Geotech Report

REPORT#
9650/GSK
Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near Revenue Authority-Head

Location
Office Phase III, Hayatabad Peshawar
Project Construction of Plaza (Hayatabad Heights)
No. of Boreholes 03
Depth of Drilling 100ft
Drilling Method Motorized Percussion
Date of Drilling December 2020
Reporting Officer Engr. Ghassan Sattar Khan
Submitted to: M/S Ecotech Design Consultants
Ground Water Table Depth Not Encountered
PLANNING - TESTING - DESIGNING & DEVELOPMENT

Flat No. 205 & 206, 2nd Floor, Afzal Tower, Behind Shahab Orthopedic Hospital, Phase III Chowk.
Email: gsk.engineerz@gmail.com, Phones: 0333-912-6118, 091-584-1515
Report No. 9650/GSK
General Notes
1. This report will be prepared for the exclusive use of the client named in the document and copyright
will subsist with M/S GSK Engineerz. Prior written permission must be obtained to reproduce all or
part of the report. It will be prepared on the understanding that you will disclose its contents to parties
directly involved in the current investigation, preparation and development of the site
2. The report and /or opinion will be prepared for the specific purpose stated in the document and in
relation to the nature and extent of proposals made available to us at the time of your enquiry. The
recommendations should not be used for other schemes on or adjacent to the site without further
reference to M/S GSK Engineerz. The assessment of the factual data will be provided to assist the
client and his Engineer and/or advisors in the preparation of their designs.
3. The report will be based on the ground conditions encountered in the exploratory holes/test pits
together with the results of field and laboratory testing in the context of the proposed development.
There may be special conditions, appertaining to the site, however, which may not be revealed by the
investigation, and which may not be taken into account in the report. Foundation design features can
later be discussed with the reporting officer by the structural engineer, commenting on its influence on
the various layers encountered or effect of these layers on the foundation selection & type according to
the applied loading.
4. Methods of construction and/or design other than those proposed by the designers or referred to in the
report may require consideration during the evolution of the proposals and further assessment of the
geotechnical data would be required to provide discussion and recommendation appropriate to these
methods.
5. The accuracy of the results reported will depend upon the technique of measurement, investigation and
test used and these values should not be regarded necessarily as characteristic of the strata as a whole.
Where such measurements are critical, the technique of the investigation will need to be reviewed and
supplementary investigation undertaken in accordance with the advice of the company where
necessary.
6. Ground conditions should be monitored during the construction of the works and the recommendations
of the report re-evaluated in the light of these data by the supervising geotechnical engineers.
7. Any comments on groundwater conditions will be based on observations made at the time of the
investigation, unless specifically stated otherwise. It should be noted that groundwater levels will vary
due to seasonal or other effects.
8. Unless specifically stated, the investigation will not take into account of possible effects of mineral
extraction.
9. The economic viability of the proposals referred to in the report, or of the solutions put forward to any
problems encountered, will depend on very many factors in addition to geotechnical considerations
hence its evaluation will be outside the scope of the report.
Report No. 9650/GSK
CLIENT’S REQUIREMENTS
1 Test Requirement : Determination of Shear Bearing Capacity as per Field &

Laboratory Tests.
2 Project : Construction of Plaza
3 Location : Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near Revenue Authority-

Head Office Phase III, Hayatabad Peshawar
4 Deptt /Person Requiring Test : M/S Ecotech Design Consultants
5 Soil Report No. : 9650/GSK

Report No. 9650/GSK
CHAPTER NO.01 ...........................................................................................................................4
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................4
1.1 General ..............................................................................................................................4
1.2 Purpose of Geotechnical Investigation ..........................................................................5
1.3 Scope of Work .................................................................................................................6
1.4 Site Description ...............................................................................................................6
CHAPTER NO. 2 ................................................................................................................................8
FIELD INVESTIGATION & LAB TESTING ........................................................................................8

2.1 General .............................................................................................................................8
2.2 Field Exploration ............................................................................................................8
2.2.1 Drilling of Borehole: .........................................................................................................8
2.3 Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs).................................................................................8
2.4 Sampling ..........................................................................................................................9
2.5 Groundwater and Cavities ..............................................................................................9
2.6 Laboratory Activities .....................................................................................................10
CHAPTER NO.3 ...............................................................................................................................11
EVALUATION OF TEST RESULTS ................................................................................................11

3.1 Summary of Test Results .............................................................................................11
3.2 Shear Strength parameters: .........................................................................................12
3.3 Evaluation of test results & borehole logs ...................................................................12
Discussion on Overall sub-surface litho-logy..........................................................................12
CHAPTER NO. 4 ..............................................................................................................................13
BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS & GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS ....................................13

1
Flat No. 205 & 206, Afzal Tower, Behind Shahab Ortho-Hospital, Phase III Chowk,
Peshawar. Email: gsk.engineerz@gmail.com, 0333-912-6118, 091-584-1515
Report No. 9650/GSK
4.1 Bearing capacity analysis .............................................................................................13
4.1.1 Utilizing the bearing capacity Equations (from ‘c’ & ‘): ............................................13
4.1.2 Utilizing the SPT Data for Bearing Capacity Calculation: ...........................................15
4.2 Stresses under square footing .....................................................................................18
4.3 Lateral Earth Pressure ..................................................................................................20
CHAPTER NO.05 .............................................................................................................................21
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................................21

5.1 Engineering Recommendations ...................................................................................21
5.1.1 Parameters for Design ...................................................................................................21
5.2 Drainage of the Site ........................................................................................................22
5.3 Materials for Backfill .....................................................................................................22
5.4 Site Class ........................................................................................................................22
5.5 Seismic Considerations .................................................................................................23
5.6 Limitations ......................................................................................................................24
CHAPTER NO. 06 ............................................................................................................................25
TESTING METHODOLOGIES .........................................................................................................25

6.1 Moisture Content ...........................................................................................................25
6.2 Bulk Density...................................................................................................................25
6.3 Particle Size Distribution ..............................................................................................26
6.4 Direct Shear Test ............................................................................................................26
Report No. 9650/GSK
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This site located at KPPRA road, Near Revenue Authority-Head Office Phase III,
Hayatabad Peshawar, where M/S GSK Engineerz was engaged by M/S Ecotech Design
Consultants to carry out geotechnical investigation for the project “Construction of Hayatabad
Heights”.
Three (03) No. boreholes at selected points, marked on site map were drilled using Motorized
Percussion. Conduction of SPT & collection of samples continued as drilling progressed. After
successful conduction of field activities the Undisturbed / Disturbed samples collected were
tested in the laboratory. Classification tests were performed to determine the type of soil while
direct shear test were conducted to evaluate shear strength parameters of soil.
The bearing capacity was calculated using the shear test parameters using Terzaghi‟s equation
with correction factors suggested by Meyerhof. Additionally bearing capacity was also computed
from SPT. Sub-soil stresses was calculated to facilitate the structural designer as well as field
execution works. The conclusion of this report documents the values at 24ft depth which is
recommended to be 2.75 TSF.
Report No. 9650/GSK
CHAPTER NO.01
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
M/S GSK Engineerz was hired by M/S Ecotech Design Consultants for the project
construction of “Hayatabad Heights” at location of Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near
Revenue Authority-Head Office Phase III, Hayatabad Peshawar. For the same
purpose necessary Geotechnical Investigations were carried out. This individual task
comprised of both field and laboratory activities, discussed in detail in the sections
below. The studies are later used for structure design of this health facility.
1.1.1 Brief about GSK Engineerz Geotechnical works profile
Providing consultancy in the field of civil engineering since 2015, and as Geotechnical Consultants
with material testing Laboratories since 2012, we have had the opportunity to provide services to
many Govt. departments, Armed forces and in the private sector. We have vast experience in
Buildings, Roads, Bridges and Dams. We are also offering vast geotechnical, structural and
architectural services in the private sector. It is a pride to state that we are one of the very first
Geotechnical Laboratory and consultants after UET in Peshawar. Such has been an honor to even
train young engineers in our laboratory and made understanding of geotechnical engineering easy
to be absorbed. On our profile, we have not less than almost 600 geotechnical reports and almost
100 geotechnical designs that includes foundations, slopes, embankments, retaining structures and
even improvement of soil bearing capacity. We claim to be the only soil laboratory in Peshawar to
acquire our laboratory equipment, trained staff, field drilling machinery (rotary and percussion) and
field testing equipment. It is pertinent to mention that we have highly qualified staff working under
each head of an engineering project. We have the ability to provide solution to complex problems
weather its soil mechanics, structures or any other civil engineering subject. We have joined hands
in high profile projects with high ranking consultants in joint ventures as well.
Report No. 9650/GSK
1.2 Purpose of Geotechnical Investigation
Purpose of Geotechnical investigation is to conduct soil investigation for the site
where building construction needs to take place.
The activity comprises of soil exploration and determining suitability of the site for
proposed construction. It mainly helps in estimating which type of foundation is
required or what safety measures should be taken. The effort and detail of
geotechnical site investigation is to obtain sufficient and correct site information so as
to select and design the depth and diameter of piles in this case.
In general, geotechnical investigations provide the following:
1. Information to determine the type of foundation required (shallow or deep).
2. Information to allow the geotechnical consultant to make a recommendation on the
allowable bearing capacity of the soil.
3. Sufficient data/ laboratory tests to make settlement and swelling predictions.
4. Location of the groundwater level.
5. Information so that the identification and solution of excavation problems can be
made.
6. Recommendation regarding soil improvement if required.
Report No. 9650/GSK
1.3 Scope of Work
The scope for this task of geotechnical investigation for the construction of Building consists of
the following activities;
i. Drilling of 03 number boreholes up to a depth 100ft.
ii. Collection of samples and recording the on field subsurface litho-logy.
iii. Conduction of standard penetration test where possible
iv. Identification of soil types encountered through soil classification tests
v. Computation of Shear Strength parameters of soil
vi. Provision of bearing capacity values
1.4 Site Description
The site is located at Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near Revenue Authority-Head
Office Phase III, Hayatabad Peshawar. No high voltage, electrical or telephone poles,
sewer or water pipes were observed within the depth of the drilled boreholes.
Report No. 9650/GSK
BH#01
BH#02
BH#03
Report No. 9650/GSK
CHAPTER NO. 2
FIELD INVESTIGATION & LAB TESTING

2.1 General
This chapter mainly deals with the activities performed in the field to acquire the
subsurface information of existing soils / rock present at the proposed project site and
lab activities for computation of different soil parameters.
2.2 Field Exploration
2.2.1 Drilling of Borehole:
Exploration of site subsurface conditions was conducted at site through drilling of (03)
boreholes up to 100ft depth, below existing ground level at location marked in
borehole layout plan.
Drilling was carried out utilizing motorized percussion with the possibility of continuous
sampling at different depths and at each litho-logical change of the strata.
2.3 Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs)
Standard penetration test was carried out on site in each borehole. The split spoon
was driven with the 140 lb hammer falling from 30 in height and the number of blows
was counted, applied in each increment until the full penetration of 18 in (450 mm)
was achieved.
Report No. 9650/GSK
The procedure was repeated after every 5ft (1.5 m) due to homogeneous strata, or
even at very stratum change. Number of blows for each 6 in (150 mm) penetration
was recorded. The blows for the last 300 mm of penetration (12 in) were added to
compute the penetration resistance N. Details are shown in the borehole log. Number
of blows was later corrected for 60% efficiency for a hand operated US Donut
hammer, for the computation of bearing capacity.
2.4 Sampling
 Undisturbed samples; for computation of shear strength parameters
 Disturbed samples; For identification and index property testing purposes at various depths.
Representative samples were placed in sealed plastic bags and core boxes and then
transported to the laboratory for further testing.
2.5 Groundwater and Cavities
Ground water was not encountered throughout drilling depth. No rock, cavities were
noticed within the drilled depth of boreholes.
Report No. 9650/GSK
2.6 Laboratory Activities
The following tests were performed to evaluate the engineering properties of the soils
and rocks influencing the performance of the proposed structure:
1- Determination of Natural moisture contents & Bulk Densities
Moisture content of the collected soil samples was determined at site and also in laboratory. Soil
weights were taken on site and dried in lab. Also speedy moisture tester was used upon receiving
the samples. Bulk densities were computed from the Undisturbed samples collected at various
depths, which were later used in the computation of shear strength parameters & bearing
capacities.
2- Classification of Soil
This comprised of gradation tests and computation of atterberg’s limits. The soil received
was pulverized, washed and dried, making it ready for the mentioned tests to determine
the soil type. Later the soil was sieved through sieve No. 40, so as to make it in use for
cassagrade’s apparatus and also for making threads of 1/8 inch dia.
3- Direct Shear Test
For the soil being sandy and gravelly in nature, the preferred way to compute the shear strength parameters is
direct shear tests, to be conducted on disturbed samples. Parameters computed were further used in
terzaghi’s equation for bearing capacity calculation.
10
Report No. 9650/GSK
CHAPTER NO.3
EVALUATION OF TEST RESULTS
3.1 Summary of Test Results
Classification
Borehole No.
Depth (ft)
Fineness
Modulus
(USCS)
Gravel
Fines
Sand
No.
(%)
(%)
(%)
1 10 79.0 2.4 18.7 6.44 GC, Clayey Gravel
2 20 68.0 6.5 25.5 5.08 GC, Clayey Gravel

Borehole # 1
3 40 62.5 7.6 29.9 5.07 GC, Clayey Gravel
4 60 45.9 16.1 38.0 3.78 GC, Clayey Gravel
5 80 62.7 8.6 28.7 5.33 GC, Clayey Gravel
6 100 60.4 9.3 30.3 4.91 GC, Clayey Gravel
7 20 56.2 10.8 33.0 4.87 GC, Clayey Gravel

Borehole # 2 & 3
8 40 67.6 4.7 27.7 4.83 GC, Clayey Gravel
9 60 55.4 12.8 31.8 4.4 GC, Clayey Gravel
10 80-100 61.7 7.2 31.1 4.89 GC, Clayey Gravel
11
Report No. 9650/GSK
3.2 Shear Strength parameters:
From direct shear test, it was computed;

Between Depth 10ft – 20ft
„c‟ ranged from 0.02kg/cm2 - 0.04kg/cm2
„ɸ‟ ranged from 23 degrees-25 degrees
3.3 Evaluation of test results & borehole logs
Discussion on Overall sub-surface litho-logy
 The strata encountered during drilling mainly comprised of Clayey Gravels throughout drilling depth
of boreholes.
 Percentage of fines was found increasing with the depth ranging from 18.70% up to 38.00%.
 Percentage of gravels ranged from 79.00% up to 45.40%.
 Ground water table was not encountered throughout drilling depth.
 Direct Shear Test was conducted on the soil samples for computation of shear strength parameters
later to be used for bearing capacity calculations.
12
Report No. 9650/GSK
CHAPTER NO. 4
BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS & GEOTECHNICAL

ANALYSIS
4.1 Bearing capacity analysis

Following approaches were utilized to calculate the bearing capacity:
i. from c & 
ii. from CPT / SPT
iii. from SPT at constant settlement
4.1.1 Utilizing the bearing capacity Equations (from ‘c’ & ‘):
The bearing capacity was calculated using the shear test parameters of cohesion and
angle of internal friction and the soil density of the specimens extracted from the
boreholes. The following well known Terzaghi‟s equation with correction terms
suggested by Meyerhof can be used to calculate the bearing capacity of rectangular
foundation of any sides ratio B:L
Qu =1.3𝑐𝑁𝑐+𝑞𝑁𝑞𝑅𝑤1+0.4 γ𝐵𝑁γ𝑅𝑤2
where:
C = Cohesion of soil,  = unit weight of soil, D = depth of footing, B= width of footing
C,Ø – Strength parameters of the soil below foundation level.L – Length of foundation.
Nc, Nq, Nγ – Bearing capacity coefficients dependent on the angle of internal friction
of the soil below foundation level (dimensionless).
13
Report No. 9650/GSK
Nc = cot  (Nq –1) Nq = etan tan2(45+/2)]
N = (Nq – 1) tan (1.4), Kp = tan2(45 + /2)
Table 4.2 Mayerhoff’s Bearing Capacity Factors
Ø Nc Nq Ny
0 5.1 1 0
5 6.5 1.6 0.1
10 8.3 2.5 0.4
15 11 3.9 1.2
20 14.9 6.4 2.9
25 20.7 10.7 6.8
30 30.1 18.4 15.1
35 46.4 33.5 34.4
40 75.3 64.1 79.4
Summary Footing Width& Bearing Capacity Column Load for Single Column
at 16ft Depth at 16ft Depth
Allowable Bearing Capacity Footing width Footing area

Column Load (Kips)
(Tsf) (ft) (sft)
2.13 20 400 1877
2.30 30 900 4612
2.50 40 1600 8888
2.70 50 2500 14692
14
Report No. 9650/GSK
Summary Footing Width& Bearing Capacity Column Load for Single Column
at 24ft Depth at 24ft Depth

Column Load (Kips)
(Tsf) (ft) (sft)
3.00 20 400 2644
3.19 30 900 6338
3.30 40 1600 11955
3.50 50 2500 19756
Summary Footing Width& Bearing Capacity at 30ft Column Load for Single Column at 30ft
Depth Depth

Column Load (Kips)
(Tsf) (ft) (sft)
3.65 20 400 3220
3.80 30 900 7632
4.03 40 1600 14256
4.20 50 2500 23351
15
Report No. 9650/GSK
4.1.2 Utilizing the SPT Data for Bearing Capacity Calculation:
Mayerhoff‟s equation was used for the determination of bearing capacity from „N‟
values obtained from SPT and corrected. The assumed footing width is 5 ft. The
following formula has been used.

2
𝑁 𝐵+1
𝑄𝑎 = 6 𝐵
𝐾
Where,
K = 1 + 0.33(D / B)
60% efficiency correction used for „N‟ using the following;
EcsCrCbN
N60 =
0.6
Furthermore the depth corrections applied are;
2000
N60 Corr = N60
ɣ Df
FPS System
Refer to borehole logs for details regarding N-Values and Bearing capacity from SPT
16
Report No. 9650/GSK
4.1.3 SPT based Bearing Capacity at constant settlement
𝑘𝑖𝑝 𝐷𝑓
𝑞𝑛𝑒𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 0.25 𝑁60 1 + 0.33 𝑆𝑒 (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ) ≤ 0.33 𝑁60 𝑆𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ
𝑠𝑓𝑡 𝐵
Qnet(all)
B Bearing Capacity from SPT vs 'B'
(ft)
at 16ft at 24ft at 30ft

5.5
at 16ft depth
5
10 3.12 4.07 4.97 at 24ft depth
Allowable Bearing Capacity (TSF)
4.5
at 30ft depth
4
20 2.58 3.12 3.73
3.5
3
30 2.4 2.87 3.32
2.5
2
40 2.31 2.72 3.11 1.5
1
50 2.26 2.63 2.99 0 20 40 60 80
Footing Width 'B'(ft)
60 2.22 2.57 2.91
17
Report No. 9650/GSK
4.2 Stresses under square footing
Boussinesq Method was adopted to calculate the stress variation under square footing.
Δδ = qo m I_____________(i)
Using Boussinesq equation for isobars at max stress and min stress (0.2qo);
2
3𝑄 3
𝑟= 𝑧 −1
2𝛿𝑧𝜋𝑧 2
5/2
3𝑄 1
𝛿𝑧 = 2
2𝜋𝑧 2 𝑟
1+ 𝑧
4.2.1 Footing size 30ft x30ft and depth 24ft, Column load taken as 6338.00kips.
Depth
S.No Δδ Ksf
(ft)
1 2 7.04
2 4 6.82
3 6 6.56
4 8 6.55
5 10 5.92
6 12 5.15
7 14 4.94
8 16 4.94
9 20 3.63
10 25 3.01
11 30 2.37
12 50 1.05
13 55 0.34
14 60 0.50
15 70 0.73
16 80 0.25
17 90 0.11
18
Report No. 9650/GSK
Δδ ksf
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
0
10
20
30
depth (ft)
40
50
60
70
Δδ Ksf Poly. (Δδ Ksf)
80
90
100
Horizontal distance 'r' (ft)

0 5 10
0
5
10
15
20
Depth (ft)
25
30
35
40
Max Stress ksf
45
50 Min Stress ksf
19
Report No. 9650/GSK
4.3 Lateral Earth Pressure
Height of wall 24 ft 7 m
Backfill soil 'c' 0 kg/cm2 0.00 KN/m2
Backfill soil 'γ' 1.8 g/cm3 17.7 KN/m3
Backfill Soil 'ᴓ' 23 degrees
Lateral Pressure Lateral Thrust / Force
Distance
Active Tensile
Active Active of Fa
Presure Active force Cracking
Pressure Pa force Fa from the
Coefficient Fa(KN/m) Zone
Pa1 Pa2 KN/m2 (kip/ft) bottom
Ka Zo(m)
(at bottom) (at top) z' (m)
0.438 56.584 0.000 56.584 207.015 14.185 2.439 0.000
Passive Passive Passive

Pp1 Pp2
Kp Pressure Fp1 Fp2 Force Force
(at bottom-Pp2) (at top)
Pp KN/m2 KN/m kip/ft
2.283 294.824 0.000 294.824 1078.624 0.000 1078.624 73.909
Lateral Pressure KN/m2 Lateral thrust (KN/m)

0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0
0 0.0
1 1.0
Active pressure
2 2.0
Height of wall (m)
Height of wall (m)
3 Passive Pressure
3.0
4 4.0
5 5.0
6 6.0
7 7.0 Active force KN/m
8 8.0 Passive Pressure KN/m
20
Report No. 9650/GSK
CHAPTER NO.05
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Engineering Recommendations
As a result of field and laboratory activities carried out and the analysis of the
available data and test results
5.1.1 Parameters for Design
Allowable bearing capacity recommended at various depths is given as;
 2.30 TSF at 16ft depth.
5.1.2 Recommendations
 It is recommended to compact the surface prior to laying foundation.
 For deeper excavations such as till 24ft to 30ft depth, the best suited procedure is
to provide sheeting / retention to soil prior to excavation. This can be done by
providing Secant Piles, designed properly by geotechnical engineer.
21
Report No. 9650/GSK
5.2 Drainage of the Site
It is recommended to design an effective rainwater drainage system to get rid of
the consequences of the rainwater percolation into the layers (i.e. provision of
parametric drains). The site should be graded so as to direct rainwater and water
away from all planned structures.
5.3 Materials for Backfill
In general, materials for the backfilling should be granular, not containing rocks or
lumps over 15 cm in greatest dimension, free from organic matter, with plasticity index
(PI) not more than 9%. The backfill material should be laid in lifts not exceeding 25 cm
in loose thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density
at optimum moisture content as determined by modified compaction test (Proctor)
(ASTM D-1557).
5.4 Site Class
The on-site soils are classified as „SC Soil Profile‟ based on the N-values obtained from
SPT.
22
Report No. 9650/GSK
5.5 Seismic Considerations
As per Pakistan Building Code, the site is being situated in Peshawar. Peshawar is in
seismic Zone 2B with ground acceleration ranging from 0.16g to 0.24g.
23
Report No. 9650/GSK
5.6 Limitations
Finally, it should be noted that the results and recommendations of this report are
solely based on the collected samples from the drilled boreholes on December, 2020
and assuming that the subsurface conditions do not significantly deviate from those
encountered.
Reporting Officer
24
Report No. 9650/GSK
CHAPTER NO. 06
TESTING METHODOLOGIES
The following tests were performed following ASTM standards to evaluate the
engineering properties of the soils and rocks influencing the performance of the
proposed structure:
1- Natural moisture contents were determined in accordance with ASTM D-2216.
2- Partical Size Distribution in accordance with ASTM D422, D1140.
3- Direct Shear Test ASTM D-3080
6.1 Moisture Content
To determine the moisture content of soils, the soil sample was dried at a temperature
of 105°C to 110°C for about 24 hours. The loss in weight of the soil sample
represented the weight of moisture in the soil. The moisture content of the soil to the
dry weight of soil in percentage is the moisture content of the testing soil. This test
was performed in accordance with ASTM.
6.2 Bulk Density
The bulk density of a soil, i.e. the mass per unit volume of the soil deposit including
any water it contains was determined at the laboratory by using the linear
measurement method.
25
Report No. 9650/GSK
6.3 Particle Size Distribution
Particle size distribution was determined by
means of sieving. Sieves of standard sizes were
used as per ASTM E11-09e1. The percentage of
weight of the various particle sizes were
determined by sieving through a set of these
standard sieves. This test was performed to
determine the percentage of different grain sizes
contained within a soil sample. This test was performed as per ASTM D422, D1140.
Graphs obtained are attached in the appendices.
6.4 Direct Shear Test
Where three identical specimens were sheared under
three vertical load conditions and the maximum shear
stress in each case was measured. The strength
parameters, namely cohesion (c) and angle of internal
friction (Ø) were determined from the maximum shear-vs-
normal stress plot.
26
BOREHOLE LOG & STANDARD PENETRATION TESTING (ASTM-1586-54)
Borehole No. : 1&2 Drilling Method : Motorized Percussion
Date of Driling: 1-Dec-20 Report No. 9650/GSK
Assumed footing width (ft)= 6 Name of Project: Construction of Hayatabad Heights
Borehole diameter (Inches)= 6 Client: M/S Ecotech Design Consultants
CS = 1 Location: Phase III, Hayatabad
CB = 1.05 Depth of Borehole: 100ft
Em = 0.55 Water Table Depth not encountered
Select Efficiency Correction N60 Name of Engr:
Depth Penetration N60 Vs Depth
N- Value N60 Soil Classification Soil Profile
ft 6-in 6-in 6-in
5 22 - - - - 0 0.5 1
5
10 25 - - - - GC
10
15 32 - - - -
15
20 33 - - - -
20
25 - -
25
30 - -
30
35 - -
35
40 - -
40
45 - -
45
50 - - GM
50
55 - -
55
60 - -
Refusal 60
65 - - 65
70 - - 70
75 - - 75
80 - - 80
85 - - 85
90 - - 90 GC
95 - - 95
- - 100
100
BOREHOLE LOG & STANDARD PENETRATION TESTING (ASTM-1586-54)
Borehole No. : 3 Drilling Method : Motorized Percussion
Date of Driling: 1-Dec-20 Report No. 9650/GSK
Assumed footing width (ft)= 6 Name of Project: Construction of Hayatabad Heights
Borehole diameter (Inches)= 6 Client: M/S Ecotech Design Consultants
CS = 1 Location: Phase III, Hayatabad
CB = 1.05 Depth of Borehole: 100ft
Em = 0.55 Water Table Depth not encountered
Select Efficiency Correction N60 Name of Engr:
Depth Penetration N60 Vs Depth
N- Value N60 Soil Classification Soil Profile
ft 6-in 6-in 6-in
5 25 - - - - 0 0.5 1
5
10 33 - - - - GC
10
15 38 - - - -
15
20 42 - - - -
20
25 - -
25
30 - -
30
35 - -
35
40 - -
40
45 - -
45
50 - - GM
50
55 - -
55
60 - -
Refusal 60
65 - - 65
70 - - 70
75 - - 75
80 - - 80
85 - - 85
90 - - 90 GC
95 - - 95
- - 100
100
Report No. 9650/GSK
U.S. Standard Sieve Opening in Inches U.S. Standard Sieve Numbers Hydrometer Results
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
% Retained by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size in Millimeters
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
Date : December, 2020 D10 = 0.04 USCS Classification % Gravel % Sand
Sample #: 1 D30 = 8.21 GC, Clayey Gravel
Sample ID: 101 D60 = 40.02 Specifications 79.0% 2.4%
Source: Motorized Percussion CC = 41.91 No Specs
Project: Construction of Plaza CU = 995.31 Sample Meets Specs % Silt & Clay
Location: Phase III,Peshawar Liquid Limit= n/a n/a 18.7%
Boring #: 1 Plastic Limit= n/a Fineness Modulus
Depth: 10ft Plasticity Index= n/a 6.44
Coarse Actual Interpolated Fines Actual Interpolated
Section Cumulative Cumulative Section Cumulative Cumulative
Sieve Size Percent Percent Specs Specs Sieve Size Percent Percent Specs Specs
US Metric Passing Passing Max Min US Metric Passing Passing Max Min
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 21.0% 21.0%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 20.3% 20.3%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 20.1% 20.1%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 19.6% 19.6%
2.00" 50.00 72.5% 72.5% #20 0.850 19.4% 19.4%
1.75" 45.00 66.2% #30 0.600 19.3%
1.50" 37.50 56.8% 56.8% #40 0.425 19.2% 19.2%
1.25" 31.50 52.9% #50 0.300 19.1%
1.00" 25.00 48.7% 48.7% #60 0.250 19.1% 19.1%
7/8" 22.40 47.3% #80 0.180 18.8% 18.8%
3/4" 19.00 45.5% 45.5% #100 0.150 18.7% 18.7%
5/8" 16.00 43.6% #140 0.106 18.7%
1/2" 12.50 41.4% 41.4% #170 0.090 18.7%
3/8" 9.50 36.0% 36.0% #200 0.075 18.7% 18.7%
1/4" 6.30 21.0% 21.0% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 21.0% 21.0%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 32.0% 32.0%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 30.1% 30.1%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 29.4% 29.4%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 28.1% 28.1%
2.00" 50.00 100.0% #20 0.850 27.4% 27.4%
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 27.0%
1.50" 37.50 89.7% 89.7% #40 0.425 26.8% 26.8%
1.25" 31.50 85.1% #50 0.300 26.5%
1.00" 25.00 80.2% 80.2% #60 0.250 26.4% 26.4%
7/8" 22.40 79.0% #80 0.180 25.9% 25.9%
3/4" 19.00 77.6% 77.6% #100 0.150 25.7% 25.7%
5/8" 16.00 71.8% #140 0.106 25.5%
1/2" 12.50 65.1% 65.1% #170 0.090 25.5%
3/8" 9.50 55.0% 55.0% #200 0.075 25.5% 25.5%
1/4" 6.30 32.0% 32.0% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 32.0% 32.0%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 37.5% 37.5%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 36.0% 36.0%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 35.4% 35.4%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 33.8% 33.8%
2.00" 50.00 84.0% 84.0% #20 0.850 32.8% 32.8%
1.75" 45.00 80.8% #30 0.600 32.3%
1.50" 37.50 76.0% 76.0% #40 0.425 31.9% 31.9%
1.25" 31.50 71.8% #50 0.300 31.5%
1.00" 25.00 67.3% 67.3% #60 0.250 31.4% 31.4%
7/8" 22.40 65.2% #80 0.180 30.5% 30.5%
3/4" 19.00 62.4% 62.4% #100 0.150 30.2% 30.2%
5/8" 16.00 60.4% #140 0.106 30.0%
1/2" 12.50 58.1% 58.1% #170 0.090 29.9%
3/8" 9.50 53.6% 53.6% #200 0.075 29.9% 29.9%
1/4" 6.30 37.5% 37.5% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 37.5% 37.5%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
Sample #: 4 D30 = 0.06 GM, Silty Gravel with Sand
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 54.1% 54.1%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 51.2% 51.2%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 50.0% 50.0%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 46.8% 46.8%
2.00" 50.00 100.0% #20 0.850 44.8% 44.8%
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 43.5%
1.50" 37.50 92.0% 92.0% #40 0.425 42.6% 42.6%
1.25" 31.50 88.8% #50 0.300 41.7%
1.00" 25.00 85.3% 85.3% #60 0.250 41.4% 41.4%
7/8" 22.40 83.9% #80 0.180 39.4% 39.4%
3/4" 19.00 82.2% 82.2% #100 0.150 38.7% 38.7%
5/8" 16.00 79.6% #140 0.106 38.3%
1/2" 12.50 76.6% 76.6% #170 0.090 38.2%
3/8" 9.50 71.6% 71.6% #200 0.075 38.0% 38.0%
1/4" 6.30 54.1% 54.1% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 54.1% 54.1%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 37.3% 37.3%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 35.8% 35.8%
3.00" 75.00 88.6% 88.6% #10 2.000 35.2% 35.2%
2.50" 63.00 73.4% 73.4% #16 1.180 33.5% 33.5%
2.00" 50.00 71.2% 71.2% #20 0.850 32.5% 32.5%
1.75" 45.00 69.6% #30 0.600 31.9%
1.50" 37.50 67.3% 67.3% #40 0.425 31.5% 31.5%
1.25" 31.50 65.9% #50 0.300 31.0%
1.00" 25.00 64.3% 64.3% #60 0.250 30.8% 30.8%
7/8" 22.40 62.4% #80 0.180 29.8% 29.8%
3/4" 19.00 60.0% 60.0% #100 0.150 29.3% 29.3%
5/8" 16.00 58.1% #140 0.106 29.0%
1/2" 12.50 55.9% 55.9% #170 0.090 28.8%
3/8" 9.50 52.1% 52.1% #200 0.075 28.7% 28.7%
1/4" 6.30 37.3% 37.3% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 37.3% 37.3%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 39.6% 39.6%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 38.2% 38.2%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 37.6% 37.6%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 35.6% 35.6%
2.00" 50.00 100.0% #20 0.850 34.4% 34.4%
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 33.7%
1.50" 37.50 74.7% 74.7% #40 0.425 33.2% 33.2%
1.25" 31.50 71.2% #50 0.300 32.7%
1.00" 25.00 67.3% 67.3% #60 0.250 32.5% 32.5%
7/8" 22.40 66.6% #80 0.180 31.3% 31.3%
3/4" 19.00 65.6% 65.6% #100 0.150 30.8% 30.8%
5/8" 16.00 64.3% #140 0.106 30.5%
1/2" 12.50 62.7% 62.7% #170 0.090 30.4%
3/8" 9.50 58.3% 58.3% #200 0.075 30.3% 30.3%
1/4" 6.30 39.6% 39.6% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 39.6% 39.6%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
Boring #: 2&3 Plastic Limit= n/a Fineness Modulus
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 43.8% 43.8%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 41.9% 41.9%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 41.0% 41.0%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 38.7% 38.7%
2.00" 50.00 100.0% #20 0.850 37.3% 37.3%
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 36.6%
1.50" 37.50 72.9% 72.9% #40 0.425 36.1% 36.1%
1.25" 31.50 66.6% #50 0.300 35.6%
1.00" 25.00 59.9% 59.9% #60 0.250 35.4% 35.4%
7/8" 22.40 58.7% #80 0.180 34.2% 34.2%
3/4" 19.00 57.1% 57.1% #100 0.150 33.6% 33.6%
5/8" 16.00 55.9% #140 0.106 33.2%
1/2" 12.50 54.6% 54.6% #170 0.090 33.1%
3/8" 9.50 53.1% 53.1% #200 0.075 33.0% 33.0%
1/4" 6.30 43.8% 43.8% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 43.8% 43.8%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 32.4% 32.4%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 32.0% 32.0%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 31.6% 31.6%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 30.5% 30.5%
2.00" 50.00 95.8% 95.8% #20 0.850 29.9% 29.9%
1.75" 45.00 93.3% #30 0.600 29.5%
1.50" 37.50 89.7% 89.7% #40 0.425 29.2% 29.2%
1.25" 31.50 87.7% #50 0.300 28.9%
1.00" 25.00 85.5% 85.5% #60 0.250 28.8% 28.8%
7/8" 22.40 83.9% #80 0.180 28.2% 28.2%
3/4" 19.00 81.8% 81.8% #100 0.150 27.9% 27.9%
5/8" 16.00 80.3% #140 0.106 27.7%
1/2" 12.50 78.6% 78.6% #170 0.090 27.7%
3/8" 9.50 64.8% 64.8% #200 0.075 27.7% 27.7%
1/4" 6.30 32.4% 32.4% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 32.4% 32.4%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 44.6% 44.6%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 41.6% 41.6%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 40.6% 40.6%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 38.0% 38.0%
2.00" 50.00 100.0% #20 0.850 36.5% 36.5%
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 35.6%
1.50" 37.50 90.1% 90.1% #40 0.425 35.0% 35.0%
1.25" 31.50 86.8% #50 0.300 34.4%
1.00" 25.00 83.3% 83.3% #60 0.250 34.1% 34.1%
7/8" 22.40 82.2% #80 0.180 32.9% 32.9%
3/4" 19.00 80.8% 80.8% #100 0.150 32.3% 32.3%
5/8" 16.00 77.9% #140 0.106 32.0%
1/2" 12.50 74.6% 74.6% #170 0.090 31.9%
3/8" 9.50 67.1% 67.1% #200 0.075 31.8% 31.8%
1/4" 6.30 44.6% 44.6% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 44.6% 44.6%
Report No. 9650/GSK
20 6 4 3 1½ ¾ ½ ⅜ #4 10 16 20 30 40 50 100 200
100% 0%
90% 10%
80% 20%
70% 30%
% Passing by Weight
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
30% 70%
20% 80%
10% 90%
0% 100%
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silts Clays
Depth: 80ft-100ft Plasticity Index= n/a 4.89
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 38.3% 38.3%
4.00" 100.00 100.0% #8 2.360 37.0% 37.0%
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 36.4% 36.4%
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 34.6% 34.6%
2.00" 50.00 100.0% #20 0.850 33.5% 33.5%
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 32.9%
1.50" 37.50 87.8% 87.8% #40 0.425 32.5% 32.5%
1.25" 31.50 81.4% #50 0.300 32.1%
1.00" 25.00 74.5% 74.5% #60 0.250 32.0% 32.0%
7/8" 22.40 70.6% #80 0.180 31.5% 31.5%
3/4" 19.00 65.6% 65.6% #100 0.150 31.5% 31.5%
5/8" 16.00 62.0% #140 0.106 31.3%
1/2" 12.50 57.8% 57.8% #170 0.090 31.2%
3/8" 9.50 51.6% 51.6% #200 0.075 31.1% 31.1%
1/4" 6.30 38.3% 38.3% #270 0.053
#4 4.75 38.3% 38.3%
Report No. 9650/GSK
Project: Construction of Plaza

Location: Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near Revenue Authority-Head Office Phase III, Hayatabad Peshawar
BH # 1
Depth : 20ft
Report No. 9650/GSK
c kg/cm2 0.02
φ Degrees 22.75
0.7
0.6
0.574743816
0.5
kg/cm2
0.4 0.395934629
Shear stress
0.3
0.2 0.204353357
0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Normal stress kg/cm2
Report No. 9650/GSK
Project: Construction of Plaza

Location: Phase III, Peshawar
BH # 1
Depth : 10ft
Report No. 9650/GSK
2
c kg/cm 0.02
φ Degrees 22.04
0.6
0.561971731
0.5
kg/cm2
0.4 0.389548587
0.3
Shear stress
0.2 0.204353357
0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Normal stress kg/cm2

Geotech Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotech Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPORT#

Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near Revenue Authority-Head

Project Construction of Plaza (Hayatabad Heights)

Depth of Drilling 100ft

Drilling Method Motorized Percussion

Date of Drilling December 2020

Reporting Officer Engr. Ghassan Sattar Khan

Submitted to: M/S Ecotech Design Consultants

Ground Water Table Depth Not Encountered

PLANNING - TESTING - DESIGNING & DEVELOPMENT

1 Test Requirement : Determination of Shear Bearing Capacity as per Field &

2 Project : Construction of Plaza

3 Location : Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near Revenue Authority-

4 Deptt /Person Requiring Test : M/S Ecotech Design Consultants

5 Soil Report No. : 9650/GSK

CHAPTER NO.01 ...........................................................................................................................4

1.1 General ..............................................................................................................................4

1.2 Purpose of Geotechnical Investigation ..........................................................................5

1.3 Scope of Work .................................................................................................................6

1.4 Site Description ...............................................................................................................6

CHAPTER NO. 2 ................................................................................................................................8

FIELD INVESTIGATION & LAB TESTING ........................................................................................8

2.2 Field Exploration ............................................................................................................8

2.2.1 Drilling of Borehole: .........................................................................................................8

2.3 Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs).................................................................................8

2.4 Sampling ..........................................................................................................................9

2.5 Groundwater and Cavities ..............................................................................................9

2.6 Laboratory Activities .....................................................................................................10

CHAPTER NO.3 ...............................................................................................................................11

EVALUATION OF TEST RESULTS ................................................................................................11

3.2 Shear Strength parameters: .........................................................................................12

3.3 Evaluation of test results & borehole logs ...................................................................12

Discussion on Overall sub-surface litho-logy..........................................................................12

CHAPTER NO. 4 ..............................................................................................................................13

BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS & GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS ....................................13

4.1 Bearing capacity analysis .............................................................................................13

4.2 Stresses under square footing .....................................................................................18

4.3 Lateral Earth Pressure ..................................................................................................20

CHAPTER NO.05 .............................................................................................................................21

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................................21

5.1.1 Parameters for Design ...................................................................................................21

5.2 Drainage of the Site ........................................................................................................22

5.3 Materials for Backfill .....................................................................................................22

5.4 Site Class ........................................................................................................................22

5.5 Seismic Considerations .................................................................................................23

5.6 Limitations ......................................................................................................................24

CHAPTER NO. 06 ............................................................................................................................25

TESTING METHODOLOGIES .........................................................................................................25

6.2 Bulk Density...................................................................................................................25

6.3 Particle Size Distribution ..............................................................................................26

6.4 Direct Shear Test ............................................................................................................26

recommended to be 2.75 TSF.

construction of “Hayatabad Heights” at location of Railway Track, KPPRA road, Near

1.1.1 Brief about GSK Engineerz Geotechnical works profile

1.2 Purpose of Geotechnical Investigation

Purpose of Geotechnical investigation is to conduct soil investigation for the site

where building construction needs to take place.

proposed construction. It mainly helps in estimating which type of foundation is

geotechnical site investigation is to obtain sufficient and correct site information so as

In general, geotechnical investigations provide the following:

1. Information to determine the type of foundation required (shallow or deep).

2. Information to allow the geotechnical consultant to make a recommendation on the

allowable bearing capacity of the soil.

3. Sufficient data/ laboratory tests to make settlement and swelling predictions.