COURSEWORK ON GROUND INVESTIGATION AND SOIL TESTING

CIVL 6077
ASSIGNMENT1
S.I. INTERPRETATION REPORT

Document No. CIVL6077/REP/001

Prepared for:
Department of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
The University of Hong Kong

Issued: November 2014

Prepared by:
Hamza Nadeem
UID:2010539786
7/F Prosperity Millennia Plaza
663 Kings Road
North Point, Hong Kong
Tel:

+852 53749093

Fax:

+852 2527 6364

1.

GEOLOGICAL CROSS SECTIONS

The following table summarized the soil strata encountered in Boreholes BH1 through BH8

Top of Stratum (mPD)

Borehole
No.

Ground
Level
(mPD)

Concrete
Slab

Fill

MD

Alluvium

CDT/HDT
(Grade
V/IV)

MDT/SDT
(Grade III/II)

End of
Borehole

BH1
BH2
BH3
BH4
BH5
BH6
BH7
BH8

+4.58
+4.58
+4.53
+4.5
+4.48
+4.47
+4.53
+4.57

+4.58
+4.58
+4.53
+4.50
+4.48
+4.53
+4.57

+4.48
+4.48
+4.43
+4.40
+4.38
+4.47
+4.43
+4.47

-10.72
-9.92
-9.07
-9.70
-13.37
-11.68
-8.97
-13.53

-16.22
-16.88
-17.17
-15.80
-16.44
-16.73
-16.23
-16.36

-33.72
-31.92
-31.72
-34.50
-34.15
-33.83
-33.97
-32.59

-37.24
-42.05
-41.29
-44.25
-45.00
-37.10
-44.55
-42.51

-42.37
-47.24
-46.35
-49.35
-50.18
-42.24
-49.70
-47.81

Table 1. Summary of Strata Levels

Key:
MD
CDT
HDT
MDT
SDT

Marine Deposits
Completely Decomposed
Tuff
Highly decomposed Tuff
Moderately Decomposed
Tuff
Slightly Decomposed Tuff

Scale: 1:400

Figure 1. Geological Section A-A

2.

ROCKHEAD CONTOURS

The following table summarized the data relevant to the bedrock contours

Borehole
No.
BH1
BH2
BH3
BH4
BH5
BH6
BH7
BH8

Easting

Northing

842807.650
842834.820
842848.450
842827.560
842844.960
842857.160
842873.230
842877.070

814237.110
814257.220
814280.040
814217.570
814231.280
814255.470
814225.450
814241.190

Rockhead Level
(mPD)
-37.24
-42.05
-41.29
-44.25
-45.00
-37.10
-44.55
-42.51

Table 2. Relavent Data for formulation of Rockhead Contours

Note:
1. Rockhead is defined as 5m continuous vertical thickness of Grade III or better rock with a Total Core Recovery of greater than 85%.
2. The contours shown have been produced using site specific boreholes.
3. The contours have been generated using Krigging Method of interpolation between boreholes. Actual site conditions may vary.

The data summarized in Table 2 above has been used to develop the Rochead Contours for the site area (Figure 2). Commercially available software Surfer 12 has been used to generate
the contours.

814400

814350

814300

814250

814200

814150

4.

842760 842780 842800 842820 842840 842860 842880 842900 842920 842940

Figure 2. Rockhead Contours Generated using Surfer

The Rockhead contours developed using surfer have been overlaid on the site area and are shown in Figure 3.

NOTES:
1. ROCKHEAD IS DEFINED AS 5M
CONTINUOUS VERTICAL
THICKNESS OF GRADE III OR
BETTER ROCK WITH A TOTAL
CORE RECOVERY OF GREATER
THAN 85%.
2. THE CONTOURS SHOWN HAVE
BEEN PRODUCED USING SITE
SPECIFIC BOREHOLES.
3. THE CONTOURS HAVE BEEN
GENERATED USING KRIGGING
METHOD OF INTERPOLATION
BETWEEN BOREHOLES. ACTUAL
SITE CONDITIONS MAY VARY.

3.

SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil Properties
Particle Size Distribution(%)

(kN/m3)

Friction
Angle
(Deg)

Moisture
Content (%)

Gravel

Sand

Silt

Clay

FILL

18.3

5.14

34.06

31

14

68

18

MD

15.9

10.17

52

18

60

20

ALL

18.8-19.4

5.32- 45.80

24.83
29.3432.01

28-31

7-11

24-36

53-69

53-69

17.3-18.2

25.44-32.54

22.3327.39

29-41

1-10

16-23

74-76

74-76

CDT/HDT
(Grade V/IV)
MDT/SDT
(Grade III/II)

4.

Bulk Density

Cohesion c
(kN/m2)

Soil Strata

SOIL CLASSIFICATION

Following a review of Borehole Drilling data on site, it is my opinion that the following soil layers define the geology of the site. These soil layers can be further classified as follows:
a. Fill: The fill layer is the upper most soil layer identified in all the Drilling Record. The fill is can be classified as coarse grained material and is generally composed mainly of sand, gravels,
cobbles and boulders. The thickness varies 13.4m to 18.0m and the material generally comprises loose to medium dense sand (with some silt), gravel, cobbles, and boulders. In addition
these is presence of fragments of brick, wood and volcanic tuff.
b. Marine Deposit: A layer of Marine Deposits is presents beneath the Fill layer with thickness ranging from 3.1m to 7.5m. In general, the marine deposit comprises of fine grained material
which predominantly clay with shell fragments. In addition a localized lens of loose sand within the Marine Deposits layer has also been identified.
c. Alluvium: The Alluvium layer underlies the Marine Deposits with thickness varying from 14.6m to 18.7m. In general, the alluvium comprises a coarse grained material predominantly
gravels and cobbles of moderately decomposed volcanic tuff (and slightly decomposed Granite) together with medium dense to dense sand. Localized lens of with a thickness ranging
from approximately 1m to 3m have also been identified in this layer.
d. Tuff: The Tuff layer underlies the Alluvium layer and is present in different degrees of decomposition with decomposition decreasing as the depth increases. The thickness of the tuff
layer Beneath the alluvium is tuff at different stages of decomposition. For the layer of Completely Decomposed Tuff and Highly Decomposed Tuff (Grade V/IV), the thickness varies from
3.3m to 10.9m.
The bedrock is composed of tuff andhas been defined as atleast 5m of Grade II or better rock with more than 85% core recovery, it vares from -37.10mPD to -45 mPD across the site. It
can be classified as Moderately to Slightly Decomposed Rock with close to very close joint spacing. The joints have been described from narrow to extremely narrow and there roughness
varies from rough to smooth planar joints.

5.

AVERAGE GEOLOGICAL PROFILE

The average geological profile has been summarized in the following sections:

5.1.

Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) Profiles

SPT Profile

SPT Profile

Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

SPT
Value

Borehole
No.

Ground
Level
(mPD)

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

SPT
Value

BH1

4.58

2.45

2.13

16

BH5

4.48

2.95

1.53

10

BH1

4.58

16.45

-11.87

BH5

4.48

20.45

-15.97

BH1

4.58

19.45

-14.87

BH5

4.48

26.45

-21.97

53

BH2

4.58

2.45

2.13

10

BH5

4.48

29.45

-24.97

80

BH2

4.58

9.45

-4.87

12

BH5

4.48

34.45

-29.97

34

BH2

4.58

13.5

-8.92

BH5

4.48

39.45

-34.97

10

BH2

4.58

14.95

-10.37

BH5

4.48

42.45

-37.97

50

BH2

4.58

17.95

-13.37

BH5

4.48

45.45

-40.97

69

BH2

4.58

20.95

-16.37

10

BH6

4.47

17.45

-12.98

BH2

4.58

25.45

-20.87

34

BH6

4.47

20.45

-15.98

BH2

4.58

28.45

-23.87

17

BH6

4.47

28.45

-23.98

30

BH2

4.58

31.95

-27.37

29

BH6

4.47

41.3

-36.83

200

BH2

4.58

35.95

-31.37

80

BH7

4.53

10.45

-5.92

10

BH2

4.58

38.95

-34.37

11

BH7

4.53

13.95

-9.42

BH2

4.58

41.95

-37.37

14

BH7

4.53

16.95

-12.42

BH2

4.58

45.95

-41.37

80

BH7

4.53

19.95

-15.42

BH3

4.53

9.45

-4.92

BH7

4.53

26.45

-21.92

27

BH3

4.53

16.43

-11.9

BH7

4.53

30.45

-25.92

10

BH3

4.53

19.45

-14.92

BH7

4.53

35.45

-30.92

33

BH3

4.53

37.45

-32.92

11

BH7

4.53

38.45

-33.92

BH3

4.53

40.45

-35.92

12

BH7

4.53

41.45

-36.92

21

BH3

4.53

43.45

-38.92

136

BH7

4.53

44.45

-39.92

62

BH4

4.5

2.45

2.05

19

BH7

4.53

47.45

-42.92

83

BH4

4.5

15.45

-10.95

BH8

4.57

2.45

2.12

BH4

4.5

18.45

-13.95

BH8

4.57

7.45

-2.88

10

BH4

4.5

34.45

-29.95

43

BH8

4.57

9.95

-5.38

BH4

4.5

41.45

-36.95

11

BH8

4.57

14.95

-10.38

BH4

4.5

44.45

-39.95

77

BH8

4.57

18.95

-14.38

10

BH4

4.5

47

-42.5

200

BH8

4.57

23.95

-19.38

10

BH8

4.57

27.45

-22.88

27

BH8

4.57

30.45

-25.88

15

BH8

4.57

33.45

-28.88

19

BH8

4.57

36.45

-31.88

50

BH8

4.57

39.45

-34.88

12

BH8

4.57

42.45

-37.88

23

BH8

4.57

45.45

-40.88

89

SPT Profile
5.00
0.00
0

50

100

-5.00
-10.00

Level (mPD)

-15.00
-20.00
-25.00
-30.00
-35.00
-40.00
-45.00
-50.00

SPT Value

150

200

5.2.

Undrained Shear Strength

Undrained Shear Strengths

Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth (m)

Level (mPD)

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

Undrained
Shear Strength
(kN/m2)
31

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

20

Undrained Shear Strength

0.00
0

-2.00

Level (mPD)

-4.00

-6.00

-8.00

-10.00

-12.00

-14.00

Strength (kN/m 2 )

10

12

5.3.

Total Unit Weight

Total Unit Weight

Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth (m)

Level (mPD)

Total Unit
Weight (kN/m3)

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

15.9

BH2

4.58

26.5

-21.92

19.4

BH2

4.58

37

-32.42

18.2

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

18.3

BH6

4.47

39.5

-35.03

17.3

BH7

4.53

31

-26.47

18.8

Total Unit Weight

0.00
0

10

15

-5.00

Level (mPD)

-10.00
-15.00
-20.00
-25.00
-30.00
-35.00
-40.00
Total Unit Weight (kN/m 3 )

20

25

5.4.

Water Content and Atterberg Limits

Water Content and Atterberg Limits

Atterberg Limits
Liquid
Plastic
Limit
Limit
(%)
(%)
56
25

Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth (m)

Level (mPD)

Water
Content(%)

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

52

BH2

4.58

26.5

-21.92

28

BH2

4.58

37

-32.42

29

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

31

41

21

BH6

4.47

39.5

-35.03

41

BH7

4.53

31

-26.47

31

Water Content and Atterberg Limits

0.00
-5.00

0.00

10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00

-10.00
Level (mPD)

Water Content

-15.00
Atterberg Limit Plastic Limit

-20.00

"Atterberg Limit Liquid Limit"

-25.00
-30.00
-35.00
-40.00

Water Content, Atterberg Limits (%)

5.5.

Plasticity Index

Plasticity Index
Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

Plasticity Index
(%)

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

31

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

20

Plasticity Index
0.00
0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

-5.00

-10.00

Level (mPD)

-15.00

-20.00

-25.00

-30.00

-35.00

-40.00

Plasticity Index (%)

25.00

30.00

35.00

5.6.

Liquidity Index

Liquidity Index
Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

Liquidity Index
(%)

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

87

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

50

Liquiditiy Index
0.00
0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

-5.00

-10.00

Level (mPD)

-15.00

-20.00

-25.00

-30.00

-35.00

-40.00

Liquidity Index (%)

80.00

100.00

5.7.

Hydraulic Conductivity

Hydraulic Conductivity
Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

Coefficient of
Permeability
(m/sec)
1.05E-09

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

9.78E-10

Hydraulic Conductivity
0.00
0.00E+00

5.00E-01

1.00E+00

1.50E+00

2.00E+00

-2.00

Level (mPD)

-4.00

-6.00

-8.00

-10.00

-12.00

-14.00

Coefficient of Permeability (m/sec)

2.50E+00

5.8.

Hydrostatic Pressure Line and in-situ Pore Water Pressures

Hydrostatic Pressure Line and in-situ Pore Water Pressures

Borehole No.

Ground
Level (mPD)

BH1

4.58

17

-12.42

167

In-situ pore
water
pressures
(kN/m2)
95

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

172

95

BH1

4.58

18

-13.42

177

95

BH2
BH2
BH2
BH2
BH2

4.58
4.58
4.58
4.58
4.58

26
26.5
27
36.5
37

-21.42
-21.92
-22.42
-31.92
-32.42

255
260
265
358
363

195
195
195
145
145

BH2
BH3

4.58
4.53

37.5
14

-32.92
-9.47

368
137

145
95

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

142

95

BH3

4.53

15

-10.47

147

95

BH6
BH6

4.47
4.47

39
39.5

-34.53
-35.03

383
387

195
195

BH6
BH7

4.47
4.53

40
30.93

-35.53
-26.4

392
303

195
195

BH7

4.53

31

-26.47

304

195

BH7

4.53

31.5

-26.97

309

195

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

Hydrostatic
Pressure Line
(kN/m2)

Hydrostatic Pressure Line and

In-situ Pore Water Pressure
0.00
0

500

1000

1500

-5.00

Level (mPD)

-10.00
Hydrostatic
Pressure Line

-15.00

in situ pore
Water
Pressure
Linear
(Hydrostatic
Pressure Line)

-20.00
-25.00
-30.00
-35.00
-40.00
Pressure (kN/m2 )

5.9.

Total and Effective in-situ Stresses

Total and Effective in-situ vertical stresses

Borehole No.

Ground
Level (mPD)

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

p(kN/m2)

q(kN/m2)

In-situ
pore
water
pressures
(kN/m2)

Effective
in-situ
vertical
stresses
(kN/m2)

Total insitu
vertical
stresses
(kN/m2)

BH1

4.58

17.00

-12.42

65.20

35.20

95.00

100.40

195.40

BH1

4.58

17.50

-12.92

124.20

64.20

95.00

188.40

283.40

BH1

4.58

18.00

-13.42

238.00

109.00

95.00

347.00

442.00

BH2

4.58

26.00

-21.42

268.40

176.40

195.00

444.80

639.80

BH2

4.58

26.50

-21.92

474.80

294.80

195.00

769.60

964.60

BH2

4.58

27.00

-22.42

822.90

469.90

195.00

1292.80

1487.80

BH2

4.58

36.50

-31.92

178.60

89.60

145.00

268.20

413.20

BH2

4.58

37.00

-32.42

315.30

143.30

145.00

458.60

603.60

BH2

4.58

37.50

-32.92

590.90

244.90

145.00

835.80

980.80

BH3

4.53

14.00

-9.47

57.00

37.00

95.00

94.00

189.00

BH3

4.53

14.50

-9.97

156.80

91.80

95.00

248.60

343.60

BH3

4.53

15.00

-10.47

324.90

187.90

95.00

512.80

607.80

BH6

4.47

39.00

-34.53

212.80

122.80

195.00

335.60

530.60

BH6

4.47

39.50

-35.03

405.80

225.80

195.00

631.60

826.60

BH6

4.47

40.00

-35.53

701.80

351.80

195.00

1053.60

1248.60

BH7

4.53

30.93

-26.40

175.70

82.70

195.00

258.40

453.40

BH7

4.53

31.00

-26.47

372.00

197.00

195.00

569.00

764.00

BH7

4.53

31.50

-26.97

700.60

340.60

195.00

1041.20

1236.20

Total and Effective in-situ Vertical Stresses

0.00
0.00

500.00

1000.00

1500.00

-5.00

Level (mPD)

-10.00
-15.00

Total in-situ
vertical stresses
Effective in-situ
vertical stresses

-20.00
-25.00
-30.00
-35.00
-40.00
2

In-situ Vertical Stresses (kN/m )

5.10.

Preconsolidation Pressures

Preconsolidation Pressures
Borehole No.

Ground Level
(mPD)

Depth
(m)

Level
(mPD)

Preconsolidation
Pressure
(kN/m2)

BH1

4.58

17.5

-12.92

87

BH3

4.53

14.5

-9.97

50

Preconsolidation Pressures
0.00
0

-2.00

Level (mPD)

-4.00

-6.00

-8.00

-10.00

-12.00

-14.00

Pressure (KN/m 2 )

10

12

6.

AVERAGE GEOLOGICAL PROFILE

The project site under discussion is location in the Chai Wan district of Hong Kong Island. Based on the geographic location of the site obtained from the CEDD website, it is quite likely that
the site is located on reclaimed land. A review of the history of the site using Aerial Photographs may confirm whether or not the site is indeed located on reclaimed land however based on
the available Site Investigation data for the project, it can be seen that up to 18m thick layer of fill material is present on site which indicated reclamation was carried on site at some point in
time.
Figure 1: The development of reclamation in Hong Kong to 2000 (CEDD Website)

Approximate
Location of the Site

In terms of formation history, our site is located at the Che Kwu Shan formation near the Cape Collinson as shown on the figure below.
Figure 2: Distribution of the volcanic rocks in Hong Kong (Sewell et al., 2000)

Approximate
location of the
Site

Based on the geological maps for The Che Kwu Shan Formation near the Cape Collinson Correctional Institution, it can be seen that the rock present on site comprises mainly dark grey to
black rhyolitic crystal tuff, with a weak streaked appearance, and grey tuff-breccia. The former was generated by welding of very hot crystal ash particles. The clasts within the tuff-breccia are
composed mainly of angular to subangular crystal tuff, and vary in size from a few centimetres up to about 8 cm. The tuff-breccia was probably formed by a flow of block and ash that resulted
from the collapse of a growing lava dome. In contrast, the rhyolitic crystal tuff probably formed by a volcanic ash flow (GEO, 2007).
According to the site investigation fieldwork report of our project, the bedrock layer mainly consists of fine ash tuff with very closely spaced to extremely narrow joints. This result is in general
consistent with the geological characteristics of the Che Kwu Shan Formation.
Based on a desk study of the project site the following observations and conclusions can be made about the soil layers and ground water conditions:
a. Fill: The fill on the project site matches quite well with typical cohessionless fills used in Hong Kong. The thickness of fill in our case is around 15m. Where older reclamations were
extended, the later works may incorporate earlier structures such as concrete or masonry sea walls. There is sometimes seawall debris found in the boreholes which further support the
evidence that this is indeed reclamation fill.
b. Marine Deposit: Generally in Hong Kong coastal areas, superficial marine deposits overly older alluvial deposits and the pre-Holocene eroded rock surface. In our case, particle size
distribution results show that the marine deposit on site has a high percentage (80%) of silt/clay composition. It is also reasonable that the layout has a relatively high percentage of water
content (52%).

c. Alluvium: Alluvium is defined as a detrital material of any grain size transported and deposited during comparatively recent geological time by a river or stream. Borehole logs show the
shape of the layer is usually sub-rounded. The result is also foreseeable as soil carried by the medium of water usually has a rounded and uniformed shape.

d. Tuff: Beneath the alluvium is tuff at different stages of decomposition. For the layer of Completely Decomposed Tuff and Highly Decomposed Tuff (Grade V/IV), the thickness varies from
3.3m to 10.9m.
For the Rockhead level, which is defined as the elevation below which there is at least 5m of Grade II or better rock with more than 85% core recovery, it vary from 37.10mPD to -45.00mPD across the site.

e. Ground water conditions: The ground water levels measured by standpipe are tabulated as follows.

Borehole No.

BH1

BH3

BH8

Date
Ground Water Level

Sept 1994
+2.70

Oct 1994
+2.61

Oct 1994
+2.60

The values of 2.60mPD to 2.70mPD are relatively higher than that suggested by the Port Works Design Manual (CEDD 2002) in the Quarry Bay/ North Point location as shown below.

Location

Period of Data

Quarry Bay/ North Point

1981-1999

Mean Sea Level

(mPD)
+1.30

Extra care should be paid for adopting the suitable values of ground water tables for design purposes.

7.

ENGINEERING IMPLICATIONS ON DESIGN

a) Excavation Stability: Since the excavation is 11m deep it is quite likely that most of the retained soil will be the fill layer. Due to the cohessionless nature of the fill layer, there may be
stability issues when designing for the Excavation and Lateral Support Works (ELS). Due to the low stiffness of the Fill layer, lateral deflection of the retaining wall might be an issue
hence suitable lateral support measures will need to be provided in order to limit lateral movement of the wall and subsequent vertical ground settlement. Furthermore the retaining walls
used will need a relatively large embedment depth in order to ensure the overall stability of the system.
b) Foundation: A shallow foundation may not be suitable for the current site since the building will consist of a 3-level underground parking structure and if a shallow foundation is used it is
most likely to be footed on the fill layer. Hence a bearing capacity problem may arise hence it is recommended to adopt pile foundations. Pile foundation would penetrate through the
Sand Fill and low strength MD and be founded in the underlying Alluvial Sand, CDG orRock depending on the load and form of piling.

c) Bearing Capacity of Frictional Pile: If frictional piles are adopted as the foundation, one of the potential problems that may arise is significant secondary consolidation settlement due to
the presence of the Clay and Silt layers within the Marine deposit layer which has a maximum thickness of approximately 8m. If it is assumed that future secondary consolidation
settlement will be significant, there is a potential of significant negative skin friction to be induced on the frictional piles which will reduce their capacity and make them less efficient. A 1-D
consolidation test can be used to better estimate the current degree of consolidation of the clays to better predict whether future settlement will be significant or not.

d) Bearing Capacity of End-Bearing Pile: The bedrock is composed primarily of Grade II/II tuff which is generally much stronger and abrasive than granite with a UCS of up to 400MPa.
From personal experience, it can be said that the ultimate bearing capacity values suggested in the Code of Practice of Foundations are normally on a very conservative side. In addition
these values have been prescribed for granite rather than tuff. If end bearing piles are adopted and designed based on the Code of Practice for Foundations, it is quite likely that the
required size and number of piles will be overestimated.

8.

ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION

8.1 Determination of Properties of Marine Clay

In order to determine the strength properties of the MD layer the following testing is recommended to ascertain the undrained shear strength of the Clay layer
1. SPTs may be carried out within the MD layer to get an idea of the consistency of the Clays (e.g Soft/ Firm/ Stiff). The SPt N Value may also be correlated to the undrained shear
strength of the Marine Deposit layer, however this alone should not be used and should be supplemented with lab/field test results.
2. Field Vane Shear Testing: Vane Shear testing on site can be used to determine the undrained shear strength of the MD Clay layer since it does not cause disturbance of the soil
layer. Vane shear test has an advantage that it is relatively quick and easy to perform. Also it has been used quite commonly in the industry and due to the marine nature of the MD
layer; it will generally give reliable results.
3. In order to supplement the Vane Shear Tests results, Triaxial CU Lab tests using the total stress approach may be used to determine the Undrained Shear Strength. Guideline for
such testing are prescribed in Geoguide 3.
4. As discussed earlier, the consolidation state of the MD layer may influence the choice of foundation hence a 1D oedometer lab test is suggested to determine the compressibility
parameters of the MD layer and predict potential future settlement. The oedometer test can provide us with parameters such as the coefficient of consolidation, coefficient of volume
compressibility and the compression index.

8.2 Determination of Parameters for Seepage Analysis

The following field/lab testing is proposed for the seepage analysis

1. Standpipes are proposed to be install din drill holes to ascertain the height of the water table
2. Constant Head Permeability Test is recommended on site to determine the permeability of the coarser layers such as the Fill and Alluvium
3. Falling Head Permeability test is recommended in low permeability soil such as the Marine Deposits that comprises mainly of clay.

9.

INSTRUMNETATION AND MONITORING

The following appropriate instrumentation may be installed and monitored during the Excavation and Lateral Support Works:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Inclinometers in the retained soil outside the cofferdam

Settlement markers are recommended in the ground and existing structures and utilities if any
Porewater Pressure will be monitored by piezometers installed in observation wells outside the sheet pile cofferdam.
Survey/Tilt meters installed on the sheet piles to measure sheet pile deflection
Strain Gauges installed on struts.

6. Observation Wells with standpipes within the cofferdam to measure the

level of ground water
7. If sensitive structures or utilities are present nearby vibration points should be
installed near these structures/utilities to measure the vibration in terms of peak
particle velocity (ppv). It should be recorded at every meter length of penetration of
pile, at final set and at levels where obstructions are encountered.

Based on adopted design (Type of Sheet Pile/Size of Lateral Members, etc), an instrumentation and monitoring regime should be developed with suitable AAA values.