GEO TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

FOR

PROPOSED ELSR UNDER AMRUT 2.0 IN KANTESHWAR,

NIZAMABAD DISTRICT,TELANGANA.

FOR
M/s.MEGHA ENGINEERING & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.

Geotechnical Consultant
M/s ANJI GEO SOLUTIONS
Drilling & Grouting Works Geo
Technical Investigations

#3-103,Near P.A.B.R. Dam(V),Kudair(Mdl),Anantapuram(Dist.,)

Phone: 9908023322,9866748961
Email : anjigeosolutions@gmail.com
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sheet No.

1.0 INTRODUCTION 2
1.1 Project Description 2
1.2 Purposes of Study 2

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION 2

2.1 Soil Borings 2
2.2 Disturbed Sampling (Soil) in boreholes 3
2.3 Undisturbed Sampling (Soil) in boreholes 3
2.4 Groundwater 3

3.0 LABORATORY TESTS 3

4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 4

4.1 Site Stratigraphy 4
4.2 Hydrogeology 4

5.0 CONCEPTS FOR FOUNDATION ANALYSIS 5

5.1 Liquefaction Potential 5
5.2 Definition of Gross and Net Bearing Pressure 6

6.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7

6.1 General 7
6.2 Recommendations 7
6.3 Variability in Subsurface Conditions 7

7.0 CLOSURE 8
ANNEXURE
o Soil and Rock Profiles & Laboratory test results
o Sample calculation for safe bearing capacity for open foundation

1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description

M/s. MEGHA Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd has Proposed to taking
up the soil investigation works for Proposed ELSR in Kanteshwar,
Nizamabad Dist, Telangana Under AMRUT 2.0.

M/s. ANJI GEO SOLUTIONS is carrying out the Geotechnical

Investigations Proposed Proposed ELSR in Kanteshwar, Nizamabad
Dist, Telangana Under AMRUT 2.0.

1.2 Purposes of Study

The overall purposes of this study are to investigate the
stratigraphy at the site and to develop geotechnical recommendations
for foundation design and construction of different structures along the
alignment of the proposed stretch.
To accomplish these purposes, the study was conducted in the
following phases:
(a) drilling Two(02) boreholes to required depth in order to
investigate the site stratigraphy and collect disturbed and
undisturbed soil samples for laboratory testing;
(b) testing selected soil samples in the laboratory to determine
pertinent index and engineering properties of the strata; and
(c) analyzing all field and laboratory data in order to develop
engineering recommendations for foundation design and
construction.

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

2.1 Soil Borings
The borings were progressed by Rotary drilling to the specified depth
as per instructions of client. The work was in general accordance with
IS: 1892-1979.
Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) is conducted by connecting a
split spoon sampler to ‘A’ rods and driving it by 45 cm using a 63.5 kg
hammer falling freely from a height of 75 cm.
The tests were conducted in accordance with IS: 2131-1981.
The number of blows for each 15 cm of penetration of the split spoon
sampler was recorded.

2
 The blows required to penetrate the initial 15 cm of the split
spoon for seating the sampler is ignored due to the possible presence
of loose materials or cuttings from the drilling operation. The
cumulative number of blows required to penetrate the balance 30 cm
of the 45 cm split spoon sampler is termed the SPT value or the ‘N’
value. The ‘N’ values are presented on the soil profile for each
borehole. Refusal to further boring penetration was considered when
the ‘N’ values exceed 100.

2.2 Disturbed Sampling (Soil) in boreholes

Disturbed soil collected in the SPT sampler was preserved in
polythene covers and transported to the laboratory. One more
polythene cover was provided to prevent the loss of moisture during
the transit period.

2.3 Undisturbed Sampling (Soil) in boreholes

Undisturbed samples were collected by attaching 100 mm
diameter thin walled ‘Shelby’ tubes and driving the sampler by light
hammering using a 63.5 kg hammer in accordance with IS: 2132-
1986. The tubes were sealed with wax at both ends. Collection of
undisturbed samples in refusal strata is practically not possible. All
samples were transported to our laboratory at Hyderabad for further
examination and testing.
2.4 Groundwater
Groundwater level was measured in the boreholes 24
hours after drilling and sampling was completed. The measured water
levels are recorded on the individual soil profiles.

3.0 LABORATORY TESTS

Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples,
groundwater samples to determine its index and engineering
properties. The testing procedures were in accordance with current
applicable IS specifications. The following tests were conducted on
selected samples recovered from the boreholes:
On Soil:
Name of Test IS Code No.
Bulk Density By Calculation
Grain size analysis IS : 2720 (Part-4)-1985
Specific gravity IS : 2720 (Part-3)-1980
Liquid and plastic limits IS:2720 (Part-5)-1985

3
 Name of Test IS Code No.
Unconfined compression test IS:2720 (Part-10)-1991

Natural moisture content IS:2720(Part-2)-1973

Unconsolidated undrained Direct Shear Test IS : 2720 (Part-13)-1986
On Rock:
Name IS Code No.
of Test
Bulk density IS : 13030-1991
Specific Gravity IS : 2720 (Part-3)-1980
Water absorption IS : 13030-1991
Crushing strength IS: 9143-1979

All the test results are presented in the Annexure section of this report.

4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 Site Stratigraphy
Based on the boring information, the following subsoil profile
was inferred up to final depth of boreholes:

Depth (m)
Location Strata Description
From To

0.00 5.00 Silty Sand

BH-01
5.00 6.00 Soft Disintegrated Rock/Residual Soil

0.00 2.50 Silty Sand

BH-02
2.50 6.00 Soft Disintegrated Rock/Residual Soil

*All locations of boreholes were given by client

4.2 Hydrogeology:
Based on the measurements in the completed boreholes ground water not
met below existing ground level during the period of our field investigation
(April, 2023).
5.0 CONCEPTS FOR FOUNDATION ANALYSIS
5.1 Liquefaction Potential
Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of a granular
material from a solid to a liquefied state as a consequence of increased pore-

4
water pressure and reduced effective stress (Marcuson, 1978) (1). Increased
pore pressure may be induced by the tendency of granular materials to
compact when subjected to cyclic shear deformation, such as in the event of
an earthquake.
As per IS: 1893-2002, liquefaction is likely to occur in fine sand
(SP) below water tabl e for SPT value less than 15. As per
stratigraphy, Subsurface consists either non-cohesive soil with high
standard penetration resistance, followed by bed rock.
Reviewing all the soil conditions, SPT values and soil gradation,
we are of the opinion that the liquefaction at the site is not likely to
occur during earthquakes.
As per IS: 1893-2002, the project site is in earthquake Zone-II.
The design parameters applicable for Zone-II should be used for the
structural design.
Open Foundations on Soil
Bearing capacity analysis was carried out based on the shear
parameters (c-), as interpreted from field and laboratory tests to
determine the safe net bearing capacity (shear criterion).
The bearing capacity equation used is as follows:
qnet safe = 1 [cNcc dc+ p(Nq -1) q dq+ 0.5 B N d Rw]
F
where :
qnet safe = safe net bearing capacity of soil, based on the
shear failure criterion.
c = cohesion intercept
 = angle of internal friction
 = total unit weight of soil
p = overburden pressure
B = width of foundation
Rw = water table correction factor
F = Factor of safety, taken as equal to 2.5 in accordance with
IS:1904
Nc,Nq,N = Bearing capacity factors which are a function of .
c, q,  = Shape factors.
For Strip footings, c = q =  = 1

(1) Markuson, W.F. (III) (1978), “Definition of terms related to liquefaction”, J. Geotech Engrg.
Div,, ASCE, 104(9), 1197-1200

5
For Square footing = c = 1.3, q = 1.2,  = 0.6
dc ,dq, d = Depth factors
For   10, dc = 1 + 0.2 tan (45 + /2) D/B, dq = d = 1
For  > 10, dq = d = 1 + 0.1 tan (45 +  / 2) D/B
Appropriate values have been substituted into the bearing
capacity equation given above to compute the safe net bearing
capacity. The values have been checked to determine the settlement
of the foundation under the safe bearing pressure. The allowable
bearing pressure has been taken as the lower of the two values
computed from the bearing capacity shear failure criterion as well as
that computed from the tolerable settlement criterion.
In predominantly granular soils, settlement analysis has been
performed based on the SPT values in accordance with Clause 9.1.4
of IS 8009 (Part 1) - 1976 Fig.9.
Where applicable (typically where substantial incremental
stresses are anticipated in cohesive strata below groundwater table),
settlement analysis has been performed based on classical theory; as
the sum of elastic settlement and consolidation settlements. The
elastic settlement is calculated in accordance with Clause 9.2.3 of IS
8009 Part 1-1976. The consolidation settlement is computed in
accordance with Clause 9.2.2 of IS 8009 (Part 1)-1976.

5.2 Definition of Gross and Net Bearing Pressure

For the purposes of this report, the net allowable bearing
pressure should be calculated as the difference between total load on
the foundation and the weight of the soil overlying the foundation
divided by the effective area of the foundation. The gross bearing
pressure is the total pressure at the foundation level including
overburden pressure and surcharge load.
The following equations may be used -
qnet = [(Ps + Wf +Ws) / Af] - Sv
qgross = qnet + Sv = (Ps + Wf + Ws) / Af

where:
qnet = net allowable bearing pressure
qgross = gross bearing pressure
Ps = superimposed static load on foundation
Wf = weight of foundation
Ws = weight of soil overlying foundation

6
 Af = effective area of foundation
Sv = overburden pressure at foundation level

6.0 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 General
A suitable foundation for any structure should have an
adequate factor of safety against exceeding the bearing capacity of the
supporting soils. Also the vertical movements due to compression of
the soils should be within tolerable limits for the structure. We consider
that foundation designed in accordance with the recommendations
given herein will satisfy these criteria.

6.2 Recommendations
Based on the Geotechnical Investigations and site appraisal, the
following recommendations were given:

 Open(Isolated / Raft) foundation are recommended.

Foundation
Location Embedment depth *Recommended SBC, T/m2
minimum from EGL, m
2.50 25.00
BH-01 & BH-02
3.00 27.00
 The actual size and depth of the foundations will be based on the
requirements of the super structure.

 The change in SBC for different foundation sizes is insignificant.

Therefore, the recommended values may be considered applicable
for all sizes of foundations including raft foundation.

7
 6.3 Variability in Subsurface Conditions
Subsurface conditions encountered during construction may
vary somewhat from the conditions encountered during the site
investigation. In case significant variations are encountered during
construction, we request to be notified so that our engineers may
review the recommendations in this report in light of these variations.

7.0 CLOSURE
We appreciate the opportunity to perform this investigation for
you and have pleasure in submitting this report. Please contact us
when we can be of further service to you.

For Anji Geo Solutions

(Authorized Signature)

8
Field Borelogs and Laboratory Test Summary
 SGECS

BORE / DRILL LOG

Construction of ELSR of 1200KL capacity at Kanteshwar in Under Amrut 2.0 in Nizamabad Dist, TG
Project:
G.W.T. (m)
LOCATION Amrut 2.0 Nizamabad_Kanteshwar Zone TYPE OF DRILLING: Rotary Drilling TERMINATION DEPTH(m): 6.00
BORE HOLE NO BH 1 TYPE OF BIT USED: Clay/TC/Diamond COMMENCED ON : 23/09/2024
GROUND RL 373.390 ANGLE WITH THE HORIZON: 90 COMPLETED ON : 24/09/2024

Conducting SPT as per I.S.: 2131-

Rate (cm/ min)

Depth (m) Run Drill Water

Depth of NX
Casing (m)
1981

Nature of

Run No.

RQD %
TCR %
Sample

Legend

From (M)
Description of Strata

15-30 cm

30-45 cm

N' Value
0-15 cm

To (M)
Depth

Color
Loss
(M)
From To

0.00 2.50 Silty Sand DS 2.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2.50 2.95 Silty Sand SPT 2.95 6 14 18 32 - - - - - - - - -

2.95 3.50 Silty Sand DS 3.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3.50 3.95 Silty Sand SPT 3.95 7 11 21 32 - - - - - - - - -

-
3.95 4.50 Silty Sand DS 4.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

4.50 4.95 Silty Sand SPT 4.95 19 27 45 72 - - - - - - - - -

4.95 5.50 Silty Sand DS 5.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

5.50 5.95 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil SPT 5.95 50 - - N>100 - - - - - - - - -

5.95 6.00 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil DS 6.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 SGECS

BORE / DRILL LOG

Construction of ELSR of 1200KL capacity at Kanteshwar in Under Amrut 2.0 in Nizamabad Dist, TG
Project:
G.W.T. (m)
LOCATION Amrut 2.0 Nizamabad_Kanteshwar Zone TYPE OF DRILLING: Rotary Drilling TERMINATION DEPTH(m): 6.00
BORE HOLE NO BH 2 TYPE OF BIT USED: Clay/TC/Diamond COMMENCED ON : 23/09/2024
REDUCED LEVEL 373.390 ANGLE WITH THE HORIZON: 90 COMPLETED ON : 24/09/2024

Conducting SPT as per I.S.: 2131-

Rate (cm/ min)

Depth (m) Run Drill Water

Depth of NX
Casing (m)
1981

Nature of

Run No.

RQD %
TCR %
Sample

Legend

From (M)
Description of Strata

15-30 cm

30-45 cm

N' Value
0-15 cm

To (M)
Depth

Color
Loss
(M)
From To

0.00 2.50 Silty Sand DS 2.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2.50 2.95 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil SPT 2.95 9 25 50 75 - - - - - - - - -

2.95 3.50 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil DS 3.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3.50 3.95 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil SPT 3.95 6 7 11 18 - - - - - - - - -

-
3.95 4.50 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil DS 4.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

4.50 4.95 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil SPT 4.95 13 21 35 56 - - - - - - - - -

4.95 5.50 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil DS 5.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

5.50 5.95 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil SPT 5.95 11 25 36 61 - - - - - - - - -

5.95 6.00 Completely weathered rock/Residual soil DS 6.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 LABORATORY TEST SUMMARY

SOIL SAMPLES

Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Direct Shear on Soil

Sample

Natural Density gms/cm3

Angle of Internal Friction

Cohesion Intercept kPa
Dry Density gms/cm3

Moisture Content %

Confining Pressure
Plasticity Index %
SITE SAMPLE

Specific Gravity
Plastic limit %
Liquid limit %
IDENTIFIER DESCRIPTION
Sample No.
Depth (m)

Gravel %
Location

Kg/cm2
Sand %

Clay %
Silt %
0.00-
BH-1 5.00
1 Dense Sand(SM) 0 86.50 13.50 2.54 1.82 8.55 0 30.70

5.00-
BH-1 6.00
2 Dense Sand(SM) 0 81.40 18.60 2.52 1.80 9.15 0 32.50

0.00-
BH-2 3.00
3 Dense Sand(SM) 0 83.70 16.30 2.53 1.77 4.74 0 30.20

3.00-
BH-2 6.00
4 Dense Sand(SM) 0 82.10 17.90 2.55 1.81 3.56 0 33.60

M/S. ANJI GEO SOLUTIONS

Drilling & Grouting Works, GeoTechnical Investigations
#3-103,Near P.A.B.R. Dam(V),Kudair(Mdl),Anantapuram(Dist.,) Phone: 9908023322,9866748961
Email: anjiconsultancy19@gmail.com
Foundation Computations
 Sheet No.3

BEARING CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOR

SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS
Analysis as per IS 6403-1981

Project : Site Investigations for Proposed ELSR at Kanteshwar, Nizamabad,TG

Under AMRUT 2.0
Safe Bearing Capacity Computation

The bearing capacity equation is as follows :

qnet safe = (1/FS){cNczcdc+q(Nq-1)zqdq+0.5BgNgzgdgRw }
where:
qnet safe = safe net bearing capacity c = cohesion intercept
q = overburden pressure B = Foundation width
g = Bulk density of soil below founding level
Rw = Water table correction factor FS = Factor of safety
Nc, Nq, Ng = bearing capacity factors, which are a function of f
dc, dq, dg = Depth factors
z c, z q, z g = Shape factors
Soil parameters : Bulk Density
c= 0.00 T/m2 f = 30.0 degrees GENERAL SHEAR FAILURE Profile
c' = 0.00 T/m2 f'= 21.1 degrees LOCAL SHEAR FAILURE Depth, m g
General Shear Failure : Nc = 30.14 Nq = 18.40 Ng = 22.40 From To T/m3
' ' '
Local Shear Failure : Nc = 15.87 Nq = 7.11 Ng = 6.24 0.0 3.0 1.74
3.0 6.0 1.78
Factor of safety = 2.5 as per IS 1904-1986 5.0 12.0 1.80

Design Water Table depth = GL

Rw factor: Constant value(V) for worst condition or
Rw = 0.50
calculate(C) based on WT Depth ? : V
Depth factor to be considered ? Y
For computation of Depth Factor, depth below GL to be ignored to account for loose
soils,poorly compacted backfill above foundation, scour etc. = 0.2 m
FAILURE CRITERIA : General SHEAR FAILURE

Foundation Depth factors Depth factors qnet safe , Safe Net

Depth,m

FOUN- Shape Factors

Dimensions (GSF) (LSF) T/m
2 Bearing
DATION Rw
' '
Capacity
B, m L, m SHAPE zc zq zg dc dq dg dc dq' dg GSF LSF
T/m2
2.4 2.4 square 2.5 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.33 1.17 1.17 26.9 26.9
2.4 2.4 square 3.0 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.40 1.20 1.20 31.5 31.5
2.7 2.7 square 2.5 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.30 1.15 1.15 27.6 27.6
2.7 2.7 square 3.0 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.36 1.18 1.18 32.0 32.0
3.0 3.0 square 2.5 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.27 1.13 1.13 28.3 28.3
3.0 3.0 square 3.0 0.50 1.30 1.20 0.80 1.32 1.16 1.16 32.7 32.7
 Sheet No.4

SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS FOR

SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS BASED ON N - VALUES
Analysis as per IS:8009(Part 1)-1976 , Clause 9.1.4

Project : Site Investigations for Proposed ELSR at Kanteshwar, Nizamabad

Under AMRUT 2.0
sbc computation

Design Water Table Depth : GL

R w factor : Calculate (C) based on water table depth
or Fixed Value(V) for worst condition : V Rw factor for design : 0.5
Fox's Depth Factor to be considered ? Y
Depth to be ignored in Depth Factor Computation for loose
soils, poorly compacted backfill, scour, etc. 0.2 m
Settlement
Rigidity Factor,
2
Net Allowable

Pressure, T/m

Settlement,
Foundation

Fox's Depth

@ 1kg/cm2
Computed
Foundation

Foundation
Length,m

Factor, df
N-value
Depth,m
Width,m

Design

Bearing

(as read off

mm
Shape Rw
dr

from graph),
mm

2.4 2.4 2.5 square 22.0 23.9 12.0 0.50 0.74 1.0 42.5
2.4 2.4 3.0 square 25.0 28.0 10.4 0.50 0.70 1.0 40.7
2.7 2.7 2.5 square 22.0 26.0 12.3 0.50 0.76 1.0 48.7
2.7 2.7 3.0 square 25.0 26.6 10.6 0.50 0.72 1.0 40.7
3.0 3.0 2.5 square 22.0 25.0 12.6 0.50 0.78 1.0 49.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 square 25.0 28.0 10.8 0.50 0.74 1.0 45.0

Max Permissible Settlement Under footing 50 mm