SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

for
PROJECT
REHABILITATION OF AL-GHAZALIYAH MAIN TRUNK
SEWERAGE SYSTEM
AL-GHAZALIYAH/BAGHDAD/IRAQ

Prepared by:
CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES BUREAU
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING/UNIVERSITY OF BAGHDAD
IMAGE

For Client:
GYPSUM STRUCTURAL INDIA PVT LTD
IMAGE
 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

for
PROJECT
REHABILITATION OF AL-GHAZALIYAH MAIN TRUNK
SEWERAGE SYSTEM
AL-GHAZALIYAH/BAGHDAD/IRAQ

Prepared by:
CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES BUREAU
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING/UNIVERSITY OF BAGHDAD
IMAGE

For Client:
GYPSUM STRUCTURAL INDIA PVT LTD

IMAGE

This report may be used only by the client and only for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later
than 3 years from the date of the report. Land or facility use, on and off-site conditions, regulations, or other factors may change over time,
and additional work may be required with the passage of time.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

ONLY IMAGE
 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

TABLE OF CONTENTS
No. Subject Page
1 INTRODUCTION 7
1.1. Project Description 8
1.2. Purpose and Scope of Services 8
1.3. Report Organization 8
2 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC SETTING 8
2.1 Site Geology 8
2.2 Seismicity and Regional Faulting 11
3 SITE CONDITIONS 12
3.1 Climatologic Setting 12
3.2 Site Description 12
3.3 Soil Stratigraphy 12
3.4 Groundwater 13
3.5 Variations in Subsurface Conditions 13
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13
4.1 Site Preparation 14
4.1.1 Site Stripping and Grubbing 14
4.1.2 Existing Utilities, Wells and Foundations 14
4.1.3 Scarification and Compaction 14
4.2 Engineering Fill 14
4.2.1 Compaction Requirements 15
4.2.2 Subgrade Preparation 15
4.2.3 Temporary Excavations and Slopes 15
4.2.4 Protection of Existing Facilities 16
4.3 Foundation Design Recommendations 16
4.3.1 Chemical Data 17
4.3.2 Bearing Capacity 18

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad
No. Subject Page
4.3.3 Foundation Types and Depths 21
4.3.4 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 22
4.3.5 Earth Embankment 23
4.3.6 Uplift Pressure 23
4.3.7 Settlement 23
4.4 Concrete Slab-Grade Floors 24
4.4.1 Subgrade Preparation 24
4.4.2 Floor Slab Considerations 25
4.5 Moisture Protection 25
4.6 Exterior Concrete Slabs Supported-on-Grade 26
5 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND LIMITATIONS 26
5.1 Additional Services 26
5.2 Recommendations 27
5.3 Limitations 28
6 REFERENCES 28
APPENDICES 30
Appendix-A 31
Field Investigations 31
Appendix-B 36
Laboratory Testing and Records of Tests Results 37
Appendix-C 48
Results of Bearing Capacity Calculation 48
Appendix-D 54
Photos of Tested Soil Samples and Field Drilling 54

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

Symbol Definition
ASTM American Society for Testing Materials
BH Borehole
BS British Standards
c Cohesion
CH High plasticity clay
CL Low plasticity clay
CC Compression Index for Normally Consolidated Soil
 Cl-1 Chloride content
CS Swelling Index for Over Consolidated Soil
CV Coefficient of vertical consolidation
DS Disturbed soil sample
EGL Existing ground level
e0 Initial void ratio
FFL Finishing floor level
GPS Global Positioning System
Gs Specific gravity
GWT Ground water table
K Coefficient of permeability
L Length of pile
LL Liquid limit
MV Coefficient of volume compressibility
MH High plasticity silt
ML Low plasticity silt
N Standard penetration test value
N60 Corrected standard penetration test value
NGS Natural Ground Surface
NP Non-Plastic
OM Organic matter content
PC Preconsolidation pressure
PS Swelling pressure
PCA Portland Cement Association
PI Plasticity Index
PL Plastic limit
SL Shrinkage limit
SP Poorly graded sand
SW Well graded sand
SO3 Sulphate content
SPT Standard Penetration Test
SS Split spoon sample
T Thickness of consolidated clay layer Total soluble salts
TSS Total Soluble Salts
US Undisturbed soil sample
USCS Unified Soil Classification System
WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant
Z The seismic zone factor
Pdry Dry density
pt Total density
wn Water content
Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

1 INTRODUCTION
The soil investigation for this project has been conducted by the Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad
according to the authorization of the client of Gypsum Structural India PVT Ltd. via their official letter CIN:
U74899DL1993PTC05581 dated on 6th of February, 2023. This report presents the results of geotechnical investigation for the
proposed project Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System in Al-Ghazaliyah/Baghdad Governorate/Iraq as
shown in Figure 1. The following sections of this report describe the geotechnical properties of soils in the locations of project and
brief description about the parts of the project.
 IMAGE

IMAGE

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

1.1. Project Description

The proposed project will involve investigation of soil in project of Rehabilitation of Al- Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System in
Al-Ghazaliyah/Baghdad Governorate/Iraq. The project consists of construction and rehabilitation main sewerage trunk pipeline in
Al- Ghazaliyah District at Baghdad city. The civil work including construction of foundations for the proposed structures of this
project. The project consists of construction pipeline of 1,5 km length and rehabilitation of existing pipeline of 2 km length. The site
is almost the main streets in this district and surrounded by houses from all sides. The foundations of structures almost raft
foundation, but the main objective of soil investigation is obtaining clear image about soil profile. The dimensions of foundation will
depend on the load transmitted from the building to the soil and the bearing capacity of soil.
1.2. Purpose and Scope Services
The purposes of this study were to explore subsurface conditions at the site and to provide recommendations for geotechnical
aspects of design and construction of the proposed project. These purposes were accomplished by:
Reviewing readily-accessible geologic and geotechnical information in the general site vicinity;
Drilling four boreholes extended to a depth of 10 m below the existing ground level to explore subsurface conditions and to obtain
soil samples for laboratory testing. The coordinates of drilled boreholes are given in Table 1.
Analyzing the field and laboratory data to develop conclusions and recommendations; and
Preparing this report, which includes the calculations of bearing capacity, consolidation settlement, types of foundations and necessary
recommendations for construction of foundations.
Table 1: Coordinated of drilled boreholes.
Borehole No. Depth, m Latitude, degree Latitude, degree

BH1 10 33.324329 44.288584

BH2 10 33.327371 44.286769

BH3 10 33.331156 44.286481

BH4 10 33.334859 44.285103

1.3. Report Organization

The following sections of this report describe the geologic and geotechnical properties of the project site soil, describe the
subsurface conditions, and present the conclusions and geotechnical recommendations for design and construction. A description
of the field exploration program and the exploratory boring logs are presented in Appendix A.
2 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC SETTING
2.1. Site Geology
Iraq can be considered as a large anticline which has the trend of NW-SE and contain many small folds (syncline and anticlines).
The northeastern limb of this anticline has suffered from recumbence and then thrusting over the southwestern limb. Because of
colliding of Arabian and Iranian plates now Iraq is divided tectonically to, Western desert, Mesopotamian (Unfolded Zone), Low,
High, Imbricated and Thrust Zones from southwest

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

toward northwest (see Figure 2). Mesopotamia represented transgression and regression of sea level started with in calcareous
Sualy and Yamama Formations, then clastic Ratawi and Zubair Formations and calcareous Sha'uba Formation, then clastic Nahr
umr formation and continue with repetitive succession of clastic and calcareous rock. Uplift might be sufficient to raise the shelf of
the Mesopotamian passive-margin basin above sea level. Uplift period designated disappear of Touronian age in the south Iraq.

IMAGE
 IMAGE

The geologic map of the site, located at the middle of Baghdad governorate, is part of flood plain region and represent the recent
surface formation of Iraq geology, since it contains the resent alluvial sedimentation deposit from the Tigris River and aeolian.
Geologic mapping for the site, which is considered as a part of Baghdad governorate region has been performed

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

at the State Establishment of Geological Survey, and Mining as shown in Figure 3. The geologic formation of site is belonging to
Holocene and Pleistocene period, which consist of aeolian, alluvial deposits of Tigris River, sand dune, and sand and silt deposits.
The geology of site consists of sand, silt and clay (symbol Q' on Figure 3). However, the site is free from erosion old rock surface.

IMAGE

IMAGE

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

2.2. Seismicity and Regional Faulting

According to Iraqi seismic code (No. 2/1997), the ordinary structure may be designed by the equivalent static method using conventional liner
elastic analysis. The seismic analysis of structures shall take the dynamic properties of the structure into consideration by equivalent static
analysis. In this analysis, the seismic hazard and zoning coefficient (Z) are required. The evaluation of seismic hazard in different seismic areas
for the design of buildings and structures shall be performed according to the seismic zoning map of Iraq, Table 2 and Figure 4. The site of the
project is located in Zone I, so the value of the seismic factor (Z) equals to 0.05 should be used in the design of foundation.
Table 2: The value of seismic factor (Z).
Zone I II III
Value of Z 0.05 0.07 0.09

IMAGE

IMAGE

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

3 SITE CONDITIONS
Discussions of the field investigation and laboratory testing programs are presented in Appendix A, of this report. Detailed
descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered during the field investigation are presented on the Logs of Borings in
Appendix A. The following sections describe the general site conditions that interpreted from the available topographic, subsurface
and laboratory test data.

3.1. Climatologic Setting

Al-Ghazaliyah district is located in the northwest of Baghdad/Iraq, the four summer months (June, July, August and September) are
completely dry and the rain may fall in winter months (December, January, February, March, and April). The average temperatures
range from higher than 48 degrees in July and August to below freezing in January. A majority of the rainfall occurs from December
through April. The summer months are marked by two kinds of wind phenomena: the southern and southeasterly sharqi, a dry,
dusty wind with occasional gusts to eighty kilometers an hour, occurs from April to early June and again from late September
through November; the shamal, a steady wind from the north and northwest, prevails from mid-June to mid-September. Dust
storms accompany these winds and may rise to height of several thousand meters.
The average annual rainfall in Baghdad was 122.2 mm for duration from 1970 to 2012. The maximum rainfall intensity for duration
of one hour was about 67.5 mm/hrs happened in 15/3/1972. However, in spite of that the rainfall and other climatic elements
causes changes to the moisture contents of subsurface layers and may direct influencing the stability and strength of these
materials, the amount of rainfall in the investigated area is insufficient and is considered to be very low rainfall unaffected to
engineering properties of the soil.

3.2. Site Description

The project consists of two stages: The first stage construction new sewage trunk line and the second stage rehabilitation of
existed sewage trunk line. In both stages, the project requires information about soil profiles, bearing capacity of foundation, and
compressibility of soil. These parameters of soils were measured by drilling four boreholes each of 10 m depth upon the request of
Gypsum Structural India PVT Ltd. The site has specific geotechnical properties and parameters to be used in the e design of
foundation depending on the location of boreholes in the site plan of project.

3.3. Soil Stratigraphy

Generally, the soil profile consists of layers of different colors of silty clay or clayey silt of low plasticity and river sand. The surface
layer contains gravel as shown in Appendix-A. Note in these figures, the soil stratification was started from the EGL (existing
ground level). The lines designating the interface between soil strata on the boring logs represent approximate boundaries;
transition between materials may be gradual. The subsoil profile can be summarized as follows:

1) Borehole one site (BH1)

 The surface layer is brown silty clay to clayey silt with sand of low plasticity extended from the EGL to a depth of 8.0 m
below EGL.
 The second layer is silty sand extended from the end of the first layer to a depth of 10.0.
 At the end of boring, a layer of river sand start appears in the site of BHI.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

2) Borehole one site (BH2)

 The surface layer is brown silty clay of low plasticity extended from the EGL to a depth of 8.0 m below EGL.
 The second layer is gray river sand extended from the end of the first layer to a depth of 10.0.

3) Borehole one site (BH3)

 The surface layer is brown silty clay of low plasticity extended from the EGL to a depth of 4.5 m below EGL.
 The second layer is brown silty clay with sand extended from the end of the first layer to a depth of 6 m below EGL.
 The third layer is brown silty clay extended from the end of the second layer to a depth of 9.5 m below EGL.
 At the end of boring, a layer of gray river sand start appears in the site of BH3.
4) Borehole one site (BH4)
 The surface layer is brown silty clay of low plasticity with sand and gravel extended from the EGL to a depth of 1.0 m
below EGL.
 The second layer is brown silty clay extended from the end of the first layer to a depth of 4.5 m below EGL.
 The third layer is brown silty clay with organic materials extended from the end of the second layer to a depth of 6.0 m
below EGL.
 The fourth layer is brown silty clay of low plasticity extended from the end of the third layer to a depth of 9.5 m below EGL.
 At the end of boring, a layer of gray river sand start appears in the site of BH4.
3.4. Groundwater
At the time of field investigation 11th of March, 2023, the groundwater table encountered 4, 6, 4, and 7.5 m at boreholes BH1, BH2,
BH3, and BH4 respectively. The groundwater table depends on the ground level where the boreholes drilled in the site. The
groundwater table may be changed due to seasonal variation.

3.5. Variations in Subsurface Conditions

The interpretations of soil and groundwater conditions, as described above, are based on data obtained from the boring drilled for
this study and review of existing information. The conclusions and recommendations that follow are based on those interpretations.
Seasonal variation in groundwater table will be expected.

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on our review of the field exploration and laboratory data collected to date, we believe that the project as currently proposed
is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into plans
for design and construction. The conclusions and recommendations that follow are based on design information provided by others,
the results of our field and laboratory field investigations, our engineering analyses, and our professional judgment.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

4.1. Site Preparation

4.1.1. Site Stripping and Grubbing
Site preparation should include removing the concrete pavement, building rubble, concrete foundations and any other debris noted
on or below the existing ground surface as part of the site preparation for the proposed construction area. Also, the stripping and
removal of existing vegetation, trees, topsoil, debris, and other deleterious materials from the areas to be graded. The removal soil
should be replaced with controlled clean fill soil. Site clearing, grubbing and stripping will need to be performed only during dry
weather conditions. Operation of heavy equipment on the site during wet conditions could result in excessive rutting and mixing of
organic debris with the underlying soils. Deeper stripping or grubbing may be required where existing structures, concentrations of
organic soils, or tree roots are encountered during site grading. Stripped topsoil (less any debris) may be stockpiled and reused for
landscape purposes provided it is not contaminated with lead or other potentially hazardous material. The contaminated soils and
highly organic soils should not be included in any engineered fill.

4.1.2. Existing Utilities, Wells and Foundations

All utilities such as electricity towers, water pipes, buried electricity and telephone cables existing in the parts of site should be removed and
disposed of off-site. Existing utility pipelines that extend beyond the limits of the proposed construction and that are to be abandoned in-place
should be plugged with cement grout to prevent migration of soil and/or water. All excavations resulting from removal activities should be
cleaned of loose or disturbed material (including all previously placed backfill) and dish-shaped (with sides sloped 3(h): 1(v) or flatter) to permit
access for compaction equipment.

4.1.3. Scarification and Compaction

Following site stratification and any required grubbing and/or over-excavation, we recommend all areas to receive engineered fill or
to be used for the future support of structures or concrete slabs supported-on-grade be scarified to a depth of 20 cm, uniformly
moisture-conditioned to between 2 and 5 percent above the optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of the
maximum dry density as determined by ASTM (Test Method D 1557). The upper 30 cm of pavement subgrades should be
scarified; moisture conditioned slightly above the optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent relative
compaction. Scarification and compaction may not be required within earthwork cut areas consisting of cemented soils if approved
by the project Geotechnical Engineer during construction. In-place scarification and compaction may not be adequate to densify all
disturbed soil within areas grubbed or otherwise disturbed below a depth of about 20 cm. Therefore, over-excavation of disturbed
soil, scarification and compaction of the exposed subgrade, and replacement with engineered fill may be required to sufficiently
densify all disturbed soil.

4.2. Engineering Fill

The on-site soils consisted predominantly of silts, clays, silty clay and sandy silt. These soils may be reused as engineered fill
provided that strict moisture control is maintained during and following placement and compaction. Where potentially expansive fat
clay soils are encountered during construction, they should not be placed within the structures pad areas. If the on-site soils are
used as engineered fill, these soils should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations provided in Section
4.2.1. Furthermore, oversized material (greater than 75 mm in maximum dimension) should not be included in any

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad
engineered fill that will support future structural loads. Imported soils may be required to achieve the proposed site grades. All
imported non-expansive engineered fill soils should be nearly free of organic or other deleterious debris, essentially non-plastic,
and less than 75 mm in maximum dimension. In general, well-graded mixtures of gravel and sand are generally acceptable for use
as engineered fill for soil replacement under the footings of structures. Specific requirements for non-expansive engineered fill, as
well as applicable test procedures to verify material suitability are provided in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Imported non-expansive engineered fill requirements.

Fill Requirement Test Procedures
Gradation
Sieve Size Percent Passing ASTM
75mm 100
19mm 70-100
No. 4 50-100 D 422
No. 200 20-70
Plasticity
Liquid Limit, % Plasticity Index, % ASTM
<25 <6 D 4318
Organic Content
Less than 2% D 2974
Sulphate Content
SO3 <0.5% BS 1377: Part 3: 1990, clause 5
Total soluble salts
TSS <5% D 4542
4.2.1. Compaction Requirements
Soils used for engineered fill should be uniformly moisture-conditioned to between 0 and 5 percent above the optimum moisture
content, placed in horizontal lifts less than 20 cm in loose thickness, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction as
determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. The upper 30 cm of pavement subgrades should be compacted to at least 95 percent
relativeting at a moisture content slightly above optimum.

4.2.2. Subgrade Preparation

Prior to placement of bedding, the exposed subgrade at the bottoms of trench excavations should be examined to detect soft,
loose, or unstable areas. Loose materials at trench bottoms resulting from excavation disturbance should be removed to firm
material. If soft or unstable areas are encountered, these areas should be over excavated to a depth of at least 0.5 m or to a firm
base and be replaced with additional bedding material. Where excavations cross existing trench backfill materials, the need for and
extent of over-excavation or stabilization measures should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer on an individual basis.
Where clean crushed rock bedding materials are specified, the bedding material should be surrounded by a non-woven filter fabric
to prevent migration of fines into the bedding layer.

4.2.3. Temporary Excavations and Slopes

All excavations must comply with applicable local regulations. Construction site safety generally is the sole responsibility of the
Contractor, who shall also be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. The
Contractor should

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

be aware that slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depths (including utility trench excavations) should in no case exceed those specified
in local regulations.

Heavy construction equipment, building materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should not be allowed within 1/3 the slope
height from the top of any excavation. Where the stability of adjoining buildings, walls, or other structures is endangered by
excavation operations, support systems such as shoring, bracing, or underpinning may be required to provide structural stability
and to protect personnel working within the excavation. Shoring, bracing, or underpinning required for the project (if any) should be
designed by a professional engineer. During wet weather, earthen berms or other methods should be used to prevent runoff water
from entering all excavations. All runoff water and/or groundwater encountered within the excavation(s) should be collected and
disposed of outside the construction limits.

4.2.4. Protection of Existing Facilities

The shoring designer should perform a deflection analysis for the proposed shoring system. A survey of existing utilities, pavements, and
structures adjacent to those portions of the proposed excavation that will be shored should also be performed prior
to construction. The purpose of the analysis and survey would be to evaluate the ability of existing structures, pipelines, or conduits
to withstand anticipated horizontal and vertical movements associated with a shored excavation. If movements are greater than the
tolerance of existing project features (utilities, pavements, structures, etc.), alternative shoring systems employing the at-rest earth
pressure, tie-backs, dead-man anchors, or cross bracing may be needed to reduce deflections to acceptable levels.

The Contractor should anticipate repairing cracks in pavements adjacent to shored excavations due to anticipated lateral
displacements of the shoring system. In areas where new excavations will encroach upon or pass under existing utilities,
stabilization of these utilities and backfill materials may be necessary. Alternatives for stabilization include shoring or bracing
systems, and various in-situ compaction or permeation grouting methods.

The stabilization method chosen for support of adjacent utilities (and backfilling) should be determined based on a thorough review of existing
conditions and with the approval of the utility owner. The proposed shoring system design should be reviewed by the design tea to evaluate
whether the proper soil parameters have been used and the anticipated shoring deflections are within the tolerance established by the owners of
adjacent improvements that may be affected by nearby trench installations. The Contractor should use means and methods that will limit
vibrations at the locations adjacent structures/facilities. Where construction operations such as sheet pile driving demolition, or similar activities
induce significant ground vibrations near critical facilities. More stringent requirements may be needed adjacent to historic structures, buildings
in poor condition, or buildings where vibration sensitive equipment is being operated.

4.3. Foundation Design Recommendations

Foundations should satisfy two independent criteria with respect to foundation soils. First, the foundation should have an adequate
safety factor against bearing failure with respect to shear strength of the foundation soils. Second, the vertical movements of the
foundation due to settlement of the foundation soils should be within tolerable limits.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

According to preliminary grading plans of building, the building will be supported on native materials. To reduce the potential for
adverse foundation performance under these conditions, the subgrade preparation and engineered fill material selection and
compaction recommendations presented in this report (Section 4.1, Site Preparation, and Section 4.2, Engineered Fill) should be
followed. The following paragraphs present recommendations for different types of footings, raft foundation for medium weight
structures and pile foundation for heavy weight structures. According to the calculations of bearing capacity of shallow foundations,
the site divided into the following regions to interest from the results geotechnical investigation report in accurate form.

4.3.1. Chemical Data

Concrete degradation may have various causes. Concrete can be damaged by fire, aggregate expansion, sea water effects,
bacterial corrosion, calcium leaching, physical damage and chemical damage (from carbonation, chlorides, sulfates and distilled
water). Chemical deicers can affect concrete both physically and chemically. Physical effects are typically manifested as cracking
and salt scaling. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain the phenomenon of salt scaling, including thermal shock,
precipitation and growth of salt crystals, and osmotic pressure. Chemical effects can result from reactions involving cement
hydration products, aggregates, or reinforcing steel.

The most common chemical reactions caused by chlorides and sulfates. Chlorides, particularly calcium chloride, have been used to
shorten the setting time of concrete. However, calcium chloride and sodium chloride have been shown to leach calcium hydroxide
and cause chemical changes in Portland cement, leading to loss of concrete strength, as well as attacking the steel reinforcement
present in most concrete. Accumulation of critical concentrations of chloride ions in the vicinity of the steel can initiate corrosion.
Sulfates in solution in contact with concrete can cause chemical changes to the cement, which can cause significant microstructural
effects leading to the weakening of the cement binder (chemical sulfate attack). Sulfate solutions can also cause damage to porous
cementation materials through crystallization and recrystallization (salt attack). The summary of chemical tests conducted on soil
samples and groundwater are listed in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4: Summary of chemical tests results for soil samples.

Site SO3, % OM, % Gypsum, %

BH1 0.171 4.572 0.398

BH2 0.068 1.179 0.158
BH3 0.154 6.458 0.359
BH4 0.505 3.906 1.177

Table 5: Results of Chemical Tests Conducted on Groundwater Samples.

pH SO4 TDS CL-1

ppm ppm ppm

8.1 246.9 250 70.484

Sulfates are ubiquitous in the natural environment and are present from many sources, including gypsum (calcium sulfate) often
present as an additive in 'blended' cements which

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

include fly ash and other sources of sulfate. With the notable exception of barium sulfate, most sulfates are slightly-highly soluble in
water. The chemical analysis of soil and groundwater samples is important to get the necessary data for the durability of foundation
through providing protection against chlorides and sulfates attacks.

4.3.2. Bearing Capacity

The allowable bearing capacity for footings installed at the recommended depth on firm, unyielding native soils or engineered fill. In
addition, the net allowable bearing capacity includes a safety factor (FS) of at least 3 with respect to shear failure of the foundation
soils. For safe foundation, the following criteria must be meet:
qult.net = qult- ƔDf
q ult .net
qall,net =
FS
qult= qult,net+ƔDf
q ult−ƔD f
qall= qall,net+ƔDf = + ƔDf
FS
Where
qult = ultimate bearing capacity;
qult,net = ultimate bearing capacity;
qall = allowable bearing capacity;
qall,net = allowable bearing capacity;
FS = factor of safety (assumed to be 3);
Df = depth of footing placement.

1) The applied load must not cause shear failure in the soil (evaluating the ultimate bearing capacity and using suitable factor of safety).
2) The settlement must not be excessive, beyond the allowable values.

During the last sixty years, several bearing capacity theories were proposed for estimating the ultimate bearing capacity of shallow
foundations. Generally, the most bearing capacity could be evaluated from one of the following methods:

A. Terzaghi bearing capacity equation (shallow foundation):

Where:
qult = 1.3c'Nc+qNq + 0.4ƔBNƔ For square foundation
qult = 1.3c'N+qNq +0.3ƔBNƔ For circular foundation
qult = c'Nc+qNq +0.5ƔBNƔ, For continuous or strip foundation

Where:
c' = cohesion;
q= effective stress at the level of the bottom of the foundation = Ɣ Df’;
Ɣ= unit weight of soil;
Df = is the depth of footing placement;

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

B = width or diameter of foundation;

ᵩ
Nc, Nq, NƔ = bearing capacity factors (functions of the soil friction angle, );
B. Meyerhof bearing capacity equation (shallow foundation):
1
qu= c'NcFcs FcdFci+qNqFqsFqdFqi+ ƔBNƔFƔSFƔdFƔi
2
Where:
Fcs Fqs Fys shape factors;
Fcds Fqd, FƔd = depth factors;
Fci Fqi, FƔi = load inclination factors.
C. Hansen bearing capacity equation (shallow foundation):
1
qu= c'NcFcs FcdFciFcb Fcg +qNqFqsFqdFqiFqbFqg+ ƔBNƔFƔSFƔdFƔiFƔbFƔg
2
Where:
Fcb, Fqb, FƔb = base inclination factors;
Fcg, Fqg, FƔg = ground factors;
D. The ultimate load-carrying capacity Qult of a pile is:
Qutl=Qp+Qs
Qp = Apqp = Ap[c'N*c + q'N*q+ƔDN*Ɣ]

Qs = Σ p Δl f
Where:
Qp = load-carrying capacity of the pile point;

qp = unit point resistance;

c' = cohesion of the soil;

N*c , N*q,N*Ɣ = the bearing capacity factors;

Qs = frictional resistance (skin friction);
p = perimeter of the pile section;
ΔL = incremental pile length;
f = unit friction resistance at any depth z.

For sandy soil (c=0);

Qp = Apqp = Apq' N*q
Qs = Kσ, tan (0.8∅') p L

Where
K= 1.5 for driven piles;
K= 1-sinᵩ' for bored piles;
σ´º average effective overburden pressure.
For clayey soil (ϕ=0);

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

Qp = Apqp = ApCuN*c = 9CuAp

Qs = Σp ΔL f = Σa cu p ΔL
σ ´ ο 0.45
α=C ( )
Cu
Where
C=0.4 to 0.5 for bored piles and ≥ 0.5 for driven piles.
σ´ο = average effective overburden pressure.
E. The bearing capacity from SPT, using correction values of (N60).
For shallow foundation
N 60 B+ 0.3 2 Se
qult.net(KN/m2) = ( ) Fd( ) For isolated and strip foundation
0.08 B 25
N 60 Se
qult.net(KN/m2) = Fd( ) For raft foundation
0.08 25

Where:
N60 = standard penetration resistance;
B = width or diameter of foundation (m);
Df
Fd = 1 +0.33( ) ≤ 1.33;
B
Se = settlement of soil (mm);

For pile foundation

Qp (kN) 19.7 Pa Ap (N60) 0.36

Qs (kN) = 0.224 Pa p L(N60) 0.29

Where:
Qp= bearing resistance;
Qs = skin friction resistance;
Pa = atmospheric pressure (~ 100 kN/m2);
Ap= cross-sectional area of pile;
p= pile perimeter;
L = pile length.

The bearing capacity for different types of foundations is concluded from the results of standard penetration tests and interpolated
for the in between depths. The values of bearing capacity given in Tables 6, 7, and 8 are based on factor of safety equal to 3 and
the consolidation settlement must be checked to be within allowable limits as listed in section 4.3.7.. The factor of safety is
assumed to be 3 due to low friction between the wall of bored pile and soil resulting from the silty clay nature of site soil. The
magnitude of bearing capacity for surface layers of soft soil can increased by soil replacement, in such case the bearing capacity
used in calculations of foundations dimensions will be one at the depth of

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

excavation and the addition weight resulting from using well compacted soil layers should be taken into consideration. Nevertheless, for deep
layers of soft soil and for economical purposes, we should change the type of foundation to be deeper than the depth of soft soil.

Table 6: Allowable bearing capacity of shallow foundation (gall).

Site Depth (m) qall,(T/m2) Site Depth (m) qall,(T/m2)
1.00 10.00 1.00 8.50
3.00 8.50 3.00 8.50
BH1 4.50 12.00 BH3 4.50 10.50
7.50 - 7.50 -
9.50 14.00 9.50 17.50
1.00 9.00 1.00 5.50
3.00 - 3.00 8.50
BH2 4.50 11.50 BH4 4.50 -
7.50 12.50 7.50 13.50
9.50 18.50 9.50 14.00

Table 7: Bearing capacity of bored piles foundation (Qall).

Length (m) Pile Length (m)

Site Pile Site Diameter
Diameter 6 7 8 9 10 mm 6 7 8 9 10
mm
600 67 70 73 76 79 600 67 70 73 76 179
BH1 800 111 115 119 123 12' BH3 800 111 115 120 124 128
1000 165 170 176 181 186 1000 166 171 176 182 187
600 69 72 75 79 82 600 63 66 69 72 75
BH2 800 115 120 124 128 132 BH4 800 104 108 112 116 120

Table 8: Bearing Capacity of Driven Piles Foundation (Qall).

Pile Dimension Length
Site
L(mm) x B(mm) 6 7 8 9 10
ВН1 25.00 26.50 28.50 30.50 32.00
ВН2 26.00 27.50 29.50 31.50 33.50
285 x 285
ВН3 25.00 27.00 28.50 30.50 32.50
ВН4 23.50 25.00 27.00 28.50 33.50

4.3.3. Foundation Types and Depths

A foundation is defined as the supporting base of a structure, which forms the interface across which the loads are transmitted to
the underlying soil or rock. In most cases foundations in civil engineering are constructed of plain or reinforced concrete, notable
exceptions being roads, embankments and dams. Foundations are classified according to the depth of founding, Dr (depth of base
of foundation below ground level) compared to the width of the foundation, B.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

Shallow foundations: are placed at shallow depths i.e. D<B or where D is less than about 3 m (i.c. within reach of normal excavation plant).
Deep foundations: are placed at greater depths i.e. D> 3 m or D > B.

Pile foundations: transmit the loads to greater depths through steel or reinforced concrete columns.

4.3.4. Modulus of Subgrade Reaction

Vesic (1961a, 1961b) proposed that the modulus of subgrade reaction could be computed using the stress-strain modulus Es as:

ks=
B √
0.65 12 E s B 4 ES
EFIF 1−μ 2

Where:
Es is the modulus of elasticity of soil;
B is the foundation width;
EF is the modulus of elasticity of footing;
IF is the moment of inertia of footing; His Poisson's ratio.
Since the twelfth root of any value × 0.65 will be close to 1, for all practical purposes the Vesic equation reduces to:

ES
Ks =
B (1−μ 2)

The value of Es can be calculated from the results of odometer tests given the Appendix-B of the report by plotting stress-strain
relationship. The value of Poison's ratio can be assumed to be 0.2. For simplicity of finding the modulus of subgrade reaction,
Bowels (1997) suggested the following formula for approximating the K s value:

Where
FS is the factor of safety to be taken 3; qall is the allowable bearing capacity.

Table 9: Values of coefficient of sub-grade reaction.

Site Depth (m) qall,(T/m2) Site Depth (m) qall,(T/m2)

1.00 12.00 1.00 10.00
3.00 10.00 3.00 10.00
BH1 4.50 14.00 BH3 4.50 13.00
7.50 - 7.50 -
9.50 17.00 9.50 21.00
1.00 11.00 1.00 7.00
3.00 - 3.00 -
BH2 4.50 14.00 BH4 4.50 0.00
7.50 15.00 7.50 16.00
9.50 22.00 9.50 17.00

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

4.3.5 Earth Embankment

The embankment consists of a series of compacted layers or lifts of suitable material placed on top of each other until the level of
the subgrade surface is reached. The subgrade surface is the top of the embankment and the surface upon which the sub-base
layer is placed. The fill material (Section 4.2) should be taken from an approved, designated borrow area. It should be free of roots,
stumps, wood, rubbish, stones greater than 6 inches, and frozen or other objectionable materials. Fill material for the center of the
embankment should conform to Unified Soil Classification GC, SC, or CL. Consideration may be given to the use of other materials
in the embankment based on the recommendations of a geotechnical engineer supervises the design and construction. The
maximum dimension of any particle of the material may not be greater than the loose lift thickness. Any particles that are larger
than the loose lift thickness must be removed and disposed of, or may be put in the embankment side slope. The use of select fills
was not a primary concern of the respondents. The compatibility of the existing embankment soil with the new fill with respect to
permeability was considered important. The survey results also indicate that unreinforced slopes up to 2:1 (H:V) are typically used
for embankments.
The area on which fill is to be placed should be scarified before its placement. Fill material should be placed in layers a maximum
of 20 cm thick (before compaction), which should be continuous over the entire length of the fill. The most permeable borrow
material should be placed in the downstream portions of the embankment. The principal spillway must be installed concurrently
with fill placement and not excavated into the embankment. The fill material should be compacted with appropriate compaction
equipment such as a sheep's foot, rubber-tired or vibratory roller. The number of required passes by the compaction equipment
over the fill material may vary with soil conditions. Compaction tests should be performed regularly throughout the embankment
construction; typically, one test per 500 square meters on each layer of fill or as directed by the geotechnical engineer based on
site and soil conditions and the size and type of structure being built. Generally, the Modified Proctor Test (ASTM D1557) will be
used for compaction test during the construction of embankment. A new Proctor test is required if the material changes from that
previously tested. The surface layer of compacted fill (top soil) should be scarified prior to placement of at least 15 cm of topsoil.
The topsoil shall be stabilized with in efficient cementing material.

4.3.6. Uplift Pressure

.‫كلية الهند‬
Uplift load resistance may be based on the total weight of the concrete footing and the total weight of soil above the footing, if it is
buried. For uplift pressure computation, we recommend use of a total unit weight of concrete of 25 kN/m3, dry unit weight of soil is
16 kN/m3 and a saturated unit weight of soil of 18 kN/m3. The uplift pressure depends on the dimensions of footing of underground
structure and groundwater table.

4.3.7. Settlement
For foundations designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations in this report and under static loading
conditions, total post-construction foundation settlement is expected to be calculated using the following equation (for more details
see Appendix-D). Post-construction differential settlement is expected to be about half of the total settlement.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

H
Sc = Δe
1+ eo
Where
Sc: is consolidation settlement.
H: is thickness of clayey soil layer;
eo: is initial void ratio;
∆e : is change in void ratio.
∆e = Cc ∆logσ ˊ for normally consolidated clayey soil

Δe = Cs ∆logσ ˊ for overconsolidated clayey soil

Where
Cc: is the compression index,
Cs: is the recompression index or swell index.

The tolerable settlements, total and differentiable, of different types of foundation constructed in different types of soils based on
experience of many agencies and persons are given in Table 10.

Table 10: Tolerable magnitude of settlement.

Total Differentiable
Type
Type of footing settlement settlement Reference
of soil
mm mm
Isolated and Strip 25 0 Terzaghi and Peck, 1967
Slab and raft 50 0 Tomlinson, 1980
Sand
Isolated and Strip 40 51
Slab and raft 45-65 51-76 Skempton and
Isolated and Strip 65 76 McDonald, 1956
Clay
Slab and raft 65-100 76-126

It's recommended to adopt the values presented by Skempton and McDonald (1956) in checking the settlement of structures
foundation.
The soil parameters necessary for calculations of consolidation settlement under the footing of building are listed in Table 11.

Table 11: Summary soil consolidation parameters.

BH Depth ρ dry ω Mv Cv×10 6 kx10 -9

Gs eo Cc Cs
No. (m) g/cm3 % m2 /kN m2 /min m/min
2 3.5 1.659 2.72 0.64 22 0.1 171 0.0294 0.000229 1.05 2.357
4 5 1 .791 2.7 0.51 17 0.1442 0.025 0.00028 1.422 3.909

4.4. Concrete Slab-on-Grade Floors

4.4.1. Subgrade Preparation
Floor slabs-on-grade should be structurally independent of the rest of the foundation system. Slab thickness and reinforcing should be evaluated
by the designer based on the anticipated use and loadings. Prior to constructing interior concrete slabs supported-on-grade, the

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

subgrade soils should be prepared as recommended in Section 4.1. Site Preparation, and Section 4.2. Engineered Fill.
Scarification and compaction may not be required if floor slabs are to be placed directly on undisturbed engineered fill, or native soil
compacted during site preparation, or within earthwork cut areas consisting of cemented soils and if approved by the project
Geotechnical Engineer during construction. The compacted subgrade must be overlain with a minimum 20 cm thickness of
compacted crushed rock or boulders to serve as a capillary break. The material should have less than 5 percent by weight passing
the No. 4 sieve size. A capillary break may reduce the potential for soil moisture migrating upwards toward the slab.
A capillary break may not be required for some types of construction (such as warehouses, equipment buildings, garages, and
other non-habitable structures). For these types of structures, the gravel capillary break recommended above may be omitted and
the slab placed directly on a minimum 20 cm thick layer of compacted sub base material (sand- gravel mixture). The material
should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction at a moisture content slightly above optimum.

4.4.2. Floor Slab Considerations

It should be noted that although capillary break and vapor barrier systems are currently the industry standard, this system may not
be completely effective in preventing floor slab moisture problems. Various factors such as surface grades, adjacent planters, the
quality of slab concrete, and the permeability of the onsite soils affect slab moisture control performance. In many cases, perceived
floor moisture problems are the result of improper curing of flooring adhesives, not excessive slab moisture transmission. Special
precautions must be taken during the placement and curing of all concrete slabs. Excessive slump (high water-cement ratio) of the
concrete and/or improper curing procedures used during either hot or cold weather conditions could lead to excessive shrinkage,
cracking, or curling in the slabs. High water-cement ratio and/or improper curing also greatly increase the water vapor permeability
of concrete. We recommend that all concrete placement and curing operations be performed in accordance with the American
Concrete Institute (ACI) Manual.

To reduce the potential for under slab moisture problems, we recommend that floor slabs be established 15 cm or more above
surrounding final grades. Drainage should be provided for planters adjacent to buildings such that water does not accumulate
against foundations.

4.5. Moisture Protection

Foundation and slab performance depend greatly on how well runoff waters drain from the site. This drainage should be maintained both during
construction and over the entire life of the project. The ground surface around structures should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from
structures. The surface gradient needed to do this depends on the landscaping type. In general, pavement and lawns within 1.5 m of buildings
should slope away at gradients of at least two percent.

In general, the elevation of exterior grades should not be higher than the elevation of the subgrade beneath the slab to help prevent
water intrusion beneath slabs. In any event, maintenance personnel should be instructed to limit irrigation to the minimum actually
necessary to properly sustain landscaping plants. Due to excessive irrigation, waterline breaks, or unusually high rainfall occur,
saturated zones and "perched" groundwater may be developed. Consequently, the site should be graded so that water drains away
readily

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

without saturating the foundation or landscaped areas. Potential sources of water, such as water pipes, drains, and the like, should
be frequently examined for signs of leakage or damage. Any such leakage or damage should be promptly repaired. All utility
trenches that pass beneath perimeter foundations should be backfilled with compacted non-pervious fill material or a lean concrete
trench plug to reduce the potential for external water to migrate beneath the building through the utility trenches. Special care
should be taken during installation of sub-floor water and sewer lines to reduce the possibility of leaks.

4.6. Exterior Concrete Slabs Supported-on-Grade

Prior to constructing exterior concrete slabs supported-on-grade such as walkways, driveways, etc. surficial soils should be
scarified to a minimum depth of 20 cm, uniformly moisture-conditioned to between 2 and 5 percent above the optimum moisture
content, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Scarification and compaction may not be required if exterior
slabs are to be placed directly on undisturbed engineered fill, or native soil compacted during site preparation, or within earthwork
cut areas consisting of cemented soils if approved by the project Geotechnical Engineer during construction. Once the slab
subgrade soil has been moisture conditioned and compacted, the soil should not be allowed to dry prior to concrete placement. If
the subgrade soil is too dry, the moisture content of the soil should be restored to the recommended value prior to placement of
concrete. The geotechnical engineer should check the moisture content of the subgrade soil prior to construction of the slabs.

Proper moisture conditioning and compaction of subgrade soils is important. Even with proper site preparation, we anticipate that over time there
will be some effects of soil moisture change on concrete flatwork. Exterior flatwork will be subjected to edge effects due to the drying out or
wetting of subgrade soils where adjacent to landscaped or non- paved areas. To help reduce edge effects, lateral cutoffs such as a thickened edge
are suggested. Control joints should be used to reduce the potential for panel cracks as a result of soil displacement. Steel reinforcement will aid
in keeping the control joints and other cracks closed. Exterior concrete slabs-on-grade should be cast free from adjacent footings or other non-
heaving edge restraints. This may be accomplished by using a strip of 12.5 cm asphalt-impregnated felt divider material between the slab edges
and the adjacent structure. Frequent construction or control joints should be provided in all concrete slabs where cracking is objectionable.
Dowels at the construction and control joints will also aid in reducing uneven slab movements.

5 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND LIMITATIONS

5.1. Additional Services
Variations in soil types and conditions are possible and may be encountered during construction. To permit correlation between the
soil data obtained during this investigation and the actual soil conditions encountered during construction, we recommend that
Rock Company be retained to provide observation and testing services during site earthwork and foundation construction. This will
allow us the opportunity to compare actual conditions exposed during construction with those encountered in our investigation and
to provide supplemental recommendations if warranted by the exposed conditions. Earthwork should be performed in accordance
with the recommendations presented in this report, or as recommended by the Rock Company during construction.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

5.2. Recommendations
1) The natural ground must be compacted before starting any structure fill.
2) The effect of water table must be considered in calculations of the bearing capacity.
3) For deep excavation, designed braced wall (shoring) should be used.
4) The ground must be sloped away from structures as much as possible one of the most practical and economical methods are
through use of compaction control for the backfill of the zone around the foundation with well-compacted layer of low permeability.
Those slopes maintained so that runoff water will be carried away from adjacent to stand near foundations, but must be drained
into lined ditched.
5) Drainage pipe lines of water, sewers, and gas must be installed in such a way that not make weakness of the foundations and
should be designed to absorb movement without breaking, these pipes also must be well fixed and laid with permeable material
cover all around.
6) Using expansion joints between columns and floor slab for long buildings and fence.
7) Using a good rainfall drainage system to collect the rainfall from the site and out the site.
8) It's recommended to protect the pavement from rain water and any other water (surface and underground water), by using a
good side ditch along all the road side in the right- of-way of the road. Normal cross slopes including camber must be done in slop
not less than 1/50.
9) The surface soil of thickness at least 1 m must be removed to avoid the debris and wastes of demolished materials.
10) Soil replacement: it is recommended to use the following layers under all types of foundation, isolated, strip, raft and cap of
piles.
a) A layer of boulders (gravel) of 30 cm thickness must be added after grading and compaction of natural or fill soil;
b) Two layers of well-compacted sub-base (mixture of gravel and sand) of 30 cm thickness after well compaction decided by the
designer engineer of foundation.
11) The zone beside the roads (shoulders) should be filled with a well-compacted clayey layer of low permeability according to
(ASTM D-1557) to conform required a non- permeable layer.
12) Using good and safe dewatering system such as well point system to reduce the groundwater level to adequate depth and to insure for not
pumping the fine particles of soil.
13) Using the sulphate resistant Portland cement in all concrete works in contact with soil. The minimum cement content of 370 kg/m3 for
maximum size of gravel 20 mm and water/cement ratio is 0.45 by weight. The cement content must be increased by 100 kg/m3 in case of using
pile foundation. In addition, the minimum compressive strength of concrete is 30 MPa.
14) All concrete that is in contact with soil should coated with bitumen material at the base and sides of the foundation.
15) The allowable bearing capacity for shallow foundation are given in Table 6.
16) The allowable bearing capacity for bored piles are given in Table 7.
17) The allowable bearing capacity for driven piles are given in Table 8.
18) The Coefficient of subgrade reaction are given in Table 9.
19) The maximum permissible settlement for different types of foundations is given in Table
10.
20) The coefficients of soil compressibility are given in Table 11.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

5.3. Limitations
The Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad have prepared this report for the Client of GYPSUM
STRUCTURAL INDIA PVT LTD. to the project of Main Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Trunk Sewerage System at AL-
GHAZALIYAH/BAGHDAD/IRAQ for use in the design of foundations of the proposed project. This report prepared in substantial
accordance with the generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice, as it exists in the project area at the time of our study.
No warranty, express or implied, is made or intended. It is likely that soil conditions vary between or beyond the locations that we
have explored to date. Land use, site conditions (both on-site and off-site) or other factors may change over time, and additional
geotechnical exploration may be required if the construction plan or schedule changes. Only Project owner may use this report,
only for the purposes stated, and within a reasonable time from its issuance. Any party other than the building owner who wishes to
use this report shall notify the Project owner of such intended use. Based on the intended use of the report, The Consulting
Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad may require that additional work be conducted and that an updated report be
issued. Noncompliance with any of these requirements by the client or anyone else will release the Consulting Engineering
Services Bureau/University of Baghdad from any liability resulting from the use of this report by any unauthorized party.

The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from subsurface explorations
agreed by the Client of GYPSUM STRUCTURAL INDIA PVT LTD. to the project of Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk
Sewerage System at AL-GHAZALIYAH/BAGHDAD/IRAQ. The recommendations contained herein are not intended to dictate
construction methods or sequences. Instead, they are furnished solely to help designers identify potential construction problems
related to foundation and earth plans and specifications, based upon findings derived from sampling. Depending upon the final
design chosen for the project, the recommendations may also be useful to personnel who observe construction activity. Potential
contractors for the project must evaluate potential construction problems on the basis of their review of the contract documents,
their own knowledge of and experience in the local area, and on the basis of similar projects in other localities, taking into account
their own proposed methods and procedures.

6 REFERENCES
Al-Khafaji, A.W. and Andorslang O.B (1972): “ Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Testing", S. Ink. USA.
College of Engring University of Biotechnical Engineering and Soil
Andorslang O.B.
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
American Concrete Pipe Association (2000), Concrete Pipe Design Manual, Revised.
American Lifelines Alliance (2001), Guidelines for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe.
American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM, (2004): "Soil and Rock".
Bowles, J. E. (1997), "FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN", fifth edition, McGraw-Hill Companies, Singapore.
British Standard Institutions (1975): "Methods of Testing Soil for Civil Engineering Purposes", B.S., 1377.
Budh, M. (2000): "Soil Mechanics and Foundation", John Wiley and Sons Inc., USA.
Craij, R.F (2003): "Craij's Soil Mechanics", 7th edition Spoon Press, London, England.
Das, B.M (2011): "Principles of Foundation Engineering", Seventh Edition, Thomson Brooks/Cole, USA.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

Howard, A.K., (1996), "Pipeline Installation," by Relativity Publishing, Lakewood, Colorado.

Lambe, T.W. (1951): "Soil Testing for Engineering", John Wiley and Sons, Inc., USA. Spangler, M.G. and Handy, R.L. (1982), Soil Engineering,
4th Edition, Harper & Rowe, New York, NY.
Peck, R.P; Hanson, W.E. and Thornburn, T.H. (1974): "Foundation Engineering", John Wiley and Sons Inc., USA.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

APPENDICES

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
1. General
The subsurface soil conditions at the site of project were explored 11 March 2023 by drilling four boreholes of 10 m depth below the existing
ground surface. Boring was drilled using truck-mounted drill rigs equipped with 100 mm-diameter solid flight auger.

The location and depth of boreholes was specified under the structure of project directly to get detailed information about the geotechnical
properties of subsurface soil. The field Logs and descriptions of Boring, visually classified soils encountered according to the Unified Soil
Classification System (Figures A-1 to A-4).

Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were obtained from the subsurface materials to be tested in the laboratory. Soil
classifications were made in the field from samples and rotary cuttings in accordance with ASTM D2488 (Visual-Manual
Procedure). Sample classifications, blow counts recorded during sampling after correction, and other related information were
recorded on the boring logs. Following laboratory testing, the visual soil classifications made in the field were reviewed and
reclassified in accordance with ASTM D2487.

2. Sampling Procedures
During the drilling operations, disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were obtained from soil extracted through the advance of
rotary into the subsurface soil, the disturbed soil samples were used for testing the physical and chemical properties of soil. While
undisturbed soil samples were obtained at irregular intervals depending on the situation of soil, these soil samples were used for
testing the mechanical properties of soil.

3. Standard Penetration Test

The standard penetration tests were performed in accordance with (AASHTO T-206 and ASTM D-1586) at irregular intervals to
evaluate the relative density/consistency of the soils encountered and to retain soil samples for laboratory testing. The penetration
tests were performed by initially driving the sampler of 5 cm diameter into the bottom of the bore hole using a 76 kg manual-
hammer falling 76 cm. The sampler was driven the first 15 cm to penetrate loose soil cuttings and "seat" the sampler. Thereafter,
the sampler was progressively driven an additional 30 cm with the results recorded as the corresponding number of blows required
to advance the sampler 30 cm, or any part thereof. The variation of N-value and corrected N-value with depth are presented in
Figures A-5 and A-6.

The N-values in all soil types should be corrected for energy efficiency (ASTM D 4633). An energy efficiency of 60% is considered
the reference. The SPT-values (blow count.) should be corrected according to the following procedure:

N' 15+0.5(N-15) Correction for groundwater table

N'= corrected N-value;
N= measured value in the field (blow count).

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

N60 = NˊCECN
N60 = corrected N-value;

CE = energy correction factor = 0.75;

CN = overburden correction factor.

200
CN =
100+σˊv

σˊv = effective overburden pressure, kPa.

The consistency of fine-grained soils and density of coarse-grained soils are estimated from the blow count (N-value) obtained from
Standard Penetration Tests. The consistency of clays and silts (cohesive soils) varies from soft to medium to stiff to hard. The
density of coarse-grained soil (non- cohesive soils) ranges from very loose to medium to dense and very dense. Suggested
guidelines in Tables A-1 and A-2 are given for estimating the in-place consistency or density of soils from N- values.

Table A-1: Consistency of cohesionless soils.

Table A-2: Consistency of cohesion soils.

56

4. Groundwater Measurement
After 24 hrs from completion drilling the groundwater table was measured by using labeled rod from the ground surface.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

APPENDIX-B
LABORATORY TESTING AND
RECORDS OF TESTS
RESULTS

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING AND RECORDS OF TESTS RESULTS
1. General
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples to aid in soil classification and to evaluate chemical, physical and mechanical
properties of the soils that may affect the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. A description of the laboratory testing program
is presented below. A summary of all laboratory tests performed is presented on the Records of Laboratory Tests Results, Table B-1 to Table B-
9 and Figures B-1 to B-10. Most of the laboratory test results are also included on the boring logs.

2. Physical Tests
2.1 Moisture Content and Dry Unit Weight
Moisture content and dry unit weight tests were performed to evaluate moisture condition requirements during site preparation and
earthwork grading, soil overburden, and active and passive earth pressures, and relative soil strength and compressibility. Moisture
content was evaluated in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 2216. Dry unit weight was evaluated using procedures
similar to ASTM Test Method D 2937. Results of these tests are presented on the logs and are summarized on the Records of
Laboratory Tests Results. The variation of water content with are presented in Figures B-5 and B-6.

2.2 Specific Gravity

Specific gravity was performed to measure the density of solids in the soil samples and to aid in calculations of soil properties.
Tests were performed according to ASTM D 854. The results of tests are summarized on the Records of Laboratory Tests Results.
The values of specific gravity (Gs) are presented in Tables B-1 to B-4.

2.3 Atterberg's Limits

Atterberg Limits tests were performed to aid in soil classification and to evaluate the plasticity characteristics of the material.
Additionally, test results were correlated to published data to evaluate the shrink/swell potential of near-surface site soils. Tests
were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4318. Results of these tests are summarized in Figures B-5 and
B-6. In the results of Atterberg's tests are presented on plasticity chart as shown in Figures B-1 10 B-4.

2.4 Particle-Size Analysis

Sieve and hydrometer analyses were performed to evaluate the gradational characteristics of the material and to aid in soil classification. Tests
were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 422. Results of these are summarized on the boring logs and the Records of
Laboratory Tests Results shown in Tables B-1 to B-4.

2.5 Permeability
The permeability of undisturbed soil samples was determined from 1-D consolidation test to evaluate the rate of consolidation
settlement and design of dewatering system. Results of these tests are given in the Records of Laboratory Tests Results Table B-
7.

3. Chemical Tests
Selected samples of the subsurface soils encountered at the site were subjected to chemical analysis for the purpose of corrosion
assessment of concrete reinforcement and sulphate

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

attack assessment. The samples were tested for organic matter content (ASTM D 2974), chloride content (BS 1377: Part 3: 1990,
clause 7), total soluble salts (ASTM D4542), sulfate content (BS 1377: Part 3: 1990, clause 5), and gypsum content, see Table B-5.
Also, the results of chemical analysis of groundwater are listed in Table B-6.

4. Mechanical Tests
4.1 Consolidation Settlement
Oedometer tests were performed on a selected, undisturbed soil samples to evaluate the coefficients of vertical consolidation and some
geotechnical properties of soil. Test procedure was in general accordance with ASTM Test D 2435, see Table B-7 and Figures 7 and 8.

4.2 Unconfined Compression Strength Tests

Unconfined compression tests were performed on a selected, undisturbed soil samples to evaluate the undrained shear strength of the sample
collected. Test procedure was in general accordance with ASTM Test D 2166. Results of this test are presented on the Records of Laboratory
Tests Results, Table B-8.

4.3 Direct Shear Tests

Direct shea tests were performed on a selected, undisturbed soil samples to evaluate the shear strength of the sample collected.
Test procedure was in general accordance with ASTM Test D 3080. Results of this test are presented on the Records of
Laboratory Tests Results, Table B-9 and Figures 9 and 10.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

RECORDS OF LABORATORY
TESTS RESULTS

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad
Table (B-1): Description and Results of Physical Tests for BH1.

From To Thickness Sample Gravel Sand Fines

Gs USCS DESCRIPTION
m m m Type % % %

0.0 1.0 DS - - - - -
1.0 1.5 SPT - 6.03 93.97 2.72 CL
1.5 3.0 DS - - - - -
3.0 3.5 SPT - - - - -
Brown silty clay
3.5 4.5 8.0 DS - - - - -
silt with sand
4.5 5.0 US - - - - -
5.0 6.0 DS - - - - -
6.0 7.5 DS - - - - -
7.5 8.0 SPT - 18.31 81.69 2.69 ML
8.0 9.5 DS - - - - -
2.0 Silty sand
9.5 10.0 SPT - 65.28 34.72 2.68 -

Table (B-2): Description and Results of Physical Tests for BH2.

From To Thickness Sample Gravel Sand Fines

Gs USCS DESCRIPTION
m m m Type % % %

0.0 1.0 DS - - - - -
1.0 1.5 SPT - - - -
1.5 3.0 DS - - - - -
3.0 3.5 US - 3 97 3 -
3.5 4.5 8.0 DS - - - - - Brown silty clay
4.5 5.0 SPT - - - - -
5.0 6.0 DS - - - - -
6.0 7.5 DS - - - - -
7.5 8.0 SPT - - - - -
8.0 9.5 DS - - - - -
2.0 Gray river sand
9.5 10.0 SPT - 3 97 3 -

Table (B-3): Description and Results of Physical Tests for BH3.

From To Thickness Sample Gravel Sand Fines

Gs USCS DESCRIPTION
m m m Type % % %

0.0 1.0 DS - - - - -
1.0 1.5 SPT - - - - CL
1.5 3.0 4.5 DS - - - - - Brown silty clay
3.0 3.5 SPT - - - - CL
3.5 4.5 DS - - - - -
4.5 5.0 SPT - - - - -
1.5 Brown silty clay with sand
5.0 6.0 DS - - - - -
6.0 7.5 DS - - - - -
7.5 8.0 3.5 US - 14.76 85.24 2.71 Brown silty clay
8.0 9.5 DS - - - - -
9.5 10.0 0.5 SPT - 8.19 91.81 2.70 - Gray river sand

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

 Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

Table (B-4): Description and Results of Physical Tests for BH4.

From To Thickness Sample Gravel Sand Fines

Gs USCS DESCRIPTION
m m m Type % % %

0.0 1.0 1.5 DS - - - - - Brown silty clay with sand and gravel
1.0 1.5 SPT - - - - CL
1.5 3.0 DS - - - - -
3.5 Brown silty clay
3.0 3.5 SPT - 59.08 40.92 2.70 -
3.5 4.5 DS - - - - -
4.5 5.0 SPT - - - 2.70 -
1.5 Brown silty clay with organic
5.0 6.0 DS - - - - -
6.0 7.5 DS - - - - -
7.5 8.0 3.5 US - 55.39 44.61 - Brown silty clay
8.0 9.5 DS - - - - -
9.5 10.0 0.5 SPT - - - - - Gray river sand

Table (B-5): Results of Chemical Tests Conducted on Soil Samples.

Table (B-6): Results of Chemical Tests Conducted on Groundwater Samples.

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

PALSTICITY CHARTS
WATER CONTENT AND ATTERBERG’S
LIMITS

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

APPENDIX-C
RESULTS OF BEARING CAPACITY
CALCULATION

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

APPENDIX-D
PHOTOS OF TESTED SOIL SAMPLES
AND FIELD DRILLING

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad

Soil Investigation Report/Rehabilitation of Al-Ghazaliyah Main Trunk Sewerage System/Baghdad

Consulting Engineering Services Bureau/University of Baghdad