0% found this document useful (0 votes)
45 views5 pages

INTRODUCTIO

Mrs. B Supraja has proposed soil investigation work for a shed at Kucharam Village, Telangana, conducted by M/s. GEO TECHNICAL SERVICES. The report details the methodology, laboratory test results, and recommendations for foundation design, indicating that isolated footings are suitable with a safe bearing capacity of 22 T/m2. The investigation revealed medium dense silty sand with minimal cohesion, and further recommendations include avoiding loose soil for foundations and ensuring all concreting is done under dry conditions.

Uploaded by

brahmanna8
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
45 views5 pages

INTRODUCTIO

Mrs. B Supraja has proposed soil investigation work for a shed at Kucharam Village, Telangana, conducted by M/s. GEO TECHNICAL SERVICES. The report details the methodology, laboratory test results, and recommendations for foundation design, indicating that isolated footings are suitable with a safe bearing capacity of 22 T/m2. The investigation revealed medium dense silty sand with minimal cohesion, and further recommendations include avoiding loose soil for foundations and ensuring all concreting is done under dry conditions.

Uploaded by

brahmanna8
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

INTRODUCTION

Mrs B Supraja D/o of B.Ratan Reddy has Proposed to taking up the soil
investigation work for Proposed Shed (Area 43000 sft) at Survey No: 58 (P)
Kucharam Village, Manoharabad Mandal, Medak District, Telangana. Water
supply recommendations were given to cater to the intended needs of structure.
In view of this M/s.GEO TECHNICAL SERVICES has carried out the
Geotechnical Investigation at the site. This report includes the details of
methodology of investigation, collections of samples and laboratory test
results including their interpretation/ analysis, recommendations for the
properties essential to the design of foundations and recommendations.

The aim of this report is to evaluate the nature and depth of soils at the site and to
determine the safe bearing capacity of the foundations accordingly.

FIELD INVESTIGATIONS & SITE STRATIGRAPHY

The site is visited by qualified geotechnical engineer. A general reconnaissance


survey was conducted in the locality to understand the foundation systems being
adopted in the nearby construction sites.

Also, One sample from trail pits were dug up at the proposed building site at the
location and site stratigraphy as follows:

TP No’s. Depth, m Strata Description

1 1.50 Medium dense silty sand with traces of gravel

Samples procured from the bottom of pit were tested in laboratory.

LABORATORY TESTING
The soil samples from the pit were tested in laboratory at Hyderabad. The
following tests were
Conducted:
 Specific Gravity
 Bulk Density

 Grain size distribution

 Box Shear test

All the tests were conducted in accordance with IS:2720 ( Code of Practice for
Testing of Soils)

GEOLOGY
The major type of soil is Gravelly soil and followed by SDR /rock types occurring
in the district are granites, gneisses, quartzite’s etc Archaean and Moderately to
Slightly Weathered Group of Rocks are occupied in the district

OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS

The sub-soil is essentially a frictional material with very less cohesion. The soil is
good enough to recommend ordinary pad footings (shallow foundations) for the
proposed building. The collected information and calculations adopted to
recommend safe bearing capacity were presented in the Appendix.

Table 1 gives the results of physical and engineering tests on soil samples. It is
designated as GM as per IS 1498.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the Geotechnical Investigations and site appraisal, the following


recommendations were given:

1. Isolated footings were recommended for the proposed building.


2. The recommended Safe Bearing Capacity as follows:
TP’ No’s Depth of Foundation, m Recommended SBC T/m2
1 2.00 22

3. Correction not needed in water table.


4. Avoid resting of foundation on loose soil or isolated rock boulders.
5. All concreting should be done under dry conditions.
6. All foundation should be filled back with well compacted Soils

For Geo Technical Services

(Authorized signature)
APPENDIX
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF SOIL PROPERTIES

Grain Size  Shear


Depth, Specific Distribution(%) (max) Parameters
TP No Soil
m Gravity kN/
Si.& Cum
Gr. Sa. C Ф
Cl.
Medium dense gravelly silty
1 1.50 2.61 20 69 11 17.74 0 32
sand

NOTATION:

Gr: Gravel : Cl: Clay: Sa: Sand Si: Silt

unit weight Ф : Angle of internal friction, deg.

C : Cohesion, kg/cm2
Sheet No.3

BEARING CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOR


SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS
Analysis as per IS 6403-1981

Project : Proposed Shed at Survey No: 58 (P) Kucharam Village, Manoharabad Mandal,
Medak District, Telangana.

The bearing capacity equation is as follows :


qnet safe = (1/FS){cNcz cdc+q(Nq-1)z qdq+0.5BgNgz gdgRw}
where:
qnet safe = safe net bearing capacity c = cohesion intercept
q = overburden pressure B = Foundation width
g = Bulk density of soil below founding level
Rw = Water table correction factor FS = Factor of safety
Nc, Nq, Ng = bearing capacity factors, which are a function of f
dc, dq, dg = Depth factors
zc, zq, zg = Shape factors
Soil parameters : Bulk Density
c= 0.00 T/m2 f = 32.0 degrees GENERAL SHEAR FAILURE Profile
c' = 0.00 T/m 2 f'= 22.6 degrees LOCAL SHEAR FAILURE Depth, m g
General Shear Failure : Nc = 35.49 Nq = 23.18 Ng = 30.21 From To T/m3
'
Local Shear Failure : Nc' = 17.59 Nq' = 8.33 Ng = 7.77 0.0 3.0 1.70

Factor of safety = 2.5 as per IS 1904-1986

Design Water Table depth = 0.0 m


Rw factor: Constant value(V) for worst condition or
calculate(C) based on WT Depth ? : C
Depth factor to be considered ? Y
For computation of Depth Factor, depth below GL to be ignored to account for loose
soils,poorly compacted backfill above foundation, scour etc. = 0.0 m
FAILURE CRITERIA : General SHEAR FAILURE

qnet safe ,
Safe Net
Depth,m

Foundation Depth factors Depth factors


FOUN- Shape Factors
Dimensions (GSF) (LSF) Bearing
2
DATION Rw T/m
Capacity
B, m L, m SHAPE zc zq zg dc dq dg dc ' dq' dg ' GSF LSF T/m2
2.0 2.0 square 1.5 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.27 1.14 1.14 22.0 22.0

You might also like