COLLABORATION OF HIGH ACTIVITY SOIL

AND GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE FACTORS

IN PAGELARAN SOIL CREEP OCCURRENCE

Ahmad Fuad Salam, Twin Hosea Widodo, Azriza, Reza Syahputra,

Albert Septario Tempessy, Tito Latif Indra.
 OUTLINE
Introduction
Geological Setting
Methodology
Theory
Result and Discussion
Conclusion
References
 INTRODUCTION
Background
In December 2014, soil creep
disaster was happened at
Pagelaran, Cianjur which is
wiped out 13 houses and
collapsed road along 280 m
[1].

There are many factors which

triggered soil creep
occurrence, such as minerals
contained of the soil,
geological structures, and
physical properties of soil
[2,3,4].

Map of landslide supceptibility [5].

 INTRODUCTION
Objectives

To know the contribution of soil physical properties toward soil creep

occurrence in Pagelaran, Cianjur.
By determining grain size distribution of the soil sample
By measuring soil physical properties based on water content (Atterberg limits)

To know the contribution of geological structures toward the soil creep

occurrence in Pagelaran Cianjur.
By determine the main force of the that affect the geological structure orientation.
 GEOLOGICAL SETTING
Geomorphology

Geomorphological profile of
research area
 GEOLOGICAL SETTING
Geomorphology

Geomorphological profile of research area

 GEOLOGICAL SETTING
Stratigraphy
Koleberes Formation (TmK) :

o Koloberes Formation consists of well-layered

sandstone, tuff breccia, and brownish gray
sandstone.

Bentang Formation (Tmb) :

o The slope is formed by Bentang formation,

this formation tend to be similar with the
(TmK) which are containing less
compressible tuff sandstone, crystal tuff and
pumice tuff with globigerina clay, silt
stone, breccia andesite and conglomerate

Stratigraphy of the research

area [6]
 GEOLOGICAL SETTING

Geological map of research area [6]

 METHODOLOG
Y
Field Works

Geotechnical drilling
Borings top and bottom of the
slope and taking undisturbed soil
sample up to 3 m depth.

Geological structure mapping

Investigating outcrop and
measuring the geological
structure orientation

Drilling activity and joint orientation measurement

 METHODOLOG
Y
Laboratory Analysis

Grainsize Analysis
Atterberg Limit Test

Studio Analysis

Shrinkage Plastic Liqui

Casagrande method Limit Limit d
Limit
Gillot method
Seed et al. method Semi-
Solid Plastic Liquid
William and Donaldson method Solid
Plasticity
Index
Increasing Moisture Content
 THEORY
Soil Creep Factors

High activity soil (containing active clay mineral)

Geological Structure Factor (structure orientation same with the

slope orientation, can impact slope stability to)

Geological structures as a discontinuities (can be access for water

to flow inside the slope, and affecting soil properties)
 Soil Physical
THEORY
Atterberg Limits
Properties
Five states of soil consistency based on water content are :
Liquid limit (WL) : The water content above which the soil behaves as a viscous liquid (a
IP soil water mixture with no measurable shear strength)
Plastic limit (WP) : The water content below which the soil no longer behaves as a plastic
material.
Shrinkage limit (WS) : The water content below which no futher soil volume change occurs
with further drying.
Sticky limit : The water content at which a soil loses its adhesive property and ceases to
stick to other objects.
Cohesion limit : The water content at which the soil grains just cease to stick together.
Plasticity index (IP) : the range between WL and WP , that the soil behaves as a plastic
material.

Grain Size Distribution Analysis

Grain size of a soil refers to the diameters of the soil particles making up the soil mass
 RESULT AND
DISCUSSION
Physical Properties
Laboratory Test Result
Sample Atterberg Limit Test Grain Size Distribution
Soil Description
Depth (m) USCS
LL (%) PL (%) PI (%) Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%)

Silty Clay, Brown, High

0.00 0.50 90.24 34.50 55.69 0.00 18.00 32.40 49.60 CH
Plasticity

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

1.00 1.50 grades with sand 54.81 57.60 27.23 0.00 21.80 34.60 43.60 CH

1.50 2.00 Same as above 68.79 29.60 39.16 0.00 21.80 32.90 45.30 CH

2.00 2.50 Same as above 74.48 32.10 42.41 0.00 6.00 43.00 51.00 CH

2.50 3.00 Same as above 99.31 36.00 63.31 0.00 16.40 36.20 47.40 CH

TABLE I. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL IN TOP OF THE SLOPE

 RESULT AND
DISCUSSION
Physical Properties
Laboratory Test Result
Sample Atterberg Limit Test Grain Size Distribution
Soil Description
Depth (m) USCS
LL (%) PL (%) PI (%) Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%)

Silty Clay, Brown, High

0.00 0.50 76.40 37.90 38.47 0.00 7.50 52.50 40.00 MH
Plasticity

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

1.00 1.50 grades with sand 76.79 37.80 38.95 0.00 20.60 43.70 35.70 MH

1.50 2.00 Same as above 67.43 36.10 31.32 0.00 22.20 41.60 36.20 MH

2.00 2.50 Same as above 64.79 34.40 30.41 0.00 20.40 50.40 29.20 MH

TABLE I. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL IN BOTTOM OF THE SLOPE

 RESULT AND
DISCUSSION
Casagrande Method (1948)
Based on Cassagrande
method:

All the fifth sample in the

bottom of the slope (Blue
dots) are Clay with high
plasticity (CH).

All the fourth sample in

the top of the slope (Red
dots) are Silt with high
plasticity (MH).

So from this method we can

conclude that, all the sample
are high placticity soils.
Diagram of Cassagrande Method
 RESULT AND
DISCUSSION
Activity Number Analysis

Diagram of Gillot Method Diagram of William and Donaldson Method

 RESULT AND
DISCUSSION
Activity Number Analysis
Activity Number (Skempton Method)

Sample Depth (m) Activity Number (A) Activity

UDS 1 0.00 0.50 1.099 High

N/A N/A N/A N/A
UDS 2 1.00 1.50 1.268 Very High
UDS 3 1.50 2.00 1.004 High
UDS 4 2.00 2.50 1.2566 Very High

Table. Activity Number Soil at Top of Slope

Sample Depth (m) Activity Number (A) Activity

UDS 1 0.00 0.50 1.248 High

N/A N/A N/A N/A
UDS 2 1.00 1.50 0.705 Medium
UDS 3 1.50 2.00 0.9717 High
UDS 4 2.00 2.50 0.922 Very High
UDS 5 2.50 3.00 1.4931 Very High

Diagram of Seed Method Activity Number Soil at Bottom of Slope

 RESULT AND
DISCUSSION
Geological Structure Orientation

Based on Rosset Diagram of

outcrops joint and crack, the main
force orientation (1) is NE SW
which is in line with the slope
orientation.

Joint orientation of rock outcrop (left) and

joint orientation measurement of cracks in
the body of slope (right)
 CONCLUSION

Based on Atterberg limits and several activity number analyses, it can be

concluded that creep occurrence in Pagelaran was influenced by high
activity of soil formed the slope.

The geological structures orientation on this area are inline with the slope
orientation. Therefore, it can impact slope stability and trigger soil creep
occurrences.
 REFERENCES
[1] Anonymous. Emergency Response Report of Landslide Occurence in Pagelaran, Cianjur, West Java, Indonesia.
Centre of Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation, Geological Agency (2015).
[2] Md. Anisuzzaman, D. Muslim, Arifuzzaman, N. Sadhrina. The role of clay minerals on land subsidence: a case
study in Jakarta, Indonesia. Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Ecological, Environmental, and
Biological Sciences, Singapore (2013) 188-191.
[3] R.W. Fleming and A.M. Johnson. Structures associated with strike-slip faults that bound landslide elements. Eng.
Geol., (27) (1989) 39-114.
[4] Saro Lee, Ueechan Chwae, Kyungduck Min. Landslide susceptibility mapping by correlation between topography
and geological structure: the Janghung area, Korea, Geomorphology, (46) (2002) 149-162
[5] Gak tau dr mana mas
[6] Koesmono, M., and Suwarna N. Kusnama. Peta Geologi Lembar Sindang Barang Dan Bandarwaru, Geology
Survey of Indonesia, Bandung (1996).