Arena 1

MILVEST-DRC KINSHASA ARENA PROJECT
GEOTECHNICAL INTERPRETATION REPORT
2023-09-29
Volkan Gökçe Eren Dr. Mustafa Koç
Civil Engineer (PhD)

Civil Engineer (MSc.) Civil Engineer (MSc.)
Geological Engineer
Project: MILVEST-DRC KINSHASA ARENA
Location: Kinshasa-Democratic Republic of the Congo
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. THE PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF I ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2. I N OF THE I AREA ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2.1. Geomorphology and Surroundings ....................................................................................................... 2
1.2.2. The Information About Building Blocks ................................................................................................ 3
1.2.3. Climate ................................................................................................................................................. 6
1.2.4. Natural Hazard Potential ...................................................................................................................... 6
1.2.5. Structure Information ........................................................................................................................... 7
2 GEOLOGY.................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1. R GEOLOGY.......................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2. R T S SE ........................................................................................... 10
3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS .............................................................................................................. 12
3.1. S I ................................................................................................................................. 12
3.2. IN-S TESTS ................................................................................................................................................ 14
3.2.1. Standard Penetration Test.................................................................................................................. 14
3.2.1. Pressuremeter Test ............................................................................................................................. 17
4 HYDROGEOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................... 19
5 LABORATORY WORKS ............................................................................................................................... 20
6 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY OF INVESTIGATION AREA .................................................................................... 22
7 SOIL PROFILE ............................................................................................................................................ 24
8 GEOTECHNICAL PROFILES AND ANALYSES ................................................................................................. 25
9 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESMENT AND ANALYSES ............................................................................................. 29
9.1. SHALLOW F .................................................................................................................................. 29
9.1.1. Settlement Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 29
9.1.2. Bearing Capacity................................................................................................................................. 31
9.2. S IMPROVEMENT-R I ............................................................................................................... 32
9.2.1. Bearing Capacity and Settlement Analysis ......................................................................................... 34
10 FINAL DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 41
10.1. D ................................................................................................................................................... 41
10.1.1. Surface Drainage .............................................................................................................................. 41
10.1.2. Sub-Surface Drainage ....................................................................................................................... 41
11 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMANDATIONS ................................................................................................ 42
12 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 44
13 ANNEX .................................................................................................................................................... 47
DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

BO Akdeniz Mah. Cumhuriyet Blv. No:87- T: +90 232 483 34 85
Cons. Eng. and Design BO T: +90 212 280 34 85
Jsc.
II
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 General Information of Arena Structure .................................................................... 3

Table 3.1 Summary of Borehole properties ............................................................................. 12
Table 3.2 Lithology of the Boreholes....................................................................................... 13
es Corresponding to IDI Percentages (TBDY) .................................... 15
Table 3.4 Correction Factors (2018 TBDY) ............................................................................ 15
Table 3.5 Summary of SPT-N Correlations ............................................................................. 15
Table 3.6 Pressuremeter Test Results ...................................................................................... 17
Table 5.1 Physical properties ................................................................................................... 20
Table 5.2 Mechanical properties .............................................................................................. 21
Table 6.1 Thickness, facies, and age of the strata (Wetshondo, 2012). ................................... 22
Table 8.1 Determination of GSI for Jointed Rock Mass (Hoek and Marinos, 2000) .............. 26
Table 8.2 Intact rock parameter Mi (after Marinos and Hoek 2000; with updated values from
Rocscience, Inc., 2007) ............................................................................................................ 27
Table 8.3 Guidelines for the selection of modulus ratio (MR) values ..................................... 27
Table 8.4 Idealized Soil Parameters for the structure according to SPT.................................. 28
Table 8.5 Idealized Soil Parameters for the structure according to Pressuremeter .................. 29
Table 9.1 Summary of soil pressures ....................................................................................... 30
Table 9.2 Summary of settlement results ................................................................................. 31
Table 9.3 Bearing Capacity Calculations Resistance values-R (kPa) ...................................... 32
Table 9.4 Values for Tip Bearing Factor.................................................................................. 35
Table 9.5 Pile capacity calculation by using PMT ................................................................... 40
Table 9.6 Rigid Inclusion Column design information ............................................................ 40
Table 11.1 Rigid Inclusion Summary Table ........................................................................... 42
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Aerial view of the plot (Google Earth) ..................................................................... 1

Figure 1.2 Geomorphology of the Kinshasa region (Antoine, 2016). ........................................ 2
Figure 1.3 Kinshasa Municipality .............................................................................................. 3
Figure 1.4 Plan View of the Structure ........................................................................................ 4
Figure 1.5 Plan View of the Arena ............................................................................................. 4
Figure 1.6 Phases of construction .............................................................................................. 5
Figure 1.7 Foundation Plan and Soil Pressure for Zone-1 ......................................................... 5
Figure 1.8 Annual Average Temperature and Precipitation Values in Kinshasa ....................... 6
Figure 1.9 Seismicity of Kinshasa.............................................................................................. 7
Figure 2.1 Geological setting of the Congo Basin. Congo Craton and surrounding Pan-African
orogenic belts (adapted from Kadima et al., 2015). ................................................................... 8
Figure 2.2 General stratigraphy of Kinshasa City (modified from Lateef et al., 2010). ............ 9
Figure 2.3 General geological map of Kinshasa City (modified from Lateef et al., 2010). .... 10
Figure 2.4 Seismotectonic map of Kinshasa and surrounding area (Earthquake data from
USGS). ..................................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3.1 Location plan of boreholes ..................................................................................... 12
Figure 3.2 SPT N Corrected Values (N1)60 vs. Elevation ........................................................ 16
Figure 3.3 Ideal pressuremeter curve ....................................................................................... 17
Figure 3.4 Limit pressure vs. Depth ......................................................................................... 18
Figure 3.5 Deformation modulus pressure vs. Depth (from +284.0 m) ................................... 18
Jsc.
III
Figure 4.1 Hydrogeologic map of Kinshasa City indicating the main hydrogeologic units,
groundwater depth contours, and the location of 1270 boreholes (Lateef et al., 2010). .......... 19
Figure 4.2 Groundwater flow direction map of the Kinshasa City (Cedrick et al., 2021). ...... 20
Figure 6.1 Borehole location in 2D (Cedrick et al., 2021) ....................................................... 22
Figure 6.2a) 3D stratigraphic model and b) transparent view of the structural contacts of the
Kinshasa (Cedrick et al., 2021) ................................................................................................ 23
Figure 7.1 Typical Cross Section with geological data ............................................................ 24
Figure 7.2 Plan view of the cross sections ............................................................................... 24
Figure 7.3 Geological Cross Sections ...................................................................................... 25
Figure 9.1 Proposed stress distribution .................................................................................... 30
Figure 9.2 Settlement analysis results of +284.0 m ................................................................. 31
Figure 9-3 Rigid inclusion model............................................................................................. 33
Figure 9-4 Rigid inclusion FoXTa analysis model .................................................................. 33
Figure 9.5 Ultimate Skin Friction vs. PLM Based on Design Curves ..................................... 34
Figure 9.6 Event Area results 60 kPa zone with 10.0 m long 0.8 m diameter piles ................ 36
Figure 9.7 Area-1 results 100 kPa zone with 10.0 m long 0.8 m diameter piles. .................... 37

Jsc.
IV
ANNEX
Annex 1: Borehole Logs
Annex 2: Geological Sections

Annex 3: Core Box Photos
Annex 4 : Laboratory Works

Jsc.
V
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Purpose and Scope of Investigation
The aim of this interpretative report is to evaluate soil and foundation engineering
assessment based on boreholes for Arena Project. The structure will be in Kinshasa province.
The scope of soil investigation works comprises drilling, in-situ testing, laboratory
testing, desktop studies, and data evaluations. This geotechnical interpretation report includes
data from site soil survey, in-situ-laboratory tests. All field works, such as in-situ tests and
drilling processes, were carried out under supervision of Destech Consultancy Engineering and
Design JSC.
Eleven boreholes with varied depths were executed with a total depth of 388.30 m.
Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed in those borings.
Moreover, pressuremeter tests (PMT) were performed in additional boreholes.
The design methodology is based on Eurocodes (French national annexes) and EN 1997
in the order of importance.
1.2. Introduction of the Investigation Area
The investigation area is by the Stade des Martyrs in Kinshasa, DRC. Transportation can
be provided by the Avenue Des Huileries. The plan view of the investigation area is given in
Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1 Aerial view of the plot (Google Earth)

Jsc.
1
1.2.1. Geomorphology and Surroundings
Kinshasa is a municipality in the Lukunga district of Kinshasa Province in the Democratic

Republic of Congo. Kinshasa has bordered Gombe to the north and the Boulevard du 30 Juin.
The land area of the Kinshasa urban area is 583 km2. The Kinshasa region is bound east
and northeast by the provinces of Kwango, Kwilu, and MaiNdombe, south and southwest by
the province of Kongo Central, and north and west by the Congo River, which is also the natural
boundary with the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville). The approximate elevation above sea level
is 240 m. The city is built on a flat plain extending to hilly areas. The area is often swampy.
Four zones characterize the geomorphological aspect: 1) the southwest hills zone, 2) the north
plain zone, 3) the flood basin all around the Congo River, and 4) the east Kwango Plateau zone
(Plateau of Bateke). The investigation area is located on the plain zone. The plain zone
encompasses the gently undulating plain (plain of Lemba) in the west of Ndjili stream and the
east plain. It ranges between 300 to 320 m and covers an area of around 100 km2. The plain is
the most densely populated area in the Kinshasa region.
Figure 1.2 Geomorphology of the Kinshasa region (Antoine, 2016).

The investigation area is a relatively plain area, and the elevation is approximately
+285.00 m. The location of the site is given in Figure 1.3.

Jsc.
2
Figure 1.3 Kinshasa Municipality
1.2.2. The Information About Building Blocks
Palace of Democratic Republic of the Congo is on the west side. The structure consists of court,
main concourse, upper concourse, two balconies and the roof. General information about the
planned arena is given in Table 1.1. The view of the layout of the arena is shown in Figure 1.4.
Foundation bottom level of the structures are given as different options based on bearing
capacity calculations in related chapter.
Table 1.1 General Information of Arena Structure
Dimensions of Foundation (BxL)
Floors
(m x m)
2 Concourses + The roof 136 x 156

Jsc.
3
Figure 1.4 Plan View of the Structure
Figure 1.5 Plan View of the Arena

Jsc.
4
Figure 1.6 Phases of construction
Figure 1.7 Foundation Plan and Soil Pressure for Zone-1

Jsc.
5
1.2.3. Climate
Kinshasa province is under the influence of tropical wet and dry climates. The long rainy
season lasts from October to May, with a relatively short dry season, between June and
September. The dry season is somewhat cooler than the wet season, although the temperature
is relatively constant throughout the year. The average daily mean temperature is 25.5°C, the
average annual rainfall is 1482 mm, and the average relative humidity is 80%.
Figure 1.8 Annual Average Temperature and Precipitation Values in Kinshasa
1.2.4. Natural Hazard Potential
Regarding seismicity, the Democratic Republic of the Congo province of Kinshasa is at

very low risk. The expected maximum ground acceleration values are in the order of 0.04-0.05g.
Volcanic hazards around Kinshasa are pretty low (See Mavonga et al., 2010; WHO,
2010a). The highest seismic hazard levels are found in the East part of the country nearby Lake
Tanganyika Rift zone.
The floods occur along three geomorphologic elements in Kinshasa: the Congo River, the
tributary streams, and sloping planes. According to Lateef et al. (2010), the first two geomorphic
elements are affected by more than one watershed that is of a regional scale. The third is
governed mainly by local conditions and individual sub-watersheds. In 2007, heavy rains in
Kinshasa seriously affected 1500 families in 11 high-risk communes (DREF, 2009). The
massive landslides and erosion that killed 31 people and destroyed 1500
homes (DREF, 2009).
Geotechnical and topographic conditions in Kinshasa do not seem disposed to large

landslide incidences. Stream landslides and backward erosion in Kinshasa are man-induced
hazards that bring about vertical incisions of valleys and watercourses (Lateef et al., 2010).

Jsc.
6
Figure 1.9 Seismicity of Kinshasa
1.2.5. Structure Information
The area is currently empty, and no structure exists. Arena and adjacent parking structures
are planned to be constructed in this area.
2 GEOLOGY
2.1. Regional Geology
The Congo Basin is a typical intracratonic basin. It developed within the Precambrian
basement of Central Africa. The stratigraphic units of the region range in age from Precambrian
to recent with the geological events including the development of the Congo Craton (Brito
Neves et al., 1999), the Pan-African orogeny (Boudzoumou and Trompette, 1988; Cosson,
1955; Dadet, 1969), the development of the Congo basin (Crosby et al., 2010; Giresse, 1982,
2005; Kadima et al., 2011) and the opening of the Atlantic Ocean (Guiraud et al., 2005; Wilson,
1966) (Figure 2.1). All these events resulted in fracture zones (Alkmim et al., 2006; Heine et
al., 2013; Moulin et al., 2010) that are likely to be reactivated by lithospheric dynamics.

Jsc.
7
Figure 2.1 Geological setting of the Congo Basin. Congo Craton and surrounding Pan-African
orogenic belts (adapted from Kadima et al., 2015).
Kinshasa city is in the eastern part of the Congo Basin, which is a circular basin in the
center of the African plate. All deposits are continental of fluvial, fluvio-deltaic,
fluviolacustrine, lacustrine, and eolian genesis. The documented stratigraphy of Kinshasa
extends from the late Precambrian to the Holocene, with numerous unconformities of various
magnitudes. Except for the marly sandstone unit that overlays the Inkisi siliciclastics, the pile
of continental deposits lacks independent dating. The spatial and temporal stratigraphical
relationship of the Neogene units is commonly unclear or ambiguous (Lateef et al., 2010).
Kinshasa city displays geological units from bottom to top: 1) the Inkisi siliciclastics rest
in an angular unconformity on the units of the West Congo Belt. This Group comprises quartzo-
feldspathic sandstones of fluvial origin, ranging from post-Cambrian to pre-Permian age
(Boudzoumou, 1986; Tack et al., 2008; Lateef et al., 2010; Callec et al., 2015). The Inkisi
siliciclastics are overlain by (2) marly sands and fossiliferous clays of fluvial-lacustrine origin
(Callec et al., 2015). (3) Cretaceous Gres Tendre unit, which includes sandstones, are observed
in the plain of Kinshasa (Lateef et al., 2010). (4) Eosene to Miocene Gres Polymorphes unit is
silicified at the basal part toward the underlying Gres Tendre. (5) Post Gres Polymorphes

Jsc.
8
entrenches older units as channel fills. (6) All of these units are covered by the yellow sands of
the Cover Formation (Miyouna et al., 2016, 2019) (Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3).
Figure 2.2 General stratigraphy of Kinshasa City (modified from Lateef et al., 2010).

Jsc.
9
Figure 2.3 General geological map of Kinshasa City (modified from Lateef et al., 2010).
2.2. Regional Tectonic Settings and Seismotectonic
The Congo Basin is delimited by several cratonic blocks. These blocks are Archean to
Proterozoic age and include magmatic, volcano-sedimentary deposits and metamorphic
complexes. The basin started to form in the late Mesoproterozoic, most probably as a failed rift
basin and evolved over a heterogeneous basement formed from the collision of different
cratonic pieces (Delvaux et al. 2021). The Congo Basin has been affected by global and local
compressional and extensional tectonic forces (Hartley and Allen, 1994; Kadima et al., 2015;
Linol et al., 2015a). Recent studies show that the epicenters coincide with faults delimiting the
horsts and grabens of basement rocks in the Congo Basin (Ayele, 2002; Bouka Biona and
Sounga, 2001).
Kinshasa city is located on the African plate's passive western margin, which has
experienced several recorded destructive earthquakes (Ambraseys and Adams, 1986). It is
affected by brittle deformation that consists of joints and faults. The fractures in the sedimentary
units of the region consist of essentially NE-SW joints and a group of conjugate strike-slip faults
associated dominantly with NE-SW dextral strike-slip and a few with E-W to WNW-ESE
sinistral strike-slip are observed in the area (Nkodia et al., 2020). The stress stage started with

Jsc.
10
the development of NE-SW joints and then evolved into a system of conjugate NE-SW dextral
strike-slip faults and WNW-ESE to E-W sinistral strike-slip faults. The joints have evolved into
a strike-slip regime, indicating an NNW-SSE extensional regime.
The earthquake locations indicate that the passive western margin of the Atlantic Ocean
has been affected by both onshore and offshore earthquakes. Offshore earthquakes in the west
Atlantic Ocean margin align with the main transform fault zones. The magnitudes of these
earthquakes do not exceed Mw 5.
Figure 2.4 Seismotectonic map of Kinshasa and surrounding area (Earthquake data from
USGS).
The low frequencies and magnitudes associated with earthquakes described in the region
imply that these earthquakes originated from intraplate movement and are preferentially
concentrated along the western passive margin of the African continent. The calculated
recurrence of Mw 6 is 12 years, and that of average earthquake magnitudes, Mw 4-5, is two
years. This can show a possibility of an earthquake of Mw 6 in the study area. The stresses from
earthquake data recorded in the Congo Basin are of similar orientation with stresses associated
with the phase in the sedimentary units of the region as calculated in Kinshasa. This
undoubtedly proves that Congo Basin earthquakes and the deformation in the sedimentary units
in Kinshasa originated from a unique tectonic event. It is, therefore, appropriate that the
construction of walls and buildings consider the seismic risk of the basement rocks of Kinshasa
(Nkodia et al., 2020).

Jsc.
11
3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
3.1. Subsoil Investigations
A soil investigation study has been carried out at the site to define the project site's
geological and geotechnical profile. Boring works were carried out by NF EN ISO 22475-1.
Boreholes were drilled with a total depth of 388.30 m. The location plan of the boreholes is
given in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1 Location plan of boreholes

Soil definitions and lithology during drilling works are as follows. The general borehole
data indicates that the study area is generally formed of fill layer down to 0.0-2.8 m from the
surface level, followed by kaolin sand up to 4.5 8.5 m depth, then weak sandstone to 30.0 -
33.5 m depth, after that, arkose in deeper zones. Loam (fine to medium sand) is observed in BH-
04 between fill and kaolin sand layers. General information about boreholes and the lithology
are given in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Summary of Borehole properties
Coordinate (ITRF)
Borehole No. Depth (m) Borehole Elevation (m)
X Y
BH-01 9521167.42 534081.59 35.5 +287.7
BH-02 9521191.46 534095.46 35.0 +287.5
BH-03 9521215.49 534127.35 35.7 +285.0
BH-04 9521207.32 534170.11 35.5 +285.1
BH-05 9521173.33 534200.20 35.8 +283.4
BH-06 9521134.80 534193.60 35.7 +283.8

Jsc.
12
Coordinate (ITRF)
Borehole No. Depth (m) Borehole Elevation (m)
X Y
BH-08 9521084.09 534148.69 35.0 +285.4
BH-09 9521093.21 534104.23 35.8 +285.4
BH-10 9521126.26 534075.83 35.3 +287.3
BH-12 9521184.94 534135.24 35.0 +285.2
BH-14 9521116.72 534136.78 34.0 +286.2
Table 3.2 Lithology of the Boreholes

Borehole No Depth (m) Description
0.0 - 2.7 Fill
2.7 - 6.0 Kaolin Sand
BH-01
6.0 - 32.0 Weak Sandstone
32.0 - 35.5 Arkose
0.0 - 2.4 Fill
BH-02
31.0 - 35.0 Arkose
0.0 - 2.5 Fill
BH-03
33.5 - 35.7 Arkose
0.0 - 2.6 Fill
2.6 - 4.3 Loam
BH-04 4.3 - 6.5 Kaolin Sand
31.5 35.5 Arkose
0.0 - 2.5 Fill
BH-05
30.0 - 35.8 Arkose
0.0 - 2.5 Fill
BH-06
30.5 - 35.7 Arkose
0.0 - 2.8 Fill
BH-08
30.5 - 35.0 Arkose
BH-09 5.5 - 31.0 Weak Sandstone
31.0 - 35.5 Arkose
0.0 - 2.7 Fill
BH-10
31.0 - 35.3 Arkose
0.0 - 3.0 Fill
BH-12 3.0 - 6.0 Kaolin Sand
Jsc.
13
Borehole No Depth (m) Description

32.8 - 35.0 Arkose
0.0 - 2.9 Fill
BH-14
31.3 - 34.0 Arkose
3.2. In-Situ Tests

3.2.1. Standard Penetration Test
The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is performed according to ASTM D1586 (2011)
standard. Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were taken by EN ISO 22475-1: Geotechnical
investigation and testing - Sampling methods and groundwater measurements - Part 1:
Technical principles for execution and other international standards. An automatic SPT hammer
was used in the campaign. A split tube sampler is connected to the end of the SPT hammer, and
the hammer is dropped with a weight of 63.5kg to the ground automatically.
N1,60 value is calculated by using raw SPT-N data obtained from the field. (2018 Turkish
Building Earthquake Code)
N1,60 = N CN CR CS CE CB
Correction factors are defined below:
- Correction for groundwater level; If the test is performed below the groundwater table
and if the soil type is fine sand or silty sand and SPT-N> 15, this factor is used
(Terzaghi and Peck, 1948).
- The blow counts corrected for the fine grain content (IDI) are calculated by N1,60f.
According to TBEC 2018, fine-grained content corrections should be applied only in
liquefaction analysis, so it is not used in the tables below.
- N1,60f 1,60f
table.

Jsc.
14
Table 3.3
exp (1.76-(190/IDI2)) 1.5

/1000
- Depth correction factor (CN); The effective vertical vo' (kN /m2) at the depth
where the Standard Penetration Test is performed is calculated. The factor is
calculated by the formula;
CN vo'
The CN value should not exceed 1.7 by the (Youd et al. 2001)
- The energy correction factor (CE), the rod length correction factor (CR), the sample
receiver type correction coefficient (CS), and the drill hole diameter correction
coefficient (CB) are given in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4 Correction Factors (2018 TBDY)
Correction
Variation Values
Coefficient
Between 3m and 4m 0.75
CR
Deeper than 10m 1.00
Standard Sample Receiver 1.00
Cs
Sample receiver without an inner tube 1.10-1.30
Diameter between 65mm - 115mm 1.00
CB Diameter 150 mm 1.05
Diameter 200 mm 1.15
Safety Hammer 0.60 - 1.17
CE Ringed Hammer 0.45 - 1.00
Automatic pulsed Hammer 0.90 - 1.60
SPT-N correlations and uncorrected-corrected values are given in Table 3.5.
Table 3.5 Summary of SPT-N Correlations
Borehole No. Depth (m) Elevation (m) SPT-N N60 (N1)60
3.00 284.70 2 1 2
BH-01 4.50 283.20 93 71 100
6.00 281.70 100 100 100
3.00 284.50 6 4 7
BH-02 4.50 283.00 100 100 100
6.00 281.50 100 100 100
3.00 282.10 3 2 3
BH-04
4.50 280.60 23 18 28

Jsc.
15
Borehole No. Depth (m) Elevation (m) SPT-N N60 (N1)60

6.00 279.10 72 62 85
3.00 280.40 3 2 3
BH-05
4.50 278.90 19 15 23
3.00 280.80 5 3 6
BH-06
4.50 279.30 14 11 17
3.00 282.40 2 1 2
BH-08 4.50 280.90 16 12 19
6.00 279.40 79 68 93
3.00 284.30 4 3 5
BH-10 4.50 282.80 87 67 100
6.00 281.30 100 100 100
Figure 3.2 SPT N Corrected Values (N1)60 vs. Elevation

Jsc.
16
3.2.1. Pressuremeter Test
below.
The results of a test are usually represented by a plot of volume (V) against pressure (P).
The datum of reference pressure, p0, for the interpretation of pressure meter results is a value
equal to the in-situ total horizontal stress in the soil before boring. The reference volume, v0,
corresponding to pressure p0, is taken to be the initial volume of the borehole cavity over the
test duration. On an ideal plot a linear section would normally occur between the pressure points
p1 and p2. Point p1 gives the pressure necessary to achieve initial contact between the cell and
the borehole wall and to compress the soil disturbed and softened as a result of boring and point
p2 gives the pressure corresponding to the onset of plastic strain in the soil. Volumes v 1 and v2
are the values corresponding to pressures p1 and p2. Eventually a limit pressure (PL*) is
approached at which continuous expansion of the borehole cavity would occur. On an ideal test
PL* will be clearly defined on the curve.
Figure 3.3 Ideal pressuremeter curve
Table 3.6 Pressuremeter Test Results

Depth PL PL*(PL-P0) EM Eoed
Borehole Soil EM/PL a
(m) (kPa) kPa (kPa) (kPa)
3.9 Rock-Weathered 4440 4380 110056 25 0.67 164263
5.9 Rock-Weathered 6067 5730 155741 27 0.67 232449
BH-1
6.9 Rock-Weathered 6968 6735 169320 25 0.67 252716
9.9 Rock-Weathered 6112 5818 168511 29 0.67 251509
BH-2 7.9 Rock-Weathered 6931 6853 210948 31 0.67 314848
2.5 Sand 397 345 5135 15 0.67 7664
10.0 Rock-Weathered 4070 4018 318526 79 0.67 475412

Jsc.
17
Figure 3.4 Limit pressure vs. Depth
Figure 3.5 Deformation modulus pressure vs. Depth (from +284.0 m)

Jsc.
18

Arena 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arena 1

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

Arena 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MILVEST-DRC KINSHASA ARENA PROJECT

GEOTECHNICAL INTERPRETATION REPORT

Volkan Gökçe Eren Dr. Mustafa Koç

Civil Engineer (PhD)

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Table 1.1 General Information of Arena Structure .................................................................... 3

Figure 1.1 Aerial view of the plot (Google Earth) ..................................................................... 1

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Annex 2: Geological Sections

Annex 4 : Laboratory Works

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 1.1 Aerial view of the plot (Google Earth)

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

1.2.1. Geomorphology and Surroundings

Kinshasa is a municipality in the Lukunga district of Kinshasa Province in the Democratic

Figure 1.2 Geomorphology of the Kinshasa region (Antoine, 2016).

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 1.3 Kinshasa Municipality

1.2.2. The Information About Building Blocks

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 1.4 Plan View of the Structure

Figure 1.5 Plan View of the Arena

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 1.6 Phases of construction

Figure 1.7 Foundation Plan and Soil Pressure for Zone-1

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 1.8 Annual Average Temperature and Precipitation Values in Kinshasa

1.2.4. Natural Hazard Potential

Regarding seismicity, the Democratic Republic of the Congo province of Kinshasa is at

Geotechnical and topographic conditions in Kinshasa do not seem disposed to large

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 1.9 Seismicity of Kinshasa

1.2.5. Structure Information

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

2.2. Regional Tectonic Settings and Seismotectonic

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 3.1 Location plan of boreholes

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Table 3.2 Lithology of the Boreholes

Borehole No Depth (m) Description

3.2. In-Situ Tests

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

exp (1.76-(190/IDI2)) 1.5

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Borehole No. Depth (m) Elevation (m) SPT-N N60 (N1)60

Figure 3.2 SPT N Corrected Values (N1)60 vs. Elevation

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

3.2.1. Pressuremeter Test

Figure 3.3 Ideal pressuremeter curve

Table 3.6 Pressuremeter Test Results

DESTECH HO Konak T: +90 232 489 34 85

Figure 3.4 Limit pressure vs. Depth

Figure 3.5 Deformation modulus pressure vs. Depth (from +284.0 m)

You might also like