Definition of Site Investigation

The process of determining the layers of natural soil

deposits that will underlie a proposed structure and their
physical properties is generally referred to as site
investigation.

Broadly Subsurface strata consists of Soil, rock and

Intermediate Geo Material (IGM).
 Estimation of the probable settlement
Type and depth of foundation of a structure
Evaluation of the load- Establishment of construction
bearing capacity. methods for changing subsoil
conditions.

Geotechnical investigation program offers

Estimation of lateral earth pressure

Determination of potential foundation
for structures like retaining walls,
problems (expansive soil, collapsible
sheet pile bulkheads, and braced
soil, sanitary landfill, and so on)
cuts.
 Subsurface exploration program

1. Collection of all available information

2. Foundation for any special requirements
3. For bridges the soil engineer should have access to
type and span lengths as well as pier loadings.
 Subsurface exploration program

2.Reconnaissance of the area:

 Study of the existing adjacent structures
 Subsurface exploration program

3. A preliminary site investigation:

Few borings
Test pits
Possible location of the ground water table
 Subsurface exploration program

4. A detailed site investigation:

The preliminary borings and data are used as a
basis for locating additional borings, which
should be confirmatory in nature, and
determining the additional samples required.
 Depth of Investigation

Predetermined.
The estimated depths can be changed during the
drilling operation
To determine the approximate minimum depth of
boring, engineers may use the certain guidelines.
 Depth of Investigation

Determination of the minimum depth of boring

 Depth of Investigation
Deep excavations are anticipated, at least 1.5 times the
depth of excavation.
Sometimes subsoil conditions are such that the foundation
load may have to be transmitted to the bedrock. The
minimum depth of core boring into the bedrock is about 3m.
If the bedrock is irregular or weathered, the core borings
may have to be extended to greater depths.
 Spacing of Boreholes
There are no hard and fast rules for the spacing of the boreholes.
The following table gives some general guidelines for borehole spacing.

Type of project Spacing (m)

Multistory building 10-30
One story industrial plants 20-60
Highways 250-500
Residential subdivision 250-500
Dams and dikes 40-80
SOIL BORING
Boring tools

Auger boring
Boring tools
Boring tools
Boring tools
SOIL SAMPLING

Disturbed
and
Undisturbed
Common Sampling Methods
Disturbed vs Undisturbed
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

Cutting Shoe
 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

Head
 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

Split Body
 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

Coupling
Actual Test
 Overburden Correction

N’ =C*NR
C =Overburden correction factor
NR=Recorded SPT Number
Dilatancy Correction

N’’=15+0.5*(N’-15)
N’=SPT number after overburden correction
 USES
1- Shear strength parameter f
2- Relative density determination RD
3- Elasticity of soil determination E
4- Total settlement determination
5- Pile capacity calculation
6- Consolidation parameter determination
7- Liquefaction potential analysis
 1- Shear strength parameter f

N Value Compaction state Angle of internal friction

<10 Very Loose to Loose 28-30
10-30 Medium dense 30-36
30-50 Dense 36-41
>50 Very Dense >41
 2- Relative Density determination RD

N Value Compaction state Angle of internal friction

Upto 10 Very Loose to Loose Upto 20%
10-30 Medium dense 20-70
30-50 Dense >70%
3- Elasticity of soil determination E
As per IS:8009-(Part-II)-1980
 3- Elasticity of soil determination E
Es (Modulus of Elasticity of Soil) can be estimated based on Corrected SPT “N”
value and cohesion value as per various correlations.
Modulus of Elasticity of Sand given by Mezenbach (1961) as E = C1 + C2 N (kg/cm2)
Soil Type C1 (kg/cm2) C2 (kg/cm2/blow)
Fine Sand above GWT 52 3.3
Fine Sand below GWT 71 4.9
Sand (Medium) 39 4.5
Coarse Sand 38 10.5
Sand + Gravel 43 11.8
Silty Sand 24 5.3
Silt 12 5.8
3- Elasticity of soil determination E
Stress – Strain Modulus of Sand (Bowles, 1988)
Type of Sand E (kg/cm2)
Sand (NC) 5(N+15)
Sand (Saturated) 2.5(N+15)
Sand (OC) 7.5(N+24)
Sand with gravel 12(N+6) for N >15
6(N+6) for N <=15
Silty Sand 3(N+6)
As per NAVFAC
for Sands E = 70N (T/m2)
For Clay Soils: E = 200 to 300 N (T/m2 )
4- Total Settlement determination
5- Pile Capacity Calculation IS:2911 (Part-1/2)-2010
5- Pile Capacity Calculation IS:2911 (Part-1/2)-2010
5- Pile Capacity Calculation IS:2911 (Part-1/2)-2010
 6- Consolidation parameter determination
In 1974 Stroud
published findings that
the SPT was a reliable
test that could provide a
means of estimating in-
situ properties of clay.

c = f1 x N
mv = 1/(f2 x N)
6- Consolidation parameter determination
6- Consolidation parameter determination
6- Consolidation parameter determination
7- Evaluation of Liquefaction Susceptibility
Earthquake Loading Cyclic Shear Stress

Liquefaction resistance Cyclic Shear Resistance

Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) > Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR)

FS liquefaction = CRR/CSR
Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR)
Equivalent average of shear stress av likely to be induced in the strata due to earthquake is
calculated as
av = 0.65 *  * h * (amax / g)* rd
av = Equivalent average of shear stress
 = Unit weight of foundation material
h = Depth at which cyclic shear stress is calculated
amax = Maximum surface acceleration (PGA)
rd = Stress reduction factor
= 1.0 – 0.00765 * h if h < 9.15 m
= 1.174 – 0.0267 * h if h = 9.15 m to 23 m
= 0.744 – 0.008 * h if h = 23.0 m to 30.0 m
= 0.50 if h > 30.0 m
When av is normalized with the initial effective overburden pressure (o), seismic demand
of soil layer or cyclic stress ratio (CSR) is obtained
CSR = 0.65 * (o / o’ )* (amax / g )* rd
 Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR)
It expresses capacity of soil to resist liquefaction.

CRR = CRR7.5(MSF)K.Ka
CRR7.5 = Standard CRR for 7.5 magnitude earthquake
MSF = Magnitude Scaling Factor = 102.24/Mw2.56
K = 1 when depth >15m otherwise (v0/Pa)(f-1)
f = an exponent depending on relative density of strata
f = 0.8, 0.7 and 0.8 for Dr=40,60 and 80% respectively
Ka is required for sloping ground, otherwise =1
 Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR)
CRR7.5 = [1/(34-(N1)60CS)]+[(N1)60CS/135]+
[50/{10*(N1)60CS+ 45}2]–[1/200]
(N1)60CS = a +  (N1)60
Where a = 0.0 and  = 1.0 for FC<=5%
a=exp [(1.76–(190/FC2)] and =[0.99+(FC1.5/1000)] for 5%<FC<35%
a = 5.0 and  = 1.20 for FC >= 35%
N60 = NC60
C60 = CHT CHW CSS CRL CBD
(N1)60 = CN N60
CN= SQRT(Pa/sv0’)<=1.70
 Computation of Liquefaction Potential as per IS-1893 (PART-1): 2016 Table No.- 1

Borehole No. BH-1

Borehole dia. 150 mm
Water Table assumed for calculation 6.00

Peak ground acceleration amax/g

Bulk/Submerged Density (t/m3)

Stress reduction coefficient (rd)

Bulk/Saturated density (t/m3)

Earth quake magnitude (Mw)

Cyclic Stress ratio (CSR)

Computation Depth (h)

Total overburden (so)

Relative Density, Dr%

SPT Corrected (N1)60
Eff. overburden (so)'
Plasticity Index (PI)

EarthQuake Zone
Fine Content (%)
Type of Strata

SPT Value (N)

CRRM = 7.5

REMARK
(N1)60cs

MSF

CRR
Kα
Kσ
CN C60 NC60 a b FSL

f
1.50 SM NP 1.68 1.68 38 IV 0.24 7.00 0.989 2.52 2.52 0.15 9 1.70 1.00 9.00 15.3 5.00 1.20 23.4 0.26 31.93 0.84 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.313 2.03 NL
3.00 SM NP 1.68 1.68 38 IV 0.24 7.00 0.977 5.04 5.04 0.15 14 1.41 1.00 14.00 19.7 5.00 1.20 28.7 0.40 41.87 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.471 3.09 NL
4.50 SP NP 1.78 1.78 6 IV 0.24 7.00 0.966 7.56 7.56 0.15 15 1.15 1.00 15.00 17.3 0.03 1.00 17.4 0.18 36.32 0.82 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.220 1.46 NL
6.00 SP NP 2.00 1.00 3 IV 0.24 7.00 0.954 10.23 10.23 0.15 21 0.99 1.00 21.00 20.8 0.00 1.00 20.8 0.23 44.22 0.78 0.99 1.00 1.19 0.267 1.80 NL
7.50 SP NP 2.00 1.00 3 IV 0.24 7.00 0.943 13.23 11.73 0.17 25 0.92 1.00 25.00 23.1 0.00 1.00 23.1 0.26 49.44 0.75 0.96 1.00 1.19 0.296 1.79 NL
9.00 SP NP 2.00 1.00 3 IV 0.24 7.00 0.931 16.23 13.23 0.18 19 0.87 1.00 19.00 16.5 0.00 1.00 16.5 0.18 34.67 0.83 0.95 1.00 1.19 0.200 1.12 NL
10.50 CI 16.50 2.00 1.00 91 IV 0.24 7.00 0.894 19.23 14.73 0.18 17 0.82 1.00 17.00 14.0 5.00 1.20 21.8 0.24 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.285 1.57 NL
12.00 CI 16.50 2.00 1.00 91 IV 0.24 7.00 0.854 22.23 16.23 0.18 15 0.78 1.00 15.00 11.8 5.00 1.20 19.1 0.20 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.244 1.34 NL
13.50 CI 16.50 2.00 1.00 91 IV 0.24 7.00 0.814 25.23 17.73 0.18 17 0.75 1.00 17.00 12.8 5.00 1.20 20.3 0.22 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.262 1.45 NL
15.00 CI 16.50 2.03 1.03 91 IV 0.24 7.00 0.774 28.23 19.23 0.18 20 0.72 1.00 20.00 14.4 5.00 1.20 22.3 0.25 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.294 1.66 NL
FLYOVER FROM MUNIRAKA
- RR HOSPITAL , NEW DELHI
A stretch of 2 km
along the road from
Muniraka towards
Army Research and
Referral Hospital on
Outer Ring Road.
METHODS OF INVESTIGATION
 Challenges During Field Work

Scarcity of working space

Survey drawing of Authentic
underground utilities viz. HT Cable, CNG
gas pipeline not available
Traffic diversions
 Geological Surprises
‘Geological Surprise’ was encountered in Munirika area, where sub-soil
variation had been observed in a stretch of 2 km corridor.
A total number of 10
boreholes in just 2
km corridor, have
shown different sub-
soil strata, and even
level of bedrock at
varying depth.
Some of the
Bore-hole
samples
Even the foundation analysis has also shown large variation in pile
capacity, which has an impact on the foundation design.
 Large sub-surface strata variation
 Almost every bore-hole has shown a different sub-soil strata,
where rock level has been encountered at varying depth.
 At the time of execution even variations were found within a pile
group which led to make more boreholes within a pile group to
mitigate the uncertainty in Pile capacity and its resting levels.
 No uniform tab on the design process.
 Even the execution methodology for each location was different,
which obviously had a great impact on the project cost and time.
HIGH RISE RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX AT GREATER NOIDA
Multistoried Residential Tower in the Trans Hindon
area of Noida (NCR)
Total No of floors =35 with Single Basement for
Parking purpose
 Soil Type as per IS
Layer No. Depth below EGL (m) Strata Description
1893:2002
Sandy Silt with Gravel
Layer - 1 0.0m to 2.0m Type – III
(ML-CL)

Layer – 2 2.0m to 5.0m Fine Sand (SP) Type – II

Sandy Silt with Gravel

Layer – 3 5.0m to 12.0m Type – II
(ML-CL)
Fine Sand
Layer – 4 12.0m to 21.0m Type –I
(SP)
Sandy Silt
Layer - 5 21.0m to 23.0m Type –I
(ML-CL)
Fine Sand
Layer - 6 23.0m to 50.0m Type –I
(SP)
 SUBSOIL CROSS SECTION N Recorded N Corrected
Depth
Min Max Avg Min Max Avg
Depth BH-1 BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5 1.50 9 12 11 13 17 15
2.0
3.00 3 12 6 4 7 5
4.0 4.50 9 14 12 10 20 15
6.0 6.00 12 20 15 13 19 16
8.0
10.0
7.50 14 26 19 15 22 18
12.0 9.00 17 19 18 17 17 17
14.0 10.50 17 29 25 16 30 22
16.0
18.0 12.00 26 29 28 20 32 23
20.0 13.50 29 59 41 21 36 27
22.0
15.00 36 60 48 24 35 30
24.0
18.00 35 64 50 23 36 29
30.0
35.0 21.00 44 60 51 26 32 28
40.0 27.00 48 70 61 26 34 30
45.0
30.00 50 69 62 26 32 30
50.0
42.00 77 89 83 31 34 33
SANDY SILT SILTY SAND FINE SAND
45.00 72 96 86 29 36 33
49.55 75 96 87 29 35 32
 Pressuremeter test results
Unload/Reload Modulus

Limit Pressure
Test Depth, m

classification

Deformation
Type of Test

Pressure (P1),

Pressure (P2),
Modulus E,

Gur2, kg/cm2
Gur1, kg/cm2
(pL) bar

kg/cm2
S.No.

Soil

bar

bar
1 4.0 Sandy silt 1.7 14 - - - -
Pressure-meter

2 6.0 Silty sand 13.9 136 - - - -

Non-Cyclic

3 8.0 Sandy silt with gravel 12.2 96 - - - -

test

4 10.0 Silty sand 14.3 149 - - - -

5 12.0 Silty sand with gravel 16.7 211 - - - -
6 14.0 Silty sand 17.0 215 - - - -
7 18.0 Silty sand 29.0 232 - - - -
8 20.0 Fine sand 27.4 231 5.6 ND* 15.6 132
meter test
Pressure-

9 22.0 Sandy silt with gravel 19.5 195 6.0 136 16.1 ND*
Cyclic

10 24.0 Fine sand 21.0 164 5.9 ND* 15.6 ND*

11 30.0 Fine sand 24.5 194 6.3 36 18.3 278
12 36.0 Fine sand 40.3 333 7.2 56 30.8 172
 RECOMMENDATION
Pile Diameter (cm)

Safe Axial Load Safe Lateral Load

Resting Level
Carrying Capacity (t) Carrying Capacity (t)
Cut off level
below EGL

below EGL

Effective
Length

Compression
Settlement

Fixed Head
Free Head
(cm)

Uplift
4.0m 29.0m 25.0m 525 165 12.5 34.0 5.36
100
4.0m 34.0m 30.0m 650 220 12.5 34.0 4.69

4.0m 29.0m 25.0m 750 200 17.0 45.0 7.72

120
4.0m 34.0m 30.0m 900 280 17.0 45.0 6.75
OFFICE COMPLEX AT FILM CITY NOIDA
S. N. DESCRIPTION RESULTS
1. Name of Project New Building
2. Location Sector-16-A, Noida (U.P.)
3 nos. of 40m depth, 2 nos. of 30m
No. of Boreholes depth, 1 no. of 20m depth and 2
3.
& Depth DCPT up to 10m depth below EGL or
refusal
4. Seismic Zone Zone IV
 5.1 - Sub soil Strata

Layer No. Depth below EGL (m) Strata Description

Layer - 1 0.00-1.00 Sandy Silt (ML-CL)
Layer - 2 2.00-4.00 Silty Sand (SM)
Layer - 3 4.00-28.00 Fine Sand with Gravel (SP)
Layer - 4 28.00-35.00 Sandy Silt with Gravel (ML-CL)
Layer - 5 35.00-40.00 Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)
 5.2 – SPT values at different depth
BH-1 BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5 BH-6 BH-7
Depth
Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc
1.50 m 10 15 11 16 6 9 8 12 11 16 9 13 6 9
3.00 m 9 11 9 11 8 10 7 9 8 10 8 10 14 17
4.50 m 11 12 11 12 13 14 16 17 10 11 13 14 21 23
6.00 m 37 37 13 13 17 17 30 30 17 17 22 22 22 22
7.50 m 39 36 24 22 20 18 41 38 21 19 22 20 25 23
9.00 m 59 50 29 25 18 15 27 23 26 22 27 23 28 23
 5.2 – SPT values at different depth
BH-1 BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5 BH-6
Depth
Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc
10.50 m 31 25 27 22 18 14 39 31 30 24 28 23
12.00 m 34 26 33 25 63 48 63 48 36 27 33 25
13.50 m 28 20 23 17 19 14 36 26 17 12 65 47
15.00 m 37 21 20 14 27 17 42 22 40 22 21 15
18.00 m 48 24 34 19 42 22 46 23 38 20 30 18
21.00 m 47 23 43 21 50 24 57 26 52 24 58 27
 5.2 – SPT values at different depth

BH-1 BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5

Depth
Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc Nr Nc
24.00 m 49 23 48 23 45 22 56 25 48 23
27.00 m 59 25 29 16 50 23 27 16 56 24
30.00 m 52 23 47 21 48 21 36 18 57 24
33.00 m 29 16 - - 72 28 - - 60 24
36.00 m 66 25 - - 54 22 - - 70 27
40.00 m 78 28 - - 63 24 - - 85 30
5.3 - Water Table: Water table was found at 15m depth below EGL.

5.4 - Liquefaction Potential: After carrying out assessment of

liquefaction potential of subsoil strata by simplified approach
proposed by Seed & Idriss (1983 – 1985) from the SPT data and
peak ground acceleration likely to occur at the site during earthquake,
it is found that the soil strata up to the explored depth i.e., 40.0 m
below ground level is not susceptible to liquefaction.
* For shear criteria the weighted average value of SPT has been
taken up to a depth equal to least dimension of the foundation below
the depth of foundation, while for settlement criteria the influence
zone has been taken as twice the least dimension of the foundation
below the depth of foundation. In case of influence zone below the
depth of investigation it has been suitably assumed that the strata are
similar as observed in deeper boreholes.
6.2 Allowable total settlement taken for safe bearing pressure :
For Isolated footing: 50 mm, For raft footing: 75mm
Recommendations:
7.1 Type of Foundation : Isolated / Raft Foundation
Depth of Foundation Thickness of Type of Size of q allowable Modulus of Subgrade
below EGL Foundation Foundation Foundation (t/m2) Reaction (k) in KN/m3
Isolated 2.0m 10.50 -
1.50m Strip 2.5m 11.00 -
( Buildings without 1.50m Isolated 2.5mX2.5m 11.75 -
basement Floor) Square 3.0m X3.0m 12.00 -
Raft 25.0mX25.0m 20.75 2,760
14.50 m 25.0mX25.0m 47.00 6,260
(Buildings with three 1.50m Raft 30.0mX30.0m 45.25 6,030
basement Floors) 35.0mX35.0m 44.75 5,960
 7.2 Type of Foundation : Cast in situ bored piles with M30 Grade of concrete
Length of Pile Safe Axial Load Carrying Safe Lateral Load
Dia. of Minimum Pile length (4T)
Below Cut-off Capacity (t) Carrying Capacity (t)
Pile
Level Compression Uplift Free Head Fixed Head Free Head Fixed Head
10.0 m 55 15 4.5 11.5 8.14m 8.14m
15.0 m* 85 30 4.5 11.5 8.14m 8.14m
600 mm
20.0 m* 120 45 4.5 11.5 8.14m 8.14m
25.0 m 155 65 4.5 11.5 8.14m 8.14m
10.0 m 75 20 6.0 17.0 9.73m 9.73m
15.0 m* 135 45 6.0 17.0 9.73m 9.73m
750 mm
20.0 m* 190 70 6.0 17.0 9.73m 9.73m
25.0 m 240 95 6.0 17.0 9.73m 9.73m
The cut off level is 15.0m below EGL.

The load capacities of piles are based on Static formulae using IS code. It is recommended to
confirm the theoretical pile capacity by conducting initial pile load tests as per IS: 2911 (Part IV) on
test piles before installing the working piles.

*For 0.6 m and 0.75 m pile diameter of piles, the pile length of 15 m and 20 m are actually terminated
in sandy silt / clay layer which has some plasticity / compressibility. Hence settlement of piles/pile
groups has to be calculated and checked for the permissible limits at working loads.
 Misuses of SPT

1. SPT is a very useful and versatile field test for

subsurface characterization.
2. Wrong way of doing SPT is a big set back for its
utility.
3. SPT needs to be done correctly. Its an abuse if not
done properly.
 Misuses of SPT

4. Proper interpretation of soil parameters using SPT

number is the requirement.
5. For fine soil it is wrongly used. For such cohesive soil,
SPT number offers only tentative parameters. Such
parameters need to be verified after conducting test in
lab.
 Conclusion
• SPT is a very well established and verified test for
strata characterization.
• It gives reliable parameters for granular
cohesionless soil.
• For fine grained cohesive soil, the inferred
parameters are tentative / indicative which need
verification by lab test.