SHARJAH

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

To : M/s. ARADA Fax Ref : RSI2021-0003-PRE

Sharjah, U.A.E

Attn. : Engr. Bahar Bacha (Structural Manager) Date : 27/01/2021

Email. : b.bacha@arada.com Page : 1 of 9

SUBJECT : Preliminary Report for Proposed (B+G+9+R) Residential Buildings , Al Jada

Development, Block J-Boulevard 01&02 Sharjah”, United Arab Emirates

Dear Sir,

Further to your instructions regarding subject project, please note the followings preliminary recommendations
covering one of the drilled boreholes (BH 02) up to 30.0 m depth below existing ground level. The geotechnical
investigation works has been performed in general accordance with the British Standards BS 5930:2015 “Code
of practice for site investigations”. The scope of geotechnical investigation comprised of a total of fourteen (14)
boreholes between 20.0m and 30.0m, and laboratory testing in the location of Block J-Boulevard 01&02

1.0 EXPLORATORY BOREHOLES

One (01) borehole was drilled up to 30.0 m on the site beneath existing ground level. Drilling was performed
using a truck mounted mobile rotary drilling rig (MDR-02). The boreholes were advanced through soil deposits,
including variably cemented sands, using cable percussive equipment’s and techniques.
Table 1: Coordinates of Borehole Locations
BH Coordinates
Borehole
Drilled depth (m)
Location Easting Northing

BH-02 30.0 346412.398 2800466.939

2.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The borehole observations and test results indicate relatively consistent subsurface conditions over the site. The
subsurface strata revealed from the drilled boreholes are given in table 2.
 Table 2:- Recommended Design Subsurface Profile
Depth Range
Material Description
(m BEGL)
Light brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained SAND with occasional road
0.0 m to 0.50 m
base materials
Medium Dense to dense, light brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained
0.50 m to 6.00 m
SAND.
Very Dense, light brown to brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained SAND
6.00 m to 7.30 m
with occasionally pieces of cemented sand.
7.30 m to 30.0 m Extremely weak to very weak, light brown/brown, thinly to medium bedded, fine to
medium grained SANDSTONE, locally close to close spaced, distinctly to partially
End of Boreholes
weathered, horizontal to sub-horizontal smoth/rough fractures.

During the period of site works, groundwater level was encountered at a depth of 9.50 m depths below
existing ground level.

3.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions with respect to the design of
foundations for the proposed development. It is understood from the information provided by the client that it is
proposed to construct (B+G+9+R) floor residential building on this site, to be set on shallow / Raft foundations.
However, at the time of writing this report detailed information regarding foundation layout or loadings had not
been made available so that only a general discussion can be undertaken.
The observed sub-surface conditions are such that relatively moderate to high load bearing soils are present
below the influence zone of the formation level. Accordingly, shallow foundations are considered appropriate
for the proposed developments.
Note- Prior to keep any foundations, it is recommended that the formation level should be excavated further 25cm
and excavated surface shall be compacted properly using a heavy vibratory roller of 25 ton and backfilling with one
(01) layer of Road Base material (not more than 250mm thick) and thoroughly compacted to not less than 98% (for
Road Base material) MDD as determined by the Modified Proctor.

Table 3: Proposed Structure & Recommended Formation Level

S. No. Structure Description Foundation Level (m BEGL)
1 (B+G+9+R) Building 4.00 m to 4.50 m
2 Underground Water Tank/Lift Pit Area 5.50 m to 6.00 m

Allowable Bearing Capacity calculations by Meyerhof Method

The allowable bearing pressures are calculated using practical experience, the results obtained from the field /
laboratory tests and the empirical equations developed by Terzagi / Meyerhof / Bowels.

Allowable bearing pressures are dependent on the shear strength parameters of the soil and the tolerance of the
proposed structure to settlement. In granular soils, the latter factor is normally more critical. Settlement in such
deposits (granular) normally takes place during construction and initial loading but, where more silty or
cohesive materials exist; there could be a degree of time dependent consolidation. Therefore as granular soils
are present at this site settlement will be the governing factor in considering foundation design.
The bearing pressure values for shallow foundation are calculated by Meyerhof equation 4-12 given in
Foundation Analysis and Design by Joseph E. Bowels (fifth edition) as below:

qa = N/F2 [(B+F3)/B}]² Kd
Where, qa = allowable bearing pressure for 25mm settlement
F2 = Factor from Table page 264 taken as 0.08
F3 = Factor from Table page 264 taken as 0.3
N= SPT average "N" Values
B = Footing width
Kd = 1+0.33D/B

If water level is less than B width of foundation, then Water Correction will be use:-
Cw= Water Correction due to water table (Craig, p.400)
• Cw = 0.5 + (z/2(Df+B)
• Where z = depth of water
• D=Depth of foundation
• B= width of foundation.

Settlement Calculation by Schmertmann and Hartman Method

The bearing pressure was calculated by use of semi-empirical strain influence factor proposed by Schmertmann
and Hartman (1978). According to them the settlement is:
z2
S e  C1C2 q  q 
Iz
z
Where: 0 Es
Iz  Strain influence factor

C1  A correction factor for the depth of foundation embedment

 1  0.5q / q  q 

C2  A correction factor to account for creep in soil= 1 + 0.2 log (time in years/0.1)
q  Stress at the level of the foundation
q  D f

qc = 0.3N , Es = Modulus of elasticity,

The values of Es were determined based on the following relations suggested by Schmertmann (1978)
Es, MPa = 4 qc for qc < 10
Es, MPa = (2qc + 20) for10 <qc <50
Es, MPa =120 for qc >50
(Reference: Joseph E Bowles, Foundation Design and Analysis, Six Editions).

Calculation Methods for RAFT foundation

The bearing pressures for raft foundations were calculated by Meyerhof equations 4-13 and 10.1 given below.
qa = N /F2 (ΔHa/25)*Kd

Where Kd = 1+0.33D/B
 ΔHa = allowable settlement of 50mm .
Note: For Mat/ Raft foundations the ratio ((B+F3)/B) 2 ≈ 1.0 and is neglected.

Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction

Based on recommendations given in report for raft type of foundations and depending on the rigidity of raft,
differential movement is estimated to be less than half the respective total value. On the basis of the pressure /
settlement relationships the Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction given above can be used for 50mm settlements. The
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction ks is calculated with the procedure given by Joseph E. Bowles “Foundation
Analysis and Design Fifth Edition;

The modulus of sub-grade reaction is a conceptual relationship between soil pressure and deformation / settlement.

q
Where, Ks  x FS

Ks = Modulus of Subgrade reaction (kN/m3)
q = Allowable bearing pressure (kN/m2)
δ = Corresponding settlement (mm)
FS = Factor of Safety
(Reference: Joseph E Bowles, Six Edition, Foundation Design and Analysis)
Allowable Bearing Pressure for Shallow Raft Foundations
The assessments of net bearing pressure, with corresponding estimated orders of settlement, are given below in
Table 3 for a rigid raft foundation. and table 4 for isolated/pad /strip footing . These recommendations are based
on the raft/isolated/pad footing being set at a depth of around 4.00-4.50m for (B+G+9+R) Building and 5.50-
6.00m for Underground water tank/lift pit area below the existing ground level on properly levelled and
compacted surface.

Table 4:- Assessment of Bearing pressure and Settlement for Raft Foundations
Modulus of Sub-
Net Allowable grade Reaction*
Foundation Footing
Bearing Pressure for (k)
BH ID Location Depth Width
Raft Foundations @50mm
m Below EGL (m)
(kN/m2) settlement
(kN/m3)
(B+G+9+R)
4.00 - 4.50m 300 18,000
Building
BH 02 Underground 20.00
Water Tank/Lift 5.50 – 6.00m 325 19,500
Pit Area
* (k) Modulus of subgrade reaction generated in this report and advice should be taken from consultant as to the actual working
loads of the various proprietary foundations available before foundation designs are finalized.
With loads of the magnitudes quoted above, total settlement is calculated as being less than the generally accepted tolerance
of 50mm, with differential movements being minimal.
 Foundation Ground Preparation

 Prior to construction of the foundations the ground should be excavated further 25 cm and excavated
surface shall be compacted properly using a heavy vibratory roller of 25 ton and backfilling with one
(01) layer of Road Base material (not more than 250mm thick) and thoroughly compacted to not less
than 98% (for Road Base material) MDD as determined by the Modified Proctor.
 The compacted surface should then be protected by immediately covering with a layer of concrete
blinding.
 In addition to above, at the time of foundation construction, this laboratory shall be contacted to carry
out in-situ field density, compaction, and plate load.

In addition, Piled foundations are also recommended and considered appropriate for the proposed
developments if higher bearing capacity values are required.

4.0 PILE FOUNDATION

Piled foundations are also considered appropriate for the proposed developments. Bored, or augured, cast in-situ
piles are considered suitable piling systems in the ground conditions encountered at this site. Based on the results of
the Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) tests and Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) tests carried out in one
(01) geotechnical boreholes (BH 02) drilled at proposed project location. The pile bearing capacities in compression
and tension capacities over the length of the rock socket, given below tables are available for piles, founded into
extremely weak to weak SANDSTONE encountered from approximately ~7.30 m below the existing ground level,
with cut off level 4.50 m depths below existing ground level .The depth that a pile is set into the bearing stratum is a
function of the type and diameter of pile used and should be determined by the specialist piling contractor.

The ultimate axial pile capacity has been estimated based on the established design methods. The axial pile capacity
is a combination of the load resisted in skin friction along the pile shaft and end bearing. However, it may be noted
that for bored cast-in-situ piles, settlements of the order of 1% of the pile diameter is normally required to mobilize
full skin friction whereas full end bearing is developed at much higher settlements (usually at about 10% to 20% of
pile diameter). Hence, the pile capacity will be based on full skin friction and partial end bearing. In order to carry
such loads, the concrete to be specified should be of high strength and the piles must be properly reinforced. The
piles are to be designed to resist the effects of shear and bending moment stresses resulting from the lateral forces in
addition to the vertical stresses resulting from axial loads and overturning moments.

Pile load tests are considered the most satisfactory method to assess the carrying capacity of a pile. It is therefore
recommended that such tests be performed either on specially constructed piles installed before the start of the
general construction works or during the foundation construction period. Since the capacity of cast-in-situ reinforced
concrete piles depends on the type and method of casting of such piles, it is the responsibility of the specialized
piling contractor to verify the calculated values recommend in our soil investigation report by conducting pile load
tests (Dynamic as per ASTM D4945-00 or static as per ASTM D 1143-81 Reapproved 1994 e1) on an instrumented
pilot and/or working piles. However, if pre-contract testing is carried out, significant savings may result from a more
economical pile design based upon specific test data.
It is highly stressed that in addition to the caliper logging of piles, cross hole sonic logging tests are to be performed
in order to check the concrete integrity since CSL method is the most accurate quality assurance method for defect
identification in drilled shafts. CSL testing provides assurance that the foundation concrete is sound and also
hardened as velocity to the 4th power is proportional to concrete strength.

The design piles capacities determined using the theoretical design methods should be confirmed and supplemented
as work progresses by results of pile load tests, pile installation and driving if considered necessary by in-situ tests.
The design length of piles represents the design requirements but this may be varied to suit site conditions.

Care should be taken when drilling for cast in place piles not to disturb or loosen the end bearing strata, and to
maintain direct and firm contact between these strata and the piles. Otherwise excessive unaccounted settlement may
occur on initial loading.

The piling construction should be carried out by specialist well-experienced and equipped piling contractor, who
must submit a method statement for the construction of the piles and should be requested to confirm the actual
working loads for his particular piling system before foundation design is finalized.

Since the theoretical design methods provide an approximate working load, the contractor should also demonstrate
by load test the piles performance and its load settlement characteristics.

The ultimate pile capacity is the sum of the adhesion and skin friction along the shaft and the end load. All the static
pile formulas may be expressed by the following basic equation:
Qu = Qb + Qf
Where:
Qu = Ultimate Pile Capacity
Qb = load Carried by End bearing (Pile base) = qb . Ab
Qf = Load Carried by Friction Along Perimeter of Pile = fs . As
Ab = Pile base Area
As = Pile Shaft Area in contact with rock (socket area)
qb = Ultimate base Resistance , fs = Ultimate Skin Friction/Adhesion

Ultimate bond stress for underlying rock layers

When piles are socketed or driven into rock, some load transfer to the embedded portion of the shaft will occur.
The Ultimate bond stress (skin friction / Adhesion) fs are related to the average unconfined compression
strength, quc by the equation:
fs = αβquc
Where:
α = is a reduction factor relating to uniaxial compression strength (quc)
β = is a correction factor related to the discontinuity spacing in the rock mass
Notes: For uplift capacity

The above recommended ultimate skin friction shall be multiplied by 0.7, Then a safety factor of 2.5 to be
applied to obtain working loads in uplift (this makes overall Safety factor for uplift resistance = 2.5/0.7 >3.5.
This recommendation is based upon a study by Carter and Kulhawy (1988) for sockets in weak rocks.

Ultimate end bearing for underlying rock layers

Where the joints are spaced widely, that is at 600mm or more part, or where the joints are tightly close and
remain closed after pile installation, the ultimate base resistance may be calculated from the following equation:

Where, quc = Unconfined compressive strength of rock., NØ = Bearing Capacity Factor

Where, bearing capacity factor is obtained from

The values of NØ obtained from the friction angle of an intact rock can be reduced substantially if the rock mass
has open or clay filled joints, or if joints which are tightly closed in situ are subsequently opened by pile
displacement and vibrations. In the case of open joints the ultimate base resistance may be no more than the
unconfined compression strength, quc of the intact rock.

Notes: For the calculation, a conservative UCS value of 0.8 Mpa is considered for the distinctly weathered and
fractured SANDSTONE layer starting from ~7.30 m and continuing up to drilled depth of 30.0 m BGL. A factor
of safety of 2.5 is considered for deriving allowable Unit skin friction and 3.0 for deriving unit end bearing.

Table-5: Parameters used for Pile Load Calculation

Rock
Depth Design socket Allowable
Layer Design Reduction Allowable
(m, UCS correcti Skin
Description Thickness Ø value factor End Bearing
below value on Friction
(m) (º) (α) (kN/m2)
EGL) (Mpa) factor (kN/m2 )
(β)
0 to 4.50 Cut Off Level 4.50 -
4.50 to Dense to very
2.80 Neglected
7.30 dense SAND
Extremely Weak/
7.30 to
Very Weak/Weak 27.70 0.80 40 0.56 0.63 110 2450
35.0
SANDSTONE
Table 6: Allowable Working Loads in Compression and tension for piles

Toe Rock Allowable working loads (kN) in Allowable working loads (kN) in
level of socket Pile Compression for piles Tension for piles
Piles Depth Length Pile Diameter (m) Pile Diameter (m)
(m (m) (m)
BEGL) 0.50 0.75 0.90 1.00 0.50 0.75 0.90 1.00

10.50 3.2 6.0 1034 1912 2554 3030 387 581 697 774
11.50 4.2 7.0 1207 2171 2865 3376 508 762 914 1016
12.50 5.2 8.0 1380 2430 3176 3721 629 943 1132 1258
13.50 6.2 9.0 1552 2689 3487 4067 750 1125 1350 1500
14.50 7.2 10.0 1725 2949 3798 4412 871 1306 1568 1742
15.50 8.2 11.0 1898 3208 4109 4758 992 1488 1785 1984
16.50 9.2 12.0 2071 3467 4420 5104 1113 1669 2003 2226
17.50 10.2 13.0 2244 3726 4731 5449 1234 1851 2221 2467
18.50 11.2 14.0 2416 3985 5042 5795 1355 2032 2438 2709
19.50 12.2 15.0 2589 4244 5353 6140 1476 2213 2656 2951
20.50 13.2 16.0 2762 4504 5664 6486 1597 2395 2874 3193
21.50 14.2 17.0 2935 4763 5975 6831 1718 2576 3092 3435
22.50 15.2 18.0 3107 5022 6286 7177 1839 2758 3309 3677
23.50 16.2 19.0 3280 5281 6597 7523 1959 2939 3527 3919
24.50 17.2 20.0 3453 5540 6908 7868 2080 3121 3745 4161
Notes:
 The Pile cut off level has taken as 4.50m below EGL.
 The center to center distance between the piles can be taken as 2.5 to 3.0 times the pile diameter.
 These values have been provided based on the SPT,Ø values, UCS values and practical experiences.
 The self-weight of the pile has not been considered for evaluation of uplift capacity.
 The piles capacities shall be reviewed and approved by Consultant and Geotechnical/Piling Contractor.
 All piles capacities provided in this report are for individual piles only.
  Piles group effect on the pile capacities shall be considered by the Consultant and Geotechnical/Piling
Contractor.
 Allowable pile capacities shall be limited to permissible stresses in the piles concrete (<25% concrete
strength) and should be confirmed by geotechnical/piling contactor and consultant.
 The pile loads specified above are based on geotechnical considerations only and should be limited on
the basis of structural capacity of pile.

We hope above preliminary recommendation will help you for the design purposes, however, if you need any
clarification or have any queries with regard to above preliminary recommendations please do not hesitate to
contact us. Above recommendation are subject to on-going remaining field and laboratory tests results.

Yours faithfully,
For Al Mawazeen Laboratory

____________________
Engr. Ahmed Salah Gad
Geotechnical Manager