UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 1

LABORATORY REPORT 2019/67

On behalf of RAWBANK
GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES FOR AGENCY Lubumbashi
351 Avenue du 30 Juin, Lubumbashi Township, Lubumbashi,
DR CONGO

Version: 00_21-07-2019

Revision Dated comments

01

July 2019
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 2

TABLE OF CONTENT

TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................... .................................................. ................ 2

FIGURES LIST ............................................... .................................................. ..................... 3

INTRODUCTION ................................................. .................................................. ........................ 4

I. SITE LOCATION AND ESTABLISHMENT SURVEY POINTS ................ 5

II. LOCAL LITHOLOGY ................................................ .................................................. ......... 9

III. PENETRATION TEST PENETROMETER DYNAMIC DPL 10 KG ....... 10

III.1. Principle of test ............................................. .................................................. .............. 10

III.2. Equipment used : ............................................... .................................................. ............... 10

III.3. Test procedure ............................................... .................................................. ... 10

III.4. Interpretation of test results ............................................ ..................................... 11

IV. LABORATORY TESTS ............................................... ................................................ 17

IV.1. Determination of the apparent weight .............................................. ....................................... 17

IV.2. Determination of the natural water content ........................................... ......................... 18

IV.3. Particle size analysis by sieving .............................................. ............................. 19

IV.4. Determination of Atterberg limits ............................................ ................................ 20

IV.5. direct shear test .............................................. ................................................ 20

IV.6. Standard Proctor Test ............................................... .................................................. ...... 21

V. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................. . 22

V.1. Type of soil ............................................... .................................................. ..................... 22

V.2. Groundwater level .............................................. .................................................. ............ 22

V.3. bearing capacity - Foundations for buildings .......................................... ........... 22

V.4. bearing capacity of soil - paving, rigid and flexible pavements on natural soil ........... Error! Bookmark not defined.

................................................. NOTES .................................................. .................................. 23

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 3

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Location of the site. .................................................. .................................................. ...... 6

Figure 2: Location of survey .......................................... points ...................................... 7
Figure 3: Results of the survey point PD1 ......................................... ........................................ 12
Figure 4: Results of the survey point PD2 ......................................... ........................................ 13
Figure 5: Results of the survey point PD3 ......................................... ........................................ 14
Figure 6: Results of the survey point PD4 ......................................... ........................................ 15
Figure 7: Results of the survey point PD5 ......................................... ........................................ 16

LIST TABLES

Table 1: apparent specific weight and ........................................... ............................................. 17

Table 2: Content of natural water ........................................... .................................................. ... 18
Table 3: Settings granular soil ........................................... ........................................... 19
Table 4: Atterberg Limits ground ......................................... .................................................. 20
Table 5: soil shear parameters on site. .................................................. .......... 20
Table 6: Standard Proctor Test Results ........................................ ...................................... 21
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 4

INTRODUCTION

The laboratory of Civil Engineering of the Polytechnic Faculty of the University of Kinshasa was asked by RAWBANK
to conduct a geotechnical study of the Lubumbashi site to receive an R + 1 building site on Avenue 30 June, the number 351.

To do this, we realized:

- Five (5) Dynamic penetration test light dynamic penetrometer DPL

- One (1) sample auger

In addition, revised and undisturbed samples were taken from that site to perform tests in the laboratory.

The present report of the test results on the site following the diagram below:

I. Location of the site and location of survey points

II. local lithology
III. penetration test light dynamic penetrometer DPL
IV. Laboratory Tests
V. Analysis of results and recommendations

It should be noted here that made on-site and laboratory tests all conform to BS EN ISO 22476-2: 2005, BS 1377-1: 1990
(General requirements and sample preparation) and BS 1377-2: 1990 (Classification tests ).
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 5

I. SITE LOCATION AND LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS

The surveys were conducted at the site located on Avenue 30 June, at number 351, in Lubumbashi.

Figure 1 shows the location of the site (aerial view). Figure 2 shows the sampling points.
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHA

Figure 1: Location of the site.

6
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHA

Figure 2: Location of sampling points.

7
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 8

Soil surveys consisted in achieving:

- One (1) sample auger down to 5.00 m;

- Five (5) tests the dynamic cone penetrometer;
- Sample collection reworked and undisturbed;

The purpose of the survey auger is to provide information on the stratification of soil in place, the presence of the water table
and the sampling reworked

Core samples were made with a hand auger

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 9

II. LOCAL LITHOLOGY

The survey auger carried on this site helped find lithology below:

survey T1

From 0.00 m to 0.05 m: bank

0.05 m to 0.50 m: yellowish gray clay
0.50 m to 5.00 m: lateritic clay

NB: No groundwater was found to 5.00 m deep (mid-July).

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 10

III. PENETRATION TEST PENETROMETER DYNAMIC DPL 10 KG

III.1. Principle of the test:

The standard penetration test is to be driven into the ground by hammering using a sheep a tube diameter of 20 to 60 mm,
provided with a tip. This tube acts as a micropile and has a device intended to eliminate as much as possible the lateral
friction.

In this case, we measure the number of sheep blows necessary to drive the point of a certain depth.

III.2. Equipment used :

To perform these tests, we used a heavy dynamic penetrometer, having the following characteristics:

• weight of sheep: 10 daN

• weight of a rod: 2.1 daN
• drop height: 50 cm
• length of a rod: 1.00 m
• tip section: 4.8 cm²
• cone angle: 45 °

III.3. Test procedure:

Five (5) to light dynamic penetrometer tests were conducted on the weigh station site. Sinking each survey was conducted by
counting the number of shots to 10 cm recess (N / 10 cm). All survey points have reached a refusal between 8.00 m and 9.60
m deep.
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 11

III.4. Interpretation of test results:

The results were interpreted using the formula of the Dutch. This formula calculates the tip of dynamic resistance q d:

1
q d NM 2 H x1
Ax M m Pz e

with:

N = Number of sheep blow M = weight of sheep in daN H its drop

height in cm D z = weight stems at depth z in daN A = cross-section
of the tip in cm² e = sag cm

m = weight of the anvil and the drill guide in daN q d = dynamic tip resistance in daN / cm² To determine the allowable

resistance (R adm), we generally consider the 1/15 dynamic resistances.

The results obtained with the formula of the Dutch are given in Figures 3 to 7.
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 12

survey PD1
survey PD1
Site RAWBANK - AVENUE DU 30 JUIN 351 LUBUMBASHI-
Date of survey July 10, 2019
Type of survey dynamic penetration
Equipment Dynamic penetrometer 10 kg
Contact information
STRESS ELIGIBLE (daN / cm²)
Level napp P ace phéatique web to 5.00 m depth (July 2019)
Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible 0 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00

[M] (DaN / cm²) [M] (DaN / cm²)

0.2
0.1 5.65 5.1 0.75
0.4
0.2 6.06 5.2 0.51
0.6
0.3 2.83 5.3 0.75
0.8 1
0.4 2.83 5.4 0.51
0.5 2.02 5.5 0.51
1.2
0.6 1.62 5.6 0.75
1.4
0.7 1.21 5.7 0.51
1.6
0.8 2.43 5.8 0.51
1.8 2
0.9 2.83 5.9 0.75
1 1.44 6 0.93
1.1 1.80 6.1 1.63 2.2

1.2 1.08 6.2 1.87 2.4

1.3 1.08 6.3 1.17 2.6

Depth (m)
1.4 1.44 6.4 1.17 2.8 3

1.5 1.44 6.5 1.63

1.6 2.52 6.6 1.63 3.2

1.7 1.44 6.7 1.87 3.4

1.8 1.80 6.8 1.87 3.6

1.9 1.44 6.9 1.40 3.8 4

2 1.63 7 1.53
2.1 1.30 7.1 1.75 4.2

2.2 0.98 7.2 1.96 4.4

2.3 0.98 7.3 1.53 4.6

2.4 1.30 7.4 1.53 4.8 5

2.5 1.30 7.5 1.75

2.6 1.30 7.6 1.75 5.2

2.7 1.30 7.7 1.75 5.4

2.8 1.30 7.8 1.96 5.6

2.9 1.30 7.9 1.96 5.8 6

3 1.48 8 3.27
3.1 1.19 8.1 3.89 6.2

3.2 1.48 8.2 2.66 6.4

3.3 1.19 8.3 3.07 6.6

3.4 1.48 8.4 3.27 6.8 7

3.5 1.48 8.5 3.89

3.6 1.19 8.6 3.68 7.2

3.7 1.48 8.7 3.07 7.4

3.8 2.07 8.8 3.47 7.6
3.9 4.43 8.9 4.09 7.8 8
4 1.36 9 4.04
4.1 1.63 9.1 5.20
8.2
4.2 1.36 9.2 5.77
8.4
4.3 1.09 9.3 6.73
8.6
4.4 1.09 9.4 8.66
8.8 9
4.5 0.82 9.5 9.24
4.6 0.82 9.6 9.62
9.2
4.7 0.82 9.7
9.4
4.8 0.82 9.8
9.6
4.9 0.55 9.9
9.8 10
5 0.75 10

Figure 3: Results of the survey point PD1

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 13

survey PD2 survey PD2

Site RAWBANK - AVENUE DU 30 JUIN 351 LUBUMBASHI-
Date of survey July 10, 2019
Type of survey dynamic penetration
Equipment Dynamic penetrometer 10 kg
Contact information
STRESS ELIGIBLE (daN / cm²)
Level napp P ace phéatique web to 5.00 m depth (July 2019)
Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible 0 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00

[M] (DaN / cm²) [M] (DaN / cm²)

0.2
0.1 7.27 5.1 0.25
0.4
0.2 10.50 5.2 0.25
0.6
0.3 8.08 5.3 0.25
0.8 1
0.4 4.85 5.4 0.25
0.5 4.04 5.5 0.51
1.2
0.6 3.23 5.6 0.51
1.4
0.7 2.83 5.7 1.01
1.6
0.8 2.43 5.8 1.01
1.8 2
0.9 2.02 5.9 1.01
1 0.72 6 0.93
1.1 1.08 6.1 1.40 2.2

1.2 0.72 6.2 1.63 2.4

1.3 0.72 6.3 1.87 2.6

Depth (m)
1.4 0.36 6.4 1.40 2.8 3

1.5 0.72 6.5 1.63

1.6 0.36 6.6 1.40 3.2

1.7 0.36 6.7 1.17 3.4

1.8 0.72 6.8 1.63 3.6

1.9 0.36 6.9 1.40 3.8 4

2 0.65 7 1.31
2.1 0.65 7.1 1.75 4.2

2.2 2.27 7.2 1.75 4.4

2.3 2.27 7.3 1.96 4.6

2.4 2.60 7.4 1.53 4.8 5

2.5 2.27 7.5 2.18

2.6 1.63 7.6 1.96 5.2

2.7 2.60 7.7 2.83 5.4

2.8 2.27 7.8 2.83 5.6

2.9 3.25 7.9 3.05 5.8 6

3 1.48 8 3.68
3.1 2.07 8.1 3.47 6.2

3.2 2.07 8.2 3.47 6.4

3.3 2.66 8.3 3.27 6.6

3.4 1.19 8.4 3.07 6.8 7

3.5 0.59 8.5 4.50

3.6 0.59 8.6 5.11 7.2

3.7 2.07 8.7 6.13 7.4

3.8 0.89 8.8 5.72 7.6
3.9 0.59 8.9 6.13 7.8 8
4 0.55 9 6.73
4.1 0.55 9.1 9.62
8.2
4.2 0.55 9.2
8.4
4.3 0.55 9.3
8.6
4.4 0.55 9.4
8.8 9
4.5 0.55 9.5
4.6 0.55 9.6
9.2
4.7 0.55 9.7
9.4
4.8 0.55 9.8
9.6
4.9 0.55 9.9
9.8 10
5 0.51 10

Figure 4: Results of the survey point PD2

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 14

poll PD3 poll PD3

Site RAWBANK - AVENUE DU 30 JUIN 351 LUBUMBASHI-
Date of survey July 10, 2019
Type of survey dynamic penetration
Equipment Dynamic penetrometer 10 kg
Contact information
STRESS ELIGIBLE (daN / cm²)
Level napp P ace phéatique web to 5.00 m depth (July 2019)
Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible 0 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00

[M] (DaN / cm²) [M] (DaN / cm²)

0.2
0.1 4.45 5.1 0.75
0.4
0.2 3.64 5.2 0.75
0.6
0.3 2.43 5.3 0.51
0.8 1
0.4 2.43 5.4 1.01
0.5 1.62 5.5 1.26
1.2
0.6 3.23 5.6 1.26
1.4
0.7 1.21 5.7 1.76
1.6
0.8 0.81 5.8 1.76
1.8 2
0.9 0.81 5.9 1.76
1 1.08 6 1.40
1.1 0.72 6.1 1.63 2.2

1.2 1.08 6.2 2.33 2.4

1.3 0.72 6.3 2.33 2.6

1.4 0.36 6.4 2.57 2.8 3

1.5 0.72 6.5 2.33

1.6 0.36 6.6 2.10 3.2

1.7 1.44 6.7 3.03 3.4

1.8 1.44 6.8 3.27 3.6

1.9 1.80 6.9 3.03 3.8 4

2 0.98 7 3.05
2.1 0.65 7.1 3.49 4.2

2.2 0.65 7.2 3.92 4.4

Depth (m)
2.3 0.65 7.3 3.49 4.6

2.4 0.98 7.4 4.36 4.8 5

2.5 0.98 7.5 3.92

2.6 0.98 7.6 3.71 5.2

2.7 0.65 7.7 3.49 5.4

2.8 0.98 7.8 4.14 5.6

2.9 0.98 7.9 4.36 5.8 6

3 0.89 8 4.29
3.1 3.25 8.1 5.11 6.2

3.2 3.55 8.2 4.09 6.4

3.3 5.03 8.3 5.72 6.6

3.4 0.89 8.4 6.33 6.8 7

3.5 0.89 8.5 7.15

3.6 1.19 8.6 8.17 7.2

3.7 1.19 8.7 10.21 7.4

3.8 0.89 8.8 7.6
3.9 0.89 8.9 7.8 8
4 1.90 9
4.1 0.82 9.1
8.2
4.2 0.82 9.2
8.4
4.3 0.82 9.3
8.6
4.4 0.82 9.4
8.8 9
4.5 0.82 9.5
4.6 0.82 9.6
9.2
4.7 1.09 9.7
9.4
4.8 0.82 9.8
9.6
4.9 0.82 9.9
9.8 10
5 1.01 10

Figure 5: Survey Results point PD3

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 15

poll PD4 poll PD4

Site RAWBANK - AVENUE DU 30 JUIN 351 LUBUMBASHI-
Date of survey July 10, 2019
Type of survey dynamic penetration
Equipment Dynamic penetrometer 10 kg
Contact information
STRESS ELIGIBLE (daN / cm²)
Level napp P ace phéatique web to 5.00 m depth (July 2019)
Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible 0 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00

[M] (DaN / cm²) [M] (DaN / cm²)

0.2
0.1 12.52 5.1 1.76
0.4
0.2 11.31 5.2 1.51
0.6
0.3 8.89 5.3 1.51
0.8 1
0.4 6.46 5.4 1.76
0.5 7.27 5.5 1.51
1.2
0.6 4.45 5.6 2.01
1.4
0.7 4.45 5.7 1.51
1.6
0.8 4.04 5.8 1.51
1.8 2
0.9 2.83 5.9 1.26
1 1.44 6 1.63
1.1 1.08 6.1 1.40 2.2

1.2 0.72 6.2 1.87 2.4

1.3 0.36 6.3 1.63 2.6

1.4 1.08 6.4 1.40 2.8 3

1.5 1.08 6.5 2.10

1.6 1.44 6.6 2.80 3.2

1.7 0.72 6.7 2.33 3.4

1.8 1.80 6.8 3.03 3.6

1.9 1.80 6.9 2.80 3.8 4

2 0.65 7 2.61
2.1 1.30 7.1 2.83 4.2

2.2 0.98 7.2 3.27 4.4

Depth (m)
2.3 0.98 7.3 3.05 4.6

2.4 0.65 7.4 2.83 4.8 5

2.5 0.65 7.5 3.71

2.6 0.65 7.6 3.49 5.2

2.7 0.98 7.7 4.14 5.4

2.8 0.65 7.8 4.36 5.6

2.9 0.65 7.9 4.57 5.8 6

3 0.89 8 4.70
3.1 1.19 8.1 5.52 6.2

3.2 0.89 8.2 5.72 6.4

3.3 1.19 8.3 6.33 6.6

3.4 0.89 8.4 9.19 6.8 7

3.5 0.89 8.5 10.21

3.6 1.19 8.6 7.2

3.7 1.19 8.7 7.4

3.8 0.89 8.8 7.6
3.9 0.89 8.9 7.8 8
4 1.09 9
4.1 0.82 9.1
8.2
4.2 0.82 9.2
8.4
4.3 1.09 9.3
8.6
4.4 1.09 9.4
8.8 9
4.5 0.82 9.5
4.6 1.09 9.6
9.2
4.7 1.36 9.7
9.4
4.8 1.36 9.8
9.6
4.9 1.63 9.9
9.8 10
5 1.01 10

Figure 6: Survey Results developed PD4

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 16

poll PD5 poll PD5

Site RAWBANK - AVENUE DU 30 JUIN 351 LUBUMBASHI-
Date of survey July 10, 2019
Type of survey dynamic penetration
Equipment Dynamic penetrometer 10 kg
Contact information
STRESS ELIGIBLE (daN / cm²)
Level napp P ace phéatique web to 5.00 m depth (July 2019)
Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible Depth Constraint dyn. Eligible 0 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00

[M] (DaN / cm²) [M] (DaN / cm²)

0.2
0.1 6.87 5.1 0.51
0.4
0.2 6.06 5.2 0.75
0.6
0.3 4.85 5.3 1.01
0.8 1
0.4 3.64 5.4 1.01
0.5 2.02 5.5 0.75
1.2
0.6 2.02 5.6 1.26
1.4
0.7 1.62 5.7 1.26
1.6
0.8 2.83 5.8 1.51
1.8 2
0.9 2.43 5.9 1.51
1 1.44 6 1.40
1.1 1.08 6.1 1.40 2.2

1.2 1.08 6.2 1.63 2.4

1.3 0.72 6.3 1.87 2.6

1.4 0.72 6.4 2.33 2.8 3

1.5 0.72 6.5 2.57

1.6 1.08 6.6 3.03 3.2

1.7 0.36 6.7 2.57 3.4

1.8 0.72 6.8 2.80 3.6

1.9 0.72 6.9 3.50 3.8 4

2 0.33 7 3.49
2.1 0.65 7.1 3.05 4.2

2.2 0.65 7.2 3.27 4.4

Depth (m)
2.3 0.65 7.3 3.71 4.6

2.4 0.98 7.4 4.36 4.8 5

2.5 0.65 7.5 4.79

2.6 0.98 7.6 5.45 5.2

2.7 0.98 7.7 6.53 5.4

2.8 0.98 7.8 6.10 5.6

2.9 0.65 7.9 7.62 5.8 6

3 1.19 8 8.17
3.1 1.19 8.1 10.21 6.2

3.2 0.89 8.2 6.4

3.3 0.89 8.3 6.6

3.4 1.19 8.4 6.8 7

3.5 0.89 8.5

3.6 2.66 8.6 7.2

3.7 2.07 8.7 7.4

3.8 1.19 8.8 7.6
3.9 0.89 8.9 7.8 8
4 0.82 9
4.1 1.09 9.1
8.2
4.2 0.82 9.2
8.4
4.3 1.36 9.3
8.6
4.4 1.63 9.4
8.8 9
4.5 0.82 9.5
4.6 0.82 9.6
9.2
4.7 1.09 9.7
9.4
4.8 0.82 9.8
9.6
4.9 0.82 9.9
9.8 10
5 0.51 10

Figure 7: Results of the survey point PD5

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 17

IV. LABORATORY TESTS

Various laboratory tests were carried out by the Civil Engineering Laboratory to complete investigations on site. These are
the following tests:

- Determination of bulk density

- Determination of the natural water content
- Particle size analysis by sieving
- Determination of Atterberg limits
- Shear Test
- Standard Proctor

IV.1. Determination of bulk density

The apparent weight is determined by weighing and measuring the apparent volume. The results of testing of three (2)

samples are presented in Table 1 below:

Table 1: apparent specific weight and

Survey TARIERE
Depth (m) 1.00 3.00
apparent weight (T / m 3) 19.1 19.4
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 18

IV.2. Determination of the natural water content

The water content was determined by passage in an oven at 105 ° C. The results are presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Content of natural water

Survey TARIERE
Depth (m) 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Natural water content (%) 14.3 16.7 17.8 17.5 16.7

comments :

water contents on this site vary between 14 and 18%.

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 19

IV.3. Particle size analysis by sieving

The particle size analysis by sieving was performed on 5 soil samples at different depths. Table 3 shows the main results
obtained: Maximum diameter, mean diameter, and percentage of fines (passing through the sieve of 0.080 mm). Details of the
results and the grading curves are presented in Appendix 1.

Table 3: Settings granular soil

Survey TARIERE
Depth (m) 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Maximum diameter D 90 ( mm) 0.16 0.16 0.08 0.2 0.16
Average diameters D 50 ( mm) <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080
Percentage of fines (%) 84.7 87.7 95.0 86.3 86.8

comments :

The results of such size analysis by sieving shows that the maximum grain diameter ranges from 0.08 mm to 0.2 mm. The
average diameter is less than 0.080
mm. The percentage of fines varies is greater than 80%.
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 20

IV.4. Determination of Atterberg limits

Determining the Atterberg limits (Liquidity limits, plasticity limits and plasticity index) was carried out on 5 samples of soil taken
from the site investigated at different depths. Table 4 presents the main results. Details of the actions performed in the
laboratory and the determination curves of liquidity indices are presented in Appendix 2.

Table 4: Atterberg Limits ground

Survey TARIERE
Depth (m) 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
liquid limit (%) 42.66 41.90 41.75 42.49 43.49
plastic limit (%) 23.85 21.90 21.87 23.94 24.60
Plasticity index 18.81 20.00 19.88 18.55 18.89

comments :

We note that the plastic limits are all above 15%. It is therefore a plastic floor.

IV.5. direct shear test

The direct shear test is designed to determine shear parameters that are drained soil cohesion and angle of internal friction.

Laboratory Engineering has made shear tests on two (2) undisturbed soil samples taken from the site at 1.00 m and 3.00 m

deep. Table 5 presents the main results of this test.

Table 5: soil shear parameters on site.

Survey ITA-TAR-1
Depth (m) 2.00 3.00
Specimen Type Clay Clay
Cohesion (kPa) 11.9 14.2
Internal friction angle (degree) 28.8 29.8
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 21

IV.6. Standard Proctor Test

The normal Proctor test is intended to determine, for a given intensity of compaction, the water content at which a soil to be
compacted to obtain maximum dry density.

The moist sample was placed in a mold in three layers, each compacted using 25 blows lady.

Repeating this operation until a dry density decrease can trace the Proctor curve, the maximum point corresponds to the
maximum dry density and optimum water content of the soil.

The test was carried out on a soil sample collected at 1.00 m deep.

Table 6: Results of Standard Proctor

standard Proctor
sample type Clay
Maximum dry density (T / m 3) 1.77
Content optimum water (%) 16
 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 22

V. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

We present in this section our analysis of the results and some recommendations.

V.1. Type of soil

The soil in place on the project site consists essentially of clay mixed with the laterite from 0.50 m deep. This lateritic clay is
red.

V.2. Level of the web

No groundwater was found to 5.00 m deep (in July 2019) on the project site.

V.3. bearing capacity - Foundations for buildings

The determination of the bearing capacity of the soil in place on the project site is based DPL dynamic penetration tests.

Examination of the curves test penetrometer DPL shows a medium bearing ground layer is present between 1.20 m and 1.70
m in depth in the region of the PD2 point and between 1.40 m and 2.20 m in the stitch area PD3. For building R + 1 to build
the foundations will be built:

- 1.50 m depth, considering an allowable stress of 100 kPa;

- 2.00 m depth, considering an allowable stress of 110 kPa

The case base should be compacted to 95% of the normal Proctor Optimum to obtain a minimum maximum dry density of
1.68 T / m 3.

V.4. Reusing the ground up for backfilling

The ground-up has a good ability to be reused as backfill. This reuse must be made in maximum layer thickness of 20 cm, with
an optimum water content of around 16% for maximum dry density of 1.77 T / m 3.

Done at Kinshasa, 21 July 2019 The Head of Civil

Engineering Department

Teacher. Dr. Ir. R. Tozin

 UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA - CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 23

NOTES

ANNEX 1: ANALYSIS particle size 1-1 page

SCHEDULE 2: LIMITS ATTERBERG 2-1 page
SCHEDULE 3: TEST NORMAL PROCTOR 3-1 page
 Limon end

Limon Average

0.01

Limon magnified

fine sands GRAIN

0.1

medium sands

SIZE

wholesale sands

DIMENSIONS OF SCREENS IN mm SCALE IN LOGARITHMIC

ANALYSIS Provenance: 3

chippings

granulate

10

pebbles
Designation: Sample No. 1

100

ANN

1.1
 Limon end

Limon Average

0.01

coarse silt

fine sands
0.1
GRAIN

medium sands

SIZE

wholesale sands

DIMENSIONS OF SCREENS IN mm SCALE IN LOGARITHMIC

ANALYSIS Provenance: 3

chippings

granulate

10

pebbles
Designation: Sample No. 2

100

ANN

1.2
 Limon end

Limon Average

0.01

coarse silt

fine sands
0.1

PARTICLE
medium sands

SIZE
wholesale sands

DIMENSIONS OF SCREENS IN mm SCALE IN LOGARITHMIC

ANALYSIS From: 351, Jun

chippings

granulate

10

pebbles
Designation: Sample No. 3

100

ANN

1.3
 Limon end

Limon Average

0.01

coarse silt

fine sands
0.1

GRAIN
medium sands

SIZE
wholesale sands

DIMENSIONS OF SCREENS IN mm SCALE IN LOGARITHMIC

ANALYSIS Provenance: 3
chippings

granulate

10

pebbles
Designation: Sample No. 1

100

ANN

1.4
 Limon end

Limon Average

0.01

coarse silt

fine sands
0.1

PARTICLE
medium sands

SIZE
wholesale sands

DIMENSIONS OF SCREENS IN mm SCALE IN LOGARITHMIC

ANALYSIS From: 351, June

chippings

granulate

10

pebbles
Designation: Sample No. 5

100

ANN

1.5
 APPENDIX 2
2.1

LIMITS ATTERBERG
LIQUIDITY-PLASTICITY
Provenance: 351 from 30 June to Lubumbashi / Lubumbashi
T1, depth: 1.00m

LIM ITE LI QUIDITE LIMIT P LASTICITE

AB AO X Y Z M NOT

Number of strokes 34 30 24 19 15

total wet weight in grams 27.54 24.13 23.96 26.15 26.20 17.07 14.40

total dry weight in grams 24.29 21.08 20.90 23.00 23.05 16.92 14.24

Tare weight in gr 16.39 13.78 13.72 15.74 15.95 16.29 13.57

Water Weight gr 3.25 3.05 3.06 3.15 3.15 0.15 0.16

net dry weight in grams 7.9 7.3 7.18 7.26 7.1 0.63 0.67
Water content in% 41.1 41.8 42.6 43.4 44.4 23.8 23.9

45.0

44.5

44.0

43.5

43.0
Water content in%

42.5

42.0

41.5

41.0

40.5 10
100
Number of strokes
logarithmic scale

LIMITED LIQUIDITY: LIMIT 42.66%

Plasticity: Plasticity INDEX: 23.85%

18.81
 APPENDIX 2
2.2

LIMITS ATTERBERG
LIQUIDITY-PLASTICITY
Provenance: 351 from 30 June to Lubumbashi / Lubumbashi
T1, depth: 2.00m

LIM ITE LI QUIDITE LIMIT P LASTICITE

B C O P Q R S

Number of strokes 34 30 25 20 15

total wet weight in grams 27.10 24.68 25.46 24.44 24.47 14.42 14.51

total dry weight in grams 23.93 21.47 22.29 21.22 21.18 14.28 14.35

Tare weight in gr 16.09 13.64 14.69 13.66 13.66 13.64 13.62

Water Weight gr 3.17 3.21 3.17 3.22 3.29 0.14 0.16

net dry weight in grams 7.84 7.83 7.6 7.56 7.52 0.64 0.73
Water content in% 40.4 41.0 41.7 42.6 43.8 21.9 21.9

44.5

44.0

43.5

43.0

42.5
Water content in%

42.0

41.5

41.0

40.5

40.0 10
100
Number of strokes
logarithmic scale

LIMITED LIQUIDITY: LIMIT 41.90%

Plasticity: Plasticity INDEX: 21.90%

20.00
 APPENDIX 2
2.3

LIMITS ATTERBERG
LIQUIDITY-PLASTICITY
Provenance: 351 from 30 June to Lubumbashi / Lubumbashi

T1, depth: 3,00m

LIM ITE LI QUIDITE LIMIT P LASTICITE

V P U D AL AT BH

Number of strokes 34 29 24 19 15

total wet weight in grams 24.11 27.00 24.71 27.93 26.18 13.5 14.73

total dry weight in grams 20.92 23.80 21.49 24.69 22.89 13.38 14.57

Tare weight in gr 12.95 15.96 13.77 17.08 15.35 12.83 13.84

Water Weight gr 3.19 3.20 3.22 3.24 3.29 0.12 0.16

net dry weight in grams 7.97 7.84 7.72 7.61 7.54 0.55 0.73

Water content in% 40.0 40.8 41.7 42.6 43.6 21.8 21.9

44.5
44.0
43.5
43.0
42.5
Water content in%

42.0
41.5
41.0
40.5
40.0
39.5 10
100
Number of strokes
logarithmic scale

LIMITED LIQUIDITY: LIMIT Plasticity: 41.75%

Plasticity INDEX: 21.87%

19.88
 APPENDIX 2.
2.4

LIMITS ATTERBERG
LIQUIDITY-PLASTICITY
Provenance: SOCIR / Crossover Tombalbay and Kasai / Gombe
T1, depth: 4,00m

LIMIT LIQUIDITY PLASTICITY LIMIT

Number of tare M E DRANK AQ BV X J

Number of strokes 35 30 25 20 15
total wet weight in grams 23.68 27.32 24.47 24.96 23.51 13.78 14.70
total dry weight in grams 20.52 24.09 21.33 21.84 20.24 13.62 14.52
Tare weight in gr 12.79 16.34 13.94 14.63 12.83 12.95 13.77
Water Weight gr 3.16 3.23 3.14 3.12 3.27 0.16 0.18
net dry weight in grams 7.73 7.75 7.39 7.21 7.41 0.67 0.75
Water content in% 40.9 41.7 42.5 43.3 44.1 23.9 24.0

45.0

44.5

44.0

43.5
Water content in%

43.0

42.5

42.0

41.5

41.0

40.5 10
100

Number of strokes
logarithmic scale

LIMITED LIQUIDITY: LIMIT 42.49%

Plasticity: Plasticity INDEX: 23.94%
18.55
 APPENDIX 2.
2.5

LIMITS ATTERBERG
LIQUIDITY-PLASTICITY
Provenance: SOCIR / Crossover Tombalbay and Kasai / Gombe
T1, depth: 5,00m

LIMIT OF LIQUIDITYANDCAPITALRE E PLASTICITY LIMIT

Number of tare M E DRANK AQ BV X J
Number of strokes 35 30 25 20 15
total wet weight in grams 26.86 25.82 24.30 26.04 27.61 17.23 17.6
total dry weight in grams 23.68 22.34 20.86 22.24 23.80 16.99 17.38
Tare weight in gr 16.09 14.19 12.95 13.66 15.35 16.01 16.49
Water Weight gr 3.18 3.48 3.44 3.80 3.81 0.24 0.22
net dry weight in grams 7.59 8.15 7.91 8.58 8.45 0.98 0.89
Water content in% 41.9 42.7 43.5 44.3 45.1 24.5 24.7

46.0

45.5

45.0

44.5

44.0
Water content in%

43.5

43.0

42.5

42.0

41.5 10
100

Number of strokes
logarithmic scale

LIMITED LIQUIDITY: 43.49%

PLASTICITY LIMIT: 24.60%
PLASTICITY INDEX: 18.89
 11.43
35 12 47 51 AB
4

1.66 1.85 12.0 793 14702334380412%

12.50
40 12 52 57 CK
5
PROCTOR
Well 1 to 1.00 m: Laterite

COMPACTION
14.3 5.00
35 13 48 53 AZ

1.72 1.96 13.6 15512334388514%

793

13 39 18 57 62 CT
5

11.76 13.00
34 47 51 BL Test sample: Dry Weight 3000gr
4

Initial water content:

1.77 2.06 15.9 16312334396516%
793 TEST NORMAL site: Avenue June 30 / Lubumbashi

20.0030.00 14.00
44 50 BC
6

15.15
33 16 49 54 YZ
5

1.74 2.05 17.8 16242334395818%

793

20.5139.00
14 53 61 AC
8

22.86 50.00
35 15 58 DI
8

1.69 2.03 20.0 16112334394520%

793
APPENDIX 3

17.14
35 16 51 57 DD
6
3.1
 12.00

13.00

14.00
PROCTOR

water content (W)%

CURVE
15.00

NORMAL

16.00

WEBSITE:

17.00 Avenue June 30 in Lubumbashi Laterite dry de

18.00

19.00

20.00

Series1 APPENDIX 3
21.00

3.2