Igmt 047 23 Rev 01 Nic South 380kv .BSP

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT NO.
IGMT 11-23
AL SHARIF GROUP HOLDING

CONSTRUCTION OF 380 KV OHTL ASSOCIATED WITH NIC SOUTH 380KV BSP
REF-IGMT-47-REV-01
www.igmtlabs.com
E-Mail: basit.igmt@gmail.com
Telephone: 00966-561404139
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 4
2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................... 4
3 Seismicity ........................................................................................................................................ 6
3.1 Seismic Design Category ............................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Seismicity of The Site ................................................................................................................... 8
4 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................ 10
5 Investigation Details ....................................................................................................................... 11
6 General .......................................................................................................................................... 11
7 Drilling of Boreholes, Performance of SPTs, and Sampling ............................................................. 11
8 Geology of Study Area ................................................................................................................... 13
9 Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................................................... 13
9.1 Soil Classification Tests .............................................................................................................. 14
9.2 Chemical Tests ........................................................................................................................... 14
10 Results of The Investigation............................................................................................................ 14
10.1 Subsurface Strata ........................................................................................................................ 14
11 Groundwater Condition .................................................................................................................. 15
11.1 Soil Classification Tests .............................................................................................................. 15
11.1.1 Chemical Tests.................................................................................................................... 15
12 Coefficient of Earth Pressures ......................................................................................................... 15
13 Foundation Design Considerations .................................................................................................. 16
13.1 General ....................................................................................................................................... 16
14 Selection of Foundation Types ........................................................................................................ 16
15 Method of Analysis for Pad & Chimney Foundations ...................................................................... 17
15.1 Bearing Capacity Analysis .......................................................................................................... 17
15.2 Settlement Calculations .............................................................................................................. 18
16 Recommendations for Foundations ................................................................................................. 19
16.1 Type of Foundations ................................................................................................................... 19
16.1.1 Pad and Chimney Foundations............................................................................................. 19
16.2 Bearing Capacity for Drilled Piers ............................................................................................... 20
17 Earthwork ...................................................................................................................................... 20
17.1 Clearing, Grubbing, Leveling and Grading .................................................................................. 20
17.2 Excavations ................................................................................................................................ 21
17.3 Fill Materials .............................................................................................................................. 21
17.4 Placement and Compaction ......................................................................................................... 21
18 Soil Corrosivity .............................................................................................................................. 22
18.1 Protection of Concrete Against Corrosion .................................................................................... 22
18.2 Protection of Utilities .................................................................................................................. 22
18.3 Reservations ............................................................................................................................... 23
19 References...................................................................................................................................... 24
Annex (1): Borehole Logs and Results of Field and Laboratory Tests .......................................................... 25
1 Introduction
Ibrahim Al-Ghamdi Material Testing (IGMT) was engaged by Al Sharif Group Holding for carrying
out the geotechnical investigation for the Project. Construction of 380 KV OHTL Associated with
NIC South 380KV BSP, Duba in the SOA objectives of the investigation was to evaluate the
subsurface conditions at the site of each tower and to make a comprehensive report, describing the
investigations performed, the methodology used, the results obtained and recommendations for
foundations.
The field investigation program included the drilling of (18) boreholes (listed in Table-2) and carrying
out Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs). Concurrent with the field activities, selected representative
subsurface samples obtained from the borehole were tested in our Soils and Materials Testing
Laboratories in Duba. This report on geotechnical investigation covers all the reporting requirements
stipulated in the scope of work. The report contains the main text together with TABLES & FIGURES.
The borehole logs and results of field & laboratory tests are presented in APPENDICES.
2 Project Description
Saudi Electricity Company (SEC) is planning to construct of Construction of 380 KV OHTL

Associated with NIC South 380KV BSP, Duba, K.S.A, Al Sharif Group Holding has been awarded
the contract for the construction of the proposed OHTL. The location of the proposed transmission line
is presented in FIGURE-1.
Figure 1 Proposed Transmission Line
3 Seismicity
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been divided into seven regions for determining the maximum
considered earthquake ground motion as shown in Figure 9.4.1(a). The parameter SS shall be
determined from the 0.2 second spectral response accelerations shown on Figures 9.4.1(b) through
9.4.1(i). The parameter S1 shall be determined from the 1.0 second spectral response accelerations
shown on Figures 9.4.1(j) through 9.4.1(q). Where S1, is less than or equal to 0.04 and SS is less than
or equal to 0.15, the structure is permitted to be assigned Seismic Design Category A.
Site Class. Based on the site soil properties, the site shall be classified as Site Class A, B, C, D, E or F
in accordance with Chapter 14. Where the soil properties are not known in sufficient detail to determine
the Site Class, Site Class D or E shall be used, as per Section 14.1.
3.1 Seismic Design Category

• The Site location is within (Region -1)
• Based on the site soil Properties, The Site Could be classified as (Class – C)
• Liquefaction Phenomenon is not expected During earthquake.
Short Period Acceleration (Ss) in %g = 30
1-Sec Period Acceleration (S1) in %g = 8
SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY Based on Short Period C
Table 1 Seismic Design
SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY Based on 1-Second Period C

Occupancy Category II
(MCER) 0.493 for SDs
0.1274 for SD1
PGAM 0.1641
3.2 Seismicity of The Site
The project site is located in Neom Region, as per Saudi Building Code SBC-301/2018, Figure-
2, the seismic factor for Neom Region According to Seismic Maps (SBC 301), the following
seismic.
Seismic Design Category C. Suspended ceilings in Seismic Design Category C shall be designed and
installed in accordance with the CISCA recommendations for seismic Zones 0-2, (Ref. 12-16), except
those seismic forces shall be determined in accordance with Sections 12.1.3 and 12.2.6.1. Sprinkler
heads and other penetrations in Seismic Design Category C shall have a minimum of 6 mm clearance
on all sides.
Figure 2 Seismic Factor for Neom Region
Data Could Be Considered
According to the soil profile of the subsurface formation’s (3D)

the soil profile type is classified (B).1 in %g is (49.3)
Ss 2 in %g is (9.8)
4 Scope of Work
The scope of the investigation comprised subsurface soil exploration through drilling, sampling, and
testing, analyses of field and laboratory data, and assessment of the geotechnical conditions at the site.
This report prepared by Ibrahim Al-Ghamdi Material Testing (IGMT) describes the details of the
geotechnical investigation carried out at the site and provides the evaluation of the subsurface
conditions encountered at the investigated locations. The recommendations given in this report are
based on field and laboratory test results and on the state-of-the-art knowledge in foundation
engineering, design, and construction.
5 Investigation Details
The scope of work for geotechnical investigation consisted of the following major tasks:
• Drilling of (18) boreholes down to depths ranging between 10-15 Meters below the
existing ground level.
• In situ testing and sampling of overburdened soil by performing Standard Penetration
Tests (SPTs)at thespecified depth intervals to test and sample the subsurface soil.
• Testing representative samples of subsurface materials in our laboratory.
• Preparation of a geotechnical report presenting the results of the investigation together
with the field andlaboratory testing data and recommendations for foundations design
and construction.
6 General
Borehole drilling, in-situ testing and sampling were done in the field and samples retrieved were tested
inour laboratory. The results of the investigations discussed in this report are based on the data obtained
at the investigated points, test results, and on the engineering interpretation of the data obtained. It is
possible to have variations in the ground conditions. In case of any variation revealed during the
execution of the work, the mattercan be referred back to Ibrahim Al-Ghamdi Office, Material Testing
for further analyses.
7 Drilling of Boreholes, Performance of SPTs, and Sampling

The field investigation consisted of drilling and sampling (18) boreholes down to a maximum depth
of 10-15 meters below the existing ground surface. The locations of boreholes are shown in FIGURE-
1. The borehole coordinates are presented in TABLE-2 of the report.
The drilling at each borehole location was carried out using one of our ACKER AD-II drilling rigs. The
drillingwas generally commenced by the wash boring method. A tricone bit was used to cut and loosen
the particles, penetrating through the overburdened soil by rotary action. Standard Penetration Tests
(SPTs) were performed in the overburden layers. Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were performed
at the surface and thereafter at 1.5 meters depth intervals. The SPTs were performed in accordance
with ASTM D1586 using a split spoon sampler of 35mm inner diameter and 50mm outer diameter.
The drive assembly of SPT consists of a 63.5kg weight, a driving head and a guide permitting a free
fall of 76cm. The sampler was driven 45cm into the soil for each test or to refusal. The number of
blows for every 15cm penetration was counted for the full 45cm of driving. The number of blows
required to drive the sampler, the last 30cm of penetration was recorded as Standard penetration
resistance. The samples recovered from thesplit spoon sampler were visually inspected and classified
as per ASTM D2488. A description of soil samplesrecovered including change in stratification, color,
structure, density, grain size, organic material, shape of particles, moisture condition and cementation
was recorded in the form of field borehole logs along with the presentation of SPT number and
recovery.
All the disturbed samples recovered from the split spoon sampler were preserved in polyethylene bags,
identified by boring number, sample number, depth, and standard penetration resistance for each 15cm
increment, and later on, were sent to our laboratory at Jubail for further identification and testing. The
field investigation record is presented in the form of borehole logs presented in APPENDIX “A” of
this report.
Table 2 Borehole Coordinates
SR NO BH NO NORTHING EASTING DEPTH(m)

1 1/1 3044418.291 764439.567 10
1 1/12 3047294.612 761210.984 10
2 1/14 3047735.639 760715.944 10
4 1/15 3048064.248 760347.091 10
5 1/16 3048283.764 760100.691 10
6 1/20 3049352.739 758900.799 10
7 1/21 3049586.892 758837.969 10
8 1/25 3050641.895 757453.761 10
9 1/26 3050922.609 757138.668 10
10 1/27 3051198.001 756829.548 10
11 1/28 3051476.720 756516.695 10
12 1/31 3052308.219 755583.363 10
13 1/32 3052551.017 755310.829 10
14 1/33 3052844.369 754981.550 10
15 1/34 3053006.013 754800.110 10
16 1/35 3053184.286 754600.004 10
17 1/36 3053445.709 754306.564 10
18 End-B 3044084.438 764963.096 15
8 Geology of Study Area
Based on the geological map of Neom the study site shows the geologic setting of the Neom area
including Proterozoic stratiform, the Paleozoic sandstones, and the Mesozoic-Cenozoic sedimentary
successions. The Neom area is situated northeast of the junction of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aqaba rift
systems and is influenced by both systems' structural elements (mainly faults). The used data sets were
controlled by tectonic trends that seem to have been inherited from Proterozoic fabrics and form
significant fault scarps along most of the boundary between the Proterozoic basement rocks and the
Neogene sedimentary cover. The Jabal az Zuhd and Ash Shiqri fault zones are associated with dike
swarms. Gabbroic dikes of probable Tertiary age (Blank 1977) are present along fault traces in several
locations. Some mafic dikes are Tertiary, but others are older; Motti et al. (1982) showed that faults
having a Red Sea trend were active as far back as the Paleozoic.
Figure 3 Geologic Map of Saudi Arabia
9 Laboratory Testing
Based on the sub-surface strata encountered at the site, a laboratory testing program was carefully
prepared. Thelaboratory testing was performed at our Duba Soil & Material Testing Laboratory. The
relevant laboratory testing was performed on selected soil samples retrieved from boreholes. The
laboratory test results are presented in APPENDIX “B”.
The testing program included the following test
• Sieve Analysis ASTM D422

• Atterberg Limits… ASTM D4318
• Moisture Content ASTM D2216
• Chemical (pH, Sulfate, Chloride) BS 1377 & BS 812
A brief description of the laboratory tests performed is outlined as follows:
9.1 Soil Classification Tests
The classification tests performed on selected representative samples of sub-surface materials

consisted of the determination of natural moisture content, liquid limit and plastic limits, and particle
size distribution. The tests were performed in accordance with relevant ASTM Standards (ASTM D-
2216, D-2487, and D-4318).
9.2 Chemical Tests
Chemical tests were performed on the selected soil samples. The testing program included pH,
chlorides (Cl-), and Sulfate (SO3). The tests were conducted as per BS1377 and BS812 on soil samples.
10 Results of The Investigation
10.1 Subsurface Strata
The geotechnical investigation carried out through drilling of (18) boreholes down to depths of
10meters ‘meters below the existing ground surface showed that the alternate layers of subsurface
strata consist of the following.
1/1, 1/12, 1/14, 1/15, 1/16, 1/20, 1/21, 1/25, 1/26, 1/27, 1/28, 1/31, 1/32, 1/33, 1/34, 1/35, 1/36
• The first layer consists of Granodiorite, Fine-grained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to Moderately
Weathered, Very Highly Fractured Rock, this layer starts from the ground level and extends to
a depth of 10 meters. The end of the depth. As described in Annex (1).
End-B
• The first layer consists of Light Brown Sande Silt with Gravels, this layer starts from the ground
level and extends to a depth of 4.5 meters. This is followed by Gray Brown Sande Stone which
extended up to Depth of 15 meters. The end of the depth. As described in Annex (1).
The subsurface strata encountered at all these tower locations comprises of any of the above layers or
morethan one layer. The details of layers encountered at each tower location are described in TABLE-
3 as well as on each borehole log.
11 Groundwater Condition
Groundwater was not encountered in any borehole down to the maximum depth of investigation
during the present geotechnical investigation.
11.1 Soil Classification Tests
The soil samples at various depths were classified as SP, SW to SP-SM. The moisture content ranged
between 4%to 8% and fine up to 9 % maximum.
11.1.1 Chemical Tests
The pH values indicate that in all foundation soils the PH values are higher than 7, sulfate content was
in the range of 0.46 to ppm to .049 percent while chloride content was in the range of .067 to .070 percent to.
On the basis of the value of Chloride and Sulfate which are less than 0.1 % magnesium results range are very
less than 0.01 to 0.03
12 Coefficient of Earth Pressures
The  value of 29-35 degrees should be adopted 35 maximums for the granular soil for the purpose of
earth pressure calculations. Accordingly, the coefficients of active, passive and at rest pressures are
estimated as follows:
(a) Coefficient of
Active Earth Pressure (Ka) = (1 - Sin)/(1 + Sin) = 0.35 to 0.36
(b) Coefficient of
Passive Earth Pressure (Kp) = (1 + Sin)/(1 - Sin) = 2.77 to 2.88
(c) Coefficient of
"At rest" Earth Pressure (Ko) = 1 - Sin = 0.53 to 0.53
In the case of backfill materials, it is considered that these materials will be granular in texture and
compacted toa dry density of not less than 95% of the maximum Modified Proctor Density (ASTM
D1557) in case of the structural fill and not less than 90% in case of general backfill. The granular
backfill materials compacted to this recommended density will develop an angle of friction of the order
of 35 degrees. Therefore, the above-recommended values of coefficients of earth pressures will also be
applicable to the granular backfill materials, placed and compacted in accordance with the
recommendations given in Section 17.
13 Foundation Design Considerations
13.1 General
In order for the foundations to be safe, the load-carrying strata must be competent to sustain the
imposed loading without undergoing shear failure, and at the same time, any settlements of the
foundations must not exceed the tolerable limits. Therefore, the load-carrying characteristics of the
strata must be evaluated from these two considerations. According to the information provided by the
client, the proposed construction at the site comprises the overhead transmission line.
14 Selection of Foundation Types
Soil formations encountered at the site are divided into different categories according to the type of subsurface
conditions as well as their consistency. In order to categorize the sub-surface conditions Standard Penetration
Test (SPT) values have been used. Table-6 shows the main properties of these classifications
USCS Class Description

SP-SM Poorly graded sand with silt, very dense, Fine to medium grain.
SP Poorly graded sand, light brown, very dense, medium grain with gravel
Depending upon the type of soil, the following foundation types are considered feasible for
Transmission Line Towers at the site.
• Pad and Chimney (P)
• Auger or Drilled Pier (A)
15 Method of Analysis for Pad & Chimney Foundations
In order to be safe, the load-carrying strata must be competent to sustain the imposed loading without
undergoing shear failure, and at the same time, settlements of the foundations must not exceed the
tolerable limits. Therefore, the load carrying characteristics of the strata must be evaluated keeping in
view these two considerations.
15.1 Bearing Capacity Analysis
The ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations against shear failure of the load bearing strata
was calculated according to Terzaghi’s theory of bearing capacity using the Meyerhoff’s equation.
QULT=c Nc Sc dc +  Df Nq Sq dq + 0.5  B N S d
Where
QULT = Ultimate Bearing Capacity (kN/m²).

c = Cohesion, kN/ m2
 = Unit weight of soil, kN/m3.
Df = Depth of foundation below ground level (meters)
B = Width of foundation (meters).
Nc , Nq , N = Meyerhoff’s Bearing capacity factors
Sc , Sq , S = Meyerhoff’s Shape factors
dc , dq ,d = Meyerhoff’s depth factors
F.O.S. = 3.0
Considering the type and size of the proposed foundations and the expected bearing pressure, the
results ofthe analysis show that the foundations are safe against shear failure.
Table 4 Bearing Capacity Calculations
Input Results
Units of Measurement Terzaghi’s

SI SI or E Bearing Capacity
q ult = 824 kPa
Foundation Information qa= 275 kPa
S
Shape SQ, CI, CO, or RE
Q
B= 1.5 m Allowable Column Load
L= 2 m P= 618 kN
D= 1.5 m Terzaghi’s Computations
a theta = 3.208423 gamma' = 18
Soil Information Nc = 34.24 coefficient #1 = 1.3
c= 0 kPa Nq = 19.98 coefficient #3 = 0.4
phi = 30 deg N gamma= 20.12 sigma zD' = 27
gamma= kN/m^3 a theta = 3.3508 gamma' = 18

18
Dw = NP m
Factor of Safety
F= 3
Bearing Capacity = 2.75 Kg/cm2
Recommended = 2.5 Kg/cm2
15.2 Settlement Calculations
The subsurface strata show that the load carrying strata consists of sand with varying amount of silt,
clay andgravel. Therefore, immediate settlements calculations are considered.
The settlement of foundations of different types (isolated and mat) and dimensions have been calculated
usingthe following relationship given by Bowles.
Table 5 Check of Settlement and Allowable Bearing Capacity

Max.
Foundation
Allowable Se Df qnall B L B" u Es Is If
Layer
Settlements
Soil 25 8.21 1.5 250 1.5 2 0.75 0.3 30 0.361 1
Rock 25 5.69 1.5 1000 1.5 2 0.75 0.3 120 0.278 0.9
Where
H = Allowable Settlement
qa = Allowable Bearing Capacity
B' = Least lateral dimension of the foundation
IF = Influence factor for reduction of settlement when
foundation is placed at some depth “D” in the ground
Is = Influence factor which depends upon L/B, thickness of
stratum H and Poisson’s ratio 0.3.
Es = Elastic soil parameter
Generally, 25mm is considered maximum allowable limit of settlement tolerance for spread or strip
footing. In case of mat the tolerance of structures to settlement is a function of type and size of
foundations, and type and methodology of construction. foundations 50mm is considered maximum
allowable limit of settlement. The allowable differential settlement is considered as 75% of the
maximum allowable total settlement.
Where
qnall=Applied vertical stress (KPa)
Es= Young's modulus of soil (MPa)
u= Possin's Ratio
B"= (B/2) for center of foundation
α = 4 (for center of foundation)
If= Depth factor
Is = Shape factor
16 Recommendations for Foundations

16.1 Type of Foundations
Depending upon the condition of the sub-surface soil encountered at each tower location, Auger
(Drilled Pier) or Pad and Chimney foundations are considered feasible.
16.1.1 Pad and Chimney Foundations
Based on the results of soil classification (Soil Type B), the pad & chimney foundation can be placed
at a minimum depth of 1.5 meters provided that stability requirement of the towers is satisfied. The
net allowablebearing pressure to be used in design of pad and chimney foundations placed at 1.5 meters
below existing ground level shall be limited to a maximum of 250 kPa for foundations placed on natural
soil strata.
The bearing capacity calculation for share failure is presented in TABLE-4. The expected settlement
under a range of foundation sizes subjected to a range of net allowable bearing pressures are
summarized in Table-5.
16.2 Bearing Capacity for Drilled Piers
The ultimate end bearing capacity for the drilled piers can be calculated using the following
relationship:
Qp = (πd2/4) [1.3C Nc + γ D Nq + 0.3 γ Nγ dγ]
The ultimate skin friction can be computed using the following

relationship:
Qs = Σ 4πCAiDzi2 + Σ πd Dzi Ksi tanδ1 Pdi

Where
d = Pier diameter
D = Embedded length of pier
Dzi = Depth of soil layer i through which pier passes
CAi = Adhesion of layer i
γ = Bulk density
C = Cohesion of layer i
Nc, Nq, Nγ = Bearing capacity factors
δ1 = Pile Soil friction angle

Ksi = Coefficient of lateral earth pressure
Pdi = Average overburden pressure of soil layer i through which pier passes
The coefficient of lateral earth pressure (Ksi) used in pier design is related to earth pressure coefficient
(Ko) and method of installation of piers. A Ks =1 is recommended bored cast in-situ piers. An average
safety factor of (2.5) shall be adopted to determine the allowable Auger foundation capacity. The angle
of Internal friction between the soil and Pier shaft could be considered as ( = ).
17 Earthwork
17.1 Clearing, Grubbing, Leveling and Grading

Prior to any construction activity at the site, it must be cleared of all debris. This can be carried out by
graders/dozers. For leveling and grading, stakes should be installed on a grid marked by Surveying
Crews. The required levels to be attained through cut or fill at the grid points must also be identified.
The leveling and grading can be carried out by normal earth moving machine. No special problems
are anticipated in excavating and moving these soils with excavators, scrappers and dozers.
17.2 Excavations
The excavations for construction of foundations, other substructures or for trenches for utility lines
can be made in soil. The excavation in these layers can be made by using conventional earth moving
machinery including scrappers, dozers and trenchers etc.
The sides of excavation in soil shall be sloped at 1:1 (1 Horizontal = 1 vertical) to the required
foundation depth. After reaching the designed foundation level and before placing the foundation, it is
recommended thatthe soil should be well compacted by using a vibratory roller or equivalent.
17.3 Fill Materials
The fill intended to raise the ground to site development level and support the structural foundations of
floors must comprise only the “select materials”. The materials must be granular and non-plastic
meeting the graduation requirements as described for GroupsA-l-a or A-l-b according to ASTM D-
3282 classification system (see table 8B). The Plasticity Index (P.I.) of these materials are limited to
6%. All structural fill should be placed in layers (loose lift not exceeding 20cm) and each layer
compacted to dry density not less than 95% of the dry density as determined through Modified
Compaction Test (ASTM D 1557).
A-3 material shall be used in confined areas such as excavations around foundations and grade beams.
The above recommendations are valid for both site development fill and structural fill. For general
filling, any type of material free of organic material, vegetation and debris are considered satisfactory.
17.4 Placement and Compaction

All general/structural fill materials must be placed in layers not exceeding 20cm in loose state. In case
of structural fill, the compacted density must not less than 95% determined on the basis of Modified
Proctor Compaction Tests (ASTM D 1557), while in case of general fill a compacted density of 90%
of modified compaction test is considered satisfactory.
Penetration Resistance Relative Density Angle of Shearing

(Blows/ft) Resistance (degrees)
4 Very Loose. 28.5

4 -- 10 Loose. 28.5 -- 30
10 -- 30 Medium. 30 -- 36
30 -- 50 Dense. 36 -- 41
 50 Very Dense.  41
18 Soil Corrosivity
18.1 Protection of Concrete Against Corrosion
The chemical tests performed on the soil samples indicate moderate exposure conditions at the tested
locations. As per PTS Concrete in contact with soil will be consider as “Severe Exposure Conditions,
and guideline provided in PTS Type I cement with 8 to 14 % micro silica or fly ash with 390 kg cement
should be used if magnesium value more than 1000 ppm or 0.1 %, but the result reflects magnesium
values are less than 0.1%.The chloride and Sulphate contents results show less than 0.1 % so as per
Saudi Electricity Company (SEC) Standards Table 8B of 70-TMSS-03-R01(Sec-8.5.3) and Section
7.0 of TES-P-122.06-R0, following are recommendation for cement type and concrete protection to
avoid possible attack of deleterious salts on concrete and reinforcement.
Type of
Min. BM* Max. Cl in Min.
Exposure Admixture Max.
Cement Type Content Concrete Concrete
Type (Pozzolanic W/BM*
(Kg/m3) % Cover (mm)
Materials)
Severe Type I C3A-8-14% Micro silica 0.40 390 0.10 75
BM= Binding Material= Cement + Pozzolanic Materials (Fly Ash or Silica Fumes)
18.2 Protection of Utilities
It is necessary that all the utility lines (water, sewage, oil pipelines, and cables, etc.) should be protected
againstcorrosion due to the presence of deleterious salts in the soil materials used for backfilling utility
trenches. Suchprotection is specifically required for certain underground utilities, the specifications of
the manufacturer of suchutility should be followed.
18.3 Reservations
Results and recommendations given in this report are based on the data obtained at the investigated
points and the best possible engineering interpretation and judgment. Ibrahim Al-Ghamdi Office,
Material Testing bears no responsibility for the variations encountered from what has been described
in this report. However, if the matter is referred to Ibrahim Al-Ghamdi Office, Material Testing, advice
can be providing in resolving theissue.
19 References
• Bowles, J. E., "Foundation Analysis and Design", McGraw Hill International Editions,
Civil Engineering Series, 5th Edition, 1996.
• Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Design Manual 7.02.
• International Building Code (IBC-2009).
• Saudi Building Code (SBC-301).
• The Foundation Engineering (Hand Book) by Manjriker Gunaratne.
• Principles of Foundation Engineering (6th addition) by Braja M. Das.
• Modified after FHWA, 1993, Soils and Foundations, Workshop Manual, 2nd Edn, FHWA HI-
88-009, National Highway Institute, NHI Course No. 13212, Revised, July.
• Principles and Practices of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy.
• Foundation Design Principles and Practices (2nd edition) by Donald P. Coduto.
Annex (1): Borehole Logs and Results of Field and Laboratory
Tests
BOREHOLE NO . T = 1 /1
Project : Construction of 380 KV OHTL Associated with NIC South 380KV BSP BH NO: 3
Client : Al Sharif Group Holding Sheet 1 of 1
Location: OHTL Date Commenced: 13/12/2022
Drill Method: Wash Boring. Date Completed : 13/12/2022
Drill Eqpt. : B - 53 E: 764439.567 Hole Daim. (mm) : 150
Geo.Eng. : N: 3044418.291 Core Daim. (mm) : 66
Driller : Kamran Tower Type: F-T2 Groundwater depth (m): Dry.
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
Description of Material
0 10 20 30 40 50
Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

1 Moderately Weathered , Very Highly Fractured Rock
35 12
2 - Ditto -
52 15
3 - Ditto -
57 18
4 - Ditto -
61 21
5 - Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 64 23
7
- Ditto -
65 24
8
- Ditto -
- Ditto - 69 27
9
End of Borehole at 10.0m

10
11
12
13
14
15
Depth ( m )
Recovery (%)
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

45 15
2 - Ditto -
57 21
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 63 23
4
- Ditto - 61 21
5
- Ditto -
6 60 20
- Ditto -
7 - Ditto -
64 24
8 - Ditto -
- Ditto -
9 65 32

10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

26 0
2 - Ditto -
44 14
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 48 15
4
- Ditto - 50 18
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 53 19
7 - Ditto -
56 21
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 61 26
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

25 10
2 - Ditto -
45 12
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 48 17
4
- Ditto - 52 20
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 53 21
7 - Ditto -
59 23
8
- Ditto -
- Ditto -
9 61 28

10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

32 10
2 - Ditto -
48 15
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 49 17
4
- Ditto - 55 19
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 59 19
7 - Ditto -
61 21
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 63 23
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

21 0
2 - Ditto -
33 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 39 12
4
- Ditto - 46 13
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 52 15
7 - Ditto -
66 21
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 65 25
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

23 0
2 - Ditto -
39 12
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 45 15
4
- Ditto - 51 18
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 54 20
7 - Ditto -
57 22
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 63 28
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

26 10
2 - Ditto -
37 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 48 16
4
- Ditto - 53 17
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 65 19
7 - Ditto -
66 21
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 65 24
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

22 0
2 - Ditto -
33 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 45 0
4
- Ditto - 52 14
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 59 22
7 - Ditto -
61 24
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 66 26
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

24 0
2 - Ditto -
45 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 52 15
4
- Ditto - 58 21
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 65 22
7 - Ditto -
60 25
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 66 26
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

26 0
2 - Ditto -
37 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 48 16
4
- Ditto - 59 20
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 61 21
7 - Ditto -
63 23
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 65 24
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

19 0
2 - Ditto -
31 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 39 0
4
- Ditto - 51 20
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 57 23
7 - Ditto -
60 24
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 63 26
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

24 0
2 - Ditto -
32 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 45 0
4
- Ditto - 49 24
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 53 29
7 - Ditto -
57 32
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 63 31
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

28 0
2 - Ditto -
39 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 44 21
4
- Ditto - 52 24
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 58 26
7 - Ditto -
60 28
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 64 30
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

27 0
2 - Ditto -
45 13
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 50 17
4
- Ditto - 56 19
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 58 21
7 - Ditto -
59 21
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 60 24
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

28 0
2 - Ditto -
39 13
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 46 16
4
- Ditto - 51 17
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 55 18
7 - Ditto -
56 19
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 60 24
10
11
12
13
14
15
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50

20 0
2 - Ditto -
38 0
- Ditto -
3
- Ditto - 48 15
4
- Ditto - 51 19
5
- Ditto -
6 - Ditto - 52 20
7 - Ditto -
55 22
- Ditto -
8
- Ditto -
9 61 25
10
11
12
13
14
15
BOREHOLE NO . T = End-B
Driller : Kamran Tower Type: MF-HA90 Groundwater depth (m): Dry.
Recovery (%)
Depth ( m )
R.Q.D (%)
N-Value
SPT (N - Value)
0 10 20 30 40 50
Light Brown Sande Silt With Gravels 45

1 50
50
2 - Ditto -
50
- Ditto -
3 50
- Ditto -
4 50
- Ditto -
Light Brown Sand Stone
5
- Ditto -
6
- Ditto -
7
- Ditto -
8 - Ditto -
9 - Ditto -
- Ditto -
10
- Ditto -
11
- Ditto -
12
- Ditto -
13 - Ditto -
14 - Ditto -

15
TABLE-6
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED SOIL/ROCK PARAMETERS
CLIENT : AL SHARIF GROUP HOLDING
PROJECT : Construction of 380 KV OHTL Associated with NIC South 380KV BSP
Borehole No/Location
Proposed Foundation
Soil/Rock Parameters
Overall Soil/Rock
Angle of Internal
Adhesion Factor
Cohesion Factor
Depth (m)
Layer No.
Condition
N-values (Avg.)
Category
Average RQD
Unit Weight g
Average UCS
Friction (Æ)
A.B.C
Name
Type
Exp.
GWL (m)
(kg/cm2)
Soil Classification Ks
(kN/m3)
Kg/cm2
(kPa)
(kPa)
(%)
E
Granodiorite, Fine-grained Greyish to Pad &
1/1 Pinkish, Highly to Moderately Weathered , 1 0.0-10.0 - 20 186.9 24.5 38 - - 1000 N. E. 1000 B 1.00 Severe Chimney
Very Highly Fractured Rock or Auger

1/15 Pinkish, Highly to Moderately Weathered , 1 0.0-10.0 - 19 176.2 24.9 38 - - 1000 N.E 1000 B 1.00 Severe Chimney
Light Brown Very Dense, Sande Silt With
1 0.00-4.5 >50 - - 19.5 35 - - 500 Pad &
Gravels
End-B N. E. 350 B 1.00 Severe Chimney
Light Brown Sand Stone 2 4.5-15.0 >50 - - 20.0 36 - - 500 or Auger
Proposed foundation types are indicative of their suitability at the particular borehole location. Final selection/design to Overall soil category for each borehole is based on the average of N-values recorded
be made by client. and soil classification (coarse grained/fine grained).
Depth to Ground Water Level (GWL) in meters below EGL during the period of fieldwork. The maximum N-value is taken as 50 blows per 30cm penetration.
Foundations should be taken down to natural soil, no foundations are to be placed on

The values of angle of internal friction are for dry soil conditions.
fill material.
TABLE-7
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF INTACT ROCK CORE SPECIMENS
ASTM D 2938
CLIENT: AL SHREEF GROUP
PROJECT: Construction of 380 KV OHTL Associated with NIC South 380KV BSP, Duba
PREPARED WATER DRY APPLIED COMPRESSIVE
BH Depth DIAMETER WEIGHT
LENGTH CONTENT DENSITY LOAD STRENGTH REMARKS
# (M) (cm) (cm) (gms) % (gm/cc) (kN) (N/mm.Squ.) Kg/cm2
1/1 9.0 12.0 6.2 958.3 1.0 2.6 55.4 18.3 186.9
1/12 6.0 12.0 6.2 993.4 1.0 2.7 64.2 21.2 216.6
1/14 6.0 12.0 6.2 945.8 1.0 2.6 49.6 16.4 167.5
1/15 6.0 12.0 6.2 983.2 1.0 2.7 52.2 17.3 176.2
1/16 6.0 12.0 6.2 976.5 1.0 2.7 53.4 17.7 180.2
1/20 9.0 12.0 6.2 947.6 1.0 2.6 41.7 13.8 140.9
1/21 6.0 12.0 6.2 970.3 1.0 2.7 48.1 15.9 162.4
1/25 6.0 12.0 6.2 964.7 1.0 2.7 46.3 15.3 156.2
1/26 7.0 12.0 6.2 952.6 1.0 2.6 39.1 13.0 132.1
1/27 6.0 12.0 6.2 969.4 1.0 2.7 47.7 15.8 160.9
1/28 6.0 12.0 6.2 973.2 1.0 2.7 46.0 15.2 155.2
1/31 7.0 12.0 6.2 958.8 1.0 2.6 43.6 14.4 147.1
1/32 6.0 12.0 6.2 976.1 1.0 2.7 50.2 16.6 169.4
1/33 6.0 12.0 6.2 984.6 1.0 2.7 52.8 17.5 178.3
1/34 6.0 12.0 6.2 976.7 1.0 2.7 49.7 16.5 167.9
1/35 6.0 12.0 6.2 971.3 1.0 2.7 47.4 15.7 160.2
1/36 6.0 12.0 6.2 979.8 1.0 2.7 44.5 14.7 150.3

Igmt 047 23 Rev 01 Nic South 380kv .BSP

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

Igmt 047 23 Rev 01 Nic South 380kv .BSP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT NO.

AL SHARIF GROUP HOLDING

Saudi Electricity Company (SEC) is planning to construct of Construction of 380 KV OHTL

3.1 Seismic Design Category

Table 1 Seismic Design

SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY Based on 1-Second Period C

Data Could Be Considered

According to the soil profile of the subsurface formation’s (3D)

7 Drilling of Boreholes, Performance of SPTs, and Sampling

Table 2 Borehole Coordinates

SR NO BH NO NORTHING EASTING DEPTH(m)

Figure 3 Geologic Map of Saudi Arabia

The testing program included the following test

• Sieve Analysis ASTM D422

A brief description of the laboratory tests performed is outlined as follows:

9.1 Soil Classification Tests

The classification tests performed on selected representative samples of sub-surface materials

9.2 Chemical Tests

10 Results of The Investigation

10.1 Subsurface Strata

11.1 Soil Classification Tests

11.1.1 Chemical Tests

12 Coefficient of Earth Pressures

13 Foundation Design Considerations

14 Selection of Foundation Types

USCS Class Description

15 Method of Analysis for Pad & Chimney Foundations

15.1 Bearing Capacity Analysis

QULT = Ultimate Bearing Capacity (kN/m²).

Table 4 Bearing Capacity Calculations

Units of Measurement Terzaghi’s

gamma= kN/m^3 a theta = 3.3508 gamma' = 18

15.2 Settlement Calculations

Table 5 Check of Settlement and Allowable Bearing Capacity

16 Recommendations for Foundations

16.1.1 Pad and Chimney Foundations

16.2 Bearing Capacity for Drilled Piers

Qp = (πd2/4) [1.3C Nc + γ D Nq + 0.3 γ Nγ dγ]

The ultimate skin friction can be computed using the following

Qs = Σ 4πCAiDzi2 + Σ πd Dzi Ksi tanδ1 Pdi

δ1 = Pile Soil friction angle

17.1 Clearing, Grubbing, Leveling and Grading

17.3 Fill Materials

17.4 Placement and Compaction

Penetration Resistance Relative Density Angle of Shearing

4 Very Loose. 28.5

18.1 Protection of Concrete Against Corrosion

18.2 Protection of Utilities

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

End of Borehole at 10.0m

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

End of Borehole at 10.0m

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

End of Borehole at 10.0m

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to

Granodiorite, Finegrained Greyish to Pinkish, Highly to