/`

P
PRRO
OP POOS
SEED
DB BU
UIIL
LDDIIN
NGGC COOMMP
PLLE
EXX
O
OFF
M
MRRS
S.. S
SUUN
NIIT
TAAKKU
UMMA ARRII S
SOONNT
THHA
ALLIIA
A

Final Report
on
Soil Investigation Works

of
Proposed Building Site
at
Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur

Client : Mrs. Sunita Kumari Sonthalia

April, 2018
Submitted By:
MULTI LAB (P) LTD
Kupondole, Lalitpur
P.O. Box 5720, Kathmandu, Nepal
Tel: 977-1-5548900 Fax: 977-1-5523103
E-mail: multilab@wlink.com.np

Kupondole, Lalitpur, Nepal

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Field Work...................................................................................................................................... 1
2.1 General ............................................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Boring................................................................................................................................. 1
2.3 Photographs ....................................................................................................................... 1
2.4.1 Sampling ............................................................................................................................ 1
2.4.2 Undisturbed Samples ......................................................................................................... 2
2.5 Field Test. ......................................................................................................................... 2
2.6 Ground Water Table Monitoring....................................................................................... 2
3. Laboratory Tests and Results ......................................................................................................... 2
4. Soil Description .............................................................................................................................. 4
5. Foundation Analysis....................................................................................................................... 4
5.1 General ............................................................................................................................... 4
5.2 Depth of Foundation .......................................................................................................... 4
5.3 Computation of Bearing Capacity ..................................................................................... 4
5. 3.1 General ............................................................................................................................... 4
6. Liquefaction/Densification Susceptibility ..................................................................................... 8
6.1 General ............................................................................................................................... 8
6.2 Evaluation of Peak Ground Acceleration and Probable EQ Magnitude .......................... 8
6.3 Load Characterization........................................................................................................ 9
6.4 Resistance Characterization............................................................................................... 9
6.5 Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................. 10
7. Discussions .................................................................................................................................... 13
8. Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 13
9. References ..................................................................................................................................... 14

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of Field Works .................................................................................................. 1

Table 2: Test Results Summary Sheet ............................................................................................. 3
Table 3: Soil Description ................................................................................................................. 4
Table 4: SPT Value Correction of Boreholes .................................................................................. 6
Table 5: Computation of Bearing Capacity ..................................................................................... 7
Table 6a: Liquefaction Trigerring Analysis- BH1 ........................................................................... 11
Table 6b: Liquefaction Trigerring Analysis- BH2 ........................................................................... 12
Table 7: Summary of bearing capacity ........................................................................................... 13

APPENDICES

APPENDIX-A: Borehole Logs

APPENDIX-B: Photographs
APPENDIX-C: Test Result Sheet

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 1 of 1

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

1. INTRODUCTION

This report on Proposed Building Site of Mrs. Sunita Kumari Sonthalia at Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
District discusses the details of sub-surface exploration works carried on its buildings site. The
investigation work included Percussion Boring, SPT Test, Laboratory Tests and Analysis of
various test results to predict the allowable bearing capacity and liquefaction susceptibility of
existing soils at the site. The details of the investigation work as well as that of findings of the
analysis made are presented in the following paragraphs.

2. FIELD WORK

2.1 General

The fieldwork included Percussion Boring, Sampling, Standard Penetration Test and Water Table
Monitoring. The details of the field works carried out at the building site are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of Field Works

S No Boring Type BH Started Completed Depth
No M
1 Percussion boring 1 27-03-2018 29-03-2018 15
2 Percussion boring 2 30-03-2018 31-03-2018 15

2.2 Boring

The drilling work was carried out using Percussion Boring. The diameter of borehole at the
building site used was over 100 mm size. The boreholes were logged continuously in the field.
The borehole logs included visual classification of soil, records of SPT values at every depth
interval of 1.5 m and position of water table. At each depth where SPT test was carried out, SPT-
N values were recorded at every penetration depth interval of 150 mm until a total depth of
penetration of 450 mm was reached. The field boreholes records were updated after completion
of laboratory investigation works wherever was necessary. The updated borehole logs for the
buildings site are presented in Appendix A. The location of boreholes is shown in Fig 1.

2.3 Photographs

A set of color photographs was taken to show the record of ground investigation work. The
photographs cover the location of borehole, drilling of borehole, sample recovery and soil samples.
The photographs showing most of the investigation works are presented in Appendix C.

2.4.1 Sampling

Before any disturbed samples were taken, the bore holes were washed clean to flush any loose
disturbed soil particles deposited during the boring operation. The samples obtained in the split
spoon barrel of SPT tube during SPT tests were preserved as representative disturbed samples.
The disturbed samples recovered were placed in airtight doubled 0.5 mm thick transparent plastic
bags, labeled properly for identification and finally sealed to avoid any loss of moisture. Only
then the samples were transportation to the laboratory for further investigation.

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 1 of 14

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

2.4.2 Undisturbed Samples

Undisturbed samples were taken in clayey soil by means of 100 mm diameter thin walled tube
sampler made of steel pipes. The procedure of the sampling involved attaching a string of drill
rods to the sampling tube adapter and lowering the sampler to rest in the bottom of the bore hole
cleaned in advance for any loose materials left during boring operation. The sampler was then
pushed into the soil and every care was taken to avoid over pushing. After the sampler is pushed
to the required depth, the soil at bottom of the sampler is sheared off by giving a twist to the drill
rod at the top. The extracted samples were sealed properly by waxing the sampling tubes at the
both ends immediately after their recovery. On the top of the sampling tube the depth at which
the sample was extracted was labeled properly for later identification. On completion of waxing,
sampling tubes were wrapped by airtight polythene sheets and then bound on by adhesive tapes.
Samples from the sites were then transport to the testing laboratory at the earliest. Prior to
transporting, the samplers containing undisturbed samples were placed in wooden boxes. Saw
dust was used for packing to minimize disturbances during transportation.
2.5 Field Test.
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was the field test conducted at the site. A standard split barrel
sampler was used in the test. The SPT tests were conducted in all the boreholes of the building
site at depth interval of every 1.5 m. The driving of split-spoon was recorded at every 150 mm of
penetration till the total depth of penetration of 450 mm was reached. The number of blows
recorded for the first 150 mm of penetration is disregarded. The number of blows recorded for the
last two 150 mm intervals are added and expressed as SPT N-value. The records of the SPT
values obtained are presented in borehole logs in the Appendix A. The recorded SPT values are
without any correction of overburden and water table. The test was conducted without using liner.
The maximum rod length used was 16.5m. The SPT value obtained in the field are corrected for
overburden pressure.
2.6 Ground Water Table Monitoring
After completion of boring work the bore hole was left open for 24 hour. The depth to water table
recorded after 24 hour of boring work is taken as the position of the water table.
3. LABORATORY TESTS AND RESULTS
The following laboratory tests were conducted:
a) Grain Size Analysis (Sieve)
b) Grain Size Analysis (Hydrometer)
c) Atterberg’s Limits
d) Bulk Density
e) Unconfined Compression Test
f) Specific Gravity
g) Natural water content
h) Consolidation Test
The above laboratory tests were performed as per the specification laid down in the IS standard
codes. The above tests were conducted at the Geotechnical Laboratory of MULTI Lab (P) Ltd. at
Kupondole, Lalitpur. The results of laboratory tests were compiled in the form of Test Results
Summary Sheet and are presented in Table-2. The test result sheets of individual tests are given
in Appendix C.

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 2 of 14

 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
Table 2. - Test Result Summary Sheet
Project : Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Complex Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
BH. Depth % of Atterberg Limits Water Specific Unit Weight qu mv
Fines Content Dry Bulk
Gravel Sand LL PL PI
No m Silt Clay Gravity gm/cc gm/cc kN/m² cm²/kg

0.00-0.75 50.00 22.00 28.00 - - - 9.63 - - - - -

0.75-3.50 61.00 15.00 24.00 - - - 11.76 - - - - -

1 3.50-6.00 24.00 48.00 28.00 - - - 13.19 - - - - -

6.00-12.00 0.00 59.00 41.00 - - - 15.59 - - - - -

12.00-15.00 0.00 6.00 58.00 36.00 35.00 30.09 4.91 30.95 2.512 1.392 1.819 112.00 0.044

0.00-1.00 59.00 7.00 34.00 - - - 10.36 - - - - -

1.00-3.50 65.00 20.00 15.00 - - - 12.96 - - - - -

2 3.50-6.00 5.00 7.00 55.00 33.00 34.00 30.40 3.60 31.43 2.507 1.375 1.808 94.00 0.054

6.00-11.00 0.00 54.00 46.00 - - - 14.32 - - - - -

11.00-15.00 6.00 8.00 86.00 - - - 29.08 - - - - -

MULTI Lab (P). Ltd.

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

4. SOIL DESCRIPTION

The surface as well as sub-surface geological features existing at the building site is shown in the
borehole logs presented in Appendix A. Brief description of soil condition encountered at the
building site is presented in Table 3 below;

Table 3: Soil Description

S.N BH No Soil Description
1 1 The soil to a depth of 0.75m from ground level is top soil including sandy silty
gravels. From 0.75m depth to 3.50m depth soil is gray to brown sandy silty gravel
is found. From that depth to 3.50 depth gray gravelly silty sand is encountered.
Below 6.0 m gray silty fine sand is found. Below 6.0 m to the investigated depth
15m gray clayey silt of low plasticity is found.
2 2 The soil to a depth of 1.00m from ground level is filling materials including silty
gravels including cobbles. From 1.00m depth to 3.50m depth soil is gray to brown
silty sandy gravels is found. From that depth to 6.00m depth gray clayey silt of low
plasticity with traces of gravel. Below 6.0 m to 11.0 m depth gray silty fine sand is
found. Below 11.0 m 15.0 m gray clayey silt of low plasticity is found.

5. FOUNDATION ANALYSIS

5.1 General

Before selecting a given type of foundation vis-à-vis the particular set of conditions prevailing at
a site, the probable performance of the foundation must be judged with respect to two types of
potentially unsatisfactory behavior. In the first place, the bearing capacity of the foundation soil
must be sufficient enough to ensure that the induced total or differential settlement is not
detrimental. Secondly, the bearing capacity should be such that excessive shear strain, which
could lead to shear failure, does not occur.

5.2 Depth of Foundation

The depth of foundation is governed mainly factors such as scour depth and the nature of the
subsoil strata to place the foundation, basement requirement and other environmental factors. The
soil condition governs the bearing capacity. The suggested depth of foundation for building with
is 1.5m. The dimension of the isolated square foundation taken in the analysis is 3m.

5.3 Computation of Bearing Capacity

5. 3.1 General

Computation of Bearing Capacity

For the building site the bearing capacity analysis has been made using settlement criteria as the
soil at the site is sandy. The analysis was carried out for an isolated footing at 1.5m depth from
the ground level. The equation suggested by IS: 6403, (1981) has been used to determine bearing
capacity on the basis of settlement criteria. Observed SPT values are corrected for overburden

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 4 of 14

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

pressure. The SPT value corrections are shown in Table 4. The equation used for computation of
bearing capacity of a raft as well as isolated foundation is:

Peck et al. (1974)

IS: 6403, (1981)
 B  0.3 2 
qns  35 * N c  3 *    * RW , For 25 mm allowable settlement
 2 B  
Where,

qns = Net Safe Bearing Capacity

Nc = Corrected SPT Value
Rw = Water Table Correction Factor

Using the appropriate relationships suggested above the analyses was carried out. The results of
analysis are summarized in Table 5.

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 5 of 14

COMPUTATION OF BEARING CAPACITY Table 4
Soil Investigation of Proposed Building
SPT Value Correction
BH 1 Location: Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
ϒ kN/m3 18.1 ϒsub kN/m3 Energy CE CB CS CR 8.1 GWT, m 3 Remarks
Depth, Measured Corrected SPT
S.No po' CN Design SPT Value
m SPT Ratio ER Value (N1)60
1 1.5 27 27 1.44 60 1 1 1 0.75 29 po' =g'*D

2 3 33 54 1.21 60 1 1 1 0.75 30 CN =0.77log10(2000/po')

3 4.5 25 81 1.07 60 1 1 1 1 27 30

4 6 17 109 0.97 60 1 1 1 1 17

5 7.5 18 145 0.88 60 1 1 1 0.85 13

BH 2
ϒ kN/m3 18.1 ϒsub kN/m3 Energy CE CB CS CR 8.1 GWT, m 6 Remarks
Depth, Measured Corrected SPT
S.No po' CN Design SPT Value
m SPT Ratio ER Value (N1)60
1 1.5 30 27 1.44 60 1 1 1 0.75 32 po' =g'*D

2 3 32 54 1.21 60 1 1 1 0.75 29 CN =0.77log10(2000/po')

3 4.5 8 81 1.00 60 1 1 1 1 8 28

4 6 19 109 0.97 60 1 1 1 0.85 16

5 7.5 19 145 0.88 60 1 1 1 0.85 14

MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.

COMPUTATION OF BEARING CAPACITY
Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Table 5
Location: Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
COMPUTATION OF BEARING CAPACITY FROM SHEAR FAILURE CRITERIA
Description Unit Symbol Data Remarks
BH location 1 2
Depth m Df 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Width m B 1.5 2 3 1.5 2 3
Length m L 1.5 2 3 1.5 2 3
Unit Weight of Soil kN/m3 g 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1
Depth to Water Table m Dw 3 3 3 3 3 3
Corrected SPT Value Nc 30 30 30 28 28 28
BEARING CAPACITY FROM SETTLEMENT CRITERIA
From Peck's 1972 method
Water Table correction Factor - Rw 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Net Safe Bearing capacity kN/m2 qns 252 252 252 235 235 235
From IS:6403-1971 method
Net Safe Bearing capacity kN/m2 qns 197 181 166 183 168 154
Allowable Bearing Capacity kN/m2 qall 195 180 165 180 165 150
Remarks Settlement Criteria Governs Bearing Capacity
CHECK AGAINST OVERSTRESSING
Description Unit Symbol Data
2
Net Safe Bearing capacity kN/m qns 197 181 166 183 168 154
Depth to top of Clay Layer from FL m DT NA NA NA 2.0 2.0 2.0
Equivalent Width m Be NA NA NA 4 4 5
Equivalent Length m Le NA NA NA 5 6 8
Pressure on Top of Clay Layer kN/m2 qT NA NA NA 23 28 35
Bearing Capacity Factor - NC NA NA NA 6 6 6
Net safe Bearing Capacity kN/m2 Qnet NA NA NA 252 252 252
Net Safe Bearing Capacity kN/m2 qS NA NA NA 84 101 101
Remarks - qt<qS OK
MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

6. LIQUEFACTION/DENSIFICATION SUCEPTABILITY

6.1 General

The liquefaction phenomena occur in saturated cohesionless soil. The generation of excess pore
pressure below water table under undrained condition is a hall mark of liquefaction phenomena.
Under earthquake a rapid dynamic loading takes place. As a result there is tendency of saturated
sandy soil for densification but it cannot. This trend increases excess pore water pressure in
saturated sand to rise and the effective stress to decrease. If the effective stress of soil becomes
zero, the soil behaves as a liquid and any weight lying above it sinks in a level ground or soil
flows like water in sloppy areas.

In Nepal Laboratory Testing facility for liquefaction analysis is not available. As liquefaction
occurs in sands and non-plastic silty sands, simulation of field condition in the laboratory is very
much difficult. Thus results of field test is much preferred and widely used.

6.2 Evaluation of Peak Ground Acceleration and Probable EQ Magnitude

The Study conducted by JICA shows that the earthquake intensity varies from MMI VI to MMI
IX for Kathmandu Valley and accordingly the characteristic maximum magnitude of earthquake
taken in the analysis is 9.12 in MMI Scale or 7.6 in Richter Scale.

Using the relation and taking maximum magnitude of earthquake suggested as 7.6 in Ritcher
Scale, the corresponding intensity of earthquake in MMI scale comes to be 7.6*1.2 = 9.12

N V Nayak in his “Foundation Design Manual" has given a relation for maximum ground
acceleration in terms of Earthquake intensity in MMI Scale as:

Im
log10 (amax )   0.5
3
Where,
Im = Modified Marcalli Intensity
amax  Maximum ground acceleration in cm/sec2

9
log10 (amax )   0.5  2.5
3
 amax  316.23 cm / sec2  0.32 g
In the present analysis the value of earthquake magnitude has been taken 7.6 in Ritcher Scale.

Over the years a number of approaches to evaluation for potential for initiation of liquefaction
haven developed. Out of these, the most common is the cyclic stress approach developed H B
Seed between 1960s and 1970s at the University of California, Berkley. Liquefaction occurs
when cyclic shear stress induced by a certain earthquake exceeds the shear strength of soil.

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 8 of 14

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

The cyclic stress approach is conceptually is quite simple. In this approach the earthquake
induced loading is expressed in terms of cyclic shear stresses. It is then compared with the
liquefaction resistance of the soil which is also expressed in terms of cyclic shear stresses. If the
loading exceeds the soil resistance liquefaction is expected to occur.

Seed and Idriss (1971) has given a simplified procedure to obtain uniform cyclic shear stress for
level ground or gently sloping sites using SPT test. Since then a lot of advancement in the
liquefaction study has taken place. Accordingly in this study the approach suggested by I. M.
Idriss and R. W. Boulanger (2008) has been used in the analysis.

6.3 Load Characterization

Seed and Idriss (1971) has given a simplified procedure to obtain uniform cyclic shear stress for
level ground or gently sloping sites. The suggested relation is:
a
 max  max * v * rd
g
a
 cyc  O.65 * max * v * rd
g
Where,
 max  Maximum shear stress
amax  Peak ground surface acceleration
g = Acceleration due to gravity
 v = Total vertical stress
rd = Stress reduction factor at the depth of interest

6.4 Resistance Characterization

In most of the countries The Standard Penetration test (SPT) has been the most commonly used
in-situ test for characterization of liquefaction resistance. Seed et al. (1983) compared the
corrected SPT resistance ( N1(60) ) and cyclic stress ratio for clean sand (< 5 % fines) and silty
sand (> 5 % fines) for earthquake of magnitude M = 7.5 in MM Scale.
Em
( N1(60) = N m * C N *
0.6 * E ff
Where,
N1(60) = Corrected SPT value,
CN  Overburden Correction Factor = 10
p0 '
Em = Actual hammer energy = 60 % of E ff
E ff = Theroritical fre fall hammer energy
p0 ' = Effective overburden pressure in at depth of interest, KPa
As per Seed et al. the cyclic stress ratio to initiate liquefaction is given by:

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 9 of 14

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

 cyc ,L   cyc , L * v0

Where,
 cyc, L  Cyclic shear stress to initiate liquefaction
 v0 = Effective overburden pressure

6.5 Factor of Safety

The factor of safety is given by:

Cyclic shear stress required for liquefacti on

F
Equivalent cyclic shear stress induced by earthquake

Using the above mentioned relationships the analysis has been carried out. The analysis of
liquefaction susceptibility analysis is presented in Table 6a & Table 6b.

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 10 of 14

Proposed Building Table 6a
Liquefaction Trigerring Analysis
BH 1
Input Parameters Symbol Unit Data
Pear Ground Acceleration amax - 0.32

Earthquake Magnitude , Ritcher M - 7.6

Water Table Depth (m) m 0

3
Unit Weight above Water Table gt kN/m 18.10
3
Unit Weight below Water Table gsat kN/m 20.00

Borehole Diameter d mm 100.00

Required Correction for Sampler liners Cs - NO
SPT Depth Measured Fines % Energy CE CB CS CR N60 sVC sVC' CN (N1)60 DN for (N1)60 -CS Stress CSR MSF for Ka for CRR for CRR FOS

Sample m N Ratio fine Reduction Sand Sand M = 7.5

Number ER contents Coefficient &
rd sv' = 1 atm

4 6.00 17 41 60.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 14.45 120.00 61.14 1.29 18.57 5.58 24.16 0.95 0.39 0.97 1.08 0.27 0.29 0.73

5 7.50 18 41 60.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 17.10 150.00 76.43 1.15 19.66 5.58 25.24 0.94 0.38 0.97 1.05 0.30 0.30 0.79

6 9.00 21 41 60.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 19.95 180.00 91.71 1.05 20.94 5.58 26.52 0.92 0.37 0.97 1.02 0.33 0.33 0.88

7 10.50 24 41 60.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 24.00 210.00 107.00 0.97 23.32 5.58 28.90 0.90 0.37 0.97 0.99 0.42 0.41 1.12

MULTI Lab (P). Ltd.

Proposed Building Table 6b
Liquefaction Trigerring Analysis
BH 2
Input Parameters Symbol Unit Data
Pear Ground Acceleration amax - 0.32

Earthquake Magnitude , Ritcher M - 7.6

Water Table Depth (m) m 0

3
Unit Weight above Water Table gt kN/m 18.10
3
Unit Weight below Water Table gsat kN/m 20.00

Borehole Diameter d mm 100.00

Required Correction for Sampler liners Cs - NO
SPT Depth Measured Fines % Energy CE CB CS CR N60 sVC sVC' CN (N1)60 DN for (N1)60 -CS Stress CSR MSF for Ka for CRR for CRR FOS

Sample m N Ratio fine Reduction Sand Sand M = 7.5

Number ER contents Coefficient &
rd sv' = 1 atm

4 6.00 19 46 60.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 16.15 120.00 61.14 1.29 20.76 5.61 26.37 0.95 0.39 0.97 1.09 0.33 0.35 0.89

5 7.50 19 46 60.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 18.05 150.00 76.43 1.15 20.75 5.61 26.36 0.94 0.38 0.97 1.05 0.33 0.33 0.87

6 9.00 20 46 60.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 19.00 180.00 91.71 1.05 19.94 5.61 25.55 0.92 0.37 0.97 1.02 0.30 0.30 0.80

7 10.50 27 46 60.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 27.00 210.00 107.00 0.97 26.23 5.61 31.84 0.90 0.37 0.97 0.99 0.63 0.60 1.65

MULTI Lab (P). Ltd.

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

7. DISCUSSIONS

For the building site the bearing capacity analysis has been made using settlement criteria as the
soil at the site is sandy. The analysis was carried out for an isolated footing at 1.5m depth from
the ground level. The bearing capacity analysis was carried out based on the results of SPT Test.
The size of foundation for isolated square footing taken for the analysis is is 3m×3m size. The
equation suggested by IS: 6403, (1981) has been used to determine bearing capacity on the basis
of settlement criteria. The minimum of the bearing capacity obtained from the above equation has
been suggested as the bearing capacity of the soil.

A clay layer exists below the foundation level. Thus a check on overstressing is required. To
accomplish this, the stress imposed by foundation pressure on the top of clay is computed using
stress distribution theory (2V:1H). The bearing capacity of clay layer is computed and compared
with pressure imposed by foundation on the top of underlying clay layer. The transferred stress is
kept less than the bearing capacity of clay underneath.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS

On the basis of foundation analysis the following recommendations have been made. The type of
foundation analyzed is an isolated foundation. On the basis of foundation analysis the following
recommendations have been made. The bearing capacities are as follows in table 7 below;

Table 7: Summary of bearing capacity

SNo BH Depth Width Bearing Capacity Allowable
Location M M kN/m2 Bearing capacity
Peck IS:(6403) kN/m2
(etal Method) Method Bearing capacity
1.5 252 197 195
1 1 1.5 2 252 181 180
3 252 166 165
1.5 235 183 180
2 2 1.5 2 235 168 165
3 235 154 150

 Bearing capacity is governed by settlement criteria.

 The depth adopted in the analysis is 1.5m for isolated square foundation.
 The width adopted in the analysis is 3m for isolated square foundation.
 The bearing capacity recommended is as per Table 7 above.
 The allowable settlement taken in the analysis is 40mmn (IS-1904) for RCC foundation in sandy soil.
The values can be adjusted linearly for other values of allowable settlements.
 The average modulus of sub-grade rxn for the site can be taken as 12MN/m3.
 The soil is susceptible to liquefaction for earthquake intensity above 9.12 in Modified
Marcalli Scale or 7.6 in Ritcher Scale.
 To prevent excessive settlement due to densification in the event of a major earthquake 600
mm diameter stone column are to be installed in a triangular pattern at 2m c/c to a depth of
8.5m from the foundation level with a minimum of 0.3m thickness gravel blanket below the
raft level.

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 13 of 14

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

 The foundation designer need not follow strictly the depth and dimensions adopted in the
analysis presented in this report. He is free to select any other dimensions for depth and width
depending upon the actual loads and moments to be transmitted to the foundation soil. At this
juncture it is worth mentioning that the allowable bearing capacity depends on many variables
such as allowable settlement, type of foundation, size and depth of foundation, importance of
structure, cost of project etc. Therefore, on the basis of soil index properties data and
engineering properties data provided in this report (i.e. data furnished in test result summary
sheet Table 2 and bore hole logs provided in Appendix A), the foundation designer is free to
refine the calculations wherever he feels necessary.

9. REFERENCES

a. Simons, N. E. and Menzies, B. K. (1977), “A short course in Foundation Engineering”,

Newons and Butterworths, London
b. Murty, V. N. S. (1991), “Foundation Engineering”, Sai Kripa Technical Consultant Banglore.
c. Peck, R. B., Hanson W. E. and Thornburn T. H (1974), “Foundation Engineering”, Wiley
Eastern Limited, New Delhi.
d. Noyak, N. V. (1982), “Foundation Design Manual ", Dhanpati Rai & Sons. Delhi.
e. Bowles, J. E (1988), “Foundation Analysis and Design”, 4th Edition, Mcgraw Hill and
Company, USA.
f. Murthy, V. N. S. (1991), “Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering”, Vol. II, “Foundation
Engineering”, Sai Kripa Technical Consultants, Bangalore.
g. Terzaghi, K. and Peck R. B. (1967), “Soil Mechanic in Engineering Practice,” John Wiley
and Sons Inc. New York, USA.

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 14 of 14

Appendix-A
Borehole Logs
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
BORE HOLE LOG
Project : Soil Investigation Works of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
Client : Mrs. Sunita Kumari Sonthalia
Bore Hole No : 1
Diameter of BH, mm : 100 mm
RL of GWT : 3.0 m
Date : 27th March, 2018 to 29th March, 2018
Logged By : Sunil Yadav
Prepared By : Manoj Subedi
Checked By : Sandeep Kr. Jha
Certified By : Madhu Sudan KC
Scale Depth Thickness Sampiling Group Soil SPT (Field Record)
1=50cm Depth Type Soil Classification Symbol Symbol Value
Each m m m 15 cm 30 cm 45 cm N

0-0.75 0.75 Filling materials including sandy silty gravels FM

1.50 SPT 8 13 14 27

3.43 Gray to brown sandy silty gravels GM

3.00 SPT 15 18 15 33
3.50

4.50 SPT 6 10 15 25
Gray gravelly silty sand with cut layer of clayey
2.50 SP
silt at 4.00 to 4.30 m

6.00 6.00 SPT 8 8 9 17

7.50 SPT 7 8 10 18

9.00 SPT 8 9 12 21
6.00 Gray silty fine sand SP

10.50 SPT 9 9 15 24

12.00 12.00 SPT 6 6 7 13

12.50 UDS

13.50 SPT 5 6 8 14
3.00 Gray clayey silt of low plasticity ML

15.00 15.00 SPT 7 5 7 12

 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
BORE HOLE LOG
Project : Soil Investigation Works of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
Client : Mrs. Sunita Kumari Sonthalia
Bore Hole No : 2
Diameter of BH, mm : 100 mm
RL of GWT : 3.0 m
Date : 30th March, 2018 to 31st March, 2018
Logged By : Sunil Kumar Yadav
Prepared By : Manoj Subedi
Checked By : Sandeep Kr. Jha
Certified By : Madhu Sudan KC
Scale Depth Thickness Sampiling Group Soil SPT (Field Record)
1=50cm Depth Type Soil Classification Symbol Symbol Value
Each m m m 15 cm 30 cm 45 cm N

0.00 Filling materials including silty gravels including

1.00 FM
1.00 cobbles
1.50 SPT 8 15 15 30

3.50 Gray to brown silty sandy gravels GW

3.00 SPT 10 18 14 32
3.50
4.00 UDS
4.50 SPT 2 4 4 8
Gray clayey silt of low plasticity with traces of
2.50 ML
gravels

6.00 6.00 SPT 10 8 11 19

7.50 SPT 10 10 9 19

5.00 Gray silty fine sand SP

9.00 SPT 9 8 12 20

10.50 SPT 10 12 15 27
11.00

12.00 SPT 6 8 7 15

Gray clayey silt of low plasticity with traces of

4.00 ML
13.50 SPT gravels 5 6 7 13

15.00 15.00 SPT 6 8 8 16

Appendix-B
Photographs
 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 1 of 2

 Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur- Final Report

MULTI Lab (P) LTd. Page 2 of 2

 Appendix-C
Test Result Sheets
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
ATTERBERG LIMITS
Project : Proposed Building Site BH No. : BH-1
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur Date : 5th April, 2018
Depth (m) : 12.00-15.00 Checked by : S.K. Jha
Tested by : Manoj Subedi Certified by : Madhu Sudan KC
PLASTIC LIMIT
Determination No. 1 2 3
Continer No 1 2
Weight of Container + wet soil gms 32.50 32.80
Weight of container + Dry soil gms 26.90 27.30
Weight of water gms 5.60 5.50
Weight of container gms 8.10 9.20
Weight of dry soil gms 18.80 18.10
Water content % 29.79 30.39
Plastic limit % 30.09

LIQUID LIMIT
Determination No. 1 2 3 4 5 6
Container No 3 4 5
Weight of container + Wet soil gms 43.50 45.90 46.90
Weight of container +Dry soil gms 32.80 36.40 39.90
Weight of water gms 10.70 9.50 7.00
Weight of container gms 10.00 9.80 10.00
Weight of dry soil gms 22.80 26.60 29.90
Water content % 46.93 35.71 23.41
Number of blows 16.00 24.00 37.00

100.00
Log Number of Blows

10.00

1.00
15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55
Water Content, %

Liquid Limit, WL 35.00 Remarks:

Plastic Limit, Wp 30.09
Plascicity Index, PI 4.91
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
ATTERBERG LIMITS
Project : Proposed Building Site BH No. : BH-2
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur Date : 5th April, 2018
Depth (m) : 3.50-6.00 Checked by : S.K. Jha
Tested by : Manoj Subedi Certified by : Madhu Sudan KC
PLASTIC LIMIT
Determination No. 1 2 3
Continer No 1 2
Weight of Container + wet soil gms 34.20 33.70
Weight of container + Dry soil gms 28.40 28.40
Weight of water gms 5.80 5.30
Weight of container gms 9.50 10.80
Weight of dry soil gms 18.90 17.60
Water content % 30.69 30.11
Plastic limit % 30.40

LIQUID LIMIT
Determination No. 1 2 3 4 5 6
Container No 3 4 5
Weight of container + Wet soil gms 42.50 43.50 43.50
Weight of container +Dry soil gms 33.40 35.00 35.90
Weight of water gms 9.10 8.50 7.60
Weight of container gms 9.50 10.00 10.20
Weight of dry soil gms 23.90 25.00 25.70
Water content % 38.08 34.00 29.57
Number of blows 16.00 24.00 37.00

100.00
Log Number of Blows

10.00

1.00
20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50
Water Content, %

Liquid Limit, WL 34.00 Remarks:

Plastic Limit, Wp 30.40
Plascicity Index, PI 3.60
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: 1
Wt. of Sample (gms): 459.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 4th April, 2018 Checked by: Sandeep Kr. Jha
Depth (m): 12.00-15.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
20.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
16.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
12.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
10.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
6.300 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
2.360 1.40 1.40 0.31 99.69
1.180 2.10 3.50 0.76 99.24
0.600 0.60 4.10 0.89 99.11
0.425 0.00 4.10 0.89 99.11
0.300 0.90 5.00 1.09 98.91
0.150 4.20 9.20 2.00 98.00
0.075 18.70 27.90 6.08 93.92
0.057 87.43
0.041 85.87
0.029 82.74
0.021 76.50
0.015 68.69
0.012 Data From Hydrometer Analysis 59.33
0.008 51.52
0.006 46.84
0.004 43.71
0.003 39.03
0.001 34.35

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS

Project : Proposed Building Site

BH No : 1 Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur

Volume of Hydrometer (cucm) : 50.00 Depth (m) : 12.00-15.00

Qty of Dispersing Agent (gms) : 4.00 Date: : 4th April, 2018

Specific Gravity : 2.510 Jar No. : A

Minus 75 micron Seive : 50.00 Hydrometer No : 1

Meniscus Correction (Cm): : 0.50 Unit Wt water (gm/cc) : 1.00

Dispersing Agent: : (NaPo3)6 Area of Jar (sqcm) : 38.46

Tested by : Manoj Subedi ho : 7.50

Certified by: : Madhu Sudan KC Checked by : S.K. Jha

Time Elapses Hyd. Temp. Comp. Cor. Eff. Rh2 = h M (He/t) 0.5
Particle %age
Time Reading Cor. Read Depth Size Finer
Rh1 = He D N
min Rh ºC C Rh+Cm cm Rh + C mm %
10.31 0.50 31.00 22.00 -1 31.5 8.495 30 0.00961 0.01382 4.122 0.057 99.74
10.32 1.00 30.50 22.00 -1 31 8.63 29.5 0.00961 0.01382 2.938 0.0406 98.07
10.34 2.00 29.50 23.00 -1 30 8.9 28.5 0.00938 0.01365 2.11 0.0288 94.75
10.38 4.00 27.50 23.00 -1 28 9.44 26.5 0.00938 0.01365 1.536 0.021 88.10
10.46 8.00 25.00 23.00 -1 25.5 10.12 24 0.00938 0.01365 1.124 0.0154 79.79
11.01 15.00 22.00 23.00 -1 22.5 10.93 21 0.00938 0.01365 0.853 0.0117 69.81
11.33 30.00 19.50 24.00 -1 20 11.6 18.5 0.00916 0.01349 0.622 0.0084 61.50
12.33 60.00 18.00 24.00 -1 18.5 12.01 17 0.00916 0.01349 0.447 0.006 56.52
2.33 120.00 17.00 24.00 -1 17.5 12.28 16 0.00916 0.01349 0.32 0.0043 53.19
6.33 240.00 15.50 23.00 -1 16 12.68 14.5 0.00938 0.01365 0.23 0.0031 48.21
10.31 1440.00 14.00 22.00 -1 14.5 13.09 13 0.00961 0.01382 0.095 0.0013 43.22
0.5
M = [0.03h/(G-1)] D = M (He/t)0.5
N = (G/G-1)(Rh2/W) x 100
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: 2
Wt. of Sample (gms): 413.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 4th April, 2018 Checked by: Sandeep Kr. Jha
Depth (m): 3.50-6.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
20.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
16.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
12.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
10.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
6.300 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
4.750 19.70 19.70 4.77 95.23
2.360 4.50 24.20 5.86 94.14
1.180 3.70 27.90 6.76 93.24
0.600 1.30 29.20 7.07 92.93
0.425 0.00 29.20 7.07 92.93
0.300 2.20 31.40 7.60 92.40
0.150 6.00 37.40 9.06 90.94
0.075 12.00 49.40 11.96 88.04
0.057 81.95
0.041 80.49
0.029 76.10
0.021 70.24
0.016 61.46
0.012 Data From Hydrometer Analysis 54.15
0.008 46.83
0.006 43.90
0.004 40.98
0.003 36.59
0.001 30.73

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS

Project : Proposed Building Site

BH No : 2 Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur

Volume of Hydrometer (cucm) : 50.00 Depth (m) : 3.50-6.00

Qty of Dispersing Agent (gms) : 4.00 Date: : 4th April, 2018

Specific Gravity : 2.510 Jar No. : B

Minus 75 micron Seive : 50.00 Hydrometer No : 1

Meniscus Correction (Cm): : 0.50 Unit Wt water (gm/cc) : 1.00

Dispersing Agent: : (NaPo3)6 Area of Jar (sqcm) : 38.46

Tested by : Manoj Subedi ho : 7.50

Certified by: : Madhu Sudan KC Checked by : S.K. Jha

Time Elapses Hyd. Temp. Comp. Cor. Eff. Rh2 = h M (He/t) 0.5
Particle %age
Time Reading Cor. Read Depth Size Finer
Rh1 = He D N
min Rh ºC C Rh+Cm cm Rh + C mm %
10.31 0.50 31.00 22.00 -1 31.5 8.495 30 0.00961 0.01382 4.122 0.057 99.74
10.32 1.00 30.50 22.00 -1 31 8.63 29.5 0.00961 0.01382 2.938 0.0406 98.07
10.34 2.00 29.00 23.00 -1 29.5 9.035 28 0.00938 0.01365 2.125 0.029 93.09
10.38 4.00 27.00 23.00 -1 27.5 9.575 26 0.00938 0.01365 1.547 0.0211 86.44
10.46 8.00 24.00 23.00 -1 24.5 10.39 23 0.00938 0.01365 1.139 0.0156 76.46
11.01 15.00 21.50 23.00 -1 22 11.06 20.5 0.00938 0.01365 0.859 0.0117 68.15
11.33 30.00 19.00 24.00 -1 19.5 11.74 18 0.00916 0.01349 0.625 0.0084 59.84
12.33 60.00 18.00 24.00 -1 18.5 12.01 17 0.00916 0.01349 0.447 0.006 56.52
2.33 120.00 17.00 24.00 -1 17.5 12.28 16 0.00916 0.01349 0.32 0.0043 53.19
6.33 240.00 15.50 23.00 -1 16 12.68 14.5 0.00938 0.01365 0.23 0.0031 48.21
10.31 1440.00 13.50 22.00 -1 14 13.22 12.5 0.00961 0.01382 0.096 0.0013 41.56
0.5
M = [0.03h/(G-1)] D = M (He/t)0.5
N = (G/G-1)(Rh2/W) x 100
 Sheet 1 of 2

MULTI Lab (P) Ltd

CONSOLIDATION TEST

Project: Proposed Building Site Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur

BH. No. 1 Depth (m): 12.50 m UDS
Analyzed by : S.K. Jha Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Description of soil : Date : 30th to 5th April, 2018
Consolidometer Type: Fixed Ring Ring No : 1
Multiplication ratio of load device: 10 Height(cm) : 2
Ring Diameter (cm) : 6 Dial Constant (cm) : 0.001
Specific Gravity : 2.54 Volume V(cm3 ) : 56.55
Area(cm² ) : 28.27
SOIL PROPERTY DETERMINATION
Weight of can + wet soil (gms) : 300.000
Weight of can + dry soil (gms) : 275.900
Weight of can (gms) : 197.000
Weight of water (gms) : 24.100
weight of wet soil (gms) : 103.000
weight of dry soil (gms) : 78.900
Natural water content (%) 30.545
Weight of ring (gms) : 197.000
Weight of ring+ wet soil after test (gms) : 300.300
Weight of ring+dry soil after test (gms) : 275.900
Weight of wet soil after test (gms) : 103.300
Weight of dry soil (gms ) : 78.900
Weight of water after test (gms) : 24.400
Final water content (%) : 30.925
Initial dial reading (div) : 1532.000
Final dial reading (div) : 1342.000
Change in height (cms) : 0.190
Final height of sample (cms) 1.810
Height of solids (cms) : 1.099
Final height of voids (cms) : 0.711
Final void ratio 0.648
Initial height of voids 0.901
Initial voids ratio 0.820
Unit weight of soil (gm/ cc) : 1.821
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULT SHEET
Sheet 2 of 2
Project : Proposed Building Site Location: Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
BH No : 1 Depth (m) : 12.50 m UDS
Date : 30th to 5th April, 2018 Analyzed by : S.K. Jha
Certified By: Madhu Sudan KC
De = ((1+ef) / Hf) x DH
Applied Initial Final Diff. DH Total Sample De Total Void cc av mv
Load Dial Dial DH Height De Ratio
Reading Reading cm cm cm e cm²/kg cm²/kg
0.1 1532 1525 7 0.007 0.007 2.000 0.006 0.006 0.814
0.5 1525 1488 37 0.037 0.044 1.963 0.034 0.040 0.780 0.080 0.044
1 1488 1448 40 0.040 0.084 1.923 0.036 0.076 0.744 0.076 0.043
2 1448 1399 49 0.049 0.133 1.874 0.045 0.121 0.699 0.151 0.061 0.035
4 1399 1348 51 0.051 0.184 1.823 0.046 0.167 0.653 0.042 0.025
8 1348 1285 63 0.063 0.247 1.760 0.057 0.225 0.596 0.028 0.017
0.1 1285 1342 -57 -0.057 0.190 1.810 -0.052 0.173 0.648

0.900

0.850

0.800

0.750
Void Ratio

0.700

0.650

0.600

0.550

0.500
0.1 1 10
Pressure kg/cm²
 Sheet 1 of 2

MULTI Lab (P) Ltd

CONSOLIDATION TEST

Project: Proposed Building Site Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur

BH. No. 2 Depth (m): 4.0 m UDS
Analyzed by : S.K. Jha Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Description of soil : Date : 1st to 7th April, 2018
Consolidometer Type: Fixed Ring Ring No : 1
Multiplication ratio of load device: 10 Height(cm) : 2
Ring Diameter (cm) : 6 Dial Constant (cm) : 0.001
Specific Gravity : 2.54 Volume V(cm3 ) : 56.55
Area(cm² ) : 28.27
SOIL PROPERTY DETERMINATION
Weight of can + wet soil (gms) : 299.500
Weight of can + dry soil (gms) : 275.000
Weight of can (gms) : 197.000
Weight of water (gms) : 24.500
weight of wet soil (gms) : 102.500
weight of dry soil (gms) : 78.000
Natural water content (%) 31.410
Weight of ring (gms) : 197.000
Weight of ring+ wet soil after test (gms) : 299.800
Weight of ring+dry soil after test (gms) : 275.000
Weight of wet soil after test (gms) : 102.800
Weight of dry soil (gms ) : 78.000
Weight of water after test (gms) : 24.800
Final water content (%) : 31.795
Initial dial reading (div) : 1685.000
Final dial reading (div) : 1482.000
Change in height (cms) : 0.203
Final height of sample (cms) 1.797
Height of solids (cms) : 1.086
Final height of voids (cms) : 0.711
Final void ratio 0.655
Initial height of voids 0.914
Initial voids ratio 0.841
Unit weight of soil (gm/ cc) : 1.813
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULT SHEET
Sheet 2 of 2
Project : Proposed Building Site Location: Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
BH No : 2 Depth (m) : 4.0 m UDS
Date : 1st to 7th April, 2018 Analyzed by : S.K. Jha
Certified By: Madhu Sudan KC
De = ((1+ef) / Hf) x DH
Applied Initial Final Diff. DH Total Sample De Total Void cc av mv
Load Dial Dial DH Height De Ratio
Reading Reading cm cm cm e cm²/kg cm²/kg
0.1 1685 1675 10 0.010 0.010 2.000 0.009 0.009 0.832
0.5 1675 1631 44 0.044 0.054 1.956 0.041 0.050 0.792 0.099 0.054
1 1631 1585 46 0.046 0.100 1.910 0.042 0.092 0.749 0.092 0.051
2 1585 1540 45 0.045 0.145 1.865 0.041 0.134 0.708 0.151 0.067 0.038
4 1540 1486 54 0.054 0.199 1.811 0.050 0.183 0.658 0.046 0.027
8 1486 1425 61 0.061 0.260 1.750 0.056 0.239 0.602 0.030 0.018
0.1 1425 1482 -57 -0.057 0.203 1.797 -0.052 0.187 0.655

0.900

0.850

0.800

0.750
Void Ratio

0.700

0.650

0.600

0.550

0.500
0.1 1 10
Pressure kg/cm²
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH1
Wt. of Sample (gms): 1,125.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 0.00-0.75 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 132.20 132.20 11.75 88.25
20.000 139.00 271.20 24.11 75.89
16.000 61.00 332.20 29.53 70.47
12.500 55.20 387.40 34.44 65.56
10.000 64.40 451.80 40.16 59.84
6.300 55.80 507.60 45.12 54.88
4.750 59.00 566.60 50.36 49.64
2.360 12.80 579.40 51.50 48.50
1.180 20.00 599.40 53.28 46.72
0.600 35.00 634.40 56.39 43.61
0.425 32.00 666.40 59.24 40.76
0.300 65.00 731.40 65.01 34.99
0.150 52.00 783.40 69.64 30.36
0.075 32.00 815.40 72.48 27.52
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH1
Wt. of Sample (gms): 755.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 0.75-3.50 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 113.40 113.40 15.02 84.98
20.000 100.40 213.80 28.32 71.68
16.000 47.50 261.30 34.61 65.39
12.500 55.00 316.30 41.89 58.11
10.000 48.50 364.80 48.32 51.68
6.300 47.00 411.80 54.54 45.46
4.750 45.70 457.50 60.60 39.40
2.360 8.50 466.00 61.72 38.28
1.180 12.00 478.00 63.31 36.69
0.600 15.00 493.00 65.30 34.70
0.425 22.00 515.00 68.21 31.79
0.300 12.00 527.00 69.80 30.20
0.150 15.00 542.00 71.79 28.21
0.075 32.00 574.00 76.03 23.97
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH1
Wt. of Sample (gms): 525.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 3.50-6.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
20.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
16.000 30.90 30.90 5.89 94.11
12.500 42.00 72.90 13.89 86.11
10.000 25.40 98.30 18.72 81.28
6.300 20.70 119.00 22.67 77.33
4.750 8.10 127.10 24.21 75.79
2.360 6.20 133.30 25.39 74.61
1.180 26.00 159.30 30.34 69.66
0.600 28.00 187.30 35.68 64.32
0.425 32.00 219.30 41.77 58.23
0.300 25.00 244.30 46.53 53.47
0.150 88.40 332.70 63.37 36.63
0.075 47.20 379.90 72.36 27.64
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH1
Wt. of Sample (gms): 459.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 6.00-12.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
20.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
16.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
12.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
10.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
6.300 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
4.750 1.20 1.20 0.26 99.74
2.360 3.90 5.10 1.11 98.89
1.180 12.50 17.60 3.83 96.17
0.600 15.00 32.60 7.10 92.90
0.425 32.00 64.60 14.07 85.93
0.300 61.40 126.00 27.45 72.55
0.150 99.90 225.90 49.22 50.78
0.075 45.00 270.90 59.02 40.98
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH1
Wt. of Sample (gms): 459.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 12.00-15.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
20.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
16.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
12.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
10.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
6.300 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
2.360 1.40 1.40 0.31 99.69
1.180 2.10 3.50 0.76 99.24
0.600 0.60 4.10 0.89 99.11
0.425 0.00 4.10 0.89 99.11
0.300 0.90 5.00 1.09 98.91
0.150 4.20 9.20 2.00 98.00
0.075 18.70 27.90 6.08 93.92
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH2
Wt. of Sample (gms): 525.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 0.00-1.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 78.60 78.60 14.97 85.03
20.000 58.70 137.30 26.15 73.85
16.000 39.90 177.20 33.75 66.25
12.500 19.40 196.60 37.45 62.55
10.000 45.00 241.60 46.02 53.98
6.300 65.00 306.60 58.40 41.60
4.750 5.70 312.30 59.49 40.51
2.360 2.50 314.80 59.96 40.04
1.180 4.50 319.30 60.82 39.18
0.600 10.00 329.30 62.72 37.28
0.425 5.00 334.30 63.68 36.32
0.300 5.30 339.60 64.69 35.31
0.150 3.40 343.00 65.33 34.67
0.075 4.30 347.30 66.15 33.85
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH2
Wt. of Sample (gms): 952.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 1.00-3.50 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 142.00 142.00 14.92 85.08
20.000 90.40 232.40 24.41 75.59
16.000 81.70 314.10 32.99 67.01
12.500 59.90 374.00 39.29 60.71
10.000 57.10 431.10 45.28 54.72
6.300 59.00 490.10 51.48 48.52
4.750 133.30 623.40 65.48 34.52
2.360 15.20 638.60 67.08 32.92
1.180 30.80 669.40 70.32 29.68
0.600 40.00 709.40 74.52 25.48
0.425 35.00 744.40 78.19 21.81
0.300 20.00 764.40 80.29 19.71
0.150 15.00 779.40 81.87 18.13
0.075 32.00 811.40 85.23 14.77
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH2
Wt. of Sample (gms): 600.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 6.00-11.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
20.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
16.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
12.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
10.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
6.300 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
4.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
2.360 5.00 5.00 0.83 99.17
1.180 12.20 17.20 2.87 97.13
0.600 5.50 22.70 3.78 96.22
0.425 15.00 37.70 6.28 93.72
0.300 65.00 102.70 17.12 82.88
0.150 135.00 237.70 39.62 60.38
0.075 86.50 324.20 54.03 45.97
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Soil Investigation of Proposed Building Site
Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur BH No.: BH2
Wt. of Sample (gms): 525.00 Tested by : Manoj Subedi
Date : 6th April, 2018 Checked by: S.K.Jha
Depth (m): 11.00-15.00 Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Seive Wt. of Cumulative Cumulative Percent
Size Soil Retained Weight Percentage Passing
Retained Retained
mm gms gms % %
80.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
63.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
50.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
40.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
31.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
25.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
20.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
16.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
12.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
10.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
6.300 18.00 18.00 3.43 96.57
4.750 15.00 33.00 6.29 93.71
2.360 5.10 38.10 7.26 92.74
1.180 4.50 42.60 8.11 91.89
0.600 2.10 44.70 8.51 91.49
0.425 6.00 50.70 9.66 90.34
0.300 5.10 55.80 10.63 89.37
0.150 2.50 58.30 11.10 88.90
0.075 15.00 73.30 13.96 86.04
Pan

100.00
90.00
80.00
Percentage Finer

70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Particle Size, mm
 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
SPECIFIC GRAVITY

Project : Proposed Building Site

Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur

Date : 5th April, 2018

Tested by : Manoj Subedi

Checked by : S.K. Jha

Certified By : Madhu Sudan KC

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

BH No 1 2

Depth (m) 12.00-15.00 11.00-15.00

Weight of Pycnometer gms 32.40 32.40

Weight of Pycnometer + soil sample gms 82.90 83.80

Weight of Pycnometer + water + soil gms 179.50 180.00

Weight of Pycnometer + water gms 149.10 149.10

Weight of Sample , gms 50.50 51.40

Temperature of Water, deg. 22.00 22.00

Specific Gravity of Water, 1.00 1.00

Specific Gravity of Soil Sample, 2.512 2.507

 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
Project : Proposed Building Location: Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
Borehole No.: 1 Depth: UDS at 12.50 m
Diameter: 3.8 cm Height: 7.60 cm
Volume: 86.184 cc Area: 11.34 cm²
Load Dial Const: 0.3028 Kg/Div Strain Dial Const 0.001 cm
Wet Weight: 156.80 gms Bulk Unit wt.: 1.819 gm/cc
Dry Weight : 120.00 gms Dry Unit Wt.: 1.392 gm/cc
Date: 30th March, 2018 Prov. Ring No: SSTC 111
Tested by : Manoj Subedi Checked by : Sandeep Kr. Jha
Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Strain Load Load Total Unit 1-Unit Corrected Stress
Dial Dial Strain strain Strain Area
(div) (div) Kg cm cm² kN/m²
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 11.34 0.00
50 1.50 0.45 0.05 0.66 0.99 11.42 3.98
100 3.00 0.91 0.10 1.32 0.99 11.49 7.91
150 4.50 1.36 0.15 1.97 0.98 11.57 11.78
200 6.50 1.97 0.20 2.63 0.97 11.65 16.90
250 8.50 2.57 0.25 3.29 0.97 11.73 21.95
300 11.00 3.33 0.30 3.95 0.96 11.81 28.21
400 15.50 4.69 0.40 5.26 0.95 11.97 39.21
500 20.00 6.06 0.50 6.58 0.93 12.14 49.89
600 24.00 7.27 0.60 7.89 0.92 12.31 59.03
700 28.00 8.48 0.70 9.21 0.91 12.49 67.88
800 32.00 9.69 0.80 10.53 0.89 12.67 76.45
900 36.00 10.90 0.90 11.84 0.88 12.86 84.74
1000 40.00 12.11 1.00 13.16 0.87 13.06 92.75
1200 48.00 14.53 1.20 15.79 0.84 13.47 107.93
1400 54.00 16.35 1.40 18.42 0.82 13.90 117.63
1600 58.00 17.56 1.60 21.05 0.79 14.36 122.27
1800 60.00 18.17 1.80 23.68 0.76 14.86 122.27
2000 58.00 17.56 2.00 26.32 0.74 15.39 114.12

140.0
130.0
120.0
110.0
100.0
90.0
Stress, kN/m²

80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Unit strain

Unconfined Strength( kN/m²): 122.00 Shear Strength (kN/m²) : 61.00

 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd.
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
Project : Proposed Building Location: Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur
Borehole No.: 2 Depth: UDS at 4.0 m
Diameter: 3.8 cm Height: 7.60 cm
Volume: 86.184 cc Area: 11.34 cm²
Load Dial Const: 0.3028 Kg/Div Strain Dial Const 0.001 cm
Wet Weight: 155.80 gms Bulk Unit wt.: 1.808 gm/cc
Dry Weight : 118.50 gms Dry Unit Wt.: 1.375 gm/cc
Date: 1st April, 2018 Prov. Ring No: SSTC 111
Tested by : Manoj Subedi Checked by : Sandeep Kr. Jha
Certified by: Madhu Sudan KC
Strain Load Load Total Unit 1-Unit Corrected Stress
Dial Dial Strain strain Strain Area
(div) (div) Kg cm cm² kN/m²
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 11.34 0.00
50 1.00 0.30 0.05 0.66 0.99 11.42 2.65
100 2.00 0.61 0.10 1.32 0.99 11.49 5.27
150 3.00 0.91 0.15 1.97 0.98 11.57 7.85
200 4.00 1.21 0.20 2.63 0.97 11.65 10.40
250 5.00 1.51 0.25 3.29 0.97 11.73 12.91
300 6.00 1.82 0.30 3.95 0.96 11.81 15.39
400 9.00 2.73 0.40 5.26 0.95 11.97 22.77
500 11.50 3.48 0.50 6.58 0.93 12.14 28.69
600 14.00 4.24 0.60 7.89 0.92 12.31 34.43
700 17.00 5.15 0.70 9.21 0.91 12.49 41.21
800 20.00 6.06 0.80 10.53 0.89 12.67 47.78
900 23.00 6.96 0.90 11.84 0.88 12.86 54.14
1000 26.00 7.87 1.00 13.16 0.87 13.06 60.29
1200 33.00 9.99 1.20 15.79 0.84 13.47 74.20
1400 39.00 11.81 1.40 18.42 0.82 13.90 84.95
1600 44.00 13.32 1.60 21.05 0.79 14.36 92.75
1800 46.00 13.93 1.80 23.68 0.76 14.86 93.74
2000 44.00 13.32 2.00 26.32 0.74 15.39 86.57

140.0
130.0
120.0
110.0
100.0
90.0
Stress, kN/m²

80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Unit strain

Unconfined Strength( kN/m²): 94.00 Shear Strength (kN/m²) : 47.00

 MULTI Lab (P) Ltd
WATER CONTENT DETERMENATION

Project : Soil investigation of Proposed Building Site

Location : Jhamsikhel, Lalitpur

Date: 1st April, 2018

Tested by : Manoj Subedi

Checked by : S. K. Jha

Certified By: Madhu Sudan KC

Bore Hole No. 1 2

Depth (m) 0.00-0.75 0.75-3.50 3.50-6.00 6.00-12.00 12.00-15.00 0.00-1.00 1.00-3.50 3.50-6.00 6.00-11.00 11.0-15.00

Container No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Wt of cont.+wet soil, gms 1202.20 1525.20 1305.10 1065.20 865.10 1352.10 1562.80 915.20 968.10 868.00

Wt of cont.+dry soil, gms 1105.00 1375.00 1165.00 935.00 680.00 1235.00 1395.00 715.00 855.00 695.00

Wt of container, gms 95.20 98.10 102.50 100.00 82.00 105.00 100.00 78.00 65.00 100.00

Wt of water, gms 97.20 150.20 140.10 130.20 185.10 117.10 167.80 200.20 113.10 173.00

Wt of dry sample gms 1009.80 1276.90 1062.50 835.00 598.00 1130.00 1295.00 637.00 790.00 595.00

Moisture content, % 9.63 11.76 13.19 15.59 30.95 10.36 12.96 31.43 14.32 29.08