Combined Material Report

The United Republic of Tanzania
Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication
Tanzania National Roads Agency
Consultancy services for Feasibility Study, Environment & Social Impact

Assessment, Detailed Engineering design and Preparation of Tender Documents
for the Upgrading of Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road (52.3Km) to Bitumen standards
(Contract No.)
DRAFT MATERIAL REPORT
May, 2019
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Project Background ....................................................................................................................... 1
Project Location and Description .................................................................................................. 1
Scope of Investigation ................................................................................................................... 1
PHYSIOGEOGRAPHY OF THE PROJECT AREA......................................................................................... 3
Soils and Topography .................................................................................................................... 3
Geology ......................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.1 Regional Geology .................................................................................................................. 4
2.2.2 Local Geology ........................................................................................................................ 4
Climate .......................................................................................................................................... 5
SOILS AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................... 7
General.......................................................................................................................................... 7
Subgrade Soils Alignment ............................................................................................................. 7
3.2.1 Sampling of Subgrade Soil Alignment ................................................................................... 7
3.2.2 Testing of Subgrade Soils Alignment..................................................................................... 8
3.2.3 Problem Soils on the Subgrade Alignment ........................................................................... 9
Homogenous Sections ................................................................................................................ 10
3.3.1 The CUSUM Method to Establish Homogeneousness ........................................................ 10
3.3.2 Calculation of CUSUM against Chainage............................................................................. 11
Borrow Material sources............................................................................................................. 13
3.4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 13
3.4.2 Sampling and Testing Method for Borrow pits ................................................................... 14
3.4.3 Laboratory Tests and Classification of Borrow pit materials .............................................. 15
3.4.4 Materials for Embankment and Natural gravel .................................................................. 15
3.4.5 Cemented Materials............................................................................................................ 16
Quarry Sources............................................................................................................................ 17
Sand Sources ............................................................................................................................... 18
Water Sources ............................................................................................................................. 20
i
Other Construction Materials ..................................................................................................... 21
EVALUATION AND PROPOSED USE OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ................................................. 23
General........................................................................................................................................ 23
Surfacing aggregates ................................................................................................................... 23
Base course crushable materials................................................................................................. 23
Subbase Construction ................................................................................................................. 23
Capping layers for improved subgrade or embankment ............................................................ 23
Water and Sand materials .......................................................................................................... 23
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN ...................................................................................... 24
Baseline Traffic Studies ............................................................................................................... 24
Hourly Adjustment Factor ........................................................................................................... 24
Monthly/Seasonal adjustment Factor. ....................................................................................... 24
Traffic growth projection. ........................................................................................................... 24
Generated traffic......................................................................................................................... 25
Diverted traffic ............................................................................................................................ 25
Pavement Design Standard ......................................................................................................... 25
Estimation of Cumulative Standard Axle Loading ....................................................................... 25
5.8.1 Vehicle Equivalent Factors standard axle loading on the project road .............................. 25
5.8.2 Estimated cumulative standard axle loading ...................................................................... 26
5.8.3 Traffic loading Analysis ....................................................................................................... 26
Proposed Pavement Structure .................................................................................................... 27
Design Sub grade......................................................................................................................... 27
5.10.1 Non- problematic Soils ........................................................................................................ 27
5.10.2 Low strength Sub- grade Soils. ............................................................................................ 28
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................ 30
Appendix 1: Trial pits log for subgrade soil alignments .............................................................. 30
Appendix 2: Detailed laboratory test results for subgrade soils alignment ............................... 31
Appendix3: Borrow pit loggings and detailed laboratory test results ....................................... 32
6.3.1 Borrow pit Logs ................................................................................................................... 32
6.3.2 Detailed Laboratory test results ......................................................................................... 33
Appendix 4: Sand pit loggings and detailed laboratory test results ........................................... 34
6.4.1 Sand pit logs ........................................................................................................................ 34
ii
6.4.2 Laboratory test results ........................................................................................................ 35
Appendix 5: Water sources- Detailed laboratory test results .................................................... 36
Appendix 6: Laboratory test results- Initial Consumption of Lime ............................................. 37
Appendix 7: Borrow pit Soil Plan................................................................................................. 38
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1- 1 : A map showing project route location .......................................................................................................1
Figure 2- 1: General Soil types in Mafia Island ..............................................................................................................3

Figure 2- 2: Generalize Geology and Geological Section of Tanzania (Semkimwa P. et all, 2005) ................................5
Figure 2- 3: Specific Geological Map of Mafia Island.....................................................................................................5
Figure 2- 4: Map showing Climatic Zones in Tanzania...................................................................................................6
Figure 3- 1: Design Depth requirement (Source: PMDM-1999) .....................................................................................7

Figure 3- 2: Excavated pits at Chainage 0+250 RHS and 8+250 CENTRE respectively along Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road
.......................................................................................................................................................................................8
Figure 3- 3: Excavated pits at Chainage 31+750 CENTRE and 41+750 CENTRE respectively along Kilindoni-
Rasmkumbi road ............................................................................................................................................................8
Figure 3- 4: Homogenous sections of subgrade layer along Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road. ............................................11
Figure 3- 5: Materials location plan (borrow pits, sandpits, quarry site and water sources) in Mafia. .......................14
Table 3- 6: Summary test results for Kanga and Lugoba Quarry sites .........................................................................17
Figure 3- 7: Sample of hand crushed aggregates at Kanga quarry .............................................................................18
Figure 3- 8: Grading envelope for Dongo sand pit. .....................................................................................................19
Figure 3- 9: Grading envelope for Kiegeani sandpit.....................................................................................................19
Figure 3- 10: Grading envelope for Kirongwe sandpit. ................................................................................................20
Figure 3- 11:Shows water sources at Ndagoni Hippo dam and Ndagoni stream .......................................................21
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3- 1: Problem areas along the road section. ......................................................................................................10
Table 3- 2: Location of Borrow pit areas and estimated quantities .............................................................................14
Table 3- 3: Quality Classification of Borrow pit Materials ...........................................................................................15
Table 3- 4: Requirement for fill and improved subgrade .............................................................................................15
Table 3- 5: Requirement for cemented materials ........................................................................................................16
Table 3- 6: Location of Sand pits and estimated quantities .........................................................................................18
Table 3- 7: Sand source test results and specification requirements ...........................................................................20
Table 3- 8: Summary test results for water samples collected ....................................................................................21
Table 7- 1: Traffic loading summary ............................................................................................................................26

Table 7- 2: Design of Improved Sub grade Layers ........................................................................................................27
iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
GPS Global Positioning System
PMDM Pavement Material and Design Manual
CML Central Material Laboratory
BS British Standard
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
UDSM University of Dar es Salaam
LL Liquid Limit
PI Plasticity Index
LS Linear Shrinkage
CBR California Bearing Ratio
ACV Aggregate Crushing Value
AIV Aggregate Impact Value
TFV Ten Percent Fines Value
CM Cemented Materials
SSS Sodium Sulphate Soundness
LAA Los Angeles Abrasion
GDP Gross Domestic Product
VEF Vehicle Equivalence Factor
TLC Traffic Load Class
LGV Low Goods Vehicles
MGV Medium goods vehicles
HGV Heavy Goods Vehicles
VHGV Very Heavy Goods Vehicles
iv
INTRODUCTION
Project Background
Project Location and Description

Kilindoni – Rasmkumbi road (52.3 km) connects up the growing town of Kilindoni from Kilindoni
roundabout where Mafia Airport is located towards Baleni, Kirongwe and Kanga wards where the road
destination is located in Bweni village, Kanga.
This Soils and Materials Report is the part of the Detailed Engineering Design report prepared for
pavement design purposes. The report also represents observations on the characteristics of insitu
soils, materials investigations and the design of the pavement structure using applicable Tanzanian
standards (Pavement and Materials Design Manual-1999).
All procedures for the materials investigations and pavement design are in accordance with the
Pavement and Materials Design Manual (PMDM-1999), Laboratory Testing Manual -2000 and Field
Testing Manual -2003.
Figure 1- 1 : A map showing project route location
Scope of Investigation
The field investigation has been conducted through the proposed project route locations. The
reconnaissance and materials investigations was conducted in relation to the soils and materials
1
investigation to ensure pavement design is conducted taking into consideration the prevailing
conditions of in-situ soils and intrinsic characteristics of the construction materials. In essence it
includes;
 Desk study for the purpose of obtaining previous data and information on the availability and
properties of the existing material sources in Mafia Island including the as-constructed data
on the existing roads.
 Reconnaissance of the existing roadways to acquaint with the dominant features of the roads
or villages including surface type and their service condition, location, top and visual in-situ
soils properties
 In situ soils sampling along the identified road and villages at intervals of 250 meters for the
section starting from Kilindoni to Bweni village, Kanga.
 Identification of Borrow pits and quarry sites for sampling including identification of existing
and new sites in the Mafia Island. The materials to be investigated in the laboratory in
compliance with the Laboratory Testing Manual - 2000.
 Sampling of water and sand sources for construction works. The water and sand samples shall
undergo laboratory investigations to determine existence or non-existence of deleterious
salts and organic matter.
2
PHYSIOGEOGRAPHY OF THE PROJECT AREA
Soils and Topography

Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road section is located in Mafia Island, Coast region and it is amongst the coastal
regions in Tanzania. SAND and Loamy SAND soils are typical types of soils dominantly found in the
Island. The road passes over locations overlain the short trees, grass and coconut palm trees which
are typical Island vegetation. About 28km of the road section from Kilindoni is dominated by light
brown to brown-blackish silty SAND soil. The overlying silty SAND soil is generally non-plastic (NP) with
fine to coarse grain size distribution. Generally, this section (28km) is flat with good drainage
properties.
Furthermore, from km 28 to about 42km of this section is dominated by mostly light brown to blackish
clay and silty clay with some areas consisting of gravels. The blackish clay (black cotton soil as known),
is very plastic fine grained soils exhibiting low permeability, and thus poor drainage. These areas forms
swamps around the road due to poor drainage and topography of the area itself. Extending towards
Rasmkumbi about 10km, light brown to blackish silty SAND soil mixed with gravel mainly found. The
soil exhibits non-plastic (NP) properties with good drainage properties but poorly graded (GP).
Figure 2- 1: General Soil types in Mafia Island
3
Geology
2.2.1 Regional Geology

Mafia Island lies over Coastal sedimentary basins of Tanzania Geological setting which regionally were
formed during the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. Coastal basins resulted from separation of
Madagascar from East Africa due to prolonged Gondwana break-up. The development of Mesozoic
sedimentary coastal basins in Tanzania similar to the Karoo Rifting in Gondwana supercontinent.
Costal basins in Tanzania are part of East African coastal basins which extends from Somalia through
Kenya, Mozambique to South Africa
In Tanzania, coastal basins include the whole of Tanzania coastal belt from Kenyan border (north) to
the Mozambique border (south). It includes the series of sub-basins e.g. Ruvu-Tanga, Mandawa and
Ruvuma basins and the Islands Offshore. The basin consists of sedimentary rocks of Upper Mesozoic
which include limestone, sandstone, shale, marls and local evaporate (gypsum, anhydrite and salt).
2.2.2 Local Geology

Mafia Island is composed of mainly SANDS and silty SAND sediments, clay, and parts of which these
sediments are mixed with medium to fine gravel. In-situ soil investigation survey and logging has
revealed the presence of more silty SAND from Kilindoni ward to Kirongwe ward through Baleni. The
area consists of light brown, brown to whitish color. Furthermore, the section from Kirongwe is
localized by existence of CLAY (some parts with montmorillonite clays and relatively stiff light-brown
clays in Bweni
Most Offshore areas around the Island composed of mainly Whitish beach sands influenced by sea
wave action. Weathering and sea waves’ action on the rocks along the coastline resulted into
formation on sediments. These sediments consist of gravelly-sized limestone clasts embedded by silty
SAND matrix/groundmass to form conglomeritic limestone rocks/boulders.
The limestone strata resulted from lithification of accumulated sediments (shells and skeletal debris
of marine organism) that contain calcium carbonate forming in marine environment. These strata is
found at Kanga offshores towards the sea. This area is found suitable for extraction of construction
materials (stone quarry) for this project.
4
Figure 2- 2: Generalize Geology and Geological Section of Tanzania (Semkimwa P. et all, 2005)
Figure 2- 3: Specific Geological Map of Mafia Island
Climate
The projects lies at the Coastal region of Tanzania, which due to its high elevation to about 20m AMSL,
remains relatively humid and cool throughout the year. The coastal regions i.e. Pwani and Dar es
Salaam are warm and humid, with temperatures between 23°C to 30°C through most of the year,
dipping just below 25°C in the coolest months. The monthly average temperatures for Kilindoni town
5
are usually between 24.8°C (77°F) for the cooler period and 28.3°C (83°F) for hotter periods. The
average temperature for town of Kilindoni is 26.7°C. These temperatures appear to be similar in all
areas around the island and shall be considered for Mafia District, for the purpose of this report
(Wikipedia).
Rainfall is similar for all the roads in project area, where the rainfall information indicates the average
annual rainfall is 1705mm at Kilindoni town. In general there one major rain season, with most rainfall
coming between March and May. Dry season extends from July to October.
For purposes of pavement design PMDM-1999 divides Tanzania into three environmental zones
namely dry, moderate and wet. Figure below shows climatic pattern of Tanzania regions. It has been
established that the project route falls entirely within the WET climatic zone.
Figure 2- 4: Map showing Climatic Zones in Tanzania.
6
SOILS AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATION
General
Materials investigations and characterization was carried out based on the following approach:
 Investigations and characterization of alignment/centreline soils along the existing gravel road
for the purpose of carrying out structural pavement design based on traffic loading and
environment as recommended by PMDM-1999 and the Field Testing Manual -2003;
 Investigations of existing and potential new borrow areas for the purposes of securing
appropriate construction materials for pavement layers and road embankment mainly for
improved subgrade (capping), subbase and base layer;
 Investigations of potential existing and new quarry/stone sites for obtaining appropriate
materials for pavement surfacing and crushed tock for base;
 Investigations of potential sand and water sources in order to understand their physical and
chemical suitability for concreting, mortar and paving works;
Subgrade Soils Alignment
3.2.1 Sampling of Subgrade Soil Alignment

The subgrade soil alignment test pits were excavated alternately (Left, Right edges and Centre) at
250m interval respectively. The ground investigation has been conducted according to the Pavement
and Materials Design Manual, 1999. The excavations were made at the design depth (m) of between
0.8m – 1.2m; this depth is above the general requirement set out in the Pavement and Materials
Design Manual-1999 (section 5.1) for other roads design. The samples were collected, packed into the
polythene bags, labeled and transported to Regional Manager’s Laboratory, TANROADS Dar es Salaam
for testing.
Figure 3- 1: Design Depth requirement (Source: PMDM-1999)
7
Figure 3- 2: Excavated pits at Chainage 0+250 RHS and 8+250 CENTRE respectively along Kilindoni-
Rasmkumbi road
Figure 3- 3: Excavated pits at Chainage 31+750 CENTRE and 41+750 CENTRE respectively along
Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road
3.2.2 Testing of Subgrade Soils Alignment

Centerline Soil Alignment conducted in the project road has been presented in Appendix 1 whereby
each excavated pit (together with Chainage) has been logged respectively.
8
The alignment soils samples collected were taken to the laboratory for different tests. The samples
were tested according to CML-2000 Test methods. The laboratory testing conducted comprised of the
following tests;
 Particle Size Distribution

 Atterberg Limits
 Moisture-density relationship (Proctor Test)
 California Bearing Ratio tests
The summary of test results for Subgrade alignment are attached and presented as Appendix 2. The
detailed Test results are presented in a separate volume
3.2.3 Problem Soils on the Subgrade Alignment

A problem soil is a soil with low strength and/or exhibit unfavorable characteristics such as
expansiveness. The Soil problem soil is regarded as soil with low strength when subjected to the
following conditions.
(i). Field reconnaissance and visual inspection of excavated soils along the centerline
(ii). The laboratory test CBR soaked strength less 3% (<2% in dry climatic zones).
(iii). The Laboratory test PIw>20%
The laboratory weighted Plasticity Index has shown some section to consist of PIw>20%, the list of
chainages is shown on Table 3.1 below.
The field reconnaissance has shown that, the section from km 0+00-28+00 is dominated by brown-
blackish silty SAND soil of non-plastic (NP). Furthermore, the section from 28+000 to 42+000 is
dominated by light brown to blackish silty clay and sands with gravel pockets in some areas. However,
the last 10km is encroaching the sea and the area is dominated mainly by light brown to blackish silty
SAND soil mixed with gravel.
The Analysis of the laboratory results for all sections with PIw>20% has CBR greater than 5% after 4
days soaked. In this regard, the design subgrade CBR=3%. Therefore, the soils for these sections do
not need special investigations. However, special treatment of the subgrade soil should be adopted
according to section 6.25 of PMDM figure 6.3.
9
Table 3- 1: Problem areas along the road section.
Chainage GM LL PL SL CBR Strength AASHTO Class Property
(%)
2+750 0.9 49.1 21.2 14.3 9 A-7-5 Clayey soil
26+500 0.3 45.2 20.4 12.1 6 A-7-5 Clayey soil
28+500 0.5 39.6 11.8 12.1 7 A-6 Clayey soil
28+750 0.3 25.6 8.7 7.1 9 A-6 Clayey soil
29+000 0.4 65.0 25.5 12.9 7 A-7-5 Clayey soil
29+750 0.5 43.6 17.3 12.9 8 A-7-5 Clayey soil
30+000 0.7 31.1 14.5 7.1 A-6 Clayey soil
30+250 0.4 45.2 19.3 12.1 8 A-7-5 Clayey soil
30+500 0.5 47.2 19.2 13.6 7 A-7-5 Clayey soil
30+750 0.5 39.6 11.8 12 A-6 Clayey soil
31+000 0.2 38.2 17.1 10 5 A-6 Clayey soil
31+250 0.4 36.4 15.5 10 7 A-6 Clayey soil
31+500 0.6 27.4 15.5 5.7 6 A-6 Clayey soil
31+750 0.5 43.6 17.3 12.9 A-7-5 Clayey soil
33+000 0.3 36.2 14.0 11.4 5 A-6 Clayey soil
33+250 0.5 40.8 16.2 10.7 10 A-7-5 Clayey soil
33+500 0.6 40.1 17.4 10 5 A-7-5 Clayey soil
33+750 0.2 41.3 19.9 11.4 10 A-7-5 Clayey soil
34+000 0.3 46.3 18.5 13.6 7 A-7-5 Clayey soil
35+750 0.4 52.0 21.5 15.7 6 A-7-5 Clayey soil
36+750 0.7 42.2 17.5 11.4 6 A-7-5 Clayey soil
46+500 0.2 22.5 12.9 5 A-7-5 Clayey soil
Homogenous Sections
3.3.1 The CUSUM Method to Establish Homogeneousness

The statistical technique depicted in the Pavement and Materials Design Manual will be used to
determine homogeneous sections based on CBR values of in-situ subgrade soils. This technique is the
cumulative sums method, where plots of the cumulative sums of deviations from the mean CBR
against chainage would be used to discern the sections strength. The cumulative sum is calculated
using the formula:
Si = Xi − X m + Si−1
where,
Xi= CBR at chainage i
Xm = Mean CBR
Si = Cumulative sum of the deviations from the mean CBR at Chainage i
10
Using the cumulative sums, the extent to which the measured CBR values on sections of road vary
from the mean CBR of the whole road can be determined. Changes in the slope of the line connecting
the cumulative sums will indicate non-homogeneity.
40
35
30
25
20
CUSUM
15
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50
-5
-10
-15
Chainage
Figure 3- 4: Homogenous sections of subgrade layer along Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road.
3.3.2 Calculation of CUSUM against Chainage

The final stage of the procedure is to calculate the representative CBR (i.e. CBR design for each
homogeneous section of the road. The proposed method will tend to separate out areas of very high
CBR on areas that warrant special treatment such as expansive soil areas and therefore the
distribution of the remaining CBR values will approximate to a normal distribution.
The design of improved subgrade layers depends on the subgrade CBR design determined in the soil
surveys and assessments of the field data. The representative CBR, i.e. CBR design, which is the 90th
percentile value, would then be calculated as recommended in the PMDM-1999 (Chapter 5,
subsection 5.2.3).
This road is divided into five (5) homogenous sections with different design CBR. Design CBR are
determined as below;
11
(i) Section 1-from Kilindoni (Ch. 0+000 to 12+500)
90%-ile value CBR design-Section 1

14
d=0.1(n-1) 13
N=25, d= 2.4 12
11
90%-ile= 5.4 10
9
CBR (%)
8
CBR design 7
6
5% 5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
Tests
(ii) Section 2 (Ch. 12+500 to 30+000)
CBR design-Section 2
20
90%-ile value 18
d=0.1(n-1) 16
n=36, d= 3.5 14
90%-ile= 6.0 12
CBR (%)
10
8
CBR design
6
6%
4
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Tests
(iii) Section 3 (Ch. 30+000 to 40+000)
CBR design-Section 3
20
90%-ile value 18
d=0.1(n-1) 16
n=21, d= 2.0 14
90%-ile=5.0 12
CBR (%)
10
CBR design 8
6
5%
4
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Tests
12
(iv) Section 4 (Ch. 40+000-45+500)
CBR design- Section 4

90%-ile value 18
d=0.1(n-1) 16
n=12, d= 1.1 14
12
90%-ile= 6.1
CBR (%)
10
8
CBR design
6
6%
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Tests
(v) Section 5-to Rasmkumbi (Ch. 45+500-50+000)
90%-ile value CBR design- Section 5

20
d=0.1(n-1)
n=12, d= 1.1
15
90%-ile= 6.1
CBR (%)
10
CBR design
6%
5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Tests 6 7 8 9 10
Borrow Material sources
3.4.1 Introduction
Mafia Island is characterized mainly by SAND and LOAMY soils, much of Sand soils exposed over beach
extended to inland areas. However, offshore areas are characterized by sedimentary rocks and gravels
which are suitable for construction works. Due to fewer construction projects took place in Mafia, few
borrow pits sources have been established and yet unexploited to their full capacity. However, due to
variation in engineering properties caused by existence of silty SANDS and silty CLAYS, the available
and existing borrow pits sources are few mainly near to or close to the offshore area whereby the
materials are characterized by the formation of sedimentary rocks. These areas include BWENI, JIMBO
KIBAONI and KANGA. The existing pits were found at BWENI, JIMBO and KIBAONI. However, KANGA
Borrow pit was recently identified by TANROADS and has good gravel and stone quarry.
13
3.4.2 Sampling and Testing Method for Borrow pits
The pattern of trial pitting for existing and new pits was decided at randomly order within the selected
locations depending on the topographical features and materials distribution within the source. The
average thicknesses of the material strata of interest (overburden or gravel) were determined from
trial pit profiles. The data obtained from trial pit logs were therefore used to subdivide the borrow
area into segments comprising materials of similar characteristics. At least four (4) bulk samples of
materials were taken from each borrow pit area. The summary of the borrow sources with the
estimated quantities are as shown in Table below. Note that, the Borrow pit Soil Plan is presented in
the Annex 6.
Table 3- 2: Location of Borrow pit areas and estimated quantities

No. Borrow Location Offset Estimated Estimated Exploited Available
pit (from distance(from Depth of Area (m2) area(m2) quantity to be
Name Kilindoni) Kilindoni Excavation(m) excavated(m3)
(Km) road) (Km)
BP01 KANGA 36.80 0.40 RHS 2.5 263,590 0 658,975
BP02 BWENI 43.50 0.25 RHS 2.5 112,639 12,633 250,015
BP03 JIMBO 30.50 1.80 LHS 2.5 103,678 17,923 214,387
BP04 KIBAONI 7.40 1.30 RHS 3 129,418 28,450 302,904
Figure 3- 5: Materials location plan (borrow pits, sandpits, quarry site and water sources) in Mafia.
14
3.4.3 Laboratory Tests and Classification of Borrow pit materials
The samples taken in the listed borrow pits above have been taken to the Laboratory for testing. The
tests conducted to assess their suitability include Grading, Atterberg Limits, Proctor and 4 days soaked
CBR. Borrow pit loggings and detailed laboratory test result have been presented in Appendix 3.
Table 3- 3: Quality Classification of Borrow pit Materials

No. Name Tests Classification
GM LL PI CBR LS
PMDM CLASS
(95%)
BP01 KANGA 2.2 46.4 25 16 13.3 G7 &G15
BP02 BWENI 2.2 34.6 16 16 8.3 G7 & G15
BP03 JIMBO 1.3 41 21.5 13 10.4 G7
BP04 KIBAONI 1.5 43 25 22 13 G15
3.4.4 Materials for Embankment and Natural gravel

The materials obtained in the borrow pits have shown to consist of high quality gradation in terms of
grading modulus and good CBR strength. It is therefore concluded that, all existing borrow pits found
along the proposed road have suitable materials for improved subgrade layers and fill for road
embankment according to section 5.5.2 and section 5.6 respectively of Pavement and Materials
Design Manual-1999
Table 3- 4: Requirement for fill and improved subgrade
Source: Pavement and Materials Design manual-1999, table 5.5 and table 5.6
15
3.4.5 Cemented Materials
Due to the climatic condition of area, the subbase layers may require being constructed using
cemented materials. The study shows that, the available borrow pits have materials that meet the
requirement for G15, therefore these borrow pit could be utilized for Cemented materials type of
treatment. The laboratory trials tests on Initial lime consumption have been conducted at University
of Dar es Salaam on the respective borrow pits. The test results for ICL for the selected borrow pit
materials is presented below;
Table 3- 5: Initial Consumption of Lime of the Selected Borrow Pits

SN Borrowpit Chainage % passing % of Lime Organic Cement Remarks
Name 0.425mm Content Content Dosing
1 Kibaoni km7+400, offset 40.3% 3.2% 0.39% 2.9% OK

1.3km RHS
2 Kanga km36+800, offset 26.8% 2.9% 0.45% 3.1% OK
400m RHS
3 Bweni km43+500, offset 29.6% 3.4% 0.46% 3.4% OK
250m RHS
The test results have shown all borrow pits have organic content less than 0.5%, which indicates that
the materials are suitable for CM stabilization. The dosing of cement for each borrow pit source is
shown on the table 3-5 above. The average cement content required for stabilization to CM may be
taken as 3.1%. This amount includes the durability of stabilizer to ensure that an irreversible
stabilization reaction occurs as specified in the standard specification for roadworks-2000 section
3802 (d)
Table 3- 5: Requirement for cemented materials
Source: Pavement and Materials Design manual-1999, table 7.7
16
Quarry Sources
Stone quarry materials is required for production of aggregates for concrete works, production of base
course pavement layers (CRR &CRS) and production of bituminous surfacing pavement layer. Hard
stone samples from Kanga quarry sites were taken for laboratory testing. Following tests were carried
out according to BS 812; BS 812-Part 2;BS 812-Part 111; CML Test No. 2.9, Ref. ASTM C 131-89; CML
Test No. 2.10, Ref. ASTM C 88-90; AASHHTO Designation T 182-84;
 Ten Percent Fine Value at dry and wet conditions (TFV dry and TFV wet)
 Aggregate Crushing Value (ACV)
 Aggregate Impact Value (AIV)
 Water Absorption
 Sodium Sulphate Soundness (SSS)
 Bitumen Affinity
 Water Absorption test
 Specific gravity
 Los Angeles Abrasion test
Aggregates samples were collected from existing Kanga Quarry site in Mafia Island and Lugoba Quarry
in Bagamoyo. Kanga quarry is located at 36.8km from Kilindoni ferry terminal while Lugoba Quarry is
located at 275km from Nyamisati ferry terminal. This means that, the aggregates shall be shipped by
boat from Nyamisati to Kilindoni Port (start of the project) thereafter to the project site. Strength
tests were performed and the results are presented in the table below. The laboratory tests were
attached as Appendix 3 for reference. Not that, the specifications for Aggregates is according to BS
812: 2-1975 test method.
Table 3- 6: Summary test results for Kanga and Lugoba Quarry sites
TEST DESCRIPTION KANGA LUGOBA REQUIREMENT REMARKS
Specific Gravity 2.52 2.85 Min.2.6 Kanga is Light
Water Absorption 1.94% 0.09% Less than 2% OK
Bitumen Affinity ˃95% >95% Min 95% OK
Aggregate Crushing Value (ACV) 23% 19.3% Max. 30% OK
Ten Percentage Fine Value (TFV)-dry 157kN 216kN Min.110kN OK
Ten Percentage Fine Value (TFV)-wet 132kN 161 Min.75% of Dry OK
Aggregate Impact Value (AIV) 21% 17.6% Max. 30% OK
Sodium Sulphate Soundness (SSS) 0.7% 2.4% Less than 7% OK
17
Both quarry aggregates found to meet the minimum strength, however the Kanga aggregate quarry
has slightly less dense than minimum requirement of aggregates according to BS 812:2-1975 test
method. According to PMDM, the aggregates from Kanga stone Quarry meet the requirements for
construction of base course pavement layer, surfacing and concrete works.
The stone quarry found at Kanga site meets the minimum requirement for aggregates required for
surface dressing for traffic AADT <1000 in which the minimum TFVdry is 120kN (refer table 10.2,
PMDM-1999). However, due to increase of commercial and goods vehicles, the AADT is expected to
grow than current state to more than AADT >1000. Therefore, superior aggregates, i.e. granite is
recommended for surfacing. In this regard, the Lugoba stone quarry has been tested and meet all
requirements for surfacing aggregates for all traffic levels.
Figure 3- 7: Sample of hand crushed aggregates at Kanga quarry
Sand Sources
Potential and Existing Sand sources were investigated along the project area. Three (3) sand sources
and sampling were found at Dongo, Kiegeani and Kirongwe. The sources of sand pits were investigated
by sampling and performing sieve analysis to ascertain their suitability for concrete works. Location
of sand pit sources and estimated quantities is presented in the table below.
Table 3- 6: Location of Sand pits and estimated quantities

No. Sand pit Location Offset Estimated Estimated Exploite Available
Name (from distance(fro Depth of Area (m2) d quantity to be
Kilindoni) m the road) Excavation(m) area(m2) excavated(m3)
(Km) (Km)
SP01 DONGO 5.50 0.40 RHS 3.0 209,288 38,839 511,347
SP02 KIEGEANI 6.15 0.40 RHS 3.0 188,296 14,727 520,707
18
SP03 KIRONGWE 22.00 0.60 LHS 3.0 648,848 296,150 1,058,094
Testing was done at University of Dar es Salaam; Building Materials Laboratory and the following tests
were performed;
 Particle Size Distribution(PDS)
 Chloride content
 Sulfate content
 Organic impurities
The grading of these sources were checked to verify the compliance of grading requirements for fine
aggregates according to BS 812-103.1. The graph for sand grading envelopes for each sand pit have
been developed and presented hereunder in the figures below;
Figure 3- 8: Grading envelope for Dongo sand pit.
Figure 3- 9: Grading envelope for Kiegeani sandpit.
19
Figure 3- 10: Grading envelope for Kirongwe sandpit.
The chemical impurities in the sand contents have been checked to enable the consultant decide on
the contamination of the materials in question. The results have indicated that, all sand pits have low
chemical contents for Sulphate (<0.7%) and Chlorides (<0.01%). %. The organic impurities (content) of
the sand samples is to be ≤0.5%. Sand pit loggings together with detailed laboratory test results have
been attached as Appendix 4.
Table 3- 7: Sand source test results and specification requirements

Sample NO,ID Organic Impurities (%) Sulphate content (%) Chloride content (%)
1.DONGO 1.0 0.036 0.0096
2.KIEGEANI 0.4 0.068 0.0064
3.KIRONGWE 0.7 0.062 0.0068
Permissible Limits Max. 0.5% Max. 0.3% 0.3%
It is concluded that all proposed sand sources were found to meet grading requirement and other
laboratory tests hence suitable for construction works. It has also noted that, the sand in two sand
pits consist of high organic content due to decomposition of plant remains. It is therefore
recommended that these sand pits to be abandoned. It is recommended that, Kiegeni sand pit to be
utilized for concrete works on the construction of proposed road projects. Furthermore, before
extracting sand, 450mm depth overburden should be removed to ensure that the sand is not
contaminated by organic materials.
Water Sources
The water samples have been collected from different source to ensure sufficient water is available
during construction. The water sources include Ndagoni Hippo dam and Ndagoni stream crossing the
culvert along Kilindoni-Rasimkumbi road at Baleni area. Both Dam and the Stream crossings at
20
Ndagoni is perennial and has large quantity of water for construction works, hence the proposed
project.
The chemical tests for the samples have been conducted to ascertain the quality of these proposed
sources. The summary of the test parameters and their quality have presented in the table below. The
detailed test results were attached on Appendix 5.
Table 3- 8: Summary test results for water samples collected

Sample ID STREAM/RIVER HIPPO DAM Permissible Limits
Parameters Units
Acid content(pH) 6.58 6.81 5.5- 8.5
Chloride(Cl-) mg/L 50.0 10.0 300- 600Mg/l
Sulfate(SO42+) mg/L 35.6 12.0 200- 600Mg/l
Magnesium (Mg2+) mg/L 1.02 11.3 300- 1000Mg/l
Ammonium(NH4+) mg/L 11.0 20.0 15-30Mg/l
The results have indicated that, all water sources proposed have slightly acid and with slightly alkaline.
Therefore, the degree of aggressiveness is absolutely low and is suitable for construction works.
Figure 3- 11: Shows water sources at Ndagoni Hippo dam and Ndagoni stream
Other Construction Materials

In additional to the field investigated materials, the industrial manufactured materials for construction
should be investigated during construction. These materials include Cement and Reinforcements and
bitumen. It is emphasized that in accordance to the Specification-2000 section 7100, particularly on
21
section 7104 shall be complied promptly to verify the quality of the materials brought to site for
construction works.
22
EVALUATION AND PROPOSED USE OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
General
Owing to the design requirements provided for bituminous surfaced roads with possible unbound or
bound pavement layers, the utilization of sources of materials can be recommended as follows:
Surfacing aggregates
The Kanga existing crushing site is definitely suitable in quality and quantity for production of crushed
materials for base course and surfacing aggregates for low traffic volume. However, for high traffic
volume, chippings shall be high strength stone such as granite. In this regard, it is recommended
aggregates from Lugoba for chipping materials.
Base course crushable materials

Kanga stone quarry found has proved to consist of suitable stone with high TFV values. In this regard
base course stones (CRR) should be obtained from this quarry site. The strength quality of the stone
sources were evaluated and found to be satisfactory. Arrangements have to be sorted out to obtain
the crushed aggregates of desired sizes from the local producers currently exploiting the source.
Subbase Construction
Due to the climatic condition of the area, it is recommended that, the subbase to be constructed with
impermeable layer to restrict movement of water to the subgrade layer. Therefore cemented layer,
CM category is recommended for this purpose.
Capping layers for improved subgrade or embankment

Materials for capping layers should have CBR strength more than 15%. The materials from three (3)
borrow pit sources proved to have high CBR strength and are sufficiently for capping layer/improved
subgrade upper layer.
Water and Sand materials

Observations made and discussed from the preceding sections indicated that the satisfactory quality
& quantity of water and sand are found. For sands, DONGO, KIEGEANI and KIRONGWE are suitable
sources of sands for construction purposes. For water, both Ndagoni hippo dam and Ndagoni stream
have satisfactory quality and hence potential sources of water for construction.
23
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN
Baseline Traffic Studies

The Classified Traffic Counts was carried out from 13th August 2019 to 19th August 2019 for 7 days
each counting station. The Classified Counts were undertaken at three location/stations, namely
Kigamboni, Kirongwe and Bweni. The classified traffic counts of vehicle categorized according to
Pavement and Materials Design manual (PMDM-1999) as follows:
• Buses greater than 40 passengers (Buses)
• Medium Goods Vehicles (MGV)
• Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV)
• Very Heavy Goods Vehicles (VHGV);
Hourly Adjustment Factor

The three (3) day 24-hour count was aimed at obtaining the hourly factor for the road. The
hourly adjustment factors have been calculated from the ratio of 24-hour and 12-hour counts.
These hourly factors have been used to adjust the 12-hour counts for estimating Average Daily
Traffic (ADT).
Monthly/Seasonal adjustment Factor.

The monthly adjustment factor has been used to eliminate seasonal bias for the month in
which the traffic survey is carried out. These seasonal have been used to arrive at the Average
Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) for the project road. The seasonal variation has been based on the
baseline Traffic in Tanzania Mainland established for comprehensive traffic count
Methodology by the Ministry of Works, 2008. The adjustment factor for month of August for
Goods vehicles is taken as 0.93 and 1.00 for buses as given in the BTS report for count point
(CP 26) at Kibiti along Dar es Salaam-Kibiti-Lindi-Mingoyo, (10007) road section.
Traffic growth projection.
Macroeconomic forecasts show a decrease in GDP growth at the national level of about 6.7% in 2018,
down from 7.1% in 2017. According to Economic report, in 2008, M/s Intercontinental Consultants Pvt
prepared a generalized traffic forecast model for TANROADS for use on Tanzania roads. Proposed
passenger and freight growth rates ranged between 6-8% for a 20-year analysis period. Therefore, the
design traffic growth rate is taken as 8%.
24
Generated traffic
This is the vehicular traffic that is expected to use the project road as a result of improvement as a
result of subsequent lowering of user costs. Most of this traffic will come from increased use of the
improved facility from existing base traffic. It is commonly accepted as a good approximation that the
traffic to be generated by the project is primarily linked to the decrease in vehicle operating costs
(VOC).According to Economic Report, short term generated traffic will arise from increased number
of trips of existing operators on reduced surface roughness on upgrading the road. In the medium and
long term there will be increased demand for transport due to increased touristic economic activities
in Mafia District council. Therefore, the generated traffic forecasted due to tourism growth is
considered as 3.4% (economic report) and this will result into the growth of freight vehicles
respectively. Therefore, the adjustment factors for generated traffic is taken as 3.4% for all traffic
categories.
Diverted traffic
This is traffic that is expected to be attracted to the project road after widening and
improvement of intersections. Economic report prevails, due to the nature of the Island, there
is no possibility of vehicles to divert from east to north, hence to the project road. Therefore,
taking into consideration this situation, the diverted traffic is taken as 0% of the total traffic.
Pavement Design Standard

Pavement design has been done in accordance with Tanzania Standards (Pavement and
Materials Design Manual, PMDM-1999). The basis for the pavement design is the Climatic
conditions, the topography and the actual observations. All this indicate that subsoil
proportions should be assessed at soaked condition. Therefore, Mafia Island is lying at Wet
Climatic Condition according to PMDM-1999.
Estimation of Cumulative Standard Axle Loading
5.8.1 Vehicle Equivalent Factors standard axle loading on the project road
Due to unavailable passenger and goods vehicles, the consultant has adopted rigorous
factors obtained from previous nearest project along Dar es Salaam-Kibiti-Lindi -Mingoyo
road (Kurasini station). Therefore, the equivalence factor, VEF is taken as 1.80 for Low
Good vehicles (LGV); 1.80 for Medium Goods Vehicles (MGV), 4.1 for Heavy Goods
25
Vehicles (HGV), 3.73 for Very Heavy Goods Vehicles (VHGV) and 3.9 for buses in all
directions.
5.8.2 Estimated cumulative standard axle loading

The vehicles that impart substantial stressing on the road pavement structure and
subgrade are Medium goods vehicles, Heavy goods vehicles, semi-trailers, full trailers
(Very Heavy goods vehicles) and large buses. However, due to low traffic in this Island,
the Consultant has considered also Low Goods vehicles (LGV) and buses more than 25
passengers to realize the economic viability of the project. The total daily loading from
current traffic from these vehicle categories has been computed and used to estimate
the accumulated traffic loading up to the design period. The cumulative loading, up to
the design year which is taken as 20 years after completion of the road construction has
been estimated using a growth rate of 8% for all vehicle classes. The influence of attracted
and generated traffic components of the traffic spectrum are usually taken to be a
relatively short time, but their contribution to the loading and duration thereof on the
project road has been taken as for the other components.
5.8.3 Traffic loading Analysis

The traffic analysis of different classified counting station was carried out to develop road
carrying capacity. The design life was taken as 20 years specified in the ToR with 2 years
construction period.
It is also estimated that, the Quantity for construction material is 374,000m3 for 52km
will be moved on the road during construction transported with trucks with 15m3
capacity and having equivalence factor of 12.5 when fully loaded.
374,000
Equivalency for this is 15
𝑥12.5 = 311,700
Therefore, total design cumulative standard axle loading is E8020+311,700

The summary of computed E80 over design life (20years) for Kilindoni-Rasimkumbi road
(52km) per station is summarized in the table below;
Table 7- 1: Traffic loading summary

Design Traffic Traffic Load
S/N Count Station Loading Climatic Zone
Class
(E80x106)
Kigamboni
1 Wet TLC 3
(Kirongwe– Kilindoni) 2.51x106
26
Kirongwe
2 Wet TLC1
(Bweni-Kigamboni) 0.56x106
Bweni
3 Wet TLC05
(Rasimkumbi-Kirongwe) 0.35x106
Proposed Pavement Structure

In considering long term traffic, the maximum design Traffic load shall be considered
for upgrading Kilindoni – Rasimkumbi (52km). Therefore, TLC 3 was adopted for all
road sections.
a) Option 1: Pavement structure with Granular Materials

Surfacing - 30mm (20/10) DSD/ST
Base course - 150mm CRS
Sub base - 200mm G45
Improved sub grade-CBR min. 15%
b) Option 2: Pavement Structure with Cemented Materials

Surfacing - 30mm (20/10) DSD/ST
Base course - 150mm CRS
Sub base - 200mm CM
Improved sub grade -CBR min. 15%
Note; G45 materials can be obtained as natural materials or mechanically stabilized materials.
Design Sub grade.
5.10.1 Non- problematic Soils

The required CBR values for the pavement design is 15% in Tanzania standards, this can be
achieved by construction of improved sub grade layers in some sections.
Table 7- 2: Design of Improved Sub grade Layers

General improved subgrade layers are hereunder;
Subgrade Classes
S7 S3
S15 General General Requirement
Requirement Moderate or Wet Climate
dry
Upper
Improved None 150mm G15 150mm G15 150mm G15
Layer
subgrade
layers to be
Lower
constructed None None 150mm G7 300mm G7
Layer
The design of improved sub-grade is referenced on Materials Report section 3.3.2 design CBR
using CUSUM method into homogeneous sections. The overall design CBR is 5%, therefore,
the minimum improved subgrade layer is G7 materials.
27
5.10.2 Low strength Sub- grade Soils.
A problem soil is a soil with low strength and/or exhibit unfavorable characteristics such as
expansiveness. The Soil problem soil is regarded as soil with low strength when subjected to the
following conditions.
(i). Field reconnaissance and visual inspection of excavated soils along the centerline
(ii). The laboratory test CBR soaked strength less 3% (<2% in dry climatic zones).
(iii). The Laboratory test PIw>20%
According to the Materials report, the weighted has occurred from various location, starting r from
chainage 2+750 to 46+500, however these locations are dominated by silt-clayey sand with very good
strength. The minimum CBR strength along the section with PIw>20% is 5%. This indicates that, the
soils consist of silts/sand and soft rocks from sea shores. In this regard, some treatment should be
adopted where the soil conditions are changing.
a) Removal and Replacement of suitable materials for Embankments less than 2m

Where the finished road level is designed to be less than 2m above ground level, remove the
unsuitable soil materials to a depth of 600mm over the full width of the road, replace with
min. G3 materials in 150mm compacted layers to the specified height. The excavated
unsuitable soil materials should stockpile and then spread over the side of slopes.
b) Removal and Replacement of suitable materials for Embankments 2m or higher

Where the finished road level is designed to be more than 2m above ground level, no remove
and replacement is allowed since the CBR is greater than 5%. Embankment fill will continue
with G7 and G15 to the top level.
28
References
i. Baseline Traffic Counts in Tanzania Mainland and Establishing a Comprehensive
TRAFFIC Census Methodology for TANROADS, 2008.
ii. Pavement and Materials Design Manual, Ministry of Works 1999
iii. Martin Rogers, 2003. Highway Engineering, Ireland
iv. O`Flaherty,1991, Highway Engineering, London
29
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Trial pits log for subgrade soil alignments
30
IN-SITU SOIL SAMPLING AND MATERIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY
ROAD SECTION: KILINDONI- RASMKUMBI
ROAD LENGTH: 52.3 Km
Date: 4th -9th March 2019
CHAINAGE SAMPLE DEPTH LEGEND DESCRIPTION PHOTO
(km + m) NO. (mm)
0+000 LHS 1
light brown coarse gravel silty sand soil
300
G15
700
natural silty sand

1000
0+250 RHS 2
blackish silty sand topsoil
200
blackish silty sand
1000
0+500 CENTRE 3
light brown silty sand soil
350
natural whitish sand
1000
0+750 LHS 4
400
1000
1+00 RHS 5
blackish soil sand coarse gravel
300
whitish bolded gravel silty sand soil
450
whitish natural sand
1000
1+250 CENTRE 6
blackish soil sand/coarse gravel
400
whitish silty sand soil
1000
1+500 LHS 7
light brown silty sand soil,coarse gravel
400
whitish silty sand
1200
100 light brown soil sand
light brown silty sand soil (imported)

1+750 RHS 8
900
silty clay soil

1200
2+000 CENTRE 9
250 light brown soil sand,coarse gravel
450 natural whitish sand
natural silty sand soil
1000
2+250 LHS 10
blackish silty sand soil
200
natural whitish silty sand soil
1000
2+500 RHS 11
300 blackish soil sand
1000
2+750 CENTRE 12 150 blackish soil
brownish silty soil sand
300
greyish soil clay
1000
3+000 LHS 13
light brown soil (imported)
300
whitish silty sand soil (imported)

600
natural brown silty sand soil
1000
3+250 RHS 14 100 blackish silty sand soil

300
whitish natural sand
1000
3+500 CENTRE 15 100 blackish sand soil
1000
3+750 LHS 16
G15
300
1000
4+00 RHS 17
300
1000
300
whitish silty sand soil/improved subgrade
1000
4+500 LHS 19
light brown soil sand
200
natural light brown silty sand soil

500
brownish sand
1000
4+750 RHS 20
300 light brown imported soil sand gravely
white sand
1000

350
1000
5+250 LHS 22
light brown soil sand imported
300
blackish silty soil sand
450
greyish silty soil sand
1000
5+500 RHS 23 100 blackish soil
600
natural whitish sand soil
1000
5+750 CENTRE 24
light brown silty sand soil coarse gravel
400
1000
6+000 LHS 25 100 blackish soil

400
1000
6+250 RHS 26
350
1000
6+500 CENTRE 27 100 light brown soil
1000
6+750 LHS 28
light brown coarse gravel soil
300
800
darkish silty sand soil
1000
7+000 RHS 29 50 light brown silty sand soil
light brown silty soil sand
1000
7+250 CENTRE 30
light brown soil sand (imported)
200
light brown silty clayey soil sand
1000
7+500 LHS 31
300
light brown sand soil
1000
7+750 RHS 32
300
natural brownish silty sand soil
1000
8+000 LHS 33
300
1000
8+250 CENTRE 34
reddish silty sand soil
200
1000 light brown silty sand
8+500 LHS 35 100 light brown soil sand
1000 brownish silty sand soil

8+750 CENTRE 36
1000
9+000 RHS 37
1000
9+250 CENTRE 38
150
brownish silty sand soil
1000
9+500 LHS 39
blackish soil sand
150
1000
9+750 CENTRE 40
800
1000
10+000 RHS 41 100 light brown silty sand soil
1000
10+250 CENTRE 42
1000
10+500 LHS 43
blackish soil sand
200
1000
10+750 CENTRE 44
ligth brown silty sand soil
200
1000
11+000 LHS 45
300
1000
11+250 CENTRE 46
1000
11+500 LHS 47
blackish soil
200
1000
11+750 CENTRE 48
light brown soil sand coarse gravel
300
greyish silty sand soil
1000
12+000 RHS 49
blackish soil
150
1000
12+250 CENTRE 50
1000
12+500 LHS 51
blackish silty sand sol
300
1000
12+750 CENTRE
300
52
natural greyish silty sand soil
1000
13+000 RHS 53
200
natural light brown sand soil
1000
13+250 CENTRE 54
350
1000
13+500 LHS 55
blackish soil sand
150
1000
13+750 CENTRE 56
350
light grey silty sand soil
1000
14+000 RHS 57
light brown silty clayey sand soil
1000
14+250 CENTRE 58
light brown gravelly soil
350
1000
14+500 LHS 59
blackish soil
150
light brown sand soil coarse gravel
1000
14+750 CENTRE 60
400
1000
15+000 RHS 61
250
silty clayey sand soil
1000
15+250 CENTRE 62
300
1000
15+500 LHS 63 100 blackish soil
1000
15+750 CENTRE 64
300
1000
16+000 RHS 65
300
1000
16+250 LHS 66
300 light brown silty sand soil
1000
16+500 CENTRE 67
1000
16+750 RHS 68 100 light brown soil sand
1000
17+000 CENTRE 69
blackish soil
200
1000
17+250 LHS 70
200
1000
17+500 CENTRE 71
200
1000
17+750 LHS 72 100 brownish soil
1000
18+000 CENTRE 73
300
1000
18+250 RHS 74
300
1000
18+500 CNTRE 75
400
1000
18+750 RHS 76
light brown soil gravelly
400
natural blackish silty sand soil
1000
19+000 CENTRE 77
1000
19+250 LHS 78
G15
300
1000
19+500 CENTRE 79
blackish soil
150
1000
19+750 RHS 80
light brown soil coarse gravel
200
1000
20+000 CENTRE 81
200
blackish soil
400
1000
20+250 LHS 82 100 blackish silty sand soil
natural silty clay sand soil
1000
20+500 CENTRE 83
light brown gravelly soil
200
1000
20+750 RHS 84 100 light brown soil sand
light grey soil sand
1000
21+000 CENTRE 85
1000
21+250 LHS 86
brownish silty clayish soil sand
200
1000
21+500 CENTRE 87
light brown clayish soil sand
300
natural brownish sand soil
1000
21+750 RHS 88
200
1000
22+000 CENTRE 89 100
1000
22+250 LHS 90
250
light grey silty sand soil
1000
22+500 CENTRE 91
blackish soil
200
1000
22+750 RHS 92 100 brownish soil sand
1000
23+000 CENTRE 93
1000
23+250 LHS 94
light brown silty clayish sand soil
1000
23+500 LHS 95
light brown coarse graavel soil
300
1000
23+750 CENTRE 96
blackish soil sand
200
light brown silty clay sand soil
1000
24+000 RHS 97
300
brownish silty clay sand soil
1000
24+250 CENTRE 98
300
1000 natural brownish silty sand soil

24+500 LHS 99
blackish soil
250
1000 light brown soil sand clayish(water detected)
24+750 CENTRE 100
silty soil sand
1000
25+000 RHS 101
natural brownish soil sand
1000
25+250 CENTRE 102
200
brownish soil sand
1000
25+500 LHS 103

brownish silty clay soil sand
300
1000
25+750 CENTRE 104
brownish silty clayish sand soil
1000
26+000 RHS 105
blackish soil
300
natural brownish silty clay sand soil(water detected)
1000
26+250 CENTRE 106

light brown silty clayish soil
200
natural blackish soil
1000
26+500 LHS 107

blackish sand soil
300
1000
26+750 CENTRE 108
light brownish silty soil sand
300
brownish soil sand
1000
27+000 RHS 109

250
1000 natural whitish silty sand soil
27+250 CENTRE 110

300
1000 brownish soil sand

27+500 LHS 111
1000
27+750 CENTRE 112

200
1000 light grey silty sand soil
28+000 RHS 113

200
natural light grey silty sand soil
1000
28+250 CENTRE 114
300
1000
28+500 LHS 115

blackish soil
300
natural blackish silty clay soil sand
1000
28+750 CENTRE 116

light brown silty clayish soil sand
300
natural silty clayish soil sand
1000
29+000 RHS 117
light brown clay soil
150
brownish silty clay soil
1000
29+250 CENTRE 118

light brown coarse gravel soil sand
300
darkish clayish soil sand
1000
29+500 LHS 119

light brown clayish soil
200
1000
29+750 CENTRE 120
natural silty clay sand soil
1000
30+000 RHS 121

200
brownish silty soil sand
1000
30+250 CENTRE 122

blackish soil sand
300
yellowish soil
1000
30+500 LHS 123
blackish clayish soil
300
natural silty clay soil
1000
30+750 CENTRE 124

light brown silty clay soil
250
1000
31+000 RHS 125

blackish soil
300
yellowish clayish soil
1000
31+250 CENTRE 126
yellowish soil
200
1000
31+500 LHS 127

blackish silty clayish sand soil
250
yellowish silty clay soil sand
1000
31+750 CENTRE 128
yellowish silty clay soil,(black cotton)
1000
32+000 RHS 129
200
yellowish clayish soil
1000
32+250 CENTRE 130
1000
32+500 LHS 131

silty sand soil
200
brownish clayish soil
1000
32+750 CENTRE 132
silty clay sand soil
250
silty clay soil,(black cotton)
1000
33+000 RHS 133

light brown soil
300
1000
33+250 CENTRE 134

silty clay soil,(black cotton)
300
brownish clayish soil,(black cotton)
1000
33+500 LHS 135
blackish soil
300
silty clay soil
1000
33+750 CENTRE 136
natural blackish soil
1000
34+000 RHS 137 100 blackish soil
1000
34+250 CENTRE 138
1000
34+500 LHS 139
700
soft rock
1000
34+750 CENTRE 140

blackish soil
300
1000
35+000 RHS 141
200
700
boulders
1000
35+250 CENTRE 142

blackish gravel soil
300
boulders
1000
35+500 LHS 143

blackish soil
300
rock boulders
1000
35+750 CENTRE 144
300
reddish clayish soil sand
1000
36+000 RHS 145

light brown soil
300
1000
36+250 CENTRE 146

200
350
soft rock
1000
36+500 LHS 147
300
1000
36+750 CENTRE 148

200 blackish soil sand
natural brownish silty clay soil
1000
37+000 RHS 149

300
1000
37+250 CENTRE 150
250
1000
37+500 LHS 151

300
1000
37+750 CENTRE 152

300
natural brownish silty clay soil
1000
38+000 RHS 153
blackish silty clay soil
200
brownish silty sand
1000
38+250 CENTRE 154

blackish soil
300
1000
38+500 LHS 155

silty sand soil
300
yellowish clay soil
1000
38+750 CENTRE 156
200
1000
39+000 RHS 157

blackish soil sand
200
1000
39+250 CENTRE 158

blackish soil
200
1000
39+500 LHS 159
blackish soil
300
1000
39+750 CENTRE 160
1000
40+000 RHS 161-A

slity sand soil
200
1000
40+250 CENTRE 161-B
200
reddish clayish soil
1000
40+500 LHS 162

200
light brown clayish soil
1000
40+750 CENTRE 163
natural light brown fine gravel
1000
41+000 RHS 164
350
brownish soil sand
1000
41+250 CENTRE 165

300
1000
41+500 LHS 166

300
1000
41+750 CENTRE 167-A
200
1000
42+000 RHS 167-B

blackish soil
300
brownish soil
1000
42+250 CENTRE 168

silty sand soil
300
light brown soil
1000
42+500 LHS 169
250
brownish clay soil
1000
42+750 CENTRE 170
natural blackish silty sand
1000
43+000 RHS 171

blackish soil sand
300
light brown natural silty sand soil
1000
43+250 CENTRE 172
blackish soil sand
250
1000
43+500 LHS 173

blackish soil sand
300
1000
43+750 CENTRE 174

200
1000
44+000 RHS 175
blackish silty soil
250
1000
44+250 CENTRE 176 100 blackish silty sand soil
1000
44+500 LHS 177

blackish sand soil
300
1000
44+750 CENTRE 178
200
1000
45+000 RHS 179
300 blackish silty sand soil
1000 natural whitish silty sand soil
45+250 CENTRE 180

blackish silt sand soil
300
1000
45+500 LHS 181
350
1000
45+750 CENTRE 182

300
1000
46+000 RHS 183

350
1000
46+250 CENTRE 184
light brown soil, course gravel
300
rock
1000
46+500 LHS 185
brownish soil sand with boldered rocks
1000
46+750 CENTRE 186

light brown soil sand course gravel
300
bouldered rock
1000
47+000 RHS 187
1000
47+250 CENTRE 188

blackish soil sand course gravel
400
rock
1000
47+500 LHS 189
700
rock
1000
47+750 CENTRE 190 100 blackish soil/topsoil
reddish silty sand soil
1000
48+000 RHS 191

light brown soil with gravel
300
rock
1000
48+250CENTRE 192
whitish silty sand soil(powdered form)
1000
48+500 LHS 193 100 light brown brown soil with coarse gravel
rock
1000
48+750 CENTRE 194

whitish soil course gravel
250
rock
1000
49+000 RHS 195

light brown silty sand soil course gravel
250
rock
1000
49+250 CENTRE 196
brownish gravel with soil
200
rock
1000
49+500LHS 197
light brown soil with gravel
200
rock
1000
49+750CENTRE 198
200
light brown soil with coarse grvel
1000
light brown soil with coarse grvel
1000
50+000 RHS 199

400
rock
1000
Appendix 2: Detailed laboratory test results for subgrade soils
alignment
31
Appendix3: Borrow pit loggings and detailed laboratory test results
6.3.1 Borrow pit Logs
32
BORROW PIT NAME DEPTH(mm) LEGEND DESCRIPTION PHOTO
1. KANGA
200
light brown silty clayish soil,coarse gravel
1500
2. BWENI
300
yellowish brown soil sand gravelly
1700
3. JIMBO
light brown silty clayish sand soil
250
yellowish soil sand coarse gravel
1800
4. KIBAONI
300
brown yellowish soil sandcoarse gravel,
1600
6.3.2 Detailed Laboratory test results
33
Appendix 4: Sand pit loggings and detailed laboratory test results
6.4.1 Sand pit logs
34
SAND PIT NAME DEPTH(mm) LEGEND DESCRIPTION PHOTO
1. DONGO (existing sandpit)
150
white silt sand
1700
2. KIEGEANI(existing sandpit)
200
whitish sand
2000
2
3. KIRONGWE(existing sandpit)
200
whitish sand
2500
3
6.4.2 Laboratory test results
35
UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM DEPARTMENT OF STRUCTURAL AND CONSTR. ENG.
P.O.Box 35131 Tel 2410500/9 Ext. 2861
-~
~-
-~~~~
STRUCTURES AND BUILDING MATERIALS LABORATORY
TEST REPORT
COMPILATION OF TEST RESULTS (SAND FOR CONCRETE)

CLIENT: MHANDISI CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT :CONSULT ANCE SERVICES OF FEASIBILITY STUDY.
ENVIRONMENT &SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAILED ENGINEERING
DESIGN AND PREPARATION OF TENDER DOCUMENTS FOR THE UPGRADING
OF KILINDONI-RASIMKUMBI ROAD (52 .3KM) TO BITUMEN STANDARD
SAMPLE Type of BULK Specfic pH Chloride Sulfate Organic clay and

No Aggr DENSITY Gravity content content impurities silt content Loss on ignition
3
Kg/m3 kg/m % 'ro 'ro '}'0 %
SAND-KIEGEANI NR NR NR 0 .0064 0 .068 0.4 NR N.R
SAND-KIRONGWE NR NR NR 0 .0068 0 .062 0.7 NR N.R
SAND-DONGO NR NR NR 0 .0096 0 .036 1.0 NR N.R
LIMIT OF CLAY & SILT CONTENT (SAND) =< 3'}'o (TZS 58 Part 2:1980)
LIMIT OF CHLORIDE CONTENT =< 0.01 '}'o (BS 58 EN 12620: 2002+AL:2008) __ ..~..,-·:::-· ..•
LIMIT OF SULFATE CONTENT= < 0 . 2'}/o (BS EN 12620:2002 + AL:2008) .~·"~';,~~--~~·fl~ti~"~;,~~ri;~,?~~)'~
:\ . :i: (.~b·
;/.-§' •'·'I'·'·.f·E~/',}.'' '\
/ ·~ ~ ~
•.. 'f'<. v~ · - ·.:· • \\
'/) "'· ...
,;:. ::JI!-.-, 't" \ .,

l !- " ----- ,.,, -- , ~~ Gl ; , 1
N . R =Not requested r1 ~ .t r-ROf:.ATUKV uf s · r ·~ c - :z ~ :
COMMENT : Based on the test results, the samples are suitable for concreting purpos~ _I\ ILDIN~'!AT<"'•"
- -
~-)
•_!,
Date Signature HOL ;"t~ t. .c~~. 0 .n.w ... . ~-~~/
..,
----
"~"-- -~ -""" ! --v ,.., ., 1 t-, _,_.. ·
.........-
UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM
DEPARTMENT OF STRUCTURAL & CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING
[I]
Tel 2410500 /9 Ext. 2861 Telegram Univeng
Direct line 2410500 DarEs Salaam
Our reference SCE 2019 Fax 2410114
Your reference E-mail head ste @ce.udsm.ac.tz
TEST RESULTS
SIEVE ANALYSIS BS 882
CLIENT :MHANDISI CONSULT. ENG. PROJECT :CONSULTING SERVICE OF FEASIBILITY STUDY

ENVIRONMENT &SOCIAL IMP. ASSESSMENT DETAILED ENG.
ENG.DESIGN AND PREPARATION OF TENDER DOC.
TYPE OF MATERIAL: SAND PIT 1 DONGO FOR THE UPGRADING OF KILINDONI-RASIMKUMBI RD
)
TO BITUMEN STANDARD.
SAMPLE: NO 1 LAB NO: SCE 2019 DATE: 04/04/2019
Sample sand 4. 75mm

s/size mm 0.075 0.15 0.3 0 .6 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 20 37.5
Test 1 1497 1442 1455 1125 136 6 0 0 0 0 0
Test 2 1497 1441 1454 1125 136 6 0 0 0 0 0
Test 3 1496 1441 1453 1125 136 6 0 0 0 0 0
sum 4490 4324 4362 3375 408 18 0 0 0 0 0
'l'oRet 100 99 97 75 9 0 0 1 0 0 0
'ropass 0 1 3 25 91 100 100 100 100 100 100
zone 2 sieve curve for sand and grdlng limits for zone 2
lower limit zone 3 pper/Limit ZONE Sand
0.08 1 . 100
_,
.-- ......
0 0 90
0.15 0 10 3 .>
.!!
.t:
60
70
60
I
_,_ ..,..
en 50
"0
,,
0 .3 8 30 25 :5
40
30
_A' _/
en ..;';/
20
0.6 33 59 57 ."'
c:
'iii
c.
10
0
~
1.18 55 90 91 ;!. 0.075 0.15 0.3 0.6 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 19 37.5
s/slze
2 .36 75 100 100
4.75 90 100 100 I -- - - u p per limit zone 2 --Sand I
9 .5 100 100 100
19 100 100 100
37.5 100 100 100
...... ,,
Date ........ I/t/.?.::17.
.... .. ......... ...
Signature ~., .,
[I]
Direct line 2410500 Dar Es Salaam
TEST RESULTS
CLIENT :MHANDISI CONSULT . ENG. I PROJ~CT :CONSULTING SERVICE OF FEASIBILITY STUDY I

ENVIRONMENT &SOCIAL IMP.ASSESSMENT DETAILED ENG.
ENG.DESIGN AND PREPARATION OF TENDER DOC .
TYPE OF MATERIAL: SAND PIT 2 KIEGEANI FOR THE UPGRADING OF KILINDONI-RASIMKUMBI RD
Sample sand 4. 75mm

s/size mm 0.075 0.15 0.3 0.6 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 20 37.5
Test 1 1498 1496 1482 1391 1085 221 25 1 0 0 0
Test 2 1497 1495 1480 1391 1084 220 24 1 0 0 0
Test 3 1496 1494 1480 1390 1083 220 23 1 0 0 0
sum 4491 4485 4442 4172 3252 661 72 3 0 0 0
%Ret 100 100 99 93 72 15 2 0 0 0 0
'Yopass 0 0 1 7 28 85 98 100 100 100 100
lower limit zone 3 pper/limit ZONE Sand
~~f
1.18
I :1 I 1'!1 11111 11 1
55 90 85 ,'t 0.075 0.15 0.3 0.6 1.18
s/slze
2.36 4.75 9.5 19 37.5
2.36 75 100 98
4 . 75 90 100 100 I -- - - upper limit zone 2 - - Sand I
·-·· ·-...
9.5 100 100 100 -
19 100 100 100
37.5 100 100 100
~ ·~ "' j_ll.fiO~.i\'U"' -G· t.\f\1'tn•-~· · .., .,
,·c.o ~
. iiD\14 •i . .·.'
5/<J/.?:!.:.J'J........
Date .........
. ~;;., :.:;
;c:- '
.
S1gnature HOL!........ .. .... .. ............ .. ...........,.,~ ·:'"
' 1tt.
..; ....
., .h .,..,..,
"! -~ .:;,11/f.;tsn-.- Ol- ;;~~~:-~. -·
. . ~~·~:.,~ ==..---:-~
~
Direct line 2410500 Dar Es Salaam
TEST RESULTS
CLIENT :MHANDISI CONSULT. ENG. I PROJ,ECT :CONSULTING SERVICE OF FEASIBILITY STUDY I

ENVIRONMENT &SOCIAL IMP .ASSESSMENT DETAILED ENG.
ENG.DESIGN AND PREPARATION OF TENDER DOC.
TYPE OF MATERIAL:SAND PIT 3 KIRONGWE FOR THE UPGRADING OF KILINDONI-RASIMKUMBI RD
Sample sand 4. 75mm

s/size mm 0.075 0.15 0.3 0.6 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 20 37.5
Test 1 1497 1492 1456 1257 785 212 48 11 3 0 0
Test 2 1497 1492 1456 1255 785 210 48 11 3 0 0
Test 3 1496 1491 1455 1256 785 212 48 11 3 0 0
sum 4490 4475 4367 3768 2355 634 144 33 0 0 0
'Yo Ret 100 100 97 84 52 14 3 1 0 0 0
'ropass 0 0 3 16 48 86 97 100 100 100 100
~·
lower limit zone 3 pper/Limit ZONE Sand
Hl liHtfr
0.08 0 0 0
0.15 0 10 1
0.3 8 30 7
0.6 33 59 28 'iii
:::
10
0
c.
1.18 55 90 85 ~ 0.075 0.15 0.3 0.6 1. 18 2.36 4.75 9. 5 19 37.5
s/slze
2.36 75 100 98
100 100 -- --upper limit zone 2 --Sand I
4.75 90
9.5 100 100 100 . ~·~ -
.. . ,.....c-·.-..
~ -.
,_. .c ~)\/\11\~~ ·~1 ·~!1N;n~\j,~':~~.
19 100 100 100 /".;'<> ~ ..\r.. "1:5ll r1G IJfi· ,:· ' 'lt~ -,
~ ~·<- c"~·
··~\. ..,. ·L·r• d• ·,
l ~"'-
. >.,'!.! '1'<.7', ..•
37.5 100 100 100 ·'? "' , ·\
" ---~., ~.r·.~~r~~ ~~,·l.\\
-< :Z I ;
:n:
..., ..
J..fct./..?:PJ..i. . . ..
Date ............ ..
.','
AGGREGATE IMPACT VALUE
Client: MHANDISI CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Consultancy Service of Feasibility Study, Environmental and Social Impact

Project: Assessment, Detailed Engineering Design and Preparation of Tender Documents
for the Upgrading of Kilindoni- Rasimkumbi road (52 .3 Km) to Bitumen Standard
Material: Aggregate
Source
I
.,.No.
Date: 9/4/2019
Tested By: Yohane Lusega
Checked By: Marco M.Bisake
Approved By: Rachel Henry
Test 1 Test 2
WeiQht of dry sample (g) 350 .0 356.0
WeiQht retained on 2.36 mm sieve (Q) 277 .0 282 .0
Weight pasing 2.36 mm sieve (g) 73 .0 74 .0
Difference A- (b+c) I Nil Nil
Aggregate Impact value (%) 20.9 20 .8
AVERAGE AGGREGATE IMPACT VALUE(%) 21
Remarks
UNIVERSITY OF DARES SALAAM P.O. Box 35131

Transportation & Geotechnic Engineering Department Phone 2410500-9 ext 2839-40
Laborato
!.. ~
. ' .,
I. .J.
fJ .;;.:..t. ;;:_ ~; ·. ,.., '

• ' 1 \ ..: J
~·- ... : :.:. ~.1· :1 .~. .J ::~.~-&;

l)f~~- ~ .:.~~-.; :- .: -~ ~ £~'" -~- ~·:.~:~ ~ -,~~; ~·~a~:J
r: 0. Uox 3513 1
Dar-es-salaam··1anzania
AGGREGATE CRUSHING VALUE

Consultancy Service of Feasibility Study, Environmental and Social
Impact Assessment, Detailed Engineering Design and Preparation of
Project:
Tender Documents for the Upgrading of Kilindoni- Rasimkumbi road
(52.3 Km) to Bitumen Standard
Material: Aggregate
Sample No:
Date: 9/4/2019
ested By: Yohane Lusega
Approved By: Rachel Hen
Trial 1 Trial 2
Weight of dry sample (g) 2629 2710
Weight retained on 2.36 mm sieve (g) 2015 2075
Weight pasing 2.36 mm sieve (g) 614 635
Difference A- (b+c) Nil Nil
Aggregate Crushing value (%) 23.4 23.4
AVERAGE AGGREGATE CRUSHING VALUE(%) 23
Remarks
UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM P.O. Box 35131

ransportation & Geotechnic Engineering Department Phone 2410500-9 ext 2839-40
Highway Laboratory
r "''l'-'~'
. .J'tv ..
.,
'1
. ., ::
~
!·lc;·i·: ~l- ~tC:·::,1~ . :·t i·.:.' ~ . ··-;~J !.:r~~tor:v
':·· . .,. .,,., ......... , .~ -. ,,_.,, ·· ··~:,. · '] .,. ~..'1!''~1 ;;:;r., ·
tu . \\ .. J.1..~·· .. : :•.. ·'·:··• ~t.J l .:·:...... ,: \.\..t: .. ~.;........ t ... r- •·0
11
t.) ~:-~.\'\/f, .\"~~~-~~.'/ ;; f. t .... ,..'·. ~~/)··· ~...:·;J.a.'itHl
E 0. Btm :i::J D 1
Da!i'~es~r.;alaa.m ·· Tai11.ania
LOS ANGELES ABRASION TEST
CML TEST NO. 2.9, Ref. ASTM C 131-89

Consultancy Service of Feasibility Study, Environmental and Social Impact
Assessment, Detailed Engineering Design and Preparation of Tender
Project:
Documents for the Upgrading of Kilindoni - Rasimkumbi road (52.3 Km) to
Bitumen Standard
Date: 8/4/2019
Grading used A Number of Spheres 12
Test Results
Sieve size (mm) Weight

Passing Retained (g)
37.5 25.0 1254.0
25.0 19.0 1256.0
19.0 12.5 1250.0
12.5 9.5 1250.0
9.5 6.3
6.3 4.8
4.8 2.4
TOTAL A 5010.0
Retained on 4.75 mm 2650
Retained on 1. 70 mm after washing 653
Total coarser than 1.70 mm 8 3303
Percent Wear = [ (A-B)/A]*1 00 34.1
Remarks:

College of Engineering and Transportation Phone 241 0500-9 ext 2839-40
Transportation & Geotechnic Engineering Department Dar es Salaam
Highway Laboratory
~ -
JJ.l'l.CIU.GJl
• i X.Ji;.,-
JL.t6., '-·r~
•. ,.. . . ~; ~; •• · ' , , ·
....... . . . ... _ \
Dept. 0fTrmlSl':CTi::~! ~1: ,:: t ' . .-.: .. ..~·: ,il !>ti;;

Uru-.-er.sity '}f I ... •~2·· c" .·.: :·:. ..'. ,
~~ 0 . Bo<: 3.5131
Da.rooes'"SaJaam ~ Thnzanm
SPECIFIC GRAVITY AND WATER ABSORPTION OF
COARSE AGGREGATES
According to BS 812 Part 2

Consultancy Service of Feasibility Study, Environmental and Social impact Assessment, Detailed Engineering
Project: Design and Preparation of Tender Documents for the Upgrading of Kilindoni- Rasimkumbi road (52 .3 Km) to
Bitumen Standard
Material: Aggregate
Source:
Date: 9/4/2019
roved By: Rachel Henry
TEST RESULTS
Test 1 Test 2
Total weight of oven dry sample (g) A 1232.0 1144.0
Weight of saturated surface dry sample in air (g) B 1256.0 1166.0
Weight of saturated sample in water (g) c 771 .0 708 .0
BULK SPECIFIC GRAVITY AI(B-C) 2.540 2.498
MEAN BULK SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2.519
Bulk Specific Gravity saturated surface dry basis B/(B-C) 2.590 2.546
Mean Bulk Specific Gravity (Saturated surface dry basis 2.568
ABSORPTION PERCENT 100* (B-A)/A 1.948 1.923
IIJIEAN ABSORPTION PERCENT 1.94
P.O. Box 35131

Transportation & Geotechnic Engineering Department Phone 2410500-9 ext 2839-40
Highway Laboratory
I~·
~{1,.''; .-l>
'',-··;
u.• ,~ .-··. .·...· ·J. '
.. .. i.' ... . ~ ·
·, · ' .,1_,•o.
r.>ept. ornau£110l.~,.~: r. ;.. {:. ;.:.\-.. ~.):i:.jc' .:. \..:.~!;. ;
,l
UniVCl'Sit~}' vf:_:;,:;J-·C':>;;r~l2.".:.m
P. 0. B<'"- 35131
Dar-es·sa}aa111" -ranzanla
SOUNDNESS OF AGGREGATE BY USE OF SODIUM SULPHATE
CML TEST 2.1 0, Ref. ASTM C88 - 90

Consultancy Service of Feasibility Study, Environmental and Social Impact Assessment, Detailed
Project: Engineering Design and Preparation of Tender Documents for the Upgrading of Kilindoni-
Rasimkumbi road (52.3 Km) to Bitumen Standard
Material: Aggregate
Source:
Sample No:
Date: 9/4/2019
Tested By: Yohana J. Lusega -
Sieve size Weighed

Weight of test Percentage
Wt of original Grading of original average
fractions passing sieve
Retained sample retained sample corrected
Passing (mm) before testing used to
(mm) (gms) (percent) percentage
(gms) determine loss
loss
Soundness test of coarse Aggregates

63 50 0.00
50 37 .5 957.00
37 .5 25.0 308.00
52
25.0 19.0 716 .00
19.0 12.5 459.00
43 1040.70 0.89 0.39
12.5 9.5 134.77
9.5 4.75 57.33 4 303.00 7.80 0.33
Total 1367.10 100 0.71
REMARKS The soundness value of the sample is 0. 7%

COET Tel. 2410500/9
TGE Department Ext. 2538/40
Highway Laboratory - - - - - - - -- --
(..c...~.
. ,. .· ·'"
·
..... .. : ,:!U
f)ept. Of Trnl~T<::rt..:. : .: 1.'. '.i ~ . '::, . " ..
Univers.H:t of:i_u·-:::.:;-~ .~' __ :~_, ,
P. 0 . Bo3c35 13-].
Dar-es..saJ.a.am ·• T'.wzania
TEN PERCENT FINES VALUE

Consultancy Service of Feasibility Study, Environmental and Social Impact Assessment , Detailed
Project: Engineering Design and Preparation of Tender Documents for the Upgrading of Kilindoni - Rasimkumbi road
(52 .3 Km) to Bitumen Standard
Material: Aggregates
IS:ornnl<> No:
9/4/2019
By: Yohane Lusega
Marco M.Bisake
Rachel Henry
TEST RESULTS
TEST RESULTS ON OVEN DRY CONDITION Trial1 Trial2
Weight of material retained on 2.36mm (g) B 2288.0 2344.0
Weight of material passing through 2.36mm (g) c 258 .0 270 .0
Difference A -(B+C) 0.0 0.0
Ultimate load (x) 160 160
Percentage fines (C/A) 10.1 10.3
Mean percentage of fines (Y) 10.2
Load required to produce 10% Fines= 14X/(Y+4) kN 157
Remarks

liege of Engineering & Technolgy Phone 2410500-9 ext 2839-40
nsportation & Geotechnic Engineering Department
I ucJft~:\:,
!l.l u~..wl ......i.,)·"••"-·;. 1
OfTl"'""'"~()•'ii'·': ·~·t 'p.

r ...., .. , ....•
.:. -· .. \ .......• ...
t··.-;,
~ -. ·J'J
r)ept
, • ~.u...-...~t:J • .11. .. -:~·~_:-"' •- ·" ~:- ''"·"!'nic··~!
...... ~vL.I..v- ..~ .. - a:.t ED•'
·w
Umvers1ty m J..!.::.r~cs~s~~hnm
P. 0 . Box35131
Dar-es~salaam ~ Tanzania
TEN PERCENT FINES VALUE

Construction of Kitengule Bridge (140) and its Approach Roads (18km) under Design and Built Type of
Project:
Contract in Kagera Region
Material: Aggregates
3/12/2018
By: Yohane Lusega

TEST RESULTS
TEST RESULTS ON SSS CONDITION Trial1 Trial2
Weight of material retained on 2.36mm (g) B 2338.0 2410.0
Weight of material passing through 2.36mm (g) c 317.0 325.0
Difference A -(B+C) 0.0 0.0
Ultimate load (x) 150 150
Percentage fines (C/A) 11 .9 11.9
Mean percentage of fines (Y) 11 .9
Load required to produce 10% Fines= 14X/(Y+4) kN 132
Remarks
NIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM P.O. Box 35131

College of Engineering & Technolgy Phone 241 0500-9 ext 2839-40
f!{:;.c:•1 , .;,,-... ___,__ · - . - , ..... ..."!"'

.,.,. .... .....
l. __.j ...... • ..... . •,. • •• • \.• •-·
f)'ept
~.
or•p ..,..,, ~., ... ,...·: ... I,:, I '-. , •. .,.·z-,-!"'' 1 E···
.~~ a.~.:.... ..t·"'~-H...... lr..l~.... ~~· ... ·... ...... ~ .•.n\.-\..... t l . '••-~ . ~\
# ,.. ~
Univcrt;ilJ ~f .0--:·· -: !··-~~~:!{~:Sll.l

P. 0 . Bcx 35 .tH
Dar~es..Waam D Thnzania
COATING AND STRIPPING OF AGGREGATE MIXTURES
AASHTO DESIGNATION T 182-84

Construction of Kitengule Bridge (140) and its Approach Roads (18km) under
Project:
Design and Built Type of Contract in Kagera Region
Source:
Material: Aggregate
Date: 9/4/2019
Checked By:
1
Marco M. Bisake
THE ESTMATED COATED AREA IS ABOVE 95%

College of Engineering & Tecnhology P.O.Box 35131
Department of TGE Tel. 2410500/9 Ext. 2538/40
Highway Laboratory
( .~(;.
!)e,.;.t c:.
. . ...._,. , !'.:~~ .......ij 2...~~
Oui·.-.;.d.:. .. '.. .. .. , . J.:a::-:::1
p 0 . n::l:.tJU5l3 1
D<1r-es~saiaam ~ Th.uz..arua
Appendix 5: Water sources- Detailed laboratory test results
36
UNIVERSITY OF DARES SALAAM DEPARTMENT OF STRUCTURAL &
CONSTR ENGINEERING
STRUCTURES AND BUILDING MATERIALS LABORATORY
A
CLIENT: MHANDISI CONSULTING ENGINEERS CO.LTD
PROJECT: CONSULTANCY SERVICES OF FEASIBIUTY STUDY ENVIRONMENT &

SOCIAL IMPACT IMPACT ASSESSMENT, DETAILED ENGINEERING DESIGN AND
PREPARATION OF TENDER DOCUMENTS FOR THE UPGRADING OF KILINDONI-
RASIMKUMBI ROAD (52 .3KM) TO BITUMEN STANDARDS
Re: WATER: TEST NDAGONI BRIDGE/W ANGONI HIPPO DAM
On 27 MARCH 2019 The Building materials laboratory received two (2)

samples of water for testing the suitability of concreting
TEST RESULTS :
NDAGONI BRIDGE WANGONI HIPPO DAM
Acid content (pH) 6.58 6.81
Chloride (cn mg/1 50.0 10.0
Sulfate (S0 42+) mg/1 35.6 12.0
Magnesium(Mq 2+) mg/1 1.02 11.3
Ammonium (NH4+) mg/1 110 20
E/Conductivity_ - -- - - ---
50.2 81 -- - - --- -- - -
The values set by DIN 4030 for various attack are listed below.
AGGRESSIVE Degree of aggressiveness

COMPONENT
Very severe Slight Severe
Acids Ph 6.5-5.5 5.5-4.5 Below 4.5
Magnesium(Mg2+)mg/1 300-1000 1000-3000 Above 3000
Sulfate( So/ +)mg/1 200-600 600-3000 Above 3000
Ammonium (NH 4+) mg/1 15-30 30-60 Above 60
Chloride (CL-l mg/1 300-600 600-3000 Above 3000
According to the results obtained , the sample is suitable for concrete purpose
_. ·-· --.~~ ~.T-;·,\'1!V'"ri'·Ji:7'' J! C~-'
HO(":~~;~:.vG ~m 1H: .. ~.-~;~~~'\. Structures and Building Materials laboratory
~"-":~<"" ~-
' "' - \ .,..........-::'- <>' ~
••..•~ ...... .,.. ')'
~
;I "$• (
~
c.' \-~ .. ~
.M.
II
'•'. ~ ~ :\~~--
\.,. #
.. /i
,:l·t' J/ i"\..1'' u -~ . - :i ..
I• X,\. I , j>\ ol\ " ' ' . ~ • _./
~~·~ "' ~-. , \' \'-"

e;!'.;/
~
'{,.;; •'
., '· '
•,•.:t.fli',•?C•~' 0~_.;:;:
\- ._.~,,'(~.:,.··
"'"~~~~;(,;!'~;;::.. ;
Appendix 6: Laboratory test results- Initial Consumption of Lime
37
Appendix 7: Borrow pit Soil Plan
38
Consultancy services for Feasibility Study, Environment & Social Impact Assessment,
Detailed Engineering design and Preparation of Tender Documents for the Upgrading of
Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road (52.3Km) to Bitumen standards
BORROW PIT SOIL PLAN
Coordinates: 7 58’ 16’’ S

to KIEGEANI 39 41’ 32’’ E
Location: 7+400 km
1300m offset
KIBAONI BP
TP No. RHS
1 Test PI GM OMC MDD 95%-
Ch. 7+400 km
Pit (%) CBR
1 25 1.5 9.0 2040 24

1.3km offset
Excavated
2 25 1.5 7.0 2004 20
area
Classification(PMDM Class)
TP No. 2 G15
KILINDONI
1 Estimated area;
129,418m2
Estimated exploitable quantity;
302,904m3
2 Coordinates: 7 46’ 8’ S
JIMBO BP 39 51’ 18’’ E
to RASMKUMBI
Location: 30+500 km
1800m offset
LHS
TP No.
Test PI GM OMC MDD 95%-
1
Pit (%) CBR
1 22.9 1.3 9.5 1988 13

Ch. 30+500km
1.8km 2 20 1.3 13.6 1978 12

Excavated
area offset
G7
TP No. 2 Estimated area; 103,678m2
KILINDONI
214,387m3
3 Coordinates: 7 41’ 36’’ S
39 52’ 28’’ E
Location: 43+500 km
250m offset
RHS
to RASMKUMBI Test PI GM OMC MDD 95%-
Pit (%) CBR
BWENI
1 16 2.2 9.2 1900 15
BP TP No. 1
2 16 2.2 6.9 1800 14
km
Ch. 43+500
0.25km
offset Excavated G7 & G15
Estimated area;
TP No. 2 112,639m2
KILINDONI
250,015m3
4 Coordinates: 7 43’ 35’’ S

39 52’ 45’’ E
to RASMKUMBI Location: 36+800 km
KANGA
BP 400m offset
RHS
TP No. Test PI GM OMC MDD 95%-

1 Pit (%) CBR
Ch. 36+800km
1 24 2.2 11.2 1948 13
2 25 2.2 11.1 2000 18

0.4km
offset
G7 & G15
TP No. 2 Estimated area; 263,590m2

KILINDONI
658,975m3

Combined Material Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Combined Material Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The United Republic of Tanzania

Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication

Tanzania National Roads Agency

Consultancy services for Feasibility Study, Environment & Social Impact

DRAFT MATERIAL REPORT

Figure 2- 1: General Soil types in Mafia Island ..............................................................................................................3

Figure 3- 1: Design Depth requirement (Source: PMDM-1999) .....................................................................................7

Table 7- 1: Traffic loading summary ............................................................................................................................26

GPS Global Positioning System

PMDM Pavement Material and Design Manual

CML Central Material Laboratory

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

UDSM University of Dar es Salaam

CBR California Bearing Ratio

ACV Aggregate Crushing Value

AIV Aggregate Impact Value

TFV Ten Percent Fines Value

SSS Sodium Sulphate Soundness

LAA Los Angeles Abrasion

GDP Gross Domestic Product

VEF Vehicle Equivalence Factor

TLC Traffic Load Class

LGV Low Goods Vehicles

MGV Medium goods vehicles

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicles

VHGV Very Heavy Goods Vehicles

Project Location and Description

Figure 1- 1 : A map showing project route location

Soils and Topography

Figure 2- 1: General Soil types in Mafia Island

2.2.1 Regional Geology

2.2.2 Local Geology

Figure 2- 3: Specific Geological Map of Mafia Island

Figure 2- 4: Map showing Climatic Zones in Tanzania.

Subgrade Soils Alignment

3.2.1 Sampling of Subgrade Soil Alignment

Figure 3- 1: Design Depth requirement (Source: PMDM-1999)

3.2.2 Testing of Subgrade Soils Alignment

 Particle Size Distribution

3.2.3 Problem Soils on the Subgrade Alignment

3.3.1 The CUSUM Method to Establish Homogeneousness

Figure 3- 4: Homogenous sections of subgrade layer along Kilindoni-Rasmkumbi road.

3.3.2 Calculation of CUSUM against Chainage

90%-ile value CBR design-Section 1

(ii) Section 2 (Ch. 12+500 to 30+000)

(iii) Section 3 (Ch. 30+000 to 40+000)

CBR design- Section 4

(v) Section 5-to Rasmkumbi (Ch. 45+500-50+000)

90%-ile value CBR design- Section 5

Borrow Material sources

Table 3- 2: Location of Borrow pit areas and estimated quantities

Table 3- 3: Quality Classification of Borrow pit Materials

3.4.4 Materials for Embankment and Natural gravel

Table 3- 4: Requirement for fill and improved subgrade

Table 3- 5: Initial Consumption of Lime of the Selected Borrow Pits

1 Kibaoni km7+400, offset 40.3% 3.2% 0.39% 2.9% OK

Source: Pavement and Materials Design manual-1999, table 7.7

Figure 3- 7: Sample of hand crushed aggregates at Kanga quarry

Table 3- 6: Location of Sand pits and estimated quantities

Figure 3- 8: Grading envelope for Dongo sand pit.

Figure 3- 9: Grading envelope for Kiegeani sandpit.

Table 3- 7: Sand source test results and specification requirements

Table 3- 8: Summary test results for water samples collected