HomeMy WebLinkAbout145 Wilowood Dr11 A
-b Address:
ascription of Work:
istoric District:
CITY OF SANFORD PERMh APPLICATION
w02(
wJL4r
IJIo� �1i ®ti
Zoning:
Date:
1--1-ATfc)PJ Total
s4uare Footage
Value of Work: S � 54,0
Trait Type. Building Electrical _ Mechanical Plumbing Firc Sprinkler/Alarm Pool
ectrical: New Service - # of AMPS Addition/Alteration Change of Sera icc ___ Temporary Pole
echanicaL Residential Non -Residential Replacement New(Duct Layout &Energy Calc. Required)
umbing/ New Commercial: # of Fixtures # of Water & Sewer Lines # of Gas Lines
umbing[New Residential: # of Water Closets
rcupancy Type: Residential :�_ Commercial Industrial _
Instruction Type: 1 # of Stories: # of Dwelling Units
Plumbing Repair - Residential or Commercial
Flood Zone: (FEMA form required)
vuers Name & Address: t) �r't J `L-" 1 1 QaJ
Phone.
,utractor Name & Address: t_&P6 6 G ,
i 301- 6Rii0HNA AO L'Ak6 9—AiX
one & Fa::
uding Company
!dress:
rrtgagc Lender:
.dress:
*%h4ettlFugineer:
dress:
c )� Slate
�I.ilcense Numbe/rI� (/0207 _ -^�— �1
Contact Person: ry� (f'1(a�� PL�t'tl'ic Phone (j =t/ ssl`
�7�7
MWV'
Phone.
tax
plication is hereby made to obtain a permit to do the work and installations as indicated. i certify that no work or installation has commenced prior to the
ranee of a permit and that all work will be performed to meet standards of all laws regulating construction in this jurisdiction. I understand that a separate
mit must be secured for ELECTRICAL WORK, PLUMBING, SIGNS, WELLS, POOLS, FURNACES, BOILERS, HEATERS, TANKS, and
( CONDITIONERS, etc.
JNER'S AFFIDAVIT: I certify that all of the foregoing information is accurate and that all work will be done in compliance with all applicable laws regulating
istruction and zoning. WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENTMAY RESULT IN YOUR PAYING
LICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER OR AN
TORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT.
NICE: in addition to the requirements ofthis permit, there may be additional restrictions applicable to this property that may be found in the public records of
county, and there may be additional permits required from other governmental entities such as water management districts, state agencies, or federal agencies.
xptance of permit is verification that 1 will notify the owner of the property of the requirem of F�o da"FIAA&
A3,-;)-,07
Signature of Owner, ent Date Signature of Contractor/ nt Date
AtOA40-0 A. , IC
0
Print Owner/Agent's Name Pri -Gontr r/Agent"s Narne
Signature of Notary -State of Florida Date ignature of No S
03/2006
��i MY COMMISSION # DD629096
EXPIRES: February 25, 2011
1-R00 7-NO7AttY FI. Novy Discount Agee Co.
Owner/Agent is _
{D
Personally Known to Me or
Contractor/Agent is
ID
ersona y nOwn to Me or 7r
1--
_Produced
_Produced
2ldo?
'ROVALS: ZONING-
UT[L:
FD: ENG:
BLIXi:
tial Conditions
G e f
ik�.J 14 �C
03/2006
NOTICE OF COMMEN
Parcel I.D. No..
State of Florida
10 0 7zo- 30 f 50-2- � Oocv -0 X30
The Undersigned hereby gives notice
will be made to certain real property
with Chapter 713 Florida Statute, the
is provided in this Notice of Commen
(1) Description of property (legal de
Legal Description: 0S6 l.0
Address: 1 g 5 lam! i o G
(2) General description of
(3) Owner information:
a. Name and address JwME5
b. Interest in property
c. Name and address of fee simple
(4) Contractor (name and address)
(5) Surety: a.) Name and address
b.) Amount of bond $
(6) Lender: (name and address)
improvement
in accordance
wing information
ent.
I IS 11111111111111110 111111111111111 It Ill it 111 11 Ili it ill I illi
MARYANNE MORSE, CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT
SEMINOLE COUNTY
BK 06576 Pg 15341 tipgl
CLERK'S # 2007017180
RECORDED 02/02/2007 1is37:36 AM
RECORDING FEES 10.00
RECORDED BY S Butt
CERT=IFt�O" GOPY
MAI7YANNE MORSE
CtfRK'OF-CIRCUIT COURT
SEMI CITY. FL IDA
6
EPUTY CLERK ,.
of the property and street address if available) ; �U
j1.C- V62-3 P663 0 L' 2007
FOUNDATION STABILIZATION
holder (if other than owner)
(7) Persons within the State of Florida designated by Owner who notices or other documents may
be served as provided by Section 713.13 (1) (a) (7), Florida Statues. (name and address)
(8) In addition to himself, owner
Section 713.13(1) (b). Florida Statutes.
(9) Expiration date of notice of coma
(The expiration date is one year from
The following instrument was ackx
who is personally known to me o"
AFTER RECORDING RETURN S
Name Certified Foundations, Inc.
Address 1306 Banana Road
City Lakeland, Florida 33810
L, I )D33
of
to receive a copy of the Lienor's Notice as provided
date of recording unless a different date is specified.)
aA'q'A'. -4 /P
Signature of Owner
before me on 01_/25 /20 09, by Q Cl-. y}or\
ed- as identification.
(Notary Signature)
Name (Print) )MAS P011C _ STATE OF 1T,ORMA
Serial Number, if any "" Tathan l)_ Hinkle
My Commission expires :Commission #DD623918
••.,,,,,,,e Expires: DEC. 20, 2010
BONDED THRU ATLANTIC BONDING CO., INC.
CERTIFIEDFoUNDATIONS, INC.
Building Department
RE: Letter of Authorization
I, Lewis G. Collier, Qualifier and Pr ent of ertified Foundations, Inc., authorize my
employee,in—ac—toe act y age securing permits. I understand I am
respons' a for any d all w perfo my agent.
f ` TOR' S SIGNATURE
/
Lie6nse #CGC 1504067
State of Worida
County of Polk
Sworn to and subscribed before me this n o day of 3�9� 72006.
r�
, 2-�--� 2°�►a;w CHERYLMEINKE
* * MY COMMISSION 9 DD 084094
Notary Public EXPIRES: February 12,2W6
'FOMdwO Bonded Thru Budget Notsry Services
AGENT/EwLOYEE' S SI ATURE
State of Florida
County of Polk
Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of Tib, A/ , 2006.
✓ / �! �! �'.."...� CHERVIL M EINKE
Notary�Publi * MY �MMISSION # DO 084094
EXPIRES: Febuq 12, 2008
°'�'oFVLOF a BMW WIM BMW Notery Semkas
1306 Banana Road • Lakeland, Florida 33810 • (863) 859-3889 • (800) 329-3889 • Toll Free Fax (877) 859-8593 • www.cfi-l.com • State Lic. # CGC1504067
Pressure Grouting • Underpinning • Sinkhole Remediation • Pre -Construction Piling
W
I-
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
�ZT Kri;l 16 FLI-n, i Lp,;] I I & ";-�l �*!;71 Mel -a
Clayton Residence, Sanford, Florida
Claim Number: 59-D134-166
The Earth is our Business'
Prepared for:
Eric Atkinson
and
State Farm Florida Insurance
Prepared by:
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863-533-9007
Project No. 5169
October 2006
s
Executive Claim Report
State Farm Florida Insurance Company
Claim Number 59-13134-166
This report summarizes the results of a subsidence investigation of the James & Willa
Clayton residence located at 145 Wildwood Drive in Sanford, Florida. According to information
provided to Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. (MEG), the insured has reported a recent collapse
feature in front of the residence. MEG was retained by State Farm Florida Insurance to conduct
a subsidence investigation at the property to determine the possible cause(s) of the damage
and specifically to identify whether or not ongoing karst or sinkhole activity is a possible cause
of the damage within a reasonable, professional probability.
Site Location and Description
The Clayton residence is a two-story structure. The first floor is constructed of concrete
block covered with paneling on the front and stucco on the sides and back. The second story is
of wood frame construction with wood paneling. The residence was originally constructed in
1980. The current owners of the residence (Seminole County Property Appraiser's Parcel Id
No. 10-20-30-502-0000-0230) purchased the property in May of 1984. The residence is located
approximately 1 mile north Lake Mary Blvd., in Section 10, Township 20 South, Range 30 East,
in Seminole County. The legal description as reported by the Seminole County Property
Appraiser is:
Lot 23 Ramblewood, Plat Book 23, Pages 7 and 8.
Findings
It is MEG's professional opinion that ongoing karst or sinkhole activity is likely one of two
primary causes of actual physical and structural damage at the Clayton residence. The analysis
described in this report is of sufficient scope to identify karst or sinkhole activity as one two
causes while eliminating other causes of damage such as organic soils and expansive clays
within a reasonable, professional probability. The second cause of damage is densification of
very loose to loose surficial soils. This conclusion is based upon a series of tests including: a
geophysical survey consisting of Ground Penetrating Radar, Electrical Resistivity and Floor Slab
Elevation Survey, 5 SPT borings, 4 hand auger borings and probing around the structure.
Remediation Recommendation
A remedial program consisting of a combination of fill grouting and pressure grouting is
recommended to fill the voids in the limestone and transfer the structural loads to competent
bearing strata. Based on our borings, the limestone surface occurs at approximately 57 to 67
feet bgs.
The grouting program should consist of angled and vertical injection points installed to
the rock surface to adequately treat the very soft soils above the limestone unit. Grout points
should initially be installed on 8 foot centers around the perimeter of the structure (see attached
figure), and grouting injection completed using the primary and secondary method, whereby
spacing between primary points is reduced if grout takes on the secondary points are similar in
Executive Claim Report, continued
State Farm Florida Insurance Company
Claim Number 59-D134-166
Page 2 of 2
volume to the primary injection points. Angled points shall only be injected after the vertical
points on either side have been injected. A low -slump (less than 4 inches) grout should be
utilized to fill the voids in the limestone and compact sandy soils above the limestone. The
grout volume is estimated to be 250CY.
CERTIFICATION TO STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE
AND JAMES AND WILLA CLAYTON:
Engineering Certification
I hereby certify To State Farm Florida Insurance and James and Willa Clayton that I am a
registered professional engineer in the State of Florida practicing with Madrid Engineering
Group, Inc. under license number EB 0006509 issued by the Florida Department of Business
and Professional Regulation and the Board of Professional Engineers. I certify that I, or others
under my direct supervision, have prepared the geotechnical engineering evaluations, findings,
opinions, and conclusions represented in this report.
Clayton Residence
Subsidence Investigation
MEG # 5169
SIGNATURE:
NAME: Larry D. Madrid P1.
LICENSE #: 39559
DATE:
Geologic Certification
I hereby certify To State Farm Florida Insurance and James and Willa Clayton that I am a
registered professional geologist in the State of Florida practicing with Madrid Engineering
Group, Inc. under license number GB 0000459, issued by the Florida Department of Business
and Professional Regulation and the Board of Professional Geologists. I certify that 1, or others
under my direct supervision, have prepared the geologic evaluations, findings, opinions, and
conclusions represents s report.
SIGNATURE:A�-`, SIGNATURE:0_4_4x a
NAME: Robert Lff SfaqJiQ.PQ9P32 NAME: Brian K. Murphy, P.G.
LICENSE #: 1 LICENSE #: 887
[American Institute of ssion§T o &gis(s, 9276] DATE: ` CJ %
DATE: °�,�_ �s
1. 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1
1.1
Site Location and Description...............................................................................
1
1.2
Site Inspection and Damage Assessment............................................................ 1
1.3
Soil Survey Map Review...................................................................................... 2
1.4
Geology Review................................................................................................... 2
2.0
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION....................................................................
3
2.1
Hand Augers........................................................................................................
3
2.2
Test Pits...............................................................................................................
4
2.3
Geophysical Survey.............................................................................................
4
2.3.1 GPR Results..............................................................................................
4
2.3.2 ERI Results................................................................................................
5
2.3.3 Floor Slab Survey Results..........................................................................
6
2.4
Standard Penetration Test Borings......................................................................
6
3.0
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ......................................... ....................................
6
3.1
Description of Soils...............................................................................................
6
4.0
CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................
8
5.0
REMEDIAL MEASURES......................................................................................
9
5.1
Project Costs -Subsurface Grouting....................................................................
10
6.0 LIMITATIONS.........................................................................................................
11
FIGURES
Figure 1
Site Location Map
Figure 2
Topographic Map
Figure 3
Site Map
Figure 4
Photo Log
Figure 5
Soil Survey
Figure 6
Remediation Plan
APPENDICES
Appendix A Soil Boring Logs
Appendix B Geophysical Survey Report
Appendix C Grout Specifications
i
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a subsidence investigation of the James &
Willa Clayton residence located at 145 Wildwood Drive in Sanford, Florida. According
to information provided to Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. (MEG), the insured has
reported a recent collapse feature in front of the residence. MEG was retained by State
Farm Florida Insurance to conduct a subsidence investigation at the property to
determine the possible cause(s) of the damage and specifically to identify whether or
not ongoing karst or sinkhole activity is a possible cause of the damage within a
reasonable, professional probability.
1.1 Site Location and Description
The Clayton residence is a two-story structure. The first floor is constructed of
concrete block covered with paneling on the front and stucco on the sides and back.
The second story is of wood frame construction with wood paneling. The residence was
originally constructed in 1980. According to the homeowner, there was only one
previous owner of the residence. The current owners of the residence purchased the
property in May of 1984 according to the Seminole County Property Appraiser's
records. The residence is located approximately 1 mile north of Lake Mary Blvd., in
Section 10, Township 20 South, Range 30 East, in Seminole County (Figure 1). The
property slopes to the south with the front of the house facing south 60 degrees east.
The house sits at an elevation of approximately 55 feet above mean sea level. A
portion of the USGS Sanford Quadrangle showing the site topography is included as
(Figure 2).
1.2 Site Inspection and Damage Assessment
On September 14, 2006, Brian Murphy, Project Manager, completed a site
inspection and damage assessment of the Clayton Residence. The inspection and
assessment consisted of preparing a site map (Figure 3) and taking inventory of visible
cracking damage and distress to the home, with photographic documentation of
relevant features. In addition, MEG interviewed the homeowner, performed hand auger
borings, excavated several test pits and checked the structure for deflection. Selected
photographs are shown in Figure 4.
According to the homeowner, the windows and doors operate satisfactorily.
Several of the windows in the area of the collapse feature were checked and found to
operate freely. No floor issues were reported to or observed by MEG personnel. No
other interior damage reported.
1._ s
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project 5169
Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
October 2006
In general, the homeowner's only complaint was the collapse feature (7 feet in
diameter by 4 feet deep) located at the right front corner of the garage. The exterior of
the residence was inspected and two instances of cracking damage were found and
pointed out to the owner. These cracks are located on the left side of the garage. The
first is a hairline stair step near the front corner of the house. This stair step crack can
be clearly seen on the inside of the garage as well. The second is a vertical crack,
measuring 1/16 -inch wide, located above and to the left of the side garage door. No
other damage was reported by the homeowner or observed by MEG personnel during
the initial site inspection.
1.3 Soil Survey Map Review
Soils data from the 1989 Soil Survey of Seminole County, Florida (USDA-NRCS)
were reviewed as part of the investigation. Mapped soil units in the vicinity of the
Clayton Residence are classified as Urban land, 0 to 12 percent slopes (map unit 34).
The soils in this map unit cannot be described due to the effects of development.
The seasonal high water table for the Urban land soils is dependent upon the
effectiveness of installed drainage systems.
1.4 Geology Review
According to the Florida Geological Survey Seminole County Geologic Map, the
residence lies within a mapped area where undifferentiated Quaternary age sands
comprise the surficial sediments. Tertiary age Hawthorn Group sediments reportedly
pinch out in this area of Seminole County. To the north near Sanford, Hawthorn
sediments are absent. To the south they are present. The underlying limestones are of
the Ocala formation.
A review of the Florida Geologic Survey's sinkhole database reveals three (3)
confirmed sinkholes within approximately one mile of the Clayton residence.
A review of the Floridan Aquifer potentiometric data for Seminole County found
the end of wet season (September, 2002) potentiometric surface at this location to be at
approximately 33 feet above sea level. The elevation of the surficial water table on site
was not observed in either the hand auger or SPT borings. Thus, the amount of vertical
hydraulic between the two aquifers is unknown.
2
I i
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
MEG Project 5169 October 2006
SprinFbstis Is r, S V V I
Semi
tin 7 -� on dence
in Spriny �—
ar Vek a
rZ 1
� Fa Re_ 1
_ 51 -
tl 1 3bqa Mary
Rock
pri _ 1�
54 Star uck a eva
O d S rn
ki s �4 240 22
,F .1 11
grin 37o do
50 am4.nte
jApopka Springs E _ 1N_ _.
9 r Winter rk t�Q
jrt
X59 52, 50 36
'90 I S 62 o Or o 0
82 s°55 51 40 R' Cr
n Fin C tle � 1 V 1,,'i E
Floridan Aquifer Potentiometric Surface
End of Wet Season, September 2002
2.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
2.1 Hand Augers
Four hand auger (HA) borings were completed during the site visit on September
14, 2006. The borings were advanced to a depth of 7 feet below ground surface (bgs)
on all sides of the house. The hand auger borings were completed in accordance with
ASTM standard D-1452-90 at the locations shown on Figure 3. In general, boring HA -1
encountered sand from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 5 1/2 -feet bgs.
From 5 1/2 to 7 feet bgs, clayey sand was encountered. Boring HA -2 encountered
clean sand to a depth of 7 feet bgs. Boring HA -3 encountered clean sand to a depth of
4 1/2 feet bgs followed by clayey sand to a depth of 7 feet bgs. Boring HA -4
encountered sand to a depth of 5 feet bgs followed by clayey sand to a depth of 7 feet
bgs. The water table was not encountered in any of the hand auger borings. Boring
logs are included in Appendix A.
3
1: L
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project 5169
2.2 Test Pits
Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
October 2006
Four shallow test pits were excavated during the site inspection to evaluate the
type and condition of the foundation beneath the structure and accompanying slabs or
decks (as shown on Figure 3). Test pit TP -1 was excavated along the driveway and
revealed a 3 1/2 thick slab with 3 1/2 inches of embedment bgs. Test pit TP -2 was
excavated along the front sidewalk and revealed a 3 1/2 inch thick slab with 3 1/2
inches of embedment bgs. Test pit TP -3 was excavated on the south side of the house
near the AC equipment and revealed an approximately 14 1/2 -inch thick thickened edge
slab with 5 inches of embedment bgs. Test pit TP -4 was excavated on the east side of
the house and revealed a 15 inch thickened edge slab with 12 inches of embedment
bgs.
2.3 Geophysical Survey
MEG subcontractor GeoView, Inc. completed a geophysical investigation
consisting of ground penetrating radar (GPR) and electrical resistivity imaging (ERI)
surveys. The geophysical surveys were completed on September 14, 2006, along with
a floor elevation survey. The results of all geophysical surveys are summarized in a
report from GeoView dated October 3, 2006. A copy of this report is included in
Appendix B.
2.3.1 Ground Penetrating Radar Survey (GPR)
Results of the GPR survey indicated the presence of a well-defined, relatively
continuous set of GPR reflectors at an approximate depth range of 4 to 6 ft bgs. The
GPR reflector set correlates to the lithologic contact between the sand and underlying
clay stratum identified at 6 ft bgs by the hand auger boring.
Four GPR anomaly areas were identified around the exterior of the residence.
The anomaly areas are designated as GPR Anomalies 1 through 4 on Figure 1. The
anomalies are numbered in order of significance with GPR Anomaly 1 being the most
significant and GPR Anomaly 4 being the least significant. A description of each of the
anomalies is as follows:
GPR Anomaly 1 is irregular in shape with total area of approximately 290 square
ft. The anomaly is located near the southwest corner of the residence. The apparent
vertical relief of the upper portion of the anomaly area is 2-3 ft as characterized by the
observed downwarping of the GPR reflector set. A localized increase in the depth of
penetration of the GPR signal was also observed within the anomaly area. The
apparent center of the feature is characterized as the area of maximum downwarping of
the previously referenced GPR reflectors.
4
4.
i.
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project 5169
Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
October 2006
GPR Anomaly 2 is elliptical in shape with total area of approximately 35 square
ft. The anomaly is located around the surface depression located near the front
walkway. The anomaly is characterized by a localized increase in the depth of
penetration of the GPR signal. The apparent center of the feature is characterized as
the area of maximum penetration depth of the radar signal. GPR Anomaly 2 is
associated with the drop out near the northeast corner of the driveway.
GPR Anomaly 3 is elliptical in shape with total area of approximately 50 square
ft. The anomaly is located near the northeast corner of the residence. The apparent
vertical relief of the upper portion of the anomaly area is 1-2 ft as characterized by the
observed downwarping of the GPR reflector set. A localized moderate increase in the
depth of penetration of the GPR signal was also observed within the anomaly area. The
apparent center of the feature is characterized as the area of maximum downwarping of
the previously referenced GPR reflectors.
GPR Anomaly 4 is elliptical in shape with total area of approximately 45 square
ft. The anomaly is located east of the shed. The anomaly is characterized by a localized
moderate increase in the depth of penetration of the GPR signal. The apparent center of
the feature is characterized as the area of maximum penetration depth of the radar
signal.
2.3.2 Electrical Resistivity Imaging Survey (ERI)
Results from the four ERI surveys are presented in Appendix 1. The ERI
transects are of acceptable quality (a discussion of the criteria used to determine the
quality of an ERI inversion model is provided in Appendix A2.3.1).
Results from the ERI Transects indicate the presence of high resistivity near -
surface soil materials across the majority of the project site to a depth range of 4 to 6 ft
bgs. The high resistivity surficial sediments correspond to the surficial sand stratum
identified in the hand auger boring. The high resistivity soils are underlain by moderate
to low resistivity soils to the maximum depth of exploration of the ERI transects which
ranged from approximately 12 to 24 ft bgs.
One ERI anomaly that may be associated with sinkhole activity was observed on
ERI Transect 4 (Appendix 1). The ERI anomaly is characterized by the localized
occurrence of moderate resistivity soils at depth.
5
4.
i. I.
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project 5169
Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
October 2006
2.3.3 Floor Slab Survey (FSS)
The elevation of the main floor of the house found a total differential of 1.0 inch
between the low area, in the central portion of the home and the highest point in the
eastern portion of the home. The garage sloped 0.3 inches from north to south. Results
of the floor elevation survey are presented as Figure 2.
2.4 Standard Penetration Test Borings
Five standard penetration test (SPT) soil borings were completed at the Clayton
residence. Borings SPT -1, SPT -2, and SPT -4 were completed on September 26, 2006,
and borings SPT -3 and SPT -5 were completed on October 2, 2006. The borings were
completed to a depth of 60 to 70 feet bgs in accordance with ASTM standard D-1586
using the mud -rotary drilling method. Soil samples were collected from the borehole
using a 1.4 -inch I.D. split -spoon sampler driven with a 140 -pound slide hammer falling a
distance of 30 inches. A professional geologist familiar with soil classification and field
evaluations logged the borings in the field and placed samples in sealed containers and
returned them to MEG's laboratory for further classification. Upon completion, the
borehole was filled from bottom to top with cement grout using the tremie method.
Boring logs are included in Appendix A.
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Description of Soils
Boring SPT -1 was completed in GPR anomaly 2 located in the front yard next to
the collapse feature (as shown on Figure 3). Loose sands were encountered from the
surface to a depth of 4 feet bgs. From 4 feet to 17 feet bgs, medium dense clayey sand
was encountered. From 17 feet to 32 feet bgs, medium dense to dense sand was
encountered. From 32 feet to 37 feet bgs, loose slightly clayey sand was encountered.
From 37 feet to 42 feet bgs, firm clay was encountered. From 42 feet to 52 feet bgs,
very loose to loose sand was encountered. This interval included a rapid 36 -inch weight
of rod drop from 43.5 to 46.5 feet bgs with almost no (10%) sample recovery. From 52
feet to 57 feet bgs, stiff clay was encountered. From 57 feet to 67 feet bgs, dense to
very dense sand was encountered. From 67 feet to the bottom of the boring at 70 feet
bgs, very dense limestone was encountered. Circulation of the drilling fluid was lost at
43.5 feet bgs.
Boring SPT -2 was completed in the vicinity of the ERI anomaly and GPR
anomaly 1 located in the front yard to the left of the garage (as shown on Figure 3).
Boring SPT -2 encountered loose to medium dense sands from the surface to a depth of
6 feet bgs. From 6 feet to 17 feet bgs, medium dense clayey sand was encountered.
0
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
MEG Project 5169 October 2006
From 17 feet to 37 feet bgs, loose to medium dense sand was encountered. From 37
feet to 42 feet bgs, firm clay was encountered. From 42 feet to 52 feet bgs, medium
dense to dense clayey sand with shell was encountered. From 52 feet to 57 feet bgs,
stiff clay was encountered. From 57 feet to the bottom to he boring at 65 feet bgs, very
dense (89-3", 50-4") refusal conditions were encountered in limestone. Circulation of
the drilling fluid was lost at 47 feet bgs.
Boring SPT -3 was completed in GPR anomaly 3 located on the back right side of
the house (as shown on Figure 3). Boring SPT -3 encountered very loose to loose
sands from the surface to a depth of 6 feet bgs. From 6 feet to 17 feet bgs, medium
dense clayey sand was encountered. From 17 feet to 27 feet bgs, medium dense sand
was encountered. From 27 feet to 32 feet bgs, very loose clayey sand was
encountered. From 32 feet to 37 feet bgs, loose sand was encountered. From 37 feet
to 42 feet bgs, very loose clayey sand was encountered. From 42 feet to 47 feet bgs,
very soft clay with clay was encountered. This soil horizon included a slow 24 -inch
weight of hammer drop with excellent (100%) sample recovery. From 47 feet to 52 feet
bgs, loose sand with shell was encountered. From 52 feet to 57 feet bgs, stiff clay with
shell was encountered. From 57 feet to 62 feet bgs, medium dense sand with shell was
encountered. From 62 feet to the bottom of the boring at 65 ,feet bgs, very dense
limestone was encountered. Circulation of the drilling fluid was lost at 47 feet bgs.
Boring SPT -4 was completed in GPR anomaly 4 located near the back left corner
of the house (as shown on Figure 3). Boring SPT -4 encountered very loose to medium
dense sand from the surface to a depth of 8 feet bgs. From 8 feet to 17 feet bgs,
medium dense clayey sand was encountered. From 17 feet to 37 feet bgs, medium
dense sand was encountered. From 37 feet to 42 feet bgs, loose silty sand was
encountered. From 42 feet to 57 feet bgs, medium dense clayey sands and sands were
encountered. From 57 feet to the bottom of the boring at 65 feet bgs, very dense
limestone was encountered. Circulation of the drilling fluid was lost at 57 feet bgs.
Boring SPT -5 was completed in the back yard (as shown on Figure 3). Boring
SPT -5 encountered very loose to loose sands from the surface to a depth of 6 feet bgs.
From 6 feet to 17 feet bgs, loose to medium dense clayey sand was encountered. From
17 feet to 37 feet bgs, loose to medium dense sand was were encountered. From 37
feet to 42 feet bgs, soft clay was encountered. From 42 feet to 57 feet bgs, loose to
medium dense clayey sands and sand were encountered. From 57 feet to the bottom
of the boring at 60 feet bgs, very dense limestone was encountered. Circulation of the
drilling fluid was lost at 47 feet bgs.
7
L `
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
MEG Project 5169 October 2006
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
It is MEG's professional opinion that ongoing karst or sinkhole activity is likely
one of two primary causes of damage at the McCulloch Residence. The analysis
described in this report is of sufficient scope to eliminate other causes of damage such
as organic soils and expansive clays within a reasonable, professional probability. The
other contributing cause of damage is densification of very loose to loose surficial soils.
Our conclusions are based on the following:
• The seven -foot diameter by four -foot deep collapse feature that opened
suddenly overnight on September 6, 2006, is direct evidence of sinkhole
activity.
• From 42 to 52 feet bgs, boring SPT -1 encountered very loose to loose
conditions. In this case, possible void conditions are indicated by the
presence of a 100% loss of circulation of the drilling fluid in conjunction
with a rapid 3 -foot interval of very loose (weight of rod) sand. Voids in the
limestone unit, or immediately above the limestone bedrock, are indicative
of karst activity.
• The soil immediately overlying the above-mentioned possible void (from
13.5 to 42 feet bgs) revealed a trend of decreasing SPT -`N' values with
depth. Decreasing density with depth is indicative of raveling. Raveling is
the downward migration of soil into voids in the limestone bedrock below.
Raveling is indicative of karst activity.
• Boring SPT -1 was drilled near the collapse feature in an area identified as
Ground Penetrating Radar anomaly 2 marked by a localized increase in
the depth of penetration of the GPR signal. Increased signal penetration is
frequently associated with a decrease in soil density. The increased signal
penetration in conjunction with the apparent raveling seen in SPT -1 is
consistent with sinkhole activity.
• From 42 to 52 feet bgs, boring SPT -3 encountered very soft clay with shell
and loose sand with shell material. In this case, possible in filled void
conditions are indicated by the presence of a 100% loss of circulation of
the drilling fluid in conjunction with a slow 2 -foot interval of very soft
(weight of hammer) clay with shell material. Again, voids in the limestone
R
t. -
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project 5169
Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
October 2006
unit, or immediately above the limestone bedrock, are indicative of karst
activity.
• Borings SPT -3, SPT -4, and SPT -5 found very loose to loose sand in the
surficial 10 feet. This is the area where most of the structural load is
dissipated. This sand would be expected, over time, to undergo
densification and long-term settlement, thereby contributing to some minor
cosmetic cracking damage.
• The scope of the investigation was sufficient to eliminate other causes of
differential settlement such as: densification of near surface soils, high
organic content soils, and shrink -swell clays.
5.0 REMEDIAL MEASURES
A remedial program consisting of a combination of fill grouting and pressure
grouting is recommended to fill the voids in the limestone and transfer the structural
loads to competent bearing strata. Based on our borings, the limestone surface occurs
at approximately 57 to 67 feet bgs. After completion of the grouting program, the
collapse feature should be filled with compacted fill.
The grouting program should consist of angled and vertical injection points
installed to the rock surface to adequately treat the very soft soils above the limestone
unit. Grout points should initially be installed on 8 foot centers around the perimeter of
the structure (Figure 6), and grouting injection completed using the primary and
secondary method, whereby spacing between primary points is reduced if grout takes
on the secondary points are similar in volume to the primary injection points. Angled
points shall only be injected after the vertical points on either side have been injected.
A low -slump (less than 4 inches) grout should be utilized to fill the voids in the limestone
and compact sandy soils above the limestone.
A copy of recommended specifications for the grouting program and contractor
bid form are included in Appendix D. Of special note in the specification include:
➢ Installation of grout casings in a manner to prevent leakage and/or uplift of grout
casings during grout injection. Contractors bidding the project should provide a
description of their method of installing the grout casings.
➢ Injection of a low -slump grout (less than 4 inches) as measured at the truck.
X
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project 5169
Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
October 2006
➢ For each five-foot injection interval injected, initial grout quantities should be limited
to a maximum of 10 cubic yards. The recommended grout -pumping rate is one to
five cubic feet per minute.
➢ Grouting shall be completed using the primary and secondary methods of grouting.
If the secondary grout points take similar quantities of grout as the primary points,
then the spacing between primary points shall be reduced.
➢ MEG has established a maximum depth of grouting as 10 feet greater than the
anticipated average depth (60 feet bgs), and/or 10 feet into the bedrock unit.
5.1 Project Quantities - Subsurface Grouting
The highly variable conditions and large interval of soft sediments encountered in
the SPT borings at this site make estimating grout quantities very difficult. Based on
conditions encountered in the SPT borings and historical grouting data from other sites,
we estimate the quantity of grout to range from 345 to 380 cubic yards.
Contractor Bid Quantities
Mobilization
1 each,
Drill Casings
1,750 L. F.
Low Mobility Grout
250-275 C. Y.
In order to ensure the grouting program is properly bid according to the written
specifications, we recommend MEG review all bids prior to award. In addition, we
recommend that MEG be retained to provide project monitoring and oversight services
during the grouting operations. Two weeks notification will be required to schedule
monitoring services.
10
a.
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. Clayton Residence Subsidence Investigation
MEG Project 5169 October 2006
6.0 LIMITATIONS
The analysis described in this report is of sufficient scope to identify sinkhole
activity as a cause of damage within a reasonable, professional probability.
The findings herein are based on the exploratory borings at the referenced site
and our professional judgment. The soil conditions described within this report are
accurate with respect to the location and extent that the soil borings were completed.
Because soils vary from place to place, and with depth, subsurface conditions different
from those encountered in our exploration may exist. This investigation was completed
in accordance with Florida law and complies with the minimum standards as specified in
Florida Statute 627.707 and Florida Geological Survey Special Publication No 57 In
the event conclusions and/or recommendations based on our data are made by others
such conclusions and/or recommendations are not our responsibility unless we have
been given an opportunity to review and concur with them. No warranty regarding this
investigation or the effectiveness of the remedial measures is intended, nor should any
be inferred.
11
1
*Ewft, cw Home Cove 4"'ii0edt-
MapPoint;
r
75
145 Wildwood Dr,
Sanford, FL, 32773-5572
Borada
L3fdr�
Cc
E Floyd Ave Lake Mary p(na Isla or �
E Alrna Ave
Sanford
ro
g; n'
E Wilbur Ave71
Anthony Dr
Gr`�eaf Ln
L Meador a
= Groveview Way
w Lake Mary Blvd z `— yvd
IN fake Mary �
02006 MirrosoRCatP 02045 N441EQ,andJurGOT.In-,. f
State Farm Florida Insurance
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 1
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, FL
Site Location Map
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-8997 Clayton EB -0006509 yt Residence
The Varth is our Business Sanford, Florida
DATE: Sept. 2006 Revised: Drawn By: BKM Checked By: LDM MEG Project No. 5169 nts
QID
DI
TF
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. State Farm Florida Insurance
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 2
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, FL USGS Topographic Map
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-8997
EB -0006509 Clayton Residence
L020
rth is our Business' Sanford, Florida
ept. 2006 Revised: Drawn By: BKM Checked By: LDM MEG Project No. 5169 nts
4
SPT -
E
;layton Residence
SPT -2 S2
irface Collapse Feature
E1
3
PT -3
/S3
a
a
0
D
0 SCALE 20'
Legend
ERI Anomaly
2, GPR Anomaly
HA -1 • Hand Auger Boring Location
SPT -1.;- SPT Boring Location
TP -1E] Test Pit Location
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. State Farm Florida Insurance
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 3
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, FL Site Map
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-8997 Clayton Residence
LONIP
EB-0006509 YEarth is our Business Sanford, Florida
Sept. 2006 Revised: Drawn By: BKM Checked By: LDM MEG Project No. 5169 1" = 20'
Vertical Cracking
Clayton Residence
.I'
Garage
j{II
Stair Step Cracking -.-----
Collapse Feature
Collapse Feature
Front Elevation
State Farm Florida Insurance
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 4
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, FL Photo Log
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-8997
EB -0006509 Clayton Residence
Los)
F.arth is our Business" Sanford, Florida
Sept. 2006 Revised: Drawn By: BKM Checked By: LDM MEG Project No. 5169 nts
oa
D �
10
20 y. l '
A. ory
Lc e 20 17 34
ti
31 37 2 611,
30 c� .
2 V
�1'Air 20,, 31 3 _
10 L -e 7 17 31 20
�3
27 Luke
2 10 Jennie
6 00
W r
u AQP y" 10 31
y�PO
20
31
10 20
3 6 29 az5
w
27 y
0 13 vP 27 9z
7 / 34
10 11
tke Lake
SITE LOCATION 29 Ada
W 10 20
10 27
Lor?
31 Lour 11
26
31 3
7 J
10 20 °� 10
20 20
6 31 27
6 27 13
20 31 a
10 10 v
i
26 34 10 c
34 10 20
27 6
20 27 20 27
7 20
J BLVD 27 V, 31
IT 3
20 10 11 1
31 34
10 tiiary 3 Fairlane - Lake
6 Estates Minnie 20
20 27 �� 10 34
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. State Farm Florida Insurance
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 5
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, Fl_ USDA-NRCS Soil Survey
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-8997CUD Cla on Residence
EB-0006509 yt
The Earth is our Business" Sanford, Florida
DATE: Sept. 2006 Revised: Drawn By: BKM Checked By: MEG Project No. 5169 nts
0
"I
4
15
16
17
18
19
10-20
ture
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, FL
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-8997
O SCALE 20'
Legend
• Injection Point
---6 Angled Injection Points
State Farm Florida Insurance
FIGURE 6
Recommended Grout Points
Clayton Residence
Sanford, Florida
IDATE: Sept. 2006 1 Revised: I Drawn By: BKM I Checked By: LDM IMEG Project No. 5169 1" = 20' 1
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, Florida 33831
(863) 533-9007 Fax: (863) 533-8997
HAND AUGER BORING LOG
Project Name: Clayton Residence Date: 9/14/06
Client: State Farm Florida Insurance Completed By: BKM
Project No: 5169
HA NO. 1
DEPTH FT
1 Location: 4' in front of & 5' left of the left front corner of the house
SOIL DESCRIPTION
USCS
Classification
0 TO 1.5
gray to grayish brown fine sand
SP
1.5 TO 5.5
very ale brown fine sand
SP
5.5 TO 7
pale brown & orange slightly clayey sand
SP -SC
6 TO 7
Pale brown & orange slightly clayey sand
SP -SC
No water table was encountered.
HA NO. 2
DEPTH LFT
Location: 4' in front of & 4' out from the back left corner of the house
SOIL DESCRIPTION
USCS
Classification
0 TO 2.5
gray to grayish brown fine sand
SP
2.5 TO 5.5
very ale brown fine sand
SP
5.5 TO 7
white sand
SP
6 TO 7
Pale brown & orange slightly clayey sand
SP -SC
No water table was encountered.
HA NO. 3
DEPTH FT
Location: 2' in front of & 4' out from the back rli ht corner of the house
ISOIL DESCRIPTION
USCS
Classification
0 TO 1.5
gray to grayish brown fine sand
SP
1.5 TO 5.5
pale brown to very ale brown fine sand
SP
5.5 TO 7
pale brown & orange slightly clayey sand
SP -SC
6 TO 7
Pale brown & orange slightly clayey sand
SP -SC
No water table was encountered.
HA NO. 4
DEPTH FT
1 Location: at right front corner of the house
ISOIL DESCRIPTION
USCS
Classification
0 TO 1.5
gray to grayish brown fine sand
SP
1.5 TO 5
very ale brown fine sand
SP
5 TO 6
white sand
SP
6 TO 7
Pale brown & orange slightly clayey sand
SP -SC
No water table was encountered.
DEPTH DESCRIPTION
(FT.)
0.0
4.
17.1
32.(
37.0
42.0
52.0
57.0
67.0
70.0
ELEVATION *STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(FT.) BLOWS/FT
GC / A AA .fA
Loose, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2, 8/4), sand. SP•
7
50-11
•
7
Medium dense, mottled light gray (10yr - 7/1) and
yellow (10yr - 7/6), clayey sand. SC
•
17
•
27
45-
I
40-
•
23
Medium dense to dense, white (10yr - 8/1), sand. SP
3 5
28
3 0
19
2 5
32
Loose, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2), slightly clayey
sand. SP -SC
20
•
4
Firm, yellowish brown (10yr - 5/6), clay. CH
15
•
7
Very loose to loose, very pale brown (10yr - 8/4),
sand. SP
Rapid fall of drill rod accompanied by 100% loss of
10
OR -36"
Circulation.
•
7
5
Stiff, dark greenish gray (gley 1 - 4/10y), clay. CH
0
•
14
Dense to very dense, greenish gray (gley 1 - 5/10y)
to very pale brown (10yr - 8/2), sand with phosphate
grains and limestone. SP
5
78 5"
-10
42
Very dense, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2), limestone.
Limestone
50-5"
REMARKS: Located in GPR anomaly 2, colapse
feature in front of house. 100% LOC at 43.5 feet. TFST RnRIN(; RF[`(1R(1;
BORING NUMBER SPT -1
DATE DRILLED 9/26/2006
PROJECT NUMBER 5169
PROJECT Clayton Residence
PAGE 1 OF 1
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION ® STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(FT.) (FT.) BLOWS/FT
0A FF n n in In 'In en
A
17.1
37.(
42.0
47.0
52.0
57.0
65.0
Loose to medium dense, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2,
8/3, 8/4), sand. SP
11
®
8
p
50
®
8
Medium dense, mottled light gray (10yr - 7/1), yellow
(10yr - 7/6, 7/8) and red (2.5yr - 5/6), clayey sand.
14
SC
19
45
40
®
14
Loose to medium dense, white (10yr- 8/1), sand. SP
35
11
3 0
17
25
19
20
5
Firm, dark greenish gray (gley 1 - 4/10y), clay. CH
15
7
Medium dense, dark greenish gray (gley 1 - 4/10y),
clayey sand with shell. SC
10-0
25
Dense, olive yellow (2.5y - 6/6), clayey sand with
shell. SC LOC @ 47 feet bgs.
5
32
Stiff, dark greenish gray (gley 1 - 4/10y), clay with
shell. CH
0
14
Very dense, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2), limestone.
Limestone
5
41
89-3„
50-4"
-10
REMARKS: Located in GPR anomaly 1. 100% LOC at
48.5 feet.
BORING NUMBER SPT -2
DATE DRILLED 9/26/2006
PROJECT NUMBER 5169
PROJECT Clayton Residence
PAGE 1 OF 1
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION • STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(FT.) (FT.) BLOWS/FT
0.(} F,, n n in 9n in An an on 4 nn
91
17.1
27.(
32.(
37.0
42.0
47.0
52.0
57.0
62.0
65.0
Very loose to loose, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2, 8/4),
•
sand. SP
3
•
3
50
6
Medium dense, mottled light gray (10yr - 7/1), and
yellow (10yr - 7/8), clayey sand. SC
10
•
15
45
i
40
•
12
Medium dense, very pale brown (10yr - 7/4) to white
(10yr - 8/1), sand. SP
35
•
14
3 0
•
14
Very loose, light gray (10yr - 7/1), clayey sand. SC
25
•
3
Loose, very pale brown (10yr - 7/4), sand. SP
20
•
8
Very loose, yellow (10yr - 7/8) to yellowish red (5yr -
4/6), clayey sand. SC
15
•
2
Very soft, light gray (10yr - 7/2) to gray (10yr - 6/1),
clay with shell. CH
10AP
OH -24"
Loose, light yellowish brown (2.5y - 6/4), sand with
shell. SP LOC @ 47 feet bgs.
5
•
4
Stiff, dark greenish gray (gley 1 - 4/10y), clay with
shell. CH
0
•
12
Medium dense, light yellowish brown (2.5y - 6/4),
sand with shell. SP
- 5
19
Very dense, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2), limestone.
Limestone
-10
41
50-5"
REMARKS: Located in GPR anomaly 3. 100% LOC at
48.5 feet.
"47 777�7
TEST`BORING:RECORD
BORING NUMBER SPT -3
DATE DRILLED 10/2/2006
PROJECT NUMBER 5169
PROJECT Clayton Residence
PAGE 1 OF 1
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION ® STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(FT.) (FT.) BLOWS/FT
0.0 Fr n n 4n 9n 4n An on on 4nn
8.1
17.(
37.0
42.0
47.0
52.0
57.0
65.0
Very loose to medium dense, very pale brown (10yr -
•
8/2, 8/4) to white (10yr- 8/1), sand. SP
3
•
4
50
6
I
•
11
Medium dense, light gray (10yr - 7/2), clayey sand.
Sc
45
14
i
40
•
12
Medium dense, light gray (10yr - 7/2) to very pale
brown (10yr - 8/4), sand. SP
35
•
2
6
3 0
•
17
2 5
•
18
20
•
18
Loose, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2), silty sand.
SP -SM
15
•
4
Medium dense, light yellowish brown (2.5y - 6/4),
clayey sand with shell. SC
10
10
Medium dense, pale yellow (2.5y - 7/3), sand with
shell. SP
5
•
13
Medium dense, dark gray (gley 1 - 4/1), clayey sand
with shell. SC
0
•
27
Very dense, very pale brown (10yr - 8/3), limestone.
•
Limestone LOC @ 57 feet bgs.
-5
50-4"
-10
REMARKS: Located in GPR anomaly 4. 100% LOC at
58.5 feet
BORING NUMBER SPT -4
DATE DRILLED 9/26/2006
PROJECT NUMBER 5169
PROJECT Clayton Residence
PAGE 1 OF 1
DEPTH DESCRIPTION
(FT.)
0.0
6.
17.1
37.0
42.0
47.0
52.0
57.0
60.0
ELEVATION ® STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(FT.) BLOWS/FT
GG A A AA
Very loose to loose, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2,
•
3
8/4), sand. SP
•
4
50
•
5
8
Loose to medium dense, light gray (10yr - 7/2),
clayey sand. SC
•
1
8
45
i
40
•
7
Loose to medium dense, light gray (10yr - 7/1) to very
pale brown (10yr - 8/2), sand. SP
35
®
1
4
30
®
12
25
•
14
20
®
5
Soft, greenish gray (gley 1 - 5/10y), clay. CH
15
•
3
Medium dense, greenish gray (gley 1 - 5/10y), clayey
sand with shell. SC
10
10
Medium dense, olive yellow (2.5y - 6/6), sand with
shell. SP LOC @ 47 feet bgs.
5
29
Loose, very dark gray (10yr - 3/1), clayey sand with
shell. SC
0
•
7
Very dense, very pale brown (10yr - 8/2), limestone.
Limestone
50-5"
5
-10—
REMARKS: Located in midle of back yard at corner of
the patio. 100% LOC at 48.5 feet. „
BORING NUMBER SPT -5
DATE DRILLED 10/2/2006
PROJECT NUMBER 5169
PROJECT Clayton Residence
PAGE 1 OF 1
FINAL REPORT
GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION
CLAYTON RESIDENCE
SANFORD, FL
Prepared for Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
Bartow, FL
Prepared by GeoView, Inc.
St. Petersburg, FL
Gao A
September 19, 2006
Mr. Larry Madrid, P.E.
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831-2506
Subject: Transmittal of Final Report for Geophysical Investigation
Clayton Residence -Sanford, FL
GeoView Project Number 3383
Dear Mr. Madrid,
GeoView, Inc. (GeoView) is pleased to submit the final report that
summarizes and presents the results of geophysical investigation conducted at the
Clayton Residence. Ground penetrating radar and electrical resistivity were used
to evaluate near -surface geological conditions. In addition a floor slab study was
performed. GeoView appreciates the opportunity to have assisted you on this
project. If you have any questions or comments about the report, please contact us.
GEOVIEW, INC.
Steve Scruggs
Geophysicist
Michael J. Wightman, P.G.
President
Florida Professional Geologist Number 1423
A Geophysical Services Company
4610 Central Avenue Tel.: (727) 209-2334
St. Petersburg, FL 33771 Fax: (727) 328-2477
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................... 1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION AND
FLOORSLAB STUDY.................................................................. 1
2.1 Ground Penetrating Radar Survey .................................................. 1
2.2 Electrical Resistivity Imaging Survey ............................................ 2
2.3 Floor Slab Survey.......................................................................... 2
2.4 Hand Auger Boring Results........................................................... 2
3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE SINKHOLE FEATURES USING
GPR AND ERI METHODS...........................................................
3
3.1
Identification of Possible Sinkhole Features Using GPR ..............
3
3.2
Identification of Possible Sinkhole Features Using ERI ...............
3
4.0 SURVEY RESULTS................................................................................
4
4.1
Discussion of GPR Survey Results ................................................
4
4.2
Discussion of ERI Survey Results ..................................................
5
4.3
Floor Slab Survey Results..............................................................
6
4.4
Correlation of Geophysical and Floor Slab Study Results ............
6
Appendix
1 -FIGURES AND ERI TRANSECTS
Figure 1 -Geophysical Survey Results
Figure 2 -Floor Slab Study Results
ERI Transects
Appendix 2 -DESCRIPTION OF GEOPHYSICAL METHODS,
SURVEY METHODOLOGIES AND LIMITATIONS
A2.1
On -Site Measurements...................................................................
A2-1
A2.2
Ground Penetrating Radar..............................................................
A2-1
A2.3
Electrical Resistivity (ERI).............................................................
A2-3
A2.3.1 Modeling of Resistivity Data .............................................
A2-5
A2.4
Floor Slab Study.............................................................................
A2-6
A2.5
Hand Auger Boring........................................................................
A2-6
Page 1
1.0 Introduction
A geophysical investigation and a floor slab survey were conducted at the
Clayton Residence located at 145 Wildwood Dr. in Sanford, FL. The investigation
was conducted on September 14, 2006. At the time of the GeoView investigation a
dropout was present at the northeast corner of the driveway (Figure 1).
The purpose of the geophysical investigation was to help characterize near -
surface geological conditions in the area of the residence and to identify
subsurface features that may be associated with sinkhole activity. The purpose of
the floor elevation study was to determine the relative elevation of the concrete
floor slab in the home. The location of the geophysical survey area is provided on
Figure 1. The location of the floor slab study is provided on Figure 2. A discussion
of the field methods used to generate the report figures is provided in Appendix
A2.1.
2.0 Description of Geophysical Investigation and Floor Slab Survey
2.1 Ground Penetrating Radar Survey
A GPR survey was conducted both inside and outside of the residence. The
GPR survey outside of the residence was conducted 4 along a series of
perpendicular transects spaced 10 ft apart. The GPR survey was performed in the
inside areas of the home that were accessible (Figure 1). The GPR data was
collected with a Mala radar system. The GPR settings used for the survey are
presented in Table 1.
Table 1
GPR Equipment Settings Used for Exterior and Interior GPR Surveys
Location
Antenna
Frequency
Time Range
(nano -seconds)
Estimated Depth of GPR
Signal Penetration
Exterior
250 MHz'/
129
15 to 20 ft bls
Exterior
500 MHz
75
5 to 8 ft bls
Interior
500 MHz
75
4 to 6 ft bls
11 MHz means mega -Hertz and is the mid-range operating frequency of the GPR antenna.
A description of the GPR technique and the methods employed for
geological characterization studies is provided in Appendix A2.2.
Page 2
2.2 Electrical Resistivityging, Survey
The ERI survey was conducted using the Advanced Geosciences, Inc. Sting
R8 automatic electrode resistivity system. A total of four ERI transects were
performed using up to 21 electrodes on each line with an "a spacing" of 5 ft. A
dipole -dipole combined with an inverse Schlumberger electrode configuration was
used with a maximum "n value" of six. The ERI data was analyzed using
EarthImager 2D, a computer inversion program, which provides two-dimensional
vertical cross-sectional resistivity model (pseudo -section) of the subsurface. A
description of the ERI method and the methods employed for geotechnical
characterization studies is provided in Appendix A2.2. A discussion of the
modeling process used to create the ERI results is provided in Appendix A2.2.1.
2.3 Floor Slab Survey
Floor elevation measurements were collected on an approximate 5 -foot by 5
foot grid system. Changes in the flooring material were recorded and two readings
were collected across areas where these changes occurred. This was done to
determine the necessary correction to account for a change in floor elevations due
to changes in floor coverings. Floor elevations of attachments, sunken rooms
and/or elevated rooms were measured and treated independently from the main
floor elevation. A base station was established and elevation readings were
collected at the beginning and end of the survey. The floor slab survey was
conducted in accordance with Florida Geological Survey Special Publication 57.
A further discussion of the methods used for the floor slab study are provided in
Appendix A2.4.
2.4 Hand Auger Boring
A hand auger boring was performed at the project site (Figure 1). The
purpose of the hand auger boring was to obtain information regarding near -surface
soil conditions. This information was used to assist in the interpretation of the
GPR data. A discussion of the methods used for the hand auger boring is provided
in Appendix A2.5. The location of the boring (HA -1) is provided on Figure 1 and
the results are presented in Table 1.
Table 1
Hand Auger Results
Hand Auger Depth
Designation Interval Soils T)eccrintinn
HA -1
0-6 ft bls
Sand
6-6.5 ft bls
Clay
Page 3
3.0 Identification of Possible Sinkhole Features Using GPR and ERI Methods
3.1 Identification of Possible Sinkhole Features Using GPR
The features observed on GPR data that are most commonly associated with
sinkhole activity are:
• A downwarping of GPR reflector sets, that are associated with
suspected lithological contacts, toward a common center. Such
features typically have with a bowl or funnel shaped configuration and
can be associated with a deflection of overlying sediment horizons
caused by the migration of sediments into voids in the underlying
limestone. If the GPR reflector sets are sharply downwarping and
intersect, they can create "bow -tie" shaped GPR reflection feature,
which often designates the apparent center of the GPR anomaly.
• A localized significant increase in the depth of the penetration and/or
amplitude of the GPR signal response. The increase in GPR signal
penetration depth or amplitude is often associated with either a
localized increase in sand content at depth or decrease in soil density.
• An apparent discontinuity in GPR reflector sets, that are associated
with suspected lithological contacts. The apparent discontinuities
and/or disruption of the GPR reflector sets may be associated with the
downward migration sediments.
The greater the severity of these features or a combination of these features
the greater the likelihood that the identified feature is a sinkhole. It is not possible
based on the GPR data alone to determine if an identified feature is a sinkhole or,
more importantly, whether that feature is an active sinkhole.
3.2 Identification of Possible Sinkhole Features Using ERI
Karst features are typically characterized by one of the following conditions
on the ERI profile:
1. The occurrence of highly resistivity material that extends to depth in a
columnar fashion toward the top of the limestone. Such a feature
may indicate the presence of a sand -filled depression or raveling
zone.
2. The localized presence of low -resistivity material extending below the
interpreted depth to the top of limestone. Such a feature may
indicate the presence of a clay -filled void or fracture with the
limestone or the presence of highly weathered limestone rock.
Page 4
3. Any significant localized increase in the depth to limestone. Such a
feature may indicate the presence of an in -filled depression (paleo-
sink).
When comparing the results of the ERI method, the following considerations
should be given. The ERI method, for example, describes the transition from clay
to limestone as a transition, rather than a discrete depth. This transition is due to
several factors including; a) The vertical density of the resistivity data decreasing
with depth and b) The possibility that the upper portion of the limestone is
weathered which would create a physical transition zone in terms of resistivity
between the clay and competent (non -weathered) limestone and 3) The limitations
in the modeling process.
4.0 Survey Results
4.1 Discussion of GPR Survey Results
Results of the GPR survey indicated the presence of a well-defined,
relatively continuous set of GPR reflectors at an approximate depth range of 4 to 6
ft bls. The GPR reflector set correlates to the lithological contact between the sand
and underlying clay stratum identified at 6 ft bls by the hand auger boring.
Description of GPR Anomalies
Four GPR anomaly areas were identified around the exterior of the
residence. The anomaly areas are designated as GPR Anomalies 1-4 on Figure 1.
The anomalies are numbered in order of significance with GPR Anomaly 1 being
the most significant and GPR Anomaly 4 being the least significant. A description
of each of the anomalies is as follows:
GPR Anomaly 1
GPR Anomaly 1 is irregular in shape with total area of approximately 290
square ft. The anomaly is located near the southwest corner of the residence. The
apparent vertical relief of the upper portion of the anomaly area is 2-3 ft as
characterized by the observed downwarping of the GPR reflector set. A localized
increase in the depth of penetration of the GPR signal was also observed within
the anomaly area. The apparent center of the feature is characterized as the area of
maximum downwarping of the previously referenced GPR reflectors.
GPR Anomaly 2
GPR Anomaly 2 is elliptical in shape with total area of approximately 35
square ft. The anomaly is located around the surface depression located near the
front walkway. The anomaly is characterized by a localized increase in the depth
Page 5
of penetration of the GPR signal. The apparent center of the feature is
characterized as the area of maximum penetration depth of the radar signal. GPR
Anomaly 2 is associated with the drop out near the northeast corner of the
driveway.
GPR Anomaly 3
GPR Anomaly 3 is elliptical in shape with total area of approximately 50
square ft. The anomaly is located near the northeast corner of the residence. The
apparent vertical relief of the upper portion of the anomaly area is 1-2 ft as
characterized by the observed downwarping of the GPR reflector set. A localized
moderate increase in the depth of penetration of the GPR signal was also observed
within the anomaly area. The apparent center of the feature is characterized as the
area of maximum downwarping of the previously referenced GPR reflectors.
GPR Anomaly 4
GPR Anomaly 4 is elliptical in shape with total area of approximately 45
square ft. The anomaly is located east of the shed. The anomaly is characterized by
a localized moderate increase in the depth of penetration of the GPR signal. The
apparent center of the feature is characterized as the area of maximum penetration
depth of the radar signal.
A discussion of the limitations of the GPR technique in geological
characterization studies is provided in Appendix 2.
4.2 Discussion of ERI Survey Results
Results from the four ERI surveys are presented in Appendix 1. The ERI
transects are of acceptable quality (a discussion of the criteria used to determine
the quality of an ERI inversion model is provided in Appendix A2.3.1).
Results from the ERI Transects indicate the presence of high resistivity near -
surface soil materials across the majority of the project site to a depth range of 4 to
6 ft bls. The high resistivity surficial sediments correspond to the surficial sand
stratum identified in the hand auger boring. The high resistivity soils are underlain
by moderate to low resistivity soils to the maximum depth of exploration of the
ERI transects which ranged from approximately 12 to 24 ft bls.
One ERI anomaly that may be associated with sinkhole activity was
observed on ERI Transect 4 (Appendix 1). The ERI anomaly is characterized by
the localized occurrence of moderate resistivity soils at depth.
Page 6
4.3 Floor Slab Study Results
The elevation of the main floor of the house found a total differential of 1.0
inches between the low area, in the central portion of the home and the highest
point in the eastern portion of the home. The garage sloped 0.3 inches from north
to south. Results of the floor elevation survey are presented as Figure 2.
4.4 Correlation of Geophysical Study and Floor Slab Survey Results
Both the GPR and ERI surveys identified the transition from the surficial
sand stratum to the underlying clay stratum. Accordingly, the two methods are in
agreement in this regard. The ERI method did identify anomalous conditions
within GPR Anomaly 1. This indicates that GPR Anomaly 1 has a higher
probability of being associated with karst activity. It is noted that the other GPR
anomalies (except GPR Anomaly 1) are not in the correct location to be properly
characterized by the ERI survey.
Results from the floor slab survey indicate a general slope towards the
middle of the slab. No geophysical anomalies were observed that would provide a
possible explanation as to why this slope in the slab has occurred.
APPENDIX 1
FIGURES AND ERI TRANSECTS
x
DEPRESSIOl'
IN GROUNC
EXPLANATION
S1 l El APPROX. OF ERI TRANSECT LINES WITH START AND END POINTS
PATH OF GPR TRANSECT LINES WITH DESIGNATION NUMBER
HA -1 ®
LOCATION OF HAND AUGER BORING WITH DESIGNATION
LOCATION OF SUBSURFACE ANOMALIES WITH DESIGNATION
(1 MOST SIGNIFICANT, 4 LEAST SIGNIFICANT)
APPARENT CENTER OF SUBSURFACE ANOMALY
LOCATION OF ERI ANOMALY TREE
GeV Vo ieT
FIGURE 1
SITE MAP
SHOWING RESULTS
OF GEOPHYSICAL
INVESTIGATION
0 20'
SCALE: 1"=20' APPROX.
CLAYTON RESIDENCE
145 WILDWOOD DRIVE
SANFORD, FLORIDA
PROJECT:
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 3383
BARTOW, FLORIDA DATE:
9/25/2006
LEGEND
0.3 LOCATION OF FLOOR ELEVATION SURVEY POINT
AND RELATIVE FLOOR ELEVATION
ti
FLOOR ELEVATION CONTOUR LINE (IN INCHES)
FIGURE 2
FLOOR ELEVATION
STUDY
0 10'
SCALE: 1"=10' APPROX.
CLAYTON RESIDENCE
145 WILDWOOD DRIVE
SANFORD, FL
.ID ENGINEERING GROUP 3383
BARTOW, FLORIDA DATE:
09/25/06
0.00
2.16
C
a 4.32
6.48
8.64
0.00
2.16
C
4.32
6.48
8.64
ERI Transect 2 - Clayton Residence
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25 0 30.0 35.0 40.
P -
i .v D.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
i.mcmarea Apparent Kestsavity Pseudosection
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
0.00
2.90
C
5.80
8.70
11.60
Inverted Resistivity Section Iteration = 8 RNIS = 3.61% Normalized L2 = 1.45
25.0 30.0 35.0
Ohm -m
2591
1537
911
540
320
40.0 Ohm -m
2591
1537
911
540
320
40.0 Ohm -m
4171
111^
35:
1;;
ERI Transect 1 - ClaYton Residence
0.0 10.0 20.0 300 40.0 50.0 60.0 700
80.0 90.0 100.0 ohm -m
0.0
2415
�
5.0
.. - °
1112
m
99
51^_
0
14.9
236
19.8
109
Measured Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0
80.0 90.0 100.0 Oh ---
0.0
2415
3.0
pop -
1112
9.9
512
14.9
236
19.8
109
Calculated Apparent Rzsistivity Pseudosection
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0
80.0 90.0 100.0 Ohm -m
0.0
3290
5.9
-
-
1198
C
11.9
436
158
17.8
159
23.7
Inverted Resistivity Section Iteration -3 RMS -8.19% Normalized L2 - 7.45
0.00
2.16
C
a 4.32
6.48
8.64
0.00
2.16
C
4.32
6.48
8.64
ERI Transect 2 - Clayton Residence
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25 0 30.0 35.0 40.
P -
i .v D.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
i.mcmarea Apparent Kestsavity Pseudosection
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
0.00
2.90
C
5.80
8.70
11.60
Inverted Resistivity Section Iteration = 8 RNIS = 3.61% Normalized L2 = 1.45
25.0 30.0 35.0
Ohm -m
2591
1537
911
540
320
40.0 Ohm -m
2591
1537
911
540
320
40.0 Ohm -m
4171
111^
35:
1;;
ERI Transect 4- ClaYton Residence
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
0.00
3.69
C
$ 7.39
11.08
14.77
Measured Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection
0.0 10.0 20.0
0.00
3 1
.. 3.69
C
x5 7.39
11.08
14.77
Calculated Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection
0.0 10.0 20.0
0.0 .��
4.8
4 9.6
11.5
19.3
Inverted Resistivity Section Iteration 8 F
30.0 40.0 50.0
30.0 40.0 50.0
60.0 70.0
Ohm -m
ERI Transect 3 - Clayton Residence
253.1
1111
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.D
0.00
25.0 30.0 35.0
40.0 45.0 50.0 Ohm -m
'73
2556
r
2.80
Ohm -m
1355
5'60
Ir
750
233
105
8.40
Ohm -m
4
406
M..
11.20
1151
Opr
379
Measured Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection
22D
0.0
0.00
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
25,0 30.0 35.0
40.0 45.0 50.0
Ohm -m
2556
�
2.8G
1385
5�
5.60
750
[a
8.40
.�
406
11.220 1
Calculated Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection
220
0.0
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
25.0 30.0 35.0
40.0 45.0 50.0 Ohm -m
0.00
3597
3.82
1441
�
7.63
577
193
11.15231
15.26
Inverted Resistivity Section Iteration a 3 RMS= 7.47%
Normalized L2 = 6.20
ERI Transect 4- ClaYton Residence
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
0.00
3.69
C
$ 7.39
11.08
14.77
Measured Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection
0.0 10.0 20.0
0.00
3 1
.. 3.69
C
x5 7.39
11.08
14.77
Calculated Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection
0.0 10.0 20.0
0.0 .��
4.8
4 9.6
11.5
19.3
Inverted Resistivity Section Iteration 8 F
30.0 40.0 50.0
30.0 40.0 50.0
60.0 70.0
Ohm -m
253.1
1111
S P,
'73
105
60.0 70.0
Ohm -m
2534
1143
516
233
105
60.0 70.0
Ohm -m
4
3500
M..
1151
Opr
379
125
41
ERI Anomaly
A2-1
APPENDIX 2
DESCRIPTION OF GEOPHYSICAL METHODS, SURVEY
METHODOLOGIES AND LIMITATIONS
A2.1 On Site Measurements
The measurements that were collected and used to create the site map were
made using a fiberglass measuring tape. Right angles were estimated using the
exterior walls of the residence. The degree of accuracy of such an approach is
typically +/- 5% for lengths and +/- 2.5 degrees for angles.
A2.2 Ground Penetrating Radar
Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) consists of a set of integrated electronic
components that transmits high frequency (200 to 1500 megahertz [MHz])
electromagnetic waves into the ground and records the energy reflected back to the
ground surface. The GPR system consists of an antenna, which serves as both a
transmitter and receiver, and a profiling recorder that both processes the incoming
signal and provides a graphic display of the data. The GPR data can be reviewed
as both printed hard copy output or recorded on the profiling recorder's hard drive
for later review. GeoView uses a Mala GPR system. Geological characterization
studies are typically conducted using a 250 MHz antenna.
A GPR survey provides a graphic cross-sectional view of subsurface
conditions. This cross-sectional view is created from the reflections of repetitive
short -duration electromagnetic (EM) waves that are generated as the antenna is
pulled across the ground surface. The reflections occur at the subsurface contacts
between materials with differing electrical properties. The electrical property
contrast that causes the reflections is the dielectric permittivity that is directly
related to conductivity of a material. The GPR method is commonly used to
identify such targets as underground utilities, underground storage tanks or drums,
buried debris, voids or geological features.
The greater the electrical contrast between the surrounding earth materials
and target of interest, the greater the amplitude of the reflected return signal.
Unless the buried object is metal, only part of the signal energy will be reflected
back to the antenna with the remaining portion of the signal continuing to
propagate downward to be reflected by deeper features. If there is little or no
electrical contrast between the target interest and surrounding earth materials it
will be very difficult if not impossible to identify the object using GPR.
A2-2
. The depth of penetration of the GPR signal is very site specific and is
controlled by two primary factors: subsurface soil conditions and selected antenna
frequency. The GPR signal is attenuated (absorbed) as is passes through earth
materials. As the energy of the GPR signal is diminished due to attenuation, the
energy of the reflected waves is reduced, eventually to the level that the reflections
can no longer be detected. As the conductivity of the earth materials increases, the
attenuation of the GPR signal increases thereby reducing the signal penetration
depth. In Florida, the typical soil conditions that severely limit GPR signal
penetration are near -surface clays and/or organic materials.
The depth of penetration of the GPR signal is also reduced as the antenna
frequency is increased. However, as antenna frequency is increased the resolution
of the GPR data is improved. Therefore, when designing a GPR survey a tradeoff
is made between the required depth of penetration and desired resolution of the
data. As a rule, the highest frequency antenna that will still provide the desired
maximum depth of penetration should be used. For areas outside of the home, a
low -frequency (250 MHz) antenna is used. This allows for maximum signal
penetration and thereby maximum depth from which information will be obtained.
For GPR surveys conducted inside of a home a 500 MHz antenna is often used.
The 500 MHz antenna sometimes provides higher quality data on concrete
surfaces.
A GPR survey is conducted along survey lines (transects) that are measured
paths along which the GPR antenna is moved. Electronic marks are placed in the
data by the operator at designated points along the GPR transects. These marks
allow for a correlation between the GPR data and the position of the GPR antenna
on the ground.
For geological characterization surveys, the GPR survey is conducted along
a set of perpendicularly orientated transects. The survey is conducted in two
directions because subsurface features such as sinkholes are often asymmetric.
Spacing between the transects typically ranges from 10 to 50 feet. Closely spaced
grids are used when the objective of the GPR survey is to identify all sinkhole
features within a project site. Coarser grids are used when the objective is to
provide a general overview of site conditions. After completion of a survey using a
given grid spacing, additional more -closely spaced GPR transects are often
performed to better characterize sinkhole features identified by the initial survey.
This information can be used to provide recommended locations for geotechnical
borings.
A2-3
Depth estimates to the top of lithological contacts or sinkhole features are
determined by dividing the time of travel of the GPR signal from the ground
surface to the top of the feature by the velocity of the GPR signal. The velocity of
the GPR signal is usually obtained from published tables of velocities for the type
and condition (saturated vs. unsaturated) of soils underlying the site. The accuracy
of GPR-derived depths typically ranges from 20 to 40 percent of the total depth.
Interpretation and Limitations of GPR data
The analysis and collection of GPR data is both a technical and interpretative
skill. The technical aspects of the work are learned from both training and
experience. Having the opportunity to compare GPR data collected in numerous
settings to the results from geotechnical studies performed at the same locations
develops interpretative skills for geological characterization studies.
The ability of GPR to collect interpretable information at a project site is
limited by the attenuation (absorption) of the GPR signal by underlying soils.
Once the GPR signal has been attenuated at a particular depth, information
regarding deeper geological conditions will not be obtained. GPR data can only
resolve subsurface features that have a sufficient electrical contrast between the
feature in question and surrounding earth materials. If an insufficient contrast is
present, the subsurface feature will not be identified.
GeoView can make no warranties or representations of geological conditions
that may be present beyond the depth of investigation or resolving capability of
the GPR equipment or in areas that were not accessible to the geophysical
investigation.
A2.3 Electrical Resistivity
Electrical resistivity surveying is a geophysical method in which an
electrical current is injected into the earth; the subsequent response (potential) is
measured at the ground surface to determine the resistance of the underlying earth
materials. The resistivity survey is conducted by applying electrical current into
the earth from two implanted electrodes (current electrodes C, and C2) and
measuring the associated potential between a second set of implanted electrodes
(potential electrodes P, and PA Field readings are in volts. Field readings are then
converted to resistivity values using Ohm's Law and a geometric correction factor
for the spacing and configuration of the electrodes. The calculated resistivity
values are known as "apparent" resistivity values. The values are referred to as
"apparent" because the calculations for the values assume that the volume of earth
A2-4
material being measured is electrically homogeneous. Such field conditions are
rarely present.
Resistivity of earth materials is controlled by several properties including
composition, water content, pore fluid resistivity and effective permeability. For
this study the properties that had the primary control on measured resistivity
values are composition and effective permeability. The general geological setting
of this project area is clay overlain by limestone.
For this study a dipole -dipole combined with an inverse Schlumberger
resistivity array configuration was used. The dipole -dipole array is different that
most other resistivity arrays in that the electrode and current electrodes are kept
together using a constant spacing value referred to as an "a spacing". The current
and potential electrode sets are moved away from each other using multiples of the
"a spacing" value. The number of multiples is referred to as the "n value". For
example, an array with an "a spacing" of 5 feet and a "n value" of 6 would have
the current and potential electrode sets spaced 30 ft apart with a separation
between the two electrodes in the set of 5 ft. By sampling at varying "n values",
greater depth measurements can be achieved. Inverse Schlumberger data is
collected with the current set of electrodes being kept with a fixed separation (L
spacing) and the potential electrodes a minimum distance of 5L from the inner
current electrodes. Dipole -dipole resistivity data is usually presented in a two-
dimensional pseudo -section format. Inverse Schlumberger data is usually
presented as a vertical profile of resistivity distribution below the center point
between the two current electrodes. The dipole -dipole and inverse Schlumberger
data is combined and presented as either a contour of the individual data points
(using the calculated apparent resistivity values) or as a geological model using
least squares analysis. Such least squares analysis was used for this study using the
computer software program (EarthImager 2D) developed for the equipment
manufacturer. Apparent resistivity values are calculated using the following
formula for a dipole -dipole configuration: 7a=71(b3/a2-b)VV/I:
Where:
ya= apparent resistivity
7L= 3.14
a= "a spacing"
b= "a spacing" x "n value"
VV= voltage between the two potential electrodes
I= current (in amps)
A2-5
For a Schlumberger configuration the apparent resistivity is calculated
using. ya=n([s2-a2]/4)VV/aI:
Where:
ya= apparent resistivity
�= 3.14
a= spacing between the inner set of electrodes"
S= distance between the outer electrode and nearest inner electrode
VV= voltage between the two potential electrodes
I= current (in amps)
A2.3.1 Inversion Modeling of ERI Data
The objective for inversion modeling of resistivity data is to create a
description of the actual distribution of earth material resistivity based on the
subsurface geology that closely matches the resistivity values that are measured by
the instrumentation. This modeling is done through the use of EarthImagerTM, a
proprietary computer program developed by the equipment manufacturer. When
evaluating the validity of the inversion model several factors need to be
considered. The RMS, or root mean square error, expresses the quality of fit
between the actual and modeled resistivity values for the given set of points in the
model. The lower the RMS error the higher the quality of fit between the actual
and modeled data sets. In general, inversion models with an RMS error of less
than 5 to 10 percent are acceptable. The size of the RMS error is dependent upon
the number of bad data points within a data set and the magnitude of how bad the
data points are. As part of the modeling process bad data points are typically
removed, which decreases the RMS error and improves (with limitations) the
quality of the model. The quality of fit between the actual and modeled resistivity
values is also expressed as the L-2 norm. When the modeled and actual data sets
have converged, the L-2 norm reduces to unity (1.0 or smaller).
However, as the number of data points is reduced, the validity of the
inversion model is diminished. Accordingly, when interpreting a particular area of
an inversion model the number of data points used to create that portion of the
model must be taken into consideration. If very few points are within a particular
area of the model, then the modeled solution in that area should be considered
suspect and possibly rejected.
The entire ERI transect should be considered suspect if a model has a high
RMS error and a large number of removed data points. It is likely that sources of
interference have affected the field readings and rendered the modeled solution
A2-6
invalid. Such sources of interference can include buried metallic underground
utilities, reinforced concrete slabs, septic leach fields or electrical grounding
systems. Accordingly, all efforts need to be made in the field to locate, to the
degree possible, the ERI transect lines away from such features. The locations of
such features also need to be mapped in the field so their potential effects can be
considered when interpreting the modeled results.
A2.4 Floor Slab Studies
Floor elevation studies are conducted with the Zip Level Pro -2000 Elevation
Measurement System. The Pro -2000 system consists of a small base unit and a
hand held measurement module connected by an approximately 100 -ft flexible
gas-filled cord. The base unit is placed in an area that is easily reoccupied for
subsequent mapping and the base location is recorded. The system measures the
elevation difference between the two units with an effective resolution of 0.1
inches. The Pro -2000 has several distinct advantages over other survey
instruments such as a transit or laser level. These advantages include: 1) It can be
used efficiently in very tight spaces where it would be impossible to use an optical
instrument, 2) It can be used in "blind" areas obscured from a direct line of sight to
the reference elevation (base module). This advantage allows surveying in areas
behind walls inside buildings or closets.
The floor elevation study data is contoured using Surfer`"', a computer -
contouring program. The Kriging method was used to develop the contour map.
A2.5 Hand Auer Boring
A hand auger boring was performed outside of the residence. The boring was
performed in general accordance with ASTM standards D1452-90 (1995) titled
"Standard Practice for Soil Investigation and Sampling by Auger Borings". The
purpose of the hand auger boring was to obtain information regarding near -surface
soil conditions to assist in the interpretation of the GPR data. The boring was
performed by manually advancing the auger bucket into the ground in approximate
increments of 6 inches. Soils were retrieved and placed on plastic sheet for
identification. Classifications of soils were made in the field based upon observed
textural, color and compositional characteristics. Hand auger borings are typically
advanced to the depth of the first competent clay layer, the water table or to a
maximum depth of 9 feet. Unless requested, soil samples are not saved.
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
Bartow, FL 33831
863-533-9007
SUBSURFACE GROUTING SPECIFICATIONS
A. INTENT OF THE GROUTING PROGRAM
The proposed grouting program shall be sufficient to fill any voids or loose rock in upper portion
of the limestone and to densify loose and soft soils overlying the limestone surface to minimize
further karst related settlement of the structure.
B. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
A geotechnical report has been prepared for the site. The information contained in the report is
intended to assist the contractor in preparation of the bid. Soil boring data represents
subsurface conditions only at the location of each boring and soil sample. Varying degrees of
heterogeneity of the horizontal and vertical soil conditions are likely to exist between boring
locations. Opinions and recommendations expressed in the report are based on geological and
geotechnical interpretation of the test data.
C. SCOPE OF WORK
The contractor shall provide project control, supervision, labor, materials and equipment to
accomplish the following items of work:
1. A detailed grouting program, including a description of method(s) used to install grout
casings.
2. Install and remove grout pipes.
3. Monitor grout slumps, pumping rates and pressures and ground movements during
grouting operations.
4. Perform grouting program under supervision of a geotechnical engineer or geologist.
5. Site clean up after grouting.
The grouting contractor will submit a description of the grouting program with the cost proposal.
A description of the work procedure, ground monitoring techniques and instrumentation program
shall also be included.
D. MATERIALS
The grout materials will consist of a combination of Portland cement, fine aggregate and water.
Additives may be used, provided the grout mixture meets slump requirements. Hydro -active
and micro -fine grouts are acceptable. For fill grouting of voids and cavities and compaction of
surrounding sands, using conventional cementitious grout, the grout mix will have a slump of no
more than 4 inches as measured at the truck. The slump shall be checked by the contractor in
accordance with ASTM method C 143 on each truck of grout delivered to the site. The engineer
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc., Bartow, Florida 863-533-9007
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
Bartow, F133831
863-533-9007
of record shall record slump observations. Grout with greater than 4 -inch slump shall be
rejected.
Fine aggregates will consist of hard, clean, strong, durable and uncoated particles, in
accordance with ASTM C144-76. The fine aggregate will have a fines content of not less than
10 percent and not more than 30 percent passing the No. 200 sieve, and will be approved by
the Engineer. The gradation of the mix will be such that sand blocking is eliminated at the grout
working pressures specified.
Water used in the grout will be free of deleterious and organic material.
No admixture will be used without the Engineer's approval and previous testing.
The Contractor will determine the source, kind and quality of the water, cement and aggregates
to be used in the work.
E. GROUT PIPE INSTALLATION
The drilling equipment will install minimum two to three inch, inside diameter, flush joint steel
casing to minimize flow restrictions and prevent plugging when injecting the low -slump material
and hangup upon retraction. The casing will extend to the anticipated depth of bedrock as
indicated in the site geotechnical report. The intent will be to intercept the limestone/soil
interface.
The contractor will consult with the project geotechnical engineer/geologist prior to
installing casing exceeding 20 feet greater than the anticipated depth of the grout point
and/or 20 feet into the bedrock unit.
The steel casing will have adequate strength to maintain the hole and to withstand the required
jacking and pumping pressures. The casing will be installed such that there is sufficient contact
with the drilled hole in order to prevent grout leakage and/or premature upward movement of the
casing during injection of high-pressure compaction grout. Rotary wash, and rotosonic drilling is
acceptable; however, any subsidence damage caused by this drilling shall be at the
Contractor's own risk and expense.
F. GROUT INJECTION PROCEDURES
Grouting shall be completed using the primary and secondary methods of grouting. Primary
(vertical points) shall be completed first. Secondary (angled points) shall be completed after the
primary points on either side of it are completed.
Grouting pressure will be continuously monitored at the hole and the pump with suitably
protected, easily readable gauges.
Grout will be injected on a continuous basis throughout the depth of the hole with the grout
casing being withdrawn in increments of 24 inches (2 feet) or less.
2
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc., Bartow, Florida 863-533-9007
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
Bartow, FL 33831
863-533-9007
Controlled grout pumping rates of 1 to 5 cubic feet per minute will be required. Grout quantities
will be monitored and recorded on a continuous basis.
The criteria for raising the grout pipe to the next increment will be when one of the following
occur:
1. The grout pressure at the gauge located at the header pipe exceeds 200 psi
over the necessary pressure to initiate grout take, provided there is no
blockage of the pipe.
2. For each five-foot injection interval, initial grout quantities should be limited to
a maximum of 10 cubic yards. If the grout take exceeds 10 cubic yards in a five-
foot interval, the injection point shall be raised no more than 24 inches (2 feet)
and flushed, and the initial (injected) amount of grout shall be allowed to set.
Subsequently, the grout injection may be resumed the next day.
3. When surface heave occurs.
The Contractor will replace any holes lost due to faulty grouting equipment at no charge to the
client.
G. TESTING AND QUALITY CONTROL
All daily drilling, grouting and testing reports will be submitted to the on-site geotechnical
engineer/geologist within 24 hours. Drilling reports will be required and should contain at a
minimum the following information: name of driller, type of equipment and method used, date
started, date completed, location and identification of hole, and total depth drilled and total
amount of pipe installed. The driller shall also note changes in drilling characteristics and drilling
returns.
Daily grouting reports will contain at least the following information: name of Contractor's
supervisor, constituents and proportions of grout, log of quantity injected per given interval in
each injection point, date, rate of pumping and grouting pressures at the hole.
A level control system will be installed and operated by the Contractor for use during grouting.
The monitoring will be carried out so as to detect any movement within 50 feet of the grouting
operations whenever grouting is occurring.
H. PROTECTION AND CLEANUP
During work operations the Contractor will take such precautions as may be necessary to
prevent drill cuttings, equipment exhaust, oil, wash water and grout from defacing and/ or
damaging the landscape.
The Contractor will furnish such pumps as may be necessary to care for wastewater and grout
for his operations and clean up all waste resulting from his operations.
3
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc., Bartow, Florida 863-533-9007
4
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
Bartow, FL 33831
863-533-9007
I. SUBMITTALS
The Contractor will provide a list of major components to be used including pumps, hoses, pipe,
fittings and drilling equipment, including manufacturers' data as to size, type, pressure rating,
capacity and other critical characteristics for each item for the Engineer's approval prior to the
commencement of work.
The Contractor will provide a detailed work schedule outline mobilization, drilling, grouting,
testing and demobilization.
The Contractor will provide an outline of the slump testing, sampling and strength testing
procedures to be utilized in the quality control program.
C!
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc., Bartow, Florida 863-533-9007
h .0 Y`
Contractor Bid Form: Subsurface Grouting
Clayton Residence
Sanford, Florida
Bid Due Date:
Task
Description
Estimated
Quantity
Unit Price
Total Price
1.
Mobilization
1
$
$
2.
Install Grout
Casings
1750 feet
$
$
3.
Grout Material
250-275
cubic yards
$
$
Total Price
$
Estimated number of days to complete:
Comments:
Alternate Bid:
days
t,
I
O iL� 5 Jvi� t2 r
'1P
qS c, rte e� LJ
"Exceeding Expectations"
Pry 1 p � , Poo?
Madrid Engineering GmgA Inc.
r • 0=0 • I ' "'• • 1;
Clayton Residence, Sanford, Florida
Claim Number 59-D134-166
The Earth Is our Business'
Prepared for:
Eric Atkinson
and
State Farm Insurance
Prepared by:
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
(863) 533-9007
Project No. 5169.1
March 2007
CERTIFICATIONS
Engineering Certification
I hereby certify that I am a registered professional engineer in the state of Florida
practicing with Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. under license number EB
0006509 issued by the Florida Department of Business and Professional
Regulation and the Board of Professional Engineers.
I certify that the grouting work performed at this residence was done in
accordance with our specifications, and that I, or others under my direct
supervision have prepared the geotechnical engineering evaluations, findings,
opinions and conclusions represented in this report.
Clayton Residence
Grout Monitoring Report
MEG Project # 5169.1
SIGNATURE: ,
NAME: Larry D. m4drid, P.E.
LICENSE #: 39559
DATE: g /07
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1
2.0 FIELD ACTIVITIES...............................................................................................2
2.1 Grout Pipe Installation.......................................................................................2
2.2 Grout Injection...................................................................................................2
3.0 GROUT QUANTITIES AND PIPE INSTALLATION...............................................3
4.0 RESULTS.............................................................................................................4
5.0 LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................... 5
FIGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Site Location Map
Grout Point Locations Map
Grout Monitoring Logs
Grout Truck Logs
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the field activities associated with the subsurface
pressure grouting program recently completed at the Clayton Residence located at 145
Wildwood Drive, Sanford, Florida (Figure 1). The grouting program, successfully
completed by Certified Foundations, Inc., generally followed the recommendations
and specifications prepared by Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. (MEG) in the
Remediation portion of the Subsidence Investigation Report (MEG# 5169) issued in
October 2006. A remedial program consisting of a combination of fill grouting and
pressure grouting was recommended to fill the voids in the limestone and transfer the
structural loads to competent bearing strata. MEG was contracted by State Farm
Insurance to provide engineering supervision of the grouting activities.
As part of the grout monitoring activities, MEG completed the following:
➢ Completed an on-site pre -construction meeting with the geotechnical specialty
contractor to convey the Engineer's project expectations, and review the
technical specifications with the superintendent.
➢ Monitored on-site the grout injection in accordance with the Subsurface Pressure
Grouting Specifications that were prepared by MEG specifically for this project.
➢ Documented the location and depth(s) of the grout injection points, estimated the
quantity of grout injected at each grout point and prepared this report
summarizing the monitoring activities.
1
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. Clayton Residence Grout Monitoring
MEG Project Number 5169.1 March 2007
2.0 FIELD ACTIVITIES
2.1 Grout Pipe Installation
Certified Foundations, Inc. utilized a drill rig to install grout pipes to bedrock
and/or refusal conditions. The grout pipe was installed to an average depth of 64 feet
below the ground surface. The pipes were 3 -inch diameter flush joint, threaded, steel
casings. All drill cuttings were removed for offsite disposal. The approximate locations
of the injection points are shown in Figure 2. Some of the points were installed
vertically, and some at an angle to inject beneath the house (denoted with an arrow on
Figure 2).
2.2 Grout Injection
Grout was delivered by Rinker, Inc. in 10 and 5 -cubic yard batches from their
grout plant. The grout was a sand -cement mix with a slump of approximately 4 inches
at the pump. The slump at the point of injection below ground is estimated to be 2 to 3
inches. The grout was injected using a concrete pump fitted with an in-line pressure
gauge to monitor injection pressure(s).
The Contractor's superintendent determined whether adequate quantities of
grout had been injected at depth based upon three conditions:
1. Rapid increase of grout pressure.
2. Uplift of the structure or ground near the structure as determined through
continual monitoring using a survey level.
3. Excessive tension on grout pipe as a result of constriction from the
injected grout. This often results in grout flowing from the top of the pipe.
2
4
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project Number 5169.1
Clayton Residence Grout Monitoring
March 2007
3.0 GROUT QUANTITIES AND PIPE INSTALLATION
During the period from February 9, 2007 through February 20, 2007
approximately 128 Cubic Yards (CY) of grout was injected into 25 vertical and angled
grout injection points around the Clayton Residence as described in Section 2.2. Grout
monitoring logs are included in Appendix A, grout truck logs are included in Appendix
B, and a summary of grout point data is provided as Table 1. The quantities were
recorded by an on-site MEG representative and indicate the quantity of grout injected at
each interval.
In general, the volume of grout injected varied from a high of 19.6 CY at grout
point No 1, to a low of 0.9 CY in point No. 13. Average grout intake per hole was
approximately 5.1 CY. The total grout volume was 128 CY.
TABLE 1
Grout
Point No.
CLAYTON'•
Date
Grouted
•
Maximum
Casing
Depth ft)
Grout
Quantities
(cf)
Grout
Quantities
(c
1
9 -Feb
64
528
19.6
2
12 -Feb
66
213
7.9
3
9 -Feb
66
339
12.5
4
12 -Feb
79
243
9.0
5
13 -Feb
62
273
10.1
6
14 -Feb
64
132
4.9
7
13 -Feb
60
120
4.4
8
14 -Feb
64
67
2.5
9
14 -Feb
64
56
2.1
10
14 -Feb
63
69
2.6
11
14 -Feb
63
96
3.6
Cl
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project Number 5169.1
Clayton Residence Grout Monitoring
March 2007
12
15 -Feb 64 65
2.4
13
15 -Feb
63
23
0.9
14
15 -Feb
62
148
5.5
15
16 -Feb
68
39
1.4
16
16 -Feb
63
61
2.3
17
19 -Feb
64
66
2.4
18
16 -Feb
63
35
1.3
19
19 -Feb
64
72
2.7
20
19 -Feb
63
69
2.6
21
19 -Feb
64
99
3.7
22
19 -Feb
55
63
2.3
23
20 -Feb
64
117
4.3
24
12 -Feb
66
270
10.0
25
13 -Feb
66
193
7.1
Totals
1604
3455.5
128.0
Average
64
138.2
5.1
4.0 RESULTS
The grouting program described herein was completed in general accordance
with the Engineer's design recommendations for this residence. Madrid Engineering
Group, Inc. monitored the activities of the Contractor. We believe the injected pressure
grout has generally stabilized the subsurface rock/soils and will result in very little, if
a
any, further movement of the house. This completes the recommended foundation
remediation for this structure.
4
Madrid Engineering Group, Inc.
MEG Project Number 5169.1
5.0 LIMITATIONS
Clayton Residence Grout Monitoring
March 2007
The activities summarized herein are based on the observations and recordings
made during the grouting activities. The actual grout quantities and pipe depths may be
slightly different from those reported by the Contractor. This monitoring and summary
report was completed in accordance with generally accepted standards of practice. No
warranty by Madrid Engineering Group, Inc. as to the effectiveness of the subsurface
grouting is intended, nor should any be inferred.
5
� i• ti F F r 19 ! '' � s P _� S? �'.. w ;:p >t
s \
iiiiI
s P
iiIiZ' Y' II
1
� t t
n
4
0 s Cj
.r
Y h
y G L
r a
K
w
., . .,. .. _ _.... ,.. : . _ � ., .� .. - ,.. �, x +., i . .. .... .... .. . _. t, ., k. ..x...•. �,., ., ,., � .z i . . .. _.-.. .., its. .,, x.t '..
Expedia.
U crq% Home Cove
ens Lands
145 Wildwood Dr,
rf` Sanford, FL, 32773-5572
'1�1 ---
E Floyd AveLake MairY
E Alma Ave g'
c5i
Ct
E Wilbur Ave
Naz�4
a a Anthony Dr -297 ��
Gto�P*af Ln _^
Groveview Way
W Lake Mary` Blvd
02006 MierosoRCorp 02005 NAVTEQ,and/orGDT,Ino.
T
r
Mappoint
_ ! Borada
LOW Cc
`� ay
31
f—
r
O�.
Meadow St
W Lake Mary 4v6
State Farm Florida Insurance
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 1
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, FL
Site Location Map
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-899741D
EB -0006509 Clayton Residence
The /:arch is our Husinca6 Sanford, Florida
DATE: February. 2007 Revised: Drawn By: BKM Checked By: LDM MEG Project No. 5169.1 nts
7
60 ft.
4.4 CY
6
64 ft. -0
4.9 CY
5
62 ft. •
10.1 CY
4
79 ft.
9.0 CY 3
0 SCALE 20'
8
ft. 9 11 12 15
2.5.5 CY 64 ft. 63 ft. 64 ft. 68 ft.
• 2.1 CY 3.6 CY 2.4 CY 1.4 CY
•
14
10 62 ft.
63 ft. 5.5 CY 16
2.6 CY
.. 0 63 ft.
63 ft. 2.3 CY
0.9 CY 17
•� 64 ft.
18 2.4 CY
idence 63 ft.
1.3 CY
19
64 ft.
2.7 CY
66 ft.
2 12.5 CY
66 ft.
7.9 CY
1
64 ft. •
19.6 CY
t24 55 ft.
66 ft. 2.3 CY
25 10.0 CY 23
66 ft. 64 ft.
7.1 CY 4.3 CY
21 -20
64 ft. 63 ft.
3.7 CY 2.6 CY
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
GEOENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
175 E Summerlin St, Bartow, FL
863 533-9007 Fax: 533-8997
Legend
Injection Point
1 Number
• 47 ft. Depth
11.8 CY Grout Qi
State Farm Florida Insurance
FIGURE 2
Grout Quantities
Clayton Residence
Sanford, Florida
'DATE: March 2007 1 Revised: I Drawn By: BKM/PCF I Checked By: LDM IMEG Project No. 5169.11 1" = 20' 1
y
. • � t' �` 'i l 3. i � L� h .�
� r� k �C t } •�,.. � x.r z s
p 4
tt r 6 J hl-
t - T
5
G L
r
;Y [J � 4 � � 1 i - kn • _
It L ,hy P ' K•f F � r�- f )` t
r
to � z• i ' � _ � rs. r.� � �� Y t.
r
t t
'i'.: � � - � "� �.. jet''• 4 � ' t t + a, f i '` f +
- r
R ! Y
`M N
1 .t
17 I---APPEND ..
.N � rR. t •J> ''.
,•. y h `� � : t. tx r y 1; �� J � 1 Y �, i s t y z try f,ry h � E
i f
t a
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 1 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64 DATE: 02/09/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU.YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
9 -Feb
64
59
10:05
10:10
200
450
55
1.0
55
1
hi h pressure
9 -Feb
59
54
10:15
10:30
200
400
318
6.0
373
1
1/32
9 -Feb
54
49
10:35
10:45
200
400
160
3.0
533
1
end of truck
12 -Feb
49
441
10:06
10:19
200
300
237
5.2
354
3
1/32
12 -Feb
44
39
10:23
10:30
200
300
106
2.3
460
3
1/32
end of truck
12 -Feb
39
34
10:55
10:59
200
300
75
1.4
75
4
1/32
12 -Feb
34
29
11:02
11:02
200
400
9
0.2
84
4
hi h pressure
12 -Feb
29
24
11:08
11:081
200
4501
5
0.1
89
41
hi h pressure
12 -Feb
24
191
11:12
11:12
200
400
5
0.1
94
4
high pressure
12 -Feb
19
14
11:17
11:17
200
300
11
0.2
105
4
1/32
12 -Feb
14
9
11:22
11:22
200
300
8
0.1
113
4
1/32
structure lift
TOTALS 1 9891 19.61
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 2 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 66 DATE: 02/12/07
Angled: X Vertical: ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
12 -Feb
66
61
11:37
11:42
200
400
44
0.8
157
4
high
pressure
12 -Feb
61
56
11:47
11:47
200
400
8
0.1
165
4
pipe tight
12 -Feb
56
51
11:51
11:56
200
250
101
1.9
266
4
1/32
12 -Feb
51
46
12:05
12:101
200
300
106
2.0
372
4
1/32
12 -Feb
46
41
12:15
12:19
200
300
63
1.2
435
4
1/32
12 -Feb
41
36
12:24
12:28
200
300
60
1.1
495
4
1/32
12 -Feb
36
31
12:33
12:33
200
250
10
0.2
505
4
1/32
12 -Feb
31
261
12:38
12:38
200
4501
5
0.1
510
41
1/32
high
pressure
12 -Feb
26
21
12:43
12:431
200
450
7
0.1
517
4
1/32
high
pressure
12 -Feb
21
16
12:48
12:481
200
450
10
0.2
527
4
1/32
high
pressure
12 -Feb
16
11
12:53
12:531
200
450
8
0.1
535
4
1/32
hi h
pressure
end of rruck
TOTALS I 4221 7.91
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford. Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 3 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 66
Angled:
Vertical:
■
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/09/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
TOTALS 1 6441 12.51
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 4 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 79
Angled: X Vertical: ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/12/07
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
13 -Feb
79
74
11:26
11:26
200
250
13
0.2
407
7
pipe tight
13 -Feb
74
69
11:35
11:35
200
500
4
0.1
411
7
high pressure
13 -Feb
69
64
11:49
11:54
200
300
131
2.4
525
7
end of truck
13 -Feb
64
59
0:00
0:00
200
600
0
0
0
hi h Pressure
13 -Feb
59
54
0:00
0:00
200
600
0
0
0
washed out
13 -Feb
54
49
12:58
1:10
200
300
216
4.3
216
8
1/32
13 -Feb
49
44
1:14
1:16
200
300
39
0.8
255
8
1/32
13 -Feb
44
39
1:20
1:211
200
3001
22
0.4
277
81
1/32
13 -Feb
39
34
1:27
1:28
200
300
16
0.3
293
8
1/32
13 -Feb
34
29
1:33
1:33
200
300
7
0.1
300
8
1/32
13 -Feb
29
24
1:40
1:40
200
400
3
0.1
303
8
1/32
hi h pressure
13 -Feb
24
19
1:45
1:45
200
400
3
0.1
306
8
1/32
high pressure
13 -Feb
19
14
1:50
1:501
200
4001
6
0.1
312
81
1/32
high pressure
13 -Feb
14
91
1:55
1:55
200
400
3
0.1
315
8
1/32
pipe lift
TOTALS 1 4631 9.01
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 5 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 62
Angled: Vertical:
X
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/13/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH (FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS (PSI)
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
13 -Feb
62
57
9:20
9:28
200
350
153
2.9
535
6
end of truck
13 -Feb
62
57
10:11
10:23
200
350
314
5.8
314
7
1/32
13 -Feb
57
52
10:27
10:29
200
350
34
0.6
348
7
1/32
13 -Feb
52
47
0:00
0:001
0
01
0
0
7
pipe grout
13 -Feb
47
42
10:37
10:38
200
350
20
0.4
368
7
1/32
13 -Feb
42
37
10:41
10:42
200
500
4
0.1
372
7
1/32
hi h pressure
13 -Feb
37
32
10:46
10:46
200
400
3
0.1
375
7
1/32
hi h pressure
13 -Feb
32
27
10:51
10:51
200
400
2
0.0
377
71
1/32
pipe lift
13 -Feb
27
221
10:55
10:551
200
3001
11
0.2
388
7
1/32
pipe lift
13 -Feb
22
17
10:59
10:59
200
300
2
0.0
390
7
1/32
pipe lift
13 -Feb
17
12
11:03
11:03
200
300
2
0.0
392
7
1/32
pipe lift
13 -Feb
12
7
11:07
11:07
200
300
2
0.0
394
7
1/32
pipe lift
TOTALS 1 5471 10.11
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
-- GROUT POINT NO.: 6 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64 DATE: 02/14/07
Angled: X Vertical: ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
14 -Feb
64
59
9:05
9:06
200
400
11
0.2
51
9
high
pressure
14 -Feb
59
54
9:11
9:14
200
250
66
1.2
117
9
1/32
slight lift
14 -Feb
54
49
9:19
9:21
200
250
56
1.0
173
9
1/32
sli ht lift
14 -Feb
49
44
9:26
9:29
200
250
58
1.0
231
9
1/32
slight lift
14 -Feb
44
39
9:34
9:35
200
250
25
0.4
256
9
1/32
slight lift
14 -Feb
39
34
9:39
9:40
200
400
32
0.6
288
9
1/32
slight lift
14 -Feb
34
29
9:44
9:44
200
400
5
0.1
293
9
hi h
pressure
14 -Feb
29
24
9:48
9:481
200
4001
3
0.1
286
91
high
pressure
14 -Feb
24
19
9:52
9:52
200
400
5
0.1
301
9
high
pressure
14 -Feb
19
14
9:56
9:56
200
400
7
0.1
308
9
pipe lift
14 -Feb
14
9
9:59
10:00
200
300
5
0.1
313
9
qround heave
TOTALS 1 2731 4.91
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 7 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 60 DATE: 02/13/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Wmmmym�m
mm�mmvm��
end of truck,
TOTALS I 2261 4.41
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 8 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64
Angled: X Vertical:
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/14/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH(FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS(PSI)
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
14 -Feb
64
59
10:19
10:22
200
200
58
1.0
371
9
1/32
slight lift
14 -Feb
59
54
10:28
10:29
200
400
26
0.5
397
9
high
pressure
14 -Feb
54
49
10:32
10:32
200
400
11
0.2
408
9
hi h
pressure
14 -Feb
49
441
10:37
10:371
200
400
5
0.1
413
9
high
pressure
14 -Feb
44
39
10:43
10:43
200
400
13
0.2
426
9
1/32
slight lift
14 -Feb
39
34
10:53
10:53
200
400
5
0.1
431
9
high
pressure
14 -Feb
34
29
11:00
11:00
200
400
5
0.1
436
9
hi h
pressure
14 -Feb
29
24
11:03
11:03
200
4001
3
0.1
439
91
high
pressure
14 -Feb
24
191
11:06
11:071
200
400
7
0.1
446
9
high
pressure
14 -Feb
19
14
11:10
11:10
200
400
2
0.0
448
9
hi h
pressure
14 -Feb
14
9
11:14
11:14
200
400
3
0.1
451
9
high
pressure
TOTALS 1 1381 2.51
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
-; CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
I_ GROUT POINT NO.: 9 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64 DATE: 02/14/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
TOTALS 1 1161 2.11
end of truck
���
1 11
1 11
���-��®
-• •
���
11
11
11
11
����_
• •-
TOTALS 1 1161 2.11
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 10 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 63 DATE: 02/14/07
Angled: X Vertical:
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH(FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
14 -Feb
63
58
1:50
1:50
0
0
0
0
10
pipe tight
14 -Feb
58
53
1:53
1:55
200
250
61
1.0
61
10
1/32
sli ht lift
14 -Feb
53
48
2:03
2:05
200
300
27
0.4
88
10
1/32
slight lift
14-Feb123
43
2:07
2:07
0
0
0
0
10
rout overflow
14 -Feb
38
2:14
2:16
200
300
34
0.6
122
10
1/32
slight lift
14 -Feb
33
2:22
2:22
200
400
5
0.1
127
10
high
pressure
14 -Feb
28
2:29
2:30
200
400
7
0.1
134
10
hi h
pressure
14 -Feb
23
2:34
2:34
200
500
5
0.1
139
10
high
pressure
14 -Feb
18
2:39
2:39
200
450
6
0.1
145
10
hi h
ressure
14 -Feb
13
2:45
2:45
200
400
9
0.1
154
10
hi h
ressure
14 -Feb
8
2:50
2:50
200
400
2
0.0
156
10
high
pressure
TOTALS 1 1561 2.61
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 11 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 63 DATE: 02/14/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS(PSI)
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT / COMMENTS
HEAVE
14 -Feb
63
58
3:20
3:21
200
400
18
0.3
181
10
hi h
pressure
14 -Feb
58
53
3:26
3:29
200
450
70
1.1
251
10
high
pressure
14 -Feb
53
48
3:35
3:35
200
450
5
0.1
256
10
hi h
pressure
14 -Feb
48
43
3:40
3:43
200
250
491
0.8
305
10
end of truck
15 -Feb
43
38
9:07
9:08
200
400
20
0.3
20
11
high
pressure
15 -Feb
38
33
9:31
9:33
200
200
30
0.5
50
11
1/32 hi h
pressure
15 -Feb
33
28
9:37
9:38
200
400
6
0.1
56
11
hi h
pressure
15 -Feb
28
23
9:43
9:431
200
4001
8
0.1
64
11
high
pressure
15 -Feb
23
18
9:49
9:49
200
400
5
0.1
69
11
high
pressure
15 -Feb
18
13
9:57
9:57
200
400
2
0.0
71
11
high
pressure
15 -Feb
13
8
10:03
10:03
200
400
2
0.0
73
11
hi h
pressure
TOTALS 1 2151 3.61
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 12 MAX DEPTH (ft.):
Angled: X Vertical:
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/15/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH (FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
15 -Feb
64
59
10:36
10:40
200
300
39
0.7
112
11
1/32
pipe tight
15 -Feb
59
54
10:46
10:47
200
300
22
0.4
134
11
1/32
sli ht lift
15 -Feb
54
49
10:51
10:52
200
300
26
0.4
160
11
1/32
sli ht lift
15 -Feb
49
441
10:57
10:57
200
300
9
0.2
169
11
1/32
slight lift
15 -Feb
44
39
11:04
11:04
200
300
9
0.2
178
11
1/32
slight lift
15 -Feb
39
34
11:10
11:10
200
400
8
0.1
186
11
1/32
hi h
Pressure
15 -Feb
34
29
11:15
11:15
200
400
6
0.1
193
11
1/32
hi h
pressure
15 -Feb
29
24
11:21
11:221
200
4001
18
0.3
211
11
high
pressure
15 -Feb
24
191
11:27
11:27
200
400
3
0.1
214
11
high
pressure
15 -Feb
19
14
11:33
11:33
200
350
2
0.0
216
ill
pipe lift
15 -Feb
14
9
11:37
11:37
200
350
2
0.0
218
11
pipe lift
�
Y
TOTALS 1 1441 2.41
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 13 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 63 DATE: 02/15/07
Angled: X Vertical: ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
TOTALS 1 431 0.91
Norm
end of trucki
TOTALS 1 431 0.91
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 14 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 62 DATE: 02/15/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH(FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS (PSI)
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
15 -Feb
62
57
11:46
11:50
200
200
80
1.3
298
11
end of truck
15 -Feb
57
52
11:55
11:55
200
600
0
0
0
washed out
15 -Feb
52
47
1:22
1:25
200
200
76
1.5
76
12
1/32
sli ht lift
15 -Feb
47
42
1:29
1:31
200
200
45
0.9
121
12
1/32
slight lift
15 -Feb
42
37
1:35
1:36
200
200
23
0.5
144
12
1/32
slight lift
15 -Feb
37
32
1:41
1:42
200
200
29
0.6
173
12
1/32
slight lift
15 -Feb
32
27
1:46
1:47
200
300
17
0.3
190
12
1/32
sli ht lift
15 -Feb
27
22
1:51
1:51
200
4001
5
0.1
195
121
high pressure
15 -Feb
22
17
1:55
1:551
200
400
4
0.1
199
12
high pressure
15 -Feb
17
12
1:59
1:59
200
400
5
0.1
204
12
high pressure
15 -Feb
12
7
2:03
2:03
200
400
3
0.1
207
12
hi h pressure
TOTALS 1 2871 5.51
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 15 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 68
Angled: X Vertical:
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/16/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH (FEET) I
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS (PSI)
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK LIFT /
NUMBER HEAVE
COMMENTS
16 -Feb
68
63
9:25
9:25
200
400
12
0.2
160
13
high pressure
16 -Feb
63
58
9:30
9:30
200
400
4
0.1
164
13
high pressure
16 -Feb
58
53
9:34
9:34
200
400
6
0.1
170
13
hi h pressure
16 -Feb
53
48
9:38
9:38
200
400
5
0.1
175
13
high pressure
16 -Feb
48
43
9:42
9:43
200
300
30
0.5
205
13
slight lift
16 -Feb
43
38
9:42
9:43
200
400
0
0
13
grout overflow
16 -Feb
38
33
9:49
9:49
200
400
7
0.1
212
13
high pressure
16 -Feb
33
28
9:52
9:521
200
4001
9
0.1
221
131
high pressure
16 -Feb
28
23
9:55
9:56
200
400
5
0.1
226
13
high pressure
16 -Feb
23
18
9:59
10:00
200
400
3
0.0
229
13
high pressure
16 -Feb
18
13
10:03
10:03
200
400
6
0.1
235
13
hi h pressure
16 -Feb
13
8
10:08
10:08
200
250
6
0.1
241
13
ground heave
r
TOTALS 1 931 1.41
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 16 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 63 DATE: 02/16/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU.YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
16 -Feb
63
58
8:30
8:31
200
400
20
0.3
20
13
high
pres sure
16 -Feb
58
53
8:35
8:35
200
400
6
0.1
26
13
pipe lift
16 -Feb
53
48
8:39
8:40
200
200
29
0.4
55
13
1/32
sli ht lift
16 -Feb
48
43
8:44
8:44
200
400
4
0.1
59
131
high
ressure
16 -Feb
43
38
8:48
8:50
200
200
32
0.5
91
13
1/32
slight lift
16 -Feb
38
33
8:54
8:54
200
200
8
0.1
99
13
1/32
slight lift
16 -Feb
33
28
8:59
9:00
200
200
36
0.6
135
13
1/32
sli ht lift
16 -Feb
28
23
9:05
9:051
200
4001
3
0.0
138
13
high
pressure
16 -Feb
23
18
9:09
9:09
200
400
3
0.0
141
131
high
pressure
16 -Feb
18
13
9:14
9:14
200
400
4
0.1
145
13
high
pressure
16 -Feb
13
8
9:18
9:18
200
200
3
0.0
148
13
qrout overflow
TOTALS 1 1481 2.3I
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 17 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64
Angled: X Vertical: _
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/19/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH (FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
19 -Feb
64
59
11:00
11:03
200
300
50
0.8
50
14
slight lift
19 -Feb
59
54
11:08
11:10
200
250
27
0.4
77
14
slight lift
19 -Feb
54
49
11:14
11:15
200
250
19
0.3
96
14
1/32
sli ht lift
19 -Feb
49
441
11:19
11:20
200
250
16
0.2
112
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
44
39
11:24
11:25
200
250
14
0.2
126
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
39
34
11:29
11:29
200
400
6
0.1
132
14
high
pressure
19 -Feb
34
29
11:33
11:33
200
400
4
0.1
136
14
hi h
pressure
19 -Feb
29
24
11:37
11:371
200
4001
6
0.1
142
141
high
pressure
19 -Feb
24
191
11:41
11:41
200
300
10
0.2
152
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
19
14
11:45
11:45
200
300
5
0.1
157
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
14
9
11:49
11:49
200
400
2
0.0
159
14
hiah
oressure
TOTALS 1 1591 2.41
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 18 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 63 DATE: 02/16/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH (FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD,
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK LIFT /
NUMBER HEAVE
COMMENTS
16 Feb
63
58
10:20
10:21
200
400
18
0.3
259
13
high pressure
16 Feb
58
53
10:28
10:28
200
400
7
0.1
266
13
hi h pressure
16 -Feb
53
48
10:35
10:35
200
300
13
0.2
279
13
sli ht lift
16 -Feb
48
43
10:41
10:42
200
300
9
0.1
288
13
slight lift
16 -Feb
43
38
10:46
10:47
200
300
11
0.2
299
13
slight lift
16 -Feb
38
33
10:54
10:54
200
250
5
0.1
304
13
slight lift
16 -Feb
33
28
11:00
11:00
200
250
7
0.1
311
13
sli ht lift
16-Feb28
23
11:05
11:06
200
250
11
0.2
322
13
slight lift
16 -Feb
23
18
11:21
11:21
200
350
3
0.0
325
13
end of truck
16 -Feb
18
13
11:28
11:28
200
200
0
0
13
pipe lift
16 -Feb
13
8
11:32
11:32
200
200
0
0
13
pipe lift
TOTALS 1 841 1.31
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 19 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64
Angled: X Vertical:
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/19/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH(FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK #
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
19 -Feb
64
59
0:00
0:00
200
600
0
0
15
washed out
19 -Feb
59
54
0:00
0:00
200
600
0
0
15
washed out
19 -Feb
54
49
2:00
2:01
200
200
46
0.9
46
15
1/32
sli ht lift
19 -Feb
49
44
2:06
2:071
200
200
28
0.5
74
15
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
44
39
2:12
2:13
200
200
18
0.3
92
15
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
39
34
2:17
2:18
200
200
15
0.3
107
15
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
34
29
2:22
2:22
200
400
6
0.1
113
15
high pressure
19 -Feb
29
24
2:27
2:27
200
4001
6
0.1
119
15
high pressure
19 -Feb
24
19
2:35
2:351
200
300
13
0.2
132
15
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
19
14
2:41
2:421
200
400
7
0.1
139
15
high pressure
19 -Feb
14
9
2:47
2:47
200
400
2
0.0
141
15
high pressure
TOTALS 1 1411 2.71
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 20 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 63
Angled: Vertical:
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/19/07
X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN:
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
19 -Feb
63
58
11:56
11:57
200.
400
18
0.3
177
14
high pressure
19 -Feb
58
53
12:02
12:04
200
200
41
0.6
218
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
53
48
12:08
12:09
200
200
16
0.2
234
14
1/32
sli ht lift
19 -Feb
48
431
12:13
12:14
200
200
17
0.3
251
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
43
38
12:17
12:18
200
200
18
0.3
269
14
1/32
sli ht lift
19 -Feb
38
33
12:22
12:23
200
200
20
0.3
289
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
33
28
12:27
12:28
200
200
17
0.3
306
14
1/32
sli ht lift
19 -Feb
28
23
12:33
12:341
200
2001
11
0.2
317
14
1/32
slight lift
19 -Feb
23
181
12:38
12:38
200
200
9
0.1
326
14
end of truck
19 -Feb
18
13
0:00
0:00
0
0
0
0
14
1/32
washed out
19 -Feb
13
8
0:00
0:00
0
0
0
0
14
1/32
washed out
TOTALS 1 1671 2.61
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 21 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64 DATE: 02/19/07
Angled: X Vertical: ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN:
Date
DEPTH FEET
FROM TO I
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU.YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
19 -Feb
64
59
0:00
0:00
200
600
0
0
16
high
pressure
19 -Feb
59
54
0:00
0:00
200
600
0
0
16
washed out
19 -Feb
54
49
0:00
0:00
200
600
0
0
16
hi h
pressure
20 -Feb
49
44
8:40
8:421
200
4001
45
1.0
45
16
high
pressure
20 -Feb
44
39
8:49
8:49
200
400
6
0.1
51
16
high
pressure
20 -Feb
39
34
8:55
8:57
200
250
34
0.8
85
16
1/32
slight lift
20 -Feb
34
29
9:05
9:06
200
250
27
0.6
112
16
1/32
sli ht lift
20 -Feb
29
24
9:12
9:13
200
250
26
0.6
138
16
1/32
slight lift
20 -Feb
24
19
9:20
9:201
200
2501
14
0.3
152
16
1/32
slight lift
20 -Feb
19
14
9:28
9:28
200
400
6
0.1
158
16
high
pressure
20 -Feb
14
9
9:35
9:35
200
400
4
0.1
162
16
high
pressure
TOTALS 1 1621 3.71
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 22 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 55 DATE: 02/19/07
Angled: Vertical: X ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
mmTp-
NONE
�80
TOTALS 1 1231 2.31
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 23 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 64 DATE: 02/20/07
Angled: X Vertical: ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH(FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
20 -Feb
64
59
10:13
10:15
200
200
41
0.9
203
16
1/32
slight lift
20 -Feb
59
54
10:28
10:29
200
200
24
0.5
227
16
1/32
pipe tight
20 -Feb
54
49
10:33
10:35
200
200
47
1.1
274
16
1/32
sli ht lift
20 -Feb
49
441
10:39
10:40
200
200
19
0.4
293
16
1/32
sli ht lift
20 -Feb
44
39
10:44
10:45
200
200
18
0.4
311
16
1/32
slight lift
20 -Feb
39
34
10:50
10:50
200
200
16
0.4
327
16
1/32
slight lift
20 -Feb
34
29
10:55
10:55
200
400
7
0.2
334
16
1/32
hi h pressure
20 -Feb
29
24
11:00
11:001
200
4001
5
0.1
339
161
high pressurel
20 -Feb
241
19
11:05
11:05
200
4001
3
0.1
342
16
high pressurel
20 -Feb
19
14
11:10
11:10
200
400
9
0.2
351
16
1/32
slight lift
20 -Feb
14
9
11:15
11:15
200
200
2
0.0
353
16
rout overflow
TOTALS 1 1911 4.31
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
GROUT POINT NO.: 24 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 66
Angled: Vertical: X
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
DATE: 02/12/07
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH(FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS PSI
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU.YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
12 -Feb
66
61
1:34
1:45
200
200
212
3.9
212
5
1/32
slight lift
12 -Feb
61
56
1:50
1:52
200
200
41
0.8
253
5
1/32
slight lift
12 -Feb
56
51
1:57
1:57
200
200
12
0.2
265
51
1/32
sli ht lift
12 -Feb
51
46
2:00
2:05
200
200
92
1.7
357
51
1/32
slight lift
12 -Feb
46
41
2:09
2:10
200
200
38
0.7
395
5
1/32
sli ht lift
12 -Feb
41
36
2:14
2:15
200
200
22
0.4
417
5
1/32
slight lift
12 -Feb
36
31
2:19
2:19
200
200
5
0.1
422
5
1/32
pipe lift
12 -Feb
31
26
2:22
2:231
200
2001
29
0.5
451
51/32
slight lift
12 -Feb
26
21
2:27
2:32
200
200
89
1.6
540
51
1/32
end of truck
12 -Feb
21
16
2:40
2:40
200
200
0
0
5
washed out
12 -Feb
16
11
2:45
2:45
200
200
0
0
5
washed out
TOTALS 1 5401 10.01
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
COMPACTION GROUT LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clavton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1
GROUT POINT NO.: 25 MAX DEPTH (ft.): 66 DATE: 02/13/07
Angled: X Vertical: ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Date
DEPTH (FEET)
FROM TO
TIME
START STOP
PRESS (PSI)
INITIAL MAX
GROUT QUANTITY
STROKES CU. YD.
STROKES/
TRUCK#
TRUCK
NUMBER
LIFT /
HEAVE
COMMENTS
13 -Feb
66
61
8:10
8:12
200
200
63
1.2
63
6
1/32
slight lift
13 -Feb
61
56
8:16
8:20
200
200
121
2.3
184
6
1/32
slight lift
13 -Feb
56
51
8:26
8:30
200
250
100
1.9
284
6
1/32
slight lift
13 -Feb
51
46
8:35
8:361
200
250
41
0.8
325
6
1/32
slight lift
13 -Feb
46
41
8:40
8:41
200
250
24
0.4
349
6
1/32
slight lift
13 -Feb
41
36
8:45
8:45
200
500
6
0.1
355
6
high pressure
13 -Feb
36
31
8:49
8:49
200
500
3
0.1
358
6
high pressure
13 -Feb
31
26
8:54
8:54
200
5001
4
0.1
362
61
high pressure
13 -Feb
26
21
8:57
8:581
200
3001
11
0.2
373
6
1/32
slight lift
13 -Feb
21
16
9:02
9:021
200
250
7
0.1
380
6
1/32
sli ht lift
13 -Feb
16
11
9:06
9:06
200
200
2
0.0
382
6
pipe lift
t
,
TOTALS 1 3821 7.11
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
GROUT TRUCK LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
1
2/9
10:00
10:55
4.0
10.0
1
0.01876
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
2
2/9
11:30
11,00
FE
10.0
0.01898
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
3
2/12
1 9:15
10:40
4.0
10.0
0.02174
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
Icy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
4
2/12
10:45
1:05
4.0
10.0
0.01869
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
(in)
SlumpIff!:
Load
(cy)
Returned
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
5
2/12
1:30
2:50
4.0
10.0
0.01852
Truck #
Date
I Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
6
2/13
8:00
9:40
4.0
10.0
1
0.01869
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
7 1
2/13
1 10:00
12:05
4.0
1 10.0
1
0.01845
MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1 DATE: 2/9/2007
Pins Used 1
Total
Strokes / Pin 527
527
Quantity / Pin 10.0
CY
10.0
Total
Strokes / Pin 533
10.0
542
Quantity / Pin
CY
460
Quantity / Pin
(CY
533
Quantity / Pin 10.0
CY
10.0
10.0
Pins Used 3
Total
Strokes / Pin 527
527
Quantity / Pin 10.0
CY
10.0
Pins Used
3 1
Total
Strokes / Pin
113 422
Total
Strokes / Pin
117 343
10.0
542
Quantity / Pin
CY
460
Quantity / Pin
(CY
2.5 7.5
10.0
10.0
Pins Used
1 3
Total
Strokes / Pin
113 422
535
Quantity / Pin
CY
2.1 7.9
10.0
Pins Used
24
Total
Strokes / Pin
540
540
Quantity / Pin
(CY
10.0
10.0
Pins Used 25
5
Total
Total
Strokes / Pin 382
153
542
Quantity / Pin
CY
535
Quantity / Pin 7.1
CY
2.9
10.0
10.0
Pins Used
5 4
Total
Strokes / Pin
394 148
542
Quantity / Pin
CY
7.3 2.7
10.0
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
GROUT TRUCK LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1 DATE: 2/13/2007
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
8
2/13
12:55
3:10
4.0
10.0
1
0.01996
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
9
1 2/14
8:30
12:10
1 4.0
10.0
1
0.01786
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
10
2/14
1:30
3:50
4.0
5.0
0.01639
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
11
2/15
8:45
12:05
4.0
5.0
0.01678
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
12
2/15
1:15
2:40
4.0
5.0
0.02000
Truck #
Date
I Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
13
2/16
8:30
11:40
4.0
5.0
0.01538
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
14
2/19
10:50
12:40
4.0
5.0
0.01534
Pins Used
4
7
8
9
Total
Strokes / Pin
315
186
138
109
501
Quantity / Pin
(CY)
6.3
3.7
2.5
1.9
10.0
Pins Used
7
6
8
9
Total
Strokes / Pin
40
273
138
109
560
Quantity / Pin
(CY)
0.7
4.9
2.5
1.9
10.0
Pins Used
10.00
9
11
Total
Strokes / Pin
156.00
7
142
305
Quantity / Pin
(CY)
2.6
0.1
2.3
5.0
Pins Used
11.00
12
14
Total
Strokes / Pin
73.00
145
80
298
Quantity / Pin
(CY)
1.2
2.4
1.3
5.0
Pins Used
14.00
13
18
Total
Strokes / Pin
207.00
43
84
250
Quantity / Pin
(CY)
4.1
0.9
1.3
5.0
Pins Used
16.00
15
18
Total
Strokes / Pin
148.00
93
84
325
Quantity / Pin
(CY)
2.3
1.4
1.3
5.0
Pins Used
17.00
20
Total
Strokes / Pin
159.00
167
326
Quantity / Pin
(CY)
2.4
2.6
5.0
MADRID ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
P.O. Box 2506
Bartow, FL 33831
863/533-9007 FAX 863/533-8997
GROUT TRUCK LOG
PROJECT NAME: Clayton Residence
CITY, STATE: Sanford, Florida MEG PROJECT NO.: 5169.1 DATE: 2/19/2007
ENGINEERS TECHNICIAN: S.S.
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
DepartureSlump
Time
(in)
Load
I (cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
15
2/19
1:55
4:45
4.0
5.0
2.0
0.01894
Truck #
Date
Arrival
Time
Departure
Time
Slump
(in)
Load
(cy)
Returned
(cy)
Pump Capac.
(CY/Stroke)
16
2/20
8:30
11"30
4.0
10.0
2.0
0.02266
Pins Used
19
22
Total
Strokes / Pin
141
123
264
Quantity / Pin
(CY
2.7
2.3
5.0
Pins Used
21
23
Total
Strokes / Pin
162
191
353
Quantity / Pin
CY
3.7
4.3
8.0