Wro Bogalech Mohamed g+4 Hotel Building

ZEDEK GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION LABORATORY & &
ENVIROMENTAL PROTECTION CONSULTING PLC
FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATION REPORT

FOR. G+4 OFFICE AND WORSHIP HALL BUILDING – HAWASSA
Client: NEW CREATION

INTERNATIONAL CHURCH
Project: G+4 OFFICE BUUILDING AND

WORSHIP HALLLocation:c i t y : -
Hawassa,sub city:-tabror ,kebele
hogane wacho
OCT, 2023
i
PREPARED BY AWOKE DESALEGN
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................................iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................1
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION........................................................................................................................1
2.1 Project Description............................................................................................................................1
2.2 Site Location and Description............................................................................................................2
3.0 SUB-SURFACE CONDITIONS...................................................................................................................2
3.1 Typical Subsurface Profiles................................................................................................................2
3.2 Ground water....................................................................................................................................2
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.....................................................................3
4.2 Earthwork..........................................................................................................................................3
4.2.1 Site Preparation..........................................................................................................................3
4.2.3 Grading and Drainage.................................................................................................................4
4.2.4 Construction Considerations.......................................................................................................4
4.3 Foundations.......................................................................................................................................5
4.3.1 Design Recommendations..........................................................................................................5
4.4 Seismic Considerations......................................................................................................................6
4.3.2 Construction Considerations.......................................................................................................7
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS...........................................................................................................................8
5.1 Additional Recommendations...........................................................................................................8
APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION..............................................................................................................10
Field Exploration Description.................................................................................................................13
Field Tests and Sampling Methods....................................................................................................13
Test Procedure...................................................................................................................................13
6.0 REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................19
7.0 ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................................................19
ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A geotechnical exploration has been performed for the Proposed NEW CREATION
INTERNATIONAL CHURCH G+4 OFFICE AND WORSHIP HALL BUILDING –
HAWASSA located at city:- hawassa, sub city:- taror, kebele:- hogane wacho, Ethiopia. Zedek
geotechnical scope of work included the advancement of Two (2) soil test borings to depths of
approximately 0.0 to 3.00 meter below existing site grades
.
Based upon geotechnical conditions encountered in the borings and our current understanding
of the proposed development the following geotechnical considerations were identified:
 The test borings encountered existing uncontrolled fill and organic topsoil to depths
ranging from 0.0 to 1.0 meter. We recommend excavating the uncontrolled fill and topsoil from
within the building area and replacement with a controlled engineered fill.
 The proposed building may be supported on isolated footing bearing on

natural, undisturbed soils or on engineered fill after removal of the existing fill and topsoil
and the existing building(s).
 Due to the high plasticity and relatively impermeable nature of the soils encountered
within our borings, water level data is limited. Based on sample moisture conditions, we
estimate the groundwater level to be between 20 and 60 meters below the existing ground
surface. We anticipate groundwater seepage in open excavations would be controlled
by sump pumping, if encountered.
 Black grain, Black soil, & Gray Soil were observed in the upper portion of our borings. These soils
have the potential for volumetric changes due to changes in moisture conditions, and tend to
swell when wet and shrink when dry. Care should be taken to avoid moisture condition changes
during excavation. Open excavations where Black & Gray Soil are exposed should be protected
from open air and precipitation to minimize changes in moisture.
 The natural soils encountered at the site are susceptible to disturbance from construction
traffic. Care should be taken to prevent disturbance of the natural soils.
Close monitoring of the construction operations discussed herein will be critical in achieving the design
subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Zedek be retained to monitor this portion of the
work.
This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It should be
recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read
in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The section titled
GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitation.
iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for the Proposed NEW
CREATION INTERNATIONAL CHURCH,located at city:- hawassa, sub city:- tabor, kebele:- hogane
wacho Ethiopia. Our geotechnical engineering scope of work for this project included the advancement of
Two (2) soil test borings to depths ranging from approximately 0.0 to 3.00 meter below existing site
grades.
The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations
relative to the proposed building:
 subsurface soil condition

 groundwater conditions
 earthwork
 foundation design and construction
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Project Description

ITEM DESCRIPTION
Site layout See Exhibit A-2, Exploration Plan
Building Approximate 693 square meters, Five stories Hotel building
The structure will be of Concrete frame construction supported on a
Building construction
reinforced concrete foundation system, concrete slab-on-grade floors.
Finished floor elevation Less than 1.0 meter above grade (assumed)
Maximum allowable Columns: 0.0254 meter
settlement Walls: 0.0127 meter over 1.27 meter
Grading We have assumed cut/fill of 1.0 meter or less.
1
2.2 Site Location and Description
ITEM DESCRIPTION
NEW CREATION INTERNATIONAL CHURCH - located city:-

Location hawassa, sub city:- tabor, kebele:- hogane wacho Ethiopia. (See
Exhibit A-1, Site Plan)
Current ground cover Grasses/weeds/sparse trees/aggregate
Existing topography Relatively level; maximum 0.3048-meter variance between boring
3.0 SUB-SURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Typical Subsurface Profiles
Based on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized
as follows:
Initially, uncontrolled fill and organic topsoil was encountered in our test borings. The uncontrolled
fill consisted of clayey sands and poorly-graded sands with silt. The topsoil was black & gray in color and
contained organic material. These soils were found to extend to depths ranging from 0.0 to 1.0 meter
below the existing grade.
Lean clays and fat clays were the predominant soils identified within our borings. These cohesive
soils were of various shades of olive-brown to grayish-brown in color. In boring B-1, stratum
consisting of grayish-brown silt was observed. Field consistencies for cohesive soils ranged from
very soft to stiff, and very loose for non-cohesive soils.
Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs.
Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil
types; in-situ, the transition between materials may be gradual.
3.2 Ground water

The boreholes were observed while manually dug and after completion for the presence and level of
groundwater. Groundwater was not observed in the borings while manually dug, or for the short
duration that the borings were allowed to remain open. However, this does not necessarily mean they
2
were terminated above groundwater. Due to the low permeability of the

soils encountered in the
borings, a relatively long period of time may be necessary for a groundwater level to develop and
stabilize in a borehole in these materials.
Based on the sample moisture conditions, we estimate the groundwater level to be 10 to 50 meters
below the existing ground surface during field activities.
Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and
other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. In addition, perched water can
develop over low permeability soil or rock strata. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or
at other times in the life of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring
logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design
and construction plans for the project.
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations
Our borings encountered uncontrolled fill and topsoil extending to depths of approximately 0.0 to 1.0
meter below the existing ground surface. These soils are not suitable for support of the proposed
foundations and floor slabs. We recommend the uncontrolled fill and topsoil be excavated from
within the building area and replaced with a controlled engineered fill. The building could then
be supported on standard combined footing bearing on the engineered fill.
Geotechnical engineering recommendations for foundation systems and other earth connected
phases of the project are outlined below. The recommendations contained in this report are
based upon the results of data presented herein, engineering analyses, and our current
understanding of the proposed project.
4.2 Earthwork
The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation
and placement of engineered fills on the project. The recommendations presented for design
and construction of earth supported elements including foundations, slabs and pavements are
contingent upon following the recommendations outlined in this section.
Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Zedek. The evaluation of
earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation,
foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of
the project.
4.2.1 Site Preparation

In preparation for building construction, we recommend the existing building(s) and all uncontrolled fill
and topsoil be removed from within the building foot print. Our borings indicate excavation for the
building will extend 1.0 to 1 meter below the existing ground surface. During this process, we
3
recommend that Zedek be retained to observe the exposed soil and to

evaluate whether additional subgrade excavation is required.
The soils encountered in the borings will be sensitive to disturbance from construction activity.
Construction activity should be monitored, and should be curtailed if the construction activity is causing
sub-grade disturbance. A Zedek representative can help with monitoring and developing
recommendations to aid in limiting subgrade disturbance.
4.2.3 Grading and Drainage

Adequate positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of
the development to prevent an increase in moisture content of the foundation, pavement and backfill
materials. Surface water drainage should be controlled to prevent undermining of fill slopes and
structures during and after construction. Gutters and downspouts that drain water a minimum of 2.5
meter beyond the footprint of the proposed structures are recommended. This can be accomplished
through the use of splash blocks, downspout extensions, and flexible pipes that are designed to attach to
the end of the downspout. Flexible pipe should only be used if it is day lighted in such a manner that its
gravity- drains collected water. Splash-blocks should also be considered below hose bibs and water
spigots. It is recommended that all exposed earth slopes be seeded to provide protection against erosion
as soon as possible after completion. Seeded slopes should be protected until the vegetation is
established. Sprinkler systems should not be installed behind or in front of walls without the approval of
the civil engineer and wall designer.
4.2.4 Construction Considerations

The natural soils encountered at this site are susceptible to disturbance from construction traffic,
especially when wet and saturated. We recommend construction traffic not be allowed to travel on
bearing soils. Excavating should be performed by a backhoe with a smooth cutting surface. If any of the
natural soils become disturbed during construction, they should be excavated to an undisturbed level and
replaced with engineered fill or concrete. Fat clays encountered at the site have a potential for shrinking
when dry and swelling when wet. Exposed clays should be protected from moisture changes to avoid the
potential for volumetric changes.
We estimate a groundwater level on the order of 10 to 80 meters below the existing grade at the time of
our field activities. We anticipate groundwater seepage in open excavations would be controllable by
sump pumping, if encountered.
Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade moisture content
prior to construction of floor slabs and pavements. Construction traffic over the completed subgrade
should be avoided to the extent practical. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface
water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If the subgrade should become frozen, desiccated,
saturated, or disturbed, the affected material should be removed or these materials should be scarified,
moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to floor slab and pavement construction and observed by
Zedek.
4
Surface water should not be allowed to pond on the site and soak into the
soil during
construction. Construction staging should provide drainage of surface water and precipitation away from
the building and pavement areas. Any water that collects over or adjacent to construction areas should be
promptly removed, along with any softened or disturbed soils. Surface water control in the form of
sloping surfaces, drainage ditches and trenches, and sump pits and pumps will be important to avoid
ponding and associated delays due to precipitation and seepage.
All excavations should be sloped or braced as required by OSHA regulations to provide stability and safe
working conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading operations. The
grading contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable,
temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required to
maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with
applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current Occupational Health and
Safety Administration (OSHA) Excavation and Trench Safety Standards.
Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means, methods
and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the information provided
herein be interpreted to mean that Zedek is assuming any responsibility for construction site safety or
the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied nor inferred.
4.3 Foundations
In our opinion, the proposed building can be supported by an Combined footing foundation system
bearing on natural, undisturbed inorganic soils or engineered fill after removal of the existing fill and
topsoil. Design recommendations for Deep foundations for the proposed structure is presented in the
following paragraphs.
4.3.1 Design Recommendations

The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The
design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or
seismic conditions. The weight of the foundation concrete below grade may be neglected in dead load
computations. Interior footings should bear a minimum of 0.3048 meter below finished grade. Finished
grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter footings and floor level for interior footings.
Footings, foundations, and masonry walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for
distress caused by differential foundation movement. The use of joints at openings or other
discontinuities in masonry walls is recommended.
Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions
encountered differ from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required.
5
4.4 Seismic Considerations

Seismicity of the Study Area
The study of seismicity of a given site area is an important consideration when

constructing engineering structures since earthquake may cause significant damage to the
structures.
The methods of assessing the likely earthquake intensity and frequency for any given site
are complex, requiring reasonable judgment and collection of geological and seismic data.
Due to such a complexity, for the project site under consideration, the recommendation
is to rely on the Ethiopian Building Code provisions and the seismic risk map of Ethiopia.
The current Ethiopian Building Code Standard for Earthquake is prepared with
provision of Peak Ground Acceleration ratio (PGA) with a return period of 475 years.
Accordingly, five distinct seismic regions are identified with different ranges of PGA values
as shown in the legend of the figure below. Note that the ratio of the PGA to the
gravitational acceleration, g, corresponds to α0 (the bedrock acceleration ratio). When
this is considered WERABIE falls under high seismic zone (zone 4) with bedrock
acceleration ratio of 0.15g.
Figure 2 Seismic hazard map of Ethiopia
6
4.3.2 Construction Considerations

The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil and rock prior to placing
concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. Should
the soils at bearing level become excessively dry, disturbed or saturated, or frozen, the affected soil
should be removed prior to placing concrete. Place a lean concrete mud-mat over the bearing soils if
the excavations must remain open over night or for an extended period of time. It is recommended that
the geotechnical engineer be retained to observe and test the soil foundation bearing materials.
If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered in footing excavations, the excavations should be extended
deeper to suitable soils and the footings could bear directly on these soils at the lower level or on lean
concrete backfill placed in the excavations. The footings could also bear on properly compacted backfill
extending down to the suitable soils. Over excavation for compacted backfill placement below footings
should extend laterally beyond all edges of the footings at least 20 centimeter per foot of over excavation
depth below footing base elevation. The over excavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base
elevation with well-graded granular material placed in lifts of 20 centimeter or less in loose thickness and
compacted to at least 95 percent of the material's maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D-698).
The over excavation and backfill procedure are described in the figure below.
7
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS

Zedek should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments
can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical
recommendations in the design and specifications. Zedek also should be retained to provide
observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other
earth-related construction phases of the project.
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained
from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in
this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the
site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such
variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we
should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations
can be provided.
The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any
environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification
or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about
the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the
project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site
safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the
event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are
planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered
valid unless Zedek reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this
report in writing.
5.1 Additional Recommendations

As a general remark the following supplementary points should be considered using design and
construction of foundation for the structures
SELECTED EXCAVATED FILL

Selected excavated fill - Suitable non-expansive material approved by the Engineer arising for excavation
and capable of being compacted to form a stable filling having side slopes as indicated on drawings or
directed by the Engineer. Sub-surface drainage system should be provided to control seepage and
percolating water in to the basement
8
 Surface drainage and infiltration
Provide about 1.3m wide water tight apron around structure with appropriate take away ditch
system. The apron must have adequate slope to facilitate rain water flow in to the take away
ditch easily. Any crack opening of the apron through aging should be sealed with concrete to
avoid rain water percolation into the foundation.
Remove at least 0.8m thick soil below the apron and replace with well compacted and well
graded select material.
Grading work and watering is not recommended close to the building since this activity will
facilitate water infiltration into the foundation soil below the granular fill material Locate water
and drainage lines so that if drainage occurs water will not be readily accessible to foundation
soil thereby creating damage Septic tank should be constructed from water tight structures.
9
APPENDIX A
FIELD
EXPLORATION
10
Exhibit A-1
11
Exhibit A-2
12
Field Exploration Description

One (1) soil test borings were performed at the site on MAY 10, 2023. The borings were
advanced at the approximate locations indicated on Exhibit A-2. The boring locations were laid
out in the field by Zedek representative using a site plan provided by the client and utilizing hand-held
GPS equipment.
Field Tests and Sampling Methods

Table 4-1 Field test and sampling methods used [22 and 24]
Test Description Test Procedure
Minnesota Department of Transportation, "User Guide to the

Dynamic Cone Penetration test Dynamic Cone penetrometer," office of Material and Road
Research, 1998[24]/ASTM D 6951‐03.
Representative disturbed soil samples were collected

using Sampling tube from the different layers of test pits,
individually, for classification tests (refer to ASTM D 4220).
Soil sampling
Undisturbed samples were collected for unconfined compressive
strength, bulk density and in situ moisture content tests (refer to
ASTM D 1587).
Test Procedure
Operation of the DCP requires three persons; one person to hold the apparatus vertical and
one person operating the hammer and the other to record the depth of penetration. The
following steps are followed:
1. The operator holds the device vertical by the handle on the top shaft and "sealing" the
cone tip by dropping the hammer until the widest part of the cone is just below the testing
surface. A second person records the height at the bottom of the anvil in reference to the
ground, this is recorded as initial penetration as "blow zero".
2. The operator lifts the hammer from the anvil to the handle, and then releases the
hammer. The second person records the new height at the bottom of the anvil.
3. Step 2 is repeated until the desired depth of testing is reached or the full length of the lower
rod is buried. The rod is 1m high and since there is unavailability of extension rod the test is
done by excavating the soil every 1m.the soil is less confined near the surface and during
excavation the upper soil is disturbed so that the DCP is able to penetrate further per drop thus
making the initial drops unreliable hence the first two reading are taken as seating blows.
13
The test is done up to 4m based on the soil condition. At that time, a specially adapted jack is
used to extract the device. If the tip is disposable (i.e., not fastened to the lower shaft and left
in the soil after test is complete), hitting the hammer lightly on the handle is acceptable.
An automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the polyethylene bags sampler in the borings
performed at this site. A greater efficiency is typically achieved with the automatic hammer
compared to the conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. Published
correlations between the SPT values and soil properties are based on the lower efficiency
cathead and rope method. This higher efficiency affects the standard penetration resistance
blow count (N) value by increasing the penetration per hammer blow over what would be
obtained using the cathead and rope method. The effect of the automatic hammer's efficiency
has been considered in the interpretation and analysis of the subsurface information for this
report.
The samples were tagged for identification, sealed to reduce moisture loss, and taken to our
laboratory for further examination, testing, and classification. Information provided on the boring
logs attached to this report includes soil descriptions, consistency evaluations, boring depths,
sampling intervals, and groundwater conditions.
14
Prediction of SPT N-value

Currently, the most widely used correlation between DCP and SPT N-value is performed by
Transport Road Research Laboratory (TRRL), Overseas Road Note (ORN) 9, Design of
small bridges [17] (See Table 2-2).
Table 2-2 typical correlation between DCP and SPT values
DCP value SPT N value

mm/blow blows/300mm
5 54
6 44
7 38
8 33
9 28
10 24
12 22
14 18
16 16
18 15
20 14
15
BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL

The bearing capacity for the soil layer is calculated from the SPT N- values using
Meyerhof’s equation as follows (Bowles, 1997):
, for B > F4…...................................(4-1)

𝑁
𝑞 =
𝐵+𝐹3 2
𝑎
( 𝐹2
) 𝐾𝑑, for B > F4................................(4-2)
𝐵
Where
- B = Width of foundation
- D = Depth of foundation
- qa = Allowable bearing pressure for settlement limited to 25 mm.
- Kd
= 1 + 0.33 < 1.33
𝐷
- F1= 0.05
- F2 = 0.08
- F3 = 0.3
- F4 = 1.2
The following average allowable bearing pressures are calculated for different foundation widths at a
depth of 3.00m below the ground level for settlement limited to 25mm. Footing width is a significant
parameter since a large foundation width will affect the soil to a greater depth and strains integrated over
a greater depth will produce a larger settlement. Bearing capacity values calculated in table 4-2 are based
on the minimum expected SPT N value obtained from the average value TP-01 and 02 (i.e. SPT N Value
of 21.8)
16
Table 0-1 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on SPT Test Results
Depth
SPT N Wtd.
TP of N
Value Average
count
0.00 2
0.01 4
0.01 9
0.16 10
1 0.35 6 23.0
0.39 32
0.53 13
0.67 16
0.67 45
0.04 1
0.11 4
0.14 5
0.28 5
2 0.47 11 11.6
0.55 13
0.59 13
0.63 12
0.75 16
17
Table 0-2 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on SPT Test Results
Width, Design
TP S B Depth(m) N F1 F2 F3 Kd Qall
1 25 1 3.5 11.6 0.05 0.08 0.3 1.33 308.99
1 25 1.5 3.5 11.6 0.05 0.08 0.3 1.33 278.09
1 25 2 3.5 11.6 0.05 0.08 0.3 1.33 255.40
1 25 2.5 3.5 11.6 0.05 0.08 0.3 1.33 242.25
1 25 3 3.5 11.6 0.05 0.08 0.3 1.33 233.67
1 25 3.5 3.5 11.6 0.05 0.08 0.3 1.33 227.64
Proposed foundation
S.N Type of Building Type of Allowable (Recommended) Depth Below
Foundation Bearing Capacity ( kPa ) Ground Level
(Meter)
Isolated 227.64 to 308.99 3.00

1 G+4 HOTEL BUILDING footing
Remark
Foundation rests on 3.00m Thick well compacted granular fill material. The compaction shall be carried
out every 0.2m thickness of selected soil.
One Boreholes of depth 3.00m were manually dug, in-situ tests conducted, disturbed and undisturbed
samples collected. By taking into consideration the type of the buildings, spacing of the columns, total
column load and the subsurface conditions, Combined footing has been proposed. The Allowable Bearing
Capacity and Foundation depth is summarized here under.
18
6.0 REFERENCES
 American Society for Testing of Materials
 Ethiopian Building code of standard for foundation (EN EBC,2013)
 Joseph E. bowles , foundation analysis and design 1998 fourth edition
 Braja m.das principles of foundation engineering 2004 third edition
 Code of practice for site investigation
 Arora Soil Mechanics And Foundation Engineering
 Alemayehu Teferra principles of foundation engineering 2nd edition
7.0 ABBREVIATIONS
PGA----------------------Peak Ground Acceleration ratio

ASTM-------------------American Society for Testing of Materials
DCP---------------------Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
SPT N-Value----------Standard Penetration Test Number (blows/300mm penetration)
TRRL-------------------Transport Road Research Laboratory
ORN--------------------Overseas Road Note
B Bore
OSHA------------------Occupational Health and Safety Administration
S Settlement limited
TP Test Pit
19

Wro Bogalech Mohamed g+4 Hotel Building

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Wro Bogalech Mohamed g+4 Hotel Building

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

Wro Bogalech Mohamed g+4 Hotel Building

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ZEDEK GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION LABORATORY & &

ENVIROMENTAL PROTECTION CONSULTING PLC

FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATION REPORT

Client: NEW CREATION

Project: G+4 OFFICE BUUILDING AND

 The proposed building may be supported on isolated footing bearing on

 subsurface soil condition

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Description

Grading We have assumed cut/fill of 1.0 meter or less.

2.2 Site Location and Description

NEW CREATION INTERNATIONAL CHURCH - located city:-

Current ground cover Grasses/weeds/sparse trees/aggregate

Existing topography Relatively level; maximum 0.3048-meter variance between boring

3.0 SUB-SURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 Typical Subsurface Profiles

3.2 Ground water

were terminated above groundwater. Due to the low permeability of the

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.2.1 Site Preparation

recommend that Zedek be retained to observe the exposed soil and to

4.2.3 Grading and Drainage

4.2.4 Construction Considerations

4.3.1 Design Recommendations

4.4 Seismic Considerations

The study of seismicity of a given site area is an important consideration when

Figure 2 Seismic hazard map of Ethiopia

4.3.2 Construction Considerations

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS

5.1 Additional Recommendations

SELECTED EXCAVATED FILL

 Surface drainage and infiltration

Field Exploration Description

Field Tests and Sampling Methods

Test Description Test Procedure

Minnesota Department of Transportation, "User Guide to the

Representative disturbed soil samples were collected

Prediction of SPT N-value

Table 2-2 typical correlation between DCP and SPT values

DCP value SPT N value

BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL

, for B > F4…...................................(4-1)

Table 0-1 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on SPT Test Results

Table 0-2 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on SPT Test Results

Isolated 227.64 to 308.99 3.00

 American Society for Testing of Materials

 Ethiopian Building code of standard for foundation (EN EBC,2013)

 Joseph E. bowles , foundation analysis and design 1998 fourth edition

 Braja m.das principles of foundation engineering 2004 third edition

 Code of practice for site investigation

 Arora Soil Mechanics And Foundation Engineering

 Alemayehu Teferra principles of foundation engineering 2nd edition

PGA----------------------Peak Ground Acceleration ratio

You might also like