Eighth Southeast Asian Geotechnical Conference/11-15 March 1985/Kuala Lumpur

RESIDUAL GRANITE SOIL OF SINGAPORE

K.B. POH Public Works Department, Singapore.

H.L. CHUAH Public Works Department, Singapore.
S.B. TAN Public Works Department, Singapore.

SYNOPSIS PL Limit pressure from pressuremeter test

P0 Horizontal earth pressure (at rest)
., The residual granite soil of Singapore formed from pressuremeter test
by weathering of the Central Granite of Qc Static cone resistance
Singapore covers approximately one-third of
Singapore Island. . The weathering has pro-:'
duced a thick overburden (10m to 35m) of
residual soil over the parent granite. The INTRODUCTION
soil ranges from silty sand to silty clay
depending on the degree of weathering. Residual granite soil covers over one-third
This paper describes the general engineering of the surface of central Singapore. It has
properties of the residual granite soil in
' Singapore based on laboratory and field test
only recently caught the attention of foun-
dation engineers in Singapore .. Major public
results from two major projects in Singapore. projects like the Mass Rapid Transit System
(MRT) and the 11-Km Bukit Timah Expressway
The granite soil has been broadly classified (BKE) involve a high content of geotech-
into two main groups for this paper, nical works for tunnelling, deep excavations
viz, Group I for the coarse-grained soil and and bridge foundations. With more development
Group II for the fine-g~ained soil. The in this area, there is a growing need to
plasticity of the fine-grained soil falls understand the general behaviour of this type
within the range for kaolinite in the plasti- of residual soil in Singapore.
city chart. The undrained cohesion,Cu of the
fine-grained soil increases with depth and is A survey of the available literature shows
strongly influenced by laterization near the that limited work has been done on this type
surface. The drained shear strength parame- of residual soil.. Publications by Lumb
ters (c' and~') correlate well with the (1%2), (1965), Ruddock (1967) Gidigasu
percentage clay fraction of the soil. (1976) and Mitchell (1982) provide some
Laboratory and field permeability tests show information on tropical residual soils in
that the fine-grained residual soil has a low other countries. However, these detailed
permeability of between 1o-5 to 10-=J em/sec. studies do not directly apply to Singapore
The compressibility characteristics (mv, Cc as those residual soils had undergone
and Cv) vary over a wide range of values. weathering under different climatic con-
ditions. Some work by Ting et al (1972),
(1976) on Halaysian residual granite soil,
NOTATIONS which was derived from the same granite
batholithic system as Singapore, is the
C' Drained cohesion only relevant local reference available.
Cc Compression index
Cu Undrained cohesion In recent years, extensive site investigation
Cv Coefficient of consolidation together with laboratory and field testing
e0 Initial voids ratio had been carried out in the granite area for
Ep Undrained modulus from two major projects, i.e. the MRT and the BKE
pressuremeter test in Singapore (see Figure 1). A total of 187
Eu Undrained modulus boreholes were drilled in granite residual
K Coefficient of permeability soil for these two projects. Undisturbed
LL Liquid Limit soil samples were obtained for laboratory
mv Coefficient of compressibility testing. Various field tests like the
0' Effective angle of internal friction pressuremeter test, permeability test and
~u Undrained angle of internal friction static cone penetration test were conducted
p' Effective pressure to obtain further geotechnical data.

3-1
oxides. The authors have noticed localised 100
extent of this type of soil at Newton Road,
90
Yio Chu Kang Road and Rifle Range Road. The
presence of such a thick layer of silty clay
"' 8 0
indicates that in some low-lying areas the
process of weathering could he more advanced.
~ 60
50
1--x- Redd.1sh brown E T w
1--;~ "'I "' 40
Sandy Silty Clay 0
<t
r-
~ z 30
w
X·X 20
'-'
·- 0:

X X
~ 10
0
-· ·001 . 01 ·1 10
X-X Yellowish brown PARTICLE SIZE mm

- Sandy Clayey Silt

X X
i CLAY SILT SAND I GRAVEL[
-
Figure 3 Particle Size Distribution of
(/
·:o:·x. Greenish grey I whitish grey _;
Group I Soil

-~:-~- Silty Sand /Sandy Silt 6

<XXXXXXXX <xxxxx:
Bedrock 90
80
Figure 2 Typical Residual Granite Soil Profile
"'
z 70 I"
U)
U)
<t
60 ''
CLASSIFICATION AND INDEX PROPERTIES

The residual granite soil of Singapore can be

11.

~GO
<t
50
I
broadly classifi~d into two main groups. r- 30
Group I is the coarse-grained group described z
as silty sand and sandy silt, while Group II ~ 20
0:
is the fine-grained group and consists of ~ 10
clayey silt and silty clay (the prefix sandy
is dropped for convenience in describing 0
sandy clayey silt and sandy silty clay).
·001 ·01 10
There are two reasons for classifying the PARTICLE SIZE mm
soil into these two broad groups. First, the
behaviour of each group as manifested in its
general engineering properties is fairly
1 CLAY SILT SAND I GRAVEL!
distinct from the other. Secondly, for field
identification and classification purposes, Figure 4 Particle Size Distribution of
it is fairly easy to distinguish between the Group II Soil
two groups.

The particle-size distribution of the two

groups of soil is shown in Figure 3 and
Figure 4. Group I soil covers a range of
non-cohesive material with a silt content
varying from 7 % to as much as 62%. Figure 4
shows that the clay content can be as high as
40% for Group II soil.
-·,
X
:!j 40
:s
60

• •• 1;7
v '"'~
>-
....
The plasticity indices of the two groups of
soil are plotted in the plasticity charts in u
.... 20
:·/
Figures 5 and 6. Figure 5 shows that the
coarse-grained group generally has a liquid '!.}_ v
i/
__J
limit below 50 and all values plot above the !L
A-line. Figure 6 shows that the fine-grained
group has a liquid limit above 40.
Casagrande's classification for clay and silt
is difficult to use in practice for this
20 40 60 so 100
group of soil as clayey silt often falls LIQUID LIMIT-'/,
within the CH range. Figure 5 Plasticity Chart for Group I Soil

3-3
undrained cohesion values deduced from sot:~e shows a strong correlation of ~ with percen- 1

pressuremeter test results. In general, the tage clay fraction. For Percentage clay
shear strength obtained by this method is fraction below 25%, the value of )i}'decreases
higher than values obtained from UU triaxial from an average 34o to 24° with increasing
tests. This is probably because a higher percentage clay fraction. Above 25% clay
shear strength is mobilised in a vertical fraction, the average value of 0' is 24°,
plane during the pressuremeter test compared indicating that the soil behaviour is domi-
to the 45-degrec plane of a triaxial test. nated by clay in the sand-silt-clay mixture
ln addition, the degree of soil disturbance of granite soil.
in a triaxial test sample is likely to be
greater than that of the insitu soil in the
pressuremeter test. " 80 /
E
Z"1o /,(
0

4000 - -~
0
0 "'
-u 60 J'
/
)
7
II I ~I
"~ ~ 0
o 800
6 50
/" /

N
E
GIBSON & ANDERS N
----iPcPo = Cu ( 1 +L N(
Dl)it; I 700 ('IE
...._
Vi /
/
, /
/A--Envelope by
Cruz 11969)

/ ;;'" /i
• /•
z Eu/3 Cu ))
GOO ~
w 40
I
0
X X
)' /
"' u 30 X X / '/

'i_, ;;; ,rv

~

5 00 u 0
>( X/,
/
z ~ 20 xY x Author's data
UJ
~2000 ~ (1 ,_)/ 400 °
U)
<( y • ling's data
Ul
iil 0 !-1. ~v- 3 00
UJ

6u "' 10
0 X 7
0
"' ~ v, p 20 40
Q_
0 60 80 100
2 00 Cl
UJ PERCENTAGE CLAY FRACTION ( < 2 I'm I
V;-"? P- f.- 1 so ~

V--
!?--·
v 100~
so
z
Figure 11 Drained Cohesion vs Percentage
Clay Fraction

- 10
10
100
::J

UNDRAINED MODULUS Eu MN/m 2 40

X
Figure 10 Undrained Cohesion derived from '
Pressuremeter Tests 6 30 X
>-- X •
u X
X X

IJrained Shear Strength

"' 20
lL
lL
X X X

0
Consolidated undrained, consolidated drained X Author's data
anrl dirl;:!ct shear tests were carried out to
~ 10
ling's data
determine the shear strength parameters in
terrns of c' and Y1'. The values of drained
"'
z
<(

cohesion c' are plotted against percentage 0

clay fraction ( < 2um) in Figure 11 for Group 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
II soil. The envelope proposed hy Cruz (1969)
for sor.~e resiclual laterite soils has been
PERCENTAGE CLAY FRACTION ( <2 pm I
superimposed onto the figure. It is
interesting to note that the majority of the Figure 12 Angle of Friction vs Percentage
r:esults falls within the envelope. Only a few Clay Fraction
results falls out of the envelope.The cement-
ation due to iron oxide probably gives rise
to the high c' in these few results. The
majority of data from Ting (197 2) also falls CONPRESSIBILITY CHARACTERISTICS
t..rithin Cruz's envelope in Figure 11.
The results frotil consolidation tests on Group
1I soils only are included in the following
The other shear strength parameter, 0' is discussion as there is a paucity of infor-
also examined hy plotting (/;' against percen- mation and samples for Group I soil.
tage clay fraction in Figure 12 for Group II
soiL Only those results fran Figure 11 where Compression Index, Cc
there is no suspected effect of cementation
(i.e.resnlts falling within or close to The compression index Cc from results of BKE
Cruz's envelope) are plotted. Figure 12 and HRT investigations are plotted against

3-5
 solidated undrained (UU) test with an
Lumb (1962) for Hongkong residual granite
unload/reload cycle at approximately half the
soil. Ting (1972) has reported a permeability
failure stress. The secant modulus at this
of Sx10-6 to Sxlo-7 em/sec for a Malaysian
unload/reload cycle is reported as Eu residual granite soil.
(cyclic). The pressuremeter modulus Ep was
determined from the pseudo elastic portion of
6
the volume vs pressure curve in the test.

Figure 17 presents the two undrained moduli, 8

.
Eu (cyclic) and Ep against depth_ below the • • •
top of the residual soil. Generally, the 10
undrained modulus increases with depth and no
E
significant difference between the results 2 •
from the pressuremeter and UU test with -'
UJ •
..
unload/reload cycle is discernable. The > 4
ratio of Eu (cyclic)/Cu is plotted against UJ
-'
depth in Figure 18. There is no trend with 6
depth and the range is between 7 0 to
with a median value of 110.
250 0
z . •
.•
::0
B
~
6
. "' 20 . • •

. ~UJ
•
8 22
\ ro
E 10
. . ;': 2 4
•• •
..
~ 12 . 0..
:!5 26 •
0
Vl
• . ..
~
4 28
.
4
::>
0 6 • . :..
. •. 30
Vl
. t . 10 100 1000
. .
UJ
8
"' Eu (Cyclic)/Cu
0 1\ .
Q_
0 22 J\ . .Figure 18 Ratio of Eu (Cyclic)/Cu vs Depth

>-
3 24
0
\ .
~

~ 26
[_\_
\
;:: 2 8

~
Q_
UJ BEST FIT LINE 45
0 30
Iill
H;
I

2 UU Test
tJ. -Pressuremeter Test/
h
34
10 100 >- 35
Eu I Cyclic J or Ep I MN/m' J z
w
>-
Fiaure 17 Undrained Nodulus vs Depth of
z
0
Resirlual Soil '-'
UJ

Coefficient of Permeability, K
"'
::>
>-
~2
0
The permeability of the residual gr~nite soil :>:
was determined using three methods, narnely
falling head permeability test in piezometer,
laboratory permeability test on undisturbed
samples and consolidation tests. The per-
r:~eahility test results are plotted against
10-5 10_,
moisture content i.n Figute 19. The majority
of results falls between 10-S to to-7 em/sec PERMEABILITY K(cmfsl
with fietrl results tending towards the
hi';her range. This is much lo~;:E"r than the Figure 19 Coefficient of Permeability vs
ra~l};e of Sxlo- 4 to 2:do-2 em/sec reported by !·loisture Content

3-7
MITCHELL,J.K. Engineering Properties of SKEHPTot;, A.W .. Notes on Compressibility of
Tropical Soils. Proc. of ASCE Geot. Eng. Clays. Quart.Journ. of Geol. Soc., London,
Division Specialty Conf. on Engineering 1944, pp 119-135
and Construction in Tropical and Residual
Soils, Hawaii, 1982, pp 30-57 T!NG, W.H. & OOI, T.A. Some Properties of
a Malaysian Residual Granite Soil. Proc.
NOSSIN, J.J. & LEVELT, W..M. Igneous Rock 3rd S.E.A. Conf. on Soil Eng., Hong Kong,
Weathering on Singapore Island. Zekschnift 1972, pp 67-71
fur Geomdrphologie, 1967
TING, W.H. & 001, T.A. Behaviour of a
PWD, Geology of The Republic of Singapore. Halaysian Residual Granite Soil As a
Public Works Department ,Singapore, 1fJ/6 Sand-Silt-Clay Composite Soil. Geotechnical
Engineering, 1976, Vol 7, pp 67-78
RUDDOCK, E.C. Residual Soils of The Kurnasi
District in Ghana. Geotechnique, 1967,
Vol 17, pp 359-376

3-9