Stone Column Report (A-A)

Mineral Separation Plant (MSP)
Zircon/Ilminite Stock Pile And Process Water Tank

(AREA 30&31)
SITE INVESTIGATIONS AND FOUNDATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 6
2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT UNDER STUDY ....................................................................... 6
3 DESCRIPTION OF PART UNDER STUDY (ZIRCON / RUTILE AND TAILINGS STOCKPILE &
PROCESS WATER TANK) ................................................................................................................................ 8
4 SCOPE OF GEOTECHNICAL WORK .......................................................................................................... 11
5 TENDER SITE INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................................................................ 11
6 ADDITIONAL SITE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM .................................................................................. 12
7 BOREHOLES AND LABORATORY TESTS ................................................................................................ 15
8 CONE PENETRATION TEST ......................................................................................................................... 18
9 BASICS OF INTERPRETATION OF CPTU RESULTS USING PROGRAM CPET-IT ........................ 21
10 BASICS OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION BASED ON BOREHOLES AND LABORATORY TESTS .... 24
11 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES AND OTHER
FIELD/LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 26
12 SOIL FORMATION ........................................................................................................................................... 32
13 ESTIMATION OF GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS BASED ON RESULTS OF THE
BOREHOLES ...................................................................................................................................................... 40
14 ESTIMATION OF GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS OF CLAY LAYER BASED ON RESULTS OF
CPTU TEST RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 56
15 IDEALIZED GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS FOR SOIL LAYERS AT THE AREA UNDER
STUDY .................................................................................................................................................................. 69
16 FINAL COMMENTS ON RESULTS SITE INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................ 71
17 OUTLINES OF GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS............................................................................................ 73
18 SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS USING SETTLE 3D ......................................................................................... 76
19 ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED OF SOIL IMPROVEMENT AND OUTLINES OF PROPOSED
SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................................................... 81
20 INTRODUCTION TO STONE COLUMNS (VIBRO REPLACEMENT) .................................................. 81
21 THEORETICAL BASIS FOR USE OF STONE COLUMNS AS A SOIL IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM84
22 DESIGN OF STONE COLUMNS..................................................................................................................... 89
23 REPLACEMENT SOIL AND GEOGRID LAYERS ..................................................................................... 92
24 QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR STONE COLUMNS ............................................................................. 97
25 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 99
Page 2
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: The general location of project under study. ....................................................................7

Figure 3-1: The general layout plan for the structure under study. .....................................................8
Figure 3-2: Cross section of the raft under study ................................................................................9
Figure 6-1: Layout of the plan of additional site investigations program. ........................................13
Figure 6-2: Location of Boreholes at the area under study. ..............................................................14
Figure 6-3: Location of CPTu at the area under study ......................................................................15
Figure 8-1: Components of cone penetrometer .................................................................................19
Figure 9-1: Different soil behavior types for STB classification ......................................................22
Figure 10-1: Unified Soil Classification System flowchart for coarse-grained soils ........................24
Figure 10-2: Unified Soil Classification System flowchart for fine -grained soils ...........................25
Figure 11-1: The Relation between the standard Penetration Resistance (Nvalue) and Angle of
shearing resistance () for granular soil (after Peck, 1974) ...............................................................27
Figure 11-2: Recommended Variation of qc/N with Grain Size for non-cohesive soil (Source: EPRI,
1990) ..................................................................................................................................................29
Figure 11-3: Relationship between drained angle of shearing resistance (d) and plasticity index for
Clay ....................................................................................................................................................30
Figure 11-4: Relationship between Over consolidation ratio and (Eu/Cu) .........................................30
Figure 12-1: The geological cross section of boreholes (BH-13 to BH-16)......................................34
Figure 12-2: The geological cross section of boreholes (BH-17 to BH-20)......................................35
Figure 12-3: The soil formation at CPT-05 .......................................................................................37
Figure 13-1: Variation of Nspt versus level for sand layer. ..............................................................41
Figure 13-2: Variation of relative density versus level for sand layer. .............................................42
Figure 13-3: Variation of drained angle of shearing resistance versus level for sand layer...........43
Figure 13-4: Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level for sand layer. .......................44
Figure 13-5: Variation of Nspt versus level for silty sand layer........................................................46
Figure 13-6: Variation of relative density versus level for silty sand layer.......................................47
Figure 13-7: Variation of drained angle of shearing resistance versus level for silty sand layer. ..48
Figure 13-8: Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level for silty sand layer. ...............49
Figure 13-9: Variation of undrained shear strength Cu versus level for clay layer. ..........................51
Figure 13-10: Variation of undrained deformation modulus versus level for clay layer. .................52
Figure 13-11: Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level for clay layer. .....................53
Figure 13-12: Variation of drained friction angle versus level for clay layer. ..................................54
Figure 13-13: Variation of Nspt versus level for silt layer. ...............................................................56
Figure 14-1: The Cone resistance (qc) for all CPT tests. ..................................................................57
Figure 14-2: The Friction resistance (fs) for all CPT tests. ...............................................................58
Figure 14-3: The undrained shear strength for all CPT tests .............................................................59
Figure 14-4: The undrained strength ratio for all CPT tests. .............................................................60
Figure 14-5: The over consolidation ratio for all CPT tests .............................................................62
Figure 14-6: The constrained modulus (M) for all CPT tests ............................................................63
Figure 14-7: The selected undrained shear strength for analysis. .....................................................65
Figure 14-8: The selected undrained strength ratio for analysis........................................................66
Figure 14-9: The selected over consolidation ratio for analysis. .......................................................67
Figure 14-10: The selected Constrained modulus for analysis. .........................................................68
Page 3
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 17-1: The general plan for area under study. .........................................................................73
Figure 17-2: The distribution of the estimated average stresses at the foundation level. ..................74
Figure 17-3: Graph of void ratio versus the logarithm of effective stress .........................................75
Figure 18-1: Settle 3d Model of the area under study. ......................................................................77
Figure 18-2: Plan view of Settle 3d Model of the area under study. .................................................78
Figure 18-3: Query line (1) consolidation settlement profile ............................................................79
Figure 18-4: Query line (2) consolidation settlement profile- Part 2 with stress 150 KPA ..............79
Figure 18-5: Query line (3) consolidation settlement profile- Part 1 with stress 250 KPA ..............80
Figure 20-1: Schematic diagram for stone columns construction sequence......................................82
Figure 21-1: Relation between the stress concentration factor (n) and the modular ratio (Es/Ec) ....86
Figure 21-2: Design chart for vibro replacement ..............................................................................88
Figure 21-3: Consideration of column compressibility .....................................................................88
Figure 22-1: Typical arrangement for the stone columns for area 1 with stress 250 KPA ...............91
Figure 22-2: Typical arrangement for the stone columns for area 2 with stress 150 KPA ...............91
Figure 23-1: Using mechanically stabilized layers for increasing bearing capacity .........................93
Figure 23-2: Using mechanically stabilized layers for controlling differential settlement ...............93
Figure 23-3: Using mechanically stabilized layers for capping weak deposits .................................94
Figure 23-4: Interlocking mechanism ................................................................................................94
Figure 23-5: Triax geogrid.................................................................................................................95
Figure 23-6: Development of confinement........................................................................................95
Figure 23-7: Effect of 3-D reinforcement on deformation modulus .................................................96
Figure 23-8: Replacement layer arrangement for structures under study..........................................96
Figure 23-9: Gradation of the crushed stone used for backfilling with MSL ....................................97
Figure 25-1: The arrangement of stone columns for the two structures. .........................................100
Page 4
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
LIST OF TABLES
Table 6-1: Boreholes Coordinates and Elevation ..............................................................................14

Table 6-2: CPTu Coordinates and Elevation ....................................................................................15
Table 7-1: ASTM standards used in boreholes execution. ................................................................16
Table 7-2: ASTM standards used in testing program ........................................................................17
Table 8-1: The applicability and usefulness of in-situ tests ..............................................................19
Table 10-1: Consistency for Clay soil (Epri 1990). ...........................................................................25
Table 10-2: Relative density limits for non-cohesive soils ...............................................................26
Table 11-1: Relation between N and bulk unit weight  t/m3 ............................................................26
Table 11-2: Relation between relative density and N values ............................................................26
Table 11-3: Relation between N values, relative density and internal friction angle ........................28
Table 11-4: Relation between Elastic Modulus and N values ...........................................................28
Table 11-5: B ratios according to soil type ........................................................................................31
Table 11-6: Typical values for Poisson’s ratio ..................................................................................32
Table 11-7: Clay sensitivity ...............................................................................................................32
Table 12-1: Water depths as measured during the boring .................................................................33
Table 13-1: Grain size distribution of Sand layer ..............................................................................40
Table 13-2: Grain size distribution of Silty Sand layer .....................................................................44
Table 13-3: Atterberg limits and natural water content of the clay layer ..........................................50
Table 13-4: The values of the compression, the recompression indexes and the void ratio according
to Consolidation tests .........................................................................................................................55
Table 13-5: Grain size distribution of Silt layer ................................................................................55
Table 14-1: Geotechnical parameters for the clay layer based on CPT tests ....................................69
Table 15-1: Geotechnical parameters for all layers ...........................................................................70
Table 18-1: The selected soil parameters as used in Settle 3-D model. ............................................77
Table 18-2: The consolidation settlement results for query points....................................................79
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix number Appendix title

The extracted deep boreholes conducted at MSP and the geotechnical
Appendix No. 1
recommendations for area 31
Appendix No. 2 Boreholes Logs and laboratory tests
Appendix No. 3 Interpretation of CPT tests
Appendix No. 4 Consolidation settlement analysis from Settle 3D
Appendix No. 5 Consolidation settlement analysis using spread sheet
Page 5
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 INTRODUCTION
This report has been prepared upon the request of Hassan Allam Construction
(HAC) in order to carry out the geotechnical engineering services for Black Sand
project. The Project includes execution of the Main process area, administrative
area, water treatment areas and Pond. The project owner is The Egyptian Black Sand
Company (EBSC) and the main consultant is The Military Technical College
(Consulting Engineering Office).
This report is related to Zircon/Ilminite stock pile (Area 31) and process water
tank (Area 30) located in the main process area. The report is addressing the results
of the additional site investigations and interpretation of collected data as well
detailed geotechnical analysis and the detailed foundation recommendations.
The detailed recommendations for both design and construction of foundations shall
be presented and to be followed by the designer (for design verification) and by the
contractor for the construction phase.
2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT UNDER STUDY

The Project under study is located at El Bullurus. Figure 2-1 shows the general
layout location of the MSP area. The MSP project comprises execution of several
process and non-process structures.
The carried survey for site project showed that the natural ground level terrain is
almost flat with difference in natural ground level around 1.0 m across the site. The
average natural ground level across the site can be considered as -0.50. However, the
level of the adjacent coastal road is about +2.50.
Page 6
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Area under
Study
Figure 2-1: The general location of project under study.
Page 7
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
3 DESCRIPTION OF PART UNDER STUDY (ZIRCON / RUTILE AND

TAILINGS STOCKPILE & PROCESS WATER TANK)
3.1 General
The part under study in this report is Zircon / Rutile and Tailings Stockpile &
Process Water Tank structure located at area 31. Figure 3-1 shows the general plan
of the area under study and the cross section.
Figure 3-1: The general layout plan for the structure under study.
Page 8
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 3-2 shows cross section of the foundation system as per tender design
Figure 3-2: Cross section of the raft under study
Page 9
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.2 FOUNDATION SYSTEM AS PER TENDER DESIGN

The proposed foundation system of the area under study (as per tender design) is raft
foundation. As per design documents the design stresses below raft as per tender
drawings are 250 kPa for part 1 and about 150 kPa for part 2.
Figure 3-3 shows the plan of the foundation with the applied stresses
Figure 3-3: The dimensions and the applied stress on the raft.
Page 10
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
4 SCOPE OF GEOTECHNICAL WORK

The activities performed for the subject project included:
 Planning of the additional investigation program.
 Execution of the both field tests as well as laboratory tests.
 Interpretation of data collected from fieldwork and laboratory work.
 Conducting the geotechnical analysis based on the data presented in the report
including numerical modeling, safety against shear failure and safety against
total/differential settlement.
 Utilizing the above results to develop the foundation recommendations.
5 TENDER SITE INVESTIGATIONS
The project tender documents included a geotechnical report prepared by

Engineering Consultant Office (Dr. Eng. Waseim Ragab Azzam) dated April 2019.
The mentioned report included the results of 46 boreholes conducted at the MSP
area. The boreholes were distributed at the Admin area, the roads and the factory
structures. The depth of boreholes was variable between 12 to 25 m according to the
investigated structure.
Based on the Executed boreholes during tender, the soil formation showed
homogenous formation consisting of the following as extracted from mentioned
geotechnical report.
- Stiff clayey silt layer with thickness of 75cm
- followed by soft silty clay (loam) layer with thickness of 1m.
- Finally a thick layer of fine to medium sand is extended to end of boring.
The SPT blows for sand layer shown in the tender boreholes the sand can be divided
into two layers according to Insitu relative density. The SPT indicated that the sand
trends to be medium dense to dense sand down to depth about 7 to 9 m with SPT
values between 25 to 35 blows. While for lower part of sand the sand trends to be
dense to very dense sand down to the end of boreholes.
Finally the report recommended to remove the upper clayey silt and sof silty clay
down to average depth about 2.25 m and recommended to carry out replacement up
to foundation levels.
For Zircon/Ilimnite Stock pile area, The reports gave a special recommendations to
increase the allowable bearing capacity to 250 kN/m2. The report recommended to
use two layers of geogrid reinforcement in the replacement soil.
Appendix (1) includes the extracted deep boreholes conducted at MSP and the
geotechnical recommendations for area 31.
Page 11
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
6 ADDITIONAL SITE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

6.1 General
A&A as a geotechnical consultant for Hassan Allam proposed an additional

confirmatory site investigation program in order to verify the tender findings and
propose the final recommendations.
For MSP area, total number of 35 boreholes with depth 20 m had been proposed
distributed as following:
- Twenty (20) Boreholes For process buildings and workshop,
- Six (6) Boreholes for administrative area,
- Ten boreholes for tanks areas and process water dam area located at the east part
of project.
- Twelve (12) CPTu tests with depth up to 30 m or refusal.
- Five deep boreholes down to 40 m depth
Figure 6-1 shows the layout of the plan of additional site investigations program.
Page 12
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 6-1: Layout of the plan of additional site investigations program.
Page 13
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
6.2 Boreholes for area under study

Eight (08) mechanical boreholes were carried out to a depth 20.00 m below the
existing ground level. The borehole logs are shown in Appendix 2. The coordinates
for the executed boreholes can be summarized in table 6-1. Figure 6-2 shows the
location of executed boreholes at the area under study.
Table 6-1: Boreholes Coordinates and Elevation
BH. NO. Easting Northing Elevation Depth (m)
BH-13 323881.235 3494813.752 -0.85 20.00
BH-14 323912.797 3494797.081 -0.778 20.00
BH-15 323949.169 3494781.329 -0.70 20.00
BH-16 323966.015 3494755.803 -0.61 20.00
BH-17 323935.240 3494748.567 -0.70 20.00
BH-18 323954.786 3494729.391 -0.67 20.00
BH-19 323944.338 3494713.550 -0.74 20.00
BH-20 323919.151 3494717.044 -0.88 20.00
Figure 6-2: Location of Boreholes at the area under study.
Page 14
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
6.3 CPTu tests

Three (03) CPTU had been carried out across the Buildings under study. The CPTu
had been carried out using a total thrust of 20 tons with total depth is about 30.00 m.
The test results are given on the CPTU in Appendix 3.
Table 6-2 shows the location of the executed CPTU.
Table 6-2: CPTu Coordinates and Elevation

CPT No. Easting Northing Elevation
CPT -05 323919 3494787 -0.392
CPT -06 324011 3494756 -0.154
CPT -12 323914 3494717 -0.58
Figure 6-3: Location of CPTu at the area under study

7 BOREHOLES AND LABORATORY TESTS
7.1 General
Boreholes had been excuated by Misr Ryomond (specialized geotechnical consultant) under
supervision of A&A. All laboratory tests had been carried out by Misr Reymond. One deep
boreholes is still in progress.
Page 15
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
7.2 Codes and standards for boreholes execution

For all field tests ASTM standards has been applied as follows:
Table 7-1: ASTM standards used in boreholes execution.

Parameter Standard
Logging and Site Characterization ASTM D420, D5434
Soil classification ASTM D2487, D2488
Standard Penetration Test ASTM D1586
Thin-Walled Tube Sampling ASTM D1587
7.3 Sampling collection

The boring equipment and the operating procedure has assured high recovery of the
bored volume. Bentonite mud had been used as boring fluid.
As ground water is encountered, the circulation fluid level in the borehole is
maintained above the ground water level during the sampling operation.
Borehole had been cleaned at the sampling elevation ensuring that soil to be
sampled is not to be disturbed. The effective depth had been measured before
sampling.
If during the boring operations cohesive soil had been encountered, samples had
been obtained utilizing shelby tube (thin wall tube sampler). In sandy formations,
split-barrel sampler had been used. Field soil description had been performed by a
geotechnical engineer. The upper and lower ends of undisturbed soil samples had
been sealed with paraffin or wax.
Each sample had been identified by waterproof label with the following data:
- Site location, - borehole number, and - type of sample, - top and bottom depth.
All samples collected from boreholes were examined, described and classified by
specialized geotechnical investigation firm and taken to the laboratory for testing.
Ground water table in the drilled boreholes were detected and measured during
boring and 24 hour after completion of each borehole.
For each bored borehole, a log sheet had been prepared including the following
information:
1. Name and location of the project.
2. Date of boring (start and finish).
3. Borehole number.
4. Borehole coordinates and ground surface elevation, or reference to a datum point.
5. Water table elevation and date.
6. Depth and thickness of bored layers.
7. Depth to top of sample and number of each sample.
8. Description of sampler type.
9. Soil description.
10. Type and results of in situ tests.
11. Results of some laboratory tests.
The logs of all executed boreholes are enclosed in Appendix 2.
Page 16
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
7.4 Laboratory tests

7.4.1 General
In order to determine the physical, mechanical and chemical properties of the
ground materials, laboratory tests were performed on selected representative
samples from boreholes according to the relevant sections of ASTM. All laboratory
tests were performed in Misr Raymond Foundations (a specialized laboratory in
Egypt for geotechnical works) under supervision of A&A and QC engineers. ASTM
standards have been used for performing all tests. Table 7-2 shows the standards
used for different tests.
Table 7-2: ASTM standards used in testing program
PARAMETER SUGGESTED STANDARDS
Moisture content ASTM D2216
Dry density EM 1110-2-1906
Atterberg limits ASTM D423, D424, D4318
Percent passing No. 200 Sieve ASTM D1140
Grain Size analysis ASTM D422
Consolidation ASTM D2435
7.4.2 Physical Properties Tests

Physical properties of soil formation help to verify the visual classification and may
be used as a guide to predict the geotechnical, and mechanical behavior of the soil.
The following tests were carried out in cohesive and non-cohesive soils.
7.4.3 Atterberg Limits

Atterberg limits include the liquid, plastic and shrinkage limits. These limits indicate
the soil water content at different states of consistency ranging from the very soft
condition at the liquid limit, to the very stiff condition at the plastic limit and the
hard condition at the shrinkage limit. Atterberg limits were performed where useful
in classifying plastic soils and in qualitative evaluation of engineering parameters
such as shear strength and compressibility. Test was carried out in accordance with
ASTM standards.
7.4.4 Natural Water Content

The natural water content was determined for undisturbed soil samples. The value of
the natural water content helps in the soil classification. Test was carried out in
accordance with ASTM standards.
7.4.5 Soil Gradation

For classification purpose, grain size distribution test for representative sandy soil
samples recovered from the boreholes using mechanical sieving was carried out in
accordance with ASTM standards. Sieve analysis tests were carried out to determine
the grain size distribution of soils.
Page 17
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
8 CONE PENETRATION TEST

8.1 History and development of the CPT
The cone penetration test (CPT) is a method used to determine the geotechnical
engineering properties of soils and delineating soil stratigraphy. It was initially
developed in the 1950s at the Dutch Laboratory for Soil Mechanics in Delft to
investigate soft soils. Based on this history it has also been called the "Dutch cone
test". Today, the CPT is one of the most used and accepted in soil methods for soil
investigation worldwide.
The early applications of CPT mainly determined the soil geotechnical property of
bearing capacity. The original cone penetrometers involved simple mechanical
measurements of the total penetration resistance to pushing a tool with a conical tip
into the soil. Different methods were employed to separate the total measured
resistance into components generated by the conical tip (the "tip friction") and
friction generated by the rod string. A friction sleeve was added to quantify this
component of the friction and aid in determining soil cohesive strength in the
1960s.[2] Electronic measurements began in 1948 and improved further in the early
1970s.[3] Most modern electronic CPT cones now also employ a pressure transducer
with a filter to gather pore water pressure data.
The filter is usually located either on the cone tip (the so-called U1 position),
immediately behind the cone tip (the most common U2 position) or behind the
friction sleeve (U3 position). Pore water pressure data aids determining stratigraphy
and is primarily used to correct tip friction values for those effects. CPT testing
which also gathers this piezometer data is called CPTU testing. CPT and CPTU
testing equipment generally advances the cone using hydraulic rams mounted on
either a heavily ballasted vehicle or using screwed-in anchors as a counter-force.
One advantage of CPT over the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is a more
continuous profile of soil parameters, with CPTU data recorded typically at 20 cm
intervals.
8.2 Standards and use

CPT for geotechnical applications was standardized in 1986 by ASTM Standard D
3441 (ASTM, 2004). ISSMGE provides international standards on CPT and CPTU.
Later ASTM Standards have addressed the use of CPT for
various environmental site characterization and ground water monitoring activities.
For geotechnical soil investigations, CPT is more popular compared to SPT as a
method of geotechnical soil investigation. Its increased accuracy, speed of
deployment, more continuous soil profile and reduced cost over other soil testing
methods. The ability to advance additional in situ testing tools using the CPT direct
push drilling rig, including the seismic tools described above, are accelerating this
process. Table 8-1 presents a partial list of the major in-situ tests and their perceived
applicability for use in different ground conditions.
Page 18
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 8-1: The applicability and usefulness of in-situ tests

(Lunne, Robertson & Powell, 1997, updated by Robertson, 2012)
8.3 Introduction to CPT

In the Cone Penetration Test (CPT), a cone on the end of a series of rods is pushed
into the ground at a constant rate and continuous measurements are made of the
resistance to penetration of the cone and of a surface sleeve. Figure 2 illustrates the
main terminology regarding cone penetrometers.
The total force acting on the cone, Qc, divided by the projected area of the cone, Ac,
produces the cone resistance, qc. The total force acting on the friction sleeve, Fs,
divided by the surface area of the friction sleeve, As, produces the sleeve friction, fs.
In a piezocone, pore pressure is also measured, typically behind the cone in the u2
location, as shown in following figure.
Figure 8-1: Components of cone penetrometer
Page 19
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
8.4 Test Procedures

8.4.1 Pre-drilling
For penetration in fills or hard soils it may be necessary to pre-drill in order to avoid
damaging the cone. Pre-drilling, in certain cases, may be replaced by first pre-
punching a hole through the upper problem material with a solid steel dummy probe
with a diameter slightly larger than the cone. It is also common to hand auger the
first 1.5m (5ft) in urban areas to avoid underground utilities.
8.4.2 Verticality
The thrust machine should be set up so as to obtain a thrust direction as near as
possible to vertical. The deviation of the initial thrust direction from vertical should
not exceed 2 degrees and push rods should be checked for straightness.
Modern cones have simple slope sensors incorporated to enable a measure of the
non-verticality of the sounding. This is useful to avoid damage to equipment and
breaking of push rods. For depths less than 15m (50 feet), significant non-verticality
is unusual, provided the initial thrust direction is vertical.
8.4.3 Reference Measurements

Modern cones have the potential for a high degree of accuracy and repeatability
(0.1% of full-scale output). Tests have shown that the output of the sensors at zero
load can be sensitive to changes in temperature, although most cones now include
some temperature compensation. It is common practice to record zero load readings
of all sensors to track these changes. Zero load readings should be recorded at the
start and end of each CPT.
8.4.4 Rate of Penetration

The standard rate of penetration is 2 cm/sec (approximately 1 inch per second).
Hence, a 20m (60 foot) sounding can be completed (start to finish) in about 30
minutes. The cone results are generally not sensitive to slight variations in the rate of
penetration.
8.4.5 Interval of readings

Electric cones produce continuous analogue data. However, most systems convert
the data to digital form at selected intervals. Most standards require the interval to be
no more than 200mm (8 inches). In general, most systems collect data at intervals of
between 25 - 50mm (1 to 2 inches), with 50 mm (2 inches) being the more common.
Page 20
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
9 BASICS OF INTERPRETATION OF CPTU RESULTS USING

PROGRAM CPET-IT
9.1 General
The CPT data shall be interpreted using CPeT-IT software. CPeT-IT is software for
interpretation of CPTu data. CPeT-IT was developed in collaboration with Gregg
Drilling & Testing Inc., a leading company in site investigation and CPT, and
Professor Peter Robertson, co-author of the comprehensive text book on the CPT.
CPeT-IT takes CPT data and performs basic interpretation in terms of Soil Behavior
Type (SBT) and various geotechnical soil and design parameters using current
published correlations based on the comprehensive review by Lunne, Robertson and
Powell (1997), as well as recent updates by Professor Robertson.
9.2 Soil classification

The major application of the CPT is for soil profiling and soil type. Typically, the
cone resistance, (qt) is high in sands and low in clays, and the friction ratio (Rf =
fs/qt) is low in sands and high in clays. The CPT cannot be expected to provide
accurate predictions of soil type based on physical characteristics, such as, grain size
distribution but provide a guide to the mechanical characteristics (strength and
stiffness) of the soil, or the soil behavior type (SBT). CPT data provides a repeatable
index of the aggregate behavior of the in-situ soil in the immediate area of the probe.
Hence, prediction of soil type based on CPT is referred to as Soil Behavior Type
The most commonly used CPT soil behavior type (SBT) chart was suggested by
Robertson et al. (1986) and an updated, dimensionless version (Robertson, 2010)
Robertson et al. (1986) developed a soil behavior type classification method derived
from CPT data (qc, fs, u). They proposed two charts, one chart uses normalized tip
resistance (Qt) and friction ratio (Fr) as input data; while the other chart uses (Qt) and
pore pressure parameter ratio (Bq) data. These parameters can be defined as follows:
They identified twelve different soil behavior types as shown in Figure 9-1.
In case a soil falls within two different zones in respective charts, engineering
judgment is required to classify the soil behavior correctly. Only the second chart
was implemented in the visual basic soil classification software developed in this
study.
Page 21
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 9-1: Different soil behavior types for STB classification
Generally, soil that falls in zones 6 and 7 represents approximately drained

penetration, whereas, soils in zones 1, 2, 3 and 4 represent approximately undrained
penetration. Soils in zones 5, 8 and 9 may represent partially drained penetration. An
advantage of pore pressure measurements during cone penetration is the ability to
evaluate drainage conditions more directly.
Robertson (1990) suggested that the charts in figure (9-1) are still global in nature
and should be used as a guide to define soil behavior type based on CPT and CPTu
data. Factors such as changes in stress history, in situ stresses, sensitivity, stiffness,
macro fabric, mineralogy and void ratio will also influence the classification.
9.3 Undrained peak and remolded shear strength for silty clay
A number of methods had been proposed for evaluation of the undrained shear
strength from the CPT readings. The most common formulas depend of using the net
cone resistance for evaluation of the undrained shear strength as follows:
Cu = (qc-'vo)/Nkt ...................………………………………….…… Equation 9-1
Where:
Nkt = 10.50 + 7 . log(Fr)
It worth to mention that the Egyptian code – Part 3 – item 3/3/7/4(B) stated that Nkt
is a parameter specified according to the practical experience and it is ranging
between 15 and 20. For purpose of analysis and as a conservative assumption, the
maximum value (20) shall be adopted.
The sensitivity of a clay is defined as the ratio of undisturbed undrained shear
strength to totally remolded undrained strength.
Page 22
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
It has long been recognized that the sleeve friction stress from an electrical CPT is a
function of the remolded shear strength and is approximately equal to the stress fs.
9.4 Over consolidation ratio for silty clay

Kulhawy and Mayne 1990 had proposed the following expression as a relation
between the over-consolidation ratio and the cone resistance as well as total and
effective overburden pressure as follows:
OCR = KOCR * (qt-vo)/'vo................……………..……………. Equation 9-1
Where K is a coefficient ranging between 0.2 and 0.3. Another correlation k is given
as:
1 .25
 Q t0.20 
k OCR   ................………………. Equation 9-2
 0 .25 (10 .50  7 log( Fr )) 
For purpose of analysis, the minimum of the two values of 0.2 and that related KOCR
to friction ratio shall be used.
9.5 Constrained modulus M

Jefferies and Davies (1993) identified that a Soil Behaviour Type Index, Ic, could
represent the SBTn zones in the normalized chart where, Ic is essentially the radius
of concentric circles that define the boundaries of soil type. Robertson and Wride,
(1998) modified the definition of Ic to apply to the Robertson (1990) Qt – Fr chart.
When the non-normalized SBT chart is presented on log-log scales the boundaries
are also essentially concentric circles and a non-normalized Soil Behaviour Type
Index, ISBT can also be defined by:
ISBT = [(3.47 - log(qc/pa))2 + (log Rf + 1.22)2]0.5 .................………. Equation 9-3
Where:
qc = CPT cone resistance (or corrected cone resistance, qt)
Rf = friction ratio = (fs/qc) 100%
fs = CPT sleeve friction
The non-normalized SBT index (ISBT) is essentially the same as the normalized
SBTn index (Ic) but only uses the basic CPT measurements
If Ic > 2.20:
a = 14 for Qn > 14
a = Qn for Qn ≤ 14
MCPT = a.(qt-v)
If Ic ≤ 2.20:
MCPT = (qt-v) x 0.0188 x 100.55Ic+1.68
Page 23
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
10 BASICS OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION BASED ON BOREHOLES

AND LABORATORY TESTS
10.1 Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
The USCS is one of the most common used method for soil classifications. The
USCS classification method depends mainly on the particle size and Atterberg
limits. The USCS uses symbols for the particle size groups. These symbols and
their representations are G—gravel, S—sand, M—silt, and C—clay. These are
combined with other symbols expressing gradation characteristics—W for well
graded and P for poorly graded—and plasticity characteristics—H for high and L for
low, and a symbol, O, indicating the presence of organic material. A typical
classification of CL means a clay soil with low plasticity, while SP means a poorly
graded sand. The flow charts shown in Error! Reference source not found.Figure
10-1 and Figure 10-2 provide systematic means of classifying a soil according to the
USCS.
Figure 10-1: Unified Soil Classification System flowchart for coarse-grained soils
Page 24
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 10-2: Unified Soil Classification System flowchart for fine -grained soils
10.2 Consistency state for clay soil

The clay consistency can be described based on unconfined compressive strength as
in Table 10-1
Table 10-1: Consistency for Clay soil (Epri 1990).
Page 25
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
10.3 Relative density for non-cohesive soil

The sand can be described based on relative density as in Table 10-2(Epri, 1990).
Table 10-2: Relative density limits for non-cohesive soils
Relative density Soil Description
< 15% Very loose
15%-35% Loose
35%-65% medium
65%-85% Dense
>85% Very dense
11 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES

AND OTHER FIELD/LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
The relations between the soil parameters and the results of field and laboratory tests
shall be discussed in this section in brief as most of them are given in the literatures.
These relations shall be used for estimating the soil parameters needed in the
geotechnical analysis and design.
11.1 Correlation for non-cohesive soils

11.1.1 Relation between bulk unit weight  and N for non-cohesive soils
According to Bowles design handbook (1982), the relation between the unit weight
and the N values is given in Table 11-1.
Table 11-1: Relation between N and bulk unit weight  t/m3

N values Bulk unit weight  (t/m3)
0–4 1.1 to 1.4
4 -10 1.4 to 1.6
10 - 30 1.6 to 1.9
30 - 50 > 1.9
11.1.2 Relation between N values and Relative Density Rd for non-cohesive Soil
According to Terzaghi-Peck (1948) and Gibbs-Holtz (1957), the relation between
the number of blows in SPT test and the relative density is given in Table 11-2.
Table 11-2: Relation between relative density and N values
Number of blows in SPT Relative Density Dr%
0-4 0 – 15%
4 -10 15% - 35%
10 - 30 35% - 65%
30 - 50 65% - 85%
> 50 > 85%
Page 26
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
For engineering practical use in estimating the relative density Dr from N and
effective overburden stress 'vo, in addition, Giuliani and Nicoll (1982) correlated
the relative density to N value by the following formula:
Rd = N0.5 / (4.188 + 0.639 'vo0.606) ................................………. Equation 11-1
Where:
N Corrected number of blows
'vo Effective overburden stress in (t/m2)
Rd The relative density.
11.1.3 Relation between N values, Relative Density Rd and the angle of internal friction  for
non-cohesive Soil
Peck (1974) presented a relation between the number of blows NSPT and the angle of
internal friction  as presented in Figure 11-1.
Schmertmann (1975) gave a correlation between N and angle of internal friction  as
a function of stress level. This correlation can be approximated as follows:
'= tan-1 [N / (12.25 + 20.3 'VO)] 0.34 .........………………..……. Equation 11-2
Where
'vo effective overburden stress in (kg/cm2).
Figure 11-1: The Relation between the standard Penetration Resistance (Nvalue) and
Angle of shearing resistance () for granular soil (after Peck, 1974)
The Egyptian Code of Practice – Part 3 presented the relationship between N,

relative density (Dr) and internal friction angle as in Table 11-3.
Page 27
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 11-3: Relation between N values, relative density and internal friction angle
Number of blows Relative Density Internal Friction
in SPT Dr% Angle (Degrees)
0-4 0 – 15% 27 – 30
4 -10 15% - 35% 30 – 32
10 - 30 35% - 65% 32 – 36
30 - 50 65% - 85% 36 – 40
> 50 > 85% > 40
11.1.4 Relation between Relative Density Rd and the internal angle of friction  for non-
cohesive Soil
Giuliani and Nicoll (1982) gave the following expression as a relation between the
relative density Rd and tangent of the drained angle of internal friction ' as follows:
tan'= 0.575 + 0.361 Rd0.866 .........………………………….……. Equation 11-3
11.1.5 Relation between Deformation modulus E and N for Non-cohesive Soils

To get the relation between the deformation modulus and standard penetration test
results NSPT for cohesionless soils, many empirical correlations between NSPT and
the deformation modules E have been established. Webb (1970) showed that the
relationship between N values and the values of the drained young's modules can be
calculated approximated by the formula:
E = a N + b .........……………………………..……………….…. Equation 11-4

Where a, b = 478, 7170 kPa
In addition, AASHTO (1996) provided correlation for elastic modules E based on

soil type and from SPT N values (uncorrected values due to overburden effect) is
given in Table 11-4.
Table 11-4: Relation between Elastic Modulus and N values
Soil Type Equivalent Elastic Modulus E (kPa)
Silt and sandy silt 400 N
Clean fine to medium sand and
700 N
slightly silty sands
Coarse sand and sand with little
1000 N
gravel
Sandy gravel 1200 N
Janbu (1963) proposed a correlation relating the deformation modulus to the relative
density of the sand as well as the sand gradation and the confining pressure (which
is depending on the effective vertical pressure). In this correlation E is stress
depended as E is depending on the confining pressure as follows:
 '
E  F * x
.........………………………….…………. Equation 11-5
100
Page 28
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Where
E E50% kN/m2
F Factor depends on sand relative density and sand formation
15,000 for loose and silty sand
30,000 for medium dense sand
50,000 for dense sand and very gravelly sand
x’ Effective confining pressure kN/m2 = y’* Ko (Ko = at rest earth pressure
coefficient)
y’ Effective vertical pressure kN/m2
Figure 11-2: Recommended Variation of qc/N with Grain Size for non-cohesive soil
(Source: EPRI, 1990)
11.2 Correlation for cohesive soils

11.2.1 Relation between plasticity index and drained angle of shearing resistance for clay
For normally consolidated clay, the relation between the drained angle of shearing
resistance d and the plasticity index is given by EPRI 1990 as shown in Figure
11-3. The drained cohesion c’ must be evaluated using triaxial test results. For
normally consolidated clays, the drained cohesion is zero. However, the drained
cohesion is ranging between 10 and 20 kN/m2 for stiff and very stiff clays.
Page 29
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 11-3: Relationship between drained angle of shearing resistance (d) and
plasticity index for Clay
11.2.2 Relation between undrained deformation modulus and the undrained cohesion
The relation between the undrained deformation modulus (Eu) and the undrained
cohesion (Cu) has been given by Duncan (1976) as a function of the over-
consolidation ratio and the plasticity index as shown in Figure 11-4.
Figure 11-4: Relationship between Over consolidation ratio and (Eu/Cu)

Another relation between the undrained deformation modulus (Eu) and the undrained
cohesion (Cu) has been given by Termaat, Vermeer and Vergeer (1985) as a function
of plasticity index for normally consolidated clays as follows:
........………………………….……………... Equation 11-6
11.2.3 Relation between undrained modulus and drained modulus for cohesive soil
The drained and the undrained deformation modulus (Ed and Eu) are related with the
relation.
Eu = 3 Ed / (2*(1+ ’)) ........…………………………………..…. Equation 11-7
Page 30
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Where ’ is the drained Poisson’s ratio. For drained Poisson’s ratio of 0.3, the value
Ed shall be about 0.86 Eu.
Other literatures show that the above equation is based on elastic theory and may be
not applied for soft clays. Industrial floors and pavement guidelines 1999 had
reported that the  ratio represent the short term to long terms settlement would be
considered as follows:
Table 11-5: B ratios according to soil type
B Material
0.9 Gravel
0.8 Sand
0.7 Silt, Silty Clay
0.6 Stiff Clay
0.4 Soft Clay
11.2.4 Relation between Deformation Modulus and undrained shear strength
The following correlations are used to estimate Young's modulus, Eu, from CPT
results in silly clay (after Robertson & Campanella, 1984):
Eu = (150 to 300) cu ........…………………….……………………. Equation 11-8
11.2.5 Relation between compression index and index proprieties

In addition, Terzaghi and Peck (1967) had given the following correlation between
the compression index Cc and the liquid limit WL in the following form:
For normally consolidated clay: Cc=0.009 (WL-10) …..………. Equation 11-9

For over consolidated clay: Cc=0.007 (WL-10) ........…….……. Equation 11-10
11.2.6 Undrained shear strength for normally consolidated and over consolidated clay
Skempton (1957) had proposed a correlation between Cu and the plasticity index Ip
as well as the effective overburden as follows:
Cu/Po’=0.11+0.37*Ip ........…………………………….………. Equation 11-11

For pre-consolidated clay, Ladd (1977) showed that the ratio between the undrained
shear strength of pre-consolidated clay to that of normally consolidated clay is given
as:
(Cu/Po’) o.c / (Cu/Po’) n.c = (OCR) 0.8..……….………………. Equation 11-12
11.2.7 Poisson's ratio

The value of Poisson's ratio () can be determined according Bowles (1982) as shown in the
Table 11-6.
Page 31
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 11-6: Typical values for Poisson’s ratio

Soil Type 
Clay, saturated 0.4 – 0.5
Clay, unsaturated 0.1 – 0.3
Sandy Clay 0.2 – 0.3
Sand, gravely Sand 0.3 – 0.4
11.2.8 Clay sensitivity

Correlations given below (EPRI 1990), relates the clay description with the clay
sensitivity as follows:
Table 11-7: Clay sensitivity
12 SOIL FORMATION
12.1 Soil formation based on Boreholes
Based on the results of the soil investigation program (8 Boreholes), the soil
subsurface condition at the site was divided into different layers. These layers shall
be outlined in the next items
12.1.1 Layer (01): SAND

This layer is mainly SAND, Medium dense to dense, Fine to Medium, Poorly
Graded, with some of Silt, Grayish Brown.
12.1.2 Layer (02): Silty SAND

This layer is mainly SAND, Silty, Loose to medium dense, Fine, With traces of
Organic matter, shell and mica, Gray.
12.1.3 Layer (03): silty CLAY

This layer is mainly CLAY, Medium stiff, with traces of Sand, With some of
Organic matter, shell and mica, Dark Gray.
12.1.4 Layer (04): Sandy SILT

This layer is mainly SILT, Sandy, Dark Gary, with traces of Organic matter, shell
and mica.
Page 32
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
12.1.5 Ground water table
The ground water had been measured during the boring as illustrated at the
following table.
Table 12-1: Water depths as measured during the boring

BH No. Measured Water depth (m)
BH-13 0.75
BH-14 0.75
BH-15 0.77
BH-16 0.76
BH-17* 0.80
BH-18 0.75
BH-19 0.75
BH-20 0.75
* converted to piezometer
Based on the measured water depth, the recorded ground water level is about (-1.50)
12.1.6 Geological cross section

Figures (11-1) & (11-2) show the geological section of the executed boreholes at
the area under study.
Page 33
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 12-1: The geological cross section of boreholes (BH-13 to BH-16).
Page 34
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 12-2: The geological cross section of boreholes (BH-17 to BH-20).
Page 35
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
12.2 Soil formation based on CPTu tests

From the results of the CPTu tests carried at different locations, soil strata at
locations of can be summarized as follows starting from ground surface with
groundwater table normally below ground surface by about 0.50 m.
1. Silty Sand / Sand – Layer 1

This layer starts, from the ground surface and extends to depth about 9.0 to 17.0 m
except for CPTu 12 where the clay layer appears at different depth inside the Sand
& Silty Sand layer.
2. Silty Clay / Clay- Layer 2:

This layer appears below the silty sand layer and extends to depth above the lower
part of the CPT test by about 1.0 m except CPTu 12 which extends to the end of the
test.
The soil formation for the CPTu executed at the area under study can be summarized
from Error! Reference source not found. to Figure 12-5.
Page 36
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 12-3: The soil formation at CPT-05
Page 37
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 38
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 39
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
13 ESTIMATION OF GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS BASED ON

RESULTS OF THE BOREHOLES
13.1 Layer (01): Sand
13.1.1 General description
This layer is mainly SAND, Medium dense to dense, Fine to Medium, Poorly
Graded, with some of Silt, Grayish Brown.
13.1.2 Grain size distribution

The grain size distribution according to the results of laboratory tests can be
summarized in the following table:
Table 13-1: Grain size distribution of Sand layer
BH No. Depth (m) Gravel % Sand % Fines % USCS
1.45 1.00 92.80 6.20 SP-SM
BH-13 3.45 0.00 94.50 5.50 SP-SM
5.45 0.00 91.40 8.60 SP-SM
3.45 0.00 93.90 6.10 SP-SM
BH-14
5.45 10.10 83.70 6.10 SP-SM
4.45 0.00 95.70 4.30 SP
BH-15 5.45 0.00 88.40 11.60 SP-SM
9.95 0.00 88.30 11.70 SP-SM
5.45 1.30 88.90 9.80 SP-SM
BH-16
9.90 0.40 89.90 9.70 SP-SM
BH-17 5.45 0.00 95.40 4.60 SP
1.45 0.80 88.50 10.70 SP-SM
BH-18 3.45 0.00 96.30 3.70 SP
5.45 0.00 93.00 7.00 SP-SM
1.45 0.10 89.90 10.00 SP-SM
3.45 0.00 96.90 3.10 SP
BH-19
5.45 0.00 93.60 6.40 SP-SM
20.45 4.80 86.80 8.30 SP-SM
5.45 4.40 91.20 4.40 SP
BH-20 18.95 4.90 89.90 5.20 SP-SM
20.45 0.00 95.30 4.70 SP
13.1.3 Unified Soil Classification System

Based on the results of the grain size distribution, the samples classification is
ranging between SP (Poorly graded Sand) to SP-SM (Poorly graded Sand with Silt).
Page 40
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
13.1.4 Results of SPT test

The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) countered blows values show that the Nspt is
ranging from 2 to more than 50 blows. For purpose of analysis, the number of blows
for this layer shall be considered as 20 blows. Figure 13-1 shows Variation of Nspt
versus level.
Figure 13-1: Variation of Nspt versus level for sand layer.
13.1.5 Relative density based on SPT data

Based on the results of the SPT, as well as the correlations given in item 11.1.2, the
average relative density for this layer can be considered as 50.00% and the sand can
be considered as medium dense sand. Figure 13-2 shows Variation of relative
density versus level.
Page 41
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-2: Variation of relative density versus level for sand layer.
13.1.6 Shear strength parameters based on the results of SPT

According to value of the relative density, and the number of blows N, the drained
angle of shearing resistance  for this layer can be taken as 34 degree. Figure 13-3
shows Variation of drained angle of shearing resistance versus level.
Page 42
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-3: Variation of drained angle of shearing resistance versus level for sand
layer.
13.1.7 Deformation modulus based on the results of SPT

According to value of the number of blows N, as well as the correlations mentioned
before, the deformation modulus for this layer can be taken as 20 MPa .Figure 13-4
shows Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level.
Page 43
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-4: Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level for sand layer.
13.2 Layer (02): Silty SAND

This layer is mainly SAND, Silty, Loose to medium dense, Fine, With traces of
Organic matter , shell and mica, Gray..

Table 13-2: Grain size distribution of Silty Sand layer
9.54 0.40 78.00 21.60 SM
BH-13 14.08 0.00 69.20 30.80 SM
15.95 4.70 60.70 34.60 SM
0.45 9.80 63.30 26.90 SM
4.45 0.60 87.10 12.3 SM
6.95 0.00 86.70 13.30 SM
BH-14
8.45 0.00 58.00 42.00 SM
14.45 0.00 77.50 22.50 SM
17.45 0.00 74.10 25.90 SM
Page 44
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS

0.45 2.80 59.70 37.50 SM
BH-15 8.45 0.00 70.40 29.60 SM
14.45 0.00 61.00 39.00 SM
0.45 3.10 60.10 36.80 SM
6.95 0.00 80.60 19.40 SM
BH-16 12.95 0.00 68.90 31.10 SM
14.20 0.00 63.80 36.20 SM
15.95 0.00 63.90 36.10 SM
0.45 0.00 83.40 16.60 SM
11.45 0.00 78.80 21.20 SM
BH-17
14.08 0.00 72.20 27.80 SM
15.95 0.00 56.90 43.10 SM
0.45 0.10 69.20 30.70 SM
BH-18 8.45 0.00 72.00 28.00 SM
12.95 0.00 66.90 33.10 SM
0.45 8.40 63.10 28.50 SM
6.95 4.10 80.60 15.30 SM
BH-19 12.95 0.00 69.50 30.50 SM
14.40 0.00 58.10 41.90 SM
15.15 0.00 58.50 41.50 SM
0.45 2.20 80.30 17.50 SM
11.45 0.00 74.70 25.30 SM
BH-20
13.45 0.00 66.00 34.00 SM
14.50 0.00 65.20 34.80 SM

Based on the results of the grain size distribution, the samples can be classified
mainly as SM (Silty Sand).

ranging from 6 to 47 blows. For purpose of analysis, the number of blows for this
layer shall be considered as 15 blows. Figure 13-5 shows Variation of Nspt versus
level.
Page 45
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-5: Variation of Nspt versus level for silty sand layer.
13.2.5 Relative density based on SPT data

Based on the results of the SPT, as well as the correlations given in item 11.1.2, the
average relative density for this layer can be considered as 45.00% and the sand can
be considered as medium dense sand. Figure 13-6 shows Variation of relative
density versus level.
Page 46
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-6: Variation of relative density versus level for silty sand layer.
13.2.6 Shear strength parameters based on the results of SPT

According to value of the relative density, and the number of blows N, the drained
angle of shearing resistance  for this layer can be taken as 33 degree. Figure 13-7
shows Variation of drained angle of shearing resistance versus level.
Page 47
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-7: Variation of drained angle of shearing resistance versus level for silty
sand layer.
13.2.7 Deformation modulus based on the results of SPT

According to value of the number of blows N, as well as the correlations mentioned
before, the deformation modulus for this layer can be taken as 10 MPa .Figure 13-8
shows Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level.
Page 48
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-8: Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level for silty sand
layer.
13.3 Layer (03): silty CLAY

This layer is mainly CLAY, Medium stiff, With traces of Sand, With some of
Organic matter, shell and mica, Dark Gray.
13.3.2 Atterberg limits and natural water content

The Atterberg limits and natural water content according to the results of laboratory
tests can be summarized in the following table:
Page 49
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 13-3: Atterberg limits and natural water content of the clay layer
BH. No. Depth (m) W.C % L.L % P.L % P.I % USCS
9.60 --- 53.00 25.00 28.00 CH
14.15 --- 49.00 24.00 25.00 CL
BH-13 17.50 --- 34.00 18.00 16.00 CL
17.95 --- 28.00 15.00 13.00 CL
19.20 51.80 104.00 32.00 72.00 CH
8.10 --- 81.00 28.00 53.00 CH
18.95 --- 80.00 27.00 53.00 CH
BH-14
19.70 55.00 85.00 28.00 57.00 CH
20.15 --- 88.00 28.00 60.00 CH
16.00 --- 40.00 22.00 18.00 CL
BH-15
19.10 50.20 87.00 29.00 58.00 CH
8.45 --- 35.00 18.00 17.00 CL
14.53 --- 93.00 31.00 62.00 CH
BH-16 17.45 --- 30.00 16.00 14.00 CL
19.20 53.50 79.00 28.00 51.00 CH
20.70 53.00 76.00 27.00 49.00 CH
12.88 46.70 79.00 28.00 51.00 CH
13.20 --- 25.00 15.00 10.00 CL
BH-17
14.18 --- 41.00 21.00 20.00 CL
20.70 59.90 83.00 28.00 55.00 CH
9.65 --- 47.00 23.00 24.00 CL
14.95 --- 35.00 18.00 17.00 CL
BH-18
17.10 --- 29.00 16.00 13.00 CL
19.20 56.60 107.00 33.00 74.00 CH
14.70 --- 40.00 22.00 18.00 CL
BH-19 17.45 --- 34.00 18.00 16.00 CL
17.70 50.80 98.00 31.00 67.00 CH
BH-20 17.55 58.30 98.00 32.00 66.00 CH

Based on the results of the Atterberg limits, the samples classifications are ranging
between CH (Clay with high plasticity) and CL (Clay with low plasticity).
13.3.4 Undrained shear strength of the clay layer

The value of the undrained shear strength Cu has been estimated based on the results
of unconfined compressive strength tests , SPT tests and Atterberg limits. The
results showed that this layer can be considered as medium stiff clay. Figure 13-9
shows Variation of undrained shear strength Cu versus level.
Page 50
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-9: Variation of undrained shear strength Cu versus level for clay layer.
The undrained shear strength Cu for this layer is ranging between 10 to 100 KPa, as
shown in the above figure.
Page 51
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
13.3.5 Undrained and drained deformation modulus based on undrained cohesion

The values of the undrained deformation modulus has been calculated considering
the ratio between the undrained deformation modulus and the undrained cohesion as
per Vermeer and Vergeer (1985) equation given in item 11.2.4. For an average value
of plasticity index of 38.00%, the ratio between Eu and Cu shall be conservatively
about 375.
Figure 13-10 shows Variation of undrained deformation modulus Cu versus level.
Figure 13-11 shows Variation of drained deformation modulus Cu versus level.
Figure 13-10: Variation of undrained deformation modulus versus level for clay layer.
The undrained deformation modulus Eu for this layer is ranging between 4 to 30

MPa, as shown in the above figure.
Page 52
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 13-11: Variation of drained deformation modulus versus level for clay layer.
The drained deformation modulus Ed for this layer is ranging between 3 to 26 MPa,
as shown in the above figure.
Page 53
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
13.3.6 Drained shear strength parameters

The drained angle of shearing resistance has been calculated as per the correlation
given in item 11.2.1. The results are shown in Figure 13-12.
The results of the analysis showed that the drained angle of shearing resistance is
ranging from 23 to 36 degree.
Figure 13-12: Variation of drained friction angle versus level for clay layer.
Page 54
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
13.3.7 Consolidation parameters (Compression index (Cc) , the recompression index (Cr)
and initial void ratio)
The consolidation parameters are mainly the compression index Cc and the
recompression index Cr. The compression index is defined as the slope of the virgin
branch of the consolidation curve where the virgin branch is the line extends for
stresses higher than the pre-consolidated pressure. The values of the compression
and the recompression indexes can be summarized as follows:
Table 13-4: The values of the compression, the recompression indexes and the void
ratio according to Consolidation tests
Pre-
Over Void
Depth consolidated
Location BH. No. Cc Cr consolidation ratio
(m) pressure
ratio
(kg/cm2)
At the
Area
BH-16 18.50 0.922 0.208 2.6 2.1 1.504
under
study
At other BH-02 20.00 0.880 0.202 2.6 2.0 1.652
area BH-10 17.80 0.895 0.201 2.2 1.9 1.771
13.4 Layer (04): Deep Sandy SILT

This layer is mainly SILT, Sandy, Dark Gary, With traces of Organic matter shell
and mica.

Table 13-5: Grain size distribution of Silt layer
BH-13 17.00 0.00 32.00 68.00 ML
BH-14 15.50 0.00 49.80 50.20 ML
15.50 0.00 20.80 79.20 ML
BH-15 16.00 0.00 43.20 56.80 ML
18.50 0.00 41.80 58.20 ML
BH-17 17.70 0.00 21.00 79.00 ML
15.50 0.00 31.60 68.40 ML
BH-18
17.10 0.00 31.80 68.20 ML
BH-19 15.50 0.00 45.00 55.00 ML
12.50 0.00 26.00 74.00 ML
BH-20 14.00 0.00 35.20 64.80 ML
14.50 0.00 45.20 54.80 ML
Page 55
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results of the Atterberg limits, the samples can be classified mainly as
ML (Silt with low plasticity).

ranging from 2 to 24 blows. For purpose of analysis, the number of blows for this
layer shall be considered as 12 blows. Figure 13-13 shows Variation of Nspt versus
level.
Figure 13-13: Variation of Nspt versus level for silt layer.
14 ESTIMATION OF GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS OF CLAY

LAYER BASED ON RESULTS OF CPTU TEST RESULTS
14.1 General
The geotechnical parameters for the silty clay layers shall be concluded from the
results of CPTu tests results as well as the results of previous site investigations.
Page 56
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
14.2 Cone resistance and friction resistance for the tested CPT
CPeT-IT had derived the Cone resistance (qc) and the Friction resistance (fs) for the
tested CPT. The variation of the Cone resistance (qc) and the Friction resistance (fs)
versus depth are shown in Appendix 3 and can be summarized in Figure 14-1 and
Figure 14-2.
Figure 14-1: The Cone resistance (qc) for all CPT tests.
Page 57
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 14-2: The Friction resistance (fs) for all CPT tests.
Page 58
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
14.3 Undrained shear strength parameters for cohesive layers

CPeT-IT had derived the undrained shear strength parameters (Cu) for cohesive
layers using the relations given in item 9.3. The variation of the undrained shear
strength parameters (Cu) versus depth for each CPT is are shown in Appendix 3 and
can be summarized in Figure 14-3
Figure 14-3: The undrained shear strength for all CPT tests
Page 59
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
14.4 Ratio between undrained shear strength/effective stresses

The variation of the ratio between the undrained shear strength and the effective
overburden stresses is shown in Figure 14-4.
Figure 14-4: The undrained strength ratio for all CPT tests.
Page 60
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
In order to judge the value of Su/sv’ and its effect on the over-consolidation ratio
Skempton 1957 had proposed a correlation between Cu and the plasticity index Ip as
well as the effective overburden as follows:
Cu/Po’=0.11+0.37*Ip........…………………………………………. Equation 14-1
Mersi 1975 had suggested the following correlation for soft clays:
Cu/Po’=0.22 ……….........…………………………………………. Equation 14-2

Larsson 1980 had suggested the following correlation inorganic clays:
Cu/Po’=0.33 ........…………………………………………………. Equation 14-3
Bowles 1984 had suggested the correlation for normally consolidated clays function
of liquid limit:
Cu/Po’=0.45 WL ........………………………………………..……. Equation 14-4
Burland 1990 had suggested the following correlation natural sensitive clays:
Cu/Po’=0.30 ........…………………………………….……………. Equation 14-5
For pre-consolidated clay, Ladd, 1977 showed that the ratio between the undrained
shear strength of pre-consolidated clay to that of normally consolidated clay is given
as:
(Cu/Po’) o.c / (Cu/Po’) n.c = (OCR) 0.8.. ........…………….………. Equation 14-6
The above proves that the concluded value of Cu/v is indicating that the clay is not
a normally consolidated clay and can be classified as over consolidated clay.
14.5 Over consolidation ratio O.C.R

CPeT-IT had derived the over consolidation ratio (OCR) for cohesive layers using
the relations mentioned above. The variation of the over consolidation ratio (OCR)
versus depth can be summarized in the Figure 14-5.
These results show that in general the OCR is about 6 for the clay layer. This value
is matching with the value of Cu/v concluded in item 14.4.
Page 61
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 14-5: The over consolidation ratio for all CPT tests
Page 62
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
14.6 Constrained modulus

CPeT-IT had derived the constrained modulus (M) for layers using the relations
given above. The variation of the constrained modulus (M) versus depth are shown
in Appendix 3. The variation of the constrained modulus (M) versus depth can be
summarized in the Figure 14-6.
Figure 14-6: The constrained modulus (M) for all CPT tests
Page 63
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
14.7 Comments on the results of CPTU

The results of CPT showed that CPT-06 have the maximum thickness of Silty Clay
layer. In addition the lower part of this clay showed lower OCR value and shear
strength parameters.
The geotechnical parameters of the clay layers had been evaluated based on the
results of CPT 05, CPT 06 and CPT 12 as follows:
A- Undrained cohesion
The variation of the undrained cohesion had been plotted and shown in Figure
14-7. The average value of 60 KPa can be assigned for the middle and lower
layers
B- Su/σv’
The variation of the Su/σv’ (undrained cohesion/effective stresses) for this layer
had been plotted and shown in Figure 14-8. The average value of 0.7 and 0.4 for
the middle clay and lower clay respectively can be assigned
C- Over consolation ratio OCR

The variation of the OCR (Over consolation ratio) had been plotted and shown
in Figure 14-9. The average value of 4 and 2 for the middle clay and lower clay
respectively can be assigned
Page 64
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Su = 60 KPa
Su = 60 KPa
Figure 14-7: The selected undrained shear strength for analysis.
Page 65
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Su/σvˋ = 0.7
Su/σvˋ = 0.4
Figure 14-8: The selected undrained strength ratio for analysis.
Page 66
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
OCR = 4.0
OCR = 2.00
Figure 14-9: The selected over consolidation ratio for analysis.
Page 67
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
M=7 MPa
M=8 MPa
Figure 14-10: The selected Constrained modulus for analysis.
Page 68
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the above, the idealized geotechnical parameters for the silty clay layers
would be summarized as follows:
Table 14-1: Geotechnical parameters for the clay layer based on CPT tests
Level Average
Constrained
Layer cohesion OCR Su/σv’
From to modules
Su
m m KPa MPa --- ---
Silty
-8.00 -10.00 60 7 4.00 0.7
Clay
-18.00 -26.00 60 8 2.00 0.4
15 IDEALIZED GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS FOR SOIL

LAYERS AT THE AREA UNDER STUDY
In general the values of parameters estimated from CPT had close results compared
to results of boreholes. Both CPTU tests and boreholes show some variation in the
lithology and the soil formation. This in terms of the thickness of the clay layer.
Indeed conservative lithology shall be considered for geotechnical analysis for
assessment of safe foundation system and also the geotechnical parameters needed
for structural analysis.
The following summarizes the basics of selection of the idealized profile and the
idealized geotechnical parameters:
1- The thickness of the lower clay had be selected form level -18 to -26 (CPT6).
2- The thickness of middle clay layer had been considered from level -8 to -10.
3- The OCR for the lower clay layer had been considered 2. This is based on results
of the consolation tests as well CPT tests.
4- The OCR for the middle clay layer had been considered 4. This is based on
results of the CPT tests.
Based on the above, the idealized geotechnical parameters for the all layers at the
area under study as an average between results from boreholes and CPT tests would
be summarized as follows
Page 69
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 15-1: Geotechnical parameters for all layers
From
Drained
Level Drained Undrained Consolidation
Deformation
Layer Nspt Friction Cohesion OCR tests
modules
Botto Thick Angle (KPa)
Top (MPa) Cr Cc
m (m)
Sand 0 -8.00 8.0 20 20 33 --- --- --- ---
Silty CLAY -8.00 -10.00 2.00 --- 10 26 60 4.00 0.208 0.922
Silty Sand -10.00 -18.00 8.0 15 12 34 --- --- --- ---
Silty CLAY -18.00 -26.00 2.00 --- 10 26 60 2.00 0.208 0.922
Page 70
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
16 FINAL COMMENTS ON RESULTS SITE INVESTIGATIONS

16.1 General
From the results of the site investigations, two main conclusion would be drawn
1- Difference of results of additional site investigations compared to tender site
investigations.
2- The soil condition across the site is extremely heterogeneous.
16.2 Comparison between tender site investigations and additional site investigations
16.2.1 Tender site investigations
 The project tender documents included a geotechnical report prepared by

Engineering Consultant Office (Dr. Eng. Waseim Ragab Azzam) dated April 2019.
The mentioned report included the results of 46 boreholes conducted at the MSP
area. The boreholes were distributed at the Admin area, the roads and the factory
structures. The depth of boreholes was variable between 12 to 25 m according to the
investigated structure.
 Based on the Executed boreholes during tender, the soil formation showed
homogenous formation consisting of the following layers (as extracted from
mentioned geotechnical report)
- Top Stiff clayey silt layer with thickness of 75cm. Followed by soft silty clay (loam)
layer with thickness of 1m.
- Finally a thick layer of fine to medium sand is extended to end of boring.
 The SPT blows for sand layer shown in the tender boreholes the sand can be divided
into two layers according to SPT value and the coresoding relative density.
 The SPT indicated that the sand trends to be medium dense to dense sand down to
depth about 7 to 9 m with SPT values between 25 to 35 blows
 For lower part of sand the sand trends to be dense to very dense sand down to the
end of boreholes.
 Finally the report recommended to remove the upper clayey silt and soft silty clay
down to average depth about 2.25 m and recommended to carry out replacement up
to foundation levels.
16.2.2 Results of the additional site investigations.
The results of the additional site investigations (boreholes and CPTU tests) shows
the site includes the following layers:
- Upper Silty SAND (SM) layer, very loose to medium dense with thickness about
2.0 m.
- Followed by poorly graded SAND (SP-SM) layer, medium dense down to depth
variable between 5 to 10 m.
- Below this layer a silty SAND (SM) extended down to depth variable between
14 to 18 m, this layer showed extreme heterogeneity across the site.
Page 71
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
The layer is interbedded with soft to medium stiff CLAY layers with significant
thickness variable between 0.5 m to 3.0 m. Moreover, this layer recorded very
loose to loose condition at some boreholes.
- This layer is followed by a sandy SILT (ML) layer, this layer is not appearing in
all boreholes as it is a transition layer between the sand layers and lower
recorded Clay layers.
- Finally, all boreholes showed medium stiff CLAY at the lower part of boreholes
from depth about 16.0 m down to the end of boreholes in most cases.
16.2.3 Contradictions between Tender investigation and additional site investigations:
The main contradictions between the two investigations results is summarized in

main two points:
a- The tender documents had not shown any soft or loose layers interbedding the
sand layers, which is clearly recorded on the additional site investigations.
b- The tender investigations had not shown any existence of the lower medium stiff
CLAY layer which is clearly recorded on the additional site investigation.
16.3 Site heterogeneity

The results of site additional investigations showed extreme heterogeneity in the
geotechnical conditions. This is in terms of the layers thickness/levels as well as
strength of encountered layers. The upper silty clay layers appears in some
locations and vanishes at other locations. The thickness of this layer ranges
between 0.0 and 3.0 m. For lower silty clay layer, the thickness as well as the top
level of the layer always varies in the executed boreholes. On the other side, the
relative density of the sand and silty sand layers showed extreme variation
between loose to very dense condition.
Page 72
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
17 OUTLINES OF GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS

17.1 Structural system and loading condition
Based on the received date as per tender drawings, the foundation system for
structure under study is Reinforced concrete raft. As mentioned above, the proposed
structure shall comprise several stockpiles. As per the architectural and structural
design, as shown in Figure 17-1.
Figure 17-1: The general plan for area under study.
Page 73
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the above, the building area shall be divided into two parts where the first
part is representing the zircon / rutile and ilmenite stockpile while the second part
represents the magnetile and sandtrap stockpile.
The stresses under each part had been considered as per allowable bearing capacity
required by the tenderer. The tenderer required stress for part one with value about
250 kPa while the required value for second part shall be about 150 kPa. Figure 17-2
shows the distribution of the estimated average stresses at the foundation level.
Figure 17-2: The distribution of the estimated average stresses at the foundation
level.
Page 74
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
17.2 Introduction to Consolidation settlement

For pre-consolidated clay which had a non-linear material, the modulus is not
constant but is a function of stress. This relationship is most commonly shown on a
graph of void ratio versus the logarithm of effective stress as shown in figure 11.1.
The stress level Pc is the pre-consolidation stress and represents the maximum
effective stress experienced. The stress level Pc is the pre-consolidation stress and
represents the maximum effective stress experienced by the soil in the past. If a soil
is experiencing an effective stress less than Pc it is over-consolidated. The
relationship between the void ratio and the logarithm of the effective stress is given
by the recompression index, Cr. A soil that has a stress greater than or equal to Pc is
normally consolidated and its deformation is dictated by the compression index Cc.
In turn, the basic equations for calculating the settlement are gives as :
For overburden effective pressure Po> PC (Normally consolidated clays)
cc P  p
H  .H.log o ....................…………………….…… Equation 17-1
1 e0 po
For over burden effective pressure Po< PC and Po+P < PC .
cr P  p
H  .H.log o ....................……..……………….…… Equation 17-2
1 e0 po
For over burden pressure effective Po< PC and Po+P > PC .
cr Pc c Po  P
H  .H .log  c .H .log ...................……..… Equation 17-3
1 e0 po 1 e0 pC
Figure 17-3: Graph of void ratio versus the logarithm of effective stress
Page 75
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
17.3 Safety against Shear Failure

The allowable soil bearing capacity which satisfies the shear failure criteria shall be
calculated. The calculations shall performed by adopting the shear strength
parameters listed in item 15 for the soil condition of Foundation. The allowable net
bearing capacity is given as follows:
qult = CNc . c + 1 Df Nq q + 2 BN 

Where:
qult = ultimate bearing capacity (KN/m2)
c = cohesion (KN/m2)
q = effective surcharge; (KN/m2)
= 1 Df where Df refers to depth of footing
1 = unit weight of subsoil above foundation level (KN/m3)
2 = unit weight of subsoil below foundation level (KN/m3)
B = width (diameter) of footing (m)
Df = The depth of the base of footing (m)
Nc, Nq, N = bearing capacity factors dependent only on the angle of
shearing resistance  of the soil.
c, q,  = shape factors
It is worth the mention that for raft foundations allowable bearing capacity is
governed by the settlement values rather than safety against shear failure.
18 SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS USING SETTLE 3D

18.1 General
Settlement analysis had been carried out using the software SETTLE 3D. The aim of
the analysis is to validate the values of calculated consolidation settlement and
predicted rate of settlement. It worth to mention that the program “Settle3D” is
geotechnical program oriented for settlement calculations and consolidation
analysis. For settlement calculations, it uses the consolidation/deformation
parameters. For vertical consolidation, the program uses the finite difference
technique.
18.2 Geotechnical parameters used in analysis

The following summarizes the soil parameters as used in Settle 3-D foundation:
Page 76
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 18-1: The selected soil parameters as used in Settle 3-D model.
From
Level Consolidation
Layer OCR tests
Botto Thick
Top Cr Cc
m (m)
Not encountered in
Sand 0 -8.00 8.0
consolidation
Silty CLAY -8.00 -10.00 2.00 4.00 0.208 0.922
Not encountered in
Silty sand -10.00 -18.00 8.0
consolidation
Silty CLAY -18.00 -26.00 2.00 2.00 0.208 0.922
The water head was taken at depth 0.75 m below ground level
18.3 Input data for SETTLE 3D

The input data used in the settle 3D files are enclosed in Appendix 4 and can be
summarized as following:
1- Soil layers and Soil data
2- Load data for different models
18.4 Model configuration

Following figure show model configuration considering service loads ad geometry
and subsurface condition is considered as per table 18-1.
q1 = 250 kPa
q2 = 150 kPa
Figure 18-1: Settle 3d Model of the area under study.
Page 77
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
q1 = 250 kPa
Query
point 1
Query
line 3
Query
line 1
Query
line 2
Query
q2 = point 2
150 kPa
Figure 18-2: Plan view of Settle 3d Model of the area under study.
The query point (1) shows the settlement at mid of part 1 with stress of 250 kPa. The
second point (query point 2) represents the settlement at mid of part 2 with stress of
150 kPa. The purpose of query lines is to show the settlement profile along
foundation. As shown in figure (18-2) line 1 crosses through all raft parts vertically,
line 2 shows the settlement profile in horizontal direction along part 2 and line 3
shows the settlement profile along part 1.
18.5 Results of the analysis

The detailed results of the analysis are included in Appendix 4. The following table
shows the consolidation settlement results for query points.
In addition, figures (18-3), (18-4) and (18-5) present settlement profiles across raft
due to consolidation.
Page 78
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 18-2: The consolidation settlement results for query points.

Point Consolidation settlement (cm)
Query point (1)- Maximum settlement
28.7
of area with stresses 250 KPA
Query point (2) Maximum settlement of
18.38
area with stresses 150 KPA
In addition, figures (18-3), (18-4) and (18-5) present consolidation settlement profiles
Raft – Part 1- Raft – Part 2-

stress 250 KPA STRESS 150
22 cm kpa
end of
part 1
Figure 18-3: Query line (1) consolidation settlement profile
Figure 18-4: Query line (2) consolidation settlement profile- Part 2 with stress 150
KPA
Page 79
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 18-5: Query line (3) consolidation settlement profile- Part 1 with stress 250
KPA
Reviewing previous figures, the maximum settlement due to consolidation is

observed at query point (1) with value of 28.7cm located at mid of part (1).
Moreover, the settlement due to consolidation at mid of part 2 is 18.38 and
increasing when approaches to the first part with value of 22cm.
The actual settlement values for part 1 with stress 250 KPA would be an average
value of maximum settlement at middle of 28 cm and the minimum stress at coroner
of 22 cm. A value of 25 cm would be the most anticipated value for this part.
Following the same methodology the anticipated settlement for part 2 with stress
150 Kpa would be in range of 17 cm
18.6 Verification of settlement values using in-house spread sheet
Using the consolidation settlement equations given in item 17.2, an indoor spread
sheet had been used to estimate the settlement values of both parts 1 and 2.
Appendix 5 includes the detailed analysis of consolidation settlement calculations
which can be summarized as following:
Part Number Consolidation settlement (cm)
Part -1 area with stresses 250 KPA 26.6
Part -2 area with stresses 150 KPA 13.5
The values of the settlement concluded from the consolidation settlement equations
showed good agreement with the results concluded from settle3D., especially for
part 1 with stress 250 KPA. For the other part with stress 150 KPA, consolidation
equation showed less value than Settle 3D. This can be clearly explained by the fact
that settle 3D analysis considered the effect of the adjacent part with stress 250 kPa.
Indeed this adjacent stress shall affect the settlement values.
Page 80
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
19 ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED OF SOIL IMPROVEMENT AND

OUTLINES OF PROPOSED SYSTEM
19.1 General
The calculated settlement values are in general exceeding the allowable limits
according to ECP code of practice. The high settlement values would also affect the
operation of the structure and the serviceability limit state shall be a real problem.
In addition, the variation of the soil condition (as outlined in previous item) would
result in a differential settlement and/or tilt which would affect the servility and the
safety of the structure.
Based on the above, it is believed that a soil improvement technique must be used to
ensure the safety of the buildings against both total and differential settlement.
19.2 Soil improvement proposed alternative

Many soil improvement alternatives have been studied. These include preloading
and wick drains, vibro compaction and stone columns. Finally, Stone columns
technique has been selected to improve the subsoil condition underneath the
Buildings in light of time constrains and geotechnical properties. This in light of the
soil nature and the anticipated stresses and also the project time schedule
The stone columns shall work not only for strengthen of soil but also as vertical
drains for accelerating the consolidation process. A minimum of 0.5 m-thick of
crushed stone shall be placed over the stone columns as shall be discussed in the
next items
20 INTRODUCTION TO STONE COLUMNS (VIBRO

REPLACEMENT)
20.1 General
Vibroflotation (Vibro-compaction)/(Vibro replacement) techniques are famous
techniques used to reduce the settlement and also improve the bearing capacity and
the embankment slope stability safety factors.
Vibro-Replacement is a combination of Vibro floatation with a gravel backfill
resulting in stone columns, which not only increases the amount of densification, but
provides a degree of reinforcement and a potentially effective means of drainage.
Spacing of the probe compaction points depends upon soil type, density
requirements, and probe/vibrator characteristics. Typical spacing is in range from
1.50 to 4.00 m (5 to 12 ft). The vibro replacement causes the reduction of settlement
and increase of shear strength. The technique offers a double benefit by reducing the
settlement in addition to improving the ground sufficiently to allow foundation
support on rafts spread footings.
The use of stone column for such a project is mainly to decrease the total settlement
and also it contributed for the stability requirements. The rule of the stone columns
for decreasing the settlement is due to the following:
Page 81
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
- Increasing in lateral stress

- Increasing in stiffness modulus
- Improved drainage.
The stone columns are arranged in equilateral triangular or rectangular pattern. The
spacing between the columns (S) shall be determined based on the allowable stress
and the induced settlement. The proposed stone columns are 1.0 in diameter.
20.2 Sequence for construction of stone columns

The schematic diagram for construction of stone columns is shown in following
figure:
Figure 20-1: Schematic diagram for stone columns construction sequence
20.3 Material used for Stone Columns

1- The gradation of the stone columns and replacement layer shall satisfy the
requirements of FHWA 10528 as follows:
Page 82
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
2- The stone used for stone columns must satisfy the following requirements:
Material used shall be:
- Sound Material
- Free of debris
- Dolomite
- Not affected by sea water
Tests performed for Material Acceptance:

- Loose and compacted densities (ASTM C29)
- Soundness (ASTM C88)
- Specific gravity (ASTM C127)
- Abrasion [Los Angeles](ASTM C131)
- Gradation curves (ASTM D422)
Material Acceptance Criteria:

- Percent weight loss of the aggregate should not exceed 12 percent when
subjected to the Sulfate Soundness Test in accordance with ASTM C88.
- The gradation of the stone columns must satisfy a suitability number not more
than 15 where the stability number is defined as follows:
Where D50, D20 and D10 are the diameters in mm at percent passing 50%, 20% and
10% respectively.
- Percent loss of the aggregate should not exceed 40 percent when subjected to
500 revolutions using the Los Angeles Abrasion Test in accordance with ASTM
C131.
 Percent weight loss of the aggregate should not exceed 12 percent when
subjected to the Sulfate Soundness Test in accordance with ASTM C88.
Page 83
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
 The gradation of the stone columns must satisfy a suitability number not
more than 15 where the stability number is defined as follows:
Where: D50, D20 and D10 are the diameters in mm at percent passing 50%, 20%
and 10% respectively.
21 THEORETICAL BASIS FOR USE OF STONE COLUMNS AS A

SOIL IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM
21.1 General
One of the main aims of using the stone columns is to improve both
strength/stiffness parameters of the soil. In the following, the step by step procures
for the stone columns system shall be presented. Indeed, complete design for each
structure shall be submitted for the engineer’s approval. The design shall be carried
out using equations/relations presented in FHWA NO. RD-83/026.
21.2 Concept of area replacement ratio (as)

The volume of soil replaced by stone columns has an important effect upon the
performance of the improved ground. To quantify the amount of soil replacement,
define the Area Replacement Ratio (as), as the fraction of soil tributary to the stone
column replaced by the stone, as presented in the following equation:
Where As is the area of the stone column after compaction and A is the total
Area within the unit cell. Further, the ratio of the area of the soil remaining, Ac to
the total area is then:
The area replacement ratio, as, can be expressed in terms of the diameter and spacing
of the stone columns as follows:
Where
D = diameter of the compacted stone column.
S = center-to-center spacing of the stone columns.
C1 = a constant dependent upon the pattern of stone columns used;
Page 84
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
For a square pattern, the value of C1=/4 while for triangular pattern with apex
angle 60 degree (Equilateral triangle), the value of C1=0.907. Finally for triangular
pattern with apex angle of 90 degree, the value of C1=/2.
For other shapes or non-uniform distribution, the value of (as) must be calculated.
The following table summarizes the value of (as) for different configurations.
Area
pattern arrangement C1 replacement
ratio (as)
Square pattern π/4
Triangular pattern
with apex angle 60 0.907
degree
Triangular pattern
with apex angle 90 π/2
degree
The distribution of vertical stress within a unit cell can be expressed by a stress
concentration factor n defined as:
Where:
: Stress in the stone column
: Stress in the surrounding cohesive soil
The average stress  which must exist over the unit cell area at a given depth must,
for equilibrium of vertical forces to exist within the unit cell, equal for a given area
replacement ratio, as
Page 85
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Where all the terms have been previously defined. Solving equation for the stress in
the clay and stone using the stress concentration factor n:
Where and are the ratio of stresses in the clay and stone, respectively, to the
average stress  over the tributary area. For a given set of field conditions, the stress
in the stone and clay can be readily determined using equations) if a reasonable
value of the stress concentration factor is assumed based on previous measurements.
The above , and stresses are due to the applied loading. In addition, the
initial effective (and total) overburden and initial lateral stress at a given depth are
also important quantities.
For a give value of modular ratio Es/Ec (Where Es and Ec are average modulus of
elasticity of the stone column and soil, respectively), the related stress concentration
factor (n) using figure (21-1). and by applying the modular ratio (Es/Ec).
Figure 21-1: Relation between the stress concentration factor (n) and the modular
ratio (Es/Ec)
Page 86
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
The lower bound can be calculated as follows:
21.3 Reduction of settlement due the use of stone columns

The ratio of settlements of the stone column improved ground to the unimproved
ground (St/S) can be expressed as:
This equation shows that the level of improvement is dependent upon (1) the stress
concentration factor n, (2) the initial effective stress in the clay, and (3) the
magnitude of applied stress . Equation (21-9) indicates, if other factors are
constant, a greater reduction in settlement is achieved for longer columns (the
average increases with stone column length) and for smaller applied stress
increments.
For very large (long length of stone column) and very small applied stresses ,
the settlement ratio relatively rapidly approaches:
21.4 Equivalent shear strength parameters

The role of the stone columns for bearing capacity problems is to modify and
increases the shear strength of the soil. For pure clay layers with undrained
cohesion, installation of stone columns creates a friction angle  and the final soil
matrix shall have both cohesion and angle of internal friction. For purpose of
geotechnical analysis, equivalent shear strength parameters (C and ) shall be
determined for the improved soil with stone columns. The equivalent shear strength
parameters shall be calculated based on equations and charts given by Heinz J.
Priebe 1995- FHWA design manual which are as follows:
Proportional area of the soil:
Ac 1

A ( A / Ac)  ( A / Ac)
Proportional load on the column (m')
n 1
m' 
n
Improved soil angle of shear resistance
tan   tan c  (1  m' ) tan s
Page 87
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Cohesion for improved soil (C')

Ac
C  (1  )Cs
Where : A
Stone columns constrained modulus (Dc)
Angle of friction for column c
Soil constrained modulus (Ds)
Soil angle of shear resistance (s)
Soil cohesion (Cs)
Dimater of the columns (D)
Spacing between stone columns (S)
Area Ratio (A/Ac)
Constrained Modulus Ratio (DC/DS)
Improvement factor (n) (from Figure 21-1 )
Addition to the area ratio Δ(A/Ac) (from Figure 21-3)
Proportional area of the soil
Proportional load on the column (m')
Figure 21-2: Design chart for vibro replacement
Figure 21-3: Consideration of column compressibility
Page 88
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
22 DESIGN OF STONE COLUMNS

22.1 Diameter of stone columns
The proposed stone columns shall be 1.0 m in diameter.
22.2 Design concept

The design concept shall be based on the following:
o The contact stress at the foundation level is 250 KPA/150 KPA
o The factor of safety against bearing capacity failure shall be minimum 3.
o The allowable settlement is 75 mm.
o The foundation design shall be a raft foundation.
o The minimum thickness of the replacement soil above stone columns is 50 cm.
22.3 Depth of stone columns and proposed working platform.

The stone columns working platform shall be prepared to be above water level by
about minimum 0.5 m.
The stone column shall extend down to bottom of silty clay layer or down to refusal.
Referring to the results of the site investigation, the depth of stone columns shall be
vary from 20 and 26 m, Indeed field measurements for refusal shall define the depth
of stone columns at different locations.
22.4 Proposed arrangement for stone columns

The settlement reduction factor had been calculated considering the following:
1. Constrained modulus of the soil 10 to 15 MPA.

2. Constrained modulus of the stones is 75 MPA.
3. Stone columns is arranged in rectangular pattern or Triangular pattern with apex
angle 90 degree
The settlement reduction factor had been calculated for spacing 1.25 m *1.25 m to
2.5 m*2.5 m. The results can be summarized in the following table:
Stone column Spacing Settlement Reduction factor

pattern (m) S improved/S unimproved
1.25 0.177
1.50 0.289
1.75 0.387
Rectangular
2.00 0.471
2.25 0.542
2.50 0.602
Page 89
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Stone column Spacing Settlement Reduction factor

pattern (m) S improved/S unimproved
1.75 0.17
Triangular 2.00 0.25
pattern with 2.25 0.32
apex angle 90 2.50 0.39
degree 2.75 0.45
3.00 0.504
Stone columns pattern for our site shall be both the square pattern and Triangular
pattern with apex angle 90 degree according to design stress.
For case of raft, the aim of the stone columns is to reduce the settlement to the
allowable value (7.5 cm maximum). The following table summarizes the required
settlement reduction factor and the corresponding spacing between stone columns:
Selected
Assumed
Settlement spacing settlement Settlement
stresses at
Model pre- between reduction after
foundation
improvement stone factor improvement
level
columns
2.0 m
Triangular
M1 250 kPa 25 cm pattern with 0.25 6.50 cm
apex angle
90 degree
2.0 m
M2 150 kPa 15 cm rectangular 0.47 7.0 cm
pattern
The typical arrangement for the stone columns is shown in Figure 22-1 and Figure
22-2.
Page 90
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 22-1: Typical arrangement for the stone columns for area 1 with stress 250
KPA
Figure 22-2: Typical arrangement for the stone columns for area 2 with stress 150
KPA
Page 91
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
22.5 Soil replacement above stone columns (Cushion layer)

A minimum soil replacement (crushed stone) with thickness 0.5 m shall be adopted
above stone columns. The main rule of the replacement soil is to help in sharing the
loads of the foundation.
The cushion layer shall be provided with two layers of geo grid TX-150 to unify the
settlement. The gradation of the cushion shall be as per following items.
22.6 Geotechnical parameters for design of raft

For design of raft, the anticipated settlement and the average modulus of subgrade
reaction shall be as follows:
Assumed
Settlement after Modulus of subgrade
Model stresses at
improvement reaction
foundation
M1 250 kPa 6.5 cm 3850 kN/m3
M2 150 kPa 7.0 cm 2150 kN/m3
23 REPLACEMENT SOIL AND GEOGRID LAYERS

23.1 General
In our case, replacement soil shall be provided by mechanically stabilized layers
(MSL). The main function of the MSL can be summarized as follows:
1- Increasing bearing capacity

By applying MSL, the load spreading capability of the mechanically stabilized layer
can increase the bearing capacity of working platforms for heavy-duty plant, cranes
and piling/Dwall rigs (Figure 23-1)
Page 92
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 23-1: Using mechanically stabilized layers for increasing bearing capacity
2- Controlling differential settlement

Multiple layers MSL in an aggregate layer create a flexarally stiff platform. Through
the use of this technology the effects of a variable quality of support from a
foundation soil can be smoothed out (Figure 23-2).
Figure 23-2: Using mechanically stabilized layers for controlling differential settlement
3- Capping weak deposits
Where the ground is exceptionally weak, MSL is available to enable a capping

operation. This enable safe placement and compaction of the fill when capping
sludge lagoons and industrial waste deposits (Figure 23-3).
Page 93
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 23-3: Using mechanically stabilized layers for capping weak deposits
23.2 Basic theory of Triax

For a stabilized layers to be effective it must have the ability to distribute load
through 360 degrees. To ensure optimum performance, the geogrid in a
mechanically stabilized layer should have a high radial stiffness throughout the full
360 degrees.
Triaxe geogrid can solve stabilization problems because it interlocks very efficiently
with granular materials. When granular materials are compacted over the geogrid,
they partially penetrate and project through the apertures and about against the ribs,
this means that the interlock is the mechanism by which the geogrid and aggregates
interact under an applied load. This mechanism results in the confinement and
lateral resistance of granular materials. The above is illustrated in Figure 23-4.
Figure 23-4: Interlocking mechanism
The geogrid is generated from the basic spheres. Product dimensions and geometry
are replicated as per Figure 23-5
Page 94
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 23-5: Triax geogrid
The TriAx or equivalent manufacturing process produces a hexagonal geogrid

structure consisting of high strength junctions and stiff ribs forming equilateral
triangular apertures. The ribs present a thick square leading edge to the aggregate
which allows the geogrid ribs to get a good “grip” on the aggregate particles, and
results in effective mechanical interlock. Efficient interlock helps control lateral
movement and dilation of aggregate particles, so that a very high effective angle of
shearing resistance is mobilized. This effect is also referred to as confinement,”
because interlock efficiently confines and restrains the aggregate particles. The
distribution of confinement is shown in Figure 23-6.
Figure 23-6: Development of confinement
With respect to the effect of the use of 3-D reinforcement, this decrease the value of
the deformation modulus and hence stiffer behavior is notices as per Figure 23-7.
Page 95
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 23-7: Effect of 3-D reinforcement on deformation modulus
23.3 Replacement soil details

In order to ensure the uniformity of the settlement, 0.50 m of Replacement layer
(crushed stone) shall be used underneath the foundations. The replacement layers
shall be provided with two (2) layers of TX-150 (mechanically stabilized layers).
Figure 23-8 shows the typical foundation and replacement for the structures under
study.
Figure 23-8: Replacement layer arrangement for structures under study.
Page 96
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
The gradation of the crushed stone that will be used in the replacement layer shall be
as follows:
Figure 23-9: Gradation of the crushed stone used for backfilling with MSL
24 QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR STONE COLUMNS

24.1 During Construction Stage
a- Stone properties.
The tests and the gradation defined in item 20.3 shall be followed.
b- Survey work.
The coordinates of the stone columns shall be located using suitable equipment.
The accuracy of the location of the stone columns shall be 10 cm
c- Real Time Monitoring for each Stone Column:
For each stone column, a printout log is produced by the operating equipment. The
log includes the total excavated depth and the Ampere reading which figures to the
soil layers variations.
Page 97
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
24.2 Full Scale Load Tests

24.2.1 General
A full scale load test shall be carried out according FHWA in order to verify the
theoretical design and the construction method for the proposed soil improvement
works. The test shall be carried out on a representative RC footing and shall be
rested on a multi stone columns.
This footing shall be tested up to 150% of the design soil bearing pressure. The load
test shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations ASTM D1194 or
equivalent Standards.
24.2.2 Test loading increments

The maximum test load shall be 1.5 times the working load. The testing procedures
and the loads increments had been applied according to the following tables:
Time duration for

% of Load
load application
0% --
25% 15 min
50% 15 min
LOADING
75% 15 min
STAGE
100% 15 min
125% 15 min
150% 12 Hr*
125% 15 min
100% 15 min
UNLOADING 75% 15 min
STAGE 50% 15 min
25% 15 min
0% 4 Hr**
- * For 150% hold the increment for 12 Hr or until the settlement rate is not
greater than 0.05 mm/Hr
- * * For 0% hold the increment for 4 Hr or until the settlement rate is not greater
than 0.05 mm/Hr.
Page 98
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
25 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This report is addressing the results of the additional site investigations, settlement
analysis and the proposed soil improvement system for ZIRCON/ILMINITE
STOCK PILE (AREA 31) and process water tank area 30. The report had been
based on data collected during the additional site investigations as well as the design
drawings for the foundations
The main conclusion would be drawn from the analysis included in the report can be
summarized as follows:
1- A difference between the results of the tender site investigation and the
additional site investigation is noticed and outlines in the report. This in terms
of the strength of sand layers and also the existence of middle and lower
medium stiff silty clay layer.
2- The additional site investigation had shown heterogeneity and non-
homogeneity of the subsurface condition. This is in terms of the levels and
thickness of different layers.
3- The final anticipated long term settlement of the for part of structures with
design stress 250 KPa would be in range of 25 cm. For part with stress 150
KPa, the long term settlement would be in range of 15cm.
4- Improvement system shall be implemented for area under study in order to
reduce the total settlement and the differential settlement to the tolerable
values. The selected improvement system shall be Stone columns.
5- The stone columns shall be overlaid with a cushion of 50 cm thickness
provided with two layers of geogrid Tx-150 to unify the structure settlement
and reduce the differential settlement. .
6- The stone columns shall be 1.0 m in diameter and shall be fully penetrating
the clay layers down to refusal depth. According to the executed
investigations the predicted length of Stone columns shall be ranging between
20 to 26 m.
7- The arrangement of the stone columns for both parts shall be as following:
- For part 1 (Zircon/Ilminite stock pile & water process tank) with stress 250
KPa: 2.0 m Triangular pattern with apex angle 90 degree
- For part 2 (Rejects stock piles) with stress 150 kPa: 2.0 m rectangular pattern
shall be used
- The arrangement of stone columns for the two structures is shown in Figure 25-1
Page 99
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 25-1: The arrangement of stone columns for the two structures.
8- The anticipated settlement after improvement and recommended modulus of

subgrade reaction shall be considered as Following:
Assumed
Settlement after Modulus of subgrade
Model stresses at
improvement reaction
foundation
M1 250 kPa 6.5 cm 3850 kN/m3
M2 150 kPa 7.0 cm 2150 kN/m3
Page 100
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
9- The gradation of the cushion shall be as Given in item 23.3 and Figure 23-9
10- The gradation of the stone columns shall satisfy the requirements of FHWA
10528 and material acceptance criteria as given in item 20.3
11- The QC of the stone columns shall include static plate bearing test on the
columns.
12- The QC for the cushion shall include mainly plate bearing tests.
It worth to mention complete drawings for the stone columns and also the
technical specifications shall be issued in due time after approval of the report.
Zone load test and also other tests shall be outlined as a part of the quality control
plan.
Page 101
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDICES
Page 102
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX (01)
The Extracted Deep Boreholes Conducted at MSP and The
Geotechnical Recommendations for Area 31
Page 103
Engineering Consultant Office ‫اﻟﻤﻜﺘﺐ اﻟﮭﻨﺪﺳﻲ ﻟﻼﺳﺘﺸﺎرات اﻟﮭﻨﺪﺳﯿﺔ وأﺑﺤﺎث اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ‬
Dr. Eng. Waseim Ragab Azzam ‫ وﺳﯿﻢ رﺟﺐ ﻋﺰام‬/ ‫ﻣﮭﻨﺪس اﺳﺘﺸﺎري دﻛﺘﻮر‬
Professor of Soil Mechanic and Foundation ‫اﺳﺘﺎذ ﺑﻘﺴﻢ ھﻨﺪﺳﺔ اﻹﻧﺸﺎءات‬
Faculty of Engineering – Tanta University
‫ﻛﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﮭﻨﺪﺳﺔ – ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ طﻨﻄﺎ‬
`site ` Baltim- Kafer ElSheikh Governorate

Clint Egyptian -- Black Sands Company
structure Factories , administration buildings, and internal roads
Soil profile for boring # 1 X (Location of factories)
H. W. L: -1.00 m L. W . L: -2.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
N/30 density Soil description
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill
-1 Soft silty clay/fine sand -loam
-2 20
-3
24 Brown Fine to medium sand
-4
-5 28 34
-6
28
-7
-8 30 Brown medium sand
-9
- 10 34
- 11
- 12 35
- 13
- 14
- 15 36/5
- 16
- 17
- 18 34/4
38
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22 35/3
- 23
- 24
- 25
‫ﻧﮭﺎﯾﺔ اﻟﺠﺴﺔ‬
Fig. 14
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 28 /81

Office : Tanta, Emmar Building, Alexandria highway e-mail: azzam_waseim@yahoo.com

Soil profile for boring # 2X (Location of factories)
H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ clayey silt
-2 21
-3
25
-4 Brown Fine to medium sand
-5 27 34
-6
27
-7
-8 28
-9 30 Brown medium sand
- 10
- 11 34
- 12
- 13 35
- 14
- 15
- 16 36/5
- 17
- 18
- 19 34/4
38
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23 35/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 15
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 29 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -1.750m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
Brown Fine to medium sand
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
32
- 16
-
- 17 35
- 18
- 19 35/4 Brown medium to coarse
- 20
- 21 34/3 sand
40
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 16
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 30 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -1.30m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ sand /silt
-2 20
-3
23
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
33
- 16
- 17 34
- 18
- 20
- 21 34/3 sand
40
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 17
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 31 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -1.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill
-2 21
-3
25
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
32
- 16
-
- 17 35
- 18
- 20
- 21 sand
40
- 22
- 23 35/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 17
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 32 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -2.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
30
- 16
-
- 17 35
- 18
- 20
- 21 sand
40
- 22
- 23 34/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 17
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 33 /81


H. W. L: -1.00 m L. W . L: -1.50m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
32
- 16
-
- 17 35
- 18
- 20
- 21 34/3 sand
40
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 18
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 34 /81


H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.50m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-5 27 34
-6
27
-7
-8 28
-9 34
- 10
- 11 36
- 12
- 13 38
- 14
- 15
- 16 36/5 Brown medium sand
- 17
- 18
- 19 34/4
38
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23 35/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 19
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 35 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -1.30m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ sand /silt
-2 20
-3
23
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
33
- 16
- 17 34
- 18
- 19 38 Brown medium to coarse
- 20
- 21 37/2 sand
40
- 22
- 23 34/5
- 24
- 25
Fig. 20
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 36 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -1.30m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ sand /silt
-2 21
-3
-4
-5 24 34
-6
-7
-8 25
- 10
- 11 28
- 12
- 13
- 14 31
- 15
- 16
33
- 17 34
- 18
- 20
- 21 34/3 sand
41
- 22
- 23 36/2
- 24
- 25
Fig. 21
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 37 /81


H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.50m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ sand /silt
-2 20
-3
23
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
33
- 16
- 17
- 18 34
- 19
- 21 sand
- 22 34/3
40
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 22
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 38 /81


H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-5 27 34
-6
27
-7
-8 28
-9 30
- 10
- 11 34
- 12
- 13 35
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19 34/4
38
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23 35/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 23
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 39 /81


H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 24
-3
25
-4
-5 27 35 Brown Fine to medium sand
-6
29
-7
-8 31
-9
- 10
- 11 32
- 12
- 13 35
- 14
- 15 37
- 16
- 17 Brown medium sand
- 18 36/5
38
- 19
- 20
- 21 34/4
- 22
- 23
- 24 35/3
- 25
Fig. 24
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 40 /81


H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.40m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ sand /silt
-2 22
-3
-4
-5 25 36
-6
-7
-8 27
- 10
- 11 27
- 12
- 13
- 14 31
- 15
- 16
- 17 33
- 18 34
- 19
- 21 sand
- 22 34/3
40
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 25
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 41 /81


H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.50m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ sand /silt
-2 20
-3
23
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
28
- 13
- 14
- 15
30
- 16
- 17
- 18 34
- 19
- 21 sand
- 22 34/3
40
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 26
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 42 /81


H. W. L: -1.00 m L. W . L: -1.50m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
32
- 16
-
- 17 35
- 18
- 20
- 21 34/3 sand
40
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 27
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 43 /81


H. W. L: -0.95 m L. W . L: -1.50m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-5 27 34
-6
27
-7
-8 28
-9 34
- 10
- 11 36
- 12
- 13 38
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19 34/4
38
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23 35/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 28
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 44 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -1.30m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill/ sand /silt
-2 20
-3
23
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
33
- 16
- 17 34
- 18
- 20
- 21 34/3 sand
40
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
Fig. 29
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 45 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -1.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-0 Fill
-2 21
-3
25
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
32
- 16
-
- 17 35
- 18
- 20
- 21 sand
40
- 22
- 23 35/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 30
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 46 /81


H. W. L: -0.90 m L. W . L: -2.80m
S.P.T  Bulk
Depth Legend qun.
(m) kg/cm2
cm bulk (t/m3)
-2 21
-3
25
-4
-5 34
-6
27
-7
-8
-9
27
- 10
- 11
- 12
31
- 13
- 14
- 15
30
- 16
-
- 17 35
- 18
- 20
- 21 sand
40
- 22
- 23 34/3
- 24
- 25
Fig. 31
Tel: 01272037757- 0403410331 47 /81

Engineering Consultant Office
Dr. Eng. Waseim Ragab Azzam
Professor of Soil Mechanic and Foundation
Faculty of Engineering - Tanta Univers ity
:-··-----·····-------·········-----·········----··--..----··-···········------······-------···········---··--..···-··-------··------- .............................................-----···-·-··---,
;I !
I !
I I
! i
i I
i I
i I
1
;
6EOTE[BNJ[Al response I
i
i i
'i
i
For 1i
I
i I
! ProJect I
I
I
01 Sand Separation Factory of Balllm· lair EI·Shelkh ·EJ!ypt 1
I
I !
! I
! i
i To be submitted to: Egyptian -- Black Sands Company i
I I
I I
II
I [Onsultant:
I
I
I EnJ!IneerlnJ! consultant office and soli research
I
i
!
I
I
! Geotechnical Consulta
!;
I
I
!!
i
I
i
!
! Quality Manager of Soil Mechanics Laboratory and Foundation Laboratory
I Tanta Univers ity - Faculty of Engineering, Tanat- Egypt
I Seb,2019
i!
i
!!
iL.._____..___..........................................................- ................................................................................................................................................................................--·········-·----··············J
Tei:OI272037757- 0403410331
O ffice : Tanta, Em mar Building, A lexa ndria highway e-mail: a7:7Al m_ \\ a~ci m 'u~~a hoo.com
Faculty of Engi neering- Tanta University
Dear Prof, Dr. M. Hassanien

Cont.- Response of technical comments
Shallow foundation recommendation for raft of stockpile
According to the nature and characteristics of the soil encountered in the drilled
boreholes for proposed structures the following recommendations are based on
the findings in this report that confirm the report of the early investigation.
o It is very important to excavate and to completely remove the layer of the
fill and soft loamy soils from the site until reaching the homogeneous
layer. Therefore, the area under the proposed fo undations should be
excavated to an average depth of 2.25 m below the average level of the
ground surface.
o A layer of replacement soil "clean graded gravel layer" with thickness
according to design level and requirements of raft. It must be installed
in layers @ 25cm thickness with compaction each layer by using heavy
equipment. Replacement layer should be extended out of ~~~:l!:
dimensions at least 0.5 m.

o Compacted with vibratory compactor 15.00 tons cap
verify the allegeable soil pressure over the replaced
loading test.
o The blinding concrete with a thickness ofO.lO m above the compacted soil
replacement layers.
o The foundations are being a system of reinforced concrete raft foundation

considering load eccentricity in design. The raft should be connected with
outer thickening with emddement in soil not less than 800 nun and in
accordance with design requierments.
o A two layer of reinforceed soil element asTri-Ax geogrid should be

installed withing the replaced fill, the first layer located at a depthof 50cm
Tei:Ol272037757- 0403410331 2
Office: Tanta, Emmar Building, Alexandria highway e-mail: az-r..am_waseim@yahoo.com
Faculty of Engineering- Tanta University
from the foundation and the vertical distance between the two layer 1s
75cm. Considering compaction to achive a considerable interlocking with
reinforced element/layer opening and fill.
o The backfill was requested to extend 0.5m from PC,while Georgie

requested to extend lm from the placed backfill.
o The allowable net bearing pressure at the top of the face of compacted
reinforced graded gravel by such Tri-Ax geogrid qa11 net should not exceed
250 kPa (2.50 kg/cm2).
o The bearing capacity above the reinforced soil mass should be checked in
the field using in site plate load test PLT.
o The subgrad modulus for foundation at assumed foundation level and at
face of replaced layer is taken 6000 t/m 3 and it can be determined at the
face of the replaced layer in the field using in site plate load test PLT for
check.
Tel:01272037757- 0403410331 3
Office: Tanta, Emmar Building, Alexandria highway e-mail: a:r.t..am_waseim1i).yahoo.com
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX (02)
Boreholes logs and Laboratory tests
Page 104
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.85
D-1 0.00 0.45 4 4 7 11
W. D.
SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense to
1 dense, fine to medium, greyish brown, trace shell
4 D-2
fragments and mica. 1.00 1.45 5 6 8 14
2
D-3 2.00 2.45 4 11 10 21
8
same as above but fine, yellowish brown,
3
D-4 below elev. -2.85m. 3.00 3.45 12 17 20 37
12
4
D-5 4.00 4.45 13 17 22 39
5 16
D-6 same as above but light grey, below elev. -4.85 m. 5.00 5.45 11 14 14 28
6 20
-7.35
D-7 6.50 6.95 9 10 8 18
7
24
8 SM: silty SAND, loose to medium dense, fine, grey, trace

D-8 organic mattar, shell fragments and mica. 8.00 8.45 7 6 10 16
28
9
D-9 -10.39 CH: fat CLAY with sand, soft, dark grey, trace organic 9.50 9.95 2 2 2 4
32 -10.45
10 -10.85 mattar, shell fragments and mica.
PEAT: organic mattar with clay, black, trace mica.
11 36
D-10 11.00 11.45 10 9 6 15

40 shell fragments and mica.
D-11 12.50 12.95 12 10 8 18
13
44
14
D-12 -14.93 CL: lean CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, some fine sand, 14.00 14.45 11 4 4 8
-15.00
48 trace organic mattar, shell fragments and mica.
15
SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine to medium, dark
52
D-13 grey, trace shell fragments and mica. 15.50 15.95 10 12 15 27
16
17 56 -17.85
UD-1 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, trace shell fragments and 17.00 17.50 42
-18.15 mica.
D-14 CL: lean CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace sand, 17.50 17.95 6 4 5 9
18 organic mattar, shell fragments and mica.
60 sme as above but with sand, below elev. -18.35 m.
-19.35
UD-2 18.50 19.20 86
19
64 D-15 CH: fat CLAY, medium stiff to stiff, dark grey, trace 19.20 19.65 4 4 5 9
sand, shell fragments and mica.
20
UD-3 20.00 20.70 86
-21.55
68
21
22 72
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.78 SM: silty SAND, loose, fine, light grey, calcareous,
D-1 0.00 0.45 5 3 6 9
occasional seams of clay, trace calcareous materials, shell W. D.
fragments and mica.
1 -1.78
4 D-2 1.00 1.45 5 8 10 18
2
D-3 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense to 2.00 2.45 12 15 20 35
8 dense, fine to medium, yellowish brown, trace shell
fragments and mica.
3
D-4 3.00 3.45 10 19 21 40
12
4 -4.78
D-5
SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine, dark grey, trace shell
4.00 4.45 7 9 11 20
fragments and mica.
5 16 -5.78
D-6 5.00 5.45 13 15 15 30
SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, dense, fine to
medium, yellowish brown, some shell fragments, trace
6 20 mica.
-7.28
D-7 6.50 6.95 8 16 20 36
7 SM: silty SAND, dense, fine to medium, dark grey, trace
8 -8.78
D-8 CH: fat CLAY with sand, very soft, dark grey, trace shell 8.00 8.45 1/30 2 2
-8.88
28 fragments and mica.
9
32 D-9 9.50 9.95 17 22 25 47

10
11 36
D-10 11.00 11.45 17 22 25 47
SM: silty SAND, medium dense to dense, fine, dark grey,
12 trace shell fragments and mica.
40
D-11 12.50 12.95 10 14 16 30
13
44
14
D-12 14.00 14.45 9 12 13 25
48
15
-16.28
52
D-13 15.50 15.95 8 11 13 24
16 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, occasional seams of clay,
trace shell fragments and mica.
17 56 -17.78
D-14 17.00 17.45 4 5 7 12
SM: silty SAND, medium dense to dense, fine, dark grey,
60
-19.28 CH: fat CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace sand, shell
D-15 18.50 18.95 3 5 5 10
UD-1 same as above but occasional seams of slickensides layer, 19.00 19.70 64
64 below elev. -19.78 m.
-20.9
20 D-16
3
same as above but without slickensides, below elev. -20.48 19.70 20.15 2 3 4 7
m.
68
21
22 72
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.70
D-1
FILL: SM: silty SAND, loose, fine to medium, brownish
0.00 0.45 4 3 5 8
W. D.
grey, calcareous, trace shell fragments, mica and roots.
1 -1.70
4 D-2 1.00 1.45 5 9 11 20
2
D-3 2.00 2.45 7 10 13 23
8
SP: poorly graded SAND, medium dense to dense, fine,
3
D-4 yellowish brown, trace silt, shell fragments and mica. 3.00 3.45 9 14 15 29
12
4
D-5 4.00 4.45 7 13 18 31
5 16 -5.70
D-6 5.00 5.45 8 12 19 31
SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, dense, fine to
6 20 medium, light grey, trace shell fragments and mica.
-7.20
D-7 6.50 6.95 6 4 4 8
7
24
SM: silty SAND, loose to medium dense, fine, grey, trace
8
D-8 shell fragments and mica. 8.00 8.45 5 7 9 16
28
9
-10.20
32 D-9 9.50 9.95 13 24 28 52
10 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, very dense, fine,
greyish brown, trace shell fragments and mica.
11 36 -11.70
D-10 11.00 11.45 6 9 12 21
12
40
D-11 12.50 12.95 6 9 12 21
14
D-12 14.00 14.45 6 4 6 10
48
15
-16.10 ML: SILT with sand, dark grey, trace shell fragments and
52 UD-1
mica. 15.50 16.00 84
16 -16.55
D-13 -16.70 CL: lean CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace sand, shell 16.00 16.45 3 7 10 17
fragments and mica.
17 56
D-14 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, trace shell fragments and 17.00 17.45 8 11 8 19
mica.
18
60
UD-2 -19.40 18.50 19.20 79
19
64 D-15 19.20 19.65 4 4 5 9
CH: fat CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace sand, shell
UD-3 20.00 20.70 86
68
21 D-16
-21.85
20.70 21.15 2 3 4 7
22 72
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.61 FILL: SM: silty SAND, loose, fine to medium, brownish
D-1 0.00 0.45 6 4 5 9
grey, calcareous, occasional seams of clay, trace calcareous W. D.
materials, shell fragments, mica and roots.
1 -1.61
4 D-2 1.00 1.45 9 12 14 26
2
D-3 2.00 2.45 7 10 13 23
8
3
D-4 3.00 3.45 8 15 16 31
SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense to
12 dense, fine to medium, yellowish brown, trace shell
D-5 4.00 4.45 12 13 16 29
5 16
D-6 5.00 5.45 10 15 16 31
6 20
-7.11
D-7 6.50 6.95 9 6 6 12
7 SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine, light grey, trace
8 -8.61
D-8 8.00 8.45 1 2 4 6
28 CL: lean CLAY with sand, medium stiff, dark grey, trace
-10.11
32 D-9 9.50 9.95 15 17 27 44
10 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, dense, fine, light
grey, trace shell fragments and mica.
11 36 -11.61
D-10 11.00 11.45 8 9 12 21
12
40
SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine, dark grey, trace
13
44
14
UD-1 -14.81 CH: fat CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace sand, shell 14.00 14.50 94
48 D-12
-15.11 fragments and mica. 14.50 14.95 4 4 4 8
15
D-13 SM: silty SAND, loose to medium dense, fine, dark grey, 15.50 15.95 5 8 9 17
16
17 56 -17.61
D-14 17.00 17.45 2 3 5 8
CL: lean CLAY with sand, medium stiff, dark grey, trace
60
-19.11
UD-2 18.50 19.20 86
19
64 D-15 19.20 19.65 2 3 4 7
UD-3 20.00 20.70 86
68
21 D-16
-21.76
20.70 21.15 1 3 4 7
22 72
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.70
D-1
SM: silty SAND, loose, fine, brownish grey, calcareous,
0.00 0.45 6 4 6 10
W. D.
trace calcareous materials, shell fragments, mica and roots.
1 -1.70
4 D-2 1.00 1.45 5 5 6 11
2
D-3 2.00 2.45 5 6 7 13
8
3
D-4 3.00 3.45 10 12 20 32
SP: poorly graded SAND, medium dense to dense, fine to
12 medium, yellowish brown, trace silt, shell fragments and
4 mica.
D-5 4.00 4.45 14 19 20 39
5 16
D-6 5.00 5.45 13 17 22 39
6 20
-7.20
D-7 6.50 6.95 7 7 9 16
7
24
8
D-8 8.00 8.45 9 10 12 22
28
9
SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine, light grey, trace
32 D-9 shell fragments and mica. 9.50 9.95 10 10 12 22
10
11 36
D-10 11.00 11.45 7 10 12 22
12
40
UD-1
fragments and mica.
12.50 13.20 57
13 -13.58
44 -13.90 CL: sandy lean CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace
D-11 13.20 13.65 5 7 10 17
shell fragments and mica.
14 SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine, dark grey, trace
D-12 -14.78 shell fragments and mica. 14.00 14.45 6 6 4 10
-14.88
48 CL: lean CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace sand, shell
fragments and mica.
15
52
D-13 SM: silty SAND, loose, fine, dark grey, trace shell 15.50 15.95 7 7 8 15
17 56
No
UD-2 17.00 17.70
Rec
-18.40 .
18 D-13 17.70 18.15 1 1 1 2
60 ML: SILT with sand, dark grey, trace shell fragments and
mica. No
UD-3 18.50 19.20
19 Rec
-19.90 .
64 D-15 19.20 19.65 1 2 2 4
UD-3 20.00 20.70 86
-21.40
68
21
22 72
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.67 SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine to medium, brownish
D-1 0.00 0.45 4 7 10 17
materials, shell fragments and mica.
1 -1.67
4 D-2
SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense,
1.00 1.45 8 10 11 21
fine to medium, light grey, trace shell fragments and mica.
2 -2.67
D-3 2.00 2.45 9 12 16 28
8
SP: poorly graded SAND, medium dense, fine to medium,
3
12
4 -4.67
D-5 4.00 4.45 6 10 13 23
5 16 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense,

D-6 5.00 5.45 9 13 15 28
fine, light grey, trace shell fragments and mica.
6 20
-7.17
D-7 6.50 6.95 3 3 5 8
7
24
SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine, light grey, trace
8
28
9
-10.17 CL: lean CLAY with sand, stiff, dark grey, trace shell
32 D-9
-10.32
9.50 9.95 4 7 8 15
11 36
D-10 11.00 11.45 7 10 12 22

D-11 12.50 12.95 4 5 10 15
13
44
14
UD-1 14.00 14.50 No
Rec
48 D-12
-15.17
14.50 14.95 1 1 1 2
CL: lean CLAY, soft, dark grey, some fine sand, trace .
15
-16.17
52
D-13 15.50 15.95 5 7 8 15
16 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, trace shell fragments and
mica.
17 56 -17.67 CL: lean CLAY, soft, dark grey, trace sand, shell
UD-2 -17.77
fragments and mica.
17.00 17.70 60
-18.37 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, trace shell fragments and
18 D-14 17.70 18.15 2 3 5 8
mica.
60
UD-3 fragments and mica. 18.50 19.20 64
19
64 D-15 19.20 19.65 2 2 3 5
-20.32
20 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, dense, fine to
D-16
-21.12
medium, light grey, trace shell fragments and mica. 20.00 20.45 10 14 18 32
68
21
22 72
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.74
D-1 SM: silty SAND, medium dense, fine to medium, brownish 0.00 0.45 7 7 10 17
materials, shell fragments and mica.
1 -1.74
4 D-2
SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense,
1.00 1.45 7 9 12 21
2 -2.74
D-3 2.00 2.45 9 11 11 22
8
SP: poorly graded SAND, medium dense, fine to medium,
3
12
4 -4.74
D-5 4.00 4.45 4 6 8 14
5 16 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense,

D-6 5.00 5.45 7 10 10 20
6 20
-7.24
D-7 6.50 6.95 5 8 10 18
8
D-8 8.00 8.45 7 7 7 14
28
9
32 D-9 9.50 9.95 8 8 9 17

10
11 36
D-10 same as above but dark grey, below elev. -8.74 m. 11.00 11.45 7 2 4 6
12
40
D-11 12.50 12.95 5 7 9 16
13
44
14
UD-1 14.00 14.70 77
-15.14 CL: lean CLAY with sand, medium stiff, dark grey, trace
48
-15.44 shell fragments and mica.
15 D-12 14.70 15.15 4 7 10 17
-16.24
52
D-13 15.50 15.95 9 8 6 14
16 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, trace shell fragments and
mica.
17 56 -17.74 CL: lean CLAY with sand, medium stiff, dark grey, trace
UD-2
17.00 17.70 86
-18.19
18 D-14 17.70 18.15 7 10 27 37
fragments and mica.
60
D-15 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, dense to very 18.50 18.95 6 20 22 42
19 dense, fine to medium, grey, trace shell fragments and
64 mica.
20
D-16
-21.19
20.00 20.45 15 22 30 52
68
21
22 72
Diagram of N
100
20
40
60
80
To
0
0 0 -0.88 FILL: SM: silty SAND, loose, fine to medium, brownish
D-1 0.00 0.45 1 2 3
grey, calcareous, trace calcareous materials, shell W. D.
fragments, mica and roots.
1 -1.88
4 D-2 1.00 1.45 2 2 3
2
D-3 2.00 2.45 3 3 3
8
3
D-4 3.00 3.45 1 1 2
SP: poorly graded SAND, very loose to loose, fine to
12 medium, yellowish brown, trace silt, shell fragments and
4 mica.
D-5 4.00 4.45 3 5 5
5 16
D-6 5.00 5.45 6 4 2
6 20
-7.38
D-7 6.50 6.95 2 3 6
7
24
8
D-8 8.00 8.45 4 6 7
28
9
SM: silty SAND, loose to medium dense, fine, grey, trace
32 D-9 shell fragments and mica. 9.50 9.95 7 11 14
10
11 36
D-10 11.00 11.45 13 15 14
12
40
-13.38 ML: SILT with sand, dark grey, trace shell fragments and
UD-1 12.50 13.00 80
13 -13.88
mica.
D-11
13.00 13.45 10 6 6
44
14 -14.88
UD-2 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, occasional seams of clay, 14.00 14.50 80
-15.08
trace shell fragments and mica.
48 D-12
-15.38
14.50 14.95 3 6 10
SM: silty SAND, fine, dark grey, trace shell fragments and
15 mica.
D-13 ML: sandy SILT, dark grey, trace shell fragments and 15.50 15.95 4 3 4
52 mica.
16
17 56 -17.88 CH: fat CLAY, medium stiff, dark grey, trace sand, shell
UD-3
fragments and mica.
17.00 17.70 86
-18.58 same as above but with shell fragments, below elev. -18.43
18 D-14 17.70 18.15 2 6 10
m.
60
D-15 SP-SM: poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense to 18.50 18.95 10 15 18
19 dense, fine to medium, grey, trace shell fragments and mica.
64
20 -20.88
D-16 SP: poorly graded SAND, dense, fine to medium, light 20.00 20.45 15 20 26
-21.33
grey, trace silt, shell fragments and mica.
68
21
22 72
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS (ASTM D-2487)
Job No. : MY-1244
Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Borehole No. : 13
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 1 + D 2
Location : El Burulles, Kafr EL-Sheikh, Egypt Depth (m.) : 0.00 to 1.45
1. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION (ASTM D 422)
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
Percent Passing By Weight
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Sieve 3 in. 2 in. 1.5 in. 1 in. 3/4 in. 1/2 in. 3/8 in. no. 4 no. 10 no. 20 no. 40 no. 60 no. 100 no. 200
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.0 97.8 96.6 64.9 18.2 9.8 6.2
Effective Diameter (D10) : 0.15 D30 (mm) : 0.29 D60 (mm) : 0.41 Uniformity coefficient (Cu) : 2.67
Description : SP-SM Coefficient of curvature (Cc) : 1.40
% Gravel 1.0 % Sand 92.8 % Fines 6.2
2. ATTERBERG LIMITS (ASTM D-4318)
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) (%)
CH
Water Content (wt %)
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID LIMIT (LL) (%) Number of Blows
Liquid Limit = NP % Plastic Limit = NP % Plasticity Index = NP %
Tested By Date Checked By
A. A. Hamed 07/07/2020 Eng. Hossam A. Elshafy

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.9 98.6 95.5 36.9 17.9 5.5
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 98.9 96.4 54.9 27.6 8.6
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 7 to D 9 A
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.0 97.8 97.6 68.9 47.2 21.6
Effective Diameter (D10) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) Uniformity coefficient (Cu)
Description : SM Coefficient of curvature (Cc)
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 9 ( B )
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.0 96.5 93.5 91.0 77.0
Description : CH Coefficient of curvature (Cc)
Flow Curve
60 66
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
64
-L
A
40
CL
62
30
MH & OH
60
20
10 58
ML & OL
0 56
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID
CL-ML LIMIT (LL) (%) Number of Blows
Liquid Limit = 53 % Plastic Limit = 25 % Plasticity Index = 28 %

ATTERBERG LIMITS
Job No. : MY-1244 Borehole No. : 13

Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Sample No. :D9(C)
Project : Black Sand Factory Depth (m.) : 9.60 to 9.95
Location : El Burulles, Kafr EL-Sheikh, Egypt
Item Test Result Item Test Result
1 Water Content % 113.4 3 Plastic Limit % NP
2 Liquid Limit % 168.0 4 Plasticity Index % NP
Flow Curve
183
178
173
168
163
158
10 25 30 40 50
M.Ashour 07/07/2020 Eng. Hossam A. Elshafy

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 10 + D 12 ( A )
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.5 99.4 99.3 98.9 96.8 30.8
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 89.3
Description : CL Coefficient of curvature (Cc)
Flow Curve
60 52
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
51
I
-L
A
40 50
CL
30 49
MH & OH
20 48
10 47
ML & OL
0 46
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 12 ( C ) + D 13
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 95.3 95.1 95.0 84.8 74.0 53.7 34.6
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : UDS 1 Top
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 99.4 99.0 68.0
Description : ML Coefficient of curvature (Cc)
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : UDS 1 Bott.
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 99.2 98.4 93.2
Flow Curve
60 37
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
36
I
-L
A
40 35
CL
30 34
MH & OH
20 33
10 32
ML & OL
0 31
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 14
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.0 97.8 97.2 85.8
Flow Curve
60 31
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
30
A
40
CL
30 29
MH & OH
20
28
10
ML & OL
0 27
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : UDS 2
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.3 98.3 97.3
Flow Curve
60 111
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
109
I
-L
A
40 107
CL
30 105
MH & OH
20 103
10 101
ML & OL
0 99
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID

Moisture Content = 51.8 % Consistency Index = 0.73 % Liquidity Index = 0.27 %

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
OF COHESIVE SOIL
Lab No. : MY-1244 Borehole No. : 13
Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Sample No. : UDS 2
Description : CH
1.40
1.20
1.00
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Strain (Percentage of Height)
Notes :
1) Water Content = 51.79 wt %
2) Test Density = 1.702 g/cm3
2
3) Maximum Unconfined Stress = 1.15 kg/cm
4) Strain at Failure = 5.31 %
5) Axial Strain Rate = 0.76 mm/minute
6) Initial Length of Sample (cm) = 14.30 cm
7) Initial Diameter of Sample (cm) = 6.83 cm
8) E50 modulus = 32.1 kg/cm2
Tested by Date Checked by
A. Abd El Hamed 07/07/2020 Eng. Hossam A. Elshafy

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 96.7 92.9 90.2 89.2 88.0 83.7 64.0 34.3 26.9
Flow Curve
60 18
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
17
-L
A
40
CL
16
30
MH & OH
15
20
10 14
ML & OL
0 13
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID
Liquid Limit = 16 % Plastic Limit = NP % Plasticity Index = NP %

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 2 to D 4
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.8 98.0 82.8 40.2 12.7 6.1
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.4 98.7 97.5 95.2 84.9 45.3 12.3
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100.0 95.7 93.5 89.9 86.1 75.1 58.8 44.7 17.3 6.1
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.1 96.0 87.1 75.1 34.4 13.3
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 8 Top
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.2 98.0 96.6 93.6 85.0
Flow Curve
60 86
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
84
A
40
CL
30 82
MH & OH
20
80
10
ML & OL
0 78
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 8 Bott.
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.0 95.0 90.0 82.3 70.0 42.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.5 99.2 99.0 98.8 97.5 22.5
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.4 98.8 97.4 50.2
Flow Curve
60 28
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
27
-L
A
40
CL
26
30
MH & OH
25
20
10 24
CL-ML ML & OL
0 23
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.1 98.9 98.0 96.1 25.9
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.8 97.2 96.6 95.2
Flow Curve
60 84
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
83
I
-L
A
40 82
CL
30 81
MH & OH
20 80
10 79
CL-ML ML & OL
0 78
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.2 98.4 97.2
Flow Curve
60 98
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
95
I
-L
A
40 92
CL
30 89
MH & OH
20 86
10 83
CL-ML ML & OL
0 80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


OF COHESIVE SOIL
Description : CH
0.80
0.70
0.60
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50
Notes :
2

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.6 97.6 97.0 96.4 95.8 94.8
Flow Curve
60 94
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
92
-L
A
40
CL 90
30
MH & OH
88
20
10 86
CL-ML ML & OL
0 84
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.1 97.2 96.3 95.1 91.9 70.2 44.9 37.5
Flow Curve
60 20
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
19
A
40
CL
30 18
MH & OH
20
17
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.4 98.8 91.2 20.8 8.9 4.3
Description : SP Coefficient of curvature (Cc) : 1.35
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 94.3 52.0 11.6
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.9 99.7 89.1 74.7 29.6
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.6 98.1 97.9 93.8 47.3 11.7
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 99.0 97.0 39.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 99.2 79.2
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50
LIQUID

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.4 99.2 99.0 96.4
Flow Curve
60 43
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
42
-L
A
40
CL
41
30
MH & OH
40
20
10 39
CL-ML ML & OL
0 38
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.5 98.7 56.8
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.4 99.2 88.2 64.4 61.6 58.2
Flow Curve
60 19
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
N
18
I
-L
A
40
CL
30 17
MH & OH
20
16
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 98.4 98.2
Flow Curve
60 95
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50 93
IN
-L
A
40 91
CL 89
30
MH & OH 87
20
85
10
CL-ML ML & OL
83
0 81
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


OF COHESIVE SOIL
Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Sample No. : UDS 2 Bott.
Description : CH
0.90
0.80
0.70
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
Notes :
2

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 97.8 96.9 96.1 95.1 93.6 76.9 46.7 36.8
Flow Curve
60 23
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
22
I
-L
A
40 21
CL
30 20
MH & OH
20 19
10 18
CL-ML ML & OL
0 17
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.7 97.8 96.8 86.4 35.8 17.5 9.8
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.3 81.9 19.4
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.9 99.1 96.1 92.0 72.4
Flow Curve
60 38
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50 37
IN
-L
A
40 36
CL 35
30
MH & OH 34
20
33
10
CL-ML ML & OL 32
0 31
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 96.4 94.9 93.9 86.7 44.9 9.7
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 80.1 51.0 31.1
Effective Diameter (D10) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) : 0.18 Uniformity coefficient (Cu)
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 85.8 63.7 36.2
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 99.2 98.6
Flow Curve
60 104
PLASTICITY CHART
102
CH
E
50
IN
-L
100
A
40
98
CL
30 96
MH & OH
20 94
92
10
CL-ML ML & OL 90
0 88
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99.5 99.2 98.1 95.2 36.1
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 91.4 89.2 81.6
Flow Curve
60 32
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
A
40 31
CL
30
MH & OH
20 30
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 29
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 98.8 98.0
Flow Curve
60 88
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50 86
IN
-L
A
40 84
CL 82
30
MH & OH 80
20
78
10
CL-ML ML & OL
76
0 74
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.0 98.4
Flow Curve
60 80
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
78
A
40
CL
30 76
MH & OH
20
74
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 72
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


OF COHESIVE SOIL
Description : CH
0.60
0.50
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Notes :
2

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.2 96.6 90.6 62.5 25.2 16.6
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.9 97.6 81.0 41.5 11.6 4.6
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 99.3 96.1 82.2 21.2
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : UDS-1 Top
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.0 98.4
Flow Curve
60 88
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50 86
IN
-L
A
40 84
CL 82
30
MH & OH 80
20
78
10
CL-ML ML & OL
76
0 74
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


OF COHESIVE SOIL
Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Sample No. : UDS-1 Top
Description : CH
1.20
1.00
0.80
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
Notes :
2

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : UDS-1 Bott.
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.6 98.2 97.8 96.8 94.8 68.4
Flow Curve
60 29
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50 28
IN
-L
A
40 27
CL 26
30
MH & OH 25
20
24
10
CL-ML ML & OL
23
0 22
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 11 + D 12 ( A )
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 99.5 99.2 97.5 94.0 27.8
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 90.8
Flow Curve
60 44
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
43
-L
A
40
CL
42
30
MH & OH
41
20
10 40
CL-ML ML & OL
0 39
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 12 ( C ) + D 13
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.3 97.1 43.1
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 98.8 79.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : UDS-4
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.8 99.2 98.4
Flow Curve
60 91
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
89
I
-L
A
40 87
CL
30 85
MH & OH
20 83
10 81
CL-ML ML & OL
0 79
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


OF COHESIVE SOIL
Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Sample No. : UDS-4
Description : CH
1.40
1.20
1.00
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Notes :
2

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.9 99.4 98.7 95.7 75.0 43.7 30.7
Flow Curve
60 22
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
21
-L
A
40
CL
20
30
MH & OH
19
20
10 18
CL-ML ML & OL
0 17
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.2 99.1 98.3 82.4 35.5 15.4 10.7
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.5 98.9 83.3 19.6 7.5 3.7
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.5 98.7 94.0 30.1 17.5 7.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.7 98.6 98.4 95.0 76.0 28.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 9 Top
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 99.4 96.8 85.0
Flow Curve
60 50
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
49
I
-L
A
40 48
CL
30 47
MH & OH
20 46
10 45
CL-ML ML & OL
0 44
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sample No. : D 9 Bott. to D 11
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.9 99.8 99.7 98.7 93.1 33.1
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.4 99.2 99.0 98.4 88.8
Flow Curve
60 38
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
37
-L
A
40
CL
36
30
MH & OH
35
20
10 34
CL-ML ML & OL
0 33
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 99.3 68.4
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.9 99.7 93.6
Flow Curve
60 33
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50 32
IN
-L
A
40 31
CL 30
30
MH & OH 29
20
28
10
CL-ML ML & OL
27
0 26
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 99.6 98.5 68.2
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 93.8 91.0 85.5 85.2 84.8 84.5 84.3 83.8
Flow Curve
60 119
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
N
116
I
-L
A
40 113
CL
30 110
MH & OH
20 107
10 104
CL-ML ML & OL
0 101
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


OF COHESIVE SOIL
Description : CH
0.80
0.70
0.60
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Notes :
2

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100.0 96.1 92.1 89.9 87.9 77.1 31.0 11.0 5.2
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 93.9 91.6 90.8 89.5 87.5 67.9 36.9 28.5
Flow Curve
60 22
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
21
A
40
CL
30 20
MH & OH
20
19
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 18
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 99.9 99.6 99.2 82.3 31.4 14.3 10.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.9 98.3 85.0 36.8 8.5 3.1
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.4 98.9 97.9 79.0 29.0 6.4
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100.0 95.9 95.4 95.1 94.9 93.3 74.0 15.3
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 99.4 99.1 97.8 94.3 30.5
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.9 93.9 89.1 41.9
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 99.2 98.2 95.8 94.2 74.4
Flow Curve
60 43
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
42
-L
A
40
CL
41
30
MH & OH
40
20
10 39
CL-ML ML & OL
0 38
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.5 41.5
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 98.4 98.2 98.0 97.8 97.4 55.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 98.6 94.0 88.4 87.6 84.8
Flow Curve
60 36
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
35
A
40
CL
30 34
MH & OH
20
33
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 32
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 98.6 98.4 98.2
Flow Curve
60 109
PLASTICITY CHART
107
CH
E
50
IN
-L
105
A
40
103
CL
30 101
MH & OH
20 99
97
10
CL-ML ML & OL 95
0 93
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


OF COHESIVE SOIL
Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Sample No. : UDS 2 Bott.
Description : CH
0.70
0.60
0.50
STRESS (Kg/cm2)
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
Notes :
2

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100.0 97.8 95.2 94.2 92.6 69.5 25.4 13.3 8.3
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100.0 99.1 97.8 97.2 96.3 89.4 56.5 25.2 17.5
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100.0 96.4 95.6 94.9 93.6 76.7 41.4 11.5 4.4
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.7 98.2 92.5 25.3
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.2 98.6 74.0
Flow Curve
60 31
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
30
-L
A
40
CL
29
30
MH & OH
28
20
10 27
CL-ML ML & OL
0 26
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 98.6 97.7 34.0
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 98.6 97.6 64.8
Flow Curve
60 34
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
32
-L
A
40
CL
30
30
MH & OH
28
20
10 26
CL-ML ML & OL
0 24
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.3 34.8
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.8 99.2 98.4 54.8
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
1i .
1/2 n.
in.
in.
10
20
40
60
in
4
n.
n.
n.
no.
1.5
no.
3/4
3/8
no.
no.
no.
no.
no.
3i
2i
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 99.6 98.8 98.2
Flow Curve
60 107
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
E
50
IN
-L
103
A
40
CL
30 99
MH & OH
20
95
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 91
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50


UNCONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
SHEAR STRENGTH TEST (UU) - ASTM D 2850
Job No. : MY-1244
Project : Black Sand Factory Sanple No. : UDS 3 Top
Description : CH
Item Test Trial No. 1 Trial No. 2 Trial No. 3

1 Sample Diameter (cm) 7.21 7.21 7.21
2 Sample Height (cm) 14.30 14.30 14.30
3 Water content of sample (Wt %) 58.2 58.5 58.3
3
4 Bulk density (gm/cm ) 1.67 1.67 1.67
5 Major principal stress (kg/cm2) 1.47 2.49 3.53
6 Minor principal stress (kg/cm2) 1.00 2.00 3.00
7 Deviator stress (kg/cm2) 0.47 0.49 0.53
Shear Stress-Normal Stress Relationship Stress-Strain Relationship
4.0 0.60
Deviator Stress (kg/cm2)
Shear Stress ( Kg/cm2)
0.50
3.0
0.40
2.0 0.30
0.20
1.0 Cell Pressure = 2.00 kg/cm2
0.10 Cell Pressure = 3.00 kg/cm2
Cell Pressure = 4.00 kg/cm2
0.0 0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
2
Normal Stress (Kg/cm ) Strain (%)
Cohesive Strength (Cu) = 0.23 kg/cm2

Friction Angle () = 0.00 Degrees
Tested by Checked by Date

Ismail Eng. Hossam A. Elshafy 7-07-2020
Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100.0 98.4 95.1 94.0 92.3 67.6 20.3 7.3 5.2
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

Job No. : MY-1244
CLAY
GRAVEL SAND
SILT
200
100
20
60
3/8 n.
10
40
in.
in.
in.
4
1.5 .
n.
n.
n
no.
no.
2i
no.
no.
3i
1/2
no.
no.
1i
no.
3/4
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Diameter in mm
Size (mm) 75 50 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.85 0.425 0.25 0.15 0.075
100 100
% Passing 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100.0 90.5 22.8 8.0 4.7
Flow Curve
60 3
PLASTICITY CHART
CH
50
E
IN
-L
A
40
CL
30 2
MH & OH
20
10
CL-ML ML & OL
0 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 25 30 40 50

SUMMARY OF SOIL CHEMICAL TEST RESULTS
Job No. : MY-1244
Client : Prof. M. Elnabarawy Date : 12/07/2020
Project : Black Sand Factory
BH Sample Depth (m) Acid Water Acid Water Chloride Content
Organic
No. No. T.D.S soluble soluble soluble soluble represented as pH
Content
From To Sulphate as Sulphate as Sulphate as Sulphate as
SO3, % SO3, % SO4, % SO4, %
NaCl, % Cl-, %
% %
1 D2 1.00 1.45 0.198 0.43 0.09 0.516 0.108 0.051 0.031 8.4
5 D3 to D5 2.00 4.45 0.898 1.65 0.194 1.98 0.233 0.497 0.302 8.8
7 D1+D2 0.00 1.45 0.602 1.15 0.204 1.38 0.245 0.238 0.144 8.0
D1+D2 0.00 1.45 0.257 0.84 0.096 1.008 0.115 0.113 0.069 8.2
13
D9 (C ) 9.60 9.95 30.0
Checked By
Chemist : Hanaa Mohamed

ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES OF SOILS (ASTM D 2435)
Location : El Burulles, Kafr EL-Sheikh, Egypt Description : CH
1. Specimen Diameter .....………………....... ........................... : 50.00 mm

2. Specimen Height .....……….....………….....………………...............: 20.00 mm
3. Voids ratio .....……….....………….....…………… a- Initial : 1.504
.....……….....………….....…………… b- Final : 0.965
4. Specific gravity .....……….....………….....…………….....................: 2.750
3
5. Bulk density .....……….....………….....…………….....................: 1.685 g/cm
6. Natural water content (before testi.....………….....…………… a- Initial : 53.45 % dry weight
3
7. Dry Density .....……….....………….....………………...............: 1.098 g/cm
8. Degree of saturation .....……….....………….....………………...............: 97.7 %
9. Compression Index C C .....………..….………..................... 4.00-8.00 : 0.922
10. Coefficient of volume compressibility mv ………………2.00-4.00 : 0.344 m2 /MN
11. Recompression Index (Cr)………………………………………………… : 0.208
2
12. Preconsolidation Pressure Pc.........…………………......... : 2.60 kg/cm
13. Coefficient of consolidation (C v & C) & Coefficient of Permeability
Applied Pressure (kg/cm2) 1.00 2.00 4.00 8.00
2
Cv (m / Year) 0.97 0.75 0.64 0.28
Coeff. of secondary compression, C  1.5E-03 3.8E-03 1.5E-02 2.2E-02
Coeff. of Permeability, k (cm/sec) 6.1E-09 6.8E-09 6.9E-09 2.7E-09
1.600
60.06
1.500
Water
1.400 Flooding
VOIDS RATIO
1.300
1.200
1.100
Tested By Date Checked by
1.000
0.900
0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
VERTICAL STRESS (Kg/cm2)


ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES OF SOILS (ASTM D 2435)
Location : El Burulles, Kafr EL-Sheikh, Egypt Description : CH
0.0
5.0
10.0
STRAIN %
15.0
20.0
25.0
0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
2
VERTICAL STRESS (Kg/cm )

(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX (03)
Interpretation of CPT tests
Page 105
A&A-Consultants CPT: CPT05
39 Mohamed Fahmy El-Mohdar St. - Seventh District - Nasr City - Cairo - Egypt. Total depth: 23.96 m, Date: 7/19/2020
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178 Surface Elevation: -0.39 m
E-mail: mail@a-aconsultants.com
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Project: Black Sand Burullus Cone Type: Uknown
Location: Burullus Cone Operator: Uknown
Cone
Cone
resistance
resistance Sleeve
Sleeve
friction
friction Pore
Pore
pressure
pressure
0 0 0
1 1 1
2 2 2
3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5 5
6 6 6
7 7 7
8 8 8
9 9 9
10 10 10
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
11 11 11
12 12 12
13 13 13
14 14 14
15 15 15
16 16 16
17 17 17
18 18 18
19 19 19
20 20 20
21 21 21
22 22 22
23 23 23
24 24 24
20 40 0 100 200 500
Tip resistance (MPa) Friction (kPa) Pressure (kPa)
The plot below presents the cross correlation coeficient between the raw qc and fs values (as measured on the field). X axes presents the lag
distance (one lag is the distance between two sucessive CPT measurements).
Cross correlation Cross
between
correlation
qc & fs between qc & fs
1.2
1 7
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-1.2
CPeT-IT v.2.2.1.1 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 1/14/2013, 10:22:16 AM 170
Project file: Z:\Projects 1\1-10\5- hassan allam\5-167 Black sand Burullus\A&A work\Main process area\CPT results\ALL CPTUs.cpt
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Surface Elevation: -0.39 m
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
SBT - Bq plots
SBTSBT
plotplot Bq plot
Bq plot
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
Corrected cone resistance, qt/pa

100
100
Cone resistance, qc/pa
10
10
1
- 0 .6 0 - 0 .4 0 -0 .2 0 0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0 1 .2 0 1 .4 0
Pore pressure ratio, Bq
1
0 .1 1 10 SBT legend
Friction Ratio, Rf (%) 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty clay 7. Gravelly sand to sand
2. Organic material 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand
3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand 9. Very stiff fine grained
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
SBT - Bq plots (normalized)
SBTn
SBTn
plotplot Normalized
Normalized
Bq plot
Bq plot
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
Normalized cone resistance, Qtn

100
Normalized Cone Resistance, Qtn
100
10
10
1
-0 .6 0 - 0 .4 0 - 0 .2 0 0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0 1 .2 0 1 .4 0
1
0 .1 1 10 SBTn legend
Normalized Friction Ratio, Fr (%)
1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty clay 7. Gravelly sand to sand
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Bq plots (Schneider)
Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SoilSoil
Class.
Class. Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SoilSoil
Class.
Class.
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
Essentialy Essentialy
Drained Drained
Sands Sands
ils
l So
a
ils on
s
2 l So 2 iti
ay
o na
s
ns
Cl
ay
it i a
ns Tr
Cl
Tra
I r"
100 100
ow
"L
3 ys 3
Cla
ys
I r"
an
ow
la
Q = qcnet/sig'v
Q = qcnet/sig'v
d "L
C
l ts
s an
ve
Sil t
Si
iti
1a 1a
ns
Se
ys 1b
Cla
1b
1c 1c
10 10
ys
e Cla
sitiv
Se n
1 1
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 .1 1 10 100
Du2/sig'v Du2/sig'v
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Norm.
Norm.
SoilSoil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type Fuzzy
Fuzzy
Classification
Classification
0 0
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 20 40 60 80 100
SBTn (Robertson 1990) Probability of Soil Types (%)
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Cone
Cone
resistance
resistance
qt qt Friction
Friction
ratio
ratio Pore
Pore
pressure
pressure
u u SBTSBT
Index
Index Soil
Soil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type
0 0 0 0 0
Silty sand & sandy silt
1 1 1 1 1 Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand
2 2 2 2 2 Sand
3 3 3 3 3 Sand
Sand & silty sand
4 4 4 4 4
Sand & silty sand
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6 Sand
Sand & silty sand
7 7 7 7 7 Sand & silty sand
Sand & silty sand
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
Sand
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
11 11 11 11 11
Sand & silty sand
12 12 12 12 12
Sand & silty sand
13 13 13 13 13

Clay & silty clay
16 16 16 16 16
Sand & silty sand
Clay & silty clay
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20 Clay & silty clay
21 21 21 21 21
Clay
22 22 22 22 22
Clay & silty clay
24 24 24 24 24
20 40 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 500 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Tip resistance (MPa) Rf (%) Pressure (kPa) I(SBT) SBT (Robertson, 2010)
SBT legend
1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty clay 7. Gravely sand to sand
39 Mohamed Fahmy El-Mohdar St. - Seventh District -
Nasr City - Cairo - Egypt Total depth: 23.96 m, Date: 7/19/2020
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Norm.
Norm.
cone
cone
resistance
resistance Norm.
Norm.
friction
friction
ratio
ratio Norm.
Norm.
pore
pore
pressure
pressure
ratio
ratio SBTn
SBTn
Index
Index Norm.
Norm.
SoilSoil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type
0 0 0 0 0
Sand & silty sand
2 2 2 2 2
3 Sand
3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
Sand & silty sand
5 5 5 5 5 Sand
6 6 6 6 6 Sand
Sand & silty sand
Sand & silty sand
8 8 8 8 8
Sand & silty sand
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
Sand
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
12 12 12 12 12
Sand & silty sand
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15 Clay
16 16 16 16 16 Clay
17 17 17 17 17
Clay & silty clay
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
Clay
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22

Clay & silty clay
24 24 24 24 24
0 100 200 300 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 - 0 .2 0 0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic SBTn (Robertson, 1990)
SBTn legend
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Norm.
Norm.
cone
cone
resistance
resistance Norm.
Norm.
friction
friction
ratio
ratio Norm.
Norm.
Pore
Pore
Pressure
Pressure Mod.
Mod.
SBTn
SBTn
I(B)
I(B) Mod.
Mod.
Norm.
Norm.
SBTn
SBTn
0 0 0 0 0
Sand like - Dilative
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
Transitional - Dilative
15 15 15 15 15 Sand like - Dilative
Transitional - Contractive
16 16 16 16 16
18 18 18 18 18 Transitional - Dilative
Clay-like - Contractive - Sensitive
19 19 19 19 19
Clay-like - Contractive
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22 Clay-like - Contractive
23 23 23 23 23 Transitional - Contractive
24 24 24 24 24
32 22
0 100 200 300 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 100 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Qtn Fr (%) U2 I Mod. SBTn (Robertson 2016)
Mod. SBTn legend B
1. CCS: ClayLike - Contractive, Sensitive 4. TC: Transitional - Contractive 7. SD: Sand-like - Dilative
2. CC: Clay-like - Contractive 5. TD: Transitional - Dilative
3. CD: Clay-Like: Dilative 6. SC: Sand-like - Contractive
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Updated SBTn plots
Modified
Modified
Robertson
Robertson
(2016)
(2016)
SBTn
SBTn Modified
Modified
Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SBTnSBTn Normalized
Normalized
Rigidity
Rigidity
Index
Index
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
IB=32

IB =22
100
SD 100 100
CD=70
TC
TD CC
SC
CD CCS
K*
TC
(G
10 10 10
)=
K*
33
(G
0
)=
CCS CC
10
0
1 1 1
0 .1 1 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1 10 100 1 ,0 0 0
Normalized Friction Ratio, Fr (%) Du2/sig'v Go/qn
CCS: Clay-like - Contractive - Sensitive K(G) > 330: Soils with significant microstructure
CC: Clay-like - Contractive (e.g. age/cementation)
CD: Clay-like - Dilative
TC: Transitional - Contractive
TD: Transitional - Dilative
SC: Sand-like - Contractive
SD: Sand-like - Dilative
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Permeability
Permeability SPTSPT
N60N60 Young's
Young's
modulus
modulus
(E25)
(E25) Relative
Relative
density
density Friction
Friction
angle
angle
0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
-9 -6 -3 +0 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 50 100 150 0 20 40 60 80 100 30 35 40 45
1 x1 0 1 x1 0 1 x1 0 1 x1 0
Ksbt (m/s) N60 (blows/30cm) Es (MPa) Dr (%) ĳ (degrees)
Calculation parameters
Permeability: Based on SBTn Relative density constant, CDr: 350.0
SPT N60 : Based on Ic and qt Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)
Young’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009) User defined estimation data
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Constrained
Constrained
Modulus
Modulus Shear
Shear
modulus
modulus Shear
Shear
strength
strength Undrained
Undrained
strength
strength
ratio
ratio OCR
OCR
0 0 0 0 0
S u peak
1 1 1 S u remolded 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
0 200 100 200 0 50 100 150 0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
M(C PT) (MPa) Go (MPa) Su (kPa) Su/ı',v OC R
Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009) OCR factor for clays, Nkt: Auto
Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009) User defined estimation data
Undrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: Auto Flat Dilatometer Test data
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Shear
Shear
Wave
Wave
velocity
velocity State
State
parameter
parameter In-situ
In-situ
stress
stress
ratio
ratio Soil
Soil
sensitivity
sensitivity Effective
Effective
friction
friction
angle
angle
0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
100 200 300 - 0 .2 - 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .5 1 1 .5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 20 25 30 35 40
Vs (m/s) Ǔ Ko S Peak ĳ (degrees)
Soil Sensitivity factor, NS: 7.00
User defined estimation data
Coords: X:323918.72, Y:3494786.99
Bearing
Bearing
Capacity
Capacity
Plot Plot
4 ,6 0 0
4 ,4 0 0
4 ,2 0 0
Ultimate Bearing Capacity (kPa)

4 ,0 0 0
3 ,8 0 0
3 ,6 0 0
3 ,4 0 0
3 ,2 0 0
3 ,0 0 0
Bearing Capacity calculation is 2 ,8 0 0

perfromed based on the formula:
2 ,6 0 0
Q ult R k u q t q soil
2 ,4 0 0
where:
Rk: Bearing capacity factor 2 ,2 0 0
qt: Average corrected cone
resistance over calculation depth
qsoil: Pressure applied by soil 1 1 .5 2 2 .5 3 3 .5 4
above footing Footing Width (m)
:: Tabular results ::
No B Start End Depth Ave. qt Rk Soil Press. Ult. bearing
(m) Depth (m) (MPa) (kPa) cap. (kPa)
(m)
1 1.00 0.50 2.00 10.29 0.20 9.50 2066.61

2 1.20 0.50 2.30 13.00 0.20 9.50 2609.02
3 1.40 0.50 2.60 15.11 0.20 9.50 3031.76
4 1.60 0.50 2.90 17.14 0.20 9.50 3436.80
5 1.80 0.50 3.20 19.05 0.20 9.50 3819.47
6 2.00 0.50 3.50 20.15 0.20 9.50 4039.04
7 2.20 0.50 3.80 21.03 0.20 9.50 4215.70
8 2.40 0.50 4.10 21.64 0.20 9.50 4337.46
9 2.60 0.50 4.40 21.90 0.20 9.50 4390.38
10 2.80 0.50 4.70 21.85 0.20 9.50 4379.65
11 3.00 0.50 5.00 21.76 0.20 9.50 4361.24
12 3.20 0.50 5.30 21.14 0.20 9.50 4237.92
13 3.40 0.50 5.60 20.85 0.20 9.50 4179.19
14 3.60 0.50 5.90 21.84 0.20 9.50 4378.32
15 3.80 0.50 6.20 22.98 0.20 9.50 4605.18
16 4.00 0.50 6.50 23.52 0.20 9.50 4714.20
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Cone
Cone
resistance
resistance Sleeve
Sleeve
friction
friction Pore
Pore
pressure
pressure
0 0 0
1 1 1
2 2 2
3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5 5
6 6 6
7 7 7
8 8 8
9 9 9
10 10 10
11 11 11
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
12 12 12
13 13 13
14 14 14
15 15 15
16 16 16
17 17 17
18 18 18
19 19 19
20 20 20
21 21 21
22 22 22
23 23 23
24 24 24
25 25 25
26 26 26
0 20 40 0 100 200 0 500 1 ,0 0 0
between
correlation
1.2
6
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-1.2
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
SBT - Bq plots
SBTSBT
plotplot Bq plot
Bq plot
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0

100
100
10
10
1
- 0 .6 0 - 0 .4 0 -0 .2 0 0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0 1 .2 0 1 .4 0
1
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
SBTn
SBTn
plotplot Normalized
Normalized
Bq plot
Bq plot
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0

100
100
10
10
1
-0 .6 0 - 0 .4 0 - 0 .2 0 0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0 1 .2 0 1 .4 0
1
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SoilSoil
Class.
Class. Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SoilSoil
Class.
Class.
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
Drained Drained
Sands Sands
ils
l So
a
ils on
s
2 l So 2 iti
ay
o na
s
ns
Cl
ay
it i a
ns Tr
Cl
Tra
I r"
100 100
ow
"L
3 ys 3
Cla
ys
I r"
an
ow
la
Q = qcnet/sig'v
Q = qcnet/sig'v
d "L
C
l ts
s an
ve
Sil t
Si
iti
1a 1a
ns
Se
ys 1b
Cla
1b
1c 1c
10 10
ys
e Cla
sitiv
Se n
1 1
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 .1 1 10 100
Du2/sig'v Du2/sig'v
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Norm.
Norm.
SoilSoil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type Fuzzy
Fuzzy
Classification
Classification
0 0
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 20 40 60 80 100
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Cone
Cone
resistance
resistance
qt qt Friction
Friction
ratio
ratio Pore
Pore
pressure
pressure
u u SBTSBT
Index
Index Soil
Soil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type
0 0 0 0 0
Sand & silty sand
2 2 2 2 2 Sand
3 3 3 3 3 Sand
4 4 4 4 4 Sand
Sand
6 6 6 6 6
Sand
Clay
9 9 9 9 9 Clay
10 10 10 10 10
Sand
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
19 19 19 19 19
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
25 25 25 25 25

0 20 40 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 500 1 ,0 0 0 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
SBT legend
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Norm.
Norm.
cone
cone
resistance
resistance Norm.
Norm.
friction
friction
ratio
ratio Norm.
Norm.
pore
pore
pressure
pressure
ratio
ratio SBTn
SBTn
Index
Index Norm.
Norm.
SoilSoil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type
0 0 0 0 0
Sand
2 2 2 2 2
Sand
4 4 4 4 4 Sand
Sand
6 6 6 6 6
Sand
7 7 7 7 7
Sand & silty sand
Clay
9 9 9 9 9 Clay
10 10 10 10 10
Sand
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Sand & silty sand
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18 Clay
Clay & silty clay
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
Clay
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
25 25 25 25 25

0 100 200 300 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 - 0 .2 0 0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
SBTn legend
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Norm.
Norm.
cone
cone
resistance
resistance Norm.
Norm.
friction
friction
ratio
ratio Norm.
Norm.
Pore
Pore
Pressure
Pressure Mod.
Mod.
SBTn
SBTn
I(B)
I(B) Mod.
Mod.
Norm.
Norm.
SBTn
SBTn
0 0 0 0 0

Sand-like - Contractive
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8 Transitional - Dilative
9 9 9 9 9 Clay-like - Contractive - Sensitive
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13 Sand-like - Contractive
14 14 14 14 14
17 17 17 17 17
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
25 25 25 25 25

32 22
0 100 200 300 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 100 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Mod. SBTn legend B
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Updated SBTn plots
Modified
Modified
Robertson
Robertson
(2016)
(2016)
SBTn
SBTn Modified
Modified
Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SBTnSBTn Normalized
Normalized
Rigidity
Rigidity
Index
Index
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
IB=32

IB =22
100
SD 100 100
CD=70
TC
TD CC
SC
CD CCS
K*
TC
(G
10 10 10
)=
K*
33
(G
0
)=
CCS CC
10
0
1 1 1
0 .1 1 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1 10 100 1 ,0 0 0
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Permeability
Permeability SPTSPT
N60N60 Young's
Young's
modulus
modulus
(E25)
(E25) Relative
Relative
density
density Friction
Friction
angle
angle
0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
25 25 25 25 25
26 26 26 26 26
-9 -6 -3 +0 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 50 100 150 0 20 40 60 80 100 30 35 40 45
1 x1 0 1 x1 0 1 x1 0 1 x1 0
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Constrained
Constrained
Modulus
Modulus Shear
Shear
modulus
modulus Shear
Shear
strength
strength Undrained
Undrained
strength
strength
ratio
ratio OCR
OCR
0 0 0 0 0
S u peak
1 1 1 1 1
S u remolded
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
25 25 25 25 25
26 26 26 26 26
0 100 200 300 100 200 0 50 100 150 0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 0 2 4 6 8
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Shear
Shear
Wave
Wave
velocity
velocity State
State
parameter
parameter In-situ
In-situ
stress
stress
ratio
ratio Soil
Soil
sensitivity
Effective
friction
friction
angle
angle
0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
21 21 21 21 21
22 22 22 22 22
23 23 23 23 23
24 24 24 24 24
25 25 25 25 25
26 26 26 26 26
100 200 300 - 0 .2 - 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 20 25 30 35 40
Coords: X:324011.21, Y:3494755.76
Bearing
Bearing
Capacity
Capacity
Plot Plot
4 ,8 0 0
4 ,6 0 0
4 ,4 0 0
4 ,2 0 0
4 ,0 0 0

3 ,8 0 0
3 ,6 0 0
3 ,4 0 0
3 ,2 0 0
3 ,0 0 0
2 ,8 0 0
2 ,6 0 0
2 ,4 0 0
Bearing Capacity calculation is 2 ,2 0 0

perfromed based on the formula: 2 ,0 0 0
Q ult R k u q t q soil 1 ,8 0 0
1 ,6 0 0
where:
qt: Average corrected cone 1 ,2 0 0
(m)
1 1.00 0.50 2.00 5.49 0.20 9.50 1107.28

2 1.20 0.50 2.30 9.41 0.20 9.50 1892.03
3 1.40 0.50 2.60 12.16 0.20 9.50 2441.44
4 1.60 0.50 2.90 14.33 0.20 9.50 2875.67
5 1.80 0.50 3.20 15.74 0.20 9.50 3157.55
6 2.00 0.50 3.50 16.60 0.20 9.50 3330.49
7 2.20 0.50 3.80 18.53 0.20 9.50 3715.58
8 2.40 0.50 4.10 20.22 0.20 9.50 4054.01
9 2.60 0.50 4.40 21.56 0.20 9.50 4321.52
10 2.80 0.50 4.70 22.47 0.20 9.50 4503.32
11 3.00 0.50 5.00 22.77 0.20 9.50 4562.52
12 3.20 0.50 5.30 22.86 0.20 9.50 4581.21
13 3.40 0.50 5.60 23.02 0.20 9.50 4613.69
14 3.60 0.50 5.90 23.46 0.20 9.50 4700.54
15 3.80 0.50 6.20 23.72 0.20 9.50 4753.36
16 4.00 0.50 6.50 24.05 0.20 9.50 4819.81
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178 Surface Elevation: 0.00 m
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Cone
Cone
resistance
resistance Sleeve
Sleeve
friction
friction Pore
Pore
pressure
pressure
0 0 0
1 1 1
2 2 2
3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5 5
6 6 6
7 7 7
8 8 8
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 9 9
10 10 10
11 11 11
12 12 12
13 13 13
14 14 14
15 15 15
16 16 16
17 17 17
18 18 18
19 19 19
20 20 20
0 10 20 30 100 200 0 500
between
correlation
1.2
1
6
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-1.2
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Surface Elevation: 0.00 m
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
SBT - Bq plots
SBTSBT
plotplot Bq plot
Bq plot
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0

100
100
10
10
1
- 0 .6 0 - 0 .4 0 -0 .2 0 0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0 1 .2 0 1 .4 0
1
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
SBTn
SBTn
plotplot Normalized
Normalized
Bq plot
Bq plot
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0

100
100
10
10
1
-0 .6 0 - 0 .4 0 - 0 .2 0 0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0 1 .2 0 1 .4 0
1
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SoilSoil
Class.
Class. Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SoilSoil
Class.
Class.
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
Drained Drained
Sands Sands
ils
l So
a
ils on
s
2 l So 2 iti
ay
o na
s
ns
Cl
ay
it i a
ns Tr
Cl
Tra
I r"
100 100
ow
"L
3 ys 3
Cla
ys
I r"
an
ow
la
Q = qcnet/sig'v
Q = qcnet/sig'v
d "L
C
l ts
s an
ve
Sil t
Si
iti
1a 1a
ns
Se
ys 1b
Cla
1b
1c 1c
10 10
ys
e Cla
sitiv
Se n
1 1
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 .1 1 10 100
Du2/sig'v Du2/sig'v
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Norm.
Norm.
SoilSoil
Behaviour
Behaviour
TypeType Fuzzy
Fuzzy
Classification
Classification
0 0
0 .5 0 .5
1 1
1 .5 1 .5
2 2
2 .5 2 .5
3 3
3 .5 3 .5
4 4
4 .5 4 .5
5 5
5 .5 5 .5
6 6
6 .5 6 .5
7 7
7 .5 7 .5
8 8
8 .5 8 .5
9 9
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 .5 9 .5
10 10
1 0 .5 1 0 .5
11 11
1 1 .5 1 1 .5
12 12
1 2 .5 1 2 .5
13 13
1 3 .5 1 3 .5
14 14
1 4 .5 1 4 .5
15 15
1 5 .5 1 5 .5
16 16
1 6 .5 1 6 .5
17 17
1 7 .5 1 7 .5
18 18
1 8 .5 1 8 .5
19 19
1 9 .5 1 9 .5
20 20
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 20 40 60 80 100
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Cone
Cone
resistance
resistance
qt qt Friction
Friction
ratio
ratio Pore
Pore
pressure
pressure
u u SBTSBT
Index
Index Soil
Soil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type
0 0 0 0 0
Sand & silty sand
2 2 2 2 2 Sand
Sand
4 4 4 4 4 Sand
Sand & silty sand
6 6 6 6 6 Clay
8 8 8 8 8
Sand
Clay & silty clay
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 9 9 9 9 Clay

12 12 12 12 12 Clay
Sand & silty sand
Sand & silty sand
Clay
14 14 14 14 14 Clay

Sand & silty sand
16 16 16 16 16 Clay
Clay
17 17 17 17 17 Clay
18 18 18 18 18 Clay
Clay & silty clay
19 19 19 19 19
Sand & silty sand
20 20 20 20 20
0 10 20 30 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 500 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
SBT legend
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Norm.
Norm.
cone
cone
resistance
resistance Norm.
Norm.
friction
friction
ratio
ratio Norm.
Norm.
pore
pore
pressure
pressure
ratio
ratio SBTn
SBTn
Index
Index Norm.
Norm.
SoilSoil
Behaviour
Behaviour
Type
Type
0 0 0 0 0
Sand & silty sand
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
Sand
4 4 4 4 4 Sand
5 5 5 5 5
Sand & silty sand
Clay
6 6 6 6 6
8 8 8 8 8
Sand
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 9 9 9 9 Clay

12 12 12 12 12 Clay
Sand & silty sand
Sand & silty sand
14 14 14 14 14 Clay
Clay & silty clay
Sand & silty sand
16 16 16 16 16 Clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay
18 18 18 18 18 Clay
Clay & silty clay
19 19 19 19 19
Sand & silty sand
20 20 20 20 20
0 100 200 300 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 - 0 .2 0 0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
SBTn legend
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Norm.
Norm.
cone
cone
resistance
resistance Norm.
Norm.
friction
friction
ratio
ratio Norm.
Norm.
Pore
Pore
Pressure
Pressure Mod.
Mod.
SBTn
SBTn
I(B)
I(B) Mod.
Mod.
Norm.
Norm.
SBTn
SBTn
0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 9 9 9 9

13 13 13 13 13 Clay-like - Dilative
14 14 14 14 14
Clay-like - Dilative
16 16 16 16 16
Clay-like - Dilative
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
32 22
0 100 200 300 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 100 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Mod. SBTn legend B
Tel/Fax.: 202 226141198 - 226141178
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Updated SBTn plots
Modified
Modified
Robertson
Robertson
(2016)
(2016)
SBTn
SBTn Modified
Modified
Schneider
Schneider
et alet(2008)
al (2008)
SBTnSBTn Normalized
Normalized
Rigidity
Rigidity
Index
Index
1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0
IB=32

IB =22
100
SD 100 100
CD=70
TC
TD CC
SC
CD CCS
K*
TC
(G
10 10 10
)=
K*
33
(G
0
)=
CCS CC
10
0
1 1 1
0 .1 1 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1 10 100 1 ,0 0 0
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Permeability
Permeability SPTSPT
N60N60 Young's
Young's
modulus
modulus
(E25)
(E25) Relative
Relative
density
density Friction
Friction
angle
angle
0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
-9 -6 -3 +0 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 30 35 40 45 50
1 x1 0 1 x1 0 1 x1 0 1 x1 0
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Constrained
Constrained
Modulus
Modulus Shear
Shear
modulus
modulus Shear
Shear
strength
strength Undrained
Undrained
strength
strength
ratio
ratio OCR
OCR
0 0 0 0 0
S u peak
1 1 1 S u remolded 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
0 100 200 300 100 200 0 100 200 0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 2 .5 0 2 4 6 8 10
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Shear
Shear
Wave
Wave
velocity
velocity State
State
parameter
parameter In-situ
In-situ
stress
stress
ratio
ratio Soil
Soil
sensitivity
Effective
friction
friction
angle
angle
0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20
100 200 300 - 0 .2 - 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 20 25 30 35 40
Coords: X:0.00, Y:0.00
Bearing
Bearing
Capacity
Capacity
Plot Plot
4 ,5 0 0
4 ,4 0 0
4 ,3 0 0
4 ,2 0 0
4 ,1 0 0

4 ,0 0 0
3 ,9 0 0
3 ,8 0 0
3 ,7 0 0
3 ,6 0 0
3 ,5 0 0
3 ,4 0 0
3 ,3 0 0
3 ,2 0 0
3 ,1 0 0
Bearing Capacity calculation is
3 ,0 0 0
perfromed based on the formula:
2 ,9 0 0
Q ult R k u q t q soil 2 ,8 0 0
2 ,7 0 0
where:
qt: Average corrected cone 2 ,5 0 0
(m)
1 1.00 0.50 2.00 12.19 0.20 9.50 2447.16

2 1.20 0.50 2.30 14.47 0.20 9.50 2902.64
3 1.40 0.50 2.60 16.22 0.20 9.50 3253.18
4 1.60 0.50 2.90 17.37 0.20 9.50 3483.27
5 1.80 0.50 3.20 18.23 0.20 9.50 3655.49
6 2.00 0.50 3.50 18.95 0.20 9.50 3798.54
7 2.20 0.50 3.80 20.09 0.20 9.50 4026.84
8 2.40 0.50 4.10 21.09 0.20 9.50 4226.79
9 2.60 0.50 4.40 21.67 0.20 9.50 4343.37
10 2.80 0.50 4.70 22.25 0.20 9.50 4458.92
11 3.00 0.50 5.00 22.62 0.20 9.50 4533.86
12 3.20 0.50 5.30 22.52 0.20 9.50 4513.15
13 3.40 0.50 5.60 21.55 0.20 9.50 4319.83
14 3.60 0.50 5.90 20.40 0.20 9.50 4090.01
15 3.80 0.50 6.20 19.77 0.20 9.50 3963.74
16 4.00 0.50 6.50 19.35 0.20 9.50 3879.27
This software is licensed to: A&A Consultants
Presented below is a list of formulas used for the estimation of various soil properties. The formulas are presented in SI unit system and assume
that all components are expressed in the same units.
:: Unit Weight, g (kN/m³) :: :: Small strain shear Modulus, Go (MPa) ::

§ q ·
g gw ¨¨ 0.27 log(R f ) 0.36 log( t ) 1.236 ¸¸ G0 (q t ı v ) 0.0188 10 0.55Ic 1.68
© p a ¹
where gw water unit weight :: Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (m/s) ::
0.50
:: Permeability, k (m/s) :: § G0 ·
Vs ¨¨ ¸¸
I c 3.27 and I c ! 1.00 then k 10 0.952-3.04I c © Ǐ ¹
I c d 4.00 and I c ! 3.27 then k 10 -4.52-1.37Ic :: Undrained peak shear strength, Su (kPa) ::
Nkt 10.50 7 log(F r ) or user defined

:: NSPT (blows per 30 cm) :: q t ı v
Su
§ qc · 1 N kt
N60 ¨¨ ¸¸ 1.1268 0.2817I
© Pa ¹ 10 c (applicable only to SBTn: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9 or Ic > Ic_cutoff)
1
N160 Q tn 1.1268 0.2817I :: Remolded undrained shear strength, Su(rem) (kPa) ::
10 c
S urem fs (applicable only to SBTn: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9

:: Young's Modulus, Es (MPa) :: or Ic > Ic_cutoff)
(q t ı v ) 0.015 10 0.55I c 1.68 :: Overconsolidation Ratio, OCR ::

(applicable only to Ic < Ic_cutoff) ª º
1.25
Q 0.20
tn
k OCR « » or user defined
:: Relative Density, Dr (%) :: ¬« 0.25 (10.50 7 log(F r )) ¼»
OCR k O C R Q tn
Q tn (applicable only to SBTn: 5, 6, 7 and 8
100 (applicable only to SBTn: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9 or Ic > Ic_cutoff)
k DR or Ic < Ic_cutoff)
:: State Parameter, Ǔ :: :: In situ Stress Ratio, Ko ::
Ǔ 0.56 0.33 log(Q tn, cs ) KO (1 sin M ' ) OCR sinM '

(applicable only to SBTn: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9 or Ic > Ic_cutoff)
:: Drained Friction Angle, ĳ (°) ::
ĳ ĳ'cv +15.94 log(Q tn,cs ) 26.88 :: Soil Sensitivity, St ::

(applicable only to SBTn: 5, 6, 7 and 8 or Ic < Ic_cutoff) NS
St
Fr
:: 1-D constrained modulus, M (MPa) :: (applicable only to SBTn: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9 or Ic > Ic_cutoff)
If Ic > 2.20
Į = 14 for Qtn > 14 :: Peak Friction Angle, ĳ' (°) ::
Į = Qtn for Qtn 14
MCPT = Į·(qt í ıv) ĳ' 29.5q B 0.121
q 0.256 0.336 B q logQ t
(applicable for 0.10<Bq <1.00)
If Ic 2.20
M
CPT
=0.03 (qt ı v ) 100.55Ic +1.68
References
• Robertson, P.K., Cabal K.L., Guide to Cone Penetration Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc., 5th Edition, November
2012
• Robertson, P.K., Interpretation of Cone Penetration Tests - a unified approach., Can. Geotech. J. 46(11): 1337–1355 (2009)
(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX (04)
Consolidation settlement analysis from Settle 3D
Page 106
SETTLE3D 2.014
Page 1 of 3
Settle3D Analysis Information

Project Settings
Document Name: Final

Date Created: 22/07/2020, 12:54:31 PM
Stress Computation Method: Westergaard
Use average properties to calculate layered stresses
Groundwater method: Water Table
Water Unit Weight: 9.81 kN/m3
Depth to water table: 0.75 [m]
Stage Settings
Stage # Name
1 Stage 1
2 Consoldation
Results
Time taken to compute: 0.25147 seconds
Stage: Stage 1
Data Type Minimum Maximum
Total Settlement [cm] 0 28.7711
Consolidation Settlement [cm] 0 28.7711
Immediate Settlement [cm] 0 0
Loading Stress [kPa] 55.8363 250
Effective Stress [kPa] 75 385.556
Total Stress [kPa] 75 643.068
Total Strain -0 0.0477139
Pore Water Pressure [kPa] 0 257.512
Degree of Consolidation [%] 0 100
Pre-consolidation Stress [kPa] 75.6443 440.3
Over-consolidation Ratio 1 2.26359
Void Ratio 0 1.48019
Hydroconsolidation Settlement [cm] 0 0
Stage: Consoldation
Data Type Minimum Maximum
Total Settlement [cm] 0 28.7711
Consolidation Settlement [cm] 0 28.7711
Immediate Settlement [cm] 0 0
Loading Stress [kPa] 55.8363 250
Effective Stress [kPa] 75 385.556
Final.s3z 22/07/2020, 12:54:31 PM

SETTLE3D 2.014
Page 2 of 3
Total Stress [kPa] 75 643.068

Total Strain -0 0.0477139
Pore Water Pressure [kPa] 0 257.512
Degree of Consolidation [%] 0 100
Pre-consolidation Stress [kPa] 75.6443 440.3
Over-consolidation Ratio 1 2.26359
Void Ratio 0 1.48019
Hydroconsolidation Settlement [cm] 0 0
Loads
1. Polygonal Load
Load Type: Flexible
Area of Load: 4415 m2
Load: 250 kPa
Depth: 0 m
Installation Stage: Stage 1
Coordinates
X [m] Y [m]
25.25 86
-7.75 86
-7.75 20
55.75 20
55.75 86
41.25 86
41.25 100
25.25 100
2. Polygonal Load
Load Type: Flexible
Area of Load: 960 m2
Load: 150 kPa
Depth: 0 m
Installation Stage: Stage 1
Coordinates
X [m] Y [m]
0 20
0 0
48 0
48 20
Soil Layers
Layer # Type Thickness [m] Depth [m]

1 Medium Sand 8 0
2 Upper Clay 2 8
3 Medium Sand 8 10
Final.s3z 22/07/2020, 12:54:31 PM

SETTLE3D 2.014
Page 3 of 3
4 Lower Clay 8 18
5 Medium Sand 1 26
Soil Properties
Property Medium Sand Upper Clay Lower Clay

Color ___ ___ ___
Unit Weight [kN/m3 ] 18 18 18
3 18 18 18
Saturated Unit Weight [kN/m ]
Primary Consolidation Disabled Enabled Enabled
Material Type Non-Linear Non-Linear
Cc 0.9 0.9
Cr 0.2 0.2
e0 1.5 1.5
OCR 1 4 2
Query Points
Point # (X,Y) Location Number of Divisions

1 24.453, 52.787 Auto: 73
2 24, 10 Auto: 73
Query Lines
Line # Start Location End Location Horizontal Divisions Vertical Divisions

1 33.4232, 100 33.4232, 0 20 Auto: 73
2 0, 9.76277 48, 9.76277 20 Auto: 73
3 -7.75, 52.6505 55.75, 52.6505 20 Auto: 73
Final.s3z 22/07/2020, 12:54:31 PM

(AREA 30&31)
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX (05)
Consolidation settlement analysis using spread sheet
Page 107
PROJECT: Design by: Project No
Black sand MSP S.H
SUBJECT: Checked by: Rev.:
A&A Consultants Consolidation settlement for un-improved soil (Clay Layer) - Area 250 kPa S.H 0
Ground and water levels

Ground Level 0.00
Ground water Level 0.00
Foundation and stresses

Foundation Length 60 m
Foundation Width 60 m
Foundation Level 1.00
Applied Stress 250 Kpa
3
Soil Bulk Unit Weight 18 kN/m
3
Water Unit weight 10 kN/m
3
Soil Effective Unit Weight 8 kN/m
Applied
Bottom Layer Effective Pc = Total
Vertical Final Stress, Use of cr or Settlement
Layer Level of Thickness, Overburden, O.C.R OCR*svo Cc/1+e0 Cr/1+e0 Settlment
Stress, sv pf (kPa) cc (mm)
Layer H (m) svo (kPa) (kPa) (mm)
(kPa)
Upper Sand
-1.00 1.00
-2.00 1.00
-3.00 1.00
-4.00 1.00
-5.00 1.00
-6.00 1.00
-7.00 1.00
-8.00 1.00
-9.00 1.00 186.33 68.00 254.33 4.00 272 cr 0.19 0.067 38.38
-10.00 1.00 181.08 76.00 257.08 5.00 380 cr 0.19 0.067 35.46
-11.00 1.00
-12.00 1.00
(B) -13.00 1.00 257.20
-14.00 1.00
-15.00 1.00
-16.00 1.00
-17.00 1.00
-18.00 1.00 146.05 140.00 286.05 2.00 280 cr+cc 0.33 0.088 29.55
-19.00 1.00 142.40 148.00 290.40 2.00 296 cr 0.33 0.088 25.76
-20.00 1.00 138.88 156.00 294.88 2.00 312 cr 0.33 0.088 24.33
-21.00 1.00 135.50 164.00 299.50 2.00 328 cr 0.33 0.088 23.02
-22.00 1.00 132.23 172.00 304.23 2.00 344 cr 0.33 0.088 21.80
-23.00 1.00 129.08 180.00 309.08 2.00 360 cr 0.33 0.088 20.66
-24.00 1.00 126.05 188.00 314.05 2.00 376 cr 0.33 0.088 19.61
-25.00 1.00 123.11 196.00 319.11 2.00 392 cr 0.33 0.088 18.63
PROJECT: Design by: Project No
Black sand MSP S.H
SUBJECT: Checked by: Rev.:
A&A Consultants Consolidation settlement for un-improved soil (Clay Layer) - Area 150 kPa S.H 0
Ground and water levels

Ground Level 0.00
Ground water Level 0.00
Foundation and stresses

Foundation Length 50 m
Foundation Width 25 m
Foundation Level 1.00
Applied Stress 150 Kpa
3
Soil Bulk Unit Weight 18 kN/m
3
Water Unit weight 10 kN/m
3
Soil Effective Unit Weight 8 kN/m
Applied
Bottom Layer Effective Pc = Total
Vertical Final Stress, Use of cr or Settlement
Layer Level of Thickness, Overburden, O.C.R OCR*svo Cc/1+e0 Cr/1+e0 Settlment
Stress, sv pf (kPa) cc (mm)
Layer H (m) svo (kPa) (kPa) (mm)
(kPa)
Upper Sand
-1.00 1.00
-2.00 1.00
-3.00 1.00
-4.00 1.00
-5.00 1.00
-6.00 1.00
-7.00 1.00
-8.00 1.00
-9.00 1.00 91.34 68.00 159.34 4.00 272 cr 0.19 0.067 24.78
-10.00 1.00 87.30 76.00 163.30 5.00 380 cr 0.19 0.067 22.26
-11.00 1.00
-12.00 1.00
(B) -13.00 1.00 135.81
-14.00 1.00
-15.00 1.00
-16.00 1.00
-17.00 1.00
-18.00 1.00 62.92 140.00 202.92 2.00 280 cr 0.33 0.088 14.19
-19.00 1.00 60.63 148.00 208.63 2.00 296 cr 0.33 0.088 13.12
-20.00 1.00 58.45 156.00 214.45 2.00 312 cr 0.33 0.088 12.16
-21.00 1.00 56.40 164.00 220.40 2.00 328 cr 0.33 0.088 11.30
-22.00 1.00 54.45 172.00 226.45 2.00 344 cr 0.33 0.088 10.51
-23.00 1.00 52.60 180.00 232.60 2.00 360 cr 0.33 0.088 9.80
-24.00 1.00 50.84 188.00 238.84 2.00 376 cr 0.33 0.088 9.15
-25.00 1.00 49.18 196.00 245.18 2.00 392 cr 0.33 0.088 8.56
For overburden effective pressure Po> PC (Normally consolidated clays)
cc P  p
Settlement  . H . log o
1 e0 po
For over burden effective pressure Po< PC and Po+ P < PC
cr P  p
Settlement  . H . log o
1 e0 po
For over burden pressure effective Po< PC and Po+ P > PC
cr Pc cc Po   P
Settlement  . H . log  . H . log
1 e0 po 1  e 0 pC

Stone Column Report (A-A)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stone Column Report (A-A)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mineral Separation Plant (MSP)

Zircon/Ilminite Stock Pile And Process Water Tank

Figure 2-1: The general location of project under study. ....................................................................7

Table 6-1: Boreholes Coordinates and Elevation ..............................................................................14

Appendix number Appendix title

2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT UNDER STUDY

Figure 2-1: The general location of project under study.

3 DESCRIPTION OF PART UNDER STUDY (ZIRCON / RUTILE AND

Figure 3-2: Cross section of the raft under study

3.2 FOUNDATION SYSTEM AS PER TENDER DESIGN

4 SCOPE OF GEOTECHNICAL WORK

5 TENDER SITE INVESTIGATIONS

The project tender documents included a geotechnical report prepared by

6 ADDITIONAL SITE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

A&A as a geotechnical consultant for Hassan Allam proposed an additional

Figure 6-1: Layout of the plan of additional site investigations program.

6.2 Boreholes for area under study

Figure 6-2: Location of Boreholes at the area under study.

6.3 CPTu tests

Table 6-2: CPTu Coordinates and Elevation

Figure 6-3: Location of CPTu at the area under study

7.2 Codes and standards for boreholes execution

Table 7-1: ASTM standards used in boreholes execution.

7.3 Sampling collection

7.4 Laboratory tests

7.4.2 Physical Properties Tests

7.4.3 Atterberg Limits

7.4.4 Natural Water Content

7.4.5 Soil Gradation

8 CONE PENETRATION TEST

8.2 Standards and use

Table 8-1: The applicability and usefulness of in-situ tests

8.3 Introduction to CPT

Figure 8-1: Components of cone penetrometer

8.4 Test Procedures

8.4.3 Reference Measurements

8.4.4 Rate of Penetration

8.4.5 Interval of readings

9 BASICS OF INTERPRETATION OF CPTU RESULTS USING

9.2 Soil classification

Figure 9-1: Different soil behavior types for STB classification

Generally, soil that falls in zones 6 and 7 represents approximately drained

Cu = (qc-'vo)/Nkt ...................………………………………….…… Equation 9-1

9.4 Over consolidation ratio for silty clay

OCR = KOCR * (qt-vo)/'vo................……………..……………. Equation 9-1

9.5 Constrained modulus M

ISBT = [(3.47 - log(qc/pa))2 + (log Rf + 1.22)2]0.5 .................………. Equation 9-3

10 BASICS OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION BASED ON BOREHOLES

10.2 Consistency state for clay soil

Table 10-1: Consistency for Clay soil (Epri 1990).

10.3 Relative density for non-cohesive soil

11 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES

11.1 Correlation for non-cohesive soils

Table 11-1: Relation between N and bulk unit weight  t/m3

Rd = N0.5 / (4.188 + 0.639 'vo0.606) ................................………. Equation 11-1

'= tan-1 [N / (12.25 + 20.3 'VO)] 0.34 .........………………..……. Equation 11-2

The Egyptian Code of Practice – Part 3 presented the relationship between N,

tan'= 0.575 + 0.361 Rd0.866 .........………………………….……. Equation 11-3

11.1.5 Relation between Deformation modulus E and N for Non-cohesive Soils

E = a N + b .........……………………………..……………….…. Equation 11-4

In addition, AASHTO (1996) provided correlation for elastic modules E based on

11.2 Correlation for cohesive soils

Figure 11-4: Relationship between Over consolidation ratio and (Eu/Cu)