Geotechnical Investigation Report R3 Phase-II (17-09-2020)

Government of Punjab
RAWALPINDI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (RDA)

Headquarter Building, LiaqatBagh, Murree Road,
Rawalpindi – Pakistan
Phone: +92-51-5556704, Fax: +92-51-5762314
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Feasibility Study and Detailed Design
of Rawalpindi Ring Road Project
VOLUME-II
(ANNEXURE-D)
Zeeruk International Pvt. Ltd.

(Lead Member of the JV)
HEAD OFFICE
Time Square Plaza, 3rd Floor, I-8 Markaz, Islamabad – Pakistan
Tel: +92-51-4938213-214, Fax: +92-51-4938215
Email:zeerukpk@yahoo.com, Web: www.zeeruk.com
Joint Venture (JV) with
Engineering General Consultant EGC Pvt. Ltd

(JV Member)
HEAD OFFICE
49-D-1, Gulberg III, Lahore – Pakistan
Tel: +92-42-35754751, Fax: +92-42-35760030
E-mail:info@egcpakistan.com, Web: www.egcpakistan.com
Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II)
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Background ....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................1
Chapter 2: Regional Geology ............................................................................................ 5
Chapter 3: Seismology ...................................................................................................... 8
Chapter 4: Field Investigations ....................................................................................... 10

4.1 Description of Boreholes ..........................................................................................................10
4.2 Excavation of Test Pits.............................................................................................................10
4.3 Field Testing and Collection of Samples..................................................................................10
4.3.1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT).............................................................................................10
4.3.2 Field Density Test (FDT) ..........................................................................................................11
4.3.3 Undisturbed Samples (UDS) ....................................................................................................11
4.3.4 Disturbed Samples (DS) ..........................................................................................................11
4.4 Hydrology .................................................................................................................................11
Chapter 5: Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................... 13

5.1 General.....................................................................................................................................13
5.2 Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D 422 and AASHTO T 27)...........................................................13
5.3 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318 and AASHTO T 89 & 90) ......................................................13
5.4 Uniaxial Compressive Content (ASTM D 2216) ......................................................................14
5.5 Direct Shear Test (ASTM D 3080) ...........................................................................................14
5.6 Modified Proctor Test (AASHTO T 180-D)...............................................................................14
5.7 California Bearing Ratio (AASHTO T 193)...............................................................................14
5.8 Chemical Analysis ....................................................................................................................14
Chapter 6: Engineering Analysis ..................................................................................... 17

6.1 Subsurface Lithology................................................................................................................17
6.2 Bearing Capacity ......................................................................................................................18
6.2.1 Pile Load for Deep Foundations ..............................................................................................18
6.2.2 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction ................................................................................................22
Chapter 7: Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................... 24

7.1 Conclusions ..............................................................................................................................24
7.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................26
M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers June, 2020

LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Location and depth of boreholes for the investigation of deep foundations...................10
Table 4.2: Location and depth of test pits, excavated at the location of nullah bridge ...................10
Table 4.3: Summary of field density test (FDT), field moisture and compaction ............................11
Table 4.4: Detail of measured groundwater table/seepage water in drilled boreholes ...................12
Table 5.1: Summary of laboratory test results for borehole samples..............................................15
Table 5.2: Summary of laboratory test results for test pit samples according to AASHTO M 145
classification ...................................................................................................................16
Table 5.3: Summary of chemical analysis for water quality ............................................................16
Table 6.1: Subsurface lithology according to drilled boreholes .......................................................17
Table 6.2: Pile load for deep foundations along proposed road corridor ........................................18
Table 6.3: Modulus of subgrade reaction with reference of drilled boreholes for proposed
structures ........................................................................................................................22
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Google image showing the proposed Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) alignment (Phase-II)
from M1 Interchange to Sangjani (N-5) ............................................................................ 3
Figure 1.2: Google image showing the location of boreholes & test pit along the Rawalpindi ring
road (R3) alignment (Phase-II) ......................................................................................... 4
Figure 2.1: Regional geological map for the proposed Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) alignment
(Phase-II) .......................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 3.1: Seismic zoning map of Punjab showing the project area ................................................ 9
Figure 6.1: Pile calculation graph for proposed Nullah Bridge (RD: 64+490 to 64+560) with ref. of
BH-1 ...............................................................................................................................20
Figure 6.2: Pile calculation graph for proposed Sangjani Interchange (RD: 65+390 to 65+440) with
ref. of BH-2 .....................................................................................................................21

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix-I Borehole & Test Pit Logs
a) Borehole Logs
b) Test Pit Logs
c) Field Density Test (FDT)
Appendix-II Laboratory Test Results
a) Boreholes
b) Test Pits
c) Water Quality
Appendix-III Site Photographs
a) Boreholes
b) Test Pits

Abbreviations
RDA = Rawalpindi Development Authority

NHA = National Highway Authority
AASHTO = American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials
ASTM = American Society for Testing and Materials
TP = Test Pit
FDT = Field Density Test
RD = Reduce distance
NMC = Natural Moisture Content
CBR = California Bearing Ratio
MDD = Maximum Dry Density
OMC = Optimum Moisture Content
in. = Inch
mm = Millimeter
m = Meter
km = Kilometer
E = Easting
N = Northing

Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Project Background
Development of the Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) will help relieve the bottleneck on N-5. It will help
alleviate congestion in the central areas of Rawalpindi city, and release space and save travel time for
non-motorized traffic, public transport and commuting vehicles within the twin cities. It will also
facilitate the growth of the Rawalpindi city towards south-western side in a planned manner. It will also
contribute to reduction in fuel consumption, vehicular noise and air pollution in the urban area.
Islamabad – Rawalpindi Metropolitan Area plays a vital role in Pakistan’s economy. It is the country's
third largest populated metropolitan area, consisting principally of the twin cities of Islamabad and
Rawalpindi. Both cities are connected by road and metro bus system, and their economies are closely
interlinked. Rawalpindi is also a major logistics and transportation center for northern Pakistan. The
National Highway N-5 is one of the most important national transport corridors in the country. One of
the key bottlenecks on N-5 is the section which passes through the central areas of Rawalpindi. The
traffic on G.T. road from Lahore to Rawalpindi/Islamabad & to Peshawar and vice-versa is compelled
to pass through heart of the City and this traffic combined with the local slow moving vehicles results
in high traffic congestion and traffic management. Further; the integration of Capital Islamabad and
Rawalpindi has further aggravated the traffic situation. The quantum of registered vehicles in
Rawalpindi & Islamabad is increasing day by day. Therefore, RDA has planned the project of
construction of Rawalpindi Ring Road in the city on priority basis.
Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi Ring Road is assigned by RDA to M/S Zeeruk
International (Pvt.) Ltd. in association with Engineering General Consultants (EGC). Figure 1.1 is
showing the location of the proposed alignment (Phase-II).
1.2 Scope of Work
The scope of work was entrusted to Zeeruk International (Pvt.) Ltd for the geotechnical investigations
of feasibility study and detailed design includes;
A. Drilling, Sampling & Field Testing
 Drilling of boreholes upto depth of 50 m for Major Bridge/Flyover & boreholes of 30 m depth
for Nullah Bridge with Percussion method for the investigation of deep foundations as per
TOR,
 Performance of Standard Penetration Test (SPT) in soil at 1.5 m interval as per site
conditions.
 Collection of undisturbed samples (UDS) with Shelby Tube in cohesive soil from each
borehole at specified interval or as per site conditions and disturbed samples (DS) from
boreholes for laboratory testing at specified interval or as per site conditions.
 Coring of subsurface rock, coring waxing and core preservation if encountered.
 Excavation of test pit upto 2.5 m depth at minor nullah bridge location with FDT and collection
of bulk samples.
 Preparation of subsurface lithological logs of each borehole.
 Observation and recording of ground water table, if encountered.
M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 1 of 26

 Surface and subsurface water sampling with qaultity testing.
B. Laboratory Testing
 Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D-422 & AASHTO T 27)

 Atterberg Limit (ASTM D-4318 & AASHTO T 89 & 90)
 Moisture Content (ASTM D-2216)
 Direct Shear Test (ASTM D-3080)
 Unconfined Compressive Strength of soil (ASTM D-2166)
 Modified Proctor Test (AASHTO T-180)
 CBR (AASHTO T-193)
 Chemical Analysis of water
C. Report
Geotechnical investigation report describes the regional geology, general seismology of site, borehole
location plan, borehole logs, test pit logs, field & laboratory test results and bearing capacities for
shallow & deep foundations on the basis of field and laboratory test results.

Figure 1.1: Google image showing the proposed Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) alignment (Phase-II) from M1 Interchange to Sangjani (N-5)

BH-2
Figure 1.2: Google image showing the location of boreholes & test pit along the Rawalpindi ring road (R3) alignment (Phase-II)

Chapter 2: Regional Geology
The dominant factor controlling the geology of the Islamabad-Rawalpindi area is the convergence of
the Pakistan India and Eurasian tectonic plates and the collision between the plates that began about
20 million years ago. This process produced complex structure and stratigraphy in the Islamabad
Rawalpindi area.
The sedimentary rocks of the Islamabad area record a long period of gentle geologic fluctuations and
slow deposition while the Pakistan-India tectonic plate drifted northward across the Indian Ocean,
followed by much more vigorous tectonic processes and rapid deposition in the shorter period since
the Pakistan-India and Eurasian plates converged. Consequently, the 150-million-year (m.y.) period
from deposition of the Samana Suk Formation (Middle Jurassic) to the beginning of deposition of the
Murree Formation (lower Miocene) is represented by only about 675 m of primarily marine
sedimentary rocks, whereas the last 20 m.y. are represented by more than 7,572 m of continental
sedimentary rock.
Stratigraphic units along proposed Options of Rawalpindi Ring Road
According to regional geological map by Geological Survey of Pakistan (GSP) and field observations,
following major stratigraphic units are observed along proposed road corridor. The regional geological
map for proposed road corridor is given as Figure 2.1.
Murree Formation
The “Mari Group” of Wynne (1874), “Murree Beds” of Lydekker (1876) and “Murree Series” of Pilgrim
(1910) have been formally named Murree Formation by the Stratigraphic Committee of Pakistan from
the Murree Hills in Murree District.
The formation is composed of red thinly laminated siltstone, shale, clay, with subordinate
intraformational conglomerate. The sandstone is fine to medium grained, pale green to grey, maroon
colored, calcareous and greywacke in nature. The beds of sandstone, clay or shale alternate with
each other. This pattern shows a cyclic deposition. In sandstone veins of calcite and quartz are
common. At few places beds of calcareous sandy conglomerates are calcareous, flattened and
squeezed in various shapes. Some of which are tapered to point on one end. Evidently these pebbles
originally were soft calcareous and balls formed at the site of depositions rather than the detritus
material brought from elsewhere.
The large areas of Jhelum Valley and Neelum Valley are covered with Murree Formation. In the
Jhelum Valley it is thickly exposed and its upper faulted contact with Punjal Volcanics throughout the
area extending in SE direction to the occupied Kashmir, in NW direction to the Neelum valley within
the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis. It is unconformably underlain by the Kuldana Formation of Middle
Eocene time.
This contact is marked by Ashraf et al. (1993) as brecciated base near Panjgran, Neelum valley.
Bossart et. al. (1983) and Greco (1989) misidentified Kuldana Formation and called it as lower part of
Murree Formation giving Paleocene and Eocene age, which is misinterpretation possibly due to
reworked complete forminiferal fauna found by them in this formation. The lithology and fauna of
Kuldana Formation is distinctly different from it everywhere so as in this area. Therefore, their
inclusion of Kuldana formation erroneously in this formation is due to two reasons. First may be due to

similar colour of both the formations and secondly due to reworking of unbroken foraminiferal fauna
from soft natured Kuldanas to stratigraphically higher level into shales of Murree Formation. Ashraf et.
al, (1973) marked the Main Boundary Thrust between Carboniferous to Triassic Panjal Formation and
Miocene Murree Formation along the eastern limb of Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis.
Kamlial Formation
The name “Kamlial Formation” was used for the rocks exposed near the Kamlial village (Late. 33 15
N; Long. 72 30 E.) in the Attock district. These rocks were previously named “Kamlial Stage” by
Pinfold (1918). The Kamlial Formation in eastern Kohat is comprised of dark-gray to greenish-gray
sandstone (about 75%) exhibiting spheroidal weathering, interbedded with dark-red to maroon color
siltstone (about 20%) and subordinate intraformational conglomerates (about 5%). The sandstone is
fine to medium grained, cross-bedded, channelized and intercalated with lenses of intraformational
conglomerates or thin layers of clay flakes (Abbasi, 1991). The Kamlial sandstone is characterized by
the presence of high amounts of detrital green minerals such as chlorite, greenish biotite and minor
amount of glauconite (Abbasi and Friend, 1989). Tourmaline and garnet are its common heavy
mineral constituents (Abbasi and Khan, 1990). The lower contact of the Kamlial Formation with the
Murree Formation is transitional, but in the Kohat plateau, it unconformably overlies the Kohat
Formation. Its upper contact with the Chinji Formation is, however, conformable. The age of the
Kamlial Formation is middle to late Miocene (Fatmi, 1973; Meissner et al., 1974). It is also assigned
an age from 18.3 to 14.3 Ma on the basis of magnetic stratigraphic studies (Johnson et al., 1982).

Figure 2.1: Regional geological map for the proposed Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) alignment (Phase-II)

Chapter 3: Seismology
Tectonically, the Pakistan region comprises diverse nature of geological/tectonic features as it lies at
the junction of Indian, Eurasian and Arabian plate boundaries. Himalayas are in the North and
Hindukush in the Northwest. In the South, along the coast of Arabian Sea, there is a narrow marine
zone belt. In rest of the country there is a belt of sub-mountain Potowar plateau and Salt range in
Punjab, western bordering highlands the Baluchistan plateau and South Indus plain.
The region of Pakistan is divided into five main Seismic zones in term of major, moderate, minor and
negligible zones with respect to ground acceleration values. The division of the region into these
source zones is based on the seismicity, the fault systems and the stress direction analysis. The
division was also based on the data processing of the whole catalogue regarding the seismicity, depth
and the study of research papers. The seismic zoning of Pakistan is shown in the following table:
Seismic Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration

Description
Zone (PGA)
1 0.05 to 0.08 Very Low
2A 0.08 to 0.16 Low
2B 0.16 to 0.24 Moderate
3 0.24 to 0.32 High
4 >0.32 Very High
Seismic zoning map of Pakistan have been developed by Pakistan Meteorological Department by
earthquake data collected from United States of Geological Survey (USGS), International
Seismological Centre (ISC) and PMD.
According to regional geological & tectonic maps, main boundary thrust (MBT) passes to road
alignment (Phase-II) of R3 project near start point. Along the MBT have shown a constant seismic
activity, and it was this fault which ruptured in the M=7.6 Muzafarrabad earthquake (2005). The
historical seismicity depicts; this is a very active deformation zone. The project area lies in the seismic
zone 2B with reference of Seismic zoning map of Pakistan which is shown in the following Figure 3.1:

Figure 3.1: Seismic zoning map of Punjab showing the project area

Chapter 4: Field Investigations
4.1 Description of Boreholes
Two (2) boreholes have been drilled with percussion method upto depth of 30 m at the location of
minor nullah bridge & 50 m at the location of major bridge/flyover for the investigation of deep
foundations for the feasibility study & detailed design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II).
The main purpose of drilling is to study the subsurface behavior of soil/rock and to examine their
engineering properties under the imposed loading of the proposed structures at the proposed
locations. Location, co-ordinates & depth of boreholes are given in Table 4.1 and marked on Google
image (given as Figure 1.2). Borehole logs are provided in Appendix-I (a) of this report.
Table 4.1: Location and depth of boreholes for the investigation of deep foundations
Borehole Co-ordinates (43 S) Depth

Structure RD’s
No. Easting (m) Northing (m) (m)
Nullah Bridge
BH-1 300299 3727710 64+500 30
(RD: 64+490 to 64+560)
Sangjani Interchange
BH-2 300783 3728453 65+410 50
(RD: 65+390 to 65+440)
Total Drilled Depth (m) 80
4.2 Excavation of Test Pits
One (1) test pit has been excavated for the geotechnical investigations of proposed minor Nullah
bridge. Test pits have been excavated up to the depth of 2.5 m below existing surface. Bulk samples
were collected from test pits for soil classification and CBR tests. The main purpose of field testing
was to study the soil classification and to examine its engineering characteristics i.e. California
bearing ratio (CBR), natural moisture content (NMC), maximum dry density (MDD) and field density
test (FDT). The detail of test pit is given in Table 4.2. The test pit log is provided as Appendix-Ib.
Table 4.2: Location and depth of test pits, excavated at the location of nullah bridge
Co-ordinates (43 S) Depth
Test Pit No. Structure
Easting (m) Northing (m) (m)
Nullah Bridge
TP-1 300317 3727778 2.5
(RD: 64+490 to 64+560)
4.3 Field Testing and Collection of Samples
4.3.1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
Standard penetration test (SPT) has been performed in specific boreholes during drilling at 1.5 m
interval or as per site conditions, according to ASTM standard. SPT values are given in borehole logs
(Appendix-Ia).

The standard penetration test is basically a sound method, which provides an index to determine the
relative density/consistency of subsoil material. The test consisted of 23.62 inch long standard
sampler of 3.81 cm diameter provided with a standard cutting shoe which is driven into the soil at the
testing horizon by using a 63.5 kg hammer, falling freely through a height of 76 cm on to the drill rods
to which the standard sampler is attached.
4.3.2 Field Density Test
The sand cone method (AASHTO T-191) is applied for the in-situ density of natural soil. In this
method a cylindrical hole is manually excavated of specified depth in the soil (natural or compacted),
the weight of moist soil and the moisture content are determined. The volume of the hole is calculated
by re-introducing known density sand into the hole. The dry unit weight is calculated as the ratio
between moist unit weight and moisture content. The in-situ compaction is calculated as the
percentage ratio between field dry density and laboratory dry density.
This test method is applicable for soils without appreciable amounts of granular material in excess of
1 1/2 in. (38 mm) in diameter. The main application of this test is to determine the compaction for
embankment fill and is a quality control test for a certain degree of compaction is required. The test is
also applied for stability analysis of embankments, slopes and design of underground structures. Field
density tests (AASHTO T 191) were conducted at a specified interval along the proposed road
alignment. The summary for the field density of soil samples is given in Table 4.3. The detail results of
field density tests (FDT) are provided in Appendix-Ic.
Table 4.3: Summary of field density test (FDT), field moisture and compaction
Field Moisture
FDT's Compaction
Test Pits Location Density Content
Nos. (%)
(gm/cm3) (%)
Nullah Bridge
1. TP-1 1.544 18.0 88
(RD: 64+490 to 64+560)
4.3.3 Undisturbed Samples (UDS)
The thin wall tube (Shelby) sampler is commonly used to obtain relatively undisturbed samples of
cohesive soils for strength and consolidation testing. The sampler commonly used has a 51 ~ 76 mm
diameter and lengths from 700 ~ 900 mm. The test method for thin walled tube sampling is used as
described in ASTM D 1587 / AASHTO T-207.
4.3.4 Disturbed Samples (DS)
Disturbed samples were collected by using split-barrel sampler and with rotary method. The split-
barrel sampler is typically used in conjunction with the standard penetration test (SPT), is specified in
ASTM D 1586 / AASHTO T-206. The detail of samples is noted in borehole logs (Appendix-Ia).
4.4 Hydrology
The ground water table affects many elements of foundation design and construction. Therefore, its
location has been established as accurately as possible, especially it is within the probable
construction zone. It is generally determined by measuring the water level in boreholes after a suitable
time elapse. The detail of groundwater table/seepage water is given following Table 4.4.

Table 4.4: Detail of measured groundwater table/seepage water in drilled boreholes

Groundwater
Borehole Drilled Depth table/seepage
Location / Structure Measured Date
No’s (m) water
(m)
Nullah Bridge
BH-1 (RD: 64+490 to 30.0 4.0 08-06-2020
64+560)
BH-2 (RD: 65+390 to 50.0 9.5 06-06-2020
65+440)

Chapter 5: Laboratory Testing

5.1 General
Soil samples were collected from test pits at a specified depth and were sent to the GEOENGINEERS
and Green Crescent laboratories for their following physical analysis;
 Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D-422 & AASHTO T 27)

 Atterberg Limit (ASTM D-4318 & AASHTO T 89 & 90)
 Moisture Content (ASTM D-2216)
 Direct Shear Test (ASTM D-3080)
 Unconfined Compressive Strength of soil (ASTM D-2166)
 Modified Proctor Test (AASHTO T-180)
 CBR (AASHTO T-193)
 Chemical Analysis of water
These tests are required for the classification of soil and to predict their engineering characteristics.
The summary of laboratory test results for borehole samples is given as Table 5.1 and detail of
laboratory test results are provided in Appendix-IIa, summary of laboratory test results for test pit
samples is given as Table 5.2 and detail of laboratory test results are provided in Appendix-IIb, and
summary of chemical analysis for water samples is given as Table 5.3, result sheets are given in
Appendix-IIc.
5.2 Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D 422 & AASHTO T 27)
Grain size analysis has been performed on the disturbed samples collected from the test pits. The
oven dried material retained on the No. 200 sieve after washing was placed on the top sieve included
in most of sieves ranging from 75 to 0.074 mm and shaken for 5 minutes. The values are given in
Table 5.1 & 5.2 whereas result sheets are provided as Appendix-II (a & b) of this report.
5.3 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318 & AASHTO T 89 & 90)
Liquid Limits
The liquid limit of a soil is the water content at the boundary between the liquid and plastic states. A
soil sample (with grains passing 0.425mm sieve) is thoroughly mixed with various water content and
is placed in the Casagrande apparatus. A groove of ½ inch width is cut in the middle of the sample.
The apparatus is moved up and down by turning the crank. The number of drops required to close this
½ inch groove is recorded. The liquid limit is the water content at which 25 drops of the dish will close
the ½ inch groove. The values are given in Table 5.1 & 5.2 whereas result sheets are provided as
Appendix-II (a & b) of this report.
Plastic Limit
The plastic limit of a soil is the water content at the boundary between the plastic and semi-solid
states. The water content at the boundary is arbitrarily defined as the lowest water content at which
the soil can be rolled into threads 1/8 inch in diameter without any visible cracks. The values are given
in Table 5.1 & 5.2 whereas result sheets are provided as Appendix-II (a & b) of this report.

Plasticity Index
The plasticity index is the numerical difference between the liquid limit and plastic limit. The values are
given in Table 5.1 & 5.2 whereas result sheets are provided as Appendix-II (a & b) of this report.
5.4 Uniaxial Compressive Strength (ASTM D 2166)
This test method covers the determination of the strength of soil. This test was performed on
undisturbed samples (UDS) according to standard. The values are given in Table 5.1 whereas result
sheets are provided as Appendix-II (a) of this report.
5.5 Direct Shear Test (ASTM D 3080)
Direct shear test was performed on disturbed samples in laboratory according to ASTM D-3080. The
values are given in Table 5.1 whereas result sheets are provided as Appendix-II (a) of this report.
5.6 Modified Proctor Test (AASHTO T 180-D)
Moisture density relationship using a 4.5 kg hammer and 475mm drop is commonly known as the
Modified Proctor Test. The main purpose of this test is to find laboratory based maximum density and
optimum moisture content, which then, in turn, is used to estimate the percentage of compaction from
the field density test. These tests were conducted on subgrade samples of the existing road sections,
as per AASHTO specification, T-180 type D. The values are given in Table 5.2 whereas result sheets
are provided as Appendix-IIb of this report.
5.7 California Bearing Ratio (AASHTO T 193)
The California Bearing Ratio Test was conducted (Three points, soaked for 96 hours) as per AASHTO
designation T-193 on all subgrade samples. The CBR value is determined as the ratio of the test
resistance at 2.5mm or 5.1mm penetration to the standard resistance of soil at the same penetration
(1000 psi for 2.5mm and 1500 psi for 5.1mm). The values are given in Table 5.2 whereas result
sheets are provided as Appendix-IIb of this report.
5.8 Chemical Analysis
Chemical analysis was performed on the water samples collected from the existing tube well and
nullah. The location of collected samples are given in Table 5.3. The chemical analysis tests
performed include determination of pH, along with the concentration of chloride and sulphate content.
The values are given in Table 5.3 whereas result sheets are provided as Appendix-IIc of this report.

Table 5.1: Summary of laboratory test results for borehole samples
Sieve analysis Atterberg’s Limits Direct Shear

(%-age) (%-age) Test
UCS (kPa)
Location (Rd’s) of
Cohession
Borehole Depth Density
Boulders /
Silt / Clay
Plasticity
Boreholes with
Plastic
Gravel
Liquid
Phi (ᶿ)
No’s (m) (kN/m3)
Index
Sand
(kPa)
Limit
Limit
Structure
3.0 21/14 39 26 NON-PLASTIC - - - -

6.0 0/31 23 46 NON-PLASTIC - - - -
7.5 - - - - - - 18.12 - 18.4 29.1
Nullah Bridge 12.0 0/34 13 53 25.9 20.5 5 - - - -

BH-1 (RD: 64+490 to 15.0 - - - - - - 18.32 - 16.3 33.6
64+560) 21.0 0/7 11 82 23.9 20.0 4 - - - -
22.5 - - - - - - 18.58 140.44 - -
28.5 - - - - - - 18.84 155.17 - -
30.0 0/4 12 84 24.1 19.8 4 - - - -
4.5 0/23 15 62 23.5 19.9 4 - - - -
6.0 - - - - - - 17.71 - 6.4 50.8
9.0 51/20 15 14 23.5 19.9 4 - - - -
12.0 - - - - - - 17.87 131.23 - -
Sangjani
Interchange 16.5 0/41 19 40 NON-PLASTIC - - - -
BH-2
(RD: 65+390 to 22.5 - - - - - - 18.53 141.82
65+440)
24.0 0/7 9 84 25.5 21.7 4 - - - -
27.0 - - - - - - 18.65 - 31.2 0
32.0 - - - - - - 18.56 - 7.1 53.5
47.0 - - - - - - 18.81 - 6.8 51.3

Table 5.2: Summary of laboratory test results for test pit samples according to AASHTO M 145 classification
Atterberg’s
Field Compaction (%)
Material as Subgrade
Moisture Content (%)
Sieve analysis Modified Swelling
penet. against 95%

Limits
General Rating of
(AASHTO M 145)
(Passing %) Proctor Test (%)
CBR (at 2.5mm
Classification
(%-age)
Pit No.
MDD)
Content (%)
Location
Plasticity
Optimum
10 blows
30 blows
65 blows
Moisture
Max. Dry
Density
(g/cm3)
Plastic
Liquid
Index
Limit
Limit
#200
# 10
# 40
Nullah Bridge
TP-1 87.2 81.5 61.4 22.8 20.2 3 1.800 11.2 18.0 88 0.73 0.69 0.60 7.5 A-4 Fair
(RD: 64+490 to 64+560)
Table 5.3: Summary of chemical analysis for water quality
Co-ordinates TDS Chloride Sulphate

Source Location pH
Latitude Longitude mg/l mg/l mg/l
Ground Water Sangjani Village 33°40'28.6"N 72°51'04.6"E 7.27 1159.0 95.97 302.52
Surface Water Sangjani Nullah 33°40'16.0"N 72°50'51.0"E 7.19 625.0 67.97 179.04

Chapter 6: Engineering Analysis

6.1 Subsurface Lithology
The investigations were conducted at the locations of proposed Structures for the Feasibility Study &
Detailed Design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II). Two (2) boreholes have been drilled
upto depth of 30 m for minor nullah bridge & 50 m for major bridges/flyovers with percussion method
for the investigation of deep foundations. The detail of subsurface lithology is given in following Table
6.1 and detail borehole logs are provided in Appendix-I (a).
Table 6.1: Subsurface lithology according to drilled boreholes

Borehole Depth
Location Lithology
No. (m)
Silty CLAY:
0.0 ~ 1.0 Dark brown to brown in color, low plastic CLAY with silt
and traces of sand with some roots of plants.
Sandy GRAVEL:
Greyish brown to brown in color, rounded to sub-
1.0 ~ 4.5
rounded GRAVEL and pebbles with fine to medium
grained sand.
Sandy Gravelly SILT:
(RD: 64+490 to 64+560)
Yellowish brown to brown in color, non plastic SILT with

4.5 ~ 9.0
some rounded to sub-rounded gravel & pebbles and
Nullah Bridge
sand.
Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel:
BH-1 Yellowish brown to brown in color, very low to low plastic
9.0 ~ 21.0
CLAY with silt, some rounded to sub-rounded gravel &
pebbles and sand.
Silty CLAY:
Dark brown to brown in color, low plastic and very stiff
21.0 ~ 23.5
CLAY with silt, some very fine-grained sand and traces
of gravel & pebbles.
Silty CLAY:
Yellowish brown to brown in color, low plastic and very
23.5 ~ 30.0
stiff to hard CLAY with silt, some very fine-grained sand
and traces of gravel & pebbles.
Fill Material:
0.0 ~ 2.0 Dark brown, low plastic, soft, CLAY with silt, some gravel
& pebbles.
Silty CLAY:
(RD: 65+390 to 65+440)
2.0 ~ 3.0 Light brown to dark brown, low to medium plastic, soft to
firm, CLAY with silt.

Gravelly Silty CLAY:
Yellowish brown to brownish brown in color, low plastic
3.0 ~ 6.0
BH-2 CLAY with silt and some rounded to sub-rounded gravel
& pebbles.
Silty CLAY:
6.0 ~ 16.0 Yellowish brown to brown in color, low to medium plastic
and stiff to very stiff CLAY with silt.
Sandy GRAVEL & COBBLES with some Boulders:
16.0 ~ 17.5 Angular to sub angular & rounded to sub rounded
GRAVEL & COBBLES with some boulders of Sandstone

Borehole Depth
Location Lithology
No. (m)
& Limestone origin and fine to coarse-grained sand.
Silty CLAY:
17.5 ~ 21.0 Light brown to brown in color, low to medium plastic and
very stiff to hard CLAY with silt.
Silty CLAY:
and hard CLAY with silt.
Sandy GRAVEL & COBBLES with some Boulders::
Angular to sub angular & rounded to sub rounded
27.0 ~ 30.0
origin and fine to coarse-grained sand.
Silty CLAY:
37.0 ~ 40.0
Silty CLAY:
Reddish brown to brown in color, very low to low plastic
40.0 ~ 50.0 and hard CLAY with silt and traces of gravel.
SPT values were observed as Refusal due to Hard soil
from 40.0 to 50.0 m depth.
6.2 Bearing Capacity
6.2.1 Pile Load for Deep Foundations
According to subsurface investigations; various soil layers such as silty CLAY/clayey SILT, sandy
GRAVEL, are observed in boreholes. Pile load is calculated by using the Meyehof’s method in soil for
the friction piles.
Table 6.2: Pile load for deep foundations along proposed road corridor
Allowable
Allowable Pile Allowable Pile Allowable Pile
Pile Load of
Depth Load of 1000 Load of 1200 Load of 1500
Location 2000 mm Pile
(m) mm Pile mm Pile mm Pile
diameter
diameter (KN) diameter (KN) diameter (KN)
(KN)
5 221 282 383 579

(RD: 64+490 to
10 652 818 1089 1599

Nullah Bridge
64+560)
15 1259 1565 2058 2972

20 2042 2524 3292 4696
25 3498 4311 5600 7939
30 5195 6390 8282 11697

Allowable
Allowable Pile Allowable Pile Allowable Pile
Pile Load of
Depth Load of 1000 Load of 1200 Load of 1500
Location 2000 mm Pile
(m) mm Pile mm Pile mm Pile
diameter
diameter (KN) diameter (KN) diameter (KN)
(KN)
5 243 291 364 485

10 728 873 1092 1455
(RD: 65+390 to 65+440)
15 1535 1842 2302 3069

20 2611 3133 3916 5222

25 3914 4697 5871 7828
30 5478 6574 8217 10956
35 7266 8720 10899 14532
40 9310 11172 13965 18620
45 11515 13818 17272 23029
50 14085 16758 20946 27929

Figure 6.1: Pile calculation graph for proposed Nullah Bridge (RD: 64+490 to 64+560) with ref. of BH-1

Figure 6.2: Pile calculation graph for proposed Sangjani Interchange (RD: 65+390 to 65+440) with ref. of BH-2

6.2.2 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction
The modulus of subgrade reaction is a conceptual relationship between soil pressure and deflection
that is widely used in the structural analysis of foundation members. It is used for continuous footings,
mats and various types of pilings.
0.48 to 0.90Es
ks = Chapter 16-15 (Joseph E. Bowles, P.E., S.E. Fifth Edition)
B
Where;
0.48 is for HP Piles,
0.9 is for round piles (i.e. slope factor Fw1 ≈ 2)
Es = 650 N
Modulus of sub grade reaction for proposed bridges given below in Table 6.3;
Table 6.3: Modulus of subgrade reaction with reference of drilled boreholes for proposed
structures
ks (kN/m3) Round Pile
Depth 1000 mm 1200 mm 1500 mm 2000 mm
Location BH No’s
(m) Pile Pile Pile Pile
diameter diameter diameter diameter
1.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
3 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
4.5 37099.5 30916.3 24733.0 18549.8
6 33590.1 27991.8 22393.4 16795.1
7.5 41611.6 34676.4 27741.1 20805.8
Nullah Bridge (RD: 64+490 to 64+560)
9 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3

10.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
12 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
13.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
BH-1
15 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
16.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
18 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
19.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
21 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
24 22059.2 18382.7 14706.1 11029.6
25.5 27072.6 22560.5 18048.4 13536.3
27 31083.4 25902.8 20722.3 15541.7
30 41110.3 34258.6 27406.9 20555.1

ks (kN/m3) Round Pile

Depth 1000 mm 1200 mm 1500 mm 2000 mm
Location BH No’s
(m) Pile Pile Pile Pile
diameter diameter diameter diameter
1.5 9024.2 7520.2 6016.1 4512.1
3 30080.7 25067.3 20053.8 15040.4
4.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
6 13035.0 10862.5 8690.0 6517.5
7.5 14037.7 11698.1 9358.4 7018.8
9 15541.7 12951.4 10361.1 7770.8
10.5 16043.0 13369.2 10695.4 8021.5
13.5 18549.8 15458.1 12366.5 9274.9
15 20053.8 16711.5 13369.2 10026.9
16.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
Sangjani Interchange (RD: 65+390 to 65+440)
18 22560.5 18800.4 15040.4 11280.3

19.5 24565.9 20471.6 16377.3 12283.0
21 26069.9 21725.0 17380.0 13035.0
24 28576.7 23813.9 19051.1 14288.3
25.5 30582.0 25485.0 20388.0 15291.0
BH-2 27 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
28.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
30 39104.9 32587.4 26069.9 19552.5
31.5 40608.9 33840.8 27072.6 20304.5
33 42614.3 35511.9 28409.6 21307.2
34.5 43617.0 36347.5 29078.0 21808.5
36 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
37.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
39 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
40.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
42 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
43.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
45 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
46.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
48 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3
49.5 50134.5 41778.8 33423.0 25067.3

Chapter 7: Conclusions and Recommendations

7.1 Conclusions
The conclusions are made on the basis of boreholes, field testing and laboratory test results.
Geotechnical investigations consists on drilling of one (1) boreholes up to the depth of 50 m at the
location of major Bridge/Flyover & one (1) boreholes upto the depth of 30 m at the location of minor
nullah bridge along with field testing, sampling, laboratory testing and pile load calculations with the
instruction of consultants/engineers using percussion methods for the deep foundations whereas one
(1) test pit excavated upto 2.5 m depth at the location of nullah bridge for the feasibility study &
detailed design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II).
According to regional geological & tectonic maps, main boundary thrust (MBT) passes to road
alignment (Phase-II) of R3 project near start point. Along the MBT have shown a constant seismic
activity, and it was this fault which ruptured in the M=7.6 Muzafarrabad earthquake (2005). The
historical seismicity depicts; this is a very active deformation zone.
The following subsurface information is observed up to maximum depth of 50 m depth from NSL
whereas detail sub surface borehole logs are given in Appendix-I (a) of this report;
Borehole Depth
Location Lithology
No. (m)
Silty CLAY:
0.0 ~ 1.0 Dark brown to brown in color, low plastic CLAY with silt
and traces of sand with some roots of plants.
Sandy GRAVEL:
Greyish brown to brown in color, rounded to sub-
1.0 ~ 4.5
rounded GRAVEL and pebbles with fine to medium
grained sand.
Sandy Gravelly SILT:

Yellowish brown to brown in color, non plastic SILT with
(RD: 64+490 to 64+560)
4.5 ~ 9.0
some rounded to sub-rounded gravel & pebbles and
sand.
Nullah Bridge
BH-1 Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel:

Yellowish brown to brown in color, very low to low plastic
9.0 ~ 21.0
CLAY with silt, some rounded to sub-rounded gravel &
pebbles and sand.
Silty CLAY:
Dark brown to brown in color, low plastic and very stiff
21.0 ~ 23.5
CLAY with silt, some very fine-grained sand and traces
of gravel & pebbles.
Silty CLAY:
Yellowish brown to brown in color, low plastic and very
23.5 ~ 30.0
stiff to hard CLAY with silt, some very fine-grained sand
and traces of gravel & pebbles.

Borehole Depth
Location Lithology
No. (m)
Fill Material:
0.0 ~ 2.0 Dark brown, low plastic, soft, CLAY with silt, some gravel
& pebbles.
Silty CLAY:
2.0 ~ 3.0 Light brown to dark brown, low to medium plastic, soft to
firm, CLAY with silt.
Gravelly Silty CLAY:
Yellowish brown to brownish brown in color, low plastic
3.0 ~ 6.0
CLAY with silt and some rounded to sub-rounded gravel
& pebbles.
Silty CLAY:
and stiff to very stiff CLAY with silt.

16.0 ~ 17.5
& Limestone origin and fine to coarse-grained sand.
(RD: 65+390 to 65+440)
Silty CLAY:
17.5 ~ 21.0 Light brown to brown in color, low to medium plastic and
very stiff to hard CLAY with silt.
BH-2
Silty CLAY:
Sandy GRAVEL & COBBLES with some Boulders::
27.0 ~ 30.0
Silty CLAY:
37.0 ~ 40.0
Silty CLAY:
Reddish brown to brown in color, very low to low plastic
40.0 ~ 50.0 and hard CLAY with silt and traces of gravel.
SPT values were observed as Refusal due to Hard soil
from 40.0 to 50.0 m depth.
Hydrology
The ground water table affects many elements of foundation design and construction. Therefore, its
location has been established as accurately as possible, especially it is within the probable
construction zone. It is generally determined by measuring the water level in boreholes after a suitable
time elapse. The detail of groundwater table/seepage water is given following Table;

Detail of measured groundwater table/seepage water in drilled boreholes

Drilled Groundwater
Borehole Measured
Location / Structure Depth table /seepage
No’s Date
(m) water (m)
BH-1 Nullah Bridge (RD: 64+490 to 64+560) 30.0 4.0 08-06-2020
Sangjani Interchange (RD: 65+390 to
BH-2 50.0 9.5 06-06-2020
65+440)
7.2 Recommendations
 Pile foundations should be recommended for the proposed bridge structures of R3 project
(Phase-II).
 Allowable load for piles are given in Table 6.2 (section 6.2.1) of this report.
 Drilling of boreholes with field & laboratory test results must be drilled at each prier of
proposed structures to identify the subsurface behavior of rock & soil.
 A pile load test must be carried out at each proposed structure before construction of working
piles for the confirmation of pile load.
 An experienced geotechnical engineer/engineering geologist/site supervisor should inspect all
the activities relating to identification of soil, rechecking of bearing pile load, backfilling and
placing of foundation.
 Efficient drainage system should be ensured to avoid seepage into the foundation soil. This
should be specially taken care during construction, when the foundation soil is exposed.
 The design of the proposed structure should be based on moderate seismicity at PGA 0.24g
for seismic safety condition.

Appendix-I Borehole & Test Pits Logs
a) Borehole Logs
b) Test Pit Logs
c) Field Density Test (FDT)
APPENDIX – I a
Borehole Logs
GEOENGINEERS
Geotechnical Investigations, Piling, Tube Well Construction, Drilling, Grouting, Geological Mapping,
Topographic Survey, Feasibility Study of Irrigation & Hydel Projects
Sub-surface Exploration Bore Hole Logs

Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi RD: 64+500 km - (Nullah Bridge from
Project: Location:
Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II). RD: 64+490 to 64+560 km)
Borehole No. 1 Date Started: 02.06.2020 Sheet: 1 of 3
Ref. Elevation: - Date Completed: 08.06.2020 Ground/Seepage Water: 4.0 m
Sampler weight: 63.5 kg Type of boring: Percussion Weather: Sunny
Driller: Wazir Khan Drop Height: 30" Coordinates: 43S; 300299 m E, 3727710 m N
Final Depth: (m) 30 Geologist: Mazhar Hussain Site Inspector : Haider Ali Qureshi
Depth Dia of Sample Type SPT (inches) Corrected N

GWT Legend Description of Material N Value Remarks
(m) Hole & no. 6 6 6 Value (N60)
- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (0.0 ~ 1.0 m)

- -х-х- Dark brown to brown in color, low
- -х-х- plastic CLAY with silt and traces of
- -х-х- sand with some roots of plants.
--1 -х-х-
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ Sandy GRAVEL: (1.0 ~ 4.5 m)
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ Greyish brown to brown in color, SPT/DS-1 3 37 50/2" R
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ rounded to sub-rounded GRAVEL and
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ pebbles with fine to medium grained
--2 ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ sand.
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
--3 ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ SPT/DS-2 50/2" - - R
Soil is classified as per Unified soil classification (ASTM D-2487)

- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ Undisturbed sample was collected at
Percussion method was used for drilling up to 30.0 m depth.

- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ 3.2 m depth using Shelby tube.
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
SPT perform in soil according to (ASTM D-1586)

- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
--4 ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ
Diameter of hole is 5 inches
- ĝ● ĝ ●ĝ SPT/DS-3 21 33 41 74 47.2
- -хĝх- Sandy Gravelly SILT: (4.5 ~ 9.0 m)
- -хĝх- Yellowish brown to brown in color,
--5 -хĝх- non plastic SILT with some rounded to
- -хĝх- sub-rounded gravel & pebbles and
- -хĝх- sand.
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
--6 -хĝх- SPT values were observed high & SPT-4 19 28 39 67 42.7
- -хĝх- refusal due to the presence of gravel &
- -хĝх- cobbles from 4.5 to 13.5 m depth.
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
--7 -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх- SPT-6 28 36 47 83 59.1
- -хĝх-
--8 -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
--9 -хĝ●ĝ- Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel: SPT/DS-7 33 44 50/3" R
- -хĝ●ĝ- (9.0 ~ 10.0 m)
- -хĝ●ĝ- Yellowish brown to brown in color,
- -хĝ●ĝ- very low to low plastic CLAY with silt,
- -хĝ●ĝ- some rounded to sub-rounded gravel &
--10 -хĝ●ĝ- pebbles and sand.
Geohouse, Sohan, main Islamabad Highway near Faizabad, Islamabad. Tel & Fax: 051-2613232, Email: geohouse2006@gmail.com, Website: www.geoengineers.pk
GEOENGINEERS

Project: Location:

- -хĝ●ĝ- Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel:

- -хĝ●ĝ- (10.0 ~ 20.0 m)
- -хĝ●ĝ- Yellowish brown to brown in color, SPT/DS-8 34 47 50/4" R
- -хĝ●ĝ- very low to low plastic CLAY with silt,
--11 -хĝ●ĝ- some rounded to sub-rounded gravel &
- -хĝ●ĝ- pebbles and sand.
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
--12 -хĝ●ĝ- Disturbed sample was collected at 12 SPT/DS-9 27 45 50/4" R
- -хĝ●ĝ- m depth.
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
--13 -хĝ●ĝ-

- -хĝ●ĝ-

- -хĝ●ĝ- Disturbed sample was collected at 13.5
- -хĝ●ĝ- m depth. SPT/DS-10 36 50/5" - R

- -хĝ●ĝ-
--14 -хĝ●ĝ- SPT was not performed from 15.0 to
- -хĝ●ĝ- 21.0 m depth due to the presence of
- -хĝ●ĝ- gravel & cobbles.

- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
--15 -хĝ●ĝ- Disturbed sample was collected at 15.0 DS-11
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
--16 -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ- Disturbed sample was collected at 16.5 DS-12
--17 -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
--18 -хĝ●ĝ- Disturbed sample was collected at 18.0 DS-13
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
--19 -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ-
- -хĝ●ĝ- Disturbed sample was collected at 19.5
- -хĝ●ĝ- m depth. DS-14
- -хĝ●ĝ-
--20 -хĝ●ĝ-
GEOENGINEERS

Project: Location:

- -хĝ●ĝ- Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel:

- -хĝ●ĝ- (20.0 ~ 21.0 m)
- -хĝ●ĝ- Yellowish brown to brown in color,
- -хĝ●ĝ- non plastic SILT with some rounded to
--21 -хĝ●ĝ- sub-rounded gravel & pebbles and DS-15
- -х-х- sand.
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (21.0 ~ 23.5 m)
- -х-х- Dark brown to brown in color, low
--22 -х-х- plastic and very stiff CLAY with silt,
- -х-х- some very fine-grained sand and traces
- -х-х- of gravel & pebbles.
- -х-х- UDS-1
- -х-х-
--23 -х-х-

- -х-х-

- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (23.5 ~ 30.0 m)
- -х-х- Yellowish brown to brown in color,

- -х-х- low plastic and very stiff to hard
--24 -х-х- CLAY with silt, some very fine- SPT-16 13 17 27 44 31.4
- -х-х- grained sand and traces of gravel &
- -х-х- pebbles.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--25 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Hard soil is observed at 25.5 m depth. SPT-17 16 21 33 54 38.5
- -х-х-
--26 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--27 -х-х- Hard soil is observed at 27.0 m depth. SPT-18 18 24 38 62 44.2
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--28 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Hard soil is observed at 28.5 m depth. UDS-2
- -х-х-
--29 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Hard soil is observed at 30.0 m depth.
--30 -х-х- End of the Borehole SPT-19 21 37 45 82 58.4
GEOENGINEERS

Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi RD: 65+410 km (Sangjani Interchange
Project: Location:
Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase II). Bridge - RD: 65+390 to 65+440 km)
Driller: Qasim khan Drop Height: 30" Coordinates: 43S; 300783.00 m E, 3728453.00 m N
Final Depth: (m) 50 Geologist: Mazhar Hussain Site Inspector : Fareedullah

- Fill Material: (0.0 ~ 2.0 m)

- Dark brown, low plastic, soft, CLAY
- with silt, some gravel & pebbles.
-
--1
-
- SPT/DS-1 3 7 11 18 10.1
-
-
--2 -х-х- Silty CLAY: (2.0 ~ 3.0 m)
- -х-х- Light brown to dark brown, low to
- -х-х- medium plastic, soft to firm, CLAY
- -х-х- with silt.
- -х-х-
--3 -хĝх- Gravelly Silty CLAY: (3.0 ~ 6.0 m) SPT/DS-2 18 24 36 60 33.8

- -хĝх- Yellowish brown to brownish brown in

- -хĝх- color, low plastic CLAY with silt and
- -хĝх-

some rounded to sub-rounded gravel &
- -хĝх- pebbles.
--4 -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх- SPT values were observed as Refusal SPT/DS-3 35 50/2" - R

- -хĝх- due to the presence of gravel &
- -хĝх- cobbles.
--5 -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
--6 -х-х- Silty CLAY: (6.0 ~ 10.0 m) SPT-4 8 11 15 26 16.6
- -х-х- low to medium plastic and stiff to very
- -х-х- stiff CLAY with silt.
- -х-х-
--7 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Very stiff soil is observed at 7.5 m SPT-5 11 12 16 28 20.0
- -х-х- depth.
- -х-х-
--8 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Very stiff soil is observed at 9.0 m
--9 -х-х- depth. SPT-6 10 14 17 31 22.1
- -х-х- Thin layer (0.5 m) of fine-grained
- -х-х- SAND is observed at 9.0 m depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--10 -х-х-
GEOENGINEERS

Project: Location:

- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (10.0 ~ 16.0 m)

- -х-х- low to medium plastic and very stiff SPT-7 11 13 19 32 22.8
- -х-х- CLAY with silt.
--11 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--12 -х-х- Undisturbed sample was collected at UDS-1
- -х-х- 12 m depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--13 -х-х-

- -х-х-

- -х-х- Very stiff soil is observed at 13.5 m
- -х-х- depth. SPT-8 12 13 24 37 26.4

- -х-х-
--14 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--15 -х-х- Very stiff soil is observed at 15.0 m SPT-9 12 15 25 40 28.5
- -х-х- depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--16 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ Sandy GRAVEL & COBBLES with
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ some Boulders: (16.0 ~ 17.5 m)
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ Angular to sub angular & rounded to
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ sub rounded GRAVEL & COBBLES SPT/DS-10 26 50/2" - R
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ with some boulders of Sandstone &
--17 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ Limestone origin and fine to coarse-
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ grained sand.
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (17.5 ~ 20.0 m)
- -х-х- Light brown to brown in color, low to
--18 -х-х- medium plastic and very stiff to hard SPT-11 15 18 27 45 32.1
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--19 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--20 -х-х-
GEOENGINEERS

Project: Location:

- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (20.0 ~ 21.0 m)

- -х-х- Light brown to brown in color, low to
- -х-х- medium plastic and very stiff to hard
--21 -х-х- SPT-13 16 23 29 52 37.1
- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (21.0 ~ 27.0 m)
- -х-х- low to medium plastic and hard CLAY
--22 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Undisturbed sample was collected at UDS-2
- -х-х- 22.5 m depth.
--23 -х-х-

- -х-х-

- -х-х-
- -х-х-

- -х-х-
--24 -х-х- Hard soil is observed at 24.0 m depth. SPT-14 19 25 32 57 40.6
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--25 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--26 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--27 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ Sandy GRAVEL & COBBLES with SPT-16 50/3" - - R
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ sub rounded GRAVEL & COBBLES
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ with some boulders of Sandstone
--28 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ origin and fine to coarse-grained sand.
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ SPT values were observed as Refusal SPT-17 48 50/1" - R
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ due to the presence of gravel &
--29 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ cobbles at depth of 27.0 to 30.0 m
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ depth.
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
--30 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ Hard soil is observed at 30.0 m depth. SPT-18 22 33 45 78 55.6
GEOENGINEERS

Project: Location:

- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (30.0 ~ 37.0 m)

- -х-х- low to medium plastic and hard CLAY
--31 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--32 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--33 -х-х- Hard soil is observed at 33 m depth. SPT-20 26 37 48 85 60.6

- -х-х-

- -х-х-
- -х-х-

- -х-х-
--34 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--35 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--36 -х-х- Disturbed sample was collected at 36 SPT/DS-22 27 42 50/3" R
- -х-х- m depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--37 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ Sandy GRAVEL & COBBLES with
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ sub rounded GRAVEL & COBBLES SPT/DS-23 37 50/4" - R
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ with some boulders of Sandstone
--38 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ origin and fine to coarse-grained sand.
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
--39 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ Disturbed sample was collected at 39 SPT/DS-24 43 50/3" - R
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ m depth.
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
- ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
--40 ĝ●ĝ●ĝ
GEOENGINEERS

Project: Location:

- -х-х- Silty CLAY: (40.0 ~ 50.0 m)

- -х-х- Reddish brown to brown in color, very
- -х-х- low to low plastic and hard CLAY SPT/DS-25 38 47 50/3" R
- -х-х- with silt and traces of gravel.
--41 -х-х- SPT values were observed as Refusal
- -х-х- due to Hard soil from 40.0 to 50.0 m
- -х-х- depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--42 -х-х- Disturbed sample was collected at 42 SPT/DS-26 32 50/5" - R
- -х-х- m depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--43 -х-х-

- -х-х-

- -х-х- Disturbed sample was collected at 43.5
- -х-х- m depth. SPT/DS-27 36 50/3" - R

- -х-х-
--44 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- m depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--46 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Disturbed sample was collected at 46.5 SPT/DS-29 23 38 50/2" R
- -х-х- m depth.
--47 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- m depth.
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х-
--49 -х-х-
- -х-х-
- -х-х- Disturbed sample was collected at 49.5
- -х-х- m depth. SPT/DS-31 41 50/3" - R
- -х-х-
--50 -х-х- End of the Borehole
APPENDIX – I b
Test Pit Logs
GEOENGINEERS
Geotechnical Engineers, Piling, Tube Well Construction, Drilling, Grouting, Geological
Mapping, Topographic Survey, Feasibility Study of irrigation & Hydel Projects.
Test Pit log

Project: Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II)
Test Pit No: TP-1 Location: RD: 64+530 Weather: Sunny

Ground/Seepage Water Depth: Not encountered Date Started : 27/02/2020 Date Completed: 27/05/2020
27/02/2020
Easting: E: 300317 Excavation: Manual Sample Type: Bulk sample
Coordinates UTM: 43S
Northing: N: 3727778 Geologist: Mazhar Hussain Lab. Technician : Haider Ali Qureshi
Depth (m) 2.5 Width (m) 1.5 Length (m) 1.5
Depth Sample Field Density Test

Legend Description of Material Remarks
(m) Type & no. (FDT)
- Silty CLAY: (0.0 ~ 0.15 m)
- -хĝх- Sandy Gravelly Silty Sandy CLAY:(0.15 ~ 2.5m)
- -хĝх- Dark brown to brown in color, low to non plastic
- -хĝх- CLAY with gravels, silt and traces of sand. Roots
--0.5 -хĝх- of crops are found up to the depth of 1.1m.
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
FDT was performed at 2.5 m depth.

- -хĝх-
- -хĝх-
--1 -хĝх-
- -х●х- Sandy Silty CLAY: (1.1 ~ 2.5 m)
- -х●х- Dark brown to brown in color, low to non plastic
Bulk Sample
- -х●х- CLAY with some silt and some fine-grained sand.
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
--1.5 -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
--2 -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х-
- -х●х- FDT = 1.544 gm/cm3
--2.5 -х●х- Field MC = 18.0 %
- End of the Test Pit
-
-
-
-
--3
-
-
-
-
-
--3.5
-
-
-
-
-
--4
-
-
-
-
-
--4.5
-
-
-
-
-
--5
Geohouse, Sohan, main Islamabad Highway near Faizabad, Islamabad. Tel: & Fax: 051-2613232, E-mail: geohouse2006@gmail.com
APPENDIX – I c
Field Density Test (FDT)
GEOENGINEERS
IN-SITU DENSITY BY SAND CONE METHOD
(AASHTO T-191)
Project: Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of
Date: 27-02-2020
Date:27-05-2020
Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II).
GENERAL DATA
Test No.: 1 - -
Pit No.: TP-1 - -
RD: 64+530 - -
Type of Material: Gravelly Silty CLAY - -
Depth of test Hole (cm): 15 - -
MOISTURE CONTENT
Container No.: M2 - -
Weight of container (gms.): 10.4 - -
Weight of wet soil + container (gms.): 63.4 - -
Weight of oven-dry soil + container (gms.): 55.3 - -
Weight of water (gms.): 8.1 - -
Weight of oven-dry soil (gms.): 44.9 - -
Natural Moisture Content (%): 18.0 - -
Oven-Dry Method determination (%): [ref: ASTM D2216] 18.0 - -
TEST DATA
Weight of soil from test pit + container (gms.): 4052 - -
Weight of container (gms.): 24 - -
Weight of soil from test pit (gms.): 4028 - -
Weight of residual sand + container before test (gms.): 8060 - -
Weight of residual sand + container after test (gms.): 3362 - -
Weight of residual sand used (gms.): 4698 - -
Cone calibration (gms.): 1648 - -
Weight of residual sand in test pit (gms.): 3050 - -
3
Unit weight of residual sand (gms/cms ): 1.380 - -
3
Volume of test pit (cms ): 2210.1 - -
3
Wet density of soil (gms/cms ): 1.823 - -
3
Field Dry Density (gms/cms ): 1.544 - -
3
Maximum dry density (gms/cms ): 1.762 - -
Compaction achieved (%): 88 - -
Remarks:
Tested by: Checked by:

Haider Ali Qureshi Aslam Hussain
Appendix-II Laboratory Test Results
a) Boreholes
b) Test Pits
c) Water Quality
APPENDIX – II a
Laboratory Test Results
for Boreholes
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)
Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design

Project:- Date: 10-06-2020
of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II).
BH / TP No: BH-1 Depth (m): 3.0 Sample : SPT/DS-2
Sieve opening Cumulative

Weight
Grading as per
retained Weight Remarks
ASTM D-422 Retention Passing
inch mm. (gms.) retain
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 103.4 103.4 20.7 79.3
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 68.3 171.7 34.3 65.7
Coarse # 10 2.00 23.7 195.4 39.0 61.0

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 34.3 229.7 45.9 54.1
Fine # 200 0.075 139.7 369.4 73.8 26.2
Silt-Clay Pan 1.9
Wet wash analysis (ASTM D-422) Particle Distribution
Weight of fresh sample before washing (gms.): 500.7 Boulder/Cobbles (%): 21
Weight of oven-dry sample after washing (gms.): 371.3 Gravel (%): 14
Weight of material finer than # 200 (gms.): 129.4 Sand (%): 39
Material finer than # 200 (%): 25.8 Silt / Clay (%): 26
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Project: Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II). Date: 10-06-2020
Passing
Borehole/Test Pit No: BH-1 Depth (m): 3.0 Sample No. SPT/DS-2 Material:
# 40 Sieve
DESCRIPTION LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT 27
No. of blows: 26
Container No.: 25

Weight of container (gms.): 24
Weight of wet soil + container (gms.): 23
Weight of oven-dry soil + container (gms.):

NON-PLASTIC 22
Weight of water (gms.):

21
Weight of oven-dry soil (gms.):

20
1
Moisture Content (%): No. of blows
Liquid Limit: - Plastic Limit: - Sieve 4 #10 #40 #200

Analysis
Plasticity Index: - Group Index: - (% Passing) 65.7 61.0 54.1 26.2
Remarks: Material is classified as A-1-b as per ASTM- D-2487 soil classification.

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)

BH / TP No: BH-1 Depth (m): 6.0 Sample : SPT-4

Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 153.1 153.1 30.6 69.4
Coarse # 10 2.00 31.7 184.8 37.0 63.0

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 27.3 212.1 42.4 57.6
Fine # 200 0.075 56.6 268.7 53.7 46.3
Silt-Clay Pan 1.7
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
Borehole/Test Pit No: BH-1 Depth (m): 6.0 Sample No. SPT-4 Material:
# 40 Sieve
No. of blows: 26
Container No.: 25

Weight of container (gms.): 24

NON-PLASTIC 22
Weight of water (gms.):

21

20
1

Analysis
Remarks: Material is classified as A-4 as per ASTM- D-2487 soil classification.

GEOENGINEERS
Geotechnical Engineers, Piling, Tube well Construction, Drilling, Grouting, Geological
Mapping, Topographic Survey, Feasibility Study of Irrigational & Hydel Projects
Direct Shear Test

Project Name :
Location :
Bore Hole No = BH-1

Depth (m) = 7.5
Unit Weight (pcf) = 116.4
Insitu Moisture Content ( %) = -
Sample Type =
Under Saturation Condition

Sample Area Dial Ring Factor Normal Shear Stress
Sample No Applied Load (lb)
(Sq ft) Reading (lbs/div) Stress (psf) (psf)
1 20 0.029 60.2 0.4 690 830

2 40 0.029 78.3 0.4 1379 1080
3 60 0.029 93.4 0.4 2069 1288
1600
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
0 1000 2000 3000
Angle of Friction 18.4°

Undrained Cohesion (Psf) 608
Tested by Checked by
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Geo House, Sohan, Main Highway, near Faizabad, Islamabad. Tel: 0512613232
Website : geoengineers.pk, Email: geohouse2006@gmail.com
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)


Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 120.3 120.3 34.3 65.7
Coarse # 10 2.00 11.3 131.6 37.6 62.4

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 14.3 145.9 41.7 58.3
Fine # 200 0.075 19.9 165.8 47.3 52.7
Silt-Clay Pan 1.6
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
# 40 Sieve
DESCRIPTION LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT

29
No. of blows: 33 25 18 28
Container No.: B6 D5 A5 Z7 Z3 27

Weight of container (gms.): 23.0 23.7 23.4 12.3 11.8 26
25
Weight of wet soil + container (gms.): 53.6 47.5 59.8 14.9 16.1
24
Weight of oven-dry soil + container (gms.): 48.2 42.6 51.6 14.5 15.3
23
Weight of water (gms.): 5.4 4.9 8.2 0.4 0.8
22
Weight of oven-dry soil (gms.): 25.2 18.9 28.2 2.2 3.5
21
1 10 100
Moisture Content (%): 21.4 25.9 29.1 18.2 22.9 No. of blows
Liquid Limit: 25.9 Plastic Limit: 20.5 Sieve 4 #10 #40 #200
Analysis
Plasticity Index: 5 Group Index: - (% Passing) 65.7 62.4 58.3 52.7

GEOENGINEERS
Direct Shear Test

Project Name :
Location :
Bore Hole No = BH-1

Depth (m) = 15
Sample Type =

1 20 0.029 65.4 0.4 690 902

2 40 0.029 80.1 0.4 1379 1105
3 60 0.029 94.6 0.4 2069 1305
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
0 1000 2000 3000

_______________________________________________________________________________________
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)

BH / TP No: BH-1 Depth (m): 21.0 Sample : DS-15

Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 24.0 24.0 6.9 93.1
Coarse # 10 2.00 6.0 30.0 8.6 91.4

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 13.1 43.1 12.3 87.7
Fine # 200 0.075 19.0 62.1 17.7 82.3
Silt-Clay Pan 1.6
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
Borehole/Test Pit No: BH-1 Depth (m): 21.0 Sample No. DS-15 Material:
# 40 Sieve
No. of blows: 33 25 17 26
Container No.: A4 E4 B2 M2 W2 25

Weight of wet soil + container (gms.): 57.3 61.5 69.0 13.6 13.9 23
Weight of oven-dry soil + container (gms.): 51.8 53.7 59.0 13.1 13.5 22

21

20
1 10 100
Analysis

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE TEST
(ASTM D-2166)
DATA SHEET
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3)
Project:
Project (Phase-II).
Borehole: BH-1 Depth (m): 22.5 Sample No. UDS-1 Date of test: 10-06-2020
II. TEST DETAILS

Initial specimen diameter, D o : mm 63.5 Initial specimen area, A o : m2 0.0032
Initial specimen Length, L o : mm 127 Initial specimen volume, V o : m3 0.0004
Moist mass of specimen M : g 767 Bulk density: kg/m3 1908.0
Deformation indiator type : Dial gauge
Deformation dial gauge converstion factor, K L :x10 -3 mm
Force measurement instrument type: Dial gauge
160
140
Axial Stress (kN/m2)
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Axial Strain %
III. RESULT
Unconfined compressive strength q u (kPa) = 140.44
Undrained shear strength S u (kPa)= 70.22
Tested By: Checked By:

(ASTM D-2166)
DATA SHEET
Project:
Project (Phase-II).
II. TEST DETAILS

180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Axial Strain %
III. RESULT

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)

BH / TP No: BH-1 Depth (m): 30.0 Sample : SPT-19

Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 13.1 13.1 4.4 95.6
Coarse # 10 2.00 7.1 20.2 6.7 93.3

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 5.7 25.9 8.6 91.4
Fine # 200 0.075 23.3 49.2 16.4 83.6
Silt-Clay Pan 1.9
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
Borehole/Test Pit No: BH-1 Depth (m): 30.0 Sample No. SPT-19 Material:
# 40 Sieve

27
No. of blows: 33 25 17
26
Container No.: B4 B3 B5 G3 A1

25
Weight of container (gms.): 21.9 22.9 23.7 11.3 10.1
24
Weight of water (gms.): 6.4 7.0 7.2 0.8 0.8 22

21
1 10 100
Analysis

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)


Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 69.8 69.8 23.1 76.9
Coarse # 10 2.00 10.6 80.4 26.6 73.4

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 18.1 98.5 32.5 67.5
Fine # 200 0.075 17.2 115.7 38.2 61.8
Silt-Clay Pan 1.3
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
# 40 Sieve
No. of blows: 32 24 17 26
Container No.: A6 E1 B7 W3 M1 25

Weight of wet soil + container (gms.): 56.3 63.5 63.3 13.7 13.6 23

21

20
1 10 100
Analysis

GEOENGINEERS
Direct Shear Test

Project Name :
Location :
Bore Hole No = BH-2

Depth (m) = 6
Sample Type =

1 20 0.029 82.9 0.4 690 1143

2 40 0.029 87.6 0.4 1379 1208
3 60 0.029 94.1 0.4 2069 1298
1400
1350
1300
1250
1200
1150
1100
1050
1000
0 1000 2000 3000

_______________________________________________________________________________________
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)

BH / TP No: BH-2 Depth (m): 9 Sample : SPT-6

Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 201.3 201.3 51.0 49.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 79.0 280.3 71.0 29.0
Coarse # 10 2.00 7.3 287.6 72.8 27.2

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 31.0 318.6 80.7 19.3
Fine # 200 0.075 20.8 339.4 85.9 14.1
Silt-Clay Pan 3.0
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
Borehole/Test Pit No: BH-2 Depth (m): 9 Sample No. SPT-6 Material:
# 40 Sieve

26
No. of blows:
25
Container No.:

24
Weight of container (gms.):

NON-PLASTIC 22
Weight of water (gms.): 21

20
1

Analysis
Remarks: Material is classified as A-1-a as per ASTM- D-2487 soil classification.

(ASTM D-2166)
DATA SHEET
Project:
Project (Phase-II).
Borehole: BH-2 Depth (m): 12 Sample No. UDS-1 Date of test: 08-06-2020
II. TEST DETAILS

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Axial Strain %
III. RESULT

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)


Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 160.5 160.5 40.8 59.2
Coarse # 10 2.00 9.2 169.7 43.2 56.8

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 11.6 181.3 46.1 53.9
Fine # 200 0.075 55.9 237.2 60.4 39.6
Silt-Clay Pan 1.2

19
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
# 40 Sieve

26
No. of blows:
25
Container No.:

24
Weight of container (gms.):

NON-PLASTIC 22
Weight of water (gms.): 21

20
1

Analysis

(ASTM D-2166)
DATA SHEET
Project:
Project (Phase-II).
II. TEST DETAILS

160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Axial Strain %
III. RESULT

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(ASTM D-422)

BH / TP No: BH-2 Depth (m): 24 Sample : SPT-14

Weight
Grading as per
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Coarse 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Cobble
Medium 1 25.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Gravel Fine #4 4.75 21.0 21.0 6.8 93.2
Coarse # 10 2.00 8.7 29.7 9.7 90.3

Sand
Medium # 40 0.425 8.5 38.2 12.5 87.5
Fine # 200 0.075 11.2 49.4 16.1 83.9
Silt-Clay Pan 0.5
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:
ATTERBERG LIMITS
(ASTM D-4318)
Passing
Borehole/Test Pit No: BH-2 Depth (m): 24 Sample No. SPT-14 Material:
# 40 Sieve

29
28
Container No.: A7 C5 B4 Z7 W8

27
26
Weight of water (gms.): 7.9 8.0 9.2 0.6 0.7 24

23
1 10 100
Analysis

GEOENGINEERS
Direct Shear Test

Project Name :
Location :
Bore Hole No = BH-2

Depth (m) = 27
Sample Type =

1 20 0.029 29.1 0.4 690 401

2 40 0.029 62.5 0.4 1379 862
3 60 0.029 89.6 0.4 2069 1236
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 1000 2000 3000

_______________________________________________________________________________________
GEOENGINEERS
Direct Shear Test

Project Name :
Location :
Bore Hole No = BH-2

Depth (m) = 32
Sample Type =

1 20 0.029 87.4 0.4 690 1206

2 40 0.029 93.1 0.4 1379 1284
3 60 0.029 99.8 0.4 2069 1377
1500
1450
1400
1350
1300
1250
1200
1150
1100
0 1000 2000 3000

_______________________________________________________________________________________
GEOENGINEERS
Direct Shear Test

Project Name :
Location :
Bore Hole No = BH-2

Depth (m) = 47
Sample Type =

1 20 0.029 83.6 0.4 690 1153

2 40 0.029 89.8 0.4 1379 1239
3 60 0.029 95.6 0.4 2069 1319
1400
1350
1300
1250
1200
1150
1100
1050
0 1000 2000 3000

_______________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX – II b
for Test Pits
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
(AASHTO T 27)
Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of
Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3) Project (Phase-II).
TP No: TP-1 (64+530) Depth (m): 2.5 Sample No: TP-1

Weight
Grading as per
AASHTO-M145 Retention Passing
(%) (%)
(gms.)
Cobble 3 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Coarse 3/4 19.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Gravel
#4 4.75 26.9 26.9 9.0 91.0

Fine
# 10 2.00 11.6 38.5 12.8 87.2
Coarse # 40 0.425 17.0 55.5 18.5 81.5

Sand
Fine # 200 0.075 52.4 107.9 35.9 64.1
Silt-Clay Pan 1.3
Wet wash analysis (AASHTO T-11) Particle Distribution
Weight of fresh sample before washing (gms.): 300.3 Cobbles (%) 0
100
80
Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve opening (mm.)
Remarks:

ATTERBERG LIMITS
(AASHTO T 89 & 90)
Passing
Test Pit No: TP-1 (64+530) Depth (m): 2.5 Sample No. TP-1 Material:
# 40 Sieve

26
25
Container No.: A9 D5 B1 Z3 M2

24
23
22
21

20

19
1 10 100
Analysis
Remarks: Material is classified as A-4 as per AASHTO M-145 soil classification.

GEOENGINEERS
Moisture-Density Relationship of Soil
(AASHTO T-180)
Project: Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design

Date: 06-06-2020
Material: Natural Soil /

Test Pit # : TP-1 (64+530)
Embankment
Test method: D No. of blows: 56

3
Weight of mould (gms.): 4124 Volume of mould (cms ): 2168.86
Weight of rammer (gms.): 4648 Rammering height (in.): 18
TEST DATA
Observation No. 1 2 3 4 5
Weight of compacted soil + mould (gms.): 8053 8230 8416 8495 8419
Weight of compacted soil (gms.): 3929 4106 4292 4371 4295

3
Wet density of compacted soil (gms/cms ): 1.812 1.893 1.979 2.015 1.980
MOISTURE CONTENT
Container No.: 1 2 3 4 5
Moisture Content (%): 5.4 7.8 10.2 12.7 15.5
Dry Density of compacted soil (gms/cms3): 1.719 1.756 1.796 1.789 1.715
Maximum Dry Density (gms/cms3): 1.800 Optimum Moisture Content (%): 11.2
1.810
1.800
1.790
Dry Density (gms/cms3)
1.780
1.770
1.760
1.750
1.740
1.730
1.720
1.710
4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0

GEOENGINEERS
California Bearing Ratio (AASHTO T-193)
Project:Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design
Date: 10-06-2020
Test Pit # :TP-1 (64+530) Material: Natural Soil / Embankment
Area of plunger (cms2): 19.35 Load Ring Calibration factor (Kgs.): 24

Dry Density determination Moisture Content
No. of rammer blows: 10 30 65 Moisture container No.: A B C
Mould No.: 1 2 3 Mass of container (gms.): 23.28 17.0 18.16
Mould Mass (gms.): 5434 5236 5274 Mass of wet soil + container (gms.): 151.4 139.4 144.4
Mould volume (cms3): 3180 3180 3180 Mass of dry soil + container (gms.): 138.4 127.3 131.8
Mass of mould + soil (gms.): 11245 11236 11648 Mass of water (gms.): 13.0 12.1 12.6
Mass of soil (gms.): 5811 6000 6374 Mass of oven dry soil (gms.): 115.1 110.3 113.6
Wet density of soil (gms/cms3): 1.827 1.887 2.004 Moisture Content (%): 11.3 11.0 11.1
Moisture container No.: A B C Maximum Dry Density (gms/cms3): 1.800
Dry density of soil (gms/cms3): 1.642 1.700 1.804 Optimum Moisture Content (%): 11.2
No. of rammer blows: 10 30 65

(Kg/cms2)
(Kg/cms2)
(Kg/cms2)
C. B. R.
C. B. R.
C. B. R.
Penetration
reading
reading
reading
Load
Load
Load
Dial
Dial
Dial
(%)
(%)
(%)
Minute mm.
0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
0.5 0.635 1 1.2 2 2.5 3 3.7
1.0 1.27 2 2.5 3 3.7 5 6.2
1.5 1.91 2 2.5 3 3.7 6 7.4
2.0 2.54 3 3.7 5.3 4 5.0 7.1 7 8.7 12.4
2.5 3.18 3 3.7 4 5.0 7 8.7
3.0 3.81 3 3.7 5 6.2 8 9.9
3.5 4.45 4 5.0 5 6.2 9 11.2
4.0 5.08 4 5.0 4.7 5 6.2 5.9 10 12.4 11.8
5.0 6.35 4 5.0 6 7.4 10 12.4
10 30 65 Swell Percentage
14
12
Load (Kgs/cms3)
10 Mould No.: 1 2 3
8
6 0 Hrs. reading: 0.00 0.00 0.00
4
2 96 Hrs. reading: 0.85 0.80 0.70
0
0.00 0.63 1.27 1.90 2.54 3.17 3.81 4.44 5.08 5.71 6.35 Swell %age 0.73 0.69 0.60
Penetration (mm.)

GEOENGINEERS
California Bearing Ratio (AASHTO T-193)
Project: Geotechnical Investigations for Feasibility Study & Detailed Design of Rawalpindi Ring Road (R3)
Date: 10-06-2020
Project (Phase-II).
Test Pit # : TP-1 (64+530)
13
12
11
10
9
CBR (%)
3
1.620 1.640 1.660 1.680 1.700 1.720 1.740 1.760 1.780 1.800 1.820
Dry Density (gm/cm3)
*%CBR at 90% mdd calculated with Slope Linear Equation

APPENDIX – II c
for Water Quality
Punjab-EPA Certified
Lahore Laboratory
Sample Details
Job Ref. No: GCEC-PK-113/2019 Client Name: Zeeruk International Pvt. Ltd.
Sampling Method: APHA 1060-B & C Sample Matrix: Ground Water Sample
No. of Samples: One Sample Date: 10-04-2020
Sample Receipt Date: 11-04-2020 Sampled By: GCEC
Sample Identification
02 Sungjani Village Coordinates: 33°40'28.6" N 72°51'04.6" E
Result
Parameters Analysis Method Unit LOR PEQS
02
PHYSICAL & CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
pH APHA-4500H+ B - 0.01 7.27 6.5-8.5
Odor In-house - - Odorless Non-Objectionable
Taste In-house - - Salty Non-Objectionable
Color APHA-2120 B/C Pt/Co 1.0 ND ≤15 TCU
Turbidity APHA-2130 B NTU - ND <5 NTU
Total Hardness APHA-2340 C mg/l 0.1 588 < 500 mg/l
Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) APHA-2540 C mg/l 1.0 1159 < 1000
Ammonia APHA-4500-NH3-B mg/l 0.002 ND -
Chloride APHA-4500Cl- B mg/l 0.24 95.97 < 250
Cyanide (Cn) APHA-4500CN E mg/l 0.01 ND ≤ 0.05
Fluoride (F) APHA-4500F- C mg/l 0.01 ND ≤ 1.5
Nitrite APHA-4500NO2 B mg/l 0.01 ND ≤ 3 (P)
Nitrate APHA-4500NO3 B mg/l 0.1 1.6 ≤ 50
Phenolic Compound APHA-5530 D mg/l 0.01 ND -
Residual Chlorine APHA-4500Cl G mg/l 0.1 ND 0.2-0.5
Aluminum (Al) APHA-3500Al B mg/l 0.028 <0.028 ≤ 0.2
Cadmium APHA-3500Cd B mg/l 0.0028 <0.0028 0.01
Copper APHA-3500Cu B mg/l 0.0045 <0.0045 2
Chromium APHA-3500Cr B mg/l 0.0054 <0.0054 ≤ 0.05 (P)
Mercury APHA-3500-Hg B mg/l 0.0008 <0.0008 ≤ 0.001
Antimony (Sb) APHA-3500Sb B mg/l - ND ≤ 0.005 (P)
Nickel APHA-3500-Ni B mg/l 0.008 <0.008 ≤ 0.02
Zinc APHA-3500-Zn B mg/l 0.0033 <0.0033 5.0
Arsenic APHA-3500As B mg/l 0.01 0.01 ≤ 0.05 (P)
Barium APHA-3500Ba B mg/l 0.031 <0.031 0.7
Manganese APHA-3500-Mn B mg/l 0.0016 <0.0016 ≤ 0.5
Iron APHA-3500-Fe-B mg/l 0.1 0.53 -
Boron APHA-4500B-C mg/l 0.1 <0.1 0.3
Lead APHA-3500-Pb B mg/l 0.013 <0.013 ≤ 0.05
Selenium APHA-3500Se C mg/l - ND 0.01 (P)
Sulphate APHA-4500-SO4C mg/l 0.41 302.52 -
Potassium APHA-3500K-B mg/l 0.0009 0.05 -
Sodium APHA-3500-Na-B mg/l 0.0037 4.19 -
3500 Ca D. EDTA
Calcium mg/l 0.4 128.0 -
Titrimetric Method
Chlorine APHA-4500Cl-B mg/l 0.1 ND 0.2-0.5
Page 3 of 7
Lahore Laboratory
Result
Parameters Analysis Method Unit LOR PEQS
02
MICROBIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Total Coliforms APHA:9222 B CFU/100ml 03 0/100ml
Faecal Coliforms (Ecoli) APHA:9222 D CFU/100ml Absent 0/100ml
Faecal Streptococcci APHA:9230 D CFU/100ml Absent -
Pueudomonas Aeruginosa APHA:9213 D CFU/100ml Absent -
Ecoli APHA:9222 D CFU/100ml Absent -
Abbreviations:
ND: Not Detected
LOR: Limit of Reporting
PEQS: Punjab Environmental Quality Standard
Note:
* Uncertainty of all the parameters and laboratory conditions at the time of analysis will be provided as per client’s requirement. The lab environmental conditions
are maintained at 25±5C° and humidity at 50±15%.
Lab Manager
Page 4 of 7
Lahore Laboratory
Sample Details
Job Ref. No: GCEC-PK-113/2019 Client Name: Zeeruk International Pvt. Ltd.
Sampling Method: APHA 1060-B & C Sample Matrix: Surface Water Sample
No. of Samples: One Sample Date: 10-04-2020
Sample Receipt Date: 11-04-2020 Sampled By: GCEC
Sample Identification
03 Sangjani Nallah Coordinates: 33°40'16.0" N 72°50'51.0" E
Result
Parameters Analysis Method Unit LOR
03
PHYSICAL & CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Temperature - 0C - 25.1
pH APHA-4500H B+ pH unit 0.01 7.19
Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) APHA-2540 C mg/l 1.0 625.0
Color APHA-2120 B/C Pt/Co 1.0 98.0
Oil and Grease USEPA-1664 mg/l 0.2 ND
Biological Oxygen Demand APHA, 5210 mg/l 1.0 5.0
Chemical Oxygen Demand APHA-5220-D mg/l 1.0 17
Total Suspended Solid APHA-2540-D mg/l 1.0 124.0
Phenolic Compound APHA-5530 D mg/l 0.01 0.01
Chloride (Cl) APHA-4500Cl- B mg/l 0.24 67.97
Fluoride (F) APHA-4500F- C mg/l 0.01 ND
Cyanide (CN) APHA-4500CN F mg/l 0.01 ND
Detergent APHA-5540 B mg/l - ND
Sulphate APHA-4500-SO4C mg/l 0.41 179.04
Sulphide APHA-4500-S2-E mg/l 0.4 ND
Ammonia APHA-4500-NH3-B mg/l 0.002 ND
Silver APHA-3500Ag-B mg/l 0.0032 <0.0032
Cadmium APHA-3500Cd B mg/l 0.0028 <0.0028
Chromium APHA-3500Cr B mg/l 0.0054 <0.0054
Copper APHA-3500Cu B mg/l 0.0045 <0.0045
Lead APHA-3500-Pb B mg/l 0.013 <0.013
Mercury APHA-3500-Hg B mg/l 0.0008 <0.0008
Nickel APHA-3500-Ni B mg/l 0.008 <0.008
Zinc APHA-3500-Zn B mg/l 0.0033 <0.0033
Arsenic APHA-3500As B mg/l 0.01 0.01
Barium APHA-3500Ba B mg/l 0.031 <0.031
Manganese APHA-3500-Mn B mg/l 0.0016 <0.0016
Iron APHA-3500-Fe-B mg/l 0.1 0.32
Boron APHA-4500B-C mg/l 0.1 <0.1
Total Chlorine APHA-4500Cl-B mg/l 0.1 ND
Selenium APHA-3500Se C mg/l - ND
Abbreviations:
ND: Not Detected
LOR: Limit of Reporting
Note:
*Uncertainty of all the parameters and laboratory conditions at the time of analysis will be provided as per client’s requirement. The lab environmental conditions are
maintained at 25±5C° and humidity at 50±15%.
Lab Manager
Page 7 of 7
Appendix-III Site Photographs
a) Boreholes
b) Test Pits
APPENDIX – III a
Site Photographs for Boreholes
Site photographs of BH-1 at proposed Nullah Bridge at RD:
64+500
Site photographs of BH-2 at proposed Sangjani Interchange
at RD: 65+410
APPENDIX – III b
Site Photographs for Test Pits
Site photographs of TP-1 at proposed Nullah Bridge at RD:
64+490 to 64+560

Geotechnical Investigation Report R3 Phase-II (17-09-2020)

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

Geotechnical Investigation Report R3 Phase-II (17-09-2020)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Government of Punjab

RAWALPINDI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (RDA)

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Zeeruk International Pvt. Ltd.

Joint Venture (JV) with

Engineering General Consultant EGC Pvt. Ltd

Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2: Regional Geology ............................................................................................ 5

Chapter 3: Seismology ...................................................................................................... 8

Chapter 4: Field Investigations ....................................................................................... 10

Chapter 5: Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................... 13

Chapter 6: Engineering Analysis ..................................................................................... 17

Chapter 7: Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................... 24

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers June, 2020

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers June, 2020

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers June, 2020

RDA = Rawalpindi Development Authority

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers June, 2020

1.2 Scope of Work

A. Drilling, Sampling & Field Testing

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 1 of 26

 Surface and subsurface water sampling with qaultity testing.

 Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D-422 & AASHTO T 27)

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 2 of 26

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 3 of 26

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 4 of 26

Chapter 2: Regional Geology

Stratigraphic units along proposed Options of Rawalpindi Ring Road

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 5 of 26

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 6 of 26

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 7 of 26

Seismic Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration

1 0.05 to 0.08 Very Low

2A 0.08 to 0.16 Low

2B 0.16 to 0.24 Moderate

3 0.24 to 0.32 High

4 >0.32 Very High

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 8 of 26

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 9 of 26

Chapter 4: Field Investigations

4.1 Description of Boreholes

Borehole Co-ordinates (43 S) Depth

4.2 Excavation of Test Pits

4.3 Field Testing and Collection of Samples

4.3.1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 10 of 26

4.3.2 Field Density Test

4.3.3 Undisturbed Samples (UDS)

4.3.4 Disturbed Samples (DS)

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 11 of 26

Table 4.4: Detail of measured groundwater table/seepage water in drilled boreholes

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 12 of 26

Chapter 5: Laboratory Testing

 Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D-422 & AASHTO T 27)

5.2 Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D 422 & AASHTO T 27)

5.3 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318 & AASHTO T 89 & 90)

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 13 of 26

5.4 Uniaxial Compressive Strength (ASTM D 2166)

5.5 Direct Shear Test (ASTM D 3080)

5.6 Modified Proctor Test (AASHTO T 180-D)

5.7 California Bearing Ratio (AASHTO T 193)

5.8 Chemical Analysis

M/S MTMS Pvt. Ltd. in JV with Geoengineers Page 14 of 26