Final Soil Investigation Report For Zubair Mishrif DGS Phase 1

ENI - IRAQ
ZUBAIR OIL FIELD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final Soil Investigation Report for Zubair Mishrif DGS

phase 1
CD-FE 00 02.06.11 FINAL ISSUE

Validity Rev.
Prepared Checked Approved Contractor Company
Status number Date Description
by by by Approval Approval
Revision Index
Company logo and business name Project name Company Document ID
ZUBAIR OIL FIELD 00251000BARS95000
DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT
exploration & production division Job N.
Contractor logo and business name Contractor Document ID
Contract N.
Vendor logo and business name Vendor Document ID
Order N.
Facility Name Location Scale Sheet of Sheets
ZUBAIR FIELD – ZUBAIR ONSHORE n.a. 1 of 280
MISHRIF DGS
Document Title Supersedes N.
Final Soil Investigation Report for Zubair Mishrif DGS - phase 1 Superseded by N.
Plant Area Plant
Unit
Software: Microsoft Word 97-2003 File No. 00251000BARS95000_CDFE00_280.pdf
This document is property of Eni S.p.A. Exploration & Production Division.

It shall neither be shown to Third Parties not used for purposes other than those for which it has been sent.
University of Basra
College of Engineering
Engineering Consulting Bureau
Final Report/Phase 1
Soil Investigation for

Zubair Mishrif DGS/Zubair Field
Basra, IRAQ
Submitted to
eni-Iraq
May/2011
Report No. 2/SI/IB/2011

Contents
1- Introduction
1.1- General
1.2- Authorization
1.3- Site Location and Description
2- Field Investigation
2.1- General
2.2- Drilling and Sampling of Boreholes
2.3- Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
2.4- Spacing of Soil Samples
2.5- Test Pits
2.6- Plate Load Test (PLT)
2.7- Crosshole Test
2.8- Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Resistivity.
3- Laboratory Testing For Soils
3.1- General
3.2- Method of Testing
3.3- Moisture Content and Unit Weight
3.4- Particle Size Analysis
3.5- Direct Shear Test
3.6- Permeability
3.7- Modified Proctor Test
3.8- California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test
3.9- Chemical Tests
4- Subsurface Conditions
4.1- Subsoil Material Description

4.2- Underground Water Level
5- Geology and Seismicity
5.1- Regional Geology

5.2- Local Subsurface and Surface Geology
5.3- Seismic Hazard
5.4- Other Risks and Hazards
5.5- Liquefaction Potential
5.6- Seismic Design Parameters
6- Earthwork
6.1- Lowering of Groundwater Level

6.2- Excavation Difficulties
6.3- Preparation Works
6.4- Fill Material
6.5- Roads
6.6- Compaction Requirements
6.7- Shrinkage of Soil
6.8- Cut and Filled slopes
6.9- Shoring
6.10- Drainage
6.11- Pavement Design
7- Results and Discussion
7.1- Shear Strength

7.2- Chemical Properties
7.3- Gypsum
7.4- Plate Loading Test
8- Analysis and Recommendations
8.1- Allowable Bearing Capacity (ABC) of Shallow Foundations

8.2- Allowable Bearing Capacity for Transient Loads
8.3- Elastic Settlement of Shallow Foundations
8.4- Allowable Settlement
8.5- Modulus of Subgrade Reaction
8.6- Coefficients of Lateral Earth Pressure
8.7- Carrying Capacity of Pile Foundation
8.8- Group Effect
8.9- Lateral Resistance of Piles
8.10- Pile Loading Test
8.11- Elastic Properties of Soil
8.12- Surface Drainage
8.13- Design Parameters Summary
8.14- Type of Foundation
References
Appendices
Appendix A: Borehole Logs

Appendix B: Test Pit Logs
Appendix C: SPT Results
Appendix D: Lab Tests Results
Appendix E: Crosshole Test Results
Appendix F: Thermal Resistivity Results
Appendix G: Plate Bearing Test Results
Appendix H: CBR and Modified Proctor Tests Results
Eni-Iraq
Soil Investigation Report for Zubair Field / Zubair Mishrif DGS - Phase 1
1-Introduction
1.1-General
This report presents the results of a subsurface investigation for proposed
constructions on Zubair Field/Zubair Mishrif DGS – Phase 1 in Basra Governorate. It
summarizes the data obtained and presents our conclusions and recommendations based
on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. Design
parameters and a discussion of engineering conditions related to construction of the
proposed constructions are also included. The assignment was taken on March through
May, 2011.
1.2-Authorization
The soil investigation for the mentioned site has been conducted
by the Engineering Consulting Bureau (ECB) – University of Basra at the request by
eni-Iraq.
1.3- Site Location and Description

The proposed site is located in Basra Governorate about 16.82 km from Basra city.
At the time of field works, the site was an agricultural area. The site is relatively flat.
2- Field Investigation
2.1- General
The field work for this study was conducted in March, 2011. Field activities include
the following:
1- 41 boreholes to depths of 15m to 40m below existing ground surface.

2- 23 Test Pits to a depth of 3m.
3- 23 Plate Loading Tests.
4- 1 Crosshole Test.
5- 36 Thermal Resistivity Tests.
The locations of all field works were setup by the client. All activities were
continuously supervised on site by ECB engineers. UTM coordinates of all field activities
are shown in the attached appendices.
2.2- Drilling and Sampling of Boreholes

Boreholes were advanced using rotary drill method according to ASTM D-5783.
Undisturbed samples were extracted using Shelby tube according to ASTM D-1587.
These samples which represent as closely as the true in- situ structure and water contents
of the soil, are taken from the thin walled tube. The tube (75mm- diameter, 600mm-
length) is drive for its full extent into the soil and then withdraws with its content. After
1
Eni-Iraq
extraction, the samples were trimmed off, caped with paraffin wax, and sealed properly at
both ends.
2.3- Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
The disturbed samples were collected by driving a 40mm outer diameter split
spoon sampler in general accordance with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) procedure
described in ASTM D-1586. The number of blows required for a 63.5 kg hammer falling
through 760mm to drive the split spoon sampler for the final 300mm of the total 450mm
penetration is usually referred to as the SPT value. If 50 blows are reached before
penetration of 300mm, no further blows are applied and the actual penetration is
recorded.
The measured SPT values have been corrected for effective overburden pressure,
using the following formula which proposed by Peck, Hanson and Thornburn:
NC = Cn x N
Cn= 0.77 log(2000/qo)
where:
N: the measured SPT value from the field test.
NC: the corrected SPT value.
Cn: the correction factor.
qo: the effective overburden pressure (kN/m2).
If the soil layer is below the water level and consists of silty fine sand, the above
corrected value is further corrected using the below formula suggested by Terzaghi and
Peck, 1967. This formula is used only when N > 15.
N = 15 + 0.5(NC – 15)
The corrected SPT values at different depths are listed in Appendix A. Undisturbed
samples were used for strength and compressibility tests and disturbed or undisturbed
samples as available are used for classification tests.
2.4- Spacing of Soil Samples

It is frequently specified that soil samples should be taken at intervals
(1.5-3.0m) and at each change of strata in boreholes. In this investigation, representative
samples were taken at every 1.5m and at changes in soil properties in the first 6m from
ground level and at every 3m and at changes in soil properties below 6m. The depths at
which the samples were recovered are shown on borehole logs (Appendix A).
2
Eni-Iraq
2.5- Test Pits
The field work also includes excavating (23) test pits to a depth of 3 m below
existing ground surface. Excavations were advanced by backhoe. Bulk samples were
obtained from tailings generated during excavation at intervals of 1 m. Recovered
samples were sealed in plastic containers and transported to the laboratory for further
classification and testing. The logs of test pits are included in Appendix B.
2.6- Plate Load Test (PLT)

The purpose of this test is to evaluate the modulus of subgrade reaction and to
facilitate and determine the bearing capacity and settlement of the top soil layers. The test
has been made according to ASTM D-1194 by using a circular plate with diameter of 0.3
m and load to a pressure of 550 kPa.
The field work consists of conducting (23) tests at the location, within the
foundation area at 0.5 m depth beneath the ground surface. At the laboratory, a program
was used to analyze the data and plot the curves between applied pressure and recorded
settlement of the plate, and evaluate the modulus of subgrade reaction of the soil. The test
locations, details, and results are included in Appendix G.
2.7- Crosshole Test

Crosshole seismic test is carried out at the site to evaluate the dynamic elastic
parameters. Two additional boreholes were drilled with five meters apart and on a line
with borehole 1130. The locations of existing and additional boreholes are as follows:
Closest Borehole The Additional Two Boreholes
LOCATION B.H. No. 1 B.H. No.2

No. UTM Coordinates
UTM Coordinates UTM Coordinates
ZUBAIR
MISHRIF
DGS 1130 751022 3367372 751016 3367368 751014 3367368
This test was conducted on March, 18th , 2011. The test details and results are shown in
Appendix E.
2.8- Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Resistively

Thermal parameters are usually used in the thermal analysis of underground electrical
transmission lines, oil pipelines, radioactive waste disposal, and solar thermal storage
facilities. In situ thermal conductivity and thermal resistivity have been measured using a
transient heat method according to ASTM-D5334. Single needle-KD2 pro device is used
for this purpose. The rate at which heat flows through a material is a measure of its
3
Eni-Iraq
thermal conductivity. In this test method the thermal conductivity is determined by
inserting a relatively long needle of small diameter into the material. The needle consists
of both heating and temperature measuring elements. To perform the test a known
amount of current is passed through the heater element and the resulting variation of
temperature is monitored as a function of time.
Thermal conductivity (K) and thermal resistivity (ρ) of the specimen are computed
using the following formulae:
Q
K= ln(t 2 / t1 )
4π (T2 − T1 )
1
ρ =
K
where:
Q: Power consumption of heater wire in Watts per unit length that is assumed to be the
equivalent of heat output per unit length of wire.
T1, T2: initial and final temperatures (oC)
t1, t2: initial and final times (seconds)
K: thermal conductivity (W/m- oC)
ρ: thermal resistivity (m- oC /W)
Locations of the tested samples and test results are shown in Appendix F.
3- Laboratory Testing for Soils

3.1- General:
A Laboratory testing program was carried out to aid classification and to evaluate the
engineering properties of the subsurface soil. The program includes the determination of
natural moisture content, unit weight (natural and dry), particle size distribution, direct
shear test, CBR, permeability, maximum dry density, and chemical tests for soil and
water.
The results of laboratory tests are summarized in Appendices D and H.
3.2- Method of Testing

All tests were carried out according to the recommendations and procedures of ASTM
and BSI. The types and numbers of laboratory tests are as follows:
4
Eni-Iraq
Test No. of tests Method of Testing
Moisture content 291 ASTM-D2216
Grain size analysis 326 ASTM-D422
Direct shear test 136 ASTM-D3080
CBR test 23 ASTM-D1883
Permeability 2 ASTM-D2434
Modified Proctor test 190 ASTM D-1557
Chemical tests / soil 7 BS: 1377-3
Chemical tests / water 4 BS: 1377-3
3.3- Moisture Content and Unit Weight

Water content determination is a routine laboratory test to determine the amount of
water present in a quantity of soil in terms of its dry weight. The oven drying method
(standard method) is used with a procedure as indicated by ASTM D-2216.
The moisture content of the soil, w, is calculated as a percentage of the dry soil mass,
from the equation:
m 2 − m3
w= × 100%
m3 − m1
where:
m1: the mass of container (g).
m2: the mass of container and wet soil (g).
m3: the mass of container and dry soil (g).
Bulk unit weight ( γ b ): is the weight of bulk soil per unit volume:
Wb
γb =
V
Dry unit weight ( γ d ): is the weight of dry soil per unit volume:
Wd γ
γd = =
V 1+ w
where:
Wb: weight of bulk soil (g).
Wd: weight of dry soil (g).
V: volume of soil simple (cm3)
5
Eni-Iraq
w: moisture content.
3.4- Particle Size Analysis

The particle size distribution of a coarse-grained soil is determined by the method of
sieving. The soil sample is passed through a series of standard test sieves having
successively smaller mesh sizes. The weight of soil retained in each sieve is determined
and cumulative percentage by weight passing each sieve is calculated.
The particle size distribution of a fine-grained soil is determined by the method of
hydrometer. Full details of the determination of particle size distribution by both sieve
and hydrometer methods are given in ASTM D-422.
3.5- Direct Shear Test

Direct shear tests were performed on the samples obtained from boreholes of
different depths below ground level to compute shear resistance. The samples were
compacted in the standard square mould (10x10x3 cm) near the natural moisture content
and density. The shearing device is motorized strain controlled. The normal face is
applied by a lever loading yoke, which is activated by dead weights. Porous stones are
inserted to allow drainage from the soil specimen along the top and bottom boundaries.
This test has been conducted according to ASTM-D3080.
3.6- Permeability
Two standard laboratory tests are used to determine the hydraulic conductivity of soil;
the constant head test and the falling head test.
The constant head test (ASTM-D2434) is used to determine the hydraulic

conductivity of coarse grained soils. Water is allowed to flow through a cylindrical
sample of soil under constant head (h). The outflow (Q) is collected in a measuring
cylinder at a convenient duration (t). The hydraulic conductivity in the vertical direction
is given by:
K z = QL /(t Ah)
where L and A are respectively, the length and cross-sectional area of the soil sample.
The falling head test is used for fine grained soils because the flow of water through
these soils is too slow to get reasonable measurements from the constant head test. Water
is allowed to flow through a sample from a stand pipe attached to the top of the cylinder.
The head of water (h) changes with times as flow occurs through the soil. At different
times, the head of water is recorded. The value of hydraulic conductivity is calculated as
follows:
K z = ((aL ) /( A(t 2 − t1 )) * ln(h1 / h2 )
6
Eni-Iraq
where:
a: cross sectional area of the tube.
L, A: length and cross sectional area of the soil sample.
h1, h2: the head of water at times t1, t2 respectively.
3.7- Modified Proctor Test

The modified Proctor test (ASTM-D1557) was developed to cover laboratory
compaction method to determine the relationship between molding water content and dry
unit weight of soils. A soil at a selected molding water content is placed in five layers
into a mold of (101.6 mm) diameter, with each layer compacted by 25 blows of (44.48 N)
rammer dropped from a distance of (457.2mm) subjecting the soil to a total compaction
effort of about (2700 kN-m/m3). The resulting dry unit weight is determined. The
procedure is repeated for a sufficient number of molding water contents to establish
relationship between the dry unit weight and the molding water content for the soil. This
data, when plotted, represent a curvilinear relationship known as the compaction curve.
The values of optimum water content and modified maximum dry unit weight are
determined from the compaction curve.
3.8- California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test

This test is carried out according to ASTM D-1883-07. This method covers the
determination of CBR of soil which is a load test applied to the surface and used in soil
investigations as an aid to the design of pavements. The laboratory test uses a circular
piston to penetrate material compacted in a mold at a constant rate of penetration. The
CBR is expressed as the ratio of the unit load on the piston required to penetrate 2.5 mm
and 5 mm of the test soil to the unit load required to penetrate a standard material of well-
graded crusted stone.
3.9- Chemical Tests

− −
Chemical tests for soil (chlorides Cl , sulphates So4 , gypsum, organic, carbonates,
− −
and PH) and water (chlorides Cl , sulpthates So4 , total dissolved solids TDS, and PH)
are carried out according to BS: 1377-part 3.
4- Subsurface Conditions
4.1- Subsoil Material Description
The subsoil strata encountered at the investigated location are detailed on the borehole
logs. The soil strata were found to be consisting of medium to very dense, brown to red,
silty sand and sometimes with gravel OR medium to very dense, brown to red, poorly
graded sand with silt and sometimes with gravel. These layers are extended from the
natural ground surface to the end of boring.
7
Eni-Iraq
4.2- Underground Water Level
At the time of investigation, groundwater table was encountered at depths ranging
from 3.1m to 5.0m below the ground level (see below). This level may be changed by the
effects of rainfall, temperature, tides, dewatering, or by other effects. Therefore
reconfirmation is recommended prior to any works related to the ground water table. For
a long period monitoring, stand pipes or piezometers installed in boreholes are
recommended.
Borehole No. GWL (m) Borehole No. GWL (m)

BH1101 3.7 BH1251 3.5
BH1102 3.75 BH1252 3.3
BH1103 3.85 BH1257 3.9
BH1104 4.1 BH1258 3.6
BH1106 4.7 BH1259 3.4
BH1107 3.8 BH1261 3.7
BH1108 3.9 BH1265 3.1
BH1109 4.35 BH1266 3.2
BH1112 4.6 BH1167 3.6
BH1127 5.0 BH1169 3.2
BH1130 4.25 BH1171 3.7
BH1131 4.5 BH1172 3.4
BH1132 4.5 BH1273 3.3
BH1134 5.0 BH1274 3.6
BH1137 5.0 BH1279 3.8
BH1143 3.7 BH1280 3.6
BH1144 3.75 BH1182 3.5
BH1245 4.2 BH1183 5.0
BH1247 4.1 BH1184 4.0
BH1249 3.8 BH1185 4.0
BH1250 3.6
8
Eni-Iraq
5- Geology and Seismicity
5.1-Regional Geology
Iraq is located in north-eastern part of Arabian plate. Tectonically, the stable platform
interior of the Arabian plate is surrounded by passive margins from the western and
southern sides which they are located at the spreading ridges of the Red Sea and the Gulf
of Aden. The north-western boundary is represented by Levant transcurrent fault.
Masirah fault zone, in Oman, is in the south eastern boundary of Arabian plate. And the
northern and northeastern boundaries of it are compressional zone due to the Late-
Tertiary collision of the Arabian Plate from one side and Turkish and Iranian contents
form the other side. During the Late-Precambrian Pan African development of the
Arabian Plate, the combined activity of successive subduction of Arabian plate
underneath the Iranian and Anatolian plates and arc accretion has led to form the
basement terranes. The outcrop of these terranes is well defined in Arabian shield of
Western Saudi Arabia. The subsequent development of the Phanerozoic basins of the
Arabian plate was highly affected by the basement terranes so that the tectonic fabric and
evolution of Iraq can be understood because of the extension of these terranes beneath the
sedimentary column of Iraq. The youngest sediments Quaternary and Neoene-aged lie
within the central depression (Fig. 1) while the flanks expose older strata of Palaeogene
to Palaeozoic age. The central depression is defined as a low-topographic cultivated area
and extends from Syria to the Arabian Gulf. Almost all the young sedimentary cover in
Iraq has filled the northwest-southeast oriented trough (central depression) which is
flanked by a gently-inclined plateau to the west and south-west and a series of ridges and
depressions passing into mountainous area in the northeast. In general, the Quaternary
deposits in Iraq can be divided into two zones, the Rutba-Jazira and Salman zone and the
Mesopotamian zone. The site of interest is classified in Mesopotamian zone. The
Mesopotamian plain extends from northwest of Baiji as a narrow area and gradually
becomes much broader toward the Arabian Gulf southeast-ward. The total area covered
by this sedimentary zone is 110,000 km2 (Saad et al., 2006).
5.2- Local Subsurface and Surface Geology

The local stratigraphic sequence can be summarized in (Fig.2). The formation of
Zubair zone comprises 380-400 m of alternating shale, siltstone and sandstone. The type
section was divided into five informal sand and shale units used for reservoir description
in the Zubair oil field. To the SW the proportion of shale in the formation rapidly
decreases. In the Salman zone the formation consists only of sandstone. The proportion
of sandstone in the formation also decreases to the NE; the formation consists almost
entirely of shale near Dujaila in Central E Iraq. The Zubair formation passes laterally into
the limestone-marl of the Shu’aiba or Sarmord formations in the Buzurgan area. The
formation is thickest in the type area in S Iraq; the depocenter is located at the boundary
of the Salman and Mesoptamian zones. There are no surface structural features (e.g.,
faults, folds, and joints) in this area (OEC, 1996 and Saad et al., 2006).
9
Eni-Iraq
Zubair‐Mishrif DGS m
Figure 1: Topographic Map of Iraq shows the location of Zubair‐Mishrif DGS Site.
10
Eni-Iraq
Formation Age Average depth

Lithology
(m)
Dibdiba Holocene
Upper‐Faris
Tertiary
AlGa’ar
Dammam
1000
Um‐Rudima
Tayarat
Shiranish
Hartha
Sa’adi
Tanuma
Kaseeb
Mushrif
Cretaceous
Rumaila 3000
Ahmadi
Maudud
Nahar‐Umar
Shua’iba
Zubair
Ratawi
Yamama 4000
Sulay
Qutnia
Figure 2: Stratigraphic sequence of southern Iraq‐Basra, not to scale
(OEC, 1996 and Saad et al., 2006).
11
Eni-Iraq
5.3- Seismic Hazard
The seismological records of Iraq show that the annual seismic activity of different
strength. Highest level of seismic activity of Iraq is concentrated in the north and
northeastern parts of Iraq; these seismic activities are strongly diminution in the south
and southwestern parts of Iraq (Fig. 3).
Figure 3: Seismotectonic setting of Iraq and the geographical distribution of seismic
activities along the eastern border of Iraq. (Earthquakes records are from Advanced

National Seismic System (ANSS) Catalog).

The tectonic and seismic activities are because of the location of Iraq northeastern
boundaries of the Arabian plate. As it is clear from (Fig. 3), the geographical distribution
of seismicity is inhomogeneous and the activity is focused in the high folded and the
Balambo-Tanjero zones. The majority of focal depth is shallow. Alsinawi (2003)
constructed a historical isointensity map of Iraq (Fig.4-a) and a general isointensity map
(Fig.4-b). The potential seismic hazard and risk is always associated with the surface
rupture occurs as a fault breaks to the land surface during an earthquake. The site is not
12
Eni-Iraq
subject to such scenario because it is required an earthquake greater than 6.5 magnitude.
Therefore, the seismic hazard and risk is small in terms of the historical and current
seismic record of southern part of Iraq.
A B
Figure 4: A) historical isointensity map of Iraq. B) General isointesity of Iraq
(Alsinawi and Alqasrani, 2003)

Bolton (1958) divided the structural framework of Iraq into three prominent zones,
thrust zone, folded zone, and unfolded zone. The southern part of Iraq where located the
proposed site is situated in the unfolded zone so that it is unequivocal that the proposed
site resides in a relatively stable zone seismically and tectonically.
5.4- Other Risks and Hazards

The sits is relatively flat and no slopes were detected, so slope instability and
landslides are unlikely to take place. Moreover no flood hazard is expected in the site
because its location is far away for water masses.
5.5- Liquefaction Potential

The typical subsurface soil condition that is susceptible to liquefaction is loose sand
that has been newly deposited or placed, with a groundwater table near ground surface.
During an earthquake, the application of cyclic shear stresses induced by the propagation
of shear waves causes the loose sand to contract, resulting in an increase in pore water
pressure. Because seismic shaking occurs so quickly the cohesionless soil is subjected to
13
Eni-Iraq
an undrained loading. The increase in pore water pressure causes an upward flow of
water to the ground surface, where it emerges in the form of mud spouts or sand boils.
The development of high pore water pressures due to the ground shaking and the upward
flow of water my turn the sand into a liquefied condition, which has been termed
liquefaction. For this state of liquefaction, the effective stress is zero and the individual
soil particles are released from any confinement, as if the soil particles were floating in
water.
When liquefaction occurs, the soil can become a liquid and thus the shear strength of
the soil can be decreased to essentially zero. Without any shear strength, the liquefied soil
will be unable to support the foundations for buildings.
The potential for liquefaction increases as the earthquake intensity and duration of
shaking increases. According to the '' National Research Council , Ishihara 1985" , a
liquefaction analysis would typically not be needed for those sites having a peak ground
acceleration amax less than 0.1 g or a local magnitude ML less than 5.
The most common type of analysis to determine the liquefaction potential is to use the
standard penetration test (SPT). The analysis is based on the simplified method proposed
by Seed and Idriss (1971). This method has been implemented as “Guidelines for
Analyzing and mitigating Liquefaction in California” SP 117.
Based on the above guideline procedures, liquefaction is unlikely to take place for this
site.
5.6- Seismic Design Parameters

Based of the soil type and site location and conditions described in this report, we
recommend the following values to be used for seismic design of the project in
accordance with section 1613.5.3 of IBC/2006.
Table (1): IBC/2006 Seismic Design Values
Parameter Value
Soil profile site class D
0.2 second Spectral Acceleration Ss 0.3g
1.0 second Spectral Acceleration S1 0.12g
Site Coefficient Fa 1.6
Site Coefficient Fv 2.4
14
Eni-Iraq
6- Earthwork
6.1- Lowering of Groundwater Level
The field tests indicate that the groundwater level is ranged between 3.1m – 5.0m
below the natural ground level. Therefore the excavation works of the upper unsuitable
soil and the construction of shallow foundation does not require the ground water table to
be lowering. However, construction of foundations at depths below the groundwater level
requires the use of dewatering system. Based on the depth of footing and local site
conditions, either open trenches or well points system should be used.
6.2- Excavation Difficulties

Based on the excavation field works of boreholes and test pits, we anticipate no
significant excavation difficulties in the site with conventional heavy-duty excavation
equipment in good working condition.
6.3- Preparation Works

Prior to placement of fill, the top soil layer should be removed to a depth not less than
0.3 m. All debris, organic matter, salts, unsuitable soils and deleterious material shall be
removed and disposed out of the site. Excavated top soil should not be incorporated into
fills. Instead, it may be stockpiled during initial grading operations for placement in areas
to be landscaped or for other approved uses. Excavation for more than 0.3 m depth shall
be made where removal of unsuitable material is required. Material excavated below
designed levels shall be replaced with engineering fill (subbase) and placed and
compacted as specified below.
Prior to filling, the top 0.2 - 0.3 m of subgrade layer on which fill soils will be placed
should be scarified, moisture conditioned and properly compacted in accordance with the
recommendations below to provide a uniform base for fill placement. For regions of
compressible soils, the field density cannot be reaching the required degree of
compaction. Such soils should be removed to a depth of about 0.3-0.5m and replaced
with a mixture of cobbles and coarse aggregate (particle size ranged between 50 – 150
mm) and compacted before placement of fill materials.
6.4- Fill Material

The material for earth filling may be taken from approved borrows pits. These
materials cannot be used until they are sampled, tested and submitted to and approved by
client. The filling material is a mixture of sand and gravel and shall be free of organic
materials, soluble salts, sulphate and gypsum. However, subbase type A or B may be
used as filling materials. The grading of these types should be in accordance with
SORB/R6 (Table 2). The fill material shall be compacted in layers not more than 0.25m
thickness (before compaction). The existing native soils that are free of trash, organic
materials, construction debris and other deleterious material and meet the grading
requirements could be used for placement as compacted fill.
15
Eni-Iraq
Table (2): Engineering fill gradation according to (SORB/R6)
Sieve size Passing %
(mm)
Type A Type B Type C Type D
75 100 -
50 95-100 100
25 75-95 100 100
9 30-65 50-85 50-85 60-100
4.75 25-55 35-65 35-65 50-85
2.36 16-42 26-52 26-52 42-72
0.30 7-18 14-28 14-28 23-42
0.075 2-8 5-15 5-15 5-20
6.5- Roads
Soils beneath any proposed traffic-bearing pavement, including minimum lateral
distance of at least 0.6 m beyond pavement edges, should be excavated a minimum of 0.6
m below the existing grade. The bottom of excavation should then be scarified 0.15 m, be
moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and be uniformly compacted to at
least 95% of maximum dry density using mechanical compaction equipment.
Compaction should be verified by testing.
6.6- Compaction Requirements

1. The subgrade soil, after cleaning and removal of unsuitable soil, shall be compacted
to 95% of maximum dry density.
2. Fill material shall be compacted to at least 95% of maximum dry density.
3. Maximum dry density shall be obtained according to modified Proctor test (ASTM-
D1557)
16
Eni-Iraq
4. In place density test shall be determined by method accordance with ASTM-D 1556
or ASTM-D 2922.
5. Laboratory determination of moisture content of soil shall be calculated according

to ASTM-D2216.
6. Sheeps foot roller is recommend for fine grained subgrade layer and rubber-tired
rollers or vibrating compacters are recommended for coarse grained subgrade and
fill layers.
6.7- Shrinkage of Soil

Shrinkage because of excavation and compaction of the upper site soils is expected to
be approximately 25 percent of any excavated site soils. This estimate is based upon
compaction effort needed to produce an average degree of relative compaction of
approximately 96 percent. Losses for site clearing and grubbing operations may affect
quantity calculations and should also be taken into account.
6.8 Cut and Filled Slopes

Permanent site slopes supported by on-site cohesionless soils up to 3 m in height, or
up to the groundwater level whichever is smaller, may be constructed no steeper than 2:1
(horizontal:vertical). We recommend 1.5:1 slope for temporary excavations. For deeper
excavations or when seepage is encountered, the Geotechnical Engineer should be
retained to evaluate the conditions and provided additional recommendations, as
appropriate. The risk of slope instability will be significantly increased in areas of
seepage along excavating slopes.
6.9- Shoring
Should site constraints prohibit the use of the recommended slope angles, temporary
shoring should be used. The shoring should be designed to resist the lateral earth pressure
exerted by structure, hydrostatic pressure, traffic, equipment, and stock piles.
6.10- Drainage
Good surface drainage should be provided around temporary excavation slopes to
direct surface runoff from the slope faces. A properly designed swale should be provided
at the top of the excavations. In no case should water be allowed to pond at the site.
17
Eni-Iraq
6.11- Pavement Design
Referring to Fig.(5), the pavement layers consists of:
1- Subgrade:
The subgrade layer represents the natural material located along the horizontal
alignment of the pavement and serves as the foundation of the pavement structure. Soil
which contains the following materials is not suitable as subgrade layer;
- More than 12% organic materials.

- Branches, roots, and all decomposition vegetation.
- More than10% of gypsum.
- Liquid limit and plasticity index more than 70 and 45, respectively.
- Surface layer
- Base layer
- SubBase layer
- Subgrade layer
Fig.(5): The pavement layers
2- Subbase Layer:
The specification of subbase layer according to the general Specifications Of Roads
and Bridges (SORB/R6):
(a) Gravel (retained on sieve 4.75mm)

- Percent of corrosion not exceed 45% according to the test (AASHTO T74-96).
- Texture index not more than 35%.
- Protraction index not more than 15%
.
(b) Fine materials ( passing on 4.75 mm)
- Organic materials not more than 2%
- For the materials passing on 0.425mm: LL ≤ 25, PI ≤ 6.
- Materials passing on 0.075 mm ≤ 2/3 of that passing on 0.425mm.
- Total soluble salt not more than 10%.
- SO4 not more than 5%.
- Gradation according to table (2).
18
Eni-Iraq
(c) CBR:
The CBR not less than 35% for type B, 30 for type C, and 20% for type D at 95%
of maximum dry density.
(d) Climatic border:
- Materials must not be spread when the temperature equal to or less than 3oC.
- Thickness of subbase layer not more than 20 cm, and the degree of compaction
not less than 95% for maximum dry density.
3- Base Layer
This layer supports the surface layer and carries and distributes the traffic loads to
bottom layers. Also, it protects the surface road from swelling or depression of natural
soil and leaks of ground water. Therefore, this layer must have good properties of
durability and resistance. The CBR should not be less than 40%.
4- Surface Layer:
In designing pavement thickness, the following factors should be considered:
- Design axle load.

- Material characteristics.
- Climate or environment.
For roads using by heavy trucks, we suggest 10cm surface layer, 10 cm asphalt base
layer, 10 cm stone base layer, and 30cm subbase layer. For roads using by small cars and
light weight tracks, we suggest 5cm surface layer, 7.5 cm asphalt base layer, 7.5 cm stone
base layer, and 20 cm subbase layer. The minimum thickness of the pavement layers for
different types of axle loads are given in table (3).
Table (3): Minimum thickness of pavement layers
The type of sub grade layer Local street Collector street Arterial street
5cm surface layer 5cm surface layer

5cm surface layer
Excellent sub grade layer (CBR>9%) 5cm asphalt base layer 5cm asphalt base layer
15 cm base layer
20 cm base layer 25 cm base layer
5cm surface 5cm surface layer 5cm surface layer
Moderate sub grade layer (CBR 5-9%) layer 5cm asphalt base layer 5cm asphalt base layer
15 cm base layer 25 cm base layer 30 cm base layer
5cm surface layer 5cm surface layer

5cm surface layer
Weak sub grade layer (CBR 2-5%) 5cm asphalt base layer 7cm asphalt base layer
30 cm base layer
30 cm base layer 35 cm base layer
19
Eni-Iraq
7- Results and Discussion
7.1- Shear Strength
Shear strength of cohesionless soils is usually described in terms of relative density.
The relative density is an index that quantifies the degree of packing between the loosest
and densest state of coarse grained soils. The density state of cohesionless soil can be
described as very loose, loose, medium, dense, and very dense. Some standards (like BS
5930) give the following relationship between N-value and the relative density of
cohesionless soils.
N-value
Relative density
(blows/300mm of penetration)
Below 4 Very loose
4-10 Loose
10-30 Medium-dense
30-50 Dense
Over 50 Very dense
Referring to the results of Direct Shear Test and SPT values, the relative density of the
cohesionless soil layers is ranged between medium to very dense.
7.2- Chemical Properties

The primary cause of serious deterioration in reinforced concrete is corrosion of the
reinforcement due to attack by chlorides, present in concrete either within concrete
aggregate and mixing water, or through penetration from surrounding environment. Since
chloride induced reinforcement corrosion can only occur in the presence of oxygen and
water, the risk of corrosion can be reduced by control of chloride in concreting materials
and by ensuring adequacy, integrity and impermeability of the concrete cover.
It may be noted that as per CIRIA special publication 31, there is no widely accepted
view on the concentration at which chlorides become significant in soil or ground water,
but limited experience in the Gulf Region suggests it may be as low as 0.05% particularly
in situations where wetting and drying or capillary rise effect the concrete.
Sulphate attack to concrete is caused by the presence of a high sulphate content either
by the ingress from the sulphate of the surrounding environment such as foundations soils
or groundwater, or by the presence of sulphate in the concrete ingredients. The attack
results in a considerable internal expansion which may lead to crack and disintegration of
20
Eni-Iraq
the concrete. This effect can be reduced by use of selected cements or by suitable
protection of the concrete.
The results of chemical analysis are given in Appendix D. Based on the requirements
of the International Building Code/2006 for concrete exposed to chlorides and sulphates,
we recommend to use sulphate resisting Portland Cement (Type V) with maximum water
/
cement ratio of 0.45 and minimum concrete strength f c =31 N/mm2. Also adequate
coating of inert materials such as asphalt should protect all concrete works that are in
contact with subsoil.
7.3- Gypsum
The chemical tests of soil indicate to moderately gypsum content for the upper layer
(3.0-5.0 m) and then reduced to slightly gypsum content for the next layer. The gypsum
particles are dense to the overburden and the applied loads. But after the site is
developed, there can be infiltration of water into the ground from rainfall, irrigation,
leaky water pipes or groundwater fluctuation. Gypsum is water soluble and it dissolves
when water penetrates the gypsiferous soils causing loss of cementation. The loss of
gypsum by dissolution leads not only to decrease in the strength and bearing capacity of
the foundation but also settlement of the footing. Two types of settlement can occur;
1. The collapse of the soil structure due to weakening of salt cemented bonds at
particle contacts.
2. The water can dissolve away the gypsum resulting in ground surface settlement.
As general to avoid problems of foundation on such soil, two kinds of provisions

are usually considered. First making the structure resistant to damage from soil
movement and this can be done by strengthening the structure to withstand movement
and second by avoiding percolation of water surround the structures foundation to the
zone beneath the base of footing. To insure the durability of the foundation the following
points were taken in the design criteria;
1. A factor of safety equal or greater than three (FS≥3) is adopted for all calculations
of bearing capacity formulas which is acceptable value for such type of soil.
2. One of the most practical and economical methods is through use of compaction
control for the backfill of the zone around the foundation with well compacted
subbase layer.
7.4-Plate Loading Test

Obviously the most quick and fairly acceptable method of obtaining the ultimate
bearing capacity at a site is to perform a load test. This would directly give the bearing
capacity if the load test is on a full-size footing; however, this is not usually done since an
enormous load would have to be applied.
21
Eni-Iraq
The plate bearing test is a well-known approach for determination of modulus of

subgrade reaction and bearing capacity of soils. This test, as in any other on-site testing
approach has advantages and disadvantages which could be briefly reviewed.
The advantages of the plate bearing test is that, it gives close simulation of actual
loading condition typically found in foundations. Also, the loaded volume of soil is large
by comparison with other tests, and therefore more representative. In plate bearing test,
there is close control of loading intensity, rate and duration which in turn provide more
representative results than laboratory testing not forgetting that plate bearing test could be
carried out in pits and open areas which reflects its flexibility.
On the other hand, the disadvantageous of this method of testing is that, a number of
tests are required to obtain coverage with depth for application to foundation designs.
Upward seepage pressure at the test level reduces effective stress and has significant
effects on the test results. Specialist technicians are necessary and the scale effects should
be considered as the results are difficult to interpret in some types of soils.
Although plate load tests may seem to be a reasonable approach, experience has
proven otherwise in certain cases. This is primarily because the plate is so much smaller
than the foundation, and we cannot always extrapolate the results accurately.
The depth of influence of the plate (about twice the plate width) is much shallower
than that of the real footing, as shown in the following figure, so the test reflects only the
properties of the near-surface soils.
In addition, because of the small size of the plate, and the fact that the test reflects
only the properties of the uppermost soils, results can be difficult to interpret especially
when the soil properties vary with depth.
Because of these problems, and because of the development of better methods of

testing and analysis, current engineering practice recommends strongly drilling boreholes
to obtain clearer image on the soil layers and properties. However, these tests are still
useful for other design problems, such as those involving wheel loads on pavement
subgrades, where the service loads act over smaller areas, and also for the foundations
where the area under question is well-known for the investigator historically and layer’s
nature wise.
22
Eni-Iraq
The stresses induced by a

plate load test do not
penetrate very deep into the
soil, so its load-settlement
behavior is not the same as
that of a full-sized footing
Back to the project in hand, the plot of pressure versus settlement and the modulus of
subgrade reaction value are enclosed in Appendix G. It is clear from the plots that the
modulus of subgrade reaction is very high at most of the locations tested, while the result
for other locations yield moderate modulus of sub-grade reaction value and in certain
locations, fairly low figures reported for the sub-grade reaction with excessive
settlements up to (1” = 25.48mm) as indicated in the remarks on the pressure vs.
settlement graph. Gypsiferrous materials in appreciable amount observed at some tested
locations which shall seriously affect the settlement magnitude especially when came in
contact with water, as such, one of the tests conducted under dry condition and after that
submerged in water to clearly shade light on the water presence effect. This could be
noticed at the location of (P.L 1110). The high figures of the modulus of sub-grade
reactions reported at most of the tested location may be due the cementation of Sandy soil
material with fine materials and/or Gypsiferrous materials in its dry status.
8- Analysis and Recommendations

8.1- Allowable Bearing Capacity (ABC) for Shallow Foundations
Loads from structure are transferred to the soil through a foundation. A geotechnical
engineer must ensure that a foundation satisfies the following stability conditions:
1- The foundation must be safe agonist bearing capacity failure.

2- The foundation must not settle to such an extent that it damages the structure.
The allowable bearing capacity for shallow foundations could be evaluated from one
of the following methods:
23
Eni-Iraq
1- Bering capacity equation.
The most commonly used bearing capacity equation is that equation developed by
Terzaghi:
q ult = C N c S c + 0 .5 γ B N γ S γ + γ D N q S q
where:
qult : ultimate bearing capacity (kPa).
B, L: width and length of the footing (m).
γ : unit weight of the soil (kN/m3).

D: depth of the footing (m).
C: Cohesion of the soil (kPa).
N c , N γ , N q : dimensionless bearing capacity factors.
S c , S γ , S q : dimensionless shape factors.
For strip footing, all of the shape factors equal 1.0. For rectangular footing of width B
and length L, commonly used shape factors are:
Sc = [1+0.3(B/L)], S γ = 0.8, Sq = 1.0
For cohesive soil, one should use the undrained shear strength in the ''Total Stress
Analysis’’. For such condition, the following parameters should be used:
φ = 0 , C = Su , Nc = 5.5 , N γ = 0 , Nq = 1 , and hence the bearing capacity equation

reduces to:
qult = 5.5 Su Sc + γ D
For cohesionless soils, the bearing capacity equation becomes:
q ult = 0.5 γB N γ S γ + γ D N q S q
The bearing capacity factor Nq is:
φ
N q = e π tan φ tan 2 ( 45 + )
2
24
Eni-Iraq
Various equations have been proposed for N γ in the literature. The one proposed by
Davis and Booker (1973) is based on a refined plasticity method and gives conservative
values compared with the others.
N γ = 0.1054 exp (9.6 φ ) for rough footing
N γ = 0.0663 exp (9.6 φ ) for smooth footing
The allowable bearing capacity ( qall ) , which is used to determine the size of
footing is given by the following equation .
qult
q all =
F
where:
qall : allowable bearing capacity (kPa).
F : factor of safety ( commonly F = 3).
2- The net allowable bearing capacity of cohesive soils is approximately equal to the
unconfined compressive strength ( qu ) with factor of safely F=3:
qall = qu
where qu is the unconfined compressive strength (kPa).
3- From SPT, AASHTO (2004) recommended that;

D
qult = 32 N B ( C w1 + C w 2 )
B
where:
N = SPT value (average value for a depth up to 1.5B below footing base).
B = foundation width.
Cw1, Cw2 = ground water factors given as:
25
Eni-Iraq
Depth of groundwater
Cw1 Cw2
Below finished grade
0 0.5 0.5
Df 0.5 1.0
1.5B + Df 1.0 1.0
Source AASHTO,2004.
4- For cohesionless material, the allowable bearing capacity could be estimated

based on the relationship between standard penetration resistance and the allowable
bearing capacity (Reproduced from K. Terzaghi and R.B. Peck-1967).
26
Eni-Iraq
5- Extrapotation of allowable bearing capacity for a full-size footing from the results
of plate loading test. For clay soils it is common to note that BNγ term is zero , so that
one might say that qult is independent of footing size, giving :
(qult) foundation = ( qult )plate

For cohesionless material one can use the following formula (J.E.Bowles);
B founndation
q ult = ( q ult ) plate ( )
B plate
The use of this equation is not recommended unless BFoundation / Bplate is not much more
than 3.
Based on the above equations, the allowable bearing capacity has been calculated
and the most critical values (minimum) among them were adopted. The recommended
allowable bearing capacity for shallow foundation is as listed below.
ABC at depth d=1.0m Alternative values of ABC at depth d

Borehole No
qall (kN/m2) qall (kN/m2) d (m)
BH1101 150 160 2.5
BH1102 60 100 2.5
BH1103 40 95 4.5
BH1104 70 110 2.5
BH1106 135 150 2.5
BH1107 90 150 2.5
BH1108 60 100 2.0
BH1109 50 115 2.5
BH1112 85 140 2.5
BH1127 160 - -
BH1130 110 160 4.0
27
Eni-Iraq
Borehole No
BH1131 160 - -
BH1132 160 - -
BH1134 160 - -
BH1137 115 135 2.0
BH1143 45 160 2.5
BH1144 160 - -
BH1245 60 160 4.0
BH1247 50 160 4.5
BH1249 60 160 4.5
BH1250 50 130 2.0
BH1251 55 140 2.5
BH1252 50 60 3.0
BH1257 60 160 2.5
BH1258 40 90 4.0
BH1259 70 155 2.0
BH1261 90 115 2.5
BH1265 160 - -
BH1266 90 160 2.5
BH1167 100 160 2.5
BH1169 160 - -
28
Eni-Iraq

Borehole No
BH1171 100 160 2.5
BH1172 85 160 2.5
BH1273 65 130 3.0
BH1274 60 160 2.0
BH1279 50 115 2.0
BH1280 60 160 2.5
BH1182 65 115 2.5
BH1183 60 130 4.0
BH1184 60 115 3.0
BH1185 50 100 2.5
8.2- Allowable Bearing Capacity for Transient Loads

The indicated allowable bearing capacity values for shallow foundation (section 8.1)
may be increased by 1/3 when transient loads, such as wind and seismic forces are
included.
8.3- Elastic Settlement of Shallow Foundations

It is difficult to obtain undisturbed samples of coarse grained soils for testing in the
laboratory. Consequently, the settlement of footings on coarse-grained soils is obtained
based on empirical methods using test data from field tests. Meyerhof (1965) suggested
that the settlement under a shallow foundation can be estimated from SPT value using:
2q all
S e ( mm) = ; B ≤ 1.2m ; q all ( kPa)
N
3.2q all 1
S e (mm) = (1 + ) −2 ; B > 1.2m ; q all (kPa)
N 3.28 B
29
Eni-Iraq
where qall is the allowable bearing capacity.
The elastic settlement could also be estimated from the results of plate loading test.
For D ≤ B and B≤ 6m:
4q B2
Se =
k v ( B + 0.3) 2
For D ≤ B and B ≥ 12m:
2q B2
Se =
k v ( B + 0.3) 2
where:
Se : elastic settlement of the footing (m).
q : vertical footing pressure (kPa)
B : footing width (m).
Kv : Subgrade modulus from the plate load test (kN/m3).
D : depth of the footing below the ground surface (m).
It is necessary to interpolate between the above two equations for footing width between
6m and 12m.
8.4- Allowable Settlement

The excessive amount of differential settlement causes extra forces in the
superstructure. To reduce the amount of differential settlement (max. =12mm), the
maximum total settlement should be limited to a specific value. We recommend the
tolerable total settlement should not exceed 25mm for isolated footing or 50mm for raft
foundation.
8.5- Modulus of Subgrade Reaction

The modulus of vertical subgrade reaction required for design a continuous or raft
foundation may be computed using the following formulae (Bowles, J.E.):
Kv = 20 F qall kN/m3 [Mat foundation for settlement of 50mm]
Kv = 40 F qall kN/m3 [Spread or continuous footing for settlement 25mm]
30
Eni-Iraq
where qall is the allowable bearing capacity of the soil and F is the factor of safety.
The modulus of subgrade reaction could also be estimated from the results of Plate
Loading Test. Back to the results of plate loading test given in Appendix G, it is clear
from the plots that the modulus of subgrade reaction is in the order of 14000 to 538000
kN/m3. By eliminate the extreme figures from our assessment and judgment and relay on
the figures that are in somehow close to each other and take their average, we suggest a
value for kv=125000 kN/m3 for dry soil and 16000 kN/m2 for submerged soil as a figure
representing the site’s subgrade reaction.
8.6- Coefficients of Lateral Earth Pressure

The lateral earth pressure is a significant design parameter in retaining and
underground structures. Therefore, a quantitative estimate of the total lateral pressure on
structural members is required for either a design or stability analysis.
Based on the Rankine earth pressure theory, the horizontal earth pressure (active and
passive) is defined by the following formulae:
σ A = γz K A − 2c K A
σ p = γz K p + 2c K p
where:
σA: active soil pressure (kN/m2)
σP: passive soil pressure (kN/m2)
KA, KP :coefficients of lateral soil pressure of active and passive states, respectively.
φ/ φ/
KA = tan ( 45 −
2
) KP = tan ( 45 +
2
)
2 2
γ : effective unit weight of the soil (kN/m3).
Z : depth of the soil (m).
c : cohesion (kN/m2).
Ǿ : angle of internal friction (effective).
For the case of at rest condition, Ko should be used instead of KA or Kp. The
lateral earth pressure coefficient (Ko) is defined as the ratio between the lateral and
vertical principal effective stresses when an earth retaining structure is at rest.
For overconsolidated soil (OCR > 1), Ko is calculated by;
K o = (1 − sin φ / ) (OCR ) sin φ

/
31
Eni-Iraq
and for normally consolidated soil (OCR =1) the above equation reduced to:
K o = (1 − sin φ / )
The typical values of (Ko) for different types of soils is as listed below (R.F. Grieg,
2002).
Soil Ko
Dense sand 0.35
Loose sand 0.6
Normally consolidated clays (Norway) 0.5-0.6
Clay, OCR=3.5 (London) 1.0
Clay ,OCR=20 (London) 2.8
8.7- Carrying Capacity of Pile Foundation
(a) Point Bearing Capacity:
For piles driven into cohesionless soils, the point bearing capacity can be expressed
as:
__
Qb = A p ( q Nq / ) ≤ A p (11000) kN
where:
Ap: Pile cross sectional area (m2).
q : Effective overburden pressure at pile point (kN/m2).
Nq' : Berezantev's bearing capacity factor.
For piles driven into cohesive soils, the point bearing capacity can be expressed as .
Qb=Ap(C Nc')
where:
C : cohesion (or undrained shear strength).
Nc' : deep foundation bearing capacity factor for cohesion.
Nc' = 9.0 for C > 25 kPa
Nc' = 6.0 for C ≤ 25 kPa
32
Eni-Iraq
For standard penetration test (SPT) data, Meyerhof (1976) proposed:
Lb
Qb = Ap (40 N) ≤ Ap (380 N) kN
B
where:
N : average value taken in a zone of about 8B above to 3B below the pile point.
B : width or diameter of pile point.
Lb: pile penetration depth into point bearing stratum.
(b) Skin Friction Capacity:
In general, skin friction resistance is computed as;

_
Q s = ∑ As (α c + p k s tan δ ) = ∑ As f s
where:
As: Effective pile surface area (m2)
α : Adhesion factor.
c : Average cohesion (kN/m2)
P: Average effective overburden pressure (kN/m2)
ks: Coefficient of lateral earth pressure.
δ : Effective friction angle between soil and pile material.
Skin friction could also be estimated based an SPT data for piles in sand. Meyerhof
(1976) suggested obtaining fs as ;
a. For piles with large-volume displacement (solid piles);
fs = 2N ≤ 100 kPa
b. For piles with small-volume displacement (H-piles)
fs = 1N ≤ 50 kPa
Shioi and Fukui (1982) suggest the following :
a. For driven piles:
fs = 2 N for sand = 10 N for clay
b. For bored piles:
33
Eni-Iraq
fs = 1 N for sand = 5 N for clay
where:
N= average blow count in the material indicated for the pile or pile segment length.
(c) Uplift Resistance:

Piles are not only subjected to compression forces but also to uplift forces from
applied loads and moments. An estimation of the uplift resistance can be obtained by
applying a reduction factor for the skin frictional stress Qs for compressive loads as:
(Qult) uplift = C × Q s
where:
C = 0.5 – 0.7 for sand and silt
C = 0.7 – 1.0 for clay
Based on the above analysis, the allowable carrying capacity, with factor of safety
F=3, of the precast concrete pile, driven and cast in place piles, and bored piles extending
to the bearing layer are calculated and the results are listed below. Lower limits
correspond to the weakest soil profile (BH1252) and upper limits correspond to the
strongest soil profile (BH1131).
Allowable Carrying Allowable

Pile
Pile Capacity (kN) Lateral
Pile Type Length
Dimensions (m) Resistance
(m)
Compression Tension (kN)
Precast Concrete
0.285 x 0.285 9 400-500 100-200 75-110
Pile (Square)
φ 0.5 10 800-850 130 165-240

Driven and Cast in
Place (Round)
φ 0.8 10 1900-2000 250 350-500
φ 0.7 10 700 190 290-410

Bored Pile (Round)
φ 1.0 10 1350 330 510-725
34
Eni-Iraq
8.8- Group Effect
A 15% - 20% reduction should be applied to the allowable carrying capacity of piles
given in section (8.7) due to pile group effect.
8.9- Lateral Resistance of Piles

Generalized solutions for laterally loaded vertical piles are given by Matlock and
Reese (1960). The solution involves the concept of modulus of subgrade reaction which
is based on Winkler's assumption that soil medium may be approximated by a series of
closely spaced independent elastic springs.
The key to the solution lies in the determination of the value of the modulus of
subgrade reaction Es (soil modulus) with respect to depth along the pile. In general, the
variation of Es with depth may be expressed as:
Es = Kh Xn
In which Kh is termed the coefficient of soil modulus variation. The value of the power n
depends upon the type of soil. The most useful form of variation of Es is the linear
relationship expressed as:
Es = Kh X
which is normally used by investigators of vertical piles. Typical values of Kh for

cohesive and cohesionless soils are as follows:
Soil type Kh (MN/m3) Reference
0.16 – 3.45 Reese and Matlock , 1956

Soft NC clay
0.27 – 0.54 Davisson and Prakash , 1963
0.11 – 0.27 Peck and Davisson , 1962

NC organic clay
0.11 – 0.81 Davisson , 1970
0.05 Davisson , 1970

Peat
0.027 – 0.11 Wilson and Hills, 1967
35
Eni-Iraq
Soil type Kh (MN/m3) Reference
Dry sand
Loose 2.8 – 12.4 Reese , 1975
Medium 12.4 – 44.3 Reese , 1975
Dense 44.3 – 76.8 Reese , 1975
Submerged sand
Loose 2.8 – 8.8 Reese, 1975
Medium 8.8 – 25.9 Reese, 1975
Dense 25.9 – 43.4 Reese, 1975
Matlock and Reese (1960) have given equations for the determination of y, S, M, V,
and P at a point x along the pile based on dimensional analysis. The equations are.
Pt T 3 M tT 2
Deflection y =[ ] Ay + [ ]B y
EI EI
Pt T 2 MT
Slope S =[ ] As + [ t ]Bs
EI EI
Moment M = [ Pt T ] Am + [ M t ]Bm
Mt
Shear V = [ Pt ] Av + [ ]Bv
T
Pt M
Soil reaction P= AP + 2t B p
T T
Where T is the relative stiffness factor expressed as :
1
EI
T = [ ]5
Kh
Es = K h x
36
Eni-Iraq
In the above equations, A and B are the set of non-dimensional coefficients whose values
are function of the depth coefficient, Z, expressed as
X
Z=
T
At ground level, the values of Ay and By are 2.43 and 1.62 respectively. Hence,
the corresponding deflection equation will be;
Pt T 3 M T2
y g = 2.43 + 1.62 t
EI EI
yg for fixed head is :
Pt T 3
yg = 0.93
EI
Moment at ground level for fixed head is :
Mt = – 0.93 Pt . T
Using the above equations, the lateral pile capacity, for 12mm lateral movement
at the top of the pile, has been calculated and the results were listed in the table-section
8.7.
8.10- Pile Loading Test

Theoretical design methods provide an approximate working load and settlement of
the pile. The contractor should also demonstrate by load test the pile performance and its
load-settlement characteristics. Pile loading test gives:
1. The maximum permissible settlement in the region of the anticipated working load.
2. The ultimate carrying capacity as a check on the value calculated from theatrical
methods.
3. The final decision for pile length.
Therefore, it is recommended to perform sufficient pile tests before starting the general
construction works of pile installation.
8.11- Elastic Properties of Soil

The elastic properties of soil are described by three characteristics , modulus of elasticity
E , shear modulus G, and poisons ratio υ , but only two needs to be known, since the
third one can be determined from the relation :
37
Eni-Iraq
E
G=
2(1 + υ )
(a) Static Properties:

Typical values for Poisson’s ratio and modulus of elasticity are as shown below (M.
Budhu, 2007):
Soil Type Description υ E (MPa)
Soft 0.35-0.40 1-15
Clay Medium 0.30-0.35 15-30
Stiff 0.20-0.30 30-100
Loose 0.15-0.25 10-20
Sand Medium 0.25-0.30 20-40
Dense 0.25-0.35 40-80
(b) Dynamic Properties:

Crosshole seismic test were carried out at the site to evaluate the dynamic properties at
location of borehole BH1130. The test results show that the Poisson's ratio ranges from
0.22 to 0.46 for the sand layer which extends from the ground surface to the end of tested
depth. The dynamic modulus of elasticity ranges from 631 to 8205.
The recommended values of elastic properties of soil are given in section 8.13.
8.12- Surface Drainage

The following drainage measures are recommended for design, construction and
should be maintained all times after the project has been completed:
1. Avoid the installation of service pipes inside the building.

2. All water supply and sewerage connections should be well embedded in
concrete to reduce possibility of damage.
3. Wetting or drying of excavation should be avoided during construction.
Permitting increases / variations in moisture to the adjacent or supporting soils
may result in a decrease in bearing capacity and an increase in volume change
of the underlying soils and / or differential movement.
38
Eni-Iraq
4. Seepage of surface water should be prevented to reach the foundation and the
adjacent zone using impervious paving material such as asphalt or concrete
with mastic joints with a minimum 3 percent slope in the first 3m.
5. In no case should water be permitted to pond adjacent to or on sidewalks,
landscaping or other improvements as well as utility trench alignments, which
are likely to be adversely affected by moisture-volume changes in the
underlying soils or flow of infiltrating water.
6. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the perimeters of
the structure foundations, or be provided with positive conveyance off-site for
collected waters.
7. Vegetation that may require watering should ideally be located 3m or more
from building perimeters, flatwork, or other site improvements. As minimum,
vegetation requiring irrigation should not be located within 3m of structure
perimeters. Irrigation sprinkler heads should be deployed so that applied water
is not introduced near or into foundation/subgrade soils. Landscape irrigation
outside that 3m limit should be limited to the minimum quantities necessary to
sustain healthy plant growth.
8.13- Design Parameters Summary

According to the field and laboratory tests results, the following soil parameters are
recommended for the design of shallow, deep, and retaining structures:
Parameter Recommended Value
Bulk Unit Weight (g/cm3) 1.94
Dry Unit Weight (g/cm3) 1.69
Undrained Shear Strength (kN/m2) 0
Angle of Interior Friction 36-40
Coefficient of permeability (cm/s) 1.87 x 10-3-7.79x10-3
Elastic Parameters:-
Es (MPa) 100
Ed (MPa) 3400
ν 0.30
39
Eni-Iraq
Parameter Recommended Value
Modulus of subgrade reaction (kN/m3):
Dry soil 125000
Submerged soil 16000
CBR 30-60
Coefficient of Lateral Earth Pressure:-
KA 0.22-0.26
KP 3.85-4.6
KO 0.35-0.4
8.14- Type of Foundation
The selection of appropriate type of foundation will normally depend on the

magnitude and distribution of structural loads (column loads), the bearing capacity, and
the settlement characteristics. No information regarding the magnitude and distribution of
column loads were available as of this writing. However, the following guidelines should
be considered in the selection of appropriate type of foundation:
1- For ordinary one story buildings, we recommend shallow foundation (strip or mat
foundation).
2- For pipe-rack steel structures, we recommend shallow foundation (strip footing).
3- For equipment foundations, we recommend shallow foundation (strip or mat) or

pile foundation depending on the magnitude, distribution, and nature of the
applied loads.
4- For minor structures (lighting poles, minor equipment foundations, etc), we

recommend isolated footing.
5- For elevated tank, we recommend ring foundation, mat foundation, or piles on

mat foundation depending on the magnitude and distribution of applied loads.
6- When precast concrete pile is used, it should be provided with shoe to reduce the
effect of driving stresses.
40
Eni-Iraq
Due to presence of gypsiferrous materials in the encountered strata at the
site, which will increase the problems of leaching and create the collapse problem,
special precaution should be taken into consideration;
1- For structures supported by shallow foundations, the provisions given in section

(8-12) should be considered. If these provisions are difficult or uncertain to be
achieved in the site, the construction should be supported by pile foundation. The
length of piles should be more than 5.0 m to pass the layer of moderately gypsum
content.
2- Mat foundation is the most suitable among other types of shallow foundations in
such soils. However, if isolated or strip footing is used, it should be designed for
adequate rigidity to reduce the effects of differential settlement.
3- Shallow foundations are not recommended for structures exposed to liquid like
cooling towers, ground storage tanks, etc, even when the bearing capacity and
settlement requirements are satisfied, instead piles should be used.
4- For shallow foundations, a layer of compacted sub-base according to the

specification with thickness of 1.0 m for the structures founded by spread footing
and/or continuous foundations and 1.5 m for raft foundation under main structures
should be placed beneath the base of shallow foundations with following
requirements:
a. The value of CBR not less than 45% (ASTM D1883) at 95% of the max
dry density established according to (ASTM D1557)
b. Liquid limit 25 % maximum
c. Plasticity index 6 % maximum
d. Organic matter not more than 2 %
e. SO3 not more than 5 %
f. Total soluble salts not more than 5 %
g. Gypsum content not more than 10 %
h. Relative compaction not less than 95 % modified
5- It is recommended to fill the zone around the foundation with a well compacted
clean clayey soil of low permeability following (ASTM D-1557) to conform the
requirements achieving a relative compaction of 95% with carrying out the
following tests:
a. Particle size distribution

b. In-situ dry density and optimum moisture content
c. Atterberg limits
d. Minimum C.B.R. is 4%
41
References
1- Peck, R.B, Hanson, W.E, and Thornburn. T. H , Foundation Engineering , 2nd ed, John Wiley ,
New York , 1967.
2- Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.B, Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, 2nd ed, John Wiley , New
York , 1967.
3- Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) Catalog.
4- Alsinawi, S.A, and Alqasrani, Z.O, 2003, Earthquake Hazards Considerations for Iraq.
5- Bolton, C.M, 1958, The Geology of Rania Area. Sight Investigations Co. Rep.Geol.Surv.Min.
Investigation. Lib, Report No. 271 Baghdad.
6- Saad,Z,J., Jeremy, C.G, and Layout, L.N,2006, Geology of Iraq. Hlavni 2732, Prague and
Moravian Museum, Zelny trh 6.brno, Czech Republic.
7- National Iraq Oil Exploration Company, 1996, Seismic Exploration Interpretations of Nahar-
Umr-Zubiar Area.
8- Seed, J.B. and Idriss, I.M.(1971), Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction
Potential, Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol.97, No. SM9,
pp.1249-1273.
9- Ishihara, K. (1985), Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes, Proceedings of the

Eleventh International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, San
Francisco, pp. 321-376.
10- "Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG" Special Publication. A guidelines for
Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California
11- Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA), The CIRIA Guide to
Concrete Construction in the Gulf Region, Special Publication 31,London , 1984, pp. 1-95
12- Hughes, I.M.O, and withers, N.I, (1974), Reinforcing of Soft Cohesive Soils with Stone
Columns," Ground Engineering, Vol.7, No.3, pp: 42-49.
13- Hughes, J.M.O, Withers, N.J., and Greenwood, D.A, 1975, A Field Trial of the Reinforcing
Effect of a Stone Column in Soil”, Geotechnique, 25, (1):31-44.
14- Davis, E.H. and Booker, J.R. (1973), The Bearing Capacity of Strip Footings from Plasticity
Theory. " Proc. First Australia –New Zealand Conference on Geomechaincs, Vol .1,276-282.
15- Bowles, J.E, Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th –Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1996.
16- Craig, R.F., Soil Mechanics, 6th –Edition, Spon Press, 2002.
17- Matlock, H, and L.C Reese: Generalized Solutions for Laterally Loaded Piles, Journal of the
Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, Proceedings of the A Mercian Society of Civil
Engineers, Vol. 86, No .SM5, October, 1960.
18- Budhu, M., Foundations and Earth Retaining Structures ", John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2008.
19- Budhu, M., Soil Mechanics and Foundations, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2007.
20- Day, R.W, Foundation Engineering Handbook, ASCE Press, 2nd edition, 2010.
21- Tomlinson, M.J., Foundation Design and Construction, 5th edition , Longman Scientific
Technical, 1986
22- ASTM Standards, Section 4-Construction. Volume 4.08, Soil and Rock (I), 2009.
23- ASTM Standards, Section 4-Construction, Volume 4-09, Soil and Rock (II), 2009.
24- International Building Code, 2006, ASCE.
25- Minimum Design Loads for Building and Other Structures, ASCE 7-05.
Appendix A
Borehole Logs
BOREHOLES UTM COORDINATES
Zubair Oil Field Development Project / Phase 1
(Zubair Mishrif DGS)
UTM Coordinates
BH No.
X ± 10m Y ± 10m
1101 750368 3367776
1102 750544 3367560
1103 750482 3367521
1104 750354 3367651
1106 750312 3367408
1107 750182 3367658
1108 750093 3367809
1109 750161 3367818
1112 751334 3368015
1127 751052 3367362
1130 751022 3367372
1131 751044 3367319
1132 751112 3367209
1134 751063 3367149
1137 750822 3367545
1143 750804 3366985
1144 750558 3367390
1245 750198 3367034
1247 750153 3367272
1249 750036 3367429
1250 749891 3367346
1251 749740 3367412
1252 749655 3367519
1257 749893 3367664
1258 749970 3367584
1259 749831 3367782
1261 749578 3367834
1265 749560 3368053
1266 749602 3368137
1167 749938 3367998
1169 750005 3368027
1171 750000 3368105
BOREHOLES UTM COORDINATES
UTM Coordinates
BH No.
X ± 10m Y ± 10m
1172 749882 3368079
1273 749841 3368201
1274 749804 3368279
1279 750060 3368308
1280 750057 3368362
1182 750221 3367769
1183 750352 3367674
1184 750313 3367760
1185 750291 3367693
Key to Boring Logs
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS

Clay Silt Sand Gravel Cobbles Boulders
Fine Medium Coarse Fine Coarse
0.002mm #200 #40 #10 #4 ¾ inch 3 inch 12 inch
STANDARD PENETRATION CLASSIFCATION*

Granular Soil Clayey Soil
Blows / Ft Density Blows / Ft Consistency
0–4 Very Loose 0–1 Very Soft
5 – 10 Loose 2–4 Soft
11 – 30 Medium Dense 4–8 Medium Stiff
31 – 50 Dense 8– 15 Stiff
Over 50 Very Dense 15 – 30 Very Stiff
* Standard Penetration Test (N), 140 Ib hammer 30 31 – 60 Hard
inch free fall on 2 inch O.D. x 1.4 I.D. sampler Over 60 Very Hard
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)

Group Legend Typical Soil Description
GW Well graded gravels, gravel – sand mixtures, little or no fines
GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines
GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel – sand – clay mixtures
SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines
SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines
SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand – silt mixtures
SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand – clay mixtures
Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands with
ML
slight plasticity
Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty
CL
clays, lean clays
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silt
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays
OL Organic silts and organic silt – clays of low plasticity
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity
PT Peat and other highly organic soils
Borehole Log
Project Zubair Oil Field Development Project / Phase 1 Site Zubair Mishrif DGS
B.H. No. 1101 Date 20 – 3 – 2011 Method of Boring Rotary
Depth 25 m W.T. Depth 3.70m
Type
Scale Depth
& SPT Legend Description of Soil
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (47)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (49)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/22)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/20)
6.0
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (50/23)
9.0
10.0
11.0
SPT 6 11.5 (50/25)
12.0
Dense to very dense, brown, poorly graded fine
13.0
sand with silt and sometimes with fine gravel
14.0
SPT 7 14.5 (50/25)
15.0
16.0
17.0
SPT 8 17.5 (50/28)
18.0
19.0
20.0
SPT 9 20.5 (50/28)
21.0
22.0
23.0 D 10 23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 11 25.0 (50/27)
U : Undisturbed Sample, D : Disturbed Sample, ( ) : SPT – Value

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (20)
Medium, brown, silty sand
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (33)
3.0
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (49)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/28)
7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (50/28)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 6 12.0 (50/29)
13.0
Dense to very dense, brown to red, poorly
14.0
graded sand with silt
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (50/28)
16.0
17.0
18.0 SPT 8 18.0 (50/29)
19.0
20.0
21.0 SPT 9 21.0 (50/29)
22.0
23.0 SPT 10 23.0 (50)
24.0
25.0 SPT 11 25.0 (48)

Borehole Log
Depth 25 m W.T. Depth 3.85 m
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0
SPT 1 1.5 (16) Medium, brown, poorly graded sand with silt
2.0
3.0 SPT 2 3.0 (22)
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (31)
5.0
Medium to dense, brown to red, silty sand
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (36)
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (31)
9.0
10.0
SPT 6 10.5 (33)
11.0
12.0
13.0 SPT 7 13.0 (42)
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (49)
16.0 Dense, brown to red, poorly graded sand with

silt and sometimes with gravel
17.0 D9 17.0
18.0
19.0 SPT 10 19.0 (46)
20.0
21.0
22.0 SPT 11 22.0 (50)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (47)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (23)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (35)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (42)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/24)
6.0
7.0 D5 7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 6 9.0 (50/23)
10.0
11.0 SPT 7 11.0 (50/27)
12.0
Medium to very dense, brown to red, poorly
13.0
graded sand with silt
14.0 SPT 8 14.0 (44)
15.0
16.0
17.0 SPT 9 17.0 (49)
18.0
19.0
20.0 SPT 10 20.0 (46)
21.0
22.0
SPT 11 22.5 (43)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (45)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (42)
Dense, brown, silty sand
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (47)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/20)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/29)
6.0
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (50/24)
9.0
10.0 D6 10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 7 12.0 (42)
13.0
Dense to very dense, brown, poorly graded sand
14.0
with silt and sometimes with fine gravel
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (46)
16.0
17.0
18.0 SPT 9 18.0 (50/29)
19.0
20.0
21.0 SPT 10 21.0 (50)
22.0
23.0 D 11 23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (46)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (30)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (46)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/22)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/25)
6.0
7.0 D5 7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 6 9.0 (50/26)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 7 12.0 (50/28)

13.0
with silt
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50)
16.0
17.0 D9 17.0
18.0
19.0 SPT 10 19.0 (48)
20.0
21.0
22.0 SPT 11 22.0 (45)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (48)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT 1 0.5 (18)
1.0
2.0 SPT 2 2.0 (33)
3.0
SPT 3 3.5 (35)
4.0
5.0 SPT 4 5.0 (50/27)
6.0
SPT 5 6.5 (50/25)
7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 6 9.0 (50/24)
10.0
11.0 D7 11.0
12.0
Medium to very dense, brown, poorly graded
13.0 SPT 8 13.0 (50/29)
sand with silt
14.0
15.0
16.0 SPT 9 16.0 (49)
17.0
18.0
19.0 SPT 10 19.0 (46)
20.0
21.0
22.0 SPT 11 22.0 (47)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (44)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (17)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (36)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/29)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/28)
6.0
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (50/24)
9.0
10.0
SPT 6 10.5 (50/25)
11.0
12.0
13.0
SPT 7 13.5 (50/28)
14.0
15.0
D8 15.5
16.0
17.0
SPT 9 17.5 (50)
18.0
19.0
20.0 SPT 10 20.0 (45)
21.0
22.0
SPT 11 22.5 (43)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (44)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (28)
2.0 Medium to dense, brown, silty sand

SPT 2 2.5 (44)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/23)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/22)
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (50)
9.0
10.0 with silt
SPT 6 10.5 (50/26)
11.0
12.0
D7 12.5
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (47)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (50/25)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/23)
3.0
4.0 D3 4.0
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/26)
6.0
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (48)
9.0
10.0
11.0
SPT 6 11.5 (50/26)
12.0
13.0 with silt and sometimes with fine gravel
14.0
SPT 7 14.5 (50/28)
15.0
16.0
17.0
SPT 8 17.5 (50/29)
18.0
19.0
20.0
SPT 9 20.5 (49)
21.0
22.0
23.0
SPT 10 23.5 (35)
24.0
25.0

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
26.0
SPT 11 26.5 (45)
27.0
Dense, brown, silty sand
28.0
29.0
SPT 12 29.5 (42)
30.0
31.0
SPT 13 31.5 (31)
32.0
33.0
34.0 Dense, brown, poorly graded sand with silt

SPT 14 34.5 (35)
35.0 and sometimes with fine gravel
36.0
37.0
SPT 15 37.5 (39)
38.0
39.0
40.0 SPT 16 40.0 (34)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (50/24)
Very dense, brown, poorly graded sand with silt
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (34)
3.0 Dense, brown, silty sand
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/24)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/26)
6.0
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (40)
9.0
10.0
11.0
SPT 6 11.5 (50/28)
12.0
13.0
14.0
SPT 7 14.5 (50/29) Dense to very dense, brown, poorly graded sand
16.0
D8 16.5
17.0
18.0
SPT 9 18.5 (49)
19.0
20.0
21.0 SPT 10 21.0 (35)
22.0
23.0
24.0 SPT 11 24.0 (39)
25.0

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
26.0
27.0 SPT 12 27.0 (42)
28.0
29.0
30.0 SPT 13 30.0 (37)
31.0
32.0
Dense to very dense, brown, poorly graded
33.0 SPT 14 33.0 (35)
34.0
35.0
36.0 SPT 15 36.0 (38)
37.0
38.0 D 16 38.0
39.0
40.0 SPT 17 40.0 (36)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT 1 0.5 (50/27)
1.0
2.0 SPT 2 2.0 (50/28)
3.0
SPT 3 3.5 (50/28)
4.0
5.0 SPT 4 5.0 (50/23)

6.0
and sometimes with gravel
7.0 SPT 5 7.0 (50/21)
8.0
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 10.0 (50/24)
11.0
12.0
13.0 SPT 7 13.0 (50/27)

Very dense, brown, silty sand
14.0
15.0
SPT 8 15.5 (50/27)
16.0
17.0
18.0 D9 18.0
19.0
20.0 Dense to very dense, brown, poorly grade sand

21.0 SPT 10 21.0 (49)
22.0
23.0
24.0 SPT 11 24.0 (50)
25.0

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
26.0
27.0 SPT 12 27.0 (38)
28.0
29.0
30.0 SPT 13 30.0 (43)
31.0
32.0 D 14 32.0
33.0
34.0 SPT 15 34.0 (39)
35.0
36.0
37.0 SPT 16 37.0 (42)
38.0
39.0
40.0 SPT 17 40.0 (41)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (50/26)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/28)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/24)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/24)
6.0
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (50/25)
9.0
10.0
11.0
SPT 6 11.5 (50/26)
12.0
13.0
with silt
14.0
SPT 7 14.5 (50/26)
15.0
16.0
17.0
SPT 8 17.5 (43)
18.0
19.0
20.0 SPT 9 20.0 (48)
21.0
22.0
23.0 SPT 10 23.0 (45)
24.0
25.0

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
26.0 SPT 11 26.0 (36)
27.0
28.0
29.0 D 12 29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0 SPT 13 32.0 (32)

33.0
sand with silt
34.0
35.0 SPT 14 35.0 (35)
36.0
37.0
SPT 15 37.5 (43)
38.0
39.0
40.0 SPT 16 40.0 (41)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (50/23)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/20)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/29)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50)
6.0
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (50/25)
9.0
10.0 D6 10.0
11.0
12.0
SPT 7 12.5 (50/29)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/28)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT 1 0.5 (37)
1.0 Dense, brown, silty sand
2.0 SPT 2 2.0 (42)
3.0
SPT 3 3.5 (50/21)
4.0
5.0 SPT 4 5.0 (50/20)
6.0
SPT 5 6.5 (50/22)
7.0
8.0
SPT 6 9.5 (50/28)
10.0
11.0
12.0 D7 12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (16)
Medium, brown, silty sand
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/24)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/20)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/19)
7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (50/24)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 6 12.0 (40)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (50/29)

Very dense, brown, silty sand

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (50/23)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/24)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/28)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/22)
6.0
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (50/25)
9.0
10.0
SPT 6 10.5 (50/24)
11.0
12.0
13.0 D7 13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (47)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (21)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (26)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/24)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/21)
6.0
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (50/24)
9.0
10.0 D6 10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 7 12.0 (50/28)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/26)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0
SPT 1 1.5 (18)
2.0
3.0 SPT 2 3.0 (26)
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (50/24)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/23)
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (50/21)
9.0
10.0
SPT 6 10.5 (50/26)
11.0
12.0
13.0 D7 13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/29)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (21)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (26)
3.0
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (50/20)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/28)
7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (50/27)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 6 12.0 (38)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (50/28)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT 1 0.5 (17)
1.0
2.0 SPT 2 2.0 (41)
3.0
SPT 3 3.5 (50/23)
4.0
5.0 SPT 4 5.0 (50/20)
6.0
SPT 5 6.5 (50/22)
7.0
8.0
sand with silt
9.0
SPT 6 9.5 (50/21)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 7 12.0 (50/28)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/28)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (19)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (44)
3.0
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (50/20)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/18)
7.0
8.0 D5 8.0
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 10.0 (50/24)
11.0
12.0
SPT 7 12.5 (48)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (45)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0
SPT 1 1.5 (18)
2.0
3.0 SPT 2 3.0 (30)
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (20)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (22)
7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (33)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 6 12.0 (22)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (50/28)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (21)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/23)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/20)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/26)
6.0
7.0 D5 7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 6 9.0 (50/26)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 7 12.0 (50/25)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/27)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (15)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (17)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (29)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/23)
7.0
8.0
sand with silt
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (50/22)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 6 12.0 (31)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (50/29)

Borehole Log
B.H. No. 1259 Date 11– 3 – 2011 Method of Boring Rotary
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT 1 0.5 (23)
1.0
2.0 SPT 2 2.0 (48)
3.0
SPT 3 3.5 (50/19)
4.0
5.0 SPT 4 5.0 (50/20)
6.0
SPT 5 6.5 (50/26)
7.0
8.0
9.0
SPT 6 9.5 (45)
10.0
11.0
12.0
SPT 7 12.5 (50/26)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/27)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (29)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (37)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/23)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/27)
6.0
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (50/23)
9.0
10.0
SPT 6 10.5 (50/24)
11.0
12.0
13.0 D7 13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/29)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (50/20)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/19)
3.0
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (50/21)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/23)
7.0
8.0 D5 8.0 Very dense, brown, poorly graded sand with silt
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 10.0 (50/23)
11.0
12.0 SPT 7 12.0 (50/26)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/29)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (29)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/20)
3.0
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (50/22)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/18)
7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (50/26)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 6 12.0 (50/23)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (50/27)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (32)
Dense, brown, poorly graded sand with silt
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/21)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/19)

Very dense, brown, silty sand and sometimes
5.0 with fine gravel
SPT 4 5.5 (50/18)
6.0
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (50/24)
9.0
10.0 D6 10.0
11.0 Very dense, brown, poorly graded sand with silt

12.0 SPT 7 12.0 (50/25) and sometimes with fine gravel
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/26)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT1 0.5 (50/25)
1.0
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/23)
3.0
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (50/20)
5.0
6.0
SPT 4 6.5 (50/20)
7.0
8.0
and sometimes with fine gravel
9.0
SPT 5 9.5 (50/27)
10.0
11.0
12.0
SPT 6 12.5 (50/29)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (50/28)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (32)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/26)
3.0
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (50/25)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (48)
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (49)
with silt
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 10.0 (41)
11.0
12.0
D7 12.5
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (37)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (28)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/22)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/20)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/23)
6.0
7.0
SPT 5 7.5 (50/21) Medium to very dense, brown, poorly graded
8.0
sand with silt
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 10.0 (48)
11.0
12.0
SPT 7 12.5 (50/28)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (50/28)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0
SPT 1 1.5 (23)
2.0
3.0 SPT 2 3.0 (40)
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (39)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/19)
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (26)
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 10.0 (33)
11.0
12.0 D7 12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (34)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT 1 0.5 (21)
1.0
2.0 SPT 2 2.0 (50/27)
3.0
SPT 3 3.5 (50/29)
4.0
5.0 SPT 4 5.0 (50/20)
6.0
SPT 5 6.5 (50/21)
7.0
8.0
sand with silt
9.0
SPT 6 9.5 (50/24)
10.0
11.0
12.0
SPT 7 12.5 (48)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 8 15.0 (46)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
SPT 1 0.5 (18)
1.0
2.0 SPT 2 2.0 (36)
3.0
SPT 3 3.5 (50/20)
4.0
5.0 SPT 4 5.0 (46)
6.0
7.0 SPT 5 7.0 (50/21)

8.0
9.0
SPT 6 9.5 (42)
10.0
11.0
SPT 7 11.5 (50)
12.0
13.0 D8 13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 9 15.0 (36)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (21)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (50/18)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/29)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/22)
7.0
8.0
sand with silt
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (49)
10.0
11.0
12.0 SPT 6 12.0 (50/25)
13.0
14.0
15.0 SPT 7 15.0 (39)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (22)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (36)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (49)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/29)
6.0
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (49)
9.0
10.0
SPT 6 10.5 (50/24)
11.0
12.0
13.0 SPT 7 13.0 (50/27)
sand with silt
14.0
15.0 D8 15.0
16.0
17.0 SPT 9 17.0 (50)
18.0
19.0
20.0 SPT 10 20.0 (50/29)
21.0
22.0
SPT 11 22.5 (470
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (49)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (23)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (18)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/29)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (43)
6.0
7.0
8.0 SPT 5 8.0 (31)
9.0
10.0 SPT 6 10.0 (41)
11.0
12.0
13.0 SPT 7 13.0 (46)
sand with silt and sometimes with fine grfavel
14.0
15.0
16.0 SPT 8 16.0 (42)
17.0
18.0 D9 18.0
19.0
20.0 SPT 10 20.0 (44)
21.0
22.0
SPT 11 22.5 (45)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 12 25.0 (44)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0
SPT 1 1.5 (21)
2.0
3.0 SPT 2 3.0 (36)
4.0
SPT 3 4.5 (48)
5.0
6.0 SPT 4 6.0 (50/29)
7.0
8.0
9.0 SPT 5 9.0 (50/28)
10.0
11.0 SPT 6 11.0 (50/24)
12.0
13.0
sand with silt
14.0 SPT 7 14.0 (50)
15.0
16.0
17.0 SPT 8 17.0 (46)
18.0
19.0
D9 19.5
20.0
21.0
22.0 SPT 10 22.0 (44)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 11 25.0 (47)

Borehole Log
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
1.0 SPT 1 1.0 (17)
2.0
SPT 2 2.5 (32)
3.0
4.0 SPT 3 4.0 (50/25)
5.0
SPT 4 5.5 (50/21)
6.0
7.0
8.0
SPT 5 8.5 (50/23)
9.0
10.0
11.0
SPT 6 11.5 (50/22)
12.0
13.0
sand with silt
14.0
SPT 7 14.5 (50/25)
15.0
16.0
D8 16.5
17.0
18.0
19.0 SPT 9 19.0 (50/27)
20.0
21.0
22.0 SPT 10 22.0 (48)
23.0
24.0
25.0 SPT 11 25.0 (45)

Appendix B
Trial Pits Logs

TRIAL PITS UTM COORDINATES
UTM Coordinates
TP No.
X ± 10m Y ± 10m
1105 750351 3367523
1110 751264 3368163
1114 751433 3367885
1116 751160 3368065
1118 751298 3367838
1135 750998 3367321
1136 750925 3367442
1138 750865 3367413
1139 750934 3367305
1141 750737 3367371
1142 750815 3367238
1246 750143 3367089
1248 750108 3367370
1253 749750 3367506
1256 749874 3367588
1262 749713 3367855
1264 749634 3368012
1168 749964 3368026
1170 749934 3368088
1275 749870 3368255
1278 750000 3368315
1186 750282 3367740
1187 750194 3367691
Test Pit Logs
Project Zubair Oil Field Development Project/Phase 1 Site Zubair Mishrif DGS
T.P. No. 1105 Date March, 2011
Depth 3.0m W.T. Depth > 3.0m
Type
Scale Depth
& Legend Description of Soil
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
Brown, poorly graded sand with silt
2.0 B 2.0
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
Brown, poorly graded sand with silt and
2.0 B 2.0 sometimes with fine gravel
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
U : Undisturbed Sample, B: Bulk Sample,

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0 Brown, poorly graded sand with silt
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
Brown, poorly graded sand with silt and fine
2.0 B 2.0 gravel
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0 gravel
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0 gravel
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0 gravel
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0 gravel
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Test Pit Logs
Type
Scale Depth
(m) (m)
Number
0.5
1.0 B 1.0
1.5
2.0 B 2.0
2.5
3.0 B 3.0

Appendix C
SPT and DCPT Results

Site: Zubair Mishrif DGS
BH or Test Pit No.: 1101
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750368 3367776
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
SPT (N - Values) DCPT (PI)
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750544 3367560
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750482 3367521
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750354 3367651
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750312 3367408
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750182 3367658
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750093 3367809
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750161 3367818
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
751334 3368015
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
751052 3367362
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
751022 3367372
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
751044 3367319
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
751112 3367209
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
751063 3367149
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750822 3367545
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750804 3366985
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750558 3367390
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750198 3367034
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750153 3367272
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750036 3367429
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749891 3367346
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749740 3367412
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749655 3367519
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749893 3367664
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749970 3367584
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749831 3367782
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749578 3367834
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749560 3368053
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749602 3368137
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749938 3367998
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750005 3368027
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750000 3368105
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749882 3368079
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749841 3368201
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
749804 3368279
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750060 3368308
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750057 3368362
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750221 3367769
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750352 3367674
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750313 3367760
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
X ± 10m Y± 10m
UTM Coordinates:
750291 3367693
0 10 20 30 40 ≥ 50 60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
0 0
5 5
10 10
15 15
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
20 20
25 25
30 30
35 35
40 40
Appendix D
Lab Tests Results

Site: Zubair Mishrif DGS Borehole No.: 1101 Depth: 25m Date: 20 – 3 – 2011
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
Specimen Depth (m) Weight Particle Size Analysis Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
Properties Procter Test
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 8.5 1.83 1.69 10 87 3 SP Poorly graded sand with silt
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 8 88 4 SP Poorly graded sand with silt 1.87 13
6 SPT 11.5 12.0 10.4 1.81 1.64
8 SPT 17.5 18.0 4 87 19 SP Poorly graded sand with gravel 1.94 12
9 SPT 20.5 21.0 8.7 1.82 1.67 3 72 25 SP Poorly graded sand with gravel
10 D 23.0 23.5 10.3 1.93 1.75 4 74 22 SP Poorly graded sand with gravel
11 SPT 25.0 25.5 6 77 17 SP Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel 1.89 11
Shear Strength Parameters
Permeability K (cm/s)
Specimen
Depth Consolidation Test Chemical Test Results Chemical Test Results
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
(m) VST Results (Soil) (Water)
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 4 39
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 7730
5 SPT 8.5 9.0 0 43
6 SPT 11.5 12.0 1.26 8.0 3.86 0.35 0.35 7.2
7 SPT 14.5 15.0
8 SPT 17.5 18.0 2 41
9 SPT 20.5 21.0
10 D 23.0 23.5
11 SPT 25.0 25.5 3 41
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 14 82 4 SM Silty sand 1.93 12

8 SPT 18.0 18.5 7 86 7 SP Poorly graded sand with silt
9 SPT 21.0 21.5 9.7 1.87 1.71 5 89 4 SP Poorly graded sand with silt 1.92 13
10 SPT 23.0 23.5
11 SPT 25.0 25.5 12.9 1.94 1.72 3 88 9 SP Poorly graded sand 1.91 13
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.5 5.0 4 38
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 9.0 9.5
6 SPT 12.0 12.5 3 39
7 SPT 15.0 15.5
8 SPT 18.0 18.5
9 SPT 21.0 21.5
10 SPT 23.0 23.5 0 38
11 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 3.0 3.5 12.2 1.74 1.55 13 84 3 SM Silty sand
3 SPT 4.5 5.0 15 79 6 SM Silty sand 1.87 10
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 13.0 1.81 1.69
5 SPT 8.5 9.0 10.7 1.76 1.59 7 70 23 SP Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel 1.91 9
6 SPT 10.5 11.0 9.4 1.77 1.62 6 69 25 SP Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
9 D 17.0 17.5 8 85 7 SP Poorly graded sand with silt 1.92 11
10 SPT 19.0 19.5
12 SPT 25.0 25.5
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.5 2.0
2 SPT 3.0 3.5 6 32
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 8.5 9.0
6 SPT 10.5 11.0 3 36
7 SPT 13.0 13.5
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
9 D 17.0 17.5
10 SPT 19.0 19.5 4 38
11 SPT 22.0 22.5
12 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

8 SPT 14.0 14.5 11.9 1.85 1.65
11 SPT 22.5 23.0 1.88 13
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 4 36
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 D 7.0 7.5 5 40
6 SPT 9.0 9.5
7 SPT 11.0 11.5
8 SPT 14.0 14.5
9 SPT 17.0 17.5 4 40
10 SPT 20.0 20.5
11 SPT 22.5 23.0
12 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 7.1 1.72 1.61 14 81 5 SM Silty sand 1.94 12

5 SPT 8.0 8.5 6 74 20 SP Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel
6 D 10.0 10.5 4 80 16 SP Poorly graded sand with gravel 1.95 12
10 SPT 20.0 20.5 4 84 12 SP Poorly graded sand
11 D 23.0 23.5 13.4 1.88 1.66 7 93 0 SP Poorly graded sand with silt 1.89 11
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 3 39
5 SPT 8.0 8.5
6 D 10.0 10.5 2 41
7 SPT 12.0 12.5
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
9 SPT 18.0 18.5
10 SPT 20.0 20.5
11 D 23.0 23.5 2 40
12 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

3 SPT 4.0 4.5 10.1 1.84 1.67 4 92 4 SP Poorly graded sand
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 1.93 13
5 D 7.0 7.5 12.8 1.86 1.65 8 92 0 SP Poorly graded sand with silt
10 SPT 19.0 19.5
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 3 38
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 D 7.0 7.5 4 42
6 SPT 9.0 9.5
7 SPT 12.0 12.5
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
9 D 17.0 17.5 4 39
10 SPT 19.0 19.5
11 SPT 22.0 22.5
12 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 2.0 2.5 11.5 1.78 1.60
4 SPT 5.0 5.5 10.7 1.85 1.67
8 SPT 13.0 13.5 1.91 14
10 SPT 19.0 19.5 1.93 11
11 SPT 22.0 22.5 14.0 1.87 1.64
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0
2 SPT 2.0 2.5
3 SPT 3.5 4.0 4 36
4 SPT 5.0 5.5
5 SPT 6.5 7.0
6 SPT 9.0 9.5
7 D 11.0 11.5 2 41 1840
8 SPT 13.0 13.5
9 SPT 16.0 16.5
10 SPT 19.0 19.5
11 SPT 22.0 22.5
12 SPT 25.0 25.5 3 38
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
9 SPT 17.5 18.0 1.93 12
11 SPT 22.0 22.5 1.91 13
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 6 32
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 10.74
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 3 40
5 SPT 8.0 8.5
6 SPT 10.5 11.0
7 SPT 13.5 14.0
8 D 15.5 16.0 4 39
9 SPT 17.5 18.0
10 SPT 20.0 20.5
11 SPT 22.0 22.5 4 38
12 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 18 76 6 SM Silty sand 1.88 15

2 SPT 2.5 3.0 10.9 1.80 1.62 16 81 3 SM Silty sand
6 SPT 10.5 11.0 19.5 12
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 7 37
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 4 42
5 SPT 8.5 9.0
6 SPT 10.5 11.0
7 D 12.5 13.0 3 41
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
3 D 4.0 4.5 10 74 16 SP Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel 1.92 14
11 SPT 26.5 27.0 12.4 1.90 1.69 14 77 9 SM Silty sand
15 SPT 37.5 38.0 15.9 1.94 1.67 25 72 3 SM Silty sand
16 SPT 40.0 40.5 12.4 1.91 1.70 1.95 14
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 D 4.0 4.5 4 42
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 SPT 8.5 9.0
6 SPT 11.5 12.0 3 40
7 SPT 14.5 15.0
8 SPT 17.5 18.0
9 SPT 20.5 21.0 4 38
10 SPT 23.5 24.0
11 SPT 26.5 27.0
12 SPT 29.5 30.0
13 SPT 31.5 32.0 2 35
14 SPT 34.5 35.0
15 SPT 37.5 38.0
16 SPT 40.0 40.5 5 35
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 2.5 3.0 9.4 1.72 1.57 17 74 9 SM Silty sand 1.86 14
9 SPT 18.5 19.0 1.93 13
11 SPT 24.0 24.5 1.91 10
13 SPT 30.0 30.5 1.89 10
15 SPT 36.0 36.5 1.92 9
17 SPT 40.0 40.5
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 8 36
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 SPT 8.5 9.0 5 36
6 SPT 11.5 12.0
7 SPT 14.5 15.0
8 D 16.5 17.0 3 41
9 SPT 18.5 19.0
10 SPT 21.0 21.5
11 SPT 24.0 24.5
12 SPT 27.0 27.5 3 37
13 SPT 30.0 30.5
14 SPT 33.0 33.5
15 SPT 36.0 36.5
16 D 38.0 38.5 5 36
17 SPT 40.0 40.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
7 SPT 13.0 13.5 15.7 1.96 1.69 15 82 3 SM Silty sand
10 SPT 21.0 21.5 1.90 15
12 SPT 27.0 27.5 12.5 1.90 1.69 1.92 12
14 D 32.0 32.5 12.9 1.90 1.68 1.93 11
16 SPT 37.0 37.5 10.7 1.89 1.71
17 SPT 40.0 40.5 4 93 3 SP Poorly graded sand 1.92 13
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0
2 SPT 2.0 2.5 4 42
3 SPT 3.5 4.0
4 SPT 5.0 5.5
5 SPT 7.0 7.5 3 42
6 SPT 10.0 10.5
7 SPT 13.0 13.5
8 SPT 15.5 16.0
9 D 18.0 18.5 3 40
10 SPT 21.0 21.5
11 SPT 24.0 24.5
12 SPT 27.0 27.5
13 SPT 30.0 30.5
14 D 32.0 32.5 2 37
15 SPT 34.0 34.5
16 SPT 37.0 37.5
17 SPT 40.0 40.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 9.5 1.81 1.65 1.90 12

8 SPT 17.5 18.0
10 SPT 23.0 23.5 13.6 1.90 1.67
13 SPT 32.0 32.5
15 SPT 37.5 38.0 1.91 10
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 5 41
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 2 41
5 SPT 8.5 9.0
6 SPT 11.5 12.0
7 SPT 14.5 15.0
8 SPT 17.5 18.0 3 38
9 SPT 20.0 20.5
10 SPT 23.0 23.5
11 SPT 26.0 26.5
12 D 29.0 29.5 5 36
13 SPT 32.0 32.5
14 SPT 35.0 35.5
15 SPT 37.5 38.0
16 SPT 40.0 40.5 3 37
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

6 D 10.0 10.5 13.0 1.97 1.74 7 56 37 SP Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel
7 SPT 12.5 13.0 11.5 1.92 1.72
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 3 43
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 SPT 8.0 8.5
6 D 10.0 10.5 4 42
7 SPT 12.5 13.0
8 SPT 15.0 15.5 3 42
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 0.5 1.0 13 77 10 SM Silty sand

5 SPT 6.5 7.0 12.4 1.93 1.72 1.91 11
7 D 12.0 12.5 14.3 1.90 1.66 4 84 12 SP Poorly graded sand
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0 6.08
2 SPT 2.0 2.5
3 SPT 3.5 4.0 3 40
4 SPT 5.0 5.5
5 SPT 6.5 7.0 0 43
6 SPT 9.5 10.0
7 D 12.0 12.5 2 41
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 6.0 1.65 1.56 22 78 0 SM Silty sand

6 SPT 12.0 12.5 1.88 13
7 SPT 15.0 15.5 15.5 1.93 1.67 19 81 0 SM Silty sand
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5 3 41
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 9.0 9.5 5 42
6 SPT 12.0 12.5
7 SPT 15.0 15.5 8 40
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 2 43
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 SPT 8.5 9.0 0 41
6 SPT 10.5 11.0
7 D 13.0 13.5 4 40
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 2.5 3.0 8.3 1.78 1.64 3 69 28 SP Poorly graded sand with gravel 1.92 10
5 SPT 8.0 8.5
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 12.38
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 2 32
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 0 43
5 SPT 8.0 8.5
6 D 10.0 10.5 3 41
7 SPT 12.0 12.5
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.5 2.0 8.7 1.79 1.65

5 SPT 8.5 9.0 1.94 12
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.5 2.0 4 32
2 SPT 3.0 3.5
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 3 40
5 SPT 8.5 9.0
6 SPT 10.5 11.0
7 D 13.0 13.5 3 42
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
6 SPT 12.0 12.5 11.9 1.87 1.67 4 77 19 SP Poorly graded sand and gravel 1.95 9
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 5 33
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 9.0 9.5 0 40
6 SPT 12.0 12.5
7 SPT 15.0 15.5 2 40
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

4 SPT 5.0 5.5 14.2 2.00 1.75 1.92 12
8 SPT 15.0 15.5 13.7 1.97 1.73 1.93 12
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0
2 SPT 2.0 2.5 4 37
3 SPT 3.5 4.0
4 SPT 5.0 5.5
5 SPT 6.5 7.0 1 43
6 SPT 9.5 10.0
7 SPT 12.0 12.5 3 41
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

5 D 8.0 8.5 12.6 1.95 1.73 1.97 10
7 SPT 12.5 13.0 13.8 1.95 1.71 1.92 11
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 4 33
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 D 8.0 8.5 2 42
6 SPT 10.0 10.5
7 SPT 12.5 13.0
8 SPT 15.0 15.5 2 39
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 3.0 3.5 12.1 1.86 1.66 1.89 11
5 SPT 9.0 9.5 13.7 1.92 1.69
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.5 2.0
2 SPT 3.0 3.5 4 33
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 2 32
5 SPT 9.0 9.5
6 SPT 12.0 12.5 5 32
7 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 9.0 1.77 1.62

Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 1769 4300 1704 7.0
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 3 42
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 D 7.0 7.5 4 43
6 SPT 9.0 9.5
7 SPT 12.0 12.5
8 SPT 15.0 15.5 3 41
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 3 30
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 1 40
5 SPT 9.0 9.5
6 SPT 12.0 12.5 2 35
7 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0 5 31
2 SPT 2.0 2.5
3 SPT 3.5 4.0 4 43
4 SPT 5.0 5.5
5 SPT 6.5 7.0
6 SPT 9.5 10.0 4 38
7 SPT 12.5 13.0
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 7.1 1.68 1.57 3 92 5 Poorly graded sand 1.87 9
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 9.2 1.75 1.60 4 96 0 Poorly graded sand
3 SPT 4.0 4.5 12.8 1.91 1.69 6 84 10 Poorly graded sand with silt
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 16.4 1.97 1.69 1.91 13
5 SPT 8.0 8.5 11.9 1.92 1.72 7 71 22 Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel
6 SPT 10.5 11.0 13.7 1.97 1.73 5 70 25 Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel 1.94 12
7 D 13.0 13.5 14.8 1.95 1.70 6 86 8 Poorly graded sand with silt
8 SPT 15.0 15.5 4 96 0 Poorly graded sand
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 3 35
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 SPT 8.0 8.5 0 43
6 SPT 10.5 11.0
7 D 13.0 13.5 2 41
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
5 D 8.0 8.5 12.5 1.95 1.73 1.97 12
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 4 41
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 2.52 10.0 4.71 0.46 0.14 7.0
5 D 8.0 8.5 2 40
6 SPT 10.0 10.5
7 SPT 12.0 12.5
8 SPT 15.0 15.5 2 41
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 14.9 1.96 1.71 6 83 11 Poorly graded sand with silt 1.93 12
5 SPT 9.0 9.5 12.6 1.95 1.73 3 72 25 Poorly graded sand with gravel
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 2 42
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 3 41
5 SPT 9.0 9.5
6 SPT 12.0 12.5 2 43
7 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 2.5 3.0 12.4 1.94 1.73 13 73 14 SM Silty sand 1.92 14
3 SPT 4.0 4.5 16.8 2.01 1.72 19 77 4 SM Silty sand
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 11.7 1.97 1.76 15 69 16 SM Silty sand with gravel 1.93 14
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 3 34
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 6 43
5 SPT 8.0 8.5
6 D 10.0 10.5 4 42
7 SPT 12.0 12.5
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 2.5 3.0 11.9 1.96 1.75 1.95 10
4 SPT 6.5 7.0 4 55 41 SP Poorly graded sand with gravel 1.94 11
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 3 40
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.5 7.0 3 43
5 SPT 9.5 10.0
6 SPT 12.5 13.0 4 40
7 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
5 SPT 8.0 8.5 1.92 12
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.5 5.0 3 41
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 8.0 8.5 4 39
6 SPT 10.0 10.5
7 D 12.5 13.0 3 36
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

7 SPT 12.5 13.0 15.4 1.93 1.67
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 0 33
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 3 42
5 SPT 7.5 8.0
6 SPT 10.0 10.5 1 33 1.00 9.6 3.83 1.57 0.17 7.1
7 SPT 12.5 13.0
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
2 SPT 3.0 3.5 11.3 1.84 1.65 6 90 4 Poorly graded sand with silt 1.90 11
5 SPT 8.0 8.5 1.88 12
7 D 12.0 12.5 15.1 1.91 1.66 5 88 7 Poorly graded sand with silt 1.91 12
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.5 2.0 3541 13844 2272 7.0
2 SPT 3.0 3.5 4 37 11.7
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 8.0 8.5 5 34
6 SPT 10.0 10.5
7 D 12.0 12.5 0 35
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 0.5 1.0 6 94 0 SPT Poorly graded sand with silt

2 SPT 2.0 2.5 8.1 1.86 1.72 7 90 3 SPT Poorly graded sand with silt 1.89 13
3 SPT 3.5 4.0 13.9 1.90 1.67 6 91 3 SPT Poorly graded sand with silt
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0
2 SPT 2.0 2.5 3 41
3 SPT 3.5 4.0
4 SPT 5.0 5.5 4 44
5 SPT 6.5 7.0
6 SPT 9.5 10.0 4 42
7 SPT 12.5 13.0
8 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 0.5 1.0

7 SPT 11.5 12.0
8 D 13.0 13.5 13.5 1.93 1.70 4 87 9 SP Poorly graded sand 1.93 10
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 0.5 1.0
2 SPT 2.0 2.5 5 35
3 SPT 3.5 4.0
4 SPT 5.0 5.5
5 SPT 7.0 7.5 4 42
6 SPT 9.5 10.0
7 SPT 11.5 12.0
8 D 13.0 13.5 0 37
9 SPT 15.0 15.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
3 SPT 4.0 4.5 15.5 1.95 1.69 4 92 4 SPT Poorly graded sand
5 SPT 9.0 9.5 17.4 2.00 1.70 4 96 0 SPT Poorly graded sand
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 4 33
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 9.0 9.5 2 40
6 SPT 12.0 12.5
7 SPT 15.0 15.5 6 37
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

3 SPT 4.0 4.5 1.90 13
5 SPT 8.5 9.0 1.95 11
7 SPT 13.0 13.5 1.95 12
8 D 15.0 15.5 10 87 3 SP Poorly graded sand with silt
9 SPT 17.0 17.5
11 SPT 22.5 23.0
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 2980 12130 2110 7.0
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 5 37
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 SPT 8.5 9.0 3 40
6 SPT 10.5 11.0
7 SPT 13.0 13.5
8 D 15.0 15.5 4 41
9 SPT 17.0 17.5
10 SPT 20.0 20.5
11 SPT 22.5 23.0
12 SPT 25.0 25.5 1 38
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 6.3 1.72 1.62

8 SPT 16.0 16.5
10 SPT 20.0 20.5
12 SPT 25.0 25.5 1.85 13
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5 3 33
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 6 39
5 SPT 8.0 8.5
6 SPT 10.0 10.5 4 36
7 SPT 13.0 13.5
8 SPT 16.0 16.5
9 D 18.0 18.5 3 37
10 SPT 20.0 20.5
11 SPT 22.5 23.0
12 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil

2 SPT 3.0 3.5 10.1 1.79 1.63
4 SPT 6.0 6.5 15.0 1.93 1.68 1.89 12
6 SPT 11.0 11.5 12.4 1.90 1.69
8 SPT 17.0 17.5 10.8 1.91 1.72
10 SPT 22.0 22.5
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.5 2.0
2 SPT 3.0 3.5 5 35
3 SPT 4.5 5.0
4 SPT 6.0 6.5
5 SPT 9.0 9.5 3 42
6 SPT 11.0 11.5
7 SPT 14.0 14.5 4 40
8 SPT 17.0 17.5
9 D 19.5 20.0 3 40
10 SPT 22.0 22.5
11 SPT 25.0 25.5
Unit
Index Modified
Moisture Content
(g /cm3)
Content %
Gravel %
Optimum
Max. Dry
Moisture
Sand %
Clay %
Symbol
Density
(g/cm3)
Silt %
LL %
PL %
From
PI %
Type
Bulk
Dry
No.
To
Description of Soil
2 SPT 2.5 3.0 9.3 1.80 1.65 1.87 12
4 SPT 5.5 6.0 16.3 1.95 1.68 1.92 14
6 SPT 11.5 12.0 11.5 1.94 1.74 1.95 12
9 SPT 19.0 19.5
11 SPT 25.0 25.5 14.7 1.92 1.67
Specimen
Triaxial
Unconf-
Shear
(UU)
ined
Test
Box
x 10-6
× 10-3
CC × 10-3
Org. %
Cr × 10-3
Gyp %
CaCO3
SO4 %
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
(KPa)
From
Cl %
Type
TDS
SO4
ø°
No.
pH
pH
Cu
To
PC
Cl
C
e 0
1 SPT 1.0 1.5
2 SPT 2.5 3.0
3 SPT 4.0 4.5 5 41
4 SPT 5.5 6.0
5 SPT 8.5 9.0
6 SPT 11.5 12.0 2 43
7 SPT 14.5 15.0
8 D 16.5 17.0 4 42
9 SPT 19.0 19.5
10 SPT 22.0 22.5 1 38
11 SPT 25.0 25.5
Appendix E
Cross-hole Test Results

Introduction
The crosshole seismic method determines shear and compressional wave velocities
versus depth profile. From these measurements, parameters, such as Poisson's ratio and
elastic moduli, can be easily determined. The downhole system is comprised of a
borehole source capable of generating shear and compressional waves and a three
component triaxial geophone receivers. These instruments are lowered to the same depth
in two boreholes at about 5.0 meters apart in a line (Fig. 1).
Crosshole Seismic Test Equipment

The Geotomographie (Germany) borehole seismic equipment's were used in this test.
The seismic measuring instrument (seismograph) was the Terraloc MK6 (ABEM,
Sweden). The details of these instruments are listed here below:
1- Seismograph instruments: Terraloc MK6 (Fig.2), 24 channels seismograph.

2-Borehole Sparker Equipment comprises (Fig. 3):
A- Basic Sparker Equipment comprises

• Impulse generator SWG 1005 (1000 J)
• Remote control RCU
• Common source adapter CSA with downhole cable (operational depth 100 m)
• P-wave probe SBS-42
• Carrier rope on drum
• Spares [ HV-cable(1), control cables (2), grounding cable (1), grounding hook(1),
power cable (1) , IPG tool box (1) ]
B- Downhole source SH-66 for SH-wave generation.
• SH-66 probe (outer diameter ~65 mm)
• Magnetic compass with cable on drum and surface display unit (better 5° resolution)
• Air hose on rum with valve and gauge (110 m)
• Rotary pipe string (10 m pcs)
• Pulley with winch and clamping device
• Spares [ clamping adaptor (1), window tube (1), air bladder (1), Air compressor (1),
SH66 tool box (1) ]
3-Borehole Receiver Equipment comprises (Fig. 4):
Borehole Geophone BGK 3 for 100 m with clamping device.
Specifications:-
• outer tool diameter approx. 50 mm
• tool length ~ 550 mm
• 3 standard geophons (28 Hz)
• (2 horizontal geophones with 90° angular positioning and 1 vertical geophone)
• 100 m pressure hose and downhole cable on drum for pneumatic clamping
• applicable borehole size max. 90 mm
• magnetic compass with surface display unit (5° azimutal resolution)
• female connector to seismograph
• toolbox and manual, air pump
• cable marker every two meter
• cable on drum
Field Work and Measurements

Two boreholes of 22.0 to 23.0 meters depths were drilled with a diameter of 4 to 5
inches. The drilling was in early hours of the morning which directly followed by PVC
casing of 3.0 inches (Fig. 5). This is to minimize the borehole wall collapsing. For this
reason the borehole drilling was 22.0 – 23.0 meters depths, just to ensure the right depth
for the crosshole test of 20.0 meters. The PVC casing was filled by water which is needed
by the sparker to keep the hydrostatic pressure during the sparking pulses.
Both the sparker and geophone probes were lowered inside the PVC at depth of one
meter. They were oriented toward each other by using the magnetic compass (Fig 6).
Both probes were anchored to the PVC wall by air pressed into clamping unit (the rubber
expands in direction to counter side the reference direction). The measurement was done
by at least three sparks pulses and sometimes reaches ten pulses (stacking) for the signal
enhancement. The spark probe is designed to generate horizontal shear and
compressional seismic waves. The traveling times for both seismic waves were detected
and measured by the seismograph as a single seismic record (Fig.7).
The work continued with other depths. The probes lowering were in stepwise at every
one meter down to 20.0 meters depth. At each depth there is a seismic record which is
usually saved in the seismograph hard disc memory. The measured readings are shown in
table (1).
Data Processing and Results
The picking of the first arrival times for both P-wave and S-wave was done for the 20
seismic records. The picking and filtering were done using the Terraloc instrument
software in addition to ReFlexw ver. 5 software. The velocities of P-Wave and S-wave
were calculated depending on the first arrival and the known distance between the two
boreholes PVC walls, which was measured after the PVC installation. Table (1) shows
the calculated compressional and shear velocities.
Elasto – Dyanmic Properties

The elasto – dynamic moduli of subsurface soil layers were calculated using the recorded
P-wave and S-wave velocities at each depth with their related densities. Table (2) shows
the P-wave and S-Wave velocities and the calculated moduli parameters. The related
familiar equations were used (listed below) for elastic moduli calculations.
V p
2
− 2V s
2
υ =
(
2V p
2
−V s
2
) Poisson's Ratio
Gd = P . Vs2 Shear Modulus
Ed = 2 . Gd (1 + V) Young's Modulus
Bd = Ed / (3 * (1 – 2 . V)) Bulk Modulus
Where:
Vp is the propagation velocity of the compressional waves
Vs is the propagation velocity of the shear waves
P is the bulk density of the material
Table 1 Compressional and shear waves velocities
Propagation Propagation Distance
Record Depth traveling time P- traveling time between two Vs
wave S-wave boreholes Vp (m/sec)
No. (meters) (m/sec)
(m)
(m sec) (m sec)
1 1 3.0 11.5 4.8 1600.0 417.4
2 2 4.0 13.5 4.8 1200.0 355.5
3 3 3.4 10.0 4.8 1411.7 480.0
4 4 3.6 9.5 4.8 1333.3 505.3
5 5 3.0 7.0 4.8 1600.0 685.7
6 6 3.6 6.0 4.8 1333.3 800.0
7 7 3.3 5.8 4.8 1454.5 827.6
8 8 2.8 5.5 4.8 1714.3 872.7
9 9 2.0 3.8 4.8 2400 1263.2
10 10 1.7 3.8 4.8 2823.5 1263.2
11 11 2.3 5.5 4.8 2086.9 872.7
12 12 2.8 6.2 4.8 1714.3 774.2
13 13 2.7 5.3 4.8 1777.8 905.7
14 14 3.0 5.8 4.8 1600.0 827.6
15 15 2.7 5.2 4.8 1777.8 923.1
16 16 3.3 6.0 4.8 1454.5 800.0
17 17 3.0 6.2 4.8 1600.0 774.2
18 18 2.8 6.0 4.8 1714.3 800.0
19 19 3.0 5.8 4.8 1600.0 827.6
20 20 3.0 11.5 4.8 1600.0 842.1

Table -2 Crosshole Seismic Test Results of Hammar Mishrif
Shear Young Bulk
Record Depth Vp VS Density Poisson’s Modulus Modulus Modulus
No. (meters) (m/sec) (m/sec) (Kg/m3) Ratio Gd Ed Bd
(MPas) (MPas) (MPas)
1 1 1600.0 417.4 1720 0.46 299.7 877.1 4003.6
2 2 1200.0 355.5 1720 0.45 217.4 631.2 2187.0
3 3 1411.7 480.0 1720 0.43 396.3 1137.1 2899.4
4 4 1333.3 505.3 1880 0.42 480.0 1359.5 2702.0
5 5 1600.0 685.7 1880 0.39 883.9 2453.0 3634.2
6 6 1333.3 800.0 1880 0.22 1203.2 2932.7 1737.8
7 7 1454.5 827.6 1880 0.26 1287.7 3246.5 2260.4
8 8 1714.3 872.7 1870 0.33 1424.2 3774.4 3596.7
9 9 2400 1263.2 1870 0.31 2983.9 7808.4 6792.7
10 10 2823.5 1263.2 1870 0.37 2983.9 8205.0 10929.4
11 11 2086.9 872.7 1900 0.39 1447.1 4034.5 6345.4
12 12 1714.3 774.2 1900 0.37 1138.8 3124.7 4065.3
13 13 1777.8 905.7 1900 0.32 1558.6 4129.4 3927.0
14 14 1600.0 827.6 1910 0.32 1308.2 3446.7 3145.3
15 15 1777.8 923.1 1910 0.32 1627.5 4281.8 3866.6
16 16 1454.5 800.0 1900 0.28 1216.0 3120.6 2398.3
17 17 1600.0 774.2 1900 0.35 1138.8 3068.3 3345.6
18 18 1714.3 800.0 1900 0.36 1216.0 3309.5 3962.4
19 19 1600.0 827.6 1900 0.32 1301.4 3428.7 3128.9
20 20 1600.0 842.1 1890 0.31 1340.3 3507.3 3051.4

Fig.1: Sketch for the crosshole seismic test.
Fig.2: Seismograph ABEM Terraloc
1
Fig.3: Borehole sparker system
8
Fig.4: BKG3 borehole geophone
9
Fig. 5: The additional two boreholes which were drilled.
10
Fig. 6: Field measurement for the crosshole seismic test.
11
Fig. 7: Seismic records for record No. 2 and 17.
12
Appendix F
Thermal Resistivity Results

Thermal Resistivity Result
Thermal Thermal
T. R. UTM Coordinates Temperature. Moisture
Resistivity Conductivity
No. °C Content %
X±10 m Y±10 m (°C.cm /W) (w/m°c)
1 750143 3367089 520.1 19.0 0.192 3
2 750087 3367221 313.5 19.5 0.319 4
3 750108 3367370 394.5 19.19 0.253 6
4 750029 3367432 456.3 17.6 0.219 5
5 749975 3367524 341.2 19.34 0.175 4
6 749874 3367588 572.8 16.0 0.175 6
7 749838 3367649 111.4 19.5 0.898 5
8 749717 3367558 189.6 18.6 0.527 4
9 749775 3367478 278.6 18.5 0.359 4
10 749840 3374050 413.2 17.16 0.242 7
11 749662 3367632 438.3 15.96 0.228 5
12 749766 3367680 342.4 17.0 0.292 10
13 749734 3367803 560.8 17.66 0.178 5
114 749608 3367854 466.4 18.1 0.214 4
15 749696 3367974 472.9 16.4 0.211 4
16 749575 3368051 305.6 16.6 0.328 5
17 749613 3368117 347.1 18.8 0.288 3
18 749850 3368196 329.1 17.7 0.304 5
19 749826 3368280 430.1 18.1 0.232 6
20 749951 3368268 268.1 20.4 0.373 5
21 750046 3368332 414.2 24.9 0.241 3
22 749891 3368090 336.4 24.5 0.297 4
23 749996 3368098 397.4 21.9 0.252 3
24 749964 3368012 454.4 21.8 0.220 5
25 750556 3367393 458.2 23.0 0.218 3
26 750726 3367436 416.7 24.12 0.240 4
27 750730 3367381 334.5 21.2 0.299 4
28 750821 3367233 514.2 23.3 0.194 5
29 750934 3367296 415.1 23.8 0.241 3
30 750999 3367328 515.9 22.38 0.194 7
31 750935 3367442 440.3 25.5 0.287 5
32 750863 3367415 392.0 22.3 0.255 4
33 750830 3367541 425.2 25.3 0.202 5
34 750458 3367470 293.6 22.1 0.341 6
35 750331 3367408 291.5 24.0 0.343 4
36 750180 3367455 294.6 24.5 0.340 5
Appendix G
Plate Loading Test Results

Plate Load Test Procedure
The standard method for a field load test is given by the American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) under Designation (ASTM D-1194, 1997). Circular steel bearing
plates 152 to 760 mm (6 to 30 in.) in diameter or (300 to 750) mm (1 ft x 2.5 ft) Square
Plates should be used for this type of test.
The bearing plate is placed on the ground surface soil at the required level, and an
incremental load on the bearing plate is applied. After the application of an incremental
load, enough time is allowed for settlement to occur. When the settlement of the bearing
plate becomes negligible, another incremental load is applied. In this manner, a load-
settlement plot can be obtained, as shown in the test results.
To conduct the test, below the existing natural ground level, one must have a pit of
required depth Df excavated. The width of the test pit should be at least four times the
width of the bearing plate to be used for the test.
The method of performing plate load test is outlined in the below sketch:
Df
1
Plate Load Apparatus
1- Bearing Plate
Circular steel bearing plates, not less than 25 mm thickness, and 707 cm2 in
area is used.
2- Hydraulic Jack
Hydraulic Jack with sufficient capacity to provide & maintain the maximum
load of 300 kN is used.
3- Settlement – Recording Devices
Dial gauge, capable of measuring settlement of the test plate to an accuracy of
at least 0.01 mm is used.
4- Pressure Gauge
Pressure Gauge with capacity of 300 kN is used.
5- Miscellaneous Apparatus
The miscellaneous apparatus Include loading columns, steel stands & other
construction tools required for preparation of the test pits & loading apparatus.
Method of the Operation

The plate load tests for twenty three locations were carried out at the project site. The
data was required for the design of the reinforced concrete foundation supporting the
project’s structures.
The test was conducted at the levels of (-0.5) below the surface of existing natural
ground soil, which consists of various types of soils as mentioned in the description of the
soil profile, by a circular plate having an area of 707 cm2 area with maximum applied
pressure of about (550) kPa.
The area under question was totally dry during the test process and hence, no
dewatering system was required.
2
UTM COORDINATES FOR PLATE BEARING POINTS
UTM Coordinates
PL No.
X ± 10m Y ± 10m
1105 750351 3367523
1110 751264 3368163
1114 751433 3367885
1116 751160 3368065
1118 751298 3367838
1135 750998 3367321
1136 750925 3367442
1138 750865 3367413
1139 750934 3367305
1141 750737 3367371
1142 750815 3367238
1246 750143 3367089
1248 750108 3367370
1253 749750 3367506
1256 749874 3367588
1262 749713 3367855
1264 749634 3368012
1168 749964 3368026
1170 749934 3368088
1275 749870 3368255
1278 750000 3368315
1186 750282 3367740
1187 750194 3367691
PLATE BEARING TEST
Project Zubair Oil Field Development Project Test No. 1

Site Zubair - Mishrif DGS Date 12.3.2011
Location PL 1105 Procedure ASTM D1194
Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Settlement (mm)
REMARKS Modulus of Subgrade Reaction Ks = 219941 kPa/m

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Settlement (mm)
REMARKS Modulus of Subgrade Reaction Ks1 = 184812 kPa/m (Dry)

Ks2 = 23421 kPa/m (Submerging)
Ks3 = 64488 kPa/m (Saturated)
PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Settlement (mm)
Excessive settlement; Failure after three load increments.

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm 2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Settlement (mm)
Excessive Settlment more than 25 mm

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
550
500
450
400
350
Pressure (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Settlement (mm)

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm 2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Settlement (mm)
Excessive Settlment about 25 mm

PLATE BEARING TEST

Circle Area
Depth 0.5 m
Plate: 30 , cm 706.86 cm2
600
500
400
Pressure (kPa)
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Settlement (mm)

Appendix H
CBR and Modified Proctor

Tests Results
CBR and Modified Procter Test Results
UTM Coordinates Modified Procter

TP No. CBR Optimum
Max. Dry Density
X ± 10m Y ± 10m Moisture Content
(g/cm3)
(%)
1105 750351 3367523 54 1.82 12
1110 751264 3368163 62 1.99 9
1114 751433 3367885 71 2.02 13
1116 751160 3368065 50 1.96 10
1118 751298 3367838 60 1.93 12
1135 750998 3367321 67 1.93 14
1136 750925 3367442 46 1.92 11
1138 750865 3367413 60 1.96 13
1139 750934 3367305 21 1.81 14
1141 750737 3367371 37 1.82 10
1142 750815 3367238 65 1.92 13
1246 750143 3367089 30 1.86 12
1248 750108 3367370 38 1.90 10
1253 749750 3367506 23 1.86 13
1256 749874 3367588 20 1.85 9
1262 749713 3367855 27 1.92 9
1264 749634 3368012 55 1.93 12
1168 749964 3368026 18 1.86 13
1170 749934 3368088 60 1.92 13
1275 749870 3368255 26 1.89 12
1278 750000 3368315 31 1.93 10
1186 750282 3367740 19 1.87 13
1187 750194 3367691 24 1.97 11

Final Soil Investigation Report For Zubair Mishrif DGS Phase 1

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

Final Soil Investigation Report For Zubair Mishrif DGS Phase 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENI - IRAQ

ZUBAIR OIL FIELD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Final Soil Investigation Report for Zubair Mishrif DGS

CD-FE 00 02.06.11 FINAL ISSUE

Software: Microsoft Word 97-2003 File No. 00251000BARS95000_CDFE00_280.pdf

This document is property of Eni S.p.A. Exploration & Production Division.

Soil Investigation for

Report No. 2/SI/IB/2011

3- Laboratory Testing For Soils

4.1- Subsoil Material Description

5.1- Regional Geology

6.1- Lowering of Groundwater Level

7- Results and Discussion

7.1- Shear Strength

8- Analysis and Recommendations

8.1- Allowable Bearing Capacity (ABC) of Shallow Foundations

Appendix A: Borehole Logs

1.3- Site Location and Description

1- 41 boreholes to depths of 15m to 40m below existing ground surface.

2.2- Drilling and Sampling of Boreholes

2.4- Spacing of Soil Samples

2.6- Plate Load Test (PLT)

2.7- Crosshole Test

Closest Borehole The Additional Two Boreholes

LOCATION B.H. No. 1 B.H. No.2

2.8- Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Resistively

3- Laboratory Testing for Soils

3.2- Method of Testing

3.3- Moisture Content and Unit Weight

3.4- Particle Size Analysis

3.5- Direct Shear Test

The constant head test (ASTM-D2434) is used to determine the hydraulic

K z = ((aL ) /( A(t 2 − t1 )) * ln(h1 / h2 )

3.7- Modified Proctor Test

3.8- California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test

3.9- Chemical Tests

Borehole No. GWL (m) Borehole No. GWL (m)

5.2- Local Subsurface and Surface Geology

Formation Age Average depth

5.4- Other Risks and Hazards

5.5- Liquefaction Potential

5.6- Seismic Design Parameters

Table (1): IBC/2006 Seismic Design Values

Soil profile site class D

0.2 second Spectral Acceleration Ss 0.3g

1.0 second Spectral Acceleration S1 0.12g

Site Coefficient Fa 1.6

Site Coefficient Fv 2.4

6.2- Excavation Difficulties

6.3- Preparation Works

6.4- Fill Material

Table (2): Engineering fill gradation according to (SORB/R6)

Sieve size Passing %

25 75-95 100 100

9 30-65 50-85 50-85 60-100

4.75 25-55 35-65 35-65 50-85

2.36 16-42 26-52 26-52 42-72

0.30 7-18 14-28 14-28 23-42

0.075 2-8 5-15 5-15 5-20

6.6- Compaction Requirements

2. Fill material shall be compacted to at least 95% of maximum dry density.

5. Laboratory determination of moisture content of soil shall be calculated according