Rwanda Underpass

Addis Ababa City Roads Authority
SUB-SURFACE INVESTIGATION
AND FOUNDATION
RECOMMENDATION REPORT
FOR
Bole-Meskel Square Road

(At Rwanda Embassy Junction)
JUNE 2008
P.O.BOX 62668 Tel. 391065/391733/391617/395955/391499 Fax 391230, 391617

E-mail: sava.eng@telecom.net.et/saba,eng@telecom.net.et
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Bole-Meskel Square Road, Rwanda Embassy Junction
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 1
1.1 Background .................................................................................... 1

1.2 Location .......................................................................................... 1
1.3 Regional and Site Geology.............................................................. 2
1.3.1 Regional Geology ..................................................... 2
1.3.2 Site Geology............................................................. 2
2. METHODOLOGY .................................................................. 4
2.1 Drilling ............................................................................................ 4

2.2 Testing and Sampling..................................................................... 4
2.2.1 Field Testing ............................................................ 4
2.2.2 Sampling ................................................................. 4
3. GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS................................... 6
4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATION ...................................... 8
5. CONCLUSION .................................................................... 16
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Borehole Logs
Appendix 2: Borehole Locations
Appendix 3: Geological Cross Section
Appendix 4: Laboratory Test Results
Appendix 5: Core Boxes Photograph
Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report

SABA Engineering Plc.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
As per the request made by the client (i.e. Eng. Zewdie Eskinder & Co. Plc) for
Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation works for Bole Ring
Road Round About to Meskel Square Road Design and supervision, SABA
Engineering PLC has executed a geotechnical investigation work by drilling eight
exploratory boreholes to a maximum depth of 15.75m at Rwanda Embassy Junction
at the proposed locations shown on the attached site plan (Appendix 2).
The objective of this investigation was to:
• Determine the type and extent of geological formations;
• Investigate the presence of ground water and identification of its level if

encountered;
• Determine the engineering properties of the layers constituting the sub-

surface geology of the site.
The field investigation was conducted from May 25 to June 03, 2008.
Accordingly, the general and particular geology of the site and the methodologies
employed are described and the investigation and tests used to study the engineering
properties of the subsurface strata including analysis and interpretations of results are
discussed. Finally, recommendation is given with regard to the bearing layer, bearing
depth, allowable bearing pressure and suitable type of foundation.
1.2 Location
The new overpass structure is located at Rwanda Embassy area having several
supporting piers. Representative eight supporting pier structure positions were
selected by the client and one borehole was drilled at each location to various depths
below NGL till a confidential foundation bearing layer was identified. The
coordinates and elevations of boreholes measured using hand-held GPS and the
depths drilled are tabulated as follows:
Borehole Easting Northing Elevation Depth

(m)
BH-D 0475587 0993901 2315 9.00
BH-E 0475585 0993859 2313 7.00
BH-F 0475600 0993822 2312 15.75
BH-G 0475593 0993803 2312 12.00
BH-H 0475598 0993751 2314 8.60
BH-I 0475593 0993691 2312 9.00
BH-J 0475594 0993724 2313 9.10
BH-K 0475600 0993658 2312 9.10
Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 1

1.3 Regional and Site Geology
1.3.1 Regional Geology
Addis Ababa city is situated in the western margin of the Main Ethiopian Rift and
represents a transition zone between the Ethiopian Plateau and the rift with poorly
defined escarpment.
The geology of Addis Ababa area is represented by four volcanic units dominated in
the lower part by basaltic lava flows (Addis Ababa basalt), followed by a pyroclastic
sequence, mainly formed by ignimbrites (Addis Ababa Ignimbrite), followed by
central composite volcanoes (Central Volcanoes unit), and finally small spatter cones
and lava flows (Akaki unit).
Addis Ababa basalt extensively crops out along Akaki, Kebena, and Dukem rivers at
the east to southeastern part of Addis Ababa, and represents the oldest unit of the
area.
It consists of essentially sub-horizontal lava flows with thickness ranging from few
meters up to 20m. Maximum exposed thickness was found east of Addis Ababa,
along the Kebena River. Addis Ababa basalt is predominantly constituted by alkaline
and olivine basalts with three main textural attributes, that is, porphyritic, aphyric,
and sub-aphyric.
Addis Ababa ignimbrite is exposed close to Addis Ababa along the Akaki and
Kebena rivers. It overlies the Addis Ababa basalt and locally covers the products of
the composite central volcanoes of Wechecha and Furi. The sequence is constituted
by different flow units, consisting of pale-green to pale-yellow welded and crystal
rich ignimbrites.
Central volcanoes unit includes the Yerer volcano and the product of the two
composite volcanoes Wechecha and Furi west and southeast of Addis Ababa,
respectively. Wechecha and Furi volcanoes are two large edifices composed by
predominant trachyte with minor pyroclastics. Yerer represents the largest volcanic
edifice in the region, with a relief of 1000m from the plain and 14km wide along east-
west direction. Products mainly consist of trachytes, even if pyroclastics are
widespread mainly in the central part eastern sector. The highest part of Yerer
volcano was affected by a more recent volcanic activity that produces spatter cones
and associated basalt.
Akaki unit crops out east of Addis Ababa and consists of scoria and spatter cones
with associated tabular lava flows and phreato-magmatic deposits. Alluvial deposits
covering these units consists of regolith, reddish brown soils, talus and alluvium with
maximum thickness of about two meters.
1.3.2 Site Geology
The top most part of the project site is covered by back-fill material having
thicknesses varying from 0.50m to 1.50m. Underlying the back-fill, a residual soil
layer of basalt origin comprising very stiff/hard, dark-grey to yellowish-brown, sandy
clayey silt/silty sand with some gravel-sized basalt fragments was found having an
average thickness of about 4.40m. Below the residual soil, dark-grey, fine grained,
moderately to highly weathered and closely jointed, medium strong basalt was

identified in borehole BH-D, BH-E, BH-H, BH-I, BH-J and BH-K and continued to
the maximum depth where drilling terminated. In borehole BH-G and BH-F, the
residual soil is followed by a contact marking paleosol comprising stiff, reddish silty
clay/clayey silt layer. The paleosol pinches out toward BH-F and grades into highly
weathered and decomposed volcanic Tuff comprising light-yellow to brownish clayey
silt/silty clay and continued to the bottom depth where drilling terminated.
The detailed geological strata encountered are presented in the boreholes log sheets
attached with this report (Appendix 1).

2. METHODOLOGY
Drilling
Rotary core drilling technique has been employed using one Korean made crawler
type drilling rig having the capacity to perform boring operation to the required
standard and quality.
Dry drilling method has been utilized for the top soil formation using inner lining and
double core barrels fitted with appropriate size tungsten carbide bits at the bottom in
order to achieve good quality core recovery. When the formation changed to rock,
water was pumped down to the bit through hollow drill rods, thus, lubricating the bit
and flushing the debris up the borehole.
Telescopic drilling was used whereby the drilling size was reduced progressively
starting from 110 mm hole diameter through 101mm and to 86mm and remained so
till the completion depth.
Ground water was not encountered in all the boreholes till completion depth.
Testing and Sampling
Field Testing
The field testing was conducted in the boreholes starting from a depth of 1.50m
below NGL
Standard penetration tests (SPTs) have been conducted inside boreholes using a
standard hammer, weighting 63.5 kg and falling freely from a height of 760 mm
along a frictionless guide rod in accordance with test procedure mentioned in test No.
19 of BS 1377; 1975. Blow counts for a total penetration depth of 450 mm from the
bottom of a cleaned borehole were recorded and counts for the first 150 mm
penetration were discarded since the ground is considered to be distributed by drilling
activity prior to the test. SPT N-values for the last 300 mm penetration were thus
recorded at the corresponding depths on the borehole log sheets.
Sampling
Two undisturbed soil samples were taken using thin wall Shelby tube from boreholes
BH-G and BH-F at a depth of 3.0m and 9.10m for soil UCS and direct shear tests.
Additionally, ten distributed soil samples were taken for laboratory determinations of
gradation, Atterberg limit and free swell tests. Also six rock samples were collected
for determination of unit weight and rock UCS.
Table (2-1) presents summary of the exploration methods and tests performed for the
project.
Core samples recovered from core barrels were arranged in partitioned wooden core
boxes having 1.0 m length, and are properly labeled indicating project name, client,
borehole designation, depth, etc. The cores inside core boxes were logged and
photographed (colored) as part of the report document.

Table 2.1: Summary of Methods of Exploration and Tests Performed for the
Project
Type of Exploration/Test Qty.

− Boreholes to a maximum depth of 15.75 meters 8
− Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) 14
− Undisturbed Soil Sampling 2
− Disturbed Soil Sampling 10
− Laboratory Tests
Gradation 10
Atterberg Limits 10
Free Swell 10
Direct Shear 2
UCS of Soil 2
UCS of rock 6

3. GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Descriptive analysis was made on the soil and rock samples retrived from the
boreholes. This was used together with the classification tests and relative compactions
as indicated from the SPT tests, and the following generalized geo-technical layers are
identified. Details on type and extent of the geothecnical layers are given in Appendix 1
(Borehole logs).
A. Back-fill material
The top most part of the project site at Rwanda embassy junction is composed of a
back-fill material having thicknesses varying from 0.50m around BH-F to 1.50m
around BH-D.
B. Stiff/hard residual soil layer
Underlying the back-fill material, a residual soil layer of basalt origin comprising very
stiff/hard, dark-grey to yellowish-brown, sandy clayey silt/silty sand with some gravel-
sized basalt fragments was found having an average thickness of about 4.40m. The field
SPT N-values conducted in these layers ranges from 5 to 31 indicating the dense nature
of compaction down deep the layer.
The soil consistency test results for the residual soil layer showed Plasticity Index and
Liquid Limit values varying from 7% to 49% and from 35% to 99% respectively. The
free swell ranges from 30% to 80%.
According to Unified Soil Classification System, the residual soil layer is classified as
low plastic silt. According to Bowles, 1988, soils having a PI values lower than 35%
show a very low potential for volume change.
C. Stiff paleosol layer
The residual soil is followed by a contact marking paleosol comprising stiff, reddish
silty clay/clayey silt layer and it was found in BH-F and BH-G. The field SPT N-values
conducted in these layers ranges from 18 to 20 indicating stiff consistency of the layer.
The soil consistency test results for these soil layers showed Plasticity Index and Liquid
Limit values of 30% and 62% respectively. The free swell is 90%.
D. Weathered and decomposed volcanic Tuff layer
Underlying the paleosol, highly weathered and decomposed volcanic Tuff comprising
light-yellow to brownish clayey silt/silty clay was found in BH-F and BH-G and
continued to the bottom depth where drilling terminated. The field SPT N-values
conducted in these layers ranges from 13 to 30 indicating the very stiff consistency of
the layer.
The soil consistency test results for the weathered and decomposed volcanic Tuff layer
showed Plasticity Index and Liquid Limit values varying from 23% to 33% and from
65% to 80% respectively. The free swell ranges from 20% to 90%.
According to Unified Soil Classification System, the decomposed volcanic Tuff layer is
classified as high plastic silt. According to Bowles, 1988, soils having a PI values lower
than 35% show a very low potential for volume change.

E. Medium strong basalt layer
Dark-grey, fine grained, moderately to highly weathered and closely jointed, medium
strong basalt was identified in boreholes BH-D, BH-E, BH-H, BH-I, BH-J and BH-K
and continued to the bottom depth where drilling terminated. The average R.Q.D values
for the encountered basalt layer vary from 27% to 74%.
Six rock samples were collected from boreholes BH-D, BH-E,BH-H, BH-I, BH-J and
BH-K for unit weight and unconfined compressive strength tests from depths of 6.50m,
6.20m, 4.00m, 6.00m, 4.50m and 3.50m respectively and the UCS values obtained for
the six rock samples are 1008.1 kg/cm2, 687.2 kg/cm2 , 861.3 kg/cm2, 751.3 kg/cm2,
683.7 kg/cm2 and 910.8 kg/cm2 respectively.

4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATION
Foundation recommendation refers to the determination of the bearing layer and depth,
allowable pressure on the bearing layer and type of foundation that could be adopted
safely and economically.
As can be observed from the stratigraphy encountered in all the boreholes, both the
residual soil layer and the underlying medium strong basalt can be considered for
placing foundation footings of the four pier structures of the overpass. The allowable
bearing pressures for the selected foundation layers shall be discussed based on
correlation of the relative compaction of the in-situ ground as indicated from SPT and
laboratory determination of Direct Shear and UCS of soil and rock.
Determination of the allowable bearing pressures and selection of foundation types and
depth is discussed below:
(IA). Isolated Footing Foundation on residual soil layer for the supporting
pier structure around BH-D and BH-F
The very stiff/hard residual soil layer of basalt origin is considered as a competent
foundation bearing layer for the supporting pier structure around boreholes BH-D and
BH-F. Foundation footings shall be placed at a depth of 3.50m below NGL on the very
dense residual soil layer.
Bearing Pressure Based on SPT Values
SPT values were used to calculate the bearing capacity of the residual
soil layers. Representative values are selected from the SPT data. The
boreholes, the depths below NGL at which the selected SPT N- values
are obtained, the SPT N-values and the adjusted N-values (i.e. N’55) are
given below and they are considered for determining the design N-
values.
Boreholes Depth (m) SPT N-value Adjusted SPT N-value

BH-F 1.50 31 37
BH-D 3.00 >50 42
BH-F 9.35 27 16
BH-F 10.20 30 18
BH-F 12.50 16 9
BH-F 14.70 14 7
The N-values are converted to N55 standard energy ratio value according to Bowles
(Bowles, 1988).
N’55 = CN x N x n1 x n2 x n3 x n4
Where
N’55 = adjusted N
CN = adjustment for overburden pressure (p’’o/p’o)1/2

p’o = overburden pressure
p’’o = reference overburden pressure (95.76 kPa or 1.0 kg/cm2)
n1 = Er/Erb (where Er is average energy ratio that depends on the drill system and Erb is
the standard energy ratio). Er is taken as 45 and Erb as 55.
n2 = Rod length correction
Rod length > 10 m = 1,
Rod length 6-10 m = 0.95,
Rod length 0-4 m = 0.75
n3 = sampler correction (1.00 in our case)
n4 = borehole diameter correction (1.00 in our case)
After adjusting the N-values based on the above formula and taking corresponding
average values from respective boreholes, a design N-values are chosen from
consecutive depths where the test is performed. The design N-values are taken as the
average of N-values which are found in between ½ B above and 2B below the proposed
footing depths where B is the width of the foundation.
The bearing capacity for the soil layer is calculated from the SPT N- values using
Meyerhof’s equation as follows (Bowles, 1988): -
qa = (N/F2) [(B+F3)/B)]2 kd , B>F4
B = Width of foundation
D = Depth of foundation
qa = Allowable bearing pressure for settlement limited to 25 mm.
Kd = 1+0.33D/B < 1.33
F2 = 0.08
F3 = 0.3
F4 = 1.2
The following allowable bearing pressures are calculated for different foundation
widths at a footing depth of 3.50m below the ground level for settlement limited to 25
mm. Footing width is a significant parameter since a large footing width will affect the
soil to a greater depth and strains integrated over a greater depth will produce a larger
settlement.

Table 4.1 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on SPT
Width B (m)
Proposed Footing Depth
Below Ground Level 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
(m)
Allowable Bearing Pressures (KPa)
3.50 m 525 480 470 445 430 410
Usually SPT reflects the actual in-situ condition of the ground and, therefore, we
recommend an allowable bearing values ranging from 410 kPa to 525 kPa based on
footing widths (table 4.1) for foundations around boreholes BH-D and BH-F.
(IB).Isolated Footing Foundation on stiff, reddish clayey soil layer for the
supporting pier structure around BH-G
A. Bearing Pressure Based on UCS
UCS test was conducted on one undisturbed soil sample taken from BH-G from a depth
of 3.00m. The test results are shown below:
Bulk Unit Dry Unit Moisture

BH UCS Cu
Depth (m) Weight Weight Content
No. (kg/cm2) (kg/cm2)
(gm/cc) (gm/cc) (%)
BH-G 3.00-3.50 1.850 1.403 31.88 0.835 0.418
Unconfined compression test was conducted on one soil samples to derive the
undrained shear strength value, Cu of the soil. The Cu value obtained from BH-G is
considered and angle of internal friction, Ø, is taken as zero.
Ø = 0, UCS = 81.8 kPa, Cu = 40.9 kPa (½ UCS)
The net ultimate bearing pressure for vertical loads on clay soils is normally computed
as a simplification of either the Meyerhof or Hansen equations as follows (Bowles,
1984). For cohesive soils, changes in ground water levels do not affect theoretical
ultimate bearing capacity. Presence of ground water has no effect on cohesive soils with
Ø = 0. For the most critical stability state (Ø = 0), which is created when the foundation
load is applied so rapidly, the immediate bearing capacity is independent of the location
of the water table. This is in contrast to the long term stability in which case the value
of the drained shear strength cd, and the bearing capacity factors are obtained
corresponding to a drained friction angle Ød.
qult = CNcScdc + q(Nq – 1)

When C = su, we have Ø = 0 and Nq = 1.0. In this case we have
qult = CNcScdc (when Ø = 0, Nc = 5.14)
qult = CNcScdc = 40.9(5.14)(1.2)(1.2) = 303
When designing a foundation on the basis of ultimate bearing capacity, a suitable factor
of safety should be used to determine the allowable pressure so that the foundation
system may be safe against shear failure. For footing foundations, a factor of safety of 2
to 3 is commonly used under normal loading conditions. Thus, taking a factor of safety
of 3; one obtains:
qallowable = 303/3 = 101 kPa
The allowable bearing pressure obtained from the analysis based on soil UCS test is
very low and unrepresentative for the encountered sub-surface material.
B. Bearing Pressure Based on Direct Shear Test
In order to get the shear strength properties of the reddish clayey soil layer, Direct
Shear test was conducted on undisturbed sample retrieved from borehole BH-G. The
friction angle (φ), cohesion (C) and unit weight (γ) are obtained from the direct shear
test conducted on one Shelby tube sample taken from BH-G. The test results are shown
below:
Bulk Unit Dry Unit Moisture

BH φ
Depth (m) Weight Weight Content C (kN/m2)
No. (degree)
(gm/cc) (gm/cc) (%)
BH-G 3.00-3.50 1.851 1.408 31.4 93.00 19.29
Among the bearing capacity equations we have chosen Meyerhof’s bearing capacity
equation since it can be used in any situation. Terzaghi’s bearing capacity equation is
usually preferred for very cohesive soils where D/B < 1.
Allowable Bearing Capacity for a Square Footing Using Meyerhof’s equation:
qult = CNcscdc + qNqsqdq + 0.5γBNγsγdγ

qult = Ultimate Bearing Capacity
qall = Allowable Bearing Capacity
C= Cohesion (93 kPa),
φ= Friction Angle (19.29°),
γ= Unit Weight (18.2 kN/m3),
B= Width of Footing
D= Depth of Footing
sc, sq, sγ = Shape Factors
dc,dq,dγ = Depth Factors
Nc,Nq,Nγ= Bearing Capacity Factors
J.E.Bowels states that the base width term can be ignored for a conservative solution
since its contribution is not substantial. Thus the base width term has been ignored and
the depth factor dropped since the application of these theoretically based values to a
practical situation has been questionable. (Vesic, 1975).Thus the increased bearing
capacity of shallow footings due to the depth effect has not been taken into account.

Substituting the relevant values in the equation we obtain:
qult = CNcsc + qNqsq
= 93 X 14.2X1.4+ (18.2-9.81) X 5.97 X 1.2 = 1909kPa
qult = 1849 + 60 = 1909 kPa
When designing a foundation on the basis of ultimate bearing capacity, a suitable factor
of safety should be used to determine the allowable pressure so that the foundation
system may be safe against shear failure. For footing foundations, a factor of safety of 2
to 3 is commonly used under normal loading conditions. Thus, taking a factor of safety
of 2.5; one obtains:
qallowable = 1909/3 = 636 kPa
C. Bearing Pressure Based on SPT Values
SPT values were used to calculate the bearing capacity of the residual soil layers.
Representative values are selected from the SPT data. The boreholes, the depths below
NGL at which the selected SPT N- values are obtained, the SPT N-values and the
adjusted N-values (i.e. N’55) are given below and they are considered for determining
the design N-values.
Boreholes Depth (m) SPT N-value Adjusted SPT N-value

BH-G 3.50 20 17
BH-G 4.50 19 16
BH-G 6.10 18 14
The N-values are converted to N55 standard energy ratio value according to Bowles
(Bowles, 1988).
N’55 = CN x N x n1 x n2 x n3 x n4
Where
N’55 = adjusted N
CN = adjustment for overburden pressure (p’’o/p’o)1/2
p’o = overburden pressure
p’’o = reference overburden pressure (95.76 kPa or 1.0 kg/cm2)
n1 = Er/Erb (where Er is average energy ratio that depends on the drill system and Erb is
the standard energy ratio). Er is taken as 45 and Erb as 55.
n2 = Rod length correction
Rod length > 10 m = 1,

Rod length 0-4 m = 0.75
n3 = sampler correction (1.00 in our case)
n4 = borehole diameter correction (1.00 in our case)
After adjusting the N-values based on the above formula and taking corresponding
average values from respective boreholes, a design N-values are chosen from
consecutive depths where the test is performed. The design N-values are taken as the
average of N-values which are found in between ½ B above and 2B below the proposed
footing depths where B is the width of the foundation.
The bearing capacity for the soil layer is calculated from the SPT N- values using
Meyerhof’s equation as follows (Bowles, 1988): -
qa = (N/F2) [(B+F3)/B)]2 kd , B>F4
B = Width of foundation
D = Depth of foundation
qa = Allowable bearing pressure for settlement limited to 25 mm.
Kd = 1+0.33D/B < 1.33
F2 = 0.08
F3 = 0.3
F4 = 1.2
The following allowable bearing pressures are calculated for different foundation
widths at a footing depth of 4.0m below the ground level for settlement limited to 25
mm. Footing width is a significant parameter since a large footing width will affect the
soil to a greater depth and strains integrated over a greater depth will produce a larger
settlement.
Table 4.1 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on SPT
Width B (m)
Proposed Footing Depth
Below Ground Level 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
(m)
Allowable Bearing Pressures (KPa)
4.0 m 360 330 320 300 295 290
From the above analysis, one can see that allowable bearing pressure obtained using
bearing capacity equations from UCS tests is 101 kPa which is a very low value and do
not represent the engineering behavior for the encountered sub-surface foundation

material of the project site. The allowable bearing pressure obtained from Direct Shear
test is 636 kPa which is highly exaggerated values for the stiff reddish clayey soil.
Usually SPT reflects the actual in-situ condition of the ground and, therefore, we
recommend an allowable bearing values ranging from 290 kPa to 360 kPa based on
footing widths (table 4.1) for foundations around borehole BH-G.
(II). Foundation on rock layer for the supporting pier structures around BH-E,
BH-H, BH-I, BH-J and BH-K
Since basalt rock was encountered at a relatively shallower depths in boreholes BH-E,
BH-H, BH-I, BH-J and BH-K starting from 1.50m, 2.20m,4.10m, 2.0m and 4.60m
respectively and continued to the bottom depth where drilling terminated, it is
recommended to place foundation footings for pier structures around BH-E, BH-H, BH-
I, BH-J and BH-K at a depth where rock is encountered and footings shall be imbedded
at least 0.50m with in the rock layer. Footings shall be placed at a depth of 3.0m around
BH-E, BH-H and BH-J and at 5.0m around BH-I and BH-K below NGL within the
rock layer.
Six rock samples were collected from BH-D, BH-E, BH-H,BH-I, BH-J and BH-K for
unit weight and unconfined compressive strength tests from depths of 6.50m, 6.20m,
4.0m, 6.0m, 3.50m and 4.50m respectively and the UCS values obtained for the six
samples are 1008.1 kg/cm2, 687.2 kg/cm2 , 861.3 kg/cm2, 751.3 kg/cm2, 910.8 kg/cm2
and 683.7 kg/cm2 respectively. According to Bowles, 1988, the allowable rock bearing
pressure is taken in the range of 1/10 to 1/3 the unconfined compression strength. For
safety reasons, we have taken 1/10 of the unconfined compression strength of the
average of the results for the samples and we obtain an allowable rock bearing pressure
of 81.7 kg/cm2 (8200 kPa).

Table 4.2 Summary of Bearing Parameters
Alternative (1A): Isolated Footing Foundation on Residual Soil Layer for

supporting pier structure around BH-D and BH-F
Stiff, light yellowish brown, clayey sandy silt mixed with silty
Bearing Layer
sandy gravel (Residual soil of basalt origin).
3.50 meter below NGL for the supporting pier structure around
Bearing Depth
BH-D and BH-F.
Vary from 410 kPa to 525kPa based on footing widths (See
Allowable bearing pressure
table 4.1).
Foundation Type Isolated Footing
Alternative (1B): Isolated Footing Foundation on stiff, reddish clayey soil layer for
supporting pier structure around BH-G
Bearing Layer Stiff, reddish silty clay/ clayey silt (paleosol).
4.00 meter below NGL for the supporting pier structure around
Bearing Depth
BH-G
Vary from 290 kPa to 360 kPa based on footing widths (See
Allowable bearing pressure
table 4.1).
Alternative 2: Foundation on Rock Layer for Pier structures around BH-E, BH-H,
BH-I, BH-J and BH-K
Dark-grey, fine-grained, moderately weathered and jointed
Bearing Layer
medium strong basalt.
3.00m below NGL for the supporting pier structure around BH-
E, BH-H and BH-J and;
Average Bearing Depth

5.00M below NGL for the supporting pier structure around BH-I
and BH-K with in the rock layer.
Allowable bearing pressure 8200 kPa.
Since SABA Engineering is involved in supervision of the bridge construction it shall

carryout confirmation test/investigations during foundation construction works. SABA
Engineering shall conduct supervision of the foundation excavation works during
construction to verify/check the actual subsurface conditions, and will make
adjustments to the foundation recommendation as given in this report, where actual site
conditions warrant such changes.

5. CONCLUSION
Bearing capacities are calculated for shallow foundation systems for two alternative
bearing layers at different depths.
Isolated Footing Foundation on Residual Soil Layer for supporting pier structure around
BH-D and BH-F shall be placed at a depth of 3.50m below NGL. An allowable
bearing pressure varying from 410 kPa to 525 kPa is recommended based on footing
widths for this option (see table 4.1).
Isolated Footing Foundation on stiff, reddish silty clayey/ clayey silt (paleosol) soil
layer for supporting pier structure around BH-G shall be placed at a depth of 4.00m
below NGL. An allowable bearing pressure varying from 290 kPa to 360 kPa is
recommended based on footing widths for this option (see table 4.2).
For the supporting Pier structures around BH-E, BH-H, BH-I, BH-J and BH-K,
foundation footings shall be placed on dark-grey, fine-grained, moderately weathered
and jointed medium strong basalt. Footings shall be placed at a depth of 3.00m around
BH-E, BH-H and BH-J and at a depth of 5.00m around BH-I and BH-K below NGL
within the rock layer. An allowable rock bearing pressure of about 8200 kPa is
recommended for this option.

APPENDICES

Appendix 1
Borehole Logs

Appendix 2
Borehole Locations

Appendix 3
Geological Cross Section

Appendix 4
Laboratory Test Results

Appendix 5
Core Boxes Photograph

Bole-Meskel Square Road, Rwanda Embassy Junction Eng. Zewdie Eskinder & Co.plc
Photo No:1, BH-D

Box 1of2
Depth 0.00 – 4.30m
Photo No:2, BH-D

Box 2of2
Depth 4.30 – 9.00m

SABA Engineering plc
Photo No:3, BH-E

Box 1of2
Depth 0.00 – 5.00m
Photo No:4, BH-E

Box 2of2
Depth 5.00 – 7.00m

Photo No:5, BH-F

Box 1of3
Depth 0.00 – 5.50m
Photo No:6, BH-F

Box 2of3
Depth 5.50 – 12.00m

Photo No:7, BH-F

Box 3of3
Depth 12.00 – 15.15m
Photo No:8, BH-G

Box 1of3
Depth 0.00 – 5.10m

Photo No:9, BH-G

Box 2of3
Depth 5.10 – 10.00m
Photo No:10, BH-G

Box 3of3
Depth 10.00 – 12.00m
Photo No:11, BH-H

Box 1of2
Depth 0.00 – 4.60m
Photo No:12, BH-H

Box 2of2
Depth 4.60 – 8.60m
Photo No:13, BH-I

Box 1of2
Depth 0.00 – 3.90m
Photo No:14, BH-I

Box 2of2
Depth 3.90 – 9.00m

Photo No:15, BH-J

Box 1of2
Depth 0.00 – 4.80m
Photo No:16, BH-J

Box 2of2
Depth 4.80 – 9.10m
Photo No:17, BH-K

Box 1of2
Depth 0.00 – 5.20m
Photo No:18, BH-K

Box 2of2
Depth 5.20 – 9.10m


Rwanda Underpass

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

Rwanda Underpass

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Addis Ababa City Roads Authority

Bole-Meskel Square Road

P.O.BOX 62668 Tel. 391065/391733/391617/395955/391499 Fax 391230, 391617

1.1 Background .................................................................................... 1

2.1 Drilling ............................................................................................ 4

4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATION ...................................... 8

Appendix 1: Borehole Logs

Appendix 2: Borehole Locations

Appendix 3: Geological Cross Section

Appendix 4: Laboratory Test Results

Appendix 5: Core Boxes Photograph

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report

The objective of this investigation was to:

• Determine the type and extent of geological formations;

• Investigate the presence of ground water and identification of its level if

• Determine the engineering properties of the layers constituting the sub-

Borehole Easting Northing Elevation Depth

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 1

1.3 Regional and Site Geology

1.3.1 Regional Geology

1.3.2 Site Geology

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 2

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 3

Testing and Sampling

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 4

Type of Exploration/Test Qty.

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 5

B. Stiff/hard residual soil layer

C. Stiff paleosol layer

D. Weathered and decomposed volcanic Tuff layer

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 6

E. Medium strong basalt layer

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 7

Bearing Pressure Based on SPT Values

Boreholes Depth (m) SPT N-value Adjusted SPT N-value

CN = adjustment for overburden pressure (p’’o/p’o)1/2

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 8

p’o = overburden pressure

p’’o = reference overburden pressure (95.76 kPa or 1.0 kg/cm2)

n2 = Rod length correction

Rod length > 10 m = 1,

Rod length 6-10 m = 0.95,

Rod length 4-6 m = 0.85,

Rod length 0-4 m = 0.75

n3 = sampler correction (1.00 in our case)

n4 = borehole diameter correction (1.00 in our case)

qa = (N/F2) [(B+F3)/B)]2 kd , B>F4

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 9

Table 4.1 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on SPT

3.50 m 525 480 470 445 430 410

A. Bearing Pressure Based on UCS

Bulk Unit Dry Unit Moisture

BH-G 3.00-3.50 1.850 1.403 31.88 0.835 0.418

Ø = 0, UCS = 81.8 kPa, Cu = 40.9 kPa (½ UCS)

qult = CNcScdc + q(Nq – 1)

Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendation Report 10

When C = su, we have Ø = 0 and Nq = 1.0. In this case we have

qult = CNcScdc (when Ø = 0, Nc = 5.14)

qult = CNcScdc = 40.9(5.14)(1.2)(1.2) = 303

qallowable = 303/3 = 101 kPa

B. Bearing Pressure Based on Direct Shear Test

Bulk Unit Dry Unit Moisture

Allowable Bearing Capacity for a Square Footing Using Meyerhof’s equation:

qult = CNcscdc + qNqsqdq + 0.5γBNγsγdγ