Atterberg Limits Test

Bore Hole No. of Depth of AASHTO Soil Soil

N - Values
No. Layer Layer (m) LL PL PI Classification Description

White
Sample 1 1.5 – 1.95 56 29 25 4 A-1-a
Limestone
Hole #1
White
Sample 2 3.0 – 4.35 66 28 23 5 A-1-a
Limestone
White
Sample 1 1.5 – 1.95 52 31 26 5 A-1-a
Limestone
Hole #2
White
Sample 2 3.0 – 3.45 64 26 20 6 A-1-a
Limestone
White
Sample 1 1.5 – 1.95 54 29 24 5 A-1-a
Limestone
Hole #3
White
Sample 2 3.0 – 3.45 62 28 22 6 A-1-a
Limestone

Soil Parameters
 Recognized
Sampling Type of SPT Blows N- Cohesive Granular Soil
Environmental
Depth (m) Sampling (per 15 cm) Values Soils Soils Description
Condition (REC)

Standard
White
1.5 – 1.95 Penetration 21% 22 27 29 56 Hard Dense
Limestone
Test

Standard
White
3.0 – 3.45 Penetration 10% 29 32 34 66 Very Hard Very Dense
Limestone
Test

Standard
4.5 – 4.95 Penetration - - - - - - - -
Test

Bore Hole #1 Log and Test Results

 Recognized
Sampling Type of SPT Blows N- Cohesive Granular Soil
Environmental
Depth (m) Sampling (per 15 cm) Values Soils Soils Description
Condition (REC)
Standard
White
1.5 – 1.95 Penetration 26% 18 24 28 52 Hard Dense
Limestone
Test
Standard
Very White
3.0 – 3.45 Penetration 15% 29 31 33 64 Very Hard
Dense Limestone
Test
Standard
4.5 – 4.95 Penetration - - - - - - - -
Test

Bore Hole #2 Log and Test Results

Recognized
Sampling Type of Environmental SPT Blows N- Cohesive Granular Soil
Depth (m) Sampling Condition (per 15 cm) Values Soils Soils Description
(REC)
Standard
White
1.5 – 1.95 Penetration 20% 22 25 29 54 Hard Dense
Limestone
Test
Standard
Very White
3.0 – 3.45 Penetration 13% 27 30 32 62 Very Hard
Dense Limestone
Test
Standard
4.5 – 4.95 Penetration - - - - - - - -
Test

Bore Hole #3 Log and Test Results

Welfare - Welfare can be explained in a way that by stabilizing the
slope in that area, majority of the public will believe that their
safety has strengthened, their concern in landslide is no longer
alarming, and tourists can reach the attractions efficiently.
 ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Improves the fertility of the Needs skilled labor for proper
soil in the long run construction
Effectively controls soil,
Time-consuming construction
water runoff, and erosion
Requires high expenditure of
Provides permanent
money for construction and
improvement of the land
maintenance
 ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Reduces the loss of soil and Risk of breakages and
water therefore increased erosion
Tolerant to climate extremes Not suitable for short term
(e.g. rain storms) establishments
High amount of labor
Has low to medium labor
involved for initial
requirements in maintenance
construction
 ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Utilizes the land left between Not suitable for high rainfall
terrace and the ridge regions
Cost depends on the length of
Intercepts the runoff and divert
terrace and size of slope cross-
to a safe point.
section
Is preferred due to ease of
Has critical maintenance
construction equipment and
requirements
procedures
 ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Construction materials are
Should be designed with
easy to transport to sites, easy
adequate corrosion protection.
to unload, and place
Doesn’t require a skilled labor
Needs large stone quantities.
or specialized equipment
Resists breakage and
separation due to the
Time-consuming construction
flexibility of their wire mesh
construction
 ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Susceptible to elastic
Requires select granular fill
deformation
Specifications and contracting
Simple and fast construction practices have not been fully
standardized
Requires a relatively large
Cost effective
space
 ADVANTAGES
Not recommended for sensitive
Economical and cost-effective
No need for heavy equipment
Performs well during seismic
events and to overall system
flexibility
DISADVANTAGES
and expansive soils
Requires specialized and
experienced contractors
Very high soil density may be
required in soils of low shear
strength
 CONSEQUENCES

Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic

Almost
High High Extreme Extreme Extreme
Certain

Likely Medium High High Extreme Extreme

LIKELIHOOD

Possible Low Medium High Extreme Extreme

Unlikely Low Low Medium High Extreme

Rare Low Low Medium High High

BENCH TERRACING
Final
Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result
Assessment

Earth-moving
equipment Unlikely Moderate Medium
malfunction
During
Uncompact Soil Rare Moderate Medium

High
Soil Erosion Unlikely Major High

Uneven spread of
Unlikely Minor Low
top soil
After
Uncompact terrace
Possible Minor Medium
formation
FANYA JUU TERRACING
Consequenc Final
Scenario Likelihood Result
e Assessment

Earth-moving
equipment Rare Insignificant Low
malfunction
During Uncompact Soil Rare Moderate Medium

Medium
Soil Erosion Rare Moderate Medium

Uneven spread of
Unlikely Minor Low
top soil
After
Uncompact terrace
Unlikely Minor Low
formation
BROAD-BASE TERRACING

Consequenc Final
Scenario Likelihood Result
e Assessment

Earth-moving
equipment Unlikely Moderate Medium
malfunction
During Uncompact Soil Rare Moderate Medium

High
Soil Erosion Unlikely Major High

Uneven spread of
Possible Minor Medium
top soil
After
Uncompact terrace
Possible Moderate High
formation
GABION WALL
Final
Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result
Assessment
Earth-moving
equipment Unlikely Minor Low
malfunction
During Wall
Rare Minor Low
Deformation
Ground
Unlikely Moderate Medium Medium
movement
Vegetation
growing at the Possible Minor Medium
After toe of the wall
Bulging of the
Unlikely Moderate Medium
MSE WALL
Final
Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result
Assessment
Earth-moving
equipment Unlikely Moderate Medium
malfunction
During Wall
Rare Moderate Medium
Deformation
Ground
Possible Moderate High High
movement
Vegetation
growing at the Possible Minor Medium
After toe of the wall
Bulging of the
Rare Moderate Medium
wall
SOIL NAIL WALL
Final
Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result
Assessment
Earth-moving
equipment Unlikely Moderate Medium
malfunction
During Wall
Rare Moderate Medium
Deformation
Ground
Possible Moderate High High
movement
Vegetation
growing at the Possible Minor Medium
After toe of the wall
Bulging of the
Rare Major High
wall
BENCH TERRACING
Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result Final Assessment

Workers not wearing

Unlikely Minor Low
proper PPE
Serious Injuries Rare Moderate Medium

Unskilled/ Less
Unlikely Minor Low
experience personnel
During
Weather condition Possible Minor Medium
Hazardous Noise
Possible Minor Medium
levels Medium
Suffocation/Buried Rare Moderate Medium
Airbone fibres/dust Possible Minor Medium
Exhaustion of workers Possible Minor Medium
Sliding Failure Rare Minor Low

After Hand Arm and

Vibration Syndrome Possible Minor Medium
(HVAS)
FANYA JUU TERRACING

Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result Final Assessment

Workers not wearing

Rare Minor Low
proper PPE
Serious Injuries Unlikely Minor Low

Unskilled/ Less
Possible Minor Medium
experience personnel
During
Weather condition Possible Minor Medium
Hazardous Noise
Rare Minor Low
levels Medium
Suffocation/Buried Rare Insignificant Low
Airbone fibres/dust Possible Minor Medium
Exhaustion of workers Possible Minor Medium
Sliding Failure Rare Minor Low

After Hand Arm and

Vibration Syndrome Possible Minor Medium
(HVAS)
BROAD-BASE TERRACING

Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result Final Assessment

Workers not wearing

Unlikely Moderate Medium
proper PPE
Serious Injuries Rare Moderate Medium

Unskilled/ Less
Unlikely Minor Low
experience personnel
During
Weather condition Possible Minor Medium
Hazardous Noise
Possible Minor Medium
levels High
Suffocation/Buried Possible Moderate High
Airbone fibres/dust Possible Moderate High
Exhaustion of workers Possible Minor Medium
Sliding Failure Rare Minor Low

After Hand Arm and

Vibration Syndrome Possible Minor Medium
(HVAS)
GABION WALL
Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result Final Assessment

Workers not wearing

Unlikely Minor Low
proper PPE
Serious Injuries Unlikely Minor Low

Unskilled/ Less
Possible Minor Medium
experience personnel

During Airbone fibres/dust Possible Minor Medium

Falling from the
Unlikely Minor Low
height of the wall
Hazardous Noise Medium
Unlikely Minor Low
levels
Exhaustion of
Possible Minor Medium
workers
Excessed materials Unlikely Minor Low
Stone fragments Possible Minor Medium

After Hand Arm and

Vibration Syndrome Possible Minor Medium
(HVAS)
MSE WALL

Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result Final Assessment

Workers not wearing

Unlikely Moderate Medium
proper PPE
Serious Injuries Possible Minor Medium

Unskilled/ Less
Possible Minor Medium
experience personnel

During Airbone fibres/dust Possible Minor Medium

Falling from the
Unlikely Moderate Medium
height of the wall
Hazardous Noise Medium
Unlikely Moderate Medium
levels
Exhaustion of
Possible Minor Medium
workers
Excessed materials Possible Minor Medium
Stone fragments Possible Minor Medium

After Hand Arm and

Vibration Syndrome Possible Minor Medium
(HVAS)
SOIL NAIL WALL

Scenario Likelihood Consequence Result Final Assessment

Workers not wearing

Unlikely Moderate Medium
proper PPE
Serious Injuries Possible Moderate High

Unskilled/ Less
Possible Minor Medium
experience personnel

During Airbone fibres/dust Possible Minor Medium

Falling from the
Unlikely Moderate Medium
height of the wall
Hazardous Noise High
Unlikely Moderate Medium
levels
Exhaustion of
Possible Minor Medium
workers
Excessed materials Unlikely Moderate Medium
Stone fragments Possible Minor Medium

After Hand Arm and

Vibration Syndrome Possible Minor Medium
(HVAS)
BENCH TERRACING
Negative Impact Positive Impact
No Impact
Very Likely Possible Possible Very Likely
Numerical Equivalent (NE) -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Environmental Effects
Solute dispersion X

Toxic substances X

Pollution Organic pollution X

Anaerobic effects X

Gas emissions X
Salinity X
Soil properties X
Saline
Soil X
groundwater
Saline drainage X

Saline intrusion X
Number of Crosses (NC) - 6 2 2 -
NE x NC -3 0 1
Final Assessment
(𝑵𝑬 𝒙 𝑵𝑪) -20%
[ 𝑵𝑪
𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎%]
FANYA JUU TERRACING
Negative Impact Positive Impact
No Impact
Very Likely Possible Possible Very Likely
Numerical Equivalent (NE) -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Environmental Effects

Solute dispersion X

Toxic substances X

Pollution Organic pollution X

Anaerobic effects X

Gas emissions X
Salinity X
Soil properties X

Saline
Soil X
groundwater

Saline drainage X

Saline intrusion X
Number of Crosses (NC) - 4 4 2 -
NE x NC - -2 0 1 -
Final Assessment
(𝑵𝑬 𝒙 𝑵𝑪) -10%
[ 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎%]
𝑵𝑪
BROAD-BASE TERRACING
Negative Impact Positive Impact
No Impact
Very Likely Possible Possible Very Likely
Numerical Equivalent (NE) -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Environmental Effects

Solute dispersion X

Toxic substances X

Pollution Organic pollution X

Anaerobic effects X

Gas emissions X
Salinity X
Soil properties X

Saline
Soil X
groundwater

Saline drainage X

Saline intrusion X
Number of Crosses (NC) - 5 4 1 -
NE x NC - -2.5 0 0.5
Final Assessment
(𝑵𝑬 𝒙 𝑵𝑪) -20%
[ 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎%]
𝑵𝑪
GABION WALL
Negative Impact Positive Impact
No Impact
Very Likely Possible Possible Very Likely
Numerical Equivalent (NE) -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Environmental Effects
Solute dispersion X

Toxic substances X

Pollution Organic pollution X

Anaerobic effects X

Gas emissions X
Salinity X
Soil properties X
Saline
Soil X
groundwater
Saline drainage X

Saline intrusion X
Number of Crosses (NC) - 4 5 1 -
NE x NC - -2 0 1 -
Final Assessment
(𝑵𝑬 𝒙 𝑵𝑪) -10%
[ 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎%]
𝑵𝑪
MSE WALL
Negative Impact Positive Impact
No Impact
Very Likely Possible Possible Very Likely
Numerical Equivalent (NE) -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Environmental Effects

Solute dispersion X

Toxic substances X
Pollution Organic pollution X
Anaerobic effects X

Gas emissions X

Salinity X

Soil properties X

Soil Saline
X
groundwater
Saline drainage X
Saline intrusion X
Number of Crosses (NC) - 5 3 1 -
NE x NC - -2.5 0 0.5
Final Assessment
(𝑵𝑬 𝒙 𝑵𝑪) -20%
[ 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎%]
𝑵𝑪
 SOIL NAIL WALL
Negative Impact Positive Impact
No Impact
Very Likely Possible Possible Very Likely
Numerical Equivalent (NE) -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Environmental Effects
Solute dispersion X

Toxic substances X
Pollution Organic pollution X
Anaerobic effects X

Gas emissions X
Salinity X
Soil properties X

Soil Saline
X
groundwater
Saline drainage X
Saline intrusion X
Number of Crosses (NC) - 6 3 1 -
NE x NC - -3 0 0.5 -

(𝑵𝑬 𝒙 𝑵𝑪)
Final Assessment [ 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎%] -25%
𝑵𝑪
 GEOTECHNICAL TRADE-OFFS
CONSTRAINTS
BENCH TERRACING FANYA JUU TERRACING BROAD-BASE TERRACING

ECONOMICAL
Php 797, 650 Php 934, 390 Php 797, 650
(PROJECT COST)
CONSTRUCTABILITY
35 days/ 5 weeks 41 days/ 6 weeks 35 days/ 5 weeks
(DURATION)
SUSTAINABILITY
15 years 25 years 10 years
(LIFESPAN)
RISK ASSESSMENT
3 2 3
(DURING AND AFTER)
HEALTH AND SAFETY
2 2 3
(DURING AND AFTER)
ENVIRONMENTAL
(POLLUTION AND SOIL -20% -10% -20%
EFFECTS)
 STRUCTURAL TRADE-OFFS
CONSTRAINTS
GABION WALL MSE WALL SOIL NAIL WALL

ECONOMICAL
Php 109, 320 Php 252, 450 Php 84,167
(PROJECT COST)

CONSTRUCTABILITY
23 days/ 3 weeks 12 days/ 2 weeks 45 days/ 6 weeks
(DURATION)

SUSTAINABILITY
50 years 75 years 40 years
(LIFESPAN)

RISK ASSESSMENT
2 3 3
(DURING AND AFTER)

HEALTH AND SAFETY

2 2 3
(DURING AND AFTER)

ENVIRONMENTAL
-10% -20% -25%
GEOTECHNICAL TRADE-OFFS
CRITERION’S
ABILITY TO SATISFY THE CRITERION
IMPORTANCE
DECISION CRITERION
BENCH FANYA JUU BROAD-BASE
on a scale of 0 to 5
TERRACING TERRACING TERRACING
ECONOMICAL
4 1 10 1
(PROJECT COST)
CONSTRUCTABILITY
3 1 10 1
(DURATION)
SUSTAINABILITY
5 10 28 1
(LIFESPAN)

RISK ASSESSMENT
3 1 10 1
(DURING AND AFTER)

HEALTH AND SAFETY

3 10 10 1
(DURING AND AFTER)

ENVIRONMENTAL
1 10 1 10

OVERALL RANK 100 244 28

 STRUCTURAL TRADE-OFFS
CRITERION’S
ABILITY TO SATISFY THE CRITERION
DECISION CRITERION IMPORTANCE
on a scale of 0 to 5 GABION WALL MSE WALL SOIL NAIL WALL
ECONOMICAL
4 1 -50.21337415 10
(PROJECT COST)
CONSTRUCTABILITY
3 10 13 1
(DURATION)
SUSTAINABILITY
5 10 32.5 1
(LIFESPAN)

RISK ASSESSMENT
3 10 1 1
(DURING AND AFTER)

HEALTH AND SAFETY

3 10 10 1
(DURING AND AFTER)

ENVIRONMENTAL
1 -17 1 10

OVERALL RANK 127 34.6465 64

1. ASTM’s Geotechnical Engineering Standards
2. DPWH Blue Book Volume I
3. AASHTO’s Study guide for Soil Mechanics Level 1 (Module II)
a. Unified Soil Classification System
b. AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials)
c. USDA Textural Soil Classification
4. The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD 1096)