SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT

For the Proposed Commercial Building

for

MRs. Basundhara Baral / Chandrakala Baral / Keshu Sharma

PMC-07, Masbar, Kaski, Nepal

Submitted By:

Barahi Technical Solutions Pvt. Ltd

Pokhara – 8, Simalchaur

Ashad, 2078

i
 Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background.................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose of the Study...................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Scope of Investigation .................................................................................................................... 1
1.4 Site Details ..................................................................................................................................... 2
2. FIELD EXPLORATION AND TESTING ...................................................................................................... 4
2.1 General Details .............................................................................................................................. 4
2.1.2. Locations of Tests ...................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.3 Numbers and Depth of Boreholes ............................................................................................... 4
2.1.4 Field Tests ................................................................................................................................... 6
Core Drilling ..................................................................................................................................... 6
SPT .................................................................................................................................................. 6
DCPT................................................................................................................................................ 6
Co-relation between SPT & DCPT ..................................................................................................... 7
2.1.6 Sampling ..................................................................................................................................... 9
2.1.7 Ground water table .................................................................................................................... 9
3. LABORATORY TESTS & RESULT INTERPRETATION ............................................................................... 10
3.1. Laboratory Tests ......................................................................................................................... 10
3.2 Result Interpretation.................................................................................................................... 11
3.2.1 Soil Description ..................................................................................................................... 11
3.2.2 Correction of N-value ............................................................................................................ 12
3.2.3 Computation of Bearing Capacity of Soils. ............................................................................. 17
4. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 20
4.1 Foundation Ground, Depth and Types. ......................................................................................... 20
4.1.1 Foundation Ground ............................................................................................................... 20
4.1.2 Foundation Depth ................................................................................................................. 20
4.1.3 Foundation Type ................................................................................................................... 21
4.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure ...................................................................................................... 21
4.4 Settlement Criteria................................................................................................................... 21
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 23

i
PHOTOGRAPHS ........................................................................................................................................ i
ANNEX-A: Samples of Lab Tests ............................................................................................................... ii

ii
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

This report discusses about the details of Sub-soil Exploration for Proposed Commercial
Building for MRs. Basundhara Baral / Chandrakala Baral / Keshu Sharma, PMC- 07,
Masbar, Kaski, Nepal. The investigation work included drilling boreholes, Laboratory Tests
and Analysis fo Various test results to predict the allowable bearing capacity of sub-soil at
the proposed buildings site and recommeded the most suitable foundation compatible to the
prevailing soil conditions.

1.2 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this site investigation was to determine the existing soil profiles and
engineering characteristics of the sub-surface conditions at the site and to provide the
designer with comments on the followings:

a. Suitable footing types, foundation depths and geotechnical design parameters such as
soil bearing capacity, expected foundation settlement, hydrological conditions at site etc
which will be required for a safe and economic design.

b. Identifying any danger of inherent natural suscepitblity of the land to the process of
sliding and erosion, adverse effect of construction to the existing conditions and
forecasting any natural/geological process likely to threaten the integrity of the building.

c. Recommending the possible engineeirng solutions for ensuring stability of the building
foundation if the site is vulnereable with respect to stability conditions.

1.3 Scope of Investigation

The scope of investigation for this study comprises the followings:

1
a. Collecting the geological and geotechnical informations related to the project site from
the secondary sources

b. Making visits for site reconaisance in order to collect information abut site nature,
topography of the site, geological features and other properties concernng the project
site.

c. Drilling three (3) boreholes and sampling of distrubed samples.

d. Performing all necessary laboratory tests

e. Applying engineering analysis and evaluation of field findings and labortory results.

f. Developing conclusions and recommendatoins conerning design and contruction of the

most safe and economical foundatoins & site preparation.

g. Submision of the report.

1.4 Site Details

a. Site location

The site for the proposed project is situated on Pokhara Metropolitan City - 07, Masbar,
Kaski , Nepal. The plot number is 237, 238 & 249 respetively.

b. Site layout and Topography

The site is more or less Trapezoidal in shape with longer portion lying in North - South
direction and mesures 816.00 Sq.m. The site is in level with existing road and is fairly level..
The colour of exposed soil surfce is brown.

c. The structure

As per the Client’s information, the propoesed structure is a Commercial Building

comprsing of Ground plus four upper floors.

2
d. Seisicm zone

The seismic zone of the propsed site as per NBC 105:1994 lies in zone 1.0

e. Geological Informaton

The proposed site lies in:

- Latitude: 28°12’41.76” N

- Departure: 83°58’19.92” E

3
2. FIELD EXPLORATION AND TESTING

2.1 General Details

2.1.1 Weather Conditions

Weather was clear during the field investigations which were carried out in month of Ashad,
2078.

2.1.2. Locations of Tests

A schematic site plan showing the location of the trial pits were given in figure below.

Fig. 1: Schematic diagram locating pisiton of boreholes (BH)

2.1.3 Numbers and Depth of Boreholes

The number and spacing of boreholes or trial pits will depend upon the extent of the site and
the nature of the structure upcoming on it. The proposed building is expected to have mat
foundation. Thus, three (3) boreholes aling the centre of the plot has been conducted.

4
The NBC 108: 1994 (Site Consideration for Seismic Hazard) states that the depth of
Exploration, in general, will be carried out to a depth up to which the increase in pressure
due to structural loading is likely to cause perceptible settlement or shear failure. Such a
depth is known as significant depth, which depends upon the type, weight, size, shape of
structure as well as soil profile and its properties. It is generally safe to assume the
significant depth up to a depth at which the net increase in vertical pressure becomes less
than 10% of the initial overburden pressure. Alternatively, a pressure bulb bounded by an
isobar of one-fifth to one-tenth of the surface loading intensity is sometimes assumes to
define the minimum depth of exploratoin. This depth may be assumed to be equal to one and
a half to two times the width (smaller lateral dimension) of the loaded footting area.

However, in this investigation, the depth of exploration were determined by uisng the
equations suggested by Sowers & Sowers 1970.

D = CS0.7

Where,

D = Depth of exploration in mtr

C = Constant (value ranges from 3 to 6 depending type of structure)

S = Number of storey

5
2.1.4 Field Tests
Core Drilling

It was carried out as per ASTM designation D 2113-83. The core size is NQ size (47mm)
with hole diameter of 76 mm and the core barrel is double tube swivel type with retrievable
inner tube. The drilling is carried out by using NW casing. All the cores recovered from
drilling were placed safely in wooden box. The in-situ tests such as standard penetration test
(SPT) & dynamic cone penetration test (DCPT) were carried out as per IS: 2131-1963 & IS:
4968-part I & II 1976 respectively.

SPT

It is conducted in a bore hole using a standard split spoon sampler. When the borehole has
been drilled to the desired depth the drilling tools are removed and the sampler is lowered to
the bottom of the hole. The sampler is driven into the soil by a drop hammer of 63.5 kg mass
falling through a height of 750 mm at the rate of 30 bows per minute (IS: 2131-1963). The
number of hammer blows required to drive 150 mm of the sample is counted. The sampler is
further driven by 150 mm and the number of blows recorded. Likewise, the sampler is once
again further driven by 150 mm and the number of blows recorded. The number of blows
recorded for the first 150 mm is disregarded. The number of blows recorded for the last two
150 mm intervals are added to give the standard penetration number (N value).

DCPT

The test is performed as per IS: 4968-part I & II 1976, using a 50 mm cone. The cone
driving was accomplished by a drop of hammer weighing 63.5 kg falling freely through a
height of 750 mm onto the drive head. The number of blows required to penetrate total depth
of 300 mm (in three successive penetrations; 100 mm in each layer) were recorded and are
called dynamic cone resistance value (Ncbr).

6
 Co-relation between SPT & DCPT

The approximate co-relation between N-value & Ncbr when 50 mm diameter cone is used is
as follows:

Ncbr = 1.50 N-value for depths up to 3.0 m

Ncbr = 1.75 N-value for depths up to 3.0 m to 6.0 m
Ncbr = 2.00 N-value for depths greater than 6.0 m
(Source: K.R. Arora, 2010)

The in-situ test locations/depths carried out in the drilling holes have been summarized in Table
2.1, 2.2 & 2.3 respectively.

Table 2.1: Borehole No: 1

Sample Nos. of Blows (SPT) Nos. of Blows (DCPT)
Field Field
Type &
Soil Description N- Ncbr- GWT Remarks
Depth 15cm 15cm 15cm 10 cm 10 cm 10 cm
Value Value
(m)
Reddish brown
sand & silt-clay
mixture from
ground surface
to 1.5 m depth 1.5 3.0 6.0 5.0 11.0 - - - - -
3.0 5.0 7.0 9.0 16.0 - -
4.5 6.0 9.0 11.0 20.0 - - - - -
Sand Gravel 6.0 5.0 9.0 14.0 23.0 - - - - -
mixture with 7.5 6.0 11.0 13.0 24.0 - - - - -
boulder from 9.0 9.0 12.0 15.0 27.0 - - - - -
1.5 m to 15. 0 10.5 14.0 14.0 18.0 32.0 - - - - -
m depth 12.0 8.0 18.0 15.0 33.0 - - - - -
13.5 11.0 16.0 19.0 35.0 - - - - -
15.0 8.0 21.0 17.0 38.0 - - - - -
(Source: Field Test 2078)

Table 2.2: Borehole No: 2

Sample Nos. of Blows (SPT) Nos. of Blows (DCPT)
Field Field
Type &
Soil Description N- Ncbr- GWT Remarks
Depth 15cm 15cm 15cm 10 cm 10 cm 10 cm
Value Value
(m)
Reddish brown
sand & silt-clay
mixture from
ground surface 1.5 5.0 6.0 4.0 10.0 - - - - -
7
to 1.5 m depth

3.0 5.0 9.0 7.0 16.0 - -

4.5 >50 - - - - -

Sand Gravel
mixture with 6.0 6.0 13.0 9.0 22.0 - - - - -
boulder of
Conglomerate 7.5 7.0 12.0 11.0 23.0 - - - - -
Origin from 1.5
9.0 >50 - - - - -
m to 15. 0 m
depth
10.5 12.0 14.0 18.0 32.0 - - - - -
12.0 14.0 19.0 16.0 35.0 - - - - -
13.5 11.0 18.0 17.0 35.0 - - - - -
15.0 13.0 21.0 19.0 40.0 - - - - -
(Source: Field Test 2078)

Table 2.3: Borehole No: 3

Sample Nos. of Blows (SPT) Nos. of Blows (DCPT)
Field Field
Type &
Soil Description N- Ncbr- GWT Remarks
Depth 15cm 15cm 15cm 10 cm 10 cm 10 cm
Value Value
(m)
Reddish brown
sand & silt-clay
mixture from
ground surface
to 1.5 m depth 1.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 11.0 - - - -
3.0 >50 - -
4.5 6.0 11.0 8.0 19.0 - - - -
Sand Gravel
mixture with 6.0 11.0 7.0 14.0 21.0 - - - -
boulder of 7.5 >50 - - - -
Conglomerate 9.0 9.0 15.0 10.0 25.0 - - - -
Origin from 1.5 10.5 - - - >50 - - - - -
m to 15. 0 m 12.0 12.0 10.0 17.0 27.0 - - - - -
depth
13.5 7.0 18.0 13.0 31.0 - - - - -
15.0 15.0 18.0 22.0 40.0 - - - - -
(Source: Field Test 2078)

8
 2.1.6 Sampling
Distrubed samples were taken from all three (3) bore holes representing the various layers.
All the samples were placed in waterproof plastic bags in order to conserve their moisture
contents. Then, the samples were then brought to Laboratory of Barahi Technical Solutions
Pvt. Ltd, PMC-08, Kaski, Nepal

2.1.7 Ground water table

During the core drilling up to investigated depth of 15 m, no signs of GWT marks were
observed.

9
3. LABORATORY TESTS & RESULT INTERPRETATION

3.1. Laboratory Tests

The following lab tests were conducted, viz;

a. Dry Sieve Analysis

The above test were performed in the soil lab of Barahi Technical Solutions Pvt. Ltd, PMC-
08, Kaski, Nepal as per the specification laid down in the IS standard codes. The results of
the laboratory tests were compiled in the form of Test Results summary sheet and presented

as;

Table 3.1: Summary of Dry Sieve Analysis Test

BH Depth Boulder Gravel Sand Silt-Clay (%) Remarks

No (m) (%) (%) (%)
1.50 0.00 9.80 59.80 30.40
3.00 0.00 60.80 31.20 8.00
4.50 0.00 46.00 51.80 2.20
6.00 0.00 42.80 55.60 1.60
1 7.50 0.00 55.60 34.70 9.70
9.00 0.00 51.37 42.13 6.50
10.50 0.00 46.00 51.80 2.20
12.00 0.00 46.71 51.22 2.07
13.50 0.00 37.80 56.81 5.39
15.00 0.00 33.91 58.54 7.55
1.50 0.00 42.80 55.60 1.60
3.00 0.00 9.80 55.80 34.40
4.50 0.00 33.20 63.20 3.60
6.00 0.00 31.80 64.00 4.20
2
7.50 0.00 30.40 65.20 4.40
9.00 0.00 37.80 56.81 5.39
10.50 0.00 33.80 56.81 9.39
12.00 0.00 33.20 63.20 3.60
13.50 0.00 44.23 51.22 4.55
15.00 0.00 39.76 56.17 4.07
1.50 0.00 31.80 64.00 4.20
3.00 0.00 13.40 53.60 33.00

10
 4.50 0.00 13.40 53.60 33.00
6.00 0.00 52.80 44.80 2.40
3 7.50 31.67 56.81 11.52
0.00
9.00 0.00 37.80 54.10 8.10
10.50 0.00 33.78 58.72 7.50
12.00 0.00 52.80 44.80 2.40
13.50 0.00 39.76 56.17 4.07
15.00 0.00 37.80 56.81 5.39
(Source: Lab Test 2078)

More details are shown in Annex-A

3.2 Result Interpretation

3.2.1 Soil Description

Borehole-1

The soil to a depth of 1.5 m is reddish to brown medium sand with many silt-clay mixtures.
Between depths 1.5 m to 15.00 m the soil is medium sand gravel mixture with certain
boulders.

Borehole-2

The soil to a depth of 1.5 m is reddish to brown medium sand with many silt-clay mixtures.
Between depths 1.5 m to 15.00 m the soil is medium sand gravel mixture with certain
boulders. The conglomerate boulders were encountered at depths 4.5m & 9.00m
respectively.

Borehole-3

The soil to a depth of 1.5 m is reddish to brown medium sand with many silt-clay mixtures.
Between depths 1.5 m to 15.00 m the soil is medium sand gravel mixture with certain
boulders. The conglomerate boulders were encountered at depths 3.00m, 7.5m & 10.5 m
respectively.

11
3.2.2 Correction of N-value
The N-value correction was applied as per American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM D 1586). i.e.

N’70 = CN x NR x Ƞ1 x Ƞ2 x Ƞ3 x Ƞ4

Where,

N’70 = Standard Energy Ratio

CN = Overburden Correction Factors

NR = Field N-value

Ƞ1 = Hammer Efficiency Ratio

Ƞ2 = Correction factor for Rod Length

Ƞ3 = Correction factor for Sampler

Ƞ4 = Correction factor for bore hole diameter

a. Overburden Pressure Correction

In granular soils, the overburden pressure affects the penetration resistance. If the two soils
having same relative density by different confining pressures are tested, the one with higher
confining pressures gives a higher penetration number. As the confining pressure in
cohesionless soils increases with the depth, the penetration number for soils at shallow depth
is underestimated and that at greater depths is overestimated. Thus, for getting uniformity in
result, we shall have this correction.

Therefore, overburden pressure correction factor CN was computed as;

CN = Sq.rt. (95.76/ǭ)

Where,

Ǭ = Effective overburden pressure

12
 b. Hammer Efficiency Ratio

The ratio of hammer efficiency to the standard energy ratio is called hammer efficiency ratio.

Ƞ1 =Er / Erb

Where,

Er = Efficiency of hammer used (=0.75 for safety hammer; pulley rope type)

Erb= the standard energy ratio (=70)

c. Correction factor for Rod Length

Rod Length (m) Ƞ2 = Correction

factor

>10 1.0

6-10 0.95

4-6 0.85

0-4 0.75

d. Correction factor for Sampler

Type of Sampler Ƞ3 = Correction factor

Without Liner 1.0

With liner; Dense sand, clay 0.80

Loose Sand 0.90

e. Correction factor for bore hole diameter

Hole Diameter (mm) Ƞ4 = Correction factor

60-120 1.0

13
 150 1.05

200 1.15

f. Dilatancy Correction

This correction is required when there is no dissipation of pore water pressure. The pore
pressure is increases the resistance of the soil and hence the N-value. The dilatancy effect
usually occurs in silty fine sands and fine sands below water table.

In our case, there is no permanent water table encountered up to the investigated depth and
most of the soils are granular type, hence dilatacny correction is not required.

Table 3.4: Correction of N-values

14
 (Source: Field Test 2078)

Table 3.5 Correlation between N-value & Angle of Shearing Resistance

Run Depth
BH No Corrected N-Value Denseness Angle of shearing resistance(Ø) Remarks
(m)

1.50 16.00 Medium 30º - 40º

3.00 16.00 Medium 30º - 40º
4.50 19.00 Medium 30º - 40º
6.00 19.00 Medium 30º - 40º
1
7.50 19.00 Medium 30º - 40º
9.00 20.00 Medium 30º - 40º

15
 10.50 22.00 Medium 30º - 40º
12.00 22.00 Medium 30º - 40º
13.50 22.00 Medium 30º - 40º
15.00 Medium 30º - 40º
23.00

Run Depth
BH No Corrected N-Value Denseness Angle of shearing resistance(Ø) Remarks
(m)

1.50 15.00 Medium 30º - 40º

3.00 17.00 Medium 30º - 40º
4.50 - V. Dense > 45º
6.00 18.00 Medium 30º - 40º
2 7.50 19.00 Medium 30º - 40º
9.00 - V. Dense > 45º
10.50 23.00 Medium 30º - 40º
12.00 24.00 Medium 30º - 40º
13.50 22.00 Medium 30º - 40º
15.00 24.00 Medium 30º - 40º

Run Depth
BH No Corrected N-Value Denseness Angle of shearing resistance(Ø) Remarks
(m)

1.50 16.00 Medium 30º - 40º

3.00 - V. Dense > 45º
4.50 17.00 Medium 30º - 40º
6.00 17.00 Medium 30º - 40º
3 7.50 - V. Dense > 45º
9.00 18.00 Medium 30º - 40º
10.50 - V. Dense > 45º
12.00 18.00 Medium 30º - 40º
13.50 19.00 Medium 30º - 40º
15.00 23.00 Medium 30º - 40º
(Source: Field Test 2078)

16
 3.2.3 Computation of Bulk Unit Weight of Soils.

Unit weight of a soil mass is the ratio of the total weight of soil to the total volume of soil.

Unit Weight is usually determined in the laboratory by measuring the weight and volume of
a relatively undisturbed soil sample obtained from a brass ring. Measuring unit weight of
soil in the field may consist of a sand cone test, rubber balloon or nuclear densiometer.
However; in this exploration an Empirical values for, of granular soils based on the standard
penetration number, (from Bowels, Foundation Analysis).

SPT Penetration, N-Value (blows/ foot) Bulk Unit Weight of Soil (lb/ft3)
0-4 70 - 100
4 - 10 90 - 115
10 - 30 110 - 130
30 - 50 110 - 140
>50 130 - 150

3.2.4 Computation of Bearing Capacity of Soils.

The bearing capacity analysis has been made by considering both shear failure and
settlement criteria. The bearing capacity computation for granular soil was carried out based
on the results of SPT & DCPT.

As per the client’s information, building will have a basement floor, hence Tengs, 1962
method was used to determine the bearing capacity from the shear failure criteria as well as
settlement criteria for the mat foundation. The minimum value obtained from these criteria
is recommended as the allowable bearing capacity.

i. For shear failure criteria;

The safe bearing capacity (qns) = 0.22 N2 .B.Wϒ + 0.67 (100+ N2).Df. Wq KN/m2

ii. For settlement criteria

The safe settlement pressure for a settlement of 25 mm; (q np) = 17.5(N-3) .Wϒ KN/m2

Where,

B= smaller dimension of raft (m)

17
 Df = Depth of footing (m)

Wq , Wϒ = water table correction factors

The details of computations are tabulated below;

Table 3.6: Computation of Bearing Capacity of Soil for BH-1

Table 3.7: Computation of Bearing Capacity of Soil for BH-2

Table 3.8: Computation of Bearing Capacity of Soil for BH-3

18
(Source: Field Test 2078)

19
4. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

According to the field exploration, laboratory testing, subsurface conditions and engineering
analysis, it can be concluded that the existing natural ground at the investigated site can
support the expected building loads, provided that the followings recommendations are
applied.

4.1 Foundation Ground, Depth and Types.

4.1.1 Foundation Ground

Based on our findings and the encountered materials, it is recommended that the foundations
of the proposed buildings will be laid on “Grey to white medium sand & gravel mixture”.

In all cases, all the friable and loose materials should be removed before laying the
foundations. Differences in foundation depth for adjacent footings can be filled with lean
concrete. Reinforced wall beams are also recommended where big differences in
foundations levels are occurred.

It is also advisable to spoil fine sand and cement slurry into the pit (after leveling but prior to
the boulder stone soling) in order to add the cementations value of the foundation soil over
soft pocket, if any.

4.1.2 Foundation Depth

The foundation depth could vary due to different levels in the site and differences in the
depth of the bearing layer. However, foundations must be located properly so as not to be
adversely affected by outside influence such as adjacent structures, water, frost action,
significant soil volume change, underground cavities or utility cavities.

20
According to the Client information, the proposed building is expected to have ground plus
four upper storeys. The investigated depth is sufficient to fulfill the clients’ purpose.

4.1.3 Foundation Type

Isolated footing with double tie beam system or general mat foundation will best suit the site
condition. However, the designer is free to choose the type of foundation. It depends upon
him/her.

4.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure

The allowable bearing capacity of soil has been determined by Teng’s (1974) by considering
both bearing and settlment criteria. The summary of minimum value of safe bearing
pressure of the soil were as follows:

Table 4.1: Bearing Capacity of Soil at Proposed Site.

Safe Bearing Pressure

Deth
(KN/m2 ) Remarks
(m)
(for 25 mm settlement)
1.50 220.96
3.00 236.25
4.50 262.50
6.00 262.50
7.50 280.00
9.00 280.00
10.50 227.50
12.00 320.83
13.50 315.00
15.00 355.83
(Source: Field Test 2078)

4.4 Settlement Criteria

The field exploration of the site shows the proposed building will be laid on medium sand
gravel mixture. On the other hand, the settlemnt achieved in lab do not comply with the field
21
condition, in general. Which basically depends upon the type of soil, type of structure,
structure load, geological conditons etc. Therefore, Thus, the settlement parameters of the
soil were not found out.

However, the designer can consider the settlement based on his/her foundation size with the
permissible value based type of foundation.

………………

Prabesh Adhikari

Nec Reg: 5460 “A”

Geotechnical Engineer

22
REFERENCES

Nepal National Building code 108:1994 “Site Considerations for Seismic Hazards,”HMG of
Nepal, Ministry of Physical Planning and works DUDBC, Kathmandu 2060

Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (USCS), ASTM
Committee, May 1, 2006

Magdi M.E Zumrawi, E. Hussam, “Predicting Bearing Strength Characteristics from Soil
Index Properties” International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), Vol
7, Issue 2, March-April 2016, IAEME Publication.

Ranjan Gopal, Rao A.S. R, “Basic and Applied Soil Mechanics” New Age International (P)
ltd, New Delhi, Second Edition, 2000

Arora, K. R, “Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering” Standard Publishers

Distributors, Delhi, Reprint Edition 2010

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM D 1586)

23
PHOTOGRAPHS

i
ANNEX-A: Samples of Lab Tests

ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii