NTC Building Makwanpur

Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 2
2. OBJECTIVES......................................................................................................................... 2
3. SCOPE.................................................................................................................................. 2
4. FIELD INVESTIGATION ........................................................................................................ 2
6. LABORATORY INVESTIGATION....................................................................................... 4
6.1. Water Content Test (Natural Moisture Content) ........................................................... 4
6.2. Particle Size Analysis ....................................................................................................... 4
6.3. Atterberg Limits .............................................................................................................. 5
6.4. Direct Shear Test ............................................................................................................. 6
6.5. Unconfined Compression Test ........................................................................................ 7
7. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATION AND ANALYSIS ......................................................... 7
7.1. Correction of N (SPT Nos. from field) ............................................................................. 7
7.2. Allowable Bearing Pressure ............................................................................................ 8
7.3. Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity (MAT FOUNDATION)
................................................................................................................................................ 8
7.4. Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Tolerable Settlement (MAT FOUNDATION) ....... 9
7.5. Liquefaction .................................................................................................................. 12
8. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...................................................................... 13
9 Reference: ............................................................................................................................. 14
ANNEX-1, Bore Log
ANNEX-2. Calculation and Lab Data
ANNEX-3. Photographs
Geotechnical report on soil investigation work of The NTC Building at Hetauda, Makwanpur
1. INTRODUCTION
The report presents the detail geotechnical soil investigation works in order to prepare
the design of The NTC Building at Hetauda, Makwanpur. The geotechnical investigation
works comprise the exploratory drilling, in-situ field testing of SPT test, borehole
logging, and collection of samples to perform necessary tests on soil samples for detail
information on subsurface conditions and index properties of the soil strata. The work
finally develops safe bearing capacity of the foundation for the proposed Building.
2. OBJECTIVES
This investigation works aim to carry out subsurface investigation and acquire soil
parameters required for the design of building with International standard
and norms.
3. SCOPE
The scope of work comprises the following activities:

Field investigation Program
 Percussion Drilling
 Standard Penetration Test/Dynamic cone penetration Test
Laboratory investigations
 Moisture content
 Sieve analysis
 Direct shear test
Factual report with all field and laboratory test data sheets together with conclusion
and recommendation are included in the report.
4. FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was mainly consisted of three boreholes at proposed site of the
Proposed Building. The bore holes BH1 reached to depth of 20 m. Similarly, the
boreholes BH2 and BH3 also reached up to 20m depth. The investigation work was
Page | 2
started on 4/10/2079 and completed on 10/10/2079. The drilling work was performed
with Percussion drilling machine. Casings of 6 inch diameter were used for purpose of
protecting hole from collapsing by side fall or caving.
The standard penetration tests (SPT) consist of driving a split-spoon sampler with an
outside diameter of 50mm into the soil at the base of borehole. Driving was
accomplished by a trip hammer weighing 63.5kg falling freely through a height of 75cm
onto the drive head which was fitted at the top of rods. First of all the split spoon was
driven 15cm into the soil at the bottom of the borehole. It was then driven a further
30cm and the number of blows required to drive for each 15cm distance was recorded.
The blow count for driving last 30cm penetration was referred to SPT ‘N’ value. The
equipment with attached SPT hammer was according to ASTM D 1586. The results of
the SPT test are shown in the respective bore hole logs; Annex-I.
Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DCPT): It consists of driving a cone by blows of

hammers. The number of blows for driving the cone through a specified distance is a
measure of the dynamic cone resistance. A 50 mm cone performs dynamic Cone
Penetration test. The driving energy is given by a 63.5 kg falling freely through a height
of 750 mm onto the drive head. First of all the cone is driven 100 mm into the soil at the
bottom of the borehole. It is then driven further 200 mm and the number of blows (Ncbr
values) required to drive this distance is recorded. The result i.e., Nc values first
corrected to the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) value (N) and that provides and
estimation of degree of compaction of soil strata, values of angles of internal friction ()
and allowable bearing capacity. The dynamic cone resistance is correlated with the SPT
(N) as given below.
Nc = 1.25 N for depth up to 3 m
= 1.75 N for depth 3 to 6 m
= 2 N for depth greater than 6 m
But normally we divide by 2 for safety reasons.
Page | 3
5. NATURE OF SOIL STRATA
Altogether three bore holes were driven, BH1, BH2 and BH3 to unravel the local
subsurface condition, nature and depth of the soil strata. In all the borehole Siltysand,
coarse sand and gravel up to depth of 20m. (Annex-I).
6. LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
The selective samples from the site were taken. samples were taken at various depths
shown in borehole log. The laboratory tests of samples were performed. The test
comprised of natural moisture content, grain size analysis (sieve analysis, Moisture
Content and Direct shear test.
6.1. Water Content Test (Natural Moisture Content)

Natural moisture content test had been determined in accordance with ASTM D2216
(Oven –drying method) of Core Samples.
6.2. Particle Size Analysis

Soil gradation is a classification of a coarse-grained soil that ranks the soil based on the
different particle sizes contained in the soil. Soil gradation is an important aspect of soil
mechanics and geotechnical engineering because it is an indicator of other engineering
properties such as compressibility, shear strength, and hydraulic conductivity. In a
design, the gradation of the in situ or on site soil often controls the design and ground
water drainage of the site. A poorly graded soil will have better drainage than a well
graded soil.
Soil is graded as either well graded or poorly graded. Poorly graded soils are further
divided into uniformly-graded or gap-graded soils. Soil gradation is determined by
analyzing the results of a sieve analysis or a hydrometer analysis.
The process for grading a soil is in accordance with either the Unified Soil Classification
System or the AASHTO Soil Classification System. Gradation of a soil is determined by
reading the grain size distribution curve produced from the results of laboratory tests
on the soil.
Page | 4
Calculating the Coefficients of Uniformity and Curvature
Calculating the coefficients of uniformity and curvature requires grain diameters. The
grain diameter can be found for each percent of the soil passing a particular sieve. This
means that if 40% of the sample is retained on the No. 20 sieve then there is 60%
passing the No. 20 sieve.
The coefficient of uniformity, Cu is a crude shape parameter and is calculated using the
following equation:
Where, D60 is the grain diameter at 60% passing, and
D10 is the grain diameter at 10% passing.

The coefficient of curvature, Cc is a shape parameter and is calculated using the
following equation:
Where, D60 is the grain diameter at 60% passing, D30 is the grain diameter at 30%
passing, and D10 is the grain diameter at 10% passing.
Criteria for Grading Soils
The following criteria are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System:
For a gravel to be classified as well graded, the following criteria must be met: Cu > 4 &
1 < Cc < 3. If both of these criteria are met, the gravel is classified as well graded or GW.
If both of these criteria are not met, the gravel is classified as poorly graded or GP.
For a sand to be classified as well graded, the following criteria must be met: Cu > 6 & 1
< Cc < 3. If both of these criteria are met, the sand is classified as well graded or SW. If
both of these criteria are not met, the sand is classified as poorly graded or SP.
6.3. Atterberg Limits

The Atterberg limits are the basic measures of the nature of a fine-grained soil.
Depending on the water content of the soil, it may appear in four states: solid, semi-
solid, plastic and liquid. In each state the consistency and behavior of a soil is different
and thus so are its engineering properties.
Page | 5
The liquid limit (LL) is the water content at which a soil changes from plastic to liquid
behavior. Casagrande standardized the apparatus and the procedures to make the
measurement more repeatable. Soil is placed into the metal cup, portion of the device
and a groove is made down its center with a standardized tool of 13.5 millimeters
width. The cup is repeatedly dropped 10mm onto a hard rubber base at a rate of 120
blows per minute, during which the groove closes up gradually as a result of the impact.
The number of blows for the groove to close is recorded. The moisture content at which
it takes 25 drops of the cup to cause the groove to close over a distance of 13.5
millimeters is defined as the liquid limit. The test is normally run at several moisture
contents, and the moisture content which requires 25 blows to close the groove is
interpolated from the test results.
The plastic limit (PL) is the water content where soil transitions between brittle and
plastic behavior. The sample is rolled up to the diameter of 3 mm when it starts to
crumbles; the percentage of water content is recorded. The plastic limit test is defined
by ASTM standard test method D 4318.
Classification of Soil
The soil samples are classified according to Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
based on the laboratory tests i.e. gradation test and Atterberg limit test.
6.4. Direct Shear Test
This test is performed to determine the consolidated-drained shear strength of a sandy

to silty soil. The shear strength is one of the most important engineering properties of a
soil, because it is required whenever a structure is dependent on the soil’s shearing
resistance.
Direct shear tests can be performed under several conditions. The sample is normally
saturated before the test is run, but can be run at the in-situ moisture content. The rate
of strain can be varied to create a test of undrained or drained conditions, depending
whether the strain is applied slowly enough for water in the sample to prevent pore-
water pressure build up. In the laboratory, a direct shear device will be used to
determine the shear strength of cohesion less soil (i.e. angle of internal friction (Φ)).
From the plot of the shear stress versus the horizontal displacement, the maximum
Page | 6
shear stress is obtained for a specific vertical confining stress. After the experiment is
run several times for various vertical-confining stresses, a plot of the maxi mum shear
stresses versus the vertical (normal) confining stresses for each of the tests is produced.
From the plot, a straight-line approximation of the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope
curve can be drawn, Φ may be determined, and, for cohesion less soils, the shear
strength can be computed from the following equation:
τ=σtanΦ
6.5. Unconfined Compression Test

The unconfined compression test is used to measure the unconfined shear strength of
fine-grained soils, which is an approximate value of their undrained shear strength. This
test is applicable only to cohesive materials such as saturated clays or cemented soils
that retain an intrinsic strength without a confining pressure. It is not applicable to dry
or cohesion less soils, such as gravels and sands. The test is defined by ASTM standard
test method D 2166-00. Results of the test are shown in Table 6.1 and test sheets are
attached in Annex-II.
7. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATION AND ANALYSIS
Considering the site condition following corrections are made to correct SPT blow count
in general way and shown in Annex-I.
7.1. Correction of N (SPT Nos. from field)
a) Overburden Pressure Correction
The correction for overburden pressure for the SPT blow count is necessary and made
with the following equation:
2000
N corr  0.77  N r  log ……………………………………(7.1)
'
Where, Nr= SPT Blows count from field
σ’ = Effective over burden pressure in kN/m2
Page | 7
(For granular material, sandy, silty/clayey and organic clay the sigma value is chosen
22, 20, 18, and 16kN/m2 respectively. The water table correction for the respective part
is -10)
b) Dialatancy Correction
Dialtancy correction is to be applied when obtained after overburden correction,

exceeds 15 in saturated fine sands and silts. The standard incorporates the Terzaghi and
Peck recommended dilatancy correction (when > 15) using the equation
N= Nr (when Nr≤ 15) and N= 15+ (Nr-15)/2 ……………(7.2)
Where, Nr= SPT Blows count from field
7.2. Allowable Bearing Pressure

The allowable bearing pressure (qa) is the maximum pressure that can be imposed on
the foundation soil taking into consideration the ultimate bearing capacity of the soil
and the tolerable settlement of the structure. Analysis to determine the ultimate
bearing capacity and the pressure corresponding to a specified maximum settlement
were performed and the minimum pressure obtained from the two analyses were
adopted as the allowable bearing pressure.
7.3. Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity (MAT

FOUNDATION)
Since the soil in the vicinity of the foundation level has been found to be granular or
non-plastic, cohesion less sand through-out the site, the allowable bearing capacity has
been analyzed using the N-values from SPT results. Empirical formula of Teng (1962)
for granular soils based on the SPT values has been used to obtained the allowable
bearing pressure with safety factor 3.
As per Teng (1962) the safe bearing capacity can be obtained from the results of SPT
test.
From shear failure criteria, the net safe bearing capacity is given by:
qns = 0.02N2BRW1 + 0.06(100 + B2)DfRW2 ———-(1)
qns Net safe bearing Capacity
N Corrected SPT Value
B Width of Foundation, ft
Page | 8
D Depth of Foundation, ft
Rw & Rw’ Water Table Correction Factor (Fig 7.1)
7.4. Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Tolerable Settlement (MAT

FOUNDATION)
The maximum allowable settlement for footings in sand is generally 40 mm to 65 mm
(Skempton and MacDonald, 1955). . This method is a modification of the method
proposed by maeyerhof such that the allowable bearing pressure could directly be
obtained from the SPT values.
Where, qs is the safe allowable bearing pressure in SI unit for maximum settlement of
25 mm. For other settlement below formula is used.
Page | 9
Bearing Pressure Calculation Sheet for MAT Foundation
Project: Soil Investigation Work Of NTC Building

Location: Hetauda Makwanpur Water Table at Surface
Raft Size: =15m ( Least Dimension of the MAT foundation) x20m
S.N. Parameter Unit Values
1 Depth of Foundation D m 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.5 6.0

Width of Foundation( Least Value of The
2 B m 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0
Dimension)
3 Least of three borehole value SPT 'N60' N60 Blow 9 10 11 11 11 15
3.1 water Correction factor Rw1 Rw1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
3.2 Water Correction factor Rw2 Rw2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Teng
4 qns=(0.22N2RBRw₂+0.67(100+N2)DRw₁Fd (for Qnet KN/m2 148.275 184.5 224.025 228.9 243.525 429.75
shear)
Qnet Bearing Capacity(25mm Settlement) Qnet KN/m2 60.45 67.89 75.46 76.25 78.61 110.41
5
Meyerhoft modified Equation
Qnet t/m2 6.05 6.79 7.55 7.62 7.86 11.04
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction For 25mm
6 Ks KN/m3 7254.4 8146.3 9055.4 9149.8 9433.0 13249.5
settlement
7 Qnet Bearing Capacity(50mm Settlement) Qnet KN/m2 120.9 135.8 150.9 152.5 157.2 220.8
Meyerhoft modified Equation
8 Qnet t/m2 12.1 13.6 15.1 15.2 15.7 22.1
9 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction For 50mm
Ks KN/m3 7254.45 8146.33 9055.38 9149.8 9433.05 13249.5
settlement
Page | 10
Footing
h
Water Level
D
d0
Water d0
level
H
(a)
1.0 1.0
0.9 0.9
Reduction factor R
0.8 Reduction factor R 0.8
0.7 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
d0/D d0/B
(b) (c)
Fig. 6.4 Correction factor for position of water level: (a) depth of water level with
respect to dimension of footing; (b) water level above base of footing; (c) water
Fig. 7.1. Correction factor for position of water level: (a) depth of water level with respect to
level below base of footing. After AREA.
dimension of footing; (b) water level above base of footing; (c) water level below base of
footing. After AREA.
The minimum average SPT values from the boreholes in each structure have been
selected for the analysis of bearing capacity of the relevant structure.
The allowable bearing pressure for a limiting settlement other than 25 mm (e.g. x mm)
can be linearly interpolated from the allowable bearing pressure for 25 mm settlement.
Page | 11
7.5. Liquefaction
A liquefaction phenomenon is common in the earthquake prone area where local
geology is dominated by fine grain sitly sands. When fine or medium fine, saturated,
loose sand sediment is subjected to a sudden shaking the sediments will temporarily
liquefy. This phenomenon is termed as Liquefaction. When liquefaction takes place in a
particular soil, or whole of the bearing capacity of the soil disappears and the structure
built on it tilts or even sinks. The past great earthquakes, have shown that saturated
sandy soils in a loose to medium dense condition were liquefied during an earthquake
varying in magnitude from 5.5 to 8.5 (Richter scale) and epicenter distance of few
hundred kilometer. From the case studies, it is confirmed that liquefaction is the
potential characteristics of the soil which depends on the following:
a) If the soil contains less than 10 percent fines (Silt and Clay sizes)
b) If D60 is between 0.2mm and 1.0mm
c) If Cu (D60/D10) is between 2 and 5
d) If the SPT blow count per 30.0cm is less than 15
Based on the above criteria and the subsoil characteristics at all the boreholes, the sub
soil below the foundation can be considered safe for liquefaction in the study area.
Page | 12
Figure: Seismic hazard map of Nepal. Modified after Pandey et al. (2002). Bedrock peak
ground horizontal acceleration is calculated for five hundred years return period. Contour interval is
50 gals.
8. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
1. The detail field and Geotechnical Investigations of three boreholes have revealed mostly
Clayeysilt and coarse to fine Sandy material, ML, SP soil types as per the Unified Soil
Classification System. According to NBC code 105 2020 the soil type classified as Type ”C”.
Page | 13
2. The Recommended Angle of Friction is 30 degree and Cohesion is 0KN/m2. Bulk Density is
20KN/m3.
2.1 The bearing capacity of MAT size 15mx20 is calculated to be 13.6T/m2 at depth of 2m
Depth 1.5m 2.0m 2.5m
Size of Footing
15mx20m(for
12.1 T/m2 13.6 T/m2 15.1 T/m2
50mm settlement)
3. The proportion of the Clayeysilt is very low in all the boreholes.
4. The Bearing Capacity table for MAT Footing are given in table above in Page 10
5. The present study area lies in Makwanpur district where Peak Ground Horizontal
Acceleration is around 100-200gal.
6. The consolidation, Atterberg Limit and UCS test is not applicable in these type of soil.
6. The site is safe for any potential Liquefaction.
Limitations
The recommendations which are given in this report are based on the assumption that the
soil conditions do not deviate significantly from those disclosed in the borehole and
laboratory test results.
9 Reference:
1. (Burt look 2007 Pg 71 Table 6.8(Field evaluation of weathered rock)

2. Seismic hazard map of Nepal. Modified after Pandey et al. (2002)
3. Teng (1988)
4. Meyerhof Modified Equation
5. Terzaghi and Peck (1948)
6. ASTM D 1586, ASTM D2216, ASTM standard test method D 4318.,and ASTM standard
test method D 2166-00
Page | 14
ANNEX-1 BORE HOLE LOG
Bore Hole Log
Project: Geotechnical soil investigation of NTC Building Sheet no: 1 of 3
Client: Nepal Telcom, Makwanpur Start Date: 4/10/2079
Location: Hetauda Makwanpur Finish Date: 10/10/2079
Bore Hole:BH1 Easting:
Drilling Type: Percussion Northing:
GW level: Elevation:
Depth No of Blows
Depth Sample Barrel and Soil N Remar
Scale 1 cell
Casing
Soil Classification Type 15c 15c 15c
m Run symbol value k
= 0.5m m m m
0.5
1 1.5 R1 Brownish grey colour gravelly sandysilt
SPT 4 8 8 16
2
Brownish grey colour silty coarse to fine sand

3 4 R2 SPT 18 24 27 51
with Cobble pebble and gravel
4
SPT 18 24 30 54
5
6 SPT >50
7
DCPT >50
8
9 DCPT >50
10
DCPT >50
11
12 Brownish grey colour siltycoarse sand with DCPT >50

20 R3
pebble and cobble and gravel with boulder
13
DCPT >50
14
15 DCPT >50
16
DCPT >50
17
18 DCPT >50
19
DCPT >50
20
Logged by : RAM BASNET Checked By Daman Panthi
Bore Hole Log
Depth No of Blows
Scale 1 cell
Casing
= 0.5m m m m
0.5
1 1.5 R1 Brownish grey colour gravelly sandysilt
SPT 6 8 10 18
2

3 4 R2 SPT 12 14 18 32
4
DCPT 6 8 10 18
5
6 DCPT >50
7
DCPT >50
8
9 DCPT >50
10
DCPT >50
11

20 R3
13
DCPT >50
14
15 DCPT >50
16
DCPT >50
17
18 DCPT >50
19
DCPT >50
20
Bore Hole Log
Depth No of Blows
Scale 1 cell
Casing
= 0.5m m m m
0.5 0.5 R0 Filling material RCC material
1 Brownish grey colour gravelly sandysilt with
1.5 R1
coarse sand SPT 6 10 12 22
2

3 4 R2 SPT 20 28 36 64
4
DCPT 10 14 14 28
5
6 DCPT >50
7
DCPT >50
8
9 DCPT >50
10
DCPT >50
11

20 R3
13
DCPT >50
14
15 DCPT >50
16
DCPT >50
17
18 DCPT >50
19
DCPT >50
20
ANNEX -2 LABORATORY TEST SHEET AND
CALCULATIONS
MOISTURE CONTENT
Project Soil Investigation Work of NTC Building

Location Hetauda, Makwanpur
Test No. NMC
LOCATION:---> BH 1
SAMPLE DEPTH, m : ---> 1.5 4.5 7.5
Container No. No 22 24 4 5 18 16
Wt. of Container + Wt. of Wet Soil gm 227.5 325.0 115.0 110.0 75.0 65.0
Wt. of Container + Wt. of Dry Soil gm 205.0 290.0 106.0 101.0 68.0 59.0
Wt. of Water, Ww gm 22.5 35.0 9.0 9.0 7.0 6.0
Wt. of Empty Container gm 78.9 78.9 33.3 33.3 13.3 13.3
Wt. of Dry Soil, Wd gm 126.1 211.1 72.7 67.7 54.7 45.7
Moisture Content % 17.8 16.6 12.4 13.3 12.8 13.1
Average Moisture Content % 17.2 12.8 13.0
LOCATION:---> BH 2
SAMPLE DEPTH, m : ---> 1.5m 4.5 7.5
Container No. No 17 16 10 12 13 14
Wt. of Container + Wt. of Wet Soil gm 254.0 302.0 88.0 89.0 92 99
Wt. of Container + Wt. of Dry Soil gm 229.0 275.0 80.0 82.0 85 91
Wt. of Water, Ww gm 25.0 27.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 8.0
MOISTURE CONTENT
Project Soil Investigation Work of NTC Building

Location Hetauda, Makwanpur
Test No. NMC
LOCATION:---> BH 3
SAMPLE DEPTH, m : ---> 1.5 4.5 7.5
Container No. No 22 24 4 5 18 16
Wt. of Container + Wt. of Wet Soil gm 100.0 99.0 152.0 111.0 89.0 92.0
Wt. of Container + Wt. of Dry Soil gm 92.0 92.0 140.0 101.0 83.0 85.0
Wt. of Water, Ww gm 8.0 7.0 12.0 10.0 6.0 7.0
Sieve Analysis (ASTM D 136, 422)
Sheet No: 1 of 2
Project: NTC Building Sample ID: 1.5-4.5

Location: Hetauda, makwanpur
Easting: Northing:
Sample from: BH01
Sample Depth: 1.5-4.5 m
Original Sample Wt. gm: 500.0 Oven Dry Wt.: 300.0 gm
Wt. Retained, Cum. Retained, Cum Wt.

Diam. (mm) Sieve No. Passing, % Remarks
gm gm Ret., %
19 3/4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
12.5 1/2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
9.5 3/8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
4.75 #4 78.0 78.0 26.0 74.0
2.36 #8 56.0 134.0 44.7 55.3
1.18 # 16 45.0 179.0 59.7 40.3
0.3 # 50 23.0 202.0 67.3 32.7
0.15 #100 45.0 247.0 82.3 17.7
0.075 #200 18.0 265.0 88.3 11.7
Pan 35.0
Results:
Gravel % 26.0 D50= 2.0mm
Sand % 62.3
Fines % Silt 7.8
Fines % Clay 3.8
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS ASTM D 422
Project : NTC Building Sample ID: 1.5-4.5

Sample from: BH01
Test No.: DH 02-H2
Gs = 2.500
yw = 0.99802
m= 9.81
yc = 0.9965 SOIL SAMPLE WEIGHT
Tested Sample Poured off
Hydrometer No : 1 Container No. B-16

Dispersing Agent : Sodium HM 4% Weight of Container + Dry Soil g 106.8
Amount : 5 g per 125 cc Weight of Container g 56.8
Meniscus correction x 1,000= 0.50 Weight of Dry Soil, Ws g 50
Total Weight Dry Soil g 50
Fraction Finer No. 200 Sieve= 11.7 %
Elapsed N= D=
Date Time Hyd. Time, t R= Rw = Temp. R-Rw K1(R-Rw) Rc Zr Zr (cm) K2 Zr N'
0
Reading min 1000 (r-1) 1000(yw-1) c % cm. t (min) t %
2-Mar 1.01550 0.25 15.50 -0.90 15 16.40 54.48 16.00 13.78 7.425 0.1049 6.4
1.01500 0.50 15.00 -0.90 15 15.90 52.81 15.50 13.95 5.283 0.0747 6.2
1.01400 1.00 14.00 -0.90 15 14.90 49.49 14.50 14.29 3.780 0.0534 5.8
1.01350 2.00 13.50 -0.90 16 14.40 47.83 14.00 14.46 2.689 0.0380 5.6
1.01300 3.00 13.00 -0.90 16 13.90 46.17 13.50 11.52 1.960 0.0277 5.4
1.01200 5.00 12.00 -0.90 16 12.90 42.85 12.50 11.86 1.540 0.0218 5.0
1.01175 8.00 11.75 -0.90 16 12.65 42.02 12.25 11.94 1.222 0.0173 4.9
1.01150 15.00 11.50 -0.90 18 12.40 41.19 12.00 12.03 0.895 0.0127 4.8
1.01100 30.00 11.00 -0.90 18 11.90 39.53 11.50 12.20 0.638 0.0090 4.6
1.01000 60.00 10.00 -0.90 18 10.90 36.21 10.50 12.54 0.457 0.0065 4.2
1.00900 120.00 9.00 -0.90 18 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.328 0.0046 3.8
1.00900 240.00 9.00 -0.90 18 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.232 0.0033 3.8
6/4 1.00900 1200.00 9.00 -0.90 16 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.104 0.0015 3.8
K1 = yc x Gs x 100 = 3.321666667 yc = Unit Wt. of water at the temp.of hydrometer

(Gs - 1) Ws calibration, g/cm3
Gs = Specific gravity of solids
Ws = Wt. Of dry soil, g
K2 = 5.531 x 10-3 m= 0.014132779 m= Viscosity of water at the temp. of the test,
ys-yw millipoises
ys = Unit Wt. of soil grains, g/cm3
yw = Unit Wt. of water at the temp.of the test, g/cm3

Sample from: BH01
GRAVEL SAND
Unified Soil Classification COBBLES SILT or CLAY
System Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
A A S H T O Classification GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

BOULDERS Coarse Medium Fine Coarse Fine
GRAVEL SAND
ASTM Classification BOULDER COBBLE SILT CLAY
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
BS GRAVEL SAND SILT

BOULDERS COBBLE CLAY
Classification Coarse Medium Fine Coarse Medium Fine Coarse Medium Fine
100
90
80
70
Percentage passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Particle size mm
Sheet No: 1 of 2

Easting: Northing:
Sample from: BH02
Original Sample Wt. gm: 500.0 Oven Dry Wt.: 400.0 gm

gm gm Ret., %
19 3/4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
12.5 1/2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
9.5 3/8 77.0 77.0 19.3 80.8
4.75 #4 89.0 166.0 41.5 58.5
2.36 #8 65.0 231.0 57.8 42.3
1.18 # 16 52.0 283.0 70.8 29.3
0.3 # 50 47.0 330.0 82.5 17.5
0.15 #100 33.0 363.0 90.8 9.3
0.075 #200 22.0 385.0 96.3 3.8
Pan 15.0
Results:
Gravel % 41.5 D50= 3.2mm
Sand % 54.8
Fines % Silt 2.5
Fines % Clay 1.2

Sample from: BH02
Test No.: DH 02-H2
Gs = 2.500
yw = 0.99802
m= 9.81

Elapsed N= D=
0
2-Mar 1.01550 0.25 15.50 -0.90 15 16.40 54.48 16.00 13.78 7.425 0.1049 2.0
1.01500 0.50 15.00 -0.90 15 15.90 52.81 15.50 13.95 5.283 0.0747 2.0
1.01400 1.00 14.00 -0.90 15 14.90 49.49 14.50 14.29 3.780 0.0534 1.9
1.01350 2.00 13.50 -0.90 16 14.40 47.83 14.00 14.46 2.689 0.0380 1.8
1.01300 3.00 13.00 -0.90 16 13.90 46.17 13.50 11.52 1.960 0.0277 1.7
1.01200 5.00 12.00 -0.90 16 12.90 42.85 12.50 11.86 1.540 0.0218 1.6
1.01175 8.00 11.75 -0.90 16 12.65 42.02 12.25 11.94 1.222 0.0173 1.6
1.01150 15.00 11.50 -0.90 18 12.40 41.19 12.00 12.03 0.895 0.0127 1.5
1.01100 30.00 11.00 -0.90 18 11.90 39.53 11.50 12.20 0.638 0.0090 1.5
1.01000 60.00 10.00 -0.90 18 10.90 36.21 10.50 12.54 0.457 0.0065 1.4
1.00900 120.00 9.00 -0.90 18 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.328 0.0046 1.2
1.00900 240.00 9.00 -0.90 18 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.232 0.0033 1.2
6/4 1.00900 1200.00 9.00 -0.90 16 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.104 0.0015 1.2

ys-yw millipoises

Sample from: BH02
GRAVEL SAND

GRAVEL SAND
BS GRAVEL SAND SILT

100
90
80
70
Percentage passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Particle size mm
Sheet No: 1 of 2

Easting: Northing:
Sample from: BH03
Original Sample Wt. gm: Oven Dry Wt.: 400.0 gm

gm gm Ret., %
19 3/4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
12.5 1/2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
9.5 3/8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
4.75 #4 96.0 96.0 24.0 76.0
2.36 #8 69.0 165.0 41.3 58.8
1.18 # 16 45.0 210.0 52.5 47.5
0.3 # 50 33.0 243.0 60.8 39.3
0.15 #100 35.0 278.0 69.5 30.5
0.075 #200 25.0 303.0 75.8 24.3
Pan 97.0
Results:
Gravel % 24.0 D50= 1.5mm
Sand % 51.8
Fines % Silt 16.3
Fines % Clay 8.0

Sample from: BH03
Test No.: DH 02-H2
Gs = 2.500
yw = 0.99802
m= 9.81

Elapsed N= D=
0
2-Mar 1.01550 0.25 15.50 -0.90 15 16.40 54.48 16.00 13.78 7.425 0.1049 13.2
1.01500 0.50 15.00 -0.90 15 15.90 52.81 15.50 13.95 5.283 0.0747 12.8
1.01400 1.00 14.00 -0.90 15 14.90 49.49 14.50 14.29 3.780 0.0534 12.0
1.01350 2.00 13.50 -0.90 16 14.40 47.83 14.00 14.46 2.689 0.0380 11.6
1.01300 3.00 13.00 -0.90 16 13.90 46.17 13.50 11.52 1.960 0.0277 11.2
1.01200 5.00 12.00 -0.90 16 12.90 42.85 12.50 11.86 1.540 0.0218 10.4
1.01175 8.00 11.75 -0.90 16 12.65 42.02 12.25 11.94 1.222 0.0173 10.2
1.01150 15.00 11.50 -0.90 18 12.40 41.19 12.00 12.03 0.895 0.0127 10.0
1.01100 30.00 11.00 -0.90 18 11.90 39.53 11.50 12.20 0.638 0.0090 9.6
1.01000 60.00 10.00 -0.90 18 10.90 36.21 10.50 12.54 0.457 0.0065 8.8
1.00900 120.00 9.00 -0.90 18 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.328 0.0046 8.0
1.00900 240.00 9.00 -0.90 18 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.232 0.0033 8.0
6/4 1.00900 1200.00 9.00 -0.90 16 9.90 32.88 9.50 12.87 0.104 0.0015 8.0

ys-yw millipoises

Sample from: BH03
GRAVEL SAND

GRAVEL SAND
BS GRAVEL SAND SILT

100
90
80
70
Percentage passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Particle size mm
DIRECT SHEAR TEST, ASTM D 3080
Project : NTC building
Location : Hetauda Makwanpur
Material Description : sandy gravel BH-1
Depth(mtr.) : 1.5-4.5 m
Test No 1 2 3
Wt of Wet Soil + Can g 172 154 147 Strain Rate: 0.625mm/min
Wt of Dry Soil + Can g 145 133 125 Least Count of Strain Dial: 0.01mm
Weight of Water g 27 21 22 Least Count of Vertical Dial: -
Weight of Container g 12.8 12.3 14 Proving Ring Constant: 1.009
Weight Dry Soil g 132.2 120.7 111
Water Content. W. % 20.4 17.4 19.8
SOIL SPECIMENT MEASUREMENTS

Length, l cm. 6.0 6.0 6.0
Bredth, b cm. 6.0 6.0 6.0
Height, h cm. 2.5 2.5 2.5
Plan Area cm2. 36.0 36.0 36.0
Volume cm3 90.0 90.0 90.0
Weight of wet Soil +
g 332.0 333.0 331.0
Container
Weight of dry Soil +
g 180.0 180.0 180.0
Container
Weight of Water g 152.0 153.0 151.0
Wet Unit Weight, Kn/m3 16.6 16.7 16.5
Dry Unit Weight yd =
Kn/m3 13.8 14.2 13.7
100*yT/(100+W)
Normal Load (σn) 50 KN/m2 Normal Load (σn) 100 KN/m2 Normal Load (σn) 200 KN/m2
Strain Dial div Shear Stress Load Reading Shear Stress Load Reading Shear Stress
Load Reading Dial
KN/m2 Dial KN/m2 Dial KN/m2
0.25 11.0 11.099 38.0 38.3 89.0 89.8
0.50 14.0 14.126 40.0 40.4 99.0 99.9
0.75 15.0 15.135 45.0 45.4 108.0 109.0
1.00 17.0 17.153 51.0 51.5 110.0 111.0
1.25 19.0 19.171 54.0 54.5 115.0 116.0
1.50 21.0 21.189 60.0 60.5 120.0 121.1
1.75 32.0 32.288 0.0 122.0 123.1
2.00 34.0 34.306 0.0 125.0 126.1
2.50 0 0.0 0.0
3.00 0 0.0 0.0
3.50 0 0.0 0.0
4.00 0 0.0 0.0
4.50 0 0.0 0.0
5.00 0 0.0 0.0
5.50 0 0.0 0.0
6.00 0 0.0 0.0
6.50 0 0.0 0.0
7.00 0 0.0 0.0
7.50 0 0.0 0.0
8.00 0 0.0 0.0
8.50 0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Tested By : Checked By:
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
ASTM D 3080 -98

Depth(mtr.) : 1.5-4.5 m
SHEAR STRESS VS NORMAL STRESS

250.0
200.0
f = Shear Stress kN/m2
150.0
y = 0.6184x + 1.5135
100.0
50.0 C = 14 KN/m2
ø = Tan-¹ (23 -14)/160
=
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250
n = Normal Stress kN/m2
Result:
Angle of Internal friction (f) : 31.0

2
Cohesion (C) kN/m : 0.0
Depth(mtr.) : 1.5-4.5
Test No 1 2 3
Water Content. W. % 18.8 20.4 23.5

Length, l cm. 6.0 6.0 6.0
Bredth, b cm. 6.0 6.0 6.0
Height, h cm. 2.5 2.5 2.5
Plan Area cm2. 36.0 36.0 36.0
Volume cm3 90.0 90.0 90.0
g 332.0 333.0 331.0
Container
g 180.0 180.0 180.0
Container
Kn/m3 13.9 13.8 13.3
100*yT/(100+W)
Load Reading Dial
0.25 11.0 11.099 38.0 38.3 89.0 89.8
0.50 14.0 14.126 40.0 40.4 99.0 99.9
0.75 15.0 15.135 45.0 45.4 108.0 109.0
1.00 17.0 17.153 50.0 50.5 109.0 110.0
1.25 19.0 19.171 55.0 55.5 110.0 111.0
1.50 22.0 22.198 60.0 60.5 120.0 121.1
1.75 29.0 29.261 0.0 130.0 131.2
2.00 33.0 33.297 0.0 0.0
2.50 35.0 35.315 0.0 0.0
3.00 0 0.0 0.0
3.50 0 0.0 0.0
4.00 0 0.0 0.0
4.50 0 0.0 0.0
5.00 0 0.0 0.0
5.50 0 0.0 0.0
6.00 0 0.0 0.0
6.50 0 0.0 0.0
7.00 0 0.0 0.0
7.50 0 0.0 0.0
8.00 0 0.0 0.0
8.50 0 0.0 0.0
0 0.0
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
ASTM D 3080 -98

Depth(mtr.) : 1.5-4.5

250.0
200.0
150.0
y = 0.6486x
100.0
50.0 C = 14 KN/m2
ø = Tan-¹ (23 -14)/160
=
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Result:

2
Depth(mtr.) : 1.5-4.5
Test No 1 2 3
Water Content. W. % 24.1 22.7 27.9

Length, l cm. 6.0 6.0 6.0
Bredth, b cm. 6.0 6.0 6.0
Height, h cm. 2.5 2.5 2.5
Plan Area cm2. 36.0 36.0 36.0
Volume cm3 90.0 90.0 90.0
g 332.0 333.0 331.0
Container
g 180.0 180.0 180.0
Container
Kn/m3 13.4 13.6 12.9
100*yT/(100+W)
Load Reading Dial
0.25 11.0 11.099 38.0 38.3 89.0 89.8
0.50 14.0 14.126 40.0 40.4 99.0 99.9
0.75 15.0 15.135 45.0 45.4 108.0 109.0
1.00 17.0 17.153 50.0 50.5 110.0 111.0
1.25 19.0 19.171 55.0 55.5 120.0 121.1
1.50 22.0 22.198 62.0 62.6 130.0 131.2
1.75 29.0 29.261 65.0 65.6 0.0
2.00 33.0 33.297 0.0 0.0
2.50 0 0.0 0.0
3.00 0 0.0 0.0
3.50 0 0.0 0.0
4.00 0 0.0 0.0
4.50 0 0.0 0.0
5.00 0 0.0 0.0
5.50 0 0.0 0.0
6.00 0 0.0 0.0
6.50 0 0.0 0.0
7.00 0 0.0 0.0
7.50 0 0.0 0.0
8.00 0 0.0 0.0
8.50 0 0.0 0.0
0 0.0
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
ASTM D 3080 -98

Depth(mtr.) : 3.0-4.5

250.0
200.0
150.0
y = 0.653x + 0.5045
100.0
50.0 C = 14 KN/m2
ø = Tan-¹ (23 -14)/160
=
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Result:

2
ANNEX 3: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
DRILLING PHOTOGRAPHS
Drilling in progress Drilling Sample
Drilling in Progress Drilling sample

Drilling sample Drilling sample
Drilling in progress Drilling sample


NTC Building Makwanpur

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NTC Building Makwanpur

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

NTC Building Makwanpur

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Table of Contents

4. FIELD INVESTIGATION ........................................................................................................ 2

6.1. Water Content Test (Natural Moisture Content) ........................................................... 4

6.2. Particle Size Analysis ....................................................................................................... 4

6.3. Atterberg Limits .............................................................................................................. 5

6.4. Direct Shear Test ............................................................................................................. 6

6.5. Unconfined Compression Test ........................................................................................ 7

7. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATION AND ANALYSIS ......................................................... 7

7.1. Correction of N (SPT Nos. from field) ............................................................................. 7

7.2. Allowable Bearing Pressure ............................................................................................ 8

7.5. Liquefaction .................................................................................................................. 12

8. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...................................................................... 13

ANNEX-1, Bore Log

ANNEX-2. Calculation and Lab Data

The scope of work comprises the following activities:

Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DCPT): It consists of driving a cone by blows of

Nc = 1.25 N for depth up to 3 m

= 1.75 N for depth 3 to 6 m

= 2 N for depth greater than 6 m

But normally we divide by 2 for safety reasons.

5. NATURE OF SOIL STRATA

6.1. Water Content Test (Natural Moisture Content)

6.2. Particle Size Analysis

Calculating the Coefficients of Uniformity and Curvature

Where, D60 is the grain diameter at 60% passing, and

D10 is the grain diameter at 10% passing.

Criteria for Grading Soils

6.3. Atterberg Limits

6.4. Direct Shear Test

This test is performed to determine the consolidated-drained shear strength of a sandy

6.5. Unconfined Compression Test

7. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATION AND ANALYSIS

7.1. Correction of N (SPT Nos. from field)

a) Overburden Pressure Correction

σ’ = Effective over burden pressure in kN/m2

Dialtancy correction is to be applied when obtained after overburden correction,

N= Nr (when Nr≤ 15) and N= 15+ (Nr-15)/2 ……………(7.2)

Where, Nr= SPT Blows count from field

7.2. Allowable Bearing Pressure

7.3. Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity (MAT

qns = 0.02N2BRW1 + 0.06(100 + B2)DfRW2 ———-(1)

qns Net safe bearing Capacity

N Corrected SPT Value

Rw & Rw’ Water Table Correction Factor (Fig 7.1)

7.4. Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Tolerable Settlement (MAT

Bearing Pressure Calculation Sheet for MAT Foundation

Project: Soil Investigation Work Of NTC Building

S.N. Parameter Unit Values

1 Depth of Foundation D m 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.5 6.0

0.8 Reduction factor R 0.8

b) If D60 is between 0.2mm and 1.0mm

c) If Cu (D60/D10) is between 2 and 5

d) If the SPT blow count per 30.0cm is less than 15

8. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Depth 1.5m 2.0m 2.5m

3. The proportion of the Clayeysilt is very low in all the boreholes.

6. The site is safe for any potential Liquefaction.

1. (Burt look 2007 Pg 71 Table 6.8(Field evaluation of weathered rock)

Brownish grey colour silty coarse to fine sand