DRAFT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

FOR

GBARAN VZTX-2 SITE

BAYELSA STATE

FOR THE NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL COMPANY (NETCO)

BY

COMMCO LIMITED

August 2011

CONTENT NOTATIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 OVERVIEW SITE CONDITIONS AND GEOLOGY FIELD WORK GROUNDWATER LABORATORY TESTS SOIL STRATIGRAPHY ENGINEERING DISCUSSION BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS-Shallow Foundations SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS Shallow Foundations BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS-Deep Pile Foundations RECOMMENDATIONS SITE OTHER WORKS CONCLUSIONS LIMITATIONS References APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Site Plan APPENDIX B: Borehole Logs APPENDIX C: Cone Penetration Tests iii iv 1 3 5 7 8 11 11 13 14 17 18 21 22 26 27

ii

NOTATIONS B BS c f H mv Nq Po q Qall width of raft foundation British Standard

undrained cohesion of the soil unit skin friction Thickness of strata under consideration = 2B coefficient of volume compressibility bearing capacity factor effective overburden pressure of the soil at the point, kPa unit end bearing capacity for driven piles allowable bearing capacity for raft foundation for a safety factor of 3 safe bearing capacity for a limiting maximum settlement of 50mm for raft ultimate bearing capacity for raft foundation consolidation settlement immediate settlement = Immediate settlement + consolidation settlement

Qs foundation Qu Sc Si St Soed SPT -

Total settlement = Si + Sc -

One dimensional consolidation calculated from laboratory oedometer test Standard Penetration Test

iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Core Mineral and Mining Company (COMMCO) Limited was contracted by the National Engineering and Technical Company (NETCO) Limited, a subsidiary of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to carry out a geotechnical investigation on the Gbaran VZTX-2 location, which is one of the site locations for the Gbaran-Ubie Integrated Oil and Gas Development Infill Project being sponsored by The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC) Limited. This project is being undertaken by SPDC as one of its commitment to boost the supply of natural gas to the Nigerian Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) facilities. The geotechnical investigation is to obtain soil parameters for the foundation analysis and design of the gas gathering facilities for the project. The scope of the investigation which was, executed between May 29 and July 23, 2011 include the exploration of one (1) number geotechnical borehole using a cable percussive drilling rig and three (3) number Cone Penetration Tests (CPTs). All explorations were to a maximum depth of 30m below the existing ground level. The stratigraphy reveals greyish brown CLAY from the ground level to a depth of three (3) metres overlying a formation of medium dense fine to medium SAND with occasional gravel to the maximum 30m depth of investigation From the analysis of the results, shallow raft foundation placed a minimum depth of 1.0m is recommended to support the anticipated imposed load to the extent that the bearing pressures given in table 5 below are not exceeded. However, the clay formation will undergo both immediate and consolidation settlements. Beside the settlement, ground water which was at the ground surface during the investigation will also create serious problem during excavation for shallow raft footing except thorough de-watering is employed. Where settlements and the ground water become of concern, deep piled foundation should be employed. Piled foundation employed should be embedded in the sand formation at least to a depth of eight (8) pile diameters and pile load test carried out to determine pile working stress.

iv

1.0 1.1

OVERVIEW Introduction The Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) Limited is proposing the execution of the Gbaran-Ubie Integrated Oil and Gas Development Infill Project to meet its commitment to supply natural gas to the Nigerian Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) facilities. Before the execution of the works SPDC Limited contracted the National Engineering and Technical Company (NETCO) Limited, a subsidiary of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to carry out engineering design and construction works for the Gbaran VZTX-2 location one of the site for the Gas Gathering project in the phase II of the Project Initiative. The phase II of the project will sustain the Gbaran-Ubie Phase I gas supply of 1.05 Bscf/d to NLNG. To collect parameters for the design works, Core Mineral and Mining Company (COMMCO) Limited was commissioned by NETCO to carry out a geotechnical investigation on the site of the operations. This document present the report of both the field and laboratory investigations carried out within the Gbaran VZTX-2 location.

1.2

Objectives of the Survey The objectives of this survey are (i) (ii) (iii) Carry out a topographical survey of the site for the Infill Project site Carry out geotechnical survey of the entire Infill site Produce a profile boring to establish the nature and properties of the subsoil to a depth of 30m below the existing ground level (iv) (v) Analyse soil samples recovered from the site by the boring operations Produce geotechnical parameters, from the analysis, for foundation design of the infrastructures required for the gas gathering facilities (vi) Obtain ground water samples from the location and analyse same for deleterious properties

(vii) (viii)

Determine the ultimate and allowable bearing capacities of the site Determine allowable bearing pressure for shallow concrete footings founded between 500mm to 3000mm below the existing grade.

(ix) (x) (xi)

Estimate the anticipated settlement of the subsoil under imposed loads Recommend capacities for Piles within the area being tested Provide recommendations on the construction of the facilities expected for the gas gathering operations.

1.3

The Scope of the Works The scope of the work involves (i) (ii) Carry out site surveys to establish all test locations Carrying out two (2) geotechnical borehole at a pre-determined location to a depth of 20.0m below the existing ground level within the site. (iii) Collect both disturbed and undisturbed samples from the boreholes at one (1) metre intervals. (iv) Carrying out two (2) numbers Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) at predetermined locations to a depth of 20.0m below the existing ground level or refusal, whichever first occurs, within the site. Refusal is the point where it becomes unsafe either for the operator or equipment, or both, to continue the test. (v) Carry out laboratory analysis on selected soil samples recovered to the laboratory (vi) Analyse the results and submit a detailed engineering report

2.0 2.1

SITE CONDITION AND GEOLOGY Site Description The site is located within Gbaran community of Bayelsa State in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria. On the north it is bordered by the Ogidikoro community. To the south is the Kokologbene community and on the east is the Koluama community. Running on the west from the North west all through to the South-west is the Nun River. See map in figure 1, below. During the field investigations, it was observed that a greater part of the site is seasonally flooded during the rains. This is so by virtue of the fact that the entire Gbaran area was a Swamp forest. The entire site covers an area approximately 650 km2 in Bayelsa and Rivers State in the eastern part of the Niger Delta of Nigeria. The area is subject to seasonal flooding and height variations of up to 5.5 metres have been recorded in the Nun River that runs adjacent to the site of the Central Processing Facility (CPF) at Gbaran. The geographic centre of the Gbaran Ubie node is located 100 km NW of Port Harcourt and 40 km NE of Yenagoa. The affected fields in the node are in the Eastern Division of SPDC Limited.

Fig. 1: Showing site location

2.1

Site Geology The regional geology of the site is primarily in the Niger Delta basin which forms the southern or bottom extension of the Nigerian sedimentary basin. See section 1 of Map, figure 2, below. The site area falls within a basal section of predominantly conglomerates which give way to gritty coarse to medium grained loose sand interbedded with clay. .

Fig. 2: Geological map of the site

The local geology of the site is composed of sediments which are characteristic of several depositional environments as the River Niger empties her load into the Atlantic ocean. The tidal swamp forest covers a substantial area of the delta coastline, with the exception of the zone adjacent to the river plains, where they are overlain by recent deposits of river mouth sediments. The growth of plants on the surfaces of this sediment aided the slowing down of the Niger River flow which encouraged further plant growth. community, on which this site lies. Slowly these sediment deposits had displaced portions of the river water to give way to what we now have as the Gbaran

2.1

Site Use It is understood that the site is being proposed for the gas gathering works for the Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) Limited. This is in other to improve the processing of both associated and un-associated gases as part of the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) initiative to reduce or stop the gas flaring exercise in Nigeria.

3.0

FIELD WORK The field work which was, executed between May 19 and July 23, 2011 comprised the exploration of one (1) geotechnical borehole using a cable percussive drilling rig and recovering soil sampling to a depth of 30m below the existing ground level to the geotechnical laboratory in Port Harcourt. Representative disturbed and undisturbed samples were taken at regular intervals of 1.0m from the boreholes. The samples were used for a detailed and systematic description of the soil in each borehole in terms of its visual properties and laboratory analysis. The borehole logs obtained are presented in the Appendix. Cone Penetration Tests were also carried out to 30m below the existing ground level or to refusal, whichever occurs first. The 10tons Cone Penetrometer was deployed for this test.

3.1

Survey Coordinates The site exploration for the boring and cone penetration testswere carried out on the locations with the below coordinates

S/N 1 2 3 4

Location BH 1 CPT1 CPT2 CPT3

Easting (m) 111 880 111 903 111 886 111 924

Northing (m) 432 107 432 143 432 156 432 171

3.2

Boring Activity 5

The boreholes were drilled by the shell and auger cable percussive drilling method, using a hand rig. The hand rig is fitted with a free fall auger. The auger is lifted to a height of about 1.0m above ground level, using gloved hands, and allowed to free-fall under gravity to advance the boring. As the auger falls it cuts through the soil such that the cut soil material is retained inside it by means of a clerk. The auger is then brought to the surface where the soil retained in it is emptied out. To prevent collapse of the borehole wall, the hole is lined with casings or shell corresponding to the size of the auger being used for the drilling. As the drilling continues, the auger drops into the open hole until the time sample is to be taken. Representative undisturbed and disturbed samples were taken at regular intervals of 1.0m depth, and also when a change in soil type was observed. The samples were used for a detailed and systematic description of the soil in each stratum in terms of its visual and haptic properties and for laboratory analysis. obtained is presented in Appendix B. In the cohesive soils, a large number of undisturbed samples were taken for examination and laboratory analysis. The laboratory test results are shown in Appendix C. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were carried out at regular intervals of depth in the granular sediments in order to assess their in situ densities. In this test, the number of blows required to drive the standard sampling spoon 300mm penetration after the initial sitting drive was recorded as the SPT (N) value. The borehole log

3.3

Cone Penetration Tests The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) is an in-situ testing method used to determine the geotechnical engineering properties of soils and delineating soil stratigraphy. The CPT sounding is made by pushing an instrumented cone tip first into the ground, at the designated location. The cone is pushed into the ground at a rate of between 10 and 20mm/s, using an hydraulic ram from the Cone Penetrometer. gauges. Before commencing the tests at the location, the upper part of the cone is screwed to the base of the pipe shaft with the upper end of the pipe shaft supporting the hydraulic ram of the Penetrometer. Attached to this ram are the mechanical gauges. Inside the pipe shaft is past the CPT rods. The CPT rods connect to the base of the dial gauges. The cone in position is advanced by pushing the rods, a distance of 100mm, by means of the hydraulic ram. The rod pushes out the cone tip and the cone resistance is recorded by the first dial gauge. The knob that connects the ram to the pipe shaft is turned to engage the pipe shaft. The ram is pushed at this stage and this pushes the entire cone tip and sleeve assembly. The assembly is advance a further distance of 100mm. This gives the sleeve + cone tip resistance. Both readings are recorded by another dial gauge. Continuous measurements are made of the resistance to penetration of the cone tip and the frictional sliding resistance of the sleeve of the cone. The penetration resistance, which is recorded at every 200 mm depth intervals, permits detailed inferences about stratigraphy and lithology of the soil. Once the cone and first pipe, measuring 1000mm, are completely pushed into the ground, the hydraulic ram is released and slides up on the A frame to allow another pipe to be screwed on. The lower part is screwed to the upper part of the pipe in the ground while the upper part supports the hydraulic ram. The process is continued until the target depth is obtained or refusal attained. Refusal is the point when it is no longer safe for either the operator or the machine to continue the test. To provide reaction to the lifting force experienced by the Penetrometer while advancing the cone, anchors are buried prior to carrying out the test. The total cone resistance is made up of side sleeve friction on the cone shaft perimeter and the cone tip pressure. Data usually recorded are the cone sleeve resistance, qs, the cone tip resistance qc, both recorded against depth. The results of the test are presented as a plot of depth against cone tip resistance, qc, and sleeve The Cone Penetrometer is a machine that houses an A frame with provisions for mechanical

friction, qs.

Soil type is inferred from a chart that compares these three (3)

measurements with the known physical properties of various soils.

4.0

GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS Ground water was encountered at the ground surface. This will create severe

problems for any form of shallow foundations, except effective de-watering measures are applied. Deep pile foundation may become an economical option.

5.0

LABORATORY TESTS

Detailed laboratory investigations were carried out on representative disturbed samples obtained from the open boreholes for the classification tests. All tests were carried out in accordance with BS1377 (1990) Methods of test for soil for civil engineering purposes. Brief comments on the tests are given below: 5.1 Moisture Content The moisture content, w, of a soil is the amount of water, expressed as a proportion by mass of the dry solid particles. A clean metal container is weighed to the nearest 0.01g (M1) on a weighing balance. About 30g of the soil specimen is placed on the container and weighed again, (M2). The container and content are placed in the drying oven and dried at 105oC (+ 5oC) for at least 24hours. after cooling in a desiccator. The moisture content (w) of the soil is calculated as w = [(M2 - M1) / (M3 - M1)] x 100% 4.1.1 After drying, the container and contents are removed from the drying oven and weighed again (M3)

5.2

Atterberg Limits The Atterberg Limits of the soil is the amount of water, expressed as a proportion by mass of the dry solid particles as the soil moves from liquid to plastic state and from plastic state to the shrinkage state. Primarily, two limits are of importance to the soil engineer. The liquid limit and these are plastic limit.

5.2.1

Liquid Limits The Liquid Limits (LL) is the empirically established moisture content at which the soil passes from the liquid state to the plastic state. About 500g is taken from a soil in the undisturbed or disturbed state, containing little or no material retained in the 425 microns test sieve. Take a sample of oil, about 300g and place on a glass plate. Thoroughly mix the paste with distilled water using two (2) palette knives. With the cup of the apparatus resting on the base, place a portion of the mixed soil in the cup without entrapping some air. Level off the top of the soil surface parallel to the base. Use the grooving tool to divide te soil into two equal parts by drawing the tool from the hinge towards the front in a continuous circular movement. Hold the grooving tool normal to the surface of the cup, with the chamfered edge facing the direction of movement. Turn the crank handle of the Cassangrande cup at the rate of 2rev/s so that the cup is lifted and dropped counting the number of blows. Continue until the two parts of the soil come into contact at the bottom of the groove along a distance of 13mm, record the number of blows. Remove some soil from the cup and place in a suitable container to determine the moisture content. Add a little more of the prepared soil from the glass plate and mix it with the soil in the cup. Repeat the test and record the blows. Again, remove some soil from the cup and place in a suitable container to determine the moisture content. The number of all the recorded blows shall be between 15 and 35. Plot the number of blows versus moisture content on a semi-log scale. The point where the curve intersects the 25number blows is taken as the liquid limit of the soil.

5.2.2

Plastic Limits The Plastic Limits, PL, of the soil is the empirically established moisture content at which the soil becomes too dry to be plastic. It is used together with the liquid limits to determine the plasticity index which when plotted against the liquid limit on the plasticity chart provide a means of classifying cohesive soils. Samples for the test are prepared as in the liquid limits and spread on the glass plate. The sample shall not be allowed to become dry before testing. Mould the soil in the fingers to equalize the distribution of moisture, and then form the soil into thread s about 6mm diameter. Roll the threads to 3mm diameter on the surface of the glass rolling plate until the soils shears both longitudinally and transversely when it has been rolled to this diameter. Place all rolled soils and their crumbled soil threads into a container and determine the moisture content.

5.2.3

Plasticity Index The Plasticity Index, PI, of the soil is the difference between the Liquid Limits and the Plastic Limits. PI = LL - PL 4.2.3.1

5.3

Particle Size Analysis The particle size analysis was performed by means of drying and sieving. Sieving was carried out for particles that would be retained on a 0.063mm sieve. The sieve was carried out by passing the soil sample over a set of standard sieve size and the entire units of sieves are shaken vigorously for few minutes. Particle size is presented on a logarithmic scale so that two (2) soil samples having the same degree of uniformity are represented by curves of the same shape regardless of their positions on the particle size distribution plot. The general slope of the distribution curve may be described by the coefficient of uniformity, Cu and the coefficient of curvature, Cc. The coefficient of uniformity Cu = D60/D10 while the coefficient of curvature, Cc = (D30)2/D10 x D60. D10, D30 and D60 are the particle sizes indicating that 10%, 30% and 60% of the particles of the sand sample by weight. The detailed particle sizes are presented on the individual particle size analysis curves given in the Appendices.

5.4

Undrained Shear Strength This type of test is usually performed on undisturbed samples of cohesive soils. Depending on the consistency of the cohesive material, the test specimen is prepared by trimming the sample or by pushing a mould into the sample. A latex membrane with thickness of approximately 0.2mm is placed around the specimen. A lateral confining pressure of 600kPa to 1000 kPa is maintained during axial compression loading of the specimen. Consolidation and drainage of pore water during testing is not allowed.

10

The test is deformation controlled (strain rate of 60%/h), single stage, and stopped when an axial strain of 15% is achieved. The deviator stress is calculated from the measured load assuming that the specimen deforms as a right cylinder. The presentation of test results includes a plot of a Mohr circle. The undrained shear strength, Cu, is taken as the point of intercession of a common tangent to the semicircles and the ordinate of the chart.

5.5

Consolidation Test-One dimension oedometer test This method covers the determination of the magnitude and the rate of the consolidation of a saturated or near-saturated soil specimen in the form of a disc confined laterally, subjected to vertical axial pressure, and allowed to drain freely from the top and bottom surfaces. In the test the soil specimen is loaded axially in increments of applied stress. Each stress increment is held constant until the primary consolidation has ceased. During the process water drains out of the specimen, resulting in a decrease in height which is measured at suitable intervals, by means of a dial gauge. These measurements are used for the determination of the relationship between void ratio and effective stress, and for the calculation of parameters which describe the amount of compression and the rate at which it takes place. The plot of void ratio (e) against effective pressure (P) for the samples tested, are presented in Appendix C of this report together with calculated values of the coefficients of consolidation (Cv) and of the coefficients of compressibility (Mv). Test results show that the samples are of moderately high compressibility and predominantly exhibiting negligible swelling potentials as presented in Appendix C.

11

6.0

SOIL SRATIGRAPHY The soil stratigraphy encountered on the site as obtained from the explored boreholes are as presented in Appendix. The lithology of the boreholes at the reveals a near surface clay thickness 3.0 thick overlying a sand stratum with density between medium dense to very dense which is occasionally gravelly in few places, up to the final investigation depth of 30m below the existing ground level. The profile for the borehole is as presented below. Table 1: Profile for the strata.
Stratum No. Description Average depth range (m) Cone tip resistance (MPa) 0.5 1.0

CLAY, medium greyish brown 1 SAND, medium dense, greyish brown (gravelly at 12m and 21m)

0 -3

3.0 30.0

4.0 14.0

7.0

ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL The engineering properties of the formation encountered during the investigation are as summarised below.

7.1

The CLAY

The medium greyish brown CLAY is characterized by moderate compressibility and moisture content. This clay stratum encountered presents the engineering properties below:

Table 2.

12

Min Moisture content (%) Bulk unit weight (kN/m3) Dry unit weight (kN/m3) Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%) Plasticity index (%) Undrained cohesion (kPa) Angle of Frictional Resistance, 25 13.61 10.89 18 17 6 41 5

Max 28 15.07 11.77 42 21 22 43 6

Mean 26.5 14.34 17.60 30 19 14 42 5

7.2

MEDIUM DENSE to VERY DENSE SAND

The fine to coarse silty sand encountered immediately beneath the firm to stiff clay is of medium dense to very dense sand. This sand formation presents an SPT N value between 21 and 61. From the SPT values it is observed that the sand formation increases in density with depth. This formation of sand is competent to support high bearing pressures without excessive settlement. The variation of the geotechnical parameters is as presented below:
Min Effective Particle Size, d10 (mm) Mean Particle Size, d30 (mm) Particle Size, d60 (mm) Particle Size, d100 (mm) 2.00 0.08 0.12 0.19 9.50 Max 0.13 0.28 0.48 5.75 Ave 0.11 0.20 0.34

Coefficient of Uniformity, Cu = d60/ d10 Coefficient of Curvature, Cc = d302/d10.d60 Angle of Frictional Resistance,

2.16 0.84 28

9.13 1.27 31

5.65 1.06 30

8.0

DISCUSSIONS

13

The investigation was carried out with the aim of obtaining geotechnical parameters of the foundation works for the gas gathering facilities proposed for Gbaran VZTX-2 location and the accompanying infrastructure necessary for the facilities operations and maintenance. The boring activity revealed a 3.0m thick surface medium greyish brown soft to firm clay soil is of moderately compressibility overlying medium dense sand with occasional gravels. Since the clay is of moderate compressibility, the consolidation will normally be slow and because the effective thickness is about 3m, the time required will not be prolonged, especially as it overlay a stratum of sand. This stratum of sand will shorten the drainage path of the excess pore pressure created under the imposed load. This shortened path will reduce the total time of consolidation. The amount of total settlement will remain the same but the time period will be reduced. Atterberg consistency limit tests were carried out on the cohesive samples. The results showed that the clay is of low to medium plasticity. The particle size distributions carried out on representative samples revealed that the samples are predominantly medium dense fine to coarse grained sand. The lithology present at the site is competent to adequately support both shallow pad or raft foundation and deep piled foundations. To minimize the settlement from raft foundations, however, such footings should be placed at a minimum depth of 1.0m below the existing ground level. Should settlement become of serious concern, only deep piled foundation should be used. The water table encountered at the ground level during the investigation will also create some problem during excavation for foundations except adequate de-watering measures are engaged. Should deep piled foundations should be employed, they must be reasonably embedded in the sand formation at least to a depth of eight (8) pile diameters and pile load test carried out to determine pile working stresses..

14

9.0

BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Shallow Foundation The ultimate bearing capacity, Qu, for shallow rectangular foundations on cohesive soils, using Terzaghis equation as modified by Meyerhoff for = 0 soils is given below as: Qu = c[1+0.3(B/L)]Nc + .Df.Nq = = = = = = = = unit weight of soil at depth depth of foundation Undrained soil cohesion Foundation width Foundation Length Bearing Capacity factors 5.7 1.0

where Df c B L Nc, Nq Nc, Nq Therefore, Qu =

5.7c[1+0.3(B/L)] + .Df.Nq

For B/L = 0.1, c = 42kPa, Df = 1.0m, sat = 14.34 9.81kN/m3 Qu = 5.7 x 42[1+0.3(0.1)] + 4,53 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 253.05 kN/m2

Charts of the ultimate bearing capacity various foundation depths for various breadth/length (B/L) aspect ratios are presented below.

15

Fig. 1: Ultimate Bearing Capacity Chart for different Breadth/Length Ratios

Table 3: Values of Ultimate Bearing Capacity, kPa, for various breadth/length ratios at different depth of foundation.

Df (m) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.1 255 251 248 247 0.2 262 258 255 254

B/L Ratio 0.5 284 280 276 275 1.0 321 316 311 309

16

Below is a chart for the allowable bearing capacities versus foundation depth for various breadth/length (b/L) aspect ratios for a safety factor (SF) of 3 applied to the ultimate bearing capacity.

Fig. 2: Allowable Bearing Capacity Chart for different Breadth/Length Ratios

17

Table 4: Values of Allowable Bearing Capacity, kPa, for various breadth/length ratios at different depth of foundation

Df (m) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.1 85 84 83 82 0.2 87 86 85 85

B/L Ratio 0.5 95 93 92 92 1.0 107 105 104 103

10.0

SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS Shallow Foundation Total calculated settlements from the above values of allowable bearing capacity are far above the limits of maximum allowable settlements permitted. Find below safe bearing pressures for with limiting maximum settlement valuses of 25mm Settlement calculations are presented at the appendix.

Table 5: Values of Safe Bearing Capacity, kPa, for various foundation width, Bm, as limited by a maximum settlement value of 25mm

Df (m) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 1.0 80 80 83 82

Foundation width, (B) m 2.0 57 72 85 85 5.0 52 68 90 92 10.0 53 70 97 103

11.0

BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Pile Foundation

18

The ultimate bearing capacity, Qu, of driven piles is determined by the equation below: Qu where q f Ab As = = = = = q.Ab + f.As unit end bearing capacity = kPa unit skin friction = kPa gross base area of pile tip, m2 side surface area of pile, m2

11.1

End Bearing & Skin Friction in Cohesive Soils For piles in cohesive soils, The unit end bearing, q The unit skin friction, f Where, Su = = = c. Nc .Su 9.1.1
9.1.2

undrained shear strength of the soil, kPa

11.2

End Bearing & Skin Friction in Cohesionless Soils For piles in cohesionless soils, The unit skin friction, f The unit end bearing, q Where, K = = = Nc, Nq = po = coefficient of lateral earth pressure friction angle between the soil and pile wall 0.75 x (angle of frictional resistance) bearing capacity factor effective overburden pressure of the soil at the point, kPa = = K Po tan po Nq 9.2.1 9.2.2

Find below the ultimate bearing capacity chart for straight shaft steel pipe piles with diameters of 0.30m, 0.36m and 0.45m.

19

Fig. 5: Pile Ultimate bearing capacity

The allowable pile capacity is obtained by dividing the ultimate pile capacity by a safety factor of 2.5 to give the below chart of pile allowable bearing capacity.

20

Fig. 6: Pile allowable bearing capacity

12.0

RECOMMENDATIONS

21

The investigation was carried out with the aim of determining the bearing capacity of the location at Gbaran VZXT-2 for the facilities required for the gas gathering project of the Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC) Limited.. From the field and laboratory analysis, shallow raft foundation founded a minimum depth of one (1) metre below the existing ground level is recommended to support the proposed facilities and the accompanying infrastructures required for the operations and maintenance of the gas gathering station. However, the imposed loads should not by any means exceed the safe bearing pressures stated in table 5 above. Settlement values resulting from these values are within the recommended maximum values of 25mm. At the time of this report, the anticipated maximum imposed load for the location was unknown. But, it is not expected that the loads from the proposed facilities would exceed the given safe bearing pressures. Where these values be exceeded, deep piled foundations are recommended Should deep piled foundations be employed, they must be reasonably embedded in the sand formation at least to a depth of eight (8) pile diameters and pile load test carried on such piles to establish the working stresses..

13.0

SITE OTHER WORKS

22

13.1

Constructing Slabs on Ground Surface

The existing topsoil is unsuitable to support slab constructed directly on it as ground floors or as rigid pavements for roads. Therefore, the topsoil and root layers wherever encountered should be removed to a minimum depth of 150mm below the ground surface before all such slabs are placed. This is necessary because the topsoil are highly compressible organic material from either plant or animal remains. It is important that all compressible organic material be removed; otherwise their settlement and consolidation cannot be estimated. Where it is required to excavate deeper than 150mm to remove all such materials, coarse clean river sand should be import as a fill material. The sand should be placed carefully to minimize the inclusion of pockets of voids and compacted to 95% of its Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture Content (OMC), using the standard Proctor compaction.

13.2

Perimeter and Floor Drains

The existing water table at the site was found to be at the ground level or very close at the time of this investigation. And since the site is always flooded especially during the rains, it is very important that adequate measures are taken to drain the site thoroughly. It may therefore be prudent to provide a continuous perimeter drain The drain should consist of 100mm (4) around the buildings as exterior drain.

diameter weeping tile or equivalent perforated pipe connecting to a sump pit. The tile shall be covered by appropriately graded granular materials. Where crushed stones are used, they should be covered with porous geotextile materials.

Floor drains should be positively sloped to drain and empty adequately into the sump. They are to be placed 150mm below the underside of the floor slab and be spaced at a distance of about 4m. The filter zone around the drain pipe may consist of properly graded aggregates. The floor drain should connect to a sump pit but not to the perimeter drains. A sump should empty automatically by gravity or pumping.

23

13.3

Damp Proof Membrane

Polyethylene membranes may be considered for damp proof membrane. The

membrane is normally placed on the outside of the structure and may be protected by a layer of mortar about 25mm thick on side walls and by about 75mm unreinforced concrete working slab on the floor.

13.4

Corrosion of Soil and Groundwater

Corrosion from soil and groundwater is attributed to the pH value, the sulphate content and resistivity of the area. The pH values from the tests showed that the area is acidic and mildly corrosive. Therefore, cathodic protection should be in-place to protect all pipe works for this project

13.5

Excavation an d Fill Material

Excavations for the construction of shallow foundations and underground services installations must be carried out in a safe and efficient manner to prevent injury to workers or loss of equipment and tools. Proper shore protection must be in place where all such excavations exceeds 1.2m deep to avoid landslide of collapse of slopes. Where fill material is imported they must be placed in lifts od 300mm and adequately compacted to 95 of the Maximum Dry Density (MDD) at its Optimum Moisture Content (OMC), using the standard Proctor compaction procedure.

13.6

Retaining Walls and Basements

Should retaining walls be required at any time of the project reinforced concrete of a grade higher than 35N/mm2 should be employed.

Where basements wall are to be used or required, the active lateral earth pressure on of the soil may be obtained as below

p = K (H + q) Where p = lateral pressure at a depth of H 24

K = earth pressure coefficient (range 0.3) = unit weight of the soil (range 20 kN/m3) H = depth q = contribution due to surcharge

The final K value should be based on the design configuration and the backfill actually used in the construction. Employing the above formula presumes that the groundwater table will be maintained at an elevation beneath footing level by the provision of suitable drainage measures and free draining backfill adjacent to the foundation wall.

13.7

Pavement and Parking Construction

Both flexible and rigid pavements and parking areas can be constructed on the site as long as there are adequate side drains for runoff water. Asphaltic concrete is recommended for all flexible drains and parking areas. Rigid concrete pavement may be considered where heavy duty vehicles and trailers will be parked. Given the soil conditions encountered at the borehole locations, a conventional pavement structure can be anticipated for this Site. The following flexible pavement thickness is recommended

TABLE: MINIMUM PAVEMENT THICKNESS

LIGHT DUTY PARKING DRIVEWAYS & HEAVY DUTY PARKING COMPACTION REQUIREMENT S

Asphalt finishing course Asphalt base-course

25mm 50mm

40mm 75mm

98% Marshall Density Test 98% Marshall Density Test

25

Crushed stone sub-base material of 20mm sieve size Crushed stone sub-base material of 40mm sieve size 250mm 300mm l50mm 150mm

98% MDD@OMC 98% MDD@OMC

The granular base materials should be compacted to at least 95% of their MDD at OMC using the standard Proctor

13.8

Designing for Earthquake Resistance

The enormous amount involved in this project is worth giving a consideration for earthquake resistance. Nigeria is not known to be an earthquake prone zone, but a safe project should be safe even in the occurrence of such unforeseen event. Therefore the structure should be designed for earthquake resistance according to BS EN 1998 -1: 2004 The Design of Structures for Earthquake

14.0

CONCLUSION

26

Core Mining and Mineral Company (COMMCO) Limited was contracted by the National Engineering and Technical Company (NETCO) Limited to carry out geotechnical investigations works for the foundation works of the proposed gas gathering facilities for Gbaran VZTX-2 location in Bayelsa State of Nigeria. The geotechnical investigation activity was by means of one (1) borehole and three (3) Cone Penetration tests. All explorations were to a maximum depth of 30m. Field and laboratory investigations revealed a formation of greyish brown clay from the existing ground surface to a maximum depth of 3.0m overlying a formation of fine to coarse grained sand of medium density. This fine to coarse grained sand extends to the final investigation depth of 30,0m. From the analysis of the results, shallow raft foundation placed a minimum depth of 1.0m is recommended to support the anticipated imposed load to the extent that the pressures given in table 5 above are not exceeded. However, the clay formation will undergo both immediate and consolidation settlements. Beside settlement, ground water which was at the ground surface during the investigation will also create problem during excavation for shallow raft footing except thorough de-watering is employed. Should settlements and the ground water become of concern, deep piled foundation should be employed. Piled foundation employed should be embedded in the sand formation at least to a depth of eight (8) pile diameters and pile load test carried out to determine pile working stress.

27

13.0

LIMITATIONS This investigation was carried out in accordance with accepted geotechnical engineering practice. The recommendations and conclusions reached in the report are based on the data obtained from soil boring and the laboratory analysis. It is not anticipated that the soil conditions will vary significantly from those described. However, slight variations resulting from differences in tidal gauges should be anticipated.

Engr. Matthias Akhagbosu,

MNSE

28

References 1. Bowles, J. E, (1997); Foundation Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.; 5th edition

2. Gopal, R. & Rao, A.S.R, (1991); Basic and Applied Soil Mechanics, pages 474 -545; New Age International Publishers; 2nd edition.

3. Murthy, V. N. S, (2007); Textbook of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, page 630; CBS Publishers; 1st edition.

4. Tomlinson, M. J. (1994); Pile Design and Construction Practice; E & F N Spon; 4th edition,

29

APPENDIX A

SITE PLAN

30

APPENDIX B

BOREHOLE LOGS

31