersion Device : Apparatus A - Mech Mixer
Dispersion Period : 1 minute
Specific Gravity : 2.65
Separation of Sample: #200 Sieve
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 78

10. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: TP-2
Sample ID: G-3
Depth : 5.5-8.5 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/08/17
Test Id: 403870
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, dark olive gray clay
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:45:54 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
0.0
%Sand
2.1
%Silt &Clay Size
97.9
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
Particle Size (mm)
0.0276
0.0186
0.0119
0.0087
0.0063
0.0045
0.0033
0.0014
100
100
100
100
100
100
98
Percent Finer
87
71
51
41
31
24
20
12
Spec. Percent Complies
Coefficients
D =0.0265 mm
85
D =0.0144 mm
60
D =0.0114 mm
50
D =0.0061 mm
30
D =0.0019 mm
15
D =N/A
10
C =N/A
u C =N/A
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Soils (A-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ---
Sand/Gravel Hardness : ---
Dispersion Device : Apparatus A - Mech Mixer
Dispersion Period : 1 minute
Specific Gravity : 2.65
Separation of Sample: #200 Sieve
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 79

11. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: TP-3
Sample ID: G-2
Depth : 7.3-8 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/08/17
Test Id: 403871
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, very dark gray sandy clay
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:45:54 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
0.0
%Sand
32.7
%Silt &Clay Size
67.3
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
Particle Size (mm)
0.0321
0.0208
0.0129
0.0092
0.0066
0.0047
0.0033
0.0014
100
100
98
93
88
82
67
Percent Finer
41
31
20
15
11
10
8
6
Spec. Percent Complies
Coefficients
D =0.1921 mm
85
D =0.0591 mm
60
D =0.0427 mm
50
D =0.0203 mm
30
D =0.0090 mm
15
D =0.0048 mm
10
C =12.313
u C =1.453
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Soils (A-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ---
Sand/Gravel Hardness : ---
Dispersion Device : Apparatus A - Mech Mixer
Dispersion Period : 1 minute
Specific Gravity : 2.65
Separation of Sample: #200 Sieve
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 80

12. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: TP-4
Sample ID: G-2
Depth : 2.5-5.8 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/08/17
Test Id: 403872
Tested By: jbr
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, reddish brown silty sand
Sample Comment: ---
Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422
printed 2/16/2017 11:50:58 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
Percent
Finer
Grain Size (mm)
0.375
in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
%Cobble
---
%Gravel
2.9
%Sand
73.1
%Silt &Clay Size
24.0
Sieve Name Sieve Size, mm Percent Finer Spec. Percent Complies
0.375 in
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
9.50
4.75
2.00
0.85
0.42
0.25
0.15
0.075
Particle Size (mm)
0.0365
0.0223
0.0129
0.0091
0.0065
0.0047
0.0033
0.0014
100
97
94
86
70
51
35
24
Percent Finer
20
17
14
13
12
11
9
6
Spec. Percent Complies
Coefficients
D =0.8286 mm
85
D =0.3229 mm
60
D =0.2418 mm
50
D =0.1096 mm
30
D =0.0160 mm
15
D =0.0039 mm
10
C =82.795
u C =9.539
c
Classification
ASTM N/A
AASHTO Silty Gravel and Sand (A-2-4 (0))
Sample/Test Description
Sand/Gravel Particle Shape : ANGULAR
Sand/Gravel Hardness : HARD
Dispersion Device : Apparatus A - Mech Mixer
Dispersion Period : 1 minute
Specific Gravity : 2.65
Separation of Sample: #200 Sieve
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 81

13. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-2
Sample ID: S-8
Depth : 39-41 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/10/17
Test Id: 403889
Tested By: cam
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Wet, olive clay
Sample Comment: ---
Atterberg Limits - ASTM D4318
printed 2/16/2017 11:35:18 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Plasticity
Index
Liquid Limit
Plasticity Chart
ML or OL
CL-ML
CL or OL
MH or OH
CH or OH
"A" Line
"U" Line
Symbol Sample ID Boring Depth Natural
Moisture
Content,%
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index
Liquidity
Index
Soil Classification
S-8 NB-2 39-41 ft 58 53 27 26 1.2
Sample Prepared using the WET method
Dry Strength: VERY HIGH
Dilatancy: SLOW
Toughness: MEDIUM
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 82

14. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-3
Sample ID: S-9B
Depth : 41.7-43 ft
Sample Type: jar
Test Date: 02/10/17
Test Id: 403890
Tested By: cam
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, olive clay
Sample Comment: ---
Atterberg Limits - ASTM D4318
printed 2/16/2017 11:35:18 AM
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Plasticity
Index
Liquid Limit
Plasticity Chart
ML or OL
CL-ML
CL or OL
MH or OH
CH or OH
"A" Line
"U" Line
Symbol Sample ID Boring Depth Natural
Moisture
Content,%
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index
Liquidity
Index
Soil Classification
S-9B NB-3 41.7-43
ft
61 59 29 30 1.1
Sample Prepared using the WET method
Dry Strength: VERY HIGH
Dilatancy: SLOW
Toughness: LOW
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 83

15. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-1
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 0.5-5.5 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/10/17
Test Id: 403882
Tested By: cwd
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, dark olive brown silty sand with gravel
Sample Comment: ---
Compaction Report - ASTM D1557
printed 3/1/2017 12:12:37 PM
115
120
125
130
135
140
0 5 10 15 20
Dry
Density,
pcf
Water Content, %
zero air
voids line
uncorrected
corrected
Data Points Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Point 4
Dry density, pcf
Moisture Content, %
129.0
4.9
130.5
7.0
128.8
9.1
124.9
11.2
Method : C
Preparation : WET
As received Moisture :5 %
Rammer : Mechanical
Zero voids line based on assumed specific gravity of 2.75
Maximum Dry Density= 130.5 pcf
Optimum Moisture= 7.1 %
Oversize Correction (9.1% > 3/4 inch Sieve)
Corrected Maximum Dry Density= 132.7 pcf
Corrected Optimum Moisture= 6.4 %
Assumed Average Bulk Specific Gravity = 2.55
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 84

16. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-2
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 1.1-6 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/14/17
Test Id: 403884
Tested By: cwd
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, dark olive brown silty sand with gravel
Sample Comment: ---
Compaction Report - ASTM D1557
printed 3/1/2017 12:13:07 PM
105
110
115
120
125
130
0 5 10 15 20
Dry
Density,
pcf
Water Content, %
zero air
voids line
uncorrected
corrected
Data Points Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Point 4
Dry density, pcf
Moisture Content, %
118.7
7.4
120.2
9.1
119.1
11.2
115.3
13.0
Method : C
Preparation : WET
As received Moisture :10 %
Rammer : Mechanical
Zero voids line based on assumed specific gravity of 2.65
Maximum Dry Density= 120.3 pcf
Optimum Moisture= 9.6 %
Oversize Correction (8.7% > 3/4 inch Sieve)
Corrected Maximum Dry Density= 122.9 pcf
Corrected Optimum Moisture= 8.8 %
Assumed Average Bulk Specific Gravity = 2.55
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 85

17. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-3
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 1.1-6 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/08/17
Test Id: 403881
Tested By: cwd
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, olive brown silty sand
Sample Comment: Sample contains organics
Compaction Report - ASTM D1557
printed 3/1/2017 12:13:30 PM
105
110
115
120
125
130
0 5 10 15 20
Dry
Density,
pcf
Water Content, %
zero air
voids line
uncorrected
corrected
Data Points Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Point 4
Dry density, pcf
Moisture Content, %
116.6
7.2
118.1
9.2
119.6
11.2
115.6
13.0
Method : C
Preparation : WET
As received Moisture :10 %
Rammer : Mechanical
Zero voids line based on assumed specific gravity of 2.65
Maximum Dry Density= 119.8 pcf
Optimum Moisture= 10.9 %
Oversize Correction (5% > 3/4 inch Sieve)
Corrected Maximum Dry Density= 121.3 pcf
Corrected Optimum Moisture= 10.3 %
Assumed Average Bulk Specific Gravity = 2.55
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 86

18. Client: Nobis Engineering, Inc.
Project: I-91 at Route 9
Location: Northampton, MA Project No: GTX-305975
Boring ID: NB-5
Sample ID: G-1
Depth : 0.5-6 ft
Sample Type: bucket
Test Date: 02/14/17
Test Id: 403883
Tested By: cwd
Checked By: emm
Test Comment: ---
Visual Description: Moist, very dark grayish brown silty sand with gravel
Sample Comment: Sample contains asphalt
Compaction Report - ASTM D1557
printed 3/1/2017 12:14:00 PM
115
120
125
130
135
140
0 5 10 15 20
Dry
Density,
pcf
Water Content, %
zero air
voids line
uncorrected
corrected
Data Points Point 1 Point 2 Point 3 Point 4
Dry density, pcf
Moisture Content, %
125.8
3.1
130.0
5.0
130.6
6.9
128.4
8.7
Method : C
Preparation : WET
As received Moisture :6 %
Rammer : Mechanical
Zero voids line based on assumed specific gravity of 2.65
Maximum Dry Density= 130.8 pcf
Optimum Moisture= 6.2 %
Oversize Correction (22.8% > 3/4 inch Sieve)
Corrected Maximum Dry Density= 136.4 pcf
Corrected Optimum Moisture= 4.8 %
Assumed Average Bulk Specific Gravity = 2.55
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 87

19. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 88

20. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 89

21. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 90

22. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 91

23. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 92

24. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 93

25. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 94

26. by ASTM D1883
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 95

27. APPENDIX
F
–
Calculations
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 96

28. APPENDIX
F.1
–
Bearing
Resistance
and
Settlement
for
Proposed
Modular
Block
Wall
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 97

29. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 1 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Objective:
References: 1) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 7th Edition with 2016 Interim Revisions.
Assumptions:
Solution:
Bearing Soil Properties/Subsurface Information
125 pcf Estimated
130 pcf Estimated
0 psf Estimated
33 degrees Estimated
Footing Elevation: 138.25 ft, NAVD88 Reference 3
Min. Ground Surface (GS) Elevation: 138.75 ft, NAVD88 Reference 3
Groundwater Elevation: 114.8 ft, NAVD88
Footing Geometry
0.5 ft
Groundwater Height Below GS: 23.95 ft
3.42 ft Reference No. 3
176 ft Reference No. 3
Width Eccentricity (eB): 1 ft See Note 2
Length Eccentricity (eL): 0 ft Assumed
2.3 ft
176 ft
Notes:
Reference No. 4 (B-17)
2) Width eccentricity (eB) assumes maximum allowable eccentricity (i.e. B/6).
3) AutoCAD file titled "604597_SV" and PDF drawing entitled "ACAD-604597_HD(Corr) Model"
prepared by TranSystems.
4) Record I-91 bridge over Bridge Street construction drawings, dated 1966 and 1992.
1) Soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the Nobis borings are representative of
existing soil conditions at the locations of the proposed temporary abutments.
2) Calculation considers minimum embedment of four (4) feet below grade.
Effective Width (B'):
3) Refer to pages 2 and 3 for example bearing resistance and settlement calculations,
respectively. Refer to page 4 for graph created using a range of effective footing dimensions.
Bearing Resistance and Settlement Calculations for Proposed Modular Block Retaining Wall
Develop a graph for a range of effective footing sizes that can be used to evaluate bearing
resistance and settlement based on effective footing width for the proposed modular block
retaining wall.
Width ( B ):
2) Test borings observed by Nobis in January and February, 2017.
Cohesion of Bearing Soil ( c ):
Friction Angle of Bearing Soil ( φ' ):
Minimum Footing Depth ( Df ):
3) Engineering properties for gravel borrow for bridge foundations.
1) Calculations for bearing resistance and settlement assume footing subgrade is prepared in
accordance with Geotechnical Report.
Unit Weight of Bearing Soil ( γ ):
Unit Weight of Soil Above Footing ( γ ):
Length ( L ):
Effective Length (L'):
Soil Description: Minimum of 12 inches of compacted Gravel Borrow overlying proof-compacted fill
soils. See Note 1.
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 98

30. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 2 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.3.1.1-1
0.45
26.1
1.01
i q = [1-H/(V+cB'L'cotφf )]n
1.0 Assumed
n =[(2+L'/B')/(1+L'/B')]cos2
θ 1.99 Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a-9
+ [(2+B'/L')/(1+B'/L')]sin2
θ
Load Angle (θ) 90 degrees Assumed
1.0
Nqm= 26.32
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nc ) = 38.6 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-1
Shape Correction Factor ( sc ) = 1.01 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-3
Load Inclination Factor ( i c ) =
i c = i q -[(1-i q)/Nq-1)] = 1.0 Assumed
Ncm = 38.94
35.2 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-1
0.99
i γ = [1-H/(V+cB'L'cotφf )]n+1
1.0 Assumed
Nγm= 35.02
( Cwq ) 1.00
( Cwγ ) 1.00
qn= 6.7 ksf
qR= 3.0 ksf
Groundwater Coefficients Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-2
Shape Correction Factor ( sγ ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-3
Load Inclination Factor ( i γ )
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nγ or Nγq )
Depth Correction Factor ( dq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-4
Ncm = Nc*sc*i c Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a-2
Nγm = Nγ*sγ*i γ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a-4
Shape Correction Factor ( sq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-3
Load Inclination Factor ( i q )
q n = c*Ncm + γ*Df *Nq m*Cwq + 0.5*γ*B'*Nγm*Cwγ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a-1
Nqm = Nq*sq *dq *i q Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a-3
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a-1
Factored Bearing Resistance: qR = qn * φb
Resistance Factor ( φb ) = Tb. 10.5.5.2.2-1
Nominal Resistance (q n) =
Example Bearing Resistance Calculation
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 99

31. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 3 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.2.4.2-1
Poisson's Ratio (v) 0.3 Tb. C10.4.6.3-1
Young's modulus of elasticity (Es) 7 ksi Tb. C10.4.6.3-1
Flexible or Rigid Flexible
Shape Factor (βz) 1.41 Tb. 10.6.2.4.2-1
Effective Footing Width (B') 2
Effective Area of Footing (A') 401 ft2
B' * L'
Example Settlement (Elastic) Calculation
Se =
(q o(1-v 2
)√A')
144*Es*βz
1.0 6.5
Assumed Settlement,
Se (in)
Applied Vertical
Stress, q o (ksf)
0.5 3.2
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 100

32. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 4 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
1) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 7th Edition with 2016 Interim Revisions.
2) BB-4, performed by New Hampshire Boring, Inc. dba New England Boring Contractors.
2) Calculation considers minimum embedment of four (4) feet below grade.
Notes:
qR = Factored Bearing Resistance - Strength Limit State (enter graph with B' and read qR)
q0 = Maximum Bearing Pressure - Service Limit State (enter graph with q0 and read settlement at B')
1. q R vs B' line and settlement curves developed using test boring information.
2. Bearing capacity and settlements are based on foundations bearing conditions provided on page 1.
3. A bearing resistance factor of 0.45 was used to calculate the bearing resistance at the strength limit state.
North and South Abutment
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 2 4 6 8 10
q
R
or
q
o
(ksf)
B' - Effective Footing Width (ft)
qR vs B'
S = .5 inch
S = 1 inch
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 101

33. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 5 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
2) Calculation considers minimum embedment of four (4) feet below grade.
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 102

34. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 6 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 103

35. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 7 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 104

36. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 8 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 105

37. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 9 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 106

38. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 10 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 107

39. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 11 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 108

40. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 12 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 109

41. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 13 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 110

42. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 14 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 111

43. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 15 of 15
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 112

44. APPENDIX
F.2
–
Lateral
Earth
Pressures
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 113

45. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 1 of 1
Calculated by: PC Date: 2/20/17
Checked by: AJ Date: 2/20/17
Objective:
Approach:
References: 1. MassDOT LRFD Bridge Manual, Section 3.1.6, 2013.
2. Principles of Foundation Engineering, Second Edition, Das.
3. AASHTO Bridge Design Specifications, 2014.
Assumptions: 1. Retained soil is crushed stone with a friction angle of 37°.
At‐Rest Earth Pressure using Rankine's Method (Principles of Foundation Engineering, Second Edition, Das)
Ko = 1 ‐ sin(φ)
Ko = 0.40 Effective friction angle of soil: φ = 37°
Active Earth Pressure using Coulomb's Method (Principles of Foundation Engineering, Second Edition, Das)
 = backslope angle
 = wall batter angle
 = soil friction angle
 = soil/wall friction angle ( = φ(2/3) )
Proposed Wall
   
30 90 φ = 37° 25
Ka = 0.37 (Use for proposed walls)
Calculate lateral earth pressure coefficients for the proposed modular block retaining wall.
Use Coulomb's method to determine active earth pressure and Rankine's method to determine the at‐rest
earth pressure coefficient in accordance with MassDOT LRFD Bridge Manual.
(and active earth pressure) will vary with
height and wall type selected.
4. PDF drawing entitled "ACAD‐604597_HD(Corr) Model"
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 114

46. APPENDIX
F.3
–
Bearing
Resistance
and
Settlement
for
Existing
Bridge
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 115

47. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 1 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Objective:
References: 1) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 7th Edition with 2016 Interim Revisions.
Assumptions:
Solution:
Bearing Soil Properties/Subsurface Information
130 pcf Estimated
130 pcf Estimated
0 psf Estimated
37 degrees Estimated
Footing Elevation: 146.3 ft, NAVD88 Reference 4 (North Abutment, I‐91 SB)
Min. Ground Surface (GS) Elevation: 150.3 ft, NAVD88 Assumption 2
Groundwater Elevation: 114.8 ft, NAVD88
Footing Geometry
4 ft
Groundwater Height Below GS: 35.5 ft
6 ft Reference No. 4
49.2 ft Reference 4 (North Abutment, I‐91 SB)
Width Eccentricity (eB): 1 ft See Note 2
Length Eccentricity (eL): 0 ft Assumed
5 ft
49.2 ft
Notes:
2) Loads on abutments not available, effective abutment footing width (B') reduced by 20
percent to account for unknown loading eccentricities.
2) Calculation considers minimum embedment of four (4) feet below grade.
3) AutoCAD file titled "604597_SV" and PDF drawing entitled "ACAD‐604597_HD(Corr) Model"
prepared by TranSystems.
4) Record I‐91 bridge over Bridge Street construction drawings, dated 1966 and 1992.
Estimate bearing resistance and settlement for existing abutments bearing on concrete spread
footings.
1) Soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the Nobis borings are representative of
existing soil conditions at the locations of the proposed temporary abutments.
Effective Width (B'):
Effective Length (L'):
Soil Description:
Reference No. 4 (B‐17)
Compacted Gravel Borrow for bridge foundations (M1.03.0).
Bearing Resistance and Settlement Calculations ‐ Existing Concrete North Abutments
Width ( B ):
2) Test borings observed by Nobis in January and February, 2017.
Cohesion of Bearing Soil ( c ):
Friction Angle of Bearing Soil ( ' ):
Minimum Footing Depth ( Df ):
3) Engineering properties for gravel borrow for bridge foundations.
1) Example bearing resistance and settlement calculations can be found on pages 2 and 3,
respectively.
Unit Weight of Bearing Soil ( γ ):
Unit Weight of Soil Above Footing ( γ ):
Length ( L ):
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 116

48. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 2 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.3.1.1‐1
0.45
0 Footings bearing on or near slope
1.07
i q = [1‐H/(V+cB'L'cotf )]n
1.0 Assumed
n =[(2+L'/B')/(1+L'/B')]cos
2
θ 1.91 Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐9
+ [(2+B'/L')/(1+B'/L')]sin
2
θ
Load Angle (θ) 90 degrees Assumed
1.0
Nqm= 0.00
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nc ) = 55.6 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐1
Shape Correction Factor ( sc ) = 1.00 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i c ) =
i c = i q ‐[(1‐i q)/Nq‐1)] = 1.0 Assumed
Ncm = 55.60
65 Figure 10.6.3.1.2c‐2
0.96
i γ = [1‐H/(V+cB'L'cotf )]n+1
1.0 Assumed
Nγm= 62.46
( Cwq ) 1.00
( Cwγ ) 1.00
qn= 19.5 ksf
qR= 8.8 ksf
Groundwater Coefficients Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐2
Shape Correction Factor ( sγ ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i γ )
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nγ or Nγq )
Depth Correction Factor ( dq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐4
Ncm = Nc*sc*i c Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐2
Nγm = Nγ*sγ*i γ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐4
Shape Correction Factor ( sq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i q )
q n = c*Ncm + γ*Df *Nq m*Cwq + 0.5*γ*B'*Nγm*Cwγ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐1
Nqm = Nq*sq *dq *i q Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nq )
Factored Bearing Resistance: qR = qn * b
Resistance Factor ( b ) = Tb. 10.5.5.2.2‐1
Nominal Resistance (q n) =
Example Bearing Resistance Calculation
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 117

49. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 3 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.2.4.2‐1
Poisson's Ratio (v) 0.3 Tb. C10.4.6.3‐1
Young's modulus of elasticity (Es) 7 ksi Tb. C10.4.6.3‐1
Flexible or Rigid Rigid
Shape Factor (βz) 1.41 Tb. 10.6.2.4.2‐1
Effective Footing Width (B') 5
Effective Area of Footing (A') 236 ft2
B' * L'
Example Settlement (Elastic) Calculation
Se =
(q o(1‐v 2
)√A')
144*Es*βz
1.0 8.5
Assumed Settlement,
Se (in)
Applied Vertical
Stress, q o (ksf)
0.5 4.2
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 118

50. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 4 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 119

51. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 5 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 120

52. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 6 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 121

53. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 7 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 122

54. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 8 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 123

55. Shared Use Bridge over MBTA/CSX
Franklin, MA
85891.00
Page: 7 of 7
Calculated by: RAC Date: 4/14/2015
Checked by: PCC Date: 4/20/2015
Revision: 1
b/B = 0.2
N(gamma)q = 65
Page 9 of 9
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 124

56. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 1 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Objective:
References: 1) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 7th Edition with 2016 Interim Revisions.
Assumptions:
Solution:
Bearing Soil Properties/Subsurface Information
130 pcf Estimated
130 pcf Estimated
0 psf Estimated
37 degrees Estimated
Footing Elevation: 146.3 ft, NAVD88 Reference 4 (North Abutment, I‐91 SB)
Min. Ground Surface (GS) Elevation: 150 ft, NAVD88 Reference 3
Groundwater Elevation: 114.8 ft, NAVD88
Footing Geometry
3.7 ft Assumption No. 2
Groundwater Height Below GS: 35.2 ft
6 ft Reference No. 4
49.2 ft Reference 4 (North Abutment, I‐91 SB)
Width Eccentricity (eB): 1 ft See Note 2
Length Eccentricity (eL): 0 ft Assumed
5 ft
49.2 ft
Notes:
2) Loads on abutments not available, effective abutment footing width (B') reduced by 20
percent to account for unknown loading eccentricities.
2) Calculation considers minimum embedment of 3.7 feet below grade.
3) AutoCAD file titled "604597_SV" and PDF drawing entitled "ACAD‐604597_HD(Corr) Model"
prepared by TranSystems.
4) Record I‐91 bridge over Bridge Street construction drawings, dated 1966 and 1992.
Estimate bearing resistance and settlement for existing abutments bearing on concrete spread
footings during modular block retaining wall construction.
1) Soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the Nobis borings are representative of
existing soil conditions at the locations of the proposed temporary abutments.
Effective Width (B'):
Effective Length (L'):
Soil Description:
Reference No. 4 (B‐17)
Compacted Gravel Borrow for bridge foundations (M1.03.0).
Bearing Resistance and Settlement Calculations ‐ Existing Concrete North Abutments During Construction
Width ( B ):
2) Test borings observed by Nobis in January and February, 2017.
Cohesion of Bearing Soil ( c ):
Friction Angle of Bearing Soil ( ' ):
Minimum Footing Depth ( Df ):
3) Engineering properties for gravel borrow for bridge foundations.
1) Example bearing resistance and settlement calculations can be found on pages 2 and 3,
respectively.
Unit Weight of Bearing Soil ( γ ):
Unit Weight of Soil Above Footing ( γ ):
Length ( L ):
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 125

57. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 2 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.3.1.1‐1
0.45
0 Footings bearing on or near slope
1.07
i q = [1‐H/(V+cB'L'cotf )]n
1.0 Assumed
n =[(2+L'/B')/(1+L'/B')]cos
2
θ 1.91 Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐9
+ [(2+B'/L')/(1+B'/L')]sin
2
θ
Load Angle (θ) 90 degrees Assumed
1.0
Nqm= 0.00
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nc ) = 55.6 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐1
Shape Correction Factor ( sc ) = 1.00 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i c ) =
i c = i q ‐[(1‐i q)/Nq‐1)] = 1.0 Assumed
Ncm = 55.60
15 Figure 10.6.3.1.2c‐2
0.96
i γ = [1‐H/(V+cB'L'cotf )]n+1
1.0 Assumed
Nγm= 14.41
( Cwq ) 1.00
( Cwγ ) 1.00
qn= 4.5 ksf
qR= 2.0 ksf
Groundwater Coefficients Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐2
Shape Correction Factor ( sγ ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i γ )
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nγ or Nγq )
Depth Correction Factor ( dq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐4
Ncm = Nc*sc*i c Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐2
Nγm = Nγ*sγ*i γ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐4
Shape Correction Factor ( sq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i q )
q n = c*Ncm + γ*Df *Nq m*Cwq + 0.5*γ*B'*Nγm*Cwγ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐1
Nqm = Nq*sq *dq *i q Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nq )
Factored Bearing Resistance: qR = qn * b
Resistance Factor ( b ) = Tb. 10.5.5.2.2‐1
Nominal Resistance (q n) =
Example Bearing Resistance Calculation
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 126

58. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 3 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.2.4.2‐1
Poisson's Ratio (v) 0.3 Tb. C10.4.6.3‐1
Young's modulus of elasticity (Es) 8 ksi Tb. C10.4.6.3‐1
Flexible or Rigid Rigid
Shape Factor (βz) 1.41 Tb. 10.6.2.4.2‐1
Effective Footing Width (B') 5
Effective Area of Footing (A') 236 ft2
B' * L'
Example Settlement (Elastic) Calculation
Se =
(q o(1‐v 2
)√A')
144*Es*βz
1.0 9.7
Assumed Settlement,
Se (in)
Applied Vertical
Stress, q o (ksf)
0.5 4.8
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 127

59. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 4 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 128

60. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 5 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 129

61. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 6 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 130

62. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 7 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 131

63. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 8 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 132

64. Shared Use Bridge over MBTA/CSX
Franklin, MA
85891.00
Page: 7 of 7
Calculated by: RAC Date: 4/14/2015
Checked by: PCC Date: 4/20/2015
Revision: 1
b/B = 0.2
N(gamma)q = 15
Page 9 of 9
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 133

65. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 1 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Objective:
References: 1) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 7th Edition with 2016 Interim Revisions.
Assumptions:
Solution:
Bearing Soil Properties/Subsurface Information
130 pcf Estimated
130 pcf Estimated
0 psf Estimated
37 degrees Estimated
Footing Elevation: 146.3 ft, NAVD88 Reference 4 (North Abutment, I‐91 SB)
Min. Ground Surface (GS) Elevation: 150.3 ft, NAVD88 Assumption 2
Groundwater Elevation: 114.8 ft, NAVD88
Footing Geometry
4 ft
Groundwater Height Below GS: 35.5 ft
6 ft Reference No. 4
49.2 ft Reference 4 (North Abutment, I‐91 SB)
Width Eccentricity (eB): 1 ft See Note 2
Length Eccentricity (eL): 0 ft Assumed
5 ft
49.2 ft
Notes:
3) AutoCAD file titled "604597_SV" and PDF drawing entitled "ACAD‐604597_HD(Corr) Model"
prepared by TranSystems.
4) Record I‐91 bridge over Bridge Street construction drawings, dated 1966 and 1992.
Estimate bearing resistance and settlement for existing abutments bearing on concrete spread
footings post‐construction.
1) Soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the Nobis borings are representative of
existing soil conditions at the locations of the proposed temporary abutments.
Effective Width (B'):
Effective Length (L'):
Soil Description:
Reference No. 4 (B‐17)
Compacted Gravel Borrow for bridge foundations (M1.03.0).
Bearing Resistance and Settlement Calculations ‐ Existing Concrete North Abutments Post‐Construction
Width ( B ):
2) Test borings observed by Nobis in January and February, 2017.
Cohesion of Bearing Soil ( c ):
Friction Angle of Bearing Soil ( ' ):
Minimum Footing Depth ( Df ):
3) Engineering properties for gravel borrow for bridge foundations.
1) Example bearing resistance and settlement calculations can be found on pages 2 and 3,
respectively.
Unit Weight of Bearing Soil ( γ ):
Unit Weight of Soil Above Footing ( γ ):
Length ( L ):
2) Loads on abutments not available, effective abutment footing width (B') reduced by 20
percent to account for unknown loading eccentricities.
2) Calculation considers minimum embedment of four (4) feet below grade.
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 134

66. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 2 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.3.1.1‐1
0.45
0 Footings bearing on or near slope
1.07
i q = [1‐H/(V+cB'L'cotf )]n
1.0 Assumed
n =[(2+L'/B')/(1+L'/B')]cos
2
θ 1.91 Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐9
+ [(2+B'/L')/(1+B'/L')]sin
2
θ
Load Angle (θ) 90 degrees Assumed
1.0
Nqm= 0.00
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nc ) = 55.6 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐1
Shape Correction Factor ( sc ) = 1.00 Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i c ) =
i c = i q ‐[(1‐i q)/Nq‐1)] = 1.0 Assumed
Ncm = 55.60
50 Figure 10.6.3.1.2c‐2
0.96
i γ = [1‐H/(V+cB'L'cotf )]n+1
1.0 Assumed
Nγm= 48.05
( Cwq ) 1.00
( Cwγ ) 1.00
qn= 15.0 ksf
qR= 6.7 ksf
Factored Bearing Resistance: qR = qn * b
Resistance Factor ( b ) = Tb. 10.5.5.2.2‐1
Nominal Resistance (q n) =
Example Bearing Resistance Calculation
Shape Correction Factor ( sq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i q )
q n = c*Ncm + γ*Df *Nq m*Cwq + 0.5*γ*B'*Nγm*Cwγ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐1
Nqm = Nq*sq *dq *i q Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nq )
Bearing Capacity Factor ( Nγ or Nγq )
Depth Correction Factor ( dq ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐4
Ncm = Nc*sc*i c Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐2
Nγm = Nγ*sγ*i γ Eq. 10.6.3.1.2a‐4
Groundwater Coefficients Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐2
Shape Correction Factor ( sγ ) Tb. 10.6.3.1.2a‐3
Load Inclination Factor ( i γ )
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 135

67. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 3 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Eq. 10.6.2.4.2‐1
Poisson's Ratio (v) 0.3 Tb. C10.4.6.3‐1
Young's modulus of elasticity (Es) 7 ksi Tb. C10.4.6.3‐1
Flexible or Rigid Rigid
Shape Factor (βz) 1.41 Tb. 10.6.2.4.2‐1
Effective Footing Width (B') 5
Effective Area of Footing (A') 236 ft2
B' * L'
Example Settlement (Elastic) Calculation
Se =
(q o(1‐v 2
)√A')
144*Es*βz
1.0 8.5
Assumed Settlement,
Se (in)
Applied Vertical
Stress, q o (ksf)
0.5 4.2
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 136

68. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 4 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 137

69. Interstate 91 and Route 9
Intersection Reconstruction
Northampton, Massachusetts
Project No. 92470.00
Page: 5 of 9
Calculated by: PCC Date: 2/20/2017
Checked by: RAC Date: 2/23/17
Revision: 0
Proposal No. 604597 - 105762
A00804 - 138