Material Test Pvt. LTD.: Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu

Soil Investigation of Proposed BUILDING Foundations Material Test Pvt. Ltd.
At SARANKOT, Kaski, Nepal Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu
Table of Contents
1. GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2. Location and Description of Area ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.3. Objectives .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.4. Regional Geology of the Project Area .......................................................................................................................... 2
1.5. Surface Geology ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.6. Slope Stability ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4
1.7. Recommended Drilling ......................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.8. Recommendation ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6
2. GEO-TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION................................................................................................................. 9
2.1 Soil Investigation of the Proposed Area ...................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Planning of works .................................................................................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Geo-technical Exploration ................................................................................................................................................... 9
2.3.1 Boring............................................................................................................................................................................. 10
2.3.2 Sampling ....................................................................................................................................................................... 11
2.3.3 Field Test ....................................................................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 Generalize Borehole-Log (Subsurface) findings ..................................................................................................... 15
2.5 Analysis of Allowable Bearing Pressure ...................................................................................................................... 16
2.5.1 Correlation between SPT and DCPT ............................................................................................................... 16
2.5.2 SPT correction ............................................................................................................................................................ 16
2.5.3 Allowable Bearing Pressure based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity................................................... 18
2.5.4 Allowable Bearing Pressure based on Tolerable Settlement .............................................................. 19
2.5.5 Pile Foundation ......................................................................................................................................................... 20
2.5.6 Estimation of Bearing Capacity (Rock/Boulder) ........................................................................................ 21
2.5.7 Analysis of Foundations ........................................................................................................................................ 24
2.6 Conclusion and Recommendation ................................................................................................................................ 34
2.7 References and Standards ................................................................................................................................................. 37
I
1. GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
1.1. Introduction
M/S FLIP NEPAL RESORTS PTE LTD is proposed to construct the Hotel Building in between
Naudanda and Sarankot of Kaski District, Nepal. Material Test (P) Ltd. was entrusted to carry out
the Detail Geo-Technical Investigation of proposed building site at under contract made by FLIP
NEPAL.
A team headed by Senior Geologist (Dr. P. D. Ullak), including Senior Engineer (Madhukar
Karki), Geo-technical Engineer (Kishor Paudel) and contractor’s representative Er. Raj Thapa
visited site on July 26, of 2014.
The report is about visual observation and general geological condition of the sites, detail drilling
and laboratory tests.
1.2. Location and Description of Area
The proposed project site is located in north-west of Pokhara, Kaski District, Gandaki Zone. The
area can be accessed by black topped road about 20 km north from Pokhara along Pokhara-
Baglung Road. The proposed area is about 3 km away from Naudanda village along Sarangkot
road.
1.3. Objectives
The following scopes of works were covered under this study:
 Preliminary observation of soil condition
 Slope stability analysis of the proposed construction area
 Exploration of the sub-surface conditions at various locations of proposed foundation sites

and conduct requisite in-situ tests.
 Limited laboratory testing of representative samples obtained during the field investigation
to evaluate relevant engineering parameters of the subsurface soils.
 Engineering analyses.
The scope of this investigation report includes:
 Geological Assessment
 Drill logs
 Assessment of bearing capacity
 Recommendations of foundation type and depth
FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 1

1.4. Regional Geology of the Project Area
The project area lies in the Lesser Himalayan rocks; structurally this zone is located in 20 km south
of the Main Central Thrust (MCT) zone. The lithostratigraphy of the Lesser Himalaya is presented
in Figure 1 and Table 1. Geologically, the proposed construction area (Sarangkot) is covered with
phyllite and quartzite. The effect of the MCT is considered as minimum, although the area has
active MCT zone. The active MCT zone passes through Taprang village along the Madi River.
Table 1: Lithostratigraphy of Western Nepal Himalaya (DMG, 1987)
Group Formation Lithology Age

SIWALIKS
MAIN BOUNDARY THRUST (MBT)
Lakharpata Limestone, limestone, shale
Syangja Quartzite, limestone, shale
Sangram Shale, limestone and quartzite Upper Pre-
Midland Galyang Slate, limestone Cambrian
Ghanpokhara Slate, limestone, quartzite -Late Paleozoic
Seti* Gritty phyllite, phyllite, quartzite
Ulleri Augen gneiss
MAIN CENTRAL THRUST (MCT)
HIGHER HIMALAYA
Table 2: Lithostratigraphy of Central-Eastern Nepal Himalaya (DMG, 1987)
Lithological Thickness (m) Lithological characters Age

Units
Siwalik Group 6,000 Mudstone, sandstone and Neogene
conglomerate
--------------------Main Boundary Thrust (MBT)--------------------
Suri Dobhan >200 Augen gneisses, schist and
Augen gneiss* quartzite Pre-
Laduk Phyllite* 1,000-2,000 Phyllite, chlorite-schist and Cambrian-
sandy-phyllite Lower
Chagu-Chilangka 400-700 Tourmaline bearing augen Paleozoic
Gneiss gneiss
Khare Phyllite 2,500 Schist, quartzite, slates and
limestone
--------------------Main Central Thrust (MCT)-----------------
Lesser Himalaya
The Lesser Himalaya consists of low-grade metamorphic rocks like quartzite, slate and phyllite.
Based on the lithological characters the rocks of the Lesser Himalaya is subdivided into the
Lakharpata, Syangja, Sangram, Galyang, Ghanpokhara, Seti, Ulleri formations in ascending order.
Lakharpata Formation
The Lakharpata Formation is composed of thick bedded, fine-grained, grey to bluish grey dolomite
and limestone. Estimated thickness of this bed is around 3000m.

Syangja Formation
This lithounit often begins with a coarse quartzite bed several tens of meters thick. It is mainly
composed of quartzite, slate. The total thickness is 1,000 m.
Sangram Formation
The unit is represented by thick bedded limestone and quartzite. Thickness of the unit is more than
1,000 m.
Project Area
Figure 1: Regional Geological Map
Galyang Formation
This lithounit characterized by presence of calcareous slate and limestone as well as slate, slate.
The total thickness is 1,000 m.
Ghanpokhara Formation
This lithounit characterized by presence of slate and limestone as well as quartzite. The total
thickness is 800 m.
Seti Formation
The Seti Formation is represented by presence of grey to milky white quartzite intercalated with
phyllite and schist. The total thickness is 3,000 m.

Ulleri Formation
This lithounit characterized by presence of augen gneiss and schist only and attain thickness about
800 m.
The existing geology of proposed hotel building area belongs to the rocks of the Seti formation,
Lesser Himalaya. The area is covered by phyllite, slate and quartzite (Seti formation). However,
underneath part of the rock is topped by residual soil with alluvial and colluvial deposits.
1.5. Surface Geology
The existing site area is mostly covered by residual soil and colluvial deposits. Thickness of
residual soil ranges from 1 m to 3 m, whereas colluvial deposits ranges from 1 m to 4 m depths.
Bedrocks are observed along newly constructed road alignment nearby proposed hotel entrance.
Rocks are visible at around 10% surface of proposed hotel areas. Exposed rocks are of fresh to
slightly weathered, phyllite and quartzite.
Along the road section from Naudanda to Sarangkot, bedrocks of phyllite and quartzite are exposed
on the hill slope. Proportion of the phyllite is greater than quartzite. On the surface, the rocks are
slightly weathered. Thickness of the phyllite is around 10 cm to 15 cm.
1.6. Slope Stability
The slope stability condition is fair to good (Table 2 and Figure 2). Generally the natural hill slope
is oriented southwest direction with low angle dipping (10°-20°). The foliation plane is oriented
northeast. So, the stability condition is good due to opposite slope of the hill slope and foliation
plane. The dip of the hill slope is very low (10°-20°), low height cut slope, covered by forest, with
stepping topography on hill slope. The joints also oriented in opposite to the hill slope and long
spacing can be seen in the exposed rocks.
Slope nearby Entrance Area

Slope nearby Hotel Block B
Slope nearby Sherpa Block
Slope nearby Naudanda-Sarangkot road
The slope of the hill on the back side (North-east) of the project area has steep in nature, the
dipping of the hill slope and foliation plane is nearly oriented at same direction, so there is little

possibility of the plane failure, whereas sufficient setback (more than 10 m) from north end
prevents proposed area from probable damage by slope failure.
The staff dormitory area is geologically safe as slope is gentle and required cutting height is not
much.
Table 2: Slope stability condition
Location HS/F F/J1 F/J2 F/J3 J1/J2 J2/J3 J3/J1

Starting point of entrance Stable Stable Unstable Stable Stable Stable Stable
Just below the Hotel Block B Stable Stable Stable Stable
Just below the Sherpa Block Stable Stable Unstable Stable Stable Stable Stable
Along the road section Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable
Naudanda and Sarangkot
1.7. Recommended Drilling
Altogether 9 nos. of borehole are plausible for the drilling to identify the subsurface condition of
the area. (Refer Table 3). One borehole location, D1 is shifted by 4 m west from the previously
proposed location of Block B, as rock bed is undulating and exposure has been noticed about 50 m
west only.
D2 is newly proposed, whereas D5 and D6, at Sherpa Block is recommended as rock exposure is
rear nearby this block and topographically it is slightly elevated. Other drilling points are same as
proposed by the client.
Table 3: Depth of proposed drilling holes
Drill hole Location Proposed Depth

D1 Hotel Block B (Shift 4 m to west) 10 ~ 15 m
D2 Hotel Block B (Add new hole) 10 ~ 15 m
D3 Hotel Block A 10 ~ 15 m
D4 Hotel Block A 10 ~ 15 m
D5 Sherpa Block (add new hole) 8 ~ 10 m
D6 Sherpa Block (add new hole) 8 ~ 10 m
D7 Just below the Hotel Block B 8 ~ 10 m
D8 Staff Dormitory 10 ~ 15 m
D9 Staff Dormitory 10 ~ 15 m
Total 84 ~ 120 m
Drilling should stop, either after drilling up to a proposed depth or 5 ~6 m after encounter of
rock deposit
1.8. Recommendation
 The project area is located in rocks of Seti formation, Lesser Himalaya. The Seti
Formation is composed of thick bedded phyllite and quartzite.

 8~9 holes are sufficient to verify the stability and to asses the bearing capacity of soil
strata.
 The slope stability condition is good on hill slope so there is no possibility to occur the
slide and any other major/minor failures. However, it is recommended to construct the
wall on the hill slope along the cutting slope of road and building with sufficient weep
holes with well managed drains.
 On the basis of site geology, existing topography, folliation planes, bedding of rocks,
slope os hills, the proposed building (Hotel) construction area is observed as stable and
sound.
 It is highly recommended to design building foundation, so that base of footing can rest of
bed rocks.
Figure 2: Proposed Location of Drill hole

PHOTOGRAPHS OF SOIL/ROCK EXPOSURE
Plate 1: Bedrock Phyllite Plate 2: Drilling location at Plate 3: Way to Hotel area
exposed at entrance area Dormitory area, gentle hill
slope
Plate 4: Gentle slope with Plate 5: Bedrocks just below Plate 6: Gentle slope area
residual soil the Hotel Block B
Plate 7: Hotel Block B and A Plate 8: Hotel Block A area Plate 9: Just below the
area on ridge area on ridge area Sherpa block area requires
the wall
Plate 10: Back side of the Plate 11: Sherpa Block area Plate 12: Top area of the
area elevated area proposed hotel area

2. GEO-TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
2.1 Soil Investigation of the Proposed Area
This section presents the result of soil investigation for the design of a Foundation of FLIP NEPAL
RESORT building at Sarankot, Kaski, Nepal. The investigation characterizes the subsurface
conditions and develops the necessary requirement for the proposed safe bearing capacity of the
foundation.
The soil investigation work was carried out on August-September of 2014. The total quantity of
soil investigation included eight boreholes, each of ranging from 10 m – 15 m depth as per
understanding and requirement. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) and Dynamic Cone Penetration
Tests (DCPT) were conducted at 1.0 to 1.5m depth intervals or as per convenience to furnish the
compactness of the soil strata at field.
2.2 Planning of works
Work schedule, location of these boreholes and other project specific issues were identified on
mutual understanding between drilling consultant and client engineer during a desk study, which
was carried out immediately after finalization of agreement in-between. Immediately after initial
site visit by experts, drilling team had revised methodology depending upon the changes on
environment, geological and local conditions.
Table 4 Proposed Laboratory investigation of Soil
U/D samples Rock / Boulder

SPT samples
(at least 1 in each hole if (at least 1 in each hole)
(as per change in strata)
cohesive strata)
Natural Moisture test Natural Moisture test Unit weight
Specific Gravity test Specific Gravity test Point load Test
Liquid limit / Plastic Limit test Liquid limit / Plastic Limit test Uni-axial Compression Test
Grain Size Distribution test Grain Size Distribution test
Unit weight Unit weight/ Bulk density
Direct shear test Uni-confined compression test
Consolidation test
2.3 Geo-technical Exploration
Geological condition/stratum at the test site is important aspect to determine the depth, size and
types of foundation. Drilling can define the characteristic and strength of soil and rock in both
unstable and stable zones. Dynamic Cone Penetration Tests were carried out in different depths can
give appropriateness of the densification of the soil strata. Ground water table, cavities and changes
in strata are major aspect of drilling.
As drilling location lies on alluvial deposit followed by rocky strata within proposed drilling depth,
drilling team have been mobilized with rotary drilling rig. Safety mechanisms were developed for

technical team and workers.
2.3.1 Boring
Boring works were carried out using Rotary Drilling Rig. Whole investigation works were
conducted as per IS 1892: 1979 Code of practice for subsurface investigations for foundations
(First revision) 1979 Soil and foundation engineering
Figure 3: SPT test @ proposed hole D9
Figure 4: Soil Sample abstracted on Split Spooner at hole D9

Groundwater was monitored on drilled holes 24 hours after completion of drilling works.
2.3.2 Sampling
The samples were obtained as per IS 8763: 1978 Guide for undisturbed sampling of sands and
sandy soils 1978 Soil and foundation engineering
Figure 5: Preparation for Sounding Test (SPT) at borehole D8
2.3.3 Field Test
Figure 6: Highly weathered phyllitic rock sample on split spooner after SPT test

SPT Test/DCPT
The number of blows required to drive the split-spoon/cone was recorded at every 150 mm of
penetration till the total penetration was 450 mm. The number of blows recorded for the last two
successive 150 mm penetration are added and expressed as SPT/DCPT N-value.
Figure 7: Preparation for SPT test on D7
Figure 8: Drilling in progress with SPT arrangement at D1

DCPT
In-situ penetration tests have been widely used in geotechnical and foundation engineering for site
investigation in support of analysis and design. The dynamic cone penetration test (DCPT) is
typical in-situ penetration tests. The dynamic cone penetration test shows features of both the CPT
and the SPT. The Dynamic Cone Penetration (DCPT) is similar to the SPT in test.

It is performed by dropping a hammer from a certain fall height and measuring a penetration depth
per blow for each tested depth. Therefore, it is quite similar to the procedure of obtaining the blow
count N using the soil sampler in the SPT. In the DCPT, however, a cone is used to obtain the
penetration depth instead of using the split spoon soil sampler. In this respect, there is some
resemblance with the DCPT in the fact that both tests create a cavity during penetration and
generate a cavity expansion resistance.
The shape of the dynamic cone is similar to that of the penetrometer used in the CPT. Cone having
standard apex angle of 60° at its lower end was driven into the ground at the base of the borehole
by means of a 63.5 kg hammer falling from a height of 760 mm. (DCPT) were carried out in the
borehole at 1.5m depth intervals.
DCPT tests were conducted on hard strata and sometime soft strata containing gravelly to boulder
mix soil at similar interval like SPT. Only disturbed samples were abstracted from strata where
DCPT conducted.
There has not been direct correlation between DCPT and shear strength. The correlation
between SPT and DCPT is yet to be proven. DCPT values start increasing and deviating from
the SPT values (due to skin friction). It is difficult to figure out what are the condition that
the DCPT and SPT are comparable and when are not. However, until we have SPT values of
adjacent layer, DCPT blow count were used as a qualitative tool, not quantitative.
The nature of the subsoil was investigated from the debris collected at different depths to identify

the stratification and type of soil at initial stage. Disturbed soil samples were retrieved from boring
tools at depth intervals of 1.5m. The samples were wrapped in plastic bags and labeled.
The recorded DCPT values are without any correction of overburden pressure and water table. The
test was conducted without using liner. The maximum rod length used was 15 m.
2.4 Generalize Borehole-Log (Subsurface) findings
Project Borehole Generalize Generalize soil Characteristic

Name Identity depth, m
Brownish grey dense sandy silt with small gravel of weathered
0.0 – 2.20
phyllite
D-1
Radish brown to yellowish white highly weathered phyllitic
2.20 – 15.00
rock (WEAK BED ROCK)
Light grey to brownish medium dense to dense sandy gravel
0.0 – 3.65
with fresh to weathered fragments of phyllite with quartzite
D-2
Brownish fresh to slightly weathered phyllitic rock with
3.65 – 15.00
quartzite (WEAK BED ROCK)
Light grey to brownish medium dense sandy silt with small
0.0 – 1.65
gravel and clayey traces
Radish brown medium dense to dense sandy soil with gravel
D-3 1.65 – 4.20
and fragments of weathered phyllite
Light grey to brownish slightly weathered and highly fractured
4.20 -15.00
fine grained quartzite with phyllite (WEAK BED ROCK)
0.0 – 1.15 Dark grey to reddish soft sandy soil with clayey traces
Radish brown medium dense to dense highly fractured
1.15 -5.10
D-4 fragments of phyllite and quartzite with sandy soil
Light purple to reddish, highly fractured and slightly weathered
5.10 – 15.0
rock of phyllite with quartzite (WEAK BED ROCK)
0.0 – 1.00 Light grey medium dense gravel mix sandy soil
FLIP
NEPAL 1.00 – 2.00 Radish brown dense sandy soil with fragments of phyllite
RESORT Light grey dense sand mix gravel of weathered phyllite and
2.00 – 3.00
BUILDING quartzite
D–5
Radish brown to pale yellow very dense sandy soil with
3.00 – 5.00
fragments of phyllite
Brownish grey to pale yellow highly weathered phyllitic rock
5.00 – 10.00
(WEAK ROCK BED)
Brownish grey to radish loose to medium dense silty sand with
0.0 – 1.95
clay and small fragments of phyllite
Light Brown medium dense to very dense sandy silt with
D-7 1.95 – 3.00
gravel of fine grained quartzite and phyllite
Brownish grey to reddish slightly weathered and fractured rock
3.00 – 10.00
of phyllite with fine grained quartzite (WEAK BED ROCK)
Light brownish grey loose to medium dense silty sand with
0.0 – 4.00 fragments of phyllite (size of pebble, cobble and boulder) with
D-8 clayey traces
Light grey slightly weathered and fractured phyllitic rock
4.00 – 10.00
(WEAK BED ROCK)
Light raddhish to grey medium dense silty clay sand with
0.00 – 2.00
weathered phyllite with quartzite (pebble to cobble)
D-9
Light grey fresh to highly weathered fractured phyllitic rock
2.00 – 10.00
bed (WEAK BED ROCK)

2.5 Analysis of Allowable Bearing Pressure
The allowable bearing pressure (qa) is the maximum pressure that can be imposed on the
foundation soil taking into consideration the ultimate bearing capacity of the soil and the tolerable
settlement of the structure. Analysis to determine the ultimate bearing capacity and the pressure
corresponding to a specified maximum settlement were performed and the minimum pressure
obtained from the two analyses were adopted as the allowable bearing pressure.
2.5.1 Correlation between SPT and DCPT

Nc values of different bore holes are presented in the corresponding borelogs.
The dynamic cone resistance is correlated with the SPT – N number as given below:
Nc = 1.50 N for depths up to 3 m
Nc= 1.75 N for depths 3 to 6 m
Nc= 2.00 N for depths greater than 6 m
2.5.2 SPT correction

The SPT values have been corrected in accordance with the proposal of Skempton, (1986) and Liao
and Whitman (1987) as outlined below with consideration of field procedure, hammer efficiency,
borehole diameter, sample and rod length.
Correction of SPT N-value using the relation after Skempton, 1986

N60 = Em CB CS CR N/0.60
Where: N60 = SPT N value corrected for field procedure
Em = Hammer Efficiency
CB = borehole diameter correction
CS = Sample Correction
CR = rod length correction
N = SPT N value recorded in the field
The correction factors taken are :
Em =0.55 for hand drop hammer, due to lack of true verticalness and proper speed of SPT blow
CB = 1.0 for 65 mm to 115 mm dia. Borehole,
Cs =1.0 for standard sampler,
CR =0.7 for rod length 0.00 - 2.99,
=0.75 for rod length 3.00 - 3.99 m,
=0.85 for rod length 4.00 - 5.99 m,
=0.95 for rod length 6.00 - 9.99 m,
=1 for rod length beyond 10.00 m,
Correction for overburden
Correction of corrected N60 field value for overburden pressure using the relation after Liao and
Whitman, 1987
(N1)60 = N60 √(100kPa/σ'z)
Where: N60 = SPT N value corrected for field procedure
(N1)60 = SPT N-value corrected for field procedures and overburden stress
Similarly,
The correction for values of N should be made for the field SPT values for depths. Modified
correction in 1974, peck, Hanson and Thornburn with suggested standard pressure of 100 kN/m2
corresponding to a depth of 5 m of soil with bulk density 20kN/m2 can be represented by the
following equation:
(N1)60 = N60 Cn

Cn=0.77 log (2000/p0)
Where, p0 is effective overburden pressure in kN/m2.
2.5.3 Allowable Bearing Pressure based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity
Since the soil in the vicinity of the foundation level has been found to be granular or non-plastic,
cohesion less sandy gravel with pebble and cobble, the allowable bearing capacity has been
analyzed using the angle of friction and cohesion values from direct shear test results. Empirical
formula of Indian Standard IS 6403:1981 is applicable for this type of soils has been used to obtain
the allowable bearing pressure with safety factor equal to 3.
qa = c Nc sc dc ic+q (Nq-1) sq dq iq+1/2*B ſ Nſ sſ dſ iſ W’ (2.1)
Where: qa = net allowable bearing pressure, t/m2
C = cohesion in t/m2
Nc, Nq, Nſ = Bearing capacity factors
sc, sq, sſ = Shape factors,
dc, dq, dſ = Depths factors
ic, iq, iſ = Inclination factors
q = Effective surcharge at the base level of foundation in t/m2
B = Width of footing in m,
ſ = Bulk unit weight of soil sample in t/m3
W’ = Correction factor for location of water table
The values of Nc, Nq, and Nſ may be obtained from Table 2.
Table 2, Bearing Capacity Factor
Angle of friction Ø (degree) Nc Nq Nſ

0 5.14 1 0
5 6.49 1.57 0.45
10 8.35 2.47 1.22
15 10.98 3.94 2.65
20 14.83 6.4 5.39
25 20.72 10.66 10.88
30 30.14 18.4 22.4
35 46.12 33.3 48.03
40 75.31 64.2 109.41
45 138.88 134.88 271.76
50 266.89 319.07 762.89
The values of sc, sq, and sſ may be obtained from Table 3.

Table 3, Shape Factors
Shape of Footing Sc Sq Sſ
Square 1.3 1.3 1.3
The depth factors shall be as
dc,= 1+0.2 Df/B√NØ
dq,= dſ = 1 for Ø<10̊
dq,= dſ = 1+0.1 Df/B√NØ for Ø>10̊
The inclination factor shall be as under
ic = iq = (1-α/90)2 and iſ = (1-α/Ø)2
W’ (effect of water table)
If water table is likely to permanently remains at or below a depth of (D f+B) beneath the ground
level surrounding the footing then W’ = 1.
If the water table is located at depth Df or likely to rise to the base of the footing or above then the
value of W’ shall be taken as 0.5.
If the water table is likely to permanently got located at depth D f<Dw<(Df+B), then the value of W’
be obtained by linear interpolation.
2.5.4 Allowable Bearing Pressure based on Tolerable Settlement
SPT/DCPT methods proposed by Schmertmann Hartmann and Meyerhof, modified by Bowels are
used.
The semi empirical strain influence factor method proposed by Schmertmann and Hartmann (1978)
is as follows:
Se = C1.C2 ∆qƩ0z1(Iz/Es)∆z
Where
Se = net allowable settlement
C1 = a correction factor for the depth of foundation embedment = 1-0.5 (q/∆q)
q = effective overburden pressure on foundation
C2 = a correction factor to account into creep in soil = 1+0.2 log (time in year/0.1)
∆q = difference between stress at level of foundation and overburden pressure.
∆z = Thickness of soil layer

Es = Modulus of elasticity of sand
Iz = Strain influence at depth z
Approximate relationship between Cone penetration resistance (qc) and SPT value (N1)60 with
Stress- Strain Modulus Es (Bowles, 1982) are given below:
qc/N Es (kN/m2 ) Soil type
300-800 2.5 qc Coarse sand with small gravel
2.5.5 Pile Foundation
1  n
A p  Dr N r  PD N q    KPDi tan  . Asi
Qu1 = 2  i l
Ap CNc  c. Asi

Qu2 =
Qu = Qu1 + Qu2
Where,
Ap = Cross sectional area of pile toe
D = Pile Stem diameter
ɣ = effective unit weight of soil at pile toe
PD = effective over burden pressure at pile toe
Nɣ & Nq = bearing capacity factor depending upon the angle of internal friction at toe.
i l = summation of n layers in which pile is installed.
Ø = angle of internal friction
 1  sin  
K = coefficient of earth pressure   
 1  sin  
Pdi = effective over burden pressure for the i th layer where i varies from 1 to n.
δ = angle of wall friction between the pile
Asi = surface area of pile stem in the i th layer
c = Cohesion of Soil
Nc = Skemption factor and α = Adhesion Factor

For working out a safe load carrying capacity of the pile, a factor of safety of 2.5 is adopted.
BASED ON MEYERHOF’S
Qutip =120 N Ab, KN and Qushaft=Naverage Asi, KN
For working out a safe load carrying capacity of the pile, a factor of safety of 2.5 and 4 is adopted.
BASED ON DECOURT, 1995

Qutip=Kb Naveragebase Ab, KN and Qushaft=α (2.8 N60 + 10) Asi, KN
Where, α = 0.5 to 0.6 for sandy and 1 for clayey
Kb
Soil Type Kb
Sand 165
Sandy Silt 120
Clayey Silt 100
Clay 80
The bearing capacity of a single pile is to be determined from loading or failure test of a pile during
construction works. The purpose of the test is one or more of the following:
 to establish criteria for installation of working piles
 to establish settlement of working load
 to get an idea of the suitability of the pile for a particular purpose
 to determine the safe load capacity
2.5.6 Estimation of Bearing Capacity (Rock/Boulder)

Foundation on Intact Rock
When the loaded area is same or slightly less than the spacing of open vertical joints, for a footing
resting at the surface or near the surface or a pile, the ultimate bearing capacity, q ult is,
qult =σc
If the loaded area is much smaller, i.e. less than 1/5th of the spacing of open vertical joints as may
be in the case of pile, the ultimate bearing capacity will be greater than σ ci and is obtained by
considering one of the theories adopted for soils, i.e Terzaghi’s,
qult = 1.2 c’ Nc + 0.5 ɣBNr
Where,
c’=cohesion intercept of intact rock
B=width or diameter of the loaded area and ɣ=density of rock

Nc and Nr = bearing capacity factors, depend on the friction angle of intact rock
The rupture surface may develop on one side, due to defects in the rock. Therefore qult may be
taken as 50% of the value given by above equation. Studies of model footings on rock-like material
have shown (Ramamurthy 1995), that qult may be taken as 1.4 σci.
If the vertical joints are tight, even in this case q ult will be greater than σci; the qult may be obtained
by enhancing σci by considering the influence of confinement, if the joint sets dip on either side, the
qult will be greater than σcj, compressive strength and shear stresses developed on the different
combination of joint planes with one of the joint planes dipping under the loaded area from its one
of the edges.
Alternatively, the qult may be estimated by enhancing the compressive strength of the rock mass, σ cj
(Ramamurthy 1995) using joint factor, j f. it has been concluded from model studies that qult of rock
mass for surface footing could be taken as 1.7σcj; σcj is estimated from joint factor, this may take
care of rotation of some of the blocks.
Heavily Fractured Rock
When the rock mass is heavily fractured (i.e. c’ = 0) and the strip foundation is to be located at
some depth Df, the ultimate bearing capacity have been calculated by considering rupture planes
under the footing and the surrounding mass (Pauker 1889),
qult = ɣ Df tan4
Where
Df = depth of foundation, ɣ = density of rock mass and Ø’ = friction angle, degrees.
For surface footings, above equation gives qult = 0 as in the case of gravelly soil.
By considering crushing of rock under the footing and with the confining pressure from the sides
acting equal to σci, Goodman (1989) suggested
qult =σci or σci (NØ+1)
Where, Ø’ is the friction angle of the intact rock and N Ø = tan2 , ignoring its cohesion
component. For a value of Ø’ = 30°, above equation will give q ult four times the unconfined
compressive strength for crushing of rock under a symmetrical condition of side confinement.
The influence of size of footing with respect to the spacing of joints (horizontal and vertical),
Bishnoi (1968) showed for open vertical joints that
qult = σ ci

Where, s = spacing of joints and B = width of footing.
When s = B, qult = σci and when the spacing between the open vertical joints increases to five times
the width, the qult will increase to 3.9 σci for Ø’ = 30°. The Ø’ value will increase the qult above
equation is applicable when Ø’>0. With the tilting failure of footing, q ult will be 1.95σci.
As per above equations the qult will generally be high for rock mass. The actual values will be
lower mainly due to the rotation and sliding of some blocks within the zone of influence. with the
uncertainty involved in the estimation of Ø’ and σci, it is always desirable to adopt larger factor of
safety or conservative values of σ ci and Ø’.
Bearing Capacity with Shape Factors
For estimating the ultimate bearing capacity of a strip footing resting on rock surface, Coates
(1970) suggested a simplified expression in the following form by considering failure along two
planes,
qult=c’ Nc + q Nq + 0.5 ɣ B Nɣ
Where,
c’ = cohesion of rock and q = surcharge loading around the footing
B = width of footing and ɣ = density of rock
Nc = , Nq = tan6 and Nr = Nq + 1
Ø’ = friction angle of rock.
This equation gives good results for Ø’ varying from 0° to 45° and the results are comparable with
Terzaghi’s equation for the bearing capacity of strip footing. For square and circular footings on
rocks, the term Nc will be taken as,
Nc=7 tan4
If the rupture surface is not likely to develop on either side of the footing due to site conditions or
loading and the failure is likely to occur on one side, only 50% of q ult will have to be taken into
consideration.
The shear strength parameters, c’ and Ø’ for rock could be evaluated by conducting two plate -
bearing tests at the surface of the rock. The size of the plate should match with the joint system,
usually less than 1 * 1 m2 sizes. The results obtained could be applied to a larger loaded area.
A more rigorous expression by Terzaghi (1943) may be adopted for strip loading
qult = c’ Nc sc + ɣ Df Nq + 0.5 ɣ B Nɣ sq

The values of Nc, Nq and Nr as per Terzaghi are given in Table 4, for various values of Ø’
considering general shear failure. The values of sc for circular and square footings are 1.2 and sq
for square footing = 0.8 and for circular footing = 0.6.
When no test data of c’ and Ø’ is available, RQD from bore log may be adopted with caution to
estimate the ultimate bearing capacity from
qult = σci(RQD/100)2
Where, σci = compressive strength of intact specimen.
In most cases, (RQD/100)2 may very between 1/3 and 1/10; for lower values of RQD (<25%), it is
better to treat rock as soil/dense gravelly material (Tomlinson 1986).
For very preliminary estimation,
Net allowable bearing pressure (qa) based on rock material as per Bureau of Indian Standards (IS:
1207-1987)
Materials qa (MPa)
Massive crystalline bedrock including granite, diorite, gneiss, trap, hard limestone 10.0
and dolomite
Foliated rocks such as schist or slate in sound condition 4.0
Bedded limestone in sound condition 4.0
Sedimentary rock, including hard shales and sandstones 2.5
Soft or broken bedrock (excluding shale) and soft limestone 1.0
Soft shale 0.4
It is common to use Factor of safety 6-10, if RQD is less than 0.75. (J. E. Bowles).
2.5.7 Analysis of Foundations
General Assumption
 Each stratum was considered as a combination of different heterogeneous layer, so

maximum thickness considered for unique soil properties was limited to 1.5 m otherwise as
tested.
 Corrected SPT value beyond depth of exploration was same as value at end of borehole
depth.
 In between two tested samples, properties of soil in middle sections were interpolated as
relevancy of data.
 Design data were interpolated between semi empirical data form field test and lab test
results. Some of input and output data were refined as per relevancy with correlated data.

DESIGN INPUT DATA

Project : Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Foundation Hole No.: D1 ~ D9
Client : FLIK NEPAL RESORT PET LTD Station (Km+m)
Location : SARANKOT, Kaski, Nepal Ground Water GL, m : NO
Identification = Modeled Strata Depth of exploration, m: 15.0
Clayey layer exist ; fro m 0.0 m to 0.0 m 0.0 m to 0.0 m 0.0 m to 0.0 m 0.0 m to 0.0 m 0.0 m to 0.0 m Designed Ground Water GL, m : 0.00
Hammer energy Correction, Er: 60 % Scour Depth, m: 1.50 1.5
Drilling Method : ROTARY r Soil Condition : = Drain Void Ratio (e) = 0.730324 Depth of Pile Top from NGL, m = 1.5
Drainage Condition
Is
there Part of Design D50 N value
Silt soil, (Equivalent) Bulk from Liquid after Field Field Lab Lab Design
Depth, or Sandy or SPT N- Density, Seive Limit, Dilatancy Based Based C, Based Based c, PHI Design Cohesion, Design c, Cc ,
m not* Clayey Value t/m3 analysis LL (%) Correction Ncoorected Ф, ° t/m2 Ф, ° t/m2 Ф, ° Ф, ° T/m2 KN/m2 KN/m3 **
0 n Sand 5 1.75 0.5 0 5 6 23 - 30 (1) 27 27 - 1.0 - D E
1.5 n Sand 6 1.85 0.50 - 6 7 24 4.4 31 - 27 > 30 4.4 - - D E
3 n Sand 17 1.85 0.50 - 17 18 29 11.3 32 - 30 > 31 11.3 - - D E
4.5 n Sand 18 1.85 0.50 - 18 20 30 12.5 32 - 31 > 31 12.5 - - D E
6 n Sand 23 1.85 0.50 - 23 26 32 16.3 33 - 32 > 32 16.3 - - D E
7.5 n Sand 33 1.85 1.00 - 33 35 35 21.9 34 - 34 > 34 21.9 - - D E
9 n Sand 41 1.85 1.00 - 41 42 37 26.3 35 - 36 > 36 26.3 - - D E
10.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D E
12 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D E
13.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D E
15 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D E
16.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
18 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
19.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
21 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
22.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
24 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
25.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
27 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
28.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
30 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
31.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
33 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
34.5 n Sand > 50 > 2.00 >1 - 50 50 39 31.3 > 37 - 38 > 38 31.3 - - D A
* n = NO * y = YES ** E = Estimated ** A = Assumed D Drain U Undrain

BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW (OPEN) FOUNDATION

Client : FLIK NEPAL RESORT PET LTD Station (Km+m) 0
Identification = Modeled Strata Designed Ground Water GL, m : 0
Depth
of unit Effective
Width Length water Depth Angle Cohesion weight Surcharge
of of Area of table of of of soil of soil at base of
footing footing footing (Dw), Footing friction ©, (‫)ץ‬, footing (q),
(B), m (L), m (A), m 2 m (Df), m (Φ), ° kg/cm 2 kg/m 3 NΦ" kg/cm 2 Nc Nq Ny
1.0 29 0.00 0.002 37.9 0.08 28.04 16.45 12.85

1.5 30 0.00 0.002 29.7 0.13 30.14 18.40 15.07
2.0 30 0.00 0.002 29.7 0.17 30.14 18.40 15.07
2.5 31 0.00 0.002 22.7 0.22 32.50 21.00 18.03
3.0 31 0.00 0.002 22.7 0.26 32.50 21.00 18.03
2.0 2.0 4 0.0 4.0 31 0.00 0.002 22.7 0.35 32.50 21.00 18.03
5.0 31 0.00 0.002 22.7 0.44 32.50 21.00 18.03
6.0 32 0.00 0.002 16.8 0.61 36.05 23.50 21.09
7.0 33 0.00 0.002 11.9 0.71 38.50 26.50 24.84
8.0 35 0.00 0.002 4.7 0.82 46.12 33.30 33.93
9.0 36 0.00 0.002 2.3 0.92 51.15 37.20 39.45
Net Gross
Ultimate Allowable Allowable
Water Bearing Bearing Bearing
Depth
table Capacity Factor Capacity of Capacity
of
Shape Factor Depth factor Inclination factor correction of Soil of Footing Soil (qna), of Soil
2 2 2
Sq Sc S‫ץ‬ dq dc d‫ץ‬ iq ic w' (qc ), t/m Safety (Df), m t/m (qga), t/m
1.48 1.59 0.60 1.15 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 26.49 3.0 1.0 8.25 10.00
1.50 1.61 0.60 1.22 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 48.00 3.0 1.5 15.07 17.85
1.50 1.61 0.60 1.29 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 66.07 3.0 2.0 20.79 24.49
1.52 1.65 0.60 1.25 1.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 91.73 3.0 2.5 29.03 33.66
1.52 1.65 0.60 1.28 1.39 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 111.11 3.0 3.0 35.19 40.74
1.52 1.65 0.60 1.31 1.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 150.37 3.0 4.0 47.66 55.06
1.52 1.65 0.60 1.34 1.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 189.96 3.0 5.0 60.24 69.49
1.53 1.65 0.60 1.34 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 302.26 3.0 6.0 96.75 108.75
1.54 1.69 0.60 1.35 1.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 401.45 3.0 7.0 129.15 143.15
1.57 1.72 0.60 1.34 1.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 582.12 3.0 8.0 188.71 204.71
1.59 1.73 0.60 1.33 1.54 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 735.08 3.0 9.0 239.03 257.03

Settlement Analysis of Open (SHALLOW) Foundation

Semi Empirical Method by Schmertmann and Hartmann
Identification = Modeled Strata Depth of exploration, m: 15
Depth of Foundation D = 1.50 m Designed Ground Water GL, 0m :
Width of Foundation B = 2.00 m Scour Depth, m: 1.5
Length of Foundation L = 2.00 m Depth of Pile Top from NGL, 1.5
m=
Allowable Bearing Capacity (Shear) of soil for designated foundation; 15.1 t/m2 2
Assumed Safe Bearing Capacity of foundation (Shear or Settlement), 15.1 t/m2
In case of 2 m wide, Shallow Fondation resting on 1.5 m below the NGL effective depth =5.5 m
Z to
Bulk the
Density center
Depth, (gamma) Ratio qc, Es, of I z at center Settlement,
m Soil Layer, m t/m 3 N- Corrected of qc/N KN/m 2 KN/m 2 layer, m of layer Iz/Es * ΔZ Ss
1.5 1.5 to 3.0 1.85 7 6.3 4410 11025 0.75 0.400 0.000054 9.5014
3 3.0 to 3.0 1.85 18 6.3 11340 28350 1.50 0.417 0.000000 0.0000
4.5 3.0 to 4.5 1.85 20 6.3 12600 31500 2.25 0.292 0.000014 2.4248
6 4.5 to 6.0 1.85 26 6.3 16380 40950 3.75 0.042 0.000002 0.2665
7.5 6.0 to 7.5 1.85 35 8 28000 70000 5.25 -0.208 0.000000 0.0000
9 7.5 to 9.0 1.85 42 8 33600 84000 6.75 -0.458 0.000000 0.0000
10.5 9.0 to 10.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 8.25 -0.708 0.000000 0.0000
12 10.5 to 12.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 9.75 -0.958 0.000000 0.0000
13.5 12.0 to 13.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 11.25 -1.208 0.000000 0.0000
15 13.5 to 15.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 12.75 -1.458 0.000000 0.0000
16.5 15.0 to 16.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 14.25 -1.708 0.000000 0.0000
18 16.5 to 18.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 15.75 -1.958 0.000000 0.0000
19.5 18.0 to 19.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 17.25 -2.208 0.000000 0.0000
21 19.5 to 21.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 18.75 -2.458 0.000000 0.0000
22.5 21.0 to 22.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 20.25 -2.708 0.000000 0.0000
24 22.5 to 24.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 21.75 -2.958 0.000000 0.0000
25.5 24.0 to 25.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 23.25 -3.208 0.000000 0.0000
Effective Bulk Density = 1.85 Settlement in Sandy layer = 12.2 mm
Depth correction factor C1 = 0.89 0.89 Creep Factor C2 = 1.6 Assuming 100 yrs for settlement
Now Settlement prediction on cohesionless soil with designed load; 12.2 mm
Semi Empirical Method Based on Clayey layer

In case of 2 m wide, Shallow Fondation resting on 1.5 m below the NGL effective depth for clayey soil =5.5 m
Design Void
Depth, Compression Compression Ratio, Settlement,
m Soil Layer, m Index, cc Index, cc e0 sigma/z ∆P P0 H Sc Predicted Settlement, Sc
1.5 1.5 to 3.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.999 15.1 2.8 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
3 3.0 to 3.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.508 7.7 5.6 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
4.5 3.0 to 4.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.194 2.9 8.3 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
6 4.5 to 6.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.096 1.4 11.1 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
7.5 6.0 to 7.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.065 1.0 13.9 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
9 7.5 to 9.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.000 0.0 16.7 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
10.5 9.0 to 10.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.000 0.0 19.7 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
12 10.5 to 12.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.000 0.0 22.7 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
13.5 12.0 to 13.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.000 0.0 25.7 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
15 13.5 to 15.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.000 0.0 28.7 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
16.5 15.0 to 16.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.000 0.0 31.7 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
Settlement in clayey layer= 0.0 mm
Limiting Settlement as per Code; 40.00 mm 0
Predicted Total Settlement with designated load; 12.2 mm

BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW (OPEN) FOUNDATION

Identification = Modeled Strata Designed Ground Water GL, m : 0
Depth
of unit Effective
Width Length water Depth Angle Cohesion weight Surcharge
of of Area of table of of of soil of soil at base of
footing footing footing (Dw), Footing friction ©, (‫)ץ‬, footing (q),
(B), m (L), m (A), m 2 m (Df), m (Φ), ° kg/cm 2 kg/m 3 NΦ" kg/cm 2 Nc Nq Ny
1.0 34 0.00 0.002 7.9 0.08 42.08 29.70 29.04

1.5 35 0.00 0.002 4.7 0.13 46.12 33.30 33.93
2.0 35 0.00 0.002 4.7 0.17 46.12 33.30 33.93
2.5 35 0.00 0.002 4.7 0.22 46.12 33.30 33.93
3.0 35 0.00 0.002 4.7 0.26 46.12 33.30 33.93
15.0 15.0 225 0.0 4.0 36 0.00 0.002 2.3 0.35 51.15 37.20 39.45
5.0 36 0.00 0.002 2.3 0.44 51.15 37.20 39.45
6.0 37 0.00 0.002 0.7 0.61 56.30 42.60 47.02
7.0 37 0.00 0.002 0.7 0.71 56.30 42.60 47.02
8.0 38 0.00 0.002 0.0 0.82 62.00 48.90 56.14
9.0 38 0.00 0.002 0.0 0.92 62.00 48.90 56.14
Net Gross
Ultimate Allowable Allowable
Water Bearing Bearing Bearing
Depth
table Capacity Factor Capacity of Capacity
of
Shape Factor Depth factor Inclination factor correction of Soil of Footing Soil (qna), of Soil
2 2 2
Sq Sc S‫ץ‬ dq dc d‫ץ‬ iq ic w' (qc ), t/m Safety (Df), m t/m (qga), t/m
1.56 1.71 0.60 1.02 1.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 81.42 3.0 1.0 26.56 28.31
1.57 1.72 0.60 1.03 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 125.55 3.0 1.5 40.92 43.70
1.57 1.72 0.60 1.03 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 149.70 3.0 2.0 48.67 52.37
1.57 1.72 0.60 1.04 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 174.23 3.0 2.5 56.54 61.16
1.57 1.72 0.60 1.05 1.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 199.16 3.0 3.0 64.54 70.09
1.59 1.73 0.60 1.07 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 283.54 3.0 4.0 92.05 99.45
1.59 1.73 0.60 1.08 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 342.54 3.0 5.0 111.10 120.35
1.60 1.76 0.60 1.10 1.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 540.58 3.0 6.0 176.19 188.19
1.60 1.76 0.60 1.11 1.19 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 624.60 3.0 7.0 203.53 217.53
1.62 1.79 0.60 1.12 1.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 823.20 3.0 8.0 269.07 285.07
1.62 1.79 0.60 1.14 1.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.5 924.87 3.0 9.0 302.29 320.29

Settlement Analysis of Open (SHALLOW) Foundation

Semi Empirical Method by Schmertmann and Hartmann
Identification = Modeled Strata Depth of exploration, m: 15
Depth of Foundation D = 2.00 m Designed Ground Water GL, 0m :
Width of Foundation B = 15.00 m Scour Depth, m: 1.5
Length of Foundation L = 15.00 m Depth of Pile Top from NGL, 1.5
m=
Allowable Bearing Capacity (Shear) of soil for designated foundation; 48.7 t/m2 2
Assumed Safe Bearing Capacity of foundation (Shear or Settlement), 46.9 t/m2
In case of 15 m wide, Shallow Fondation resting on 2 m below the NGL effective depth =32 m
Z to
Bulk the
Density center
Depth, (gamma) Ratio qc, Es, of I z at center Settlement,
m Soil Layer, m t/m 3 N- Corrected of qc/N KN/m 2 KN/m 2 layer, m of layer Iz/Es * ΔZ Ss
2 2.0 to 3.5 1.85 7 6.3 4410 11025 0.75 0.140 0.000019 12.6240
3.5 3.5 to 3.5 1.85 18 6.3 11340 28350 1.50 0.180 0.000000 0.0000
5 3.5 to 5.0 1.85 20 6.3 12600 31500 2.25 0.220 0.000010 6.9432
6.5 5.0 to 6.5 1.85 26 6.3 16380 40950 3.75 0.300 0.000011 7.2831
8 6.5 to 8.0 1.85 35 8 28000 70000 5.25 0.380 0.000008 5.3968
9.5 8.0 to 9.5 1.85 42 8 33600 84000 6.75 0.460 0.000008 5.4441
11 9.5 to 11.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 8.25 0.483 0.000007 4.8050
12.5 11.0 to 12.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 9.75 0.450 0.000007 4.4736
14 12.5 to 14.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 11.25 0.417 0.000006 4.1423
15.5 14.0 to 15.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 12.75 0.383 0.000006 3.8109
17 15.5 to 17.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 14.25 0.350 0.000005 3.4795
18.5 17.0 to 18.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 15.75 0.317 0.000005 3.1481
20 18.5 to 20.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 17.25 0.283 0.000004 2.8167
21.5 20.0 to 21.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 18.75 0.250 0.000004 2.4854
23 21.5 to 23.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 20.25 0.217 0.000003 2.1540
24.5 23.0 to 24.5 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 21.75 0.183 0.000003 1.8226
26 24.5 to 26.0 2.00 50 8 40000 100000 23.25 0.150 0.000002 1.4912
Effective Bulk Density = 1.85 Settlement in Sandy layer = 75.0 mm
Depth correction factor C1 = 0.96 0.96 Creep Factor C2 = 1.6 Assuming 100 yrs for settlement
Now Settlement prediction on cohesionless soil with designed load; 75.0 mm
Semi Empirical Method Based on Clayey layer

In case of 15 m wide, Shallow Fondation resting on 2 m below the NGL effective depth for clayey soil =32 m
Design Void
Depth, Compression Compression Ratio, Settlement,
m Soil Layer, m Index, cc Index, cc e0 sigma/z ∆P P0 H Sc Predicted Settlement, Sc
2 2.0 to 3.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.999 46.9 3.7 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
3.5 3.5 to 3.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.958 44.9 6.5 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
5 3.5 to 5.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.921 43.2 9.3 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
6.5 5.0 to 6.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.855 40.1 12.0 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
8 6.5 to 8.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.773 36.3 14.8 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
9.5 8.0 to 9.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.707 33.1 17.6 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
11 9.5 to 11.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.631 29.6 20.6 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
12.5 11.0 to 12.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.550 25.8 23.6 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
14 12.5 to 14.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.469 22.0 26.6 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
15.5 14.0 to 15.5 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.395 18.5 29.6 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
17 15.5 to 17.0 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.350 16.4 32.6 1.50 0.000000 0.0000000
Settlement in clayey layer= 0.0 mm
Limiting Settlement as per Code; 75.00 mm 0
Predicted Total Settlement with designated load; 75.0 mm

CAPACITY OF CAST IN-SITU BORED PILE

Project : Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Foundation Hole No. = 0
Client : FLIK NEPAL RESORT PET LTD Excavation Depth, m = 4.0 Station (Km+m) = 0+000
Location : SARANKOT, Kaski, Nepal Depth of Pile Top from NGL, m = 4.0 Ground Water GL, m = NO
Identification = Modeled Strata Drill with Bentonite Slurry 7200 Depth of exploration, m = 15.0
Length of Pile (L), m = 10.0 Base of the pile lies on = 14.0 Designed Ground Water GL, m 0=.0
Diameter of Pile (D), mm = 800 Probable Liquefaction depth, m = 1.5 Scour Depth, m = 4.0
Area of Pile X-Section, m2 = 0.503 End Bearing Resistance, qt, Tons = 110.8 Shaft Bearing Resistance, qs , Tons = 19.3
Allowable Load Carrying Capacity of Pile (Q), Tons = 130.2
Load Capacity of Pile @ liquefaction (Q liq), Tons = 216.9 Indian Standard Meyerhof Decourt Method
Effective End Skin End Shaft Shaft
Surface End Bearing Skin Bearing End Bearing Shaft Bearing End Bearing
Effective Design Design c, Surcharge Bearing Bearing Bearing Bearing Bearing
Depth, m area (A si ), N-value Resistance Resistance Resistance Resistance Resistance q t ,
Thickness, m Ф, ° KN/m2 Pressure, Resistance Resistance Resistance Resistance Resistance
m2 (Qupc), Tonnes (Qusc), Tonnes (Qus ), Tonnes (Qus ), Tonnes t/m2
t/m2 Qups, Tonnes (Quss ), Tonnes (Qus), Tonnes (Qup), Tonnes q s , t/m2
0 - 27 - 0.000 - 6 - - - - - - - - - -
1.5 - 27 - 0.578 - 7 - - 4.1 - 19.6 - 27.0 - 8.1 -
3 - 31 - 1.395 - 20 - - 11.2 - 31.7 - 43.5 - 22.2 -
4.5 1.5 31 - 2.513 3.8 22 - - 20.0 1.1 37.7 6.6 51.8 4.5 39.9 0.3
6 1.5 33 - 3.649 3.8 29 - - 34.2 1.8 51.3 8.7 70.5 5.9 68.1 0.5
7.5 1.5 35 - 4.793 3.8 39 - - 56.3 2.5 63.3 11.8 87.1 7.2 111.9 0.7
9 1.5 36 - 5.940 3.8 46 - - 81.7 2.7 72.4 13.9 99.5 8.2 162.5 0.7
10.5 1.5 38 - 7.090 3.8 50 - - 110.8 3.5 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.3 0.9
12 1.5 38 - 8.241 3.8 50 - - 110.8 4.0 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.4 1.1
13.5 1.5 38 - 8.907 3.8 50 - - 110.8 3.6 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.5 1.0
15 1.5 38 - 9.000 3.8 50 - - 110.9 3.7 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.6 1.0
16.5 1.5 38 - 9.076 3.8 50 - - 110.9 3.7 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.6 1.0
18 1.5 38 - 9.140 3.8 50 - - 110.9 3.7 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.6 1.0
19.5 1.5 38 - 9.194 3.8 50 - - 110.9 3.8 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.7 1.0
21 1.5 38 - 9.240 3.8 50 - - 110.9 3.8 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.7 1.0
22.5 1.5 38 - 9.280 3.8 50 - - 111.0 3.8 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.7 1.0
24 1.5 38 - 9.315 3.8 50 - - 111.0 3.8 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.8 1.0
25.5 1.5 38 - 9.346 3.8 50 - - 111.0 3.8 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.8 1.0
27 1.5 38 - 9.373 3.8 50 - - 111.0 3.8 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.8 1.0
28.5 1.5 38 - 9.398 3.8 50 - - 111.0 3.8 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.8 1.0
30 1.5 38 - 9.420 3.8 50 - - 111.0 3.9 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.8 1.0
31.5 1.5 38 - 9.440 3.8 50 - - 111.0 3.9 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 220.8 1.0
33 1.5 38 - 10.089 3.8 50 - - 119.0 4.1 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 236.7 1.1
34.5 1.5 38 - 12.416 3.8 50 - - 119.0 5.1 75.4 15.1 103.7 8.5 236.7 1.3

Output
Shallow Foundation
Breaking strength of sample (boulder)
Point Load Index (Mpa) ≈ 0.6 to 2.6

Rock/Boulder Type Phyllitic with quartzite
Rock Strength Very weak to weak
Assumed Uniaxial Compressive Strength (Mpa) ≈ 15 to 65.0
RQD ≈ <25
Ultimate Bearing Capacity (Qult1), T/m2 ≈ 93.75 to 406.25
Factor of Safety 6
Proposed Depth of Foundation, m  3.0 m
Safe Bearing Capacity (Qult1), T/m2 ≈ 15.6 to 67.7
Based on IS 1207 - 1987 (Qall), T/m2 ≈ 15.6
Recommended Allowable Bearing Capacity (Qallrec), T/m2 ≈ 15.6
SAFE BEARING CAPACITY OF FOUNDATION AT PROPOSED COSTRUCTION SITE
Theoretical Recommended Theoretical Recommended Theoretical Recommended

Depth of Safe Bearing design Safe Safe Bearing design Safe Safe Bearing design Safe
footing, m Capacity, Bearing Capacity, Bearing Capacity, Bearing
t/m2 Capacity, t/m2 t/m2 Capacity, t/m2 t/m2 Capacity, t/m2
Width of Square Footing, m Width of Square Footing, m Width of Square Footing, m
1.5 2 2.5
1 10.2 10.2 10.0 10.0 9.9 9.9
1.5 18.4 15.6 17.8 15.6 17.6 15.6
2 23.8 15.6 24.5 15.6 27.1 15.6
2.5 34.1 15.6 33.7 15.6 34.7 15.6
3 41.3 15.6 40.7 15.6 40.3 15.6
4 55.7 15.6 55.1 15.6 54.4 15.6
5 70.2 15.6 69.5 15.6 76.6 15.6
6 109.8 15.6 108.8 15.6 121.0 15.6
7 144.3 15.6 143.1 15.6 149.0 15.6
8 206.0 15.6 204.7 15.6 201.6 15.6
9 258.4 15.6 248.5 15.6 218.0 15.6
Width of Square Footing, m Width of Square Footing, m Width of Square Footing, m
3.0 4.0 5.0
1 11.2 11.2 11.4 11.4 11.8 11.8
1.5 17.6 15.6 20.2 15.6 20.6 15.6
2 26.8 15.6 26.6 15.6 26.8 15.6
2.5 34.0 15.6 33.3 15.6 33.2 15.6
3 41.6 15.6 40.3 15.6 39.8 15.6
4 53.9 15.6 55.3 15.6 60.2 15.6
5 75.9 15.6 74.8 15.6 86.7 15.6
6 119.9 15.6 117.0 15.6 104.1 15.6
7 139.2 15.6 120.2 15.6 107.4 15.6
8 177.8 15.6 141.6 15.6 123.6 15.6
9 190.2 15.6 152.4 15.6 130.0 15.6

Width of Square Footing, Width of Square Footing, Width of Square Footing,

m m m
6.0 7.0 10.0
1 12.2 12.2 14.5 14.5 18.3 15.6
1.5 21.1 15.6 21.5 15.6 26.1 15.6
2 27.1 15.6 27.4 15.6 36.9 15.6
2.5 33.3 15.6 37.5 15.6 44.2 15.6
3 44.4 15.6 44.5 15.6 58.2 15.6
4 59.5 15.6 66.6 15.6 84.8 15.6
5 95.1 15.6 93.9 15.6 100.0 15.6
6 151.1 15.6 140.0 15.6 108.9 15.6
7 158.9 15.6 143.1 15.6 112.3 15.6
8 178.6 15.6 158.2 15.6 121.2 15.6
9 185.1 15.6 163.6 15.6 125.5 15.6
Width of Square Footing, Width of Square Footing, Width of Square Footing,
m m m
15.0 20.0 30.0
1 28.3 15.6 35.7 15.6 27.8 15.6
1.5 43.7 15.6 41.1 15.6 31.0 15.6
2 50.6 15.6 43.2 15.6 33.6 15.6
2.5 52.6 15.6 45.1 15.6 35.4 15.6
3 64.7 15.6 52.9 15.6 39.9 15.6
4 68.2 15.6 56.7 15.6 43.7 15.6
5 75.9 15.6 62.3 15.6 48.3 15.6
6 82.0 15.6 67.8 15.6 53.2 15.6
7 85.8 15.6 71.7 15.6 57.0 15.6
8 91.4 15.6 76.4 15.6 61.2 15.6
9 95.6 15.6 80.4 15.6 65.2 15.6
Deep Foundation (Cast In-Situ Bored Concrete Pile)
BEARING CAPACITY OF SINGLE VERTICAL PILE FOUNDATION GENERAL (Static)
Diameter of Pile, mm 800

Length of pile, m 10.0
Bearing Capacity, KN 1302
BEARING CAPACITY OF SINGLE VERTICAL PILE FOUNDATION (DYNAMIC)
Diameter of Pile, mm 800
Length of pile, m 10.0
Bearing Capacity, KN 2170

CAPACITY OF CAST IN-SITU BORED PILE ( for > 710 mm)
Effective Design c, End Bearing Shaft Bearing

Depth, m Design Ф, ° 2
Thickness, m KN/m2 Resistance q t , t/m Resistance q s , t/m2
0 - 27 - - -
1.5 - 27 - 8.1 -
3 - 31 - 22.2 -
4.5 1.5 31 - 39.9 0.3
6 1.5 33 - 68.1 0.5
7.5 1.5 35 - 111.9 0.7
9 1.5 36 - 162.5 0.7
10.5 1.5 38 - 220.3 0.9
12 1.5 38 - 220.4 1.1
13.5 1.5 38 - 220.5 1.0
15 1.5 38 - 220.6 1.0
16.5 1.5 38 - 220.6 1.0
18 1.5 38 - 220.6 1.0
19.5 1.5 38 - 220.7 1.0
21 1.5 38 - 220.7 1.0
22.5 1.5 38 - 220.7 1.0
24 1.5 38 - 220.8 1.0

2.6 Conclusion and Recommendation
o The proposed building site over Sarankot is on top residual soil deposits followed by phyllitic
rock with quartzite, Seti formation of Lesser Himalaya.
o Rock is slightly to highly weathered in nature, fall on weak stage.
Recommendation
o A recommended allowable bearing capacity of 2.0 m wide square, shallow (OPEN) foundation
near or at particular borehole 2.0 m depth is nearly equal to 156 KN/m2. The recommended
ABC is in safer side, which is within a settlement of 40mm. It takes care of differential
settlement as well.
o A recommended allowable bearing capacity of 15.0 m wide square, shallow (OPEN)

foundation near or at or at particular borehole at 2.0 m depth is nearly equal to 156 KN/m2.
The recommended ABC is in safer side, which is within a settlement of 75 mm. It takes care
of differential settlement as well.
o Refer Pages 31, 32 and 33 for more Details (Theoretical and recommended values)
o Considering size of armored and layered soil, compaction level of material and geotechnical
empirical calculation, recommended angle of friction of soil is ≈ 34°
o For 15 m wide square raft foundation, at 2.0 m below existing ground, Modulus of Sub-grade
reaction is ≈ 20,000 KN/m3, which changes significantly with depth and size of raft
foundation, so recommend to use with proper attention and calculation, based on actual size
and shape of footing.
o As described in the heading LIQUEFACTION in this report, sooner or later a very strong
earthquake is expected to occur in Nepal. Therefore the Foundation Engineer must pay due
attention in this regard.
o Because of presence of seepage water and probable rise in water table in summer, side fall
(collapse) is eminent. So, at the time of construction of foundation, it is strongly
recommended to design the appropriate temporary site protection measures based on the soil
properties shown in this report.
o The foundation Design Engineer needs not strictly follow the depth and dimension of
foundation selected in the bearing capacity analysis of this report. Designer is free to select
any other foundation dimension and depth depending upon the load of the structure. Allowable
bearing capacity depends on many variables such as adopted allowable settlement, type of
foundation, size and depth of foundation, importance of structure, cost of the project,

topographical, hydrological characteristics of river etc. Therefore once the size and depth of
the foundation is finalized the calculation may need to be refined during design phase based
on the parameters obtained from this investigation.
Important Notes;
o The recommendations and discussions presented in this report are based on the sub-surface
conditions encountered during the site work at the time of investigation and on the result of
the field and laboratory testing on samples obtained from limited number of boreholes. There
may be, however, conditions pertaining to the site which have not been into account due to the
limited number of boreholes.
o The ground water levels indicated on the logs of borings represents the measured levels at the
time of investigations and immediately 24 hour after completion of drilling works, which may
be permanent water table or seepage water from nearby small pouch of fractured/weathered
strata.
o It should be noted; however, that ground water levels are subject to variation caused by flood
and weather seasonal variations and by changes of local drainage and or pumping conditions,
and may at the times be significantly different to those measured during the investigation.
o PGA value used on this analysis report is based on a map prepared by Department of mines
and Geology, Nepal, which was only preliminary indication, due to lack of sufficient data,
which cannot forestall some diverse situation if large earthquake occur in nearby a rea.
o Conventional excavation equipment such as excavators, loaders and bulldozers will be

sufficient for most of the excavation work. Every effort should be done to avoid soil
disturbance at foundation level.
o Where space permits, the sides of the excavations shall be battered to a slope of two vertical
and one horizontal (2V: 1H) to avoid collapse. If these recommended side sloped cannot be
achieved for insufficient lateral space or for any other reason, lateral support system (shoring
system) for the sides of the excavation will be required and should be considered to maintain
safe working conditions.
o It is expected that the excavation work for shallow foundation (Raft) and Pile cap will be
below the water table in most of the bridge, so dewatering is required. Experience has shown
that small close-boarded excavation can be conveniently dealt with by conventional sump
pumping techniques. However, if larger excavations are to stand open for considerable period,
the installation of dewatering system may be required.
o Specialist contractors should be consulted in this regard during construction. Care should be

taken during dewatering to ensure that fines are not removed during pumping since this could
result in unpredictable settlements of the surrounding ground and associates structures.
o It is recommended that proper and efficient surface drainage be provided at the location of the
structures both during and after construction. Surface water should be directed away from the
edges of the excavation.
o The SANDY/GRAVELLY materials will probably be satisfactory for backfilling purposes,

whereas, the CLAYEY materials will not be satisfactory for backfilling purposes. However,
the final decision shall be taken during construction after complete excavation.
o The materials to be used for backfilling purposes shall be of selected fill composed of sand
and/or granular mixture free from organic matter or other deleterious substances. The
plasticity index of the backfill material shall not exceed 10 percent. It shall be spread in lifts
not exceeding 25cm in un-compacted thickness, moisture conditioned to its optimum moisture
content, and compacted to a dry density not less than 95% of the maximum dry density as
obtained by modified proctor test (ASTM D-1557).
o With prior approval from project directorate specific geotechnical designs are allowed to
adjust as per actual soil observed during construction works on specific.

2.7 References and Standards
1. Seismic Hazard Map of Nepal -2002, Department of Mines and Geology
2. AASTHO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONs, 4th edition
3. Canadian FOUNDATION ENGINEERING MANNUAL 4th EDITION, Canadian

Geotechnical Society 2006
4. Design Guide AGMU Memo 10.1 - Liquefaction Analysis
5. IS 2131: 1981 Method for standard penetration test for soils (first revision) 1981 Soil and
foundation engineering
6. IS 2720: Part 2: 1973 Methods of test for soils: Part 2 determination of water content (Second
revision) 1973 Soil and foundation engineering
7. IS 2720: Part 4: 1985 Methods of Test for Soils – Part I: Grain Size Analysis (Second revision)
1985 Soil and foundation engineering
8. IS 2720: Part 3: Sec 1: 1980 Methods of test for soils: Part 3 Determination of specific gravity
Section fine grained soils (First revision) 1980 Soil and foundation engineering
9. IS 2720: Part 10: 1991 Methods of test for soils: Part 10 Determination of unconfined
compressive strength (Second revision) 1991 Soil and foundation engineering
10. Is 2720: Part 13: 1986 Methods of Test for Soils - Part 13: Direct shear Test (Second revision)
1986 Soil and foundation engineering
11. IS 6403: 1981 Code of practice for determination of bearing capacity of shallow foundations
12. IS 8009: Part 1: 1976 Code of Practice for Calculation of Settlements of Foundations - Part I:
Shallow Foundations Subjected to Symmetrical Static Vertical Loads 1976 Soil and foundation
engineering
13. IS 8009: Part I: 1976 Code of Practice for Calculation of Settlements of Foundations - Part I:
Shallow Foundations Subjected to Symmetrical Static Vertical Loads
14. IS 8009: Part II: 1980 Code of Practice for Calculation of Settlement of Foundations - Part II:
Deep Foundations Subjected to Symmetrical Static Vertical Loading
15. IS 2911: Part 1: Sec 2: 1979 Code of practice for design and construction of pile foundations:
Part 1 Concrete piles, Section 2 Bored cast-in-situ piles
16. IS 2950: Part I: 1981 Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Raft Foundations - Part
I: Design

SOIL INVESTIGATION
REPORT
OF
FLIP NEPAL RESORT PTE LTD

SARANKOT, KASKI, NEPAL
September, 2014
Prepared BY:
MATERIAL TEST (P) LTD

Web: material-test.com.org
E-Mail: matecon.lab@gmail.com
Phone/Fax: 01-4486092
Mid Baneswor, Kathmandu, Nepal
Annex
Borehole log
Laboratory Test Results

Borehole log and Laboratory Test Data

Borehole Log
Project : Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Foundation Hole No.: D - 1
Client : FLIK NEPAL RESORT PET LTD Date: 22/08/2014 ~ 25/08/2014
Location : SARANKOT, Kaski, Nepal Ground water table: GL- Not Encountered
Method of Drilling: Rotary Hole Dia.: HX, NX, BX
Sample No.
No. of blows N-Value SPT
Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
&Type
UDS DCPT
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
Soil Description
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
Brownish grey dense sandy silt with -1 SPT 7 9 11 20 1

small gravel of weathered phyllite
-2 SPT 12 14 13 27 2
-3 SPT 17 19 23 42 3
-4 SPT 50/12 > 50 4
-5 SPT 50/10 > 50 5
-6 6
-7 7
-8
8
Radish brown to yellowish white
highly weathered phyllitic rock -9
(WEAK BED ROCK) 9
- 10
10
- 11
11
- 12
12
- 13
13
- 14 14
- 15 15
End Depth * Completed at 15m
Types of Soil N Value
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
Granular Soil Compactness
Very Loose Loose Med. Dense Dense Very Dense
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
Cohesive Soil Consistency
Very Soft Soft Med. Soft Stiff Very Stiff Hard
Borehole Log
Sample No.
Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
&Type
UDS DCPT
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
Soil Description
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
-1 SPT 15 17 16 33 1
Light grey to brownish medium
dense to dense sandy gravel with
-2 SPT 13 14 16 30 2
fresh to weathered fragments of
phyllite with quartzite
-3 SPT 50/14 > 50 3
-4 SPT 50/13 > 50 4
-5 SPT 50/11 > 50 5
-6 SPT 50/10 > 50 6
-7 7
-8
8
Light grey to brownish fresh to -9

9
slightly weathered phyllitic rock
with quartzite (WEAK BED - 10
10
ROCK)
- 11
11
- 12
12
- 13
13
- 14 14
- 15 15
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
Borehole Log
Sample No.
Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
&Type
UDS DCPT
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
Soil Description
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
Light grey to brownish medium
dense sandy silt with small gravel -1 SPT 12 10 9 19 1
and clayey traces
-2 SPT 14 16 16 32 2
Radish brown medium dense to
dense sandy soil with gravel and -3 SPT 14 15 16 31 3
fragments of weathered phyllite
-4 SPT 17 19 20 39 4
-5 SPT 50/13 > 50 5
-6 6
-7 7
-8 8
Light grey to brownish slightly -9 9

weathered and highly fractured fine
grained quartzite with phyllite - 10
10
(WEAK BED ROCK)
- 11
11
- 12
12
- 13
13
- 14 14
- 15 15
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
Borehole Log
Sample No.
Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
&Type
UDS DCPT
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
Soil Description
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
Dark grey to reddish soft sandy
soil with clayey traces -1 SPT 2 3 5 8 1
-2 SPT 7 9 11 20 2
Radish brown medium dense to
dense highly fractured fragments -3 SPT 10 12 14 26 3
of phyllite and quartzite with
sandy soil. -4 SPT 14 12 17 29 4
-5 SPT 15 17 20 37 5
-6 6
-7 7
-8 8
-9 9
Light purple to reddish, highly
fractured and slightly weathered - 10 10
rock of phyllite with quartzite
(WEAK BED ROCK) - 11 11
- 12 12
- 13 13
- 14 14
- 15 15
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
Borehole Log
Sample No. &Type

Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
UDS DCPT
Soil Description
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
Light grey medium dense gravel mix

sandy soil.
-1 SPT 9 11 13 24 1
Radish brown dense sandy soil with

fragments of phyllite
-2 SPT 12 14 17 31 2
Light grey dense sand mix gravel of

weathered phyllite and quartzite
-3 SPT 15 17 19 36 3
Radish brown to pale yellow very dense -4 SPT 30 35 20 55 4

sandy soil with fragments of phyllite
-5 SPT 20 22 24 46 5
-6 SPT 17 19 26 45 6
-7 SPT 50/14 > 50 7

Brownish grey to pale yellow highly
weathered phyllitic rock (WEAK ROCK
BED) -8 8
-9 9
- 10 10
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
Borehole Log
Sample No.
Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
&Type
UDS DCPT
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
Soil Description
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
Brownish grey to radish loose to

medium dense silty sand with clay
-1 SPT 2 3 3 6 1
and small fragments of phyllite
-2 SPT 5 7 10 17 2
Light Brown medium dense to very

dense sandy silt with gravel of fine
grained quartzite and phyllite -3 SPT 50/11 > 50 3
-4 SPT 14 50/15 > 50 4
-5 CPT 50/11 > 50 5
-6 6
Brownish grey to reddish slightly
weathered and fractured rock of
phyllite with fine grained quartzite
-7 7
-8 8
-9 CPT 50/10 >50 9
- 10 10
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
Borehole Log
Sample No. &Type

Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
UDS DCPT
Soil Description
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
-1 SPT 3 2 4 6 1
Light brownish grey loose to medium

dense silty sand with fragments of phyllite -2 SPT 10 8 9 17 2
(size of pebble, cobble and boulder) with
clayey traces
-3 SPT 8 9 9 18 3
-4 SPT 10 12 11 23 4
-5 SPT 10 16 17 33 5
-6 SPT 11 19 22 41 6
Light grey slightly weathered and 7

-7
fractured phyllitic rock (WEAK BED
ROCK) SPT 31 34 36 > 50
-8 8
-9 SPT 50/07 > 50 9
- 10 10
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
Borehole Log
Sample No. &Type

Depth, m
N-Value
Symbol
UDS DCPT
Soil Description
15 cm
15 cm
15 cm
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
Light radish to grey medium dense

-1 SPT 6 7 6 13 1
silty clay sand with weathered phyllite
with quartzite (pebble to cobble)
-2 SPT 10 13 18 31 2
-3 SPT 30 34 37 71 3
-4 4
SPT 31 29 30 59
-5 5
Light grey fresh to highly weathered

-6 SPT 32 35 33 68 6
fractured phyllitic rock bed (WEAK
BED ROCK)
-7 7
SPT 50/9 > 50
-8 8
-9 SPT 19 18 21 39 9
- 10 10
0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50
0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 16 to 32 > 32
NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
Project : Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Foundation
Client : FLIK NEPAL RESORT PET LTD
Location : SARANKOT, Kaski, Nepal
Wt. of Wt. of Cont. Moisture

Wt. of Wt. of Empty Wt. of Dry
Sample No. Depth,m Cont. + + Content
Water, gm Container, gm Soil, gm
Wet Soil Dry Soil (%)
Bore Hole No. D-1
SPT - 1 1.0 63.80 54.80 9.00 14.70 40.10 22.44
SPT - 2 2.0 56.40 49.80 6.60 8.07 41.73 15.82
SPT - 5 5.0 66.50 60.20 6.30 14.10 46.10 13.67
Bore Hole No. D-2
SPT - 1 1.0 87.30 72.10 15.20 14.70 57.40 26.48
SPT - 3 3.0 70.10 60.20 9.90 8.07 52.13 18.99
SPT - 6 6.0 64.80 57.20 7.60 14.10 43.10 17.63
Bore Hole No. D-3
SPT - 1 1.0 56.80 48.30 8.50 14.70 33.60 25.30
SPT - 3 3.0 60.40 53.20 7.20 8.07 45.13 15.95
SPT - 5 5.0 68.90 61.50 7.40 14.10 47.40 15.61
Bore Hole No. D-4
SPT - 2 2.0 88.40 73.50 14.90 8.34 65.16 22.87
SPT - 3 3.0 66.30 58.90 7.40 7.86 51.04 14.50
SPT - 5 5.0 56.90 51.50 5.40 13.70 37.80 14.29
Bore Hole No. D-5
SPT - 2 1.0 73.50 65.80 7.70 14.70 51.10 15.07
SPT - 4 2.0 66.40 56.30 10.10 8.07 48.23 20.94
SPT - 7 4.0 52.60 45.80 6.80 14.10 31.70 21.45
Bore Hole No. D-7
SPT - 1 1.0 88.50 78.20 10.30 8.34 69.86 14.74
SPT - 4 4.0 69.80 59.40 10.40 7.86 51.54 20.18
CPT - 6 9.0 64.50 59.60 4.90 13.70 45.90 10.68
Bore Hole No. D-8
SPT - 1 1.0 61.00 56.10 4.90 14.70 41.40 11.84
SPT - 4 4.0 90.80 80.90 9.90 8.07 72.83 13.59
SPT - 7 7.5 54.60 50.30 4.30 14.10 36.20 11.88
Bore Hole No. D-9
SPT - 1 1.0 63.60 54.80 8.80 8.34 46.46 18.94
SPT - 4 4.0 72.40 63.50 8.90 7.86 55.64 16.00
SPT - 7 7.5 49.60 43.50 6.10 13.70 29.80 20.47
Bulk Density of Soil
Sample Depth Length Weight V Bulk Density
No m cm gm cm³ gm/cm³
Borehole No. D1
SPT - 1 1.00 10 178.50 96.21 1.86
SPT - 2 2.00 10 186.90 96.21 1.94
Borehole No. D2
SPT - 1 1.00 10 187.90 96.21 1.95
SPT - 3 3.00 10 200.30 96.21 2.08
Borehole No. D3
SPT - 1 1.00 10 178.60 96.21 1.86
SPT - 4 4.00 10 180.60 96.21 1.88
Borehole No. D4
SPT - 1 1.00 10 173.90 96.21 1.81
SPT - 4 4.00 10 178.40 96.21 1.85
Borehole No. D5
SPT - 2 2.00 10 188.60 96.21 1.96
SPT - 4 4.00 10 200.60 96.21 2.08
Borehole No. D7
SPT - 1 1.00 10 200.10 96.21 2.08
SPT - 4 4.00 10 184.70 96.21 1.92
CPT - 6 9.00 10 213.70 96.21 2.22
Borehole No. D8
SPT - 1 1.00 10 146.10 96.21 1.52
SPT - 2 2.00 10 188.90 96.21 1.96
Borehole No. D9
SPT - 1 1.00 10 200.10 96.21 2.08
SPT - 4 4.00 10 184.70 96.21 1.92
SPT - 7 7.50 10 213.70 96.21 2.22

Unit Weight of Rock Mass
Unit Weight
Depth m Dry Weight gm Volume cm³
gm/cm³
12.0 - 13.0 156.90 60.80 2.58
8.0 - 9.0 132.10 50.60 2.61
9.0 - 10.0 214.60 86.10 2.49
6.0 - 7.0 168.90 65.40 2.58
8.0 - 9.0 246.80 96.90 2.55
4.50 104.30 40.20 2.59

7.50 159.50 61.90 2.58
7.50 203.30 82.20 2.47

10.00 303.10 118.60 2.56
4.50 293.50 108.00 2.72

7.50 105.80 41.70 2.54
SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST
Borehole No. D-1

SPT SPT - 1 SPT - 5 DS
Depth, m 1.0 5.0 12.0 -13.0
Wt. Pycnometer + Water + Soil gm 180.30 179.80 182.10
Temperature °C 25 25 25
Wt. Pycnometer + Water gm 161.5 161.1 163.2
Wt. Pycnometer + Dry Soil gm 18.8 18.7 18.9
Wt. Soil gm 30 30 30
Specific Gravity of Water 0.9971 0.9971 0.9971
Specific Gravity of Soil 2.671 2.647 2.695
Borehole No. D-2
Depth, m 1.0 5.0 8.0 - 9.0
Wt. Pycnometer + Dry Soil gm 18.8 18.7 19
Borehole No. D-3
Depth, m 1.0 5.0 9.0 - 10.0
Borehole No. D-4
Depth, m 1.0 5.0 6.0 - 7.0
SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST
Borehole No. D-5

Depth, m 1.0 4.0 8.0 - 9.0
Borehole No. D-7
SPT SPT - 1 SPT - 5 CPT
Depth, m 1.0 3.0 9.0
Borehole No. D-8
SPT SPT - 1 SPT - 4 SPT - 7
Depth, m 1.0 4.0 7.5
Borehole No. D-9
SPT SPT - 1 SPT - 3 SPT - 7
Depth, m 1.0 3.0 9.0
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Test Method : IS: 2720 (Part 4) - 1985
Client : FLIK NEPAL RESORT PET LTD Borehole: D-1
Location : SARANKOT, Kaski, Nepal SPT - 1
Depth m : 2.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm
20.000 mm 100.00 90
10.000 mm 89.90
80
4.750 mm 70.19
2.360 mm 51.32 70
1.180 mm 41.59 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 33.47
0.425 mm 28.25 50
0.300 mm 24.34 40
0.150 mm 16.89
30
0.075 mm 4.09
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.007 mm CLAY SILT SAND GRAVEL
0.005 mm 0.0 % 4.09 % 66.1 % 29.8 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 1.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 94.87 90
10.000 mm 78.06
80
4.750 mm 55.11
2.360 mm 41.60 70
1.180 mm 32.72 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 25.84
0.425 mm 23.08 50
0.300 mm 18.44 40
0.150 mm 12.98
30
0.075 mm 5.05
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 5.05 % 50.1 % 44.9 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 3.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm
20.000 mm 100.00 90
10.000 mm 92.35
80
4.750 mm 75.30
2.360 mm 57.04 70
1.180 mm 49.86 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 44.29
0.425 mm 36.87 50
0.300 mm 17.22 40
0.150 mm 10.03
30
0.075 mm 7.88
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 7.88 % 67.4 % 24.7 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 1.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 90.42 90
10.000 mm 70.15
80
4.750 mm 56.78
2.360 mm 30.44 70
1.180 mm 27.76 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 22.87
0.425 mm 20.15 50
0.300 mm 14.79 40
0.150 mm 6.31
30
0.075 mm 1.42
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 1.42 % 55.4 % 43.2 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 4.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm
20.000 mm 90
10.000 mm 100.00
80
4.750 mm 84.68
2.360 mm 61.30 70
1.180 mm 29.56 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 23.92
0.425 mm 20.78 50
0.300 mm 15.55 40
0.150 mm 10.82
30
0.075 mm 4.82
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 4.82 % 79.9 % 15.3 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 1.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 88.65 90
10.000 mm 84.02
80
4.750 mm 49.18
2.360 mm 26.65 70
1.180 mm 18.22 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 10.94
0.425 mm 8.60 50
0.300 mm 7.41 40
0.150 mm 4.45
30
0.075 mm 2.35
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 2.35 % 46.8 % 50.8 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 5.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm
20.000 mm 100.00 90
10.000 mm 98.25
80
4.750 mm 92.02
2.360 mm 70.82 70
1.180 mm 61.43 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 55.79
0.425 mm 33.03 50
0.300 mm 5.98 40
0.150 mm 4.86
30
0.075 mm 1.56
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 1.56 % 90.5 % 8.0 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 1.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 89.22 90
10.000 mm 86.12
80
4.750 mm 81.26
2.360 mm 56.68 70
1.180 mm 26.10 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 22.81
0.425 mm 16.12 50
0.300 mm 11.26 40
0.150 mm 2.99
30
0.075 mm 2.10
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 2.10 % 79.2 % 18.7 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 5.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 100.00 90
10.000 mm 97.09
80
4.750 mm 87.24
2.360 mm 79.59 70
1.180 mm 58.88 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 22.57
0.425 mm 11.63 50
0.300 mm 7.71 40
0.150 mm 5.70
30
0.075 mm 2.02
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 2.02 % 85.2 % 12.8 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 1.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm
20.000 mm 100.00 90
10.000 mm 84.59
80
4.750 mm 55.00
2.360 mm 41.83 70
1.180 mm 32.47 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 25.50
0.425 mm 23.11 50
0.300 mm 21.45 40
0.150 mm 12.53
30
0.075 mm 1.37
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 1.37 % 53.6 % 45.0 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 2.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 100.00 90
10.000 mm 93.06
80
4.750 mm 89.26
2.360 mm 86.28 70
1.180 mm 81.50 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 73.77
0.425 mm 61.82 50
0.300 mm 53.67 40
0.150 mm 26.26
30
0.075 mm 3.61
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 3.61 % 85.7 % 10.7 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 4.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 100.00 90
10.000 mm 100.00
80
4.750 mm 99.49
2.360 mm 98.88 70
1.180 mm 96.68 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 85.29
0.425 mm 69.41 50
0.300 mm 57.71 40
0.150 mm 34.12
30
0.075 mm 4.29
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 4.29 % 95.2 % 0.5 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 1.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 71.26 90
10.000 mm 62.35
80
4.750 mm 34.94
2.360 mm 23.37 70
1.180 mm 16.17 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 11.34
0.425 mm 9.50 50
0.300 mm 8.14 40
0.150 mm 5.40
30
0.075 mm 1.10
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 1.10 % 33.8 % 65.1 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 4.00
Sieve % Passing
40.000 mm 100.00
100
20.000 mm 100.00
10.000 mm 97.31 90
4.750 mm 79.71 80
2.360 mm 71.95
1.180 mm 57.87 70
0.600 mm 45.17 60
% Passing
0.425 mm 39.75
0.300 mm 35.32 50
0.150 mm 15.27 40
0.075 mm 1.78
30
0.075 mm
0.053 mm 20
0.038 mm
10
0.027 mm
0.019 mm 0
0.014 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.010 mm Sieves, mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 1.78 % 77.9 % 20.3 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 1.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 90.39 90
10.000 mm 80.38
80
4.750 mm 49.47
2.360 mm 38.79 70
1.180 mm 25.35 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 14.45
0.425 mm 11.47 50
0.300 mm 9.39 40
0.150 mm 5.68
30
0.075 mm 1.01
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 1.01 % 48.5 % 50.5 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Depth m : 3.00
Sieve % Passing 100
40.000 mm 100.00
20.000 mm 95.80 90
10.000 mm 88.12
80
4.750 mm 54.77
2.360 mm 42.03 70
1.180 mm 28.45 60
% Passing
0.600 mm 19.31
0.425 mm 15.86 50
0.300 mm 13.26 40
0.150 mm 6.40
30
0.075 mm 0.78
0.075 mm 20
0.053 mm
10
0.038 mm
0.027 mm 0
0.019 mm 0.001 0.002 0.01 0.075 0.1 1 4.75 10 100
0.014 mm Sieves, mm
0.010 mm
0.005 mm 0.0 % 0.78 % 54.0 % 45.2 %
0.003 mm
0.002 mm
0.001 mm
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: D - 1
Sample No: SPT - 1
Depth (m): 1.00
Test No. 1 Test No. 2 Test No. 3

SDT Normal Stress 0.5 kg/cm² Normal Stress 1.0 kg/cm² Normal Stress 1.5 kg/cm²
cm PRDRg SST kg/cm² PRDRg SST kg/cm² PRDRg SST kg/cm²
0.1 32.00 0.140 37.00 0.162 43.00 0.189
0.2 53.00 0.232 58.00 0.254 64.00 0.281
0.3 70.00 0.307 81.00 0.355 87.00 0.382
0.4 76.00 0.333 109.00 0.478 122.00 0.535
0.5 77.00 0.338 131.00 0.575 174.00 0.763
0.6 78.00 0.342 134.00 0.588 204.00 0.895
0.7 133.00 0.583 208.00 0.912
0.8 209.00 0.917
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
SDT = Shear Displacement; PRDRg = Proving Ring Dial Reading; SST = Shear Stress
f = 31°
2.50
2.00
Shear Stress, kg/sq.cm
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Normal Stress, kg/sq.cm
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: D - 2
Sample No: SPT - 2
Depth (m): 2.00

0.1 40.00 0.175 44.00 0.193 48.00 0.211
0.2 61.00 0.268 72.00 0.316 76.00 0.333
0.3 86.00 0.377 102.00 0.447 109.00 0.478
0.4 89.00 0.390 133.00 0.583 146.00 0.640
0.5 91.00 0.399 139.00 0.610 187.00 0.820
0.6 142.00 0.623 214.00 0.939
0.7 143.00 0.627 223.00 0.978
0.8 226.00 0.991
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 33°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: D - 3
Sample No: SPT - 3
Depth (m): 3.00

0.1 34.00 0.149 36.00 0.158 40.00 0.175
0.2 58.00 0.254 64.00 0.281 64.00 0.281
0.3 81.00 0.355 93.00 0.408 91.00 0.399
0.4 83.00 0.364 124.00 0.544 134.00 0.588
0.5 84.00 0.368 158.00 0.693 172.00 0.754
0.6 159.00 0.697 201.00 0.882
0.7 160.00 0.702 203.00 0.890
0.8 201.00 0.882
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 32°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: D - 4
Sample No: SPT - 3
Depth (m): 3.00

0.1 32.00 0.140 37.00 0.162 41.00 0.180
0.2 53.00 0.232 59.00 0.259 64.00 0.281
0.3 69.00 0.303 83.00 0.364 87.00 0.382
0.4 72.00 0.316 121.00 0.531 115.00 0.504
0.5 73.00 0.320 142.00 0.623 146.00 0.640
0.6 148.00 0.649 187.00 0.820
0.7 149.00 0.654 192.00 0.842
0.8 193.00 0.846
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 31°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: D - 5
Sample No: SPT - 3
Depth (m): 3.00

0.1 32.00 0.140 37.00 0.162 41.00 0.180
0.2 53.00 0.232 59.00 0.259 64.00 0.281
0.3 69.00 0.303 83.00 0.364 87.00 0.382
0.4 72.00 0.316 121.00 0.531 115.00 0.504
0.5 73.00 0.320 142.00 0.623 146.00 0.640
0.6 148.00 0.649 187.00 0.820
0.7 149.00 0.654 192.00 0.842
0.8 193.00 0.846
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 31°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 5
Sample No: SPT - 1
Depth (m): 1.00

0.1 31.00 0.136 38.00 0.167 41.00 0.180
0.2 49.00 0.215 62.00 0.272 67.00 0.294
0.3 67.00 0.294 91.00 0.399 92.00 0.404
0.4 72.00 0.316 116.00 0.509 134.00 0.588
0.5 73.00 0.320 134.00 0.588 168.00 0.737
0.6 74.00 0.325 132.00 0.579 194.00 0.851
0.7 130.00 0.570 196.00 0.860
0.8 197.00 0.864
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 30°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 5
Sample No: SPT - 5
Depth (m): 5.00

0.1 33.00 0.145 36.00 0.158 40.00 0.175
0.2 56.00 0.246 63.00 0.276 64.00 0.281
0.3 73.00 0.320 90.00 0.395 91.00 0.399
0.4 81.00 0.355 121.00 0.531 130.00 0.570
0.5 80.00 0.351 129.00 0.566 170.00 0.746
0.6 79.00 0.346 130.00 0.570 211.00 0.925
0.7 127.00 0.557 224.00 0.982
0.8 226.00 0.991
0.9 225.00 0.987
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 33°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 7
Sample No: SPT - 2
Depth (m): 2.00

0.1 38.00 0.167 46.00 0.202 69.00 0.303
0.2 60.00 0.263 73.00 0.320 102.00 0.447
0.3 83.00 0.364 98.00 0.430 133.00 0.583
0.4 96.00 0.421 121.00 0.531 162.00 0.711
0.5 94.00 0.412 142.00 0.623 196.00 0.860
0.6 140.00 0.614 207.00 0.908
0.7 204.00 0.895
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 32°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 8
Sample No: SPT - 1
Depth (m): 1.00

0.1 36.00 0.158 47.00 0.206 69.00 0.303
0.2 52.00 0.228 77.00 0.338 102.00 0.447
0.3 74.00 0.325 101.00 0.443 133.00 0.583
0.4 93.00 0.408 123.00 0.539 158.00 0.693
0.5 98.00 0.430 132.00 0.579 186.00 0.816
0.6 95.00 0.417 130.00 0.570 207.00 0.908
0.7 215.00 0.943
0.8 213.00 0.934
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 32°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 8
Sample No: SPT - 4
Depth (m): 4.00

0.1 40.00 0.175 48.00 0.211 69.00 0.303
0.2 62.00 0.272 74.00 0.325 104.00 0.456
0.3 83.00 0.364 102.00 0.447 135.00 0.592
0.4 102.00 0.447 122.00 0.535 167.00 0.732
0.5 108.00 0.474 138.00 0.605 192.00 0.842
0.6 105.00 0.461 142.00 0.623 210.00 0.921
0.7 140.00 0.614 207.00 0.908
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 33°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 8
Sample No: SPT - 7
Depth (m): 7.50

0.1 38.00 0.167 46.00 0.202 71.00 0.311
0.2 62.00 0.272 74.00 0.325 103.00 0.452
0.3 84.00 0.368 92.00 0.404 135.00 0.592
0.4 89.00 0.390 121.00 0.531 168.00 0.737
0.5 87.00 0.382 136.00 0.596 192.00 0.842
0.6 142.00 0.623 215.00 0.943
0.7 140.00 0.614 210.00 0.921
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 33°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 9
Sample No: SPT - 1
Depth (m): 1.00

0.1 37.00 0.162 45.00 0.197 68.00 0.298
0.2 52.00 0.228 70.00 0.307 103.00 0.452
0.3 74.00 0.325 101.00 0.443 136.00 0.596
0.4 93.00 0.408 128.00 0.561 162.00 0.711
0.5 90.00 0.395 142.00 0.623 193.00 0.846
0.6 148.00 0.649 190.00 0.833
0.7 145.00 0.636
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 31°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 9
Sample No: SPT - 3
Depth (m): 3.00

0.1 38.00 0.167 48.00 0.211 68.00 0.298
0.2 57.00 0.250 74.00 0.325 102.00 0.447
0.3 74.00 0.325 98.00 0.430 136.00 0.596
0.4 89.00 0.390 122.00 0.535 164.00 0.719
0.5 95.00 0.417 132.00 0.579 192.00 0.842
0.6 92.00 0.404 136.00 0.596 190.00 0.833
0.7 132.00 0.579
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 31°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Borehole No.: 9
Sample No: SPT - 7
Depth (m): 9.00

0.1 40.00 0.175 48.00 0.211 69.00 0.303
0.2 62.00 0.272 76.00 0.333 103.00 0.452
0.3 84.00 0.368 102.00 0.447 134.00 0.588
0.4 101.00 0.443 124.00 0.544 166.00 0.728
0.5 98.00 0.430 137.00 0.601 196.00 0.860
0.6 135.00 0.592 207.00 0.908
0.7 204.00 0.895
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
f = 32°
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Point Load test Result
Drill Hole Sample Depth Test Wide height P 2 Is IS (50)

De De F
No. No. m Direction mm mm KN Mpa MPa
DG - 1 1 12.0 - 13.0 Diameterical 41.1 62.2 0.0 3868.84 62.2 0 1.10 0.00
1 5.0 - 6.0 Diameterical 53.5 70.5 0.0 4970.25 70.5 0 1.17 0.00
DG - 2 2 7.0 - 8.0 Diameterical 53.5 66.2 0.0 4382.44 66.2 0 1.13 0.00
3 8.0 - 9.0 Diameterical 51.7 75.2 0.0 5655.04 75.2 0 1.20 0.00
1 9.0 - 10.0 Diameterical 53.3 89.5 1.0 8010.25 89.5 0.12484 1.30 0.16
DG - 3
2 14.0 - 15.0 Diameterical 41.5 57.6 2.0 3317.76 57.6 0.602816 1.07 0.64
DG - 4 1 6.0 - 7.0 Diameterical 52.3 92.5 5.0 8556.25 92.5 0.584368 1.32 0.77
DG - 5 1 8.0 - 9.0 Diameterical 41.6 56.9 1.0 3237.61 56.9 0.30887 1.06 0.33
1 4.5 Diameterical 53.4 35.6 0.0 1267.36 35.6 0 0.86 0.00

DG - 7
2 7.5 Diameterical 53.4 30.5 3.0 930.25 30.5 3.22494 0.80 2.58
1 7.50 Diameterical 54.4 47.7 1.5 2275.29 47.7 0.659257 0.98 0.65
DG - 8
2 10.00 Diameterical 54.4 68.4 3.0 4678.56 68.4 0.641223 1.15 0.74
1 4.5 Diameterical 54.4 63.5 1.0 4032.25 63.5 0.248 1.11 0.28
DG - 9
2 7.5 Diameterical 41.1 59.2 0.0 3504.64 59.2 0 1.08 0.00

Material Test Pvt. LTD.: Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu

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

Material Test Pvt. LTD.: Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Soil Investigation of Proposed BUILDING Foundations Material Test Pvt. Ltd.

At SARANKOT, Kaski, Nepal Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu

1.2. Location and Description of Area

The following scopes of works were covered under this study:

 Preliminary observation of soil condition

 Slope stability analysis of the proposed construction area

 Exploration of the sub-surface conditions at various locations of proposed foundation sites

The scope of this investigation report includes:

 Assessment of bearing capacity

 Recommendations of foundation type and depth

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 1

1.4. Regional Geology of the Project Area

Table 1: Lithostratigraphy of Western Nepal Himalaya (DMG, 1987)

Group Formation Lithology Age

Lithological Thickness (m) Lithological characters Age

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 2

Figure 1: Regional Geological Map

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 3

1.5. Surface Geology

1.6. Slope Stability

Slope nearby Entrance Area

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 4

Slope nearby Hotel Block B

Slope nearby Sherpa Block

Slope nearby Naudanda-Sarangkot road

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 5

Table 2: Slope stability condition

Location HS/F F/J1 F/J2 F/J3 J1/J2 J2/J3 J3/J1

Table 3: Depth of proposed drilling holes

Drill hole Location Proposed Depth

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 6

Figure 2: Proposed Location of Drill hole

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 7

PHOTOGRAPHS OF SOIL/ROCK EXPOSURE

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 8

2.2 Planning of works

Table 4 Proposed Laboratory investigation of Soil

U/D samples Rock / Boulder

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 9

technical team and workers.

Figure 3: SPT test @ proposed hole D9

Figure 4: Soil Sample abstracted on Split Spooner at hole D9

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 10

Figure 5: Preparation for Sounding Test (SPT) at borehole D8

2.3.3 Field Test

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 11

Figure 7: Preparation for SPT test on D7

Figure 8: Drilling in progress with SPT arrangement at D1

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 12

Figure 9: Drilling in progress with SPT arrangement at D2

Figure 10: Drilling in progress with SPT arrangement at D3

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 13

Figure 11: Drilling in progress with SPT arrangement at D4

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 14

2.4 Generalize Borehole-Log (Subsurface) findings

Project Borehole Generalize Generalize soil Characteristic

FLIP NEPAL/KASKI/ September - 2014 Page 15

Figure 12: Drilling in progress with SPT arrangement at D5

2.5 Analysis of Allowable Bearing Pressure

2.5.1 Correlation between SPT and DCPT

Nc = 1.50 N for depths up to 3 m

Nc= 1.75 N for depths 3 to 6 m

Nc= 2.00 N for depths greater than 6 m