I. BASIC INFORMATION COMMERCIAL BUILDING (HYPERMARKET...

FORM I

1

Commercial Building at Vikaspuri

April 2015 Reliance Prolific Commercial (P) Ltd.

I. BASIC INFORMATION

Name of the Project: COMMERCIAL BUILDING

(HYPERMARKET)

Location / site alternatives under consideration: The site is located at Plot No. A, Block A,

Community Centre, Vikaspuri.

Refer ANNEXURE I for site location map and

ANNEXURE II for Site surrounding features.

Size of the Project: The Campus has spread over an area of

13628 SQM or 1.3628 Hec (Approx.).

Expected cost of the project: About 413.09 Crores.

Refer ANNEXURE VI for CA Certificate

Contact Information: Sh ASHWANI AGARWAL

Reliance Prolific Commercial Private Limited,

A3, 1st Floor, Mohan Cooperative Industrial

Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi - 110044.

Ph: 011-40658201, Mob: 0-9717491991

E-Mail: [email protected]

Screening Category: B

II. ACTIVITY

1. Construction, operation or decommissioning of the project involving actions, which

will cause physical changes in the locality (topography, land use, changes in water

bodies, etc.)

S.No. Information/Checklist

confirmation

Yes/No Details thereof (with approximate

quantities /rates, wherever possible)

with source of information data

1.1 Permanent or temporary change in land

use, land cover or topography including increase in intensity of land use (with

respect to local land use plan)

No The site falls in area Designated as

general commercial area or community centre area. The site was

previously being used as a construction hub by Delhi Metro Rail Corporation. The site is surrounded by petrol pump

and Police station on the western side.

1.2 Clearance of existing land,

vegetation and buildings?

No The proposed site was being used by

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation as a construction hub and does not support any vegetation.

1.3 Creation of new land uses? No The proposed site falls under area designated as general commercial area

or community center area.

1.4 Pre-construction investigations e.g.bore houses, soil testing?

Yes The d e t a i l s o f the geotechnical report are enclosed as

ANNEXURE III.

FORM I

2



1.5 Construction works? Yes The proposed project will involve

construction of single tower having 5

floors (height- 26m) and three level basements for parking and services.

Refer ANNEXURE IV for Site layout plan.

1.6 Demolition works? No

1.7 Temporary sites used for Construction works or housing of

construction workers?

No Mostly, local labour will be

employed. However, temporary labour

sheds along with labour toilets will be made during the construction phase.

Covered storage areas will be provided for construction materials such as

cement and steel and batching plants

shall be set up at site.

1.8 Above ground buildings, structures or

earthworks including linear structures, cut and fill or excavations

Yes The proposed commercial complex

shall comprise of a single tower with 5 floors and building height of 26m. Three level basements shall be

provided for parking facilities. The cut and fill

quantities are presented below:

Cutting : 1.40 lac cum Filling: 0.35 lac cum

1.9 Underground works including Mining or tunnelling?

Yes Three level Basements has been provided for parking and services.

1.10 Reclamation works? No

1.11 Dredging? No

1.12 Offshore structures? No

1.13 Production and manufacturing

processes?

No

1.14 Facilities for storage of goods or materials?

Yes A temporary shed will be made for the storage of materials during construction phase, which shall be

dismantled after the construction is over.

1.15 Facilities for treatment or disposal of solid waste or liquid effluents?

Yes Wastewater A STP of 125 KLD capacity,

working on the principle of Fluidized

Aerobic Bed Reactor (FAB) Refer

Annexure V for STP location on site

layout plan. The treated wastewater

shall be used for horticulture, flushing

and DG set cooling.

Solid waste For Solid Waste Management – An

authorized waste management agency

will be hired for handling and

disposing the solid waste generated

during operational phase. Emphasis

will be laid on the proper waste

FORM I

3



segregation into Biodegradable, Non-

biodegradable, Recyclable and Inert

wastes.

1.16 Facilities for long term housing of

operational workers?

No

1.17 New road, rail or sea traffic during construction or operation?

Yes There will be increase in vehicular traffic along the 24.0 m ROW road

during the operational phase due to the upcoming development. However, no adverse impact is anticipated.

1.18 New road, rail, air waterborne or other transport infrastructure including

new or altered routes and stations, ports,

airports etc?

No

1.19 Closure or diversion of existing transport routes or infrastructure leading

to changes in traffic movements?

No

1.20 New or diverted transmission lines or pipelines?

Yes Provision for mains/BSES supply has been made. Municipal water supply

line shall be made available for water supply.

1.21 Impoundment, damming, culverting,

realignment or other changes to the

hydrology of watercourses or aquifers?

No

1.22 Stream crossings? No

1.23 Abstraction or transfers of water form ground or surface waters?

Yes Municipal water supply along with

Ground water will be / is the main source of water during the operation

phase. Water Scheme has been approved by DJB. Refer ANNEXURE VII. Application submitted for

Borewell (1 No) to CGWA.

1.24 Changes in water bodies or the land surface affecting drainage or runoff?

Yes The project falls within an

urbanized area equipped with storm water drainage system. The project will involve construction of paved areas

and hence the quantity of runoff will

increase due to reduced infiltration. This runoff will be collected through

a well- designed storm water network and will be used for artificial recharge of aquifers. The excess overflow will

be diverted to the municipal storm water drain existing adjacent to the site. Thus, the project will not materially

affect the drainage or runoff in the area.

1.25 Transport of personnel or materials for construction, operation or

decommissioning?

Yes Transport of Personnel Approximately 500 to 700

labourers will be employed

FORM I

4



during the construction phase. During

operation phase, the proposed

hyper market will provide employment

t o 5 00 -600 persons.

Transport of Material for

construction The construction schedule is

programmed in phases. An average of

500 truckloads per month is estimated

for the transportation of materials

during the period of construction.

1.26 Long-term dismantling or decommissioning or restoration

works?

No

1.27 Ongoing activity during decommissioning which could have an

impact on the environment?

No

1.28 Influx of people to an area in either temporarily or permanently?

Yes Being a commercial centre there will

be temporary influx of people.

1.29 Introduction of alien species? No

1.30 Loss of native species or genetic diversity?

No

1.31 Any other actions? No

2. Use of Natural resources for construction or operation of the Project (such as land,

water, materials or energy, especially any resources which are non-renewable or in

short supply):

S.No. Information/checklist confirmation Yes/No Details thereof (with approximate

quantities /rates, wherever possible)


2.1 Land especially undeveloped or

agricultural land (ha)

Yes 13628 Sqm. of vacant land has been

acquired for the development of the hyper market from DDA.

2.2 Water (expected source competing users) unit: KLD

Yes Municipal water supply along with groundwater will be the main source of water supply during the operation phase

of the project.

The water demand for the project is

144.2 KLD. The water demand for

domestic consumption is 65 KLD, for

flushing is 45 KLD and for landscaping

10 KLD.

The entire treated wastewater will be

used on site for landscaping, DG set

FORM I

5



cooling and Flushing.

Hence the net fresh water demand will

be 65 KLD

Rainwater harvesting will be carried out

for the project with 2 RWH pits of

capacity 151.89 KL/Hr and 273.34

KL/Hr have been made. The total

capacity is 473.23 KL/hr. It is expected

that on an average of the 473.23 KL/Hr

will be carried if the rain intensity is 50

mm/Sqm/hr. Refer ANNEXUE VIII for

RWH Calculation.

2.3 Minerals (MT) No

2.4 Construction material – stone,

aggregates, sand / soil (expected source

– MT)

Yes Cement – 15,000 MT

Stone Aggregates: 6,000 m3

Steel : 2,500 MT

2.5 Forests and timber (source – MT) No

2.6 Energy including electricity and fuels (source, competing users)

Unit: fuel (MT), energy (MW)

Yes Electricity- 4135 KW (Maximum peak demand). The commercial centre has

have provision for captive power generation through 2 DG sets of 1875

KVA and 2 DG sets of 1250 KVA

each. Provisions also be made for 100 % mains/BSES supply. HSD 1054 L/Hr at 75% loading of

DG sets (Backup power supply)

3. Use, storage, transport, handling or production of substances or materials, which

could be harmful to human health or the environment or raise concerns about

actual or perceived risks to human health.

S.No. Information/Checklist confirmation Yes/No Details thereof (with approximate

quantities/rates, wherever possible)


3.1 Use of substances or materials, which are hazardous (as per MSIHC

rules) to human health or the

environment (flora, fauna, and

water supplies)

Yes Waste Oil generated from DG sets. The

waste oil generated from DG sets will

be stored in containers at earmarked place and will finally be sold to authorized recyclers.

3.2 Changes in occurrence of disease or affect disease vectors (e.g. insect or

water borne diseases)

No

3.3 Affect the welfare of people e.g. by changing living conditions?

Yes The project will generate employment opportunities during the

FORM I

6



operation phase.

3.4 Vulnerable groups of people who

could be affected by the project e.g.

hospital patients, children, the

elderly etc.,

No

3.5 Any other causes No

4. Production of solid wastes during construction or operation or decommissioning

(MT/month)

S.No Information/Checklist

confirmation




4.1 Spoil, overburden or mine wastes No

4.2 Municipal waste (domestic and or commercial wastes)

Yes Commercial – ~12 MT/month* Food Court– ~2.0 MT/month *

4.3 Hazardous wastes (as per Hazardous Waste Management Rules)

Yes Waste Oil- 1000 l/yr (Assuming one maintenance per

year)

4.4 Other industrial process wastes No

4.5 Surplus product No

4.6 Sewage sludge or other sludge from effluent treatment

Yes 1.17 MT/month

4.7 Construction or demolition wastes Yes 110 MT/month#- During

construction phase only

4.8 Redundant machinery or equipment No

4.9 Contaminated soils or other materials No

4.10 Agricultural wastes No

4.11 Other solid wastes No Garden and Open space 0.6 MT/month**

*- Source – As per Norms of CIWMB

**-Source-Discussion with horticulturists

#- Source – Report by Technology, Information, Forecasting and assessment council (TIFAC)

5. Release of pollutants or any hazardous, toxic or noxious substances to air (Kg/hr)

S.No Information/Checklist confirmation Yes/No Details thereof (with approximate



5.1 Emissions from combustion of fossil fuels from stationary or mobile

sources

Yes Diesel Generator sets

Item Emn

std

Diesel

Engine

emn**

NOx (ppmV) 710 690

NHMC (mg/Nm3)* 150 55

CO (mg/Nm3)* 150 110

PM (mg/Nm3)* 75 12

FORM I

7



5.2 Emissions from production processes No

5.3 Emissions from materials handling including storage or transport

No

5.4 Emissions from construction activities including plant and

equipment

Yes The emissions from construction activities were estimated using an

emission factor of 1.2 tons

SPM/month/acre as per AP-42 Section 13.2.3.3 (US EPA, 1995). The overall SPM emitted from the area

source with no control is found

to be 1.144 x10-4 g/m2/s.

5.5 Dust or odours from handling of materials including construction

materials, sewage and waste

No Odours from the domestic wastes will be controlled by way of effective solid

waste management system that will involve storage and transportation of

food wastes in closed containers.

Proper ventilation system shall be

introduced in the soil and waste

system to ensure foul smell is disposed

off. STP working on FAB technology

will be provided so as to minimize odor

problems, and will be strategically

located so that no adverse impact is

caused.

5.6 Emissions from incineration of waste No

5.7 Emissions from burning of waste in open air (e.g. slash materials,

construction debris)

No

5.8 Emissions from any other sources No

*- As per Emission Standards for Diesel Engines (Engine rating more than 0.8 MW (800 kW) which were notified by

Environment (Protection)Thoird Amendment Rules 2002 vide G.S.R. 489 € dated 9th July 2002 at serial no. 96 under

envirionment (Protection) Act, 1986

**Engine emission values tabulated above are based on engne out emissions at 85% of continuous power on the

Develeopment Engine. Data was recorded during steady state rated engine speed (+/- 25 RPM) with load (+- 2%) and

less than 3 m from engine exhaust

6. Generation of Noise and Vibration, and Emissions of Light and Heat:


confirmation




6.1 From operation of equipment e.g. engines, ventilation plant, crushers

Yes Noise generation from Diesel generator sets. The DG sets will be

located strategically and housed in acoustic enclosures so that no adverse impact is caused.

6.2 From industrial or similar processes No

6.3 From construction or demolition Yes The noise levels (dB) generated from

FORM I

8



construction equipment at a distance of

50 ft. from the source are given below:

There have been no complaints of NOISE during Construction. As by site

was noise by boulding out .work areas have been separted buy separate

boarings.

Concrete Mixer Truck – 85 dB

Mobile cranes- 81dB

Hammering – 86 dB

Loader - 81 dB

6.4 From blasting or piling No

6.5 From construction or operational traffic

Yes The traffic during the construction and

operational phases will not have any significant impact.

6.6 From lighting or cooling systems Yes Noise generation D.G sets However the DG sets will be placed in an

acoustic enclosure and will be

strategically located so that no impact is caused.

6.7 From any other sources

No

7. Risks of contamination of land or water from releases of pollutants into the

ground or into sewers, surface waters, groundwater, coastal waters or the sea:


confirmation




7.1 From handling, storage, use or spillage of hazardous materials

No Waste oil from DG sets. The waste oil

will be stored at an earmarked place and will be sold to authorized recyclers.

7.2 From discharge of sewage or other effluents to water or the land (expected

mode and place of discharge)

No The wastewater generated will be

treated in on site sewage treatment plant based on FAB technology. The treated

effluent shall be used for landscaping; Flushing and DG set cooling purposes. Excess treated wastewater will be

disposed off to the municipal sewer line adjacent to the site conforming to CPCB standards.

7.3 By deposition of pollutants emitted to air into the land or into water

No The D.G sets have been provided with adequate stack heights (32m),

which will be sufficient to disperse the pollutants effectively and thus will not

cause deposition of pollutants on land

or water body.

7.4 From any other sources No

7.5 Is there a risk of long term build up No The D.G sets will be used as a

FORM I

9



of pollutants in the environment from

these sources?

backup power source only.

8. Risk of accidents during construction or operation of the Project, which could

affect human health or the environment


confirmation




8.1 From explosions, spillages, fires etc from storage, handling, use or

production of hazardous substances

No The project does not involve any storage, handling, use or production of hazardous substances.

8.2 From any other causes No

8.3 Could the project be affected by natural disasters causing

environmental damage (e.g. floods,

earthquakes, landslides, cloudburst etc)?

Yes The site falls under zone IV as per the seismic zone map of India and is prone

to high intensity earthquake. The

design for the project has been done

as per the relevant guidelines.

9. Factors which should be considered (such as consequential development) which could

lead to environmental effects or the potential for cumulative impacts with other existing

or planned activities in the locality


confirmation




9.1 Lead to development of supporting Utilities, ancillary development or

development

Stimulated by the project which could

have impact on the environment e.g.:

• Supporting infrastructure (roads,

power supply, waste or waste water

treatment, etc.)

• housing development

• extractive industries • supply industries

• other

No The proposed site is located in an

urbanized area and is well equipped

with infrastructural facilities like water

supply, sewer network and storm water

network. Thus, no major ancillary

developments are expected to come up

due to the proposed project.

9.2 Lead to after-use of the site, which could have an impact on the

environment

No

9.3 Set a precedent for later developments

Yes The hypermarket concept is a new venture and will set a precedent for future developments.

9.4 Have cumulative effects due to proximity to other existing or planned

projects with similar effects

No

FORM I

10



III. Environmental Sensitivity

S.No Areas Name/

Identity

Aerial distance (within 15 km.)

Proposed project location

boundary

1 Areas protected under international conventions, national or

local legislation for their ecological,

landscape, cultural or other related

value

No

2 Areas which are important or sensitive for ecological reasons -

Wetlands, watercourses or other

water bodies, coastal zone,

biospheres, mountains, forests

Yes Rajokri & Masudpur Protected Forests are located at 13 and 14 km

respectively where as the Southern

ridge of Budha Jayanti Park R.F and

Civil Line R.F which fall under

Kamla Nehru Ridge are located at 10

and 14.5 km from the project site.

3 Areas used by protected, important or sensitive species of

flora or fauna for breeding, nesting,

foraging, resting, over wintering,

migration

Yes Rajokri & Masudpur Protected Forests are located at 13 and 14 km

respectively where as the Southern

ridge of Budha Jayanti Park R.F and

Civil Line R.F which fall under

Kamla Nehru Ridge are located at 10

and 14.5 km from the project site.

4 Inland, coastal, marine or underground waters

No

5 State, National boundaries Yes The Delhi Haryana border is at a distance of 11.5 km from the site.

6 Routes or facilities used by the public for access to recreation or

other tourist, pilgrim areas

No

7 Defence installations No

8 Densely populated or built-up area No

9 Areas occupied by sensitive man- made land uses (hospitals, schools,

places of worship, community facilities)

Yes Sarvodaya Vidyalaya at a distance of about 200 m from the proposed

site. A temple also exist in the

vicinity of the proposed site.

10 Areas containing important, high quality or scarce resources (ground

water resources, surface resources,

forestry, agriculture, fisheries, tourism,

minerals)

No

11 Areas already subjected to pollution or environmental damage.

(those where existing legal

environmental standards are exceeded)

No

12 Areas susceptible to natural

hazard which could cause the

project to present environmental

No

FORM I

11



problems (earthquakes,

subsidence, landslides, erosion,

flooding or extreme or adverse

climatic conditions)

IV. Proposed Terms of Reference for EIA studies

The proposed terms of reference for Environmental assessment studies would involve following

steps:

• Evaluation of present environmental status through analysis of generated and collected

baseline data for one season. The baseline monitoring would be carried out as per

MoEF/SPCB guidelines. All the monitoring stations and frequency / schedule for the various

monitoring would be conducted as per the MoEF / SPCB guidelines. The data generated

would be analysed at the laboratory approved by MoEF / SPCB.

• Assessing the probable impact on the environmental factors due to implementation of the

project with respect to the existing scenario. This would include evaluation on various

environmental attributes such as ambient air quality, water quality, noise and vibration,

ecological and socio-economic impact within the study area. MoEF approved models would

be used for impact evaluation of various environmental parameters.

• Analysing the predicted impact with respect to the regulatory environmental standards.

• Developing an Environment Management Plan for the proposed project to mitigate any

negative significant impacts that would arise from the proposed project. Environment

Management plan would be formulated for the mitigation of the identified adverse

impacts. The plan would formulate and describe proposed environmental safeguards and

monitoring of the following aspects:

• Measures to control air and water pollution.

• Measures to arrest the generation of noise.

• Proper plans for wastewater management.

• Proper methods for disposal of solid wastes.

• Post project environmental quality monitoring program.

• Initiatives like Rain Water Harvesting etc.

Reliance Prolific Commercial Pvt Ltd

207020-A i

CENGRS GEOTECHNICA PVT. LTD. Job No. Sheet No.

REPORT ON :

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR

PROPOSED COMMUNITY CENTRE PLOT NO. A, BLOCK-A, VIKAS PURI

NEW DELHI

Submitted to:

M/s. Majestic Agrotech (P) Ltd. 84-A, Mittal Court 224, Nariman Point,

Mumbai-400021.

207020-A ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS Sheet No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Project Description 1 1.2 Purposes of Study 1 2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS 1 2.1 Soil Borings 1 2.2 Dynamic Cone Penetration Test 2 2.3 Groundwater 3 3.0 LABORATORY TESTS 3 4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 4 4.1 Regional Geology 4 4.2 Site Stratigraphy 4 4.3 Groundwater 5 5.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 5.1 General 5 5.2 Foundation Type and Depth 5 5.3 Open Foundations 6 5.4 Definition of Gross and Net Bearing Pressure 8 5.5 Basement Design 8 5.6 Liquefaction Potential 9 6.0 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 9 6.1 Excavation 9 6.2 Foundation Level Preparation 10 6.3 Backfilling 10 6.4 Chemical Attack 10 6.5 Variability in Subsurface Conditions 12 7.0 SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS 12

8.0 CLOSURE 13

207020-A iii


TABLES Table No. Soil Profiles 1 to 5 Engineering Description of Soil 6 Uncertainty in Laboratory measurements 7 Chemical Test Results 8

ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. No. Plan of field investigation 1 Dynamic Cone Penetration Test Results 2 Summary of Borehole Profile 3 Standard Penetration Test Results 4

Grain Size Analysis 5 to 16 Shear Test Results 17 to 34 Consolidation Test Results 35 & 36

Typical Calculations : Sheet Nos. 1 to 2 --------------------------------------------------------

207020-A 1


1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description

M/s. Majestic Agrotech(P)Ltd. is planning to construct various Greenfield Commercial Outlet Projects in Delhi.This report presents the results of Community Centre on Plot No. A in Block-A, Vikaspuri, New Delhi.

The plot covers an area of 13628 m2. The ground coverage

shall be 3174 m2 for building and 680 m2 for atrium. The building will have a height of 26 m and shall have three basements. A layout plan showing the locations of our field investigation is illustrated on Fig.1.

1.2 Purposes of Study

The overall purposes of this study are to investigate the stratigraphy at the site and to develop geotechnical recommendations for foundation design and construction. To accomplish these purposes, the study was conducted in the following phases: (a) drilling five boreholes to 30 m depth or refusal whichever is

earlier in order to determine site stratigraphy and to collect disturbed and undisturbed soil samples for laboratory testing;

(b) conducting five dynamic cone penetration tests to 10 m depth or

refusal, so as to obtain additional data for foundation analysis. (c) testing selected soil samples in the laboratory to determine

pertinent index and engineering properties of the soils; and (d) analyzing all field and laboratory data in order to develop

engineering recommendations for foundation design and construction.

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

2.1 Soil Borings The boreholes were progressed using a mechanized shell and auger to the specified depth or refusal, whichever is encountered earlier. The borehole diameter was 150 mm. Where caving of the

207020-A 2


borehole occurred, 150 mm diameter casing was used to keep the borehole stable. The work was in general accordance with IS:1892-1979. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were conducted in the boreholes at 1.5 m depth intervals upto 15 m depth and 3.0 m depth intervals below by connecting a split spoon sampler to ‘A’ rods and driving it by 45 cm using a 63.5 kg hammer falling freely from a height of 75 cm. The tests were conducted in accordance with IS:2131-1981.

The number of blows for each 15 cm of penetration of the split spoon sampler was recorded. The blows required to penetrate the initial 15 cm of the split spoon for seating the sampler is ignored due to the possible presence of loose materials or cuttings from the drilling operation. The cumulative number of blows required to penetrate the balance 30 cm of the 45 cm sampling interval is termed the SPT value or the ‘N’ value.

The ‘N’ values are presented on the soil profile for each borehole. Refusal to further boring penetration was considered when the ‘N’ values exceed 100 or when practical refusal to further penetration by shell and auger was encountered. Where the ‘N’ value exceeded 100, the penetration of the split spoon sampler (after the initial seating) is recorded together with the number of blows given on the sampler. Where the seating blow count exceeded 100, the ‘N’ value is recorded as “Ref” on the soil profiles. Disturbed samples were collected from the split spoon after conducting SPT. The samples were preserved in transparent polythene bags. Undisturbed samples were collected by attaching 75 mm diameter thin walled ‘Shelby’ tubes and driving the sampler using a 63.5 kg hammer in accordance with IS: 2132-1986. The tubes were sealed with wax at both ends. All samples were transported to our NABL accredited laboratory at Delhi for further examination and testing. 2.2 Dynamic Cone Penetration Test

The dynamic cone penetration tests were conducted using a

50 mm diameter cone in general accordance with IS:4968 Part-I. The

207020-A 3


cone is attached to ‘A’ rods and driven by means of 63.5 kg hammer falling freely from a height of 75 cm. The number of blows required for each 30 cm penetration of the cone is recorded. In order to limit the friction between the rods and the soil, the rods are rotated after every 1 to 1.5 m of cone penetration. Results are presented as blows per 30 cm penetration versus depth on Fig. No. 2. 2.3 Groundwater

Groundwater level was measured in the boreholes 24 hours

after drilling and sampling was completed. The measured water levels are recorded on the individual soil profiles.

3.0 LABORATORY TESTS

The laboratory testing has been carried out in our NABL accredited laboratory. The quality procedures in our laboratory conform to ISO/IEC-17025-2005.

The laboratory testing programme was aimed at verifying the field classifications and developing parameters for engineering analysis. All testing was performed in accordance with the current applicable IS specifications. The following tests were conducted on selected soil and water samples recovered from the boreholes:

Laboratory Tests IS : Code Referred Bulk density & natural moisture content IS : 2720 (Part-2) -1973 Specific gravity IS : 2720 (Part-3) -1980 Grain size analysis IS : 2720 (Part-4) -1985 Liquid & plastic limit IS : 2720 (Part-5) -1985 Unconfined compression test IS : 2720 (Part-10) -1991 Unconsolidated undrained triaxial shear test IS : 2720 (Part-11) -1993 Consolidated drained direct shear test IS : 2720 (Part-13)-1986 Consolidation Test IS : 2720 (Part-15)-1986

pH value IS : 2720 (Part-26) -1987 Sulphate content IS : 2720 (Part-27) -1977 Chemical analysis*

of soil to determine Chloride content IS : 3025 (Part-32)-1993 pH value IS : 3025 (Part-11) -1996 Sulphate content IS : 3025 (Part-24) -1998 Chemical analysis*

for water to determine Chloride content IS : 3025 (Part-32)-1993 * outside NABL Scope

207020-A 4


All test results are presented in the illustration section of this report. A note on our NABL accreditation together with the uncertainty in laboratory measurements is presented on Table 7.

4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 4.1 Regional Geology

The soils at the project site belong to the “Indo Gangetic Alluvium”(1) and are river deposits of the Yamuna and its tributaries. The Pleistocene and Recent Deposits of the Indo-Gangetic Basin are composed of gravels, sands, silts and clays with remains of animal and plants. The older alluvium is rather dark coloured (locally called “Bhanger”) and is generally rich in concretions of nodules of impure calcium carbonate (Kankars). The kankars are of all shapes and sizes, varying from small sand sized grains to big lumps. The age of the “Bhanger” alluvium is Middle to Upper Pleistocene.

The newer alluvium (locally called “Khadar”) is light coloured and

poor in concretions. It contains lenticular beds of sand and gravel as well as peat beds. It is merged by insensible gradations into the Recent or deltaic alluvia and its age is Upper Pleistocene to Recent. 4.2 Site Stratigraphy

The soils at the site are alluvial in nature and consist of

alternating layers of silty sand / fine sand and sandy silt/clayey silt from the ground surface to the final explored depth of 30 m. Silty sand is met from the ground surface to about 7-8 m depth. This is underlain by sandy silt to about 11 m depth and silty sand to about 13-14 m depth. Sandy silty / clayey silt is then met to about 26-29 m depth. However, at BH-4, sand is met below 10.5 m depth that extends to the final explored depth of 30 m.

(1) Krishnan, M.S. (1986), “Geology of India & Burma”, CBS Publishers, New Delhi.

207020-A 5


SPT N-values range from 9 to 15 to 3.0 m depth with some

higher values. However, at BH-5, SPT value of 5 is encountered at 1.5 m depth. Below this, SPT values generally range from 18 to 33 to about 10.0 m depth from 25 to 55 to about 20 to 21 m depth and from 28 to more than 100 to the final explored depth of 30.0 m.

DCPT values range from 8 to 15 to 2.0 m depth with some

higher values. Below this, DCPT values range from 16 to 34 to 7.0 m depth and from 35 to 50 to final test depth of 10.0 m.

Detailed description of the materials encountered at the

borehole locations is presented on the individual soil profiles on Table 1 to 5. Engineering terms used for describing soils are explained on Table 6. Chemical test results are presented on Table 8. All laboratory data are presented graphically in the illustrations. A summary of the borehole profiles is presented on Fig. 3. Standard penetration test results are presented on Fig. 4.

4.3 Groundwater

Based on the measurements in the completed boreholes, groundwater was met between 9.0 to 11.0 m depth below existing ground level at the time of our field investigation (February, 2007). Fluctuations may occur in measured water levels due to seasonal variations in rainfall and surface evaporation rates.

5.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 General A suitable foundation for any structure should have an adequate factor of safety against exceeding the bearing capacity of the supporting soils. Also the vertical movements due to compression of the soils should be within tolerable limits for the structure. We consider that foundation designed in accordance with the recommendations given herein will satisfy these criteria.

5.2 Foundation Type and Depth

We understand that building will have a height of 26 m and shall have three basements. Individual isolated footings with interconnecting

207020-A 6


beams or RCC strip footings (T-beam and slab) may be provided. Raft foundation is also a suitable foundation scheme.

For lightly loaded structures such as boundary wall etc., we recommend a minimum foundation embedment depth of 1.2~1.5 m 5.3 Open Foundations

Bearing capacity analysis for shallow foundations has been done in general accordance with IS: 6403 - 1981. Soil parameters used for foundation analysis are as follows: At 6.0 m depth : c = 7.5 T/m2 φ = 5° ϒ = 1.80 g/cc Nc = 6.49 Nq = 1.57 Nϒ = 0.45 General Shear Failure Below 6.0 m depth : c = 9.0 T/m2 φ = 5° ϒ = 1.90 g/cc Nc = 6.49 Nq = 1.57 Nϒ = 0.45 General Shear Failure where : c = cohesion intercept φ = angle of internal friction ϒ = effective unit weight of soil Nc,Nq,Nγ = bearing capacity factors which are a function of φ. The bearing capacity equation used is as follows : qnet safe = 1 [cNcζc dc+ q (Nq -1) ζq dq+ 0.5 Bϒ Nγζγ dγ Rw] F where : qnet safe = safe net bearing capacity of soil based on the shear failure criterion. q = overburden pressure Rw = water table correction factor, taken as 0.5 to account for

saturation of the soils and consequent loss of shear strength.

207020-A 7


F = factor of safety, taken as equal to 2.5 in accordance with IS: 1904. ζc, ζq, ζγ = Shape factors. For Strip footings, ζc = ζq = ζγ = 1. For Square footing ζc = 1.3, ζq = 1.2, ζγ = 0.6 dc, dq, dγ = depth factors For φ ≤ 10°, dc = 1+0.2 tan (45 + φ/2) D/B, dq = dγ = 1 For φ >10°, dq = dγ = 1 + 0.1 tan (45 + φ/2)D/B

Appropriate values have been substituted into the bearing

capacity equation given above to compute the safe net bearing capacity. The values have been checked to determine the settlement of the foundation under the safe bearing pressure. The allowable bearing pressure has been taken as the lower of the two values computed from the bearing capacity shear failure criterion as well as that computed from the tolerable settlement criterion. Settlement analysis has been performed based on the SPT values.

The following table presents our recommended values of net

bearing pressure at 4.0 m and below.

Net Allowable Bearing Pressure, T/m2

Corresponding Gross Allowable Bearing

Pressure, T/m2

Permissible Settlement Permissible Settlement

Foundation Embedment,

m

40 mm 50 mm 75 mm 40 mm 50 mm 75 mm

Suggested Modulus of Subgrade Reaction,

kg/cm3

4.0 16.0 20.0 29.2 22.8 26.8 36.7 2.0 6.0 21.8 27.3 35.0* 32.3 37.8 45.5 3.2

10.0 34.4 40.0 40.0* 52.4 58.0 58.0 4.4 * Restricted from shear criteria

The above values include a bearing capacity safety factor of 2.5.

Net bearing pressures for foundations at intermediate depths may be interpolated linearly between the values given above. The appropriate values of net bearing pressure may be selected as per the displacement computed from soil-structure interaction.

For lightly loaded facilities such as boundary wall etc., we

recommend a net allowable bearing pressure of 10 T/m2 at about 1.2~1.5 m depth.

207020-A 8


5.4 Definition of Gross and Net Bearing Pressure

By definition, the net allowable bearing pressure is the intensity

of loading which gives the safety against both the shear failure criteria as well as settlement criteria.

For the purposes of this report, the net allowable bearing

pressure should be calculated as the difference between total load on the foundation and the weight of the soil overlying the foundation divided by the effective area of the foundation. The gross bearing pressure is the total pressure at the foundation level including overburden pressure and surcharge load. The following equations may be used - qnet = [(Ps + Wf +Ws) / Af] - Sv qgross = qnet + Sv = (Ps + Wf + Ws) / Af where:

qnet = net allowable bearing pressure qgross = gross bearing pressure Ps = superimposed static load on foundation Wf = weight of foundation Ws = weight of soil overlying foundation Af = effective area of foundation Sv = overburden pressure at foundation level prior to excavation for foundation.

It may please be noted that safe bearing pressures

recommended in this report refer to “net values”. 5.5 Basement Design Groundwater was met at 9 to 11 m depth during our field investigation. For design purpose, the groundwater may be considered to rise to 4.0 m depth for the worst condition. The foundations should be designed to resist the consequent uplift with adequate safety factor.

207020-A 9


The basement should be designed to resist lateral earth pressure due to backfill and saturation of soils due to rains etc. For design purpose, we recommend the following values of co-efficient of earth pressures for the active, passive and at rest condition.

Depth, m From To ka kp ko 0.0 5.0 0.39 2.56 0.56 5.0 10.0 0.36 2.78 0.53 10.0 15.0 0.33 3.00 0.50

where: ka = Co-efficient of active earth pressure kp = Co-efficient of passive earth pressure ko = Co-efficient of earth pressure at rest A suitable safety factor should be applied on the passive earth pressures in the design of the wall. 5.6 Liquefaction Potential

As per IS:1893-2002, liquefaction is likely in fine sand (SP) below water table for SPT values less than 15. In general SPT values in the sand layer exceeds 15. Groundwater was met at 9.0 to 11.0 m depth. The soils classify as sandy silt and silty sand.

On review of all the soil parameters like in-situ density, dry

density, SPT values, we are of the opinion that liquefaction is not likely to take place.

According to Fig.1 of IS:1893 (Part-1)-2002 showing seismic

zones, the proposed site falls under Zone-IV. The design for seismic forces should be done considering the project in Zone-IV.

6.0 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATION

6.1 Excavation Temporary open cut excavation to about 3.0 m depth may be cut

using side slopes of 1 vertical on 0.2 to 0.4 horizontal. Below this, the

207020-A 10


excavations may be cut using side slopes of 1 vertical on 0.6 to 1.0 horizontal. A 1.5 m wide horizontal berm should be provided at every 2.5 to 3.0 m depth interval for stability purpose. Alternatively, consideration may be given to provision of sheet piles or contiguous piles.

The engineer should monitor the excavation slopes. In case,

excessive sloughing or caving occurs, the slope may be flattened further to ensure stability. Heavy construction equipment should not be permitted to operate within 1.0 m distance of the edge of open excavations. 6.2 Foundation Level Preparation

The exposed foundation bearing surface should be watered and compacted properly using light manual rammers/rollers. The surface should then be protected from disturbances due to construction activities so that the foundations may bear on the natural undisturbed ground. For all shallow foundations, we recommend the placement of a 75 to 100 mm thick “blinding layer” of lean concrete to facilitate placement of reinforcing steel and to protect the soils from disturbance.

6.3 Backfilling

The soil met at the site may be used as backfill behind the basement walls. The backfill should be compacted in layers not exceeding 15-25 cm in thickness at moisture content equal to ± 1 percent of the optimum moisture content. Compaction should be done to at least 95% of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with IS : 2720 Part-7 (Standard Proctor). 6.4 Chemical Attack

Chemical test results on soil and water are presented on Table

8. The results indicate that the soils contain less than 0.10 percent sulphates and less than 0.03 percent chlorides. The pH value of soil is about 7.3 indicating near neutral condition. The groundwater contains 340-374 mg/litre sulphates and 5748-5798 mg/litre of chlorides. The pH value of groundwater is 7.2 indicating near neutral condition.

207020-A 11


IS:456-2000 classifies the sulphate content of the soils into three classes. For Class-II, the concentration of sulphates in soils is given as 0.2 to 0.5 percent in soils and 300 to 1200 mg/litre in groundwater. Groundwater is at about 9.0 to 11.0 m, and there is potential for rise of water table. Comparing the test results with these specified limits, the sulphate content of soils is less than the specified limit, and the sulphate content of groundwater is marginally above this limit. The strata at the site is therefore considered in Class-II which indicates moderately aggressive condition on the basis of sulphate attack. Bartholomew(2) states that for tropical climate conditions, a chloride content exceeding 2000 ppm indicates a high potential for corrosion. Since chlorides in the groundwater exceeds this limit, in our opinion, the strata at site is highly aggressive. Whereas sulphates attack concrete and causes its deterioration and spalling, chlorides will accelerate the corrosion of steel members and reinforcement steel embedded in concrete. We recommend the following measures to protect the foundations from corrosion in aggressive environment.

(1) For foundation concrete, the minimum cement content should be

at least 330 kg/cu.m. Portland Pozzolona cement or slag cement may be used for concrete.

(2) It should be ensured that the coarse aggregates used for

concrete complies with the requirements of durability and soundness as given in IS:383.

(3) Water cement ratio in foundation concrete should not exceed

0.50. If required, admixtures may be used to improve workability.

(2) Bartholomew, R.F. (1979), “The Protection of Concrete Piles in Aggressive Ground Conditions”, Recent developments in design and construction of piles, Institution of Civil Engineers, London.

207020-A 12


(4) A clear concrete cover over the reinforcement steel of at least

50 mm should be provided for all foundations. (5) Foundation concrete should be densified adequately using a

vibrator so as to form a dense impervious mass. Honeycombing of concrete or other defects can accelerate the corrosion process. Therefore, adequate quality control should be exercised on site to ensure good quality concrete of low permeability.

(6) The mixing water and curing water for foundations concrete

should be tested and suitable water conforming to IS:456 should be used for concreting and curing.

(7) Corrosion resistant steel (CRS) may be provided for

reinforcement steel. Alternatively, epoxy coating may be provided on the tor steel reinforcement.

6.5 Variability in Subsurface Conditions

Subsurface conditions encountered during construction may vary somewhat from the conditions encountered during the site investigation. In case significant variations are encountered during construction, we request to be notified so that our engineers may review the recommendations in this report in light of these variations.

7.0 SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

M/s. Cengrs Geotechnica Private Limited conducted a

geotechnical investigation for Commercial Outlet Project at Community Centre, Block-A, Vikaspuri in New Delhi. The scope of work included five boreholes to 30 m depth and five dynamic cone penetration tests to 10 m depth.

The soils at the site are alluvial in nature and consist of

alternating layers of silty sand / fine sand and sandy silt / clayey silt from the ground surface to final explored depth of 30 m. Groundwater was met between 9.0 and 11.0 m depth below existing ground level at the time of our field investigation (February, 2007).

207020-A 13


Isolated foundations with a connecting beams, RCC strip

footings (T-beam and slab) and raft foundation are suitable foundation schemes. Net bearing pressures for different settlements are given in Section 5.3 of this report. The appropriate net bearing pressure may be selected for the desired settlement as computed from soil-structure interaction.

8.0 CLOSURE

We appreciate the opportunity to perform this investigation for you and have pleasure in submitting this report. Please contact us when we can be of further service to you.

for CENGRS GEOTECHNICA PRIVATE LIMITED

(RAVI SUNDARAM) (SANJAY GUPTA) DIRECTOR MANAGING DIRECTOR

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

iB

H.N

o.

1

TA

BL

E N

O.

1

a

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2

Angle of Internal Friction

0.0

01.0

0

1.5

01.9

5

2.2

59

40

41

10

26.2

17.7

8.5

2.6

61.7

01.5

410.2

00.7

42.5

5(U

C)

3.0

03.4

5

4.5

04.9

5

5.2

50

77

23

01.7

11.5

69.8

0.5

032o

5.5

51.0

1.5

6.0

0(D

S)

6.4

5

7.5

07.9

5

8.2

50

14

51

35

43.7

28.5

15.2

1.7

61.5

811.7

1,2

,30.9

54

o

8.5

5(U

UT

)

9.0

09.4

5U

C :

Un

con

fine

d C

om

pre

ssio

n T

est

DS

: D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

10.5

0U

UT

: U

nco

nso

lidate

d U

ndra

ined T

riaxi

al S

hear

Test

10.9

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.1

b)

(3.0

m)

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nLoca

tion

Gra

in S

ize

Ana

lysi

s

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

WA

TE

R T

AB

LE

:

Specific Gravity

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri3

0.4

5 m

9.0

m20

7020

-A

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Mediu

m d

ense

dark

bro

wn s

andy

silt,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

-

very

stif

f, 8

.0 to 1

0.0

m

- m

ed

ium

de

nse

, 0

.0 t

o 1

.0 m

-

with

gra

vel,

1.0

to 3

.0 m

13

SP

T1

13

UD

S1

Moisture Content %

Very

stif

f to h

ard

light g

rey

claye

y si

lt, m

ediu

m p

last

ic

(M

I)

Mediu

m d

ense

light g

rey

silty

fine s

and (

SM

)

(8.0

m)

Tria

xia

l Te

st

DS

1

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Atterb

erg

Lim

its

UD

S2

23

SP

T3

24

21

SP

T6

SP

T2

-

hard

, 10.0

to 1

1.0

m

18

SP

T5

UD

S3

SP

T4

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

81

SP

T7

(11

.0m

)

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

iB

H.N

o.

1

TA

BL

E N

O.

1

b

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


11.2

50

92

80

1.7

81.6

110.8

11.5

5

12.0

012.4

5

13.5

013.9

5

14.2

525.4

16.5

8.9

1.8

41.6

312.6

01.1

514.5

5(U

C)

15.0

015.4

5

17.2

50

13

52

35

38.4

24.0

14.4

2.6

91.8

91.6

514.3

17.5

5

18.0

018.4

5

20.2

50

12

51

37

1.9

51.6

716.5

20.5

5

21.0

021.4

5

23.2

50

34

49

17

1.9

81.6

917.4

23.5

5

24.0

0U

C :

Un

con

fine

d C

om

pre

ssio

n T

est

24.4

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.1

c)*

Ou

tsid

e N

AB

L s

cop

e

UD

S8

Dense

light b

row

n s

andy

silt,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

34

SP

T13

(25

.0m

)

28

SP

T12

UD

S7

42

SP

T10

45

SP

T11

UD

S6

UD

S5

31

SP

T9

Mediu

m d

ense

light g

rey

sandy

silt

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

13

SP

T8

UD

S4

Mediu

m d

ense

light gre

y fin

e s

and (

SP

-SM

)

Com

munity

Centr

e, V

ikasp

uri

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Moisture Content %

9.0

m3

0.4

5 m

2070

20-A

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Tria

xia

l Te

stG

rain

Siz

e A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Symbol

(16

.0m

)H

ard

light g

rey

claye

y si

lt m

ediu

m p

last

ic (

MI)

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

Loca

tion

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

(13

.0m

)

(22

.0m

)

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

iB

H.N

o.

1

TA

BL

E N

O.

1

c

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


26.2

50

17

51

32

39.2

24.6

14.6

2.6

82.0

41.7

119.2

26.5

5

27.0

027.4

5

29.2

512

76

12

02.0

31.7

416.8

29.5

5

30.0

030.4

596

SP

T15

(29

.0m

)

UD

S10

Very

dense

gre

y fin

e s

and w

ith g

rave

l (S

P-S

M)

(30

.45

m)

49

SP

T14

UD

S9

Dense

light bro

wn c

laye

y si

lt, m

ediu

m p

last

ic (

CL)

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Moisture Content %

Tria

xia

l Te

st3

0.4

5 m

2070

20-A

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Gra

in S

ize A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri9

.0 m

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

Loca

tion

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

iB

H.N

o.

2

TA

BL

E N

O.

2

a

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


0.0

01.0

0

1.5

01.9

5

2.2

50

79

21

02.6

51.6

61.5

38.2

0.5

0.0

030o

2.5

51.0

1.5

3.0

0(D

S)

3.4

5

4.5

04.9

5

5.2

50

82

18

01.7

11.5

69.4

5.5

5

6.0

06.4

5

7.5

07.9

5

8.2

50

33

49

18

1.7

61.5

910.6

8.5

5

9.0

09.4

5D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

10.5

010.9

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.2

b)

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

45

SP

T7

(11

.0m

)

(7.0

m)

Dense

gre

y sa

ndy

silt,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

37

SP

T6

SP

T2

51

SP

T5

UD

S3

SP

T4

UD

S2

28

SP

T3

25

Tria

xia

l Te

st

DS

1

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Atterb

erg

Lim

its

Moisture Content %

9S

PT

1

15

UD

S1

2070

20-A

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Loose

to m

ediu

m d

ense

light bro

wn s

ilty

fine s

and

(S

M)

-

loose

, 0.0

to 2

.0 m

- m

ed

ium

de

nse

, 2

.0 t

o 7

.0 m

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

WA

TE

R T

AB

LE

:

Specific Gravity

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri3

0.4

5 m

9.2

0 m

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nLoca

tion

Gra

in S

ize

Ana

lysi

sC

ert

ific

ate

No

.T-0

80

9

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

iB

H.N

o.

2

TA

BL

E N

O.

2

b

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


11.2

50

76

24

01.7

91.6

111.1

0.5

0.0

035o

11.5

51.0

1.5

12.0

0(D

S)

12.4

5

13.5

013.9

5

14.2

527.2

18.7

8.5

1.8

31.6

312.5

14.5

5

15.0

015.4

5

17.2

50

32

47

21

26.1

16.6

9.5

1.8

51.6

214.1

17.5

5

18.0

018.4

5

20.2

50

37

48

15

28.9

20.4

8.5

1.9

61.6

816.4

1,2

,31.2

05

o

20.5

5(U

UT

)

21.0

0D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

21.4

5U

UT

: U

nco

nso

lidate

d U

ndra

ined T

riaxi

al S

hear

Test

23.2

52.0

11.7

117.3

23.5

5

24.0

024.4

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.2

c)

(14

.0m

)

-

dense

, 14.0

to 1

7.5

m

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

Loca

tion

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

Symbol

-

very

dense

, 17.5

to 2

5.0

m

Moisture Content %

9.2

0 m

30

.45

m20

7020

-A

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Tria

xia

l Te

stG

rain

Siz

e A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Mediu

m d

ense

gre

y si

lty s

and (

SM

)

Com

munity

Centr

e, V

ikasp

uri

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

25

SP

T8

UD

S4

28

SP

T9

UD

S5

Dense

to v

ery

dense

light b

row

n s

andy

silt,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

38

SP

T10

51

SP

T11

UD

S6

UD

S7

52

SP

T12

UD

S8

103

SP

T13

(25

.0m

)*

Ou

tsid

e N

AB

L s

cop

e

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

iB

H.N

o.

2

TA

BL

E N

O.

2

c

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


26.2

50

19

51

30

38.7

24.1

14.6

2.6

82.0

81.7

320.1

26.5

5

27.0

027.4

5

29.2

50

14

52

34

43.2

28.7

14.5

2.1

51.7

522.7

1,3

,51.4

56

o

29.5

5(U

UT

)

30.0

030.4

5

UU

T : U

nco

nso

lidate

d U

ndra

ined T

riaxi

al S

hear

Test

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

Loca

tion

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri9

.20

m3

0.4

5 m

2070

20-A

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Gra

in S

ize A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Moisture Content %

Tria

xia

l Te

st

UD

S9

Hard

dark

bro

wn c

laye

y si

lt, m

ediu

m p

last

ic (

MI)

64

SP

T14

51

SP

T15

UD

S10

(30

.45

m)

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

3

TA

BL

E N

O.

3

a

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


0.0

01.0

0

1.5

01.9

5

2.2

50

78

22

01.6

71.5

57.6

0.5

0.0

032o

2.5

51.0

1.5

3.0

0(D

S)

3.4

5

4.5

04.9

5

5.2

53

81

16

01.7

01.5

78.1

5.5

5

6.0

06.4

5

7.5

07.9

5

8.2

53

32

48

17

1.7

51.5

910.3

8.5

5

9.0

09.4

5D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

10.5

010.9

5(1

1.0

m)

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.3

b)

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nLoca

tion

Gra

in S

ize

Ana

lysi

s

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

WA

TE

R T

AB

LE

:

Specific Gravity

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri3

0.0

5 m

11

.0 m

2070

20-A

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Mediu

m d

ense

light bro

wn s

ilty

fine s

and (

SM

)

12

SP

T1

17

UD

S1

Moisture Content %

-

light gre

y w

ith tra

ces

of gra

vel,

3.0

to 7

.0 m

-

dense

, 7.0

to 1

0.0

m

Tria

xia

l Te

st

DS

1

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Atterb

erg

Lim

its

UD

S2

27

SP

T3

30

33

SP

T6

SP

T2

-

very

dense

, 10.0

to 1

1.0

m

31

SP

T5

UD

S3

SP

T4

gra

vel,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

(7.0

m)

Dense

to v

ery

dense

gre

y sa

ndy

silt

with

trace

s of

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

92

SP

T7

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

3

TA

BL

E N

O.

3

b

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


11.2

50

77

23

01.8

31.6

411.7

0.5

0.0

036o

11.5

51.0

1.5

12.0

0(D

S)

12.4

5

13.5

013.9

5

14.2

55

18

50

27

43.2

29.0

14.2

1.9

01.6

713.9

1,2

,31.0

54

o

14.5

5(U

UT

)

15.0

015.4

5

17.2

50

16

51

33

1.9

61.6

915.8

17.5

5

18.0

018.4

5

20.2

540.9

28.3

12.6

2.0

31.7

218.2

20.5

5

21.0

021.4

5

23.2

50

33

49

18

25.4

16.5

8.9

2.0

61.7

319.1

1,3

,51.2

56

o

23.5

5(U

UT

)D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

24.0

0U

UT

: U

nco

nso

lidate

d U

ndra

ined T

riaxi

al S

hear

Test

24.4

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.3

c)*

Ou

tsid

e N

AB

L s

cop

e

UD

S8

63

SP

T13

(26

.0m

)

52

SP

T12

Very

dense

light g

rey

sandy

silt,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

UD

S7

59

SP

T10

48

SP

T11

UD

S6

UD

S5

Very

dense

light b

row

n c

laye

y si

lt, m

ediu

m p

last

ic (M

I)

42

SP

T9

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

65

SP

T8

UD

S4

Very

dense

light g

rey

silty

fine s

and (

SM

)

Com

munity

Centr

e, V

ikasp

uri

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Moisture Content %

11

.00

m3

0.0

5 m

2070

20-A

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Tria

xia

l Te

stG

rain

Siz

e A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Symbol

(21

.0m

)

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

Loca

tion

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

(14

.0m

)

-

with

gra

vel,

14.0

to 1

6.0

m

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

3

TA

BL

E N

O.

3

c

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


26.2

50

98

20

2.0

51.7

516.9

26.5

5

27.0

027.3

0

29.2

529.5

5

30.0

030.0

5R

ef/

5cm

SP

T15

DS

2

(30

.05

m)

113/

15

cmS

PT

14

UD

S9

Very

dense

light b

row

n fi

ne s

and (

SP

)

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Moisture Content %

Tria

xia

l Te

st3

0.0

5 m

2070

20-A

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Gra

in S

ize A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri1

1.0

0 m

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

Loca

tion

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

4

TA

BL

E N

O.

4

a

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


0.0

01.0

0

1.5

01.9

5

2.2

50

79

21

01.6

71.5

57.7

2.5

5

3.0

03.4

5

4.5

04.9

5

5.2

50

76

24

01.7

01.5

78.3

0.5

0.0

034o

5.5

51.0

1.5

6.0

0(D

S)

6.4

5

7.5

07.9

5

8.2

528.7

20.2

8.5

1.7

71.6

010.6

00.8

48.5

5(U

C)

9.0

09.4

5D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

10.5

0U

C :

Un

con

fine

d C

om

pre

ssio

n T

est

10.9

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.4

b)

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

38

SP

T7

Dense

gre

y fin

e s

and (

SP

-SM

)

(7.5

m)

Dense

light g

rey

sandy

silt,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

104

SP

T6

SP

T2

(10

.5m

)

36

SP

T5

UD

S3

SP

T4

UD

S2

24

SP

T3

31

Tria

xia

l Te

st

DS

1

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Atterb

erg

Lim

its

Moisture Content %

14

SP

T1

37

UD

S1

2070

20-A

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Mediu

m d

ense

light bro

wn s

ilty

fine s

and (

SM

)

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

WA

TE

R T

AB

LE

:

Specific Gravity

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri3

0.4

5 m

10

.20

m

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nLoca

tion

Gra

in S

ize

Ana

lysi

sC

ert

ific

ate

No

.T-0

80

9

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

4

TA

BL

E N

O.

4

b

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


11.2

50

94

60

1.8

01.6

49.9

0.5

0.0

036o

11.5

51.0

1.5

12.0

0(D

S)

12.4

5

13.5

013.9

5

14.2

50

76

24

01.8

81.6

712.4

14.5

5

15.0

015.4

5

17.2

50

81

19

01.9

21.6

913.6

17.5

5

18.0

018.4

5

20.2

50

79

21

01.9

61.7

114.5

20.5

5

21.0

021.4

5

23.2

50

77

23

02.0

01.7

315.7

0.5

0.0

038o

23.5

51.0

1.5

24.0

0D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

(DS

)24.4

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.4

c)

-

dense

, 10.5

to 1

2.0

m

(13

.5m

)

-

very

dense

, 13.5

to 1

8.0

m

-

very

dense

, 12.0

to 1

3.5

m

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

Loca

tion

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

Symbol

Moisture Content %

10

.20

m3

0.4

5 m

2070

20-A

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Tria

xia

l Te

stG

rain

Siz

e A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dense

to v

ery

dense

gre

y fin

e s

and (

SP

-SM

)

Com

munity

Centr

e, V

ikasp

uri

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

55

SP

T8

UD

S4

59

SP

T9

Dense

to v

ery

dense

light b

row

n s

ilty

fine s

and (

SM

)

UD

S5

61

SP

T10

30

SP

T11

UD

S6

-

dense

, 18.0

to 2

4.0

m

UD

S7

36

SP

T12

UD

S8

64

SP

T13

-

very

dense

, 24.0

to 3

0.4

5 m

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

4

TA

BL

E N

O.

4

c

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


26.2

50

80

20

02.0

61.7

517.6

26.5

5

27.0

027.4

5

29.2

50

78

22

02.1

21.7

719.7

1,2

,30.0

040o

29.5

5(D

S)

30.0

030.4

5D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

Loca

tion

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri1

0.2

0 m

30

.45

m20

7020

-A

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Gra

in S

ize A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Moisture Content %

Tria

xia

l Te

st

UD

S9

Very

dense

light b

row

n s

ilty

fine s

and (

SM

)

-

very

dense

, 24.0

to 3

0.4

5 m

75

SP

T14

59

SP

T15

DS

2

(30

.45

m)

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

5

TA

BL

E N

O.

5

a

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


0.0

01.0

0

1.5

01.9

5

2.2

51.6

51.5

37.8

2.5

5

3.0

03.4

5

4.5

04.9

5

5.2

50

77

23

01.7

01.5

68.9

0.5

0.0

033o

5.5

51.0

1.5

6.0

0(D

S)

6.4

5

7.5

07.9

5

8.2

50

80

20

01.7

31.5

89.7

8.5

5

9.0

09.4

5D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

10.5

010.9

5

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.5

b)

(3.0

m)

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nLoca

tion

Gra

in S

ize

Ana

lysi

s

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

WA

TE

R T

AB

LE

:

Specific Gravity

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri3

0.1

5 m

10

.15

m20

7020

-A

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Firm

bro

wn c

laye

y si

lt, m

ediu

m p

last

ic (

MI)

5S

PT

1

11

UD

S1

Moisture Content %

Mediu

m d

ense

to d

ense

light g

rey

silty

fine s

and

(S

M)

Tria

xia

l Te

st

DS

1

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Atterb

erg

Lim

its

UD

S2

24

SP

T3

25

37

SP

T6

SP

T2

31

SP

T5

UD

S3

SP

T4

- m

ed

ium

de

nse

, 3

.0 t

o 7

.0 m

-

dense

, 7.0

to 1

3.5

m

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

39

SP

T7

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

5

TA

BL

E N

O.

5

b

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


11.2

50

82

18

02.6

51.7

91.6

210.4

0.5

0.0

035o

11.5

51.0

1.5

12.0

0(D

S)

12.4

5

13.5

013.9

5

14.2

53

33

48

16

27.7

17.1

10.6

1.8

51.6

412.8

1,2

,31.1

05

o

14.5

5(U

UT

)

15.0

015.4

5

17.2

50

35

48

17

1.8

81.6

613.5

17.5

5

18.0

018.4

5

20.2

50

14

51

35

38.9

24.2

14.7

1.9

61.6

816.7

01.2

420.5

5(U

C)

21.0

021.4

5

23.2

50

92

80

1.9

71.7

115.3

23.5

5D

S : D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

24.0

0U

UT

: U

nco

nso

lidate

d U

ndra

ined T

riaxi

al S

hear

Test

24.4

5U

C :

Un

con

fine

d C

om

pre

ssio

n T

est

(Cont'd

on T

able

No.5

c)*

Ou

tsid

e N

AB

L s

cop

e

UD

S8

Very

dense

light b

row

n fi

ne s

and (

SP

-SM

)

114

SP

T13

54

SP

T12

UD

S7

Hard

light bro

wn c

laye

y si

lt, m

ediu

m p

last

ic (

MI)

55

SP

T10

53

SP

T11

UD

S6

UD

S5

-

very

dense

, 14.2

to 1

9.0

m

37

SP

T9

Dense

to v

ery

dense

gre

y sa

ndy

silt,

low

pla

stic

(C

L)

-

with

tra

ces

of gra

vel,

13.5

to 1

5.0

m

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

70

SP

T8

UD

S4

Dense

light g

rey

silty

fine s

and (

SM

)

Com

munity

Centr

e, V

ikasp

uri

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Moisture Content %

10

.15

m3

0.1

5 m

2070

20-A

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Tria

xia

l Te

stG

rain

Siz

e A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Symbol

(19

.0m

)

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

Loca

tion

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

(13

.5m

)

-

dense

, 13.5

to 1

4.2

m

(22

.0m

)

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

Pro

ject

: V

arious

Com

mer

cial

Outle

t P

roje

cts

in D

elh

BH

.No.

5

TA

BL

E N

O.

5

c

JO

B N

O.

Gravel %

Sand %

Silt %

Clay %

Liquid %

Plastic %

Plasticity Index %

Confining Pressure

Kg/cm2

Cohesion Intercept

Kg/cm2


26.2

526.5

5

27.0

027.4

5

29.2

50

94

60

2.0

51.7

517.1

0.5

0.0

039o

29.5

51.0

1.5

30.0

0(D

S)

30.1

5

DS

: D

rain

ed D

irect

Shear

Test

Ref/

15

cmS

PT

15

DS

2

(30

.15

m)

99

SP

T14

DS

2V

ery

dense

light b

row

n fi

ne s

and (

SP

-SM

)

Natural Density

gms/cm3

Dry Density

gms/cm3

Moisture Content %

Tria

xia

l Te

st3

0.1

5 m

2070

20-A

N-Value*

Depth (m)

Sample No.

Symbol

SO

IL D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

Gra

in S

ize A

naly

sis

Atte

rberg

Lim

its

Specific Gravity

Surf

ace

Ele

vatio

nW

AT

ER

TA

BL

E :

(Co

nt'

d)

Co

mm

un

ity C

en

tre

, V

ika

spu

ri1

0.1

5 m

TE

RM

INA

TIO

N

DE

PT

H

* O

uts

ide

NA

BL

sco

pe

Loca

tion

Ce

rtif

ica

te N

o.T

-08

09

Blo

ck A

Plo

t N

o A

CENGRS GEOTECHNICA PVT. LTD. Job No.:207020-A Table No.: 6

PLASTICITY OF CLAY

Plasticity Liquid Limit

Low Plastic < 35 Medium Plastic 35 to 50 High Plastic > 50

CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS

Consistency Undrained Shear Strength,

kg/sq.cm

SPT (N) Value

Very Soft < 0.1 0 to 2 Soft 0.1 to 0.25 2 to 4 Firm/Medium 0.25 to 0.5 4 to 8 Stiff 0.5 to 1.0 8 to 15 Very Stiff 1.0 to 2.0 15 to 30 Hard > 2.0 > 30

DENSITY CONDITION OF GRANULAR SOILS

Density Descriptor

SPT (N) Value

Static Cone Tip

Resistance kg/sq.cm

Very Loose 0 to 4 < 20 Loose 4 to 10 20 to 40 Medium Dense 10 to 30 40 to 120 Dense 30 to 50 120 to 200 Very Dense > 50 > 200

DEGREE OF EXPANSION OF FINE GRAINED SOILS

Liquid Limit

Plasticity Index

Shrinkage Index

Free Swell Percent

Degree of Expansion

Degree of Severity

20 – 35 < 12 < 15 < 50 Low Non-critical

35 – 50 12 – 23 15 – 30 50 – 100 Medium Marginal

50 – 70 23 – 32 30 – 60 100 – 200 High Critical

70 – 90 > 32 > 60 > 200 Very High Severe

ENGINEERING DESCRIPTION OF SOILS

NABL ACCREDITED LABORATORY

207020-A Table No. 7 Job

Our laboratory is accredited to National Accreditation Board for Laboratories (NABL), New Delhi. The quality procedures in our laboratory conform to the International Standard ISO/IEC: 17025-2005.

The accreditation assures our clients of work quality in conformance with international norms and practices. It authorizes us to use the NABL logo on test results.

To maintain the necessary level of quality and reliability in all measurements on a continual basis, we indulge in the following:

Use of calibrated equipment, regular maintenance and good housekeeping are a part of our work culture.

Inter-laboratory comparison, proficiency testing and replicate testing, continuing education - ensure uniform quality of results.

Internal Audit of quality procedures is done by our qualified ISO 17025 auditors to maintain the requisite standards. NABL conducts external audit.

UNCERTAINTY

Every measurement entails an uncertainty. It is well known that no measuring instrument can determine the true value of any measurement. The cumulative effect of factors such as sensitivity of equipment, accuracy in calibration, human factors and environmental conditions will determine the overall uncertainty in the parameter determined from these measurements.

As a part of our commitment to our clients, we have worked out the uncertainty in the parameters reported by our laboratory. Although this does not form a part of our contract agreement, we present below our statistical estimate of uncertainty of various parameters based on our most recent evaluation (May, 2006).

Test / Parameter Uncertainty* Test / Parameter Uncertainty* Moisture Content, % ± 0.1 % Free Swell Index, % ± 0.20 % Bulk & Dry Density ± 0.01 g/cc Swell Pressure ± 0.01 kg/cm2

Specific Gravity ± 0.008 cc1 ± 0.0003 Liquid Limit ± 0.11 % cc2 ± 0.003 Plastic Limit ± 0.11 % mv ± 0.0003 cm2/kg

Shrinkage Limit ± 0.04 %

Consolidation

pc ± 0.15 kg/cm2 Unconfined

Compression c ±0.01 kg/cm2

CD Direct Shear Test φ ± 0.25°

c ± 0.01 kg/cm2 Sands &

Silty sands ± 1.5% of particle size

UU Triaxial Test

φ ± 0.04°

Soil Gradation Sandy silt /

clayey silt ± 1.5% of particle size

MDD ± 0.05 g/cc Laboratory CBR ± 0.3 % Std/Mod Proctor

Compaction OMC ± 0.3 % Coefficient of Permeability

± 1.3 % of value

* at 95 percent confidence level for coverage factor of 2

UNCERTAINTY IN LABORATORY MEASUREMENTS

8

Borehole No.pH

Value

1 7.3

2 7.3

WATER

Borehole No.

1

3

1

2

3

4

5

Negligible

Moderate

High

Very High

374 5798 7.2

340 5748 7.2

PER IS : 456-2000, CLAUSES 8.2.2.4 AND 9.1.2, TABLE 4, PAGE-19

REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULPHATE ATTACK AS

Location : Community Centre, Block A, VikaspuriVarious Commercial Outlet Projects in Delhi

Class In Groundwater (mg/l)

Less than 300

Concentration of Sulphates, expressed as SO3

In-Soil-Water Extract (Total) PercentTraces (<0.2)

0.2 to 0.5

> 2.0

300-1200

CHEMICAL TEST RESULTS

SOIL-WATER EXTRACT :

Depth, (m)

Sulphate Content (SO3) ,%

Chloride Content ,%

2000-10,000 ppm 0-2000 ppm

*SOURCE : INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS, LONDON (1979)

More than 10,000 ppm 2000-20,000 ppm

Generally not applicableOnly if considerably in excess

of 20,000 ppm

0-2000 ppm Not Applicable

ClassificationTropical ClimateTemperate Climate

Chloride Limits

CLASSIFICATION OF CHLORIDE CONDITIONS IN GROUNDWATER*

> 5000

1200-2500

1.0 to 2.0 2500-5000

0.5 to 1.0

2.25 0.09 0.02

0.022.25

Sulphate Content mg/l (SO3)

Chloride Content, mg/l

0.09

pH Value

Job No. Table No.207020-A

2

Symbol DCPT No.

1

2345

L E G E N D

DYNAMIC CONE PENETRATION TEST

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100NO. OF BLOWS PER 30cm PENETRATION

D E

P T

H,

m Job No. Fig No.


207020-A

SYMBOL

Clayey silt (MI)

Sandy silt (CL)

Fine sand (SP)

Fine sand (SP-SM)

Silty Fine Sand (SM)

Water Table

L E G E N D

DESCRIPTION

4

8

12

16

20

24

28

D E

P T

H,

m

32

36

Job No. Fig No.207020-A

0

SUMMARY OF BOREHOLE PROFILESLocation : Community Centre, Block A, Vikaspuri

Various Commercial Outlet Projects in Delhi

15

28

25

51

37

45

28

25

38

51

52

9

103

64

51

N-Value

BH-2

30.45 m

11.0

7.0

14.0

25.0

17

27

30

31

33

92

42

65

59

48

52

12

63

113/15cm

Ref/5cm

N-Value

BH-3

30.05 m

11.0

7.0

14.0

26.0

21.0

37

24

31

36

104

38

59

55

61

30

36

14

64

75

59

N-Value

BH-4

30.45 m

7.5

10.5

13.5

11

24

25

31

37

39

37

70

55

53

54

5

114

99

Ref/15cm

N-Value

BH-5

30.15 m

13.5

3.0

19.0

22.0

13

23

24

18

21

81

31

13

42

45

28

13

34

49

96

N-Value

BH-1

30.45 m

8.0

11.0

22.0

3.0

16.0

29.0

25.0

13.0

3

C

4

Symbol BH.No.

BH-1

BH-2

BH-3

BH-4BH-5

L E G E N D

Job No. Fig No.

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

C O R R E C T E D " N " V A L U E

D E

P T

H,

m

Location : Community Centre, Block A, VikaspuriVarious Comercial Outlet Projects in Delhi

207020-A

113/15cm

Ref/15cm

5

SYMBOL BORE DEPTH DESCRIPTION GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY D60 D10 Cu

HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

Sandy silt with gravel (CL)

Silty fine sand (SM)

Clayey silt (MI)

Fine sand (SP-SM)

1 2.25 9 40


41 10 0.140

1 5.25 0 77 23 0 0.240

1 8.25 0 14 51 35 0.013

1 11.25 0 92 8 0 0.280 0.094 2.98

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

GRAVELFINE MEDIUMS I L T COARSE

S A N DCLAY

207020-A Job No. Fig No.

Certificate No.T-0809

6


HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

Clayey silt (MI)

Clayey silt (MI)

Sandy silt (CL)

1 17.25 0 13


52 35 0.011

1 20.25 0 12 51 37 0.009

1 23.25 0 34 49 17 0.075

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



7


HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

Clayey silt (MI)

Fine sand with gravel (SP-SM)

1 26.25 0 17


51 32 0.014

1 29.25 12 76 12 0 0.580

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



8


HOLE m % % % %

2 11.25 0 76 24 0 0.260

49 18 0.4102 8.25 0 33

2 5.25 0 82 18 0 0.240

21 0 0.230

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS



Sandy silt (CL)


2 2.25 0 79


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



9


HOLE m % % % %

2 29.25 0 14 52 34 0.009

51 30 0.0122 26.25 0 19

2 20.25 0 37 48 15 0.061

47 21 0.016


GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

Sandy silt (CL)

Sandy silt (CL)

Clayey silt (MI)

Clayey silt (MI)

2 17.25 0 32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



10


HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS


Silty fine sand with traces of gravel (SM)

Sandy silt with traces of gravel (CL)


3 2.25 0 78


22 0 0.250

3 5.25 3 81 16 0 0.260

3 8.25 3 32 48 17 0.062

3 11.25 0 77 23 0 0.262

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



11


HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

Clayey silt with gravel (MI)

Clayey silt (MI)

Sandy silt (CL)

Fine sand (SP)

3 14.25 5 18


50 27 0.016

3 17.25 0 16 51 33 0.010

3 23.25 0 33 49 18 0.042

3 26.25 0 98 2 0 0.290 0.131 2.21

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



12


HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS



Fine sand (SP-SM)


4 2.25 0 79


21 0 0.258

4 5.25 0 76 24 0 0.256

4 11.24 0 94 6 0 0.297 0.123 2.41

4 14.25 0 76 24 0 0.236

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



13


HOLE m % % % %

23 0 0.2464 23.25 0 77

4 20.25 0 79 21 0 0.272

19 0 0.258

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS




4 17.25 0 81


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



14


HOLE m % % % %

4 29.25 0 78 22 0 0.239

20 0 0.279


GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS



4 26.25 0 80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



15


HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS




Sandy silt with traces of gravel (CL)

5 5.25 0 77


23 0 0.264

5 8.25 0 80 20 0 0.255

5 11.25 0 82 18 0 0.256

5 14.25 3 33 48 16 0.056

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



16


HOLE m % % % %

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

Sandy silt (CL)

Clayey silt (MI)

Fine sand (SP-SM)

Fine sand (SP-SM)

5 17.25 0 35


48 17 0.052

5 20.25 0 14 51 35 0.009

5 23.25 0 92 8 0 0.279 0.098 2.85

5 29.25 0 94 6 0 0.297 0.123 2.41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10P A R T I C L E S I Z E , m m

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


S A N DCLAY



Borehole No : 1 Dry Density "c" Value "Φ" ValueDepth : 5.25 m gm/cc kg/cm2

DEGREE

1.56 0 32

Type of Test : Saturated Consolidated Drained Type of Soil : Silty Fine Sand

D R A I N E D D I R E C T S H E A R T E S T

Location : Community Centre,Block-A,VikaspuriVarious Commercial Outlet Projects in Delhi

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

N O R M A L S T R E S S ( kg/cm2 )

S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )

Job No. 207020-A Fig No. 17


Borehole No : 1Depth : 8.25 m

BULK DENSITY DRY DENSITY MOISTURE CONTENT "c" Value "Φ" Valuegm/cc gm/cc % kg/cm2

DEGREE

1.76 1.58 11.7 0.95 4

Type of Sample: UndisturbedType of Soil : Clayey Silt


UNCONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST

Location : Community Centre,Block-A,Vikaspuri

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


S H

E A

R

S T

R E

S S

(

kg

/cm

2 )




DEGREE

1.53 0 30




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.61 0 35




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )





DEGREE

1.96 1.68 16.4 1.2 5

Type of Sample: UndisturbedType of Soil : Sandy Silt




0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


S H

E A

R

S T

R E

S S

(

kg

/cm

2 )





DEGREE

2.15 1.75 22.7 1.45 6

Type of Sample: UndisturbedType of Soil : Clayey Silt




0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


S H

E A

R

S T

R E

S S

(

kg

/cm

2 )




DEGREE

1.55 0 32




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.64 0 36




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )





DEGREE

1.67 1.90 13.9 1.05 4

Type of Sample: UndisturbedType of Soil : Clayey silt with gravel




0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


S H

E A

R

S T

R E

S S

(

kg/c

m2 )





DEGREE

2.06 1.73 19.1 1.25 6

Type of Sample: UndisturbedType of Soil : Sandy Silt




0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


S H

E A

R

S T

R E

S S

(

kg

/cm

2 )




DEGREE

1.57 0 34




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.64 0 36

Type of Test : Saturated Consolidated Drained Type of Soil : Fine Sand



0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.73 0 38




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.77 0 40




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.56 0 33




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.62 0 35




0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )





DEGREE

1.85 1.64 12.8 1.1 5

Type of Sample: UndisturbedType of Soil : Sandy silt with traces of gravel




0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


S H

E A

R

S T

R E

S S

(

kg/c

m2 )




DEGREE

1.75 0 39

Type of Test : Saturated Consolidated Drained Type of Soil : Fine Sand



0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5


S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S (

kg/c

m2 )



Job No. 207020-A Sheet no.1

c =

B =

FS =

c = 9.00 T/m2 φ = 5.0c' = 6.00 T/m2 φ'= 3.3 γ

Nc = Nq = Nγ = From To T/m3

Nc' = Nq

' = Nγ' = 0.0 7.0 1.80

7.0 10.0 1.902.5 10.0 14.0 2.00

C0.70

Y

1.0

B, m L, m ζc ζq ζγ dc dq dγ dc' dq' dγ

' GSF LSF

4.0 4.0 Square 10.0 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.49 1.00 1.00 48.9

0.45

0.27

GENERAL SHEAR FAILURELOCAL SHEAR FAILURE

Dep

th,m Depth factors

(GSF)

General

6.49

as per

5.99 1.35

1.57

Local Shear Failure :

GI work for various commercial outlet projects in Delhi

Location : Community Centre, Block A, Vikaspuri

The bearing capacity equation is as follows :

where:

Depth factors (LSF)

Shape Factors

Foundation Dimensions

48.9

Rw

FOUN-DATION SHAPE

Safe Net Bearing Capacity

T/m2

BEARING CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOR SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

qnet safe = (1/FS){cNcζcdc+q(Nq-1)ζqdq+0.5BγNγζγdγRw}

Depth factor to be considered ?

Depth, m

Factor of safety =

qnet safe ,

T/m2

Rw factor: Constant value(V) for worst condition or

calculate(C) based on WT Depth ? :

Project :

overburden pressure

CENGRS GEOTECHNICA PVT. LTDNEW DELHI

Analysis as per IS 6403-1981

Factor of safety

degrees

degrees

Bulk Density Profile

Soil parameters :

Rw =

dc, dq, dγ =

bearing capacity factors, which are a function of φNc, Nq, Nγ =

Water table correction factor

m SHEAR FAILURE

General Shear Failure :

FAILURE CRITERIA :

For computation of Depth Factor, depth below GL to be ignored to account for loose soils,poorly compacted backfill above foundation, scour etc. =

4.0

IS 1904-1986

Design Water Table depth = m

qnet safe =

Depth factors

Shape factors

q =

γ =

ζc, ζq, ζγ =

cohesion intercept

Foundation width

Bulk density of soil below founding level

safe net bearing capacity

Job No. 207020A Sheet No.2

Project :

C 0.5Y

3.040 mm

Foundatio

n

Wid

th,m

Fo

un

da

tion

L

en

gth

,m

Foundatio

n

Depth

,m

Shape

Desi

gn

N-v

alu

e

Settlement

@ 1kg/cm2

(as read off from graph),

mm

Rw

Fox'

s D

epth

F

act

or,

df

Rig

idity

F

act

or,

dr

Net Allowable Bearing

Pressure,

T/m2

4.0 4.0 4.0 Square 15.0 20.8 0.63 0.94 0.8 16.0

4.0 4.0 6.0 Square 20.0 14.7 0.50 0.78 0.8 21.8

4.0 4.0 10.0 Square 25.0 11.4 0.50 0.64 0.8 34.4

GI for various Commercial outlet Projects in Delhi

Location : Community Centre, Block A, Vikaspuri

Analysis as per IS:8009(Part 1)-1976 , Clause 9.1.4

CENGRS GEOTECHNICA PVT. LTD

SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS BASED ON N - VALUESSETTLEMEMT ANALYSIS FOR

NEW DELHI

Tolerable Total Settlement :

Design Water Table Depth :

Fox's Depth Factor to be considered ?

m

m

Depth to be ignored in Depth Factor Computation for loose soils, poorly compacted backfill, scour, etc.

R w factor : Calculate (C) based on water table depth or

Fixed Value(V) for worst condition :

5.0

GROUND FLOOR PLAN – Area : 3173.35 sqm

OPEN PARKING

Retail Lift/Lift Lobby Staircase Passages Toilets Escalators Voids

Plot Area : 13,628.00 sqm

ANNEXURE - IV

SITE PLAN SHOWING STP LOCATION

OPEN PARKING

Retail Lift/Lift Lobby Staircase Passages Toilets Escalators Voids

ANNEXURE - IV

STP BELOW

saravanan.thamizhave

Rectangle

saravanan.thamizhave

Line

ANNEXURE - VI

FOR RWH‐1

Roof Area = 1265.00 sqmArea under Road/Parking = 2651.00 sqmGreen Area = 979.00 sqm

1 = 0.852 = 0.73 Green areas = 0.15

S.No Description of Area

Area sqm. Run-off Factor

Yearly Rainfall in mtr.

1 Roof Top 1265.00 0.85 0.79732 Roads and

Pavements 2651.00 0.7 0.7973

3 Green Areas 979.00 0.15 0.7973Total

= 1963.14 m3

PEAK HOURLY RAINFALL = 50mm/hr.

= 53.76 m3

1 Roof Top = 92.79 m3

2Roads and pavements

= 7.34 m3

3 Green Areas

Total = 153.89 m3

FOR RWH‐2

Roof Area = 2515.00 sqmArea under Road/Parking = 4386.00 sqmGreen Area = 1726.00 sqm

1 = 0.852 = 0.73 Green areas = 0.15

S.No Description of Area

Area sqm. Run-off Factor

Yearly Rainfall in mtr.

1 Roof Top 2515.00 0.85 0.7973

Rain Water Harvesting Calculations

Volume of Water Available for Rain Water Harvesting Yearly (cum.)

As per Table No. 1 Rain Water Harvesting and Conservation Manual by CPWD, the annual rain fall is 797.3 mm (0.7973 mtr.) at DELHI

Run-off Factors for various types of surfaces

Roof top areasRoads and pavements

857.30

1479.55

117.082453.93

Volume of Water Available for Rain Water Harvesting Yearly (cum.)

Run-off Factors for various types of surfaces

Roof top areasRoads and pavements

Considering evaporation, spillage and first flush wastage, only 80 % of water is actually available for rain water harvesting

PEAK HOURLY DISCHARGE

1704.43

2 Roads andPavements

4386.00 0.7 0.7973

3 Green Areas 1726.00 0.15 0.7973Total

= 3486.98 m3

PEAK HOURLY RAINFALL = 50mm/hr.

= 106.89 m3

1 Roof Top = 153.51 m3

2Roads and pavements

= 12.95 m3

3 Green Areas

Total = 273.34 m3

Considering evaporation, spillage and first flush wastage, only 80 % of water is actually available for rain water harvesting

PEAK HOURLY DISCHARGE

2447.87

206.424358.72

I. BASIC INFORMATION COMMERCIAL BUILDING (HYPERMARKET...

Documents

Transcript of I. BASIC INFORMATION COMMERCIAL BUILDING (HYPERMARKET...