Rsi2013 0127 F Rak Al Jeer Final PDF

M/s. CHINA HARBOUR ENGINEERING CO.(SHJ) L.L.
C
P.O. Box No 25871
Tel.: +971 6 5751840, Fax: +971 6 5751841
Sharjah,
United Arab Emirates.
Attn: Engr. Zhang Xiaolin (Marine Construction Manager)/ Engr. Yu Fuyang (Project Manager)
Ref: RSI2013-0127-H-RAK “Al Jeer Port” 02nd September, 2013
Dear Sir,
GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION

G+1 ACCOMMODATION, G LEVEL STORAGE & MAJLIS BULDINGS
FOR FISHERMEN/COAST GAURD’S
AT AL JEER FISHING PORT
RAS AL KHAIMAH
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
We have pleasure in enclosing herewith Four (04) hard and one soft copy (CD) of our final engineering report, for
carrying out the geotechnical investigation work on the above project. Should you have any queries with regard to
our report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Please note that soil/water samples related to this project will be retained at our storage facility for 1 calendar month,
without charge, from the date of this final report, before disposal. Should you wish to extend the storage period,
please contact us before the intended disposal date.
We are pleased to have been of service on this occasion, and look forward to further co-operation on future projects.
_________________________
Engr. Shabir Hussain Khawaja
General Manager
Report: RSI2013-0127 RAK (G+1 Accommodation, G Level Storage & Majlis Buildings, Al Jeer Fishing Port, RAK, UAE)
Site Investigation Report for Proposed
G+1 Accommodation, G Level Storage &
Majlis Buildings For Fishermen/ Coast Guards
Al Jeer Fishing Port,
at RAS AL KHAIMAH,
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES.
RSI2013-0127 H- RAK
For Client
M/s. H.H. THE CROWN PRINCE COURT
Consultant
M/s. DORSCH GRUPPE (DC Abu Dhabi)
ABU DHABI
SEPTEMBER 02, 2013
RAS AL KHAIMAH
REPORT: RSI2013-0127 H- RAK “AL JEER PORT” 02nd SEPTEMBER, 2013
REPORT ISSUE STATUS
<01> 21-July-12 Final Engineering Report-Dorsch AS SHK RSI2012-0046

<02> 02-Sep-13 Final Engineering Report AA SHK
Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved
M/s. CHINA HARBOUR ENGINEERING CO.(SHJ) L.L.C AL MAWAZEEN LABS

P.O. BOX 25871 P.O. BOX 58595
SHARJAH DUBAI
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
RAS AL KHAIMAH
CONTENTS PAGE
SUMMARY 5
1.0 INTRODUCTION 6
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 6
3.0 LOCAL AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY 7
4.0 FIELDWORK 8
5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 9
6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 10
7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 11
8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS 16
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A LOCALITY & SITE PLAN

APPENDIX B FIELD RESULTS
APPENDIX C LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX D APPENDICES TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTS
Report: RSI2013-0127 H- RAK (G+1 Accommodation, G Level Storage & Majlis Buildings, Al Jeer Fishing Port, RAK, UAE) Page 4
SUMMARY
China Harbour Engineering & Construction (CHEC) is providing contracting service while M/s. Dorsch Gruppe
(Dorsch Holding GmbH) is providing consultancy services to H.H. The Crown Prince Court Office, Abu Dhabi, for
the proposed developments of eight (08) Nos. Fishermen Ports, in the Emirates of Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab
Emirates.
This report covers the soil investigation work performed at Al Jeer Fishing Port. The work scope comprising four
(04) onshore boreholes to 20.0m depths along with supplementary field and laboratory testing was performed as
instructed by M/s. China Harbour Engineering Co. LLC for the proposed construction of G+1 Storey Fishermen/
Coast Guards Accommodation along with ground level storage and Majlis buildings.
Previously, as preliminary design purposes three (03) nos. onshore boreholes to 20.0m and one (01) marine
borehole to 30m depths were drilled by our Lab for M/s. Dorsch Gruppee (Dorsch holding GmbH) and was
submitted with Report Ref: RSI2012-0046-H, dated July 2012 for same area. In the second stage and for
construction of proposed developments, this geotechnical investigation comprising of four (04) boreholes (BH-01
to BH-04) to 20m depths were performed between 18th and 25th August 2013, in order to have detailed subsurface
information for the recommendations of safe bearing pressures for proposed developments. A subsequent
programme of field and laboratory testing was performed on representative soil and groundwater samples
recovered from the site.
The observed sub-surface conditions are such that relatively moderate grading to high load bearing soils are present
below the influence zone of the formation level. It is therefore, recommended that in order to set the foundation at -
1.0m below existing ground levels, the site at formation level should be thoroughly compacted to not less than 95%
of Maximum Dry Density (MDD) as determined from Modified Proctor Tests. Accordingly, an allowable bearing
pressure for shallow isolated, pad/ strip footings to be set at depths of -1.0m are recommended. In addition, if raft
type of foundation is to be considered, than net allowable bearing pressures with corresponding estimated orders of
settlement have been given for a rigid raft foundation to be set at same depths of around -1.0 below existing ground
level.
The corrosive potential of the soil have also been considered with respect to appropriate concrete mix design
recommendations. In addition, recommendations for earth works and retaining structures have also been given.
Furthermore, seismic design profile has also been given.
During the period of site works groundwater level encountered in the drilled boreholes was ranging from 1.50m to
1.60m depths below existing ground level.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
China Harbour Engineering & Construction (CHEC) is providing contracting service, while M/s. Dorsch Gruppe
(Dorsch Holding GmbH) is providing consultancy services to H.H. The Crown Prince Court, Abu Dhabi, for the
proposed developments of eight (08) Nos. Fishermen Ports, in the Emirates of Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab
Emirates.
Al Mawazeen Lab was commissioned by M/s. M/s. China Harbour Engineering Co. LLC to perform geotechnical
site investigation, and provide geotechnical consulting services, for the proposed developments. The developments
comprised of construction and redesign existing fishing ports along with construction of G+1 Storey
accommodation buildings for Fishermen/ Coast Guards along with ground level Majlis and storage facilities. The
details of Fishing Ports selected for these developments are;
 Al Jazeerah Al Hamrah Fishing Port

 Old Ras Al Khaimah Fishing Port
 Al Ma’arid Fishing Port
 Al Rams Fishing Port
 Khor Khawair Fishing Port
 Al Sha’am Fishing Port
 Ghalilah Fishing Port and
 Al Jeer Fishing Port.
This report covers the soil investigation work performed at “Al Jeer Fishing Port”. The work scope comprising of
four (04) onshore boreholes to 20.0m depths along with supplementary field and laboratory testing for the proposed
developments. The investigation has been based on Al Mawazeen Labs proposal Ref. PSI2013-0509-DXB, dated
01st and 12th August 2013, and subsequent approval by the client M/s. Hunan General Contracting/ China Harbour
Engineering Co. LLC, dated 12th August 2013. The work has been performed in general accordance with British
Standard BS 5930: 1999, “Code of practice for Site Investigations”.
The locality and site plans are presented in Appendix A. The site location is indicated on locality plan, Plate A1.1.
Field test locations, relative to the proposed site layout, and existing site features, are indicated in the site plan,
Plate A1.2. Field work for the initial investigation was performed from 18th and 25th August 2013 (for borehole,
BH-01 to BH-04). The factual field and laboratory data, together with appropriate engineering interpretation and
discussion of results, are presented herein.
2.0 THE SITE DESCRIPTION
The site Al Jeer Fishing Port is located in the Emirates of Ras Al Khaimah, northern Emirates, and nearly 270km
north east of Abu Dhabi, The Capital City of the United Arab Emirates and around 50km further north east of
Nakheel city, Ras Al Khaimah. Fishermen boats are casually mooring to this area. The current facilities need to be
upgraded to meet the development of the whole Emirates and to satisfy the basic demands of the fishing ports. The
port should allow for an easy entrance manoeuvre and appropriate area to construct the mooring figures of the
floating marina, a considerable turning circle, a potential extension area to allow for sustainable development of the
fishing activities and avoid blocking the coastal area of the coast guard facilities. At the time of the investigation
the investigated area was relatively flat, partially occupied by existing warehouses and accommodation for
fishermen and partially undeveloped.
3.0 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY
The geology of the United Arab Emirates, and the Arabian Gulf area, has been substantially influenced by the
deposition of marine sediments associated with numerous sea level changes during relatively recent geological
time. With the exception of mountainous regions shared with Oman in the north- east, the country is relatively
low-lying, with near surface geology dominated by Quaternary to late Pleistocene age, mobile aeolian dune sands,
and sabkha/evaporite deposits.
The geologically stable Arabian Plate is separated from the unstable Iranian Fold Belt by the Arabian Gulf. It is
believed that a tilting of the entire Arabian Plate occurred during the early Permian period, resulting in uplift in
southern Yemen, and depression to the north- east. Crustal deformations and igneous intrusions occurred in the
north- east as a result of this movement. Subsequent tectonic movements, peripheral to the folding of the Iranian
Zagros Range, during the Plio-Pleistocene epoch, probably contributed to the formation of both the Arabian Gulf
depression, and the mountainous regions shared by the United Arab Emirates and Oman in the north- east.
The near surface geology of the Ras Al Khaimah region is dominated by aeolian dune sand deposits of Holocene to
Pleistocene age. These deposits typically comprise fine grained silty calcareous sand, which is commonly dense
and variably cemented beneath a shallow, loose, normally consolidated mobile layer. Occasionally Wadi Gravel
also encountered at various places. Although variable, the degree of cementation generally increases with depth,
such that the variably cemented sand grades to predominantly calcareous sandstone. Very silty, gypsiferous sabkha
and evaporite layers occur occasionally within the aeolian sand deposits.
Although surficial sabkha deposits are found throughout the coastal belt of the Arabian Gulf, and far inland in the
western and southern parts of the United Arab Emirates, they are not particularly common in the Dubai region.
Sabkha is an Arabic name used to describe relatively fine grained, hypersaline, silt and sand deposits, which are
commonly saturated with brine, and salt encrusted. These deposits form in natural evaporation pans where saline
water, introduced by sea invasion or elevated saline groundwater, is able to accumulate at or near ground surface
level, assisted by capillary action.
4.0 FIELDWORK
A programme of subsurface investigation, performed at the site from 18th and 25th August 2013, include the
following:
 Total of four (04) Nos. Exploratory Boreholes to 20.0mdepths with:
 Regular split-spoon sampling during Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) in soils
 Disturbed bulk soil sampling from cable percussion drill cuttings
 Backfilling of boreholes
The geotechnical investigation works were performed in general accordance with the British Standard BS 5930:
“Code of practice for site investigations”.
Field test results and observations are presented in Appendix B. The presentation of field results is preceded by
summarised explanations of boreholes log symbols and classification system, and a summary of soil and rock
strength definitions, on Plates B1.1 to B1.3, and B2 respectively.
4.1 Setting out Land Boreholes
Coordinates of all test locations were provided by the client and are summarised below in Table 1. Coordinates are based
on the WGS 84 spheroid with plan datum projection of UTM Zone 40 North. Reduced levels of the test locations were
not available.
Table 1: Coordinates of Borehole Locations

Borehole No. /Depths UTM Coordinates WGS 84, Zone 40 North
Easting (m) Northing (m)
BH01/20.0m 408513.708 2880746.000
BH02/20.0m 408507.840 2880681.518
BH03/20.0m 408492.164 2880629.639
BH04/20.0m 408482.565 2880557.664
4.2 Exploratory Boreholes
The borehole locations were set out in accordance with the instructions of the Client’s Representative and is shown
on the site plan presented as Plate A1.2.
A total of four (04) boreholes were completed at the site to a proposed depth of 20.0metres below existing ground
level. Drilling was performed using a combination of rotary and cable percussion drilling rigs. The boreholes were
advanced through soil deposits, including variably cemented sands, using cable percussive equipments and
techniques.
Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were conducted at regular intervals within the soil layers in order to estimate
relative soil densities, and obtain soil samples for classification purposes. Test intervals within soil layers were
generally 0.5m to 3.0m depths and 1.0m thereafter to termination depths of all the boreholes to 20.0m below
existing ground level.
SPTs were conducted in accordance with the relevant British Standard (BS 1377- Part 9); “Methods of test for soils
for civil engineering purposes”. The test involves driving a 50mm external diameter thick walled split spoon
sampler into the bottom of the borehole with successive blows of a 63.5kg hammer falling freely through 760mm.
The sampler is driven through 6 intervals of 75mm and the number of blows required to penetrate each interval is
recorded. The initial 150mm interval is intended to ensure “seating” of the sampler such that it penetrates beyond
the zone of influence of any soil disturbance at the base of the borehole. The aggregate number of blows to drive
the sampler over the final 300mm is termed the “N” value, and is considered indicative of the in-situ relative soil
density.
In very dense and/or cemented soil layers it is often not possible to ensure complete penetration of the SPT sampler,
due to driving refusal, or the risk of damage to sampling equipment as a result of hard driving. The practical
driving limit is of the order of 50 blows for the final 300mm penetration. Where driving resistance exceeds this
limit, SPTs are usually terminated with incomplete penetration. In such cases the total 50 blows driven against the
actual penetration depth is recorded on the borehole logs. A plot of SPT versus depth is presented in Appendix A,
Plate A3.1.
Water was added to assist cable percussive boring and to stabilize each hole during in-situ testing. Careful attention was
paid for the existence of the groundwater present in the boreholes. Groundwater levels were recorded at suitable interval
or break or at the end of each shift and are presented on individual borehole logs in Appendix B.
Disturbed SPT and bulk soil samples collected during drilling were retained in sealed, labelled plastic bags.
Groundwater samples were also retained in sealed plastic bottles. All samples were transported to the Al Mawazeen
Lab sample processing and storage facility for detailed logging and sample processing. Representative samples
were selected for laboratory testing to assist with sample descriptions and determination of engineering material
properties. Individual borehole logs are presented in Appendix B, Plates B3.1.1 to B3.6.3.
4.3 Backfilling of Boreholes
Each borehole was backfilled on completion with arising material ‘sand’ from bottom to top of the borehole, in
order to avoid any future pollution of an aquifer. The site area was cleaned and cleared from any waste during
investigation work.
5.0 LABORATORY TESTING
A programme of laboratory testing was performed on selected samples of soil and groundwater obtained during the
fieldwork. Test results have been used to assist with the classification and determination of relevant physical and
mechanical properties of soil samples. Chemical test results have been used to determine the corrosively of soil
and groundwater. In general, laboratory testing has been performed in accordance with British Standard
procedures. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C.
5.1 Particle Size Distribution
The particle size distribution was determined for a total of twelve (12) soil samples in accordance with the wet
sieving method described in BS 1377:Part2, 1990, Clause 9.2 "wet sieving method". Compliance with the standard,
with respect to minimum sample quantity is dependent on the maximum significant grain size and the method of
sampling.
In particular, for SPT samples, the quantity of soil available for testing is typically about 100g. This sample
quantity is considered representative where grain sizes range up to 2mm (i.e. to coarse sand size). Where
significant quantities of coarser particles are present, the particle size distribution obtained from SPT samples
should be regarded as indicative only. It is particularly important to recognise the limitations of SPT samples
where medium to coarse grained gravels and/or cobbles are present. Detailed presentations of results are preceded
by a results summary on Plates C1.1 to C1.6.
5.2 Chemical Analysis
Chemical analyses were performed on one (01) soil samples and two (02) groundwater samples to determine
sulphate content, chloride content, and pH levels. These analyses were performed in accordance with the BS 1377:
Part 3:1990: Clause 5.2: Amd. 9028:96 methods for testing acid soluble sulphate (expressed as percentage of sulphur
trioxide) and chloride contents in accordance with the BS 1377: Part 3:1990: Clause 7.3: Amd. 9028: 96. The pH
levels were determined in accordance with the BS 1377: Part 3: Clause9: 1990, Amd. 9028: 96.
The chemical test results are summarised on Plate C2.1.
6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface strata encountered during drilling are given on the Borehole Logs in Appendix B, Plates B3.1.1 to
B3.4.3. The borehole observations and test results indicate relatively consistent subsurface conditions over the site.
The subsurface strata encountered from the borehole revealed dense to very dense, brown, slightly silty to silty,
slightly shelly, gravelly, fine to medium, SAND from existing ground level to between 2.0m and 3.0m followed by
very dense, reddish brown to brown, slightly silty to silty, gravelly, fine to medium SAND to 5.0m depths below
existing ground level.
Below this material very dense, brownish grey, slightly silty to silty, sub rounded to sub angular, medium to coarse,
sandy GRAVEL comprised of assorted rock types was observed to termination depths of all the boreholes to 20.0m
depths below existing ground level.
During the period of site works groundwater was encountered in the drilled boreholes was between 1.50m and
1.60m depths below existing ground level.
7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions with respect to the design of foundations
for the proposed development. It is understood from the information provided by the client that it is proposed to
construct G+1 storey accommodation buildings along with ground level majlis and storage facilities, on this site, to
be set on shallow foundations. However, at the time of writing this report detailed information regarding
foundation layout or loadings had not been made available so that only a general discussion can be undertaken.
The observed sub-surface conditions are such that relatively high load bearing soils are present below the influence
zone of the formation level. It is therefore, recommended that in order to set the foundation at -1.0m below existing
ground levels, the site at formation level should be thoroughly compacted to not less than 95% of Maximum Dry
Density (MDD) as determined from Modified Proctor Tests. Accordingly, after thoroughly compacted, shallow
foundations are considered appropriate for the proposed structure.
7.1 Shallow Isolated Foundations for Accommodation, Majlis & Storage Buildings
Allowable bearing pressures are dependent on the shear strength of the soil and the tolerance of the proposed structure to
settlement. In granular soils, the latter factor is normally more critical. Settlements in such deposits normally take place
during construction and initial loading but, where more silty or cohesive materials exist; there could be a degree of time
dependent consolidation.
Based on the results of the Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) performed in the boreholes, the following allowable bearing
pressure given in Table 2 can be used safely for the conventional isolated/ strip or pad footings to be set at depth of
approximately -1.0m below existing road level, on properly level and compacted surface. The foundation depths
recommended below are with respect to final grading levels, both for Isolated and raft type of footings.
Table 2:- Assessment of Bearing pressure with factor of safety 3.0 (Meyerhof Method)
Foundation Depth Footing Width Allowable Bearing Pressure for
(m Below RL) (m) Isolated Foundations
(kN/m2)
-1.0m <1.2 225
2.0 200
3.0 175
5.0 150
The above bearing pressure values for Isolated foundations are calculated by Meyerhof Equation 4-12 given in
Foundation Analysis and Design by Joseph E. Bowels (fifth edition) below.
qa = N/F2[(B/B+0.33)2] Kd
Where, qa = allowable bearing pressure for 25mm settlement
F2 = Factor from Table page 264 taken as 0.08
F3 = Factor from Table page 264 taken as 0.3
N= SPT average "N" Values
B = Footing width
Kd = 1+0.33D/B
With loads of the magnitudes quoted above, total settlement is calculated as being less than the generally accepted
tolerance of 25mm, with differential movements being minimal.
7.2 Shallow Raft Foundations for Accommodation, Majlis & Storage Buildings
If wider or raft type of foundation is considered for ground plus one (G+1) storey accommodation and ground level
Majlis and Storage facility buildings, than following allowable bearing pressure given in Table 3, can be used safely.
Based on the results of the Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) performed in four (04) boreholes drilled and routine
laboratory test results, following net allowable bearing pressures should be used for wider or raft type of
foundations in order to construct building structures. The assessments of net bearing pressure, with corresponding
estimated orders of settlement, are given below in Table 3 for a rigid raft foundation. These recommendations are
based on the raft being set at the same depth of around -1.0m below existing ground level.
Table 3:- Assessment of Bearing pressure and Settlement for a shallow raft foundations
Settlement (mm) Net Allowable Bearing Pressure Modulus of Subgrade
(kN/m2) Reaction for 50mm
settlement
Depth m Below (RL) -1.0m
25mm 150
30mm 175
35mm 200
20,000kN/m3
40mm 225
45mm 250
50mm 275
With loads of the magnitudes quoted above, total settlement is calculated as being less than the generally accepted
tolerance of 50mm for raft, with differential movements being minimal. Depending on the rigidity of raft, differential
movement is estimated to be less than half the respective total value.
The bearing pressures for raft foundations were calculated by Meyerhof equations 4-13 and 10.1 given below.
qa = N /F2(ΔHa/25)*Kd
Where Kd = 1+0.33D/B
ΔHa = allowable settlement such as 25, 30,35,40,45 and 50mm etc.
Note: For Mat/ Raft foundations the ratio ((B+F3)/B)2 ≈ 1.0 and is neglected.
When excavating to foundation level, care should be taken not to disturb strata underlying formation level
otherwise settlement in excess of those quoted above could occur. If any disturbance does occur, or if any soft
spots or gypsiferous material are encountered, the material should be removed and replaced by selected granular
fill, which should be properly compacted before the foundations are constructed.
Prior to construction of the foundations the soil at formation level should be compacted to not less than 95% of the
soils maximum dry density, as determined from the modified Proctor test. The compacted surface should then be
protected by immediately covering with a layer of concrete blinding.
7.3 Excavation for Foundation and Dewatering
As the excavation will be carried out to approximately 1.0-1.25m depth in order to set the foundation and with
groundwater being encountered at approximately 1.5m below the existing ground level, the site will not need to be
dewatered in order to construct the foundations at around 1.0m depths below existing ground level. As mentioned
in Section 8, “Report Limitations” that the groundwater level may vary significantly at the time of construction due
to tidal and seasonal effect. If during construction water level encountered at or close to formation level than site
will require dewatering. In this case a well point dewatering system should probably prove adequate and
economical in the ground conditions encountered at this site. However, prior to finalizing designs for the building
the advice of specialist dewatering contractors should be sought with regard to the suitability and economy of their
proprietary systems.
The dewatering should remain in operation until the weight of the structure is greater than the uplift pressure
exerted by the groundwater returning to its natural level. The waterproofing system adopted should be capable of
withstanding the hydrostatic head that will be effective once the water table has returned to the natural conditions.
To ensure a dry, firm base to the excavation, it is therefore, considered that the draw down level should be
maintained at around 1.0m below formation level.
The excavation works should be carried out in accordance with good construction practice, such as that embodied
in British Standards BS 6031: 1981 “Code of Practice for Earthworks”, or a similar recognized Standard.
7.4 Retaining Structures
As discussed above it is understood that development at the site may involve excavation to approximately 1.25m
below existing ground level. Retaining walls may therefore be required as part of the structure and possibly also as
temporary works. The parameters summarised in Table 4 are recommended for the design of retaining structures.
For design purposes, the natural groundwater level has been taken as being at a depth of approximately 1.50 below
the existing ground level.
Table 4:- Recommended Design Parameters for Retaining Structures

Depth/RL Stratum Bulk Submerged Internal Coefficient of Lateral
(m OGL) Density Density Friction Earth Pressure
(Mg/m3) (Mg/m3) Phi Φ
(degree) Ko Ka Kp
0.0m to 3.0m Dense, slightly silty to silty, 1.75 0.75 34 0.44 0.28 3.54
gravelly SAND
3.0m to 5.0m Very dense, slightly silty to silty, 1.80 0.80 36 0.41 0.26 3.85
gravelly SAND
5.0m to 20.0m Very dense, slightly silty to silty, 1.85 1.85 38 0.38 0.24 4.20
sandy GRAVEL
In the above Table Ko has been determined using Bishop’s procedure, with Rankine’s method being used to
calculate both Ka and Kp.
7.5 Concrete Design For Foundation Purposes
One (01) soil and one (01) groundwater sample was tested for chemical analysis. The sulphate contents (expressed as 2:1
water / soil extract) of the soil sample tested ranges from 1.50%, with corresponding water samples concentration of
between 2.49grams per liter. The chloride content for the soil tested ranges from 0.45% with water sample concentration
of between of 2.0%. The pH value of the samples tested varied between 7.8 and 8.2.
For guidance for a suitable concrete design it is recommended that reference should be made to CIRIA Special
Publication 31 (The CIRIA Guide to Concrete Construction in the Gulf Region published by the Construction
Industry Research and Information Association, London 1984). This publication considers both sulphate and
chloride contamination of soils and groundwater in various exposure conditions and is not restricted just to sub-
surface concrete.
Figure 6 and Table 13 from this publication is presented in Appendix D of this report and with reference to this
Figure it is considered that this site would be classed as having moderate to significant contamination with sulphate
and moderate to significant contamination with chloride salts. On this basis it is considered that Exposure
Condition d(iv) would apply, for which it is recommended that either a Sulphate Resisting Cement to BS 4027 or a
cement containing at least 3.5% but not more than 9% of C3A be used in a mix meeting the following criteria :-
 Minimum cement content for 20mm aggregates 320 to 400 kg/m3

 Maximum water : cement ratio 0.50 to 0.42
 Minimum cover for reinforcement 40mm to 50mm
In addition it is recommended that the surface of all concrete in contact with the soil should be covered with a
suitable waterproof membrane or coating. However, prior to finalising and adopting a mix design, appropriate
consultation with the structural engineer is advised.
7.6 Seismic Zone & Soil Profile
As no geophysical testing (i.e. cross-hole or down-hole seismic testing) was performed at the site, so no analysis was
made in the report. It should be noted that the below reported values are considered to be tentative and based on the
results of the drilled boreholes as well as the classification mentioned in the UBC and that only geophysical logging
of boreholes can give exact value of the shear wave velocity.
The current practices in UAE are to follow the provision of UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1997 for seismic
design parameters. Based on the provisions of (UNIFORM BUILDING CODE) and existing subsoil conditions in
the site, the following design parameters may be adopted:
According to Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997 for seismic design parameters and based on seismic activity,
Dubai, United Arab Emirates has been grouped under Seismic Zone 2A with Seismic Zone Factor (Z) 0.15.
The seismic design parameters for soil strata encountered (with SPT “N” values from 15 to 50) at this site, the Soil
Profile type SD representing stiff Soil Profile may be adopted for the design with a shear wave velocity of 180 to
360 m/sec. as per UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1997.
 The seismic coefficient Ca = 0.22

 The seismic coefficient Cv = 0.32
7.7 Construction Supervision
An experienced engineer or supervisor should be present on the site to oversee all earthworks and foundation
construction activities. In particular, it is recommended that all foundation excavations are inspected by a suitably
qualified geotechnical engineer, prior to foundation construction, to ensure that the contact surface is properly prepared,
and that exposed sub-surface conditions are consistent with design assumptions.
In addition to above, at the time of foundation construction, this laboratory shall be contacted to carry out in-situ field
density, compaction, plate load, pile integrity tests (in case of piles recommendation) or other tests recommended in this
report at random locations selected by our engineer. Without which a letter of confirmation can not be issued for the safe
bearing pressure and foundation levels.
8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS
As mentioned in the report the boreholes made were of 150mm in diameter. The information received from the limited
number and the diameter of boreholes may not represent the entire site and may not reveal all the weak layers or
conditions especially when they are localized. Hence no responsibility can be borne for conditions not revealed by
boreholes made on the site. In case of any such findings we shall be contacted immediately to arrange a site visit by a
geotechnical engineer to make an on site study of such conditions after which recommendations if it is deemed necessary
will be revised.
The borehole logs and related information represent subsurface conditions only at the specific locations and times where
sampling was conducted. Any lines designating the changes between soil and/ or rock layers represent approximate
boundaries. The transition between deposits / strata may be gradual, or may occur between recovered samples.
The groundwater levels indicated on the borehole logs represents the measured levels at the time of investigations.
It should be noted, however, that groundwater levels are subject to variation caused by tidal and weather seasonal
variations and by changes of local drainage and or pumping conditions. The levels may at time be significantly
different to those measured during the investigation.
The recommendations and discussions given in this report are based on the subsurface conditions encountered
during the site investigation work and on the results of the field and laboratory testing on samples obtained from
the limited number of boreholes. There may be, however, conditions pertaining to the site which has not been in to
account due to the limited number of boreholes.
Prepared by: Checked by:
Afsar Ali Ansari Engr. Shabir Hussain Khawaja

Geotechnical Engineer General Manager
APPENDIX A
LOCATION & SITE PLANS
LOCALITY PLAN PLATE A1.1

SITE PLAN PLATE A1.2
SPT “N” VALUES VS DEPTH PLATE A1.3
SITE LOCATION
Al Jeer Fishing Port,
Ras Al Khaimah
SITE: Project: Maritime Development of RAK Fishing Ports TITLE: Location Plan
G+1 Storey Accommodation, Majlis & Storage Facilities
At Al Jeer,, Ras Al Khaimah Report
p Ref.: "Volume H" Al Jeer Port
JOB REF : RSI2013-0127-H RAK United Arab Emirates
DATE: 22-Sep-13 CLIENT: China Harbour Engineering Co./Dorsch Gruppe PLATE No: A1.1
BH 1
BH 2
BH 3
BH 4
SITE: Project: Maritime Development of RAK Fishing Ports TITLE: Site Plan
G+1 Storey Accommodation, Majlis & Storage Facilities
At Al Jeer, Ras Al Khaimah Report Ref.: "Volume H" Al Jeer Port
JOB REF : RSI2013-0127-H RAK United Arab Emirates
'N' VALUES
1 10 100
0
Very Loose Loose M.Dense Dense V.Dense
2
Design Profile
3
9
DEPTH (m)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
BH 1-SPT BH 2-SPT Design Profile BH 4-SPT BH 3-SPT
SITE: Project: Maritime Development of RAK Fishing Ports TITLE: Summary of SPT
G+1 Storey Accommodation, Majlis & Storage Facilities Values vs Depth
At Al Jeer, Ras Al Khaimah
JOB REF : RSI2013-0127-H RAK United Arab Emirates Report Ref.: "Volume H" Al Jeer Port
APPENDIX B
FIELD RESULTS
BOREHOLE LOG LEGEND & CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS PLATES B1.1 TO B1.3

SOIL/ROCK STRENGTH DEFINITIONS PLATE B2
BOREHOLE LOGS PLATES B3.1.2 TO B3.4.3
Borehole Log AL MAWAZEEN SOIL TESTING, DUBAI
Project: Proposed (G+1) Labour Accommodation, Majlis, Storage Building and Fisherman Port, At Al Jeer, Ras Al Khaimah
Client: China Harbour Engineering Co (SHJ) LLC Project No.: RSI2013-0127-Volume H
Borehole No.: BH 1 Date of Drilling: 25.08.13
B.H.Elevation: 0.00 m Rig No.: MDR 4 (Bedford) Method of Drilling: Rotary Cored
Borehole Dia.: 0.00m to 20.00m 125mm N-Coordinate: 2880746.00 N Flushing Medium: Water
Depth of Borehole: 20.15 m E-Coordinate: 408513.71 E Ground Water Level: Not Encountered
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
SPT Blows / Drive ( N / mm )
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
date 0.00 SPT Blows per 75 mm N/mm 0.00
25.08.13
(1.50) Very dense, brown, silty, gravelly, fine to
B1 medium grained SAND. Gravel is subangular
fine to medium igneous rock fragments.
SPT1 5, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15 50
SPT2 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 19 50

-1.50 1.50
(3.50) Very dense, brown, silty, very gravelly, shelly,
SPT3 7, 13, 15, 21, 14/40, - 50/190
fine to medium grained SAND. Gravel is
subangular fine to coarse igneous rock
SPT4 6, 11, 20, 21, 9/30, - 50/180 fragments.
SPT5 9, 16/65, 26, 24/65, -, - 50/140
SPT6 7, 14, 22, 28, -, - 50/150
SPT7 10, 15/65, 30, 20/45, -, 50/120

-
-5.00 5.00
SPT8 7, 15, 32, 18/25, -, - 50/100 (15.15) Very dense, brown to greyish brown, silty,
sandy, subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of
igneous rock fragments.
SPT9 13, 12/45, 35, 15/15, -, 50/90

-
SPT10 20, 5/5, 24, 26/35, -, - 50/110
SPT11 14, 11/25, 38, 12/5, -, - 50/80

LAND BH. SP BH LOGS.GPJ AGS3_HK.GDT 23/09/13
SPT12 10, 15/65, 50/55, -, -, - 50/55
Standard Peneteration Test Ground Water Sample REMARKS Operator : Tarique

Small Distrubed Sample Ground Water Level
Large Disturbed Sample Logged By : Afsar
Bulk Sample
U76 Undisturbed Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
date -10.00 SPT Blows per 75 mm N/mm 10.00
SPT13 12, 13/55, 50/70, -, -, - 50/70 Very dense, brown to greyish brown, silty,
igneous rock fragments. (continued)
SPT14 14, 11/35, 50/60, -, -, - 50/60
SPT15 16, 9/25, 50/60, -, -, - 50/60
SPT16 18, 7/15, 37, 13/15, -, - 50/90
SPT17 16, 9/5, 50, -, -, - 50/75
SPT18 14, 11/35, 39, 11/5, -, - 50/80
SPT19 10, 15/50, 36, 14/10, -, 50/85

-
SPT20 16, 9/25, 42, 8/5, -, - 50/80
SPT21 25/70, -, 33, 17/15, -, - 50/90

SPT22 12, 13/45, 41, 9/5, -, - 50/80

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
25.08.13 -20.15 SPT23 20, 5/5, 50/70, -, -, - 50/70 20.15
End of borehole (20.15m)

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 3 of 3
Depth of Borehole: 20.16 m E-Coordinate: 408507.84 E Ground Water Level: 1.55 mBGL
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
24.08.13
(2.00) Dense, brown, silty, slightly gravelly to
B1 gravelly, fine to medium grained SAND.
Gravel is subangular fine to medium igneous
SPT1 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15 47
rock fragments.
SPT2 5, 7, 9, 8, 11, 15 43
SPT3 6, 9, 10, 12, 10, 17 49

-2.00 2.00
SPT4 8, 12, 10, 14, 18, 8/25 50/250 fine to medium grained SAND. Gravel is
subangular fine to medium igneous rock
SPT5 9, 13, 18, 20, 12/60, - 50/210 fragments.
SPT6 10, 15/65, 21, 23, 6/10, 50/160

-
SPT7 7, 13, 33, 17/35, -, - 50/110
-5.00 5.00
SPT8 13, 12/55, 34, 16/25, -, 50/100 (15.16) Very dense, brown to greyish brown, silty,
- sandy, subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of
SPT9 9, 14, 28, 22/45, -, - 50/120
SPT10 16, 9/35, 31, 19/25, -, - 50/100
SPT11 18, 7/25, 27, 23/25, -, - 50/100

SPT12 11, 11/35, 26, 24/45, -, 50/120

-

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
SPT13 10, 13, 36, 14/15, -, - 50/90 Very dense, brown to greyish brown, silty,
SPT14 7, 16, 25, 25/25, -, - 50/100
SPT15 16, 9/25, 37, 13/15, -, - 50/90
SPT16 25/70, -, 29, 21/35, -, - 50/110
SPT17 13, 12/50, 50/50, -, -, - 50/50
SPT18 12, 13/40, 30, 20/20, -, 50/95

-
SPT19 14, 11/35, 38, 12/15, -, 50/90

-
SPT20 10, 15/65, 50/50, -, -, - 50/50
SPT21 16, 9/65, 31, 19/25, -, - 50/100

SPT22 9, 16/70, 50, -, -, - 50/75
1.55m
at
Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
24.08.13 18:00 -20.16 SPT23 25/70, -, 36, 14/10, -, - 50/85 20.16
End of borehole (20.155m)

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 3 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
21.08.13
(2.00) Dense to very dense, brown, silty, gravelly,
B1 fine to medium grained SAND. Gravel is
subangular fine to medium igneous rock
SPT1 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 15 42
fragments.
SPT2 4, 7, 9, 11, 13, 16 49
SPT3 5, 11, 14, 16, 17, 3/5 50/230

-2.00 2.00
SPT4 7, 13, 15, 21, 14/60, - 50/210
fine to medium grained SAND. Gravel is
subangular fine to coarse igneous rock
SPT5 8, 14, 31, 19/25, -, - 50/100 fragments.
SPT6 12, 13/35, 28, 22/35, -, 50/110

-
SPT7 16, 9/35, 35, 15/25, -, - 50/100
-5.00 5.00
SPT8 10, 15/65, 39, 11/5, -, - 50/80 (15.17) Very dense, brown to greyish brown, silty,
SPT9 7, 13, 34, 16/10, -, - 50/85
SPT10 12, 13/35, 35, 15/15, -, 50/90

-
SPT11 14, 11/35, 50/70, -, -, - 50/70

SPT12 20, 5/10, 50, -, -, - 50/75

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
SPT13 21, 4/5, 50/70, -, -, - 50/70 Very dense, brown to greyish brown, silty,
SPT14 17, 8/15, 41, 9/10, -, - 50/85
SPT15 20, 5/5, 50/70, -, -, - 50/70
SPT16 25/70, -, 50/70, -, -, - 50/70
SPT17 16, 9/25, 37, 13/5, -, - 50/80
SPT18 14, 11/11, 32, 18/25, -, 50/100

-
SPT19 16, 9/15, 30, 20/15, -, - 50/90
SPT20 13, 12/45, 29, 21/15, -, 50/90

-
SPT21 25/70, -, 37, 16/15, -, - 53/90

SPT22 16, 9/25, 50/50, -, -, - 50/50
1.50m

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
21.08.13 at -20.17 SPT23 18, 7/15, 39, 11/5, -, - 50/80 20.17
18:00 End of borehole (20.17m)

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 3 of 3
Borehole No.: BH 4 Date of Drilling: 18.08.13 to 19.08.13
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
18.08.13
(1.50) Dense to very dense, brown, slightly silty to
B1 silty, gravelly, slightly shelly, fine to medium
grained SAND. Gravel is subangular fine to
SPT1 4, 8, 10, 11, 12, 16 49
medium rock fragments.
SPT2 5, 9, 13, 15, 15, 7/25 50/250

-1.50 1.50
(1.50) Dense, brown, slightly silty to silty, slightly
SPT3 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13 37 gravelly, fine to medium grained SAND.
Gravel is subangular fine to medium rock
SPT4 3, 3, 8, 10, 14, 12 44
fragments.
SPT5 2, 4, 6, 9, 11, 15 41
-3.00 3.00
(17.15) Very dense, light greyish brown, slightly silty
SPT6 6, 11, 13, 20, 17/60, - 50/210
to silty, sandy, subangular fine to coarse
GRAVEL of igneous rock fragments.
SPT7 8, 13, 20, 25, 5/10, - 50/160
SPT8 10, 15/65, 27, 23/55, -, 50/130

-
SPT9 13, 12/55, 31, 19/35, -, 50/110

-
1.60m
at
18.08.13 16:10
19.08.13
SPT10 9, 16/65, 36, 14/15, -, - 50/90
SPT11 8, 17/65, 50/60, -, -, - 50/60

SPT12 12, 13/45, 39, 11/15, -, 50/90

-

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
SPT13 15, 10/35, 50/70, -, -, - 50/70 Very dense, light greyish brown, slightly silty
to silty, sandy, subangular fine to coarse
GRAVEL of igneous rock fragments.
(continued)
SPT14 25/70, -, 26, 24/45, -, - 50/120
SPT15 18, 7/25, 34, 16/10, -, - 50/85
SPT16 25/70, -, 41, 9/15, -, - 50/90
SPT17 25/60, -, 31, 19/15, -, - 50/90
SPT18 16, 19/15, 29, 21/25, -, 50/100

-
SPT19 14, 11/45, 33, 17/10, -, 50/85

-
SPT20 16, 9/15, 31, 19/25, -, - 50/100
SPT21 18, 7/15, 50/70, 70-, -, 120/70

-
SPT22 25/70, -, 42, 8/5, -, - 50/80

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 3
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
19.08.13 -20.15 SPT23 25/65, -, 40/40, 10/10, 50/50 20.15
-, - End of borehole (20.145m)

Bulk Sample
Checked By :
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 3 of 3
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTS PLATES C1.1 TO C1.6

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL & WATER PLATES C2.1
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION REPORT
CLIENT INFORMATION
Client : China Harbour Engineering Co (SHJ) LLC
Project Title : Proposed (G+1) Labour Accommodation, Majlis, Storage Building and Fisherman Port, At Al Jeer, Ras Al Khaimah
Location : Al Jeer, Ras Al Khaimah-UAE
Page 1 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
Date of test : 27/08/2013 Lab Report No. : RSI2013-0127
Test location : Al Mawazeen Soil Testing, Dubai Report Date : 08/09/2013
Test method used : BS 1377: Part 2: 1990: Cl. 9.2
Test method variation: Nil Tested By : Mahendra
Sample preparation : BS 1377: Part 2: 1990: Cl. 9.2.3
1
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
BS aperture Size(mm)
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
Clay Fine Medium Coarse Fine Medium Coarse Fine Medium Coarse
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

Borehole Sample ID Depth(m) Curve %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay D10 D30 D60 Dmax Cu Cc
BH 1 SPT3 1.50 - 1.95 24.5 65.0 10.5 0.06 0.19 0.94 20 15.41 0.64
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
MAW SIEVE.6 BH LOGS.GPJ GINT LAB BSI A4.GDT 08/09/13
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 1 SPT5 2.50 - 2.95 23.2 70.5 6.3 0.08 0.18 0.74 14 9.62 0.59
Description:
Remarks: Soil Description is based on BS5930:1999, which determine from particle size only, it does not differentiate between soil particles or shell fragments
Appendix C
Plate 1 of 6 Authorized Signatary
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 2 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
1
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 1 SPT8 5.00 - 5.45 42.6 49.5 7.9 0.07 0.25 2.33 20 31.05 0.36
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 2 SPT2 1.00 - 1.45 12.8 77.2 10.0 0.06 0.12 0.29 6.3 4.67 0.78
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 3 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
1
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 2 SPT4 2.00 - 2.40 16.6 73.2 10.2 0.06 0.12 0.29 14 4.62 0.80
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 2 SPT9 6.00 - 6.27 37.9 53.2 8.9 0.07 0.19 1.69 20 24.87 0.31
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 4 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
1
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 3 SPT3 1.50 - 1.95 24.6 65.9 9.5 0.06 0.15 0.52 20 8.20 0.65
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 3 SPT6 3.00 - 3.24 12.5 78.7 8.8 0.07 0.13 0.34 6.3 5.09 0.79
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 5 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
1
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 3 SPT11 8.00 - 8.45 22.7 66.2 11.1 0.06 0.12 0.4 20 6.61 0.63
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 4 SPT2 1.00 - 1.40 11.9 82.5 5.6 0.07 0.12 0.21 14 2.97 0.94
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 6 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
1
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 4 SPT3 1.50 - 1.95 6.1 88.5 5.4 0.07 0.1 0.17 6.3 2.43 0.86
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 4 SPT7 4.00 - 4.31 16.0 78.2 5.8 0.08 0.18 0.68 6.3 8.82 0.60
Description:
Appendix C
REPORT ON CHEMICAL TESTS FOR SOIL & WATER
Client M/s. China Harbour Engineering Co. Lab Ref. No. RSI 2013-0127-H
Project Name Proposed (G+1) Labour Accommodation Sample No. See below
Location Al Jeer, Ras Al Khaimah, UAE Sampled By AML
Date Tested 26/08/2013 to 28/08/2013 Sampling Method BS 5930 : 1999
Acid Extract Ground Water

BH Sample Depth Sulphate Chloride Organic Matter Sulphate Chloride
No. No (m) as SO4 as Cl content as SO4 as Cl pH
(%) (%) (%) (g/l) (%)
BH-4 SPT2 1.0-1.40 1.50 0.45 - - - 8.2
BH-3 GWL 1.50 - - - 2.49 2.00 7.8
Tested By Issued By
HI
Test Methods:
- Sulphate Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.3 / 5.2 (Water Extraction /
Acid Extraction)
- Chloride Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.7.2 / 7.3 (Water Extraction /
Acid Extraction)
- Sulphate Content of Ground Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5
- Chloride Content of Ground Water: BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.7
- pH of Soil and Ground Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.9.5
- Site Classification : BS 8500 – 1 : 2002 & BRE Special Digest 1 : 2005
Sample Prep. Method
- Sulphate Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.2 / 5.3 (Water Extraction /
Acid Extraction)
- Chloride Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.7.2.3 / 7.3.3 (Water
Extraction / Acid Extraction)
- Sulphate Content of Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.4
- Chloride Content of Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.4
- pH Value of Soil and Ground Water: BS 1377: Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl. 9.4
RSI 2013-0127-H Appendix C, Plates C2.1

APPENDIX D
APPENDICES TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTS
APPENDIX TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT PLATE D1

FIGURE 6 AND TABLE 13 FROM CIRIA SPECIAL PUBLICATION 31 PLATE D2

Rsi2013 0127 F Rak Al Jeer Final PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Rsi2013 0127 F Rak Al Jeer Final PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

M/s. CHINA HARBOUR ENGINEERING CO.(SHJ) L.L.

Ref: RSI2013-0127-H-RAK “Al Jeer Port” 02nd September, 2013

GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION

SEPTEMBER 02, 2013

REPORT: RSI2013-0127 H- RAK “AL JEER PORT” 02nd SEPTEMBER, 2013

REPORT ISSUE STATUS

<01> 21-July-12 Final Engineering Report-Dorsch AS SHK RSI2012-0046

Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved

M/s. CHINA HARBOUR ENGINEERING CO.(SHJ) L.L.C AL MAWAZEEN LABS

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 6

3.0 LOCAL AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY 7

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 9

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 10

7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 11

8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS 16

APPENDIX A LOCALITY & SITE PLAN

 Al Jazeerah Al Hamrah Fishing Port

2.0 THE SITE DESCRIPTION

3.0 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY

4.1 Setting out Land Boreholes

Table 1: Coordinates of Borehole Locations

4.2 Exploratory Boreholes

4.3 Backfilling of Boreholes

5.1 Particle Size Distribution

5.2 Chemical Analysis

The chemical test results are summarised on Plate C2.1.

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.3 Excavation for Foundation and Dewatering

7.4 Retaining Structures

Table 4:- Recommended Design Parameters for Retaining Structures

7.5 Concrete Design For Foundation Purposes

 Minimum cement content for 20mm aggregates 320 to 400 kg/m3

7.6 Seismic Zone & Soil Profile

 The seismic coefficient Ca = 0.22

7.7 Construction Supervision

Prepared by: Checked by:

Afsar Ali Ansari Engr. Shabir Hussain Khawaja

LOCALITY PLAN PLATE A1.1

BOREHOLE LOG LEGEND & CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS PLATES B1.1 TO B1.3

Client: China Harbour Engineering Co (SHJ) LLC Project No.: RSI2013-0127-Volume H

Borehole No.: BH 1 Date of Drilling: 25.08.13

SPT2 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 19 50

SPT5 9, 16/65, 26, 24/65, -, - 50/140

SPT6 7, 14, 22, 28, -, - 50/150

SPT7 10, 15/65, 30, 20/45, -, 50/120

SPT9 13, 12/45, 35, 15/15, -, 50/90

SPT10 20, 5/5, 24, 26/35, -, - 50/110

SPT11 14, 11/25, 38, 12/5, -, - 50/80

SPT12 10, 15/65, 50/55, -, -, - 50/55

Standard Peneteration Test Ground Water Sample REMARKS Operator : Tarique

Client: China Harbour Engineering Co (SHJ) LLC Project No.: RSI2013-0127-Volume H

Borehole No.: BH 1 Date of Drilling: 25.08.13

SPT14 14, 11/35, 50/60, -, -, - 50/60

SPT15 16, 9/25, 50/60, -, -, - 50/60

SPT16 18, 7/15, 37, 13/15, -, - 50/90

SPT17 16, 9/5, 50, -, -, - 50/75

SPT18 14, 11/35, 39, 11/5, -, - 50/80

SPT19 10, 15/50, 36, 14/10, -, 50/85

SPT20 16, 9/25, 42, 8/5, -, - 50/80

SPT21 25/70, -, 33, 17/15, -, - 50/90

SPT22 12, 13/45, 41, 9/5, -, - 50/80

Standard Peneteration Test Ground Water Sample REMARKS Operator : Tarique