Draft Report JayShree Khola

Department of RoadBridge Unit

Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Draft Report on

Detailed Soil Investigation Work for Jay Shree Khola

Bridge

at

Gaidakot, Nawalparasi

Submitted To:

Building Design Authority Pvt. Ltd.

Osho Bhavan, Kamaladi Kathmandu

Submitted By:

Jaljala Geo Solution Pvt. Ltd. Jwagal-10, Lalitpur

Tel :01-5011208 Oct, 2015

TableofContents1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE ........................................................................................................... 1

1.2. GENERAL GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 1

1.3. SEISMICITY .............................................................................................................................. 2

2. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF WORK .............................................................................................. 4

2.1. Field Work .................................................................................................................................. 4

2.2. Laboratory Work ......................................................................................................................... 4

3. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................... 5

3.1. Rotary Drilling ............................................................................................................................ 5

3.2. Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DCPT) ................................................................................... 5

3.3. Sampling ..................................................................................................................................... 5

3.4. Water Table Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 5

3.5. Laboratory Testing ...................................................................................................................... 6

4. FIELD INVESTIGATION RESULTS ................................................................................................ 7

4.1. Penetration Tests (SPT/DCPT) ................................................................................................... 7

4.2. Standard Penetration Test (SPT): ............................................................................................... 7

4.4. Bearing Capacity from SPT: ....................................................................................................... 9

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................ 13

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 14

APPENDICES

BOREHOLE LOGS

TEST RESULT SUMMARY SHEETS

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

PHOTOGRAPHS

1

1. INTRODUCTION

This is a geotechnical investigation report carried out by Jaljala Geo Solution Pvt. Ltd. at

proposed Bridge site of river in Jay Shree Khola. This is the final report which discusses briefly

the field investigation works, analysis and interpretation of the obtained data and their

recommendations for application in the foundation design of the Bridge.

1.1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

The soil investigation is done for a multi span bridge project across a river called Jay Shree

KholaThe site lies inNawalparasi. Figure below shows the site location. The drilling for soil

investigation was done on both bank and center of the river.

Photo 1: Drilling work under Progress

1.2. GENERAL GEOLOGY

The bridge site lies in the Sub-Himalaya Zone. The Sub-Himalaya Zone is also called as Siwalik

Zone and is delimited on the south by the Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) and on the north by the

Main Boundary Thrust (MBT). It consists basically of fluvial deposits of the Neogene age (23

million years to 1.6 million years old). This Zone extends all along the Himalaya forming the

southernmost hill range with width of 8 to 50 km. The Lesser Himalayan rocks thrust southward

over the rocks of Siwalik along the MBT (Dahal, 2006).

The general dip of beds of Siwalik has northward trend with varying angles and the overall strike

is east-west. The Siwalik Zone has number of east-west running thrusts. Siwalik Zone is also

rich with fossils. Fossils of plants, Pisces, reptiles and mammals (Carnivore, Proboscidean,

Artiodactyl, Rodent and Primates) have been reported from Siwalik.

2

1.3. SEISMICITY

Many earth scientists believe that longitudinally the entire 2,400 km long Himalayan arc can be

segmented into different individual parts (200-300 km) which periodically break and move

separately and produce mega earthquake (catastrophic earthquake) in the Himalayan region.

From east to west, the great earthquake of Assam, India (1950), Shilong, India (1897), Nepal-

Bihar, India (1934) and Kangra, India (1905) are the mega-earthquakes of the last century

produced by the movements in different parts of the Himalayan arc, all with magnitude around

8.0 - 8.7. When a sector of the Himalaya moves and produces earthquakes, it will take some

time (from decades to century) to repeat the event at the same place. Nepal is prone to an

earthquake of minor or major magnitude. Records of earthquakes since 1253 indicate that Nepal

was hit by 16 major earthquakes - the 1833 (magnitude 7.9) and 1934(magnitude 8.3) are two of

these which have occurred at an interval of 100 years. Statically, the earthquake occurrence

data of the last century shows that in average Nepal was hit by a big earthquake in every 12

years (Nakarmi, 1997).

Now-a-days, earth scientists are most concerned about the lack of occurrence of any great

earthquake between Kathmandu in the east and Dehra Dun, India in the west during the past

many centuries, and have named it the CENTRAL GAP. It is most likely that this segment of the

Himalaya is due for a major break to trigger a mega-earthquake in the Himalaya. It is even

suspected that it may be the greatest earthquake that we have so far experienced in the

Himalaya in the past few centuries. The area closer to the epicenter will suffer the maximum

damage.

3

Fig. 2: Historical events of Earthquakes (Source: Micro seismicepicenter map of Nepal

Himalaya and adjoining region, 1997 published by DoMG, GON).

Fig 3: Seismic zoning map (Source: UNDP/UNCHS (Habitat, 1994).

To counteract earthquake effect due consideration has to be taken in the structural design of

bridges. The project area is located in the area having Seismic Zoning Factor, Z, equal to 0.9,

according to the Nepal National Bridge Code (NBC 105: 1994).

4

2. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF WORK

The objective behind this geotechnical investigation work is to provide information to the

Engineer about the geo- profile of the project site, the engineering properties and load carrying

capacity of the in-situ soil by carrying out different field works and various laboratories testing

works. With aforesaid objective field investigation works was started on 25 Nov 2015 and was

completed on 30 Nov 2015

The scope of works consist of field work as well as laboratory works.

2.1. Field Work

Field works included advancement of borehole by rotary drilling, conducting Standard

Penetration Test (SPT); DCPT, collection of undisturbed and disturbed samples and

measurements of ground water table.

2.2. Laboratory Work

The following laboratory tests have been carried out in order to assess the physicalproperties of

the soil.

2.2.1. General Properties

Sieve analysis

Natural Moisture Content

Specific Gravity

Shear Test

5

3. METHODOLOGY

The methodologies adopted for whole operation are described briefly in the following

subheadings.

3.1. Rotary Drilling

The boreholes at selected location were advanced by rotary drilling machine. Borehole

wasdrilled up to a depth of 20 meter. The method of rotary drilling has been selected based on

the site observation. The diameter of the hole was kept 100 mm so that undisturbed sample

could be extracted for tests like Directsheartestand Core Sample. The soil extracted during

drilling of each hole was observed carefully by the supervisor so as to make siteborehole logs.

3.2. Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DCPT)

DCPTwas conducted in all drill holes. The tests were conducted at every 1.50 m interval, as far

as possible, starting first at 1.50 m depth. The total number of blow count of a 65 kg hammer,

falling freely through 75 cm height, required for 2nd and 3rd 150 mm penetration of cone were

recorded as field N-value and are presented in the borehole logs. The purpose of the test is to

obtain information on relative density of cohesion less soil and consistency of cohesive soils.

The samples obtained in the split tube are disturbed but representative samples. They are

preserved for determination of the index properties of the soil. Number of blow is counted by

DCPT for gravel and boulder layer.

3.3. Sampling

Before any sample was taken, the borehole was cleaned up of loose disturbed soil deposited

during boring operation. The samples thus obtained were placed in airtight plastic bags, labeled

properly for identification. Undisturbed samples were not taken for cohesion less soil. Core

samples of rocks were also not obtained during drilling process. The core recovery was very

poor.

3.4. Water Table Monitoring

Water table was measured in borehole during the period of investigation. The water level

measured in a particular borehole at the end of 24hour's period after the completion of drilling, is

recorded as the water level for that borehole. Fluctuation in the water level in borehole observed

6

during the investigation period was recorded every day before the start and end of every shift of

work. Water table is found at ground level.

3.5. Laboratory Testing

Depending upon the type of soil and the scope of works, type and number of the laboratory test

were determined in consultation with the Engineer. The tests were carried out utilizing standard

procedures as specified by IS, BS, AASHTO or ASTM. Sieve analysis, specific gravity, shear

test presented in annex is done for sludge sample obtained during coring process.

7

4. FIELD INVESTIGATION RESULTS

4.1. Penetration Tests (SPT/DCPT)

Dense sand mixed with Gravels and boulders was observed during the borehole drilling.

So, Dynamic Cone penetration Test (DCPT) was conducted in thedrill hole at the interval

of 1.5 meters down the borehole, in remaining depth of BH1 and remaining boreholes.

The tests were conducted at every 1.50 m interval, as far as possible, starting first at 1.50

m depth. The total penetration depth under 50 blow count of a 65 kg hammer, falling

freely through 75 cm height, is noted.Then the number of blows for penetration of

300mm, is the DCPT value.The DCPT value obtained is again converted in SPT using

the correlation given by Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee;

NDCP= 1.5NSPT for depths upto 4m NDCP = 1.75NSPT for depths between 4 to 9m NDCP= 2NSPT for depths greater than 9m

4.2. Standard Penetration Test (SPT): Theory:

The SPT values have been corrected in accordance with the proposal of

Skempton, (1986) and Liao and Whitman (1987) as outlined below with

consideration of field procedure, hammer efficiency, borehole diameter, sample

and rod length.

Correction of SPT N-value

N60 = Em CB CS CR (N/0.60)

Where:

N60 = SPT N value corrected for field procedure

Em = Hammer Efficiency

CB = borehole diameter correction

CS = Sample Correction

CR = rod length correction

N = SPT N value recorded in the field

8

The correction factors taken are :

Em = 0.30 for hand drop hammer

CB = 1.0 for 100 mm dia. borehole

Cs = 0.8 sampler with liner

CR = 0.75 for rod length 3.0 - 4.0 m

0.85 for rod length 4.0 - 6.0 m

0.95 for rod length 6.0 - 10 m

1.0for rod length >10 m

Correction of corrected N45 field value for overburden pressure using the relation after

Liao and Whitman, 1987

(N1)60 = N60√(95.76/'z)

Where:

N60 = SPT N value corrected for field procedure

(N1)60 = SPT N-value corrected for field procedures and overburden stress

4.3. Field DCPT/SPT Summary:

The log of all the boreholes shows that the field DCPT values of all the

layers are always greater than 50. The converted SPT values are also

greater than 50. So the SPT values greater than 50 is reduced to this

value(50) for the analysis. The summary of field DCP test with converted

SPT and Adopted SPT N values are shown in Table below.

9

Depth BH1

RL ( m) DCPT N Adopted SPT N

1.5 >50 50

3 >50 50

4.5 >50 50

6 >50 50

7.5 >50 50

9 >50 50

10.5 >50 50

12 >50 50

13.5 >50 50

15 >50 50

16 >50 50

4.4. Bearing Capacity from SPT: Theory:

The allowable bearing capacity based on the SPT test according to Meyerhof

is:

Also, skin friction and end bearing capacity of deep foundations is calculated using Quiros and Reese (1977) and Reese and O’Neill (1988) equations respectively.

10

According to Quiros and Reese (1977);

i.e.fs=95.76(0.026N) KPa

Again, According toReese and O’Neill (1988) q (ult) = 95.76(0.6N) for N≤ 75

q (ult) = 95.76*45 for N > 75

11

4.5. Bearing Capacity:

The bearing capacity of open foundation for 10m x 10m foundation size,

at various depth,using the bearing capacity by the Bowles/Meyerhof,

1976 equation is shown below.

Also, the bearing capacity of drilled shaft of 0.6m, 0.75m and 0.9m

diameter at various depths are mentioned below.A factor of safety of 2.5 is

adopted for estimation of allowable side shear capacity, and 3 for estimation of

12

allowable base bearing capacity from their respective ultimate values.If the foundation is submerged adopt a factor of safety of 6 for estimation of allowable base bearing capacity from their respective ultimate values.

Dia. 0.6m Dia. 0.75m Dia. 0.9m Depth, m

fs, kN/m2

qb, kN/m2

fs, kN/m2

qb, kN/m2

fs, kN/m2

qb, kN/m2

1.5 46.5 1687.5 46.5 1687.5 46.5 1687.5

3 54.2 1687.5 54.2 1687.5 54.2 1687.5

4.5 60.3 1870.3 60.3 1870.3 60.3 1870.3

6 77.7 2027.5 64.7 2027.5 64.7 2027.5

7.5 81.7 2109.5 79.7 2109.5 79.7 2109.5

9 85.7 2156.9 83 2156.9 83 2156.9

10.5 88.6 2186.6 86.7 2186.6 86.7 2186.6

12 90.1 2206.2 89.2 2206.2 89.2 2206.2

13.5 91.1 2219.9 90.5 2219.9 90.5 2219.9

15 91.6 2229.8 91.3 2229.8 91.3 2229.8

16.5 92.1 2237.2 91.7 2237.2 91.7 2237.2

18.0 92.1 2242.9 92.1 2242.9 92.1 2242.9

19.5 92.1 2247.3 92.1 2247.3 92.1 2247.3

13

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The river bed consists of dense sand with gravels and boulders. Hence the bearing capacity is found

to be very good. However due to the presence of shallow water table a suitable factor of safety should

be adopted to get the allowable bearing capacity from the ultimate values. For open foundation, the

allowable bearing capacity to be adopted for design should not exceed 500 KPa. Special provision

should be provided for shuttering and bracing during excavation process.

14

REFERENCES

1. Bowels Joseph E, 1984: Physical and Geotechnical Properties of Soils 2. MJ. Tomlinson, 1980: Foundation Design and Construction, ELBS, London. 3. Punmia B. C., 1973 Soil Mechanics and Foundation, Standard Book House, Delhi 4. Teng Wayne C., 1981 Foundation Design, Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited. 5. IS: 1890-1966, January, 1970: Draft revision of Indian Standard criteria for

earthquake design of structure – Indian Standards Institution, Pp 44.

6. Upetri B. N.: Earthquake and Earthquake Hazards in Nepal - News Bulletin of Nepal Geological Society, Vol. 18, April 2001.

7. Ervin M. C. (Editor): In-Situ Testing for Geotechnical Investigation

- Proceeding of an extension course on In-situ testing for Geotechnical Investigations /Sydney / May-June 1983.

8. Nepal National Bridge Code

NBC 105:1994 Seismic Design of Bridge in Nepal, HMG Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning

9. Donald P. Coduto Geotechnical Engineering Principles and

practices Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, N.D,

2002. 10. M. R. Pandey, G. R. Chitrakar, B. Kafle, S. N. Sapkota,

S. Rajaure and U. P. Gautam Seismic Hazard Map of Nepal, National Seismological Centre, Lainchaur, Kathmandu

11. Swami Saran Analysis and Design of Substructures, Oxford & IBH publication co. Pvt.

Ltd, New Delhi 12. Braja M. Das Principle of Foundation Engineering, Thomson Asia Pte. Ltd. Singapore

APPENDICES:

APPENDIX A

BOREHOLE LOG

Project Name : Jaya Shree Khola Bridge Start Date: 25‐Nov‐2015

Location: Gaidakot, Nawalparasi End Date: 30‐Nov‐2015

Water Level : 50 cm Total Depth: 20 m

Total Depth: 20 m

15cm 30cm 45cm

1.5 18 30 40 >50/40 below

3 21 35 >50/35 below

4.5 20 38 >50/33 below

6 >50/35 below

7.5 >50/34 below

9 >50/30 below

10.5 >50/28 below

12 >50/27 below

13.5 >50/25 below

15 >50/25 below

16.5 >50/24 below

18 >50/25 below

19.5 >50/24 below

Light grey to white very dense gravely

sand with pebbles and cobbles


sand with pebbles, cobbles traces of

boulders.


sand with cobbles and boulders.

Jaljala Geo Solution Pvt. Ltd.Jwagal‐10 Lalitpur

Bore Hole Log

Soil Description Symbol

SPT/DCPT‐

Depth (m)

SPT‐DCPTTotal of N

value

APPENDIX B

TEST RESULT SUMMARY SHEET

Gravel SandSilt & Clay

C φ

(m) % % % % KN/m3 KN/m3 KN/m2 Degree1.5 8 84 8 32.99 2.543 0 90 10 32.42 2.58

4.5 0 88 12 31.85 2.57 0 23.46 6 85 9 33.15 2.58 0 23.4

7.5 0 89 11 32.55 2.56 0 23.49 0 89 11 31.25 2.58 0 24.34

10.5 0 92 8 30.87 2.58 0 24.3412 0 91 9 34.52 2.57 0 26.18

13.5 0 92 8 33.84 2.58 0 26.1815 0 93 7 37.91 2.58 0 25.27

16.5 0 95 5 34.37 2.58 0 25.2718 0 93 7 35.46 2.58 0 25.73

19.5 0.00 93.00 7.00 34.84 2.58 0 25.73

1

Jay Shree Khola, NawalparasiTest Result Summary Sheet

Jaljala Geo Solution Pvt. Ltd.Lalitpur-14

Direct Shear TestPercentage of

BH No.

Depth Natural Moisture Content Bulk Unit Weight Dry Unit Weight Specific Gravity

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

BH Depth m Wt. of wet soil (gms)

Wt. of dry soil (gms)

Wt. of water(gms)

Moisture content (%)

1.5 76.48 57.51 18.97 32.993 90.43 68.29 22.14 32.42

4.5 70.25 53.28 16.97 31.856 63.98 48.05 15.93 33.15

7.5 60.02 45.28 14.74 32.559 86.19 65.67 20.52 31.25

10.5 59.26 45.28 13.98 30.8712 63.60 47.28 16.32 34.52

13.5 61.70 46.10 15.60 33.8415 62.75 45.50 17.25 37.91

16.5 60.40 44.95 15.45 34.3718 62.42 46.08 16.34 35.46

19.5 63.75 47.28 16.47 34.84

Jaljala Geo Solution Pvt. Ltd.Lalitpur, 14

Jay Shree Khola, NawalparasiMoisture Content

1

BHDepth

Wt. of Pyc+Water

(A)Wt. of Pyc

(B)

Wt. of Pyc+ dry Sample ©

Wt. of Pyc+ Sample+

water full (E)

Wt of dry sample

(D)

Specific Gravity

(G)1.5 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.32 23 2.543 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.46 23 2.58

4.5 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.43 23 2.576 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.45 23 2.58

7.5 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.40 23 2.569 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.45 23 2.58

10.5 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.45 23 2.5812 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.43 23 2.57

13.5 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.44 23 2.5815 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.44 23 2.58

16.5 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.44 23 2.5818 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.44 23 2.58

19.5 175.37 67.14 90.14 189.44 23 2.58

Jaljala Geo Solution Pvt. Ltd.Lalitpur, 14

Jay Shree Khola, Nawalparasi

1

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

Initial Weight 331.33 Bore hole 1Wt. of Sample (gms): 331.33Depth (m): 1.5

6.3 26 26.00 7.85 92.154.750 0.00 26.00 7.85 92.152.360 0.00 26.00 7.85 92.151.180 0.00 26.00 7.85 92.150.600 4.27 30.27 9.14 90.860.300 143.85 174.12 52.55 47.450.150 73.28 247.40 74.67 25.330.075 56.38 303.78 91.69 8.31Pan 27.55 331.33 100.00 0.00

331.33

Initial Weight 253.74Bore hole 1Wt. of Sample (gms): 253.74Depth (m): 3

4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.000.600 1.20 1.20 0.47 99.530.300 121.63 122.83 48.41 51.590.150 56.25 179.08 70.58 29.420.075 48.93 228.01 89.86 10.14Pan 25.73 253.74 100.00 0.00

253.74

Initial Weight 299.98Bore hole 1Wt. of Sample (gms): 299.98Depth (m): 4.5

4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.000.600 3.56 3.56 1.19 98.810.300 130.10 133.66 44.56 55.440.150 77.11 210.77 70.26 29.740.075 53.26 264.03 88.02 11.98Pan 35.95 299.98 100.00 0.00

299.98

SEIVE ANALYSISJaljala Geo Solution P. Ltd.


Seive Size (mm)

Wt. of Retained soil

(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)

Cumulative percentage retined %

Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

Initial Weight 375.05 Bore hole 1Wt. of Sample (gms): 375.05Depth (m): 6

9.5 21 21.00 5.60 94.404.750 0.00 21.00 5.60 94.402.360 0.00 21.00 5.60 94.401.180 0.00 21.00 5.60 94.400.600 2.16 23.16 6.18 93.820.300 166.64 189.80 50.61 49.390.150 80.55 270.35 72.08 27.920.075 69.90 340.25 90.72 9.28Pan 34.80 375.05 100.00 0.00

375.05


4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 3.10 3.10 0.85 99.150.600 4.90 8.00 2.18 97.820.300 154.71 162.71 44.44 55.560.150 87.28 249.99 68.28 31.720.075 77.56 327.55 89.46 10.54Pan 38.60 366.15 100.00 0.00

366.15


4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 4.76 4.76 1.76 98.240.600 2.30 7.06 2.61 97.390.300 100.85 107.91 39.85 60.150.150 76.30 184.21 68.03 31.970.075 56.29 240.50 88.82 11.18Pan 30.28 270.78 100.00 0.00

270.78



Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm


6.3 0 0.00 0.00 100.004.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.000.600 2.00 2.00 0.46 99.540.300 77.43 79.43 18.36 81.640.150 197.29 276.72 63.96 36.040.075 122.51 399.23 92.28 7.72Pan 33.40 432.63 100.00 0.00

432.63


4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.000.600 4.06 4.06 1.01 98.990.300 83.80 87.86 21.86 78.140.150 172.71 260.57 64.83 35.170.075 103.46 364.03 90.57 9.43Pan 37.91 401.94 100.00 0.00

401.94


4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.000.600 2.65 2.65 0.69 99.310.300 73.35 76.00 19.77 80.230.150 158.21 234.21 60.94 39.060.075 119.27 353.48 91.97 8.03Pan 30.85 384.33 100.00 0.00

384.33



Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

Initial Weight 381.69 Bore hole 1Wt. of Sample (gms): 381.69Depth (m): 15

6.3 0 0.00 0.00 100.004.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 3.29 3.29 0.86 99.140.600 3.40 6.69 1.75 98.250.300 75.28 81.97 21.48 78.520.150 147.28 229.25 60.06 39.940.075 127.10 356.35 93.36 6.64Pan 25.34 381.69 100.00 0.00

381.69


4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.000.600 3.00 3.00 0.73 99.270.300 84.28 87.28 21.30 78.700.150 172.09 259.37 63.30 36.700.075 130.28 389.65 95.09 4.91Pan 20.10 409.75 100.00 0.00

409.75


4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.000.600 4.19 4.19 1.05 98.950.300 73.25 77.44 19.32 80.680.150 168.77 246.21 61.41 38.590.075 126.20 372.41 92.89 7.11Pan 28.49 400.90 100.00 0.00

400.9



Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm


6.3 0 0.00 0.00 100.004.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.002.360 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.001.180 4.86 4.86 1.37 98.630.600 2.11 6.97 1.97 98.030.300 65.68 72.65 20.50 79.500.150 130.29 202.94 57.27 42.730.075 125.10 328.04 92.58 7.42Pan 26.30 354.34 100.00 0.00

354.34



Seive Size (mm)


(gm)

Cumulative weight

Retained (gm)


Percent pasing %

0102030405060708090

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Per

cent

age

Fin

er

Particle Size, mm

APPENDIX D

PHOTOGRAPHS

Jay Shree Khola site

SPT at 4.5m

Sample Collection

Drilling work at site

Hammering

DCPT at 9m

Draft Report JayShree Khola

Documents

Transcript of Draft Report JayShree Khola