Indian Geotechnical Conference – 2010, GEOtrendz

December 16–18, 2010

IGS Mumbai Chapter & IIT Bombay

Interpretation of Geotechnical Report

Sanjeev Gupta
Senior Manager,
e-mail: sanjeevgupta@tce.co.in

Infrastructure /Tata Consulting Engineers, Mumbai

ABSTRACT
Geotechnical engineering deals with the safe transmittal of loads due to various engineering applications to, and
into, the soil or rock mass. The soil and rock mass formations are heterogeneous and generally are subjected to
stresses (due to various engineering applications) which are additional to those presently existing in the earth
mass from its self weight and geological history. Due to these earth mass properties, the amalgamation of experience,
study of what others have done in somewhat similar situations and site specific geotechnical information are
required to produce an economical, practical and safe substructure design. The correct interpretation of the
results obtained from field exploration and laboratory test program is one of the most important crucial parts of
geotechnical engineering. Through this paper, the Author shares his experience about problems faced in various
projects while reviewing the geotechnical investigation reports for interpreting geotechnical parameters required
for design of structures. Author has made some suggestions which could be useful to resolve issues under such
circumstances.

1. INTRODUCTION (b) Geotechnical parameters for determining the load

For any development to take place, whether within cities
or outside hills or plains, dry/marshy ground, it is essential
to provide a technical criteria and guidance for its planning,
design and construction. Geological and geotechnical
investigations are crucial to establish various properties
determining the behaviour of the soil / rocky strata at site.
In such cases it becomes one of the prime responsibilities
of a geotechnical engineer to make correct foundation
recommendations and provide the correct and economical
solution with respect to site condition. This is only possible
by conducting proper tests and making correct
interpretation of parameters obtained from various tests.
2. PURPOSE OF GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION
It is necessary to review the need of investigation and the
information sought there-from before the commencement
of investigation in order to have the desired design
parameters. Primary objective of an investigation is to
determine sub-surface stratification with an additional aim
of assessing the following from an investigation:
(a) The type of foundation system (shallow or deep
foundation system) with respect to the sub-surface
characteristics, location and structures.
carrying capacity of substrata with the proposed
foundation system.
(c) Deformation characteristics of sub-surface strata.
(d) Anticipation of any peculiar phenomena, its effect
during the construction and on the proposed
foundation system like artesian conditions etc.
(e) Ground water level, its seasonal fluctuations and
its effect during and after construction.
(f) Chemical content and PH values of both soil and
ground water.
(g) Construction problems during excavation.
(h) Assessment of effect of the proposed development
on the adjoining structures or facilities during and
after construction and its extent.
(i) Any geotechnical related environmental problems
that can be caused due to the proposed
development.
Besides above, geotechnical investigations are also
conducted to determine the cause of geotechnical nature of
any failure or defects in any existing structure or system.
3. FACTORS AFFECTING INTERPRETATION
The foundation of correct interpretation begins by proper
provision of items (tests) in the tender document, appropriate
1126
to local geology with due consideration to the limitations
of the various field and laboratory tests. Wherever the
parameters are critical there should be provision of
obtaining such parameters by using a minimum of two
alternative methods.
Besides the proper specification /BOQ, it is necessary
to select a contractor who is a geotechnical specialist.
However, sometimes, inspite of taking all precaution it is
observed that poor workmanship, improper calibration of
equipment and personal negligence result in reporting of
unrealistic values. Major cause of misinterpretations are
inexperienced supervisors, lack of inter coordination
between field data (bore logs) and laboratory test data; it
could be a result of improper labelling of samples while
transporting to laboratory, human error while incorporating
the results in the report. In most of the cases, after
completion of report it becomes difficult to reach to the
cause when the report is used to interpret geotechnical
parameters for design of structures due to passage of time.
In an important project having large quantum of
geotechnical investigation, inter coordination problems can
be minimised by taking the advantage of technology, that
is developing digital record of field samples collected and
samples tested in the laboratory which could be used later
for clarifying doubts / correcting interpretation at the time
of inconsistency in the report. This suggestion is made
considering that the storage of samples may be difficult for
longer duration as it requires larger space. Review of interim
reports may also help in reducing inconsistency up to certain
extent.
Interpretation problems may exaggerate if engineer
handling the geotechnical aspects is not qualified and
proficient for handling the geotechnical aspects of the
project assigned to him.
Further the process of revising IS codes /introduction
of new codes is not able to match the pace of development
of new technology due to which there are lack of acceptable
guidelines in some areas which also leads to conflict in
interpretation.
4. SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Following points can help in minimising problem in the
interpretation of report:
(a) Test locations –Less importance is assigned for
recording the co-ordinates and R.L of test location.
It is common to indicate depth of bore hole with
respect (w.r.t) to existing ground level and not w.r.t
R.L especially on site having flat ground,
forgetting that there can be an ample gap of time
for project to commence after the completion of
geotechnical investigation. Ground levels may
change (normally increases due to backfilling) up
Sanjeev Gupta
to the time of commencement of project, creating
difficult situation for the foundation
recommendations especially in absence of record
about the thickness of backfill. In such cases it is
worth reconfirming the depth of founding strata
by excavating few trial pits at scattered location
before recommending founding levels as column
sizes increase with increase in their heights.
Similarly it is difficult to trace the bore hole
locations without proper co-ordinates. Error in co-
ordinates will affect the design assumptions and
sometime could lead to major contractual
problems. Hence it may be noted that co-ordinates
and ground levels are one of the most important
information required in the report.
For the sites where detailed surveying is not
completed and survey pillars are not stabilised co-
ordinates can be obtained by using hand-held GPS
(preferably in UTM) and levels can be taken with
respect to a nearby permanent object. This
information should become a part of soil
investigation report.
(b) Correct identification of strata- It is observed that
sometimes the identification of strata is not done
as per the guideline of IS 1498 and IS 11315 part
5. There are several cases where soil strata in the
bore log are described to suit all types of
classification example – “Brownish to greyish
Medium dense clayey silty sand”. In such cases
up to certain extent laboratory results can be used
while making recommendations. But it is a
difficult situation when the bore logs and
laboratory results are very different. In such cases,
recommendations are more like a guess based on
other bore logs information especially in erratic
soils. Sample photographs with proper
identification tag, if stored could be an important
tool for resolving the issue.
(c) Collection of water samples: Some time water
samples are collected during the drilling operation,
resulting in collection of water used for drilling
instead of ground water and reporting chemical
content of drilling water in place of ground water.
If ground water is found to have high sulphate or
chloride content in any of such cases and if
detected after the award of civil contract, it could
lead to major contractual problem. Hence ground
water samples should be collected after 48 hours
of completion of drilling activities that is when
water in bore holes reaches its equilibrium. Further
it is advisable to use fumigated bottle for collection
of water sample.
Interpretation of Geotechnical Report
(d) Evaluating consolidation in clay: Collection of
UDS sample is always topic of debate and
consolidation results are very sensitive to sample
disturbance. Any disturbance of sample affects the
consolidation results leading to erroneous
interpretation. In such cases provision of alternate
item of conducting static cone penetration test is
always advantageous. In hard clay expected
consolidation may be negligible; UDS sample may
be collected by using triple tube barrel. Preserving
field moisture content of UDS /SPT samples is
important as it also helps in obtaining cohesion
by using following graphs.
(g) Point load test: It is preferred in place of UCS as
(e) SPT test: There is no standard practice for bore
logs showing SPT values at refusal. Reports simply
(h) Pressuremeter tests: Pressuremeter tests are useful
indicate it as refusal. Where test could not be
conducted to full depth , better practice could be
to show SPT values as 70/100 or 50/100 in bore
logs indicating that 70 (or 50) blows resulted in a
penetration of 100mm.
Although code specifies to record SPT values for
three consecutive 150mm penetration, it is
advisable to have a record of four consecutive
150mm penetration as it helps in reconfirming
the trend of N values.
Sudden variation if observed need to be
substantiated (in bore log) with observations made
during investigation. It will eliminate the doubt
1127
of typographical errors. In fractured rock reverse
SPT (recording penetration against 6 consecutive
20 blows) can be helpful in obtaining shear
strength of rock by using recommendations of Cole
and Stroud (1997) . In reverse SPT, first 20 blows
are considered as seating blows.
(f) Unconfined Compression strength (UCS) of rock
sample: It is observed that often UCC dry and
saturated are performed at different depth in order
to have more spread test results. But it defeats the
purpose of comparing effect of saturation on rock
samples. Further in several cases it is found that
average strength of saturated rock samples are
more than average values of dry samples. In such
cases one has to take decision based on his
experience while recommending a value; one way
is to use minimum saturated value but sometimes,
it could be too low. Hence it is suggested to test
similar samples (probably from same source) for
dry and saturated conditions.
it is quicker. It is suggested to limit its use for
rock classification and not to use it as a substitute
to UCS as the correlation between UCS and point
load tests are approximate, on an average UCS is
20~25times point load strength index but can vary
up to 100 % with different rock types especially
for anisotropic rock. Test is not reliable if strength
is less than 1Mpa. It is noticed that guideline for
sampling specified in clause no 5 of IS: 8764 are
very rarely followed, as per the code
recommendations are to be made out of minimum
10 test specimen. IS Code also suggests to report
numerical values for water content & degree of
saturation at the time of testing which is very rarely
followed. All these limitations affect the accuracy
of interpretation, hence it is better to conduct UCS
test and minimise the problems.
in the hard clay /soft rocks /highly weathered /
highly fractured rock. Pressuremeter test has got
very little significance in a hard rock whose
strength is beyond the instrument capacity.
Limitations of pressure meter test need to be
understood while making the interpretation.
Unless the soil is isotropic the value of Young’s
modulus/deformation modulus (pressuremeter
modulus) obtained from pressuremeter is lateral
and different from vertical values needed for
settlement analysis. For this reason pressuremeter
modulus usually has more relevance to laterally
loaded piles and drilled caissons.
1128
Many geotechnical engineers believe that effect
of any type of disturbance on the pressuremeter
results is insignificant, but it may be noted that
the sensitive soil/rocks (like Phyllite) tends to
expand in the cavity when hole is opened causing
considerable disturbance to the results obtained
by conducting pressuremeter test. Inconsistencies
in results are also observed due to equipment
configuration and user technique.
Despite all above limitations it is one of the
effective tests for obtaining parameters of deeply
located strata. Test need to be performed by the
person specialised in conducting this type of test
for correct interpretation.
(i) Cross hole test – Often the reported value of
Poisson ratio (µ) in rocky strata are very near to
soil (ì are reported between 0.45~0.4) may be due
to presence of filling material in the rock joints/
fractures at the testing depth which are not
indicated in the report, it creates confusion at the
time of interpretation. It is necessary to obtain
correct value of ì as it is directly used to calculate
Shear Modulus (G) and also indirectly affect
deformation modulus value.
Some engineers recommend boring in bore holes
identified for cross holes without conducting SPT
and without obtaining rock cores which is a wrong
practice as SPT helps in estimating appropriate
insitu density and rock core examination helps to
understand shear and compression wave velocity
in a better way. Further knowledge about the
stiffness of soil helps during the interpretation
(through literature review).
Errors in reporting shear wave velocity and
compression wave velocity values were also
noticed in a few cases. If such errors are noticed
after a gap of time than it becomes difficult to trace
the cause of error and one has to consider the
values indicated for weaker strata(conservative)
in the report for the design.
There is a standard practice to conduct test at a
regular interval. Additionally, it is suggested to
conduct this test at every change of strata, as it
helps in deciding the founding depth especially
for the structures sensitive to earthquake like
nuclear plant.
Since Cross hole test is a non destructive test it is
suggested to record three values at every test
interval by repeating the test so as to avoid the
reporting errors, as at later stage there is hardly
any source to reconfirm the same. It is always
Sanjeev Gupta
better to have the core logs as it can be helpful in
interpretation of results.
(j) Deformation modulus of rock: It is noticed that
IS code guidelines about taking at least 10 readings
over the load range to define the axial and
diametric stress strain curve are not strictly
followed. In one incident it was observed that the
values were not reported at 50% of the ultimate
stress as indicated in IS: 9221. Hence it necessary
to have stress strain curve in the report to ensure
that correct interpretative values are reported.
5. CONCLUSIONS
The responsibility of planning the geotechnical work should
be with a person who is qualified and proficient for handling
the geotechnical aspects of the project. It is advisable to
prepare specification / BOQ after site visit and after studying
various available data pertaining to the site.
Selection of the appropriate agency is important. For
important and fast track projects it is better to appoint a
contractor with proven capabilities.
Control on the quality of data up to certain extent in
projects involving large quantum of geotechnical
investigation can be kept by reviewing daily bore logs and
interim reports if an engineer is appointed at the time of
investigation to oversee day to day work. For critical
projects, the parameters should be obtained by using
minimum two alternative methods so that results can be
compared.
It must be remembered that geotechnical engineering
is a highly specialised area of civil engineering and it is
incumbent upon geotechnical agencies to take all care to
report the data with minimum ambiguities. The very
foundations of the project depend upon these decisions.
REFERENCES
Bowles, J.E. (1988). Foundation Analysis and Design, 4th
Ed., McGraw-Hill.
Cole, K.W. and Stroud, M.A. (1977). Rock socketed piles
at Coventry Point, Market Way, Coventry, Proc. Piles
in Weak Rock, Inst. Of Civil Engrs., London
IS 1892 – 1979. Code of Practice for Site Investigation for
Foundations, BIS, New Delhi.
IS 8764 – 1998. Method for Detrmination of Point Load
Strength Index of Rocks, BIS, New Delhi.
IS 9221 – 1979. Method for Determination of Modulus of
elasticity and Poisson’s Ratio of Rocks, Materials in
Uniaxial Compression,BIS, New Delhi.
Lambe, T.W. and Whitman, R.V. (1969). Soil Mechanics,
John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Terzaghi, K. (1943). Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John
Wiley and Sons, New York.