Sunteți pe pagina 1din 198

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

2 x 31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

00

04-02-2014

Issued to Client

Rev

Date

Description

Client

AAG
Initials

Signature

Prepared by

Chiniot Power Limited

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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
Linear Subsurface Profile 2-2
Linear Subsurface Profile 3-3
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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Water Treatment
Plant
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Water Treatment
Plant
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Cooling Tower
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Cooling Tower
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/Mat Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at Cooling Tower
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at TG-1
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at TG-1
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/ Mat Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at TG-1
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at TG-2
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at TG-2
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/Mat Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at TG-2
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Maintenance Bay
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Maintenance Bay
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Boiler-1
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Boiler-1
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/Mat Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at Boiler-1
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Boiler-2
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Boiler-2
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/Mat Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at Boiler-2
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft/Mat Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm at Chimney
Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Square Footings for
Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm at Coal Shed

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Page 6

Berkeley Associates

Fig. 5-26
Fig. 5-27
Fig. 5-28

Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Strip Footings for


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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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).
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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


2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

=
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)

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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 %
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

and

relevant

Page 28

Berkeley Associates

APPENDIX - A
TABLES AND FIGURES

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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

Silty Clay with Sand

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

Silty Clay with Sand

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


Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

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

BH12

Fig. 2-2C Profile for ObservedSPT N-Values for Water Treatment Plant

25

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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
E-mail: berkeley.associates@gmail.com
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:

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 2-2'

Berkeley Associates
316-D,OPF Housing Society, Raiwind Road, Lahore
Contact: +92-42-35323312-15
Fax: +92-42-35323316
E-mail: berkeley.associates@gmail.com
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. 4-3

LEGEND:

CLIENT:
PROJECT:

SILTY CLAY / SILTY CLAY WITH SAND

SILTY SAND / SANDY SILT / CLAYEY SILTY SAND

GROUND WATER TABLE


SPT

TITLE:
DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

DATE:

CHINIOT POWER LIMITED


CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW
COGENERATION PROJECT

LINEAR SUBSURFACE PROFILE 3-3'

Berkeley Associates
316-D,OPF Housing Society, Raiwind Road, Lahore
Contact: +92-42-35323312-15
Fax: +92-42-35323316
E-mail: berkeley.associates@gmail.com
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.

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. 5-1A Profile for Corrected SPT N-Values for Switchyard

25

30

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

N-Value (Blows/30 cm)


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

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

350

300

250

200

Df = 2.0m

150

100

50
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-5.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Water Treatment Plant

Berkeley Associates

400

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

350

300

250

200

Df = 2.0m

150

100

50
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-6.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
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.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Cooling Tower

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. 5-8.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Cooling Tower

Berkeley Associates

160

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Mat/Raft Footings for Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm
at Cooling Tower

35

Berkeley Associates

250

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

200

150

Df = 4.0m
100

Df = 3.0m
30
Df = 2.0m

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-10.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at TG-1

Berkeley Associates

250

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

200

150

Df = 4.0m
100

Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m
50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-11.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at TG-1

Berkeley Associates

120

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Mat/Raft Footings for Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm
at TG-1

35

Berkeley Associates

350

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

300

250

200

Df = 4.0m

150

Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m

100

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-14.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at TG-2

Berkeley Associates

160

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Mat/Raft Footings for Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm
at TG-2

35

Berkeley Associates

350

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

300

250

200

150

2 0m
Df = 2.0m
100

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-16

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Maintenance Bay

Berkeley Associates

350

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

300

250

200

150

Df = 2.0m

100

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-17.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Maintenance Bay

Berkeley Associates

350

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

300

250

200

Df = 4.0m
150

Df = 3.0m
100

Df = 2.0m
50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-18.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
ar Boiler-1

Berkeley Associates

350

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

300

250

200

Df = 4.0m
150

3 0m
Df = 3.0m
100

Df = 2.0m
50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-19.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Boiler-1

Berkeley Associates

180

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Mat/Raft Footings for Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm
at Boiler-1

Berkeley Associates

250

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

200

150

Df = 4.0m
100

Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-21.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Boiler-2

Berkeley Associates

250

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

200

150

Df = 4.0m
100

30
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-22.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Boiler-2

Berkeley Associates

120

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

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.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Mat/Raft Footings for Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm
at Boiler-2

Berkeley Associates

220

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

200

180

160

Df = 3.0m
30
140

120

100
0

10

15

20

25

30

Width (m)

Fig. 5-24.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Mat/Raft Footings for Permissible Settlement of 50.8mm
at Chimney

35

Berkeley Associates

250

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

200

150

100

3 0m
Df = 3.0m
Df = 2.0m

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-25.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Square Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
at Coal Shed

Berkeley Associates

250

Net Alllowable Bearing Pressures (kPa)

200

150

100

Df = 3.0m
30

Df = 2.0m

50

0
0

Width (m)

Fig. 5-26.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressures for Strip Footings for Permissible Settlement of 25.4mm
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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

43

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

SPT-2

CLIENT:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

32

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION PROJECT

LOCATION: BOILER NO. 2


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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

SPT-2

CLIENT:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

35

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION PROJECT

LOCATION: BOILER NO. 1


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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

SPT-4

CLIENT:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

28

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION PROJECT

LOCATION: BOILER NO. 2


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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

SPT-4

CLIENT:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

39

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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,


Silty Sand (SM), trace mica,
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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

SPT-2

CLIENT:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

35

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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

Light Brown to Light Grey, Loose to Dense,


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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

SPT-4

CLIENT:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

32

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

29

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

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,


Silty Sand (SM), trace mica,
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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

50

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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
Light Brown to Light Grey, Loose to Dense,
Silty Sand (SM), trace mica,
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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

SPT-4

CLIENT:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

27

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

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:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION PROJECT

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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

17

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

22

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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

HYDRAULIC FEED STRAIGHT ROTARY DRILLING TECHNIQUE

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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE)

19

60

Berkeley Associates
PROJECT:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(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:

CHINIOT POWER COMPANY 2X31.2 MW COGENERATION 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:
CHINIOT POWER LIMITED

(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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Appendix-C

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-2

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)


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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-17(25.0 meter)

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-3

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)


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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-16(24.0 meter)

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-4

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)


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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-16(24.0 meter)

Silt

UDS-1(1.0 meter)

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-5

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(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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-17(25.0 meter)

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-6

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)


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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-16(24.0 meter)

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-7

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)

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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-10A(15.0 meter)

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-8

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(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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-14(21.0 meter)

Silt

SPT-17(25.0 meter)

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-9

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(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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-16(24.0 meter)

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-10

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(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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-13(19.5 meter)

Silt

SPT-17(25.0 meter)

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-11

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(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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

SPT-10(15.0 meter)

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-12

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)


SPT-1(1.5 meter)

Boulders

Cobbles

Tested by:Sikandar

Gravel

SPT-4(6.0 meter)

SPT-9(13.5 meter)

Sand
Coarse

Medium

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-13

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)


SPT-2(3.0 meter)

Boulders

Cobbles

Tested by:Sikandar

Gravel

SPT-5(7.5 meter)

SPT-10(15.0 meter)

Sand
Coarse

Medium

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Borehole No. BH-14

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)


SPT-1(1.5 meter)

Boulders

Cobbles

Tested by:Sikandar

Gravel

SPT-2(3.0 meter)

SPT-8(12.0 meter)

Sand
Coarse

Medium

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Test Pit

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)


TP-1(0-4 meter)

Boulders

Cobbles

Tested by:Sikandar

Gravel

TP-2(0-4 meter)

Sand
Coarse

Medium

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Fine

Silt

Clay

Berkeley Associates
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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

AASHTO T-89/ASTM D4318-00, Method"A"

Trial #

No. of blows

37

29

23

17

Dish No.

38

39

40

AASHTO T-90
1

41

42

43

Wt. of dish+wet soil

16.56

17.39

17.86

18.04

13.57

13.62

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-7

Depth: 0.50 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

35

29

22

16

Dish No.

32

33

34

AASHTO T-90
1

35

36

37

Wt. of dish+wet soil

21.33

22.43

22.17

22.13

18.37

14.45

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-7

Depth: 15.0 meter

Sample No. SPT-10B

Sample Type: Disturbed

Liquid Limit
Description

Unit

Plastic Limit

AASHTO T-89/ASTM D4318-00, Method"A"

Trial #

No. of blows

37

30

23

17

Dish No.

44

45

46

AASHTO T-90
1

47

48

49

Wt. of dish+wet soil

19.20

17.40

18.13

16.05

14.74

13.06

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-8

Depth: 0.50 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

35

30

24

16

Dish No.

26

27

28

AASHTO T-90
1

29

30

31

Wt. of dish+wet soil

20.01

25.98

24.86

21.83

22.23

16.46

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-9

Depth: 0.50 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

35

30

24

16

Dish No.

19

21

22

AASHTO T-90
1

23

24

25

Wt. of dish+wet soil

17.44

22.37

23.13

22.06

23.79

19.10

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-10

Depth: 0.50 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

35

28

22

16

Dish No.

AASHTO T-90
1

10

11

12

Wt. of dish+wet soil

20.64

21.85

21.60

21.09

21.06

22.17

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-11

Depth: 0.50 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

34

27

21

15

Dish No.

AASHTO T-90
1

Wt. of dish+wet soil

22.07

23.82

22.22

21.24

20.04

18.62

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-13

Depth: 3.0 meter

Sample No. SPT-2

Sample Type: Disturbed

Liquid Limit
Description

Unit

Plastic Limit

AASHTO T-89/ASTM D4318-00, Method"A"

Trial #

No. of blows

36

29

22

16

Dish No.

15

16

17

AASHTO T-90
1

18

19

20

Wt. of dish+wet soil

26.53

19.34

21.00

21.24

15.74

18.12

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Date: 22/01/2014
Borehole No.BH-14

Depth: 1.50 meter

Sample No. SPT-1

Sample Type: Disturbed

Liquid Limit
Description

Unit

Plastic Limit

AASHTO T-89/ASTM D4318-00, Method"A"

Trial #

No. of blows

34

27

22

16

Dish No.

50

51

52

AASHTO T-90
1

53

54

55

Wt. of dish+wet soil

13.52

13.95

15.88

17.09

15.04

13.09

Wt. of dish+dry soil

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
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

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)

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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
=
Tested by: Sikandar Hayat

32.0 Degrees
1.0 kPa

Checked by:Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-1
Sample No. SPT-8

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
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
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-2
Sample No. SPT-2

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

30.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-2
Sample No. SPT-5

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

31.8 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

300

350

400

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-2
Sample No. SPT-17

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.8 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

350

400

450

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-3
Sample No. SPT-4

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

31.8 Degrees
1.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

300

350

400

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-3
Sample No. SPT-14

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

33.6 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

300

350

400

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-4
Sample No. SPT-3

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

33.1 Degrees
4.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

300

350

400

4.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-4
Sample No. SPT-8

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

35.2 Degrees
2.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-5
Sample No. SPT-2

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

29.4 Degrees
8.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-5
Sample No. SPT-9

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.2 Degrees
3.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-5
Sample No. SPT-14

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

33.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-6
Sample No. SPT-4

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.7 Degrees
2.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-6
Sample No. SPT-8

Test Condition Soaked


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

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 - 0.017
LINEAR REGRESSION
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.0 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-6
Sample No. SPT-16

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

33.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-7
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 = 0.626x + 1.585
LINEAR REGRESSION
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.0 Degrees
1.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-7
Sample No. SPT-13

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

31.8 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-8
Sample No. SPT-2

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=
Tested by: Sikandar Hayat

32.6 Degrees
4.0 kPa

Checked by:Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-8
Sample No. SPT-5

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

33.1 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

300

350

400

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-8
Sample No. SPT-17

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=
Tested by: Sikandar Hayat

34.5 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Checked by:Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-9
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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

31.7 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-9
Sample No. SPT-12

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

34.6 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-10
Sample No. SPT-6

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.1 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-10
Sample No. SPT-13

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

35.1 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

300

350

400

4.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-11
Sample No. SPT-1

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

31.2 Degrees
2.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

4.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-11
Sample No. SPT-8

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.9 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-12
Sample No. SPT-1

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

31.8 Degrees
2.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.0

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-13
Sample No. SPT-2

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

31.3 Degrees
0.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. J 559
Sample Type : Remolded
Borehole No. BH-14
Sample No. SPT-1

Test Condition Soaked


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

Horizontal Displacement (mm)


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
Angle of Internal Friction =
Cohesion
=

32.3 Degrees
1.0 kPa

Tested by: Sikandar Hayat Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

250

300

350

3.5

Berkeley Associates
Unconfined Compression Test
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
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
Unconfined Compression Test
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. 559
Date: 21-01-2014
Depth: 0.5-1.0 meter
Borehole No. BH - 5
Sample No. UDS- 1
LC for deformation gauge
0.010 mm
Load Factor =
Length

Area(Avg.)

16.5 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
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

Unconfined Compressive Strength=


Unconfined Compressive Strength

Tested by:
Sikandar Hayat

Checked by:
Muhammad Ajmal

2
3
Strain (%)

Strain =
67 Kpa

Berkeley Associates
Unconfined Compression Test
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. 559
Date: 21-01-2014
Depth: 0.5-1.0 meter
Borehole No. BH - 7
Sample No. UDS- 1
LC for deformation gauge
0.010 mm
Length

Area(Avg.)

14 cm

Dia(Avg.) =
Weight
=
Volume =

Def.
Gauge
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400

0.245 kg per division for 0.002 mm Least count gauge

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

Unconfined Compressive Strength=


Unconfined Compressive Strength

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
Unconfined Compression Test
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No. 559
Date: 21-01-2014
Depth: 0.5-1.0 meter
Borehole No. BH - 9
Sample No. UDS- 1
LC for deformation gauge
0.010 mm
Length

Area(Avg.)

14 cm

Dia(Avg.) =
Weight
=
Volume =

Def.
Gauge
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450

0.245 kg per division for 0.002 mm Least count gauge

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

Unconfined Compressive Strength=


Unconfined Compressive Strength

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)
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No.: J 559
Test Pit # TP-1
Sample # : CS-1
Depth: 0.00-4.00 meter
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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (g/cc) = 1.77

Berkeley Associates
MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
STANDARD AASHTO T-99-93(ASTM D 698-00a)
Project: Chiniot Power Company 2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Ref No.: J 559
Test Pit # TP-2
Sample # : CS-1
Depth: 0.00-4.00 meter
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

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

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
95 % 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
C.B.R. at 95% of Max.Dry Density
C.B.R. at 100% 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


C.B.R. Value at 0.1"
C.B.R. Value at 0.2"
Tested by: Sikandar Hayat

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

1.700

1.750

1.800

Berkeley Associates

CBR DENSITY RELATIONSHIP (AASHTO T-193-99)


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
CBR Value 0.2" Penetration
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
CBR DENSITY RELATIONSHIP (AASHTO T-193-99)
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
C.B.R. Value at 0.2"
Dry Density (g/cc)
Moisture Content %
Swell (%)
Compaction % age at
88 % In-situ Dry density
90 % of Maxmum Dry Density
95 % of Maxmum 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


C.B.R. at 90% of Max.Dry Density
C.B.R. at 95% of Max.Dry Density
C.B.R. at 100% of Max.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


C.B.R. Value at 0.1"
C.B.R. Value at 0.2"
Tested by: Sikandar Hayat

Checked by: Muhammad Ajmal

1.650

1.700

1.750

Berkeley Associates

CBR DENSITY RELATIONSHIP (AASHTO T-193-99)


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
CBR Value 0.1" Penetration
4.5
7.9
10.7
CBR Value 0.2" Penetration
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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Appendix-E

Chiniot Power Limited

2 x 31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

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
E-mail: berkeley.associates@gmail.com

Berkeley Associates

2 x 31.2 MW Cogeneration Project

00

04-02-2014

Issued to Client

Rev

Date

Description

AAG

KA

Initials

Signature

Prepared by

Client

Chiniot Power Limited

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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.

ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEY

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
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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
2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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:

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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.

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Berkeley Associates

TABLE

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Electrical Resistivity Survey

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Annexure

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

ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEY


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.

ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEY


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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Appendix-E

Berkeley Associates

Investigation Points are being demarcated

Inspection of Drilling Equipment is in progress


2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Appendix-E

Berkeley Associates

SPT in Borehole is in progress

FDT in TP-1 is being carried out


2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project
Report on Geotechnical Investigations

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

2x31.2 MW Cogeneration Project


Report on Geotechnical Investigations

Doc. No. J-559


Rev. 00

Appendix-E