Indian Railway Stations Development Corporation ...irsdc.in/sites/default/files/BWSN-GIR.pdfMinistry of Indian Railways, (MOR) Govt. of India, through Indian Railway Stations Development

SENER Doc. P210G04-01-KD2-GIR-SR-RP-0001

Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 1 of 41

KD2- Geotechnical Investigations Report

SENER Ingeniería y Sistemas S.A. - India 2013

The information contained in this document is confidential and restricted, and is to be used only for the purposes established in the document. No modification, exploitation, reproduction, communication to any third party, dissemination or distribution of the whole or any part of the document is permitted without the prior written consent of SENER Ingeniería y Sistemas, S.A.. Failure to respond to any request for such consent shall in no way be construed as authorization for use.

PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY STUDY AND MASTER PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BIJWASAN NEW DELHI RAILWAY STATION OF THE INDIAN RAILWAY NETWORK

KD2 – GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS REPORT

WWW.SENER.ES


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 2 of 41



Signature Control

Written Approved

Mr. Ranga Rao Mr. Juan Francisco Paz

July 2013 July 2013

Date and Signature Date and Signature

Changes Record

Rev Date Author Affected section Changes

0 2013.07.02 Mr. Ranga Rao Update


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 3 of 41



TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 6

1.1 Scope of this Report ...................................................................... 6

2 PLANNING OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROGRAMME .............................. 7

3 LOCATION AND CO – ORDINATES OF BORE HOLES ........................................... 8

3.1 Co – Ordinaste of bore holes ............................................................ 8

3.2 Depth of bore holes ....................................................................... 8

4 METHODOLOGY OF SOIL INVESTIGATION SURVEY .......................................... 10

4.1 Scope of Work ............................................................................ 10

4.2 Safety measures ......................................................................... 11

4.3 Boring ...................................................................................... 11

4.4 In-situ Tests ............................................................................... 12

4.5 Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) .................................................... 12

4.6 Collection of Samples ................................................................... 12

4.7 Labeling, Packing and Transporting ................................................. 15

4.7.1 Sample Labeling: .................................................................15

4.7.2 Packing and Transporting .......................................................16

4.7.3 Laboratory Testing: ..............................................................16

4.7.4 Moisture Content Determination ...............................................16

4.7.5 Grain Size Distribution ...........................................................16

4.7.6 Atterberg Limits ..................................................................16

4.8 Consolidation Tests ..................................................................... 17

4.8.1 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) ......................................18

4.9 Direct shear Tests ....................................................................... 18


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 4 of 41



4.10 Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Samples ......................... 19

4.11 Chemical Tests ........................................................................... 19

4.12 Report Preparation ...................................................................... 19

5 TERMINATION OF BORE HOLE .................................................................. 21

6 LABORATORY TESTS ............................................................................. 22

7 GEOLOGICAL INFORMATION OF THE REGION ................................................ 23

7.1 Location ................................................................................... 23

7.2 Climate .................................................................................... 23

7.3 Topography, Geography and General Geology .................................... 24

7.4 Seismicity ................................................................................. 26

7.5 Liquefaction .............................................................................. 27

8 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESMENT /PROPOSED DESIGN PARAMETERS ......................... 29

8.1 Subsurface Conditions / Strength Characteristics ................................ 29

9 DESIGN CRITERIA .................................................................................. 31

9.1 Design Methodology ..................................................................... 31

9.1.1 Open Foundation ..................................................................31

9.1.2 Shallow Foundation ...............................................................32

10 COMPUTATIONS ................................................................................... 33

11 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 41


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 5 of 41



ANNEXURES

Annexure nº1.Liquefaction Potential Evalaution

Annexure nº2.Chemical Analysis

Annexure nº3.Borelogs

Annexure nº4. PHI

Annexure nº5.GSD

Annexure nº6.DST

Annexurenº7.Photographs

Annexure nº8.Bore Hole location Drawing


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 6 of 41



1 INTRODUCTION

Ministry of Indian Railways, (MOR) Govt. of India, through Indian Railway Stations

Development Corporation Limited (IRSDC)” Which is Constituted under Companies Act,

1956, a Government Company under the Ministry of Railways and “Rail Land Development

Authority (RLDA)” a statutory authority under Ministry of Railways, has decided for

preparation of Master Plan for Development / Redevelopment of Bijwasan Railway Station,

New Delhi on the Indian Railway Network.

IRSDC, has appointed M/s. SENER, an International Architect firm from Spain along with

M/s. Balaji Railroad Systems Limited, Hyderabad for preparation of Master Plan.

1.1 Scope of this Report

This report presents the details of Geotechnical investigations carried out and data

obtained from various field and laboratory tests, their computation, compilation, analysis

and suitable recommendation made as regards to type of foundations to be adopted for

the proposed structures.

This report contains the following information

Introduction

Planning Geo – Technical Investigation programme

Geological Information of the region.

Methodology of Investigation.

Subsurface conditions / Geotechnical Assessment.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 7 of 41



2 PLANNING OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROGRAMME

Based on the nature of Project the work was planned as given below:

a) Drilling bore holes of 150mm diameter up to 30.0m depth by shell & auger

Method as per IS code of practice and as per the direction of the Engineer-in-

Charge.

b) Conducting Standard Penetration tests in the bore holes at regular intervals of

1.50m or wherever possible as per IS Code of Practice.

c) Collecting undisturbed soil samples from the bore holes at regular intervals of

3.0m or change of strata or wherever possible as per IS Code of Practice.

d) Recording of water table level in the bore holes after completion of borehole.

e) Preparation of report summarizing the details of soil classification, analysis of

test data, type of foundation etc.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 8 of 41



3 LOCATION AND CO – ORDINATES OF BORE HOLES

The boreholes for the proposed structure were drilled as per the direction of the Engineer

in charge and are given at Table I below:

3.1 Co – Ordinaste of bore holes

Table – 1

S.No. Bore Hole No. Easting Northing

1 B.H-1 3158171.869 702673.071

2 B.H-2 3158642.248 702577.612

3 B.H-3 3158939.625 702583.179

4 B.H-4 3158939.773 702729.936

5 B.H-5 3158792.537 702728.484

6 B.H-6 3159230.003 702580.573

7 B.H-7 3158940.533 702900.146

8 B.H-8 3158496.438 702785.303

9 B.H-9 3159203.839 703040.651

10 B.H-10 3159553.814 702885.079

11 B.H-11 3159761.624 702800.220

12 B.H-12 3160205.297 702836.366

13 B.H-13 3159221.756 702817.007

14 B.H-14 3160416.075 702778.680

15 B.H-15 3160702.703 702600.542

3.2 Depth of bore holes

Table ‐ 2

BH No. Depth of Borehole(m) Water Table(m)

1 30.0 28.30

2 30.0 26.00


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 9 of 41




3 30.0 26.00

4 30.0 25.70

5 30.0 26.00

6 30.0 26.30

7 30.0 26.50

8 30.0 26.00

9 30.0 26.70

10 30.0 27.00

11 30.0 25.40

12 30.0 25.20

13 30.0 27.10

14 24.20 Not Met

15 30.0 28.90


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 10 of 41



4 METHODOLOGY OF SOIL INVESTIGATION SURVEY

Purpose

The Purpose of this Method Statement is to form a procedure for soil investigation

works required for the preparation of Bijwasan Railway station Master Plan

development Project.

Description

Geotechnical investigations are required to evolve various soil / rock parameters at

the proposed project location in order to carry out engineering analysis. Broad

objectives of the investigations are as follows.

To evaluate geo-technical parameters of soil / rock at the proposed

borehole locations.

To assess the engineering parameters and to estimate bearing capacity of

soil.

To recommend suitable foundation systems.

To evaluate the aggressiveness of soil due to chemical content in the

deposits.

To measure the effect of ground water on steel and other materials and to

submit recommendations for preventive measures.

4.1 Scope of Work

The scope of work includes the following:

Drilling boreholes at accessible locations within the project site boundaries.

Conducting standard penetration tests at 1.5m interval (depth) or at every

identifiable change of strata, whichever is met earlier.

Conducting the field tests like Standard Penetration Tests (SPT), Vane Shear Test

(VST) as per the Technical Specifications.

Collection of both disturbed and undisturbed soil samples and rock cores and

carrying out the entire relevant laboratory tests on soils and rock cores.

Submitting a detailed report on soil investigations including the design soil

parameters for the various locations.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 11 of 41



Location of boreholes

The exact location of boreholes shall be obtained from the topographical survey

data and the Chainage / coordinates will be intimated to Engineer’s representative.

Tentatively 6 weeks are planned to complete the works at site.

4.2 Safety measures

All safety measures will be strictly followed during working. The following shall be taken

care:

Barricading the location with prior information to traffic police, if it is on the road.

Safety standby man shall be deployed from start to finish.

Only licensed and experienced operators and workers shall be working at site.

All men working at site shall be provided with required PPEs like safety helmets,

safety shoes, reflective Jackets, safety gloves etc.

Drinking water in sufficient quantity shall be available at working place. Also

necessary lighting arrangements shall be made at work place at night.

Necessary Sign Board shall be installed at site.

The work shall be carried out under the Supervision of a qualified Engineer.

4.3 Boring

Boring in Soil

Boring shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of IS 1892:1979. Minimum

diameter of boring shall be 150 mm. Auger boring shall be resorted to above the water

table, whereas below the water table the boreholes shall be advanced by rotary drilling

with mud circulation through all kinds of soils other than rock. While boring above water

table, no water shall be introduced in the boreholes. Casing if required shall be used to

support the sides of boreholes in soil for loose soils. Water table in the borehole shall be

carefully recorded and reported.

Use of chisel and percussion boring shall be permitted exclusively in strata having N (SPT)

value greater than 100 per 30 cm of penetration.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 12 of 41



Boring in Rock

If the rate of advancement of boring by chiseling is slow (i.e. less than 20 cm in 4 hrs),

then core drilling with N* size Tungsten Carbide (TC) bit shall be done. Where core

recovery exceeds 10%, TC bits shall be used for coring in soft / weathered rock and

diamond bits for hard rock (Rock Quality Designation (RQD) > 50% or core recovery

Percentage > 75%). Maximum length of coring in rock shall be 1.5m. In hard rock maximum

length of coring shall be restricted to 1.0m. Double tube core barrel shall be used for

coring.

4.4 In-situ Tests

In-situ Density

The in-situ density of the soil in trial pits at ground surface shall be determined by the

core cutter method provided the soil consists of predominantly fine grained particles, as

per IS2720 (Part 29). In medium grained to coarse grained soils the sand replacement

method shall be adopted for determination of field density as described in IS 2720 (Part

28).

4.5 Standard Penetration Tests (SPT)

These tests were conducted at every 1.50 m intervals and every change of strata or

wherever possible. The tests were performed by driving into the soil (bore holes cleaned of

any loose material) a standard split spoon sampler with the help of a standard hammer

with a free fall of 75 cm on a driving head as described in IS: 2131. This head was

attached to “A” drill rod to the other end of which the sampler was fitted. The number of

blows needed to penetrate the first, second and third stages (each of 15 cm) depth of the

sampler length, were noted. The number of blows (N value) as given in the borehole data

sheets is the numerical sum of blows counted during the second & third stage only i.e. for

a depth of 30 cm.

4.6 Collection of Samples

Disturbed Soil Samples

Disturbed samples shall be collected at every 1.5m up to 15 m depth and at intervals of 2.0

m beyond 15m depth and at every change of strata from borehole. Weight of disturbed


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 13 of 41



samples shall not be less than 1 kg and shall be taken as per IS 1892 : 1979. The samples

are placed immediately in airtight containers with a minimum of air space so as to

maintain the natural moisture content for at least one week.

Identification levels, indicating depth, borehole number and visual soil classification shall

be affixed on the containers.

Undisturbed Soil Samples

Undisturbed samples shall be collected from all boreholes from representative soils at

intervals of 3.0m in depth and at every change of stratum, whichever occurs earlier.

For adjacent boreholes, depth of sample collections shall be staggered to cater for full

layer.

The ratio of the sampling tubes not exceed 20%. In soft deposits, piston sampler shall be

used to collect UDS.

Before taking an undisturbed sample the bottom of the boring shall be carefully cleaned to

remove loose materials and where casing is being used the sample shall be collected from

the bottom of the casing.

Care shall be taken to minimize sample disturbance while collection of samples. Samples

shall be collected preferably by pushing the sampler. Driving by hammer above ground

level (like SB’T) is not acceptable.

Where an attempt is made to collect an undisturbed sample, which is aborted because of

slippage, the boring shall be cleaned out for the full depth to which the sampling tube has

been driven and the recovered soil shall be kept as a disturbed sample.

A fresh attempt shall be then made from the level of the base. Where full recovery is not

achieved the actual length of sample in the sampling tube shall be recorded and the

reason for only partial recovery shall be noted. Samples with recovery of less than 60%

shall be regarded as disturbed samples.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 14 of 41



The depths from which all samples arc taken shall be recorded. The level at the top of the

sample and the length of the sample obtained shall be given, together with the depth of

casing. As soon as the sample is obtained from the trial pit or borehole, the ends of the

sample should be cut and removed to a depth of 2.5 cm and several layers of molten wax

should be applied to each end.

Rock Samples

Disturbed Rock Samples:

The sludge from percussion borings, or from rotary borings, which have failed to yield a

core, may be taken as a disturbed sample. It may be recovered from circulating water by

settlement in a trough. The rock type may be deduced by examining the material of which

the sludge is composed.

Undisturbed Rock Samples:

Coring is the process of recovering cylindrical cores of rock by means of rotating a hollow

steel tube (Core barrel) equipped with a coring bit. The drilled core is carefully collected

in the core barrel as the drilling progresses.

Once the core has been cut and the core barrel is full, the drill rods or overshot assembly

ore pulled and the core retrieved.

Cores of rock shall be taken by means of rotary drills fitted with a coring bit with core

retainer. Rock core shall be recovered continuously in the borehole. If recovery drops

below 100%, modify the drilling procedure, that is, adjust the drilling RPM, down feed

pressure, the drilling fluid type and flow.

Water Samples

Samples of ground water shall be taken from each boring in which water is found. Where

water has been previously added for boring purposes, the boring shall be bailed out before

sampling until only uncontaminated groundwater is present in the boring.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 15 of 41



The samples shall be stored in watertight containers, which shall be washed out with

groundwater before filling. The sample shall be not less than 0.5 litres in volume. In the

event that sample contains any suspended sediment, a larger quantity of sample shall be

obtained and allowed for sediment settling.

The clean water shall then be decanted into the storage container. The depth of borehole,

depth of casing and water level at the time of sampling and the depth from which the

sample is obtained shall be recorded on two labels to be fixed to the samples, using

appropriate non-fade waterproof marker pen.

Bulk / Disturbed Soil Samples

Bulk / Disturbed samples shall be collected at ground surface, 0.5m and 1.0m depths. They

shall be fully representative of the zone from which they are taken. Weights of bulk

sample shall not be less than 5 kg and disturbed sample shall not be less than 1.0 kg.

They shall be placed immediately in airtight containers with a minimum of air space so as

to maintain the natural moisture content for at least one week.

Identification levels, indicating depth, borehole number and visual soil classification shall

be affixed on the containers.

4.7 Labeling, Packing and Transporting

4.7.1 Sample Labeling:

All samples, irrespective of their type, shall be clearly and permanently labeled with the

following information immediately upon recovery:

a) Project name and location

b) Borehole number

c) Depths at which sample collected

d) Date of recovery

e) In the case of core samples or undisturbed “tube” samples, tl>c top and bottom

of the samples shall be clearly marked as such.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 16 of 41



All samples shall be fixed with two labels one on the lid or screw top, the other on the jar

or on the steel tube.

4.7.2 Packing and Transporting

All collected samples shall be transported at the end of every borehole to the laboratory.

4.7.3 Laboratory Testing:

After collecting disturbed and undisturbed soil samples from different boreholes at

different depths and trial pits, a laboratory test schedule shall be prepared. The laboratory

tests shall essentially comprise of but not limited to the following.

4.7.4 Moisture Content Determination

The natural moisture content of all the soil samples brought from the site should be

determined as prescribed in IS2720 (Part 2) – 1973.

4.7.5 Grain Size Distribution

Sieve analysis for grain distribution should be conducted on all disturbed and undisturbed

samples collected from boreholes and trial pits. A hydrometer analysis should be carried

out on fractions less than 75 micron wherever applicable as per IS 2720 (Part 4) – 1985. For

the hydrometer analysis, the hydrometer should be calibrated appropriately and all

corrections viz. meniscus, temperature and dispersing agent corrections applied to the

readings.

The grain size distribution curve i.e. Percent finer vs particle diameter should be plotted.

A table showing the percentage of various grain sizes (gravel to clay), D___ Dm, Uniformity

Coefficient C, and Coefficient of Curvature Cc for each test should be given.

4.7.6 Atterberg Limits

These tests shall be carried out on clay fractions (size < 75 microns) for all disturbed and

undisturbed samples. The test results should include liquid limit, plastic limit, and

plasticity index and shrinkage limit of the soil samples. These test shall be conducted as

per IS2720 (Part – 5) 1985 and IS 2720 (Part – 6) – 1972. In swelling type of soils, the free

swell index should be determined.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 17 of 41



4.8 Consolidation Tests

These tests shall be conducted on undisturbed samples of clayey soils for vertical drainage

only. The following loading stages shall be employed:

0.1, 0.25, 0.50, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, 8.0 kg/cm2.

From e vs log p curves, pre-consolidation pressure shall be determined to establish

whether the soil is normally consolidated or over-consolidated.

The point (e, p) showing initial condition of the soil under test must be specifically marked

on the consolidation curves. Cycle(s) of loading, unloading and reloading shall be applied.

The field virgin compression curve shall be established. Settlement predictions based on

the field virgin compression curve shall only be acceptable. The procedure adopted in

respect of obtaining compression indices from the field curve and that for computing

settlements for the type of soil under consideration shall be clearly illustrated in the

report.

The following curves shall be included in the report:

a) e Vs log p

b) e Vs p

c) Compression Vs log (t) or compression Vs square root (I)

The choice of relationship in part © depends upon the shape of the plot that enables clear

determination of CVI the coefficient of consolidation. The time period required for 50% and

90% primary consolidation should be given in the report.

Location of pc (pre-consolidation pressure) shall be clearly indicated in the e-log p curve.

Values of mV CV shall be furnished for different pressure ranges including the values of eo,

Cc, & Pc in the e-log p plot as well as in tabular form. Computation of secondary

settlements if significant shall also be made and included in the report.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 18 of 41



4.8.1 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS)

These tests shall be done as per IS 2720 (Part – 10) – 1973 on undisturbed soil samples of

saturated (or nearly saturated) non-fissured cohesive soils. The cylindrical soil sample

should be tested quickly without allowing for drainage, in vertical compression. The UCS

and cohesion (half the UCS) of the samples should be reported.

4.9 Direct shear Tests

These tests shall be conducted on disturbed samples collected in boreholes/trial pits

remolded to their natural density. The test shall be performed as per IS2720 (Part – 13) –

1971. In case cohesive soils, the specimen of required dimension shall be prepared by

compacting the sample to the natural density and natural moisture content and extracted

and trimmed to required size or directly compacted in to the shear box.

In case cohesion less soils, the sample shall be prepared directly in to the shear box itself

with base plate or grid plate / porous plate. The shear box with the specimen, plain grid

plate over the base plate at the bottom of the specimen and plain grid plate at top of the

specimen shall be fitted into the loading frame. The serrations of the grid plates should be

at right angles of the directions of shear. A water jacket should be provided so that the

specimen does not gel dried during the test. The test shall be commenced and shear load

reading and displacements should be noted at regular intervals. The test shall be

continued until the specimen fails or to 20 percent of Longitudinal displacement, which

occurs first. The specimen then is unloaded and final moisture content shall be noted.

A minimum of three specimens shall be tested as above for different shear loads. The

dimensions of each specimen, the bulk density, the moisture content, the normal load, the

value of the maximum principal stress difference, and the corresponding strain and time to

failure and the rate of strain at which the test was conducted shall be reported.

All the stress – strain diagrams as well as Mohr’s envelopes shall be included in the report.

The Secant Modulus and Tangent Modulus at 50% of the peak strength shall be indicated.

The shear strength parameters shall be obtained from the plot of Mohr circles and be

reported.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 19 of 41



4.10 Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Samples

The tests shall be performed as per IS 9143 – 1979. Intact rock cores of minimum NX size

and length 2.5 to 3 times the diameter should be tested for its Uni-axial compressive

strength. This test should be conducted on perfectly cylindrical samples, which shall be

polished and conform to the relevant Indian Standards. The UCS of the sample should be

reported along with the diameter and length of the sample.

4.11 Chemical Tests

Chemical test shall be conducted on soils and water samples as per the relevant IS a latest

revision to report the following:

PH

Chlorides inppm & percentage

Sulphate in ppm and percentage and expressed as SO3 & SO4

4.12 Report Preparation

The report shall also contain the summary of various soil parameters evaluated in a

Performa. The final report shall include but not limited to the following:

A plot plan shall be attached with the report showing all test locations with (here

coordinates and reduced levels).

General geological information of the region.

Character and genesis of soil.

Procedure of investigations and methods of various tests adopted.

Detailed bore logs indicating co-ordinates, reduced ground/bed levels, ground

water table, subsoil section along various profiles indicating borehole nos., depth

wise in situ tests like SPT, etc.

All field and laboratory test results shall be plotted against depth and also in

tabular form.

Summary of results obtained from various tests and their interpretation to evaluate

various soil parameters.

Sets of longitudinal and transverse soil profile connecting various boreholes showing

the variation of soil stratum.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 20 of 41



Comments on chemical nature of ground water and soil with due regard to potential

deleterious effect on steel and other materials and firm recommendations on

protective measures. Also remedial measure for sulphate attack or acidity shall be

dealt with in detail giving clear practical recommendations.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 21 of 41



5 TERMINATION OF BORE HOLE

Each Bore hole was planned to be extended up to a maximum depth of 30m below ground

level meeting the requirements of the structural Engineer. In any Borehole, if three

consecutive values of SPT conducted at an interval of 1.5 m were obtained as more than 52

refusal was encountered, the borehole was terminated. Depth of exploration: Reference to

"Foundation engineering handbook" by Dr. N. V. Nayak

Where the soft rock is encountered it should be proved by boring to minimum 5m. Hence

bore holes were terminated after drilling minimum 5 m in soft rock.

"Where hard rock is encountered it should be proved by boring to a minimum 3m". Hence

boreholes were terminated after drilling minimum 3m in hard rock

Recording of water table

Water table was recorded after 24 hours of completion of the boreholes at the time of soil

investigation, which was carried out during the months of April 2013. The details are

shown in respective borelogs and Table 3 below.

Table – 3


1 30 28.3

2 30 26

3 30 26

4 30 25.7

5 30 26

6 30 26.3

7 30 26.5

8 30 26

9 30 26.7

10 30 27

11 30 25.4

12 30 25.2

13 30 27.1

14 24.2 Not Met

15 30 28.9


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 22 of 41



6 LABORATORY TESTS

A visual and discrete examination of all the soil samples collected, was carried out for

deciding the number and type of tests as well as the number of samples to be tested from

each bore hole. Based on the strata met at the site, the following tests were conducted on

samples to classify them and to evaluate their index and Engineering properties.

Grain size distribution / Hydrometer Analysis (on DS

& UDS samples)

IS 2720(Part IV)

Moisture content and dry density( On UDS Samples) IS 2720 ( Part II)

Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit( On DS & UDS Samples) IS 2720(Part V)

Specific gravity (On UDS Samples) IS 2720(Part III)

Direct Shear Tests (On UDS Samples) IS 2720(Part XIII)

Chemical Analysis of Soil Samples IS 2720 & IS 3025

Chemical Analysis of Water Samples IS 3025 & IS 5401


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 23 of 41



7 GEOLOGICAL INFORMATION OF THE REGION

7.1 Location

The site Project site is referred to as proposed Development / Redevelopment of Bijwasan

– New Delhi Railway Station on the Indian Railway Network located located in the South

West Delhi district of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, India.

7.2 Climate

The climate of Project Site is a monsoon-influenced humid subtropical climate with high

variation between summers and winter temperatures and precipitation. Summers start in

early April and peak in May and June, these month will experience a maximum

temperature of around forty three degrees (430 C) and a minimum temperature of around

thirty degrees (300 C), although occasional heat waves can result in highs close to 450C (114 0F) on some days. Winters are during the months of October, November, December,

January and February. The maximum temperature during these months will range around

twenty five degrees (250C) and the minimum temperature during this time will range

around (5 0C). Area is notorious for its heavy fog during the winter season. Extreme


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 24 of 41



temperature have ranged from -0.6 0C (30.9 0F) to 47 0C (116.6 0F) the monsoon starts in

late June and lasts until mid-September, with about 797.3 mm of rain

7.3 Topography, Geography and General Geology

The project site is part of Indo-Gangetic Plain. It is the world’s most extension tract of

uninterrupted alluvium. These deep, river-deposited sediments give rise to fertile soils. In

addition, they are rich in groundwater for well irrigation. The flat terrain also makes the

area ideal for canal irrigation.

Topographically the plain is homogeneous, with only the floodplain bluffs, changes in river

channels and other related features of river erosion forming natural feature.

Two narrow terrain belts, collectively known as the Terai, constitute the northern

boundary of the Indo-Gangetic Plain. In the area where the foothills of the Himalayas

encounter the plain, small hills known locally as ghar (meaning house in Hindi) have been

formed by coarse sands and pebbles deposited by mountain streams

The Indo-Gangetic Plain of N India cover an area of 740.00 Km2, extending from N

Rajasthan and Panjab eastward to NE India. The Plain range in width from 480 km in the W

to 150 km in the E. They display a thick sequence of Pleistocene and Holocene alluvial

sediments overlying a basement of Archean and early Proterozoic (Vindhyan ) rocks.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 25 of 41




Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 26 of 41



Sediments of the Indo-Gangetic Plain of the foredeep of the Himalaya. The Cenozoic

succession in these deposits begins with the Eocene- Oligocene ‘Nummulitic’ Dagshal and

kasauli formations and their equivalents

7.4 Seismicity

The seismic hazard map of India was updated in 2000 by the Bureau of Indian Standard

(BIS) and IRC- 6, 2010. The project site lies in Zone IV. The area under study and its

surrounding are seismically active falls in Seismic Zone –IV and the tectonic elements of

the area are considered capable of generating an earthquake of moderate intensity. In

Seismic design Zone factor, Z of 0.24 is recommended.

Seismic Map of India


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 27 of 41



7.5 Liquefaction

Liquefaction is a process in which a saturated cohesion less soil loose strength during an

earthquake and acquires a degree of mobility sufficient to permit significant movements.

In general, fine uniform sands are found to be most susceptible for liquefaction in terms of

grain size. It can be stated that soils containing less than 10% fines, D60 between 0.20 mm

to 1.0mm, uniformity coefficient between 2 to 5 are most susceptible to liquefaction for

given relative density of soil and intensity of earthquake. Thus, uniformly graded materials

are more susceptible to liquefaction than well graded materials. Also fine sands are more

susceptible than gravelly soils, silty sands, silts or clays.

Assessment of liquefaction potential of foundation strata is made by simplified approach

proposed by Seed & Idriss (1983 - 1985) from the SPT data and peak ground acceleration

likely to occur at the site. In this method, cyclic shear stress likely to be induced in the

foundation strata by design Basis Earthquake (DBE) is first evaluated. Next threshold cyclic

shear stress, which is good enough to cause liquefaction, is determined from SPT data and

the empirical relations. Finally, comparison of these two stresses is used in the estimation

of liquefaction susceptibility of the foundation strata

Liquefaction Analysis:

Cyclic Stress Ratio under Earth Quake (CSR)

Stress ratio under earth quake (CSR)

= ( / o )earthquake = 0.65 (h a max/ o g )

o= Effective overburden pressure at depth h

= Bulk density of soil

a max= Max. ground acceleration = 0.24g

Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance ( CRR)

CRR7.50= 1/{(34‐(N1)60CS} + (N1)60CS / 135 +50/{10*(N1)60CS + 45}2 – 1/ 200

(N1)60 = NmCNCECBCRCS


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 28 of 41



Nm= Measured Standard Penetration resistance

CN= factor to normalize Nm to a common reference effective overburden stress = (po

/ o )0.5

CE =Correction for Hammer Energy Ratio

CB= Correction factor for the borehole diameter

CR= correction factor for rod length

CS= Correction for samples with or without liners

Correction for Fineness content

(N1)60cs = α + β (N1)60

CRRL = CRR7.50* km

km Correction factor

for earthquake magnitude other than 7.5 = 102.24/M7.5

Magnitude of Earth quake considered as 7.0.

Liquefaction occurs if CSRL CRR.

The Liquefaction analysis has been calculated for each bore hole and given at Annexure I.

The strata is not susceptible to liquefaction.

2.56


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 29 of 41



8 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESMENT /PROPOSED DESIGN PARAMETERS

8.1 Subsurface Conditions / Strength Characteristics

For the proposed structure 15 Boreholes were drilled. The locations are shown in Fig PLAN.

While advancing the boreholes, SPT tests were conducted at regular interval of 1.5m depth

and representative samples were collected and analyzed for soil classification. From the

soil classification, it has been observed that the strata consists of non-plastic Dense to

Medium Dense Sandy Silt with gravel / Gravelly Silt with Sand up to the depth explored.

Filled up soil was observed in BH 12 to BH 15 up to 1.0m depth below ground level.

Refusal starta was observed in Borehole BH 14 at a depth of 24.20m below ground level.

The SPT conducted at 1.50 m intervals have been corrected for overburden and Dilatancy

and the same are reported in the respective bore logs. In order to obtain an integral

strength view, the SPT values of the bore holes were plotted against depth and shown in

Fig.ASP. It can be seen from the Plots that the SPT values are increasing with depth and

are generally varying from 10 to 45 up to 20.0m depth. Below 20.0m depth the SPT values

are varying from 35 to 50 up to the depth drilled. UDS were collected at regular intervals

of 3.0 m. On the UDS samples collected, Direct Shear test were conducted for evaluating

Shear strength parameters. The test results are shown in the respective bore logs.

Parameters for Design:

Table – 4

BH Depth (m) N Value Bulk Density

(t/m3) � Value

1 0 to 13 15 to 20 1.85 to 1.87 30o to 31o

13 to 30 25 to 30 32o to 33o

2

0 to 6 8 to 15 1.80 to 1.83 29o to 30o

6 to 11 20 to 23 1.85 31o

11 to 30 30 to 45 1.92 to 2.06 32o to 33o

3 0 to 11 18 to 30 1.85 to 1.93 30o to 32o

11 to 30 35 to 45 1.95 to 2.11 31o to 33o

4 0 to 30 25 to 40 1.88 to 2.02 31o to 32o

5 0 to 5 13 to 25 1.84 to 1.85 29o to 31o

5 to 30 25 to 60 1.93 to 2.06 31o to 34o


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 30 of 41



BH Depth (m) N Value Bulk Density

(t/m3) � Value

6 0 to 30 25 to 50 1.91 to 2.08 30o to 32o

7 0 to 12 11 to 20 1.83 to 1.86 31o

12 to 30 30 to 40 1.89 to 1.94 32o to 33o

8 0 to 12 12 to 23 1.86 to 1.92 29o to 31o

12 to 30 27 to 45 1.95 to 2.09 31o to 33o

9 0 to 4 15 to 25 1.85 30o

4 to 30 25 to 50 2.01 to 2.11 32o to 33o

10 0 to 30 25 to 45 1.90 to 2.01 31o to 33o

11 0 to 30 19 to 40 1.87 to 2.11 30o to 33o

12 0 to 7 20 to 25 1.93 31o

7 to 30 30 to 40 2.02 to 2.06 32o to 33o

13 0 to 5 15 1.83 30o

5 to 30 27 to 45 1.92 to 2.03 32o to 33o

14 0 to 5 12 to 18 1.80 30o

5 to 24 31 to 45 1.96 to 2.13 32o to 33o

15 0 to 8 17 to 28 1.86 to 1.90 31o to 32o

8 to 30 32 to 45 1.94 to 1.98 32o to 33o


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 31 of 41



9 DESIGN CRITERIA

Any foundation is to be safe against possible failure against

Excessive Shear failure (the bearing pressure should be within permissible limits)

and

Excessive Settlement.

The latter depends upon not only on the type of soil in the foundation but also on the type

of foundation, material used for construction and functionality of the structure.

9.1 Design Methodology

Footing Foundation has been analysed at a depth of 2.0m and 3.0m below the ground

level. Foundation in the present case rests on non-plastic soil. An allowable settlement for

the footing foundation is considered as 50mm.

Alternatively Raft Foundation has been analysed at a depth of 2.0m and 3.0m below the

ground level. Foundation in the present case rests on non-plastic soil. An allowable

settlement for the footing foundation is considered as 75mm.

9.1.1 Open Foundation

Bearing Capacity for Open Foundation

The subsoil profile indicates the reasonably good soil/ SDR / HDR at shallow depths ranging

from 3m to 4.5 m at borehole locations. The bearing capacity for Shallow Foundations in

soil has been analyzed in accordance with IS: 6403 – 1981. Foundations should not fail in

shear, Factor of safety of 2.5 is provided against bearing capacity failure. Standard

Penetration Test (SPT) results are also used to determine the safe bearing capacity of

shallow foundation in accordance with IS: 6403 – 1981 for non – cohesive soils, hard clay.

While using this approach the N value are corrected, wherever applicable below the

footing base to at least 1.5m below the base to account for the effect of energy ratio

adopted boring procedure, dilation of submerged silty fine sands / fine sands as well as

that due to the overburden pressure.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 32 of 41



9.1.2 Shallow Foundation

Analysis based on SPT values and soil Parameters

a) Shear failure criteria

The safe bearing pressure from Shear failure criteria can be obtained, using the

equation given below

Qu = cNc Sc Dc Ic + q(Nq ‐ 1) Sq Dq Iq + 0.5 B N SD I W'

where,

c = Average cohesion below the foundation in t/m2

B = Width of the footing in m

Dc, Dq,D = Depth factors

Sc, Sq,S = Shape factors

Ic Iq,I = Inclination factors

Nc, Nq,N = Bearing capacity factor

q = Effective overburden pressure at foundation, in t/m2

W' = Water table correction factor

= Bulk unit wt. of foundation soil, in t/m3

b) Settlements:

When the strata consists of Non Plastic strata

Soil profiles are given for each borehole. The soil profile, which is likely to

cause greater settlements, is to be considered for calculations.

The imposed load at the foundation level is likely to compress the soil up

to a depth of approximately equal to 1.5B below the foundations.

The settlements can be calculated using IS: 8009 Part 1 & 2, 1976.


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 33 of 41



10 COMPUTATIONS

BH 1, 2, 8 & BH 13

FOOTING FOUNDATION

Shear Failure Criteria

Case I

Df = 2.00 m; B = 2.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 30 , ’ = 20, avg = 25

Nq = 10.66, Nr = 10.88 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation

Qu = q ( Nq ‐ 1 ) Sq Dq Iq + 0.5 B N SD I W'

Substituting the data in the equation given, we get

Qult = 28.40 t/m2

Qsafe = 11.36 t/m2

Case II

Df = 2.00 m; B = 4.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 30 , ’ = 20, avg = 25

Nq = 10.66, Nr = 10.88 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation



Qult = 33.624 t/m2

Qsafe = 13.45 t/m2


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 34 of 41



Case III

Df = 3.00 m; B = 2.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 30 , ’ = 20, avg = 25

Nq = 10.66, Nr = 10.88 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation



Qult = 39.936 t/m2 Qsafe = 15.95 t/m2

Case IV

Df = 3.00 m; B = 4.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 30 , ’ = 20, avg = 25

Nq = 10.66, Nr = 10.88 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation



Qult = 45.156 t/m2 Qsafe = 18.06 t/m2

Settlement Criteria

Df=2.00 m Df=3.00 m

B=2.0m B=4.0m B=2.0m B=4.0m

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10

t/m2 in dry condition. 22 22 20 22


t/m2 after water table correction 37 37 34 37


t/m2 after water table and depth correction 28 32 23 26


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 35 of 41



Df=2.00 m Df=3.00 m

B=2.0m B=4.0m B=2.0m B=4.0m

Net safe bearing pressure for 50mm settlements (t/m2 ) 17.85 15.63 21.74 19.23

Alternatively Raft Foundation

Case I

Df =2.00 B = 10.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 30 , ’ = 20, avg = 25

Nq = 10.66, Nr = 10.88 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

iq = ir = 1.0 dq = dr = 1.0 , = 1.0t/m3

Using the equation



Qult = 49.284t/m2 Qsafe = 19.71 t/m2

Settlement Criteria (Refer Fig: 9 of IS 8009 Part I)

Df = 2.0 m


t/m2 in dry condition. 20mm


t/m2 after water table correction 34mm


t/m2 after rigidity correction . 28mm

Net safe bearing pressure for 75mm settlements (t/m2 ) 26.78


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 36 of 41



Case II

Df =3.00 B = 10.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 30 , ’ = 20, avg = 25

Nq = 10.66, Nr = 10.88 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

iq = ir = 1.0 dq = dr = 1.0 , = 1.0t/m3

Using the equation



Qult = 60.87 t/m2 Qsafe = 24.35 t/m2


Df = 3.0 m

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2 in

dry condition. 20mm

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2

after water table correction 34 mm

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2

after rigidity correction . 28 mm


BH 3 to BH 7, BH 9 to BH 12, BH 14 & BH 15

FOOTING FOUNDATION

Shear Failure Criteria

Case I

Df = 2.00 m; B = 2.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 31 , ’ = 21, avg = 26


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 37 of 41



Nq = 11.85, Nr = 12.54 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation



Qult = 32.06 t/m2

Qsafe = 12.82 t/m2

Case II

Df = 2.00 m; B = 4.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 31 , ’ = 21, avg = 26

Nq = 11.85, Nr = 12.54 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation



Qult = 38.078 t/m2

Qsafe = 15.23 t/m2

Case III

Df = 3.00 m; B = 2.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 31 , ’ = 21, avg = 26

Nq = 11.85, Nr = 12.54 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation



Qult = 45.08 t/m2

Qsafe = 18.03 t/m2


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 38 of 41



Case IV

Df = 3.00 m; B = 4.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 31 , ’ = 21, avg = 26

Nq = 11.85, Nr = 12.54 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

Using the equation



Qult = 51.078 t/m2

Qsafe = 20.44 t/m2

Settlement Criteria

Df=2.00 m Df=3.00 m

B=2.0m B=4.0m B=2.0m B=4.0m

Settlement under footing with a load

intensity of 10 t/m2 in dry condition. 15 17 15 17


intensity of 10 t/m2 after water table

correction

25 29 25 29


intensity of 10 t/m2 after water table and

depth correction

19 25 17 22

Net safe bearing pressure for 50mm

settlements (t/m2 ) 26.31 20.0 29.41 22.72

Alternatively Raft Foundation

Case I

Df =2.00 B = 10.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 31 , ’ = 21, avg = 26

Nq = 11.85, Nr = 12.54 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

iq = ir = 1.0 dq = dr = 1.0 , = 1.0t/m3


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 39 of 41



Using the equation



Qult = 56.13 t/m2 Qsafe = 2245 t/m2


Df = 2.0 m

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2 in dry

condition. 14mm

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2 after water

table correction 24 mm

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2 after rigidity

correction . 20 mm


Case II

Df =3.00 B = 10.0 m

F.O.S = 2.5 = 31 , ’ = 21, avg = 26

Nq = 11.85, Nr = 12.54 Sq = 1.20 Sr = 0.80 , W’ = 0.60

iq = ir = 1.0 dq = dr = 1.0 , = 1.0t/m3

Using the equation



Qult = 69.15 t/m2

Qsafe = 27.66 t/m2


Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 40 of 41




Df = 3.0 m

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2 in dry

condition.

14mm

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2 after water

table correction

24 mm

Settlement under footing with a load intensity of 10 t/m2 after

rigidity correction .

20 mm



Rev. 0

2013/07/02 Page 41 of 41



11 RECOMMENDATIONS

Sand the Net safe bearing pressure are as given below:

BH No Depth of

foundation (m)

Width of

Foundation (m)

Net Safe Bearing

Capacity (t/m2)

1, 2, 8 & 13

2.0 2 11.0

4 13.0

3.0 2 15.0

4 18.0

3 to 7, 9 to

12, 14 & 15

2.0 2 12.0

4 15.0

3.0 2 18.0

4 20.0

Alternatively Raft Foundation is recommended. The depth of foundation, width of

foundation and the Net safe bearing pressure are as given below:

BH No Depth of foundation (m) Width of

Foundation (m) Net Safe Bearing Capacity (t/m2)

1, 2, 8 & 13 2.0 10 19.0

3.0 10 24.0

3 to 7, 9 to 12, 14 & 15

2.0 10 22.0

3.0 10 25.0


Rev. 0

2013/07/02



LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL EVALUATION

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L, m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

% )

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

), k

N/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

dur

ing

test

ing

(so)

, kN

/m2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on

1.8 SM-ML 15 18.50 8.50 84 0.99 33.30 33.30 33.30 0.15 1.70 0.83 1.05 0.75 1.00 16.73 5.00 1.20 25.08 0.29 0.42 2.75 Non Liquefiable






Actual Water Table Depth

Geotechnicl Investigation work for development of Bijwasan Delhi railway Stattion on IndianRailways Network

Liquefaction potential assessment

Borehole BH 01

28.3

10

150

Water table assumed for Calculation

Parameters from SPT Boring

Was liner used in SPT boring No

Design (DBE) PGA 0.24

Borehole diameter

Liquefaction Potential Evaluation

Importance Factor of the Structure

Borehole Details

Seimsmic Parameters

1

Based on IRC 6, 2010 for bridges & roads or IS 1893 (Part 1) for general buildings

Computation Sheet

Efficiency Factors

Rope-Pulley (UK) - 50% efficiency

Trip/Auto (UK) - 60% efficiency

Magnitude of Earthquake 6.5

Efficiency in SPT Boring (for CE factor) 50

Page 1

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on







Borehole Details

Liquefaction Potential Evaluation

Computation Sheet



1

Borehole BH2

Actual Water Table Depth 26

Water table assumed for Calculation 10

Borehole diameter 150 Trip/Auto (UK) - 60% efficiency

Seimsmic Parameters


Design (DBE) PGA 0.24 Based on IRC 6, 2010 for bridges & roads or IS 1893 (Part 1) for general buildings


Parameters from SPT Boring Efficiency Factors

Efficiency in SPT Boring (for CE factor) 50 Rope-Pulley (UK) - 50% efficiency


Page 2

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on


1.8 SM-ML 29 18.50 8.50 87 0.99 33.30 33.30 33.30 0.15 1.70 0.83 1.05 0.75 1.00 32.35 5.00 1.20 43.82 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable





Borehole Details

Liquefaction Potential EvaluationComputation Sheet



1

Borehole BH3




Seimsmic Parameters







Page 3

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on







Borehole Details





Importance Factor of the Structure 1

Borehole BH4

Actual Water Table Depth 25.7


Seimsmic Parameters







Page 4

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on













Seimsmic Parameters





Borehole Details

Borehole BH5




Page 5

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on

1.8 SM-ML 18 19.10 9.10 82 0.99 34.38 34.38 34.38 0.15 1.70 0.83 1.05 0.75 1.00 20.08 5.00 1.20 29.10 0.41 0.60 3.89 Non Liquefiable3.3 SM-ML 30 19.10 9.10 66 0.97 63.03 63.03 63.03 0.15 1.26 0.83 1.05 0.80 1.00 26.45 5.00 1.20 36.74 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable4.8 SM-ML 41 19.10 9.10 74 0.96 91.68 91.68 91.68 0.15 1.04 0.83 1.05 0.85 1.00 31.85 5.00 1.20 43.22 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable6.3 SM-ML 31 19.50 9.50 71 0.95 120.93 122.85 122.85 0.15 0.90 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 23.25 5.00 1.20 32.90 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable7.8 SM-ML 41 19.50 9.50 86 0.94 150.18 152.10 152.10 0.14 0.81 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 27.63 5.00 1.20 38.16 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable9.30 SM-ML 49 19.50 9.50 85 0.93 179.43 181.35 181.35 0.14 0.74 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 30.25 5.00 1.20 41.30 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable

1





Seimsmic Parameters




Borehole Details

1

Borehole BH6






Page 6

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L, m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

% )

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

), k

N/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

dur

ing

test

ing

(so)

, kN

/m2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on







Borehole Details

Parameters from SPT Boring



Was liner used in SPT boring

Efficiency Factors


50

No


Seimsmic Parameters


Efficiency in SPT Boring (for CE factor)



Borehole BH7



Page 7

Project:

Job:

g

%

mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on

0.8 SM-ML 12 18.60 8.60 84 0.99 14.88 14.88 14.88 0.16 1.70 0.83 1.05 0.75 1.00 13.39 5.00 1.20 21.07 0.23 0.33 2.13 Non Liquefiable1.8 SM-ML 21 18.60 8.60 89 0.99 33.48 33.48 33.48 0.15 1.70 0.83 1.05 0.75 1.00 23.43 5.00 1.20 33.11 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable3.3 SM-ML 10 18.60 8.60 95 0.97 61.38 61.38 61.38 0.15 1.28 0.83 1.05 0.80 1.00 8.93 5.00 1.20 15.72 0.17 0.24 1.59 Non Liquefiable4.8 SM-ML 19 18.60 8.60 94 0.96 89.28 89.28 89.28 0.15 1.06 0.83 1.05 0.85 1.00 14.96 5.00 1.20 22.95 0.26 0.37 2.46 Non Liquefiable6.3 SM-ML 39 18.70 8.70 83 0.95 117.33 117.81 117.81 0.15 0.92 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 29.87 5.00 1.20 40.84 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable7.80 SM-ML 35 18.70 8.70 87 0.94 145.38 145.86 145.86 0.15 0.83 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 24.09 5.00 1.20 33.91 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable










Seimsmic Parameters

Borehole diameter 150



Borehole BH8

Borehole Details


Page 8

Project:

Job:

g

%mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

.5

CRR

FOS

Conc

lusi

on

1.8 SM-ML 11 18.50 8.50 89 0.99 33.30 33.30 33.30 0.15 1.70 0.83 1.05 0.75 1.00 12.27 5.00 1.20 19.73 0.21 0.31 1.99 Non Liquefiable3.3 SM-ML 21 18.50 8.50 81 0.97 61.05 61.05 61.05 0.15 1.28 0.83 1.05 0.80 1.00 18.81 5.00 1.20 27.58 0.36 0.51 3.37 Non Liquefiable4.8 SM-ML 34 18.50 8.50 89 0.96 88.80 88.80 88.80 0.15 1.06 0.83 1.05 0.85 1.00 26.83 5.00 1.20 37.20 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable6.3 SM-ML 32 20.10 10.10 82 0.95 118.95 126.63 126.63 0.14 0.89 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 23.64 5.00 1.20 33.37 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable7.8 SM-ML 41 20.10 10.10 67 0.94 149.10 156.78 156.78 0.14 0.80 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 27.22 5.00 1.20 37.66 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable9.30 SM-ML 55 20.80 10.80 78 0.93 180.30 193.44 193.44 0.13 0.72 0.83 1.05 0.95 1.00 32.87 5.00 1.20 44.45 NA NA >1 Non Liquefiable


Seimsmic Parameters



Actual Water Table Depth 26.7Water table assumed for Calculation 10


BH9

Efficiency FactorsParameters from SPT BoringEfficiency in SPT Boring (for CE factor) 50Borehole diameter 150



Borehole DetailsBorehole

Based on IRC 6, 2010 for bridges & roads or IS 1893 (Part 1) for general buildingsImportance Factor of the Structure 1


Page 9

Project:

Job:

g

%mm

Dep

th b

elow

EG

L,

m

Type

of

Stra

ta

Fiel

d SP

T N

Fie

ld

Bulk

uni

t w

eigh

t (k

N/m

3 )

Subm

erge

d un

it

wei

ght

(kN

/m3 )

Fine

s Co

nten

t (

%

)

Stre

ss r

educ

tion

co

effi

cien

t (r

d)

Tota

l ove

rbur

den

pres

sure

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Effe

ctiv

e ov

erbu

rden

du

ring

tes

ting

(s o

),

kN/m

2

Cycl

ic S

tres

s ra

tio

(CSR

)

C N CE C B C R CS

SPT

(N

1)60

α β

SPT

(N1)

60cs

CRR M

= 7

Documents

Indian Railway Stations Development Corporation ...irsdc.in/sites/default/files/BWSN-GIR.pdfMinistry of Indian Railways, (MOR) Govt. of India, through Indian Railway Stations Development