Geotechnical Investigation & Site Classification

Geotechnical Investigation
and Site Classification,

Northlakes Estate Stage 21
October 2009
North Lakes Pty Ltd
Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited

ABN 80 078 004 798
Level 3
5155 Bolton Street
NEWCASTLE NSW 2300
PO Box 1162
NEWCASTLE NSW 2300
Australia
Telephone
+61 2 4929 8300
Facsimile
+61 2 4929 8382
Email
newcastle@pb.com.au
2103382A-PR_9366
Certified to ISO 9001, ISO 14001, AS/NZS 4801
Revision
Details
Date
Original
27/10/09
Amended By
Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited (PB) [2009].

Copyright in the drawings, information and data recorded in this document (the information) is the property of PB. This
document and the information are solely for the use of the authorised recipient and this document may not be used, copied or
reproduced in whole or part for any purpose other than that for which it was supplied by PB. PB makes no representation,
undertakes no duty and accepts no responsibility to any third party who may use or rely upon this document or the information.
Author:
Glen Burton ....................................................................................
Signed:
........................................................................................................
Reviewer:
Stephen Flux .................................................................................
Signed:
........................................................................................................
Approved by:
Glen Burton ....................................................................................
Signed:
........................................................................................................
Date:
27/10/09 ..........................................................................................
Distribution:
North Lakes Pty Ltd (PDF) .............................................................
Please note that when viewed electronically this document may contain pages that have been intentionally left blank. These
blank pages may occur because in consideration of the environment and for your convenience, this document has been set up
so that it can be printed correctly in double-sided format.
\\AUNCLF\PROJ\N\NORTHLAKES\2103382A_NTH_LKS_ST_21_SITE\05_WRKPAPERS\WP\DRAFT\2103382A-PR_9366.DOCX
Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21
Contents
Page number
1.
Introduction
2.
Investigation method
3.
Investigation results
3.1
Site description
3.2
Regional geology and subsurface conditions
3.3
3.2.1
Fill
3.2.2
Topsoil
3.2.3
Residual soil
3.2.4
Weathered rock
3.2.5
Groundwater
Laboratory results
5
5
6
6
6
6
4.
5.
Discussion and recommendations
4.1
Site classifications
4.2
Site preparation
4.3
Excavations
4.4
Filling
4.5
Footing design and construction
4.6
Drainage
Limitations
PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF
11
2103382A-PR_9366
Page i
Contents
(Continued)
List of tables
Page number
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
Table 4.1
Typical subsurface profile

Shrink/swell results
5
6
7
Appendices
Appendix A
Figures
Appendix B
Engineering logs and explanatory notes
Appendix C
Laboratory certificates
Appendix D
Limitations of geotechnical site investigation
Appendix E
Reactive soil notes
Page ii
2103382A-PR_9366
1.
Introduction
At the request of North Lakes Pty Ltd, Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) has completed a
geotechnical site investigation of Stage 21 at Northlakes Estate, Cameron Park, New South
Wales. At the time of the investigation, Stage 21 consisted of twenty six residential lots (2101
to 2126).
The investigation was generally completed in accordance with our proposal (PB Ref:
PP_9342, dated 17 September 2009) with the objective to assess subsurface conditions
within the residential lots and assign site classifications in accordance with AS 2870.
PBs civil engineers provided civil design drawings for the stages which were used to scope
the site investigation.
2103382A-PR_9366
Page 1
2.
Investigation method
Fieldwork for the investigation was carried out on 6 October 2009 and comprised the
excavation of 12 test pits (TP2101 to TP2112). Test pits were initially located on lot
boundaries to minimise potential disturbance to future footings with residential buildings. One
of the test pits (TP2110) was moved off a lot boundary due to the placement of the site office
and excavating equipment. The location of the test pits were recorded using a hand held
GPS. The locations are shown on Figure 1 attached in Appendix A.
A geotechnical engineer from PB supervised the test pit excavations, collected
representative subsoil samples and prepared engineering logs of the subsurface conditions
encountered. Pocket penetrometer tests were completed in clayey soils to assess the
consistency. Description of the subsurface conditions was completed with reference to
AS1726-1993 Geotechnical site investigations and PBs field manual for site investigation.
Engineering test pit logs are attached in Appendix B along with explanatory notes that
describe the terms and symbols used.
The strength of bedrock was assessed by observation of excavation resistance in
conjunction with inspection of fragments recovered from the test pits.
Groundwater observations were made in the test pits both during and a short time after
excavation prior to backfill. No long term groundwater monitoring was undertaken.
Undisturbed (U50) samples were collected from selected test pits and sent to Valley Civilab,
a NATA accredited laboratory, for shrink/swell analysis. The laboratory certificates are
attached in Appendix C.
2103382A-PR_9366
Page 3
3.
Investigation results
3.1
Site description
Stage 21 is located off Constitution Drive in Northlakes Estate, straddling Roads 28 (Shipley
Street) and 32A (Hooghly Avenue) and to the south-east of Road 32 (Hooghly Avenue).
At the time of the investigation, Stages 21 was still under construction. Partial clearing of the
site had been completed for the associated works with mature trees still located throughout
the residential lots.
Slope gradients at the site range from 2 to 12 generally in a south-westerly direction.
Drainage from the site runs off to a natural gully line to the south-east.
3.2
Regional geology and subsurface conditions

The Newcastle Soil Landscape Series Sheet 9232 indicates that the site lies within the
Warners Bay residual soil landscape. This unit comprises undulating to rolling low hills and
rises on fine-grained sediments of the Newcastle Coal Measures in the Awaba Hills.
The Newcastle 1:250,000 Geological Series Sheet SI 56-2 indicates that the site is underlain
by the Newcastle Coal Measures of Permian age. This unit comprises interbedded
conglomerate, sandstone, tuff, shale and coal.
The typical subsurface profile encountered during the investigation program is summarised
in Table 3.1. For a detailed description at specific locations, reference should be made to the
engineering logs and explanatory notes attached in Appendix B.
Table 3.1
Typical subsurface profile
Material
Depth range encountered (m)
Fill
0.0 to 0.10
Topsoil
0.0 to 0.2
Residual soil
0.021 to 1.00
Weathered rock
+0.10
Note 1: Topsoil assumed to be striped and replaced with shallow fill.

The characteristics of the subsurface conditions are summarised below.
3.2.1
Fill
Some filling on the site consisted of landscaping woodchips.

Minor filling was present at the locations investigated to the west of Road 28 (Shipley Street)
where gravelly SAND (SP) or GRAVEL (GP) was encountered to depths up to 0.10 m.
3.2.2
Topsoil
Topsoil depths of 0.2 m are typical, with the material predominantly silty SAND (SM), brown
to grey, fine grained with organic material. Moisture was typically assessed as dry during the
investigation with loose to medium dense relative density. Low to medium plasticity grey
CLAY (CL) was also identified within some of the test pits.
2103382A-PR_9366
Page 5
3.2.3
Residual soil
Residual soil at the site typically comprises sandy/clayey SILT (ML) or sandy/silty CLAY
(CL), low to medium plasticity, grey to brown with varying percentage of fine grained sand.
Consistency was typically very stiff to hard with moisture contents at or less than the plastic
limit.
3.2.4
Weathered rock
Weathered rock was encountered in the test pits at depths between 0.10 m and 1.00 m, with
bucket refusal of the backhoe typically occurring around 1.00 m on highly weathered
siltstone and sandstone of medium strength at depths . Typically, the depth to bedrock is
shallower (0.10 m to 0.60 m) along the western and eastern edges of the site. Excavation
was readily achievable through extremely low to low strength material. Weathering of the
rock resulted in interbedding of weathered rock and residual soil material.
3.2.5
Groundwater
No groundwater was encountered within any of the test pits during the short period that they
remained open. No long term monitoring was undertaken. Groundwater levels can be
influenced by many factors including:
Regional groundwater levels
Local and regional drainage
Geology
Rainfall
Changes in land use
Groundwater extraction.
3.3
Laboratory results
Undisturbed (U50) samples were sent to Valley Civilab for shrink/swell analysis. The results
are summarised in Table 3.2 and certificates are attached in Appendix C.
Table 3.2
Shrink/swell results
Sample location
Shrink/Swell
Iss (%)
Page 6
TP2105
0.9
TP2107
3.2
TP2109
3.0
TP2111
4.2
TP2112
3.7
2103382A-PR_9366
4.
Discussion and recommendations
4.1
In assessing site classification for the lots in this site, consideration has been given to
subsurface conditions, soil reactivity, anticipated fill settlement, and slope stability.
AS2870-1996 provides for the classification of lots based on the characteristic surface
movement as follows:
Surface Movement, ys (mm)
Site Classification
0<ys 20
20<ys 40
40<ys 70
70<ys
The subject lots have been classified as detailed in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1
4.2
Lot
Site Class
Lot
Site Class
2101
2114
2102
2115
2103
2116
2104
2117
2105
2118
2106
2119
2107
2120
2108
2121
2109
2122
2110
2123
2111
2124
2112
2125
2113
2126
Site preparation
In general, all earthworks should be completed in accordance with AS3798 Guidelines on
earthworks for commercial and residential developments.
All topsoil, organic matter and any existing uncontrolled fill should be stripped from areas
where engineered fill or slabs are to be placed. A typical stripping depth of 0.20 m should be
allowed for the site.
Areas to be filled should be proofed rolled under the inspection of a geotechnical
engineer/engineering geologist and any soft or heaving materials removed.
2103382A-PR_9366
Page 7
4.3
Excavations
If required and where practicable, excavated slopes should be benched in accordance with
the NSW WorkCover: Code of Practice Excavation March 2000.
Excavations within the topsoil, residual soils and extremely weathered bedrock should be
achievable using conventional earthmoving equipment such as excavators, backhoes or
bobcats. It is anticipated that excavation within the distinctly weathered bedrock should be
feasible using hydraulic excavators with rock hammers.
Excavation conditions were not investigated below backhoe refusal, which typically ranged
from 0.40 m to 2.40 m deep.
Temporary excavations through natural soils and extremely low to very low strength bedrock,
up to a maximum depth of 1.5m, may be excavated near vertical provided that:
they are barricaded when not in use
they are not left open for more than 24 hours
no surcharge loading is applied within 2.5m of the edge of the excavation
no groundwater inflows are encountered
they are not used for access by a worker
Where the excavation is to be open for more than 24 hours or access is required for a
worker or deeper excavations are required, the excavation batters should be regraded to no
steeper than 1.5H in 1V, or supported by properly designed shoring.
Any permanent excavations should be battered no steeper than 3H in 1V and vegetated to
reduce erosion potential. If steeper batters are required they should be supported by
properly engineered and constructed retaining walls with due consideration to surcharge
loads and drainage conditions.
The above recommendations should be confirmed by a geotechnical engineer once the
profile is exposed.
4.4
Filling
Prior to placement of fill, areas to be filled should be prepared as detailed in the Section 4.2.
Placement of fill should be in maximum 300 mm (loose) layers. The full depth of each layer
should be compacted to 95 % standard maximum dry density (SMDD) at 2 % of the
standard optimum moisture content (SOMC). Each layer should be placed to minimum of
Level 2 supervision in accordance with AS3798-2007. Level 1 supervision should be
provided in areas to support high level footings with a relative compaction of 98 % SMDD
achieved.
All permanent fill slopes should be graded no steeper than 2H in 1V and should be protected
from erosion. Alternatively, fill embankments may be retained with properly engineered and
constructed retaining walls with due consideration to surcharge loads and drainage
conditions.
The depth of fill placed on individual lots should not exceed a nominal 1.5 m without prior
approval by a geotechnical engineer/engineering geologist.
Page 8
2103382A-PR_9366
4.5
Footing design and construction

In general, flexible structures such as brick veneer or clad frames are preferred for
residential development on reactive clay sites. Footings should be designed by a practising
structural engineer in accordance with AS2870-1996 for the classifications provided in
Section 4.1.
Strip/pad footings, raft slabs and pier and beam systems would be suitable footing types.
Any future cut and fill earthworks may affect the site classifications provided in this report.
We recommend that the site classifications be reassessed if excavations in excess of 0.4 m
or filling in excess of 0.5 m thick are proposed.
Footings should be excavated, cleaned out and poured with minimum delay. If footing
excavations are to be left open for an extended period of time, a concrete blinding layer
should be provided to protect the foundation material. Should any uncompacted fill or locally
deep topsoil be encountered during footing excavation, these materials should be penetrated
and the footings founded in accordance with the requirements of Section 6 of AS2870-1996.
A geotechnical engineer should be consulted if these conditions are encountered.
Where footing excavations are partially on rock, the whole footing should be taken to rock to
achieve uniform bearing and foundation conditions. Alternatively structures may be
articulated over changes in founding conditions, in accordance with AS2870-1996.
Where footings are to be founded on rock, reclassification of the site and amendment to
footing sizes may be appropriate, and both a geotechnical and structural engineer should be
consulted prior to construction of the footing.
4.6
Drainage
Site drainage should be installed to prevent ponding of surface water adjacent to structures.
Surface water and roof runoff should be directed away from foundations and collected in the
stormwater system.
Where retaining walls are required, subsoil drainage should be provided and connected to
the stormwater system.
Surface water flows should be redirected from batter slopes by the use of dish drains.
Classification of the subject lots has been assessed based on moisture variations caused by
normal climatic and garden conditions. More severe moisture variations can be caused by
other common, but controllable factors. Reactive soil notes included in Appendix E are
intended as a summary to those provided in CSIRO 10 - 91 A guide to Home Owners on
Foundation Maintenance and Footing Performance and should be regarded as
recommendations. Future owners should be advised of these maintenance procedures, as
it is commonly accepted that most damage to residential type structures on reactive sites is
due to poor site maintenance.
2103382A-PR_9366
Page 9
5.
Limitations
This report should be read in conjunction with the Limitations of Geotechnical Site
Investigation statement attached in Appendix D, which provides important information
regarding geotechnical investigation and assessment. Significant variation in subsurface
conditions from those anticipated should be reported to this office for reassessment.
ReferencesAustralian Standards AS 1289 Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes.
Standards Australia
Australian Standard. (1993). AS1726-1993 Geotechnical site investigations. Standards
Australia.
Australian Standard. (1996). AS2870-1996 Residential slabs and footings-Construction.
Standards Australia.
Australian Standard. (2007). AS3798-2007 Guidelines on earthworks for commercial and
residential developments. Standards Australia.
WorkCover Authority of New South Wales Code of Practice - Excavation 2000
Australian Standard. (2007). AS3798-2007 Guidelines on earthworks for commercial and
residential developments. Standards Australia.
Newcastle Soil Landscape Series Sheet 9232
Newcastle 1:250,000 Geological Series Sheet SI 56-2
2103382A-PR_9366
Page 11
Appendix A
Figures
Client:
North Lakes Pty Ltd
Project:
Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification
Location: Cameron Park, NSW
LEGEND
APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION.
STAGE 21 BOUNDARY
10
20
Full Size 1:1000 A3

SCALE (m)
30
Stage 21 Test Pit Location Plan

Figure 1
Appendix B
Engineering logs and explanatory
notes
Explanatory Notes - Soil Description

In engineering terms soil includes every type of uncemented or partially cemented inorganic material found in the ground. In practice, if the material can be
remoulded by hand in its field condition or in water it is described as a soil. The dominant soil constituent is given in capital letters, with secondary textures in
lower case. The dominant feature is assessed from the Unified Soil Classification system and a soil symbol is used to define a soil layer .
MOISTURE CONDITION
METHOD
Method
AS
BH
CT
EE
EX
HA
HQ
JET
NMLC
NQ
PT
RAB
RB
RT
TC
V
WB
DT
Description
Auger Screwing
Backhoe
Cable Tool Rig
Existing Excavation/Cutting
Excavator
Hand Auger
Diamond Core-63mm
Jetting
Diamond Core 52mm
Diamond Core 47mm
Push Tube
Rotary Air Blast
Rotary Blade
Rotary Tricone Bit
Auger TC Bit
Auger V Bit
Washbore
Diatube
WATER
Water level at date shown
Partial water loss
Water inflow
Complete water loss
NFGWO: The observation of groundwater, whether present or not, was not

possible due to drilling water, surface seepage or cave in of the
borehole/test pit.
NFGWE: The borehole/test pit was dry soon after excavation. Inflow may
have been observed had the borehole/test pit been left open for a longer
period.
SAMPLING
Sample
B
D
Jar
SPT
U50
U75
Description
Bulk Disturbed Sample
Disturbed Sample
Jar Sample
Standard Penetration Test
Undisturbed Sample 50mm
Undisturbed Sample 75mm
Dry
Cohesive soils are friable or powdery

Cohesionless soil grains are free-running
Moist
Soil feels cool, darkened in colour

Cohesive soils can be moulded
Cohesionless soil grains tend to adhere
Wet
Cohesive soils usually weakened

Free water forms on hands when handling
For cohesive soils the following codes may also be used:

MC>PL
MC~PL
MC<PL
Moisture Content greater than the Plastic Limit.

Moisture Content near the Plastic Limit.
Moisture Content less than the Plastic Limit.
PLASTICITY
The potential for soil to undergo change in volume with moisture change is
assessed from its degree of plasticity. The classification of the degree of
plasticity in terms of the Liquid Limit (LL) is as follows:
Description of Plasticity
Low
Medium
High
LL (%)
<35
35 to 50
>50
COHESIVE SOILS - CONSISTENCY

The consistency of a cohesive soil is defined by descriptive terminology
such as very soft, soft, firm, stiff, very stiff and hard. These terms are
assessed by the shear strength of the soil as observed visually, by hand
penetrometer values and by resistance to deformation to hand moulding.
A Hand Penetrometer may be used in the field or the laboratory to provide
an approximate assessment of the unconfined compressive strength (UCS)
of cohesive soils. The undrained shear strength of cohesive soils is
approximately half the UCS. The values are recorded in kPa as follows:
Strength
Very Soft
Soft
Firm
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
Symbol
Undrained Shear Strength, Cu

(kPa)
< 12
12 to 25
25 to 50
50 to 100
100 to 200
> 200
VS
S
F
St
VSt
H
COHESIONLESS SOILS - RELATIVE DENSITY

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
The appropriate symbols are selected on the result of visual examination,
field tests and available laboratory tests, such as, sieve analysis, liquid limit
and plasticity index.
USC Symbol
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SM
SC
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
Pt
Description
Well graded gravel
Poorly graded gravel
Silty gravel
Clayey gravel
Well graded sand
Poorly graded sand
Silty sand
Clayey sand
Silt of low plasticity
Clay of low plasticity
Organic soil of low plasticity
Silt of high plasticity
Clay of high plasticity
Organic soil of high plasticity
Peaty Soil
Relative density terms such as very loose, loose, medium, dense and very
dense are used to describe silty and sandy material, and these are usually
based on resistance to drilling penetration or the Standard Penetration Test
(SPT) N values. Other condition terms, such as friable, powdery or crumbly
may also be used.
Term
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
Symbol
VL
L
MD
D
VD
Density
Index
0 to 15
15 to 35
35 to 65
65 to 85
>85
N Value
(blows/0.3 m)
0 to 4
4 to 10
10 to 30
30 to 50
>50
COHESIONLESS SOILS PARTICLE SIZE DESCRIPTIVE TERMS

Name
Boulders
Cobbles
Gravel
Subdivision
Sand
C:\Webs\ausydg\BP20_TechGuidelines\20.5 Geotechnical\stdnotes\Geotech Explan. Notes - brief version.doc

1
coarse
medium
fine
coarse
medium
fine
Size
>200 mm
63 mm to 200 mm
20 mm to 63 mm
6 mm to 20 mm
2.36 mm to 6 mm
600 m to 2.36 mm
200 m to 600 m
75 m to 200 m
30/09/02
Rock Description
The rock is described with strength and weathering symbols as shown below. Other features such as bedding and dip angle are given.
METHOD
ROCK STRENGTH
Refer soil description sheet
Rock strength is described using AS1726 and ISRM - Commission on

Standardisation of Laboratory and Field Tests, "Suggested method of
determining the Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Rock materials and the
Point Load Index", as follows:
WATER
Refer soil description sheet
Term
ROCK QUALITY
The fracture spacing is shown where applicable and the Rock Quality
Designation (RQD) or Total Core Recovery (TCR) is given where:
TCR (%) =
length of core recovered

length of core run
RQD (%) =
Sum of Axial lengths of core > 100mm long

length of core run
ROCK MATERIAL WEATHERING

Rock weathering is described using the abbreviations and definitions used
in AS1726. AS1726 suggests the term Distinctly Weathered (DW) to
cover the range of substance weathering conditions between (but not
including) XW and SW. For projects where it is not practical to delineate
between HW and MW or it is deemed that there is no advantage in making
such a distinction, DW may be used with the definition given in AS1726.
Symbol
RS
Term
Residual Soil
Definition
Soil definition on extremely weathered
rock; the mass structure and substance
are no longer evident; there is a large
change in volume but the soil has not
been significantly transported
XW
Extremely
Weathered
Rock is weathered to such an extent

that it has soil properties, ie. It either
disintegrates or can be remoulded in
water
HW
Highly
Weathered
The rock substance is affected by

weathering to the extent that limonite
staining or bleaching affects the whole
rock substance and other signs of
chemical or physical decomposition are
evident. Porosity and strength is usually
decreased compared to the fresh rock.
The colour and strength of the fresh
rock is no longer recognisable.
DW
MW
SW
FR
Distinctly
Weathered
(see AS1726
Definition
below)
Moderately
Weathered
The whole of the rock substance is

discoloured, usually by iron staining or
bleaching, to the extent that the colour
of the fresh rock is no longer
recognisable
Slightly
Weathered
Rock is slightly discoloured but shows

little or no change of strength from fresh
rock
Fresh
Rock shows no sign of decomposition

or staining
Distinctly Weathered: Rock strength usually changed by weathering. The

rock may be highly discoloured, usually by iron staining. Porosity may be
increased by leaching, or may be decreased due to the deposition of
weathering products in pores. (AS1726)
Symbol
Extremely Low
Very Low
Low
Medium
High
Very High
Extremely High
EL
VL
L
M
H
VH
EH
Point Load Index

Is(50) (MPa)
<0.03
0.03 to 0.1
0.1 to 0.3
0.3 to 1
1 to 3
3 to 10
>10
Diametral Point Load Index test

Axial Point Load Index test
DEFECT SPACING/BEDDING THICKNESS
Measured at right angles to defects of same set or bedding.
Term
Extremely closely spaced
Very closely spaced
Closely spaced
Moderately widely spaced
Widely spaced
Very widely spaced
Defect Spacing
<6 mm
6 to 20 mm
20 to 60 mm
0.06 to 0.2 m
0.2 to 0.6 m
0.6 to 2 m
>2 m
Bedding
Thinly Laminated
Laminated
Very Thin
Thin
Medium
Thick
Very Thick
DEFECT DESCRIPTION
Type:
B
BP
F
C
J
SZ
CZ
DB
Definition:
Bedding
Bedding Parting
Fault
Cleavage
Joint
Shear Zone
Crushed Zone
Drill Break
Planarity:
P Planar
Ir Irregular
St Stepped
U Undulating
Coating or Infill:
Clean
Stain
Veneer
Coating
Roughness:
R Rough
S Smooth
Sl Slickensides
Po Polished
Description
No visible coating or infilling
No visible coating or infilling but surfaces are
discoloured by mineral staining
A visible coating or infilling of soil or mineral
substance but usually unable to be measured
(<1mm). If discontinuous over the plane, patchy
veneer
A visible coating or infilling of soil or mineral
substance, >1mm thick. Describe composition
and thickness
The inclinations of defects are measured from perpendicular to the core

axis.

2
30/09/02
Graphic Symbols for Soil and Rock

Graphic symbols used on borehole and test pit reports for soil and rock are as follows. Combinations of these symbols may be used to indicate mixed
materials such as clayey sand.
30/09/02
Page 3
TEST PIT ENGINEERING LOG
TEST PIT NO.
TP2101
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

Geotechnical lnvestigation and Site Classification
Stage 21, Northlakes Estate
2103382A
Excavation Method:
Backhoe with 300mm bucket
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
7
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
SOIL/ROCK MATERIAL FIELD DESCRIPTION
MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
(SM) TOPSOIL: Silty SAND, fine grained, brown, with root

fibres
E 370251 N 6358696 MGA
STRUCTURE AND ADDITIONAL

OBSERVATIONS
TOPSOIL
MC<PL
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
6/10/09
6/10/09
MJH
SF
Field Material Description

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)
Test Pit Information

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:
RESIDUAL SOIL
G
W
E
0.20
(ML) Sandy SILT, grey, fine grained sand
Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd. Version 5.1 ENGINEERING TEST PIT LOG STAGE 21 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION.GPJ YH2006.GDT 27/10/09
0.35
(CL) Silty CLAY, low plasticity, grey, interbedded with

extremely weathered, extremely low strength siltstone
0.90
SILTSTONE, grey to off-white, distinctly weathered,

low to medium strength
WEATHERED ROCK
END OF TEST PIT AT 1.15 m
Bucket refusal on medium

strength siltstone
This test pit log should be read in conjunction with Parsons Brinckerhoff's accompanying standard notes.
TEST PIT NO.
TP2102
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
0.10
0.35
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
(ML) Sandy SILT, grey, fine grained sand, with sandstone

boulders up to 300mm and roots
MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
(SC) TOPSOIL: Clayey SAND, fine to medium grained,

brown, medium plasticity clay with root fibres
E 370272 N 6358663 MGA

OBSERVATIONS
TOPSOIL
MC<PL
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
6/10/09
6/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:
RESIDUAL SOIL
SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, grey mottled

orange to red, distinctly weathered, medium strength
WEATHERED ROCK
Bucket refusal on medium to high

strength sandstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2103
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
E 370299 N 6358631 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
6/10/09
6/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:
FILL: Woodchips

OBSERVATIONS
FILL
0.10
(ML) Sandy SILT, grey, fine grained sand, with tree roots
W
E
0.45
MC<PL
RESIDUAL SOIL
SANDSTONE, grey, extremely weathered, low strength
WEATHERED ROCK

strength sandstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2104
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
E 370204 N 6358635 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:
FILL: Woodchips

OBSERVATIONS
TOPSOIL
F
0.10
(SM) TOPSOIL: Silty SAND, fine to medium grained, brown,

with root fibres
(CL) Sandy CLAY, medium plasticity, brown, fine grained
sand,
0.20
0.50
(CL) Sandy CLAY, medium plasticity, brown, fine grained

sand, trace tree roots
0.80
D
RESIDUAL SOIL
Section of test pit appears to have
some fill. Possibly associated
with drainage line excavation of
lot boundary.
MC<PL
G
W
>600
>600
>600
SILTSTONE, grey, highly weathered, low to medium

strength, thinly laminated
WEATHERED ROCK

strength siltstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2105
SHEET 1 OF 2
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
E 370235 N 6358628 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
(SM) TOPSOIL: Silty SAND, fine to medium grained, brown,

low plasticity clay and with root fibres
MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:

OBSERVATIONS
TOPSOIL
G
W
MC<PL
0.50
(CH) Silty CLAY, medium to high plasticity, brown mottled

orange, trace root fibres
(ML) Clayey SILT, grey to brown mottled orange, low to

medium plasticity clay
>600
>600
>600
RESIDUAL SOIL
U50
0.80

medium plasticity clay, interbedded with extremely
weathered, extremely low strength Siltstone
MC<PL
0.20
MC~PL
WEATHERED ROCK
TEST PIT NO.
TP2105
SHEET 2 OF 2
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
7
E 370235 N 6358628 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY

medium plasticity clay, interbedded with extremely
weathered, extremely low strength Siltstone
(continued)
2.20
MC<PL MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:

OBSERVATIONS
SILTSTONE, brown to grey mottled orange, highly

weathered, low strength
Bucket refusal on low to medium

strength siltstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2106
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
0.10
E 370260 N 6358598 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
SILTSTONE, grey to orange, extremely weathered, low

strength
MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
(ML) TOPSOIL: Sandy SILT, brown, fine grained sand, with

root fibres
F
G
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:

OBSERVATIONS
TOPSOIL
WEATHERED ROCK
0.30
As above but medium to high strength
Bucket refusal on high strength

siltstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2107
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
E 370170 N 6358600 MGA
10
11
MOISTURE
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY

OBSERVATIONS
(SC) TOPSOIL: Clayey SAND, fine to medium grained,

brown, low to medium plasticity clay
TOPSOIL
(SC) Clayey SAND, fine to medium grained, grey to orange,

with Sandstone boulders up to 400mm, fine to medium
grained, distinctly weathered, medium strength, with
tree roots
RESIDUAL SOIL
(CL) Silty CLAY, medium plasticity, brown to grey, with fine

grained sand
MC<PL
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:
G
W
E
0.15
0.40
>600
>600
>600
U50
1.00
SILTSTONE, grey, extremely weathered, low strength
WEATHERED ROCK

strength siltstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2108
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
E 370201 N 6358592 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
(CL) TOPSOIL: Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, brown, fine

grained sand, with silt and root fibres
MC<PL MOISTURE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:

OBSERVATIONS
TOPSOIL
W
E
0.15
(CL) Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, brown mottled orange, fine

grained sand
0.45
300
350
400
RESIDUAL SOIL
(CL) As above but off white mottled brown
0.90
SILTSTONE, grey, extremely weathered, low to

medium strength
WEATHERED ROCK

strength siltstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2109
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
E 370229 N 6358554 MGA
10
11
MOISTURE
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
(ML) TOPSOIL: Clayey SILT, brown, low plasticity clay, with

root fibres

OBSERVATIONS
TOPSOIL
MC<PL
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:
RESIDUAL SOIL
G
W
0.20
(CL) Silty CLAY, medium plasticity, brown trace root fibres
0.35
(CL) Silty CLAY, low to medium plasticity, orange with sand

fine grained, trace root fibres
0.50
(CL) Silty CLAY, low plasticity, grey mottled brown
MC~PL
450
550
500
550
600
600
U50
0.85
SILTSTONE, grey to brown, highly weathered, low to

medium strength
WEATHERED ROCK

strength siltstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2110
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
0.10
E 370107 N 6358576 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
(SP) FILL: Gravelly SAND, fine to medium grained, brown,

fine to coarse, sub-angular gravel
F
G
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:

OBSERVATIONS
FILL
SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, yellow to white,

highly weathered, very low to low strength
WEATHERED ROCK

strength sandstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2111
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
7
E 370132 N 6358559 MGA
10
11
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
(GP) FILL: Gravel, fine to medium, grey, sub-angular

(ML) Sandy SILT, brown, fine grained sand, trace root fibres
0.02
D-M MOISTURE
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
N
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:

OBSERVATIONS
FILL
RESIDUAL SOIL
G
W
0.25
(CL) Silty CLAY, medium plasticity, brown, with large root

fibres
MC<PL
400
340
400
U50
0.60
SANDSTONE, fine, white mottled orange interbedded

with siltstone, extremely weathered, low strength
WEATHERED ROCK

strength sandstone
TEST PIT NO.
TP2112
SHEET 1 OF 1
Client:
Project:
Test Pit Location:
Project Number:
North Lakes Pty Ltd

2103382A
Excavation Method:
Surface RL:
Co-ords:
E 370157 N 6358523 MGA
10
11
MOISTURE
RELATIVE
DENSITY
/CONSISTENCY
(SP) FILL: Gravelly SAND, fine to medium, yellow, fine to

(SC) medium gravel, grey
Clayey SAND, fine to medium, brown, low plasticity
clay trace root fibres
W
M
(CH) Silty CLAY, medium to high plasticity, grey to brown
MC~PL
0.02
USC SYMBOL
GRAPHIC LOG
SAMPLE
FIELD
TEST
DEPTH(m)
RL(m)
WATER
N
5/10/09
5/10/09
MJH
SF

VS FB
S
VL
F
L
ST MD
VST D
H
VD
HAND
PENETROMETER
(kPa)

1
Date Commenced:
Date Completed:
Recorded By:
Log Checked By:

OBSERVATIONS
FILL
RESIDUAL SOIL
W
E
0.30
300
320
320
U50
Large tree root
0.85
SILTSTONE, off white, slightly weathered, medium to

high strength
WEATHERED ROCK
Bucket refusal on medium to high
strength siltstone
Appendix C
Laboratory certificates
Appendix D
Limitations of geotechnical site
investigation
Legal
Standard Work Practice
SP-LGL-2002
Limitations of Geotechnical Site Investigation
Rev: A
Scope of services
This geotechnical site assessment report (the report) has been prepared in accordance with the scope of
services set out in the contract, or as otherwise agreed, between the client and PB (scope of services). In
some circumstances the scope of services may have been limited by a range of factors such as time,
budget, access and/or site disturbance constraints.
Reliance on data
In preparing the report, PB has relied upon data, surveys, analyses, designs, plans and other information
provided by the client and other individuals and organisations, most of which are referred to in the report
(the data). Except as otherwise stated in the report, PB has not verified the accuracy or completeness of
the data. To the extent that the statements, opinions, facts, information, conclusions and/or
recommendations in the report (conclusions) are based in whole or part on the data, those conclusions
are contingent upon the accuracy and completeness of the data. PB will not be liable in relation to
incorrect conclusions should any data, information or condition be incorrect or have been concealed,
withheld, misrepresented or otherwise not fully disclosed to PB.
Geotechnical investigation
Geotechnical engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion. It is far less exact than other
engineering disciplines. Geotechnical engineering reports are prepared to meet the specific needs of
individuals. A report prepared for a consulting civil engineer may not be adequate for a construction
contractor or even some other consulting civil engineer. This report was prepared expressly for the client
and expressly for purposes indicated by the client or his representative. Use by any other persons for any
purpose, or by the client for a different purpose, might result in problems. The client should not use this
report for other than its intended purpose without seeking additional geotechnical advice.
This geotechnical report is based on project-specific factors

This geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsurface investigation which was designed for
project-specification factors, including the nature of any development, its size and configuration, the
location of any development on the site and its orientation, and the location of access roads and parking
areas. Unless further geotechnical advice is obtained this geotechnical engineering report cannot be
used:
when the nature of any proposed development is changed
when the size, configuration location or orientation of any proposed development is modified.
This geotechnical engineering report cannot be applied to an adjacent site.
Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited ABN 80 078 004 798

Prepared:
Approved: Legal Counsel

Page 1 of 3
Legal

SP-LGL-2002
Rev: A
The limitations of site investigation

In making an assessment of a site from a limited number of boreholes or test pits there is the possibility
that variations may occur between test locations. Site exploration identifies specific subsurface
conditions only at those points from which samples have been taken. The risk that variations will not be
detected can be reduced by increasing the frequency of test locations; however this often does not result
in any overall cost savings for the project. The investigation program undertaken is a professional
estimate of the scope of investigation required to provide a general profile of the subsurface conditions.
The data derived from the site investigation program and subsequent laboratory testing are extrapolated
across the site to form an inferred geological model and an engineering opinion is rendered about overall
subsurface conditions and their likely behaviour with regard to the proposed development. Despite
investigation the actual conditions at the site might differ from those inferred to exist, since no
subsurface exploration program, no matter how comprehensive, can reveal all subsurface details and
anomalies.
The borehole logs are the subjective interpretation of subsurface conditions at a particular location, made
by trained personnel. The interpretation may be limited by the method of investigation, and can not
always be definitive. For example, inspection of an excavation or test pit allows a greater area of the
subsurface profile to be inspected than borehole investigation, however, such methods are limited by
depth and site disturbance restrictions. In borehole investigation, the actual interface between materials
may be more gradual or abrupt than a report indicates.
Subsurface conditions are time dependent

Subsurface conditions may be modified by changing natural forces or man-made influences. A
geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions which existed at the time of subsurface
exploration.
Construction operations at or adjacent to the site, and natural events such as floods, or groundwater
fluctuations, may also affect subsurface conditions, and thus the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical
report. The geotechnical engineer should be kept appraised of any such events, and should be consulted
to determine if additional tests are necessary.
Avoid misinterpretation
A geotechnical engineer should be retained to work with other appropriate design professionals
explaining relevant geotechnical findings and in reviewing the adequacy of their plans and specifications
relative to geotechnical issues.
Bore/profile logs should not be separated from the engineering report

Final bore/profile logs are developed by geotechnical engineers based upon their interpretation of field
logs and laboratory evaluation of field samples. Customarily, only the final bore/profile logs are included
in geotechnical engineering reports. These logs should not under any circumstances be redrawn for
inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. To minimise the likelihood of bore/profile log
misinterpretation, contractors should be given access to the complete geotechnical engineering report
prepared or authorised for their use. Providing the best available information to contractors helps prevent
costly construction problems. For further information on this matter reference should be made to
Guidelines for the Provision of Geotechnical Information in Construction Contracts published by the
Institution of Engineers Australia, National Headquarters, Canberra 1987.
Geotechnical involvement during construction

During construction, excavation is frequently undertaken which exposes the actual subsurface
conditions. For this reason geotechnical consultants should be retained through the construction stage, to
identify variations if they are exposed and to conduct additional tests which may be required and to deal
quickly with geotechnical problems if they arise.

Prepared:

Page 2 of 3
Legal
SP-LGL-2002
Rev: A
Report for benefit of client

The report has been prepared for the benefit of the client and no other party. PB assumes no
responsibility and will not be liable to any other person or organisation for or in relation to any matter
dealt with or conclusions expressed in the report, or for any loss or damage suffered by any other person
or organisation arising from matters dealt with or conclusions expressed in the report (including without
limitation matters arising from any negligent act or omission of PB or for any loss or damage suffered by
any other party relying upon the matters dealt with or conclusions expressed in the report). Other parties
should not rely upon the report or the accuracy or completeness of any conclusions and should make
their own enquiries and obtain independent advice in relation to such matters.
Other limitations
PB will not be liable to update or revise the report to take into account any events or emergent
circumstances or facts occurring or becoming apparent after the date of the report.
Amendment details
Revision
Details
Date
By
Original
18/07/08
M Jenkins

Prepared:

Page 3 of 3
Appendix E
Reactive soil notes
Reactive Soils - General Design Precautions

These procedures generally apply to masonry residential buildings founded on reactive clay soils.
Such soils are prone to shrink/swell movements due to moisture variations (either by natural or
artificial causes). It must be accepted that some degree of structural cracking is likely for
structures founded on these soils. The basic design philosophy is to minimise any cracking and
provide a serviceable structure. It is thus a compromise between economy and performance.
The following procedures are supplementary to the foundation recommendations given in the
attached report.
All surface water runoff must be directed away from the building by appropriate grading in
order to prevent ponding near foundations. Site drainage should form part of the building
contract.
Peripheral pathways, with impermeable underliner, should be provided around the

building to improve site drainage and assist in the stabilisation of moisture conditions near
foundations.
All brickwork should be suitably articulated into discrete units to accommodate the
expected movements. Brickwork over doors and windows should be avoided.
Internal and external walls should be arranged along straight lines, where possible.
All house drains and water pipes should be provided with sufficient flexibility to
accommodate the expected differential movements (between foundation and uncovered
outside area) at the level of the service.
The extension of services through slabs should be avoided where possible in order to
prevent hidden leaks under the slab area. Most plumbing fixtures can be arranged to exit
through outside walls.
Septic systems should be located so as not to influence the house or neighbouring

foundations.
Subgrades beneath elevated and well ventilated floors should be covered with an
impermeable liner (with protective soil blanket) to minimise excessive desiccation.
In addition, certain other site management precautions must be adhered to during the life of the
structure. These precautions generally relate to the control of abnormal moisture variations due to
the effects of drainage and vegetation. Recommendations on site management precautions are
contained in the following section.
Reactive Soil Notes
Page 1 of 2
Reactive Soils - Site Management Precautions

These precautions are considered supplementary to any structural and/or foundation design
measures for the subject building, and are intended for distribution to the prospective house
owner.
Reactive clays are prone to heave/shrink movements with changes in soil moisture content due to
natural or artificial means. The basic design philosophy employed for the dwelling is to provide a
foundation/superstructure adequate to accommodate ground movements due to extreme
seasonal moisture changes only. The possibility of other abnormal and/or localised moisture
changes (the cause of most housing distress) has been assumed to be controlled by the
following site management procedures.
Leaking plumbing or blocked drains should be repaired promptly and site grading maintained to
prevent ponding near foundations. Garden watering, particularly by fixed systems, should be
controlled to avoid over-watering. Proper garden maintenance should produce year round
uniform moisture conditions.
Trees and some shrubs can cause a substantial drying and shrinking of reactive clays, additional
to that experienced in a drought or a long dry spell. This effect is most likely to result in damage
when added to the drying effects from a drought or a long dry spell. Trees should be planted at a
substantial distance from the house. The distance depends upon the species and soil conditions,
but generally a distance equal to 75% of the mature height is a minimum.
Problems during a drought can be minimised by extensive pruning (thus reducing water demand)
and/or providing trees with adequate water. Frequent moderate watering during dry periods
should minimise the risk of the tree extracting excessive moisture from beneath the foundation of
the house. This action should also be immediately undertaken by the owner if brickwork cracking
due to tree drying is noticed. Most reactive clay failures can be minimised by controlling the
combined drying effects of trees and drought.
The owner should appreciate that on reactive clays it is virtually impossible to design an
economic foundation system that will totally prevent movement. Some minor aesthetic cracking,
while undesirable, is likely to occur in a significant proportion of houses. In addition some minor
problems should be expected with jamming of windows and doors especially during the settling
period or following a major drought and any repairs should be regarded as part of normal house
maintenance. Even significant masonry cracking with widths over 3 mm usually has no influence
on the function of the wall and only presents an aesthetic problem. Just as it is difficult to design
an immovable footing system, it is almost impossible to provide remedial measures that will
prevent further movement if distress does occur. Consequently, extreme remedial measures
should not be undertaken for minor problems, without further engineering advice.
Reference should be made to Appendix A of AS2870.2-1990 "Residential Slabs and Footings"
and CSIRO 10-91 "A Guide to Home Owners on Foundation Maintenance and Footing
Performance" for more detailed recommendations regarding Design and Site management
precautions.
Reactive Soil Notes
Page 2 of 2

Geotechnical Investigation & Site Classification

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotechnical Investigation & Site Classification

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotechnical Investigation & Site Classification

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotechnical Investigation

and Site Classification,

North Lakes Pty Ltd

Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited

Certified to ISO 9001, ISO 14001, AS/NZS 4801

Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited (PB) [2009].

Glen Burton ....................................................................................

Stephen Flux .................................................................................

Glen Burton ....................................................................................

North Lakes Pty Ltd (PDF) .............................................................

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Regional geology and subsurface conditions

Discussion and recommendations

Footing design and construction

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Typical subsurface profile

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Regional geology and subsurface conditions

Typical subsurface profile

Depth range encountered (m)

Note 1: Topsoil assumed to be striped and replaced with shallow fill.

Some filling on the site consisted of landscaping woodchips.

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Discussion and recommendations

The subject lots have been classified as detailed in Table 4.1.

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Footing design and construction

Geotechnical Investigation and Site Classification, Northlakes Estate Stage 21

Full Size 1:1000 A3

Stage 21 Test Pit Location Plan

Explanatory Notes - Soil Description

Partial water loss

Complete water loss

NFGWO: The observation of groundwater, whether present or not, was not

Cohesive soils are friable or powdery

Soil feels cool, darkened in colour

Cohesive soils usually weakened

For cohesive soils the following codes may also be used:

Moisture Content greater than the Plastic Limit.

COHESIVE SOILS - CONSISTENCY

Undrained Shear Strength, Cu

COHESIONLESS SOILS - RELATIVE DENSITY

COHESIONLESS SOILS PARTICLE SIZE DESCRIPTIVE TERMS

C:\Webs\ausydg\BP20_TechGuidelines\20.5 Geotechnical\stdnotes\Geotech Explan. Notes - brief version.doc

Refer soil description sheet

Rock strength is described using AS1726 and ISRM - Commission on

length of core recovered

Sum of Axial lengths of core > 100mm long

ROCK MATERIAL WEATHERING

Rock is weathered to such an extent

The rock substance is affected by

The whole of the rock substance is

Rock is slightly discoloured but shows

Rock shows no sign of decomposition

Distinctly Weathered: Rock strength usually changed by weathering. The

Point Load Index