geotechnical investigation report part-2 - … · table 12: estimated capacity of precast r.c.c....

BANGLADESH-INDIA FRIENDSHIP POWER COMPANY (PVT.) LIMITED

2x660MW MAITREE SUPER THERMAL POWER PROJECT RAMPAL, BANGLADESH

OWNERS CONSULTANT:

M/s FICHTNER GmbH & Co KG. STUTTGART, GERMANY

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

PART-2

COAL HANDLING/COAL STOCK AREA

DOC. NO. : - Maitree-00-UTX-ED-421602C001PEM-B

BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED PROJECT ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT

NOIDA-201301

C

TENDER NO - PSER:SCT:KLN-C1860:17 (TCN-02)

House 11, Road 19/A, Sector 04,Uttara Model Town, Dhaka 1230

Phone +880-2-58957231, Fax +880-2-58957283

Email: [email protected], Web: http://www.dcl-fcl.com


G E O T E C H N I C A L I N V E S T I G A T I O N R E P O R T O N 2X660MW MAITREE SUPER THERMAL POWER PROJECT; RAMPAL, BAGERHAT

i

T A B L E O F CO N T E N T S CHAPTER PAGETABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................... i

LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................................. iii LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................................. iv CHAPTER - I INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1

1.1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION WORK....................................................................................... 1 1.2.2 LABORATORY WORK ...................................................................................................... 2

1.3 STRUCTURE OF REPORT......................................................................................................... 2 CHAPTER - II TOPOGRAPHIC & GEOLOGICAL SETTINGS ................................................. 3

2.1 TOPOGRAPHY AND LANDSCAPE ......................................................................................... 3 2.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 3 2.3 SEISMICITY ................................................................................................................................ 3

CHAPTER- III INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY ................................................................... 5 3.1 DRILLING OF BOREHOLES ..................................................................................................... 5 3.2 SPT TEST AND DISTURBED SAMPLE COLLECTION ......................................................... 5 3.3 UNDISTURBED SAMPLE COLLECTION ............................................................................... 6 3.4 MEASUREMENT OF GROUND WATER ................................................................................ 6 3.5 ELECTRONIC STATIC CONE PENETRATION TEST WITH PORE PRESSURE (CPT-U) . 6 3.6 FIELD VANE SHEAR TEST ...................................................................................................... 7 3.7 ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY TEST .......................................................................................... 7 3.8 PLATE LOAD TESTS.................................................................................................................8

CHAPTER-IV INVESTIGATION RESULTS ................................................................................... 9 4.1 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL ...................................................................................................... 9 4.2 SUMMARY OF FIELD INVESTIGATION ...............................................................................9 4.3 LABORATORY TEST ..............................................................................................................11 4.4 GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES ............................................................................................. 11

4.4.1 SOIL GRADATION ........................................................................................................... 11 4.4.2 SOIL PLASTICITY ............................................................................................................ 12

4.5 Correction to SPT-N value: ........................................................................................................ 12 CHAPTER-V ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 14

5.1 GENERAL.................................................................................................................................. 14 5.2 ANALYSIS FOR FOUNDATION SYSTEM ............................................................................ 14

5.2.1 DESIGN SOIL PROFILE ................................................................................................... 14 5.3 ANALYSIS FOR SHALLOW FOUNDATION ........................................................................ 14

5.3.1 BEARING CAPACITY ...................................................................................................... 14 5.4 DEEP FOUNDATION ............................................................................................................... 14

5.4.1 BORED CAST-IN SITU PILES & DRIVEN CAST IN SITU PILE: ................................ 14 5.4.2 ANALYSIS BORED CAST-IN-SITU PILES .................................................................... 15 5.4.3 SIDE RESISTANCE FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES ........................................................... 15 5.4.4 TIP RESISTANCE FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES .............................................................. 16 5.4.5 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES ......................................... 16



ii

5.4.6 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES ......................................... 17 5.4.7 ANALYSIS OF PRECAST DRIVEN PILES ..................................................................... 18 5.4.7.1 SIDE RESISTANCE FOR DRIVEN PILES ................................................................... 18 5.4.7.2 TIP RESISTANCE FOR DRIVEN PILES ...................................................................... 18 5.4.8 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES ................................. 18 5.4.9 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES ................................. 19 5.4.10 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST PSC HOLLOW CORE CONCRETE PILES ........................................................................................................................................... 19

CHAPTER VI ANALYSIS FOR LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ............................................... 21 6. 1 EXCAVATION, COMPACTION, AND GROUND IMPROVEMENT CRITERIA: ............. 21

I. SUITABILITY OF ON SITE SOIL AS STRUCTURAL FILL ...........................................21 II. SLOPES FOR EXCAVATION: .......................................................................................21 III. CEMENT FOR UNDERGROUND FOUNDATIONS/STRUCTURES:.........................21 IV. GROUND IMPROVEMENT ...........................................................................................21

6.2 METHODS FOR ANALYSIS OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ........................................ 22 6.2.1 GENERAL .......................................................................................................................... 22 6.2.2 METHOD ............................................................................................................................ 22 I. CALCULATION OF CYCLIC STRESS RATIO ................................................................22 II. CALCULATION OF CYCLIC RESISTANCE RATIO ..................................................22

6.3 ANALYSIS OF RESULT .......................................................................................................... 23 CHAPTER VII REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 24 CHAPTER-VIII RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSIONS ..................................................... 25

8.1 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOUNDATION SYSTEM ....................................................... 25 8.2 RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR BORED CAST-IN-SITU RCC PILES ................ 26 8.3 RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES ................................ 26 8.4 RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST PSC HOLLOW CORE CONCRETE PILES ............................................................................................................................................... 26 8.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSIS ........................................................27



iii

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGETABLE 1: LOCATION COORDITATES & GROUND ELEVATION OF BORE HOLES ................ 9

TABLE 2: TEST LOCATIONS FOR ISCPT ....................................................................................... 10

TABLE 3: TEST LOCATIONS FOR IDCPT ...................................................................................... 10

TABLE 4: TEST LOCATIONS FOR IERT ......................................................................................... 10

TABLE 5: TEST LOCATIONS FOR IPLT ......................................................................................... 11

TABLE 6: LIST OF LABORATORY TESTS. .................................................................................... 11

TABLE 7: CORRECTED SPT & DESIGN SPT VALUE ................................................................... 13

TABLE 8: DESIGN SOIL PROFILE CONSIDERED ......................................................................... 14

TABLE 9: ESTIMATED DRILLED SHAFT CAPACITY FOR DIFFERENT DIAMETER BASED

ON SPT ................................................................................................................................................. 17

TABLE 10: ESTIMATED DRILLED SHAFT CAPACITY FOR DIFFERENT DIAMETER BASED

ON CPT (CUT OFF LEVEL 2.0M BELOW G.L) ............................................................................... 17

TABLE 11: ESTIMATED CAPACITY OF PRECAST R.C.C. DRIVEN PILE (SQUARE SHAPED

FOR DIFFERENT SIZE BASED ON SPT .......................................................................................... 19

TABLE 12: ESTIMATED CAPACITY OF PRECAST R.C.C. DRIVEN PILE FOR DIFFERENT

SIZE BASED ON SCPT (PILE TOP CONSIDERED AT 2M DEPTH FROM G.L).......................... 19

TABLE 13: ESTIMATED CAPACITY OF PRECAST PSC HOLLOW CORE CONCRETE PILE

FOR DIFFERENT SIZE BASED ON SPT (PILE CUT OFF LEVEL IS CONSIDERED AT GL) .... 20

TABLE 14: RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR BORED CAST-IN-SITU RCC PILES ...... 26

TABLE 15: RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES ...................... 26

TABLE 16: RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST PSC HOLLOW CORE

CONCRETE PILES .............................................................................................................................. 26



iv

L I S T O F F I G U R E S FIGURE 1: AERIAL PHOTO OF THE PROPOSED SITE .................................................................. 3

FIGURE 2: SEISMIC MAP OF BANGLADESH (BNBC 2006) .......................................................... 4

FIGURE 3: ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY TEST SET-UP .................................................................. 7

FIGURE 4: SOIL GRADATION ENVELOPE .................................................................................... 12

FIGURE 5: PLASTICITY OF SOIL SAMPLE ................................................................................... 12



P A R T 2 . 0 : V O L U M E - 0 1 : C O A L S T O C K A R E A

CHAPTER - I I N T R OD U C TI O N

1.1 DESCRIPTION

This report presents report on Geotechnical Investigation (field and laboratory tests) including

recommendation for proposed 2X660 MW MAITREE STPP, Rampal, Bagerhat. The whole

report has been divided into three parts covering the following.

Part 1: Main power block and Balance of Plant & Non-plant Areas

Part 2: Coal Handling/Coal Stock Area

Part 3: Ash Dyke Area < ii > Jetty Area

This report has covered the Part 2: Coal Handling/Coal Stock Area. The project location

map is shown in Fig-1.

1.2 SCOPE OF WORK

The scope of work is given hereunder:

Performing geotechnical investigation including field tests on land and laboratory

tests for disturbed/undisturbed soil samples, chemical analysis of soil and water

samples.

Preparing a Geotechnical Report based on engineering analysis to present the data

obtained through investigation.

Recommendation for foundation etc.

1.2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION WORK

Field work including drilling and in-situ testing at various instructed locations has been

carried out since March, 2016.

The following list of the field work has been undertaken:

Setting out test locations using and establishing their elevation from nearest survey

benchmark as provided by BHEL using total station.

Drilling using rotary drilling rig only.

Performing Standard Penetration Test (SPT) using automatic trip hammer according

to ASTM D1586.

Recovering undisturbed soil samples from borehole according to ASTM D1587.

Electronic Static Cone Penetration Test (SCPT) as per ASTM D5778.

Conducting in-situ Vane Shear Test (VST) as per ASTM D2573.

Conducting Electric Resistivity Test (ERT) as per ASTM G57.

Performing Plate Load Test (PLT) as per IS: 1888.

Performing Pressure-meter Test (PMT) as per ASTM D4719.




Performing Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DCPT) as per IS: 4968-II.

Performing Pump out Type Field Permeability Test (POTFPT) as per IS: 5529-I.

Performing Cross-hole Shear Test (CST) as per ASTM D4428.

Performing Seismic Refraction Test (SRT) as per ASTM D 5777.

1.2.2 LABORATORY WORK

All soil samples were subjected to visual-manual soil classification procedures in accordance

with ASTM D-2488. In order to evaluate the engineering properties of the sub-soil, laboratory

tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained from exploratory boreholes.

The following laboratory tests were performed by DCL at its Geotechnical Testing

Laboratory in Uttara, Dhaka during April to August, 2016:

Bulk Density/Unit Weight ASTM D7263

Moisture Content Test ASTM D2216

Particle Size Distribution ASTM D0422

Atterberg Limits ASTM D4318

Specific Gravity Test ASTM D0854

Shrinkage Limit Test ASTM D 427

Direct Shear Test ASTM D3080

Consolidation Test ASTM D2434

Unconfined Compression Strength ASTM D2166

Standard Proctor Compaction Test ASTM D1557-70

Modified Proctor Compaction Test ASTM D1557-12E1

Relative Density Test ASTM D1556-64

1.3 STRUCTURE OF REPORT

The outcomes of the geotechnical investigations carried out on the project location have been

divided into the following segments:

Appendix A contains the layout for test location.

Appendix B contains field test results

Appendix C contains the laboratory test reports.

Appendix D contains the analysis of results.


G E O T E C H N I C A L I N V E S T I G A T I O N R E P O R T O N 2x660MW Maitree Super Thermal Power Project; Rampal, Bagerhat

4

RAMPAL COAL BASED

POWERPLANT-[PROPOSED]

CHAPTER - II T O P O G R A P H I C & G E O L O G I C A L S E T T I N G S

2.1 TOPOGRAPHY AND LANDSCAPE

The site is located at Rampal Upazilla under Bagerhat district. The site is proposed to be

used as 2 X 660 MW Maitree Super Thermal Power Project on the north-east bank of river

Pussur. The plot is fairly flat with dredge filling, of which a part is bounded by masonry

boundary wall. The site is accessible through a feeder road.

2.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

xviii. Geological map of Bangladesh published by Geological Survey of Bangladesh (GSB) indicates that this area falls under Zone PPC (Paludal deposits) and this area is

subsiding.

Figure 1: Aerial Photo of the Proposed Site

R U P S H A R I V E R

3


G E O T E C H N I C A L I N V E S T I G A T I O N R E P O R T O N 2x660MW Maitree Super Thermal Power Project; Rampal, Bagerhat

Geomorphology During periods of maximum glaciation, marine regression led to increasederosional processes whereas Holocene transgression revitalized the sedimentationprocesses. Thus Geomorphologically, Bangladesh can be divided into four distinct regionseach having distinguishing characters of its own. a) The Holocene Floodplains of the Ganges, the Brahmaputra and the Meghnariver systems. b) The Bengal Delta. c) The Eastern and Northeastern Tertiary Hills Regions. d) The Pleistocene Terrace or the Pleistocene Uplands. The Flood plain and the Bengal Delta regions occupy seventy two (72) percent of the total land area of Bangladesh and the Pleistocene Terrace and the Tertiary Hills Regions cover rest 28% (Ref: Report of the ground water task force,ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Local GovernmentDivision,2002). The project site locates in the southern part of the Delta plain. This area is tidedominated and is considered as the active part of the delta. The landforms are characterized by tidal low land with weakly developed natural levees distributed in an irregular pattern. Numerous rivers, channels, tidal creeks have criss-crossedthe area. Swamps and depressions are also present in the area. Estuarine depositsof silt, silty clay dominates in this area. The landforms in the area are temporal as they are changing due to the cyclonesand other natural calamities.




Figure 2: Seismic Map of Bangladesh (BNBC 2006) 2015)




C H A P T E R - I I I I N V E S T I G AT I O N M ET HO D O L O GY

Following describes in brief each of the field works undertaken in the geotechnical

investigation at the proposed location.

3.1 DRILLING OF BOREHOLES

Boreholes have been drilled by rotary boring methods using a bladed bit to produce a

nominal diameter for 150mm. Flushing of the hole was achieved by the addition of bentonite

to form a mud of sufficient density to lift soil cutting satisfactorily. Careful attention was

given to drilling rates with slow rotation speeds and a slow bit advance to ensure that soil

particles cut by the bit was able to rise in bentonite mud column and thus ensure a 'clean' base

to the bore hole. Casing of 150 mm diameter was used in the uppermost few meters of each

boring.

3.2 SPT TEST AND DISTURBED SAMPLE COLLECTION

Standard Penetration Test (SPT) according to ASTM D 1586 has been executed using

automatic trip hammer at 1.0m intervals for first 5m and 1.5m interval for greater depths to

determine relative density/consistency and classification of soil at different elevation

inclusive collection of disturbed soil samples from each interval in accordance to the

requirements of the specification of the Engineer. An exploratory boring with a diameter

150mm was bored to the depth of the first test. A SPT sampler, connected with required

length of BW size rod to a 63.5 kg hammer, is inserted in to the boring. SPT sampler is split-

spoon sampler with a ball valve to permit exit of air or water from the top during driving and

to assist in retaining sample during withdrawal; in addition, the sampler has a tapered shoe for

allowing penetration in to the ground. The number of blows required to progress the sampler

450 mm was recorded in three 150 mm intervals. The SPT N-value has been calculated by

summing the hammer blows required to advance the sampler during the last two intervals of

the test. The blow count for the first 150 mm was recorded; however, this number is ignored

during the N-value since the soil immediately below the drilling rod is generally considered to

be disturbed.

When the test has been completed, the SPT sampler was withdrawn and opened. The

amount of soil recovered in the sampler was recorded including its description. After that, the

sample has been transferred to an airtight container. The uncorrected SPT results are shown in

the borehole records. Disturbed samples from split spoon at all SPT location labelled and

preserved in airtight container before transferring them to DCLs laboratory in Dhaka.

Boring logs with SPT records has been enclosed in Appendix B-1.




3.3 UNDISTURBED SAMPLE COLLECTION

Undisturbed Shelby tube sampling was under taken in drill holes as per ASTM

D1587 of the contract document. An exploratory boring with a diameter 150mm was bored to

the depth of the first test. A sampler, connected with a connector rod to a 63.5 kg (140 lb)

hammer, has been inserted in to the boring. The Shelby sampler of 72mm diameter is an open

drive sampler with holes on top to permit exit of air or water from the top during driving.

When driving has been completed, the sampler rotated through two complete

revolutions to shear the superficial deposits horizontally at the bottom; afterwards, the

sampler was withdrawn. Next, the sample tube has been sealed on the both ends using three

alternating layers of 20mm wax and aluminium foil and rubber capped. Sample tubes were

properly labelled and a marking TOP was attached on the tube. All tubes were stored and

transported vertically.

3.4 MEASUREMENT OF GROUND WATER

Water level inside the casing was measured for all boreholes 24 hour after completion

of drilling. Measurement of water level was recorded by using a measuring tape and data was

recorded. But it should be noted that this recorded data may not reflect long term ground

water level due to the presence of perched water table, monsoon, and drilling operation.

Therefore, recorded ground water data may not accurately reflect actual or long term ground

water elevation.

3.5 ELECTRONIC STATIC CONE PENETRATION TEST WITH PORE PRESSURE (CPT-U)

Electronic Cone Penetration Testing was carried out using a 15cm2 projected area

electronic cones with 60o apex angle and 225cm2 friction sleeve area advance using a 20Ton

hydraulic penetrometer. A total of fifteen (15) out of fifteen (15) soundings (designated

SCPT-1 through SCPT-10 and ISCPT-1 through ISCPT-5) were performed at selected

locations. CPT tests were terminated 60m (maximum) below existing grade and tests were

conducted in accordance to ASTM D 5778. Throughout the test the cone was advanced by

applying thrust on 1m long 36mm diameter rod at a rate of 2.0cm/sec. After advancement of

each 1m segment subsequent rod was attached and operation was repeated.

The cone manufactured by GeoMil is a subtraction type cone equipped with

instruments to measure (a) Cone Pressure, (b) Sleeve Friction, and (c) Dynamic Pore

Pressure; furthermore, the cone is also equipped with two inclinometers to monitor its

verticality at all times. Depth of the cone was recorded using an opto-electric encoder. All

data was recorded for every centimetre automatically in a computer running proprietary

software.




Prior to commencement of each test, the pressure transducer of the cone was saturated using

silicon oil. The cone was calibrated prior to commencement and at the end of each test

conforming to the specification using CPTest software (from GeoMil), this software also

automatically recorded all data from the cone.

After completion of the test all collected data has been plotted using CPTask

software, which was also used to estimate engineering parameters from the in situ test data.

This software has been used to estimate following engineering parameters: Friction Angle,

Undrained Shear Strength, Relative Density, and Classification.

CPT logs have been enclosed in Appendix B-2.

3.6 FIELD VANE SHEAR TEST

Field Vane Shear Test has been done for measuring the undrained shear strength

parameter of cohesive soil by means of rotating a vane in boreholes.

The test has been performed in a pre-drilled hole, pushing from the surface. A

reaction casing was set to transfer forces to the torque head without twist or slippage. The

drilling work was stopped at 750mm above test level to conform at least five times the outside

diameter of the hole. The vane was advance from the bottom of the hole carefully in a single

thrust to the test depth. The vane was pushed down without giving any blow, vibration, or

rotation. No torque was applied to the rods during the thrust. Vane rod friction in this case

was negligible.

The time from the end of vane penetration to beginning rotation was no more than 5

minutes. Keeping the vane at its position, the torque has been applied to the vane at a rate of

0.1 deg/sec until failure.

The test results have been presented in APPENDIX B-3.

3.7 ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY TEST

Electrical resistivity tests was carried using a Chauvin-Arnoux (Model: CA6460) Soil

Resistivity Meter at ground surface with electrode spacing of 0.5m, 1.0m, 2.0m 3.0 m, 4.0m,

6m, 8m, and 10m utilizing the Wenner - 4 Pin method. Steel electrode pegs of 2m length were

hammered into the ground at the required spacing and were connected to the resistance meter

as detailed in the diagram below [ASTM G57 95(a)].

Figure 3: Electrical Resistivity Test Set-up

A low voltage 97 Hz square wave current was passed between the two (outer) current

electrodes E, H. The detector measures the voltage drop between the two (inner) potential




electrodes ES, S, and compares this with internal standard resistors and indicates the

resistance reading in ohms on a LCD display. Soil resistivity is then calculated using the

following formula for the Wenner electrode configuration:

ESSw dR 2 The test results have been presented in APPENDIX B-4.

3.8 PLATE LOAD TESTS

Plate bearing tests were performed in accordance with Indian Standard (IS 1888-82).

A square steel plate 600x600mm size (25mm thick) was bedded horizontally onto the surface

of the test location. Vertical loads were applied incrementally using a hydraulic ram reacting

against the weight of a loaded Kentledge. Loads were determined by reference to a calibrated

pressure gauge connected to the hydraulic ram. Settlement of the test plate was monitored

using two 50mm travel, 0.01mm division dial gauges spaced equally around the plate

perimeter and mounted on an independent tubular reference frame shaded from direct sunlight

and protected from disturbance by wind.

Initial seating loads were then applied to give some compensation for any surface

loosening caused during preparation of the test areas. The seating loads were then released

and the dial gauge readings noted at zero load. Test pressures were then applied as specified.

The plate settlement, as an average of the readings of the two dial gauges, was noted for each

pressure increment until completion of the sequence. The pressure-settlement and settlement-

time graphs of the plate bearing test are presented in Appendix B.




C H A P T E R - I V I N V E S T I G AT I O N R E S U LT S

4.1 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL

The Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487) was used to classify the soil

encountered in boring.

4.2 SUMMARY OF FIELD INVESTIGATION

Following list presents borehole number, location coordinates and chainage and ground

surface elevation. Borehole location plans are included in Appendix A. Borehole logs are

included in Appendix B. Table 1: LOCATION COORDITATES & GROUND ELEVATION OF BORE HOLES

BH NO CO-ORDINATES GROUND ELEVATIONNORTHING EASTING

IBH 02 1579.00 1386.00 5.687mIBH-04 1317.00 1395.00 5.366mIBH 05 1031.00 1766.00 5.228mIBH 06 1197.00 1766.00 5.669mIBH 08 967.00 819.00 5.394mIBH 09 1050.00 819.00 5.318mIBH 10 1133.00 819.00 5.495mIBH 11 1216.00 819.00 5.211mIBH 12 1317.00 819.00 5.621mIBH 18 1245.00 1167.00 5.311mIBH 19 1240.00 1635.00 5.321mIBH 20 1165.00 925.00 5.111mIBH 21 1160.00 1431.00 5.229mIBH 22 1163.00 1635.00 5.052mIBH 23 1083.00 925.00 5.532mIBH 24 1164.00 1083.00 5.312mIBH 25 997.00 925.00 5.309mIBH-26 1005.00 1431.00 5.215mIBH-27 1003.00 1635.00 5.521mIBH-28 1280.00 1006.00 5.316mIBH-29 1280.00 1274.00 5.331mIBH-30 1280.00 1546.00 5.312mIBH-31 1216.00 1017.00 5.389mIBH-32 1197.00 1290.00 4.791m

1083.00 1164.00




Table 2: Test locations for ISCPT

Table 3: TEST LOCATIONS FOR IDCPT

Table 4: Test locations for IERT

BH NOCO-ORDINATES GROUND

ELEVATIONNORTHING EASTINGIBH 33 1216.00 1547.00 4.965mIBH 34 1133.00 1017.00 5.125mIBH 35 1114.00 1291.00 5.259mIBH 36 1133.00 1547.00 4.846mIBH 37 1050.00 1015.00 5.301mIBH 38 1031.00 1299.00 5.045mIBH 39 1050.00 1554.00 4.957mIBH 40 967.00 1022.00 4.998mIBH 41 967.00 1309.00 4.942mIBH 42 967.00 1557.00 4.992mIBH 46 920.00 1766.00 5.611mIBH 47 1417.00 1798.00 5.461mIBH 48 1317.00 1587.00 5.313mIBH 49 1317.00 1214.00 5.232mIBH 50 1318.00 943.00 5.108mIBH 56 1266.00 1802.00 5.350mIBH 57 1114.00 1796.00 5.151mIBH 67 1264.00 2133.00 0.802mBH 101 951.00 992.00 4.415mBH 104 951.00 1512.00 4.825m

Test NoCO-ORDINATES

NORTHING EASTINGIDCPT 04 1207 1798

Test NoCO-ORDINATES

NORTHING EASTINGIERT-03 836.00 1344.00IERT-04 1346.00 1578.00IERT-06 1009.00 819.00IERT-10 1031.00 1625.00

987 18031243 1414998 1124

1344.001344.00 836.00




Table 5: TEST LOCATIONS FOR IPLT

4.3 LABORATORY TEST

Following table lists the schedule of laboratory test undertaken. All tests were under taken at

DCLs own laboratory in Dhaka. A table summarizing all tests result is enclosed in

Appendix-D, and all laboratory test reports are enclosed in Appendix-C.

Table 6: List of Laboratory Tests.

LABORATORY TESTSBulk Density/Unit Weight

Moisture Content TestParticle Size Distribution

Atterberg LimitsShrinkage Limit Specific Gravity

Direct Shear TestUnconfined Compression Strength Test

Standard Proctor Compaction TestModified Proctor Compaction Test

Consolidation TestOrganic Content Test of Soil Sample

Underground Water Sample Test

4.4 GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES

4.4.1 SOIL GRADATION

Figure 4 shows the soil gradation envelope of all tests performed under the current

investigation program.

Test NoCO-ORDINATES

NORTHING EASTINGIPLT 04 1240.00 925IPLT 05 1083.00 1635.00IPLT 06 1304.00 1703.00




Figure 4: Soil Gradation Envelope

4.4.2 SOIL PLASTICITY

Figure 5 shows the plasticity chart of all soil samples tested under the current investigation

program.

Figure 5: Plasticity of Soil Sample

4.5 Correction to SPT-N value:

SPT N-value has been corrected using the following formula:

N60 = (ER / 60%) N

Where:

N60 = SPT blow count corrected for hammer efficiency (blows/ft)

Size (mm)

Per cent Passing




ER = Hammer efficiency expressed as % of theoretical free fall energy delivered

by the hammer system actually used (80% for automatic trip hammer used in

the field)

N = uncorrected SPT blow count (blows/ft)

Table 7: Corrected SPT & Design SPT Value

C indicates clay/silt of high plasticity type soil

S indicates sandy soil.

Star

t dep

th

(m)

End

dep

th

(m)

Lay

er

Thi

ckne

ss

(m)

Mid Soil Type

(kPa) Pore

-Pr

essu

re

(kPa

) '

(kPa)N N60 N1(60)

0 6 6 3 S 57 29.43 27.57 4 5 8

6 14 8 10 C 190 98.1 91.9 5 7 7

14 19 5 16.5 C 313.5 161.87 151.64 16 21 20

19 30 3 20.5 S 389.5 201.11 188.4 27 36 29

30 40 3 23.5 S 446.5 230.54 215.97 31 41 28

40 50 5 27.5 S 522.5 269.78 252.73 44 59 35

50 60 10 55 S 1045 539.55 505.45 54 72 38

11

10

10

24.5

35.0

45.055.010

Note: unconfined compression test is done on undisturbed soil (UDS) samples. In this project site collection of UDS sample is very difficult and in some cases notpossible. Hence other test results viz field vane shear test etc. is considered.




C H A P T E R - V A N A L Y S I S & R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S

5.1 GENERAL

A soil anticipated profile diagram is enclosed in Appendix B. As such, recommendations and

calculations for foundation are given per-location basis.

5.2 ANALYSIS FOR FOUNDATION SYSTEM

5.2.1 DESIGN SOIL PROFILE

Based on the field and laboratory test results, design soil profile has been considered as

follows.

Table 8: DESIGN SOIL PROFILE CONSIDERED

Start depth (m) End Depth (m)

Layer Thickness (m) Soil Type

0.00 6 6 S 6.00 14 8 C

14.00 19 5 C 19.00 22 3 S 22.00 25 3 S 25.00 30 5 S 30.00 40 10 S 40.00 50 10 S 50.00 60 10 S

5.3 ANALYSIS FOR SHALLOW FOUNDATION

5.3.1 BEARING CAPACITY

Due to the presence of very loose to loose dredged material (sand filled) followed by soft silty

soil at the upper horizon, it is not recommended to implement shallow foundation in the

proposed site for heavy or major structure with bearing capacity greater than 50 KN/m2; as it

is likely to consolidate under induced pressure of shallow foundation resulting in excessive

settlement. In the liquefaction analysis (referred on Chapter VI) it is found that, the filled up

dredged sand up to 6m below the G.L is susceptible to liquefaction Hence, minor structures

having a pressure intensity less than 50 kN/m2 may be rested on isolated shallow foundation

with necessary ground improvement as described elsewhere.

5.4 DEEP FOUNDATION

5.4.1 BORED CAST-IN SITU PILES & DRIVEN CAST IN SITU PILE:

Due to presence of dredged sand fill and very soft to soft Organic/ Inorganic Silt up to 14m

depth from G.L, pile foundation shall be adopted for structures having pressure intensity




greater than 50 kN/m2 with pile terminating below the 14m depth .In case of Bored Cast In-

situ Piles, temporary casing can be provided up to the depth of about 16 m below the existing

G.L.

5.4.2 ANALYSIS BORED CAST-IN-SITU PILES

Ultimate Pile capacities have been calculated based on methods outlined in "Nominal Axial

Compression Resistance of Single Drilled Shaft" in AASTHO LRFD 2007 -Section 10. The

ultimate unit is given by the relationship following relationship for drilled shaft:

= + In which:

=

= Where:

= Nominal Shaft Tip Resistance

= Nominal Shaft Side Resistance

= Unit Tip Resistance

= Unit Side Resistance

= Resistance factor for tip resistance

= Resistance factor for side resistance

5.4.3 SIDE RESISTANCE FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES

Nominal side resistance in cohesive soil is determined by following equation:

=

In which:

Where:

= Undrained Shear Strength (MPa)

= Adhesion Factor (dimensionless)

= Atmospheric pressure (= 0.101MPa)

Side Resistance in cohesionless sandy soil:




Nominal side resistance in cohesion-less soil is determined by following equation ( -

method):

For :

For :

Where:

= Vertical effective stress at soil layer mid-depth

Load Transfer coefficient (dimensionless)

z = Depth below ground, at soil layer mid-depth

N60 = Average SPT blow count (corrected only for hammer efficiency) = (ER/60%)N and

ER=80% for automatic trip hammer (Equation 10.4.6.2.4-2 of AASHTO LRFD 2007)

5.4.4 TIP RESISTANCE FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES

Tip Resistance in cohesionless soil may be estimated using following equation:

Where:

= Atmospheric pressure (=0.101MPa)

= vertical effective stress at the tip elevation of the shaft (MPa)

N60 = Average SPT blow count (corrected only for hammer efficiency) in the design zone

under consideration (blows/300mm)

Based on the above design SPT N-values and data obtained from field and laboratory tests,

following pile capacity has been estimated (Calculation is enclosed in the Appendix-D):

5.4.5 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES

Using AASHTO LRFD -2007 procedure following working load capacities of different sizes

was calculated based on SPT Value.




Table 9: Estimated Drilled Shaft Capacity for different diameter based on SPT

5.4.6 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR CAST-IN-SITU PILES

Using LCPC procedure following working load capacities of different sizes was calculated

based on CPT Test (Calculation is enclosed in the Appendix-D):

Table 10: Estimated Drilled Shaft Capacity for different diameter based on CPT

(Cut off Level 2.0m below G.L)

The geotechnical capacity of bored cast-in-situ R.C.C Pile terminating in non-cohesive sandy

could be enhanced up to 25% of the above recommended capacity by Tube-a-Manchette

method of Base Grouting.

However, the capacity shall be confirmed by Load Test for particular soil

formation around Toe Level of piles.

Pile diameter

(mm)

Length(m)

Cut-offLevel (m)

Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN)

Tension(kN)

Lateral Capacity

Free

H

ead

Fixe

dH

ead

600 30

03

1053 498 40 80760 38 1834 885 55 115900 45 2911 1365 80 1501000 50 3789 1802 100 175600 30

4.5

1111 532 40 80760 38 1924 939 55 115900 45 3035 1439 80 1501000 50 3941 1893 100 175

COL Pile diameter(mm) Length(m)Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN) Tension(kN)

3.0m600 30 1365.85 409.4750 38 2377.83 786.2850 45 2809.04 990.161000 50 4483.54 1346.388

4.5m600 30.0 1338.04 411.438750 38.0 2114.68 729.624850 45.0 2666.57 995.9081000 50.0 4955.16 1414.396

789.624




5.4.7 ANALYSIS OF PRECAST DRIVEN PILES

5.4.7.1 SIDE RESISTANCE FOR DRIVEN PILES

For cohesionless soil:

Nominal side resistance in cohesionless soil for driven displacement pile is determined by

following equation:

Where:

f = unit skin friction for driven piles (kPa)

po = effective overburden pressure at the point

= friction angle between soil and pile wall

Nominal side resistance in cohesive soil is determined by following equation:

=

Where:

x = coefficient that is a function of cx, and

cx = undrained shear strength at depth x.

ax is taken equal to 1 for c less than 24 kPa. For c in excess of 24kPa but less than or

equal to 72 kPa ax decrease linearly from unity at c equal to 24kPa 0.5 at c equal to 72 kPa.

For c in excess of 72 kPa ax is taken as 0.5.

5.4.7.2 TIP RESISTANCE FOR DRIVEN PILES

Tip Resistance (Cohesionless):

Tip Resistance in Cohesionless soil may be estimated using following equation:

Where:

q = unit tip resistance for driven piles (kPa)

po = effective overburden pressure at pile tip

Nq = bearing capacity factor

5.4.8 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES


was calculated based on SPT Value (Calculation is enclosed in the Appendix-D):




Table 11: Estimated Capacity of Precast R.C.C. Driven pile (Square Shaped for different

size based on SPT

5.4.9 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES

Using LCPC procedure following working load capacities of different sizes was calculated

based on CPT Test Results (Calculation is enclosed in the Appendix-D):

Table 12: Estimated Capacity of Precast R.C.C. Driven pile for different size based on

SCPT (Pile top considered at 2m depth from G.L)

The estimated capacity shall be confirmed by load test.

5.4.10 ESTIMATED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST PSC HOLLOW CORE

CONCRETE PILES


was calculated based on SPT Value (Calculation is enclosed in the Appendix-D):

Pile cut off level (m)

Pile size

(mm)Length(m)

Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN) Tension(kN)Lateral(kN)Free Head

Fixed Head

2.0

350 21.0 568 256 27 50400 24.0 672 293 35 60450 24.0 782 329 40 70450 26.0 897 393 40 70

Borehole Pile Size(mm) Length(m)Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN) Tension(kN)

Design CPT

350 24.0 534 153400 24.0 635 175450 24.0 732 197




Table 13: Estimated Capacity of Precast PSC Hollow Core Concrete pile for different size

based on SPT (Pile cut off level is considered at GL)

The estimated capacity shall be confirmed by load test.


Pile size

(mm)Length(m)

Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN) Tension(kN) Lateral(kN)

At GL

400 24.0 461 191 50600 25.0 839 312 80600 30.0 1006 380 80800 25.0 1261 416 110800 30.0 1507 506 110

PSC Hollow core concrete pile considered as circular and thickness considered as 90mm.




C H A P T E R V I A N A L Y S I S F O R L I Q U E F A C T I O N P O T E N T I A L

6. 1 EXCAVATION, COMPACTION, AND GROUND IMPROVEMENT CRITERIA:

I. SUITABILITY OF ON SITE SOIL AS STRUCTURAL FILL

The materials covering the site near the surface consist of mostly dredged fill

comprises of silty sand material, which are suitable for general backfilling purpose.

Material below Pavements:

Material selected for use in the top 500mm for cut or fill areas in the roadway shall be

in addition to meeting the requirements; the materials passing the #200 (0.076mm) sieve shall

not exceed 35%, the liquid limit & plasticity index for these material shall not be more than

35% & 10% respectively and the swell not exceed 2%.

II. SLOPES FOR EXCAVATION:

The materials covering the site near the surface consist of mostly silty sand. Open

excavation at 1H:1V slope may be permitted for up to 1m depth. Appropriate shoring should

be used for greater excavation particularly during rainy seasons or where it is required.

III. CEMENT FOR UNDERGROUND FOUNDATIONS/STRUCTURES:

Chemical analysis indicates the presence of medium to high sulphate content and falls

in medium to severe Sulphate attack hazard (Ref: Kosmatka and Panarese, 1988, and

Portland Cement Association, 1991). Cement to be used for this project should conform to

the requirement of ASTM Standard Specification C150 or equivalent. Cement shall be

Sulphate resisting type. Cement Type V is recommended in all class of concrete for

foundation structures to be used. It is recommended to use at least 400kg cement per cubic

meter of concrete for pile foundation. It is recommended to undertake a mix-design program

under supervision of a structural engineer for finalizing mix-design of concrete.

IV. GROUND IMPROVEMENT

Very loose to loose dredged material (sand filled) at the upper horizon up to 6m depth

below the existing G.L is susceptible to liquefaction, it is not recommended to implement

shallow foundation at the proposed site for heavy or major structure with bearing capacity

greater than 50kN/m2.

In order to mitigate the liquefaction of site, the following ground improvements are

recommended.




Pile Foundation shall be adopted for the structures having pressure intensity more

than 50kN/m2 with piles resting below 14 m depth from the existing G.L.

Wherever the pile foundations are provided, in case the pile cut off level is above 4.0

m depth from G.L then dynamic compaction should be done at G.L before installation

of piles; incase pile cut off level is below 4.0 m depth from the G.L, piles can be

directly installed. However, the back filling shall be done with excavated sandy soil

with relative density not less than 80%.

Wherever lightly loaded shallow foundations/ roads/structures having pressure

intensity less than 50kN/m2 are adopted, dynamic compaction should be done prior

to excavation.

6.2 METHODS FOR ANALYSIS OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL

6.2.1 GENERAL

The shear stress induced/developed at different depth during an earthquake depends upon the

overburden pressure while the shear resistance can be calculated based on the SPT values.

The shear stress induces/developed and the shear resistances offered by the soil are evaluated

in terms of Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR) and the Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) respectively.

The CSR is the ratio of the shear stress developed to the effective over burden pressure at

various depths while the CRR is the ratio of the shear resistance of the soil to the effective

overburden pressure at various depths.

6.2.2 METHOD

I. CALCULATION OF CYCLIC STRESS RATIO

For the determination of the CSR values at various depths, a peak horizontal ground

acceleration coefficient of 0.12 as stated in Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC 2006)

has been taken in to consideration.

CSR values have been determined using the well-established and widely accepted

methods given by Seed & Idriss (1971) which also included the stress reduction coefficient

which varies with depth.

II. CALCULATION OF CYCLIC RESISTANCE RATIO

The CRR values have been determined using the method given by Robertson (2010)

for an earthquake magnitude of 7.5 giving due consideration to the fact that earthquake of

magnitude greater than 7 have been recorded in Bangladesh. The procedure is an update on

procedure originally published in NCEER-97-0022 (Proceedings of the Workshop on

Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils).




6.3 ANALYSIS OF RESULT

The variations of the CSR and the CRR with depth based on the results of each of the

SPT have been presented in Appendix-D. Factor of safety (F.S) are also included in the

calculation sheet.

Factor of safety has been calculated based on ratio between CRR and CSR. A factor

of safety of less than 1.0 indicates liquefiable soil (Seed and Idriss, 1982, Earthquake

Engineering Research Institute).

Soil is liquefiable up to 6m from ground level as indicated by low factor of safety for

all the boring location.

In view of the above, to mitigate liquefaction, the ground improvement recommended

as discussed above may be adopted.




C H A P T E R V I I R E F E R E N C E S

1. Geological Map of Bangladesh (1990). Md. Md. Khurshid Alam, AKM Shahidul

Hasan, and Mujibur Rahman Khan, Geological Survey of Bangladesh and John

W. Whitney, United States Geological Survey of Bangladesh. Published by

Geological Survey of Bangladesh.

2. Bangladesh National Building Code (2006). Director, Housing and Building

Research Institute, Ministry of Housing and Public Works.

3. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).

4. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Organization

(AASHTO).

5. Indian Standard (IS).

(2015)




C H A P T E R - V I I I R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S & C O N C L U S I ON S

8.1 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOUNDATION SYSTEM

Minor structures having a pressure intensity less than 50 kN/m2 may be rested on isolated

shallow foundation with necessary ground improvement as described elsewhere.

Pile Foundation shall be adopted for the structures having pressure intensity more than

50kN/m2 with piles resting below 14 m depth from the existing G.L.

Wherever the pile foundations are provided, in case the pile cut off level is above 4.0 m depth

from G.L then dynamic compaction should be done at G.L before installation of piles; incase

pile cut off level is below 4.0 m depth from the G.L, piles can be directly installed. However,

the back filling shall be done with excavated sandy soil with relative density not less than

80%.

Wherever lightly loaded shallow foundations/ roads/structures having pressure intensity less

than 50kN/m2 are adopted, dynamic compaction should be done prior to excavation.

The recommended safe load carrying capacity of piles as follows.




8.2 RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR BORED CAST-IN-SITU RCC PILES

Table 14: RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR BORED CAST-IN-SITU RCC

PILES

8.3 RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES

Table 15: RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST DRIVEN PILES

8.4 RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST PSC HOLLOW CORE CONCRETE PILES

Table 16: RECOMMENDED PILE CAPACITY FOR PRECAST PSC HOLLOW CORE

CONCRETE PILES

* Pile Length is evaluated considering maximum L/D ratio 50.

Pile diameter

(mm)

Length(m)

Cut-offLevel (m)

Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN)

Tension(kN)

Lateral Capacity

Free

H

ead

Fixe

dH

ead

600 30

03

1053 498 40 80760 38 1834 885 55 115900 45 2911 1365 80 1501000 50 3789 1802 100 175600 30

4.5

1111 532 40 80760 38 1924 939 55 115900 45 3035 1439 80 1501000 50 3941 1893 100 175

Pile cut offlevel (m)

Pile size

(mm)Length(m)

Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN) Tension(kN)Lateral(kN)

Free Head

Fixed Head

2.0

350 21.0 568 256 27 50400 24.0 672 293 35 60450 24.0 782 329 40 70450 26.0 897 393 40 70


Pile size

(mm)Length(m)

Pile capacity(kN)

Compression(kN) Tension(kN) Lateral(kN)

At GL

400 24.0 461 191 50600 25.0 839 312 80600 30.0 1006 380 80800 25.0 1261 416 110800 30.0 1507 506 110

409.4787.51016

1346.38411.43790.41040.41414.396

485635732843

153175197

216




** The recommended pile Capacities shall be confirmed by conducting pile load test.

8.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

Electrical resistivity of subsoil is given in Appendix B: ERT Results.

Cement to be used for this project should conform to the requirement of ASTM Standard

Specification C150 or equivalent. Cement shall be Sulphate resisting type. Cement Type V is

recommended in all class of concrete for foundation structures to be used. It is recommended

to use at least 400kg cement per cubic meter of concrete for pile foundation. It is

recommended to undertake a mix-design program under supervision of a structural engineer

for finalizing mix-design of concrete.


House 11, Road 19/A, Sector 04,Uttara Model Town, Dhaka 1230

Phone +880-2-58957231, Fax +880-2-58957283

Email: [email protected], Web: http://www.dcl-fcl.com


1.0

2.0

3.0

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

18.0

19.0

20.0

21.0

22.0

23.0

24.0

25.0

26.0

27.0

28.0

29.0

30.0

Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)

Consolidation ShearStrength

Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)

Borehole: IBH- 4Depth:70m

Start: 02.08.16End: 05.08.16

D1

D3

D4

D5

D6

D7

D8

D12

D13

D14

D15

D16

D17

D18

D19

D2

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue

01 02 03 05

03 03 04 07

03 04 05 09

02 03 04 07

06 08 14 22

07 09 16 25

08 11 13 24

c /s(kN/m)

u u

D9

D10

D1102 02 03 05

D20

C = Compression IndexcG = Specific Gravitys

Y = Dry Unit WeightdY = Bulk Unit Weightt

w = Moisture ContentP.I. = Plasticity IndexL.L. = Liquid Limit

C = Re-compression Indexr

D = Disturbed SampleUD = Undisturbed Sample

WD = Depth of Water Measured 24h after Completion of DrillingLeg

end e = Initial Void Ratioo

C = Undrained CohesionS = Undrained Shear Strengthu

u

250

(Deg)

= Angle of Internal Friction

DST = Direct Shear Test

01 02 02 04

01 02 02 04

E: 1395mN: 1317mGL : 5.366m

WD(m) 2.80m

260

270

280

450

450

420

430

330

320

290

270

00 00 00 00

02 03 04 07

09 12 14 26

D21 28006 11 12 23

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

-1.0

-2.0

-3.0

-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

-18.0

-19.0

-20.0

-21.0

-24.0

-23.0

-22.0

5.0

4.0

450

450

00 00 01 01

DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED.Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory. Dhaka.House 11. Road 19A. Sector 4. Uttara. Dhaka 1230. Bangladesh.Phone: +880-2-58957231. Fax: (880) 2-58957283. Email: [email protected]. Client: Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited.

Project: 2x660MW Maitree SuperThermal Power Project.Location: Rampal,Bagerhat.

Owner:Bangladesh India FriendshipPower Company (Pvt) Limited.(BIFPCL)

01 01 02 03

UDS-1 420

01 01 01 02

UDS-2 430

-25.0

Checked BY: Priodeep ChowdhuryApproved BY: Eng. Roknuz zaman

Drawn BY: Md. Emran Uddin

Date : 27.09.16

01 02 02 04

260

01 01 02 03

00 00 00 00

450

450

450

450

450

02 02 03 05

00 53 47 N P

00 08 92 37 10

00 05 95 53 24

00 81 19 N P

SM- Silty Sand.Medium. Grey.

ML- Silt. Stiff. Mediumto Very stiff. Grey.

MH- Elastic Silt. VerySoft. Grey.

SM- Silty Sand. VeryLoose to Loose.Grey.

44.0217.7012.29 2.66

Standard Penetration TestDia/Depth of Casing:- 150mm/6.5m


Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue c /s

(kN/m) u u









u

(Deg)



D23 27010 12 15 27

34.0

35.0

D24 26011 12 17 29

36.0

D25 25010 14 18 34

D26 24012 16 20 36

D27 23010 15 22 37

37.0

38.0

39.0

40.0

31.0

32.0

33.0

D22 29008 10 20 30

-28.0

-29.0

-30.0

-31.0

-32.0

-33.0

-34.0

-27.0

-26.0

D28 22010 19 20 39




D29 24012 18 20 38

D30 45006 07 07 14

D31 24016 17 27 44

D32 18034 61 (50 blows/150mm)

D33 21022 34 42 76

D34 22020 30 40 70

D35 230

D36 19026 40 24 64

D37 20024 38 38 76

D38 22025 25 25 50

D39 23020 32 37 69

41.0

-35.0

42.0

-36.0

43.0

-37.0

44.0

-38.0

45.0

-39.0

46.0

-40.0

47.0

-41.0

48.0

-42.0

49.0

-43.0

50.0

-44.0

51.0

-45.0

52.0

-46.0

53.0

-47.0

54.0

-48.0

55.0

-49.0

56.0

-50.0

57.0

-51.0

58.0

-52.0

59.0

-53.0

60.0

-54.0

D40 18030 62 08 70 (210mm/ Frist 50 blows)

D41 23016 22 24 46

D42 180 61.0

-55.0



Date : 27.09.16

UDS-3 380

14 15 19 34

35 64 (50 blows/150mm)

(402mm/ Frist 50 blows)








00 92 08 N P

00 67 33 N P

00 02 98 40 13

00 46 54 N P

SP-SM - Poorly gradedSand with Silt. Denseto Very Dense. Grey.

SM- Silty Sand. VeryDense. Grey.

ML- Silt. Stiff. Grey.

ML- Sandy Silt. VeryStiff to Hard. Grey.

28.5019.3715.07 2.68

Standard Penetration TestDia/Depth of Casing:- 150mm/6.5m Borehole:

IBH- 4Depth:70m

Start: 02.08.16End: 05.08.16

E: 1395mN: 1317mGL : 5.366m

WD(m) 2.80m


Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue c /s

(kN/m) u u









u

(Deg)



END OF BORING




D43 17062.0

-56.0

63.0

-57.0

64.0

-58.0

65.0

-59.0

66.0

-60.0

67.0

-61.0

68.0

-62.0

D44 180

D45 24030 40 30 70 (220mm/ Frist 50 blows)

D46 25022 24 25 49 (320mm/ Frist 50 blows)

D47 24020 24 28 52 (325mm/ Frist 50 blows) 69.0

-63.0

70.0

-64.0

-65.0



Date : 27.09.16

33 68 (50 blows/150mm)

30 66 (50 blows/150mm)

D47 25022 23 27 50 (322mm/ Frist 50 blows)

SP-SM - Poorly gradedSand with Silt. Denseto Very Dense. Grey.


IBH- 4Depth:70m

Start: 02.08.16End: 05.08.16

E: 1395mN: 1317mGL : 5.366m

WD(m) 2.80m


1.0

2.0

3.0

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

18.0

19.0

20.0

21.0

22.0

23.0

24.0

25.0

26.0

27.0

28.0

29.0

30.0

Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)


Start: 30.06.16End: 01.07.16

D1

D3

D4

D5

D6

D7

D8

D12

D13

D14

D15

D16

D17

D18

D19

D2

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue

00 01 01 02

02 02 03 05

10 12 15 27

08 13 16 29

09 11 12 23

11 13 17 30

08 12 15 27

10 14 18 32

09 13 20 33

c /s(kN/m)

u u

D9

D10

D1105 07 08 15

D20









u

450

(Deg)



01 01 02 03

03 05 05 10

E: 1766mN: 1197mGL : 5.669m

WD(m) 1.15m

470

430

440

420

430

420

420

400

380

420

370

400

420

390

360

01 01 01 02

02 02 03 05

06 09 12 21

16 17 21 38

D21 41013 15 18 33

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

-1.0

-2.0

-3.0

-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

-18.0

-19.0

-20.0

-21.0

-24.0

-23.0

-22.0

5.0

4.0

440

470

440

450

02 03 03 06

01 01 02 03

01 02 02 04UDS-1 300

01 01 02 03

UDS-2 340




Date : 27.09.16




00 92 08 N P

00 92 08 N P

00 92 08 N P

00 92 08 N P

SM- Silty Sand.Medium to Dense.Grey.

MH- Elastic Silt. Soft toStiff. Grey.

SP - Poorly gradedSand.Very Loose toLoose. Grey.

46.4617.5611.99 2.68



1.0

2.0

3.0

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

18.0

19.0

20.0

21.0

22.0

23.0

24.0

25.0

26.0

27.0

28.0

29.0

30.0

Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)


Start: 27.06.16End: 29.06.16

D1

D3

D4

D5

D6

D7

D8

D12

D13

D14

D15

D16

D17

D18

D19

D2

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue

00 01 01 02

02 02 03 05

10 12 15 27

08 13 16 29

09 11 12 23

11 13 17 30

08 12 15 27

10 14 18 32

09 13 20 33

c /s(kN/m)

u u

D9

D10

D1105 07 08 15

D20









u

450

(Deg)



01 01 02 03

03 05 05 10

E: 1766mN: 1031mGL : 5.228m

WD(m) 1.20m

470

430

440

420

430

420

420

400

380

420

370

400

420

390

360

01 01 01 02

02 02 03 05

06 09 12 21

16 17 21 38

D21 41013 15 18 33

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

-1.0

-2.0

-3.0

-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

-18.0

-19.0

-20.0

-21.0

-24.0

-23.0

-22.0

5.0

4.0

440

470

440

450

02 03 03 06

-24.0

01 01 02 03

01 02 02 04UDS-1 300

01 01 02 03

UDS-2 340




Date : 27.09.16




00 11 89 53 22

00 17 83 37 10

00 14 86 40 13

ML- Silt.Very Stiff.Grey.

ML- Silt with sand.Stiff.Grey.

MH- Elastic Silt. Softto Mediume. Grey.

42.8016.3411.44

43.1017.4212.17

SP - Poorly gradedSand.Very Loose toLoose. Grey.

2.67



Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue c /s

(kN/m) u u









u

(Deg)



END OF BORING

D23 42014 14 20 34

34.0

35.0

D24 37019 29 32 61

36.0

D25 39017 20 28 48

D26 36012 15 17 32

D27 44007 08 09 17

37.0

38.0

39.0

40.0

31.0

32.0

33.0

D22 39018 20 25 45

-28.0

-29.0

-30.0

-31.0

-32.0

-33.0

-34.0

-27.0

-26.0

D28 42009 11 14 25




-35.0



Date : 27.09.16




00 24 76 34 08 ML- Silt with sand.VeryStiff to Hard. Grey.

DST 25.9 30.7


IBH- 5Depth:40m

Start: 27.06.16End: 29.06.16

E: 1766mN: 1031mGL : 5.228m

WD(m) 1.20m


Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue c /s

(kN/m) u u









u

(Deg)



END OF BORING

D23 42014 14 20 34

34.0

35.0

D24 37019 29 32 61

36.0

D25 39017 20 28 48

D26 36012 15 17 32

D27 44007 08 09 17

37.0

38.0

39.0

40.0

31.0

32.0

33.0

D22 39018 20 25 45

-28.0

-29.0

-30.0

-31.0

-32.0

-33.0

-34.0

-27.0

D28 42009 11 14 25




-35.0



Date : 27.09.16




-26.0

-25.0

ML- Silt with sand.VeryStiff to Hard. Grey.


IBH- 6Depth:40m

Start: 30.06.16End: 01.07.16

E: 1766mN: 1197mGL : 5.669m

WD(m) 1.15m


1.0

2.0

3.0

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

18.0

19.0

20.0

21.0

22.0

23.0

24.0

25.0

26.0

27.0

28.0

29.0

30.0

Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m) Borehole: IBH- 8

Depth:40mStart: 30.07.16End: 01.08.16

D1

D3

D4

D5

D6

D7

D8

D12

D13

D14

D15

D16

D17

D18

D19

D2

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue

02 03 03 06

03 04 05 09

04 06 06 12

07 09 10 19

08 13 15 28

10 16 17 33

08 14 15 29

05 06 08 14

c /s(kN/m)

u u

D9

D10

D1103 04 05 09

D20









u

360

(Deg)



03 03 04 07

E: 819mN: 967mGL : 5.394m

WD(m) 0.95m

340

330

370

350

340

400

400

370

340

360

380

350

380

360

01 02 02 04

00 00 00 00

03 04 04 08

07 10 12 22

D21 37009 11 15 26

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

-1.0

-2.0

-3.0

-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

-18.0

-19.0

-20.0

-21.0

-24.0

-23.0

-22.0

5.0

4.0

390

420

380

390

04 05 06 11

02 03 03 06

00 01 01 02

(50 blows/305mm)

(50 blows/305mm)

(50 blows/310mm)

03 03 04 07 (50 blows/310mm)

(50 blows/305mm)

(50 blows/310mm)

VST-1

(50 blows/320mm)

UDS-1 325

00 01 01 02 (50 blows/310mm)

VST-2

(50 blows/320mm)

UDS-2

01 02 02 04 (50 blows/320mm)

(50 blows/315mm)

(50 blows/310mm) 380

(50 blows/305mm)



Date : 27.09.16




-25.0

00 93 07 N P

00 03 97 56 25

00 51 49 N P

00 65 35 N P

43.6416.8211.71

ML- Silt. Very Stiff .Grey.

SM- Silty Sand.Medium to Dense.Grey.

MH- Elastic Silt. Soft toStiff. Grey.

SP-SM - Poorly gradedSand with Silt. Loose toMedium. Grey.

2.67



Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

cific

Gra

vitY

ClaySiltSandGravel

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt

Gravel(%) E

lev

(m)

Sam

ple

Rec

. (m

m)

150m

m

150m

m

150m

m

N-V

alue c /s

(kN/m) u u









u

(Deg)



END OF BORING

D23 40008 11 13 24

34.0

35.0

D24 39008 10 12 22

36.0

D25 34007 11 14 25

D26 33010 13 15 28

D27 28009 12 12 24

37.0

38.0

39.0

40.0

31.0

32.0

33.0

D22 38007 07 10 17

-28.0

-29.0

-30.0

-31.0

-32.0

-33.0

-34.0

-27.0

-26.0

D28 30011 14 16 30



Date : 27.09.16




-35.0

00 13 87 36 11

ML- Silt. Very Stiff .Grey.


IBH- 8Depth:40m

Start: 30.07.16End: 01.08.16

E: 819mN: 967mGL : 5.394m

WD(m) 0.95m


1.0

2.0

3.0

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

18.0

19.0

20.0

21.0

22.0

23.0

24.0

25.0

26.0

27.0

28.0

29.0

30.0

Dep

th (m

)

Sam

ple

No.

10 20 30 40 500Typ

e

eo CcGsYdYtw

(%)P.I.L.L.Fines(%)

Sand(%) Cr

GrainSize

AtterbergLimits

UnitWeight(kN/m)


Laye

r Sym

bol

Spe

geotechnical investigation report part-2 - … · table 12: estimated capacity of precast r.c.c....

Documents