Copy-01: of Plot 158, Block C, Multi Orchards Mpchs For Mr. Shukat

Copy-01
SUB-SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Of
Plot 158, Block C,
Multi Orchards
MPCHS
For
Mr. Shukat
1st September 2020
SADAAT ENTERPRISES GENERAL CONTRACTORS

AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORIES
Original
SUB-SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Of
Plot 158, Block C,
Multi Orchards
MPCHS
For
Mr. Shukat
1st September 2020
SADAAT ENTERPRISES GENERAL CONTRACTORS

AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORIES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Serial no. Content Page No.
1 Introduction 2
2 Need of Geotechnical Study 2
2 Description of Site 2
3 Scope of Study 4
4 Discussion of Field testing 4
5 Number / Location of Boreholes 5
6 Depth of Exploration 5
7 Drilling of Borehole 6
8 Depth of Ground Water Table 6
9 Discussion of Laboratory Testing 6
10 Soil Classification 8
11 Bearing Capacity Analysis 8
12 Lateral Earth Pressure 8
13 Settlement Analysis 9
14 Conclusion and Recommendations 9
APPENDIX
Appendix – A Borehole Plan
Appendix – B Borehole Logs
Appendix – C Laboratory Test Results
Appendix – D Site Photos
Appendix – E Laboratory Photos
Page 1
SADAAT ENTERPRISES GENERAL CONTRACTORS AND GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORIES
Introduction:
Soil investigation of Plot # 158, Block C, Multi Orchards MPCHS was conducted by Sadaat
Enterprises General Contractors and Geotechnical Laboratories to evaluate the strength and index
properties of soil for determination of safe allowable baring capacity of soil for safe structure
design.
Need of Geotechnical Study:

Most failures of structures are probably caused by the failure of their foundations. Although
their number has been significantly reduced due to the rapid development of the science of
foundation engineering in recent years, they are still frequent. Their form and origin are, however,
often different. The cost of the foundation exceeds one-tenth of the total cost of the structure, but
on the foundation depends the security of the superstructure and an attempt to save on this part
of work may result in catastrophic consequences.
A disturbing feature of an unsatisfactory foundation is that the defects and faults seldom
appear immediately; most of them are not obvious until the building is in use, when it is very
expensive to remedy them. The design of foundation is far from being an exact science. The same
theories of foundation cannot be applied to all the problems that arise, because of the different
nature of the soils at different sites and even at the same site, different methods of doing work,
different effects of climatic conditions and ground water on different soils. Account of failure and
discussion of their causes and consequences therefore provide a very instructive guide in the
design and construction of future work.
Description of Site:
The Project site is located at Plot-90, Main Boulevard Block-B New City Phase-II Wah. The proposed
site is located at global coordinates of Lat 33°42'56.74" and Long 72°43'0.53" and elevation of
1510ft above mean sea level. Google satellite Imaginary for layout of project side is attached in at
(Appendix-A).
General Lithology of Project Site:
Project site was found 1ft above from adjacent front road level of plot is during soil investigation at
site in the month of July 2020.
Historical Topography
The Historical topography in forthcoming figures revealed that, the location of proposed plot was
situated on Barren land, and also rain water Nalla is there in the surrounding area.
6th Nov 2010
Page 2
22nd Sep 2012
1st Mar 2013
20th Sep 2014
Page 3
14th Dec 2016
Scope of Study:
Foundation of any structure has a direct bearing on the engineering characteristics of the
underlying soil deposits. As such, it is the main purpose of the soil investigation to evaluate the
deposits of same or different characteristics, constitutions and engineering properties. Irrespective
of the size and type of the project, the engineering procedure almost remains the same for
determining the most appropriate type and size of the foundation under determined
characteristics of the sub-soil. The scopes of soil investigation are:-
(a) To discuss and evaluate engineering parameters based on field and laboratory testing
data of foundation soil.
(b) To select most appropriate economical foundation and its proposed depth on sub-soil
strata and building requirements.
(c) To recommend different geotechnical parameters by keeping in view the behavior and
characteristics of foundation soil.
(d) Recommendations about dewatering in case of water table encountered in footing
excavation zone.
(e) Recommendations about net allowable bearing pressure for the proposed foundation
level.
(f) Soil liquefaction potential assessment of proposed building.
(g) Settlement and lateral earth pressure parameters for investigated sub-soil as guide line
for structural design.
Discussion of Field Testing
In view of the site testing analysis as per testing procedure were presented are as under:-
1. Standard penetration test.

Standard penetration test (SPT) is most commonly used through the world wide for
determinations of rapid in situ shearing strength of soil and sub soil stratum consistency. The tests
are conducted according to ASTM-D-1586 and N-value at 12 inch penetration is recorded in bore
holes log. Minimum N-value has encountered as 8.
Page 4
2. In situ bulk density.
In situ Bulk Density test conducted in boreholes. In situ Bulk Density test is most important
parameter which is used in analysis of allowable bearing capacity and determination of over
burden of soil. In other words this test indicates the natural degree of compaction. These values
are varying from 104.76 pcf to 130.94 pcf. The results are indicating that the sub soil stratum is
medium stiff state.
3. Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples.

Collection of sub soil samples extracted during drilling to define the familiar group of strata.
Skeletons and useful for preparation of Bore hole logs. These samples have been used in
laboratory to determine the grain size analysis and Atterberg’s Limits test.
4. Preparation of bore holes log.

Bore Hole logs are presented to geotechnical and geological subsoil description in brief
underlying features of subsoil stratum.
5. Stratigraphy
Stratigraphy of the various layers has been analyzed through the information data gathered
from field and laboratory testing of samples. The stratification is as under:
Borehole No. 1
1 ~ 9ft Filling material encountered, 10 ~ 20.0ft depth silty lean clay Light brown to Dark
brown in colour (CL-ML)
Borehole No.2
1 ~ 13.5ft Filling material encountered, 14 ~ 20.0ft depth silty lean clay Light brown to Dark
Borehole No.2
1 ~ 14ft Filling material encountered, 15 ~ 20.0ft depth silty lean clay Light brown to Dark
Number / Location of Test Pits / Bore Holes

There is no hard and fast rule for borehole spacing. Spacing can be increased or decreased,
depending upon the subsoil condition. If various soil strata are more or less uniform and
unpredictable, fewer boreholes are needed to explore sub-soil strata visualizing expected soil
behavior with moisture under building load. A number of boreholes as per plot geometry are
required for getting valuable sub-soil information. In our case, one test Borehole was drilled with
Earth Machine at different locations, to obtain general soil profile of the ground.
Depth of Exploration
For office and other commercial buildings, Sowers (1970) suggested the following expression
to estimate the required depth of sub-soil exploration:
Depth of boring (ft) = 10 x S0.7 (for light steel or narrow concrete buildings)
Page 5
Depth of boring (ft) = 20 x S0.7 (for heavy steel or wide concrete buildings)
Where, ‘S’ indicates number of stories. However, when deep excavations are anticipated, the
depth of exploration should not be less than 1.5 time the depth of excavation or width of
foundation. For two stories building depth of boring comes out to be 16.24 ft for light steel
concrete buildings.
Drilling of Bore Holes and Sampling

Three Boreholes was drilled with Cable Percussion Mechanical Operated. The disturbed
samples of soil were collected during drilling with Split spoon sampler 24 inch (600mm long)
engaged for performing Standard Penetration Tests.
Depth of Ground Water Table

Depth of ground water table, if encountered, needs to be observed and recorded on the
borehole logs. The ground water affects many elements and phases of foundation design and
construction. In case of site under consideration, the ground water table was NOT encountered at
the depth of 20.0 ft during the time of investigation.
Laboratory Testing
Following tests were conducted at Laboratory as per procedure of ASTM evaluation of index
and strength properties of soil, for analysis of bearing capacity and statement behavior of under
footing of foundation soil. Results are summarized in Appendix B.
 Natural Moisture Content (ASTM-D-2216-98)

 Grain size analysis (ASTM-D-422)
 Liquid Limit (ASTM-D-423 and ASTM-D-424)
 Plastic Limit (ASTM-D-423 and ASTM-D-424)
 Soil Classification. ( USCS ASTM D 2487-85)
Discussion of Laboratory Testing

Following tests were conducted in SADAAT ENTERPRISES Laboratory situated in Hattar,
Haripur, according to ASTM standard procedure of testing and evaluated the test results and their
objectives are discussed as under:-
1. Natural Moisture Content

Natural Moisture Content determination is a moisture field/laboratory test, to determine the
amount of water percentage in a quality of soil in term of its soil mass, usually amount of water
expressed in percent. Natural Moisture Content (NMC) is most important parameter to be
considered in foundation designing purpose. A disturbed soil sample were collected from various
depths of boreholes /test pits and sealed with wax according ASTM standard procedure sampling,
and transported to PEGL Lab for determination of natural moisture content. The result of natural
moisture content from various borehole/test pits depths varies in percent from 6.93 to 15.77
percent and are presented in below table. These results are indicating that the degree of
saturation is normal.
Page 6
SR.No Bore Hole # Depth (ft) % Moisture Content
1 5 17.05
2 10 15.02
3 1st Bore Hole 15 15.35
4 20 15.31
5 5 17.19
6 10 15.85
7 2nd Bore Hole 15 14.13
8 20 12.65
9 5 18.02
10 3rd Bore Hole 10 19.35
11 15 14.10
12 20 14.65
2. Grain Size Analysis

Grain Size Analysis distributes the soil solid groups through US or BS standard sieves. For
example coarse grained soil (gravel and sand ) is consisting of more than 50% retained on No. 200
sieve. Fine grained soil (Clay or Silt) is consisting of more than 50% passing No. 200 sieve. Fine
grained soils are further separated by determining their Atterberg Limits i.e Liquid Limit, Plastic
Limit and Plasticity Index. Coarse grained soils are separated in gravel and sand by passing them on
No. 4 sieve i.e gravel is more than 50% retained on No. 4 sieve and sand is more than 50% passing
No. 4 Sieve. For these Grain size analysis of each borehole at different depths has been conducted
in laboratory and result are summarized in Appendix C.
3. Liquid and Plastic Limit Tests

Liquid and Plastic Limits are used internationally for soil identification, and classification and
for strength correlation. The tests have been conducted on air dried soil sample in Casagranda
liquid limit apparatus. The liquid limit defined as that water content which produce a standard
groove cloure ½ Inch for 25 blows in the liquid limit machine.
Plastic limit is the range of water content which soil thread become 3.2 mm and crumbles with
finger pressure.
Soil Classification
Unified soil classification system was introduced by Casagranda in 1942 for classifying the soil
elements groups. Based on % ages of grain size and Plastic Index (PI) of soil, classification is
suggested as (CL-ML) in all bore holes according to Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).
ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
DETERMINATION OF ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY

Bearing capacity of foundation soil can be determined with standard penetration test (SPT).
The discussion on the determination of bearing capacity is as under:-
Page 7
Assessment of Bearing Capacity with SPT blows “N”
1. Allowable Bearing Capacity Equation Developed By Terzaghi and Peck.
Qa = 0.72 ( B+1
2B ) X
1000
2240
X (N – 3)TSF
Where Qa = Allowable Bearing Capacity of Soil

B = Width of footing in feet
N = SPT Blows count
2. Allowable Bearing Capacity Equation Developed by Meyerhof
N 1000
Qa = X TSF
4 2240
Where Qa = Allowable Bearing Capacity of Soil
Lateral Earth Pressure

Any new foundation load—either an increase (+) from a foundation or a decrease (-) from an
excavation—imposes new stresses on the existing state of "locked in" stresses in the foundation
soil mass. The mass response is heavily dependent on the previous stress history, so one of the
most important considerations in foundation engineering is to ascertain this stress imprint. The
term imprint is used since any previously applied stresses that are larger than those currently
existing have been locked into the soil structure and will affect subsequent stress-response
behavior until a new set of larger stresses are applied to produce a new imprint. it is logical to
expect that vertical locked-in effective stresses would be larger than the effective lateral
stresses at the same point. We may define the ratio of the horizontal to vertical stresses as
K= , which is valid for any depth z at any time. This effective stress state is termed the at-rest or
Ko condition with Ko defined as K= , Because of the sampling limitations given in Sec. 3-5 it is an
extremely difficult task to measure Ko either in the laboratory or in situ. A number of laboratory
and field methods are cited by Abdelhamid and Krizek (1976); Brooker and Ireland (1965) (for
normally consolidated clay) suggest Ko = 0.95-sinφ’, Alpan (1967) (for normally consolidated clay)
suggests Ko = 0.19 H- 0.233 log10 Ip , An equation similar is given by Holtz and Kovacs (1981) as
Ko=0.44 + 0.0042 Ip where Ip is in percent. According to Holtz and Kovacs the value of Ko ranges
from 0.47 to 0.48.
Settlement Analysis
Footing on stiff clay, hard clay and other firm soils generally require no settlement analysis if
the design provide a minimum factor of safety 3 in this study area, the consistency of sub-soil
Page 8
stratum varies from very stiff to hard in clayey strata and dense to very dense in gravelly strata at
in-situ moisture below the proposed footing depth. The assessment of footing settlement is
worked out for desired depth with relation adopted minimum bearing capacity and minimum SPT
number.
Safe Bearing Capacity (Qs) = 0.94 Kg/cm2

Width of Footing (B) = 120 cm
Poisson’s Ratio (µ) = 0.30
Static Constant (Es) = 100 kg/cm2
Influence Factor (I) = 0.73
S= Qs x B x( 1 - µ2 )x I x 10
Es
Settlement is 9.37 mm
These computations revealed that the elastic settlement will remain well within the allowable
limit of 25.0 mm; hence the safe bearing capacity adopted is allowable.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Calculations
Recommended Allowable Bearing Capacity
The recommended allowable bearing capacity at 10ft depth may be taken as

for Strip footing 3ft Wide = 0.45 tsf
for Isolated footing 5X5ft = 0.50 tsf
for Rectangular footing 3X5ft = 0.51 tsf
Depth of Foundation
The depth of foundation may be taken at 5 ~ 6ft with Isolated footing and 8 ~ 9ft for Single
Basement, from existing road level.
Type of Footing
Isolated Footing with Piling can successfully be designed for the proposed structures on Plot #
158, Block-C Multi Orchards MPCHS.
RECOMMENDATIONS
(i) The foundation soil should be well compacted prior to laying the footing for firm
setting.
(ii) Light earth moving machinery can be used for the excavation purpose.
Page 9
(iii) It is recommended to use well graded gravel/sand blend cushion immediately under
the footing to increase net allowable bearing capacity, to avoid any pore water
generation and to provide uniform modulus of subgrade reaction. The non-plastic
gravel/sand blend cushion should be provided in 1.5ft thickness in three layers and
compacted upto 95% of maximum dry density
(iv) Drainage and sub drainage system should be efficient, so the intrusion of water into
foundation soil should be restricted/minimized. Percolation of water to subsurface
strata around foundation shall be prevented, otherwise, the erosion/piping effect
will occur and there upon the settlement of structure may rise. In this regard, the
side drains should properly be provided around the structure for collection of
surface runoff water. Further to that, special care shall be adopted to avoid any
water inundation around the structure during construction and throughout life time
of structure by providing efficient surface drainage system.
(v) The sewerage and plumbing system shall be designed/provided in such a way that
thte leakage shall be avoided otherwise the piping effect may occur wherein the
fine particles may erode, and settlement of structure will occur.
(vi) The project site is located in seismic zone of 2B as per revised building code 2007
(Seismic Provisions) with peak ground acceleration of 0.16g to 0.24g.
Engineer Geologist
Muhammad Raziq Khattak
Page 10
Plot # 158, Block-C,
Multi Orchards
MPCHS
Coordinates: Northing: 33°42'56.74'' Easting: 72°43'0.53"
Open Plot
15'
15' 2nd Drill
Open Open
Plot Plot
2nd Drill 3rd Drill 15'

15'
15' 15'
Location: Front Side Road

Block-C, Plot-158 Bore Hole Layout Plan
SADAAT ENTERPRISES GENERAL CONTRACORS AND LOG OF BORING B-1
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORIES SHEET 1 OF 3
New City Phase-II Wah DRILLER Rizwan
ON-SITE REP. Raziq Khattak
BORING NO. / LOCATION Multi Orchards MPCHS Block-C, Plot-158 DRY ON COMPLETION ? No
DATE August 27, 2020 SURFACE ELEV. 1510.0 FT. WATER LEVEL DATA (IF APPLICABLE)
COMPLETION: DEPTH FT.
SAMPLED 5.0 FT. 10.0 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. ELEV. FT.
COORDINATES Northing 33°42'56.74'' Easting 72°43'0.53" AFTER 24 HRS. DEPTH FT.
ELEV. FT.
BOTTOM OF HOLE DEPTH 40.0 FT. ELEV. 1470.0 FT.
BORING ADVANCED BY: POWER AUGERING WASHBORING X

.
STRATUM SAMPLE DEPTH SAMPLE FIELD LABORATORY
DEPTH FROM TO OR SAMPLE RESULTS RESULTS STRATUM DESCRIPTION
FT. ELEV. FT. FT. RUN NO. TYPE N-Value N LL PI %M

Topsoil (6 inches)
2.5 1507.5
Loose Fill - with Grass Roots - slurry of soil with
black layer of soil, highly moist upto 9ft
3.5 5.0 1 DS 2,2,4 6 25.16 4.63 17.05
5.0 1505.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY (CL-ML) - with light brown,

7.5 1502.5 highly moist, soft to Firm with grass roots
8.5 10.0 2 DS 10,11,12 23 23.49 4.12 15.02
10.0 1500.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) -dark brown, highly

moist, very stiff
12.5 1497.5
13.5 15.0 3 DS 11,10,10 20 - - 15.35
15.0 1495.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) -dark brown, highly

17.5 1492.5
moist, very stiff,
18.5 20.0 4 DS 9,12,13 25 - - 15.31
20.0 1490.0
22.5 End of Bore Log

1487.5
25.0 1485.0
REMARKS:
SAMPLED 5.0 FT. 10.0 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. ELEV. FT.
ELEV. FT.

.

Topsoil (6 inches)
Losse fill with Grass Roots - with yellow brown

2.5 1507.5 loose soil with soil slurruy paste, highly moist upto
13.5ft
3.5 5.0 1 DS 1,1,1 2 - - 17.19
5.0 1505.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY (CL-ML) - light brown, highly

moist, soft to firm
7.5 1502.5
8.5 10.0 2 DS 2,2,2 4 - - 15.85
10.0 1500.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) - light brown, highly

moist, firm to stiff,
12.5 1497.5
13.5 15.0 3 DS 7,9,11 20 28.81 4.77 14.13
15.0 1495.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) - light brown to dark
brown, medium moist, very stiff
17.5 1492.5
18.5 20.0 4 DS 5,8,10 23 25.84 5.78 12.65
20.0 1490.0
22.5 1487.5 End of Bore Log
25.0 1485.0
REMARKS:
SAMPLED 5.0 FT. 10.0 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. 25 FT. ELEV. FT.
ELEV. FT.

.

Topsoil (6 inches)
Loose Fill with Grass Roots - with yellow brown,

saline soil, moist upto 14ft
2.5 1507.5
3.5 5.0 1 DS 2,2,3 5 - - 18.02
5.0 1505.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY (CL-ML) - dark brown, highly

moist, soft to firm
7.5 1502.5
8.5 10.0 2 DS 3,5,7 12 - - 19.35
10.0 1500.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) - dark brown, highly

moist, firm to stiff
12.5 1497.5
13.5 15.0 3 DS 6,7,8 15 23.28 4.56 14.10
15.0 1495.0
SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) - light brown to dark

brown, medium moist, firm to stiff
17.5 1492.5
18.5 20.0 4 DS 7,9,9 18 - - 14.65
20.0 1490.0
22.5 1487.5 End of Bore Log
25.0 1485.0
REMARKS: End of Bore Log
ATTERBURG'S LIMITS
Project: Multi Orchards MPCHS BH # 1
Location: Multi Orchards MPCHS Block-C, Plot-158 Sample Depth : 5ft

946.3
Atterburg Limits (Liquid Limit & Plastic Limit )
Type of Test LIQUID LIMIT TEST
PLASTIC LIMIT TEST
Number of Blows 32 23 20 15
Trial No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3
Container Number 22 23 24 25 1 8 15
Wt. of Container g 11.62 11.42 11.19 11.34 11.56 10.65 10.19
Wt. Wet Soil + Container g 31.99 33.55 34.50 36.00 18.95 19.22 21.79
Wt. Dry Soil + Container g 28.11 29.00 30.00 30.71 17.72 17.76 19.77
Wt. of Water g 3.88 4.55 4.50 5.29 1.23 1.46 2.02
Wt. of Dry Soil g 16.49 17.58 18.81 19.37 6.16 7.11 9.58
Water Content % 23.53 25.88 23.92 27.31 19.97 20.53 21.09
Avg. 25.16 20.53
28.00
27.50
Water Content %
27.00
26.50
26.00
25.50
25.16
25.00
24.50
24.00
23.50
23.00 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
10 100
No. of Blows
Liquid Limit (L.L) LL = 25.16 Plastic Limit (P.L) P.L =20.53

Plasticity Index (P.I) P.I = L.L - P.L 4.63 Classification Group CL-ML
TESTED BY:--------------------------- CHECKED BY:---------------------------

ATTERBURG'S LIMITS
Location: Multi Orchards MPCHS Block-C, Plot-158 Sample Depth : 10 ft

946.3
PLASTIC LIMIT TEST
Trial No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3
Wt. of Container g 10.13 11.20 11.70 11.86 11.68 13.07 11.26
Wt. of Water g 4.30 4.50 4.00 4.95 1.20 1.34 1.90
Wt. of Dry Soil g 18.77 18.80 18.10 19.79 6.47 7.05 9.24
Water Content % 22.91 23.94 22.10 25.01 18.55 19.01 20.56
Avg. 23.49 19.37
25.50
25.00
Water Content %
24.50
24.00
23.50
23.49
23.00
22.50
22.00
20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
21.50
10 100
No. of Blows


ATTERBURG'S LIMITS

946.3
PLASTIC LIMIT TEST
Trial No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3
Wt. of Container g 29.39 31.25 31.51 30.96 29.39 31.25 31.51
Wt. of Water g 2.20 3.60 3.60 3.50 2.60 1.90 1.80
Wt. of Dry Soil g 11.41 10.35 11.39 11.84 10.01 7.95 8.09
Water Content % 19.28 34.78 31.61 29.56 25.97 23.90 22.25
Avg. 28.81 24.04
40.00
35.00
Water Content %
30.00
28.81
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0.00
10 100
No. of Blows


ATTERBURG'S LIMITS

946.3
PLASTIC LIMIT TEST
Trial No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3
Wt. of Container g 10.10 11.67 11.43 11.43 11.34 11.55 11.85
Wt. of Water g 5.00 4.80 3.70 5.21 1.37 1.51 1.61
Wt. of Dry Soil g 18.10 17.53 18.67 18.26 7.21 7.49 7.66
Water Content % 27.62 27.38 19.82 28.53 19.00 20.16 21.02
Avg. 25.84 20.06
30.00
25.00
Water Content %
25.84
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0.00
10 100
No. of Blows


ATTERBURG'S LIMITS

946.3
PLASTIC LIMIT TEST
Trial No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3
Wt. of Container g 10.10 11.67 11.80 11.43 11.34 11.55 11.85
Wt. of Water g 3.46 3.38 3.30 4.00 0.98 1.13 1.22
Wt. of Dry Soil g 15.24 14.33 15.60 15.57 5.68 6.16 5.93
Water Content % 22.70 23.59 21.15 25.69 17.25 18.34 20.57
Avg. 23.28 18.72
30.00
25.00
Water Content %
20.00
23.28
15.00
10.00
5.00
20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0.00
10 100
No. of Blows


Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Project: Multi Orchards MPCHS Bore Hole No: 1
Location: Multi Orchards MPCHS Block-C, Plot-158Sample Depth: 10ft
Dry Wt (gms): 135
Sieve
Sieve Opening Weight Retained Cumulative Percentage
Opening Percentage Passing
(gms) Retained (gms) Retained
Inches (mm)
3/4" 19.1
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 10 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 40 0.43 7.12 7.12 5.27 94.73
# 100 0.15 14.32 21.44 15.88 84.12
# 200 0.075 20.18 41.62 30.83 69.17
PAN 93.38 135.00 100.00 0.00
0
110
100
90
Grain Size %age Passing
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01
Sieve Size (mm)
Gravel: 0.00 (%)

Sand: 30.83 (%)
Silt & Clay: 69.17 (%)
Tested By:___________________ Checked By:___________________

Dry Wt (gms): 145.15
Sieve
Inches (mm)
3/4" 19.1
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 10 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 40 0.43 6.19 6.19 4.26 95.74
# 100 0.15 12.36 18.55 12.78 87.22
# 200 0.075 17.02 35.57 24.51 75.49
PAN 109.58 145.15 100.00 0.00
0
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01
Sieve Size (mm)
Gravel: 0.00 (%)

Sand: 24.51 (%)
Silt & Clay: 75.49 (%)

Dry Wt (gms): 176.2
Sieve
Inches (mm)
3/4" 19.1
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 10 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 40 0.43 6.70 6.70 3.80 96.20
# 100 0.15 12.51 19.21 10.91 89.09
# 200 0.075 16.29 35.50 20.15 79.85
PAN 140.65 176.15 100.00 0.00
0
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01
Sieve Size (mm)
Gravel: 0.00 (%)

Sand: 20.15 (%)
Silt & Clay: 79.85 (%)

Dry Wt (gms): 155.3
Sieve
Inches (mm)
3/4" 19.1
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 10 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 40 0.43 4.12 4.12 2.65 97.35
# 100 0.15 7.95 12.07 7.77 92.23
# 200 0.075 12.05 24.12 15.53 84.47
PAN 131.21 155.33 100.00 0.00
0
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01
Sieve Size (mm)
Gravel: 0.00 (%)

Sand: 15.53 (%)
Silt & Clay: 84.47 (%)

Dry Wt (gms): 167.5
Sieve
Inches (mm)
3/4" 19.1
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 10 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
# 40 0.43 4.44 4.44 2.65 97.35
# 100 0.15 13.23 17.67 10.55 89.45
# 200 0.075 23.62 41.29 24.65 75.35
PAN 126.21 167.50 100.00 0.00
0
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01
Sieve Size (mm)
Gravel: 0.00 (%)

Sand: 24.65 (%)
Silt & Clay: 75.35 (%)

Block-C, Plot-158
Laboratory Test Conducting
Site Soil Samples: 1st & 2nd Drill
Site Soil Samples: 3rd Drill
Appendix - A Borehole Plan
Appendix - B Borehole Logs
Appendix - C Laboratory Test Results
Appendix - D Site Photos
Appendix - E Laboratory Photos
S
A
D
A
A
T
ENTERPRISES
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
CONTRACTORS
A
N
D
GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERING
LABORATORIES
Head Office; office #2,1st Floor Haroon Plaza,Main Bazar Tarbela Ghazi.
Phone : 0995-6616886 Cell: 0300-8550892
Sub Ofiice: Office#3, 1st Floor, Eliyana Square, J Block New City Phase 2 Wah Cantt.
Investigated And Prepared by:

Engineer Geologist Muhammad Raziq Khattak
Phone#0306-9558032, 0347-8362224
Email: m [email protected]

Copy-01: of Plot 158, Block C, Multi Orchards Mpchs For Mr. Shukat

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copy-01: of Plot 158, Block C, Multi Orchards Mpchs For Mr. Shukat

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Copy-01: of Plot 158, Block C, Multi Orchards Mpchs For Mr. Shukat

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copy-01

SUB-SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

1st September 2020

SADAAT ENTERPRISES GENERAL CONTRACTORS

SUB-SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

1st September 2020

SADAAT ENTERPRISES GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Serial no. Content Page No.

Appendix – A Borehole Plan

Appendix – B Borehole Logs

Appendix – C Laboratory Test Results

Appendix – D Site Photos

Appendix – E Laboratory Photos

Need of Geotechnical Study:

6th Nov 2010

1st Mar 2013

20th Sep 2014

1. Standard penetration test.

3. Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples.

4. Preparation of bore holes log.

Number / Location of Test Pits / Bore Holes

Drilling of Bore Holes and Sampling

Depth of Ground Water Table

 Natural Moisture Content (ASTM-D-2216-98)

Discussion of Laboratory Testing

1. Natural Moisture Content

2. Grain Size Analysis

3. Liquid and Plastic Limit Tests

DETERMINATION OF ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY

1. Allowable Bearing Capacity Equation Developed By Terzaghi and Peck.

Where Qa = Allowable Bearing Capacity of Soil

Lateral Earth Pressure

Safe Bearing Capacity (Qs) = 0.94 Kg/cm2

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommended allowable bearing capacity at 10ft depth may be taken as

Coordinates: Northing: 33°42'56.74'' Easting: 72°43'0.53"

15' 2nd Drill

2nd Drill 3rd Drill 15'

Location: Front Side Road

SAMPLED 5.0 FT. 10.0 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. ELEV. FT.

COORDINATES Northing 33°42'56.74'' Easting 72°43'0.53" AFTER 24 HRS. DEPTH FT.

BOTTOM OF HOLE DEPTH 40.0 FT. ELEV. 1470.0 FT.

BORING ADVANCED BY: POWER AUGERING WASHBORING X

DEPTH FROM TO OR SAMPLE RESULTS RESULTS STRATUM DESCRIPTION

FT. ELEV. FT. FT. RUN NO. TYPE N-Value N LL PI %M

3.5 5.0 1 DS 2,2,4 6 25.16 4.63 17.05

SILTY LEAN CLAY (CL-ML) - with light brown,

8.5 10.0 2 DS 10,11,12 23 23.49 4.12 15.02

SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) -dark brown, highly

13.5 15.0 3 DS 11,10,10 20 - - 15.35

SILTY LEAN CLAY(CL-ML) -dark brown, highly

18.5 20.0 4 DS 9,12,13 25 - - 15.31

22.5 End of Bore Log

SAMPLED 5.0 FT. 10.0 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. ELEV. FT.

COORDINATES Northing 33°42'56.74'' Easting 72°43'0.53" AFTER 24 HRS. DEPTH FT.

BOTTOM OF HOLE DEPTH 40.0 FT. ELEV. 1470.0 FT.

BORING ADVANCED BY: POWER AUGERING WASHBORING X

DEPTH FROM TO OR SAMPLE RESULTS RESULTS STRATUM DESCRIPTION

Tested By:_ Checked By:_

Tested By:_ Checked By:_

Tested By:_ Checked By:_

Tested By:_ Checked By:_