Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Registration number
IS12B32/761
S13B32/437
S13B32/503
S13B32/318
S12B32/011
S13B32/423
S13B32/
S13B32/612
IS12B32/
Signature
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................ 3
2.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 4
3.0 OBJECTIVES.......................................................................................................... 4
4.0 SCOPE OF ASSIGNMENT....................................................................................... 4
5.0 SITE DESCRIPTION................................................................................................ 5
5.1 Site topography................................................................................................. 5
5.2 Surface and subsurface conditions....................................................................5
5.3 Regional Geology.............................................................................................. 6
6.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION........................................................................................... 7
6.1 Sampling........................................................................................................... 8
6.2 Penetration test................................................................................................. 9
7.0 LABORATORY TEST............................................................................................. 10
8.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS...............................................................................10
9.0 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 10
2.0 INTRODUCTION
The third year students of Bachelor of Science In Civil and Environmental Engineering at
Uganda Christian University were tasked to find to design a foundation which is structurally
stable and suitable for the site adjacent to the to the Science Laboratory Block on the uphill end.
This report highlights observations arising from visual inspections, site tests and subsequent
analysis. The reason for the selection of a particular foundation has been well explained.
Conclusions and recommendations have been made in case action needs to be taken in some
areas.
3.0 OBJECTIVES
To design an appropriate and structural safe foundation
To find out the geo-technical properties of the soil at the site.
To make appropriate recommendations for any construction on the site
within the lower valley floors and swamps, and oxidizing, red iron rich loams that constitute the
mid slopes. Both types of soils yielded pH values between 5 and 6 on saturation with distilled
H2O. The higher ground on which the majority of settlements are found exhibit only sporadic
occurrences of laterite (partially as a result of land improvement). In addition, samples of soil
were collected from the central and southern regions of Uganda that overlie lithological units
containing granites of post basement age; members of the Mityana series, the karagwe-Ankolean
System and the Bunyoro Series: mafic volcanic of Mesozoic to Tertiary age; and Pleistocene
volcanic and sedimentary rocks.
The highest Mg and Ce concentrations are associated with the Mesozoic to Tertiary and
Pleistocene volcanic (carbonatitic) soils from the vicinity of Fort Portal, the rift valley and
Tororo. Mg and Ce concentrations within soils developed on the other sampled soils lay within
the range observed in soils overlying the Toro system and the Basement Complex gneisses. It is
therefore difficult to attribute the spatial distribution in EMF cases to the similar spatial
distribution of these units with the Mukono-Luwero-Kampala triangle.
Hoe
Spade
Shovel
Dynamic cone Penetrometer
Core cutter
Dolly
Firstly, a rectangular trial pit of about 1m was dug using a hoe and a spade. A shovel was used to
clear the debris off the pit.
6.1 Sampling
Both disturbed and undisturbed samples were taken at the trial pit. The undisturbed sample was
taken using a core cutter which was rammed into the pit by a dolly. A hoe was den used to dig
around the core cutter so that the sample can be removed. It was then placed in a polythene bag
and tied to maintain the moisture content and other in situ conditions of the soil.
The disturbed sample was also picked from the excavated soil and placed in a polythene bag.
sample
Readings
216
233
241
247
264
286
318
362
413
440
469
502
537
572
609
655
698
743
791
838
918
250
321
377
418
530
591
639
742
784
825
875
916
T1
6
22
T2
5
22
T3
65
102
18
18
92
Moisture content
SAMPLE ONE
Moisture content=
W 2w 3
2218
x 100=
x 100
w 3w1
186
=33.3%
SAMPLE 2
Moisture content=
W 2w 3
2218
x 100=
x 100
w 3w1
185
=30.8%
SAMPLE 3
Moisture content=
W 2w 3
10292
x 100=
x 100
w 3w1
9265
=37.04%
= 33.7 %
m=
2672949
1000
=1.723kg.
2
V= r h
2
= 0.05 x 0.13
=1.02x10
-3
m3
1.23
= 1.02 x 103
= 1689.2 kg/m3
=1689.2 x 9.81
=16571.2 N/m3
= 16.57 KN/m3
allow =
10 x CBR + h
h= (716/2000) + 1
=1.358 m
q
allow =
10 x 5 + 16.57x1.358
=72.502 KN/m2
300450 x 0.55
450
= 0.117m
L
0.117 6
L 0.702
Adjusted to L= 1m
2 x1
= 3
= 0.667 m
Adjusted to 1m
450
6 X 0.117
(1
)
1X1
1
= 450( 1 0.702
actual
max=765.9 KN/m2
actual
min=134.1 KN/m2
However this is less than the allowable pressure, hence need for adjusting
the dimensions of the foundation.
Using L=2
Adjusted to L= 2m
2 x2
3
= 1.33m
Adjusted to 2m
OBTAINING CONTACT PRESSURE
450
6 X 0.117
(1
)
2X2
2
= 112.5( 1 0.351
actual
max=151.9875 KN/m2
actual
min=73.0125 KN/m2
But q actual is greater than Q allowable, hence need for more adjustments of
foundation dimensions.
ADJUSTING L=3
2 x3
3
=2m
Adjusted to 3m
OBTAINING CONTACT PRESSURE
450
6 X 0.117
(1
)
3 X3
3
= 50( 1 0.234
Q act max=61.7 KN/m2
Q act min=38.3 KN/m2
9.0 CONCLUSIONS
DCP REPORTS
APPENDICES
Figure 9:
Figure 10: Wet soil samples in cans before putting the in the oven