Mukemil Gemale Foundation Recommendation

MUKEMIL GEMALE G+4 MIXED USE BUILDING
PROJECT
Geotechnical Investigation Report
July 2023, Werabe

Keycon Engineering Group (HBG)
Huldare Business Group (Keycon Engineering Group)
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 2
2. METHODOLOGY OF INVESTIGATION........................................................................... 3
3. GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY ........................................................................................... 5
4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATION .............................................................................. 9
5. Appendices 1 Core boxes ..................................................................................................... 13
6. Appendices 2 Soil Laboratory test Results .......................................................................... 16
1
MUKEMIL G. G+4 MIXED USE BLDG PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Following an agreement signed on 5th of June 2023 between Mr Mukemil and

Zekeyco Engineering, Geotechnical works Business Unit of the Company has
performed geotechnical investigation works at Worabe Town for G+4 Mixed Use
Building.
The investigation comprises of core drilling, pitting, insitu testing, sampling and
laboratory testing.
1.2 Location
The project Site is located in Silte Zone, Worabe Town is a a small town 167KM
away from the capital in south-central Ethiopia in Silte Zone, Worabe town,
kebele 01, Block KB4, Plot p12 with plot area 560 m2. The geographical
coordinates of the town are 8°1′N and 38°20′E with an average elevation of 2113
meters above sea level.
Fig.1 Mukemil gemale site plan
2
2. METHODOLOGY OF INVESTIGATION
To get reliable and sufficient information about the surface and subsurface
geology and hydrogeology of the project area, the following methodology was
employed:
 Planning of office and field work,
 Rotary core drilling with in situ testing
 Sampling,
 Logging,
 Conducting different laboratory tests and technical report writing.
2.1 Drilling and Pitting
The drilling operation was carried out using a Koken /Trailer mounted rigs and
two BR50 drilling machines.
The methods applied in the investigation were in compliance with the code,
specification and standards of the American Society for Testing Materials
/ASTM/.
A continuous rotary core drilling technique was used in order to obtain high
quality cores. During drilling, complete geological materials reflecting the
boreholes sections were collected as precisely as possible. In loose and compacted
soils, a dry drilling technique was used starting with 116mm and reducing (when
necessary) to 75mm diameter with tungsten carbide bits fitted to a single core
barrel.
As soon as soil or rock cores are removed from core barrels in each run, they were
placed in standard partitioned wooden core boxes and described immediately on
site. Finally, the boxes are properly labeled, photographed.
Moreover, samples were recovered from existing pits and road cuts so that CBR
tests would be conducted.
2.2 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
This test is performed to evaluate the degree of compaction and/or consistency

and strength of cohesive soils.
During drilling operation, at the bottom of the hole of required depth, the split
spoon sampler is lowered and driven in to the formation by a drop of hammer of
63.5kg mass falling vertically through a height of 76cm. The method measures
3
the resistance to penetration offered by the formation. It is measured on the basis

of the number of blows of hammer required for a sampler tube penetration of
45cm. The number of blows counted for the last two intervals, 15cm each, is
added to report as N-value of the test.
2.3 Sampling and Testing
Desired undisturbed soil samples were collected, where favorable geological

layers are encountered at depths shown on the log sheet of each bore hole and
sealed with wax in order to preserve the natural moisture content and
transported to the main soil laboratory of the company in order to perform the
required tests.
4
3. GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY

3.1 Regional Geology
According to this study, Worabe town soils are grouped in to four types of soils.
Group I (expansive soils), group II (non-expansive soils), group III (marginal
soils) and group IV (sandy soils).
The geographical coordinates of the town are 8°1′N and 38°20′E with an average
elevation of 2113 meters above sea level.
3.2 Seismicity
The methods of assessing likely earthquake intensity and frequency at a given

site are complex, requiring reasonable judgment and collection of geological and
seismic data.
Ethiopia is divided into zones of approximately equal seismic risks based on the
known distribution of past damaging earthquakes. By definition, the hazard with
in each zone can be assumed to be constant. From the seismic hazard map of
Ethiopia, the project site corresponds to no hazard. This map is based on the
amplitudes to be expected during 100 years return period. w
Figure 1: Seismic hazard map of Ethiopia

Project location
5
3. 3 Topography and Local Geology
3.3.1 Topography
The project site and its surroundings have flat topography. Dome shaped hills are
observed scattered within the command area. Currently it is covered by
vegetation, seasonal crops, rock fragments, and tilled dark soil.
3.1.2 Local Geology
Surfacially the area is covered mostly by dark expansive clay while a small
portion (close to an adjacent hill) is covered by rock fragments mixed with
reddish granular material. The dark expansive soil covers very vast area
horizontally surrounding the specific factory site and the command area. River
banks, road cuts, and natural exposures were observed to have an over view of
the thickness of the dark expansive soil as well as identification of any underlying
formation. Observation of the walls of the river banks reveal that the dark
expansive soil has a thickness of only 1.5 to 2.5m while the reddish granular
material extends to a depth of 4 to 5m and gradually changes in to a weathered
rock formation. The dark clay is underlain by a highly to completely weathered
and highly fractured rock, which is in turn underlain by a moderately fractured
slightly to moderately weathered rock. The contact between the rock formations
is gradational. Moreover, the natural and the river cut exposures reveal the
existence of networked dikes which was further encountered in borehole BH3.
The formations were characterized according to samples recovered by drilling. It

was observed that the site is uniformly constituted by a top dark clay soil
underlain by volcanic rock formation (Feldspar rich Rock) with varying degree of
weathering. Moreover, no ground water was encountered during drilling.
Plate 1. Representative core box showing the general sequence of the formations where
expansive silty clay part on top, highly weathered in the middle and moderately to slightly
weathered part at the bottom of the core box.
6
Detailed description of the drilling outcome is presented on the log sheets while
summary of the encountered units is presented below.
A. Dark Stiff CLAY
This unit is encountered in all the boreholes except the one closer to the adjacent
hill (BH 3). It is dark, stiff, expansive silty CLAY. It has a thickness range of 1.50
to 2.50m with thickness increasing as one goes away from the nearby hill.
B. Highly to Completely Weathered rock.
This unit is encountered underlying the top dark expansive clay formation. It is
encountered in all boreholes with variable thickness. The top part of this
formation is a mixture of rock fragments and very dense, brownish to whitish
gray sandy Gravels/ Gravelly SANDS (the completely weathered part). Standard
Penetration Test conducted within this layer gave an N value of mostly greater
than 50 (refusal) which is attributed to the occurrence of gravel sized rock
fragments. While the bottom part is moderately to highly weathered, fractured,
coarse grained rock. Whenever drilling was conducted using flash water, some
fractured core stones were able to be recovered washing out the fine particles. But
in dry drilling, the broken rock fragments are recovered mixed with silty sands
and gravels. There is no clear demarcation between these two variations and
mostly occur intercalating with each other.
The following averaged design engineering parameters are considered to

represent the layer:-
Bulk Unit Weight = 17.3KN/m3

Specific Gravity = 2.54
Moisture Content = 12.9%
Cohesion Value = 9.5KN/m2
Angle of internal friction = 26.30
Plasticity Index = 8.36%
Chloride Content = 0.5mg/l
Sulphate Content = 1.43mg/l
PH-Value = 7.4
7
C. Slightly to Moderately Weathered rock.
Plate 10. Sound but fractured rock formation.
This unit is moderately weathered, and sometimes slightly weathered, fractured,

medium to coarse grained, feldspar rich Rock. It has a low RQD (Rock Quality
Designation) because of intense fracturing.
The following averaged design engineering parameters are considered to

represent the layer:-
Bulk Unit Weight = 27 KN/m3

Unconfined Compressive Strength = 18.45Mpa
8
4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATION
4.1. GENERAL
The geology of the site is uniform and it is composed of stiff clay at the top, which
ranges from 1.5 to 2.5m in thickness, followed by a very dense sandy
gravel/gravely sand with some silt and occasional rock fragments and
moderately weathered and fractured Basaltic rock which extends to the limit of
drilled depths. The gravelly and sandy nature of the layer is attributed to
weathering that depicts in situ formation and as a result it would be sound
enough with regard to foundation. Considering, the basic parameters of soil
bearing, where shear failure and settlement are prominent, and the above-
mentioned soil nature is tolerable and adequate for the proposed infrastructures
of the project.
Furthermore, the seismic effect is also critically important. With this regard, the
country has been divided into different seismic zones in accordance to figure 2,
depending on the severity of hazards. The site corresponds to low seismic hazard
area and as a result seismic hazard could draw less attention in the design of the
structures.
4.1.1. BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATION
Bearing capacity computation is made using different approaches giving stress to

field and laboratory tests. Besides site inspection and laboratory results,
engineering considerations are prominent to come up with safe and economical
foundation recommendations.
For this particular case, Meyerhof approach is found to be more appropriate and
adopted for computing the allowable bearing capacity because of the sandy to
gravelly nature of the soil at shallow depth. This approach limits settlements to
25-mm using SPT–values (Standard Penetration Test values) which work out only
for sandy soils. Hence, Meyerhof‘s computation approach is used as can be seen
below.
Qall = N x Kd B≤ F4
F1
Qall = N (B+F3)2 Kd B>F4

F2 B2
Where: - Kd = 1 +.33(Df/B) ≤ 1.33
N = Adjusted SPT blow count
B = Width of the foundation
Df = Depth of foundation
9
N’70
F1 0.04
F2 0.06
F3 0.3
F4 1.2
The field N value is adjusted as follows.

Adjusted –N value = N-count x Cn x η1 x η2 x η3 x η4
Where: -Cn = Adjustment for effective overburden pressure

= 95.76
(Df*γ)0.5
Where Df = Depth of the of the foundation

γ = Bulk unit weight of the soil
η1 = Adjustment for hammer energy

= Er
70
η2 = Adjustment for rod length
= If rod length is >10, 1.0
η3 = Adjustment for liner
= If the soil is not linear, 1.0
= If the soil is linear: dense sand or clay, 0.8
= If the soil is loose sand, 0.9
η4 = Adjustment for borehole diameter
= If the whole diameter is = 200mm, 1.15
= If the whole diameter is = 150mm, 1.05
= If the whole diameter is < 150mm, 1.0
In these equations N is the statistical average value for the footing influence zone
of about 0.5B (where ‘B’ is the width of the footing) above footing base to at least
2B below.
It can be noted that, footing width is a significant parameter. Obviously if the

influence depth is on the order of 2B a larger footing width will affect the soil to
a greater depth and strains integrated over a greater depth will produce a larger
settlement.
10
Considering the settlement limit to be 25mm at the recommended foundation

depth the following allowable bearing capacity is calculated for the following
structures but this large bearing pressure would be reduced as per Ethiopian
Building Code Standard for foundations (EBCS 7, 1995) and Bowles. Hence the
calculated allowable bearing capacity is reduced with a safety factor.
Foundation
No Type of Foundation Type Depth from Bearing Capacity
. Structure NGL
1 G+4 Mixed Use Isolated Footing 3.0m 280Kpa
Additional Consideration
 Top excavated expansive clay soil should not be used as a back fill around the
foundation.
 The foundations should be placed on the very dense sandy gravel/gravely
sand with some silt soil.
 Remove at least 1.0m thick expansive clay soil below the hard core and replace
it with a well graded, non-expansive selected soil material with a compaction
of 95% standard proctor density for every 25cm fill.
 Provide at least 1.5m wide apron around the buildings and remove at least
1.0m thick expansive clay soil below the apron and replace it with a well
graded, non-expansive selected soil material with a compaction of 95%
standard proctor density for every 25cm fill.
 PH, Chloride and Sulphate content of soil was determined according to BS
1377, and all values are within the permissible requirement (BS 3148).
Therefore, Ordinary Portland Cement can be used for the structures.
 Resistivity value of the soil is in the range of 400 to 1000 ohms which is far
beyond the most national and international Lightning Protection Codes that
requires an earth resistance of 10 ohms or less for a lightning protection
installation.
In this regard, improving an earthing system is recommended.
4.3. DESIGN CONSIDERATION FOR THE ROAD
Engineering characteristics of sub grade soil, i.e. its CBR strength is used to design
foundation of heavy duty pavements. It is clear that heavy trucks are expected to
move around the service area within the premises of the factory for loading and
unloading purposes. Considering this fact sub grade soil investigation has been
conducted using test pits along with sampling and subsequent laboratory testing.
11
The entire site is composed of uniform geology as revealed by borings and pit
excavation. For this particular case associated with road base, test pits TP1, 2 and
3 have been dug. The test pits were properly logged and representative samples
were taken for laboratory testing from layers that are likely to be affected by
traffic load.
The laboratory tests conducted on the sub grade soil samples are
 CBR test
 CBR Swelling
 Classification test (grading)
 Natural moisture content.
 Optimum moisture content.
 Maximum dry density
The summary of the soil test results are appended in the report.
4.3.1. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
The test pit logs depict that there exist layers which is expansive at the top
followed by the sandy gravel soils. The most problematic in sub grades are
expansive soils which do exist at this site makes the situation unsuitable for the
desired purpose.
4.3.1.1. Laboratory CBR
Laboratory CBR indirectly measures the shearing resistance of a soil under

controlled moisture and density conditions. Therefore, Laboratory CBR tests
were under taken on the test pits for the sub grade soil samples from 1.5m to 2.5m
depth to measure its strength. The soil have a CBR values which are reasonably
high enough (which falls in the range of 15.94% -22.04% exceeding its required
value (5%)) to be used as a sub grade material. On contrary the top expansive clay
soil which is found to a depth of 1.5m below the NGL should not be used as sub
grade material.
4.3.1.2. CBR Swelling
The CBR swelling of a soil gives very good indication of its expansion potential.
Therefore, swelling tests were undertaken to assess its expansion potential and
the results reveal that the soil is very far below the permissible limit which is 2%.
12
5. Appendices 1 Core boxes

BH 1
DEPTH 0.00- 4.00m
BH 1
DEPTH 4.00- 7.00m
13
BH 2
DEPTH 0.00- 3.80m
BH 2
DEPTH 3.80- 7.80m
14
BH 3
DEPTH 0.00-4.30m
DEPTH 4.30-7.20
15
6. Appendices 2 Soil Laboratory test Results
16
Form No
Zekeyco Engineering Group (HBG) OF/KeyCo./123
Issue NO Page Nº
LABORATORY TEST RESULT 1 Page 1 of 2
W.O.No :- T2-108/03
Date :- 7/15/2023
Project :- Mukemil Gemale G+4 Mixed Use Building Proje
Client :- Ato Mukemil Gemale
Location :- Worabe
Compaction :- SStanderd
Sample TP 1
Depth :- 1.50-2.50
4.00 4.03KN
3.00
2.91KN
Force (KN)
2.00
1.00
5.08mm
2.54mm
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
penetration (mm)
At TOP BOTTOM Swell

CBR value 2.54 mm 18.72 22.04 %
(%) 5.08 mm 16.01 20.13 0.20
Tested by :- Ahmed Abdulahi Approved by :- Suleman Abdela

Date :- 7/27/2023 Date : 7/27/2023
Checked by :- Temam jemal
Date :- 7/27/2023
___________________________________________
PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS THE CORRECT ISSUE BEFORE USE
Form No
Zekeyco Engineering Group(HBG) OF/KeyCo./123
Issue NO Page Nº
W.O.No :- T2-108/03
Date :- 7/15/2023
Project :Wolkyite Sugar Factory

Client :Ato Mukemil Gemale
Location Worabe
Sample :TP 1
Depth :1.50-2.50
Type of Compaction :- Standerd Natural Moisture Content (%) 0.75
Maximum Dry Density (Kg/m3) 2002 Optimum Moisture Content (%) 7.67
Dry Density Vs Moisture Content
2000
1980
Dry Density (Kg/m3)
1960
1940
1920
1900
1880
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Moisture Content (%)

Date 7/15/2023 Date :- 7/27/2023
Date :- 7/15/2023
__________________________________________
Company Name Form No
Title Issue NO Page Nº
Proj.NO T2-108/07
Date :- 7/15/2023
Project :- Mukemil Gemale G+4 Mixed Use Building Project

ClientAto Mukemil Gemale
Location :- Worabe
Object :- Soil
1. Bore Hole Sampl

BH Moisture Natural Specific Atterberig Limits Shear Strength Sulphate Chloride Resistivity
Nº ID Depth content Unit Weight Gravity LL PL PI C Ø PH Content Content (ohm cm)
(M) (%) Kg/M3 (%) (%) (%) KN/m2 Degree mg/l mg/l
1 1 4.20 5.72 1690 2.52 29.04 23.19 5.85 3 27 7.43 1.10 0.51 50000
2 1 3.50 9.77 1569 2.52 22.74 20.68 2.06 3 27 - - - -
3 1 5.90 14.90 1765 2.52 26.99 21.36 5.63 7 27 7.36 1.50 0.50 45000
4 2 3.40 6.35 1804 2.52 26.98 23.86 3.12 2 28 - - - -
5 2 7.50 17.56 1832 2.52 34.26 24.79 9.47 14 26 7.45 1.30 1.00 100000
6 2 2.50 20.17 1803 2.55 54.88 38.46 16.42 18 25 - - - -
7 3 3.90 12.37 1832 2.52 31.35 26.23 5.12 10 26 7.42 1.40 0.50 45000
8 3 2.50 18.31 1682 2.58 72.20 41.77 30.43 20 24 - - - -
9 3 3.80 15.62 1801 2.55 49.23 34.29 14.94 13 26 7.36 1.80 0.50 40000
________________________________________________________________
Company Name Form No
Title Issue NO Page Nº
Proj.NO T2-108/07
2. Test Pit Sample OF/KeyCo./1 7/15/2023
Natural Optimum Maximum

Nº TP Moisture Moisture Dry CBR % at Swell
ID Depth Content Content Density 2.54 mm 5.08mm %
(M) % % Kg/m3
1 1 1.50-2.50 0.75 7.67 2002 22.04 20.13 0.20
2 2 1.50-2.50 1.49 7.72 1995 21.49 19.22 0.21
3 3 1.50-2.50 0.80 12.26 1815 15.94 15.46 0.20
Note
1. Twelve graphs for grain size distribution test result are drawn and attached here with.
2. Nine graphs for Direct shear test result are drawn and attached here with.

Date :- 7/15/2023 Date :- 7/27/2023
Date :- 7/15/2023
________________________________________________________________

Mukemil Gemale Foundation Recommendation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Mukemil Gemale Foundation Recommendation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Mukemil Gemale Foundation Recommendation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MUKEMIL GEMALE G+4 MIXED USE BUILDING

Geotechnical Investigation Report

July 2023, Werabe

Following an agreement signed on 5th of June 2023 between Mr Mukemil and

Fig.1 Mukemil gemale site plan

2.1 Drilling and Pitting

2.2 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

This test is performed to evaluate the degree of compaction and/or consistency

the resistance to penetration offered by the formation. It is measured on the basis

2.3 Sampling and Testing

Desired undisturbed soil samples were collected, where favorable geological

3. GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY

The methods of assessing likely earthquake intensity and frequency at a given

Figure 1: Seismic hazard map of Ethiopia

3. 3 Topography and Local Geology

3.1.2 Local Geology

The formations were characterized according to samples recovered by drilling. It

A. Dark Stiff CLAY

B. Highly to Completely Weathered rock.

The following averaged design engineering parameters are considered to

Bulk Unit Weight = 17.3KN/m3

C. Slightly to Moderately Weathered rock.

Plate 10. Sound but fractured rock formation.

This unit is moderately weathered, and sometimes slightly weathered, fractured,

The following averaged design engineering parameters are considered to

Bulk Unit Weight = 27 KN/m3

4.1.1. BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATION

Bearing capacity computation is made using different approaches giving stress to

Qall = N (B+F3)2 Kd B>F4

The field N value is adjusted as follows.

Where: -Cn = Adjustment for effective overburden pressure

Where Df = Depth of the of the foundation

η1 = Adjustment for hammer energy

It can be noted that, footing width is a significant parameter. Obviously if the

Considering the settlement limit to be 25mm at the recommended foundation

4.3. DESIGN CONSIDERATION FOR THE ROAD

4.3.1. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

4.3.1.1. Laboratory CBR

Laboratory CBR indirectly measures the shearing resistance of a soil under

4.3.1.2. CBR Swelling

5. Appendices 1 Core boxes

6. Appendices 2 Soil Laboratory test Results

At TOP BOTTOM Swell

Tested by :- Ahmed Abdulahi Approved by :- Suleman Abdela

Project :Wolkyite Sugar Factory

Dry Density Vs Moisture Content

Moisture Content (%)

Tested by :- Ahmed Abdulahi Approved by :- Suleman Abdela

Zekeyco Engineering Group (HBG) OF/KeyCo./123

Title Issue NO Page Nº

LABORATORY TEST RESULT 1 Page 1 of 2

Project :- Mukemil Gemale G+4 Mixed Use Building Project

1. Bore Hole Sampl

Zekeyco Engineering Group (HBG) OF/KeyCo./123

Title Issue NO Page Nº

LABORATORY TEST RESULT 1 Page 1 of 2

Natural Optimum Maximum