TR 509 2

MANUAL FOR GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION AND GEOTECHNICAL

DESIGN
PART 2: GROUND INVESTIGATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN
DOCUMENT NO: TR-509

SECOND EDITION
JUNE-2021
DOCUMENT AMENDMENT PAGE
EDITION REVISION DATE PAGE NO. AMENDMENTS NOTES
NO. NO.
01 00 DEC
2016
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Addition as below:

2021 TABLE-2 In addition to boreholes, the excavated trial pits
(PAGE-20) shall be utilized to collect bulk samples from
subgrade. CBR and other field/laboratory tests shall
be carried out on samples collected at/below
subgrade instead of zone planned to be excavated
for pavement construction.
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Modify as below:
2021 TABLE-2 Low rise buildings (e.g. toll plaza or road
(PAGE-21) maintenance depot), shades or other landscaping
structures.
One exploratory hole at building/structure location
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Notes added as below:
2021 TABLE-2 The provided spacing in table-2 are between two
(PAGE-22) similar type of exploratory holes and should be
finalized in conjunction with the depth
requirements provided in Table-3.
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Modify as below:
2021 TABLE-3 Low rise buildings (e.g. toll plaza or road
(PAGE-25) maintenance depot), shades or other landscaping
structures.
2021 TABLE-3 It is designer responsibility to ensure that required
(PAGE-26) criteria of investigation shall be fulfilled during the
design stage. In-case, investigation results may
require further additional number of boreholes
and/or few boreholes may require to extend up to
greater depth, efforts shall be made to execute it
during design stage. However, if due to time or
other constrains the additional/extended boreholes
cannot be executed during design stage along with
main investigation, then particular additional scope
can be added to verification stage investigation
(construction stage). Approval and agreement with
authority reviewer shall be required in this regard
and design Consultant shall undertake full
responsibility of the design, errors and associated
risks due to non-compliance to the investigation
requirements at design stage (if any).
2021 TABLE-11 Water Soluble Salts in Soil: BS 1377: Part 3: 1990
(PAGE-43) (Amd. 9028-96), and Earth Manual Des.8: A.
Page 1-2
Shall be tested at 0.5m interval for soil above
groundwater table and few samples from soil
below groundwater table.
2021 TABLE-13 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS): BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990:
(PAGE-47) Cl: 8. A
Adequate frequency below groundwater table.
2021 TABLE-14 Where, in-situ/laboratory tests not performed to
(PAGE-49) determine modulus of elasticity (Em). For non-
cohesive soil a criteria of Em = 1N and for rock
stratum a criteria of (Em=J x Mr x UCS) shall be
adopted.
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Modified as below:
2021 8.1 (PAGE- The recommended analysis is a total stress analysis
85) in which the seismic demand (represented by the
earthquake induced stresses) is compared to the
seismic capacity (undrained cyclic shear strength of
the soil, which is also called liquefaction
resistance). The seismic demand will be denoted as
CSR (cyclic stress ratio), whereas seismic capacity
will be denoted as CRR (cyclic resistance ratio).
The safety factor (SF), computed as a ratio between
CRR and CSR, should not be less than 1.25.
Evaluation of settlements in dry sands due to
seismic densification can be carried out using
guidance available in Kramer (154). In order to
conduct proper assessment of liquefaction
potential, investigations of soil characteristics are
required in terms of in situ Standard Penetration
Tests (SPT) or Cone Penetration Tests (CPT). It is to
be noted that CPT data is preferred for assessing
potential for liquefaction and seismic densification
of loose granular strata during an earthquake
event.
If soils are found to be susceptible to liquefaction
and the ensuing effects are deemed capable of
affecting the load bearing capacity or the stability
of the foundations/roads/pavement, measures,
such as ground improvement and/or pile
foundation (structures) shall be taken to ensure
stability.
The liquefaction hazard may be neglected when
one of the following conditions is fulfilled:
i) Sands have a clay content greater than
20% with plasticity index (PI) larger than
10.
ii) Sands have a silt content greater than
35% and at the same time the SPT
normalized blow count value (N1(60)) is
larger than 20.
Page 1-3
iii) Sands are clean, with SPT normalized
blow count value (N1(60)) larger than 30.

2021 TABLE-26 Methods described in Tomlinson(2) (2001)(102),
(PAGE-90) Bowles (1996)(159) and Hong Kong Geoguide 1
(1994)(160).
Methods described in Tomlinson(3) (2008) (161).

AASHTO LRFD (2017) or Latest Edition/Interim(4)
Notes added as below:
(2) For Spread footings minimum safety factor
of 3.0 shall be adopted to calculate net
allowable bearing capacity and total
tolerable settlement shall not exceed
25mm.
(3) Pile allowable compression capacities
based on ASD method shall be calculated
by using minimum factor of safety (2.5 for
skin friction and 3.0 for end bearing).
Tension capacities shall not exceed 70% of
allowable compression load.
(4) Pile strength design shall comply with
LRFD bridge design specifications and
guidelines set forth in ADQCC roads
structures design manual TR-516.
(5) In order to calculate the compression
capacity for piles socket in rock, end
bearing shall be ignored.
2021 TABLE-26 Strength, trafficability, requirement of capping,
(PAGE-91) settlement/collapses due to low CBR/loose layer
underneath or weak subgrade, and/or presence
of unsuitable/soluble material below subgrade.
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: New Section (Ground Improvement & Treatment of
2021 8.5 (PAGE- Voids/Cavities) added:
92)
The geotechnical risks and hazards shall be
identified in details by performing
geophysical/geotechnical investigation at design
and verification stage. In case investigation findings
indicates “unfavourable” conditions susceptible to
liquefaction and/or settlement of
roads/pavement/infrastructures/structures/utilities
etc. Ground improvement (such as soil replacement,
reinforcement with geosynthetics, vibro-
compaction or vibro-flotation, vibro replacement
(stone columns), dynamic
compaction/replacement, CMC columns (controlled
modulus columns/rigid inclusions), Rapid Impact
Compaction (RIC), High Energy Impact Compaction
(HEIC), soil mixing or other applicable techniques)
shall be performed prior to construction over it.
The conventional ground improvement techniques
listed above are for general guidelines and should be
finalize at site by Ground Improvement Specialist in
function of the soil type (gradation and density) and
the site trials results, in order to efficiently satisfy
the performance criteria.
Page 1-4
An indicative plan showing the location of the
proposed improvement techniques shall be
prepared based on the findings of the existing and
complementary subsurface investigation data at the
project design stage.
The following performance requirements shall be
followed as guideline (post improvement);
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: New sub section added as below:
2021 8.5.1 Minimum Criteria for Roads/Pavement:
(PAGE-92) i) Total settlement (immediate and long-
term) shall not exceed 25mm at 100%
design load and shall not be considered less
than 40 kN/m2 (considering vehicle load of
HL-93).
ii) The safety factor against liquefaction shall
not be less than 1.25.
iii) The in-situ CBR of improved ground shall
not be less than CBR value adopted in
design and in general shall not be less than
10% at 5mm penetration for any condition.
2021 8.5.2 Minimum Criteria for
(PAGE-93) Structures/Infrastructures/Utilities Foundation:
i) Total settlement (immediate and long-
term) shall not exceed 25mm (footings)
and 50mm (Raft) at 100% of design load.
ii) The safety factor against liquefaction shall
iii) The post-improvement vertical and lateral
settlements induced by earthquake loading
shall be limited to a maximum of 20 mm at
the top of the ground.
iv) Angular distortion (differential settlement)
of points 5m apart shall be less than 1:500.
v) A minimum equivalent Young’s Elastic
Modulus for the treated ground of 30MPa.
vi) SPT: Minimum N value of 30 along the
improved depth of granular material.
vii) CPT: Minimum cone tip resistance value of
10 MPa along the improved depth of
granular material.
viii) Minimum relative density of 70%.
ix) An effective angle of shear resistance not
less than 35° for the medium dense to
dense sand (granular material).
The parameters of each locality must be checked for
the material type, mineralogy, size, and for the
deposit thickness before the final decision to be
made on the improvement method, level of energy
used, and spacing of improvement points.
Moreover, the thickness of the soil cover, which is
important in determining the improvement method,
can be checked through the pre-CPT/SPT testing
with close spacing. It shall be noted that vibrations
Page 1-5
induced by heavy machinery shall be limited, while
working next to existing structures or utilities that
are sensitive to vibrations.
The efficiency of the final adopted improvement
method for the project, final thickness/depth of the
improvement ground and verification of set
performance criteria shall be checked by performing
post ground improvement in- situ tests (SPT, CPT,
Plate load test (PLT), Zone Load test, CBR etc.).
The suitability of the soil material shall be
determined by performing standard laboratory tests
(such as gradation, plasticity index (P.I), proctor, CBR,
organic content, water soluble salts (WSS), total
dissolved salts (TDS), sulphate, chloride, pH and/or
other.) by testing collected soil samples as per the
standard requirements provided under TR-542
(part-1 & 2).
2021 8.5.3 Voids/Cavities Treatment: The risk of voids/cavities
(PAGE-93 and highly fractured zones within right of way (ROW)
& 94) and underneath the foundation
(structures/infrastructure/utilities) shall be
investigated (geophysical/geotechnical) at design
stage to determine vertical/lateral extent and shall
be verified at verification stage by executing probing
holes (grid spacing 10m x 10m) with the depth of
each probe reaching a minimum penetration of
10.0m below the last cavity encountered, and
cavities filled with low mobility grout.
All encountered open cavities/voids/highly
fractured zones shall be grouted prior to
construction over it. Grouting design and
specifications shall be developed by considering the
nature of material/ vertical and lateral extent and
shall be design/performed by a company specialized
in such works.
In addition, the subgrade layer (road/pavement)
shall be reinforced with geogrid layers in order to
cater for any potential of cavities collapse, leading to
excessive settlement in future. The type and
strength of geogrid shall be finalized in consultation
with geogrid designer/supplier based on
effectiveness for the problem in hand and
performance warranties.
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: New section (Criteria to design retaining
2021 8.6 (PAGE- walls/foundation subjected to overturning loads)
94) added as below:
External stability of retaining walls design and
foundation subjected to overturning loads (such as
shade foundations) shall fulfil the serviceability
criteria by following the minimum factor of safety
i.e. FoS = 2.0 (overturning), FoS = 1.5 (sliding) and
Page 1-6
FoS = 3.0 (Bearing Capacity). The global stability shall
For strength limit state the stability checks shall be
in compliance with the guideline of AASHTO LRFD
and set forth in ADQCC roads structures design
manual TR-516. In general, the larger dimension
from design of SLS & ULS shall be consider.
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: New section (Slope Stability analysis) added as
2021 8.7 (PAGE- below:
94 & 95) Slope Stability analysis shall be carried out to
evaluate the stability of earth and rock-fill,
embankments, excavated slopes, and natural slopes
in soil and rock. The stability of slope depends upon
certain factors and shall be considered in the
analysis (analytical or empirical methods).
i) Uncertainty in the accuracy with which the
slope stability analysis represents the
actual mechanism of failure.
ii) Uncertainty in the accuracy with which the
input parameters (shear strength,
groundwater conditions, slope geometry,
etc.).
iii) The likelihood and duration of exposure to
various types of external loading.
Stability analyses must be formulated with great
care. Since the available shearing resistance of the
soil depends on pore water drainage conditions,
those conditions must be considered carefully in the
selection of shear strength and pore pressure
conditions for the analysis. A minimum surcharge
load of 20 kPa shall be consider.
Accordingly, in static condition, the slope design
shall satisfy minimum safety factor criteria of 1.5
(permanent) and 1.3 (temporary) and 1.1 for seismic
case. Erosion protection measures shall be provided
as appropriate to design requirements in compliance
with ADQCC standards and specifications.
For stability analysis in rock slopes, following modes
of failure shall be considered as applicable.
i) Planar failure
ii) Polygonal failure
iii) Wedge failure
iv) Toppling failure
Stereographic and kinematic analysis shall be
performed as appropriate and applicable to project
specific requirements.
2021 9.2.1 i) Boreholes, trial pits, cone penetration tests
(PAGE-96) (CPT)
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Modified and new addition as below:
2021 9.3 (PAGE- For new works the subgrade/foundation requires
100 & 101) assessment and shall be carried out as per the
criteria provided in table-2 & 3 of this manual.
Page 1-7
In case soil investigation indicates that subgrade is
suspected to liquefaction and/or
excessive/differential settlement more than
tolerable limits, due to unsuitable material/weak
ground condition and/or presence of water soluble
content/pure salt layer underneath and/or other
risks and geo-hazards, that may affect the stability of
roads/pavement and/or foundation of
structures/infrastructure/utilities, than ground
improvement measures shall be taken into account,
to mitigate the effect of both liquefaction and
settlement, prior to construction over it. Subgrade
shall be reinforced with geogrid layers and the
requirements shall be determined at design stage.
The type and strength of geogrid shall be finalized in
consultation with geogrid designer/supplier based
on the effectiveness for the problem in hand and
performance warranties. For ground improvement,
requirements and criteria provided in section 8.5 of
TR-509-2 shall be followed.
The suitability of the material shall be evaluated
based on the criteria provided in ADQCC TR-542 (1
& 2). The sum of the organic matters’ content and
the soluble salt content as a total shall not exceed
2% in both natural soil and imported backfill.
Similarly, mitigation due to shallow groundwater
table (such as capillary break, subsurface drainage
etc.) shall also be adopted at design stage. For the
provision of capillary break layer (wrapped in
geotextile), the criteria of design groundwater table
of minimum1.5m below formation level (TR-514-2,
Standard DWG C-5) shall be followed.
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Modified as below;

2021 CITED Tomlinson, M. J. Pile design and construction
REFERENCES practice. 5th edition. s.l. : Taylor Francis, 2008.
(PAGE-
161)
02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: New figures added as below (information only):
2021 APPENDIX A Figure A6: Reported Loose Soil Thickness-Abu
(PAGE-120 Dhabi
TO 124) Figure A7: Reported Sabkha Deposit -Abu Dhabi
Figure A8: Reported Halite Deposit-Abu Dhabi
Figure A9: Reported Voids/Cavities-Abu Dhabi
Figure A10: Reported Geohazard Risk-Abu Dhabi
Page 1-8
Document No: TR-509
Second Edition
June - 2021
Department of Municipal Affairs and Transport
PO Box 20
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
© Copyright 2016, by the Department of Municipal Affairs and Transport. All Rights Reserved. This
document, or parts there of, may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the
publisher.
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PART-2: GROUND INVESTIGATION AND GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables................................................................................................................................. v
Glossary ...................................................................................................................................... vii
Abbreviations and Acronyms ...................................................................................................... x
Nomenclature and Symbols ....................................................................................................... xii
1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Overview........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose and scope ........................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Application of this manual ................................................................................................. 1
1.4 Content and format ........................................................................................................... 2
2 ABU DHABI GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS .................................................. 3
2.1 Overview........................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Geology of the Region ...................................................................................................... 3
2.2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3
2.2.2 Solid geology ............................................................................................................. 3
2.2.3 Superficial geology .................................................................................................... 5
2.3 Characteristics of Abu Dhabi strata ................................................................................... 7
2.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 7
2.3.2 Aeolian sands ............................................................................................................ 7
2.3.3 Sabkha ...................................................................................................................... 8
2.3.4 Lagoonal muds .......................................................................................................... 8
2.3.5 Fluvial sands/gravels ................................................................................................. 9
2.3.6 Bedrocks.................................................................................................................... 9
3 PRELIMINARY SOURCES STUDY ....................................................................................... 13
3.1 Overview......................................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Scope of preliminary sources study ................................................................................ 13
4 GROUND INVESTIGATION PLANNING ............................................................................... 14
4.1 Overview......................................................................................................................... 14
4.2 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 14
4.3 Ground investigations proposals ..................................................................................... 16
4.3.1 Phasing of ground investigation ............................................................................... 16
4.3.2 Guidelines for overall coverage of exploratory holes spacings and depths............... 17
4.4 Soils and rocks sampling and testing to obtain engineering parameters for use in
geotechnical design................................................................................................................... 27
Page i
TOC Second Edition June-2021
4.4.1 General.................................................................................................................... 27
4.4.2 Difficulties in parameter determination ..................................................................... 31
4.5 Guidelines for engineering parameters typically required ................................................ 36
4.6 Laboratory tests for determining soils, groundwater and rock properties and engineering
parameters ................................................................................................................................ 42
4.6.1 Soils and groundwater ............................................................................................. 42
4.6.2 Rock ........................................................................................................................ 49
5 GROUND INVESTIGATION PROCUREMENT ...................................................................... 52
5.1 Overview......................................................................................................................... 52
5.2 Procurement of a ground investigation company ............................................................ 52
5.2.1 Quality of ground investigation personnel ................................................................ 53
5.2.2 Laboratory quality .................................................................................................... 54
5.3 Specification and bill of quantities ................................................................................... 55
5.4 Specification of ground investigation of contaminated land ............................................. 55
5.5 Ground investigation company performance ................................................................... 58
6 IN SITU TESTING AND ITS INTERPRETATION................................................................... 59
6.1 Overview......................................................................................................................... 59
6.2 Standard penetration testing ........................................................................................... 59
6.2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 59
6.2.2 Influence of different practices and equipment on SPT results ................................. 59
6.2.3 Corrections applied to SPT results ........................................................................... 61
6.2.4 Engineering parameters and direct design methods ................................................ 63
6.3 Cone penetration testing ................................................................................................. 65
6.3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 65
6.3.2 Test methods ........................................................................................................... 66
6.3.3 Factors that can affect CPT results .......................................................................... 66
6.3.4 Presentation of results ............................................................................................. 67
6.3.5 Soils characteristics, engineering parameters, direct design methods and other
applications ............................................................................................................................ 69
6.4 In situ density tests ......................................................................................................... 72
6.5 Geophysical surveys ....................................................................................................... 72
6.5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 72
6.5.2 Planning .................................................................................................................. 73
6.5.3 Procurement of geophysical survey work ................................................................. 78
7 GROUND INVESTIGATION REPORTING ............................................................................ 81
7.1 Description of soils and rocks, borehole and trial pit records ........................................... 81
Page ii
7.2 Laboratory test reporting ................................................................................................. 81

7.3 Electronic transfer of geotechnical data .......................................................................... 81
8 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN.................................................................................................... 82
8.1 Seismic loading............................................................................................................... 82
8.2 Interpretative ground model ............................................................................................ 86
8.3 Selection of geotechnical design parameters .................................................................. 87
8.4 Geotechnical design ....................................................................................................... 89
8.5 Ground improvement & treatment of voids/cavities ......................................................... 92
8.5.1 Minimum criteria for Roads/Pavement: .................................................................... 92
8.5.2 Minimum criteria for Structures/Infrastructures/Utilities Foundation .......................... 93
8.5.3 Voids/Cavities Treatment ......................................................................................... 93
8.6 Criteria to design retaining walls/foundation subjected to overturning loads .................... 94
8.7 Slope Stability analysis ................................................................................................... 94
9 GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF ROAD PAVEMENTS ........................................................ 96
9.1 Overview......................................................................................................................... 96
9.2 Pavement investigation and assessment ........................................................................ 96
9.2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 96
9.2.2 Visual condition survey ............................................................................................ 96
9.2.3 Trial pits through the pavement layer ....................................................................... 97
9.2.4 Asphalt cores ........................................................................................................... 97
9.2.5 Dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) ......................................................................... 98
9.2.6 Ground penetrating radar (GPR) .............................................................................. 99
9.2.7 Laboratory testing .................................................................................................. 100
9.2.8 Testing pavement “strength” .................................................................................. 100
9.3 Subgrade investigation and assessment ....................................................................... 100
Cited References....................................................................................................................... 102
Other References ...................................................................................................................... 112
Appendix A: Geological map, litho-stratigraphical section, tectonic setting maps and
geohazard risk maps ................................................................................................................ 114
Appendix B: Abu Dhabi soils and rock strata typical geotechnical hazards and risks ....... 125
Appendix C: Preliminary sources study.................................................................................. 129
Appendix D: Example template evaluation sheets for ground investigation companies .... 136
Appendix E: Template bill of quantities for ground investigation ......................................... 146
NOTE: APPENDICES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE PDF COPIES ................................................ 146
Appendix F: SPT corrections spreadsheet template .............................................................. 169
Appendix G: Cone penetration testing .................................................................................... 171
Page iii
Appendix H: Borehole geophysical techniques ..................................................................... 174

Appendix I: Example exploratory hole record ........................................................................ 178
Appendix J: Example reporting forms for soils and rock laboratory tests ........................... 181
Appendix K: Example geological profiles ............................................................................... 305
Appendix L: International Standards - Limit state geotechnical design ............................... 307
Page iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Cone penetrometer components ............................................................................... 66
Figure 2: Refraction methodology (from Wightman et al (2003)(116)) .................................... 75
Figure 3: Example of moderately conservative and worst credible values and parameters . 89
Figure 4: Example dynamic cone penetration test ................................................................... 99
Figure A1: Geological Map of the United Arab Emirates (Huntington Geology & Geophysics
Ltd, 1979(1))............................................................................................................................... 115
Figure A2: Abu Dhabi litho-stratigraphy (Alsharhan (2008)(2)) ............................................. 116
Figure A3: Tectonic setting of the Arabian plate (Aldama et al (138)) .......................................... 117
Figure A4: Maximum considered earthquake ground motion for the United Arab Emirates of 0.2s (Ss)
spectral response acceleration (5% of critical damping), Site class B (Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use
of International Building Codes, (149)) ........................................................................................ 118
Figure A5: Maximum considered earthquake ground motion for the United Arab Emirates of 1.0s (S1)
spectral response acceleration (5% of critical damping), Site class B (Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use
of International Building Codes (149)) ......................................................................................... 119
Figure A6: Reported Loose Soil Thickness-Abu Dhabi ................................................................ 120
Figure A7: Reported Sabkha Deposit - Abu Dhabi ...................................................................... 121
Figure A8: Reported Halite Deposit- Abu Dhabi .......................................................................... 122
Figure A9: Reported Voids/Cavities- Abu Dhabi .......................................................................... 123
Figure A10: Reported Geohazard Risk- Abu Dhabi ..................................................................... 124
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Abu Dhabi main soils and bedrock strata units ........................................................... 7
Table 2: Guidelines for overall exploratory holes spacings for detailed design .................... 19
Table 3: Guidelines for exploratory holes depths .................................................................... 23
Table 4: Soils properties/engineering parameters, symbols and units................................... 28
Table 5: Rock properties/engineering parameters, symbols and units .................................. 30
Table 6: Quality classification for soil samples ........................................................................ 32
Table 7: Sampling techniques for Abu Dhabi soils .................................................................. 32
Table 8: Guidelines on the minimum number of samples to be tested for particular soils
laboratory tests ........................................................................................................................... 34
Table 9: Guidelines on the minimum number of samples to be tested for particular rock
laboratory tests ........................................................................................................................... 35
Table 10: Engineering parameters commonly required for design and to be considered in
planning a ground investigation ................................................................................................ 37
Table 11: Soil properties and engineering parameters commonly determined from laboratory
tests for Abu Dhabi road projects.............................................................................................. 43
Table 12: Soil properties and engineering parameters occasionally determined from
laboratory tests for Abu Dhabi road projects ........................................................................... 45
Table 13: Groundwater properties commonly determined from laboratory tests for Abu Dhabi
road projects ............................................................................................................................... 48
Table 14: Rock properties and engineering parameters commonly determined from
Page v
Table 15: Rock properties and engineering parameters occasionally determined from
Table 16: Site categorisation in relation to the ground investigation of landfills and
contaminated land (after UK Site Investigation Steering Group (1993)(93)) ........................... 57
Table 17: Correction factors in sands for rod length ............................................................... 61
Table 18: Correction factors CN for vertical effective stress (σv’) owing to overburden of the
soils ............................................................................................................................................. 62
Table 19: Engineering parameters commonly derived from SPT results ............................... 64
Table 20: Soil characteristics and engineering parameters commonly derived from CPT
results .......................................................................................................................................... 70
Table 21: Tests commonly undertaken for Abu Dhabi road projects for determining the in situ
density of soils ............................................................................................................................ 72
Table 22: Summary of geophysical survey techniques and their application ........................ 74
Table 23: Summary of uses and limitations of frequently used seismic methods ................. 76
Table 24: Summary of seismic hazard studies results for Abu Dhabi at various return periods.
..................................................................................................................................................... 83
Table 25: Seismic design parameters for Site Class B for use in seismic design according to
IBC (Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use of International Building Codes (149)) ............................... 84
Table 26: International Standards and references commonly used for geotechnical design 90
Table 27: Abu Dhabi design guidelines for use in geotechnical design in Abu Dhabi road
projects........................................................................................................................................ 92
Table B1: Abu Dhabi typical geotechnical hazards and risks ............................................... 126
Table C1: General information required for a preliminary sources study ............................ 130
Table C2: Sources of information for a preliminary sources study ...................................... 132
Table C3: Notes on site reconnaissance ................................................................................. 134
Table D1: Example template technical evaluation sheet for Ground Investigation Companies
................................................................................................................................................... 137
Table D2: Example template health and safety questionnaire............................................... 144
Table F1: SPT corrections spreadsheet template ................................................................... 170
Table G1: Summary of typical checks and recalibrations to be made for CPT .................... 172
Table G2: Check list for information required for CPT to check data quality ....................... 173
Table H1: Tools and methods for subsurface investigations ................................................ 175
Table H2: Geophysical methods and techniques for logging boreholes .............................. 176
Table H3: Borehole logs and their applications and limitations ............................................ 177
Table L1: International Standards – Limit state geotechnical design ................................... 308
Page vi
GLOSSARY
Borehole: A general term for a small diameter hole sunk in the ground, usually vertically but
occasionally may be horizontal or inclined, to recover samples of soil and rock strata and
groundwater and to carry out tests to establish the properties of the strata.
Characteristic value parameters: Soil parameters which are defined as being a cautious estimate
of the value affecting the occurrence of the limit. This is analogous to moderately conservative
parameters.
Cone penetration test: The cone penetration test, often referred to as CPT, is an in situ test to
determine the geotechnical engineering properties of soils and to delineate soil stratigraphy. The test
method consists of pushing an instrumented cone, with the tip facing down, into the ground at a
controlled rate.
Earthwork: Work of excavating or raising of ground.
Exploratory holes: A general term for boreholes, sunk by various means including cable percussion
and rotary coring and rotary open holing, trial pits and trial trenches.
Geophysical Survey Company: A specialist contractor who carry out geophysical survey work.
Geotechnical design: The use of scientific principles, technical information and thought in the
definition of the ground engineering aspects a structure, earthwork or system to perform pre-
specified functions with the maximum economy and efficiency.
Geotechnical engineering: The application of sciences of soils and rock mechanics and
engineering geology in building, civil engineering construction and the protection of the environment.
Geotechnical hazard: Unfavourable ground and or groundwater conditions that may pose a risk to
construction or of adverse performance of completed works.
Geotechnical practitioner: A person specialising in geotechnical engineering or engineering

geology.
Geotechnical risk: The risk posed to construction or to appropriate function of completed works by
the ground or groundwater conditions at a site.
Geotechnical risk register: A live and continuously updated table or spreadsheet that provides an
up to date register of the project geotechnical risks. The register usually contains a description of the
risk, an assessment of its likelihood and consequences, proposed mitigation measures and owners.
Ground investigation: The process by which geological, geotechnical and other relevant
information is obtained for a project.
Ground Investigation Company: A company that specialises in the likes of borehole drilling, soils
and rock in situ and laboratory testing.
Ground Investigation Factual Report: The report that presents the results of a ground
investigation. The report will normally include the records of borehole and trial pits, soils and rock in
situ and laboratory testing.
Page vii
GLOSSARY Second Edition June-2021
Ground model: A conceptual model based on the geology and morphology of the site, and used to
speculate on likely ground and groundwater conditions and their variability.
Groundwater: Water that is present under the earth’s surface. Groundwater that is situated below
the surface of the land, irrespective of its source and transient status. Saturated soils having high
groundwater elevations within the foundations and landscaped areas of road pavements require
special under drain removal systems.
Likelihood: The probability of a risk occurring.
Liquefaction: The process by which typically saturated unconsolidated sediments are transformed
into a substance that acts like a liquid.
Moderately conservative parameters: Engineering parameters which are the geotechnical

practitioner’s conservative best estimate.
Overseeing Organisation: The governmental or other body with overall responsibility for the
project.
Piezocone test: A cone penetration test where pore pressure measurement is also made.
Pile load capacity: The load that a pile can carry without failing, usually defined in terms of ultimate
capacity and capacity such that restricts movement within serviceability limits.
Porewater pressure: The pressure of groundwater held within a soil or rock, in gaps between the
particles (pores).
Preliminary sources study: An examination of all existing information concerning a site, such as
geological maps, previous borehole records, historic maps, aerial photograph, satellite imagery, to
assess ground conditions and previous land use.
Risk: The chance of something happening that will have an impact upon project objectives. Risk
components are the probability or likelihood of failing to achieve a particular outcome, and the
consequences and impacts of failing to achieve that outcome.
Road earthworks: A general term for any embankment, cutting that may be encountered in the
transportation system.
Road structures: A general term for any bridge, culvert, catch basin, drop inlet, retaining wall,
cribbing, manhole, endwall, building, sewer, service pipe, underdrain, foundation drain and similar
features, that may be encountered in the transportation system.
Seismic hazard: Unfavourable condition resulting from earthquake activity that may pose a risk to
construction or have an adverse affect on the performance of completed works.
Seismic loading: The application of an earthquake-generated load to a structure.
Standard penetration test: The standard penetration test, often referred to as SPT, is an in situ
dynamic penetration test designed to provide information on the geotechnical engineering properties
of a soil. Procedures for the test are described in British Standard BS EN ISO 22476-3: 2005 and
ASTM D1586-08a.
Page viii
Trial pit: A general term for an excavation usually by machine, occasionally by small tools and hand-
dig to inspect and record the soil and rock strata conditions, any groundwater entry and to recover
strata samples.
Trial trench pit: A general term for an elongated excavation usually by machine to inspect and
record the soil and rock strata conditions, any groundwater entry and to recover strata samples.
Worst credible parameters: Engineering parameters which are the worst that the geotechnical
practitioner realistically believes might occur.
Page ix
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
A2LA American Association for Laboratory Accreditation
AGS Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists
AS Aeolian sand
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BDA British Drilling Association
BP Before present
BRE Building Research Establishment
BS British Standard
CAD Computer aided drafting
CD Consolidated drained (triaxial test)
CIRIA Construction Industry Research and Information Association
CNIA Critical National Infrastructure Authority
CPT Cone penetration test
CPTU Cone penetration test with porewater pressure measurement
CU+PWP Consolidated undrained with porewater pressure measurement (triaxial test)
CV Curriculum vitae
DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (UK)
DPC Dynamic cone penetrometer
EHS Environment, health and safety
FGS Fluvial sand/gravel
GPR Ground penetrating Radar
H Horizontal
H&S Health and safety
IBC International Building Codes
ISSMFE International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering
ISRM International Society for Rock Mechanics
L Lagoonal mud
LRDF Load and resistance design factor
MASW Multichannel analysis of surface waves (related to geophysical survey)
NDT Non-destructive testing
OO Overseeing Organisation
PGA Peak ground acceleration
PPE Personal protection equipment
R Rock
S Sabkha
SASW Spectral analysis of surface waves (related to geophysical survey)
Page x
ABBREVIATIONS Second Edition June-2021
SPT Standard penetration test

TRL Transport Research Laboratory
UAE United Arab Emirates
UBC Uniform Building Code
UK United Kingdom
UKAS United Kingdom Accreditation Service
US United States of America
UU Unconsolidated undrained (triaxial test)
V Vertical
Page xi
NOMENCLATURE AND SYMBOLS

Symbol Units Property/engineering parameters
c’ kPa (kN/m2)* Drained cohesion intercept
cr kPa (kN/m2)* Remoulded shear strength
c r’ kPa (kN/m2)* Drained residual cohesion intercept
c’crit kPa (kN/m2)* Critical state cohesion intercept (usually zero)
CN - Correction factor related to SPT rod length
cu kPa (kN/m2)* Undrained shear strength
cv m2/yr Coefficient of consolidation (one dimensional)
CaCO3 % Carbonate content (total)
CBR % California Bearing Ratio
Cl %, mg/l Chloride (total, water soluble)
Dr - Relative density
Ip % Plasticity index (PI)
E MPa Young’s modulus of elasticity
E’ MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (drained)
Eh mV Redox potential
E’0.01 & MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (small strain)

Es
Eu MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (undrained)
Er - Energy ratio of SPT hammer
fs MPa Sleeve friction- cone penetration test
G MPa (MN/m2)* Shear modulus
Gmax MPa (MN/m2)* Very low strain shear modulus
Gs MPa Shear modulus (small strain/initial modulus)
γ Mg/m3 Bulk density/Mass density
I - Point load index, axial (Ia), diametral (ld), lump (Il)
ID - Density index
j - Mass factor j
k m/s Coefficient of permeability, horizontal (k h), vertical (kv) as appropriate
Ko - Coefficient of earth pressure at rest
Page xii
ks kN/m3 Modulus of subgrade reaction
LL % Liquid limit (wI)
m - Rock material constant
mv m2/MN Coefficient of volume compressibility (one dimensional)
n % Porosity
N - Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow count (uncorrected)
N60 - SPT blow count corrected to a standard energy ratio of 60% of the
theoretical free-fall hammer energy (and rod length where
appropriate)
(N1)60 - SPT blow count corrected to a standard energy ratio of 60% of the
theoretical free-fall hammer energy (and rod length where
appropriate) and the effective overburden pressure
OCR - Overconsolidation ratio
PI % Plasticity index
PL % Plastic limit (wp)
PSD - Particle size distribution
qc MPa Cone resistance - cone penetration test
RMR - Rock mass rating
rs Ohms.m Apparent resistivity
s - Rock material constant
SO4 %, mg/l Sulphate (total, water soluble)
u kN/m2 Porewater pressure
UCS MPa Uniaxial compressive strength
ν - Poisson’s ratio
ν’ - Drained Poisson’s ratio
νu - Undrained Poisson’s ratio
w % Moisture content
wI % Liquid limit (LL)
wp % Plastic limit (PL)
γd Mg/m3 Dry density
γdmax Mg/m3 Maximum dry density
γdmin Mg/m3 Minimum dry density
λ - Correction factor related to SPT rod length
ρs Mg/m3 Particle density
Page xiii

σh kPa (kN/m2)* In situ horizontal stress
σv kPa (kN/m2)* In situ vertical stress
’ degrees Peak drained (effective stress) angle of shear resistance
’crit degrees Critical state drained (effective stress) angle of shear resistance
r’ degrees Residual drained (effective stress) angle of shear resistance
Notes:
* Units in brackets also commonly used.
Page xiv
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
In 2010, the Abu Dhabi Department of Transport commenced with the “Unifying and Standardizing
of Road Engineering Practices” Project. The objective of the project was to enhance the
management, planning, design, construction, maintenance and operation of all roads and related
infrastructures in the Emirate and ensure a safe and uniform operational and structural capacity
throughout the road network.
To achieve this objective a set of standards, specifications, guidelines and manuals were developed
in consultation with all relevant authorities in the Abu Dhabi Emirate including the Department of
Municipal Affairs (DMA) and Urban Planning Council (UPC). In future, all authorities or agencies
involved in roads and road infrastructures in the Emirate shall exercise their functions and
responsibilities in accordance with these documents. The purpose, scope and applicability of each
document are clearly indicated in each document.
It is recognized that there are already published documents with similar objectives and contents
prepared by other authorities. Such related publications are mentioned in each new document and
are being superseded by the publication of the new document, except in cases where previously
published documents are recognized and referenced in the new document.
1.2 Purpose and scope

The Manual for Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical Design comprises two parts as follows:
Part 1: Management of Geotechnical Risk. Part 1 of the Manual sets out the role of geotechnical
practitioners in managing the quality of geotechnical investigations, ground interpretation and also
in geotechnical design and geotechnical construction. Part 1 of the Manual also sets out the
procedure of Geotechnical Certification, which provides a clear and consistent framework for the
management of the geotechnical risk in a project throughout its lifetime. The format of the reports
and documents to be prepared and submitted to the Overseeing Organisation (OO) under
Geotechnical Certification as a project progresses is presented. The documents to be submitted may
include reports covering preliminary sources study, the planning of ground investigation works, the
interpretation of geotechnical investigations, geotechnical design and geotechnical construction.
Part 2: Ground Investigation and Geotechnical Design. Part 2 of the Manual provides guidance on
Abu Dhabi soils and bedrock strata and the geotechnical hazards that they can present. It also
provides guidance on undertaking preliminary sources studies, the planning and procurement of
ground investigations and on in situ and laboratory testing and geotechnical design.
1.3 Application of this manual

The Geotechnical Certification procedure set out in the Part 1 of the Manual: Managing Geotechnical
Risk is mandatory for all Abu Dhabi Department of Transport – Main Roads Projects. Other
authorities may adopt the procedure as they require.
Where a third party development is proposed immediately adjacent to, under or over a road for which
Abu Dhabi Department of Transport is responsible then Abu Dhabi Department of Transport
acceptance of the scheme aspects impacting on the road will be required. In such cases the third
Page 1
01-INTRODUCTION Second Edition June-2021
party developer shall follow the Geotechnical Certification procedure to ensure that there is
appropriate quality management of the geotechnical risks that could impact on the road.
Part 2 of the Manual: Ground Investigation and Geotechnical Design provides guidance for the
geotechnical practitioner engaged on Abu Dhabi road projects.
1.4 Content and format

The general content and layout of the Manual for Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical
Design is as follows:
Manual Part 1: Managing Geotechnical Risk
Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the Manual for Geotechnical Investigation and

Geotechnical Design. Chapter 2 describes the need for geotechnical practitioners in projects and
their general role. Chapter 2 also presents a categorisation of geotechnical practitioners relative
to their education, professional qualifications and industry experience to provide for the
appointment of appropriate staff to project roles and thereby promote quality of geotechnical
work. Chapters 3 to Chapter 7 inclusive set out the four Key Stages of the geotechnical
certification process to be followed to manage geotechnical risk on projects. The documents
required to be prepared and submitted under each Key Stage are described. Chapter 8 describes
the preparation of a geotechnical risk register and the undertaking of geotechnical risk analysis.
Manual Part 2: Ground Investigation and Geotechnical Design
Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the Manual for Geotechnical Investigation and

Geotechnical Design, which is common with Part 1 Chapter 1. Chapter 2 provides a description
of the geology of the Region, the characteristics of Abu Dhabi strata and the geotechnical
hazards and risks that are typical of Abu Dhabi Emirate. Chapter 3 describes the general scope
of the preliminary sources study that should be undertaken in the early stages of a project.
Chapter 4 provides guidance on the planning of ground investigation and Chapter 5 presents
advice on the procurement of a Ground Investigation Company. Chapter 6 describes in situ
testing best practice for standard penetration testing (SPT), cone penetration testing (CPT),
density and geophysical surveys, which are commonly undertaken in Abu Dhabi. Chapter 7
covers laboratory testing reporting and electronic transfer of geotechnical data. Chapter 8
provides guidance on standards to be used in geotechnical design and Chapter 9 presents
guidance on the geotechnical aspects of road pavements.
Page 2
01-INTRODUCTION Second Edition June-2021
2 ABU DHABI GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL

HAZARDS
2.1 Overview
This chapter provides a description of the geology of the Region, the characteristics of Abu Dhabi
strata and the typical geotechnical hazards that may be encountered in Abu Dhabi Emirate.
2.2 Geology of the Region

2.2.1 Introduction
The geology of Abu Dhabi is characterised by a classic carbonate-evaporite complex influenced by
the deposition of marine sediments associated with numerous sea level changes. Abu Dhabi is
relatively low lying with the exception of the mountainous area adjacent to Al Ain which marks the
boundary of the emirate with neighbouring Oman. The surface geology is dominated by aeolian sand
dunes reaching heights of 150m inland in the region of Liwa and with coastal areas dominated by
sabkha/evaporite deposits which extend more than 80km southwards into desert areas. A copy of
the Geological Map of the United Arab Emirates (Huntington Geology & Geophysics Ltd (1979) (1))
is included as Figure A1 in Appendix A and the litho-stratigraphy of Abu Dhabi (Alsharhan (2008)
(2)) is included as Figure A2 in Appendix A. It is to be noted an updated geological map of UAE is
currently in preparation with the British Geological Survey.
2.2.2 Solid geology

Few rocks older than about 100 million years (Ma) crop out within the territory of Abu Dhabi. For
completeness, however, all the major solid geology formations from Cambrian to Recent are
described, as these may be encountered in some deeper investigations.
2.2.2.1 Palaeozoic (540 Ma to 250 Ma)

Throughout the Palaeozoic, Arabia was located south of the equator forming part of the mega-
continent Gondwana. The oldest rocks in Abu Dhabi that can be seen at the surface occur around
the various salt diapirs such as Jebel Dhanna in the west of the emirate and the offshore diapiric
islands (which includes Zirku island, Sir Bani Yas and Das Island). These older rocks, comprising
shales, dolomites, siltstones and volcanics (Alsharhan (2008) (2)) have been brought to the surface
as a by-product of the process of diapirism. Diapirism describes the effect of buoyant salt deposits
(in this case, salts of the Hormuz Formation) rising through the overlying rocks and bringing
fragments of buried rock upwards to the surface. The salt of the Hormuz Formation was deposited
some 540 Ma during the Cambrian-Precambrian period , by evaporation from a shallow sea. As
sediments were laid down over the Hormuz Salt, the salt, which is less dense than the overlying
rocks, and is incompressible, has risen to the surface, flowing through fractures and faults in the
rock.
Following the Hercynian Orogeny in the early Carboniferous, fine to medium grained cross bedded
quartzose sandstones of the Uanayzah Formation (previously termed the Pre Khuff Formation)
overlain by siltstone, mudstone and minor claystones were laid down under fluvial conditions. As the
climate warmed, a carbonate-evaporite environment developed and in the Mid-Late Permian the
Khuff Formation was laid down in a shallow marine environment. These deposits comprise a
complex sequence of bioclastic dolomite, limestone and anhydrite.
Page 3
02-ABU DHABI GEOLOGY AND
GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS Second Edition June-2021
2.2.2.2 Mesozoic (250 Ma to 65 Ma)

During the Upper Permian-Late Triassic the Arabian Shield was uplifted to the west and conditions
became more arid (Alsharhan (2008) (2)). During the Lower Triassic a near shore shallow marine
environment dominated, leading to the deposition of the Sudair Formation. The Sudair Formation
comprises an interbedded sequence of terrigeneous mudstones and dolomites. By the Mid-Triassic
the Jilh (Gulailah) Formation was deposited under sabkha conditions comprising anhydrite, dolomite
and mudstone with minor wackestone, packstone and grainstone. By the Late Triassic the Minjur
Formation was deposited in a fluvio-deltaic environment comprising quartz sandstone, mudstones
and thin coal seams progressing upwards into shale, sandstone and dolomitic limestone.
Marine conditions continued throughout the Lower to Upper Jurassic, depositing the Marrat
Formation and Hamlah Formation, a sequence of wackestone, lime mudstone (limestone with less
than 10% grains in a mud-supported sediment) and quartzose sandstone; and the Izhara and Araej
Formations, an interbedded sequence of argillaceous mudstones, packstones and grainstones. The
formations of the Sila Group of the upper Jurassic are typically found in onshore areas of Abu Dhabi,
identified during drilling of wells. The formations of the Sila Group comprise: Tuwaiq Mountain
Formation, Dukhan Formation, Diyab Formation, Arab Formation, Qatar Formation, Hith Formation
and Asab Formation. The sedimentary rocks were deposited in a changing, gradually shallowing
marine environment, depositing mudstones, packstone, grainstone and calcareous shales.
A rapid sea level rise in the area occurred during the Lower Cretaceous with the deposition of the
Habshan, Lekhwar, Kharaib and Shuaiba Formations; a sequence of lime mudstone, wackestone,
dolomite and dolomitic limestone. The Wasia Group of the Mid-Cretaceous is bounded above and
below by unconformities, comprising shale, mudstone, packstone, wackestone, grainstone and
limestone. The formations of the Wasia Group comprise: Nahr Umr Formation, Mauddud Formation,
Shilaif Formation and Mishrif Formation. The shales and marls of the Laffan Formation (Upper
Cretaceous) rest unconformably on the underlying Wasia Group. The overlying Halul Formation and
Fiqa Formation comprise interbedded calcareous shale, mudstone and limestone. The Simsima
Formation deposited over most of Abu Dhabi consists of packstone, wackestone and dolomitic
limestone with corals.
2.2.2.3 Palaeogene – Neogene (65 Ma to 2 Ma)

The Palaeogene rocks across Abu Dhabi comprise: the Umm Er Radhuma Formation, the Rus
Formation and the Dammam Formation consisting of shales, packstone, wackestone and limestone.
Uplift and erosion occurred during the late Eocene-early Oligocene followed by marine transgression
leading to the deposition of the Oligocene Asmari Formation comprising dolomitic limestone with thin
interbeds of marls and calcareous mudstone (Alsharhan (2008) (2)). The Oligocene Asmari
Formation is overlain by the Gachsaran (Lower Fars) Formation comprising anhydrite, dolomite and
limestone and interbedded anhydrite, shales, marls and limestones
The sedimentary rocks of the Miocene were deposited during a period coinciding with a major fall in
sea level. The majority of the Miocene deposits are combined into a single geological Group, the
Fars Group, and this has been divided into Lower Fars, sometimes termed the Gacharan Formation
(about 20 Ma to 18 Ma, and the overlying Upper Fars. These units comprise a sequence of marls
and mudstones, sandstone (calcarenite), limestone and evaporates (typically gypsum and anhydrite)
dipping gently to the south. A particular unit of the Upper Fars is the Barzaman unit that contains a
sequence of conglomerate deposits. The underlying Shuwaihat Formation (part of the Upper Fars)
Page 4
crops out in western Abu Dhabi comprising evaporite deposits replaced upwards by dune sand which
are exposed on Shuwaihat Island and Jebel Dhanna and south of Sila (Glennie, 2007). The
Baynunah Formation unconformably overlies the Shuwaihat Formation comprising fluvial sands and
gravels with abundant fossils including crocodiles, hippopotamus and turtles. The Baynunah
Formation forms small mesas found in the western region of Abu Dhabi.
2.2.3 Superficial geology

The Quaternary Period was marked by cycles of cooling and warming associated with ice ages and
inter-glacial periods in northern and southern climes and causing rises and falls in global sea levels,
influencing the climate and leading to the deposition of the superficial deposits seen across Abu
Dhabi. With the exception of small exposures of the underlying bedrock, Abu Dhabi is covered by
superficial deposits laid down during the Quaternary period. The Quaternary deposits predominantly
comprise:
• aeolian sands deposited during periods of lower sea levels, most notably during the last ice
age (20,000 years BP (before present)) when sea levels dropped 120m to 130m below
present levels;
• sabkha and fluvial deposits laid down during periods of marine transgression.
2.2.3.1 Aeolian sand

The surface of the interior of Abu Dhabi is dominated by aeolian dune sands occasionally interrupted
by interdune areas occupied by sabkha and gravel plains. The aeolian sands exhibit several
morphologies stretching from the coast, south to the Rub-al-Khali with the border of Saudi Arabia
and Oman. Mega dunes dominate the area around Liwa reaching up to 150m above interdune
sabkha areas. Smaller dunes occur in the south overlying alluvial fans that flank the Oman mountains
(Glennie (2007) (3)).
The aeolian sands vary in composition. Inland the sands consist predominately of siliclastic grains
(quartz, feldspar and lithic grains). Near the coast the sands consist mostly of calcium carbonate
derived from fragments of calcareous shells and corals. Carbonate dunes are known locally as
‘miliolite’ and can be seen along the Abu Dhabi – Al Ain Road and the Hameem Road. Miliolite are
often white in colour due to the carbonate content, further inland the dunes change from white to red
due to the a decrease in carbonate content and increase in quantities of iron oxide.
2.2.3.2 Sabkha
Sabkha are extensive salt flats underlain by sand, silt and clay that are often encrusted with salt
(halite). Sabkhas occur along the coast (coastal sabkha) and inland (inland sabkha) across the
surface of Abu Dhabi. The two main factors which control the formation of the sabkha are the depth
to water table and the effects of wind deflation.
Coastal sabkha
Coastal sabkha dominates the coastline from Abu Dhabi Island westwards to the Qatar Peninsula,
covering much of the islands south west and northeast of Abu Dhabi Island and extending up to
15km inland (Glennie (2001)(4))
Coastal sabkha are extremely flat and are formed when the water table, which is saline, due to the
proximity of the sea, occurs at shallow depths within the capillary zone. The saline water evaporates
Page 5
from the surface which then becomes saturated with halite to form a crust. Beneath the crust calcium
sulphate (CaSO4) becomes concentrated forming a mush of gypsum crystals. As ground
temperatures rise, water of crystallisation is driven from the gypsum crystals to form anhydrite. Active
coastal sabkhas also feature a mat of thin black algae. Most of the time the surface is dry and cracked
however, during spring tides and during storm events sea water inundates the mats causing the
algae to regenerate into a slimy, rubbery surface. With time the mat once again becomes dry and a
halite crust forms. Algae mats are seen extensively along the coastline of Abu Dhabi south of
Musaffah.
Inland sabkha
Inland sabkha have no direct hydrological connection with the sea and derive moisture from rare
rainfall and a shallow water table within the capillary zone. Inland sabkhas tend to occur in areas
dominated by sand dunes; the best examples of inland sabkha are found in the interdunal areas
between the large sand dunes of Liwa in the west of the emirate and are often found on the landward
margins of the coastal sabkha. As with coastal sabkha, inland sabkha develop halite crusts
concentrated by evaporation of groundwater, which contains dissolved salts from the surrounding
rocks and soils. Algae mats are not well developed on inland sabkha but are present in rare locations.
The Sabkha Matti is the most famous inland sabkha occupying the western extremities of Abu Dhabi.
The Sabkha Matti is recorded to extend up to 150km inland from the coast and is up to 60km wide
(Glennie (2007)(3)).
2.2.3.3 Lagoonal Muds

Recent processes along the coast have resulted in the deposition some deposits (typically carbonate
muds) nearshore, and in some cases these have been buried by recent reclamation. These deposits
– sometimes referred to as lagoonal muds - are thought to have been deposited in shallow lagoons
(Butler (1970) (5)) and in the region of Yas Island are typically up to 3m in thickness. Due to limited
availability of investigation data along the coastline, their lateral and vertical extent elsewhere is
undefined.
2.2.3.4 Duricrusts
Duricrusts are typically formed from cementation of sediments by precipitation of iron oxides or other
minerals contained in percolating groundwater. Precipitation of these minerals is often initiated by
the evaporation of the percolating fluids under the intense desert heat. They occur as a hardened
surface layer that can range from a few centimetres to several metres thick, sometimes with a
leached, cavernous, porous or friable zone underneath (Fookes (1978)(6)).
2.2.3.5 Fluvial Sediments

Fluvial sediments are rarely found at the surface in Abu Dhabi as they are often covered by aeolian
sands. Fluvial sediments are most commonly found flanking the foothills of the Hajar Mountains in
the eastern part of the Emirate and can be found further west in the Al Ain region near Jebel Hafeet.
Fluvial gravels have also been exposed on the western side of the Sabkha Matti, comprising pebbles
of limestone and volcanics (Glennie (2007) (3)).
The fluvial sands and gravels are formed from outwash fans at the base of the eastern Hajar
mountains and may extend outwards from the base of the mountains for distances of up to 70 km.
Page 6
The source rocks of these deposits tend to be the Asmari, Dammam and Rus formation limestones
and marls that are present on the eastern flanks of the Hajar range combined with gabbros and other
igneous rocks that form the central parts of the mountains.
Away from the mountain areas, flat, wide or ribbon-like areas of dry dusty silt are often present at
the ground surface. These represent the silty deposits of flood lagoons that periodically form in the
low lying desert and coastal areas.
2.3 Characteristics of Abu Dhabi strata

2.3.1 Introduction
This Section provides a description of the engineering characteristics and the typical uses and issues
relating to the main soils and bedrock strata units encountered in Abu Dhabi Emirate, as listed in
Table 1 below. Guidance of the typical geotechnical hazards and risks in Abu Dhabi Emirate
associated with these main strata units are summarised in Table B1 in Appendix B. The geotechnical
practitioner will need to identify all project specific geotechnical hazards for a scheme and prepare
a geotechnical risk register in order to provide for active management of the geotechnical risks during
the lifetime of a project.
Table 1: Abu Dhabi main soils and bedrock strata units
Abu Dhabi main strata units

Soils - aeolian sands
- sabkha
- fluvial deposits (sands/gravels)
Bedrock strata - recent evaporates

- conglomerate
- sandstone and siltstone
- mudstone and gypsum
- calcarenites
- limestone
2.3.2 Aeolian sands

The aeolian sands vary in composition between siliclastic deposits inland and calcium carbonate
deposits derived from fragments of shells near the coast. The aeolian sands are fine to medium
grained and contain sub-rounded to well rounded particles of quartz, carbonate and evaporite
minerals. The deposits are generally clay and silt free and have moderate to good permeability. The
consistency of the materials varies from loose to very dense. Many of the larger sand dunes comprise
an upper layer of loose, mobile, single sized sand grains overlying a core of denser single sized sand
that has been cemented by pressure solution and re-cementation of the carbonate and evaporite
particles.
In the region aeolian sands are typically used as general earthworks and structural backfill.
Depending on source area and history after deposition, the sands can have a high salt content
Page 7
(sodium chloride) and this should be checked before using the materials close to concrete
foundations or as fine aggregate in concrete mixes.
Owing to the uniform grading of the deposits, there have been issues related to poor compaction of
aeolian sands where standard compaction procedures have been used to place the material in
engineering works. It is often necessary to flood the deposits with water and use a heavy vibratory
roller in order to achieve the required compaction. Sometimes, however, the moisture content versus
maximum dry density curve for these deposits is very flat, allowing them to be compacted in a
completely dry state (known as dry compaction) to achieve reasonable levels of compaction.
2.3.3 Sabkha
Sabkha comprises fine, poor to well graded sands or silts that have been inundated by hypersaline
groundwater.
The coastal sabkhas are highly variable materials both horizontally and vertically. Much of the
horizontal variation can be considered to be related to the position of the material relative to the
shoreline. In the vertical dimension, the coastal sabkha comprises a series of layers having a range
of textures and varying degrees of cementation depending on the quantities and state of the calcium
carbonates and calcium sulphates present.
Inland sabkhas are typically variable in the horizontal direction only, owing to the relatively constant
level of groundwater table beneath the existing surface.
Owing to their mode of deposition sabkha typically contains high concentrations of chloride and
sulphates giving rise to aggressive environments for buried concrete and steel. This together with
their fine grading usually makes them unsuitable as structural fill.
Extensive sabkha deposits are found across the emirate of Abu Dhabi and due to the variability the
deposits they are typically either excavated and replaced or left in place and treated. Ground
improvement methods typically used on sabkha deposits include pre-loading and surcharging,
dynamic compaction and stone columns, the method employed being dependant upon the type and
thickness of sabkha present.
Historically in the region, existing unpaved tracks followed sabkha flats as they provided a hard
surface to travel along in comparison with the surrounding soft desert sand. During periods of heavy
rain, however, the roads often became impassable, as the surface crust of the sabkha would lose its
strength when saturated, causing vehicles to sink into the underlying crystal mush.
Gypsum and anhydrite, which are typically abundant in sabkha deposits, can undergo alternate
hydration and dehydration under hot and humid conditions. If placed beneath a foundation or road
pavement, swelling or shrinkage can occur as a result of the volume changes associated with the
hydration or dehydration processes.
Significant variability in the compressibility (ranging from high to low compressibility) characteristics
of sabkha sediments can be expected, that can result in large differential settlements.
2.3.4 Lagoonal muds

The lagoonal muds, such as are encountered near Yas Island, are typically silty carbonate sands
and sandy silts. They are commonly very soft with very high moisture contents and commence at
Page 8
near zero datum and are up to approximately 3m in thickness. Due to their low strength they can
cause bearing capacity and trafficability problems for construction traffic and make a poor foundation
for roads and other civil engineering structures.
2.3.5 Fluvial sands/gravels

The fluvial sediments typically comprise dense to very dense silty gravel of limestone, gabbro and/or
igneous or volcanic rocks. The deposits are typically poorly graded and sub-rounded to rounded and
can range from cobble/coarse gravel size down to sand and silt size. Particle size is typically related
to the spatial location within an alluvial fan deposit. Deposits further from the mountain source areas
tend to be finer grained.
Over time, many layers of different sized gravels may be deposited in the same area and become
mixed with wind blown sands, silts and salts, so that different elevations can contain different sized
deposits. When excavated, these materials (locally termed Gatch) characteristically comprise
clayey, silty and gravelly sands or sandy gravels. The fines (clay and silt size particles) are typically
of the order of 20% to 30% and of low to medium plasticity.
Gatch materials are easily excavated and have been used extensively for desert road construction
in the region, as the cementing properties of the salts gives good resistance to wind erosion. When
compacted to a dense state, Gatch can remain stable for many years. If inundated with fresh water
chemical changes can, however, occur resulting in softening and swelling, erosion and/or
dissolution. Gatch materials with a high fines and soluble salt content can make them unsuitable for
use as structural fill. The more uniform deposits of fluvial sand and gravel can, however, make good
aggregate for concrete, provided they are clear of contamination by salts or sulphates.
2.3.6 Bedrocks
The rock strata encountered in shallow ground investigations across most of the Abu Dhabi region
are typically of the Miocene Upper Fars (including Baynounah, Shuweihat and Barzaman) and Lower
Fars (sometimes called the Gachsaran) Formations and mainly comprise calcarenite, mudstone and
gypsum with deposits of conglomerate in the Barzamam Formation. In the east of the Emirate, older
deposits of the Asmari, Dammam and Simsima Formations consisting of mudstones, lime-
mudstones and limestones are present. The Muthaymima Formation, situated between the Simsima
and Dammam Formations contains a sequence of conglomerates. The typical characteristics of the
most commonly encountered rocks are summarised below.
2.3.6.1 Recent evaporites

Recent evaporites such as halite, anhydrite and gypsum are common near the surface in many parts
of Abu Dhabi, particularly along the coast and in the inland sabkha regions. The deposits tend to be
chemically unstable, subject to volume change and dissolution, and contain very high sulphates and
chlorides that make them unsuitable for use as construction fills.
2.3.6.2 Conglomerate
Conglomerates encountered in the Abu Dhabi region typically belong to the Barzaman Unit of the
Upper Fars Formation and comprise fluvial sediments representing cemented outwash fans
containing sub-rounded gravels and cobbles of gabbroic rocks. Given their origin, the coarser
conglomerates are typically encountered within 30 km or so of the base of the Hajar Mountains and
as they progress westwards become intercalated with layers of dolomite marls, claystones and
siltstones. The conglomerates generally comprise larger clasts of fine to medium sub-rounded to
Page 9
rounded gravels within a matrix of fine silt sized materials. The matrix varies in colour from brownish
to reddish. The matrix materials are often washed out when coring and standard penetration tests
(SPTs) show refusal with little or no penetration.
In the eastern part of the Abu Dhabi Emirate, a thick sequence of conglomerates from the upper part
of the Muthaymimah Formation may be encountered. These comprise cemented sub-rounded to
rounded limestone of pebble to boulder size.
Conglomerates can be useful sources of structural fill for earthworks and depending on grain size
and degree of cementation may also be suitable as aggregate for concrete if suitably processed.
2.3.6.3 Sandstone and siltstone

In the western part of Abu Dhabi, sandstones and siltstones of the Gachsaran and Baynounah
Formations may be encountered. These are typically weakly cemented and often referred to as the
Miocene Clastics.
The sandstones are generally fine to medium grained and are often interbeddded with siltstones and
intercalations of marly mudstones. The unconfined compressive strength (UCS) values for these
strata typically range between 2.5MPa and 10MPa.
The materials can usually be excavated easily by mechanical excavators and when excavated can
make for good general fill materials for use in embankments or building platforms. They can,
however, contain high concentrations of sulphates and chlorides that create an aggressive chemical
environment for concrete. In extreme cases high gypsum contents can make the strata susceptible
to collapse due to dissolution of the gypsum particles.
Excavated rock slopes tend to be prone to failure and deterioration unless properly designed and
protected. Rock slope stability is governed by the spacing, orientation and condition of the
discontinuities within the rock mass and excavations in these materials must be designed
accordingly, based on geological mapping and rock mass characterisation.
In temporary cuts, these deposits can often stand near vertical in the short term, but may suffer brittle
collapse if cut too steep or left unsupported for long periods.
2.3.6.4 Mudstone and gypsum

Mudstones intercalated with gypsum (evaporites) are seen generally in all parts of the Emirate. In
the eastern part of the Emirate, they occur in the Asmari and Lower Fars Formations and are
sometimes interbedded with friable marls. Towards the western region, marly dolomites and
anhydrites dominate.
Structurally these deposits are horizontally bedded and show gentle and simple folding. The UCS
values of gypsum are typically in the range of 10MPa to 15MPa and that of mudstone are typically
in the range of 2MPa to 3MPa.
Where the mudstone and gypsum deposits are interlayered, particularly in the Upper Fars units,
cavities are known to occur as a result of dissolution of the gypsum where groundwater flow tends
to concentrate at the mudstone/gypsum interface.
Gypsum is a sulphate based evaporite that is susceptible to dissolution and is generally not
recommended for use in earthworks unless it is permanently saturated in saline water or can be
Page 10
protected from contact with fresh water. Excavation of thick gypsum deposits, due to the strength
and massive nature of the deposits, typically requires heavy ripping or cutting machinery.
The mudstones are generally easily excavated by mechanical means but have a tendency to
disintegrate. The high fines content can make them difficult to compact in earthworks and they can
contain high sulphates as a result of thin intercalations of gypsum.
If exposed in excavations, permanent cut slopes in gypsum and mudstone will suffer from surface
erosion and may require application of a surface protection such as shotcrete. Excavations can also
suffer from shallow landslides over time as a result of stress release leading to increases in moisture
content in the mudstone and consequent loss of strength.
2.3.6.5 Calcarenite
Calcarenites are weakly cemented calcareous sandstones typically occurring within the Upper Fars
Formation. They are usually creamy in colour and have a high concentration of carbonate minerals.
The strata may also be classified as Calcisiltite (silt sized) and Calcilutite (clay sized) rocks, based
on grain size. The deposits are generally very weak to weak with UCS values of between 1MPa and
1.5MPa. Calcernites can typically be excavated easily by mechanical excavators and when
excavated makes for good general fill for use in embankments or building platforms. They can,
however, contain high concentrations of sulphates and chlorides that create an aggressive chemical
environment for concrete.
Rock slopes in the coarser grained deposits tend to be reasonably resistant to erosion. The finer
grained deposits, however, can suffer from erosion and may need surface protection for permanent
cuttings. Rock slope stability is governed by the weak strength of the rock material and also by the
spacing, orientation and condition of the discontinuities within the rock mass. Excavations in these
materials must be designed accordingly, based on geological mapping and rock mass
characterisation.
In temporary cuts, these deposits can often stand near vertical in the short term, but may suffer brittle
collapse if cut too steep or left unsupported for long periods.
2.3.6.6 Limestone
Many limestone units are present in the region but are only exposed at ground surface in the eastern
parts of the Abu Dhabi emirate, near Al Ain and the Hajar mountains. Limestones predominate in
the Asmari, Dammam and Simsima Formations. The limestones vary in composition from weak
marly limestones to strong reef limestones. UCS values for the limestones show a wide range from
5MPa to 100MPa.
Excavatability depends on the material strength and spacing of bedding and joint planes. Stronger,
massive units may require blasting but the weaker more fractured rock masses can be excavated
by heavy to moderate ripping machines.
Rock slope stability is governed by the spacing, orientation and condition of the discontinuities within
the rock mass and excavations in these materials must be designed accordingly based on geological
mapping and rock mass characterisation.
Page 11
Stronger limestone units from the Dammam and Simsima Units can make good road or concrete
aggregate. Other deposits can make for good general fill but may require crushing to obtain suitable
particle sizes. The deposits are typically not prone to high sulphates or chlorides.
Page 12
3 PRELIMINARY SOURCES STUDY

3.1 Overview
The preliminary sources study is an important part of the geotechnical studies for any Abu Dhabi
roads project. This chapter provides guidance for carrying out a preliminary sources study and
associated site reconnaissance. It also provides details on the sorts of information that are typically
available and should be considered for review.
3.2 Scope of preliminary sources study

It is essential to carry out a preliminary sources study at an early stage in any geotechnical
investigation. The primary objectives of the preliminary sources study are to evaluate the ground and
groundwater conditions based on existing information and to assess the scope of any further
investigations that are required. This should cover both engineering and environmental assessment
aspects of a scheme. A list of the sorts of information that may be routinely required for a preliminary
sources study is given in Table C1 in Appendix C. The precise information to be gathered should,
however, be project specific with the scope of the preliminary sources study being determined by
the project geotechnical practitioner.
A significant amount of information about a site may already be available in existing records. A list
of the most important sources of information is given in Table C2 in Appendix C.
As part of the preliminary sources study a reconnaissance of the site and where possible also the
area immediately surrounding it, should be made. Table C3 in Appendix C provides a summary of
the procedure for site reconnaissance and the main points to be routinely considered. The precise
extent of the reconnaissance required at any site should, however, be established by the
geotechnical practitioner taking account of the particular circumstances of the site and scheme. The
geotechnical practitioner should extend or modify the standard procedure to reflect the site and
scheme needs.
Road and railway cuttings and the likes of quarries in the locality of a site can provide useful
information on soil and rock types and their stability characteristics. Similarly the likes of
embankments, buildings or other structures with a history of settlement can provide useful evidence
of unstable or compressible soils. Surface (geomorphological) features on a site can also provide
evidence of the ground conditions that exist, for example ground collapse depressions might be
indicative of underground cavities.
Further information on carrying out preliminary sources studies can be found in

BS5930:1999+A2:2010 (7), AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations (1988) (8) and in Section
1 of ICE (1998) -The Value of Geotechnics in Construction (9).
Page 13
03-PRELIMINARY SOURCES STUDY Second Edition June-2021
4 GROUND INVESTIGATION PLANNING

4.1 Overview
This chapter provides guidance on the phasing of ground investigations, and guidelines for
exploratory holes spacings and depths. It also provides advice on soils and rock sampling, guidance
on engineering parameters typically required for geotechnical design and on soils and rock
laboratory testing to obtain those engineering parameters.
4.2 Introduction
The composition and the extent of the geotechnical investigations for a scheme should reflect the
anticipated type and design of the proposed construction. Consequently the geotechnical practitioner
should seek all pertinent information for a scheme from the designer at the early stages of
geotechnical investigation planning and design. For guidance, the sorts of details that should be
obtained are given below:
• Road earthworks: locations, layout, dimensions, geometry and elevations of the sections at
grade, in cutting and on embankment.
• Road structures: locations of bridges and their approaches, tunnels and their approaches,
retaining walls, gantry signage and buildings (for example toll booths, low rise office buildings
or maintenance depots). Information on the structures layout, type of construction
anticipated together with design load and performance criteria.
• Borrow pit requirements and re-use of earthworks materials.
The precise details to be obtained will be project specific and must be established by the
geotechnical practitioner.
With such information the geotechnical practitioner can optimise the design of the geotechnical
investigations and thereby provide overall value for money.
The geotechnical investigations should provide sufficient data on the ground and groundwater
conditions to facilitate a full description of the essential ground properties and a reliable assessment
of the soil and rock parameters to be used in design calculations.
The typical aspects to be considered by the geotechnical practitioner when scoping a ground
investigation are as follows:
The ground
i) the suitability of the site with respect to the proposed construction and the level of
acceptable risks;
ii) the deformation of the ground caused by the structure or earthworks or resulting from
construction works and its behaviour over time;
iii) the safety with respect to limit states, for example settlement, subsidence, ground heave,
uplift, slippage of soil and rock masses;
Page 14
04-GROUND INVESTIGATION PLANNING Second Edition June-2021
iv) the loads transmitted to the structure from the ground, for example lateral pressures on
piles, and the extent to which they depend on its design and construction;
v) the foundation methods, for example ground improvement, whether it is possible to

excavate, drivability of piles, drainage;
vi) the sequence of foundation works;
vii) the effects of the structure;
viii) any additional structural measures required, for example support of excavations,
anchorage, sleeving of bored piles, removal of obstructions;
ix) the effects of construction on the surroundings;
x) the type and extent of contamination on, and in the vicinity of the site including the
effectiveness of any existing measures installed to contain or remediate contamination.
Use of excavated materials for construction
i) suitability of the intended use;
ii) the extent of the deposits;
iii) whether it is possible to extract and process the materials, and whether and how suitable
material can be separated and disposed of;
iv) the prospective methods to improve soil and rock;
v) the workability of the soil and rock during construction and possible changes in their
properties during excavation, transport, placement and further treatment.
Groundwater
i) the depth, thickness, extent and permeability of water bearing strata in the ground and
joint systems in rock;
ii) the elevation of the groundwater surface or piezometric surface of aquifers and their
variation over time and actual groundwater levels including possible extreme levels and
their periods of recurrence;
iii) the porewater pressure distribution;
iv) the chemical composition and temperature of groundwater;
v) the scope and nature of groundwater lowering work;
Page 15
vi) the harmful effects of the groundwater on excavations or on slopes, for example the risk
of hydraulic failure, excessive seepage pressure or erosion;
vii) necessary measures to protect the structure, for example waterproofing, drainage and
measures to protect against aggressive water;
viii) the effects of groundwater lowering, desiccation, impounding on the surroundings;
ix) the capacity of the ground to absorb water injected during construction;
x) whether it is possible to use local groundwater, given its chemical constitution, for
construction purposes;
xi) is there any existing groundwater control in the vicinity of the site, which will need to be
considered;
xii) near tidal waters, groundwater monitoring over a tidal cycle.
Constructability
i) the effects of construction traffic and heavy loads on the ground;
ii) the prospective methods of dewatering and/or excavation, effects of precipitation,

resistance to weathering, and susceptibility to shrinkage, swelling and disintegration.
Further information on the planning of ground investigations can be found in UK Site Investigation
Steering Group (1993). (10)
4.3 Ground investigations proposals

4.3.1 Phasing of ground investigation
Ground investigation for road projects is typically undertaken in a three phased approach as follows:
• Phase 1: Often referred to as the Preliminary Ground Investigation. Undertaken in the early
stages of a project for route selection and concept design and/or for scheme preliminary
design for construction tendering purposes.
• Phase 2: Often referred to as the Detailed Ground Investigation. Usually undertaken at the
beginning of a scheme construction contract to provide additional earthwork and structure
specific information for verification of the preliminary design and or update of the design to
be taken to construction.
In some circumstances there could be other phases of ground investigation prior to scheme
construction.
• Phase 3: Often referred to as the Construction Ground Investigation. Usually undertaken
during scheme construction for controlling and monitoring purposes. For example to
investigate particular ground conditions and verify the extent of construction works such as
Page 16
the treatment of solution cavities or for the installation of piezometers to monitor groundwater
levels associated with dewatering of a deep excavation.
The composition and the extent of the ground investigations should reflect the amount and quality of
available historic exploratory hole information, the particular stage of a project and also the ground
risks as established from a Geotechnical Risk Assessment (discussed in Manual Part 1 Chapter 8)
and reflected in the Geotechnical Category of the project (discussed in Manual Part 1 Section 3.3).
4.3.2 Guidelines for overall coverage of exploratory holes spacings

and depths
It is to be noted that the term exploratory holes is used here as it covers all forms of possible
investigative holes, including boreholes, trial pits and trial trenches, that the geotechnical practitioner
may wish to use in a ground investigation.
The geotechnical practitioner should plan each phase of ground investigation to supplement
information already available to ensure that an appropriate level of geotechnical information and data
are available at the particular project stage. The information obtained must be sufficient to enable
the geotechnical practitioner to assess the geotechnical risks relative to the project stage. The
ground investigation would normally be required to establish the soil, rock and groundwater
conditions, and if present the level of contamination and provide for the determination of the
properties of the soil and rock.
The type, frequency and spacing of exploratory holes required for a particular phase of investigation
will depend on the quantity and quality of information already available, the variability of subsurface
conditions, the type of earthworks and structures proposed and the Geotechnical Category of the
project. It is to be noted that, where appropriate the geotechnical practitioner should incorporate in
situ cone penetration testing (ref Section 6.3) within the overall ground investigation design to provide
overall value for money in obtaining the information required on the ground and groundwater
conditions at a site.
For the likes of route selection studies and conceptual design, overall coverage of exploratory holes
(comprising good quality available historic exploratory holes and any required Phase 1 ground
investigation to supplement those data) of up to 300m spacing may be appropriate. For simple
schemes in areas of generally uniform or simple subsurface conditions it may be appropriate to adopt
a greater spacing of up to 500m. For the purpose of preparing a preliminary design for a scheme
then an overall reduced spacing of possibly some 200m may be appropriate with at least one
exploratory hole at important structures such as a bridge foundation. The overall coverage of
exploratory holes and the extent of any Phase 1 ground investigation to supplement available historic
records should, however, be limited to that necessary for making basic design decisions.
For scheme detailed design a much denser spacing of exploratory holes (comprising good quality
available historic records, any Phase 1 ground investigation previously undertaken and any required
Phase 2 ground investigation to supplement those data) will be required. The locations of exploratory
holes and the depths of the investigations should reflect the expected ground conditions, the
dimensions of the structures and earthworks and the engineering problems. Guidelines on the layout
of exploratory holes for detailed design of scheme structures and earthworks are given in Table 2.
Guidelines on the minimum depths requirements for the exploratory holes below the lowest point of
Page 17
the structure foundation or earthwork are given in Table 3. The precise numbers of exploratory holes,
their locations and depths must, however, be determined by a suitably experienced geotechnical
practitioner based on the project specific geotechnical risk assessment and guidelines provided in
this document, in particular Table-2 & 3.
When selecting the exploratory holes locations, the following should be observed:
i) The investigation points should be arranged in such a pattern that the soils and rock
stratification can be assessed across the site.
ii) The investigation points for structures and any buildings should be placed at critical points
relative to the shape, structural behaviour and expected loading.
iii) For linear structures the exploratory holes should be arranged at adequate offsets to the
centreline depending on the overall width of the structure, such as an embankment
footprint or a cutting.
iv) For structures on or near slopes and changes in the terrain (including excavations), the
exploratory holes should be located so that the stability of the slope or cut can be
assessed. Where anchorages are installed, due consideration should be given to the
extent and likely stresses in their load transfer zone.
Page 18
Table 2: Guidelines for overall exploratory holes spacings for detailed design
Scheme element / Scheme element Exploratory hole (typically boreholes, trial pits and possibly in situ cone penetration tests where appropriate)
geotechnical hazard size/layout
Minimum requirements (1) Additional considerations
Bridge foundations - Advice on the design of the ground investigation 1. Additional exploratory holes to be provided in areas of variable sub-
should be sought from a geotechnical practitioner surface conditions.
with knowledge and experience in bridge design
2. Additional exploratory holes to be provided for unusual foundation
and construction.
shape and loading.
For piers or abutments One exploratory hole at each foundation
less than 25m wide
For piers or abutments Two exploratory holes at each foundation

over 25m wide
Tunnel - Advice on the design of the ground investigation -

should be sought from a geotechnical practitioner
with knowledge and experience in tunnel design
and construction.
- One exploratory hole at each portal and/or launch and

reception shafts.
One exploratory hole at intermediate shafts

Exploratory holes at 25 to 50m intervals along the
tunnel alignment depending on the initial geological
assessment and/or terrain.
Retaining walls For retaining walls less One exploratory hole at each retaining wall 1. Additional exploratory holes inside and outside the wall line to define
than 25m length conditions at the toe of the wall and in the zone behind the wall to
estimate lateral loads, engulfing slope failure and anchorage
For retaining walls over Spacing between exploratory holes should be no capacities.
25m length, greater than 25m at each retaining wall.
Gantry signs - One exploratory hole at each foundation. -
Page 19
Cuttings For cuttings of less than One exploratory hole at each cutting. 1. Additional exploratory holes perpendicular to the cutting (typically a
25m length minimum of 3) to be provided at critical locations and high cuts to define
the ground and groundwater conditions for stability analysis design.
For cuttings of greater Spacing between exploratory holes should be no 2. For existing slopes affected by landslide instability there should be at
than 25m length greater than 100m at each cutting in simple ground least one exploratory hole upslope of the landslide.
conditions. Reduce minimum spacing required in more
difficult ground conditions relative to complexity.
Embankments For embankments of One exploratory hole at each embankment. 1. Additional exploratory holes perpendicular to the embankment to be
less than 25m length provided at critical locations and high embankments (typically a
minimum of 3) to define the ground and groundwater conditions for
For embankments of Spacing between exploratory holes should be no settlement and stability analysis design.
greater than 25m greater than 100m at each embankment in simple
length ground conditions. Reduce minimum spacing required
in more difficult ground conditions relative to
complexity.
Carriageways - Spacing between exploratory holes along the 1. Some of the exploratory holes should be off-set from the centreline.
carriageway alignment generally should not exceed
2. The spacing and locations of the exploratory holes should be reduced
250m.
in the case of complex ground and groundwater conditions (eg sabkha)
to ensure that the vertical and horizontal boundaries of the distinct soil
and rock units within the project limits are defined. Use may be made
of boreholes sunk for other scheme elements such as embankments,
cuttings and structures.
3. In addition to boreholes, the excavated trial pits shall be utilized to
collect bulk samples from subgrade. CBR and other field/laboratory
tests shall be carried out on samples collected at/below subgrade
instead of zone planned to be excavated for pavement construction.
Culverts - One exploratory hole at each major culvert 1. Additional exploratory holes should be provided for long culverts or in
areas of very variable subsurface conditions.
Page 20
Non-destructive For crossings less than Two exploratory holes, one at each end of the crossing 1. Additional exploratory holes should be provided for long crossings or
crossings 25m length (close to crossing ends at the launch and reception in areas of very variable subsurface conditions.
locations/pits).
Non-destructive For crossings of Two exploratory holes, one at each end of the crossing 1. Additional exploratory holes should be provided for long crossings or
crossings (continued) greater than 25m (close to the crossing ends at the launch and reception in areas of very variable subsurface conditions.
length locations/pits).
One borehole at crossing centre point.
Low rise buildings - One exploratory hole at building/structure location 1. Additional exploratory holes to be provided in areas of variable sub-
(e.g. toll plaza or road surface conditions.
maintenance depot),
2. Additional exploratory holes to be provided for unusual foundation
shades or other
shape and loadings.
landscaping
structures.
Landslides - Advice on the design of the ground investigation -

with knowledge and experience in the
investigation and interpretation of landslides, their
management and in the design and construction
of remediation measures.
At minimum three boreholes along critical section
perpendicular through the landslide to establish
ground model including groundwater conditions for
analysis. One borehole should be upslope of the area
of instability.
Natural cavities - Advice on the design of the ground investigation -

with knowledge and experience in the
Page 21
investigation and interpretation of natural cavities,

their management and in the design and
construction of remediation measures.
Materials borrow - One exploratory hole every 1,000m2 of borrow area 1. Additional exploratory holes should be provided areas of variable
areas subsurface conditions.
Note:
(1) The provided spacing in table-2 are between two similar type of exploratory holes and should be finalized in conjunction with the depth requirements provided in Table-3.
Page 22
Table 3: Guidelines for exploratory holes depths
Scheme element / Foundation type Depth of exploratory holes below the lowest point of the structure foundation or earthwork
geotechnical hazard
Minimum depth requirements (Dmin ) (1) Additional considerations
B = breadth (m), L = length (m), Dia = diameter (m), H = height (m)
Bridge (abutments Spread foundation For L<2B take Dmin = greater of 5m or 2B 1. Extend exploratory hole depth in unfavourable ground conditions
and piers) such as weak or compressible strata.
For L>4B take Dmin = greater of 6m or 3B
For L between 2B and 4B interpolate between the
above.
Pile foundations For single piles Dmin = 5m or 3Dia of the pile 1. Extend exploratory hole depth in unfavourable ground conditions
whichever is the greater in competent strata (below such as weak or compressible strata.
the estimated depth of the pile toe)
2. If tension piles are needed the depth of investigation should be
For pile groups Dmin must also be greater than B for as for pile foundations.
the area circumscribing the pile group area in
competent strata.
Tunnel - Advice on the design of the ground investigation -

with knowledge and experience in tunnel design
and construction.
If vertical alignment is known Dmin = 1Dia to 2Dia of the
tunnel below tunnel invert.
Retaining walls Gravity and cantilever Dmin = 5m or 2B whichever is the greater. 1. Extend exploratory hole depth in situations with sloping ground
walls (spread footing) behind retaining wall.
In the case of piled footings the same as bridge pile
foundations applies. 2. Extend exploratory hole depth to provide sufficient information to
allow comprehensive stability assessment of engulfing slope
Embedded walls Dmin = 1.5H for the wall retained height failures of the retaining wall.
3. Extend exploratory hole depth in unfavourable ground

conditions such as weak or compressible strata.
Page 23
geotechnical hazard
Gantry signs Spread footings Dmin = 5m or 2B whichever is the greater. -
Pile foundations For single piles Dmin = 5m or 3Dia of the pile -

whichever is the greater in competent strata.
For pile groups Dmin must also be greater than B for the
area circumscribing the pile group area in competent
strata.
Cuttings - Dmin = 2m or 0.4H for the cutting whichever is the 1. Extend exploratory hole depth to provide sufficient information to
greater, below the base of the cutting. allow comprehensive stability assessment of cutting slope.
Embankments - Dmin = 5m or 1.2H for the embankment whichever is 1. Exploratory holes should extend to a depth where the additional
the greater, below embankment founding level. stress owing to the embankment is less than 10% of the imposed
load at its base.
2. Exploratory holes should be extended in unfavourable ground
conditions such as weak or compressible strata to competent
strata.
Carriageways (at - Dmin = 4m below the proposed formation level. 1. Exploratory holes should be extended in unfavourable ground
grade sections) conditions such as weak or compressible strata to competent
strata.
Culverts Ground bearing Dmin = 4m below the invert level or 1.5B of the trench 1. For major culverts Dmin = 5m or 3B of the trench whichever is
whichever is the greater the greater should apply.
Piled For single piles Dmin = 5m or 3Dia of the pile -

whichever is the greater in competent strata.
For pile groups Dmin must also be greater than B for
the area circumscribing the pile group area in
competent strata.
Page 24
geotechnical hazard
Non-destructive - Dmin = 4m below crossing invert level or 3Dia -

crossings whichever is the greater.
Low rise buildings - Dmin = 5m or 3 times width of the spread footing 1. Exploratory holes should extend to a depth where the additional
(e.g. toll plaza or road whichever is the greater, below building founding level. stress owing to the building is less than 10% of the imposed load
maintenance depot), at its base.
For pile foundations criteria for bridge pile foundations
shades or other
should be adopted. 2. Exploratory holes should be extended in unfavourable ground
landscaping
conditions such as weak or compressible strata to competent
structures.
strata.
Landslides - Advice on the design of the ground investigation 1. Geomorphological mapping and assessment of the landslide
should be sought from a geotechnical practitioner should be initially carried out and used to design the ground
with knowledge and experience in the investigation and should also be used to assist in development
investigation and interpretation of landslides, their of the ground model.
management and in the design and construction of
remediation measures.
Dmin has to prove the depth of the landslide together
with the geological sequence of soils and rocks that
make up the landslide and the affected slope.
Natural cavities - Advice on the design of the ground investigation 1. Geophysical survey mapping and assessment of the natural
should be sought from a geotechnical practitioner cavities should be initially carried out and used to design the
with knowledge and experience in the ground investigation and also be used to assist in development
investigation and interpretation of natural cavities, of the ground model.
their management and in the design and
construction of remediation measures.
Dmin has to prove the bedrock cover to potential or
known cavities to between 3 and 5 times the
anticipated cavity width.
Materials borrow - Dmin = base of the deposit or to the depth required to -

areas provide the quantity of materials needed.
Page 25
Note:
(1) It is designer responsibility to ensure that required criteria of investigation shall be fulfilled during the design stage. In-case, investigation results may require further additional
number of boreholes and/or few boreholes may require to extend up to greater depth, efforts shall be made to execute it during design stage. However, if due to time or other
constrains the additional/extended boreholes cannot be executed during design stage along with main investigation, then particular additional scope can be added to verification
stage investigation (construction stage). Approval and agreement with authority reviewer shall be required in this regard and design Consultant shall undertake full responsibility
of the design, errors and associated risks due to non-compliance to the investigation requirements at design stage (if any).
Page 26
4.4 Soils and rocks sampling and testing to obtain

engineering parameters for use in geotechnical design
4.4.1 General
The derivation of engineering parameters for soils and rocks for use in geotechnical design will
usually form an important part of a geotechnical investigation. It is essential, therefore, that in
designing a ground investigation the geotechnical practitioner duly considers the soils and rock
properties that need to be investigated and the engineering parameters that will be required for
design of both permanent earthworks and structures and any temporary measures required for their
construction, for example support to a deep excavation. He can then design within the ground
investigation a programme of in situ testing, soils and rock sampling for subsequent laboratory
testing and in special cases possibly even field trials to enable him to derive the parameters required.
The type, quantity and sophistication of the geotechnical test data required for a project will depend
on the nature of the ground and the importance and sensitivity of the structure or earthwork. For
most projects in Abu Dhabi, in situ standard penetration testing (SPT) with bulk sampling of soils for
classification and chemical testing will form the basis of the ground investigation. In bedrock, cores
will normally be taken for laboratory determination of the rock unconfined compressive strength. For
some major structures, such as bridges, the consequences of a foundation failure or excessive
settlement are likely to be severe. In those cases more sophisticated in situ and laboratory testing
may be appropriate to provide the data required for specialist modelling of the ground structure
interaction during and post construction and possibly also during extreme events such as an
earthquake. Before embarking on a programme of expensive tests careful consideration should be
given to the aims, applicability and cost benefits of such testing.
Table 4 provides a list of the main soils properties and engineering parameters that might be required
to be determined for use in design, together with symbols and units used for those properties in later
sections of this manual.
Table 5 provides a list of the main rock properties and engineering parameters that might be required
to be determined for use in design, together with symbols and units used for those properties in later
sections of this manual.
Page 27
Table 4: Soils properties/engineering parameters, symbols and units
Symbol Units Soils property/engineering parameters
Classification properties
wI % Liquid limit (LL) Collectively referred to as Atterberg limits
wp % Plastic limit (PL)
Ip % Plasticity index (PI)
γ Mg/m3 Bulk density/Mass density
γd Mg/m3 Dry density (maximum γdmax or minimum γdmin)
- - Particle size distribution (PSD) – fine and coarse
ρs Mg/m3 Particle density
- % Organic content (O)
Compaction/compaction related and CBR properties
- - Moisture content/dry density relationship (COMP)
- % California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
Chemical properties
- - pH, sulphate and chloride, as appropriate
Electrochemical properties
Shear strength properties
cu kPa (kN/m2)* Undrained shear strength
cr kPa (kN/m2)* Remoulded shear strength
c’ kPa (kN/m2)* Drained cohesion intercept Peak effective shear strength
’ degrees Drained angle of shear resistance
c r’ kPa (kN/m2)* Drained residual cohesion intercept Residual effective shear

strength
r’ degrees Drained residual angle of shear
resistance
c’crit kPa (kN/m2)* Critical state cohesion intercept Critical state effective shear
(usually zero) strength
’crit degrees Critical state angle of shear

resistance
Page 28
Consolidation and elastic properties
mv m2/MN Coefficient of volume compressibility (one dimensional)
cv m2/yr Coefficient of consolidation (one dimensional)
Eu MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (undrained)
E’ MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (drained)
E’0.01 MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (small strain)
G MPa (MN/m2)* Shear modulus
Gmax MPa (MN/m2)* Very low strain shear modulus
ν - Poisson’s ratio (νu – undrained, ν’ – drained)
Ko - Coefficient of earth pressure at rest
ks kN/m3 Modulus of subgrade reaction
Permeability
k m/s Coefficient of permeability, horizontal (k h), vertical (kv) as appropriate
Notes:
* Units in brackets also commonly used.
Page 29
Table 5: Rock properties/engineering parameters, symbols and units
Classification properties
n % Porosity
γ Mg/m3 Density
Chemical properties (Chem) (as appropriate)
- - pH, sulphate and chloride, as appropriate
CaCO3 % Carbonate content (total)
Electrochemical properties (EChem)
Strength and mass properties
I - Point load index, axial (Ia), diametral (ld), lump (Il)
UCS MPa Uniaxial compressive strength
- MPa Tensile strength
m and s - Rock material constants
RMR - Rock mass rating
j - Mass factor j
c’ MPa Discontinuity drained cohesion Discontinuity peak effective strength

intercept
’ degrees Discontinuity drained angle of shear

resistance
c r’ MPa Discontinuity drained residual Discontinuity residual effective shear

cohesion intercept strength
r’ degrees Discontinuity drained residual angle

of shear resistance
Elastic properties
E MPa Young’s modulus of elasticity
Es MPa Young’s modulus of elasticity (small strain/initial modulus)
G MPa Shear modulus
Gs MPa Shear modulus (small strain/initial modulus)
Page 30
ν - Poisson’s ratio
4.4.2 Difficulties in parameter determination

It is to be recognised that only a very small proportion of the ground that will be influenced by the
proposed structures and earthworks is tested in situ or sampled during a ground investigation. Also,
only a selection of the samples recovered are usually tested in the laboratory. Therefore, testing
must be carried out using reliable and repeatable techniques that will yield parameters representative
of the bulk of the soil or rock in situ.
Soil parameters can be derived from in situ testing, laboratory testing and field trials. There are,
however, several factors that will influence the measured values, many of which are inherent or
unavoidable. The geotechnical practitioner should be aware and appreciate the magnitude of these
influences on the required parameter and where necessary take these into account based on his
experience and published knowledge. The factors which affect the measured soil and rock
parameters can be categorised as follows:
i) natural variability
ii) sampling and testing procedures
iii) interpretation.
4.4.2.1 Natural variability

Lateral and vertical variability on a large scale will lead to scatter of test results. There may also be
small scale variability in the likes of sabkha and lagoonal muds that could require particular
consideration. Soils are also typically anisotropic with, particularly, their compressibility and
permeability being different in the vertical and horizontal directions. The orientation of soil testing
may, therefore, need to be considered also with respect to the proposed structures and earthworks.
With regards to soil laboratory testing for the likes of shear strength and consolidation properties
owing to the non-linear stress-strain behaviour of soils it is essential that testing is carried out over
the appropriate working stress range of the proposed construction.
Fabric features such as local cementing in sands and laminations in lagoonal clays can also have a
significant influence on measured engineering properties. It is therefore important to recognise the
presence of such fabric within the soil and be aware of the possible influence it has on the test
results.
The stress history that a soil has undergone will also affect the way it responds to an imposed load.
In some cases it may be important to understand and possibly model the stress history and to model
the stress changes that the works will cause to achieve the most accurate prediction of soil
behaviour.
4.4.2.2 Sampling and testing procedures

All in situ testing and sampling techniques cause disturbance to the soil and to a greater or lesser
extent some rocks fabric. This is a combination of physical remoulding of the soil and modification
of its state of stress from that existing in situ. BS5930:1999+A2-2210(7) provides a quality
classification for soil samples (Class 1 to Class 5) and provides guidance on the soils properties that
can be reliably determined from each class of sample, ref Table 6.
Page 31
Table 7 lists the types of samples that are generally most suitable for taking in Abu Dhabi soils and
provides guidance on the quality class of those samples, for cross reference with Table 6. Further
guidance on preferred methods for drilling in different soils types, achievable standards of sampling
and quality class of samples that might be obtained may be found in BS EN ISO 22475-1:2006(11).
Table 6: Quality classification for soil samples
Soil sample Properties that can be reliably determined

quality class
Moisture content
Deformation and
Atterberg limits,
Strata sequence
particle density
Shear strength
consolidation
distribution,
Bulk density
Particle size
Class 5 * - - - - -
Class 4 * * - - - -
Class 3 * * * - - -
Class 2 * * * * - -
Class 1 * * * * * *
Table 7: Sampling techniques for Abu Dhabi soils
Soil type Type of drilling/ Sampling technique Quality

exploratory hole class
Aeolian sand Light cable percussion SPT sampler Class 4
boring (preferred method) Bulk sample Class 4
Rotary (usually tricone bit SPT sampler Class 4
open hole)
Trial pit Bulk sample Class 4
Fluvial sands Light cable percussion SPT sampler (in sands) Class 4
/ gravels boring (preferred method) Bulk sample Class 4
Rotary (usually tricone bit SPT sampler (in sands) Class 4
open hole)
Sabkha Light cable percussion Piston thin wall (PS-T/W) Class 1
boring (preferred method) Open-tube thin wall (OS-T/W) Class 1
Open-tube thick wall (OS-TK/W) Class 2
SPT sampler Class 4
Bulk sample Class 4
Page 32
Soil type Type of drilling/ Sampling technique Quality

exploratory hole class
Rotary (usually tricone bit Open-tube thin wall (OS-T/W) Class 1
open hole) SPT sampler Class 4
Lagoonal Light cable percussion Piston thin wall (PS-T/W) Class 1
muds boring (preferred method) Open-tube thin wall (OS-T/W) Class 1
Open-tube thick wall (OS-TK/W) Class 2
SPT sampler Class 4
Bulk sample Class 4
Rotary (usually tricone bit Open-tube thin wall (OS-T/W) Class 1
open hole) SPT sampler Class 4
For sampling of rock strata, rotary core drilling using a double tube barrel is most widely used in Abu
Dhabi and preferably should also include use of a core liner. Core sizes H (76mm diameter) and P
(92mm diameter) are most commonly used. With drilling care a high level of core recovery can
usually be achieved. Core recovery of 90% minimum in any single core run can normally be attained,
and usually core recovery of close to 100% can be obtained. It should be noted that coring at a larger
diameter will usually provide a better recovery and quality of core compared to a smaller diameter
core in the same strata. Where high pressure dilatometer testing of rock strata is undertaken, then
the ‘pockets’ for those tests is normally achieved by coring at N size (54.5mm diameter).
To ensure that representative properties and engineering parameters are determined for soils and
rock strata which are inherently variable, a reasonable number of samples should be subjected to
laboratory testing. The precise numbers and types of tests to be undertaken must be based on a
comprehensive understanding of the scheme and the engineering parameters required for design
together with appreciation of the different deposits and variation within them encountered in the
ground investigation exploratory holes. Considerable experience is required to attain the right
balance of cost effective data.
Guidelines on the minimum number of samples to be tested for each soil stratum in a scheme
element (for example a bridge or embankment length) are given in Table 8. Guidelines on the
minimum number of samples to be tested for each rock stratum in a scheme element are given in
Table 9. Further guidance on the minimum numbers of samples to be tested may be found in BS EN
1997-2:2007(12).
Page 33
Table 8: Guidelines on the minimum number of samples to be tested for particular soils laboratory tests
Soil property/engineering parameter Number of samples to be tested in each soil stratum per scheme section
Minimum number Additional considerations
Classification tests
Moisture content (w) 5 These classification tests should be undertaken on all samples on which shear strength and or consolidation/elastic
properties are determined. The classification test data will often prove helpful in explaining atypical strength or
Plasticity index (Ip), liquid limit (wI) and plastic 5 consolidation/elastic properties test results that lie outside the general data set for a particular soils stratum.
limit (wp)
In situ density tests may be undertaken instead of/in addition to laboratory bulk density tests.
Bulk density (mass density) (γ) 3
Particle size distribution (PSD) 5
Particle density (or specific gravity) (ρ8) 2 -
Compaction/compaction related tests & California Bearing Ratio
Dry density/moisture content relationship 3 The number of tests should be selected considering the variation of the particle size distribution and the quantity of
material to be compacted. 4.5kg rammer tests are mainly undertaken with the occasional 2.5kg rammer test.
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) 3 In situ CBR tests may be undertaken instead of/in addition to laboratory CBR tests. Resilient modulus may be
estimated from CBR and published correlations.
Chemical tests
Soil sulphate content, chloride content and 3 -

pH
Water sulphate content, chloride content, pH 3 -
Shear strength
Undrained shear strength 3 Triaxial compression method (without measurement of pore pressure)
Effective shear strength 3 Direct shear (small shear box) method, consolidated undrained triaxial with measurement of pore pressure or
consolidated drained triaxial with measurement of volume change or combination of the three methods of test. For
sands shear box tests are commonly undertaken on remoulded specimens.
Residual effective shear strength 3 Direct shear (small shear box) method or ring shear or combination of the two methods of test.
Page 34
Soil property/engineering parameter Number of samples to be tested in each soil stratum per scheme section
One dimensional consolidation 3 Oedometer cell or hydraulic cell test or combination of the two methods of test
Permeability
Coefficient of permeability (k) 3 Consideration to be given to both vertical permeability (k v) and horizontal permeability (kh)
Table 9: Guidelines on the minimum number of samples to be tested for particular rock laboratory tests
Rock property/engineering parameter Number of samples to be tested in each rock stratum per scheme section
Moisture content (w) 5 Moisture content and bulk density measurements are often carried out and reported as part of uniaxial compressive
strength testing.
Bulk density (mass density) (γ) 5
Strength testing
Uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) 5 -
Point load testing 10 -
Chemical tests
Carbonate content 3 -
Soil sulphate content, chloride content and 3 -

pH
Water sulphate content, chloride content, pH 3 -
Page 35
4.4.2.3 Interpretation
Some of the largest errors in the derivation of engineering parameters can arise in making the
interpretative step from a series of in situ or laboratory test results to the engineering parameter to
be used in design calculations. With the natural variability in soils and rocks (Sub-section 4.4.2.1)
and the overall limited extent of in situ and soils laboratory testing there is the inevitable risk that the
likes of the soils and rocks strengths and deformation characteristics are inferior to the test results.
In case where soils laboratory testing is undertaken on remoulded test specimens where larger
particle sizes are removed then those tests will give results that are inferior to the performance of
the in situ materials. Simply taking the average of all the results is seldom appropriate and a
considerable degree of engineering judgement and well-established experience is required to select
the design parameters. The determination of engineering parameters for use in design is discussed
further in Section 8.3
4.5 Guidelines for engineering parameters typically

required
A summary of the soils properties and the engineering parameters typically required to be assessed
by the geotechnical practitioner for road schemes is given in Table 10.
Page 36
Table 10: Engineering parameters commonly required for design and to be considered in planning a ground investigation
Structure/earthwork Design issue Material Engineering Usual source of data for Occasional other testing undertaken
parameters* parameter* derivation and other engineering parameters*
normally derived
required In situ Laboratory
testing/data testing
Strata abbreviations: AS – aeolian sand, FSG – fluvial sand/gravel, S – sabkha, LM – lagoonal mud, R – rock *for parameter abbreviations refer to Table 4 &
Table 5
Structures (All) Chemical attack on Soils (All) Chemical - pH, SO4, Cl

buried concrete and properties
steel corrosion
Bridge Spread Sizing//bearing capacity Soil (AS, FSG) γ, ’, ks SPT N, CPT, - Soil & rock (All) – field pressuremeter
(including footings density tests testing.
abutments and Soil (AS, FSG) – laboratory small & large
Rock γ, UCS, ks Fracture indices, UCS (and PL)
piers), gantry shear box tests for ’.
m, s, RMR rock exposures
signs
preferably (or core Soil (S, LM) – laboratory triaxial tests for
if no exposures cu and c’+ ’.
available)
Settlement Soil (AS, FSG) E’ SPT N, CPT - Soil & rock (All) – field pressuremeter
(components, total, testing.
differential and rate) Rock E’ (& Es), Fracture indices, UCS with
Soil (AS, FSG) – field plate bearing test
RMR rock exposures strain gauges
for E’.
(or core if no
exposures Soil(S, LM) – field testing for k and
available) laboratory oedometer tests for mv and cv.
Pile Carrying capacity (axial Soil (AS, FSG) γ , ’, ks SPT N, CPT - Soil & rock (All) – field pressuremeter
foundations and lateral), downdrag/ testing.
negative skin friction Rock UCS - UCS (and PL)
Soil (AS, FSG) – laboratory small & large
shear box tests for ’.
Soil (S, LM) – laboratory oedometer tests
for mv and cv and triaxial tests for cu
Page 37
Structure/earthwork Design issue Material Engineering Usual source of data for Occasional other testing and
parameters parameter derivation engineering parameters required
normally
Bridge Pile Settlement/ deflection of Soil (AS, FSG) E’ SPT N, CPT - Soil (AS, FSG) – field plate bearing test for
(including foundations laterally loaded piles E’
abutments and (continued) Rock E (& Es), Fracture indices UCS with
piers), gantry RMR rock exposures strain gauges
signs (core if exposures
(continued) not available)
Tunnels Loading on tunnel lining Soil (AS) γ , ’, E’, ν, SPT N, CPT - Advice on parameters for design
Ko should be sought from a geotechnical
practitioner with knowledge and
Rock γ ,UCS, E (& Fracture indices UCS with experience in tunnel design and
Es), ν, Ko, rock exposures strain gauges construction.
RMR (core if exposures
Soil & rock (All) – field pressuremeter
not available)
testing.
Soil (AS, FSG) – field plate bearing test for

E’

shear box tests for ’.
Soil (S, LM) – laboratory oedometer tests

for mv and cv and triaxial tests for cu and
c’+ ’.
Retaining walls Gravity wall Bearing capacity Soil (AS, FSG) γ, ’, ks SPT N, CPT - Soil & rock (All) – field pressuremeter
density tests testing.
Rock γ, UCS, m, Fracture indices UCS (and PL)

s, RMR rock exposures
Page 38
(core if exposures Soil (AS, FSG) – laboratory small & large

not available) shear box tests for ’ (and ’r where soils
are affected by landslide.
normally
Retaining walls Gravity wall Sliding resistance Soil (AS, FSG) ’ SPT N, CPT - Soil (AS, FSG) – field plate bearing test for
(continued) (continued) E’
Rock γ, c’ + ’ - -
Soil(S, LM) – laboratory oedometer tests
Stability (engulfing Soil (AS, FSG) γ, ’ SPT N, CPT, - for mv and cv and triaxial tests for cu and
failures) density
c’+ ’.
Cantilever/ Wall stability & Soil (AS, FSG) γ, ’, ks SPT N, CPT, - Rock – laboratory rock shear box for c’+
anchored engulfing stability density ’.
embedded
wall Anchorage design Soil (AS, FSG) γ, ’ SPT N, CPT, -
density
Soil cuttings Stability Soil (AS, FSG) γ, ’ SPT N, CPT, - Soil (AS, FSG) – laboratory small & large
density shear box tests for ’.
Soil (S,LM) γ, cu , c’+ ’ Triaxial tests
shear box tests for c’+’ (and c’r+’r where
(UU, CU+PWP
soils are affected by landslide).
, CD)
Rock cuttings Stability Rock γ, c’ + ’, Discontinuity UCS Rock – laboratory rock shear box for c’+
RMR’ spacing and ’.
orientation rock
exposures (core if
no exposures)
Page 39
Embankments Stability Soil (AS, FSG) γ, ’ SPT N, CPT, - Soil (AS, FSG) – laboratory small & large
density shear box tests for ’.
Soil (S, LM) – laboratory small shear box
Soil (S, LM) γ, cu, c’ + ’ - Triaxial tests
tests for c’+’ & (c’r +’r where soils
(UU, CU+PWP
affected by landslip).
, CD)
normally
In situ Laboratory
required
Embankments (continued) Settlement Soil (AS, FSG) E’ SPT N, CPT - -

(components, total,
differential and rate) Soil (S, LM) mv, cv, k Permeability test Oedometer
Road pavement Strength, trafficability Soil (All) CBR CBR CBR -

and requirement for
capping layer
Excavatability Excavatability Rock UCS RMR Discontinuity - -

spacing and
orientation, rock
exposures
preferably (or core
if no exposures
available)
Structures and earthworks - Groundwater flow - kv & kh Permeability test Permeability Published correlations for permeability
general and infiltration test test based on particle size distribution data.
Notes
(1) Triaxial tests: UU – Unconsolidated undrained (quick undrained), CU+PWP –Consolidated undrained with porewater pressure
measurement, CD – Consolidated drained.
(2) The geotechnical practitioner will be responsible for making a final determination of the parameters required for design.
Page 40
Page 41
4.6 Laboratory tests for determining soils, groundwater and

rock properties and engineering parameters
4.6.1 Soils and groundwater
A list of the soils properties and engineering parameters commonly determined from laboratory tests
for Abu Dhabi road projects is given in Table 11. The table also provides guidance on the standards
that should be used for the particular laboratory test.
A list of the soils properties and engineering parameters occasionally determined from laboratory
tests for Abu Dhabi road projects is given in Table 12. The table also provides guidance on the
standards that should be used for the particular laboratory test.
A list of the groundwater properties that are commonly determined from laboratory tests for Abu
Dhabi road projects is given in Table 13. The table also provides guidance on the standards that
should be used for the particular laboratory test.
Further guidance on the selection of soils laboratory testing can be found in the AGS Guide: The
selection of geotechnical soil laboratory testing (1998) (13).
Page 42
Table 11: Soil properties and engineering parameters commonly determined from laboratory tests for Abu Dhabi road projects
Soil property/engineering parameter Test methods for laboratory measurement Cost/ Notes including comments on alternative indirect
complexity methods of engineering parameter assessment
BS ASTM AASHTO category(1)
Moisture content (w) BS1377.Part 2.Cl 3(14) D2216-10(15) - A -
Plasticity index (Ip), liquid limit (wI) and plastic BS1377.Part 2.Cl D4318-10(16) T89-10(17) T90-00 A -
limit (wp) 4,5(14) (18)
Bulk (mass) density (γ) BS1377.Part 2.Cl 7 (14) D7263-09(19) - A In situ tests are preferred in granular soils.
Dry density (γd) BS1377.Part 2.Cl 7 (14) D7263-09(19) - A -
Particle density (ρ8) BS1377.Part 2.Cl 8 (14) D854-10(20) T100-06(21) A Obtained by calculation if w and ρ are known.
Particle size distribution BS1377.Part 2.Cl 9 (14) D422-63 T88-10(23) A -

(2007)(22)
Shear strength
Effective stress strength parameters Direct shear (shear box) D3080-04(25) - B/C -
methods BS1377,Part
(Φ’ and Φcrit’) 7,Cl 4,5 (24)
Compaction/compaction related tests & California Bearing Ratio
Dry density/moisture content relationship BS1377.Part 4.Cl 3(24) D698-07 (26) T099-10 (28) A/B -
D1557-09 (27) T180-10(29)
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) BS1377.Part 4.Cl 7 (24) D1883-07 (30) - A/B Direct field measurement of CBR is preferred if the ground
conditions are suitable.
Maximum density (pmax) minimum density BS1377.Part 4.Cl 4 (24) D4253-00(2006) - A/B -
(pmax) (31)
D4254-00(2006)
(32)
Chemical tests
Page 43
Sulphate content of soil BS1377.Part 3.Cl 5 (33) C1580-09e1(34) - A BS covers both acid soluble and water soluble sulphate.
ASTM covers water soluble sulphate. The determination of
water soluble sulphate is most commonly made.
Chloride content of soil BS1377.Part 3.Cl 7 (33) C1524-02a(2010) T291-94(36) A ASTM test is used for testing aggregates
(35)
pH value BS1377.Part 3.Cl 9 (33) G51-95 (2005)(37) - A -
Carbonate Content BS377.Part 3.C l6 (33) D4373- - A ASTM provides result as Calcite (CaCO3) equivalent BS
02(2007)(38) results need to be corrected to be in CaCO3 equivalent.
Magnesium value in soil - C114-11b Section - B -

16 (39)
Water Soluble Salts in Soil BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 - - A Shall be tested at 0.5m interval for soil above groundwater
(Amd. 9028-96), and table and few samples from soil below groundwater table.
Earth Manual Des.8
Notes:
(1) Cost/complexity category definitions:
A - Low cost routine test: Normally carried out in large numbers to classify soils and to assess consistency of soil parameters.
B - More expensive, relatively routine test: Normally carried out selectively to determine design parameters.
C - High cost complex test: Normally carried out only when absolutely necessary to establish or confirm design parameters.
Page 44
Table 12: Soil properties and engineering parameters occasionally determined from laboratory tests for Abu Dhabi road projects
Dispersibility tests, pinhole crumb and BS1377.Part 5.Cl 6 (40) D4647-06e1 (41) - B -
dispersion methods Pinhole method
D4221-11 (42)
Double
Hydrometer
Organic content (O) BS1377.Part 3.Cl 3 (33) D2974-07a(43) - A -
Collapse potential of soils BS1377.Part 5.Cl 4 (40) D5333-03 (44) - B ASTM working group currently looking at re-working this
standard (WK34531)
Chemical tests
Resistivity of soil (rs) BS1377.Part 3.Cl 10 G187-05 (45)using - B/C Field tests are usually preferred when practicable.
(33) two electrode soil
box method.
Redox potential of soil (Eh) BS1377.Part 3.Cl 11 - - B/C -

(33)
Shear strength
Undrained shear strength (cu or cr) Laboratory vane D4648M-10(47) - A * Often unrepresentative due to small scale and sample
method BS1377.Part lab vane. Pocket disturbance.
7.Cl 3* (46) penetrometer cu can also be assessed from classification tests such as
method in plasticity index (Ip) and published correlations.
development cu can be assessed from SPT N60 values and static cone
penetration tests in many soil types.
Triaxial compression D2850- T296-10(49) A Complementary field strength determinations from in situ
method (without 03a(2007)(48) tests are often useful.
measurement of pore
pressure) BS1377.Part
7.Cl 8,9 (46)
Page 45
Shear strength
Effective stress strength parameters Direct shear (shear box) D6528-07(50) - B/C Φcrit can be assessed from specific classification test
with multi-reversals Direct shear of measured in the laboratory using modified BS test
(c’, Φ’ and Φcrit’) BS1377. Part 7 Cl 4,5 cohesive soils procedures
(46)
Consolidated undrained D4767-11(52) - C

triaxial (with
measurement of pore
pressure) BS1377.Part
8,Cl 3 to 7 (51)
Consolidated drained D7181-11(53) - C

triaxial (with
measurement of volume
change) BS1377. Part
8. Cl 3,6 & 8 (51)
Residual effective stress strength Direct shear (shear box) New ASTM under - C Φr’ can be assessed based on classification tests and
parameters (Φr’) with multi-reversals development published correlations.
BS1377. Part 7.Cl 4,5, (WK3822)(54)
(46) Φr’ may be assessed from back analysis of failures.
One dimensional consolidation/swelling Oedometer cell test D2435M-11(55) T216 -07 (56) B mv can be estimated from SPT N60 values in
properties and pre-consolidation pressure methods BS1377.Part overconsolidated clays
(mv, mv(rebound),cv, cv(rebound) and pc’) 5.Cl 3 (40)
mv can be estimated from static cone penetration test cone
resistance
Swelling Test Methods D4546-08(57) - B mv can also be assessed based on historical data on the
BS1377.Part 5.Cl 4 (40) performance of structures.
cv laboratory generally significantly underestimates in situ
Hydraulic Cell methods D4186M-12 (59) - C performance. A field estimate of cv can be made taking cv =
BS1377.Part 6.Cl 3 (58) k/(γwmv) based on the oedometer mv value, γw (weight density
of water = 9.81kN/m3 )and a field permeability (k) from the
likes of a borehole or piezometer permeability test.
Page 46
Permeability
Coefficient of Permeability (k) Constant Head Method D2434-68 T215(61) B In situ field tests are usually preferred to laboratory tests
BS1377.Part 5.Cl 5 (40) (2006)(60)
kv and kh in layered soils can be significantly different
Falling Head Method D5084-10(63) - B requiring measurement in tests with suitable sample
(Head K H (1982)(62)) preparation, orientation and drainage.
k can be assessed from particle size distribution and
published correlations.
Notes:
Page 47
Table 13: Groundwater properties commonly determined from laboratory tests for Abu Dhabi road projects
Chemical tests
Sulphate content of groundwater BS1377.Part 3.Cl 5 (33) D516-11 (64) - A -
Chloride content of groundwater BS1377.Part 3.Cl 7 (33) D512-10(66) - A -

BRE Report 279
(1995)(65)
pH value BS1377.Part 3.Cl 9 (33) G51-95 (2005)(37) - A -
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990: - - A Adequate frequency below groundwater table.
Cl: 8.
Notes:
Page 48
4.6.2 Rock
4.6.2.1 Laboratory testing

A list of the rock properties and engineering parameters commonly determined from laboratory tests
for Abu Dhabi road projects is given in Table 14. The table also provides guidance on the standards
that should be used for the particular laboratory test.
A list of the rock properties and engineering parameters occasionally determined from laboratory
tests for Abu Dhabi road projects is given in Table 15. The table also provides guidance on the
standards that should be used for the particular laboratory test.
4.6.2.2 Quality and properties of rock mass

In assessing the quality and properties of rocks and rock masses the geotechnical practitioner has
to make a distinction between the behaviour of rock material as measured in the laboratory on core
samples and the behaviour of the much larger rock masses in the field which include structural
discontinuities such as bedding planes, joints, shear zones and solution cavities. In assessing rock
mass behaviour consideration needs to be given to the following characteristics of the joints:
• spacing
• orientation
• aperture, persistence (continuity)
• tightness
• roughness, including the effects of previous movements on the joints
• any joint infilling.
Those characteristics can be assessed from logging on site of nearby rock exposures or by
orientation of recovered rock core. Guidance on the recording of rock exposures is given in
references, ISRM (1989) (67), TRL (2011) (68), TRL (2011) (69) and Hoek & Bray (1994) (70) and
the method to be adopted on a project will need to be determined by a suitably qualified and
experienced geotechnical practitioner.
Estimates of rock mass properties such as strength and stiffness may be obtained by using the
concept of rock mass classification. Further details can be found in Bieniawski (1976)(71), Bieniawski
(1989)(72), Barton (2002)(73) and Hoek et al (2002)(74).
Page 49
Table 14: Rock properties and engineering parameters commonly determined from laboratory tests for Abu Dhabi road projects
Rock property/engineering parameter Test methods for laboratory measurement Cost/ Notes including comments on alternative indirect
BS ASTM ISRM/Other category(1)
Water content (w) - D2216-10*(15) ISRM Part 2(67) A * Normally determined as part of UCS test
Density (ρ) - Part of UCS test* ISRM Part 2(67) A * Normally determined as part of UCS test
Chemical tests
Carbonate content BS1997. Part 3.Cl6(33) D4373- - - -

02(2007)(38)
Strength
Point load (I) - D5731-08(75) Broch & Franklin A Tests are typically carried out as axial point load (Ia) or
(1972)(76) diametrical point load (Id) or lump tests
Uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) - D7012-10*(77) ISRM Part 2(67) A * test includes the determination of moisture content and
bulk density.
Young’s Modulus of elasticity (E) - D7012-10*(77) ISRM Part 2(67) B Where, in-situ/laboratory tests not performed to determine
modulus of elasticity (Em). For non-cohesive soil a criteria of
Em = 1N and for rock stratum a criteria of (Em=J x Mr x
UCS) shall be adopted.
Notes:
Page 50
Table 15: Rock properties and engineering parameters occasionally determined from laboratory tests for Abu Dhabi road projects
Rock property/engineering parameter Test methods for laboratory measurement Cost/ Notes including comments on alternative indirect
BS ASTM ISRM/Other category(1)
Porosity - D4404-10 D4992- ISRM Part 2(67) A -

07(78)
Strength
Splitting tensile strength - D3967-08(79) ISRM Part 2(67) A -
Discontinuity peak and residual effective - - ISRM Part 2(67) B -

shear strength
Notes:
Page 51
5 GROUND INVESTIGATION PROCUREMENT

5.1 Overview
The Ground Investigation Company can have a substantial influence on the accuracy and quality of
ground investigation data, which may impact on ground interpretation, geotechnical design and the
cost of the scheme. It is important therefore that an appropriately experienced Ground Investigation
Company with qualified, trained and experienced staff and operatives is engaged to undertake any
ground investigation works. The Ground Investigation Company should also operate under an
appropriate quality assurance system. It will be usual to engage a Ground Investigation Company
through a tender process. This chapter provides guidance on tender information to be requested
from a Ground Investigation Company in order that an assessment of his technical competency can
be made as part of the tender process. The chapter also provides guidance on industry standards
for assuring the quality of ground investigation personnel and laboratory testing. Advice on the
specification of ground investigation and on the preparation of a bill of quantities for tendering and
contract purposes is also given.
5.2 Procurement of a ground investigation company

The precise procedure for the procurement of a specialist ground investigation company will depend
on the stage that a project has reached in its development and implementation. The Overseeing
Organisations procurement procedure should be followed and in the case of Abu Dhabi Department
of Transport the procedure is set out in its Procurement and Contracts Manual (ref
DOT/SS/P&C/M001)(80)). The assessment of ground investigation tenders should include both
technical and financial evaluation. The technical evaluation of a Ground Investigation Company
should cover:
• methodology and approach
• compliance with local health and safety regulations and local environmental regulations
relevant to the particular aspect of work being carried out
• quality of personnel, including competency assessment of drillers (ref Section 5.2.1)
• certification requirements
• technology requirements
• documentation of operations in similar projects
• capacity to upgrade and support
• green procurement initiatives
• the ability of the company to mobilize and begin work
• time for programme completion and programme logic
05-GROUND INVESTIGATION Page 52 Second Edition June-2021

PROCUREMENT
• relevant experience in the local market and available resources (plants, office, software,
tools) in the UAE
• criteria for technical presentation and interviews, if any.

Templates for the technical and health and safety evaluation of Ground Investigation Companies are
included as Table D1 and Table D2 in Appendix D. Electronic copies of the templates may be
obtained from Abu Dhabi Department of Transport.
Adherence to quality assurance procedures is of prime importance to the success of any ground
investigation, as a guarantee that specific standards are attained. The Ground Investigation
Company should operate a quality management system, which should preferably comply and be
registered to a recognised industry standard such as BS EN ISO 9001(81). The Company should
also operate an environmental management system, which should preferably by registered to an
international standard such as BS EN ISO 14001(82) and a health and safety system, preferably
registered to an international standard such as OHSAS 18001 (83).
Further information on the quality management of ground investigation may be found in UK Site
Investigation Steering Group (1993)(10). Further information on the quality of ground investigation
personnel and certification requirements are given in the following sub-Sections.
5.2.1 Quality of ground investigation personnel

Geotechnical practitioners employed on ground investigations carried out by a Ground Investigation
Company must be appropriately qualified with appropriate expertise and experience in geotechnics
for the role they undertake. Defined requirements for geotechnical personnel relative to technical
education, professional qualifications and industry experience are given in the Part 1 of the Manual,
Section 2.3. Appropriate training and continued professional development of such personnel is
important for them to be able to successfully undertake their duties.
Drillers and crew should also be appropriately experienced and trained. Studies have shown that the
skill and care of the driller in applying appropriate techniques and procedures in sinking a borehole
can have a significant influence on in situ test results, for example SPT ref CIRIA Report 143
(1995)(84), and the quality of soils sample and rock core recovery. For quality control it is important,
therefore, that drillers undertaking a ground investigation are competent in the drilling techniques
used. That competency should be a combination of appropriate training and relevant drilling
experience. This should ensure that drillers are aware of the detrimental impact on data quality of
poor drilling that is to be avoided and of drilling best practice to be employed.
The competency of drillers should be reviewed on an annual basis, as such auditing can improve
the quality of work and safety. The audits should be carried out on site by suitably experienced and
qualified persons, observing the driller’s work practices and reviewing in detail an individual's ability
to carry out work in accordance with relevant standards and contract specific specifications. The
driller’s ability to make correct and accurate records and to make appropriate use of method
statements and risk assessments should also be assessed. An inspection of the driller’s rig and all
drilling tools should also be made to check that they are of the required standard. In the absence of
an independent UAE body that undertakes such audits, the audits might be made by appropriate
staff in a Ground Investigation Company as part of its quality control procedures. If and when an

PROCUREMENT
independent UAE body is set up, then it is expected that the Ground Investigation Company will
adopt independent accreditation and auditing of its drillers. Further information on the competency
assessment of drillers may be found at www.britishdrillingassociation.co.uk(85).
The following information should be sought from a Ground Investigation Company for review as part
of the technical evaluation of the company:
i) names of the geotechnical practitioners to be employed on the contract together with details
of their academic and professional qualifications and summary of their experience;
ii) names of the drillers (and drilling assistants) to be employed on the contract together with
evidence of them having been subject to an annual competency audit (or accreditation by an
independent audit body), and a summary of their experience;
iii) details of the company training and development policy and training programme for its
specialist staff and drilling crews.
5.2.2 Laboratory quality

It is important for all ground investigations that there is consistency and quality of laboratory testing.
This ensures accuracy of data and reduces the risk of erroneous information that could result in
interpretation that could be overly conservative thus giving rise to unnecessary higher scheme costs
or rise to a failure with associated increase in construction or maintenance costs. It is highly desirable
and encouraged by Abu Dhabi Department of Transport – Main Roads Projects that laboratories
undertaking soils and rock testing and analytical contaminant testing should be accredited by an
independent industry recognised body such that:
i) the test work is conducted using valid, recognised, technical methods suitable for the purpose
required and of established performance characteristics, with reproducible results;
ii) the work is carried out by properly qualified and trained staff;
iii) the work is carried out on correctly functioning equipment that is calibrated so as to provide
traceability to international standards of measurement;
iv) data are consistent and of known quality being subject to quality control for accuracy and
precision by techniques that are approved by independent technical assessors.
The United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) (www.ukas.com)(86) provides accreditation of

laboratories based on international standard, ISO 17025:2005 (87) - General requirements for the
competence of testing and calibration laboratories and is recognized worldwide. The American
Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA) (www.a2la.org) (88) also provides accreditation of
laboratories.
Details of any independent accreditation held and of the company’s quality assurance procedures
for testing and results reporting should be sought from a Ground Investigation Company for review
as part of the technical evaluation the company.

PROCUREMENT
5.3 Specification and bill of quantities

Having established the scope of the ground investigation required for a scheme (Chapter 4 above)
and in order to facilitate the procurement of the ground investigation works, the geotechnical
practitioner should prepare a specification and bill of quantities. To provide for clear and concise
presentation of the requirements of the ground investigation published standards should be adopted
for the specification and bill of quantities. Use of such standards will provide for consistency and
quality of documentation and minimise the risk of the Ground Investigation Company not
understanding the requirements.
The UK Site Investigation Steering Group (1993)(89) specification and bill of quantities have
commonly been used for stand-alone ground investigation contracts in Abu Dhabi. An update of
those documents was published in 2012, ref UK Site Investigation Steering Group (2012)(90). The
published documents recognise that each and every ground investigation is unique in terms of its
aims and requirements. Consequently there is provision for the geotechnical practitioner to complete
a series of schedules that define investigation specific details including:
i) a description of the site, the anticipated ground and groundwater conditions, drawings and
documents provided;
ii) the numbers, type and location of the exploratory holes;
iii) amendments and additions to the published standard specification.
The UK Site Investigation Steering Group (2012)(90) specification and bill of quantities may be
adopted for stand-alone ground investigation works and an Excel workbook template bill of quantities
in that format is included as Appendix E. An electronic copy of the template is available from Abu
Dhabi Department of Transport.
It is to be noted that in the case of Abu Dhabi Department of Transport construction contracts, ground
investigation works to be included within such contracts will normally be specified and billed in
accordance with Abu Dhabi Department of Transport’s Standard Specification for Road Works
Manual (91) and Standard Bill of Quantities Manual (DOT/T/HW/172/2009)(92). The comprehensive
details for the specification and billing of ground investigation works provided in UK Site Investigation
Steering Group (2012)(90) may, however, provide a useful reference for the inclusion of any
additional work items required that are not covered in the Standard Specification and Standard Bill
of Quantities Manuals.
5.4 Specification of ground investigation of contaminated

land
The geotechnical practitioner may occasionally require a ground investigation to be performed at a
site or part of a site with known or potentially contaminated soils and or known or potentially
contaminated groundwater. For such investigations the objectives and anticipated hazards must to
be clearly defined by the geotechnical practitioner to allow the ground investigation company to
select the appropriate plant, equipment, drilling methods, materials and protective measures. The
geotechnical practitioner should therefore include additional clauses within the ground investigation
specification related to the investigation of contaminated ground or groundwater. There should also

PROCUREMENT
be additional bill of quantities items to reflect the additional work and measures that the ground
investigation company will have to undertake compared to those for a ground investigation in
uncontaminated conditions. UK Site Investigation Steering Group (1993)(93) Guidelines for the safe
investigation by drilling of landfills and contaminated land provides advice for the investigation of
known or potentially contaminated sites and includes example additional bill of quantities items that
could be added to the standard bill of quantities described in Sub-section 5.3 above.
UK Site Investigation Steering Group (1993) (93) guidelines use a ‘traffic light’ system to categorise
sites based on the risk to human health and controlled waters as presented in Table 16.

PROCUREMENT
Table 16: Site categorisation in relation to the ground investigation of landfills and
contaminated land (after UK Site Investigation Steering Group (1993)(93))
Site Broad description

designation
GREEN Subsoil, hardcore, bricks, stone, concrete, clay, excavated road materials, glass,
ceramics, abrasives, etc.
Wood, paper, cardboard, plastics, metals, wool, cork, ash, clinker, cement, etc
Note: there is a possibility that bonded asbestos could be contained in otherwise inert
areas.
YELLOW Waste food, vegetable matter, floor sweepings, household waste, animal carcasses,
sludge, trees, bushes, garden waste, leather, etc.
Rubber and latex, tyres, epoxy resin, electrical fittings, soaps, cosmetics, non-toxic
metal and organic compounds, tar, pitch, bitumen, solidified wastes, fuel ash, silica dust,
etc.
RED All substances that could subject persons and animals to risk of death, injury or
impairment of health
Wide range of chemicals, toxic metal and organic compounds, etc; pharmaceutical and
veterinary wastes, phenols, medical products, solvents, beryllium, micro-organisms,
asbestos, thiocyanates, clyanides, dye stuffs, etc
Hydrocarbons, peroxides, chlorates, flammable and explosive materials, materials that
are particularly corrosive or carcinogenics, etc
Notes:
It should be borne in mind that discriminate dumping may have taken place on a particular landfill or
contaminated site, and therefore the above categorisation should be treated as a guide only to
determining operational procedures.
Landfill sites licensed to accept asbestos waste or other sites where significant deposits of bound or
unbound asbestos occur justifiably have a RED designation, warranting the highest level of caution.
Many contaminated sites may, however, only have very small quantities of asbestos, often present as
asbestos cement, which (while presenting a hazard) may not warrant the highest level of protection. In
these cases it may be sufficient simply to add mains water to the borehole to prevent asbestos fibres
becoming airborne and hence available for inhalation, and to wear disposable ‘paper masks suitable
for low levels of asbestos’.
The presence of radioactive materials on a site has not been included in the above categorisation and
should be considered separately subject to relevant regulations and codes of practice.
The majority of dye stuffs are likely to be in the YELLOW category. There is, however, a variety of base
materials that have been used for the manufacturing of dyes and it is possible that some of those, when
in concentrated form, could be sufficiently toxic to require a RED designation.
In those situations where a preliminary sources study has not been carried out, or the preliminary
sources study has not revealed sufficient information, then the site should be given an automatic RED
designation.

PROCUREMENT
Other references that provide information and guidance in relation to the ground investigation of
contaminated land include:
• BS 10175:2011 Investigation of potentially contaminated sites – Code of practice(94)

• AGS Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations
(2000)(95);
• US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) document 625/12-91/002 titled “Description and
Sampling of Contaminated Soils – A Field Pocket Guide”(96);
• ASTM D5730-04 “Standard Guide for Site Characterization for environmental purposes with
emphasis on Soil, Rock, the vadose zone and groundwater”(97).
5.5 Ground investigation company performance

During a ground investigation the geotechnical practitioner should monitor the performance of the
Ground Investigation Company and provide feedback to the Overseeing Organisation that may be
helpful in respect of technical evaluation of the Company in future ground investigation tenders.
Aspects which the geotechnical practitioner should typically monitor include:
• quality of service
• timeliness of delivery
• adherence to specifications
• quality of resources deployed
• contract compliance.

PROCUREMENT
6 IN SITU TESTING AND ITS INTERPRETATION

6.1 Overview
In situ testing usually forms an important part of any ground investigation for Abu Dhabi road projects.
This chapter provides guidance on the execution, interpretation and uses of Standard Penetration
Testing, Cone Penetration Testing, in situ density determinations and geophysical surveys.
6.2 Standard penetration testing

6.2.1 Introduction
The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is the most commonly used in situ test in Abu Dhabi and the
Arabian peninsular and is widely used around the World. The test provides an indicator of the density
and compressibility of granular soils, such as the aeolian sand deposits and fluvial sediments of Abu
Dhabi (ref Sub-section 2.2.3). It is a particularly valuable test in these types of soils as undisturbed
samples cannot be readily obtained for laboratory testing. The SPT can also be used to assess the
consistency of cohesive soils such as sabkha and lagoonal muds and also weak rocks.
The SPT is a relatively simple test that gives a numerical parameter which can be used for:
• profiling soils and weak rock;

• soil classification;
• determination of engineering parameters for use in design based on empirical design rules,
discussed further in Sub-section 6.2.4;
• direct design; discussed further in Sub-section 6.2.4.
The International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (ISSMFE) (1988) (98)
published an International Reference Test Procedure for the SPT, that describes the principles
constituting acceptable test procedures from which the results are comparable. Only standards that
comply with the reference test procedure, such as BS EN ISO 22476-3: 2005 (99) and ASTM.
D1586-08a (100) should be used in ground investigations.
The SPT basically consists of driving a standard 50mm outside diameter thick-walled sampler into
the soil at the base of a borehole, using repeated blows of a 63.5kg hammer falling through 760mm.
The SPT N value is the number of blows required to achieve a penetration of 300mm, after an initial
seating drive of 150mm.
6.2.2 Influence of different practices and equipment on SPT results

Apart from the soil conditions in which the test is made the main influences on SPT results are:
• driller competence and borehole construction
• the SPT equipment.
6.2.2.1 Driller competence and borehole construction

Studies reported in CIRIA Report 143 (1995)(84) have shown that the quality of drilling equipment
and drilling technique can produce some of the largest differences in penetration resistance in
06-IN-SITU TESTING AND ITS Page 59 Second Edition June-2021

INTERPRETATION
granular soils. The skill and care of the driller in applying appropriate techniques and procedures in
the sinking the borehole can have a significant influence on the penetration resistance of the soil.
The correct execution of the SPT itself is also of critical importance. For quality control it is important
therefore, that drillers undertaking a ground investigation are competent in the drilling techniques
and testing to be used, ref Sub-Section 5.2.1.
Best practice drilling needs to be employed to minimize the disturbance of soils to be tested by SPT.
In light cable percussion boreholes most commonly used in ground investigations these include:
• Where drilling in the presence of a groundwater table a water balance should be

maintained within the borehole casing. This avoids a hydraulic gradient at the base of the
hole that would likely cause upward seepage and piping failure within sand and silt
deposits resulting in them becoming loose.
• SPTs should be carried out below the borehole casing and not within it.
• Standard 35mm internal diameter split spoon samplers should be used.
• In very loose aeolian sands or in very soft lagoonal clays the static weight of the rods and
hammer assembly will often be sufficient to push the test equipment some distance into
the ground below the base of the borehole. That distance should be recorded in
accordance with the test standard, otherwise the penetration resistance will be over-
estimated by an unknown quantity.
Typically in Abu Dhabi drilling is undertaken in 110mm diameter casing. Whilst drilling in larger
diameter boreholes is not common practice, the geotechnical practitioner should be aware that
drilling in boreholes of greater than 150mm diameter may give lower SPT N values than might
otherwise be the case. The geotechnical practitioner should, therefore, consider this when
interpreting test data and make corrections where necessary.
Further information on the influence of driller competence and borehole construction on SPT results
can be found in CIRIA Report 143 (1995)(84).
6.2.2.2 SPT equipment

The equipment used to carry out SPTs can have a significant influence on measured N values. In
order to minimise such influences equipment complying with recognised industry standards such as
BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005 (99) and ASTM D1586-08a (100) should only be used in ground
investigations. The energy that the SPT hammer delivers to the rods and consistency of that energy
level with each drop of the hammer are important influences on SPT results. The automatic trip
hammer provides the most consistent energy application with each hammer drop and is therefore
the preferred type of equipment to be used. The automatic trip hammer is mostly used in Abu Dhabi.
Further information on the automatic trip hammer and other types of SPT hammers commonly used
can be found in CIRIA Report 143 (1995) (84).
Energy delivered to the rods
With regards to the level of energy application, this varies depending on the individual hammer used.
Energy losses are induced by the hammer assembly due to frictional and other effects, which cause
the hammer velocity at impact to be less than the free fall velocity. Further losses of energy arise
from the impact of the anvil depending on its mass and other characteristics. Following studies of

INTERPRETATION
energy imparted by hammers, it has been established that a standard rod energy ratio (Er) of 60%
of the theoretical free-fall hammer energy is appropriate for normalising penetration resistances from
different equipment and systems. This permits like for like comparison of results. The correction of
SPT N values to a standard rod energy ratio of 60% of the theoretical free-fall hammer energy is
applied in standards such as BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005 (99) and ASTM D6066-96(2004)(101). The
adjusted N value is denoted by the symbol N60.
In sands the blow count N is inversely proportional to the energy ratio (Er) of the hammer and the
correction factor that has to be applied (see Section 6.2.3 below). In order to establish the correction
factor the Er value of the particular test hammer has to be established from calibration testing. SPT
hammers should be calibrated by an appropriate specialist company on a 6 monthly basis and also
after damage, overloading or repair, as recommended in BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005 (99). Annex B of
BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005 provides a recommended method to measure the actual energy imparted
by a SPT hammer assembly to the rods. The ground investigation company should provide a copy
of the current certificate(s) of calibration for the SPT hammer(s) used during a ground investigation
and referenced to the tests undertaken as part of its factual reporting of the ground investigation.
Energy loss owing to the length of rods
With low penetration resistance (N <50) the energy transmitted down the rods in the first compressive
pulse of force will be reduced as a result of a reflective tensile wave. Studies indicate that this has
an impact on tests in sand but not in cohesive soils. For SPT in sands if the rod length is less than
10m then a further correction to that for the energy ratio of the hammer should be applied as
described in Section 6.2.3.
6.2.3 Corrections applied to SPT results
6.2.3.1 Energy delivered to the rods

As discussed in Section 6.2 above for design and comparison purposes SPT N values should be
adjusted to a reference energy ratio of 60% of the theoretical free-fall hammer energy. This
adjustment is made using Equation 1:
Where:
N60 = Er x N - N is the SPT blow count
- Er is the energy ratio of the SPT hammer (%)
60
- N60 is the adjusted N value
Equation 1: SPT N60: Correction of N values to reference energy ratio of 60% of the
theoretical free-fall hammer
6.2.3.2 Energy loss owing to length of rods in sands

To correct for the energy loss associated with short rod lengths when testing sands then a further
correction (λ) to the reference energy correction given in Sub-Section 6.2.3.1 should be applied to
the SPT N results. The rod length correction factors are presented in Table 17.
Table 17: Correction factors in sands for rod length

INTERPRETATION
Rod length below the Correction factor (λ)

anvil (m)
>10m 1.0
6 to 10 0.95
4 to 6 0.85
<3m 0.75
In sands, therefore, the adjustment to be made to SPT N values to obtain a value corrected to a
reference energy of 60% of the theoretical free-fall hammer is made using Equation 2.
Where:
N60 = Er x N x λ - N is the SPT blow count
60 - Er is the energy ratio of the SPT hammer (%)
- λ is the correction factor related to rod length
- N60 is the adjusted N value
Equation 2: SPT N60: Correction of N values to reference energy ratio of 60% of the
theoretical free-fall hammer including allowance for rod length energy loss
6.2.3.3 Effect of overburden pressure

For some SPT correlations it is necessary to further correct the SPT N60 values to take account of
the effect of overburden pressure. There are several published corrections that take account of the
effective overburden pressure at the SPT depth. The correction factors (CN) presented in BS EN ISO
22476-3:2005 (99) also take account of the type of consolidation of the deposit. Suggested CN values
to be applied to take account of overburden pressure and the type of consolidation of the deposit
are given in Table 18. The adjusted N60 value is denoted by the symbol (N1)60.
Table 18: Correction factors CN for vertical effective stress (σv’) owing to overburden of the
soils
Type of consolidation Correction factor (CN )
Normally consolidated
√ 98
σ’ v

INTERPRETATION
Overconsolidated 170 .
70 + σv’
σv’ is the vertical effective stress in kN/m2
In sands, therefore, the adjustment to be made to SPT N values to obtain a value corrected to a
reference energy of 60% of the theoretical free-fall hammer and to take account of effective
overburden pressure is made using Equation 3.
Where:
(N1)60 = Er x N x λ x CN - N is the SPT blow count
60 - Er is the energy ratio of the SPT hammer (%)
- λ is the correction factor related to rod length
- CN is the correction factor related to effective
overburden pressure
- (N1)60 is the adjusted N60 value.
Equation 3: SPT (N1)60: Correction of N values to reference energy ratio of 60% of the
theoretical free-fall hammer including allowance for rod length energy loss and for effective
overburden pressure
6.2.3.4 SPT corrections spreadsheet template

A template spreadsheet for the application of corrections to SPT results is presented as Table F1 in
Appendix F. An electronic copy of the template may be obtained from Abu Dhabi Department of
Transport.
6.2.4 Engineering parameters and direct design methods
6.2.4.1 Engineering parameters

SPT results have been correlated to a wide range of engineering parameters used in geotechnical
design and for a wide range of soils and weak rock types. The engineering parameters that are
commonly derived from SPT results and published correlations are listed in Table 19. Details of the
various correlations and discussion on their application can be found in CIRIA Report 143
(1995)(84) and also in geotechnical engineering design text books such as Tomlinson (2001)(102).

INTERPRETATION
Table 19: Engineering parameters commonly derived from SPT results
Parameter Symbol Material type Required

Granular soils Cohesive Weak rock input
soils
aeolian sands, sabkha, carbonate
fluvial sands/ lagoonal rock
gravels muds
Relative density Dr * - - (N1)60
Effective angle of
friction
’ * - - (N1)60
Undrained shear
strength
cu - * * N60
Unconfined
compressive strength
UCS - - * N60
Undrained Young’s
modulus
Eu - * - N60
Drained (effective)
Young’s modulus
E’ * * * N60
Coefficient of volume
compressibility
mv - * - N60
Shear modulus at
very small strain
Gmax * - - (N1)60
6.2.4.2 Direct design methods

Several direct design methods have been developed for SPT. In these methods the N value
(corrected as appropriate) is the input parameter and the analysis directly gives the value to be
calculated, for example the settlement of a foundation, without any estimate of the engineering
parameters of the soil or rock. Direct design methods include:
i) estimation of settlements of shallow foundations on sands
ii) design of piles in soils and weak rocks
iii) liquefaction potential in sands
iv) estimation of sheet pile drivability in granular soils.
Details of the direct design methods and discussion on their application can be found in CIRIA Report
143 (1995)(84) and also in geotechnical engineering design text books such as Tomlinson
(2001)(102).

INTERPRETATION
6.3 Cone penetration testing

6.3.1 Introduction
The cone penetration test (CPT) and the cone penetration test with pore pressure measurement
(CPTU) commonly referred to as the “piezocone test”, are widely undertaken in Abu Dhabi and
around the World. In addition, seismic or electrical sondes can be included in the CPT array to
provide information on sonic velocity or resistivity that can be correlated with engineering properties
such as stiffness. CPTU is the generally preferred method of test as the data obtained is more
versatile for interpretation of the ground conditions at a site. In the subsequent text CPT is used as
a generic term covering both CPT and CPTU unless stated otherwise. CPT can be very cost-effective
and can provide continuous data on the strata being tested with good repeatability of observations.
CPT can be used for:
• profiling soils stratigraphy and identifying the materials encountered;
• determination of engineering parameters of soils for use in design based on empirical design
rules, discussed further in Sub-section 6.3.5.1;
• direct design, discussed further in Sub-section 6.3.5.2.
In most cases, it is desirable that a CPT investigation is supplemented by exploratory holes, sampling
and testing in order to:
• provide correlations and verifications of soil type;
• provide complementary information where interpretation of CPT data is difficult, ie where

there has been partial drainage or where there have been problem soils;
• evaluate the effect of future changes in soil loading that cannot be assessed from the CPT.
The International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (ISSMFE) (1989)(103)
published an International Reference Test Procedure for Cone Penetration Test (IRTP) that
describes the principles constituting acceptable test procedures for the CPT from which the results
are comparable. Only equipment and procedures that comply with the reference test procedure, as
described in international standards such as BS 1377-9:1990 (104) and ASTM D5778-07(105)
should be used for CPT investigations.
The CPT basically consists of pushing a cone attached to the end of a series of rods into the ground
at a constant rate of penetration with continuous or intermittent measurements made of the
resistance to penetration of the cone. Measurements are also made of either the combined
resistance to penetration of the cone and outer surface of a friction sleeve or the resistance of the
surface friction sleeve itself. The standard CPT cone has a 60 degree apex angle and a diameter of
35.7mm providing a 10cm2 cross-sectional base area and 150cm2 friction sleeve located above the
cone, ref Figure 1. CPT cones of 15cm2 cross-sectional base are also used, especially where
additional sensors are incorporated into the equipment. The ISSMFE IRTP(103) advises that
immediately behind the cone (position u2 on Figure 1) is the preferred location for the filter for the
measurement of pore pressure. Some equipment, however, has the filter on the cone (position u1 on
Figure 1) or behind the friction sleeve (position u3 on Figure 1).

INTERPRETATION
Figure 1: Cone penetrometer components
Electrical strain gauge load cells within the cone penetrometer measure the cone resistance (qc) and
the sleeve friction (fs) of the soils being tested as the cone is pushed into the ground.
6.3.2 Test methods

Methods for undertaking CPT are set out in various international standards, including ISSMFE IRTP
(1989)(103), BS 1377-9:1990(104), ASTM D3441-05(106) and ASTM D5778-07(105).
6.3.3 Factors that can affect CPT results

The main factors that typically affect CPT results are listed below together with details of measures
that can be taken to avoid the error from occurring or to correct the data:
• The skill and care of the CPT operator. Following the correct test procedure is fundamentally
important in ensuring quality and reliability of CPT results. Only suitably trained and
experience operators should be engaged to undertake CPT testing.
• Calibration of sensor and load cells. Accurate and up to date calibration of sensors and load
cells is essential for recording accurate CPT data. Good technical support facilities for
calibration and maintenance of the CPT equipment are therefore essential. Calibration
records should always be requested for the cone, friction sleeve, piezometer and any other
sensors such as seismic sonde. Such records should be current at time of commencement
of testing and should be repeated at the end of the investigation process to determine any
drift in readings that may have occurred over time.
• Pore water pressures. Pore water pressures around a penetrating cone influence the
measured cone resistance and sleeve friction. In clays a higher rate of penetration generates
higher pore pressures that will result in over-estimation of cone resistance and therefore
strength properties. High rates of penetration can also give increased resistance in some
sands owing to dilatancy generating high negative pore water pressures. Such rate effects
can be avoided by carrying out the test to the standard rate of penetration. ISSMFE
IRTP(103) recommends a rate of penetration of 20mm/s +/- 5mm/s.

INTERPRETATION
• De-airing of piezometers. If the piezometer within the CPT array becomes unsaturated then
it will give erroneous pore pressure readings. Piezocones should therefore be immersed in
de-aired water for at least 24 hrs prior to testing. Piezocones should be regularly replaced
with de-aired piezocone elements.
• Inclination of testing. If the test path deviates significantly off vertical then this will induce
errors in the depth of the recorded data. To minimize the risk of the test deviating off vertical
the thrust machine should be set up so as to obtain a trust direction as near as possible to
vertical. The deviation of the initial thrust direction from the vertical should not exceed 2
degrees. The axis of the test push rods should also coincide with the vertical trust direction.
The inclusion of a slope sensor in the penetrometer will also provide for monitoring and
recording the verticality of the test path. That information can then be used to make any
necessary corrections to give the correct measurement depth.
• Temperature. Changes in temperature can affect readings. In sands, temperature may

increase owing to friction between the cone penetrometer and the sand particles.
Temperature affects can be checked by taking a reading at zero-load at the beginning and
end of test at the same temperature as exists in the ground. The inclusion of a temperature
sensor in the penetrometer will also provide for monitoring and recording the temperature.
Corrections to the data can then be made based on laboratory calibrations.
• Cone penetrometer condition. General wear and tear can result in a cone penetrometer
falling out of standard to an extent that the accuracy of the test data may be affected. The
cone should be inspected prior to carrying out a CPT survey to ensure the cone is in good
condition. An appropriate inspection and maintenance schedule for the CPT equipment
should be put in place to ensure that any equipment that falls out of standard is identified and
taken out of use.
Further information on factors that can affect CPT results and measures that can be taken to
avoid the error or correct the data may be found in Luune et al (1997)(107). A summary of
frequency of checks and recalibrations that should be made for CPT to ensure quality of data is
given in Table G1 in Appendix G.
6.3.4 Presentation of results

The following details should be presented in the Ground Investigation Company’s reporting of CPT:
• Measured parameters. For each CPT the measured parameters listed below should be
plotted on one sheet with a common set of scales used at any one site:
- measured cone resistance (qc)

- measured sleeve friction (fs)
- pore water pressure (u), where measured.
ISSMFE IRTP (1989)(103) gives recommendations for scales to be used, but those may be
varied where appropriate to ensure best presentation of data.

INTERPRETATION
• Derived parameters. Where possible the following parameters should be derived and also
presented:
- cone resistance corrected for pore pressure effects (qt)

- sleeve friction corrected for pore pressure effects (only valid when pore pressures
have been measured at both ends of the friction sleeve)
- friction ratio (Rf), usually in %, where Rf = fs/qc or is preferably Rf = ft/qt or more
typically Rf = fs/qt
- pore pressure ratio (Bq), where Bq = Δu/(qt –σvo)
With Δu = excess pore pressure (u-u0)
u0 = in situ equilibrium pore water pressure
σvo = in situ total vertical stress.
• On each CPT record:
- site name
- CPT reference number
- date of test
- serial number of the cone penetrometer
- position of the pore pressure filter(s) on the cone penetrometer
- groundwater level
- test Company and CPT operator name.
• In the factual report:
- plan showing the location of each CPT coordinated to an agreed Cartesian system
- description of the equipment used and name of the manufacturer(s)
- cone geometry and dimensions and any deviation from ISSMFE IRTP (1989) (103)
or the standard being used
- calibration factors for all sensors and the load range over which they apply
- capacity of each sensor
- zero readings for all sensors before and after each test, and the temperature at which
taken or alternatively the change in zero reading expressed in kPa
- type of liquid used in the pore pressure measurement system
- observed wear or damage on the cone, friction sleeve or the filter element.
- any irregularities during testing to the standard being used.
- the area ratio of the cone and the friction sleeve end areas.
- for dissipation tests it should be noted whether or not the rods were clamped or
unclamped during dissipation.
A check list of information required with CPT results to ensure and check data quality is provided as
Table G2 in Appendix G.

INTERPRETATION
6.3.5 Soils characteristics, engineering parameters, direct design

methods and other applications
6.3.5.1 Soils characteristics and engineering design parameters

CPT is extremely effective for establishing soil type and soils stratigraphy, particularly when
correlated with data from boreholes. CPT results have also been correlated to a wide range of
engineering parameters used in geotechnical design and for a wide range of soil types. The
engineering parameters that are commonly derived from CPT results and published correlations are
listed in Table 20. Details of the various correlations and discussion on their application can be found
in Luune et al (1997)(107).
It should be noted that most of the correlations given in Lunne et al (1997)(107) are based on
empirical results and data derived for silica/quartz sands. In some instances, these correlations can
be in error for CPT tests in calcareous sands (carbonate content greater than 50%-70%) (Lunne et
al (1997)(107)).
In calcareous sands correction factors should be applied to take account of the crushability of the
shell content and hence higher compressibility of the deposits which often results in artificially lower
CPT cone resistance values compared to silica/quartz sands of the same relative density.
6.3.5.2 Direct design methods

Several direct design methods have been developed for CPT. In these methods the qc is usually the
only input parameter from the CPT test and there are various formulae and correlations for the value
to be calculated. Design methods available using CPT data include:
i) pile load capacity and pile settlement
ii) bearing capacity and settlement of shallow foundations
iii) liquefaction potential evaluation.
Details of the design methods and discussion on their application can be found in Lunne et al
(1997)(107) and the CIRIA Cone Penetration Testing – Methods and Interpretation(108).
6.3.5.3 Other applications

Other applications for which CPT data is commonly used are:
i) the estimation of SPT N values for use in SPT-based design approaches
ii) ground improvement quality control.
Details of these and other less common applications in Abu Dhabi can be found in Luune et al
(1997)(107) and the CIRIA Report Cone Penetration Testing – Methods and Interpretation(108).

INTERPRETATION
Table 20: Soil characteristics and engineering parameters commonly derived from CPT results
Soil characteristics/ Symb Material type Notes

parameters(1 & 2) ol
Granular soils Cohesive soils
aeolian sands, sabkha, lagoonal muds

fluvial sands/
gravels
CPT CPTU CPT CPTU
Soil state (1) For details of the correlations and discussion on their application see
Luune et al (1997).
Soil type - B A B A (2) The general applicability of CPT and CPTU data for assessing soil
Soil stratigraphy characteristics and parameters: A – high, B – moderate, C – low, - not
- A A A A
applicable.
In situ static pore pressure u - - - A (3) CPTU provides additional approaches compared to CPT to assess
this characteristic/parameter
Unit weight/weight density
(γ ) - - - C (4) The coefficient of volume compressibility can be assessed from mv =
(bulk density/mass density)
1/M
Relative density (density
ID A/B A/B - -
index)
Overconsolidation ratio
- - - B B(3)
(OCR)
In situ horizontal stress σh C C B/C B/C(3)
Shear strength
Undrained shear strength cu - - B B(3)
Sensitivity - - - C C
Effective angle of friction ’ B B C B
Deformation
06-IN SITU TESTING AND ITS Page 70 Second Edition June-2021

INTERPRETATION
Soil characteristics/ Symb Material type Notes

parameters(1 & 2) ol
Granular soils Cohesive soils
aeolian sands, sabkha, lagoonal muds

fluvial sands/
gravels
CPT CPTU CPT CPTU
Drained (effective)
M B B C(4) B(4)
constrained modulus
Coefficient of consolidation cv - - - A/B
Coefficient of permeability k - - - B
Undrained Young’s modulus Eu - - C B
Drained (effective) Young’s

modulus E’ B B - -
Shear modulus at very small

strain Gmax B B B B
06-IN SITU TESTING AND ITS Page 71 Second Edition June-2021

INTERPRETATION
6.4 In situ density tests

Soil bulk density, also known as mass density, is an important parameter required for geotechnical
engineering design. As described in Section 4.4, routine sampling techniques cannot provide
samples of the type and quality suitable for bulk density determination for aeolian sand deposits,
which predominate in Abu Dhabi, or for fluvial sands and gravels. The bulk density of those deposits
can, however, be determined by testing the soils in situ. A list of the tests that are commonly
undertaken for Abu Dhabi road projects to establish soils bulk density in situ is given in Table 21.
Table 21: Tests commonly undertaken for Abu Dhabi road projects for determining the in situ
density of soils
Test BS ASTM Notes

method
Sand BS1377.Part 9.Cl D1556-07 (sand-cone Suitable for fine and medium
replacement 2.1(104) (small pouring method) (109) grained soils (aeolian sand).
cylinder)
BS1377.Part 9.Cl 2.2 D4914-08 (sand Suitable for fine, medium and
(104) (large pouring replacement method) coarse grained soils (aeolian
cylinder) (110) sand and fluvial sands &
gravels).
Water BS1377.Part 9.Cl D5030-04(111) Used rarely in coarse and very

replacement 2.3(104) coarse soils wadi deposits.
Core cutter BS1377.Part 9.Cl 2.4 Suitable for cohesive soils free
(104) from coarse grained material.
-
Used rarely, for example in
cement stabilised fill.
Nuclear BS1377.Part 9.Cl 2.5 D6938-10 (112) Commonly used. The Ground
(104) Investigation Company
requires a Federal Authority for
Nuclear Regulations (FANR)
licence (annual renewal) and
the adoption of FANR
procedures in respect of the
transportation and storage of
the nuclear equipment.
Suitable for fine grained
materials like aeolian sand.
Technique much less reliable
in coarse gravelly soils.
6.5 Geophysical surveys

6.5.1 Introduction
Geophysics is a very broad category of non destructive methods of ground investigation.
Geophysical techniques including electrical, gravity, magnetic, seismic or thermal are used to
measure the physical, electrical or chemical properties of the soil, rock and pore fluids. In general
06-IN SITU TESTING AND Page 72 Second Edition June-2021

ITS INTERPRETATION
geophysical surveys are non invasive and enable correlation between known points of control. There
is, however, no one typical method that can be used in every instance. The selection of a geophysical
method has to be based on knowledge of the existing ground conditions and what information is
required to be obtained.
Data gathering and data interpretation in geophysical surveys are all important and require specialist
knowledge and experience. There are no samples to be handled or stored that can be checked at a
later point. Most of the geophysical methods require processing of the data after it is gathered in
order that an interpretation can be made. The specification of the geophysical survey is, therefore,
very important and the selected specialist company must be able to demonstrate that he is able to
provide the needed solutions.
Geophysics can provide information over a much broader area of a site than can be obtained by
ground investigation exploratory holes. It can provide mapping of the natural conditions of a site and
establish anomalous conditions that could present increase risk to road structures or earthworks.
For example, geophysics can be used to investigate possible cavities within limestone and gypsum
rich strata that could impact on construction or performance of bridge foundations. Geophysics may
also be used to determine soils stratigraphy if say a preliminary sources study has indentified a
possible buried channel or similar features that may impact on proposed earthworks or road
structure. Geophysics is, therefore, a very useful technique to reduce the risk of unknown conditions.
The Al Ain Municipality has published requirements concerning the use of geophysical surveys in
the document Geophysical Study in Al Ain Guideline Manual dated 2010(113), to which the
geotechnical practitioner should refer.
This chapter provides an overview of the geophysical techniques that are typically used in Abu Dhabi
Emirate and also other techniques that may be useful. Further detailed information on the
geophysical methods described can be found in ASTM D6429-99(2011)(114), McDowell et al
(2002)(115), Wightman et al (2003)(116), McCann et al (1997)(117), United States Department of
Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (2001)(118), and United States Department of Interior, Bureau of
Reclamation (1998)(119).
6.5.2 Planning
The design and planning of geophysical surveys for transportation projects depends on a number of
factors which include:
• the physical properties of interest
• the techniques which can provide the information at the resolution required
• the geophysical tools that can perform well under the study conditions
• the techniques that can provide complementary data
• the non-geophysical control that is required for the interpretation of the acquired geophysical
survey data.
To assist in the planning of geophysical survey there are numerous references as indicated above.
Good basic guidance can be found in ASTM D6429-11 (114) Standard guide for selecting surface

ITS INTERPRETATION
geophysical methods, ASTM D5753-05(2010) (120) Standard guide for the planning and conducting
of geophysical logging and Transportation Research Board Circular E-C130 (2008)(121)
“Geophysical methods commonly employed for geotechnical site characterization”.
Geophysical surveys can be used as a screening tool to provide a relatively quick understanding of
the ground conditions at a site. They can also be used to provide more detail on the specifics of a
site. The first aspect of planning a geophysical survey is to determine why the survey is to be
performed and what questions are to be answered when the survey is complete. For the various
geophysical methods that can be used, each has its own set of advantages and limitations. Table
22 provides a summary of the common applications of land based geophysical surveys in Abu Dhabi
and the preferred geophysical methods for that application (see also Table H1 in Appendix H). For
information on the use of geophysics in the marine environment reference should be made to
International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (2005)(122).
Table 22: Summary of geophysical survey techniques and their application
Application Geophysical survey technique(1)

Seismic MASW(2) / Resistivity Ground Electromagnetic Gravity
Refraction SASW(2) Penetrating (EM)
Radar
P – Primary method of choice S – Secondary method of choice/alternative
Unconsolidated
layer / soil P P - P S -
stratigraphy
Rock
S P - S - -
Stratigraphy
Depth to
P P P S S
bedrock
Depth to water
P - - P S -
table
Fractures and
S S S S P S
fault zones
Soils and rock S
P P S - -
properties (density)
Cavities / sink
- P P P S P
holes
Saltwater
- - P S P -
intrusion
Buried objects - - - P P/S S
Notes:
(1) Refer also to Table 1 in ASTM D6429-11(114) and Table 2 in McCann et al (1997)(117).
(2) MASW – Multichannel analysis of surface waves; SASW - Spectral analysis of surface waves

ITS INTERPRETATION
For all the geophysics methods listed in Table 22 the interpretation of the geophysics data should
be calibrated against ground conditions at the site established from boreholes or trial pits. That
calibration should preferably be undertaken at the time of original data processing. If for some reason
this is not possible and the borehole or trial pit information is obtained at a later date then in these
situations the results of the geophysical survey should be reviewed and updated as necessary in
light of the actual ground conditions found in the exploratory holes.
6.5.2.1 Seismic
Seismic techniques including seismic refraction and MASW measure the travel time of direct and
indirect acoustic waves as they travel from a sound source at ground surface to a series of geophone
receptors placed in direct contact with the ground surface at a range of distances from the sound
source. The acoustic waves can be generated by a sledge hammer hitting a metal plate, by a weight
drop source or by a large vibratory weight drop source. Figure 2 shows the theory behind seismic
data gathering.
Figure 2: Refraction methodology (from Wightman et al (2003)(116))
A summary of uses and limitations of frequently used seismic methods is given in Table 23.

ITS INTERPRETATION
Table 23: Summary of uses and limitations of frequently used seismic methods
Method Data collected and uses Limitations Additional comments
Seismic 1. P Wave velocity 1. Layers must be relatively 1. Resolution is a

Refraction (compressional wave) thick in order to be “seen”. function of the
to determine velocity source and the
2. Only layers of increasing
differentiation of geophone spacing.
velocity can be recorded.
geologic layers.
Weaker materials at depth,
2. Able to determine will not be recorded.
differences in material
3. The acoustic (seismic)
properties for thick
velocity through water (ie
layers.
the water table; 1,400 m/s)
3. Provides data along may mask some weaker
continuous lines. weathered rock layers.
MASW 1. Measures propagation 1. The acoustic (seismic) 1. Resolution is subject

of surface waves from velocity through water (ie to the geophone
which shear wave the water table; 1,400 m/s) spacing and the
velocity may be may mask some weaker acoustic frequency
interpreted. weathered rock layers. being recorded by
the geophone.
2. Able to obtain data 2. Penetration is limited by
below weak layers. the source of acoustic 2. Data can be
waves generated. collected in noisy
3. Able to delineate voids
areas using just the
or cavities.
traffic noise as an
acoustic source if
depth of data
collection is not too
deep.
6.5.2.2 Electrical Resistivity

Electrical Resistivity surveys measure the resistivity of the earth materials relative to a current that
is induced into the ground. There are numerous types of resistivity surveys, but in general all of them
use a current induced into one electrode and measure the current received at receptor electrodes.
As the current input is known the apparent resistivity between the two or more electrodes can be
calculated. There are three commonly used resistivity arrays, the difference being in the spacing of
the receiving electrodes:
• Wenner: 4 equally spaced electrodes with the current placed on the outer electrodes and the
readings on the inner electrodes.
• Schlumberger: 4 electrodes but the inner electrodes (potential electrodes) are less than 1/5th
of the distance between the centre of the spread and the outer current electrode.

ITS INTERPRETATION
• Resistivity profiling: where the electrode spacing is constant but the induced current is moved
along the line.
The electrical resistivity of a material depends on its porosity and the salinity of the water within the
pore spaces. The method is limited by the insertion of the electrode into the ground surface, so if the
surface material is pavement, very dense material or bedrock then the electrode locations need to
be pre-drilled. Additionally, in soil materials it may be necessary to wet the electrodes with saline
water, in order to increase the amount of electric current directed into the ground. In dry conditions,
such as dunes, this may require very large quantities of water to be available.
Electrical resistivity can be performed as point surveys using the Wenner or Schlumberger array.
Single point surveys are used primarily in corrosion surveys for steel (such as sheet pile walls) or for
determining ground characteristics for earthing design of electrical substations. Gridded surveys
along transects using profiling methods are usually performed for trying to find anomalies such as
cavities.
Electrical resistivity surveys can be used to map sand and gravel deposits, determine parameters
for cathodic protection, and map variations in groundwater salinity. They can also be used to locate
voids or cavities especially in areas where the cavities are above the water table. In areas where the
cavities are below the water table a lack of contrast between the electrical resistivity of the host rock
and groundwater can make the results more difficult to interpret. Electrical Resistivity surveys do not
provide information on rock properties.
6.5.2.3 Ground Penetrating Radar

Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) is a quick method of evaluating shallow near surface geology,
including the location of buried objects such as pipes, boulders, and near surface cavities. GPR can
be used for near surface underground utility detection since it can pick up PVC cable ducts and
similar pipelines that may not be currently active and which, therefore, would not be visible to other
pipeline detection methods. GPR is limited in its usefulness since conductive materials such as
saline water or the water table limits the depth of penetration. The method uses many different
antennae configurations so it is very important to provide the specialist geophysics survey company
with a clear directive on the purpose of the survey and the suspected ground conditions or the buried
structure that is being sought. GPR data does not require an excessive amount of processing and
therefore the specialist field engineer can usually review the survey findings as work progresses to
assess if the investigation needs are being met.
GPR surveys can be used in the evaluation of road pavement (including concrete) and bridge decks.
In those cases it does, however, need to be used in conjunction with other non-destruction testing
(NDT) and /or coring methods to obtain the necessary data for the calibration of the GPR data
(Wightman et al (2003)(116)).
6.5.2.4 Microgravity
Microgravity or gravity measurement techniques measure the local variations in the gravitational pull
of the earth that the likes of underground cavities and buried channels or underground structures
can create. Measurements are made using a gravity meter, at intervals along traverses that cross
an anticipated or known area of interest. The variations in the relative gravity measured can then be
used to identify the likely position of the underground feature. The method can provide a very

ITS INTERPRETATION
accurate sizing and depth of a void or anomaly. In order to achieve accuracy, it is important that the
microgravity survey data are correlated with other ground investigation data and information. The
microgravity method is labour intensive and requires the initial point of measurement (base station)
to be re-occupied frequently in order to monitor any drift in the recording of the instrument. Extremely
accurate elevation data is also required (+/- 3mm). The distance between readings taken along a
traverse should be based on the expected size of the void or anomaly to be detected; with close
spacing for small size voids and larger spacing for large voids. The gravitational anomaly that occurs
with a void decreases with depth. If the void is in the bedrock, the top of the bedrock surface below
the overburden soils must be taken into account; that information usually requires the use of a
second geophysical technique such as seismic refraction or MASW. Microgravity surveys can be
made in inside buildings and structures and in urban areas (ASTM D6429-11(114)).
6.5.2.5 Borehole geophysics

There are several borehole geophysics techniques that can be used to identify strata stratigraphy,
establish particular geotechnical properties and for groundwater characterisation. Table H2 and
Table H3 in Appendix H provide lists of the different methods of borehole geophysical survey and
their applications. It should be noted that a number of the techniques require the use of a shielded
radioactive source. For this reason some of the methods that are listed and are available in the likes
of the US or the UK may not be available for use in the UAE owing to permitting issues. Consultation
should therefore be made with local geophysical survey companies to confirm the types of borehole
geophysical survey that can be provided.
6.5.3 Procurement of geophysical survey work

Geophysical surveys and their interpretation is specialist work and accurate scope definition is
extremely important if value for money is to be obtained from the investigation work. It is also
important that an experienced specialist geophysical survey company is employed to undertake the
survey work and perform its interpretation. It can be advantageous to seek the advice of the specialist
geophysical survey company in determining the final scope of a geophysical survey. To facilitate
this, in addition to the geotechnical practitioner providing an initial indication of form of geophysical
survey required he should also provide the specialist geophysical survey company with the following:
1. Details of the known or anticipated ground conditions including groundwater level and
groundwater salinity (if available).
2. Information on what is wanted to be achieved by the geophysical survey for example the
location of cavities, the determination of ground parameters, the location of salt water
interface or locations of underground utilities.
3. Proposed depth of investigation from the ground surface.
4. Presentation of results. How will the data ultimately be used? Requirements for the data to
be coordinated to local grid and elevation. Requirements for the data to be presented in
electronic format (for example CAD) as well as paper files.
5. Expected result presentation in terms of interpreted profiles and slices, identification of

anomalies and scale of the drawings. The level of detail required to be detected from the
reported data (for example 0.5m or 10m size anomalies).

ITS INTERPRETATION
The geophysical survey company can then advise on any changes in the scope of the geophysical
survey or technique(s) that might be employed to maximise the benefit from the proposed survey
work.
The procurement process should also include the minimum requirements of the report that should
be provided (Anderson et al (2008)(123)). This includes:
i) executive summary
ii) purpose and scope of study
iii) dates and location of survey (including base plan)
iv) personnel and organization involved
v) summary of data collection procedures used at the site.
vi) summary of data processing methodology
vii) quality and reliability of the acquired data
viii) interpretation of the data including summary of the procedure used and verification processes
(ground truth and /or modelling).
ix) conclusions and recommendations.
It is to be noted that in some instances it is most appropriate and best value for money if a phased
programme of geophysical survey work, using different techniques is undertaken. For example, for
the investigation of possible underground cavities, it might be appropriate to initially undertake a
wide area Resistivity or MASW survey of a site. Anomalies that are found would be verified using
either boreholes or diagraphy drilling to confirm the presence or otherwise of any cavities. The size
of the cavities might then be confirmed using cross-hole borehole geophysical surveys or with a
micro gravity survey.
Geophysical surveys can be included within the ground investigation standard specification and bill
of quantities described in Sub-section 5.3. In some instances it may be appropriate to include
multiple geophysical survey methods in the documentation in order to establish any significant price
differential between different techniques, for example Resistivity or MASW, as the price may vary
between sites depending on surface conditions and project requirement.
The geophysical survey contract should also include a “field release clause” that permits contract
termination if preliminary results do not justify continuation of the survey (Anderson et al
(2008)(123)). The clause might be invoked if the ground conditions differ from what was expected or
if the geophysical method does not achieve the data objectives including depth of penetration.
The Geophysical Survey Company should be required to include in any tender return evidence that
he has used the geophysical survey method proposed successfully at similar locations in similar
ground conditions. The tender should also include a method statement indicating the proposed
working method including as a minimum the following items:
i) proposed spacing of geophones or electrodes

ITS INTERPRETATION
ii) quality assurance checks that will be performed daily
iii) methods that will be used in the analysis of the data
iv) equipment that will be used including external source, data storage and data back up during
the survey
v) staff, including CVs of team leaders for data collection and data interpretation
vi) methods to be used for interpretation of the data including details of the data processing
programs that will be used
vii) schedule of works based on a notice to proceed date.
The geotechnical practitioner should supervise the field geophysical survey work to ensure the
quality of work and to enable any changes in the scope of the geophysical survey to be made, in the
light of survey findings.

ITS INTERPRETATION
7 GROUND INVESTIGATION REPORTING
7.1 Description of soils and rocks, borehole and trial pit

records
The description of soils and rocks and the preparation of borehole and trial pit records should be
undertaken to an appropriate standard such as BS5930:1999+A2(2010) (7). An example borehole
record is included in Appendix I.
7.2 Laboratory test reporting

The information required to be reported for soils and rock laboratory tests is generally given in the
relevant standard to which the test is being undertaken. Example test reporting forms are included
as Appendix J, a list of which is provided at the front of the appendix. An electronic copy of the forms
may be obtained from Abu Dhabi Department of Transport.
Laboratory testing and test reporting should be undertaken in accordance with industry recognised
quality assurance and quality control procedures. For Abu Dhabi Department of Transport projects
the procedures should be in accordance with the Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Requirements for Road Projects (DOT-MR-M-05) (124).
7.3 Electronic transfer of geotechnical data

To facilitate the electronic transfer of geotechnical data without the need for re-input of information
which can lead to transcribing errors the Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental
Specialists developed its Data Interchange Format (commonly referred to as AGS format). The AGS
format provides a set of rules for the electronic transfer of geotechnical data, including exploratory
hole records together with in situ and laboratory testing results.
AGS format data files can be readily imported into geotechnical database programmes such as
Holebase and gINT. Also, there are a number of utility programs available that allow the user to
check AGS data files for errors and convert the data to Excel spreadsheets, including free
downloads. Example utility programs are;
• Keynetix: KeyAGS at www.keynetix.com(125)

• gINT software at www.gintsoftware.com(126)
When specifying the ground investigation the geotechnical practitioner should include the
requirement that the ground investigation company supplies the investigation records in AGS format
in addition to hard copy reports.
More information on the AGS format can be found in AGS (2005) (127), AGS (2011) (128) and on
the AGS web site www.ags.org.uk(129).

REPORTING
8 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN
8.1 Seismic loading
Abu Dhabi is located on the Arabian Plate which is bounded by a series of well-defined tectonic
margins. The Arabian Plate itself is considered to be a stable landmass, with no known significant
seismic events over the past 2,000 years, ref Aldama-Bustos et al (2009)(120). The north-east border
of the Arabian plate, however, is an active plate boundary with relative convergence taking place
between the Arabian and Eurasian plates. As a result, continental collision is taking place along the
Zagros fold-and-thrust belt in southern Iran (about 120km from the UAE), while further east (in the
north of the Gulf of Oman) the oceanic part of the Arabian plate subducts beneath the Eurasian plate
along the Makran subduction zone, ref Figure A3 in Appendix A, Berberian (130). The transition from
the continental to the oceanic collision is accommodated, to a large extent, by the Zendan-Minab
fault, a north north-west trending zone of strike-slip and thrust faults, ref Regard et al.(131) (132). In
the south-east, the African and Arabian plates diverge across the Gulf of Aden while, in the south-
west, the Red Sea spreading boundary defines the interface between the two plates, ref Johnson
(133), Vita-Finzi(134) .
Among the above-mentioned plate boundaries, the Zagros fold-and-thrust belt zone and the Makran
subduction zone are the most likely contributors to seismic hazard for Abu Dhabi. In the past, the
Zagros region has been responsible for the generation of numerous large earthquakes of magnitude
around M7.0, while in the Makran subduction zone the largest earthquake recorded had a magnitude
M8.2. In addition, a number of active tectonic features in the Oman Mountains are also expected to
contribute to the hazard in the area. The Oman Mountains are located along the north-east margin
of the Arabian plate, in Northern Oman, and seismic activity has been noted by both field evidence
and historical seismicity, ref Kusky et al (135). The main structures of interest in the region are the
Dibba line, the Wadi Shimal and the Wadi Ham faults, ref Styles et al (136).
A number of seismic hazard studies have been performed for the United Arab Emirates and its
surroundings. Table 24 summarises the ground motion predictions obtained by different studies for
Abu Dhabi at various return periods. It is noted that significant differences exist among the
predictions of the various studies; these differences are discussed in Aldama-Bustos (137) and
Aldama-Bustos et al (138). Best estimate values provided in Table 24 are intended to provide an
indication of the seismic hazard levels for Abu Dhabi based on the latest studies; however PGA
values for engineering design according to AASHTO or IBC should be derived following the
procedures laid out in each of the codes and using the seismic hazard maps provided therein.
08-GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN Page 82 Second Edition June-2021

Table 24: Summary of seismic hazard studies results for Abu Dhabi at various return
periods.
Author Peak Ground Acceleration (g)
475yrs 1,000yrs 2,475yrs
UBC (139) No seismic - -

action required
Grunthal et al (140) - GSHAP 0.24 - -
Al-Haddad et al (141) 0.05 - -
Abdalla and Al-Homoud (142) 0.10 - -
Sigbjörnsson and Elnashai (143) - 0.10 0.20
Musson et al (144) 0.035 - -
Malkawi et al (145) 0.09 - -
Pascucci et al (146) 0.04 - 0.07
Aldama-Bustos et al (138) 0.032 0.047 0.07
Best estimate 0.035 0.047 0.07
For transport infrastructure in Abu Dhabi seismic design is usually carried out following the general
principles set out in AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (AASHTO LRFD) (2012)(147).
According to AASHTO LRFD (147), the definition of seismic hazard at a site shall use the peak
ground acceleration (PGA) and the short-period and long-period spectral acceleration coefficients,
Ss and S1 respectively, with a 7% probability of exceedance in 75 years (1,000yr return period).
These shall be based either on approved state ground motion maps or on a site-specific probabilistic
seismic hazard analysis generating a uniform hazard spectrum for the required probability of
exceedance. The PGA, Ss and S1 values correspondig to the 1,000-year return period shall be
multiplied by the site factors for the appropriate site class in order to define the design spectral
accelerations and design response spectrum. At present approved state seismic hazard maps for
the 1,000-year return period are not available; therefore a site-specific probabilistic seismic hazard
analysis would be required if the seismic design is to be carried out in accordance with AASHTO. It
should be noted that hazard maps for Ss and S1 provided in Appendix A are not suitable for design
according to AASHTO as these correspond to a different return period (i.e., 2,500 years).
According to AASHTO (147) each bridge shall be assigned to one of the four seismic zones set out
in the code. The seismic zone classification will depend on the value of the design long-period
spectral acceleration SD1, which is obtained from the product of the long-period spectral acceleration

coefficient S1 (for rock site conditions) and the appropriate site factor for long-period motion, Fv. For
the earthquake event the coincident traffic load is taken to be 50% of the design traffic load.
Traditionally, for building design in the Abu Dhabi region, seismic loads for use in building design of
five or more storeys were taken from the Uniform Building Code (UBC)(139) for a seismic category
of Zone 2A. It is to be noted that the UBC itself places Abu Dhabi in seismic category Zone 0, which
implies that no seismic loading is required to be taken into consideration in design. The UBC Zone
2A PGA is 0.15g at bedrock level. Soils overlying bedrock have the effect of amplifying the PGA and
therefore for design the bedrock level PGA value is normally enhanced based on the type of soil
present.
UBC was superseded in the United States by the International Building Codes (IBC) in 2000. The
IBC is updated every three years and the latest edition is IBC 2012(148). As part of a phased program
of customisation, adoption and implementation of IBC Abu Dhabi Department of Municipal Affairs
(DMA) published the guide “Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use of International Building Codes” in 2011
(149) and publication of its code International Building Codes in the Emirates of Abu Dhabi is due in
2012(150). The guide provides code users a reference for any amendments that have been made
to meet the local specifications of Abu Dhabi Emirate. Accordingly, the seismic ground motion values
shall be determined from the mapped 0.2s and 1.0s spectral accelerations, Ss and S1 respectively
(ref Figure A4 and Figure A5 in Appendix A) Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use of International Building
Codes (149).
For the development of these maps a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment was not performed
due to time constraints, ref Ghosh and Dowty (151). Instead, the hazard maps included in the IBC
for the Emirate of Abu Dhabi were based on the work of Abdalla and Al-Homoud(142). The hazard
maps in the “Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use of International Building Codes” are for 0.2s and 1.0s
spectral acceleration, for rock-site conditions, with 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years (2,475yr
return period). According to these maps, for Abu Dhabi, Ss for rock site conditions (site class B as
per IBC) shall be 0.60g and S1 0.24g, ref Table 25. The mapped values shall be multiplied by an
appropriate site factor for the relevant site class and a factor of 2/3 in order to obtain the design
spectral response acceleration parameters (SDS and SD1). The determination of the seismic design
categories shall be according to the amended tables presented in the “Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use
of International Building Codes” (149).
Table 25: Seismic design parameters for Site Class B for use in seismic design according to
IBC (Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use of International Building Codes (149))
Ss S1
0.60g 0.24g
It should be noted that the ground motion parameters from the two codes, AASHTO(147) and
IBC(148), have different return periods. Maps developed for IBC(148), therefore, are not suitable for
design according to the AASHTO(147) specifications.
It is noted that where the size of the project merits, it is good practice to undertake a site specific
seismic hazard assessment in order to evaluate the appropriate ground motions to be used in the

design of transport infrastructure and buildings. It is to be noted that significant savings in

construction costs might be achieved in cases where the site specific PGA is determined to be lower
than the values given in the state ground motion maps.
In both AASHTO (147) and IBC(148) design earthquake spectral response acceleration shall
account for site class effects. All sites, therefore, need to be classified in the appropriate site class
by their stiffness; this can be determined by the average shear wave velocity, standard penetration
resistance or undrained shear strength in the upper 30m of the soil deposit, as described in the
relevant sections of the two codes. Special attention must be given to sites that are vulnerable to
liquefaction or collapse under earthquake loading, contain peats and/or highly organic clays, contain
very high plasticity clays or are composed of very thick soft clays. In such cases, the site shall be
classified as Class F and a site-specific site response analysis shall be performed for the derivation
of appropriate site factors.
In addition to possible structural failure and failure of foundation soils under excessive bearing
pressures associated with seismic loading, loose saturated granular soils may be subject to
liquefaction and loose dry soils may be subject to settlements associated with the phenomenon of
seismic densification. Both liquefaction and seismic densification can result in significant ground
settlements causing distress to and possibly even failure of highway structures and earthworks.
The potential for liquefaction and soil strength loss shall be evaluated for site peak ground
accelerations, magnitudes and source characteristics consistent with the design earthquake ground
motions. According to IBC, peak ground acceleration for the liquefaction assessment shall be
determined based on a site-specific study taking into account soil amplification effects, or, in the
absence of such a study, peak ground accelerations shall be assumed equal to SDS/2.5. The
assessment of soils liquefaction potential is typically carried out in line with the procedures outlined
in Youd et al (152) or Idriss and Boulanger (153) and involves three main steps:
i) the calculation of the cyclic stress ratio induced in the soil by the earthquake;
ii) the calculation of the cyclic resistance ratio based on in situ data, typically SPT, CPT or
shear wave velocity data;
iii) calculation of the ratio of the values from i) and ii) above that gives the factor of safety
against liquefaction.
As outlined in Youd et al (152), different empirical methods are available for the calculation of the
cyclic resistance ratio based on the type of information available. Correction factors will need to be
applied to the calculated values to take into account of factors such as the earthquake magnitude,
the fines content of the soils and the overburden pressure.
The recommended analysis is a total stress analysis in which the seismic demand (represented by
the earthquake induced stresses) is compared to the seismic capacity (undrained cyclic shear
strength of the soil, which is also called liquefaction resistance). The seismic demand will be denoted
as CSR (cyclic stress ratio), whereas seismic capacity will be denoted as CRR (cyclic resistance
ratio).
The safety factor (SF), computed as a ratio between CRR and CSR, should not be less than 1.25.
Evaluation of settlements in dry sands due to seismic densification can be carried out using guidance
available in Kramer (154). In order to conduct proper assessment of liquefaction potential,

investigations of soil characteristics are required in terms of in situ Standard Penetration Tests (SPT)
or Cone Penetration Tests (CPT). It is to be noted that CPT data is preferred for assessing potential
for liquefaction and seismic densification of loose granular strata during an earthquake event.
If soils are found to be susceptible to liquefaction and the ensuing effects are deemed capable of
affecting the load bearing capacity or the stability of the foundations/roads/pavement, measures,
such as ground improvement and/or pile foundation (structures) shall be taken to ensure stability.
The liquefaction hazard may be neglected when one of the following conditions is fulfilled:
iv) Sands have a clay content greater than 20% with plasticity index (PI) larger than 10.
v) Sands have a silt content greater than 35% and at the same time the SPT normalized blow
count value (N1(60)) is larger than 20.
vi) Sands are clean, with SPT normalized blow count value (N1(60)) larger than 30.
8.2 Interpretative ground model

The derivation of the ground model is an essential component of the geotechnical practitioner’s
evaluation of the ground and groundwater conditions at a site and his assessment of their impact on
the proposed scheme earthworks and structures. The geotechnical practitioner should develop a
detailed ground model of the relative location and thicknesses of the types of strata known or
expected to be present, of their properties and of the groundwater conditions based on his evaluation
of the available geological, hydrogeological and geotechnical data. In preparing the ground model
the geotechnical practitioner should make use of the available factual information such as the
exploratory hole records from ground investigations undertaken as part of a current or previous
schemes and published records such as geological maps. The published geology and hydrogeology
of the area will assist in the classification of the materials encountered and indicate their likely extent
both over the site and at depth. These provide useful records against which a correlation of the strata
encountered in the exploratory holes can be made.
The presentation of a detailed ground model solely in descriptive text can be difficult and hard for a
reader to understand except for the simplest of ground models. The preparation of a series of ground
model sections, both along the road alignment and typically perpendicular to it is, therefore, usually
of great value. When preparing sections the degree of uncertainty when interpolating between
investigation positions and projecting or extrapolating data should be highlighted. It is preferable that
sections are prepared to natural scale, ie same scale in both directions, but for long linear sites in
particular the sub-surface profile should be presented at a scale appropriate to the depth and
frequency of the exploratory holes and the overall length of the section. Exaggerated scales of
1(V):10(H) and 1(V):20(H) are often used. Example sections are included in Appendix J. In very
special circumstances it may be appropriate to prepare a three dimensional ground model.
Contour plans of groundwater levels and boundaries such as rockhead, strata thicknesses and
isometric views can also greatly assist the geotechnical practitioner in his interpretation of the ground
conditions at the site and highlight features such as buried channels and any sharp changes in
thickness or dip of strata that could have a significant impact on the proposed earthworks or
structures. Such plans and illustrations also greatly aid the presentation of the ground model.

8.3 Selection of geotechnical design parameters

Design by calculation is the most commonly used method of geotechnical design. The calculation
may consist of an analytical analysis, use of semi-empirical rules or numerical modelling (such as
finite element or finite difference methods) for which key geotechnical parameters will be required.
The selection of geotechnical design parameters requires the knowledge and experience of the
geotechnical practitioner. When assessing geotechnical parameters from test results the
geotechnical practitioner should take into account the possible difference between the properties
obtained from the tests and those governing the behaviour of the ground mass and/or the
geotechnical earthwork or structure. The differences may be due to factors such as:
• many geotechnical parameters are not true constants but depend on stress level and the
mode of deformation;
• soil and rock structure (eg fissuring, laminations or large particles) can influence test results
differently to mass behaviour;
• time effects;
• percolating water can have a softening effect on soils or rock strength;
• dynamic loading can have a softening effect on soils and rock strength;
• brittleness of the soil and rock tested;
• the method of installation of the geotechnical structure;
• the influence of workmanship on artificially placed or improved ground;
• the effect of construction activities on the properties of the ground.
The geotechnical practitioner should also take into account the following:
• published and well recognised information relevant to the use of each type of test in the
ground conditions;
• the extent of field and laboratory investigation;
• the type and number of samples and the scatter of the results;
• the extent of the zone of ground governing the behaviour of the geotechnical structure;
• geological and other published and background information, such as data from previous
projects;
• the value of each geotechnical parameter compared with relevant published data and local
and general experience;
• the variability of the ground and variation of the geotechnical parameters that are relevant to
the design;
• the results of any large scale field trials and measurements from neighbouring constructions;
• any significant deterioration in ground material properties that may occur during the lifetime
of the structure.
Statistical approaches to the derivation of parameters are described in documents including

Designers’ Guide to EN 1997-1 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design – General rules (155). Statistical
approaches do, however, require a sufficiently large number of test results for the method to be valid.
When statistical methods are used, BS EN 1997-1 Eurocode 7 (156) recommends that there should
be no greater than 5% probability that the determined characteristic value (defined below) of a
parameter will be worse than that value. Most often, however, there are insufficient data available
for a purely statistical approach. Parameter selection is therefore often very dependant on the

knowledge and experience of the geotechnical practitioner and is usually broadly based around
published guidelines. Mostly lower value conservative parameters are adopted for use in design, for
example the effective shear strength of a soil in assessing slope stability. For particular designs and
design circumstances however other parameter values may be needed. For example mid-range
(mean or median) values are often adopted for bulk density and deformation properties and upper
value conservative parameters may be used to assess pile drivability.
CIRIA 104 (1984)(157) uses the following terminology in respect of geotechnical design parameters:
- moderately conservative parameters, which are a conservative best estimate and
- worst credible parameters, which are the worst that the geotechnical practitioner realistically
believes might occur.
BS EN 1997-1:2004 (156) uses the terminology:
- characteristic value soil parameters, which are defined as being a cautious estimate of the
value affecting the occurrence of the limit state. This is essentially the same as the
aforementioned moderately conservative parameters.
Examples of moderately conservative and worst credible values and parameters are shown on
Figure 3.

Figure 3: Example of moderately conservative and worst credible values and parameters
8.4 Geotechnical design

Geotechnical design should be undertaken where possible to published International Standards and
with reference where appropriate to local Abu Dhabi and UAE design guidelines. Where a design
procedure is not covered by or fully prescribed by a Standard then based on his specialist knowledge
and experience the geotechnical practitioner may adopt other industry recognised and proven
published design procedures and guidelines.
Table 26 presents a list of typical roads structures and earthworks and their related geotechnical
design issues together with the International Standards and other references commonly used for
geotechnical design in Abu Dhabi road projects. Those Standards and references typically follow the
traditional approach to geotechnical design based on working stress with overall factors of safety.
A limit state design approach with use of partial factors of safety has been adopted for most standard
geotechnical design work in Europe. Whilst this approach is not currently widely used in Abu Dhabi
or the UAE region, the relevant limit state design Standards are listed in Table L1in Appendix L for
reference and possible future use.
Table 27 lists Abu Dhabi local guidelines which the geotechnical practitioner will need to consider in
geotechnical investigations and geotechnical design.

Table 26: International Standards and references commonly used for geotechnical design
in Abu Dhabi road projects
Structure/earthwork Geotechnical design issue Commonly used standards (working stress Comments
design with overall factors of safety) and
references
Structures (All) Chemical attack on buried BRE Special Digest 1 (2005)(65) (1) This has been superseded
concrete and steel by BS EN 1997-1:2004
(156) in the UK
Bridge (including Spread footings Sizing/bearing capacity BS 8004:1986(1) (158)
(2) For Spread footings
abutments and piers),
Settlement (components, total, Methods described in Tomlinson(2) minimum safety factor of 3.0
gantry signs
differential and rate) (2001)(102), Bowles (1996)(159) and shall be adopted to calculate
net allowable bearing
Stability (including failure of Hong Kong Geoguide 1 (1994)(160).
capacity and total tolerable
foundations on slopes) settlement shall not exceed
25mm.
Pile foundations Carrying capacity(5) (axial and BS 8004:1986(1)(158) (3) Pile allowable compression
lateral), downdrag/ negative skin capacities based on ASD
friction Methods described in Tomlinson(3) (2008)
method shall be calculated
(161).
Settlement/ deflection of laterally by using minimum factor of
loaded piles AASHTO LRFD (2017) or Latest safety (2.5 for skin friction
Edition/Interim(4) and 3.0 for end bearing).
Tension capacities shall not
Retaining walls Gravity wall Wall stability BS 8002: 1994(1)(162) exceed 70% of allowable
compression load.
Bearing capacity BS 8004:1986(1)(158) (4) Pile strength design shall
Sliding resistance BS 8008: 1995(1) (163) comply with LRFD bridge
design specifications and
Settlement ( total, differential and Methods described in Tomlinson (2001)(102) guidelines set forth in
rate) ADQCC roads structures
design manual TR-516.
Stability (including slope failures) (5) In order to calculate the
compression capacity for
Cantilever/ Wall stability BS 8002: 1994(1)(162)
piles socket in rock, end
anchored
Anchorage design BS 8081:1989 for anchorage design(164) bearing shall be ignored.
embedded wall
CIRIA C580(165)
Methods described in Tomlinson (1994)(161).

Structure/earthwork Geotechnical design issue Commonly used standards (working stress Comments
design with overall factors of safety) and
references
Soil cuttings - Stability BS 6031:2009(166)
Rock cutting - Stability BS 6031:2009(167)

Hoek & Bray (1994)(70), Transport Research
Laboratory (2011)(68) .
Embankments - Stability (including internal and BS 6031:2009(167)

surface erosion)
BS 8008: 1995(1) (163)
Settlement (components, total,
differential and rate)
Road pavement - Strength, trafficability, requirement Highways Agency IAN 73/06 Revision1 (2009)
of capping, settlement/collapses (168)
due to low CBR/loose layer
underneath or weak subgrade,
and/or presence of
unsuitable/soluble material below
subgrade.
Excavatability - Excavatability Pettifer & Fookes (1994)(169)

Table 27: Abu Dhabi design guidelines for use in geotechnical design in Abu Dhabi road
projects
Geotechnical issue Reference
Geophysical studies Abu Dhabi Department of Municipal Affairs. Geophysical Study

in Al Ain (113)
Seismic loading Abu Dhabi Department of Municipal Affairs. Abu Dhabi Guide to
the Use of International Building Codes(149)
Abu Dhabi Department of Municipal Affairs. International

Building Codes in the Emirates of Abu Dhabi. Expected publication
2012.(150)
8.5 Ground improvement & treatment of voids/cavities

The geotechnical risks and hazards shall be identified in details by performing
geophysical/geotechnical investigation at design and verification stage. In case investigation findings
indicates “unfavourable” conditions susceptible to liquefaction and/or settlement of
roads/pavement/infrastructures/structures/utilities etc. Ground improvement (such as soil
replacement, reinforcement with geosynthetics, vibro-compaction or vibro-flotation, vibro
replacement (stone columns), dynamic compaction/replacement, CMC columns (controlled modulus
columns/rigid inclusions), Rapid Impact Compaction (RIC), High Energy Impact Compaction (HEIC),
soil mixing or other applicable techniques) shall be performed prior to construction over it.
The conventional ground improvement techniques listed above are for general guidelines and should
be finalize at site by Ground Improvement Specialist in function of the soil type (gradation and
density) and the site trials results, in order to efficiently satisfy the performance criteria.
An indicative plan showing the location of the proposed improvement techniques shall be prepared
based on the findings of the existing and complementary subsurface investigation data at the project
design stage.
The following performance requirements shall be followed as guideline (post improvement);
8.5.1 Minimum criteria for Roads/Pavement:

iv) Total settlement (immediate and long-term) shall not exceed 25mm at 100% design load and
shall not be considered less than 40 kN/m2 (considering vehicle load of HL-93).
v) The safety factor against liquefaction shall not be less than 1.25.
vi) The in-situ CBR of improved ground shall not be less than CBR value adopted in design and
in general shall not be less than 10% at 5mm penetration for any condition.

8.5.2 Minimum criteria for Structures/Infrastructures/Utilities

Foundation
x) Total settlement (immediate and long-term) shall not exceed 25mm (footings) and 50mm
(Raft) at 100% of design load.
xi) The safety factor against liquefaction shall not be less than 1.25.
xii) The post-improvement vertical and lateral settlements induced by earthquake loading shall
be limited to a maximum of 20 mm at the top of the ground.
xiii) Angular distortion (differential settlement) of points 5m apart shall be less than 1:500.
xiv) A minimum equivalent Young’s Elastic Modulus for the treated ground of 30MPa.
xv) SPT: Minimum N value of 30 along the improved depth of granular material.
xvi) CPT: Minimum cone tip resistance value of 10 MPa along the improved depth of granular
material.
xvii) Minimum relative density of 70%.
xviii) An effective angle of shear resistance not less than 35° for the medium dense to
dense sand (granular material).
The parameters of each locality must be checked for the material type, mineralogy, size, and for the
deposit thickness before the final decision to be made on the improvement method, level of energy
used, and spacing of improvement points. Moreover, the thickness of the soil cover, which is
important in determining the improvement method, can be checked through the pre-CPT/SPT testing
with close spacing. It shall be noted that vibrations induced by heavy machinery shall be limited,
while working next to existing structures or utilities that are sensitive to vibrations.
The efficiency of the final adopted improvement method for the project, final thickness/depth of the
improvement ground and verification of set performance criteria shall be checked by performing post
ground improvement in- situ tests (SPT, CPT, Plate load test (PLT), Zone Load test, CBR etc.).
The suitability of the soil material shall be determined by performing standard laboratory tests (such
as gradation, plasticity index (P.I), proctor, CBR, organic content, water soluble salts (WSS), total
dissolved salts (TDS), sulphate, chloride, pH and/or other.) by testing collected soil samples as per
the standard requirements provided under TR-542 (part 1 & 2).
8.5.3 Voids/Cavities Treatment
The risk of voids/cavities and highly fractured zones within right of way (ROW) and underneath the
foundation (structures/infrastructure/utilities) shall be investigated (geophysical/geotechnical) at
design stage to determine vertical/lateral extent and shall be verified at verification stage by
executing probing holes (grid spacing 10m x 10m) with the depth of each probe reaching a minimum
penetration of 10.0m below the last cavity encountered, and cavities filled with low mobility grout.

All encountered open cavities/voids/highly fractured zones shall be grouted prior to construction over
it. Grouting design and specifications shall be developed by considering the nature of material/
vertical and lateral extent and shall be design/performed by a company specialized in such works.
In addition, the subgrade layer (road/pavement) shall be reinforced with geogrid layers in order to
cater for any potential of cavities collapse, leading to excessive settlement in future. The type and
strength of geogrid shall be finalized in consultation with geogrid designer/supplier based on
effectiveness for the problem in hand and performance warranties.
8.6 Criteria to design retaining walls/foundation subjected

to overturning loads
External stability of retaining walls design and foundation subjected to overturning loads (such as
shade foundations) shall fulfil the serviceability criteria by following the minimum factor of safety i.e.
FoS = 2.0 (overturning), FoS = 1.5 (sliding) and FoS = 3.0 (Bearing Capacity). The global stability
shall not be less than 1.5.
For strength limit state the stability checks shall be in compliance with the guideline of AASHTO
LRFD and set forth in ADQCC roads structures design manual TR-516. In general, the larger
dimension from design of SLS & ULS shall be consider.
8.7 Slope Stability analysis
Slope Stability analysis shall be carried out to evaluate the stability of earth and rock-fill,
embankments, excavated slopes, and natural slopes in soil and rock. The stability of slope depends
upon certain factors and shall be considered in the analysis (analytical or empirical methods).
iv) Uncertainty in the accuracy with which the slope stability analysis represents the actual
mechanism of failure.
v) Uncertainty in the accuracy with which the input parameters (shear strength, groundwater
conditions, slope geometry, etc.).
vi) The likelihood and duration of exposure to various types of external loading.
Stability analyses must be formulated with great care. Since the available shearing resistance of
the soil depends on pore water drainage conditions, those conditions must be considered
carefully in the selection of shear strength and pore pressure conditions for the analysis. A minimum
surcharge load of 20 kPa shall be consider.

Accordingly, in static condition, the slope design shall satisfy minimum safety factor criteria of 1.5
(permanent) and 1.3 (temporary) and 1.1 for seismic case. Erosion protection measures shall be
provided as appropriate to design requirements in compliance with ADQCC standards and
specifications.
For stability analysis in rock slopes, following modes of failure shall be considered as applicable.
v) Planar failure
vi) Polygonal failure
vii) Wedge failure
viii) Toppling failure
Stereographic and kinematic analysis shall be performed as appropriate and applicable to project
specific requirements.

9 GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF ROAD

PAVEMENTS
9.1 Overview
The four main reasons for carrying out carriageway investigations and assessments are:
i) network management, the monitoring and assessment of the road pavement including the
investigation of failures
ii) design of new works
iii) design of maintenance works and improvements
iv) premature failure.
The investigative works typically undertaken are discussed in this chapter.
9.2 Pavement investigation and assessment

9.2.1 Introduction
It is important for road pavement investigations that all condition surveys and investigation points
(such as in situ testing and pavement cores) are referenced to a permanent chainage (or features)
or to a scheme specific chainage. There are several stages and techniques to carrying out road
pavement investigations, as follows:
i) visual condition survey
ii) Boreholes, trial pits, cone penetration tests (CPT)
iii) cores
iv) dynamic cone penetrometer
v) ground penetrating radar
vi) laboratory testing
vii) testing pavement “strength”.
These stages are described in detail in the immediately following sub-Sections.
9.2.2 Visual condition survey

An engineer’s survey should be carried out as the first step in a pavement investigation. The survey
should note basic features including:
• topography
• carriageway details including number of lanes, width etc
09-GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS Page 96 Second Edition June-2021

OF ROAD PAVEMENTS
• drainage arrangements
• surface type
• construction materials, as far as a visual survey will permit
• defects (the typical features to be observed are presented in Abu Dhabi Department of
Transport’s Pavement Design Manual. (170).
The survey data should be interpreted to provide an assessment of the general condition of the road
pavement and any requirements for additional surveys.
9.2.3 Trial pits through the pavement layer

Trial pits offer the opportunity for gathering most information but are also the most expensive and
disruptive survey technique. They also need careful backfilling to negate problems with local
subsidence and damage to the reinstated road pavement with the consequential disruption and risk
to road users. The trial pit sides through the pavement should be saw-cut to establish thickness and
general make up of the different layers making up the pavement. Saw cut edges in trial pits also
allow identification of the layers that are or are not rutted and to what depth with more accuracy than
can be achieved by taking rows of cores. Trial pits also allow the taking of bulk samples and in situ
testing of the foundation layers and subgrades. As trial pits permit more detailed examination of the
road pavement and subgrade than other investigative techniques they are particularly useful for
investigating pavement failures. The following information should be recorded:
• location
• general condition of the pavement at the trial pit position, preferably with a photograph
• depth of pit
• thickness of each layer and any changes in thickness or alignment across the area of the pit.
• the shape of the layers; note any rutting or deformation and in which layers it occurs
• description of each layer, material type and condition
• voiding, where evident
• bond or lack of bond between the layers making up the pavement
• depth of cracking
• any stripping of the binder from the aggregate.
• any particular difficulties with excavation, or where materials break easily under excavation.
• subbase thickness and type; take in situ tests such as Dynamic Cone Penetrometer/ CBR if
possible; take bulk samples for laboratory testing
• subgrade (natural ground) and type; take in situ tests such as Dynamic Cone Penetrometer/
CBR if possible; take bulk samples for laboratory testing.
9.2.4 Asphalt cores

Cores are the most effective means of gathering information on a road pavement. Where little is
known of a pavement they can be regularly spaced, but consideration should be given to the
information required. A row of closely-spaced cores may be able to detect rutting at different depths.
Cores should be taken in good, average, and poor areas, for comparison. Where cores are taken

OF ROAD PAVEMENTS
over cracked areas an adjacent core should always be taken in sound material. Further information
is given in Highways Agency DMRB HD29 (2008)(171). The following information should be
recorded in respect of cores taken:
• location
• general condition of the pavement at the core position, preferably with a photograph
• depth of hole
• length of core
• loss of core
• thickness of each layer
• description of each layer, material type and condition
• voiding, where evident
• bond or lack of bond between the layers making up the pavement
• depth of cracking
• any stripping of the binder from the aggregate.
9.2.5 Dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP)

The DCP consists of a standard cone driven by a standard drop-weight. The equipment is low cost,
easily transportable, and easy to use. There are published correlations of blows against penetration
to give values of CBR. In pavement investigations the DCP is usually driven from the base of the
bound material. The thickness of the underlying layers can to some extent be estimated by changes
in blow count (and hence stiffness). Individual readings should not be used to define a CBR value at
a specific depth. Results should be plotted graphically as below with cumulative blows against depth.
Sections with similar gradients can be plotted. It can be seen from the example included as Figure
4 that the bound material was about 270mm thick, followed by a layer approximately 150mm thick
with a CBR of 1385 (most probably a granular subbase), there is a base layer with CBR of 30%
(possibly a relatively stiff subgrade). There is an intermediate 300mm layer of CBR 7% (probably an
upper layer of softer subgrade). Further information on DCP can be found in Highways Agency
DMRB HD29 (2008)(171).

OF ROAD PAVEMENTS
Figure 4: Example dynamic cone penetration test
9.2.6 Ground penetrating radar (GPR)

Ground penetrating radar (GPR) is a useful technique to gather data on pavement thickness and
construction and can provide continuous information on pavement structures. It can identify
anomalies and discontinuities that coring would miss. It can also be used to build a database of
existing pavement construction; this is useful when at initial assessment stage as changes or
deficiencies in construction can be identified and compared with the incidence of defects. GPR itself
will provide little information regarding the condition of a pavement but complemented with other
forms of investigations, such as cores/trial pits, it will enable a wider assessment of pavement
condition to be made.
GPR is a non-destructive technique that operates by transmitting a pulse of electromagnetic radiation

into a pavement. The radiation penetrates into the pavement as an energy wave, with an envelope
in the shape of a cone. As the wave travels through the pavement its velocity is changed and its
strength is attenuated. Part of the signal will be reflected back by buried discontinuities or interfaces
between layers. The return signal can be interpreted to give information on the likes of layer thickness
and location of services. The accuracy of GPR is dependent on the wavelength used and the speed
of survey and should be undertaken by trained specialists. At lower speeds surveys will usually
provide much more detail on the likes of reinforcement position, joints, pipes and services, but will
be more disruptive to traffic.
Traffic speed surveys can be used to identify layer thickness and to check the consistency of layers;
cores are required to calibrate the survey data. There is usually no signal once materials, particularly
subgrades, become saturated.

OF ROAD PAVEMENTS
9.2.7 Laboratory testing

Laboratory testing should only be carried out where there is an identified need.
Tests can be carried out to determine:
• “strength”, the stiffness modulus

• resistance to deformation (rutting)
• binder penetration.
Binder penetration is usually only relevant in the investigation of failures. It can be used to identify
what penetration was used at time of construction (ie was the binder too soft, in which case rutting
and pushing may have occurred, or too hard, in which case premature fatigue may have occurred).
It should be carried out relatively soon after construction because all binders age to a residual
penetration with time. There is little merit in carrying out binder penetration from samples from routine
investigations.
9.2.8 Testing pavement “strength”

Individual techniques such as surface condition, coring, and DCP can give an indication of the overall
condition of the pavement but there are techniques that enable the overall strength of a pavement
to be measured objectively and directly in situ.
Objective assessment of pavement layers is often carried out by measuring deflections in some way.
There are a number of deflectometers available for use. Some are mounted on lorries to simulate
normal loading and to provide continuous measurements. The Falling Weight Deflectometer is widely
used and consists of a dropped weight at discrete points to simulate loads; geophones measure
deflections at different distances from the load, enabling a bowl shape to be established. It is trailer-
mounted and easily towed by a normal 4x4 type vehicle. This method also provides data on the
"strength" of different pavement layers and foundation in the form of modulus values. The data allows
the pavement to be analysed and maintenance solutions involving either inlays or overlays, or both
to be developed and adopted. The technique can also be used to determine the residual life of a
pavement.
Coring or trial pits will also be required for correlation and identification of existing layers, their
thickness and condition. For simpler schemes an assessment of this data with simple in situ testing
may be sufficient.
9.3 Subgrade investigation and assessment

For new works the subgrade/foundation requires assessment and shall be carried out as per the
criteria provided in table-2 & 3 of this manual. The subgrade assessment may form part of predictive
design for new works or for maintenance or improvement design. For all cases the methods of
assessment will be similar. It is to be noted, however, that tests carried out below in-service road
pavements may give a better assessment of pavement long term performance. The subgrade
“strength” is usually assessed by measurement of its CBR.
Measurements are normally made by direct in situ tests. Soils are, however, moisture sensitive and
a direct measurement at any location may therefore vary with time. In situ tests, should therefore
normally be supplemented with laboratory tests including remoulded/soaked tests as appropriate.

OF ROAD PAVEMENTS
Information on the frequency of testing is given in sub-Section 4.4.2.2. It is to be noted that CBR
may also be assessed based on soils laboratory classification tests and published local correlations.
Validation in situ CBR tests should be undertaken during construction to ensure the in situ value is
no worse than has been designed for. The equipment typically used for in situ testing is conventional
CBR, drop hammer (light Falling Weight Deflectometer), or Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP).
Particularly for work on existing live highways, the use on non-destructive geophysical survey
techniques might be employed as part of the overall investigation strategy to minimise traffic
disruption. Information on geophysical survey techniques is given in Section 6.5.
In case soil investigation indicates that subgrade is suspected to liquefaction and/or

excessive/differential settlement more than tolerable limits, due to unsuitable material/weak ground
condition and/or presence of water soluble content/pure salt layer underneath and/or other risks and
geo-hazards, that may affect the stability of roads/pavement and/or foundation of
structures/infrastructure/utilities, than ground improvement measures shall be taken into account, to
mitigate the effect of both liquefaction and settlement, prior to construction over it. Subgrade shall
be reinforced with geogrid layers and the requirements shall be determined at design stage. The
type and strength of geogrid shall be finalized in consultation with geogrid designer/supplier based
on the effectiveness for the problem in hand and performance warranties. For ground improvement,
requirements and criteria provided in section 8.5 of TR-509-2 shall be followed.
The suitability of the material shall be evaluated based on the criteria provided in ADQCC TR-542
(1 & 2). The sum of the organic matters’ content and the soluble salt content as a total shall not
exceed 2% in both natural soil and imported backfill.
Similarly, mitigation due to shallow groundwater table (such as capillary break, subsurface drainage
etc.) shall also be adopted at design stage. For the provision of capillary break layer (wrapped in
geotextile), the criteria of design groundwater table of minimum1.5m below formation level (TR-514-
2, Standard DWG C-5) shall be followed.

OF ROAD PAVEMENTS
CITED REFERENCES
1. Huntington Geology & Geophysics Ltd. Geological Map of United Arab Emirates . Prepared for
Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. 1979.
2. Alsharhan, A.S. Geology of Abu Dhabi Emirate. Environment Agency Abu Dhabi, Terrestrial
Environment of Abu Dhabi Emirate. 2008.
3. Glennie, K.W. Chapter 4: Geology. . Environment Agency Abu Dhabi, Physical Geography. 2007.
4. —. Evolution of The Emirates' Land Surface: An Introduction. United Arab Emirates: A New
Perspective. 2nd. London : Trident Press, 2001, pp. 9-27.
5. Holocene gypsum and anhydrite of the Abu Dhabi Sabkha, Trucial Coast: An alternative
explanation of origin. BUTLER, G.P. 1970. Third Symposium on Salt. pp. 120-152.
6. Middle East - Inherent Ground Problems. Fookes, P. G. 1, 1978, Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology, Vol. 2.
7. British Standrads Institution. Code of practice for site investigations . 2010.
BS5930:1999+A2:2010.
8. Manual on Subsurface Investigations. American Association of State and Highway
Transportation Officials. 1988. AASHTO MSI-1:1988.
9. Proceedings of the seminar on The Value of Geotechnics in Construction. Institution of Civil
Engineers. s.l. : Construction Research Communications Limited, 1998.
10. Site Investigation Steering Group. Site investigation in construction series: 2. Planning,
procurement and quality management. London : Thomas Telford, 1993.
11. British Standards Institution. Geotechnical investigation and testing – Sampling methods and
groundwater measurements. Part 1: Technical principles for execution. 2006. BS EN ISO 22475-
1:2006.
12. —. Eurocode 7 - Geotechnical design - Part 2: Ground investigation and testing. 2007. BS EN
1997-2:2007.
13. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists . AGS Guide: The selection of
geotechnical soil laboratory testing. London : Construction Research Communications Ltd, 1998.
14. British Standards Institution. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes.
Classification tests. 1990. BS 1377-2:1990.
15. ASTM International. Standard test method for laboratory determination of water (moisture)
content of soil and rock by mass. 2010. ASTM D2216-10.
16. —. Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soils. 2010. ASTM
D4318-10.
17. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Standard method of
test for determining the liquid limit of soils. 2010. AASHTO T089-10.
18. —. Standard method of test for determiningthe plastic limit and plasticity index of soils. 2008.
AASHTO T090-00.
CITED REFERENCES Page 102 Second Edition June-2021

19. ASTM International. Standard test methods for laboratory determination of density (unit weight)
of soil specimens . s.l. : ASTM International, 2009. D7263-09.
20. —. Standard test methods for specific gravity of soils solids by water Pycnometer. 2010. ASTM
D854-10.
test for specific gravity of soils . 2006. AASHTO T100-06.
22. ASTM International. Standard test method for particle size analysis of soils. 2007. ASTM D422-
63(2007).
test for particle size analysis of soils. 2010. AASHTO T088-10.
Compaction-related tests. 1990. BS 1377-4:1990.
25. ASTM International. Standard test method for direct shear test of soils under consolidated
drained conditions. 2004. ASTM D3080-04.
26. American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard test methods for laboratory compaction
characteristics of soil using standard effort (12 400ft ilf/ft3 (600 kN m/m3)). 2007. ASTM D698-07.
27. —. Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using modified effort
(56,000ft lbft/ft3 (2,7000 kN/m3)). 2009. ASTM D1557 -09.
test for moisture-density relations of soils using a 2.5kg (5.5lb) rammer and a 305-mm (12-in) drop.
2010. AASHTO T099-10.
29. —. Standard method of test for moisture-density relations of soils using a 4.45-kg (10-lb) rammer
and a 457-mm (18-in) drop. 2010. AASHTO T180-10.
30. ASTM International. Standard test method for CBR (California Bearing Ratio) of laboratory
compacted soils. 2007. ASTM D1883-07.
31. —. Standard test method for maximum index density and unit weight of soils using a vibratory
table . 2006. ASTM D435-00(2006).
32. —. Standard test methods for minimum index density and unit weight of soils and calculation of
relative density. 2006. ASTM D4254-00(2006)e1.
33. British Standards Institution. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. Chemical
and electro-chemical tests. 1990. BS1377-3:1990.
34. ASTM International. Standard test method for water soluble sulfate in soil. 2009. ASTM C1580-
09e1.
35. —. Standard test method for water soluble chloride in aggregate (Soxhlet method). 2010. ASTM
C1524-02a(2010).
test for determining water-soluble chloride ion content in soil. 2008. AASHTO T291.
37. ASTM International. Standard test method for measuring pH of soil for use in corrosion testing.
2005. ASTM G51-95(2005).

38. —. Standard test method for rapid determination of carbonate content of soils. 2007. ASTM
D4373-02(2007).
39. —. Standard test methods for chemical analysis of hydraulic cement. 2011. ASTM C114-11b.
40. British Standards Institution . Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes.
Compressibility, permeability and durability tests. 1990. BS 1377-5:1990.
41. ASTM International. Standard test method for identification and classification of dispersive clay
soils by the pinhole test. 2006. ASTM D4647-06e1.
42. —. Standard test method for dispersive characteristics of clay soil by double hydrometer. 2011.
ASTM D4221-11.
43. —. Standard test method for moisture, ash and organic matter of peat and other organic soils .
s.l. : ASTM International, 2007. D2974-07a.
44. —. Standard test method for measurement of collapse potential of soils . 2003. ASTM D5333-
03.
45. —. Standard test method for measurement of soil resistivity using the two electrode soil box
method. 2005. ASTM G187-05.
46. British Standards Institution. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. Shear
strength tests (total stress). 1990. BS 1377-7:1990.
47. ASTM International. Standard test method for laboratory miniture vane shear test for saturated
fine grained clayey soil. 2010. ASTM D4648M-10.
48. —. Standard test method for unconsolidated undrained triaxial compression test on cohesive
soils. 2007. ASTM D2850-03a(2007).
test for unconsolidated, undrained compressive strength of cohesive soils in triaxial compression
triaxial compressive strength . 2010. AASHTO T296-10.
50. ASTM International. Standard test method for consolidated undrained direct simple shear
testing of cohesive soils. 2007. ASTM D6528-07.
51. British Standards Institution. Methods of tests for soils for civil engineering purposes. Shear
strength tests (effective stress). 1990. BS 1377-8:1990.
52. ASTM International. Standard test method for consolidated undrained triaxial compression test
for cohesive soils. 2011. ASTM D4767-11.
53. —. Method for consolidated drained triaxial compression test for soils. 2011. ASTM D7181-11.
54. —. New test method for repeated direct shear test of soils under consolidated drained conditions.
In prep. WK3822.
55. —. Standard test method for one dimensional consolidation properties of soil using incremental
loading. 2011. ASTM D2435M-11.
56. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Standrad method of
test for one-dimensional consolidation properties of soils. 2007. AASHTO T216-07.
57. ASTM International. Standard test methods for one dimensional swell or collapse of cohesive
soils. 2008. ASTM D4546-08.

Consolidation and permeability tests in hydraulic cells and with pore pressure measurement. 1990.
BS 1377-6:1990.
59. ASTM International. One-dimensional consolidation properties of saturated cohesive soils using
controlled-strain loading. 2012. ASTM International.
60. —. Standard test method for permeability of granular soils (constant head). 2006. ASTM D2434-
68(2006).
test for permeability of granular soils (constant head). 2003. AASHTO T215-70.
62. Head, K. H. Manual of soils laboratory testing. London : Pentech Press, 1982, Vol. 2, 10.7, p.
449.
63. ASTM International. Standard test methods for measurement of hydraulic conductivity of
saturated porous materials using a flexible wall permeameter. 1010. ASTM D5084-10.
64. —. Standard test method for sulfate ion in water. s.l. : ASTM D516-11, 2011.
65. Building Research Establishment. Sulphate and acid attack on concrete in the ground:
recommended procedures for soil analysis. s.l. : Construction Research Communications Limited,
1995.
66. ASTM International. Standard test methods for chloride ion in water. 2010. ASTM D512-10.
67. International Society for Rock Mechanics. Rock Characterization Testing and Monitoring
ISRM Suggested Methods. [ed.] E T Brown. Oxford : Pergamon Press, 1981.
68. Transport Research Laboratory. Rock engineering guides to good practice: road rock slope
excavation. 2011. TRL Published Project Report PPR556.
69. Transport Reseach Laboratory. Rock slope risk assessment. 2011. TRL Published Project
Report PPR554.
70. Hoek, E. and Bray, E.W. Rock Slope Engineering. Revised third edition. s.l. : E & FN Spon for
Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, 1994.
71. Rock mass classification in rock engineeringn. Bieniawski, Z.T. Rotterdam : Balkema, 1976.
Proceedings of the Symposium on Exploration for Rock Engineering. Vol. 1, pp. 97-107.
72. Beiniawski, Z.T. Engineering rock mass classification: a complete manual for engineers and
geologists in mining, civil and petroleum engineering. New York : Wiley, 1989.
73. Some new Q-value correlations to assist in site characterisation and tunnel design. Barton, N.
2002, International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, Vol. 39, pp. 185-216.
74. Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C. and Corkum, B. Heok-Brown Failure Criterion - 2002 Edition .
2002.
75. ASTM International. Standard test method for determination of the point load strength index of
rock and application to rock strength classifications. 2008. ASTM D5731-08.
76. The point-load test. Broch, E. and Franlin, J. A.,. s.l. : Pergamon Press, 1972, International
Journal of Rock Mechanics, Vol. 9. pp669-697.
77. ASTM International. Standard test method for compressive strength and elastic moduli of intact
rock core specimens under varying states of stress and temperature. 2010. ASTM D7012-10.

78. —. Standard test method for determination of pore volume and pore volume distribution of soil
and rock by mercury intrusion porosimetry . 10. ASTM D4404-10.
79. —. Standard test method for splitting tensile strength of intact rock core specimens. 2008. ASTM
D3967-08.
80. Procurement and Contracts Manual. Abu Dhabi Department of Transport. 2011.
DOT/SS/P&C/M001.
81. British Standards Institution. Quality Management Systems - requirements (incorporating
corrigendum July 2009). BS EN ISO 9001:2008.
82. —. Environmental management systrems - Requirements with guidance for use (including
corrigendum July 2009). 2004. BS EN ISO 14001.
83. —. Occupational health and safety management systems - requirements. 2007. OHSAS 18001.
84. Construction Industry Research and Information Association. The Standard Penetration
Test (SPT): Methods and Use. London : CIRIA, 1995. Authored by Professor C.R.I. Clayton .
85. British Drilling Association. British Drilling Association. [Online] 2011.
www.britishdrillingassociation.co.uk.
86. United Kingdom Accreditation Service . UKAS. [Online] 2011. www.ukas.com.
87. British Standards Institution. General requirements for the competence of testing and
calibration laboratories (ADM Corrigendum 16767) . 2005. BS EN ISO/IEC 17025:2005.
88. American Association for Laboratory Accreditation. American Association for Laboratory
Accreditation. [Online] 2011. www.a2la.org.
89. Site Investigation Steering Group. Site investigation in construction series: 3. Specification for
ground investigation. London : Thomas Telford, 1993.
90. —. Site Investigation in Construction UK Specification for Ground Investigation. Second Edition.
London : ICE Publishing, 2012.
91. Abu Dhabi Department of Transport. Standard Specification for Road Works Manual. 2012.
92. —. Standard bill of quantities manual. 2012. DOT/T/HW/172/2009.
93. Site Investigation Steering Group. Site investigation in construction series: 4. Guidelines for
the safe investigation by drilling of landfills and contaminated land. m. London : Thomas Telford,
1993.
94. British Standards Institution. Investigation of potentially contaminated sites - Code of practice.
s.l. : British Standards Institution, 2011. BS 10175.
95. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists. Guidelines for Combined
Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations. 2000.
96. United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Description and Sampling of Contaminated
Soils – A Field Pocket Guide”. Document 625/12-91/002 .
97. ASTM International. Standard guide for site characterization for environmental purposes with
emphasis on soil, rock, the vadose zone and groundwater. 2004. ASTM D5730-04.
98. International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Standard Penetration
Test (SPT): International Reference Procedure. 1988. Proc. ISOPT-1.

99. British Standards Institution. Geotechnical investigation and testing - Field testing - Part 3:
Standard penetration test . 2005. BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005.
100. ASTM International. Standard test method for standard penetration test (SPT) and split-barrel
sampling of soils . Philadelphia, USA : s.n., 2008. ASTM D1586-08a.
101. —. Standard practice for determining the normalized penetration resistance of sands for
evaluation of liquefaction potential. Philadelphia, USA : s.n., 2004. ASTM D6066-96(2004) .
102. Tomlinson, M.J. Foundation design and construction. 7th edition. s.l. : Pearson Eduction
Limited, 2001.
103. International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. International
reference test procedure for cone penetration test (CPT). 1989.
104. British Standards Institution. Methods of test for Soils for civil engineering purposes - Part 9:
In-situ tests . 1990. BS 1377-9:1990.
105. ASTM International. Standard method for electronic friction cone and piezocone penetration
testing of soils. 2007. ASTM D5778-07.
106. —. Standard test method for mechanical cone penetration tests of soil. 2005. ASTM D3441-05.
107. Luune, T., Robertson, P. K. and Powell, J. J. M. Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical
Practice. s.l. : Blackie Academic & Professional, 1997.
108. Construction Industry Research and Information Association. Cone penetration testing
methods and interpretation. Authored by A.C. Meigh. London : CIRIA, 1987.
109. International, ASTM. Standard test method for density and unit weight of soil in place by the
sand cone method. 2007. ASTM D1556-07.
110. ASTM International. Standard test methods for density and unit weight of soil and rock in place
by the sand replacement method in a test pit. 2008. ASTM D4914-08.
111. —. Standard test method for density of soil and rock in place by the water replacement methos
in a test pit. 2004. ASTM D5030-04.
112. —. Standard test method for in place density and water content of soil and soil aggregate by
nuclear methods (shallow depth). 2010. ASTM D6938-10.
113. Abu Dhabi Al Ain Municipality. Geophysical Study in Al Ain Guideline Manual. 2010.
114. ASTM International. Standard guide for selecting surface geophysical methods. 2011. ASTM
D6429-99(2011)e1.
115. Construction Industry Research and Information Association. Geophysics in engineering
investigations. London : s.n., 2002. Author McDowell, P.W. et al. CIRIA C562 and Geological Society
Special Publication 19.
116. Wightman, W., Jalinoos, F., Sirles, P. and Hanna, K. Application of geophysical methods to
highway related problems. Lakewood, CO, USA : s.n., 2003. Contract No. DTFH68-02-P-00083,
prepared for Federal Highways Administration [available at http://www.cflhd.gov.
117. McCann, D.M., Culshaw, M.D., and Fenning P.J. Setting the Standard for Geophysical
Surveys in Site Investigation. Modern Geophysics in Engineering Geology. 1997, pp. 3-34.

118. United States Deptartment of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Engineering Geology Field
Manual. 2nd. 2001 . Vol. II, Chapters 13 and 14. [available at
http://www.usbr.gov/pmts/geology/geoman.html ].
119. United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Earth Manual, Part 1. 3rd.
1998. [available at http://www.usbr.gov/pmts/writing/earth/index.html].
120. ASTM International. Standard guide for planning and cionducting borehole geophysical
logging. 2010. ASTM D5753-05(2010).
121. Transportation Research Board. Geophysical methods commonly employed for geotechnical
site characterization. 2008. Circular E-C130 (2008) .
122. International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering . Geotechnical and
geophysical investigations for offshore and nearshore developments. [ed.] E. Danson. s.l. :
Technical Committee 1, 2005. available at http://www.issmge.org/web/page.aspx?refid=339.
123. Anderson, N., Croxton,N., Hoover, R. and Sirles, P. Geophysical methods commonly
employed for geotechnical site characterization . 2008. p. 35. available at
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/circulars/ec130.pdf. Transportation Research Circular E-C130 .
124. Abu Dhabi Department of Transport. Quality assurance and quality control requirements for
road projects. 2012. DOT-MR-M-05.
125. Keynetix Ltd. Keynetix Ltd. [Online] http://www.keynetix.com.
126. Bentley Systems. gINT Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental software . [Online] [Cited: ]
http://www.gintsoftware.com.
127. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specilaists. Electronic Transfer of
Geotechnical and GeoEnvironmental Data . 3.1 Edition. s.l. : Construction Research
Communications Ltd, 2005.
128. —. Electronic Transfer of Geotechnical and GeoEnvironmental Data. 4.0 Edition. 2011. (in
preparation).
129. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists. [Online]
http://www.ags.org.uk.
130. Master 'blind' thrust faults hidden under the Zargos folds: active basement tectonics and surface
morphotechnics. M, Berberian. 1995, Tectnophysics, Vols. 241 (3-4), pp. 193-224.
131. Accommodation of Arabia-Eurasia convergence in the Zagros-Makran transfer zone, SE Iran:
A transition between collision and subduction throug. Regard, V., Bellier, O., Thomas, J. C.,
Abbasi, M., Mercier, J., Shabanian, E., Feghhi, K., Soleymani, S. 2004, Tectonics, Vol. 23.
doi:10.1029/2003TC001599.
132. Cumulative right-lateral fault slip rate across the Zagros-Makran transfer zone: role of the
Minab-Zendan fault system in accommodating Arabi-Eurasia convergence in southeast Iran.
Regard, V., Bellier, O., Thomas, J. C., Bourles, D., Bonnet, S., Abbasi, M. R., Braucher, R.,
Mercier, J., Shabanian, E., Soleymani, S., Feghhi, K. 2005, Geophysical Journal International,
Vol. 162, pp. 177-203.
133. US Geological Survey. Technical Report USGS-TR-98-3 (IR 948), US Geological Survey, p.
2. 1998. Tectonic map of Saudi Arabia and adjacent areas. Johnson, P.R..

134. Neotectonics at the Arabian plate margins. Vita-Finzi, C. Journal of Structural Geology, Vol.
23, pp. 521-530.
135. Tertiary-Quaternary faulting and uplift in the northern Oman Hajar Mountains. Kusky, T.,
Robinson, C., El-Baz, F. 2005, Journal of the Geological Society, Vol. 162 (5), pp. 871-888.
136. Styles, M. T., Ellison, R. A., Arkley, S., Crowley, Q. G., Farrant, A. R., Goodenough, K. M.,
McKervey, J. A., Pharoah, T. C., Phillips, E. R., Schofield, D. I., Thomas R. J. The geology and
geophysics of the United Arab Emirates. Keyworth : British Geeological Survey, 2006. p. 27. Vol. 2:
Geologgy.
137. Aldama-Bustos, G. An exploration study of parameter sensitivity, representation of results and
extensions of PSHA: Case study – United Arab Emirates. London : Imperial College, 2009. p. 491,
PhD thesis.
138. Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for rock sites in the cities of Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Ra's
Al Khaymah, United Arab Emirates. Aldama-Bustos G., Bommer J.J., Fenton C.H. and Stafford
P.J. March 2009. Georisk. Vols. 3, No.1, pp. 1-29.
139. Uniform Building Code, Structural Engineering Design Provisions . Whittier, California : s.n.,
1997. International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO). Vol. 2. International Building Code.
140. Compilation of the GSHAP regional seismic hazard map for Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
Grünthal, G., Bosse C, Sellami, S., Mayer-Rosa, D., Giardini, D. 1999, Annali di geofisica, Vol.
vol. 42 (6), pp. 1215-1223.
141. A basis for evaluation of seismic hazard and design criteria for Saudi Arabia. Al-Haddad, M.,
Siddiqi, G. H., Al-Zaid, R., Arafah, A., Necioglu, A., Turkelli, N. 1994, Earthquake Spectra, Vol.
10 (2), pp. 231-258.
142. Seismic hazard assessment of United Arab Emirates and its surroundings. Abdalla, J.A. and
Al-Homoud, A. S. 2004, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 8 (6), pp. 817-837.
143. Hazard assessment of Dubai, United Arab Emirates, for close and distant earthquakes.
Sigbjörnsson, R. and Elnashai, A.S. 2006, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 10 (5), pp.
749-773.
144. Musson, R.M.W., Northmore, K. J., Sargeant, S. L., Phillips, E. R., Boon, D., Long, D.,
McCue, K., Ambraseys, N. N. The geology and geophysics of the United Arab Emirates. Keyworth :
British Geological Survey, 2006. p. 237. Vol. 4: Geological Hazards.
145. Malkawi, A. I. H., Bakarat, S. A., Shanableh, A., Omar, M., Altoubat, S. Seismic hazard
assessment and mitigation of earthquake risk in United Arab Emirates. University of Sharjah, United
Arab Emirates. 2007. p. 88, Technical Report UOS-3.
146. Seismic hazard and seismic design requirements for the Arabian Peninsula region. Pascucci,
V., Free, M. W., Lubkowski, Z. A. Beijing, China. : s.n., 2008. 14th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering. , October, 12-17.
147. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Load and resistance
factor design (LRDF) bridge design specification. 3rd Edition (2006 Interim Revisions). 2012.
AASHTO LRFD.
148. International Code Council. International Building Code. 2012.

149. Abu Dhabi Department of Municipal Affairs. Abu Dhabi Guide to the Use of International
Building Codes. 2011.
150. —. International Building Codes in the Emirates of Abu Dhabi. 2012 (in preparation).
151. Ghosh, S. K. and S. E. Dowty. Seismic ground motion values for locations outside the United
States. Structural Engineer. February 2010.
152. Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquifaction
Resistance of Soils. Youd, T. L., and Idriss, I. M. April 2001, Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering.
153. Idriss, I. M., and Boulanger, R. W. Soil liquefaction during earthquakes. s.l. : Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute , 2008. Monograph MNO12.
154. Kramer, L. S. Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering. s.l. : Prentice-Hall International Series in
Civil and Engineering Mechanics, 1996.
155. Frank, R., Bauduin, C., Driscoll, R., Kavvadas, M., Kerbs Ovesen, N., Orr, T. and
Schuppener, B. Designers’ Guide to EN 1997-1 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design – General rules.
[ed.] Haig Gulvanessian. London : Thomas Telford, 2007. Chapter 2.
156. British Standards Institution. Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 1: General rules. 2004
(incorporating corrigendum February 2009). BS EN 1997-1:2004.
157. Construction Industry Research and Information Association. Design of retaining walls
embedded in stiff clay. 1984. authors Padfield, C.J. and Mair, R.J.. CIRIA Report 104.
158. British Standards Institution. Code of practice for Foundations . 1986. BS 8004:1986.
159. Bowles, J.E. Foundation analysis and design. 5th edition. s.l. : McGraw Hill, 1996.
160. Geotechnical Engineering Office Civil Engineering Department Hong Kong. Geoguide 1.
Guide to retaining wall design. 1994.
161. Tomlinson, M. J. Pile design and construction practice. 5th edition. s.l. : Taylor Francis, 2008.
162. British Standards Institution. Code of practice for Earth retaining structures. 1994. BS
8002:1994.
163. —. Code of practice for Strengthened/reinforced soils and other fills. 1995. BS 8006:1995.
164. British Standards Instituition. Code of practice for Ground anchorages. 1989. BS 8081:1989.
165. Construction Industry Research and Information Association. Embedded retaining walls -
Guidance for economic design. 2003. CIRIA Report C580.
166. British Standards Institution. Code of practice for earthworks. s.l. : BS 6031:2009, 2009.
167. —. Code of practice for Earthworks. 1981. BS 6031:1981.
168. Highways Agency. Design guidance for road pavement foundations. 2009. Interim Advice
Note 73/06 Revision 1.
169. A revision of the graphical method for assessing the excavatability of rock. Pettifer, G.S. and
Fookes, P.G. 1994, Qauterly Journal of Engineering Geology, Vol. 27, pp. 145-164.
170. Abu Dhabi Department of Transport. Pavement Design Manual. 2013. AD-D-10.

171. Highways Agency. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. Volume 7 Pavement Design and
Maintenance. Section 3 Pavement Maintenance Assessment. Part 2 HD 29/08 Data for Pavement
Assessment. 2008. DMRB HD 29/08.
172. The influence of ground and groundwater chemistry on construction in the Middle East. Fookes
P. G., French W. J. & Rice S.M.M. 2, London : s.n., 1985, Quaterly Journal of Engineering Geology,
Vol. 18, pp. 101-128.
173. Construction Industry Research & Information Association. Guide to the construction of
reinforced concrete in the Gulf. 2002. CIRIA Report C577.
174. Proceedings of the Conference on engineering problems associated with ground conditions in
the Middle East. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology. 1978. Vol. Vol II No 1.
175. Abu Dhabi Environment Agency. State of the Environment Abu Dhabi. [Online]
Http://www.soe.ae.
176. UAE Interact. [Online] http://www.uaeinteract.com.
177. SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology . [Online] [Cited: ] http://www.sempstrata.org.
178. Commission for the geological maps in the Middle East. Commission for the geological
maps in the Middle East. [Online] Http://www.cgmme.com.
179. ISTM International. Standard test method for water soluble sulfate in soil. 2009. ASTM C1580-
09e1.
180. British Standards Institution. Code of practice for site investigations. 2010. BS 5930: 1999
Amendment No.2 (Aug 2010).
181. —. Environmental management systrems - Requirements with guidance for use (including
corrigendum July 2009). 2004. BS EN ISO 14001:2004.

OTHER REFERENCES
1. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists. Safety Manual for
Investigation Sites. 2002.
2. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists. Guidelines for the

preparation of Ground Report. 2005.
3. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists. Management of risk

associated with the preparation of Ground Reports. 2005.
4. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists. AGS Guidelines for good

practice in site investigation (Issue 2). 2006.
5. Association of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Specialists. Guide to good practice in

writing Ground Reports. 2007.
6. Begemann, H. K. S. The Friction Jacket Cone as an Aid in Determining the Soil Profile.
Proceedings, 6th ICSMFE, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Vol I, pp.17-20. 1965.
7. BRE. Guide – Cone Penetration Testing. 2003.
8. Brouwer J J. In-situ soil testing. pub IHS BRE Press, 2007.
9. De Reister, J., Electric Penetrometer for Site Investigations. Journal of SMFE Division, ASCE,
Vol. 97, SM-2, pp. 457-472. 1971.
10. European Commission. English Style Guide. A handbook for authors and translators in the
European Commission. 6th edition. 2010.
11. Fathi M. Shaqour. Cone penetration resistance of calcareous sand. Bull Eng Geol Environ
66:59–70 - DOI 10.1007/s10064-006-0061-2. (2007)
12. Fugro. Cone Penetration Testing. July 2004.
13. Geotechnical Engineering Office Civil Engineering Department Hong Kong. Geotechnical
manual for slopes. 1994.
14. Highways Agency. Geotechnical Considerations and Techniques for Widening Highway
Earthwork. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Section Volume 4 Section 1 HA 43/91. 1991.
15. Gregg Drilling (Robertson et al). Guide to Cone Penetration Testing. July 2010.
16. Highways Agency. Site Investigation for Highway Works on Contaminated Land. Design
Manual for Roads and Bridges Section Volume 4 Section 1 Part 7 HA 73/95. 1995.
17. Institution of Civil Engineers. Risk and variability in geotechnical engineering (2007), pub
Thomas Telford.
OTHER REFERENCES Page 112 Second Edition June-2021

18. Mayne, Paul; Auxt, Jay A.; Mitchell, James K.; Yilmaz, Recep U.S. National Report on CPT.
Proceedings, International Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing, Vol. 1 (CPT '95).
Linköping, Sweden: Swedish Geotechnical Society. pp. 263-276. October 4-5, 1995.
19. NCHRP Report 368. Static Cone Penetration Testing. 2007.
20. National Highway Institute of the Federal Highway Administration. Subsurface

Investigations – Geotechnical Site Characterization Reference Manual. Publication No.
FHWA NHI-01-031. May 2002.
21. US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Geotechnical

Technical Guidance Manual. May 2007.
22. US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Checklist and

guidelines for review of geotechnical reports and preliminary plans and specifications.
Publication No. FHWA ED-88-053. August 1988 Revised February 2003.
23. Utah Department of Transportation. Geotechnical Manual of Instruction. August 2010.
OTHER REFERENCES Page 113 Second Edition June-2021

APPENDIX A: GEOLOGICAL MAP, LITHO-STRATIGRAPHICAL

SECTION, TECTONIC SETTING MAPS AND GEOHAZARD RISK MAPS
APPENDIX A Pag114 Second Edition June-2021

Figure A1: Geological Map of the United Arab Emirates (Huntington Geology & Geophysics Ltd, 1979(1))
APPENDIX A Pag115 Second Edition June-2021

Figure A2: Abu Dhabi litho-stratigraphy (Alsharhan (2008)(2))
APPENDIX B Pag116 Second Edition June-2021

Figure A3: Tectonic setting of the Arabian plate (Aldama et al (138))

Figure A4: Maximum considered earthquake ground motion for the United Arab Emirates of
0.2s (Ss) spectral response acceleration (5% of critical damping), Site class B (Abu Dhabi
Guide to the Use of International Building Codes, (149))

Figure A5: Maximum considered earthquake ground motion for the United Arab Emirates of
1.0s (S1) spectral response acceleration (5% of critical damping), Site class B (Abu Dhabi
Guide to the Use of International Building Codes (149))

Figure A6: Reported Loose Soil Thickness-Abu Dhabi

(The above is for Information only, and shall be investigated further, during project specific investigation)

Figure A7: Reported Sabkha Deposit - Abu Dhabi


Figure A8: Reported Halite Deposit- Abu Dhabi


Figure A9: Reported Voids/Cavities- Abu Dhabi


Figure A10: Reported Geohazard Risk- Abu Dhabi


APPENDIX B: ABU DHABI SOILS AND ROCK STRATA TYPICAL

GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS AND RISKS

Table B1: Abu Dhabi typical geotechnical hazards and risks
Strata/ feature Typical risk/ undesirable consequence
Soils and rock strata
Aeolian Sand Very loose and loose deposits are prone to erosion, mobility and settlement.
Possible metastable structure leading to collapse settlements.
Very loose and loose deposits can be expected to have a lower effective shear
strength compared to deposits of greater relative density. There is therefore a
greater risk of instability of slopes and of lower bearing capacity for foundations
in very loose and loose deposits compared to denser deposits.
Normally uniformly graded deposits which are difficult to compact to engineering
standards when not confined.
Depending on the origin, possible high salt content that gives rise to an
aggressive chemical environment for buried concrete and steel.
Sabkha Significant local variability (both horizontally and vertically) within the deposits
with resultant variation in material properties and differential in engineering
performance.
Some deposits can have high fines content and be highly compressible giving
rise to large settlements and large differential ground displacements. This can
adversely impact on the construction and performance of infrastructure.
Loss of strength and possible dissolution when saturated (rainfall, flash floods,
storm tides inundation, absorption of water in humid weather conditions)
resulting in ground instability under loading conditions and adverse impact on
infrastructure.
High salt content that gives rise to an aggressive chemical environment for
buried concrete and steel.
Presence of gypsum and anhydrite minerals that can undergo alternate
dehydration and rehydration due to changes in the environment. These changes
may be due to natural causes such as seasonal variation, or may be due to man
made causes such as irrigation systems. The resultant shrinkage and swelling
within the deposits that can adversely affect the engineering performance of
foundations and road pavements.
Lagoonal Parts of the coastal fringe in Abu Dhabi contain significant thicknesses of
Sediments Lagoonal Sediments. These vary in composition but are typically silts and clayey
silts (aragonite muds) with gypsum inclusions. They are very compressible, and
hence are unsuitable as founding layers and may cause problems during
construction.
Duricrusts Often a hardened surface due to heat, evaporation and salt content, overlying a
leached, cavernous porous or friable zone underneath may cause problems
during construction.
Fluvial Variable grading of the deposits related to their spatial location within the alluvial
sands/gravels fan. This gives rise to variability in the characteristics of the deposits and their
engineering performance.

Evaporites Chemically unstable and liable to volume change and dissolution

Conglomerate Difficult to excavate.
Gypsum Gypsum dissolution natural cavities, the presence of which can impact on
engineering design and construction. The collapse of cavities can impact on
engineering construction and the performance of completed engineering works.
Massive (limited discontinuities) strong units of gypsum can be difficult to
excavate. This can give rise to claims and/ or construction delays.
Sandstone/siltstone/ Depending on the origin, possible high salt content that gives rise to an
mudstone aggressive chemical environment for buried concrete and steel.
In extreme cases with high gypsum content, strata susceptible to collapse owing
to dissolution of the gypsum.
Slopes excavated in the strata can be prone to deterioration and failure.
Calcarenite Typically is of low strength.
Depending on the origin, highly porous strata can give rise to groundwater flow
bringing in high salt concentrations that give rise to an aggressive chemical
environment for buried concrete and steel.
Limestone Stronger, massive strata can be difficult to excavate. This can give rise to claims
and/ or construction delays.
Other factors
Groundwater High salt content that gives rise to an aggressive chemical environment for
Lowering of groundwater for an excavation may cause adverse settlement, for

example from:
• changes in effective stress in compressible deposits by ground loss
• unrestricted flow of water into excavations resulting in piping erosion
• loss of fines from the ground into poorly designed wells.
Seismic activity Liquefaction of some soils and associated ground settlement and lateral
spreading with adverse impact on infrastructure.
Increased loading on structures that may exceed load carrying capacities in
terms of serviceability and ultimate limit states adversely affecting structure
performance and may give rise to failure and collapse.
Flash floods Flash floods are common and occur in wadis in Al Ain desert areas and also in
developed areas with hard surfaces – e.g. Roads. Flash floods can result in
severe erosion and damage to the natural and man made environment.
Sand accumulation Construction of barriers to wind flow (eg road embankments) in areas of wind
blown sand results in deposition and accumulation of sand. This can cause
ongoing maintenance and operational difficulties.

Boreholes Ground investigation techniques commonly adopted in the region are relatively
poorly developed, commonly resulting in poor quality boreholes and non
representative borehole logs. In particular, rotary coring is common with SPTs
between drill strings and the SPTs are used as the key source of parameters.
Core recovery rates are commonly poor, and normal drilling techniques are not
able to recover the weak silty layers which are found within some of the weak
rock units. This can be significant when considering settlement of foundations.
Notes:
The term ‘high salt content’ is used in this table. Sulphates tend to dominate with concentrations of over
50% being reported (Fookes, French and Rice (1985)(172)). This affects the durability of concrete and
steel and it is essential that the aggressive conditions are understood and designed for (ref Guide to
the construction of reinforced concrete in the Gulf, CIRIA C577 (2002)(173) ).
For further information on hazards in the region refer to ”Proceedings of the Conference on Engineering
problems associated with ground conditions in the Middle East”, Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology, Vol II No 1 1978(174) .

APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SOURCES STUDY
APPENDIX C Pag129 Second Edition June-2021

Table C1: General information required for a preliminary sources study
Ref Topic Information required

No.
1 General a) location of site on published maps and charts

topographical land b) aerial photographs, all dated where appropriate
survey c) site boundaries, outlines of structures and building lines
d) ground contours and natural drainage features
e) obstructions to sight lines and aircraft movement, for example
transmission lines
f) indication of obstructions below ground
g) record of differences and omissions in relation to published maps
h) position of survey stations and benchmarks (with reduced levels)
i) climate and meteorological information.
2 Permitted use and a) Planning and statutory restrictions applying to the particular areas
restrictions under the Emirate Planning Regulations administered by Abu Dhabi
Municipality
b) Local Authority regulations on planning restrictions
c) tunnels rights
d) ancient monuments, burial grounds, etc
e) previous potentially contaminative uses of site and adjacent areas
f) any restrictions imposed by environmental and ecological
considerations, e.g., natural reserves and protected sites
g) oil and gas field, Royal Palaces, military bases.
3 Approaches and a) road

access (including b) by water
temporary access) c) by air.
4 Ground conditions a) geological maps

b) geological memoirs or reports
c) wadi flooding, erosion, and subsidence history
d) data held by central and local authorities
e) construction and investigation records of adjacent sites
f) seismicity.
5 Sources of materials a) natural materials

for construction b) imported materials.
6 Drainage and a) names of sewage, land drainage and other authorities, bye-laws
sewage b) location and levels of existing systems (including fields, drains and
ditches), showing sizes of pipes, and whether foul, storm water or
combined
c) existing flow quantities and capacity for additional flow
d) liability to surcharging
e) charges for drainage facilities
f) disposal of solid waste
g) flood risk in wadi areas.

Ref Topic Information required

No.
7 Services (water, a) names of authorities concerned and their requirements, bye-laws

electricity, gas, b) location, sizes and depths of services including drawings
telecommunications) c) gas and water mains, pressure characteristics
d) electricity voltage, phases and frequency
e) water analysis
f) availability of water for drilling
g) storage requirements
h) water source for fire-fighting.
8 Air conditioning a) district cooling.
9 Information related to a) history of the site, including details of occupiers and users, any
made ground and incidents or accidents relating to dispersal of contaminants
potential b) processes used, including their locations
contamination c) nature and volume of raw materials, products, waste residues
d) soil and/or waste disposal activities and methods of soil and/or
handling waste
e) layout of the site above and below ground at each stage of
development, including roadways, storage areas, hard-cover areas,
and the presence of any extant structures and services
f) presence of any waste disposal tips, abandoned pits and quarries
g) presence of nearby sources of contamination from which
contaminants could migrate via air and/or groundwater onto site.

Table C2: Sources of information for a preliminary sources study
Ref Topic Source of information

No.
1 Geography a) geographic maps for Abu Dhabi can be obtained for Abu Dhabi
Municipality can be provided in the form of base plans;
b) Google Maps and Google Earth images (these are subject to licensing);
c) the Physical Geography of Abu Dhabi, which can be downloaded
http://www.soe.ae/English/Documents/physical_geog_forweb.04.11.08.p
df (175)
2 Geology, a) geological maps: The following Geological maps published by the UAE
hydrogeology Ministry of Energy can be referred to for geological information about the
and soils UAE and Abu Dhabi
• UAE - Geological Map of the United Arab Emirates 1:1,000,000.
1 sheet, 1976.
• UAE - Geohazards Overview Map of the United Arab Emirates
1:500,000. 1 sheet, 2006.
• The Ministry of Energy has also commissioned the British
Geological Survey (BGS) to prepare 1:100,000 geological maps
for the UAE with geological explanations. The maps are expected
to be published by the Ministry in 2013;
b) geological memoirs: The 1:100 000 geological maps currently being
prepared by BGS will have an accompanying series of explanatory sheet
memoirs;
c) borehole core and specimens: There are many collections of ground
investigation data for Abu Dhabi but these are not centrally archived. In
order to establish availability of information for a certain area it may be
necessary to contact several sources including local ground investigation
companies;
d) hydrogeological maps: Hydrogeological Map of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
2005;
e) soil maps and memoirs: Soils survey information for Abu Dhabi is held by
the Environment Agency in Abu Dhabi. The soil survey comprises
mapping and classification of the various types of soils in the Emirate of
Abu Dhabi. The entire Emirate is mapped at a scale of 1:100,000. Selected
land, covering 400,000 hectares, evaluated as being suitable for irrigated
agriculture is mapped at a scale of 1:25,000. There are 21 thematic maps
identifying suitability of soils for various purposes such as agriculture,
dune, sabka, forestry and landfill
f) a series of published literature on the geology, soil and hydrogeology of
the UAE are available on line. For example UAE Interact Website
http://www.uaeinteract.com/nature/geology/index.asp,(176)
http://sepmstrata.org/UAE/AbuDhabi/UAEGallery/ABgallery.html (177)
and the Commission of the Geological Maps for the Middle East
http://www.cgmme.com (178)
3 Marine a) marine information in relation to wave heights, wind speed and wind
information directions is available from The National Centre for Meteorology and
Seismology.

Ref Topic Source of information

No.
4 Meteorological a) meteorological information for UAE is available from The National Centre
information for Meteorology and Seismology.
5 Hydrological a) water resource data is available from the Department of Water Resources
information of the Environment Agency.
6 Aerial a) aerial photographs of Abu Dhabi are available in hard and electronic from
photographs Abu Dhabi Municipality.
7 Seismological a) computer listings and maps of earthquakes occurring in the UAE and
information elsewhere in the Middle East are available from The National Centre for
Meteorology and Seismology.

Table C3: Notes on site reconnaissance
Ref Topic Action

No.
1 Preparatory a) whenever possible, have the following available: site plan, maps or charts,
work and geological maps and aerial photographs
b) ensure that permission to gain access has been obtained from both owner
and occupier and is not a restricted area
c) obtain Critical National Infrastructure Authority (CNIA) pass as needed
d) ensure safety precautions, equipment and PPE required, particularly in
respect of dune and sabkha areas
e) when undertaking site reconnaissance on potentially contaminated land,
ensure that all likely hazards have been identified, that appropriate safety
procedures are followed, and that necessary safety equipment is used.
2 General a) traverse whole area, preferably on foot but by vehicle for larger sites
information b) set out proposed location of work on plans, where appropriate
c) observe and record differences and omissions on plans and maps; for
example, boundaries, buildings, roads and transmission lines
d) inspect and record details of existing structures
e) observe and record obstructions; for example, transmission lines, ancient
monuments/ structures of archaeological importance, trees subject to
preservation orders, gas and water pipes, electricity cables, sewers
f) check site access arrangements, also consider the probable effects of
construction traffic and heavy construction loads on existing roads, bridges
and services
g) check and note water levels, tidal and other fluctuations due to dewatering
at or near to site
h) observe and record adjacent property and the likelihood of its being
affected by proposed works, and any activities that may have led to
contamination of the site under investigation
i) observe and record quarry workings, old workings, old structures, and any
other features that may be relevant
j) observe and record any obvious immediate hazards to public health and
safety (including to trespassers) or the environment
k) observe and record any areas of discoloured soil, polluted water,
distressed vegetation or significant odours
3 Ground a) study and record surface features, on site and nearby, preferably in
information conjunction with geological maps and aerial photographs, and note the
following:
i. morphology and note if site is dune, sabkha or made ground
ii. type and variability of surface conditions
iii. in areas of sabkha note areas of ponding after rain and salt
accumulation
iv. comparison of surface lands and topography with previous map
records to check for presence of fill, wind erosion, or cuttings
v. steps in surface, which may indicate geological faults or shatter
zones. In cavity areas evidence of subsidence should be looked
for: compression and tensile damage in brickwork, buildings and
roads; structures out of vertical
vi. crater-like holes in carbonate rocks, which usually indicate
swallow holes filled with soft material

Ref Topic Action

No.
3 Ground b) assess and record details of ground conditions in quarries, cuttings and
information rock outcrops on site and nearby
(continued) c) assess and record, where relevant, ground water level or levels (often
different from water course) positions of irrigation wells and occurrence of
artesian flow
d) study embankments, buildings and other structures in the vicinity having a
settlement history.
4 Site inspection (ii) inspect and record location and conditions of access to working sites;
for ground (iii) observe and record obstructions, such as power cables, telephone lines,
investigation boundary fences and trenches
(iv) locate and record areas for depot, offices, sample storage, field
laboratories
(v) ascertain and record ownership of working sites, where appropriate
(vi) consider liability to pay compensation for damage caused
(vii) locate a suitable water supply where applicable and record location and
estimated flow
(viii) record particulars of lodgings and local labour, as appropriate
(ix) obtain list of permissions and notices required from Land Authorities.

APPENDIX D: EXAMPLE TEMPLATE EVALUATION SHEETS FOR

GROUND INVESTIGATION COMPANIES
APPENDIX D Pag136 Second Edition June-2021

Table D1: Example template technical evaluation sheet for Ground Investigation Companies
Technical aspect to Notes for preparing a list of technical Information sought from Ground Depending on the evaluation
system used the headings below
be evaluated information for evaluation to be Investigation Company will vary
submitted by the Ground Investigation
system
Point
Points
Weighting
Weighting
Points *
points =
Total
Company as part of its tender
Methodology and (1) The Ground Investigation Company’s (i) Description of the Ground Investigation
approach to ground methodology and approach to the Company’s proposed methodology and
investigation proposed ground investigation can approach to the ground investigation. (2 No
have a substantial influence its A4 page sides maximum)
successful execution and timely (ii) Preliminary method statements for key
completion. Details of these should activities describing the Ground
be sought as part of a tender Investigation Company’s proposed
package. methods, including temporary works and
safety provision. (Each preliminary method
statement shall be limited to 2No. A4 page
sides maximum).
(iii) Project organogram detailing lines of
responsibility and communication within the
team and with other parties (see Quality of
personnel aspect for information to be
supplied in respect of competencies,
relevant experience and qualifications of
key staff). (2 No A4 page sides maximum)
Compliance to EHS (1) The Ground Investigation Company (i) Details and copies of relevant accreditation
requirements should operate under an certificates of the Ground Investigation
environmental management system, Company’s environmental management
preferably register to BS EN ISO policy and any training programme for its
14001:2005 or similar staff, technicians and drilling crews. (1 No.
A4 page side maximum + certificates)

system
Point
Points
Weighting
Weighting
Points *
points =
Total
Compliance to EHS (2) Appropriate environmental (i) Details of the Ground Investigation
requirements management is important to negate Company’s environmental protection
(continued) environmental damage and for measures in respect of the proposed
providing overall success of the ground investigation works. (1 No. A4 page
ground investigation. Details of the side maximum)
Ground Investigation Company’s
environmental management
proposals in respect of the ground
investigation should be sought.
(3) It is essential that the Ground (i) Complete the health and safety
Investigation Company appropriately questionnaire (Table D2 below).
manages the health and safety (ii) Copy of the Company’s health and safety
aspects of the ground investigation policy and its health and safety training
for the protection of its staff, programme for its staff, laboratory
operatives, other parties involved in technicians and drilling crews.
the ground investigation, the public (iii) Evidence of competence to carry out the
and existing infrastructure. Evidence ground investigation to the requirements of
of the health and safety competence health and safety legislation and the named
of the Ground Investigation resources allocated to control and manage
Company should be sought. the health and safety risks.
(iv) A preliminary assessment of the main
health and safety risks associated with the
proposed ground investigation. (2No. A4
page sides maximum)

system
Point
Points
Weighting
Weighting
Points *
points =
Total
Quality of personnel (1) The Ground Investigation Company (i) Names of the specialists to be employed on
should employ on the ground the ground investigation together with
investigation appropriately qualified details of their academic and professional
staff with appropriate expertise and qualifications and a summary of their
experience in work to be undertaken experience. Full curriculum vitae to be
and for the role for which they are provided for senior roles such as Site Agent
named (ref Manual Part 1 Section and Laboratory Manager.
2.3 Definition of geotechnical
practitioners)
(2) Drills and crew appropriately (i) Names of the drillers (and drilling
experienced and trained. assistants) to be employed on the contract
Competence assessed and together with details of their accreditation, if
accredited by an independent any, and a summary of their experience
industry body (ref Manual Part 2
Section 5.2.1 Quality of ground
investigation personnel)
(3) Company staff, technician and (i) Details of the company training and
operatives training and development development policy and its training
policy and programme (ref Manual programme for its specialist staff, laboratory
Part 2 Section 5.2.1 Quality of technicians and drilling crews. (1 No. side
ground investigation personnel) A4 page maximum)
Certification (1) The Ground Investigation Company (i) Details and copies of relevant certificates
requirements should operate under a quality for the company’s quality assurance
assurance system, preferably system. (1 No. side A4 page maximum +
register to BS EN ISO 9000:2005 or copies of certificates)
similar) (ref Manual Part 2 Section (ii) An example quality plan for similar previous
5.2.1 Quality of ground investigation ground investigation work.
personnel).

system
Point
Points
Weighting
Weighting
Points *
points =
Total
Certification (2) Laboratories undertaking soils and (i) Details and copies of relevant certificates of
requirements rock testing and analytical any independent accreditation held for
(contined) contaminant testing should be laboratory testing and results reporting. (1
accredited by an independent No. side A4 page maximum + copies of
industry recognised body eg UKAS certificates)
or A2LA (ref Manual Part 2 Section
5.2.2 Laboratory quality).
Technology (1) Where innovative or new technology (ii) Statement of knowledge and experience of
requirements is required to be used on a ground the particular technology required to be
investigation the Ground used. (1 No. side A4 page maximum)
Investigation Company’s knowledge
and experience of that technology
should be established.
Documentation of (1) Past experience of similar ground (i) Details of ground investigations of a similar
operations in similar investigation works to those nature which have been carried out by the
projects proposed past similar ground Ground Investigation Company within the
investigation can have a substantial last five years with evidence of satisfactory
influence its successful execution completion. Details shall include how
and timely completion. Details of lessons learnt from previous ground
these should be sought as part of a investigations would be used to improve
tender package. performance on the proposed ground
investigation. The statement shall include
up to 5No. previous investigations. (3No.
sides A4 pages maximum)
Capacity to upgrade (1) Possible requirements for the (i) Description with evidence of the Ground
and support Ground Investigation Company to Investigation Company’s capacity to
upgrade its services and provide upgrade and support as set out in the
additional support to the overall
system
Point
Points
Weighting
Weighting
Points *
points =
Total
delivery of the ground investigation tender documentation. (1No. A4 page

should be set out in the tender maximum)
documentation. This might be to
Capacity to upgrade
undertake ground investigation
and support
works outside those included in the
(continued)
bill of quantities or provision of other
specialist staff additional drilling
crews, equipment and other plant
and laboratory testing and facilities.
The ability of the (1) A prompt start is usually important to (i) Confirmation and details of the Ground
company to mobilise ensuring that a ground investigation Investigation Company’s available
and begin work is completed in a timely manner resources and its ability to mobilise and
within the specified ground begin work. ( ½No. A4 page maximum)
investigation contract programme
and the overall project programme.
Details of the Ground Investigation
Company’s ability to mobilise and
begin work should be sought.
Time for programme (1) An appropriate programme for the (i) A preliminary resourced programme which
completion and execution of the proposed ground shows the periods required and the
programme logic investigation works with associated sequence in which the Ground Investigation
programme logic in terms of order of Company proposes to undertake the
execution of those works is various parts of the ground investigation
important for the timely execution and the dates of the principle operations.
and completion of the ground The details submitted must include an easy
investigation and its successful to understand bar chart programme.
completion. A preliminary resourced
programme covering the main

system
Point
Points
Weighting
Weighting
Points *
points =
Total
elements of the ground investigation

should be sought.
Relevant experience (1) Relevant experience in the local (i) Details of the Ground Investigation
in the local market market and having appropriate local Company’s experience of working in UAE
and available resources can benefit the timely and of its local UAE resources including
resources (plants, execution and successful completion numbers of:
office, software, of a ground investigation. Details of - geotechnical practitioners (office & field
tools) in the UAE the Ground Investigation Company’s based) against the categories in Table
experience of the local market and A1 in Appendix A Part 1 of the Manual
his local UAE resources should be for Geotechnical Investigation and
sought. Geotechnical Design;
- office administration support staff;
- drillers and drilling crew related to the
type of drilling rig they operate and
whether they are accredited;
- laboratory staff and technicians;
- numbers and types of drilling rigs and
other plant;
- numbers and types of laboratory testing
machines (eg shear box and triaxial test
apparatus, oedometers) together with
copies of their calibrations certificates;
(ii) Confirmation of whether the Ground

Investigation Company can supply AGS
data together with a copy of a typical AGS
data file from its database.

system
Point
Points
Weighting
Weighting
Points *
points =
Total
Relevant experience (iii) Copies of the Ground Investigation

in the local market Company’s typical borehole, trial pit and
and available field and laboratory test reporting records.
resources (plants, (iv) Details shall include how lessons learnt
office, software, from previous ground investigations in UAE
tools) in the UAE would be used to improve performance on
(continued) this ground investigation (2no. side of A4
page maximum)

Table D2: Example template health and safety questionnaire

for Ground Investigation Companies
Question Included Response
Yes No N/A (If information is part of a separate document or continued on
a separate sheet provided please give the title and page or
clause number)
A) General information
1. Company name and
Registered Address 1. Name……………………………...………………
Address………………………….………………
…………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………….
Tel…………………………………………………
Fax………………………………………………
Email………………………………………………
Internet……………………………………………
Contact
Name……………………………………..
2. Give the name and position
in the Company of the 2. Name……………………………...………………
person who has overall
responsibility for ensuring Position………………………….………………..
adequate resources are
made available for Health
and Safety. H&S
Submit an organisation Chart…………………………………….…..
chart for Health and Safety.
3. Give the name, 3. Name……………………………...………………
qualifications, and .
experience of the person Position………………………….………………..
nominated to provide .
specific Health and Safety
advice in the execution of
the contract. CV Included……………………………………...
4. Summarise the main 4.
details of your safety
management system.
5. Do you audit Health and

5. If not go to Q.6
Safety?
6. Give details of the 6.
recommendations from any
audits that have been
undertaken.
7. How do you learn from 7.

your past Health and
Safety experience?
APPENDIX E Page144 Second Edition June-2021

Question Included Response

Yes No N/A (If information is part of a separate document or continued on
a separate sheet provided please give the title and page or
clause number)
8. Summarise injuries,
diseases and dangerous
occurrences during the last 8.
three years. Provide the
information in the form of
an incidence rate per
100,000 employees.
Identify fatalities
separately.
9. Summarise your 9.
arrangements for selecting
and controlling sub-
contractors with respect to
Health and Safety.
B) Project specific
information
10. Information on similar 10.
projects and experience
11. Ground investigation risk
management experience 11.
on a project of similar size,
procurement style
12. A developed H&S Plan
12.
from at least one ground
investigation
13. Names and experience 13.
(H&S) of project team
14. How competence and
resource checks will be 14.
done for any
sub-contractors
15. Confirmation that the
competent personnel are 15.
available for the project
programme

APPENDIX E: TEMPLATE BILL OF QUANTITIES FOR GROUND

INVESTIGATION
NOTE: APPENDICES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE PDF COPIES

.

UK Specification for Ground Investigation second edition, ref UK Site Investigation Steering Group
(2012)(90), includes a specification, a model bill of quantities and schedules that enable the
geotechnical practitioner to define investigation specific details together with associated notes for
guidance. The model bill of quantities provides a comprehensive list of items that are correlated to
the specification items. It is intended that the numbering of the model bill of quantities items remains
unaltered with items that are not required for a particular project ground investigation either marked
as “not used” or not presented in the project-specific bill of quantities. Typically the project-specific
additional items should be included at the end of each bill. The template bill of quantities for Abu
Dhabi road projects included in this appendix follow those principles so that the published standard
specification may be used with minimal changes for project-specific requirements.

APPENDIX F: SPT CORRECTIONS SPREADSHEET TEMPLATE
APPENDIX F Page169 Second Edition June-2021

Table F1: SPT corrections spreadsheet template
APPENDIX F Page170 Second Edition June-2021

APPENDIX G: CONE PENETRATION TESTING
APPENDIX G Page171 Second Edition June-2021

Table G1: Summary of typical checks and recalibrations to be made for CPT
Frequency
Check or recalibration At start of At three-

At start of At end of
test month
sounding sounding
programme(1) intervals
Verticality of thrust machine - * - -
Straightness of push rods

* * - -
Precision of measurements
* - - *
Zero load error (taking baselines) - * * -
Wear:
- dimension of cone, friction
sleeve * * - -
- roughness * * * -
- filters - - - *
Seals:
- presence of soil particles * * - -
- quality * * * -
Calibration:
- load cells and pressure

transducers * - - *
- unequal end area - - - *
- temperature - - - *
Notes
(1) And regularly during a long testing programme

Table G2: Check list for information required for CPT to check data quality
Question Answer Notes
Manufacturer, capacity, type.

1 Type of cone penetrometer
ISSMFE IRTP (1989)(103) standard.
Adhering to international
Compare with requirements in
2 standard (ie 10cm², 60⁰, sleeve
ISSMFE IRTP (1989)(103).
area = 150cm² etc)
x-sect area =
If answer to 2 is no, what cone If A = 15cm², α = 60⁰
3 cone angle =
is being used? and Asl = 202cm²; ok.
sleeve area =
Location of filter(s) for

4 measuring pore pressure and
type of fluid
5 Area ratio (a) of cone tip Normally in range a = 0.59 to 0.85.
6 End areas of friction sleeve Best if they are equal.
Is qc corrected for pore pressure Compare with formulas given in

7
effects? Lunne et al (1997)(107).
Is ƒs corrected for pore pressure Compare with formulas given in

8
effects? Lunne et al (1997)(107).
Assumed? Based on measurement

9 What is basis for σ’vo?
of bulk density (ρ) on samples?
Compare with requirements given in

When were sensors (qc, u, ƒs)
10 specifications or Lunne et al
last calibrated?
(1997)(107).
Zero readings before and after Important to check if results appear

11
each test reported? "abnormal"
Where were readings zeroed?

12 (eg sea bottom or bottom of Important for overwater testing
borehole)
13 Depth of any pre-drilling Explains any missing data
What is frequency of readings? The commercial rate is one set

14 every second, ie every 2cm.
Decided by project requirements
For dissipation testing;

How well was the initial part of the
(a) were the rods clamped or
15 dissipation curve defined - faster
unclamped?
sampling rate to start with?
(b) frequency of readings

APPENDIX H: BOREHOLE GEOPHYSICAL TECHNIQUES
APPENDIX H Page174 Second Edition June-2021

Table H1: Tools and methods for subsurface investigations

(from US Dept of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (1998)(119))
Method Principle and application Limitations
Surface seismic Determine bedrock depths and characteristic May be unreliable unless velocities
refraction wave velocities as measured by geophones increase with depth and bedrock surface
spaced at intervals. is regular. Data are indirect and
represent averages. Limited to depths of
about 30m (100ft).
High resolution Determine depths, geometry and faulting in Reflected impulses are weak and easily
reflection deep rock strata. Good for depths of a few obscured by the direct surface and
thousand meters. Useful for mapping offsets shallow refraction impulses. Does not
in bedrock. Useful for locating ground water. provide compression velocities.
Computation of depths to stratum
changes requires velocity data obtained
by other means.
Vibration Travel time of transverse or shear waves Velocity of wave travel and natural period
generated by a mechanical vibrator is of vibration gives some indication of soil
recorded by seismic detectors. Useful for types. Data are indirect. Usefulness is
determining dynamic modulus of subgrade limited to relatively shallow foundations.
reaction for design of foundations of vibrating
structures.
Uphole, downhole, Obtain velocities for particular strata; Unreliable for irregular strata or soft soils
and cross-hole dynamic properties and rock-mass quality. with large gravel content. Cross-hole
surveys (seismic Energy source in borehole or at surface; measurements best suited for in-place
direct methods) geophones on surface or in borehole. modulus determination.
Electrical resistivity Locate fresh/salt water boundaries; clean Difficult to interpret and subject to wide
surveys granular and clay strata; rock depth; depth to variations. Difficult to interpret strata
ground water. Based on difference in below water table. Does not provide
electrical resistivity of strata. engineering properties. Used up to
depths of about 30m (100ft).
Electromagnetic Measures low frequency magnetic fields Fixed coil spacings limited to shallow
conductivity surveys induced into the earth. Used for mineral depth. Background noise from natural
exploration; locating near surface pipes; and constructed sources (manufactured)
cables, and drums and contaminated plumes. affects values obtained.
Magnetic Mineral prospecting and locating large Difficult to interpret quantitatively, but
measurements igneous masses. Highly sensitive proton indicates the outline of faults, bedrock,
magnetometer measures Earth’s magnetic buried utilities or metallic objects in
field at closely spaced intervals along a landfills.
traverse.
Gravity Detect major subsurface structures, faults, Not suitable for shallow depth
measurements domes, intrusions, cavities. Based on determination but useful in regional
differences in density of subsurface studies. Some application in locating
materials. caverns in limestone.
Ground-penetrating Locate pipe or other buried objects, bedrock, Does not provide depths or engineering
radar boulders, near surface cavities, extent of properties. Shallow penetration. Silts,
piping caused by sink hole and leakage in clays, and salts, saline water, the water
dams. Useful for high-resolution mapping of table, or other conductive materials
near-surface geology. severely restrict penetration of radar
pulses.

Table H2: Geophysical methods and techniques for logging boreholes

(from US Dept of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (1998)(119))
Method Principle and application Limitations
Electrical logging Several different methods available. Provides Provides qualitative information. Best used with
continuous record of resistivity from which test-boring information. Limited to uncased
material types can be deduced when correlated hole.
with test-boring data.
Neutron radiation Provides continuous measure of natural moisture Data from neutron probe is limited to-in-place
logging content. Can be used with density probe to moisture content values. Often differs from
locate failure zones or water bearing zones in oven-dried moisture content and requires
slopes. correction.
Gamma-gamma Provides continuous measure of in-place density Data limited to density measurements. Wet
logging of materials. density usually more accurate than dry density.
Scintillometer (Gamma Provides measure of gamma rays. Used to Quantitative assessments of shale or clay
ray logging) locate shale and clay beds and in mineral formations.
prospecting.
Acoustic borehole Sonic energy generated and propagated in fluid Must be used in fluid-filled borehole unless
imaging such as air to water. Provides continuous 360 casing is being inspected. Tool must be
image of borehole wall showing fractures and centred in the borehole. Logging speed is
other discontinuities. Can be used to determine relatively low between 20 and 75 mm/s (4 and
dip. 15ft/min). Imaging less clear than house
obtained with borehole cameras.
Acoustic velocity Can determine litho logic contracts, geologic Borehole must be fluid filled and diameter
logging structure, cavities and attitude of discontinuities. accurately known. Penetration beyond
Elastic properties of rock can be calculated. borehole wall of about a meter or so. Geologic
Compression (P-water) is generated and materials must have P-water velocities higher
measured. Used almost exclusively in rock. than velocity of the borehole fluid.
Crosshole seismic Seismic source in one borehole; receiver(s) at Borehole spacing is critical and should be >3m
tests same depth in second (or more) borehole(s). and <15m. Precise borehole spacing must be
Material properties can be determined from accurately known for data to be useful.
generated and measured compression and
shear waves. Low velocity zones underlying high
velocity zones can be detected.
Borehole cameras Borehole TV or film type cameras available. TV Requires open hole. Images are affected by
viewed in real time. Can examine cavities, water clarity. Aperture on film camera must be
discontinuities joints, faults, water well screen, preset to match reflectivity of borehole wall
concrete-rock contacts, grouting effectiveness, materials.
and many other situations.
Borehole caliper Used to continuously measure and record Diameter ranges from about 50 to 900mm (2 to
logging borehole diameter. Identify zones of borehole 36in). Must calibrate caliper against known
enlargement. Can evaluate borehole for minimum and maximum diameter before
positioning packers for other tests. One to six logging. Special purpose acoustic caliper
arm probe designs. designed for large or cavernous holes (dia) 1.8
to 30m (6 to 100ft).
Temperature logging Continuous measure of borehole fluid Probe must be calibrated against a fluid of
temperature after fluid has stabilized. Can known temperature. Open boreholes take
determine temperature gradient with depth. longer to stabilize than cased holes. Logging
speed 15 to 20mm/s (3 to 4 ft/min).

Table H3: Borehole logs and their applications and limitations

(from BS5930-1999 with 2010 Addendum(7))
Log type (“1” against a particular log type means that it is suitable for the application listed)
temperature
Introduction
conductivity
Application
Flow meter
Televiewer
Television
Formation
Resistivity
Spontane
Diameter
Electrical
potential
Spectral
Gamma
Neutron
gamma
gamma
gamma
Natural
Caliper
Sonic
micro
limitations
Fluid
Fluid
Lined hole - - 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - -
Open hole 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Air-filled - - 1 - - - - 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 - -
Water/mud filled 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Diameter - - - - - - - - 1 - - - -- - - -
Casing - - - 1 - - - 1 1 - - - 1 - 1 -
Fractures/joints 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 - - 1 -
Cement bend - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bed boundaries 1 1 1 1 - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Bed thickness 1 1 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Bed type - - 1 - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Porosity - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 - 1 1 -
Density - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - -
Permeable zones 1 1 - - 1 1 1 - 1 - 1 1 - - - -
Borehole fluid quality - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - -
Formation fluid quality - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1
Fluid movement - - - - 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - -
Direction of dip - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shale /sand indication - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - 1
APPENDIX H Pag177 Second Edition June-2021

APPENDIX I: EXAMPLE EXPLORATORY HOLE RECORD

APPENDIX I Pag178 Second Edition June-2021

APPENDIX J: EXAMPLE REPORTING FORMS FOR SOILS AND

ROCK LABORATORY TESTS
APPENDIX J Page181 Second Edition June-2021

APPENDIX K: EXAMPLE GEOLOGICAL PROFILES

APPENDIX K Page305 Second Edition June-2021

APPENDIX L: INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS - LIMIT STATE

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN
APPENDIX L Page307 Second Edition June-2021

Table L1: International Standards – Limit state geotechnical design
Structure/earthwork Geotechnical design issue Limit state geotechnical design standards Comments
(with use of partial factors of safety)
BS EN 1997-1:2004(156)
Bridge Spread footings Sizing/bearing capacity BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 6, Annex D,

(including Annex F, Annex G for foundations on rock
abutments and Settlement (components, total, and Annex H
piers), gantry differential and rate)
signs BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 11
Stability (engulfing failure of
foundations on slopes)
Pile foundations Carrying capacity (axial and lateral) , BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 7

downdrag/ negative skin friction
Settlement/ deflection of laterally
loaded piles
Retaining walls Gravity wall Wall stability BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 9, Annex C,

Annex H
Bearing capacity
BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 11 for slope
Sliding resistance stability aspects
Stability (engulfing failures)
Cantilever/anch Wall stability BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 9 & Annex C

ored embedded
wall Anchorage design BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 8 for anchorage
design
Stability (engulfing failures)
BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 11 for slope
stability aspects.
Soil cuttings - Stability BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 11 & BS

6031:2009 (166)
Rock cutting - Stability BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 11
Embankments - Stability (including internal and BS EN 1997-1:2004 Section 11, BS EN

surface erosion) 1997-1:2004 Section 12, Annex F & BS
6031:2009 (166)
APPENDIX L Page308 Second Edition June-2021

TR 509 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TR 509 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

TR 509 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MANUAL FOR GEOTECHNICAL

INVESTIGATION AND GEOTECHNICAL

DOCUMENT NO: TR-509

02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Addition as below:

02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Modified as below:

Methods described in Tomlinson(3) (2008) (161).

02 01 JUNE TR-509-2: Modified as below;

7.2 Laboratory test reporting ................................................................................................. 81

Appendix H: Borehole geophysical techniques ..................................................................... 174

Table F1: SPT corrections spreadsheet template ................................................................... 170

Earthwork: Work of excavating or raising of ground.

Geotechnical practitioner: A person specialising in geotechnical engineering or engineering

Likelihood: The probability of a risk occurring.

Moderately conservative parameters: Engineering parameters which are the geotechnical

Seismic loading: The application of an earthquake-generated load to a structure.

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

SPT Standard penetration test

NOMENCLATURE AND SYMBOLS

c’ kPa (kN/m2)* Drained cohesion intercept

cr kPa (kN/m2)* Remoulded shear strength

c r’ kPa (kN/m2)* Drained residual cohesion intercept

c’crit kPa (kN/m2)* Critical state cohesion intercept (usually zero)

CN - Correction factor related to SPT rod length

cu kPa (kN/m2)* Undrained shear strength

cv m2/yr Coefficient of consolidation (one dimensional)

CaCO3 % Carbonate content (total)

CBR % California Bearing Ratio

Cl %, mg/l Chloride (total, water soluble)

Ip % Plasticity index (PI)

E MPa Young’s modulus of elasticity

E’ MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (drained)

E’0.01 & MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (small strain)

Eu MPa (MN/m2)* Young’s modulus of elasticity (undrained)

Er - Energy ratio of SPT hammer

fs MPa Sleeve friction- cone penetration test

G MPa (MN/m2)* Shear modulus

Gmax MPa (MN/m2)* Very low strain shear modulus

Gs MPa Shear modulus (small strain/initial modulus)

γ Mg/m3 Bulk density/Mass density

I - Point load index, axial (Ia), diametral (ld), lump (Il)

k m/s Coefficient of permeability, horizontal (k h), vertical (kv) as appropriate

Ko - Coefficient of earth pressure at rest

Symbol Units Property/engineering parameters

ks kN/m3 Modulus of subgrade reaction

LL % Liquid limit (wI)

m - Rock material constant

mv m2/MN Coefficient of volume compressibility (one dimensional)

N - Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow count (uncorrected)

OCR - Overconsolidation ratio

PL % Plastic limit (wp)

PSD - Particle size distribution

qc MPa Cone resistance - cone penetration test

RMR - Rock mass rating

rs Ohms.m Apparent resistivity

s - Rock material constant

SO4 %, mg/l Sulphate (total, water soluble)

u kN/m2 Porewater pressure

UCS MPa Uniaxial compressive strength

ν’ - Drained Poisson’s ratio