Soil Investigation Report-Nimr

Document: ACO-9-2001-106-T7-4-0
:No.:
Date: 03-09-2018 CONTRACT OGC/14/2017 – EPC
Revision: 00 WORKS FOR PERMANENT STAFF
ACCOMMODATION AT FUHUD &
NIMR
NEO - REPORT ON SOIL INVESTIGATION

FOR NIMR
Document No: ACO-9-2001-106-T7-4-0
CONTRACT OGC/14/2017 – EPC WORKS FOR PERMANENT

STAFF ACCOMODATION AT FAHUD & NIMR
Rev. Date Check By Approved By Status
Project Contract Issued for

00 03.09.2018
Manager Manager Information
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TEXT
1.0 INTRODUCTION: ................................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 FIELD WORK: ...................................................................................................................................... 2

A. DRILLING: ............................................................................................................................................ 2
B. TRIAL PITS: .......................................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 SAMPLING AND LABORATORY TESTING:.................................................................................. 4
4.0 SITE CONDITIONS: ............................................................................................................................. 4

4.1 SURFACE CONDITION: .................................................................................................................. 4
4.2 SUB-SURFACE CONDITION: ......................................................................................................... 5
4.5 GROUND WATER CONDITION: ...................................................................................................... 7
5.0 DISCUSSION ON FOUNDATION CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: ........ 7
6.0 CHEMICAL ATTACK ON BURIED CONCRETE:............................................................... 13
7.0 CONCLUSION:.................................................................................................................................... 15
ANNEXURES
1.0 SITE PLAN ....................................................................…………………................…..........I
2.0 PROCEDURE FOR SITE INVESTIGATIONS..…………….................................................II
3.0 RECORD OF BORE HOLES.........................................….............…........................................III
4.0 RECORD OF TRIAL PITS...................................................…...............................................IV
5.0 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS.........................................................…...................................V
6.0 REPRODUCTION OF EXTRACT FROM CIRIA PUBLICATION 31/84
& BRE DIGEST NO.363 : 1991..................................................…..............................VI
7.0 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS...............................................................................…..................…..... VII
Soil Inv. for Prop. Permanent Staff Accommodation on plot No. 11-04-022-01-018 at Nimr, Al Jazir , Al Wusta Gov, J-6748/3, Aug’2018
REPORT ON
SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR

PROPOSED PERMANENT STAFF
ACCOMMODATION ON PLOT
NO. 11-04-022-01-018 AT NIMR,
WILAYAT AL JAZER IN
AL WUSTA GOVERNORATE
-------------------------------------------------------
CLIENT : OMAN GAS COMPANY SAOC
CONSULTANT : NATIONAL ENGINEERING OFFICE
MAIN CONTRACTOR : TARGET LLC
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
OMAN DRILLING & SOIL TECHNOLOGY CO. LLC were commissioned for carrying out
Soil Investigation for the Proposed Permanent Staff Accommodation on plot No. 11-04-
022-01-018 at Nimr, Wilayat Al Jazir in Al Wusta Governorate. The work involved field
study of the soil condition, drilling, trial pitting, sample collection, testing of the samples
in laboratory, examination and interpretation of the data thus collected. This report
presents the results of the investigation alongwith an assessment of the soil type, its
1
bearing capacity, its physical and chemical behavior etc. and recommendations regarding
the proposed foundation.
2.0 FIELD WORK:
The field investigation comprised visual examination of the ground surface condition,
drilling of three boreholes with insitu standard penetration testing, excavation of three
trial pits, lithologging and sample collection therefrom etc. The location of the boreholes
and trial pits were marked on the ground based on the drawing provided by the Main
Contractor. These locations are shown on the Site Plan enclosed in Annexure I.
a. Drilling:
Three boreholes were drilled upto 10.0 m depth each from the existing ground level
(EGL) as specified. The details of the boreholes are as given below:
Table – 1
Sr. BH No. Depth Elevation * Co-ordinates

No. (m) (m) Northing Easting
1. BH – 1 10.0 226.686 2051073.816 381308.932
2. BH – 2 10.0 226.466 2051024.135 381250.405
3. BH – 3 10.0 226.343 2051074.079 381253.128
* Co-ordinates are in WGS – 84 system
Drilling of the borehole was carried out by employing rotary core drilling technique
using a truck mounted diamond core drilling rig supported by mud pump. Temporary
steel casings and bentonite mud circulation were utilised to stabilise the sides and bottom
of the borehole wherever required. The borehole was drilled upto 10.0 m depth each as
specified from the existing ground level (EGL). The borehole was drilled in moderately
to highly and at places completely weathered LIMESTONE rock type formation.
Disturbed samples were collected from the borehole in casing tubes and core samples by
using double tube core barrel during drilling at appropriate depths and logged. After
2
completion of the drilling, the boreholes were flushed with clean water to clear Bentonite
mud and kept under observation for groundwater monitoring for 24 hours after which the
boreholes were backfilled with a cement based grout.
Standard Penetration Tests / Standard Penetration Tests (Cone) were carried out in the
boreholes during drilling. For this purpose, a split spoon sampler alongwith accessories
as per BS 5930 was used. Due to the presence of rock formation at shallow depth, the
SPT drive shoe was replaced by 50 mm dia, 60o apex solid cone and SPT(C) were
conducted. Three SPT / SPT(C) were conducted in the boreholes. The procedure adopted
for site investigation was as per BS 5930 and is detailed in Annexure II. The record of
boreholes with SPT / SPT(C) results alongwith coring and RQD details are shown in
Annexure III.
b. Trial Pits:
Three trial pits were excavated at this site upto various depths from the existing ground
level (EGL). The details of trial pits are as given below:
Table – 2
Sr. No. TP. No. Depth Elevation * Co-ordinates
(m) (m) Northing Easting
1. TP – 1 0.20 226.761 2051049.109 381306.196
2. TP – 2 0.30 226.414 2051054.427 381232.991
3. TP – 3 0.30 226.189 2051101.183 381267.660
* Co-ordinates are in WGS – 84 system
The excavation was done by manual means. Further excavation in the pits was not
possible due to the presence of hard strata / rock formation at shallow depth. The trial
pits were logged and bulk samples were collected at appropriate depths. Analysis results
of the samples thus collected and the test certificates are given in Annexure IV.
3
3.0 SAMPLING AND LABORATORY TESTING:
Bulk samples of soil were collected from the trial pits at appropriate depths. Disturbed
samples were collected from the borehole in casing tubes and core samples by using
double tube core barrel during drilling. These samples and the return water sludge were
visually examined, logged and preserved for future reference. The laboratory tests
carried out on the samples collected from this site are as given below:
Table – 3
Sr. No. Laboratory Tests carried out Quantity
1. Moisture Content 2
2. Sieve Analysis 5
3. Atterberg Limits 3
4. Specific Gravity 2
5. Compaction Test 1
6. CBR Test 1
7. Gypsum Content 2
8. Unconfined Compressive Strength on Rock core Samples 3
9. Chemical Analysis for SO3, Cl and pH on soil samples 3
Analysis results of the samples thus collected and the test certificates are given in
Annexure V.
4.0 SITE CONDITIONS:
4.1 Surface Condition:
The site investigated for the Proposed Permanent Staff Accommodation on plot No. 11-
04-022-01-018 at Nimr, Wilayat Al Jazir in Al Wusta Governorate. The plot is flanked
by water pipe line to its North West and open plots / open area on other sides. The
4
subsurface topography of the plot is slightly undulated ground and is covered by silty
sandy GRAVEL with few cobbles. It is devoid of any vegetation.
4.2 Sub-Surface Condition:
Full details of the strata encountered are given in the borehole and trial pit records. The
subsurface profile and lithology encountered in the boreholes and trial pits shows minor
lateral variation. The subsurface conditions as revealed by the investigation are
summarized below:
Table – 4
Sr. No. Borehole Depth (m) Strata encountered
Location
1. BH – 1 0.00 – 0.90 Medium dense to dense and becoming very dense, sandy very silty
GRAVEL with few cobbles.
0.90 – 10.0 Closely to medium and at places very closely fractured, moderately to
highly and at places completely weathered LIMESTONE, moderately
strong.
2. BH - 2 0.00 – 1.00 Dense to very dense, very sandy silty GRAVEL with cobbles and few
boulders.
1.00 – 8.40 Closely to medium fractured, moderately to highly weathered
LIMESTONE, moderately strong.
8.40 – 10.0 Very closely to closely fractured, moderately to highly and at places
completely weathered LIMESTONE.
3. BH - 3 0.00 – 0.50 Dense to very dense, sandy very silty GRAVEL with cobbles.
0.50 – 1.30 Highly to completely weathered Limestone.
1.30 – 6.30 Closely to medium fractured, moderately to highly weathered

LIMESTONE, moderately strong.
6.30 – 10.0 Closely and at places very closely fractured, moderately to highly and
at places completely weathered LIMESTONE.
The Rock Quality Description (RQD) which is a quantitative measure of the fractured
state of rock and indirectly gives an index to quality of rock mass has been computed
from the recovered core of individual drilling runs in the borehole (Ref. Borehole records
– Annexure III). The result can be correlated by referring to the following table given in
BS 5930.
5
Table – 5
RQD Rock Description

(%)
0 – 25 Very Poor
25 – 50 Poor
50 – 75 Fair
75 – 90 Good
90 – 100 Excellent
Referring this table, the rock strata encountered in the borehole can be categorised as of
‘Very Poor to Good’ strength quality upto the depth explored.
Three rock core samples collected from the boreholes were subjected to Uniaxial
Compressive Strength Test. The test results shows the compressive strength ranging
from 33315 kN/m2 to 49974 kN/m2. Thus the rock encountered here can be classified as
‘Moderately Strong’ as per the chart given in BS 5930 and reproduced below:
Table – 6
Term Compressive Strength

MN/m2
Very Weak Less than 1.25
Weak 1.25 to 5
Moderately Weak 5 to 12.5
Moderately Strong 12.5 to 50
Strong 50 to 100
Very Strong 100 to 200
Extremely Strong Greater than 200
6
4.5 Ground water Condition:
Groundwater was not encountered in the boreholes / trial pits upto the depth explored
at this site during the time of conducting the field investigation. No long term
monitoring of ground water was specified. Thus the ground water conditions
established is applicable for the time of investigation only. The ground water
condition is subjected to climatic changes and any changes in the surrounding area.
Reconfirmation of groundwater level is recommended prior to any work relating to the
ground water regime by installing Piezometer / open pit upto the bottom of excavation
/ foundation for long term monitoring.
5.0 DISCUSSION ON FOUNDATION CONDITIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS:
After examining the subsurface condition, coring, RQD details and other engineering
characteristics, we suggest the following net allowable bearing pressure for the design of
Isolated pad footing type foundation and for RCC Raft foundation placed at various
depths below the lowest existing ground level (LEGL) of each structure.
5.1 Shallow Foundation:
5.1.1 Type of Foundation: Isolated Pad Footing:
(i) Depth of Foundation: 1.00 m

Table – 7 (i)
Sr. No. Width of Footing Net Allowable Anticipated Modulus of Subgrade

(m) Bearing Pressure Settlement Reaction
(kPa) (mm) (kN/m3)
1. 2.0 250 2.3 108695
2. 3.0 250 3.9 64102
3. 4.0 250 5.4 46296

7
4. 5.0 250 7.0 35714
(ii) Depth of Foundation: 1.50 m

Table – 7 (ii)

(kPa) (mm) (kN/m3)
1. 2.0 300 2.8 107142
2. 3.0 300 4.7 63829
3. 4.0 300 6.5 46153
4. 5.0 300 8.4 35714
(iii) Depth of Foundation: 2.0 m – 3.0 m

Table – 7 (iii)

(kPa) (mm) (kN/m3)
1. 2.0 350 3.3 106060
2. 3.0 350 5.5 63636
3. 4.0 350 7.6 46052
4. 5.0 350 9.8 35714
8
5.1.2. Type of Foundation: Raft Foundation:
(i) Depth of Foundation: 1.00 m
Table – 8 (i)
Sr. No. Size of Foundation Net Allowable Bearing Anticipated Modulus Subgrade
(m x m) Pressure Settlement Reaction
(kPa) (mm) (kN/m3)
1. 10 x 10 200 10.9 18348
2. 20 x 20 200 15.4 12987
3. 30 x 30 200 16.7 11976
(ii) Depth of Foundation: 1.50 m

Table – 8 (ii)
(kPa) (mm) (kN/m3)
1. 10 x 10 220 11.8 18644
2. 20 x 20 220 16.5 13333
3. 30 x 30 220 17.7 12429
(iii) Depth of Foundation: 2.0 m – 3.0 m

Table – 8 (iii)
(kPa) (mm) (kN/m3)
1. 10 x 10 250 13.2 18939
2. 20 x 20 250 18.3 13661
3. 30 x 30 250 19.5 12820
9
It is possible to excavate upto the recommended depth by mechanized means. Care

should be taken to ensure that the foundation strata is not disturbed during excavation.
Rock Breaker may be required to reach the founding depth. No loose portion may be left
on the excavated floor and it may be well compacted. The excavated floor may be
closely inspected and if any cavities, cracks, voids or loose pockets are observed, these
may be cleaned and filled with mass concrete before the foundation concrete is laid. The
excavated floor may not be left open to nature for long. The side slopes are expected to
remain stable at 20o - 30o angle from vertical for a limited period of time. Barring major
seasonal changes, groundwater may not be encountered during foundation excavation.
Differential Settlements and Long Term Settlements:
The substrata is homogenous in all the borehole drilled at this site. Hence, we do not
anticipate any differential settlements with in the structure. Secondly, creep
settlements or long term settlements will not occur at this site. Since, the substrata is
Limestone rock formation, creep or long term settlements will not occur and will happen
only in soft clay / silt formation which is not present at this site.
Gypsum Content:
The Gypsum was observed in the top soil upto 20 cm – 50 cm only at this site.
Thereafter, the formation becomes moderately to highly and at places completely
weathered LIMESTONE upto the depth explored.
The minimum depth of foundation is 1.00 m below the existing ground level and
placed on Limestone rock formation. Hence, the Gypusm present in the top soil will
not have any effect on foundation.
10
5.2 Subsoil Parameters and Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters:

Table – 9
Sr. Depth Bulk Angle of Internal Coefficients of Lateral Earth Pressure

No. Density Friction Ko Ka Kp
3
(m) (Mg/m ) ()
1. 1.00 2.10 34 0.44 0.2827 3.5371
2. 1.50 2.20 34 0.44 0.2827 3.5371
3. 2.0 – 3.0 2.30 34 0.44 0.2827 3.5371
5.3 Suitability of Excavated Materials for backfilling:
The soil material available at this site is not suitable for structural backfilling purpose and
hence we suggest to use imported materials for backfilling purpose as per the PDO
specification of Class B or B1.
Specification for backfilling materials as per PDO:
Granular Fill Materials

Table – 10
Material Specification PDO PDO PDO PDO PDO PDO PDO

Type A Type B Type B1 Type C Type D Type E Type F
4-day soaked CBR value 80 80 – 60 60 – 45 40 40 40 -
When compacted to the following % max dry

98% 98 – 95% 98 – 95% 95% 95% 95% -
density
Gradation Requirements to ASTM D1241 Type I-B Type I-D - Type II-F - - -
AASHTO (ASTM E11/BS 410) Sieve Size % passing by Weight
2 inch 50 mm 100 - - - 100 100 100
1 inch 25 mm 75 - 95 100 100 100 55 – 85 55 – 95 75 – 95
11
¾ inch 19 mm - - - - - 50 – 90 -
Material Specification PDO PDO PDO PDO PDO PDO PDO

Type A Type B Type B1 Type C Type D Type E Type F
3/8 inch 9.5 mm 40 – 75 60 – 100 60 – 100 100 40 – 70 40 - 80 40 – 70
No. 4 4.75 mm 30 – 60 50 – 85 50 – 85 70 – 100 30 – 60 30 – 65 25 – 45
No. 10 2.0 mm 20 – 45 40 – 70 40 – 70 55 – 100 20 – 50 20 – 50 -
No.40 425 µm 15 – 30 25 – 45 25 – 45 30 – 70 10 – 30 10 – 30 5 – 20
No.200 75 µm 5 - 15 8 - 15 8 - 15 8 – 15 5 – 15 5 - 15 0–2
AASHTO ASTM
Liquid Limit 25% max 35% max 40% max 40 % max 25% max 25% max -
T89 D4318
AASHTO ASTM
Plasticity Index 6% max 9% max 12% max 12% max 7% max 7% max -
T90 D4318
Sand AASHTO ASTM

- - - - 25% min 25% min
Equivalent T176 D2419
Loss by AASHTO
ASTM C131 50% max 50% max 50% max - 50% max 50% max -
Abrasion T96
Required % Compaction As specified
Moisture Content Should be between 2% below and 1% above optimum
5.4 Recommendation for Internal Roads:
The subsurface at these borehole locations shows the presence of top gypsiferous soil
upto 0.30 m – 0.50 m depth followed by moderately to highly and at places completely
weathered LIMESTONE upto the depth explored.
Considering the presence of weathered Limestone, we suggest to excavate and remove

all the loose Soil upto the rocky strata. If the rocky strata is encountered within 600
mm below the Asphalt road level, then the rock has to be cut upto a minimum of 200
12
mm – 300 mm and backfill with imported fill material of having a CBR greater than
25. Further, the area has to be backfilled with imported soil materials having a CBR
greater than 25 for a thickness of 200 mm which is to be considered as Subgrade.
Then, a layer of 150 mm thick Subbase materials has to be laid over the subgrade
material. Further, a layer of 150 mm – 200 mm thick Aggregate Base Course has to
be laid before placing the Asphalt layer.
5.4.1. Graded Road:
We suggest to excavate a minimum depth of 0.50 m below the graded road level or a
minimum of 0.30 m – 0.50 m below the existing ground level. The excavated ground
may be backfilled as per engineering practice using subgrade / subbase material of B
or B1 class Material Specification of PDO.
6.0 CHEMICAL ATTACK ON BURIED CONCRETE:
One of the major causes of deterioration of foundation concrete is corrosion of the

reinforcement. Corrosion results from attack by Chlorides present either within concrete
aggregates or in the environment and can only occur in the presence of oxygen and
water. The risk of corrosion can be reduced by assuring that the amount of Chloride in
concreting materials are kept to a minimum and by ensuring both the adequacy and
integrity of the concrete cover.
Chemical aggression of Sulphate present in concrete materials and in the environment to

which concrete is exposed may lead to internal expansion and disintegration of the
concrete itself. Their effect can be reduced by the use of certain selected cements or in
extreme conditions by protecting the concrete by tanking. However, where sulphate and
chlorides occur together, problems are accentuated because sulphate resisting cements
provide less protection to steel against attack in the presence of Chlorides.
The Chemical Analysis carried out on the soil sample collected from the site shows the
following range:
13
Table – 11
CONSTITUENTS CONTENTS
Maximum Minimum
Sulphate as SO3 (gm/l) : 1.152 0.123
Chloride % : 0.098 0.007
pH : 8.3 7.9
Taking into consideration the sulphate contents, the recommendations for mix design for
sub-surface concrete contained in BRE Digest No. 363: 1991 may be used for guidance
(Ref. Annexure VI). For choosing cement type, content and water:cement ratio, the Class
1 condition specified in Table No. 1 of the above literature may be followed.
For protection against chloride, the recommendations given in CIRIA Special Publication
31 of 1984 for reinforced concrete in an extreme environment may be used. Copy of the
relevant part of this publication is attached in the Annexure VI.
Considering the sulphate and chloride content of the subsoil and prevailing exposure
condition, the following concrete criteria are recommended for the foundations.
Table – 12
Cement Minimum cement Maximum Suggested clear Additional requirement

type content Water : cover over
Kg/m3 cement ratio reinforcement
Solvented coal tar epoxy resin coating

OPC 350 0.45 75 m.m.
/ Bituminous non asbestos fibre
reinforced coating
14
7.0 CONCLUSION:
The interpretation and recommendations contained in this report are based on results of
the subsoil encountered in boreholes and trial pits explored at this site and Laboratory
Tests conducted at the time of the investigation. The sub-surface conditions inferred
from the data are thus, indicative for the test location the accuracy of which cannot be
assured for locations and time other that those investigated.
for OMAN DRILLING & SOIL TECHNOLOGY CO. LLC
B. R. MANJUNATH
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
15
TP-1
BH-2
BH-1
BH-3 TP-2
TP-3
LEGEND
CLIENT CONSULTANT PROJECT
BOREHOLE
OMAN GAS COMPANY SAOC NATIONAL ENGINEERING OFFICE
TRIAL PIT
*******************************************************************
DRILLING WORK IN PROGRESS

TRIAL PITS
TP - 1
DEPTH : 0.00 – 0.20 M
TP - 2
DEPTH : 0.00 – 0.30 M

TRIAL PIT
TP - 3
DEPTH : 0.00 – 0.30 M

SAMPLE OF BOREHOLE-1 : DEPTH : 0.00 – 4.70 M
*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************

Soil Investigation Report-Nimr

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Soil Investigation Report-Nimr

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Document: ACO-9-2001-106-T7-4-0

NEO - REPORT ON SOIL INVESTIGATION

Document No: ACO-9-2001-106-T7-4-0

CONTRACT OGC/14/2017 – EPC WORKS FOR PERMANENT

Rev. Date Check By Approved By Status

Project Contract Issued for

2.0 FIELD WORK: ...................................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 SITE CONDITIONS: ............................................................................................................................. 4

6.0 CHEMICAL ATTACK ON BURIED CONCRETE:............................................................... 13

SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR

CLIENT : OMAN GAS COMPANY SAOC

CONSULTANT : NATIONAL ENGINEERING OFFICE

MAIN CONTRACTOR : TARGET LLC

2.0 FIELD WORK:

Sr. BH No. Depth Elevation * Co-ordinates

1. BH – 1 10.0 226.686 2051073.816 381308.932

2. BH – 2 10.0 226.466 2051024.135 381250.405

3. BH – 3 10.0 226.343 2051074.079 381253.128

* Co-ordinates are in WGS – 84 system

Sr. No. TP. No. Depth Elevation * Co-ordinates

(m) (m) Northing Easting

1. TP – 1 0.20 226.761 2051049.109 381306.196

2. TP – 2 0.30 226.414 2051054.427 381232.991

3. TP – 3 0.30 226.189 2051101.183 381267.660

* Co-ordinates are in WGS – 84 system

3.0 SAMPLING AND LABORATORY TESTING:

Sr. No. Laboratory Tests carried out Quantity

8. Unconfined Compressive Strength on Rock core Samples 3

9. Chemical Analysis for SO3, Cl and pH on soil samples 3

4.0 SITE CONDITIONS:

4.1 Surface Condition:

4.2 Sub-Surface Condition:

Sr. No. Borehole Depth (m) Strata encountered

0.50 – 1.30 Highly to completely weathered Limestone.

1.30 – 6.30 Closely to medium fractured, moderately to highly weathered

RQD Rock Description

Term Compressive Strength

Very Weak Less than 1.25

Moderately Weak 5 to 12.5

Moderately Strong 12.5 to 50

Very Strong 100 to 200

Extremely Strong Greater than 200

4.5 Ground water Condition:

5.0 DISCUSSION ON FOUNDATION CONDITIONS AND

5.1 Shallow Foundation:

5.1.1 Type of Foundation: Isolated Pad Footing:

(i) Depth of Foundation: 1.00 m

Sr. No. Width of Footing Net Allowable Anticipated Modulus of Subgrade

1. 2.0 250 2.3 108695

2. 3.0 250 3.9 64102

3. 4.0 250 5.4 46296

4. 5.0 250 7.0 35714

(ii) Depth of Foundation: 1.50 m

Sr. No. Width of Footing Net Allowable Anticipated Modulus of Subgrade

1. 2.0 300 2.8 107142

2. 3.0 300 4.7 63829

3. 4.0 300 6.5 46153

4. 5.0 300 8.4 35714

(iii) Depth of Foundation: 2.0 m – 3.0 m

Sr. No. Width of Footing Net Allowable Anticipated Modulus of Subgrade

1. 2.0 350 3.3 106060

2. 3.0 350 5.5 63636

3. 4.0 350 7.6 46052