DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY UNITED STATES COAST GUARD CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT PROVIDENCE

COAST GUARD CUTTER EAGLE HOMEPORT PIER HOMEPORT PIER EVALUATION

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD PIER 7, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, FORT TRUMBULL NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT

USCG Contract No. HSCGG1-16-D-PRV087 USCG Task Order No. HSCGG1-17-J-PRV178

AUGUST 2017

Prepared for:

United States Coast Guard Civil Engineering Unit Providence 475 Kilvert Street, Warwick, RI 02886

Prepared by:

Distribution limited to U.S. Government agencies and their contractors; administrative/operational use. Other requests for this document shall be referred to the United States Coast Guard CEU Providence.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Coast Guard Cutter EAGLE Homeport Pier Homeport Pier Evaluation

Pier 7, State of Connecticut, Fort Trumbull New London, Connecticut

The purpose of this assignment was to perform a Routine Waterfront Facility Inspection, a structural load rating, and berthing analysis in support of a gap analysis of Pier 7 to meet the Basic Facility Requirements (BFR) for the CGC EAGLE. A structural inspection of Pier 7 at the State of Connecticut owned Fort Trumbull was conducted on June 20 and 21, 2017, by a four person, engineer diver team from Childs Engineering Corporation. Fort Trumbull is located in New London, Connecticut at 90 Walbach Street. The following narrative serves to briefly summarize the recommended improvements required to meet the BFR in four key areas, Structural, Berthing, Mechanical Utilities, and Electrical Utilities. Due to the berth having suitable depths closer inshore two options were looked at. An outshore option with the CGC EAGLE berthed in the historic location and the pier completely repaired, and an inshore option with the CGC EAGLE berth further inshore and with only the necessary piles being repaired.

For the Structural repairs it was recommended that the piles would have concrete structural jackets to provide a longer term repair that anodes. The jackets would either be from the base of the existing jacket to below the mudline or for existing jackets that are in poor condition a new jacket would be placed the entire length. In addition all the spalls would be repaired on the pile caps and deck and the deck would be sealed.

For the berthing repairs and upgrades it was recommended that two sections of timber fender piles would be added and three sea cushions to allow the load to spread out both on the fender system and across the mooring hardware. The bollards would also be cleaned and recoated and the foundations repaired, as needed.

For the mechanical utility upgrades it was recommended that new heat traced water and sewer lines would be needed as none currently exist on the pier. In addition a wastewater treatment system would be added to the existing unheated sewer line so that it could be used for the bilge water. The fire protection would come from either stand pipes or additional connections on the potable water pipe for hydrants.

i Most of the electrical and telecommunication utilities appear to be at the pier however it was recommended that a one cable and one LAN line would be run out to the site and that this would be contained inside a new conduit run out to the site. For the inshore option a new utility mound was also need to be installed.

The summary of cost for the upgrades and repairs for the outshore options can be found in Table 1 below and in Table 2 for the inshore option.

Requirement Estimated Cost Structural Repairs $7,070,441 Berthing Repairs $237,608 Mechanical Utilities $1,215,200 Electrical Utilities $51,240 TOTAL $8,575,343

Table 1 – Summary of Estimated Repair Costs to Meet CGC EAGLE BFR at the Outshore End of Pier 7

Requirement Estimated Cost Structural Repairs $3,335,203 Berthing Repairs $237,608 Mechanical Utilities $696,500 Electrical Utilities $49,105 TOTAL $4,318,416

Table 2 – Summary of Estimated Repair Costs to Meet CGC EAGLE BFR at the Inshore End of Pier 7

ii Table of Contents PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Purpose and Scope ...... 1 1.2 General Description of the Facility ...... 2 1.3 Units Serviced ...... 2

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR THE WATERFRONT INSPECTION ...... 2

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE STRUCTURES EXAMINED ...... 4 3.1 Approach Pier ...... 4 3.2 Pier 7 ...... 4 3.3 Pier 7 Fender System ...... 4 4.0 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES ...... 5 5.0 OBSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS ...... 5 5.1 Environmental Conditions ...... 5 5.2 Approach Pier ...... 5 5.3 Pier 7 ...... 7 5.4 Pier 7 Fender System ...... 9 6.0 LOAD RATING ...... 10 6.1 Description of Structures and Vehicles Analyzed ...... 11 6.2 Structural Analysis of Pier 7 ...... 11 7.0 BERTHING ANALYSIS ...... 13 7.1 Environmental Conditions and Vessel Characteristics ...... 13 7.2 Mooring Analysis of the CGC EAGLE at Outshore End of Pier 7 .... 14 7.3 Mooring Analysis of the CGC EAGLE at Inshore End of Pier 7 ...... 15 8.0 HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY ...... 16 9.0 GAP ANALYSIS ...... 17 9.1 CGC EAGLE Basic Facility Requirements ...... 17 9.2 Structural Gaps at Pier 7 ...... 18 9.3 Berthing Gaps at Pier 7 ...... 19 9.4 Utility Gaps at Pier 7 ...... 19

v 9.4.1 Mechanical Utility Gaps ...... 20 9.4.2 Electrical Utility Gaps ...... 20 10.0 COST ESTIMATE FOR REPAIRS TO MEET BFR ...... 21 Appendix A – Assessment Report ...... A-1 through A-7 Appendix B – Figures ...... B-1 through B-16 Appendix C – Photographs ...... C-1 through C-25 Appendix D – Structural Calculations ...... D-1 through D-53 Appendix E – Berthing Calculations ...... E-1 through E-20 Appendix F – Cost Estimates ...... F-1 through F-4 Appendix G – Miscellaneous Data ...... G-1 through G-15

v COAST GUARD CUTTER EAGLE HOMEPORT PIER HOMEPORT PIER EVALUATION

PIER 7, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, FORT TRUMBULL NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this assignment was to perform an evaluation of the Pier to be used as a homeport for the CGC Eagle. This evaluation included routine inspection of the above water and underwater components of the waterfront facilities of Pier 7, a structural load rating, and berthing analysis in support of a gap analysis of the pier to meet Basic Facility Requirements (BFR) for the CGC EAGLE. Pier 7 is located at the State of Connecticut owned Fort Trumbull, in New London, Connecticut. The inspection was intended to assess the general overall condition of each structure, assign a condition assessment rating, and to assign recommended actions and costs to meet the BFR. Additional analysis objectives included the quantitative evaluation of local loss of structural capacity of typical components as a result of damage or deterioration, permissible load limits analysis by quantitative evaluation of the global structural integrity relative to actual loads of each structure, estimating the remaining useful life of each structure, and to develop an order of magnitude estimate of probable costs for rehabilitation work. Photographs were taken to document the typical conditions of the facilities and areas of damage or deterioration. A summary of findings from the inspection can be found in the Assessment Report located in Appendix A.

Childs Engineering Corporation worked as a consultant for the USCG Civil Engineering Unit, Providence, in the evaluation of this facility. The points of contact for this project were Lieutenant Kieron McCarthy (401-736-1789), Design Project Manager for the U.S. Coast Guard, and Mr. David Cass (401-736-1734), Senior Design Manager for the U.S. Coast Guard.

1 1.2 General Description of the Facility

Pier 7 is owned by the State of Connecticut and is located at Fort Trumbull, 90 Walbach Street in New London, Connecticut. The U.S. Coast Guard Cutter EAGLE is the primary user and typically berths on the north side of the pier. The waterfront facilities of Pier 7 are located on the Thames River, which feeds into New London Harbor. The structures are located on the east side of the site and include the Approach Pier, Pier 7, and the Pier 7 Fender System. The Approach Pier consists of a concrete deck structure supported by approximately 57 steel piles. The pier extends east from the shoreline and provides access to Pier 7. Pier 7 is a concrete pier supported by 218 steel support/batter piles and extends east from the Approach Pier. The Pier 7 Fender System is a predominately timber pile fender system providing protection to the pier on the north and south sides of Pier 7.

1.3 Units Serviced

Although owned by the State of Connecticut, Pier 7 is presently the homeport to the United States Coast Guard Cutter EAGLE (WIX-327).

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR THE WATERFRONT INSPECTION

A structural inspection of Pier 7 at the State of Connecticut owned Fort Trumbull was conducted on June 20 and 21, 2017, by a four person, engineer diver team from Childs Engineering Corporation. Fort Trumbull is located in New London, Connecticut at 90 Walbach Street. The purpose of this assignment was to perform a Routine Waterfront Facility Inspection, a structural load rating, and berthing analysis in support of a gap analysis of the pier to meet the Basic Facility Requirements (BFR) for CGC EAGLE. The following narrative serves to briefly summarize the conditions existing at the site at the time of the inspection and presents recommendations for repairs to meet BFR and for future improvements to maintain the pier. A summary of the operational rating and restrictions for each asset is presented in Table 2-1, Condition Summary for Pier 7. The elements inspected and their associated conditions are shown below in Figure 1.

The Approach Pier is in fair condition with minor to moderate defects noted. No load limits were posted on site for this structure. Defects include corrosion spalls on the pile jackets, pile caps, beams, deck, and deck curb, and steel pile section loss due to

2 corrosion. The recommended repairs include installing concrete jacket extensions to encase the entire steel pile into the mud line, and repairing the spalled concrete. It is recommended to wait on replacing the concrete T-beams. The anticipated service life with repairs and regular maintenance is 25 years; however, the T-beams will most likely need to be replaced in about 10 yrs.

Pier 7 is in fair condition with minor to major defects noted. No load limits were posted onsite for this structure. Defects include steel piles in fair to poor condition due to steel section loss from corrosion, open and closed corrosion spalls, corrosion cracking, coating loss, broken utility chases, and a buckled light post. The recommended repairs include sealing the top deck cracks, installing concrete jacket extensions to encase the entire steel pile into the mud line, replacing some existing concrete pile jackets, repairing spalled concrete, replacing the cracked concrete bollard bases, and cleaning and recoating the mooring hardware. The anticipated service life with repairs and regular maintenance is 25 years.

The Pier 7 Fender System is in poor condition with minor to severe defects noted. No load limits were posted on site for this structure. Defects include dry rot, marine borer damage, broken, split, missing, and crushed members. The recommended repairs include replacing fender piles, filling in the minor dry rot, replacing deteriorated chocks/wales/blocks, and capping the pile ends. The anticipated service life with regular maintenance is 15 years.

Operational Restrictions Assessment Condition Operational Component Rating Index Rating Deck Vessel Vessel Loading Mooring Berthing

Approach Pier Fair 55 C2 No No No

Pier 7 Fair 55 C2 No No No

Pier 7 Fender Poor 45 C3 No No Yes System C1 = Structure Operational, C2 = Structure Mostly Operational, C3 = Structure Partially Operational, C4 = Structure Not Operational

Table 2-1 – Condition Summary for Pier 7

3 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE STRUCTURES EXAMINED

3.1 Approach Pier

The Approach Pier is a concrete structure that is supported by steel HP 14x73 piles. The piles are encased by a concrete jacket that is approximately 12 feet long, starting from the underside of the pile caps. The piles are arranged in 6 bents and 15 rows. Bents 1 through 4 are constructed with additional beams and edge beams, while concrete T-beams span from Bent 4 to Bent 6. Overall, the wharf is approximately 727 square yards in area (see Figure 6).

3.2 Pier 7

Pier 7 was originally constructed in 1965 by the U.S. Navy. It is currently owned by the State of Connecticut and leased by the U.S. Coast Guard for the homeport location of the CGC EAGLE. The pier is constructed of steel HP 14x73 piles and batter piles that are encased with approximately 12 foot long concrete jackets that extend down from the bottom of the pile caps. There are 218 total piles arranged in 52 bents. The piles support 36 inch wide pile caps and an 11 inch thick concrete deck. The deck is also supported by an 18 inch by 32 inch edge beam on both the north and south sides. There is also a concrete curb around the perimeter and a utility vault that runs the longitudinal length of the pier. Pier 7 is a rectangular shaped pier that is 657 feet long and 30 feet wide. Overall, the pier is approximately 2,190 square yards in area (see Figures 7 through 9).

3.3 Pier 7 Fender System

The Pier 7 Fender System is a timber system that protects the pier from ships and floating debris. The fender system is located on the north and south sides of Pier 7. There is no fender system on the east side of Pier 7. The fender system is generally constructed of 12 to 14 inch diameter timber piles and an upper and lower wale. The lower wale is a 12 inch by 12 inch timber located near MLW and bolted to the outside face of each pile. An 8 inch by 12 inch upper timber wale is located behind the fender pile tops with 10 inch by 12 inch timber chocks located between each pile. Timber spacer blocks, 4 inch by 12 inch by 12 inch, are located between the upper wale and the pier concrete edge beam at approximately 6 feet on center. Bolts embedded into the pier concrete edge beam fasten the upper wale to the pier at each spacer block.

4 The upper wale, chocks, and piles are fastened together with connection bolts. Overall, Pier 7 Fender System is approximately 492 feet long on the south side and 657 feet long on the north side for a grand total of 1149 linear feet (see Figures 10 through 12).

4.0 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES

Field data was collected by a four person, engineer diver team. Inspectors accessed both the above water and under water portions from Fort Trumbull. Two engineer divers conducted the underwater inspection consisting of a Level I visual and tactile inspection and a Level II detailed investigation of 10% of all support piles. The Level I inspection was performed to confirm as-built plans and detect obvious major damage/deterioration due to over stress, impact damage, or severe corrosion. The Level II inspection is a complete detailed investigation of selected components directed toward detecting and describing damaged or deteriorated areas that may be hidden by surface biofouling, and judging the structural integrity of the components.

The underwater inspection was performed with surface supplied air gear in accordance with OSHA Diving Standards. Equipment used during the inspection included hammers, an ultrasonic thickness gauge, rulers, and an underwater camera. The third member of the inspection team tended the diver, while the fourth member recorded the inspection field notes. Following the underwater portion of the inspection, an inspection of the under deck and topside conditions was conducted.

5.0 OBSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS

5.1 Environmental Conditions

The inspection of Pier 7 at Fort Trumbull was conducted on Tuesday June 20, 2017 and Wednesday June 21, 2017. During the inspection the outside temperature was approximately 75 degrees Fahrenheit with a water temperature of approximately 62 degrees Fahrenheit. Typically the current was less than 1 knot. Visibility under water varied between 3 to 6 feet with depth.

5.2 Approach Pier

The Approach Pier is in fair condition (see Photos 01 and 03). Minor to moderate defects were noted at the time of the inspection. No load limits were posted onsite for

5 this structure. Defects include corrosion spalls on the pile jackets, pile caps, beams, deck, and deck curb, and steel pile section loss due to corrosion. Based on conditions found at the time of inspection, live loading and facility usage can be maintained at its current level. However more details can be found in Section 6.0. The beams, edge beams, and pile caps have open corrosion spalling due to insufficient depth of concrete cover for the reinforcing steel. Overall, there are 19 defect locations with a total of approximately 59 square feet of spalled concrete. Typically, the spalls are 2 to 3 square feet in area and 1 inch in depth with exposed corroded reinforcing steel (see Photo 06).

There is one location that has open corrosion spalling on the deck curb that is approximately 2 square feet in area and 5 inches in depth with exposed, corroded reinforcing steel (see Photo 04).

Nine pile jackets exhibit closed or open corrosion spalling near MHW. The closed corrosion spalling was 15 to 18 square feet in area with cracking and rust staining. The open corrosion spalling was noted on Bent 4 Piles B, K, M, N, and P and is most likely due to insufficient depth of the concrete cover for the reinforcing steel of the pile jacket cage. The spalled area is typically 4 to 8 square feet in area and 1 to 3 inches in depth with the corroded reinforcing cage exposed.

The under deck also has an area of open corrosion spalling that is most likely the result of insufficient depth of concrete cover for the reinforcing steel. The total spalled area is approximately 8 square feet in area by 1 inch in depth.

The top deck overlay has a spall that is approximately 1.5 square feet in area and 4 inches in depth. The bituminous concrete overlay on the top deck is noted as abraded in areas exposing the concrete deck below (see Photo 07).

Nearly every T-beam spanning between Bents 4 and 6 have multiple open and closed corrosion spalls on the webs and the underside of the flanges. The condition appears to be poorer at the southern half of the pier as opposed to the northern half. The spalling is again related to insufficient depth of concrete cover for the reinforcing steel within the T-beam. Each spall defect ranges between 20 to 60 square feet in area and 1 inch in depth and is noted on nearly every beam on both the web and flanges (see Photo 05).

6 The concrete pile jackets extend into the mud line on Bent 4 Piles H to Q and on Bent 5. Typically, a 1 to 2 foot length of steel pile is exposed below the jackets in Bents 1 to 3 and Bent 4 Piles A to G. Steel section loss due to corrosion is noted on all the exposed steel piles (see Photo 08).

A complete listing of the defects and their location, along with a typical cross section, are shown in Appendix B, Figure 6. Photographs of typical conditions and damage/deterioration can be found in Appendix C, Photos 04 through 08.

5.3 Pier 7

Pier 7 is in fair condition (see Photos 09 to 12). Minor to major defects were noted at the time of the inspection. No load limits were posted onsite for this structure. Defects include steel piles with significant steel section loss from corrosion, open and closed corrosion spalls, corrosion cracking, coating loss, broken utility chases, and a buckled light post. Based on conditions found at the time of inspection, live loading and facility usage can be maintained at its current level. However, more details can be found in Section 6.0.

Overall, the steel HP piles are in fair condition. The steel pile section is reduced from the original section due to corrosion. The greatest steel section loss is noted on the top 6 feet of exposed pile just below the pile jackets. Flange edge thickness of 3/16 inch or less is frequently observed, and 9 piles are noted with flanges knife edged from corrosion (see Photos 13 and 14). Steel thickness measurements indicate an average thickness of 0.325 inches for the web and 0.304 inches for the flange. The original theoretical thickness for web and flange of the HP14 pile is 0.505 inches. The average percentage of remaining steel to original is approximately 64% for the webs and 59% for the flanges. For a listing of the ultrasonic thickness measurements of selected samplings, please see Appendix G.

Approximately 40% of the concrete pile jackets have corrosion related spalling/cracking within the tidal zone due to insufficient concrete cover of the reinforcing steel. Minor spalling is typically 1 to 5 square feet in area and 1 to 3 inches deep. Moderate spalling is typically 10 to 40 square feet in area and 1 to 4 inches deep. Major spalling is typically 16 to 30 square feet in area with a 6 inch depth, exposing the steel pile and reinforcing steel within (see Photo 17). Twelve pile jackets are noted with major spalling defects. The corrosion related cracking is typically 4 to 6 feet in

7 1 length and /8 inch wide, and without an adequate repair, will soon become corrosion related spalling.

The pile caps have four locations of 4 square feet by 4 inch depth, open corrosion spalling (see Photos 18 and 19). One location on Bent 38 has 12 square feet of closed corrosion spalling.

The edge beams also have corrosion related spalling observed at 15 locations. Typically the spalls are 2 to 8 square feet in area and 1 to 2 inches deep, and 16 to 20 square feet in area and 1 inch deep (see Photo 20). An edge beam has one location with a 12 square foot, 4 inch deep open corrosion spall.

The under deck area also has three locations of open corrosion spalling, 3 square foot by 2 inch deep each.. Three locations have closed corrosion spalling ranging in area from 12 to 25 square feet.

The top deck is in satisfactory condition with minor surface transverse cracking located above the area of the pile caps. The deck curb also has transverse cracking approximately every 5 to 8 feet.

A utility vault cover on the top deck has an open corrosion spall approximately 3 square feet in area and 2 inches in depth.

All of the mooring hardware on the pier have 25% to 75% loss of coating with light surface corrosion on the exposed steel (see Photo 22).

Three concrete cleat bases have multiple hairline cracks. Five double bitt bollards have hairline cracks in the concrete base at the outshore corners. One double bitt bollard has 3/16 inch wide cracks in the concrete base at the outshore corners (see Photo 23). One double bitt bollard has closed corrosion spalling and multiple hairline to 1/16 inch wide cracks in the concrete base.

A light pole located on the north side of Bent 35 is buckled 5 feet above the pier deck (see Photo 25).

8 The location of the defects and a typical cross section are shown in Appendix B, Figures 7 through 9. Photographs of typical conditions and damage/deterioration can be found in Appendix C, Photos 13 through 25.

5.4 Pier 7 Fender System

The Pier 7 Fender System is in poor condition (see Photos 26 to 28). Minor to severe defects were noted at the time of the inspection. No load limits were posted onsite for this structure. Defects include dry rot, marine borer damage, broken, split, missing, and crushed members. Based on conditions found at the time of inspection, facility usage can be maintained at its current level, although berthing cannot be maintained at all locations along the pier.

The most predominant defect of the fender system is dry rot in the upper ends of the piles. The major deterioration has reached the pile’s bolted connection with a depth between 12 and 48 inches and diameter of 10 inches (see Photo 34). Minor deterioration is typically less than 12 inches in depth, affecting an 8 inch diameter or less. In total, there are currently 37 fender piles with major dry rot and 34 piles with minor dry rot.

There are 14 fender piles that are broken, most likely due to overstressing. The breaks are typically located at the lower wale (approximately MLW). Also, 13 fender piles have split through the bolted connection at the upper wale. Typically, the length of the split is 5 feet.

Deterioration due to marine borer activity is also present in the fender piles. Many fender piles exhibit a degree of light marine borer damage with a section loss of less than 2 inches. Seven piles display severe marine borer damage with an effective remaining diameter of approximately 3 to 5 inches throughout the water column (see Photo 31). Another three piles are noted with marine borer damage and an effective remaining diameter of approximately 7 to 10 inches on the bottom 10 feet of the piles. One pile in the northwest pile grouping is hollow from marine borer activity.

Three fender piles exhibit brooming near the lower wale with a 2 inch loss of cross sectional area.

9 The upper wale exhibits deterioration from dry rot that affects the full depth of the wale over approximately a 20 foot length.

Both the upper and lower wales are broken at two locations over a 25 foot length each (see Photo 32). The lower wale is missing in three locations, and the lengths of the three missing sections are 46, 195 and 144 feet long each. The upper wale is broken or crushed in three locations, and the lengths of the three broken sections are 20, 20 and 10 feet long each (see Photo 33). A 4 foot length of upper wale is missing in four locations.

The chocks have full length, full depth dry rot in five locations. There are four chocks with full length, full depth splits. The chocks are approximately 6 feet in length.

There are two locations where the timber spacers and pier/wale connections are missing (see Photo 35).

The west fender pile grouping on the north side has dry rot deterioration on the tops of the piles. Typically the depth is 16 inches over the entire diameter of the pile.

The fender chains on the two fender pile groupings on the pier north side have severe section loss due to corrosion. The northeast fender pile grouping is not bearing on the rubber fender element and is displaced outshore approximately a foot from the fender element.

The location of the defects and a typical cross section are shown in Appendix B, Figures 10 through 12. Photographs of typical conditions and damage/deterioration can be found in Appendix C, Photos 29 through 35.

6.0 LOAD RATING

For the load rating of the structures the piles, pile caps and deck were analyzed to determine the maximum allowable loads they are capable of withstanding taking into consideration the age and condition of the pier elements. No design drawings were provided for Pier 7 so the load rating was based on the pier configurations which were determined during the on-site inspection. Many assumptions needed to be made including certain material properties and reinforcement details. These assumptions were made based on typical design standards used during the time of construction; they were

10 conservative but reasonable. The analysis considered an HS-20 truck, 40 ton truck crane, and forklift as part of the BFR for the CGC EAGLE. Full calculations for the Load Rating can be found in Appendix D.

6.1 Description of Structures and Vehicles Analyzed

Pier 7 is a fixed concrete pier which consists of steel H-piles topped with concrete caps, edge beams and deck. The fender system consist of timber fender piles with a timber wale for small craft berthing as well as timber panels with rubber arch fender supports for large craft berthing. The pier deck is outfitted with mooring cleats and bollards.

The pile foundations are steel H-piles. Each bent consists of four piles, three vertical piles and a single batter pile which alternates direction each bent. It is assumed that each of the piles are driven to refusal at solid rock and that none of the piles were anchored.

The concrete pile caps, edge beams and deck were all cast-in-place and act as a monolithic deck diaphragm. The deck mooring hardware is embedded and cast in the concrete deck.

The vehicles analyzed for the load rating of the pier were AASHTO HS20-44 trucks, as well as a 40 ton truck crane and typical forklift. The 40 ton truck crane and forklift did not produce as large wheel/traveling loads as the HS20 truck, but the 40 ton truck crane was capable of producing large concentrated outrigger point loads.

6.2 Structural Analysis of Pier 7

A structural analysis was performed to determine the load capacity for the pier. Each of the critical structural elements, including the piles, pile caps, and deck slabs, were analyzed to determine the maximum allowable loads that the aprons are capable of withstanding. The results are summarized in Table 6-1, with the full calculations shown in Appendix D.

The loads investigated on the pier include the required 40 ton truck crane and forklift loads which were listed as requirements for berthing the CGC EAGLE, as well as AASHTO standard truck loads, and uniform live loads which are representative of

11 pedestrian and other cargo loads that are typically found during the berthing of the CGC EAGLE.

Many assumptions were made for the analysis of the structure. These assumptions include material properties such as a compressive strength of concrete of 4000 pounds per square inch (psi), and a yield strength of steel of 36 kips per square inch (ksi) for the H-piles and 60 ksi for reinforcing steel. The reinforcement details for the concrete caps and deck were unknown and therefore the rebar area and layout were assumed. It was assumed that the rebar had a moderate amount of section loss due to spalling found during the inspection. The piles were given a considerable reduction in section due to many areas of corrosion found on the piles during the inspection in addition to ultrasonic thickness readings taken over the course of three prior inspections (actual measurements show a 35% reduction in cross sectional area since 1991). It was also assumed that the piles were driven to refusal and that there were no rock anchors. Due to the lack of driving records and the poor soil conditions, it was assumed the soil provided negligible uplift capacity in the piles.

Piles Pile Cap Deck Slab Uniform LL 311 psf 485 psf 465 psf Max. Load 47 kips 36 kips 26 kips

Table 6-1 – Summary of Structural Element Maximum Loads.

It was determined that the allowable uniform live load on the pier is 311 pounds per square foot (psf) which, as shown in Table 6-1, is controlled by the axial capacity of the steel H-piles. The maximum allowable AASHTO vehicle is an HS-20 truck (or a maximum of a 19.8 kip wheel load) which is controlled by the deck slab. The forklift loads detailed above were found to be less than the wheel loads of an HS-20 truck and therefore fall within the allowable capacity of the pier. The maximum allowable crane load on the apron is 26 kips over a 12 inch by 12 inch outrigger which is controlled by bending in the deck slab, as seen in Table 6-1. This is enough to accommodate a 40 Ton truck crane.

12 7.0 BERTHING ANALYSIS

For the berthing analysis the mooring loads where analyzed for the CGC EAGLE berthed at Pier 7. The CGC EAGLE has been berthed at this pier in the past but actual mooring line arrangements were not available. For the analysis the CGC EAGLE was looked at both outshore in its historic location and also closer to the inshore end. The layouts can be found in Appendix B, Figures 13 and 14.

The analysis used the predicted environmental conditions to estimate the loads being applied to the pier and mooring hardware to determine the adequacy of the existing hardware and to make any recommendations on new hardware to meet the BFR of the CGC EAGLE. The loads were estimated using Optimoor mooring line analysis software. The calculations and Optimoor print outs can be seen in Appendix E.

7.1 Environmental Conditions and Vessel Characteristics

The environmental conditions used in the analysis include wind, current, and wave. The wind speed was taken from ASCE 7-10 for a Category I wind speed of 125 mph (3s Gust). Per ASCE 7, this speed was reduced down to an equivalent 30s wind speed and converted to knots. A 30 second wind speed was used as that is more typical of a sustained wind load that would affect the movement of a vessel. Current data taken from Winthrop Point was used to get the estimated currents. This showed a maximum current of 0.8 knots. This is likely higher than what might be seen at the site but was used as a conservative estimate. The wave conditions were computed using ACES software for a wind generated wave based on the ASCE 7 wind speed. The wind speed was reduced to a 1 hour equivalent speed as that is a more typical time to allow the waves to setup. Table 7-1 below shows a summary of the conditions assumed in the analysis that was taken from a wave study at Station New London by Childs Engineering Corporation in December 2013.

Wind Speed (3 sec) 125 mph Wind Speed (30 sec) 95 knots Current 0.8 knots Significant Wave Height 3.83 feet Wave Period 3.43 secs

Table 7-1 – Summary of Environmental Condition Assumptions

13 For the set of conditions shown in Table 7-1 four cases were run in Optimoor showing the environmental forces acting on the vessel in different ways. Table 7-2 shows a summary of each of the different cases.

Case Description Case 1 Waves and current from the south, wind blowing vessel off berth. Case 2 Waves and current from the south, wind blowing 45° off bow. Case 3 Waves and current from the south, wind blowing 45° off stern. Case 4 Waves and current from the north, wind blowing vessel into berth.

Table 7-2 – Summary of Cases Run in Optimoor

7.2 Mooring Analysis of the CGC EAGLE at Outshore End of Pier 7

The USCGC EAGLE is a 295 foot Coast Guard Cutter that is used as a training vessel from her homeport of New London, CT. The EAGLE was not available for inspection for the type, location, and layout of the mooring lines. A drawing was referenced that showed a typical mooring line layout. The line type and size was provided, and the layout was done to spread out the mooring line loads found during an extreme storm event. Details of the mooring hardware, lines, and arrangement as inputted into Optimoor, can be found in Appendix E.

Pier 7 is a 658 feet long and 30 feet wide pier consisting of steel H-Piles supporting a concrete pile cap and deck. Along the face of the pier there is a treated timber fender system with one section having additional fender elements behind the piles. The pier has a mixture of cleats and double bitts with unknown berthing capacities. For the purpose of this evaluation we assumed they have a capacity of 30T.

Each of the four cases shown in Table 7-2 was inputted in Optimoor to identify the forces being transferred to the mooring hardware from the vessel, via the mooring lines. Appendix E contains the full print out for the Optimoor analysis and Table 7-3 shows a summary of the total horizontal forces for each piece of mooring hardware during each case. The ‘slack’ cells in the table indicate that there was no or minimal forces transferred, via the mooring lines, to the mooring hardware for that particular case.

14 Hardware A B C D E F G H I J Case 1 32.8 0.9 2.4 60.0 8.4 26.5 18.8 15.7 23.7 9.3 Case 2 35.4 1.3 1.2 36.3 3.4 28.0 16.2 12.2 14.6 4.4 Case 3 8.6 slack 3.0 54.1 11.4 7.9 10.3 9.7 21.1 10.8 Case 4 0.3 slack 0.1 slack slack 0.2 0.2 slack slack slack

Table 7-3 – Summary of Total Horizontal Force (kips) for Mooring Hardware

From Table 7-3 it can be seen that the highest loads are typically seen in Case 1. This is to be expected as the wind, waves, and current are all forcing the vessel of the berth and this is the most exposed direction for the environmental forces. The highest loads were seen at the double bitt bollard, represented by the letter D. This high force is mainly due to the close proximity and high angle of the mooring line.

The majority of the double bitt bollards did have enough capacity during the design storm. The bollard forces that exceed the bollard capacity with a factor of safety of two are shown in orange and the highest force in each case are shown in red. A recommended factor of safety (FS) ranges from 1.5 to 3.0 and if the vessel is berthed off center of the fender pile cluster it aligns better with the bollards and the line from D can be added to J to keep all of the forces under a FS of 1.5.

7.3 Mooring Analysis of the CGC EAGLE at Inshore End of Pier 7

In the same manner that the CGC EAGLE was analyzed at the outshore end, the vessel was also analyzed at the inshore end using the same parameters and a similar layout. Details of the mooring hardware, lines, and arrangement as inputted into Optimoor, can be found in Appendix E.

Each of the four cases shown in Table 7-2 was inputted in Optimoor to identify the forces being transferred to the mooring hardware from the vessel, via the mooring lines. Appendix E contains the full print out for the Optimoor analysis and Table 7-4 shows a summary of the total horizontal forces for each piece of mooring hardware during each case. The ‘slack’ cells in the table indicate that there was no or minimal forces transferred, via the mooring lines, to the mooring hardware for that particular case.

15 Hardware A C D F G H I J K L Case 1 36.6 3.4 43.2 27.7 24.8 37.6 18.1 6.3 4.9 8.7 Case 2 37.6 3.1 21.6 27.8 23.1 24.4 11.0 3.6 6.2 9.8 Case 3 10.8 2.5 46.3 10.4 12.5 30.6 16.9 6.7 0.5 2.3 Case 4 slack slack slack slack 0.1 slack slack slack slack slack

Table 7-4 – Summary of Total Horizontal Force (kips) for Inshore Mooring Hardware

From Table 7-4 it can be seen that the highest loads are typically seen in Case 1. This is to be expected as the wind, waves, and current are all forcing the vessel of the berth and this is the most exposed direction for the environmental forces. The highest loads were seen at the double bitt bollard, represented by the letter D. This high force is mainly due to the close proximity and high angle of the mooring line.

The majority of the double bitt bollards did have enough capacity during the design storm. The bollard forces that exceed the bollard capacity with a factor of safety of two are shown in orange and the highest force in each case are shown in red. A recommended factor of safety (FS) ranges from 1.5 to 3.0.

7.4 Berthing Analysis of the CGC EAGLE at Pier 7

Based on berthing energy calculations determined for the CGC EAGLE and the current fender elements located on the pier, it was determined that the fender system is inadequate to absorb berthing loads unless a controlled, tug assisted berthing is used. The arch type rubber fenders are not large enough for the energy abortion required from a vessel the size of the EAGLE. If the CGC EAGLE impacted the fender system of Pier 7 with a berthing energy consistent with a 0.4 knots (.67 ft/sec) approach velocity, the resulting force could potentially overstress the pier and cause excessive uplift in the piles.

8.0 HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY

A hydrographic survey of the berth was not conducted and there was no survey information available for review as part of this evaluation. In lieu of this information lead line soundings were collected along the edge of the pier from the top of the deck and then referenced back to Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW). The soundings can be seen on Figure 4, Site Plan, in Appendix B.

16 To have enough clearance between the keel and the mudline, it is recommended to add 4 feet below the keel as a factor of safety to accommodate extreme tides and waves that could potentially cause grounding. The CGC EAGLE has a draft of 17 feet so the minimum required water depth would be 21 feet below MLLW. Based on the soundings taken, it shows that the water depth along the edge of the pier on the outshore north side, where the CGC EAGLE is typically berthed, is typically 26 to 27 feet below MLLW, which is more than adequate for the CGC EAGLE.

In addition, it appears that there is suitable water depth along most of the north side, up to approximately 100 feet from the inshore end of Pier 7 that could allow the CGC EAGLE to be berthed closer inshore, this assumption is the basis for the inshore gap analysis.

9.0 GAP ANALYSIS

9.1 CGC EAGLE Basic Facility Requirements

The CGC EAGLE Basic Facility Requirement (BFR) as shown in Table 9-1 and include structural requirements for various vehicles to access the pier as well as berthing requirements to enable the vessel to berth against the pier without damaging the vessel or overloading the pier. In addition, the CGC EAGLE has minimum utility requirements to enable the vessel to be homeported at the pier year round, including during the winter months when temperatures drop below freezing for extended periods of time. Parking and storage requirements are also included in the BFR, however they were not included in this this evaluation.

Depth at Mooring 17ft Telephone 6 line Mooring Length 350 ft Cable 1 line Pier Fendering Full CGDN+ and Required LAN System SIPRNET HS-20 truck, 40-ton Access Fire Protection 2.5” connection truck crane, forklift Electrical 200 AMP service Parking 45 spaces Potable Water 1 heated connection Combined Storage Sewage 1 heated connection (Sail Loft, Flammable, Approx. 2500 sq ft Bilge Water 1 connection HAZMAT, Parts, etc)

Table 9-1 – CGC EAGLE Basic Facility Requirements

17 9.2 Structural Gaps at Pier 7

Pier 7 currently meets structural capacity required by the BFR to berth the CGC EAGLE. This includes the vertical loads imposed by required vehicles and cargo as well as the lateral loads imposed by the berthing and mooring forces of the CGC EAGLE itself. However, substantial structural defects were found throughout the pier which have already led to a considerable reduction in the capacity of the pier from what it was originally designed. If untreated, the defects will continue to reduce the current capacity of the pier beyond a level required to berth the CGC EAGLE. This could happen in less than five years. To maintain the pier at the current capacity, anodes could be added to the piles to minimize any additional corrosion. This would give a life span of approximately 10-15 yrs before the anodes would need to be replaced. However, a more effective repair that would require less maintenance and provide a higher capacity, long term solution would be to encapsulate the piles with a concrete jacket similar to what is currently on the top 12 feet of each of the piles. For the piles with existing jackets in satisfactory condition, the jacket would be extended down below the mudline and for the jackets in poor condition, they would be chipped back to sound concrete and a new jacket placed along the entire length of the pile. In addition, all the spalls should be repaired and the deck cracks sealed. As the spalling on the T-Beams is not significant yet, it is recommended to not repair them until the condition deteriorates further and then replace the whole section of approach pier with what is needed; this could include altering or reducing the footprint to include a building for storage.

For both cost estimates it was assumed that the piles would have concrete structural jackets, all the spalls would be repaired on the pile caps and deck, and the deck would be sealed, in the identified areas. Replacement costs for the approach pier T-beams were not included in the cost estimate.

For the outshore option, it was assumed that all of the pier would be repaired. For the inshore option, it was assumed that all the approach pier and Pier 7, Bents 1 - 21 would be fully repaired to support loading. From Bents 22-32 it was assumed that only the batter piles would be repaired to resist the mooring and berthing forces. This enabled the costs to be optimized based on the required water depths and loading needs.

18 9.3 Berthing Gaps at Pier 7

The current fender system is adequate to absorb the berthing energies typical for a vessel the size of the CGC EAGLE that is assisted into the berth with the use of tugboats. However, if the only point of contact is the central section of piles, it is recommended that at least two more sections of timber piles with an 8-12 foot sea cushion be added and that one sea cushion is used when berthing against the current timber pile section. This would also allow the CGC EAGLE to be better aligned with the bollards to help better distribute the mooring loads to the hardware more evenly. In additional the addition of sea cushions would also absorb some of the berthing energies and allow a higher berthing velocity, up to approximately 1.5 knots. If the berthing recommendations were used, then most of the mooring loads would have a FS of 2 and all would at least have a FS of 1.5, which would mean that the bollards would not need to be upgraded. However, all the bollards need to be cleaned and recoated and the more significant cracks on the bollard foundations should be fixed. It should also be noted that the hardware estimates were based on the size of the double bitt and not on the size of the bolts. Typically, the capacity of the bollards is controlled by the bolt capacity, but on Pier 7 all the bolt holes are filled and we were unable to identify a bolt size.

For both the cost estimates, it was assumed that two sections of timber fender piles and three sea cushions would be added. The bollards would be cleaned and recoated and the foundations repaired, as needed.

9.4 Utility Gaps at Pier 7

There are significant utility gaps between what is currently on Pier 7 and the BFR for the CGC EAGLE. While it was noted during the inspection that there are some utilities on the pier, it was difficult access those that were in utility trenches. Based on the condition of those that were able to be inspected, it was assumed that there were no working mechanical utilities on the pier. However, it appeared that there were existing electrical utilities that were visible at the end of the pier and labeled for the CGC EAGLE. While these were not fully visible, as they were in conduits within the pier, it was assumed that they were working. It was also assumed that all new utilities would be placed under the pier as they currently are; however, it would be more economical to place the utilities on top of the pier as long as there is enough room and they can be protected.

19 9.4.1 Mechanical Utility Gaps

Most of the BFR mechanical utilities shown in Table 9-1, were not present or did not appear to be in working order on the pier. The only visible utility that appeared to still be connected was a single sewer pipe, hung under the pier and connected up through the deck. However, this pipe was not heat traced, so that would need to be added to the pipe to meet the BFR (see Photo 36). A visible water pipe that was located in a manhole appeared to be abandoned with the valves removed (see Photo 37). In addition there were no signs of any heat trace on the pipe and therefore it was decided to replace the entire pipe. There was also no visible bilge water connection or fire protection. It was noted that there appeared to be a heat control panel on the pier but there were no visible pipes that appeared to be heated (see Photo 38).

It may be possible to use the existing sewer line as a bilge water line, as this line does not have a requirement to be heated. The line would need the addition of a wastewater treatment system before the water would be combined with the sewer line. It may also be possible to combine the fire protection with a potable water line rather than running a new line out to the end of the pier. In lieu of this, stand pipes could be mounted to the pier to be able to pull water up from the river.

For both cost estimates, it was assumed that new heat traced water and sewer lines would be needed, a wastewater treatment system would be added to the existing unheated sewer line, fire protection would come from either stand pipes or additional connections on the potable water pipe. The treatment system would most likely need to be in a building, but that is not included in the costs as it was assumed that a building would be placed on or near the pier to help with additional storage requirements. The utilities would run from the inshore end adjacent to the Fort Trumbull bathrooms out to either berth location.

9.4.2 Electrical Utility Gaps

Most of the electrical and telecommunication utility requirements appear to be present on the pier. While the lines were not physically tested to make sure they were working, the CGC EAGLE has been berthed at this location in the past and there were utilities labeled for her use (see Photo 39 to 43). Towards the end of the pier, there is an electrical receptacle consisting of a 500 AMP 1-Gang Shore Power Unit this has been used for the CGC EAGLE and should meet her current BFR (see Photo 40 and 41).

20 Adjacent to the receptacle is a utility mound that includes up to 6 telephone lines and the CGDN LAN (see Photo 42 and 43). It was not obvious that there was the SIPRNET LAN at the site or a cable connection.

For the cost estimates it was assumed that one cable and one LAN line would be run out to the site that would be contained inside a new conduit. The conduit would run from the inshore end adjacent to the Fort Trumbull bathrooms out to either berth location. In addition, for the inshore option a cost was included to add an additional utility mound.

10.0 COST ESTIMATE FOR REPAIRS TO MEET BFR

Both the outshore and inshore option cost estimates include the estimated repairs to enable Pier 7 to meet the BFR for the CGC EAGLE. These estimates assume that the CGC EAGLE is berthed at either the end of Pier 7, on the north side of the pier where the shore side utilities are located, or on the same side but much further inshore with new utility connections. The costs for the outshore option is summarized in Table 10-1 the costs for the inshore option is summarized in Table 10-2. The full cost estimates can be found in Appendix F.

Requirement Estimated Cost Structural Repairs $7,070,441 Berthing Repairs $237,608 Mechanical Utilities $1,215,200 Electrical Utilities $51,240 TOTAL $8,575,343

Table 10-1 – Summary of Estimated Repair Costs to Meet CGC Eagle BFR on the Outshore End of Pier 7.

Requirement Estimated Cost Structural Repairs $3,335,203 Berthing Repairs $237,608 Mechanical Utilities $696,500 Electrical Utilities $49,105 TOTAL $4,318,416

Table 10-2 – Summary of Estimated Repair Costs to Meet CGC Eagle BFR on the Inshore End of Pier 7.

21

APPENDIX A– Assessment Report

Appendix A Table of Contents

Item PAGE Aerial View ...... A-3 Overall Assessment ...... A-4 Approach Pier Assessment ...... A-5 Pier 7 Assessment ...... A-6 Pier 7 Fender System Assessment ...... A-7

A-2

Assessment Report Pier 7, Fort Trumbull New London, CT A-3

Civil Engineering Unit Providence 475 Kilvert Street, Warwick, RI 02886 Assessment Report Pier 7, Fort Trumbull Date of Inspection: June 2017

Structure Rating

Approach Pier Fair

Pier 7 Fair

Pier 7 Fender Poor System A-4

Satisfactory = Minor to moderate defects and deterioration may be present. No overstressing was observed.

Fair = Widespread areas of minor to moderate, and localized areas of advanced defects and deterioration may be present.

Poor = Widespread areas of moderate to advanced defects and deterioration, and local failures may be present.

Serious = Advanced deterioration has, or in the near term, will result in localized failures of primary structural components.

Civil Engineering Unit Providence 475 Kilvert Street, Warwick, RI 02886 Assessment Report Approach Pier Date of Inspection: June 2017 A-5 Condition: Fair Operational Restrictions: The Approach Pier is in fair condition None, No load limits were posted on with minor to moderate defects site for this structure. noted including steel pile corrosion Recommendations: and corrosion spalls on the pile The recommended repairs include jackets, pile caps, beams, deck, and new concrete pile jacket installation, deck curb. repairing spalled concrete, and replacing the T‐beam deck area.

Civil Engineering Unit Providence 475 Kilvert Street, Warwick, RI 02886 Assessment Report Pier 7 Date of Inspection: June 2017 A-6 Condition: Fair Operational Restrictions: Pier 7 is in fair condition with minor None, No load limits were posted on to major defects noted including steel site for this structure. pile corrosion, opened and closed Recommendations: corrosion spalls, corrosion cracking, The recommended repairs include coating loss, and a broken utility new concrete pile jacket installation, chase. repairing spalled concrete, replacing the cracked concrete bollard bases, and recoating the mooring hardware. Civil Engineering Unit Providence 475 Kilvert Street, Warwick, RI 02886 Assessment Report Pier 7 Fender System Date of Inspection: June 2017 A-7 Condition: Poor Operational Restrictions: The Fender System is in poor None, No load limits were posted on condition with minor to severe site for this structure. defects noted including dry rot, Recommendations: marine borer damage, broken, split, The recommended repairs include missing, and crushed members. replacing fender piles, filling in the minor dry rot, replacing missing and deteriorated chocks/wales/blocks, and capping the pile ends. Civil Engineering Unit Providence 475 Kilvert Street, Warwick, RI 02886

APPENDIX B – Figures

Appendix B Table of Contents

FIGURE DESCRIPTION PAGE Figure 1 Locus Plan ...... B-3 Figure 2 Vicinity Plan ...... B-4 Figure 3 Locus Photo ...... B-5 Figure 4 Site Plan ...... B-6 Figure 5 Condition Plan ...... B-7 Figure 6 Approach Pier Plan and Section ...... B-8 Figure 7 Pier 7 Plan ...... B-9 Figure 8 Pier 7 Plan ...... B-10 Figure 9 Pier 7 Plan and Section ...... B-11 Figure 10 Pier 7 Fender System Plan ...... B-12 Figure 11 Pier 7 Fender System Plan ...... B-13 Figure 12 Pier 7 Fender System Plan and Section ...... B-14 Figure 13 CGC EAGLE Layout at Outshore End of Pier 7 ...... B-15 Figure 14 CGC EAGLE Layout at Inshore End of Pier 7 ...... B-16

B-2

PIER 7, FORT TRUMBULL

N

CHILDS DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ENGINEERING CORPORATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT PROVIDENCE

LOCUS PLAN PIER 7, FORT TRUMBULL

N

CHILDS DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ENGINEERING CORPORATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT PROVIDENCE

VICINITY PLAN U.S.C.G. STATION NEW LONDON (N.I.C.)

THAMES RIVER

APPROACH PIER 7 PIER

PIER 7 FENDER SYSTEM FLOATING DOCK (N.I.C.)

PIER 4 (N.I.C.)

N

CHILDS DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ENGINEERING CORPORATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT PROVIDENCE

LOCUS PHOTO PLAN

CHILDS DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ENGINEERING CORPORATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT PROVIDENCE N SITE PLAN PLAN

CHILDS DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ENGINEERING CORPORATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT PROVIDENCE N CONDITION PLAN 0 1 2 S E C T I O N

N E C C N O H G I R L I P D N O S E R

E A R T I N I O G

N 0

1

0 1

1 6 5 0 5 2 7 U D C A 1 1 N E I 5 3 V P P I 5 I T L P A E P

R R 5 E D L T N

O 4 S M A G 4 T A 2 E I N A N 4 N 9 C 4 T E 4 0 T 9 2 E H E 1

O S R 1

P

F I C N 8

1 I H O G E 6 4 O A

R U 4 0 M S 4 N

T 1 E P I

1 T L 4 G L

A P U A N R A 1 1 N D 4 O 1 R 0 1

4

V D S 4 A 3 I E D N C E D U N R

C S 7 I E T E Y 1 2 C 3 T 0 8 I O 0 0 3 6 N

1 1 5 3 ” ” ” ’ ” ” ” ” ” 0 9 1 6 1 3 4

N 1 7 2 4 7 7 5 1 4 1 2 P 4 L A 1 4 N 9 1 9 1 9 2 3 E C C N O H G I R L I 4 P D N O S E R

E 1 A R 9 4 T I N I O G N 2 3 9 9 U D C N E I V 8 P I I T L A E

R E D T N

S M G T 1 E I A N 2 1 N T E T E E

O S R

F I C P N

H O G I E O A

2 U 1 R M S N T E

I 1 7

T L G 7

A P P U N R A L 3 D O R 0 A

V D S 7 N I E D C 5 E U N R C I E T Y 7 0 1 2 ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” 1 1 0 3 6 1 9 2 0 1 2 4 2 9 3 8 7 7 1 1 8 1 9 0 2 3 5 2 7 1 2 7 2 8 1 0 2 4 4 8 9 1 1 4 1 0 4 2 9 2 3 4 9 3 1 7 2 5 1 8 1 2 1 9 9 1 1 8 1 9 N 2 3 1 8 1 2 6 1 4 1 9 2 3 1 2 9 3 1 5 0 1 2 1 6 2 P P 7 1 9 2 2 L L 1 2 4 7 2 4 A A 7 1 4 N N 2 2 9 5 4 9 1 4 1 1 7 1 1 0 2 1 9 9 2 0 E C C N O H G I 1 R L I 1 P D N O S E 1 R

E 9 0 A R T I N I O G N 2 7 1 5 2 1 5 9 8 1 1 4 5 U D C N E I V P I I T L A 5 E

R E D T N

S M 8 G T 7 1 E I A N 1 N 1 T E 3 3 T 9 E E 2 O S R 3

F I C P N

4 H O G I 1 E O A 1

U 2 R M 9 S 7 N 7 T E 1

I 7 8

6 T L G

A P P U N R A L D O R 1 9 A

4 2 V D S 3 N 7 I E 1 D 9 1 2 C E 1 1 2 5 U 8 N 2 R C I E T Y 6 1 1 1 0 5 2 ” ’ ” ” 9 4 2 0 9 1 1 1 1 1 4 P L A 2 1 N 4 5 1 1 2 20 0 2 3 1 1 5 0 2 0 1 0 2 1 6 6 9 2 1 2 2 4 7

N E C C N O H G I R L I P D N O S E R

E A R T I N I O T G N Y P I C A U D C L N E I V

P S I I T L A E E

R E D C T N P

S M T G I T E E I I A N O N R T E T N E E

7 O S R

F I P C N

H O L G O A A

U M S N N T E I

T L A G

A P U N N R A D D O R

V D S S I E D E C E C U N R T C I I E T O Y N 3 1 0

N 1 2 0 2 0 2 P L A N 2 1 5 E C C N O H G I R L I P D N O S E R

E A R T I N I O G N 1 5 U D C N E I V P I I T L A E

P R E 2 D T I N

E S M G T R E I A N N

T 7 E T E E

F O S R E

F I C N

N H O G O D A

U M S E N T E 2 R I

T L G

A S P U N R A Y D O R S

V D S T I E D E C E M U N R C

P I E T L Y A N 3 1 7 2 1 6 2 7 1 5 6 3 2 1 6 2 1 6 4 1 4 1 4 2 2 1 6 2 9 2 2 1 7 1 0 4 3 3 1 1 6

N 3 2 3 5 1 8 3 1 5 2 4 2 3 2 3 3 2 5 P P 1 4 L L 2 A A N N 1 4 2 6 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 3 9 2 1 9 1 2 9 2 E C C N O H G I R L 1 1 I P D N O S E 1 R

E A R T I N 2 I O G N 4 2 3 2 0 2 1 8 U D C 3 N E I 5 2 1 V 4 P I 3 1 I T 3 L A 5 E

P R E D 4 T I N

E S M G T R E I A N N

T 7 E 3 T E 2 E

F 8 O S R E

F I C N

N H O 1 4 G 2 2 O D A

U 1 M S E 6 N 1 T E R 3 I

T L G 5 2

A S P U N R A Y D O R S 1

1 3 4 V D S T I E D 5 E C E 3 8 M U 4 N 4 R 1 C

P I E T L Y A 2 N 1 1 1 2 0 2 2 4 5 P 1 2 L 2 A N 1 1 4 5 4 5 2 2 8

N T Y E C C N O H P G I R L I I P D N C O S E R

E A A R T L I N I O G

N S E C T I O U D C N E I N V P I I T L A E

R E D T N

S M G P T E I A N I N E P T E T E R E L

O S R A

7 F I C N N

H O F G

O A A E

U M S N N N T E D I D

T L G

A E

P U S N R R A E D O R

C

S V D S Y T I E D C I S E O U T N N R C E I E T M Y PLAN PLAN

APPENDIX C – Photographs

Appendix C Table of Contents

Name Photo Description Page Photo 01 - Approach Pier: Overall view of top deck looking northeast ...... C-4 Photo 02 - Approach Pier: View of entry gate to Pier 7 ...... C-4 Photo 03 - Approach Pier: Overall view of pier north side from Pier 7...... C-5 Photo 04 - Approach Pier: Bent 2, top deck curb spall looking north ...... C-5 Photo 05 - Approach Pier: Bent 5, under deck open corrosion spall of T beams ...... C-6 Photo 06 - Approach Pier: Bent 2, open corrosion spall of pile cap ...... C-6 Photo 07 - Approach Pier: Abraded asphalt cover exposing concrete top deck ...... C-7 Photo 08 - Approach Pier: Pile 1E, corroded, thin pile flange at EL -4’ ...... C-7 Photo 09 – Pier 7: Overall view looking from the Approach Pier ...... C-8 Photo 10 – Pier 7: Overall view looking east from Bent 24 ...... C-8 Photo 11 – Pier 7: Overall view looking west from Bent 24 ...... C-9 Photo 12 – Pier 7: Typical view of the under deck and piles looking east from B16 .. C-9 Photo 13 - Pier 7: Pile 26aB, corroded flange edge less than 1/8” thick at EL -4’. .... C-10 Photo 14 - Pier 7: Pile 43B, corroded flange edge 3/16” thick at EL -14’...... C-10 Photo 15 - Pier 7: Pile 43B, typical corroded, pitted flange surface at EL -14’ ...... C-11 Photo 16 - Pier 7: Pile 1A, underwater view of concrete jacket in good condition ..... C-11 Photo 17 - Pier 7: Pile 2C, concrete jacket spall exposing the pile flange ...... C-12 Photo 18 - Pier 7: Bent 36, pile cap open corrosion spall looking west ...... C-12 Photo 19 - Pier 7: Bent 41, pile cap open corrosion spall looking east ...... C-13 Photo 20 - Pier 7: Bent 50, edge beam open corrosion spall looking south ...... C-13 Photo 21 - Pier 7: Bent 10, top deck utility vault cover open corrosion spall ...... C-14 Photo 22 - Pier 7: Bent 39, double bitt bollard with 75% coating loss ...... C-14 Photo 23 - Pier 7: Bent 51, bollard foundation with 3/16” cracks at corners ...... C-15 Photo 24 - Pier 7: Bent 33, bollard foundation with spalls and cracking ...... C-15 Photo 25 - Pier 7: Bent 35, light post buckled 5’ above the pier deck ...... C-16 Photo 26 - Pier 7 Fender System: Overall view of the pier fender north side ...... C-16 Photo 27 - Pier 7 Fender System: Overall view of the pier fender south side ...... C-17 Photo 28 - Pier 7 Fender System: Typical elevation view, fender north side ...... C-17 Photo 29 - Pier 7 Fender System: Typical fender pile cluster, northeast side ...... C-18 Photo 30 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 42.5, underwater view south fender pile ..... C-18

C-2

Appendix C Table of Contents

Photo 31 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 42.5, marine borer damage on north pile .... C-19 Photo 32 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 41, broken wale behind pile cluster ...... C-19 Photo 33 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 41 south side, broken upper wale ...... C-20 Photo 34 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 45.5 north side, pile head fungal attack ...... C-20 Photo 35 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 37 south side, missing upper wale block ..... C-21 Photo 36 - Pier 7 Utilities: Sewer connection at Bent 40 ...... C-21 Photo 37 - Pier 7 Utilities: Abandoned water pipe ...... C-22 Photo 38 - Pier 7 Utilities: Heat controller box ...... C-22 Photo 39 - Pier 7 Utilities: Utility mound for CGC Eagle ...... C-23 Photo 40 - Pier 7 Utilities: Electrical receptacle for CGC Eagle ...... C-23 Photo 41 - Pier 7 Utilities: Electrical receptacle specifications ...... C-24 Photo 42 - Pier 7 Utilities: Telecommunications box for CGC Eagle ...... C-24 Photo 43 - Pier 7 Utilities: Telecommunications box interior panel ...... C-25

C-3

Photo 01 - Approach Pier: Overall view of top deck looking northeast.

Photo 02 - Approach Pier: View of entry gate to Pier 7.

C-4

Photo 03 - Approach Pier: Overall view of pier north side from Pier 7

Photo 04 - Approach Pier: Bent 2, top deck curb spall looking north

C-5

SPALLING DUE TO INSUFFICIENT COVER OF THE REINFORCING STEEL.

Photo 05 - Approach Pier: Bent 5, under deck open corrosion spall of T beams

Photo 06 - Approach Pier: Bent 2, open corrosion spall of pile cap

C-6

EXPOSED CONCRETE TOP DECK

Photo 07 - Approach Pier: Abraded asphalt cover exposing concrete top deck

PILE FLANGE STEEL THICKNESS LOSS DUE TO CORROSION

Photo 08 - Approach Pier: Pile 1E, corroded, thin pile flange at EL -4’

C-7

Photo 09 - Pier 7: Overall view looking from the Approach Pier

Photo 10 - Pier 7: Overall view looking east from Bent 24

C-8

Photo 11 - Pier 7: Overall view looking west from Bent 24

Photo 12 - Pier 7: Typical view of the under deck and piles looking east from B16

C-9

Photo 13 - Pier 7: Pile 26B, corroded flange edge less than 1/8” thick at EL -4’

STEEL PILE CORRODED FLANGE EDGE

Photo 14 - Pier 7: Pile 43B, corroded flange edge 3/16” thick at EL -14’

C-10

Photo 15 - Pier 7: Pile 43B, typical corroded, pitted pile flange surface at EL -14’

Photo 16 - Pier 7: Pile 1A, underwater view of concrete jacket in good condition

C-11

STEEL PILE EXPOSED FLANGE AND EXPOSED JACKET REINFORCING STEEL

Photo 17 - Pier 7: Pile 2C, concrete jacket spall exposing the pile flange

OPEN CORROSION SPALL 4 SF IN AREA 4” DEEP WITH EXPOSED REINFORCING STEEL

Photo 18 - Pier 7: Bent 36, pile cap open corrosion spall looking west

C-12

OPEN CORROSION SPALL 4 SF IN AREA 4” DEEP WITH EXPOSED REINFORCING STEEL

Photo 19 - Pier 7: Bent 41, pile cap open corrosion spall looking east

OPEN CORROSION SPALL 6 SF IN AREA 2” DEEP WITH EXPOSED REINFORCING STEEL

Photo 20 - Pier 7: Bent 50, edge beam open corrosion spall looking south

C-13

OPEN CORROSION SPALL 4 SF IN AREA 2” DEEP

Photo 21 - Pier 7: Bent 10, top deck utility vault cover open corrosion spall

Photo 22 - Pier 7: Bent 39, double bitt bollard with 75% coating loss

C-14

3/16” WIDE CRACK AT THE BOLLARD BASE CORNER

Photo 23 - Pier 7: Bent 51, bollard foundation with 3/16” cracks at corners

4 SF CLOSED CORROSION SPALL AND HAIRLINE CRACKING

Photo 24 - Pier 7: Bent 33, bollard foundation with spalls and cracking

C-15

BUCKLE IN LIGHT POLE MAST

Photo 25 - Pier 7: Bent 35, light post buckled 5’ above the pier deck

Photo 26 - Pier 7 Fender System: Overall view of the pier fender north side

C-16

Photo 27 - Pier 7 Fender System: Overall view of the pier fender south side

Photo 28 - Pier 7 Fender System: Typical elevation view, fender north side

C-17

Photo 29 - Pier 7 Fender System: Typical fender pile cluster, northeast side

TIMBER FENDER PILE IN GOOD CONDITION BELOW MLW

Photo 30 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 42.5, underwater view south fender pile

C-18

TIMBER FENDER PILE WITH SEVERE MARINE BORER DAMAGE AND 5” EFFECTIVE PILE DIAMETER

Photo 31 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 42.5, marine borer damage on north pile

BROKEN WALE BEHIND NORTHEAST FENDER PILE CLUSTER

Photo 32 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 41, broken wale behind pile cluster

C-19

UPPER WALE IS BROKEN AND MISSING OVER A 20 FEET LENGTH

Photo 33 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 41 south side, broken upper wale

Photo 34 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 45.5 north side, pile head fungal attack

C-20

MISSING UPPER WALE BLOCK, BUT WALE CONNECTION BOLT REMAINS

Photo 35 - Pier 7 Fender System: Bent 37 south side, missing upper wale block

Photo 36 - Pier 7 Utilities: Sewer connection at Bent 40

C-21

Photo 37 - Pier 7 Utilities: Abandoned water pipe

Photo 38 - Pier 7 Utilities: Heat controller box

C-22

Photo 39 - Pier 7 Utilities: Utility mound for CGC Eagle

Photo 40 - Pier 7 Utilities: Electrical receptacle for CGC Eagle

C-23

Photo 41 - Pier 7 Utilities: Electrical receptacle specifications

Photo 42 - Pier 7 Utilities: Telecommunications box for CGC Eagle

C-24

Photo 43 - Pier 7 Utilities: Telecommunications box interior panel

C-25

APPENDIX D– Structural Calculations

Appendix D Table of Contents

Item PAGE Structural Calculations ...... D-3

D-2

"RECTBEAM (318-05).xls" Program Version 1.1

RECTANGULAR CONCRETE BEAM/SECTION ANALYSIS Flexure, Shear, Crack Control, and Inertia for Singly or Doubly Reinforced Sections Per ACI 318-05 Code Job Name: Subject: Job Number: Originator: Checker:

Input Data: b Beam or Slab Section? Beam Exterior or Interior Exposure? Exterior Reinforcing Yield Strength, fy = 60 ksi Concrete Comp. Strength, f 'c = 4 ksi h d Beam Width, b = 36.000 in. Depth to Tension Reinforcing, d = 18.500 in. Total Beam Depth, h = 22.000 in. As Tension Reinforcing, As = 6.320 in.^2 Singly Reinforced Section No. of Tension Bars in Beam, Nb = 8.000 Tension Reinf. Bar Spacing, s1 = 4.000 in. d'=3.5'' b=36'' Clear Cover to Tension Reinf., Cc = 3.000 in. Depth to Compression Reinf., d' = 3.500 in. A's Compression Reinforcing, A's = 6.320 in.^2 =6.32 Working Stress Moment, Ma = 280.00 ft-kips h=22'' d=18.5'' Ultimate Design Moment, Mu = 400.00 ft-kips Ultimate Design Shear, Vu = 100.00 kips Total Stirrup Area, Av(stirrup) = 0.400 in.^2 As=6.32 Tie/Stirrup Spacing, s2 = 9.0000 in. Doubly Reinforced Section

Results:

Moment Capacity Check for Beam-Type Section: Crack Control (Distribution of Reinf.): b1 = 0.85 Per ACI 318-05 Code: c = 3.558 in. Es = 29000 ksi a = 3.025 in. Ec = 3605 ksi rb = 0.02851 n = 8.04 n = Es/Ec r(prov) = 0.00949 fs = 32.19 ksi r(min) = 0.00333 fs(used) = 32.19 ksi As(min) = 2.220 in.^2 <= As = 6.32 in.^2, O.K. s1(max) = 11.14 in. >= s1 = 4 in., O.K. r(temp) = N.A. (total for section) As(temp) = N.A. in.^2/face Per ACI 318-95 Code: r(max) = 0.03074 dc = 3.5000 in. As(max) = 20.474 in.^2 >= As = 6.32 in.^2, O.K. z = 154.35 k/in. f 's = 1.42 ksi (A's does not yield) z(allow) = 145.00 k/in. < z = 154.35 k/in., fMn = 481.79 ft-k >= Mu = 400 ft-k, O.K. N.G.

Shear Capacity Check for Beam-Type Section: Moment of Inertia for Deflection: fVc = 63.18 kips fr = 0.474 ksi fVs = 37.00 kips kd = 5.5928 in. fVn = fVc+fVs = 100.18 kips >= Vu = 100 kips, O.K. Ig = 31944.00 in.^4 fVs(max) = 252.73 kips >= Vu-(phi)Vc = 36.82 kips, O.K. Mcr = 114.79 ft-k Av(prov) = 0.400 in.^2 = Av(stirrup) Icr = 10764.09 in.^4 Av(req'd) = 0.398 in.^2 <= Av(prov) = 0.4 in.^2, O.K. Ie = 12223.47 in.^4 (for deflection) Av(min) = 0.270 in.^2 <= Av(prov) = 0.4 in.^2, O.K. s2(max) = 9.250 in. >= s2 = 9 in., O.K. Comments:

1 of 1 7/12/2017 12:36 PM "RECTBEAM (318-05).xls" Program Version 1.1

RECTANGULAR CONCRETE BEAM/SECTION ANALYSIS Flexure, Shear, Crack Control, and Inertia for Singly or Doubly Reinforced Sections Per ACI 318-05 Code Job Name: Subject: Job Number: Originator: Checker:

Input Data: b Beam or Slab Section? Slab Exterior or Interior Exposure? Exterior Reinforcing Yield Strength, fy = 60 ksi Concrete Comp. Strength, f 'c = 4 ksi h d Slab Section Width, b = 12.000 in. Depth to Tension Reinforcing, d = 7.500 in. Total Slab Section Depth, h = 11.000 in. As Tension Reinforcing, As = 0.880 in.^2 Singly Reinforced Section No. of Tension Bars in Slab, Nb = 2.000 Tension Reinf. Bar Spacing, s1 = 6.000 in. d'=3.5'' b=12'' Clear Cover to Tension Reinf., Cc = 3.000 in. Depth to Compression Reinf., d' = 3.500 in. A's Compression Reinforcing, A's = 0.880 in.^2 =0.88 Working Stress Moment, Ma = 14.00 ft-kips h=11'' d=7.5'' Ultimate Design Moment, Mu = 20.00 ft-kips Ultimate Design Shear, Vu = 5.00 kips Total Stirrup Area, Av(stirrup) = 0.000 in.^2 As=0.88 Tie/Stirrup Spacing, s2 = 0.0000 in. Doubly Reinforced Section

Results:

Moment Capacity Check for Slab-Type Section: Crack Control (Distribution of Reinf.): b1 = 0.85 Per ACI 318-05 Code: c = 1.522 in. Es = 29000 ksi a = 1.294 in. Ec = 3605 ksi rb = 0.02851 n = 8.04 n = Es/Ec r(prov) = 0.00978 fs = 28.55 ksi r(min) = 0.00333 fs(used) = 28.55 ksi As(min) = N.A. in.^2 s1(max) = 13.51 in. >= s1 = 6 in., O.K. r(temp) = 0.00180 (total for section) As(temp) = 0.119 in.^2/face Per ACI 318-95 Code: r(max) = 0.02438 dc = 3.5000 in. As(max) = 2.194 in.^2 >= As = 0.88 in.^2, O.K. z = 150.70 k/in. f 's = N.A. ksi (A's does not yield) z(allow) = 129.00 k/in. < z = 150.7 k/in., fMn = 27.14 ft-k >= Mu = 20 ft-k, O.K. N.G.

Shear Capacity Check for Slab-Type Section: Moment of Inertia for Deflection: fVc = 8.54 kips >= Vu = 5 kips, O.K. fr = 0.474 ksi fVs = N.A. kips kd = 2.5934 in. fVn = fVc+fVs = N.A. kips Ig = 1331.00 in.^4 fVs(max) = N.A. kips Mcr = 9.57 ft-k Av(prov) = N.A. in.^2 = Av(stirrup) Icr = 245.29 in.^4 Av(req'd) = N.A. in.^2 Ie = 591.63 in.^4 (for deflection) Av(min) = N.A. in.^2 s2(max) = N.A. in. Comments:

1 of 1 7/12/2017 12:34 PM Pile Bent Analysis Project Pier 7 - Eagle Birth

Program Designed By MMS Piles Fixed at Top Date 7 / 7 /2016

lbf lbf kip≡ 1000⋅ lbf ksi≡ 1000⋅ ksf≡ 1000⋅ kN≡ 1000⋅ newton 2 2 in ft LEGEND input data is tan results and warnings are yellow

Model

NumberOfPiles:= 3 a minimum of two is required

PileSpacing:= 11.5⋅ ft along with the pile width affects shadowing

Overhang:= 3.5⋅ ft See Pile Bent Model (minimum length is 0.01 ft)

LengthPileSection1 := 40⋅ ft If the clear height is zero provide a small value such as 0.1*ft (minimum length is 0.01 ft)

LengthPileSection2 := 50⋅ ft (minimum length is 0.01 ft) see sketch

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 1 LengthPileSection3 := 20⋅ ft (minimum length is 0.01 ft) see sketch

Ecap := 4000⋅ ksi modulus of elasticity of cap beam

2 Acap := 5.5⋅ ft cross sectional area of cap beam

4 Icap := 1.54⋅ ft inertia of cap beam

Epile := 4000⋅ ksi modulus of elasticity of pile

2 Apile := 21.4⋅ in cross sectional area of pile. Since the axial stiffness of the pile is controlled linearly by this value along with the total pile length this area can be altered to obtain the correct axial stiffness.

4 Ipile := 729⋅ in inertia of pile

Soil Springs

Terzaghi's recommended values for modulus of subgrade reaction for piles in sand Units are kips/ft^3 Relative Density Loose Medium Dense of Sand Dry or Moist 6 - 18 22 - 70 90 - 180

Submerged 4 - 11 14 - 47 55 - 110

Recommended values for modulus of subgrade reaction for piles in clay Units are kips/ft^3

Clay Type Soft Medium Stiff

Dry or Moist 10 - 250 250 - 900 350-1400

Submerged 10 - 250 75 - 500 175 - 700

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 2 z:= 0.. ( NumberOfPiles- 1)

kip kPileSection2 := 4⋅ This is the modulus of subgrade reaction for Pile Section 2. The top embedded 3 ft section. Soil spring stiffness should reflect the soil at a depth of 3 pile widths.

kip kPileSection3 := 60⋅ This is the modulus of subgrade reaction for Pile Section 3. Soil spring 3 ft stiffness should reflect the stiffness near the top of the section.

This is the width of the pile that bears against the soil Widthpile := 1.2⋅ ft

kmodifier := z These values modify the stiffness of the piles for lateral loads due to 0.8 shadowing. These values are a function of spacing as a ratio of pile width. 0.4 For medium to dense sand the multipliers for a 5 pile group with 0.3 3 pile widths spacing are 0.8, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 0.2. The mulipliers for loose sand 0.2 with the same conditions would be 1.0, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 0.2. If the pile spacing is 0.2 5 pile widths or greater modifiers are not required. 0.2 0.2

Constants and Range Variables for Calculating Structural Properties

ns := 0.. 1 step( value) := if( value< 0 , 0 , 1)

ndf:= NumberOfPiles⋅ 3⋅3 + 5 maxz:= NumberOfPiles- 1

i:= 0, 9 .. (ndf- 14) k:= 0.. ndf

j:= 0.. ndf ClrDist:= LengthPileSection1

ks := k il:= 0, 9 .. (ndf- 23) 0, z PileSection2

ks := k 1, z PileSection3

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 3 Loads afn

Point Loads af1

af0

f0 f1 fn

Point Load Description

NumLoads:= 4 (Provide a minimum of one load even if it has zero value)

f := 1⋅ kip af := 3.6⋅ ft 0 0

f := 0⋅ kip af := 9.25⋅ ft 1 1

f := 1⋅ kip af := 15.5⋅ ft 2 2

f := 0⋅ kip af := 20.75⋅ ft 3 3

f := 0⋅ kip af := 1⋅ ft 4 4

f := 0⋅ kip af := 1⋅ ft 5 5

f := 0⋅ kip af := 1⋅ ft 6 6

f := 0⋅ kip af := 1⋅ ft 7 7

f := 0⋅ kip af := 1⋅ ft 8 8

f := 0⋅ kip af := 1⋅ ft 9 9

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 4 Uniform Loads

awn lwn

aw1 lw1

aw0 lw0

wln wln0 wln1 n

Uniform Load Description

UnifLoads:= 1

kip aw := 3.50⋅ ft lw := 11⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 0 0 0 ft

kip aw := 1⋅ ft lw := 1⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 1 1 1 ft

kip aw := 1⋅ ft lw := 1⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 2 2 2 ft

kip aw := 1⋅ ft lw := 1⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 3 3 3 ft

kip aw := 1⋅ ft lw := 1⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 4 4 4 ft

kip aw := 1⋅ ft lw := 1⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 5 5 5 ft

kip aw := 1⋅ ft lw := 1⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 6 6 6 ft

kip aw := 1⋅ ft lw := 1⋅ ft wln := 0⋅ 7 7 7 ft

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 5 Transverse Load spread equally to all pile cap nodes at the top of each pile

T force

Transverse Load Description

Ad := 0 j

Tforce := 0⋅ kip

Tforce Tforce := kip

Tforce Ad := 3+ 9⋅ z NumberOfPiles

pi:= 0.. NumLoads- 1

wi:= 0.. UnifLoads- 1

Adjust point load locations to miss joints

AdjustPointLocation() a := for j∈ 0.. ( NumLoads- 1) for k∈ 0.. ( NumberOfPiles- 1) a ← a + 0.000001⋅ in if a = Overhang+ k⋅ PileSpacing j j j a

af:= AdjustPointLocation() af

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 6 PointLoadInfoString := for j∈ 0.. ( NumLoads- 1) if af > [(NumberOfPiles- 1)⋅PileSpacing + 2⋅ Overhang] + af < 0  j  ()j ans← "A Point Load is located outside of the extent of the Cap" break ans← "All Point Loads are located on the Cap" otherwise ans

PointLoadInfoString= "All Point Loads are located on the Cap"

UniformLoadInfoString := for j∈ 0.. ( UnifLoads- 1) if aw < 0 + aw + lw > [(NumberOfPiles- 1) ⋅PileSpacing + 2⋅ Overhang] ()j ()j j  ans← "A Uniform Load extends beyond the Cap" break ans← "All Unform Loads are located on the Cap" otherwise ans

UniformLoadInfoString= "All Unform Loads are located on the Cap"

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 7 Modify soil springs to account for shadowing

ks := ks ⋅kmodifier ns, z ns, z z

A. Create the Stiffness Matrix

Calculate the common terms for the beam on elastic foundation members

Lengthembed := LengthPileSection2 0

Lengthembed := LengthPileSection3 1

1 4 ks ⋅Width  ns, z pile   0.0069 0.0058 0.0054  - 1 B := B = ⋅in ns, z      4⋅ Epile⋅Ipile   0.0136 0.0114 0.0106 

Ŏ0 := cos B ⋅Lengthembed ⋅cosh B ⋅Lengthembed ns, z ( ns, z ns) ( ns, z ns)

 -16.927 -15.4105 -12.8009  Ŏ0 =    -13.0207 -7.2217 -5.399 

1 Ŏ1 := ⋅sin B ⋅Lengthembed ⋅cosh B ⋅Lengthembed ...  ns, z ( ns, z ns) ( ns, z ns) 2   + cos B ⋅Lengthembed ⋅sinh B ⋅Lengthembed  ( ns, z ns) ( ns, z ns) 

 -21.8543 -10.479 -7.0562  Ŏ1 =    -7.3054 -2.0748 -0.876 

1 Ŏ2 := ⋅ sin B ⋅Lengthembed ⋅sinh B ⋅Lengthembed ns, z 2 ( ( ns, z ns) ( ns, z ns))

 -13.3884 -2.7829 -0.673  Ŏ2 =    -0.8117 1.4941 1.7697 

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 8 1 Ŏ3 := ⋅sin B ⋅Lengthembed ⋅cosh B ⋅Lengthembed ...  ns, z ( ns, z ns) ( ns, z ns) 4   + -cos B ⋅Lengthembed ⋅sinh B ⋅Lengthembed  ( ns, z ns) ( ns, z ns) 

 -2.4679 2.4514 2.853  Ŏ3 =    2.8387 2.5438 2.2292 

2  125.3145 33.4326 20.5843  D := Ŏ2 - Ŏ1 ⋅Ŏ3 D =   ns, z ()ns, z ns, z ns, z  21.3966 7.5102 5.0847 

The beam on elastic foundation stiffness has been developed for the degrees of freedom shown in the 1984 ASCE Structural Journal by Ting and Mockry on pages 2324 - 2339. The associated axial degrees will be added by considering them to be uncoupled such that they will be equivalent to the standard beam element stiffness PL / (AE)

3 B ⋅E ⋅I ()ns, z pile pile K11 := ⋅ 4⋅Ŏ2 ⋅Ŏ3 + Ŏ0 ⋅Ŏ1 ns, z D ( ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z) ns, z

 3.8629 2.3011 1.8549  kip K11 =   ⋅  29.5034 17.5623 14.2042  in

2 B ⋅E ⋅I ()ns, z pile pile  2 K21 := ⋅ Ŏ0 ⋅Ŏ2 + 4⋅ Ŏ3 ns, z D  ns, z ns, z ()ns, z  ns, z

 279.2524 197.3508 170.7858  K21 =   ⋅kip  1080.1943 767.4439 671.3021 

3 K31 := 4⋅ B ⋅Epile ⋅Ipile⋅Ŏ1 - 4⋅ B ⋅K21 ⋅Ŏ3 - K11 ⋅Ŏ0 ns, z ()ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 9  0.1681 0.1797 0.1584  kip K31 =   ⋅  2.509 1.2071 0.6067  in

K11 ⋅Ŏ1 2 ns, z ns, z K41 := -4⋅ B ⋅Epile⋅Ipile⋅Ŏ2 - K21 ⋅Ŏ0 + ns, z ()ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z B ns, z

 -14.8962 -8.2066 -2.7917  K41 =   ⋅kip  -20.4849 75.9615 115.0937 

B ⋅E ⋅I ns, z pile pile K22 := ⋅ Ŏ1 ⋅Ŏ2 - Ŏ0 ⋅Ŏ3 K44 := K22 ns, z D ( ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z) ns, z

 4 4 4   4.0358× 10 3.3948× 10 3.1636× 10  K22 = ⋅kip⋅ in  4 4 4   7.9545× 10 6.7849× 10 6.4034× 10 

K21 ⋅Ŏ1 ns, z ns, z K42 := -4⋅B ⋅Epile⋅Ipile⋅Ŏ3 - K22 ⋅Ŏ0 + ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z ns, z B ns, z

 -397.0895 1243.2227 2186.9677  K = ⋅kip⋅ in 42  4 4   5264.5519 1.1302× 10 1.3614× 10 

K32 := -K41 K33 := K11 K43 := -K21

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 10 kip S := 0.0⋅ j, k in

Ecap⋅Acap 12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 4⋅ Ecap⋅Icap S := S := S := S := 0, 0 Overhang 1, 1 3 1, 2 2 2, 2 2 Overhang Overhang ⋅in Overhang⋅ in

-Ecap⋅Acap Ecap⋅Acap Ecap⋅Acap 12⋅ Epile⋅Ipile -12⋅Ecap⋅Icap S := S := + + S := 0, 3 Overhang 3, 3 Overhang PileSpacing 3 1, 4 3 ClrDist Overhang

-6⋅Ecap⋅Icap 12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Epile⋅Apile S := S := + + 2, 4 2 4, 4 3 3 ClrDist Overhang ⋅in Overhang PileSpacing

6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 2⋅ Ecap⋅Icap -6⋅Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap S := S := S := + 1, 5 2 2, 5 2 4, 5 2 2 Overhang ⋅in Overhang⋅ in Overhang ⋅in PileSpacing ⋅in

4⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 4⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 4⋅ Epile⋅Ipile -12⋅Epile⋅Ipile S := + + S := 5, 5 2 2 2 3+ i, 6+ i 3 Overhang⋅ in PileSpacing⋅ in ClrDist⋅ in ClrDist

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 11 12⋅ Epile⋅Ipile -()Epile ⋅Apile S := + K11 i S := 6+ i, 6+ i 3 0, 4+ i, 7+ i ClrDist ClrDist 9

Epile ⋅Apile Epile ⋅Apile 6⋅ Epile ⋅Ipile S := + S := 7+ i, 7+ i 3+ i, 8+ i ClrDist Lengthembed 2 0 ClrDist ⋅in

K21 i K44 i 0, 0, -6⋅Epile⋅Ipile 9 4⋅ Epile ⋅Ipile 9 S := + S := + 6+ i, 8+ i 2 in 8+ i, 8+ i 2 2 ClrDist ⋅in ClrDist⋅ in in

K32 i 0, 9 S := K31 i S := S := K33 i + K11 i 6+ i, 9+ i 0, 8+ i, 9+ i in 9+ i, 9+ i 0, 1, 9 9 9

Epile⋅Apile Epile⋅Apile Epile⋅Apile S := - S := + 7+ i, 10+ i 10+ i, 10+ i Lengthembed Lengthembed Lengthembed 0 0 1

K41 i K42 i 0, 0, 9 9 S := S := 6+ i, 11+ i in 8+ i, 11+ i 2 in

K43 i K21 i K22 i K22 i 0, 1, 0, 1, 9 9 9 9 S := + S := + 9+ i, 11+ i in in 11+ i, 11+ i 2 2 in in

2⋅ Ecap⋅Acap 12⋅ Epile⋅Ipile -()Ecap⋅Acap S := + S := 12+ i, 12+ i PileSpacing 3 3+ i, 12+ i PileSpacing ClrDist

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 12 12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 2⋅ Ecap⋅Icap S := - S := - S := 4+ i, 13+ i 3 5+ i, 13+ i 2 5+ i, 14+ i 2 PileSpacing PileSpacing ⋅in PileSpacing⋅ in

24⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Epile⋅Apile 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap S := + S := 13+ i, 13+ i 3 ClrDist 4+ i, 14+ i 2 PileSpacing PileSpacing ⋅in

kip 8⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 4⋅ Epile⋅Ipile S := 0⋅ S := + S := S 13+ i, 14+ i in 14+ i, 14+ i 2 2 ndf- 11, ndf- 11 3, 3 PileSpacing⋅ in ClrDist⋅ in

S := S S := -S S := S ndf- 10, ndf- 10 4, 4 ndf- 10, ndf- 9 4, 5 ndf- 9, ndf- 9 5, 5

Ecap⋅Acap Ecap⋅Acap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap S := - S := S := - ndf- 11, ndf- 2 Overhang ndf- 2, ndf- 2 Overhang ndf- 9, ndf- 1 2 Overhang ⋅in

-12⋅Ecap⋅Icap 12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap S := S := S := ndf- 10, ndf- 1 3 ndf- 1, ndf- 1 3 ndf- 10, ndf 2 Overhang Overhang Overhang ⋅in

2⋅ Ecap⋅Icap -6⋅Ecap⋅Icap 4⋅ Ecap⋅Icap S := S := S := ndf- 9, ndf 2 ndf- 1, ndf 2 ndf, ndf 2 Overhang⋅ in Overhang ⋅in Overhang⋅ in

-6⋅Epile⋅Ipile 2⋅ Epile ⋅Ipile 6⋅ Epile ⋅Ipile S := S := S := 6+ i, 5+ i 2 8+ i, 5+ i 2 3+ i, 5+ i 2 ClrDist ⋅in ClrDist⋅ in ClrDist ⋅in

T St := S

Sint j, j in - 1 Sint := SS+ t Sint := SS:= int⋅ Sinv := S j, j 2 kip

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 13 B. Calculate the Member Force Matrix

q:= 0.. [ 9⋅( NumberOfPiles- 1) + 8]

zz:= 0.. ( NumberOfPiles- 2)

kip Amd := 0⋅ q, j in

Ecap⋅Acap Ecap⋅Acap Amd := Amd := - 9⋅ z, 3+ 9⋅ z PileSpacing 9⋅ z, 12+ 9⋅ z PileSpacing

12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := 1+ 9⋅ z, 4+ 9⋅ z 3 1+ 9⋅ z, 5+ 9⋅ z 2 PileSpacing PileSpacing ⋅in

-12⋅Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := 1+ 9⋅ z, 13+ 9⋅ z 3 1+ 9⋅ z, 14+ 9⋅ z 2 PileSpacing PileSpacing ⋅in

4⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := - 2+ 9⋅ z, 5+ 9⋅ z 2 2+ 9⋅ z, 13+ 9⋅ z 2 PileSpacing⋅ in PileSpacing ⋅in

2⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := 2+ 9⋅ z, 14+ 9⋅ z 2 2+ 9⋅ z, 4+ 9⋅ z 2 PileSpacing⋅ in PileSpacing ⋅in

12⋅ Epile⋅Ipile 12⋅ Epile⋅Ipile Amd := Amd := - 3+ 9⋅ z, 6+ 9⋅ z 3 3+ 9⋅ z, 3+ 9⋅ z 3 ClrDist ClrDist

6⋅ Epile ⋅Ipile Epile⋅Apile Amd := - Amd := 3+ 9⋅ z, 8+ 9⋅ z 2 4+ 9⋅ z, 7+ 9⋅ z ClrDist ClrDist ⋅in

-Epile ⋅Apile -6⋅Epile ⋅Ipile Amd := Amd := 4+ 9⋅ z, 4+ 9⋅ z ClrDist 5+ 9⋅ z, 6+ 9⋅ z 2 ClrDist ⋅in

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 14 6⋅ Epile⋅Ipile Amd := Amd := K31 5+ 9⋅ z, 3+ 9⋅ z 2 6+ 9⋅ z, 6+ 9⋅ z 0, z ClrDist ⋅in

4⋅ Epile⋅Ipile Amd := Amd := K33 5+ 9⋅ z, 8+ 9⋅ z 2 6+ 9⋅ z, 9+ 9⋅ z 0, z ClrDist⋅ in

K32 0, z Epile⋅Apile Amd := Amd := 6+ 9⋅ z, 8+ 9⋅ z in 7+ 9⋅ z, 10+ 9⋅ z Lengthembed 0

K43 0, z -Epile⋅Apile Amd := Amd := 6+ 9⋅ z, 11+ 9⋅ z in 7+ 9⋅ z, 7+ 9⋅ z Lengthembed 0

K41 K42 0, z 0, z Amd := Amd := 8+ 9⋅ z, 6+ 9⋅ z in 8+ 9⋅ z, 8+ 9⋅ z 2 in

K43 K22 0, z 0, z Amd := Amd := 8+ 9⋅ z, 9+ 9⋅ z in 8+ 9⋅ z, 11+ 9⋅ z 2 in

Ecap⋅Acap Ecap⋅Acap Amd := - Amd := 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 2 Overhang 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 11 Overhang

-(12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap) 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := 1+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 1 3 1+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf 2 Overhang Overhang ⋅in

12⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := 1+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 10 3 1+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 9 2 Overhang Overhang ⋅in

-(6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap) 2⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := 2+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 1 2 2+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf 2 Overhang ⋅in Overhang⋅ in

6⋅ Ecap⋅Icap 4⋅ Ecap⋅Icap Amd := Amd := 2+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 10 2 2+ 9⋅ maxz, ndf- 9 2 Overhang ⋅in Overhang⋅ in

2⋅ Epile⋅Ipile -6⋅Epile ⋅Ipile Amd := Amd := 5+ 9⋅ z, 5+ 9⋅ z 2 3+ 9⋅ z, 5+ 9⋅ z 2 ClrDist⋅ in ClrDist ⋅in

in Amd := Amd⋅ kip

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 15 C. Calculate the Fixed Reaction Matrix

v:= 0.. ( 2+ 3⋅ maxz)

kip Ard := 0⋅ v, j in

Ard := K31 3⋅ z, 9+ 9⋅ z 1, z

K32 1, z -Epile⋅Apile Ard := Ard := 3⋅ z, 11+ 9⋅ z in 1+ 3⋅ z, 10+ 9⋅ z Lengthembed 1

K41 K42 1, z 1, z Ard := Ard := 2+ 3⋅ z, 9+ 9⋅ z in 2+ 3⋅ z, 11+ 9⋅ z 2 in

in Ard := Ard⋅ kip

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 16 D. Calculate Fixed End Reactions due to Point Loads Adl_L1 := 0⋅ kip ndf

2 NumLoads- 1  Overhang- af   ( n)  Adl_L1 := step Overhang- af ⋅f ⋅ ⋅3⋅ af + Overhang- af  1 ∑ ( ( n)) n 3  n ( n) n = 0  Overhang 

2 NumLoads- 1  af   ()n  Adl_L1_cant_react := step Overhang- af ⋅f ⋅ ⋅af + 3⋅ Overhang- af  ∑  ( n) n 3  n ( n) n = 0  Overhang 

2 NumLoads- 1  Overhang- af   ( n) - 1 Adl_L1 := step Overhang- af ⋅f ⋅af ⋅ ⋅in 2 ∑  ( n) n n 2  n = 0  Overhang 

NumLoads- 1  Overhang- af   2 n - 1 Adl_L1_cant_mom := step Overhang- af ⋅-f ⋅ af ⋅ ⋅in ∑  ( n) n ()n 2  n = 0  Overhang 

  il     il valid( n, il) := step Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - af  ⋅step af - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅    9  n  n  9 

2    il    NumLoads- 1  Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - af   9 n - 1 A := valid( n, il)⋅f ⋅ af - Overhang ... ⋅     ⋅in  dl_L1 n  n   5+ il ∑    il  2  n = 0   + PileSpacing⋅  PileSpacing     9  

Adl_L1 := Adl_L1 + Adl_L1_cant_mom 5 5

il  Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - af  NumLoads- 1     n   2   9  - 1 Adl_L1 := - valid( n, il)⋅f ⋅af - Overhang ...  ⋅ ⋅in ... 14+ il ∑ n  n   2  il PileSpacing  n = 0   + PileSpacing⋅      9   + Adl_L1 14+ il

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 17 2  Overhang ... - af     n    il    NumLoads- 1  + PileSpacing⋅ + 1       9     Adl_L1 := valid( n, il)⋅f ⋅ ⋅3⋅ af - Overhang ...  ...  4+ il ∑  n 3  n    PileSpacing  il  n = 0    + PileSpacing⋅      9   + Overhang ... - af     n     il      + PileSpacing⋅ + 1       9   

Adl_L1 := Adl_L1 + Adl_L1_cant_react 4 4

2  af - Overhang ...    n      il  NumLoads- 1   + PileSpacing⋅      9   Adl_L1 := valid( n, il) ⋅f ⋅ ⋅af - Overhang ...  ...  ... 13+ il ∑  n 3 n    PileSpacing  il  n = 0   + PileSpacing⋅     9   + Overhang ... - af ⋅3     n     il       + PileSpacing⋅ + 1        9     + Adl_L1 13+ il

validendp() n := step af - (Overhang+ maxz⋅ PileSpacing) ⋅step( 2⋅ Overhang + maxz⋅ PileSpacing) - af  n   n

2⋅ Overhang ... - af NumLoads- 1    n    2 + PileSpacing⋅( maxz)  - 1 Adl_L1 := - validendp() n ⋅f ⋅af - Overhang ...  ⋅ ⋅in ndf  ∑  n n   + PileSpacing⋅( maxz)  2  n = 0  Overhang 

2  2⋅ Overhang ... - af  NumLoads- 1    n  + PileSpacing⋅( maxz) - 1 A := validendp() n ⋅f ⋅ af - Overhang ... ⋅    ⋅in  ... dl_L1 n  n   ndf- 9 ∑  + PileSpacing⋅( maxz) 2  n = 0     Overhang  + Adl_L1 ndf- 9

2  2⋅ Overhang ... - af  NumLoads- 1    n  + PileSpacing⋅( maxz)   A := validendp() n ⋅f ⋅ ⋅ 3⋅ af - Overhang ......  ... dl_L1 n   n    ndf- 10 ∑  3  + PileSpacing⋅ maxz  n = 0 Overhang    + 2⋅ Overhang ... - af     n    + PileSpacing⋅ maxz   + Adl_L1 ndf- 10

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 18 2  af - Overhang ...  NumLoads- 1   n     + PileSpacing⋅ maxz  A := validendp() n ⋅f ⋅ ⋅ af - Overhang ......  dl_L1 n  n    ndf- 1 ∑  3  + PileSpacing⋅ maxz  n = 0 Overhang   + 2⋅ Overhang ... - af ⋅3     n    + PileSpacing⋅ maxz   

AL1_w := 0⋅ kip E. Calculate Fixed End Reactions due to Uniform Loads ndf

actlw() n := if aw > Overhang , 0⋅ in , if aw + lw > Overhang , Overhang- aw , lw  n ()n n ( n) n

actc() n := Overhang- aw - actlw() n n

actlw() n actd() n := aw + n 2

actlw() n acte() n := actc() n + 2

UnifLoads- 1 -step Overhang- aw ⋅wln ⋅actlw() n   ( n) n  2 2  - AL1_w := ⋅ actlw() n ⋅Overhang ...  - 24⋅ acte() n ⋅actd() n ⋅in 2 ∑  2  + 3⋅ actc() n - aw   n = 0  24⋅ Overhang   ( n)  

UnifLoads- 1 step Overhang- aw ⋅wln ⋅actlw() n    ( n) n  2  - AL1_w_cant := ⋅24⋅ acte() n ⋅(Overhang+ actd() n ) ...  ⋅in  ∑  2 2  n = 0 24⋅ Overhang + 3⋅ actlw() n ⋅ aw - actc() n ...    ( n )     2 2    + (actlw() n ⋅Overhang) - 24⋅ acte() n ⋅Overhang 

UnifLoads- 1 step Overhang- aw ⋅wln ⋅actlw() n  ( n) n 2 2  A :=  ⋅4⋅ acte() n ⋅ Overhang ... - actlw() n ⋅ actc() n - aw  L1_w    ( n) 1 ∑  3 + 2⋅ actd() n  n = 0  4⋅ Overhang    

UnifLoads- 1 step Overhang- aw ⋅wln   ( n) n  3 2  AL1_w_cant_react := ⋅ 4⋅ actlw() n ⋅(Overhang - acte() n ⋅Overhang) ... ∑ 3    4⋅ Overhang 2  n = 0  + -8⋅actlw() n ⋅acte() n ⋅actd() n ...  3  + actlw() n ⋅ actc() n - aw    ( n) 

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 19   il     il validw( n, il) := step Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - aw  ⋅step aw + lw - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅    9  n ()n n  9 

  il  il acta( n, il) := if aw < Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅  , 0⋅ in , aw - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅   n  9  n  9 

   il   il actlwb( n, il) := if aw + lw ≤ Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 , aw + lw - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅  , PileSpacing ()n n   9  ()n n  9 

actlw(n, il) := if aw > Overhang ... , if aw + lw ≤ Overhang ... , lw , Overhang ... - aw  n ()n n n   n  il   il    il     + PileSpacing⋅  + PileSpacing⋅ + 1 + PileSpacing⋅ + 1    9   9    9   

actc(n, il) := PileSpacing- acta( n, il) - actlw( n, il)

actlw( n, il) actlw( n, il) acte(n, il) := actc( n, il) + actd(n, il) := acta( n, il) + 2 2

UnifLoads- 1 actlw( n, il) 2 - 1 A := -validw( n, il) ⋅wln ⋅ ⋅actlw( n, il) ⋅ PileSpacing ......  ⋅in L1_w n   5+ il ∑  2  + 3⋅( actc( n, il) - acta( n, il))  n = 0 24⋅ PileSpacing     2   + -24⋅acte( n, il) ⋅actd( n, il) 

AL1_w := AL1_w + AL1_w_cant 5 5

UnifLoads- 1 validw( n, il) ⋅wln ⋅actlw( n, il)   n  2   - AL1_w :=  ⋅ 24⋅ acte( n, il) ⋅(PileSpacing+ actd( n, il)) ...  ⋅in 14+ il     ∑ 2 2  n = 0  24⋅ PileSpacing + 3⋅ actlw( n, il) ⋅(acta( n, il) - actc( n, il)) ...     2 2    + (actlw( n, il) ⋅PileSpacing) - 24⋅ acte( n, il)⋅PileSpacing  + AL1_w 14+ il

UnifLoads- 1 validw( n, il)⋅wln ⋅actlw( n, il)   n  2  AL1_w := ⋅ 4⋅ acte( n, il) ⋅PileSpacing ...  ... 4+ il ∑  3  + 2⋅ actd( n, il)  n = 0 4⋅ PileSpacing     2   + ()-1 ⋅actlw( n, il) ⋅[actc( n, il) - (acta( n, il))] 

AL1_w := AL1_w + AL1_w_cant_react 4 4

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 20 UnifLoads- 1 validw( n, il) ⋅wln  n  3 2  AL1_w :=  ⋅4⋅ actlw( n, il)⋅(PileSpacing - acte( n, il) ⋅PileSpacing) ... + AL1_w 13+ il ∑ 3 2 13+ il n = 0  4⋅ PileSpacing + (-8⋅actlw( n, il)⋅acte( n, il) )⋅actd( n, il) ...    3   + actlw( n, il) ⋅[actc( n, il) - (acta( n, il))] 

validendw() n := step( 2⋅ Overhang + PileSpacing⋅ maxz) - aw ⋅step aw + lw - (Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ maxz)  n ()n n 

acta()n := if aw < (Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ maxz) , 0⋅ in , aw - (Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ maxz)  n n 

actauxlw() n := if( 2⋅ Overhang + maxz⋅ PileSpacing) ≤ aw + lw , (2⋅ Overhang + maxz⋅ PileSpacing) - aw , lw  ()n n n n

actlw()n := if aw ≤ Overhang ... , if aw + lw > 2⋅ Overhang ... , Overhang , aw + lw ...  n ()n n n n   + maxz⋅ PileSpacing  + maxz⋅ PileSpacing    + -Overhang ...     + maxz⋅ PileSpacing  

actc()n := Overhang- acta() n - actlw() n

actlw() n actd()n := acta() n + 2 actlw() n acte()n := actc() n + 2

UnifLoads- 1 validendw() n ⋅wln ⋅actlw() n  n  2  - 1 AL1_w :=  ⋅24⋅ acte() n ⋅(Overhang+ actd() n ) ...  ⋅in ndf ∑ 2 2 n = 0  24⋅ Overhang + 3⋅ actlw() n ⋅(acta() n - actc() n ) ...    2 2   + (actlw() n ⋅Overhang) - 24⋅ acte() n ⋅Overhang 

UnifLoads- 1 actlw() n 2 2 A := -validendw() n ⋅wln ⋅ ⋅actlw() n ⋅ Overhang ... - 24⋅ acte() n ⋅actd() n  L1_w  n     ndf- 9 ∑ 2 + 3⋅( actc() n - acta() n ) n = 0  24⋅ Overhang     + AL1_w ndf- 9

UnifLoads- 1 validendw() n ⋅wln n  3 2 2 AL1_w :=  ⋅ 4⋅ actlw() n ⋅(Overhang - acte() n ⋅Overhang) - 8⋅ actlw() n ⋅acte() n ⋅actd() n ... ndf- 1 ∑  3  3 n = 0  4⋅ Overhang + actlw() n ⋅[actc() n - (acta() n )]

UnifLoads- 1 validendw() n ⋅wln ⋅actlw() n   n  2 2  AL1_w := ⋅4⋅ acte() n ⋅Overhang ...  - actlw() n ⋅[actc() n - (acta() n )] ... ndf- 10 ∑  3 + 2⋅ actd() n  n = 0  4⋅ Overhang     + AL1_w ndf- 10

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 21 F. Calculate Fixed Member End Reactions due to Point Loads

Aml_L1 := 0⋅ kip q

  i     i  valid()n, i := step Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - af  ⋅step af - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅    9  n  n  9 

2    i   NumLoads- 1  Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - af     i    9  n Aml_L1 := valid() n, i ⋅f ⋅af - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅  ⋅ ⋅in 2+ i ∑  n  n  9  2 n = 0  PileSpacing

2  Overhang ... - af     n     i     NumLoads- 1 + PileSpacing⋅ + 1      9       i   Aml_L1 := valid() n, i ⋅f ⋅ ⋅3⋅ af - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅  ...  1+ i ∑  n 3 n 9  PileSpacing      n = 0    i    + Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - af      9  n 

validendp()n := step af - (Overhang+ maxz⋅ PileSpacing) ⋅step( 2⋅ Overhang + maxz⋅ PileSpacing) - af  n   n

2  2⋅ Overhang ... - af  NumLoads- 1    n  + PileSpacing⋅( maxz) - 1 A := validendp() n ⋅f ⋅ af - Overhang ... ⋅    ⋅in  ml_L1 n  n   2+ 9⋅ maxz ∑  + PileSpacing⋅( maxz) 2  n = 0     Overhang 

2  2⋅ Overhang ... - af  NumLoads- 1    n  + PileSpacing⋅( maxz)   A := validendp() n ⋅f ⋅ ⋅ 3⋅ af - Overhang ......  ml_L1 n   n    1+ 9⋅ maxz ∑  3  + PileSpacing⋅ maxz  n = 0 Overhang    + 2⋅ Overhang ... - af     n    + PileSpacing⋅ maxz  

G. Calculate Member Fixed End Reactions due to Uniform Loads

AL1_mw := 0⋅ kip q

  i     i  validw()n, i := step Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 - aw  ⋅step aw + lw - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅    9  n ()n n  9 

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 22   i   i  acta()n, i := if aw < Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅  , 0⋅ in , aw - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅   n  9  n  9 

   i   i  actlwb()n, i := if aw + lw ≤ Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ + 1 , aw + lw - Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅  , PileSpacing ()n n   9  ()n n  9 

actlw()n, i := if aw > Overhang ... , if aw + lw ≤ Overhang ... , lw , Overhang ... - aw  n ()n n n   n  i   i    i     + PileSpacing⋅  + PileSpacing⋅ + 1 + PileSpacing⋅ + 1    9   9    9   

actc()n, i := PileSpacing- acta() n, i - actlw() n, i

actlw() n, i actlw() n, i acte()n, i := actc() n, i + actd()n, i := acta() n, i + 2 2

UnifLoads- 1 actlw() n, i 2 - 1 A := -validw() n, i ⋅wln ⋅ ⋅actlw() n, i ⋅ PileSpacing ......  ⋅in L1_mw n   2+ i ∑  2  + 3⋅( actc() n, i - acta() n, i )  n = 0 24⋅ PileSpacing     2   + -24⋅acte() n, i ⋅actd() n, i 

UnifLoads- 1 validw() n, i ⋅wln ⋅actlw() n, i   n  2  AL1_mw := ⋅ 4⋅ acte() n, i ⋅PileSpacing ...  ... 1+ i ∑  3  + 2⋅ actd() n, i  n = 0 4⋅ PileSpacing     2   + ()-1 ⋅actlw() n, i ⋅[actc() n, i - (acta() n, i )] 

validendw()n := step( 2⋅ Overhang + PileSpacing⋅ maxz) - aw ⋅step aw + lw - (Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ maxz)  n ()n n 

acta()n := if aw < (Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ maxz) , 0⋅ in , aw - (Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ maxz)  n n 

actlw()n := if aw < Overhang ... , aw + lw - Overhang ... , if aw + lw > 2⋅ Overhang ... ,  n ()n n   ()n n   + PileSpacing⋅ maxz + PileSpacing⋅ maxz   + PileSpacing⋅ maxz 

actc()n := Overhang- acta() n - actlw() n

actlw() n actd()n := acta() n + 2

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 23 actlw() n acte()n := actc() n + 2

UnifLoads- 1  actlw() n 2 - 1 A :=  -validendw() n ⋅wln ⋅ ⋅actlw() n ⋅ Overhang ......  ⋅in L1_mw n   2+ 9⋅ maxz  ∑  2  + 3⋅( actc() n - acta() n )  n = 0 24⋅ Overhang      2    + -24⋅acte() n ⋅actd() n 

UnifLoads- 1 validendw() n ⋅wln ⋅actlw() n   n  2 2  AL1_mw := ⋅4⋅ acte() n ⋅Overhang ...  - actlw() n ⋅[actc() n - (acta() n )] 1+ 9⋅ maxz ∑  3 + 2⋅ actd() n  n = 0  4⋅ Overhang    

Adl_L1 AL1_w Aml_L1 AL1_mw Adl_L1 := + Aml_L1 := + kip kip kip kip

DL1 := Sinv⋅(Ad - Adl_L1) Am_L1 := Aml_L1 + Amd⋅DL1 Ar_L1 := Ard⋅DL1

0 0 0 -0.0168 0 5.241·10-4 - 6 1 -0.019 1 1.1161  3.3175× 10  2 4.1785·10-5 2 -0.0314  1.1161  3 -0.0168 3 5.241·10-4   - 4 4 -0.0172 4 1.1161  -6.9333 × 10  5 4.1785·10-5 5 -0.283   - 5 6 -0.0013 6 6.3936·10-5  4.3521× 10  D = A = A = L1 7 -0.011 m_L1 7 1.1161 r_L1  0.7104  8 1.5911·10-5 8 0.0072   -0.0027 9 2.3237·10-6 9 5.1412·10-4    - 5  10 -0.0031 10 0.8265 4.6198× 10 11 -1.2266·10-7 11 -17.4871   0.1735 12 -0.0168 12 -9.9762·10-6     13 -0.011 13 0.7104  -0.0027  14 5.1764·10-5 14 -0.23 15 ... 15 ...

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 24 Moment_L1acap.at.pile := Am_L1 ⋅in⋅kip - Am_L1 ⋅in⋅kip - Am_L1 ⋅kip⋅ClrDist z ( 2+ 9⋅ z ) ( 5+ 9⋅ z ) ( 3+ 9⋅ z )

Moment_L1bcap.at.pile := Am_L1 ⋅in⋅kip z ( 2+ 9⋅ z )

Moment_L1cap.at.pile := if Moment_L1acap.at.pile > Moment_L1bcap.at.pile , Moment_L1acap.at.pile , Moment_L1bcap.at.pile z ( z z z

 0.0026  Moment_L1 =  1.4573  ⋅ft⋅ kip cap.at.pile    0.0377 

Shear_L1cap.at.pile := Am_L1 ⋅kip z, 1 1+ 9⋅ z  - 15  2.8866× 10 1.1161 Shear_L1cap.at.pile := Am_L1 - Am_L1 ⋅kip z, 0 ( 4+ 9⋅ z 1+ 9⋅ z) Shear_L1cap.at.pile =  -0.1161 0.8265   0.1735 -4.6185 × 10

 1.1161    Axial_L1pile := Am_L1 ⋅kip Axial_L1pile = 0.7104 ⋅kip z 4+ 9⋅ z    0.1735 

Moment_L1pile.at.cap := - Am_L1 ⋅in⋅kip + Am_L1 ⋅kip⋅ClrDist z ( 5+ 9⋅ z 3+ 9⋅ z )  0.0026  Moment_L1 =  0.0196  ⋅ft⋅ kip pile.at.cap    0.0377 

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 25 H. Calculate the Moments at the Point Load Locations af - Overhang  n  span() n := ceil  spinc() n := if( n≤ 0 , 0 , span() n - 1)  PileSpacing 

R_dist() n := af - if[ span() n > 1 , (span() n - 1) ⋅PileSpacing , 0] - if( span() n > 0 , Overhang , 0) n

shr_post() n := if span() n < 1 , 0 , Am_L1   1+( span() n -1)⋅9

mom_post() n := if span() n < 1 , 0 , Am_L1  ⋅in  2+( span() n -1)⋅9

validwpost (n, qz) := step af - aw ⋅step aw + lw - [Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅( spinc() n )] tmp (()n qz ) ()qz qz 

validwpost( n, qz) := if af ≤ Overhang , step af - aw , validwpost (n, qz) ( n ()n qz tmp ) actapost (n, qz) := if aw < [Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅( spinc() n )] , 0⋅ in , aw - [Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅( spinc() n )] tmp  qz qz  actapost( n, qz) := if af ≤ Overhang , aw , actapost (n, qz) ( n qz tmp ) splt() n := [Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅( span() n )]

actlwpostb( n, qz) := if aw + lw ≥ af , af - aw , lw ()qz qz n n qz qz actlwposta( n, qz) := if af ≤ aw + lw , af - (Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅ spinc() n ) , aw + lw - [Overhang + PileSpacing  n ()qz qz n ()qz qz actlwpost (n, qz) := if aw < Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅( spinc() n ) , actlwposta( n, qz) , actlwpostb( n, qz) tmp  qz 

actlwpost( n, qz) := if af ≤ Overhang , actlwpostb( n, qz) , actlwpost (n, qz) ( n tmp )

actlwpost( n, qz) actdpost( n, qz) := actapost( n, qz) + 2 validppost (n, qz) := step af - af ⋅step af - [Overhang+ PileSpacing⋅( spinc() n )] tmp ()n qz  qz 

validppost( n, qz) := if af ≤ Overhang , step af - af , validppost (n, qz) ( n ()n qz tmp )

M_post_L1 := shr_post() pi ⋅R_dist() pi ⋅kip - mom_post() pi ⋅kip ... pi UnifLoads- 1 + - validwpost( pi, rz)⋅wln ⋅actlwpost( pi, rz)⋅(R_dist() pi - actdpost( pi, rz)) ... ∑  rz  rz = 0 NumLoads- 1 + - validppost( pi, rz)⋅ af - af ⋅f ∑  ()pi rz rz rz = 0

0.1142   0.7702 M_post_L1 =   ⋅ft⋅ kip  1.8705     0.9598 

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 26 I. Calculate the Pile Moments

2 Mdefl(Ĭ , s , z) := -DL1 ⋅in⋅4⋅Ĭ ⋅0.5⋅sin()Ĭ ⋅s ⋅sinh()Ĭ⋅s 6+ 9⋅ z

Mrotat(Ĭ , s , z) := -DL1 ⋅4⋅Ĭ ⋅0.25⋅(sin()Ĭ ⋅s ⋅cosh()Ĭ ⋅s - cos()Ĭ⋅s ⋅sinh()Ĭ ⋅s ) 8+ 9⋅ z

-Am_L1 ⋅kip⋅in 5+ 9⋅ z Mm(Ĭ , s , z) := ⋅cos()Ĭ⋅s ⋅cosh()Ĭ⋅s Epile⋅Ipile

Am_L1 ⋅kip 3+ 9⋅ z Mpl(Ĭ , s , z) := - ⋅0.5⋅(sin()Ĭ⋅s ⋅cosh()Ĭ⋅s + cos()Ĭ⋅s ⋅sinh()Ĭ ⋅s ) Ĭ⋅Epile⋅Ipile

tmpx:= 0.. 39

Lengthembed l 0 tmpx x:= 0.. 40 l := ⋅x px:= 0.. 80 embedpile.top := x 40 tmpx ft

Moment_top := E ⋅I ⋅ Mdefl B , l , z + Mrotat B , l , z - Mm B , l , z + Mpl B , l , z z, x pile pile ( ()0, z x ()0, z x ) ()0, z x  ()0, z x 

0 1 2 3 4 Moment_top = 0 -0.023581 -0.023934 -0.023756 -0.023151 -0.022211 ⋅ft⋅ kip 1 -0.019168 -0.019019 -0.018629 -0.018043 -0.017299 2 -0.017098 -0.0164 -0.015607 -0.014744 ...

Momenttop.tmp := Moment_top z, tmpx z, tmpx

2 - 2 pile_mom_top:= max( Moment_top) pile_mom_top= 34.4473lb⋅ ft ⋅s

pile_mom_top := if( min( Moment_top) > pile_mom_top , min( Moment_top) , pile_mom_top)

pile_mom_top= 0.0239⋅ kip⋅ ft

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 27 2 Mdefl(Ĭ , s , z) := -DL1 ⋅in⋅4⋅Ĭ ⋅0.5⋅sin()Ĭ ⋅s ⋅sinh()Ĭ⋅s 9+ 9⋅ z

Mrotat(Ĭ , s , z) := -DL1 ⋅4⋅Ĭ ⋅0.25⋅(sin()Ĭ⋅s ⋅cosh()Ĭ⋅s - cos()Ĭ ⋅s ⋅sinh()Ĭ⋅s ) 11+ 9⋅ z

-Am_L1 ⋅kip⋅in 8+ 9⋅ z Mm(Ĭ , s , z) := ⋅cos()Ĭ⋅s ⋅cosh()Ĭ⋅s Epile⋅Ipile

Am_L1 ⋅kip 6+ 9⋅ z Mpl(Ĭ , s , z) := - ⋅0.5⋅(sin()Ĭ⋅s ⋅cosh()Ĭ⋅s + cos()Ĭ⋅s ⋅sinh()Ĭ ⋅s ) Ĭ⋅Epile⋅Ipile

Lengthembed l+ Lengthembed 1 0 x:= 0.. 40 l := ⋅x embedpile.bot := x 40 ft

Moment_bot := E ⋅I ⋅ Mdefl B , l , z + Mrotat B , l , z - Mm B , l , z + Mpl B , l , z z, x pile pile ( ()1, z x ()1, z x ) ()1, z x  ()1, z x 

0 1 2 3 4 Moment_bot = 0 0.000604 0.000571 0.000535 0.000499 0.000462 ⋅ft⋅ kip 1 0.000987 0.000981 0.000967 0.000947 0.000921 2 0.000906 0.000898 0.000885 0.000867 ...

2 - 2 pile_mom_bot:= max( Moment_bot) pile_mom_bot= 31.7544lb⋅ ft ⋅s

pile_mom_bot := if( min( Moment_bot) > pile_mom_bot , min( Moment_bot) , pile_mom_bot)

2 - 2 pile_mom_bot= 31.7544lb⋅ ft ⋅s

max_pile_mom := pile_mom_bot

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 28 max_pile_mom := if( pile_mom_top> max_pile_mom , pile_mom_top , max_pile_mom)

Moment_L1pile := augment( Momenttop.tmp , Moment_bot)

embedpile := stack( embedpile.top , embedpile.bot)

Moments in Embedded Portion of Piles 0.01

0 20 40 60 80

Moment_L1pile z, px- 0.01 ft⋅ kip

- 0.02

- 0.03

embedpile px

max( Moment_L1pile) = 0.0011⋅ ft⋅ kip

min( Moment_L1pile) = -0.0239⋅ft⋅ kip

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 29 Summary Results:

Moment in pile cap at pile locations

Values are from left to right as seen in elevation (negative value indicates tension in the top of the cap)

Moment to the left of pile: Moment to the right of pile:

 - 14   -0.0026   3.973× 10    -1.4573 Moment_L1acap.at.pile =  -1.4377  ⋅kip⋅ ft Moment_L1bcap.at.pile =   ⋅kip⋅ ft    - 13   0.0377   -1.1369 × 10 

Shear in pile cap at pile locations

Values are for left side and right side of pile...

- 15  2.8866× 10 1.1161  Values are from left to right as seen in elevation   The first value in each row indicates the shear on the left side of the Shear_L1cap.at.pile =  -0.1161 0.8265  ⋅kippile and the second value is for the right side of the pile  - 14   0.1735 -4.6185 × 10 

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 30 Axial Load in Piles

 1.1161  Axial_L1 =  0.7104  ⋅kip pile   Values are from left to right as seen in elevation  0.1735 

Moments in pile cap at point load locations

0.1142   0.7702 Values are from left to right as seen in elevation M_post_L1 =   ⋅kip⋅ ft  1.8705     0.9598 

Moments in piles

At Cap:

 0.0026  Moment_L1 =  0.0196  ⋅kip⋅ ft pile.at.cap    0.0377 

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 31 In Embedded Portion of Piles:

0 1 2 3 4 0 -0.0236 -0.0239 -0.0238 -0.0232 -0.0222 Moment_L1pile = ⋅kip⋅ ft 1 -0.0192 -0.019 -0.0186 -0.018 -0.0173 2 -0.0171 -0.0164 -0.0156 -0.0147 ...

max( Moment_L1pile) = 0.0011⋅ ft⋅ kip

Lateral Displacement (inches)

DL1 = -0.0168 0 The deflection will not match actual behavior as closely as the moments will for a properly developed model, since deflections are the results of a model that uses a linear spring instead of a non-linear one.

7/12/2017 pile bent fixed.xmcd v1.7 32 Job No Sheet No Rev 2645-16.03 1

Part Software licensed to Childs Job Title Eagle Birth Pier 7 Ref By MMS Date10-Jul-17 Chd Client USCG File Pier 7.std Date/Time 12-Jul-2017 12:29

Job Information Engineer Checked Approved

Name: MMS Date: 10-Jul-17

Structure Type SPACE FRAME

Number of Nodes 72 Highest Node 72 Number of Elements 64 Highest Beam 64

Number of Basic Load Cases 2 Number of Combination Load Cases 0

Included in this printout are data for: All The Whole Structure

Included in this printout are results for load cases: Type L/C Name

Primary 1 single Primary 2 Distrubuted

Nodes Node X Y Z (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 30.000 0.000 0.000 2 26.500 0.000 0.000 3 15.000 0.000 0.000 4 3.500 0.000 0.000 5 0.000 0.000 0.000 6 26.500 -60.000 0.000 7 15.000 -60.000 0.000 8 3.500 -60.000 0.000 9 -10.000 -60.000 -5.000 10 0.000 0.000 13.000 11 3.500 0.000 13.000 12 15.000 0.000 13.000 13 26.500 0.000 13.000 14 30.000 0.000 13.000 15 3.500 -60.000 13.000 16 15.000 -60.000 13.000 17 26.500 -60.000 13.000 18 40.000 -60.000 18.000 19 30.000 0.000 26.000 20 26.500 0.000 26.000 21 15.000 0.000 26.000

Print Time/Date: 12/07/2017 12:31 STAAD.Pro for Windows 20.07.04.12 Print Run 1 of 7 Job No Sheet No Rev 2645-16.03 2

Part Software licensed to Childs Job Title Eagle Birth Pier 7 Ref By MMS Date10-Jul-17 Chd Client USCG File Pier 7.std Date/Time 12-Jul-2017 12:29

Nodes Cont... Node X Y Z (ft) (ft) (ft) 22 3.500 0.000 26.000 23 0.000 0.000 26.000 24 26.500 -60.000 26.000 25 15.000 -60.000 26.000 26 3.500 -60.000 26.000 27 -10.000 -60.000 21.000 28 0.000 0.000 39.000 29 3.500 0.000 39.000 30 15.000 0.000 39.000 31 26.500 0.000 39.000 32 30.000 0.000 39.000 33 3.500 -60.000 39.000 34 15.000 -60.000 39.000 35 26.500 -60.000 39.000 36 40.000 -60.000 44.000 37 30.000 0.000 52.000 38 26.500 0.000 52.000 39 15.000 0.000 52.000 40 3.500 0.000 52.000 41 0.000 0.000 52.000 42 26.500 -60.000 52.000 43 15.000 -60.000 52.000 44 3.500 -60.000 52.000 45 -10.000 -60.000 47.000 46 0.000 0.000 65.000 47 3.500 0.000 65.000 48 15.000 0.000 65.000 49 26.500 0.000 65.000 50 30.000 0.000 65.000 51 3.500 -60.000 65.000 52 15.000 -60.000 65.000 53 26.500 -60.000 65.000 54 40.000 -60.000 70.000 55 30.000 0.000 78.000 56 26.500 0.000 78.000 57 15.000 0.000 78.000 58 3.500 0.000 78.000 59 0.000 0.000 78.000 60 26.500 -60.000 78.000 61 15.000 -60.000 78.000 62 3.500 -60.000 78.000 63 -10.000 -60.000 73.000 64 0.000 0.000 91.000 65 3.500 0.000 91.000 66 15.000 0.000 91.000

Print Time/Date: 12/07/2017 12:31 STAAD.Pro for Windows 20.07.04.12 Print Run 2 of 7 Job No Sheet No Rev 2645-16.03 3

Part Software licensed to Childs Job Title Eagle Birth Pier 7 Ref By MMS Date10-Jul-17 Chd Client USCG File Pier 7.std Date/Time 12-Jul-2017 12:29

Nodes Cont... Node X Y Z (ft) (ft) (ft) 67 26.500 0.000 91.000 68 30.000 0.000 91.000 69 3.500 -60.000 91.000 70 15.000 -60.000 91.000 71 26.500 -60.000 91.000 72 40.000 -60.000 96.000

Beams Beam Node A Node B Length Property β (ft) (degrees) 1 1 2 3.500 2 0 2 2 3 11.500 2 0 3 3 4 11.500 2 0 4 4 5 3.500 2 0 5 1 9 72.284 1 0 6 2 6 60.000 1 0 7 3 7 60.000 1 0 8 4 8 60.000 1 0 9 10 11 3.500 2 0 10 11 12 11.500 2 0 11 12 13 11.500 2 0 12 13 14 3.500 2 0 13 10 18 72.284 1 0 14 11 15 60.000 1 0 15 12 16 60.000 1 0 16 13 17 60.000 1 0 17 19 20 3.500 2 0 18 20 21 11.500 2 0 19 21 22 11.500 2 0 20 22 23 3.500 2 0 21 19 27 72.284 1 0 22 20 24 60.000 1 0 23 21 25 60.000 1 0 24 22 26 60.000 1 0 25 28 29 3.500 2 0 26 29 30 11.500 2 0 27 30 31 11.500 2 0 28 31 32 3.500 2 0 29 28 36 72.284 1 0 30 29 33 60.000 1 0 31 30 34 60.000 1 0 32 31 35 60.000 1 0 33 37 38 3.500 2 0

Print Time/Date: 12/07/2017 12:31 STAAD.Pro for Windows 20.07.04.12 Print Run 3 of 7 Job No Sheet No Rev 2645-16.03 4

Part Software licensed to Childs Job Title Eagle Birth Pier 7 Ref By MMS Date10-Jul-17 Chd Client USCG File Pier 7.std Date/Time 12-Jul-2017 12:29

Beams Cont... Beam Node A Node B Length Property β (ft) (degrees) 34 38 39 11.500 2 0 35 39 40 11.500 2 0 36 40 41 3.500 2 0 37 37 45 72.284 1 0 38 38 42 60.000 1 0 39 39 43 60.000 1 0 40 40 44 60.000 1 0 41 46 47 3.500 2 0 42 47 48 11.500 2 0 43 48 49 11.500 2 0 44 49 50 3.500 2 0 45 46 54 72.284 1 0 46 47 51 60.000 1 0 47 48 52 60.000 1 0 48 49 53 60.000 1 0 49 55 56 3.500 2 0 50 56 57 11.500 2 0 51 57 58 11.500 2 0 52 58 59 3.500 2 0 53 55 63 72.284 1 0 54 56 60 60.000 1 0 55 57 61 60.000 1 0 56 58 62 60.000 1 0 57 64 65 3.500 2 0 58 65 66 11.500 2 0 59 66 67 11.500 2 0 60 67 68 3.500 2 0 61 64 72 72.284 1 0 62 65 69 60.000 1 0 63 66 70 60.000 1 0 64 67 71 60.000 1 0

Section Properties

Prop Section Area Iyy Izz J Material (in2) (in4) (in4) (in4) 1 HP14X73 21.400 261.000 729.000 1.793 STEEL 2 Rect 24.00x36.00 864.000 93.3E+3 41.5E+3 97.4E+3 CONCRETE

Print Time/Date: 12/07/2017 12:31 STAAD.Pro for Windows 20.07.04.12 Print Run 4 of 7 Job No Sheet No Rev 2645-16.03 5

Part Software licensed to Childs Job Title Eagle Birth Pier 7 Ref By MMS Date10-Jul-17 Chd Client USCG File Pier 7.std Date/Time 12-Jul-2017 12:29

Materials Mat Name E ν Density α (kip/in2) (kip/in3) (1/°F) 1 STEEL 29E+3 0.300 0.000 6.5E -6 2 STAINLESSSTEEL 28E+3 0.300 0.000 9.9E -6 3 ALUMINUM 10E+3 0.330 0.000 12.8E -6 4 CONCRETE 3.15E+3 0.170 0.000 5.5E -6

Supports Node X Y Z rX rY rZ (kip/in) (kip/in) (kip/in) (kip-ft/deg) (kip-ft/deg) (kip-ft/deg) 6 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 7 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 8 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 9 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 15 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 16 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 17 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 18 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 24 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 25 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 26 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 27 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 33 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 34 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 35 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 36 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 42 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 43 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 44 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 45 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 51 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 52 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 53 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 54 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 60 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 61 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 62 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 63 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 69 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 70 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 71 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed 72 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed

Print Time/Date: 12/07/2017 12:31 STAAD.Pro for Windows 20.07.04.12 Print Run 5 of 7 Job No Sheet No Rev 2645-16.03 6

Part Software licensed to Childs Job Title Eagle Birth Pier 7 Ref By MMS Date10-Jul-17 Chd Client USCG File Pier 7.std Date/Time 12-Jul-2017 12:29

Basic Load Cases Number Name

1 single 2 Distrubuted

Beam Maximum Forces by Section Property Axial Shear Torsion Bending Section Max Fx Max Fy Max Fz Max Mx Max My Max Mz (kip) (kip) (kip) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) HP14X73 Max +ve 1.714 0.001 0.026 0.000 0.802 0.420 Max -ve -1.081 -0.014 -0.016 -0.000 -0.786 -0.418 Rect 24.00x36.00 Max +ve 0.617 0.917 0.060 2.540 1.097 3.213 Max -ve -0.000 -0.877 -0.075 -0.000 -0.000 -2.621

Print Time/Date: 12/07/2017 12:31 STAAD.Pro for Windows 20.07.04.12 Print Run 6 of 7 Job No Sheet No Rev 2645-16.03 7

Part Software licensed to Childs Job Title Eagle Birth Pier 7 Ref By MMS Date10-Jul-17 Chd Client USCG File Pier 7.std Date/Time 12-Jul-2017 12:29

Y X Z Load 1

Whole Structure Loads 0.0680337kip:1ft 1 single (Input data was modified after picture taken)

Print Time/Date: 12/07/2017 12:31 STAAD.Pro for Windows 20.07.04.12 Print Run 7 of 7 Berthing Energy Calculations A SystemFender Consulting Ltd spreadsheet for QuayQuip BV Colour Key Locked Project Ref: ABC123 Client Specified No Project Name: Berth, port, country Mandatory Input No Calculated Value Yes Vessel Class: Passenger (Cruise) Ship Result Yes Ship Table: 75% Confidence Limit Dimension: Displacement 1,813 t PIANC Table Range: 1030t (min) to 45300t (max)

Interpolated from PIANC 2002 tables Client specified value(s) Deadweight: DWT 1,890 dwt dwt Displacement: MD 1,813 t t Length Overall: LOA 79.1 m 90.0 m Length Between Perpendiculars: LBP 73.3 m m Breadth: B 14.1 m 12.0 m Maximum Draft: DL 3.3 m 5.30 m Minimum Freeboard: F 2.8 m m

Berthing Angle: α 6.0 deg Berthing Conditions: (b) Difficult berthing, sheltered Berthing Velocity: VB 303 mm/s 205 mm/s

Seawater Density: ρ 1.025 t/m³ Under Keel Clearance: KC 4.0 m Req'd for PIANC 2002 Added Mass method Bow Radius: RB 45.2 m m Block Coefficient: CB 0.379 Usual range: 0.45–0.7

Impact from Bow (% of LOA) x 14.67 m 20.0% 1/5 Point Impact to Centre of Mass R 22.81 m Based on PIANC 2002 tables Radius of Gyration: K 13.35 m Based on PIANC 2002 tables Added Mass Method: BS6349 (Vasco Costa) Velocity Vector Method: Perpendicular to Berthing Line Velocity Vector Angle: φ 68.7 deg 65.0 deg

Added Mass Coefficient: CM 1.883 Eccentricity Coefficient: CE 0.353 Berth Configuration Coefficient: CC 1.000 Softness Coefficient: CS 1.000

Normal Energy: EN 25.3 kNm Factor of Safety: FS 2.00 0.0

Energy is based upon client specified input Abnormal Energy: EA 50.6 kNm values where provided.

60

50 Impact to CM 40 Berth Line 30 Velocity Vector 20 Bow Radius 10

0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Calculations are in accordance with methods defined in PIANC 2002, BS6349 (Part 4), EAU 2004 and similar international guidelines, standards and codes. Ship tables are adopted from PIANC 2002, using the 50% and 75% confidence limit values. No responsibility is accepted for input or calculation errors. © SystemFender Consulting Ltd, 2009

APPENDIX E– Berthing Calculations

Appendix E Table of Contents

Item PAGE Berthing Calculations ...... E-3

D-2

Vessel Data for CGC EAGLE Outshore (file C:\OPTIMOOR\No Name.vsl) Units in ft, inches, & kips Longitudinal datum at Midship

LBP: 230.0 Breadth: 38.8 Depth: 30.0 Target: 0.0 fwd from midship and 0.0 above deck at side End-on projected windage area: 1180 above deck level Side projected windage area: 1960 above deck level Fendering possible from: 0.350 LBP aft of midship to: 0.400 LBP fwd of midship Current drag data based on: OPTIMOOR (Generic Data) Wind drag data based on: OCIMF Tanker (V-shaped Bow)

______Line Fair- Fair- Ht on Dist to Brake Pre- Line Tail Segment-1 No. Lead X Lead Y Deck Winch Limit Tension Size-Type-BL Lgth-Size-Type-BL 1 80.4 18.5 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 2 115.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 3 57.2 18.9 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 4 -44.2 18.5 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 5 -89.1 15.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 6 -115.8 7.5 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 7 113.4 8.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 8 82.6 18.3 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 9 -46.8 19.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 10 -86.8 16.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 11 -114.0 8.3 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 12 60.2 18.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 ______Codes for Types of Line: pp: polypropylene dry (broken-in)

Berth Data for Pier 7 Outshore (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Pier 7.bth) Units in ft & kips

Left to Right of Screen Site Plan Points: 270° Width of Estuary (for Current): 3281 Pier Height (Fixed) above Datum: 7.0 Dredged Depth below Datum: 25.0 Dist of Berth Target to Right of Origin: 0.0 Wind Speed Specified at Height: 32.8 Current Specified at Depth: 6.6

______Hook/ X-Dist Dist to Ht above Allowable Bollard to Origin Fender Line Berth Load A -128.7 14.9 0.0 66 B -55.3 15.3 0.0 66 C 18.0 14.6 0.0 66 D 91.6 14.9 0.0 66 E 163.4 14.9 0.0 66 F -128.7 42.7 0.0 66 G -55.5 42.6 0.0 66 H 18.0 42.0 0.0 66 I 91.4 42.6 0.0 66 J 163.6 42.6 0.0 66 ______

______Fender X-Dist Ht above Width Face Contact to Origin Datum Along Side Area (ft²) aa 30.0 0.0 12.0 bb -50.0 0.0 12.0 cc -10.0 0.0 12.0

______

Case 1-Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Outshore at Pier 7 Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 1 - Eagle at Pier 7.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 180° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 180° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 180° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: -90°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 12.0 0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: 0.0 156.5 -8.6 Total Force: 0.0 178.5 -8.4

Vessel Moves(at Target): 0.1 fwd -2.0 out 0.0° port 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-G 0.00 50.9 10° 19.0 24% 2-A 0.00 32.0 15° 34.0 43% 3-C 0.00 77.3 7° 2.3 3% 4-B 0.00 101.2 5° 0.9 1% 5-D 0.00 20.7 24° 65.4 83% 6-E 0.00 55.4 9° 8.5 11% 7-F 0.00 56.2 9° 18.2 23% 8-F 0.00 64.3 8° 9.4 12% 9-H 0.00 52.0 10° 15.9 20% 10-I 0.00 47.0 11° 24.1 30% 11-J 0.00 73.7 7° 9.3 12% ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 0 free 100% bb 0 free 100% cc 0 free 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift A 13.8 29.8 32.8 25° 9.1 B 0.9 0.2 0.9 80° C -2.3 0.5 2.4 -77° 0.3 D -7.5 59.5 60.0 -7° 26.1 E -7.2 4.4 8.4 -59° 1.4 F 11.4 23.9 26.5 25° 4.1 G -9.0 16.5 18.8 -29° 3.3 H 8.5 13.2 15.7 33° 2.7 I -2.3 23.6 23.7 -6° 4.4 J -6.2 6.9 9.3 -42° 1.1 ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 22 Sway: 6.2 secs

Case 1 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Outshore Arrangement

Case 2-Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Outshore at Pier 7 Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 2 - Eagle at Pier 7.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 180° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 180° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 135° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: -135°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 12.0 0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: 14.4 115.7 7.7 Total Force: 14.4 137.8 7.9

Vessel Moves(at Target): -0.1 aft -1.7 out 0.2° port 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-G 0.00 50.9 10° 16.4 21% 2-A 0.00 32.0 15° 36.7 46% 3-C 0.00 77.3 7° 1.2 2% 4-B 0.00 101.2 5° 1.3 2% 5-D 0.00 20.7 24° 39.8 50% 6-E 0.00 55.4 9° 3.4 4% 7-F 0.00 56.2 9° 18.9 24% 8-F 0.00 64.3 8° 10.2 13% 9-H 0.00 52.0 10° 12.3 16% 10-I 0.00 47.0 11° 14.9 19% 11-J 0.00 73.7 7° 4.4 6% ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 0 free 100% bb 0 free 100% cc 0 free 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift A 15.1 32.0 35.4 25° 9.8 B 1.3 0.2 1.3 80° 0.1 C -1.2 0.3 1.2 -77° 0.1 D -4.3 36.0 36.3 -7° 16.3 E -2.9 1.7 3.4 -59° 0.6 F 12.2 25.1 28.0 26° 4.3 G -7.8 14.2 16.2 -29° 2.8 H 6.7 10.2 12.2 33° 2.1 I -1.4 14.6 14.6 -5° 2.8 J -3.0 3.3 4.4 -42° 0.5 ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 24 Sway: 6.2 secs

Case 2 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Outshore Arrangement

Case 3-Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Outshore at Pier 7 Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 3 - Eagle at Pier 7.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 180° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 180° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 225° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: -45°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 12.0 0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: -22.2 99.2 -25.9 Total Force: -22.2 121.3 -25.7

Vessel Moves(at Target): 0.4 fwd -1.5 out 0.2° stbd 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-G 0.00 50.9 10° 10.5 13% 2-A 0.00 32.0 16° 8.9 11% 3-C 0.00 77.3 7° 3.0 4% 4-B 0.00 101.2 5° slack 5-D 0.00 20.7 24° 59.0 75% 6-E 0.00 55.4 9° 11.5 15% 7-F 0.00 56.2 9° 5.7 7% 8-F 0.00 64.3 8° 2.6 3% 9-H 0.00 52.0 10° 9.9 12% 10-I 0.00 47.0 11° 21.4 27% 11-J 0.00 73.7 7° 10.9 14% ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 0 free 100% bb 0 free 100% cc 0 free 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift A 3.6 7.8 8.6 25° 2.5 C -2.9 0.6 3.0 -78° 0.3 D -7.7 53.6 54.1 -8° 23.7 E -9.8 5.9 11.4 -59° 1.8 F 3.3 7.2 7.9 25° 1.3 G -5.1 9.0 10.3 -30° 1.8 H 5.3 8.2 9.7 33° 1.7 I -2.2 21.0 21.1 -6° 4.0 J -7.2 8.0 10.8 -42° 1.3 ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 24 Sway: 6.2 secs

Case 3 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Outshore Arrangement

Case 4-Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Outshore at Pier 7 Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 4 - Eagle at Pier 7.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 0° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: 90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 0° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: 90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 0° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: 90°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 -12.1 -0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 -10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: 0.0 -156.5 8.6 Total Force: 0.0 -178.6 8.4

Vessel Moves(at Target): 0.0 fwd 0.0 inw 0.0° port 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-G 0.00 50.9 10° 0.1 0% 2-A 0.00 32.0 16° 0.3 0% 3-C 0.00 77.3 7° slack 4-B 0.00 101.2 5° slack 5-D 0.00 20.7 26° slack 6-E 0.00 55.4 9° slack 7-F 0.00 56.2 9° 0.2 0% 8-F 0.00 64.3 8° slack 9-H 0.00 52.0 10° slack 10-I 0.00 47.0 11° slack 11-J 0.00 73.7 7° slack ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 105 0.07 100% bb 14 0.01 100% cc 60 0.04 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift A 0.1 0.3 0.3 27° C -0.1 0.1 -79° F 0.2 0.2 16° G 0.1 0.2 -30° ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 28 Sway: 6.4 secs

Case 4 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Outshore Arrangement

Vessel Data for CGC EAGLE Inshore (file C:\OPTIMOOR\No Name.vsl) Units in ft, inches, & kips Longitudinal datum at Midship

LBP: 230.0 Breadth: 38.8 Depth: 30.0 Target: 0.0 fwd from midship and 0.0 above deck at side End-on projected windage area: 1180 above deck level Side projected windage area: 1960 above deck level Fendering possible from: 0.350 LBP aft of midship to: 0.400 LBP fwd of midship Current drag data based on: OPTIMOOR (Generic Data) Wind drag data based on: OCIMF Tanker (V-shaped Bow)

______Line Fair- Fair- Ht on Dist to Brake Pre- Line Tail Segment-1 No. Lead X Lead Y Deck Winch Limit Tension Size-Type-BL Lgth-Size-Type-BL 1 80.4 18.5 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 2 115.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 3 57.2 18.9 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 4 -44.2 18.5 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 5 -89.1 15.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 6 -115.8 7.5 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 7 113.4 8.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 8 82.6 18.3 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 9 -46.8 19.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 10 -86.8 16.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 11 -114.0 8.3 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 12 60.2 18.8 0.0 0.0 8.0 pp 79 ______Codes for Types of Line: pp: polypropylene dry (broken-in)

Berth Data for Pier 7 Inshore (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Pier 7_inshore.bth) Units in ft & kips

Left to Right of Screen Site Plan Points: 270° Width of Estuary (for Current): 3281 Pier Height (Fixed) above Datum: 7.0 Dredged Depth below Datum: 25.0 Dist of Berth Target to Right of Origin: 0.0 Wind Speed Specified at Height: 32.8 Current Specified at Depth: 6.6

______Hook/ X-Dist Dist to Ht above Allowable Bollard to Origin Fender Line Berth Load A -99.7 15.1 0.0 66 B -24.8 16.3 0.0 66 C 49.4 16.0 0.0 66 D 122.7 15.0 0.0 66 E 209.3 15.0 0.0 66 F -99.7 43.4 0.0 66 G -24.6 42.5 0.0 66 H 48.7 42.7 0.0 66 I 123.4 42.2 0.0 66 J 197.9 42.0 0.0 66 K -172.6 15.0 0.0 66 L -172.6 43.1 0.0 66 ______

Case 1 - Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Inshore at Pier 7 Inshore Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 1 - Eagle at Pier 7_inshore.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 180° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 180° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 180° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: -90°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 12.0 0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: -0.1 156.4 -8.8 Total Force: -0.1 178.4 -8.6

Vessel Moves(at Target): 0.6 fwd -2.5 out 0.2° port 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-F 0.00 49.1 10° 28.1 35% 2-K 0.00 64.5 8° 5.0 6% 3-C 0.00 108.3 5° 3.4 4% 4-B 0.00 71.7 7° slack 5-I 0.00 57.9 9° 18.3 23% 6-J 0.00 98.7 5° 6.3 8% 7-L 0.00 80.5 6° 8.7 11% 8-A 0.00 25.3 20° 38.8 49% 9-H 0.00 44.1 11° 30.9 39% 10-H 0.00 60.4 8° 9.1 12% 11-D 0.00 29.0 17° 45.1 57% 12-G 0.00 56.6 9° 25.0 32% ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 0 free 100% bb 0 free 100% cc 0 free 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift A 24.0 27.6 36.6 41° 13.0 C -3.3 0.6 3.4 -80° 0.3 D -13.6 41.0 43.2 -18° 13.1 F 10.2 25.8 27.7 22° 4.9 G -15.3 19.5 24.8 -38° 3.8 H 3.9 37.4 37.6 6° 7.3 I -10.7 14.6 18.1 -36° 2.7 J -5.2 3.5 6.3 -56° 0.6 K 4.4 2.3 4.9 62° 0.7 L 6.3 6.0 8.7 46° 1.0 ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 19 Sway: 6.2 secs Case 1 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Inshore Arrangement

Case 2 - Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Inshore at Pier 7 Inshore Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 2 - Eagle at Pier 7_inshore.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 180° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 180° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 135° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: -135°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 12.0 0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: 14.2 116.3 7.7 Total Force: 14.2 138.4 7.9

Vessel Moves(at Target): 0.5 fwd -2.1 out 0.5° port 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-F 0.00 49.1 10° 28.2 36% 2-K 0.00 64.5 8° 6.2 8% 3-C 0.00 108.3 5° 3.1 4% 4-B 0.00 71.7 7° slack 5-I 0.00 57.9 9° 11.1 14% 6-J 0.00 98.7 5° 3.6 5% 7-L 0.00 80.5 6° 9.9 13% 8-A 0.00 25.3 20° 39.8 50% 9-H 0.00 44.1 11° 21.3 27% 10-H 0.00 60.4 8° 4.5 6% 11-D 0.00 29.0 17° 22.7 29% 12-G 0.00 56.6 9° 23.4 30% ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 0 free 100% bb 0 free 100% cc 0 free 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift A 24.7 28.3 37.6 41° 13.4 C -3.1 0.5 3.1 -80° 0.3 D -6.9 20.5 21.6 -19° 6.8 F 10.3 25.8 27.8 22° 4.9 G -14.3 18.2 23.1 -38° 3.6 H 1.7 24.3 24.4 4° 4.8 I -6.5 8.8 11.0 -36° 1.7 J -3.0 2.0 3.6 -56° 0.3 K 5.5 2.9 6.2 62° 0.9 L 7.1 6.8 9.8 46° 1.1 ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 19 Sway: 6.3 secs

Case 2 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Inshore Arrangement

Case 3 - Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Inshore at Pier 7 Inshore Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 3 - Eagle at Pier 7_inshore.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 180° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 180° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 225° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: -45°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 12.0 0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: -22.2 99.1 -25.9 Total Force: -22.2 121.1 -25.7

Vessel Moves(at Target): 0.5 fwd -1.7 out 0.2° stbd 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-F 0.00 49.1 10° 10.5 13% 2-K 0.00 64.5 8° 0.5 1% 3-C 0.00 108.3 5° 2.4 3% 4-B 0.00 71.7 7° slack 5-I 0.00 57.9 9° 17.1 22% 6-J 0.00 98.7 5° 6.7 8% 7-L 0.00 80.5 6° 2.2 3% 8-A 0.00 25.3 20° 11.5 15% 9-H 0.00 44.1 11° 23.9 30% 10-H 0.00 60.4 8° 8.8 11% 11-D 0.00 29.0 17° 48.3 61% 12-G 0.00 56.6 9° 12.6 16% ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 0 free 100% bb 0 free 100% cc 0 free 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift A 7.4 7.9 10.8 43° 4.0 C -2.4 0.4 2.5 -80° 0.2 D -14.5 43.9 46.3 -18° 14.0 F 3.9 9.6 10.4 22° 1.9 G -7.9 9.7 12.5 -39° 2.0 H 4.2 30.3 30.6 8° 6.0 I -10.0 13.7 16.9 -36° 2.6 J -5.6 3.8 6.7 -56° 0.6 K 0.5 0.2 0.5 63° L 1.6 1.5 2.3 47° 0.3 ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 20 Sway: 6.3 secs

Case 3 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Inshore Arrangement

Case 4 - Static Mooring Response for CGC EAGLE Inshore at Pier 7 Inshore Units in ft & kips (file D:\Eagle\Optimoor\Case 4 - Eagle at Pier 7_inshore.opt) Remarks: Static Analysis for Time: 0000 Jul 10 2017 Water Level: 3.00 above Datum Draft: 17.0 Trim: 0.0 Bottom Clearance: 11.0 Deck Level: 9.0 above Berth (at Target) Significant Wave Ht: 3.84 Wave Mean Period: 3.4 sec Wave Direction True: 180° Wave Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Current: 0.8 knots Current Direction True: 180° Current Direction to Berth X-axis: -90° Wind Speed: 95 knots Wind Direction True: 0° Wind Direction to Berth X-axis: 90°

Total End-0n Windage Area: 1684 Total Side Windage Area: 4950

Longitudinal Transverse Yaw Moment/LBP Wave Drift Force: 0.0 12.0 0.2 Current Drag Force: 0.0 10.0 0.0 Wind Drag Force: 0.0 -156.5 8.6 Total Force: 0.0 -134.4 8.7

Vessel Moves(at Target): 0.0 fwd 0.0 inw 0.0° port 0.0 up

______Line to Pull Tot.Line In-Line Winch Inclin. Line Percent Bollard -in Length ±Motion Slippage Down Tension Strength 1-F 0.00 49.1 11° slack 2-K 0.00 64.5 8° slack 3-C 0.00 108.3 5° slack 4-B 0.00 71.7 7° slack 5-I 0.00 57.9 9° slack 6-J 0.00 98.7 5° slack 7-L 0.00 80.5 6° slack 8-A 0.00 25.3 21° slack 9-H 0.00 44.1 12° slack 10-H 0.00 60.4 9° slack 11-D 0.00 29.0 18° slack 12-G 0.00 56.6 9° slack ______Fender Thrust Compression Pressure Contact Area aa 87 0.06 100% bb 3 0.00 100% cc 44 0.03 100% ______Total Hook/ X- Y- Other Other Horiz Direction Bollard Force Force X-Load Y-Load Force in Plan Uplift G 0.1 -39° ______

Approximate natural periods Surge: 24 Sway: 6.4 secs

Case 4 - CGC EAGLE at Pier 7 Inshore Arrangement

APPENDIX F– Cost Estimates

Appendix F Table of Contents

Item PAGE Cost Estimate ...... F-3

D-2

PIER 7 OUTSHORE COST ESTIMATE Date Prepared: AUG 2017 SHEET 1 OF 1

ACTIVITY AND LOCATION USCG CONTRACT NUMBER CEC JOB NUMBER CGC EAGLE HOMEPORT EVALUATION - GAP ANALYSIS HSCGG1-17-J-PRV178 2645-16.03 PIER 7, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, FORT TRUMBULL TASK ORDER NUMBER PREPARED BY NEW LONDON, CT HSCGG1-16-D-PRV078 RJW CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD & CONTINGENCIES QUANTITY MATERIAL COST LABOR COST SUBTOTAL PROFIT

ITEM DESCRIPTION NO. UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL UNIT COST TOTAL UNIT COST TOTAL 20% 20% TOTAL ITEM COST STRUCTURAL REPAIRS Encasement of exposed steel piles into the mud line with concrete pile jacket extensions on the Approach Pier. 31 EA $2,250.00 $69,750 $3,750.00 $116,250 $6,000 $186,000 $37,200.00 $37,200.00 $260,400 Encasement of exposed steel pile with new concrete pile jacket extension into the mud line , Pier 7 B1 to B3 10 EA $2,240.00 $22,400 $4,160.00 $41,600 $6,400 $64,000 $12,800.00 $12,800.00 $89,600 Encasement of steel pile with new concrete pile jacket from pile cap to mud line, Pier 7 B1 to B3 2 EA $5,040.00 $10,080 $9,360.00 $18,720 $14,400 $28,800 $5,760.00 $5,760.00 $40,320 Encasement of exposed steel pile with new concrete pile jacket extension into the mud line, Pier 7 B4 to B7 16 EA $4,160.00 $66,560 $7,800.00 $124,800 $11,960 $191,360 $38,272.00 $38,272.00 $267,904 Encasement of exposed steel pile with new concrete pile jacket extension into the mud line, Pier 7 B8 to B51 175 EA $7,392.00 $1,293,600 $13,728.00 $2,402,400 $21,120 $3,696,000 $739,200.00 $739,200.00 $5,174,400 Encasement of steel pile with new concrete pile jacket from pile cap to mud line, Pier 7 B8 to B51 15 EA $10,192.00 $152,880 $18,928.00 $283,920 $29,120 $436,800 $87,360.00 $87,360.00 $611,520 Repair deck, pile cap, and beam spalls on the Approach Pier 78 SF $70.00 $5,460 $220.00 $17,160 $290 $22,620 $4,524.00 $4,524.00 $31,668 Repair pile jacket spalls on the Approach Pier 99 SF $70.00 $6,930 $300.00 $29,700 $370 $36,630 $7,326.00 $7,326.00 $51,282 Repair deck, pile cap and beam spalls on Pier 7 253 SF $70.00 $17,710 $220.00 $55,660 $290 $73,370 $14,674.00 $14,674.00 $102,718 Repair pile jacket spalls on Pier 7 824 SF $70.00 $57,680 $300.00 $247,200 $370 $304,880 $60,976.00 $60,976.00 $426,832 Seal concrete deck 2,190 SY $1.50 $3,285 $3.00 $6,570 $5 $9,855 $1,971.00 $1,971.00 $13,797 SUBTOTAL $7,070,441

BERTHING REPAIRS Double bitt bollard concrete base spall and cracking repair at B33 15 SF $60.00 $900 $300.00 $4,500 $360 $5,400 $1,080 $1,080 $7,560

Double bitt bollard base crack repair by epoxy crack injection at B51 1 EA $120.00 $120 $450.00 $450 $570 $570 $114 $114 $798 Clean and recoat double bitt bollards 10 EA $120.00 $1,200 $450.00 $4,500 $570 $5,700 $1,140 $1,140 $7,980 Repair pile cluster with new wale and chains 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500 $4,750.00 $4,750 $6,250 $6,250 $1,250 $1,250 $8,750 Add additional pile clusters 2 EA $21,400.00 $42,800 $39,500.00 $79,000 $60,900 $121,800 $24,360 $24,360 $170,520 Add new sea cushion 3 EA $7,000.00 $21,000 $3,000.00 $9,000 $10,000 $30,000 $6,000 $6,000 $42,000 SUBTOTAL $237,608 MECHANICAL UPGRADES Add heat traced water line including fire hydrants 610 LF $570.00 $347,700 $280.00 $170,800 $850 $518,500 $103,700 $103,700 $725,900 Add heat traced sewer line 610 LF $275.00 $167,750 $175.00 $106,750 $450 $274,500 $54,900 $54,900 $384,300 Convert existing sewer line to bilge water and add treatment system 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 $25,000.00 $25,000 $75,000 $75,000 $15,000 $15,000 $105,000 SUBTOTAL $1,215,200 ELECTRICAL UPGRADES Add one conduit containing cable and LAN 610 LF $27.00 $16,470 $34.00 $20,740 $61 $37,210 $7,442 $7,442 $52,094 SUBTOTAL $52,094 ESTIMATED BUDGET AMOUNT = $8,575,343

NOTE: THE COSTS SHOWN ABOVE DO NOT INCLUDE DESIGN PHASE ENGINEERING , ADDITIONAL PIER 7 INSHORE COST ESTIMATE Date Prepared: AUG 2017 SHEET 1 OF 1

ACTIVITY AND LOCATION USCG CONTRACT NUMBER CEC JOB NUMBER CGC EAGLE HOMEPORT EVALUATION - GAP ANALYSIS HSCGG1-17-J-PRV178 2645-16.03 PIER 7, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, FORT TRUMBULL TASK ORDER NUMBER PREPARED BY NEW LONDON, CT HSCGG1-16-D-PRV078 RJW CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD & CONTINGENCIES QUANTITY MATERIAL COST LABOR COST SUBTOTAL PROFIT

ITEM DESCRIPTION NO. UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL UNIT COST TOTAL UNIT COST TOTAL 20% 20% TOTAL ITEM COST STRUCTURAL REPAIRS Encasement of exposed steel piles into the mud line with concrete pile jacket extensions on the Approach Pier. 31 EA $2,250.00 $69,750 $3,750.00 $116,250 $6,000 $186,000 $37,200.00 $37,200.00 $260,400 Encasement of exposed steel pile with new concrete pile jacket extension into the mud line , Pier 7 B1 to B3 10 EA $2,240.00 $22,400 $4,160.00 $41,600 $6,400 $64,000 $12,800.00 $12,800.00 $89,600 Encasement of steel pile with new concrete pile jacket from pile cap to mud line, Pier 7 B1 to B3 2 EA $5,040.00 $10,080 $9,360.00 $18,720 $14,400 $28,800 $5,760.00 $5,760.00 $40,320 Encasement of exposed steel pile with new concrete pile jacket extension into the mud line, Pier 7 B4 to B7 16 EA $4,160.00 $66,560 $7,800.00 $124,800 $11,960 $191,360 $38,272.00 $38,272.00 $267,904 Encasement of exposed steel pile with new concrete pile jacket extension into the mud line, Pier 7 B8 to B21 50 EA $7,392.00 $369,600 $13,728.00 $686,400 $21,120 $1,056,000 $211,200.00 $211,200.00 $1,478,400 Encasement of steel pile with new concrete pile jacket from pile cap to mud line, Pier 7 B8 to B21 6 EA $10,192.00 $61,152 $18,928.00 $113,568 $29,120 $174,720 $34,944.00 $34,944.00 $244,608 Encasement of exposed steel pile with new concrete pile jacket extension into the mud line, Pier 7 B22 to B34 batter piles only 20 EA $7,392.00 $147,840 $13,728.00 $274,560 $21,120 $422,400 $84,480.00 $84,480.00 $591,360 Repair deck, pile cap, and beam spalls on the Approach Pier 78 SF $70.00 $5,460 $220.00 $17,160 $290 $22,620 $4,524.00 $4,524.00 $31,668 Repair pile jacket spalls on the Approach Pier 99 SF $70.00 $6,930 $300.00 $29,700 $370 $36,630 $7,326.00 $7,326.00 $51,282 Repair deck, pile cap and beam spalls on Pier 7 B1 to B34 91 SF $70.00 $6,370 $220.00 $20,020 $290 $26,390 $5,278.00 $5,278.00 $36,946 Repair pile jacket spalls on Pier 7 B1 to B34 451 SF $70.00 $31,570 $300.00 $135,300 $370 $166,870 $33,374.00 $33,374.00 $233,618 Seal concrete deck B1 to B34 1,444 SY $1.50 $2,166 $3.00 $4,332 $5 $6,498 $1,299.60 $1,299.60 $9,097 SUBTOTAL $3,335,203

BERTHING REPAIRS Double bitt bollard concrete base spall and cracking repair at B33 15 SF $60.00 $900 $300.00 $4,500 $360 $5,400 $1,080 $1,080 $7,560 Clean and recoat double bitt bollards 11 EA $120.00 $1,320 $450.00 $4,950 $570 $6,270 $1,254 $1,254 $8,778 Repair pile cluster with new wale and chains 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500 $4,750.00 $4,750 $6,250 $6,250 $1,250 $1,250 $8,750 Add additional pile clusters 2 EA $21,400.00 $42,800 $39,500.00 $79,000 $60,900 $121,800 $24,360 $24,360 $170,520 Add new sea cushion 3 EA $7,000.00 $21,000 $3,000.00 $9,000 $10,000 $30,000 $6,000 $6,000 $42,000 SUBTOTAL $237,608 MECHANICAL UPGRADES Add heat traced water line including fire hydrants 325 LF $570.00 $185,250 $280.00 $91,000 $850 $276,250 $55,250 $55,250 $386,750 Add heat traced sewer line 325 LF $275.00 $89,375 $175.00 $56,875 $450 $146,250 $29,250 $29,250 $204,750 Convert existing sewer line to bilge water and add treatment system 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 $25,000.00 $25,000 $75,000 $75,000 $15,000 $15,000 $105,000 SUBTOTAL $696,500 ELECTRICAL UPGRADES Add one conduit containing cable and LAN 325 LF $27.00 $8,775 $34.00 $11,050 $61 $19,825 $3,965 $3,965 $27,755 Add utility mound 1 EA $9,500.00 $9,500 $5,750.00 $5,750 $15,250 $15,250 $3,050 $3,050 $21,350 SUBTOTAL $49,105 ESTIMATED BUDGET AMOUNT = $4,318,416

NOTE: THE COSTS SHOWN ABOVE DO NOT INCLUDE DESIGN PHASE ENGINEERING ,

APPENDIX G – Miscellaneous Data

Appendix G Table of Contents

Item PAGE Pier 7 Ultrasonic Thickness Measurements of Piles...... G-3 Description of Condition Assessment Ratings ...... G-4 Definitions ...... G-6

E-2

Ultrasonic Theoretical Thickness Measurements of Selected Sampling of Steel HP Piles Location 2017 Inspection % Remaining Elevation Web N Flange S Flange Web N Flange S Flange Pile (ft) (in) (in) (in) (%) (%) (%) 3:B* ‐4 0.28 0.21 NA 55 42 1:A ‐4 0.328 0.212 0.194 65 42 38 ‐4 0.338 0.258 0.260 67 51 51 5:A ‐10 0.236 0.296 0.248 47 59 49 ‐4 0.274 0.364 0.274 54 72 54 9:C ‐10 0.276 0.320 0.268 55 63 53 ‐20 0.512 0.536 0.518 101 106 103 ‐4 0.300 0.136 0.192 59 27 38 13:C ‐12 0.465 0.352 0.392 92 70 78 ‐25 0.428 0.380 0.436 85 75 86 ‐4 0.240 0.242 0.294 48 48 58 17:A ‐12 0.278 0.290 0.264 55 57 52 ‐25 0.342 0.442 0.450 68 88 89 ‐4 0.330 T** T** 65 5 5 21:B ‐12 0.266 0.286 0.176 53 57 35 ‐25 0.33 0.184 0.176 65 36 35 ‐4 0.286 NR 0.214 57 42 25:C ‐12 0.296 0.298 0.258 59 59 51 ‐25 0.348 0.320 0.408 69 63 81 ‐4 0.304 0.220 0.196 60 44 39 26a:B ‐12 0.350 0.306 0.325 69 61 64 ‐25 0.410 0.348 0.350 81 69 69 ‐4 0.268 0.220 0.236 53 44 47 30:C ‐12 0.230 0.228 0.250 46 45 50 ‐25 0.300 0.300 0.340 59 59 67 ‐4 0.370 0.328 0.288 73 65 57 34:C ‐12 0.304 0.296 0.298 60 59 59 ‐25 0.454 0.408 0.398 90 81 79 ‐4 0.222 0.342 0.290 44 68 57 39:A ‐12 0.372 0.318 0.380 74 63 75 ‐25 0.414 0.420 0.474 82 83 94 ‐4 0.354 0.288 0.324 70 57 64 43:B ‐12 0.314 0.308 0.282 62 61 56 ‐25 0.238 0.286 0.300 47 57 59 (in) (in) (in) (%) (%) (%) Average 0.325 0.304 0.305 64 59 59

Notes: (1) Theoretical thickness for a new HP 14x73 (1965): web = .505 in., flange = .505 in. (2) % Remaing is based on the theoretical thickenss for a new HP 14x73. * 3:B located in Approach Pier ** T = paper thin flange steel

G‐3 Description of Condition Assessment and Facility Operational Ratings

Rating Description Minor to moderate defects and deterioration may be present, but no Satisfactory overstressing observed. No repairs are required. All primary structural elements are sound, but minor to moderate defects or deterioration is observed.

Fair Localized areas of moderate to advance deterioration may be present but do not significantly reduce the load‐bearing capacity of the structure. Repairs are recommended, but the priority of the recommended repairs is low.

Advanced deterioration, overstressing or breakage is observed on widespread portions of the structure and may significantly reduce the load‐ Poor bearing capacity of the structure. Load restrictions may be necessary. Repairs may need to be carried out with a moderate to high priority level of urgency.

Advanced deterioration, overstressing, or breakage may have significantly affected the load bearing capacity of primary structural components. Serious More widespread failures are possible or likely to occur, and load restrictions should be implemented as necessary. Repairs may need to be carried out on a very high priority basis with strong urgency.

C1 ‐ FACILITY OPERATIONAL No limitations on design structural live load or fendering capacity. Structure is well maintained and in good condition.

C2 ‐ FACILITY MOSTLY OPERATIONAL

Design live load capacity is unaffected at present time. Some damage or deterioration of structural members and/or fender systems exists which might result in downgrading of the load capacity in the next three years.

C3 ‐ FACILITY PARTIALLY OPERATIONAL

Design live load capacity of certain deck areas (or fender systems) is limited at present time. Damage or deterioration of structural members is present resulting in limitations in berthing, crane loading and material handling.

C4 ‐ FACILITY NOT OPERATIONAL Damage or deterioration of structural members (and/or fender systems) is present to an extent that the structure is not able to safely support the intended operations. Major structural repairs are required before restoration of original live load capacity.

E-4 E-5

DEFINITIONS

Abutment. A substructure composed of stone, designated upon bridge detail plans as so many concrete, brick, or timber supporting the end of inches to one foot. a single span or the extreme end of a multi- span superstructure and, in general, retaining Batter Pile. A pile driven in an inclined or supporting the approach embankment placed position to resist forces which act in other than in contact therewith. a vertical direction. It may be computed to withstand these forces or, instead, may be used Aggregate. The sand, gravel, broken stone, or as a subsidiary part or portion of a structure to combinations thereof with which the cementing improve its general rigidity. material is mixed to form a mortar or concrete. The fine material used to produce mortar for Bed Load. Sediment that moves by rolling, stone and brick masonry and for the mortar sliding or skipping along the bed and is component of concrete is commonly termed essentially in contact with the streambed. "fine aggregate" while the coarse material used in concrete only is termed "coarse aggregate." Bed Rock. (Ledge Rock.) A natural mass formation of igneous, sedimentary, or Backfill. 1. Material placed adjacent to an metamorphic rock material either outcropping abutment, pier, retaining wall or other structure upon the surface, uncovered in a foundation or part of a structure to fill the unoccupied excavation, or underlying an accumulation of portion of the foundation excavation. 2. Soil, unconsolidated earth material. usually granular, placed behind and within the abutment and wingwalls. Bench Mark. A point of known elevation.

Backwall. The topmost portion of an abutment Bent. A supporting unit of a trestle or a viaduct above the elevation of the bridge seat, type structure made up of two or more column functioning primarily as a retaining wall with a or column-like members connected at their live load surcharge. It may also serve as a topmost ends by a cap, strut or other member support for the extreme end of the bridge deck holding them in their correct positions. This and the approach slab. connecting member is commonly designed to distribute the superimposed loads upon the Backwater. 1. The water of a stream retained bent, and when combined with a system of at an elevation above its normal level through diagonal and horizontal bracing attached to the the controlling effect of a condition existing at a columns, the entire construction functions downstream location such as a flood, an ice jam somewhat like a truss distributing its loads into or other obstruction. 2. The increase in the the foundation. When piles are used as the elevation of the water surface above normal column elements, the entire construction is produced primarily by the stream width designated a "pile bent" and, correspondingly, contraction beneath a bridge. the wave-like when those elements are framed, the effect is most pronounced at and immediately assemblage is termed a "frame bent". upstream from an abutment or pier but extends downstream to a location beyond the body of Berm. 1. The line, whether straight or curved, the substructure part. which defines the location where the top surface of an approach embankment or Base Metal, Structure Metal, Parent Metal. causeway is intersected by the surface of the The metal at and closely adjacent to the surface side slope. This term is synonymous with to be incorporated in a welded joint which will "Roadway Berm". be fused, and by coalescence and interdiffusion 2. A horizontal bench located at the toe of a with the weld will produce a welded joint. slope of an approach cut, embankment or causeway to strengthen and secure its Batter. The inclination of a surface in relation to underlaying material against sliding or other a horizontal or vertical plane or occasionally in displacement into an adjacent ditch, borrow pit relation to an inclined plane. Batter is commonly or other artificial or natural lower lying area.

E-6

Blanket. A protection against stream scour assemblage. 2. A retaining wall-like structure placed adjacent to abutments and piers, and composed of timber, steel or reinforced covering the streambed for a distance from concrete members commonly assembled to these structures considered adequate for the form a barrier held in a vertical or an inclined stream flow and streambed conditions. The position by members interlocking therewith and streambed covering commonly consists of a extending into the restrained material to obtain deposit of stones of varying sizes which, in the anchorage necessary to prevent both combination, will resist the scour forces. A sliding and overturning of the entire second type consists of a timber framework so assemblage. constructed that it can be ballasted and protected from displacement by being loaded Cap. (Cap Beam, Cap Piece.) 1. The topmost with stones or with pieces of wrecked concrete piece or member of a viaduct, trestle or frame structures or other adaptable ballasting bent serving to distribute the loads upon the material. columns and to hold them in their proper relative positions. 2. The topmost piece or Bleeding Channels. Essentially vertical member of a pile bent in a viaduct or trestle localized open channels in concrete caused by serving to distribute the loads upon the piles heavy bleeding. and to hold them in their proper relative positions. Bracing. A system of tension or compression members, or a combination of these, forming Cement Paste. The plastic combination of with the part or parts to be supported or cement and water that supplies the cementing strengthened, a truss or frame. It transfers action in concrete. wind, dynamic, impact and vibratory stresses to the substructure and gives rigidity throughout Channel Profile. Longitudinal section of a the complete assemblage. channel.

Breast Wall. (Face Wall, Stem.) The portion of Checking. Development of shallow cracks at an abutment between the wings and beneath closely spaced but irregular intervals on the the bridge seat. The breast wall supports the surface of mortar or concrete. superstructure loads and retains the approach fill. Chemical Attack, Timber. This will resemble fungus decay in timber members. Bridge Seat. The top surface of an abutment or pier upon which the superstructure span is Cofferdam. In general, an open box-like placed and supported. For an abutment it is the structure constructed to surround the area to be surface forming the support for the occupied by an abutment, pier, retaining wall or superstructure and from which the backwall other structure and permit unwatering of the rises. For a pier it is the entire top surface. enclosure so that the excavation for the preparation of a foundation and the abutment, Buckles and Kinks. These conditions develop pier, or other construction may be effected in in steel members primarily because of damage the open air. In its simplest form, the dam arising from thermal strain, overload, or added consists of interlocking steel sheet piles. load conditions. The latter condition is caused by the failure or the yielding of adjacent Collision, Timber. Shattered or injured timbers members or components. Collision damage are indications of collision. may also cause buckles, kinks and cuts. Sometimes observed where cracks radiate from Concrete. A composite material consisting cuts or notches. essentially of a binding medium within which are embedded particles or fragments of Bulkhead. 1. A retaining wall-like structure relatively inert mineral filler. In portland cement commonly composed of driven piles supporting concrete, the binder or matrix, either in the a wall or a barrier of wooden timbers or plastic or the hardened state, is a combination reinforced concrete members functioning as a of portland cement and water. The filler constraining structure resisting the thrust or material, called aggregate, is generally graded earth or other material bearing against the in size from fine sand to pebbles or stones

E-7

which may, in some concrete, be several inches Crustacean Borers. The most commonly in diameter. encountered crustacean borer is the limnoria, or wood louse. It bores into the surface of the Consolidation. The time-dependent change in wood to a shallow depth. Wave action or volume of a soil mass under compressive load floating debris breaks down the thin shell of caused by pore-water slowly escaping from the timber outside the borers' burrows, causing the pores or voids of the soil. The soil skeleton is limnoria to burrow deeper. The continuous unable to support the load by itself and changes burrowing results in a progressive deterioration structure, reducing its volume and usually of the timber pile cross section which will be producing vertical settlements. most noticeable by the hour glass shape developed between the tide levels. Continuous Spans. A beam, girder or truss type superstructure designed to extend Davit. A small crane that projects over the side continuously over one or more intermediate of a ship or hatchway and is used especially for supports. boats, anchors, or cargo.

Corrosion. The general disintegration and Debris. Any Material including floating woody wasting of surface metal or other material materials and other trash, suspended sediment through oxidation, decomposition, temperature, or bed load, moved by a flowing stream. and other natural agencies. Degradation. General, progressive lowering of Corrosion (electrolytic). Corrosion resulting the stream channel by erosion. from galvanic action. Deterioration. Deterioration is any adverse Cracks, Concrete. Cracks in concrete are change of normal mechanical, physical and classified by direction, width and depth. The chemical properties either on the surface or in following adjectives are used: longitudinal, the whole body of concrete generally through transverse, vertical, diagonal, and random. separation of its components. Three width ranges are used as follows: fine-- generally less than 1 mm; medium--between 1 Dike. (Dyke.) An earthen embankment used and 2 mm; wide--over 2 mm. on stream channels to prevent stream erosion and localized scour at a bridge site, and/or to (1) D-Cracking. The progressive formation on direct the stream current so that debris will not a concrete surface of a series of fine cracks at accumulate upon bottom land adjacent to rather close intervals, often of random patterns, approach embankments, abutments, piers, but in highway slabs paralleling edges, joints, towers or other portions of the structure. and cracks and usually curving across slab corners. Dike, Spur. A protecting jetty-like construction placed adjacent to an abutment of the "U", "T", (2) Hairline Cracking. Small cracks of random block or arched type upon the upstream and pattern in an exposed concrete surface. downstream sides, but sometimes only on the upstream side, to secure a gradual contraction (3) Pattern Cracking. Fine openings on of the stream width and induce a free, even flow concrete surfaces in the form of a pattern; of water adjacent to, and beneath, a bridge. resulting from a decrease in volume of the They may be constructed in extension of the material near the surface, or increase in volume wing wall or a winged abutment. Spur dikes of the material below the surface, or both. serve to prevent stream scour and undermining of the abutment foundation, and to relieve the condition which otherwise would tend to gather Cracks, Steel. Cracks in the steel may vary and hold accumulations of stream debris from hairline thickness to sufficient width to adjacent to the upstream side of the abutment. transmit light through the member. Disintegration. Deterioration into small Creep. An inelastic deformation that increases fragments or particles due to any cause. with time while the stress is constant.

E-8

Distortion. Any abnormal deformation of rather than strength and rigidity although its concrete from its original shape. function may involve both.

Dolphin. A group or cluster of piles driven in Fascia Girder. An exposed outermost girder of one to two circles about a center pile and drawn a span sometimes treated architecturally or together at their top ends around the center pile otherwise to provide an attractive appearance. to form a buffer or guard for the protection of channel span piers or other portions of a bridge Fender. 1. A structure placed at an upstream exposed to possible injury by collision with location adjacent to a pier to protect it from the waterbound traffic. The tops of the piles are striking force, impact and shock of floating served with a wrapping consisting of several stream debris, ice floes, etc. This structure is plies of wire, rope, coil, twist link, or stud link sometimes termed an "ice guard" in latitudes anchor chain, which, by being fastened at its productive of lake and river ice to form ice ends only, renders itself taut by the adjustments flows. 2. A structure commonly consisting of of the piles resulting from service contact with dolphins, capped and braced rows of piles or of ships, barges, or other craft. The center pile wooden cribs either entirely or partially filled may project above the others to serve as a with rock ballast, constructed upstream and bollard for restraining and guiding the downstream from the center and end piers (or movements of water-borne traffic units. Single abutments) of a fixed or movable superstructure steel and concrete piles of large size may also span to fend off water-borne traffic from be used as dolphins. collision with these substructure parts, and in the case of a swing span, with the span while in Efflorescence. A deposit of salts, usually white, its open position. formed on a concrete surface, the substance having emerged from below the surface. Fender Pier. A pier-like structure which performs the same service as a fender but is Element. An angle, beam, plate or other rolled, generally more substantially built. These forged or cast piece of metal forming a part of a structures may be constructed entirely or in part built piece. For wooden structures, a board, of stone or concrete masonry. plank, joist or other fabricated piece forming a part of a built piece. Fill, Filling. Material, usually earth, used for the purpose or raising or changing the surface Epoxy. A synthetic resin which cures or contour of an area, or for constructing an hardens by chemical reaction between embankment. components which are mixed together shortly before use. Flange. The part of a rolled I-shaped beam or of a built-up girder extending transversely Erosion. Deterioration brought about by the across the top and bottom edges of the web. abrasive action of fluids or solids in motion. The flanges are considered to carry the compressive and tensile forces that comprise Exudation. A liquid or viscous gel-like material the internal resisting moment of the beam, and discharged through a pore, crack or opening in may consist of angles, plates or both. the concrete surface. Floating Bridge. In general this term means Falsework. A temporary wooden or metal the same as "Pontoon Bridge." However, its framework built to support, without appreciable parts providing buoyancy and supporting power settlement and deformation, the weight of a may consist of logs or squared timbers, held in structure during the period of its construction position by lashing pieces, chains or ropes, and and until it becomes self-supporting. In floored over with planks, or the bridge itself may general, the arrangement of its details are be of hollow cellular construction. devised to facilitate the construction operations and provide for economical removal and the Flood Frequency. The average time interval in salvaging of material suitable for reuse. years in which a flow of a given magnitude, taken from an infinite series, will recur. Fascia. An outside, covering member designed on the basis of architectural effect

E-9

Footing. The enlarged, or spread-out lower (1) Mild. Mild fungus decay appears as a stain portion of a substructure, which distributes the or discoloration. It is hard to detect and even structure load either to the earth or to harder to distinguish between decay fungi and supporting piles. The most common footing is staining fungi. the concrete slab, although stone piers also utilize footings. "Footer" is a colloquial term for (2) Advanced. Wood darkens further and footing. shows signs of definite disintegration, with the surface becoming punky, soft and spongy, Forms. (Form Work, Lagging, Shuttering.) stringy, or crumbly, depending upon the type of The construction, wooden or metal, providing decay or fungus. It is similar to dry rot of door means to receiving, molding and sustaining in posts and outside porches. Fruiting bodies of position the plastic mass of concrete placed fungi, similar to those seen on old stumps, may therein to the dimensions, outlines and details develop. Decay is very likely to occur at of surfaces planned for its integral parts connections, splices, support points, or around throughout its period of hardening. bolt holes. This may be due either to the tendency of such areas to collect and retain Foundation. The supporting material upon moisture, or to bolt holes or cuts being made in which the substructure portion of a bridge is the surface after the preservative treatment has placed. A foundation is "natural" when having been applied. Unless these surfaces are stability adequate to support the superimposed subsequently protected, decay is very likely. loads without lateral displacement or Any holes, cuts, scrapes or other breaks in the compaction entailing appreciable settlement or timber surface which would break the protective deformation. Also, applied in an imprecise layers of the preservative treatment, allowing fashion to a substructure unit. access to untreated wood, invite fungus decay.

Foundation Grillage. A construction Galvanic Action. Electrical current between consisting of steel, timber, or concrete members two unlike metals. placed in layers. Each layer is normal to those above and below it and the members within a Galvanic Corrosion. This condition will appear layer are generally parallel, producing a crib or essentially similar to rust. grid-like effect. Grillages are usually placed under very heavy concentrated loads. Grillage. A platform-like construction or assemblage used to insure distribution of loads Foundation Load. The load resulting from upon unconsolidated soil material. traffic, superstructure, substructure, approach embankment, approach causeway or other Grout. A mortar having a sufficient water incidental load increment imposed upon a given content to render it a free-flowing mass, used foundation area. for filling (grouting) the interstitial spaces between the stones or the stone fragments Foundation Pile. A pile, whether of wood, (spalls) used in the "backing" portion of stone reinforced concrete or metal used to reinforce a masonry; for fixing anchor bolts and for filling foundation and render it satisfactory for the cored spaces in castings, masonry, or other supporting of superimposed loads. spaces where water may accumulate.

Foundation Seal. A mass of concrete placed H-Pile, H-Beam. A rolled steel bearing pile underwater within a cofferdam for the base having an H-shaped cross section. portion of an abutment, pier, retaining wall or other structure to close or seal the cofferdam Honeycomb. Voids left in concrete due to against incoming water from foundation springs, failure of the mortar to effectively fill the spaces fissures, joints or other water carrying channels. among coarse aggregate particles. Foundations Stone. The stone or one of the Incrustation. A crust or coating, generally stones of a course having contact with the hard, formed on the surface of concrete or foundation of a structure. masonry construction. Fungus Decay. Joint Spall. Elongated cavity along a concrete joint.

E-10

Level I Inspection. A Level I inspection Level III Inspection. A Level III inspection is a includes a close visual examination, or a tactile highly detailed inspection of a critical structure examination using large sweeping motions of or structural element, or a member where the hands where visibility is limited. Although extensive repair or possible replacement is the Level I inspection is often referred to as a contemplated. The purpose of this type of "swim-by" inspection, it must be detailed inspection is to detect hidden or interior enough to detect obvious major damage or damage or loss in cross-sectional area, and to deterioration due to over-stress, or severe evaluate material homogeneity. This level of deterioration or corrosion. It should confirm the inspection includes extensive cleaning, detailed continuity of the full length of all members and measurements, and selected non-destructive detect undermining or exposure of normally and partially destructive testing techniques such buried elements. A Level I inspection is as ultrasonics, sample coring or boring, physical normally conducted over the total exterior material sampling and in-situ hardness testing. surface of each underwater structure element, The use of testing techniques is generally whether it be a pier, abutment, retaining wall, limited to key structural areas, areas which are bulkhead or pile bent. A Level I inspection may suspect, or areas which may be representative also include limited probing of the substructure of the underwater structure. and adjacent streambed. The results of the Level I inspection provide a Limnoria. See Crustacean Borers. general overview of the substructure condition and verification of the as-built drawings. The Masonry. A general term applying to Level I inspection can also indicate the need for abutments, piers, retaining walls, arches and Level II or Level III inspections, and aid in allied structures built of stone, brick or concrete determining the extent and selecting the and known correspondingly as stone, brick or location of more detailed inspections. concrete masonry.

Level II Inspection. A Level II inspection is a Meander. The tortuous channel that detailed inspection which requires that portions characterizes the serpentine curvature of a slow of the structure be cleaned of marine growth. flowing stream on a flood plain. Cleaning is time-consuming and should be restricted to critical areas of the structure. For Mechanical Wear. Wear due to abrasion of pile type structures, a 10-inch high band should timber members is readily recognized by the be cleaned at designated locations, generally gradual loss of section at the points of wear. near the low waterline, near the mudline and midway between the low waterline and the Mollusk Borers (Shipworms). The shipworm mudline. On a rectangular pile, the cleaning is one of the most serious enemies of marine should include at least three sides; on an timber installations. The most common species octagonal pile, at least six sides; on a round of shipworm is the teredo. This shipworm pile, at least three-fourths of the perimeter; on enters the timber in an early stage of life and an H-pile, at least the outside faces of the remains there for the rest of its life. Teredos flanges and one side of the web. On large solid reach a length of 15 inches and a diameter of faced elements such as piers and abutments, 1 3/8 inch, although some species of shipworm foot by 1 foot areas should be cleaned at three grow to a length of 6 feet. The teredo maintains levels on each face of the element. The a small opening in the surface of the wood to selection of the locations for cleaning should be obtain nourishment from the sea water. made so as to minimize the potential for damage to the structure. Damaged areas Mortar. 1. An intimate mixture, in a plastic should be measured, and the extent and condition, of cement, or other cementitious severity of the damage documented. material with fine aggregate and water, used to The Level II inspection is intended to detect and bed and bind together the quarried stones, identify damaged and deteriorated areas which bricks or other solid materials composing the may be hidden by surface biofouling. The major portion of a masonry construction or to thoroughness of cleaning should be governed produce a plastic coating upon such by what is necessary to discern the condition of construction. 2. The enduring jointing material the underlying material. Removal of all filling the interstices between and holding in biofouling staining is generally not required. place the quarried stones or other solid

E-11

materials of masonry construction. practical considerations may require that two or Correspondingly, this term is applied to the more column supports be placed upon a single cement coating used to produce a desired base or footing section. To prevent surface condition upon masonry constructions accumulation of stream debris at periods of high and is described as the "mortar finish", "mortar water, or under other conditions, the upstream coat", "floated face or surface", "parapet", etc. piers may be constructed with cut-waters and in 3. The component of concrete composed of addition the piers may be connected with an cement, or other indurating material with sand integrally built web between them. When and water when the concrete is a mobile mass composed only of a wide block-like form, it is and correspondingly this same component after called a wall or solid pier. it has attained a rigid condition through hardening of its cementing constituents. Pier, Pivot. (Center Pier.) a term applied to the center bearing pier supporting a swing span Peeling. A process in which flakes of mortar while operating throughout an opening-closing are broken away from a concrete surface; such cycle. This pier is commonly circular in shape as by deterioration or by adherence of surface but may be hexagonal, octagonal or even mortar to forms as forms are removed. square in plan.

Pier. A structure composed of stone, concrete, Pier, Rest. A pier supporting the end of a brick, steel or wood and built in shaft or block- movable bridge span when in its closed like form to support the ends of the spans of a position. multi-span superstructure at an intermediate location between its abutments. Pier, Rigid Frame. Pier with two or more columns and a horizontal beam on top Pier, Anchor. A pier functioning to resist an constructed to act like a frame. uplifting force, as for example: the end reaction of an anchor arm of a cantilever bridge. This Pile. A rod or shaft-like linear member of pier functions as a normal pier structure when timber, steel, concrete or composite materials subjected to certain conditions of superstructure driven or jetted into the earth to carry structure loading. loads through weak strata of soil to those strata capable of supporting such loads. Piles are Pier Cap. (Pier Top.) The topmost portion of a also used where loss of earth support due to pier. On rigid frame piers, the term applies to scour is expected. the beam across the column tops. On hammerhead and tee piers, the cap is a Pile Pier or Bent. A pier composed of driven continuous beam. piles capped or decked with a timber grillage, concrete cap or steel beam; or with a reinforced Pier, Cylinder. A type of pier produced by concrete slab forming the bridge seat. sinking a cylindrical steel shell to a desired depth and filling it with concrete. The foundation Pile or Piled Foundation. A foundation excavation may be made by open dredging reinforced by driving piles in sufficient number within the shell and the sinking of the shell may and to a depth adequate to develop the bearing proceed simultaneously with the dredging. capacity required to support the foundation load. Pier, Dumbbell. A pier consisting essentially of two cylindrical or rectangular shaped piers Pile, Sheet. Commonly used in the construction joined by a web constructed integrally with of bulkheads, cofferdams and cribs to retain them. earth and prevent the inflow of water, liquid Pier, Hammerhead. (Tee Pier.) A pier with a mud, and fine grained sand with water. Sheet cylindrical or rectangular shaft, and a relatively piles are of three general types: long, transverse cap. (1) timber composed of a single piece or of two Pier, Pedestal. A structure composed of stone, or more pieces spiked or bolted together to concrete or brick built in block-like form-- produce a compound piece either with a lap or supporting a column of a bent or tower of a a tongued and grooved effect, viaduct. Foundation conditions or other

E-12

(2) reinforced concrete slabs constructed with erosion and scour by water flow, wave or other or without lap or tongued and grooved effect, movement.

(3) rolled steel shapes with full provision for Run-Off. As applied to bridge design, the rigid interlocking of the edges. portion of the precipitation upon a drainage (catchment) area which is discharged quickly by Pile Splice. One of the means of joining one its drainage stream or streams and which, pile upon the end of another to provide greater therefore, becomes a factor in the design of the penetration length. effective water discharge area of a bridge. Run- off is dependent upon soil porosity (varied by Pitting. Development of relatively small cavities saturated or frozen condition), slope or soil in a surface, due to phenomena such as surfaces, intensity of rainfall or of melting snow corrosion or cavitations, or, in concrete, conditions, and other pertinent factors. localized disintegration. Rust. Rusted steel varies in color from dark red Plinth Course. The course or courses of stone to dark brown. Initially, rust is fine grained, but forming the base portion of an abutment, pier, as it progresses, it becomes flaky or scaly in parapet or retaining wall and having a character. Eventually, rust causes a pitting of projection or extension beyond the general the member. Rust is classified as follows: surface of the main body of the structure. (1) Light. A light, loose rust formation pitting the Pointing. The operations incident to the paint surface. compacting of the mortar in the outermost portion of a joint and the troweling or other (2) Moderate. A looser rust formation with treatment of its exposed surface to secure scales or flakes forming. Definite areas of rust water tightness or desired architectural effect or are discernible. both. (3) Severe. A heavy, stratified rust or rust scale Pontoon Bridge. A bridge ordinarily composed with pitting of the metal surface. This rust of boats, scows or pontoons so connected to condition eventually culminates in the the deck or floor construction that they are perforation of the steel section itself. retained in position and serve to support vehicular and pedestrian traffic. A pontoon Sand Streak. Streak in surface of formed bridge may be so constructed that a portion is concrete caused by bleeding. removable and thus serve to facilitate Scaling. Local flaking or peeling away of the navigation. Modern floating bridges may have near surface portion of concrete or mortar. pontoons built integrally with the deck. (1) Light. Loss of surface mortar without Popout. The breaking away of small portions exposure of coarse aggregate. of a concrete surface due to internal pressure which leaves a shallow, typically conical, (2) Medium. Loss of surface mortar up to 1/2 to depression. 1 cm in depth and exposure of coarse aggregate. (1) Small. Popouts leaving holes up to 1 cm in diameter, or the equivalent. (3) Severe. Loss of surface mortar 1/2 to 1 cm in depth with some loss of mortar surrounding (2) Medium. Popouts leaving holes between 1 aggregate particles 1 to 2 cm in depth, so that and 5 cm in diameter, or the equivalent. aggregate is clearly exposed and stands out (3) Large. Popouts leaving holes greater than 5 from the concrete. cm in diameter, or the equivalent. (4) Very Severe. Loss of coarse aggregate Riprap. Brickbats, stones, blocks of concrete particles as well as surface mortar and mortar or other protective covering material of like surrounding aggregate, generally greater than 2 nature deposited upon river and streambeds cm in depth. and banks, lake, tidal or other shores to prevent

E-13

Scour. An erosion of a river, stream, tidal inlet, ends of a pier built with surfaces battered, thus lake or other water bed area by a current, wash forming a cutwater to divide and deflect the or other water in motion, producing a deepening stream waters and floating debris and, of the overlying water, or a widening of the correspondingly, when on the downstream end, lateral dimension of the flow area. functioning to reduce crosscurrents, swirl and eddy action which are productive of depositions Seal. See Foundation Seal. of sand, silt and detritus downstream from the pier. Shipworm. See Mollusk Borers. Stem. The vertical wall portion of an abutment Silt. Very finely divided siliceous or other hard retaining wall, or solid pier. and durable rock material derived from its mother rock through attritive or other Stone Facing, Stone Veneer, Brick Veneer. A mechanical action rather than chemical stone or brick surface covering or sheath laid in decomposition. In general, its grain size shall be imitation of stone or brick masonry but having a that which will pass a Standard No. 200 sieve. depth thickness equal to the width dimension of one stone or brick for stretchers and the length Slope Pavement, Slope Protection. A thin dimension for headers. The backing portion of a surfacing of stone, concrete or other material wall or the interior portion of a pier may be deposited upon the sloped surface of an constructed of rough stones imbedded in mortar approach cut, embankment or causeway to or concrete, cyclopean concrete, plain or prevent its disintegration by rain, wind or other reinforced concrete, brick bats imbedded in erosive action. mortar, or even of mortar alone. The backing and interior material may be deposited as the Spall, Concrete. A fragment, usually in the laying of the facing material progresses to shape of a flake, detached from a larger secure interlocking and bonding with it, or the concrete mass by a blow, by the action of covering material may be laid upon its weather, by pressure, or by expansion within preformed surface. the large mass. Stratification. The separation of over-wet or (1) Small. A roughly circular or oval depression over-vibrated concrete into horizontal layers generally not greater than 2 cm in depth nor with increasingly lighter material toward the top; greater than about 15 cm in any dimension, water, laitance, mortar, and coarse aggregate caused by the separation of a portion of the will tend to occupy successively lower positions surface concrete. in that order; a layered structure in concrete resulting from placing of successive batches (2) Large. May be a roughly circular or oval that differ in appearance. depression, or in some cases an elongated depression over a reinforcing bar, generally 2 Stress Concentrations. Indications of large cm or more in depth and 15 cm or greater in strains due to stress concentrations in steel any dimension, caused by a separation of the include fine cracks in the paint at connections at surface concrete. joints and sheared or deformed bolts and rivets.

Spall, Stone Masonry. Small pieces of rock Suspended Load. Sediment that is supported break out or chip away. by the upward components of the turbulent currents in a stream and that stays for an Splitting, Stone Masonry. Seams or cracks appreciable length of time. open up in rocks, eventually breaking them into smaller pieces. Swing Span. A superstructure span designed to be entirely supported upon a pier at its Springing Line. The line within the face center, when its end supports have been surface of an abutment or pier at which the withdrawn or released, and equipped to be introits of an arch takes its beginning or origin. revolved in a horizontal place to free a navigable waterway of the obstruction it Starling. An extension at the upstream end presents to navigation when in its normal traffic only, or at both the upstream and downstream service positions.

E-14

Tail Water. Water ponded below the outlet of a wall portion of a crib, cofferdam or similar culvert or bridge waterway, thereby reducing structure, usually in a horizontal position, to the amount of flow through the waterway. Tail maintain its shape and increase its rigidity, water is expressed in terms of its depth. stability and strength.

Teredo. See Mollusk Borers. Water Pocket. Voids along the underside of aggregate particles or reinforcing steel which Toe of Slope. The location defined by the formed during the bleeding period. Initially filled intersection of the sloped surface of an with bleeding water. approach cut, embankment or causeway or other sloped area with the natural or an artificial Waterway. The available width for the passage ground surface existing at a lower elevation. of stream, tidal or other water beneath a bridge, if unobstructed by natural formations or by Trestle. A bridge structure consisting of beam, artificial constructions beneath or closely girder or truss spans supported upon bents. adjacent to the structure. For a multiple span The bents may be of the piled or of the framed bridge, the available width is the total of the type, composed of timbers, metal or reinforced unobstructed waterway lengths of the spans. concrete. They may involve two or more tiers in Weathering, Stone Masonry. The hard surface their construction. Trestle structures are degenerates into small granules, giving stones designated as "wooden", "frame" or "framed", a smooth, rounded look. "metal", "concrete", "wooden pile", "concrete pile", etc., depending upon or corresponding to Weathering, Timber. the material and characteristics of their principal members. (1) Slight. Surfaces of wood are rough and corrugated, and the members may even warp. Vermin. (1) Termites. All damage is inside the surfaces of the wood; hence, it is not visible. (2) Advanced. Large cracks extend deeply or White mud shelter tubes or runways extending completely through the wood. Wood is crumbly up from the earth to the wood and on the sides and obviously deteriorated (similar to tips of roof of masonry substructures are the only visible shingles at the eaves). signs of infestation. Timber members may exhibit signs of excessive sagging or cushing. Weep Hole. (Weep Pipe.) An open hole or an embedded pipe in a masonry retaining wall, (2) Powder-Post Beetles. The outer surface is abutment, arch or other portion of a masonry pocked with small holes. Often a powdery dust structure to provide means of drainage for the is dislodged from the holes. The inside may be embankment, causeway, spandrel backfill or completely excavated. retained soil wherein water may accumulate.

(3) Carpenter Ants. Accumulation of sawdust Wing Wall. The retaining wall extension of an on the ground at the base of the timber is an abutment intended to restrain and hold in place indicator. The large, black ants may be seen in the side slope material of an approach the vicinity of the infested wood. causeway or embankment. When flared at an angle with the breast wall, it serves to deflect (4) Marine Borers. The inroads of marine stream water and floating debris into the borers will usually be most severe in the area waterway of the bridge and thus protects the between high and low water since they are approach embankment against erosion. water-borne, although damage may extend to the mudline. Cracks or holes in jackets, wraps or shielding invite marine borers. Unplugged Reference bolt holes also permit entrance of these pests. In such cases, there are often no outside **Definitions are adapted from "Bridge evidences of borer attack. Inspectors Training Manual", FHWA, 1979, the "Guide for Making a Condition Survey of Wale, Waler, Wale-Piece. A wooden or metal Concrete in Service", ACI, 1968 and the piece or an assemblage of pieces placed either Manual, "Underwater Inspection of Bridges", inside or outside, or both inside and outside, the FHWA, 1989. Rev. 1 07-09-1993

E-15