INFORMATION HANDOUT

For Contract No. 07-293704

At 07-LA-110, 405-8.0/9.0, 12.2/13.2

Identified by
Project ID 0713000239

MATERIALS INFORMATION
Geotechnical Report for Retaining Walls and Sign Posts
List of the Preconstruction Operational Status-Check Results
Cross Section Drawings

1
 Housing Agency

Memorandum Flex your power!

Be energy efficient!

To: RAMIN RASHEDI Date: January 20, 2017

Bridge Design Branch 11
Office of Bridge Design South 1
File: 07-LA-110/405 PM 8.0/9/0
EA 07-293701
0713000239
Attention: Phu Nguyen

From: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING SERVICES
Geotechnical Services
Office of Geotechnical Design – South

Subject: Geotechnical Design Report for Retaining Walls and Sign Posts Associated with Route
110/Route 405 Interchange Improvement Project-Bridge No.53-1137

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In response to the request from the Office of Bridge Design South, the Office of Geotechnical
Design South (OGDS) prepared this geotechnical deign report for the proposed soil nailed and
ground anchored walls under the Bridge 53-1137, retaining walls, and sign posts associated with
the Route 110/ Route 405 interchange improvement project.

1.1 Project Description

Based on Structure Advance Planning Study Request, the project involves improving the traffic
operations within I-110/I-405 interchanges on Route 110 between Torrance Blvd PM8.0 and the
Dominquez channel PM9.0 and on Route 405 between Truck Scales PM12.2 to 190th St.
PM13.2.

This project will consist of 4 mainline thru lanes on the southbound (SB) I-110, and the
realignment of the northbound (NB) Route I-405 to SB Route I-110 connector, and an aux lane
that merges with the SB Route I-405 to SB Route I-110 Connector. To accommodate the
additional aux lane, the SB Route I-405 to SB Route I-110 Connector must be shifted to the west
and require realignment, resulting in widening SB Route I-110- mainlines to the Del Amo Blvd
UC.

The general location of the project site is shown on the Vicinity Map in Figures 1a and 1b.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 2 0713000239

Project Site

Figure 1a: Site Vicinity Map

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 3 0713000239

Figure 1b: Site Vicinity Map

 RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 4 0713000239

1.2 Proposed Earth Retaining Systems

According to the plan view layout, profile, and cross sections provided by the Structure Design,
the basic configuration of these retaining walls are summarized in the Table 1 are proposed at the
following locations:

Table 1. Summary of the Retaining Walls

Location Station Estimated Approximate
Begin End Maximum Length (ft) Note
Height (ft)
Wall Number 59
59+00.00 63+88.00
SB Route 405 to SB
(B1-Line) (B1-Line) 8 Fill
Route 110 connector 488
Wall Number 72 NB
71+80 74+36
Route 405 to SB Route
(A1-Line) (A1-Line) 10 Fill
110 Connector Loop 256

Wall Number 437 437+00.00 451+84.00

14 1484 Fill
SB 110 (2LA110 (2LA110
Line) Line)
Wall Number 461
Bridge No. 53E0365 Cut Fill
Beneath Route 110/Route Slope with
405 Separation and ground
Connector Bridges: (460+04.27 (466+07.90 24.86 anchors
Bridge: 53-1137L, 53- A1-Line) A1-Line) 603.63 and soil
1137F, 53-1137G, 53- nails
1137 & 53-1137R

1.3 Proposed Sign Posts

Four major sign post foundations’ No. S2-5 at Sta 427+70.00; S2-6 at Sta 427+74.00; S3-3A at
Sta 466+33.60 and S3-4A at Sta 446+38.00 required geotechnical design.

2.0 SITE CONDITION

2.1 Site Geology

According to National Geological Map Database, the subsurface materials of the project site
consist of Surfical Sediment (Qa/Qae), underlain by Shallow Marine Sediments (Qsp) and
Fernando Formation (Tfp). The Surfical Sediment (Qa/Qae) consists of alluvium, mostly loamy
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 5 0713000239

clay of valley and flood plains, and fine sand near Palos Verdes Hills. The Shallow Marine
Sediment (Qsp) consists of light gray to reddish-tan sand and pebble gravel, pebbles derived
mostly from Miocene hard siliceous shale and limestone detritus. The Fernando Formation (Tfp)
is late Pliocene age, mostly Venturian Stage and consists of mostly blue and blond sandy shale
and sandy siltstone.

2.2 Subsurface condition

2.2.1 Previous Site Exploration

According to the available LOTBs, the project site consists of embankment fill and alluvium
materials. The fill consists of medium to dense fine sand with various degrees of silt and clay
content. The soil is poorly graded silty sand. The alluvium consists of soft to very stiff clay and
silt with various degrees of sand content, and medium dense to very dense fine to medium sand
with gravel with various degrees of silt and clay content. The locations are shown in Figure 2
and the detailed LOTB logs are shown in Appendix B.

2.2.2 Current Site Exploration

Subsurface exploration for this project was performed on December 14-17, 2015. Subsurface
exploration applicable for the subject retaining wall includes three boreholes using rotary wash
drilling (4.25 inch outer diameter). Standard Penetration Tests (SPT’s) were performed and
California samples were obtained during boring. SPT N-Values and California samples were
recorded at 5 foot intervals alternatively during drilling. The SPTs were performed in accordance
with ASTM Test Method D1586. Boring information is summarized in Table 2. Boring was
logged based on visual observations of the soil cuttings and collected samples. The locations of
the boreholes were measured using GPS unit, while the elevations were estimated using Google
Earth. The locations of the boreholes are shown in Figure 3 and the detailed LOTB logs are
shown in Appendix B.

Table 2. Summary of Subsurface Investigation

Compl Approx. Ground

Boring Drill Rig Hammer Hammer Boring Depth
etion Surface
No. Type Type Efficiency (ft)
Date Elevation (ft)
12/15/
R-15-101 Dietrich Automatic 92 34 51.5
2015
12/17/
R-15-102 Dietrich Automatic 92 41 67.5
2015
12/16/
R-15-103 Dietrich Automatic 92 25 51.5
2015
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 6 0713000239

Figure 2 Current and Previous Borehole Locations

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 7 0713000239

2.2.3 Soil Engineering Properties

The native soil is medium dense, equivalent to the moist unit weight of 120 pcf, and a friction
angle of 32 degrees. The fill material above the native soil is also medium dense silty sand with
small cohesion. The unit weight is 120 pcf and a friction angle of 34 degree and the cohesion of
50 psf. The engineering properties used for the design of the proposed retaining wall designs are
summarized in the Table 3a-3c and in Appendix C.

Table 3a. Soil Engineering Properties Based on R15-101

Layer Elevation Uncorrected SPT
Soil Type Shear Strength Parameters
No. (ft) N values

Elastic Silt with

1 0-30 γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 10-21
Fine Sand (MH)

2 30-50 Sandy Silt (ML) γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 14-36

Table 3b. Soil Engineering Properties Based on R15-102

Layer Elevation Uncorrected SPT
Soil Type Shear Strength Parameters
No. (ft) N values

γ = 120 pcf; φ = 34˚ and

1 0-20 Silty Sand (Fill) 18-28
cohesion=50 psf

2 20-40 Sandy Silt (ML) γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 5-19

Poorly graded
3 40-65 Sand and Elastic γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 16-27
Silt (MH)
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 8 0713000239

Table 3c. Soil Engineering Properties Based on R15-103

Layer Elevation Uncorrected SPT
Soil Type Shear Strength Parameters
No. (ft) N values

γ = 120 pcf; φ = 34˚ and

1 0-15 Silty Sand (Fill) 17
cohesion of 50 psf

2 15-25 Sandy Silt (ML) γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 14-17

Poorly graded
3 25-50 Sand and Elastic γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 22-55
Silt (MH)

Note: depths are measured from top of the slope grade

2.2.4 Corrosion

CORROSIVITY

Corrosivity of subsurface materials at the depth between 10- 20 ft below the existing grade was
tested and reported on February 11, 2016 in accordance with CTM 643, 417, and 422. The test
results summarized in Table 4 and in Appendix C indicated that the subsurface materials in the
project area are corrosive.

Table 4. Corrosion Test Summary of the Composite Samples

Sample Minimum Chloride Sulfate
TL 101 Boring Depth pH Resistivity Content Content
Number Number
(ft) (ohm-cm) (ppm) (ppm)

C969801 R-15-102 10-20 8.82 1864 34 222

C969802 R-15-103 10-20 7.73 615 608 226

Note:
For structural element, Caltrans considers a site corrosive if one or more of the following condition exist: pH is 5.5
or less, Choride Concentration is 500 ppm or greater, sulfate concentration is 2000 ppm or greater. The Caltrans
Corrosion Guidelines state that if the minimum resistivity is less than 1000 Ohm-cm the sample is considered to be
corrosive and testing to determine sulfate and chloride is not performed. It is shown in Red in Table 4.
2.2.5 Groundwater and Seepage

According to the available LOTBs, the groundwater was encountered at the elevation of (-10ft
MSL) 10ft below MSL from 1960 to 2000 LOTB. This groundwater elevation was used for the
liquefaction potential analysis.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 9 0713000239

2.3 Geological and Geotechnical Hazards

2.3.1 Faulting and Seismicity

Both deterministic and probabilistic seismic analysis were performed using Caltrans ARS on-line
using average shear wave velocity of 270 m/sec based on available LOTBs. According to the
analysis, there are three controlling faults near the project site, and the seismic hazard at the
project site is governed by the probabilistic seismic analysis. The controlling fault parameters
were summarized in Table 5 and Figure 3.

Table 5: Summary of Controlling Faults (LAT = 33.852740 and LONG = 118.284302)

Magnitude
Fault Name Type Distance (km) PGA (g)
(Mw)
Newport Inglewood (N.
SS 7.2 3.7 (Rx) 0.42
Los Angeles Basin)
Compton Rev 6.9 0 (Rjb) 0.52
Newport Inglewood (S.
SS 7.2 3.0 (Rx) 0.4
Los Angeles Basin)

Based on the design ARS curve below, the estimated design PGA is 0.5g.

Design Acceleration Response Spectrum (ARS)

1.2
1.1
Spectral Acceleration, Sa (g)

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5
Period (second)

Figure 3: ARS Curve at the Proposed Retaining Wall Locations

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 10 0713000239

2.3.2 Liquefaction Potential

Based on the Seismic Hazard Zones (Liquefaction and Earthquake-Induced Landslides) for
Torrance Quadrangle, some areas of the project site are located within Zones of Required
Investigation.

The water table is 10 ft below MSL. The facing and the toe of soil anchors is above the water
table. All the retaining walls is above the water table.

Based on Caltrans’ Geotechnical Manual on liquefaction, the site is not liquefiable by assuming
the ground water table is 45-ft below the existing surface and the SPT N values of 16. Using
Youd 2001 method with Rousch adjusted equation in evaluating liquefaction potential, it
indicated the liquefaction is unlikely in this site location.

2.4 Environmental Study

Environmental study was conducted in November 2016. The purpose of conducting additional
investigation is to find out the extent of solid waste at the site location around Retaining Wall 72
and Soil Nailed Wall 461.

Five test pits up to 5-ft deep were excavated and four handheld boreholes were drilled. The
locations are shown in Appendix D. Three test pits-1346-119, 1346-120 and 1346-122 showed
solid waste debris. Those solid waste contained concrete and asphalt were in test pits- 1346-119
and 1346-120.

Test Pit-1346-122 at the location near the North end of soil nailed wall posed the potential
geotechnical challenge. In that test pit, Eucalyptus roots and waste sample at the depth about 4
feet were found. The waste sample contains concrete, rock fragment, textiles, fiber, plastic,
wood, paper and metal fragments.

Since the environment is anaerobic as indicated in the test pit because the debris fragments in the
test pit are relatively inert and no decomposed organic materials were observed.

The soil property in these sparse locations of solid waste can be assumed to be the same as the
property of the fill material because most of the solid waste in this locations are asphalt and
concrete.

The extent of these solid waste is difficult to identify because of the materials are varied
differently in different locations.

3.0 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION

3.1 Evaluation of Retaining Wall ERS types

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 11 0713000239

For the proposed retaining walls beneath Route 110/Route 405 separation and connector bridges,
four retaining wall structures were considered in this report.

3.1.1 Retaining Wall #59

This retaining wall #59 is from the tangent section between I405 South to I110 South. The
maximum retaining wall height is 8 ft. The length is about 488 ft. The footing elevation varies
from 27.17 and 41.67 from MSL. Based on LOTB records from R15-102 and R15-103, the fill
material is from the surface extended to 10 feet above MSL. This means the footing is rested
mainly on the fill material. The bulk density is about 120 pcf and the angle of friction is 34
degree and the cohesion is 50 psf. It is recommended to use footing keys for the retaining wall
foundation as shown in Table 6. The wall is supported by footings.

Table 6. Soil Engineering Properties for Retaining Wall #59

Layer Thickness Elevation Shear Strength
Soil Type SPT N values
No. (ft) MSL (ft) Parameters

Silty SAND γ = 120 pcf; φ = 34˚,

1 0-25 16-41 17-28
(Fill) C=50 psf

2 25-50 (-9)-16 Sandy Silt γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 5-19

Based on the wall height and the soil properties, Type 1 retaining wall is recommended.

Since the ground water was encountered about 10 feet below MSL. No ground water should be
anticipated during the wall construction. However, any perched water may present during the
construction. It is expected to be temporary and will not affected the wall. But precautious
should be taken if water was observed during the construction.

3.1.2 Retaining Wall #72

This retaining wall #72 is from the tangent section between I405 North to I110 South. The
maximum retaining wall height is 10 ft. The length is about 256 ft. The footing elevation varies
from 36.67 and 41.67 from MSL. Based on LOTB records from R15-101 and R15-102, the fill
material is from the surface extended to 10 feet above MSL. This means the footing is rested on
the fill material.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 12 0713000239

Table 7. Soil Engineering Properties for Retaining Wall #72

Layer Elevation Elevation Shear Strength
Soil Type SPT N values
No. (ft) MSL (ft) Parameters

γ = 120 pcf; φ = 34˚,

1 0-20 21-41 Silty SAND (Fill) 10-28
Cohesion=50 psf

2 20-50 (-9)-21 Sandy Silt (ML) γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 5-27

In the environmental report dated December 2016, the waste material deposit may be presence.
Since the solid waste is mainly concrete and fragments of asphalt, this will not pose a major
concerns especially the materials is very sparsely distributed in the soil matrix. The material
should behave as fill material. The bulk density is about 120 pcf and the angle of friction is 34
degree and the cohesion is 50 psf as shown in Table 7.

Based on the wall height and the soil properties, Type 1 retaining wall is recommended.

Since the ground water was encountered about 10 feet below MSL. No ground water should be
anticipated during the wall construction. Any perched water may present during the
construction. It is expected to be temporary and will not affected the wall. But precautious
should be taken if water was observed during the construction.

3.1.3 Retaining Wall #437

This retaining wall #437 is along I110 South from Station 437+00 to Station 451+84.66. The
maximum retaining wall height is 14 ft. The length is about 1,484 ft. The footing elevation
varies from 11.75 to 25.17 from MSL. Based on LOTB records from R15-102 and R15-103, the
fill material is from the surface extended to 10 feet above MSL. This means the footing is rested
on the fill material. The bulk density is about 120 pcf and the angle of friction is 34 degree and
the cohesion is 50 psf as shown in Table 8. It is recommended to use footing keys for the
retaining wall foundation.

The geotechnical design parameters are shown in Table 8:

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 13 0713000239

Table 8. Soil Engineering Properties for Retaining Wall #437

Layer Elevation Elevation Shear Strength
Soil Type SPT N values
No. (ft) MSL (ft) Parameters

γ = 120 pcf; φ = 34˚,

1 0-25 16-41 Silty SAND (Fill) 17-28
C=50 psf

2 25-50 (-9)-16 Sandy Silt (ML) γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 5-19

Based on the wall height and the soil properties, Type 1 retaining wall is recommended.

Since the ground water was encountered about 10 feet below MSL. No ground water should be
anticipated during the wall construction. Any perched water may present during the
construction. It is expected to be temporary and will not affected the wall. But precautious
should be taken if water was observed during the construction.

3.1.4 Sign Post Foundations

3.1.4.1 Retaining Wall #437 with Sign Post Foundation

A sign post- S3-3A Sta 446+33.60 will be installed next to Retaining wall #437 to form one
monolithic structure. A 24-ft section of 14-ft height retaining wall was recommended from the
structural design. This section of the retaining wall will attach to the wall and will be protruded
about 15.6ft above the grade with the bottom of footing elevation of 15.83ft MSL. The top of
sign post pedestal is at 31.43ft above MSL.

Based on the soil properties and the design load for sign post from Structural Design, the bearing
capacity is adequate for the proposed sign post. Strength 1a condition from LRFD retaining wall
design is the most critical among LRFD design. The calculated B’ is 8.8ft and the bearing
pressure qo is 3.9 kips/sq.ft. The bearing capacity for this retaining structure to include the sign
post is 33 kips/sq.ft. Hence the bearing pressure is adequate for the sign post.

The anticipated ground water level is about -10ft from MSL. Although water will not be
presented during installation, perch water table is still posted the problem. If any perched water
is presented, dewatering and adequate compaction should be taken care of.

3.1.4.2 Sign Post Foundation with CIDH Pile

Three sign posts on CIDH piles (No. S2-5 at Sta 427+70.00; S2-6 at Sta 427+74.00; and S3-4A
at Sta 446+38.00) will be installed. Adopted 2015 Caltrans Standard Plan for Overhead signs
post, the recommended CIDH pile is 5-ft diameter and the length of 22-ft. Based on L-Pile
Analysis and the maximum deflection of the CIDH pile under the load is less than 0.25-in. and
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 14 0713000239

the allowable deflection is 0.5-in. Hence the sign post design is adequate using 5-ft diameter and
22-ft long CIDH pile. Since it may encounter the ground water, it is recommended to use 25-ft
long CIDH pile.

Table 9: Recommendation for Sign Post CIDH Pile

Axial Load Shear (kips) Bending Proposed Proposed
(kips) Moment (Kip-ft) Foundation Foundation
Diameter (ft) Depth (ft)

22.9 14.5 430 5 25

3.1.5 Ground Anchors and Soil Nails Wall #461 (Bridge Number 53E0365)

Total five ground anchors and soil nails walls will be installed along Wall #461 (Bridge Number
53E0365). Two of the segments are ground anchors walls and the other three segments are soil
nails walls as shown in Table 10.

Table 10: Wall 461 Soil Anchors and Soil Nails Design along SB Route 110 from Station
460+04 to Station 466+07.90

Wall Type Wall Beginning of End of Wall Max. Length of Number of

Zone Wall Height Wall Soil Nails or
(ft) (ft) Ground
Anchors
Soil Nail 1 460+04.27 460+67.23 21.45 62.96 34

Ground 1 460+67.23 461+08.81 17.04 41.58 16

Anchor
Soil Nail 2 461+08.81 462+05.81 22.87 97.00 80

Ground 2 462+05.81 465+31.74 24.67 325.93 162

Anchor

Soil Nail 3 465+31.74 466+07.90 19.55 76.16 38

Total: 603.63

Based on LOTB records from R15-102 and R15-103, the fill material is from the surface
extended to 10 feet above MSL. This means the footing is rested on the fill material. The bulk
density is about 120 pcf and the angle of friction is 34 degree and the cohesion is 50 psf as
shown in Table 11.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 15 0713000239

Table 11. Soil Engineering Properties

Layer Elevation Elevation Shear Strength SPT N
Soil Type
No. (ft) MSL (ft) Parameters values

γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚,

1 0-25 16-41 Silty SAND (Fill) 17-28
Cohesion=50 psf

2 25-50 (-9)-16 Sandy Silt (ML) γ = 120 pcf; φ = 32˚ 5-19

To allow for the softening of soil during the removal of soil during the construction, the angle of
friction was reduced from phi= 34 degree to phi=32 degree as suggested by the Structural
Design. Analysis was performed, it was found the ground anchored and soil nailed retaining
wall were adequate.

Based on the environmental report in December 2016, some of the top soil may encounter
discrete solid waste pocket at the toe of the fill slope at the North end of the soil nail wall at Sta
466. The extent is very sparsely. This will not affect the ground anchored wall or soil nailed wall
soil properties.

Should this solid waste be found during the construction, all the waste materials should be
removed and treated according to EPA and California Environmental Regulations.

3.1.5.1 Ground Anchored/Soil Nailed Walls

Two ground anchored diaphragm walls located from A-line Station 460+67.23 to Station
461+08.81 and Station 462+05.81 to Station 465+31.74. The ground anchored diaphragm walls
design was based on the subsurface condition from the available LOTBs and regional geological
information. The limit of the wall is shown in Table 12 below. The pre-stressed ground anchor
can provide lateral support to the walls, and reduce the lateral movement of the wall during and
after construction. Ground anchored wall will be installed beneath Bridge 53-1137, F, L, R and
G along the bridge abutment.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 16 0713000239

Table 12 Ground Anchor Wall Zone

Wall Beginning End Station Ground Approximate Approximate Anchor
zone Station Anchor Upper Lower Wall
Wall Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Height
Length (ft)
(ft)
1 460+67.23 461+08.81 41.58 42.61 26.23 16.38

2 462+05.81 465+231.74 325.93 51.42 26.56 24.86

For the global design of the recommended soil anchored wall, the computer programs
SLOPE/W and CTFlex were used. Ground anchors should be inclined 12 degrees (no less than
10 degrees) from horizontal for all ground anchors.

Nominal CIDH pile capacity beneath the bridge was estimated that included the additional load
from the ground anchors. It was found the existing CIDH pile is capable of taking the additional
loading condition from ground anchors.

Unbonded length should be at least 50 feet for seating loss control upon anchor lock-off.

3.1.5.2 Soil Nailed Walls

The soil nailed diaphragm walls will be used and the limit of the wall is shown in Table 13a and
13b. The soil nails can provide lateral support to the walls, and reduce the lateral movement of
the wall during and after construction. Soil nailed wall will be installed between Bridge 53-1137
along the bridge abutment.

For the design of the recommended soil nail walls, the computer program SNAIL was used.

Following are the geotechnical design criteria for the soil nail walls:

Static Case: Minimum Factor of Safety: 1.5

Seismic Case: Minimum Factor of Safety: 1.1
Non-dimensional horizontal seismic coefficient kh: = 0.2;
Soil Nail fy=60 ksi
Inclination from horizontal: 15 degree
Soil Nail Bar Diameter: 1.128 inch
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 17 0713000239

Table 13a Soil Nailed Wall-Wall and Nails Configuration

Wall Configuration Nail Configuration

Wall Segment Max. Wall Min. Nail Max. Max. Nail Measured Measured
Height Position Length Hor. Vert. Inclina from Top from
(ft) MNR Spacing Spacing tion of Wall (ft) Bottom of
(ft) (ft) Angle Wall (ft))
Beg. End. Wall Row ft
Sta. Sta. Zone

460+ 460+ 1 21.45 MS 4 1-4 25 5 5 15 4.16 2.0

04.27 67.23

461+ 462+ 2 22.17 MS 4 1-4 25 5 5 15 4.16 2.0

08.81 05.81

465+ 466+ 3 19.55 MS 4 1-4 25 5 5 15 4.16 2.0

31.74 07.90

Table 13b Soil Nailed Wall-Wall Configuration and Nails Properties

Wall Configuration Nail Properties

Allowable
Facing
Wall Segment Max. Nail Minimum Resistance
Wall DPR (kips)
Height Strength
Threaded (Kips/ft) (Static/Seismic)
(ft) Position MNR
Beg. End. Wall (Kips) Bar Size
Sta. Sta. Zone

460+ 460+ 1 21.45

MS 4 60 #9 2.5 28/38
04.27 67.23

461+ 462+ 2 22.17

MS 4 60 #9 2.5 28/38
08.81 05.81

465+ 466+ 3 19.55

MS 4 60 #9 2.5 28/38
31.74 07.90
Where: DPR- Design Pullout Resistance
Note:
Square soil nail layout pattern should be used.
The wall height is the vertical distance from the original ground at the top of the wall to the
finished grade at the toe of the wall.
The nails are inclined 15 degrees from horizontal.
First row of the nails should be placed 2.5 to 3.0 feet below the original ground, and vertical nail
spacing needs to be adjusted in areas with geometric constraints.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 18 0713000239

Since the soil is corrosive, plastic sheathing are required for all soil nails.
For the global design of the recommended soil nailed wall, the computer programs SLOPE/W
and SNAIL were used. Soil nails should be inclined 15 degrees from horizontal as shown in
Table 13a and 13b.

3.1.5.3 Drainage for Retaining Walls

For Type 1 retaining walls- Wall #59, #72 and #437, drainage behind the wall is required.
Sub-surface drainage behind the ground anchors and soil nails wall #461 shall be installed. A
typical geo-composite drainage systems is recommended.
A 24 inches down-drain drainage system at Sta 461+ 67.48 will be installed behind wall #461
and approximately 30-ft away from the facing of the soil nailed wall. This down-drain will be
connected to the existing drainage pipe between Sta 461+67.48 and 462+50.
During the construction of this drainage system, the trenching and shoring or other temporary
support scheme should be proposed by the contractor and checked by the Engineer. After the
installation of the drainage system, all backfill material should be compacted to 95 percent
relative compaction (or similar material has the same properties as 95 percent compacted fills
such as slurry cement backfill) as stated in Caltrans general specification.
Because of the existing drainage and the new down-drain systems within the vicinity of soil
nailed wall system, extreme care should be exercised in this region not to interfere each other. It
is recommended the length of the soil nails in this region from Sta 461+67.48 and 462+50 should
be 30-ft instead of 25-ft. Additional soil nails upon finalized the installation of the down-drain
drainage system may be needed and the locations and the angle of soil nails may be readjusted
upon the installation of the down-drain drainage system.
3.2 Recommendation

Based on the evaluation of the wall types in the previous section, and available subsurface
information, OGDS recommends following retaining walls and the sign posts for this project:

• Wall #59: Standard Type 1 wall for SB Route 405 to SB Route 110 connector (Station
59+00 to Station 63+88)
• Wall#72 : Standard Type 1 wall is from the tangent section between I405 North to I110
South from Station 71+80 to 74+36
• Wall #437: Standard Type 1 wall is along I110 South from Station 437+00 to Station
451+84.66
• Wall #461 (Bridge Number 53E0365): Soil nailed and anchored Walls SB Route 110
from Station 460+04.27 to Station 466+07.90 beneath Bridge 53-1137
• Three sign posts on CIDH piles (No. S2-5 at Sta 427+70.00; S2-6 at Sta 427+74.00; and
S3-4A at Sta 446+38.00)
• One sign post- S3-3A Sta 446+33.60 next to Retaining wall #437 to form one monolithic
structure.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 19 0713000239

4.0 References

1. As built log of test borings for North Connector OC and Separation, East Connector UC
(Widen), and West Connector UC.
2. California Geological Survey Webstie.
3. Seismic Hazard Zone Report for Torrance Quadrangle.
4. Landslide and/or Liquefaction Map.
5. Fault Zone Map.
6. National Geologic Map Database for Torrance Quadrangle.
7. Environmental correspondence December 2016 from GeoSyntec (Appendix 4)

5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 SS 19-3 Structure Excavation and Backfill

Section 19-3.01A(3)(b) Wall Zones.

The wall zone limits for the ground anchored and soil nailed walls under Bridge No 53-1137 are
shown in the Table 12 and Table 13a and b respectively.

5.2 SS46-1 General

Section SS46-1.01E Research Investigation

The Department will conduct research activities within the limits of the ground anchored wall.

Research Activities at Wall #461

This ground anchor research activities includes installation of monitoring instruments, bond
breaker, and the research ground anchors; and test and record the research ground anchors
performance.

The Contractor will install the monitoring instruments and the bond breaker on the research
ground anchors, test the research ground anchors and record the data according the modified
performance test during pullout tests of the research ground anchors as shown in Table14 under
Engineer’s direction. The locations of the research ground anchors are as shown on the Contract
Plans Sheets. The engineer will monitor the test and record the data using data logger.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 20 0713000239

Table 14 Research Ground Anchor Loading Schedules

Load Increment Hold Time (Minutes)

AL Until Stable
0.20 FTL 1-2
AL Until Stable
0.20 FTL 1-2
0.40 FTL 1-2
AL Until Stable
0.20 FTL 1-2
0.40 FTL 1-2
0.60 FTL 1-2
AL Until Stable
0.20 FTL 1-2
0.40 FTL 1-2
0.60 FTL 1-2
0.80 FTL 1-2
AL Until Stable
0.20 FTL 1-2
0.40 FTL 1-2
0.60 FTL 1-2
0.80 FTL 1-2
1.00 FTL 10
AL Until Stable
0.20 FTL 1-2
0.40 FTL 1-2
0.60 FTL 1-2
0.80 FTL 1-2
1.00 FTL 1-2
1.20 FTL 1-2
1.50 FTL or the movement is greater 1-2
than 3 inches
AL Until Stable
FTL=Factored Test Load;
AL=Alignment Load=0.10FTL;
1.00 FTL is the Maximum Design Load

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of the bond breaker. Six research
ground anchors are to be installed. Four of the research ground anchors will include the bond
breaker. The other two as the reference ground anchors are same as the production anchors. These
research ground anchors will be instrumented as directed by the engineer.

Schematic drawing of the research ground anchors is shown in Figure 4.

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 21 0713000239

Instrumentation

Multiple Depth Extensometer (MDE)

Multiple Depth Extensometer (MDE) gages are to be attached to the outside of the corrugated
sheathing of the research ground anchors. Multi-depth extensometer (MDE) comprised of an
anchor head and elongated extensometers extending down through the anchor hole.

Number of gages in each MDE for research ground anchors is shown in Table 15.

Table 15: Number of gages in each research ground anchors

Research ground anchor no. Number of gages in MDE

1 4

2 4

3 6

4 6

5 4

6 4

The Engineer determines the exact positions of the MDE gages.

Load Cell

A calibrated load cell should be placed between the loading jack and the anchor head. All
loading schedule should be recorded electronically, displayed and stored in the data logger
software.

The MDE will be installed at the distal of following locations as directed by the engineer.

Anchor Head Movement

Anchor head movement should be recorded electronically, displayed and stored in the data
logger software.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 22 0713000239

Section A-A Cross Section of Un-bonded Length in Section B-B Cross Section of Bonded Length in
Ground Anchor Ground Anchor

Section C-C Bond Breaker After Installation

Schematic Ground Anchor Strand Tendon Components

Figure 4: Schematic Cross Section Ground Anchor Strand Tendon Detailed Components
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 23 0713000239

Data Logger

The data logger must be compatible with the multi-depth extensometer read out unit. The data
logger must be able to record the load and the displacement of the ground anchor head during
testing. The data logger must have at least 16 channels, one USB connection, and a battery
system with 16-hour run-time.

The software of the data logger must be able to display real-time load and deflection data and
graph during the load test, and allow download of raw data.

Research Ground Anchor Construction

Same as the production ground anchors with additional plastic pipe attached to the distal of the
ground anchor. This plastic pipe is to install MDE at the distal of the research ground anchors.

The bond breaker will be installed the bonded and un-bonded length of the research ground
anchors as shown in contract Plan Sheets. The bond breaker is wrapped around the ground anchor
sheathing and the surrounding soil. Research activities include installing and monitoring multiple
displacement gages at the locations directed by the Engineer.

Research equipment installation is scheduled in advance and be discussed in pre-construction

meeting. Fifteen days before the installation of the research ground anchors, contractor should
inform the engineer.

Construction activities will be coordinated to prevent interference with the equipment installation
and monitoring. The engineer will order you to assist in installing the equipment. The grout pipe
must be retrieved during grouting.

All anchors after testing will be abandoned by removing the research ground anchor to 6 inches
behind the face of the wall after the completion of load test. In addition, fill the void with grout.

Ground Anchor Bond Breaker

Bond Breaker (for Ground Anchor) Material
Bond breaker must be manufactured from neoprene. Bond Breaker must comply with the
requirements shown in the followings:
• Minimum thickness of any bond breaker: 6-inches.
• Compression Deflection: 2 to 5psi (ASTM D575, D1056)
• Percent of coverage of cross section: 80 percent uncovered area between the outside of
sheath; and
• the inside of the borehole of the ground anchor cross section.

Construction of Ground Anchor Bond Breaker

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 24 0713000239

Use authorized methods to secure bond breaker at the interface between the bonded and
unbonded section of the ground anchor.

5.3 SS 46-2 Ground Anchors

Section 46-2.03A Geotechnical Issues during Ground Anchor Installation

Expect difficult ground anchor installation due to no return of water during the site exploration
as well as loss of grout during the backfilling of the exploration hole.

Cave-in potential of the slope materials may be anticipated in areas with granular materials
during the ground anchor wall construction.

During the installation of soil anchor, presence of fissures or loose pockets may affect the
grouting operation. Should this be the case, more grouts are anticipated in these locations with
granular materials during installation.

5.4 SS 46-3 Soil Nails

Section 46-3.03A Geotechnical Issues during Soil Nails Installation

Expect difficult soil nail or installation due to no return of water during the site exploration as
well as loss of grout during the backfilling of the exploration hole.

Cave-in potential of the slope materials may be anticipated in areas with granular materials
during the soil nail wall construction.

During the installation of soil nails, this may encounter the loose pockets of solid waste. Should
this be the case, more grouts are anticipated in areas with granular materials during installation.

Section 46-3.01D(2)(b)(ii) Soil Nails Verification Test

For wall Zones 1, 2 and 3, at least 2 soil nails verification test shall be performed.

Section 46-3.01D(2)(b)(iii) Soil Nails Proof Test

Three proof tests for Wall Zones 1 and 3, and seven proof tests for Zone 2 shall be performed as
shown on the contract plan.

In addition, the engineer will direct one additional proof test to be performed in Zones 1 and 3
and two additional proof tests in Zone 2. The exact location will be determined by the engineer
during the construction.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 25 0713000239

5.5 CIDH Pile for the Sign Post

The CIDH pile for the sign post is 5-ft in diameter and 25-ft in length.

Temporary casing is needed to assist the installation of CIDH pile as there is a likelihood of
caving of the sidewall of the hole.

Groundwater is not anticipated during construction. However, if ground water is encountered

within excavations, it is the responsibility of the contractor to control ground water during
construction.

Hard drilling should be anticipated within gravel, cobble and boulder zones. Contractor should
have appropriate equipment to penetrate these difficult to drill zones as indicated in Section 2.1.

5.6 Environmental Issues

Should Type 1 Retaining Wall no.72 encounters the solid waste, the solid waste should be
removed at least 5-ft below grade and replaced by compacted fill and disposal of the solid waste
according to Federal or California EPS regulations. The backfill materials should be compacted
according to Caltrans general specification.

If you have any question regarding this report, please contact me (916-227-7066) or Deh-Jeng
(David) Jang (916)-227-5722.

James N. Lee, Ph.D, P.E., MASCE

Transportation Engineer
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 26 0713000239

Appendix A

Retaining Wall Locations

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 27 0713000239

Figure A-1 Retaining Wall #59

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 28 0713000239

Fig.A2-Retaining Wall 72
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 29 0713000239

Figure A-3 Retaining Wall #437

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 30 0713000239

Figure A4 Soil Anchors Walls and Soil Nails Walls Location 461- The extent of each wall zones
for Soil Nails and Ground Anchors should refer to the report and the plans.
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 31 0713000239

Appendix B

Existing LOTBs and the Current LOTBs

RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 32 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 33 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 34 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 35 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 36 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 37 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 38 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 39 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 40 0713000239

Appendix C
Laboratory Test Results
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 41 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 42 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 43 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 44 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 45 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 46 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 47 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 48 0713000239

Appendix D
Environmental Site Investigation
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 49 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 50 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 51 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 52 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 53 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 54 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 55 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 56 0713000239
RAMIN RASHEDI
01/20/2017 EA 07-293700
Page 57 0713000239
 07-293701 List of Preconstruction Operational Status-Check Results

TMS STATUS
VDS # CO. FWY DIR PM CROSS STREET NAME PROBLEMS
766505 LA 405 N 12.05 TRUCK SCALE 2 Ctlr Down
766506 LA 405 N 12.05 TRUCK SCALE 2 Ctlr Down
717738 LA 405 N 12.57 MAIN Insufficient Data
718259 LA 405 N 12.57 MAIN Insufficient Data
766268 LA 405 N 12.57 MAIN No Data
772473 LA 405 N 13 N/B 405 TO S/B 110 Ctlr Down
772474 LA 405 N 13 N/B 405 TO N/B 110 Ctlr Down
772475 LA 405 N 13 N/B 405 TO N/B 110 Ctlr Down
716663 LA 405 N 13.18 N OF 110 Good
769249 LA 405 N 13.18 N OF 110 Good
716479 LA 110 N 7.98 TORRANCE Good
763532 LA 110 N 7.98 TORRANCE Good
763849 LA 110 N 7.98 TORRANCE Good
766341 LA 110 N 8.64 NB 110 TO SB 405 Insufficient Data
766340 LA 110 N 8.65 NB 110 TO NB 405 #1 Insufficient Data
766336 LA 110 N 8.66 S OF 405 Insufficient Data
766338 LA 110 N 8.66 SB 405 TO NB 110 #2 Insufficient Data
716660 LA 405 S 12.05 TRUCK SCALE 2 Ctlr Down
764657 LA 405 S 12.05 TRUCK SCALE 2 Ctlr Down
766504 LA 405 S 12.05 TRUCK SCALE 2 Ctlr Down
716661 LA 405 S 12.57 MAIN Insufficient Data
718258 LA 405 S 12.57 MAIN Insufficient Data
718260 LA 405 S 12.57 MAIN Insufficient Data
717739 LA 405 S 13.18 SB 405 TO NB 110 #1 No Data
769248 LA 405 S 13.18 N OF 110 Insufficient Data
769250 LA 405 S 13.18 N OF 110 Good
769251 LA 405 S 13.181 SB 405 to SB 110 #1 No Data
766337 LA 110 S 8.59 S OF 405 Insufficient Data
766339 LA 110 S 8.59 SB 405 TO SB 110 #2 Insufficient Data
774712 LA 110 S 8.83 CONNECTOR TO 405 Card Off
774713 LA 110 S 8.83 CONNECTOR TO 405 Good

CCTV STATUS
CCTV# CO. FWY DIR PM CROSS STREET NAME PROBLEMS
340 LA 405 S 12.50 MAIN ST NO PROBLEMS
343 LA 405 N 13.20 N/O ROUTE 110 NO PROBLEMS
341 LA 110 S 8.30 S/O ROUTE405 NO PROBLEMS
342 LA 110 S 9.54 N/O ROUTE 405 NO PROBLEMS