Ug190554 - Site Investigation

GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS:
INFLUENCING FOUNDATION SYSTEMS

C
T
SOIL INVESTIGATION 2
REPORT
0
GUIDED BY: PROF PAVNI PANDYA AND
PROF CHANDRESH SOLANKI
2
4
TUTOR ASSISTANT: ANJAN PAREKH AND
KHUSHI SHAH
HARSHIT KAVADIA I HERIL JAIN I RUSHIKESH PATEL

UG190519 I UG190554 I UG191149
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
We would like to express our gratitude to Prof. Pavni Pandya, for the opportunity to
work in this studio, visiting sites, performing laboratory experiments and her expert
supervision through every part of the semester, Prof. Chandresh Solanki, for sharing
his experienced vision in tackling this problem as an engineer in the field and not just
leaning from literature. For insights on conducting the investigation and presenting the
report in a standard professional manner and providing us with invaluable knowledge
about working on field. Special thanks to Teaching associates Anjan Parekh and Khushi
Shah for their continuous presence and efforts in helping us get better.
Lab Assistants Mr. Jagdish Prajapati for assistance in the lab and help in laboratory
experiments. Lastly, Faculty of Technology, CEPT University for enrolling us in this
studio and the opportunity to work as a professional in the field.
Table of Contents:
1.0 Introduction: ........................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 Scope of work: ..................................................................................................................... 1
2.1 Drilling: ................................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Sampling:.............................................................................................................................. 2
3.0 Site map: .............................................................................................................................. 3
4.0 Laboratory Investigation: ..................................................................................................... 4
5.0 Field Investigation- Field Bore log........................................................................................ 9
6.0 Soil classification: ............................................................................................................... 10
7.0 Summary table: .................................................................................................................. 11
8.0 Annexure- A: ...................................................................................................................... 12
8.1 Determination of field density: .......................................................................................... 12
8.2 Determination of moisture content: ................................................................................. 13
8.3 Calculation for N-value correction: .................................................................................... 14
8.4 Determination of Grain sieve analysis ............................................................................... 15
8.5 Determination of liquid limit: ............................................................................................ 16
8.6 Determination of Plastic limit: ........................................................................................... 17
8.7 Determination of Shrinkage limit: ..................................................................................... 18
8.8 Determination of Specific gravity: ..................................................................................... 20
8.9 Determination of Free swell index: ................................................................................... 21
8.10 Determination of Consolidation test: .............................................................................. 22
8.11 Determination of Triaxial test: ......................................................................................... 25
9.0 Annexure- B: ...................................................................................................................... 31
Table Index:
Table no. 1: Field bore log .................................................................................................. 9
Table no. 2: Soil classification ........................................................................................... 10
Table no. 3: Summary table .............................................................................................. 11
Table no. 4: Determination of field density ..................................................................... 12
Table no. 5: Determination of moisture content ............................................................. 13
Table no. 6: Calculation for N value correction ................................................................ 14
Table no. 7: Determination of Grain sieve analysis .......................................................... 15
Table no. 8: Determination of Liquid limit ....................................................................... 16
SPRING 2021 CT-2024 GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS: INFLUENCING FOUNDATION SYSTEMS
Table no.9: Determination of Plastic limit ........................................................................ 17

Table no. 10: Determination of Shrinkage limit ............................................................... 18
Table no. 11: Determination of Specific gravity ............................................................... 20
Table no. 12: Determination of Free swell index test ...................................................... 21
Table no. 13: Readings of consolidation settlement with different loading conditions .. 22
Table no. 14: Readings of Applied pressure Vs void ratio ................................................ 22
Table no. 15: Readings of deviatoric stress for 3 m UDS sample ..................................... 25
Table no. 16: Initial and deformation readings of the sample for 3 m UDS sample ........ 26
Table no.17: Readings of deviatoric stress for 9 m UDS sample ...................................... 27
Table no. 18: Initial and deformation readings for 9 m UDS sample ............................... 28
Table no. 19: Readings of deviatoric stress for 10 m UDS sample ................................... 29
Table no. 20: Initial and deformation readings of the sample for 10 m UDS sample ...... 30
Image Index:
Figure 1: Site location taken from Google earth pro .......................................................... 3
Image no.1: Extracting UDS sample for field density and other tests ............................. 31
Image no.2: For calculating moisture content ................................................................. 31
Image no.3: Performing wet sieve analysis and dry sieve analysis .................................. 32
Image no.4: Performing liquid limit test using Casagrande and cone penetrometer ...... 33
Image no.5: Performing Plastic limit test ......................................................................... 34
Image no.6: Performing Shrinkage limit test .................................................................... 34
Image no Image no.7: Performing specific gravity test .................................................... 35
Image no.8: Performing free swell index ......................................................................... 35
Image no.9: Performing Consolidation test ..................................................................... 35
Image no.10: Performing Triaxial test .............................................................................. 36
Graph Index:
Graph 1: The graph loading vs time is being taken on basis of 0.4 kg/cm2 loading ........ 23
Graph 2: Applied pressure Vs void ratio ........................................................................... 24
Graph 3: Plotting of values strain Vs Deviatoric stress for 3 m UDS sample ................... 26
Graph 4: Plotting Mohr circle for 3 m UDS sample .......................................................... 26
Graph 5: Plotting of values strain Vs Deviatoric stress for 9 m UDS sample ................... 28
Graph 6: Plotting Mohr circle for 9 m UDS sample .......................................................... 28
Graph 7: Plotting of values strain Vs Deviatoric stress for 10 m UDS sample ................. 30
Graph 8: Plotting Mohr circle for 10 m UDS sample ........................................................ 30
1.0 Introduction:
The report includes details for the geotechnical field and lab investigations
conducted for developing a two-floor factory at Sanand highway- Dipen bricks.
The objective of this report is to provide information collected during the
investigation period and from laboratory tests results to understand strata and
give soil properties to derive foundation design parameters from
recommended safe bearing capacity of foundation soil. As one progressed
deeper into the strata, it was discovered that white gravels was also present in
the soil.
The exploration work was carried out on site and then laboratory tests were
conducted at Faculty of Technology, CEPT University.
• Site location: Dipen bricks, Sanand, Gujarat
• Co-ordinates: 22°58'04.5"N 72°24'49.2"E
• No. of Bore hole: 1
• Depth of Bore hole: 10.0 m
• Ground water table: 2.75 m
2.0 Scope of work:

The Scope of work was to assess properties of the encountered subsurface
and provide foundation design recommendations for any structure. The
scope of work consisted of the following tasks:
• Locating a suitable spot for drilling of the borehole.
• Drilling a borehole till 10 m of depth using suitable boring method.
• Collecting disturbed and undisturbed samples at desired depths.
• Conducting standard penetration test and noting down number of
blows.
• Recording down ground water table depth, if encountered during depth.
• Packing, labelling, and transporting the collected samples during boring
to laboratory.
• Performing various lab test to determine the engineering properties of
soil.
• Compiling all the data of field work and lab tests in soil investigation
report.
1|Page
2.1 Drilling:
Drilling is essential to evaluate a site’s soil before constructing any building. It
involves collecting soil samples at representative levels below the desired
foundation depths, at a collection of different locations in the building site.
• Drilling Method: Manual Auger: A screw like tool much like a large
carpenters' bit with cutting lips attached to a rod and operated by hand and
used to bore shallow holes and obtain samples of soil and other relatively
unconsolidated near-surface materials.
• Samples collected from boreholes are often of two types Disturbed and
Undisturbed using Split sampler tube and shelby tubes. The collected samples
are first visually inspected and then collected in a plastic bag with a token of its
identification, in case of UDS the sample is sealed through wax on site and is
directly opened in lab.
2.2 Sampling:
a. Ground Water Table and Rock Strata: Because it is a manual auger, there is
no need to wait 24 hours as with a rotatory auger; instead, water is
continuously poured into the bore. The water table at Sanand, where the
entire report is based, is 2.75 m.
b. Disturbed Samples: Soil samples were collected during boring from the split
spoon sampler. The samples recovered were logged, labelled, and placed in
airtight polythene bags.
c. Undisturbed Samples: Soil samples collected from the bore hole in a 100 mm
thin-walled sampler (Shelby tube). The sampler used had an appropriate area
as per IS 2132. The samples obtained were logged, labelled, and sealed using
wax to retain its natural moisture content.
d. Standard Penetration Test: In this test, the split spoon sampler resting on
the bottom of the bore hole is allowed to sink under its own weight, then the
split spoon sampler is seated 15cm with the blows of a hammer free falling
through 750mm height. The driving assembly consists of a driving head and a
65-kilogram hammer.
2|Page
3.0 Site map:
Figure 1: Site location taken from Google earth pro
3|Page
4.0 Laboratory Investigation:

Sr.no. Test Reference code Type of sample
1 Sample preparation IS 2720 Pt.1 DS/UDS
2 Moisture content IS 2720 Pt.2 DS/UDS
3 Specific gravity IS 2720 Pt.3 DS
4 Grain size analysis IS 2720 Pt.4 DS
5 Liquid limit IS 2720 Pt.5 DS
6 Plastic limit IS 2720 Pt.5 DS
7 Shrinkage limit IS 2720 Pt.6 DS
8 Soil Classification IS 1498 DS/UDS
9 Triaxial test IS 2720 Pt.11 UDS
10 Direct shear test IS 2720 Pt.13 UDS
11 Consolidation IS 2720 Pt.15 UDS
12 Free swell index IS 2720 Pt.40 DS/UDS
4.1 Field Dry Density:

After removing paraffin wax and loose soil, the weight of an undisturbed soil
sample taken with a sampler (Shelby tube) is calculated. After subtracting the
empty length from the total length of the sampler, the total length of soil
sample recovery is determined. The volume of soil mass retained in the
sampler is thus calculated based on the known volume. The sampler's
diameter and the total length of the soil mass is taken. After that, the soil
mass is removed, and then average moisture content of the soil is calculated
by oven drying f or 24 hours at 100-105 degrees Celsius. The empty weight of
the container is then taken. The weight of the sampler with soil mass is
subtracted from the total weight of the sampler. The field density is calculated
by using formula: (Refer table no.4)
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠
𝐹𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 (𝑔𝑚/𝑐𝑐) =
𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠
4|Page
4.2 Water content:

The soil samples were brought to the lab in a sealed bag and then from each
bags the small amount of wet sample was taken in a container and was oven
dried for 24 hours at 100-105°C and afterwards dry weight was taken and
water contained was obtained. The water content is calculated by using
formula: (Refer table no.5)
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑔)
𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 =
𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 (𝑔)
4.3 Grain size analysis:

IS: 2720 (Part IV) is followed when conducting the sieve analysis. A soil sample
is obtained from the soil sample collected or received from the site. The
amount of soil taken will be determined by the largest particle size present in
the soil. Sieve analysis is divided into two sections: (Refer table no.6)
1. Wet sieve analysis is performed first:
• Taking 100 g and 200 g sample from SPT and UDS samples respectively.
The sample is kept in a 75-micron sieve under running water that
removes major silt and clay portion present in the soil.
2. After oven drying for 24 hours:

• The sample retained in the sieve is then oven dried for 24 hrs, then
passed through the sieves as shown down in observation table. •
Individual weight retained on all the sieves were noted and
simultaneously the cumulative weight and percentage passing were
calculated.
• Dry sieve analysis helps in categorising soil based on size of particles. It
gives an account of the condition of aggregate and particles present in
the soil sample.
5|Page
4.4 Atterberg’s limit:

The procedure outlined in IS: 2720 (Pt-V) is used to determine liquid and
plastic limit. The outcomes are listed on the result sheet.
For liquid limit the thoroughly wet soil paste is transferred to the cone
penetrometer apparatus's cylindrical trough, which is 150mm in diameter and
50mm high, and levelled up to the trough's top. The cone point of the
penetrometer is adjusted so that it just touches the surface of the soil paste in
the trough. The vertical rod is released, and the penetrometer's scale is reset
to zero, allowing the cone to penetrate the soil paste under its own weight.
After 30 seconds after the cone is released, the penetration is detected. The
liquid limit of the soil which corresponds to the moisture content of a paste
which would give 25 mm penetration of the cone is used. (Refer table no.8)
For plastic limit, soil sample weighing at least 20 gm from a soil sample passing
the 425 micron IS sieve is thoroughly mixed with water and easily moulded
with fingers to determine the plastic limit. With about 8 to 10 gm of this soil, a
ball is formed and rolled between the fingers and the glass plate with just
enough pressure to roll the mass into a thread of uniform diameter of 3mm all
the way through. After that, the soil is kneaded into a uniform mass and rolled
once more. The procedure is repeated until the thread breaks. The pieces of
crumbled soil thread are collected, and moisture content is determined and
reported as plastic limit. (Refer table no.9)
For shrinkage limit the soil is passed from 425 micron and 30gm is taken and
water is added into it for making it in paste form as done in above to tests-
Liquid limit and plastic limit. The weight of shrinkage dish be taken before the
paste is then filled in shrinkage dish in three layers so that no air voids are
present. The shrinkage dish is tamped also for no voids. It should be filled up to
the top of the dish. The sample is air- dried for 24 hours till it doesn’t get into
solid form. The dry soil pat is taken out.
• Take up the evaporating dish and take it weight also. Fill the mercury top to
the evaporating dish and record its weight. After completing this using, the
straight edge to remove excess mercury from dish. Keep the soil pat in the
evaporating dish and then again use the straight edge and record weight of
dish and pat and weight of mercury felled outside. (Refer table no.10)
6|Page
4.5 Specific gravity:

A 50ml density bottle is used to determine the specific gravity of soil solids.
The weight (W1) of the empty dry bottle is taken first. A sample of 5-10 g oven-
dried soil is placed in the bottle, and the weight (W2) of the bottle and the soil
is measured. The bottle is then gradually filled with distilled water, with the
trapped air removed either by vacuum or shaking the bottle. The weight of the
bottle, soil, and water (filled to the brim) is then calculated (W3). Finally, the
bottle is completely emptied and thoroughly washed before being filled with
clean water to the top and the weight (W4) taken. The Specific gravity is
calculated by using formula, (Refer table no.11)
(𝑊2−𝑊1)
𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 =
((𝑤2−𝑊1)−(𝑊3−𝑊4))
W1: Weight of density bottle

W2: Weight of density bottle + soil
W3: Weight of density bottle + soil + water
W4: Weight of density bottle + water
4.6 Free swell index:

A differential free swell test is performed to determine the soil's swelling
characteristics. A 10 g oven dried soil sample passing through a 425micron
filter is poured into two glass cylinders. Cylinders with a graduated capacity of
100 ml. One cylinder was filled with distilled water, while the other was filled
to the 100 ml mark with kerosene. After the entrapped air was removed, the
sample was given enough time nearly 24 hours to reach a volume equilibrium
state. Each cylinder's final soil height was measured. The Free swell index % is
calculated by using formula, (Refer table no.12)
𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑘𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑒
𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑙𝑙 % = ∗ 100
𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑘𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑒
7|Page
4.7 Consolidation:
Consolidation tests were conducted on undisturbed soil samples to determine
the settlement of soil at various depths. The tests were carried out in
accordance with the IS: 2720 standard (Pt-XV). An undisturbed soil sample is
extruded to a 60mm diameter consolidation ring. The edge is carefully
trimmed so that the sample is flush with the ring's top and bottom edges. The
specimen's thickness is measured, and its weight is recorded. After that, the
bottom porous stone is centred on the consolidation cell's base. Between the
bottom porous stone and the upper porous stone, the specimen is placed in
the middle. Between the specimen and the porous stones is a filter paper. The
loading cap is then placed on top. After that, the dial gauge is clamped in place
to record the relative movement between the cell's base and the loading cap.
The specimen is subjected to a seating pressure of 0.05 kg/cm2. Water is
always kept in the cell. After 24 hours, the test is repeated using a loading
sequence of 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, and 8.0 kg/cm2 on the soil specimen. After
each loading increment, readings of the dial gauge are taken in the following
order: 0, 0.25, 1, 2.25, 2, 6.25, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49... up to 24 hours. The void ratio
versus log (pressure) curve is derived from all incremental pressure
observations. The slope of the straight-line portion is designated as
compression index cc. (Refer table no.13)
4.8 Triaxial test:

Triaxial test is used to determine the shear properties of soil. Unconsolidated-
undrained triaxial tests were conducted in accordance with IS 2720 Pt. 11. The
test was significant to determine the shear strength parameters (∁ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 ∅) of
the soil. A disturbed sample was remoulded to desired density and moisture
content in a mould having diameter 37.5 mm and height 75mm. The initial
diameter and height of the specimen was recorded. The mould was then
placed in the triaxial cell. The cell assembly was placed in the loading machine.
The major principal stress (𝜎1) was applied in the vertical downward direction.
The other two principal stresses (𝜎2 and 𝜎3) were applied in the horizontal
direction with the introduction of cell fluids in the triaxial cell. The specimen
was given confining pressure and simultaneous readings of load and
compression measuring gauge were taken. The test was continued until the
stress reached a peak and starts to decrease. (Refer table no.14)
8|Page
5.0 Field Investigation- Field Bore log
FIELD BORE LOG SHEET (GROUP A)

Site Details: Dipen Bricks Type of Boring: Hand Auger Village: Sanand Water table at depth: 2.75 m
District:
Total drilled depth from EGL(m): 10 Date Started: 24/01/2022 Dia. Of Borehole: 200 mm
Ahmedabad
Date Completed: Classification of Soil
Co-Ordinate: 22°58'04.5"N 72°24'49.2"E State: Gujarat Day: Monday
24/01/2022
Sr. Sample Sample Standard Penetration Test Record
Depth(m) Time Recovery (cm) Visual Description of Soil Strata
No. Type No. N1 N2 N3 N= N2 + N3
1 0 - DS 1 - - - - - - CL
2 1 11:45 DS 2 - - - - - Silt sand, brown colour CI
3 1.5 11:52 SPT 1 2 2 3 5 50-28=22 Silt sand, brown colour CL
4 2 11:53 DS 3 - - - - - Silt sand, brown colour CL
5 3 12:00 DS 4 - - - - - Sand with gravel, light brown colour SC
6 3 12:05 UDS 1 - - - - 50-13=37 Sand with gravel, light brown colour
7 4 12:10 DS 5 - - - - - Sand with gravel, light brown colour SC
8 4.5 12:18 SPT 2 1 2 2 4 50-14=36 Sand with gravel, brown colour SC
9 5 12:23 DS 6 - - - - - Sand with gravel, brown colour SC
10 6 12:35 DS 7 - - - - - Sand with gravel, brown colour SC
11 6 12:37 UDS 2 - - - - No recovery Sand with gravel, brown colour
Clay with gravel, brown colour, hard
12 7 12:50 DS 8 - - - - - SC
strata
13 7.5 1:05 SPT 3 7 13 22 35 50-13=37 SC
strata
14 8 1:19 DS 9 - - - - - SC
strata
15 9 1:56 DS 10 - - - - - Clay with gravel, brown colour CI
16 9 2:00 UDS 3 - - - - 50-32=18 Clay with gravel, brown colour
17 10 2:40 UDS 4 - - - - 50-42=8
strata
18 10 2:45 DS 11 - - - - - CI
strata
Table no. 1: Field bore log
9|Page
6.0 Soil classification:
Soil Classification
75μ Passing 4.75 mm Passing LL & PL for Fine Grain

Plastic
A line PI
Sample Index Classification of
Depth (m) (0.73)*(LL- A - Line Graph
Type Ip=Wl- Soil
20)
Wp
Passing >50% Passing <50% Sand Coarse Grain LL 35-
% % LL LL <35% LL >50% PL
Clay+Silt or Gravel Soil 50%
1.5 SPT 68.39 Fine Grain 95 33% ✓ 22% 11% 9.61 Above CL
3 UDS 56.54 Fine Grain 95 30% ✓ 20% 10% 7.30 Above CL
4.5 SPT 32.55 Coarse Grain 99 Sand 25% ✓ 15% 10% 3.56 Above SC
6 DS 30.96 Coarse Grain 96 Sand 25% ✓ 13% 12% 3.35 Above SC
7.5 SPT 42.75 Coarse Grain 96 Sand 28% ✓ 18% 10% 5.84 Above SC
9 UDS 47.69 Coarse Grain 87 Sand 32% ✓ 19% 13% 8.76 Above CL
10 UDS 53.6 Fine Grain 92 30% ✓ 19% 11% 7.30 Above CL
Table no. 2: Soil classification
10 | P a g e
7.0 Summary table:
LABORATORY RESULTS (GROUP A)
Site Details: Dipen Bricks Village: Sanand Water table at depth: 2.75 m
Total drilled depth from EGL(m): 10 District: Ahmedabad Dia. Of Borehole: 200 mm
Co-Ordinate: 22°58'04.5"N 72°24'49.2"E State: Gujarat Day: Monday
Shear strength
Parameter Consolidation
Grain Size Analysis
(Triaxial test- Parameter
Free UU)
Types Field
Dept Observed Corrected Moisture Dry Density Sp. PL PI Classification swell
of N" Density LL (%)
h N value N value Content (%) (gm/cc) Gravity (%) (%) of soil index
Sample (gm/cc)
(%)
Gravel Sand Silt + C Ф
% % Clay% (kg/cm2) (0)
Cc σC
1.5 SPT 5 7 - - 17.39% - 2.50 4.54 27.07 68.39 33% 22% 11% CL 19.05 - - - -
3 UDS - - - 2.02 20.33% 2.02 2.53 4.61 38.85 56.54 30% 20% 10% CL 20.00 0.28 15 - -
4.5 SPT 4 4 - - 15.23% - 2.51 1.17 66.28 32.55 25% 15% 10% SC 12.50 - - - -
6 DS - - - 16.19% - 2.60 3.54 65.5 30.96 25% 13% 13% SC 12.50 - - - -
7.5 SPT 35 29 22 - 14.49% - 2.51 3.74 53.51 42.75 28% 18% 10% SC 16.67 - - - -
9 UDS - - - 2.21 14.40% 2.21 2.59 7.34 39.91 52.75 32% 19% 13% CL 17.65 0.75 9.2 - -
10 UDS - - - 2.27 20.70% 2.27 2.55 8.42 37.98 53.6 32% 19% 13% CL 10.00 0.4 26 0.32 0.84
Table no. 3: Summary table
11 | P a g e
8.0 Annexure- A:
8.1 Determination of field density:

Field Density
Total Weight
Avg. Weight
Dia. Of Avg. dia. height Height of Weight Field
Sample height Volume of Field
Sample shalby Of of of UDS sample of Density
Depth of UDS of Soil Shalby Density
Type tube shalby Shalby Sample + Shalby Sample (Kg /
(m) Sample (m3) Tube (gm / cm3)
(mm) tube (m) Tube (mm) Tube (Kg) m3)
(m) (Kg)
(mm) (Kg)
97.77 352
3 UDS 99.02 0.098 500 372 0.361 0.0027 9.754 4.255 5.499 2019.85 2.02
97.12 360
98.06 160
9 UDS 97.24 0.098 500 188 0.186 0.0014 7.114 4.025 3.089 2210.50 2.21
98.19 210
98.8 110
10 UDS 98.35 0.098 500 120 0.115 0.0009 6.054 4.07 1.984 2267.98 2.27
97.74 116
Table no. 4: Determination of field density
Calculation for reference:
For 3 m UDS,
Height of Shelby tube: H = 0.5 m
Weight of soil + Shelby tube (A): 9.68 kg
Weight of Shelby tube (B): 4.225 kg
Weight of soil (A-B): 5.425 kg
Taking out three diameter and taking out average of all: 𝐷𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 0.098 m
Taking out three different sample height and taking out average of all:
𝐻𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 0.361 m
2
Volume of soil (C): V = 𝜋 × 𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑔 × ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑔
(0.098×0.098)
=𝜋 × 4
× 0.361 = 0.0027 𝑚3
𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 (𝐴−𝐵)(𝑔) 5425
Field density (gm/cc) = 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙(𝐶)
= 0.0027 = 1992.67 kg/𝑚3
1992.67
= 1000
gm/cc = 1.99 gm/cc
Field density for 3 m: 1.99 gm/cc
Conclusion: In field density as going deeper into the strata the volume and
quantity of soil decreases as is compacted more from all sides and so on the
field density increases.
12 | P a g e
8.2 Determination of moisture content:
Table no. 5: Determination of moisture content
For 1.5 m SPT,
Empty bowl weight (A): 480.15 g
Wet weight + bowl weight (B): 880.15 g
Wet weight of sample (B-A): 400 g
Dry weight + bowl weight (C): 820.89 g
Dry weight of sample (C-A): 340.74 g

Weight of water (g)= Wet weight of soil (g) – dry weight of soil (g)
(400−340.74) 59.26
= = = 0.174 = 0.174× 100 = 17%
340.74 340.74
Moisture content % for 1.5 m: 17%
Conclusion: In case of moisture content the clayey soil with plasticity nature
has more moisture content as clay and water mix together and make a strong
bond whereas in clayey sand soil due to less % of clay and more % of sand the
bond between sand and water happens to be weak.
Result: For clayey soil with plasticity nature the moisture content is more and
in clayey sand moisture content is less.
13 | P a g e
8.3 Calculation for N-value correction:

N value correction
for Overburdern correct n
Field Field
Depth (A) Types of pressure- Cn value-
density density (B) N' (D) (kg/m2) N''
(m) Sample (C=B*A/100) Cn*N'
(g/cc) (kg/cm3)
(kn/m2) (C*D)
1.5 SPT 2.02 2020 30.3 1.40 7 -
4.5 SPT 2.21 2210 99.45 1.00 4 -
7.5 SPT 2.27 2270 170.25 0.82 29 21.9
Table no. 6: Calculation for N value correction
For 1.5 m SPT,
Depth of sample (A): 1.5 m
Field density (B): 2020 kg/𝑐𝑚3 (Value obtain from 8.1)

2020 × 1.5
Overburden pressure (C) = 100
= 30.3 kN/𝑚2 = Cn
2000
N’ (D): 0.77 × 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 × 30.3
= 1.4 kg/𝑚2
Correct N value: Cn× 𝑁′ = 30.3× 1.4 = 7
Conclusion: The N value correction is used to determine whether the N value

obtain from field bore log happens to be right or not and also N value
correction helps to understand and give us idea about the type of soil it can be.
14 | P a g e
8.4 Determination of Grain sieve analysis:

DRY SIEVE ANALYSIS
Empty
Sample Dry 4.75mm
Sample Bowl 75µ passing Clay + Silt
Depth Weight passing Sand (%) Gravel %
Type Weight (gm) Cumm. (%)
(m) (gm) (gm)
(gm)
1.5 SPT 479 32 68.39 95.46 68.39 27.07 4.54

3 UDS 208 41.8 56.54 95.39 56.54 38.85 4.61
4.5 SPT 504 66.5 32.55 98.83 32.55 66.28 1.17
6 DS 166 68.93 30.96 96.46 30.96 65.5 3.54
7.5 SPT 461 57 42.75 96.26 42.75 53.51 3.74
9 UDS 210 47.02 52.75 92.66 52.75 39.91 7.34
10 UDS 460 43.85 53.6 91.58 53.6 37.98 8.42
Table no. 7: Determination of Grain sieve analysis
For 1.5 m SPT,
Total soil sample: 100 g
75 microns passing: 68.39 g
4.75 mm passing: 95.46 h
Total Gravel % = 100 - 95.46 = 4.54 %
Total Sand % = 95.46 – 68.39 = 27.07 %
Total Clay + silt = 100 – 27.07 – 4.54 = 68.39 %
Conclusion: From the test results of sieve analysis test, first 2 samples and last
2 samples can be classified into fine grain soil and between them other
samples are found as coarse grain and specifically sand from observation of 75-
micron sieve and 4.75 mm sieve passing percentage. This gradation will help to
further classify the soil and its properties.
15 | P a g e
8.5 Determination of liquid limit:

Liquid limit
Wet Dry
Empty Wet Dry
Sample Dial Dial Weight Weight Water
Sample Penetration Bowl Weight Weight
Depth Initial Final with with Content
Type Depth (14-28mm) Weight (B-A) (C-A)
LL Water Content
(m) Reading Reading Bowl (B) Bowl (C) (%)
(A) (gm) (gm) (gm)
(gm) (gm)
1.5 SPT 400 254 25.4 7.48 49.6 42.12 39.11 31.63 33%
3 UDS 400 164 16.4 23.63 30.84 7.21 29.17 5.54 30%
4.5 SPT 400 145 14.5 7.98 47.53 39.55 39.65 31.67 25%
6 DS 400 185 18.5 20.73 66.78 46.05 57.69 36.96 25%
7.5 SPT 400 182 18.2 8.32 34.23 25.91 28.6 20.28 28%
9 UDS 400 185 18.5 19.62 51.44 31.82 43.71 24.09 32%
10 UDS 400 161 16.1 19.11 47.5 28.39 40.96 21.85 30%
Table no. 8: Determination of Liquid limit
For 1.5 m SPT,
Wet weight of sample (B-A): 42.12 g

(400−340.74) 59.26
= 340.74
= 340.74 = 0.174 = 0.174× 100 = 17%
Moisture content % in liquid limit for 1.5 m: 17%
Conclusion: Due to presence of clayey strata in the first 2 samples and the last
2 samples the liquid limit of that soil sample is high and in the remaining
samples the sand content in the soil sample increase and so the liquid limit is
less.
Result: In clayey soil with plastic nature the moisture content is more whereas
in sandy clay type moisture content is less, Liquid limit also effects the
classification of soil.
16 | P a g e
8.6 Determination of Plastic limit:

Plastic Limit
Wet Dry
Empty Wet Dry
Sample Weight Weight Water
Sample Bowl Weight Weight
Depth with with Content
Type Weight (B-A) (C-A)
(m) PL Water Content (A) (gm)
Bowl (B)
(gm)
Bowl (C)
(gm)
(%)
(gm) (gm)
1.5 SPT 17.11 18.15 1.04 17.96 0.85 22%
3 UDS 18.37 19.89 1.52 19.64 1.27 20%
4.5 SPT 22.88 24.97 2.09 24.70 1.82 15%
6 DS 13.54 16.24 2.70 15.94 2.40 13%
7.5 SPT 8.78 10.96 2.18 10.62 1.84 18%
9 UDS 20.13 22.11 1.98 21.79 1.66 19%
10 UDS 22.14 23.62 1.48 23.38 1.24 19%
Table no.9: Determination of Plastic limit
For 1.5 m SPT,
Wet weight of sample (B-A): 1.04 g

(1.04−0.85) 59.26
= 0.85
= 340.74 = 0.224 = 0.224× 100 = 22%
Moisture content % in Plastic limit for 1.5 m: 22%
Conclusion: Due to presence of sand content in the soil along with clay samples
4.5 and 6 are non-plastic in nature. And in the other samples in which the clay
content is higher shows more activity of soil and has higher plasticity.
Result: In clayey soil with plastic nature the moisture content is more whereas
in sandy clay type moisture content is less or has no plasticity nature in it,
Plastic limit also effects the classification of soil.
17 | P a g e
8.7 Determination of Shrinkage limit:
Table no. 10: Determination of Shrinkage limit
18 | P a g e
For 1.5 m SPT,
Mass of shrinkage dish (A): 42.41 g
Mass of shrinkage dish + Wet soil pat (B): 87.67 g
Wet soil pat (B-A): 45.26 g
Mass of shrinkage dish + dry soil pat (C): 77.88 g
Dry soil pat (C-A): 35.47 g

(45.26 − 35.47)
= 35.47
= 0.276 = 0.276× 100 = 27%
Moisture content % in shrinkage limit for 1.5 m: 22%
Mass of evaporating dish (D): 42.41 g
Mass of evaporating dish + mass of mercury filling shrinkage dish (E): 369.98 g
Mass of mercury filling shrinkage dish (E-D): 327.57 g
Volume of wet soil pat (V) (E-D/13.6) (𝑐𝑚3 ) = 24.09 𝑐𝑚3
Mass of tray (F): 317.21 g
Mass of tray + mass of mercury (G): 635.05 g
Mercury displaced out (G-F): 317.84 g
Volume of dry soil pat (V0) (G-F/13.6) (𝑐𝑚3 ) = 23.37 𝑐𝑚3

𝑊(𝑉−𝑉0) 0.276×(24.09−23.37)
Shrinkage limit = 𝑀𝑑
× 100(%) = 35.47
× 100 = 25.6%
𝑀𝑑 35.47
Shrinkage ratio (Sr) = 𝑉0
= 23.37
= 1.52
Volumetric shrinkage Vs = (w-was)× 𝑆𝑟 = (27.6 − 25.6) × 1.52 = 0.03
Conclusion: The shrinkage ratio is more in clayey soil and is less in sandy clay
soil, as clay soil has more shrinking property as compared to sand.
19 | P a g e
8.8 Determination of Specific gravity:
Table no. 11: Determination of Specific gravity
For 1.5 m SPT,
Empty bottle weight (A): 33.05 g
Soil sample + bottle weight (B): 43.02 g
Soil sample + bottle weight + water (C): 89.67 g
Water + bowl weight (D): 83.7 g

(𝐵−𝐴) (43.02−33.05)
𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 = ((𝐵−𝐴)−(𝐶−𝐷)) = ((43.02−33.05)−(89.67−83.7)) = 2.5
Specific gravity for 1.5 m SPT: 2.5 g
Conclusion: The specific gravity of soil happens to be out between 2.5-2.6 in

range, is furthermore useful in finding the degree of saturation, void ratio and
unit weight of soil etc.
20 | P a g e
8.9 Determination of Free swell index:
Table no. 12: Determination of Free swell index test
For 1.5 m SPT,
Volume of soil in water: 12
Volume of soil in kerosene: 10

𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑘𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑒
𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑙𝑙 % = ∗ 100
𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑘𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑒
12−10
= × 100 = 9.09%
10
Conclusion: The soil swelling occurs in water is being compare to soil kept in
kerosene thus the swelling index result is calculated on the basis of result. In
clay swelling is more compare to the sand because of changes in moisture
content and thus clay swelling is more and sand swelling is less.
Result: The swelling property in clay is more and in sandy clay is less.
21 | P a g e
8.10 Determination of Consolidation test:
Table 13: Readings of consolidation settlement with different loading conditions
Table 14: Readings of Applied pressure Vs void ratio
22 | P a g e
Graph 1: The graph loading vs time is being taken on basis of 0.4 kg/cm2 loading
23 | P a g e
Graph 2: Applied pressure Vs void ratio
24 | P a g e
8.11 Determination of Triaxial test: (for 3m UDS):
Deformation dial Reading Proving ring reading Area A = A0/(1-e) Deviatoric Stress σd= Load/A
Deformation (mm) B Strain e = B/h1 Load (kg) σ1= σ3+σd (kg/cm2)
(Div) (Divison) (cm2) (kg/cm2)
Sample 1 - Cell pressure 0.5Kg/cm2

0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 0.50
125 0.25 0.0032 18 3.96 11.86 0.33 0.83
250 0.5 0.0065 23 5.06 11.90 0.43 0.93
375 0.75 0.0097 31 6.82 11.94 0.57 1.07
500 1 0.0129 30 6.6 11.98 0.55 1.05
625 1.25 0.0161 23 5.06 12.02 0.42 0.92
750 1.5 0.0194 38 8.36 12.06 0.69 1.19
875 1.75 0.0226 44 9.68 12.10 0.80 1.30
1125 2.25 0.0291 46 10.12 12.18 0.83 1.33
1250 2.5 0.0323 40 8.8 12.22 0.72 1.22
1375 2.75 0.0355 45 9.9 12.26 0.81 1.31
Sample 2 - Cell pressure 1Kg/cm2
0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 1.00
125 0.25 0.0033 16 3.52 12.27 0.29 1.29
250 0.5 0.0066 32 7.04 12.31 0.57 1.57
375 0.75 0.0099 38 8.36 12.36 0.68 1.68
500 1 0.0132 39 8.58 12.40 0.69 1.69
625 1.25 0.0165 44 9.68 12.44 0.78 1.78
750 1.5 0.0199 45 9.9 12.48 0.79 1.79
875 1.75 0.0232 56 12.32 12.52 0.98 1.98
1000 2 0.0265 60 13.2 12.57 1.05 2.05
1125 2.25 0.0298 61 13.42 12.61 1.06 2.06
1250 2.5 0.0331 75 16.5 12.65 1.30 2.30
0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 1.50
125 0.25 0.0033 50 11 11.59 0.95 2.45
250 0.5 0.0065 69 15.18 11.62 1.31 2.81
375 0.75 0.0098 70 15.4 11.66 1.32 2.82
500 1 0.0130 45 9.9 11.70 0.85 2.35
625 1.25 0.0163 69 15.18 11.74 1.29 2.79
750 1.5 0.0196 80 17.6 11.78 1.49 2.99
875 1.75 0.0228 77 16.94 11.82 1.43 2.93
1000 2 0.0261 77 16.94 11.86 1.43 2.93
Table 15: Readings of deviatoric stress for 3 m UDS sample
25 | P a g e
Sample 1
σ3 Cell Pressure (Kg/cm2) 0.5
Weight wet (gm) 175.40
Height (mm) h1 77.41
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.80
Area (cm2) A0 11.82
Height (mm) 59.56
Deformation Readings
Diameter (mm) 44.98
Sample 2
σ3 Cell Pressure (Kg/cm2) 1
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 39.47
Area (cm2) A0 12.23
Height (mm) 58.65
Diameter (mm) 44.95
Sample 3
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.35
Area (cm2) A0 11.55
Height (mm) 69.81
Diameter (mm) 41.90
Table 16: Initial and deformation readings of the sample for 3 m UDS sample
Graph 3: Plotting of values strain Vs

Deviatoric stress for 3 m UDS sample
Ф 15
c 0.28
Final C and Ф values for 3 m UDS
sample
Graph 4: Plotting Mohr circle for 3 m UDS sample

26 | P a g e
for 9m UDS:
Proving ring
Deviatoric Stress σd= σ1= σ3+σd
Deformation dial Reading (Div) Deformation (mm) B Strain e = B/h1 reading Load (kg) Area A = A0/(1-e) (cm2)
Load/A (kg/cm2) (kg/cm2)
(Divison)

0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 1.50
125 1.25 0.0163 14.2 3.124 11.79 0.26 1.76
250 2.5 0.0326 28.6 6.292 11.99 0.52 2.02
375 3.75 0.0488 39 8.58 12.19 0.70 2.20
500 5 0.0651 42.2 9.284 12.41 0.75 2.25
625 6.25 0.0814 27.8 6.116 12.63 0.48 1.98
0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 0.50
125 1.25 0.0170 10.2 2.244 11.68 0.19 0.69
250 2.5 0.0340 18.6 4.092 11.88 0.34 0.84
375 3.75 0.0510 27 5.94 12.10 0.49 0.99
500 5 0.0680 28.2 6.204 12.32 0.50 1.00
625 6.25 0.0850 28 6.16 12.55 0.49 0.99
750 7.5 0.1020 32.4 7.128 12.78 0.56 1.06
875 8.75 0.1190 30 6.6 13.03 0.51 1.01
1000 10 0.1361 16 3.52 13.29 0.26 0.76
0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 1.00
125 1.25 0.0162 7.6 1.672 12.06 0.14 1.14
250 2.5 0.0323 8.2 1.804 12.26 0.15 1.15
375 3.75 0.0485 7.2 1.584 12.47 0.13 1.13
500 5 0.0647 17.2 3.784 12.68 0.30 1.30
625 6.25 0.0809 18.4 4.048 12.90 0.31 1.31
750 7.5 0.0970 21 4.62 13.13 0.35 1.35
875 8.75 0.1132 31.4 6.908 13.37 0.52 1.52
1000 10 0.1294 30 6.6 13.62 0.48 1.48
1125 11.25 0.1456 29.8 6.556 13.88 0.47 1.47
1250 12.5 0.1617 29.8 6.556 14.15 0.46 1.46
1375 13.75 0.1779 22 4.84 14.43 0.34 1.34
1500 15 0.1941 18 3.96 14.72 0.27 1.27
1625 16.25 0.2102 12 2.64 15.02 0.18 1.18
27 | P a g e
Sample 1
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.23
Area (cm2) A0 11.48
Height (mm) 66.50
Diameter (mm) 44.60
Sample 2
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.86
Area (cm2) A0 11.86
Height (mm) 66.40
Diameter (mm) 52.30
Sample 3
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.43
Area (cm2) A0 11.60
Height (mm) 74.60
Diameter (mm) 39.90
Table 18: Initial and deformation readings for 9 m UDS sample

Ф 9.2
c 0.75
sample
Graph 6: Plotting Mohr circle for 9 m UDS

sample
28 | P a g e
for 10m UDS:
Deformation dial Reading Proving ring Deviatoric Stress σd= σ1= σ3+σd
Deformation (mm) B Strain e = B/h1 Load (kg) Area A = A0/(1-e) (cm2)
(Div) reading (Divison) Load/A (kg/cm2) (kg/cm2)

0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 0.50
125 1.25 0.0170 4 0.88 11.68 0.08 0.58
250 2.5 0.0340 20 4.4 11.88 0.37 0.87
375 3.75 0.0510 32 7.04 12.10 0.58 1.08
500 5 0.0680 36 7.92 12.32 0.64 1.14
0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 190.00
125 1.25 0.0322 11 2.42 68.61 0.04 190.04
250 2.5 0.0643 31 6.82 70.97 0.10 190.10
375 3.75 0.0965 35 7.7 73.49 0.10 190.10
500 5 0.1287 38 8.36 76.21 0.11 190.11
625 6.25 0.1608 47 10.34 79.13 0.13 190.13
750 7.5 0.1930 52 11.44 82.28 0.14 190.14
875 8.75 0.2252 54 11.88 85.70 0.14 190.14
1000 10 0.2573 60 13.2 89.41 0.15 190.15
1125 11.25 0.2895 65 14.3 93.46 0.15 190.15
0 0 0 0 0 - 0.00 76.80
125 1.25 0.1078 12 2.64 44.72 0.06 76.86
250 2.5 0.2155 15 3.3 50.86 0.06 76.86
375 3.75 0.3233 25 5.5 58.96 0.09 76.89
500 5 0.4311 28 6.16 70.13 0.09 76.89
625 6.25 0.5388 30 6.6 86.52 0.08 76.88
750 7.5 0.6466 50 11 112.90 0.10 76.90
875 8.75 0.7544 66 14.52 162.43 0.09 76.89
1000 10 0.8621 76 16.72 289.39 0.06 76.86
1125 11.25 0.9699 85 18.7 1325.08 0.01 76.81
1250 12.5 1.0777 94 20.68 -513.82 -0.04 76.76
1375 13.75 1.1854 101 22.22 -215.19 -0.10 76.70
1500 15 1.2932 107 23.54 -136.09 -0.17 76.63
1625 16.25 1.4010 110 24.2 -99.51 -0.24 76.56
29 | P a g e
Sample 1
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.80
Area (cm2) A0 11.83
Height (mm) 66.81
Diameter (mm) 45.34
Sample 2
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.57
Area (cm2) A0 11.68
Height (mm) 66.22
Diameter (mm) 44.41
Sample 3
Initial Readings
Diameter (mm) 38.76
Area (cm2) A0 11.80
Height (mm) 68.04
Diameter (mm) 43.52
Table 20: Initial and deformation readings of the sample for 10 m UDS sample

Ф 26
c 0.4

sample
Graph 8: Plotting Mohr circle for 10 m UDS sample

30 | P a g e
9.0 Annexure- B:
Image no.1: Extracting UDS sample for field density and other tests
Image no.2: For calculating moisture content
31 | P a g e
Image no.3: Performing wet sieve analysis and dry sieve analysis
32 | P a g e
Image no.4: Performing liquid limit test using Casagrande and cone penetrometer
33 | P a g e
Image no.5: Performing Plastic limit test
Image no.6: Performing Shrinkage limit test
34 | P a g e
Image no Image no.7: Performing specific gravity test
Image no.8: Performing free swell index
Image no.9: Performing Consolidation test
35 | P a g e
Image no.10: Performing Triaxial test
36 | P a g e

Ug190554 - Site Investigation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Ug190554 - Site Investigation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS:

INFLUENCING FOUNDATION SYSTEMS

HARSHIT KAVADIA I HERIL JAIN I RUSHIKESH PATEL

Table no.9: Determination of Plastic limit ........................................................................ 17

2.0 Scope of work:

3.0 Site map:

Figure 1: Site location taken from Google earth pro

4.0 Laboratory Investigation:

1 Sample preparation IS 2720 Pt.1 DS/UDS

2 Moisture content IS 2720 Pt.2 DS/UDS

3 Specific gravity IS 2720 Pt.3 DS

4 Grain size analysis IS 2720 Pt.4 DS

5 Liquid limit IS 2720 Pt.5 DS

6 Plastic limit IS 2720 Pt.5 DS

7 Shrinkage limit IS 2720 Pt.6 DS

8 Soil Classification IS 1498 DS/UDS

9 Triaxial test IS 2720 Pt.11 UDS

10 Direct shear test IS 2720 Pt.13 UDS

11 Consolidation IS 2720 Pt.15 UDS

12 Free swell index IS 2720 Pt.40 DS/UDS

4.1 Field Dry Density:

4.2 Water content:

4.3 Grain size analysis:

2. After oven drying for 24 hours:

4.4 Atterberg’s limit:

4.5 Specific gravity:

W1: Weight of density bottle

4.6 Free swell index:

4.8 Triaxial test:

5.0 Field Investigation- Field Bore log

FIELD BORE LOG SHEET (GROUP A)

Table no. 1: Field bore log

6.0 Soil classification:

75μ Passing 4.75 mm Passing LL & PL for Fine Grain

3 UDS 56.54 Fine Grain 95 30% ✓ 20% 10% 7.30 Above CL

6 DS 30.96 Coarse Grain 96 Sand 25% ✓ 13% 12% 3.35 Above SC

10 UDS 53.6 Fine Grain 92 30% ✓ 19% 11% 7.30 Above CL

Table no. 2: Soil classification

7.0 Summary table:

LABORATORY RESULTS (GROUP A)

Co-Ordinate: 22°58'04.5"N 72°24'49.2"E State: Gujarat Day: Monday

6 DS - - - 16.19% - 2.60 3.54 65.5 30.96 25% 13% 13% SC 12.50 - - - -

Table no. 3: Summary table

8.1 Determination of field density:

Table no. 4: Determination of field density

Calculation for reference:

Height of Shelby tube: H = 0.5 m

Weight of soil + Shelby tube (A): 9.68 kg

Weight of Shelby tube (B): 4.225 kg

Weight of soil (A-B): 5.425 kg

Field density for 3 m: 1.99 gm/cc

8.2 Determination of moisture content:

Table no. 5: Determination of moisture content

Calculation for reference:

For 1.5 m SPT,

Empty bowl weight (A): 480.15 g

Wet weight + bowl weight (B): 880.15 g

Wet weight of sample (B-A): 400 g

Dry weight + bowl weight (C): 820.89 g

Dry weight of sample (C-A): 340.74 g

Moisture content % for 1.5 m: 17%

8.3 Calculation for N-value correction: