Final Report on:

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR REPORT FOR

PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT ECOTECH-II,
GREATER NOIDA, U.P.

Submitted to:

ANNEX STEEL METAL WORK

C/O INDIA STEEL SUMMIT PVT. LTD.

Report No. 2023006 Date: 3rd December, 2024

SUBMITTED BY
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Project Description 1
1.2 Purposes of Study 1
1.3 Scope of Work 1

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS 1

2.1 Soil Borings 1
2.2 Groundwater 2

3.0 LABORATORY TESTS 2

4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 2

4.1 Site Stratigraphy 2
4.2 Groundwater 3

5.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3

5.1 General 3
5.2 Liquefaction Susceptibility Assessment 3
5.3 Foundation Type and Depth 3
5.4 Concepts of Analysis 3
5.5 Recommended Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Foundations 4
5.6 Definition of Gross and Net Bearing Pressure 4

6.0 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 5

6.1 Excavation 5
6.2 Foundation Level Preparation 5

7.0 CLOSURE 5

Report No. 2023006 i

 ILLUSTRATIONS

Caption Plate No.

Soil Profiles 1 to 2
Summary of Borehole Profiles 3
Standard Penetration Test results 4
Grain Size Analysis 5 to 8
Shear Test Results 9 to 14
Typical Calculations 15 & 16
Site Photograps 17
------------------------------------------------------

Report No. 2023006 ii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description

This Soil investigation work, whose results are being presented herewith, has been carried
out for Proposed Structure at Ecotech-II, Greater Noida, U.P.

M/s. Aarna Geo Survey Pvt. Ltd. has carried out the geotechnical investigations at the project
site.

1.2 Purposes of Study

The overall purposes of this study are to conduct a geotechnical investigation to evaluate the
stratigraphy at the site and to develop initial geotechnical recommendations for foundation design and
construction.

To accomplish these purposes, the study is being conducted in the following phases:

(i) drilling two (2) boreholes to 15.0 m depth or refusal, whichever is earlier; to evaluate the
stratigraphy at the site and to collect soil samples for laboratory testing;

(ii) testing selected soil samples in the laboratory to determine pertinent index and engineering
properties; and

(iii) analyzing all field and laboratory data to develop geotechnical recommendations for foundation
design and construction.

1.3 Scope of Work

The following table presents details of tests included in this report:

 Exploratory Boreholes

S. No. Borehole Designation Borehole Termination Depth, m

1 BH-1 15.0

2 BH-2 15.0

 The depths referred to in this report are with respect to the existing ground levels (EGL) at the time
of our field investigation.

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

2.1 Soil Borings

The borehole was progressed using mechanized shell and auger drilling rig to the specified
depth. The diameter of the borehole was 150 mm. Where caving of the borehole occurred, casing was
used to keep the borehole stable. The work was in general accordance with IS: 1892-1979 RA 2007.

Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) was conducted in the boreholes at 1.5-3.0 m depth interval
up to 25 m depth. The tests were conducted by connecting a split spoon sampler to ‘A’ rods and driving
it by 45 cm using a 63.5 kg hammer falling freely from a height of 75 cm. The tests were conducted in
accordance with IS: 2131-1981.

Report No. 2023006 Page 1 of 9

 The number of blows for each 15 cm of penetration of the split spoon sampler was recorded.
The blows required to penetrate the initial 15 cm of the split spoon for seating the sampler is ignored due
to the possible presence of loose materials or cuttings from the drilling operation. The cumulative
number of blows required to penetrate the balance 30 cm of the 45 cm sampling interval is termed the
SPT value or the ‘N’ value.

Where the split spoon sampler did not penetrate the initial 15 cm seating in a total of 100 blows,
it is indicated “Ref" for an indicated amount of penetration. The ‘N’ values are presented on the soil
profile for each borehole.

Disturbed samples were collected from the split spoon after conducting SPT. The samples were
preserved in transparent polythene bags. Undisturbed soil samples were collected by attaching 75 mm
diameter thin walled ‘Shelby’ tubes and driving the sampler by light-hammering using a 63.5 kg hammer
in accordance with IS: 2132-1986. The tubes were sealed with wax at both ends. All samples were
transported to our NABL-accredited laboratory at New Delhi for further examination and testing.

2.2 Groundwater

Groundwater level was measured in the boreholes after drilling and sampling was completed.
The measured water levels are recorded on the individual soil profiles.

3.0 LABORATORY TESTS

The laboratory testing has been carried out in our laboratory. The quality procedures in our
laboratory conform to ISO/IEC-17025-2017.

Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples to determine their physical and
engineering properties. The testing procedures were in accordance with current applicable IS
specifications.
The following tests were conducted on selected soil and water samples recovered from the
borehole:

Laboratory Test IS Code Referred

Bulk Density By calculations
Natural moisture content IS : 2720 (Part-2)-1973, RA-2010
Specific Gravity IS : 2720 (Part-3)-1980, RA-2007
Grain size analysis IS : 2720 (Part-4)-1985, RA-2010
Unconsolidated Undrained Tri-axial shear test IS : 2720 (Part-11)-1993, RA-2010
Direct shear test- Consolidated Drained (DCD) IS : 2720 (Part-13)-1986, RA-2010

4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 Site Stratigraphy

The natural soils at the site generally comprises of fine sand to about 9.0 m depth. Below this,
sandy silt is met to the final explored depth of 15.0 m.

Field SPT-N values range from 8 to 15 to about 5 m depth. Below this, the field SPT-N values
range from 9 to 29 to about 10 m depth and 14 to 39 to the maximum explored depth of 15 m depth.

A summary of the borehole profile is illustrated on Plate 3. Plots of corrected SPT values versus
depth are presented on Plate 4.

Report No. 2023006 Page 2 of 9

 4.2 Groundwater

Ground water was encountered about 12.0 m depth during the period of our field investigation
(December, 2023). Fluctuations may occur in the measured water levels due to seasonal variations in
rainfall and surface evaporation rates.

5.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 General

A suitable foundation for any structure should have an adequate factor of safety against
exceeding the bearing capacity of the supporting soils. Also, the vertical movements due to compression
of the soils should be within tolerable limits for the structure. We consider that foundation designed in
accordance with the recommendations given herein will satisfy these criteria.

5.2 Liquefaction Susceptibility Assessment

Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of a granular material from a solid to a liquefied

state as a consequence of increased pore-water pressure and reduced effective stress. Increased pore
pressure may be induced by the tendency of granular materials to compact when subjected to cyclic
shear deformation, such as in the event of an earthquake.

As per IS: 1893 (Part 1) – 2016, liquefaction is likely in loose fine sand (SP) below the water
table. The following points are highlighted for the soils with regard to liquefaction susceptibility
assessment:

1. The surficial soils at the site generally consist of fine sand or sandy silt to the final explored
depth of 15 m depth.

2. Field SPT-N values generally range from 8 to 29 to about 9.0 m depth. Below this, SPT values
exceed 14.

3. Groundwater was met about 12.0 m depth at the time of our field investigation (December,
2023).

Reviewing the soil gradation, N-values and groundwater level, we are of the opinion that the
soils at this site are not likely to liquefy in the event of the design earthquake.

According to Fig.1 of IS: 1893 (Part-1)-2016 showing seismic zones, the proposed site falls
under Zone-III. The design for seismic forces should be done considering the project in Zone-IV.

5.3 Foundation Type and Depth

Reviewing the site Stratigraphy, SPT ‘N’ values and laboratory test results, we recommend that
Isolated open spread foundation or raft foundation at or below 1.5 m depth below the existing ground
level may be provided at the site to support the loads of the proposed structure. Recommendations for
the same are provided in section 5.5 of this report.

5.4 Concepts of Analysis

Bearing capacity analysis for isolated or raft foundations has been done in general accordance
with IS: 6403-1981. The bearing capacity equation used is as follows:

qnet safe = 1 [cNcc dc+ q(Nq-1) qdq+ 0.5 B N d Rw]

F
where:

Report No. 2023006 Page 3 of 9

 qnet safe = safe net bearing capacity of soil based on the shear failure criterion.
q = overburden pressure
Rw = water table correction factor,
F = Factor of safety, taken as equal to 2.5 in accordance with IS:1904-1986.
c,q, = Shape factors. For Strip footings, c = q =  = 1
For Square footing, c = 1.3, q = 1.2,  = 0.6
dc ,dq, d = Depth factors
For   10, dc = 1 + 0.2 tan (45 +  / 2) D / B, dq = d = 1
For  > 10, dq = d = 1 + 0.1 tan (45 +  / 2) D / B

Appropriate values have been substituted into the bearing capacity equation given above to
compute the safe net bearing capacity. The values have been checked to determine the settlement of
the foundation under the safe bearing pressure. The allowable bearing pressure has been taken as the
lower of the two values computed from the bearing capacity shear failure criterion as well as that
computed from the tolerable settlement criterion.

Settlement analysis has been performed based on SPT values in accordance with Clause 9.1.4
and Fig.9 of IS 8009 (Part 1)-1976 RA 2003.

5.5 Recommended Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Foundations

The following table presents our recommended values of Net allowable bearing pressure for 2-5
m wide Isolated Open Spread foundation or Raft Foundation (Width>6.0m) bearing at or below 1.5 m
depth below the existing ground surface.:

Recommended Net Allowable Bearing

Foundation Embedment Depth below EGL, m Pressure, T/m2
Settlement = 50 mm

1.5 10.0

2.0 11.7

3.0 14.8

*Restricted in shear Criteria

The following points are highlighted with regard to the above recommended net bearing
pressures:

1. The above bearing pressures include a bearing capacity safety factor of 2.5.

2. The appropriate values of net bearing pressure may be selected as per the permissible
settlement criterion.

3. Net bearing pressures for foundations at intermediate depths may be interpolated linearly
between the values given above.

4. The soils at foundation level should be compacted thoroughly using a heavy roller. It should be
ensured that there are no loose pockets at foundation level.

5.6 Definition of Gross and Net Bearing Pressure

For the purposes of this report, the net allowable bearing pressure should be calculated as the
difference between total load on the foundation and the weight of the soil overlying the foundation
divided by the effective area of the foundation. The gross bearing pressure is the total pressure at the

Report No. 2023006 Page 4 of 9

 foundation level including overburden pressure and surcharge load. The following equations may be
used -

qnet = [(Ps + Wf + Ws) / Af] - Sv

qgross = qnet + Sv = (Ps + Wf + Ws) / Af

where:
qnet = net allowable bearing pressure
qgross = gross bearing pressure
Ps = superimposed static load on foundation
Wf = weight of foundation
Ws = weight of soil overlying foundation
Af = effective area of foundation
Sv = overburden pressure at foundation level prior to excavation for foundation.

It may please be noted that safe bearing pressures recommended in this report refer to “net
values”. The gross bearing pressure may be computed by adding the overburden pressure to the net
bearing pressure. Fill placed above EGL should be treated as a surcharge load.

6.0 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 Excavation

Temporary open-cut excavations for foundation construction to about 2-3 depth may be cut
using side slopes of 1-vertical on 0.8~1.0-horizontal. Such slopes are expected to remain stable except
during rains. The engineer should monitor the slopes during excavations. In case excessive sloughing or
caving occurs, the slope may be flattened further to ensure stability.

6.2 Foundation Level Preparation

The area shall be excavated up to the foundation level. All loose soils should be removed and
the exposed foundation bearing surface should be watered and compacted properly using rammers /
rollers.

In case mechanical means like excavators are deployed for excavations, the excavations should
be carried out up to 0.5 m above the proposed level. The last 0.5 m depth of excavation should be
carried out manually, so that the founding soils are not disturbed / loosened.

The surface should be protected from disturbances due to construction activities so that the
foundations may bear on the natural undisturbed ground. We recommend the placement of a 75 to 100
mm thick “blinding layer” of lean concrete to facilitate placement of reinforcing steel and to protect the
soils from disturbance.

7.0 CLOSURE

We are thankful to client to provide the opportunity to perform this investigation by us. We have
pleasure in submitting this report. Please contact us when we can be of further service to you.

TECHNICAL MANAGER For AARNA GEO SURVEY PVT. LTD.

MR. VAIBHAV JAIN PAWAN KUMAR

B.TECH, M. TECH DIRECTOR
(SOIL MECHANICS & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING)

Report No. 2023006 Page 5 of 9

 BH.No. 1 TERMINATION
Project : PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT ECOTECH-II, DEPTH (M)
TABLE NO. 1
GREATER NOIDA, U.P. WATER TABLE : 15.50
12.0 m
Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Triaxial Test

Moisture Content
N-Valuec (Field)

Specific Gravity

Natural Density
0Sample type

Dry Density
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Depth (m)

Confining

Cohesion
Gravel %

Plastic %

Pressure
3

3
Plasticity

Intercept
Liquid %

Angle of
Index %

gms/cm

gms/cm
Sand %

Internal
Friction
2

2
Clay %

Kg/cm

Kg/cm
Silt %

%
0.00 Loose to medium dense grey Fine Sand (SP-SM)
DS1
0.50

1.50 - loose, 0.0 to 3.0 m 0 91 9 0 N.P. N.P. 2.63

SPT1 9
1.95
0.5
2.25 1.71 1.55 10.3 1.0, 1.5 0.00 30o
UDS1
2.55 (DST)
Direct Shear Test
3.00 - medium dense, 3.0 to 9.0 m
SPT2 14
3.45

4.50
SPT3 11
4.95

5.25 2 89 8 1 N.P. N.P. 2.64

UDS2
5.55

6.00
SPT4 14
6.45

7.50
SPT5 16
7.95
0.5
8.25 0 94 6 0 N.P. N.P. 2.63 1.78 1.57 13.1 1.0, 1.5 0.00 31o
UDS3
8.55 (DST)
(9.0m) Direct Shear Test
9.00 Stiff to very stiff brown Sand Silt, low plastic (CL)
SPT6 29
9.45

10.50 - very stiff, 9.0 to 10.5 m 0 36 54 10 30.9 19.4 11.5 2.67

SPT7 14
10.95 - stiff, 10.5 to 11.0 m
 BH.No. 1 TERMINATION
Project : PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT ECOTECH-II, DEPTH (M)
TABLE NO. 1a
GREATER NOIDA, U.P. WATER TABLE : 15.50
12.0 m
Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Triaxial Test

Moisture Content
Specific Gravity

Natural Density
Sample type

Dry Density
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Depth (m)

Confining

Cohesion
Gravel %

Plastic %

Pressure
3

3
Plasticity

Intercept
Liquid %
N-Value

Angle of
Index %

gms/cm

gms/cm
Sand %

Internal
Friction
2

2
Clay %

Kg/cm

Kg/cm
Silt %

%
11.25 Stiff to hard brown Sandy Silt,
UDS4
11.55 low plastic (CL)

12.00 - stiff, 11.0 to 13.5 m 0 32 59 9 31.2 20.3 10.9 2.67

SPT8 14
12.45

13.50 - very stiff, 13.5 to 15.0 m

SPT9 21
13.95

14.25 0 35 52 13 32.6 20.4 12.2 2.69 1.89 1.57 20.6 1,2,3 0.70 8o
UDS5
14.55 (UUT)

15.00 - hard, 13.5 to 15.5 m

SPT10 39
15.45 (15.5m)
 BH.No. 2 TERMINATION
Project : PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT ECOTECH-II, DEPTH (M)
TABLE NO. 2
GREATER NOIDA, U.P. WATER TABLE : 15.50
12.0 m
Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Triaxial Test

Moisture Content
N-Valuec (Field)

Specific Gravity

Natural Density
0Sample type

Dry Density
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Depth (m)

Confining

Cohesion
Gravel %

Plastic %

Pressure
3

3
Plasticity

Intercept
Liquid %

Angle of
Index %

gms/cm

gms/cm
Sand %

Internal
Friction
2

2
Clay %

Kg/cm

Kg/cm
Silt %

%
0.00 Loose to medium dense grey Fine Sand (SP-SM)
DS1
0.50

1.50 0 93 7 0 N.P. N.P. 2.64

SPT1 8
1.95
0.5
2.25 1.68 1.53 9.9 1.0, 1.5 0.00 29o
UDS1
2.55 (DST)
Direct Shear Test
3.00 - medium dense, 3.0 to 6.0 m
SPT2 14
3.45

4.50
SPT3 15
4.95

5.25 0 89 11 0 N.P. N.P. 2.65

UDS2
5.55

6.00
SPT4 10
6.45

7.50 - loose, 6.0 to 9.0 m

SPT5 9
7.95
0.5
8.25 0 90 10 0 N.P. N.P. 2.63 1.76 1.55 13.2 1.0, 1.5 0.00 30o
UDS3
8.55 (DST)
(9.0m) Direct Shear Test
9.00 Very stiff brown Sand Silt, low plastic (CL)
SPT6 26
9.45

10.50 0 39 52 9 31.4 20.2 11.2 2.67

SPT7 19
10.95
 BH.No. 2 TERMINATION
Project : PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT ECOTECH-II, DEPTH (M)
TABLE NO. 2a
GREATER NOIDA, U.P. WATER TABLE : 15.50
12.0 m
Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Triaxial Test

Moisture Content
Specific Gravity

Natural Density
Sample type

Dry Density
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Depth (m)

Confining

Cohesion
Gravel %

Plastic %

Pressure
3

3
Plasticity

Intercept
Liquid %
N-Value

Angle of
Index %

gms/cm

gms/cm
Sand %

Internal
Friction
2

2
Clay %

Kg/cm

Kg/cm
Silt %

%
11.25 Very stiff to hard brown Sandy Silt,
UDS4
11.55 low plastic (CL)

12.00 - very stiff, 11.0 to 15.0 m 0 35 55 10 32.6 21.5 11.1 2.67

SPT8 17
12.45

13.50
SPT9 24
13.95

14.25 2 37 54 7 31.3 19.6 11.7 2.66 1.95 1.61 21.3 1,2,3 0.90 10o
UDS5
14.55 (UUT)

15.00 - hard, 15.0 to 15.5 m

SPT10 36
15.45 (15.5m)
 Fig. 3

BH-1 N-Value BH-2 N-Value

9 8
2
14 14
4
11 15

6 14 10
D E P T H, m

16 9
8
9.0 m 29 9.0 m 26
10
14 19
12.0 m 12.0 m
12 14 17

21 24
14
39 36
16 15.5m 15.5m

SUMMARY OF BOREHOLE PROFILE

LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
Sandy Silt (CL)
Fine Sand (SP-SM)
Water Table
 Fig. 4

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

CORRECTED "N" VALUE

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0

8
DEPTH , m

10

12

14

16

18

20

LEGEND
Symbol BH.No.
BH-1
BH-2
 Fig. 5

SAND
CLAY SILT GRAVEL
FINE MEDIUM COARSE

100

90

80

70
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
PARTICLE SIZE, mm

GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

SYMBOL BH.NO / DEPTH. DESCRIPTION
% % % %

1/1.50 Fine Sand (SP-SM) 0 91 9 0

1/5.25 Fine Sand (SP-SM) 2 89 8 1

1/8.25 Fine Sand (SP-SM) 0 94 6 0

1/10.50 Sandy Silt (CL) 0 36 54 10

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

 Fig. 6

SAND
CLAY SILT GRAVEL
FINE MEDIUM COARSE

100

90

80

70
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
PARTICLE SIZE, mm

GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

SYMBOL BH.NO / DEPTH. DESCRIPTION
% % % %

1/12.00 Sandy Silt (CL) 0 32 59 9

1/14.25 Sandy Silt (CL) 0 35 52 13

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

 Fig. 7

SAND
CLAY SILT GRAVEL
FINE MEDIUM COARSE

100

90

80

70
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
PARTICLE SIZE, mm

GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

SYMBOL BH.NO / DEPTH. DESCRIPTION
% % % %

2/1.50 Fine Sand (SP-SM) 0 93 7 0

2/5.25 Fine Sand (SP-SM) 0 89 11 0

2/8.25 Fine Sand (SP-SM) 0 90 10 0

2/10.50 Sandy Silt (CL) 0 39 52 9

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

 Fig. 8

SAND
CLAY SILT GRAVEL
FINE MEDIUM COARSE

100

90

80

70
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
PARTICLE SIZE, mm

GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

SYMBOL BH.NO / DEPTH. DESCRIPTION
% % % %

2/12.00 Sandy Silt (CL) 0 35 55 10

2/14.25 Sandy Silt (CL) 2 37 54 7

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

 Fig. 9

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

Borehole No : 1 Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.55

Depth : 2.25M "C" Value (kg/cm2) 0
Type of Test: Direct Shear Test "φ" Value Degree 30

2.5

2.0
S H E A R S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

N O R M A L S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )
 Fig. 10

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

Borehole No : 1 Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.57

Depth : 8.25M "C" Value (kg/cm2) 0
Type of Test: Direct Shear Test "φ" Value Degree 31

2.5

2.0
S H E A R S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

N O R M A L S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )
 Fig. 11

UNCONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST

Borehole No: 1 Depth : 14.25m

BULK DENSITY DRY DENSITY MOISTURE CONTENT "C" Value φ Value

2
(gm/cc) (gm/cc) (%) (kg/cm ) (Degree)
1.89 1.57 20.6 0.70 8

5.0

4.0
S H E A R S T R E S S (kg/cm2)

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
N O R M A L S T R E S S (kg/cm2)
 Fig. 12

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

Borehole No : 2 Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.53

Depth : 2.25M "C" Value (kg/cm2) 0
Type of Test: Direct Shear Test "φ" Value Degree 29

2.5

2.0
S H E A R S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

N O R M A L S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )
 Fig. 13

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

Borehole No : 2 Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.55

Depth : 8.25M "C" Value (kg/cm2) 0
Type of Test: Direct Shear Test "φ" Value Degree 30

2.5

2.0
S H E A R S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

N O R M A L S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )
 Fig. 14

UNCONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST

Borehole No: 2 Depth : 14.25m

BULK DENSITY DRY DENSITY MOISTURE CONTENT "C" Value φ Value

(gm/cc) (gm/cc) (%) (kg/cm2) (Degree)
1.95 1.61 21.3 0.90 10

5.0

4.0
S H E A R S T R E S S (kg/cm2)

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
N O R M A L S T R E S S (kg/cm2)
 Fig. 15

Bearing Capacity Analysis for Shallow Foundations

Analysis as per IS 6403-1981

PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT ECOTECH-II, GREATER NOIDA, U.P.

The bearing capacity equation is as follows :

qnet safe = (1/FS){cNczcdc+q(Nq-1)zqdq+0.5BgNgzgdgRw}
where:
qnet safe = safe net bearing capacity c = cohesion intercept
q = overburden pressure B = Foundation width
 Bulk density of soil below founding level
Rw = Water table correction factor FS = Factor of safety
Nc, Nq, Ng = bearing capacity factors, which are a function of f
dc, dq, dg = Depth factors
zc, zq, zg = Shape factors
Soil parameters : Bulk Density
c= 0.00 T/m2  = 29.0 degrees GENERAL SHEAR FAILURE Profile
2
c' = 0.00 T/m  = 20.3 degrees LOCAL SHEAR FAILURE Depth, m 
General Shear Failure : Nc = 27.86 Nq = 16.44 Ng = 19.34 From To T/m3
Local Shear Failure : Nc' = 15.10 Nq' = 6.58 Ng' = 5.60 0.0 5.0 1.65
5.0 10.0 1.75
Factor of safety = 3.0 as per IS 1904-1986 10.0 15.0 1.85

Design Water Table depth = 9.0 m

Rw factor: Constant value(V) for worst condition or
Rw = 0.60
calculate(C) based on WT Depth ? : V
Depth factor to be considered ? Y
For computation of Depth Factor, depth below GL to be ignored to account for loose
soils,poorly compacted backfill above foundation, scour etc. = 1.5 m
FAILURE CRITERIA : AVERAGE OF LOCAL & GENERAL SHEAR FAILURE

Foundation Depth factors Depth factors Gross

Shape Factors qnet safe , T/m2 Safe Net
Dimensions (GSF) (LSF) Bearing
Depth,m

FOUN-
Bearing
DATION Rw Capacity
Capacity
B, m L, m SHAPE zc zq zg dc dq dg dc '
dq' dg'
GSF LSF (Safe)
T/m2
T/m2
3.0 3.0 Square 1.5 0.60 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 22.9 7.7 15.3 17.8
3.0 3.0 Square 2.0 0.60 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.06 1.03 1.03 1.05 1.02 1.02 28.8 9.8 19.3 22.6
3.0 3.0 Square 3.0 0.60 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.17 1.09 1.09 1.14 1.07 1.07 41.7 14.3 28.0 32.9
 Fig. 16

Settlement Analysis for Shallow Foundation Based on N-Values

Analysis as per IS:8009(Part 1)-1976 , Clause 9.1.4

PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT ECOTECH-II, GREATER NOIDA, U.P.

Design Water Table Depth : 9.0 m

R w factor : Calculate (C) based on water table depth
or Fixed Value(V) for worst condition : V Rw factor for design : 0.6
Fox's Depth Factor to be considered ? Y
Depth to be ignored in Depth Factor Computation for
loose soils, poorly compacted backfill, scour, etc. 1.5 m

Settlement
Rigidity Factor, dr
Design N-Value

Settlement, mm
2
Pressure, T/m

@ 1kg/cm2
Fox's Depth
Foundation

Computed
Foundation

Foundation

Design Net
Length,m

Factor, df
Depth,m
Width,m

Bearing

(as read off

Shape from graph), Rw
mm

3.0 3.0 1.5 Square 11.0 10.0 29.8 0.60 1.00 1.0 49.7
3.0 3.0 2.0 Square 12.0 11.7 26.5 0.60 0.96 1.0 49.6
3.0 3.0 3.0 Square 13.0 14.8 23.9 0.60 0.85 1.0 50.0
Fig. 17