Geotechnical Report - W-B PDF

Index
1.OBJECT.............................................................................................................1
2.INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................1
3.SCOPE OF WORK:...............................................................................................2
4.EXPLORATION PROGRAMME:...............................................................................2
5.METHODOLOGY OF FIELD INVESTIGATION:...........................................................4
5.1.Boring:...........................................................................................................4
5.2.Sampling:.......................................................................................................4
5.2.1.Disturbed Sampling (DS):..............................................................................4
5.2.2.Undisturbed Sampling (UDS):.........................................................................4
5.2.3.Transportation and storage of samples:...........................................................5
5.3.Standard Penetration Test (SPT):......................................................................5
5.4.Drilling in rock:...............................................................................................6
5.5.Ground Water Level Measurement:....................................................................7
6.STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR FIELD INVESTIGATIONS:..................................7
7.GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING:...............................................................8
8.GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND FOUNDATION FEASIBILITY..................................
...........................................................................................................................9
8.1.DEPTH OF FOUNDATION...................................................................................9
8.1.1.FOUNDATION IN SOIL...................................................................................9
8.1.2.FOUNDATION IN ROCK................................................................................11
9.OPEN/ SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS IN SOIL............................................................11
9.1.Net safe bearing capacity from shear consideration:...........................................11
9.1.1.For Clay Soils ( = 0):................................................................................11
9.1.2.For C - soils:...........................................................................................11
9.1.3.Reduction Factors:......................................................................................12
9.2.Net Safe Bearing Capacity:.............................................................................12
9.3.Determination of Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) from SPT 'N' value considerations...12
10.PILE FOUNDATIONS........................................................................................15
10.1.Capacity of Piles in Intermediate Geo-material and Rock:..................................15
10.2.Ultimate Capacity of Pile in Soils:...................................................................17
10.3.Lateral Capacity of Pile..................................................................................18
11.SUMMARY OF FOUNDATION DETAILS:...............................................................20
12.LIMITATIONS:................................................................................................25
ANNEXURE
Individual Reports of all Structures
Preparation of Detailed Project Report for Up-gradation of FINAL DETAILED PROJECT REPORT
Ausa Waranga & Wardha Butibori Section of NH361 in SUB SOIL EXPLORATION &
the state of Maharashtra. ANALYSIS REPORT
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
SUB SOIL EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS REPORT

1. OBJECT
Conducting detailed Subsoil Investigation and recommendation of Net Safe Bearing

Capacity (SBC) for various structures of Ausa-Waranga & Wardha - Buttibori section
of NH361 in the state of Maharastra.
The entire project awarded consists of following four packages:

Ausa Chakur (58.2 km)
Chakur Loha (61.8 km)
Loha Waragaphata (70.7 km)
Wardha-Butibori (60 km)
The present report consists of detailed engineering services for Wardha Buttibori
section (NH 361) from Km 85+300 to Km 28+800 (i.e., Salad to Butibori).
This Report Consists of:

Introduction
Scope of work
Methodology of subsurface Investigation
Sub soil profile
Analysis & sample Design
Foundation Recommendations
2. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of field explorations and Geotechnical engineering
studies performed for proposed major bridges (MJB), minor bridges (MIB) and
vehicle underpasses (VUP) in various predetermined locations. The purpose of the
explorations and studies is to identify subsurface conditions and formulate
Geotechnical recommendations for design and construction.
The main text of the report includes description of field explorations, laboratory
testing, subsurface conditions, conclusions and recommendations based upon review
of existing data, engineering studies and analysis.
Field and Laboratory works are conducted based on Indian Standard specifications
and, as per the requirement of project.
1
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
3. SCOPE OF WORK:
The scope of subsoil Investigation is to ascertain Geotechnical and geological

properties of substratum for design and construction of various types of foundations.
It is proposed to have exploration by drilling of boreholes at various locations of
given structures. Accordingly the exploration program of boreholes are taken upto a
maximum depth of 19.5 m or 3 m into hard rock whichever occurs earlier.
Undisturbed, Disturbed and Rock samples were collected appropriate to ground
conditions and transported them to Geotechnical laboratory. Laboratory tests are
conducted to determine the Index and Engineering properties of soil, rock and
suggested the Net Safe bearing capacity of the soil on which structures are to be
constructed. Engineering analysis was carried out for recommending the location
and Net Safe Bearing Capacity of foundation for the proposed structures.
4. EXPLORATION PROGRAMME:
Sub-Soil Investigation Plan
S. No. Existing chainage Proposed Chainage Type of Structure No of Boreholes
1 28+750 523+305 Half Trumpet 2
2 36+233 517+060 4 Lane VUP 1
3 38+853 514+515 MIB 1
4 39+810 513+566 MIB 1
5 43+607 509+760 MIB 1
6 43+905 509+462 MIB 1
7 44+830 508+583 MIB 1
8 45+789 507+773 2 Lane VUP 1
9 47+126 506+316 MIB 1
10 49+552 503+860 MIB 1
11 501+930 2 Lane VUP 1

Kelzar Bypass
12 501+093 MIB-2 1
13 55+052 498+449 MIB 1
14 56+979 496+428 MIB 2
15 58+550 494+892 MIB 1
16 493+270 Major Bridge 5
17 493+132 MIB-2 1
Seloo Bypass
18 492+914 MIB-1 1
19 492+204 2 Lane VUP 1
20 65+961 487+542 MIB 1
2
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
S. No. Existing chainage Proposed Chainage Type of Structure No of Boreholes
21 67+122 486+368 MIB 1
22 67+725 485+759 MJB 9
23 72+328 477+600 2 Lane VUP 1
24 76+650 474+016 2 Lane VUP 1
25 Salod realignment 471+516 ROB 2
26 Salod reallignment 468+038 4 Lane VUP 1
Field Tests
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was conducted at every 1.5m depth interval
in boreholes as per IS: 2131-1981.
Disturbed Samples (DS) and undisturbed Samples (UDS) were collected as

per IRC 78 2000 guidelines
Drilling in soft rock, weathered rock and in hard rock was carried out by
diamond core drilling method using double tube core barrels of Nx size and
obtained the rock cores.
Ground Water table was observed in each bore hole as per IS : 6935 - 1973
Following Laboratory Tests are Conducted on selected samples of Disturbed and

Undisturbed soil samples
Moisture content & Specific Gravity
Bulk Density
Grain Size Analysis
Atterbergs Limits
Free Swell Index
Triaxial Shear Properties Cohesion, C and Friction Angle,
Following Laboratory Tests are Conducted on selected Rock samples
3
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Moisture content, Porosity & Density
Specific gravity
Uniaxial Compression test

5. METHODOLOGY OF FIELD INVESTIGATION:
The field exploration methods, sampling requirements, types and frequency of field
tests are performed based on project design requirements. Accordingly, we have
developed the overall investigation plan which enables us to obtain the data needed
to define subsurface conditions and perform Engineering analysis and design.
5.1. Boring:
Drilling of boreholes was carried out at specified locations to obtain information about
the subsoil profile, its nature, strength and also to collect soil samples for strata
identification and conducting laboratory tests. The sequence of boring was planned
after ascertaining preliminary nature of subsoil profile. Boring is carried out as per
the provisions given in IS: 1892-1979.
5.2. Sampling:
All the accessories used for sampling and the method of sampling adopted confirms
to IS: 2132. All the disturbed and undisturbed samples collected in the field have
been classified at the site as per IS : 1498.
5.2.1. Disturbed Sampling (DS):
Disturbed soil samples were collected from bore holes at regular intervals to
determine the soil type, grain size distribution, Atterberg limits and soil classification.
5.2.2. Undisturbed Sampling (UDS):
In each borehole, undisturbed samples are collected at every change of strata.

Undisturbed sampler tubes are made up of 100mm diameter, 450mm long MS tubes
provided with sampler head with ball check arrangement. Samples are collected in
such a manner that the structure of soil and its moisture content do not get altered.
At few locations, the sampling tubes could not be pushed into the soil because of
hard consistency. The specifications for the accessories used for sampling and the
sampling procedure adopted conforms to IS:1892 and IS:2132. Undisturbed samples
are used to determine the shear parameters, natural moisture content and unit
weight.
4
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
5.2.3. Transportation and storage of samples:
Undisturbed Samples are hand carried holding them in vertical. Shipping and storage
was done vertically in most of the situations. Samples are kept as near to ground
temperature during shipping. Samples are stored in a dark humid room having 90 -
94% humidity to prevent loss of moisture.
5.3. Standard Penetration Test (SPT):
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was conducted at different depths in all boreholes.
For shallow depths SPT was conducted at close intervals of 1.5m. SPT split spoon
sampler of standard dimensions was driven into the soil from borehole bottom using
63.5kg hammer falling from 75cm height. The SPT weight was mechanically lifted to
the specified height and allowed to free fall. Blow count for each of three 15cm
penetrations was recorded and the N is reported as the blows count for the last 30cm
penetration of the sampler leaving the first 15cm penetration as seating drive. When
the number of blows exceeded 50 to penetrate the first or second 15cm length of the
Sampler, the SPT N is regarded as more than 100 as described in IS: 2131 - 1981.
SPT refusal is recorded when there is no penetration of the sampler at any stage and
also when a rebound of the sounding system is recorded. Samples from the SPT split
spoon sampler was preserved in polythene covers and transported to the laboratory.
One more polythene cover was provided to prevent the loss of moisture during the
transit.
The degree of denseness or looseness of natural deposited cohesionless soils can be

measured in terms of their relative density. SPT N values are correlated with
relative density of non - cohesive stratum and with consistency of cohesive stratum.
Correlation for Sand/ non-plastic Silt Correlation for Clay/ Plastic soils
Penetration Value Relative Penetration Value

Consistency
(N) Density (N)
0 - 4 Blows Very Loose 0 - 2 Blows Very Soft
4 - 10 Blows Loose 2 - 4 Blows Soft
10 - 30 Blows Medium Dense 4 - 8 Blows Medium
30 - 50 Blows Dense 8 - 15 Blows Stiff
>50 Blows Very Dense 15 - 30 Blows Very Stiff
>30 Blows Hard
5
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
5.4. Drilling in rock:
For drilling in rock, drilling was advanced by rotary core drilling method using double
tube core barrels with T.C bit or diamond bit as per the guidelines of IS:6926-1996.
The maximum length of drill run maintained is 1.0m. At the end of each run, the drill
rod string with core barrel is extracted from the Borehole and core is recovered
from the core barrel. The percentage of core recovery is recorded and the core
pieces are transferred to the core box duly numbered and labeled properly. The
selected core samples are sent to the laboratory for conducting tests. The rock core
samples are preserved and stored in wooden core boxes as specified in IS:4078
1980
Rock classification in terms of weathering, state of fractures and strength is carried

out in the following manner. (As per IS: 4464)
Term Description Grade Interpretation
No visible sign of rock material weathering; perhaps

Fresh I CR > 90 %
slight discoloration on major discontinuity surfaces
Slightly Discoloration indicates weathering of rock material and II CR between

discontinuity surfaces. All the rock material may be
Weathered discolored by weathering. 70% to 90%
Less than half of the rock material is decomposed or

Moderately disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discolored rock is III CR between
Weathered present either as a continuous framework or as core 51% to 70%
stones.
More than half of the rock material is decomposed or

Highly disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discolored rock is IV CR between
Weathered present either as a discontinuous framework or as 11% to 50%
core stones
Completely All rock material is decomposed and / or disintegrated V CR between

to soil. The original mass structure is still largely
Weathered intact. zero to 10%
All rock material is converted to soil. The mass

Residual structure and material fabric are destroyed. There is a CR = Zero
VI
Soil large change in volume, but the soil has not been But N > 50
significantly transported.
6
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
RELATION BETWEEN RQD AND IN-SITU ROCK QUALITY
Rock quality is further measured by frequency of natural joints in rock mass. Rock
Quality Designation (RQD) is used to define state of fractures or massiveness of rock.
Following table defines the quality of rock mass.
RQD CLASSIFICATION RQD (%)
Excellent 91-100
Good 76-90
Fair 51-75
Poor 25-50
Very Poor <25
As per IS: 13365 Part -1: 1998
CLASSIFICATION OF ROCK WITH RESPECTIVE OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Rock is also classified by strength of intact rock cores collected during drilling. Rock
Compressive strength (UCS) is used to define strength of rock. Following table
summarizes classification of rock based on strength.
5.5. Ground Water Level Measurement:
The depth of ground water level is supposed to be measured during boring and
thereafter the ground water is stabilized as per IS:6935 - 1973.
6. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR FIELD INVESTIGATIONS:
Field exploration by boring was as per below given standards:
S.
IS Code No: Title
No
Code of Practice for sub surface investigation for
1 IS : 1892 - 1979
foundations
Classification and Identification of Soils for General
2 IS : 1498 - 1970
Engineering Purpose
Method for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) for
3 IS : 2131 - 1981
Soils
Code of Practice for Thin- Walled tube sampling of
4 IS : 2132 - 1986
Soils
7
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
S.
IS Code No: Title
No
Code of practice for presentation of drilling
5 IS : 4464 - 1985 information and core description in foundation
investigation
6 IS : 5313 - 1980 Guide for core drilling observations
Code of practice for indexing and storage of drill

7 IS : 4078 - 1980
cores
Diamond core drilling-Site investigation for river
8 IS : 6926 - 1996
valley projects-code of practice
Method of determination of water level in a bore
9 IS : 6935 - 1973
hole
IS: 6065 (part-1) - Recommendations for the preparation of Geological
10
1985 and Geotechnical maps for river valley projects
7. GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING:
Laboratory tests are performed on selected samples in our Geotechnical and Material
testing laboratory, Bowenpally, Secunderabad. Laboratory tests comprises of the
following tests conducted as per procedures given in relevant IS codes.
Following tests are conducted on Undisturbed samples:
i) Sieve Analysis
ii) Atterberg Limits
iii) Free Swell Index (FSI)
iv) Triaxial test (UU)
v) NMC & Bulk density
vi) Specific Gravity
Following tests are conducted on SPT samples:
i) Sieve Analysis
Following tests are conducted on Rock Samples:
i) Water Absorption , Dry density, Porosity and Specific Gravity
ii) Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS)
iii) Point Load Index Test (as per requirement)
8
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
8. GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND FOUNDATION FEASIBILITY
By observing the nature of subsurface strata, the type of foundation for a given
proposed structure, expected heavy loads on piers and abutment foundations, the
following types of foundations can be recommended.
a) Shallow Foundations
b) Deep/ Pile Foundations
For satisfactory performance of a foundation, the following criteria must be satisfied;
I. The foundation must not fail in shear.
II. The foundation should not settle by an amount more than the permissible settle-
ment.
The smaller of the bearing pressure values obtained according to above (I) and (II),
is adopted as the allowable bearing capacity.
8.1. DEPTH OF FOUNDATION
Depth of Analysis:
For footing resting on multilayer deposits, weighted average or average of the C and
values upto a depth of H = 0.5 B Tan (45 + /2)
8.1.1. FOUNDATION IN SOIL
A foundation must have an adequate depth from the considerations of adverse

environmental influences. It must also be economically feasible in terms of overall
structure. Depth of foundation in soil shall be decided as per Clause 705.2 of IRC 78
for open foundations and confirmed with clause 7 of IS : 1904 for special cases like;
where volume change/ scour is expected/ or when foundation is to rest on sloping
ground/ made or filled up ground/ frost action is expected etc.
Scour depth calculation:
Hydrology for the structures is calculated separately and presented whereas,

maximum scour depth based on erodible strata has been worked out and presented
in summary of borelog results itself. If the strata at which founding level arrived
based on scour depth is soil, the founding level has been arrived as explained below
(i.e Founding level = H.F.L- 2*d sm - 2 in case of piers and H.F.L 1.27*d sm - 2 in
case of abutments) as per IRC : 78 provisions.
9
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Silt Factor:
This is important factor for determining the scour depth of erodible strata. It is
calculated using following procedure as per IRC:78 (clause 703.2.2) & as suggested
in IRC: 5 (clause 110.1.3)
Where Ksf = 1.76(dm)
Ksf = Silt Factor
dm = Mean Diameter in mm
The mean scour depth below Highest Flood Level (HFL) for natural channels flowing
over erodible bed can be calculated as per IRC : 78 (clause 703.2)
dsm = 1.34 *(Db 2/ Ksf )1/3
Where Db = The design discharge for foundation per metre width at

effective linear water way
Ksf = Silt factor for a representative sample of bed material obtained

upto the level of anticipated scour
The minimum depth of Open foundation shall be upto the stratum having safe
bearing capacity but not less than 2.0m below scour level or protected level as per
IRC:78 (Clause 705.2.1)
Floor Protection:
When high discharges are encountered in a stream water flows turbulently which
results in erosion of the bed. To prevent this, floor protection can be suggested for an
economic shallow/ open foundation. As per IRC: 78 2000, clause 703.3.2, for the
design of floor protection works for open foundations, the following values of
maximum scour depth may be adopted:
I) In a straight reach : 1.27 dsm
II) In a bend : 1.50 dsm or on the basis of concentration of flow
10
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
8.1.2. FOUNDATION IN ROCK
As per clause 705.2.2 (a) of IRC:78; for hard rock with an ultimate crushing
Strength of 12.5 MPa or above, the depth of foundation shall be 0.60m below rock
surface and 1.50m for all other cases. The embedment of the foundations shall be
decided keeping in view the overall characteristics like fissures, bedding plans,
cavities, ultimate crushing strength, proposed treatment of foundation strata etc.
9. OPEN/ SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS IN SOIL
The safe bearing capacity of soil is the net intensity of loading which the foundation
will carry, without undergoing settlement in excess of the permissible value for the
structure under consideration.
9.1. Net safe bearing capacity from shear consideration:

9.1.1. For Clay Soils ( = 0):
The net ultimate bearing capacity immediately after construction on fairly saturated
homogeneous cohesive soils shall be calculated using following equation.
qd = C Nc Sc dc ic ; Where Nc = 5.14
The value of C shall be obtained from unconfined compressive strength test or static
cone penetration test or triaxial shear (UU) test.
Alternatively Net ultimate bearing capacity can be determined by using the following
equation;
qd = C Nc Sc dc ; Where qd = Net ultimate bearing capacity
A factor of safety of 2.5 is used
Considering = 0, Nc = 5.14
Thus the equation is simplified as
q (net safe) = 1/ 2.5 *C*5.14 Sc dc
= 2.056 C Sc dc
9.1.2. For C - soils:
For General shear:
360 and C 5 t/m2
qd = C Nc Sc dc ic + q ( Nq-1) Sq dq iq + 0.5 g B Ng Sg dg ig W '
11
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
For Local shear:
280 and C 3 t/m2
qd = (2/3) c Nc Sc dc ic + q ( Nq-1) Sq dq iq + 0.5 g B Ng Sg dg ig
For Intermediate Shear:
Average or interpolate between Local and General Shear.
9.1.3. Reduction Factors:
Determined Bearing Capacity Factors Nc , Nq, N from Table 1 of IS : 6403-1981
Shape factors Sc Sq S from Table 2 of IS : 6403 - 1981
Depth factors dc dq d from clause 5.1.2.2 of IS : 6403 - 1981
Inclination factors ic iq i from clause 5.1.2.3 of IS : 6403 1981
9.2. Net Safe Bearing Capacity:
Net safe bearing capacity is obtained by dividing the above Net Ultimate bearing
capacity by the factor of safety of 2.5.
1
N et S afe Bearing C apacity = N et ultimate b ea ring cap a city
FO S
9.3. Determination of Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) from SPT 'N' value con-
siderations
As there is neither undisturbed sample nor C, values are available, but only N
values are available, Net Safe Bearing Capacity has been assessed based on SPT (N)
values. Therefore the safe bearing capacity of foundation soil at proposed founding
depth based on corrected SPT (N) value is determined using following theories.
12
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
I) Based on Terzaghi-Peck Theory:

2
q a =3 . 35C b N 3
[ 2B ]
B+ 0 . 3
W d t
where,
qa = Allowable net increase in soil pressure (t/m 2).
Cb = Correction Factor
N = Corrected SPT number
B = Width of footing (m)
w = Water table Correction Factor
dt = Depth Factor
II) Based on Tengs Theory:

2
q a =35 N 3
[ B+ 0 .3
2B ]
W R d
qa = Allowable net increase in soil pressure (kN/m2).
w = Water table Correction Factor
Df
Rd = Depth Correction Factor 1+ 2.0
B
III) Based on Pecks Theory:
q a = 0 . 41C w N S
where,
qa = Safe settlement Pressure (kN/m2)
0 . 5D w
Cw = Water table Correction Factor =0 . 5
D f +B
S = Settlement (mm)
13
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
IV) Based on Meyerhofs Theory:
q a =C b [ N S
20 . 8 ]
d m .. .. . .. . IfB< 1 . 2 m q a =C b [ N S
31. 2 ]
d m .. .. . .. . IfB> 1 . 2m
Where
qa = Allowable net increase in soil pressure (t/m 2).
Cb = Correction Factor
0 . 3 D f
dm =1 1. 33
B
V) Based on Bowles Theory:
q a =0 . 73 N R D1 S . . .. .. . IfB< 1 . 2 m
2
q a =0 . 48N R D2
B+ 0. 3
2B [ ]
S .. . .. .. IfB> 1 . 2 m Where
qa = Safe Bearing Pressure (kN/m2)
S = Settlement (mm)
0 . 2D f
RD1 =1 1 . 20
B
0 . 3 D f
RD2 =1 1. 33
B
14
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
10. PILE FOUNDATIONS
The total vertical load carrying capacity of pile foundation is a combination of skin
friction resistance along the surface and end bearing resistance at pile tip, when Piles
are installed through layered soils. The pile design in soft soils has relatively high
skin friction resistance and granular soils have high end bearing resistance. Generally
piles resting on sound rock can be loaded to their safe structural capacity. But for the
piles resting on weathered rock it is necessary to provide Socketing depth. In the
present situation socketing depth has been considered based on IS 14593-1998,
Table 1 of Clause 6.5.1 and IRC 78-2009 amendments. The General practice of
calculating Ultimate Bearing capacity of pile socketed into the rock is of following
categories:
a) Ultimate load capacity calculated from end bearing resistance only.
b) Ultimate load capacity calculated from skin frictional resistance only.
c) Ultimate load capacity calculated from combination of both skin friction &
end bearing resistance.
d) Ultimate load capacity calculated from end bearing resistance and ultimate
side socket shear in case of piles resting on rock.
IRC: 78 2009 amendments suggests the following methods for calculation

of pile capacities
10.1. Capacity of Piles in Intermediate Geo-material and Rock:
The ultimate load carrying capacity may be calculated from one of the two
approaches given below:
Where Cores of the rock can be taken and Unconfined Compressive Strength directly
established using standard method of testing, the approach described in Method 1
can be used. In situations where RQD shows highly fragmented strata (which is not
classified as granular or clayey soils), the approach described in Method 2 (Cole and
Stroud approach) can be used. Also for weak rock like Chalk, mudstone, claystone,
shale and other intermediate rocks this method is preferred.
15
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Method:1
where Qu = Re + R af =Ksp qc df Ab + AsCus
Qu = Ultimate Capacity of Pile socketed into rock in Newtons
Re = Ultimate End Bearing
Raf = Ultimate Side Socket Shear
Ksp = An Empirical Co-efficient whose value ranges from 0.3 to

1.2 as per the table given below for the rocks where core
recovery is reported and cores tested for Uniaxial
Compressive Strength.
(CR+RQD)/ 2 Ksp
30% 0.3
100% 1.2
CR = Core Recovery in %
RQD = Rock Quality Designation in %
For Intermediate values, Ksp shall be linearly interpolated.
qc = Average Unconfined Compressive strength of Core below

base of pile for a depth twice the diameter /least lateral
dimension of pile in Mpa.
Ab = Cross sectional area of base of Pile
df = Depth Factor = 1 + 0.4 Length of Socket/ Diameter of

Socket. However, value of df, should not be taken more
than 1.2.
As = Surface area of Socket
Cus = Ultimate Shear strength along socket length = 0.225qc
For calculation of Socket resistance the same should be restricted to 3 MPa.
16
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Method: 2
This method is applicable when cores and /or core testing results are not available or
when geo-material is highly fragmented. The shear strength of geo-material is
obtained from its correlation with extrapolated SPT values for 300mm of penetration
as given in table below.
Shear Strength/ Consistency Moderately Weak Weak Very Weak
Approx 'N' Value 300 200 200 100 100 60
Shear Strength/ Cohesion in MPa 3.3 1.9 1.9 0.7 0.7 0.4
Qu = Re+R af = Cub Nc Ab+ As.Cus
Cub = Average shear strength below base of pile for the depth twice the
diameter / least lateral dimension of the pile
Cus = Ultimate Shear strength along socket length = 0.225qc
For calculation of Socket resistance the same should be restricted to 3 MPa.
L = Length of Socket
Nc = 9
10.2. Ultimate Capacity of Pile in Soils:

The Ultimate capacity of Pile socketed into the Rock shall be calculated using
following equation.
Q u =Q ep +Q sf
Q u =A p( C pN c +qN q +0 . 5DN )+(( KP Di *tan )Asi +CAs )
Where ,
Qu = Total Ultimate capacity of pile in Soil
Qe = Ultimate End bearing resistance
Qsf = Ultimate Skin frictional resistance
Cp = Average cohesion at pile tip
Nc = Bearing capacity factor as per IS 2911(Part 1)
q = Effective over-burden pressure at pile tip
17
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Nq, N = Bearing Capacity factors depending on angle of internal friction ''

at toe.
= Effective Unit weight of bearing soil layer
D = Diameter of the pile.
AP = Cross sectional area of base of pile.
K = Coefficient of earth pressure
PDi = Effective overburden pressure at center of gravity of the pile
= Angle of wall friction between pile and soil (taken as 2/3 of )
Asi = Surface area of the pile stem.
= Reduction factor as per IS 2911(Part 1)
As = Surface area of the pile shaft.
C = Average cohesion through out the length of the Pile.
Total Ultimate Safe Capacity of Pile:
Total Ultimate Safe capacity of the pile in rock is obtained from above ultimate
capacity divided by factor of safety of 3 for end bearing resistance and 6 for side
socket shear resistance. Where as In soils the total safe capacity is obtained by
dividing the ultimate capacity with a factor of safety of 2.5 for both end bearing
resistance and skin friction resistance.
Re R Qep Q sf
Q s= + af & Q s= + W p
F .S F .S F.S F.S
10.3. Lateral Capacity of Pile
The Long flexible pile, fully or partially embedded, is treated as a cantilever fixed at
some depth below the ground level. The Depth of Fixity and hence the Equivalent
Length of Cantilever are determined using the plots of Fig: 2 of 2911-Part I-2.
Where T = 5EI/K1 for sands and normally loaded clays; R = 4EI/K2 for Over-
consolidated Clays
T, R are the Relative Stiffness Factors
K1 and K2 are constants in kg/cm2 given in Table 1 and 2 of 2911-Part I - 2
18
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
E is the Young's Modulus of the Pile Material in Kg/cm2
I is the Moment of Inertia of the Cross Section in cm4.
Fig: 2 of 2911-Part I-2 is valid for Long Flexible Piles where the embedded Length Le
is 4R or 4T.
Knowing the Length of Cantilever, the Pile head deflection (Y) shall be computed
using the following Equation:
Y in cm = Q(L1+Lf)3/ 3EI, for free Head Pile
Y in cm = Q(L1+Lf)3/ 12EI, for fixed Head Pile
Where L1 is the Free standing length/ Unsupported length of pile
Lf is the Depth of fixity Q is the Lateral Load in kg.
19
Preparation of Detailed Project Report for Up-gradation of Ausa Waranga & Wardha FINAL DETAILED PROJECT REPORT
Butibori Section of NH361 in the state of Maharashtra. SUB SOIL EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS REPORT
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
11. SUMMARY OF FOUNDATION DETAILS:

Safe
RL of the Scour RL of the Foundation Pile Lateral
S. Existing Proposed Type of Type of Foundation Bearing
ground Level foundation size capacity capacity
No. chainage Chainage Structure Foundation Strata capacity
(m) (m) (m) L* x B* (m) (t) (t)
(t/m2)
Half Stiff to Very

1 28+750 523+305 262.952 - Raft 261.847 12.5 x 8 15 - -
Trumpet Stiff Sandy Clay
Soft Disintegrated
2 36+233 517+060 4 Lane VUP 290.444 - Raft 289.444 24 x 14.5 40 - -
ROCK
Stiff to Very
3 38+853 514+515 MIB 262.952 - Raft 261.847 12.5 x 8 15 - -
Stiff Sandy Clay
Highly Weathered
4 39+810 513+566 MIB 261.967 - Raft 258.868 12 x 5 50 - -
Strong Rock
Soft Disintegrated
5 43+607 509+760 MIB 261.857 - Raft 257.357 12.5 x 12 45 - -
ROCK
Soft
6 43+905 509+462 MIB 258.624 - Raft 257.222 14.5 x 6 Disintegrated 45 - -
ROCK
7 44+830 508+583 MIB 257.302 - Raft 253.91 14.5 x 12 Reddish Hard Clay 35 - -
Medium Dense
8 45+789 507+773 2 Lane VUP 269.640 - Raft 268.640 14.5 x 12 Clayey Gravel 35 - -
with Sand
20
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Safe
(m) (m) (m) L* x B* (m) (t) (t)
(t/m2)
Moderately
9 47+126 506+316 MIB 260.200 - Isolated 259.200 12 X 5 Weathered 50 - -
Strong ROCK
Highly Weathered
10 49+552 503+860 MIB 267.390 - Raft 263.959 14.5 X 10.0 45 - -
Very Weak Rock
Completely
Kelzar Weathered
11 501+930 2 Lane VUP 281.631 - Raft 280.631 12 x 5 45 - -
Bypass Extremely Weak
Rock
12.50 X Soft
Kelzar
12 501+093 MIB-2 282.659 - Raft 281.659 6.0 Disintegrated 45 - -
Bypass
Rock
Soft Disintegrated
13 55+052 498+449 MIB 260+191 - Raft 257.312 21 x 12.5 40 - -
ROCK
14 56+979 496+428 MIB 257.362 - Raft 253.570 36 x 14.5 Dense Silty SAND 40 - -
Soft Disintegrated
15 58+550 494+892 MIB 258.522 - Raft 255.030 25 x 12.5 50 - -
ROCK
21
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Safe
S. Existing Proposed Type of Type of Bearing
ground Level foundation size Foundation Strata capacity capacity
No. chainage Chainage Structure Foundation capacity
(m) (m) (m) L* x B* (m) (t) (t)
(t/m2)
Completely
MJB A1 258.955 254.210 Pile 240.955 1.20 Weathered Very - 350 30
Weak Rock
Highly Weathered
MJB P1 259.050 251.620 Pile 240.050 1.20 - 300 30
Rock
Highly Weathered
Seloo MJB P2* 255.890 251.610 Pile 235.890 1.20 - 300 30
16 493+270 Rock
Bypass
Highly Weathered
MJB P3 252.940 250.640 Open 248.440 10 x 5 Extremely Weak 55 - -
Rock
Moderately
MJB A2 258.012 253.230 Pile 246.012 1.20 Weathered Strong - 450 30
Rock
Seloo 12.5 X 6 Stiff Sandy Clay

17 493+132 MIB-2 256.477 - Raft 255.477 15 - -
Bypass with Gravel
Seloo 12.5 X 6 Very Stiff Sandy

18 492+914 MIB-1 264.267 - Raft 263.267 18 - -
Bypass Clay
Seloo Medium Dense

19 492+204 2 Lane VUP 265.208 - Raft 263.708 14.5 x 12 15** - -
Bypass Silty Sand
20 65+961 487+542 MIB 248.545 - Raft 246.722 14.5 X 8 Stiff Sandy Clay 12/20** - -
Reddish Medium
21 67+122 486+368 MIB 241.729 - Raft 240.729 12.5 X 10 dense Clayey 20 - -
Sand
22
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Safe
S. Existing Proposed Type of Type of Bearing
ground Level foundation size Foundation Strata capacity capacity
No. chainage Chainage Structure Foundation capacity
(m) (m) (m) L* x B* (m) (t) (t)
(t/m2)
Moderately
MJB A1 241.868 241.868 Open 236.868 10 x 5 Weathered Weak 45 - -
Rock
Highly Weathered
MJB P1 241.795 241.795 Open 238.295 10 x 5 45 - -
Weak Rock
Slightly Weathered
MJB P2 240.733 240.733 Open 237.733 10 x 5 80 - -
Strong Rock
Slightly Weathered
MJB P3 236.349 234.849 Open 233.349 10 x 5 100 - -
Strong Rock
Slightly Weathered
22 67+725 485+759 MJB P4 236.175 234.675 Open 233.175 10 x 5 Moderately Strong 60 - -
Rock
Moderately
MJB P5 238.337 236.337 Open 234.837 10 x 5 50 - -
Weathered Rock
Highly Weathered
MJB P6 240.231 237.231 Open 235.231 10 x 5 45 - -
Rock
Slightly Weathered
MJB P7 240.895 237.895 Open 235.895 10 x 5 70 - -
Strong Rock
Highly Weathered
MJB A2 241.684 238.684 Open 236.684 10 x 5 45 - -
Very Weak Rock
23
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Safe
(m) (m) (m) L* x B* (m) (t) (t)
(t/m2)
Brownish Medium
23 72+328 477+600 2 Lane VUP 276.811 - Raft 275.311 14.5 x 12 Dense Sand With 40 - -
Gravelly Clay
Highly Weathered
24 76+650 474+016 2 Lane VUP 286.204 - Raft 285.204 12 x 5 Moderately Strong 50 - -
ROCK
Moderately
ROB A1 266.885 - Open 264.885 10 x 5 weathered and 60 - -
strong rock
Moderately
- Open 265.175 10 x 5 weathered and 50 - -
strong rock
ROB P1 267.175
Salod Moderately
25 realignme- 471+516 - Pile 261.275 1.20 weathered and - 350 20
nt strong rock
Highly
- Open 265.338 10 x 5 50 - -
weathered rock
ROB P2 267.338
Highly weathered
- Pile 261.438 1.20 - 350 20
rock
Highly weathered
ROB A2 268.306 - Open 266.306 10 x 5 50 - -
rock
24
WARDHA-BUTIBORI
Safe
(m) (m) (m) L* x B* (m) (t) (t)
(t/m2)
Salod Soft
26 reallignme 468+038 4 Lane VUP 253.699 - Raft 252.699 24 X 14.5 Disintegrated 40 - -
-nt ROCK
Note: CWR=Completely weathered Rock, MWR=Moderately weathered Rock, DSS= Dense Silty Sand, DCG= Dense Clayey Gravel, SSC=
Stiff Sandy Clay, VSC= Very Stiff Clay, DCS = Dense Clayey Sand* Along with 0.5 m replacement below foundation level with granular
material.
Note : All Individual bridge reports along with calculations are enclosed in the Annexure.
12. LIMITATIONS:
Recommendations contained in this report are based on our field observations, subsurface exploration, laboratory tests and some assumptions.
It is possible that soil conditions could vary between or beyond the points explored. If soil conditions encountered during construction differs
from those described herein, concerned person at construction is requested to notify the same immediately in order that a review may be made
and any supplementary recommendations be provided.
For aarvee associates architects engineers & consultants pvt. ltd.
25

Geotechnical Report - W-B PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Geotechnical Report - W-B PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Index

SUB SOIL EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS REPORT

Conducting detailed Subsoil Investigation and recommendation of Net Safe Bearing

The entire project awarded consists of following four packages:

This Report Consists of:

The scope of subsoil Investigation is to ascertain Geotechnical and geological

Sub-Soil Investigation Plan

S. No. Existing chainage Proposed Chainage Type of Structure No of Boreholes

1 28+750 523+305 Half Trumpet 2

2 36+233 517+060 4 Lane VUP 1

3 38+853 514+515 MIB 1

4 39+810 513+566 MIB 1

5 43+607 509+760 MIB 1

6 43+905 509+462 MIB 1

7 44+830 508+583 MIB 1

8 45+789 507+773 2 Lane VUP 1

9 47+126 506+316 MIB 1

10 49+552 503+860 MIB 1

11 501+930 2 Lane VUP 1

13 55+052 498+449 MIB 1

14 56+979 496+428 MIB 2

15 58+550 494+892 MIB 1

16 493+270 Major Bridge 5

19 492+204 2 Lane VUP 1

20 65+961 487+542 MIB 1

S. No. Existing chainage Proposed Chainage Type of Structure No of Boreholes

21 67+122 486+368 MIB 1

22 67+725 485+759 MJB 9

23 72+328 477+600 2 Lane VUP 1

24 76+650 474+016 2 Lane VUP 1

25 Salod realignment 471+516 ROB 2

26 Salod reallignment 468+038 4 Lane VUP 1

Disturbed Samples (DS) and undisturbed Samples (UDS) were collected as

Following Laboratory Tests are Conducted on selected samples of Disturbed and

Moisture content & Specific Gravity

Grain Size Analysis

Free Swell Index

Triaxial Shear Properties Cohesion, C and Friction Angle,

Following Laboratory Tests are Conducted on selected Rock samples

Moisture content, Porosity & Density

Uniaxial Compression test

5.2.1. Disturbed Sampling (DS):

5.2.2. Undisturbed Sampling (UDS):

In each borehole, undisturbed samples are collected at every change of strata.

5.2.3. Transportation and storage of samples:

5.3. Standard Penetration Test (SPT):

The degree of denseness or looseness of natural deposited cohesionless soils can be

Penetration Value Relative Penetration Value

0 - 4 Blows Very Loose 0 - 2 Blows Very Soft

4 - 10 Blows Loose 2 - 4 Blows Soft

10 - 30 Blows Medium Dense 4 - 8 Blows Medium

30 - 50 Blows Dense 8 - 15 Blows Stiff

>50 Blows Very Dense 15 - 30 Blows Very Stiff

>30 Blows Hard

5.4. Drilling in rock:

Rock classification in terms of weathering, state of fractures and strength is carried

Term Description Grade Interpretation

No visible sign of rock material weathering; perhaps

Slightly Discoloration indicates weathering of rock material and II CR between

Less than half of the rock material is decomposed or

More than half of the rock material is decomposed or

Completely All rock material is decomposed and / or disintegrated V CR between

All rock material is converted to soil. The mass

q (net safe) = 1/ 2.5 C5.14 Sc dc