Geotechnical Studies of Foundation Soil: Bhygraph Geotechnique S. A

Translated from French to English - www.onlinedoctranslator.
com
GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES OF FOUNDATION

SOIL
Chantier
Ouvrage
N° Sondage 1 Repère
Date 01/10/2015
Type pénétro PDL (Section de pointe 20,00 cm²)
BHYGRAPH GEOTECHNIQUE S. A
GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY Résistance dynamique en pointe (Kg/cm
Public limited company with capital of 50,000,000 - Approval No. 018

AB/MINTP/SG/DGET/DPPN/CNT/CEA5
1 10 100
0.00
RC/YAO/2013/B/40 - N° Cont: M011300044147-T - Headquarters: Yaoundé BP: 4941 Tel: 677 37 08 02
1.00
PROJECT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING
OF THE SINGLE-FLOOR TYPE FOR RESIDENTIAL USE
2.00
AT A PLACE CALLED MBOPPI IN THE LITTORAL 3.00
REGION DEPARTMENT OF WOURI (DOUALA 1st) 4.00
5.00
Established Approved
Hint Date Purpose of the edition/revision verified by
6.00
by by
JP02 02/28/2022 First broadcast K.NGUIFO JP KUIATE LKF

7.00
8.00
CUSTOMER :LANAVET ANTENNA

9.00 DOUALA Veterinary Lab
Pr ofonde ur (m)
Transmitter 10.00
BHYGRAPH GEOTECHNIQUE SA
Total number of pages 23
The Research Officer 11.00 The Technical Director
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
Côte des sondages : - Masse active (Poids mouton) (kg)

Côte TN : Hauteur de chute (cm)
Origine Essai (m) : - Masse passive (Accessoires) (Kg)
Niveau d'eau (m) : Poids unitaire tige (kg)
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
BG-AVP-RPT-101-Aof05/10/2015 Page2on26
Ref Show.BHYGRAPH Géotechnique/BG15 023 600198134.docx

ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
UPDATES STATUS
PAGE HAS B VS D E F G H I J
BG-AVP-RPT-009-CAL Page2on26
Ref Show.BHYGRAPH GéotechniqueBG22 0018-03
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
Contents
1 GENERAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY..........................................................................4

2 MATERIAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES...............................................................................4
2.1 Mission reminder.............................................................................................................4
2.2 Material resources...........................................................................................................4
2.3 Human resources............................................................................................................4
3 WEBSITE PRESENTATION...................................................................................................5
3.1 Topography.....................................................................................................................5
4 CONTENT OF THE RECOGNITION CAMPAIGN.................................................................5
4.1 Location of survey points................................................................................................5
4.2 Methodology for carrying out soundings with a heavy dynamic penetrometer..............5
5 RESULTS ANALYSIS.............................................................................................................6
5.1 Case of SPDL1...............................................................................................................6
5.2 Case of SPDL 2..............................................................................................................7
5.3 Case of SPDL 3..............................................................................................................8
5.4 Case of SPDL 4............................................................................................................10
5.5 Summary table..............................................................................................................11
5.6 Proposal of the choice of foundation............................................................................12
5.7 Adaptation of the Boussinesq stress distribution to the real stresses..........................14
5.8 Determination of the zone of influence of the load.......................................................15
5.9 Opinion on the conditions for carrying out the work.....................................................15
6 IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING USE OF RESULTS......................................................16
7 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................17
8 APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................18
8.1 Layout plan for geotechnical tests................................................................................18
8.2 Results of the various heavy dynamic penetrometer surveys......................................19
8.3 Photographic Illustrations..............................................................................................23
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
1 GENERAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY

For request of LANAVET ANTENNA DOUALA Veterinary Lab , BHYGRAPH
GEOTECHNIQUE SAcarried out a geotechnical study of the site reserved for the
construction project of a single-storey type building for residential use at a place called
Mboppi in the Littoral region, Department of Wouri, arrondissement of Douala 1er.
The objective of this study is to determine the bearing capacities of the soil in place on the
site of the building to be constructed and to give recommendations on the possibilities of
achieving the foundations.
The report presents:
 The investigations carried out on the site,

 The results of the tests and their interpretations,
 The constructive provisions and the specific conditions for carrying out the work.
2 MATERIAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES

2.1 Mission reminder
We are part of a G2PRO mission according to the NFP 94-500 standard of November 2013.
We will therefore have to do:
No. Designation of tasks Quantities

001 Mobilization/demobilization (Team and materials) 1
002 Heavy dynamic penetrometer test pushed up to 10 ml or refusal 04
003 Factual report 3
2.2 Material resources

The execution of this work required the mobilization of the following equipment:
- A Pick-Up vehicle,4 × 4
- A Heavy Dynamic Penetrometer,
- A toolbox,
- test sheets,
2.3 Human resources

The execution of this work required the mobilization of the personnel below:
- A geotechnical engineer in charge of coordinating operations, using data and writing
the report,
- A senior geotechnical technician in charge of data processing,
- two sounders,
- A driver,
- A maneuver.
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
3 WEBSITE PRESENTATION
3.1 Topography
The current topography of the site shows that the project is on flat ground.
4 CONTENT OF THE RECOGNITION CAMPAIGN

The recognition campaign consists of:
- Four (04) sounding points, pushed up to 11 m deep except in the event of refusal, with a
heavy dynamic penetrometer;
-
The objectives of this campaign are:
- Recognize the foundation grounds (thickness, resistance),

- Define the different foundation possibilities (depth, bearing capacity),
- Define the conditions for carrying out the work.
4.1 Location of survey points.

According to the architectural data, the future building will be built on approximately110 m².
We therefore carried out four survey points distributed as presented in the appendix.
4.2 Methodology for carrying out soundings with a heavy dynamic

penetrometer
The dynamic penetration tests consist in driving into the ground, by beating with the aid of a
standardized ram and in a quasi-continuous manner, a string of rods provided at its end with
an overflowing tip of section also standardized. The number of hammer strokes
corresponding to a given penetration is noted as the point penetrates the ground. This test
makes it possible to obtain the peak dynamic resistance and to assess its evolution in the
different soil layers in place. The tests carried out give the resistance profile obtained by the
Dutch formula RQ d
( 2
RQ d= N . M . )( )(
H 1
. .
1
A e Po+ n∗t )
With
RQ d: Peak dynamic resistance;
M: Mass of sheep: 65kg
Po:Initial passive mass (mass of the ram + guide rod mass + anvil mass): 83.17 Kg.
t: Mass of a rod: 7.18 kg
H: Drop height: 75cm
n :Number of stems buried in the ground (number of stems);
and: Permanent sinking of the pile for a number of strokes: 20cm
NOT: Number of blows for the depression (e);
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
HAS: Section of the tip: 20cm²
5 RESULTS ANALYSIS
This part makes the synthesis of the mechanical models (Depths; stresses) of the grounds in
various studied zones. The allowable stresses proposed below must satisfy the following
conditions:
 Avoid soil failure due to insufficient bearing capacity;

 Avoid major settlements that could damage the building;
 Avoid large differential settlements between various parts of the building
Nb: The safety coefficients that will be applied will come from DTU 13.12 for the calculation
of the ultimate stresses according to the penetrometer tests.
It should be noted that the value of the safety factor applied at the surface (depth less than 3
meters) comes from the consideration that said layer is very often in a state of consolidation.
We are going to add statistical calculations to our study to best limit errors during testing.
On the other hand, not having information relating to the descents of load of the future works,
the results obtained at the end of the present campaign and summarized in the tables which
follow, will be used as a basis for the dimensioning of the foundations of the said works. .
5.1 Case of SPDL1

For SPDL1, all the results obtained following the penetrometer surveys are recorded in the
following table.
n:
Teacher n: stem NOT RQd Qd Z stem NOT RQd Qd
[m] (u) (Blows) [Bar] [Bar] [m] (u) (Blows) kk [Bar]
0 0 0 0 0 8.2 9 7 38 3.8
0.2 1 8 70 3.5 8.4 9 8 43 4.3
0.4 1 4 35 1.8 8.6 9 7 38 3.8
0.6 1 4 35 1.8 8.8 9 8 43 4.3
0.8 1 3 26 1.3 9 9 7 38 3.8
1 1 3 26 1.3 9.2 10 9 46 4.6
1.2 2 3 24 1.2 9.4 10 10 51 5.1
1.4 2 3 24 1.2 9.6 10 10 51 5.1
1.6 2 4 32 1.6 9.8 10 10 51 5.1
1.8 2 7 57 2.8 10.0 10 11 56 5.6
2 2 7 57 2.8 10.2 11 10 49 4.9
2.2 3 6 45 2.3 10.4 11 10 49 4.9
2.4 3 6 45 2.3 10.6 11 13 64 6.4
2.6 3 6 45 2.3 10.8 11 13 64 6.4
2.8 3 7 53 2.6 11.0 11 14 68 6.8
3 3 6 45 2.3 11.2
3.2 4 6 42 2.8 11.4
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
n:
Teacher n: stem NOT RQd Qd Z stem NOT RQd Qd
[m] (u) (Blows) [Bar] [Bar] [m] (u) (Blows) kk [Bar]
3.4 4 7 50 3.3 11.6
3.6 4 6 42 2.8 11.8
3.8 4 7 50 3.3 12.0
4 4 5 35 2.4 12.2
4.2 5 6 40 2.7 12.4
4.4 5 7 47 3.1 12.6
4.6 5 6 40 2.7 12.8
4.8 5 5 33 2.2 13.0
5 5 4 27 1.8 13.2
5.2 6 4 25 1.7 13.4
5.4 6 5 31 2.1 13.6
5.6 6 4 25 1.7 13.8
5.8 6 7 44 2.9 14.0
6 6 5 31 2.1 14.2
6.2 7 6 36 3.6 14.4
6.4 7 6 36 3.6 14.6
6.6 7 5 30 3 14.8
6.8 7 6 36 3.6 15.0
7 7 6 36 3.6 15.2
7.2 8 6 34 3.4 15.4
7.4 8 7 39 3.9 15.6
7.6 8 7 39 3.9 15.8
7.8 8 8 45 4.5 16.0
8 8 8 45 4.5 16.2
5.2 Case of SPDL 2

For SPDL2, all the results obtained following the penetrometer surveys are recorded in the
following table.
n:
Teacher n: stem NOT RQd Qd
Z stem NOT RQd Qd
[m] (u) (Blows) [Bar] [Bar] [m] (u) (Blows) [Bar] [Bar]
0 0 0 0 0 8.2 9 12 64 6.4
0.2 1 17 149 7.5 8.4 9 10 54 5.4
0.4 1 6 53 2.6 8.6 9 10 54 5.4
0.6 1 7 61 3.1 8.8 9 11 59 5.9
0.8 1 6 53 2.6 9 9 12 64 6.4
1 1 4 35 1.8 9.2 10 12 61 6.1
1.2 2 5 41 2 9.4 10 17 87 8.7
1.4 2 5 41 2 9.6 10 18 92 9.2
1.6 2 5 41 2 9.8 10 18 92 9.2
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
n:
Teacher n: stem NOT RQd Qd
Z stem NOT RQd Qd
1.8 2 6 49 2.4 10.0 10 19 97 9.7
2 2 6 49 2.4 10.2
2.2 3 8 61 3 10.4
2.4 3 9 68 3.4 10.6
2.6 3 8 61 3 10.8
2.8 3 9 68 3.4 11.0
3 3 10 76 3.8 11.2
3.2 4 9 64 4.2 11.4
3.4 4 7 50 3.3 11.6
3.6 4 8 57 3.8 11.8
3.8 4 9 64 4.2 12.0
4 4 9 64 4.2 12.2
4.2 5 8 53 3.5 12.4
4.4 5 10 67 4.4 12.6
4.6 5 13 86 5.8 12.8
4.8 5 15 100 6.7 13.0
5 5 16 106 7.1 13.2
5.2 6 15 94 6.3 13.4
5.4 6 15 94 6.3 13.6
5.6 6 14 88 5.9 13.8
5.8 6 15 94 6.3 14.0
6 6 17 107 7.1 14.2
6.2 7 13 77 7.7 14.4
6.4 7 14 83 8.3 14.6
6.6 7 15 89 8.9 14.8
6.8 7 12 71 7.1 15.0
7 7 13 77 7.7 15.2
7.2 8 14 79 7.9 15.4
7.4 8 15 85 8.5 15.6
7.6 8 14 79 7.9 15.8
7.8 8 12 68 6.8 16.0
8 8 14 79 7.9 16.2
5.3 Case of SPDL 3

For the SPDL3, all the results obtained following the penetrometer surveys are recorded in
the following table:
Teacher n: stem NOT RQd Qd Z n: stem NOT RQd Qd
0 0 0 0 0 8.2 9 9 48 4.8
0.2 1 5 43.8 2.2 8.4 9 10 54 5.4
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE

0.4 1 4 35.1 1.8 8.6 9 10 54 5.4
0.6 1 3 26.3 1.3 8.8 9 10 54 5.4
0.8 1 4 35.1 1.8 9 9 9 48 4.8
1 1 4 35.1 1.8 9.2 10 12 61 6.1
1.2 2 4 32.5 1.6 9.4 10 13 66 6.6
1.4 2 4 32.5 1.6 9.6 10 15 77 7.7
1.6 2 4 32.5 1.6 9.8 10 16 82 8.2
1.8 2 5 40.6 2 10.0 10 16 82 8.2
2 2 7 56.9 2.8 10.2 11 17 83 8.3
2.2 3 7 53 2.6 10.4
2.4 3 8 60.5 3 10.6
2.6 3 8 60.5 3 10.8
2.8 3 9 68.1 3.4 11.0
3 3 8 60.5 3 11.2
3.2 4 9 63.7 4.2 11.4
3.4 4 8 56.6 3.8 11.6
3.6 4 9 63.7 4.2 11.8
3.8 4 9 63.7 4.2 12.0
4 4 10 70.8 4.7 12.2
4.2 5 10 66.5 4.4 12.4
4.4 5 9 59.9 4 12.6
4.6 5 10 66.5 4.4 12.8
4.8 5 8 53.2 3.5 13.0
5 5 10 66.5 4.4 13.2
5.2 6 9 56.5 3.8 13.4
5.4 6 10 62.8 4.2 13.6
5.6 6 10 62.8 4.2 13.8
5.8 6 9 56.5 3.8 14.0
6 6 8 50.2 3.3 14.2
6.2 7 9 53.4 5.3 14.4
6.4 7 8 47.5 4.8 14.6
6.6 7 9 53.4 5.3 14.8
6.8 7 10 59.4 5.9 15.0
7 7 13 77.2 7.7 15.2
7.2 8 9 50.7 5.1 15.4
7.4 8 10 56.3 5.6 15.6
7.6 8 8 45.1 4.5 15.8
7.8 8 7 39.4 3.9 16.0
8 8 8 45.1 4.5 16.2
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
5.4 Case of SPDL 4

For the SPDL4, all the results obtained following the penetrometer surveys are recorded in
the following table:
0 1 0 0 0 8.2 9 13 70 7
0.2 1 8 70.1 3.5 8.4 9 12 64 6.4
0.4 1 4 35.1 1.8 8.6 9 10 54 5.4
0.6 1 4 35.1 1.8 8.8 9 11 59 5.9
0.8 1 4 35.1 1.8 9 9 12 64 6.4
1 2 5 40.6 2 9.2 10 10 51 5.1
1.2 2 4 32.5 1.6 9.4 10 11 56 5.6
1.4 2 5 40.6 2 9.6 10 13 66 6.6
1.6 2 6 48.7 2.4 9.8 10 13 66 6.6
1.8 2 7 56.9 2.8 10.0 10 14 72 7.2
2 3 8 60.5 3 10.2 11 14 68 6.8
2.2 3 7 53 2.6 10.4 11 15 73 7.3
2.4 3 7 53 2.6 10.6 11 15 73 7.3
2.6 3 8 60.5 3 10.8 11 16 78 7.8
2.8 3 10 75.7 3.8 11.0 11 18 88 8.8
3 4 9 63.7 3.2 11.2
3.2 4 9 63.7 4.2 11.4
3.4 4 8 56.6 3.8 11.6
3.6 4 7 49.6 3.3 11.8
3.8 4 8 56.6 3.8 12.0
4 5 8 53.2 3.5 12.2
4.2 5 7 46.6 3.1 12.4
4.4 5 8 53.2 3.5 12.6
4.6 5 7 46.6 3.1 12.8
4.8 5 6 39.9 2.7 13.0
5 6 7 43.9 2.9 13.2
5.2 6 6 37.7 2.5 13.4
5.4 6 7 43.9 2.9 13.6
5.6 6 8 50.2 3.3 13.8
5.8 6 9 56.5 3.8 14.0
6 7 10 59.4 4 14.2
6.2 7 9 53.4 5.3 14.4
6.4 7 9 53.4 5.3 14.6
6.6 7 6 35.6 3.6 14.8
6.8 7 7 41.6 4.2 15.0
7 8 7 39.4 3.9 15.2
7.2 8 6 33.8 3.4 15.4
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE

7.4 8 10 56.3 5.6 15.6
7.6 8 10 56.3 5.6 15.8
7.8 8 11 62 6.2 16.0
8 9 13 69.7 7 16.2
5.5 Summary table

Summary of RQd in Bar
Teacher PDL1 PDL2 PDL3 PDL4 Median Mean
0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
20 70.1 149.1 43.8 70.1 70.1 83.3
40 35.1 52.6 35.1 35.1 35.1 39.5
60 35.1 61.4 26.3 35.1 35.1 39.5
80 26.3 52.6 35.1 35.1 35.1 37.3
100 26.3 35.1 35.1 40.6 35.1 34.3
120 24.4 40.6 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.5
140 24.4 40.6 32.5 40.6 36.6 34.5
160 32.5 40.6 32.5 48.7 36.6 38.6
180 56.9 48.7 40.6 56.9 52.8 50.8
200 56.9 48.7 56.9 60.5 56.9 55.7
220 45.4 60.5 53.0 53.0 53.0 53.0
240 45.4 68.1 60.5 53.0 56.7 56.7
260 45.4 60.5 60.5 60.5 60.5 56.7
280 53.0 68.1 68.1 75.7 68.1 66.2
300 45.4 75.7 60.5 63.7 62.1 61.3
320 42.5 63.7 63.7 63.7 63.7 58.4
340 49.6 49.6 56.6 56.6 53.1 53.1
360 42.5 56.6 63.7 49.6 53.1 53.1
380 49.6 63.7 63.7 56.6 60.2 58.4
400 35.4 63.7 70.8 53.2 58.5 55.8
420 39.9 53.2 66.5 46.6 49.9 53.2
440 46.6 66.5 59.9 53.2 56.6 57.7
460 39.9 86.5 66.5 46.6 56.6 64.3
480 33.3 99.8 53.2 39.9 46.6 62.1
500 26.6 106.5 66.5 43.9 55.2 66.5
520 25.1 94.1 56.5 37.7 47.1 58.6
540 31.4 94.1 62.8 43.9 53.3 62.8
560 25.1 87.9 62.8 50.2 56.5 58.6
580 43.9 94.1 56.5 56.5 56.5 64.8
600 31.4 106.7 50.2 59.4 54.8 62.8
620 35.6 77.2 53.4 53.4 53.4 55.4
640 35.6 83.1 47.5 53.4 50.5 55.4
660 29.7 89.1 53.4 35.6 44.5 57.4
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
Summary of RQd in Bar

Teacher PDL1 PDL2 PDL3 PDL4 Median Mean
680 35.6 71.3 59.4 41.6 50.5 55.4
700 35.6 77.2 77.2 39.4 58.3 63.3
720 33.8 78.9 50.7 33.8 42.3 54.5
740 39.4 84.5 56.3 56.3 56.3 60.1
760 39.4 78.9 45.1 56.3 50.7 54.5
780 45.1 67.6 39.4 62.0 53.5 50.7
800 45.1 78.9 45.1 69.7 57.4 56.3
820 37.5 64.3 48.2 69.7 56.3 50.0
840 42.9 53.6 53.6 64.3 53.6 50.0
860 37.5 53.6 53.6 53.6 53.6 48.2
880 42.9 59.0 53.6 59.0 56.3 51.8
900 37.5 64.3 48.2 64.3 56.3 50.0
920 46.0 61.4 61.4 51.1 56.2 56.2
940 51.1 86.9 66.5 56.2 61.4 68.2
960 51.1 92.0 76.7 66.5 71.6 73.3
980 51.1 92.0 81.8 66.5 74.1 75.0
1000 56.2 97.1 81.8 71.6 76.7 78.4
1020 48.9 83.1 68.4 58.6 44.0
1040 48.9 73.3 24.4 16.3
1060 63.5 73.3 31.8 21.2
1080 63.5 78.2 31.8 21.2
1100 68.4 88.0 34.2 22.8
5.6 Proposal of the choice of foundation

Load descents
The load drops used below are indicative. The structural engineer must redo them according
to the load reductions obtained after calculation of the structure.
We have G = 90 KN and Q = 70 KN. The service force deducted is 160 KN and the ultimate force
deducted is 226.5 KN.
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
Choice of foundation and proposal of footing dimensions
First hypothesis: insulated footing
We are in shallow foundation.
Data
Post dimensions Large side of the post b= 0.3 m
Short side of pole a= 0.3 m
MP
Stress of steel used Fe = 400
a
MP
Concrete stress at 28 days Bc28 = 25
a
Service Effort = G + Q Nser = 0.16 MN
0.226
Ultimate Effort = 1.35 G + 1.5 Q Nude = MN
5
MP
Soil stress Depends on soil type q.soil = 0.194
a
Type of calculation (1) Homothetic overhangs, (2) Constant overhang Kind : 2
Cracking conditions (1) FP, (2) FTP Kind : 1
Results
Area approached to the airfoil (Nu/q.sol) S1 = 1.17 m²
Calculation of approximate
Homothetic overflow =>
dimensions
A1 = ( S1 x ( a / b )) ^1/2
Overhang
B1 = ( S2 x ( b / a )) ^1/2 A=
0.39 m
Overhang
Constant overhang => B=
0.39 m
Overflow = [((( 4 x S1 ) + a² - 2ab + b² )^1/2)-a-
b]/4
A1 = 1.08 m
A1 = a+( 2 x overflow ), B1 = b+( 2 x
B1 = 1.08 m
overflow )
Choice of sizes A > A1 A= 1.20 m
B > B1 B= 1.20 m
If overhang > 15 cm => (( B - b ) / 4 ) + 5
Minimum sole height 13.00
cm
If overhang < 15 cm => (2 x overhang) + 5
Ht min = 0.28 m
cm
Choice of sole height Round HT = 0.80 m
Calculation of useful height ( Height - 5 cm ) d= 0.75 m
Soil stress check

Airfoil area (AxB) S= 1.44 m²
0.028
Own weight of the sole ( A x B x Ht x 0.025 ) p= MN
8
Total floor load ( Nu + Pp ) N= 0.255 MN
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
3
MP
Work stress on the ground (N/S) q' = 0.177
a
check
Control ( q' < q )
ed
With an ULS stress of 0.177 MPa, the dimensions obtained from the isolated footings are of
the order of 1.20 mx 1.20 m.
5.7 Adaptation of the Boussinesq stress distribution to the real stresses

The estimation of the embankment height is made on the basis of the following formula
The coefficient n is called the concentration factor, it is this which determines the shape of
the distribution of the pressures on the various horizontal planes located under the load. For
most natural soils, n seems to lie between 3 and 4, for Boussinesq's formula it corresponds
to 3. Q is the load andαis the angle of pressure distribution inside the soil. Still according to
Boussinesq forα= 30°, the stress is equal to 49% of the maximum stress, forα=
45°to18%and forα= 60°toabout 3%.
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
5.8 Determination of the zone of influence of the load

Boussinesq also admits that one can calculate at a depth z the influence of a load P placed
on the surface (point load case), on a circular surface of radius . It will easily be found that
this circle supports a fraction P' of P which has the value:r =ztgα
[ ]
α
1 cos3 α
P =3 P∫ cos2 α sinα dα=3 P
'
− =P(1−cos 3 α )
0 3 3
5.9 Opinion on the conditions for carrying out the work.

 Create a peripheral drainage system, with evacuation of infiltration water during the
earthworks;
 The bottoms of excavations and backfill must be compacted, then be accepted
by an approved geotechnical laboratory.
 Earthworks and excavation will be carried out in dry weather.
 Take care to seal the structural elements that are in contact with water.
 Rainwater will be channeled and discharged away from the foundations.
 Seepage water will be carefully drained.
 The pozzolan must be implemented in such a way as to facilitate the drainage
of the soil under the paving
 The solutions for the backfill under the footing must be the subject of
additional study to ensure the quality of the materials used.
 The settlements according to the loads applied must be evaluated by additional
tests (at ELS).
6 IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING USE OF

RESULTS.
This geotechnical report constitutes the report of the mission defined by the order under
which it was drawn up and whose references are mentioned at the top.
In the absence of specific contractual clauses, the submission of this report to the client
marks the end of the mission.
This report and all its identified annexes constitute an inseparable whole and cannot be
interpreted separately.
Any other interpretation that could be made of a communication or partial reproduction of this
report cannot engage the responsibility of BHYGRAPH GEOTECHNIQUE SA.
The BHYGRAPH GEOTECHNIQUE SA laboratory cannot be held responsible for erroneous
interpretations made from the results contained in this report, in particular by unauthorized
persons.
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
7 CONCLUSION
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
Geographically, the project site is located on a slightly sloping terrain.

The hydrogeological conditions are favourable: the site does not present any water influx.
Nevertheless, it is imperative to make the foundations waterproof. Similarly, rainwater
during construction must be carefully drained and evacuated away from the foundations.
The water sanitation system in the area is non-existent.
From the geomechanical characteristics obtained on the soils, we can make the following
recommendation:
 Found on an isolated footing at a depth of 1.40 m. For the foundation
calculation, the calculation constraints according to DTU.13.12 are as follows:
Calculation stresses for footing
(Bar)
Excavation ELECTE
Fill height Sole side that you ELS
bottom side D
1.40m 0m 1.40m 4.93 2.46 1.64
The bottom of the excavation must be compacted so as to obtain, on the upper level,
a compactness of 90% of the OPM. The topsoil will have to be completely removed
during the excavations.
reminder:However, according to the assessment of the engineer in charge of the

structure, the data from the load descent and the foundation plans may lead to an
adjustment of the solution proposed above. And this in accordance with the various
penetrograms obtained.
For the work, the following points must be observed:

 Earthworks and excavation will be carried out in dry weather.
 The excavation bottoms must be compacted.
 Take care to seal the structural elements that are in contact with water.
 Rainwater will be channeled and discharged away from the foundations.
 Seepage water will be carefully drained.
Done in Douala, in February 2022
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
8 APPENDICES
8.1 Layout plan for geotechnical tests.
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
8.2 Results of the various heavy dynamic penetrometer surveys.

Essai de pénétration dynamique : NF P 94-115
Localisation : N° Essai : 1
Sondage N°1 Repére : TN Naturel pendant la réalisation de l'essai Date=
SPDL 1 N= E= DEGRE DECIMAUX
caracteristiques Masse du mouton : M(kg) = 65

Alpha= 20 Masse de la poine (kg) = 0.41
Masse tige guide+Embouts (kg) = 2.55
Masse de l'enclume (kg) = 15.21
Masse passive initiale: Po(kg)= 83.17
Masse d'une tige : t(kg) = 7.18
Hauteur de chute : H(m) = 0.75
Section de la pointe : S(cm²) = 20
Essais Qd=M²*H*N / (e*S*(Po+n.t)) Enfoncement : e(m) = 0.2
Prof n : tige N RQd Qd Z n : tige N RQd Qd
Résistance dynamique de pointe (Bar)
[m] (u) (Coups)[Bar] [Bar] [m] (u) (Coups) kk [Bar] 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0 0 0 0 0 8.2 9 7 37.5 3.75 SPDL1
0
0.2 1 8 70 3.51 8.4 9 8 42.9 4.29
0.4 1 4 35 1.75 8.6 9 7 37.5 3.75
0.6 1 4 35 1.75 8.8 9 8 42.9 4.29
1
0.8 1 3 26 1.32 9 9 7 37.5 3.75
1 1 3 26 1.32 9.2 10 9 46 4.6
1.2 2 3 24 1.22 9.4 10 10 51.1 5.11
1.4 2 24 1.22 9.6 10 10 51.1 5.11 2
3
1.6 2 4 32 1.62 9.8 10 10 51.1 5.11
1.8 2 7 57 2.84 10.0 10 11 56.2 5.62
2 2 7 57 2.84 10.2 11 10 48.9 4.89 3
2.2 3 6 45 2.27 10.4 11 10 48.9 4.89
2.4 3 6 45 2.27 10.6 11 13 63.5 6.35
2.6 3 6 45 2.27 10.8 11 13 63.5 6.35 4
2.8 3 7 53 2.65 11.0 11 14 68.4 6.84
3 3 6 45 2.27 11.2
3.2 4 6 42 2.83 11.4 5
3.4 4 7 50 3.3 11.6
3.6 4 6 42 2.83 11.8
3.8 4 7 50 3.3 12.0 6
4 4 5 35 2.36 12.2
Profondeur (m)
4.2 5 6 40 2.66 12.4

4.4 5 7 47 3.11 12.6 7
4.6 5 6 40 2.66 12.8
4.8 5 5 33 2.22 13.0
5 5 4 27 1.77 13.2 8
5.2 6 4 25 1.67 13.4
5.4 6 5 31 2.09 13.6
5.6 6 4 25 1.67 13.8 9
5.8 6 7 44 2.93 14.0
6 6 5 31 2.09 14.2
6.2 7 6 36 3.56 14.4 10
6.4 7 6 36 3.56 14.6
6.6 7 5 30 2.97 14.8
6.8 7 6 36 3.56 15.0
11
7 7 6 36 3.56 15.2
7.2 8 6 34 3.38 15.4
7.4 8 7 39 3.94 15.6
12
7.6 8 7 39 3.94 15.8
7.8 8 8 45 4.51 16.0
8 8 8 45 4.51 16.2 13
Observations : Spécifications: Conforme
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE

SPDL 2 N= Y= DEGRE DECIMAUX

[m] (u) (Coups)[Bar] [Bar] [m] (u) (Coups)[Bar] [Bar] 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
0 0 0 0 0 8.2 9 12 64.3 6.43 SPDL2
0
0.2 1 17 149 7.45 8.4 9 10 53.6 5.36
0.4 1 6 52.6 2.63 8.6 9 10 53.6 5.36
0.6 1 7 61.4 3.07 8.8 9 11 59 5.9
1
0.8 1 6 52.6 2.63 9 9 12 64.3 6.43
1 1 4 35.1 1.75 9.2 10 12 61.4 6.14
1.2 2 5 40.6 2.03 9.4 10 17 86.9 8.69
2
1.4 2 5 40.6 2.03 9.6 10 18 92 9.2
1.6 2 5 40.6 2.03 9.8 10 18 92 9.2
1.8 2 6 48.7 2.44 10.0 10 19 97.1 9.71
2 10.2 3
2 6 48.7 2.44
2.2 3 8 60.5 3.03 10.4
2.4 3 9 68.1 3.4 10.6
2.6 3 8 60.5 3.03 10.8 4
2.8 3 9 68.1 3.4 11.0
3 3 10 75.7 3.78 11.2
3.2 4 9 63.7 4.25 11.4 5
3.4 4 7 49.6 3.3 11.6
3.6 4 8 56.6 3.78 11.8
3.8 4 9 63.7 4.25 12.0 6
4 4 9 63.7 4.25 12.2
Profondeur (m)
4.2 5 8 53.2 3.55 12.4

4.4 5 10 66.5 4.44 12.6 7
4.6 5 13 86.5 5.77 12.8
4.8 5 15 99.8 6.65 13.0
5 5 16 106 7.1 13.2 8
5.2 6 15 94.1 6.28 13.4
5.4 6 15 94.1 6.28 13.6
5.6 6 14 87.9 5.86 13.8 9
5.8 6 15 94.1 6.28 14.0
6 6 17 107 7.11 14.2
6.2 7 13 77.2 7.72 14.4 10
6.4 7 14 83.1 8.31 14.6
6.6 7 15 89.1 8.91 14.8
6.8 7 12 71.3 7.13 15.0 11
7 7 13 77.2 7.72 15.2
7.2 8 14 78.9 7.89 15.4
7.4 8 15 84.5 8.45 15.6 12
7.6 8 14 78.9 7.89 15.8
7.8 8 12 67.6 6.76 16.0
8 8 14 78.9 7.89 16.2 13
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE

SPDL 3 X= Y= DEGRE DECIMAUX

[m] (u) (Coups)[Bar] [Bar] [m] (u) (Coups)[Bar] [Bar]
0 0 0 0 0 8.2 9 9 48.2 4.82 0 10 20 30 SPDL350
40 60 70 80 90
0.2 1 5 43.84 2.19 8.4 9 10 53.6 5.36 0
0.4 1 4 35.07 1.75 8.6 9 10 53.6 5.36
0.6 1 3 26.3 1.32 8.8 9 10 53.6 5.36
0.8 1 4 35.07 1.75 9 9 9 48.2 4.82 1
1 1 4 35.07 1.75 9.2 10 12 61.4 6.14
1.2 2 4 32.49 1.62 9.4 10 13 66.5 6.65
1.4 2 4 32.49 1.62 9.6 10 15 76.7 7.67 2
1.6 2 4 32.49 1.62 9.8 10 16 81.8 8.18
1.8 2 5 40.61 2.03 10.0 10 16 81.8 8.18
2 2 7 56.86 2.84 10.2 11 17 83.1 8.31 3
2.2 3 7 52.96 2.65 10.4
2.4 3 8 60.53 3.03 10.6
2.6 3 8 60.53 3.03 10.8 4
2.8 3 9 68.09 3.4 11.0
3 3 8 60.53 3.03 11.2
3.2 4 9 63.73 4.25 11.4 5
3.4 4 8 56.64 3.78 11.6
3.6 4 9 63.73 4.25 11.8
3.8 4 9 63.73 4.25 12.0 6
4 4 10 70.81 4.72 12.2
Profondeur (m)
4.2 5 10 66.54 4.44 12.4

4.4 5 9 59.88 3.99 12.6
7
4.6 5 10 66.54 4.44 12.8
4.8 5 8 53.23 3.55 13.0
5 5 10 66.54 4.44 13.2
8
5.2 6 9 56.48 3.77 13.4
5.4 6 10 62.75 4.18 13.6
5.6 6 10 62.75 4.18 13.8
5.8 6 9 56.48 3.77 14.0 9
6 6 8 50.2 3.35 14.2
6.2 7 9 53.44 5.34 14.4
6.4 7 8 47.5 4.75 14.6 10
6.6 7 9 53.44 5.34 14.8
6.8 7 10 59.38 5.94 15.0
7 7 13 77.19 7.72 15.2 11
7.2 8 9 50.71 5.07 15.4
7.4 8 10 56.35 5.63 15.6
7.6 8 8 45.08 4.51 15.8 12
7.8 8 7 39.44 3.94 16.0

8 8 8 45.08 4.51 16.2 13
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE

SPDL 4 X= Y= DEGRE DECIMAUX

[m] (u) (Coups)[Bar] [Bar] [m] (u) (Coups)[Bar] [Bar] 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0 1 0 0 0 8.2 9 13 69.7 6.97 SPDL3
0
0.2 1 8 70.15 3.51 8.4 9 12 64.3 6.43
0.4 1 4 35.07 1.75 8.6 9 10 53.6 5.36
0.6 1 4 35.07 1.75 8.8 9 11 59 5.9
1
0.8 1 4 35.07 1.75 9 9 12 64.3 6.43
1 2 5 40.61 2.03 9.2 10 10 51.1 5.11
1.2 2 4 32.49 1.62 9.4 10 11 56.2 5.62
2
1.4 2 5 40.61 2.03 9.6 10 13 66.5 6.65
1.6 2 6 48.74 2.44 9.8 10 13 66.5 6.65
1.8 2 7 56.86 2.84 10.0 10 14 71.6 7.16
2 3 60.53 3.03 10.2 11 14 68.4 6.84 3
8
2.2 3 7 52.96 2.65 10.4 11 15 73.3 7.33
2.4 3 7 52.96 2.65 10.6 11 15 73.3 7.33
2.6 3 8 60.53 3.03 10.8 11 16 78.2 7.82 4
2.8 3 10 75.66 3.78 11.0 11 18 88 8.8
3 4 9 63.73 3.19 11.2
3.2 4 9 63.73 4.25 11.4 5
3.4 4 8 56.64 3.78 11.6
3.6 4 7 49.56 3.3 11.8
3.8 4 8 56.64 3.78 12.0 6
4 5 8 53.23 3.55 12.2
Profondeur (m)
4.2 5 7 46.58 3.11 12.4

4.4 5 8 53.23 3.55 12.6 7
4.6 5 7 46.58 3.11 12.8
4.8 5 6 39.92 2.66 13.0
5 6 7 43.93 2.93 13.2 8
5.2 6 6 37.65 2.51 13.4
5.4 6 7 43.93 2.93 13.6
5.6 6 8 50.2 3.35 13.8 9
5.8 6 9 56.48 3.77 14.0
6 7 10 59.38 3.96 14.2
6.2 7 9 53.44 5.34 14.4 10
6.4 7 9 53.44 5.34 14.6
6.6 7 6 35.63 3.56 14.8
6.8 7 7 41.56 4.16 15.0
11
7 8 7 39.44 3.94 15.2
7.2 8 6 33.81 3.38 15.4
7.4 8 10 56.35 5.63 15.6 12
7.6 8 10 56.35 5.63 15.8
7.8 8 11 61.98 6.2 16.0
8 9 13 69.69 6.97 16.2 13
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE
8.3 Photographic Illustrations
ETUDE DE SOL
ETUDE GEOTECHNIQUE

Geotechnical Studies of Foundation Soil: Bhygraph Geotechnique S. A

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

Geotechnical Studies of Foundation Soil: Bhygraph Geotechnique S. A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Translated from French to English - www.onlinedoctranslator.

GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES OF FOUNDATION

Public limited company with capital of 50,000,000 - Approval No. 018

AT A PLACE CALLED MBOPPI IN THE LITTORAL 3.00

REGION DEPARTMENT OF WOURI (DOUALA 1st) 4.00

JP02 02/28/2022 First broadcast K.NGUIFO JP KUIATE LKF

CUSTOMER :LANAVET ANTENNA

Côte des sondages : - Masse active (Poids mouton) (kg)

Ref Show.BHYGRAPH Géotechnique/BG15 023 600198134.docx

1 GENERAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY..........................................................................4

1 GENERAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY

The report presents:

 The investigations carried out on the site,

2 MATERIAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES

No. Designation of tasks Quantities

2.2 Material resources

2.3 Human resources

4 CONTENT OF THE RECOGNITION CAMPAIGN

The objectives of this campaign are:

- Recognize the foundation grounds (thickness, resistance),

4.1 Location of survey points.

4.2 Methodology for carrying out soundings with a heavy dynamic

HAS: Section of the tip: 20cm²

 Avoid soil failure due to insufficient bearing capacity;

5.1 Case of SPDL1

5.2 Case of SPDL 2

5.3 Case of SPDL 3

Teacher n: stem NOT RQd Qd Z n: stem NOT RQd Qd

5.4 Case of SPDL 4

Teacher n: stem NOT RQd Qd Z n: stem NOT RQd Qd

5.5 Summary table

Summary of RQd in Bar

5.6 Proposal of the choice of foundation

Choice of foundation and proposal of footing dimensions

First hypothesis: insulated footing

We are in shallow foundation.

Soil stress check

5.7 Adaptation of the Boussinesq stress distribution to the real stresses

5.8 Determination of the zone of influence of the load

5.9 Opinion on the conditions for carrying out the work.

6 IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING USE OF

Geographically, the project site is located on a slightly sloping terrain.

reminder:However, according to the assessment of the engineer in charge of the

For the work, the following points must be observed:

Done in Douala, in February 2022

8.1 Layout plan for geotechnical tests.

8.2 Results of the various heavy dynamic penetrometer surveys.

caracteristiques Masse du mouton : M(kg) = 65

4.2 5 6 40 2.66 12.4

Observations : Spécifications: Conforme

Essai de pénétration dynamique : NF P 94-115

caracteristiques Masse du mouton : M(kg) = 65

4.2 5 8 53.2 3.55 12.4

Observations : Spécifications: Conforme

Essai de pénétration dynamique : NF P 94-115

caracteristiques Masse du mouton : M(kg) = 65

4.2 5 10 66.54 4.44 12.4

7.8 8 7 39.44 3.94 16.0

Observations : Spécifications: Conforme

Essai de pénétration dynamique : NF P 94-115

caracteristiques Masse du mouton : M(kg) = 65

4.2 5 7 46.58 3.11 12.4

Observations : Spécifications: Conforme