geotechNMC 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St. Sta. Ana Metro Manila

Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................1

2.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ..................................................................1
3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM..............................................1
4.0 LABORATORY TESTING...............................................................2
5.0 INTERPRETATION OF LABORATORY RESULTS & SOIL PROFILE ..4
6.0 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS...........................................................6
7.0 DISCUSSION AND GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ...................7
8.0 GENERAL REMARKS..................................................................11
APPENDIX A – FIGURES
APPENDIX B – FINAL BORING LOGS
APPENDIX C – LABORATORY RESULTS
APPENDIX D – PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX E – GRAPHS
APPENDIX F – SOFTWARE RESULTS
Page | 0
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As part of the preliminary or detailed engineering of the project, NMC Soil Testing was
hired to conduct geotechnical investigation in order to ensure a rational, safe and
economical design and construction of the Proposed 3-Storey Building located at No.
2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St., Sta. Ana, Metro Manila (Appendix A – Figure 1). The
data obtained will define the stratigraphy and engineering properties of the soils
underlying the site, particularly the strength and deformation characteristics of the soil
strata, the soil bearing capacity, groundwater and surface drainage conditions among
others which shall then be used to determine the appropriate foundation scheme for
the proposed structure.
2.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY
Metro Manila belong to the Ilocos-Central Luzon Basin. According to the Lexicon of
Philippines Stratigraphy, Guadalupe Formation may be expected. The Guadalupe
Formation or Guadalupe Tuffs Formation has two members, the Alat Conglomerate
and Diliman Tuff. It is also a Pleistocene age.
Alat Conglomerate is consist of conglomerate, mudstones and sandstone.
Conglomerate which is the most predominant rock type. It is also have a well-rounded
pebbles and small boulders of underlying rocks cemented by coarse grained. The
sandstone is poorly bedded, tuffaceous, fine to medium grained, loosely cemented,
friable and exhibits cross bedding. The mudstone is medium to thin bedded, soft,
sticky, silty and tuffaceous. (Alvir, 1929)
Diliman Tuff has a fine grained vitric tuffs and welded pyroclastic breccias with minor
fine to medium grained tuffaceous sandstone. Dark mafic minerals and bits of
pumiceous and scoriaceous materials are dispersed in the glassy tuff matrix. (Teves
and Gonzales, 1950).
3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM
The investigation consists of drilling one (1) borehole with fifteen (15.0) meters in
depth.
The hole was advanced by wash boring and standard penetration test (SPT). The
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is performed every 1.0 meter of depth measured from
the ground surface for the first six meters and 1.5 meters for the succedding until reach
the desired depth. Initially an NW-casing was driven into the ground using the driver
hammer weighing 63.5 kg. up to a depth of 0.50 m. The section of the casing which
was driven into the ground was cleaned up to the bottom by wash boring. The term
“wash boring” refers to the process in which a hole is advanced by combination of
chopping and jetting to break the soil or rock into small fragments called cuttings and
washing to remove cuttings from the hole. The tools used consist of drill rods with a
chopping bit at the bottom and a water swivel and lifting bail at the top. This is
connected to the water pump by a heavy duty hose attached to the water swivel. This
Page | 1
assembly is attached to the cathead by means of a rope which passes through the
sheave and tied to the lifting bail. The tools are then lowered to the level of soil in the
casing, and water under pressure is introduced at the bottom of the hole by means of
water passages in the drill rods and the chopping bit. At the same time, the bit is raised
and dropped by means of the rope attached to the lifting bail. Each time the rods are
dropped they are also partially rotated manually by means of a wrench placed around
the rods. The latter process helps to break up the material at the base of the hole. The
resulting cuttings are carried to the surface in the drilling water which flows in the
annular space between the drill rods and the inside of the casing. The process is
continued until the depth for taking SPT samples is reached.
The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was used to extract relatively distributed
samples from the borehole at intervals not exceeding 1.50 meters. This was done by
driving a standard split-barrel sampler with the following specifications:
Make : Std. Sprague and Henwood Type
Outside Diameter : 5.40 cm.
Inside Diameter : 3.50 cm.
Length : 61.0 cm.
This split-barrel sampler is attached to the end of a string of rods and is driven into the
ground by means of blows from a donut type or center-hole cell hammer weighing
63.50 kg. The hammer is dropped repeatedly and freely from a height of 76.2 cm. into
a special anvil until the required 45.0 cm. penetration is attained. The sample is initially
driven a distance of 15.0 cm. to seat it on undisturbed soil and the blow count also
recorded (unless the weight of the assembly sinks the sampler, so no N can be
counted). The blow count for each of the next two 15-cm-increment is summed up and
used as the penetration number N, unless the last increment can not be completed
either from encountering rock/ gravelly layer or the blow count exceeds 60. Where N-
blow count s exceeds to 60, the test is stopped and the penetration attained is recorded
as a denominator to the number of blows e.g. 60/10 meaning 60 blows for 10 cm.
penetration. This would be indicated as “refusal” in the borehole log. The method
described above is the standard penetration tests (SPT). N-values derived from the
borings are reflected in appropriate columns in the Final Borehole Log in Appendix B.
A number of pictures were taken during the investigation (Appendix D).
4.0 LABORATORY TESTING
All recovered soil samples were visually identified and logged at the site. Soil sample
were placed inside the airtight plastic bags before transporting them to the laboratory
of NMC Soil Testing. All Geotechnical laboratory testing was conducted in accordance
with the American Standard for Testing and Material (ASTM) procedures.
 Grain Size Analysis - ASTM D422

This method covers the quantitative determination of the distribution of particle
sizes of soils.
Page | 2
Soil was passed through a series of sieves, the weight of soil retained in each sieve
determined and recorded. For each sample analyzed, a gradation curve was drawn
based on the percent finer weight.
 Determination of Moisture Content - ASTM D2216

This method covers the laboratory determination of the water (moisture) content of
soil by weight.
The moisture content of a material is defined as the ratio, expressed as a
percentage, of the mass of pore water in a given mass of material to the mass of
the solid material particles.
 Atterberg Limit Test per ASTM D4318

This test method covers the determination of the liquid limit, plastic limit, and the
plasticity index of soils.
Liquid Limit of Soils
The liquid limit of a soil is the water content expressed as a percentage of the
weight of the oven-dried soil after attaining the condition between the liquid and
plastic states.
Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index of Soils
The plastic limit of a soil is the water content, expressed as a percentage of the
mass of the oven-dried soil after attaining the condition between the plastic and
semi-solid states.
Plasticity Index is defined as the difference between the liquid and plastic limits of
the soil.
 Soil Classification Tests per ASTM D2487

This standard describes a system for classifying mineral and organic-mineral soils
for engineering purposes based on laboratory determination of particle size
characteristics, liquid limit and plasticity index.
 Unconfined Compressive Strength of intact rock core specimen per

ASTM D2938
This test method covers the determination of the unconfined compressive strength
of intact rock core specimens. It measures this through unconfined compression
test, which is an unconsilidated undrained test where the lateral confining pressure
is equal to zero.
The rock sample is cut to length and the ends are machined flat. The rock specimen
is placed in a loading frame and if required heated to the desired test temperature.
Apply a load until its failure.
Page | 3
5.0 INTERPRETATION OF LABORATORY RESULTS & SOIL PROFILE
Overburden soil deposit was encountered up to 15.0m below the ground surface.
Based on the findings from the one (1) exploratory borehole drilled, sand and clay may
be considered representative of the deposits in the area. The descriptions of these
deposits are follows:
Sand: (USCS Classification – SC, SW-SC, SC-SM): This deposit was encountered
in BH-1 (0.0m to 1.0m, 3.0m to 4.0m, 5.0m to 15.0m) below the ground surface. It
has a SPT N-value from 3 to 24 indicating a very loose to medium dense
consistency.
Clay: (USCS Classification – CL): This deposit was encountered in BH-1 (1.0m to
3.0m, 4.0m to 5.0m) below the ground surface. It has a SPT N-value of 7 indicating
a medium stiff consistency.
The groundwater level was encountered at around 1.2 meter below the ground surface.
Appendix A - Figure 4 shows the interpreted soil profile. The properties of the soil
deposits between borings are not expected to deviate significantly but the thickness
and depth may vary more.
The SPT N-value observed during testing is not utilized directly in assessing soil
properties. These values are corrected to account for the overburden pressure.
Corrected N-values are between 2-7 blows with relative density of very loose to loose
for cohensionless and between 3-5 blows with consistency of soft to medium stiff for
cohesive (Appendix E-1).
Correlations with SPT N-values from Peck et al. (1974), David F. McCarthy, Wilun and
Starzewski to determine the angle of shearing resistance and cohesion. The stiffness
parameters (Es) and unit weight (ɣ) were also taken from correlation with SPT N-values
that are summarized in Table 1. Modulus of subgrade reaction for vertical and
horizontal has been determine using NAVFAC (1986), Simons & Menzies shown in
Table 2. It should be noted that B is the pile width / diameter.
Table 1 – Parameters for Borehole 1
Angle of Cohesion C Unit weigth (ɣ)

Depth (m) Es, (MPa)
Friction (ϕ) (kPa) kN/m3
0.0-1.0 14 2 - 14
1.0-2.0 19 3 30 19
2.0-3.0 19 3 24 19
3.0-4.0 19 3 - 19
4.0-5.0 19 2 18 19
5.0-6.0 19 3 - 19
6.0-7.5 19 3 - 19
7.5-9.0 19 4 - 19
9.0-10.5 19 3 - 19
10.5-12.0 19 4 - 19
12.0-13.5 20 5 - 20
13.5-15.0 20 5 - 20
Page | 4
Table 2 – Subgrade Modulus for Horizontal (kh) and Vertical (kv)
BH-1
Depth (m)
kh (kN/m3) kv (kN/m3)
0.0-1.0 750 /B 3,143
1.0-2.0 3,200 /B 15,714
2.0-3.0 3,200 /B 15,714
3.0-4.0 1,600 /B 5,500
4.0-5.0 3,200 /B 15,714
5.0-6.0 2,400 /B 6,286
6.0-7.5 11,250 /B 15,714
7.5-9.0 13,500 /B 25,143
9.0-10.5 15,750 /B 25,143
10.5-12.0 18,000 /B 31,428
12.0-13.5 20,250 /B 59,713
13.5-15.0 22,500 /B 59,713
Page | 5
6.0 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS
Soil liquefaction describes a phenomenon where a saturated or partially saturated soil

substantially loses strength and stiffness in response to an applied stress, usually
earthquakes shaking or other sudden change in stress condition, causing it to behave
like a liquid. The phenomenon is most often observed in saturated, loose (low density
or uncompacted), sandy soils. This is because loose sand has a tendency to compress
when a load is applied; dense sands by contrast tend to expand in volume or dilate. If
the soil is saturated by water, a condition that often exists when the soil is below the
ground water table or sea level, then water fills the gaps between soil grains ('pore
spaces'). In response to the soil compressing, this water increases in pressure and
attempts to flow out from the soil to zones of low pressure (usually upward towards the
ground surface). However, if the loading is rapidly applied and large enough, or is
repeated many times (e.g. earthquake shaking, storm wave loading) such that it does
not flow out in time before the next cycle of load is applied, the water pressures may
build to an extent where they exceed the contact stresses between the grains of soil
that keep them in contact with each other. These contacts between grains are the
means by which the weight from buildings and overlying soil layers are transferred
from the ground surface to layers of soil or rock at greater depths. This loss of soil
structure causes it to lose all of its strength (the ability to transfer shear stress) and it
may be observed to flow like a liquid (hence 'liquefaction').
For a cohesive material to become susceptible to liquefaction, it must meet all the
following criteria:
 The soil must have less than 15% of the particles that are finer than 0.005 mm;
 The soil must have a liquid limit that is less than 35; and
 The water content of the soil must be greater than 0.9 of the liquid limit.
Present cohesive materials indicates a low relative densities that are prone to
liquefaction. According to PHIVOLCS, the area identified to be high potential
liquefiable (Appendix A – Figure 6).
To further investigate the liquefaction potential of the sand deposits a quantitative
analysis was also conducted using the N-values obtained from standard penetration
tests. Using a soil liquefaction analysis software for the assessment of liquefaction
potential based on SPT using the most recent and well-known deterministic and
probabilistc methods. In this method the Critical Resistance Ratio (CRR) and the Cyclic
Stress Ratio (CSR) are calculated. The factor of safety (FS) against liquefaction is
estimated by dividing CRR and CSR. The values of the factors of safety are then
plotted and presented in Appendix F. The peak ground acceleration value of 0.4g was
used to analyze the liquefaction. The results show that all sand deposits between 2.0
meters to 15.0 meters deep have F.S. ≤ 1.0 below the ground surface indicating that
these deposits will most likely be by passed if a ground modification is introduced.
Page | 6
7.0 DISCUSSION AND GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Results of the soil investigation show that shallow foundations for structures consisting
of isolated, combined or continuous footings would be adequate to support the
proposed structures. These footings should have widths not less than 1.0m and should
be founded at least 1.0m below the natural ground level. At this depth, a net allowable
soil bearing capacity of 67 kPa may be used in proportioning these footings. This may
change using the allowable bearing capacity with corresponding depths that is shown
in Table 3.
Table 3: Allowable Bearing Capacity
Depth Bearing Capacity (kPa)
(m) BH-1
2.0 68
3.0 72
4.0 83
5.0 87
6.0 125
Isolated footings must be tied together in least two orthogonal directions by stiff tie
beams and grade beams. This is to counter any lateral displacement if earthquake
occurs and to provide rigidity in the foundation.
Grouting
Due to expected large settlement when shallow foundation is applied, it is
recommended to use GROUTING METHOD to increase the bearing capacity and to
prevent a differential settlement of footings. The grout is composed of mixed water and
cement with a ratio by weight of 0.40 to 0.50 using a high pressured piston pump or
the like. The bearing capacity will be confirmed after a month after completion of
grouting by conducting a confirmatory soil investigation.
Piles
Due to expected large maximum settlement when shallow foundation is applied, it is
recommended that building with a load exceeding suggested bearing capacity can be
supported by piles.
Ultimate capacity was calculated using a pile analysis software considering the effects
of soil conditions. The analysis is calculated based on Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) Standards. Table 4A – 4B below are the generated results by the software.
Page | 7
Table 4A: Tabulated Micro-Pile Capacities (BH-1)
Skin Friction Capacity (kN) End Bearing Capacity (kN) Ultimate Capacity (kN) Allowable Capacity (kN)
Depth
From Pile Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia. Dia.
Head (m) 150 200 250 300 150 200 250 300 150 200 250 300 150 200 250 300
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
1.0 1 1 1 1 6 11 17 24 7 12 18 25 3 6 9 13
2.0 12 17 21 25 4 7 11 16 16 24 32 41 8 12 16 20
3.0 24 32 40 48 4 7 11 16 28 39 51 64 14 20 26 32
4.0 28 37 46 56 18 33 51 73 46 70 97 129 23 35 49 64
5.0 40 53 66 79 4 7 11 16 44 60 77 95 22 30 38 48
6.0 45 60 75 90 27 47 74 106 72 107 149 196 36 54 74 98
7.5 55 73 91 109 37 66 104 149 92 139 195 259 46 70 97 129
9.0 66 89 111 133 44 78 122 176 110 167 233 309 55 83 117 155
10.5 80 107 133 160 51 90 141 203 131 197 275 363 65 99 137 182
12.0 96 128 159 191 58 102 160 230 153 230 319 422 77 115 160 211
13.5 113 151 189 227 65 116 181 260 178 267 370 487 89 133 185 244
15.0 133 178 222 266 73 129 202 290 206 307 424 557 103 153 212 278
Factor of Safety: 2.0
Page | 8
Table 4B: Tabulated Driven Pile Capacities (BH-1)
Ultimate Capacity Ultimate Capacity Ultimate Capacity Allowable Capacity

Depth From Pile Head (m) (End Bearing) (kN) (Skin Friction) (kN) (Total) (kN) (Total) (kN)
400 mm 450 mm 400 mm 450 mm 400 mm 450 mm 400 mm 450 mm
1.0 27 35 5 6 32 41 16 20
2.0 36 46 45 51 81 96 40 48
3.0 36 46 85 96 121 141 60 71
4.0 84 106 112 128 196 234 98 117
5.0 36 46 152 173 188 219 94 109
6.0 102 129 193 221 295 350 148 175
7.5 102 129 274 317 376 446 188 223
9.0 102 129 371 432 474 562 237 281
10.5 102 129 485 567 587 696 294 348
12.0 102 129 615 720 717 850 358 425
13.5 102 129 761 894 863 1023 432 512
15.0 102 129 926 1089 1028 1218 514 609
Factor of Safety: 2.0
Page | 9
Based on the initial findings of the exploration, the following parameters may be used
for seismic design as required by the National Structural Code of the Philippines 2015.
• Importance Factor, I - 1.00
• Soil Type Profile, S - SE
• Seismic Zone Factor, Z - 0.4
• Seismic Zone Type -A
• Near source factor, Na - 1.2
• Near source factor, Nv - 1.6
• Seismic Coefficient, Ca - 0.44Na
• Seismic Coefficient, Cv - 0.96Nv
• Estimated Distance to seismic source - 5.8 km
Seismic Design Parameters
A peak ground acceleration of 0.4g may be expected on site during intense
earthquakes. This is based on the assumption of a 500–year return period on the rock
site (Appendix A - Figure 5).
Floor slabs:
The sub-grade soil should be compacted to at least 90% of maximum dry density. In
addition, it is also recommended that a well compacted coarse granular sub-base
material at least 100mm thick be placed between the sub-graded soil and the floor
slab.
Excavation / Shoring:
Based on the encountered groundwater level, seepage problems may pose during
foundation excavation. Dewatering and lateral support may be needed to prevent
water ponding and soil erosion inside the excavation. Excessive surface run-off should
not be allowed to infiltrate the vertical face of excavations.
Page | 10
8.0 GENERAL REMARKS
This geotechnical evaluation was carried out based on the soil borings and laboratory
test shown in Appendix C as provided by NMC Soil Testing. The samples taken and
used for testing and the observations are believed to be representative of the entire
area. However, the writer should be contacted during design modification of the
structure to determine the load distribution. Any changes in the conditions will be
evaluated and the foundation designs may be adjusted or alternate designs may be
recommended.
Evaluated by:
DON B. ADSUARA, MSCE

Geotechnical Engineer
PRC # 98546
Page | 11
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
PROJECT: LOCATION: TITLE: FIG. NO.:
Proposed 3-Storey Building 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St., Sta.
Ana, Metro Manila VICINITY MAP
1
SOURCE: GOOGLE MAP
SITE
Proposed 3-Storey Building 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St., Sta.
SOURCES OF
Ana, Metro Manila
EARTHQUAKE MAP 3
SOURCE: PHIVOLCS
Proposed 3-Storey Building 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St.,

SOIL PROFILE
4
Sta. Ana, Metro Manila SCALE:
N.T.S.
LEGEND:
SPT BLOW COUNT GROUND WATER LEVEL
N=60/x (x=length not penetrated during refusal in mm.) RECOVERY (%)
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
(RQD in %)
Proposed 3-Storey Building
5
2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St., Sta. PEAK GROUND
Ana, Metro Manila ACCELERATION MAP
SOURCE: PHIVOLCS
SITE
6
2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St., Sta.
LIQUEFACTION
Ana, Metro Manila
MAP
SOURCE: PHIVOLCS
SITE
APPENDIX B
FINAL BORING LOGS
GEOTECHNICAL DATA and SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS
Project : Proposed 3-Storey Building Date Started : Nov 23, 2022 BH No.
Location : 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St., Sta. Ana, Metro Manila Date Finished :Nov 24, 2022 1
Final Depth: 15.00 m Water Level : 1.20 m page 1
Laboratory Test result (%) No. of Blows
% Recovery
Sample ID
RQD (%)
N-Value
wt
(g/cm3)we
SPT
Log
Depth (m) Description and Soil Classification
(kg/cm2)
strain %
NMC No.4 No.10 No.40 No. 200 LL PI 15 15 15
Unit
qu
10 30 50
t
Clayey SAND with traces of
gravel, brown.
0.55-1.00 Ss1 22 36 94 88 62 43 3 1 1 2
CLAY with sand, brownish
gray. CL
1.55-2.00 Ss2 84 40 100 99 96 82 43 20 7 4 4 3
CLAY with traces of sand,
brownish gray. CL
2.55-3.00 Ss3 89 37 98 97 94 86 41 18 7 3 4 3
Clayey fine SAND, gray. SC

3.55-4.00 Ss4 89 41 100 100 100 28 28 13 8 4 4 4
CLAY with sand, gray. CL

4.55-5.00 Ss5 91 70 100 98 94 73 34 15 7 4 4 3
5.55-6.00 Ss6 89 25 100 100 99 48 20 9 9 4 4 5

Clayey fine SAND, gray. SC
7.05-7.50 Ss7 89 31 99 97 93 20 22 10 12 5 6 6
Silty clayey fine SAND, gray.
SC-SM
8.55-9.00 Ss8 93 22 100 92 78 29 19 7 15 6 7 8
Clayey fine SAND with traces
of gravel, gray. SC
10.05-10.50 Ss9 91 18 77 77 56 18 22 10 15 7 7 8
Well-graded medium SAND
with clay and traces of gravel,
11.55-12.00 Ss10 93 17 93 73 32 10 23 9 gray. SW-SC 17 7 8 9
with silt, gray. SW-SM
13.05-13.50 Ss11 84 32 98 77 18 5 24 10 12 12
with silt, light gray. SW-SM
14.55-15.00 Ss12 80 18 99 87 33 9 24 11 11 13
End of BH = 15.00 m
Drilling Rig : Toho

Drilled by : J. TAGAM
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY RESULTS
APPENDIX D
PICTURES
APPENDIX E
GRAPHS
N value
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
N value variation
Corrected N value variation
6
Depth
12
15
BH-1
Angle of Friction, ϕ
0 10 20 30 40
0
6
DEPTH, m
BH-1
12
15
Cohesion, kPa
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0
6
DEPTH, m
BH-1
12
15
Unit Weight, ɣ, kPa
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
6
DEPTH, m
BH-1
12
15
Elastic Modulus, Es, MPa
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0
6
DEPTH, m
BH-1
12
15
APPENDIX F
SOFTWARE RESULT
Technical Review
Borehole 1
1. Ground Material Data
(1) Ground Material data entered in this Analysis model is as follows:
Saturated Cohesion Internal Horizontal Vertical
Wet Unit
Model Unit Weight Friction Permeability Permeability
ID Name Weight
Type (kN/m2) Angle Coefficient Coefficient
(kN/m3)
(kN/m3) ([deg]) Kh(m/sec) Kv(m/sec)
1 SS1 Sand 14 18 0 28 - -
2 SS2 Clay 16 19 30 0 1.000e-005 1.000e-005
3 SS3 Clay 16 19 24 0 1.000e-005 1.000e-005
4 SS4 Sand 16 19 0 28 - -
5 SS5 Clay 16 19 18 0 1.000e-005 1.000e-005
6 SS6 Sand 16 19 0 28 - -
7 SS7 Sand 17 19 0 29 - -
8 SS8 Sand 17 19 0 29 - -
9 SS9 Sand 17 19 0 29 - -
10 SS10 Sand 17 19 0 29 - -
11 SS11 Sand 19 20 0 29 - -
12 SS12 Sand 19 20 0 29 - -
(2) The Ground Material data for 1D Consolidation Analysis in this model is as follows:
SPT N- Compression Swelling Preconsolidation Overconsolidation
Model Calculation
ID Name value Index Index Loading Ratio
Type Method
(blows) (Cc) (Cr) (kN/m2) (OCR)
Hough
1 SS1 Sand 3 - - - -
Method
2 SS2 Clay 7 0.297 0.030 0 1 Cc Method
3 SS3 Clay 7 0.279 0.028 0 1 Cc Method
Hough
4 SS4 Sand 8 - - - -
Method
5 SS5 Clay 7 0.216 0.022 0 1 Cc Method
Hough
6 SS6 Sand 9 - - - -
Method
Hough
7 SS7 Sand 12 - - - -
Method
Hough
8 SS8 Sand 15 - - - -
Method
Hough
9 SS9 Sand 15 - - - -
Method
Hough
10 SS10 Sand 17 - - - -
Method
Hough
11 SS11 Sand 24 - - - -
Method
Hough
12 SS12 Sand 24 - - - -
Method
Secondary
Secondary End Time of Strength
Consolidation Elimination
Model Drain Consolidation Primary Increase
ID Name Calculation Factor
Type Condition Index Consolidation Ratio
Time (RF)
(Ca) (tp) years
(ts) years
(m)
Double
2 SS2 Clay Side 0.003 25 1 1 1
Drainage
Double
3 SS3 Clay Side 0.003 25 1 1 1
Drainage
Double
4 SS4 Clay Side 0.003 25 1 1 1
Drainage
2. Checking the Boundary of Analysis model.
Footing Width of 1.0 meter @ 1.0 meter depth
 The model's width is 10 m and the height is 15 m.

 In this Analysis model (Total 226 elements): Ground elements (0) and Structural
elements (226).
Footing Width of 1.0 meter @ 2.0 meters depth

elements (255).

elements (284).

elements (313).

elements (342).

elements (390).
3. Results
Footing Width of 1.0 meter @ 1.0 meter depth
Primary Consolidation Secondary

Ground Material (Immediate) Consolidation
Layer Set Treatment Method
Property
Settlement (m) Settlement (m)
Ground Surface - - 0.005132 0.012563
Smart Surface 3 SS2 NONE 0 0.004194
Smart Surface 5 SS4 NONE 0.004435 0
Smart Surface 8 SS7 NONE 0 0


Property
Ground Surface - - 0.001468 0.008388

Property
Ground Surface - - 0.011017 0.004162


Property
Ground Surface - - 0.00158 0.004194

Property
Ground Surface - - 0.010894 0


Property
Ground Surface - - 0 0
4.0 Summary
Service Foundation Load

Footing Depth (m) Settlement (mm)
(kPa)
1.0 67.0 17.70
2.0 68.0 9.86
3.0 72.0 15.18
4.0 83.0 5.77
5.0 87.0 10.89
6.0 125.0 0.00

Report Created Date: 2022/12/02, 16:56:51
Software Version: 3.007
0|Page
RSPile Analysis Information
BH-1
Project Summary
Document Name Proposed 3-Storey Building
Date Created 12/02/2022, 16:56:51 PM
Last saved with RSPile version 3.007
1|Page
DRIVEN PILES RESULTS
Square Section (m) – 0.40
3D VIEW
RESULTS
2|Page
DRIVEN PILES RESULTS
Square Section (m) – 0.45
3D VIEW
RESULTS
3|Page
MICRO-PILES RESULTS
Diameter (m) – 0.15
Concrete Cylinder Strength (kPa) – 34500
3D VIEW
RESULTS
4|Page
MICRO-PILES RESULTS
3D VIEW
RESULTS
5|Page
MICRO-PILES RESULTS
3D VIEW
RESULTS
6|Page
MICRO-PILES RESULTS
3D VIEW
RESULTS
7|Page

geotechNMC 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St. Sta. Ana Metro Manila

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

geotechNMC 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St. Sta. Ana Metro Manila

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................1

2.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

 Grain Size Analysis - ASTM D422

 Determination of Moisture Content - ASTM D2216

 Atterberg Limit Test per ASTM D4318

 Soil Classification Tests per ASTM D2487

 Unconfined Compressive Strength of intact rock core specimen per

Angle of Cohesion C Unit weigth (ɣ)

Soil liquefaction describes a phenomenon where a saturated or partially saturated soil

6.0 45 60 75 90 27 47 74 106 72 107 149 196 36 54 74 98

7.5 55 73 91 109 37 66 104 149 92 139 195 259 46 70 97 129

Ultimate Capacity Ultimate Capacity Ultimate Capacity Allowable Capacity

DON B. ADSUARA, MSCE

Proposed 3-Storey Building 2526 Callejon 5 Del Pilar St.,

Laboratory Test result (%) No. of Blows

Depth (m) Description and Soil Classification

Clayey fine SAND, gray. SC

CLAY with sand, gray. CL

5.55-6.00 Ss6 89 25 100 100 99 48 20 9 9 4 4 5

Drilling Rig : Toho

2 SS2 Clay 16 19 30 0 1.000e-005 1.000e-005

3 SS3 Clay 16 19 24 0 1.000e-005 1.000e-005

5 SS5 Clay 16 19 18 0 1.000e-005 1.000e-005

2 SS2 Clay 7 0.297 0.030 0 1 Cc Method

3 SS3 Clay 7 0.279 0.028 0 1 Cc Method

5 SS5 Clay 7 0.216 0.022 0 1 Cc Method

2. Checking the Boundary of Analysis model.

Footing Width of 1.0 meter @ 1.0 meter depth

 The model's width is 10 m and the height is 15 m.

 The model's width is 10 m and the height is 15 m.

Footing Width of 1.0 meter @ 3.0 meters depth

 The model's width is 10 m and the height is 15 m.

 The model's width is 10 m and the height is 15 m.

Footing Width of 1.0 meter @ 5.0 meters depth

 The model's width is 10 m and the height is 15 m.

 The model's width is 10 m and the height is 15 m.

Primary Consolidation Secondary

Settlement (m) Settlement (m)

Ground Surface - - 0.005132 0.012563

Smart Surface 3 SS2 NONE 0 0.004194

Smart Surface 4 SS3 NONE 0 0.004194

Smart Surface 5 SS4 NONE 0.004435 0

Smart Surface 6 SS5 NONE 0 0.004175

Smart Surface 7 SS6 NONE 0.000697 0

Smart Surface 8 SS7 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 9 SS8 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 10 SS9 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 11 SS10 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 12 SS11 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 13 SS12 NONE 0 0

Primary Consolidation Secondary

Settlement (m) Settlement (m)

Ground Surface - - 0.001468 0.008388

Smart Surface 5 SS3 NONE 0 0.004194

Smart Surface 6 SS4 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 7 SS5 NONE 0 0.004194

Smart Surface 8 SS6 NONE 0.001468 0

Smart Surface 9 SS7 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 10 SS8 NONE 0 0

Smart Surface 11 SS9 NONE 0 0