Geotechnical Report for 35m Telecom Tower

REPORT
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR 35M HIGH

TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER
AT BELLE MARE, MAURITIUS
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
REPORT
PREPARED FOR
CHEUNG CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD.
PREPARED BY
CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERS & GEOCSCIENTISTS,
MAURITIUS
PROJECT NO.: MU157-2016
SUBMITTED ON
A world of AUGUST 24, 2016
innovative solutions
delivered locally
REPORT
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR 35M HIGH
TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER
AT BELLE MARE, MAURITIUS
Prepared for:
CHEUNG CONSULTING
ENGINEERS LTD.
Prepared by:
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers & Geoscientists

Tel: (230) 5290 1350, Email:geocrustltd@yahoo.com
www.geocrust.com
Submitted on
August 24, 2016
Revision Issued Issued by Descriptions Prepared by Reviewed &

No. date Approved by
0 August GK Geotechnical Investigation GK CA

24, 2016 Report for Comments
This report was prepared by GeoCrust Ltd. for the exclusive use of Cheung Consulting Engineers Ltd.
and / or their representatives and may not be produced in whole or in part, or used or relied upon in
whole or in part by any party other than Cheung Consulting Engineers Ltd. for any purpose
whatsoever without the express permission of Cheung Consulting Engineers Ltd. in writing.
CLIENT:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Description Page
No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................2

1.1 SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION ..............................................................2
1.2 PROJECT INFORMATION & SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................3
1.3 PROJECT SITE LOCATION .....................................................................................................3
1.4 DESKTOP STUDY (REGIONAL GEOLOGY OF THE SITE) ...................................................3
2.0 SITE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM ..........................................................................................3
2.1 EXPLORATORY TRIAL PITS ........................................................................................4
3.0 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ..............................................................................................4
4.0 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERISTICS OF STRATA .................................................................4
5.0 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS ..................6
5.1 GENERAL ....................................................................................................................................6
5.2 TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATION............................................................................6
5.3 GUIDELINES FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN .......................................................................................7
5.4 EXCAVATIONS AND GROUNDWATER CONTROL .............................................................................8
5.5 BACKFILL AND COMPACTION OF FILL ............................................................................................8
5.6 SURFACE DRAINAGE....................................................................................................................8
5.7 INSPECTION AND MONITORING ......................................................................................................9
6.0 REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................9
7.0 CLOSURE ...............................................................................................................................10
Page 1 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

at Belle Mare, Mauritius
CLIENT:
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation conducted on behalf of CHEUNG
CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD. on August 12, 2016 for the proposed 35m high telecommunication
tower construction at Belle Mare, Mauritius. The consulting geotechnical engineering services of
GEOCRUST LTD (Consulting Geotechnical Engineers & Geoscientists) were retained by
CHEUNG CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD. to carry out geotechnical investigation field investigation
and report preparation services for the proposed Telecommunication tower construction. This report is
being written to provide guidelines for foundation design.
The tests and terminologies used in this report are according to BS 8004:1986 and BS5930: 1999+A2
2010. The site investigation and recommendations generally follow accepted practices for geotechnical
engineering. The format and contents are guided by the client’s specific needs as per agreed scope of
work. Presented herein are the results of our findings (such as subsoil conditions and groundwater
condition) along with comments and recommendations are pertaining to guidelines for foundation
design aspects.
1.1 SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION
The purpose of these services is to determine subsurface ground conditions and geotechnical
engineering recommendations based on scope of work relative to:
 Subsurface soil conditions to exploration depths;

 Subsurface water conditions to exploration depths; and
 Bearing capacity of subsoil for foundation design and construction of Tower
Foundation
In order to accomplish these objectives, the following scopes of work have been included in
accordance with client’s project requirements:
 Excavation of 1 No. of test pit;

 Geotechnical Logging of Subsurface Strata;
 In-situ Dynamic Penetration Testing (DCPT);
 Engineering classification of soil/rock and engineering evaluation of soil/rock
properties;
 Evaluation of Bearing Capacity of Foundation and engineering recommendations; and
 Geotechnical Investigation Report Preparation.

CLIENT:
1.2 PROJECT INFORMATION & SITE DESCRIPTION
It is understood that the proposed structure will consist of a 35m height, telecommunication self-
supporting steelwork Tower. It is understood that a raft foundation (approximately L=10m, B=10m, 1.0
m thick) at 1.0 to 2.5 m below existing ground level is being considered to be preferred option for
support the tower. It is assumed that the volume above the foundation as well as below the raft
consists of consolidated/compacted earth (engineered earth)/aggregates as per standard practices.
Based on our observation during field visit the topography of the site is flat.
It is our understanding that the proposed construction of tower will comply with standard design and
specifications. It is assumed that the telecommunication tower facilities will be of pre-fabrication
construction material (structural steel, metal panel etc.)
1.3 PROJECT SITE LOCATION
The project site is located at Belle Mare, Mauritius. The general location of the site is presented in
Figure 1 (Appendix A): Vicinity Map and Figure 3 (Appendix A): Land use Map.
1.4 DESKTOP STUDY (REGIONAL GEOLOGY OF THE SITE)
The project site under ground investigation belongs to Recent volcanic formation. The geological map
(Giorgi, Loicc-1999) presented in the Figure 4 (Appendix A), which shows location of project site.
The project site consists of Lithosols (Rock land) Soils (Published Notes on the 1:100,000 soil map of
Mauritius by parish et. al. 1965) is presented in Figure 5 (Appendix A). The exploratory test hole
subsurface strata (residual soil, basalt rock) confirmed the geological and soil profile described in the
published records.
2.0 SITE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM
The site investigation consisted of one trial pit at the proposed Tower construction site. The location of
the site in conjunction with this investigation is also presented on Figure 2 (Refer to Appendix A):
Google Location. A general description of the present scope of work carried out is presented in the
following sections. The field investigations performed is shown in the Table 1.
TABLE 1: DETAILS OF FIELD INVESTIGATION PERFORMED
Trial Pit Depth of Trial In-situ Test (DCPT) & Depth (m) of the test
No. Pit (m) below existing ground level
TP-1 1.10 DCPT Test was not able to performed due to the
presence of Strong Basalt Bedrock from 0.45m,
hammering through bed rock was done to 1.10m
depth and hammering stop due to end refusal.

CLIENT:
2.1 EXPLORATORY TRIAL PITS
One no. of trial pit was excavated on the project site using excavator CAT 428F using hammer when
rocky mass encountered during excavation. The exposed subsoil were inspected and logged after
completion of excavation. The logging of subsoil profiles were carried out by an engineering geologist
in accordance with “Geological Society Engineering Group Working Party Report on The Logging of
Rock Cores for Engineering Purposes” &“Code of Practice for Site Investigation: BS 5930”. In-situ
test (dynamic cone penetration test) was not carried out because of strong basalt bedrock. The
geotechnical logs of trial pits together with photographs are attached in Appendix B. The trial pit was
backfilled with adequate compaction with layer thickness 300 mm using backhoe bucket immediately
after completion of investigation.
3.0 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
Groundwater affects many elements of the foundation design and construction, so that the ground
water level was generally observed from surrounding ground water condition. Groundwater
observations are presented on the trial pit log in the Appendix B. It must be recognized that
groundwater levels are subject to seasonal and annual fluctuations depending on many factors such
as precipitation, water line break, surface drainage, rise in sea level and hydrogeology of the area. A
contingency amount should be included in the construction budget to allow for the possibility of
variations in groundwater conditions, which may result in modification of the design, and/or changes in
construction procedures. Groundwater level was not encountered in the exploratory trial pit to the
maximum exploratory depth. Groundwater observations are presented on the trial pit Logs (Appendix
B).
4.0 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERISTICS OF STRATA
The general soil profile encountered at this site was, in descending order: topsoil, silty gravel or
gravelly silt (residual soil) and strong to very strong basalt bedrock. Detailed subsoil conditions
encountered in trial location is described on the trial pit log in Appendix B. These boundaries are
intended to reflect transition zones for the purposes of geotechnical design and should not be
interpreted as exact planes of geological change. The soil and rock test results and definitions of the
terminology and symbols used on the trial pit logs are provided on the Explanation of Terms and
Symbols sheets also in Appendix B. The following is a brief description of the soil types encountered.
4.1 Ground Profile & Engineering Properties
One trial pit was excavated at the project site to investigate the ground condition. For the purpose of
foundation design, the subsoil ground profile is presented on the basis of the stringent case as follows:
0.00-0.25m: Soft to firm, light to dark brown colour, GRAVELLY SILT with plenty of plant
rootlets (Topsoil);
0.25-0.45: Firm, dark brown colour, SILTY GRAVEL / GRAVELLY SILT with gravels, cobbles
and occasional boulders, (Pocket penetrometer [PP] reading = 2.0 – 3.0 kg/cm2);

CLIENT:
0.45-1.10m: Strong to very strong (S-VS), light grey to dark grey with yellowish to purple
discolouration, fine grained, vesicular BASALT ROCK of moderately to highly weathered.
.
The following is a brief description of the engineering properties subsurface strata types encountered.
4.1.1 Topsoil
A 25 mm thick surficial topsoil layer was encountered in trial pit location. The topsoil was organic, light
to dark brown and dry to slight moist. Based on observations and experience, this topsoil may be of
variable thicknesses at different locations. In general, these organic soils are considered to be weak
and compressible under load. Topsoil (if any) is not suitable as a founding material or for use as
engineered fill. Consequently, it should be removed from the foot print area of any structures.
4.1.2 Silty Gravel / Gravelly Silt (Residual Soil)
Residual silty gravel/gravelly silt was encountered below topsoil in trial pit location extending to depth
of 0.45 m below grade. The silty clay/clayey silt was low to medium plastic. These deposits were of firm
consistency based on site observation, Pocket penetrometer [PP] reading was noted 2.0 – 3.0 kg/cm2,
average shear strength of 75 kPa, unit weight=18 KN/m3 & internal angle of friction (Ø) = 200.
4.1.3 Basalt Bedrock
Strong to very strong basalt bedrock of different weathering grade was encountered below silty
gravel/gravelly silt residual soil at 0.45 m depth below grade. BASALT bedrock was of moderately to
highly weathered, estimated UCS=25 to 75 Mpa, unit weight=20 - 21 KN/m3 and internal angle of
friction (Ø) = 32 to 380. The competency of the bedrock increased with depth. In general, the volcanic
bed rock has been classified according to Rock Quality Designation (RQD): RQD less than 50%
belongs to weak rock category and RQD greater than >50% belongs to strong rock category.

CLIENT:
5.0 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND ENGINEERING

RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 GENERAL
The following section of the report presents our interpretation of the factual information obtained from
the current geotechnical investigation and is intended only for the use of the design engineer.
Contractors bidding on or undertaking the work should make their own interpretation of the factual
results of the investigation as it affects their construction methods, equipment capabilities, costs, and
sequencing. Our professional services for this assignment address only the geotechnical aspects of
the subsurface conditions encountered at the site.
It is understood that the Telecommunication tower (Height 35m above ground level) planned for
construction at project site will be of pre-fabricated construction material (steel structure, metal panel
etc.). The following recommendations are based on the information available on the proposed
structure, observations made at the subject site, interpretation of the data obtained from the subsurface
investigations, and our experience with similar soils and subsurface conditions encountered at project
site. Since the exploratory trial pit represent very limited subsurface conditions, subsurface conditions
could vary substantially during construction from those indicated by trial pit log. In such instances,
adjustments to the design and construction of the proposed structures might be necessary, depending
on the actual conditions encountered.
The site appears suitable for the proposed construction. It is understood shallow foundation system
(Raft foundation) are the preferred foundation for this site by the Client.
Evaluation and recommendation presented are based on the interpretation of the subsoil conditions
present in the test pit advanced within the subject site. Comments and recommendations regarding
foundations and other issues related to the geotechnical aspects of the project are presented in the
following sections.
5.2 TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATION
It is understood that in addition to vertical loads, the foundations will also be subjected to uplift and
lateral loads by wind. The general subsurface soil condition of the site is presented in Section 4.0 and
Trial pit Log (Appendix B). The following design recommendations are based on the present
subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory trial pit location, empirical correlations for the soil
as well as rock types encountered, our analyses and experience in same type of subsurface conditions.
Based on the results of the geotechnical investigation, a shallow foundation system can be used to
support the proposed Telecommunication Self-supporting Tower construction. The choice of foundation
methods will be depend on the column loads and whether excavation is required for the proposed
development. The following foundation options should be considered:
 Shallow footings (Raft foundation / Spread Footing);and

 Alternatively, Drilled cast-in-place concrete piles, if shallow foundation is not suitable.
CLIENT:
On basis of the engineering properties and sub-surface conditions, raft foundation would be
appropriate for proposed structure. The foundation should be buried sufficient depth / anchored into
sound rock sufficiently to resist overturning forces. The minimum depth at which a foundation should
be placed depends on the soil profile, structural requirement, ground water condition and so on. The
design and construction of Tower foundation should conform to applicable codes/standards. The
following factors should generally be taken into consideration in determining the depth of foundations.
 Depth of topsoil, rubbish fills if any.

 Depth of poor surface deposit such as peat, muck, or sanitary land fill.
 Location of ground water table and its seasonal fluctuation
 Depth of poor or better underlying strata.
 Depth of adjacent footings if any.
If the subsoil near the ground surface consists of a heterogenous fill / topsoil of uncertain properties or
compressible soil like peat, muck etc. the foundation should, preferably be taken below the fill.
Based on our past experience in similar type of the project, it is assumed that the foundation should be
placed at minimum 2.5 m below grade in approved foundation subgrade and with sufficient depth to
withstand the over turning moment of the Tower. For the raft to resist the overturning moment, the
weight of the concrete and any soil vertically above the foundation can be used.
Other design considerations: The site conditions can exclude any risk of ground sliding. There are
no visible signs of slope instabilities in the vicinity of the site. It must be noted that the above should
be considered as a guideline and the required analysis should be carried out by design engineer.
5.3 GUIDELINES FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN

5.3.1 Shallow Foundation – Raft Foundation
On basis of findings of subsoil characteristics, conventional shallow foundation system (raft

foundation / spread footing) can be adopted for the proposed Self-supporting steelwork tower
construction. If bearing capacity of shallow foundation system is not found to be acceptable, the deep
foundation can be adopted. Final selection of the deep foundation type should be determined in
conjunction with economic and structural design considerations.
On the basis of the subsoil characteristics (strong to very strong basalt bed rock) at the proposed
foundation level, the maximum allowable bearing capacity of 800 kPa shall be used for raft foundation
between 1.0 to 2.5m depth below grade. The above figures are conservatively based on a factor of
safety 3 with usual settlement tolerances (25mm). In our analysis, it is considered that the moderately
to highly weathered strong to very strong rock underlying the residual soil below 0.45m is relatively
incompressible in comparison to residual soil.
However, it is important to note that the allowable bearing pressure may be reduced by the presence
of weak layers, discontinuities, or where the rocks are weathered, decomposed, heavily shattered or
steeply dipping, subject to actual ground condition. Therefore, it is important that all bearing surfaces
CLIENT:
must be inspected and approved by our geotechnical engineer prior to confirm soil conditions/origin of
soil and bearing pressures as anticipated in design.
5.4 EXCAVATIONS AND GROUNDWATER CONTROL
Normal excavation practice is applicable at this site, namely vertical cut for 1.2m and 45 degree side
slopes for deeper trench for stability purposes. Construction of foundation may require some
excavation into strong rock (such as boulder or bed rock) by means of powerful hydraulic
hammers. Temporary surcharge load such as stocks of material or heavy equipment should be kept
back from excavation faces a distance equal to at least one-half the excavation depth.
Groundwater seepage was not encountered in the trial pit below existing ground level. In all cases, the
excavation must comply with the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations Act of the Country.
Adequate protection against sloughing of soils should be provided for worker and inspector entering the
excavation.
5.5 BACKFILL AND COMPACTION OF FILL
On site native soil would be suitable for use of footing backfill. Backfill must consist of low to medium
plastic inorganic imported soil. All engineered back fill placed adjacent to and above the Tower
foundation should be compacted to at least 98% of the Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density
(SPMDD) and is suitable moisture content (±2% of Optimum Moisture Content). The compaction should
be accomplished by placing the fill in about 200mm loose lift and mechanically compacting each lift to
at least the specified minimum dry density. Field density tests should be performed on each lift as
necessary to insure that adequate moisture conditioning and compaction is being achieved.
Compaction by flooding is not considered acceptable. This method will generally not achieve the
desired compaction and the large quantities of water will tend to soften the foundation soil. As per
standard practice, field review of backfill and compaction fill inspection shall be required by the
registered professional geotechnical engineer.
5.6 SURFACE DRAINAGE
As a primary drainage measure, surface grading of the proposed development should be provided in
order to drain away from the structure and prevent surficial erosion and infiltration into the foundation
soil. A minimum 5% slope should be provided for a distance of 3.0m (minimum) from the structure. In
general, water should not be allowed to accumulate next to the foundation. The upper 0.6m of the
backfill around the structure should consist of compacted non expansive clay should be placed to act
as seal against the ingress of surface runoff water.

CLIENT:
5.7 INSPECTION AND MONITORING
Geotechnical aspects of foundation construction and/or installation, and fill placement should be
monitored by a registered geotechnical engineer’s representative. All geotechnical recommendations
presented in this report are based on the assumption that a qualified contractor shall be hired to carry
out the work. The adequate level of inspection shall be provided during construction in accordance with
standard practice requirements. Recommendations presented in this report may not be valid if an
adequate of inspection is not provided during construction, or if any relevant codes are no met.
6.0 REFERENCES
British Standard Institution (1999). Code of Practice for Site Investigation: BS 5930,
British Standard Institution, London.
British Standard Institution (1990). Methods of Test for Soil for Civil Engineering
Purposes: BS 1377, British Standard Institution, London.
British Standard Institution (1986). Code of Practice for Foundations: BS 8004, British
Standard Institution, London.
ISRM. Standard of Rock Characterisation Testing and Monitoring (E.T.BROW N).
Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual (4 th Edition, 2006).
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology (1995). The W orking Party Report the
description and classification of weathered rocks for engineering purposes Geological
Society Engineering Group, Vol. 28, P 207 -242. Geological Society of London.
Giorgi, Loicc (1999). Carte Geologiue au 1:50000 Schema hydrogeologique, Mauritius.
Parish, D.H. (1965). Notes on the1:100000 Soil Map of Mauritius. Published by MSRI,
Mauritius.

CLIENT:
7.0 CLOSURE
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of CHEUNG CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD.
and their representatives for specific application to the area described within this report. The material
contained in this report reflects our best judgment in the light of the information and subsoil
engineering properties available at the time of the report preparation. This report was prepared using
standard care and skill in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and
practices.
We appreciate the opportunity of providing this service for you. If you have any questions concerning
this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Respectfully Submitted,
GEOCRUST LTD.
Prepared by
Mr. Karthikeyan Ganesan, M.Tech.
Engineering Geologist
Reviewed by
Chandra Acharya, M.ASc., M.Tech., RPEM, P.Eng.
Senior Geotechnical Engineering Specialist
Registered Professional Engineer of Mauritius (ID. 1202)
Professional Engineer of Canada (ON, AB, BC, SK, MB)
August 24, 2016
Enclosures: Appendix A to B

APPENDIX A
 Figures-Drawings
• General Location of Project Site;
• Project Site in Aerial Google Map;
• Land use Map of Project Site;
• Regional Geological Map; and
• Soil Map of Project Site;
Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

Location of Present
Study Site
CLIENT: KEY PLAN

GENERAL SITE LOCATION MAP OF THE PROJECT SITE,
MAURITIUS
CHEUNG CONSULTING PROJECT
ENGINEERS LTD. Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication
Tower at Belle Mare, Mauritius
DRAWN: CHKD.: REV.: DATE:

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER & CONTRACTOR: GK CA 0 16-Aug-16
SCALE: PROJECT REF: DRAWING NO.
NTS MU157-2016 FIGURE 1
Location of Present
Study Site
CLIENT: KEY PLAN

AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROJECT SITE (REFERENCE GOOGLE DIGITAL GLOBE)
PROJECT
Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower at Belle Mare, Mauritius

Location of
Present Study
Site
CLIENT: KEY PLAN

LANDUSE MAP OF THE PROJECT SITE
PROJECT

Approximate Location of
Project Site Recent
Volcanic Formation
(Not to the scale – scanned from Carte Geologiue au 1:50000 scheme hydrogeologiue,
Mauritius.Giorgi Loicc 1999)
CLIENT: KEY PLAN
REGIONAL GEOLOGICAL MAP OF THE PROJECT SITE
PROJECT

Location of Project
Site - Lithosols (Rock
Land)
CLIENT: KEY PLAN

SOIL MAP OF PROJECT SITE (SOURCE: 1:100000 SOIL MAP OF MAURITIUS, MSRI PUBLICATION –
PARISH D. H & FEILLAFE S.M, 1965)
PROJECT

APPENDIX B
TRIAL PIT LOGS
• Legends of Symbolic Logs and
Terms Used in accordance with BS
5930;
• Geotechnical Logs of Trial Pits,
Profile of Trial Photographs and
photographs of materials from
exploratory trial pits
Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR PROPOSED SOLAR
at Belle Mare, PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV) FARM SITE
Mauritius
AT FLACQ, MAURITIUS
Basalt /Dolerite
Agglomerate/Pyroclastic Rock
RECOMMENDED SYMBOLS FOR SOILS AND ROCK IN

ACCORDANCE WITH BS:5930
All Soil Back Ground
Basalt /Dolerite
Top Soil
Fill Agglomerate Rock
Casing v++v++v+
Basalt Plus Agglomerate Mixture
+v++v++v
v+Ov+Ov+O
Basalt Plus Agglomerate Mixture- v+Ov+Ov
Fragmented Form
Δ::Δ::Δ::Δ:
Pyroclastic Rock(Volcanic Ash) :Δ::Δ::Δ::Δ
Fresh (Fr)
Slightly Weathered (SW)
Moderately Weathered(MW)
Highly Weathered(HW)
Completely Weathered(CW)
Combination
MW-SW
HW-CW
Standard Penetration Test(SPLIT SPOON) N (SPT)
Standard Penetration Test(SOLID CONE) SC
Water Level
COMBINATION OF SYMBOLS FOR SOILS AND ROCK

Geotechnical Contractor:
Test Pit No:
GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF TEST PIT/EXCAVATION
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers & TP-1
Geoscientists
Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High EXCAVATION METHOD: Mechanical DATE COMMENCED: August 12, 2016 LOGGED BY:GK
Telecommunication Tower
PROJECT: MACHINE: CAT 428F DATE COMPLETED: August 12, 2016 REVIEWED BY: CA
LENGTH: 2.00m X (Easting) Not Available CONTRACTOR: GEOCRUST LTD.
CHEUNG CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD. CO-
CLIENT : WIDTH: 2.00m ORDINATES: Y (Northing) Not Available
LOCATION : Belle Mare DEPTH: 1.10m SUPPORT: Not required Z(m) Not Available
Ground- water
Penetrometer
Site activities
(PP:Kg/cm )
Graphic Log
Laboratory test results HOLE
2
Pocket
Elevatio
% fines Atterberg limits MC / LS Test Samples: DIG RATE n(m) DEPTH BSC MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (DESCRIPTION OF STRATA)
-75um LL (%) PI(%) (%) Results Type S M F (m)
0.1 0.00-0.25m
0.2 Soft to firm, light to dark brown colour, GRAVELLY SILT with occasional
boulders and plenty of plant rootlets (Top soil).
0.3 xoxox
0.4 xoxox 2
0.25-0.45m
0.5 xoxox Firm, dark brown colour, SILTY GRAVEL / GRAVELLY SILT with gravels,
vvv cobbles and occasional boulders. (PP = 2.0-3.0 kg/cm²)
0.6
0.7 vvv
0.8 vvv 0.45-1.10m
vvv Strong to very strong (S-VS), light to dark grey with yellowish to purple
0.9
discolourations, fine grained, vesicular, BASALT ROCK of moderately to highly
1.0 vvv weathered.
1.1 vvv
End of Trial Pit at 1.10m Depth
sampling 8. MC = Moisture Content

Notes
B bulk sample 9. GR = Grading
D disturbed sample (sample number in brackets) 1.Groundwater : Dry 10. AL = Atterberg Limit
T tube sample (sample number in brackets) 2.Dimension of pit: 2.00 x 2.00 x 1.10 m 11. C = Compaction
3.Excavator used for excavation: CAT 428F 12. BSC=British Soil Classification
D*, T* no recovery
4. Weather condition: Sunny 13.Dig Rate (S): Slow
field tests 14. Dig Rate (M): Moderate
5.Sample Taken for Laboratory Test: NIL
permeability 15. Dig Rate (F): Fast
6.Photograph of Trial Pit Profile up to 1.10m
cons=constant head 7. Insitu Test: NIL 16. PP: Pocket Penetrometer Reading
fall=falling head 17. NA: Not Applicable
rise=rising head test
= Ground water Level Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT:
GEOTECHNICAL CONTRACTOR: CHEUNG CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD.
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers &

Geoscientists
TRIAL PIT NO.: TP-1

Depth: 0.00 – 1.10m
TP-1
NORTH
TP-1 TP-1
SOUTH WEST
(Continued..)
Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High TRIAL PIT PROFILE AND

Telecommunication Tower EXCAVATED MATERIALS
TP-1
at Belle Mare, Mauritius PHOTOGRAPHS
Page 1 of 2
CLIENT:
GEOTECHNICAL CONTRACTOR: CHEUNG CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD.

Geoscientists
TRIAL PIT NO.: TP-1

Materials Recovery from Trial Pit Excavations
TP-1
EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
TP-1
EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High TRIAL PIT PROFILE AND

Telecommunication Tower EXCAVATED MATERIALS
TP-1
at Belle Mare, Mauritius PHOTOGRAPHS
Page 2 of 2
Why GeoCrust Ltd? Business Registration No.: C10093129
GeoCrust Ltd is a registered sole-propriety Geotechnical Registered Office:

Engineering and Geoscientific Consulting firm. As a leader in
geotechnical, material testing and geo-environmental GeoCrust Ltd., Morcellement Telfair,
consulting, GEOCRUST understands its responsibilities to the Moka, Mauritius
geotechnical, material testing and geo-environmental sectors
as we develop, promote, and apply the standards, procedures, Tel: (230) 5290 1350
and principles that govern our work. We practice our trade Fax: (230) 433 6931
with a serious and sober mentality. GEOCRUST provides our
clients with leadership, strong project teams, appropriate Email: geocrustltd@yahoo.com,
experience, knowledge of applicable standards, and quality CC : contact@geocrust.com
assurance/quality control oversight to ensure the best service
and product possible. Website : www.geocrust.com

Geoscientists
 Subsoil Investigation for Geotechnical
Evaluation  Engineering Geology
 Geo-environmental  Percolation Test &
Analysis  Hydrogeological Study-Pumping Test
Analysis for Groundwater Exploitation Permit
 Geophysical Investigation  Material Testing
Supervision at Construction Stage

Geotechnical Report for 35m Telecom Tower

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Geotechnical Report for 35m Telecom Tower

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPORT

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR 35M HIGH

PROJECT NO.: MU157-2016

Consulting Geotechnical Engineers & Geoscientists

Revision Issued Issued by Descriptions Prepared by Reviewed &

0 August GK Geotechnical Investigation GK CA

1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................2

Page 1 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

1.1 SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION

 Subsurface soil conditions to exploration depths;

 Excavation of 1 No. of test pit;

Page 2 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

1.2 PROJECT INFORMATION & SITE DESCRIPTION

1.3 PROJECT SITE LOCATION

1.4 DESKTOP STUDY (REGIONAL GEOLOGY OF THE SITE)

2.0 SITE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

TABLE 1: DETAILS OF FIELD INVESTIGATION PERFORMED

Page 3 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

2.1 EXPLORATORY TRIAL PITS

3.0 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

4.0 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERISTICS OF STRATA

4.1 Ground Profile & Engineering Properties

Page 4 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

4.1.2 Silty Gravel / Gravelly Silt (Residual Soil)

4.1.3 Basalt Bedrock

Page 5 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND ENGINEERING

5.2 TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATION

 Shallow footings (Raft foundation / Spread Footing);and

 Depth of topsoil, rubbish fills if any.

5.3 GUIDELINES FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN

On basis of findings of subsoil characteristics, conventional shallow foundation system (raft

5.4 EXCAVATIONS AND GROUNDWATER CONTROL

5.5 BACKFILL AND COMPACTION OF FILL

5.6 SURFACE DRAINAGE

Page 8 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

5.7 INSPECTION AND MONITORING

ISRM. Standard of Rock Characterisation Testing and Monitoring (E.T.BROW N).

Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual (4 th Edition, 2006).

Giorgi, Loicc (1999). Carte Geologiue au 1:50000 Schema hydrogeologique, Mauritius.

Page 9 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

August 24, 2016

Page 10 of 10 Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

CLIENT: KEY PLAN

DRAWN: CHKD.: REV.: DATE:

CLIENT: KEY PLAN

DRAWN: CHKD.: REV.: DATE:

CLIENT: KEY PLAN

DRAWN: CHKD.: REV.: DATE:

DRAWN: CHKD.: REV.: DATE:

CLIENT: KEY PLAN

DRAWN: CHKD.: REV.: DATE:

Geotechnical Investigation for 35m High Telecommunication Tower

RECOMMENDED SYMBOLS FOR SOILS AND ROCK IN

Fill Agglomerate Rock

Slightly Weathered (SW)

Standard Penetration Test(SPLIT SPOON) N (SPT)

Standard Penetration Test(SOLID CONE) SC

COMBINATION OF SYMBOLS FOR SOILS AND ROCK

-75um LL (%) PI(%) (%) Results Type S M F (m)

sampling 8. MC = Moisture Content

Consulting Geotechnical Engineers &