SOILS INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED MENGO

MARKET STRUCTURE, KAMPALA DISTRICT.

FINAL REPORT

PREPARED BY
GEO-CONCRETE LABORATORY SMC LIMITED

APPROVED BY
BALENZI ENOCH
MATERIALS ENGINEER

PREPARED FOR
M/S: YEAR 3 CIVIL CLASS MAKERERE UNIVERSITY
1
MARCH 20 2024
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. 4
1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Purpose of the investigation .................................................................................................. 6
1.2 Scope of the investigation ..................................................................................................... 6
2 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................. 7
2.1 Location ................................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Regional Geology.................................................................................................................. 8
2.3 Regional Seismicity ................................................................................................................... 9
2.4 Climate .................................................................................................................................. 9
3 FIELD EXPLORATION & LABORATORY TESTING .............................................................. 10
3.1 Fieldwork ................................................................................................................................. 10
3.1.1 Trial pit distribution .......................................................................................................... 10
3.1.2 Logging of soil profile ...................................................................................................... 11
3.1.3 Dynamic cone penetration tests................................................................................ 11
2.5 Laboratory Tests .................................................................................................................. 12
4 RESULTS .................................................................................................................................. 13
4.1 Soil Profile........................................................................................................................... 13
4.2 Soil Bearing Capacity.......................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Classification Test Results .................................................................................................. 14
4.3.1 Particle size distribution ............................................................................................... 14
4.3.2 Atterberg Limit test results .......................................................................................... 15
4.3.3 Natural Moisture Content ............................................................................................ 15
4.3.4 Shear Strength Test Results ......................................................................................... 15
5 Conclusions and Engineering Recommendations ...................................................................... 16
5.1 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 16
5.2 Engineering Recommendations........................................................................................... 16
6 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 17
7 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................... 18
7.1 Appendix 1 – Trial Pit Logs ................................................................................................ 19
7.2 Appendix 2 – Bearing Capacity Results ............................................................................. 20
7.3 Appendix 3 – shear Test Results ......................................................................................... 21

3
 7.4 Appendix 4 – Classification Test Results ........................................................................... 22
7.5 Appendix 5 –Photos During Site Investigation and Laboratory Tests ................................ 23

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Standards used in testing ................................................................................................... 12

Table 2: Soil bearing capacities at the trial pits ................................................................................ 13
Table 3: Grain size distribution percentages ..................................................................................... 14
Table 4: Triaxial shear test results .................................................................................................... 15

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Site overview ........................................................................................................................ 7

Figure 2: Geological map of Uganda .................................................................................................. 8
Figure 3: Seismic zoning map (Uganda) ............................................................................................. 9
Figure 4: Location of the test points .................................................................................................. 10
Figure 5: Excavation of trial pits ....................................................................................................... 11
Figure 6: Conducting of the DCP test at the bottom of excavated trial pit ....................................... 12
Figure 7: Particle size distribution for the Trial pits ......................................................................... 14
Figure 8 :A-Line chart for the tested samples ................................................................................... 15

4
1 INTRODUCTION

On 14th March 2024, Geo Concrete Laboratory SMC Limited contracted by Makerere University civil
class year 3 to carry out Geotechnical investigations for the proposed market structure. The objective
of the ground investigation was to obtain geotechnical information including design parameters for
the proposed structural foundations and any associated infrastructure.

The scope of the investigation as per standard operating procedures comprised of trial pit excavation,
DCP Tests, Classification and shear tests including sampling Disturbed and undisturbed samples from
trial pits and laboratory testing of recovered samples. The laboratory investigations were carried out
in accordance with, BS 1377:1990. The field work was carried out on the 15th day of March 2024.

This factual report presents the findings of both the fieldwork investigations and laboratory tests.

The Laboratory’s responsibility under this contract has been limited to determination and presentation
of ground conditions encountered during the ground investigation in this factual report to aid design
of the proposed structures.

5
 1.1 Purpose of the investigation

The geotechnical investigations were carried out to assess the characteristics of the subsurface
ground with respect to the following:

i. Characterisation of the nature of the shallow geology and groundwater to a

maximum depth of 2.0m;

ii. Confirmation of lithology and thickness of subsurface layers;

iii. Determination of physical and geo-mechanical properties was up to a depth of at

least 2.0m and it was achieved through having trial pits of 1.0m depth

1.2 Scope of the investigation

As per instructions from the client, Engineers followed and executed the following activities;

I. Excavation and logging of one (01) trial pits to a maximum depth of 1.0m below the

existing ground surface level.

II. Conducting one (1No) Dynamic cone penetrometer tests at existing ground level up to
2.0m

III. Recovering of disturbed and undisturbed samples.

IV. Conducting soil classification and shear strength tests on the recovered samples.

V. Compilation of a factual geotechnical investigation report.

6
2 SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1 Location

The area of investigation is located in Mengo Kampala District at national grid reference
0.308850,32.556907 in central region of Uganda. At the time of investigation, no major earth works
had been conducted on the site. Fig 1 below shows the condition of site at the time of the field work

Figure 1: Site overview

7
 2.2 Regional Geology

The geology of Kampala is generally covered by the old and new rock systems, primarily the
Cambrian and Precambrian rock. Kampala consists of sedimentary and metamorphic rock types. At
the site exists decomposing rock of relatively weak weathered clayey silt having sand grains in layers
of mostly reddish-brown color.

Figure 2 below shows the geological map of Uganda.

SITE

Figure 2: Geological map of Uganda

8
2.3 Regional Seismicity

According to the Seismic code of practice for structural designs, 2003 (US 319: 2003) from the
Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS), the project area lies in zone 3 (the most seismically
low risk area) on the seismic zoning map as shown in Figure 3.

The proposed site lies with in zone 3 of the

seismic zoning of Uganda as shown by the
seismic zoning map, figure 3. This seismic
zoning implies that the site has a low risk of
earthquake occurrence.

Figure 3: Seismic zoning map (Uganda)

2.4 Climate

Kampala has a tropical climate, favorably same as other towns in the Central region of Uganda.
According to Köppen-Geiger, climate classification of Kampala falls under Aw. Kampala is a city
with a significant rainfall. The average annual temperature in KAMPALA is 22.6 °C | 72.7 °F.
Precipitation here is about 2685 mm | 105.7 inch per year.

9
3 FIELD EXPLORATION & LABORATORY TESTING

Fieldwork for the geotechnical investigations was conducted on the 15th day of March 2024. Trial
pit excavations, logging, and sampling as well as the DCP tests were completed at one location
designated TP 01 for trial pit, and DCP 01 as per the provided scope.

3.1 Fieldwork
3.1.1 Trial pit distribution

Trial pits were excavated at approximate locations on the site as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Location of the test points

The excavations were undertaken with the use of hand tools up to a maximum depth of 1.5m as
shown in Figure 5. Trial pits were backfilled after logging, sampling and conducting the in-situ
tests.

10
 Figure 5: Excavation of trial pits

3.1.2 Logging of soil profile

Within the excavated trial pit, logging was done following procedures outlined in BS5930:2015
in-order to show the various subsoil strata as observed on site. These logs are presented as
Appendix 1.

3.1.3 Dynamic cone penetration tests

The DCP test was conducted from 0.0 to 2.0m depth of the excavated trial pit as shown in Figure
6 in order to measure the in situ bearing strength of the ground over the different depths.

The DCP used consists of;

• A 60o cone with a diameter of 20mm

• 8kg falling weight
• 575mm dropping height

11
 Figure 6: Conducting of the DCP test

Note: Test results are presented in Appendix 2 of this report.

2.5 Laboratory Tests

In order to more accurately define the engineering properties of the material encountered at
the investigated site, the laboratory tests presented in Table 1 were carried out on the samples
retrieved from the bottom of the trial pits.

Table 1: Standards used in testing

Test Description International Standard

1.Disturbed samples

In-situ Moisture content BS 1377: Part 2, Clause 3:1990

Liquid Limit BS 1377: Part 2, Clause 4:1990

Plastic Limit & Plasticity Index BS 1377: Part 2, Clause 5:1990

Linear Shrinkage BS 1377: Part 2, Clause 6:1990

Particle Size Distribution BS 1377: Part 2, Sub cl. 9.2: 1990

12
4 RESULTS
4.1 Soil Profile

• The entire site is generally characterised with coarse grained soil (gravelly).
• Ground water strike was not encountered in all the trial pits.

4.2 Soil Bearing Capacity

Equivalent allowable bearing capacity values from the shear test results are summarized in
Table 2, for the varying depths. Detailed results are attached as Appendix 2.

Table 2: Soil bearing capacities at the trial pits

Allowable Bearing
TP No. Depth (m) COORDINATES
Capacity (kPa)

TP 01 0.0 -1.0 0.308550,32.556907 515

TP 01 1.0 – 2.0 0.308550,32.556907 212

13
 4.3 Classification Test Results

The classification of the soils followed the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). A summary
of the classification results is attached as appendix 4.

4.3.1 Particle size distribution

Particle size distribution by wet sieving shows that the site is characterized by fine-grained
material.

The particle size distribution curves for the trial pit samples were plotted as shown in Figure
7. below

Figure 7: Particle size distribution for the Trial pits

Based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), the grain size distribution curves suggest
the following compositional ranges as shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Grain size distribution percentages

37% Gravel

Composite sample from 30% Sand

the trial pits

34% Clay & silts

14
4.3.2 Atterberg Limit test results

Plasticity index (PI) values were plotted against Liquid (LL) values for the samples on the A-
Line chart. These samples were above the A-Line in the region of clays of low plasticity as shown
in Figure 8.

Figure 8 :A-Line chart for the tested samples

4.3.3 Natural Moisture Content

The natural moisture content test was determined according to BS 1377: Part 2, 1990. Result
obtained is 16.5% across the entire site investigated.
Details of the moisture content test results are presented as Appendix 4.

4.3.4 Shear Strength Test Results

Triaxial shear tests were carried out on the undisturbed samples recovered from the test pits.
Triaxial shear results are presented in Table 4 below and detailed results are attached as
appendix 3

Table 4: Triaxial shear test results

Bulk
Angle of Internal
TP No. Density Cohesion (KN/m2)
Friction (Degrees)
(mg/m3)
TP 01 1.749 18.53 27.44

15
5 Conclusions and Engineering Recommendations
5.1 Conclusions

• The investigation established the nature of subsoil strata at the proposed site and
determined the bearing capacities and soil index properties.
• The entire site is generally characterised with coarse grained soil (gravelly).
• The allowable bearing capacities obtained from the trial pits range from 212kPa to
515Kpa from 0.0m to 2.0m depth.
 Ground water strike was not encountered in the trial pits.
 The average natural moisture content of the entire is 16.5% at the investigated
depth.

5.2 Engineering Recommendations

The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained
from the trial pits performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed
in this report. Suitable founding depths have been chosen in such a way that the total net
foundation pressure is less than the allowable bearing capacity.

This report does not reflect variations that may occur between trial pits, across the site, or due
to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations
may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear,

Geo Concrete Laboratory SMC Ltd should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and
supplemental recommendations can be provided. This report has been prepared for the
exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been
prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No
warranties, express or implied, are intended or made.

Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others.
In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this
report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be
considered valid unless the consultant reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the
conclusions of this report in writing.

16
6 REFERENCES

1. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. British Standards 1377: 1995 and British Standard
1377: 1990. Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes, London, 1990.

2. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. British Standards 5930: 1999. Code of

Practice for Site Investigations, London 1981.

3. VICKERS, BRIAN (1978); Laboratory work in Civil Engineering Soil Mechanics. Granada
Publishers, London.

4. Bowles Joseph E; Foundation Analysis and Design, Second Edition. McGraw Hill
Companies, Tokyo, 1997.

5. G.E Barnes; Principles and Practice of Soil Mechanics, First Edition. Macmillan Press Ltd,
London, 1995

6. G Bryen, JP Everett and K. Schwartz. A Guide to Practical Geotechnical Engineering in

Southern Africa, Frankipile, Third Edition, 1995.

7. Department of US Army Corps of Engineers, CECW-EG Engineer Manual 1110-11904

Engineering and Design of SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS, Washington, DC 20314-1000,
1990.

8. MJ Tomlinson; Foundation Design & Construction, Seventh Edition. Pearson Education

Limited, Edinburgh Gate, Harlow Essex CM20 2JE, 2001.

9. R. F. Craig; Soil Mechanics, Fourth Edition. Chapman and Hall, 2-6 Boundary Row, London
SEI 8HN, 1990.

10. V.N.S Murthy: Geotechnical Engineering: Principles and Practices of Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, @ Marcel Dekker, Inc. 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York
10016.

11. Burt G. Look; Handbook of Geotechnical Investigation and Design Tables © 2007 Taylor &
Francis Group, London, UK

12. BS1377: Part 9:1990 Method 4.4 - Determination of the in-situ vane shear strength of weak
cohesive soils.

17
7 APPENDICES

18
7.1 Appendix 1 – Trial Pit Logs

19
7.2 Appendix 2 – Bearing Capacity Results

20
7.3 Appendix 3 – shear Test Results

21
7.4 Appendix 4 – Classification Test Results

22
7.5 Appendix 5 –Photos During Site Investigation and
Laboratory Tests

23
PROGRESS PHOTAGE FOR GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS OF PROPOSED MARKET STRUCTURE

FIELD DCP TEST EXCAVATED TRIAL PIT

SAMPLE WEIGHING OVEN DRIED SAMPLES

ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST