Soil Investigation Report

M/s. DC PRO Engineering L.L.
C
Sharjah Office:
PO Box 22851, Tel +971.6.5566880, Fax: +971.6.5566881
Dubai Office:
PO Box 99352, Tel +971.4.3432110, Fax: +971.4.3432113
Abu Dhabi Office:
PO Box 110512, Tel +971.2.6316782, Fax: +971.2.6316783
Riyadh Office –
KSA: P.O. Box 18927, Tel: +966 1460 3301, Fax +966 1460 3302
E-mail: hgarcia@dcproeng.com, hsalloum@dcproeng.com
M/S. ACE International Consulting Engineers

P.O BOX 47302, Abu Dhabi,UAE
Tel: +97126447764
Fax: +97126447746
www.ace-intl.net
Attn: Engr. Hadi Salloum (Technical Support Manager)/ Harold Garcia (Document Controller)
Ref: RSI2017-0016 DXB – DCPRO Date: 19th February, 2017

Dear Sir,
GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION

PROPOSED DISTRICT COOLING PLANT (DCP)
FOR NIGHT MARKET & HOTEL PROJECT
FOR M/S THE PALM DEIRA LLC
ON PLOT NO. DIA-DCP-001, NAKHLAT DEIRA
DUBAI
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
We have pleasure in enclosing herewith our final engineering report, for carrying out the work on the above project. Should
you have any queries with regard to our report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Please note that soil/water samples related to this project will be retained at our storage facility for 1 calendar month,
without charge, from the date of this final report, before disposal. Should you wish to extend the storage period, please
contact us before the intended disposal date.
Beside onshore/ offshore geotechnical soil investigation services, Al Mawazeen Labs is also accredited from ENAS
Accreditation Department for all types of construction material testing like; Soil, Aggregates, Concrete, Steel, Chemical
Analysis, Environmental/ Contamination analysis etc. and provide quality services in above fields. In addition, we are also
providing services for Geophysical Surveys, Topographic/ Bathymetric Surveys, Plot Demarcation and Gate Level
Computations Etc.
We are pleased to have been of service on this occasion, and look forward to further co-operation on future projects.
_________________________
Engr. Shabir Hussain Khawaja

General Manager
Report: RSI2017-0016 DXB (District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project on Plot No. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira, Dubai, UAE) Page 1
Site Investigation Report
For District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project
For M/s The Palm Deira LLC
On Plot No. DIA-DCP-001
Nakhlat Deira,
Dubai,
United Arab Emirates.
Report Ref.: RSI2017-0016 DXB- DCPRO
For Client / Consultant

M/S.ACE INTERNATIONAL/ DC PRO ENGINEERING L.L.C
DUBAI
FEBRUARY 19, 2017
DUBAI
REPORT: RSI2017-0016 DXB-DCPRO 19th FEBRUARY, 2017
REPORT ISSUE STATUS
<01> 19-Feb-17 Final Engineering Report AS SHK SHK
Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved
M/S. DCPRO ENGINEERING L.L.C /ACE INTERNATIONAL AL MAWAZEEN LABS

P.O. BOX 99352 /47302 P.O. BOX 48595
DUBAI DUBAI
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
DUBAI
CONTENTS PAGE
SUMMARY 5
1.0 INTRODUCTION 6
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 6
3.0 LOCAL AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY 6
4.0 FIELDWORK 7
5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 10
6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 10
7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 11
8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS 23
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A LOCALITY, SITE PLAN & SPT VS DEPTH

APPENDIX B FIELD RESULTS
APPENDIX C LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX D APPENDICES TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTS
SUMMARY
A site investigation, comprising Six (06) boreholes to 15.0m depths and supplementary field testing, was performed
as instructed by M/s. DCPRO Engineering LLC/ACE International Consultant for the proposed construction of
Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project for M/s. The Palm Deira LLC on Plot No. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat
Deira, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Fieldwork for the investigation was undertaken between 12th and 17th
February 2017. A subsequent programme of laboratory testing was performed on representative soil and water
samples recovered from the site.
The observed sub-surface conditions are such that relatively moderate load bearing soils are present below the
influence zone of the formation level. Accordingly, Isolated, Strip, Pad and or /Raft type of footing is to be
considered appropriate for the proposed structure. An allowable bearing pressure for shallow isolated, pad/ strip
footings to be set at depths of approximately 1.25m to 1.5m/+3.15 to +2.90mDMD are recommended.
If raft type of foundation is considered than, net allowable bearing pressures with corresponding estimated orders of
settlement have also been given for a rigid raft foundation to be set at same depths of around 1.25m to 1.5m/+3.15 to
+2.90mDMD below natural ground level.
In addition, Earth Pressure coefficients have also been given to assist in the design of retaining walls for the
basement structures. The Seismic Design parameters and soil profile have also been given.
The corrosive potential of the soil have also been considered with respect to appropriate concrete mix design
recommendations. In addition, recommendations for earth works and retaining structures have also been given.
Furthermore, seismic design profile has also been given.
During the period of site works groundwater level was encountered at 4.50m and 4.60m in six boreholes.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Al Mawazeen Lab was commissioned by M/s. DCPRO Engineering LLC/ACE International Consultant for the
proposed construction of Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project for M/s. The Palm Deira LLC on Plot
No. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The investigation has been based on Al
Mawazeen Labs proposal (Ref. PSI2017-0019 DXB–DCPRO-Rev01) dated 11th January 2017, and subsequent
approval by the client M/s. DCPRO Engineering LLC with confirmation letter Ref. 170000/OJ/00010 on dated 24th
January 2017. The work has been performed in general accordance with British Standard BS 5930: 1999, “Code of
practice for Site Investigations”.
The locality and site plans are presented in Appendix A. The site location is indicated on locality plan, Plate A1.1.
Field test locations, relative to the proposed site layout, and existing site features, are indicated in the site plan,
Plate A1.2 Field work for the investigation was performed between 12th and 17th February 2017. The factual field
and laboratory data, together with appropriate engineering interpretation and discussion of results, are presented
herein.
2.0 THE SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is located on plot DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira 101, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The propose site was
located on the existing Palm Deira, The Palm Hotel. The surface of the proposed plot was approximately at same
level to the existing adjacent road. At the time of the investigation the part of the plot was occupied by temporary
office and partially with stock piles of fill material. The investigated part was relatively flat and undeveloped.
3.0 GEOMORPHOLOGY AND WEATHER CONDITIONS
The typical Geomorphology of the site revealed an arid, low lying setting and scarce vegetation. Geo-
morphological and palaeo-environmental investigations are integrated to provide a framework of environmental
change for the Late Glacial and early–mid Holocene periods against which the archaeology of the area can be set.
The site is located in Dubai where a hot arid climate prevails. A hot arid climate is one where evaporation exceeds
precipitation- such as rain, snow and dewfall. This climate regime produces characteristic hot desert terrains.
Average annual rainfall may only be a few centimetres (even only a few millimetres in some parts) which usually
occurs seasonally and sometimes only from a single cloudburst. Summer shade temperatures are frequently in
excess 400 C and humidity may be around 100% near the coast. The contrast between maximum night and day
temperature and between night and day humidity is often great. Strong persistent winds are normally in many areas.
This unfavourable climate imposes adverse conditions on the concrete structures, such as:
 High temperature and high seasonal changes
 High humidity and high change in relative humidity
 Strong drying winds
 Condensation at night
 Windborne salt – laden dust
 High solar radiation
4.0 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY
The geology of the United Arab Emirates, and the Arabian Gulf area, has been substantially influenced by the
deposition of marine sediments associated with numerous sea level changes during relatively recent geological
time. With the exception of mountainous regions shared with Oman in the north- east, the country is relatively low-
lying, with near surface geology dominated by Quaternary to late Pleistocene age, mobile aeolian dune sands, and
sabkha/evaporites deposits.
The geologically stable Arabian Plate is separated from the unstable Iranian Fold Belt by the Arabian Gulf. It is
believed that a tilting of the entire Arabian Plate occurred during the early Permian period, resulting in uplift in
southern Yemen, and depression to the north- east. Crustal deformations and igneous intrusions occurred in the
north- east as a result of this movement. Subsequent tectonic movements, peripheral to the folding of the Iranian
Zagros Range, during the Plio-Pleistocene epoch, probably contributed to the formation of both the Arabian Gulf
depression, and the mountainous regions shared by the United Arab Emirates and Oman in the north- east.
The near surface geology of the Dubai region is dominated by Aeolian dune sand deposits of Holocene to
Pleistocene age. These deposits typically comprise fine grained silty calcareous sand, which is commonly dense
and variably cemented beneath a shallow, loose, normally consolidated mobile layer. Although variable, the
degree of cementation generally increases with depth, such that the variably cemented sand grades to
predominantly calcareous sandstone. Very silty, gypsiferous sabkha and evaporate layers occur occasionally within
the aeolian sand deposits.
Although surficial sabkha deposits are found throughout the coastal belt of the Arabian Gulf, and far inland in the
western and southern parts of the United Arab Emirates, they are not particularly common in the Dubai region.
Sabkha is an Arabic name used to describe relatively fine grained, hypersaline, silt and sand deposits, which are
commonly saturated with brine, and salt encrusted. These deposits form in natural evaporation pans where saline
water, introduced by sea invasion or elevated saline groundwater, is able to accumulate at or near ground surface
level, assisted by capillary action.
In Jebel Ali area extensive filling operations have been carried out using material excavated during the construction
of the port. In parts of the port and free zone development areas the thickness of fill material can exceed 3.0m. This
fill material generally consists of gravel to cobble grade fragments of rock (calcisiltite/ siltstone) in a matrix that
can vary from silty sand to sandy silt. The proportions of coarse to fine material in the fill can be highly variable
and random bands/ lenses of highly plastic silt or clay can also be encountered.
5.0 FIELDWORK
A programme of subsurface investigation, performed at the site was performed between 12th and 17th February
2017 includes the following:
 Six (06) Nos. Exploratory boreholes to 15.0m depths with:

 Regular split-spoon sampling during Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) in soils
 Disturbed bulk soil sampling from cable percussion drill cuttings
 Backfilling of boreholes
The geotechnical investigation works were performed in general accordance with the British Standard BS 5930:
“Code of practice for site investigations”.
Field test results and observations are presented in Appendix B. The presentation of field results is preceded by
summarised explanations of boreholes log symbols and classification system, and a summary of soil and rock
strength definitions, on Plates B1.1 to B1.3, and B2 respectively.
5.1 Setting out Borehole Locations
A total of Six (06) boreholes locations were set out by our site engineer/ supervisor according to the coordinates
provided by the M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC/ACE International Consultant. Coordinates of all test locations as
drilled at the site are summarised below in Table 1. Coordinates are based on the WGS 84 Spheroid with plan datum
projection of DLTM. The elevations of test locations were not provided by the client.
Table 1: Coordinates of Borehole Locations

Borehole DLTM Coordinates Drilled Depth
Location/Depths Easting Northing (m)
BH-01 497749.83 2798.463.90 15
BH-02 497752.84 2798440.12 15
BH-03 497765.10 2798449.14 15
BH-04 497770.86 2798437.39 15
BH-05 497784.25 2798451.79 15
BH-06 497802.67 2798455.95 15
5.2 Exploratory Boreholes
The borehole locations were set out in accordance with the instructions of the Client‟s Representative and is shown
on the site plan presented as Plate A1.2.
A total of Six (06) boreholes were completed to a proposed depth of 15metres below existing ground level.
Drilling was performed using a trailer mounted cable percussion drilling rig. The boreholes were advanced
through soil deposits, including variably cemented sands, using standard light cable percussive equipment and
techniques.
Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were conducted at regular intervals within the soil layers in order to estimate
relative soil densities, and obtain soil samples for classification purposes. The test intervals within soil layers were
generally 0.5m to 3.0m and 1.0m thereafter to termination depths of both the boreholes.
SPTs were conducted in accordance with the relevant British Standard (BS 1377- Part 9); “Methods of test for soils
for civil engineering purposes”. The test involves driving a 50mm external diameter thick walled split spoon
sampler into the bottom of the borehole with successive blows of a 63.5kg hammer falling freely through 760mm.
The sampler is driven through 6 intervals of 75mm and the number of blows required to penetrate each interval is
recorded. The initial 150mm interval is intended to ensure “seating” of the sampler such that it penetrates beyond
the zone of influence of any soil disturbance at the base of the borehole. The aggregate number of blows to drive
the sampler over the final 300mm is termed the “N” value, and is considered indicative of the in-situ relative soil
density.
In very dense and/or cemented soil layers it is often not possible to ensure complete penetration of the SPT
sampler, due to driving refusal, or the risk of damage to sampling equipment as a result of hard driving. The
practical driving limit is of the order of 50 blows for the final 300mm penetration. Where driving resistance
exceeds this limit, SPTs are usually terminated with incomplete penetration. In such cases the total 50 blows driven
against the actual penetration depth is recorded on the borehole logs. A plot of SPT versus depth is presented in
Appendix A, Plate A1.3.
Water was added to assist cable percussive boring and to stabilise each hole during in-situ testing. Careful attention
was paid for the existence of groundwater present in the boreholes. Groundwater was recorded at suitable interval,
or breaks and or upon completion of boreholes and are presented on individual borehole logs.
Disturbed SPT and bulk soil samples collected during drilling were retained in sealed, labelled plastic jars.
Groundwater samples were retained in sealed plastic bottles. All samples were transported to the Al Mawazeen Lab
storage facility for detailed logging and sample processing. Representative samples were selected for laboratory
testing to assist with sample descriptions and determination of engineering properties. Ground water sample was
also retained in sealed, labelled plastic bottle. Individual borehole logs are presented in Appendix B, Plates B3.1.1
to B3.6.2.
5.3 Groundwater Level for Geotechnical Boreholes

During the period of site works groundwater levels was observed in all the boreholes and are recorded on daily
basis. The recorded groundwater levels from the borehole are presented below in Table 2 and also on individual
borehole logs.
Table 2: Groundwater Level from Boreholes.

Bore Hole No. Groundwater Level (m BEGL)
BH-01 4.60
BH-02 4.55
BH-03 4.60
BH-04 4.55
BH-05 4.60
BH-06 4.50
5.4 Backfilling of Boreholes
Each borehole was backfilled on completion with arising material „sand‟ from bottom to top of the borehole, in
order to avoid any future pollution of an aquifer. The site area was cleaned and cleared from any waste during
investigation work.
6.0 LABORATORY TESTING
A programme of laboratory testing was performed on selected samples of soil and ground water obtained during
the fieldwork. Test results have been used to assist with the classification and determination of relevant physical
and mechanical properties of soil samples. Chemical test results have been used to determine the corrosively of
soil and ground water. In general, laboratory testing has been performed in accordance with British Standard
procedures. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C.
6.1 Particle Size Distribution
The particle size distribution was determined for a total of twelve (12) soil samples in accordance with the wet
sieving method described in BS 1377:Part2, 1990, Clause 9.2 "wet sieving method". Compliance with the standard,
with respect to minimum sample quantity is dependent on the maximum significant grain size and the method of
sampling.
In particular, for SPT samples, the quantity of soil available for testing is typically about 100g. This sample
quantity is considered representative where grain sizes range up to 2mm (i.e. to coarse sand size). Where
significant quantities of coarser particles are present, the particle size distribution obtained from SPT samples
should be regarded as indicative only. It is particularly important to recognise the limitations of SPT samples
where medium to coarse grained gravels and/or cobbles are present. Detailed presentations of results are preceded
by a results summary on Plates C1.1 to C1.6.
6.2 Chemical Analysis
Chemical analyses was performed on one (01) soil and one (01) groundwater sample to determine sulphate content,
chloride content, and pH levels. These analyses were performed in accordance with the BS 1377: Part 3 methods
for testing acid soluble sulphate (expressed as 2:1 water / soil extract) and chloride contents. The chemical test
results are summarised on Plate C2.1.
7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface strata encountered during drilling are given on the Borehole Logs in Appendix B, Plates B3.1.1 to
B3.6.2. The borehole observations and test results indicate relatively consistent subsurface conditions over the site.
The subsurface strata revealed from the boreholes drilled at the site comprised of medium dense to dense, light
brown, slightly silty to silty, slightly gravelly, shelly, fine to medium grained SAND with rare sandstone and shell
fragments from existing ground level to between 1.5m and 2.0m depths followed by medium dense to dense, light
brown grading light brownish grey, slightly silty to silty, very shelly, fine to coarse grained SAND with frequent
shell and shell fragements (FILL materials) to 13.0m depths below existing ground level.
Below that materials, CAP ROCK comprised of very dense, light grey, sandy, fine to medium GRAVEL
(fragments of Calcarenite) was encountered to 14.0m depths followed by dense, dark grey, silty, fine to medium
grained SAND with few shell and shell fragments to termination of all six boreholes at 15.45m depths below
existing ground level.
During the period of site works groundwater level was encountered in the boreholes was between 4.50m and
4.60m depths below existing ground level. .
8.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions with respect to the design of foundations
for the proposed development. It is understood from the information provided by the client that it is proposed to
construct District Cooling Plant (DCP) for Night Market & Hotel Project on this site, to be set on shallow
foundations. However, at the time of writing this report detailed information regarding foundation layout or
loadings had not been made available so that only a general discussion can be undertaken.
The observed sub-surface conditions are such that relatively moderate to high load bearing soils are present below
the influence zone of the formation level. Accordingly, Isolated, Strip, Pad and or /Raft type of footing is to be
considered appropriate for the proposed structure. An allowable bearing pressure for shallow isolated, pad/ strip
footings to be set at depths of approximately 1.25m to 1.5m/+3.15 to +2.90mDMD are recommended. If raft type
of foundation is considered than, net allowable bearing pressures with corresponding estimated orders of settlement
have also been given for a rigid raft foundation to be set at same depths of around 1.25m to 1.5m/+3.15 to
+2.90mDMD below natural ground level.
8.1 Allowable Bearing Pressure for Shallow Isolated/ Strip/Pad Foundations Main Building (G+M+1+ROOF)
Allowable bearing pressures are dependent on the shear strength of the soil and the tolerance of the proposed structure
to settlement. In granular soils, the latter factor is normally more critical. Settlements in such deposits normally take
place during construction and initial loading but, where more silty or cohesive materials exist; there could be a degree
of time dependent consolidation.
Based on the results of the standard penetration tests (SPT) completed in six boreholes drilled at the site, the following
allowable bearing pressure given in Table 3 can be used safely for the conventional Isolated Strip or pad footings of up
to 5.0m in width, to be set at depth ranging between 1.25m to 1.5m/+3.15 to +2.90mDMD below existing ground
level, on properly level and compacted surfaces. The foundation depths recommended below are with respect to final
grading levels, both for Isolated and raft type of footings.
Table 3:- Assessment of Bearing pressure with factor of safety 3.0 (Meyerhof Method)
Existing Average Surface Elevation =+4.40m DMD
Foundation Depth Footing Width Allowable Bearing Pressure for
(m Below EGL/DMD) (m) Isolated, Strip, Pad Foundations
(kN/m2)
<1.2 200
1.25m – 1.5m/+3.15 to +2.90 2.0 175
3.0 150
5.0 125
The above bearing pressure values for Isolated foundations are calculated by Meyerhof Equation 4-12 given in
Foundation Analysis and Design by Joseph E. Bowels (fifth edition) below.
qa = N/F2[(B+0.33)/B)2] Kd
Where, qa = allowable bearing pressure for 25mm settlement
F2 = Factor from Table page 264 taken as 0.08
F3 = Factor from Table page 264 taken as 0.3
N= SPT average "N" Values
B = Footing width
Kd = 1+0.33D/B
With loads of the magnitudes quoted above, total settlement is calculated as being less than the generally accepted
tolerance of 25mm, with differential movements being minimal.
8.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure for Raft Foundations MAIN BUILDING (G+M+1+ROOF)
Based on the results of the Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) performed in six boreholes and routine laboratory test
results following bearing pressures should be used for wider or raft type of foundations. The assessments of net
bearing pressure, with corresponding estimated orders of settlement, are given below in Table 4 for a rigid raft
foundation. These recommendations are based on the raft being set at same depth of around 1.25m – 1.5m below
existing ground level.
Table 4:- Assessment of Bearing pressure and Settlement for a shallow Raft Foundations
Settlement (mm) Allowable Bearing Pressure
(kN/m2)
Depth m Below (EGL/DMD) 1.25m – 1.5m /+3.15 to +2.90
25mm 125
30mm 150
35mm 175
40mm 200
45mm 225
50mm 250
With loads of the magnitudes quoted above, total settlement is calculated as being less than the generally accepted
tolerance of 50mm for raft, with differential movements being minimal.
The bearing pressures for raft foundations were calculated by Meyerhof equations 4-13 and 10.1 given below.
qa = N /F2(ΔHa/25)*Kd
Where Kd = 1+0.33D/B
ΔHa = allowable settlement such as 25, 30,35,40,45 and 50mm etc.
Note: For Mat/ Raft foundations the ratio ((B+F3)/B) 2 ≈ 1.0 and is neglected.
Depending on the rigidity of raft, differential movement is estimated to be less than half the respective total value.
On the basis of the pressure / settlement relationships the Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction can be used to
approximately 20,000kN/m3.
8.3. Shallow Raft Foundations for TES (Thermal Energy Storage) Tank
Based on the Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) performed in six boreholes and routine laboratory test results, it is
recommended that following allowable bearing pressure, with corresponding estimated orders of settlement, are
given below in Table 5 for a raft foundation. These recommendations are based on the raft, being set at depths
ranging from 2.0m to 2.5m /+2.40 to +1.90mDMD below existing ground level on properly level and compacted
surface.
Table 5:- Assessment of Bearing pressure and Settlement for shallow Raft Foundations
Settlement (mm) Allowable Bearing Pressure (kN/m2)

(Raft Foundation)
Depth (m BOGL)/DMD 2.0m/+2.40 2.5m/+1.90
25mm 125 150
30mm 150 175
35mm 175 200
40mm 200 225
45mm 225 250
50mm 250 275
Modulus of Subgrade
Reaction (kN/m3) 20,000
@ 50mm Settlement
8.3.1. Piled Foundations Recommendation TES (Thermal Energy Storage) Tank
Based on the results of the Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were carried out in six (06) boreholes, following bearing
capacities (compression) and skin friction (tension capacities) values over the length of SAND/ GRAVEL (fragments
of Calcarenite), given below in Tables 6 are available for piles, founded into the dense to very dense, SAND/
GRAVEL (fragments of Calcarenite), encountered from approximately 13.0 depths, with pile toe at 13.0m, 14.0m &
15.0m and cutoff level at 3.0m depths below existing ground level.
The depth that a pile is set into the bearing stratum is a function of the type and diameter of pile used and should be
determined by the specialist piling contractor.
Table 6: Ultimate Unit End Bearing Capacities & Skin Friction values:
Pile Toe Level Cut off Level Pile Length End Bearing Pile Capacity Skin Friction
(m OGL/DMD) (m OGL/DMD (m) (kN/m2) (kN/m2)
)
13.0/-8.6 3.0/+1.4 10 7700 33
14.0/-9.6 3.0/+1.4 11 8200 35
15.0/-10.6 3.0/+1.4 12 8600 37
On the basis of the unit end bearing and skin friction values given above the following theoretical pile working loads
given in Tables 7, 8 & 9, would be available for some commonly used types of pile with pile diameter of between
500mm and 1200mm and pile toe level at 13.0m, 14.0m & 15.0m depth below existing ground level.
Table 7:- Theoretical Pile Capacities with Pile Toe @ 13.0/-8.6mDMD, Pile Cut off Level=3.0/+1.4mDMD,
Pile Length=10.0m (BOGL).
Pile Working Load

Ultimate Capacity (kN)
Diameter With (FOS 2.5)
End Bearing Skin Friction Total Ultimate Compression Tension
(mm)
(Compression) (Tension Capacity) Capacity Capacity Capacity
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
500 1512 518 2030 812 207
600 2177 622 2799 1120 249
750 3401 777 4178 1671 311
900 4898 933 5831 2332 373
1000 6046 1036 7082 2833 414
1200 8707 1244 9951 3980 498
Working Load
Pile Diameter Ultimate Capacity (kN)
With (FOS 2.5)
(mm)
500 1610 605 2215 886 242
600 2318 726 3044 1218 290
750 3622 908 4530 1812 363
900 5216 1088 6304 2522 435
1000 6459 1209 7668 3067 484
1200 9272 1451 10723 4289 580
Working Load
Pile Diameter Ultimate Capacity (kN)
With (FOS 2.5)
(mm)
500 1688 697 2385 954 279
600 2431 837 3268 1307 335
750 3799 1046 4845 1938 418
900 5470 1255 6725 2690 502
1000 6753 1395 8148 3259 558
1200 9725 1674 11399 4560 670
Note:
 Ф (phi) assumed as 36 degree for skin friction due to dense to very dense sand/ cemented sand
 Ks used 0.7 for compression & tension capacities
The formula used to calculate unit end bearing pile capacity is based on procedures as given in Tomlinson
"Foundation Design and Construction”, as following:
Qb = γd * Nq
Ultimate End Bearing Capacity (qb) = πD2/4*Qb

Where, Qb : ultimate unit capacities (kN/m2).
γ = bulk & submerged density of soils (Mg/m3)
d= depth of foundation
Nq= Bearing Capacity Factor (taken 60 from Berezantsev)
The formula we used for unit skin friction calculation is based on procedures as given in Tomlinson "Foundation
Design and Construction”, as following:
qs = Ksσ‟vo tanΦ
Where, Ks, Coefficient of horizontal soil stress (taken 0.7 from Table 7.1)
σ‟vo, Average effective overburden pressure
Φ, Angle of wall friction
To calculate Total skin friction (Qs) formula used was;
Total Skin Friction (Qs) = qs* π * D * L
Where,
qs, Unit Friction
D, Diameter of pile
L, Length of pile
Care must be taken to ensure that the pile configuration does not lead to over stressing of the ground. British
Standards BS 8004:1986, “Code of Practice for Foundations” recommends that for piles driving their capacity
mainly in end bearing the spacing, center to center, should be not less than twice the pile diameters.
Theoretical methods give an approximate working load and advice should be taken from specialist piling contractors
as to the actual working loads of the various proprietary piles available before foundation designs are finalized. At the
working load capacity given above, the settlement of piles will be small and differential settlement will be minimal.
However, load-settlement characteristics of piles assumed in design should be checked by random pile tests.
With cast in-situ piles, care must be taken to avoid slumping or necking of concrete as the casing or auger is
withdrawn. If precautions are not taken, the effective area of the piles and the working load could be reduced and the
pile reinforcement could become exposed to serious chemical attack.
It is recommended that the integrity of each pile should be checked, using, for example, an ultrasonic testing
technique. In order to be able to check for possible slumping or necking it is recommended that preference should
be given to a testing technique that can model the interaction between the pile and the soil.
8.4 Expected Settlement, Spring Constant & Vertical Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction
8.4.1 Settlement Calculation:
The settlement of piles is calculated based on the following formula where the settlement of a pile under a vertical
load is caused by three factors;
S=S1+ S2 + S3
Where S: Total Pile Settlement

S1: Elastic Settlement of Pile
S2: Settlement of Pile caused by the load at the pile tip
S3: Settlement of Pile caused by the load transmitted along the Pile Shaft
DeterminationofS1:
Based on the above recommendation and the baring Capacities given, the following values given in Tables 6 for
Pile Settlement, vertical sub-grade reaction and horizontal sub-grade reaction should be used for design purposes.
Table 10: Pile Settlement (mm), Vertical (Ks)/ Horizontal (Kh) Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction
Total Settlement (mm)
Pile Diameter „D‟ (mm)
S=S1+S2+S3)
Pile Length „L‟ (m) 10m 11m 12m

500 0.3 0.3 0.4
600 0.2 0.3 0.4
750 0.2 0.3 0.3
900 0.2 0.2 0.3
1000 0.2 0.2 0.3
1200 0.2 0.2 0.3
Modulus of Vertical Sub-Grade Reaction-Ks (kN/m)
500 215000 236000 257000
600 257000 238000 309000
750 386000 354000 416000
900 342000 424000 463000
1000 429000 472000 515000
1200 515000 566000 618000
Modulus of Horizontal Sub-Grade Reaction- Kh (kN/m)
500 520000 572000 624000
600 433000 477000 520000
750 289000 381000 386000
900 260000 318000 347000
1000 230000 286000 312000
1200 217000 238000 260000
The values of coefficient of sub grade modulus variation nh is chosen as proposed by Reese et al and the value of the
horizontal coefficient of sub grade reaction will be calculated from:
Kh = nh. z / D
The static soil spring stiffness will be calculated from
Ks = Kh. D. l (l is the spacing of springs along the pile used as 2.5 times to pile diameter)
When excavating to foundation level, care should be taken not to disturb strata underlying formation level
otherwise settlement in excess of those quoted above could occur. If any disturbance does occur, or if any soft
spots or gypsiferous material are encountered, the material should be removed and replaced by selected granular
fill, which should be properly compacted before the foundations are constructed.
Prior to construction of the foundations the soil at formation level should be compacted to not less than 95% of the
soils maximum dry density, as determined from the modified Proctor test. The compacted surface should then be
protected by immediately covering with a layer of concrete blinding.
8.5 Earth Pressure & Retaining Structures
As discussed above, it is understood that development at the site will involve excavation up to approximately
1.25m to 1.5m below existing ground level. Retaining walls will therefore be required as part of the structure and
possibly also as temporary works. The design parameters for retaining structures are given below in Table 11.
Table 11: Recommended Design Parameters for Retaining Structures

Internal Coefficient of Lateral
Bulk Submerged
Friction Earth Pressure
Depth (m) Stratum Density Density
Phi Φ
(Mg/m3) (Mg/m3)
(degree) Ko Ka Kp
Medium Dense, light brown, 1.70 0.70
0.0 to 2.0 32 0.47 0.31 3.25
slightly silty to silty, SAND.
Medium dense to dense, light
2.0 to 15.45 1.75 0.75 34 0.44 0.28 3.54
brown silty, SAND.
In the above table Ko has been determined using Bishop‟s procedure, with Rankine‟s method being used to
calculate both Ka and Kp.
8.6 Liquefaction
Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated loose cohesion less soil are subjected to a temporary, but
essentially total loss of strength induced by severe earthquakes. Significant factors known to affect the
liquefaction potential of these soil are: the characteristic of the material, such as the grain size distribution and
relative: the initial stresses or monotonic shear stresses that could even trigger flow liquefaction by the generation
of excess pore water pressure and strain softening; and the characteristics of the earthquake in, such as the intensity
and duration the of ground shaking.
In this site, the subsurface materials are generally medium dense to dense locally very dense, silty SAND, but in
account of the high seismicity the potential of liquefaction should be considered. A Way of its evaluation is to use
correlation chart with the standard penetration resistance of the soil such as in figure no.1. This figure was
published in the Journal of soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE,97 According to figure no.1 below, if
the factor Z of 0.15 is considered, liquefaction is more unlikely to occur.
Figure No.1: Penetration Resistance for which liquefaction is likely to occur [Seed and Idriss (1971)]
8.6.1 Evaluation of the effects of liquefaction
Damage in the presence of an unliquefiable surface layer or crust according to the Fig.2 Proposed boundary curves
for surface manifestation of liquefaction-induced damage
Figure No.2: Proposed boundary curves for surface manifestation of liquefaction-induced damage (Ishihara, 1985).
If the thickness of the surface layer, H1, is larger than that of the underlying liquefied layer, resulting damage on
the ground surface may be insignificant.
8.7 Excavation Side Slopes and / or Lateral Support System
Unsupported temporary excavation walls and slopes should be conducted at gradients that secure their stability.
Unsupported temporary excavations in the different strata present at the site should consider the following
gradients:
 In the very loose soils, slopes should have maximum gradients of 1V: 2H;
 In the medium dense to dense soils, slopes should have maximum gradients of 1V:1.5H;
 In weak bed rock, slopes should have maximum gradients of 1V:1H.
 Slopes for more than 3.0m deep excavations shall be designed and supervised by an engineer on a case
by case basis.
In case the above mentioned gradients are not feasible due to the site specific restrictions steeper slopes can be
adopted considering appropriate slope stabilization measures.
Vertical unsupported excavation walls in the bedrock can be achieved; however the maximum stable height should
be determined for each particular case, taking into consideration the thickness of the topping soil, expected
surcharge loads, geo-mechanical properties of the rock mass among other design parameters
8.8 Concrete Design for Foundation Purposes
One (01) soil samples and One (01) groundwater samples were tested for chemical analysis. The sulphate contents
(expressed as water extract) of the soil samples tested was 0.02%, with water sample concentration of 2.66gram per
liter. The chloride content for the soil tested was 0.04%, with water sample concentration of 0.89%. The pH value of
the samples tested varied between 7.9 and 8.4.
For guidance for a suitable concrete design it is recommended that reference should be made to CIRIA Special
Publication 31 (The CIRIA Guide to Concrete Construction in the Gulf Region published by the Construction
Industry Research and Information Association, London 1984). This publication considers both sulphate and
chloride contamination of soils and groundwater in various exposure conditions and is not restricted just to sub-
surface concrete.
Figure 6 and Table 13 from this publication is presented in Appendix D of this report and with reference to this
Figure it is considered that this site would be classed as having moderate to significant contamination with sulphate
and moderate contamination with chloride salts. On this basis it is considered that Exposure Condition d(ii) would
apply, for which it is recommended that a Sulphate Resisting Cement to BS 4027 or ASTM Type V Cement be
used in a mix meeting the following criteria :-
 Minimum cement content for 20mm aggregates 320 to 400 kg/m3

 Maximum water : cement ratio 0.50 to 0.42
 Minimum cover for reinforcement 40mm to 50mm
In addition it is recommended that the surface of all concrete in contact with the soil should be covered with a
suitable waterproof membrane or coating. However, prior to finalising and adopting a mix design, appropriate
consultation with the structural engineer is advised.
8.9 Seismic Zone & Soil Profile
As no geophysical testing (i.e. cross-hole or down-hole seismic testing) was performed at the site, so no analysis was
made in the report. It should be noted that the below reported values are considered to be tentative and based on the
results of the drilled boreholes as well as the classification mentioned in the UBC and that only geophysical logging
of boreholes can give exact value of the shear wave velocity.
The current practices in UAE are to follow the provision of UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1997 for seismic
design parameters. Based on the provisions of (UNIFORM BUILDING CODE) and existing subsoil conditions in
the site, the following design parameters may be adopted:
According to Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997 for seismic design parameters and based on seismic activity,
Dubai, United Arab Emirates has been grouped under Seismic Zone 2A with Seismic Zone Factor (Z) 0.15.
The seismic design parameters for soil strata encountered from 0.0m up to 15.45m depths at this site, the Soil
Profile
Type SD representing stiff Soil Profile (with SPT “N” values from 15 – 50) may be adopted for the design with a
shear wave velocity of 180 to 360 m/sec. as per UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1997.
 The seismic coefficient Ca = 0.22

 The seismic coefficient Cv = 0.32
8.10 Construction Supervision
An experienced engineer or supervisor should be present on the site to oversee all earthworks and foundation
construction activities. In particular, it is recommended that all foundation excavations are inspected by a suitably
qualified geotechnical engineer, prior to foundation construction, to ensure that the contact surface is properly
prepared, and that exposed sub-surface conditions are consistent with design assumptions.
In addition to above, at the time of foundation construction, this laboratory shall be contacted to carry out in-situ field
density, compaction, plate load, pile integrity tests (in case of piles recommendation) or other tests recommended in
this report at random locations selected by our engineer. Without which a letter of confirmation cannot be issued for
the safe bearing pressure and foundation levels.
9.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS
As mentioned in the report the boreholes made were of 150mm in diameter. The information received from the limited
number and the diameter of boreholes may not represent the entire site and may not reveal all the weak layers or
conditions especially when they are localized. Hence no responsibility can be borne for conditions not revealed by
boreholes made on the site. In case of any such findings we shall be contacted immediately to arrange a site visit by a
geotechnical engineer to make an on site study of such conditions after which recommendations if it is deemed
necessary will be revised.
The borehole logs and related information represent subsurface conditions only at the specific locations and times
where sampling was conducted. Any lines designating the changes between soil and/ or rock layers represent
approximate boundaries. The transition between deposits / strata may be gradual, or may occur between recovered
samples.
The groundwater levels indicated on the borehole logs represents the measured levels at the time of investigations.
It should be noted, however, that groundwater levels are subject to variation caused by tidal and weather seasonal
variations and by changes of local drainage and or pumping conditions. The levels may at time be significantly
different to those measured during the investigation.
The recommendations and discussions given in this report are based on the subsurface conditions encountered
during the site investigation work and on the results of the field and laboratory testing on samples obtained from
the limited number of boreholes. There may be, however, conditions pertaining to the site which has not been in to
account due to the limited number of boreholes. It is therefore, strongly recommended that detailed geotechnical
investigation should be carried out, prior to start any development at the site.
Prepared by: Checked by:
Engr. Ahmed Salah Gad Engr. Shabir Hussain Khawaja

Sr. Geotechnical Engineer General Manager
APPENDIX A
LOCATION & SITE PLANS
LOCALITY PLAN PLATE A1.1

SITE PLAN PLATE A1.2
SPT “N” VALUES VS DEPTH PLATE A1.3
Report: RSI2017-0016 DXB (District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project on Plot No. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira, Dubai, UAE)
SITE LOCATION
Palm Deria Islands, Dubai
SITE: District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Projec TITLE: Location Plan
Plot No. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira
Dubai
JOB REF : RSI2017-0016 DXB United Arab Emirates
DATE: 20-Feb-17 CLIENT: M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC PLATE No: A1.1
SITE: istrict Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project TITLE: Site Plan
Plot no. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira
The Palm Deira LLC-Dubai
DATE: 28-Feb-17 CLIENT: M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC PLATE No: A1.2.1
BH1
BH2
BH3
BH4
BH5
BH6
SITE: District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project TITLE: Site Plan
Plot no. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira
DATE: 20-Feb-17 CLIENT: M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC PLATE No: A1.2.2
'N' VALUES
1 10 100
Very Loose Loose M.Dense Dense V.Dense
0
2
Design Profile
6
DEPTH (m)
10
11
12
13
14
15
BH 1-SPT BH 2-SPT Design Profile BH 3-SPT BH 4-SPT BH 5-SPT BH 6-SPT
SITE: District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project TITLE: Summary of SPT
Plot no. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira Values vs Depth
DATE: 20-Feb-17 CLIENT: M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC PLATE No: A1.3
APPENDIX B
FIELD RESULTS
BOREHOLE LOG LEGEND & CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS PLATES B1.1 TO B1.3

SOIL/ROCK STRENGTH DEFINITIONS PLATE B2
ONSHORE BOREHOLE LOGS PLATES B3.1.1 TO B3.6.2
SYMBOL LEGEND FOR GEOTECHNICAL LOGS
SOIL TYPES:
Appendix B: Plate B1.1

SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Based on BS 5930)
GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION:

CARBONATE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Based on Clark & Walker)

SOIL AND ROCK STRENGTH DEFINITIONS
Appendix B: Plate B2
Borehole Log AL MAWAZEEN SOIL TESTING, DUBAI
Project: District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project on Plot no. DIA-DCP-001, For M/s The Palm Deira
Client: M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC Project No.: RSI2017-0016 DXB
Borehole No.: BH 01 Date of Drilling: 18.02.17
B.H.Elevation: m Rig No.: MDR 1 Method of Drilling: Percussive/Rotary
Borehole Dia.: 0.00m to 15.45m 150mm N-Coordinate: 2798463.90 N Flushing Medium: Water-Bentonite
Depth of Borehole: 15.45 m E-Coordinate: 497749.83 E Ground Water Level: 4.60 mBGL
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
SPT Blows / Drive ( N / mm )
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
date SPT Blows per 75 mm N/mm 0.00
18.02.17 4.60m Light brown, slightly silty to silty, slightly
at
07:00 B1 gravelly, shelly, fine to medium SAND with
0.50
rare sandstone fragments. (Fill Material)
(1.00) Dense, light brown, slightly silty to silty,
SPT1 3, 4, 7, 9, 11, 13 40
slightly gravelly, shelly, fine to medium SAND
with rare sandstone and shell fragment. (Fill
SPT2 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12 36 Material)
1.50
(11.50) Medium dense to dense, light brown gradding
SPT3 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 29 to light brownish grey, slightly silty, very
shelly, fine to coarse SAND with frequent
SPT4 3, 4, 6, 7, 7, 8 28
shell and shell fragments. (Filled Material)
SPT5 3, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7 26
SPT6 3, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9 32
SPT7 3, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8 30
SPT8 3, 5, 8, 8, 9, 10 35
SPT9 3, 5, 7, 8, 8, 9 32
SPT10 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 31
LAND BH. SP-02 BH LOG.GPJ AGS3_HK.GDT 20/02/17
SPT11 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11 36
SPT12 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12 40
Standard Peneteration Test Ground Water Sample REMARKS: Operator : Hunarjan

Small Distrubed Sample Ground Water Level
Large Disturbed Sample Logged By : Umer
Bulk Sample
U76 Undisturbed Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
Medium dense to dense, light brown gradding
(continued)
SPT14 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13 43
SPT15 4, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14 47
13.00
SPT16 14, 11/20, 45, 5/10, -, - 50/85 (1.00) Very dense, light grey, sandy, fine to medium
GRAVELS of cape rock.
14.00
(1.45) Dense, dark grey, silty, fine to medium
SPT17 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 13 46 SAND.
SPT18 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 44

18.02.17 15.45
End of Borehole (15.45)

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
at
0.50
(1.00) Medium dense, light brown, slightly silty to
SPT1 2, 3, 2, 3, 4, 5 14
silty, slightly gravelly, shelly, fine to medium
SAND with rare sandstone and shell
SPT2 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6 19 fragment. (Fill Material)
1.50
(11.50) Medium dense to dense, light brown gradding
SPT4 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6 21
SPT5 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 6 24
SPT6 2, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7 24
SPT7 2, 4, 6, 7, 7, 8 28
SPT8 3, 4, 7, 6, 7, 7 27
SPT9 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8 29
SPT10 3, 5, 7, 7, 8, 9 31
SPT11 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 38
SPT12 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 34

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
Medium dense to dense, light brown gradding
(continued)
SPT14 3, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13 43
SPT15 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 39
13.00
14.00
SPT17 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 12 42 SAND.
SPT18 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14 47

15.02.17 15.45

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
at
0.50
(1.00) Medium dense, locally dense, light brown,
SPT1 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 8 25
slightly silty to silty, slightly gravelly, shelly,
fine to medium SAND with rare sandstone
SPT2 4, 5, 7, 8, 8, 9 32 and shell fragment. (Fill Material)
1.50
(11.50) Dense, locally medium dense, light brown
SPT3 4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8 29 gradding to light brownish grey, slightly silty,
very shelly, fine to coarse SAND with
SPT4 4, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9 32
frequent shell and shell fragments. (Filled
Material)
SPT5 4, 7, 6, 7, 6, 7 26
SPT6 3, 6, 7, 6, 6, 7 26
SPT7 3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8 26
SPT8 3, 4, 6, 7, 7, 7 27
SPT9 3, 6, 6, 8, 8, 9 31
SPT10 3, 5, 8, 7, 8, 8 31
SPT11 4, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9 32
SPT12 3, 6, 8, 7, 9, 9 33

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
Dense, locally medium dense, light brown
SPT13 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11 36 gradding to light brownish grey, slightly silty,
very shelly, fine to coarse SAND with
frequent shell and shell fragments. (Filled
Material) (continued)
SPT14 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 40
SPT15 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13 44
13.00
14.00
SPT17 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 48 SAND.
SPT18 4, 8, 8, 10, 11, 13 42

16.02.17 15.45

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
14.02.17 4.55m Light brown, slightly silty to silty, gravelly, fine
at
07:00 B1 to medium grained SAND with gravel sized
0.50
angular to sub-angular cemented sand /
(1.50) pebbles of mixed rock. (Fill Material)
SPT1 2, 2, 4, 5, 4, 4 17
Medium dense, light brown to brown, slightly
silty to silty, slightly gypsiferous, fine to
SPT2 2, 3, 3, 5, 6, 7 21 medium grained SAND. (Fill Material)
SPT3 2, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6 22
2.00
(11.00) Medium dense to dense, light brown to
SPT4 2, 2, 4, 3, 4, 6 17 brown, locally light grey, slightly gravelly,
shelly, fine to coarse grained SAND with
SPT5 2, 3, 5, 6, 6, 7 24
occasional gravel sized angular to
sub-angular cemented sand fragments, fine
shell and shell fragments. (Fill Material)
SPT6 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 8 29
SPT7 2, 4, 6, 7, 7, 9 29
SPT8 2, 5, 5, 6, 8, 7 26
SPT9 3, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8 29
SPT10 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 30
SPT11 2, 5, 5, 8, 9, 11 33
SPT12 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 37

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
Medium dense to dense, light brown to
SPT13 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 11 39 brown, locally light grey, slightly gravelly,
shelly, fine to coarse grained SAND with
occasional gravel sized angular to
sub-angular cemented sand fragments, fine
shell and shell fragments. (Fill Material)
SPT14 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12 36 (continued)
SPT15 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14 44
13.00
13.19 Very dense, light grey, very well cemented
SPT16 11, 14/25, 42, 8/15, -, - 50/90 (0.81) GRAVELS with fine to coarse grained sand
anong with 2-30mm shell fragment,
cemented sand recoverd as bulk sample.
14.00 Very dense, light grey, light brown, slightly
(1.45)
silty to silty, very gravelly, very shelly, fine to
SPT17 6, 8, 10, 10, 12, 15 47 coarse grained SAND with frequent gravel
sized angular to sub-angular cemented sand
/ rock fragments, shell and shell pieces.
Very dense, dark grey, slightly silty to silty,
fine to medium grained SAND with fine shell
SPT18 5, 6, 8, 11, 13, 14 46 and shell pieces.
14.02.17 15.45

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
at
0.50
(1.50) pebbles of mixed rock found. (Fill Material)
SPT1 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5 17
SPT3 2, 4, 5, 7, 7, 8 27
2.00
(11.00) Medium dense to dense, light brown, locally
SPT4 2, 4, 4, 6, 7, 7 24 light grey, slightly gravelly, shelly, fine to
coarse grained SAND with occasional gravel
SPT5 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 7 26
well cemented sand and fragments, fine shell
and shell fragments. (Fill Material)
SPT6 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 6 22
SPT7 2, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7 24
SPT8 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8 29
SPT9 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 9 33
SPT10 3, 6, 6, 7, 8, 10 31
SPT11 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9 33
SPT12 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12 38

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
Medium dense to dense, light brown, locally
(continued)
SPT14 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, 13 41
SPT15 3, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14 45
13.00
SPT16 12, 13/20, 40, 10/20, -, 50/95 13.19 Very dense, light grey, fine to coarse grained
-
(0.81) GRAVELS well cemented with fine to coarse
grained sand and 5-30mm shell and shell
fragment, recoverd as bulk sample.
14.00 Very dense, light brown to brown, light grey,
(1.45)
slightly silty to silty, very gravelly, very shelly,
SPT17 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14 46 fine to coarse grained SAND with frequent
gravel sized angular to sub-angular cemented
sand / rock fragments, shell and shell pieces.
Dense, dark grey, slightly silty to silty, fine to
medium grained SAND with few fine shell
13.02.17 15.45

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
at
0.50
(1.50) pebbles of mixed rock found. (Fill Material)
SPT1 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 4 16
SPT3 2, 3, 5, 4, 5, 6 20
2.00
(11.00) Medium dense to dense, light brown, locally
SPT5 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6 18
SPT6 2, 4, 4, 6, 8, 7 25
SPT7 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7 25
SPT8 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 29
SPT9 3, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8 27
SPT10 3, 4, 5, 7, 7, 7 26
SPT11 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 29
SPT12 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11 34

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 1 of 2
Recovery %
Recovery %
Reduced
R.Q.D (%)
Solid core
Water
depth/size
Total core
Progress
Samples
Depth
Description
Level
level/
Legend
Casing
Drilling
(MPa)
(m )
U.C.S
(m)
time/
Medium dense to dense, light brown, locally
(continued)
SPT14 3, 5, 8, 8, 10, 12 38
SPT15 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 13 40
13.00
SPT16 10, 15/30, 38, 12/25, -, 50/100 13.21 Very dense, light grey, fine to coarse grained
-
(0.79) GRAVELS well cemented with fine to coarse
grained sand and 5-30mm shell and shell
fragment, recoverd as bulk sample.
14.00 Very dense, light brown to brown, light grey,
(1.45)
slightly silty to silty, very gravelly, very shelly,
SPT17 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13 41 fine to coarse grained SAND with frequent
gravel sized angular to sub-angular cemented
sand / rock fragments, shell and shell pieces.
Dense, dark grey, slightly silty to silty, fine to
medium grained SAND with few fine shell
12.02.17 15.45

Bulk Sample
Checked By : SHK
Core Sample
Sheet No. : 2 of 2
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTS PLATE C1.1 TO C1.6

CHEMICAL TEST RESULTS PLATE C2.1
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION REPORT
CLIENT INFORMATION
Client : M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC
Project Title : District Cooling Plant for Night Market & Hotel Project on Plot no. DIA-DCP-001, For M/s The Palm Deira
Location : Nakhlat Deira, Dubai, U.A.E.
Page 1 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
Date of test : 18-21/02/2017 Lab Report No. : RSI2017-0016 DXB
Test location : Al Mawazeen Soil Testing, Dubai Report Date : 21/02/2017
Test method used : BS 1377: Part 2: 1990: Cl. 9.2
Test method variation: Nil Tested By : Mahendra
Sample preparation : BS 1377: Part 2: 1990: Cl. 9.2.3
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
BS aperture Size(mm)
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
Clay Fine Medium Coarse Fine Medium Coarse Fine Medium Coarse
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

Borehole Sample ID Depth(m) Curve %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay D10 D30 D60 Dmax Cu Cc
BH 01 SPT2 1.00 - 1.45 5.4 81.4 13.2 0.06 0.09 0.19 14 3.24 0.75
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
MAW SIEVE.6 BH LOG.GPJ GINT LAB BSI A4.GDT 21/02/17
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 01 SPT4 2.00 - 2.45 17.4 80.4 2.2 0.21 0.46 1 14 4.80 1.01
Description:
Remarks: Soil Description is based on BS5930:1999, which determine from particle size only, it does not differentiate between soil particles or shell fragments
Appendix C
Plate 1 of 6 Authorized Signatary
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 2 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 02 SPT3 1.50 - 1.95 7.5 83.9 8.6 0.07 0.13 0.35 14 5.36 0.77
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 02 SPT6 3.00 - 3.45 2.5 86.8 10.7 0.06 0.15 0.32 6.3 5.31 1.17
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 3 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 03 SPT2 1.00 - 1.45 2.2 88.2 9.6 0.06 0.09 0.14 6.3 2.25 0.87
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 03 SPT4 2.00 - 2.45 3.3 88.0 8.7 0.07 0.13 0.33 6.3 5.02 0.77
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 4 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 04 SPT7 4.00 - 4.45 16.1 82.1 1.8 0.22 0.46 0.98 20 4.48 0.99
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 04 SPT9 6.00 - 6.45 13.5 85.0 1.5 0.22 0.46 0.97 14 4.50 1.01
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 5 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 05 SPT3 1.50 - 1.95 4.3 88.9 6.8 0.08 0.21 0.52 6.3 6.63 1.14
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 05 SPT5 2.50 - 2.95 10.8 87.0 2.2 0.17 0.35 0.78 10 4.59 0.91
Description:
Appendix C
CLIENT INFORMATION
Page 6 of 6
CLIENT INFORMATION
TEST RESULTS
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 06 SPT2 1.00 - 1.45 6.3 91.4 2.3 0.17 0.44 0.84 14 4.91 1.36
Description:
0.063
0.150
0.212
0.300
0.425
0.600
1.18
2.00
3.35
37.5
5.0
6.3
10
14
20
28
50
63
75
100
80
Percent Passing (%)
60
40
20
0
Silt Sand Gravel
0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60
Particle Size (mm)

BH 06 SPT6 3.00 - 3.45 10.0 84.5 5.5 0.1 0.25 0.54 20 5.71 1.17
Description:
Appendix C
REPORT ON CHEMICAL TESTS FOR SOIL & WATER
Client M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC Lab Ref. No. RSI2017-0016 DXB
Project Name Proposed District Cooling Plant for Night
Sample No. See below
Market & Hotel Project
Location Plot No. DIA-DCP-001, Nakhlat Deira, Sampled By AML
Dubai, U.A.E.
Date Tested 14-02-2017 to 18-02-2017 Sampling Method BS 5930 : 1999
Water Extract Ground Water
BH Sample Depth Sulphate Chloride

Sulphate Chloride
No. No (m) as SO4 as Cl
as SO4 as Cl pH
(%) (%)
(g/l) (%)
BH-05 SPT 3 1.50-1.95 0.02 0.04 - - 8.4
BH-06 GW 4.50 - - 2.66 0.89 7.9
Tested By Issued By
SR
Test Methods:
- Sulphate Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.3 / 5.2 (Water Extraction /
Acid Extraction)
- Chloride Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.7.2 / 7.3 (Water Extraction /
Acid Extraction)
- Sulphate Content of Ground Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5
- Chloride Content of Ground Water: BS 1377: Part 3: 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.7
- pH of Soil and Ground Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.9.5
- Site Classification : BS 8500 – 1 : 2002 & BRE Special Digest 1 : 2005
Sample Prep. Method
- Sulphate Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.2 / 5.3 (Water Extraction /
Acid Extraction)
- Chloride Content of Soil : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.7.2.3 / 7.3.3 (Water
Extraction / Acid Extraction)
- Sulphate Content of Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.4
- Chloride Content of Water : BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl.5.4
- pH Value of Soil and Ground Water: BS 1377: Part 3 : 1990 (Amd. 9028/96), Cl. 9.4
RSI2017-0016 DXB Appendix C, Plate C2.1

APPENDIX D
APPENDICES TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTS
APPENDIX TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT PLATE D1

FIGURE 6 AND TABLE 13 FROM CIRIA SPECIAL PUBLICATION 31 PLATE D2
GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION REFERENCE PLATE D3
SYMBOL LEGEND FOR GEOTECHNICAL LOGS
SOIL TYPES:

SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Based on BS 5930)
GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION:

CARBONATE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Based on Clark & Walker)

SOIL AND ROCK STRENGTH DEFINITIONS
Appendix B: Plate B2

Soil Investigation Report

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Soil Investigation Report

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

M/s. DC PRO Engineering L.L.

M/S. ACE International Consulting Engineers

Ref: RSI2017-0016 DXB – DCPRO Date: 19th February, 2017

GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION

Engr. Shabir Hussain Khawaja

Report Ref.: RSI2017-0016 DXB- DCPRO

For Client / Consultant

FEBRUARY 19, 2017

REPORT: RSI2017-0016 DXB-DCPRO 19th FEBRUARY, 2017

REPORT ISSUE STATUS

<01> 19-Feb-17 Final Engineering Report AS SHK SHK

Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved

M/S. DCPRO ENGINEERING L.L.C /ACE INTERNATIONAL AL MAWAZEEN LABS

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 6

3.0 LOCAL AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY 6

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 10

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 10

7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 11

8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS 23

APPENDIX A LOCALITY, SITE PLAN & SPT VS DEPTH

2.0 THE SITE DESCRIPTION

3.0 GEOMORPHOLOGY AND WEATHER CONDITIONS

 Six (06) Nos. Exploratory boreholes to 15.0m depths with:

5.1 Setting out Borehole Locations

Table 1: Coordinates of Borehole Locations

5.2 Exploratory Boreholes

5.3 Groundwater Level for Geotechnical Boreholes

Table 2: Groundwater Level from Boreholes.

5.4 Backfilling of Boreholes

6.1 Particle Size Distribution

6.2 Chemical Analysis

7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

8.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Settlement (mm) Allowable Bearing Pressure (kN/m2)

8.3.1. Piled Foundations Recommendation TES (Thermal Energy Storage) Tank

Pile Working Load

Ultimate End Bearing Capacity (qb) = πD2/4*Qb

Where S: Total Pile Settlement

Pile Length „L‟ (m) 10m 11m 12m

8.5 Earth Pressure & Retaining Structures

Table 11: Recommended Design Parameters for Retaining Structures

8.6.1 Evaluation of the effects of liquefaction

8.7 Excavation Side Slopes and / or Lateral Support System

8.8 Concrete Design for Foundation Purposes

 Minimum cement content for 20mm aggregates 320 to 400 kg/m3

8.9 Seismic Zone & Soil Profile

 The seismic coefficient Ca = 0.22

8.10 Construction Supervision

Prepared by: Checked by:

Engr. Ahmed Salah Gad Engr. Shabir Hussain Khawaja

LOCALITY PLAN PLATE A1.1

BOREHOLE LOG LEGEND & CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS PLATES B1.1 TO B1.3

Appendix B: Plate B1.1

GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION:

Appendix B: Plate B1.2

Appendix B: Plate B1.3

Client: M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC Project No.: RSI2017-0016 DXB

Borehole No.: BH 01 Date of Drilling: 18.02.17

B.H.Elevation: m Rig No.: MDR 1 Method of Drilling: Percussive/Rotary

Standard Peneteration Test Ground Water Sample REMARKS: Operator : Hunarjan

Client: M/s. DC PRO Engineering LLC Project No.: RSI2017-0016 DXB

Borehole No.: BH 01 Date of Drilling: 18.02.17

B.H.Elevation: m Rig No.: MDR 1 Method of Drilling: Percussive/Rotary