Soil Investigation Report V1R0 PDF

Chiniot Power Limited
2 x 31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on
Geotechnical Investigations
February, 2014
Doc. No. J-559
Rev. 00
Berkeley
Associates
316 D, OPF Housing Colony,

Raiwind Road Lahore
Phone: 042-35323313-15
Fax: 042-35323316
E-mail: berkeley.associates@gmail.com
Berkeley Associates
00
04-02-2014
Issued to Client
Rev
Date
Description
Client
AAG
Initials
Signature
Prepared by
Geotechnical
Investigation
Agency
KA
Berkeley Associates
Initials
Signature
Initials
Checked by
Signature
Clients Approval
55-K, Model Town, Lahore Pakistan

Tel:
+92 42 35857233-5
316-D, OPF Housing Colony near Raiwind Road,
Lahore Pakistan.
Tel:
+92-42-35323313-15
Fax:
+92-42-35323316
Email: berkeley.associates@gmail.com
REPORT ON GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Document No.
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Report on Geotechnical Investigations
J-559
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 2
Berkeley Associates
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 8
1.1
1.2
1.3
GENERAL........................................................................................................................................ 8
SCOPE OF WORK............................................................................................................................. 8
METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................................. 9
FIELD INVESTIGATIONS ......................................................................................................... 10
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.5
2.6
3
GENERAL...................................................................................................................................... 10
EXPLORATORY BOREHOLES ......................................................................................................... 10
TEST PIT EXCAVATION ................................................................................................................. 11
IN-SITU TESTING .......................................................................................................................... 11
Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) ...................................................................................... 11
Field Density Tests (FDTs) ................................................................................................. 11
Cyclic Plate Load Tests (CPLTs) ........................................................................................ 11
Electrical Resistivity Survey (ERS) ..................................................................................... 12
SAMPLING .................................................................................................................................... 12
GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS .................................................................................................. 13
LABORATORY TESTING .......................................................................................................... 14

3.1
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ...................................................................................................... 14
3.2
ATTERBERGS LIMITS ................................................................................................................... 14
3.3
SPECIFIC GRAVITY ....................................................................................................................... 15
3.4
BULK DENSITY ............................................................................................................................. 15
3.5
IN-SITU MOISTURE CONTENT ....................................................................................................... 15
3.6
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST ................................................................................................ 15
3.7
DIRECT SHEAR TEST ..................................................................................................................... 15
3.8
STANDARD PROCTOR TESTS ......................................................................................................... 16
3.9
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO ....................................................................................................... 16
3.10 CHEMICAL ANALYSES .................................................................................................................. 16
3.10.1
Soil Samples ........................................................................................................................ 16
3.10.2
Water Samples ..................................................................................................................... 16
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF SUBSOIL.................................................... 18

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
GENERAL...................................................................................................................................... 18
TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 18
SEISMICITY ................................................................................................................................... 18
STRATIGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................ 18
GROUNDWATER TABLE ................................................................................................................ 19
LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................ 19
SEISMIC SOIL PROFILE CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................ 19
CHEMICAL AGRESSIVITY .............................................................................................................. 19
CBR VALUES ............................................................................................................................... 20
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 20
FOUNDATION DESIGN.............................................................................................................. 21
5.1
GENERAL...................................................................................................................................... 21
5.2
TYPE OF FOUNDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 21
5.3
SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ............................................................................................................. 21
5.3.1
Design Criteria for Shallow Foundations ............................................................................ 21
5.3.2
Design Parameters ............................................................................................................... 22
5.3.3
Allowable Bearing Pressures ............................................................................................... 22

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 3
Berkeley Associates
5.3.4
5.4
5.4.1
5.4.2
5.4.3
5.4.4
5.4.5
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
6
Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction .......................................................................................... 23

DEEP FOUNDATIONS..................................................................................................................... 24
Cast in-situ Piles .................................................................................................................. 24
Length and Diameter ........................................................................................................... 24
Design Parameters ............................................................................................................... 24
Allowable Load Carrying Capacity ..................................................................................... 24
Horizontal Soil Spring Stiffness .......................................................................................... 25
LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE ......................................................................................................... 25
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS FOR FOUNDATIONS ................................................................ 26
PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS ................................................................................................ 26
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 27
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 28

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 4
Berkeley Associates
APPENDICES
Appendix-A
Tables and Figures
Table 2-1
Table 2-2
Table 2-3
Table 3-1
Summary of Field Density and NMC Test Results

Plate Load Test Data for CPLT-1
Plate Load Test Data for CPLT-2
Summary of Laboratory Test Results
Fig. 2-1
Fig. 2-2A
Fig. 2-2B
Fig. 2-2C
Geotechnical Investigations Plan

Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Switchyard
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Raw/Fire Water Tank
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Water Treatment
Plant
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Cooling Tower
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for TG-1
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for TG-2
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Maintenance Bay
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Boiler-1
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Boiler-2
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Chimney
Profile of Observed SPT N-values for Coal Shed
Pressure vs Settlement Curves for CPLT-1
Pressure vs Settlement Curves for CPLT-2
Linear Subsurface Profile 1-1
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Switchyard
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Raw/Fire Water Tank
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Water Treatment
Plant
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Cooling Tower
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for TG-1
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for TG-2
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Maintenance Bay
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Boiler-1
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Boiler-2
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Chimney
Profile of Corrected SPT N-values for Coal Shed
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Switchyard
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Switchyard
Fig. 2-2D
Fig. 2-2E
Fig. 2-2F
Fig. 2-2G
Fig. 2-2H
Fig. 2-2I
Fig. 2-2J
Fig. 2-2K
Fig. 2-3
Fig. 2-4
Fig. 4-1
Fig. 4-2
Fig. 4-3
Fig. 5-1A
Fig. 5-1B
Fig. 5-1C
Fig. 5-1D
Fig. 5-1E
Fig. 5-1F
Fig. 5-1G
Fig. 5-1H
Fig. 5-1I
Fig. 5-1J
Fig. 5-1K
Fig. 5-2
Fig. 5-3

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 5
Berkeley Associates
Fig. 5-4
Fig. 5-5
Fig. 5-6
Fig. 5-7
Fig. 5-8
Fig. 5-9
Fig. 5-10
Fig. 5-11
Fig. 5-12
Fig. 5-13
Fig. 5-14
Fig. 5-15
Fig. 5-16
Fig. 5-17
Fig. 5-18
Fig. 5-19
Fig. 5-20
Fig. 5-21
Fig. 5-22
Fig. 5-23
Fig. 5-24
Fig. 5-25
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/Mat Footings for

Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at Raw/Fire Water Tank
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Water Treatment
Plant
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Water Treatment
Plant
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Cooling Tower
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at TG-1
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/ Mat Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Maintenance Bay
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Maintenance Bay
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Boiler-1
Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at Chimney
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Coal Shed

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 6
Berkeley Associates
Fig. 5-26
Fig. 5-27
Fig. 5-28

Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Coal Shed
Allowable Load Carrying Capacity of the Piles in
Compression
Horizontal Soil Spring Stiffness of Pile below Pile Cap
Appendix-B
Borehole & Test pit Logs
Appendix-C
Laboratory Test Results
Appendix-D
Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey
Appendix-E
Photographs

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 7
Berkeley Associates
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1
General
Chiniot Power Limited is planning to construct a 2x31.2 MW Congeneration

Project, near Ramzan Sugar Mill on Chiniot-Jhang Road. The plant shall
comprise two turbines, two boilers, cooling towers, water treatment plant,
switchyard and other allied components. M/s Avant-Garde Engineers &
Consultants (FZC.), Sharjah, U.A.E. are the Project Consultants. M/s Berkeley
Associates were engaged to carry out the geotechnical investigations for the
proposed project.
The scope of work for these geotechnical investigations, as prepared by the
Project Consultants comprises; drilling of boreholes, excavation of test pits,
performance of in-situ tests in boreholes and test pits, performance of cyclic
plate load tests, performance of electrical resistivity survey, collection of soil
samples (disturbed and undisturbed), collection of water samples from
boreholes, performance of laboratory testing on selected soil and water
samples and submission of geotechnical investigations report.
The field work for these soil investigations was carried out during the period
from December 23, 2013 to January 27, 2014.
1.2
Scope of Work
Scope of Geotechnical Investigations is summarized below;

-
Drilling of fourteen (14) exploratory boreholes; ten (10) down to 25 m

depth and four (4) down to 15m depth below existing ground level
(EGL)
Performance of Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) in all boreholes at

a general depth interval of 1.5 m along with collection of disturbed
samples
Excavation of two (2) test pits down to 4.0 m depth each below EGL
Collection of composite bulk samples from the test pits
Collection of undisturbed soil samples from boreholes and test pits

using appropriate samplers

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 8
Berkeley Associates
Performance of Field Density Tests (FDTs) in each test pit at various

horizons
Obtaining pertinent ground water table (GWT) information in the

boreholes and collection of water samples
Performance of electrical resistivity survey (ERS) for design of earthing

system at two (2) locations
Performance of two (02) cyclic plate load tests (CPLT) at the site
Performance of laboratory tests on selected soil and water samples
Preparation of a detailed Geotechnical Investigation Report upon

completion of field and laboratory testing
1.3
Methodology
The exploratory borings were drilled using straight rotary drilling rigs. In-situ
tests (i.e. SPTs/FDTs) were performed in accordance with relevant ASTM
standards.
Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were collected from boreholes using
appropriate samplers, for identification and subsequent laboratory testing.
Composite bulk soil samples were collected from test pits using appropriate
techniques. Selected soil samples were subjected to various laboratory tests
for evaluation of classification and strength characteristics of the sub-soils.
This report has been prepared on the basis of field geotechnical investigations
data and subsequent laboratory testing performed on the selected soil
samples. An evaluation of foundation soils, foundation design parameters and
recommendations regarding type of foundations, respective allowable bearing
pressures and type of cement to be used in the construction of substructure
are also provided in this report.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 9
Berkeley Associates
2 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
2.1
General
The scope of the geotechnical studies was planned by the Project

Consultants. The field investigations included the following activities;
-
Drilling of exploratory boreholes
Excavation of test pits
In-situ testing in boreholes and test pits
Soil and water sampling in boreholes
Soil sampling in test pits
Cyclic plate load test (CPLT)
Performance of Electrical Resistivity Survey (ERS)
The details of the field work are discussed in this chapter. Photographs of field
activities are attached in Appendix-E.
2.2
Exploratory Boreholes
A total of fourteen (14) boreholes were drilled; ten (10) down to 25 m and four
(4) down to 15 m depth each below EGL at the proposed project site. The
location of all the boreholes drilled during these investigations is shown on
Fig. 2-1(Appendix-A).
All these boreholes were drilled using straight rotary drilling rig and the
boreholes were stabilized by circulating Bentonite mud in the boreholes. The
diameter of all the boreholes was in the range of 100mm to 150 mm. SPTs
were performed in these boreholes at a general depth interval of 1.5 m.
Undisturbed soil samples were collected from cohesive strata using Shelby
tube/Denison samplers.
A careful record of all the materials encountered and data of SPTs conducted
in each borehole was maintained in the form of field borehole logs. The
borehole logs are included in Appendix-B.
Ashiana-e-Iqbal, Burki Road, Lahore

Interim Report on Geotechnical Investigations
Doc. No. J-30

Rev. 00
Page 10
Berkeley Associates
2.3
Test pit Excavation
Two (2) test pits were excavated each down to 4.0 m depth below EGL.
Subsurface logs of both the test pits were prepared after carefully observing
the soils on the walls of the excavated pits. The test pit logs are also included
in Appendix-B.
2.4
In-situ Testing
During the field investigations, SPTs, FDTs, CPLT and ERS were carried out.
A brief description of these tests is provided in the following sections.
2.4.1 Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs)

For evaluating the consistency and compactness of the foundation soils,
SPTs were performed in all the exploratory boreholes. These SPTs were
carried out in each hole at 1.5m depth interval and were conducted in
accordance with the procedures described in latest version of ASTM Standard
D 1586. A donut type hammer, weighing 63.5kg, has been used for the test.
While performing the SPTs in boreholes, the hammer was lifted and dropped
mechanically through the flywheel of drilling rig and pulley hanged to a tripod.
Prior to performing each SPT, the loose material existing in the hole was
properly washed/ cleaned. A split spoon sampler without a liner was used for
all the tests. Disturbed soil samples were obtained through the split spoon
sampler. Profiles of SPTN values are shown on Fig. 2-2A to Fig.2-2K
(Appendix-A) for boreholes corresponding various structures.
2.4.2 Field Density Tests (FDTs)

In order to determine the in-situ compactness and density of soils at shallow
depth, FDTs were performed in both the excavated test pits. The tests were
performed at various horizons using sand replacement method in accordance
with the relevant ASTM Standards. For determination of in-situ moisture, soil
samples were preserved in small tin boxes. The bulk and dry densities
determined during the field work are summarized in Table 2-1(Appendix-A).
2.4.3 Cyclic Plate Load Tests (CPLTs)

For evaluating the modulus of subgrade reaction of shallow foundations, two
(2) cyclic plate load tests were carried out at TG-1 and TG-2 locations. Both
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 11
Berkeley Associates
tests were performed at 4.0 m depth below EGL. A square shaped bearing
plate of 0.45 x0.45 m size was used in the test. The test was performed in
accordance with the procedure described in BS 1377-Part IX-Section 4.1. The
pressure versus settlement data for CPLT-1 and CPLT-2 is presented in
Table 2-2 and 2-3(Appendix-A). Pressure versus settlement curves are shown
on Fig. 2-3 and 2-4(Appendix-A) respectively.
Modulus of subgrade reaction determined from the two plate load tests were
presented in following table:
Sr.
No.
Plate Load
Test
Designation
Maximum
Test Load
Maximum
Pressure on
Plate
Settlement at
Maximum
Pressure
Modulus of
Subgrade
Reaction
(Ton)
(kPa)
(mm)
(kN/m3)
CPLT-1
6.18
289.9
0.593
488,870
CPLT-2
6.18
289.9
2.067
140,250
2.4.4 Electrical Resistivity Survey (ERS)

The electrical resistivity measurements of the subsurface material were taken
in the field by resistivity measuring instrument Terrameter SAS 1000 of
ABEM, Sweden and using the Schlumberger electrode array. The Terrameter
directly records the value of resistance (V/I) in ohms. In order to study the
variation of resistivity with depth, Vertical Electric Sounding (VES) technique
was employed. In this technique, apparent resistivity values are obtained for
various depths by increasing the current electrodes spacing at the ground
surface, keeping the centre of electrode array fixed at the observation point.
Vertical electric soundings were taken at two (2) points. These resistivity
observation points are designated as ER-1 and ER-2. The locations of these
points are shown in Fig. 2-1(Appendix-A). Separate report on electrical
resistivity survey is attached in Appendix-D.
2.5
Sampling
Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were obtained from all the boreholes
drilled during these soil investigations. Disturbed soil samples were obtained
from the boreholes through split spoon sampler while performing SPTs. These
samples were placed in polythene bags and preserved in wide-mouthed
plastic jars. The jars were clearly labelled to indicate the project name, project
code, borehole designation and depth of sample and date of sampling.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 12
Berkeley Associates
Undisturbed soil samples were obtained from cohesive strata encountered in

the boreholes by using appropriate sampler. The undisturbed samples were
properly waxed and labelled to indicate the project name, project code,
borehole designation and depth of sample and date of sampling.
Composite bulk samples were obtained from the test pits. The bulk samples
were properly preserved and labelled for transportation to the soil testing
laboratory.
All the soil samples were carefully transported to Berkeley Associates Soil
Testing Laboratory Facilities, Lahore for subsequent laboratory testing.
2.6
Groundwater Observations
GWT was encountered in all boreholes at depth ranging from 9.6 m to 11.4 m
during these investigations and are mentioned in the respective borehole logs.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 13
Berkeley Associates
3 LABORATORY TESTING
For evaluation of physical and engineering and chemical characteristics of the
sub-soils, selected disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were tested in the
laboratory. The laboratory testing was carried out at Berkeley Associates
Laboratory Testing Facility, Lahore. The following laboratory tests were
performed on selected soil samples.
-
Particle size distribution

Atterbergs limits
Specific gravity
Bulk & Dry density
Natural moisture content (NMC)
Unconfined compression tests
Direct shear tests
Modified Proctor Compaction tests
3 Point Soaked CBR tests
Chemical analyses of soil and water samples
A brief description of these tests is given in the following sections. A summary

of laboratory test results is given in Table 3-1(Appendix-A).
3.1
Particle Size Distribution
For classifying the subsurface soils, seventy (70) selected soil samples were
subjected to sieve analyses during these studies. Some samples were further
subjected to hydrometer analyses. The sieve analyses were performed in
accordance with the procedures specified in ASTM D 422 , with sample
preparation by ASTM D 2217 (wet preparation method), Procedure B. The
hydrometer analyses were carried out in accordance with procedure specified
in ASTM D 422. Results of sieve and hydrometer analyses were plotted in
the form of gradation curves. These curves for all the tested samples are
presented in Appendix-C. The percentages of fines (passing sieve no. 200),
sand and concretion fractions of the tested soil samples are also provided in
Table 3-1(Appendix-A).
3.2
Atterbergs Limits
For evaluating plasticity characteristics of cohesive soils, liquid and plastic

limit tests were performed on twenty four (24) selected soil samples. The tests
were performed as specified in ASTM Designation D 4318. All the liquid limit
tests were performed with at least three trials. The test results are
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 14
Berkeley Associates
summarized in Table 3-1(Appendix-A). Fourteen (14) samples were classified

as non-plastic.
3.3
Specific Gravity
Seven (7) selected soil samples were tested for estimation of specific gravity.
The tests were carried out in accordance with ASTM Designation D 854. The
test results are provided in Table 3-1(Appendix-A). The specific gravity of
tested samples ranged between 2.62 to 2.68.
3.4
Bulk Density
Seven (7) undisturbed soil samples were tested for determination of their bulk
density. The test results are provided in Table 3-1(Appendix-A). The bulk
density of the tested samples ranges from 14.87 kN/m3 to 17.84 kN/m3.
3.5
In-situ Moisture Content
Seven (7) undisturbed soil samples were tested for determination of their insitu moisture contents. The test results are provided in Table 3-1. The in-situ
moisture content of the tested soil samples ranges from 5.0% to 13.7%.
3.6
Unconfined Compression test
In order to estimate shear strength characteristics of fine grained soils, two (2)
undisturbed soil samples were subjected to unconfined compression test. The
test results are provided in Table 3-1(Appendix-A). The measured values of
unconfined compressive strength were 44 kPa to 52 kPa for the selected soil
samples.
3.7
Direct Shear test
In order to estimate shear strength characteristics of foundation soils, twenty

nine (29) soil samples were subjected to direct shear tests. The tests were
carried out at in-situ moisture condition as specified in ASTM Designation D
3080. The test results are provided in Table 3-1(Appendix-A). The laboratory
test sheets are attached in Appendix-C.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 15
Berkeley Associates
3.8
Standard Proctor Tests
In order to determine the moisture-density relationships of subgrade soils, two

(2) Standard Proctor compaction tests were carried out on the composite bulk
samples. The test results are summarized in Table 3-1(Appendix-A). The
laboratory test sheets are attached in Appendix-C.
3.9
California Bearing Ratio
Two (2) compacted soil samples were tested to determine California Bearing
Ratio (CBR) under soaked conditions. The samples were prepared using
Standard Proctor Compaction method. The test results are summarized in
Table 3-1(Appendix-A). The laboratory test sheets are attached in AppendixC.
3.10
Chemical Analyses
3.10.1 Soil Samples

In order to determine the chemical characteristics of the subsoil, eleven (11)
selected soil samples were tested for estimation of chemical composition.
The results are summarized in Table 3-1(Appendix-A).
Sulphate Content
The sulphate content of the tested soil samples ranges from 0.036% to
0.068%.
Chloride Content
The chloride content of the tested soil samples ranges from 0.010% to
0.021%.
Organic Content
The organic content of the tested soil samples ranges from 0.46% to 0.92%.
3.10.2 Water Samples

In order to determine the chemical characteristics of the ground water, two
(02) water samples collected from boreholes were tested for estimation of
chemical composition. The results are summarized in Table 3-1(Appendix-A).
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 16
Berkeley Associates
Sulphate Content
The sulphate content of the tested ground water samples was 120 and 140
ppm.
Chloride Content
The chloride content of the tested ground water samples was 75 ppm and 99
ppm.
pH Value
The pH value of all tested ground water samples was 8.0.
Total Soluble Salts
The value of total dissolved solids in the tested ground water samples was
1175 ppm and 1182 ppm.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 17
Berkeley Associates
4 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF SUBSOIL

4.1
General
The geotechnical investigations carried for the project comprised field and
laboratory work. The field and laboratory investigations were aimed for
evaluating the engineering characteristics of the foundation soil. The
subsurface conditions and engineering characteristics of the soil existing at
the proposed project site are discussed in the following sections.
4.2
Topography and Geology
The topography of the project area is predominantly flat. Lithological units at

this site include top layer of fill material containing silty clay mixed with organic
material/ grass roots underlain by layer of Silty/ Lean Clay followed by Sandy
Silt and Silty Sand. The soils belong to alluvial deposits of Punjab plain.
4.3
Seismicity
According to Building Code of Pakistan (Seismic Provisions 2007), issued

by Government of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Seismic Zone 2A has been
assigned to Chiniot. Peak ground acceleration (PGA) associated with Zone
2A has been recommended to vary from 0.08g to 0.16g.
4.4
Stratigraphy
During these investigations, the subsurface was explored to a maximum

depth of twenty five (25) m below EGL and the following geotechnical units
have been identified;
Top layer of fill material was encountered in a few boreholes. This layer
comprises brown silty clay mixed with organic material and grass roots.
The depth of this layer ranges from 0.3 m to 0.5 m below EGL.
Layer of Silty Clay/Lean Clay is encountered below the top layer having
variable thickness in various boreholes.
Sandy Silt/ Silty Sand layer is encountered below Silty/ Lean Clay and
continues down to maximum explored depth of 25 m.
Linear subsurface profiles developed on the basis of boreholes drilled at the

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 18
Berkeley Associates
site are shown on Figs. 4-1 to 4-3.
4.5
Groundwater Table
Ground water table (GWT) was encountered in all boreholes at depth range of
9.6 m to 11.4 m, during these investigations and are mentioned in the
respective borehole logs. For the design purposes, the GWT has been
assumed at 10.0 m depth below EGL.
4.6
Liquefaction Analysis
The overburden soils at site predominantly have quite high fine content. Such
soils are not likely to undergo liquefaction (Ref.4.1). As such no liquefaction
hazard exists at the site.
4.7
Seismic Soil Profile Characterization
According to Building Code of Pakistan (Seismic Provisions 2007), issued

by Government of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the criteria for classification of
un-cemented soil profiles are to be based on;
Vs = average shear wave velocity of the top 100ft. (30m) soil profile
N = average field SPT resistance for the top 100ft. (30m) soil profile
Su = average undrained shear strength for the top 100ft. (30 m) soil
profile
or
or
Keeping in view the available field SPT data of all the holes drilled at the site,
the soil profile type as per Building Code of Pakistan (Seismic Provision
2007), should be taken as SD (i.e. Stiff Soil Profile).
4.8
Chemical Agressivity
On the basis of concentrations of sulphates determined in the foundation soil

and ground water samples, the exposure is classified as Negligible'' as
explained in ACI 318M-11 Table 4.2.1. According to the concentration of
sulphates in soil and water Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) can be used in
sub-structure construction.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 19
Berkeley Associates
4.9
CBR Values
Based on the laboratory test results, the soaked CBR values for the in-situ
soils compacted to Standard Proctor Compaction are provided below;
Relative Compaction based on
Standard Proctor Compaction
90 %
95 %
100 %
4.10
4.1
Soaked CBR Value

TP-1
TP-2
4.0
4.8
6.6
7.6
9.2
10.2
References
Youd, T. L. et al, Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report
from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on
Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, JGGE, Oct. 2001, pp
817-833.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 20
Berkeley Associates
5 FOUNDATION DESIGN
5.1
General
Various field and laboratory tests have been carried out during these
geotechnical investigations. These test results have been examined for
evaluation of subsurface conditions at the project site and determination of
geotechnical design parameters.
Design parameters have been selected on the basis of available field &
laboratory test results, literature and engineering judgement.
Evaluations have been made for allowable bearing pressures for the shallow
as well as deep oundations which are discussed in the following sections.
5.2
Type of Foundations
Keeping in view the type of structures and soil conditions existing at the site;
allowable bearing capacity for shallow foundations as well as deep
foundations has been evaluated. Shallow foundations are recommended to be
provided for light to moderately loaded structures. In order to facilitate the
designer, allowable load carrying capacity of deep foundations have also
been provided.
5.3
Shallow Foundations
Shallow foundations can be strip, square or raft footings. Allowable bearing

pressures for shallow foundations have been evaluated at different depths for
various structures of the Project.
The design criteria, geotechnical design parameters and allowable bearing
pressures for shallow foundations are discussed in the following sections.
5.3.1 Design Criteria for Shallow Foundations

Allowable bearing pressures for shallow foundations have been evaluated for
various sizes of foundations placed at depths from 2m to 4m. For evaluation
of allowable bearing pressures, the following two criteria are adopted;
i-
The allowable load should not initiate the shear failure of the

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 21
Berkeley Associates
foundation soils, and

ii-
The total as well as differential settlements caused by the

application of allowable loads should be within specified
tolerable limits of 25.4 mm for square and strip foundations and
50.8 mm for raft foundations.
5.3.2 Design Parameters

For evaluation of allowable bearing pressures for shallow footings, the
recommended design parameters are summarized as under:
Sr. No.
Structure
Designation
Depth of
Footing
(m)
Material
Type
Bulk
Density
3
(kN/m )
Cohesion
(kPa)
Design
N70
Angle of
Internal
Friction
(Deg)
Modulus
of
Elasticity
(MPa)
Switchyard
2
3
Silty Clay
18.0
35
15
Raw/Fire
Water Tank
Silty Sand
17.5
31
Water
Treatment
Plant
Silty Sand
18.0
10
32
Cooling
Tower
2
3
4
Silty Clay
18.0
30
15
Silty Sand
17.5
8
9
31.5
2
5
TG-1
3
4
5
Silty Sand
17.0
2
6
TG-2
Maintenance
Bay
Boiler-1
Boiler-2
10
Chimney
11
Coal Shed
3
4
Silty Sand
Silty Sand
17.5
Silty Clay
18.0
3
4
17.5
8
9
30.5
31
32
30
15
9
10
32
Silty Sand
18.0
Silty Sand
17.5
Silty Sand
Silty Clay
Silty Sand
18.0
18.0
17.0
25
-
5
6
7
12
6
30.5
31
33
31
The evaluations of bearing pressures are carried out by considering both the
shear based as well as settlement based criteria. The allowable bearing
pressures on the basis of shear failure of soil were determined by adopting
Doc. No. J-559
Rev. 00
32
5.3.3 Allowable Bearing Pressures

31
2
3
4
3
2
3
6
7
Page 22
12
-
Berkeley Associates
the approach given by Brinch-Hansen (Ref.5.1). A factor of safety of 3.0 was

used for determining the respective net allowable bearing pressures. The
allowable bearing pressures based on settlement criterion for foundations
underlain with cohesion less layer have been calculated using Bowles (1996).
In case both cohesive and cohesion less layers fall within the influence zone,
the elastic settlements have been evaluated using Timoshenko and Goodier
approach (Ref.1). The evaluated allowable bearing pressures for shallow
foundations for various structures are presented in Figs. 5-2 to 5-26 which are
attached in Appendix-A.
The allowable bearing pressures as provided in this report are for normal axial
loads on level ground. For eccentric loading conditions, the value of allowable
load shall be at least equal to the axial load, Pa with;
Pa = qa . Aeff
where
qa
Aeff
= allowable bearing pressure for axial loads, and

= effective foundation area = (L-2ex) (B-2ey)
where ex and ey are the magnitude of eccentricities along

dimensions of the footing respectively.
L and B
5.3.4 Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction

Modulus of sub-grade reaction Ks to be used in computer model for structural
analysis can be evaluated from the basic definition of Ks by using the
evaluated net allowable bearing pressure which causes the settlement under
the maximum structural pressure and is as follows:
For Square & Strip Footings with 25.4 mm tolerable settlement
ks (kN/m3) =
Evaluated Net Allowable Bearing Pressure x FOS

Settlement (25.4 mm) under maximum structural pressure
For raft / mat footings with 50.8 mm tolerable settlement

ks (kN/m3) = Evaluated net allowable bearing pressure X FOS
Settlement (50.8 mm) under maximum structural pressure
The modulus values determined from the two plate load tests were provided
in section 2.4.3.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 23
Berkeley Associates
5.4
Deep Foundations
5.4.1 Cast in-situ Piles

Piles are the most common type of deep foundations. The bored cast-in-situ
reinforced concrete piles are recommended to be used as the deep
foundations for the project.
5.4.2 Length and Diameter

Deep foundations are recommended for heavily loaded structures. We
envisage that cast-in-situ bored reinforced concrete piles of diameters 660mm
and 760mm shall be adequate for the structures. The allowable load carrying
capacities of cast-in-situ bored piles have been determined for these
diameters.
5.4.3 Design Parameters

For evaluation of load carrying capacity for deep foundations, design
parameters are presented in the following table:
Depth
Sr. No.
Bulk Density
Soil Type
Angle of
Relative
Internal
Density
Friction
(m)
3
(kN/m )
(Deg)
(%)
Silty Sand
3 to 10
17.5
31
30
Silty Sand
10 to
18.0
33
35
maximum
explored depth
5.4.4 Allowable Load Carrying Capacity

The load carrying capacities of bored piles have been calculated according to
the procedures described in Ref. 5.1. The pile capacities in compression are
shown on Fig. 5-27 (Appendix-A). The allowable loads provided in these
figure are for single pile. Appropriate group reduction factor should be applied
on the basis of configuration of the pile group under a foundation.
The following formula given in Ref. 5.1 can be adopted to estimate pile group
efficiency:
Eg
=
Doc. No. J-559
Rev. 00
Page 24
Berkeley Associates
and
where,
m
n
s
D
=
=
=
=
no. of columns in group

no. of rows in group
centre to centre distance between adjacent piles
pile diameter
The minimum spacing between the piles in a group should be at least 2 to 3

times the pile diameter.
The pile capacities provided in Fig. 5-27 must be verified by constructing test
pile and carrying out full scale loading tests.
5.4.5 Horizontal Soil Spring Stiffness

The horizontal soil spring stiffnesses have been evaluated for the piles. These
are shown on Fig. 5-28 (Appendix-A).
5.5 Lateral Earth Pressure

In case of buried structures and retaining walls, use of cohesion-less backfill
is recommended. The evaluation of static earth pressure on buried wall/
retaining walls depends upon the permissible movements allowed in the
design, configuration of the wall, backfill geometry and the type of soil used as
backfill. However, for smooth vertical walls with horizontal backfill, the
following simplified expressions can be used for determination of coefficients
of lateral earth pressure;
Coefficient of active earth pressure, Ka = (1 - sin)/(1 + sin )
Coefficient of earth pressure at rest, Ko = (1 - sin)
Coefficient of passive earth pressure, Kp = (1 + sin)/(1 - sin )
where
Effective angle of internal friction of backfill soil (to be

determined by shear test on fill remoulded to the
specified density and moisture)

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 25
Berkeley Associates
A conservative value of 30o can be adopted for

preliminary design purpose
For evaluation of earth pressure under earthquake conditions, the equations

proposed by Mononobe-Okabe are recommended to be used.
5.6
Construction Considerations for Foundations
The soils at foundation level must be carefully inspected prior to placing the
foundations to ensure that the soils are similar to those encountered in the
boreholes. In case any loose/weak material or fill material is encountered in
the foundation trenches/pits, it must be completely removed and foundations
should be placed on natural soil. The foundation trenches/pits must be
protected from ingress of water during foundation construction.
For floor construction, well graded fill should be used having coefficient of
uniformity greater than 4 and compacted in layers of 150 mm (compacted)
thickness. Each layer should be compacted to achieve relative density at least
75%. The material should be free draining having less than 15% fines.
For confirmation of the load carrying capacities of the selected piles, full scale
pile load tests shall be conducted on separate piles constructed outside the
area of working piles. The length and diameter of the test piles should be the
same as the designed working piles. The construction methodology and type
of equipment used for the construction of test piles must also be same as
envisaged for the working piles. The test piles shall be loaded to at least 2.5
times the theoretical design load carrying capacity of the pile or to failure.
In order to ensure proper workmanship, load tests are also recommended on
some of the working piles.
5.7
Pavement Design Parameters
The top layer at the site mainly comprises Silty Clay (CL-ML). The soaked
CBR values for the in-situ soils compacted to Standard Proctor density for
various compaction levels are provided below:
Relative Compaction based on
Standard Proctor Compaction
90 %
95 %
100 %
Soaked CBR Value

TP-1
TP-2
4.0
4.8
6.6
7.6
9.2
10.2
Doc. No. J-559
Rev. 00
Page 26
Berkeley Associates
5.8
References
5.1 Bowles, J. E., "Foundation Analysis and Design", McGraw Hill

International Editions, Civil Engineering Series, 5th Edition, 1996.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Page 27
Berkeley Associates
6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. During these investigations, the subsurface was explored to a

maximum depth of 25 m below EGL. The location of all exploratory
points is shown on Fig. 2-1.
2. Various soil layers encountered at the site below the existing ground
surface are described in section 4.4 and graphically represented in
linear subsurface profiles shown on Figs. 4-1 to 4-3.
3. Ground water table (GWT) was encountered in all boreholes at depth
range of 9.6 m to 11.4 m. For design purposes, the GWT has been
assumed at 10m depth below EGL.
4. The site soils are not prone to liquefaction hazard.
5. On the basis of our evaluations, the soil profile type as per Building
Code of Pakistan, (Seismic Provision 2007) can be taken as SD (i.e.
Stiff Soil Profile).
6. On the basis of concentrations of sulphates determined in the
foundation soil and ground water samples, the exposure is classified as
Negligible'' as explained in ACI 318M-11 Table 4.2.1. According to the
concentration of sulphates in soil and water Ordinary Portland Cement
(OPC) can be used in sub-structure construction.
7. Allowable of pressures for square, strip and mat footings have been
evaluated. Recommended allowable bearing pressures for shallow
foundations of various structures of the project are presented in Figs.
5-2 to 5-26.
8. Deep foundations are recommended for heavily loaded structures.
Allowable load carrying capacities for piles in compression are shown
on Fig. 5-27.
9. Profile of horizontal soil spring stiffness coefficient with depth is shown
on Fig. 5-28.
10. Some construction considerations are discussed in section 5.6.
11. Pavement design parameters are provided in section 5.7.
12. The report on Electrical Resistivity Survey
recommendations are provided in Appendix-D
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
and
relevant
Page 28
Berkeley Associates
APPENDIX - A
TABLES AND FIGURES

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-A
Berkeley Associates
Table 2-1 Summary of In-situ Density Test Results & Relative Compaction % age
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Sheet 1 of 1
Sr.
No.
Test Pit
No.
Sample
No.
Depth
(meter)
In-situ
Bulk
Density
Moisture
Content
(%)
(g/cm )
1
In-situ
Dry
Density
3
Standard Proctor
Compaction
Max. Dry Density
3
(g/cm )
(kN/m )
(kN/m )
(g/cm )
Optimum
Moisture
Content
(%)
Relative
Compaction
% age
FDT-1
0.60
1.640
12.78
1.454
14.260
17.36
1.77
13.9
82.2
FDT-2
2.00
1.623
11.23
1.459
14.310
17.36
1.77
13.9
82.4
FDT-3
3.00
1.707
1.76
1.677
16.450
17.36
1.77
13.9
94.8
FDT-4
4.00
1.616
2.31
1.579
15.489
17.36
1.77
13.9
89.2
FDT-1
1.00
1.542
3.20
1.494
14.653
16.67
1.70
14.0
87.9
FDT-2
2.00
1.600
2.70
1.558
15.278
16.67
1.70
14.0
91.6
FDT-3
3.00
1.643
8.92
1.509
14.793
16.67
1.70
14.0
88.7
FDT-4
4.00
1.770
8.83
1.626
15.949
16.67
1.70
14.0
95.7
TP-1
In-situ
Dry
Density
TP-2
Berkeley Associates
Table 2-2 Plate Load Test Data for CPLT-1

Project: 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Description of soil: Silty Sand
Test started on:
25/1/2014
Test completed on:
25/1/2014
1
Plate load test no:
Location:
TG-1
4.0m below EGL

Test depth:
Plate size:
18 x 18 Inches
Area of plate:
324
Sq In
Piston dia:
2.5
Inches
Piston area:
4.91 Sq In
LOADING
DATE
TIME
Pressure
on Guage
25/1/2014
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
min
(p.s.i)
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
OBSERVATIONS
SETTLEMENT in mm
Corrected Load on Pressure on

Pressure on
plate
plate
Guage
(p.s.i)
(Lbs)
kPa
REMARKS
G1
G2
G3
Average
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.18
0.20
0.21
0.09
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.12
0.15
0.17
0.16
0.16
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.133
0.140
0.143
0.143
0.143
0.160
0.183
0.193
0.20
0.20
0.18
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.12
0.12
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.140
0.140
0.127
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.49
0.51
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.29
0.31
0.33
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.58
0.59
0.60
0.420
0.420
0.420
0.420
0.420
0.433
0.463
0.480
0.34
0.34
0.34
0.34
0.34
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.293
0.293
0.293
0.293
0.293
0.273
0.273
0.273
0.33
0.33
0.34
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.59
0.59
0.59
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.403
0.403
0.407
0.417
0.417
0.417
0.417
0.417
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.037
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.027
0.003
0.003
0.36
0.36
0.37
0.38
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.66
0.67
0.68
0.68
0.69
0.483
0.483
0.487
0.497
0.507
0.510
0.510
0.513
Loading
504.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2477
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
52.71
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
1000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1009.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
4954
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-1
Loading
105.43
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
1500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1513.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
7431
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-2
Loading
158.14
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
2000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2018.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
9908
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-3
Loading
210.86
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-4
1 of 3
Berkeley Associates
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
2750
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2774.75
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
13624
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
2000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2018.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1513.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1009.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
504.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.28
0.25
0.24
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.097
0.083
0.080
0.54
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.58
0.58
0.58
0.54
0.55
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.54
0.54
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.540
0.547
0.557
0.557
0.557
0.593
0.593
0.593
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.46
0.46
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.33
0.30
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.47
0.47
0.46
0.45
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.35
0.33
0.30
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.20
0.20
0.17
0.15
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.48
0.47
0.46
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.33
0.30
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.11
0.11
0.10
0.09
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.483
0.483
0.483
0.483
0.477
0.473
0.463
0.457
0.353
0.353
0.353
0.353
0.353
0.350
0.330
0.300
0.163
0.163
0.163
0.163
0.153
0.143
0.127
0.113
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
CYCLE-4
Loading
289.93
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
UnLoading
9908
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
7431
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
4954
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2477
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
210.86
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
158.14
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
105.43
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
52.71
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-5
2 of 3
Berkeley Associates
Table 2-3 Plate Load Test Data for CPLT-2

Project: 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Description of soil:
Silty Sand
Test started on:
26/1/2014
Test completed on:
27/1/2014
Plate load test no:
2
Location:
TG-2
Test depth:
Plate size:
Area of plate:
Piston dia:
Piston area:
4.0m below EGL

18 x 18 Inches
324
Sq In
2.5
Inches
4.91
Sq In
OBSERVATIONS
LOADING
Pressure
DATE
min
(p.s.i)
Corrected
Pressure on
Guage
(p.s.i)
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
504.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
TIME
26/1/2014
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
on Guage
SETTLEMENT in mm
Load on
Pressure on
plate
plate
Lbs
kPa
2477
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
REMARKS
G1
G2
G3
Average
0.26
0.27
0.28
0.29
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.26
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.14
0.14
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.217
0.220
0.227
0.233
0.240
0.240
0.240
0.240
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.17
0.17
0.18
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.13
0.10
0.18
0.17
0.17
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.133
0.130
0.133
0.123
0.120
0.110
0.100
0.077
105.43
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.440
0.440
0.440
0.440
0.440
0.440
0.440
0.440
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.24
0.23
0.22
0.21
0.21
0.223
0.223
0.223
0.157
0.147
0.137
0.130
0.130
158.14
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.69
0.70
0.70
0.71
0.71
0.72
0.72
0.73
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.96
0.96
1.05
1.06
1.06
1.07
1.08
1.09
1.09
1.09
0.893
0.900
0.900
0.907
0.913
0.923
0.923
0.927
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.28
0.25
0.24
0.24
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.51
0.49
0.48
0.48
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.76
0.75
0.74
0.74
0.74
0.74
0.74
0.74
0.517
0.497
0.487
0.487
0.477
0.477
0.477
0.477
210.86
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.94
0.95
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.98
0.98
0.99
1.33
1.35
1.35
1.35
1.35
1.35
1.35
1.35
1.70
1.72
1.72
1.72
1.72
1.72
1.72
1.72
1.323
1.340
1.347
1.347
1.347
1.350
1.350
1.353
Loading
52.71
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
1000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1009.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
4954
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-1
Loading
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
27/1/2014
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
1500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1513.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
7431
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-2
Loading
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
2000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2018.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
9908
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-3
Loading
CYCLE-4
1 of 3
Berkeley Associates
UnLoading
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
2750
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2774.75
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
13624
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
25
27
29
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
0.25
0.5
1
2
4
8
15
20
90
2000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1000
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
500
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2018.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1513.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1009.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
504.50
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.39
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.71
0.70
0.70
0.70
0.69
0.69
0.69
0.69
1.26
1.26
1.26
1.26
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
0.787
0.773
0.773
0.773
0.763
0.763
0.763
0.763
289.93
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1.49
1.49
1.49
1.50
1.51
1.51
1.52
1.55
1.96
1.96
1.97
1.98
1.98
1.98
1.99
2.02
2.52
2.54
2.56
2.58
2.58
2.59
2.62
2.63
1.990
1.997
2.007
2.020
2.023
2.027
2.043
2.067
1.53
1.53
1.53
1.53
1.53
1.53
1.52
1.52
1.43
1.43
1.43
1.43
1.43
1.42
1.42
1.42
1.30
1.30
1.30
1.30
1.30
1.30
1.31
1.31
1.20
1.19
1.19
1.21
1.21
1.21
1.21
1.20
1.18
1.21
1.22
0.64
0.63
0.62
0.62
0.62
0.62
0.67
0.71
0.58
1.99
1.99
1.99
1.99
1.99
1.99
1.98
1.98
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.59
1.59
1.59
1.65
1.65
1.65
1.64
1.63
1.63
1.63
1.65
1.08
1.08
1.08
1.07
1.07
1.07
1.12
1.15
1.00
2.61
2.61
2.62
2.62
2.62
2.62
2.62
2.62
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.39
2.39
2.39
2.39
2.40
2.41
2.43
2.43
2.29
2.29
2.29
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.31
2.31
2.30
2.32
1.96
1.95
1.94
1.94
1.93
1.93
1.99
2.03
1.30
2.043
2.043
2.047
2.047
2.047
2.047
2.040
2.040
1.940
1.940
1.940
1.940
1.940
1.937
1.937
1.937
1.813
1.813
1.813
1.813
1.817
1.820
1.830
1.830
1.693
1.690
1.690
1.727
1.727
1.727
1.723
1.713
1.707
1.713
1.730
1.227
1.220
1.213
1.210
1.207
1.207
1.260
1.297
0.960
CYCLE-4
Loading
UnLoading
9908
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
7431
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
4954
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2477
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
210.86
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
158.14
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
105.43
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
52.71
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
0.00
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
CYCLE-5
2 of 3
Berkeley Associates
Table 3-1 Summary of Laboratory Test Results
Sheet 1 of 3
Borehole Sample
No.
No.
BH-1
BH-2
BH-3
BH-4
BH-5
BH-6
BH-7
Grain Size Analysis
Atterberg
Limits
Bulk
Unconfined
Density N.M.C Compression
%
Strain
qu
gb
3
%
kPa
kN/m
14.87
5.0
Direct
Shear Test
Total
soluble
salts
Chloride
Content
Sulphate
Content
SO4
Organic
Matter
0.068
0.820
Depth
(m)
Specific
Gravity
UDS-1
1.0
2.63
0.0
Sand Fines
%
%
66.5 33.5
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
27.4
72.6
SPT-3
4.5
0.0
89.4
10.6
1.0
SPT-8
12.0
2.0
82.5
15.5
0.0
SPT-15
22.5
0.0
79.6
20.4
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
71.0
29.0
SPT-2
3.0
0.0
77.5
22.5
0.0
30.7
SPT-5
7.5
0.0
81.5
18.5
0.0
31.8
SPT-10
15.0
1.0
77.9
21.1
SPT-17
25.0
0.0
81.9
18.1
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
76.1
23.9
SPT-4
6.0
0.0
80.5
19.5
SPT-10
15.0
0.0
74.0
26.0
SPT-14
21.0
0.0
80.2
19.8
SPT-16
24.0
0.0
84.7
15.3
UDS-1
1.0
0.0
0.8
99.2
31
CL
Lean Clay
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
33.0
67.0
26
CL-ML
Sandy Silty Clay
SPT-3
4.5
0.0
86.1
13.9
4.0
33.1
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-8
12.0
0.0
86.8
13.2
2.0
35.2
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-11
16.5
3.1
75.4
21.5
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-16
24.0
1.4
73.4
25.2
SM
Silty Sand
UDS-1
0.5
0.0
SPT-2
3.0
0.0
Non-Plastic 14.89
71.4 28.6 Non-Plastic
2.63
2.63
2.62
Concre
-tion %
8.3
LL
%
PI
%
Non-Plastic
Non-Plastic
C
F
kPa degre
Silty Sand
Silt with Sand
32.1
SP-SM
Poorly graded sand with silt
33.8
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
0.018
0.048
0.770
32.8
Non-Plastic
31.8
Non-Plastic
0.0
91.7
Group
Name
ML
Non-Plastic
0.0
Group
Symbol
SM
0.021
0.0
pH
Value
Soil Classification
(USCS)
33.6
0.016
0.048
0.620
5.1
ML
Silt
8.0
29.4
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-9
13.5
0.2
79.4
20.4
3.0
32.2
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-14
21.0
0.0
76.5
23.5
0.0
33.7
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-17
25.0
3.5
63.3
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
Non-Plastic
82.9 17.1 Non-Plastic
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-4
6.0
0.2
82.5
17.3
2.0
32.7
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-8
12.0
0.0
78.3
21.7
0.0
32.0
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-13
19.5
1.6
71.1
27.3
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-16
24.0
0.4
69.1
30.5
SM
Silty Sand
UDS-1
0.5
0.0
3.0
97.0
SPT-3
4.5
0.0
72.8
27.2
2.63
33.2
SPT-8
12.0
0.4
82.6
17.0
SPT-10A
15.0
1.2
20.8
78.0
SPT-10B
15.0
0.0
3.5
96.5
SPT-13
19.5
0.0
76.6
23.4
SPT-15
22.5
0.0
65.1
34.9
0.0
24
17.51
8.6
52
0.021
0.600
33.7
2.5
1.0
32.0
0.014
Non-Plastic
35
0.038
11
0.0
31.8
0.036
0.550
CL-ML
Silty Clay
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
ML
Silt with Sand
CL
Lean Clay
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
Berkeley Associates
Table 3-1 Summary of Laboratory Test Results
Sheet 2 of 3
Borehole Sample
No.
No.
BH-8
BH-9
Depth
(m)
Specific
Gravity
Grain Size Analysis
Atterberg
Limits
Bulk
Unconfined Direct Shear
Total
Density N.M.C Compression
Test
soluble
%
qu
salts
gb
C
Strain
F
degre
3
%
kPa
kPa
kN/m
e
15.00
7.2
BH-11
BH-13
BH-14
Water
Sample
Organic
pH
Matter
Value
(%)
Soil Classification
(USCS)
Group
Symbol
Group
Name
UDS-1
0.5
0.0
CL-ML
Silty Clay with Sand
SPT-2
3.0
0.0
42.7
57.3
4.0
32.6
ML
Sandy Silt
SPT-5
7.5
0.0
80.9
19.1
0.0
33.1
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-9
13.5
0.0
80.9
19.1
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-14
21.0
0.0
80.3
19.7
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-17
25.0
0.0
78.9
21.1
UDS-1
0.5
0.0
25.2
74.8
2.68
SPT-3
4.5
0.0
34.8
65.2
SPT-10
15.0
0.1
72.8
27.1
SPT-12
18.0
0.0
70.3
29.7
SPT-16
24.0
0.3
55.7
44.0
LL
%
23
PI
%
4
0.0
23
16.70
7.5
44
0.5
0.0
8.0
92.0
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
80.9
19.1
0.0
SPT-6
9.0
0.8
80.5
18.7
SPT-9
13.5
2.63
0.0
79.5
20.5
SPT-13
19.5
2.8
75.3
21.9
SPT-17
25.0
0.0
80.7
19.3
UDS-1
0.5
0.0
2.9
97.1
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
6.1
93.9
SPT-5
7.5
0.0
82.0
18.0
SPT-8
12.0
0.0
83.2
16.8
SPT-10
15.0
0.0
80.5
19.5
17.84
0.480
2.9
0.0
25
0.050
34.5
31.7
0.018
0.060
0.700
34.6
1175 ppm
UDS-1
(%)
0.014
75 ppm
120 ppm
13.7
0.0
0.0
32.1
0.012
Non-Plastic
16.27
0.500
35.1
0.010
24
0.046
0.036
0.460
12.6
2.0
0.0
31.2
32.9
1182 ppm
99 ppm
140 ppm
0.018
0.042
SM
Silty Sand
CL-ML
ML
Sandy Silt
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
8.0
Non-Plastic
WS
BH-12
Sulphate
Content
SO4
(%)
Sand Fines
%
%
26.5 73.5
Concre
-tion %
WS
BH-10
Chloride
Content
CL-ML
Silty Clay
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
CL-ML
Silty Clay
ML
Silt
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
8.00
SPT-1
1.5
0.0
81.9
18.1
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-4
6.0
0.0
75.6
24.4
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-9
13.5
1.6
78.7
19.7
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-2
3.0
0.0
28.9
71.1
CL-ML
2.0
26
0.0
31.8
0.860
31.3
SPT-5
7.5
0.4
82.0
17.6
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-10
15.0
2.8
74.8
22.4
SM
Silty Sand
SPT-1
1.5
0.2
2.3
97.5
SPT-2
3.0
0.0
45.2
54.8
SPT-8
Tubewell
12.0
0.0
80.1
19.9
Hand pump
24
Non-Plastic
0.014
1.0
0.052
0.920
32.3
1263 ppm
99 ppm
90 ppm
8.00
443 ppm
60 ppm
70 ppm
7.00
CL-ML
Silty Clay
ML
Sandy Silt
SM
Silty Sand
Berkeley Associates
Table 3-1 Summary of Laboratory Test Results for Test Pit

Sheet 3 of 3
Soaked C.B.R
Value at
Partical Size Analysis
Passing % age
Test Pit
No.
Sample
No.
Composition
Atterberg
Limits
Depth
(meter)
No.10 No.40 No.200 Concr- Sand Fines
etion
%
%
%
%
%
%
LL
PI
Standard Proctor
Compaction
Corresponding to
Standard Proctor
Compaction at
Soil Classification
Max.
Optimum
Dry
Density Moisture 90% 95% 100% AASHTO
Content
3
(%)
(g/cm )
TP-1
CS-1
0.0-4.0
99.9 100 46.2
0.0 53.8 46.2 Non-Plastic
1.77
13.9
4.0 6.6
TP-2
CS-1
0.0-4.0
100
0.0 81.6 18.4 Non-Plastic
1.70
14.0
4.8 7.6 10.2 A-2-4(0)
100 18.4
9.2
A-4(0)
USCS
Group
Symbol
Group
Name
SM
Silty Sand
SM
Silty Sand
N-Value (Blows/30 cm)

0
10
15
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH13
Fig. 2-2A Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Switchyard
25
30

0
10
15
20
25
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH11
Fig. 2-2B Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Fire Water Tank
30

0
10
15
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH12
Fig. 2-2C Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Water Treatment Plant
25

0
10
20
30
40
50
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Depth (m)
6.0
7.0
8.0
90
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
BH09
BH10
NAvg
Fig. 2-2D Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Cooling Tower
60

0
10
15
20
25
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH07
Fig. 2-2E Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for TG-1
30
35
40

0
10
15
20
25
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH08
Fig. 2-2F Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for TG-2
30
35
40

0
10
15
20
25
30
35
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH06
Fig. 2-2G Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Maintenance Bay
40

0
10
15
20
25
30
35
0.0
5.0
Depth (m)
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
BH02
BH04
Fig. 2-2H Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Boiler-1
NAvg
40

0
10
15
20
25
30
35
0.0
5.0
Depth (m)
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
BH03
BH05
Fig. 2-2I Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Boiler-2
NAvg
40
45

0
10
15
20
25
30
35
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH01
Fig. 2-2J Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Chimney
40
45
50

0
10
15
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH14
Fig. 2-2K Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Coal Shed
20
25
Pressure (kPa)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
0.1
Cycle 1
0.2
Settlement (mm)
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
0.3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Fig. 2-3 Pressure vs Settlement Curves of Cyclic Plate Load Test Data-1
Pressure (kPa)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Cycle 1
0.6
0.7
Cycle 2
Se
ettlement (mm
m)
0.8
09
0.9
Cycle 3
1
Cycle 4
1.1
1.2
Cycle 5
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.1
2.2
Fig. 2-4 Pressure vs Settlement Curves of Cyclic Plate Load Test -2
FIG. 4-1
LEGEND:
CLIENT:
PROJECT:
FILL MATERIAL
TITLE:
SILTY CLAY / SILTY CLAY WITH SAND
SILTY SAND / SANDY SILT / CLAYEY SILTY SAND
GROUND WATER TABLE

SPT
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW
COGENERATION PROJECT
LINEAR SUBSURFACE PROFILE 1-1'
Berkeley Associates
316-D,OPF Housing Society, Raiwind Road, Lahore
Contact: +92-42-35323312-15
Fax: +92-42-35323316
COPYRIGHT
THIS DRAWING REMAINS THE PROPERTY OF Berkeley Associates

AND MAY NOT BE COPIED IN ANY WAY EXCEPT FOR FULFILLING
THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT IS ISSUED.
SCALE
JOB N0.
FIG N0.
FIG. 4-2
LEGEND:
CLIENT:
PROJECT:
FILL MATERIAL
TITLE:
GROUND WATER TABLE

SPT
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
DATE:

Berkeley Associates
Contact: +92-42-35323312-15
Fax: +92-42-35323316
COPYRIGHT

SCALE
JOB N0.
FIG N0.
FIG. 4-3
LEGEND:
CLIENT:
PROJECT:
GROUND WATER TABLE

SPT
TITLE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
DATE:

Berkeley Associates
Contact: +92-42-35323312-15
Fax: +92-42-35323316
COPYRIGHT

SCALE
JOB N0.
FIG N0.

0
10
15
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH13
Fig. 5-1A Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Switchyard
25
30

0
10
15
20
25
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH11
Fig. 5-1B Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Fire Water Tank
30

0
10
15
20
25
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH12
Fig. 5-1C Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Water Treatment Plant
30

0
10
15
20
25
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH09
BH10
NAvg
Fig. 5-1D Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Cooling Tower
30

0
10
15
20
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH07
Fig. 5-1E Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for TG-2
25
30

0
10
15
20
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH08
Fig. 5-1F Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for TG-2
25
30

0
10
15
20
25
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH06
Fig. 5-1G Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Maintenance Bay
30

0
10
15
20
25
0.0
5.0
Depth (m)
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
BH02
BH04
Fig. 5-1H Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Boiler-1
NAvg
30

0
10
15
20
25
0.0
5.0
Depth (m)
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
BH03
BH05
Fig. 5-1I Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Boiler-2
NAvg
30

0
10
15
20
Depth (m)
10
15
20
25
30
BH01
Fig. 5-1J Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Chimney
25
30

0
10
15
0
1
2
3
4
5
Depth (m)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH14
Fig. 5-1K Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Coal Shed
20
25
Berkeley Associates
120
Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)
100
Df = 3.0m
80
Df = 2.0m
60
40
20
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-2.
Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Switchyard
Berkeley Associates
100
90
80
70
Df = 3.0m
60
50
Df = 2.0m
40
30
20
10
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-3.
Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Switchyard
Berkeley Associates
120
100
Df = 3.0m
80
60
40
0
10
15
20
25
30
Width (m)
Fig. 5-4
Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Mat/Raft Footings for Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm
at Raw/Fire Water Tank
35
Berkeley Associates
400
350
300
250
200
Df = 2.0m
150
100
50
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-5.
at Water Treatment Plant
Berkeley Associates
400
350
300
250
200
Df = 2.0m
150
100
50
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-6.
at Water Treatment Plant
Berkeley Associates
350
Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)
300
250
200
150
Df = 4.0m
Df = 3.0m
100
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-7.
at Cooling Tower
Berkeley Associates
350
300
250
200
150
Df = 4.0m
Df = 3.0m
100
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-8.
at Cooling Tower
Berkeley Associates
160
140
120
Df = 4.0m
100
Df = 3.0m
80
60
40
Df = 2.0m
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Width (m)
Fig. 5-9.
at Cooling Tower
35
Berkeley Associates
250
200
150
Df = 4.0m
100
Df = 3.0m
30
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-10.
at TG-1
Berkeley Associates
250
200
150
Df = 4.0m
100
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-11.
at TG-1
Berkeley Associates
120
110
100
90
Df = 4.0m
80
Df = 3.0m
70
Df = 2.0m
60
50
0
10
15
20
25
30
Width (m)
Fig. 5-12.
at TG-1
35
Berkeley Associates
350
300
250
200
Df = 4.0m
150
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
100
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-13.
Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Perimissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at TG-2
Berkeley Associates
350
300
250
200
Df = 4.0m
150
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
100
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-14.
at TG-2
Berkeley Associates
160
140
120
Df = 4.0m
Df = 3.0m
100
Df = 2.0m
80
60
40
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Width (m)
Fig. 5-15.
at TG-2
35
Berkeley Associates
350
300
250
200
150
2 0m
Df = 2.0m
100
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-16
at Maintenance Bay
Berkeley Associates
350
300
250
200
150
Df = 2.0m
100
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-17.
at Maintenance Bay
Berkeley Associates
350
300
250
200
Df = 4.0m
150
Df = 3.0m
100
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-18.
ar Boiler-1
Berkeley Associates
350
300
250
200
Df = 4.0m
150
3 0m
Df = 3.0m
100
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-19.
at Boiler-1
Berkeley Associates
180
160
140
Df = 4.0m
120
Df = 3.0m
100
80
60
40
Df = 2.0m
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
Width (m)
Fig. 5-20.
at Boiler-1
Berkeley Associates
250
200
150
Df = 4.0m
100
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-21.
at Boiler-2
Berkeley Associates
250
200
150
Df = 4.0m
100
30
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-22.
at Boiler-2
Berkeley Associates
120
100
Df = 4.0m
80
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
60
40
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
Width (m)
Fig. 5-23.
at Boiler-2
Berkeley Associates
220
200
180
160
Df = 3.0m
30
140
120
100
0
10
15
20
25
30
Width (m)
Fig. 5-24.
at Chimney
35
Berkeley Associates
250
200
150
100
3 0m
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-25.
at Coal Shed
Berkeley Associates
250
200
150
100
Df = 3.0m
30
Df = 2.0m
50
0
0
Width (m)
Fig. 5-26.
at Coal Shed
Berkeley Associates
Allowable Load Ca
arring Capacities in Compression (Tons)
180
160
140
Dia = 760mm
120
100
Dia = 660mm
80
60
40
20
0
10
15
20
25
Length below Pile Cap (m)
Fig. 5-27.
Allowable Load Carrying Capacities of Piles in Compression
30
35
Berkeley Associates
250,000
Horizontal Soil Spring Stiffnes (kN/m3)
200,000
150,000
660mm Dia
760mm Dia
100 000
100,000
50,000
0
0
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Depth below Pile Cap (m)
Fig. 5-28. Horizontal Soil Spring Stiffnesses of Pile below Pile Cap
Berkeley Associates
APPENDIX B
BOREHOLE & TEST PIT LOGS

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-B
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION PROJECT
LOCATION:
ID FAN
COORDS. E:
287588 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499393 m
98.61 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-01
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.20 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
30-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 30-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.61
97.61
96.61
95.61
UDS-1
SPT-1
94.61
93.61
92.61
91.61
90.61
89.61
10
88.61
11
87.61
12
86.61
13
85.61
14
84.61
15
83.61
16
82.61
17
81.61
18
80.61
19
79.61
20
78.61
21
77.61
22
76.61
23
75.61
24
25
SPT-2
SPT-3
Light Brown, Silty Sand, trace mica,

trace organic matter.
Light to Brown, Loose, Silt with Sand (ML),
trace mica, trace organic matter.
Light Grey, Medium Dense to Dense,
Poorly Graded Sand with Silt (SP-SM),
to Silty Sand (SM), trace mica,
trace concretion.
12
16
18
18
SPT-5
22
SPT-6
26
SPT-7
27
SPT-8
30
SPT-9
33
SPT-10
18
SPT-11
23
SPT-12
38
SPT-13
25
SPT-14
28
SPT-15
40
74.61
SPT-16
37
73.61
SPT-17
HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE
SPT-4
CLIENT:
(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)
43
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: BOILER NO. 1

COORDS. E:
287574 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499444 m
98.74 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-02
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.0 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
28-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 28-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.74
97.74
96.74
95.74
94.74
93.74
92.74
91.74
90.74
89.74
10
88.74
11
87.74
12
86.74
13
85.74
14
84.74
15
83.74
16
82.74
17
81.74
18
80.74
19
79.74
20
78.74
21
77.74
22
76.74
23
75.74
24
25
UDS-1
SPT-1
Light Brown to Light Grey, Medium Dense

to Dense, Silty Sand (SM), trace
concretion, trace mica, trace organic
material at top.
16
14
SPT-3
17
SPT-4
24
SPT-5
24
SPT-6
21
SPT-7
16
SPT-8
23
SPT-9
22
SPT-10
18
SPT-11
20
SPT-12
26
SPT-13
25
SPT-14
29
SPT-15
24
74.74
SPT-16
29
73.74
SPT-17
SPT-2
CLIENT:
32
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

COORDS. E:
287598 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499444 M
98.66 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-03
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.10 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
29-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 29-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.66
97.66
96.66
95.66
94.66
93.66
92.66
91.66
90.66
89.66
10
88.66
11
87.66
12
86.66
13
85.66
14
84.66
15
83.66
16
82.66
17
81.66
18
80.66
19
79.66
20
78.66
21
77.66
22
76.66
23
75.66
24
25
UDS-1
SPT-1
Light Brown to Light Grey, Loose to Dense,

Silty Sand (SM), trace concretion, trace
mica, 12 cm clayey patch at 7.5 m & 6 cm
clayey patch at 15 m depth.
5
12
SPT-3
17
SPT-4
15
SPT-5
SPT-6
22
SPT-7
18
SPT-8
16
SPT-9
22
SPT-10
19
SPT-11
14
SPT-12
16
SPT-13
23
SPT-14
31
SPT-15
29
74.66
SPT-16
33
73.66
SPT-17
SPT-2
CLIENT:
35
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

COORDS. E:
287572 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499480 m
98.70 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-04
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.0 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
28-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 28-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.7
97.7
96.7
95.7
UDS-1
SPT-1
94.7
93.7
92.7
91.7
90.7
89.7
10
88.7
11
87.7
12
86.7
13
85.7
14
84.7
15
83.7
16
82.7
17
81.7
18
80.7
19
79.7
20
78.7
21
77.7
22
76.7
23
75.7
24
25
SPT-2
SPT-3
Light Brown, Lean Clay (CL),

trace, organic matter.
Light Brown, Firm,
Sandy Silty Clay (CL-ML)
Light brown to Grey, Medium Dense
to Dense, Silty Sand (SM), trace mica,
trace concretion.
7
14
12
17
SPT-5
19
SPT-6
19
SPT-7
22
SPT-8
26
SPT-9
15
SPT-10
27
SPT-11
25
SPT-12
28
SPT-13
26
SPT-14
34
SPT-15
31
74.7
SPT-16
23
73.7
SPT-17
SPT-4
CLIENT:
28
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

COORDS. E:
287601 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499488 m
98.72 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-05
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
10.60 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
27-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 27-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.72
97.72
96.72
95.72
UDS-1
SPT-1
94.72
93.72
92.72
91.72
90.72
89.72
10
88.72
11
87.72
12
86.72
13
85.72
14
84.72
15
83.72
16
82.72
17
81.72
18
80.72
19
79.72
20
78.72
21
77.72
22
76.72
23
75.72
24
25
Light brown, Loose, Silt (ML),

trace organic matter.
SPT-2
SPT-3
9
7
Light Brown to Light Grey, Loose Dense,

Silty Sand (SM), trace mica,
trace concretion.
20
22
SPT-5
19
SPT-6
28
SPT-7
20
SPT-8
17
SPT-9
17
SPT-10
17
SPT-11
25
SPT-12
28
SPT-13
33
SPT-14
28
SPT-15
23
74.72
SPT-16
30
73.72
SPT-17
SPT-4
CLIENT:
39
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: MAINTENANCE BAY

COORDS. E:
287554 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499506 m
99.20 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-06
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.10 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
29-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 29-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
99.2
98.2
97.2
96.2
95.2
94.2
93.2
92.2
91.2
90.2
10
89.2
11
88.2
12
87.2
13
86.2
14
85.2
15
84.2
16
83.2
17
82.2
18
81.2
19
80.2
20
79.2
21
78.2
22
77.2
23
76.2
24
25
UDS-1
SPT-1
Light Brown to Grey, Loose to Dense,

trace concretion.
10
14
SPT-3
15
SPT-4
15
SPT-5
13
SPT-6
16
SPT-7
18
SPT-8
20
SPT-9
23
SPT-10
18
SPT-11
19
SPT-12
21
SPT-13
28
SPT-14
31
SPT-15
32
75.2
SPT-16
32
74.2
SPT-17
SPT-2
CLIENT:
35
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: TG -1
COORDS. E:
287586 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499517 m
98.67 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-07
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
10.80 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
25-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 25-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.67
97.67
96.67
95.67
UDS-1
SPT-1
94.67
93.67
92.67
91.67
90.67
89.67
10
88.67
11
87.67
12
86.67
13
85.67
14
84.67
15
83.67
16
82.67
17
81.67
18
80.67
19
79.67
20
78.67
21
77.67
22
76.67
23
75.67
24
25
Light Brown, Silty Clay (CL-ML),

trace concretion trace organic matter.
SPT-2
SPT-3
6
10

Silty Sand (SM), trace mica, trace
concretion, 10 cm patch of Lean Clay (CL)
at 15.05 m depth.
8
14
SPT-5
21
SPT-6
20
SPT-7
17
SPT-8
12
SPT-9
20
SPT-10
SPT-11
29
SPT-12
35
SPT-13
28
SPT-14
24
SPT-15
27
74.67
SPT-16
33
73.67
SPT-17
SPT-4
CLIENT:
32
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: TG # 2
COORDS. E:
287623 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499520 m
98.55 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-08
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.10 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
27-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 27-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.55
97.55
96.55
95.55
UDS-1
SPT-1
94.55
93.55
92.55
91.55
90.55
89.55
10
88.55
11
87.55
12
86.55
13
85.55
14
84.55
15
83.55
16
82.55
17
81.55
18
80.55
19
79.55
20
78.55
21
77.55
22
76.55
23
75.55
24
25
Light Brown, Silty Clay with Sand (CL-ML),

trace organic matter, trace concretion.
SPT-2
SPT-3
SPT-4
8
9
Light Brown, Loose, Sandy Silt (ML),

trace mica.
Light Grey, Medium Dense to Dense, Silty
Sand (SM), trace mica, trace concretion
15 cm clayey patch at 19.50 m depth.
13
19
SPT-5
23
SPT-6
19
SPT-7
16
SPT-8
14
SPT-9
20
SPT-10
24
SPT-11
20
SPT-12
30
SPT-13
34
SPT-14
28
SPT-15
26
74.55
SPT-16
32
73.55
SPT-17
CLIENT:
29
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: COOLING TOWER

COORDS. E:
287616 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499570 m
98.64 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-09
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.0 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
24-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 25-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.64
97.64
96.64
UDS-1
95.64
94.64
SPT-1
Fill Material Blackish Brown, furnace

slag mixed with silty clay, grass roots
and concretion.
SPT-2
Light Brown, Firm,

Silty Clay with Sand (CL-ML).
13
93.64
92.64
91.64
90.64
89.64
10
88.64
11
87.64
12
86.64
13
85.64
14
84.64
15
83.64
16
82.64
17
81.64
18
80.64
19
79.64
20
78.64
21
77.64
22
76.64
23
75.64
24
25
SPT-3
Light Brown to Brown, Loose to Medium

Dense, Sandy Silt (ML), trace mica,
trace concretion.
SPT-4
SPT-5
10
17
Light Grey, Medium Dense to Very Dense,

trace concretion.
16
SPT-6
16
SPT-7
18
SPT-8
18
SPT-9
16
SPT-10
20
SPT-11
36
SPT-12
34
SPT-13
31
SPT-14
31
SPT-15
30
74.64
SPT-16
33
73.64
SPT-17
CLIENT:
50
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: COOLING TOWER

COORDS. E:
287568 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499570 m
98.48 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-10
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.0 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
25-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 26-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
25 m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.48
97.48
96.48
95.48
UDS-1
SPT-1
Fill Material
Blackish Brown, furnace slag with silty
clay, grass roots, concretion.
Light Brownish Grey, Silty Clay (CL-ML).

4
94.48
93.48
92.48
91.48
90.48
89.48
10
88.48
11
87.48
12
86.48
13
85.48
14
84.48
15
83.48
16
82.48
17
81.48
18
80.48
19
79.48
20
78.48
21
77.48
22
76.48
23
75.48
24
25
SPT-2
SPT-3
16
trace concretion.
19
20
SPT-5
19
SPT-6
23
SPT-7
23
SPT-8
14
SPT-9
18
SPT-10
20
SPT-11
18
SPT-12
28
SPT-13
30
SPT-14
28
SPT-15
32
74.48
SPT-16
29
73.48
SPT-17
SPT-4
CLIENT:
27
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: FIRE WATER TANK

COORDS. E:
287593 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499620 m
98.71 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-11
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
9.90 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
23-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 23-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
15m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
98.71
97.71
96.71
95.71
94.71
93.71
92.71
91.71
90.71
89.71
10
88.71
11
87.71
12
86.71
13
85.71
14
84.71
15
83.71
30
0
UDS-1
SPT-1
Fill Material
Light Brown, silty clay with grass roots,
organic material, concretion.
Light Brown, Silty Clay (CL-ML).

SPT-2
8
Light Brown, Loose, Silt (ML), trace mica.
SPT-3
SPT-4
14
Light Grey, Medium Dense,
Silty Sand (SM),trace mica.
24
SPT-5
26
SPT-6
28
SPT-7
22
SPT-8
19
SPT-9
16
SPT-10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CLIENT:
18
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-12
SHEET 1 OF 1
LOCATION: WATER TREATMENT PLANT
DEPTH OF W.T:
10.80 m
FINAL DEPTH:
COORDS. E:
BORING STARTED ON:
287546 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499604 m
98.90 m
LOGGED BY:
24-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 24-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
15m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
98.9
97.9
96.9
95.9
94.9
93.9
92.9
91.9
90.9
89.9
10
88.9
11
87.9
12
86.9
13
85.9
14
84.9
15
83.9
30
0
UDS-1
SPT-1
SPT-2
Fill Material, grass roots with

clayey silt and organic material.
Light Brown to Light Grey, Loose to
Medium Dense, Silty Sand (SM), trace
mica, trace concretion.
10
16
SPT-3
15
SPT-4
21
SPT-5
18
SPT-6
20
SPT-7
21
SPT-8
16
SPT-9
20
SPT-10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CLIENT:
17
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: SWITCH YARD

COORDS. E:
287579 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499664 m
98.70 m
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-13
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
9.60 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:

LOGGED BY:
23-12-2013
SHAHID SALEEM
ENDED ON: 23-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
15m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.7
97.7
96.7
95.7
94.7
93.7
92.7
91.7
90.7
89.7
10
88.7
11
87.7
12
86.7
13
85.7
14
84.7
15
83.7
UDS-1
SPT-1
SPT-2
SPT-3
SPT-4
SPT-5
Fill Material, grass roots with clayey silt,

trace organic material.
Brownish,
Silty Clay with Sand (CL-ML) trace mica.
Brownish, Loose to Medium Dense,
Silty Sand (SM), trace mica.
Brownish, Loose,
Silty Clay with Sand (CL-ML), trace mica.
Greyish, Medium Dense, Silty Sand (SM),
trace mica, trace concretion.
10
8
19
24
17
SPT-6
26
SPT-7
13
SPT-8
20
SPT-9
25
SPT-10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CLIENT:
22
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: COAL SHED

COORDS. E:
287608 m
GROUND ELEV:
N: 3499299
BOREHOLE NO:
BH-14
SHEET 1 OF 1
DEPTH OF W.T:
11.40 m
FINAL DEPTH:
BORING STARTED ON:
98.58
LOGGED BY:
30-12-2013
MATEEN HUSSAIN
ENDED ON: 30-12-2013

CHECKED BY:
SPT
OF
MATERIAL
BLOWS FOR
DEPTH, m
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
DESCRIPTION
15m
LAST 30 cm
PENETRATION
UMAIR
STANDARD
PENETRATION
TEST PROFILE
30
0
98.58
97.58
96.58
95.58
94.58
93.58
92.58
91.58
90.58
89.58
10
88.58
11
87.58
12
86.58
13
85.58
14
84.58
15
83.58
UDS-1
SPT-1
Light Brown, Firm,

Silty Clay (CL-ML).
SPT-2
SPT-3
SPT-4
5
7
Light Browm, Firm,

Sandy Silt (ML).
Light Grey, Medium Dense,
Silty Sand (SM), trace mica.
12
21
SPT-5
13
SPT-6
13
SPT-7
14
SPT-8
19
SPT-9
18
SPT-10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CLIENT:
19
60
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: BOILER # 1
COORDS. E:
TP-01
DEPTH OF W.T:
287561 m
GROUND ELEV:
TESTPIT NO:
N: 3499481 m
98.48 m
STARTED ON:
SHEET 1 OF 1
NIL
FINAL DEPTH:
31-12-2013
AND
REMARKS
DEPTH, M
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
LEVEL, m
REDUCED
DEPTH, m
ENDED ON: 31-12-2013
LOGGED BY: SHAHID SALEEM
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED BY:
Fill Material
Brown to Light Brown Silty Clay (CL-ML),
trace to little grass roots, trace organic
material, trace fine sand, trace concretion.
.2
.4
.6
Brown to Light Grey, Soft, Silty Clay (CL-ML),

trace organic matter, trace grass roots,
trace concretion.
FDT-1
.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.8
2
FDT-2
2.2
2.4
MECHANICAL EXCAVATED
1.6
Light Brown, Soft, Sandy Clayey Silt (CL-ML).
CS-1
2.6
Light Grey, Loose, Moist, Silty Sand (SM).
2.8
3
FDT-3
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
FDT-4
CLIENT:
(BOTTOM OF TESTPITS)
UMAIR
BULK
MOISTURE
DRY
DENSITY
CONTENT
DENSITY
PROFILE
PROFILE
PROFILE
kN/cu.m.
10
0
4.0 m
(%)
10 20
kN/cu.m.
10
Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:
LOCATION: BOILER # 2
COORDS. E:
TP-02
DEPTH OF W.T:
287586 m
GROUND ELEV:
TESTPIT NO:
N: 3499481 m
98.67 m
STARTED ON:
SHEET 1 OF 1
NIL
FINAL DEPTH:
31-12-2013
AND
REMARKS
DEPTH, M
LEGEND
SAMPLES
DRILLING
DETAILS
TEST
DEPTH, m
ENDED ON: 31-12-2013
LOGGED BY: SHAHID SALEEM
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED BY:
Fill Material
Brown to Light Brown Silty Clay (CL-ML),
trace grass roots, trace organic material, trace
concretion.
.2
.4
Light Brown, Soft, Silty Clay (CL-ML), trace

organic material, trace grass roots, trace fine
sand.
.6
.8
1
FDT-1
1.2
1.6
1.8
2
FDT-2
2.2
2.4
MECHANICAL EXCAVATED
1.4
CS-1
Light Grey, Loose, Silty Sand (SM),
trace mica, trace concretion.
2.6
2.8
3
FDT-3
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
FDT-4
CLIENT:
(BOTTOM OF TESTPITS)
UMAIR
BULK
MOISTURE
DRY
DENSITY
CONTENT
DENSITY
PROFILE
PROFILE
PROFILE
kN/cu.m.
10
0
4.0 m
(%)
10 20
kN/cu.m.
10
Berkeley Associates
APPENDIX - C
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-C
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-1
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
Percentage Passing (%)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001
Average Grain Diameter (mm)

UDS-1(1.0 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Gravel
SPT-3(4.5 meter)
SPT-8(12.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal
Fine
SPT-15(22.5 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-2
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-2(3.0 meter)
Gravel
SPT-5(7.5 meter)
SPT-10(15.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-17(25.0 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-3
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-4(6.0 meter)
Gravel
SPT-10(15.0 meter)
SPT-14(21.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-16(24.0 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-4
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-3(4.5 meter)
SPT-8(12.0 meter)
SPT-11(16.5 meter)
Sand
Gravel
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-16(24.0 meter)
Silt
UDS-1(1.0 meter)
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-5
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

UDS-1(0.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-2(3.0 meter)
Gravel
SPT-9(13.5 meter)
SPT-14(21.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-17(25.0 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-6
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-4(6.0 meter)
Gravel
SPT-8(12.0 meter)
SPT-13(19.5 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-16(24.0 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-7
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001
Boulders
UDS-1(0.5 meter)
SPT-3(4.5 meter)
SPT-8(12.0 meter)
SPT-13(19.5 meter)
SPT-15(22.5 m)
SPT-10B(15.0 meter)
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
Gravel
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-10A(15.0 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-8
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

UDS-1(0.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-2(3.0 meter)
Gravel
SPT-5(7.5 meter)
SPT-9(13.5 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-14(21.0 meter)
Silt
SPT-17(25.0 meter)
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-9
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

UDS-1(0.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-3(4.5 meter)
Gravel
SPT-10(15.0 meter)
SPT-12(18.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-16(24.0 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-10
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

UDS-1(0.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Gravel
SPT-6(9.0 meter)
SPT-9(13.5 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-13(19.5 meter)
Silt
SPT-17(25.0 meter)
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-11
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

UDS-1(0.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Gravel
SPT-5(7.5 meter)
SPT-8(12.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SPT-10(15.0 meter)
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-12
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
Gravel
SPT-4(6.0 meter)
SPT-9(13.5 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-13
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

SPT-2(3.0 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
Gravel
SPT-5(7.5 meter)
SPT-10(15.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Borehole No. BH-14
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

SPT-1(1.5 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
Gravel
SPT-2(3.0 meter)
SPT-8(12.0 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Test Pit
300 mm
75 mm
#4
Lab Ref.
# 40
# 10
J-559
0.005 mm
# 200
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001

TP-1(0-4 meter)
Boulders
Cobbles
Tested by:Sikandar
Gravel
TP-2(0-4 meter)
Sand
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Silt
Clay
Berkeley Associates
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-4
Depth: 1.0 meter
Sample No. UDS-1
Sample Type: Undisturbed
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
AASHTO T-89/ASTM D4318-00, Method"A"
Trial #
No. of blows
36
30
24
18
Dish No.
71
70
69
AASHTO T-90
1
68
67
66
Wt. of dish+wet soil
16.94
15.76
19.72
19.69
12.20
15.39
Wt. of dish+dry soil
14.76
13.58
17.16
16.76
10.90
13.93
Wt. of dish
7.37
6.39
8.97
7.71
5.01
7.30
Wt. of water
2.18
2.18
2.56
2.93
1.30
1.46
Wt. of dry soil
7.39
7.19
8.19
9.05
5.89
6.63
29.5
30.3
31.3
32.4
22.1
22.0
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
35
34
Moisture Content %
33
Liquid Limit
31 %
Plastic Limit
22 %
Plasticity Index
9%
Group of soil
A-4( 9 )
31.0
32
31
30
29
28
Note:
27
-
26
25
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-4
Depth: 1.50 meter
Sample No. SPT-1
Sample Type: Disturbed
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
37
29
23
17
Dish No.
38
39
40
AASHTO T-90
1
41
42
43
16.56
17.39
17.86
18.04
13.57
13.62
14.54
15.22
15.82
15.70
12.52
12.58
Wt. of dish
6.33
6.68
8.03
7.12
6.97
7.11
Wt. of water
2.02
2.17
2.04
2.34
1.05
1.04
Wt. of dry soil
8.21
8.54
7.79
8.58
5.55
5.47
24.6
25.4
26.2
27.3
19.0
19.1
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
30
Liquid Limit
26 %
Plastic Limit
19 %
Plasticity Index
7%
Group of soil
A-4( 6 )
29
Moisture Content %
28
27
26.0
26
25
24
Note:
23
-
22
21
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-7
Depth: 0.50 meter
Sample No. UDS-1
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
35
29
22
16
Dish No.
32
33
34
AASHTO T-90
1
35
36
37
21.33
22.43
22.17
22.13
18.37
14.45
19.52
20.27
20.15
20.40
17.38
13.27
Wt. of dish
11.67
11.12
11.90
13.62
12.20
7.14
Wt. of water
1.81
2.16
2.02
1.73
0.99
1.18
Wt. of dry soil
7.85
9.15
8.25
6.78
5.18
6.13
23.0
23.6
24.5
25.5
19.1
19.3
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
30
Liquid Limit
24 %
Plastic Limit
19 %
Plasticity Index
5%
Group of soil
A-4( 3 )
29
Moisture Content %
28
27
26
24.1
25
24
Note:
23
-
22
21
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-7
Depth: 15.0 meter
Sample No. SPT-10B
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
37
30
23
17
Dish No.
44
45
46
AASHTO T-90
1
47
48
49
19.20
17.40
18.13
16.05
14.74
13.06
15.96
14.66
15.14
13.33
13.21
11.64
Wt. of dish
6.30
6.70
6.69
5.87
6.89
5.75
Wt. of water
3.24
2.74
2.99
2.72
1.53
1.42
Wt. of dry soil
9.66
7.96
8.45
7.46
6.32
5.89
33.5
34.4
35.4
36.5
24.2
24.1
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
40
Liquid Limit
35 %
Plastic Limit
24 %
Plasticity Index
11 %
Group of soil
A-6( 12 )
39
Moisture Content %
38
37
36
35.0
35
34
Note:
33
-
32
31
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-8
Depth: 0.50 meter
Sample No. UDS-1
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
35
30
24
16
Dish No.
26
27
28
AASHTO T-90
1
29
30
31
20.01
25.98
24.86
21.83
22.23
16.46
18.54
24.21
22.94
20.01
21.07
15.36
Wt. of dish
11.85
16.36
14.69
12.60
14.95
9.65
Wt. of water
1.47
1.77
1.92
1.82
1.16
1.10
Wt. of dry soil
6.69
7.85
8.25
7.41
6.12
5.71
22.0
22.5
23.3
24.5
18.9
19.2
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
28
Liquid Limit
23 %
Plastic Limit
19 %
Plasticity Index
4%
Group of soil
A-4( 2 )
27
Moisture Content %
26
25
24
23.1
23
22
Note:
21
-
20
19
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-9
Depth: 0.50 meter
Sample No. UDS-1
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
35
30
24
16
Dish No.
19
21
22
AASHTO T-90
1
23
24
25
17.44
22.37
23.13
22.06
23.79
19.10
15.83
20.47
21.32
20.36
22.66
17.98
Wt. of dish
8.49
12.01
13.53
13.40
16.71
12.02
Wt. of water
1.61
1.90
1.81
1.70
1.13
1.12
Wt. of dry soil
7.34
8.46
7.79
6.96
5.95
5.96
21.9
22.4
23.2
24.4
19.0
18.8
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
28
Liquid Limit
23 %
Plastic Limit
19 %
Plasticity Index
4%
Group of soil
A-4( 2 )
27
Moisture Content %
26
25
24
23.0
23
22
Note:
21
-
20
19
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-10
Depth: 0.50 meter
Sample No. UDS-1
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
35
28
22
16
Dish No.
AASHTO T-90
1
10
11
12
20.64
21.85
21.60
21.09
21.06
22.17
19.12
20.02
19.76
19.09
19.85
21.08
Wt. of dish
12.64
12.54
12.48
11.51
13.51
15.36
Wt. of water
1.52
1.83
1.84
2.00
1.21
1.09
Wt. of dry soil
6.48
7.48
7.28
7.58
6.34
5.72
23.5
24.4
25.3
26.4
19.1
19.0
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
30
Liquid Limit
25 %
Plastic Limit
19 %
Plasticity Index
6%
29
Moisture Content %
28
27
26
24.7
Group of soil
25
24
Note:
23
22
21
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
A-4( 4 )
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-11
Depth: 0.50 meter
Sample No. UDS-1
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
34
27
21
15
Dish No.
AASHTO T-90
1
22.07
23.82
22.22
21.24
20.04
18.62
20.58
21.94
20.22
19.27
19.08
17.45
Wt. of dish
14.11
13.99
12.02
11.52
14.00
11.36
Wt. of water
1.49
1.88
2.00
1.97
0.96
1.17
Wt. of dry soil
6.47
7.95
8.20
7.75
5.08
6.09
23.0
23.7
24.4
25.4
18.8
19.2
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
28
Liquid Limit
24 %
Plastic Limit
19 %
Plasticity Index
5%
Group of soil
A-4( 3 )
27
Moisture Content %
26
25
23.9
24
23
22
Note:
21
-
20
19
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-13
Depth: 3.0 meter
Sample No. SPT-2
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
36
29
22
16
Dish No.
15
16
17
AASHTO T-90
1
18
19
20
26.53
19.34
21.00
21.24
15.74
18.12
24.54
17.26
19.01
19.30
14.54
17.10
Wt. of dish
16.37
9.02
11.37
12.19
8.49
12.01
Wt. of water
1.99
2.08
1.99
1.94
1.20
1.02
Wt. of dry soil
8.17
8.24
7.64
7.11
6.05
5.09
24.4
25.3
26.1
27.3
19.9
20.1
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
30
Liquid Limit
26 %
Plastic Limit
20 %
Plasticity Index
6%
Group of soil
A-4( 5 )
29
Moisture Content %
28
27
25.7
26
25
24
Note:
23
-
22
21
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-14
Depth: 1.50 meter
Sample No. SPT-1
Liquid Limit
Description
Unit
Plastic Limit
Trial #
No. of blows
34
27
22
16
Dish No.
50
51
52
AASHTO T-90
1
53
54
55
13.52
13.95
15.88
17.09
15.04
13.09
12.14
12.42
14.15
15.04
13.80
12.12
Wt. of dish
6.15
5.99
7.07
6.99
7.20
7.07
Wt. of water
1.38
1.53
1.73
2.05
1.24
0.97
Wt. of dry soil
5.99
6.43
7.08
8.05
6.60
5.05
23.1
23.8
24.5
25.5
18.8
19.2
Water content %
Original Data
Best Fit
28
Liquid Limit
24 %
Plastic Limit
19 %
Plasticity Index
5%
Group of soil
A-4( 3 )
27
Moisture Content %
26
24.1
25
24
23
22
Note:
21
-
20
19
15
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
20
30
25
No. of Blows
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
40
50
Berkeley Associates
SUMMARY OF NMC , BULK DENSITY SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST RESULTS
NMC
(%)
Bulk Density
Dry Density
(kN/m3)
(kN/m3)
Specific
Gravity
1.0-1.5
5.0
14.87
14.17
2.63
SPT-5
7.5-7.95
2.63
BH-3
SPT-14
21.0-21.45
2.63
BH-5
UDS-1
0.5-1.0
5.1
14.89
14.17
2.62
BH-7
UDS-1
0.5-1.0
8.6
17.51
16.12
BH-8
UDS-1
0.5-1.0
7.2
15.00
13.99
BH-8
SPT-8
12.0-12.45
2.63
BH-9
UDS-1
0.5-1.0
7.5
16.70
15.53
2.68
BH-10
UDS-1
0.5-1.0
13.7
17.84
15.69
10
BH-10
SPT-6
9.0-9.45
2.63
11
BH-11
UDS-1
0.5-1.0
12.6
16.27
14.45
Sr.
No.
Borehole No.
Sample
No.
BH-1
UDS-1
BH-2
Tested by: Sikandar Hayat
Depth
(meter)
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-1
Sample No. SPT-3
Test Condition Soaked

Depth: 4.50 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Horizontal Displacement (mm)

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.625x + 1.921
LINEAR REGRESSION
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=
32.0 Degrees
1.0 kPa
Checked by:Muhammad Ajmal
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-1
Sample No. SPT-8

Depth: 12.00 meter
140.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0

400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.669x + 0.862
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
33.8 Degrees
0.0 kPa
Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal
300
350
400
4.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-2
Sample No. SPT-2

Depth: 3.00 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.594x + 0.771
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
30.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-2
Sample No. SPT-5

Depth: 7.50 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.620x - 0.743
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
31.8 Degrees
0.0 kPa
300
350
400
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-2
Sample No. SPT-17

Depth: 25.00 meter
200.0
180.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
160.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

450
400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.646x + 0.228
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.8 Degrees
0.0 kPa
350
400
450
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-3
Sample No. SPT-4

Depth: 6.00 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.621x + 1.527
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
31.8 Degrees
1.0 kPa
300
350
400
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-3
Sample No. SPT-14

Depth: 21.00 meter
180.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
160.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.665x + 0.406
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
33.6 Degrees
0.0 kPa
300
350
400
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-4
Sample No. SPT-3

Depth: 4.50 meter
120.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0

400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.651x + 4.242
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
33.1 Degrees
4.0 kPa
300
350
400
4.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-4
Sample No. SPT-8

Depth: 12.00 meter
160.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
y = 0.706x + 2.009
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
35.2 Degrees
2.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-5
Sample No. SPT-2

Depth: 3.00 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.564x + 8.059
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
29.4 Degrees
8.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-5
Sample No. SPT-9

Depth: 13.50 meter
140.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.629x + 3.430
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.2 Degrees
3.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-5
Sample No. SPT-14

Depth: 21.00 meter
180.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
160.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.667x + 0.370
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
33.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-6
Sample No. SPT-4

Depth: 6.0 meter
120.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.643x + 2.822
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.7 Degrees
2.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-6
Sample No. SPT-8

Depth: 12.00 meter
140.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.625x - 0.017
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.0 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-6
Sample No. SPT-16

Depth: 24.00 meter
180.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
160.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.667x - 0.303
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
33.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-7
Sample No. SPT-3

Depth: 4.50 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.626x + 1.585
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.0 Degrees
1.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-7
Sample No. SPT-13

Depth: 19.5 meter
160.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.620x - 0.119
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
31.8 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-8
Sample No. SPT-2

Depth: 3.00 meter
120.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.640x + 4.101
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.6 Degrees
4.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-8
Sample No. SPT-5

Depth: 7.50 meter
120.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.653x + 0.784
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
33.1 Degrees
0.0 kPa
300
350
400
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-8
Sample No. SPT-17

Depth: 25.00 meter
180.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
160.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
y = 0.687x - 0.755
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
34.5 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-9
Sample No. SPT-3

Depth: 4.50 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.618x + 0.832
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
31.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-9
Sample No. SPT-12

Depth: 18.00 meter
160.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
y = 0.689x - 0.157
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
34.6 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-10
Sample No. SPT-6

Depth: 9.00 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.628x + 0.042
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.1 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-10
Sample No. SPT-13

Depth: 19.5 meter
200.0
180.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
160.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0

400
350
Shear Stress (kPa)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.702x - 0.077
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
35.1 Degrees
0.0 kPa
300
350
400
4.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-11
Sample No. SPT-1

Depth: 1.5 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.607x + 2.994
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
31.2 Degrees
2.0 kPa
250
300
350
4.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-11
Sample No. SPT-8

Depth: 12.00 meter
140.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.647x + 0.520
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.9 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-12
Sample No. SPT-1

Depth: 1.50 meter
120.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.620x + 2.491
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
31.8 Degrees
2.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.0
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-13
Sample No. SPT-2

Depth: 3.00 meter
100.0
90.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.608x + 0.430
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
31.3 Degrees
0.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Ref No. J 559
Borehole No. BH-14
Sample No. SPT-1

Depth: 1.50 meter
120.0
Shear Stress (kPa)
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0

350
300
Shear Stress (kPa)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
200
Normal Stress (kPa)
y = 0.632x + 1.449
LINEAR REGRESSION
Cohesion
=
32.3 Degrees
1.0 kPa
250
300
350
3.5
Berkeley Associates
Unconfined Compression Test
Ref No. 559
Date: 21-01-2014
Depth: 1.0-1.5 meter
Borehole No. BH - 1
Sample No. UDS- 1
LC for deformation gauge
0.010 mm
Load Factor =
Length
Area(Avg.)
16 cm
Dia(Avg.) =
Weight
=
Volume =
Def.
Gauge
0.245 kg per division for 0.002 mm Least count gauge

Bulk Density
NMC
Dry Density
7.00 cm
934 g
3
616 cm
Load
Gauge
Strain
(%)
Corre.
Area
2
(Cm )
= 38.50
= 14.87
= 4.98
= 14.17
cm
2
3
kN/m
%
3
kN/m
70
Stress
kPa
60
50
Stress (kPa)
Sample Collapse during extract due to

Low moist and sandy soil
40
30
20
10
0
0
Unconfined Compressive Strength=

Unconfined Compressive Strength
Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
2
3
Strain (%)
Strain =
66 Kpa
Berkeley Associates
Ref No. 559
Date: 21-01-2014
Borehole No. BH - 5
Sample No. UDS- 1
0.010 mm
Load Factor =
Length
Area(Avg.)
16.5 cm
Dia(Avg.) =
Weight
=
Volume =
Def.
Gauge

Bulk Density
NMC
Dry Density
7.00 cm
964 g
3
635.25 cm
Load
Gauge
Strain
(%)
Corre.
Area
2
(Cm )
= 38.50
= 14.89
= 5.09
= 14.17
cm
2
3
kN/m
%
3
kN/m
70
Stress
kPa
60
50
Stress (kPa)
Sample Collapse during extract due to

Low moist and silty soil
40
30
20
10
0
0

Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
2
3
Strain (%)
Strain =
67 Kpa
Berkeley Associates
Ref No. 559
Date: 21-01-2014
Borehole No. BH - 7
Sample No. UDS- 1
0.010 mm
Length
Area(Avg.)
14 cm
Dia(Avg.) =
Weight
=
Volume =
Def.
Gauge
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Load
Gauge
0
13
27
42
56
71
84
86
84
Strain
(%)
0.000
0.357
0.714
1.071
1.429
1.786
2.143
2.500
2.857
= 38.50
Bulk Density
NMC
Dry Density
7.00 cm
962 g
3
539 cm
Corre.
Area
2
(Cm )
38.500
38.638
38.777
38.917
39.058
39.200
39.343
39.487
39.632
= 17.51
= 8.58
= 16.12
cm
2
3
kN/m
%
3
kN/m
60
Stress
kPa
0.000
8.087
16.735
25.939
34.460
43.532
51.315
52.345
50.941
55
50
45
40
Stress (kPa)
Load Factor =
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.0

Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
52 kPa
52 Kpa
0.5
1.0
1.5
Strain (%)
2.0
Strain = 2.5
2.5
3.0
Berkeley Associates
Ref No. 559
Date: 21-01-2014
Borehole No. BH - 9
Sample No. UDS- 1
0.010 mm
Length
Area(Avg.)
14 cm
Dia(Avg.) =
Weight
=
Volume =
Def.
Gauge
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Load
Gauge
0
13
23
33
44
53
62
69
73
71
Strain
(%)
0.000
0.357
0.714
1.071
1.429
1.786
2.143
2.500
2.857
3.214
= 38.50
Bulk Density
NMC
Dry Density
7.00 cm
918 g
539 cm3
Corre.
Area
2
(Cm )
38.500
38.638
38.777
38.917
39.058
39.200
39.343
39.487
39.632
39.779
= 16.71
= 7.52
= 15.54
cm
kN/m3
%
kN/m3
50
Stress
kPa
0.000
8.087
14.256
20.380
27.076
32.496
37.876
41.998
44.270
42.899
45
40
35
30
Stress (kPa)
Load Factor =
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.0

Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat
Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal
44 kPa
44 Kpa
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Strain (%)
Strain = 2.9
2.5
3.0
3.5
Berkeley Associates
MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
STANDARD AASHTO T-99-93(ASTM D 698-00a)
Ref No.: J 559
Test Pit # TP-1
Sample # : CS-1
Description:Sub Grade
DIAMETER OF MOLD:
BLOWS/LAYER:
WEIGHT OF RAMMER:
NUMBER OF TRIALS
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
WET UNIT WEIGHT (g/cc)
DRY UNIT WEIGHT (g/cc)
10.16 cm
56
5.5 lbs
1
10.12
1.775
1.612
2.089
ZERO AIR VOID DRY DENSITY (g/cc)
2
11.70
1.891
1.693
2.023
3
13.68
2.008
1.766
1.945
VOLUME OF MOLD:
NUMBER OF LAYERS:
DROP OF RAMMER:
4
5
15.53
17.45
1.986
1.939
1.720
1.651
1.878
1.812
944 c.c.
3
12 in
6
19.49
1.891
1.583
1.747
1.95
1.90
1.85
Dry Density (g/cc)
1.80
1.75
Zero Air Void Line
1.70
90 % Saturation
1.65
80 % Saturation
1.60
1.55
70 % Saturation
1.50
1.45
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
Moisture Content (%)

3
OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (%) = 13.9

Tested by:Sikandar Hayat
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (g/cc) = 1.77
Berkeley Associates
MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
STANDARD AASHTO T-99-93(ASTM D 698-00a)
Ref No.: J 559
Test Pit # TP-2
Sample # : CS-1
Description:Sub Grade
DIAMETER OF MOLD:
BLOWS/LAYER:
WEIGHT OF RAMMER:
NUMBER OF TRIALS
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
WET UNIT WEIGHT (g/cc)
DRY UNIT WEIGHT (g/cc)
ZERO AIR VOID DRY DENSITY (g/cc)
10.16 cm
56
5.5 lbs
1
8.99
1.637
1.502
2.140
2
10.97
1.775
1.599
2.053
VOLUME OF MOLD:
NUMBER OF LAYERS:
DROP OF RAMMER:
4
5
14.85
16.56
1.944
1.891
1.693
1.623
1.902
1.842
3
13.02
1.907
1.687
1.970
944 c.c.
3
12 in
6
18.31
1.838
1.554
1.784
1.95
1.90
1.85
1.80
Dry Density (g/cc)
Zero Air Void Line

1.75
90 % Saturation
1.70
80 % Saturation
1.65
1.60
70 % Saturation
1.55
1.50
1.45
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
Moisture Content (%)
OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (%) = 14.0

Tested by:Sikandar Hayat
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (g/cc) = 1.70
Berkeley Associates
CBR DENSITY RELATIONSHIP (AASHTO T-193-99)
Project:-
Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration
Sample No.
Location:-
Project
Test Pit-1
Blows = 10 , 30, 65
Ring Factor
4.0
CS-1
Compaction Data
Optimum Moisture Content (%)
13.9
Number of Blows Per Layer

C.B. R. Value at 0.1" inch
C.B.R. Value at 0.2"
Dry Density (g/cc)
Moisture Content %
Swell (%)
Compaction % age at
82 % In-situ Dry density
90 % of Maxmum Dry Density
100% of Maxmum Dry Density
1.454
1.593
1.682
1.770
Maximum Dry Density (g/cc)

C.B.R DATA
1.770
10
3.47
3.11
1.573
13.89
0.065
C.B.R. Value at
65
9.73
9.07
1.784
13.84
0.000
0.1"
0.2"
30
7.07
6.58
1.696
13.99
0.044
C.B.R. at In-situ Dry density

C.B.R. at 90% of Max.Dry Density
4.0
6.6
9.2
3.8
6.2
8.6
11
10
9
C.B.R Value
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1.400
1.450
1.500
1.550
1.600
1.650
Dry Density g/cc

1.700
1.750
1.800
Berkeley Associates

Project:-
Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Location:-
Test Pit-1
Dry Density
Descrition
10 Blows
30 Blows 65 Blows
Total weight gm
7680
8400
8180
Weight of Mold gm
3875
4294
3865
Weight of Wet Soil gm
3805
4106
4315
Volume of Mold cc
2124
2124
2124
Wet Density g/cc
1.791
1.933
2.032
Moisture Content %
13.89
13.99
13.84
Dry Density g/cc
1.573
1.696
1.784
Max Dry Density g/cc
1.770
Moisture Content of Specimen After Soaking
Descrition
10 Blows
30 Blows 65 Blows
Weigth of Dish gm
18.38
24.7
20.1
Total Wet weight gm
119.8
117.5
119.7
Total Dry weight gm
104.3
104.8
106.9
Weight of Water
15.5
12.7
12.8
Net Dry Weight gm
85.92
80.10
86.80
Moisture Content %
18.04
15.86
14.75
Percentage Swell
Descrition
10 Blows
30 Blows 65 Blows
Initial Reading
0
0
0
Final Dial Reading
3
2
0
Percentage Swell
0.07
0.04
0.00
Corrected CBR Values
CBR Value 0.1" Penetration
3.5
7.1
9.7
3.1
6.6
9.1
Penetration
inches
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0.450
0.500
CS-1
10, 30, 65
Proving Ring Factor Lb/div.
4.0
CBR Test Data

Load Lbs Dial Reading Load Lbs
10 Blows
30 Blows
0
0
0
0
7
28
64
16
15
60
120
30
21
84
168
42
26
104
212
53
30
120
256
64
35
140
296
74
40
160
336
84
44
176
376
94
48
192
420
105
52
208
460
115
56
224
504
126
60
240
544
136
Dial Reading
Load Lbs
65 Blows
0
0
24
96
44
176
59
236
73
292
87
348
102
408
116
464
130
520
142
568
156
624
170
680
184
736
Dial Reading
900
800
700
Load (Lb)
Moisture Content
Descrition
10 Blows
30 Blows 65 Blows
Dish No.
5
6
7
Total Wet weight gm
122.6
127.7
120.2
Total Dry weight gm
110.1
114.4
108.2
Dish weight
20.08
19.34
21.52
Weight of water
12.5
13.3
12
Weight of dry soil gm
90.02
95.06
86.68
Moisture Content %
13.89
13.99
13.84
Opt. Moisture Content %
13.90
Sample No.
Blows
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.000 0.025 0.050 0.075 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350 0.400 0.450 0.500
Penetration (Inches)
10 Blows
30 Blows
65 Blows
Berkeley Associates
Project:-
Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration
Sample No.
Location:-
Project
Test Pit-2
Blows = 10 , 30, 65
Ring Factor
4.0
CS-1
Compaction Data
Optimum Moisture Content (%)
14.0
Number of Blows Per Layer

C.B. R. Value at 0.1" inch
Dry Density (g/cc)
Moisture Content %
Swell (%)
Compaction % age at
88 % In-situ Dry density
100% of Maxmum Dry Density
1.494
1.530
1.615
1.700
Maximum Dry Density (g/cc)

C.B.R DATA
1.700
10
4.53
3.91
1.522
13.85
0.022
C.B.R. Value at
65
10.67
9.78
1.713
14.03
0.000
0.1"
0.2"
30
7.87
7.20
1.619
14.00
0.000
C.B.R. at In-situ Dry density

3.8
4.8
7.6
10.2
3.2
4.2
7.0
9.3
12
11
10
C.B.R Value
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1.350
1.400
1.450
1.500
1.550
1.600
Dry Density g/cc

1.650
1.700
1.750
Berkeley Associates

Project:-
Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Location:-
Test Pit-2
Dry Density
Descrition
10 Blows
Total weight gm
7280
Weight of Mold gm
3600
Weight of Wet Soil gm
3680
Volume of Mold cc
2124
Wet Density g/cc
1.733
Moisture Content %
13.85
Dry Density g/cc
1.522
8600 65 Blows
7770
8050
3850
3900
3920
4150
2124
2124
1.846
1.954
14.00
14.03
1.619
1.713
Max Dry Density g/cc
1.700
Moisture Content of Specimen After Soaking
Descrition
10 Blows
30 Blows 65 Blows
Weigth of Dish gm
17.82
16.76
19.26
Total Wet weight gm
126.6
131.3
114.4
Total Dry weight gm
109.6
114.1
100.8
Weight of Water
17
17.2
13.6
Net Dry Weight gm
91.78
97.34
81.54
Moisture Content %
18.52
17.67
16.68
Percentage Swell
Descrition
10 Blows
30 Blows 65 Blows
Initial Reading
0
0
0
Final Dial Reading
1
0
0
Percentage Swell
0.02
0.00
0.00
Corrected CBR Values
4.5
7.9
10.7
3.9
7.2
9.8
Penetration
inches
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0.450
0.500
CS-1
10, 30, 65
Proving Ring Factor Lb/div.
4.0
CBR Test Data

Load Lbs Dial Reading Load Lbs
10 Blows
30 Blows
0
0
0
0
10
40
68
17
20
80
132
33
27
108
188
47
34
136
236
59
39
156
280
70
44
176
324
81
49
196
364
91
55
220
404
101
62
248
440
110
67
268
476
119
72
288
508
127
77
308
532
133
Dial Reading
Load Lbs
65 Blows
0
0
28
112
47
188
66
264
80
320
95
380
110
440
126
504
139
556
150
600
160
640
171
684
181
724
Dial Reading
900
800
700
Load (Lb)
Moisture Content
Descrition
10 Blows
30 Blows 65 Blows
Dish No.
11
12
13
Total Wet weight gm
131.3
135.5
116.8
Total Dry weight gm
117.2
120.9
105.2
Dish weight
15.41
16.65
22.53
Weight of water
14.1
14.6
11.6
Weight of dry soil gm
101.79
104.25
82.67
Moisture Content %
13.85
14.00
14.03
Opt. Moisture Content %
14.00
Sample No.
Blows
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.000 0.025 0.050 0.075 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350 0.400 0.450 0.500
Penetration (Inches)
10 Blows
30 Blows
65 Blows
Berkeley Associates
APPENDIX - D
REPORT ON ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEY

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-E
Report on
Electrical Resistivity Survey
February, 2014
Doc. No. J-559
Rev. 00
Berkeley
Associates
316 D, OPF Housing Colony,

Raiwind Road Lahore
Phone: 042-35323313-15
Fax: 042-35323316
Berkeley Associates
00
04-02-2014
Issued to Client
Rev
Date
Description
AAG
KA
Initials
Signature
Prepared by
Client
Geotechnical
Investigation
Agency
Berkeley Associates
Initials
Signature
Checked by
Initials
Signature
Clients Approval
316-D, OPF Housing Colony near Raiwind Road,

Lahore Pakistan.
Tel:
+92-42-35323313-15
Fax:
+92-42-35323316
Email: berkeley.associates@gmail.com
REPORT ON ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEY

Document No.

J-559
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Berkeley Associates
CONTENTS
Page
1.
GENERAL
2.
ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEY
2.1
2.2
2.3
Principles of Resistivity Survey

Instrumentation and Field Procedure
Interpretation and Evaluation of Resistivity Data
4
5
6
3.
RESULTS
4.
SOIL CORROSION POTENTIAL
5.
CONCLUSIONS
TABLE
FIGURES
ANNEXURE
FIELD DATA SHEETS

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Berkeley Associates
1.
GENERAL
Chiniot Power Company is planning to develop a 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Power plant near
Ramzan Sugar Mills on Jhang-Chiniot road about 27 km from Chiniot in Punjab-Pakistan. In
order to design the earthing system for the electrical installations and for assessing the soil
corrosion protection requirements, the measurement of earth electrical resistivity values are
required, therefore soil resistivity survey was carried out at the site proposed for the power
plant.
The purpose of the soil resistivity survey is to determine the electrical resistivity values of the
subsoil up to a depth of about 20 meters which could be used for the design of the earthing
system and for assessing the subsoil corrosion potential for the buried pipelines.
Shallow electrical resistivity measurements using Wenner electrode configuration were
conducted at two locations within the site area. The fieldwork was carried out on January 27,
2014. The locations of electrical resistivity observation points are shown in Fig. 1.
The details of field methodology, analysis of the data collected, results of the survey and
recommendations are presented in this report.
2.
2.1
Principles of Resistivity Survey
Among the various geophysical methods of subsurface exploration, electrical resistivity

method has been successfully employed for groundwater investigations, particularly where
electrical resistivity contrast exists between the water bearing formation and surrounding soils
or rock.
Considering the variable electrical properties of the subsoil, the technique of electrical
resistivity survey makes use of measuring the current and potential differences of various
subsoil materials at the surface. In general, current is conducted electrolytically in the soils
containing interstitial fluids. The resistivity is controlled by porosity, water content, as well as
the quantity of dissolved salts. Clay minerals, however, are capable of storing electrical
charges and current conduction in clay minerals is electronic as well as electrolytic. Thus the
resistivity of soils depends directly on the amount of contained electrolyte and clay minerals
and is inversely related to the porosity and degree of saturation of the formation. Therefore,
resistivity of soil varies considerably not only from formation to formation, but also within the
same layer. In particular, the resistivity variations can be large in unconsolidated sediments.
It has generally been observed that the resistivity increases progressively from fine grained to
coarse grained material in the order of clay, silty clay, clayey silt, silt, sandy silt, silty sand,
sand, gravel and boulder.
During the resistivity survey, commutated direct or very low frequency (less than 1 Hz) current
is introduced into the ground through two current electrodes C1 and C2 inserted in the ground
surface as shown schematically on Fig. 2.
The potential electrodes P1 and P2 are inserted in the ground between the outer current
electrodes C1 and C2 such that all the electrodes are aligned along a straight line. The
potential difference is measured between the two potential electrodes.
By measuring the current (I) flowing between the two current electrodes C1 and C2 and the
associated potential difference (V) between the potential electrodes P1 and P2, the resistivity
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Berkeley Associates
(R) is computed by the following well-known Ohms law;

R = K* V/I
where
K=
V=
I=
Geometric factor of the electrode arrangement

Potential difference in millivolts
Current passing through ground in milliamperes
In homogeneous subsurface conditions, the above relation gives the true resistivity of the
subsurface material, but in anisotropic and inhomogeneous conditions, it represents weighted
average resistivity of the formations through which the current passes. Since the subsoil is
normally inhomogeneous and anisotropic, the resistivity value computed from the above
equation is called apparent resistivity and is denoted by Ra.
Therefore,
Ra = K* V/I
The apparent resistivity values are obtained for various depths below the surface by
expanding the current and potential electrodes from its centre along a straight line, while
spacing between the electrodes is maintained.
Following are the technical requirements for carrying out the resistivity survey:
2.2
Electrical resistivity contrast should exist between the formations under study.
While carrying out the electrical resistivity survey using Wenner configuration,
about three times the space along a straight line is required to achieve the
estimated depth of investigation.
Resistivity values of the alluvial strata and bedrock in an area could be

established if the subsurface lithology through at least one borehole or tubewell is
known in or around the area having similar geological conditions.
If the earth consists of thin alternate layers, the resistivity obtained at the surface
would be the average effect of these alternate layers.
Instrumentation and Field Procedure
The electrical resistivity measurements of the subsurface material were taken in the field by
resistivity measuring instrument Terrameter SAS 1000 of ABEM, Sweden and using the
Wenner electrode array. The Terrameter directly records the value of V/I in ohms. In order to
study the variation of resistivity with depth, Vertical Electric Sounding (VES) technique was
employed. In this technique, apparent resistivity values are obtained for various depths by
increasing the current electrodes spacing at the ground surface, keeping the centre of
electrode array fixed at the observation point.
Electrical resistivity survey was carried out two (2) observation points, designated as ER-1
and ER-2, the locations of which are shown in Fig. 1.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Berkeley Associates
The resistivity measurements were made as per ASTM Designation G-57-95. At each
observation point, apparent resistivity measurements were taken at electrode spacing of 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 15 and 20 meters. The field resistivity data obtained at two observation points
are presented in Annexure. From the field data, field resistivity curves were obtained by
plotting observed resistivity values against electrode spacing. The field resistivity curves are
shown in Fig. 3 and Fig.4 for ER-1 and ER-2 respectively.
2.3
Interpretation and Evaluation of Resistivity Data
The apparent resistivity values obtained in the field versus depth were plotted on the
logarithmic scale. The interpretation of resistivity sounding makes use of the method of curve
matching in which the field curve is compared with a set of standard curves or with the curve
plotted with a computer programme. The standard curves as well as computer curves
correspond to a system of subsurface layers and their specific electrical resistivity, which
could be correlated with the lithological and hydrogeological characteristics of the subsurface
material of a particular area. The final interpretation makes use of the available local
geological and borehole data.
Among the various curve matching techniques, partial curve matching technique using
auxiliary point method was employed to determine the approximate true resistivity model. For
this purpose, a set of Ebert auxiliary graphs (Orellana and Mooney 1966) was used. Final
analysis of the resistivity curves was made by employing computer software which yields
possible earth layer model from the field resistivity curve using automatic iterative method.
3.
RESULTS
The results of electrical resistivity survey obtained at two observation points in the site area
are presented in Table-1 in the form true resistivity earth layering model. From these results, it
can be inferred that the subsurface material upto 20 meters depth shows layers with large
variation of true resistivity values ranging from 21.2 to 393 ohm-meters.
At both the observation points, the resistivity shows first an increasing trend and then shows a
decreasing trend and then again a slightly increasing trend with depth.
At ER-1, top 1.5 meter layer have resistivity of 38.2 ohm-meters. Below this up to 8.2 meters
depth, a layer with high resistivity of 163.7 ohm-meters is present. From 8.2 to 18.8 meters, a
layer with a resistivity of 75.5 ohm-meters is present. Below 18.8 meters depth, a layer with
resistivity of 122.5 ohm-meters is present.
At ER-2, the top 0.5 meter layer shows a resistivity of 21.2 ohm-meters. Below this up to 5.6
meters, a high resistivity material with a resistivity of 393 ohm-meters is present. From 5.6
meters to 11.8 meters, a layer with resistivity of 36.1 ohm-meters is observed. Below 11.8
meters depth, subsoil with a resistivity of 155.9 ohm-meters is present.
The subsurface layers in the site area below about 6 to 8 meters depth show electrical
resistivity ranging from 21 to 75 ohm-meters, therefore design of earthing system for electrical
installations should be made accordingly.
4.
SOIL CORROSION POTENTIAL
Though corrosion of metals embedded in soils is generally not as rapid as in the atmosphere
Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Berkeley Associates
or underwater, yet it presents problems of sizeable magnitude. Factors governing corrosion

by soil include its (i) oxygen content (ii) moisture content (iii) hydrogen ion concentration (iv)
electrical conduction (v) particle size (vi) drainage (vii) bacterial process activity etc.
In the case of pipeline corrosion, the concentration of electrolytic cells, formed due to the
localized differences in the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil coming in contact
with the pipe, could lead to localized attack. Similarly soil-water and groundwater attack
metals to a degree, which depends upon the nature and concentration of various salts
present in the water.
Soils are generally assigned one of the following classes of corrosivity:
Soils with very low corrosivity for steel generally include somewhat excessively
drained coarse textured soils that have little clay. Water and air move through
these soils rapidly. Electrical resistivity of such soils at natural moisture content is
above 100 ohm-meters.
Soils with low corrosivity for steel generally include well drained soils that have a
coarse to medium texture. These soils are moderately permeable. The electrical
resistivity of such soils is 50-100 ohm-meters.
Soils with moderate corrosivity for the steel generally include well drained soils
that have medium to fine texture. Electrical resistivity of these soils varies
between 20 to 50 ohm-meters.
Soils with high corrosivity for steel generally include moderately well drained fine
textured soils. Very poorly drained soils are included when the water table
fluctuates within 30 cm at some time during the year. Electrical resistivity of these
soils at natural moisture equivalent is 10 to 20 ohm-meters.
Soils with very high corrosivity for steel generally include poorly to very poorly
drained fine textured soils. The electrical resistivity of these soils at natural
moisture equivalent is below 10 ohm-meters.
As described in Section-3 above, the true resistivity of the subsurface material in the site area
varies from 21.2 to 393 ohm-meters, which indicates moderate to very low soil corrosion
potential of the subsurface material as per above classification.
The near-surface material also shows moderate to very low soil corrosion potential at both the
observation points.
As near-surface material in the project area show moderate to very low soil corrosion
potential, therefore pipes embedded in this material would require only nominal corrosion
protection measures.
5.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of electrical resistivity survey carried out at two observation points in the
site area of Chiniot Power Project on Chiniot-Jhang Road in Punjab-Pakistan, the following
conclusions are drawn:

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Berkeley Associates
a)
b)
c)
d)
The true resistivity of the subsurface material up to about 20 meters depth in

the site area varies from 21.2 to 393 ohm-meters.
Near the ground surface, the subsurface material at both observation points
shows predominantly high resistivity values.
The subsurface layers below about 6 to 8 meters depth show resistivity ranging
from 21 to 75 ohm-meters, therefore design of earthing system for electrical
installations should be made accordingly.
In general, the near-surface material in the site area show moderate to very low
soil corrosion potential, therefore pipes embedded in this material would require
only nominal corrosion protection measures.

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Berkeley Associates
TABLE

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Table
TABLE - 1
CHINIOT POWER PROJECT
RESULTS OF SOIL RESISTIVITY SURVEY
Observation
Point No.
Depth
(meters)
Layer Thickness
(meters)
True Resistivity
(ohm - meters)
ER - 1
0.0 - 1.5
1.5 - 8.2
8.2 - 18.8
18.8 - 20.0
1.5
6.7
10.6
1.2
38.2
163.7
75.5
122.5
ER - 2
0.0 - 0.5
0.5 - 5.6
5.6 - 11.8
11.8 - 20.0
0.5
5.1
6.2
8.2
21.2
393.0
36.1
155.9
Berkeley Associates
FIGURES

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Figures
FIELD RESISTIVITY CURVE ER - 1
RESISTSIVITY IN OHM-METER
1000
100
10
1
10
Fi g- 3
ELECTRODE SPACING IN METERS
100
FIELD RESISTIVITY CURVE ER - 2
RESISTSIVITY IN OHM-METER
1000
100
10
10
ELECTRODE SPACING IN METERS
100
Fig - 4
Berkeley Associates
ANNEXURE
FIELD DATA SHEETS

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Annexure
BERKELEY ASSOCIATES
316-D, OPF Housing Colony
Raiwind Road, Lahore-Pakistan.

FIELD DATA SHEET
PROJECT: Chiniot Power Project
ER NO:
LOCATION: Switchyard
DATE:
COORDINATES:
N 3499650 m
CONFIGURATION: WENNER
E 287599 m
TEMPERATURE:
98.69 m
GEOPHYSICIST: M. Javed
ELEVATION:
ELECTRODE
READING
SPACING "a"
NO.
(m)
ER - 1
27-01-2014
21
ELECTRODE
CONSTANT
RESISTANCE
R=V/I
(Ohms)
APPARENT
RESISTIVITY
(Ohm-m)
REMARKS
6.28
6.8247
42.86
Silty clay/Silty sand
12.56
4.1495
52.12
with bushes and minor
18.84
3.7442
70.54
organic matter.
25 12
25.12
3 4912
3.4912
87 70
87.70
31.4
2.8603
89.81
37.68
2.5230
95.07
43.96
2.2820
100.32
10
62.8
1.7033
106.97
15
94.2
1.1450
107.86
10
20
125.6
0.9136
114.74
BERKELEY ASSOCIATES
316-D, OPF Housing Colony
Raiwind Road, Lahore-Pakistan.

FIELD DATA SHEET
PROJECT: Chiniot Power Project
ER NO:
LOCATION: Switchyard
DATE:
COORDINATES:
N 3499680 m
CONFIGURATION: WENNER
E 287548 m
TEMPERATURE:
98.88 m
GEOPHYSICIST: M. Javed
ELEVATION:
ELECTRODE
READING
SPACING "a"
NO.
(m)
ER - 2
27-01-2014
23
ELECTRODE
CONSTANT
RESISTANCE
R=V/I
(Ohms)
APPARENT
RESISTIVITY
(Ohm-m)
REMARKS
6.28
4.9134
30.86
Silty clay/Silty sand
12.56
4.9725
62.45
with bushes and dump
18.84
6.0780
114.51
material with organic
25.12
5.2555
132.02
matter.
31.40
4.4794
140.65
37.68
4.3169
162.66
43.96
3.5477
155.96
10
62.80
1.9780
124.22
15
94.20
1.4393
135.58
10
20
125.60
1.2434
156.17
Berkeley Associates
APPENDIX - E
PHOTOGRAPHS

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-E
Berkeley Associates
Investigation Points are being demarcated
Inspection of Drilling Equipment is in progress

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-E
Berkeley Associates
SPT in Borehole is in progress
FDT in TP-1 is being carried out

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-E
Berkeley Associates
Electrical Resistivity Survey is in Progress
Data during Cyclic Plate Load Test is being collected

Doc. No. J-559

Rev. 00
Appendix-E

Soil Investigation Report V1R0 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Soil Investigation Report V1R0 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chiniot Power Limited

2 x 31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

316 D, OPF Housing Colony,

2 x 31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Chiniot Power Limited

55-K, Model Town, Lahore Pakistan

REPORT ON GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

LABORATORY TESTING .......................................................................................................... 14

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF SUBSOIL.................................................... 18

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction .......................................................................................... 23

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 28

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

Summary of Field Density and NMC Test Results

Geotechnical Investigations Plan

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/Mat Footings for

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

Chiniot Power Limited is planning to construct a 2x31.2 MW Congeneration

Scope of Geotechnical Investigations is summarized below;

Drilling of fourteen (14) exploratory boreholes; ten (10) down to 25 m

Performance of Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) in all boreholes at

Collection of composite bulk samples from the test pits

Collection of undisturbed soil samples from boreholes and test pits

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

Performance of Field Density Tests (FDTs) in each test pit at various

Obtaining pertinent ground water table (GWT) information in the

Performance of electrical resistivity survey (ERS) for design of earthing

Performance of laboratory tests on selected soil and water samples

Preparation of a detailed Geotechnical Investigation Report upon

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

The scope of the geotechnical studies was planned by the Project

Drilling of exploratory boreholes

Excavation of test pits

In-situ testing in boreholes and test pits

Soil and water sampling in boreholes

Soil sampling in test pits

Cyclic plate load test (CPLT)

Performance of Electrical Resistivity Survey (ERS)

Ashiana-e-Iqbal, Burki Road, Lahore

Doc. No. J-30

Test pit Excavation

2.4.1 Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs)

2.4.2 Field Density Tests (FDTs)

2.4.3 Cyclic Plate Load Tests (CPLTs)

Doc. No. J-559

2.4.4 Electrical Resistivity Survey (ERS)

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

Doc. No. J-559

Undisturbed soil samples were obtained from cohesive strata encountered in

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project