report on geotechnical investigation multi-storey ... · subsurface conditions on the site and...

Report onGeotechnical Investigation

Multi-storey Residential Development137-143 Herring Road, Macquarie Park

Prepared forChina Overseas Sydney Pty Ltd

Project 85592.00 March 2017

Geotechnical Investigation, Multi-storey Residential Development 85592.00.R.001.Rev3137-143 Herring Road, Macquarie Park March 2017

Table of Contents

Page

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Site Description and Geology ........................................................................................................ 1

3. Field Work Methods ....................................................................................................................... 2

4. Field Work Results ......................................................................................................................... 2

5. Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................................................... 3

6. Geotechnical Model ....................................................................................................................... 3

7. Proposed Development .................................................................................................................. 3

8. Comments ...................................................................................................................................... 4

8.1 Excavation ...........................................................................................................................4

8.2 Excavation Support ..............................................................................................................4

8.2.1 General ...................................................................................................................4

8.2.2 Design .....................................................................................................................5

8.2.3 Ground Anchors ......................................................................................................6

8.3 Groundwater ........................................................................................................................7

8.4 Foundations .........................................................................................................................7

8.5 Seismic Design ....................................................................................................................8

8.6 Thrust Fault ..........................................................................................................................8

9. Limitations ...................................................................................................................................... 8

Appendix A: About this Report

Appendix B: Drawings

Appendix C: Results of Field Work

of 9


Report on Geotechnical Investigation

Multi-storey Residential Development

137-143 Herring Road, Macquarie Park

1. Introduction

This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation undertaken for a multi-storey residential development at 137-143 Herring Road, Macquarie Park. The investigation was commissioned in an email dated 18 July 2016 by Mr Jiageng Huang of China Overseas Sydney Pty Ltd and was undertaken in accordance with Douglas Partners' proposal SYD160874 dated 13 July 2016. The project involves the construction of two towers of 22 or 23 levels over a common four level basement. The basement footprint is set back from the boundaries of the site. The existing buildings will be demolished as part of the works. A geotechnical investigation was undertaken in July 2015 to provide preliminary information on the subsurface conditions on the site and included the drilling of eight boreholes, laboratory testing and engineering analysis. Details of all the field work and comments relevant to design and construction are given in this report. A preliminary contamination and waste classification assessment was carried out concurrently with the geotechnical investigation and is reported separately. 2. Site Description and Geology

The site is approximately rectangular in shape with sides of about 135 m by 40 m. It is bounded by Herring Road to the north-west (front of site), Epping Road to the south-west, and multi-storey residential buildings on the remaining sides. The site is currently occupied by four three-storey vacant residential buildings and an open parking area on the eastern side of the site. The site levels fall in an easterly direction from about RL 75.5 m relative to the Australian Height Datum (AHD) to RL 65.2 m which is approximately 5 degrees. Reference to the Sydney 1:100 000 Geological Series Sheet indicates that the site is underlain by Ashfield Shale which typically comprises dark grey shale. The site is close to the geological boundary with Hawkesbury Sandstone which typically comprises a medium to coarse grained quartz sandstone with minor shale and laminite layers. Sometimes there is a layer of Mittagong Formation which typically comprises fine to medium grained lithic sandstone between the Ashfield Shale and Hawkesbury Sandstone. A north-west to south-east thrust fault is known to be present on a nearby site. There may be some jointing in the bedrock associated with the fault on the site due to its close proximity.

of 9


The borehole investigation encountered sandstone which appears to be Mittagong Formation near the surface becoming Hawkesbury Sandstone with depth. No fresh shale was encountered. 3. Field Work Methods

The field work for the geotechnical investigation included the drilling of eight cored bores (Bores 1 to 8) at the locations shown on Drawing 1, in Appendix B. The bores were drilled to depths ranging from 15.0 m to 22.2 m using a Scout truck mounted rig or bobcat mounted drilling rig. The bores were initially augered to the top of rock at depths of between 0.7 m to 1.5 m and then advanced using NMLC-sized diamond core drilling equipment to obtain 50 mm diameter continuous samples of the rock for identification and strength testing purposes. Bores 7 and 8 also included some wash boring to prepare the bores for coring. Standpipes were installed in Bores 1, 3 and 8 to measure groundwater. The ground surface levels at the borehole locations were interpolated from the site survey drawing provided (Plan of Detail and Levels over SP 60143 at No 137-143 Herring Road, Macquarie Park, by LTS, Reference No. 42057DT, dated 22 June 2015). 4. Field Work Results

The subsurface conditions encountered in the bores are presented in the borehole logs in Appendix C. Notes defining descriptive terms and classification methods are included in Appendix C. The subsurface conditions encountered in the bores can be summarised as:

Pavement or topsoil – Asphaltic concrete and base to about 200 mm depth or 50 mm to 100 mm of silty clay topsoils;

Filling – sand, clay and crushed sandstone silty sand filling to depths between 0.1 m and 0.6 m;

Clay – dark brown, stiff to hard silty clay to depths ranging from 0.7 m to 1.4 m; and

Sandstone – interbedded extremely low strength and high strength, fine to medium grained sandstone grading into high strength medium grained sandstone at depths between 1.6 m and 6.1 m. The high strength sandstone was generally slightly fractured to unbroken. Some joints, dipping in the range of 30o to 70o, were observed in the core samples.

Table 1 summarises the levels at which different materials were encountered in the cored boreholes.

of 9


Table 1: Summary of Material Strata Levels and Rock Classifications

Stratum Level of Top of Stratum (m, AHD) in Bores

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Ground Surface 71.4 72.3 71.3 69.7 67.4 69.6 67.2 65.6

Stiff to Hard Clay 71.1 72.1 71.2 69.5 67.2 69.2 66.7 65.4

Sandstone 70.2 71.1 70.6 68.4 66.2 68.4 66.2 64.4

High Strength Sandstone 69.8 68.5 68.5 65.5 64.4 66.2 61.1 62.6

Base of Borehole 50.4 50.1 49.7 49.7 49.4 49.3 48.6 50.6

Free groundwater was not observed during augering and the use of drilling fluid prevented groundwater observations during rotary wash-boring and coring. The water levels were recorded at depths of 7.1 m (RL 63.5 m), 7.0 m (RL 64.3 m) and 5.9 m (RL 59.9 m) in Bores 1, 3 and 8 some two weeks after drilling. The water level is below the top of rock. 5. Laboratory Testing

One hundred and forty eight samples selected from the better quality rock core were tested for axial point load strength index (Is50). The results ranged from 0.4 MPa to 4.2 MPa which correspond to medium to high strength rock, respectively. These Is50 results suggest an unconfined compressive strength (UCS) in excess of 80 MPa for some of the high strength rock encountered during the investigation. 6. Geotechnical Model

A geotechnical model for the site is presented in Sections A-A’ and B-B’ in Drawings 2 and 3 respectively, Appendix B. The geological interpretation between the bores could vary from that shown on the cross-sections.

7. Proposed Development

The project involves the demolition of the existing structures and the construction of two tower apartment buildings, 22 storeys and 23 storeys high, over a common basement. The basement will comprise four basement levels set back from the boundaries. It is understood that the basement excavation level (BEL) will be at approximately RL 56.1 m. It is further understood that the new building will have column loads of the order of 10,000 kN. The geotechnical issues considered relevant to the proposed development include excavation, excavation support, groundwater, foundations and earthquake provisions.

of 9


8. Comments

8.1 Excavation

Based on a lowest floor level of RL 56.1 m, excavation depths are expected to be of the order of 10 m to 18 m. Following demolition of the existing building, excavation for the basement levels is expected to be required in filling, soil and rock of varying strength including high strength sandstone. Excavation in filling, soil and some of the interbedded strength rock should be readily achievable using conventional earthmoving equipment such as hydraulic excavators with bucket attachments. Excavation in stronger rock will probably require the use of ripping equipment, rock hammers or rock saws. The depth to consistent high strength rock was less than 4 m in six of the eight bores which indicates that most of the excavation will be in high strength sandstone, much of which is slightly fractured or unbroken. Contractors should note the amount and quality of the high strength sandstone to be removed from site and make their own assessment for its removal. The cores are available for viewing to make an assessment. The use of rock hammers will cause vibration which, if not controlled, could possibly result in damage to nearby structures and disturbance to occupants. It is suggested that vibrations be provisionally limited to a peak particle velocity (PPV) of 8 mm/s at the foundation level of the buildings to protect the architectural features of the building and to reduce discomfort for the occupants. A site specific vibration monitoring trial may be required to determine vibration attenuation once excavation plant and methods have been finalised. The contractor will have to select his equipment carefully so that the equipment used on site to remove high strength sandstone does not exceed the vibrations limits. Given the presence of some weak zones and jointing within the recovered rock cores near the rock surface as well as the possibility of jointing associated with the nearby thrust fault, it is considered essential that the rock faces are inspected every 1.5 m drop. The inspection by a geotechnical consultant during the excavation should aim to identify any zones or areas that require treatment.

8.2 Excavation Support

8.2.1 General

The overburden and the extremely to low strength sandstone will need to be temporarily supported until the permanent basement walls are constructed. Shoring support will therefore be required from the ground surface down to at least the top of consistent high strength rock. Based on the eight bores, shoring may be required to depths ranging from about 1.6 m (Bore 1) to 6.0 m (Bore 7) depth. In most locations, the shoring will be required to support interbedded extremely/very low strength and high strength sandstone. In some locations where the basement is set well back from the boundary and there is a shallow depth to high strength rock such as at the south western end of the site, it may be possible to adopt temporary batters of 1.5H:1V for the overburden instead of shoring. For most of the site, however, shoring will probably be required. Soldier piles with reinforced shotcrete panel infills are commonly used to support excavations. The soldier piles would generally be spaced at about 2 m to 2.5 m centres and should be socketed into

of 9


high strength sandstone. Shotcreting should be undertaken in maximum 1.5 m or 2.0 m ‘drops’ as excavation proceeds in order to reduce the risk of local slippages and collapse between soldier piles. Temporary ground anchors will be required to prevent excessive lateral deformation of shoring/retaining walls and also to support the toe of the pile. For the permanent situation, the basement structure usually provides the required lateral support to the perimeter excavation once the temporary anchors are de-stressed. The shoring piles should be founded on consistent high strength sandstone which in some cases is below interbedded extremely/very low strength and high strength sandstone. The piling rig used to install the piles must be capable of drilling through the high strength sandstone layers. With such a deep excavation (up to about 18 m), there will be some inward horizontal movement due to stress relief in the high strength rock. It impracticable to provide restraint for the relatively high in-situ horizontal stresses present within the Hawkesbury Sandstone. Release of these stresses due to the excavation will generally cause horizontal movement along the rock bedding surfaces and partings. Based on monitoring experience for excavations in the Sydney region, an excavation of up to 18 m depth may give rise to lateral movements of between 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm for every metre of excavation i.e. in the order of 8 – 18 mm at the centre point at the top of the excavation. Stress relief related movements can cause damage to adjacent buildings if founded at shallow depth. It is recommended that appropriate allowance be made for the repair of pavements and public utilities, where excavations are carried out close to structures. With respect to adjacent buildings, it may be prudent that a dilapidation survey be carried out on any building within 15 m of the bulk excavation prior to excavation works so that an appropriate response may be made to damage claims.

8.2.2 Design

Excavation faces retained either temporarily or permanently will be subjected to earth pressures from the ground surface down to the top of high strength rock. Table 2 outlines material and strength parameters that may be used for the preliminary design of excavation support structures. Table 2: Typical Material and Strength Parameters for Excavation Support Structures

Material Bulk Density

(kN/m3) Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure (Ka)

Coefficient of Earth Pressure at Rest (Ko)

Filling 18 0.4 0.6

Clay 20 0.3 0.5

Extremely/very low strength sandstone

22 0.2 0.3

High Strength Sandstone

22 0 0

It is probable that shoring of the basement excavation will need to incorporate more than one row of anchors, especially if the soldier piles are not taken to the full depth of the excavation. The lateral pressure distribution on a multi-anchored or braced wall is complex and for preliminary design

of 9


purposes a uniform distribution with depth (i.e. rectangular) of 4 H (kPa) could be assumed where H is the height of retained material in metres. Lateral pressures due to surcharge loads from sloping ground surface, the existing road corridor, and construction machinery should be included where relevant. Hydrostatic pressure acting on the shoring walls should also be included in the design where adequate drainage is not provided behind the full height of the wall. The pressures given in Table 2 should incorporate a suitable factor of safety to limit deflection. For rocks, jointing may be a controlling factor and should be considered. Regular rock-face inspections will be required during excavation to determine whether any potentially unstable rock wedges are present requiring permanent support. Additional anchors may be required if large wedges are observed during excavation.

8.2.3 Ground Anchors

Where necessary, the use of declined tie-back (ground) anchors is suggested for the lateral restraint of the perimeter piled walls. Such ground anchors should be declined below the horizontal to allow anchorage into the stronger bedrock materials at depth. The design of temporary ground anchors for the support of pile wall systems (and potentially unstable rock wedges) may be carried out using the typical average bond stresses at the grout-rock interface given in Table 3. Table 3: Typical Allowable Bond Stresses for Anchor Design

Material Description Allowable Bond Stress

(kPa) Ultimate Bond Stress

(kPa)

Extremely low to low strength rock 75 - 200 150 - 400

High strength sandstone 350 - 1000 700 - 2000

Ground anchors should be designed to have an appropriate free length (minimum of 3 m) and have a minimum 3 m bond length. After installation they should be proof loaded to 125% of the design working load and locked-off at no higher than 80% of the working load. Periodic checks should be carried out during the construction phase to ensure that the lock-off load is maintained and not lost due to creep effects or other causes. The parameters given in Table 3 assume that the anchor holes are clean and adequately flushed, with grouting and other installation procedures carried out carefully and in accordance with good anchoring practice. Careful installation and close supervision by a geotechnical specialist may allow increased bond stresses to be adopted during construction, subject to testing. In normal circumstances the building will restrain the basement excavation over the long term and therefore ground anchors are expected to be temporary only. The use of permanent anchors would require careful attention to corrosion protection. Further advice on design and specification should be sought if permanent anchors are to be employed at this site.

of 9


It will be necessary to obtain permission from neighbouring landowners prior to installing anchors that will extend beyond the site boundaries. In addition, care should be taken to avoid damaging buried services, pipes and subsurface structures during anchor installation.

8.3 Groundwater

As the groundwater was encountered below the top of rock, it is anticipated that the groundwater ingress into the excavation generally will occur as seepage along the soil-rock interface and through joints and bedding planes in the rock, especially after wet weather. Experience on the deep basement (5 levels) excavation immediately across Herring Road no noticeable groundwater inflow from the sides or base of the excavation during construction. Water encountered during construction was generally due to rain. Conditions are expected to be similar for the proposed basement excavation. Therefore, dewatering the site to construct the proposed basement is not anticipated for the site. Some preliminary calculations assuming a mass permeability of 10-7 m/s for the rock, which is considered to be relatively high for rock, suggests that seepage into the excavation will be less than 1 ML/yr. It is anticipated that any seepage can probably be controlled using a sub-floor drainage and collection system in the lower basement level. Pumps will be required to periodically remove stored water from the sub-floor drainage system for the basement. Pumps may also be needed to remove seepage from bored pile excavations prior to the placement of concrete, if bored piles are used for shoring support Seepage through sandstone sometimes results in iron precipitate which has the potential to block drainage material and additional precautions (e.g. wash-out points and ‘rodding points’, etc.) should be taken to avoid blocking of the drains over the medium to longer term. Grouting of open joints and partings may be necessary if excessive water ingress is an issue during excavation.

8.4 Foundations

At the base of the bulk excavation works, spread footings (i.e. pad or strip footings) should be suitable for supporting the proposed building loads. As depicted in the interpreted cross-sections (Drawings 2 and 3, Appendix B), it appears that the proposed bulk excavation level (BEL) will be in high strength sandstone. The high strength sandstone anticipated below basement level is considered suitable for an allowable bearing pressure of 10 MPa. For this bearing pressure, 100% of the footings should be tested to a depth equivalent to 1.5 times the footing width, 50% with cored bores and 50% with spoon testing. The amount of proving the founding material of the footings could be reduced to spoon testing 33% of the footings if the bearing pressure is reduced to 6 MPa. For the given load of 10 000 kN, the footing sizes would be 1 m square for a bearing pressure of 10 MPa and 1.3 m square for a bearing pressure of 6 MPa.

of 9


The settlement of a spread footing is dependent on the loads applied to the footing and the foundation conditions below the footing. The total settlement of a spread footing designed using the parameters provided in this report should be less than 1% of the footing width upon application of the design load. Differential settlements between adjacent footings may be in the order of 50% of the value of total settlement. All spread footings should be inspected by an experienced geotechnical professional to check the adequacy of the foundation material and proof drilled or spoon tested as appropriate.

8.5 Seismic Design

In accordance with the Earthquake Loading Standard, AS1170.4, 2007, the site has a hazard factor (z) of 0.08 and a site sub-soil class of rock (Be). Even though the structure will be founded on high strength rock, consideration has to be taken of the sides of the excavation, hence the classification of Be.

8.6 Thrust Fault

The thrust fault caused some near vertical jointing in the bedrock away from the fault on the nearby building site to the west. There is a possibility that some jointing associated with the thrust joint may be present on the site which will not become obvious until it is exposed by the excavation. Some treatment and redesign at some localised areas may be required on the site. 9. Limitations

Douglas Partners (DP) has prepared this report (or services) for this project at in accordance with DP’s proposal SYD160874 dated 13 July 2016 and acceptance received from China Overseas Sydney Pty Ltd dated 18 July 2016. The work was carried out under DP’s Conditions of Engagement. This report is provided for the exclusive use for this project only and for the purposes as described in the report. It should not be used by for other projects or by a third party. Any party so relying upon this report beyond its exclusive use and purpose as stated above, and without the express written consent of DP, does so entirely at its own risk and without recourse to DP for any loss or damage. In preparing this report DP has necessarily relied upon information provided by the client and/or their agents. The results provided in the report are indicative of the sub-surface conditions on the site only at the specific sampling and/or testing locations, and then only to the depths investigated and at the time the work was carried out. Sub-surface conditions can change abruptly due to variable geological processes and also as a result of human influences. Such changes may occur after DP’s field testing has been completed. DP’s advice is based upon the conditions encountered during this investigation. The accuracy of the advice provided by DP in this report may be affected by undetected variations in ground conditions

of 9


across the site between and beyond the sampling and/or testing locations. The advice may also be limited by budget constraints imposed by others or by site accessibility. This report must be read in conjunction with all of the attached notes and should be kept in its entirety without separation of individual pages or sections. DP cannot be held responsible for interpretations or conclusions made by others unless they are supported by an expressed statement, interpretation, outcome or conclusion stated in this report. This report, or sections from this report, should not be used as part of a specification for a project, without review and agreement by DP. This is because this report has been written as advice and opinion rather than instructions for construction. The scope for work for this investigation/report did not include the assessment of surface or sub-surface materials or groundwater for contaminants, within or adjacent to the site. A separate report has been prepared for this purpose. The contents of this report do not constitute formal design components such as are required, by the Health and Safety Legislation and Regulations, to be included in a Safety Report specifying the hazards likely to be encountered during construction and the controls required to mitigate risk. This design process requires risk assessment to be undertaken, with such assessment being dependent upon factors relating to likelihood of occurrence and consequences of damage to property and to life. This, in turn, requires project data and analysis presently beyond the knowledge and project role respectively of DP. DP may be able, however, to assist the client in carrying out a risk assessment of potential hazards contained in the Comments section of this report, as an extension to the current scope of works, if so requested, and provided that suitable additional information is made available to DP. Any such risk assessment would, however, be necessarily restricted to the (geotechnical / environmental / groundwater) components set out in this report and to their application by the project designers to project design, construction, maintenance and demolition.

Douglas Partners Pty Ltd

Appendix A

About this Report

July 2010

Introduction These notes have been provided to amplify DP's report in regard to classification methods, field procedures and the comments section. Not all are necessarily relevant to all reports. DP's reports are based on information gained from limited subsurface excavations and sampling, supplemented by knowledge of local geology and experience. For this reason, they must be regarded as interpretive rather than factual documents, limited to some extent by the scope of information on which they rely. Copyright This report is the property of Douglas Partners Pty Ltd. The report may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Conditions of Engagement for the commission supplied at the time of proposal. Unauthorised use of this report in any form whatsoever is prohibited. Borehole and Test Pit Logs The borehole and test pit logs presented in this report are an engineering and/or geological interpretation of the subsurface conditions, and their reliability will depend to some extent on frequency of sampling and the method of drilling or excavation. Ideally, continuous undisturbed sampling or core drilling will provide the most reliable assessment, but this is not always practicable or possible to justify on economic grounds. In any case the boreholes and test pits represent only a very small sample of the total subsurface profile. Interpretation of the information and its application to design and construction should therefore take into account the spacing of boreholes or pits, the frequency of sampling, and the possibility of other than 'straight line' variations between the test locations.

Groundwater Where groundwater levels are measured in boreholes there are several potential problems, namely: • In low permeability soils groundwater may

enter the hole very slowly or perhaps not at all during the time the hole is left open;

• A localised, perched water table may lead to an erroneous indication of the true water table;

• Water table levels will vary from time to time with seasons or recent weather changes. They may not be the same at the time of construction as are indicated in the report; and

• The use of water or mud as a drilling fluid will mask any groundwater inflow. Water has to be blown out of the hole and drilling mud must first be washed out of the hole if water measurements are to be made.

More reliable measurements can be made by installing standpipes which are read at intervals over several days, or perhaps weeks for low permeability soils. Piezometers, sealed in a particular stratum, may be advisable in low permeability soils or where there may be interference from a perched water table.

Reports The report has been prepared by qualified personnel, is based on the information obtained from field and laboratory testing, and has been undertaken to current engineering standards of interpretation and analysis. Where the report has been prepared for a specific design proposal, the information and interpretation may not be relevant if the design proposal is changed. If this happens, DP will be pleased to review the report and the sufficiency of the investigation work. Every care is taken with the report as it relates to interpretation of subsurface conditions, discussion of geotechnical and environmental aspects, and recommendations or suggestions for design and construction. However, DP cannot always anticipate or assume responsibility for: • Unexpected variations in ground conditions.

The potential for this will depend partly on borehole or pit spacing and sampling frequency;

• Changes in policy or interpretations of policy by statutory authorities; or

• The actions of contractors responding to commercial pressures.

If these occur, DP will be pleased to assist with investigations or advice to resolve the matter.

July 2010

Site Anomalies In the event that conditions encountered on site during construction appear to vary from those which were expected from the information contained in the report, DP requests that it be immediately notified. Most problems are much more readily resolved when conditions are exposed rather than at some later stage, well after the event.

Information for Contractual Purposes Where information obtained from this report is provided for tendering purposes, it is recommended that all information, including the written report and discussion, be made available. In circumstances where the discussion or comments section is not relevant to the contractual situation, it may be appropriate to prepare a specially edited document. DP would be pleased to assist in this regard and/or to make additional report copies available for contract purposes at a nominal charge. Site Inspection The company will always be pleased to provide engineering inspection services for geotechnical and environmental aspects of work to which this report is related. This could range from a site visit to confirm that conditions exposed are as expected, to full time engineering presence on site.

Appendix B

Drawings

85592.00

016.8.2016

Sydney PSCH

1:500 @ A3

Location of Boreholes

Proposed Residential Development

137-143 Herring Road, MACQUARIE PARK

1DRAWING No:

PROJECT No:

REVISION:

CLIENT:

DRAWN BY:

SCALE: DATE:

OFFICE:

TITLE:

Geotechnical Cross Section A-A'

SITE

China Overseas Sydney Pty Ltd

LEGEND

Borehole location

Locality Plan

NOTE:

1: Base drawing from LTS Lockley Pty Ltd

(ref 42057DT, dated 22.6.2015)

2: Test locations are approximate only and are shown

with reference to existing features.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

OFFICE: DRAWN BY:

CLIENT: TITLE: PROJECT No:

DRAWING No:

REVISION:16.08.2016

2GSY/LD

EL

EV

AT

IO

N (A

HD

)

Core Loss

Asphaltic Concrete

Clay

1:400 (H)

1:200 (V)

0 8

Horizontal Scale (metres)

SCALE: @ A3

Sydney

DATE:

LEGEND

DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (m)

Filling

Roadbase

Sandstone coarse grained

Sandstone fine grained

Siltstone

Silty Clay

Topsoil

Proposed Multi Storey Residential Development

A A'

Vertical Exaggeration = 2.0



Cross-section A-A'

85592

ROCK STRENGTH

EL - Extremely Low

VL - Very Low

L - Low

M - Medium

H - High

VH - Very High

TESTS / OTHERSOIL CONSISTENCY

vs - very soft vl - very loose

s - soft l - loose

f - firm md - medium dense

st - stiff d - dense

vst - very stiff vd - very dense

h - hard

N - Standard penetration test value

- Water level

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

VL

H

H

H

H-M

refusal

2

VL

VL/H-VH

H

H

H

H

H

refusal

3

vst-h

EL

VL/VL-L

M-H

H

H

H

H

N = 34

6

vst

VL

VL-H

M

H

H

refusal

7

BASEMENT LEVEL RL 55.8

NOTE:

1. Subsurface conditions are accurate at the borehole

locations only and variations may occur away from

the borehole locations.

2. Strata layers and rock classification shown is

generalised and each layer can include bands

of lower or higher strength rock and also bands

of less or more fractured rock.

3. Summary logs only. Should be read in conjunction

with detailed logs.

0

OFFICE: DRAWN BY:

CLIENT: TITLE: PROJECT No:

DRAWING No:

REVISION:15.08.2016

3

0

GSY/LD

EL

EV

AT

IO

N (A

HD

)

Topsoil

Filling

Clay

1:400 (H)

1:200 (V)

0 8

Horizontal Scale (metres)

SCALE: @ A3

Sydney

DATE:

LEGEND

DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (m)

Sandstone fine grained

Sandstone coarse grained

Asphaltic Concrete

Roadbase

Shaly Clay

Proposed Multi Storey Residential Development

B B'

Vertical Exaggeration = 2.0


Cross-section B-B'

85592

ROCK STRENGTH

EL - Extremely Low

VL - Very Low

L - Low

M - Medium

H - High

VH - Very High

TESTS / OTHERSOIL CONSISTENCY

vs - very soft vl - very loose

s - soft l - loose

f - firm md - medium dense

st - stiff d - dense

vst - very stiff vd - very dense

h - hard

N - Standard penetration test value

- Water level

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

st

EL

H/H-VH

H

H

H

N = 36

1

M-H

st

vst-h

M-H

H/M-H

H

H

H

H

refusal

4

h

H

H

H

refusal

5

h

M-H

M-H

H

H

refusal

8

BASEMENT LEVEL RL 55.8

NOTE:

1. Subsurface conditions are accurate at the borehole

locations only and variations may occur away from

the borehole locations.

2. Strata layers and rock classification shown is

generalised and each layer can include bands

of lower or higher strength rock and also bands

of less or more fractured rock.

3. Summary logs only. Should be read in conjunction

with detailed logs.


Appendix C

Results of Field Work

July 2010

Sampling Sampling is carried out during drilling or test pitting to allow engineering examination (and laboratory testing where required) of the soil or rock. Disturbed samples taken during drilling provide information on colour, type, inclusions and, depending upon the degree of disturbance, some information on strength and structure. Undisturbed samples are taken by pushing a thin-walled sample tube into the soil and withdrawing it to obtain a sample of the soil in a relatively undisturbed state. Such samples yield information on structure and strength, and are necessary for laboratory determination of shear strength and compressibility. Undisturbed sampling is generally effective only in cohesive soils. Test Pits Test pits are usually excavated with a backhoe or an excavator, allowing close examination of the in-situ soil if it is safe to enter into the pit. The depth of excavation is limited to about 3 m for a backhoe and up to 6 m for a large excavator. A potential disadvantage of this investigation method is the larger area of disturbance to the site.

Large Diameter Augers Boreholes can be drilled using a rotating plate or short spiral auger, generally 300 mm or larger in diameter commonly mounted on a standard piling rig. The cuttings are returned to the surface at intervals (generally not more than 0.5 m) and are disturbed but usually unchanged in moisture content. Identification of soil strata is generally much more reliable than with continuous spiral flight augers, and is usually supplemented by occasional undisturbed tube samples. Continuous Spiral Flight Augers The borehole is advanced using 90-115 mm diameter continuous spiral flight augers which are withdrawn at intervals to allow sampling or in-situ testing. This is a relatively economical means of drilling in clays and sands above the water table. Samples are returned to the surface, or may be collected after withdrawal of the auger flights, but they are disturbed and may be mixed with soils from the sides of the hole. Information from the drilling (as distinct from specific sampling by SPTs or undisturbed samples) is of relatively low

reliability, due to the remoulding, possible mixing or softening of samples by groundwater. Non-core Rotary Drilling The borehole is advanced using a rotary bit, with water or drilling mud being pumped down the drill rods and returned up the annulus, carrying the drill cuttings. Only major changes in stratification can be determined from the cuttings, together with some information from the rate of penetration. Where drilling mud is used this can mask the cuttings and reliable identification is only possible from separate sampling such as SPTs.

Continuous Core Drilling A continuous core sample can be obtained using a diamond tipped core barrel, usually with a 50 mm internal diameter. Provided full core recovery is achieved (which is not always possible in weak rocks and granular soils), this technique provides a very reliable method of investigation. Standard Penetration Tests Standard penetration tests (SPT) are used as a means of estimating the density or strength of soils and also of obtaining a relatively undisturbed sample. The test procedure is described in Australian Standard 1289, Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes - Test 6.3.1. The test is carried out in a borehole by driving a 50 mm diameter split sample tube under the impact of a 63 kg hammer with a free fall of 760 mm. It is normal for the tube to be driven in three successive 150 mm increments and the 'N' value is taken as the number of blows for the last 300 mm. In dense sands, very hard clays or weak rock, the full 450 mm penetration may not be practicable and the test is discontinued. The test results are reported in the following form.

• In the case where full penetration is obtained with successive blow counts for each 150 mm of, say, 4, 6 and 7 as:

4,6,7 N=13

• In the case where the test is discontinued before the full penetration depth, say after 15 blows for the first 150 mm and 30 blows for the next 40 mm as:

15, 30/40 mm

July 2010

The results of the SPT tests can be related empirically to the engineering properties of the soils.

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Tests / Perth Sand Penetrometer Tests Dynamic penetrometer tests (DCP or PSP) are carried out by driving a steel rod into the ground using a standard weight of hammer falling a specified distance. As the rod penetrates the soil the number of blows required to penetrate each successive 150 mm depth are recorded. Normally there is a depth limitation of 1.2 m, but this may be extended in certain conditions by the use of extension rods. Two types of penetrometer are commonly used.

• Perth sand penetrometer - a 16 mm diameter flat ended rod is driven using a 9 kg hammer dropping 600 mm (AS 1289, Test 6.3.3). This test was developed for testing the density of sands and is mainly used in granular soils and filling.

• Cone penetrometer - a 16 mm diameter rod with a 20 mm diameter cone end is driven using a 9 kg hammer dropping 510 mm (AS 1289, Test 6.3.2). This test was developed initially for pavement subgrade investigations, and correlations of the test results with California Bearing Ratio have been published by various road authorities.

July 2010

Description and Classification Methods The methods of description and classification of soils and rocks used in this report are based on Australian Standard AS 1726, Geotechnical Site Investigations Code. In general, the descriptions include strength or density, colour, structure, soil or rock type and inclusions. Soil Types Soil types are described according to the predominant particle size, qualified by the grading of other particles present:

Type Particle size (mm)

Boulder >200

Cobble 63 - 200

Gravel 2.36 - 63

Sand 0.075 - 2.36

Silt 0.002 - 0.075

Clay <0.002 The sand and gravel sizes can be further subdivided as follows:

Type Particle size (mm)

Coarse gravel 20 - 63

Medium gravel 6 - 20

Fine gravel 2.36 - 6

Coarse sand 0.6 - 2.36

Medium sand 0.2 - 0.6

Fine sand 0.075 - 0.2

The proportions of secondary constituents of soils are described as:

Term Proportion Example

And Specify Clay (60%) and Sand (40%)

Adjective 20 - 35% Sandy Clay

Slightly 12 - 20% Slightly Sandy Clay

With some 5 - 12% Clay with some sand

With a trace of 0 - 5% Clay with a trace of sand

Definitions of grading terms used are:

• Well graded - a good representation of all particle sizes

• Poorly graded - an excess or deficiency of particular sizes within the specified range

• Uniformly graded - an excess of a particular particle size

• Gap graded - a deficiency of a particular particle size with the range

Cohesive Soils Cohesive soils, such as clays, are classified on the basis of undrained shear strength. The strength may be measured by laboratory testing, or estimated by field tests or engineering examination. The strength terms are defined as follows:

Description Abbreviation Undrained shear strength

(kPa)

Very soft vs <12

Soft s 12 - 25

Firm f 25 - 50

Stiff st 50 - 100

Very stiff vst 100 - 200

Hard h >200

Cohesionless Soils Cohesionless soils, such as clean sands, are classified on the basis of relative density, generally from the results of standard penetration tests (SPT), cone penetration tests (CPT) or dynamic penetrometers (PSP). The relative density terms are given below:

Relative Density

Abbreviation SPT N value

CPT qc value (MPa)

Very loose vl <4 <2

Loose l 4 - 10 2 -5

Medium dense

md 10 - 30 5 - 15

Dense d 30 - 50 15 - 25

Very dense

vd >50 >25

July 2010

Soil Origin It is often difficult to accurately determine the origin of a soil. Soils can generally be classified as:

• Residual soil - derived from in-situ weathering of the underlying rock;

• Transported soils - formed somewhere else and transported by nature to the site; or

• Filling - moved by man. Transported soils may be further subdivided into:

• Alluvium - river deposits

• Lacustrine - lake deposits

• Aeolian - wind deposits

• Littoral - beach deposits

• Estuarine - tidal river deposits

• Talus - scree or coarse colluvium

• Slopewash or Colluvium - transported downslope by gravity assisted by water. Often includes angular rock fragments and boulders.

July 2010

Rock Strength Rock strength is defined by the Point Load Strength Index (Is(50)) and refers to the strength of the rock substance and not the strength of the overall rock mass, which may be considerably weaker due to defects. The test procedure is described by Australian Standard 4133.4.1 - 1993. The terms used to describe rock strength are as follows:

Term Abbreviation Point Load Index Is(50) MPa

Approx Unconfined Compressive Strength MPa*

Extremely low EL <0.03 <0.6

Very low VL 0.03 - 0.1 0.6 - 2

Low L 0.1 - 0.3 2 - 6

Medium M 0.3 - 1.0 6 - 20

High H 1 - 3 20 - 60

Very high VH 3 - 10 60 - 200

Extremely high EH >10 >200

* Assumes a ratio of 20:1 for UCS to Is(50) Degree of Weathering The degree of weathering of rock is classified as follows:

Term Abbreviation Description

Extremely weathered EW Rock substance has soil properties, i.e. it can be remoulded and classified as a soil but the texture of the original rock is still evident.

Highly weathered HW Limonite staining or bleaching affects whole of rock substance and other signs of decomposition are evident. Porosity and strength may be altered as a result of iron leaching or deposition. Colour and strength of original fresh rock is not recognisable

Moderately weathered

MW Staining and discolouration of rock substance has taken place

Slightly weathered SW Rock substance is slightly discoloured but shows little or no change of strength from fresh rock

Fresh stained Fs Rock substance unaffected by weathering but staining visible along defects

Fresh Fr No signs of decomposition or staining

Degree of Fracturing The following classification applies to the spacing of natural fractures in diamond drill cores. It includes bedding plane partings, joints and other defects, but excludes drilling breaks.

Term Description

Fragmented Fragments of <20 mm

Highly Fractured Core lengths of 20-40 mm with some fragments

Fractured Core lengths of 40-200 mm with some shorter and longer sections

Slightly Fractured Core lengths of 200-1000 mm with some shorter and loner sections

Unbroken Core lengths mostly > 1000 mm

July 2010

Rock Quality Designation The quality of the cored rock can be measured using the Rock Quality Designation (RQD) index, defined as:

RQD % = cumulative length of 'sound' core sections ≥ 100 mm long total drilled length of section being assessed

where 'sound' rock is assessed to be rock of low strength or better. The RQD applies only to natural fractures. If the core is broken by drilling or handling (i.e. drilling breaks) then the broken pieces are fitted back together and are not included in the calculation of RQD. Stratification Spacing For sedimentary rocks the following terms may be used to describe the spacing of bedding partings:

Term Separation of Stratification Planes

Thinly laminated < 6 mm

Laminated 6 mm to 20 mm

Very thinly bedded 20 mm to 60 mm

Thinly bedded 60 mm to 0.2 m

Medium bedded 0.2 m to 0.6 m

Thickly bedded 0.6 m to 2 m

Very thickly bedded > 2 m

July 2010

Introduction These notes summarise abbreviations commonly used on borehole logs and test pit reports. Drilling or Excavation Methods C Core Drilling R Rotary drilling SFA Spiral flight augers NMLC Diamond core - 52 mm dia NQ Diamond core - 47 mm dia HQ Diamond core - 63 mm dia PQ Diamond core - 81 mm dia

Water Water seep Water level

Sampling and Testing A Auger sample B Bulk sample D Disturbed sample E Environmental sample U50 Undisturbed tube sample (50mm) W Water sample pp pocket penetrometer (kPa) PID Photo ionisation detector PL Point load strength Is(50) MPa S Standard Penetration Test V Shear vane (kPa)

Description of Defects in Rock The abbreviated descriptions of the defects should be in the following order: Depth, Type, Orientation, Coating, Shape, Roughness and Other. Drilling and handling breaks are not usually included on the logs. Defect Type B Bedding plane Cs Clay seam Cv Cleavage Cz Crushed zone Ds Decomposed seam F Fault J Joint Lam lamination Pt Parting Sz Sheared Zone V Vein

Orientation The inclination of defects is always measured from the perpendicular to the core axis. h horizontal v vertical sh sub-horizontal sv sub-vertical Coating or Infilling Term cln clean co coating he healed inf infilled stn stained ti tight vn veneer Coating Descriptor ca calcite cbs carbonaceous cly clay fe iron oxide mn manganese slt silty Shape cu curved ir irregular pl planar st stepped un undulating Roughness po polished ro rough sl slickensided sm smooth vr very rough Other fg fragmented bnd band qtz quartz

July 2010

Graphic Symbols for Soil and Rock General

Soils

Sedimentary Rocks

Metamorphic Rocks

Igneous Rocks

Road base

Filling

Concrete

Asphalt

Topsoil

Peat

Clay

Conglomeratic sandstone

Conglomerate

Boulder conglomerate

Sandstone

Slate, phyllite, schist

Siltstone

Mudstone, claystone, shale

Coal

Limestone

Porphyry

Cobbles, boulders

Sandy gravel

Laminite

Silty sand

Clayey sand

Silty clay

Sandy clay

Gravelly clay

Shaly clay

Silt

Clayey silt

Sandy silt

Sand

Gravel

Talus

Gneiss

Quartzite

Dolerite, basalt, andesite

Granite

Tuff, breccia

Dacite, epidote

D O U G L A S P A R T N E R S P T Y L T D

MULTI – STOREY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT – MACQUARIE PARK

BORE 1 PROJECT 85592.00 JUL 2016

1 . 5 – 6 . 0 m




6 . 0 – 1 1 . 0 m

Note: Unless otherwisestated, rock is fracturedalong rough planarbedding dipping 0°- 10°

1.5-1.6m: fg, cly1.6-2.67m: B (x5) 0°- 5°,cly co, 1-5mm

2.27m: J70°, un, ro, cln2.32-2.35m: fg, cly

2.59m: B5°, cly, 5mm2.71m: J30°, pl, sm, cly2.8 & 2.93m: B5°, cly co,1-2mm

3.52m: B20°, pl, ro, clyvn3.77m: B5°, fe, cly co,2mm

4.15-5.0m: B (x5) 5°, fe

5.24m: J30°, he, fe

6.05-6.6m: B (x3) 10°,fe, ti

7.5m: B15°, cly vn, ti

8.38m: B5°, fe, cly vn, ti

5,11,25N = 36

PL(A) = 2.8

PL(A) = 3

PL(A) = 3.1

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 0.6

PL(A) = 2.5

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.5

80

96

100

100

100

100

A

A

A

S

C

C

C

FILLING - dark grey silty clay andfine sand filling, moist (topsoil)

FILLING - brown clay and crushedsandstone filling, moist

CLAY - apparently stiff, brown clay,slightly silty, moist

SANDSTONE - extremely lowstrength, light grey brown finegrained sandstone

SANDSTONE - high and high tovery high strength, highly tomoderately weathered, fractured,red-brown fine grained sandstonewith some clay bands

SANDSTONE - medium to highstrength, slightly weathered, slightlyfractured, grey-brown fine tomedium grained sandstone

SANDSTONE - high strength,moderately weathered then fresh,slightly fractured then unbroken,brown then light grey, medium tocoarse grained thinly beddedsandstone

SANDSTONE - description nextpage

0.05

0.35

1.2

1.6

3.2

6.6

9.5

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e

Sampling & In Situ Testing

Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities

BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE LOG CLIENT:PROJECT:LOCATION: 137-143 Herring Road, Macquarie Park

SAMPLING & IN SITU TESTING LEGENDA Auger sample G Gas sample PID Photo ionisation detector (ppm)B Bulk sample P Piston sample PL(A) Point load axial test Is(50) (MPa)BLK Block sample Ux Tube sample (x mm dia.) PL(D) Point load diametral test Is(50) (MPa)C Core drilling W Water sample pp Pocket penetrometer (kPa)D Disturbed sample Water seep S Standard penetration testE Environmental sample Water level V Shear vane (kPa)

BORE No: 1PROJECT No: 85592DATE: 27/7/2016SHEET 1 OF 3

DRILLER: SS LOGGED: SI CASING: HW to 1.5m

China Overseas Sydney Pty LtdProposed Multi Storey Residential Development

REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:

No free groundwater observed whilst augering

Solid flight auger to 1.5m; NMLC-Coring to 21.0m

SURFACE LEVEL: 71.4 AHDEASTING:NORTHING:DIP/AZIMUTH: 90°/--

Standpipe installed to 21.0m (screen 17.0 to 21.0m; gravel 1.8 to 21.0m; bentonite 1.3 to 1.8m; backfill to GL)

Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

7170

6968

6766

6564

6362




1 1 . 0 – 1 6 . 0 m




1 6 . 0 – 2 1 . 0 m

>>

>>

12.3m: B5°, cly vn, ti

19.35m: J30°, pl, ro, cln19.39m: J30°, he19.42m: J30°- 45°, cu,ro, cln19.5-19.7m: J (x2) 70°,un, ro, cln19.9m: B0°, cly vn, ti

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 2

PL(A) = 2

PL(A) = 2

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 0.9

PL(A) = 1.3

100

100

100

92

100

100

100

100

C

C

C

C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained, massive sandstone withsome carbonaceous flakes(continued)


19.6

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:





Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

6160

5958

5756

5554

5352

PL(A) = 2.4

92100C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,slightly fractured and unbroken, lightgrey, medium grained, thinly beddedsandstone (continued)

Bore discontinued at 21.0m21.0

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:





Depth(m) R

L

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

5150

4948

4746

4544

4342




1 . 4 – 6 . 0 m




6 . 0 – 1 1 . 0 m


1.58m: B0°, fe, cly,10mm1.67m: J45°, pl, ro, cln1.72m: B5°, cly, 10mm1.86m: B5°, Cz, 10mm1.93m: J30°- 85°, un, ro,fe2.02m: J45°, pl, sm, cly2.2m: J60°, he2.6m: J70°, pl, ro, fe2.8m: CORE LOSS:200mm3.0-3.15m: fg, cly3.3m: CORE LOSS:220mm

3.7m: J70°, pl, ro, fe

3.88m: J75°, he/ti

4.07m: J30°, pl, sm, cln

5.99m: B0°, fe

6.18m: B0°, fe

7.08m: B5°, cbs co,1mm

7.55m: J70°, pl, ro, cln

7,23,25/100mmrefusal

PL(A) = 2.3

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 1.1

PL(A) = 2.2

PL(A) = 0.4

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 1.1

PL(A) = 1.6

22

100

100

86

100

100

A

A

A

S

C

C

C

FILLING - grey-brown clayey sandfilling with a trace of roadbase gravel

SILTY CLAY - red-brown silty claywith ironstone gravel, moist

SANDSTONE - very low strength,light grey-brown medium grainedsandstone

SANDSTONE - high strength, highlyweathered, fragmented to fractured,light grey and brown fine grainedsandstone with some clay bands to50mm thickness

SANDSTONE - high strength,slightly weathered then freshstained, slightly fractured thenunbroken, light grey mediumgrained sandstone

6.0-6.2m: fine grained sandstonewith some carbonaceouslaminations

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained thickly bedded sandstone

0.2

1.2

1.4

3.0

3.52

3.8

9.5

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities




DRILLER: WG LOGGED: SI CASING: HW to 1.4m


REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

7271

7069

6867

6665

6463




1 1 . 0 – 1 6 . 0 m




1 6 . 0 – 2 1 . 0 m

>>

11.65m: B0°, cly co,2mm

12.65m: B0°, cly, 5mm

12.85m: B15°, cly co,3mm

14.8m: B5°, cly vn

15.7m: B35°, pl, sm, cly

17.65m: B0°, cly vn, ti

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 2.4

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.9

100

100

100

97

100

100

100

100

C

C

C

C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained thickly bedded sandstone(continued)

SANDSTONE - high then mediumstrength, fresh, slightly fractured andunbroken, light grey mediumgrained thinly bedded sandstone

17.65

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

6261

6059

5857

5655

5453


MULTI- STOREY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT – M ACQUARIE PARK


21.0 – 22.2m

21.3m: B15°, cly co,2mm21.56m: B35°, pl, ro, cly

21.98m: B0°, cly co,5mm22.12-22.16m: Cs

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 0.9

97100C

SANDSTONE - high then mediumstrength, fresh, slightly fractured andunbroken, light grey mediumgrained thinly bedded sandstone(continued)


FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

5251

5049

4847

4645

4443




1 . 1 – 6 . 0 m




6 . 0 – 1 1 . 0 m

>>


1.15m: J30°, pl, sm, cln1.22m: J70°, pl, ro, fe1.4m: J80°, un, ro, cly

2.5-2.58m: Cs2.6-2.75m: J85°, pl, ro,cly2.72-2.75m: Cs

3.1-3.13m: Cs3.26-3.4m: J70° & 50°,st, ro, fe, partially he3.5-3.52m: Cs

4.05-4.08m: Ds

4.38-4.4m: Ds4.46-4.48m: Cs

4.85-4.88m: Cs

5.25m: J30° & 80°, st,ro, fe

7.55m: B10°, cbs co,1mm

9.25-9.3m: Cs

15/100mmrefusal

PL(A) = 2

PL(A) = 4.2

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 2

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 1.7

45

98

100

100

100

100

100

100

A

A

AS

C

C

C

C

TOPSOIL - grey silty sand topsoilwith some fine gravel, moist

SILTY CLAY - red-brown, silty claywith some ironstone gravel, moist

SANDSTONE - very low strength,brown laminite

SANDSTONE - alternate bands ofvery low and high to very highstrength, highly to moderatelyweathered, fractured, light grey andbrown fine grained sandstone withapproximately 15% siltstonelaminations

SANDSTONE - high strength,slightly weathered, fractured, lightgrey-brown, fine grained sandstonewith some siltstone/carbonaceouslaminations

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey to grey, thinlybedded, medium grained sandstone

SANDSTONE - high strength,fresh, unbroken, grey, fine grainedsandstone with approximately 20%carbonaceous laminations

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey mediumgrained , thickly bedded sandstone

0.1

0.7

1.1

3.5

5.4

7.55

8.28

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Standpipe installed to 21.6m (screen 18.6m to 21.6m; gravel 1.0m to 21.6m; bentonite 0.5m to 1.0m; backfill to GL with gatic cover)

Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

7170

6968

6766

6564

6362




1 1 . 0 – 1 6 . 0 m




1 6 . 0 – 2 1 . 0 m

>>

10.25m: B0°, cly co,2mm

11.8m: B0°, cly vn

12.65m: J20°, pl, sm, cly

13.66m: B0°, cly co,2mm

15.5m: B0°, cbs co,1mm

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.1

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.2

100

100

100

99

100

100

100

100

C

C

C

C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey mediumgrained , thickly bedded sandstone(continued)

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained thinly bedded sandstone

18.25

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:





Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

6160

5958

5756

5554

5352




21.0 – 21.62m

20.4m: B0°, cly vn

21.57m: B5°, cly, 10mm

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.68

99100C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained thinly bedded sandstone(continued)


FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: DT100

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:





Depth(m) R

L

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

5150

4948

4746

4544

4342




1 . 3 5 – 5 . 0 m




5 . 0 – 1 0 . 0 m

>>


1.35-1.7m: fg

1.53-1.65m: J80°, un,ro, fe

2.27-2.42m: J85°, un,ro, inf cly, 5mm2.43-2.5m: J45°- 90°,cu, ro, cly2.63-2.64m: cly2.76-2.83m: J75°, un,ro, cly3.05m: B0°, cly co, 2mm3.16-3.3m: Cs3.37m: J30°, pl, ro, fe3.6, 3.8 & 3.87m: B (x3)0°- 5°, fe3.91-3.96m: Cs

4.1m: B5°, cly co

4.9 & 5.2m: B (x2) 5°,cbs co, 1mm

8.46m: B5°, cly, 10mm

8.95m: B5°, cbs co,1mm9.12m: B0°, cbs co,1mm


PL(A) = 2.5

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1

PL(A) = 2.4

PL(A) = 2.3

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 2.4

PL(A) = 1.7

25

88

100

100

100

100

100

100

A

A

AS

C

C

C

C

ASPHALTIC CONCRETE

ROADBASE GRAVEL

CLAY - apparently stiff, red-brownclay, moist

SHALY CLAY - very stiff to hard,light brown shaly clay1.2m: becoming extremely lowstrength sandstone

SANDSTONE - medium and highstrength, highly then highly tomoderately weathered, fragmentedand fractured, light grey and brownfine grained sandstone with someclay bands to 50mm thickness

SANDSTONE - high and medium tohigh strength, highly to moderatelyweathered, slightly fractured, brownfine to medium grained sandstonewith clay bands

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,slightly fractured and unbroken, lightgrey, fine to medium grainedsandstone with some carbonaceouslaminations

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken then slightly fractured,light grey medium grainedsandstone


0.04

0.2

0.7

1.35

3.0

4.25

5.8

9.7

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities




DRILLER: LC LOGGED: SI CASING: HW to 1.4m


REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:


Solid flight auger to 1.0m; Rotary to 1.35m; NMLC-Coring to 20.0m


Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

6968

6766

6564

6362

6160




1 0 . 0 – 1 5 . 0 m




1 5 . 0 – 2 0 . 0 m

>>

16.2m: B5°, cly, 5mm

18.65m: B20°, cly vn, ti

19.9m: B5°, cly co, 2mm

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 2.8

PL(A) = 1.8

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 2

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 1.8

PL(A) = 2

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

C

C

C

C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained massive sandstone with atrace of carbonaceous flakes(continued)

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey mediumgrained thinly bedded sandstone

Bore discontinued at 20.0m

17.7

20.0

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

5958

5756

5554

5352

5150




1 . 2 – 6 . 0 m




6 . 0 – 1 1 . 0 m


1.94m: Cs, 10mm

2.18m: J70°, un, he2.27m: Cs, 10mm2.39m: J70°- 90°, un, ro,cln

3.1m: Cs, 50mm

3.31m: B5°, pl, ro, fe stn

3.6m: B10°, pl, ro, festn, cly, 10mm

3.98m: J30°, un, ro, cln

5.12m: B0°, pl, ro, clyco, fe stn

6.76m: B5°, pl, ro, fe stn6.85m: B5°, pl, ro, fe stn

8.12m: J45°, pl, ro, festn8.22m: J45°, pl, ro, festn

8.76m: J20°, pl, ro, cly,2mm

18,25/50mmrefusal

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.1

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 1.3

94

98

97

100

100

100

100

100

A

A

AS

C

C

C

C

FILLING - asphalt filling

FILLING - dark brown roadbasegravel filling with some fine sand

CLAY - red-brown clay

CLAY - hard, light brown clay

SANDSTONE - high strength,moderately weathered, fractured,light grey and brown fine to mediumgrained sandstone with someextremely low strength bands

SANDSTONE - high strength,slightly weathered, slightly fracturedto unbroken, light grey and brownmedium to coarse grainedsandstone

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,slightly fractured and unbroken lightgrey medium to coarse grainedsandstone

0.04

0.25

0.6

1.2

3.6

6.85

10.0

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities




DRILLER: LC LOGGED: JN/SI CASING: HW to 1.25m


REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:


Solid flight auger (TC-bit) to 1.0m; Rotary (water) to 1.2m; NMLC-Coring to 18.0m


40% water loss; 80% with mud reduced to 40%

Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

6766

6564

6362

6160

5958




1 1 . 0 – 1 6 . 0 m




1 6 . 0 – 1 7 . 9 5 m

>>

15.3m: B10°, cly vn, ti

17.12m: B0°, cly co,2mm

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.7

100

100

100

100

100

100

C

C

C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken light grey medium tocoarse grained sandstone


FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




40% water loss; 80% with mud reduced to 40%

Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

5756

5554

5352

5150

4948




1 . 5 – 6 . 0 m




6 . 0 – 1 1 . 0 m


1.5m: CORE LOSS:80mm

2.3-2.38m: fg, fe

2.5m: CORE LOSS:130mm

2.83m: B0°, fe, cly,10mm2.86m: J90°- 70°, st, ro,cln2.98m: B5°, fe, cly co,2mm3.42-3.67m: B (x3) 0°-5°, fe

4.31m: J35°, pl, ro, fe4.33m: B0°, fe, cly,10mm4.45m: B5°, fe, cly co,3mm

5.45m: B5°, cbs co,3mm5.63m: B10°, cbs co,1mm

6.22m: B5°, cly6.28m: B30°, cbs co

6.95m: B10°, cly co,2mm

7.95m: B10°, cly, co,3mm

8.53-8.83m: B (x3) 0°-10°, cly co, 1-3mm

9.6m: B0°, cly, 5mm

5,7,27N = 34

PL(A) = 3.8

PL(A) = 0.9

PL(A) = 2.1

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.1

PL(A) = 1.8

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 2.3

32

97

98

100

89

100

100

A

A

A

S

C

C

C

C

TOPSOIL

FILLING - grey-brown, clay fillingwith a trace of roadbase gravel

CLAY - apparently very stiff to hard,brown clay with a race of ironstonegravel, moist

SANDSTONE - extremely lowstrength, light grey-brown shale withironstone bands

SANDSTONE - very low and verylow to low strength, highlyweathered, light grey-brown finegrained sandstone with some veryhigh strength ironstone bands

SANDSTONE - medium and highstrength, moderately weathered,fractured, light grey and red-brownfine grained sandstone with someclay bands 30mm to 60mm thick

SANDSTONE - high strength,slightly weathered then fresh,slightly fractured, light grey-brownfine grained sandstone

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,slightly fractured and unbroken, greyto light grey medium grainedsandstone

0.2

0.4

1.2

1.51.58

2.63

3.4

5.5

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities




DRILLER: GM LOGGED: SI CASING: HW to 1.5m


REMARKS:

RIG: Bobcat

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

6968

6766

6564

6362

6160




1 1 . 0 – 1 6 . 0 m




1 6 . 0 – 2 0 . 3 2 m

10.36m: B5°, cly vn

13.06-13.78m: B0°, clyco, 1-3mm

14.58m: J35°, pl, ro, cly

17.38m: B5°, cly, 3mm

18.1m: B5°, cly, 10mm

18.9m: B0°, cly vn

19.15m: B0°, cly co,3mm

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.1

PL(A) = 1.2

PL(A) = 1.8

PL(A) = 1.5

98

100

100

99

100

100

100

100

100

100

C

C

C

C

C

SANDSTONE - description previouspage

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken light grey, mediumgrained thickly bedded sandstone

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,slightly fractured and unbroken, lightgrey to grey, medium grainedsandstone

10.5

17.2

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Bobcat

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

5958

5756

5554

5352

5150

PL(A) = 1.7100100CSANDSTONE - description previouspageBore discontinued at 20.3m

20.3

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Bobcat

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

4948

4746

4544

4342

4140




1 . 1 – 5 . 0 m




5 . 0 – 1 0 . 0 m

>>

Note: Unless otherwisestated, rock is fracturedalong rough planarbedding dipping 0°- 10° - some fe stained orwith clay coating to 5mm

1.25m: J75°, pl, ro, cly1.4m: J, sv (85°) pl, ro,cly1.52m: J45°, pl, ro, fe1.76m: J70°, pl, ro, cly1.93m: J30°, pl, ro, fe,cly2.12m: J50°, un, ro, fe2.21m: J30°- 45°, cu, ro,cly2.3m: J60°, pl, sm, cly2.55m: J45°, pl, ro, cly2.63m: J35°, pl, sm, cln2.72m: Ds, 0°, 80mm2.78m: J55°, pl, sm, cly2.85m: J45°- 70°, cu,sm, cly3.2m: Ds, 0°, 300mm3.32m: J60°, un, ro, fe3.5m: CORE LOSS:60mm3.95m: J70°, pl, ro, cly4m: Ds, 0°, cly, 60mm

6.1-6.13m: Sz, 30°, fe


PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 3.2

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 0.6

PL(A) = 1

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 2

0

90

100

100

98

100

100

100

A

A

A

S

C

C

C

C

ASPHALTIC CONCRETE

ROADBASE GRAVEL

FILLING - grey coarse sand androadbase gravel filling

SILTY CLAY - very stiff, brown siltyclay, moist

SILTSTONE - very low strengthsiltstone

SANDSTONE - alternate bands ofvery low and high strength, highly tomoderately weathered, fragmentedto fractured, light grey and brownfine grained sandstone with veryhigh strength iron-cemented bands

SANDSTONE - medium strength,moderately to slightly weathered,slightly fractured, light grey andbrown medium grained sandstonewith some clay bands to 50mmthickness

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained sandstone

0.030.1

0.55

1.01.1

3.56

4.0

6.13

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

6766

6564

6362

6160

5958




1 0 . 0 – 1 5 . 0 m




1 5 . 0 – 1 8 . 6 5 m

10.06m: B10°, cly,10mm

11.1m: B5°, cly vn

12.75m: B0°, cly, 10mm

14.25m: B10°, cly, 5mm

16.6-16.98m: J (x3) 20°-30°, pl, sm, cln

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 2.1

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 2.1

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.6

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 1.3

100

100

97

100

100

100

C

C

C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey, mediumgrained sandstone (continued)

SANDSTONE - high strength, freshthen slightly weathered, slightlyfractured and unbroken light greyand brown, medium grainedcross-bedded sandstone

16.55-17.0m: sandstone brecciatedshale

Bore discontinued at 18.65m

15.75

18.65

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

5756

5554

5352

5150

4948




1 . 2 – 5 . 0 m




5 . 0 – 1 0 . 0 m


1.37m: B5°, pl, ro, cly,5mm1.37-1.53m: J70°- 90°,un, ro, cln1.66m: Cs, 40mm1.7m: J60°, pl, sm, cly1.74m: Cs, 20mm

2.43m: B5°, pl, ro, cly,3mm2.54m: Cs, 10mm2.6-2.9m: J70°- 90°, un,he2.95m: Cs, 10mm

4.01m: B0°, pl, ro, festn, cly co4.25m: B0°- 10°, un, ro,fe stn, cly, 2mm

4.74m: B0°, pl, ro, cly,2mm4.75m: Cs, 10mm4.78m: B5°, pl, ro, cly co

6.26m: Cs, 10mm

8.23m: J45°, pl, ro, clyco

9.65m: J45°, pl, ro, cly,1mm

3,25/50mmrefusal

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 2

PL(A) = 0.6

PL(A) = 1.5

PL(A) = 0.9

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.3

PL(A) = 1.3PL(A) = 1.3

86

99

100

100

100

100

100

100

A

A

AS

C

C

C

C

FILLING - asphalt filling

FILLING - dark brown roadbasegravel filling with some clay

CLAY - light brown silty clay withsome fine sand

CLAY - hard, dark brown silty claywith some fine sand (possible verylow strength sandstone)

SANDSTONE - medium and highstrength, moderately then slightlyweathered, fractured and slightlyfractured, grey and brown fine tomedium grained sandstone withsome extremely low strength bandsand trace of carbonaceouslaminations

SANDSTONE - medium and highstrength, slightly weathered, slightlyfractured then unbroke, grey andbrown medium to coarse grainedsandstone

5.6-8.8m: some carbonaceouslaminations

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey medium tocoarse grained sandstone - with some micaceous laminations

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey medium tocoarse grained sandstone

0.04

0.2

0.6

1.2

3.0

5.7

9.1

FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Standpipe installed to 15.0m (screen 12.0-15.0m; gravel 1.0 to 15.0m; bentonite 0.3 to 1.0m; backfill to GL with gatic cover)

Depth(m) R

L

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

6564

6362

6160

5958

5756




10.0 – 15.0m

>>

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.4

PL(A) = 1.7

PL(A) = 1.9

PL(A) = 1.6

100

100

100

100

C

C

SANDSTONE - high strength, fresh,unbroken, light grey medium tocoarse grained sandstone(continued)


FractureSpacing

(m)

0.01

B - Bedding

S - Shear

RockStrength

Typ

e


Ex

Low

Ver

y Lo

wLo

w

Med

ium

Hig

h

Ver

y H

igh

Ex

Hig

h

0.10

0.50

1.00 R

QD

%

Cor

eR

ec. %

Gra

phic

Log

Wat

er

Degree ofWeathering

EW

HW

MW

SW

FS

FR

Description

of

StrataJ - Joint

F - Fault

Test Results&

Comments0.05

Discontinuities






REMARKS:

RIG: Scout 1

WATER OBSERVATIONS:

TYPE OF BORING:




Standpipe installed to 15.0m (screen 12.0-15.0m; gravel 1.0 to 15.0m; bentonite 0.3 to 1.0m; backfill to GL with gatic cover)

Depth(m) R

L

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

5554

5352

5150

4948

4746

report on geotechnical investigation multi-storey ... · subsurface conditions on the site and...

Documents