Stadium Project - DP-70 Atlanta, GA, 9/30/2014

Similar documents
River Bridge - Test Shaft-1 Clarke County, MS, 4/2/2012

Homework 2 PROBLEM No. 1

An Assessment of Quality in Underwater Archaeological Surveys Using Tape Measurements

Specifications for Synchronized Sensor Pipe Condition Assessment (AS PROVIDED BY REDZONE ROBOTICS)

PART 3 MODULE 6 GEOMETRY: UNITS OF GEOMETRIC MEASURE

Method of Test for Flat & Elongated Particles

Mark Scheme (Results) Summer 2009

2 Available: 1390/08/02 Date of returning: 1390/08/17 1. A suction cup is used to support a plate of weight as shown in below Figure. For the conditio

Analysis of 24-Hour Pump Test in Well NC-EWDP-3S, Near Yucca Mountain, Nevada

Wind Flow Validation Summary

A Low Cost Digital Angle Gage, version 3

Calibration of wind direction sensors at Deutsche WindGuard Wind Tunnel Services GmbH

Gerald D. Anderson. Education Technical Specialist

Overview. 2 Module 13: Advanced Data Processing

Permeability. Darcy's Law

Physics 1021 Experiment 4. Buoyancy

Paper 2.2. Operation of Ultrasonic Flow Meters at Conditions Different Than Their Calibration

CORESTA RECOMMENDED METHOD N 6

An assessment of quality in underwater archaeological surveys using tape measurements

This document will provide detailed specifications, a bill of materials (BOM), and assembly instructions for the Official Competition Field.

Rig Math. Page 1.

Revision 7/2/02 MEASURING WRAVMA DRAWING DESIGNS WITH SCORING TEMPLATES

485 Annubar Primary Flow Element Installation Effects

ITTC Recommended Procedures and Guidelines

MEMORANDUM. Investigation of Variability of Bourdon Gauge Sets in the Chemical Engineering Transport Laboratory

Calibration Procedure

DQM Annual Hopper QA Checks

ATION TITLE. Survey QC, Decision Making, and a Modest Proposal for Error Models. Marc Willerth, MagVAR

Module 8 Coils and Threads

How to Measure R7.1. Reference. I. Linear dimensions

Technical Report. 5th Round Robin Test for Multi-Capillary Ventilation Calibration Standards (2016/2017)

MOTUS Wave Buoys. Powered By the Aanderaa MOTUS Directional Wave Sensor

HTHP Viscometer. Features DRILLING FLUIDS EQUIPMENT

Practice Test. 2 What is the area of this figure?

Data Collection and Processing: Elwha Estuary Survey, February 2013

Revisions to the Regulations for Agility Trials

CONE PENETRATION TESTS

OUTER RACE SHIM SPACERS METRIC OUTER RACE SHIM SPACERS. All Dimensions in Millimeters. Material:300 Series Stainless Steel

A REVIEW OF THE 2000 REVISIONS TO ANSI 2530/API MPMS 14.3/AGA REPORT NO. 3 - PART2 Paul J. LaNasa CPL & Associates

TWO PHASE FLOW METER UTILIZING A SLOTTED PLATE. Acadiana Flow Measurement Society

1. In most economical rectangular section of a channel, depth is kept equal to

METROLOGY LAB. I DEVICES BASED ON VERNIER SCALE

Kennedy Bridge - Summary of Pier 6 Movement Records

STATIONARY SPRINKLER IRRIGATION SYSTEM

BUCKET WHEEL RECLAIMERS. AUTHOR: MR. W KNAPPE MAN TAKRAF Fördertechnik GmbH

Walk - Run Activity --An S and P Wave Travel Time Simulation ( S minus P Earthquake Location Method)

LONG TERM SITE WIND DATA QUARTERLY REPORT. Bishop and Clerks

σ = force / surface area force act upon In the image above, the surface area would be (Face height) * (Face width).

Lab 1. Adiabatic and reversible compression of a gas

Adaptor Core Technology:

Relative Dosimetry. Photons

OPERATIONS SEAFARER CERTIFICATION GUIDANCE NOTE SA MARITIME QUALIFICATIONS CODE. Deck: Chart Work

Outlet Structures T-12

COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF HAWT BLADES

Running head: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 1

RESISTANCE OF COMPACTED ASPHALT MIXTURE TO MOISTURE INDUCED DAMAGE (Kansas Test Method KT-56)

Energy Drilling Prospects

Statistics: 4445 words plus 8 figures (x 250) = 6445 word equivalents.

Simple Measurements & Buoyancy Force

SERIES A24 RAISED RIB

R&A Rules Limited and United States Golf Association

SERIES E30 RAISED RIB

The Gas Laws: Boyle's Law and Charles Law

Precision Power Transmission Roller Chains, Attachments, and Sprockets

Impact of imperfect sealing on the flow measurement of natural gas by orifice plates

Lab # 03: Visualization of Shock Waves by using Schlieren Technique

EVALUATING AND INTERPRETING APPLICATION UNIFORMITY OF CENTER PIVOT IRRIGATION SYSTEMS

A Nomogram Of Performances In Endurance Running Based On Logarithmic Model Of Péronnet-Thibault

1. Five more than three times a number x. 3. Seventeen percent of a number x.

LONG TERM SITE WIND DATA QUARTERLY REPORT. Bishop and Clerks

Analysis of Shear Lag in Steel Angle Connectors

Total 70

Gear hobs Accuracy requirements

INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS

Viva TPS. TS11/15 Total Stations Check and Adjust Procedure. October Summary

NAME DATE PERIOD. Areas of Parallelograms and Triangles

AN31E Application Note

Digiquartz Water-Balanced Pressure Sensors for AUV, ROV, and other Moving Underwater Applications

Hydrostatic Force on a Submerged Surface

GRAND OPENINGS. By UDI, Inc. Manufacturers of Elliptical and Radius Cased Opening Jamb Systems

TRIAXYS Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Comparison Study

Tutorial for the. Total Vertical Uncertainty Analysis Tool in NaviModel3

NHL & NHLPA Future Goals Program Hockey Scholar TM

Item 404 Driving Piling

WIND DATA REPORT. Swan s Island, ME

Pole Foundation Design with Spreadsheet

ProtoTrak Knee Mill Model K3 ~ EMX Control 2 - Axis CNC ~ 3 - Axis DRO

COMPUTATIONAL FLOW MODEL OF WESTFALL'S LEADING TAB FLOW CONDITIONER AGM-09-R-08 Rev. B. By Kimbal A. Hall, PE

Calculating Total Uncertainty of Temperature Calibration with a Dry Block. Calibration White Paper. Beamex.

Commissioning an IMRT System for MLC Delivery. Gary A. Ezzell., Ph.D. Mayo Clinic Scottsdale

INTERNATIONAL HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY STANDARDS

TESTING APPLICATION STANDARD (TAS)

COMPAFLOW. Compressed Air. Volumetric flow. Gas. Mass flow. Steam. Net volumetric flow. Liquid

Gravity wave effects on the calibration uncertainty of hydrometric current meters

Troyer s Gourd Rack 8 unit F R H O P

Evaluation of the Wisconsin DOT Walking Profiler

Belt strength. Available the belt. (kg/m)

Figure 1 Location of the ANDRILL SMS 2006 mooring site labeled ADCP1 above.

Hockey Scholar Curriculum Guide

FIG: 27.1 Tool String

Transcription:

Page 1 of 13 The enclosed report contains the data and analysis summary for the SoniCaliper shaft caliper, performed at Stadium Project (DP-70), Atlanta, GA on Tuesday, September 30, 2014 by Chris Kohlhof. The shaft was calipered from a reference depth of 14.0 feet to a depth of 108.0 feet. The shaft excavation was supported by a permanent, 30.00 feet deep, 89.25 inches I.D., 0.75 inches thick steel casing. The thickness of the casing itself, if temporary, was added to the total volume calculation. The minimum concrete volume is calculated to be 154.2 yd³, based on the area of the calipered cross-sections and a Top of Concrete depth of 16.3 feet. (Note that this includes theoretical volume based on a nominal shaft cross-sectional area between depths of 108.0 feet and 111.9 feet, which was not calipered.) Note that significant wall encroachment (greater than 3.00 inches) was calculated at the depths listed below: Depth (feet) 62.0 66.0 70.0 74.0 78.0 82.0 86.0 90.0 94.0 98.0 100.0 102.0 104.0 106.0 108.0 Encroachment (inches) 3.79 4.14 4.58 4.93 4.76 4.40 6.61 12.07 15.68 17.00 25.81 27.22 28.19 28.81 29.34 Page # 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 10 10

Page 2 of 13 Depth (feet) 0.0 VERTICAL PROFILE 10.0 20.0 Section alignment -116.0º 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 Radius (inches): -75.00-50.00-25.00 0.00 25.00 50.00 75.00

Page 3 of 13 Depth (feet) 0.0 CALCULATED CONCRETE VOLUME vs. DEPTH 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 Volume (yd³): 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250

Page 4 of 13 Depth = 14.0 feet Encroachment = 0.35 inches Depth = 18.0 feet N Datum Ring Inner Area = 43.4 ft² Perimeter = 23.4 feet Diameter = 89.25 ± 0.44 inchescenter offset = 0.35 ± 0.39 inches Inner Area = 43.4 ft² Perimeter = 23.4 feet Diameter = 89.25 inches Depth = 22.0 feet Encroachment = 0.44 inches Depth = 30.0 feet Encroachment = 0.88 inches Inner Area = 43.4 ft² Perimeter = 23.4 feet Diameter = 89.25 ± 0.31 inchescenter offset = 0.44 ± 0.26 inches Inner Area = 43.4 ft² Perimeter = 23.4 feet Diameter = 89.25 ± 0.27 inchescenter offset = 0.88 ± 0.23 inches

Page 5 of 13 Depth = 34.0 feet Encroachment = 0.00 inches Depth = 38.0 feet Encroachment = 1.41 inches Area = 46.6 ft² Perimeter = 24.2 feet Diameter = 92.47 ± 0.27 inchescenter offset = 0.53 ± 0.25 inches Area = 44.0 ft² Perimeter = 23.5 feet Diameter = 89.78 ± 0.42 inchescenter offset = 1.67 ± 0.38 inches Depth = 42.0 feet Encroachment = 1.76 inches Depth = 46.0 feet Encroachment = 0.26 inches Area = 43.1 ft² Perimeter = 23.3 feet Diameter = 88.85 ± 0.36 inchescenter offset = 1.50 ± 0.34 inches Area = 44.5 ft² Perimeter = 23.6 feet Diameter = 90.33 ± 0.26 inchescenter offset = 0.79 ± 0.23 inches

Page 6 of 13 Depth = 50.0 feet Encroachment = 1.06 inches Depth = 54.0 feet Encroachment = 2.20 inches Area = 44.3 ft² Perimeter = 23.6 feet Diameter = 90.10 ± 0.28 inchescenter offset = 1.41 ± 0.23 inches Area = 44.1 ft² Perimeter = 23.5 feet Diameter = 89.95 ± 0.14 inchescenter offset = 2.55 ± 0.14 inches Depth = 58.0 feet Encroachment = 2.29 inches Depth = 62.0 feet Encroachment = 3.79 inches Area = 44.7 ft² Perimeter = 23.7 feet Diameter = 90.57 ± 0.13 inchescenter offset = 2.91 ± 0.13 inches Area = 44.3 ft² Perimeter = 23.6 feet Diameter = 90.08 ± 0.18 inchescenter offset = 4.14 ± 0.18 inches

Page 7 of 13 Depth = 66.0 feet Encroachment = 4.14 inches Depth = 70.0 feet Encroachment = 4.58 inches Area = 45.5 ft² Perimeter = 23.9 feet Diameter = 91.30 ± 0.28 inchescenter offset = 5.11 ± 0.27 inches Area = 45.3 ft² Perimeter = 23.9 feet Diameter = 91.15 ± 0.22 inchescenter offset = 5.46 ± 0.21 inches Depth = 74.0 feet Encroachment = 4.93 inches Depth = 78.0 feet Encroachment = 4.76 inches Area = 45.1 ft² Perimeter = 23.8 feet Diameter = 90.89 ± 0.28 inchescenter offset = 5.73 ± 0.29 inches Area = 45.6 ft² Perimeter = 23.9 feet Diameter = 91.41 ± 0.12 inchescenter offset = 5.81 ± 0.12 inches

Page 8 of 13 Depth = 82.0 feet Encroachment = 4.40 inches Depth = 86.0 feet Encroachment = 6.61 inches Area = 45.4 ft² Perimeter = 23.9 feet Diameter = 91.25 ± 0.11 inchescenter offset = 5.37 ± 0.10 inches Area = 51.2 ft² Perimeter = 25.4 feet Diameter = 96.85 ± 0.36 inchescenter offset = 10.40 ± 0.36 inches Depth = 90.0 feet Encroachment = 12.07 inches Depth = 94.0 feet Encroachment = 15.68 inches Area = 49.2 ft² Perimeter = 24.9 feet Diameter = 94.99 ± 0.23 inchescenter offset = 14.89 ± 0.23 inches Area = 46.9 ft² Perimeter = 24.3 feet Diameter = 92.72 ± 0.11 inchescenter offset = 17.36 ± 0.11 inches

Page 9 of 13 Depth = 98.0 feet Encroachment = 17.00 inches Depth = 100.0 feet Encroachment = 25.81 inches Area = 45.5 ft² Perimeter = 23.9 feet Diameter = 91.38 ± 0.14 inchescenter offset = 18.06 ± 0.14 inches Area = 34.5 ft² Perimeter = 20.8 feet Diameter = 79.57 ± 0.29 inchescenter offset = 20.97 ± 0.23 inches Depth = 102.0 feet Encroachment = 27.22 inches Depth = 104.0 feet Encroachment = 28.19 inches Area = 33.6 ft² Perimeter = 20.6 feet Diameter = 78.50 ± 0.24 inchescenter offset = 21.85 ± 0.21 inches Area = 33.4 ft² Perimeter = 20.5 feet Diameter = 78.29 ± 0.12 inchescenter offset = 22.64 ± 0.11 inches

Page 10 of 13 Depth = 106.0 feet Encroachment = 28.81 inches Depth = 108.0 feet Encroachment = 29.34 inches Area = 32.5 ft² Perimeter = 20.2 feet Diameter = 77.19 ± 0.13 inchescenter offset = 22.73 ± 0.12 inches Area = 32.3 ft² Perimeter = 20.2 feet Diameter = 77.01 ± 0.18 inchescenter offset = 23.17 ± 0.16 inches

Page 11 of 13 Looking North

Page 12 of 13 INTERPRETATION OF SONICALIPER FIELD DATA REPORT General: The SoniCaliper is a profiling sonar device, specially adapted to function in drilling fluids. Each 360 pass generated with the SoniCaliper device produces up to one hundred twenty individual echo returns (profile data points). In the preceding figures (profile ring plots), the diamond points represent individual profile data points. A geometric shape is fitted to the data points using the non-linear least-squares technique (see Gander et al) to approximate the cross-sectional profile of the shaft for verticality, perimeter area and volume calculations. Hollow diamonds designate rejected points which are not used in the data fitting. Deployment: The device is lowered into the shaft excavation in incremental depths. At each depth, a 360 sweep of the shaft wall is performed. The device is assumed to hang vertically in the shaft (any deviation from verticality can be noted using onboard pitch and roll sensors). Any twist in the device relative to its initial orientation is compensated by onboard compass and/or gyroscope sensors. Calibration: Because the properties of drilling fluids vary widely, a calibration must be performed for each shaft to determine fluid wavespeed. This is done by selecting a profile ring of known diameter (drilled shaft) or length & width (panel / barrette) as the calibration ring. The data analysis then back-calculates the fluid wavespeed based on the known dimensions of this ring. The fluid wavespeed is assumed to be constant over the entire column of fluid depth. Shaft Verticality: To determine shaft verticality, a profile ring (usually, but not always the calibration ring) is selected as the datum ring. The DatumRingOfsetrticalitycroachmentVerticalitygeometric centers of the datum ring and all other profile rings are compared. The center offset listed on the figures indicates the divergence of each profile ring center point from the datum ring center point. Encroachment is presented graphically as the shaded area representing the portion of the shaft wall which would encroach into the perfectly vertical projection of the datum ring to the depth in question. For circular shafts, the maximum encroachment value for each profile ring is also given numerically. The user may also choose to display computed values for the vertical inclination of the shaft between each ring and the datum ring, for both encroachment and center offset. Verticality is computed as the maximum encroachment or center offset (the deviation ) divided by change in depth, and may be expressed as an angle, a percentage or as a deviation:depth ratio. Calipered Volume: The cross sectional area of each profile ring is determined and a cumulative volume for the calipered portion of the shaft is calculated. Note that this volume is a minimum. VeEnVectimrtionRcaoinlfgPrDojateuEncroaCchentmeerntOfsetDEEP FOUNDATION TESTING, EQUIPMENT & SERVICES SPECIALIZING IN OSTERBERG CELL (O-cell ) TECHNOLOGY O-cell and SoniCaliper are registered trademarks.

Page 13 of 13 Error Estimation: The accuracy of ranging of the individual data points is specified by the manufacturer under laboratory conditions. Scatter in the data points relative to the assumed geometric cross-section may be due to multiple factors including errors in ranging, suspended solids and/or air entrainment in the fluid column (wet shaft excavations), and roughness of the shaft wall. Random ranging errors are isotropic (not dependent on direction), and since the profile sweep is 360, are assumed to cancel out. Systematic range errors are compensated for using the calibration ring. The least-squares fitting algorithm includes data filtering which rejects outlier profile data points (designated by hollow diamonds in the profile ring plots). However, the remaining data points will still exhibit a degree of scattering, which introduces an uncertainty to the computed verticality and dimensions of the shaft. Using standard spatial data error estimation techniques (see Ghilani and Wolf 2010), a Gaussian distribution error ellipse can be computed to a specified confidence level around the centerpoint of the geometric fit. The intersection of this ellipse and the chord from the datum to the centerpoint (the center offset length, which is used in verticality calculations, see sample profile ring plot below) is then reported as a ± tolerance for each profile ring. A similar approach, using the same confidence level, is used to compute the tolerance band of the principal shaft dimension. Derived dimensions (perimeter, volume, verticality, etc.) do not include further error estimation. Center offset Error Ellipse Center offset error estimate References: Legend Utilized data point Discarded data point At-depth shape Datum shape Encroachment Centerpoint Gander, W., Golub, G. H. & Strebel, R. (1994) Least-squares Fitting of Circles and Ellipses, BIT Numerical Mathematics, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 558-578. Ghilani, Charles D. & Wolf, Paul R. (2010) Adjustment Computations: Spatial Data Analysis, J. Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, N.J. ISBN 0470464917. DEEP FOUNDATION TESTING, EQUIPMENT & SERVICES SPECIALIZING IN OSTERBERG CELL (O-cell ) TECHNOLOGY O-cell and SoniCaliper are registered trademarks.