The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02102004 BSC Agenda Item 3.1111■11=111. 1 FPA-SC-10-0 Quality Control Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Other Low-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 • For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 1 of 11 r— — 01 /PO !TY CONTROL CHECKLISTS FOR FOUNDATION NSPFCTION OF RESIDENTIAL AND OTHER LOW-RISE BUILDINGS by The Structural Committee The Foundation Performance Association wwwjoul:i0tic,..; :oe,119.r.Tippcp.org Houston, Texas Document # FPA-SC-10-0 iSSUIE HISTORY Rev# 7Date Description Subcommittee Subcommittee Chair Members A 02 Oct 01 For Subcommittee Comments Jack Spivey Ron Kelm B 19 Sep 02 For Subcommittee Comments Jon Monteith C 14 Oct 02 For Subcommittee Comments Michael Skoller 26 Nov 02 For Subcommittee Comments Terry Taylor E 110 Dec 02 For Subcommittee Comments Mari Mes F 24 Jan 03 For Subcommittee Comments Mike Palmer G 06 Mar 03 For Subcommittee Comments Lowell Brumley H 28 Apr 03 Issued for Committee Comments George Wozny 1 10 Jul 03 For FPA Peer Review Dan Jaggers Toshi Nobe 0 09 Oct 03 I FPA Web Site Publishing FPA-SG i 0-0 •• • Quality Control Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Other Low-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 2 of 11 PREFACE The following documents are the results of two years of work completed in the late nineteen nineties by the Inspections Subcommittee of the Foundation Performance Committee. Jack Spivey chaired this committee and his fellow members were: MR. MICHAEL SKOLLER P.E. MR. JOE EDWARDS MR. LOWELL BRUML EY P.E. MR. DEAN EICHELI3ERGER Meetings took place on a monthly basis and were attended by many interested parties. Special recognition should be given to Mr. Jim Dutton of Du-West Foundation Repair and Mr. Dan Jaggers.of Olshan Foundation Repair. Their assistance with the foundation repair sections was invaluable. The topics for discussion have followed a general outline, which was established at the onset of the meetings. It was determined that our basic intent would be to establish a set of standards and procedures for the inspection of foundation construction and foundation repairs. These standards were to be incorporated into an inspection document, which would be thorough in its scope, but also easy to use. It was established early on in our discussions that the best form for our purposes would be a simple checklist, which would fully cover the subject of the inspection. It was also determined that keeping the checklist to one page would afford the most user-friendly instrument for our purposes. Once these parameters were established the subjects of the inspections were taken in the following order: FOUNDATION MAKE-UP -- POST TENSION STRESSING POST TENSION FOUNDATION MAKE-UP -- CONVENTIONAL/REPAR CONCRETE PLACEMENT CONSTRUCTION PIERS REPAIR PIERS SEGMENTED REPAIR PILES These topics were judged to represent the major types of foundation construction and foundation repairs found in the Houston area They are certainly not inclusive of every inspection situation or construction method in use but they do offer a basic set of standards for the majority of inspections that would be encountered in typical residential construction. They are also designed to be used by anyone who has some knowledge of foundation construction. It was our intention that they would serve field inspectors, builders, builders' superintendents,municipal inspectors, or anyone with an interest in quality foundations. The first order of business worked on by the subcommittee was to establish a heading format for each inspection. This portion of the form is meant to establish a context for the inspection. The basics of'the site such as, the builder, subdivision, address, lot and block, are all set out at the top of the form. The next section is meant to establish the parameters that will govern the rest of the inspection. The most important of'these, deals with the plans. No inspection should be undertaken without a set of plans, which should include the name of the engineer, the date of the plans and the detail sheet. Other pertinent details of the site that are covered in this section are the date, the time, the weather, and whether there is a detached garage. FPA_SC-1 Web Quality Control Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Other Low-Rise Buildings 9 For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Siructural Committee October of i 11 i Page 3 of The above guidelines were followed on each form, with the following variations dictated by the context of the inspection: * For the Concrete Placement Form there is specific reference to the Foundation Make-Up Form,and the items in need of repair. • In the Stress Form, there is an added reference to the cable count, the concrete placement date, and the post tension construction company. « On the Construction Piers Fours, there is a reference to the Geotechnical Engineer, and on the Repair Piers and Segmented Repair Piles Forms, there is reference to the design documentation and the municipal pe,niit. Once the context is established in the heading, the form moves on to sections relating to different aspects each inspection. In general, these sections are documented by simply checking the item to show that it has f been correctly completed. The checkmark(✓}serves to show that the item has been considered and complies with the plans, whereas an x (x)denotes that the item does not comply with the plans. In some sections, direct questions are asked that should be answered. Finally, the lower sections of the forms generally have reference to a drawing of the slab, the piers or piles, or the foundation being repaired. The drawings further document the conditions specific to the site and the foundation and allow the ins ector to orient the data being described in the conclusion of the inspection. p Each of these forms represents an attempt to document the events related to a specific foundation project a specific foundation repair. It should be remembered that all the answers and data reported are typically the only documentation of what actually happened during this phase of construction. For this reason, every item is pertinent and should be given careful consideration during the inspection. Though many of the items listed are fairly common knowledge to the typical inspector or builder, it is the sequencing and nuances of certain questions and items listed, which are the greatest advantage of using the forms. The committee felt that all major items such as beam size, tendon counts,plan dates, etc., were adequately covered in each form. It should be noted that the Repair Piers and Segmented Repair Piles Forms contain information that is not found in any established sources or specifications. This is particularly true of the Segmented Repair Piles Form. It was generally agreed that these items are rarely inspected by an independent inspector. This document is made freely available to the public through the Foundation Performance Association at www.foundaziorverformance.org so engineers, architects, inspectors, contractors, and other professionals involved in the quality control of foundations systems for residential and Iow-rise buildings may have 11:: access to the information. To ensure the document remains as current as possible, it will be periodically updated under the same document number but with new revision numbers. Please direct suggestions for improvement to the current chair of the structural committee. g The Foundation Performance Association and its members make no warranty regarding the accuracy of the information contained herein and will not be liable for any damages, including consequential damages, resulting from the use of this document. 1 FPA-SC-10-0 Quality ce Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and°the-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 4 of 11 QC Check lists 1 POST-TENSKDN SYSTEM FOUN DATION AllAKE-UP 2. CONCRETE PLACEMENT 3, PO,ST-TENSION SYSTEM STRESSING 4. CONVENTIONAL (REBAR) FOUNDATION MAKE-UP 5. CONSTRUCTION (BUILDERS) PIERS REPAIR PIERS T SEGMENTED REPAIR PILES i FPA-SC-10-t) Quality Con-rmi Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Othe ow-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 5 of 11 CLIENT QUALITY CONTROL COMPANY Li C Checklist #1 - POST-TFNSION SYSTEM OU A ION MAKE-UP 1 Builder _ _ Subdivision.--- Date Time Site Address Lot_ Blk Sec_ Plan site specific Yes❑ No❑ Plan#: Cable Count Design Engineer Superintendent Plan provided at site Yes f_,i No LI Weather__ Plan Date Detail Sheet Date Concrete Contractor Detached Garage Yes a No❑ Permit#: Check(✓)If Items Comply With The Plans (X)if Items Do Not Comply With The Plans SITE FORMS ADDITIONAL REVIEWS Subdivision Lot Other ❑Forms secure Date Time Lot Description ❑Floats installed Fill on site Yes❑No❑ ❑Proper clearance at floats Compaction verified by Geotechnical Engineer: ❑Garage front closed Yes❑No 0 Date Will foundation make up drain: Yes 0 No❑ Trees removed Are trees within 20' of foundation Yes No SLAB TENDONS Thickness_ (in) Count: L to R F to B Garage__________ Measured: Screeds,_______ Stringline Other Total Variance Explain _ Describe Pad Material Number of tendons left on site Rebar -- —Level and Firm Yes❑No❑ 1/2"tendons Other No tendons spaced over 6'-0" BEAMS 20D nails used at castings Design Depth: (in Exterior Interior_ Live ends stripped of lactic not over 1"or taped Actual Depth: (in (in) (in) (in) Cathead clamps all tight Design Width: in All intersections tied Actual Width: (in _(in) _(in)__ _ in) All tendons supported at intersections Average depth into undisturbed soil) (in) Dead ends have 3/4"clearance to forms Clean of soil&debris^_ _ g p (in) All S Hooks crimped Water in beams Yes❑[_J No Average Depth E Beam tendons draped and secured by#3 stakes or rebar concrete bricks Will.water drain.Yes No Ample chairs all tied ❑Plumbing obstructions accommodated Tendon grid secured for concrete placement Yes❑No❑ ❑Pier tops clean POLYETHYLENE SHEETING ❑6-mil.Lapped and Taped ❑Seated in bottom of beams secured at sides 0 Mastic/tape applied at plumbing REINFORCING STEEL SLAB SECTION WWF: Mesh)Si.ze__ Roll Sheet OR #3 @— _—_(in.)on center both ways All WWF(mesh)seams lapped 6" LI#3 Lapped per plans (i All edges 2"from forms No rebar or WWF(mesh)touching forms BEAM SECTION Rebar:grade__ _ Clearances per plan: Sides❑ Bottom❑ Top❑ Splices lapped per plan Corner rebar installed at corners&dead ends Typical Rebar/Exterior Beams __ continuous Typical Rebar/Interior Beams _continuous Corner bars installed at dead ends Yes No L Bay Windows or Porches Re ar Stirrups Extra Rebar Added Diagonal.Rebar at Re-entrant Corners ❑No. of Corners______. Nose Bars @ Construction Joints Anchor bolts on site Yes No Diameter (in)Length_ (in) Other Fasteners IS FOUNDATION READY FOR CONCRETE? Yes n No Ll Sketch CHANGES NEEDED: Quality Controller's Signature Superintendent's Signature li I FPA-SC-10-0 IoI ()the, •t�uality C Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and()the r w-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 - For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 6 of 11 CLIENT QUALITY CONTROL COMPANY Q h lry ct i - C Oi R 'F in PLACEMENT 1 Builder_-- Subdivision--___-- Date Time Site Address Lot Bik Sec Plan#: Cable Count Design Engineer Superintendent Q.C.Arrival Time Departure Time Copy of Foundation Makeup Report Provided Yes❑ No[J Date of Copy . _ Items Repaired Yes❑ No❑ Concrete Contractor------ –_,Detached Garage Yes❑ No❑ Permit#:_ Check(✓j If Items Comply With The Plans (X)If Items Do Not Comply With The Plans SITE FORMS ADDITIONAL REVIEWS Subdivision Lot ___Other ❑Forms secure Date Time _ lot Description----_--- ❑Floats installed Are there obstructions at the site which would ❑Proper clearance at floats prevent access for concrete trucks Yes❑No❑ ❑Garage closed in Explain WEATHER ----------Weather conditions START: FINISH:_____ Will temperature rise above 40°F for five hours Forty-eight hour forecast: HIGH TEMPERATURE: LOW TEMPERATURE: CONCRETE Concrete --- -- Concrete Company Batch Plant Tickets on site?Yes❑No❑ Delivered by truck over what distance Was a pump used Yes❑No❑ Pump Co. Mix : psi _ psi "pump mix"–Pump Prime Placed outside of form Yes❑No❑ Sack Mix: 4 _—5 6 OR Strength Mix Yes❑No❑ Strength_ Additives: NO CALCIUM CHLORIDE–APPLIES TO POST TENSION SLAB Fly Ash:Type C?Yes❑No❑ % Slump as ordered from plant (in) Explain(Discrepancies if slump is different): Was concrete consolidated by vibrator Yes❑No❑ Other❑ Test Cylinders Taken Yes❑No❑ Testing Company _— — Slump Test Taken Yes❑No❑ Testing Company if water is added at the jobsite,show the amounts over ten gallons and give a visual estimate of the final slump Time Draw a diagram of the slab below showing the Poured Gallons Placement Est. Tested locations of each load by truck number Truck# Out Added Location Slump Slump Temp. --- - -- -- --- ----- Anchor bolts on site Yes❑ No❑ Diameter (in)Length (in) Other Fasteners --------_-- SKETCH Describe provisions for curing ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Quality Controller's Signature Superintendent's Signature EPA-SC-1 0-C Quality Caned Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Othe•uw-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 7 of 11 CLIENT QUALITY CONTROL COMPANY I QC Checklist #3 — PORT-IFNSION STRFSS1NG Builder Subdivision Date Time Site Address Lot Bik Sec Plan site specific Yes No Ll Plan#: Cable Count Design Engineer Superintendent Plan provided at site Yes Li No 0 Weather Plan Date Detail Sheet Date Concrete Placement Date Stress Date Partial Stress Date Post Tension Company Permit#: Check(v)If Items Comply With The Plans (X)If Items Do Not Comply With The Plans D Are there any cracks in the surface of the slab Yes E No Describe ADDITIONAL REVIEWS Date Time Estimate size and locate on the sketch below Are elongations specified on the plans Yes fi No fi fl Are the tendons painted at the edge of the slab Yes 0 No 0 D What is the predetermined distance between the mark and the edge of the slab__Ain) Are the wedges placed in a vertical position Yes Ei No 0 Is there evidence of gripper marks on the gripper end of all tendons Yes No 0 ( If no show location on sketch below) D Arc tendons stressed from two ends Yes 0 No fi If So, How Many 1/2" Diameter Tendon Elongation Measurements (Min/Max Range Recommended by PTI) 11 ------- ------ •- ------ ---- ]:: --X--- ------- -- Maximum --- ---- 10 - ,------ ,.. 1 ,... WM Theoretical 1_1_1 9 1 l WM 4 .1. 111111111111:3111119 Minimum C --------- ■ wasallimuo B --------- PrOMOS1 CA 7 FP" pgragadased 57.1 - --- ----- 4 ------------ ..2111111111111111111111=1111111111 .704r t e:E 4: -- ir 1111 L 1:- • --- ------ 1 I r I 3------C I I ---I--- ::f:: ::1:: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Tendon Length (ft) Out-to-Out of Concrete USE CHART IF ELONGATIONS ARE NOT LISTED ON PLAN,OR MULTIPLY TENDON LENGIf I IN FEET BY 0.08 TO CALCULATE APPROXIMATE ELONGATION IN INCHES FOR LENGTH OVER 30 FEET. SKETCH Draw a simple sketch of the foundation configuration noting all tendon locations and their elongation nwasurements.Also note any problems which you have observed,particularly blowoms at corners or the garage entry and cracks. FOLLOWING STRESS VERIFICATION r]Are the tendon ends cut inside the pocket former D After stressing are the nails cut Are the tendon ends grouted with a non-shrink grout Quality Controller's Signature Superintendent's Signature j I FPA-SC-10-0 Quality Con rot Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Othe w-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 • _ For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 8 of 11 CLIENT UALITY CONTROL COMPANY Builder Subdivision Date Time Site Address _Lot_ Blk Sec Plan site specific Yes❑ No[] Plan#: Design Engineer Superintendent Plan provided at site Yes n No Ci Weather Plan Date Detail Sheet Date Concrete Placement Date_-- -------__— Detached Garage Yes❑ No❑ -- Permit ii — — Check(✓)If Items Comply With The Plans (X)If items I)o Not Comply With The Plans SITE FORMS ADDITIONAL REVIEWS Subdivision Lot Other Forms secure Date Time Lot Description . -- Floats installed Fill on site Yes Ej No❑ Proper clearance at floats Compaction verified by Geotechnical Engineer: ,_,Garage front closed Yes❑No❑ Date—_Will make up drain: Yes❑No(_] Trees removed Are trees within 20' of foundation YesNo ra SLAB BEAMS Thickness— (m> Design Depth: _ in Exterior Interior Measured: Screeds Stringhne : Other__ Actual Depth:__ in) (in) (in) (in) Describe Pad Material Design Width: in) - 1_ Level and Firm Yes❑No❑ — -- Actual Width: in (in) • -_(in) in Average depth into undisturbed soil (in� Clean of loose soil &debris —Water in beams Yes— No Average Depth _(in) Will water drain Yes — No L r —Plumbing obstructions accommodated — Pier tops clean Yes❑ No❑ 1 POLYETHYLENE SHEETING ❑6-mil.Lapped and taped ❑Seated in the bottom of beams secured at sides ❑Mastic/tape applied at plumbing CONSTRUCTION PIERS Number of piers Are pier tops clean of debris Yes❑ No❑ REINFORCING STEEL Grade of Steel BEAM SECTIONS Exterior Beams: Steel size Number top Bottom Stirrup size Spacing (in) Interior Beams: Steel size_ __Number top Bottom Stirrup size Spacing_._ (in) Extra Beam depth Yes❑ NO—M Additional steel required Proper Clearance: Bottom (in)Sides _ (in)Top (in)Support System_ Continuity: Splices lapped per plan Yes❑ NoU Corner bars installed Yes❑ No❑ Rebar clean of mud and excessive rust Yes No Void Boxes in bottom of beam Yes❑ No 0 ❑ Heigh (in) Condition_ SLAB REINFORCING Mesh: Size Roll Sheet OR D#3 @ tn.)on center both ways All mesh seams lapped 6" PP #3 Lapped per plans Lj All edges 2"from the forms No rebar or mesh touching forms Void Boxes Yes❑ No❑ Height_.__(in)Poly covering void boxes Yes❑ No❑ ADDITIONAL REINFORCING Diagonals: Size_ Number in slab _ Fireplace pads: Size of steel_ _ Placement Bay windows: Size of steel. _ Placement_ Other projections: Control joints Construction joints: Anchor bolts on site Yes _No 0 Diameter _(in)Length (in) Other Fasteners Is THE FOUNDATION READY FOR CONCRETE PLACEMENT?Yes❑ No❑ SKETCH „:,ttnaieiis NEEDED. Quality Controller's Signature Superintendent's Signature EPA-SC-10-0 Quality Con rol Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and()the ;r-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 _ For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 9 of 11 CLIENT___ UALI CONTROL COMPANY f leC ® 1e® -' CONSTRUCTION (BUILDER'S) PIERS Builder Subdivision Date Time Site Address _ Lot BIk Sec Plan site specific Yes❑ No P11 Plan#:_____ Design Engineer Superintendent_ _Geotechnical Engineer Plan provided at site Yes❑ No❑ Plan Date Detail Sheet Date_ Weather at site Concrete Contractor Geotechnical Report## eTinS FORM NOT APPLICARI,E FOR SLURRY PI.A!FD PIERS) Check(✓)If Items Comply With The Plans (X)If items Do Not Comply With The Plans SITE ADDITIONAL REVIEWS Subdivision Lot Other __— Explain Date Time Fill on site Yes❑-No 0 Compaction verified by Geotechnical Engineer Yes❑No❑ Date Trees removed Yes Li No[ Location: --- _ Are trees within 20' of founcation Yes 0 No Li PIERS Name of drilling company: Can drill equipment access all pier locations Yes❑No E Type of drilling apparatus:Truck Mounted Bobcat: Other: Total number of piers: PIER SIZES Bell Pier No, Rebar Stirrups Shaft D"aa Depth Rebar iac Piicrs Spacing - Total (in) (in) (ft) — —(in) _ ___ fin) _ (in) —(ft) _ to (in) (in) (ft) (in) --- - -- - —(in) __—_(in) (ft) - (in) - Sketch Typical Pier Showing Depth Describe the manner of measuring the bell sizes: (Bell checking tool required) Boring logs from Geotechnical report on site Yes❑No❑ Describe bearing strata: Pocket Penetrometer reading taken from au er cutting Yes[]No LI TSF Note locations below—_- Was water apparent in pier hole Yes❑No ] Depth - Action Taken REINFORCING Rebar placed per plan Yes❑No❑ R.ebar grade Does rebar extend above pier top Yes❑No❑ How much above (in)Sleeved Yes❑No❑ Describe CONCRETE Will concrete truck be able to access site Yes❑No Concrete company: Truck numbers: Was pump truck used Yes❑No [] Specified strength of concrete: psi Was concrete paced on the same day as the pier drilling Yes❑No❑ Estimated time of completion If not,explain: Draw a sketch of the structure indicating the pier placement SKETCH Al E THE PIER HOLES READY FOR CONCRETE PLACEMENT Yes U No❑ CHANGES NEEDED: Quality Controller's Signature Superintendent's Signature • FPA-SC-10-0 Quality Control Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Other ow-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 10 of 11 CLIENT QUALITY CONTROL COMPANY . QC: Checklist #6 — REPAIR PIERS L Owner Subdivision Date Time Site Address Lot Blk Sec Plan site specific . Yes 0 No 0 Plan#: Design Engineer Superintendent Geotechnical Engineer Plan provided at site Yes[I] No[71 Plan Date_ __Detail Sheet Date Weather at site Permit# Geotechnical Report# Check(v)If Items Comply With The Plans (X)If Items Do Not Comply With The Plans SITE ADD/TIONAL REVIEWS Subdivision Lot Other Explain Date Time Soils Report on site Yes 0 No 0 Bearing Soils at what depth ! Test hole drilled to what depth (ft) Bearing soils at Underground plumbing test Yes-Q-No CT Water lines under slab Yes 0 No Site obstructions to drillin ,Describe: Trees removed Yes 0 No III Location UNDERPINNING Name of repair contractor: . Method of repair: Total number of piers: Interior • Exterior PIER SIZES Bell Pier No. Rebar Stirrups diwitLha, UsghEshaL Size Piers . . iSpALag ..._...1Q3L7 t . (in) _(in) (ft) (in) (in) (in) (ft) in _(in) .(in) (ft) (in) . • (in) (ft) (in) _ (in) (in) (ft) (in) Sketch Typical Pier Showing Depth Describe the manner of measuring the bell sizes: (Bell checking tool required) Describe bearing strata: Pocket Penetrometer reading Yes l j No Li TSF Note locations below Was water apparent in pier:Nile Yes E]No Li Depth " Action Taken REINFORCING Rebar per plans Yes Li No[1] Rebar grade HELICAL PIERS Test hole depth (ft) Bearing Data Pier Log Onsite Yes[1]No Ej-Helix Size Bracket Style Shaft Diameter CONCRETE Will concrete truck be able to access site Yes D No Ej Was pump truck used Yes D No El Concrete company: Truck numbers: Batch Time Onsite Time Specified strength of concrete: psi Slump as delivered Water added Yes[1]No 0 Amount Was concrete placed on the same day as the pier was belled Yes 0 No D Projected time of completion of concrete placement if not,explain: ESTIMATED MAXIMUM LIFT INCHES: TO BE GROUTED Yes 0 No 0 Draw a sketch of the structure indicating the pier placement SKETCH ARE THE PIER HOLES READY FOR CONCRETE PLACEMENT Yes Li No Li CHANGES NEEDED: Quality Controller's Signature Superintendent's Signature I , 1 FPA-SC-10-0 Quality Con rol Checklists for Foundation Inspection of Residential and Qthei w-Rise Buildings 9 October 2003 . For FPA Web Site Publishing Foundation Performance Association-Structural Committee Page 11 of 11 CLIENT QUALITY CONTROL CO PANY Checklist — SEGMENTED REPAIR PILES I Builder Subdivision Date Time Site Address _—__— - Lot _Blk_ Sec Plan site specific Yes❑ No❑ Plan#: Design Engineer Superintendent Geotechnical Engineer Plan provided at site Yes❑ No❑ Plan Date Detail Sheet Date Weather at site Permit# Geotechnical Report# Check(■)If Items Comply With The Plans (X)if Items Do Not Comply With The Plans SITE ADDITIONAL REVIEWS Subdivision Lot Other Explain Date Time Geotechnical Report on site Yes El No L Bearing Soils at what depth (ft} — — — Test hole drilled to what depth (ft) Bearing soils at (❑ft) Underground plumbing test Yes-UNTO Water lines under slab Yes[J No Site obstructions to drill m , Describe: Trees removed Yes❑No p* ' Location — — Were builder's piers present Yes❑No 0-- -- — — — UNDERPINNING Name of repair contractor: --- Piling system: _ Totaf'number of piles: _ Interior Exterior FIELD OBSERVATIONS (A) (B) (C) (U) (E) Distance From Observed Top of Slab Total Depth Measurement Pile Size Segment Number of Pile Cap Pile Cap To Top of From Top of Lift R n" rc engtl► Se��nentti Size Ouantity_ril C'� n of Slab at tt f,sal (d) (in) (d) — (in) (in) — - - (: } -- -(d) ---(in) (in) (ft) (in) (ft) (in) (d) —(in) (in) _ — — -- — (ft) (in) (d) (in) (in) — -- _ (ft) (in) (A x B)+(Cx0)+E=TOTAL DEPTH Total number of pilings observed driven to completion (Minimum five is recommended) Was pile log available at the site Yes❑No❑ Explain Were the piles shimmed immediately upon completion of being driven Yes❑ No❑ If no,explain Is the piling cap horizontal Yes❑ No❑If no,explain Were the piles driven without interruption Yes❑ No❑ if no,explain Were builders piers detached prior to jacking Yes❑ No❑ Were final shims determined to be tight Yes❑ No❑ What is the method of interlock Were interior piles installed Yes❑ No❑If so,were tunnels used Describe_ Was dewatering system used and maintained in excavating and tunnels Yes❑ No❑ Describe materials used in backfilling tunnels Describe method of protecting tunnel entrance from water intrusion Was jetting required to install piles Yes❑ No❑Explain -- — — — ESTIMATED MAXIMUM LIFT INCHES: TO BE MUD PUMPED Yes❑No❑ Draw a.sketch of the structure indicating the pile placement CHANGES NEEDED: Quality Controller's Signature Superintendent's Signature