Geotech Report Minorbridge 1 Pachora-Jamnersection

CENTRAL RAILWAY
CONSTRUCTION & SURVEY ORGANISATION
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

OF
MINOR BRIDGE AT 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1,

386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
ON
FINAL LOCATION SURVEY
OF
PACHORA-JAMNER(G.C.) BODWAD NEW
B.G.LINE (84 Kms.)
(PINK BOOK ITEM NO. 16 of 2021-22)
SUBMITTED TO:
OFFICE OF THE
DY. CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION)
BHUSAWAL
SUBMITTED BY:
AERIAL DATA APPLICATIONS & MAPPING SERVICES

Registered Office: Flat No.109, 10-2-273, Keerthy Sudharshan Apartments, West
Merredpally, Secunderabad – 500 026 Telangana.
Phone/Fax: 040-2750 1689 Mobile: 9100089985
Signature Not E-mail: [email protected]
Verified
Digitally signed by
VAISHALI PATERIA
Date: 2024.06.05
13:39:01 IST
Reason: IREPS-CRIS
Location: New Delhi
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORTS OF MAJOR BRIDGE FOR PACHORA-
JAMNER (G.C) BODWAD NEW B.G.LINE
MINOR BRIDGE AT
384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
INDEX
Sr. Page.
Particulars.
No. From. To.
A Report
1 Introduction
2 Field Exploration
2.1 Boring
2.2 Sampling
2.3 Standard penetration Test.
2.4 Measurement of water Table
3 Laboratory Testing
4 Soil Profile and Properties
5 Hydrology
6 Chemical Test On Soil Samples
7 Undrained Traixial Test
8 California Bearing Ration Test
9 Results & Analysis
1) Settlement Method.
2) Is (Core Strength) Method.
10 Safe Bearing Capacity for open foundation
Recommendations.
Conclusions.
B Bore-Logs & Test Results
Soil Profile & Test Results (Table-1)
Detailed Calculations of SBC by Settlement
AKHIL BHARATIYA MARATHA SHIKSHAN PARISHAD’S ANANTRAO
PAWAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & RESEARCH, PUNE
Project: Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed line between Pachora-Bodwad
extension of malkapur (83.90Kms) section of Central Railway
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Introduction
Soil exploration, investigation and testing of soil & rock samples for the Proposed
Bridges for railway line between Pachora — Bodwad extension of Malkapur
(83.90 Kms) section of Central Railway was entrusted to M/s Aerial Data
Applications & Mapping Services, Flat no. 109, 10-2-273, Keerthy Sudharshan
Apartments, west Merredpally, Secunderabad-500026, Telangana. The objective
was to ascertain the subsoil characteristics and stratification and other necessary
data of soil condition of the site for the proposed bridge. The field work involved
in the investigation including boring, recovery of samples and the in-situ tests
were carried from 03-01-2021 to 08-01-2021
The scope of the work comprised of sinking five boreholes each one at pier or
abutment of Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1,
394/1, 397/1 by rotary equipment. The scope also included conducting standard
penetration tests (SPT), collecting disturbed samples at regular intervals for
identification and logging purposes, collecting undisturbed tube samples at
suitable intervals or at change of strata whichever ¡s earlier and testing these in
the laboratory.
Based on the above, this report presents the subsoil profile and laboratory and
field test results. On the basis of field tests and laboratory test results and their
analysis thereof, the most suitable type of foundation with it’s safe bearing
capacity is suggested. The field profile was sometime modified in the light of
laboratory test results. The consultant has prepared this report based on the field
work and the sample collected from the site by the site in charge of M/s Aerial
Data Applications & Mapping Services, Secunderabad, Telangana.
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Field Exploration:
Geotechnical investigation was envisaged In an attempt for optimization in the
design of foundation for the proposed structures to be constructed at this site.
The entire Investigation programme had been divided mainly into two parts,
I) Field works &
Il) Laboratory tests.
I) Field works unfold the sub-surface deposit types and their characteristic.
Il) Laboratory tests part would help determining the relevant physical and
geotechnical properties of the sub-surface deposits leading to finalization of
foundation depths of the structures and bearing capacity with particular
reference to the subsurface types and their strength parameters and settlement
potentials at the site.
A list of the boreholes with the terminating depth and standing water level are
presented
in a tabular form below:
Bridge Nos.:
Water
R.L. of Table
Bore Hole Terminating Date of Date of
Borehole below
NO. Depth (m) commencement completion
Top (m) Borehole
top (m)
384/1 10.00 Nil 07-01-2021 08-01-2021
385/1 10.00 Nil 07-01-2021 09-01-2021
385/2 9.00 Nil 13-01-2021 14-01-2021
386/1 10.00 Nil 16-01-2021 17-01-2021
386/2 10.50 Nil 17-01-2021 18-01-2021
388/1 10.00 Nil 18-01-2021 19-01-2021
400/1 10.00 Nil 30-01-2021 31-01-2021
404/1 13.50 Nil 20-01-2021 21-01-2021
394/1 11.50 Nil 30-01-2021 31-01-2021
397/1 10.00 Nil 20-01-2021 21-01-2021
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. 1 Boring
Boring was carried out by auger and rotary method as per IS: 1892- 1979 to
nominal diameter boreholes to desired depths and operated by a team of
experienced technicians. Flush jointed seamless casings were used to stabilize the
boreholes and prevent caving of the soil inside the boreholes. The casing pipes
were advanced by turning in order to minimize the disturbance. Undisturbed soil
samples were collected at suitable intervals or at change of strata whichever Is
met earlier by open drive sampling method since it was intended to ascertain he
characteristics. The standing water table in each borehole was determined at
least 24 hours after the termination of boring work.
2.2 Sampling
Nominal 100 mm diameter undisturbed samples were recovered. The sampling
equipment used consists of a two-tier assembly of sample tubes 400 mm in length
fitted at its lower end. Sampling assembly was driven by means of jarring link to
its full length or as far down is as was found practicable. After withdrawal the
ends of the tubes were sealed with wax at both ends and capped before
transmission to the laboratory. At close intervals in depth, disrupted sample were
collected both from split spoon sampler after the standard penetration test and
from cutting edge for identification and logging purpose. These were tagged and
packed n polythene packets transported to the laboratory. The depth wise
locations of all the undisturbed and disturbed samples were used in the
preparation of borehole log data and for general identification and classification
purposes. The details of boring are presented in the Appendix in the form of bore
log sheets.
2. 3 Standard Penetration Test

Standard penetration tests were conducted in the boreholes it suitable intervals
as per IS: 2131-1963 Using a split spoon sampler. The split spoon sampler used is
of standard design having an outer diameter of 50.8 mm and inner diameter of
35mm, driving with a monkey weighing 63.
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kgs, falling freely from a height of 75cm. A record of the number of blows
required to penetrate every 15 cm to a maximum depth of45 cm was made. The
first 15 cm of drive was considered to be seating drive and was neglected. The
total blows required to effect each I S cm of penetration was recorded. The “N”
values were obtained by counting the number of blows required to drive the
spoon from 15 cm to 45 cm. On completion of a test, the split spoon sampler was
opened and soil specimens were preserved in polythene bags for logging purpose.
All the boreholes were sunk with winch. However, rising of hammer for SPT was
done manually. Hence there will not be any inertia loss and the efficiency of
hammer blows should be considered as 100%.
2.4 Measurement of Water Table

Level of water was noted when struck in. This is termed as observed water level.
Standing water level was noted during initial stages of boring, intermediate stage
of boring and after 24 hours of removal of casing was also noted.
3.Laboratory Testing
For proper identification and classification of the sub-soil deposits and for
deriving adequate information regarding its relevant physical and geotechnical
properties at the site under investigation, the soil samples from the sampling. In
general, the following laboratory tests were conducted on the soil movement
within the tube during sampling. In general, the following laboratory tests were
conducted on the soil samples collected from the exploratory bore holes and
sampling points:
a) Visual Engineering Classification.
b) Grain size analysis (Sieve as well as Hydrometer).
e) Consistency Limits.
d) Determination of Natural Moisture Content (water content).
e) Determination of Specific Gravity.
f) Determination of Bulk & Dry unit Weight.
g)Direct Shear Test.
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
h) Direct Shear Test (DST).

I) Unconfined Compression Test (UC).
j) Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Test (UU).
k) Chemical Tests on soil samples.
4. Soil Profile and Properties

Based on visual classification and results of field and laboratory tests on the
samples recovered the proposed site may be divided into the following major soil
strata as described in Table NO.1 & Table No.2 attached.
5. Hydrology
The ground water table at the site was found up to the terminating depth for all
the five boreholes explored during the time of investigation work.
6. Chemical Tests on soil samples

Chemical Tests on soil samples were carried out to determine Carbonate as
N02C03, chloride and sulphate content. The test results are tabulated in Table No.
I of respective bore holes.
7. Undrained Triaxial test

Undrained Triaxial shear strength test is carried out in laboratory in which the soil
sample is first consolidated under all round pressure in traxial cell before failure Is
brought about by increasing the major principal stress. The size of sample was
37.5 mm diameter and 75 mm length. For every test four observations were taken
at various cell pressure value a3 0.5 kg/cm2 , 1 kg/cm2 , 1 .5 kg/cm2 and 2,0
kg/cm2. Required ‘ad deviator stresses were found out at the failure of sample &
then graph was drawn between a (a3 + ad) and The three Mohr’s Circle at failure
were joined by common tangent straight line, which gave us the values of ‘C and
‘o’. These values are given for the samples.
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angle of
o¯δ3 o¯δ1 o¯δ
Bridge & Bore internal
2 2 2 Cohesion
Hole No. friction (ø)
(KN/M) (KN/M) (KN/M)
degree
50 180.30 113.20
100 252.80 142.30
384/1,A1 150 428.10 330.90
0.8 28
200 490.60 346.50
8. California Bearing Ratio test

CBR ¡s determined by conducting a load penetration test in the laboratory on
undisturbed & remolded I compacted soil specimen ¡n soaked state. It ¡s the ratio
of force per unit area required to penetrate a soil mass with standard circular
piston at the rate of 1.25 mm/mm to that required for corresponding penetration
of a standard material.
CBR = (Test load/ Standard load) x 100
Bridge No. : 384/1 Bore Hole No : 1
Laboratory Soaked CBR

Test
PENETRATION LOAD
mm kg
0 0
0.5 37.1
1 44.2
1.5 52.6
2 60.2
2.5 67.7
3 76.3
4 84.9
5 94.5
7.5 100.7
10 104.2
12.5 120.7
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
120
Penetration-Load Curve
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
7.0 RESULTS & ANALYSIS:

The safe bearing capacity values of open foundations have been calculated as
given n Annexure A and B using different criteria & suitable method. Keeping in
view of the submergence conditions at the site, correction for the groundwater
table has been taken in account for the calculation of the safe bearing capacity of
the soil.
1. Settlement Method:
Observed SPT N-values have been corrected for both the overburden pressure
and dilatancy, the overburden pressure normalizing factor has been applied first
as per is 2131: 1981, and Peck et al (1974) relationship, as given in Annexure A
2. Is (Core Strength) Method :

The safe bearing pressure is estimated according to IS 12070 . 1987 as core
samples are detected & given ¡n Annexure B.
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safe Bearing Capacity for Open Foundation :
Table –A : Bridge No: 384/1
Depth from ground level mts. Safe Bearing Capacity t/m2
Width of Foundation, Rmts.
0.0 to 1.50 14.14
1.50 to 4.00 24.65
4.00 to 6.00 51.150
6.00 to 10.00 194.050
Bridge No: 385/1

Safe Bearing Capacity t/m2
Depth from ground level mts.
0.0 to 1.50 12.12
1.50 to 3.00 17.80
3.00 to 7.50
7.50 to 10.00 172.299
Bridge No: 385/2

0.0 to 0.20 9.24
0.20 to 4.50 51.150
4.50 to 9.00 164.050
Bridge No: 386/1

0.0 to 1.50 17.5
1.50 to 4.50 53.598
4.50 to 10.00 167.848
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridge No: 386/2
0.00 to 1.50 52.299
1.50 to 10.50 199.600
Bridge No: 388/1

0.0 to 1.50 51.245
1.50 to 6.00 156.154
6.00 to 10.00 185.145
Bridge No: 400/1

0.0 to 4.50 17.35
4.50 to 7.50 52.598
7.50 to 10.00 187.838
Bridge No: 404/1

0.00 to 3.00 14.578
3.00 to 6.00 54.578
6.00 to 13.50 179.564
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridge No: 394/1

0.0 to 7.50 18.64
7.50 to 11.50 164.62
Bridge No: 397/1

0.00 to 3.00 18.58
3.00 to 7.50 79.34
7.50 to 10.00 169.564
Bridge No. 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1, 386/2, 388/1, 400/1, 404/1, 394/1, 397/1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on results of in-situ and laboratory investigations, the following
recommendations are made:
1.Foundation section
Type of foundation : Open foundation
Depth of foundation : 2.0 to 6.0 mt. from bed level
2.It is desired that the back filling of earth ¡n foundation ¡s done with proper
compaction.
3.The foundation should be well embedded in rocks when suitable data ¡s
available.
CONCLUSIONS:
The subsoil available ¡n the borehole is predominantly Sand followed by soft rock
& Hard rock. The Safe bearing capacity Varies appreciably with depth and width of
the foundation. The SPT N-values, in situ density and the subsoil differ with the
depth, and to some extent with the location of the borehole. This leads to the
different safe bearing capacity values. The bearing capacity for open foundation
for combinations of depth and width have been worked out & presented ¡n Table
-A & also ¡n Table -B. Depending upon the total load coming on the foundation,
depth and width of foundation can easily be selected from the Table —A. Our
conclusions are based on the in situ and laboratory investigations conducted on
the in the field. If actual subsoil conditions during the construction of the
foundations differ from what has been reported, the consultants are to be
referred for suggestions.
Geotechnical Consultant.
Calculations
Bridge No: 384/1
Depth from ground level mts. Safe Bearing Capacity t/m2
0.0 to 1.50 14.14
1.50 to 4.00 24.65
4.00 to 6.00 51.150
6.00 to 10.00 194.050
Bridge No: 385/1

0.0 to 1.50 12.12
1.50 to 3.00 17.80
3.00 to 7.50
7.50 to 10.00 172.299
Bridge No: 385/2

0.0 to 0.20 9.24
0.20 to 4.50 51.150
4.50 to 9.00 164.050
Bridge No: 386/1

0.0 to 1.50 17.5
1.50 to 4.50 53.598
4.50 to 10.00 167.848
Bridge No: 386/2

0.00 to 1.50 52.299
1.50 to 10.50 199.600
Bridge No: 388/1
0.0 to 1.50 51.245
1.50 to 6.00 156.154
6.00 to 10.00 185.145
Bridge No: 400/1

0.0 to 4.50 17.35
4.50 to 7.50 52.598
7.50 to 10.00 187.838
Bridge No: 404/1

0.00 to 3.00 14.578
3.00 to 6.00 54.578
6.00 to 13.50 179.564
Bridge No: 394/1

0.0 to 7.50 18.64
7.50 to 11.50 164.62
Bridge No: 397/1

0.00 to 3.00 18.58
3.00 to 7.50 79.34
7.50 to 10.00 169.564
ANANTRAO PAWAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & RESEARCH, PUNE
Approved by AICTE & Govt. of Maharashtra, Affiliated to University of Pune
University of Pune Identification No. Id. No. /PU/PN/Engg./441/2012
ROCK PROFILE TABLE NO. 1

PROJECT Geotechnical investigation for proposed line between Pachora-Bodwad section of Central Railway.
BRIDGE NO. 384/1 CHAINAGE BORE HOLE NO. 1
Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Unconfined Safe Bearing
Length, mm
Allowance
Density Crushing Compression Safe Bearing Pressure for
Depth Description Porosity C/S Area for
gm/cc load N Strength Pressure/m2 Submerged
%
Mts of srata % mm2 submergence

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
4.00
to Soft Rock 2.13 21 3.3 2.14 55 80 2754.625 25763 10.780 0.1 114.198 0.5 54.179
6.00
6.00
to Hard Rock 2.50 14 2.4 2.61 55 110 2374.625 97823 39.830 0.1 347.897 0.5 199.448
10.00

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
3.00
to Soft Rock 2.13 21 3.3 2.14 55 80 2754.625 25763 10.780 0.1 114.198 0.5 54.179
7.50
7.50
to Hard Rock 2.50 14 2.4 2.61 55 110 2374.625 97823 39.830 0.1 347.897 0.5 199.448
10.00

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
2.00
to Soft Rock 2.18 23 3.4 2.21 55 110 2744.415 25793 12.870 0.1 107.188 0.5 56.149
4.50
4.50
to Hard Rock 2.63 17 2.6 2.70 55 110 2396.135 95623 38.860 0.1 368.877 0.5 199.448
9.00

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
1.50
to Soft Rock 2.14 24 3.1 2.24 55 110 2374.625 25693 10.820 0.1 108.198 0.5 54.099
7.50
7.50
to Hard Rock 2.70 15 2.5 2.71 55 110 2374.625 94723 39.890 0.1 398.897 0.5 199.448
10.00

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
Density C/S Crushing Compression Safe Bearing Pressure for
Depth Description Porosity for
gm/cc Area load N Strength Pressure/m2 Submerged
%
Mts of srata % submergence

mm2 N/mm2 condition
T/m2
0.00
to Soft Rock 2.30 3.4 2.21 55 110 2744.415 25793 12.870 0.1 107.188 0.5 56.149 23
1.50
1.50
to Hard Rock 1.70 2.6 2.70 55 110 2396.135 95623 38.860 0.1 368.877 0.5 199.448 17
10.50

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
1.50
to Soft Rock 2.17 23 3.3 2.14 55 840 2174.625 26893 10.740 0.1 124.134 0.5 53.749
6.00
6.00
to Hard Rock 2.45 13 2.4 2.69 55 110 2244.625 91723 38.470 0.1 367.894 0.5 198.748
10.00

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
3.00
to Soft Rock 2.13 21 3.3 2.14 55 80 2754.625 25763 10.780 0.1 114.198 0.5 54.179
7.50
7.50
to Hard Rock 2.50 14 2.4 2.61 55 110 2374.625 97823 39.830 0.1 347.897 0.5 199.448
10.00

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
6.00
to Soft Rock 2.14 24 3.1 2.24 55 110 2374.625 25693 10.820 0.1 108.198 0.5 54.099
7.50
7.50
to Hard Rock 2.70 15 2.5 2.71 55 110 2374.625 94723 39.890 0.1 398.897 0.5 199.448
12.00

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
0.00
to Soft Rock 2.12 21 3.2 2.22 55 84 2687.625 25483 19.280 0.1 187.188 0.5 58.199
7.50
7.50
to Hard Rock 2.46 12 2.1 2.61 55 110 2987.625 94873 38.870 0.1 378.897 0.5 198.448
11.50

Empirical coeff. N1
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Diameter, mm
Length, mm
Allowance
%

N/mm2 condition
T/m2
3.00
to Soft Rock 2.12 24 3.6 2.34 55 110 2346.625 25683 10.820 0.1 108.198 0.5 54.099
7.50
7.50
to Hard Rock 2.40 12 2.4 2.64 55 110 2374.655 94873 39.890 0.1 398.897 0.5 199.448
10.00
AKHIL BHARTIYA MARATHA SHIKSHAN PARISHAD’S
PROJECT:-Geotechnical investigation for proposed line between Pachora-Bodwad section of Central Railway.
BRIDGE NO. 384/1 BORE HOLE NO. 1
SOIL ROCK
Classification of soil as per IS:1498-1970
Direct
Type of soil sample (DS,UDS,SPT,Core)

Grain Size Analysis Shear/Triaxi
2
Unconfined Compression Strength
6
Point Load strength Index KN/mm
Modulus Of Elasticity (T/m ) x 10

including Hydrometer Atterberg Limit al Test
Rock quality designation %

Depth below ground level mts.
analysis
2
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Depth (mt)
Density, gm/cc
Core Recovery
Angle of internal friction
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
Porosity
Log
2
2
N/mm
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
Liquid limit %
Gravel %
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
0.0 to B.C.
1.50 SOIL 1.5 53.3 38.6 4.1 3 1.59 23.2 15.3 5.99 1.7 20 2.2 0.9
1.50 to SILTY
4.00 SAND 2.1 41.3 37.6 4.12 2.9 1.69 22.4 18.6 5.9 1.25 22 2.69 1.2
SOFT
4.00 to
ROCK
6.00
2.89 3.5 25 11.69 2.69 5.2 66 30 51.26
6.00 to HARD
10.00 ROCK
2.9 3.1 16 41.02 8.22 9.45 92 75 201.6
SOIL ROCK
Classification of soil as per IS:1498-
Grain Size Analysis Direct
Modulus Of Elasticity (T/m2) x


including Hydrometer Atterberg Limit Shear/Triaxi
Point Load strength Index

Unconfined Compression
Moisture Content %
analysis al Test
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
2
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Strength N/mm
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
2
Porosity
2
KN/mm
Angle of internal
Log
Cohesion Kg/cm
Type of soil sample
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
(DS,UDS,SPT,Core)
Liquid limit %
6
10
Gravel %
friction
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
1970
0.0 to
SAND
1.50
2.1 41.3 37.6 4.12 2.9 1.69 22.4 18.6 5.9 1.25 22 2.69 1.2
1.50 to SILTY
3.00 SAND
1.5 53.3 38.6 4.1 3 1.59 23.2 15.3 5.99 1.7 20 2.2 0.9
3.00 to SOFT
7.50 ROCK 2.23 3.5 25 11.26 2.59 5.2 66 30 52.26
7.50 to HARD
10.00 ROCK 2.9 3.1 16 41.02 8.22 9.45 92 75 199.4
SOIL
Depth below ground level mts. ROCK
Modulus Of Elasticity (T/m2)

Classification of soil as per
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
2
analysis al Test
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Strength N/mm
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
Type of soil sample
2
Porosity
(DS,UDS,SPT,Core)
KN/mm
Angle of internal
Log
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
6
Plastic Limit %
Liquid limit %
x 10
Gravel %
friction
Sand %
IS:1498-1970
Clay %
Silt %
0.0 to SILTY
0.20 SAND
1.5 53.3 38.6 4.1 3 1.59 23.2 15.3 5.99 1.7 20 2.2 0.9
0.20 to SOFT
4.50 ROCK
2.6 3.9 25 12.36 3.9 4.5 67 30 49.56
4.50 to HARD
9.00 ROCK
2.9 2.5 18 39.65 6.99 8.9 92 75 201.2

SOIL ROCK
2
6


analysis al Test
2
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
Porosity
2
2
Log
N/mm
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
Liquid limit %
Type of soil sample
(DS,UDS,SPT,Core)
Gravel %
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
1970
0.0 to B.C.
1.50 SAND 2.1 41 38 4.1 3.9 2.22 23.6 18.6 6.9 2.12 20 3.1 0.9
1.50 to SOFT
4.50 ROCK
2.62 3.9 25 11.26 2.59 4.71 67 31 48.03
4.50 to HARD
10.00 ROCK
2.91 2.78 16 41.26 8.2 9.6 91 75 201.3

SOIL ROCK



Moisture Content %
analysis al Test
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
2
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Strength N/mm
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
2
Porosity
2
KN/mm
Angle of internal
Log
Cohesion Kg/cm
Type of soil sample
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
(DS,UDS,SPT,Core)
Liquid limit %
6
10
Gravel %
friction
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
1970
0.00 to SOFT
1.50 ROCK
1.50 to HARD
2.89 3.5 25 11.69 2.69 5.2 66 30 51.26
10.50 ROCK
2.9 3.1 16 41.02 8.22 9.45 92 75 201.6

SOIL ROCK


analysis al Test
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
2
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Strength N/mm
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
2
Porosity
2
KN/mm
Angle of internal
Log
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
Type of soil sample
Plastic Limit %
Liquid limit %
(DS,UDS,SPT,Core)
6
10
Gravel %
friction
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
1970
0.0 to SILTY
1.50 SAND
1.9 42.2 38.4 4.3 3 1.47 24.3 19.1 6.1 1.8 21 2.4 0.5
1.50 to SOFT
6.00 ROCK
6.00 to HARD 2.19 3.2 26 10.69 2.12 4.9 68 32 50.45

10.00 ROCK
2.7 2.5 15 40.02 7.88 9.1 93 78 200.8


SOIL ROCK
2
6


analysis al Test
2
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
Porosity
2
2
Log
N/mm
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
Liquid limit %
Gravel %
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
1970
0.0 to SILTY
4.50 SAND
1.9 42.2 38.4 4.3 3 1.47 24.3 19.1 6.1 1.8 21 2.4 0.5
4.50 to SOFT
7.50 ROCK
7.50 to HARD 2.19 3.2 26 10.69 2.12 4.9 68 32 50.45

10.00 ROCK
2.7 2.5 15 40.02 7.88 9.1 93 78 200.8

SOIL ROCK

2
6


analysis al Test
2
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
Porosity
2
2
Log
N/mm
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
Liquid limit %
Gravel %
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
1970
0.00 to SILTY
3.00 SAND
1.9 42.2 38.4 4.3 3 1.47 24.3 19.1 6.1 1.8 21 2.4 0.5
3.00 to SOFT
6.00 ROCK
6.00 to HARD 2.19 3.2 26 10.69 2.12 4.9 68 32 50.45

13.50 ROCK
2.7 2.5 15 40.02 7.88 9.1 93 78 200.8

SOIL ROCK

6

analysis al Test
2
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
2
Porosity
2
KN/mm
Log
N/mm
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
Type of soil sample
Liquid limit %
(DS,UDS,SPT,Core)
Gravel %
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
1970
0.0 to SOFT
9.00 ROCK
2.19 3.2 26 10.69 2.12 4.9 68 32 50.45
9.00 to HARD
11.50 ROCK
2.7 2.5 15 40.02 7.88 9.1 93 78 200.8

SOIL ROCK
Classification of soil as per IS:1498-1970

2
6


analysis al Test
2
Moisture Content %
Dry Density, gm/cc
Water Absorption
Specific Gravity
Density, gm/cc
Core Recovery
Depth (mt)
SBC T/sq mt.

Void Ratio
Porosity
2
2
Log
N/mm
Cohesion Kg/cm
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit %
Liquid limit %
Gravel %
Sand %
Clay %
Silt %
0.00 to
Sand
3.00
1.9 42.2 38.4 4.3 3 1.47 24.3 19.1 6.1 1.8 21 2.4 0.5
3.00 to SOFT
7.50 ROCK
2.19 3.2 26 10.69 2.12 4.9 68 32 50.45
7.50 to HARD
10.00 ROCK
2.7 2.5 15 40.02 7.88 9.1 93 78 200.8



Percentage
Rock Crushing strength in N/mm2

Unconfined Shearing soluble salts mg/I
SPT blows per
Description of Core Rocks

compressive strength
Dia. Of casing used mm
Symbolic presentation
Compression index CC
30 cms
Details of water color

Level of water table
strength kg/cm2 characteristics
Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
Angle of shearing
of soil
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
B.C 1.0 21 3.0 0.51 0.48 1.7 21 0.086 7.1 26.9 27.2
sand 2.0 29 3.0 0.53 0.49 0.8 28 0.097 7.5 27.3 27.4
Not observed
Silty
Grey color
sand
Soft Soft 10.17

Rock Rock
Hard Hard 39.89
Rock Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
3.0 19 3.0 0.49 0.39 0.9 19 0.096 6.1 25.9 25.2
SAND 4.0 25 3.0 0.50 0.40 1.2 27 0.077 6.5 26.3 25.4
13.37
SILTY
Not observed
Grey color
SAND
39.92
Soft
Rock
Hard
Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
Silty 1.0 19 3.0 0.50 0.39 1.6 23 0.062 7.4 23.9 26.8
sand 2.0 24 3.0 0.52 0.38 0.8 22 0.088 7.1 25.7 26.9
Not observed
Grey color
Soft Soft 13.79

Rock Rock
Hard Hard 51.19

Rock Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
B.C. 5.0 21 3.0 0.51 0.48 1.7 21 0.086 7.1 26.9 27.2
6.0 29 3.0 0.53 0.49 0.8 28 0.097 7.5 27.3 27.4
Not observed
SAND
Grey color
Soft 10.17
Rock
Hard 39.89
Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
Soft 1.0 22 3.0 0.50 0.39 1.6 23 0.062 7.4 23.9 26.8 9.17
Rock 2.0 27 3.0 0.52 0.38 0.8 22 0.088 7.1 25.7 26.9
Not observed
Grey color
Hard 37.69
Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
Silty 1.0 21 3.0 0.46 0.40 0.9 19 0.066 6.9 25.3 26.5
sand 2.0 29 3.0 0.45 0.42 1.0 27 0.089 7.0 26.8 26.5
Not observed
Soft Soft 10.17

Grey color
Rock Rock
Hard Hard 39.89

Rock Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
Silty 1.0 19 3.0 0.49 0.52 2.2 19 0.081 7.9 24.9 25.2
sand 2.0 29 3.0 0.48 0.59 1.2 24 0.089 6.3 25.3 25.4
Not observed
Soft Soft
Grey color
Rock Rock
13.17
Hard Hard
Rock Rock
34.88


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
Silty 1.0 19 3.0 0.53 0.45 1.5 20 0.086 6.1 24.9 24.2
sand 2.0 24 3.0 0.51 0.41 0.7 27 0.077 6.5 25.3 24.4
Not observed
Soft 11.75
Grey color
Rock
40.85
Hard
Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
1.0 22 3.0 0.51 0.41 0.7 27 0.077 6.5 25.3 24.4
2.0 24 3.0 0.52 0.38 0.8 22 0.088 7.1 25.7 26.9
Soft
Not observed
Rock
Grey color
Soft 11.26
Hard Rock
Rock Hard 37.95
Rock


Percentage

SPT blows per

30 cms

Organic matter %
Natural Moisture
Visual kg/m2
Void Ratio
Description
of soil
Angle of shearing
Chlorides as NO2
Sulphate as NO2
Cohesion ‘ C ’
Depth in Mts
Undisturbed
Carbonates as
Resistance
Remolded
kg/cm2
Value
NO2 CO3
SO4
CL
Sand 1.0 23 3.0 0.50 0.39 1.6 23 0.062 7.4 23.9 26.8
2.0 26 3.0 0.52 0.38 0.8 22 0.088 7.1 25.7 26.9
Not observed
Grey color
Soft Soft 9.64

Rock Rock
Hard Hard 38.79

Rock Rock

Geotech Report Minorbridge 1 Pachora-Jamnersection

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotech Report Minorbridge 1 Pachora-Jamnersection

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

Geotech Report Minorbridge 1 Pachora-Jamnersection

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CENTRAL RAILWAY

CONSTRUCTION & SURVEY ORGANISATION

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

MINOR BRIDGE AT 384/1, 385/1, 385/2, 386/1,

AERIAL DATA APPLICATIONS & MAPPING SERVICES

2. 3 Standard Penetration Test

2.4 Measurement of Water Table

h) Direct Shear Test (DST).

4. Soil Profile and Properties

6. Chemical Tests on soil samples

7. Undrained Triaxial test

8. California Bearing Ratio test

CBR = (Test load/ Standard load) x 100

Bridge No. : 384/1 Bore Hole No : 1

Laboratory Soaked CBR

7.0 RESULTS & ANALYSIS:

2. Is (Core Strength) Method :

Bridge No: 385/1

Bridge No: 385/2

Bridge No: 386/1

Bridge No: 388/1

Bridge No: 400/1

Bridge No: 404/1

Bridge No: 394/1

Bridge No: 397/1

Bridge No: 385/1

Bridge No: 385/2

Bridge No: 386/1

Bridge No: 386/2

Bridge No: 400/1

Bridge No: 404/1

Bridge No: 394/1

Bridge No: 397/1

Approved by AICTE & Govt. of Maharashtra, Affiliated to University of Pune

University of Pune Identification No. Id. No. /PU/PN/Engg./441/2012

ROCK PROFILE TABLE NO. 1

BRIDGE NO. 384/1 CHAINAGE BORE HOLE NO. 1

Mts of srata % mm2 submergence

Approved by AICTE & Govt. of Maharashtra, Affiliated to University of Pune

University of Pune Identification No. Id. No. /PU/PN/Engg./441/2012

ROCK PROFILE TABLE NO. 1

BRIDGE NO. 385/1 CHAINAGE BORE HOLE NO. 1

Mts of srata % mm2 submergence

Approved by AICTE & Govt. of Maharashtra, Affiliated to University of Pune

University of Pune Identification No. Id. No. /PU/PN/Engg./441/2012

ROCK PROFILE TABLE NO. 1

BRIDGE NO. 385/2 CHAINAGE BORE HOLE NO. 1

Mts of srata % mm2 submergence

Approved by AICTE & Govt. of Maharashtra, Affiliated to University of Pune

University of Pune Identification No. Id. No. /PU/PN/Engg./441/2012

ROCK PROFILE TABLE NO. 1

BRIDGE NO. 386/1 CHAINAGE BORE HOLE NO. 1

Mts of srata % mm2 submergence

Approved by AICTE & Govt. of Maharashtra, Affiliated to University of Pune

University of Pune Identification No. Id. No. /PU/PN/Engg./441/2012

ROCK PROFILE TABLE NO. 1

BRIDGE NO. 386/2 CHAINAGE BORE HOLE NO. 1

Mts of srata % submergence

Approved by AICTE & Govt. of Maharashtra, Affiliated to University of Pune