See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327234387

Beneath the Sands: A Glimpse of Engineering Geological Conditions of Dubai,

UAE: Advances in Engineering Geology: Education, Soil and Rock Properties,
Modeling

Chapter · January 2019

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-93142-5_14

CITATIONS READS

0 129

1 author:

Luke Brouwers
University of Pretoria
5 PUBLICATIONS   18 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Luke Brouwers on 15 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Beneath the Sands: A Glimpse
of Engineering Geological Conditions
of Dubai, UAE
Luke Bernhard Brouwers
Abstract
Recent large-scale civil infrastructure developments in
Dubai have led to the completion of remarkable engi-
neering feats. These achievements are only matched by
the aspirations of future projects, which continue to push
the boundaries of engineering by seeking bigger, stronger
and deeper developments while simultaneously being
more economical. However, future ground development
in Dubai faces unique challenges and information
currently available to assist engineers in solving these
problems is limited. To combat this, this paper presents
results from 87 boreholes drilled throughout Dubai. The
general lithographic sequence comprises of Quarternary
Aeolian sand deposits overlying the thinly bedded
calcareous sandstones of the Ghayathi Formation under-
lain by interbedded conglomerates and siltstones of the
Barzaman Formation before encountering the thinly
bedded claystones of the Gachsaran Formation. Labora-
tory results show that 90% of all unconfined compressive
strength (UCS) results classify as very weak or weaker
with an overall average UCS value and elastic modulus of
2.24 and 2058 MPa, respectively. The average bulk and
dry densities are 1960 and 1630 kg/m3, respectively, with
an average moisture content of 19%. Discussion of the
laboratory results illustrates some engineering geology
challenges currently being faced in site investigations for
Dubai and identify the important role engineering geol-
ogists and geotechnical engineers play in ensuring that
suitable site investigation methods and techniques are
performed correctly to ensure that an accurate and
thorough understanding of subsurface conditions is
obtained to minimize the associated risk of development.
L. B. Brouwers (&)
Fugro Middle East, Al Quoz Industrial Area, 2863 Dubai,
United Arab Emirates
e-mail: l.brouwers@fugro.com
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019
A. Shakoor and K. Cato (eds.), IAEG/AEG Annual Meeting Proceedings,
San Francisco, California, 2018—Volume 6, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93142-5_14




Keywords
Dubai Engineering geology Laboratory testing
Challenges
1 Introduction
The ever increasing and demanding civil infrastructure
development within Dubai and the United Arab Emirates
provide engineering geologists and geotechnical engineers’
with unique hazards and challenges. Information available to
combat these hazards and challenges is however sorely
lacking despite being of paramount importance in pushing
the boundaries of engineering for future aspiring projects.
This paper attempts to illustrate some of the challenges
currently being faced in Dubai and it is hoped that more
collaboration and research is inspired from this paper.
1.1 Regional Setting
The Arabian Gulf is a shallow elongated basin of Late
Pliocene to Early Pleistocene age and currently has water
depths rarely exceeding 100 m. The basin is asymmetric,
with a gentle slope on the Arabian side and a much steeper
slope on the Iranian side. The basin is bound on the north-
west and along the Iranian side by the Zagros mountain belt,
which is the central part of the Alpine-Himalayan chain.
During the late Cretaceous, a large compressive event
caused the obduction of the Oman-UAE ophiolite on the
eastern continental margin of the Arabian platform (Macklin
et al. 2012). Eustatic fluctuations of sea level during the
Quaternary, related to climate variations, resulted in shifting
shorelines along the relatively flat Arabian Gulf (Al-Sayari
and Zötl 2012).
During Pleistocene glaciations, global sea level was 100–
120 m below the present level and resulted in most of the
Arabian Gulf occurring as a dry basin (Purser 1973;
95
96
Gunatilaka 1986), except for a restricted area around the
Straits of Hormuz (Kirkham 1998). Surface sediments
exposed during this period experienced desiccation, oxida-
tion and over-consolidation of silt and clays while evapo-
ration of sea-water in shallow restricted basins (sabkhas) led
to hypersaline conditions and deposition of evaporites.
Alluvial plains, formed from the Tigris and Euphrates rivers
that incised the exposed topography (Gunatilaka 1986), were
a major source of aeolian siliciclastic sediment that was later
blown south-eastwards by the Pleistocene Shamal winds
(Glennie 1998).
Since late Pleistocene to early Holocene times, the sea
level rose gradually until a maximum sea level stand 1.6–
2.5 m higher than today (Gunatilaka 1986). Due to the
gentle slope of the gulf on the Arabian side, a shallow
marine environment with little sediment influx from the arid
mainland resulted in sediments with biogenic origin and
high carbonate content consisting of relatively pure car-
bonate clay, silt and sand that are generally unconsolidated.
The Gulf then experienced the interaction of three equally
important depositional systems throughout
Pleistocene-Holocene time, namely, the Arabian Gulf marine
carbonate system, the Mesopotamian fluvio-deltaic system,
and the Arabian continental aeolian system (Walkden and
Williams 1998; Williams and Walkden 2002).
1.2 Dubai Geology
A generalised overview of the Arab peninsular and stratig-
raphy of geology in Dubai is presented in Fig. 1. The near
surface geology of coastal Dubai begins with Quaternary
marine, aeolian, sabkha and fluvial deposits overlying vari-
ably cemented Pleistocene calcareous sandstone and
cemented sand deposits of the Ghayathi Formation; where
small changes in sea level during this period exposed the
sand layers to the atmosphere leading to evaporation and
chemical carbonate cementation (Williams and Walkden
2002).
Below this, is a thick succession of fluvial sediments
characterized by poorly sorted conglomerates and interbed-
ded calcisiltites belonging to the Barzaman Formation
probably formed during the middle Miocene to Pliocene age
(Styles et al. 2006). Uplift and erosion of the Oman moun-
tains during this time resulted in coarse-grained sediments
being deposited in wadi channels and outwash plains during
wet periods; during the intervening dry season, high evap-
oration rates and capillary rise of dissolved carbonates
resulted in variable cementation of these sediments (Macklin
et al. 2012). These conglomerates are dominated by clasts of
harzburgite, chert and limestone while the carbonate cement
L. B. Brouwers
is now composed predominately of dolomite with minor
calcite and substantial portions of the clay mineral
palygorskite.
Underlying the Barzaman Formation is a small compo-
nent of the Fars Group also known as the Gachsaran For-
mation. The Gachsaran Formation is dominantly composed
of thinly to thickly interbedded brownish to greenish grey
siltstone and claystone (Macklin et al. 2012) with high
gypsum content and thin to thick beds of gypsum also
present.
1.3 Borehole Selection
A large number of boreholes have been drilled throughout
the Dubai region (FME 2017). However, selection for fur-
ther analysis in this paper was limited to boreholes that
satisfied the following criteria:
(1) Minimum borehole depth of 40 m;
(2) Borehole groupings with small geographical clustering
to be representative of ground conditions;
(3) Borehole logs containing detailed and full core
descriptions (i.e. description of geological formations);
(4) Multiple laboratory results present within each borehole
for a range of laboratory tests; and
(5) Author involved in the project(s).
2 Results
2.1 Overview
In total 87 boreholes satisfied the selection criteria drilled in
2016 and 2017, with core being recovered in plastic liners
with guar gum drilling fluid. From the recovered core, the
results for 506 uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) and 233
UCS local strain measurement laboratory tests following the
ASTM D7012 standard were compiled, filtered and sepa-
rated into the corresponding lithologies and geological for-
mations. Further analysis of this separation is presented later
in this paper. Figure 2 shows a histogram for the UCS
results for all 739 samples and following the British stan-
dards 5930:2015, 24% of the results occur below 0.6 MPa
(i.e. soil), while 11% classify as extremely weak rock, 55%
classify as very weak rock and 10% classify as weak rock.
Overall, for all laboratory results, the average UCS value and
elastic modulus is 2.24 and 2058 MPa respectively. The
average bulk and dry densities are 1960 and 1630 kg/m3
respectively, with an average moisture content of 19%.
Beneath the Sands: A Glimpse of Engineering … 97

Fig. 1 Generalised overview of Dubai stratigraphy (after Macklin et al. 2012)

Fig. 2 Histogram for all UCS

results
98
2.2 Ghayathi Formation
Samples of the Ghayathi Formation occurred in 73 boreholes
with 256 UCS, 133 UCS local strain measurement and
additional 40 direct shearbox tests performed. A summary of
the laboratory results is presented in Table 1. Generally the
Ghayathi Formation was described as: extremely weak to
very weak, light yellowish brown, fine to medium grained,
highly calcareous sandstone. Partially (slightly) weathered.
The UCS values were generally independent of moisture
content. From the UCS values, 37% of the samples returned
strengths less than 0.6 MPa (i.e. soil) while 13%, 45% and 5%
are classified as extremely weak, very weak and weak rock
respectively. The average elastic modulus determined for the
Ghayathi Formation sandstones was 1987 MPa. There was
moderate amount of scatter in elastic modulus values, as seen
in Fig. 3, however a correlation factor of E = 1116.7  UCS
with R2 value of 0.44 can be empirically used.
2.3 Barzaman Formation
Samples of the Barzaman Formation occurred in 41 bore-
holes and described as three lithologies, namely
siltstone/calcisiltite, conglomerate and claystone/calcilutite.
A total of 67 UCS and 26 UCS local strain measurement
tests were performed on siltstone samples, 91 UCS and 33
UCS local strain measurement tests were performed on
conglomerate samples and 3 UCS tests were performed on
claystone samples. A summary of the laboratory results is
presented in Table 2. Generally the siltstone layers was
described as: very weak, off-white to light yellowish brown
mottled greyish green, siltstone/calcisiltite, partially
(slightly) weathered; and the conglomerate layers described
as: very weak, light to dark brown mottled multi-coloured,
matrix dominated, polymitic conglomerate. Partially
(slightly) weathered, matrix of silt and sand, clasts are, sub-
angular to sub-rounded, medium to coarse gravel of differ-
ent lithologies.
The UCS values were generally independent of moisture
content. From the UCS values, 14% of the siltstone samples,
11% of the conglomerate samples and 100% of the claystone
Table 1 Summary of Ghayathi Formation laboratory results
Moisture Bulk density Dry density
content (%) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3)
Minimum 2.3 1.40 1.21
Maximum 44 2.39 2.25
Average 18 1.97 1.68
L. B. Brouwers
samples returned strengths less than 0.6 MPa (i.e. soil).
Additionally 10%, 57% and 19% of the siltstone samples
classify as extremely weak, very weak and weak rock
respectively; and 11%, 67% and 11% of the conglomerate
samples follow the same classification. The average elastic
modulus determined for the siltstone and conglomerate was
2029 and 1600 MPa respectively. There was moderate
amount of scatter in elastic modulus values for both
lithologies, as seen in Fig. 4, however a correlation factor of
E(siltstone) = 537.49  UCS with a R2 value of 0.33 can be
empirically used for siltstone and a correlation factor of
E(conglomerate) = 568.39  UCS with a R2 value of 0.56 can
be empirically used for conglomerates.
2.4 Gachsaran Formation
Samples of the Gachsaran Formation occurred in 26 bore-
holes with 89 UCS and 41 UCS local strain measurement
tests performed. A summary of the laboratory results is
presented in Table 3. Generally the Gachsaran Formation
was described as: very weak, thinly laminated, light yel-
lowish brown to dark greenish grey mottled yellow and
orange, claystone/calcilutite with occasional light greyish
white thin veins and beds of gypsum. Fresh
The UCS values were generally independent of moisture
content. From the UCS values 5% of the samples returned
strengths less than 0.6 MPa (i.e. soil) while 5%. 75% and 15%
are classified as extremely weak, very weak and weak rock
respectively. The average elastic modulus determined for the
Gachsaran Formation claystone was 2516 MPa. There was
high amount of scatter in elastic modulus values, as seen in
Fig. 5, however a correlation factor of E = 652.67  UCS
with R2 value of 0.36 can be empirically used.
3 Discussion—Current Challenges
Gaining knowledge on the depositional environments and
geological formations encountered in the Arab gulf can be
achieved through literature originating from oil and gas
sector. However, as one deviates to alternative sectors, such
UCS Elastic modulus Poisson’s Direct
(MPa) (MPa) ratio Shearbox
c′ /
(KPa) (°)
0.03 27 0.10 0 22
10.30 9793 0.47 22 34
1.58 1987 0.26 3 30
Beneath the Sands: A Glimpse of Engineering … 99

Fig. 3 Ghayathi Formation sandstone elastic modulus versus UCS

Table 2 Summary of Barzaman Formation laboratory results

Moisture Bulk density Dry density UCS Elastic modulus Poisson’s
content (%) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3) (MPa) (MPa) ratio
Siltstone/calcisiltite Minimum 2.2 1.32 0.97 0.10 79 0.14
Maximum 56 2.21 2.04 15.70 4756 0.48
Average 25 1.90 1.54 3.15 2029 0.33
Claystone/calcilutie Minimum 24 1.50 1.09 0.10 – –
Maximum 50 2.00 1.81 0.40 – –
Average 37 1.72 1.27 0.23 – –
Conglomerate Minimum 8.9 1.56 1.21 0.10 195 0.17
Maximum 38 2.28 2.09 12.26 4914 0.48
Average 22 1.93 1.59 2.45 1600 0.30

as geotechnical, the available literature reduces greatly;
which is a worrying scenario due to the rapid expansion of
Dubai and the United Arab Emirates. The need for this
invaluable knowledge on geotechnical properties and haz-
ards is even more paramount than ever, where engineering
geologists and geotechnical engineers are currently chal-
lenged to evaluate ground conditions for increasingly
demanding infrastructure developments while simultane-
ously maintaining economic and safe designs.
Perhaps the biggest challenge currently being faced in
Dubai, as indicated by the laboratory results presented in this
paper, is the strength of the rocks: where, 90% of the UCS
laboratory results return values of less than 5.0 MPa. This
presents a two fold challenge to ground investigation
professionals, namely, sampling and deformation of the
rocks encountered in Dubai. During sampling of such weak
material, it is not surprising to retrieve minimal to no core
recovery. Core that is recovered is further treated with great
care in order to protect the rock for laboratory testing to
determine geotechnical parameters. However, the applica-
bility of standard laboratory testing techniques used can be
queried due to the inherent properties of the material, which
are a result of the recent geological depositional environ-
ments of the rocks. Acknowledging and understanding the
unique depositional environment indicates that a separate
classification scheme may be required for these rocks, where
laboratory determined geotechnical parameters should be
correlated to the rock mass behaviour that may exhibit
100 L. B. Brouwers

Fig. 4 Barzaman Formation

conglomerate, siltstone elastic
modulus versus UCS

Table 3 Summary of Gachsaran Moisture Bulk Dry UCS Elastic Poisson’s

Formation laboratory results content density density (MPa) modulus ratio
(%) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3) (MPa)
Claystone/calcilutite Minimum 0.5 1.60 1.15 0.07 78 0.12
Maximum 47 2.42 2.25 19.10 9863 0.44
Average 24 1.94 1.58 3.21 2516 0.32

Fig. 5 Gachsaran Formation

claystone elastic modulus versus
UCS
Beneath the Sands: A Glimpse of Engineering …
behaviour that is different to current predictions using the
current classification schemes as they fail to appreciate the
unique geological setting of the Arabian peninsular.
Due to the rocks lack of strength, improved sampling
techniques need to be developed that maintain the in situ
properties of the weak material being extracted out of the
ground for further laboratory analysis. Improved laboratory
testing methods also need to be developed for weak rocks
with minimal sample requirement for replacing the Point
Load test which becomes invalid once strength of the rock
occurs below a minimum threshold as stated in ASTM
D5731:16, “Test method applies to medium strength rock
(compressive strength over 15 MPa)”. One such potential
method is the needle penetration test which shows promising
applicability to weak rocks (Ulusay et al. 2013), These
specialised tests for weak rocks however are not generally
well known and a greater emphasis needs to be placed on
educating geotechnical clients for improved interpretation of
subsurface conditions. Alternatively, the use of geophysical
or destructive drilling (i.e. instrumented monitored drilling)
offers a potential solution to this ‘lack of strength’ challenge
by presenting an accurate representation of ground condi-
tions through developing a database of interpreted results
and actual ground conditions post site investigation to allow
back analysis to develop accurate correlations.
If sample recovery is minimal and validity of laboratory
results is tentative, then perhaps all that remains is the core
loggers’ interpretation described in borehole log descrip-
tions. Should a competent core logger be able to adhere
accepted logging standards, then reasonable confidence can
be allocated to the borehole logs in evaluation of subsurface
conditions. However, the most important question that
should then cross an engineering geologists’ or geotechnical
engineers’ mind is: what is the purpose of the investigation.
While it is paramount to follow internationally recognised
core logging standards to ensure conformity within the
geotechnical community, it is more important to have a clear
understanding of the purpose of the investigation. This will
influence the amount of detail afforded to core logging and
core measurement such as RQD, which presents an inter-
esting argument to this region where by blindly following
logging standards, the definition of RQD may be overlooked
(Deere and Deere 1989). Following the correct RQD defi-
nition could unfairly penalise the rock mass in this geolog-
ical setting and not give a true representation of ground
conditions. Currently, however, there is no accepted alter-
native measurement method available, supporting the notion
for a separate classification scheme and form of measure-
ment for materials in this geological setting.
101
4 Conclusion
Information available to assist engineering geologists and
geotechnical engineers to evaluate potential hazards and
challenges in Dubai is limited. However, the need of such
information is paramount due to the rapid civil infrastructure
development in Dubai. This paper compiles and presents a
laboratory results and general geological descriptions of 87
boreholes drilled throughout Dubai. The general stratigraphy
of Dubai consists of Quarternary Aeolian sand deposits
overlying thinly bedded calcareous sandstones of the
Ghayathi Formation underlain by interbedded conglomerates
and siltstones of the Barzaman Formation before encoun-
tering the thinly bedded claystones of the Gachsaran For-
mation. Analysis of laboratory results involved separation
into the appropriate identified geological units and compar-
ison of UCS, elastic modulus, moisture content, bulk and dry
density. Overall all UCS results classify 90% of the rocks as
very weak or weaker with an overall average UCS value and
elastic modulus of 2.24 and 2058 MPa respectively. The
average bulk and dry densities are 1960 and 1630 kg/m3
respectively, with an average moisture content of 19%. The
lack of strength highlights a current challenge that needs to
be addressed in accurately portraying subsurface conditions
through improved sampling, classification and laboratory
testing techniques in evaluating rock mass behaviour for
such weak rocks. Recognition of the inherent hazards caused
by subsurface conditions in Dubai emphasise the important
role engineering geologists and geotechnical engineers play
in ensuring that suitable site investigation methods and
techniques are performed correctly to ensure that an accurate
and thorough understanding of subsurface conditions is
obtained to minimize the associated risk of development.
References
Al-Sayari, S.S., Zötl, J.G. (eds.): Quaternary Period in Saudi Arabia: 1:
Sedimentological, Hydrogeological, Hydrochemical, Geomorpho-
logical, and Climatological Investigations in Central and Eastern
Saudi Arabia. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin (2012)
ASTM D5731-16: Standard Test Method for Determination of the
Point Load Strength Index of Rock and Application to Rock
Strength Classifications. ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA (2016)
ASTM D7012-14: Standard Test Methods for Compressive Strength
and Elastic Moduli of Intact Rock Core Specimens under Varying
States of Stress and Temperatures. ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA (2014)
Deere, D.U., Deere, D.W.: Rock Quality Designation (RQD) After
Twenty Years. Don U Deere, Gainesville (1989)
102
Fugro Middle East [FME]: Geotechnical database (2017)
Glennie, K.W.: The Desert of Southeast Arabia: A Product of
Quaternary Climatic Change. Quaternary Deserts and Climatic
Change, pp. 279–291. Balkema, Rotterdam (1998)
Gunatilaka, A.: Kuwait and the Northern Arabian Gulf-a study in
quaternary sedimentation. Episodes 9(4), 223–231 (1986)
Kirkham, A.: A Quaternary proximal foreland ramp and its continental
fringe, Arabian Gulf, UAE. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 149(1),
15–41 (1998)
Macklin, S., Ellison, R., Manning, J., Farrant, A., Lorenti, L.:
Engineering geological characterisation of the Barzaman formation,
with reference to coastal Dubai, UAE. Bull. Eng. Geol. Env. 71(1),
1–19 (2012)
Purser, B.H.: Sedimentation around bathymetric highs in the southern
Persian Gulf. In: The Persian Gulf, pp. 157–177. Springer, Berlin
(1973)
View publication stats
L. B. Brouwers
Styles, M., Ellison, R., Arkley, S., Crowley, Q.G., Farrant, A.,
Goodenough, K.M., McKervey, J., Pharaoh, T., Phillips, E.,
Schofield, D., Thomas, R.J.: The geology and geophysics of the
United Arab Emirates. vol. 2, Geology (2006)
Ulusay, R., Aydan, Ö., Erguler, Z.A., Ngan-Tillard, D.J.,
Seiki, T., Verwaal, W., Sasaki, Y., Sato, A.: ISRM suggested
method for the needle penetration test. In: The ISRM Suggested
Methods for Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring: 2007–
2014, pp. 143–155. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland
(2013)
Walkden, G., Williams, A.: Carbonate ramps and the pleistocene-recent
depositional systems of the Arabian Gulf. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec.
Publ. 149(1), 43–53 (1998)
Williams, A.H., Walkden, G.M.: Late Quaternary highstand deposits of
the southern Arabian Gulf: a record of sea-level and climate change.
Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 195(1), 371–386 (2002)