1.

0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

At the request of M/S SEKA Associates Consulting Engineers Ltd, Smart Lab, Mulago
conducted geotechnical investigations at a site in Hoima District during the month of May 2013.
The investigations were aimed at evaluating the in-situ soils properties and obtaining suitable
geotechnical data for appropriate design of the foundation for the proposed structures in Pad 2
Kingfisher.

1.2 Scope of Work

The scope of the investigations comprised:

i) Drilling Eight boreholes each to refusal depth or to a maximum depth of 30m along the
within Pad 2; and recovery of samples from the boreholes for laboratory analysis;
ii) Conducting Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) at 1.5m in each of the boreholes;
iii) Determining the level of groundwater in the boreholes where encountered;
iv) Obtaining samples from the boreholes for further laboratory analysis;
v) Carrying out laboratory tests on retrieved samples; and
vi) Compiling a Technical report.
This report forms the key output of the exercise and describes the field and laboratory activities
carried out as well as the findings and the recommendations arising there from.

1
June 2013
1.3 Structure of the Report

The report has been structured as follows:

Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Methodology
Chapter 3: Findings
Chapter 4: Evaluation of the Soils Bearing Capacity
Chapter 5: Conclusion
Bibliography

Appendices:
1. Soil Index Properties
2. Borehole logs
3. Bearing Capacities of Soils
4. Shear strength results
5. Consolidation tests results
6. Chemical test results on soils samples

2
June 2013
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND SEISMOLOGY

2.1 Site Description

The proposed site is located within Kyangwali in Hoima District 90km from Hoima town along
Hoima-Kabwoya –Kituti road. The proposed area is 232m by 116m and it is located in Pad 2.

2.2 Seismology

The site lies within zone 1 of the seismic zoning of Uganda implying there is a high risk of
earthquake occurrence at the site. (Seismic Code of Practice for Structural designs; Uganda
National Bureau of Standards, First Edition: June 2003).

.
Fig 1: Seismic zoning of Uganda

3
June 2013
3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Field Work
The field exploratory activities were conducted in accordance with BS EN 1997-2:2007, “Part2:
Ground Investigations and Testing” as briefly described below. The key activities comprised
reconnaissance surveys, identification of boreholes positions, rotary boring, conducting standard
penetration tests, recovery of soils samples; and description of soil properties.

The boreholes positions were read from the sketch site layout drawings and accurately
established on the ground through horizontal distance measurements, offsetting, triangulation,
setting out and pegging.

3.1.1 Rotary Boring and Soils Sampling

The boreholes were investigated by drilling using a truck-mounted rotary Drilling Rig. Standard
penetration tests were conducted in each of the boreholes. The Rig augers comprising a
continuous helix of blades on a central shaft were rotated into the ground to remove the soils and
permit access to lower strata and to allow for soils sampling.

Standard penetration tests were conducted in the boreholes by driving a split spoon sampler
(tube) into the holes using a hammer mechanism. The sampler comprised a split tube with a
driving head and a solid cone point (head). The head of the tube was connected to a 63.5kg
hammer using a series of drill rods. The tube was driven into the ground by the process of the
hammer dropping through a distance of 760mm (hammer blow). At every test depth (test zone)
counts of the number of blows required to drive the tube into the soils (penetration depth)
through a total distance of 450mm were made after every interval of 150mm penetration. The
number of hammer blows from the initial penetration depth of 150mm (out of the 450mm) within
the test zone was not included in the computation of the N-value as it was considered disturbed
(seating blows) from the drilling process; thereafter, the SPT N-values were taken as the number
of blows required to achieve a penetration from 150mm to 450mm i.e. within the subsequent

4
June 2013
300mm. The N-values were used to estimate the consistency, density, and strength (bearing
capacity) of the in-situ sub soils using empirical relationships.
Soils recovered from the split spoon sampler were visually inspected, identified, labeled and
taken to the laboratory for further analysis.

3.1.2 Ground Water Table

The standard practice for determining ground water level was adopted whereby when ground
water is encountered in a borehole, the hole is left covered to allow the water level to stabilize
for about 24 hours after which the actual level of the water table is determined.

5
June 2013
3.2 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory tests were carried out on the samples recovered from the boreholes to identify the
properties of the in-situ soils. The tests were conducted only on suitable samples according to
standard test methods as briefly outlined in the following sections below:

Name of Test Standard Test Method Sample Status

Moisture content BS 1377: Part 2: 1990 Disturbed
Particle size distribution BS 1377: Part 2: 1990 “
Liquid Limit BS 1377: Part 2: 1990 “
Plastic Limit BS 1377: Part 2: 1990 “
Plasticity Index BS 1377: Part 2: 1990 “
Chemical tests (soils) BS 1377: Part 3: 1990 “
Compaction BS 1377: Part 4: 1990 “
California Bearing Ratio BS 1377: Part 4: 1990 “
Shear box test BS 1377: Part 7: 1990 Undisturbed
Consolidation (Oedometer) BS 1377: Part 5: 1990 “

3.2.1 Natural Moisture Content

The test was carried out in accordance with BS 1377: Part 2: 1990. Representative specimens
were obtained from each of the samples and their net weights taken. The specimens were oven
dried at temperatures between 105oC and 110°C for 24 hours and their dry weights were
established. The ratios of moisture loss (wet mass – dry mass) to the mass of the dried soil
expressed as a percentage were recorded as the moisture contents of the respective specimens.

3.2.2 Sieve Analysis

The standard method of wet sieving which conforms to BS 1377: Part 2: 1990 was adopted.
Representative specimens were taken from the samples and oven dried at temperatures between

6
June 2013
105o and 110oC for 24 hours. The dried soil specimens were washed through a 0.063mm BS test
sieve in accordance with the test method. The retained fractions were again oven-dried for 24
hours at the same temperature and then sieved through a nest of BS test sieves in a descending
order of aperture sizes, using a mechanical sieve shaker. The fractions retained on each sieve
were weighed and the proportions of the original sample passing given sieves were determined.

3.2.3 Liquid Limit (LL)

Liquid limit tests were carried out using the BS cone penetrometer in accordance with BS 1377:
Part 2: 1990. A BS cone penetrometer fitted with an automatic timing device that ensures 5
second penetration under a 80 gm load was used. An oven-dried representative specimen from
each sample was pounded and sieved through a 0.425 mm BS test sieve, after which 200g of
each specimen passing the 0.425 mm BS test sieve was mixed thoroughly with distilled water
and the water was allowed to permeate it over night in an air tight container. The respective
specimens were then remixed the following day with sufficient water to achieve two penetrations
in the range between 15mm and 25mm. The moisture content for each of the pastes was
recorded. A moisture content penetration curve was plotted from which the moisture content at
20mm penetration was taken as the liquid limit.
3.2.4 Plastic Limit (PL)

Plastic limit tests were carried out in accordance with BS 1377: Part 2: 1990. The specimens
used for the tests were prepared in the same manner as those for the liquid limit tests. The test
consisted of rolling a ball of soils paste from each sample between the hands and then into
threads between the palm and a glass plate. The plastic limits for the respective specimens were
recorded as the moisture contents at which the threads develop transverse cracks when they were
about 3mm diameter.

7
June 2013
3.2.5 Plasticity Index (PI)

The plasticity Index for each sample was determined in conformity with BS 1377: Part 2: 1990.
The plasticity index is the numerical difference between the LL and PL i.e. (PI = LL – PL).

3.2.6 Strength Tests

3.2.6.1 Direct Shear Test

The test was performed on the undisturbed samples in conformity to BS 1377: Part 7: 1990.
Three specimens of sizes 60x60x20mm were prepared for each test pit sample. The first
specimen was given a fixed normal stress close to the respective overburden pressure and was
sheared along its horizontal plane through its mid-depth to failure.
The process was repeated for the other specimens but this time with the fixed normal stresses
being successively increased to higher values. The failure points were noted. A plot was made
between the normal stress as the abscissa and the shear stress as the ordinate. The respective
slopes of the graphs were taken as the angles of internal friction Ø, and the intercepts as the
cohesion values cu.

3.2.6.2 Oedometer Consolidation Test

The test was performed in accordance with BS 1377: Part 5: 1990. Specimens of 76mm diameter
and 20mm height were cut from each of the test pit samples and placed in the floating ring of the
oedometer cells. Thereafter, each specimen was soaked, gradually loaded and readings of
compression values were noted at regular time intervals 0 min, ½, 1, 2, 4, 8,15,30, 1 h…..up to
24h. Thereafter, further successively higher loads were applied to the specimens after every 24
hours until 7 cycles were completed. In the meantime the specific gravities of the respective
samples were determined. Plots were made for the respective cell pressures against the void
ratios and the corresponding values for coefficient of volume compressibility (mv) and the pre-
consolidation pressure (pc) were determined.

8
June 2013
3.2.7 Chemical Tests

3.2.7.1 Sulphate test on soils samples

The test was conducted in accordance with BS: 1377: Part 3: 1990; Section 5, using the
gravimetric method. Water extract of acid soluble sulphate for each of the soil specimens was
first prepared. The respective samples were filtered and a standard solution of barium chloride
added. The precipitated barium sulphate was collected, ignited and weighed. The sulphate
content in each specimen was then calculated from the mass of the water used in the analysis and
the mass of barium sulphate precipitated.

3.2.7.2 Chloride test on soils samples

The test was carried out in accordance with BS: 1377: Part 3: 1990. From each sample, acid
extract was prepared as follows: representative specimens passing 0.150mm BS test sieve were
each poured in a beaker of 500ml volume, and 50ml of distilled water was added to it followed
by 15ml of concentrated nitric acid. In each case thereafter, the mixture was heated to near
boiling point, cooled and filtered through coarse graded filter paper. The residue was washed
with distilled water and all the filtrate collected. Silver nitrate was then added to the filtrate from
a burette until all the chlorides were precipitated. Titration was done with standard potassium
thiocynate using ferric alum as an indicator. 3,5-5 trimethylhexan-l-ol was used to coagulate the
precipitate.

3.2.7.3 pH test on soils samples

The test was performed in accordance with BS: 1377: Part 3: 1990 The Electrometric method of
pH determination was adopted. For every sample, specimen of10g of soils was mixed with
distilled water in 100ml beaker and stirred for a few minutes, covered with a cover glass and
allowed to stand for 8hours. The pH meter was initially calibrated using a standard buffer
solution, and then the electrode was washed with distilled water and immersed in the dissolved
soils sample. The corresponding readings were taken after every brief stirring between each
reading..
9
June 2013
 4.0 FINDINGS

4.1 Field Findings

4.1.1 Visual

From visual inspection of the samples, the in-situ soils were found to comprise mainly lean clays
and fat clays. In a few areas clayey sands and silts were encountered. See details in Appendix 2.
The photo below show some of the processes and findings from the field work.

Photo 1: Shows Drilling Work In progress.

1010 June 2013

Photo 2: Shows Workers setting the machine to carry out SPTs.

1111 June 2013

4.1.2 Ground Water Table

Ground water table was encountered in Five (5) of the boreholes .

Borehole Number Depth at which water was encountered (m)
BH1 6.7
BH2 6.2
BH3 6.5
BH4 6.6
BH5 7.2

4.1.3 Standard Penetration Tests

On the basis of the SPTs conducted in the boreholes, the soil profiles have been categorized into
different soil types as summarized in Table 1.0 below.

Table 1.0: SPT values of soil strata in the boreholes

Bore Sampling Soil Description
Range of
Hole Depth (m) Consistency
Level SPT blows (By Visual Inspection)
No.

I 1.5 – 2.0 7-9 Firm Fat clay

II 3.0 – 3.5 7 -10 Stiff Fat clay

III 4.5 – 5.0 9-11 stiff Fat clay

IV 6.0 – 6.5 9-11 stiff Clayey sand

BH 1

V 7.5 – 8.0 7-8 Medium Fat clay

dense

VI 9.0 – 9.5 6–8 Loose Fat clay

VII 10.5-11.0 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

VIII 12.0-12.5 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

1212 June 2013

 IX 13.5-14.0 8-10 Stiff Lean Clay

X 15.0-15.5 6-8 Loose Lean clay

XI 16.5-17.0 6-8 Loose Clayey sand

XII 18.0-18.5 9-10 Stiff Clayey sand

XIII 19.5-20.0 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XIV 21.0-21.5 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XV 22.5-23.0 9-10 Stiff Lean caly

XVI 24.0-24.5 9-10 Stiff Clayey Sand

XVII 25.5-26.0 9-10 Stiff Clayey Sand

XVII 27.0-27.5 6-8 Loose Fat Clay

XVIII 28.5-29.0 6-8 Loose Fat Clay

Bore Sampling Soil Description

Range of
Hole Depth (m) Consistency
Level SPT blows (By Visual Inspection)
No.

I 1.5 – 2.0 8-10 Firm Fat clay

II 3.0 – 3.5 7 -10 Stiff Fat clay

III 4.5 – 5.0 9-11 stiff Fat clay

BH 2

IV 6.0 – 6.5 9-11 stiff Clayey sand

V 7.5 – 8.0 7-8 Medium Fat clay

dense

1313 June 2013

 VI 9.0 – 9.5 6–8 Loose Fat clay

VII 10.5-11.0 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

VIII 12.0-12.5 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

IX 13.5-14.0 8-10 Stiff Lean Clay

X 15.0-15.5 6-8 Loose Lean clay

XI 16.5-17.0 6-8 Loose Clayey sand

XII 18.0-18.5 9-10 Stiff Clayey sand

XIII 19.5-20.0 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XIV 21.0-21.5 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XV 22.5-23.0 9-10 Stiff Lean caly

XVI 24.0-24.5 9-10 Stiff Clayey Sand

XVII 25.5-26.0 9-10 Stiff Clayey Sand

XVII 27.0-27.5 6-8 Loose Fat Clay

Bore Sampling Soil Description

Range of
Hole Depth (m) Consistency
Level SPT blows (By Visual Inspection)
No.

I 1.5 – 2.0 9-10 Firm Fat clay

II 3.0 – 3.5 7 -10 Stiff Fat clay

BH 3

III 4.5 – 5.0 9-11 stiff Fat clay

1414 June 2013

 IV 6.0 – 6.5 9-10 stiff Clayey sand

V 7.5 – 8.0 7-8 Medium Fat clay

dense

VI 9.0 – 9.5 6–8 Loose Fat clay

VII 10.5-11.0 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

VIII 12.0-12.5 9-10 Stiff Clayey sand

IX 13.5-14.0 8-9 Stiff Lean Clay

X 15.0-15.5 6-8 Loose Lean clay

XI 16.5-17.0 6-8 Loose Clayey sand

XII 18.0-18.5 9-10 Stiff Clayey sand

XIII 19.5-20.0 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XIV 21.0-21.5 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XV 22.5-23.0 9-10 Stiff Lean caly

XVI 24.0-24.5 9-10 Stiff Clayey Sand

XVII 25.5-26.0 9-10 Stiff Clayey Sand

Bore Sampling Soil Description

Range of
Hole Depth (m) Consistency
Level SPT blows (By Visual Inspection)
No.

I 1.5 – 2.0 7-9 Firm Fat clay

II 3.0 – 3.5 7 -10 Stiff Fat clay

BH 4

III 4.5 – 5.0 9-11 stiff Fat clay

1515 June 2013

 IV 6.0 – 6.5 9-11 stiff Clayey sand

V 7.5 – 8.0 7-8 Medium Fat clay

dense

VI 9.0 – 9.5 7–9 Loose Fat clay

VII 10.5-11.0 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

VIII 12.0-12.5 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

IX 13.5-14.0 8-10 Stiff Lean Clay

X 15.0-15.5 6-8 Loose Lean clay

XI 16.5-17.0 6-8 Loose Clayey sand

XII 18.0-18.5 9-11 Stiff Clayey sand

XIII 19.5-20.0 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XIV 21.0-21.5 9-10 Stiff Lean Clay

XV 22.5-23.0 9-10 Stiff Lean caly

XVI 24.0-24.5 9-11 Stiff Clayey Sand

XVII 25.5-26.0 9-10 Stiff Clayey Sand

XVII 27.0-27.5 6-8 Loose Fat Clay

XVIII 28.5-29.0 6-8 Loose Fat Clay

1616 June 2013

 Bore Sampling Soil Description
Range of
Hole Depth (m) Consistency
Level SPT blows (By Visual Inspection)
No.

I 1.5 – 2.0 8-10 Firm Fat clay

II 3.0 – 3.5 7 -10 Stiff Fat clay

III 4.5 – 5.0 9-11 stiff Fat clay

IV 6.0 – 6.5 9-11 stiff Clayey sand

V 7.5 – 8.0 7-8 Medium Fat clay

BH 5 dense

VI 9.0 – 9.5 6–8 Loose Fat clay

VII 10.5-11.0 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

VIII 12.0-12.5 8-10 Stiff Clayey sand

IX 13.5-14.0 8-10 Stiff Lean Clay

X 15.0-15.5 6-8 Loose Lean clay

Bore Sampling Soil Description

Range of
Hole Depth (m) Consistency
Level SPT blows (By Visual Inspection)
No.

I 1.5 – 2.0 9 - 10 Firm Fat clay

II 3.0 – 3.5 7 -10 Stiff Fat clay

BH 6
III 4.5 – 5.0 9-11 stiff Fat clay

IV 6.0 – 6.5 9-11 stiff Clayey sand

1717 June 2013

 V 7.5 – 8.0 7-8 Medium Fat clay
dense

VI 9.0 – 9.5 6–8 Loose Fat clay

1818 June 2013

 4.2.2 The Soils Bearing Capacity Values based on SPTs

The maximum pressures the soils are capable of resisting were estimated from the field N-
values based on empirical relations and the following assumptions:

i. The Peck et al (1967) relationship between N-values and unconfined

compressive strength is valid;
ii. The maximum allowable settlement in non-cohesive soils is 25mm.

The design N-values are derived from the statistical average of all values within a depth
zone equal to the footing width of 3m below the founding depth.

The corresponding bearing capacity values computed with a factor of safety of 3

are as summarized in Table 4.0 below; see details in appendix 4.

Table 4.0: Evaluated Bearing Capacities

Bore Sampling Allowable Bearing

Hole Depth (m) Capacity (kPa) from SPT
No. Level N-Values

I 1.5 – 2.0 167

II 3.0 – 3.5 159

III 4.5 – 5.0 167

BH 1 IV 6.0 – 6.5 167

V 7.5 – 8.0 154

VI 9.0 – 9.5 159

VII 10.5-11.0 174

3030 June 2013

 VIII 12.0-12.5 174

IX 13.5-14.0 174

X 15.0-15.5 164

XI 16.5-17.0 168

XII 18.0-18.5 174

XIII 19.5-20.0 174

XIV 21.0-21.5 174

XV 22.5-23.0 174

XVI 24.0-24.5 174

XVII 25.5-26.0 174

XVII 27.0-27.5 174

XVIII 28.5-29.0 154

Bore Sampling Allowable Bearing

Hole Depth (m) Capacity (kPa) from SPT
No. Level N-Values

I 1.5 – 2.0 172

II 3.0 – 3.5 159

III 4.5 – 5.0 167

BH 2

IV 6.0 – 6.5 167

V 7.5 – 8.0 154

3131 June 2013
 VI 9.0 – 9.5 159

VII 10.5-11.0 174

VIII 12.0-12.5 174

IX 13.5-14.0 174

X 15.0-15.5 174

XI 16.5-17.0 164

XII 18.0-18.5 168

XIII 19.5-20.0 174

XIV 21.0-21.5 174

XV 22.5-23.0 174

XVI 24.0-24.5 176

XVII 25.5-26.0 172

XVII 27.0-27.5 154

Bore Sampling Allowable Bearing

Hole Depth (m) Capacity (kPa) from SPT
No. Level N-Values

I 1.5 – 2.0 165

II 3.0 – 3.5 159

BH 3

III 4.5 – 5.0 167

3232 June 2013

 IV 6.0 – 6.5 167

V 7.5 – 8.0 154

VI 9.0 – 9.5 159

VII 10.5-11.0 174

VIII 12.0-12.5 174

IX 13.5-14.0 174

X 15.0-15.5 164

XI 16.5-17.0 168

XII 18.0-18.5 174

XIII 19.5-20.0 174

XIV 21.0-21.5 174

XV 22.5-23.0 174

XVI 24.0-24.5 174

XVII 25.5-26.0 174

Bore Sampling
Hole Depth (m)
No. Level

I 1.5 – 2.0 170

II 3.0 – 3.5 160

BH 4

III 4.5 – 5.0 167

3333 June 2013

 IV 6.0 – 6.5 167

V 7.5 – 8.0 154

VI 9.0 – 9.5 159

VII 10.5-11.0 174

VIII 12.0-12.5 176

IX 13.5-14.0 174

X 15.0-15.5 174

XI 16.5-17.0 168

XII 18.0-18.5 174

XIII 19.5-20.0 174

XIV 21.0-21.5 176

XV 22.5-23.0 184

XVI 24.0-24.5 174

XVII 25.5-26.0 174

XVII 27.0-27.5 174

XVIII 28.5-29.0 154

3434 June 2013

 Bore Sampling Allowable Bearing
Hole Depth (m) Capacity (kPa) from SPT
No. Level N-Values

I 1.5 – 2.0 175

II 3.0 – 3.5 159

III 4.5 – 5.0 167

IV 6.0 – 6.5 167

V 7.5 – 8.0 154

BH 5
VI 9.0 – 9.5 159

VII 10.5-11.0 174

VIII 12.0-12.5 174

IX 13.5-14.0 174

X 15.0-15.5 164

Bore Sampling Allowable Bearing

Hole Depth (m) Capacity (kPa) from SPT
No. Level N-Values

I 1.5 – 2.0 135

II 3.0 – 3.5 172

III 4.5 – 5.0 167

BH 6
IV 6.0 – 6.5 167

V 7.5 – 8.0 154

VI 9.0 – 9.5 159

3535 June 2013

5.0 CONCLUSIONS

i. The site was investigated by drilling Six boreholes, the depth of the borehole drilled is
shown in the tables above.

ii. Water table was encountered in Five of the boreholes drilled

iv. The allowable bearing capacity values determined from field SPT N-values ranged from
125kPa to 175kPa in all boreholes, the highest values being experience in the first layer
upto 10m.

3636 June 2013

BIBLIOGRAPHY

i. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION (1990). British Standard 1377: 1990.

Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes, London.

ii. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION (1981). British Standards 5930: 1981. Code
of Practice for Site Investigations, London.

iii. VICKERS, BRIAN (1978); Laboratory work in Civil Engineering Soil Mechanics.
Granada Publishers, London.

iv. BRYEN G, EVERETT J.P and SCHWARTZ K. (1995); A Guide to Practical

Geotechnical Engineering in Southern Africa, Frankipile SA, Third Edition.

v. BOWLES, JOSEPH E (1997); Foundation Analysis and Design, Fifth International

Edition, McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.

vi. KANIJAJ, SHENBAGA R (1995); Designs Aids in Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering. Tata McGraw Publishing Co. Ltd. New Delhi.

vii. McCARTHY, DAVID F (1997); Essentials of Soils Mechanics and Foundations. Basic
Geotechnics, Fifth Edition, Prentice Hall, USA.

31
June 2013