Geo Technical Investigation Works for Multistorey Building- at

Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad Dist,Telangana.

Submitted to
M/S GVK Infrastructure and Projects,
Hyderabad

SAI GANAPATHI ENGINEERING

CONSULTANCY SERVICES(SGECS)
Ground Floor, Plot No:17, Om Sri Sai
Prema Nilayam, Near Datta Sai
Temple,Shankar Nagar, Peerzadiguda
Hyderabad—500098.
12/8/2023 E-mail: sgecs.hyd@gmail.com,
ebsite:www.gtsonnet.com.
.
SGECS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description 2

1.2 Purpose of Study 2
1.3 Report Format 2
2. FIELD INVESTIGATION
2.1 Soil Boring 2
2.2 Rock Drilling 3
2.3 Ground Water 3
3. LABORATORY TESTS 4
4. GENERAL SITE CONDITION 5
4.1 General Geology of Site 6
4.2 Site Stratigraphy 7
4.3 Hydrogeology 8
4.4 Liquifaction Susceptibility Analysis 8
5. CONCEPTS FOR FOUNDATION ANALYSIS 9
5.1 General 10
5.2 Shallow Foundation Summary 11
5.3 Variability subsurface condition 12
6. CLOSURE 12
APPENDIX
APPENDIX-I Boreholes Key Plan
APPENDIX-II Field Borelogs
APPENDIX-III Laboratory Test Summary
APPENDIX-IV Foundation Design Computations
APPENDIX-V Excavation Assessment
APPENDIX-VI Core Snaps

1
SGECS

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Project Description
The Client(M/S.GVK Projects ) has proposed to carry out soil investigations and field
testing for the Planned Multistoreyed Building ( Cellar + Stilt + 5 Floors) that was
proposed to be built on open plot at Jubilee Hills,Hyderabad. The site is in close
proximity to busy IT Hub and has well connected road network to all parts of city. M/s
Sai Ganapathi Engineering Consultancy Services(SGECS) was entrusted with the task of
carrying out soil exploration ,field testing and reporting of key findings of Ground
Investigation and testing.
1.2 Purpose of Study
The overall purpose of this study is to conduct a geotechnical investigation to assess the
stratigraphy and to develop geotechnical recommendations for foundation design for
the various structures planned in the project area. To accomplish these purposes the
study was conducted in the following phases:
 Drilling boreholes at 5 locations identified by Consultants.
 Conducting SPT in Bore Holes and core drilling in rock.
 Testing samples in laboratory to determine the engineering properties of the
strata.
 Analyzing all field and laboratory data to develop geotechnical recommendations
for foundations.

1.3 Report Format

The initial sections of this report presents brief descriptions of the field work
methodology together with list of various laboratory tests conducted. This is followed by
borehole-wise presentation of site, stratigraphy and engineering recommendations.
This is followed by the foundation construction considerations. The report closes with a
summary of the principal findings and recommendations.
All field and laboratory data is presented in the appendix Bore Hole Wise.
2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION
2.1 Soil Borings
The borings were progressed using a calyx rotary drilling rig to the specified depth or
refusal whichever occurs earlier. Casing was used for advancing borings. The casing with

2
SGECS

a diamond shoe bit was used to assist the casings to advance .The work was in general
accordance with IS 1892 – 1979.
Standard Penetration Test ( SPT ) were conducted in the boreholes at 1.5 m depth
intervals by connecting the split spoon sampler to SPT rod and driving it by 45 cm using
a 63.5 kg hammer falling freely from a height of 75 cm . The test was conducted in
accordance with IS 2131 – 1981.
The number of blows for each 15 cm of penetration of the split spoon sampler was
recorded . The number of blows required to penetrate the initial 15 cm of the split
spoon is ignored for seating the sampler due to possible presence of loose materials or
cutting from the drilling operation. The cumulative number of blows required to
penetrate the balance 30 cm out of 45 cm is termed as the SPT or N values.
The N values are presented on the soil profile for each borehole. Refusal to further
boring penetration was considered when the N value exceeds 50 blows for 30 cm
penetration or when practical refusal to further penetration was encountered.
Disturbed samples were collected from split spoon after conducting the SPT. The
samples were preserved in transparent polythene bags. Undisturbed samples were
collected by attaching 75 mm diameter thin walled ‘Shelby’ tubes(in cohesive soils) and
driving the sampler using the 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
laboratory at Uppal for further examination and testing.
2.2 Rock Drilling
Rotary drilling through the rock was performed using heavy-duty skid mounted Joy
Voltas 12B diamond coring rotary drill machine. The drill machine has a hydraulic feed
and is driven by a bevel gear system run by a 28 HP Leister engine. The drill chuck has
four jaws to accommodate NW size drill rods.
Drilling and sampling of the rock was performed using a NX size double tube core barrel.
Tungsten Carbide bit and 48 carat impregnated diamond bit was used to drill through
hard rock. It was attached to the end of a core barrel, which is connected to the
machine by a string of NW drill rods and rotated by the drilling machine.
Water was circulated through the drill rods to the bottom of the hole. The water serves
the purpose of lubrication, cooling and protection of the diamond drill bit in addition to
flushing the cuttings out of the hole. A reciprocating pump was used to circulate the
water. While drilling through soft rock that is likely to collapse, casing was installed. A
NX casing (80 mm OD) was used. The casing with a diamond shoe bit was used to assist
the casing to advance.
3
SGECS

2.3 Groundwater
Groundwater level was measured in the boreholes in 24 hours 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 testing program was
aimed at verifying the field classifications and developing parameters for engineering
analysis. All testing was performed in accordance with the current applicable IS
specifications. The following tests were conducted on selected soil / rock samples
recovered from the boreholes.
The percent Core Recovery(CR) and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) was measured for
each core run. The percent recovery is defined as the percent ratio of the cumulative
length of core sample recovered to the total length of the core run. The Rock Quality
Designation (RQD) is defined as the ratio of the cumulative length of core pieces 10 cm
or longer to the total length of the core run, expressed as percentage. Details of samples
collected are presented on the rock profiles and RQD at various depths. The net
effective drilling time, a qualitative assessment of the nature of the strata, is also
included on the borehole logs.
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples, groundwater samples and
rock cores to determine its physical and engineering properties. The testing procedures
were in accordance with current applicable IS specifications. The following tests were
conducted on selected samples recovered from the boreholes:

Name of Test IS Code No.

Bulk Density By Calculation
Natural moisture content IS:2720 (Part-2)-1973
Grain size analysis IS:2720 (Part-4)-1985
Specific gravity IS:2720 (Part-3)-1980
Free Swell Index IS:2720 (Part40)-1977
Liquid and plastic limits IS:2720 (Part-5)-1985
Unconfined compression test IS:2720 (Part-10)-1991
Unconsolidated Undrained Direct Shear Test IS:2720 (Part-13)-1986

4
SGECS

Name of Test( Rock Cores) IS Code No.

Bulk density IS: 13030-1991
Specific Gravity IS:2720 (Part-3)-1980
Porosity and VoidRatio ByCalculations
Water absorption IS: 2386 (Part3)-1963
Crushing strength IS: 9143-1979
Point load strength index IS: 8764-1998

4 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 General Geology of Project Site
Sanga Reddy District area forms part of an upland plateau region called the Deccan
Plateau. It is generally surrounded by rocky hills. Prominent among them are : Banjara
Hills, 533-640m above MSL, Golconda Range 518-596 m above MSL in the south, Moula-
Ali Hills 518-628 m above MSL in the North east par with the Trimulgherry Heights
forming the Northern part.
The city is underlain by Archean Crystalline Complex consisting of pink and grey granites,
gneisses, migmatites, quartz reefs and dolorite dykes. The granites are medium to
coarse grained, poryphritic and equiangular in texture and foliated at places. Dolerite
dykes traverse mostly in East-west and North-south directions. The overburden is Red
loamy, sandy and black cotton soils.
4.2 Site Stratigraphy
As per the boreholes drilled at the site, there is no significant variation in the soil
characteristics encountered at the various borehole locations, particularly in terms of
the depth to competent strata. The rock mass encountered at different depths is
classified as per IS 4464 and relevant roclab analysis data is also presented in Appendix
which is required for design of deep basements.

5
SGECS

BH.No. Depth (m) Strata Description* “N” Value

0.00 0.30 Hard Murrum R

01 0.30 2.00 Weathered Rock N>100
2.00 5.00 Grade III Hard Rock CORE
02 0.00 5.00 Grade III Hard Rock CORE
0.00 1.00 Weathered Rock N>100
Completely Weathered
03 1.00 4.00 N>100
Rock
4.00 7.00 Hard Rock CORE
0.00 1.00 Hard Rock/Boulder CORE
05 1.00 3.00 Weathered Rock N>100
3.00 6.00 Hard Rock 21

0.00 1.00 Filling R

06
1.00 3.00 Weathered Rock N>100
3.00 6.00 Grade III Hard Rock CORE
4.3 Hydrogeology
Based on the measurements in the completed boreholes, groundwater was Not met
below existing ground level during the period of our field investigation (May, 2022).
Ground water is likely to be met at around 1800 ft in hard granite stratum and yield is
unreliable owing to continuous exploitation of water and depleting groundwater table.
North East and North West corners of the plot shall be chosen for drilling tube well. It is
to be noted that sub surface flows/seepage flows are likely in to open excavations due
to permeable soils(residual soil). Dewatering needs and adequate construction
preparedness is to be made for managing subsurface flows.
5.0 LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY ANALYSIS
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 (Marcuson, 1978(4)). 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.

6
SGECS

As per IS 1893 (Part-1): 2002, Table-1; liquefaction is likely in fine sands below water
table.
Based on a review of all soil parameters like in-situ density, measured groundwater
levels, fines content; we are of the opinion that liquefaction is not likely to take place at
the site in the event of a major earthquake.
According to Fig.1 of IS:1893 (Part1)-2002 showing seismic zones, the proposed site falls
under Zone-II. The design for seismic forces should be done considering the project in
Zone-II.
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 Foundation Considerations

Bearing capacity analysis for individual spread foundations, isolated foundations
and strip footings have been done in general accordance with IS:6403-1981.
Soil parameters used for foundation analysis for foundations are as follows:
c = 0.0 T/m2  = 32
Nc = 30.14 Nq = 18.4 N = 22.4 General shear Failure
where:
c = cohesion intercept
 = angle of internal friction
 = effective unit weight of soil
Nc,Nq,N = Bearing capacity factors which are a function of .
The bearing capacity equation used is as follows:
qnet safe = 1/F [cNcc dc+ p(Nq-1) qdq+ 0.5 B N d Rw]

7
SGECS

where:
qnet safe= safe net bearing capacity of soil based on the shear failure criterion.
p = 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. 8
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
For the soil conditions encountered at this site, general shear failure conditions
have been used for analysis of foundations.
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 the SPT values in accordance
with Clause 9.1.4 of IS 8009 (Part 1) - 1976 Fig.9.
The following table presents our recommended values of net allowable bearing
pressure for isolated foundations bearing with interconnecting beam at
foundation level / plinth level.
The recommended values include a bearing capacity safety factor of 2.5. The
settlements of foundations designed for the above recommended net bearing
pressures is expected to be about 50 mm. Net bearing pressure for foundations
at intermediate depths may be interpolated linearly between the values given
above.
In order to limit the influence of adjacent foundations on each other, we
recommend a minimum lateral edge-to-edge spacing of “0.8B” between

8
SGECS

adjoining foundations (where B=width of longer foundation). If this criteria

cannot be satisfied, consideration may be given to provision of combined
footings / strip footing or raft foundations.
5.4 Foundation Level Preparation

The area shall be excavated upto the foundation level. In most of the locations
hard rock is likely to be encounted. All loose soils should be removed and the
exposed foundation bearing surface should be watered and compacted
properly using rammers / rollers. The surface should then be protected from
disturbances due to construction activities so that the foundations may bear
on the natural undisturbed ground.

For open foundations, 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. We suggest the use of good earth as
backfill material above the foundation.

5.5 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 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

5.6 Shallow Foundation Summary

The safe bearing capacity is recommended at this stage considering founding

9
SGECS

of footings on hard rock beyond 3.30m(Presented in Appendix). If deep

basements are envisaged to accommodate the proposed 1 cellar +stilt+ 5floors
the proposed foundation depth shall be at about 3.50 to 4.00m m from
Existing GL and foundation shall be in rock in this case. In weathered rock with
min embedment of 0.60m for foundation the recommended net safe bearing
capacity is 55 to 60T/sq.m in weathered rock and in hard rock about
80T/sq.m is recommended. The computations are presented based on
assumed foundation size and these shall be revalidated based on structural
proposals by reassessment/computations.
If the foundations are chosen to rest on rockmass and Safe Bearing Capacity
for foundation is computed from shear criteria and based on IS 12070
considering rockmass qualitatively. A judicious value is recommended based
on engineering judgement. The summary of bearing capacities is presented as
below:

SBC from shear SBC from Recommended

criteria(T/sq.m) RMR(T/sq.m) Net
SBC(T/sq.m)
85 65 65

The recommended modulus of subgrade reaction for the geomaterials

encountered at base of foundation is 60000 kN/m 3/m in residual soils and
100000 kN/m3/m in hard rock. The cellar walls shall be designed as retaining
walls retaining soil with average angle of Internal friction of 32 0 in residual
soils and 380 in fractured rock mass. The equivalent Mohr-Coulomb soil
parameters for rockmass is presented in Appendix from Roclab analysis.
The bearing capacity of foundations resting in hard rockmass is presented
separately and min 150T/sq.m can be considered as safe bearing pressure for
hard rockmass. The relevant computations are also presented at the end.
The foundations on rock shall have anchorage/dowels in to
rockmass(reinforcement mat to be tied to dowel bars in predrilled holes). The
diameter of hole shall be 50mm and 25mm dia bars shall be provided as
anchors and hole shall be sealed with grout. Min dowel length shall be 1.00m
or as per uplift considerations in design.
Dewatering requirements:
No specific dewatering needs are anticipated but in the event of ponding of
excavations after rains dewatering is to be carried out.
It is anticipated that unsupported cuts up to 3-3.50m are safe and further deep
cuts shall required temporary shoring arrangements to prevent movements. If
deep basements are constructed to accommodate 3 stilts it is essential to

10
SGECS

check the cut slopes for stability and stabilization measures shall be
considered.
In fractured rockmass the excavation will be self supporting if cut heights or up
10m and in case of deeper cuts it is recommended to provide 3ft/1m bench to
have self supporting cut in rockmass. The retaining walls shall have gravel
packing with weep holes arrangement behind the wall.

5.7 Variability in Subsurface Conditions

Subsurface conditions encountered during construction may vary somewhat from
the conditions encountered during the site investigation. In case significant
variations are encountered during construction, we request to be notified so that
our engineers may review the recommendations in this report in light of these
variations.

6.0 CLOSURE
We appreciate the opportunity to perform this investigation for you and have
pleasure in submitting this report. Please contact us when we can be of further
service to you.
for SGECS

Subbarao Mukunda
(Principal Geotechnical Consultant)

11
APPENDIX-II
Field Borelogs
 SGECS

BORE / DRILL LOG

Construction of Cellar+Stilt+5 floors Building at Jubli hills, Hyderabad
Project:
G.W.T. (m)
LOCATION TYPE OF DRILLING: Rotary Drilling TERMINATION DEPTH(m): 5.0 M
BORE HOLE NO BH - 1 TYPE OF BIT USED: Clay/TC/Diamond COMMENCED ON : 23/11/2023
REDUCED LEVEL ANGLE WITH THE HORIZON: 90 COMPLETED ON : 24/11/2023

Description of Strata Conducting SPT as per I.S.: 2131-

Rate (cm/ min)

Depth (m) Run Drill Water

Depth of NX
Casing (m)
1981

Nature of

Run No.

RQD %
TCR %
Sample

Legend

From (M)
15-30 cm

30-45 cm

N' Value
0-15 cm

To (M)
Depth

Color
Loss
(M)
From To

0.00 0.30 Hard Murrum DS 0.30 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

0.30 1.50 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil WS 1.50 3cm/100 - N>100 - - - - - - - - -

1.50 2.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil WS 2.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2.00 3.00 Grade III Rockmass Core - - - - - CR 1 2.00 3.00 65 62 - - - -

-
3.00 4.00 Grade III Rockmass Core - - - - - CR 2 3.00 4.00 80 77 - - - -

4.00 5.00 Grade III Rockmass Core - - - - - CR 3 4.00 5.00 80 78 - - - -

 SGECS

BORE / DRILL LOG

Construction of Cellar+Stilt+5 floors Building at Jubli hills, Hyderabad
Project:
G.W.T. (m)
LOCATION TYPE OF DRILLING: Rotary Drilling TERMINATION DEPTH(m): 5.0 M
BORE HOLE NO BH - 2 TYPE OF BIT USED: Clay/TC/Diamond COMMENCED ON : 22/11/2023
REDUCED LEVEL ANGLE WITH THE HORIZON: 90 COMPLETED ON : 23/11/2023

Description of Strata Conducting SPT as per I.S.: 2131-

Rate (cm/ min)

Depth (m) Run Drill Water

Depth of NX
Casing (m)
1981

Nature of

Run No.

RQD %
TCR %
Sample

Legend

From (M)
15-30 cm

30-45 cm

N' Value
0-15 cm

To (M)
Depth

Color
Loss
(M)
From To

0.00 1.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 1.00 - - - - CR 1 0.00 1.00 90 89 - - - -

1.00 2.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 2.00 - - - CR 2 1.00 2.00 88 60 - - - -

2.00 3.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 3.00 - - - - CR 3 2.00 3.00 87 67 - - - -

3.00 4.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 4.00 - - - - CR 4 3.00 4.00 82 63 - - - -

-
4.00 5.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 5.00 - - - - CR 5 4.00 5.00 80 45 - - - -
 SGECS

BORE / DRILL LOG

Construction of Cellar+Stilt+5 floors Building at Jubli hills, Hyderabad
Project:
G.W.T. (m)
LOCATION TYPE OF DRILLING: Rotary Drilling TERMINATION DEPTH(m): 7.0 M
BORE HOLE NO BH - 3 TYPE OF BIT USED: Clay/TC/Diamond COMMENCED ON : 28/11/2023
REDUCED LEVEL ANGLE WITH THE HORIZON: 90 COMPLETED ON : 29/11/2023

Description of Strata Conducting SPT as per I.S.: 2131-

Rate (cm/ min)

Depth (m) Run Drill Water

Depth of NX
Casing (m)
1981

Nature of

Run No.

RQD %
TCR %
Sample

Legend

From (M)
15-30 cm

30-45 cm

N' Value
0-15 cm

To (M)
Depth

Color
Loss
(M)
From To

0.00 1.00 Filling DS 1.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1.00 2.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil WS 2.00 3cm/100 - - N>100 - - - - - - - - -

2.00 3.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil WS 3.00 1cm/100 - - N>100 - - - - - - - - -

3.00 4.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil WS 4.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-
4.00 5.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 5.00 - - - - CR 1 4.00 5.00 74 69 - - - -

5.00 6.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 6.00 - - - - CR 2 5.00 6.00 73 61 - - - -

6.00 7.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 7.00 - - - - CR 3 6.00 7.00 82 65 - - - -

 SGECS

BORE / DRILL LOG

Construction of Cellar+Stilt+5 floors Building at Jubli hills, Hyderabad
Project:
G.W.T. (m)
LOCATION TYPE OF DRILLING: Rotary Drilling TERMINATION DEPTH(m): 6.0 M
BORE HOLE NO BH - 5 TYPE OF BIT USED: Clay/TC/Diamond COMMENCED ON : 26/11/2023
REDUCED LEVEL ANGLE WITH THE HORIZON: 90 COMPLETED ON : 27/11/2023

Description of Strata Conducting SPT as per I.S.: 2131-

Rate (cm/ min)

Depth (m) Run Drill Water

Depth of NX
Casing (m)
1981

Nature of

Run No.

RQD %
TCR %
Sample

Legend

From (M)
15-30 cm

30-45 cm

N' Value
0-15 cm

To (M)
Depth

Color
Loss
(M)
From To

0.00 1.00 Boulders and Rock Core 1.00 - - - - CR 1 0.00 1.00 50 33 - - - -

1.00 2.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil DS 2.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2.00 3.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil WS 3.00 2cm/100 - - N>100 - - - - - - - - -

3.00 4.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 4.00 - - - - CR 2 3.00 4.00 77 72 - - - -

-
4.00 5.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 5.00 - - - - CR 3 4.00 5.00 82 76 - - - -

5.00 6.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 6.00 - - - - CR 4 5.00 6.00 78 73 - - - -

 SGECS

BORE / DRILL LOG

Construction of Cellar+Stilt+5 floors Building at Jubli hills, Hyderabad
Project:
G.W.T. (m)
LOCATION TYPE OF DRILLING: Rotary Drilling TERMINATION DEPTH(m): 6.0 M
BORE HOLE NO BH - 6 TYPE OF BIT USED: Clay/TC/Diamond COMMENCED ON : 27/11/2023
REDUCED LEVEL ANGLE WITH THE HORIZON: 90 COMPLETED ON : 28/11/2023

Description of Strata Conducting SPT as per I.S.: 2131-

Rate (cm/ min)

Depth (m) Run Drill Water

Depth of NX
Casing (m)
1981

Nature of

Run No.

RQD %
TCR %
Sample

Legend

From (M)
15-30 cm

30-45 cm

N' Value
0-15 cm

To (M)
Depth

Color
Loss
(M)
From To

0.00 1.00 Filling DS 1.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1.00 2.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil DS 2.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2.00 3.00 Completely Weathered Rock/Residual soil WS 3.00 2cm/100 - - N>100 - - - - - - - - -

3.00 4.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 4.00 - - - - CR 1 3.00 4.00 76 65 - - - -

-
4.00 5.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 5.00 - - - - CR 2 4.00 5.00 66 53 - - - -

5.00 6.00 Grade III Rockmass Core 6.00 - - - - CR 3 5.00 6.00 69 64 - - - -

 APPENDIX-III
Laboratory Test Summary
 Laboratory Test Summary
Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Direct Shear on Soil Tests on Rock Cores

Uniaxial Compressive

Uniaxial Compressive
Dry Density gms/cm3

Moisture Content %

Point Load Strength

Cohesion Intercept

Strength(Dry),Mpa
Confining Pressure

Strength(Sat),Mpa
Plasticity Index %

Angle of Internal

Weight(gms/cc)
Natural Density
Specific Gravity

Specific Gravity

Weight(gm/cc)
Saturated Unit
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

Porosity(%)
Sample No.
Depth (m)

gms/cm3
Gravel %

Index(%)
Plastic %
Location

Liquid %

Dry Unit
Kg/cm2

Kg/cm2

Friction
Sand %

Clay %
Silt %
Location

0.30-2.00 CORE Completely Weathered Rock 100 2.56 32.60

BH-01
2.00-5.00 CORE MW-SW Grade III Rockmass 2.72 2.74 6.25 108.6 94.65

BH-02 0.00-3.00 CORE MW-SW Grade III Rockmass 2.63 2.66 2.56 87.23 61.12

0.00-1.00 DS Sand
Jubilee
Hills BH-03 1.00-4.00 DS Completely Weathered Rock 100 2.54 34.30
Building
4.00-7.00 CORE MW-SW Grade III Rockmass 2.71 2.74 5.23 67.54 78.54

BH-05 4.00-7.00 CORE MW-SW Grade III Rockmass 2.69 2.71 3.54 56.87 68.32

1.00-3.00 DS Completely Weathered Rock 100 2.57 32.80

BH-06
3.00-6.00 CORE MW-SW Grade III Rockmass 2.73 2.74 4.96 78.32 93.42
 APPENDIX-IV
Foundation Computations
 Job ref
Project: Construction of C+S+5 Floors Building

Part of structure Calc sheet no rev

Safe Bearing Pressure Computations for foundation
Drawing ref. Calc by Date Check by Date
SRM 10-12-2023

Ref Calculations

Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundation on Rockmass

The calculation is based on Hoek and Brown Failure Criterion
Assumptions
1. Curved shear surface is approximated as straight line and ignores the weight of rock in the
foundation as well as shear stress that develop along the vertical interface between wedges.

2. The footing rests on horizontal rock surface and the rock under the footing is under compression
similar to that of specimen in triaxial compression test.

The rock mass is modelled in Roclab based on field drilling record and laboratory test results on
intack rock.

Failure Mechanism is illustrated as below for weak rockmass

where
qa = allowable safe bearing capacity in MPa ϒ = Unit Weight of Rock
m & s are Hoek and Brown rockmass constants D = Depth of Embedment
σu( r ) = Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Intact Rock
σ'3 = Confining stress at foundation level,MPa Cf1 = correction factor for shape
FoS = Factor of Safety (as per table 5.4 of Duncan C Wylie)
qs = overburden pressure
 Job ref
Project: Construction of C+S+5 Floors Building

Part of structure Calc sheet no rev

Safe Bearing Pressure Computations for foundation
Drawing ref. Calc by Date Check by Date
SRM 10-12-2023

Ref Calculations

m = 8.699 s = 0.0218 =ϒ 0.023 MN/m3

σu( r ) = 3.5 MPa Cf1 = 0.5 MPa = D 0.6 m
FoS = 3 D is min embedment depth below EGL
qs = 0.0138 MPa
σ'3 = 0.8428 MPa

qa = 0.9891 MPa
= 989.1 KPa

Bearing Capacity from Bell's Solution ( For weak and closely fractured rockmass)

Nc  2 N  ( N   1)

where Nq  ( N  )^ 2
B = Width of Footing,m
Cf1 & Cf2 = Correction Factors N   0.5( N  )^ 2
ϒ = Unit Weight of Rock

D = Depth of Embedment N  Tan 2(45   / 2)
Nc,Nq & Nϒ = Bearing Capacity factors

B = 2.00 D = 1.00 ϒ = 23.00

Cf1 = 1.25 Cf2 = 0.85 c = 100 kPa ( c and Φ from roclab )
Nc = 17.081 Nq 12.528 Nϒ = 6.264
FS = 3 Φ = 34 NΦ = 3.540

qa = 809.53 kPa

Recommended Allowable Bearing Pressure qa = 809.53 kPa

( at an embedment depth of 0.6m in rock) = 80.95 t/sq.m

Shear Based SBC computations gives higher Safe Bearing Capacity for foundation on rockmass by
adopting Mohr-Coulomb strength criteria and this approach does not consider the affect of jointing or
discontinuities in rockmasses.
hence a min of shear criteria approach and rock mass strength criterion is recommended

Recommended to consider SBC of 65T/sq.m to 80 T/sq.m for foundations on rock with dowels
 Job ref
Project: Construction of C+S+5 Floors Building

Part of structure Calc sheet no rev

Safe Bearing Pressure Computations for foundation
Drawing ref. Calc by Date Check by Date
SRM 10-12-2023

Ref Calculations

Settlement Prediction: Foundations on ROCK

-by Duncan C. Wyllie
Input Data
Length of footing, L = 10 m
Width of footing, B = 2 m
Depth of Footing, D = 1 m D is min embedment depth below scour level
Ratio L/B = 5.0
Recommended Allowable Bearing Pressure at founding level, kPa = 1500 kPa
Poisson's Ratio m = 0.2
Modulus of Elasticity of
Es = 6368000 kPa (Average E value)
rockmass
Shape and Rigidity factor Cd = 1.3
δv =(𝐶𝑑𝑞𝐵(1−ν2))/𝐸 2551282
Settlement for given base pressure 0.000588 = 0.59 mm OK

Method:1
k-value prediction
k= p/δ where p = load intensity corresponding to 1.25mm settlement

135
k = = 108000 kN/m3
1.25

Method: 2
Determination of Modulus of Subgrage Reaction :
Eq 9.9 - "foundation
engg by Bowles
ks=40(𝐹𝑆)𝑞𝑎
ks - soil stiffness in kN/m3
FS - Factor of Safety
qa - allowable bearing capacity(kPa)

ks = 19428.80 (Max)
ks = 108000 (Min)
ks = 63714.40 (Average)

Recommended Modulus of subgrade reaction is 100000 kN/m3

 APPENDIX-VI
Core Box Photographs
BH_1

BH_2
BH_3

BH_5
BH_6