Jadeed Hatchery

4/26/2023 GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION REPORT
SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR

JADEED HATCHERY.
CLIENT:
JADEED HATCHERY
C5P7+H7C, Kalla Kotha Harraka, Rawalpindi, Punjab, Pakistan.
CONSULTANT:
COREBRICKS PAKISTAN.
Flat 108, 1st Floor, Al-Majeed Arcade, Islamabad, Rawalpindi,
Islamabad Capital Territory 44000, Pakistan.
NAVEED KHAN
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
COREBRICKS PAKISTAN
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT: COREBRICKS PAKISTAN.
CONTENTS
Chapter No. Particulars Page No
One Introduction 01
Two Field Operations 02 - 03
Three Information about Laboratory Tests 04 - 05
Four Bore Logs 06 - 10
Five Laboratory Test Results 11 - 15
Six Calculation of Safe Bearing Capacity and settlement 16 - 65
Seven Calculation of Safe Bearing Capacity of Rock 66
Eight Analysis of the Sub Surface Investigation 67 - 68
Nine Abstract of Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) 69 - 70
Ten Conclusion and Recommendations. 71
Eleven Location Map 72

Chapter One: Introduction
Sub-surface exploration plays an important role in the design for the

construction of buildings and bridges. Before design, it is essential to study the
behavior as well as the engineering properties of the sub-surface strata, which
promotes the design more economic and perfect. It also enables to take precaution in
the design for the structural safety. “Soil Investigation for JADEED HATCHERY,
RAWALPINDI, PUNJAB, PAKISTAN” was decided to be designed on the basis of the
sub-surface investigation test results. The scope of work comprised of boring five
boreholes at site. The fieldwork included making of boreholes by Wash/Rotary Boring
method. The scope also included conducting Standard Penetration Tests at regular
intervals and collecting soil/rock samples for identification and logging purposes, and
the collected soil and rock samples were tested in the Base Laboratory and the data
were analyzed.
Based on the above, this report presents the Bore Logs, Laboratory & Field
Test results. On the basis of field & laboratory test results and their analysis, suitable
foundations have been suggested.
Chapter Two: Field Operations

2.1 General:
In an attempt for optimization in the design of foundation for the proposed

structure to be constructed at this site, Geo-technical Investigation was done. The
entire investigation work had been divided mainly into two parts. (i) Field works &
(ii) Laboratory tests.
➢ Field works determine the types of sub-soil deposit and their characteristics.
➢ Laboratory tests help in determining the relevant geo-technical properties of
the sub-surface deposits leading to finalization of foundation depth of the structure
basing on Bearing Capacities of the foundation strata as well as the influence zone.
Final depths of boring and observation of water table for each borehole are given
below.
2.2 Boring & In-Situ Tests:
Wash/Rotary boring method was adopted to bore holes to the required depth.
UDS & SPT were conducted at regular intervals and the soil samples were brought to
the laboratory with proper identification and labeling. Standard split spoon sampler
was used for conducting Standard Penetration Test. The number of blows required to
drive the sampler for the 1st, 2nd & 3rd 15cm depths were recorded. The total number
of blows required to drive the split spoon sampler due to the free fall of a 63.5kg
hammer through a distance of 75 cm for the 2nd and 3rd 15cm penetration were taken
together as the field ‘N’ value or the standard penetration test (resistance) of the soil.
After the penetration to full depth, the sampler was carefully pulled out. The
cutting shoe and the head were removed. The soil samples were then sealed in
polythene bags and labeled properly by indicating the depth of bore hole mark,
reference no. etc for visual inspection and identification of soil samples for logging of
the bore holes.
The field ‘N’ values recorded at various depths have been reported in the
summarized data sheet. Test results of soil samples & their bore logs were presented
separately in the sub-soil report.
Based on the above, this report presents the Bore Logs, Laboratory & Field Test
results.
Undisturbed soil samples were carefully extracted in such a manner that the
moisture content and structure of soil did not get altered. Standard open tube
sampler was used for the collection of undisturbed soil samples. Each end of the
sampling tube was carefully sealed with wax, the bore hole number and depth were
indicated on the tube for proper identification.
2.3 Sampling:
Representative soil samples were collected from the borehole confirming to IS:
1892-1979. Collected samples were properly sealed in polythene bags and labeled for
proper identification during testing. The disturbed samples were used for
classification of soils as per IS: 1498-1970.
2.4 Ground Water Table:
Observation of ground water table is important since it influences the bearing

capacity of soil in different seasons. When the foundation remains submerged under
water the bearing capacity is to be calculated considering the water table correction
factor. Therefore while conducting tests during dry season, it is always necessary to
enquire about the ground water table level.
Bore Hole No. Termination Depth Water Table from the

in m. G.L. in m.
BH – 1 10.0 m. Not encountered within
the drilling depth
BH – 2 6.0 m. - do -
BH – 3 6.0 m. - do -
BH – 4 6.0 m. - do -
BH – 5 6.0 m. - do -
Chapter Three: Information about Laboratory Tests
Laboratory test conforming to relevant Indian Standard specifications were

conducted on the soil samples collected from both the boreholes as detailed below.
All laboratory tests were conducted as per SP: 36 Part-1 1987 of BIS.
3.1 Grain Size Analysis:
To obtain information concerning the type of soil met at various depths and to
classify each soil strata, grain size analysis were carried out as per IS: 2720 (Part-
IV). The results have been presented in the summarized data sheet.
3.2 Index Properties:
Soil consistency refers to the resistance of the soil offered against forces that
tend to deform or rupture the soil aggregate. Consistency limits indicate the soil
moisture content limits for various states of consistency. The consistency limits
include Liquid Limit (L.L), Plastic Limit (P.L), and Shrinkage Limit (S.L). The difference
between the numerical values of liquid limit and plastic limit of the soil is called the
Plasticity Index (P.I). It indicates the range of moisture content over which the soil
exhibits plasticity. It is determined as per the procedure laid down in IS: 2720 (Part-
IV). Plasticity index was computed. Results of liquid limit and plasticity index have
been reported in the summarized data sheets.
3.3 Specific Gravity:
The specific gravity of the soil sample is the ratio of the mass of a given volume
of soil sample in air to the mass of an equal volume of water at 270C. Specific gravity
of soil sample was determined as per the provisions of IS: 2720 (Part
–III). Specific gravity of soil sample obtained during the test has been reported in the
summarized data sheet.
3.4 Void Ratio:
Void ratio of different soil samples was determined in through appropriate

formula.
3.5 DFS:
Differential free swell index of different soil samples were determined in the
laboratory and are mentioned in the laboratory test result sheet.
3.6 Final Logging:
The logging of the boreholes as obtained during field work were checked with
the disturbed and undisturbed soil samples and scrutinized with the findings of
laboratory tests to avoid discrepancies, if any. The bore logs have been reported in
the summarized data sheets.
3.7 Results of Test:
The findings of various in-situ and laboratory tests conducted on disturbed

/SPT samples have been reported in the summarized data sheet. The soil has been
classified into different categories base on their Engineering properties. A careful
study of the sub soil strata was made in accordance with the provisions of IS: 1498-
1970 to find out their suitability as foundation materials.
CHAPTER FOUR - RECORD OF BORING
Name of Consultants: COREBRICKS PAKISTAN.
Name of the client: JADEED HATCHERY, RAWALPINDI, PUNJAB, PAKISTAN.
Name of Work: Soil Investigation for Static test facility for JADEED HATCHERY.
Ground surface level: Boring No:01
Type of boring: Rotary Driling
Diameter of boring: 100mm Date of boring started: 28/04/2023
Inclination: Vertical Date of boring completed:02/05/2023
Ground water table: Not found
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
Graphical representation of soil strata
Penetration of soil strata in m.

Thickness of soil strata in m.
Depth from ground level in m.
No. of blows for 2nd 15 cm

No. of blows for 1st 15 cm
Type of sample collected
No. of blows for 3rd 15
S.P.T. value = 2+3 =N

Type of soil strata
cm penetration (3)
penetration (2)
penetration (1)
R.L. in mt.
Remarks
Sl. No
0.0
Rock SPT Rebounded, broken rock
pieces collected
01 ---- 1.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
SPT Rebounded, broken rock
3.0 pieces collected
02 ---- 2.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
SPT Rebounded, DS
03 ---- 3.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.09 Collected.
Poorly graded
sand
SPT Rebounded DS
04 ---- 4.5 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.05 Collected.
SPT Rebounded DS
05 6.0 ---- 6.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.04 Collected.
SPT Rebounded DS
06 ---- 7.5 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.06 Collected.
SPT Rebounded, sample

07 ---- 9.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00 not recovered.
1.0 Rock Core recovery-33.0% RQD -

08 ---- 10.0 ROCK --- --- --- --- --- Nil
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13



No. of blows for 2nd 15

Type of soil strata
cm penetration (3)
cm penetration (2)
penetration (1)
R.L. in mt.
Remarks
Sl. No
0.0
Poorly graded SPT conducted
sand
01 ---- 1.0 S.P.T. 10 12 15 27 0.45 DS Collected.
3.05 SPT conducted

02 ---- 2.0 S.P.T. 14 20 20 40 0.45 DS Collected.
SPT Rebounded DS
03 ---- 3.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.05 Collected.
04 3.05 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Rock
SPT Rebounded, broken

05 ---- 4.5 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00 rock pieces collected
2.95

rock pieces collected
06 ---- 6.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13




Type of soil strata
cm penetration (3)
cm penetration (2)
penetration (1)
R.L. in mt.
Remarks
Sl. No
0.0
Poorly graded
sand mixed SPT Rebounded
1.05 with silt
01 ---- 1.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.05 DS Collected.
02 1.05 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Rock
03 ---- 2.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00 rock pieces collected
---- rock pieces collected
04 3.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
4.95
pieces collected
05 ---- 4.5 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00

---- pieces collected
06 6.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
Ground water table:Not found
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

No. of blows for 3rd 15 cm

No. of blows for 2nd 15 cm

Type of soil strata
penetration (3)
penetration (2)
penetration (1)
R.L. in mt.
Remarks
Sl. No
0.0
Rock SPT Rebounded, broken
01 ---- 1.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
02 ---- 2.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
03 6.0 ---- 3.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00

04 ---- 4.5 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00

05 ---- 6.0 S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.00
Ground water table:Not found
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13




Type of soil strata
cm penetration (3)
cm penetration (2)
penetration (1)
R.L. in mt.
Remarks
Sl. No
0.0
Silty sand
mixed with SPT conducted
01 ---- 1.0 gravel S.P.T. 15 20 21 41 0.45 DS Collected.
2.4
SPT rebounded DS
02 ---- 2.0 S.P.T. 18 23 >50 >50 0.40 Collected.
03 2.4 --- --- --- --- --- ---

Poorly graded SPT Rebounded DS
04 0.64 ---- 3.0 sand mixed with S.P.T. >50 --- --- >50 0.04 Collected.
05 ---- 3.04 silt --- --- --- --- --- ---
Rock
Core recovery-85.0% RQD
06 ---- 4.5 ROCK --- --- --- --- --- - 30.0%
2. 96
Core recovery-90.0% RQD

07 ---- 6.0 ROCK --- --- --- --- --- - 53.0%
CHAPTER FIVE - LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SUB SOIL INVESTIGATION TEST RESULT OF THE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING
BORING OF B.H. No. 01
TEST CONDUCTED AS PER IS: 2720 (Pt. I, Pt. II, Pt. III , Pt. IV , Pt. V, Pt. XI / Pt. XIII , Pt. XXXX ) AND IS: 1498 – 1970
Grain size analysis Atterberg’s

Limits
Field Moisture Content

Plasticity Index in %
Bulk density in gm/cc.

Silt (S)& Clay (C) in %
Soil sample collected
(0.075mm to 0.001mm)
(0.425mm to 0.075mm)
Plastic Limit In %
Type of collection
(2.0mm to 0.425mm)
Liquid Limit In %
Field S.P.T. Value

Medium Sand In %
Specific gravity
Coarse Sand In %
Fine Gravel In %
(4.75mm to 2.0mm)
(20mm to 4.75mm)
Fine Sand in %
Group of soil.
D.F.S. In %
Sl. No
in %
From 0.0m to
1 Rock Rock strata, broken rock pieces ----- ----
1.0m depth
collected
2 At 1.0m depth SPT STP Rebounded, sample not recovered N>50 ----
From 1.0m to
2.0m depth
collected
From 2.0m to
3.0m depth
collected
6 At 3.0m depth SPT 10.32 6.03 35.68 45.06 2.91 16.0 Np --- 7.22 1.825 2.65 0.0 N > 50 SP
-
-
-
-
10 At 9.0m depth SPT STP Rebounded, sample not recovered N > 50 ----
From 9.0m to
11 Rock Rock strata, core recovery = 33.0% and RQD =
10.0m depth
Nil

Limits


Soil sample collected
(0.425mm to 0.075mm)
(0.075mm to 0.001mm)
Plastic Limit In %
Type of collection
(2.0mm to 0.425mm)
Liquid Limit In %
Field S.P.T. Value

Medium Sand In %
Specific gravity
Coarse Sand In %
Fine Gravel In %
(4.75mm to 2.0mm)
(20mm to 4.75mm)
Fine Sand in %
Group of soil.
D.F.S. In %
Sl. No
in %
1 At 1.0m depth SPT 3.72 2.33 79.33 14.44 0.18 16.0 Np --- 6.04 1.828 2.65 0.0 N =27 SP
-
2 At 2.0m depth SPT 0.19 1.24 68.57 26.73 3.27 17.0 Np --- 6.87 1.820 2.65 0.0 N = 40 SP
-
-
From 3.05m
to 4.5m depth
collected
From4.5m to Soft
6 Rock strata, broken rock pieces ----- ----
6.0m depth Rock
collected

Limits
Soil sample collected at


(0.425mm to 0.075mm)
(0.075mm to 0.001mm)
Plastic Limit In %
Type of collection
(2.0mm to 0.425mm)
Liquid Limit In %
Field S.P.T. Value

Medium Sand In %
Specific gravity
Coarse Sand In %
Fine Gravel In %
(4.75mm to 2.0mm)
(20mm to 4.75mm)
Fine Sand in %
Group of soil.
D.F.S. In %
Sl. No
in %
1 At 1.0m depth SPT 0.82 0.92 60.36 32.56 5.34 17.0 Np ---- 7.02 1.818 2.65 0.0 N>50 SP-SM
From 1.05 m
to 2.0m depth
collected
From 2.0m to
3.0m depth
collected
From 3.0m to
4.5m depth
collected
From 4.5m to
6.0m depth
collected

Limits


(0.425mm to 0.075mm)
(0.075mm to 0.001mm)
Plastic Limit In %
Type of collection
(2.0mm to 0.425mm)
Liquid Limit In %
Field S.P.T. Value

Medium Sand In %
Specific gravity
Coarse Sand In %
Fine Gravel In %
(4.75mm to 2.0mm)
(20mm to 4.75mm)
Fine Sand in %
Group of soil.
D.F.S. In %
Sl. No
in %
From 0.0 m to
1.0m depth
collected
From 1.0 m to
2.0m depth
collected
From 2.0m to
3.0m depth
collected
From 3.0m to
4.5m depth
collected
From 4.5m to
6.0m depth
collected

Limits


Plastic Limit In %
(0.425mm to 0.075mm)
(0.075mm to 0.001mm)
Type of collection
(2.0mm to 0.425mm)
Liquid Limit In %
Field S.P.T. Value

Medium Sand In %
Specific gravity
Coarse Sand In %
Fine Gravel In %
(4.75mm to 2.0mm)
(20mm to 4.75mm)
Fine Sand in %
Group of soil.
D.F.S. In %
Sl. No
in %
1 1.0m depth SPT 15.95 15.00 41.5 13.15 14.40 20.0 Np --- 7.23 1.802 2.65 0.0 N = 41 SM
-
2 2.0m depth SPT 5.00 10.06 33.94 27.10 23.90 24.0 Np --- 7.12 1.810 2.65 0.0 N >50 SM
-
3 3.0m depth SPT 0.00 0.00 64.46 30.10 5.44 17.0 Np --- 7.06 1.874 2.65 0.0 N > 50 SP-SM
-
From 3.04m to
4.5m depth
30.0%
From4.5m to
6.0m depth
53.0%
CHAPTER SIX
Calculation of Safe Bearing Capacity from Standard Penetration Test
Soil Investigation Data
Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 1
2 Depth of Sample Collection Df 1m
3 Inclination of load to the vertical  0o
Laboratory Investigations
1 Standard Penetration Value from Field > 50 SPT
Corrections as per Cl. 3.6. of IS 2131:1981
a) Due to Overburden 0.099 kg / cm2 50.00 Cohesionless Soil Factor = 1.000
Overburden presuure = q =(' D)/1000 0.099 kg / cm2
b) Due to Dilatancy N 32.50 Strata below Water Table= Fine Sand and Silt
36.5
2 Angle of Internal Friction  2.62 o Ref: Fig.1 of IS 6403: 1981
3 Specific Gravity of Soil G 0.994
4 Submerged Density of Soil ' gm/cm3
Assumptions
1 Width of Foundation B 200 cm

2 Depth of Foundation below Ground level Df 100 cm
3 Length of Foundation L 200 cm
4 Shape of Base Square
5 Depth of Water Table Dw Not found
Effect of Water Table W' 1.0
6 Factor of Safety for Sand 3
Calculations
Submerged Density of Soil ' 0.994 gm/cm3
 36.5 o
N 3.936
Surcharge Intensity = q = ' D / 1000 0.099 kg/cm2

Bearing Capacity Factors for  36.5 o
Shape Factors Depth Factors Inclination Factors
Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.0990 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.0990 i 1.0000
Ultimate Net Bearing Capacity qd = q (N q - 1) s q d q i q + ½ B γ N γ s γ d γ i γ W'
= 0.099 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.099 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.099 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 5.4274 + 5.8067
2
Ultimate Net Bearing Capacity q d= 11.2341 kg/cm
Net Safe Bearing Capacity (NSBC)= 37.45 T/m2
Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) = NSBC + q
SBC = 38.44 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 1
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.1980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.1980 i 1.0000
= 0.200 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.198 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.198 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 11.9522 + 6.368
2
SBC = 63.07 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 1
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.2980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.2980 i 1.0000
= 0.320 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.298 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.298 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 20.7198 + 7.348
2
SBC = 96.76 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 1
2 Depth of Sample Collection Df 4.5 m
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.3970 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.3970 i 1.0000
= 0.426 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.397 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.397 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 29.6871 + 7.9085
2
SBC = 129.58 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 1
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.5950 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.5950 i 1.0000
= 0.635 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.595 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.595 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 50.5238 + 8.97
2
SBC = 204.66 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 1
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.7440 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.7440 i 1.0000
= 0.784 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.744 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.744 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 68.2062 + 9.6874
2
SBC = 267.49 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 1
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.8930 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.8930 i 1.0000
= 0.941 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.893 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.893 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 88.859 + 10.5151
2
SBC = 340.66 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 2
1 Standard Penetration Value from Field = 27 SPT
Overburden presuure = q = ' D = 0.107 kg / cm2
33.4
Assumptions

Calculations
 33.4 o
N 3.449

Nq 28.532 sq 1.200 dq 1.0930 iq 1.0000
N 39.828 s 0.800 d 1.0930 i 1.0000
Angle of Internal Friction Φ' = 24
Nq 9.808
N 9.782
Difference in Nq 18.724 Difference in Ny 30.0460
From interpolation the required values of Nq & Ny are =
Nq = 22.447
Ny = 30.063

= 0.107 x ( 22.447 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.093 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 30.063 x 0.800 x 1.093 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 3.0099 + 2.8154
2
Ultimate Net Bearing Capacity q d = 5.8253 kg/cm

Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) = NSBC +q
SBC = 20.49 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 2
35.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 35.5 o
N 3.770

Nq 36.390 sq 1.200 dq 1.1940 iq 1.0000
N 54.168 s 0.800 d 1.1940 i 1.0000
Nq 12.208
N 13.184
Nq = 34.879
Ny = 51.607

= 0.212 x ( 34.879 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.194 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 51.607 x 0.800 x 1.194 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 10.2908 + 5.2154
2

SBC = 53.81 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 2
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.2980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.2980 i 1.0000
= 0.317 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.298 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.298 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 20.5256 + 7.2997
2
SBC = 95.92 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 2
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.4460 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.4460 i 1.0000
= 0.470 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.446 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.446 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 33.9022 + 8.0321
2
SBC = 144.48 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 2
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.5950 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.5950 i 1.0000
= 0.627 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.595 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.595 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 49.8872 + 8.8598
2
SBC = 202.09 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 3
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.0990 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.0990 i 1.0000
= 0.106 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.099 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.099 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 5.8112 + 6.1806
2
SBC = 41.03 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 3
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.1980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.1980 i 1.0000
= 0.209 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.198 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.198 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 12.4901 + 6.6546
2
SBC = 65.91 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 3
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.2980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.2980 i 1.0000
= 0.314 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.298 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.298 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 20.3313 + 7.21
2
SBC = 94.94 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 3
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.4460 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.4460 i 1.0000
= 0.473 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.446 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.446 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 34.1186 + 8.0859
2
SBC = 145.41 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 3
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.5950 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.5950 i 1.0000
= 0.631 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.595 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.595 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 50.2055 + 8.9191
2
SBC = 203.39 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 4
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.0990 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.0990 i 1.0000
= 0.103 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.099 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.099 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 5.6467 + 5.9878
2
SBC = 39.81 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 4
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.1980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.1980 i 1.0000
= 0.212 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.198 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.198 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 12.6693 + 6.7437
2
SBC = 66.83 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 4
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.2980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.2980 i 1.0000
= 0.318 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.298 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.298 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 20.5903 + 7.3066
2
SBC = 96.17 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 4
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.4460 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.4460 i 1.0000
= 0.477 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.446 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.446 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 34.4071 + 8.1397
2
SBC = 146.59 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 4
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.5950 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.5950 i 1.0000
= 0.640 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.595 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.595 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 50.9216 + 9.0378
2
SBC = 206.26 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No
5
35.6
Assumptions

Calculations
 35.6 o
N 3.786

Nq 37.008 sq 1.200 dq 1.0970 iq 1.0000
N 55.396 s 0.800 d 1.0970 i 1.0000
Nq 12.208
N 13.184
Nq = 35.768
Ny = 53.285

= 0.101 x ( 35.768 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.097 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 53.285 x 0.800 x 1.097 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 4.6226 + 4.7324
2

SBC = 32.19 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 5
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.1980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.1980 i 1.0000
= 0.210 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.198 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.198 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 12.5498 + 6.6928
2
SBC = 66.24 T/m2

Site Information
1 Bore Hole No 5
36.5
Assumptions

Calculations
 36.5 o
N 3.936

Nq 42.570 sq 1.200 dq 1.2980 iq 1.0000

N 66.444 s 0.800 d 1.2980 i 1.0000
= 0.326 x ( 42.570 - 1) x 1.200 x 1.298 x 1.000
+ ½ x 200.0 x 0.001 x 66.444 x 0.800 x 1.298 x 1.000 x 1.000 / 1000
= 21.1083 + 7.4929
2
SBC = 98.6 T/m2

CALCULATION OF SETTLEMENT OF FOUNDATION
AS PER IS:8009 (Part -I)-1976
BH-1
Depth of foundation 1 mt.
Corrected N Value 32.5
From graph As pr IS: 8009-1976 7.5 mm
Effect of water table 0.5
Corrected Settlement 15.00 mm
Due to imposed load = NSBC = 37.450 t/m2
Settlement from graph = 56.18 mm
Depth factor = 0.85
Sfd = Sf x Depth factor = 47.75 mm
Rigidity factor = 0.8
Final settlement ( S ) = 38.2 mm ( Say 38 mm )

BH-1
Depth factor = 0.725

BH-1
Depth factor = 0.66

BH-1
Depth of foundation 4.5 mt.
Depth factor = 0.61

BH-1
Depth factor = 0.58

BH-1

BH-1
Depth factor = 0.56

BH-2
Corrected N Value 21
Depth factor = 0.85

BH-2
From graph As pr IS: 8009-1976 9 mm

BH-2
Depth factor = 0.66

BH-2
Depth factor = 0.61

BH-2
Depth factor = 0.58

BH-3
Depth factor = 0.85

BH-3

BH-3
Depth factor = 0.66

BH-3
Depth factor = 0.61

BH-3
Depth factor = 0.58

BH-4
Depth factor = 0.85

BH-4

BH-4
Depth factor = 0.66

BH-4
Depth factor = 0.61

BH-4
Depth factor = 0.58

BH-5
Corrected N Value 28
Depth factor = 0.85

BH-5

BH-5
Depth factor = 0.66

Chapter Seven:-SAFE BEARING CAPACITY OF ROCK CORE SPECIMENS COLLECTED DURING
THE BORING AT IBRAHIMPATNAM
TEST WAS CONDUCTED AS PER IS: 9143 – 1979 & IRC: 78 - 2000
B
C
S
Length: Dia ratio of
Correction factor
strength in N/mm2
Condition of test
Water absorption
Cross- sectional
Compressive Load
speci
mens
Density in gm/cc
Size
Ave. corrected
Sample collected
strength in
Compressive
strength in
compressive
Compressive
specimen in
area of the
Length:Dia
of
Corrected
Specimen
specimen
for size
from depth
N/mm2
N/mm2
in %
mm2
Leng Diamet
reference
Reference
Bore hole
in N/mm2
Sample
th er in
in KN
or in
in in cm T/m2
Mpa
cm
1 5.4 5 1 0 2290.5 2.5 0.48 43.0 18.77 16

. : . 52 .7
BH- 9.0m to 4 1 8 1 15.67 1.96 196 WET
01 10.0m 9
2 5.4 5 1 0 2290.5 2.6 0.42 38.0 16.59 14
. : . 05 .7
4 1 8 7
9
3 5.4 5 1 0 2290.5 2.5 0.47 40.0 17.46 15
. : . 88 .5
4 1 8 4
9
4 10. 5 2 1. 2290.5 2.6 0.32 52.0 22.70 22
8 . : 0 65 .7
3.04m to 4 1 0 22.73 2.84 284 WET
4.5m
5 10. 5 2 1. 2290.5 2.6 0.38 57.0 24.89 24
8 . : 0 38 .8
BH- 4 1 9
05
6 5.4 5 1 0 2290.5 2.6 0.35 53.0 23.14 2
. : . 50 0.
4 1 8 59
9
7 10. 5 2 1. 2290.5 2.6 0.30 58.0 25.32 25
8 . : 0 85 .3
4.5m to 4 1 2 23.87 2.98 298 WET
6.0m
8 10. 5 2 1. 2290.5 2.6 0.28 52.0 22.70 22
8 . : 0 93 .7
4 1 0
9 10. 5 2 1. 2290.5 2.6 0.32 54.0 23.58 23
8 . : 0 80 .5
4 1 8
Note : SBC of the rock specimen have been calculated by considering a Factor of Safety of 8 as per IRC : 78 - 2000
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT: ARCHITECTURE & ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY SERVICES PVT. LTD.
Chapter Eight: Analysis of the Sub Surface Investigation
The analysis of the sub-surface investigation test result of the soil samples
collected during boring for the “Soil Investigation for JADEED HATCHERY,
RAWALPINDI, PUNJAB, PAKISTAN.”
BH : 1
1. It is seen that, from 0.0m to 3.0m depth, a rock strata is encountered and
broken rock pieces were collected during boring, wherein three SPTs were
conducted at 1.0m, 2.0m and 3.0m depth. The field N values from SPT are
found to be more than 50.
2. From 3.0m to 9.0m depth, a non-plastic, non-expansive and very dense
compacted poorly graded sand is presented, wherein five SPTs were conducted
at each 1.5m depth interval. The field N values from SPT are found to be more
than 50.
3. From 9.0m to 10.0m depth, (max depth explored) a rock strata is encountered,
from which rock core samples were collected. The core recovery and RQD are
found to be 33.0% and 0.0% respectively.
BH : 2
1. It is seen that, from 0.0m to 3.05m depth, a non-plastic non-expansive and
medium to very dense compacted poorly graded sand strata is existing, wherein
three SPTs were conducted at 1.0m, 2.0m and 3.0m depth. The field N values
from SPT are found to be 27, 40 and more than 50 respectively.
2. From 3.05m to 6.0m depth, (max. depth explored) a rock strata is encountered
and broken rock pieces were collected during boring, wherein two SPTs were
conducted at 4.5m and 6.0m depth. The field N values from SPT are found to
be more than 50.
BH : 3
1. It is seen that, from 0.0m to 1.05m depth, a non-plastic, non-expansive and
very dense compacted poorly graded sand mixed with silt strata is existing,
wherein one SPT was conducted at 1.0m depth. The field N value from SPT is
found to be more than 50.
2. From 1.05m to 6.0m depth, (max. dept explored) a rock strata is encountered
and broken rock pieces were collected during boring, wherein four SPTs were
conducted at 2.0m, 3.0m, 4.5m and 6.0m depth. The field N values from SPT
are found to be more than 50.
BH : 4
1. It is seen that, from 0.0m to 6.0m depth, (max. depth explored) a rock strata is
encountered and broken rock pieces were collected during boring, wherein five
SPTs were conducted at 1.0m, 2.0m, 3.0m, 4.5m and 6.0m depth. The field N
values from SPT are found to be more than 50.
BH : 5
1. It is seen that, from 0.0m to 2.4m depth, a non-plastic, non-expansive and
dense to very dense graded compacted silty sand strata is presented, wherein
two SPTs were conducted at 1.0m and 2.0m depth. The field N values from SPT
are found to be 41 and more than 50 respectively.
2. From 2.4m to 3.04m depth, a non-plastic, non-expansive and dense compacted
poorly graded sand mixed with silt strata is presented, wherein one SPT was
conducted at 3.0m depth. The field N value from SPT is found to be more than
50.
3. From 3.04m to 6.0m depth (max. depth explored), a rock strata is encountered,
from which rock core sample were collected. The core recoveries and RQDs are
varying from 85.0% to 92.0% and 30.0% to 53.0%.
Chapter Nine (a): Abstract of Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC)

Table -1
Location Depth Type of Group of NSBC in Settlement SBP for 40mm
in mt. sample soil T/m2 in mm settlement
collected in T/m2
1.0 S.P.T (N>50) 37.45 38 39.42
2.0 S.P.T (N>50) Rock 61.07 53 46.09
3.0 S.P.T (N>50) 93.56 74 50.57
(BH 1) 4.5 S.P.T (N>50) 125.32 92 54.49
6.0 S.P.T (N>50) 198.31 138 57.48
SP
7.5 S.P.T (N>50) 259.65 175 59.35
9.0 S.P.T (N>50) 331.25 223 59.42
1.0 S.P.T (N=27) 19.42 36 21.58
2.0 S.P.T (N=40) SP 51.69 54 38.29
(BH 2) 3.0 S.P.T (N>50) 92.75 73 50.82
4.5 S.P.T (N>50) 139.78 102 54.82
Rock
6.0 S.P.T (N>50) 195.82 136 57.59
1.0 S.P.T (N>50) SP-SM 39.97 41 38.99
2.0 S.P.T (N>50) 63.82 56 45.59
(BH 3) 3.0 S.P.T (N>50) 91.80 73 50.30
Rock
4.5 S.P.T (N>50) 140.68 103 54.63
6.0 S.P.T (N>50) 197.08 137 57.54
1.0 S.P.T (N>50) 38.78 40 38.78
2.0 S.P.T (N>50) 64.71 56 46.22
(BH 4) 3.0 S.P.T (N>50) Rock 92.99 74 50.26
4.5 S.P.T (N>50) 141.82 104 54.55
6.0 S.P.T (N>50) 199.86 139 57.51
1.0 S.P.T (N=41) 31.18 38 32.82
SM
(BH 5) 2.0 S.P.T (N>50) 64.14 56 45.81
3.0 S.P.T (N>50) SP-SM 95.34 76 50.18
(b) Abstract of Safe Bearing Capacity of rock

Table – 2
SBC
Rock specimens Condition of
Location Type of rock
collected from specimen test in MPa in T/m2
(BH 1) 9.0m to 10.0m depth Set – 1 Wet 1.96 196 Soft Rock
3.04m to 4.5m depth Set – 1 Wet 2.84 284 Hard Rock
(BH 5)
4.5m to 6.0m depth Set – 1 Wet 2.98 298 Hard Rock
Remarks: As per IRC: 78 – 2000,
Type of rock Suggested Allowable Bearing Values for Ave. Condtn.

a. Hard Rocks ---------------------- 2.0 MPa to 3.0 MPa
b. Soft Rocks ------------------------ 1.0 MPa to 2.0 MPa
c. Weathered Rocks,
Conglomerates & Laterites--- Not more than 1.0 MPa
Chapter Ten: Conclusion & Recommendations
1. Five boreholes have been advanced for the proposed project for the “Soil
investigation for JADEED HATCHERY, RAWALPINDI, PUNJAB,
PAKISTAN.”
2. Standing water table was not found during boring.
3. In the present case, the superstructure load is not known. Hence a low to
moderate column load has been assumed.
4. The bearing capacity has been calculated as per IS: 6403, IS: 8009(pt-1), IS:
9143 and IRC-78-2000. The sample calculations are attached herewith.
5. It is suggested that an isolated square footing may be considered suitable for
the proposed structures at 2.0m depth below the OGL, considering the SBP
30.0T/m2 corresponding to settlement of 40mm.
6. However considering the SBP as mentioned at Chapter nine, the designer may
estimate the depth & Size of footing as per requirement.
7. For the safety of the structure a tie beam may be provided, to avoid the
differential settlement. If the column load varies considerably, in such case also
the tie beams become essential to avoid differential settlement.
8. Hyderabad city is included in the zone II of earthquake with low seismic
intensity of Z=0.10.Hence due precautions may be taken to design the
foundations of building as per IS:4326 and IS:189
LOCATION OF SITE:

Jadeed Hatchery

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jadeed Hatchery

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jadeed Hatchery

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

4/26/2023 GEOTECHNICAL

SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR

Chapter No. Particulars Page No

Two Field Operations 02 - 03

Three Information about Laboratory Tests 04 - 05

Four Bore Logs 06 - 10

Five Laboratory Test Results 11 - 15

Six Calculation of Safe Bearing Capacity and settlement 16 - 65

Seven Calculation of Safe Bearing Capacity of Rock 66

Eight Analysis of the Sub Surface Investigation 67 - 68

Nine Abstract of Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) 69 - 70

Ten Conclusion and Recommendations. 71

Eleven Location Map 72

Chapter One: Introduction

Sub-surface exploration plays an important role in the design for the

Chapter Two: Field Operations

In an attempt for optimization in the design of foundation for the proposed

2.2 Boring & In-Situ Tests:

2.4 Ground Water Table:

Observation of ground water table is important since it influences the bearing

Bore Hole No. Termination Depth Water Table from the

Chapter Three: Information about Laboratory Tests

Laboratory test conforming to relevant Indian Standard specifications were

3.1 Grain Size Analysis:

3.2 Index Properties:

3.3 Specific Gravity:

3.4 Void Ratio:

Void ratio of different soil samples was determined in through appropriate

3.6 Final Logging:

3.7 Results of Test:

The findings of various in-situ and laboratory tests conducted on disturbed

Penetration of soil strata in m.

Depth from ground level in m.

No. of blows for 2nd 15 cm

No. of blows for 3rd 15

S.P.T. value = 2+3 =N

SPT Rebounded, sample

1.0 Rock Core recovery-33.0% RQD -

Penetration of soil strata in m.

Depth from ground level in m.

No. of blows for 1st 15 cm

No. of blows for 3rd 15

S.P.T. value = 2+3 =N

3.05 SPT conducted

SPT Rebounded, broken

SPT Rebounded, broken

Penetration of soil strata in m.

Depth from ground level in m.

No. of blows for 1st 15 cm

No. of blows for 3rd 15

S.P.T. value = 2+3 =N

SPT Rebounded, broken rock

Penetration of soil strata in m.

Depth from ground level in m.

No. of blows for 3rd 15 cm

S.P.T. value = 2+3 =N

SPT Rebounded, broken

SPT Rebounded, broken

Penetration of soil strata in m.

Depth from ground level in m.