Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference

December 22-24,2013, Roorkee

A COMPREHENSIVE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION IN BOULDER

DEPOSIT

A. K. Sharma, Principal Scientist, CSIR-CBRI, Roorkee - 247 667, aksharma@cbri.res.in

Ajay Dwivedi, Technical Officer, CSIR-CBRI, Roorkee - 247 667, ajaydwivedi@cbri.res.in
Prakash Chand, Senior Technical Officer, CSIR-CBRI, Roorkee - 247 667
Saurabh Singh, Project Assistant, CSIR-CBRI, Roorkee- 247 667

ABSTRACT: The boulder deposit is generally available in riverbeds, which is neither classified as soils nor as the
rocks. The strength deformation behaviour under load of such deposits cannot be evaluated considering soil or rock
deposits. Due to native nature of material, the undisturbed sampling is not possible as the natural arrangement of
grains and matrix of material might never be achieved by re-compaction in the laboratory and test on disturbed
samples may likely to yield unreliable results. The paper describes a comprehensive geotechnical investigation
study carried out for evolution of allowable load carrying capacity of boulder deposit to construct building in the
university campus, Gayatrikunj located on Haridwar - Rishikesh road.

INTRODUCTION
The site for the proposed buildings Gayatri Tower,
OM () Building and hostel building is situated in
the university campus of Gayatrikunj on Haridwar-
Rishikesh road. The entire campus area has a
gentle slope from main road to the riverside, which
is about Km from the end of the university
campus towards north. The main university
building along with residential blocks have already
been constructed in the campus. The soil
investigation report available with Shantikunj
officials for nearby buildings and soil strata chart
of tube well installed in the campus premises
revealed a boulder-gravel deposit upto depth of
25.95m followed by boulder with clay upto 38.31m
and then hard clayey strata upto 72m, the
maximum drilled depth.
recommended is similar to that for a standard
penetration test (SPT) with the SPT sampler
replaced by a push fit cast iron cone of 60 apex
angle and 62.5 mm base diameter. The cone is
driven by a 65 kg hammer dropped from a height
of 750 mm. The number of blows for every 150
mm penetration is counted and a plot is prepared of
the cumulative number of blows (N) with D/Bc ,
where D = depth, Bc = cone diameter.
The results of dynamic cone test can be correlated
with allowable pressure by the following empirical
equation in accordance with IS: 10042 - 1981.
1 N" Sa
qa = . (1)
2.54 Dc Bf

METHODOLOGY OF INVESTIGATION Where

To attain reliable results, following field tests were
chosen especially applicable for such deposits.
Dynamic cone penetration tests
In-situ density test
Particle size distribution
In-situ Field Shear Test
Footing load test
Dynamic Cone Penetration Test
DCPTs are suitable, if the boulder size does not
exceed 6 cm to 10 cm. The test set up
qa = allowable pressure (t/m2)
Dc = depth at which blows versus D/Bc curve show
a break.
Sa = allowable settlement (cm)
Bf = width of footing (m)
In total 12 nos. of DCPT were conducted, 4nos. at
each proposed building location. A typical test
result of DCPT at Gayatri Tower is presented in
Fig. 1 & Photo 1.

Page 1 of 7
A.K. Sharma & Ajay Dwivedi & Prakash Chand ,

foundation depth from three different locations of

proposed building sites.

Photo 1: Dynamic come Penetration Test

Photo 2: In-situ density test

The particle size distribution tests for larger size

particles were carried out at site itself (Photo 3)
and for finer soil in the laboratory. The grading
curves are presented in Fig. 2 and particle size
distribution results are given in table 1. The soil is
classified as poorly graded sandy gravel (GP). The
percentage of boulder-gravel and interstitial soil at
foundation depth were obtained, 83:17 for Gayatri
Fig 1: Dynamic come Penetration Test result Tower location, 80:20 for Om Building Location
(Gayatri Tower) and 75.5:24.5 for Hostel Building location.
In-situ Density Test
The field density was obtained at proposed
foundation depth of the building by excavating a
pit of size 1m X 1m X 50 cm size. The entire
excavated soil was carefully collected and weighed
properly with the help of balance. Then the pit was
covered with polythene sheet large enough to touch
the sides and bottom of the pit. Thereafter, pit was
filled with known volume of water upto brim. The
density was calculated from the known mass and
volume of the soil (Photo 2).

Particle Size Distribution

Disturbed soil samples were collected from the Photo 3: A view of Sieve test at site
density pits, 1m X 1m X 50cm excavated at

Page 2 of 7
 A Comprehensive Geotechnical Investigation in Boulder Deposit

In-situ Field Shear Test platform over the inserted shear box. The normal
The best suited test for such type of soil deposit to load was applied through filled gunny bags and the
determine strength parameters are in -situ shear shear load was applied in increment through
test. In-situ shear test provides an alternate to the remote controlled hydraulic Jack placed
load test for determination of allowable soil horizontally and reaction obtained through side of
pressure. Two types of test were conducted at site. the pit (Photo 5). The point of application of shear
load was kept at height of the block measured
Fig. 2 : Particle size distribution Curve from the base. The dial gauges were fixed to
measure horizontal displacement of the block. The
OM Building shear load was applied in increment and the
Gayatri corresponding horizontal displacement was
Tower recorded through dial gauges. The shear load was
Hostel applied till the base of the soil block contained
Building inside the rigid square block sheared completely.
The values of residual shear were obtained from
curves presented in figures 2&3.
Boulder

Cobble

Gravel
Depth

Silt &
Sand

Clay
Site

(m)
Gayatri
Tower

1.5-
8 30 45 17 0
2.0
Building

2.6-
5.5 28.5 46 20 0
3.1
Om

Photo 4: Shear Box with BB test block

Building

2.9-
Hostel

4.5 22.5 48.5 24.5 0

3.4

Table 1: Particle Size Distribution

Boulder-Boulder Test (BBT)

A steel/wooden rigid box size 1mX1mX0.30m was
fabricated. The test at two locations namely OM
building and Hostel Building was carried out by
excavating a pit upto 2.30/2.60m and then inserted
the box into the soil by trimming surrounded soil
Photo 5: Test Set-up BB shear test in progress
and removing edge boulders. The leftout gaps were
filled with cement concrete mix 1:2:4 upto
Concrete Boulder Test (CBT)
foundation depth 2.6/2.9m (Photo4). The normal
A RCC block of size 1.2m x 1.2m x 0.6m was cast
load 5t/m2 for OM building and 6t/m2 for hostel
at 1.5 m foundation depth, after excavating a pit for
building was applied on the box by making the
CBT at Gayatri tower location. A platform was

Page 3 of 7
A.K. Sharma & Ajay Dwivedi & Prakash Chand ,

erected for applying normal load of 4.5t/m2
through soil filled bags (Photo 6). The shear load
was applied in increments as per procedure
explained in BBT test. The shear stress and
The values of residual shear stresses were
computed and allowable soil pressure for BBT and
CBT were obtained using following equation.
B + 0.3
2

displacement were recorded till the base of rcc q a = Xo b (2)

block with soil completely sheared. The test results B
are presented in Fig.4. Where
qa= allowable pressure
X = A constant 6.25 for 12 mm deformation & 8
for 25 mm deformation

Photo 6: Test Set-up CB shear test

Fig. 2: Shear Stress Vs Shear displacement curve

(Om Building)

Fig. 4: Shear Stress Vs Shear displacement curve

(Gayatri Tower)
Fig.3 Shear Stress Vs Shear displacement curve
(Hostel Building) = Residual shear stress (t/m2)
B = Width of foundation (m)
b = Insitu Density (t/m3)

Page 4 of 7

Footing Load Test
A RCC footing of size 1.20m X 1.20m X 0.60m
was cast at foundation depth (1.5m) to carry out
footing load test. The advantage of using large size
footing is to distribute load over a span of several
boulders to mobilise group action of supporting
underneath deposit.
Photo 7: Test Set-up Footing Load test
The load was applied on footing through remote
controlled jack and the reaction was obtained from
dead load platform, 100 tonnes capacity (Photo 7).
Four dial gauges with least count 0.01mm were
placed on footing at four corners to observe
settlement/deformation. A seating load of 1 tonne
was applied on footing to assure direct transfer of
load on the soil underneath. The dial gauges were
reset to their zero position and the pressure gauge
of the jack was also set to zero reading. The load
was applied on footing in increments and
corresponding deformation of the footing was
recorded through dial gauges. Each load was
maintained for one hour or when the rate of
settlement reached a value of 0.02 mm per minute,
whichever was earlier.
This procedure was followed for each load
increment to test it upto failure or upto one and half
times of the design load. At each load increment all
the four dial gauge reading were carefully
recorded. The stress intensity vs. settlement curve
was plotted and is shown in Fig.5.
The allowable soil pressure on the prototype
footing of size 1.5 m (assumed) on non-cohesive
soil was worked out from settlement considerations
using the following equation and curve figure 5, in
accordance with IS:1888-1982.
A Comprehensive Geotechnical Investigation in Boulder Deposit
B p (B f + 0.3048)
2
Sp
=
S f B f (B p + 0.3048)
(3)
Where Sp and Sf are the settlement in cm for the
test footing and prototype foundation respectively,
Bp and Bf are the width of the test footing and the
foundation in meter.
Fig. 5: Load settlement curve
The load settlement behavior of gravel/boulder
matrix depicted unique behaviour representing
increase of load with settlement upto the limit of
full soil compression under applied load and then
the rate of settlement reduces with applied load
(Fig.5).
ASSESSMENT OF BEARING CAPACITY
The data as obtained from different tests at all three
locations of buildings sites is presented in Table 2
and further analyzed to evaluate safe and allowable
bearing capacity of the foundation soil at proposed
foundation depth.
The proposed foundations at the different locations
had minimum and maximum depth 1.5 m and 2.9
m from existing ground level. To evaluate
allowable / safe bearing capacity, isolated column
footing having 1.50 m square size has been
assumed to be laid to support structural load.
Page 5 of 7
 A.K. Sharma & Ajay Dwivedi & Prakash Chand ,

Table 2: Test Results Data *Value not considered due to the size of boulders
greater than 100mm.
Locat Dept Bulk Residu Norm Angle
ion h Density al al of
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
(m) ( b ), Shear Stress Intern
The particle size distribution test conducted
t/m3 Stress ( n ), al
shows 76 to 83% boulder and gravel with 24 to
( 0 ), t/m2 Fricti
on 17 % sand, classified as poorly graded gravel
t/m2 (GP) with very little fines.
( )
The recommended allowable bearing capacity
Gayat 1.5 1.988 3.05 4.50 34
for Gayatri Tower is 27 t/m2 and for OM ()
ri
building and Hostel building is 30 t/m2 at 1.5m
Towe
and 2.6m depth respectively i.e. proposed
r
foundation depth. The width of foundation is
OM 2.6 2.072 3.25 5.00 33
taken 1.5m for evaluating allowable and safe
() bearing capacity of the soil deposit.
Build
ing
CONCLUSIONS
Hoste 2.9 2.036 4.00 6.00 33
The special attention should be given for the
l
investigation of boulder deposits. Such deposits
Build
fall neither in the class of soils nor rocks. The
ing
load carrying capacity is depends upon the
The influence zone may be extended up to percentage and size of gravel/boulder and fines
maximum of 7.5 m depth (3 m + 3X1.5 m) from present in the soil matrix. Hence, the
existing ground level, which falls in the zone of investigation must be carried out very carefully
boulder deposit. The test data as obtained has been in accordance with IS : 10042-1981.
presented in Table 2 which has been used to
The precaution must be taken to avoid the flow
predict allowable load carrying of underneath soil
of rain or any kind of water through foundation
based on shear & settlement considerations. The
of the buildings. The flow of water through the
shear test data have been used to find out shearing
influence zone below foundation depth may
resistance which is further used to compute the safe
wash out fines from the deposits; create voids
bearing capacity. The computed capacities for
resulting in settlement of the structures. Hence,
different structures at different depth have been
suitable apron must be provided with proper
presented in Table 3 below.
slope around the structures. The water drainage
Locatio Depth Allowable qsafe, t/m2 and its disposal must be designed properly.
2
n (m) bearing capacity, t/m IS:6403-
DCP Shear Footin 1981 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
T* Test g The authors are grateful to Director CSIR-CBRI
Load for permission to publish the work and providing
Test necessary facilities to carry out this study.
Gayatri 1.5 32.75 27.28 30.55 46.23
Tower REFERENCES
OM( 2.6 35.69 30.30 - 65.51 1. CBRI REPORT (2002) Geotechnical
) Investigation for the construction of Multi-
Buildin storyed buildings at Shantikunj, Haridwar.
g Geotechnical Engineering Division, CBRI,
Hostel 2.9 22.35 36.65 - 70.58 Roorkee.
Buildin 2. IS: 6403(1981): Indian Standard code of
g practice for Determination of Bearing
Table 3: Safe and Allowable Bearing Capacity

Page 6 of 7
 A Comprehensive Geotechnical Investigation in Boulder Deposit

Capacity of Shallow Foundations, First

revision, Reaffirmed 1997. Publication
ISI, Mank Bhavan, Bahadur Shah Zafar
Marg, New Delhi - 10002.
3. IS: 1888(1982): Indian Standard code of
practice for Method of Load Test on Soils
(Second Revision). Publication ISI, Mank
Bhavan, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New
Delhi - 10002.
4. IS: 10042(1981): Indian Standard code of
practice for Site Investigations for
Foundation in Gravel-Boulder Deposit.
Publication ISI, Mank Bhavan, Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 10002.

Page 7 of 7