UNIVERSITY OF GUYANA FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

CIV 222 Soil Mechanics
Geotechnical Report

Submit to M. Jackson Name:Joash oseph 4/29/2011 Reg#:09/0905/1201

Table of Contents
1. 2. 3. 4. Introduction General description of site Geology of area Methodology i. Field investigation ii. Location and drilling iii. Sampling iv. Water table 5. Bore hole log – stratigraphy 6. Lab testing 7. Results and analysis i. Summary of results 8. conclusion 9. Reference 10. Appendix
1 2 3-4 5 5

6 7 8-18 19 20 21 22

Introduction
The following information is a report of a geotechnical work assigned to a group of students from the course CIV 222. The purpose of the following report is to display the physical properties of the sub soil. This investigation was done on the University of Guyana Turkeyne campus. The investigation site is located in the field close to the Sophia entrance. It is bounded by the Faculty of Technology’s laboratory to the north, the eastern, southern and northern sides are bounded by the Sophia. The investigation took place during the month of May and tests carried out on collected sample during the period of May to April.

the eastern. southern and northern sides are bounded by the Sophia.1 The site was overgrown with dense vegetation. 1 As shown in appendix I .General site description The investigation site is located in the field close to the Sophia entrance. There were no existing structures in the immediate area. It is bounded by the Faculty of Technology’s laboratory to the north. Upon removal of vegetation it was discovered that there was an abundance of garbage on the top of the soil.

Below these soft deposits were the more compacted deposits of the White Sand Series with the typical lignitic layers. Underlying the Clay Series is a layer of water-logged sand (15 – 25 feet). These formations are crossed by the old shorelines and sand ridges mostly parallel with the present shoreline. after being subjected to strong erosion and weathering. The clay deposits consist mainly of grey. They are part of the upper Clay Series which lies disconformably on the dissected plains of the White Sand Series. During the initial period of low sea level in the late Pleistocene (0. These events resulted in the undulation of the Coropina Formation as well as the formation of Coropina ‘islands’. extending from the most northern part of Guyana (Point Playa) to the Corentyne River.01 Ma). The marine and estuary deposits of the heavy. . the Pleistocene (1.Geology of site The Coastline. This caused them to become firmer in consistency due to loss of water thus resulting in the deposits which are now mapped as the Coropina Formation.8 to 0. The bearing values for piles driven through the superficial deposits would increase gradually until they reach the coarse sand overlying he deposits of the White Sand Series. The Demerara Formation is the top member of a series of unconsolidated sediments which fringe the coast of the Guianas. is underlain by the clays of the Demerara and Coropina Formation.8 to 0. soft clays of the Demerara Formation generally possesses high water content and has fan-like distributed sand and shell 5 ridges and attains a thickness of approximately 100 feet.01 Ma) deposits of soft tidal flats were dewatered and oxidized. aggradation of softer clay took place and the river valleys within the lower reaches formed during the time of low sea levels were filled up by material brought from the interior. blue and brown clay locally mottled and occasionally silted with coarse quartz grains. In the following period of the rising sea level. This soft clay now forms the Demerara Formation which still has younger parts being added to sections of the present coast. The Clay Series is distinguished from White Sand series mostly due to its much higher water content as well as the presence of marine molluscs and foraminifera of recent aspect. when it would suddenly increase at a much faster rate.

(Source: P.Snidjers. “The Demerara Formation”: Guyana Geology and Mines Commission Soil Report) .A.

Samples were sent to the laboratory immediately after they were identified and classified. The undisturbed soil samples were obtained at a depth of 0.Methodology Field investigation The field investigation was carried out by a group of CIV 222 students during the month March 7 2011 Location and drilling A reconnaissance was done. with the assistance of the lecturer.2metres using the Shelby tube. to select an appropriate site for drilling. Water table While taking the samples it was thought that the water table was at a depth of _____________. Sampling Sampling entails the collection of both disturbed and undisturbed soil samples. Students were then instructed to return in a 24 hr period to record a true depth of the water table. which were sealed with candle wax upon recovery. At the selected site a six foot by six foot area was cleared of all vegetation. with the obvious exception of the undisturbed samples. in accordance with ASTM D-1586 and ASTM D-1587 procedures. .7 metres and 2. A total of five samples were collected.

2 2.0526 gray clayey silt 48.6 () Very dense 81.26 light brown soil 342. 0.Bore hole log Project: CIV 222 Location: University of Guyana Turkeyn Campus Drilling Method: Hand auguring Water Table Elevation: Depth of Borehole: Date: 7th March 2011 Strata Depth (m) 0. 7 1.78 24.0119 171.65 1.18 1.39 Sample Depth (m) Soil Profile Sample Description Moisture content (%) Undisturbed Shear Strength (lbs/ft3) Cohesion of soil 1.0058 5 . 2. garbage present Very dense 47.2m Black soil with prescence of organics.65m 2.00 0.

The tests carried out were as follows.Laboratory testing The tests carried out on soil sample collected were in accordance to ASTM procedures. Test Moisture Content Specific Gravity Atterberg Limit (Liquid Limit) Atterberg Limit (Plastic Limit) Atterberg Limit (Shrinkage Limit) Consolidation Unconfined Compressive Strength ASTM Procedure D2216 D854 D423 D424 D427 D2435 D2166 .

1483 0.100687 2.0 3.5 3.1772 0.2362 0.5932 0 2.024845 0.074262 2.0 3.5191 0.2966 0.213459 2.2966 0.2966 0.1575 0.2966 0.080649 0.2165 0.198692 2.2966 0.07270 19.2556 0.94299 19.) Ɛ = ∆L/L .1969 0.2966 0.46110 20.81354 24.0 3.4449 0.5 2.043479 0.1378 0.2953 0 0.13805 28.2966 0.11811 0.4449 0.09843 0.Results and Analysis Results Results for Unconfined compressive test (below water table sample) mm Specimen Vertical Proving Ring Dial Reading Applied Axial Load (lbs) Corrected Area Ac = Ao/(1 –Ɛ) (in2) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 0 0.093175 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2.3708 0.006213 0.155621 2.5 4.018635 0.0 0 0.049696 0.258975 0 10.03937 0.068312 0.75223 33.05906 0.01969 0.184192 2.055912 0.127785 2.062127 0.31723 37.087394 2.243596 2.60482 24.2756 0.94366 28.012422 0.33163 20.59056 20.35936 20.44620 29.037264 0.228196 2.81396 Stress (psf) Deformation Strain = ∆L (in.031057 0.114154 2.086959 0.3708 0.074528 0.061302 2.07874 0.169814 2.141610 2.4449 0.20212 20.

0 4.118007 0.5932 0.0 5.306323 2.43307 0.099379 0.7415 0.0 5.4134 0.78651 48.136646 0.0 5.274536 2.7415 0.0 5.45276 0.64926 45.5932 0.425658 37.49213 0.8156 0.15528 4.29685 37.3740 0.3937 0.00157 44.372717 2.31496 0.77849 45.105576 0.0 4.32504 45.5932 0.7415 0.389913 2.355784 2.407354 2.149068 0.03766 36.3346 0.142858 0.5932 0.0 4.41837 .47244 0.5 0.3543 0.12422 0.322575 2.13044 0.0 5.7415 0.111792 0.800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 0.290295 2.55526 37.8156 2.339052 2.67778 48.5 5.

243596 2.9651 319.7179 190.087394 2.068312 0.2556 0.100687 2.093175 0.155621 2.07874 0.12422 0.2953 0.012422 0.4028 217.5221 304.127785 2.1408 287.355784 0 51.9485 236.1143 3.0422 5.449 4.198692 2.1524 4.05906 0.4134 0 0.2061 262.2198 326.086959 0.1905 5.449 4.339052 2.1969 0.0041 4.5361 142.049696 0.1905 5.074262 2.061302 2.258975 2.213459 2.8177 3.5853 311.3622 112.1772 0.4054 .169814 2.5592 3.2626 3.2165 0.1378 0.03937 0.31496 0.3388 0 2.6313 2.306323 2.037264 0.322575 2.3937 0.2068 254.8046 335.080649 0.099379 0.7415 1.3543 0.114154 2.3214 171.1575 0.7456 4.031057 0.290295 2.1905 5.118007 0.141610 2.6907 209.1864 1.01969 0.2756 0.) Vertical Strain Ɛ = ∆L/L Proving Ring Dial Reading Applied Axial Load (lbs) Corrected Area Ac = Ao/(1 – Ɛ) (in2) Stress (psf) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 0 0.2423 270.228196 2.018635 0.3346 0.8003 82.8939 5.274536 2.5211 2.111792 0.11811 0.2362 0.09843 0.3740 0.006213 0.0762 2.043479 0.3475 324.062127 0.mm Specimen Deformation = ∆L (in.105576 0.13044 0 5 8 11 14 17 19 21 22 24 26 27 28 30 30 32 33 34 35 35 35 36 0 0.0065 337.055912 0.024845 0.184192 2.8558 4.0793 331.074528 0.

Unconfined compressive strength test (above water table) Stress Strain .

000 35 28 17 11 7 Liquid Limit results (above water table) Cans No.993 92.887 35 26 16 .Liquid Limit results (above water table) Can No.3 35.6 18.9 of Weight of can Weight W2 (g) 28. w wet soil.8 26.1 19.727 74.0 35. Weight can.840 97. Weight can.0 23. W3 (g) (g) (%) = Number blows of 1 2 3 4 5 6. W1 (g) of Weight of can Weight of can Moisture + weight of + weight of content.1 (%) 88.0 72.576 76.7 6.1 20.8 22. W1 (g) 1 2 3 6.9 30.0 33. w of dry soil. W3 (g) 18.596 90.7 6. W2 dry soil.3 6.0 of Moisture Number blows of + moist soil. can + weight content.2 31.8 16.336 82.3 6.1 7.9 6.4 21.0 20.

696 117.7 18.1 Weight of can + Dry soil.887 36.8 18.3 18. Weight of can W1 (g) + Wet soil.6 22.7 27.2 32.2 15.412 31.3 24.4 Weight of can + Dry soil.2 47. Weight of can.4 5 6. W2 (g) 1 2 3 15.0345 30.8155 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit = Average moisture contents of Plastic limit (below water table) Can No.1 7. Weight of can W1 (g) + Wet soil.0 39.8 108.4 25. W2 (g) 1 2 15.364 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit = Average moisture contents of .857 10 5 Plastic limit (above water table) Can No. W3 (g) 22.0 29.5 19. W3 (g) 17.7 43. Weight of can.4 15.2 23.2 15.8 19.

051 38.250 cm3 22.767 Shrinkage limit (Above water table) 1 Weight of coated shrinkage limit dish.4 g 284.36 mm 22. W2 Weight of dish + dry soil.49 mm 122.49 mm 26.86 mm 252.5 g 2 251.6 23.36 mm 122.250 cm3 35.5 g .39 mm 304.6 g 285.3 25.3 15. W1 Weight of dish + wet soil.4 g 139.86 mm 304.39 mm 26.0 g 139.1 32. W3 Original length of cylinder with wet soil Original diameter of wet sample (cylindrical) Change in length of sample (dry) Change in diameter of dry sample Volume of cylinder with wet 38.

W2 Weight of dish + dry soil.478 % 24.39 mm 306.735 cm3 Shrinkage limit (Below water table) Weight of coated shrinkage limit dish.sample (V) Change in volume of (Dry) sample (Vo) Shrinkage Limit 16.39 mm 26.76 mm 123.77 mm 26.6 g 139.4 g 139.80 mm 123.6 g .86 mm 311.0498 cm3 23.1 g 286.1 g 290.86 mm 254.765 % 15. W1 Weight of dish + wet soil.79 mm 22. W3 Original length of cylinder with wet soil Original diameter of wet sample (cylindrical) Change in length of sample (dry) Change in diameter of dry sample 22.8 g 256.

030 1.250 cm3 25.025 1.250 cm3 25.022 1.002 1.000 1030 1029 1027 1025 1023 1022 1021 1019 1017 1015 1012 1010 1009 1007 1004 1002 1000 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 998 Hydrometre test (below water table) .5 1 2 5 10 20 40 80 160 320 640 1280 2560 5120 10240 20480 1.279 cm3 25.029 1.017 1.021 1.023 1.276 cm3 38.25 0.Volume of cylinder with wet sample (V) Change in volume of (Dry) sample (Vo) Shrinkage Limit Time (min) Hydrometer Reading.012 1.009 1.027 1.010 1.019 1.015 1.007 1.004 1.141 % 0.599 % Density g/L FZ (g/L) 22. R 38.

this determines that the soil has a very high moisture content The specific gravity of the soil was found to be a 2.04. Using the Unified Classification System it was shown that the soil falls above the A-line on the graph and thereby indicates that the soil is inorganic and from the graph it also shows it is a clayey soil .94 for the sample above the water table and for below the water table specific gravity was found to be 2.056315%.() The soil can be classified according to the values found by the plastic Atterberg limit tests. The moisture content of soil sample collected below the water table was observed to be the maximum.Analysis of results Moisture content of sample increased as the strata depth increased. This moisture content was determined to be 81. the values were found to be in the range of silty clays.

78651 lb/ft3 Above water table results 2 As seen in the appendix (fig 2) .The variation between the values of the liquid limit and the moisture content give an indication as to the degree of the soil settlement.8% 54.87% for below the water table and 16.with a high plasticity indicating moderate strength characteristics and the ability to deform like a plastic2. Summary of results Below water table results Liquid Limit (LL) Plastic Limit (PL) Plasticity Index (PI) = LL – PL Shrinkage Limit (SL) Liquidity Index (LI) = (w – PL)/PI Specific Gravity Compressive strength 94% 37.87% 0.795 2.4% 23.94 48. Shrinkage limit tells of the soils characteristic change in volume when water content exceeds the shrinkage limit of 23.12% for above the water table.

82% 45.04 342.18% 16.0119 lb/ft3 .Liquid Limit (LL) Plastic Limit (PL) Plasticity Index (PI) = LL – PL Shrinkage Limit (SL) Liquidity Index (LI) = (w – PL)/PI Specific Gravity Compressive strength 76% 30.12% 0.36 2.

. The final observed layer was a thick grey coloured soil which was determined to be the water table at a depth of 1. Soil was found that the soil samples from the top layer had high organic content and also appeared as though it was used for a dump site momentarily.Conclusion Moisture content of soil from the tested site increases with the increase of depth as is shown in research.0526%. the collected soil sample was classified as CH Inorganic Fat Clayey Soil with high Plasticity and low compressive strength characteristics. Based on The Unified Classification System. The secondary layer was a thick light brown soil. The soil is also normally consolidated and has a very soft consistency.65m. The maximum moisture content was found to be at the water table. The maximum moisture content was found to be 81. The depth of such soil was only found to be about 1 foot (1ft) depth.

docstoc. Robert D.uakron.com/docs/23528558/Unconfined-Compression-Test (accessed 04 28. Unconfined Compression Test. P. docstoc. Queens University Faculty of Engineering and applied sciency and engineering. Holtz. 2011).civil. n.. Guyana Geology and Mines Commission Soil Report. .d. by Robert D." In An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering. 1981. F. Holtz. "An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering.com documents for small buisnesses.d.queensu. http://www. The University of Akron .Snidjers.G. http://www. n. 2011).A. Engineering Geology. 2007.edu/~mcbelch/documents/SpecificGravityofSoils.ca/people/faculty/raymond/Notes/3412UndergradCourseNotes/05-CLASS. gozips.d.. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd.d. 2011). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. n.PDF (accessed 4 27. The demerara Formation.ppt (accessed 4 27. n. EngleWood Cliffs.References Bell.

Appendix Figure 1 Acquired by using Google Earth .

civil.ca/people/faculty/raymond/Notes/3412UndergradCourseNotes/05-CLASS.PDF .queensu.Figure 2 http://www.

Appendix Apparatus unconfined compression Test 14-3-2011 compression test 14-3-2011 set up for unconfined .

Measuring Diametre for UC test Sieving crushed soil for Atterburg Limit 1 test 1 De-airing water for Atterburg Limit .

Liquid limit apparatus with soil test Mixing wet soil for Atterburg Limit .

Preparation for Hydrometre test 1 Preparation for Hydrometre test 2 .

Preparation for Hydrometre test 3 .

Preparation for Hydrometre test 4 .

Taking readings Hydrometre test .