Final Report

on
Geotechnical Investigation of foundation
of Residential Building at Budanilkantha,
Kathmandu, Nepal

Kathmandu, September 2021

Submitted To: Submitted By:

Client: Mr. Shreedhar Khanal Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur,
Nepal

N.S. Engineering & Geo-technical Services Pvt. Ltd.

 Geotechnical investigation of foundation of residential building
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal Acknowledgement

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal is very much grateful to Mr. Shreedhar Khanal for
entrusting this job of geotechnical investigation of residential building at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu,
Nepal to revel the facts and figures relating to the sub-soil of proposed building foundation for the
stability and safety of foundation and super structure.
We hope this report will bring some useful parameters about the soil condition of the proposed building
area. This report shall also be useful in determining the depth and size of the foundation and
corresponding bearing capacity.

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal i

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT........................................................................................................... I

1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1

2.0 OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................... 1

3.0 SCOPE OF WORK ....................................................................................................... 1

4.0 GENERAL GEOLOGY, GEOMORPHOLOGY AND SEISMICITY ............................... 1

4.1 Geology of Kathmandu Valley ................................................................................................. 1
4.2 Seismicity .................................................................................................................................. 2
4.2.1 Plate Tectonic Concept .................................................................................................. 5
4.2.2 Earthquakes ................................................................................................................... 5
5.0 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 7
5.1 Field Work Procedure .............................................................................................................. 7
5.1.1 Rotary Core Boring ........................................................................................................ 7
5.1.2 In-situ Tests ................................................................................................................... 7
5.1.3 Sampling ....................................................................................................................... 8
5.2 Laboratory Tests ...................................................................................................................... 9
6.0 OBSERVATION AND RESULTS ............................................................................... 11
6.1 Field Investigation Results ..................................................................................................... 11
6.1.1 Strata ........................................................................................................................... 11
6.1.2 Ground Water Table..................................................................................................... 11
6.1.3 Field Tests ................................................................................................................... 11
7.0 BEARING CAPACITY ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 13
7.1 Allowable Bearing Pressure ................................................................................................... 13
7.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity ....................................... 13
7.3 Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Tolerable Settlement................................................. 13
7.4 Analysis of the Results ............................................................................................................ 14
8.0 LIQUEFACTION ......................................................................................................... 16

9.0 SEISMIC DESIGN FOR FOUNDATION ..................................................................... 19

10.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ............................................................... 20

ANNEXES
Annex-A: Borehole Log (Drilling)
Annex-B: Test Results Summary Sheets
Annex-C: Laboratory Test Results
Annex-D: Photographs

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal ii

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
1.0 Introduction
This report presents the results of the soil investigation work for the construction of Proposed Residential
Building at Budhanilkantha, Kathmandu. The report covers the information on the general engineering
characteristics of the subsoil as revealed by the soil investigation work as well as the allowable bearing
capacity for the proposed foundation based on the soil data obtained from the field and laboratory tests.
Single borehole was drilled at a proposed site up to the depth of 16.5 m. Drilling was commenced on
15th August 2021 and completed on 17th 2021.

2.0 Objectives
The main objective of this investigation is to explore geotechnical characteristics of the sub–soil strata,
(i) to assess the engineering properties of the sub-soil; (ii) to confirm the designed value of bearing
capacity of the ground strata during design of foundation, and (iii) to confirm the design parameters to
be used during the detailed design of the foundation for the proposed building.

3.0 Scope of work

The scope of work includes drilling of single borehole up to the depth of 16.50 m, along with standard
penetration test, dynamic cone penetration test, retrieving samples from the borehole and evaluation of
allowable bearing capacity of the foundation and liquefaction analysis based on field and laboratory
tests.

4.0 General Geology, Geomorphology and Seismicity

4.1 Geology of Kathmandu Valley

Geologically, Kathmandu valley is located in the Lesser Himalayan zone. Kathmandu Valley is the
typical example of intermountain basin surrounded by Mahabharat Range. The valley floor consists of
young fluvio-lacustrine sediments of Pliocene to Quaternary age with thickness ranging up to 500 m
(Yoshida and Igarashi, 1984). The basement rock of the valley is low grade metamorphic rock belonging
to Phulchoki Group and Bhimphedi Group of the Kathmandu Complex (Stocklin and Bhattarai, 1977).
The valley floor consists of unconsolidated fluvio-lacustrine sediments, the distribution of sediments
across Kathmandu valley is not uniform. The southern part of the valley consists of hill terraces formed
during late Pliocene to middle Pleistocene (Yoshida and Igarashi, 1984), with the sediment exposure
along the terraces. In general, northern part of the Kathmandu Valley has sand dominated soft sediments
while southern part is of clay dominated

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 1

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal

Study area

Figure 1: Geological map Kathmandu Valley (Source; Sakai et al. (2008)

The proposed residential building of Budanilkantha lies NW of Kathmandu valley and consists
sediments representing the Tokha Formation. The Tokha Formation has a flat base and begins with pale
green silt or silty sand, and some gravel lenses followed by black silt with a thin diatomite horizon.
There are also areas where the Tokha Formation commences with very thick (up to 3 m) black silt with
diatomite, succeeded by very thick (up to 5 m) sand beds with large-scale cross-stratification and some
gravelly sand and black silt beds. This formation was deposited in streams and marshes. The diatomite-
bearing black slit and overlying sand were deposited in pro-delta and delta front environments,
respectively.
Geotechnically, Kathmandu valley is characterized by the soft fluvio-lacustrine sediments with
thickness variation in different places. Moribayashi and Maruo (1980) estimated sediment thickness up
to 650 m in the central part. In addition, Katel et al. (1996), based on drilling data has shown more than
300 m thick, muddy and sandy sequence. At the central part of the KMC, Bhrikutimandap, a drillhole
reaches the basement rock at a depth of 550m. Based on the observed shear wave velocity in some bore
holes and N-values of Standard Penetration Test, the average shear wave velocity has been found to be
varying from 148 m/s to 297m/s (Chamlagain and Gautam, 2015).

4.2 Seismicity
Nepal Himalaya is considered to be located in seismically active zone. There had many earthquakes
with epicenter located within the region. The most renowned earthquakes are 1934 Nepal-Bihar
Earthquake and 1987 Nepal Earthquake which has intensity of 8.2 and 7.2 in Richter scale respectively.
They had caused uncountable number of damages.
The seismic activity is related to the geo-tectonics of Himalayan Geology. The southern Indo-Gangetic
tectonic plate is subducting into the northern Tibetan (Eurasian) Tectonic plate since the Miocene
Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 2
 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
Period. The subduction rate is presumed to be at the rate 5-8cm/year. The collision of two continental
tectonic plates has caused the rise of the Himalaya, which is the highest mountain range in the world.
As a result, major longitudinal NW-SE striking thrust faults are also created. These are Main Frontal
Thrust (MFT) between Indogangetic Plain and the Siwaliks, the Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) in
between the Siwaliks and Higher Himalaya and the Main Central Thrust (MCT) in between the Higher
Himalaya and the Higher Himalaya.
Many earth scientists believe that longitudinally the entire 2,400 km long Himalayan arc can be
segmented into different individual parts (200-300 km), which periodically break and move separately
and produce mega earthquake (catastrophic earthquake) in the Himalayan region.
From east to west, the great earthquake of Assam, India (1950), Shilong, India (1897), Nepal-Bihar,
India (1934) and Kangra, India (1905) are the mega-earthquakes of the last century produced by the
movements in different parts of the Himalayan arc, all with magnitude around 8.0 - 8.7. When a sector
of the Himalaya moves and produces earthquakes, it will take some time (from decades to century) to
repeat the event at the same place.
Nepal is prone to an earthquake of minor or major magnitude. Records of earthquakes since 1253
indicate that 16 major earthquakes hit Nepal - the 1833 (magnitude 7.9) and 1934(magnitude 8.3) are
two of these, which have occurred at an interval of 100 years. Statically, the earthquake occurrence data
of the last century shows that in average Nepal was hit by a big earthquake in every 12 years (Nakarmi,
1997).

Figure 2: Historical Events of Earthquakes in Nepal

(Source: Micro Seismic Epicenter Map of Nepal Himalaya and Adjoining Region1997, Published by DoMG, GON)

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 3

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal

Now days, earth scientists are most concerned about the lack of occurrence of any great earthquake
between Kathmandu in the east and Deharadun, India in the west during the past many centuries, and
have named it the CENTRAL GAP. It is most likely that this segment of the Himalaya is due for a
major break to trigger a mega-earthquake in the Himalaya. It is even suspected that it may be the greatest
earthquake that we have so far experienced in the Himalaya in the past few centuries. The area closer to
the epicenter will suffer the maximum damage.

Figure 3: Seismic Zoning Map (Source: UNDP/UNCHS (Habitat, 1994).

To counteract earthquake effect due consideration has to be taken in the structural design of bridge. The
project area is located in the area having Seismic Zoning Factor, Z, equal to 0.8 to 0.9 according to the
Nepal National Building Code (NBC 105: 1994).

Figure 4: Seismic Hazard Map of Nepal

(Source: Nepal Seismological Center, Lainchaur, Kathmandu)
Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 4
 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
4.2.1 Plate Tectonic Concept
From the geological studies, the Tectonic Force is generated from the continental collisions between the
Indian and Eurasian plates. It is believed that the Indian plate is going down i.e. subduction whereas,
Eurasian plate rising over the Indian plate. As a result, Peter and Topponnier considered Tibet as a
pressure guage of Asia. Indian plate applies pressure to Eurasia and Tibetan plateau rose to present
position and is still rising at the rate of 3.2 cm to 12.7 cm a year. In general, the Tectonic Forces have
created linear belt of cracks parallel to Himalayas along with the rise of height of mountains.

4.2.2 Earthquakes
Due to Tectonic Forces, Himalayan zones and the neighboring areas are seismically very active. Most
of epicenters of earthquakes are found to be located in the unstable zones. The frequency and intensity
of earthquakes are found at the weakness of the crust such as major faults, major bends or major arcs.
The Sind earthquake of 1819, and Nepal - Bihar earthquake of 1934 had their origin underneath the
alluvial covers of the Indo - gangetic trough.
In the Himalayas, where sharp structural changes are found such as Quetta, Kashmir and Assam, major
earthquakes are experienced frequently in those areas. The earthquakes of 1950 near Assam, China
border and 1987 in Assam, Dhurbi earthquake of 1930, Quetta 1935 and Kangara 1905 were major
incidences in Himalayas. A list of earthquake in Himalayas and the neighboring areas is given below:
Intensity, M Year Location
8.0 1819 Kutch
8.7 1897 Assam
8.4 1905 Kangra
7.6 1918 Srimangal
7.1 1930 Dhubri
8.4 1934 Nepal – Bihar
8.7 1950 Assam
7.6 2015 Gorkha (Epicenter)
6.9 2015 Sindhupalchowk/Dolakha
6.8 2015 Sindhupalchowk/Dolakha
The following table shows the epicenter and magnitude of the historical earthquakes in different areas
of Nepal
Epicenter
Lat. N. Long E. Location Date Magnitude
27 85.0 Kalaiya (Nepal) 4.10.1833 7.0
27 84.0 India/Nepal Border 18.10.1833 7.0

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 5

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
26.5 86.5 Bihar/Nepal Border 15.01.1934 8.3
26.7 86.6 Udaypur (Nepal) 21.08.1988 6.7
28.24 84.75 Gorkha 25.04.2015 7.6
27.84 86.05 Sindhupalchowk/Dolakha 26.04.2015 6.9
27.82 86.12 Sindhupalchowk/Dolakha 12.05.2015 6.8
This table concludes that Nepal is located on high seismic zone.

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 6

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
5.0 Methodology

5.1 Field Work Procedure

Field works involved Rotary core drilling mechanism at single borehole around the proposed building
location to the maximum depth of 16.50 m from the ground level and SPT/DCP at every 1.5m interval
is recorded according as the ground condition. Borehole log was prepared at the site on the basis of the
visual observation of the soil obtained from the borehole. The borehole log is attached to the annexes
are further verified by lab test results. The location of borehole suggested by expert team and
subsequently approved by Client is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Location map of the investigation area.

5.1.1 Rotary Core Boring

The exploratory Rotary Core Boring was carried out as per ASTM Designation D 2113-83 standard
procedure using a conventional drilling rod and rotary core drilling accessory. The borehole was
advanced by rotating a series of hollow drill rods with water swivel and drag bit with diamond bits of
HX and NX hole size.
Casing of HX type followed by NX were driven to the required depth for protecting the drilled hole
from possible side fall. One set of drill rigs and pumps were used under the qualified supervision of Geo
Cube technical team. Total 16.5 m drill hole were drilled during the investigation.

5.1.2 In-situ Tests

Standard Penetration Test (SPT): Standard penetration test (SPT) had been conducted by means of
driving standard split spoon sampler to count the number of blows per 15cm of penetration. The
equipment and hammer in which the SPT were conducted according to IS 2131-1 963.

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 7

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
The test consisted of driving a split-spoon sampler with and outside diameter of 50mm into the soil at
the base of borehole. Driving was accomplished by a trip hammer weighing 65kg falling freely through
a height of 75cm onto the drive head which was fitted at the top of rods. Procedure of driving SPT
sampler tube consisted of driving the entire split spoon to 15cm into the soil at the bottom of the
borehole. It was then driven 30cm further. The number of blows required to drive each 15cm distance
was recorded. The blow count for driving last 30cm penetration was referred to as SPT ‘N’ value. The
split spoon sampler was used to collect the disturbed sample of soil for visual classification, analysis
and determination of soil characteristics.
The value of the standard penetration number N depends on the relative density of the cohesion less soil
and the unconfined compressive strength of the cohesive soil. If the soil is compact or stiff, the
penetration number is high. The angle of shearing resistance (Φ) of the cohesion less soil depends upon
the number N. In general, the greater the N-value, the greater is the angle of shearing resistance.
Dynamic Cone penetration Test (DCPT): it was performed using a 50 mm cone. The cone was driven
with 65 kg hammer falling through a height of 75 cm. The recorded number of blows required to
penetrate the least 300 mm is taken as CPT values. These values of all borehole is presented in the
borehole log. The dynamic cone resistance value is correlated with the SPT value as given below:
Nc = 1.5 N for depths upto 3.00 m
Nc = 1.75 N for depths 3.00 m to 9.00 m
Nc = 2.00 N for depths greater than 9.00 m
5.1.3 Sampling
(i) Disturbed Sample:

Before any sample was taken, the borehole was cleaned up of loose disturbed soil deposited during
boring operation. The samples which were obtained from bailer and in the SPT tube were preserved as
representative disturbed samples for finding out index properties. The samples thus obtained were
placed in airtight double plastic bags, labeled properly for identification and later transported to the lab
for analysis.
(ii) Undisturbed Sample:

Undisturbed Sample was extracted by means of thin wall tube (Shelby tube). The tube was pushed into
the ground and the sample recovered manually. The tube was sealed with wax and wrapped with airtight
polythene sheets and then bound by adhesive tapes and properly labeled. The tube was properly packed
in a wooden box so as to minimize the disturbances during transportation to the laboratory and avoided
the changes of moisture content of sample. This sample was used for the determination of strength and
consolidation parameters.

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 8

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
5.2 Laboratory Tests
Disturbed samples were collected in plastic bags and transported to Kathmandu for the following tests.
a) Grain size analysis
b) Hydrometer analysis
c) Atterberg limit
d) Moisture content
e) Specific gravity
f) Unconfined compression test
g) Direct Shear Test
h) Consolidation test
i) Unit weight
The natural water content and the Specific gravity were determined from samples recovered from the
split spoon sampler and the undisturbed samples.

Grain size distribution was determined from sieve analysis for fine grained particles and coarse grained
particles, respectively. The results were combined to obtain the grain size distribution curves of the soil
as can be seen in the attached figures. The grain size composition of the soils is also presented in terms
of the percentage of each particle size in the Test Result Summary Sheets.

Direct shear tests were conducted on disturbed samples collected from the single borehole. The samples
were carefully extruded from the sampling tubes and molded using standard moulds of 6.0 x 6.0 cm²
cross-sectional areas and trimmed to 2.5 cm high. Solid metal plates were placed on both surfaces of
the samples to prevent the dissipation of pore water during shearing. The direct shear equipment is
mechanically-operated and shearing will be applied at more or less constant strain rate. If the samples
are cohesive they will be sheared at a relatively fast rate (duration of tests less than 10 minutes) to
maintain un-drained condition. The samples were sheared at three different normal stresses. The direct
shear test results is presented in terms of the failure envelops to give the angle of internal frictions ()
and the cohesion intercepts (c).

The primary purpose of Unconfined Compressive Strength of a cohesive soil test is to determine the
unconfined compressive strength, which is then used to calculate the unconsolidated undrained shear
strength of the clay under unconfined conditions. According to the ASTM standard, the unconfined
compressive strength (qu) is defined as the compressive stress at which an unconfined cylindrical
specimen of soil will fail in a simple compression test. In addition, in this test method, the unconfined
compressive strength is taken as the maximum load attained per unit area, or the load per unit area at
15% axial strain, whichever occurs first during the performance of a test.

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 9

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
For soils, the un-drained shear strength (su) is necessary for the determination of the bearing capacity of
foundations, dams, etc. The un-drained shear strength (su) of clays is commonly determined from an
unconfined compression test.
The unconfined compressive strength (qu) is the load per unit area at which the cylindrical specimen of
a cohesive soil fails in compression
P
qu 
A
Where,
P= axial load at failure;
A0
A =A (Corrected area)
(1 -  )

Where,
A0 = initial area of the specimen;
e = axial strain = change in length / original length.
The undrained shear strength (su) of the soil equal to one half of the unconfined compressive strength
qu
(su) 
2

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 10

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
6.0 Observation and Results

6.1 Field Investigation Results

6.1.1 Strata
Borehole of the proposed building was drilled up to a depth of 16.50 m. The Rotary core drilling
operation had been carried out on 15th August 2021 and completed on 17th 2021 from the surface level
of the ground.
In this bore hole, subsurface is classified into three layers; Light-green slit or fine-sand, black clayey silt
and light-gray, medium-coarse sand mixed with same boulder, cobble gravel lenses.
The first layer from ground level to 1m strata is represented the light-green, cohesive, loosely dense,
moist silty-sand or fine-sand and from 1m to 4 m shows the black, cohesive, moist, loose -medium
dense, medium-high plasticity clayey silt parting with little fine-sand layer. The third layer is represented
the medium-coarse grained, low plasticity, highly dense gravelly sand alternating with boulder, cobble,
gravel lenses. The SPT/DCPT N value is ranging from the 5 to more than 50.

6.1.2 Ground Water Table

Ground water table (GWT) was found at a depth of 5.0m from the surface level of the proposed building
site during the drilling period as shown in borehole log. If the (N) value exceeds 15, then dilatancy
correction should be made.

6.1.3 Field Tests

Altogether 3 SPT and 8 DCP tests were carried out for borehole BH-1. Water table was noted. The
measured field SPT ‘N’ value is provided in borehole log sheet (Annex). The DCPT value obtained is
again converted in SPT using the correlation given by Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee;
NDCP= 1.50NSPT for depths upto 4.0 m
NDCP = 1.75NSPT for depths between 4.0 to 9.0 m
NDCP = 2.0NSPT for depths greater than 9.0 m

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 11

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
The summary of field SPT test and Adopted SPT N-values are shown in the following Tables:
Field SPT/DCP

Corrected
Depth, BH-1 Adopted SPT
m
Minimum SPT, N-
N Value (Na) Remarks
value (N”)
Field N- Converted
Value
SPT/DCP SPT, N-value

1.5 5 SPT 5 5 5

3 16 SPT 16 16 16

4.5 80 SPT 80 48 28

6 70 DCPT 40 28 28

7.5 150 DCPT 86 50 45

Ignoring the top SPT N-values,
9 150 DCPT 86 50 45 minimum SPT N=16 has been
adopted for the entire depth
10.5 150 DCPT 75 45 45

12 150 DCPT 75 45 45

13.5 150 DCPT 75 45 45

15 150 DCPT 75 45 45

16.5 150 DCPT 75 45 45

If the N-value exceeds 50 then the test was discontinued and the interpreted results, with corrections
are used to estimate the geotechnical engineering properties of the soil. For the calculation of bearing
capacity, minimum value (50) is taken for each layer (15cm or 10cm).
When dynamic loads are applied on silty gravel and sandy soils in saturated state the pore pressure in
such soil will not be in a position to get dissipated due to low permeability. Hence, during dynamic
loading (i.e. application of blows) the pore water will offer a temporary resistance to dynamic loads.
This leads to higher value of N-value which is unsafe. Therefore when SPT is performed in saturated
silts and fine sands and if the observed N-value is more than 15, a correction has to be applied to reduce
the observed values. This correction is applied on the N-value corrected for over burden pressure (N’).
If the stratum (during testing) consists of fine sand & silty gravel below water table, the corrected N-
value (N’) has to be further corrected to get the final corrected value N”.

N” = 15+1/2(N’-15)
But for the proposed Residential Building at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu, Nepal has fine-sand upto the
depth of 1.0m and clayey silt parting with little fine-sand to the depth of 4.0 m and dense gravelly sand
alternating with boulder, cobble, gravel lenses below 4.0m to 16.5m. So, the field SPT N value has been
corrected for the water table. Therefore, the final minimum adopted N value used for bearing capacity
calculation is 16.

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 12

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
7.0 Bearing capacity analysis
7.1 Allowable Bearing Pressure
The allowable bearing pressure (qa) is the maximum pressure that can be imposed on the foundation
soil taking into consideration the ultimate bearing capacity of the soil and the tolerable settlement of the
structure. Analysis to determine the ultimate bearing capacity and the pressure corresponding to a
specified maximum settlement were performed and the minimum pressure obtained from two analyses
were adopted as the allowable bearing pressure.

7.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity

Since the soil in the vicinity of the foundation level has been found to be granular or non-plastic,
cohesion less sand in the left bank and middle of the proposed bridge site, the allowable bearing capacity
has been analyzed using the N-Values from SPT results. Empirical formula of Teng (1988) applicable
for this type of soils has been used to obtain the allowable bearing pressure with safety factor equal to
3.
For open foundation
qns = 0.02N2BRW1 + 0.06(100 + B2)DfRW2
Where,
qns = net safe bearing pressure, t/m2
N = SPT value corrected with respect to overburden and dilatancy
B = width of footing, m
D = depth of footing, m
RW & RW’ = correction factors for position of water level
7.3 Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on Tolerable Settlement
The maximum allowable settlement for footings in sandy gravel is generally 40 mm and for Mat
foundation in sand, the allowable settlement is 65 mm (Skempton and MacDonald, 1955). Similarly,
according to IS 1904 (1986): Code of practice for design and construction of foundations in soils:
General requirements [CED 43: Soil and Foundation Engineering], the permissible value of settlement
for multi storeyed buildings with RCC steel framed buildings is 75 mm.
The method of Teng (1988) has been employed for the analysis. This method is a modification of the
method of Terzaghi and Peck (1948) such that the allowable bearing pressure could be directly obtained
from the SPT values.
For Mat foundation:
qns = 35(N-3){(B+0.3)/2B}2RWRd
Where,
qns = Net safe bearing pressure, kN/m2 for maximum settlement of 25 mm.
N = SPT value corrected for overburden pressure
Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 13
 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal
B = width of footing, m
D = depth of footing, m
Rw = Water table correction factor
Rd = Depth correction factor = 1 + D/B
The minimum average SPT values from the borehole in each structure have been selected for the analysis
of bearing capacity of the relevant structure.
The allowable bearing pressure for a limiting settlement other than 25 mm (e.g. x mm) can be linearly
interpolated from the allowable bearing pressure for 25 mm settlement.
qa (x mm) = qa (25 mm)(x/25)
7.4 Analysis of the Results
Evaluation of safe bearing capacity for Borehole:

For Isolated Footing:

Based on Ultimate Bearing Capacity
qns = 0.02N2BRW1 + 0.06(100 + B2)DfRW2
Depth of footing, D = 1.0 m
Width of footing, B = 1.0 m
Adopted minimum SPT value after correction, N = 16 for the entire depth upto 16.50 m.
Qns = 68.547 KN/m2
Therefore, Net Safe Bearing Capacity (Qa) = 68.547 KN/m2

Summary of Results of the Analysis:

 The safe bearing capacity for Isolated footing with different width and resting at different
depth is presented as follows;
Summary Result of Isolated Footing
Depth, m Foundation Width, m B=1.0m B=1.5m B=2.0m B=2.5m B=3.0m B=3.5m
1.0 68.547 84.703 101.043 117.567 134.274 151.166
1.5 87.125 103.511 120.173 137.110 154.324 171.813
2.0 2
105.703 122.318 139.302 156.653 174.373 192.460
Qall, KN/m
2.5 124.280 141.126 158.432 176.197 194.422 213.107
3.0 142.858 159.934 177.561 195.740 214.471 233.754
3.5 161.436 178.741 196.691 215.284 234.520 254.401

For Mat Footing:

Based on Tolerable Settlement
qns = 35(N-3){(B+0.3)/2B}2RWRd
Depth of footing, D = 1.5 m
Width of footing, B = 5.0 m
 Adopted average SPT value after correction, N = 16 for the entire depth upto 16.5 m.

For a settlement of 25 mm = 84.674 KN/m2

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 14

 Geotechnical investigation of residential building Main Report
at Budanilkantha, Kathmandu Nepal

So, Safe Bearing Capacity for a settlement of 65 mm = 220.152 KN/m2
The safe bearing capacity for Mat footing with different width and resting at different depth is
presented as follows;
Summary Result of Mat Footing
Foundation
Depth, m B=5.0m B=10.0m B=15.0m B=20.0m B=25.0m B=30.0m
Width, m
1.5 220.152 201.984 196.158 193.626 191.578 190.445
2.0 Qall, KN/m2 224.306 203.945 197.440 194.617 192.336 191.073
2.5 228.459 205.906 198.722 195.608 193.093 191.702
3.0 232.613 207.867 200.004 196.599 193.850 192.330

Unconfined Compression Test

Unconfined compression tests had been carried out for the undisturbed soil samples at depth 3.0 m and
4.0 – 4.5 m. UCS value for the depth of 3.0 m is 206 KN/m2 and for 4.0 – 4.5 m is 481 KN/m2. The
details of Unconfined Compression Test is presented in annex.

Geo Cube (Pvt.) Ltd, Jwagal-10, Lalitpur, Nepal 15