LTS Geo SCG 17 2301 A

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001 31/03/2017
Reference number LTS-GEO-SCG-17-2301-A
CHURCHGATE METRO STATION - GEOTECHNICAL

INTERPRETIVE REPORT
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ)

UGC001
CHURCHGATE METRO STATION - GEOTECHNICAL INTERPRETIVE REPORT
IDENTIFICATION TABLE
Client/Project owner MUMBAI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.
Project MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001
Study Churchgate Metro Station - Geotechnical Interpretive Report
Type of document Technical Report
Date 31/03/2017
File name LTS-GEO-SCG-17-2301-A
Reference number LTS-GEO-SCG-17-2301-A
Language English
Number of pages 133
APPROVAL
Revision Name Position Date Signature Modifications
Sr.
Production KKS 07/03/2017
Engineer
Lead
Check VSI 07/03/2017
A1 Engineer
Establishm
ent of NGU/
PL/DM 07/03/2017
liability for AAP
the entity
Sr.
Engineer
Lead Revised as
A2 Engineer per LDC
Establishm comments
ent of NGU/
PL/DM 17/03/2017
liability for AAP
the entity
MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

Churchgate Metro Station - Geotechnical Interpretive Report LTS-GEO-SCG-17-2301-A Page
Report 31/03/2017 2/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Sr.
Engineer
Lead
Engineer
Revised as
A3 Check for per LDC
KGA DQAM 24/03/2017
comments
Quality
Establishm
ent of NGU/
PL/DM 24/03/2017
liability for AAP
the entity
Sr.
Engineer
Lead
Engineer
First Issue to
A Check for GC
KGA DQAM 31/03/2017
Submission
Quality
Establishm
ent of NGU/
PL/DM 31/03/2017
liability for AAP
the entity

Report 31/03/2017 3/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 12
2. SCOPE OF THE REPORT 14
3. GEOLOGY 15
3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY 15
3.2 SEISMICITY 16
4. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS 18
4.1 GROUND INVESTIGATIONS 18
4.2 GROUND WATER TABLE 19
4.3 FIELD TESTS IN SOIL STRATA 19
SPT N VALUES 19
LABORATORY TESTS – SOIL SAMPLES 19
ATTERBERG LIMITS AND PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION 20
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS OF SOILS 21
IN-SITU FALLING HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST 21
SHEAR STRENGTH TEST 21
CHEMICAL AGGRESSIVITY AND CORROSION – SOIL AND GROUNDWATER 22
FIELD TESTS IN ROCK STRATA 23
INDEX PROPERTIES: CORE RECOVERY (CR) AND ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) 23
PRESSURE-METER TEST 24
PACKER PERMEABILITY TESTS 25
LABORATORY TESTS – ROCK SAMPLES 26
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS OF INTACT ROCK 26
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (UCS) 28
POINT LOAD INDEX 29
TENSILE STRENGTH 29
GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND INTERPRETATION 30

5.1 GENERAL 30
5.2 GEOLOGICAL PROFILE 30
5.3 ASSESSMENT AND INTERPRETATION 32
SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS OF UPPER SOIL 32
ELASTIC MODULUS OF SOIL UNDER DRAINED CONDITIONS (E’) 33
PERMEABILITY OF SOIL 33
CHEMICAL TESTS – SOIL AND GROUNDWATER 34
ROCK CLASSIFICATIONS 36
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (UCS) 36
CONVERSION OF UCS FROM POINT LOAD INDEX 38
ROCK MASS RATING SYSTEM 38
GEOLOGICAL STRENGTH INDEX 41
Report 31/03/2017 4/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
ROCK MASS PARAMETERS 45
HOEK-BROWN FAILURE CRITERION 45
MOHR-COULOMB STRENGTH PARAMETERS 46
Determination of upper limit of confining stress, 47
ROCK MASS MODULUS 47
6. SUMMARY OF DESIGN PARAMETERS 49
APPENDIX A - BOREHOLE LAYOUT PLAN 54
APPENDIX B - FIELD TESTS 56
APPENDIX C - LABORATORY TESTS 65
APPENDIX D - DERIVED ROCK MASS PARAMETERS 81
APPENDIX E - ROCLAB SOFTWARE OUTPUTS 87
APPENDIX F - GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DRAWINGS 133

Report 31/03/2017 5/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Project Location 12

Figure 2 Geological map of Mumbai (Pop Envis, IIPS Mumbai, 2015) 16
Figure 3 Seismic Hazard Map of Mumbai 17
Figure 4 Values of Drained friction angle for clays based on Plasticity Index (Reference 24) 33
Figure 5 Representative values of GSI for different weathering grade in Basalt strata 42
Figure 6 Representative values of GSI for different weathering grade in Shale / Breccia strata 43
Figure 7 SPT N Value for Unit 2a – Soil 57
Figure 8 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3a – Basalt WG V 58
Figure 9 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3a – Basalt WG V 58
Figure 10 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3b– Basalt WG IV 59
Figure 11 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3b– Basalt WG IV 59
Figure 12 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III 60
Figure 13 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III 60
Figure 14 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3d– Basalt WG I & II 61
Figure 15 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3d– Basalt WG I & II 61
Figure 16 TCR vs Depth for Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V 62
Figure 17 RQD vs Depth for Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V 62
Figure 18 TCR vs Depth for Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III 63
Figure 19 RQD vs Depth for Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III 63
Figure 20 TCR vs Depth for Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II 64
Figure 21 RQD vs Depth for Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II 64
Figure 22 Particle Size Distribution for Unit 1 & Unit 2a 66
Figure 23 Atterberg's Limits for Unit 2a 66
Figure 24 Moisture Content for Unit 1 & Unit 2a 67
Figure 25 Unit Weight under Saturated Condition for Unit 2a 68
Figure 26 Unit Weight under Dry Condition for Unit 2a 68
Figure 27 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3a – Basalt WG V 69
Figure 28 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3a – Basalt WG V 69
Figure 29 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV 70
Figure 30 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV 70
Figure 31 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3c – Basalt WG III 71
Figure 32 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3c – Basalt WG III 71
Figure 33 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II 72
Figure 34 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II 72
Figure 35 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V 73
Figure 36 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V 73
Figure 37 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III 74
Figure 38 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III 74
Figure 39 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II 75
Figure 40 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II 75
Figure 41 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3a – Basalt WG V 76
Figure 42 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV 76
Figure 43 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3c – Basalt WG III 77
Figure 44 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II 77
Figure 45 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4a– Breccia & Shale WG IV & V 78
Figure 46 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b - Breccia & Shale WG III 79
Figure 47 UCS under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b - Breccia & Shale WG III 79
Figure 48 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c - Breccia & Shale WG I & II 80
Report 31/03/2017 6/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 49 UCS under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c - Breccia & Shale WG I & II 80
Figure 50 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV 82
Figure 51 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV 82
Figure 52 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III 83
Figure 53 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III 83
Figure 54 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II 84
Figure 55 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II 84
Figure 56 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 4b– Breccia & Shale WG III 85
Figure 57 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III 85
Figure 58 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 4c– Breccia & Shale WG I & II 86
Figure 59 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II 86
Figure 60 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3b, Basalt WG IV – General Application 88
Figure 61 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3c, Basalt WG III – General Application 89
Figure 62 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3d, Basalt WG I & II – General Application 90
Figure 63 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4b, Shale & Breccia WG III – General Application 91
Figure 64 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4c, Shale & Breccia WG I & II – General Application 92
Figure 75 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3b, Basalt WG IV – Slope at 15m Height 103
Figure 76 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3c, Basalt WG III – Slope at 15m Height 104
Figure 77 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3d, Basalt WG I & II – Slope at 15m Height 105
Figure 78 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4b, Shale & Breccia WG III – Slope at 15m Height 106
Figure 79 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4c, Shale & Breccia WG I & II – Slope at 15m Height 107
Figure 80 Roclab analysis for D= 0.5 for Unit 3b, Basalt WG IV – Slopes at 15m Height 108
Report 31/03/2017 7/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 8/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
LIST OF TABLES
Modifications since previous version Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 1: Summary of field work executed at Churchgate Metro Station 18
Table 2 Summary of Probe boreholes drilled in Churchgate Station Area 18
Table 3: Ground Water levels - Field Observations 19
Table 4: Summary of SPT N value data 19
Table 5: Summary of Particle Size Distribution tests 20
Table 6: Summary of Atterberg Limits tests 21
Table 7: Summary of Unit Weight of Soil, Moisture Content and Specific Gravity 21
Table 8: Results of In-situ Falling Head Permeability Tests 21
Table 9: Results of Triaxial Shear Test (UU Test) 22
Table 10: Summary of Triaxial Shear Test Results 22
Table 11: Results of chemical tests on Soil Samples 22
Table 12: Summary of chemical test results on soil samples 22
Table 13: Results of chemical tests on Water Samples 23
Table 14: Summary of chemical test results on water samples 23
Table 15: Summary of Core Recovery & RQD values 23
Table 16: Results of Pressure-Meter Test 24
Table 17: Summary of Pressure-Meter Test Results 25
Table 18: Summary of Packer Permeability & Lugeon Test results 25
Table 19: Summary of laboratory test results of intact rock 27
Table 20: Summary of UCS for Intact Rock Test Results 28
Table 21: Results of Point Load Strength Index Test 29
Table 22: Summary of Point Load Strength Index Test Results 29
Table 23: Summary of Tensile Strength Results 29
Table 24: Summary of Geological Units 30
Table 25: Summary of Permeability Tests on Soil Strata 34
Table 26: Range of Permeability values for different soils (Reference 21) 34
Table 27: Summary of chemical tests on soil / water samples 34
Table 28: Requirements for concrete exposed to sulphate attack (Extract from Reference 2) 35
Table 29: Permissible limits of soilds (Extract from Reference 2) 35
Table 30: Classification of Weathering Grades Based on Core Recovery and RQD 36
Table 31: Rock classification based on Compressive Strength 36
Table 32: Assessment of UCS for Intact rock 37
Table 33: Point Load Strength Index converted to UCS value 38
Table 34: Summary of Conversion of UCS from PLI 38
Table 35: Classification Parameters and Rock Mass Ratings 39
Table 36: Assessment of Rock Mass Rating for all rock units 40
Table 37: Rock Mass Rating for Basic / Slope for all Rock Units 41
Table 38: A comparison of GSI value with RMRBasic for intact rock 44
Table 39: The intact rock parameters and Modular Ratio 48
Table 40: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters - Failure Envelope by General Application 50
Table 41: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters - Failure Envelope by Slope at 15m height 51
Table 42: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters - Failure Envelope by Slope at 24m height 52
Table 43: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters 53

Report 31/03/2017 9/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
ABBREVIATIONS
MSL Mean Sea Level
IS Indian Standards
bgl Below ground level
PLI Point Load Strength Index
UCS Uniaxial Compression Strength
CR Core Recovery
RQD Rock Quality Designation
WG Weathering Grade
SCR Solid Core Recovery

Report 31/03/2017 10/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
REFERENCES
[1] Factual Report Land Based Geotechnical Investigation works of Mumbai Metro Line-3
Package UGC-01 (Stage-I), Mumbai Maharashtra, India
[2] IS:456 - 2000; Plain and reinforced concrete – Code of Practice.
[3] IS 1498 : 1970 Classification and identification of soils for general engineering purposes (first
revision)
[4] IS 1892 : 1979 Code of practice for subsurface investigations for foundations (first revision)
[5] IS 2950 (Part 1) : 1981 Code of practice for design and construction of raft foundations :
Part I Design (second revision)
[6] IS 4078 : 1980 Code of practice for indexing and storage of drill cores (first revision)
[7] IS 4464 : 1985 Code of practice for presentation of drilling information and core description
in foundation investigation (first revision)
[8] IS 8764 : 1998 Method of determination of point load strength index of rocks
[9] IS 9143 : 1979 Method of determination of unconfined compressive strength of rock
materials
[10] IS 9221: 1979 Method for the determination of modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio of
rock materials in uniaxial compression
[11] IS 13365: Part 1 Quantitative Classification System Of Rock Mass - Guidelines : Part 1 RMR
For Predicting Of Engineering Properties
[12] IS 13365:Part 3 Quantitative classification system of rock mass-Guidelines, Part 3:
Determination of slope mass rating
[13] Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion – 2002 Edition
[14] Hoek.E. (2006). Practical Rock Engineering. E.Book
[15] Hoek.E.,Diederichs, M.S. (2006). Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus. Volume
43,203-215.
[16] Hoek, E. and Brown, E.T. 1997. Practical estimates of rock mass strength. Intnl. J. Rock
Mech. & Mining Sci. and Geomechanics Abstracts. 34 (8), 1165-1186
[17] Carranza-Torres, C. (2004). Elasto-plastic solution of tunnel problems using the generalised
for the hoek – brown failure criteria. Int.J. of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sci., 41(3), 480-
481.
[18] Bieniawski, Z.T. 1989. Engineering rock mass classifications. New York: Wiley.
[19] Irfan, T.Y. & Dearman(1978), Engineering classification and index properties of a weathered
granite, W.R. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology 17: 79. doi:
10.1007/BF02634696.
[20] RocLab user guide – Rockmass strength analysis using the Hoek & Brown failure criterion,
2007 Rocscience Inc.
[21] Bowles (1997), Foundation analysis and design, fifth edition.
[22] CIRIA Report 143, 1995- The Standard Penetration Test (SPT): Methods and Use.
[23] IS: 6403 – 1981 Code of Practice for Determination of Bearing Capacity of Shallow
Foundation.
[24] Terzaghi K., Peck R.B & Mersi G. (1996), "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd
Edition.

Report 31/03/2017 11/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
1. INTRODUCTION
Mumbai is known the financial capital of India and Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) is one of the
fastest growing metropolitan regions in India. MMR is now experiencing a rapid growth in population
and employment and this trend is expected to continue in the future. The major reason for attracting
the immigrants from hinterland of Maharashtra as well as from all parts of the Country is the job
opportunities offered in Mumbai.
Four-fold growth of population since 1951 has been largely accommodated in the suburbs while most
of the job opportunities have remained in the Island City. The physical characteristics of the City are
such that the suburbs have been constrained to spread northwards only, and all transport facilities are
concentrated within three narrow corridors. Today’s major challenge is to provide connectivity and
promote growth by providing adequate inputs to the infrastructure which would improve the quality
of life of the residents.
Figure 1 Project Location
The city faces severe traffic congestion due to exponential growth of personalized vehicles. To tackle
this problem, the public transportation sector is carefully planning to meet the growing demands of
the city. The Mumbai Metro Rail Line 3 aims to provide a fast, reliable, convenient, efficient, modern
and economical mode of public transport, which is properly integrated with other forms of public and
private transport.

Report 31/03/2017 12/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
This Package UGC-01 is at the Cuffe Parade end of the Line-3. This package covers 4 stations namely
Cuffe Parade, Vidhan Bhavan, Churchgate & Hutatma Chowk, one crossover at Cuffe Parade &
associated Tunnels. Three stations are purely Cut and Cover stations and Hutatma Chowk has got one
tunnel to be constructed using NATM techniques.

Report 31/03/2017 13/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
2. SCOPE OF THE REPORT
This report describes the interpretation of geotechnical investigation, subsurface conditions, and soil
properties at Churchgate Metro Station location at chainage 2204 m. This report is intended to provide
a summary of the geotechnical investigations carried out at site, their interpretation and derivation of
geotechnical design parameters. It should be noted that this report is prepared based on the
information collected from the boreholes.
Soil investigation at Churchgate Metro Station of Contract UGC-01 was carried out by M/s Fugro
Geotech India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai during the period from October 08, 2016 to February 13, 2017 and
Fugro Document No.16-1474. In this stage 7 boreholes of depth 31.0 m were drilled at the station
location.
This report describes the interpretation & analysis of geotechnical data for Churchgate Metro Station,
The scope of the report may be summarized as follows:

 A summary of the regional geology of the site area,
 Summary of field and laboratory tests and interpretation of geotechnical parameters,
 Summary of geotechnical design parameters to enable detailed design of the foundations,
 Preparation of Geological Profile.

Report 31/03/2017 14/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
3. GEOLOGY
3.1 Regional Geology

The broad physiographic feature of the Mumbai region is broad and flat terrain flanked by north –
south trending hill ranges. The hill ranges from almost parallel ridges in the eastern and western part
of the area. The area is drained by Mahim, Mithi, Dahisar and Polsar rivers. These small rivers near the
coast, form small rivulets which intermingle with each other resulting in swamps and mud flats in the
low lying areas. Two types of soils have been observed in the district viz., medium to deep black and
reddish soil. The predominant soil cover in Mumbai city is sandy, whereas in the suburban district, the
soil cover is alluvial and loamy.
The stratigraphic succession of rocks in Mumbai area is given below: -
Recent : Alluvium, Sand and recent Conglomerate
Cretaceous to Eocene : Laterite, Trap dykes, Volcanic agglomerate and breccia Basalt flows with
interbedded ash beds and fossiliferous fresh water shakes.
A wide variety of basalts and associated rocks such as volcanic breccia, black tachylytic basalts, red
tachylytic basalts etc. occur in the area covered by Deccan trap basalts. Most basalts are either
compact i.e., with no gas cavities, or amygdaloidal with gas cavities filled with secondary minerals, and
vesicular basalts with empty gas cavities are rare. Though faults are rare, vertical or steeply inclined
fractures along which movement has taken place are widespread in the western parts of the Deccan
trap outcrop. Water seeping along the crack brings about decomposition of basalts on both sides and
the fracture is marked by a band of decomposed material 3 to 30 mm wide. Because of the closely
spaced vertical planes of separation of the sheet jointing, the zone of decomposition of a fracture looks
superficially like the shear zones of tectonic areas, and as a result, the fractures are commonly
described as shear zones. The geological map of the area is shown in Figure 2.
Geologically, Mumbai presents a complex lithological combination showing large heterogeneity. Major
rock types occurring in the area are fine grained, greenish basalt to black coloured, aphastilite.
Compact basalt and weathered amygdaloidal basalt are also found, characteristic of the Deccan trap.
They are associated with acidic and basic tuffs, volcanic breccia with fullaceous matrix. Basaltic flows
and inter trappean beds show westerly dip of 5° to 12°. These flows and pyroclastic rocks have been
intruded by doteritic and basaltic dykes.
Though the low lands lying between the two ridges do not show any exposures, cutting and excavations
made for various purposes reveal brownish and grey clay, grayish, brownish and greenish tuff, breccia,
ash and other pyroclastic material along with highly weathered basalts and inter trappeans.
Report 31/03/2017 15/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Coastal areas on the western shore of Mumbai consist of sandy beaches mixed with silt with shale
fragments. The western shore is exposed to intense wave action of Arabian Sea resulting in the
formation of sandy and rocky beaches (Colaba, Worli, and Bandstand). It is known that near the
Gateway of India, the sea meanders inside, and in the process intense wave action as noted on the
western coast of Mumbai Island calms down.
Figure 2 Geological map of Mumbai (Pop Envis, IIPS Mumbai, 2015)
3.2 Seismicity
Mumbai is located in Seismic Zone III as per IS:1893-2002 (BIS, 2002) signifying that the city may be
subjected to intensity VII damage as per MSK64 Intensity Scale. A review of the historical as well as the
recent earthquake activity in peninsular India indicates that different parts of the region are
Report 31/03/2017 16/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
characterized by low to moderate level of seismic activity (Jaiswal and Sinha, 2007). Occasionally some
large and damaging earthquakes, such as the Koyna (1967), Killari (1993), Jabalpur (1997), and Kachchh
(2001) earthquakes have occurred in the region. Unlike the earthquakes occurring on plate boundaries,
demarcated by mid-oceanic ridges, transform faults and island arcs, these are intraplate earthquakes
and are thus more rare. Mumbai is located near the Panvel seismic source zone, which is known to be
seismically active (Nandy, 1995 and Dessai, 1995)
Seismic hazard quantifies ground motions generated due to an earthquake in terms of peak ground
acceleration (PGA) or other similar parameters associated with a scenario earthquake (Kramer, 1996).
In this paper, a deterministic seismic hazard assessment has been carried out, where hazard in terms
of the peak ground acceleration is evaluated at the centre of each grid after dividing the city into a
number of small grids.
The seismic hazard map of India was updated in 2000 by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS). The new
map includes the central districts of Beed (Bir), Dharashiv (Osmanabad) and Latur, along with eastern
sections of Ahmednagar, Pune, Satara and Sangli districts in Zone III. All of these areas lay in Zone I or
II in the BIS 1984 map. Refer Figure 3.
Figure 3 Seismic Hazard Map of Mumbai

Report 31/03/2017 17/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
4. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
Geotechnical Investigation was carried out by M/S Fugro Geotech India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai to study the
sub soil conditions along the Churchgate Metro Station area (Reference 1).
4.1 Ground Investigations

Total 7 boreholes of depth 30.5 to 31.0m are drilled at Churchgate Metro Station in all types of soil /
rock. The boreholes were conducted by employing a mechanically operated soil boring equipment
using shell and auger tool at this site as per IS: 1892-1979. The Borehole layout plan is attached in
Appendix A. Summary of boreholes drilled at Churchgate Metro Station as given in Table 1.
Table 1: Summary of field work executed at Churchgate Metro Station
Borehole
Coordinate Coordinate Drilled Depth Drilled Level
Borehole ID Elevation
(East) (North) (m) (m MSL)
(m MSL)
CGBH - 01 3.99 271009.1 2094467.4 31.0 -27.01
CGBH - 02 4.27 270998.8 2094504.0 31.0 -26.73
CGBH - 03 4.73 271057.7 2094538.6 30.5 -25.77
CGBH - 04 4.19 271061.0 2094579.9 30.9 -26.71
CGBH - 05 3.96 271115.8 2094602.1 31.0 -27.04
CGBH - 06 3.93 271119.7 2094648.6 31.0 -27.07
CGBH - 07 4.03 271204.0 2094705.8 31.0 -26.97
In addition to above boreholes, 6 probe boreholes are drilled in Churchgate Station Area to get the
better geological profile. These boreholes are only used to check the level of different type of rocks in
this area and geological profile presented in Appendix F is modified accordingly. Summary of Probe
boreholes drilled in Churchgate Station Area as given in Table below;
Table 2 Summary of Probe boreholes drilled in Churchgate Station Area

Borehole
Coordinate Coordinate Drilled Depth Drilled Level
Borehole ID Elevation
(East) (North) (m) (m MSL)
(m MSL)
CGPBH - 01 4.273 271034.766 2094496.392 30.0 -27.73
CGPBH - 02 3.985 271092.66 2094569.662 30.0 -26.02
CGPBH - 03 4.089 271139.632 2094621.821 29.7 -25.61
CGPBH - 04 4.245 270975.534 2094469.568 29.0 -24.76
CGPBH - 05 3.96 271044.329 2094561.220 28.0 -24.04
CGPBH - 06 4.278 271100.549 2094623.308 27.5 -23.22

Report 31/03/2017 18/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
4.2 Ground Water Table
A summary of the ground water levels recorded in the boreholes during drilling is presented in Table
3:
Table 3: Ground Water levels - Field Observations
Borehole Level Ground water depth Ground water Elevation

Borehole ID
(m MSL) (m bgl) (m MSL)
CGBH - 01 3.99 4.0 -0.01
CGBH - 02 4.27 3.2 1.07
CGBH - 03 4.73 3.6 1.13
CGBH - 04 4.19 3.0 1.19
CGBH - 05 3.96 2.5 1.46
CGBH - 06 3.93 3.5 0.43
CGBH - 07 4.03 4 0.03
At the present stage, the long-term groundwater monitoring data from piezometers are not available.
The groundwater results, which are measured at the time of drilling, suggests that groundwater is
likely to fluctuate seasonally. Therefore until the long-term groundwater monitoring data is made
available, Design water table is taken as +2.96m MSL.
4.3 Field Tests in Soil Strata
SPT N Values
Figure 7 show the distribution of observed SPT N value with depth for the soil strata encountered at
Churchgate Metro Station location. Measured SPT value is considered as SPT N value equivalent to 60%
hammer efficiency (N60). The bore logs for each stretch of the alignment are studied to arrive at the
soil profile and consistency of Soil based on SPT N Values. Design parameters for the considered stretch
of the alignment are derived based on the SPT N Values. The design SPT N values are taken as average
N values of each layer from the corresponding boreholes. Plot showing the design SPT N values vs
Depth for all boreholes is presented in APPENDIX B. The SPT N is summarised in Table 4.
Table 4: Summary of SPT N value data
No of Test
Strata Maximum value Minimum value Mean value
Results
Unit 2a - Soil 19 68 9 21
Laboratory Tests – Soil Samples
Following laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples recovered from various bore hole
locations: -
a) Sieve analysis

Report 31/03/2017 19/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
b) Hydrometer analysis
c) Liquid limit & Plastic limits
d) Unit Weight under Saturated Condition
e) Unit Weight under Dry Condition
f) Specific Gravity.
g) Moisture Content
h) Chemical test on soil samples
i) Chemical test on water samples
All the above laboratory tests were carried out as per relevant Indian Standards. All the soil samples
were identified and classified as per IS: 1498-1970. A summary of the test results are presented in
Table 5 to Table 14.
Atterberg Limits and Particle Size Distribution
Atterberg Limit values (Liquid Limit (LL), Plastic Limit (PL) and Plasticity Index (PI = LL - PL)), and Particle
size distribution (PSD), were determined for Geological Unit 1 and Unit 2a. Atterberg Limit and PSD
tests were undertaken in accordance with test methods IS 2720 (part 5) and IS 2720 (part 4)
respectively. Plot showing the Atterberg Limit test results / PSD test results vs Depth for all boreholes
are presented in APPENDIX C. Atterberg Limit test results and PSD results indicate that the selected
samples are variably graded and can broadly be described as sand, Sandy clay, Clayey Sand, silty sands,
gravelly sands and clayey gravels. The Atterberg limit test results suggests that Unit 2a, on average is
highly plastic clay, however it is evident from the data that the clay may locally exhibit very high to
extremely high plasticity characteristics. Summary of the Atterberg Limit test results and PSD test
results as shown in Table 5 & Table 6;
Table 5: Summary of Particle Size Distribution tests
No of Test Maximum Minimum
Strata Type of Soil Unit Mean value
Results value value
Gravel % 1 36 36 36
Unit 1 –
Sand % 1 49 49 49
Filled up
Silt % 1 11 11 11
Material
Clay % 1 4 4 4
Gravel % 14 45 0 8
Sand % 14 59 1 19
Unit 2a - Soil
Silt % 14 46 9 26
Clay % 14 86 4 47

Report 31/03/2017 20/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 6: Summary of Atterberg Limits tests
No of Test Maximum Minimum

Strata Atterberg Limit Unit Mean value
Results value value
Liquid Limit % 9 142 40 87
Unit 2a Plastic Limit % 9 36 15 28
Plasticity Index % 9 106 25 59
Summary of Laboratory Test Results of Soils

Summary of laboratory test results of soil like Dry Unit Weight, Saturated Unit Weight, Moisture
Content under Saturated Condition, Specific Gravity are presented in table below; Unit Weight is
calculated by multiplication the density with 10 for all calculation purpose. In this laboratory test
results of soils were determined by BS 1377. Moisture Content, Specific Gravity tests were determined
as per IS 2720, Part 2 & 3. A summary of the laboratory test results of soil are presented in Table 7.
Table 7: Summary of Unit Weight of Soil, Moisture Content and Specific Gravity
No of
Maximum Minimum Mean
Strata Test Type Unit Test
value value value
Results
Unit 1 – Moisture Content % 1 13.5 13.5 13.5
Filledup
Material Specific Gravity - 1 2.672 2.672 2.672
Unit weight under
kN/m3 13 18 15.9 17
saturated condition
Unit weight under dry
Unit 2a kN/m3 13 13.4 9.4 11.89
condition
- Soil
Moisture Content % 14 70 27 44
Specific Gravity - 14 2.675 2.651 2.66
In-Situ Falling Head Permeability Test

Only one in-situ falling head permeability test was carried out in the vicinity of Churchgate Metro
Station as presented in Table 8. The test result indicates an in-situ falling head permeability for Unit 2a
3.33 x 10-6 m/sec; which are predominantly Silty sand clay strata.
Table 8: Results of In-situ Falling Head Permeability Tests
Sample The coefficient of

Bore hole Test Level,
Borehole ID depth, from, Strata permeability,
Level(m) (m MSL)
(m bgl) k,(m/sec)
CGBH-04 4.19 6 -1.81 Unit 2a 3.33E-06
Shear Strength Test
The shear strength parameters from Triaxial Shear Test provided in the geotechnical factual report
are summarized in Table 9 to Table 10.

Report 31/03/2017 21/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 9: Results of Triaxial Shear Test (UU Test)
Sample Test Angle of

Borehole depth, Level, SPT N Cohesion Internal
Strata Type of Soil
ID from, From value c, kPa Friction,
(m, bgl) (m, MSL) Φ, 
Very stiff grey
CGBH-01 3.00 0.99 Unit 2a - 12 1
clay
Very stiff grey
CGBH-01 6.00 -2.01 Unit 2a 17 13 1
sandy clay
CGBH-01 7.5 -3.51 Unit 2a Hard grey clay 42 17 1
CGBH-02 7.5 -3.23 Unit 2a Stiff grey clay 14 11 2
CGBH-04 7.5 -3.31 Unit 2a Stiff brown clay 9 27 4
CGBH-04 8.5 -4.31 Unit 2a Stiff brown clay 14 21 5
Table 10: Summary of Triaxial Shear Test Results
Shear strength No of Test Maximum Minimum

Strata Unit Mean value
Parameters Results value value
Cohesion kN/m2 6 27 11 16.8
Unit 2a Angle of Internal
 6 5 1 2.3
Friction, Φ
Chemical Aggressivity and Corrosion – Soil and Groundwater
Chemical test results for water and soil samples provided in the geotechnical factual report are
summarized in Table 11 to Table 14.
Table 11: Results of chemical tests on Soil Samples

Test Level, Chemical Tests on Soil Samples
BH Ref.
(m MSL) Sulphate (SO4), % Chloride, % pH
CGBH-01 0.99 0.0543 0.0085 7.22
CGBH-02 -3.23 0.0412 0.0078 7.152
CGBH-04 -3.31 0.0494 0.0099 7.13
CGBH-05 0.96 0.0329 0.0106 7.09
CGBH-06 0.93 0.0506 0.0092 7.21
Table 12: Summary of chemical test results on soil samples
Maximum Minimum
Test No of Test Results Mean Value
Value Value
Sulphate (SO4), % 5 0.0543 0.0329 0.04568
Chloride, % 5 0.0106 0.0078 0.0092
pH 5 7.22 7.09 7.1604

Report 31/03/2017 22/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 13: Results of chemical tests on Water Samples
Chemical Tests on Water Samples

BH Ref.
Sulphate (SO4), mg/L Chloride, mg/L pH
CGBH-02 125.1 61.48 7.38
CGBH-05 131.68 56.98 7.21
CGBH-06 139.91 54.48 7.55
Table 14: Summary of chemical test results on water samples
No. Samples Maximum Minimum

Test Mean Value
Tested Value Value
Sulphate (SO4), g/L 3 0.140 0.125 0.132
Chloride, g/L 3 0.0615 0.0545 0.0576
pH 3 7.55 7.21 7.38
Field Tests in Rock Strata
Index Properties: Core Recovery (CR) and Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
In Rocky strata, the rock core samples were obtained through double tube core barrels. The
quantitative description of natural fracture state of rock masses are indicated by means of Total Core
Recovery (TCR) or Core Recovery (CR), Solid Core Recovery (SCR) and Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
as determined from the borehole cores. TCR is the percentage ratio of core recovered (whether solid,
intact with full diameter, or non-intact) to the total length of core run. SCR is the percentage ratio of
solid core recovered to the total length of the core run. RQD is a quantitative index based on core
recovery procedure that incorporates only those pieces of core which are 100mm or more in length. It
is the total length of solid core pieces, each greater than 100mm between natural fractures, expressed
as a percentage of the total length of core run.
N, numbers of cores were recovered and logged for the 9 boreholes. The CR and RQD were derived for
these cores and plotted for each rock unit. In this classification Core Recovery (CR) and RQD are
introduced so as to give a better appreciation of the weathering. Plot showing the TCR / RQD vs Depth
for all boreholes are presented in APPENDIX B. The final rock characteristics considered for each rock
unit are as given in Table 15.
Table 15: Summary of Core Recovery & RQD values

No of
Rock Maximum Minimum Mean
Description Rock Type WG Test
Units Value Value Value
Results
Unit 3a Basalt V 11 100 22 63
TCR
Unit 3b Basalt IV 7 95 42 78
Report 31/03/2017 23/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
No of
Results
(Total Core Unit 3c Basalt III 8 100 87 95
Recovery) or 57 100 90 99
Unit 3d Basalt I & II
CR (Core
Recovery) Unit 4a Shale & Breccia IV & V 5 100 73 81
Unit 4b Shale & Breccia III 5 100 78 91
Unit 4c Shale & Breccia I & II 24 100 90 99
Unit 3c Basalt III 8 82 56 72
SCR
(Solid Core Unit 3d Basalt I & II 57 100 62 91
Recovery) Unit 4a Shale & Breccia IV & V 5 74 26 42
RQD Unit 3d Basalt I & II 57 100 52 88
(Rock Quality Unit 4a Shale & Breccia IV & V 5 28 0 17
Designation)
Pressure-Meter Test
Oyo Pressure-meter Test, also known as the High-Pressure Dilatometer Test, is a direct displacement
measuring method used to obtain the elastic properties of a rock mass. The test was performed using
an OYO Elastmeter-2 (Model-4018), with a rated pressure range of 0 to 200 Bar, for the type of
membrane. The probe (or Sonde) is lowered down to the depth of test section and inflated, exerting
pressure against the wall of the borehole and consequent radial deformation is measured. Based on
pressure-meter test results to derived the elastic modulus (Em) and the shear modulus (Gm) of the rock
mass. Results of Pressure-Meter Test are presented in Table 16 . The summary of Pressure-Meter Test
results for different weathering grade of rock mass are as given in Table 17.
Table 16: Results of Pressure-Meter Test
Sample
Test Em,- Modulus of Gm, Shear
depth,
Borehole ID Level, Strata WG Elasticity of Rock Modulus of Rock
from,
(m MSL) Mass (MPa) Mass (MPa)
(m bgl)
CGBH-01 3.99 -6.01 Unit 3b IV 3763.0 1447.0
CGBH-02 4.27 -4.73 Unit 3b IV 1605.0 617.0

Report 31/03/2017 24/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Sample
Test Em,- Modulus of Gm, Shear
depth,
Borehole ID Level, Strata WG Elasticity of Rock Modulus of Rock
from,
(m MSL) Mass (MPa) Mass (MPa)
(m bgl)
CGBH-03 4.73 -8.27 Unit 3d II 10885.0 4187.0
CGBH-04 4.19 -11.81 Unit 4a IV 2019.0 777.0
CGBH-05 3.96 -4.04 Unit 3d I 15089.0 5803.0
CGBH-06 3.93 -15.57 Unit 3d II 15124.0 5817.0
Table 17: Summary of Pressure-Meter Test Results
No of
Results
Em,- Modulus Unit 3b Basalt IV 2 3763 1605 2684
of Elasticity of Unit 3d Basalt I & II 3 15124 10885 13699
Rock Mass Shale &
(MPa) Unit 4a IV & V 1 2019 2019 2019
Breccia
Gm, Shear Unit 3b Basalt IV 2 1447 617 1032
Modulus of Unit 3d Basalt I & II 3 5817 4187 5269
Rock Mass Shale &
(MPa) Unit 4a IV & V 1 777 777 777
Breccia
Packer Permeability Tests

The Lugeon Packer permeability test measure the permeability of a test section in bedrock by packing
the test section by mechanical expanding a membrane above and below the test section, and pumping
in water into the test section under pressure. The pressure applied and the corresponding amount of
flow of water into the test section are measured and permeability of the bedrock is calculated. Based
on the test results, average Packer permeability values for different rock types are summarized in the
Table 18.
Table 18: Summary of Packer Permeability & Lugeon Test results
No of
Rock Maximum Minimu Mean
Units Value m Value Value
Results
Unit 3a Basalt V 3 1.30E-05 4.80E-06 8.70E-06
Unit 3b Basalt IV 3 1.60E-05 5.30E-07 7.31E-06
Packer head Unit 3c Basalt III 1 1.80E-07 1.80E-07 1.80E-07

Permeability Unit 3d Basalt I & II 5 6.60E-06 1.60E-07 1.59E-06
test, m/sec Shale &
Unit 4a IV & V 2 7.50E-07 3.00E-07 5.25E-07
Breccia
Shale &
Unit 4b III 1 6.20E-07 6.20E-07 6.20E-07
Breccia

Report 31/03/2017 25/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
No of
Rock Maximum Minimu Mean
Units Value m Value Value
Results
Shale &
Unit 4c I & II 2 1.40E-06 2.30E-07 8.15E-07
Breccia
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 5 60 1 14
Lugeon
Shale &
Value Unit 4a IV & V 2 7 3 5
Breccia
Shale &
Unit 4b III 1 6 6 6
Breccia
Shale &
Unit 4c I & II 2 13 2 8
Breccia
Laboratory Tests – Rock Samples
Following laboratory tests were conducted on selected rock samples recovered from various borehole
locations: -
a) Saturated Moisture content
b) Water Absorption
c) Porosity
d) Saturated Density
e) Specific gravity
f) Dry Density
g) Point Load Strength Index
h) Tensile Strength
i) Uniaxial Compressive Strength Test (Saturated)
j) Uniaxial Compressive Strength Test (Dry)
All the above laboratory tests were carried out as per relevant Indian Standards.
Summary of Laboratory Test Results of Intact Rock

Summary of laboratory test results of intact rock like Dry Unit Weight, Saturated Unit Weight, Moisture
Content under Saturated Condition, Specific Gravity, Water Absorption and Porosity with respect to
different Weathering Grade (WG) are presented in Table 19. Unit Weight is calculated by multiplication
the density with 10 for all calculation purpose. In this laboratory test results of intact rock were
determined by IS 13030. Water absorption tests were determined as per ISRM. Plot showing the unit
weight under soaked / dry condition vs Depth for all boreholes are presented in APPENDIX C.

Report 31/03/2017 26/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Representative value of unit weight under soaked condition for each weathering grade of rock is given
in section 6 of this report.
Table 19: Summary of laboratory test results of intact rock
No of
Results
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 28.2 28.2 28.20
Unit 3b Basalt IV 4 27.7 26.8 27.38
Unit weight 3 28.3 27.5 28.03
Unit 3c Basalt III
under dry
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 15 28.2 27.2 27.71
condition,
Unit 4a Shale & Breccia IV & V 1 26.3 26.3 26.30
ɣdry, kN/m3
Unit 4b Shale & Breccia III 3 25.4 21.7 23.17
Unit 4c Shale & Breccia I & II 5 23.5 21.4 22.22
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 28 28 28.00
Unit weight Unit 3b Basalt IV 4 27.7 26.2 27.08
under 3 28.3 27.3 27.93
Unit 3c Basalt III
soaked
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 15 28 26.9 27.51
condition
ɣsoaked,
kN/m3 Unit 4b Shale & Breccia III 3 24.9 18.5 21.10
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 0.63 0.63 28.00
Moisture Unit 3b Basalt IV 4 2.39 0.14 27.08
Content 3 0.72 0.08 27.93
Unit 3c Basalt III
under
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 15 1.88 0.11 27.51
Saturated
Condition,
% Unit 4b Shale & Breccia III 3 17.48 1.88 21.10
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 2.91 2.91 2.910
Unit 3b Basalt IV 4 2.9 2.77 2.825
Unit 3c Basalt III 3 2.95 2.81 2.900
Specific
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 15 2.98 2.65 2.855
Gravity
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 1.73 1.73 1.73
Water Unit 3b Basalt IV 4 1.57 0.07 0.91
absorption, Unit 3c Basalt III 3 0.51 0.07 0.22
% Unit 3d Basalt I & II 15 1.17 0.17 0.44

Report 31/03/2017 27/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
No of
Results
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 4.84 4.84 4.84
Unit 3b Basalt IV 4 4.32 0.19 2.45
Unit 3c Basalt III 3 1.39 0.19 0.60
Porosity, % Unit 3d Basalt I & II 15 3.15 0.47 1.20
Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS)

Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS) tests were carried out on selected rock core samples in
accordance with test method IS 9143 - 1979. Rock core sample diameter for the UCS tests were about
54mm. UCS test results are standardised for core diameter of 54mm and L/D ratio of 2. Plot showing
the UCS test results vs Depth for all boreholes are presented in APPENDIX C. Based on the test results,
average Uniaxial Compressive strength of intact rock under Soaked / Dry condition with respect to
different Weathering Grade are summarized in the Table 20.
Table 20: Summary of UCS for Intact Rock Test Results
No of
Results
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 81.4 81.4 81.4
Unit 3b Basalt IV 6 118.2 33.8 71.2
Unit 3c Basalt III 5 142.1 67.2 103.5
σci, UCS for Unit 3d Basalt I & II 31 176.6 8.8 80.4
intact rock
Shale &
under soaked Unit 4a IV & V 1 32.6 32.6 32.6
Breccia
Condition (Mpa)
Shale &
Unit 4b III 4 33.6 1.7 10.25
Breccia
Shale &
Unit 4c I & II 10 11.9 2.8 5.05
Breccia
σci, UCS for Shale &
Unit 4b III 3 13.9 9.5 11.57
intact rock Breccia
under dry Shale &
Unit 4c I & II 10 33.2 13.5 20.66
Condition (Mpa) Breccia

Report 31/03/2017 28/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Point Load Index
Axial and diametric point load index tests were carried out on selected rock core samples. The core
diameter was around 54mm. The point load index test results were standardised for core diameter of
54mm and L/D of 2.0. The point load test results as provided in the geotechnical investigation report
as mentioned in Table 21.
Table 21: Results of Point Load Strength Index Test
Test Level, Point load Strength

BH Ref. Rock Units Rock Type WG
m MSL Index (PLI), I50 (MPa)
CGBH-02 Unit 3b Basalt -5.93 IV 4.21
CGBH-03 Unit 3d Basalt -5.77 II 1.92
CGBH-06 Unit 3d Basalt -6.57 I 7.10
The summary of point load test results of intact rock with respect to different Weathering Grade are
summarized in the Table 22.
Table 22: Summary of Point Load Strength Index Test Results
No of Test Maximum Minimum Mean
Rock Units Rock Type WG
Results Value Value Value
Unit 3b Basalt IV 1 4.21 4.21 4.21
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 3 8.23 1.92 5.75
Tensile Strength
The tensile strength of rock (σt) is measured indirectly by conducting the Brazilian test on selected rock
core samples. The core sample diameter ranges from 54 mm. Brazilian tests are undertaken in
accordance with test method given in IS 10082: 1981. Alternative methods of determining the tensile
strength of rock (σt) include correlations with the uniaxial compressive strength (UCS), and point load
strength index, Is50. The correlation between the tensile strength (σt) and uniaxial compressive strength
(UCS) typically ranges between 50% and 10%. However, no strong correlation between Brazilian tensile
strength and UCS, or Brazilian tensile strength and point load index, was apparent from the rock test
results. The tensile strength values of intact rock with respect to different Weathering Grade are
summarized in the Table 23.
Table 23: Summary of Tensile Strength Results
Rock No of Test Maximum Minimum Mean
Rock Type WG
Units Results Value Value Value
Unit 3a Basalt V 1 4.5 4.5 4.5
Unit 3b Basalt IV 2 27.2 8.3 17.75
Unit 3c Basalt III 1 10.4 10.4 10.4
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 8 14.5 8.8 10.50

Report 31/03/2017 29/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND INTERPRETATION
5.1 General
This section contains the interpretation of field results, derivations and justification for the values of
parameters adopted for the purposes of design of Churchgate Metro Station. These geotechnical
parameters described in the sections below are derived based on borehole information available till
date. Parameters for different layers are arrived based on the field tests and Laboratory tests by using
different empirical correlations. Derivations of these parameters are discussed in this section.
5.2 Geological Profile
Geological profiles have been developed for the underground section on the basis of the borehole
data. The general geological profile developed for the site can be broadly categorized into 4 Units
(strata), which are further subcategory as summarized in Table 24. The geological profile drawings are
attached in APPENDIX F.
Table 24: Summary of Geological Units
Geological Units Descriptions

Reddish brown dry clayey sand with gravel / clayey gravelly sand
Unit 1 Filled up material / Greyish brown sand with silt & shell fragments/ Boulder sized
fragments of basalt.
Silty sand, sandy silty, sandy clay, clayey sand, gravelly clay,
Unit 2 Unit 2a: Soil
(Soil & gravelly sand, river sand etc. with SPT N < 100
Residual Unit 2b: Residual Very dense sand with gravel, well cemented sand gravel, boulders
Soil) Soil etc. with SPT N >100
Weak completely to highly weathered grey to yellowish brown
Unit 3a: Basalt - highly fractured basalt with very closely spaced fractures and well
WG V
cemented sand.
Strong highly to moderately weathered brownish grey non-intact
Unit 3b: Basalt - Basalt with very closely to moderately spaced horizontal to
WG IV
Unit 3 vertical fractures.
(Basalt)
Strong slightly to moderately weathered very dark grey Basalt
Unit 3c: Basalt - with very closely to moderately spaced sub-horizontal to inclined
WG III
fractures and well cemented sand.
Unit 3d : Basalt - Strong slightly weathered grey fine grained Basalt / light grey
WG I & II Amygdaloidal Basalt with very closely spaced horizontal fractures.

Report 31/03/2017 30/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Geological Units Descriptions
Unit 4a: Weak highly to moderately weathered reddish brown to grey Tuff
Tuff & Shale - WG
with bands of Shale & very closely spaced horizontal fractures.
IV & V
Unit 4
Unit 4b:Tuff & Weak moderately weathered grey Tuff with bands of Shale & very
(Shale,
Tuff & Shale - WG III closely spaced horizontal fractures.
Breccia) Weak slightly weathered greenish grey to greyish black Tuff with
Unit 4c: Tuff & bonding of shale & with very closely to moderately spaced
Shale - WG I & II
horizontal fractures.
Unit 1:- Filled up material
Fill, consisting mostly of Reddish brown dry clayey sand with gravel, greyish brown sand with silt &
shell fragments with boulders was encountered at the ground surface in the boreholes. The lower
boundary of this layer was encountered at depths between 0.0m and 4.5m below ground surface in
the boreholes. The average SPT N value is 21 for this layer.
Unit 2a:- Soil
Loose to Medium Silty sand, sandy silty, sandy clay, clayey sand, gravelly clay, gravelly sand, river sand
etc. was encountered below the fill layer in the boreholes. The boundary of this layer was encountered
at depths between 3.0m and 9.0m below Unit 1 filled-up material layer in the boreholes.
Unit 3a: Basalt - WG V
Basalt WG V are encountered at different depths between 5.0m and 10.5m below ground surface. This
layer is underlain by Soil. The bedrock was completely weathered. Core Recoveries varied between
22% and 100%, while Rock Quality Designation (RQD) ranged between Nil and 7%. Uniaxial
Compressive strength of rock samples value 81.4 MPa.
Unit 3b: Basalt - WG IV
Basalt WG IV are encountered at different depths between 6.0 m and 16.2m below ground surface.
This layer is underlain by Soil or Basalt WG V layer. The bedrock was highly weathered. Core Recoveries
varied between 42% and 95%, while Rock Quality Designation (RQD) ranged between 10% and 38%.
Uniaxial Compressive strength of rock samples ranged between 33.8 MPa and 118.2 MPa.
Unit 3c: Basalt - WG III
Basalt WG III are encountered at depths between 11.5m and 25m below ground surface. Thickness of
this layer is varying largely at different locations. This layer is underlain by Basalt WG V, I & II layer. The
bedrock was moderately weathered. Core Recoveries varied between 87% and 100%, while Rock
Report 31/03/2017 31/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Quality Designation (RQD) ranged between 40% and 67%. Uniaxial Compressive strength of rock
samples ranged between 67.2MPa and 142.1 MPa.
Unit 3d: Basalt - WG I & II
Basalt WG I & II are encountered at depths between 7.0m and 31m below ground surface. This layer
is underlain by Soil or Basalt WG V, IV & III layer. The bedrock was slightly weathered to Fresh Rock,
generally improving with depth. Core Recoveries varied between 90% and 100%, while Rock Quality
Designation (RQD) ranged between 52% and 100%. Uniaxial Compressive strength of rock samples
ranged between 8.8 MPa and 176.6 MPa. Some UCS values recorded are exceptionally low (e.g.8.8
MPa), which are neglected in interpretation.
Unit 4a : Tuff & Shale - WG IV & V
Tuff & Shale WG IV & V are encountered at depths between 9.0m and 17.7m below ground surface.
This layer is underlain by Soil or Basalt WG IV, I & II layer. The bedrock was completely to highly
weathered rock. Core Recoveries varied between 73% and 100%, while Rock Quality Designation
(RQD) ranged between Nil and 28%. Uniaxial Compressive strength of rock samples value 32.6 MPa.
Unit 4b: Tuff & Shale - WG III
Tuff & Shale WG III are encountered at depths between 18m and 31m below ground surface. This layer
is underlain by Soil or Tuff & Shale WG IV & V layer or Basalt WG IV layer. The bedrock was moderately
weathered rock. Core Recoveries varied between 78% and 100%, while Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
ranged between 40% and 57%. Uniaxial Compressive strength of rock samples ranged between 1.7
MPa and 33.6 MPa.
Unit 4c: Tuff & Shale - WG I & II
Tuff & Shale WG I & II are encountered at depths between 17.7m and 31.0m below ground surface.
This layer is underlain by Tuff & Shale WG IV & V layer or Basalt WG I & II layer. The bedrock was
moderately weathered rock. Core Recoveries varied between 90% and 100%, while Rock Quality
Designation (RQD) ranged between 66% and 100%. Uniaxial Compressive strength of rock samples
ranged between 2.8 MPa and 11.9 MPa.
5.3 Assessment and Interpretation

Shear Strength Parameters of Upper Soil
A total of 6 nos of triaxial shear tests were determined for Unit 2a. Review of the data suggests a
minimum angle of internal friction of 1, maximum of 5 and an average of 2.3. The cohesion for this
material suggests a minimum of 11 kN/m2, maximum of 27 kN/m2 and an average of 18 kN/m2. SPT

Report 31/03/2017 32/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
N value in Unit 2a layer is in the range from 9 to 68 and bulk density of soil about 18 kN/m 3. But
estimate value from UU triaxial test indicate very soft soil strata. Based on SPT N value, soil can be
classified as stiff to very stiff clay, therefore shear strength parameters estimated in laboratory are
not reliable.
Terzaghi K., Peck R.B & Mersi G. (1996), proposed a correlation between Plasticity Index (Ip) and
drained angle of internal friction in graphical form as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4 Values of Drained friction angle for clays based on Plasticity Index (Reference 24)
The drained friction angle 25° of Unit 2a is considered based on Plasticity Index (Ip). Following drained
design parameters are proposed for Unit 1 & 2a;
 Unit 1: c’ = 0 kPa, φ’ = 28o
 Unit 2a: c’ = 10 kPa, φ’ = 25°
Elastic Modulus of Soil under Drained Conditions (E’)

The drained Modulus of Elasticity for soil is calculated from observed SPT N value using the correlation
given below and same is also recommended in CIRIA Report 143 – 1995 (Reference 22)
’ ( ) = 1 ∗
The correlations for drained elastic modulus have been developed on basis of observed SPT N value
variation with depth.
Permeability of soil
A summary of In-situ falling head permeability test results of Churchgate Metro Station as presented
in Table 25 .

Report 31/03/2017 33/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 25: Summary of Permeability Tests on Soil Strata
The coefficient of permeability, k,(m/sec)

Strata Soil Type
Maximum Value Minimum Value Mean Value
Unit 2a Soil 3.33E-06 3.33E-06 3.33E-06
It is also interpolate with approximate values of the coefficient of permeability of soils for different soil
strata as given in Table 26 or Bowels books, which are reproduced below for easy reference;
Table 26: Range of Permeability values for different soils (Reference 21)
The Coefficient of
Drainage Soil Type
Permeability (m/sec)
100 – 10-2 Very Good Drainage Clean Gravel GW, GP
Clean Gravel and sand mixtures GW,GP,
10-2 – 10-5 Good
SW,SP GM
10-5 – 10-9 Poor Sand silt mixtures SM, SL, SC
10-9 – 10-11 Practically Impervious Clays
Chemical Tests – Soil and Groundwater

Results of chemical tests conducted and soil and water samples are summarized in Table 27 to Table
29.
Table 27: Summary of chemical tests on soil / water samples
Soil Samples Water Samples

Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum
Test Test
Value Value Value Value
Sulphate
Sulphate (SO4), % 0.0543 0.0329 0.140 0.125
(SO4), g/L
Chloride, % 0.0106 0.0078 Chloride, g/L 0.0615 0.0545
pH 7.22 7.09 pH 7.55 7.21
Results of chemical tests indicate that soil and ground water fall in class-1 and class-2 based on
sulphates content as per Reference 2 (as shown in Table 28).

Report 31/03/2017 34/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 28: Requirements for concrete exposed to sulphate attack (Extract from Reference 2)
Table 29: Permissible limits of soilds (Extract from Reference 2)
Chloride content is less than 500 mg/l, which is less than the limiting value specified in IS: 456 (as given
in Table 27).

Report 31/03/2017 35/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Rock Classifications
The classification of weathering grade for rocks is done based on Core Recovery and RQD as proposed
by Irfan and Dearmann (1978) given in Table 30. Based on the field data available for the stretch, it is
observed that Grade III to V were encountered in this stretch of the alignment. Plot showing the RQD
vs Depth for all boreholes are presented in APPENDIX B.
Table 30: Classification of Weathering Grades Based on Core Recovery and RQD
Weathering Index Properties

Description of Rock Material And Effective
Class and Strength
Rock Mass CR (%) RQD (%) Porosity
Grade
No visible sign of material
Fresh weathering. Near Boundary with
Very High 95-100 90-100
(I) Grade II some slight dis-
colorization on major defects
Discoloration indicates Very high 5%
Slightly weathering of rock material and to increase
weathered defect surface. Discoloration 50-60% of 90-95 75-90 from
(II) ranges from defect fresh rock fresh
surface only to completely stained strength rock
Less than 50 % material
Moderately 30% of
decomposed and disintegrated to 7%
weathered fresh rock 60-90 40-75
intact soil. Rock core discolored increase
(III) strength
and weakened.
More than 50 % material
Highly 15% of
decomposed and disintegrated to 10%
weathered fresh rock 30-60 10-40
intact soil. Rock core discolored increase
(IV) strength
and weakened.
Completely Intact friable soil which may be
Extremely 20%
weathered weakly cohesive. Soil has fabric of 0-30 0-10
low increase
(V) parent rock.
Residual
Friable soil with original rock Extremely
soil 0 0 >20 %
fabric completely destroyed low
(VI)
Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS)

Rocky strata can also be classified based on the strength as given in Reference 11 or Table 31.
Table 31: Rock classification based on Compressive Strength
Designation Compressive Strength, σci, MPa Point Load Strength, MPa

Exceptional Strong 250 >8
Very Strong 100-250 4-8
Strong 50-100 2-4
Average 25-50 1-2
Weak 10-25 Use of uniaxial compressive
Very Weak 2-10 strength is preferred

Report 31/03/2017 36/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
UCS strength of different weathering grade rocks are presented in Table 32.
Table 32: Assessment of UCS for Intact rock
Rock Units Rock Type WG UCS Design Value, MPa

Unit 3b Basalt IV 53
Unit 3c Basalt III 70
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 70
Unit 4b Shale & Breccia III 3
Unit 4c Shale & Breccia I & II 4
The assessment of UCS for intact rock are considered as based on investigation results engineering
judgement in between Lower bound and mean values as shown in APPENDIX C.
For Basalt WG IV, Unit 3b, as per factual report, the UCS under soaked / dry condition of intact rock
are varying from 33.8 MPa and 118.2 MPa. For UCS test under dry condition is not conducted in this
strata. The UCS values from point load tests are also considered while arriving at the design value.
Therefore, UCS value under soaked condition is considered in design. Based on UCS Strength this unit
can be categorised average to very strong.
For Basalt WG III, Unit 3c, only 4 test results of UCS under soaked / dry condition of intact rock in the
ranging from 67.2MPa and 142.1 MPa are available in the geotechnical factual report. For UCS test
under dry condition is not conducted in this strata. Therefore, UCS design value of Unit 3c is considered
same as UCS design value (70 MPa) for Unit 3d. Based on UCS Strength this unit can be categorised
strong to very strong.
For Basalt WG I & II, Unit 3d, as per factual report, the UCS under soaked / dry condition of intact rock
are varying from 8.8 MPa and 176.6 MPa. The minimum value of UCS 8.8MPa is not viable. This may
due to some erroneous testing procedure or observation. Therefore such values are ignored. For UCS
test under dry condition is not conducted in this strata. The UCS values from point load tests are also
considered while arriving at the design value. Therefore, UCS value under soaked condition is
considered in design. Based on UCS Strength this unit can be categorised average to very strong.
For Shale & Breccia WG III, Unit 4b , as per factual report, the UCS under soaked / dry condition of
intact rock are varying from 1.7 MPa to 33.6 MPa and 9.5 MPa to 13.9 MPa respectively. It is observed
that, UCS value in shale / breccia strata are lower value under soaked condition as compared to dry
condition. Therefore, UCS value under soaked condition is considered in design. Based on UCS Strength
this unit can be categorised very weak to average.

Report 31/03/2017 37/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
For Shale & Breccia WG I & II, Unit 4c , as per factual report, the UCS under soaked / dry condition of
intact rock are varying from 2.8 MPa to 11.9 MPa and 13.5 MPa to 33.2 MPa respectively. It is observed
that, UCS value in shale / breccia strata are lower value under soaked condition as compared to dry
condition. Therefore, UCS value under soaked condition is considered in design. Based on UCS Strength
this unit can be categorised very weak to average.
Conversion of UCS from Point Load Index

Conversion of UCS from Point Load Index tests are commonly used as an index test to estimate rock
strength. Hoek and Brown (1980) proposed the following correlation for estimating uniaxial
compressive strength from point load index.
 UCS = k x IS (50); Where the factor k generally varies between 10 and 30.
This value is given as 22 in IS 8764: 1998 Cl 7.1.2
The average UCS values obtained from Laboratory test results are compared with the empirically
calculated UCS values from Point Load Strength Index for Basalt & Shale Rock type. However, the values
obtained from both the test results are found to be almost identical for Basalt & Shale. Therefore, it is
recommended that rock strength shall be confirmed during construction. The conversion of point load
test results as mentioned in Table 33.
Table 33: Point Load Strength Index converted to UCS value
Test Level, m PLI converted to

Borehole ID Rock Units Rock Type WG
MSL UCS (22*I50)
CGBH-02 Unit 3b Basalt -5.93 IV 92.62
CGBH-06 Unit 3d Basalt -6.57 I 156.2
The conversion of UCS from Point load test results of intact rock with respect to different Weathering
Grades are summarized in the table below;
Table 34: Summary of Conversion of UCS from PLI
Rock No of Test Maximum Minimum Mean
Description Rock Type WG
Units Results Value Value Value
PLI converted to Unit 3b Basalt IV 1 92.6 92.6 92.6

UCS (22*I50)
(MPa) Unit 3d Basalt I & II 3 181.1 42.2 126.5
Rock Mass Rating System

The Geomechanics classification or the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system was initially developed at the
South African Council of Scientific and Industrial Research by Bieniawski (1989) on the engineering rock

Report 31/03/2017 38/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
mass classifications of different parameters. The Rock Mass Rating (RMR) is calculated based on the
criteria given in IS 13365,Part 1 & 3 (Reference 11 & 12) as presented in table below;
Table 35: Classification Parameters and Rock Mass Ratings
Parameters Ranage of Values
Exceptional
Description Very strong strong Average Weak
Strong
sci, Compressive
250 100-250 50-100 25-50 10-25
I strength, Mpa
Point Load strength >8 4-8 2-4 1-2 1
Rating 15 12 7 4 2
Description Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
II RQD 90-100 75-90 50-75 25-50 <25
Rating 20 17 13 8 3
Description Wide Moderate Close Close Very Close
Spacing of
III >2 0.6 - 2 0.2 - 0.6 0.06 - 0.2 <0.06
Discontinuities
Rating 15 10 8 8 5
Slightly rough
Slickensided
Rough and and
Very rough and rough rock
slightly moderately to 5mm thick Soft
unweathered surface or 1-5mm
weathered highly Gauge, 5mm
Condition of wall rock, tight thick gauge or 1-
wall rock weathered wide
IV Discontinuities and 5mm wide
surface, wall rock continuous
discontinuous, opening,
separation surface, discontinuity
No separation continuous
<1mm separation
discontinuity
<1mm
Rating 25 25 20 10 0
Ground water condition Completely Dry Damp Wet Dripping Flowing
Inflow per 10m tunel

None <10 10 - 25 25 - 125 >125
length, (litre/min)
V
Joint water
pressure/major 0 0 - 0.1 0.1 - 0.2 0.2 - 0.5 >0.5
principal stress
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Description of Joints in Very
Very Favourable Favourable Fair Unfavourable
Rock Slopes unfavourable
F1 - P/T (Plane /
0.15 0.4 0.7 0.85 1
Toppling failure)
F2 - T (Toppling failure) 0.15 0.4 0.7 0.85 1
F2 - P/T (Plane /
VI 1 1 1 1 1
Toppling failure)
F3 - P/T (Plane /
0 -6 -25 -50 -60
Toppling failure)

Report 31/03/2017 39/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Description of
Smooth Deficient
excavation in Rock Natural Slope Presplliting Blasting
Blasting Blasting
Slopes
F4 - P/T (Plane /
15 10 8 0 -8
Toppling failure)
Strata encounted at Churchgate Metro station is mainly Basalt WG I to V and Shale & Breccia WG I to
V.
The assessment of RMR values are made based on observations made during core drilling, core
photographs, no of joints, core recovery, RQD, weathering grade etc. The assessment different type of
rating for Basalt of WG I to IV and Shale & Breccia WG II to III is presented in Table 36.
Table 36: Assessment of Rock Mass Rating for all rock units
Parameters Range of Values

Exceptional
Strength of Description Very strong strong Average
Strong
Intact Rock ci, Compressive
I 250 100-250 50-100 25-50
material strength, MPa
(MPa)
Rating 15 12 7 4
Description Excellent Good Fair Poor
Rock Quality
II Designation RQD 90-100 75-90 50-75 25-50
(RQD)
Rating 20 17 13 8
Weathering Grade I II III IV
Description Moderate Moderate Close Close
Spacing of
III Spacing, m 0.2 - 0.6 0.2 - 0.6 0.06 - 0.2 0.06 - 0.2
Discontinuities
Rating 10 10 8 8
moderately
Slightly Slightly Slickensided
Description to highly
weathered weathered wall
Condition of weathered
IV
Discontinuities
Separation of Rock < 1mm < 1mm <1mm 1 - 5 mm
Rating 25 25 20 10
Description Dripping
Joint water
Ground water
V pressure/major 0.2 - 0.5
condition
principal stress
Rating 4
Description of
Joints in Rock Fair
Orientation of Slopes
VI Discontinuities F1 - P/T (Plane /
0.7
- Slope Toppling failure)
F2 - P/T (Plane /
1
Toppling failure)
Report 31/03/2017 40/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
F3 - P/T (Plane /
-25
Toppling failure)
Description of
excavation in Rock Presplitting
Slopes
F4 - P/T (Plane /
10
Toppling failure)
It is very difficult to assess Orientation of joints based on core data. Orientation of joints can only be
assessed when rock surface is exposed.
At this stage orientation of joints are considered under fair category; which can be further evaluated
during excavation.
The Rock Mass Rating (RMR) is calculated as RMRBasic and RMRSlope .
The Basic Rock Mass Rating (RMRBasic) = The sum of rating in I to V in table below;
Table 35 or Table 36
The Rock Mass Rating for Slope (RMRSlope) or Slope Mass Rating (SMR)
= RMRBasic + (F1 x F2 x F3) + F4 (Reference 12)
The summary of Rock Mass Rating for Basic and Slope case with respect to different Weathering Grade
(WG) of rocks are presented in Table 37. Plot showing the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) vs Depth for all
boreholes are presented in APPENDIX D.
Table 37: Rock Mass Rating for Basic / Slope for all Rock Units
Rock Mass Rating for

Basic Rock Mass Rating (RMRBasic)
Slope (RMRSlope)
Rock Rock
WG Lowe Lowe
Units Type Number
Bound
Mean Design
Bound
Mean Design
Count value Value value Value
value value
Unit 3b Basalt IV 6 32 37 34 25 30 27
Unit 3c Basalt III 5 47 50 52 40 43 45
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 31 54 63 63 47 56 56

Shale &
Unit 4b III 4 42 45 45 35 38 38
Breccia
Shale &
Unit 4c II 16 49 58 58 42 51 51
Breccia
Geological Strength Index

Hoek and Brown (1997) introduced the Geological Strength Index (GSI), both for hard and weak rock
masses. The assessment of GSI values are made based on observations made during core drilling, core
photographs, no of joints, core recovery, RQD, weathering grade etc. along with engineering
Report 31/03/2017 41/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
judgement. The assessment of GSI values for intact rock with respect to different weathering grades
of rock is done as shown in Figure 5 & Figure 6.
Figure 5 Representative values of GSI for different weathering grade in Basalt strata

Report 31/03/2017 42/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 6 Representative values of GSI for different weathering grade in Shale / Breccia strata
Basalt WG IV, Units 3b
In this unit rocky strata is disintegrated about 40 to 50 percent, heavily broken rock mass with mixture
of angular and rounded rock pieces and rock can be classified smooth and highly weathered to
moderately weathered. Intact rock in this unit is having strength average to very strong.
Based on data available GSI value for Basalt WG IV, can be taken as 35 to 45.
Basalt WG III, Units 3c

In this unit rocky strata can be considered as blocky to very blocky as no of joints in this strata ranging
6 to 9 per meter drill length and from visual inspection surface of rock can be classified rough and
moderately weathered to slightly weathered. Intact rock in this unit is having strength strong to very
strong. Based on data available GSI value for Basalt WG III, can be taken as 55 to 65.

Report 31/03/2017 43/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Basalt WG I & II, Units 3d
In this unit rocky strata can be considered as Blocky as no of joints in this strata ranging 1 to 9 per
meter drill length and from visual inspection surface of rock can be classified rough and slightly
weathered to fresh unweathered. Intact rock in this unit is having strength average to very strong.
Based on data available GSI value for Basalt WG I & II, can be taken as 65 to 75.
Shale & Breccia WG III, Units 4b

In this unit rocky strata can be considered as blocky to very blocky as no of joints in this strata ranging
8 to 10 per meter drill length and from visual inspection surface of rock can be classified smooth and
highly weathered to moderately weathered. Intact rock in this unit is having strength very weak to
average. Based on data available GSI value for Basalt WG III, can be taken as 45 to 55.
Shale & Breccia WG I & II, Units 4c

In this unit rocky strata can be considered as very blocky as no of joints in this strata ranging 1 to 10
per meter drill length and from visual inspection surface of rock can be classified rough and moderately
weathered to slightly weathered. Intact rock in this unit is having strength very weak to average.
Based on data available GSI value for Basalt WG I & II, can be taken as 60 to 70.
Comparison of GSI & RMR

There is a correlation between GSI value and RMR89 (Considering Ground Water Condition Rating 15
for Dry case and the Orientation of Discontinuities rating as 0)
GSI = RMR89 -5 (Reference 18).
A comparison of GSI with RMRBasic is shown in Table 38. RMRBasic is always less than equal to RMR89 as
RMRBasic included effect of ground water condition. In RMRBasic ground water condition rating is
considered as 4 and in RMR89 ground water condition is 15; i.e. RMR89 = RMRBasic + 11.
Therefore, GSI = RMRBasic + 6.
Table 38: A comparison of GSI value with RMRBasic for intact rock
Design value of Basic

Weathering GSI (Geological
Rock Units Rock Type Rock Mass Rating
Grade Strength Index)
(RMRBasic)
Unit 3b Basalt IV 35 - 45 34
Unit 3c Basalt III 55 - 65 52
Unit 3d Basalt I & II 65 - 75 63
Unit 4b Shale & Breccia III 45 - 55 45
Unit 4c Shale & Breccia II 60 - 70 58
In above table GSI and RMR values are comparable.

Report 31/03/2017 44/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Rock Mass Parameters
Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion
The Hoek & Brown model involves a total of 8 parameters; those parameters with their standard
units are listed below.
ci Uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock (>0), kPa

mi Intact rock parameter
GSI Geological Strength Index
E Young’s modulus of rock mass, kPa
µ Poisson’s ratio
D Disturbance factor
c’ Drained cohesion (refer to detailed design parameters)
Φ’ Drained friction angle (refer to detailed design parameters)
 Absolute value of confining pressure ’3 at which  = 0, kPa
max Dilatancy angle (at ’3=0)
The generalized Hoek-Brown failure criterion can be formulated as a non-linear relationship between
the major and minor effective principal stresses as given below;
= + +
Where,
and are the major and minor effective principal stresses at failure;
is the uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock material and
mb is a reduced value of the intact rock parameter mi as given by;
− 100
=
28 − 14
s and a are auxiliary material constants for the rock mass given by the following relationships;
= and = + −
Geological Strength Index (GSI), Disturbance factor (D) and Intact rock parameter (mi) are estimated
based on Hoek & Brown (2002) quoted in Plaxis 2016 material model.
D is a factor which depends upon the degree of disturbance to which the rock mass has been subjected
by blast damage and stress relaxation. It varies from 0 for undisturbed in situ rock masses to 1 for very
disturbed rock masses.

Report 31/03/2017 45/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
The uniaxial compression strength of the specific rock under consideration, c, can be obtained by;
=
And, the tensile strength of the specific rock under consideration, t, as given by;
Failure initiates at the boundary of an excavation when is exceeded by the stress induced on that
boundary. The failure propagates from this initiation point into a biaxial stress field and it eventually
stabilizes when the local strength, is higher than the induced stresses and . Most numerical
models can follow this process of fracture propagation and this level of detailed analysis is very
important when considering the stability of excavations in rock and when designing support systems.
This leads to the concept of a global rock mass strength, and Hoek and Brown (1997) proposed
that this could be estimated from the Mohr-Coulomb relationship:
= , with c’ and Φ’ determined for the stress range < < /4 giving
( +4 − ( − 8 ))( + )
= . 4
2(1 + )(2 + )
Mohr-Coulomb Strength Parameters

In order to compare the Hoek-Brown failure criterion with well-known Mohr-Coulomb failure
criterion for practical applications involving a particular stress range, a balanced fit can be made
for confining stresses in the range;
< < ′ ,
This give the following expressions for the Mohr-Coulomb effective strength parameters Φ’ and c’
(Carranza-Torres, 2004):
6 ( + )
∅ =
2(1 + )(2 + ) + 6 ( + )
[(1 + 2 ) + (1 − ) ]( + )
′=
6 ( + )
(1 + )(2 + ) 1 +
(1 + )(2 + )
Where, = / .
Note that the value of , the upper limit of the confining stress over which the relationship
between the Hoek-Brown and the Mohr-Coulomb criteria is considered, has to be considered for
each individual case.

Report 31/03/2017 46/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Determination of upper limit of confining stress,
The guidelines are descripts the upper limit of the confining stress, for different failure
envelope range options are explained as follows;
For the case of deep tunnels, closed form solutions for both the Generalized Hoek-Brown and the
Mohr-Coulomb criteria have been used to generate hundreds of solutions and to find the value of
that gives equivalent characteristic curves based on following expressions;
.
′
= 0.47
′
Where,
is the upper limit of the confining stress
is the rock mass strength
is the unit weight of the rock and
is the depth of the tunnel below surface.
In case of where the horizontal stress is higher than the vertical stress, the horizontal stress value
should be used in place of .
For shallow tunnels, where the depth below surface is less than 3 tunnel diameters, comparative
numerical studies of the extent of failure and the magnitude of surface subsidence gave an identical
relationship to that obtained for deep tunnels, provided that caving to surface is avoided.
For the case of slopes, using Bishop’s circular failure analysis for a wide range of slope geometries and
rock mass properties, gave:
.
′
= 0.72
′
Where,
is the upper limit of the confining stress
is the rock mass strength
is the unit weight of the rock mass and
is the height of the slope.
For the case of general, Rock lab guidelines based on empirical observation that the stress range
associated with brittle failure occurs when is less than about one quarter of ′ .
Rock Mass Modulus

Young’s modulus E is assumed to be a constant value for the considered rock layer. This modulus can
be estimated on the basis of the rock quality parameters in Hoek-Brown model (Reference 15).

Report 31/03/2017 47/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Simplified Hoek & Diederichs equation;
1 − /2
( ) = 100000. (( )/ )
1+
Simplified Hoek & Diederichs equation;
1 − /2
= 0.02 + (( )/ )
1+
Where,
is the young’s modulus of rock mass,
is the young’s modulus can be measured from axial compression tests or direct shear
tests on intact rock samples.
GSI is the Geological Strength Index
D is the Disturbance factor
The intact rock parameters and Modular Ratio of intact rock (Reference 20) with respect to different
Weathering Grade are summarized in Table 39.
Table 39: The intact rock parameters and Modular Ratio
Type of Rock Strata Intact Rock Parameters, Mi Modular Ratio (MR)

Shale 6±2 200 ± 50
Basalt 25 ± 5 350 ± 100
RocLab Software is used to estimate Mohr-Coulomb strength parameters for different weathering
grades of intact rock are tabulated in Table below. APPENDIX E shows the extracts from Roclab
software output. GSI and UCS value of rock are assumed based on the information given in
geotechnical factual report.

Report 31/03/2017 48/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
6. SUMMARY OF DESIGN PARAMETERS
Summary of interpolated design parameters for Basalt of WG I to IV and Shale & Breccia WG II to III.
are tabulated below;

Report 31/03/2017 49/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 40: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters - Failure Envelope by General Application
Hoek & Brown Classification Rock Mass Parameters
Disturbance Factor, Disturbance Factor, Disturbance Factor,
Unit weight under soaked condition,

D=0 D = 0.5 D = 0.7
GSI (Geological Strength Index)

ci, UCS for intact rock, MPa
Confining stress, MPa, 3max

Mohr Mohr
Intact rock parameter, mi
Geological Units
Intact Modulus, Ei, MPa

Mohr Coulomb
Coulomb Coulomb
Modular Ratio (MR)
Rock Mass Deformation
Permeability, m/s
Parameters
Parameters Parameters
Modulus, Erm MPa

Modulus, Erm MPa
Modulus, Erm MPa
kN/m3
Angle of internal
Angle of internal
Angle of internal
Cohesion, MPa
Cohesion, MPa
Cohesion, MPa
friction
friction
friction
Unit 3b 53 20 300 15900 13.25 40 2.8 33 2539 2.2 27 1223 1.9 24 926 25 7.31E-06
Unit 3c 70 25 350 24500 17.5 60 5.3 41 12740 4.5 37 6661 4.1 35 4917 27 1.80E-07
Unit 3d 70 25 350 24500 17.5 70 6.1 44 17954 5.4 41 10717 5.0 40 8272 27 1.59E-06
Unit 4b 3 6 200 600 0.75 50 0.1 26 184 0.1 22 88 0.1 19 64 22 6.20E-07
Unit 4c 4 6 200 800 1.00 65 0.2 30 505 0.2 27 282 0.2 25 212 22 8.15E-07
Poisson`s ratio can be considered as 0.25 for the all type of rock strata.

Report 31/03/2017 50/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 41: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters - Failure Envelope by Slope at 15m height
Hoek & Brown

Classification
Disturbance Factor, D = 0 Disturbance Factor, D = 0.5 Disturbance Factor, D = 0.7

Mohr Mohr Mohr
Rock Mass Deformation Modulus,


Coulomb Coulomb Coulomb
Geological Units

Modular Ratio (MR)
Permeability, m/s
Parameters Parameters Parameters
Slope Height, m
Angle of internal friction
kN/m3
Erm MPa
Erm MPa
Erm MPa
Cohesion, MPa
Cohesion, MPa
Cohesion, MPa
Unit 3b 53 20 300 15900 40 0.36 0.28 61 2539 0.35 0.20 56 1223 0.35 0.17 53 926 25 15 7.31E-06
Unit 3c 70 25 350 24500 60 0.42 0.73 66 12740 0.41 0.53 64 6661 0.41 0.46 63 4917 27 15 1.80E-07
Unit 3d 70 25 350 24500 70 0.43 1.25 67 17954 0.42 0.94 66 10717 0.42 0.82 65 8272 27 15 1.59E-06
Unit 4b 3 6 200 600 50 0.24 0.07 35 184 0.24 0.05 31 88 0.23 0.04 28 64 22 15 6.20E-07
Unit 4c 4 6 200 800 65 0.26 0.13 41 505 0.25 0.10 38 282 0.25 0.09 36 212 22 15 8.15E-07

Report 31/03/2017 51/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Table 42: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters - Failure Envelope by Slope at 24m height
Hoek & Brown

Classification
Disturbance Factor, D = 0 Disturbance Factor, D = 0.5 Disturbance Factor, D = 0.7

Mohr Mohr Mohr


Coulomb Coulomb Coulomb
Geological Units

Modular Ratio (MR)
Permeability, m/s
Parameters Parameters Parameters
Slope Height, m
kN/m3
Erm MPa
Erm MPa
Erm MPa
Cohesion, MPa
Cohesion, MPa
Cohesion, MPa
Unit 3b 53 20 300 15900 40 0.56 0.35 58 2539 0.54 0.26 53 1223 0.53 0.22 50 926 25 24 7.31E-06
Unit 3c 70 25 350 24500 60 0.64 0.83 64 12740 0.63 0.61 62 6661 0.62 0.54 60 4917 27 24 1.80E-07
Unit 3d 70 25 350 24500 70 0.66 1.33 65 17954 0.65 1.02 64 10717 0.64 0.90 63 8272 27 24 1.59E-06
Unit 4b 3 6 200 600 50 0.37 0.09 32 184 0.36 0.07 27 88 0.36 0.06 25 64 22 24 6.20E-07
Unit 4c 4 6 200 800 65 0.40 0.15 38 505 0.39 0.12 35 282 0.38 0.11 33 212 22 24 8.15E-07

Report 31/03/2017 52/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Following design parameters are considered for Filledup material, Soil, Basalt WG V and Shale & Breccia
WG IV & V.
Table 43: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters
Coefficient at Rest
Angle of Friction
Earth Pressure
Drained Young’s
Permeability
Unit Weight
Cohesion
Poisson Ratio
Modulus
Strata Unit
γ Ф' c' E’ K0 k
[ kN/m3] [°] [kPa] [MPa] [-] [m/s]
Filledup Material Unit 1 18 - 20 28 0.30 0 10 0.53 1E-5*
Soil Unit 2a 18 - 20 25 0.30 10 14 0.58 1E-6 - 1E-8*
Basalt – WG V Unit 3a 20 - 22 30 0.25 20 100 1 8.70E-6

Shale & Breccia –
Unit 4a 20 - 22 28 0.25 20 60 1 5.25E-7
WG IV & V
Note: Z is depth in m, MSL
* Only one Permeability test data of Unit 1 & 2a is available in the Geotechnical factual Report; therefore
for design purpose permeability value of Unit 1 & 2a are assumed based on type of soil strata.

Report 31/03/2017 53/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
APPENDIX A - BOREHOLE LAYOUT PLAN

Report 31/03/2017 54/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 55/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
APPENDIX B - FIELD TESTS

Report 31/03/2017 56/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
1.1. B.1 FIELD TESTS FOR SOIL
Figure 7 SPT N Value for Unit 2a – Soil

Report 31/03/2017 57/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
1.2. B.2 FIELD TESTS FOR ROCK
Figure 8 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3a – Basalt WG V
Figure 9 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3a – Basalt WG V

Report 31/03/2017 58/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 10 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3b– Basalt WG IV
Figure 11 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3b– Basalt WG IV

Report 31/03/2017 59/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 12 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III
Figure 13 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III

Report 31/03/2017 60/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 14 TCR vs Depth for Unit 3d– Basalt WG I & II
Figure 15 RQD vs Depth for Unit 3d– Basalt WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 61/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 16 TCR vs Depth for Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V
Figure 17 RQD vs Depth for Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V

Report 31/03/2017 62/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 18 TCR vs Depth for Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III
Figure 19 RQD vs Depth for Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III

Report 31/03/2017 63/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 20 TCR vs Depth for Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II
Figure 21 RQD vs Depth for Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 64/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
APPENDIX C - LABORATORY TESTS

Report 31/03/2017 65/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
2.1 C.1 LABORATORY TESTS FOR SOIL
Figure 22 Particle Size Distribution for Unit 1 & Unit 2a
Figure 23 Atterberg's Limits for Unit 2a

Report 31/03/2017 66/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 24 Moisture Content for Unit 1 & Unit 2a

Report 31/03/2017 67/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 25 Unit Weight under Saturated Condition for Unit 2a
Figure 26 Unit Weight under Dry Condition for Unit 2a

Report 31/03/2017 68/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
2.2 C.2 LABORATORY TESTS FOR ROCK
Figure 27 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3a – Basalt WG V
Figure 28 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3a – Basalt WG V

Report 31/03/2017 69/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 29 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV
Figure 30 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV

Report 31/03/2017 70/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 31 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3c – Basalt WG III
Figure 32 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3c – Basalt WG III

Report 31/03/2017 71/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 33 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II
Figure 34 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 72/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 35 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V
Figure 36 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4a – Breccia & Shale WG IV & V

Report 31/03/2017 73/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 37 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III
Figure 38 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III

Report 31/03/2017 74/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 39 Unit weight under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II
Figure 40 Unit weight under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 75/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 41 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3a – Basalt WG V
Figure 42 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV

Report 31/03/2017 76/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 43 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3c – Basalt WG III
Figure 44 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 77/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 45 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4a– Breccia & Shale WG IV & V

Report 31/03/2017 78/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 46 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b - Breccia & Shale WG III
Figure 47 UCS under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4b - Breccia & Shale WG III

Report 31/03/2017 79/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 48 UCS under soaked condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c - Breccia & Shale WG I & II
Figure 49 UCS under dry condition of Intact Rock Unit 4c - Breccia & Shale WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 80/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
APPENDIX D - DERIVED ROCK MASS PARAMETERS

Report 31/03/2017 81/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
3.1.D.1 DRIVED ROCK MASS PARAMETERS
Figure 50 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV
Figure 51 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 3b – Basalt WG IV

Report 31/03/2017 82/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 52 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III
Figure 53 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 3c – Basalt WG III

Report 31/03/2017 83/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 54 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II
Figure 55 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 3d – Basalt WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 84/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 56 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 4b– Breccia & Shale WG III
Figure 57 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 4b – Breccia & Shale WG III

Report 31/03/2017 85/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 58 RMRBasic vs Depth for Unit 4c– Breccia & Shale WG I & II
Figure 59 RMRSlope vs Depth for Unit 4c – Breccia & Shale WG I & II

Report 31/03/2017 86/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
APPENDIX E - ROCLAB SOFTWARE OUTPUTS

Report 31/03/2017 87/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 60 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3b, Basalt WG IV – General Application

Report 31/03/2017 88/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 61 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3c, Basalt WG III – General Application

Report 31/03/2017 89/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 62 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3d, Basalt WG I & II – General Application

Report 31/03/2017 90/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 63 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4b, Shale & Breccia WG III – General Application

Report 31/03/2017 91/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 64 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4c, Shale & Breccia WG I & II – General Application

Report 31/03/2017 92/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 93/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 94/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 95/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 96/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 97/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 98/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 99/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 100/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 101/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 102/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 75 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3b, Basalt WG IV – Slope at 15m Height

Report 31/03/2017 103/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 76 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3c, Basalt WG III – Slope at 15m Height

Report 31/03/2017 104/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 77 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 3d, Basalt WG I & II – Slope at 15m Height

Report 31/03/2017 105/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 78 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4b, Shale & Breccia WG III – Slope at 15m Height

Report 31/03/2017 106/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 79 Roclab analysis for D= 0.0 for Unit 4c, Shale & Breccia WG I & II – Slope at 15m Height

Report 31/03/2017 107/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
Figure 80 Roclab analysis for D= 0.5 for Unit 3b, Basalt WG IV – Slopes at 15m Height

Report 31/03/2017 108/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 109/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 110/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 111/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 112/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 113/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 114/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 115/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 116/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 117/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 118/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 119/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 120/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 121/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 122/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 123/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 124/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 125/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 126/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 127/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 128/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 129/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 130/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 131/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01

Report 31/03/2017 132/133
L&T-STEC JV MUMBAI
Mumbai Metro Line 3
Package No: UGC 01
APPENDIX F - GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DRAWINGS

Report 31/03/2017 133/133
MUMBAI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.
MUMBAI METRO LINE - 3
LTS-GEO-SCG-3001-001-A.DWG
MUMBAI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.
MUMBAI METRO LINE - 3
LTS-GEO-SCG-3001-002-A.DWG

LTS Geo SCG 17 2301 A

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

LTS Geo SCG 17 2301 A

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001 31/03/2017

Reference number LTS-GEO-SCG-17-2301-A

CHURCHGATE METRO STATION - GEOTECHNICAL

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ)

Project MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

Study Churchgate Metro Station - Geotechnical Interpretive Report

Type of document Technical Report

File name LTS-GEO-SCG-17-2301-A

Reference number LTS-GEO-SCG-17-2301-A

Number of pages 133

Revision Name Position Date Signature Modifications

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

2. SCOPE OF THE REPORT 14

GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND INTERPRETATION 30

6. SUMMARY OF DESIGN PARAMETERS 49

APPENDIX A - BOREHOLE LAYOUT PLAN 54

APPENDIX B - FIELD TESTS 56

APPENDIX C - LABORATORY TESTS 65

APPENDIX D - DERIVED ROCK MASS PARAMETERS 81

APPENDIX E - ROCLAB SOFTWARE OUTPUTS 87

APPENDIX F - GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DRAWINGS 133

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

Figure 1 Project Location 12

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

MSL Mean Sea Level

bgl Below ground level

PLI Point Load Strength Index

UCS Uniaxial Compression Strength

RQD Rock Quality Designation

SCR Solid Core Recovery

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

Figure 1 Project Location

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

The scope of the report may be summarized as follows:

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

3.1 Regional Geology

Figure 2 Geological map of Mumbai (Pop Envis, IIPS Mumbai, 2015)

Figure 3 Seismic Hazard Map of Mumbai

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

4.1 Ground Investigations

Table 1: Summary of field work executed at Churchgate Metro Station

Table 2 Summary of Probe boreholes drilled in Churchgate Station Area

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

Borehole Level Ground water depth Ground water Elevation

4.3 Field Tests in Soil Strata

Laboratory Tests – Soil Samples

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

Atterberg Limits and Particle Size Distribution

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

No of Test Maximum Minimum

Summary of Laboratory Test Results of Soils

In-Situ Falling Head Permeability Test

Sample The coefficient of

Shear Strength Test

MUMBAI METRO LINE 3 (COLABA - BANDRA - SEEPZ) UGC001

Sample Test Angle of

Table 10: Summary of Triaxial Shear Test Results

Shear strength No of Test Maximum Minimum

Chemical Aggressivity and Corrosion – Soil and Groundwater