SR-673 - GTIR - CH-658+750 - MNB - 01 BH - Rev.1

Geotechnical Investigation Report
Chainage/Structure:- 658+750_Minor Bridge
SR NO. : 673_22-23
G EO T E CH N IC A L I N VE S TI G AT I O N WO RK S F O R
S IX L A N I NG O F K A G A L -SA T A R A S EC TI O N O F N H -
4 8 ( O L D NH -4) [P A CK AG E -I I F RO M K M 6 5 8. 0 00 TO
K M 72 5. 0 0 0 ] I N TH E ST AT E O F M A H A R A S H T RA
T O B E EX E CU T E D O N B O T ( TO L L) M O D E U N DE R
B H AR A TM ALA P A R IY O J AN A
CLIENT
M / S . A D A NI RO AD T RA NS PO R T
PROGRAMME
OCTOBER – 2022
SR. No. Report No. Revision No. Date

673_22-23 CEGTH/ART/SR-673/2022-23/1266_(01 BH) 01 23.12.2022
673_22-23 CEGTH/ART/SR-673/2022-23/973_(01 BH) 00 07.10.2022
B-11(G), Malviya Industrial Area, Jaipur-302017

Tel. : 91-141-4046599, Fax : 91-141-2751806
E-mail : [email protected]., www.cegtesthouse.com
Geotechnical Investigaton works for "Six laning of Kagal-Satara section of NH-48 (old NH-4) SR-673_22-23
[Package-II from km 658.000 to km 725.000] in the state of Maharashtra to be executed on BOT
(Toll) mode under Bharatmala Pariyojana"
CEGTH/ART/SR-673/2022-23/1266 Date:- 23.12.2022
To,
Adani Road Transport Ltd.,
Adani Corporate House, Shantigram,
Near Vaishnodevi Circle,
S.G. Highway, Khodiyar,
Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 384221
Subject :- Geotechnical Investigaton works for "Six laning of Kagal-Satara section of NH-48 (old
NH-4) [Package-II from km 658.000 to km 725.000] in the state of Maharashtra to be
executed on BOT (Toll) mode under Bharatmala Pariyojana"
Dear Sir,
We are pleased to submit this report of the subject work based on 01 borehole carried out at
Ch. 658+750 KM for only MNB for the proposed project site.
The accompanying report presents results of field tests and laboratory tests conducted on selected Soil
& Rock samples and their interpretation.
Should there be any clarifications regarding the contents please contact us at your most convenient
time.
We value the opportunity to participate in this project and look forward a pleasant association on future
projects.
Very truly yours,

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.
Prepared By:-
Nehal Jain Dr.Sarvesh Chandra Mohd Waseem
General Manager - Geotechnical Technical Advisor Sr. Geotechnical Engineer

Authorized Signatory (Geotechnical Expert )
Former Professor, IIT Kanpur
SR. No. Report Ref. No. Revision No. Date

673_22-23 CEGTH/ART/SR-673/2022-23/1266_(01 BH) 01 23.12.2022
673_22-23 CEGTH/ART/SR-673/2022-23/973_(01 BH) 00 07.10.2022

Geotechnical Investigaton works for "Six laning of Kagal-Satara section of NH-48 (old NH- SR-673_22-23
4) [Package-II from km 658.000 to km 725.000] in the state of Maharashtra to be executed on
BOT (Toll) mode under Bharatmala Pariyojana"
CONTENTS
PAGE
S. NO. ITEMS
NO.
CHAPTER 1 GENERAL
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SITE LOCATION 1
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK 1-3
4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION 3-6
5.0 LABORATORY INVESTIGATION 7-8
CHAPTER 2 ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION
6.0 STRATIFICATION 9
6.1 COMPUTATION OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL 9-10
6.2 SILT FACTOR 10-11
CHAPTER 3 TYPE AND DEPTH OF FOUNDATION WITH ANALYSIS
7.0 ANALYSIS OF FOUNDATION 12
7.1 TYPE & DEPTH OF FOUNDATION 12-13
CHAPTER 4 RECOMMENDATIONS
8.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 14-15
ABBREVIATIONS 16
LIST OF FIGURES / TABLES
Appendix
ITEMS PAGE NO.
No.
APPENDIX – A (FIELD DATA RESULTS)
A-1 FIELD BORE HOLE LOGS 18-19
A-2 LOCATION PLAN 20
APPENDIX – B (LAB TEST RESULTS)
B-1 SOIL AND ROCK CHARACTERISTICS SHEET 22
B-2 GSD CURVES 23
APPENDIX – C (ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATION)
CALCULATION FOR COMPUTATION OF LIQUEFACTION 25
C1
POTENTIAL
SAMPLE CALCULATION FOR COMPUTATION OF
C-2 ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY OF SUB-STRATA FOR 26-31
OPEN FOUNDATION RESTING ON SOIL
CEG TEST HOUSE AND RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

CHAPTER 1 GENERAL
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
The work of conducting “Geotechnical Investigaton works for "Six laning of Kagal-Satara section
of NH-48 (old NH-4) [Package-II from km 658.000 to km 725.000] in the state of Maharashtra to
be executed on BOT (Toll) mode under Bharatmala Pariyojana" was awarded to “CEG Test House
& Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur” by M/S. “Adani Road Transport” as per service order no.
ARTL/CEG/SO/C/PR/60/22 dated 16.05.2022.
Field work including drilling of boreholes and sample collection was carried out in the presence of
representative of Client. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected Soil & Rock samples to determine
the design parameters, confirming to relevant IS specifications and the guidelines received from time to
time from representative of Client.
This report includes the details of Methodology of Investigation, collection of samples (Soil & Rock),
laboratory test results, analysis of results and recommendations for results for proposed structures based
on Rock sample collected from the locations of boreholes.
2.0 SITE LOCATION
The details of the site & test locations for the proposed project are shown in location plan attached vide
Appendix A-1. The site of proposed project is located from Kagal to Satara, in the state of Maharashtra
as client the project stretch upto koyna river falls under seismic zone III and project stretch beyond
koyna river shall be considered under seismic zone IV of India.
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK:
The stipulated scope of work involved carrying out the following operations:-
a) Mobilisation of necessary plant equipment, men and materials for the complete Geotechnical
investigation work as per specifications, drawings and instructions of the Engineer and to complete the
same within the stipulated time schedule and demobilisation after completion of field work.
Mobilization of Setup (like pontoon or similar arrangement with boat or sand bags) for Borehole under
water.
b) Shifting of Equipments from one structure location to another including Erection, installation of rigs at
site and dismantling of the same after completion of field work. Shifting of setup for each borehole
location and associated preparation for borehole under water
c) Making 150 mm nominal diameter boreholes at various locations in all types of soil including laterite,
highly weathered/weathered gneiss, granitic gneiss using suitable approved method of boring including
1 of 31
chiselling, cleaning, providing casing pipe as required or as directed; performing Standard

Penetration Test at every 1.5 m interval and at change of strata; collection of water samples and
disturbed soil samples, observation such as ground water, etc., collection of undisturbed soil samples at
every 3.0 m interval and at change of strata; transportation of all the collected samples to the laboratory
and back filling of boreholes on completion of the same, complete as per specification and instructions
of the Engineer, for depths below natural ground level.
d) Core drilling in rock using hydraulic feed rotary drill and Triple tube core barrel with diamond bit
including collection of core samples, performing SPT at locations where core recovery is less than
20%, maintaining continuous record of core recovery/ RQD, keeping the cores in metal core boxes,
transporting to laboratory, backfilling on completion of the same, all complete as per specification and
instructions of the EIC.
e) Conducting laboratory tests on Soil & Rock samples including preparation of the samples to determine
the following properties, all complete as per specification
 On Soil Samples
o Dry density test
o Bulk Density and Moisture Content.
o Sieve Analysis
o Hydrometer Analysis
o Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit
o Specific gravity
o Swelling Pressure Test
o Consolidation Test
o Direct Shear Test
o Triaxial Shear Test (Unconsolidated undrained)
o Unconfined Compressive Strength Test
On Rock Samples
o Moisture content, porosity & Density
o Specific gravity
o Hardness
o Soundness
o Slake Durability index
o Modulus of Elasticity
f) Submitting draft report in three copies including all field records and laboratory test results, graphs,
etc., all complete as per specifications.
2 of 31
g) Submitting final report in three compact disk (CD) copies and final report in 5 hard copies in after the
approval of the draft final report including all field records and laboratory test results, graphs, etc., all
complete as per specifications.
4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION:
The investigation was planned to obtain the subsurface stratification in the proposed project site and
collect soil / rock core samples for laboratory testing to determine the engineering properties such as
shear strength, along with basic engineering classification of the subsurface stratum.
For geotechnical investigation work, required equipements along with rotary drilling rigs and
manpower were mobilized at site to carry out various field activities as per the scope of work. These
were shifted from one test location to another location during execution of field work and were
demobilized on satisfactory completion of field work.
For conducting the field investigations the following practices were followed at site:
 The location of 01 borehole was marked at site at specified locations. These locations are shown in
Appendix A-1 attached subsequently.
The details of various borehole / test locations along with their coordinates are provided herein below:
Table 1.1: Details of Borehole Locations
Structure
Chainage
Depth of Depth of Co-ordinates (m)

(km)
S. Water Table Borehole

BH. No. (+) R.L. (m)
No. below EGL below EGL
E N
(m) (m)
658+750
MNB
1. BH-01 0.75 10.50 417444.00 1887843.00 570.570
Collection of Ground Water Samples from bore holes:
As the water table was met at the location of boreholes carried out for proposed structures. All the
samples were properly sealed, levelled and carefully transported to the laboratory for chemical analysis.
4.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION IN ROCK STRATA
Drilling was done by rotary core drilling method using Triple tube core barrels as per the guidelines of
IS: 6926-1196, because of its ability in retaining higher quality of rock samples. A core barrel and Nx
sized bits were used for drilling and recovering rock cores. Recovered rock cores were numbered
serially and preserved in good quality sturdy wooden core boxes as specified in IS: 4078-1980. Rock
core recovery and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) were computed for every run length. Water was
3 of 31
used as the drilling fluid. The ratio of total length of rock pieces collected to length drilled, expressed as
percentage and known as core recovery was recorded. To obtain RQD (Rock Quality Designation),
only those pieces of rock which were 10 cm and longer were measured for the total length. The above
length divided by length drilled, expressed as percentage, was recorded as RQD. The Core Recovery
and RQD value were assigned based on Standard procedure given in IS: 11315 (Part 11).
Thus
(a) Core recovery in % = (Length of Core / Length of run) x 100
(b) RQD in % = (Length of core in pieces of 100mm and above / Length of run) x100
Rock classification in terms of weathering, state of fractures & strength was carried out in the following
manner as tabulated below:-
Table 1.2: Scale of Weathering Grades of Rock Mass [cl. 3.6.2.2 of IS: 4464]
Terms Description Grade
No visible sign of rock material weathering; perhaps slight discoloration on
Fresh I
major discontinuity surfaces.
Discoloration indicates weathering of rock material and discontinuity
Slightly
surfaces. All the rock material may be discolored by weathering and may be II
Weathered
somewhat weaker externally that in its fresh condition.
Less than half of the rock material is decomposed or disintegrated to a soil.
Moderately
Fresh or discolored rock is present either as a continuous framework or as III
Weathered
core stones.
More than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a
Highly
soil. Fresh or discolored rock is present either as a discontinuous framework IV
Weathered
or as core stones.
Completely All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil. The original
V
Weathered mass structure is still largely intact.
All rock material is converted to soil. The mass structure and material fabric
Residual
are destroyed. There is a large change in volume, but the soil has not been VI
Soil
significantly transported.
As per IS 4464 it should be understood that all grades of weathering may not be seen in a given rock
mass and that in some cases a particular grade may be present to a very small extent. Distribution of the
various weathering grades of rock material in the rock mass may be decided related to the porosity of
the rock material and the presence of open discontinuities of all types in the rock mass.
Rock classification based on their physical condition and Unconfined Compressive Strength based on
Clause 8.2 and Table – 2 of IRC: 78-2014 as follows:-
4 of 31
Table 1.3: Classification of Rocks (IRC-78)
Unconfined Compressive
Rock Type Description
Strength (UCS) in MPa
Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick.
Extremely
Breaking of specimen could be done by sledge > 200
Strong
hammer only.
Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick.
Very Strong Breaking of specimens requires several hard blows of 100 to 200
geologists’ pick.
Can be scratched with knife or pick with difficulty.
Strong Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand 50 to 100
specimen.
Can be scratched with knife or pick, 6mm deep gouges or
Moderately
grooves can be made by hand blow of geologists’ pick. 12.5 to 50
Strong Hand specimen can be detached by moderate blow.
Can be grooved or gouged 1.5mm deep by firm
Moderately pressure on knife or pick point. Can be broken into
5 to 12.5
weak pieces or chips of about 2.5mm maximum size by
hard blows of the geologists’ pick.
Can be grooved or gouged easily with knife or pick
point. Can be break down in chips to pieces several
Weak 1.25 to 5
cm’s in size by moderate blows of pick point. Small
thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure.
Can be carved with knife. Can be broken easily with point
Very Weak of pick. Pieces 25mm or more in thickness can be broken < 1.25
by finger pressure. Can be scratched easily by finger nail.
Relation between RQD and In-situ Rock Quality

Rock quality is further measured by frequency of natural joints in rock mass. RQD is used to define
state of fractures or massiveness of rock. Following table defines the quality of rock mass as per Clause
5, IS: 11315 (Part 11)-1985:-
Table 1.4: Core Quality
Rock Type RQD (%)
Excellent 90 - 100
Good 75 - 90
Fair 50 - 75
Poor 25 - 50
Very Poor < 25
5 of 31
Estimated RMR values

Rock Mass Rating (RMR) of jointed rock masses, may be worked out based on IS 13365 (Part I).
RMR are reproduced from Annexure B of IS 13365 (Part I) below for ready reference:-
Strength of Intact Rock material (MPa)
Compressive Strength
Rating Basis
(MPa)
Exceptionally Strong > 250 15
Very Strong 100 - 250 12
Strong 50 - 100 7
UCS values data of specific borehole
Average 25 - 50 4
from laboratory test is used in RMR
Weak 10 - 25 2
Very Weak 2 - 10 1
Extremely <2 0
RQD
Compressive Strength (MPa) Rating Basis
Excellent 90 - 100 20
Good 75 - 90 17 RQD values data of specific borehole
Fair 50 - 75 13 given depth from relevant borehole is
Poor 25 - 50 8 used in RMR
Very Poor < 25 3
Spacing of Discontinuoties
Spacing, (m) Rating Basis
Very Wide >2 20

Wide 0.6-2 15 Spacing of discontinuities of specific
Moderate 0.2-0.6 10 borehole from filed observation is
Close 0.06-0.2 8 used in RMR
Very Close <0.06 5
Condition of Discontinuities
Very rough and Rough & slightly Slightly rough and Slickensided wall 5mm thick soft
unweathered rock weathered wall moderately to highly rock surface or 1- gauge 5mm wide
wall rock, tight and rock surface, weathered wall rock 5mm wide opening, continuous
discontinuous, no separation <1mm surface, separation continuous discontinuity
seperation <1mm discontinuity
30 25 20 10 0
Ground Water Condition
General Completely
Damp Wet Dripping Flowing
Description Dry
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
6 of 31
5.0 LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS:
5.1 LABORATORY TESTS ON ROCK CORE SAMPLES
Rock samples recovered from various depths of strata were tested for the following properties:
Table 1.5: Laboratory Tests for Rocks
Description of Test Specifications
Preparation of rock specimen IS : 9179
Specific gravity, porosity and water absorption IS : 13030
Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) IS : 9143
Modulus of Elasticity IS: 9221
Point Load Index (PLI) IS : 8764
 The results of various laboratory tests conducted on selected rock core samples are shown vide
Appendix – B.
The detailed procedure adopted for conducting various laboratory tests is described in the
following paragraphs:
5.1.1 Preparation of Rock Specimen (IS: 9179)

The core cut-off machine was used for cross cutting of rock core. Rock core was clamped in a vee-
block slotted to permit passage of wheel. Core was supported on both sides of the cut to avoid
spalling. Edge grinding was done using lathe. Sample was held directly in the chuck and rotated
and the grinding wheel was passed against it.
5.1.2 Water Absorption (WA) & Specific Gravity (SG) (IS: 13030)
Following procedure was adopted to determine water absorption and specific gravity of rock
samples.
Approximately 500g of rock sample was thoroughly washed to remove finer particles and dust
and then immersed in distilled water for a period of 24 ± ½ hours. Mass of the basket submerged
in the immersion bath was noted down. Sample was transferred under water to the basket in the
immersion bath. Saturated submerged mass of the basket plus sample was noted. Massof the clean
dry sample container and lid was noted. Sample was removed from the immersion bath and surface
dried. Mass of the saturated surface dry sample plus container was noted. Sample and the container
with lid was oven dried. Dried mass was noted.
5.1.3 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) (IS: 9143)

For the determination of UCS of rock core, length to diameter ratio of the cylindrical specimen
was kept between 2.0 to 3.0. The specimen ends were made flat. The specimen was kept on the
lower disc of compression testing machine. The axis of the specimen was carefully aligned with
the center of the thrust of the spherical seat. Load on the specimen was applied continuously at a
7 of 31
constant stress rate such that failure takes place in about 5 to 15 minutes of loading. The maximum
load on the specimen was recorded. The unconfined compressive strength of the specimen was
calculated by dividing the max load carried by the specimen during the test by the average original
cross-sectional area.
5.1.4 Point Load Index (PLI) (IS:8764)

The diameter ‘D’ of the specimen measured in ‘mm’. The core specimen was tested after soaking
them. There are two methods to determine Point Load Index on rock cores.
a) Diametral Test
Core specimens with length/diameter ratio greater than 1.0 were used for diametral testing. The
specimen was inserted in the test machine and the platens were closed to make contact along a
core diameter, ensured the distance between contact point and the nearest free end was at least 0.50
times the core diameter.
Load was applied to the specimen such that failure occurs within 10-60s and the failure load ‘P’
is recorded.
b) Axial Test
Core specimens with length/diameter ratio of 0.3 to 1.0 are suitable for axial testing. The specimen
was inserted in the test machine and the platens closed to make contact along a line perpendicular
to the core end faces.
Load was then applied to the specimen such that failure occurs within 10-60s and the failure load
‘P’ was recorded.
8 of 31
CHAPTER 2 ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION

6.0 STRATIFICATION
From the study of the borehole log of 01 BH it is revealed that the sub strata :
At the location of BH-01 :-
a) From existing ground level to 1.50m depth, strata consists of filled up soil.
b) From 1.50 to 3.00 m depth, strata consists of fine grained soil i.e., silty clay of low plasticity.
c) From 3.00 m to 4.50 depth, Strata consist of rocky strata i.e., Completely Weathered ,brown,Basalt
Rock.
d) From 4.50 m to 7.50 depth, Strata consist of rocky strata i.e., Highly Weathered,brown to
grey,Basalt Rock.
e) From 7.50 m depth to termination depth, Strata consist of rocky strata i.e., Slightly,grey,Basalt
Rock.
6.1 COMPUTATION OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL
Liquefaction is the sudden loss of shear strength of the sub soil strata due to earthquake-induced
vibration under saturated conditions.
Assessment of liquefaction potential of foundation strata is made by simplified approach proposed

as per IS: 1893 (Part-1)-2016, from the SPT data and peak ground acceleration likely to occur at
the site. In this method, cyclic shear stress likely to be induced in the foundation strata by Design
Basis Earthquake (DBE) is first evaluated.
Next threshold cyclic shear stress, which is good enough to cause liquefaction, is determined from
SPT data and the empirical relations. Finally, comparison of these two stresses is used in the
estimation of liquefaction susceptibility of the foundation strata.
Unsaturated soils are not subjected to liquefaction because vibratory forces from earthquakes do
not cause any increase in pore water pressure in such soils.
The area of site falls in seismic zone – III upto koyna river and beyond koyana river site falls in
seismic zone - IV of India as per IS: 1893. Further as per the provisions of IS: 1893 in soil deposits
consisting of submerged loose sands & soils falling under classification of SP with standard
penetration N value less than 15, the shaking caused by earthquake ground motion may cause
liquefaction or excessive total and differential settlements.
For the analysis of liquefaction potential, following constant parameters are considered:
9 of 31
EQ Zone III
Earthquake Magnitude (Mw) 6.0
Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration
0.16
(amax /g)
As per IITK RDSO Guidelines- Appendix – (G) “Simplified Procedure for Evaluation of
Liquefaction Potential (Clause 13.3):
a. Cohesive soils should be considered liquefiable if wl≤ 37 %, Ip≤ 12 % and wn>0.80 wl is the
liquid limit, where Ip is the Plasticity Index.
b. Liquefaction susceptibility of soils should be considered marginal if wl ≤ 47 %, Ip≤ 20 % and

wn≥ 0.85 wl, where Ip is the Plasticity Index.
c. Cohesive soils should be considered non-liquefiable if wl>47 % or Ip>20 % or wn<0.85 wl,

where Ip is the Plasticity Index.
The Ground Water Table was encountered 01 Borehole (namely BH-01) at depth is 0.75m below
the existing ground level, it may rise up during heavy rains / rainy season. Therefore, for the
analysis of liquefaction potential, the water table has been considered to rise by about EGL.
Therefore liquefaction analysis has been carried out & liquefaction depths are given below:-
Table 2.1: Liquefaction Analysis
Water Table Depth
Chainage/ Water Table
BH considered for Liquefiable Depth
Sl. No. Structure Depth below
No. analysis below EGL (m)
(km) EGL (m)
(m)
658+750
1. BH-01 0.75 0.00 Non-Liquefiable
MNB
Note: - The details of sample calculation for computation of liquefaction potential are shown vide
Appendix-C1.
6.2 SILT FACTOR
Silt Factor calculated as per IRC: 78-2014 and given below in table 2.2 were supplied to the
designer.
Table 2.2: Silt Factor
Chainage/Structure
BH No. DEPTH (m) SILT FACTOR
(km)
658+750 1.50 3.06
BH-01
MNB 3.00 Non-Scourable Below At
10 of 31
Table 2.3: Silt Factor Calculation

COHESIVE SOIL
As per IRC:78 - 2014 (Appendix-1) Clause 703.2.2 Page-53
B.H. No. = BH-01
Depth (m) = 1.50
Silt Factor formula = Kst = F (1+(C)1/2)
1.50 for Ø > 10o and <15o
F = 1.75 for Ø > 5o and <10o
2.00 for Ø < 5o
1.75 X (1+(0.53)1/2)
Kst =
3.06
11 of 31
CHAPTER 3 TYPE AND DEPTH OF FOUNDATION WITH ANALYSIS
7.0 ANALYSIS OF FOUNDATION

7.1 TYPE & DEPTH OF FOUNDATION:
Based on the nature & strength characteristics of the substrata and requirement of the project, the
following type of foundation have been analyzed as given below:
Chainage/ Depth of Size of the

Type of
Structure BH No. foundation foundation Remarks
foundation
(km) below E.G.L. (m) (m)
14.0 x 19.0 -
658+750 Open
BH-01 3.00, 4.00 & 5.00
MNB Foundation
17.0 x 19.0 -
The details of foundation analysis are given in the subsequent paragraph.
7.1.1 From Shear Failure Criteria

Net Safe Bearing capacity from Shear Failure consideration has been computed in accordance with
IS: 6403-1981, which is based on, modified Terzaghi’s classical approach. A factor of safety of 2.5
has been taken to estimate the net safe bearing capacity from ultimate net bearing capacity.
For soils, containing both coarse grained (gravels & sands) and fine grained (clays), c and Φ are
used to determine the soil strength. In case of predominantly fine grained soils, c and Φ are
determined by the Triaxial Compression test as per IS: 2720 pt XI. For predominantly coarse
grained soils, c and Φ are determined by Direct Shear test as per IS: 2720 pt XIII. These c and Φ
values were used for determining the SBC of soil as per shear failure criteria.
The ultimate net bearing capacity in case of general shear failure is given by following expression,
qd = c Nc sc dc ic + q (Nq-1) sq dq iq + (1/2) B NsdiW'
The ultimate net bearing capacity in case of local shear failure is given by following expression,
q'd = (2/3) c N'c sc dc ic + q (N'q-1) sq dq iq + (1/2) B N'sdiW'
Where,
dc = 1+ 0.2 (Df/B)*SQRT(N)
dq = d = 1 for  <10o
dq = d = 1 + 0.1 (Df/B)*SQRT(N) for  >10o
N = tan2(/4 +/2)
' for local shear failure = tan-1 ( 0.67 tan )
12 of 31
The following soil parameters were selected for calculations:
7.1.2 From Settlement Failure Criteria
Allowable Bearing Pressure from Settlement Failure consideration has been computed in
accordance with IS: 8009 (Part-I). The magnitude of settlement, when foundation loads are
applied, depends upon the compressibility of the underlying strata and rigidity of the substructure.
The total permissible settlement in cohesion-less soil is estimated using SPT value as per IS: 8009
(Part-I). While using this approach, the N value was corrected, wherever applicable, below the
footing base to at least 1.5B (where 'B' is the width of foundation) for the effects of energy ratio,
dilation for submerged silty fine sands / fine sands as well as that due to the overburden pressure.
Further the immediate settlements in cohesive soil are estimated using the elastic theory
considering the effect of a rigid stratum underlying the foundation soils (Reference: “Foundation
Analysis and Design” by J.E.Bowles) and for consolidation settlement in cohesive soil the
following equation has been used:
St = ∆P Mv H
Where,
Mv = Coefficient of volume compressibility, cm2/kg
∆P = Pressure increment, kg/cm2
H = Thickness of layers
For the analysis of shallow foundation the total permissible settlement have been considered as
50mm.
Zone of influence below foundation has been considered up to 1.5 times the width of the
foundation.
Lower of the two values obtained from settlement and shear criteria is used in arriving at allowable
bearing capacity of the soil.
Sample calculation for computation of allowable bearing capacity of sub-strata for shallow
foundation resting on soil are attached vide Appendix C-1.
13 of 31
CHAPTER 4 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

8.0 SBC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OPEN FOUNDATION
 The Sub-strata of location shows that the sub-strata consist of highly disintegrated rock. Proper
samples were not available for the testing purpose at these depths due to the disintegration of the
strata during drilling.
 Based on the nature & strength characteristics of the substrata and requirement of the project,
open foundation have been analysed at the location of boreholes.
 SBC has been calculated on the basis of shear & settlement crireia.
 Minimum foundation depth should be 1.5m below the Scour depth as per IRC-78 (Clause:
705.2).
 Geological Factor used in settlement calculation for clayey strata is taken as per IS 8009 (part-1),
Clause: 9.2.3.1 (Table-1).
 Stroud (1974) has proposed a correlation for estimation of mv from SPT N values as:
mv (m2 / kN) = 1 / (f2 N60)
Where f2 has been taken from graph shown below
Fig: Variation of coefficient f2 with plasticity index (PI)

(Stroud, 1974)
14 of 31
Table 4.1: Recommended Net Allowable Bearing Capacity for 50mm Settlement
Net Safe Bearing Capacity

from Shear Failure (t/m2)
Recommended Allowable
Chainage (km)/Structure
Pressure from settlement
Bearing Capacity (t/m2)

Depth of Foundation
T
Foundation size (m)

Type of Foundation
Allowable Bearing
below EGL (m)
failure (t/m2)
BH` No.
3.00 45.2 89.9 45.2

14.0 x 19.0 4.00 50.2 91.8 50.0
658+750
5.00 55.4 93.9 50.0

MNB
Open
BH-01
Foundation 3.00 48.1 89.3 48.1
17.0 x 19.0 4.00 53.1 90.8 53.1
5.00 58.3 92.7 58.3
Note:
1. For calculating the SBC of open foundation the same strata as encountered at the termination
depth has been considered up to the depth of influence zone.
2. The Recommended net allowable bearing capacity to be adopted for design of foundation is
restricted to a maximum value of 50 t/m2.
All The above recommendations are based on the field and laboratory tests conducted on selected
soil samples and our experience in this regard. If the actual substrata conditions during
excavation for the foundation differ from the observations reported here, the design
experts/consultants should be referred for suggestion, further investigations.
15 of 31
Abbreviations
BH Borehole
TP Trial Pit
ERT Electrical Resistivity Test
CBR California Bearing Ratio
EGL Existing Ground Level
GWT Ground Water Table
IS Indian Standards
SPT Standard Penetration Test
DS Disturbed Soil
R.L. Reduced Level
m Metre
sp. gr. Specific Gravity
% Percentage
mg /l Milligram per litre
mg /kg Milligram per kilogram.
Str. Structure.
App. Approach.
16 of 31
APPENDIX – A (FIELD DATA RESULTS)

Appendix No. ITEMS
A-1 FIELD BORE HOLE LOG
A-2 LOCATION PLAN
17 of 31
FIELD BOREHOLE LOG
Project Name :"Six laning of Kagal-Satara section of NH-48 in the state of Maharashtra". Client :Adani Road Transport
BH Location/Chainage :658+750 km Northing :1887843 m Easting :417444 m

Reduced Level (m):(+)570.570 BH. No. :BH-01 BH Depth (m):10.5
Proposed/Existing Structure :Minor Bridge Water Table (m):0.75 Inclination : Vertical
Boring type :Rotary Dia. of Boring :150/76 mm Depth of Casing (m) :
Date of Start :02-08-2022 Date of Completion :07-08-2022
Classification
Depth ( m )
In-SituTest
Sample &
SPT Core (Depth

Depth Sample Strata Graphic RQD Special
N Recovery v/s
IS
(m) Type Description Log (%) Observations
Value (%) SPT N Value)
0.0 0 25 50 75100 0 25 50 75100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

100
DS
0.5
Filled up soil FILL 0.75m

1.0
1.5 1.5 SPT-1 16
2.0
Brownish, very stiif, silty
CL
clay of low plasticity
2.5
3.0 3 SPT-2 100

3.05 RC-2
3.5
Brownish, completely to
highly weathered ,
GRADE-V
strong, very poor, basalt
4.0 rock
4.5 4.5 RC-3 10 8
5.0
Brownish to greyish,
highly weathered,
GRADE-IV
strong, very poor,
5.5 fractured basalt rock
6.0 6 RC-4 11 0
6.5
Greyish, highly
weathered, strong, very
GRADE-IV
poor, fine to medium
7.0 grained basalt rock
7.5 7.5 RC-5 46 38
8.0
8.5
Greyish, slightly
weathered, strong,
GRADE-II
good, fine to medium
9.0 9 RC-6 grained basalt rock 82 79
9.5
10.0
UDS*-UDS not recovered
18 of 31
FIELD BOREHOLE LOG
Project Name :"Six laning of Kagal-Satara section of NH-48 in the state of Maharashtra". Client :Adani Road Transport
BH Location/Chainage :658+750 km Northing :1887843 m Easting :417444 m

Reduced Level (m):(+)570.570 BH. No. :BH-01 BH Depth (m):10.5
Proposed/Existing Structure :Minor Bridge Water Table (m):0.75 Inclination : Vertical
Boring type :Rotary Dia. of Boring :150/76 mm Depth of Casing (m) :
Date of Start :02-08-2022 Date of Completion :07-08-2022
Classification
Depth ( m )
In-SituTest
Sample &
SPT Core (Depth

Depth Sample Strata Graphic RQD Special
N Recovery v/s
IS
(m) Type Description Log (%) Observations
Value (%) SPT N Value)
10.0 0 25 50 75100 0 25 50 75100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

100
GRADE-II
10.5 10.5 86 81
UDS*-UDS not recovered

19 of 31
Geotechnical Investigaton works for "Six laning of Kagal-Satara section of NH-48 (old NH-4) [Package-II from km 658.000 to km 725.000] in the state of SR-673_22-23
Maharashtra to be executed on BOT (Toll) mode under Bharatmala Pariyojana"
20 of 31
APPENDIX – B (LAB TEST RESULTS)

Appendix No. ITEMS
B-1 SOIL AND ROCK CHARACTERISTICS SHEET
B-2 GSD CURVES
21 of 31
SOIL AND ROCK CHARACTERISTICS
Termination
Date of Boring Chainage/Location B.H. No. Depth of Water Table Cordinates (E,N) R.L. Ref. Code
Geotechnical investigation works for Kagal Satara Package-II in the state of
Depth
Project
Maharashtra, India Project.
658+750
02-08-2022 to 07-08-2022 BH-01 0.75 m 10.50 m 417444.000 m 1887843.000 m (+)570.570 m SR-673_22-23
Minor Bridge
3
3
Grain Size Distribution % wt retained Atterberg Limits % Shear Strength Consolidation Parameters
Sand Gravel
2
-2
-4
2)
2
Soil & Rock Description
(N)
(%)
2
(cm/sec)
(kg/cm )
Silt
IS Symbol
Value (Nc)
Clay
Silt Factor
Limit
Index
Fine
Fine
Content (%)
Permeability
Sample Type
(kg/cm
Cv x 10
(kg/cm )
Angle of
Pressure
Mv x 10
(cm /Kg)
Corrected SPT
Coarse
Coarse
Plasticity
(cm /Sec)
Shrinkage
Index (Cc)
Specific Gravity
IS Classification
Medium
Free Swell Index
Cohesion C
Natural Moisture
Swelling Pressure
Type of Test
Friction (φ°)
Plastic Limit
Liquid Limit
Compression
Dry Density (g/cm )

Void Ratio (e0)
Bulk Density (g/cm )
Depth from G.L. (m)

Observed SPT Value
DS 0.00 - - Filled up soil - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brownish, very stiif, silty clay of

SPT-1 1.50 16 16 CL - 15 63 13 5 0 4 0 34 21 13 - 1.95 26.50 1.54 2.70 UUT+ 0.56 5 - - - - - - - - 3.06
low plasticity
SPT-2 3.00 >100 - Brownish, completely to highly GRADE-V - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

weathered , strong, very poor, basalt
rock C. R. = 10 % R.Q.D. = 8 % Sp.Gr. = 2.71 W.A. = 0.47 % Density = 2.71 (g/cc) Porosity = 1.27 % - - - U.C.S. = 3964.63 (t/m²)
RC-2 3.05 - - GRADE-V - -
Brownish to greyish, highly

RC-3 4.50 - - weathered, strong, very poor, GRADE-IV - C. R. = 11 % R.Q.D. = 0 % Sp.Gr. = 2.70 W.A. = 0.43 % Density = 2.72 (g/cc) Porosity = 1.19 % - - - - -
fractured basalt rock
Greyish, highly weathered, strong,
RC-4 6.00 - - very poor, fine to medium grained GRADE-IV - C. R. = 46 % R.Q.D. = 38 % Sp.Gr. = 2.70 W.A. = 0.45 % Density = 2.70 (g/cc) Porosity = 1.16 % - - - U.C.S. = 4123.63 (t/m²) -
basalt rock
RC-5 7.50 - - - C. R. = 82 % R.Q.D. = 79 % Sp.Gr. = 2.69 W.A. = 0.45 % Density = 2.70 (g/cc) Porosity = 1.21 % - - - - -
Greyish, slightly weathered, strong, GRADE-II
22 of 31
good, fine to medium grained basalt
rock C. R. = 86 % R.Q.D. = 81 % Sp.Gr. = 2.67 W.A. = 0.46 % Density = 2.69 (g/cc) Porosity = 1.23 % - - - U.C.S. = 6286.3 (t/m²)
RC-6 9.00 - - GRADE-II - -
Ref. Code:-SR-673_22-23
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES
Project Name Geotechnical investigation works for Kagal Satara Package-II in the state of Maharashtra, India Project.
Location/Chainage 658+750Minor Bridge

B.H. No. BH-01
CLAY SILT FINE SAND MEDIUM SAND COARSE FINE GRAVEL COARSE
SAND GRAVEL
100
90
80
70
Percent Finer By Weight
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 0.002 0.075 0.425 2 4.75 19

0.002 0.075 0.425 2 4.75 20 80
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
DEPTH: Grain Size Millimeters
1.50 m
Grain Size Distribution % wt retained

Depth Sand Gravel D10 D30 D60 Cu Cc
Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse Fine Coarse
1.50 m 15.00 63.00 13.00 5.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 - 0.0085 0.0410 - -
CEG TEST HOUSE AND RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.
23 of 31
APPENDIX – C
(ANALYSIS & RECOMENDATION)
Appendix No. ITEMS
CALCULATION FOR COMPUTATION OF LIQUEFACTION
C-1
POTENTIAL
SAMPLE CALCULATION FOR COMPUTATION OF ALLOWABLE
C-2 BEARING CAPACITY OF SUB-STRATA FOR OPEN FOUNDATION
RESTING ON SOIL
24 of 31
"Six laning of Kagal-Satara section of NH-48 in the state of Maharashtra". SR-673_22-23
Liquefaction Analysis as per IS: 1893 (Part 1)-2016 & RDSO BS-118
Chainage/ 658+750 Water Table depth considered for
BH No.:- BH-01 Liquefiable upto= NL 0.00
Structure Minor Bridge analysis (m):-
Stress Stress
Depth Saturate Subme Plastic Moisture Total Effective Critical SPT
Observe Liquid Plastic Fine Reductio Normali
Below d rged ity Content @ Liquefaction Check Overburd Overburd Stress Correct CRRM
d SPT Limit Limit Strata Type Content n CHT CHW CSS CRL CBD C60 zation α β (N1)60CS CRRM=7.5 KM Kα Kσ FOS Conclusion
G.L. (z) Density Densit Index 100% for Cohesive Strata en Press en (σ'o), Ratio ed w
Value 3 3 (%) (%) (%) Coefficie 2 Factor(C
in m (t/m ) y (t/m ) (%) saturation (σo), t/m t/m2 (CSR) (N1)60
nt (rd) N)
1.50 16 1.97 0.97 34.00 21.00 13.00 27.90 Cohesive Non-Liquefiable - 0.989 2.95 1.45 0.209 0.75 0.986 1.00 0.75 1.05 0.582 - - - - - - - - - - >1 Non Liquefiable
25 of 31
CEG Test House and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.
Geotechnical investigation works for Kagal Satara Package-II in the state of SR-673_22-23
Calculation of SBC for shallow foundations as per IS : 6403 - 1981

INPUT DATA 658+750 km
BH-01(MNB)
Type of footing
1 Continuous Strip
2 Rectangular Rectangular 2
3 Square
4 Circular
Angle of internal friction (f o ) 27.13

2
Cohesion (c in t/m ) 0.60
Void ratio (e), e = (G.γw/γd)-1 0.57
o
Direction of load with vertical ( ) 0.00
3
Density of foundation soil (t/m ) γbulk 1.81
Depth of water table(m) 2.00
Factor of safety 2.50
S.no. Depth (m) of footing (Df) below EGL Width (m) Length (m)
1 3.00 14.00 19.00
2 4.00 14.00 19.00
3 5.00 14.00 19.00
SHEAR FAILURE CRITERIA
Assumptions and formula used in calculation as per IS:6403-1981 are given below -
NOTE: The type of failure used for bearing capacity analysis depends upon the value of void ratio (see IS 6403 :
1981, Page No. 9, Table No. 3).
The ultimate net bearing capacity in case of general shear failure is given by (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8)
qd = c Nc sc dc ic + q (Nq-1) sq dq iq + (1/2) B g Ng sg dg ig W'
The ultimate net bearing capacity in case of local shear failure is given by (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8)
q'd = (2/3) c N'c sc dc ic + q (N'q-1) sq dq iq + (1/2) B g N'g sg dg ig W'

Where,
dc = 1+ 0.2 (Df/B)*SQRT(Nf )
o
dq = dg = 1 for f <10 (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
o
dq = dg = 1 + 0.1 (Df/B)*SQRT(Nf ) for f >10
Nf = tan2(p/4 +f/2)
-1
f' is friction angle for local shear failure = tan ( 0.67 tanf )
OUTPUT
The computer aided results for shear failure criteria are tabulated below. The results are
interpolated values of bearing capacity obtained from general and local shear failure
criteria.
CEG Test House and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur
26 of 31
Bearing capacity factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8, Table No. 1)
f 27.13 f' 18.95

Nc 24.17 N'c 13.89
Nq 13.39 N'q 5.77
Ng 14.74 N'g 4.65
Shape factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8, Table No. 2)
S.no. Width(m) Length (m) Sc Sq Sg

1 14.00 19.00 1.15 1.15 0.71
2 14.00 19.00 1.15 1.15 0.71
3 14.00 19.00 1.15 1.15 0.71
Depth factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
S.no. Depth(m) Width(m) dc dq dg

1 3.00 14.00 1.07 1.04 1.04
2 4.00 14.00 1.09 1.05 1.05
3 5.00 14.00 1.12 1.06 1.06
Inclination factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
2 2
ic = (1-a / 90) iq = (1-a / 90) 2 ig = (1- a / f)
1.00 1.00 1.00
Water table factor : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
S.no. Depth(m) Width(m) Zw/B W'

1 3.00 14.00 -0.07 0.50
2 4.00 14.00 -0.14 0.50
3 5.00 14.00 -0.21 0.50
Safe Bearing Capacity
2
S.no. Depth(m) Width(m) Length (m) SBC in (t/m )
General shear Local shear Recommended
1 3.00 14.00 19.00 48.63 16.81 45.18
2 4.00 14.00 19.00 54.06 18.88 50.25
3 5.00 14.00 19.00 59.60 20.99 55.41
NOTE: The type of failure used for bearing capacity analysis depends upon the value of void ratio (see IS
6403 : 1981, Page No. 9, Table No. 3).
27 of 31
SETTLEMENT CALCULATION AS PER 8009 Part-1 1976 BH-01 (MNB)
2
Si
To
(l )
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
From
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
Layer
Length
Si (mm)
Breadth
Settlement
Depth Factor
Cohesive Soil
Mvc (Cm /Kg)

Rigidity Factor
level (Kg/Cm2)
Corrected Total
Layer Thickness
Depth (kg/Cm2)
Average N-Value
Total Settlement
Settlement (mm)
Depth below FGL

Dispersed Length
Geological Factor
Elastic Settlement
Height of layer(m)
Dispersed Breadth
Settlement in Non-
Stress at Foundation
I), Fig. 9, Page NO. 17)
Settlement (mm) for 10
Stress Increment at mid

Corrected Consolidation
t/m2 (from IS:8009 (Part
Consolidation Settlement
Layer 1 3.00 24.00 21.00 21.00 19.00 14.000 8.987 100 0.0000 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.90 52.20 52.20
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.00 0.00 8.99 19.00 14.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.958 1.00 50.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00
Layer 1 4.00 25.00 21.00 21.00 19.00 14.000 9.179 100 0.0000 0.00 0.00 2.90 53.32 53.32
28 of 31
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.00 0.00 9.18 19.00 14.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.938 1.00 50.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00
Layer 1 5.00 26.00 21.00 21.00 19.00 14.000 9.390 100 0.0000 0.00 0.00 2.90 54.54 54.54
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.00 0.00 9.39 19.00 14.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.917 1.00 50.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00

Calculation of SBC for shallow foundations as per IS : 6403 - 1981

INPUT DATA 658+750 km
BH-01 (MNB)
Type of footing
1 Continuous Strip
2 Rectangular Rectangular 2
3 Square
4 Circular
Angle of internal friction (f o ) 27.13

2
Cohesion (c in t/m ) 0.60
Void ratio (e), e = (G.γw/γd)-1 0.57
o
Direction of load with vertical ( ) 0.00
3
Density of foundation soil (t/m ) γbulk 1.81
Depth of water table(m) 0.00
Factor of safety 2.50
S.no. Depth (m) of footing (Df) below EGL Width (m) Length (m)
1 3.00 17.00 19.00
2 4.00 17.00 19.00
3 5.00 17.00 19.00
SHEAR FAILURE CRITERIA
Assumptions and formula used in calculation as per IS:6403-1981 are given below -
NOTE: The type of failure used for bearing capacity analysis depends upon the value of void ratio (see IS 6403 :
1981, Page No. 9, Table No. 3).
The ultimate net bearing capacity in case of general shear failure is given by (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8)
qd = c Nc sc dc ic + q (Nq-1) sq dq iq + (1/2) B g Ng sg dg ig W'
The ultimate net bearing capacity in case of local shear failure is given by (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8)
q'd = (2/3) c N'c sc dc ic + q (N'q-1) sq dq iq + (1/2) B g N'g sg dg ig W'

Where,
dc = 1+ 0.2 (Df/B)*SQRT(Nf )
o
dq = dg = 1 for f <10 (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
o
dq = dg = 1 + 0.1 (Df/B)*SQRT(Nf ) for f >10
Nf = tan2(p/4 +f/2)
-1
f' is friction angle for local shear failure = tan ( 0.67 tanf )
OUTPUT
The computer aided results for shear failure criteria are tabulated below. The results are
interpolated values of bearing capacity obtained from general and local shear failure
criteria.
29 of 31
Bearing capacity factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8, Table No. 1)
f 27.13 f' 18.95

Nc 24.17 N'c 13.89
Nq 13.39 N'q 5.77
Ng 14.74 N'g 4.65
Shape factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 8, Table No. 2)
S.no. Width(m) Length (m) Sc Sq Sg

1 17.00 19.00 1.18 1.18 0.64
2 17.00 19.00 1.18 1.18 0.64
3 17.00 19.00 1.18 1.18 0.64
Depth factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
S.no. Depth(m) Width(m) dc dq dg

1 3.00 17.00 1.06 1.03 1.03
2 4.00 17.00 1.08 1.04 1.04
3 5.00 17.00 1.10 1.05 1.05
Inclination factors : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
2 2
ic = (1-a / 90) iq = (1-a / 90) 2 ig = (1- a / f)
1.00 1.00 1.00
Water table factor : (from IS 6403 : 1981, page No. 9)
S.no. Depth(m) Width(m) Zw/B W'

1 3.00 17.00 -0.18 0.50
2 4.00 17.00 -0.24 0.50
3 5.00 17.00 -0.29 0.50
Safe Bearing Capacity
2
S.no. Depth(m) Width(m) Length (m) SBC in (t/m )
General shear Local shear Recommended
1 3.00 17.00 19.00 51.74 17.82 48.06
2 4.00 17.00 19.00 57.19 19.89 53.15
3 5.00 17.00 19.00 62.73 22.01 58.31
NOTE: The type of failure used for bearing capacity analysis depends upon the value of void ratio (see IS
6403 : 1981, Page No. 9, Table No. 3).
30 of 31
SETTLEMENT CALCULATION AS PER 8009 Part-1 1976 BH-01 (MNB)
2
Si
To
(l )
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
(m)
From
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
Layer
Length
Si (mm)
Breadth
Settlement
Depth Factor
Cohesive Soil
Mvc (Cm /Kg)

Rigidity Factor
level (Kg/Cm2)
Corrected Total
Layer Thickness
Depth (kg/Cm2)
Average N-Value
Total Settlement
Settlement (mm)
Depth below FGL

Dispersed Length
Geological Factor
Elastic Settlement
Height of layer(m)
Dispersed Breadth
Settlement in Non-
Stress at Foundation
I), Fig. 9, Page NO. 17)
Settlement (mm) for 10
Stress Increment at mid

Corrected Consolidation
t/m2 (from IS:8009 (Part
Consolidation Settlement
Layer 1 3.00 28.50 25.50 25.50 19.00 17.000 8.926 100 0.0000 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.91 51.91 51.91
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.00 0.00 8.93 19.00 17.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.963 1.00 50.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00
Layer 1 4.00 29.50 25.50 25.50 19.00 17.000 9.084 100 0.0000 0.00 0.00 2.91 52.83 52.83
31 of 31
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.00 0.00 9.08 19.00 17.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.946 1.00 50.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00
Layer 1 5.00 30.50 25.50 25.50 19.00 17.000 9.271 100 0.0000 0.00 0.00 2.91 53.91 53.91
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.00 0.00 9.27 19.00 17.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.927 1.00 50.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00

SR-673 - GTIR - CH-658+750 - MNB - 01 BH - Rev.1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SR-673 - GTIR - CH-658+750 - MNB - 01 BH - Rev.1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SR-673 - GTIR - CH-658+750 - MNB - 01 BH - Rev.1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotechnical Investigation Report

Chainage/Structure:- 658+750_Minor Bridge

SR. No. Report No. Revision No. Date

B-11(G), Malviya Industrial Area, Jaipur-302017

CEGTH/ART/SR-673/2022-23/1266 Date:- 23.12.2022

Very truly yours,

Nehal Jain Dr.Sarvesh Chandra Mohd Waseem

General Manager - Geotechnical Technical Advisor Sr. Geotechnical Engineer

SR. No. Report Ref. No. Revision No. Date

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

LIST OF FIGURES / TABLES

CEG TEST HOUSE AND RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

2.0 SITE LOCATION

3.0 SCOPE OF WORK:

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

chiselling, cleaning, providing casing pipe as required or as directed; performing Standard

4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION:

Depth of Depth of Co-ordinates (m)

S. Water Table Borehole

1. BH-01 0.75 10.50 417444.00 1887843.00 570.570

Collection of Ground Water Samples from bore holes:

4.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION IN ROCK STRATA

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

Table 1.3: Classification of Rocks (IRC-78)

Relation between RQD and In-situ Rock Quality

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

Estimated RMR values

Very Wide >2 20

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

5.0 LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS:

5.1 LABORATORY TESTS ON ROCK CORE SAMPLES

5.1.1 Preparation of Rock Specimen (IS: 9179)

5.1.3 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) (IS: 9143)

5.1.4 Point Load Index (PLI) (IS:8764)

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

CHAPTER 2 ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION

6.1 COMPUTATION OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL

Assessment of liquefaction potential of foundation strata is made by simplified approach proposed

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

b. Liquefaction susceptibility of soils should be considered marginal if wl ≤ 47 %, Ip≤ 20 % and

c. Cohesive soils should be considered non-liquefiable if wl>47 % or Ip>20 % or wn<0.85 wl,

6.2 SILT FACTOR

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

Table 2.3: Silt Factor Calculation

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

CHAPTER 3 TYPE AND DEPTH OF FOUNDATION WITH ANALYSIS

7.0 ANALYSIS OF FOUNDATION

Chainage/ Depth of Size of the

The details of foundation analysis are given in the subsequent paragraph.

7.1.1 From Shear Failure Criteria

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

The following soil parameters were selected for calculations:

7.1.2 From Settlement Failure Criteria

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

CHAPTER 4 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

Fig: Variation of coefficient f2 with plasticity index (PI)

CEG Test House & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.

Net Safe Bearing Capacity

Pressure from settlement