Apartment - Geotechnical Investigation Report - 31-07-2019

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation for
Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment at Pirzadiguda,

Hyderabad.
Client: M/S Vasavi Constructions
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

July, 2019.
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
2 PROJECT SITE LOCATION ..................................................................................................... 1
3 SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT.................................................................................................. 1
4 EXPLORATION PROGRAMME .............................................................................................. 1
5 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ............................................................................................................ 2
6 METHODOLOGY OF FIELD EXPLORATION ............................................................................. 2
7 DESIGN METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................5
8 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS..................................... 7
9 LIMITATIONS....................................................................................................................... 8
10 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 8
List of Annexures
• Annexure 1: Summarized Field and Lab Borelog Test Results and Graphs.
• Annexure 2: Sample SBC Calculations

List of Tables
Table 4-1 Bore Hole locations and Drill Depth .....................................................................................................2
Table 8-1 Foundation Recommendations8 ..........................................................................................................7
Registered Address: H.No.8/5/317, Flat No. 201, Sri Venkateswara Apt., Old Bowenpally, Secunderabad, Telangana State- 500011
Email: [email protected], Contact no. 9177212643, 8374434294
Laboratory Address: Plot No.14, Survey No. 39, Bandlaguda Village, Uppal mandal, Medchal District, Telangana State - 500068
Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation for Ground + Five
PROJECT:
Floor Residential Apartment at Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad.
1. INTRODUCTION
M/s Vasavi Construction Proposed the construction of Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment at
Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad. In this connection Vasavi Constructions has appointed M/s Mercury Engineering
consultancy to provide consultancy services for Geotechnical investigations.
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.
2. PROJECT SITE LOCATION
The Project site is located nearby Buddhanagar Colony, Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad. The below image (Google)
shows the site location and the drilled points.
Figure 1. Proposed Apartment Location and Drilled points (Google Image)

3. SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT
This document presents the safe bearing capacity recommendations for the proposed Ground + Five Floor
Residential Apartment located at Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad with the following contents.
Borehole Location & Photographs
Methodology of Geotechnical Investigation
Laboratory testing on soil samples
Design Methodology
Summary of analysis and recommendations.
4. EXPLORATION PROGRAMME
The Subsurface investigations have been carried out at the proposed locations using Rotary Drilling and
SPT/DS/CORE sampling. Details of the investigation are given table below.
MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 1 of 9

PROJECT:
Table 4.1 Borehole Location and Drill Depth

Coordinates
Structure Borehole Termination
Location No. Easting(m) Northing(m) Depth(m)
BH-1 244501.333 1925875.117 7.00

Peerzadiguda,
BH-2 244511.220 1925883.740 7.00
Hyderabad
BH-3 244521.180 1925898.230 7.00
The investigations comprised of the following activities:
Drilling through Soil and Rock;
Field tests like SPT;
Collection of disturbed samples;
Measuring Core recovery (C.R) and Rock Quality Designation (R.Q.D) in rocks;
Measuring G.W.T(ground water table) in boreholes; and
Laboratory tests on Soil and Rock samples
5. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
The site photos are shown in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1. Site Photographs

6. METHODOLOGY OF FIELD EXPLORATION
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.

PROJECT:
6.1 BORING
Drilling of boreholes was carried out at specified locations to obtain information about the subsoil
profile, its nature, and 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.
6.2 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.
6.3 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.
6.4 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.
6.5 TRANSPORTATION AND STORAGE OF SAMPLES
Undisturbed Samples are hand carried holding them in vertical. Shipping and storage were 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.
6.6 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT)
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was conducted at different depths in all boreholes. For shallow depths

PROJECT:
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 (N) Relative Density Penetration Value (N) Consistency
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
6.7 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)

PROJECT:
Term Description Grade Interpretation
Fresh No visible sign of rock material weathering; perhaps slight I CR > 90 %

dis-coloration on major discontinuity surfaces
SlightlyDiscoloration indicates weathering of rock material and CR between 71% to
dis-continuity surfaces. All the rock material may be II
Weathered 90%
discolored by weathering.
Moderately Less than half of the rock material is decomposed or CR between 51% to
disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discolored rock is present III
Weathered 70%
either as a continuous framework or as core stones.
Highly More than half of the rock material is decomposed or CR between 11% to
disintegrated to soil. Fresh or discolored rock is present IV
Weathered 50%
either as a discontinuous framework or as core stones
Completely All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to CR between zero to
V
Weathered soil. The original mass structure is still largely intact. 10%
All rock material is converted to soil. The mass structure
Residual Soil and material fabric are destroyed. There is a large change VI CR = Zero But N > 50
in volume, but the soil has not been significantly
transported.
6.8 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. As per IS: 13365 Part -1: 1998
RQD Classification RQD (%)

Excellent 91-100
Good 76-90
Fair 51-75
Poor 25-50
Very Poor <25
6.9 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.
7. DESIGN METHODOLOGY
By observing the nature of subsurface strata, the type of foundation for a given proposed structure,
expected loads on foundations, the following types of foundations can be recommended.

PROJECT:
a) Shallow 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 settlement.
The smaller of the bearing pressure values obtained according to above (I) and (II), is adopted as the
allowable bearing capacity
Depth of Analysis
For footing resting on multilayer deposits, weighted average or average of the 'C' and 'ɸ' values upto
a depth of 'H' = 0.5 B Tan (45 + ɸ/2)
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 site conditions and structural requirements and confirmed with clause 7 of
IS: 1904 for special cases like; where volume change/scour is expected/ when foundation is to rest on
sloping ground/ made or filled up ground/ frost action is expected etc.
Open/Shallow Foundations In Soil
The safe bearing capacity of s oil is the net intensity of loading which the foundation will carry, without
under- going settlement in excess of the permissible value for the structure under consideration.
Net safe bearing capacity from shear consideration:
For Clay Soils (ɸ = 0):
The net ultimate bearing capacity immediately after construction on fairly saturatedhomogeneous
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 ɸ = 0, Nc = 5.14 Thus, the equation is simplified as
q (net safe) = 1/ 2.5 x C x 5.14 Sc dc
= 2.056 C Sc dc

PROJECT:
For C - ɸsoils:
For General shear:
ɸ ≥ 360 and C ≥ 5 t/m2
qd = C Nc Sc dc ic + q (Nq-1) Sq dq iq + 0.5 γ B Nγ Sγ dγ iγ W'
For Local shear:
ɸ ≤ 280 and C ≤ 3 t/m2
qd = (2/3) c Nc Sc dc ic + q (Nq-1) Sq dq iq + 0.5 γ B Nγ Sγ dγ iγ W'
For Intermediate Shear:
Average or interpolate between Local and General Shear.
Reduction Factors:
Bearing Capacity Factors Nc, Nq, Ny from Table 1 of IS: 6403-1981 Shape factors Sc Sq Sy f r o m Table 2
of IS: 6403 - 1981
Depth factors dc dq dy from clause 5.1.2.2 of IS: 6403 - 1981
Inclination factors ic iq iy from clause 5.1.2.3 of IS: 6403 - 1981
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
Net Safe Bearing Capacity = × Net ultimatebearing capacity
FOS
8. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

Proposed Location : Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad
Structure : Residential Apartment
Size of Foundation (LXB) : 1.5* X 1.5*
Table 8.1 Foundation Recommendation
Capacity (t/m2)
from Original
Ground Level
Feasibility of
Safe Bearing
Foundation
Foundation
Depth of
BH. No
S. No
Type
(m)
Foundation strata
Isolated 2.00 Very Dense Reddish Sand 22.0

1 BH-1

PROJECT:
Capacity (t/m2)
from Original
Ground Level
Feasibility of
Safe Bearing
Foundation
Foundation
Depth of
BH. No
S. No
Type
(m)
Foundation strata
Very Dense Reddish Silty

Isolated 2.00 22.0
Sand
BH-2 Very Dense Reddish Silty

2 Isolated 2.50 25.0
Sand
Very Dense Reddish Silty
Isolated 3.00 30.0
Sand
Isolated Very Dense Reddish Silty

2.00 22.0
Sand
BH-3 Isolated Very Dense Reddish Silty

3 2.50 25.0
Sand
Isolated Very Dense Reddish Silty

3.00 30.0
Sand
*Assumed values.
Note:
1. Prior to construction of any new foundations, all areas receiving fill, base rock, or structures should be
stripped of all surface vegetation, organic topsoil and any deleterious materials that might be
encountered. Any Soft or unsuitable soils encountered during stripping or excavation should be
removed and replaced with structural fill meeting the requirements.
9. LIMITATIONS
The recommendations presented in this report are based on subsurface exploration, field tests and
Laboratory tests of the specified site. There is always a possibility that the observed soil strata in the field
borelog/test results may differ to the actual field strata observed during construction, which may be due
to the limitations in exploration. If such conditions are encountered during construction, the concerned
personal at construction is requested to notify the same immediately to the designer.
10. REFERENCES
1. IS 6403 - 1981: "Code of practice for determination of bearing capacity of shallow foundations"
2. IS 8009 part - 1, 1976: “Code of practice for calculation of Settlement of foundations”

PROJECT:
3. IS 1892 - 1979: “Code of practice for subs surface investigation for foundations”
4. IS 2131 - 1981: “Method of Standard penetration test (SPT) for soils”
5. IS 6935 - 1973: “Method of determination of water level in a borehole”
6. IS 4464 - 1985: “Code of practice for presentation of drilling information and core description in
foundation investigation”
7. IS 5313 - 1980: “Guide for core drilling observations”
8. IS: 4078 - 1980: “Code of practice for indexing and storage of drill cores”
9. IS: 6926 - 1996: “ Diamond core drilling-Site investigation for river valley projects-code of practice”
FOR MERCURY ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY
S. Rukmini Kumar, M.Tech – Geotech (IIT-Kanpur)

Geotechnical Consultant/Partner

ANNEXURE – I
SUMMARIZED FIELD AND LAB BORELOG
TEST RESULTS AND GRAPHS
SUMMARIZED FIELD AND LAB BORELOG TEST RESULTS
DOC.: MEC/FF/04 Format No.: MEC/FF/13-A-07 Issue No.: 01 Issue Date: 12.01.2019
Name of the Project : Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation for Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment at Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad. JOB CODE: 029
Strucutre : Residential Apartment Northing : 1925875.117 R.L of Borehole : 0.000 Type of Foundation : Isolated Start Date : 25-Jul-19
Span of Structure: - Easting : 244501.333 High Flood Level, HFL : NA Recommended SBC, t/m2 : 30.0 End Date : 27-Jul-19
Borehole No. : 01 Method of Boring : Rotary Low Bed level: NA Foundation Depth From G.L: 3.000 Prepared By : Saddam
Location : Pirzadiguda, Hyd. Termination Depth (m) : 7.0 Scour Level, SL : NA Depth of Water Table (m): 1.75 Checked By : Eswar
FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SCOUR DEPTH

Level, m Shear
Free Swell Index
Specific Gravity
S.P.T, N Rock Cores Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits
Mean Depth of
Sample Depth
Specific Gravity
Graphical Log
IS Classification
Sample Type
Parameters
Remarks
Absorption
Slit Factor
Dia.of BH
Discharge
Enhanced
Angle of Internal
Core Recovery,
Porosity
UCS/PLI
Plastic Limit
Cohesion,C
Water
Liquid Limit
Scour
Level, R.L
Designation,
Rock Quality
Reduced
Friction,f
Corrected
Observed
Strata Description
Depth
Moisture
Plasticity
'N' Value
'N' Value
R.Q.D
Natural
CR
Gravel
15 Cm
15 Cm
15 Cm
Index
Sand
Clay
Silt
m m m - - - - - % % % % % % % % % % G % t/m2 Deg t/m2 Ksf m3/s m
0.00 0.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0.50 -0.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.00 -1.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.50 -1.50
1.50-1.57 SPT/DS > 50 Blows for 4 cm 50 - - 1.00 91.80 7.20 SW-SM NP NP NP 0 - - - - - - - - 1.69 - - -
2.00 -2.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
150 mm Dia
2.50 -2.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Very Dense
3.00 -3.00 Reddish Silty Sand
3.00-3.06 SPT/DS > 50 Blows for 6 cm 50 - - 2.30 88.40 9.30 SP-SM NP NP NP 0 - - - - - - - - 2.16 - - F.L
3.50 -3.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4.00 -4.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4.50 -4.50
5.00 -5.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5.50 -5.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
6.00 -6.00
6.50 -6.50 Highly Weathered
NX
6.00-7.00 Core - - - - - 30 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - 312.7 2.571 0.753 1.935 - - - PLI

Rock, Grade-IV
7.00 -7.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Page No.:1 of 1
SUMMARIZED TEST RESULTS AND GRAPHS
Name of the Project: Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation for Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment at Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad.
Section : Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad Sample Location : BH-01

Sample Depth(m): 0.00-1.50 Type of Activity: Subsoil Type of Sample : Disturbed
Particle Size Distribution Curve Summary of Test Results

Grain Size Analysis (IS: 2720, Part IV-1985)
100
Gravel = 1.00 %
90 Coarse Sand = 8.70 %
80 Medium Sand = 52.20 %
Percentage Finer by Weight
Fine Sand = 30.90 %

70
Fines = 7.20 %
60 Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 0.92
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
Silf Factor, Ksf = 1.69
20
Free Swell Index, FSI(IS:2720, Part 40-1977) = 0%
10 Atterberg Limits (IS: 2720, Part V-1985)
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP
Diameter in (mm) Plasticity Index = NP
IS Classfication = SW-SM
Tested By Authorised By
A.Rajkumar Eswar Mohan Kesanakurthi
Sr.Engineer Technical Manager


100
Gravel = 2.30 %
Fine Sand = 11.40 %

70
Fines = 9.30 %
60 Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.51
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP
IS Classfication = SP-SM


100
Gravel = 0.10 %
Fine Sand = 34.50 %

70
Fines = 5.40 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 0.84
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP


100
Gravel = 1.90 %
Fine Sand = 15.40 %

70
Fines = 6.40 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.40
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP
Name of the Project : Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation for Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment at Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad. JOB CODE: 029

Level, m Shear
Free Swell Index
Specific Gravity
Mean Depth of
Sample Depth
Specific Gravity
Graphical Log
IS Classification
Sample Type
Parameters
Remarks
Absorption
Slit Factor
Dia.of BH
Discharge
Enhanced
Angle of Internal
Core Recovery,
Porosity
UCS/PLI
Plastic Limit
Cohesion,C
Water
Liquid Limit
Scour
Level, R.L
Designation,
Rock Quality
Reduced
Friction,f
Corrected
Observed
Strata Description
Depth
Moisture
Plasticity
'N' Value
'N' Value
R.Q.D
Natural
CR
Gravel
15 Cm
15 Cm
15 Cm
Index
Sand
Clay
Silt
0.00 0.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
150 mm Dia
0.50 -0.50 Very Dense

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brownish Silty Sand
1.00 -1.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.50 -1.50
1.50-3.00 Core - - - - - 18.6 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.647 0.278 0.735 - - - -
Rock, Grade-IV
2.50 -2.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
3.00 -3.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F.L
3.50 -3.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4.00 -4.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NX
4.50 -4.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reddish Silty Sand
5.50 -5.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
6.00 -6.00
6.50 -6.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7.00 -7.00
Page No.:1 of 1


100
Gravel = 0.10 %
Fine Sand = 29.70 %

70
Fines = 9.40 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 0.72
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP


100
Gravel = 4.00 %
Fine Sand = 41.50 %

70
Fines = 7.70 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.14
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP


100
Gravel = 3.30 %
Fine Sand = 39.10 %

70
Fines = 8.60 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.09
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP


100
Gravel = 3.20 %
Fine Sand = 31.50 %

70
Fines = 11.30 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.03
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP
Name of the Project : Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation for Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment at Ghatkesari, Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad. JOB CODE: 029

Level, m Shear
Free Swell Index
Specific Gravity
Mean Depth of
Sample Depth
Specific Gravity
Graphical Log
IS Classification
Sample Type
Parameters
Remarks
Absorption
Slit Factor
Dia.of BH
Discharge
Enhanced
Angle of Internal
Core Recovery,
Porosity
UCS/PLI
Plastic Limit
Cohesion,C
Water
Liquid Limit
Scour
Level, R.L
Designation,
Rock Quality
Reduced
Friction,f
Corrected
Observed
Strata Description
Depth
Moisture
Plasticity
'N' Value
'N' Value
R.Q.D
Natural
CR
Gravel
15 Cm
15 Cm
15 Cm
Index
Sand
Clay
Silt
0.00 0.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
150 mm Dia

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reddish Silty Sand
1.00 -1.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.50 -1.50
1.50-3.00 Core - - - - - 11.3 11.3 - - - - - - - - - - - - 307.80 1.297 0.425 0.551 - - - PLI
Rock, Grade-IV
2.50 -2.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
3.00 -3.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F.L
3.50 -3.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4.00 -4.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NX
4.50 -4.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reddish Silty Sand
5.50 -5.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
6.00 -6.00
6.50 -6.50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7.00 -7.00
Page No.:1 of 1


100
Gravel = 1.40 %
Fine Sand = 36.80 %

70
Fines = 10.60 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 0.79
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP


100
Gravel = 4.20 %
Fine Sand = 30.50 %

70
Fines = 10.30 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.09
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP


100
Gravel = 8.30 %
Fine Sand = 30.00 %

70
Fines = 9.70 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.55
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP


100
Gravel = 7.00 %
Fine Sand = 28.00 %

70
Fines = 8.40 %
60
Silt Factor
50 Weighted Mean
= 1.38
40 Diameter, Dsm
30
20
0 0.075mm 0.425 mm 2.00 mm 4.75mm
Liquid Limit = NP
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Plastic Limit = NP
ANNEXURE- II
SAMPLE SBC CALCULATIONS
Geotechnical Inves ga on Report
Annexure
Safe Bearing capacity calculation for shallow foundation

(IS: 6403, IS: 8009 part I, IS: 1904)
Structure : Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment
Loca on : BH-1, Pirzadiguda.
1.5 x B D = 2.00 m
0.00
-1.00 B = 1.5 m
Founding Strata
Descrip on Unit Value

General Data:
R.L of the Borehole considered m 0.000
Depth of Founda on from Original Ground Level. m 2.00
Field data:
Descrip on of Strata where SBC is required Very Dense Reddish Sand
Observed average SPT N value at founding level - 50

Corrected average SPT N value (from borelog) - 50
Angle of internal fric on of soil (Ø) (as per IS 6403 fig 1) Deg 33.00
Founda on details:
Type of founda on Isolated
Shape of founda on Rectangle
Width of founda on (B) m 1.50*
Length of founda on (L) m 1.50*
Depth of base of open founda on from Original Ground Level m 2.00
Depth of Replacement m 0.00
Depth of bo3om of Replacement below Basement Level. m 2.00
Angle of inclination of open foundation (a) Deg 0.00
Depth of Ground Water Table below Ground level m 0.00
Bulk unit weight of bearing soil layer (g) t/m 3
1.85*
Effec ve unit weight of bearing soil layer (gsub) t/m3 0.85
Effec ve overburden pressure at base of founda on with respect to
t/m2 1.70
Ground Water Table (q)
Factor of Safety (FOS) - 2.5
*Assumed values
Geotechnical Inves ga on Report
Annexure
Bearing Capacity based on Shear Criteria as per IS: 6403

Conisidered cohesion (C) t/m2 0.00
Considerd Angle of internal fric on (Ø) Deg 33.00
As 28° ≤ Ø ≤ 36° it is Intermediate Shear failure.
Net allowable bearing
capcity (qd) = As 28° ≤ Ø ≤ 36° it is interpola on of General and Local shear failures
Effec ve width (B) m 1.50
Effec ve Length (L) m 1.50
Depth of shear zone below founda on base m 1.38
Reduced Angle of internal fric on of bearing soil considered (Ø') Deg 24.00
Nc = 39.73 N'c = 19.54
Bearing Capacity Factors (IS 6403 table 1) Nq = 27.34 N'q = 9.81

Ng = 37.78 N'g = 9.78
Shape Factors (IS 6403 table 2) Inclina on Factors (IS 6403 cl: Depth Factors (IS 6403 cl:
5.1.2.3) 5.1.2.2)
Sc = 1.20 dc = 1.49 ic = 1.00
Sq = 1.20 dq = 1.25 iq = 1.00
Sg = 0.60 dg = 1.25 ig = 1.00
Water Table Correc on Factor W' (As per IS 6403 clause = 0.5
5.1.2.4)
As 28° ≤ Ø ≤ 36° it is interpola on of

=
Net Ultimate bearing capacity (qd) General and Local shear failures
= 64.40 t/m2
= 64.4/2.5 t/m2
Net Safe bearing capacity (qns) qd / FOS
= 25.00 t/m2
Bearing Capacity based on Se/lement Criteria as per IS: 8009 (Part-I)
m 0.010
Se3lement per unit pressure (10t/m2) (IS 8009 part 1 fig: 9)
mm 10.00
D/√(LB) - 1.33
L/B - 1.00
Depth correc on factor (IS 8009 part 1 fig: 12) - 0.73
Rigidity factor (IS 8009 part 1 cl: 9.5.2) - 0.8
Water Table correc on factor (IS 8009 part 1 fig: 9) - 0.5
Corrected se3lement mm 11.68
Bearing pressure for 50mm se3lement t/m2 42.00
Hence, allowable bearing capacity at Founding Level (qall) t/m2 22.0

Apartment - Geotechnical Investigation Report - 31-07-2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Apartment - Geotechnical Investigation Report - 31-07-2019

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

Apartment - Geotechnical Investigation Report - 31-07-2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the scope of the document?

What is the scope of the document?

What methodology was used for field exploration?

What methodology was used for field exploration?

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation for

Ground + Five Floor Residential Apartment at Pirzadiguda,

Client: M/S Vasavi Constructions

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

• Annexure 2: Sample SBC Calculations

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Figure 1. Proposed Apartment Location and Drilled points (Google Image)

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 1 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Table 4.1 Borehole Location and Drill Depth

BH-1 244501.333 1925875.117 7.00

Figure 5.1. Site Photographs

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 2 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

6.3 DISTURBED SAMPLING (DS)

6.4 UNDISTURBED SAMPLING (UDS)

6.5 TRANSPORTATION AND STORAGE OF SAMPLES

6.6 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT)

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 3 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

6.7 DRILLING IN ROCK

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 4 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Term Description Grade Interpretation

Fresh No visible sign of rock material weathering; perhaps slight I CR > 90 %

6.8 RELATION BETWEEN RQD AND IN-SITU ROCK QUALITY

RQD Classification RQD (%)

6.9 GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 5 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 6 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

8. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

Isolated 2.00 Very Dense Reddish Sand 22.0

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 7 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Isolated 3.00 Very Dense Reddish Sand 30.0

Very Dense Reddish Silty

BH-2 Very Dense Reddish Silty

Isolated Very Dense Reddish Silty

BH-3 Isolated Very Dense Reddish Silty

Isolated Very Dense Reddish Silty

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 8 of 9

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

FOR MERCURY ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY

S. Rukmini Kumar, M.Tech – Geotech (IIT-Kanpur)

MEC/VASAVI GROUP/GT REPORT Page 9 of 9

FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SCOUR DEPTH

Free Swell Index

6.00-7.00 Core - - - - - 30 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - 312.7 2.571 0.753 1.935 - - - PLI

Section : Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad Sample Location : BH-01

Particle Size Distribution Curve Summary of Test Results

Fine Sand = 30.90 %

Section : Pirzadiguda, Hyderabad Sample Location : BH-01