GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT for the Proposed Warehouse at Village Khalikpur, Tehsil Badli, District Jhajjar, Haryana

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ANA Real Logistics LLP, Gurugram are in the process of constructing a Warehouse at near village Khalipur, Tehsil Badli, District Jhajjar, Haryana. The Designer's Consortium are the Structural Designer for the proposed project.

The proposed structure is a Warehouse Building.

The Geotechnical investigation programme has been undertaken at the site, as per the scope of investigation, stipulated by the client. The scope of work consisted of conducting boreholes in soil strata down to 10m depth at three locations and down to 20m depth at two locations.

The results of the field investigations indicate that the subsoil strata generally consists of clayey sandy silt down to the maximum depth investigated except down to 6.7m depth and also beyond 10.5m depth down to the maximum depth investigated wherein occasional thin layers of silty sand / sandy soils have also been encountered inbetween.

The N-values (N-values 4 - 22) indicate that the subsoil is loose to medium dense down to about 6m depth below which the subsoil is medium dense (N-values 8 - 81) down to the maximum depth investigated.

Ground water table had been encountered at a depth of about 3m below the existing ground level, during the period of field investigations, i.e January - February 2023.

The assessment of the susceptibility to liquefaction of the subsoil at site indicate that the subsoil down to about 6m depth is susceptible to liquefaction.

Considering the type of structures involved and the subsoil characteristics as determined from the geotechnical investigations, Straight Bored Pile foundations have been recommended.

The following safe pile capacities have been recommended for various diameters for 10m and 15m effective lengths of piles.

Pile Dia (mm)	Pile Effective Length (m)	Pile Vertical Load Capacity

(tons)	Uplift Capacity of pile (tons)	Safe Lateral Capacity (tons)
Free Head	Fixed Head
450	10	20	8	0.2	0.6
15	35	20
600	10	30	11	0.4	1.4
15	60	30
Precautions :

For Straight Bored Piles, after reaching the required depth in the pile bores, 15cm thick layer of gravel should be placed and compacted at the bottom so that the slush formed at the bottom is diminished.

1.0	INTRODUCTION

1.1	ANA Real Logistics LLP, 4/212 Shivaji Nagar, Hanuman Mandir, Gurugram, Haryana - 122001 are in the process of constructing a Warehouse building nearVillage Khalipur, Tehsil Badli, District Jhajjar, Haryana. The Designer's Consortium are the Structural Designer for the proposed project.

1.2	To design the substructures for the proposed structure, adequate information regarding the subsoil conditions is required. For this purpose, detailed geotechnical investigations have been undertaken at the site of the proposed structure.

1.3	This report contains the details of the geotechnical investigations conducted along with the results and analysis of the investigations and the recommendations thereof.

1.4	The geotechnical investigation has been carried out as per the authorization of the authorised signatory of ANA Read Logistics LLP vide their work order reference no. WH/NGC/R-01/22-23 dated 11th January 2023. This authorization has been given in response to our offer no. NCD/Q/TDC/173/2022 dated 10th February 2023.

2.0	PROJECT DETAILS

2.1	Site Location

2.1.1	The site for the proposed project is located at Village Khalipur, Tehsil Badli, District Jhajjar, Haryana and situated at a distance of about 5 km from Farukhnagar bus stand towards Village Fatehpur, Farukhnagar, Haryana.

2.2	Site Layout and Topography

2.2.1	A schematic site plan showing the dimensions and other details of the site is enclosed in this report (fig. 1a).

2.2.2	Maximum level differences of about 2m had been observed at the site, during the period of field investigations. However, the general level of the site had been observed to be about 1.5m below the adjacent village road level.

2.2.3	Site had been observed to be gently sloping in North - South direction, during the period of field investigations.

2.2.4	The boundaries of the site had been observed to be demarcated with barbed wire fencing along its periphery.

2.2.5	Vegetation in the form of grass, bushes and occasional tree had been observed at the site, during the period of field investigations.

2.2.6	The colour of the surface earth had been observed to be Yellowish brown.

2.3	Seismic Zone

2.3.1	The present site is located in the Seismic Zone - IV which is an area of high seismic activity and earthquake intensity, as per the seismic zoning map of India given in BIS code IS:1893 (Part1) - 2016.

2.4	The Structure

2.4.1	The proposed structure is a Warehouse Building.

2.4.2	The structure is understood to be a framed one and the construction is proposed to be of Reinforced Cement Concrete.

3.0	OBJECT OF INVESTIGATIONS

3.1	For designing the foundation system of the proposed structures, the following data are required :

a)	Type of foundation

b)	Depth below the ground level at which the foundation system is to be laid

c)	Allowable bearing pressure at the foundation level

3.2	To determine the above factors, the following information would be required:

a)	The subsoil profile indicating thickness of the various soil strata, to a depth within the influence zone below the foundations

b)	Engineering properties of the soil strata at various levels

c)	Physical characteristics of the soil strata

d)	Variation of strength of soil strata with depth

3.3	For evaluating the above parameters, field investigations and laboratory investigations on the soil samples collected during the field investigations, have been carried out.

3.4	The results from these investigations have been analysed to provide the recommendations for the design of foundations.

4.0	SCOPE OF INVESTIGATIONS

4.1	The scope of investigations as stipulated by the client consists of :

a)	Conducting boreholes in soil strata down to 10m depth at three locations and down 20m depth at two locations.

b)	Conducting relevant laboratory tests on soil samples recovered.

c)	Preparation and submission of a technical report in three copies containing the details of the tests carried out, their analysis and recommendations regarding the foundation system to be adopted.

4.2	The following operations were to be undertaken while progressing the boreholes:

a)	Conducting standard penetration tests at 1.5/3m intervals.

b)	Recovering undisturbed soil samples from various levels of the subsoil strata.

c)	Recording ground water table levels, if met with.

5.0	FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

5.1	Preliminary Details

5.1.1	Field investigations had been carried out between 15th January 2023 and 18th January 2023 and also between 11th February 2023 and 17th February 2023.

5.1.2	A schematic site plan showing the test locations are given in fig. 1a of the report.

5.1.3	A photograph showing view of the site and work under progress are given in fig. 1b of this report.

5.2	Boreholes

5.2.1	All the boreholes were progressed by shell and auger method. Casing pipe were used to stabilize the sides of the boreholes below water table level.

5.2.2	Boreholes, BH1 to BH3 had been progressed down to 10m depth below the existing ground level whereas boreholes BH4 and BH5 had been conducted down to the stipulated depth of 20m below the existing ground level.

5.2.3	The diameter of the boreholes was 150/100mm.

5.2.4	Standard penetration tests were conducted at 1.5/3m intervals. Disturbed soil samples recovered from split spoon samplers were retained for identification purposes.

5.2.5	Undisturbed soil samples were recovered by thin walled tubes conforming to IS : 2132. These tubes had an area ratio of less then 10%.

5.2.6	The ends of sample tubes were sealed by wax to prevent loss/ ingress of moisture. Disturbed soil samples were enclosed in polythene bags.

5.2.7	The samples thus recovered were transported to the laboratory for testing purposes.

5.2.8	Ground water table had been encountered in all the boreholes at a depth varying between 2.5m and 4.5m below the existing ground level, during the period of field investigations February 2023.

6.0	LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS

6.1	The soil samples brought to the laboratory were subjected to various tests to determine the following properties :

a)	Type of soil and its gradation

b)	Consistency limits

c)	Natural Bulk Density & Water Content

d)	Strength parameters like cohesion, angle of shearing resistance

6.2	In order to determine the above properties, the following tests have been conducted :

a)	Sieve analysis on coarse grained soil fraction

b)	Hydrometer analysis on fine grained soil fraction

c)	Atterberg Limits namely Liquid and Plastic Limits

d)	Natural Density and Water Content

e)	Triaxial compression tests

7.0	RESULTS & ANALYSIS

7.1	Presentation of Results

7.1.1	The results of the boreholes investigations have been presented in the form of soil profile tables.

7.1.2	The soil profile tables indicate the following:

a)	Standard penetration test values at various depths

b)	Soil description identifying the type of soil

c)	Grain size analysis indicating composition of subsoil

d)	Atterberg limits

e)	Natural density and water content

f)	Triaxial test results

7.2	Soil Profile

7.2.1	A perusal of the data presented in the soil profile tables indicates that the subsoil mainly consists of the following three strata in the five boreholes:

a)	Stratum - I	: Clayey sandy silt with occasional gravel / sandy clayey silt

b)	Stratum - II	: Silty sand with occasional clay and gravel

c)	Stratum - III	: Sand with traces of silt and occasional gravel/ sand with silt

7.2.2	The thickness of the three strata in the five boreholes are as follows :

BH. No.	Strata (depth in m : from : to)
Stratum - I	Stratum - II	Stratum - III
1	6.7 - 9.8	4.5 - 6.7

9.8 - 10	0 - 4.5
2	6.5 - 10	0 - 6.5	N.E.
3	4.5 - 10	0 - 3	3 - 4.5
4	0 - 3.9

5.4 - 13.3

14.4 - 17.8	13.3 - 14.4

17.8 - 20	3.9 - 5.4
5	3.6 - 4.5

6 - 10.5

18 - 20	4.5 - 6

2.2 - 3.6	0 - 2.2

10.5 - 18
N.E. : not encountered

7.2.3	The above results show that :

a)	Stratum - I consisting of predominantly of silty soils with varying percentages of clay and sand, has been encountered down to the depths investigated except down to 6.7m depth and also beyond 10.5m depth down to the maximum depth investigated wherein random layers of stratum-II and stratum-III have also been encountered inbetween.

b)	Stratum - II consisting predominantly of sandy soils with significant percentages of silt, has been encountered in occasional thin layers down to about 6.7m depth below the existing ground level, between 13.3m and 14.5m depths and also beyond a depth of 17.8m down to the maximum depth investigated only in borehole BH4.

c)	Stratum - III consisting predominantly of sandy soils, has been encountered in occasional thin layers down to about 5.4m depths and also between 10.5m and 18m depths only in borehole BH5.

7.3	Soil Composition

7.3.1	The grain size distributions of the soil samples in the five boreholes have been presented in the form of grain size analysis curves in figs. 5a to 5h.

7.3.2	The variations in the grain size distributions in each of the three strata in the five boreholes are as follows:

a)	Stratum - I	: Clayey sandy silt with occasional gravel / sandy clayey silt

BH. No.	Gravel (%)	Sand (%)	Silt (%)	Clay (%)
1	2 - 14	21 - 33	57 - 59	6 - 8
2	2 - 4	21 - 29	59 - 62	7 - 16
3	2 - 17	22 - 26	54 - 68	5 - 14
4	0 - 7	18 - 43	43 - 60	7 - 21
5	0 - 15	21 - 44	45 - 64	9 - 15
b)	Stratum - II	: Silty sand with occasional clay and gravel

BH. No.	Gravel (%)	Sand (%)	Silt (%)	Clay (%)
1	0 - 2	56 - 76	22 - 41	0 - 3
2	0 - 17	60 - 78	22 - 37	0
3	0 - 2	44 - 63	37 - 42	0 - 12
4	0 - 3	54 - 77	23 - 39	0 - 4
5	2	71	27	0

c)	Stratum - III	: Sand with traces of silt and occasional gravel/ sand with silt

BH. No.	Gravel (%)	Sand (%)	Silt (%)	Clay (%)
1	0 - 2	89 - 95	5 - 11	0
2	N.E.
3	0	83	17	0
4	2	78	20	0
5	0	83 - 93	7 - 17	0
N.E. : not encountered

7.3.3	The above results indicate that :

a)	Stratum - I consists of about 43% to 68% of silt, 18% to 44% of sand with rest of the matrix consisting of clay and gravel.

b)	Stratum - II consists of about 54% to 78% of sand and 22% to 42% of silt with occasional clay and gravel.

c)	Stratum - III consists of an average of about 90% of sand and 10% of silt with occasional gravel.

7.4	Natural Density and Water Content

7.4.1	The natural bulk densities, water contents and dry densities of soil samples collected at various depths in five boreholes vary as follows :

BH. No.	Bulk Density

(g/cm3)	Water Content

(%)	Dry Density

(g/cm3)
1	1.64 - 2.03	3.1 - 20.9	1.58 - 1.73
2	1.74 - 2.06	8.6 - 21.5	1.60 - 1.75
3	1.86 - 2.07	13.4 - 26.0	1.60 - 1.72
4	1.80 - 2.19	11.7 - 24.6	1.53 - 1.78
5	1.78 - 2.06	9.6 - 21.5	1.59 - 1.75
7.4.2	The dry densities of the soil have also been presented in the form of plots of dry density vs depth for the five boreholes conducted, in fig. 3.

7.4.3	The above results indicate that the subsoil is in a loose to medium dense state down to about 6m depth below which the subsoil is in a medium dense state down to the maximum depth investigated i.e 20m below the existing ground level.

7.5	Atterberg Limits

7.5.1	The Atterberg limits indicate that the subsoil is generally low-plastic down to the maximum depth investigated except down to about 6.5m depth and also beyond 10.5m depth down to the maximum depth investigated wherein random layers of non plastic soils have also been encountered. The variation in the Atterberg limits in the Stratum - I are as follows:

a)	Liquid limit (LL) %	:	25 - 41

b)	Plastic limit (PL) %	:	17 - 25

7.6	Standard Penetration Test Values (N-values)

7.6.1	The observed Standard Penetration Test values (N-values) vary between 4 and 81 as indicated in the soil profile tables and as also shown in the fig. 4 wherein the observed N-
values have been plotted with respect to depths.

7.6.2	The above results indicate that the subsoil is in a loose to medium dense state down to about 6m depth below which the subsoils is in a medium dense state down to the depth investigated i.e 20m below the existing ground level. However, relatively higher N-values and also N-values in excess of 100 have also been observed occasionally at deeper depths.

7.7	Triaxial Test Results

7.7.1	The results of triaxial tests are indicated in the respective soil profile tables. These results have been considered in providing the recommendations. The results of the triaxial tests in the form of shear strength parameters i.e. angle of internal resistance ( ) and cohesion (c) varies as follows :

a)	Angle of internal resistance	:	23° - 32°

b)	Cohesion (kg/cm2)	:	0.03 - 0.12

7.8	Compiled Soil Profile

7.8.1	An overview of the results and their analysis has been presented in the form of a compiled soil profile (fig. 2).

7.8.2	The above figure shows the various strata encountered and their thicknesses in each of the boreholes and also gives the soil composition and the observed N - values at various depths.

7.9	Chemical Analysis

7.9.1	The results of the chemical analysis conducted on water samples collected from the boreholes, for determining the presence of any harmful salts which can have adverse effects on concrete construction works, are as follows :

Borehole (BH)/ Depth (m)	pH value	Chloride Content (ppm)	Sulphate Content (ppm)
BH1	6.5	748	330
BH2	6.5	566	247

IS LIMITS
pH value	Not less than 6
Chloride content (ppm)	Maximum 500 ppm
Sulphate content (ppm)	Maximum 400 ppm
7.9.2	The above results indicate that the water encountered in the boreholes at the site exceeds the IS limits. Hence the same should not be used for construction work.

8.0	ANALYSIS OF LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY

8.1.1	Analysis of the susceptibility to liquefaction of the subsoil at the site has been carried out in the form of a comparison of the shear stress induced/developed in event of an earthquake with the in-situ shear resistance of the subsoil at various depths in the different boreholes.

8.1.2	This method has been found to be very reliable and is used as one of the main criteria in almost all countries. The shear stress induced/developed at different depths during an earthquake depends upon the overburden pressure and the soil characteristics while the shear resistance is calculated based on the N-values and other soil properties for a maximum repeated strain of 2%.

8.1.3	The shear stress induced/developed and the shear resistance offered by the soil are evaluated in terms of the Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR) and the Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) respectively. The CSR is the ratio of the shear stress developed to the effective overburden pressure at various depths while the CRR is the ratio of the shear resistance of the soil to the effective overburden pressure at various depths. The analysis of variation of the CSR and the CRR with depth based on the results of each of the boreholes conducted, have been given in figs. C1 to C5 of this report.

8.1.4	The soil will liquefy in the depth zones where the CSR exceeds the CRR i.e. where the shear stress developed exceeds the shear resistance or in other words, where the factor of safety defined as the ratio of the CRR to CSR, is less than 1.

8.1.5	From the above analysis, it can be observed that subsoil down to about 6m depth is susceptible to liquefaction.

8.1.6	Considering the above and also that the site is located in Seismic Zone - IV of seismic zoning map of India, the subsoil down to 6m depth can be considered to be susceptible to liquefaction. Hence shallow foundations are not feasible, the proposed structures shall have to be supported over Straight Bored Pile foundations.

9.0	DESIGN CRITERIA

9.1	Design Parameters

9.1.1	The parameters required for the design of the foundation system for the proposed structures are:

a)	Type of foundation to be adopted

b)	Depth at which the foundations have to be laid

c)	Allowable bearing pressure on the soil/rock at the foundation level

9.1.2	On the basis of the analysis of the results of the investigations, the required design parameters have been arrived at as given in the following sections.

9.2	Type of Foundation

9.2.1	The type of foundation depends upon the following :

a)	Subsoil/rock conditions

b)	Type of structure

c)	Configuration of loading points

d)	Loading intensity on each column at the foundation level

9.2.2	The proposed structures are Warehouse Buildings.

9.2.3	Considering the above, medium heavy loads can be anticipated on the foundations.

9.2.4	The results of the investigations have shown that the subsoil below the likely founding is in a loose to medium dense state down to about 6m depth below which the subsoil is medium dense state down to the depth investigated.

9.2.5	As mentioned in the earlier sections, the subsoil strata down to about 6m depth has been considered to be susceptible to liquefaction.

9.2.6	In view of the above, the proposed structures can be supported over Straight Bored Pile Foundations.

9.3	Depth of Pile Foundation

9.3.1	The minimum depth of pile foundations depends upon the following factors :

a)	Top filled-up strata / loose soil, if any

b)	Adequate depth of soil strata below the founding level of the pile foundations of requisite strength to mobilize the safe end bearing capacity

c)	Adequate depth of soil strata above the founding level of the pile foundations of requisite strength to mobilize the safe friction capacity.

9.3.2	Taking the above into consideration, the pile foundations for the proposed structures shall be made to rest at a depth greater than 12m below the existing ground level. Accordingly, considering the cut-off level of the piles as 2m below the existing ground level and effective length of piles of 10m and 15m, the founding levels of the piles will be about 12m and 17m respectively, below the existing ground level.

9.3.3	The soil encountered at the founding levels of the pile foundations will be Yellowish brown clayey sandy silt or sand with silt.

9.4	Pile Capacities

9.4.1	Load carrying capacities of bored pile foundation have been analysed and given for piles having various diameters and effective lengths.

9.4.2	The parameters considered for the analysis of the pile capacities are given below :

S. No.	Parameter	Value/s
1	Effective length (m)	10 & 15
2	Cohesion (kg/cm²)	0.1
3	Angle of shearing resistance	23o & 26o
4	Submerged density (g/cm3)	0.8 & 1
5	SPT Value at pile tip	15 & 20
6	Factor of safety	2.5
9.4.3	Considering the above parameters, the following safe pile capacities have been recommended for various diameters for 10m and 15m effective lengths of piles.

Pile Dia (mm)	Pile Effective Length (m)	Pile Vertical Load Capacity

(tons)	Uplift Capacity of pile (tons)	Safe Lateral Capacity (tons)
Free Head	Fixed Head
450	10	20	8	0.2	0.6
15	35	20
600	10	30	11	0.4	1.4
15	60	30
9.4.4	The typical calculations of safe pile capacity and safe uplift pile capacity have been given in Appendix - A.

9.4.5	The typical calculations of safe lateral capacity of the pile have been given in Appendix-B.

9.4.6	The group action of piles depends upon the number of piles in the group and their arrangement. Therefore, the efficiency factor for each pile group can be considered and checked as per the relevant BIS codes.

9.5	Special Note

9.5.1	After reaching the required depth in the pile bore, 15cm thick layer of gravel should be placed and compacted at the bottom so that the slush formed at the bottom is diminished.

10.0	RECOMMENDATIONS

10.1	Type of Foundations

Straight Bored Pile Foundations

10.2	Depth of Foundations

Considering the cut-of level of the piles as 2m below the existing ground level and for effective lengths of pile of 10m and 15m , the piles shall rest at a depth of about 12m and 17m respectively, below the existing ground level.

10.3	Safe Pile capacities

Pile Dia (mm)	Pile Effective Length (m)	Pile Vertical Load Capacity

(tons)	Uplift Capacity of pile (tons)	Safe Lateral Capacity (tons)
Free Head	Fixed Head
450	10	20	8	0.2	0.6
15	35	20
600	10	30	11	0.4	1.4
15	60	30
10.4	Special Notes

10.4.1	As the subsoil down to about 6m depth below the existing ground level has been considered to be susceptible to liquefaction, the frictional component down to this depth has been neglected for evaluating the pile capacities.

10.4.2	The above recommended safe pile capacities have been arrived at on the basis of provisions given in the BIS code IS:2911 (Part1/Sec2) - 2010 and can therefore, be used for design purposes. These pile capacities should be confirmed / validated by carrying out initial pile load test/s as per the provisions given in BIS code IS:2911 (Part-4) - 2013, prior to finalizing the working loads on the pile foundations.

10.4.3	For Straight bored pile foundations, after reaching the required depth in the pile bore, 15cm thick layer of gravel should be placed and compacted at the bottom so that the slush formed at the bottom is diminished.

10.5	Appendices

10.5.1	An appendix sheet showing the typical analysis of vertical pile capacity and uplift pile capacity calculations have been given in Appendix - A of this report.

10.5.2	An appendix sheet showing the typical analysis of lateral pile capacities calculations have been given in Appendix - B of this report.

10.5.3	An appendix sheet showing the typical procedure for Liquefaction Analysis has been given in Appendix - C of this report.

10.5.4	A list of IS Codes referred for providing the recommendations and that which might be required to implement the same is also enclosed in this report in Appendix - D.

10.6	NOTE

The recommendations given in this report have been arrived at on the basis of design parameters which have been judiciously adopted by giving due consideration to the results of field and laboratory investigations as well as NAGADI's experience of over four decades in working in various types of soil and rock conditions all over India.

10.7	LIMITATIONS

This geotechnical investigations have been carried out at locations in the site chosen by the clients so as to represent the entire site. The recommendations provided in this report are hence valid only for these test locations. However, if there is any change in subsoil conditions and properties at places between or beyond chosen test locations, fresh investigations will have to be carried out at such locations.

Dr. N. Santosh Rao

Technical Director

For Nagadi Consultants Pvt. Ltd

Appendix -A

(refer para no. 10.6.1)

CALCULATIONS FOR PILE CAPACITY

A.1	Methodology

A.1.1	A typical calculation for the pile capacity has been given hereunder for a pile of diameter 'D' = 600mm and for a length of pile 'L' = 10m.

A.1.2	The pile is designed primarily as an end bearing cum friction pile.

A.1.3	The end bearing capacity has been determined based on observed N-values while the friction capacity has been determined as per the relevant provisions of the BIS code IS:2911(part1/sec4).

A.1.4	For determining the end bearing capacity, the N- value at the level of the pile tip has been taken as 15.

A.1.5	For determining the friction capacity, the average angle of shearing resistance has been taken as 23o and the frictional resistance developed in the top 6m length (i.e. L1) of the pile foundation is neglected on account of the possibility of liquefaction of the subsoil.

A.2	DETERMINATION OF PILE CAPACITY

A.2.1	Pile end bearing capacity based on N-values

A.2.1.1	The ultimate end bearing capacity of the Bored pile foundation is determined as given below:

where	N	=	N-value at the level of the pile tip

Ap	= = cross - sectional area of pile toe	=	2827 cm2

D	=	diameter of pile shaft	=	600 mm

A.2.1.2	Therefore, the ultimate end bearing capacity of the bored pile foundation is :

Qbu = 42.4 tons

A.2.2	Pile friction capacity based on IS:2911 (Part 1/Sec 4)

A.2.2.1	The ultimate friction capacity of the pile is :

where c	=	cohesion of the soil along the pile shaft	=	0.1 kg/cm2

=	adhesion factor	=	0.75

K	=	coefficient of earth pressure	=	1

PDi	=	effective overburden pressure at for the ith layer	=	.di

=	submerged unit weight of soil below water table	=	0.8 g/cm3

di	=	depth of the ith layer from ground level

Asi	=	surface area of the pile stem in the ith layer

=	angle of wall friction between pile and soil

=	= angle of shearing resistance of the soil	=	23o

A.2.2.2	For calculation purposes, the submerged unit weight of the soil has been taken as the effective unit weight of the soil. The submerged unit weight considered is 0.8 g/cm3.

A.2.2.3	As per the IS provisions, the effective overburden pressure PDi is limited to a value equivalent to a depth of overburden equal to 15 times the diameter of the pile.

A.2.2.4	The skin friction capacity 'Qfu' is determined as :

For	L1 > 15 times the pile diameter D

A.2.2.5	The skin friction capacity 'Qfu' of the Bored pile foundation is :

Qfu = 35.1 tons

A.3	SAFE PILE CAPACITY

A.3.1	The safe pile capacity is determined by applying appropriate factors of safety to the ultimate values determined above. A factor of safety of 2.5 has been adopted for determination of the safe pile capacity.

A.3.2	Therefore, the safe pile capacity of Bored pile foundation is :

Hence,

Qs = 31 tons say 30 tons

A.4	SAFE UPLIFT CAPACITY

The safe uplift capacity of the pile is determined by applying appropriate factors of safety to the ultimate friction capacity of the pile as determined above. A factor of safety of 3 has been adopted for determination of the safe uplift pile capacity.

Hence,

Qsu = 11 tons

Appendix -B

(refer para no. 10.6.2)
TYPICAL CALCULATION OF LATERAL PILE LOAD CAPACITY

(As per IS : 2911 (Part1/Sec2) - 2010)
B.1	Methodology

B.1.1	A typical calculation for the lateral pile load capacity has been given hereunder for a pile of diameter 'D' = 600mm.

B.1.2	For determining the lateral pile load capacity, the depth of fixity of the piles or in other words, the equivalent cantilever length of the pile, has to be first determined. The depth of fixity is determined based on the modulus of horizontal subgrade reaction h value which in turn is considered based on the relative density/ soil consistency of the soil as observed in the boreholes conducted, as per table 3 of Annex - C of the BIS code IS:2911(part1/sec2).

B.1.3	Considering that the soil in is on an average in a loose to medium dense state, the modulus of horizontal subgrade reaction can be taken as h = 2.5 x 10 3 kN/m2 or 0.25 kg/cm3 applicable for submerged conditions (as ground water table is at a shallow depth), as per table 1 of Annex - C of the BIS code IS:2911(part1/sec2).

B.1.4	Considering the subsoil to be susceptible to liquefaction down to about 6m depth below the existing ground level, in the event of earthquake the restraint provided by the soil against lateral load on the pile will almost nil within this depth. Hence the pile length of about 4m below cut off level (i.e. 2m below the existing ground level) will behave like cantilever (i.e. e =4m).

B.2	Stiffness Factor and Depth of Fixity

B.2.1	The stiffness factor T is calculated as per C - 2.3.1 of Annex - C of the BIS code IS:2911(part1/sec2) , as given below:

Stiffness factor = T = 2.34 m

B.2.2	Hence, the equivalent cantilever length or in other words the depth of fixity (Le) of the pile works out to be based on stiffness factor (T) and the plot given in fig.4 in C - 3 of Annex - C of the BIS code IS:2911(part1/sec2)
Le = 1.9 × T = 1.9 × 2.34 = 4.44m (for free head condition)

Le = 2.2 × T = 2.2 × 2.34 = 5.14m (for fixed head condition)

B.2.3	The lateral pile load capacity is then determined as the horizontal force required for causing the allowable horizontal deflection of the pile head when considering the pile as a cantilever.

B.2.4	For calculation purposes, the concrete of pile has been considered to be of M30 grade.

B.2.5	For the determination of the lateral pile load capacity, the allowable horizontal deflection of the pile head has been considered as 5mm based on the provisions of clause 7.4 of BIS code IS:2911 (Part4) - 1985.

B.3	Determination of Lateral Pile Load Capacity

B.3.1	The horizontal deflection of the pile head, is determined by the following equations :

(for free head condition)

(for fixed head condition)

where,

e = cantilever length above ground/ bed to the point of load application

z = depth to point of fixity

B.3.2	The flexural rigidity 'E I' of the pile section has to be then determined by taking into account the flexural rigidity provided by the reinforcement. For this purpose, the moment of inertia 'I' is determined by taking into account the area of reinforcement along with the appropriate value of modular ratio 'm'.

B.3.3	The elastic modulus of concrete is determined as :

Where fck = characteristic strength of concrete	=	30N/mm2

Hence, E = 27,386 N/mm2 or 273,860 kg/cm2

B.3.4	The moment of inertia of the pile section is determined as :

Hence, I = 6361725123 mm4 = 636173 cm4

B.3.5	Considering an allowable horizontal deflection of the pile head of 5mm, the lateral pile load capacity works out to be :

QL = 0.4 tons (for free head condition)

QL = 1.4 tons (for fixed head condition)

Appendix - C

(refer para no. 10.6.3)

(Reference : Annex F of IS 1893 Part 1- 2016)

C.1	EVALUATION OF CYCLIC STRESS RATIO (CSR)

(i)

where,

C.2	EVALUATION OF LIQUEFACTION RESISTANCE (CRR)	(ii)

i.e.

C.2.1.	Influence of Fine Content

where,

C.2.1.	Other Corrections

C.3	NOTATIONS

Notation	Description
CSR	Cyclic Stress Ratio
CRR	Cyclic Resistance Ratio
vo	Total Vertical Overburden Stresses
vo	Effective vertical overburden stresses
av	Average horizontal shear stress acting on soil layer during shaking generated by given earthquake
max	Peak horizontal acceleration at ground surface
g	Acceleration of gravity
rd	Stress reduction coefficient to account for flexibility in soil profile
z	Depth below ground surface (m)
CRR7.5	Cyclic resistance ratio for Mw = 7.5 earthquakes
(N1)60	Corrected standard penetration resistance
(N1)60cs	(N1)60 adjusted to equivalent clean-sand value
Nm	Measured standard penetration resistance
CN	Correction factor for overburden pressure applied to SPT
CE	Correction factor for hammer energy
CB	Correction factor for borehole diameter
CR	Correction factor for drilling rod length
CS	Correction factor for split spoon sampler without liners
,	Coefficients, that are functions of fines content, used to correct (N1)60 to (N1)60cs

Appendix - D

(refer para no. 10.6.4)

LIST OF IS CODES
Field Investigation

1.	IS : 1892 - 2021 :	Code of practice for sub surface investigations for foundations (First revision)

2.	IS : 2131 - 1981 :	Method of Standard Penetration Tests for soils (First revision)

3.	IS : 2132 - 1986 :	Code of practice for thin walled tube sampling of soils (Second revision)

Laboratory Tests

1.	IS : 2720 - 1983 (Part 1) :	Methods of test for soils: Preparation of dry soil samples for various tests (Second revision)

2.	IS : 2720 - 1980 (Part 2) :	Method of test for soils: Determination of water content (Second revision) Amendment 1

3.	IS : 2720 - 1980 (Part 3/sec 1) :	Method of Test for Soils : Determination of Specific Gravity : Fine Grained Soils. (First Revision)

4.	IS : 2720 - 1980 (Part 3/Sec 2) :	Method of test for soils : Determination of Specific Gravity : Fine, Medium & Coarse grained soils. (First revision).

5.	IS : 2720 - 1985 (Part 4) :	Method of test for soils : Grain size analysis (Second revision)

6.	IS : 2720 (Part 8) -1983:	Determination of water content - dry density relation using heavy compaction. (First revision)

7.	IS : 2720 - 1985 (Part 5) :	Method of test for soils : Determination of liquid and plastic limit (Second revision)

8.	IS 2720-1981 Part 12:	Method of tests for soils : Determination of shear strength parameters using triaxial apparatus.

9.	IS : 2720 -1987 (Part 26):	Methods of tests for soils: Determination of pH value (Second revision).

10.	IS :2720 - 1977 (Part 27):	Methods of tests for soils: Determination of total soluble sulphate (First revision).

Foundation Construction

1.	IS : 2911 - 1979 (P1/Sec 1):	Code of practice for design and construction of pile foundations : concrete piles - Driven cast insitu (First revision) Amendment 2