A (.' j /Vv ■ /A- 7A
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
5+1 ZJ—
DABUS IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT FEASIBILITY STUDY AND DETAIL DESIGN PROJECT
Volume - III
Part I : Head Work Geological and Geotechnical Investigation Report
August, 2015
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
P.O.Box 2561
Tel+ 251 11 661 45 01 Fax+ 251 11 66 1 08 98
Email: w.w.d s e@ethione el Bob Marley Avenue.
Addis Ababa EthiopiaMinistry of Water and Energy
Dabus trrigaboi Study & Design Projec t
Volume III Part I
Head work Geological & Geoiechnical Invrsliga' on_Report_
DABUS IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT STUDY AND DESIGN PROJECT
VOLUME - III
GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Part I: Head Work Geological and Geotechnical Investigation Report
August 2015
This document has been prepared for the titleo projec! or named part thereof and should not be relied upon cr used for any other project without an independent check oemg carried out as to its suitability and prior written authority of water works design and supervision enterprise being obtained VWVDSF accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequence of this document being used for a purpose other than the purposes for which it was commissioned Any person using or relying on the document for such other purpose agrees, and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm his agreement to indemnify WWDSE tor al loss or damage resulting there from WWDSE accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person by whom it was commissioned
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
August 2015Ministry o* Waler and Energy
Oabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec 1
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Repod
CONTENTS OF FEASIBILITY REPORT VOl UME I          Main Report
VOLUME II          Hydrology and Climate Study Report
VOLUMF III Geological and Geotechnical Investigation Report
_
Part I            Head Work Geological and Geotechnical Investigation Report
Annex I : I aboratory Test Result Annex-Il: Borehole and Test Pit Logs Annex III Geological Cross Sections Annex-IV In situ Tests
Annex-V: Geophysical Survey
Annex VI Seismic Hazard Assessment
____
Part II
• I
Command  area  Geological  and  Geotechnical  Investigation Report
Annex-I Laboratory Test Result
Annex-Il. Test Pit Lodjs
Annex III: Geological Cross Sections along Canals Annex-IV: In situ lests
■ VOLUME - IV       Sectoral Studies
PART I
PART II
PART III
PART IV
PART V
PART VI
Agronomy Study
Soil Survey and Land Suitability Study Annex-Soil Survey Data
Livestock Study
Watershed Management Study Socio Economy Study
Market Opportunity Study
PART VII         Organization ana Management Study PART VIII         Environmental Impact Assessment Study
PART IX          Hydrogeology Study
VOLUME-V
PART I PART II
RAP and Infrastructure Study
RAP
Infrastructure Study
VOLUME - VI       Dam and Appurtenant Structures
PARTI            Feasibility Design Report
Annex-I Alternative Dam Option Report
PART ll
Drawings
VOLUME VII
Irrigation and Drainage System
PART I
Feasibility Design Report
PART II___
Drawings
VOLUME-VIII
Financial and Economical Analysis
VOLUME - IX       Engineering Cost Estimate
Waler Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
August 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus rogation Study & Design P 3|ec t
r
Volume lll-Pait I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
TABLE OF CONTFNTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
.................................... V
LIST OF FIGURES ................................
VI
................. ........................ VI
___            ___
vii
vin
i 1 General
............ .............. ...................
............................. l
1 2. Project Location and Accessibility ........................
........ ..........................2
........................... 2
... 3
...................................3
1 4 z scope or works ......................... ..........................
...      3
...........................3
3. Geomorphology 
......... ......................
.............................. 6
4 GEOLOGICAL SETTING....................................... ................................................. ........................
4.1   Regional Geology ..........................
4   2. Loca’ Geology ................................... 4,2.1         Dam Axis
4.2.2.Spillway ........................
4   3 Regional Geologic Structures
...... .................... 7
9
.9
.9
11
4               4 Geologic Structures of the Headwork Sites............................................................. ........................ ....... 1?
5.    GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION . 5 1     General................................... .. 5.2.   Geophysicai        Investigation
5 3     Core Drilling.............................
5.3.1.     General
5    3 2 Descriptive rock Core Logging 5   3.3. Discontinuity Description
5.4 In situ Tests
.........................................................................................13
13
.13
......
.14
...................................................... '4
........................................... ....................... .16
..................................... .. ............................. ................. ......... 16
54 1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)...................................................... .......
..       .......................... .17
5 4 2 Falling Head Permeability......................................... ...       ...................... ............. ..... . ............ ..................... 18
5.4.3,        Packer Permeability Test
...
...
......................................................... 19
5               5, Piezometer Installation and Groundwater Level Monitoring.......................................................... ....... —..19
5.6 Test pit/trench Excavation .................................................................................................. ........................................ .20
5               7 Sam pl mg an d La boralory Stud y.......................................„.................................................... .................... 20
5.7 1 Tests or Rock samples................................................................................................... ................. ........ .. 2D 57 2 Tests on Sod Samples .......................................................................................................... ............................ 20
6.      GEOTECHN.CAL EVALUATION
............ .............................................................. 23
6.1.    Geotechnical Consideration of Dabus Dam Foundation................................................. ........................................ 23
6.2.    Rock Mass Characterization.................. ........ ........... ................................. ... ............................ o........................ , 23
6 2.1 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) of Rocks .. ............................................................................. . ......... 23
6               2 2 Rock Quality Designation (RQO) of the Rocks at the Dam Foundation............................................ 24
6               2 2 1 RQD characterization of the rocks al the Left Abutment .......................................................... 26
6.2 3 Consistency of Foundation Soils .................................................................................................................. 26
6.3.     Bearing Capacity.................................... ................................ r'......................................... ................................. 29
6.3.1. Geotechnical Characteristics ................................................ ............................. ................... ...... ................... 29
Waterworks Ces»gn and
Superv s»on Enterprise
in
1
August 20 5Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irriga1»on Study & Design Prqec I 6 3 2. Bearing capacity analysis
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
29
Bearing Capacity of Rock mass based on the Hoek Brown Failure Criterion
30
6   4 Water Tightness of the Dam Foundaton
6.4 1 Permeability of Foundation Rocks......................... 6.4 2 Permeability of Foundation Soils.
................................
.................................
7
6   5. Seismicity ................................................................ ........................................................ “ ’
6 6 Groundwater Condition .................... ......... .......... ......................... .
67       Excavation Depth of Foundation...
6 7.1 Depth of General Foundation of tne Dam.................................................... 6 7.2 Depth of Finished Cut-off Excavation ...
6 7.3. Grouting Works
6 7 4. Excavation of Spillway............................................................. CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL INVESTIGATION and EVALUATION 7 1. General -■
7 2.
Impervious Clay Core Material
7.1.1   Permeability 
7   1 2 Grain Size Analysis 
7   1 3 Atterberg Limits
7   1 4 Swelling Potential
7.1.5 Free Swell .............................. 7   1.6 Erodiblity Tests 
717 Direct Shear
7   1 8 Organic Content 7 2.   Rockfill/ Shell Material
7.3. 74
Rock for Masonry and Rip Rap Rock for Aggregates 
7.5.  Sand
...............................
8
9
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8 1 Conclusion...................... 8 2. Recommendations 
REFERENCE
...33 .. 33
33 ...34 ...36
..37 37 37 37
. 38
. 40 ...40
40
43
43
44
.. 45
. 45 46
46
46
.46 ...48
.49 ...50
.   56 ...56 ...57 ..60
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
iv
August 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study ft Design Projec •
Volume Ill-Par* I head work Geological & Geotechnical JnyestigationRepoft _
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4 1 . Summary of structural lineaments in DISPP area from previous studies 
11
Table 5 1 Coordinates and work volumes of resistivity imaging survey lines 
11
Table 5. 2 Coordinates and work volumes of VES points
Table 5 3: Summary of Core Drilling
’able 5 4 Recommended corrections for Standard Penetrat.on Test (SPT) blow count values 
(Robertson and Wnde (1997). as modified from Skempton. 19B6)
Table 5 5. Summary of SPT Results 
.
..
T ab’o 5 6 Summaries of rock core samples Table 5 7 Summary of SPT samples 
13
15
17
18
21
................................................
Table 5 8 Summary of Shell Material Samples ................................................................................................... ...... ...... Table 5 9 Summary of Fine Material Samples 
Table 5 10 Summary of Clay borrow and Foundation Samples ............................................................... ............... ...
Table 6 1. UCS classification after Shelby 1982
..........................................................
Table 6 2. Summary of Core samples with their corresponding UCS Tab'e 6 3 Classification of Rock Quality Based on RQD (Deere. 1964) Table 6 4 Summary of aboratory results of rock core samples 
Table 6 5 Correlation of consistency of cohesive soil tn relation to N value Table 6 6 Correlation of relative density of granular Soils 
................
................................................
.......................
21
21
21
22
23
24
24
25
27
27
Table 6 7. Summary of Labo’-atory results from the Dam Foundation................................................................................ 28
Table 6 8 Average Lugeon Value of different Boreholes with different test sections 
Table 6 9 Ground motion amplitude in percentage of qravdy (%g) for rock and soil sites at different periods of motion and for different return periods at Dabus Irngation Project site For the soil site, an average thickness of 30 meters with shear wave velocity 310 m/s is adopted for all periods
33
considered (Boore etal., 1997)............................................................................................................................. . 35
Table 6 10 Amount of curtain grouting required along the dam axis 
38
T able 7 1 Summary of Laboratory test results nf samples collected from impervious clay borrow area
...
.             41
Table   7   2   Relationships   between   Swelling   Potential   and   Degree   of   Expansion   (Anderson,   1981)   45
Table 7 3 Soil group and mportant engineering properties of impe'V’.ous material
...
45
Table       7       4       Free       Swell       Tests       and       Degree       of       Seventy       (BIS-       1498       -       1970)46
I able 7 5. Comparison of the alternative clay borrow sites Table 7. 6 : Summary of laboratory results of the Shell material Table 7 7 Summary of laboratory results on rock Quarries Table 7 8 Summary of I aboratory results of Sand
46
Table 7 9 Summary of accessibility and quantity of different construction materials 
43
' 50
54
Water Works Desigr are
Supervision Enterprise
v
August. 2015*M'-isIry of Water and Energy
Dabus legation Study & Design Projec t_
11ST OF FIGURES Figure 1    1: location Map of the Project Area ....
Volume III-Pan I Head work Geolog cal & Geotechrical Investigation Report
Figure 4 1. Regional geology  of the project area (Al - Quaternary  alluvial and colluvial deposits. Tb Tertiary  basalts. gt2 - post-tectonic  granites, gdt/dt/ln granodiorites, diorites  and tonalite. gt1 pre - syn tectonic granites, um - ultramafic associations MVS1&2 - Meta volcano sedimentary
units) from (Tefcra. 1991. Alemu and Abebe. 2000) with some modifications Figure 4. 2 Local Goological map of the project area
Figure 5. 1 Borehole Location Map
Figure 6.1 Plasticity chart of Foundation Soils 
8
Figure 6 2 Analysis of rock strength using RockLab for L A (WBH 1 Bore hole)
...... 30
Figure 6 3: Analysis  of rock  strength using RockLab for L A (WBH 2 Borehole) 32 Figure 6 4. Total Hazard for Dabus  Irrigation Project Site The x-axis  represents  amplitude mg. 35 Figure 6 5- Uniform hazard spectra where the x axis represents period in seconds and the y-axis is
amplitude in fraction of g
-............................................................................................... ...... 36
Figure       ?       1       Grain       s       ze       Distribution       Curve       of       Impervious       Clay       Material       43
Figure   7   ?   Classification   of   soils   collected   from   proposed   clay   borrow   sites   on   elasticity   chart   44
Figure             7             3             Grain             size             Distribution             Curves             of             Sand             51
Figure 7 4 Fine (F1) and Coarse (F2) Filter Boundary 
Figure 7 5 Construct'On Material Map .................................................. ......................................................... 55
53
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 7 t Photo showing potential day borrow area
Plate   7   1   Picture   showing   highly   weathered   and   fractured   Meta-volcan.c   tc   be   used   for   shell Plate 7 2 Photo showing the nearby poss.ble quarry rraterial
Plate 7 3 Photo showing potential Sand deposit
Waler Wo'ks Design ana Supervision Enterprise
------- —— ------------------ -
v’
August. 2015Ministry of Waler and Energy
□aOus 'rogation Study & Desigr^Prgjg£
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Invest gation Report,
ABBRIVATIONS
AASHTO a si
C
CD
cm/s 
CH
CL
cu DISDP
D
DS
DEM
Ei
g
GWL GSI
KN/m2 LL
m
MDD MH MoW'E Mi
MPa
N
NNE
NE NMC OMC
PI
PL
ROD TCR SCR SPT
SE UCS USSR UTM VES WWDSE CP
American AssociaKon of State Highway Transport Officials Above Sea ‘ evel
Cohesion
Confined Drained
centimetre per second
Inorganic clays of high plasticity
Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity Confined unirained
Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project Disturbance factor
Downstream
Digital Elevation Model
Intact modulus
gravitational Acceleration
Ground Water Level
Global Strength Index
Kilo-Newton per meter square
Liquid limit
metre
Maximum Dry Density
Inorganic silts
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Material constant
Mega Pascal
Number of blows
North-North-East
North east
Natural Moisture content
Optimum moisture content
Plasticity Index
Plastic Limit
Rock Quality Designation
Total Core Recovery
Solid Core Recovery
Standard Penetration Test
South East
Uni-axial Compressive Strength
United state Bureau of Reclamation
Universal Mercator
Vertical Electrical Sounding
Waterworks Design and Supervsion Enterpr.se Friction Angle
Waterworks Design and Supervision Erteronsc
August, 2015Ministry of Water and Energy 
Volume Ill-Part I Hr ad work Geological AGeotechnicalJnvcstlgaJbqn^Report..
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Project--------------------- —-—-
EXCUTIVE SUMMARY
•v>o<.r>nQ  hive  been  carried  out  (or  Dabus  Dam  and Geological and geotechn.cal mvest.gat.ons have nee ca
Irrigation Project at head work sites and construction matena areas.
The  activities  carried  out  during  the  geotechnical  investigations  include  overall  geological
and geotechnical condition of the site, seismre des.gn consideration waterr
’■
bearing   capacity   assessment   at   foundations   and   ava.lab.My   and   su.tab.lily   of   local construction mater als.
Geotechnical investigation at the head work site reveals that
. The proposed Dam/ we.r site is covered by fresh to slightly weathered, widely jointed strong granite both at the left and right side overlain by sandy gravel alluvial deposit and  weathered  and  decomposed  granite  The  geologic  formatton  of  central  part  of the island is composed of about 2.5m thick alluvial soil underlain by fresh to slightly weathered granite rock
•     Based on surface and subsurface investigations and in-situ tests the unconsolidated deposits  and  the  completely  weathered  granite  material  have  relatively  low  load bearing capacity of 200 to SOOKPa
•      The  fresh  to  slightly  weathered  granite  rocks  found  beneath  the  proposed  cutoff excavation deoth has safe load bearing caoac.ty (considering a factor of safety of 3) of about 11 Mpa to 13 Mpa on average
•     Variable head permeability test conducted m the unconsolidated layers (particularly engineering geological layer II and III) have shown the mater.al is imper/ious while water pressure test conducted in hard 'orrnatrons varied from 0 to 11Lugeon value at dam  foundation  areas  and  much  higher  permeability  results  al  the  downstream spillway area With increased depth, a general trend of increase in ROD value and decrease in Lugeon value was recorded indicating an increase in the quality of the rock mass with depth
•     The  geology  of  the  spillway  area  is  composed  of  fresh  to  slightly  weathered, massive, hard granite overlair by about 2 65 m thick residual soil
Wth regard to the construction material
Three clay  borrow areas  are proposed during the investigation Clay  borrow-1 is characterized by  dark  brownish soil, mgh plasticity  and swelling and very  low permeability, while the other two clay borrow areas (clay borrow-2 and clay borrow-3) are characterized by reddish brown, with low plasticity and very low permeability
he  sheli  nate  a  assessed  and  examined  has  significant  proportion  of  fines content r urthermore. as the rock material is h.ghly to moderately weathered there is a chance ot producing more fines (especially the top part of the proposed quarry) CpT9    !;OnTac:,°n     whlch     in     turn     reduce   the   permeability   of   the   shell   material
.®,
r
V !         6 presenI sturiY has revealed that the shell material investigated is not
free dra.nrg and shall not ut.l.zed as shell embankment material,
f
S  hered t0
fill  matenal  .s  ava.labte  on  both  sides  of  the  proposed  dam  and  speway  founds  "on These quarries can prov.oe free draining rock f.ll matenal.
|'      |      f”CSh      an0
fractured      rocks      wh,ch      are       9°od       materials    for    use    as    rock 
Wafer Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
V|t|
August, 2015Ministry of Waler and Energy
Cabjs Irrgat'on Study & design Pro.ec t
Volume IIl-Parl Head work Geoloqica. & Geotechnical Investigation Report
•     All unconsolidated deposits (colluvial, residual and alluvial deposits) need to be removed from the dam foundation Borehole data inocated that the upper 5 to 15m of the rocks at the dam foundation is characterized by highiy to completely weathered granite.
•     To address water tightness problems at dam foundation, zones greater than or equal to 3 Lugeon values need tobe given due attention for treatment (grouting). Maximum depth of curtain grouting from key trench level is recommended 50% of the static water head and maximum depth of grouting shall be 18.0 m
•     Because of the suitable quality, adeauate quantity and the shorter hauling distance from the  dam  site,  clay  borrow  site  3  is  recommended  to  use  as  better  potential  site  for impervious clay core material. Clay borrow site-? has suitable quality as impervious clay core  material,  however,  the  available  quantity  is  not  adequate  and  the  hauling  distance is  considerably  more  than  that  of  clay  borrow  site  3  Clay  from  clay  borrow  sitel  is highly  expansive  and  highly  compressible  and  hence  should  not  be  used  as  core material.
•     Sand  suitable for  fine  aggregate and fine filter  material  (F1)  requirement or  the project can oe obtained from Shaga and Mana Rivers.
•     Coarse filter material (F2) and even coarser transition material as well shall be obtained by cr jshing of 'resh granite rock available »n the vicinity of the dam site.
•     Trial  embankment  shali  be  done  on  the  construction  materials  of  clay  shell  and  rock materials before commencement of the actual dam fill works
Water Works Design a-.d Supervision Enterprise
August 2015Ministry of Water and Fnrrgy
OatHjs Irrigation Study & Design Prqjcc!
1.     INTRODUCTION 1.1.  General
Volume Ill-Part I i-.-.i i work Gec'ogical 1 Ge7technical Investigation Report
Water Works  Design and Supervsion Enterprise (WWDSE) has  entered a contract agreement with the Ministry  of Water. Irrigation and Energy  (MoWIE) to conduct the feasibility study and detailed design of Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project (DISDP)
The main structures included in the capboned project are dam. spillway, irrigation canal and other appurtenant structures  Accordingly, these structures  reed detailed geological and geotechnical investigation as  well as  assessment of suitable construct on materials  in sufficient quantity and quality within economic distance from the project site
The geotechnical investigation of the dam spillway  and construction material,sites  included in Part I and that of the irrigation canal and appurtenant structure site is incorporated in Part II of the geological and geotechnical investigation report
Surface and subsurface geological and geotechnical nvestigation as  well as  construction material assessment hence, were conducted for the proposes project and the investigation scope and procedure were made m accordance to the contract agreement with the project requirements.
The surface geological investigation has been conducted to establish the surface geological map of the project area, i.e , the distribution and description of the various  geological materials and geologic structures in and around the surrounding of the project area
The subsurface investigation component included rotary  core drilling, in situ testing in boreholes, piezometer installation and water level monitoring, Pit/trench excavations, collection of representative soil and rock  samples  ard laboratory  testing and conducting geophysical resistivity  surveys  (Vertical Electrical Sounding and resistivity  profiting/lmaging) at and around structure foundation sites of the project
Tbs  report is  therefore aimed at presenting the details  of the geological and geotechnical investigation executed, geological and structural mapping of the project area, the analysis and interpretations  of gathered data, the geotechnical evaluaton of the proposed structure foundation sites and construction materials available in the vicinity of the project area, and k he geotechnical recommendations  forwarded on basis of evaluation outcomes The report, hence, incorporates descriptions of the lithologic units and structures affecting the geology of the area engineering properties of rocks and soils at structure foundation sites, construction material available in the area and slope stao.lily and water tightness of the reservoir area
Water Works Design ard SLpen/i5ion Fnterorisr
1
August. 2015Minlshy of Water and Energy
Dabus Imgalion Study&_Design_P[ojec J___
1.2. Project Location and Accessibility
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Geotecbnicai Investigation Report_
The project site .s  located in Benshangul Gumuz  Reg.onal state ^sa Zone: Bambesi Menge and Oda Godera Weredas) and can be accessed along .he Addis Ababa - Nekemet
- Asosa asphalt road and on an addit.onal 55 km gravel road to the north east of Asosa (figure  1 1)  Other  nearby towns on the main road to the project site includes Mend, and Bambesi The nearest town with hydroelectric power supply from the national grid is Asosa.
The headwork site for the irrigation project is located near Fudindu, a Kebele market town in Menge Wereda with an all-weather gravel road and public transport connection to Asosa
TqSATION IJAP of DABUS RP»QATK)?I PPOJECr
Figure 1.1: Location Map of the Project Area
1.3. Project Description
XZw            .aXX.7:
,n Me"9e Wereoa ai lhe Iefl ■>-*        «wiu
ln /ssosa
2 °"e"
' ouc,’“
**«■“• 
sba
a
»-
BHdlgdu     Wereda     The     geographer     coordX's     0^?     T     an°     ZUmba        K""’"’5        °'     O<la
723920 E. and r,om ,112,87 N - 1mrS N Th. T -
027 N Thu planned irrigation land is about 10,00Cha
““
707374 E ~
Waterworks Desgn and
Supervision Enterprise
2
>0<5Volume Ill-Part I Ministry          of          Waler          and          Energy          Geolog.cal          &          Geotechnical          InvestgallonRepqrt. Pah ;S knoat.on Study & Design P-O|CC t---------- _neau
1.4 Objectives and Scope
1.4.1.  Objectives
The main objectives o» the study include the following
. To determine the types, distribution (lateral and vertical) and engineering
characteristics of rocks and soils in the study area
. To study and evaluate the water lightness of the dam 'ounaation and other
appurtenant structure sites
. To study and evaluate foundation conditon of the dam and appurtenant structures.
. To identify and evaluate construction materials (location, volume and quality) for the
dam and appurtenant structures
•    To study seismic hazard assessment of-the dam site.
•    To identify potential geological and geotechnical problems for the dam ana
recommend appropriate engineering solulons
1.4.2.  Scope of Works
The subsurface geological and geotechnical investigation has coverage in accordance to the contract agreement The main components of the investigation executed encompass
•    Rotary core drilling of boreholes at dam, spillway and shell material sites.
•    In situ testing in borehole (Standard Penetration. Falling Head Permeability and
Packer Permeability tests)
•    Piezometer installation in selected borehole and Groundwater level recording,
•    Standard borehole core Logging and Photographing of cere samples
•    Excavation and logging of test pit/trenches at dam sites and construction material
areas
•    Preparation of geological cross-sections
•    Collection of representative soil and rock samples
•    laboratory testing of collected samples
•    Analysis and interpretation of Held and laboratory data
•    Preparation of geological and Geotechnical investigation report
1.5. Approach and Methodology
Tne geological mapping of the project area and geotechnical investigation of structure foundation sites as well as construction material assessment of the project were planned to be conducted m three stages, namely,
•    Previous data collection, review and satellite image interpretations,
•    Field data collection and in situ testing.
•    Analysis and report preparation
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
3
August 2015Ministry of Water and Energy 
Volume Ill-Part I
.       . Geolocical & Geolechnica. I nvesUg allonge port
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec 1----------------- —--------------
•   mans   And   reports,   integrated   master   plan   study   reports,
me relevant previous geo og SPOT satellite .mage wrth 5mspa
kJtion digita| elevation model (DEM), topographic
J 
(fom
sourceS whlch ,nclude
plan study reports etc have bee I and
=
reviewed for preliminary off.ee preparation of base map (geologcal and structural map) to
further held investigation SPOT satellite .mage interpretation was performed for geolog.ca,
and structural investigation of the project area Based on the interpretation of the image
some geologic contacts and structures have been digitized which helped for further held
checking and mapping
The field investigation work  included geological mapping of the project area, core drilling, test pit excavation, in situ testing in boreholes, and collection of representative rock and soil samples for further laboratory analysis
Geological mapping of the dam site and the surrounding areas  were undertaken Accordingly, observations  of rock  exposures  and geo.ogic  structures  (major structural elements  including faults/fractures. joints, primary  volcanic  structures, etc.) and measurements of their attitudes were conducted and geological map of the project area has been prepared The lithological and geological structure data collected were analyzed and interpreted to finalize the geological map prepared during the field study
Care drilling, test pit excavation and geophysical surveys were conducted to investigate the subsjrface geological formation and geotechnical properties of the rock and soil formation
I  he  core  dnllmg  operation  was  performed  using  truck  mounted  Craehus  drilling  rig  In addition to the drilling accessories, the drilling crew was equipped with standardized in situ testing  and  sampling  materials  Donut  hammer  for  Standard  Penetration  testing  (SPT), Shelby  lubes  for  undisturbed soil  sampling,  packer  test  accessories  including  HQ and NQ size  pneumatic  packers,  water  flow  meters  and  pressure  gauges  and  deep  meter  for groundwater  monitoring  Chief  drillers  were  in  charge  of  the  drilling  operation  Tnc  overall geotechnical  field  work  has  been  under  taken  by  experienced  engineering  geologist  in accordance to the technical and contract agreement requirements.
The data for the geophysical investigation as part of the geotechnical site investigation are acquired using geophysical Lund Imaging Instrument, ABLM SAS 4000 Terameter and Resistivity Instrument, inter-connecting Lund imaging cables, ES464 electrode selector, personal computers and accessories The data acquired are properly transferred into the
sXam RFS2DXCfled
^a’ a"d ,nterpreted usin9 res.sUvity-2D inversion
Geological cross sections along the proposed dam axrs and sp.ilway are constructed based
construction msterial ootential sites a’sQRccmnni m
' J ? , rt
,he Surface 9eolQ9|cal map boreholes, test pits and geophysical
v iga on surveys (ground imaging and vertical electrical sounding VES) to help
SUb"SUrfaCe 9eOl°9iCai C°ndiUonS cf lhe axrs. Finally. a UtogTal
mappin9 s,ructure foundation sites geotechnical investigation and
laboratory test results 
Waler Works Des.-gn ana Supervision Enterprise
'
’ repor’ was PreP«"* incorporating field and
4
August. 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dados Irrigation Study & Design Projec t
2. Review of Previous Works
Volume 111-Part I Head work Geological A Geotcchn cal nvesbgat ori Report
A study on the potential of Dabus River for deve’opment of irrigated agriculture in an area which largely matches the area of DRISDP was done by Halcrow. 1981 (UNDP/FAO) and limited geotechnical investigations were done in relation to construction material sources and general suitability  of (he site. And the study  concluded that the general area has  suitable foundation and all necessary  construction materials  (coarse aggregate, stone and rip rap) could be obtained from several sources of the surrounding hills within 5km distance from the site. Sand can bo produced from many  of the dry  riverbeds  in the area and the widely occurring lateritic soil providing construction clay for roads and other purposes
Since Dabus is among the most important tributaries of Abay, geological studies in relation to river valley  development in the general area of DRISDP were done under Abay  River Master Plan Project (BCEOM. 1998) As an outcome of the study a 1 500,000 scale geologic map was compiled for the whole area including the present site and shows that the area is made up of principally Precambrian Basement rocks capped by Tertiary basalts and mantled by  thick  lateritic  soil. The study  has  confirmed that the river bed in the general area of DRISDP has  metamorphosed igneous  rock  formations  (tonalite, granodiorite) with a NNE- SSE jointing pattern and few more or less tight fractures in a sub-vertical contact with the post syn - tectonic  granites with circular fracture pattern Even though both formations are geo technically similar structural factors nave created many of the bends of the f ver channel in the area and the study has recommended a more detail site investigation for specific sites
Reconnaissance leve study  of two medium scale hydroelectric  power sites  upstream from the DRISDP area (Dabus I and II / Upper Dabus and Lower Dabus) was also done more recently  (WWDSF. 2002). According to this  study  Dabus  I has  a bedrock  foundation on Tertiary  volcanic  rocks  and Dabus  II has  a foundation of Precambrian meta-granodiortes. Tne study showed that both sites provide economically viable sites for hydroelectric power development As  to the availability  of construction material, slope stability, geological structures and foundation stability is concerned It was also mentioned that the general area being located far to the west of Tertiary tectonic boundanes is among the least seismically hazardous zone in the country.
Waterworks Design and Supcrvsion Enterprise
5
August. 2015Ministry o! Water and tnergv
Dabus Irrigation Study A Design Projec t
3.    Geomorphology
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geolog.cal & Geotechnical Inves'tgabon Report
The study  area is  part of the western Ethiopian low land plain with an altitude between 1000-1500m a s.l with low using hills which reflect tectonic and lithologic contrasts of the Pre-Cambrian metamorphic  basement. Besides  the generally  undu’aling gentle hills topography  typical of Precambrian basemen! rocks  of western Ethiopia a major linear topographical break which is an expression of a NW-SE trending fault can be observed in the study area and appears to be the northern most expression of the Didesa Shear Zone mapped to the south on Ghimbi sheet (Alemu and Aoebe 2000) It shoula be mentioned that such shear zones with expressed topographe break as a fault in the study area are known to host precious  metal mineralization such as  goid This  fault with a throw of about 50 m make a boundary between a hilly area with an elevation over 1100 m as I. to the SW and a flat area with an elevation below 1050 m a s I to the NF which is proposed to be irrigated All the proposed war sites for the irrigation project are on the up thrown side of this fault thus providing toe necessary head for flow to the area to be irrigated.
Dabus River dissects the region in a north easterly direction to its confluence with the Blue Nile River. The course of Dabus River is determined by tectonic and lithologic contrast in the study area with the major clockwise bend of Dabus created by a combination of NNW SSE trending structures  and the more resistant syn tectonic  granitic  pluton to secondary processes which rise to an elevation of over 1500 m a.s.l in the center of the study area Some of the major tributaries to Dabus in the study area include Selga. Tumet, Ondil. Mana and Shaga rivers draining in to Dabus from the northwest Sumba and other smaller streams drain Into Dabus from the southeast within the study area
Water Waiks Design ana Supervision Enterprise
6
August. 2Q15Ministry of WalP and Energy
r
Dabus l.'nga' on Study_& Design Pro;ec t
4.     GEOLOGICAL SETTING 4.1.   Regional Geology
Volume III Pari I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Repor!_.
Regional geologic mapping at a scale of 1 250.000 (Tefera, 1991, Alemu and Abebe, 2000)
has  elabo ated
r
the  geology  and  structural  evolution  of  the  Precambrian  rocks  in  the  area
Geological mapping of a wider area in the Blue Nile Basin including the study  area was conducted with additional interpretations  of satellite imagery  during Abbay  River Basin Integrated Master Plan Project Study  Geologic  studies  in the P'ecambnan exposures  in western Ethiopia has  revealed that there exist two major zones  of high grade migmatitic gneissic  terrains  enclosing a central low grade volcano sedimentary  belt with attendant plutonism (granite, tonalite, diorite, granodiorite) of oatholithic  dimensions  The genera! structural fabric is N S structurally consistent to an east-west collusion and terrain accretion
Kazmin et al. 1979 have also identified five major tectonic zones m the Precambrian rocks of western Ethiopia which include an ophiolite bell, a zone of diorilic-granndioritic batholiths and associated intermediate volcanics  and a metavolcano-sedimentary  belt which are bounded by zones of high grade Pre-Pan African basement rocks to the east and west and are interpreted as continental margins enclosing a fossil island arc marginal basin system, Figure 4 1 presents the major Precambrian litho-stratigraphic units in the area surrounding the study area
Phanerozoic cover rocks on the Precambrian basement include Tertiary basalts exposed to the west on Asosa highlands and to the south where Dabus River drains land above 1500 m a s I. and surroundings of Dabus swamps. Recent superflcia' deposits alluvial and colluvial sod ments are found along past the present and past Dabus river channel
Waler Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
August, 2015VoLme Ill-Part I
1 & Geotechncal investigation Report
Figure 4. 1 Regional geology of the project area (Al - Quaternary alluvial and colluvial deposits. Tb - Tertiary basalts. gt2 - post-tectonic granites, gdt/dt/tn - granodiorites, diorites and tonalite, gtl - pre - syn tectonic granites, um - ultramafic associations MVS1&2 - Meta-volcano sedimentary units) from (Tefera, 1991; Aiemu and Abebo, 2000) with some modifications.
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
8
August, 2015Volume Ill-Part I Ministry         of         Water         and         Energy         Geological         4         Geotechnical         Irwestrqallor.         Report.
Dabus Irrigation Study_4 Design Pro|ecJ_ ------------------ — 
4.2. Local Geology
h----------------------------------------------
The local grotogy of the area is wholly rest on the meta-gramte unit Dabus River has a wide spread flow channel (>70 m width) along this axts with an island supportng some vegetation tn the middle right s.de of the river. The river water is more turbulent along this axis wtlh variable depth and speed along the various narrow channels making the river Both the left and right s.de of the proposed axis are marked oy granitic hills Jebel Uen (Plate) to the right and Albedo hills to the left supporting some vegetation cover.
4.2.1. Dam Axis
Left Abutment
The left abutment along the dam/ weir axis is the flank of Albedo hill which is composed of bare, jointed fresh to slightly weathered Meta-granite as revealed by borehole WBH 1 One borehole denoted by WBH-2 was drilled to a depth of 27 5 m about 40 m away from the river bank The lithobgic units encountered are about 4 m thick residual soil (a meter thick of dark browr. lateritic  sandy  soil underlain by  light grey  sandy  decomposed granite), underlain by highly  to completely  weathered granite material and fresh granitic  gneiss. The highly  to completely weathered granite material was cncointered upto a depth of 15m
Riverbed/Channel area
The river bed and chanrel is uniformly composed of the variably foliated, jointed and faulted meta granite carved by the energy of the water 2.5 m thick alluvial sand and silt composed the river banks and mid-channel Island and at places is covered by overside vegetation.
Right Abutment
Observations made on the right side of the river show that there are more exposures of bare granite outcrops near the river channel than on the left side. Two lest pits were sunk at the right side and its estimated to have a >10m residual and decomposed rock material overlying the meta-gramte bedrock appear to he minor as compared to the left side due to structural and/or geomorphological factors 
4.2.2. Spillway
thick orimt
Si H ‘Vlrn°St en”rely comPosed of meta-granlfe rock. The rock is fresh to i°n9 maSS'Ve At places pockets of pegmatite are encountered. A
coliiiv   al   d   T.   6    S    OUnd    near    the    s,art*n9   point   of   the   spillway   alignment.   Traces   of col.uv.al and residual materials are also encountered during site investigation.
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enlerpnse
9
August 2015*
L *d * **'
• * •   •   • i ■
•    •
— r»<w«
a Cbl-• pc-n
» P«CV»-»»r: -It n»«*
*»u
Figure 4. 2 Local Geological map or me project area
August. 2015
Water Works Design and SLpervsion Enterprise
10Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus irrigation Study & Design PrpiecJ
4.3. Regional Geologic Structures
Volume III Part I Head work Geological & Geo technical Investigation Report
As  part of the generally  North-South trending belt representing the Precambrian plate boundary  between east and west Gondwana named as  the Mozambique Belt along the present East Africa the tectono-magmatic  evolution of the Precambrian domain in western Ethiopia has  been summarized based on structural studies  by  Abraham (1989) and geochronologic studies by Teklewolde (1990) as follows
1   Intrusion of the supra-crustal rocks by plutonic rocks of intermediate composition ca.
830-810 Ma
2     The  first  episode  of  Pan-African  deformation  and  regional  low-grade  metamorphism ca. 780-760 Ma (D,) resulted in tight to isoclinal folds and penetrative foliation striking parallel  to  the  major  NNE-SSW  structural  fabric  of  the  Proterozoic  province  and  is presumably related to a collisional event
3.  A  transcurrent  deformation  phase  (D2)  which  reached  amphibolite  facies  in  discreet zones  with  simstral  shear  suggested  by  moderate  to  steeply  plunging  and  open  to tight S shaped fo!ds which dominate m the western part of the Proterozoic province
4    An episode of Rb/Sr homogenization under green schist facies condition ca. 650-630 Ma  This  event  may  be  associated  with  N-S  trending  folds  of  Dj  affinity  which resulted  in  folding  and  low-grade  metamorphism  of  the  younger  group  of  meta- volcanics and meta sediments.
5     Metamorphic  and  dextral  transcurrent  phase  ca  582  Ma  (D<)  which  formed  open- tight,  upright  and  moderate  to  steeply  plunging  Z-shaped  folds  and  mylonite  zones which were delineated as a 35-50 km wide and 200 km long high strain zone along the western boundary of the Proterozoic Province.
Stern (2006) has elaborated sequence of tectono-magmatic processes outlined above as in terms of an evolution of an East African Orogen in the Neo-Proterozoic. According to Stern et al., 2002 the Arabian Nubian Shied (ANS) represents the northern part of the East African Orogen (which by in large overlaps with the Mozambique Belt) and is formed by terrain
accretion at a converging plate boundary during the Neoproterozoic. The Precambrian
crystalline basement rocks of Ethiopia are therefore poly-deformed and poly 
metamorphosed rocks ranging from high grade rnigmatilic gneisses to low grade schists associated with less deformed and metamorphosed meta-volcano-sedimentary rocks and
mafic ultramafic suites with sporadic mafic and felsic plutons
Taking into consideraton the larger quantity of field data utilized, in summary the structural fabric  in the study  area and surroundings  can be categorized into one of the following structural sets which has been grouped in the course of regional mapping
Table 4. 1 . Summary of structural lineaments In DISPP area from previous studies
Abraham. 1989 (old Io young chronologic order)
D1 NNE SSW
Teferra.1991 (more to less abundant)
D2 NNW-SSE
03. N-S
04. E-W
Water  Works  Des.gr  ard Supervision Enterprise
_     1 135 *±10" (NVV-SF)
■ Alemu and Abebe. 2000 (old : to young chronologic order)
D1 NNE-SSW to NE-SW
2 10 °±10" (NNE-SSW)
■ 3 . 65*± 10* (E W)
D2. NNW SSE
D3 NW-SE toW-E(DSZ)
August. 2915Ministry of Water and Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design P-ojee t
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Gcolecftmcal Investigation Report
4.4.  Geologic Structures of the Headwork Sites
Satellite image interpretation of the general Dabus Irrigation Project area shows two major structural lineabon patterns which dominate the proposed headwork sites A NNW-SSE
trending lineament has determined the course of Dabus River at both old and new Site 2
Foliation of exposed schistose rocks also follows the same trend and is perpendicular to the nearly E-W axis line direction of both lhe proposed weir axes at both sites.
The proposed weir axis  at site 3 is  parallel to and located between two NW-SE trending lineaments (faults) on the meta-granite that are clearly visible on the SPOT images At site 3 the variable thickness  of developed soil horizon and the depth of weathering may  need structural explanations  Detailed feid observations  with additional field measurements  on the attitude of foliation, jointing and fracture patterns  at site 3 together with a construction ol stereographic plots is necessary to conclude the structural development at the site and help in the analyses of their implications to the engineering structure
Water Wcwks Design and Supervision Fnlerpnsc
12
August. 2015Volume Ill-Part I
l^wor^Genl^ica^o'^-’^^abon RefiOrt
5.   GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
5.1.   General
The geotechnical invest.gat.on was  carried out w>th strict procedures  and Integrat.on of results  obtained by  the var.ous  methodologies  followed Intensive field work  and laboratory analysis  were sequentially  .mplemented so as  to obtain the required geological and geotechnical data for use in engineering performance characterization of the proposed structure foundation sites and to determine engineering design parameters
The geotechnical investigation of the project is  aimed to assess  appropriate foundation design parameters for the weir and spill way sites and assessment of construction materlais squired for construction of structures  included in the project Furthermore, the aim was  to improve ground condition necessary  for optimization of the project and sound decision making al design level On the basis  of initial desk  study  and site inspection, a field investigalon program was  conducted comprising geophysical investigation, seismic  hazard assessment, core drilling, lest pitting, in situ and laboratory testing of soils and rock samples.
5.2.  Geophysical Investigation
Geophysical surveying (Imaging and Vertical Electrical Sounding) was conducted at the alternative proposed weir foundation sites (Site-2 and Site-3). The survey was carried out along the weir axis, upstream, downstream, on the island and parallel to both banks. I he aim is to get information on the thickness of over burden, weathered rock zone, depth to bed rock and geological structures (fractures, faults, shear zones etc.) at the foundation site
On the structure foundation sites mentioned above a total of 6 electrical imaging survey lines with a total length of 2200 m and 4 VFS points with AB/7 of 100 m were conducted. Out of these. 3 electrical imaging survey lines with a total length of 1190 m and 2 VES points were conducted at weir site-3. The coordinates and work volumes of weir sile-3 foliowing each electrical imaging line and VES point are given in Table 5.1 and 5 2, respectively.
Table 5. 1. Coordinates and work volumes of resistivity imaging survey lines
No.
Survey
Line
Coordinate (UlM)
Starting
Erding
Length of ’ survey line
Depth
of investigation
Lasting       Northing      Easting       Northing
4           GP4         706900       1114704      70749C       1114315             710                        50                   Weir Site 3
(m)
(m)
Remark
1
5           GP5        706992       1114502      707129        1114693             240                        50
6           GP6         707284         1114315 i   707465        11*4463
1
__
irww i 240            240         |             so50
■ 1190
Table 5. 2 Coordinates and work volumes of VES points
No. VES point
Coordir.aie^fU^M)’
(
East VES~To7o61
iV7E0S74375
North ’
1           1114592
1114404"’
; Length or A0/2 ’ (rp)
100 100
Remark Weir SCe 3
Waler Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
August, 7015
13Ministry of Waler and Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Study & Desgn Project _________ ____ Head work Geological & Geotechnical Im^gajhgnRcjjgrl
_         ,    • ,.
.u
»            o*
The survey  had used geophysical Lund Imaging Instrument. ABEM SAS 4000 lerameter and Res stivity  instrument, interconnecting Lund Imaging cables. ES464 electrode selector, PC and accessories  Electrodes  were driven into the ground along a straight line and connected with multi-channel cable to the main instrumentation. The data acquired, hence, are properly  tabulated into a computer and converted to dot dat. format and interpreted using resistivily-2D inversion software. RES2D1NV
The geophysical survey  has  provided relevant information regarding the thickness  of overburden, weathered rock zone, depth of bed rock and geologic structures in the project area.
Generally, the geophysical survey findings at site-3 are described as shown below
Fmm the resistivity survey conducted along the weir axis it is estimated that the bedrock at the weir axis may be granite and the depth of bedrock may be less than 7 m. It is considered that the bedrock has been relatively fractured mid way at both the left and right banks than other place Moreover, it is interpreted that the bedrock at the upstream has been relatively fractured than at the downstream on the left bank. At the weir site. NE-SW oriented joints are mainly develoned Furthermore, the thickness of soil and highly weathered rock over burden is significantly high which reaches to a depth of 7.60 m whereas at the right bank there is no significant over burden soil and highly weathered rock cover
Integration  of  data  obtained  from  the  core  drilling,  geophysical  surveys  and  test  pits  were applied while constructing geologic cross section along the weir Axis.
The details of the geophysical survey are discussed in separate report (ANNEX V)
5.3.   Core Drilling
5.3.1.  General
I he boreholes drilled at Dabus Irrigation Project are located along the weir axis (two on the left bank of the weir axis one at the spillway site and one at shell material site) Core drilling activity in each borehole was successfully completed with desired orientations and target
Two borehole., nane.y A/EJH-1 and WBH-2 were drilled at the proposed dam/weit axis Furthermore, one borehole DSTBH-1 at spdtway and another borehole DSBH-1 at shell Tableb 3'620 success^ul,y- Summary of the boreholes activity are shown in the
Water Works Design and Supeivtsior Fnterpnse
14
August. 2015Ministry of Water and Energy 
Dabus Imgabon Study & Design Projec tHead work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
Volume Ill-Part I
Table 5. 3: Summary of Core Drilling
Bh.No.
WBIi-l
Location
Site      Failing   Northing  Eleva lion Dain axis 706908    1114698         1005
Orientation
and Inclination
Vertical
Drilled Dcpth(m)
19.4
[nsituTest
Falling
SPT                Picker head
—
3
Remark
WBH-2    Dam axis
707017
II14629
986
Vertical
27.55
3
4
3
DSTBH-!
DSBH-1
Spjjway
Shel
Materal
7071651 1114705 981
704067 1124141 1086
VcrUcal
2
Vertical
12.1
ZJ
1
Recovered core samples preserved properly in wooden core boxes designed to standards and m accordance to technical and contract agreements  The average drilling Total Core Recovery (TCR) in each borehole exceeded 90 percent of the drilled lenglh
In addition to preservation of recovered drill core samples in wooden core boxes, relevant geological and engineering geological information were recorded with appropriate detailed formats  for each borehole Such information recorded includes: descnptive engineering geological borehole core logging, and discontinuity logging. Photographs of core samples of each borehole were properly taken as it is preserved m each core box (Annex II).
Figure 5.1: Borehole Location Map
Water Wo As Design and
r
Supervision Enterprise
15
August ?0l5Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus irrigation Study & Design Projec 1
5.3.2. Descriptive rock Core Logging
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological A Geolechnical.Investigation Report.
The engineering geological borehole core logs are produced for full depth of every borehole drilled based on standard engineering geological practice and log formats  Hence, the borehole logs  consist of detail information about borehole, the subsurface material type, geological description, zones  where sampling and in situ testing were conducted, core run engineering geological Information (Total Core Recovery. Rock Quality Designalron)
The geological description on logging addressed the rock  type identification, color and textural description, the degree of weathering, rock  strength class, intensity  of rock fracturing, and the type and extent of secondary  infilling minerals. The weathering grade classification was  made in accordance to ISRM (International Society  of Rock  Mechanics. 1981) strength classification, by  uniaxial compressive strength, was  adopted for strength rating of the drill core samples. The following procedures were followed during the
descriptive core logging process
•    Clean the core of drilling fluids or mud
•    Mark major structures, testing locations, and depths
•    Photograph the core with a scale placed n the picture
•    Complete the Discontinuity and com description logs
•    Once a core box is full, take a single photograph of the core box with a scale. The ROD data were collected following the standard practice:
5.3.3.  Discontinuity Description
The disconbnu.ty location was recorded as the total downhole length from the collar to the intersection distance of the discontinuity plane along the core centerline. The orientation of discontinuities encountered in a drill hole was determined with reference to the core axis and identified as  normal, parallel or oblique Aperture of the discontinuities  was  measured perpendicular to the plane defining the discontinuity ano most of the time it was measured in
e SP • as likely increase when the core is disturbed bv beina olaneri into thr> rnro
Waterworks Design ard
Supervision Enlecpnse
August. 201SMinistry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Prpfec t
5.4 In situ Tests
5.4.1. Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Oologica * Geotechnical Investigation Report
Regular standard penetration tests (SPT) were generally undertaken starting from depth of
1 5 meters The regular testing interval for a particular soil zone was kept 1.5-3 0 meters 
The testing was done on sand and cohesive soil layers encountered in boreholes. Sampler
tune with inner liner was in use during the operation, and disturbed samples recovered from
the testing sampler tube were examined description
The  field  measured  penetration  resistance/  number  of  blow  counts  (N)  was  considered  for the number of biov/s required for the last 30 cm penetration SPI rod/tube in to the stratum Penetration  was  considered  refusal  where  no  penetration  were  observed  for  10  successive blows or where more than 50 blows were required for the 30 crp penetration length or sum of blow  counts  of  45cm  penetration  required  more  than  100  blows.  Number  of  blows  was recorded for every 15 cm penetration In this regard, a total four standard penetration tests were executed tv the current investigation.
the measured penetration resistance (N) could not be directly used for further geotechnical evaluations as the theoretical input energy is believed to be affected by several factors. The hammer efficiency, diameter of borehole, drill rod length, the type of sampler involved, and the over burden pressure are known factors to be considered in the approx mation of the amount of energy which is transferred to the actual penetration driving energy
Table 5. 4: Recommended corrections for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow-count values (Robertson and Wride (1997), as modified from Skempton, 1986)
Factoi
Overburden
pressure
1-nergy tatio
Bquipinenr Variable
Perm G Of i action
(Pn/Ov<.)‘’K5
and Csi *'3
Donut hammet
__ Snb. r ,■ hummer Attioinaiic haniir^r
0.5—1 O
0.7—1 .2
O 8-1 .5
65— 1 1 5 mm
Borehole
diameter
ISO mm
2OO min
Ci
c-
1
3—4 m
—
-
4—6 m
1 OS
1 15
Q.75
Rod length
Sampling method
__ 6    10 m
_____  1 Q~*3O m
*30 in
, Slartdard sampler Sjimplei without liners
OSS
0.95
1
.
U
.
.. aS USe auto™at'c trip hammer release mechanism having 60% hammer
r'..
c»
< 1 .0
____  1
___ 1 I- 1.3
e  iciency  a   ccordingly,  the  measured  penetration  resistance  values  (N),  collected  in  the f e d. are corrected for aforementioned factors coefficients as developed by Skempton (1986) and   modified   by   Robertson   and   Wride   (1997).   chart   reproduced   in   Table   5.4   The over  u  en  stress  corrected  blow  count,  (N1)60  provides  a  consistent  reference  value  for ceneiation resistance Robertson and Wride (1997) defined (N,)Mas
=N ‘C -C *C -C *C
weeBs
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
17
Avgust. 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study A Design IVojec 1--------------- Where:
Volume IN Part I Head work Geological A Geotechnical Investigation Re pod
(NJw
N
ove
”7 I penct'aM                    nee corrected for rod energy and overburden pressure
= Field measured SPT blow-count value ----------------------- --------------- _ —----- ------- ----------------
- (p /ov - !hp corrector for effective overburden stress and 2_________________________ _     __ = /^reference pressure of 100 KPa------------- ----------------------- ----------------
= Vertical effective stress 
_________________________________________ __ —
ER/60% is ’.he correction to account for rod energy, ER Is the actual energy ratio o
s I the drill rig used In. percent, -----
fa ] Correction for borehole diameter, _________________
i = | Correction for length of the drillrod
Accordingly,   the   measured   Penetration   resistance   values   of   current   investigationf = IaCreorrection7or the sampling method_ corrected for corresponding Neo and Ni *o> values as tabulated below (Table 5.5)
(
Tabic 5. 5: Summary of SPT Results
SPT VnlueMN)
II11-ID
Lo calio n
Tc 5 f Xo .
De pth(m )
0.0 - 1 5 cm
1S JO cm
JO - 45 em
♦v
Soil type
Lc fl Ba nk
1
2.0 - 2 45
13
16
17
33
Alluvial  m  alcrial with s0ty cU y
Lx ft Ba nk
2
4.0 - 4.45
6
7
10
17
W Illi 2
Alluvial  m  atrrml with S ill ■ : la
Left Ba nk
3
7 50 - 7.95
10
32
16
lb
Coo- pletcly weathered and dccom pui cd
^rarut e
DST-BH-l
Spilwa y
1
2 0 - 2.45
3
5
7
12
Slity clay wit"- Itraccs of AlUvial Imaterial
5.4.2.   Falling Head Permeability
The  test  procedure  was  undertaken  in  accordance  to  the  British  Code  of  practice  for  site investigation BS5930 (1999) and U.S Bureau of Reclamation Procedures.
he  borehole  was  kept  fully  cased  above  a  test  section length  L The installed casing was f.ushed  with  clean  water  to  remove  the  remaining  drill  cuttings  or  mud.  Falling  head permeability testing was then performed by filling the borehole with clean water to the top or near surface of the casing and measuring the fall of the water level from the top of the casing to the dynamic water level in borehole The water head drawdown in borehole was recorded lor periodic time intervals
The test was kept continuous until the falling waler level shows equilibrium condition or sufficient numbers of readings were collected
The collected information was therefore analyzed using proper format and standards (Annex 9 eneral borebo,e variable head permeability computation formula, provided in
BS5930 (1999), was adopted for determination of the tested section permeability value
18
August 2015
Waterworks Design and
Supervision EnterpriseMinistry of Waler and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Project,
Volume III-Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
k H1 H2 A
= The permeability of soil;
= The variable head measured above groundwater taole at time commencement of test,
ti
=   The   variable   head   measured   above   ground   water   table   at   lime   t2 commencement of test;
= The cross-sectional area of borehole
after
after
F = Intake factor.
5.4.3. Packer Permeability Test
2itL
loRr[(£) + Jl1 + (|’'ll
A  total  of  8  Packer  permeability  tests  were  carried  out  in  geotechnical  boreholes  where appropriate Single packer  permeability  tests  were  conducted for  rock  mass sections of the drilled boreholes
The lengtn of test section was five meters commonly. I IQ and NQ size pneumatic packers were in use in a wire-line drilling system and corresponding borehole diameters
The collected information was therefore analyzed using proper format and standards (Annex IV). The resulting Lugeon values of tested sections for each run pressure were computed as:
Q
Lugeon unit (Lu) —- X 10 bars
Where.
Q = average water intake in Lit/minute P “ Total Testing Pressure tn bars
L = Length of tested section in meters
The selection of the test section representative Lugeon value is made tn accordance to flow pattern. Accordingly, the reported representative Lugeon value is taken to be the average of the five run values for laminar flow pattern, the average of Lugeon value corresponding to 2 r,a and 41** testing pressures for Dilation flow pattern. Lugeon value corresponding to peak pressure for Turbulent flow pattern, and Lugeon value corresponding to last testing pressure for void filling and washout flow patterns  The corresponding test section permeability  (k) value was  obtained from the relation that 1Lu units  is  approximately  equals  to 1.31x1 O’5 cm/sec.
5.5.    Piezometer Installation and Groundwater Level Monitoring
Observation  piezometers  is  constructed  in  one  selected  borehole  located  along  the  weir axis, in WBH-2
The standpipe section of the piezometers constitute 2” diameter PVCs which were installed as  blind and being slotted in accordance to the nature of formation encountered in the borehole. Slotted PVC screen were installed near the lower portion of the borehole and where stratum is potential for water bearing
Record of groundwater level in same piezometers was going on twice a day (morning and afternoon) for the first two weeks since installation, and once per week afterwards.
Waler Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
19
August. 2015Dabu?r^Zsiudj^^ignProjec1
5.6. Test pit/trench Excavation
Geological V_Geg1ec.hn.cal Investigation Report
Test pits  and trenches  were planned systematically  and excavated manually  at provided locations of foundation area as well as impervious clay core & embankment transition zone material source areas. A total of 26 test pits, with a maximum of 5 meters  depth, were excavated on dam impervious core zone material source areas/clay borrows
5.7.   Sampling and Laboratory Study
Representative rock core and disturbed bulk soil samples were collected from core drilling recovery, and excavated test pit/trench walls  respectively. The required laboratory  tests  of such sample were analyzed based on corresponding AS1M and BS standards
5.7.1. Tests on Rock samples
The  intact  rock  samples  were  studied  in  the  laboratory  for  determination  of  index  and engineering properties
Index  and engineering properties  of intact rock  samples  were stjdied at such tests performed to determine specific  gravity, water absorption, bulk  unit weight and strength (Uniaxial Compression and Point load) of rock specimen The details of collected rock core samples, the type of laboratory tests conducted, and corresponding laboratory test results tabulated summary are presented (Tables 5.5 and 5 4)
5.7.2.  Tests on Soil Samples
The soil samples of current investigation were collected from wails of test pits and trenches excavated at provided material source areas  for dam impervious  core zone and embankment
Twenty  nine soil samples  were obtained from pits  and trenches  excavated on darn impervious  core and embankment transition material source areas  project site. The laboratory study of collected samples included tests required for the soil classification and engineering properties characterization as to the construction purpose required. Such tests performed had embodied grain size analysis (sieve and hydrometer). Atterberg limits, bulk unit weight, specific gravity, natural moisture content. Linear and volumetric shrinkage, free swell, standard and modified compaction/proctor. shear strength (direct shear), consolidation (odometer), unconfined compression, dispersion (double hydrometer), permeability  and chemical tests (organic content, Cl and S0«) All tests were carried out in the Laboratory Service of Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Attempts for undisturbed shelby tube soil sampling at dam sites were not successful for non-cohesive or low plasticity nature of encountered soil and pyroclastic fall deposits Tabulated and graphical summary of tested samples information, laboratory test types and results obtained are presented herein.
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
?0
August, 2015... . .
.        ...
□X^SnSludy Tp^r. Projec t
Volume Ill-Part I -»“d wcxx_C.e0lq9.cal & Geotechmcal InvesUgaton Kegort.
Table 5 6: Summaries of rock core samples
Borehole
to
Sampling Depth
(m)
Sample No
1
Location                 Sample Description
WBH-1 2 75-3.17
7 10 - 7.51
• WBH-1-1
I
WBH-1-2
i ___
Foundation          HW Granite
SW Granite
15 25 -15 70            : WBH-1 -3
Fresh Granite
WBH 2             17 52 - 17 84              WQH-2-1 23 • 23 52                   WBH-2-2
Pegmatite
Fresh Granite
DST BH-1
6.14 - 6 50                  DST-BH-1-1                       Spill Way            SW Granite
11 27- 11 60               DST BH-1-2
SW Granite
DSBH-1
12-20.19
, DSBH-1-2
Shell Material        MW Meta volcanic
Table 5. 7 Summary of SPT samples
Borehole
ID
Sampling
1
Sample ID                Location
t                                                  Depth (m)
Sample Description
WBH 2
, DST UH 1
WBH 2-SPT 1                Foundation          1 60 • 2 40        CW and decomposed Granite
WBH-2-SPT-2
4.00 * 5 00        CW and decomposed Granite
WBH-2-SPT-3            I
7.00 8 31           CW and decomposed Granite
DST-BH 1 SPT-1       i Spillway
1.05-2 65          Silly Clay
Table 5. 8 Summary of Shell Material Samples
S.N [   Test Pit. ID              location
Purpose
1         DCBP-2-4
I
DCBP 2-7          Shell Materia.            shell zone material
i
3         DSBH 1 1
Table 5. 9 Summary of Fine Material Samples
Sampling Depth (m)
0 00 - t 50
0.30 3 00
2.00 - 12.00
S.X
ID
L o c a li o n
1
DSAXD-1
2
Shat’a R iv e i
DSAXD-2
3
S h a g a Rivei
VI -S A X I) -1
4
Mana Ri v c r
VI -SAXO -2
Mana Ri v c i
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
21
August. 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrgabon Study & Des-gn Pf°jccl
Volume IIl-Pait I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
Table 5. 10:Summary of Clay borrow and Foundation Samples
S.N               Test Pit ID
location
Purpose
Sampling Depth (m)
1 !   DCBP-1-6
2 i    DCBP-1-7
3       DCBP-1-8
4       □C8P-1-12                       Clay borrow 1
5       DCBP-1-13
6           DCBP-1-15
|
i
0.20 • 2 30
1 00 - 3.00
0.10 -1.50
0.10-3.00
•
*
0 20 -2.30
1 20 - 3.00
21
7 | DCBP-1-16
8       DCBP-2-1
4
9       DCBP-2-2
10      DCBP-2-3
11      DCBP-2-5
12      OCBP-2-6
13      DCBP-2-8
clay core material
Clay Borrow 2
i
I
14      DCBP-3-1
15 DCBP-4-1 I
i
16 DCBP-4-3 (right)
17      DCBP-4-3
18    i DCBP-4-4
i ciay norrow
I
0 20 - 3 00
0.80-3.00
0 00 - 1.20
0.00-2.40
0.20-2 10
0 20 - 3.00
0.20 - 3.00
0.20-2.10
0.80-3.00
0 00 - 1.20
0.00-2.40
0.00-2.41
19    j DRDC-1
20      DTP-2
21      OTP-3
Diversion
0 20-2.50
| D/s of axis
foundation area
2.75 - 5.00
1.00-5 00
22    I DISL-1
Island (Weir axis)            Island
0.20-2.50
Waler Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
.2
Al gust, 2015Ministry of Water ard Energy
Dnbus Irrigation Sturfy & Design Protect.
Volume ’.Il-Part I Head work Geotogcal ft GecfccMrical tnve$tigat»on Report
6.    GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
6.1.   Geotechnical Consideration of Dabus Dam Foundation
The meta granite rock  which is  found at the Dam/ weir foundation area of Dabus  s>tc contains  discontinuities, which include fractures  and joints. These disconinuibes  are responsible for the strength, weathering degree, deformation and permeability  characteristic of the rock mass. Some of these fractures are filled with pegmatitic veins, which when fresh and massive are even stronger than the host meta granitic  rocks  Nevertheless, at places the rock mass is disintegrated and loose material is being created
Fresh to slightly weathered rocks (granitic gneiss and pegmatite), completely weathered and decomposed granitic material as well as alluvial deposits are encountered at the tounda.on sites The performance of the rock mass as a foundation material or to form a stable slope entirely depends upon the properties of those materials
6.2.   Rock Mass Characterization
The ln-situ rock mass at Dabus dam site contains intact blocks of rock separated by discontinuities such as joints and fractures. These rock blocks vary from fresh and unaltered
rock to highly decomposed and disintegrated rocks
6.2.1. Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) of Rocks
The unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and point load of the rocks samples collected at different sections of the boreholes is given in Table 6 2 for the pegmatite and granitic gneiss rocks. In addition Rock Lab software used to work out the strength of the rock mass under the dam foundation is explained as follow
Table 6.1: UCS classification after Shelby 1982
Rock Type
Very weak rock
I
I
Point Load (MPa)
1 Weak rock
25-50
I          1.00-1 50
Moderately strong rock
50-100
UCS (MPa)
1-25
100-200
>200
1.50-4.00
Strong rock
Very strong rock
I 0.04-1.00
I 4 00-10 00
>1000
According to the classification of Shelby (1982). the granitic gneiss falls in the moderately strong to strong range in the UCS classification system while extends up to very strong rock in the point load classification The pegmatite rock also ranges from weak rock to strong in the UCS classification and strong rock in the point load classification.
The engineering geological layers at the dam foundation as shown in the geological section are summarized m to five and are presented in slratigraphical order as follows.
Waterworks Design ard
Supervision Enterprise
23
August, 2015Vdume ill-Part I
Engineering  geological  layer  1:  brownish  medium  plastic,  very  stiff  silty  day  &  clayey  sdt soil layer is found at the right bank and spilNway
Engineering geological layer 2: alluvial material mainly  composed of gravely  sand with traces of silty clay soil is found at both the right and left banks of Dabus R:ver The soil layer is pervious and has very low strength
Table 6 2: Summary of Core samples with their corresponding UCS------------------
~          .i_                  |_        |
Borehole
IO
■ -----------
Sampling
Sample No             Local ion          Sample Desorption         Load(Mpa)
‘
PKooimnti
UCS (M°a)
Depth (m)
i 2 75 - 3.17            WBH-1-1
WBH-1             7 10 -7 51        WBH-1-2
HW Granite
SW Granite
15 25 - 15 70      W9H.1-3             Weir Axis               Fresh Grarite
•
*•
-
7 CO
43 45
66 86
17 52 • 1 7 84 WBH-2-1
23 CO 23 52 WBH-2-2
’ Pegmatite                                 *
23 CC
WBP-2
Fresh Granite
•                    49 O?
DST9H-1
I 6.14-6.50
1 11 27-11 60
DST-BH-1-1
DST-BH-1-2
Spill Way
i SW Granite
-           j 47.45
1 SW Granite                             -
54 33
DSBH-1     1 12 CO-20 19       DSBH-1-2            Shell Material    1 MW Meta volcaruc              22 56                    •
Engineering geological layer 3: thick  (>10m) completely  weathered and decomposed granitic  material found on both banks  of the river SPT result shows  that the material is dense and falling head permeability tests conducted at this layer showed that the material is impervious.
Engineering geological layer 4: pockets  of pegmatite are found on both boreholes  drilled at the dam axis characterized by moderately to slightly weathered and thickness ranges from <1m-5m Laboratory tests conducted on samples of fractured pegmatite taken from the layer shows that the material is weak in strength (about 23 MPa).
Engineering geological layer 5: Fresh to slightly  weathered granitic  material covers  most of the foundation and other appurtenant structures  Laboratory  result showed that the material is quite strong and form stable foundation.
6.2.2. Rock Quality Designation (RQD) of the Rocks at the Dam Foundation
The RQD values cf the rock masses were evaluated based on the classification method suggested by Deere (1964). as shown in Table 6.3
Table 6. 3: Classification of Rock Quality Based on RQD (Deere. 1964)
•
No
-
_ RQD~
90 ~ 100* Excellent '
Rock Quality 
j
]‘
: 2j75 - 90
'_____ 2_____ 1____________SO- 75
■ < Good Fi
ar
j
------ A_i_____________________ 25 - 50 Poor------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,
:----------- ? —l__________________ j?' ^5_________________ Very Poor___________________ _
;
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
August. 2015(
Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec I
Table 6. 4: Summary of laboratory results of rock core samples
Volume Ill-Pan I Head work Geolog cal & Geotecnnica! investigation Report
Parameter
WBH-1-T
2 75- 3.17m Lab.No.727/07
7.0 2 59 1.18 233
I W0H-1-2
7 10-7 51m Lab No.728/07
WBH-1-3
15 25-15 70m Lab No 729/07
66 86
-
W0H-2-1
17 52-17 84m Lab No 730/07
WBH-2-2 23 0-23 52m
DSTBH-1-1
6 14-6 50m
Lab No 731/07 Lab.No 732/07
IUCS, Point Load Specific
Water
L/nit weight
23 0
49 02                 47 45
DST-0H-1-2 11.27-11.60m Lab No 733/07
54.33
.
43.45
289
0.47
•
•
-
-
2.60
027
2 53
059
260 2 62
020 021
2 69
0 32
!
...» (
2 74
2.55
2.42
2 53
2.51
Porosity             10 04
5.19
2.0
4.0
2 69
4.20
2 52
6 32
DSBH-1-2
12 0-20 19m
LaO No 734/07
22.56
0 72
•
Water Works Design ana Supervision Enterprise
August, 2015Mnsfry of Water and Energy 
v <*jn,e ui-Kar i
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec t_____________ Head wcrk Gedogcal & Geofecrincal Investigation Report
6.2.2.1.  RQD characterization of the rocks at the Left Abutment
Two boreholes WBH-1 and WBH- 2 were drilled at the left abutment. In all the boreholes, drilling was  carried out after removing the coiluvial/debris  materials, when encountered Results of the borehole data indicate the following
•     In borehole WBH-1, the top layer is highly weathered and fractured meta granite with RQD  value  ranging  from  27%  -  49%  Underneath,  the  RQD  value  of  the  slightly weathered  granitic  material  ranges  from  60%  -  100%  However,  in  a  narrow  zone between  depths  9  85m  and  11  33m  the  RQD  was  found  to  be  below  25%  due  to increased degree of weathering and fracturing On the other hand, with increasing deplh the rock becomes fresh and the RQD value increases up to more than 90% indicating good to excellent quality rock.
•      Borehole  WBH-2  was  drilled  Io  verify  the  deplh  of  the  completely  weathered  and decomposed  granitic  material  Indicated  by  the  resistivity  imaging  survey  Fractured pegmatite rock found underneath the decomposed granitic material has RQD value of 30%  -  53%  However, pegmatite found  within the granite  rock  further  down  has  RQD value of 67% - 100% which falls in the range of fair to excellent quality rock
6.2.3. Consistency of Foundation Soils
In order to determine the Atterberg Limits and related tests of fine-grained soils disturbed samples  were collected for laboratory  tests  The results  of Atterberg Limits  of the soil samples from the dam site area are presented in plasticity chart (Fig 6.1).
Figure 6.1: Plasticity chart of Foundation Soils
ML - Inorganic silts of low plasticity
CL - Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity OL - Organic silt of low plasticity --------------- —T
MH - Inorganic sitt of High pfas: aty CH - Inorganic day of High pTasi<ity OH - Organic days of High plasticity
Water Works Design and Supervis on Enterprise
August 2015*Ministry of Water and Energy 
Volume ill-Part I
Dntxs Irrigation Study & Design Project_____________ Head workGeo^ogcalA Gectoch-ric^ tr-/<^gjC<y Report_
According to USCS. all the soils present at the dam foundation area and island are classified as Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity* (CL)
The SPT value of the foundation matenal is dense and hard in terms of retobve density and consistency of the soil
Table 6. 5: Correlation of consistency of cohesive soil In relation to N value
1 Term
Un drained Shear Strerqth (kN/m )
N (SPT)
Very soft
<20
<2
Soft
20-40
2-4
J Firm
40-75
4-a
Stiff
75-150
5-15
Very Stiff
150-300
1^30
Hard
>300
>30
Table 6. 6: Correlation of relative density of granular Soils
j Terms
N-(SPT)
I Very loose
0-4
Loose
4-10
Compacted
10-30
Denso
30-50
Very dense
>50
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
27
August. 2Q15Ministry of Water anc Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec t
Table 6. 7: Summary of Laboratory results from the Dam Foundation
Votumc Ill-Pan I Heaa work Geolog cal & Geotecnnicai Invcsi.gation Repod
Parameters
DTP-2
2.75-
5.0/n
Lab
No:713/07
DTP-3
WBH-2SPT-1      WBH-2-SPT-2
Grain size Analysis
Clay (%)
DISL-1
0.20 - 2.50m Lab No:715/07
1369
25 41
WBH-2-SPT-3 7.0 -8 31m Lab No:725/07
DO
Silt (%)
Sand(%)
60.90
1 68 -2.40m
Lab No:723/07
22 38
24.87
52 75
4 0 - 5 0m
Lat No:724/07
19 32
27.25
2472
DST-BH-1-SPT-1 1 85- 2 65rr
Lab No:726/07
19.7
25
55.3
Gravel (%)
10-5.0m
Lab
Ncr714/07
11.01
20.71
59.66
6.62
•
-
28.71
11.31
35 72
2 97
-
Attcrberg Limits
Liquid Limit (%j
35 30
354
32 83
Piastic Limit (%)
28 10
16.40 j . '55 4 9
43 85
16 34
32 95
Non-PL
20.59
18 25
42 40
2227
Non-PL
39.77
17.31
Plasticity Index (%)
27.51
-
14.71
17 15
20.13
•
22 46
Free Swell %
•
-
75 0
850
72 5
Specific gravity
NMC %
Dispersion by Double Hydrometor Unit wolght(gm/cc)
2.66
284
2 59
-
ND
*
-
D
•
*
1 60
O
•
2 67
221
D
-
2 63
0 93
ND
-
70.0
2 68
1 72
NO
-
Oirocl shear
CfkPa)
37.66
2.54
-
NO
-
30 33
•
•
•
-
0( )
B
25 64
29 03
-
•
-
•
•
•
Wa'er Wo?<s Des'gn a rd Supervision Enterprise
Adjust 2015Ministry of Waler and Energy
Dabus Inflation Study A_Desifin_ProjCC
6.3,        Bearing    Capacity 
6.3 1. Geotechnical Characteristics
Volume III-Part I Head worX Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
The boreholes drilled at the dam site greatly enhanced better understanding of subsurface configuration of geotechnical layers General observations of the site: visual observations of the drill core recovered from 3 boreholes and in situ, test pits and trench excavated on the left bank  and on the island and laboratory  tests  conducted on representative samples enabled the determination of the geotechnical layers at the dam/ weir site.
Five engineering geological layers are identified across the full length of the profile, having different geometrical shapes, thickness  and spatial distribution, which differ significantly  in their geotechnical characteristics. Their thickness and shapes are highly variable, from very thin to thick and frequent change of lateral contact to the overlying and underlying layers.
The dominant lithologic  units  around the foundation area are rocks  (Granitic  gneiss  and pegmatite), alluvial and residual deposits  and completely  weathered and decomposed granitic  material which have different bearing capacity  and permeability  characteristics. Bearing capacity of the rock layers is calculated based on Rocl ab software as discussed below
6.3.2.  Bearing capacity analysis
The choice of a particular type of foundation depends on the magnitude of the loads, the nature of the subsurface strata, the type of the superstructure and its specific requirements.
the allowable bearing pressure is (he maximum net intensity of loading that can be imposed on the soil with no possibility of shear failure or the possibility of excessive settlement It is hence the smaller of the net safe bearing capacity  (shear failure criterion) and the safe bearing pressure (settlement criterion) that has to be considered
The safe load bearing capacity of the foundation rock can be calculated based on UCS and ROD values and using a factor of safety of 3 as:
Safe Load Beating Capacity = UCS‘(RQD)?
F actor of Safety
Accordingly, the calculated safe load bearing capacity of the foundation rocks with varying values of UCS and ROD ranges from 10 Mpa to 13 Mpa on average.
On   the  other   hand  Hoek-Brown   Criteria   (2002)   and   Rocl.ab   software   deveioped  by Rucscience can be used to evaluate the safe load bearing capacity of the foundation rock
Wale i Wc?Xs Ou sign and Supervision Enterprise
29
August. ?Q15Ministry of Water and Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Project
Volume Ill-Part I _ Head work Geological & Geotechncal Investigation Report
Bearing Capacity of Rock mass based on the Hoek- Brown Failure Criterion
With the exception of some very soft rocks and heavily jointed media, the majority of rock masses  provide an excellent foundation material However, there is  a need to accurately estimate the ultimate bearing capacity of foundation formation When the rock mass forming the unit is considered, it is infenor to that of the intact rock material due to the jointing and weathering In order to consider the overall behavior of the rock  mass  rather than the detailed failure of the individual intact rock specimen, the main geotechnical parameters of the massive and weathered rocks have been evaluated in accordance with the Hoek-Brown Criterion. 2002. using minimum values  measured in situ and RocLab software developed for this purpose by Rocscience.
At borehole WBH-1
The criterion starts from the properties of intact rock and then introduces factors to reduce those properties  on the basis  of the characteristics  of the joints, and then estimate acceptable equivalent frictional angle and cohesive strength for a given rock  mass  The
cntenon correlates the parameters as:
UCS =
Uniaxial Compressive Strength
GSI
=
Geological Strength Index
m
=
Material constant
D
=
Disturbance factor
E
=
intact modules
c 
=
Cohesion
4*
=
Frictional angle
Figure 6. 2: Analysis of rock strength using RockLab for L.A (WBH 1 Bore hole)
Waler Works Design ana Superv sion trle'p’ se
30
Augusl 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec I
Voiume Ill-Part I Head work Geological S Geotechnical Investigation Report
The  rock  mass  constituting  the  foundation  area  can  be  described  based  on  UCS  strength and field outcrop observation as fairly strong, widely spaced jointed and slightly weathered
Sigci = 66 86 specimen requires more than one blow of a geological hammer to fracture it.
GSI  =  87.  intact  rock  specimen  or  massive  in  situ  rock  with  few  widely  spaced
discontinuities
mi       = 32. for Granite
D        =0
Ei  =  Mrx  UCS.  this  relationship  is  used  when  no  direct  values  of  the  intact  modules  are available or where completely undisturbed sampling for measurement of Ei is not available
The criterion estimates Mr for Granite as 425 Then; Ei - 28415.5MPa
Hock - Drown Criterion results
Mohr Coulomb Fit
c          =8.192MPa
0          = 51.10 degrees
Rock  Mass  Parameters  □’em  ”  46  395MPa  (Fig  6).  which  is  the  global  rock  mass  strength o' the rock mass, evaluated from the following formula using the inputs (0 and c).
2ccos0
oo cm =----------
1 - sin0
Hence taking the global rock  mass  strength of 46 395MPa and considering a safety  factor of 3 a load bearing capacity  of 15 46MPa (15,465Kpa) can be taken as  the safe bearing capacity for the foundation rock at the left side of the dam axis.
Similarly at borehole WBH-2.
The rock  mass  constituting the foundation area can be described based on UCS strength and fie’d outcrop observation as  fairly  strong, widely  spaced jointed and slightly  weathered granite
Sigci = 49.02, specimen can be fractured with a single blow with a geological hammer GSI = 87. intact rock specimen or massive in situ rock with few widely spaced discontinuities
mi       = 32. for Granite
D        -0
Ei = Mrx UCS, this relationship is used wher no direct values of the intact moduies are available or where completely undisturbed sampling for measurement of Ei is not available The criterion estimates Mr for Granite as 425. Then. Ei = 20833.5MPa
Water Works Design and Superv^ion Lnlerpr-se
31
Avgust, 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec t Hoek - Brown Criterion results:
Mohr-Coulomb Fit
c         =6 OMPa
0         =51 10 degrees
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological S Geotechnical Investigation Report
Rock  Mass  Parameters  o’em  =  34  015MPa  (Fig  7).  which  is  the  global  rock  mass  strength of the rock mass, evaluated from the following formula using the inputs (0 and c)
2ccos0
06 cm =----------------;
1 - sm0
Hence taking the global rock  mass  strength of 34.015MPa and considering a safety  factor of 3 a load bearing capacity  of 11.338MPa (11,338Kpa) can be taken as  the safe bearing capacity for the foundation rock at the left side dam axis
The surface geological map and geophysical investigation results  reveal that the malenal composing the right bank  is  the same as  the materials  composing the left bank  and hence foundation rock al the right bank has load bearing capacity of 11 338 MPa
An.ity          • s o* Rack SironjjtM utXiilrj Rocl.,ib
Hoe-U-Brown rki ^ui?ic.i’,ion
1-.- t -       —-     ----- —- - ■ '2.
JI
.1ft TA Lie- _
-J
in t.i c? m\
~           ~        _ .* z J
rr.s^Utu-i     r.v.     z     »’.•«)     •
Hook. 3rowr» Criterion
s - C I?-
F.lol ir-Coijlon ib Fit
-’-M
Ko. u,
Kvantelers.
.. •DC
_          -f|
• - * Pa
•      ---r-~ri-•-
Figure 6. 3: Analysis of rock strength using RockLab for L.A (WBH 2 Borehole) Similarly the safe load bearing capac.ty of the spillway foundation rock, wh.ch is fresh to slightly weathered and slightly fractured granite, is estimated at about 10 Mpa to 12 Mpa.
Wa:e’ Works Design ana Supervision Enlerpnse
32
August ,201SMinistry of Water and Energy
Datjus Irrigation Study & pestfjn Projcc t
Volume III Part I Head work Geological 1 Geoiecnnica[ ^nvesUganon Report
6.4.      Water Tightness of the Dam Foundation
6.4.1.  Permeability of Foundation Rocks
In order to assess  the permeability  of rocks  in the foundation area, in situ water pressure tests  were conducted in boreholes  using Holsby  approach and Lugeon criteria These boreholes  for water pressire testing were drilled at the left bank  of the dam axis  and spillway site The summarized result of water pressure test is  presented in Table 6.8 The bedrock  in both abutments  is  medium permeable up to a depth of 20 m from OGL. Under turbulent flow cond'tion the permeability  decreases, as  the pressure increases  from minimum to maximum and it increases  when pressure is  decreased from maximum to minimum. 1 hus. .here is  a need to provide proper treatment of the foundation rocks up to this depth
Based on the Lugeon values, thus  obtained, the flow conditions  in the foundation rocks  are defined and presented in Table 6 8 In addition, all the water test results  are well prepared and attached in Annex IV
Table 6. 8: Average Lugeon Value of different Boreholes with different test sections
HH-iD
Location
i
| Test No
Test Section
I
Average
Lugeon
Litholoqiea!
unit
2.70-7 10               3.0
I1i
2i
1___ 1
Permeability
Very low permeable Medium
permeable
SW Granite ‘
WBH-1 I
7 10- 12 35 | I
110
MW to SW Granite
Foundation          3        12.35 - 17.35 |            1.0          impervious
Fresh
I
!
1' i
16 20-20 40 |        60           Low permeable          HW   to   MW Pegmatite
2        20 40 — 23 95 ‘          2.0 Impervious 
SW Granite j
3    | 23 95-27.55 ’
1.0        i Impervious                      SW Granite |
I DS1BH-1
Spi'lway
3.65-/ 30          |     >100         Highly
SW Granite j
2 j 7.30 ~ 12,20 '                            49        | Highly 
SW Granite 1
As  shown  in  Table  19,  the  foundation  rock  at  the  dam  site  is  very  low  to  medium  permeable whereas that of the spillway is highly permeable
6.4.2.  Permeability of Foundation Soils
In situ falling head permeability  tests  were conducted for the various  foundation soils  AH the falling head tests  which are performed on Dabus  foundation soils  are attached as  Annex  IV. According to the in situ test results  of Dabus  Weir site, both the residual soil and the completely weathered and decomposed meta granite materials are impervious
Based on evaluation of the hydraulic  properties  of the rocks  and soils, the Wowing points are made clear with regard to the water tightness  and the need for grouting at the dam foundation:
•  Even  though  packer  test  have  resulted  a  relatively  low  Lugeon  value  in  many  of the    test    sections,    from    surface    and    sub-surface    observation    (geophysical investigations and drilling), the upper part of the dam foundation rock mass is
Water Works Design and Supervision f nterpnse
33
August. 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus In gar--»n Study & Design Projec t
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological R Geotechnical Investigation Report
more weathered and fractured Therefore, it is recommended that curtain grouting is crucial to lower the permeability of the foundatron rock to allowable Lugeon value of less than 5.
The depth of curtain grouting shoull be up to 50% of the static water head (thus 50% of 36m = 18 m shall be taken as the maximum groutable depth) starting from the proposed cutoff trench excavation level of the dam/ weir foundation. Considering the jointed/ fractured nature of the rocks, it is advisable to undertake grouting to decrease leakage under tie dam and to ensure tie safety of the dam.
•  Curtain  grouting  works  require  reasonably  consolidated  and  hard  foundation strong enough which can support sealing of oacker inflation and prevents upward bleeding of the ground under treatment
6.5. Seismicity
The Ma:n Ethiopian Rift (MFR), which is part of the East African Rift System, and Afar Depression are considered to be locus of volcanic and seismic activities as they represent extensional tectonics in action The MFR meets the two oceanic rifts, namely Red Sea and Gulf of Aden in the Afar Depression^ riangle forming three-rift (RRR) triple junction
-
Dabus Irrigation Project Site is located at the most seismically stable western plateau It is prudent though to calculate the possible ground motion at this site of interest due to major earthquakes that can be sourced from the Main Ethiopian rift and South Sudan.
On the other hand, we can't rule out the possibility of Reservoir Induced Seismicity (RIS) at Dabus  dam that needs  monitoring before and after impoundment like any  other dams located elsewhere in the world The water load can possibly  trigger earthquakes  on fractures following the old Mesozoic structures of the Slue Nite rift basin
Site specific seismic hazard assessment was conducted for Dabus Irrigation Project area Results of the hazard assessment for the Dabus Irrigation Project site are summarized in Table 6.9, Figures 6 4 & 6.5. The seismic hazard can be defined as the probability that a ground motion at a specific  site will be exceeded during a time period, ie , return period. T (years). Alternatively, it is  the probability  that a ground motion will be exceeded with an annual frequency  of 17T In general, seismic  hazard due to natural earthquakes  is. rather haphazardly, presented as  the probability  that a PGA will be exceeded in T= 475 years  (Bommer and Pinho, 2006. GSHAP. 1999). An alternative interpretation is  a 10% probability  that this  PGZ\ will be exceeded in 50 years. For the 0.2 second period and soil site listed in Table 20 and Figure 9. for instance, for the T=100 and 500 years  return periods  it can alternatively  be interpreted as  10% probability  of exceeding the PGA values  of 0.0550g and 0 0675g once in 10 and 50 years, respectively at the Dabus Irrigation Project site.
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
34
August, 2015— -
Ministry of Water ard Ene gy
r
Oabus Irrigation Study A_r)esign_f»ro|cc t
Volume III Part I _Hoad work Geological A Geotechnical lnvc*bgallon Report
Table   6   9   Ground   motion   amplitude   in   percentage   of   gravity   (%g)   for   rock   and   soil sites    at    different    periods    of    motion    and    for    different    return    periods    at
Dabus   Irrigation   Project   site   For   the   soil   site,   an   average   thickness   of   30
meters    with    shear    wave    velocity    310    m/s    is    adopted    for    all    periods considered (Boore et al.. 1997).
Kdimi
1 C.rrnintl Ahilmii \mjilil ndc in «il "Tin Knm i l«i\m r-l tnn;il t1 99 IH97I
m               I’cihiil II 2 %u'
1\nml - 1.0 MM?.
i  Wars* 50
| Rm k 
Soil
, Ruck 
Soil
| I’iihuI 2JI*VC
I Kovk  Soil
~ 4.86
5"03
3.52                     3.83                       2 50                 2.72
I
; too                                     579                     5 50                    3 97                     4 34                       2 79
305
200
500
5.76
I
6.01 I
4.47                     4 gil
6 45                     6 75                    5 25             .      5 78
3.11 3.4*
3 59 3 96
i in noo                                 9 32                     9 92 I
8 78
i
9 89
5 74                 6 46
z_“
;______
—
I
Total Hazard for Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Period 0.20
—      B0C«v Joyrw* F urnu f |*93) RfrcM Flnndarn
—    — Hour JoynerFunDt
So-)
Figure 6. 4 Total Hazard for Dabus Irrigation Project Site. The x-axis represents amplitude ing.
Works Design and ^Penrision Enierprse
35
August 7015Volume Ill-Part I
(urtiSS H^rdr^HaToTbdi M|RMn S.ud, 33 0.73" P.o.ee.
p»ob-lhibr 3 2.00T CS>3
r
---- C»nr«- -»tr,nwt-r»-
----- **»»«•JW r^«Soil
Figure 6. 5: Uniform hazard spectra where the x-axis represents period in
seconds and the y-axis is amplitude in fraction of g.
The PGA values in I able 6 9. Figures 6.4 and 6 5 are relatively low due to the location of the darr site deep into the stable western plateau Dams  are normally  allocated a hazard category  using the method of ICOL D bulletin 72 which takes  into account reservoir capacity, dam height, number of persons at risk and potential downstream damage
The important implication here is  that the location of the Dabus  Irrigation project site is  less active rift in earthquake and volcanic  manifestations  On the other hand the dam can be affected by  distant and damaging earthquakes  that can be sourced from the rift margin border faults  Specific  location may  have pre existing weakness  which needs  onsite surface and subsurface investigations  with multidisciplinary  geophysical methods  and geotechnical considerations
On the other hand if the dam Site is a fractured zone, which is potentially possible from its location, with no seismicity Defoce it may be susceptible to induced seismicity after the water
load. This needs monitoring with appropriate instruments before and after the dam is finalized and filled wth water The seismic hazard assessment report is annexed (Annex VI)
6.6.      Groundwater Condition
Water level was  frequently  measured in the boreholes  during the phase of investigation, and those measured water levels  data in drilled boreholes  at different days  are presented. For further monitoring of the water level, one piezometer is  installed at borehole WBH-2 revealed that the ground water evel at borehole 2 which is  characterized by  completely  weathered and decomposed granite is below 7 meters
Water Works Design ana Supervision Enterprise
36
August 2015Ministry of Waler and Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projectneaa w^ocuoy-------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
6.7. Excavation Depth of Foundation
6.7.1. Depth of General Foundation of the Dam
The   depth   of   the   general   foundation   is   proposed   based   on   evaluation   of   the   distr.bution   of the soils/rocks and their engineering characterization. Based on this
.   The   residual   colluvial   and   alluvial   materials   need   to   be   removed   as   these   materials are    associated    with    boulders,    organic    matters    and    have    also    been    subjected    to creeping   type   of   slope   instability   The   depth   of   these   materials   is   vanable   along   the dam  axis  it  reaches  up  to  a  depth  of  7m  in  the  right  side  of  the  dam  and  up  to  a depth of 3m in the left side of the dam
.   The   completely   weathered   and   decomposed   granitic   material   found   on   both   right   and left  side  is  thick  which  reaches  up  to  a  depth  of  10m  underlying  the  residual,  colluvial and alluvial deposits
•   The   general   foundation   excavation   depth,   hence,   shall   be   3m   to   6m   which   is   the removal  residual,  colluvial  and  alluvial  deposits  and  the  top  part  of  the  weathered  and decomposed granite
6.7.2. Depth of Finished Cut-off Excavation
Borehole and geophysical data indicated that the upper 5-17m of the rock  mass  at the dam foundation is  characterized by  alluvial, residual and completely  weathered and decomposed granitic  material Based on the available data the depth of finished cutoff excavation is recommended to excavate all these weak  materials  and loose rock. The depth of cut-off excavation should be as shown Delow
•     At the abutments, the depth of the cut-off excavation is 5 m to 10 m
•     At the island, the estimated cut-off excavation depth is 2 m to 3 m
■   At   the   weakest   portion   of   the   dam   foundation   the   maximum   depth   of   finished   cutoff excavation  is  recommended  to  be  about  17  m.  However,  this  depth  could  vary  along the  dam  axis  and  excavation  shall  continue  until  depths  where  groutable  rock  mass  is encountered
6.7.3. Grouting Works
As  indicated in section 6.4 1 and Table 6 8 the Lugeon value varied from 1 to >100 which necessitate leakage treatment by  means  of cement grouting works  are recommended along the dam/ weir axis Accordingly the following points are valid:
•      Depth  of  curtain  grouting  shall  be  50%  of  static  water  head  thus  maximum  depth  of grouting anticipated is 18.0 m below the cut-off excavation level
•     Orientation of grout holes to be decided after test/ trial grouting.
•      Single  row  grouting  with  primary,  secondary  and  tertiary  grout  holes  at  12,  6  and  3  m spacing  to  be  conducted  and  quantity  to  be  adjusted  depending  on  the  outcome  of test/ trial grouting
Volume Ill-Part I unad wnrk Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
Water Works Design and Supervision Enteiprise
37
August, 2015Volume III Pari I
Project ________  Head IworkGeology ^ch^aHn^hgaten Report,
. Cement to be the main grouting material In addition bentonite and fine sand shall be used in small percentage as appropriate
. Final mix design shall be decided after Inal grouting however for the beginning thinnest grout shall be 3 1 or 2:1 and thickest shall be 0 5 1
• Maximum length of test/groutmg stage shall be 5 0 ir
. Grouting method shall be stage grouting either with descending or ascending
. Grouting shall be executed after excavation to the bottom of the key trench.
Table 6 10 Amount of curtain grouting required along the dam axis
Grouting Section along dam
axis
1st section       2nd section       3rd section
4th section
Sth section
Chainage
0-56m
56-316             316-516
Depth of grouting
10m
No of primary grout holes No of secondary grout holes No of tertiary grout holes
6
5
10
18m
23
22
516-716
18m
18
17
716 795
10m
8
7
34
14
Total No of grout holes
21
44
89
15m
18
17
34
►
69
69
29
Tota' grout for single row (m)
210                  1602                  1035
1242                  290
6.7.4. Excavation of Spillway
Open excavation refers  to the removal of material, within certain specified limits, for construction purposes  In order to accomplish this  economically  and without hazard, the character of the rocks  and sods  involved and their geological setting must be investigated. The method and the rate of progress  are influenced very  much by  the geology  on site The inclination of discontinuities  is  always  the most important parameter for slopes  of medium and large height.
Slopes  of excavations  in fresh massive plutonic  igneous  rocks  such as  granite and gabbro can be left more of less  vertical after removal of loose fragments. Gneiss, quartzite and hornfels as well are highly weather resistant and slopes in them may be left almost vertical
•       The  lithological  log  of  the  borehole  drilled  at  the  spillway  (Annex  II)  showed  that  the geology   of   the   spillway   area   is   composed   of   fresh   to   slightly   weathered,   massive, hard   granite   rock   overlain   by   about   2.65   m   thick   residual   soil.   To   attain   the   design level  of  the  spillway  huge  geologic  material  that  can  be  used  for  construction  of  the dam will be excavated
•     The total volume of materia! to be excavated is estimated as1,780.000 cubic meter.
•       i  ne  volume  of  soil  and  weathered  rock  over  burden  material  is  160,000  cubic  meters. There  is  weathered  and  weak  rock  such  as  pegmatite  within  the  granite  rock  which  is estimated as 20% is 320.000 cubic meters.
Fresh   granite   rock   estimated   as   1,130.000   cubic   meters   can   be   utilized   for   rock requirement of the project.
As  the excavation is  huge the task  should be properly  planned and executed in order to excavate the material more efficiently, avoid dangerous  slope faces  and utilize the rock  thus obtained
Water Works Design ana Supervision Enterprise
3H
August 2015Ministry of Waler and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec!
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
The top restdual soil and loose rock  can be stripped off using machineries  only  such as excavators  and dozers. The slope face thus  created due to excavation of the residual soil should be provided with gabions  or masonry  work  as  well as  drainage facility  to protect it from erosion
The underneath granite rock  is  hard to excavate and .hence need drilling and blasting. Spacing of the blast holes  is  determined on the one hand in relation to the strength, density and fracture pattern within the rock  and on the other hand in relation to the size of the Charge
■  Excavation  of  spillway  shall  start  near  the  dam  axis  before  construction  of  the  dam  to avoid   damages   during   blasting   and   carry   out   treatment   measures   if   fracturing   of foundation rock occur during blasting.
•      Excavation  shall  start  at  the  slope  sides  both  upstream  and  downstream  of  the  dam axis  and  provided  with  appropriate  drainage  so  as  to*  avoid  impoundment  of-water  in the pits thus created due to excavation
•      Slope  faces  shall  be  opened  along  contours  around  the  center  line  of  the  spillway and excavation shall proceed on both sides
•      The  rock  is  hard  and  strong  and  thus  can  stand  stable  with  vertical  slope  face  after excavat  on  However,  as  the  excavation  is  huge  it  will  create  deep  cut  slope  face Therefore,  for  work  convenience  and  to  control  hanging  rock  fragments  falling  from the  slope  face  benching  of  the  slope  face  is  advantageous.  The  slope  height  can  be fixes at 4 m to 5 m.
•      The  excavation  of  the  rock  mass  shall  proceed  with  a  series  of  drilling,  blasting  and removal of the blasted rock
•      The  depth  of  blasting  shall  not  exceed  the  bench  height  and  spacing  of  blast  holes varies between 0.75 to 1 25 times the burden materials.
•       It  is  important  to  minimize  over  break  around  bench  slopes  and  hence  controlled blasting  is  essential  around  slope  faces  and  towards  the  dam  site.  Line  drilling  and pre  splitting  shall  be  applied.  Line  drilling  is  used  to  improve  the  peripheral  shaping  of excavation whereas pre splitting is important to establish free surface in a rock mass
•    The blast hole spacing in controlled blasting shall be 1.50 m to 2.50 m
•     Once pre split, the rock excavation can be blasted with normal pattern of blast hales,
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
39
August, ?015Ministry c! Water and Erergy
Dabus Irrigation Study ft Design Projec t
Volume ill Part 1 Head work Geo!og'c.il A Geotechnical Investigation Repent
7. CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL INVESTIGATION and
EVALUATION
7.1.    General
Construction materials  suitable for construction of the proposed weir, spitway. irrigation canals  and other appurtenant structures  have been investigated in detail he investigation was  performed for the purpose of engineering characterization, sampling and volume estimation of the materials  su’table for construction of different structures  included in the project. The construction materials assessed and investigated include.
•     Impervious material for core and canal l*nmg
•    Rock quarry for masonry and Rip rap material.
•   • Rockfill/Shellmatenal,-
•     Rock quarry for coarse Aggregate, and
•    Sand for fine aggregate and li ter material
7.2.     Impervious Clay Core Material
A  wide  range  of  impervious  soils  could  be  used  successfully  for  mpervious  core  material The  appropriate  type  of  soil  ‘or  this  purpose  is  a  soil  characterized  by  low  shrinkage  and swelling property I hree clay borrow areas are investigated for Dabus Irrigation Project
Clay borrow -1
The borrow area is  found near Undulu town, bounded by coordinates 703189 E - 703995 E and 1127000 N - 1127414 N about 12km from the dam site The soil is  dark  grey  to dark, highly  plastc  and highly  compressible? sandy  silly  clay  Seven representative samples  were collected from clay borrow 1 ‘or f jrther laboratory analysis.
Clay borrow - 2
The borrow area is found on the way to Undulu Town bounded by coordinates 7C4100 E -
704160 E and 1124400 N - 1124850 N about 11km from the dam site The soil is reddish
brown residual soil intercalated with the meta-volcamc material investigated for shell
material The thickness of soil layer vanes from 1 5 m to 5 m on average. To characterize
the physical and engineering properties of the residual soil deposits selected for core
materials eight samples were collected for laboratory analysis
Clay borrow - 3
It is  found on the right side of the dam site near Belfudi town (see construction material map) The soil is  characterized by  reddish to brownish, cohesive, stiff, silty  clay  ”| he thickness  of the soil layer is  > 5 meters. Five representative samples  were collected for laboratory analysis.
Wate Works Design ard
r
Supervision Enleipnse
40
August. 2015L .J L_J i— J
Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Desgn Project
Table 7.1 Summary of Laboratory test results of samples collected from impervious clay borrow area
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical investigation Repo^
Parameters             DCBP-“-6
2.0 - 2 30m
Lab
No 329/07
| Grain size Analysis
DCB -1-7         DCBP-1-8         [DCBM-tt
p
DC0P-1-13          DCBP-1-15
"DCBP-1-16
DCSP-2-1            DCBP-2-2
1.0-3.0m
Lab
No: 330/07 58.34
1.0- 1.50m        0 1 - 3.0m Lab                    Lab
No:331/07          No.332/07
1
40 94                54.61
0.2 - 2 30m
1.2- 3.0m
0.2-2.30m
Lab
No:333/07
Lab
No:335/07
1 0 - 2 30m
Lab
No:336/07
Clay (%)
Silt (%)
71.33
14.32
9.19
18.25
13 39
3028                   2.65
Lab
No 334/07
14 35
30 26
71 39                   1.61 2 87                  15 53
Sand (%)                 14.35
Gravel (%)
Atterberg Limits
I Liquid Limit (%J                     70 64
2341
-
45 67
15 11
' * 32
-
•
3.79 44.22
84.37 11.17
1574
-                      71 53
0.00-1.25m
Lab
No:337/07
35 13
33.37
10 71
2C.79
49 40
67.50
80 80
35 50
71 90
39 80
Plastic Limit (%)
26 83
64 30
23 56
18.58
25 87
27 03
19 50                  23 99
Piast oty Index (%) Free Swei. %
43.81
40.74
30 82
SOO
41 63                  53.77
16.0                   47.91
122.5
90.0
130.0                  165 0                   42.5                    60 0
30.87
8.93
70.0
Unit weight(gm/cc)
-
•
Specific gravity 2.63 2 68 Linear Shrinkage, % 12 14 20.18
NMC
2 76
2.60 2 77
17.50 •7 86
2 84                    2.6C
821
Consolidation.Cc
0 128
0 270
1539 17.86
0.189
2.73
1 07
0.174
2 62
10.0
.... I
I
Compaction
MDD(gm/cc)                          1.470 OMC (%)                               25 20 Dispersion by                          ND Doub'e Hydrometer
Ci’(meq/lit) 1.12 SO<(meq/lit) 2.17
1.55
25.50
ND
1 610 1.419
22 80 31.30
1 421 1 77
26.0 15.5
ND ND
1 515
1.716                1 399        |
25.50
14.90
30.20
ND
ND
ND
1.68
ND ND
0 56 1.96
1.96                    0.84
4 36
1.31                   5.12                    4 69                    1.54
1 82 0.56
5.93 2 34
0.70
1.38 '
Direct shear
CflcPa)
0.Q
Organic Content (%) Pe meability(cm/s)
•
•
0.45
32.0
20.05
r
. . ,, __ __ _
39 66                67 33
15                   1377
C 34                  0 47
1.87x10® 1 23x10*
. .J
64 0                     34.0
9.37                   26.33
3.40                    0.57                    0.34
5.18x10*             3 6*3x10’
0 36
1 ?6x'C5
1.399~
30.20
0.62
2.36x1 O’ I
Water Wo-ks Design and Supervision Enterpr se
41
August. 2015Ministry of Wate- and Energy
Dabus Irrgat'on Study & Des.gn Projec I
Parameters
Grain size Analysis Clay %:
Silt (%)
Sand (%)
A’.terbcrg Limits Liquid Limit (%J
DCBP-2-3         DCBP-2-5
DCBP-2 6          DCBP-2-B   j DCBP-3-1
Volume Ill-Part Head wcr< Geology & Ceote-znn.cal Investigation Report
. ■         DCBP’4-3          □C8P-4-4              □C8P-4-3R
0 0 — 2 40m
0 20-2.10m
0.20 - 3 0m
0.2 - 3.0m
D.2 - 2 30m
0.8 -3 0m
0.2-2 30m
1.0—2.30m ”
0.0-1 25m
Lab
Lab
Lab
Nc 331/07
Lab
Lab
Lab
No:334/07
Lab
No 329/07
No 330/07
No 332/07
No 333/07
No 335/07
Lab
Nc.336/07
Lab
No-337/07
60.92                 58 1 1
57.95               55.57
54 25 59 95
18 St                 28 05
54 31                  43.85                  50 60
23 97 26 20 23 92
15 13 1569 13.13
19.61
34.19                  47.55
24 82
27 24                  12 0                  11.50                  8 60
57 20
Plastic Limit (%)          33.95
Plasticity Index (%)            23 25
F'ee Swen %                           60 0 Unit weight(gm/cc)
53 53 52.70 51.10 57 71
30 33 29 08 25 55 18 99
23.20
23 62               25.55 —
38 72
57.40
26.30
31.10
56.0                   72 70
28 29                  29.77
27 71                  42.93
50.0 60.0
19.52
29.88
53 70
30.23
23.47
55.0                    50 0                47.50               110.0
60 0
Specific gravity Linear Shrinkage % NMC
Consolidation.Cc Compaction
MDD(gm/cc) OMC (%)
Dispersion by
I Double Hyd ometer
r
Ci (meq/lit)
S0.;(meqJil)
Direct snear
C(kPa) 0(#r
Organic Contert(%) Pe rme ab i I it y(cm/s j
Water Works Design ana Supervision Enterprise
2 76
10.0
0 288
2.61                     2 75                 2.67                 2.52                   2.71
9 64
15.39               14.07 0 120
16.43                  9 64 .
2.70 2.68 2 84
15 32 15.0 15.0
0.106
0.200
1 386                  1.383
1.464
1 481
1 590
1 379                  1.51
1 397
31 70                   29.5
29.60
27.8
23 0
29 90
26.0                    31.0
1.608
24.50
ND
0.56
1.43
ND
D84
1 67
25 0
ND ND
0.84 0 56
1.46 1.02
ND                     ND
1 68 0 B4
3.63 2.30 ’
ND                      ND
ND
1.26                    0.84                    1.40
4.08                    2 77
33 0                62 66               24 33                  45 0
19 80                   17.22               13 77                5.71
13 22
61 0
7 69
51 0
10.20
0.66
-
083
0 74                 0.69
8.94x10s
1.67x10"T            1.054X10'7
C.33                   0 69                    1.55
1 32x1 O’ 5.76x1 C* 1.99x*C"
5.36
31 33
9 39
0.67
1.55x10“
August, 2015Ministry of Wafer and Energy
Dabus !mgabon Study & Design Projec t_
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological 4 Geotechncaljnvestigabon Report
Plate 7.1 : Photo showing potential clay borrow area
7.1.1. Permeability
Laboratory  permeability  lest was  done on remolded soil samples  and a very  low permeability value of about 1.76 x  105 to 5 78x100 cm/sec  was  obtained The permeability  values  indicate that all the core materials  are found to be impervious  According to USBR (1991), impervious materials  Include clays  (CH and CL) clayey  sands  and gravels  (SC or GC) and silly  clays (CL ML) whereas silts (ML) and silty sands or gravels (SM or GM) are semi pervious
7.1.2. Grain Size Analysis
A  total  of  22  samples  were  collected  and  analyzed  for  evaluating  the  quality  of  soils  which could  be  used  as  impervious  core  malenal  Two  types  of  impervious  core  materials  were identified  and  investigated  for  clay  core  the  dark  brown  clay  (black  cotton  soil)  and  light brown/reddish clay
Based on the laboratory  test results  the dark  brown core material is  dominated by  14.35 to 71 33 % clay. 2.0 - 30 28 % silt and 3 79 - 45 67 % sand The light brown impervious malenal has 35 - 60 90 % clay. 12 87 • 54.31 % silt and 10.71 - 27.24 % sand fractions with no gravels.
100.00
80 00
DCBP-1-6
---DCBP-1.7
DCBP-1 8
-       DCBP 1-121
- DCBP-1-131
_
DCBP-1-15, ------ DCBP-1-16
------ DCBP-2’1
I-------DC8P-2-2 I
20 00
— —DCBP-2-3 |
DC0P-2-S
0.00 —
DCBP-2-6
100 10
------ DCBP-2 8
1 0.1 0.01
----- Grain Size, mm
000’.-------- DCBP-4-1 ----- lPCBP-4-3R
I
Figure 7.1 Grain size Distribution Curve of Impervious Clay Material
Waterworks Design ard
Supervision E rilcrpr sc
*13
August 201rvr*tri Cf **** *'•' '■
r -,c,* imgwrer Shrfy <■ M^r " 7.1.3. Atterberg Limits
.
u*rcGH’'4
A cccrtfir<j  to  the  standard  set  by  Murthy  2002)  values  obtained  for  *t*e crowded  elasticity  index  values  higher  than  t7  exceot  OC0P-2  2  which r~atenai $ highly plastic
^astiaty index 1 0 no plastic
< T % - tow plastic
7-17 % medium plastic
> 17 % - high (source Murthy 2002)
Generally the results show that most of the dark brown sorts (black cotton
mdv *h-*
sort -oHrrtHi
cfav  benvw-1  site)  falls  under  highly  plastic  ranges  while  the  fight  brown  sorts  dassrfkpd as Medium to Mighty Plastic except DC.BP 4-4
z'
Sil
y npesp s t .«
/
y
d io jc
z*r: peer-1- ora# 4 4
r IKFIP : S |iCBf*1< (XBP X I.’
DCBP »X
dHorCH *
z
DCBP ’
z 
djA t e
OCBP 4 *
DCBP •-1
Um pie-.
Clef 4<»«~rw
L’W 4oi»nw
J
’ ’ZV -fc^r-W
,*T>CBP 4 I
fttMd
«JC
z
Z — Dcbp : r‘. o up
; *oh
z
pl tu- 1 ' ,
z
*z Z
ci mi'
/of
or
MH
10
CL Of .H* J )
OL or
Ml
xo      20         M)        40         SO        60 I iniHd 1 imir l%l
70         so       riO        IOC
Figure 7. 2 Classification of soils collected from proposed clay borrow sites on plasticity chart
Compressibility decreases wiin decreasing liquid limit The higher the liquid amt of cuy ire more compressible it will be during compaction Accordingly all soil sample** ccdeetM
core material potential sites have marginally high to high compressibility wdh Squad ju-jTS of greater than 50 % except DC8P-1 8 DCBP-1-15 and DCBP-2-2
Liquid limit < 35% • low compressibility
35 - 50 % - medium compressibility 
>50 • high compressibility (Source Purusncthama 2OGS
•Vxls Oes-gn Super« v an t nfe«?«
August Jotsw
a
Vtf’ ntr< *f Witer        Energy
□on.*     -T^ror     >vN     I     ■'esigr     r’ 7 t 4 Swelling Potential
-x!
t
Mjf* 11 r#* i r« - ~n ♦*>*-*•
The swelling octertial of the soil sar-plrs  can be calculated accurtfteg to encxcal ‘br—i.M if Arderscr •  981) in wh-ch the calculated swelling pofentwl(S) -. corrwteted ‘b« ■*qy=« ,f expansion (Table 7 2)
S-0 23PI 3 12
When®. S- Swelling Potential
Pl - Plasticity index
Table 7 2 Relationships between Swelling Potential and Degree of F <panSion
(Anderson. 1981)
S No
Degree of expansion
Plasticity •«<>•« (Pl)
Sweilitq PMontUI 5/
•
~ r
f
tow
JO
15
id it
'%   4
s
m ya
> -4 )
i
Vnry High
- io
-
a ordinqlv the lark brown clay has a high to very high degree of expansion white ’be
•ddish brown rliiyhns i Medium to »Ugh degree of expansion Mercs. clay borrows 1 \ ?
hi? suitable
Table 7 3 Soil group and important engineering properties of impervious material
•itmpto
ID
vOll
Group
I ypicnl nnm«n of nod qrnup         P&rmcntsuiy whtn
compacted
Sbcju irtg t!r«nglb
.. • »•>£* ibly
|IjO 3r Mtor«
compacted             ws«>rs.
: omp«C tell
nr.nr r a
H
nwinr < lay* of high plitftlirUv
■rnpeivHju*
fMXlf
High
tx?v »y
hcium /
t.n
inorqand... iiiys uf high ptaiboly
Impervious
poof
Hwjn
tuf'i ?*>**•■?/ Tkry
•
< ip r a
CL
Inorganic. < l»iys of w pkmbr ay
impervious
fn»r
Mfcdi - •■
*»Tf CUerey Sard
DLdP t U
CH
Inof'idiH' Mys f r.»gh plnn|ic4y
■ivpoivajut
poor
hkjf
1:
*
DCHP M3
CH
'iKMQiW*' lays of high plfltlkuly
impervious
poor
JkjT
OCBP MS
CL
!rw,rq.inic rJ.iyi of low ptatfiOly
imparvKMit
%•»!
Vrl um
3py»y t «ry us.’- r
IP • |ft
•Ji
inorganic r lay* of rwq» plmlicdy
mpcrviauit
poor
•
C HP-2-2
Ml
Iii44f|«in>r. nilH nr . .  t i pln*|iciiy
(J
mpeivoua
far
f air
ZL*y t>H *4x*<2
i
•
♦
U.bP 2 J         MM      nerqarw. nits or m|y -<,.| 1 0CBP-2-5          MH      1       ...... UlK i
□CHP 2 H          MH   t Innrqanw. itlfn t i. if noil
jr r*er
inipeivniuS ?aif to xxk H.qn V«‘e5f Sfly Vifff
mpBIVKMl*       *&r ‘a               ■1
.
imparvioua to !o poor rSQA
tisy
CC8P 2 *       CUCH          ,i          iy% of low plant            impervious        fair                 WerTium       terry tameyciay
DC0P-3-1          CH      incrqan*c day* al high pioitcity         impa/viou -        poor
U»Ff          _.^ry
OCBP -4-1
CCBP4 3R
CH
inciqai’ir. days of -’n, plasticity Inuiqanic tilts ar Silty soil
m pew iota
poor
HxJJ*
vn*rf
.mperv-cus
P*jO/
ue-cy 
xssy
rur>
1
CC0P 4 3
CH
Inorganic day* .r high plasticity
impmvtpuft
pocx
rngr
sJty ay
CCBP-4-4
•
irooprtc days of bign ptasticily
mperv’tiui
. i...i
Mhj?
JXtyey t :
7.1.5. Free
Swell
Free   swell
tests 
were   carried   out   on   the
dark   brown
(black 
cct^on
s*3»,x,
and
grit
DfcwrVreddish    soils    Classification    of    the    test    result    was    done    based    cn    aoorMCh suggested by the Bureau of Indian Standards 1493                 1970 Aa ca- ee *gted fw tre te*r
result summary in Table 7 4 the dark brown sot’s show Marina to Cneca* Cgr&flcn white
Waler Wvrts Design and Supervnicn fricrp-inc
4S
Atjguftl. TonUlrtstty cl Wfeter *<*•« € nwqv
Sh.«fr K Devjr pMw* ‘
/*•>//•»* H P-w*
M^arf vrtM               t ^Harbrvi*
ffe  >qbt  br  nwnfrcdi^  $wte  shew  non  cnttc^l  to  rnerglnal  r  tof^w  of  tow  *Hjr=«  of  >, dun to *ns» swell
Table 7 4 Free Sw^ll Tests and Degree of Severity (B’S MH ’970)
S No
Swwll |%)
t
4
<50
Non >frcal
2
so *eo
Mwginrtl
3
•CO 200
•. i.
i.    —* < -■ .       .i    ■ ■ ■ ■■■ — •
4
■*
• 
7 t 6 Erodiblity Tests
Samples collected ’torn impervious cloy com borrow areas were undergone fior ero<5bi **/
with pm bole and double hydrometer methods and results shows that all th© mafer^ «-
ron-diSDOrsive (ND)
7 t 7 Direct Shear
•.vnpi«*s wore tested tor shearing property using Direct Shear rests The direct sne<x fcs-’
result shows that tho samples have cohesion ranges from 25                   67 KPa and 'rtten
irqnn from 7 30 degrees Samples collected from clay borrow 1 (black cotton so i
■'lativniy lower shear vnlurs
7 I 8 Organic Content
The presence of significant quantity  of organic  matter has  effect on tho strength ar<! compressibility  if noils  fhe soils  with organic  matter are weaker and more comerexn>r •- than soils havmgthe same mineral composition but lacking inorganic matter
The organic content of noil samples was evaluated and the value ranges ooreen 0 X to
1            -I ‘4 it in msignificunt and has no effect on the strength and compressibility of tbn * the project area
Table 7 5 Comparison of the alternative clay borrow nites
Poramttser
__
.
____  Clay tiocfowJilts
Cj.iy Borrow- 1
Clay Hiiir«jw ?
Clay ruv sw :
I Pimeafctlity
■ffiptnwiiin
Impervious
-rpe^HU.*
Gram Stain
lardy silly day
sandy Wty <iay
lorvfy t»oy -Lev
^MJlGty__
Vary high
Mecbum fa nigh
.rect»i*r> *C
■ ConprMnr.< r.
High
Medium Io hiqn
MeOum *D ■'ntjf*
Free •• ill
Margin al la colic al
nun ertcai *o •IM.*.'*
.500 •. BC4*
Swcllirg tnnbal
11
ifi
Mrdum w •-  *
D’apenivfiy
Non 'Jlapamive
Sf
Non d taper we
Nun
Organic ;an|nrl
Low
Law
LOW
Omtanr.ie
12 km
11 km
Am
SuUuE'hV/
QnauiMDI*
‘.uitacie
• MtADie
1
Quantity (m )
•
20B,iM
i’ l VM
Rank
Raject
1
!
7.2 Rockfill/ Shell Material
Snell  materials  reed  to  have  adequate  shear  strength  fcr  rerraang  fb«*  itabihty  arid  thmy should have h-gher permeability »n order to assist atd ^watn.j pov* wj>- pressure
Wusf Works Des^n
SMMrrwuari Lntrfprie
t4Wrtoy cf Wit t an! Erwryv 
CMlA rr^ntlcr $tujy % Qr^
wr .
t
M "*f ***
ifr^^.n »-tr^
Highly  weathered ard fractured rnetavolomte rock  found near urdulu «« towsHgoted *o check  its  sutaMty  for shell material The rack  is  greenish to grey. fire grained '•xjhiy fractured and Nobly weathered .it the top cart, and somehow irttermingfed w»tb *he rweidu^i neddlsh brown clay soil
A summary of the ’abcratory results are shown rn the • able 7 2 The gran wee araryets result Of the material from this weathered meta-volcanic quarry Ms provider; 71 GQ 75 S3 ’A gravel 6 23 - 11 32 H sand and about !7 I % fines  Melton tor sample? DCW* 2-1 end DS8H-M whereas  0-20.79 % gravel 10 7! - 35 35 % sand and above 55 fine Mc5or tor samples  0C8P 2-2. DCBP-2-4 and DC8P-2-7 The coarser components  of the weathered meta volcanic  rock  are moderately  to highly  weathered This  would Tear *Mf upon compaction these materials  could generate more fines  which can reduce the cermeabrlitv of the matenal
Plate 7 1 Picture showing highly wcathored and fractured Meta-volcanic to bo used
for shod
DC8P-2 2. DCBP-2-4 and DCBP-2-7, nonco has  fine fraction much more than tne permissible limits  Samples  DCBP-2-1 and DSBH-1 1 as  well has  significant proportion of Snoe (about 17%) and hence are not free draining
As mown m Table 7  ft the optimum moisture content (OMC) vary from 14 0 < 30 0 % and maximum dry  density  (MOD) in Iho range of I 3 •  17 gm/cc  Tests  carried out cn t^e leathered melavolcanic  rock  snow relatively  medium permeability  This  is  due to the presence of significant proportion of the fines fraction (silt and clay) in the material Drrec: snear test was also carried out in order to evaluate the shear strength of these materials Direct shear test resulted m cohesion (c) value of 4 ft7 - 94 0 KPa and fnction angle (0> pt ft 53 •  30 20 degrees  Higher cohesion value and lower friction angle also depcu the presence of significant proportion of cohesivo soil
Samples from the fresh and fractured meta volcanic rock were collected from bcrebcic ceres and analyzed in trie laboratory  Results  of the laboratory  analysis  snow tne fretn ane fractured rock  demonstrated good quality  for use as  rockM material The bcrerae data revealed that the top 5 • 20 m depth is moderately to nignty weathered and fracrowd roew and beyond 20 m depth show slight weathering effects
VWWu Cesgn arc Swpmcr. Enterprise
4*
AugustMinistry of Wafer and Energy
Dabu* Irrigator Study A Design Projec 1
Volume III Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
The criteria for rockfill material generally  require the rock  to be sound, well graded, and free draining. The soundness  of the rock  quarry  also depends  on the resistance to water absorption and abrasion Therefore, the fresh and fractured rock  in the vicinity  of the dam/ weir site should be useo as  rockfill as  there is  no free draining shell material in and around the Drojecl area
In general the shell material investigated is  not free draining and. therefore, should not be used for construction of the darr Instead, rock  that will be excavated from the spillway should be utilized for rockfill.
Table 7. 6 : Summary of laboratory results of the Shell material
Parameters
DCBP-2-1           DCBP-2-2             DCBP-2-4         ! DCBP-2-7             DSBH 1-1
0 0   2 40m         0 20 2 10m
0 20 -3 0m        | 02 - 3 0m            ! 2.0 - 12 0m
lab No:701/07 l ab No 702/07 lab lab No 717/07 Lab No:718707
Nd 716/07         1
Grain size Analysts     i                                                                                                                   1
t
Clay (%)
1.61
Sill (%)
15 53
35 13
33.37
3945
20.72
i "1 I
2520
1
48 2
I
10 78
Sand (%)
11 32
10 71
3535
31 09
628
1 Gravel and larger (%)            71 53                    20 79
1 Alterbe*g Limits            1
I                    7583           |
□Quid Limit (%)                     71 90
39 80                     43.0                     4240                      33.5
I                  II
_________ ___
I
j Plastic Limit (%)
23 99                    30 87                    22 56                    35.45                     16 82
Plasticity Index (%)               47 91
8.93                     2044                     6 95           I         16 68
Hee Swell ’A
| Unt weighl(gnVcc)        I ’
I 700 |
*1
|
|
1 Spccf c gravity                       2 73                      2 62
2.67
I ________ L
2 B3
2 84
Linear Shrinkage. %               1 07
nmc______ ______________ ’Ll I I i
' Consobdalion, Cc 
10.0           1
j
I
’
J
j
j
*|
MDD(gm/cc}                          1 716                    1 399
oMcpy                          14 90                    30 20                     22.5                     33 60
1 596                   1.339
1
Dispersion by Double ND
Hydrometer
ND
I
I
ND                       ND
" ND
Cr(meqZlil) 0 56 0 70
SOa(rreqflil) 234 1 38
-
-
Direct shear
C(kPa)
4.67
94.0                    69 33
Organic Content (%)
Permeability (cm/sec) 1
7.3. Rock for Masonry and Rip Rap
30.20
0 62
2 36x10'
8.53                    13 50
I
1
5 10x10*
2 a4xio”
Sound rock  appropriate for masonry  and riprap was  assessed and located at closer proximity  from the dam site and the investigation was  based on the following three main criteria,
1 A source which can produce rock fragments in suitable size (fresh to slightly weathered),
Water Works Ces-gn and Supervision Enterpr se
4S
August. 2015MntsVv of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Desgn Project
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geologcil & Geotechnical Investigation Report
2      A source which can produce hard, dense and durable Io ’withstand destructive forces during placing, wave action, weathering, servicing, etc
3       Nearby site Io reduce haulage distance
Even though building stones for masonry work should not be transported for long distances in the case of Dabus Irrigation Project unless nearby rocks prove to be dimension stone of higher quality and expensive to be used as ordinary masonry stone, it will readily be visible that masonry stones are abundant around the dam/ weir site The following two nearby sites are suggested as  quarry  sites  for rock  fill, nprap and building stones, refer Table 7.7 for laboratory properties as per the lesl results requirements are satisfied.
•    M1- Gimit hills tonalite exposures near Fudindu
•    M2- Mountain ranges and hills nearby the weir site
Plate 7. 2: Photo showing the nearby possible quarry material
7.4.  Rock for Aggregates
Construction materials  map for Dabus  Irrigation Project shows  basaltic  rock  outcrops  for Dabus  irrigation project. However, transporting finished aggregate matenal from distances greater than 20 km prove uneconomic  Laboratory  tests  conducted on nearby  granodiorite and tonalite samples  show that the rocks  are suitable as  masonry  stones  as  well as aggregate production. The granodiorites  and tonalities  gave LAA values  of 34.42 % and 36 83 % and comparable point load values  (Io widely  used basalts) of 12.61 MPa and 10 83MPa respectively and low waler absorption values can be utilized for both aggregate production and as masonry stones.
In  order  to  determine  suitability  of  the  construction  materials  representative  samples  were collected and appropriate tests were performed
The rock  al the identified quarry  site satisfy  the minimum requirements  of soundness  and with regard to quantity  excess  volume of rock  material can be exploited from the two proposed quarry sites
Laboratory  testing was  conducted on the meta granite sample collected from Quarry  no 1 and results of the analysis are presented in Table 7.7 The test results were analyzed and proved lhal the value satisfies the requirements of crushed aggregate, rock fill and rip rap production.
Water works Design and
S.oe'vision Fnlarp’ se
49
August ,2015Ministry of Water and Energy 
Volume Ill-Part I
Dabus Irrigation Study ft Design Projec t Head work Geological & Geotechncal Investigation Report
Table 7. 7: Summary of laboratory results on rock Quarries
Material
ID
Point Load
(Mpa)
Specific
gravity
Water
Absorption.%
Unit we*gh( 1 Porosity
(gm/cc)           (%)
DQBH *            33 5          -28R                    050
L_ ---------
Excavated material from the foundation of spillway
2 77            3 82
AIV.
%
18 70
LAA
%
14 11
Sound
ness
246
The foundation of proposed spillway  is  situated along the left side of the weir axis  which needs  considerable excavation with blasting to reach the design level Accordingly  the rock materials  discussed under section 7.3 and 7.4 will be encountered during the course of excavation The excavated rock  material from the foundation shall therefore be serving as rock sources for rock fill, riprap and crushed aggregate production
7.5. Sand
Sand for fine aggregate as  well as  filter requirement of the project has  been assessed The sand in the project area is  a product of deep weathering of granitoid rocks  and associated gneissic  rocks  in the region, and subsequent erosion, transportation and deposition of sediment mainly sand fraction composed of quartz grains with minor lithic component.
f
Plate 7.3: Photo showing potential Sand deposit
Potential sand deposit is  found at Shaga River derived mainly  from the completely weathered granite matenal about 17km from the weir site Furthermore, additional sand deposit is found at Mana River which is about 4km from the weir site. The grain size analysis result shows that the sand at Shaga River is composed of 83 - 87 % sand, 12 - 15 % gravel and about 0.62 - 1 74 % fines Similarly al Mana River the gram size composition is 77 - 78 % sand, 17.48 - 20.42 % gravel and 1.88 - 5.08 % fines. Summary of the laboratory results is shown in the table below
Water Works Design ana SwDe^islan Lnterp sc
5G
A-5uSl 2015
rMinistry cf Water and Energy Oabusjmganon Study S Denign Prcjec t
Volume UPP*t ‘ Head work Geotogrcat < Gectgchncal irvw^ yrfjcn PZl
Table 1.8 Summary of Laboratory results of Sand
Parameters
OSA ND-1
» M Riv*r Lab No 719/07
DSAND-2
(Shaga River) Lab No 720/07
MSAND-1
Mana River
m,- HD 7
Mjrj
Lab No 721/07
Lab No 722/07
Gradation
Fines (%)
065
1 74
Sand (%)
87
83 13
1 88 508
77 44 7/ 44
Grovel (%)
12 35
15 13
20 42
1/48
Specific gravity
261
263
264
Index Density
1 33
1 58
1
1 85
1 89
1
19■
Water Absorption %
1 49
1 73
2 32
2 10
Permeability, cm/sec
2 10 x )0
1 90 x 10
100 oo ....................n- __
RO.00
*> 6OCO
£ 4C00
2000
1C0.C0              10 00
LEGEND
DSANO1
OSANOV
M$AN>1
MSAND-2
0.00
1.00 010 0 01 o.co
Grain Size (mm)
Figure 7. 3 Grain size Distribution Curves of Sand
The permeability of the sand ranges between 2.10 x 10’1 cm/sec to 1.90 x 10’ cm/sec. the gradation analysis  has  revealed that except one sample (MSAND-2 Mana River) all the samples have fines below 5% which satisfies for fine aggregate requirement of the project
A  step-by-step  procedure,  which  is  developed  by  the  Natural  Research  Conservation Service (NRCS) in the 1980s. has been applied for selecting proper gradation band of a filter or drainage material to protect a base soil material
Filter gradation limits  achieved by  the procedure will be a balance between permeability requirements  on the finer grained particle distribution side and a particle retention requirement on the coarser grained particle distnbution side The window of fine-to-coarse limits allows for flexibility in selection of the optimum fitter gradation band required to achieve the intended goal of the filter (FEMA, 2011).
Fine Filter (F1)
Determination of fine filter (F1) gradation of the project was carried out. The procedure starts from plotting the base material (in the case of fine filter F the base material is the impervious clay) The category of the base soil was determined based on percent finer than 0 075mm The base soli Is included in category 2 (which is 40 - 85 % fines)
Waterworks Dcsgn and
Supervision En!e*p»'*e
51
August 7015Mirmtry c* Water and Energy
Dabus irngabon Study A Design Projec!
Vohzrw III- Pari I
„-r. .
>.
-r.r m
The maximum allowable 0,$  of the filter material is calculated to satisfy the particle retcr.tcn requirement of the filter. It is 0 7mm as it is in soil category 2
The  minimum  allowable  Ol5    of  the  filter  material  has  been  determined  to  satisfy  trie permeability requirement of the filter as
Maximum allowable of the filter < 5 minimum allowable On of he c-
The minimum allowable Dj$of the filter hence is 0 14mm
The  limit  of  the  width  of  the  filter  band  is  determined  and  gap  graded  filter  is  avoided according to the following relation
Maximum allowable Dis.of. the filter, < 5
Minimum allowable Di* of the filter
Cu  = Dw  should be between 2 and 6
Dio
The minimum DiOand maximum Dfl0 were determined to limit the amount of fines and over sized particles According to the category of the base soil the minimum D*is ,0 075 mm and the maximum D1Oo is 51 mm
The maximum Dw  of the filter material was determined based on the minimum DM  to prevent segregation
The plot of the fine filter boundary is shown in Fig 7 4 As shown tn the figure the sand tn the project area can be utilized for fine filter requirement of the project.
Coarse Filter (F2)
Similarly, determ<nation of the coarse filter (F2) gradation was determined n the same procedure In this case the fine boundary of fine fitter (F1) is taken as base soil and it :s included m category 4 (i e sand and gravels with fines <15 %) The plot of the coarse filter boundary is shown in Fig 7.4 As shown in the figure the sand in the project area can be
utilized for coarse filter requirement of the project.
From geological and geomphrologtcal point of view coarse gravely  sand that can satisfy coarse filter (termed F2) material is not available within economic distance from the project area As  a result this  zone of the dam has  to be obtained by  crushing of granite rock proposed for coarse aggregate
Gravel material for transition zone requirement of the project, as well, should be fulfilled by crushing of the fresh granite rock proposed for coarse aggregates production.
Waler Work* Design ana Supervision Enterprise
5?
August 2015rie ~eologca & Geotechnical Investigabcn Repott
100.00
35 00
9C 03
85 00
80.00
75 00
70.00
65 00
60.00
55.00
50.00
45.00
4C.OO
35 00
30 00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
1000
Gram Size, mm
-  — — — - — -Core Boubduiy 
-— • • —• • Fl Boubdarv
—  —       — — F2 Boubdary
1 - —. _. — .Maximum Fl
Boubdar y
I “OWP-2-1
------ DCBP-2-2
j —-OCBP-2-3
------- DCBP-2-5
--- DCBP-2-6
------ DCBP-28
|-------------DCBP4-1
-------DCBP4-3R DCBP-4-3
------ DCBP 4 4
I     —*—DSAND-1           | 0.001                 —*—DSAND-2
------ MSAND-1 ____ —— M5AND-2
Figure 7 4 Fine (F1) and Coarse (F2) Filter Boundary
Water Works Design and Supcrvis an Enterprise
53
August 2015Minist'y of Water and Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Prqec:  Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
Table 7. 9: Summary of accessibility and quantity of different construction materials
-
♦
Volume II ;-Part I
No
1
Material Type Clay borrow Shell
Sand
Locality
Name
Coordinates
Easting Northing
Distance Estimated
(km}            Volume(m )
3                Accessibility
703571          1127248              12km              827.577
Accessible
Remark
Unsuitable olac*
cotton soil
704449          1174458              11km               208 536        Accessible                Suitable Accessio e (minor      More suitable at it
713045 1115688 7km 916.534 clearing work 
'equired)
is relatively near
the weir site
2
3
Material ID
Clay borrow • 1
Clay borrow - 2
Clay borrow - 3
Shell Material Mana Sand Shaga Sand Duarry
Jndulu Near Undulu
Belfudi (Right side) Near Undulu Fudindu
704036
706939
1124388
Accessible
Not free draining
and so unsuitable
1118643
11km
4km
1.C81.280
22.576
Accessible
Shaga
Fudindu (Near ire Darr site)
714986
707039
1123339
17km
Accession
Suitao e 'or fine sand and Fine filter
*•W
1I
4 Quarry  (
1115412
<1km
240,000
2.637.540
Accessible
Water Works Des gn and SupeMs'on Enterpr se
54
August 20:5Mnratry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projee 1
Volume Ill-Part I
Head work Geologies! & Geotechnical Inveirtiffaljon Repcrl
705000
703000
Him
714000
>•1 _LiL
Legend
TG-TI? Ac w
^i'. C'Si
702000
,‘av 5 2f ? , sand
[o' '<[ snsi uair
□ujrrb'
f Oil ODD
Figure 7. 5 Construction Material Map
Wate Works Design ard
r
Aug u id ,2015
SuDervis an Enterprise
I
J
IMinistry of Waler and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec
Volume Ill-Part I Head work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
8.   CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1. Conclusion
The investigation included geological and structural geological mapping, geophysical surveying, core drilhng, trial pit excavation and in situ testing along with collection o. representative soil and rock samples for various classifications, engineering and chemical property tests in the laboratory
•    Geologic studies in the Precambrian exposures in western Ethiopia has revealed that there exist two major zones of high grade migmatitic gneissc terrains enclosing a central low grade volcano sedimentary belt with attendant plutonism (granite, tonalite, diorite, granodiorite) of batholithic dimensions. The general structural fabric is N-S structurally consistent to an east-west collision and terrain accretion
•    The proposed Dam/ weir site is covered by fresh to slightly weathered, widely jointed strong granite both at the left and right side overlain by sandy gravel alluvial deposit and weathered and decomposed granite. The geologic formation of central part of the island is composed of about 2 5m thick alluvial soil underlain by fresh to slightly weathered granite rock
•   The engineering geological layers at the dam foundation are grouped in Io five and are presented m stratigraphical order as follows.
Engineering geological layer 1: Brownish medium plastic, very stiff silty clay & clayey silt soil layer is found at the right bank of the dam site and spillway area.
Engineering geological layer 2: Alluvial material mainly composed of gravely sand with traces of silty clay mainly found near the river at both right and left banks of Dabus River. Engineering geological layer 3: Thick (>10m) completely weathered and decomposed granitic material is found on both banks of the river towards the river bed SPT result from WBH-2 al left bank shows the material is dense and falling head permeability tests 
conducted in this laye  evealed that the matenal
rr
is impervious
Engineering geological layer 4: Stringers of pegmatite veins found to occur in both boreholes (WBH-1 and WBH-2) drilled at the dam axis are characterized by moderately to slightly weathered and thickness ranges from <1m-5m. The pegmatite veins are also quite common on the surface at both left and right abutments 
Engineering geological layer 5; Fresh to slightly weathered granitic material covers most of the foundation and other appurtenant structures Laboratory test results show the material is quite strong and form stable foundation
•    Standard penetration test conducted in the first, second and third engineering geological layers (residual, alluvial and highly to completely weathered granite material) situated in the proposed foundation of the weir have revealed that the layers are dense.
•    With regard to bearing capacity of the dam/ weir foundation,
o Based on surface and subsurface investigations and in-situ tests the unconsolidated deposits and the completely weathered granite material have relatively low load bearing capacity of 200 to 500KPa
o the fresh  to  slightly weathered granite rocks found beneath the proposed cutoff excavation depth has safe load bearing capacity (considering a factor of safety of 3) of about 11 Mpa to 13 Mpa on average
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
56
August. 2015Ministry of Water and Energy
DatHaS Irrigation Study & Design I’rojer £
Volume III-Part I
Head *nrk GeoJog cal A Geotechnical Invcsligation Report
•      Variable  head  permeability  test  conducted  in  the  unconsolidated  layers  (particularly engineering geologies layer II and III) have shown the material is impervious while water pressure  test  conducted  in  bard  formations  varied  from  0  to  Hlugeon  value  at  dam foundation areas and much higher permeability results at the downstream spillway area. With increased depth, a general trend of increase in ROD value and decrease in Lugcon value was recorded indicating an increase in the quality of the rock mass with depth
•     The geology al the spillway area is composed of fresh to slightly weathered, massive, hard grarite overlain by about 2.65 m thick residual soil.
•      Three  clay  borrow  areas  are  proposed  during  the  investigation:  Clay  borrow-1  is characterized   oy   dark   brownish   soil,   high   plasticity   and   swelling   and   very   low permeability,  while  the  other  two  clay  borrow  areas  (clay  borrow-2  and  clay  borrow-3) are characterized by reddish b own. with low plasticity and very low permeability
r
•     The  shel  material  assessed  and  examined  has  significant  proportion  of  fines  content Furthermore, as the rock material is highly to moderately weathered there is a chance of producing more fines (especially the top part of the proposed quany) during compaction which in turn reduce the permeability of the shell materia. Generally, the present study has revealed that the shell material investigated is not free draining and shall not utilized as shell embankment material
•     Slightly weathered to fresh and fractured rocks which are good materials for use as rock fill  material  is  available  on  both  sides  of  the  proposed  dam  and  spillway  foundation These quarries can provide free draining rock fill material
•     With regard to matenals for sand and filter and fine aggregates, the Shaga River is the potential area for sand production. The fines content is insignificant and the permeability is from 2.10 x 101  to 1.90 x 10"1  cm/sec Since there will be a re-deposition at every year scarcity is not a question
■ The aDundar.t meta granite found in and around the dam site is a potential source for aggregates and rip rap production
•      During  the  excavation  of  spillway  about  1.300,000  cubic  meter  of  fresh  to  slightly weathered granite rock can be obtained.
8.2. Recommendations
From the comprehensive site investigation carried out. the following points  are recommended to oe considered in the design and construction of the dam and its appurtenant structures
•  All  unconsolidated  deposits  (colluvial,  residual  and  alluvial  deposits)  neea  to  be removed from the dam foundation. Borehole data indicated that the upoer 5 to 15m of the rocks at the dam foundation is characterized by highly to completely weathered granite Based on this data
The general foundation excavation level is 3 m to 5 m on the left bank right bank and island areas
- The cut-off trench excavation level is:
Waterworks Design and
Supcrv-sion Enterprise
57
Aug US 1,2015Ministry of Water and Energy us Irriga! nn '.'jdy A tel
Volume Ill-Part I
t
Head wort Geological & GecCechnual 1nvesti$at<xi Report
o At the abutments, the depth of the cut off excavation is 5 m to 10 m from the OGL.
o  At  the  island,  the  estimated  cut-off  excavation  depth  is  3  m  to  4  m  from  the OGL.
o  At  the  weakest  portion  of  the  dam  foundation  the  maximum  depth  of  finished cutoff excavation is recommended to be about 15m from the OGL. However, this depth could vary along the dam axis and excavation should continue until depths where groutable rock mass is encountered
•     The fresh to slightly weathered granite is the foundation rock for the dam as it has good safe load bearing capacity The cutoff trench excavation shall be up to the level of this rock.
•      Colluvial  materials  found  at  sloppy  areas  mainly  in  the  right  side  of  the  dam foundation area are vulnerable for potential debris/earth slides and thus shall be removed from the dam foundation area
•     To address water tightness problems at dam foundation, zones greater than or equal to 3 Lugeon values need to be given due attention for treatment (grouting). Maximum depth of curtain grouting from key trench level is recommended 50% of the static water head and maximum depth of grouting shall be 18.0 m However, this shall be finally be fixed after trial and test grouting is accomplished.
•    The curtain grout shall be single row
•     Primary,  secondary  and  tertiary  grout  holes  spacing  shall  be  6.  3  and  1  5  m. respectively
•     Anal mix design shall be decided after trial grouting however for the beginning thinnest grout mix shall be 3 1 or 2: 1 and thickest shall be 0 5 1
•    Maximum length of test/grouting stage shall be 5.0 m
•    Grouting method shall be stage groulrg either with descending or ascending
•    The total curtain grout amount is about 8532m.
•    Excavation of the spillway shall be executed as described below?
■     Residual  soil  at  the  spillway  should  be  excavated  using  excavators  and  be provided with gabion or masonry work and drainage facility to avoid instability of the slope face thus created,
■    The  granite  underneath  the  residual  soil  at  the  spillway  site  is  fresh  to slightly weathered and massive which is hard for excavation Therefore, excavation shall proceed with series of drilling, blasting and removal of the blasted rock mass
•      Excavation  shall  commence  near  the  dam  axis  around  the  center  line  of  the spillway,
Excavation shall start at the slope sides both upstream and downstream of the dam axis and provided with appropriate drainage so as  to avoid impoundment of water in the pits  thus created due to excavation
•     Slope face shall be opened along contour and excavation shall proceed on both sides from the center line of the spil way
•      For  work  convenience  and  to  control  hanging  rock  fragments  falling  from  the slope face benching of the slope face is advantageous. The slope height can be fixed at 4m to 5m.
•     The  depth  of  blasting  shall  not  exceed  the  bench  height  and  spacing  of  blast holes varies between 0,75 to 1.25 times the burden materials
Waler Works Design and Super/ison Enterprise
53
August.2015Ministry of Waler and Energy
Dabus Hrgalion Study & Design Pro^ec l
Volume Ill-Part I
Head wotk Geological & GeolcrnntGal invc&t^galion Report
•      To  minimize  over  break  around  bench  slopes  controlled  blasting  is  essential around slope faces and towards lhe dam site. Line drilling and pre splitting shall be applied.
•    The blast hole spacing in controlled blasting shall be 1 50 m to 2 50 m
•     Once  pre  split  the  rock  excavation  can  be  blasted  with  normal  pattern  of  blast holes,
.  Trial  and  controlled  blasting  shall  be  done  for  the  spillway  excavation  works aimed   not   to   disturb   the   anticipated   foundation   and   walls   of   the   spillway structures.
•      Seismic   haiard   study   has   been   conducted   on   the   specific   project   site   A horizontal   acceleration   of   0.1g   can   be   considered   for   the   seismic   design parameter.
•      Because  of  the  suitable  quality,  adequate  quantity  and  the  shorter  hauling distance from the dam site, clay borrow site-3 is recommended to use as better potential  site  for  impervious  clay  core  material.  Clay  borrow  site-2  has  suitable qualty  as  impervious  clay  core  material,  however,  the  available  quantity  is  not adequate and the hauling distance is considerably more than that of clay borrow site-3  Clay  from  clay  borrow  site  1  is  highly  expansive  and  highly  compressible and hence should not be used as core material
•      Sar.d  suitable  for  fine  aggregate  and  fine  filter  material  (Fl)  requirement  of  lhe project can be obtained from Shaga and Mana Rivers
•     Coarse  filter  material  (F2)  and  even  coarser  transition  material  as  well  shall  be obtained by crushing of fresh granite rock available in the vicinity of the dam site.
•     The laboratory tests conducted on the proposed shell materials shows that there are significant fines content and the materia! is not free draining as well The rock is  also  highly  weathered  and  will  produce  more  fines  during  compaction  and hence the rock shall not be used as shell material
•     There  is  suitable  *ock  fill  material  m  the  spillway  excavation  area  and  in  the vicinity of the project area (i e both sides of the dam) and shall be used for free draining rockfill sources and constructions of other components of the dam
•      The   *,300,000   cubic   meter   rock   that   will   be   excavated   from   the   spillway alignment  and  beyond  toward  upstream  and  downstream  section  shall  be  used as aggregate and rockfill requirement of the project
■  The  meta  granite  found  near  the  dam  site  is  a  potential  site  for  aggregates  and rip rap production
•     Trial embankment shall be done on the construction materials of clay, shell and rock materials before commencement of lhe actual dam fill works
Waler Works Des’gr. and Supervision Enlerpnse
59Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus irrigation Study & Design P ojec t
f
Volume Ill-Par*. I He3d work Geological A Geotechnical Investigation Report
9.     REFERENCE
1. Alemu I and Abebe T. 2000, Geology of Ghimbi Area, GSE. Memoir 15. 158p. and Geological map of Ghimbi Sheet. 1:250.000 scale
2 Aya lew TW. Be'i, K„ Moore. J.A., and Parrish R.A., (1990): U-Pb and Rb-Sr geochronology of the Western Ethiopian Shield. Geol, Soc. of Amer Bull., v 102, p 1309-1316
3. Bell. F.G. 1980 "Engineering Geology and Geotechnics". Newnes-Butterworths, London, UK
4 Bieniawski. Z T . 1976. "Rock Mass Classification in Rock Engineering. Proc. Symp. Exploration for Rock Engineering (Ed Z T. Bieniawski). V 1. pp. 97-106
5. Bieniawski. Z.T., 1976 "The Geomechanics Classification in Rock Engineering Applications". Proc. 4th Int Cong. Rock Meeh,. Montreux . V 2. pp. 41 48.
6   Bieniawski. Z.T.. 1989, ’Engineering Rock Mass Classifications". John Willey and Sons, New York
7   British Standard Institution, Code of Practice for Site Investigation. BS5930, 1981
8    FEMA, (2011), Filters for Embankment Dams. Best Practices for Design and Construction. U.S Deoartment of Homeland Security. USA,
9   ISRM, (1981) Rock Characterization. Testing and Monitoring. ISRM Suggested Methods (Brown. E.T. ed). Pergamon Press. New York. 211p.
10 BCEOM - French Engineering Consultants in association with BRGM and ILS. Abay River Master Plan - Pre-feasibility Study - Dabus Hydropower Project PHASE 3. Prefeasibility Studies, Hydropower Schemes, February 1998
11 WWDSE - Dabus irrigation study and design project Geological and preliminary geotechnical investigation report. March 2014.
12. WWDSE and ELC - Zarema May Day Dam and Irrigation Study and Design Project Volume III Geology and Geotechnical Final Feasibility Report Sugar Corporation.
13 WWDSE 2C14 Geotechnical Investigation of KurazWeir, Sugar Corporation
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enlerprse
60
August.201J
Minisky of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study & Design Projec [
Head work Geological & Geotechnical I
Volume III Part I ivestigation Report
1
I rt*
.-J
ANNEXES
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
August,? 015Ministry of Water and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Study A Design Project
Volumn Ill-Part I Heid work Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
Annex I: Laboratory Test Result
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
62
August,2015Gompsiny Name.
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
zgfe
w
Title!
Document Na:
Issue No.
Page Na
Ptn-ftT              /Inter-Office Memorandum
OF/WWDSE/053
1
1 of 2
4rTC/Our
2^
•f’l/Date: 04/05/2015
h/Toi Dabus Irrigation Project
h/Trom Laboratory Service Sub process —
__JX. Nctsanct Mengistie
WWDSE
A/Lab Sub Process Manage
■> -W/Subject i        Laboratory Test Results of Soils brouqht from Dabus Irrigation
Project
Please find enclosed 209 pages test results of soils brought from Dabus Project on March 23, 2015. The remaining consolidation and permeability tests will be reported as soon as the tests are completed.
For recording purposes please be informed that the cost of analysis including VAT is Birr 93,248.90 (Ninety Three I housand Two Hundred Forty Eight Birr and Ninety Cents only).
Sincerely yours,
>  Corporate Technical Service Center
>  Audit Service Process
>   Financial Management Sub Process
WWDSEL,—i ;'i.
Summary of Test Result of Soils
Date: 4/5/2015
Parameter
‘ DCBP-1-6
0 JO-2 JO m
Lab No:
694J07
DCBP 1 7
1.OD-10Om
Lab No:
695/07
DCBP-[-8            DCBP-1-12
0. [O’ l.50m
0,19-J.OOni
Lnb No: Lab No:
696/07 697/07
DCBP-l-13           DCBP-I-I5 0.20-130 m           L2D-3,00rri
Lflb No:               Lab No:
698/07                  699.07
DCBP-1-16
OJO-J.OOm
Lab No:
700/07
DCBP-2-1             DCBP-2-2 O.BD-J.OOm         0,00-1.20m
Lab No;                Lab No; 701/07                   702/07
Specific gravity
263                   2.68                        276                   2.60
2 77                         2.84                 2.60                  2 73                         2.62
Grain Size Analysis Clay %
Silt %
Sand %
Gravel %
71.33
14.32
14 35
-
58.34
18.25
23.41
-
40.94 54.61 13,39 30.28 45.67 15.11
-
I
9.19 14.35
2.65 30 26
3,79 44 22
8437 11 17
7139                 1.61 12.87               15.53 1574                11.32
-                   71.53    ..
35.13
*• ■* -V -1
JJ.J I
10.71
20.79
I
Liquid Limit
Plastic Limit
Plastic Index
70.64
26.83
43 81
64.30
j 23 56
40.74
49,40
18.58
30.82
67,50
25.87
41.63
so SO
27.03
53.77
35.50
19.50
16.00
71.90
23.99
47.91
39.80
30.87
8.93
Standard Practar MDD (gm/cc)
OMC(M>)
1.470
25.20
IJ33
25.50
1.610
22.80
1.419
31.30
1,421
26.00
1,777
15.5
1.515
25.50
1.716
14.90
1.399
30.20
Direct Shear
C(kPa) 0(°1
1 39.66
15 38
67.33
[3.77
-
64.0
9.37
34.00
26.33
32,00
20.05
4.67
26.56
Ocdomefer Consolidation. Cc
0.128
0.270
-
-
*
----- -----------
r_
Permeability, cm/scc
-i
I I.B7 x JO'4
1
1.23 x I01-
-
5.15 x IQ’1-
3.63 x 10’
-
2.36 x ItT7-
Linear Shrinkage, %
12,14
20.18
821
[7,50
17.86
15 39
17 86
1.07
J 0.0
Dispersion by Double Hydrometer
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
.ND
ND
ND
ND
Free Swell %
122.5
90.0
900
130.0
165.0
42.5
60.0
50 0
70.0
Bulk Unit Weight, gm/cc
■
■
*
I
i
l
•
■
-
*
Organic Content (%)
0.45
0.34
047
0 40
0.57
0.34
rj
0.62
,
CF( meq/lit)
1.12
[.68
0.56
1.96
1.96
0.84
K
SO/(meq/llt)
2.17
I 4.36
i
1.31
5J2          |
4,69
.1-54
’234 v
~ I■A
\i
■il* £
n
A ! J.3B ,V
Note; -NMC- Natural Moisture Content, ND=Non Dispersive, D=Dispersive ; -The bulk specific gravity test was conducted from disturbed dry sample.
Checked by:
__ _O-,
Approved by:
=T“T
<-T.CQ0.00-2.4 lm               0.20-2 50m
Lab No: 711/07___ Lab No: 712/07
DTP-2
2.75.5.00 m
1.3b No: 711/07
DTP-3
1.00*5.00m
Lnb No: 714/0-
DISL I
0.20-2.50 m I
Lab No: 715/07 «
□CBP-2-4
0.00-1.50m
DCBP-2-7
0.30-3.00m
T
Specific gravity*
Grain Size Analysis
Clay %
Silt %
Sand %
Grave 1%
Atterberg Limits
Liquid   Limit
Plastic Limit
Plastic Index
l.ab Noi -lc/q? I Lab No 71' 07
2 67
DSBH-l-l
2.00-I2.00m Lab Noj_718/Q7
43.85
47 55
8.60
28.10
16.40
55.49
11.01
20.71
59.66
13 69
2541
60 90
39.45
25.20
35 35
20.72
48.2
31 09
10.78
6 28
72.70
29.77
42.93
37.90
o.uz 43 85                   32.95
19 07 16 34
18.83 27 51
Non-PL
35 30
20 59
43.00
22 '6
-                      1471                  20.44
Standard Proctor MDD (gm/cc) OMC(%)
42.40
35 45
6.95
75 83
33 5
16.8?
16.68
1.397
31.00
-
-
-
1 596                  1.339
1
ii
Direct Shear
C(kPa) 0(°)
22.5                   33.60                     .            I
51.00 22.66
10.20 1048
37 66 30.33
25 64 29 03
94.00 69.33
8 53 13.50
Linear Shrinkage, %
15.00                        •
-
•
-
-
•
Permeability, cm/sec
1.99 x 10 *
•
-
•
-.
5.10 x 101                   2 84 x 10^"              -
Dispersion by Double Hydrometer
ND
ND
ND
ND
D
ND
ND                     ND
Free Swell %                            60.0
•
-
1
-
Organic Content (%)
1.55
-
—
-
Cl'( meq/lit)
0.84
-
-
i•            ■            1•
•
*
SO4’(mcq/1it)
2.77       1
•
1:
Note: - NMC= Natural Moisture Content. ND- Non Dispersive, D=Dispersive
: -The bulk specific gravity test was conducted from disturbed dry sample.
——
Checked by:
Approved by:
-4 Sv^-’                   7
r 5 m«* > '
CfT—-’ r—-1 "J -’
Summary of Test Result of Rocks Date: 4/5/201_5
1=1
"B J ■ w
*1
Parameter
WBH-l-1
2.75-3 J7m
Lab
No 727/07
WBH-t-2
7,| 0-7,5 Im
Lrtb
No:728/07
WBILI-3
l5.25-15,70m
Lab
No:72Wt)7
WBH-2-1               WBH-2-2            DST-BH-l-l
DST-BHl-2             DSBH-l-2              DQBH-I
|7.52-17.84m 23.00-23.52m
Lab                        Lab
6.14-G.SQm         11.27-11.60m        1100-20.19m                Lab Lab                        Lab                        Lab                 No: 735/07
No:730/D7             No:73i/O7      !- No;7j2/D7          1 No: 733/07                No: 734/07
j
UCS, kPa
7.00
43.45
66.8fi
23 00                 49.02
47.45
54 33
1
j Point Load, .MPa
-
-
-
-
22 56 33.75
_
Specific gravity
2.59
2.89
2.60
2.53                   2.60                   2.62
2 69
-
2.88
Water Absorption. %
1.18                  .047
0.27
0.59                   0.20                   0.21                   0.32
0.72                   050
Unit Weight, gm/cc                     233                   2.74
2.55
2.42                   2 53
2.51                   2.52
■                  2.77
Porosity (%)
10.04 5.19
i
2.00                  4.00                   2 69
4.20                   6.32
3.82
AIV.%
* -1
-*-
-
1
18.7(1
LA A, %
-
-
-
1
--
I
14.! 1
Soundness by Sodium Sulphate, %
1
1-
2.46
Note; - NMC=Natural Moisture Content, ND= Non Dispersive, D-Dispers:ve
: -The hulk specific gravity test was conducted front disturbed dry' sample. Checked by:                                                                                 Approved by:prn'i pa.pt Jim*; htttc
jrcfcf
n-tiA-H hicntH-
fAX6* FUMM Mt&
1
r
Project Client Location Test Pit
Tel 251 - 116- 18 55 16/61 45 01 Fax. 251 - 116 61 53 71/61 OB 98 e-mail w.w.d.s.c@cthionet.ct
Dabus Irrigation project
Minslry of water. Irrigation & Energy Clay borrow 1
DCBP-1-7
1.0-3 0
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service
Soil & Material Testing Section
P O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed Test type Atlerberg Limit Date 23/4/2015
Lab No 695/07
LIQUID AND PLASTIC IIMIT
f DETERMINATIONS
DATA ANO COMPUTATION SHEET
Type of test
LL
LL
LL
LL
Conteiner No
10
35
36
60
No of Blows
34
28
22
16
Wl.of sample • Tare wet
25.630
28 050
30 530
32450
Wt of sample ♦ Tare dry
20.890
22 950
24 360
25200
W1 of waler
4.740
5 100
6.170
7 250
Tare
13.250
14.800
14 950
14 680
wt.ol dry SOd
7640
8.150
9.410
10 520
Waler content % |
62 042
62 577
65.569
68.916
r J
1 r
1 ypc of test
PL
PL
Conteiner No
389
399
Wt of sample ♦ Tare wet
26.010
26.090
Wl of samp e ♦ Tare dry
23.850
24.050
Wt ol waler
2 160
2 040
Tare
14.780
15.300
wl ol dry soil
9 070
8 750
Water content % |
23 815
23.314
23565
I?ID4                WW ’fcTTTC
"Hahnt wih MZ/7 /WX7W frFA
Tel 251 116 -18 55 16/61 45 01
Fax 251 - 116 - 61 53 71/61 08 98
e-mail w.w.d.s.e@el
hionet.et
Project
Dabus Irrigation
project
Client
Minslry of water. Irr
igation & Energy
Location :
Clay borrow 1
Test Pit:
DCBP-1-12
Depth (m).     0.0-3.0
LIQUIO AND Pl ASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service
Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type : Disturbed Test type Atterberg Limit Date : 24/4/2015
Lab No 697/07
Type of lest
LL
LL
LL
LL
Container No
1
7
10
11
No. of Blows
34
28
22
-16
Wl of sample ♦ Tare wel
25.410
27 220
29230
32.790
Wt.of sample ♦ Tare dry
21.270
22.250
23350
25.030
Wt of water
4.140
4.970
5.880
7760
Tare
14.670
14.440
15.140
14.710
wt.of dry sod
6.600
7.810
8 210
10.320
Water conteni % |
62.727
63.636
71.620
75 194
Type of test
PL
PL
Conteiner Na
206
216
Wlof sample ♦ Taro we!
26.230
26 250
Wt.of simple ♦ Tare dry
23950
23.930
Wt.of water
2280
2.320
Tare
15.200
14 900
wt of dry soil
8750
9030
Water content % |
26 057
25.692
25.875fmH
*TTTC
"im'e Midr-H ftioin-f
flUC rW£M hVA
Project
Client:
Location : Test Pit Depth (m)i
Tel 251-116- 18 55 16/61 45 01
Fax 251 - 116 - 61 53 71/61 08 98
c-nriail ww.d.so@cthionet.et
Dabus Irrigation project
Minstry of waler. Irrigation & Energy Clay borrow 1
DCBP-1-15 1 2-3.0
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service
Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type : Disturbed Test type Atterberg Limit Date 23/4/2015
Lab No 699/07
LIQUID ANO PLASTIC LIMIT
DE TERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Type of test
LL
LL
LL
LL
Conteiner No
39
100
107
111
No of Blows
34
28
22
16
Wl of sample • Tare wet
25.010
27.620
29 700
32 920
Wl.of sample ♦ Tare dry
22470
24280
25.780
27.850
Wl.of waler
2.540
3.340
3.920
5.070
Tate
15.020
14.780
14.790
14.500
wl of dry sod
7 450
9 500
10.990
13.350
Water con lent % [
34 094
35 158
35669
37 978
Type of test
PL
PL
Conteiner No.
195
350
Wt.of sample ♦ Tare wet
26.190
26 130
Wl.of sample + Tare dry
24.250
24 310
Wt.of water
1.940
1 820
Tare
14 120
15 140
wt of dry soil
10 130
9.170
Water content % ]
19 151
19.847
19.499PnH JLHR’W *ttG
Jtr.*+ M4ltH AlO’HH *YiHl
Mi m
MZ6* WKM? hVA
Tel 251 - 116-18 55 16/61 45 01 F ax 251 - 116-61 53 71/61 00 98 e-mail w.w.d.s.cfgethionetot
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory ServiceSub
Process
So// <S Material Testing Section
P.O Box         2561
Addis Ababa Ethiopia
Project: Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:         Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy
Location : Clay Borrow 2
T.PicNo. DCBP-2-2
Depth(m):     0 00 1.20
DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Sample type . Disturbed Test Type : Attcrbcrg Limit Date 15/04//2015
Lab No i7Q2/07
LL
LL
LL
LL
Corleiner No
221
209
254
135
No of Blows
33
27     •
23
17 ♦
Wt.of sample ♦ Tare wet
31 140
34.770
33620
34.950
Wt of sample ♦ Tare dry
26570
29.020
28 100
29.000
Wt.of walor
4 570
5.750
5 520
5950
Tare
14 280
14 670
14.640
15.000
wl.of dry soil
12 290
14 350
13 460
14000
Waler content %
37 185
40.07C
41 010
42 500
Type of test
Pt
PL
Conte-ncr No
79
392
Wt of sampie • Tare wet
30.080
30 160
Wt of sample • Tare dry
26.390
26.720
Wt of waler
3.690
3 440
Tare
14 740
15 280
wt of dry soil
11 650
11 440
Water content %
31.674
30 070
30 872
Flow curve
Results
L. Limit 39.807.
P. limit 30.87%
P. Index8.93%
Number of Blows?tnH FMP*               ■fcTTTC jjcJH- "jam nntte. him*
1f
fAZ/7 riTHW hVA
... ....
...
Tel. 251 - 116- 18 55 16/61 45 01 Fax 251 - 116 -61 53 71/61 08 98
e-mail w.w.d.s.e(gethionet.et
Project:
Dabus Irrigation project
Client:
Mmstry of water. Irrigation & Energy
Location ;
Clay borrow 2
r Test Pit. DCBP-2-5
Depth (m):      0 2-2.1
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMIT F DETERMINATIONS
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed Test type : Atterberg Limit Date 23/4/2015
Lab No.: 704/07
T
r r'
" .11
I
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
1
-I
IT
Type of test
PL
PL
Contemer No.
224
303
WLof sample + Tare wet
26 300
26.260
Wt of sample ♦ Tare dry
23 700
23610
WLof water
2 600
2 650
Tare
15060
14 940
WLof dry soil
8 640
8.670
Water content % (
30.093
30 565
30 329
I
I
I Ic
1
I
I
■4
LiPmH FiW                 HTTTT. ________
■wmi Afltid tntnn-f
tM.c rinxw hGA
Tel 251 -116 - 18 55 16/61 45 01 Fax. 251 - 116 61 53 71/61 08 96
e-mail w.w.d.s e@ettiionot.et
Project            Dabus Irrigation      project
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service
Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
I
Client:
Mlnstry of water, Irrigation & Energy
Sample type : Disturbed
Location
Clay Borrow 2
Test type Atterberg Limit
Test Pit
DCBP-2-8
Date : 23/4/2015
Depth (m):
0 2-3 0
Lab No. : 706/07
□QUID ANO PLASTIC LIMl T DETERMINATIONS
DATA ANO COMPUTATION SHEET
T ype of test
LL
LL
LL
LL
Contetner No.
170
178
249
300
No of Blows
34
28
22
16
W1 of sample ♦ Tare wet
24 680
27 030
29.95C
31 280
W1 of sample ♦ Tare dry
21 680
23 060
24.570
25 410
W1 of walci
3 000
3 970
5.380
5.870
Tare
15 120
14 910
15.040
15.020
wt of dry soil
6.560
8 150
9.530
10 390
Water content % ]
45.732
48 712
56 453
56497
Type of test
PL
PL
Container No
338
385
Wt of sample ♦ Tore we!
26.240
26 220
WLof sample ♦ Tare dry
23.980
23.940
Wlof water
2 260
2 280
Tare
15.240
14 910
wt of dry soil
8.740
9.030
Water content % |
25.858
25.249
25 554
Flow curve
i
c
E
o
u
3
*»
O
5
57 000
55 000
53 000
51 000
49000
47 000
45 000
• i
•I
I
\l
__ I
__ J
I
\
Result
I
\
♦
51 10%
25.55%
25 55%
Tested By
Checked By
Approved By
S.
.
V4PmH FirW- JUNTO ■fcTT'TC
JfC#+
"JdhnT
Mfl’Jft-t
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service
rzxc j'”£j?jew />$*
So// & Material Testing Section
Tel 251 - 116 18 55 16/61
45 01
P.O.Box 2561
Fax 251 - lie -61 53 71/61
08 98
Addis Ababa
e-mail w.w.d.s.B@ethionet.et
Ethiopia
Project:
Dabus Irrigation project
Client:
Minslry of water, Irrigation
& Energy
Sample type Disturbed
Location :
Clay borrow 4
Test type . Alterberg Limit
Test Pit
DCBP -4-1
Date 27/4/2015
Depth (m):
0 8-3 0
Lab Nd 708/07
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMIT OETERMSNATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Type cl  test
1
LL
LL
LL
LL
Conic iner No
23
24
25
42
No. or B'aws
34
28
22
16
Wl.of sample + Tare wal
24260
25.340
29 320
32 870
Wt.of sample + Tare dry
21 090
22 100
23.970
25 760
Wt.of water
3.170
4.240
5.350
7.110
Tore
14.810
14.740
14 990
14.860
wLof dr/ sail
6.280
7,360
8.980
10.900
Water content % |
50 478
57 609
59.577
65.229
Typo af test
PL
PL
Canletner No
344
393
Wl af sample + Tare wet
26.070
26.080
Wt.of sample + fare dry
23 710
23 720
W| qI waler
2.360
2 360
Tare
14 660
14.820
wl.df dry soil
9.050
8.900
Water content % |
26.077
26.517
26 297
.1
62.000
s
£
D
EJ
S 58 000
6
M 000
1
l♦
-
Result
i
♦
Number of Slows
Tested By Processed By
choked a, Approved By 
X'/Xi*
Q* .*>
5
J, y .     .
F
w..•J 1
J 1
?oh
MCfrf mti-i inoifH -m ?fti tJH-
fAXC fUHW hVA
•XL^
1
T
Tel.  251-116  18  55  16/61  45  01
Fax 251 -116-61 5’ " Z61 08 98
e-mail w,w.d.s.e@ethionet.et
Project:       Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Ghent :        Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy location       Clay Borrow 4
T Pit No DCBP-4-3
Dcpth(m):    0.00-2.40
DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory ServiceSub
Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
P O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample No:
Sample type Disturbed Test Type : Attciberg Limit Date: 16/4/2015
Lab No 710/07
LL
LL
LL
LL
Loniemer No
203
209-
225
313
Mo of Blows
34
28
22
16
M of sample ♦ Tare wet
25 630
27.120
29 890
30.770
Wl.of sample ♦ Tare dry
21 730
22 770
24.310
25000
Wl of water
3 900
4 350
5.580
5 770
Tare
14 630
14 960
14 410
15.010
wl of dry soil
7 100
7 810
9 900
9 990
Waler content %
54 930
55.698
56 364
57.758
T ypc of test
PL
PL
Conleiner No
240
205
Wl of sample ♦ Tare wet
26 210
26 240
Wl.of sample ♦ Tare dry
23.730
23 650
Wt of waler
2 480
2.590
Tare
14 990
14.470
wt of dry SO'I
8.740
9.180
Water content %
28 375
28 214
28 294
Flow curve
56 000
* 57.000
c
a
c
2 56 0C0
2
3
?
S
Results
L.    Limit    56.00% P.     limit     28.29% P. Index 27.71%
55000
54 000
’i?mM              JUtM? ’hTTTC
jrcJH "lihtt Afltfa (Henn** PAAC rVXCflr frPA
z/O^x
Tel 251-116-16 55 16/61 45 01 Fax. 251 - 116 - 61 53 71/61 00 98 e’mail w.w d,s.c@cthionetet
Project              Dabus Irrigation  project
Chen!
Minstry of water,   Irrigation & Energy
Location :
D/s of axis
Test Pit:
DRDC-1
Depth (m).
0 2-2.5
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise Central Laboratory Service
So/, & Materia, Testing Section
P O.Hox 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed Test type : Atterberg Limit Date 23/4/2015
Lab No. 712/07
LIQUID ANO PL ASTIC LIMIT
DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Type at teat
LL
LL
LL
LL
Conic mor No
387
330
268
4
Na al Hlowtt
35
28
24
. 16
Wt.ot sample + Tare weL
42.230
44.320
48 120
47 110
WLof sample * Tare dry
35.150
36 340
38.900
37 650
■ Wl.nl svalf r
7.080
7 980
9.220
9,460
fare
15 180
14 520
14.990
14 860
wtcl dry Mil
19 970
21.820
23.910
22.790
Water content % |
35.453
36.572
38.561
41.509
Type of tell
PL         ]         PL
Conleirver Na
277
57
Wl.ol sample * Tare wet
27.680
28.000
Wt pf sample + Tare dry
25.520
25.930
WLof waler
2.160
2 070
Tare
14 120
15 140
wtof dry so l
11.400
10 790
WaLer content % |
16/947
19.184
19.066
Flow curve
B
c
u
k.
m-
O
41.000
40 000
39 .OdO
3&.000
II
I
!
---------- ——
—
S
37 aoo
JCkULrU
35 000
4P
Result
IIJ
IL
37.90%
19.07%
10 83%
Tested By Processed By
Checked By
■' .</* ,,,<AV fr'A6ptByadj&y -CT?nR FtT’T M.HPA’; «HTTC MJH pn-nt+A hioifrv ^u-ft
mm
fAXC FtrtJW hKA
Tel. 251 - 116-10 55 16/61 45 01 Pax 251 - 116 61 53 71/61 08 98 e mail ww.d.s.e@ethionet.et
Project:         Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:           Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location D/s of Axis
T Pit. No DTP-3
Dcptlifm) 1.00 500
DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory ServiceSub
Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample No
Sample type : Disturbed lest Type : Attcrbcrg Limit
Date :16/04 /2015 Lab No: 714/07
LL
LL
LL
LL
Container No
45
63
217
289
Pent ration mm
13
19
23
26
W! of sample ♦ Tare wet
24 94
27.25
’29.17
33.35
Wt of sample ♦ Tate dry
22 670
24 130
25 500
28 620
Wl of waler
2 270
3.120
3.670
4 730
Tare
15.160
14 790
14690
14.920
wl of dry soil
7 510
9 340
10.810
13.700
Water content 7.
30.226
33.405
33.950
34 526
Type of test
PL
PL
Container No
Wl.of sample ♦ Tare wel
Wl.of sample + Tare dry
Wt.ol waler
Tare
wt of dry soil
Water content %
Flow curve
Results
L.    Limit    32.95% P. limit        Non PL P. IndexVm'J  JLWI ’t»TTE
REtft vnfliiA himn-t w vfti w
MXZ7 PWJtM fl&A
Tel. 251     116-1S 55 16/61 45 01
Fa*  251  116  61  53  71/61  00  98
e-mail w.wd.s.e@cthionct.et
Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Shall Material
DCBP-2.4 0.00 1.50
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory ServiceSub
Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
P 0 Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Project Client LooLUon T.Pir Nd
Sample type : Disturbed Test Type : Attciberg Limit Date 15/04/201S
Lab No : 716/07
DETERMINATIONS
DATA ANO COMPUTATION SHEET
LL
LL
LL
LL
Cuntelnef No
95
99
208
318
!Pentfation mm
34
23
22
15
Wt of sample + Tate wet
24.8B0
27,980
29 330
30.570
Wt of sample + Tarn dry
22.140
23940
24.600
25.430
Wt.of water
2.740
4 040
4730
5,140
Tare
15.010
14 480
14.280
14.880
wt.af dry soi!
7.130
9.460
10.320
10 550
Waler content %
38.429
42706
45.833
48.720
Type of test
PL
PL
Container Na.
307
387
WLcjf sample * Tare wet
26 190
26.060
Wt.ol 'sample * Tai ©dry
24.110
24.050
Wt.ol water
2.080
2.010
Tare
14.850
15 180
wt ol dry sail
9 260
8.870
Waler content %
22462
22.661
22.561
Flow curvern'i
«tttc
A tnoift-+
r^zzr sfithw h^A
Tel. 251 - 116- 18 55 1GZ61 45 01
Fax. 251 116 61 53 71/61 08 98
e mail w w.d.s.e@ethionet et
Project
Dabus Irrigation project
Client
Minslry of water,  Irrigation & Energy
Location :
Shell material
Test Pit:
DSBH-1-1
Depth (m):       2.0-12 0
LIQUID ANO PI ASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type : Disturbed Test type Atterberg Limit Date: 29/4/2015
Lab No.: 718/07
Type of lest
LL
IL
LL
LL
Container No
167
181
216
217
No. of Blows
32
28
22
16
Wl.of sample • Taro wot
24 760
26010
28.540
30 090
Wt.of sample » Tare dry
22 250
23.340
25 130
26070
Wt of waler
2.510
2.670
3.410
4 020
Tare
14 560
15 220
14 900
14940
wtaf dry soil
7690
8 120
10 230
11.130
Water content % ]
32 640
32 882
33 333
36 119
Type of test
PL
PL
Container No
351
394
WLof sample * Tare wet
26.050
26 150
Wt of sample • Tare dry
24.480
24 520
Wt of waler
1.570
1 630
Tare
15.170
14 800
wi of dry soil
9.310
9 720
Waler content % J
16.864
16 770
16.817PmV
—|U 3
HTTTC
n-ntft waifr* faac rw/™ fWA
V
I
r
IF
Tel. 251 - 116 18 55 16/61 45 01 Fax. 251 116-61 53 71/61 OH 98 o-mail w.w.d.s.e@oihianct.at
Project ■          Dabus Irrigation        project
Client               Minstry of water.   Irrigation & Energy Location
Test Pit:           WBH-2-SPT-2 Depth (rri)        4.0-5.0
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed Test type : Alterberg Limit Date . 29/4/2015
Lab No : 724/07
Type ct lost
LL
LL
LL
LL
Container No
92
95
113
107
Nd. of BIow5i
34.
20
22.
16
Wlof sarnp'e + Tate we1
24.8B0
26.360
29.440
33 350
W! of sample * Tara dry
21.930
22,960
25 120
27,570
W1 of waler
2.950
3 400
4 320
5780
Tare
14.540
15.000
15.030
14.780
wi of dry soil
7 390
7.960
10.090
12.790
Water content % ]
39 919
42.714
42.815
45.192
T flic of lest
PL
PL
Conlemer No
257
293
Wt.of sample + Tare we!
26.190
26.200
Wt.of sample + Tare dry
24.100
24 060
W1 of waler
2 090
2.140
Tare
14,640
14.530
wt of dry soil
9.460
9.530
Water coni a nt % i
22.093        22.455
22.274
Result
LL
P±
P.l
42 40%
22 27%
20.13%
Tested By
Processed ByjfGJtf "’imT
WW *TTTC
tnoifrf
MX/7 9”U?JW hKA
Tel 251 - 116- 18 55 16/61 45 01
Fax. 251 -116-61 53 71/61 08 98
e-mail w.w.d.sefdethionetet
Project. Dabus Irrigation project
Client:              Minstry of water. Irrigation & Energy Location .
Test Pit           DST-BH-1-SPT-1 Depth (m):      1 85-2 65
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATIONS
DATA AND COMPUTATION SHEET
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Central
Laboratory Service
Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed Test type : Atterberg Limit Date 29/4/2015
Lab No 726/07
Type of test
LL
LL
LL
LL
Conteiner No
92
167
257
293
No of Blows
.34
28
22
16
Wl of sample ♦ Tare wet
25 500
27 600
29.190
33.920
Wt of sample ♦ Tare dry
22.480
23 890
25 190
28.260
Wt of waler
3.020
3.710
4.000
5.660
Tare
14 550
14 550
15.400
14 520
wt of dry soil
7 930
9.340
9790
13 740
Water content % ["
38 083
39 722
40.858
41.194
T ypc of test
PL
PL
Cocilciner No.
300
338
Wt of sample * Tare wet
26.240
26.370
Wt of sample ♦ I are dry
24.590
24 690
Wt of water
1.650
1.680
Tare
15.020
15 020
wt or dr/ soil
9 570
9.670
Water content % |
17.241
17 373
17.307
Flow curve
39.77% ___17,31%
22 46%
Processed Bynun IW Jim*; «ttc
jrntff vnntiA Aicnn-f ^n-ft
F^t HL-R+
MZ6- rvtttt hVA
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Project Client
Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy  Sample Type Disturrbed
location : Clay Borrow 1 
T.Pit No. DCBP-1 6 
Depth(m) 0.20-2.30 
Test Type : Hydromcter(with out sol'n) Date : 24/4/2015
Lab-No : -694/07
Total mass o/ samf/e, >              50
Steve
No
Sieve
Opemnffmm)
Mass oj
Sieve(g)
lass of jieve
Ret .soil(g)
Man of Rel soil (g)
Peneirfage
Retained
Camitiafim
°/o Retained
Percentage
Passing
No 10
2
551.1
551.1
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
539 3
0.44
0.880
0.88
99.1
No 30
0.6
516.7
517.6
0.91
1.820
2.70
97.3
No SO
0.3
488.2
489.4
1.17
2.340
5.04
95.0
No 100
0.15
481.9
483.9
2.01
4.020
9.06
90.9
No 200
0.075
459.2
4616
2.44
4.880
13.94
86.1
: :/!
425.5
425.5
0.00
0 000
0.00
Specific Gravity of soil
2.63 
Hydrometer Analysis
Test Temperature, degc 21.0
Elapsed
Time
(min)
Actual
Hydrometer
Reading
Corrected
Hydrometer
Reading
Effective
Depth
(cm)
Coefficient
K
Crain
s*
(mm)
Percentage Finer
Combined
2
15.0000
21.0
150000
13.80
0.01356
0.0356
30.14
5
11.5000
21.0
11.5000
14.40
0.01356
0.0230
23.11
15
9.0000
21.0
9.0000
14.80
0.01356
0.0135
18.08
30
3.5000
21.0
3.5000
15.70
0.01356
0.0098
7.03
60
2.0000
21.0
2.0000
16.00
0.01356
0.0070
4.02
250
1.0000
22.0
1.0000
16.10
0.01)41
0.0034
2.01
1140
0.0000
22.0
00000
16.30
0.01341
0.0014
0.00
Gram Size Distribution Curve.BS
£
XT o c
U)
2
100.00
90 80.C00 O 70.00 
60 00 
50 00 
40 00 
30.00 
2000 
1000 0.00
t
I
rnai'H
4»ttc
vnniTA ftimn-v  ro-n
n
raxr mjror ?/<pa
Project:        D.ibusr Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:         Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location . Chy Borrow 1
T.PitNo. DCBPI-7
Depth(m) t 1.00-3.00
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
So/7 & Materia/ Testing Section
Sample Type : Di sturt bed Test Type : Hydrometer Date: 24/4/2015
Lab-No -695/07
Total mzirr ofraMpie,                   50
Stew
Maa of
Sieve fr)
jVL/jt of
Rat soil /pj
Penxittoge
Retained
% Retained
PffWflfajr
Patting
Ne 10
2
551. f
551.1
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
US
538.9
5393
0.41
0.852
0.85
993
No 30
0.6
516.7
518.2
1.45
3.015
3J7
96.1
No 50
. 03
488.2
4903
2.06
1.283
8.15
91.9
No 100
0.15
481.9
485.4
3.47
7.214
15.36
84.6
No 200
007y'
459.2
465. t
3.87
8.046
23.41
76.6
pan
425.5
425.5
0.000
0.00
SpM/ii: Gravity o / roil
Hydrometer Analysis
2.68  Ttft Tempt nr litre, de&c 21.0
H/apicd
Time
(mat)
Aetna/
l-lydwJttler
Rjadiw
Teifprahtie
Cwrtofed
f iydm we fer
Rratfinp
Depth
M
Coeffii ient
K
Grain
Si^r
(mm)
Pcmntetge
Piner
Combined
2
42.0000
21.0
35.5000
9.40
0 01336
0.0290
7331
5
40.0000
21.0
33.5000
9.70
0.01336
0.0186
6918
/J
J9.0000
21,0
$2.5000
9.90
0.01336
0.0109
67.11
JO
38.0000
21.0
31.5000
1030
0 01336
0.0077
65.05
60
370000
71 0
30.5000
10.20
0.01336
0.0055
62.98
250
350000
21.0
28.5000
10.60
0.01321
00027
58.85
14 tO |           34.5000
21.0
28.0000
10.60
0.01321
0.00/1
5782
Grain Siie Distribution Curve ,BS
100 DO 90.00 ao.oo
70.00
60.00
50 00
40.00
30.00
20 00
10.00
0 00
0.1                   0 01                 0.001 0.0001
-
£ *
Lt*
£  X
r-------1
J
I
J
nm-H             WW *TTU
zgjH mtfA fntrjfH- in-ti
w-
rzz/:
h&A
Project:
Dubusc Irrigation S
tudy anti Design Project
Client:
IjQcatijon: T Pic No
Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy Clay Borrow 1
DCBP-1-7
r Depth(m) : 1 00-3.00
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
So// <£ Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd Test Type Double I lydromclcr Date: 24/4/2015
I.ab-No ; -695/07
r
Grain SIzq Distribution Curvc.BS
■ 100 oo 90 GO
90 00
u    70    00
- 6000
50.00
*        4D.00
£       30.00
H 20,00
£ woo 0.00
by
Zt/yjFDWfr/ by
1.nm-H rtT’T JTCtff MUtfA
MZ/7 rww h?A
*TTG Tr(Hl
Project:       Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Client  Ministry  of  Water,  Irrigation  and  Energy 
Txxration : Clay Borrow 1
T Pit No DCBP 1 8
Dcpth(m): 0.10-1.50 
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type Disturrbcd
Test Type : Hydrome(cr(wiih out sol’n) Date 24/4/2015
Lab-No: - 696/07
___________________________ Total man of sample, &              50          ______
SlCIK
No
Siem
Optwr^puw)
Maa of   • Sieve (y)
lass af sieve Ret jM
Mass of
Ret. soil (jtf
Pent/ita^e
Retained
Cumulative
% Retained
Peranlag:
Passing
No 10
2
551.1
551.1
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
5400
1.08
2.160
2.16
97.8
No 30
0.6
516.7
521.2
4.45
8.900
11.06
88.9
No SO
0.3
488.2
493.4
5.18
10.360
21.42
78.6
No 100
0.15
481.9
488.2
6.29
12.580
34.00
660
No 200
0075
459.2
464.0
4.84
9680
43.68
56 3
M
425.5
425.5
0 000
0.00
SpeiVlc Gravity of toil
Hydrometer Analysis
2.76  Text Temperature, de&c 22.0
Elapsed
Time
(min)
Actual
I ly diameter
Reading
Tenpralure
Corrected
Hydrometer
Reading
Effective
Depth
(cm)
Grain
Siqr
(mm)
Percentage
Finer Combined
2
10.0000
22.0
10.0000
14.70
0.01290
00350
19.53
5
8.0000
22.0
8.0000
15.00
0.01290
0.0224
15.62
15
5.0000
220
5.0000
15.50
0.01290
0.0131
9.76
30
4.0000
22.0
4.0000
15.60
0.01290
0.0093
7.81
60
2.0000
22.0
2.0000
16.00
0.01290
0.0067
3.91
250
1.0000
22.0
1.0000
16.10
0.01290
0.0033
1.95
1440
0.0000
22.0
0.0000             16.30
0.01290
0.0014
0 00
Gram Size Distribution Curve.BS
*ntn-’l
jrctff pnntfi fnoift-f Tn-* vp*dr w-
rue rinxw hVA
«TTC
Project  Dabusc  Irrigation  Study  and  Design  Project
Client Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Total mass of sample t g/0
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disrurrbed 
Location : Clay Borrow I
Test Type: Hydrometer
T.Pit. No. DCBP-1-12
Date :24/4/2015
Depdi(m) 0 10-3.00
Lab-No: - 697/07
Sieve
No
Sieve
Opt*/*t (huh)
Mass of
Sievefg)
Aass of sieve
Rr/
Mass of
Rz/. soil
Percentage
Retained
Cumulative
9 /o Retained
Percentage
Passing
No 10
2
551.1
551.1
0.00
0.000
000
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
540.1
1.20
2.467
2.47
97.5
No 30
0.6
516.7
518.4
1.66
3.413
5.88
94.1
No SO
0.3
488.2
489.4
1.17
2.406
8.29
91.7
No 100
0.15
481.9
483.3
1.42
2.920
11.21
88.8
No 200
0.075
459.2
461.1
1.90
3.907
15.11
84.9
pan
425.5
425.5
0.00
0.000
000
Specific Gravity of sod 
Hydrometer Analysis
2.60  ________ Test Temperature, dtg.c_______21.0
Elapsed
Time
(mm)
Actual Hydrometer
Reading
Tenprature
Corrected
Hydrometer
Reading
Effective
Depth
(cm)
Coefficient
K
Grain
Si^e
(mm/
Percentage Finer
Combined
2
11.0000
21.0
34.5000
9.60
0.01369
0.0300
71.78
5
39.0000
21.0
32.5000
9.90
0.01369
0.0193
67.61
15
38.0000
21.0
31.5000
10.10
0.01369
00112
65.53
30
37.0000
21.0
30.5000
10.20
0.01369
0.0080
63.45
60
35.5000
21.0
29.0000
10.50
0.01369
0.0057
60.33
250
33.5000
21.0
27.0000
10.80
0.01369
0.0028
56.17
1440
32.0000
21 0
25 5000
11.10
0.01369
0.0012
53.05
Grain Size Distribution Curve.BS
Tested by:
Processed by:nm-M
«ttc MPtfd h7A1fr+ 'XHi
rrt m
Mzr ruMM M:a
Project:       Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:        Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location Clay Borrow 1
T.PilNo. DCBP-l-12 Depth(m): 0.10-3.00
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type Disturrbcd
Test Type : Double Hydrometer Date :24/4/201S
Lab-No: - 697/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve, BS
Ter/flf by:__
Puxcifed by
Chtcktd by
yif^oHd by
-—nm-4              JUNTO 't’TTC PAPifA hlfllft-f ” n-fi
l
’LRi
/VrZ6* r Z77.C/?$' hVA
332^
Water Works Design and k Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
4
r
‘XT/'
Project Dnbuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location Clay Borrow 1
TPit.No. DCBP143
Dcpth(m) 0,20-2,30
Service Sub Process Sort A /Material Testfng Section
Sample Type ; Disturbed
Tost Type : Hydrometerfwith nut soFn) Date :24/4/2015
Lab No; - 698/07
Tof(ji fflMXT of JUJHp/f, /50
Jmc*
No
Steve
C)pt . -rtfrtrin)
Mair of
Sieved)
Jail of neve Rr/ roi/ft)
Masi of
Rrf. sail /4I
Perctnlage
Rtfamed
CitmuhifffT
% Retained
Pertt/ttag Passing
Na 10
2
5513
5513
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
1.18
5389
539.4
04#
1.080
1.08
98.9
No JO
0.6
516.7
517.6
0.88
1.760
2.84
972
No 50
03
488.2
4893
111
2.220
5.06
94 9
No too
035
481.9
483.7
1.82
5.640
8.70
913
No 200
0.075
459.2
461.6
238
4,760
13.46
86.5
pGN
4253              425 5
0.000
000
Specific Grvidty of icii
—----------------
E/aj>irJ
Time
(min)
2.77
Hydrometer Analysis
Tc/1 Temfim/nm,
22.0
Actaai Ilydrvmefcr
Reading
______
7enpnrtare 4e^L
__________
Conwfed
Hydrometer
Reading
__________
Coejficitfit
K
___
Grain
Sr&
(mm)
Percentage Ptcier
Combined
2
18.0000
22.0
IS.OOOO
1330
0.01287
0.0332
35.08
5
14.0000
22.0
14.0000
14,00^
0.01287
0.0215
2738
13.9
9.0000
22.0
9.0000
14.80
0.0/287'
00133
1734
30
7.0000
22.0
7.0000
15.20
0.01287
0.0092
13.64
co
4.0000
22.0
4.0000
15.60
0.01287
0.0066
7.80
250
1.5000
22.0
1.5000
16.00
0.01287
0.0053
2.92
1440
0.0000
22 0
0.0000
1630
0.0128 7
0.0014
000
Grain Size Distribution Curve.BS
’CT «U c 
ii_ <1>
u>
103.00
90.00 eooo
70 00
60.00
50.00
c
s
Q||
■u
-10.00
30.DO
20.00
□_
10.00
Ttfftd bj Pioiurtd bj:_
Approved ty:
§£-s(l<n-7
♦'PTC t-cZ*
Water Works Design and
X?A"7rt-')- ^tbfi P/-^y.X?-
g--\
p Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process
MZC firtJW he*
Project:       Dabus Irrigation Project
Client:         Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy location : Clay Borrow I
T Pit No. DCBPl-13 Dcptb(m). 0.20-3 00
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Test Type : Hydrometer +Wct Sieve Date :24/4/2OI5
Lab-No: - 698/07
Total man of sample before atash, %
Total mass of sample after wash, £ 
1411.60
1244.44
Of
Sieve MM(wtfMW)
Man of
Sievefc)
Mass of sit at < Rr/ .soilft)
-    Mass of Ret. soil y)
Percentage
Retained
CMBulati*
% Retained
Percentage
Passing
75.00
1800.00
1800.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
5000
1203.50
1409.10
205.60
14.57
14.57
85.43
37.50
1087.80
108780
0.00
0.00
14.57
85.43
25.00
1191.20
1541.90
350.70
24.84
39.41
60.59
19.00
718J0
920.90
202.40
14.34
53.75
46.25
12.50
586.10
831.20
245.10
17.36
71.11
28.89
9.50
598.40
695.90
97.50
6.91
78.02
21.98
4.75
578.10
629.60
51.50
3.65
81.67
18.33
2.36
533.00
571.10
38.10
2.70
84 37
15.63
2.00
551.10
551.10
0.00
0.00
84.37
15.63
1.18
538.90
557.10
18.20
1.29
85.65
14.35
0.60
516.70
528.14
11.44
0.81
86.47
13.53
0.30
48820
498.40
10.20
0.72
87.19
12.81
0.15
481.90
490.20
8.30
0.59
87.78
12.22
0.08
459.20
464.60
5.40
0.38
8816
11.84
PAN
425.50
592.66
167.16
11.84
0.00
000
1411.60
Hydrometer Analysis
Specific Gravity ot soil __________2J7__________________Tat Temperature, dcyc 21.0
IS lapsed
Time
(mtn)
Actual
I lydrometer
Reading
Ttupjatuie
Corrected
Hydrometer
Effective
Depth
(an/
Coefficient
K
Crain
Si^e
(mm)
Pencntagr Finer
Combined
2
■ 45.5000
21.0
39.5000
8.80
0.01287
0.0270
11.09
5
44.0000
21.0
38.0000
9.10
0.01287
0.0174
10.67
15
43.0000
21.0
37.0000
9.20
0.01287
0.0101
10.39
30
41 0000
21.0
35.0000
9.60
0.01287
0.0073
9.82
60
40.5000
21.0
34.5000
9.70
0.01287
0.0052
968
250
39.0000
21.0
33.0000
9.90
0.01287
0.0026
9.26
1440
38.5000
21.0
32.5000
10.00
0.01287
0.0011
912
Tested by
Chttkcd bynm-H            WW *TTC mp&h *toih w
v+ fAxr rw/w h?A
Project Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client:        Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location : Clay Borrow 1
T.Pit No. DCBP-1-15
Deptli(m): 1.20 3.00
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type Disturrbcd Test Type : Hydrometer Date: 9/4/2015 
Lab-No: 699/07
7 olal man aj sample, /               50
Sievt
No
Sievt
Openia^mm)
Man of
Sieve(fJ
Ian of sieve R// tot iff)
Mass of
Ret soil ($)
Percentage
Retained
Cnmntotine
% Retained
Percentage
Passing
No 10
2
551.1
5511
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
542.2
3.32
6.753
6.75
93.2
No SO
0.6
516.7
522.4
5.73
11.654
18.41
81.6
No 50
. 0.3
488.2
493.8
5.58
11.349
29.76
702
No 100
0.15
481.9
489 2
7.34
14.929
44.68
55.3
No 200
0.075
459.2
467.7
8.53
17.349
62.03
37 97
pat!
425.5
425.5
0 000
0.00
Speiip. Gnii'ti', o/ soil 2.84 
Hydrometer Analysis
Tert Tempeiatiti e, de$ l 21.0
Elapsed
Time
(mm]
Actual
Reading
Teupratuie
degi
Correrted
Hydrometer
Readttf
Efferttve
Depth
Coefficient
K
Grain
Si^c
(nme)
Percentage
Finer
Combined
2
20.0000
21.0
13.5000
13.00
0.01276
0.0325
26.39
5
17.5000
21.0
11.0000
13.40
0.01276
0.0209
21.50
15
16.0000
21.0
9.5000
13.70
001276
0.0122
18.57
30
15.0000
21.0
8.5000
13.80
0.01276
0.0087
16.61
60
150000
21.0
8.5000
13.80
0.01276
0.0061
16.61
250
13.0000
21.0
6.5000
14.20
0.01276
0.0030
12.71
1440
12.5000
18.0
6.0000
14.30
0.01276
0.0013
11.73
Grain Sire Distribution Curve,BS
it
V-
<u
c
LL
<D
□>
13
c
<D
e
o
0.
100 00 
90 00 
80 70.c00  o 
60 00 
60.00 
40 00 
30 00 
20.00 
1000 
000
10
01                  0.01               0 001             00001r r
~r
r
w rtPT mim -iittc JfCfi-f MPtH MlH 'Vo-ft
W MZC f-ir>£W M-A
Project:        Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location : Chy Borrow 1
T.Pit. No DCBP-1-15 Depth (m): 1 20-3 00
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type: Dis tunbed
Test Type : Double 1 Lydrometer Date : 9/4/2015
Lab-No : 699/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
TliH           (l<n-y
fc’CE'T P'l-tto-FrfS MAIA-^ ■’lU-fi
wuft
fh£C sriDJW hVA
it-
Water Works Design and
p Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
'XIZ'
Project : Dabus Irrigation Project
Client: Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type Disturrbcd
Location : Clay Borrow 1
Test Type : Hydrometer +Wet Sieve
T.Pit. No. DCBP 1-15
Date :9/4/2015
V”
Dcpth(m); I 20-3.00
Lab-No : -699/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
11
Grain siz
e,mm
1
Gravel
Sand
Silt
Clay
I!
Inm-H /“t-PT ww «ttg
JTGtff
MlhU-i hinitH- ’>D’fi
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Project:
Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
■
Client:
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Location : Clay Borrow 1
Test Type : Hydromctcr(with out soln)
jr
TPit.No DCBP-l-16
Date .21/4/201 >
Depth(m) ; 0.20 3 00
Lab-No: -700/07
To/tf/ mass of samflt^                  >0
Steve
Mass of
Rf/. ior7
Pnwitaj?
Na
Ma/S Of
Skvtfy
■fsrj/ of skm Rf/ .
PLtSaiiiid %
Cnmit/aidt
RfAHMftZ
Ptrrenlayy Passing
iV  10
fl
2
SS I A
55 7, J
0 000
0.00
100.0
Nd 16
1.18
538-9
539.4
0.57
1.020
1.02
99.0
No 30
0.6
5167
517.9
Md
2.320
3.34
96.7
Nd 50
0.3
188.2
489.6
7.39
2780
6.12
939
(n
Nd 100
0.15
481.9
183.8
7.97
3 820
9,94
90A
' No 200
0.075
4597
461.6
2.35
4700
UG4
85.4
pan
425.5
425.5
0.000
0.00
Spttifk Graviiy of sod 
Hydrometer Analysis
2.6  1 tsf Temperaturf, city c
21.0
Elapsed
Time
fmdif
jAtfiai Hydrometer
Retrdmg
Tf-apra/wr
CornecJid
Hydrometer
Rf?xJr/r.n i;
Effei ft ye
Depth
(’rm)
Coeffkre/rt
K
Grain
J7^e
(raw)
Parentage Frmr
Gombrjeed
rJ
2
14.5000
2L0
74.5000'
13.90
0.01369
0.0361
29.34
5
9.0000
21.0
9.0000
14.80
0.01369
0.0235
7.8.21
13 9
7.0000
21.0
7.0000
15.20
0.01369
0.0143
74.77
30
10000
21.0
3.0000
15.80
0.01369
0.0099
6.07
60
7.5000
21.0
1.5000
16.00
0.01369
0.0071
3.04
250
7.0000
210
l.OWQ
16.10
0.01369
0.0035
2.02
I
I
1440
0,0000
21.0
0.0000
16.30
0.01369
0.0015
0.00
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
X
n
c
U-
fll
cn
rn
G
GJ
E
OJ
CL
i era oo 90   00 aooo
70.00
60   00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
10
1
______________________
Gravel
Grain Sizc.rnrTi
1
F=
Sand
|
Silt
Clay
Terted by : Protested by__
!/y>rt4Wri' fry .-
T”
I
r_nm-4              wmi htte
jjcM rnnt+i himn-t "in-ft
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
r
w
Service Sub Process
y”/7ze/?^ m-'a
So/7 <S Material Testing Section
Project:
Dabuse  Irrigation  Study  and  Design  Project
Client :
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Sample Type: Disturrbcd
Location  ;  Clay  Borrow  2 T.PilNo, DCBP-2 1
Test Type Hydrometer
Date :24/4/20l 5
Depth(m) . 0.80-3.00 
Lab-No : - 701/07
To fa/ mart cfs ample, g
50
r
J«i¥
Ncr
Sieve
Often
Man of   I
uh &f deva
Rs/ .Jor/tfj
Mass of Ret. tad
Penenfage 1  Rrfaifffd
Cnmufative
% Rf/rJWfi/
Penwrtdge
Panififi
No 10
2
551.1
551.1
0.000
0.00
100.0
|F"
T”
No 16
1.18
558.9
540.5
1.60
3.313
3.31
96.69
No 30
0.6
516.7
520.7
404
8364
11.68
88.32
No 50
03
488.2
492.9
468
9.689
2137
78.63
No 100
0.15
481.9
485.4
350
7.246
28.61
7139
No 200
0.075
459.2
4650
5.76
11.925
40.54
59.46
pan
1255
425.5
0.000
0.00
SpcdficGrmHtyofsod 
2.73
Hydrometer Analysis
Tw/ Tempmrt/tue, dej^.e 22.0
r r
I
Efap ted
Time
(nwi)
.4r/wZ
I Ijdrvmeter
Reading
Tenpna/itn
i/e^c
Cornered
! /jvto/w/rt'
IbwJ/'G;
Effective
DfpJb
(cm]
Coeffideai
K
Grain
s*
(mm)
Pereenfage Finer
Combined
2
22.5000
22.0
165000
12.60
0.01302
0.0327
33.57
5
180000
220
12.0000
1330
0.01302
0.0212
24 41
15
155000
22.0
9.5000
19.70
0.01302
0.0124
1933
30
13.5000
22.0
7.5000
14.10
0.01302
0.0089
15.26
60
12.0000
22.0
6.0000
14 30
0.01302
0.0064
12.21
250
10.0000
22.0
4.0000
14.70
0.01302
0.0032
8.11
1440
7.5000
22.0
1.5000
15.10
0.01302
0.0013
3.05
Grain Siz£ Distribution Curve,BS
c
-I
10000
90   00
60.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30   00
20 DO 10.00
0.00
■j
r..
J
nnbM FMFt JtmiJ *TTr. ECtfV PMtfA hionft-v ^o-fi
w
Mzc riruw hVA
Project:
Client:
Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy 
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type: Dismrrbcd
Location : Clay Borrow 2
Test Type : Double Hydrometer
T.Pit No DCBP-2 !
Date :24/4/2015
Depth (tn): 0 80-3.00
Lab No 701/07
r
Grain Size Distribution Curve.BS
r
I
i
L
1
c
z a
c
<j
O1
ra
C
o
u
GJ
a.
100.00
90  00
80  00
/ooo
60   00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20  00
10 00
0.00
10
0.1
Grain sij e,mm
0.01                     0.001                   0.0001
LJ
L
Gravel
Sand
Sill
Clayno>*7              Ahp/k t.'T'vr
uif a
tcE l-
ma-™*). wfl
'
MZC mtK Mia
x \LZ-z
Project
Client:
Location:
Dabus Irrigation Project
Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy Clay Borrow 2
T.Pit. No     DCBP-2-1 Dcpth(m) : 0 80-3.00
. Wafer Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process
So(/ 4 Malerial Tatlng Secftjn
Sample I ypc : Disturrbcd 
fest Type : Hydrometer >Wct Sieve Date -.24/4/2015
Lab-No : • 701/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
100 00
90 00
°C BOOT
a
C 70.00
£ 60 00
a>
cn 50 00
a
40.00
g 30 00
<b 2000
10 00
oco
Chtrktd by Approv'd try
—----------------- -nm-H rtjrt juijm htth
fAXC rDlJW hVA
Project:       Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client  Ministry   of  Water.  Irrigation  and  Energy 
Location Clay Borrow 2
T Pit. No DCBP-2-2
Dcpth(m) . 0.00-1.20
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Test Type IIydromrtcr(wnli out soln) Date :27/4/2OI5
Lab-No -702/07
Total mass o f jampit. g            50
Sieve
Na
Steve
Mass of   4 Sieved
an of sieve R/Z ,soil(f)
Mass of
Ret. soil (g)
Percentage
Retained
Cumnlativt
% Retained
Percentage
PaseiNg
No 10
2
551.1
551.1
0.000
000
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
539.7
0.76
1.520
1.52
98.5
No 30
0.6
516.7
518.8
2.12
4.240
5.76
94.2
No 50
0.3
488.2
490.8
2.57
5.140
10.90
89.1
No 100
0.15
181.9
484.8
2.94
5.880
16.78
83.2
No 200
0.075
459.2
461.6
2.42
4.840
21.62
78.4
pdf!
425.5
425.5
0.000
o.oo
Hydrometer Analysis
Specific Gravity of soil           2.62______________Test Temperature, deg.c_____ 21.0
Elapsed
Ttme
(mtn}
Adual
Hydrometer
Reading
Tenprature
Corrected
Hydrometer
Reading
Effective
Depth
(cm)
Coefficient
K
Groin
Sige
(mm}
Percentage
Finer Combined
2
13.0000
21.0
13.0000
14.20
0.01360
0.0362
26.18
5
7.5000
21.0
7.5000
15.10
0.01360
0.0236
15.10
13.9
3.2000
21.0
3.2000
15.80
0.01360
0.0145
6.44
30
1.5000
21.0
1.5000
16.00
0.01360
0.0099
3.02
60
1.0000
21.0
1.0000
16.10
0.01360
0.0070
2.01
250
0.0000
21.0
0.0000
16.30
0.01360
0.0035
0.00
1140
0.0000
21.0
0.0000
16.30
0.01360
0.0014
0.00(l(P-y
r.cj^'V
45.»IJB'W *TTC
’vn-ft
1
f /" ^zk-7-
^1^7
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process
/’7/zrvH- hvA
So// & Material Testing Section
Project:
Client:
Dabus Irrigation Project
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Sample Type Disrutrbcd
Location ; T Pit No
Clay Borrow 2 DCBP-2-1
Dcprh(m) : 0.«0-3 00
Tear lypc i Hydrometer »~\Vct Sieve Darc: 27/4/2015
Lab-No : - 702/07
Total mas/ of /ample before rra/b, g Total mass <?/ rample after wash, g
Sieve
Mifr of
Sievelg)
h/j of sieve Ret, soiifrj
Mass of Rr/. soil ($)
Percentage
Retained
________
__________ Ctrmn/aftx % Rftinned
75.00
____
Pemfftayy
Passat f*
f 70990
538.60
1300.00
1800.00
0.00
0.00
£W
100.00
50.00
1203.50
1203.50
0.00
0.00
acw
100.00
37.50
10S7.SO
1087.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
25.00
1191.20
1191.20
0.00
0.00
0 00
100.00
19.00
71850
774.60
5620
3 28
3.28
96.72
12.50
58610
673.10
87.00
5.09
837
91.63
9,50
598.40
652.00
53.60
3.13
11.50
4.75
88.50
57810
677.10
99.00
5.79
17.29
82.71
2.36
533.00
592.80
5980
3.50
20.79
2.00
7921
55120
55120
0.00
0.00
20.79
79 21
1,18
538.90
566.50
27.60
1.61
22.40
0.60
77.60
516.70
548.40
31.70
1.85
24.26
75.74
0.30
188.20
561 80
73.60
4.30
2856
?! 44
0.15
481.90
52900
4720
2.75
31.32
0.06
6&.6S
459.20
462.30
320
028
31.50
68.50
PAN
425.50
1596.80
1171.30
6850
0.00
0.00
1709,90
Hydrometer Analysis
Z/.l/
Elapsed
Zfl/jto/
Tcnpra/ttre
C+Grrcfted
Effective
Coefficient
Percentage
Time
I lydr&sttter
Hydwrttter
Depth
K
5>*r
Piner
(mtn)
Reading
Reading
fa)
Combined
2
38.5000
21.0 '
32.0000
10.00
0.0 J 360
0.0JQ4
5
35.0000
59.96
21.0
28.5000
10.60
0.01360
0.0f98
53 40
15
34.0000
21.0
27.5000
10.70
001360
0.0115
.
51.53
30
32.0000
21.0
25.5000
11.10
0.01)60
00083
47.78
60
29.0000
21.0
22.5000
If 50
0.01360
0.0060
42.16
250
26.0000
21.0
19J000
12.00
0.01360
0.0030
36.54
1440
24.5000
21.0
18.0^8/
r. 1U0
0.01360
0.0013
33.73
Tested fy; Protested by:
eJ
IUD-1!
JJElH MPttA hltHfrf Wfl
*!,£+
4*TTE
'V1 J"1
fiAzr y*z/7je-/)7 hr-A
1
rrr
Project; Dabusc Irrigition Study and Design Project
Ghent: Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy 
7 flZtf/ mj g; ji/ffl/Vr,
Water Works Design and Su Pervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type - Disturrbcd
Location : Clay Borrow 2 
Test Type : Hydro meter
T.Pit No. DC BP-2-3 
Date :10/4/2015
Dcpth(m) 0.00-24(1 
Lab-No ; -703/07
50
SitW
No
Sieve
Man af
Sitvefy
of neve Rr/. rw7&l
Marx of Rr/. foil (f)
Percentage
Retained
% Rrfauted
Percentage
Pautag
No 10
2
551-1
551.1
0.000
0.00
100-0
No !6
1.18
538.9
5393
039
0.7 9S
030
99.2
No JO
0.6
516.7
517.7
1.02
2.086
238
97.1
No 50
03
488.2
489.5
1 26
2377
5.46
94.5
Na 100
045
481.9
4833
1.94
3.967
9.43
906
No 200
0.075
459.2
462.0
2.79
5.706
15.13
84.9
pan
4253
425.5
0.000
0.00
Hydrometer Analysis
Specific Grtw/y of >w/
2.76
Ttr/Tew/^nr/rtrF, dc&c
21.0
r Is
Li/tipied
Time
Actual
I [yrtramefev
Rctidinp
Trnprafurc
CoFTttted
Hydrometct
RfaJt/rx
Eflitin*
Dtplb
(a»)
Coeffrdtift
K
Gnu 1
Jr^r
Pettenlage
Fitter
Go/mbined
2
443000
21.0
38.0000
900
0.01305
0.0277
75.88
5
44'OOQO
21.0
373000
9.10
0.01305
0 0176
7438
Z5
45.5000
21.0
37.0000
9.10
0.01305
0.0102
7J.8S
30
42.0000
21.0
353000
940
0.01305
0.0073
70.88
(JO
i1.0000
21.0
34.5000
9.60
0.01305
0~0052
68.89
250
38.0000
21.0
313000
10.10
0.01305
0.0026
62.90
1440
36.0000
21.0
29.5000
10.40
0.01305
0.0011
58.90'
Grein Size Distribution Curve,BSnnfr'J
HTTC
jjxjh vnrttA m-jft-t ^n-ft
fA^c rwxw? hvn
Project Dnbusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Lorin on : Clay Borrow 2
T.Pit. No. DCBP-2-3
Depth(m) : 0 00 2.40
bl
ar-i
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Sa»7 £ Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbed
Test  Type  ;  Double  I  lydramctcr Date ;10/4/2015
Lab-No: -703/07
Grain S12& Distribution Curvo^BS
!»
ej
jc
la-
100 CO
90   00
B0.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40,00
30.00
20.00
10.00
000
Tested 67 ;t
Pnnessed by;.nm-1              JLWi *TTG
VAPt-U mift-f 'Itbft
PFt 1R*
fAZZT FlTHW h^A
Project: Dabusr Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
I .o cation    Clay Borrow 2
T Pit No. DCDP-2-5
Depth(m) 0.20-210 
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Test Type : Hydrometer (with out sol’n) Date: 10/4/2015
bb No: 704/07
Total mass a) sample, &               50 
Sim
Na
Sitpt
Qpemn^auKt)
Mats pf
itfj a/jjiwf -
R//
Mats of Rf/. sei/ fa1
PfTnw/dflf
Ntf 70
2
---- 577
55/J
0.000
0.00
700.0
Nu M
518
550
53P.3
o.Jr
0.770
0.71
00.5
JO
0.6
516.7
517.7
504
20 JO
2.82
97.2
Na 50
03
488-2
189.7
553
5.050
5-88
95 r
Na 700
0.15
4859
185 8
7,AV
£740
9.62
90.4
Na 200
0.075
459.2
1655
25/
4.520
1424
858
pan
425.5
425.5
0.000
0,00
Hydrometer Analysis
Specific Gravity o f soil           2.61 
Tut Tempfratifrf, de?t.c 250
Ufapfid
Time
(mm)
XdiiW
Hyc/nimi/tr
Correrftd
/ fyf/rpOTc/rr
Liffatfive
Depth
(M
Coejfirtntt
K
Grain
Si^e
(mm)
Pen'Mfagc Fitter
Cianffitffd
2
f(3. MW
27.0
70.5000
14.60
0 01364
0.0369
2520
5
5.5000'
27.0
6.5000
15.20
0.01364
0.0238
12.69
13.9
3.0000
27.0
50000
15.80
0 01364
0.0145
5.86
30
20000
250
2.0000
16.00
0.01364
0 0100
3.91
60
7.0000
250
1.0000
16.10
0.01364
0.0071
595
250
0.0000
250
a oqoo
16.30
0.01 364
0.0035
0.00
/HO
0.0000
250
0.0000
16.30
001364
0.0015                0.00
Grain Size Distribution Curve.BS
it
c
iZ
u
o
JS c n> u
CL
100 00 90 CO BO.OQ 70   00 60  00 &0.CO 40  00 30 DO 20 CO 10.00
Graver.'
Sa-ndK
• r
Terfedby:
->
fry.'___*
fry.
Slipeiv**wi
jum*; htti;
PWA-fi hlQIrt-f ^n-ft
&
Waterworks Design and supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
mz/7
Project:
Client :
Location :
Dabusc [rrigntion Study and Design Project Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Chy Borrow 2
T.Pit. No. . DCBP-2-6
Depthfm) : 0.20 100
man or sample,
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd Test Type : Hydrometer Date: 10/4/2015
J^b-No i -705/07
50
Sitae
No
Ste*
Ojrt/iiNrfffrfff)
Man of
Sievefe)
Ian of rieyc -
!W. jw7({J
Mass of
Rr/. soil
PtrwrrfajF
Re/airred
CHHHtlafjiK
% R/foM
No JO
2
55/./
55/./
0.000
o.oo
____
100.00
IWrff/’agt?
Par fins
 - °
No 16
US
5M9
539.2
033
0.674
047
9933
Na 30
0.6
5/4.7
5/7.5
1.06
2.165
2.84
97.16
No 30
0.3
^.2
359.7
1.53
J J 25
5.96
94.04
No /DO
OJS
/5M
2.54
5J 87
ius
88.85
No 700
0.075
/5Z2
462.6
3.42
6,984
r s. 13
81.87'
pan
425.5
4255
0.000
o.oo
Grui'n'i' f rati
2.75
Hydrometer Analysis
Ikt/ Ttmrtcn
Elopni
Time
(min)
Alfiiitl
1 lycfawtfer
RAwZurig
Tenprtfft/it
flfcg. I*
Comttcd
Hjfefromttir
Reading
Effective
Depi/3
CaeflinfJrt
K
(ffljw)
Pmwfagp
Finer Combined
2
J1.5OT0
21.0
350000
9.50
0.0/309
0.0285
69.94
5
3/.0000
2L0
34.5000
9.60'
0.01309
0.0181
68.94
15
31.0000
2/,o|
34.5000
9.40
0.01509
0.0105
68.94
30
30.0000
21.0
33.5000
9.70
0.0/309
0.0074
66.94 |
60
39.0000
21.0
323000
9.90
0.01309
Q.OO53
64.94
250
34.5000
21.0
30.0000
10.30
0,01309
0.0027
59.95
14-10
34 5000
21.0
28.0000
10.60
1   0.0/309
0.0011
55.95
Grain StZo Distribution Curve,BS
100.00
90.00
BO 09
TOCO
60.00
c i0.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
I-
.        .      Grain Slza.mrn
Gravel
---------------
S1,f
Clay
. .           . ■                    ■         ’ Ts
I -•,
PmriW 1________
fry r ------ -nin-H
*ttc
jtcjH- pnntfi hicnft-f 'lo-ti
?rt w
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
razr runtM hVA
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
-
P
Project:
Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
w
Client:
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Sample Type: Disturrbcd
Location Clay Borrow 2
Test Type : Double Hydrometer
r
T  Pit.  No  DCBP  2-6 
Dale: 10/4/2015
Depch(m) 0.20-3.00
Lab No: -705/07
r
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BSr
nofi
JTES-1*
A.m’j *ttc
P^A. H.JS+
Project:
Client: Location i
□abuse Trrigauon Study and Design Project Ministry oFWatcr+ Irrigation rind Energy Clay Borrow 2
r 1
T.Pit. No. DCBP-2-8
Dcpth(m) : 0.20-3.00
Total mass of sample.
Water Works Design and
5uperv’3'on Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type: Di.iturrbcd
Test Type : Hydrometer (with out soln) Dice 10/4/2015
Lab-No: - 706/07
50
pm
Sul*
No
Sieve
Oppifiugj[afj>f)
Mass of
Sitwfy
'lass of neve -
Re/ ,rcif/(y
Mast of Rr?. sail ($)
Percentage
Attained
CirniMlative
% Rtfaiaed
Penwttdge
Passing
p
Ns w
2
551.1
551.1
0.000
0.00
fOO.O
No 16
1.18
538.9
539.3
0 35
0.700
0.70
99.3
Na 30
0.6
516.7
518.1
1.40
2.800
3.50
96.5
No JO
0.3
488.2
491.4
3.17
6 MG'
9.84
90.2
Np W0
0.15
481.9
4857
3.79
7.5S0
17.42
82.6
No 200
0.075
459 2
462.4
317
6.5-i0
23.76
76.2
pan
425.5
425.5               0.00
0.000
0.00
nr
r Or
2.73
1 iydeometer Analysis
To/ Tern ben
21.0
Elapsed
Time
(min)
Astual
1 fydrWNefcr
Reading
Tcfipra tart
Corrected
Hydrtrme/er
Reading
EffMix
Dtp/h
femf
Coefficient
K
Gmn
Si^
(mm)
Pmw/tfy
Finer Combined
2
14.0000
21.0'
14.0000
14,00
0.01316
0.0348
27.51
5
12.0000
21.0
12.0000
14.30
0.01316
0.0223
23.58
15
7.0000
21.0
7.0000
15.20
0.01316
0.0132
13.76
30
4.5000
21.0
4.5000
15.50
0.01316
0.0095
8.81
60
2.0000
21.0
2.0000
16.00
0.01316
0.0068
3.93
250
1.0000
22.0
1.0000
16.10
0.01302
0.0033
1.97
1340
0.0000
22.0
0.0000
16 30        0.01302
0.0014
0 00
Grain Siie Distribution Curve.BS
100.00
90.00
80   00
70.00
60 DG 50.00
40,00
30   00
20   00
10.00
M—
|-r"—                Grain Size.mm
GWI
y.?-TSan(t.H"^ ZK7 7Z 7
snt
______ _____________ r—,
Clay
1
1
1
Tested by.. Pmtsstd by ■nntH rtPT
*I»TTC
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
H.A+
Service Sub Process
fAzr
2msa
Soil & Material Testing Section
Project: Client; Location :
Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water , Irrigation and Energy Clay Borrow 3
r
r
T.Pit. No. DCBP-3-1
Dcptli(m) 0.20-2.10
''wTTD'j'r.   U
Sitiv
Mtffj of
ftflJ1 fff Sirl*
__ __ __-
Afar/ of
Sample Type Distnrrbed Test Type; Hydrometer Date: 9/4/2015
Lab-No : 707/07
50
Sxtvr
Pmmfqgt
Cjffffjr/afirr
Pfrmitdge
Na
Rtt .!oU(%)
RtA jw/
Rttiwied 1
% JLr/rtNMt/
Pa/rirrji
Nrt 10
2
55/./
w.r
0.000
o.oo
1000
Nd M
530
55M5
OJtf
T.N3
1.14
98.9
Ns JO
(X6
5M7
5/0
Z/2
4J27
5.47
94.5
No JO
0J
4JTO1
mz
Z45
5.000
1047
89.5
Na 100
0./5
4SO
485.6
3.73
7.612
ISOS
81.P
Nd 200
0.075
45A2
463.7
4.49
9.163
2724
72.8
pair
4255
425.5
0.000
0.00
■a)
IS/afued Tiwt (mw)
P offer/
2.52 
Hydrometer Analysis
Tut Temfxn
\ d^.r 21.0
/Irfrm/
I IjJjo/fltf/er
RfoJlHG
Tf rtpltf7NH? 2e^.f         I
OrrrrW
Hji/f nmc/fr
Redc/iap
Coc^racfl/
K
CjrrtJZJf
Si^e
(*•")
Piner Combined
2
16.5000
2/.0
30.0000
70.30
o.om<m
0.0319
63.20
j
55.0000
27.0
28.5000
10.60
0.07404
0.0204
60.04
’ /5
55.0000
2/.G
28.5000
10.60
0.0f4tW
0.0118
6004
1
.1
.1 1
50
34.5000
2/.0
28.0000
10.70
0.0/404
0.0081
58.99
60
54.0000
2/0
27.5000
10.70
0.0/404
0.0059
57573
250
JZ.JO00
2 L0
26.0000
11.00
0.D/3JJ?
0.0029
54.77
1440
32.0000
2/0
25.50Q0
11.10
0.0138?
0:0012
53.72
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
100.00 M.O0 BO.OO 70.00
60.00
50.00
40.GO 30.00
20  00
10.00
aim
- fr
r
E3SEEE
-- ""       "Grain Slza.mm
1
’             Gravel
—.At
Sift
Tc/ftw ey.
■' .e'SardrS.
jj'------- - -     '
1 >r5’ ’ ‘ ’ 'c ifl **
Clay
-»=-
-
1 ' T
£  Esnm-M /“tPl
*TTC
jrcfcf vnntfA tntnft-+ ^ihi
w w-
fM.C HlWIf hVA
r   Client:         Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy I-ocadon : Clay Borrow 3
T.Pit. No. DCBP-3 1 Depth(m) 0.20 2.10
Project:       Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Test Type : Double I lydromctcr Date: 9/4/2015
Lab No 707/07
IT
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
100 00
90  00
80  00
70.00
ir
I1!
I';
60.00
50  00
40  00
30  00
20  00
10  00
0 00
10
0.1
0.01
0001
0 0001
LJ I
U
I
Grain sizl?,mm
I
Gravel
Sand
Silt
Claytr-TH
I
1
1
nubi jlw; htth
ttUH- VWA-U h1tntb+ ’’iQ-fi P^A. 4.AY
?MC yw.w !m:a
Project:        Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy location Chy Borrow 4
EPit. No. DCBP-4 1
Dcpth(rn) : 0 80 3.00
Iola/ man sf/ tantp/f,
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type Distunbeci
Test Type : I lydrome ter (with out sol'n) Date 24/4/2015
Lab-No : - 708/07
50
Stftx
No
Opt nfrrjtfi'r/frfj
Mair of   ■ Sitvcfy
[air of jitvt ~ Rr/
iMtwr of
R<;. jot/ /y
Pcrtwlagt
Rg/aj/tfd
% Rtfatned
PtnxHtuge
PaiJW&
Nd? to
2
55/3
55/3
0.000
0.00
100.0
Nd 16
US
538.9
JJP.O
0.05
0.100
030
99.9
No JO
0.6
516.7
516.9
0.22
0.440
0.54
99.5
Nd 50
03
488.2
488.8
0.63
1.260
1.80
98.2
Na fOO
035
481.9
453,4
1.49
2-980
4.78
95.2
No 200
0.075
459.2
462.5
3.25
6.500
11.28
88.7
pan
425.5
425,5
0.000                ooo
Sptti/rc Gwny a/1«/
Hydrometer Analysis
2.71_______________ Ttit TtwprralMt,
___ 2 L0
WapJtd
Time
fww’n}
A final Rm4wij
Ttupidim-e
tlc£..
Conetffti I [ydromefcr
Reading
Effecfw
Depth
(^.1
Cocffirttm
K
Grain
Si^r
fam)
Pmn/age
Finer Combinaf
2
f 3.0000
21.0
13,0000
14.20
0.0 HOU
0,0349
25.66
5
10.0000
21.0
lO.OOOO
14,70
001309
0.0224
19.74
15
5.5000
21.0
5.5000
15.40
0.01309
0.0133
10.85
30
4,0000
21.0
4.0000
15.60
0.01309
0.0094
7.89
60
2.0000
21.0
2.0(100
16.00
0.01309
0.0068
3.95
250
t.ooov
21.0
1.0000
16.10
0.01309
0.0033
1.97
!440
0.JOO0
21.0
0.5000
16.20
0.01309
0 0011
0.99
Grain Size Distribution Curve.BS
100. GO 90   00
80   00
70   00
60.00
50  00
40   00
30 CO 20.00 WOO
0.00
ri-4
t
~a
HP
m
V
- rH-------- —r T"
.
■
.T
T
ZLZ
__ i _
k-
I#
♦ -4'
3
iJ
w
h-
L
—1—-4^
M
1
——
1nupj               Km1;
Jtci-f PAP tn
F?*t H.M+
fh<LC riflf/W fi/6A
’’ro-fi
Project:        Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:          Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy location : Clay Borrow 4
T.Pit. No, DCBP-4-3 (Right)
Depth(m) ; 0.00-1.20
Total must of
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type ; Disturrbcd Test Type : [ (yd tome ter Date : 9/4/2015
Lab-No; - 709/07
50
Stent
Stew 1
Msrjrr of
'fzrjr o/iirw -
M<W of
PfiTtfttagz
(-jtJNii/atiyc
Ptrnntaye I
No
Stevf($)
Rjf
Rif. jot/ (y
Ritatned
% RrAirr^d1
No 10
2
551.1
fjrr
o.(NM
0.00
100.0
No f6
U5
538.9
54 J J
4.55
xs%
oo
91.1
No JO
0.6
516,7
520.5
3.79
7.751
16.65
83.4
No JO
03
488.2
4MJ
2.12
4335
2098
79.0
No 100
0.15
4813
483.9
1.97
4.029
25.01
75.0
. Na 2W
0.075
459.2
461.6
238
4.867
29.88
70.1
1
pitu
l
425.5
425-5
0.000
0.00
Hydrometer Analysis
1 ctf TtmfMratart. dtf.c              21.0
J1
r
E/apred
Tim*
fwnn)
i fydrMtt/er
Rtuditifi
Ttnpnifwf
tfc&. c
Corrected 1
IJyJrpw/cj- Rfarfjfjp
Effective
(ttn)
__ 1__ ____
Coeffcarrf
K
Grain
Si**
(mt)
Permifupe
piner CtWtbiMfl
2
36.5000
21.0
J0.00001
1030
00/276
0.0290
58.96
5
35.0000
21.0
25.5000
10.60
0.01276
0.0186
56.01
/5
35.0000
21.0
25.5000
1030
0.01276
00107
56.0/ I
JO
J4.5OQ0
21,0
25.0000
10.60
0.01276
0.0076
55.01
A
60
34.0000
21.0
225000
10.70
0.01276
0.0054
54.08
250
3230Q0
21.0
26.0000
11.00
0.01276
0.0027
51.10
1410
12.0000
I       21.0
253000
11.10
0.01276
0.0011
.80.12nm-H riPl
UTTH
KEfcf PWiiA hltHtH 'MHl
rAx/7 fawn- h&A
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Project Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client : Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Sample Type: Disturrbcd 
location ; Clay Borrow 4
Test Type Double Hydrometer
T Pit. No DC.BP-4-3 (Right)
Date: 9/4/2015
Dcpth(m): 0.00-1.20
Lab-No 709/07
r
Grain Size Distribution Cur/e.BS
I
u 
If IL
K
1I
u
Grain Jizc mm
(
Gravel
Sand
Silt
ClayHUH /“tPT ’I’TTG
jrc#+ pnntfA himn-f kmi
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
p/*t ijh-
rAz/r r7/ze/?7 hvA
Service Sub Process
Soil A Material Testing Section
r
Piojcct Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client Mimsuy of Water. Irrigation and Energy 
Simple Type - Distutrbcd
Location : Clay Borrow 4
Test Type : Hydrometer (wirli out sol'll)
T.Pic No. DCBP-4-3
Date 10/4/2015
Dcpth(m) : 0.00-2.40 
I jb-No i - 710/07
_____
Total mass of sample, &                  50         _
Jiew
Na
Sfftt
AlaJJ of Situtfy)
fast
Rrt. /mVA/
Majs of Ref. jad /pj
Pem/rtajy
Rrtawed
______
Cumala/isv % R/ZfllJiffJ
Perrefttatf
Pafrinji
No 10
2
551.1
55L/
0000
0.00
100.0
No 16
f.18
518 9
0.56
0.920
0.92
99.1
No 50
0.6
516.7
5/7.5
a 75
I. S00
2.42
97,6
Na 50
03
4883
550
0.65
1300
372
963
&
iL
Na 100
0.15
4&1.9
w.o
i.to
2.200
5.92
931
No 200
0.075
4593
46 L 7
2,52
5.040
10.96
89,0
p£JH
4255
4253
o.ooo
0.00
Hydrometer Analysis
SpedfKGrwifj of soil
E/apred Time (sxiir)
2,7         ___________Test Temperatam, dt&c 21.0
Tf/ipm/ure
1 Jycbvmeto
Cwvtcltd
f lydrymeiw
Readiil?
Effective
Depth
(rtrr)
CttffkiM/
K
Gnaw;
(mm)
PentMlajp
I’twr
Comb/sed
2
H.50001
21~0
11 5000
1340
0.01528
0.0IS6
22.74
5
£OW
21.0
8.0000
15.00
0.01528
0 0250
15.82
15.9
7.0000
21.0
70000
15.20
0.0/322
0.0139
1184
50
6.0000
21.0
6.0000
1530
0.0152$
0.OQ95
11.87
60
30000
21.0
40000
15.60
0.0/725
0.0068
7.91
250
2,0000
21.0
2.0000
16.00
0.0/ 725
0.00)4
1.96
1
1440
1,0000
21.0
1.0000
16 10
0.0/525
0.0014
1.98
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
c
£
c
Ifim-H             a.HJn'i «ttg
1JI+
MAC rvttM hVA
Project Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Location * Clay Borrow 4
TPIlNo. DCBP-4-4
Dcpth(m) : 0 00-2.4 I
Total g/'rwwp/k 
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soif & Material Testing Section
Sample Type: Disnirrbed Test Type ; Hydrometer Dare : 27/4/201S
Lab-No: -711/07
50
Jmw
Sit pc
Man of
fair ff sieve
Mart of
Prrvtfitage
Pencnfiipe
No
OptMjitfuwy
Srivefy
Ret .stir/(v)
Ret. tail
Rr iained
% Retained
Passift^
No 10
2
551J
sTi
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
i.i Ji
530
539,1
0.2 J
0.478'
0.48
99.5
No 30
0.6
516.7
517.3
0.59
1 226
1.70
98.3
No JO
0 3
488.2
488.8
0.60
1.247\
2.W
97.0
No 100
0.15
481.9
483.0
1.08
2.244
5.19
94.8
No 200
0.075
459.2
460.8
1.64
3.407
8.60
91,4
ptM
425.5
425 5
0.000
0.00
SpecifkGrarity eftoii
Hydrometer Analysis
2.68_________ Dj/77w^frgfant 4^.r
21.0
l
Time
(mt/fj
Ttliptafurv
I tydr&mter
GffFrtcttfi
Hydrometer
Reading
r
affective Depth
(cm,
Crain
fam)
Percentage Finer
Combined
2
35.5000
21.0
29.0000
10.50
0.01 3J6
0.0306
59.84
5
34.0000
21.0
27.5000
10.70
0.01336
0,0195
56.75
15
32 5000'
21,0
26.0000
11.00
0.01336
0.0114
53.65
J0
JI.5000
21.0
25 0000
11.10
0.01336
0.0081
51,59
60
30.0000
21 0
23.5000
11.40
0.01336
0.0058
48.49
250
28.5000
21.0
2273000
11.60
0.01336
0.0029
15.40
1440
27.0000
21.0
20.5000
11.90
001336
0.0012
42 30
Grain Sizs Distribution Curve.BS
100.00
90.00
BO.00
70  00
60.0C 50.00
40.00
30 00 
20   00
1000 000
-
P)wjW £)' ■
-------------1
1
FnobH
+TTG
jrcfcf vnntl-A hitnn-+ "inn w-
fAzc rinfw fff-A
Project: Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:           Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Location Clay Borrow 4
T.Pit No DCBP-4-4
Dcpth(m): 0 00 2 41
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd Test Type : Double Hydrometer Date 27/4/2015
Lab-No :-711/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
«
1 1,
□
II
Grain siJ   e.mm
Gravel
|           Sand
Sill                   1           Clay
1 -1
I
t_Tim-1! Ft?1* Wtt 'hTTG
ftitnn-f ^chft nut
rh&C nmw /rf&
Project Dabuse Irrigation  Study  and  Design  Project
Client Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type Disturrbed
Location : D/s of Axis
TPitNo. DRPCI
Test Type : Hydrometcr(witb out sol'n)
Dace :24/4/20l5
DepTh(m) : 0.20-2.50 
Lab-No : 612/07
_________
___ ________
Steve
___________
Mass of
7'g/tf/fffgrj df jtfCTfrfr, X             50
dais g/ new
Mair of
______
Pttreitra^e
______
CattttMtt
Percettfagc
Na      O
petUft^Mtut) \
SlSVtfg)
Rf/ rai/ft}
RfZ jg//
Retained
% Item/
Ng ro
2
55U
551.1
0.000
aw
100.0
Ns M
US
5383
541 2
2.28
4360
95.4
No 30
0.6
516.7
524.7
7.95
15.900
20.46
793
N*50
03
488.2
4943
635
12.260
32.72
673
No 100
035
4859
4873
5.93
11.860
4438
55.4
No 200
0.075
459.2
464.7
5.48
10.960
55 54
443
pa*
425.5
4253
0.000
0.00
_
SNiifkGmn^ j/ui/                          238 
Hydrometer Ari a lysis
Tert Temperature dig.c 2f0
D lafa cd
Time
(tain}
'2
Actual
{-Sjfdntmefer
TtHpnt/itrt
‘ l;7‘        I
Canceled
Jydi vnwefer
Effective
Depth
fa»)
Cerefficiertf
K
Grain
(numt)
Pen triage Fuier
73000
21.0
7.5000
15.00
0.01377
0.0351
15.25
5
5.5000
21.0
5 5000
1330
0.01377
0.0226
1US
N?
4.0000
21.0
4.0000
1430
0.01377
0.0140
8.13
W
2.2000
210
2.2000
14.90
0.01377
0.0097
4.47
60
13000
21.0
1 5000
15.10
0.01377
0.0069
3.05
750
0.0000
21.0
0.0000
15.80
0.01377
0.0035
0.00
1440       ,       0,0000
21.0
0.0000
16.00
0.01377
0.0015
aw'
Grain Size Distribution Curve.tiS
&
C
iZ
q
CD
3
C
4) <J 
tu
CL
100 00 90   00 BO.OO 70.00
60.00
50   00
40   oo 30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
I
fflW--
p (.
Gravel
Sand
SiH
Clay
Fmcwccf £)
__RUH
<UTTC
prt w
fAZ/7 W}JWT tlKA
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soft & Material Testing Section
Project:           Dabtise Irrigation Study .incl Design Project
Client :           Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location; D/sofAxis
T.Pit No DTP-2
Dcpth(m) . 2.75 5.0
To/a/ man ofiamplt,
Sample Type' Dis lurched Test Type; Hydrometer Date: 9/4/2015
Lab-No ; - 713/07
50
J7rw
Na
Sitw
Ma it of SutftfgJ
lan of rim ■*
R// uor/frj
_____
Man of
Re/. toil (s)
Penxniagt 1
[{etaint d
OuWw/fl/#M
% fafaifitd
PtjTrniagt
Pairing
Na t0
2
551.1
5513
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
138
538.9
540.5
1.56
3.139
3.14
96.9
No 30
0.6
516-7
523.2
6.46
12.998
1614
83.9
No SO
03
488,2
494.0
5.81
11.690
27.83
72.2
No 100
0.15
4 St.9
489.2
7.30
14.688
42.52
57.5
No 200
0.075
459.2
465.7
6.45
12.978
5539
44,5
fwn
425.5
425.5
0.000
0.00
Spcaftt Gravity of rati
2.66
Hydrometer Analysis
Ter/TVw/tf rtf/Mr,
21.0
FJapitd
Time
(rmn)
Arfitai
Hydwrrtttr
Tenpm/ifrt
Cammed
plydrumtier
Pending
pffictive
Depth
(™)
Coeffiritnt
K
Grain
Sigt
Ptrttrrfagc Tintr
Combi nt d
2
25.0000
21.0
18.5000
12.20
0.01344
0.0332
3734 |
5
24.0000
21,0
17.5000
12.40
0.01344
0,0212'
3533
15
230000
21.0
16.5000
12.50
0.01344
0.0123
3332
30
22.5000
21.0
16.0000
12,60
001344
0.0087
3232
60
22.0000
21.0
15.5000
12.70
0.01344
0.0062
3132
250
21.0000
21.0
14.5000
12.90
0.01 344
0.0031
293!
1440
20.0000
21.01        13.5000
U.00|      0.01314
0.0013
27.10
Grain SLta Distribution CurveBS
3nm-M rtTT
«TTC
jtc£+ pnntfd fwjft-t ^o-fi m
razr ruw; hVA
Project    Dabuse    Irrigation    Study    and    Design    Project Client. Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
I .oration: D/sofAxis T.Pit. No DTP 2 Depth(m): 2.75-5.0
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Test  Type  :  Double  J  iydrometer Date: 9/4/2015
Lab-No713/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
C
0>
E
O)
cn
co
■*-
c
■
u
E
100.00
90  00
80  00
70.00
60  00
50 CO
40  00
30  00
20  00
d       1000
0 00
10
□ 1                       001                      0 001                    00001 Grain si; e,mm
Gravel
Sand
Silt
Clay
Ttf/ed bj
^boratodruh                jyisiH ’tiTTf
JtUJH
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Wr w
rAxc z’yjx-rtr
*
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Project:
Client:
Dabuse    Irrigation 
Study 
and 
Design 
Project
Ministry of Water, Irr
igation a
nd En
ergy
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Location :
D/s of Axis
T.Pir. No DTP 3
Dcpthfm) 1.00-500
Totui man of sample,
Test   Type   :   I   lydrometerfwich   out   soln) Date; 10/4/2015
Lab No : -714/07
70
Sieve
No
Sieve
Man of
Sievtfg)
lan g/sieve Ref .soti(g)
Man cj Krf. soil (id
Percentage
Rita: tie4
Crim ti Inti* % Retained
Percentage
Pane ng
No 10
2
551.1
55L1
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
542.7
3.76
5.571
5.37
94.6
No 10
0.6
516,7
534.1
17.38
24.829
30.20
69.8
No 50
0.3
488-2
509.8
21.63
30.900
61.10
38.9
No 100
0.15
481.9
492.8
10.94
15.629
76.7 3
23.3
No 200
0.0751
459,2
466.4
7.23
10.329
87.06
12.9
1—
425.5
425.5
0.000
000
Specific Gravity of soii
2.54
Hydrometer Analysis
Ten Tempera tare, de&t
21.0
Elapsed
Time
faitt)
sktNai
1 I-ljdromtftr Reading
TtripntfMH
iitft.e
1 Copwdff/ Hydrometer Raj tft. ■/;
Effective
Depth
(cm)
Cocffkieirf
K
Grain
Si^t
(mm)
Pern/ifajF Finer
Combined
2
5.5000
21.0
5.50W
15.40
0.01395
0.0387
8.07
5
4.0000
21.0
4.0000
15.60
0.01395
0,0246
5.87
139
3.5000
21.0
3.5000
15.70
0.01395
0.0148
5.13
30
2.0000
21.0
2.0000
16.00
0.01395
0.0102
]
1 1 i
i
2.93
60
1.0000
21.0
1.0000
16.10
0.01395
0.0072
1.47
i     250
Q.00(K
21.0
0.0000
16.30
0.01395
0.0036
0.00
wo
O.000(
,           27.0
0.0000
16.30         0.01395
00015
0.00
Grain Siw Distribution Curve.BS
100.00 go   oo BQ.00 70.00 6000
50.00
40.00
30   00
20  00
10.00
Gravo'
Sand
Sl,t
Clay
by Pttnesstd by:_
S. JSn<»-7
■’ithfi fz"4-Z£+ r^Z/r ^z/xertF hVA
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process
Sari <& Materia/ Testing Section
Project:           Dabus Irrigation Project
Client!           Minis try of Water, Tt rigadon. and Energy IxKStton : D/s of Axis
T.Pit. No. DTP 3 Depth(m): 1,00-5.00
Sample Type : Disturrbcd
Test Type : I lydrometer + Wet Sieve Date :10/4/2015
Lab-No:-714/07
Tafai mtns of sample befirv w/A r Total'man q/iafttple after nwh, 1118.00
Marr of
R/Z soil
168 1.40
j JVrw
Afar; of !
rfa/j of sieve +
Rf/ .Mtlfy}
Perania^e
Retained
Camniafiae
% Retained
PetttJtfage
Pairing
75.00
i8uo.no
1800.00
0.00
0-00
0.00
100.00
50.00
1203.50
1203.50
0.00
0,00
0.00
100.00
37JQ
1087.20
1087.80
0.00
,0.00
0.00
100.00
25.00
1191.20
1191.20
0.00
0.00
000
100.00
19.00
718.50
718.50
0.00
0 00
0.00
100.00
1250
586.10
600.70
14.60
0.87
0.87
99 13
9J0
598.40
615.00
1660
0.99
1.86
98 J 4
4.75
578.10
62630
48.20
2.87
4.72
95.28
236
533.00
598.50
65.50
3.90
8.62
91.38
2.00
551.10
551.10
0.00
000
8.62
9138
1.18
538.90
695JO
156 JO
933
17.95
82.05
0.60
516.70
797 80
281.10
16-72
34.67
6533
030
188 20
814,70
326JO
19.42
54.09
45 91
0.15
481 JO
686.50
204.60
12.17
66.25
33.75
0.08
459.20
493.20
34.00
2,02
68.28
31.72
PAN
425.50
958.90
533.40
31.72
0.00
0.00
Spetifir Giwft oj toil
168140
Hydrometer Analysis 2J4______ Ter/ Tempera fart,
21.0
Elapsed
Time
Jw£hJ
Acfittrl
I lydromtfer '
TcfiprtJtifrc
Corrected
1 lydrfimeitr
Effective
Depth
(cm)
Coeffhwrt
K
Grain
Sift
(mm)
Penentatv Finer
Cortffrirff//
2
14,0000
21.0
7JQ00
14.00
0.01395
0.0369
30.03
5
12 0000
21.0
5.5000
1430
001395
0.0236
22.02
15
11.0000^
21.0
45000
14J0
001395
00137
18.02
30
lOJOOO
21.0
4.0000
11 60
0.01395
0.0097
1602
60
10.0000
21.0
3,5000
14.70
0.01395
0.0069
14.01
250
9J000
21.0
3.0000
14.70
0.01395
0.0034
12.01
t440
9.0000
21.0
2.5000
14.80
0.01395
0.0014
rootnm-H
'hTTC VMA-ti Mfl'lft-f ^o-n 
Wr 4. AV
MAT ffl/W h&A
Project Dabusc Irrigation  Study  and  Design  Project
Client:            Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbcd 
Location : Island (w axis )
Test Type - Hydrometer
T.Pit. No. DISL-1
Date; 10/4/2015
Depth(m): 0.20-230 
I Jib-No : -715/07
Toftii muss ofsampit, j
50
J7rw
Imw
Mw
■lais of jhh ■
Muss nJ
PtnXtttoge
C/fMrrliftiK
Ntf
Sitvtfr)
Rrf
Rf/. JTffi7 ijJ
Pjfamtd
% Rf/ctttffd
Ptfxrr^
No 10
2
551.1
551J
oooo
0.00
zoo.o
Na 16
f.tf
538.9
539.0
O/2
0.244
0.24
No JO
0.6
516.7
517.3
0.55
1 140
r.jjs
P&5
No 50
0.3
488.2
491.7
3.45
7,042
M
5f.5'
Na /00
Of 5
4817
492.4
10A?
21-309
29.74
70.3
N  200
fl
0 075
459.2
474.5
15.31
31.160
60,90
39.1
425.5
425,5
0,000
0.00
nty cf/ j<?n                    234
Hydrometer Analysis
7 1
2f.O
Eiupitti
Tifift
(Mist)
Tm/Ww f
Ilyt/mwe/rf
Riudijfg
CoHTt/fJ
I Jydrowcfcr
Effet 5ir
Dep/b
frar)
Coefficient '
K
Cwi/t
57*e
(mm)
Perre/Hagt
Finer CwMimted
2
20.0000
21.0
13.5000
13,00
0.01276
0.0325
26.41
5
17.0000
21.0
103000
13.50
0.01276
0.0210
20.54
15
16 0000
21.0
9.50W1
13.70
0.01276
0.0122
18.58
30
f53000
21.0
9.0000
7570
0 01276
0,0086
17.60
60
15.0000
21.0
8.5000
13.80
0.01276
0,0061
16.63
750
11.0(100
21.0
7.5000
14.00
0 01276
0.0030
14 67
1140
13.0000
21.0
6.5000
14.20
0.01276
0,001)
Grain Size Distribution Curve,SS
100.00 go.oo so   oo 7G.0O 60   00 5000
40 00
30  00
20.00
10.00
0.00r
r
r
nm
-H
JLHjm ♦TTC
Water Works Design and
MPtH h7Q7frf W
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Wir W
Service Sub Process
fAZ/7 mft»f ^,:A
Soil & Material Testing Section
Project;
Dabusc    Irrigation    Study    and 
Design 
Project
Client :
Ministry of Water, Irrigation an
d Energy
Sample Type : Disturrbed 
r r*
I xjcation : Island (w axis ) T Pit No DISL-1
l)cpth(m): 0.20-2.50
Test Type Double Hydrometer Date :10/4/2015
Lab-No -715/07
Gram Size Distribution Curve,BS
*
4>
E
o
«:
c
100  00
90  00
BO 00
70.00
60 00
oc 
40 00        with out sol'n/with sol *n* 100=
g
'V
Q.
30.00
20 00
10.00
16.00/17.00*100= 94.00%
0 0001
11,.1
□
Gravel
Sand
Grain siJle.mm
|
11
Silt 1 c'*y  1
Checked by___________________ Approved by: _             -
»r
r
J
nm-H
httc
(Hi
T
-1
*Ut
fAZ/7 ^l/7£-/if/ hVA
r
J
Project: Client Location
□abuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Shall Material
T.Pit No DCBP-2.4
Dcpthfm) ■ 0 00 I 50
Total mm 0/ jampte
t
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Sort <8 Material Testing Section
Sample Type Distnrrbcd
Test Type : 1 lydrometerfwilh out sol’n) Date: 10/4/2015
Lab No: -716/07
50
SrtM
Ntf
Jww
O/hfm’iyjfflWj
Afdir of
Sltpffy
’ba <?/7;rwr Rr/ .wi/(g)
Mair of IW soil (yj
Pcrrtntage
Pj/UMtd
(jumMt        i % Rritowz/
Pcnt/i/tfge | Paj/tny
_s
No (0
2
5513
5513
0.000'
0.00
too.o
No 16
1 38
538.9
5413
2.20
4.400
4.40
75.6
No 30
0.6
516.7
520.9
437
8340
12.74
87.3'
No SO
03
488.2
4923
431
8.220
20.96
79.0
No 100
0.15
481.9
485. 1
3.22
6.440
2730
72.6
No 200
0.075
459.2
163.4
435
8300
35.70
643
1      A'«
425. J |         7255
0.000
0.00
Hydrometer Analysis
wrfic Gmtly
2,47
Tnt Twpmidtg.c 21.0
r E/tipttf!
Time
(fttin)
,4etaat
Hydformtet'
R&jdtfty
Ttffpnilwe
2t^i-
Conrcttd J
l-Iyffr/rmcftr'
RtffifcAfli?
Effective
Depth
(™)
Coefficient
K
Gnrin
fmnr}
Permita#
Pimr CtMibified
0.0374
1
]
1
.1
2
7.5000
21.0
7.5000
15.20
0.01357
14.93
>
5.0000
21.0
5.0000
15.50
0.01357
0.0259
9.95
13.9
2.5000
21.0
2. 5000
15.90
0.01357
0.0145
4.98
50
1 woo
21.0
1.0000
1630
0.01357
0.0099
1.99
60
0.5000
21.0
0.5000
16.20
0.01377
0.0071
1.00
250
0.0000
21.0
0.0000
16.30
0.01557
0.0035
0.00
1440
0.0000 [ 21.0
0.0000
1630
0.01357
0.0014
I     °-2£
__
Gram Size Distribution Curve,BS
IfL
70  00
60  00
50.00
40. DO 30  00
20  00
10.00
L
0 0001
Gram Srzc mm
t
Tn fed by PtwtfJtd by;
Chic fad Ay;nm-4                 A.ujn1; «httl VIDtlt h7Q1ft-+ in-fl
w
MZ/7 nW; ht-A
Project:         Dab use Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client     Ministry     of     Water,     Irrigation     and     Energy 
I .oca tro n . Shall Materia I
I Pit. No. DCI3P-2.7
Dcpth(m) ■ 0.30-3.00
Total mat; of ttimplt.^50
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Son' <S Material Testing Section
Sntnplr Type : Disturrbcd Test Type : Hydrometer Date: 21/4/2015
Lab-No : - 717/07
57rw
Jww
Moir of
lan of neve
Man of
PtrrtUtdftt
Cunrufafiin
Pem/ifapt
Nd
Sitvefy
Rct.sQtl(ir)
Rff sort fy)
Refained
% Retained
PaMtJtg
Nn to
2
551J
551.1
0.00
0.000
0.00
f 00.00
No 16
1.18
538.9
540 0
1.08
2.213
2.21
97.79
No 30
0.6
516.7
520.3
3.62
7.418
9.63
90.37
No 50
0.3
488.2
489.8
1.60*
3.279
12.91
S7.09
No JOO
0.15
481.9
186.3
4.44
9.098
2201
77.99
No 200
0.075
459.2
4636
4.43
9.078
31.09
68.9!
paw
425.5
425.5
a.oo
0.000
0.00
I lydrometer Analysis
I1
E/apttd
Time
(min)
A dun/
Hydrometer
(. .enve/ed I Hydrometer
Reading
Effective
Depth
Cfxffiae/tl
K
Gram
Sr^e
(me)
Pcnxnttiff
Fitter
Combined
2
32.0000
21.0
25.5000
11 10
0.01780
0.0301
50.31
5
28.0000
21.0
21.5000
11 70
0.01280
0.0196
42.42
25.0000
21.0
I ulhot
12.20
0.01280
0.0115
36.50
JO
23,0000
21.0
16.5000
12.50
001280
0.008 3
32.56
60
21.0000
21.0
14.5000
12.90
0.01280
0.0059
28.61
250
18.0000
21.0
11.5000
13.30
0.01280
0.0030
22.69
1440
16.0000
21.0
9.5000
13.70
0.01280
0.0012
18.74
Grnlri S|f<j Distribution Curvi^BS
Q
70   00
60.00
50.00
40  00
30   00
20  00
10 00
u
0.0001
U  1 1
Grave!
Grain Siw.mm
l|
Silt
1 1
1 . cl*> 1
pwcfttd Aye _
i.
■> i **nm-H Ptr'Ft wnv 'HTTE
jrcJH pnntfd tnmn-+ ^n-ft
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
prt m
ftszr twxm hKA
XL/z
S So// &
ervice Sub Process Material Testing Section
Project
Dabuu    Irrigation    Study 
and 
Design 
Project
Client:
Ministry of Water, Irrigat
ion an
d Energy
Sample Type:
Disturtbed
Location 
Shall Material
Test  Type  :
Double  Hydrometer
T.Pit No. DCBP-2.7
Dcpth(m): 0.30-3 00
Date : 21/4/2015
Lab-No: - 717/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve,85
100  00
90.00
80.00
D        70.00
C
60  00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20 00
1000
000
10
01                        001                0001                    0.0001
I
L
Grain sc e,mm
Gravel
Sand
Sill
Clay
TTiiltlteed d byby Trvcttscd by
Cheeked by
Approved byimn rtFT ww
pwtta ftimrbf ^rwi W- ‘LAf
Mzzr rwiw hVA
Project    :    Dabusc    Irrigation    Study    and    Design    Project Client:            Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Location ■ Shall Material
T.Pit. No DSBH-1 I
Depthfm) r 2.OQ-1Z0
To fa/ wan a/ /amping 50
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Sort & Material Testing Section
Sample Type ; Distunbcd
Test   Type   :   1   lydrnmctcr(with   out   sol'n) Date: 27/4/2015
Lab-No : - 718/07
Jiew
Sieve
Marr of
iasr ff tim -
Man of
Penenta/e
CjtJTlN/afirt
PenrNfegt
Na
SuncfaJ
Ref joi/ft
R/A soil tjJ
Retained
% Retained
Pairing
No 10
2
551.1
551.1
o.oo
0.000
0 00
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
541.0
2.14
4.280
4.28
95.7
No .30
06
5/6.7
520.1
335
6 JOO
10.98
89.0
No 30
03^
488,2
490,6
236
4.720
15JO
843
No 100
0.15
481.9
4843
239
4.780
2a4£
79.5
No 200
007$
459.2
4613
2.13
4.260
24 74
75.3
pan
4255
425.5
0.00
0.000
0.00
'ii
2.84
Hydrometer Analysis
Tni T
21.0
E/apttd
Time
(mia)
AftitdJ
Hydrometer
Reading
TrnfoM/MtT
r/rg^
Cam led
Hydrometer
Reading
CfftfitK
Depth
(W
. ---------------
Coejfkienf
K
Grain
Piner Combined
2
13.5000
27,0
13.5000
14.10
0,01276
0,0339
25.95
5
10.5000
21.0
10.5000
14.60
0.01276
0.0218
20.18
15
4.5000
21.0
4.5000
Z.5.50
0.01276
0.0/30
6.65
30
3.0000
21.0
3.0000
fy.so
0.01276
0.0093
5.77
60
2.0000
21.0
2.0000
16.00
0.01276
00066
3.84
250
1.0000
21.0
1.0000
1          16. to
0.01262
0.0032
1.92
1440
o.sooo
21.0
0.5000
| 16.20
0,01262
0.00 J 3
0.96
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
100   00 90.00 eo.oo 70,00
60.00
50.00
40   00
30.00
20   00
10  00
0.00*jir/>v ♦ttc
A1A-7A-*?’ ^D-fi
TWJtM hKA
Project Dabus Irrigation Project
Client :         Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location: Shall Material
T.Pit. No. DSBH-1-1 Deprh(m): 2.00-120
-r- x                    Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type: Disturrbed
Test Type : Hydrometer *AVct Sieve Date :26/4/2015
Lab-No:-718/07
Total man of sample before watt), /
Total man of sample after wash, &439.30
535.00
Stem
Oprittir^wst}
Man of
Surest)
lan of sieve Re/ .soilfy
Man of Re/ w/(pj
Perve/itaj^
Retained
Cnmutalivt
% Retained
Percentage
Pant fi f
75 00
1800.00
1800.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
50.00
1203.50
1203.50
0 00
0.00
0.00
100.00
37.50
1087.80
1087.80
, 0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
25 00
1191.20
1354.60
163 40
30.54
30.54
69.46
19.00
718.50
849.40
130.90
24.47
55.01
44.99
12.50
586.10
634.40
48.30
9.03
64.04
35.96
9.50
59840
635.80
37.40
6.99
71.03
28.97
4.75
578.10
596.40
18.30
3.42
74.45
25 55
2.36
533.00
540.40
7.40
1.38
75.83
24.17
200
551 10
551 10
0.00
0.00
75.83
24.17
1 18
538.90
545 90
7.00
1.31
77.14
22.86
0.60
516.70
523.40
6.70
L25
78.3?
21.61
0.30
488.20
495.20
7.00
1.31
79.70
20.30
0.15
481.90
489.70
7.80
1.46
81 16
18.84
0.08
459.20
464.30
5.10
0.95
82.11
17.89
PAN
425.50
521.20
95.70
0.00
0.00
535.00
I lydrometer Analysis
sptatk Gravity of soil 2.81___ ____ Tut Tempenslwi, de&c 21.0
Clupsed
Tint
(umL
Aetna! Hydrometer
Reading
Tenprature
dc^.e
Con teted
I lydrometer
Reading
Effective
Depth
(onj
Coefficient
K
Cnnn
5i-t
(mm)
Percentage liner
Combined
2
41.0000
21.0
34.5000
9 60
0.01276
~D.02S0
16.08
5
33 0000
21.0
26.5000
10.90
0.01276
0.0188
12.35
15
28.5000
21.0
22.0000
11.60
0.01276
0.01/2
10.25
30
27.5000
21.0
21.0000
11.80
0.01276
0.0080
9.79
60
26.0000
21.0
19.5000
12.00
0.01276
0.0057
9.09
250
230000
21.0
16.5000
12.50
0.01276
0.0029
7.69
1440
20.5000
21.0
14.0000
12.90
0.01276
0.0012
6.52(l«n-7 /"AJPT 
-frTTC XrC&l-
p-i n/z-rz X7A-7A-)- "km p/"4-zx> /"AX// y-//7Z7>$- J/PA
Project; Dabus Irrigation Project
Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location : Shaga River
T Pit No. DSAND-1 Depth(m):
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type Disturbed
Test Type : Hydrometer I Wet Sieve Date .24/4/2015
Lab No . -719/07
Total man of tunfftte befort wash, g Total fnatf of            ajltr wash,
Jim
Offfit!
Af usj of SittttO)
Viau of jim •
R/Z SOllfr’J
Mass oj R/Z. Mil (tj
Peruatagt
Ib/atatd
CmHiilatiM
% Retained
Pe/rtatage
Passing
75.00
1800.00
180000
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
50.00
1203.50
1203. SO
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
3,7.50
1087.80
1087.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
25.00
1191.20
1191.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
19.00
718.50
718.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
12.50
586.10
586.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
950
598.40
598.40
0 00
0.00
0.00
100.00
4.75
578.10
594.60
16.50
0.83
0.83
99.17
2.36
533.00
762.10
229.10
11.53
12.36
87.64
2.00
551.10
551.10
0.00
0.00
12.36
87.64
1.18
538.90
1178.20
639.30
32.16
44.52
55.48
0.60
516.70
1370.30
853.60
42.94
87.46
12.54
0 30
488.20
664,70
176.50
8.88
96.34
3.66
0.15
181.90
533.80
51.90
2.61
98.95
1.05
0.08
459.20
467.10
7.90
0.40
99.35
065
P.4N
425.50
43840
12.90
0.65
100.00
0.00
1987.70
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BSH(Ti-7 /-/C-fp-f \i|£-}<r -hTTf:                             XJXx                       Water WOTks Design and t'A-fU-fZ M£\7A--> fr/rJAt /vT  Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process
1
f’AX./T                 AfM
Project :           Dabus Irrigation Project
Ghent:             Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy 
Location :       Mana River T.Pit No,         MSAND-1 
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type - Disturrbcd
Test Type: Hydrometer +Wct Sieve Date :24/4/2015
Depih(m) :                                                                                                     Lab- No : - 721 /07
Total /mm of ftwip/t befon mi 6, jj
Total man of wMpft
1543.90
1514.80
Jmr
Opww^ rfrwwj
•'Wdrr oj \
lass of ritvt i Rf? .
Mats of Rc/ JOlt fcl
Percentage
Retained
(.itssrri/tifirt '
%■ Rtf/dJiirJ
Peruntag
Patting
75.001
1 SOO.00
1800.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
50.00
1203.50
1203.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
37.50
1087,80
1087.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
25 00
1191.20
1191.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
100 00
19.00
718 50
757,70
39,20
2.54
2.54
97.46
12.50
586JO
623 30
37.20
2.41
4.95
95,05
9.50
598.40
620.50
22.10
1.43
6.38
93.62
4.75
578.10
626.50
48.40
3.13
9.51
90.49
2.36
533.00
701 10
168.30
10.90
20.42
79.58
2.00
551.10
551.10
0.00
0.00
20.42
79.58
1.18
538.90
911,30
375.40
24.32
44.73
55.27
0.60
516.70
984.50
467 80
30.30
75.03
24.97
0.30
488.20
709.40
221.20
14.33
89.36
10.64
0.15
481.90
598.30
116.40
7.54
96.90
3JO
0.0b
459.26
478.0G
18.SC
1.22
Stf. 12
1.88
)’4A
425.51
)          4 51.66
29.t(
i            US
0.00
0.00
1543.90
Grain Size Distribution Curve.BS
OJ
.C U.
□> 2 c
1M.M 90.00 BO 0D
70 00
60 00
50 00
40.00
3D.OO 20.00
t-
<u
Ou
10,00
0.00nubH m aw? *ttc
actff mttA
^o-fi
fAzr mwr 2>*z
Project:        Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:          Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location .
T Pit. No. WBH-2-SPT1
Deptli(m): 1.68-240 
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Disturrbed Test Type . I lydrometer Date: 27/4/2015
Lab-No : -723/07
Total man JfJamp/e,^                  60
Sieve
No
Steve
Must of
Sitvefj)
Idff of sieve Ret .w/(rj
Maej of Ret. soil (tj
Percentage
Retained
Citmulative
% Retained
Percentage
Passing
No 10
2
551.1
551.1
0.000
0.00
100.0
No 16
1.18
538.9
543.5
4.59
7.790
7.79
92.2
No 30
0.6
516.7
525.8
9.09
15.428
23.22
76.8
No 50
0.3
188.2
196.0
7.78
13.204
36.42
63.6
No 100
0.15
481.9
487.7
5.83
9.895
46.32
53.7
No 200
0.075
459.2
463.0
3.79
6432
52.75
17.3
pan
425.5
125.5
0.000
0.00
Hydrometer Analysis
Gravity ■?/ roil 2.59  __________ Tut Tempenttan, de&c
Elapsed
Time
(min)
Actual
/ lydiome/ei Reade a«-
Teapt attest
Coe reded
I lydrometer
Reading
Effective
Depth
(rm)
Coefficient
K
Grain
Siye
(mm)
Percentage Finer
Combined
2
26.0000
21.0
19.5000
12.00
0.01373
0.0336
33.57
5
24.0000
21.0
17.5000
12.40
0.01373
0.0216
30.12
15
23.0000
21.0
16.5000
12.50
0.01373
0.0125
28.40
30
22.5000
21.0
16.0000
12.60
0.01373
0.0089
27,54
60
22.0000
21.0
15.5000
12.70
0.01373
00063
26.68
250
20.0000
21.0
13.5000
13.00
0.01358
0.0031
23.24
1440
190000
21.0
_ 12.5000
13.20
001358
0.0013
21.52
Grain Si/c Distribution Curve.BS1
J L J
(|HH
’UTT
C
Water Works Design and
jfcJH mu intnn-f m W
taE
-yJZ?- Super
vision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
FAAC ruWX hVA
'Al>'
Soil & Material Testing Section
Project     Daliusc     Irrigation     Study 
and 
Design 
Project
r   Client:            Ministry oF Water, Irrigation and Energy
T3.
location; _
T.Pit. No. WBH-2-SPT 1 Depth (m) : l.GB-2.40
Sample Type Disturbed
Test Type Double Hydrometer Date: 27/4/2015
Lab-No -723/07nm'i
wv? uTtr. rrt io 
rAxz* jrvretir
Water Wnrfcz Qecign and Supervision Entwrprme L^borafw/
Service Sub Process Scrft A AMerfe/ feetf/rtf "«cft*>rr
Pton?E* O^tnwc* Irrti^atTvri Study n*d
limr Minwtrr «f Wirtr. Irciqpltim uid Enemy I VCafTTtt
T p  n*' WBH ’ SET ’
Fn’ir*.'
s
lt
Oepth^m) * 1 •<> 0
•^triple ftp* TwtTrpe
L»t>No
»***•!•♦« n*
fjAft wru 'LFiwgik JJ ____________
few          r^t*             W*f* r ■■*/
Nt
7*/+f V iy*r
Ke - ^.'
<<J /
■./> ‘
V1 < iv/ * toi > M0 ft ' ■*'
jVloff V
«* -w/,;■
'<’« 'J
V* M
N* **
'J.» ■ 1
>;.# row
N--W
Vt
■
4
7 to
y, *
af*
0 0*1
Xftwftl
tf</ f
f to IM * m/
hi ft
Jiw z '•■’'
/*• ’
t
• to
> /o
: J* JW
/
r J O0
ftftXJ
-
_ TW
f J  W
l.F (JO )U------  -
f Ttf
T
k
J. ft00 t ?W i toft ft fW
/ft *6
Vt 66
P'J/lJ-jfjB1
MJ /
■M. J
i —■■ ...=*4
i—. .-. *
■ .< f 1
f
i 3 '1 Lj
IlyilnMnc-lri \|iiIyih
kXw/h (»rwwty »!*/
1 film/
r- IfflN*/
J
•
I
'» 10
’ 210
fMO
Z*ft
I1
i
Uteft ! 1
H <»*#•'.*
/OftJftJ r J (Wft/
f/ftJOO
ft/. WOO
/ WO0 J Oft/XJ
ZftJQft
f •' ’rfUfii'it* *
r
1 fp'JiikWtf/r*
Ilw.ftHf
-u
1' ,^1/fti^/ K
// 0
7J 0
?/ 0
7 ft ?r ft zr o
Jf 0
>■7 00001
i > <nnn>
J/ftJft) /ft 5Oft) Z 5 Oft)
»fttojo ? OfMJft
.'WJ
1 1 20            t)t!l t )(>
I uo
/I ft>
/ j 6d / > /ft
11 d)
D ili Hi) t)UI 1 111
o.ii m/j ft ft/ MtJ
auf Ho
*/ M If M
O/nJ
J! ft
.rt*u»
Cup
w«ij
oo ut o y*vs
lilW*
0.07 rt 0 oov t
ft OUtt '
a oo j ;
f ' .?.f !
- M> Ml ?;cq
.       '27'J
U‘11
1/OJ MO [
ihM'i !
- 7>,l jM i
HmIh Tl/tt LH«(nhu1lA0Corww.iin
z
z
!
u»
&
’
$
l:
100  W in J 00
■MJ <50 70 00 50 DO 50 51J 
10 CO %] CO 20 DO 10 'JO
; jjn®-'/
>?.»!£?<,• + TTC rAX6- z’w^je-xjr /rai
Project; Dabus Irrigation Project
Client Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location:
T.Pit No WBI I-2-SPT-2 Dcpth(m) 5.0-50.0
ii                   ^ater Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
VsjZ'?'                 service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type : Distnrrbed
Test Type : Hydrometer +Wct Sieve Date 27/4/2015
Lab-No : 624/07
io tai matt of sample before wajb, g Tvta! mast o/ sampl £2e. after wish, r
Penentag Retained
363.30 4 39  3Q
Sieve I
Mais of
Sieve(yj
lass o/ neve Re/ .soilfy
Mass of Re/, soil (f)
r6
CnmulaltH
% Retained
75.00
r. Percentage
Passing
1800.00
1800.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
50.00
1203.50
1203.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
11)0.00
37.50
1087.80
1087.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
100 00
_ 25.00
1191.20
1191.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
.
100.00
19.00
718.50
769.80
51.30
14.12
14.12
85 88
12.50
586.10
629.00
42.90
11 81
25.93
74.07
9.50
598.40
604.70
6.30
1.73
27.66
72.34
4.75
578.10
581.90
3 80
1.05
28.71
71.29
2.36
533.00
533.00
000
0.00
28.71
2.00
71 29
551.10
551.10
0.00
0.00
28.71
1.18
538.90
.
7L29
556.50
17.60
4.84
33.55
0.60
516.70
66.45
549.80
33.10
9.11
42.66
0.30
488.20
57 34
506.40
18.20
5.01
4767
0.15
481 90
.
52.33
499.00
17.10
4.71
52.38
0.08
159.20
47 62
167.00
7.80
1.05
53.4J
P.4N
125.50
.
46 57
590.70
165.20
22 30
0.00
0.00
363.30
Hydrometer Analysis
C
-—-           - ---------- ——
less lemperi
tine, det.c
Stapled
Tune
(min)
slJMeil Hydrometer
Reading
/ tn protitre
&‘.C
210
Corrected
Hydrometer
Reading
Ejftciive
Depth
(cm)
Coefficient
K
2
29.0000
Grant
Si^t
(mm)
21.0
Penentage Finer
Combined
22.5000
11.50
0.01 ho'
5
27.5000
21.0
0.0321
36 22
21.0000
11.80
0.01340
15
25.0000
21.0
0 0206
.
33 80
18.5000
12.20
0.01340
30
24.0000
21.0
00121
.
29 78
17.5000\
12.40
60
22.5000
0.01340
21.0
0 0086
28 17
16.0000
12.60
0.01340
250
20.0000
21.0
0.0061
13.5000
.
25 76
13.00
0.01340
1440
17.0000
21.0
00031
.
21 73
10.5000
13.50
0.01340
----------
0.0013
16.90
Tested by:.llm-'l FMFf JUiJm ’|»TTC
Water Works Design and
J
£G#+ MR6.H MinrM- ’VD’ft
Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
f”
PT-i w
Service Sub Process
I
1   Project
fAtf x-z/xezB' h#A
So// & Material Testing Section
Dabuse   Irrigation   Study   and   Design   Project
Client: Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy
Location : __
T Pit No. WBH-2-SPT-3
Dcpth(m)     700-831
Sample Type : Dis tun bed Test Type ; I lydromeicr Date :26/4/2015
Lab-No 725/07
7 old/ man of jamp!t                   50
t
Sieve
No
Sin*
Opvnijiuii)
Mau of
Sievth)
•Ian of neve RrZ. soilftf
Mau of
ReZ
Ptixt/tfage
Retained
Cuvridafiee
% Retained
Pencil fate
Pau lug
No 10
2
fSU
551.1
0.00
0.000
0.00
100 0
No 16
1.1 S
558 9
539.3
0.42
0.845
0.84
99.2
No 30
0.6
516.7
528 5
11.84
25.807
24.65
75J
No 50
0.5
488.2
503.4
15.23
50.623
55.27
44.7
t3
—33
No 100
0.15
481.9
494.9
13.00
26 139
81.41
18.6
No 200
0 075
459.2
465.2
6M
12.064
93.48
6.5
pan
425.5
425.5
0 000
0.00
Specific Gniw.j of toil
____
Actual
J lydrontefer Reading
2,63
__ ____
Tenpialurt
d'i‘
____________
Cameled
I lydrometer
Readi & ng
I lydromctcr Analysis
TejiTtmperalun, deyc 22.0
I
7£wr
2
____
3.0000
Effective
Depth
(™)
C.oeffident
K
Grain
s*
[mm)
Pcneittage Piner
Combined
9.0000
22.0
-
L
14.70
0.01341
0.0361
5
S.0000
22.0
2.0000
15.00
0.01341
0.0232
4 04
15
7.5000
22.0
1.5000
15.10
0.01341
0.0135
3.03
30
7.0000
22.0
1.0000
15.20
0.01341
0.0095
2.02
60
6.0000
22.0
0.0000
15.50
0.01341
0.0068
0.00
250
5.5000
22.0
0.0000
15.40
0.01341
0.0033
000
1440
16000
22.0
0.0000
15.60
0.01341
0.0014
0.00[luH
i|iTTC
mu Mflifrf -vo-ft
VI W
/^ZC PWJt-M fy ;
fA
PfO’CCt Dabusc Irrigation Study md Desien Project ‘ licnt: Ministry' of Water. Irrigation and Energy Location :
r.Pik No WBM-2 SPT-3 Dcpth(m): 7.00-R.31
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Sail <fi Material Testing Section
Sample Type Disrunbcd
Test 1 ypc Double Hydrinuclei Date 26/4/2015
1 aB-No - 725/07
□rain Shje Distribution Curve, BS
fU
EJI
100.00
90 00
80 00
u      70 00
£ 60 ao
50.00
2      40.00
C
ai
e
£l
30.00
20.00
with cut sofn/with sol'n+lOOs 0.00/0.00*100" 0.00%
CL     10.00 000
r7
---- Gra—- vel    ---
1       Grain s izc,mm
Sand              I
Slit
Claynwy
* TTC
X'c3*-’> n-n^-rv. ma^a-’I- in-n
P/"^-7.£;r-
Mzr
y .yi
/5
Project:
Dabus irrigation P
roject
Client:
Ministry of Water,
Irrigation and Energy
Location : _
&
T Pit. No. WBH-2-SPT-3 Depthfm) *. 7.00-3.31
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
service Sub Process
Soi/ & Materiaf Testing Section
Snmplc Type Disturrbed
Test Type Hydrometer -FWri Sieve Dace :26/4/2015
Lab-No 625/07
Grain Size Distribution Curve,BS
IE
Q»
O»
rc
*-<
C
Of u lu
o tL
100.00 90.00
BOOT
70  00
60.00
50 00
40 OT
3Q.D0
20.00
10 00
3.00ntib’j
UTitff
jww «uttc
ft'in*Jft*+ Wfl
P/*’t W
CAAC j^z/XC/H’ M-id
Project Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client Ministry cif Water, Lmgauon and EneLgy Location : _
T Pic No. DST BI-I 1-5PT i
Dcpili(m) . 1.85-2.65
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise Laboratory
Service Sub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
Sample Type . Distutrbed
Teat   Type   :   Hydrotncirr(with   out   s-ol'ti) Date :27/4/2015
Lab No - 726/07
Sieve
Sieve
Mm of
Tola/ mdt-f of sample, .g _         50
•tm of sieve ■   Ater of
_
PeneuiajF
Pen future
No  Op
cwi&fw*1
SritKfv}
Ref -Joi7(rj
Re/, tat/ ty
Rjfairied
% Uffairitd
Parsing
No 10
2
551.1
551,1
0.000
0.00
100.0
No f 6
IJ8
5J5 9
540.5
1.91
1.820
3.82
96.2
No 30
0.6
516.7
522.4
5.73
11.460
15,28
84.7
Me JO
0J
488,2
.490.9
2.66
5.320
20.60
79-4
No ,i%n
or /I
481.9
455.2
6.31
12,620
33.22
66.8
Nd 200
0.075
459,2
465.9
6.67
13.340
46.56
534
pun
425.5
425,5
0.00
0.000
0.00
Hydrometer Analysis
Xtentir Gflgwfr of /wZ_____ Ztffl_____________7 er/ Tempe raiwr, rttffc 21.0
Tenpfa/ttre    CffF7Tft7fd
Njdromr/tr Reading
Elapsed
Time
(min)
AcfMdl
Hyebowefcr
Heading
— '*• _
Effit'tivr
Ityb
f"«7
Cttffkie/it
K
Grain
(mm)
Pen fit lag?
Fitter Ctwrbbred
2
13.0000
21.0
13,0000
11.20
0.01336
0.0356
25.82
5
8.5000
21,0
S. 5000
14.90
0.01336
0.0231
16.89
139
7.0000
21.0
7.0000
15.20
0.01336
0.01 w
13.91
30
60000
21,0
6.0000
15.30
0.01336
0.0095
11.92
60
3.5000
21.0
3.5000
15.70
0.01336
0.0068
6 95
250
1.0000
21.0
f.0000
16 10
0.01336
0.0034
1,99
1440
0.0000
21.0
0.0000
16,30
0.01336
0.0014
0.00vni‘1 rft.T’T
rw;
'HTTTC
h7mfl-+
Tel. 251-116 1B 55 16/61 45 01
Fax. 251 - 116-61 53 71/61 08 98
e-mail w.w.d.s.e@ethi0nct.ot
Project:         Dabusc Ttngntion Study and Drsi^n Pto|crt
Client :          Ministry of Water, Ini^ation and Energy Location : Chy Borrow I
Test PH DCBP-1 6
Deplh(m}: 0.20-2.30
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise
tshnrafnrv Service
So/7 A Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed rest type : Standard Proctor Dale. 28/4/2013
Lab No 694/07
Lab test No
1
2
3
Water m cc
350
480
560
W! of mould * Wet samplefgi
3327 8
3390
3369 6
Wtof mould (g)
1654
1654
1654
Wt of wet soLlfg)
1673 a
1736
1715.6
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /cm3
1 .77
1 84
1.82
Moisture content
Tin No
33
GH
B-13
Wet soil + tin (g)
166 68
173.75
16961
Dry soil + tin (g)
136 60
142.19
138 03
Wt at tin (g)
9 77
16.03
16.69
Wt or Waler (g)
30.08
31 56
31.58
Wt of Dry soil (g)
126 83
125,36
12134
Moisture content %
23 72
25 18
26.03
Dry Density gm/cm3
1.433
1.469
1.442
Zero Air Voids 100%
1 62
1 58
1.56
E 2 *
JE
E1 'E "E
3
1 4ti0 I 475
1.470 1.465 1.460 1 455
1 450 1 445 1 440 1,435 1 430
£  1  425 O 1 420Pm'l rtIPT WH ■HTTTC
jrr.#+
rzzf rwxrfiv hVA
Te' 251 - 116 - 18 55 16/61 45 01 Fax. 251 116-61 53 71«1 08 98
e mail w.w.d.s.egethionct et
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service
Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Project
Client:
Location: Test Pit
Dabusc I rogation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Clay Borrow 1 DC13P 1-8
Depth(m)  0 10 1.50
Sample type Disturbed Test type : Standard Proctor Date 26/4 72015
Lab No 696/07
Lab.lest No
1
2
3
Water in cc
320
400
480
W1 of mould + Wet sample(g)
3443.1
3519 1
3467 9
WLof mould (g)
16464
1646 4
1646 4
Wt of wet soi'(g)
1796 7
1872.7
1821 5
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /cm3
1.90
1.98
1.93
Moisture content
Tin No
A1
1
KB
Wet soil * tin (g'
147 35
174.53
213.21
Dry soil ♦ tin (g)
126 02
144.38
171.93
Wt of tin (g)
Wt of Waler (g)
1628
16.61
16 46
21.33
30 15
41.28
Wt of Dry soil (g)
109.74
127 77
155.47
Moisture content %
1944
23.60
26 55
Dry Density gm /cm3
1 594
1.605
1.525
Zero Air Voids 100%
1.80
1 67
1.59
OMC
1.610 gm/cc 22 80 %
***)» X
/ I k\. /./'<- -teHEatJED BY_
» <■ .
u
|       , M ..n'\
<APPROVER BY---------------------- J -c tf. \ ------------------------------
_ —'-• ,.-   <
u
J;
//VmH              Jims ’UTTTC
fM.C fUlXM hKA
Tel. 251 116-18 55 16/61 45 01
Fax. 251 - 116 -61 53 71/61 08 98 e mail w,w.d.9.e@ethionet.et
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Project Client: location Tesl Pit
□abuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Clay Borrow 1 DCBP-1 -13
Depth(m): 0.202 30
Sample type Disturber!
Test  type  .  Standard  Proctor Date: 26/4/2015
Lab No;698/O7
Lab test No
1
2
3
4
Water in co
350
430
510
590
Wt of mould + Wetsample(gl
3225
3339 6
33635 '
33OB
Wtof mould (g>
1654
1654
1654
1654
WLof wet soil(g)
1571
1685 6
1709.5^
1654
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
944
Wet Density qm /cm 3
1.66
1.79
1.81
1.75
Moisture content
Tin No.
TE
_________
F0
G3
B-6
Wet soil * hn (g)
170 99
165 .77
153.25
160 44
Dry soil + tin (g)
142 90
135.26
120.51
121.00
Wtof tin igi
16.57
16.97
16 54
16 31
Wt of Waler (g)
20 09
30.51
32 74
39 44
Wt of Dry soil (gj
126,33
118.29
103 97
104.69
Moisture content %
2224
25.79
31.49
3757      '
Dry Density gm /cm3
1.361
1.419
1.377
1 273
Zero Air Voids 100%
1.71
1 62
1 48
1 36
£ *
s CT.
%
a
MDD
CMC:
1.421 gm/cc 26.00 %
CiiEBKEp BY_
BYViriH               X.'IM’; qiTTTC
Water Works Design and
mia-t
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service
rmJW hKA
Soil & Material Testing Section
Tel. 251 • 116 - IB 55 16/61 45 01
Fax 251 - 116 - 61 53 71/61 08 99
e-mail w.wd.s.egethionctet
Project      Dsibusc Irligation Study And Design. Project Client:        Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location ; Clay Borrow 1
TestPil DCBP-1-16
Depth(m) : 0.20 3-00
PO.Box 7561
Addis Ababa Ethiopia
Sample type disturbed
Test type : Standard Proctor Dale 23/4/2015
Lab No 700/07
Lab test No
1
2
3
Water in cc
350
430
510
Wt.of mould + Wet sample(g)
3232
3448 5
3384 1
W of mould (g)
1654
1654
1654
Wt of wet soil(g)
1628
1794 5
1730.1
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /cm3
1.72
1.90
1.83
Moisture content
Tin No
P2
G6
61
Wei soil + tin (g)
144.60
100.29
158.84
I Dry soil + tin (g)
12324
146.92
127 37
Wl of tin (g)
7 34
16.43
16.5
Wl of Waler (g)
21.36
33.37
31.47
Wl of Dry soil (g)
115 9
130 49
110.87
Moisture content %
1843
25 57
28 38
Dry Density gm/cm3
1.456
1.514
1 428
Zero Air Vokls 100%
1.76
156
1.50
Water contentPmi
■frTTTR
f'A/C/7 iTtrtJWT hGA
Tel 251 - 116- 10 55 16/B1 45 01 Fax. 251 -116 - SI 53 7V61 OB 98
e-mail w.w.d.s.Q@ethicnat.et Project Dabusc IiiLgtiUon Study smd. Drsign Project Client:           Ministry of Water>litigation and Energy
Location : Chy Borrow 2
Test Pit: DCRP-2-2
Deptti(m) 0.00-1.20
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service
Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed Test type : Standard Proctor Date : 26/4/2015
Lab No:702/07
Lab.test No
1
2
3
4
Water in co
400
480
560
640
Wt.of mould 4- Wet sample(g)
3201.4
3314.6
3370.9
3342 2
Wl of mould (g)
1646.4
1646.4
1646.4
1646.4
Wtof wet soilfgj
1555
1668 2
1724.5
1696 8
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /cm3
1 65
1.77
1 83
1.80
Moisture content
1 Tin No.
59
B
OX
A19
Wet soil ♦ tin (g)
128.9B
155 50
167.80
193 01
Dry soil + tin (q)
107.22
125.04
132.27
146 27
Wl oftin (g)
1660
16.36
1699
16 73
wt of Waler (gl
21 76
30 46
35 53
46.74
Wl of Dry soil (g)
90 62
108 68
115 28
129 54
Moisture content %
24.01
28.03
30 82
36.08
Dry Density gm /cm3
1.328
1.380
1 396
1.320
Zero Air Vends 100%
1.61
1 51
1.45
1 35
Water content
MUD ‘
OMC.
1 399 gm/cc. 30 20 %VniH               a.HR'V; DTTTL Mltti h7Q1ft-+
rue runtm ma
Tel 251 - 116- 10 55 16/61 45 01
Fax. 251 - 116 - 61 52 71/61 00 96 e-mail w.w.d,s.c@ethionetet
Project i Dflbusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client; Ministry of Water, I trigatron and Energy 
Location : Clay Borrow 2
Test Pit. DCBP-2 5
Deplh(m): 0.20 2 10
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service
Sail & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type Disturbed
Test type : Standard Proctor Date 27/4/2015
Lab No 704/07
Lab test No
1
2
3
4
Water in cc
400
520
640
760
W1 of mould ♦ Wet sample(g)
5543.3 1
5068 B
5092 3
5814.6
Wl.of mould (g)
4195 6
41956
4195.6 1
41956
Wtofwel soil(g)
1447 7
1673.2
1696.7
1619
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
944
Wet Density gm/cm3
1.53
1.77
1.80
1 72
Moisture content
Tin No
22
22
TF
B6
' Wet soil + bn (g)
131.69
169.32
171.73
140 27
Dry soil + tin (gj
109.74
135.22
131.68
104.58
Wt of tin (gj
16.35
16.35
16.57
1632
Wt of Water 'gl
21.95
34.1
40.05
35,69
Wtof Dry soil (g)
93.39
118 87
115 11
88.26
Moisture content %
23 50
28.69
3479
40.44
Dry Density gm /cm3
1 242
1.377
1,333
1.221
Zero Air Voids 100%
1.62
1.49
1.37
1 27
r->
E
*z
—■
■&
s
c
o
1,3 S3 gm/cc 29 50 %
tested BY PROCESSED BY
^HEQKE^BY_
ARPHd^zp BYPdl‘1
q»TTTC FVrjtffc fl<FA
Tel. 251 - 11B IB 5b 16^1 4501
Fax 251 - 116 51 53 71/01 OS 90 e-mail w.w.d.s.o@clhionet.ot
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Bm 2E01
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Project' Client:
Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Wntci, Irrigation and Energy
Location  (3xy  Borrow  2 Test Pit: DCBP-2-8
Dopth(m): 0 20 3.00
Sample type :Disturbed Test type : Standard Proctor Date 27/4/2015
Lab NO 706/07
Lab test No.
1
2
3
Water in. cc
360
450
540
Wt.of mould + Wet samplefg;
5836
5985
5920.7
Wl.of mould (g) ’
4195,6
4195.6
4195.6
Wtof wet soil(g)
1640.4
1789.4
1725.1
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /ern3
1 74
1.90
1.83
Moisture content
Tin No.
AW
1a
L.D
Wet soil + tin (g)
122.93
135.06
141.73
Dry soil + tin (g)
102.93
109 15
110.37
Wt of tin (g)
17.06
16 84
16.64
Wt of Water
20
25,91
31.36
Wt of Dry soil (g)
85 87
92.31
93 73
Moisture content %
23 29
2S.07
33 46
Dry Density gm /cm 3
1.409
1 480
1.369
Zero Air Voids 100%
1.67     |     155
1.43
MOD
OMC
1.461 gm/cc 27 SO %
TESTED BY
k X* 'Decked by_
processed hy
' ;=APPROVED BY
~ J.■'
ptEi /"iVFT JVIJn? $TTTE
flUZ F”£/Z£7)f hVA
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service
So/7 <8 Material Testing Section
Project:
Client:
location : Test Pil
Tel 251      116- 18 55 10/01 -1501
Fax 251 - 11G - 61 53 71/61 OB 98
e-mail w.w.d.s.e@ethionet.ot
Dlibijse Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Chy Borrow 4
DCBP-4-1
P.O.Bo*
2551
Addis  Ababa
Ethiopia
Sample type
Disturbed
Test  type  ;
Standard  Proctor
Date 26/4/20
15
DepLh(m). o.bo i.ao
Lab No 708/07
Lab.test No
1
2
3
Water In cc
390
500
610
Wt of mould + Wet sample(g)
5678
5883 3
5831.8
Wt.of mould {g)
4195.6
4195.6
41956
Wt.of wet soil(g)
1463 3
1687.7
1636 2
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /cm3
1.57
1.79
1.73
Moisture content
Tin No.
GH
AW
LD
Wei sail + tin (g)
138.76
144.08
132.3
Dry soil + tin (g)
114.98
114 91
101.60
iwtoflm (g)
16 03
17.06
16.64
Wt of Water (g)
23.78
29.17
30.5
Wt ut Dny soil (g)
90.15
97 85
05.16
Moisture content %
24 23
29.81
35.81
Dry Density qm /emJ
1.265
1.377
1.276
Zero Air Voids 100%
1.64
1 so
1,38
1.409 1,360
□     1.350 2 1.340
*      1 320
H      1.3M j 1.230
* 1 7B0 § .1.240 e 1.220 o i 200
■J a 30 32 34 35
Water content
MDD
OMC
1.370 gm/cc 29 90 %
wiia
TESTED BY              VMk PROCESSED GY
CHECKED BY
hi
£ |k APPROVFD BYpibh                  Jim?
VlA'ltH fAX/T X'VJXW tWA
Tei. 251 - 116- IB 55 16/61 -15 01
Fax. 251 116-B1 53 71/61 OS 9H
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O.Sax 2561
Addis Ababa
e-mail w.w.d.s.e@athionet cl
Ethiopia
Project ‘ Diibiue Irrigation, Study and Design Project
Client Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Sample type Disturbed
Location ; Clay Borrow 4
Test type : Standard Proctor
Test Pit; DCBP-4-3
Date 27/4/2015
Depth(m): 0 00-140
Lab No 710/07
I Lab.test No.
1
2
3
Water in cc
400
480
560
Wt.of mould * Wet samptefg)
3306.4
3449
3318.6
WLof mould (g)
1653.8
1653.8
1653 8
Wlof wel soil(g)
1652 6
1795 2
1664 8
Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /cm 3
1.75
1.90
1.76
Moisture content
Tin No.
202.00
C&
F13
Wet soil * tin (g)
104.77
142.45
178.76
Dry soil + tin (g)
06.06
116.52
143.06
Wtoftln (g)
9 75
1691
16.85
Wt of Water (g)
18 71
25.93
35.7
WL of Dry soil (g)
76.31
99 61
126 21
Moisture content %
24.52
26.03
28 29
Dry Density gm /cm3
1 406
1.509
1.375
t1
Zero Air Voids 100%
1.62
1 59
1.53
1.510 rt     1.490 f 1.170
5   1   450 b>  1  430 5 1.410 * 1.390
1370
O 1.350
26 27
Water cdnlenl
■IPrai rtn
jtlm otie, h7Q-m fM-C W7JW tiVA
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Service Sort A Materia/ Tesf/ng Sectron
Project: Client Location
Tel. 251 • 116- 18 55 16/61 45 01
Fax. 251 -116 -61 53 71/61 OB 98
e-mail w.w.d^.e@«th ionet, el
Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Min is tty of Water, I ruga Cion nnd Energy Shall Material
P.O Box Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
2561
Test Pit. DCBP-Z4
Depth(m) 0.0Q-L50
Sample type disturbed Test type Standard Proctor Date 28/4/2015
Lab No:716/07
Lab test No.
1
2
3
4
Water in cc
270
350
430
510
WLol mould + Wei samplc(g)
3236 7
34107
3505
3418.4
Wl.of mould (g)
1652
1654
1654
1654
Wtof wet soil(g)
1584 7
1756.7
1851
1764.4
I Volume of mould cm3
944
944
944
944
Wet Density gm /cm3
1 68
1.86
1.96
1 87
Moisture content
Tin No
14.00
Z
D
129
Wet soil* tin (g)
120.44
152.37
211 31
176.31
Dry soil + tin (gj
114.13
130.47
174 58
141.98
wt of tin (g)
17 49
16.83
17 06
16.89
Wt of Water (g)
14 31
21.9
3673
34 33
Wt of Dry soil (g)
96 64
113.64
157.52
125.09
Moisture content %
14.81
19 27
23,32
27.44
Dry Density gm /cm3
1 462
1.560
1.590
1 467
' Zero Air Voids 100%
1 91
1 76
1.65
1 54
rt
E
z
St
£.
E»
'6
**
e  1490
&  1.470 o   1.450
1.610
1.590
1.570
1.550
I 530
1 510
Walor content
MDD : 1.596 gm/cc
OMC:           22.50 %vm-'j Jims <httc
^0-h PAA 'UH
rAXfT 
i/M
Tel. 251 - 116 16 55 16/61 -15 01 Fax 251 - 116 - 61 53 71/61 06 9B e-mail w.w.d.a.egethioriet et
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
P OlBcx 2561 Addis Ababa Ethiopia
Prjcet Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location : Clay Borrow 1
T.Pit No DCBP-1 7 Depth£m); 1.110-3.00
Trst Type : Direct Shear Dsite: 25/4/2015
Lnb-No- 695/07
Normal Stress
0
Shear Stress
0
100
65
200|
99
300
120
200
iso
160
Shear Stress
y = 0.27Sx+39.66
0 ----------------- --------------------------------- - ,------------------------
0      20    40     60     80    100 120 140 160 ;80 200 220 240 260 280 300 Normal Stress
O 39.66kPa
& =15.38°Vin-<|
flW-
-hTTr.
h7Cnfi-i
'"lO-ft PftA IRf
f’W.' FWW fiVA
Tel 251      116 - 18 55 16761 JS 01
Fan. 251 - 116-61 53 71/61 00 96
o-mail wr.w.d.sc@cthionet.et
Dnbu&c Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561 Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Frjcct :
Client:
Location :
Clay Borrow 1
T.Pit. No,   DCBP-1-13 Dcplhfm) 0.20-2.30
Test Type : Direct Shear Date : 25/4/2013
Lab No -69R /07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
0
100
83
2001
92
300
116
Shear Stress
200
150
y = 0.165x + 64
0     20    40     60     80    100 120 140 160 IRQ 200 220 240 260 280 300 Normal Stress
C=64.0 kPaPtn-M
*TTC
jrr.£+ pnfltft MdiiH
■vo-ft PhA 'LJH
CAZ.6’ WMrM h^A
Tel. 251-116 18 55 16/6145 01 Fax. 251 - 116 - 61 53 71/61 08 98 e-mail w w.d.s.c@athionet.et
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Prjcct: Diibusc Irrigation Study* nnd Design Project
Client:           Ministry of Witter. Irrigation and Energy
Location : Clay Borrow 1
Test Type Direct Shear
T.PiuNo. DCBP-1-16
Date 26/4/2015
Dcptli(m): 0.20-3.00
Lab-No : -700/07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
0
100
63
200
116
300
136
Shear Stress
200
0
0      20    40     60     80    100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 JOO Normal StressPID-H JIMS')S M»TTC
jrctf-v mtn fr-nnn-f "Mbfi m ’l«+
fAAC jTt/?JW hVA
Tel. 251-116-16 55 16/61 45 01
Fax 251 - 116-61 53 71/61 06 OB e-mail w.w.d.s,e@ethioneLet
Prjcct. Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
l.ocation : Clay Borrow 2
T.Pir No. DCBP-2-5
Dcprh(m) 0 20-2.10
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process So// <£ MoterW Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561 Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
"Test Type : Direct Shear Date : 16/4/2015
Dib-No . - 704/07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
0
100
58
200
103
300
130
Shear Stress
200 1
180 |
0      20     40     60 SO 100 120 140 160 lf!0 200 220 240 260 28Q 300 Normal Stress
C= 25.0 kPa
0 =18.8
tested by
PROCESSED BY
^checked by
S)> dtvV.->
.^PROVED BY
IPm-'l rtPT Wm’ 'b'VTG
TQ’ft PAA m
f*AC FM/W h&A
Tel 251 116- 1fl 55 16/61 45 01 Fax. 251-116-61 53 71/61 08 98
e-mail w.w.d.s e@othionct.et
Prject Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Project Client:        Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory Sen/iceSub Process Soil & Material Testing Section
P.O Box 2561 Addis Ababa Ethiopia
Location ; Chy Borrow 2 T. Pit. No. DCBP2 8 Deplh(m) ; 0.20-3 00
Test Type Direct Shear Date : 17/4/2015
Lab-No: • 706/07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
0
100
90
200
106
300
139
Shear Stress
0                   — r
-
.       -------- ___
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 150 180 200 220 240 260 280 300
Normal Stressvtn-q 
fl.mq qiTTG
jrc.fr+ PAfltTA h7fl'J<V+
Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Ttbfi m V.+
■XI &
Laboratory ServiceSub Process
Soj/ <£ IWateria/ Testing Section
Tel 251 - 116 18 55 16^1 45
01
P.O.Box 2561
Fax. 251 - 116 - 61 53 71/61
08 96
e-mail w.w.d.5.e@ethlonetet
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Pqcct ;
DAbuse fi'iigation Study and
Design Projec
t
Client Ministry of Water, Triignlian and Energy Laention Chy Borrow -I
TPit.No. DCBP-4-1 Depch(m) : 0.80 TOO
Test Type Direct Shear
Dale -28/4/2015 Lab-No : -708/07
Normal Stress
Sheaf Stress
0
0
10.0
72
200
85
300
119
200
iso |
160
Shear Stress
y = O.23Sx + 45
Normal Stressmi
JtM****; 4>TTC
w Ph* m
r^zr rwjw hr a.
Tel. 251 -116- 1855 16/61 4501 Fax. 251 -116 61 53 71/61 08 98 email ww.d.BO@elhionet.et
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process So// <& Material Testing Section
P O Box 2561 Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Placet : Dabusc Irrigation Study and Design Pro|cci
Client:        Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Location : Chy Borrow 4 TPit.No DCBP-4-3 Depth(m): 0 00-240
Test Type : Direct Shear Date : 17/4/2015
Ub No -710/07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
0
100
72
200,
93
300
99
Shear Stress
200
180
160
140
y~0.135x + 61
0     20    40    60    80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 Normal Stress
C=61.0 kPavm-'l
JViPA1; >t>TTE
hmifH
^(bft pfti 4.JU
rwxw fr/?A
Tel 251 • 116 - 10 55 16/61 45 01 Fax. 251 -116 61 53 71761 09 90 e-mail w.w.d.s.e@ethionct.ot
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process
Soil & Material Testing Section
PO.BoX 3561 Addis Ababa Ethiopia
Ptject
Client:
Location :
□abuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Mintshy of Water, Irrigation and Energy
D/i of Axis 
T.Pit No DRDC-1
Depth(in) ■ 0.20-2.50
Test Type : Direct Shear Date . 21/4/2015
i.ab-No,: - 712/07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
□
100
36
I
200
66
300
75
Shear Stress y = 0.185x4-22,66
Normal Stress
C= 22.66kPa
0= 10.48
tested by PROCESSED BY _ .Yin-'l FtFF JLHJm
WltfA ATtHrt-+
10 ft m 'LM
FA AC rvKtf hKA
Tel. 251       116-18 55 16/61 $5 51 Fax.  251  -  116  61  53  71/61  06  90 e-mail w.w.d s.e@ethionet.et
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process So// <& Materia/ Testing Section
P.O.Box 2561 Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Piject l
Client ■
Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy
Location : D/s of Axis T.Pit. No. D'IT-3
■ t.OD-5,00
Test Type : Direct Shear Date :28/4/20 i 5
Lab-No:-714/07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
0
100
as
200
141
300
197
Shear Stress
0      20    40     60     80    100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 Normal Stress
C= 30.33kPa
0=29.03°
TESTED BY processed by
HECKED RY
a n[| 3-^'
5:r '''
,/<I’m-'i
arJtt
-httC
Mdifrt
•>o-h Pftd W
Mzr rtrnw hvA
Tel 251-116 ■ 18 55 16/61 45 01
Fax 251 -116 - 61 53 71/61 08 98 e-mail wwd.s c@ethionct.et
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
Laboratory ServiceSub Process So// <& Material Testing Section
P.O Box       2561
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Prjcct: Dabuse Irrigation Study and Design Project
Client:        Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Txocation Shall Material
Test Type : Direct Shear
TPit.No. DCBP-2.7
Date: 25/4/2015
Drptli(m) 0.303.00
fj»b-No 717/07
Normal Stress
Shear Stress
0
0
100
89
200
126
300
137
200 ,
jbo -
Shear Stress
y = 0.24x + 69.33
40
I
20
0
0
50
100
ISO
200
250
300
Normal Stress
C= 69.33kPa
0=13.5
tested by processed by
ApPR^'h byI
I
-----------
Project: Dabus Irrigation Project
n
Client:       Mini,try of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location: - Clay Borrow-1
BH No : DCBP-1-12 Dcpch(m): 0.10-3.00
Sample Type: Disturbed Date;     27/04/2015-03/05/2015 Tested By: D.G
I-ab No: 697/07
Void ratio Vs Pressure curveProject: Dabus Irrigation Project
Client: Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Location: - Clay Borrow-1
BHNo: DCBP-1-7
Depth(m): 1.00-3.00
Sample Type: Disturbed Date: 28/04/2015-04/05/2015 Tested By: D.G
Lab No: 695/07
Tested by;
Checked by.
Void ratio c»
This report presents Summery of laboratory test result of soils taken from Dabus Irrigation Project The test results are Permeability and Oedometer Consolidation. The soil tests are carried out following the appropriate sample preparation and testing procedures The following are the standard procedures followed to carry out the analysis
1.1 Standard Procedures
S No
Type of Test
Standard
1
Oedometer Consolidation
BS 1377: 1975. Test 17
2
Permeability
ASTM D2434Project Dab^s Irrigation Project
Client.   Ministry   of   Water.   Irrigation   and   Energy Date Tested                   27/04/2015-04/05/2015
Test Pit No; Depth(m) •
Soecfic gravity
DCBP-1-15 1 2C-3 00
2.64
Before Test
Diameter D
50 CO mm
Weight of sampie-R ng
141.83
Area. A
1963 50 mm?
20 00 mm
i
I
Weiht o* Ring
66 82
Thickness. H
Weight of sample
75.01
Volume
39 27 cm3
Weiht o< dry sample
60 99
Initial moisture content Mo
22 99
Density
Dry Density
1 91 g/cc
1.55 g/cc
0 03 76 7877
Volume change Faector F=
After Test
0.09143
:        'a’v?
Weight of samole+nng
138 22
Overall settlement
2.6540 mm
Weight of dry sample+ring
127 81
Volume change
5 2111 err1
Weight of Ring
66 82
Final volume
34.0589 cm3
Weght of wet samp e
71.4
Final dens ty
2.C964 g/cc
Weight of dry samp'e
60 99
Fina’ Dry density
1.7907 g/cc
Weight of mo’sture
1C 41
Final void ratio
0.59
Final moisture content
17 07%
Final saturation
Sf-
82 73
X.
nnu
ita
Voic Ratio
Volume Cmpressiblr
y
Coeff.cent of consoiioation
Compression
8
Pressure
Settlemeq
5e=
e=e -fie
:
Incremental Cnanges
H=H-6H |
r
Cv=
Index,Cc ]
o
c
KN/mA2
A H mm
_________
RfiH
fie
Sp
1*«t
Mv=
t50
H =20mm
c
2
0 026*(H.,. ) /t50
L
6e/6p*i00
min.
C
0
0 091
0.829
0
□
20
I—L
50
0683
0 062
0 766
0.0624
50
1.766
0 707
4 84
19.317
19.659
386.457
2 076
2
-—
100
1 181
0 108
0.721
0.0455
50
1.721
0.529
6.25
18 819
19 068
363 589
1.513
3
200
1.583
0.145
0 684
0 0368
100
1 684
0 218
3 06
h8417
18 618
346 630
2.945
0.189
■
400
2 248
0 206
0 623
0.0608
200
1 623
0 187
1.00
17 752
5
800
<8 085
327 049
8 503
2.852
0.261
0 568
C.0552
400
1 568
0 088
210
8
17.148
17 450
400
2.829
r 304.503
0 259
3 770
0.570
-0 0021
-400
9
100
2 654
0.243
0.586
-0.0160
-300
—
t---------------- 1
ri-------
i-----------------
1
rz—
—
i-----
t ’ t-j -l V
__  Checked py. xSxlsi
LProject: Dabus Irrigation Project
Client Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy
Dale Testes 
03/05/2015-10/05/2015
Test Pit No                      DCBP-2-1
Depth(m)
S pecfc g a v ity 
r
0.80-3.00 2.73
Bofore Test
Weight of sample+Ring 274 56
WeiFit of Ring
Weight of same e
Weiht of dry sample
Initial moisture con'.en: Mo In11 a! Voic eDr
nitial sat- s0=
109.50
165.06
128.95
28,00
Diameter, Area. A Thickness. H Volume Density
Dry Dersity
75 00 mm
4417 88 mm
20 00 mm SB 36 cm3
1 87 g/cc 1 A6 g/cc
87 8096
Vo'ume change Faector F= 0.09353
After Test
Weight c‘ sample*ring 266 72
Weight of dry sample*ring Weight of Ring
Weight of wet sample Weight of cry sample
238.45 109.60
157.22 . 128.95
Weight or moisture                                      28 27
Overall settlement Volume change
r*naf volume
c mal density Final Dry density Final void ratio
2 8480 mm 12.5821 cm3 75.7754 cm3
2.0748 g/cc 1.7017 g/cc
0 60
Final mo.sture content
Final saturation Sf=
21 92%
99.05
Cosohdation test -data far e-logp curve
Void Ratio
Volume Cmpressiblitj
Coefficent of consolidation
Compression
u
EL
[pressure
Settlemer
|6e®
e=e0-6e
Incremental Changes
H=H-6H
(H.«r
Cv=
Index,Cc
U
_c
KN/mA2
U H mm
F*6H
6e
Sp
1+e,
Mv=
•50
H =2O.Tim
o
0 026*(H*„.) ,'!50
5e/&p*10C
mm
I
0
0
0 094
0.871
0
0
20
1
50
0.048
0 C79
0.791
0 0793
50
1 791
0.886
5.06
f19.152
19.576
383 220
1.969
2
100
1.232
0.115
0.755
0 0359
50
1.755
0.409
4.00
18.768
18 960
359.4B2
2.337
3
200
1.763
0 165
0.706
0.0497
100
1 736
0.291
3.42
IB 237
18.503
342 343
2.603
0-174 J
4
400
2.351
0.220
0.651
0.0550
200
1 651
0.1671
7.56
17 649
17.943
321.951
1.107
5*
800
3.134
0 293
0.577
0.0732
400
1.577
0.116
4 00
16.866
17 258
I 297 021
1 936
8
400
3 044
C.285
0.586
-0.0084
*400
f
I
9a
100
2 848
C .266
0604
-00183
-300
r
I
______
_________
I
1iVUI
1 iu J-u *u.ka
Project: Dabus Irrigator Project
Client Ministry of Waler, Irrigation and Energy Date Tested :                   03/05/2015-10/05/2315
Test Pit No
DC8P-2-3
DepUifm):                        0 00-2.40
Soecfx gravity               2 76
Before Test
Weight of sample+Ring 259 63
f
Weihl o Ring Weight o* sample Weihtof dry sample
110.16
149.47
107.51
Initial moisture content Mo                            39 03
Diameter. D Area.A Thickness. H Volume Density
□7 Density
75.00 mm 4417.06 mmJ
20,00 mm 33.36 cm3
1.69 g/cc 1.22 g/cc
initial VoiceD.
Initial satuSa.
Volume change Faector F-
After Test
1 27
84.9314
*
0.11342
1
1
'Weight of samp'e*ring 253 29
Weight of dry sample*nng 21767
Weight of Ring
M0 16
Weight of wet sample                                 143 13 Weight of dry sample                                107 51      - We ghl of moisture                                       35 62
Overa" settlement Volume change Final volume Final density Final Dry density Final void ratio
3.1 SCO mm 13.9605 cmJ 74.3970 cm3
1.9239 g/cc 1.4451 g/cc 0.91
Final moisture content
Final saturation Sf=
33.13%
100.50
Cosolidation lest -data for e-lcqp curve
I
Void Ratio
I-------
1-----
Volume Cmpress iblity
Coefficent
of consolidation
Con
npress:on
g
Pressure
Settlemer
Ifie-
e=e0-8e
incremen’al Changes
H-H-5H
Cv=
ndex.Cc
ci
c
KN/m^
A H mm
F*5H
-
,5e
6p
1+e,
Mv=
150
Hr=20mm
o oze-fH^y/tso
6e/6p’10C
min
0
0
0.113
1.263
0
0
20
1
50
0.912
Q 1C3
1165
0.1034
"sol
2.165
0956
1.82
19 088
19.544
381.968
5.457
2
100
1 332
0 151
1.117
0.0476
50
2 117
0 450
4 00
18.6681
18.078
356 379
2 316
3
200
1 876
0.213
1 056
0 0617
100
2.056
0 300
4.84
18.1241
18.396
338.413
1.818
0.288
4
4001
2.617
0.297
0 972
0.0840
200
1.972
0 213
3 92
17.383
17 754
315.187
2 091
5
800
3.366
0.384
0 884
0 0872
400
1 884
a 116
14.02
16.614
16.999
L 288 949
0.507
81
400
3.330
0 379
0 390
-C.0054
-400
I
.9
100
3.160
0 358
0.910
•C 0202
-300
t
*
I
!
- Che-MM by
L
I
I_ J
tb' L
_
id' iWl
Project: Daous Irrigation Project
Client Ministry  of Water, Irrigation and Energy 
Date Tested
Test  Pit  No
Depth(m):
Scecf   c   gravity 
Before Test
Weight of sampie^Rmg WeihtofRing
Weigh! of sample Weiht of dry sample
03/05/2015-10/05/2015 DCBP-2-6
3 20-3.00 2.75
Initial moisture content Mo Initial Vo c
Initial satu$D-
Vc.jme change Faector F=
After Test
Weight of sample*nng Weight of dry sample*rmg Weight of Ring
268.10
111 44
156 66
120.11
30 43
Diameter.O Area A Thickness H Volume Dersty
Dry Density
75 00 mm 4417 B8 mma
2C 00 mm 80 36 cm’
1.77 g/cc 1 36 g/cc
1 C2 81.8019
c 101*5
266.34
231.55
111.44
Weight of wet samnle                                   154 9
Weight of dry sample
12C -1
We ght of moisture                                       34 79
Overall settlement Voiume change FinaF volume
c inal density Final Dry densty Final vo c ratio
- 270C mm 5 6107 cm?
02 7468 cm3 1 872C g/cc 1.4515 g/cc
0 89
Final moisture content
Final saturat on Sf=
20.97%
89 04
Cosoiiaation test -data for e-ioqp curve
• 
!5cV“ .
Void Ratio
'Volume empressite
X
Coefficent of consolidation
Compression
o
E
Pressure
Settlemer
e=e--5e
Incremental Changes
H=H-5H
Cv=
lndex.Cc
U
c
KN/mA2
H mm
F-SH
5e
Sp
1+e,
Mv=
t50
H0=20mm
0 026*(H   .)*/t50
ave
8e/8p*103
mm.
I
0
0
0 101
1.023
0
0
20
1
50
0610
0 062
0.961
0.0617
50
1.961
0 629
1 00
19.390
19.695
387 893
10.085
H2
100
0713
0.072
0 95*
0.0104
50
1 951
0.107
3 06
19.287
19 339
373 978
3.178
1
200
0 943
0 095
0 929
0 0233
100
1 926
0 1211
4.41
19 057
19.172
367 566
2 167
0.120
L4
40C
1.348
0 136
0.887
0 0410
200
1 887
0.109
2 25
18 652
18 855
I 355 492
4.108
L5
000
1.601
0 170
0 053
0 03371
400
1 853
0 045
4 00
18 319
18 486
I 341.714
2 221
8
400
1.628
0 165
0 858
•0 0054
-400
1.270
I-
-----------------
19
1001
0 128|          0 095
-0 0362
-300
—
--------------
__________
Chunked by
j Ap^B)!ed -Jr—.
ii i
41 iProject' Dabus irrigation Project
Client Ministry t Date Tested : Test Pit Na Deptn(m) Specfic gravity :
Before Test
f Water, Irrigation and Energy 03/06Z2Q15-10/05/2015 DCBP-4-3
(Right) 2.84
Diameter, C
75.00 mm
1
Weight   of   sample+Ring
283.09
Area A
4417 88 mm:
Weiht Qi Ring
112 8?
Thickness. H
23.00 mm
‘•
Weight   o'   sample
170 22
Volume
Density
Dry Density
83 36 cm1
Weiht of dry sample
131 92
1 93 g/cc
Initial mojsLre content Me
29 33 .
1.49 g/cc
Initial Voice *
o
nlt;al satk,So=
0 9C 313933
Volume change Faector F= After Test
0.095 r
1
i*.
1
Weight of sample+rlng 280 26
Weight of dry sample* ring 244 79
f
Weight o Ring
Weight of wet sample Weight of dry sample Weight of moisture
- nai moisture content
Fina saturation Sf=
112.37 ’ 167.39 131.92
35/7 26 89% 105 *6
Overall settlement Volume change Fmal volume Final density Final Dy density Final void ratio
1 3510 mm a. 1775 cm3
80.13CC cm3 2 3077 g/cc 1 6453 g/cc
0 73
1
Cosohdation lest -data for e^oqp curve
Void Ratio
Vofume Cmp ess?blity
r
Coefficen
of consol
datlon
Compression
0
c
d
_c
Pressure
Settlemer
<5e=
e=e0-5e
Incrementa Changes
H=H-5H
Cv=
Index.Cc
|KN/m*2
A H mm
F*5H
5e
5p
i1+e,
Mv=
(50
H-,=20mm
o.ozevH^.y/tso
5e/6p*1OO
min.
r
r
0
0
0.095
0.902
0
0
20
—
1
50
0.338
3.037
0 865
0.0369
50
1 665
0 396
1 21
19612
19.0C6
392.270
—
8.429
2
100
3.553
0.054
0 849
0 0166
50
1 849
G. ISO
529
19.437
19.525
381 206
1.87-T
3
200
0.322
0.078
0.824
0.0246
100
1 024
0/35
4.00
<9.178
19.308
372.780
2.423
0 200
4
403
1,414
0.134
0 760
0.0563
200
1 768
0 159
2.10
10.586
18.882]
356.530
4.414
5
30C
2.075
0.197
0 705
0.0629
400
1.705
0 092
6.50
17.925
18.256
333 263
1.333
1
400
2 019
0 192
0.710
-0 0053
-400
_________
9
100,
1 851
0 176
3.726
-0.0160
-300
I
Check Rd byPr oject Dabus Irrigation Project
Client: Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy Date Tested :                 29/04/2015-05/052015
Test Pit No.
DC 8 P-4-3
Depth(m):                       0 00-2.40 SnecFic gravity ;            2.70
Before Test
Diameler.D
53.00 mm
Weight of sample* Ring
142.93
Area. A
1963,50 mm7
Weiht of Ring
70.30
Thickness. P
20X0 mm
Weight of sample
72 55
Volume
Density
Dry Densly
39.27 err3
Weiht of dry sample
57.73
1.85 g/cc
Inllal moisture comen: 7c
25 07
1.47 g/cc
initial Voic
Initial satusD,
B2.S464
Voijme change Faectcr F=
0,09’B3
After Test
Weight of sample*ring
144.05
Overall settlement
0.3990 m-
Weight of dry sampie+ring
126 11
Volume cnange
0 7934 cm3
Weight of Ring
70 3B
Final volume
38 4366 cm3
Weight of wet sample
73 67
Fmai density
1 51^2 g/cc
Weight of dry sample
57.73
Final Dry- density
1.50C0 g/cc
Weight of moisture
15.94
,
Final vom ratio
0.B0
Final moisture content
27.61%
p inal saturation               Sf=
93.19
Cospliqation test -data for e-loqp curve
by: _
A
— 
r^..
, Approved by; _ ______ ' , Vr-~ A^-1 j TThis   report   presents   Summery   of   laboratory   test   result   of   soils   taken   from   Dabus   Irrigation   Project The    test    results    are    Permeability    and    Oedomeler    Consolidation.    The    soil    tests    are    carried    out following   the   appropriate   sampfe   preparation   and   testing   procedures.   The   following   are   the   standard procedures followed to carry out the analysis
1.1 Standard Procedures
S.No
Type of Test
Standard
1
Oedometer Consolidation
BS 1377: 1975, Test 17
2
Permeability
ASTM D2434Project Dabus Irrigation Project
Client.   Ministry   of   Water.   Irrigation   and   Energy Date Tested ■                 04/05/20:5-11 /05/2015
-i__ l
Test Pit No
Deplh(m) •
Specfic gravity
Before Test
DCBP-4-1 0.00-3.00 2.71
Diameter.D
50 00 mm
Weight of sample+Ring
141 35
Area, A
1963.50 mm3
Weiht of Ring
73 30
Thickness. H
20.00 mm
Weight of sample
71.05
52.83
Volume
Density
D*y Dersity
39.27 cm3
Weiht of dry sample
1.81 g/cc
Initial moisture content Mo
34 49
1 35 g/cc
initial Voice^.
Initial satu$>
1.01
92 134
Volume change Faedor F=
D.10C72
After Test
Weight of sample+ring
141 57
Overal settlement
0.4520 mm
Weight   of   dry   sample+ring
123.13
70.30
Volume change
0.8875 cm3
Weight of Ring
Final volume
38.3825 cm3
Weight of .vet sampie
71 27
Final density 
1 8569 g/cc
Weight of dry sample
52.S3
18.44
34.90%
Final Dry dersity 
1.3764 g/cc
Weight of moisture
F.nal void raho
0.97
Final moisture content
Final saturation Sh=
97 63
Cpsohdatior test -data for e - log p curve
— -»,l e »• b-*l > •
A                  hn■I
FtabJi
Consol laatlon io&: Calculation bncet
Project: Dabus Irrigation Project
Client Ministry of Water. Irrigation and Energy Date Tested:                 05/05/2015-12/05/20:5 Test Pit No                    DTP-2
DeDth(m): 2.75-5.00
Specfic gravity :            2 66
Before Test
Weight of sample-i-Ring Weihlof Ring
(
145.36 70.35
Weight of sample 75 01
Weiht of dry sample 62 02
Initial moisture content Me Initiaf Vo'ceOT
"20 94
D:ameter.D Area, A Thickness, H Volume Density
Dr/ Density
50.00 mm 1963.50 mm!
20.00 mm 39,27 cmJ •
1.91   g/cc '.58 g/cc
0.66
Initial satuStH
fl 1.4205           I
Volume change Faector F=
After Test
Weight of sample+rlng Weight of dry sample-t-ring Weight of Ring
Weight of we! sample
Weight of dry sample 62 02
Weight of moisture 10 74
0.08421 I
143.11 132.37
35 72.76 I
Overall settlement Volume change Final volume Final density Final 0-7 density Final void ratio
2.1220 mm 4.1665 cm1
35.1035 cm3 2.0727 g/cc 1 7668 g/cc
0.51
•,.-A
f
1
>1 •; h
'
CV ’
£ 
V-.; "A-. .e
'*■ * ;
*■ Js J
aV V J
.vZ
Z
Final moisture content Final saturation              Sf=
17.32%
91 11
Cosolidation test -data for e-loqp curve
Void Ratio
'Volume CmpressibTy
Coefficent of consolidation
Compression
o
c
(Pressure
Settiemer
5e-'
e=e0-Se
i Incremental Changes
H=H-5H
Cv=
Index.Cc
u
KN/m*2
A H mm
fp*5H
|5e
fip
1*e,
Mv-
t50
HQ=20mm
2
0.026*(H , ,) /t50
re
5e/6p*100
min.
0
0
0 084
0.684
0
0
20
—1
50
0.419
0.035
0.649
C.C353
50
1.649
0 428
5.76
19.581
19.791
391.664
1.768
2j
wo
0.750i
0.063
0 621
0.0279
50
1.621
0.344
3.06
19 250
19.415
376 962
3.203
3
200
1 069
0.090
0.594
0.0269
100
1 594
0.169
795
18 931
19.091
364.447
1.192
0.165
4
430
1.643,
0.138
0 5461
0.0483
200
1,546
0.156
4.80
18.357
18.644
347,599
1 883
I5
goo
2.256
0.190
0.494
0.0516
400
1.494
0.066
5.20
17.744
18 051
325.821
1.629
5
400
2 249!
•0.189
0.495
-0.0006
-400
W(f
2 122|
C .179
0.5061
-0.0107
’300Project Dabus Irrigation Project
Client. Ministry  of Water, Irrigation and Energy 
□ate Tested                   04/05/2015-11/05/2016
Test Pit No : Depth(m) Spectic gravity :
Before Test
DTP-3
1.00-5 00 2.54
D.ameter.D
5D.0C mm
Weight of sampie+Ring
1 ill.87
Area A
' 963 50 mm2
Weihl of Ring
66.80
Thickness, H
20 00 mm
Weight of sample
75 07
Volume
Density
Dry Density
39.27 cm1
Weihl o* dry sample
65.24
15.07
1,91 g/cc
Fritial moisture content Mb
1.66 g/cc
initial Voic e =
3
Initial salu
0.53 72 3n94
Volume change Faeciar F=                 0.07645 After Test
Weight of sample+r.ng
141 84
■
Weight of dry samp,'e+ring 132 04
Weight of Ring 66 80
Weight of wet sample
75.04
Overall settlement Volume change Final volume Final density
Fins Dry density Frnal void ratio
0.7600 mm 1.4923 cm3
37.7777 cm3 1.9664 g/cc 1 7269 g/cc
0.47
■t
Weight of dry sample                                65 24
•y1
Weight of moisture
Final morsture content Final saturation              Sf=
9.8 15.02%
31.04 I
i ■/.
Cosolidation test -data for e-.oqp curve
i
Void Ratio
1-------
---------
i Volume Cmpressibllty
Coefficent of consolidation
Compression
o
c
Pressure
Selt/emeH^"
e=eD-5e
1
Incrementa' Changes
H=H-6H
Cv=         1
Index,Cc
u
j:
KN/mft2
a H mm
F*5H
Tse
6P
H*ei
Mv=
150
H =20mm
o
0 026'(H  )7t50
lvv
Mp-DI
min
0
0
0 076
0 529
0
0
20
1
50
0.197
0.015
0.514
0.0151
50
1 514
0 199
1.32
19.003
19.902
396 070
7.601
2
100
0 26D
0.020
0.509
0.0048
50
1.509
0.064
1.82
19.740
19.772
390.912
5.584
T
200
0.423
0 032
0 4971
0.0125
-00
1.497
0 083
1.88
19 5771
19.659
386.457
5.345
0.042
4
403
0.594
0 045
0.483
0.0131
200
1 483
0.044
1-.04I
19 406
19.492
379 919
9.498
5.
aoor
0.842
0.064
0 465
0 0190
400
1.465
0.032
1 69
'9.150
19 282
371.796
5 720
I0
400.
0.835
0.064
0 465
<rJ. nVnpwr
<i> J - -4 30
1£L
Tool
0 760.
0.058
0 471|‘
-0.0057
-3001
I
Tpsfec bv
Oork&r1 hV
Awntwl hu-■  ■  •1>J           ’      - i
Ministry of Waler and tnergy 
Dabus Irrigation Studyj Design Projec I
Volume llhParl I Head work Geo logical A Geotechnical Investigation Report
Annex II: Borehole and Test Logs and Core Photos
Water Works Design and Supervision Enter prise
Au gust,201(5E
Company Name:
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Title:
Bore hole Rock core log
Document No:
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
Page Nd.
1 of 2
PROJECT? DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
Bwe Ho1? No:
Wflir-l
Bore Hile Uep'Ji (m): L9.Au
Bare H«Se Inc'neuon. rrnm rertknl (deg) VLRTTCAl
Wi- EftRjng (m): 706999.Q
RH            Wcrt*ng(m)            IJU^O O.G.L. (m):                   1095 0
G W. l-(rn]:
Drilling Machine. CREARIQVS DrlHinu Mp+hnrf- RgtjijrY coring
’.r>r!t!d Date. 02/04/200? rompiettd n*te IB /OS /3PQ7 Depth (tn); 0 '.0 tp
C«**» lluri Tnl’ormstirin
Packer TeM
Dncrlptipn
*k*jnpl*
DrftJih
'J
f m 'i
[mm]
LuqWft Fflllrm
RESIDUAL
Light brownish to whrtiih m&diom to
r
coarse gFained„eampletelv weathered Jr,d decornpoird nraniie materia).
GRANITE
Light grey to whihJh.mtcTiurn to coarse frrjmrri,slightly tc moderately
weathered.moderately strong with visible feldspar and quartz crystals
granite
l 'gilt fiiCY tQ
whitisli mediuin to unne
r
grained! re sh <9 slightly wealhercd/Hassive and strong.
CLIENT:                  HQWIE
CASING
COOE BARREL
CONSULTANT: W.W.D.SE
Dlam,
(mm)
Depth
Lupton
Ciraiifld *¥«tr Level
£unri*d FwietiMMA F«t 3 UnHliifurbcJ Sdfnp**
ftcmirt on Drilling Termination :
Chief PrlWCT
CONTRACTOR: W.W.US.t.
HW
DRILL BIT
kuh contractor;
NW
i egged uy
Ji.
Checked by
TWetfE ■••[Qr.>
Approved by
Depth (m)GE
Company Name:
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Title:
Bore hole Rock core log
uocumert No-
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
Page No
1 Of 2
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
Bore Hole No                WBH-1 Bore Hoie Depth (m): 19 40
Bore Hole rricl«naUcn
from vertical 'deg) VEN nCAL
Description
RESIDUAL
HH E a VI ng (m) 70691)9 0
|BH. Northing (m): 1114698.0
O G.l. (m):
toos 0
SITE: Dam Axis
G- W. L.(m):
Drilling Machine: CREAR1OUS Dntilnq Method: Rotary cpdrxj
C<w« Rua IrtfftrmMIflA
Started Date. 02 /04 /2OO7
Completed   Date   IB/OS   72007
Depth (m): 0 to 10
lifhl brownish to whdnh.medujm to coarse grained.tompletely weathered and decomposed partite material
GRANITE
Ught crey to whltish.medium to coarse groinedjIiKhtiy Io moderately weathered.moderately strong with vtable feldspar and quartz crystals
GRANITE
Light grey ip whttnh.medium to coarse grained,! resh to slightly
wealhered.massive and strong
b Tola! Core Aacovon
■  Solid Core Hoover,
> Hoch QuaMy DwigMUor
■ Lugeon
■ Ground Water Lewd
o Standard Oenetretton i«t
. l>ndl»LuH>ed Sample
CLIENT:
HOWIE
CORE BARREL
CONSULTANT: W.W.D5.E CONTRACTOR: W.W.D.S.E.
. 5MR-COHTRACTOR: None
Logged by
Qyile G_
DUm
DRILL Bn
Renw* w urimnl’ 1 tnniruoon
Ch*e< Drier
urtudeCMmct
Checked by
T«t»n LtOr.)
Approved by
Depth (rr)ISE
Company Name;
■i-.'
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
die:
Bore hole Rock core log
Document No:
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No
1
P«ige NO-
2 of 2
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
e Huie No: WBH-1
•e  Hole  Depth  (m):  |Q4Q r c Hole  Inclination;
m yerbcal (deg). VptTlCAL
IfiH. Easting (mV 7Q69Q8.D |hk. Northing (mV 111469B-0
SITE; Dam Axis G- W- L(m)r
Drilling Machine; CREARJQUS
Drilling Method; Rotary coring
Ktartcd
02 /CM /2OQ7
O.G L (mJ:
1005-0
Completed      Date      1B      /04/20Q7 Depth (m). IQ tp 20
PE
u c.
u
J u
Packer Tea
Description
£dre
Run
Core
Remark
depth
Cham.
(mm)
GRANITE
Lighl grey to whitish,medium Jo coarse grained,moderately to highly weathered and allercdhht feldspar changed to lcaollr»r] weali; in strength
F
1 l.tHm
GRANITIC GNIESS
Light grey to whitish,medium to coarv grained Fresh to si^ghcly
r
weattier?d mas5iwe and itrong
r
15 25-
iS/Dm
:il
CLIENT;
HOWIE
CORE BARREL
CONSULTANT: W^Wjj.S.E
Oiam.
I (mm]i
Depth
luf*"
N,L =
r,murd Wat*r LMl
StinUard NoetrMWi Teal
Ta
DRILL BTT
h               ■ Undisturbed 4*mcle
JSWR-CONTraCTor. None
mi rk on Drilling Termination :
Ciller orirler
Kcbid* ChiniSL
Logged by
prknqvG,
Checked by
■Tetfm mon
Approved byGE
Company Namp
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
lit*?:
Document No:
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
Page No lof3
Bore hole Rock core log
PROJECT DABUS DAM ANO IRRIGATION PROJECT
Bare Hole No:                 WBH 2 Bore Hole Depth (m); 27.55
Bore Hole IndlnaOori; from vertical (deg) VERTICAL
~nH Lasting imr 7o7017.0
BH. Northlng (m): 1114629,0
O.GL (m):
G. W. l.(m)
SIH: Dam Axil
979_9e
Drilling    Machine:    CREARIQUS Drilling Method: Rotary conng
Started [Ute: 20/04/29Q/ Completed Date: 147Q5/2QQZ Depth (m): 0 tg LQ
P nrTi
ALLUVIAL
Light grey to creamy,fine to medium gralned^tiff.silty day wrth sand and
gravel.
DECOMPOSED GRANITE
Completely weathered And decomposed to sand, discoloration to wihitish grey, stained, non
cohesive.
/4J
ClltNT:                MoWU
CASING
CONSULTANT: WWOSE
Diam.
(mm)
Depth
(m)
CONTRACTOR: W.W.O.S.E.
HW
DRILL BIT
SUB-CONTRACTOR: None
NW
Remer* on Onllmfl rermlrution :
Chief Duller
Qiimg.
Lagged 0/
Checked by
lataJUDU.
Approved by
h i h 11 i i rl 1111111 l rh l . 11 i -1!, i.. n i u i. i h n n ill i i 11 r i i j*->
CE
Company Name;
x\.L/-
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
©
Tide:
Bore hole Rock core log
Document No:
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
Pagr No.
2 of 3
PROJECT! DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
SITE:               A*i«
Bore Hole No                      WHH-2 Bore Hole Depth (m): 27,5S
Bore ’ide IncftneUoni
from vertical (deg)’ VERTICAL
Dcflcripttort
Iri* failing (m): JQ7D17.O
IM      Northing      (rn):      1114629-0 O.G i (mJ:                               0
G.W.L(m):                 9Zi2< Dilling MBchine: CREARJOUfi Drilling Method: Rnr.vy coring
Started Date; 20 /(M /2007
Completed        Dace:        14_/D§l20P2 Depth (m); to to 20
Par ter r
DECOMPOSED GRANITE
Completely weathered and decomposed to sand , discoloration to wihitish grey, stained, non
cohesive.
L13O*
PEGMATITE
Reddish to brownish.moderalely to highly weathered and altered with visible orthodase feldspar.quartz an J biotite minerals. weak in strength.
GRANITE
Light brownish to dark.fresh to slightly weathered,massive.hard and dense with pegmatite viens.
IcLItKT;
CONSULTANT: WWQSE
CASING
Dtam.
(mm)
SUBCONTRACTOR: Nqqw
PerTMirk gn DrtW TermlnMJan :
Chief Driller
Logged by
Checked by
Approved by
>^g_ghirngL
QytWlg©
Company Name:
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Tide-
Document No:
Bore hole Rock core log
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
Page No.
3 of 3
PROJECT^ DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
SrTEi Ham Axis
Bare Hol? Nm
WFU1-?
Fkjre Ho*e Depth [mJ: 27»5S
Rrxe Hole TndlnatsGrr
frorn WNtiCAl (deg): VERTICAL
E
_3? x 5
RH f-i^hnq (mJ: /Q7Q1 TO
PH. Narth ing (m): lll4SOT.JP
O.til (mi)
G. W. L.<rn]_
Drilling Medline:
Drilling Method; info*fluid an
9/0.9A
CREARIOUS
Rnbsry cart no
started Date: JO /t>4 /2QC7
CTynpieted Gate- M /OS / jOOJ
Depth (tn] 20 trt -KJ
Drnrn
tier-' r
GRANITE
light brownish to darlcjresh to slightly weathered.massive,hard and dense with pegmatite viens.
CLIENT;                HOWIE CONSULTANT: WWQSE CON TRACTOIL W.W.O.S.E, SUH-CONTRACTOR: H»nw
Lagged by
Dniltfl G,
CASING
H.Q-D-
d.wu-
SFT
UO
Tolfll L«*r* RecEw#r>
Solid fair R«©wA*Y
- ftodk Qu*”* r
■ hipeW’
« r.rfxind «*'«* L**"
■.UrtUrC P«n«TKJcnTt»t
3 jndlkMt* MHM*
Rem.rk o'1 tw’lhna ^in,Mnon :
Chief Driller
Checked bv
Approved py
reVart" |Dl1
I®Company Name
J
] ]
<£E
Vv 1. < '
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
■<le------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document No:
Page No
Bore hole Rock core log
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
1 of 2
PWOJf CT: DABUS OAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
Boi? Hale Ho
dst-rhj
Bore Hoe Depth (m): 12?0
Bote Hole Inc .nation; from vertical (deo) VERTICAL
Description
IBM Eashrgfm): 7Q716S.0 BH   Morvwng   (m):   1LI470S
O.G.I (m)
srre: Spwi w«y
G W. L.(m): started Date: IS /OS/7007
Drilling MacHnc CRtARCOUS
Drilling Metrod Rotary coring
Completed Date: 20 /05 /2007
□epte (m): 0 to IP
TCA
I*-'
SCR
mi
■QO
1*1
lupmn
PMtrm
100
1
)
J
1 1
1
I
J I
! I
RESIDUAL SOIL
light grey to creamy,fine to medium grained, stiff,silty day with sand and
gravel
Jflfl
’00
SPT
loo.
100
«9
•fl
GRANITE
Light brownish to dartjresh to
! slightly weathered,massive.hard and dense with pegmatite viens.
7.45 • 7.60 m Slightly weathered 10.10 1040 m Slightly weathered
1QQ
’d
45
»1
M
2£fi
IOC
n>
•co
100
n
•x
%
•1
M
a Total Cort Recovery
• Sold Core Recovery
■ Poca QuNty Deppnjoon
= .u9<xx>
« Ground Water .evcl
a standan) heneti ado* Tert a ijnOlttwCed S*np*r
CLIENT:                    MoWIE CONSULTANT: WWDSE CONTRACTOR: W.W.Q.S.E.
5UB CONTRACTOR: None
Logged by
.PinisJA
Dlam.
(mm)
C-.
I
Rema* on Drilling Tcrmlnattoo :
CNef Dnlle*
Checked by
Approved by
(w) ujo»aueptn
Depth (m)
Company Name:
(j£
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Title:
Document No:
Bore hole Rock core log
OF/WWDSE/413
issue NO.
1
2 of 2
PROJECT: DABUS DAM ANO IRRIGATION PROJECT
SITE: SP‘« w»V
Bore Hole No:
OST BH-1
Bore Hole Depth (m): 12,20
Bore Hole Jnd.nabon:
from vertical (deg). VERTICAL
Description
IBM facing (m): 707165 0
HX. Worthing (m): 1114705 0
O.G.L (m):
G. W L.(n):
Drilling Machine CAfAKIOUS Drilling Method: Rotary caring
Completed Date; 20 70S/20C7 Depth (m): 10 to 20
GRANITE
Ught brownish to dark.fresh to slightly weathered,ma$$ive,hard and dense with pegmatite viens.
A
A
D.
'JL
nrk Drilling Termination :
Chid Dnller
CUENT:            Mo WIT ICONSUITANT: WWDgE ICONTRACTOR: W.W.D.S.E.
SUBCONTRACTOR. None
Logged by
D*WIG
CASING
barrel
DUm.
(mm)
Depth
(m)
MW
ORJLL BIT
MW
Checked by
-•£lL*X£JLlPr_l
Approved byCompany Name:            ‘
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Document No'
Issue No.
Page No
Bore hole Rock core log
OF/WWDSE/413
1
1 of 3
PwojecT: dabus dam ano irrigation pkoject
■»e How Ro* osan-i
ore Hole Depth (m); 24C
ore Hole IndnaUon
•om vertical (deg); VERTICAL
BH Eastmg (rn): 7Q4067 0 BH    Northing    (m):    1124X1
0-G.L. (ml
G. w L_(m):
Drilling Machine; CRFARIOVS Drilling Method: Rotary coring
started Date: 21 /OS 7200J Completed   Date:   28   705   72007 Depth (m): Oto io
RESIDUAL DEPOSIT
Reddish to brownish,complctcly weathered and decomposed meta volcanic changed to day.slre ranges from fine to coarse
I
_
no»
L
META-VOLCANIC
light grey to greenish.modrrately to highly weathered,highly
fractured.weak in strength with day intercalation.
META-VOLCANIC
Light grey to greenish,slightly to moderately weathered,and fractured,weak In strength
9 60m
JI
,cx
GR-
CLIENT: CONSULTANT: WWDSE CONTRACTOR: W.W.D.
^LCONT*ACTOR: None
lO99Wby
core barrel
,wx
PT
ID
emir* on Colling Termination :
Chief Driller
drill bit
Approved by7^
Company Name;
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
tie:
Document No:
Bore hole Rock core log
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
Page No.
2 of 3
PROJECT. DABUS DAM ANO IRRIGATION PROJECT
SITE: Dam Axis
e MN* No- D$QH- f
e Hole Depth (m): 24,0
•e Hole Inclination,
m vertical [deg) VERTICAL
BH. Fasting (mJ: 704067,0 BH. Northing (m): 1124 341
0.5,L (m);
Started Date: 21 /05 /2007 Completed      Date:28      /Q5/2007 Depth (mJ. 10 to 20
?uE
3 "i
O^flcriptiQn
53
Drilling Machine: CRfcARlQUS Drilling Method Rotary curing
C*fc Ron Inf armartJan
Core
□lain.
(mm)
”Mkf f T«-St
Luq#chi
prgmatite
Whiush to creamiy. slightly to moderately weathered and fractured
META-VOLCAHIC
Light grey to greenish, made rarely to highly weatheredjiighly
fractured.weak In strength with day intercalation,
,CJL      * TOTH Can (UrDtfery
,£. R,      = 5^lls Ct,r*
■ fturLQvalltV D«Jg *»D<n
(
u              if I ipgWi
_WJ- =                     Watcr
CASING
Dlnm. y Depth
_Jm(mmm) ), (mj
CORE BARREL
pT
B SfciflElMril RenrtTitlnn Ten
rO                      = UfidlssurbeU S^mpM
Lenark do Drilling TermmMJon :
Chler Driller
Ittwtf* ChcrMt
CLIENT:
CONSULTANT: WWDSt
CONTRACTOR: W.Wj.jt/
^ih-contractok: N^.
logged by
PiblBl Cj,
DRILL BIT
HW
Checked by
2«?*g.y.(0rj
Approved by(51
Comoany Name:                                            "------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- —
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Title
rXicument No:
Bore hole Rock core log
OF/WWDSE/413
Issue No.
1
Page No.
3 of 3
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
^THole Mol ~~~DSBH f—
Bom Hole Depth (m). ?4 D
Bare Hole JncMnebon:
from vertKAl VfRHCAL
BH Easting (hi} 7Q4Q67.Q sh. NortNng   (n»):   1124341.0
O.G.I (m)
SITE: Dim Axis
G. W. L(m):
Drilling Machine: CREAR1QUS | Dnllmg Method: Rotary coring
Started Date: 21 /Q5 /?qq7 Completed Date: 28 /OS /2007 Depth (m): 20 to JQ
PMter ’ey
META-VOLCANIC
Light grey to greenish/ine gramedjresh to slightly weathered
and dense
- TotN Core Rarovrry I 5 C.R. » Wld Core Recovery
R.Q.O. ■ *xk Q^'ty Drdflntbon
CASING
CORE BARREL
LM
C.WX.
JPT
00
3 LuQtW)
s. Ground Water Lt^i
• brined ;*meCT«Oqn Test
a UniRtfuftietf Sample
CLIENT:
CONSULTANT: WWQSE CONTRACTOR: W.WUX$.£
’ ub.C0Nth*ctor: n7^
□Um.
(mm)
drill in
Rem** on DrilMng FemMnatlon
Oef Driller
rfetgft ChtfMC
LoWdby
einis'jL
Approved byI
I
-a—i
-sUil
-Im
i__, i___ , x
I
Ministry of Waler, Irrigation and Energy Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Volume III- Pad | Headwork Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
--------------------------------------- -       -------------------------  Annex ll Bore Hole (Discontinuity Log}
J
(Project:
Clio nl:
| -----------------------------------------------------------
MoWIE
Bora hole Location: Exiting |m)
Shell Material 704067
Consultant:
WWDSE
Norfhingiml
1124341
’Contractor:
WWDSE
O.C.L(a.m.j.l)
1086
IBoic hole ID;
DSBH-I
Borehole Inclination from Vert.
Vertical
--------------- - --- ---------------------------- ------------ -------------------
1 D is co iitiiiiitv Orientation W.r.r core Axis
Dijcontinuih Surface
Core rim
(m)
4
, Discontinity
Type
Geometry
Rouglincii
□
'Parallel
Oblique
Nonni
Spacing - (cm)
Apnrture
(mm)
Infilling
IPIanai
(Cuivcd
1 Irregular
Smooth
Stepped
Rough
Strained
SlikenikJed
Staining
Coating
Healed
7.0 - 5.0
Joint fracture
✓
✓
<5
<5
/
✓
L
✓
✓
/
calcite .Fe
✓
8.0 - 9 50
Joint .fracture
hr-
s
/
<5
<5
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
civile .Fe
9.50-10.35
Joint .fracture
z
J
✓
<5
<5
✓
/
/
✓
✓
✓
cnlcte ,Fc
✓
10.35-11.90
Joint .fracture
'✓
/
✓
<5
<5
✓
✓
✓
calcite ,Fc
/
II 90- 12.70
Joint .fracture
✓
J
✓
<5-10
<5
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
catilc .Fe
12 70- 14.0
Joint fracture
/
/
<5
<5
✓
✓
✓
— ■
_______
✓
calc<c ,Fc
14.0- 15.0
Joint .fracture
J
✓
<5-10
<5
✓
✓
/
-
✓
calcae .Fe
15.0- 16 C
Joint .fracture
✓
V
✓
<5
<5
✓
/
/
-
✓
✓
calcite .Fe
L ’6O- 1730
Joint .fracture
✓
/
<i
<5
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
cifcce .Fe
✓ (——
17.50- 19 0
Joint .fracture
✓
/
<5
<5
✓
✓
✓
✓
calcite .Fe
✓ -----------------1
19.0-200
J out .fracture
✓
<5
<5
✓
J
/
✓
✓
calcite fe
✓
1----------------- —' 20 0 - 20 45
■« Joini .fracture
J
'■
<5
<5
/
-
✓
✓
.
20 45-22 10
/
calcite ,Fe
---- --------
Joint .fracture
s
/
<5
<5
✓
✓
,
-I
✓
✓
/
.
22 10 - 24.0
calcite .Fe
z
Joint .fracture ]_
L
iL
<2 1
<5
✓
'1
✓
/
calcite .Fe
✓
Water Works Des-gn and Supervision Enterprise
1
MuyubiI
Volume III- Pari
I
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Headwork  Geological & Geotechnical
Investigation Repo
rt
Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Annex II Bore Hole (Drscontjnu. ty Log)
Project:
Dabus Dam and Irrigation Prefect
Borehole Location:
Spillway
Clic nt:
MbWIE
Easting(rn)
707165
Consultant:
WWDSE
Nortliing(jn)
111*1705
Contractor:
WwD5E
O.C.lXinLS J)
981
Boro hole ID:
DST-BH-I
Borehole Inclination Bum Vert.
Vertical
Discontinue Orientation                  .
Ducontinuih Surface
1 Core run
(m)
Dtscantinify
Type
W.rJ core axis
Geometry
Roughness
Parallel
Oblique
^onmi
l '( )
cm
Apurturt
{mm)
Infilling
--
Plana
r Curved
Irregular
Smooth
Stepped Rough
Strained
Silke ns I
Staining ded
Coaling
Healed
2.65 - 4.20
joint
*r
<5
<5
/
/
/
Fe,clay
4.20-5J0
joH
/
1/
<5
<5
/
/
/
Fe,chy
5 30-5.85
pint
/
<5
<5
/
/
JL
Ft,clay
5.65-6.50
jbta
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
Fe.clay
6,SO-.7.30
joinl
/
p
<5
<5
/
/
/
Fc.chy
/
17 30- S 0
jriir
/
r
<5
<5
/
/
/
Fe.clay
|8.O-9.65
joint
/
/
<5
<5
✓
/
/
Peachy
/
0.65 ■ 10.65
joint
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
_______
Fc.clay
1065-1165
io ini
✓
✓
<5
<5
/
/
/
Fe.cliy
11.65 -12 20 |
joint
✓
/
<5
z
/
/
Fe.cby
Waterworks Design and Supervision Enterprise
August .2015Ministry at Water, Irrigation and Energy Dabus irrigation Study and Design Project "
Volume Ml- Part f
^cathvek Geological 4 Geotechnical Investigation Report
------------------------------------------------------------- - —--------------------------------------------- _--------------------------- .____________________ _  Annex M Bore Hole ijOisconlinuicy Log) I
i
il'rujeet:
Dabus Da.n niv! Irrk'.iiion Pruket
(1 ere lick Location:
DninaKE
Client:
MuWIE
EjUting(m)
70690S
(’........ ...
WWDSE
NcrtliinjtT nil
II1469B
Conliwtnr
WWDSE
O.G.Lfu iii.i.1)
1005
More link 111:
W13114
rimclicilc lnrliti.ilinn tiiini Vcrl
Ven cnl
i------------------ Co if nm
(m)
1 Dm can rmu tv OrwnLitto
.1
W.r.r coic mul
Ottcontinuih Surface
DifcoiitiiHh
Tjpe
r
[|               Gc Dine In
Roughum
Para Fit
1 Oblique
'Norm Ji
1 Spacing
J kn>)
Apnrtiirc
(mm)
‘ Infilling
Plunar
Cuo cd
Irregular
SmooKli
Slcppeil
Rough
Si rained
SI ike raided
Staining
Coming
i
Healed
1 JO-175
John
✓
*]/
<10
<5
z
!Z
Z
✓
/
Feftxalcilc
Z
175-4.0
Jurt,.3.tncd
zone
Z
z
z
<5
<5
/
/
/
/
/
Feft.cn lc he
z
4 0 - 5.50
Joiiil
■7
/
<5 <0
<5
/
/
/
Z
1
Rftcnlcilc
1 5.50 ■ 6.50
Joint
z
'(/
<10
<5
/
Z
/
z
Fcftcalcic
I ci.5U-7.ro
Joint
/
z
<10
<5
/
/
✓
/
Fc ft till cite
7.10-Ji 6?
JninL
/
;[/
<1G
<5
/
/
/
/
fcftcitlcilc
15.65 - J2J2H
Jninl fjhcirij
71M1IT
Z
z
Y
<5
<5
/
Z
/
/
z
Fcftculciic
10.20- 11.55
Jninl .uJiercd
/nr
✓
r
<5
<5
/
z
/
z
Fc&culciic
| 11.55- 1135
Johil
/
<5
<5
/
/
Z
z
Fcftcalcic
■2JJ- IW
Joint
17^
<5
<5
z
z
/
z
Fcftciijcit!
?12j- 14 10
Joint
1
/
<5
<5
z
/
/
z
FcJctJi Icr.e
1
■ JJ.JO- I4.S0 i
Irin!
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
/
FeAatlcic
' 14.50- 15.70 .
Joint
1
✓
<5
<5
z
z
z
z
Fc&ciilcilc
15.70-16.45
Joint
Z
|z
<5
<5
z
/
/
z
Rftcalcic
IM5U7.5P 1
J Mil
z
<5
<5
/
z
/
/
(fc&tulcjic
|7  50 - M.30
_
Will - 19.40 |
Joinl
1/
<5
<5
z
/
z
z
Rftcidcilc
John
-------- r L
llJ
.
<5
<5
/
/
/
.
z
Fcftculctc
Waterworks Design end Supervision Enterprise
3
August .20'5'h----- i
~-t           >
-r
Ministry ol Water, irrigation and Energy Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Volume III* Pari I Headwork Geological A Geotechnical investigation Report
_ ___________ Annex ri Bora HoJe D^cantinuaty Log)
Frojcd;
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ”t
Dabus Dun m'
d 1 relation Project
Bur: hole Lucallon:
Dainflxis
Client:
MOWIE
Eflltingfni
7G7017
C Oih5ulLa.li t:
WWDSE
No nhiii£ini)
1114629
|CiMilnictuT;
WWDSE
O.GXtJum.sJ)
986
Its uh- hole ID:
mi
Bort ho k IncJinalion from Vert.
Verticil
Discnnfiriuly Orrcnlntio n
W.r.t core a^is
Dts co nlimrily Surface
Core run
Discunfmif)'
Type
Geometry
Ra ugliness
Pnnillc]
Oblique
h'omial
Spacing
(emh
A pint mt
(min)
Infilling
Plana
rCurved
JmepuLa
rSmoothS
tepped
Rough
Skid ned
Slili c raided
sunning
Canting
1
Healed
15.20- 16.0
| JoinL frnclure
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
/
/
Cfay.Fe
16.0 • 17,0
jflim, fractur
e/
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
/
/
Cb R
Zl
/
170- 1W
Joint fine lure
/
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
/
/
Clayfe
16.60-15.40
Jami
/
/
<3
<5
/
/
/
119.40 - 2&45
Jctrii
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
/
Cby.Fe
[ 20.41-21.95
Joint
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
Chy,Fe
1 21.95 -23.95
Jamil
/
/
<5
/
/
/
CfyFe
/
23.95 -24.91
Joint
/
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
Cliy.Fe
2<9h 25.30
Join
/
/
<5
<5
/
/
/
/
Ctatfe
25.30 - 25.95
Joilt
/
55
/
-
/
/
25.95 - 27.55
Jaht
<5
______
1
/
/
/
'.Vater Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
August .2015Ge
Car party Hare:
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
TOe.
Test Pit Log
DoG’jT'cni Na OF/WWDSE/411
feut Fte.
1
?sge?lc.
1 of 1
i" tst Pif N n
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AHO IRRIGATION PROJECT TP, I acting (m] .rDjS<6
£ ic-rifted Dvptb (m]; j^O
tp Worthing (m>7
1065
D.G.L (nt]
sail o*4cription
G- W. L.(m]:
Excavation iM«hGd:
Marine
STTEi SHELL MATERIAL
Started Date: jr>.pV2OO7 Lomcilttfld Date; 77/04/ Jrw/
l/ghc grey Co dark,fin r to medium gjrilhed'mDisUstiff highly expansive ar»d pla-stir siltv ctay with trace* of
rock FfartrnefitE
CONSULTANT
SUH. CONTRA CTOR
Logged by
G.
WB« EwppvMi
Remark Ort eirav»[|an lettfflvtattaHi:
CMeted by
Appravrdl byCoppery Here
GE
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
“De
Test Pit Log
Doeirent flo
OF/WWDSE/411
IS-u
Page No.
1 of 1
PROJECT; DABUS DAM AMD IRRIGATION PROJECT PR Mo?                DCB-7-1 TP EaUIng (mJ: 70372T
Ercvated Depth (mJ: 3.0
I 0**5,ON
T>, Northmq tm)
0.6,1 (mJ
X12 ZOM2
1041
SITE: CLAV BORRQW-1
G, W. L.(m):__________________ Started Date ^/D4/2QO7 Excavation Method                  —        Completed Date
Machine                  Manual
Samalr
Sheet
LsU
So« Description
ia
■ •HM'b
3
O«pch
<m)
_i
Light grey to dark.fln e to mcdwxn grained,moist,5tXf h»gh*y cxpansice and piastc silty ctoy mth traces at
reck fragments
0)0
10m
CWUrbetf
1.0m
Remark on excsvatlon termtnatwi
Lagged by
Danirf C.
Checked by
Approved by
1111 i 11 |j 11111111              , 1111111 RTi 111 ni;- ”»rii! [ ^pthTr^Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
□asxrrsnT Net:
£355 Na
Test Pit Log
OF/WWDSE/411
1 of 1
PROJE
CT:
DABUS DAM AND I
RRIGATION PROJECT
srrt: CLAY BOHROW-l
Trst
Wo?
~
ZbCtiPj’-hfr
TP, 'tja^ling (mJ:
G W L_{mk
Stirfrd IMtr: 18705/2007
EwmBLed Dqplti (m): 3-0 _____
Tr« pit fcmffistori l.SM’J.SN
L127O43
EilCflWllRH* Method:
Completed Dale: 20/Q5/JQQ7
5he*t
1 Of 1
£
c
ft
K
wE
Si
Scrill Dei Ctrl pilon
i
$
E
n
5
■
J
twpth
[mJ
Typ*
No
2
-
1
Llglil gircy La dark/m r Io medium gr lined .mgrst .stiff higNy expansive and plettH. a Ury day with trttr* of
rode fragments
1.30m
"~r
0.3 -
j.iDm
D id in* bed
1
"3
—3
YFilfwrsh to whrtlshjCOfnpteteiY weathered arid detampoied granite
1.0m
0
T*.
1 ' ‘ *u ’
T*’ *
CONTRACTOR
Hemarta on r-cavattao trrmmil Iqii
Logged  by Panlql G.
Checked fry
Apprwwrd by
□ealti [mJt
1
Ccrjp a inf I’lerrc
,1 ] ]
J
.1 3
7
1
1
3
1
1
I
1
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
L>;cyT?nt ?|tf.
I=TJ« jfc
ParJC-No.
Test Pit Log
PRO JI CT: DAfcUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECf
OF/WWDSE/411
SITE: CLAY BORROW-1
1 of 1
IW Pit n£------------------- ~tXBFT-T~ trrvatarf    Depth    (ml:    J^O TMt pit dimension I i SM ‘ 1.5M
tt, Northing (mk i 12 187
G. W.
fXHVRtwn M«hod;
MACtwnv:
Starts D.le. 18705/2057
ComplBlv-rf D»Se; JPtflS/JOO?
O.G L <m):
'□19
<Sh««
lof_l
*rpe
Light gngy lcl dorik^hn c to medium
grain cd.rrrafst, stiff highly expansive and plastic titty day with tracer or
fl.fi -
3.13m
r&ck rr*$merit5
XDm
Urmarfc w
terminal*^;
Logged by
Daniel G.
ChucSred try
Approved by
L_-
?Car.ponf J Lame
1
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
TSte
Doctmcrtt Ji<3-
toje Ito.
Page Ho,
Test Pit Log
OF/VWVDSE/411
1
1 of 1
PROJECT: DABUS DAN AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
rest Pit ho;
TOFTT
F-orated  Depth  (m)i  J.O Test pit dimension; l.SWLSH
TP, Fasting £m): '703415
TP, horthing (mJ: 112704J
O.G.L. (m);
G. W. L(m): EwCAVAtlon welhod;
5ITB: CLAY BORROW!
Started (Me: 71/05/2007
Completed Dale: 24/05/7007
Machine:
M*oual
Sheet
Soil Dwcriplfan
Light grey to dark,fin e to medium gtjiIned.mul’il,Stiff highly expansive and plastic silty clay with traces of rock Fragments
1.50m
Yellowish la whitish .completely weathered and derompq^ed aranntc
CONSULTANT
contractor
WMI fiuMKirC-
hem-Hk
Dn exWMBgn
I opged by
Daniel G,
Checked by
Apfxnvetj hY
Depth (m)liaee
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
Doeurren? Ho
JajcNe
Test Pit Log
OF/WW
DSE/411
1 of 1
SITE: CLAY
BORROW!
Test fit No:
DCBP-l-fl IP.
Easbng (n»):
*038-84
G. w L(m):
Started Date: 18/05/2007
Excvated Depth (ml: 3.
0
TP Northing (m): 112
?M4
Excavation Method
rompfeted Date: 20/05/2007
Test pt dimension l.5M l.SM
s
Samp**
i gs
*-■ - < an>
•v4 O jc _i
Soil Description
I
•a
rt
a
i
v»
Depth
(m)
tfpe
No
-
j-
~1
Light grey to darken e to medium grained,mo«sLStrff highly expansive and plastic silty day with traces of
rock tragmerts
2.3Qm
0.0
J 10m
Disturbed
I
-J
Yellowish to whitish.completely weathered and decomposed granite
J.Om
if
W7//<
-5
5ik           —rmn
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
------ rTVj>
CONTRACTOR
SUB-CONTRACTOR
WXI Support
lodged bi
Daniel G.
Remark on exetvaton termination:
V
k..
------ —         ------- —
by
I. . 1111 "11111iin11.:Iiu'Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
Doaxeen* No.
Isue No
Page No
Test Pit Log
OF/WWDSE/411
1
lofl
PROJECT: DABUS DAK AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
SITE: CLAY BORROW-1
1 Depth, (my. 3.0
dimension: l.SM’l.SM
TP. Easting (my
TP. Worthing (m): 1127045
G. W. L(m);
Excavation Method:
O.G.l. (m):                                               Machine-
Soil Description
Started Date: 20/05/200/
Completed Date; 22/05/2007
Sheet
light grey to dark.hn e to medium
grained,mokt,stiff highly expansive
and plastic silty chy with traces of
rock fragments
1.20m
Yellowish to wNtish.completety
weathered and decomposed granite
SUBCONTRACTOR
Rtnaw on
Logord by
Daniel li.
temmihon:
Checked by
Aopmvert by<£E
Corperrr Mme;
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Tfe
LkJctrrEJit Me
PagcMo
Test Pit Log
0F/WWDSE/411
1
1 of 1
PROltCT! DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION FNOJECT
SITE; CLAY BORROW-1
_____
Te« Pit No• ~ Bt8M46
rxevMcd Depth (m). 3.0_______
r«t pi? dimension:
1 5M ■ 1 .JM
t
FP. Easting (m):
TP. Northing (m}:
□,G,L (my
7034JJ
M774M
1066
G. w.
_    ______
Fxcavabon Method: ---------------------- —
Machine;
Manual
Siimple
started Date* 25/05/2007
Complied Qatri ?ft/P5/2QQZ
SMeel          JLhU
y
Soil OhKKrfiplilan
5
J
s
2
r^ti- (m)
IVP*
Na.
J
Light rjrry to darken <■ 10 medium
grained jiTKHEtpitiff highly expansive
and plastic titty day with tr»cei of
O.J
I.Dm
OHiubed
rock Fragments
3
I
3.0m
KEY
subcontractor
Win Support
Remark on excavation termkntfton:
I oggrf Dy
Daniel G,
Checked by
Approved by
111 KH U 11 U 11L i J Li. J11 i J IlTll LE2 J11 L.rl.t LHIL: fWater Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Test Pit Log
Dceurent Ila: OF/WWDSE/411
Isue ?b.
1
’agel/o 1 of 1
vjcc i QABUS DAM AMD IRRIGATION PROJECT
SITE: SHELL MATERIAL
N6 '                 ~Kw-Z-r
TO5ZZ-----------------———
ed Depth (m): 10
l.SM'l.SM
TP. Northing (m): 11)41(7
O.G.L. Im);
Excavahcr Method:
Machwie;
Started Date: C1/W20Q?
Completed Date: QV06/?007
Menydi
Sheet
Ught brownish to rcddfch.flnc to medium Qramed,cohesive stiff Silty Oiy mth Meta
r
volume
Greenish to light grey, moderately Io highly weatbered,)olnted,we«k Meta Volcanic
intercalated with day
•• '*•. ■
•:-W
3* -■
«Y
CONSULTANT
contractor
m rx
(>vl|hoo tenn|nabOh
Logged by
Danld G.
Checked UyGE
Company flame
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
©
TC-
Test Pit Log
Document Ha:
OF/WWDSE/411
1
1 of 1
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
Test Pt No              ‘ 0CBM4
Excvated Depth (m)         3-0
1.5M-1 5M
TP. Easting (m): Mft TP. Northing (ml: 1124323
5. w. l.(m)
Ek*vetion Mrthod:
Machine:
SITC: SMELL MATERIAL
Started Date; 01/06/2007 Completed Date: 0J/06/20Q7
O.G.L (m):
Sod Description
1081
Light brownish to reddish,fine to medium grained,cohesive.sbIT Silty Clay with Meta
volcanic.
0.80m
Green.sh to light grey, moderately to highly weathered,jointed,weak Meta Volcanic intercalated with clay
CONSULTANT
CONTRACTOR
logged by
Daniel G.
Remark on excavation termination:
Checked by
Approved byGT
Ctxrpcrry Har/r
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
T?>
Daesxr.enl Ila:
Issue Ita.
Test Pit Log
0F/WWDSE/411
1
?s»;b Ho.
1 of 1
PROJECT: DABUS DAN AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
Test hl No:
T£BF7T
Excvatcd Depth (m).         10
TP. Fasting (m) 704 sK
fP. Northing (m): 1124276
O.G.L(m)
G. W. L(m):
Nactwnr
2
Started Darr 01/06/2007
Completed Date* 03/06/2002
Light brownish to reddish fine to medium
r
grained,coheyve stiffjow plasticity Silty Clay
r
vrth traces Meta vnkanic.
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
CONTRACTOR
SUB* CONTRACTOR
WNI Support.
Remark on excavation termination:
lugged by
Daniel G.
Checked by
Approved by
(w)mdaQ jhihhHih______________ HimJlullWaterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
OnT’-L'f-nt tic
Page He
Test Pit Log
OF/WWDSE/411
1 of 1
SITE
[jCSP-7-4 fPi tasting (m):
7042*4
TP. Worthing (mJ: 1124290.
G, W. L(m):
______
Excavation •Method.!
Started Date: 02/Q6/2DQ/ Completed Date: 04/0 MOP?
Sheet
E
Sr-
I
s
n£
S“
r?
Sjnvrfc
Soil DescrFpr^i™
5
a.
p
a
1
a
Depth
Cm]
Tvpr
Ito,
-1
Light brownish Id reddish,fine to medium grained,cohesive.itirr Silty Clay with MrU
volcanic.
1.50m
0.0
L.SDm
tS’Efjrtwdi
1
~~
s
-J
Greenish tn light gFey, moderately to highly weathered jointed, weak Meta Volcanic
inlertalftted with clay
3,0m
•         «■
•           ■
V• «            *
•            *
■+■       *
*.          *
•*■        v
~-l
1“
>
CONSULTANT
Logged by
Daniel G.
Remark on excavabon termination:
Cheeked by1
]
<*E
Company JIwre:
'3K'
1 j/C/
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
TriO-
Sbctwjeflt Ho:
OF/WWDSE/411
Im ?ta
Test Pit Log
1
?aje llo. 1 of 1
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AMD IRRIGATION PROJECT
srrti SHELL MATERIAL
'cst Pit No;
00^ 2-5                  TP. Fading (mi' 70*344
G, W. Lfm]:
SUrfed Date: 02/06/2007
Fxo/Med Depth (n):           J-^0
TP. Northing (Tn);
1174312
EjrdwaMan Mtfhftd:
Completed Dale; Co/D^JPO/
Test p* dlmmsinn: X,5M»1.SM
O.G.L. (mJ:
1077
Mmchiirt-ej
Sheet
]
Light brownish to rctkhsh/ine tu medium
grAifledrCcitiesivi’^tiff Silty Clay with Meta
wclonk.
Greenish lii Tighi grey, maifei'HTftTy th highly
we*ih#r*d.1jrHn.1r<«-rAk Meta Vofcank
lw*urteh jHia-d
CUB NT
consultant
Wall i4i,spH3rt.
togged by
DefitH G.
Remark wi excavation termination: Checked by
Approved byWaterworks Design St Supervision Enterprise
nt rlo.
PogeNo.
Test Pit Log
QF/WWDSE/411
smr SHELL MATERIAL
1 of 1
project: Dabus dam and innication project
Tert PH Nq;
0C8FJ-6 TP. Easting (mJ:
7349lS~
emated Depth (mJ: 3 0_____________
Tnt pa dimetan. J.Sw’i.SM
TP. N-jrl^iFT^j (m);      1174538
□.Gut. (m):
Soil D**criptk>n
107?
Excavation Method:
Hathjnc:
Manual
Started Date: Q5/O6/2O<]7 Corn-pleted Dale: 09/0^/200/
Sheet
Light brownish to reddish.,fine tn mrrlluni
grained, cohesive .stiff Silty Clay with Meta
voCtanlc.
CUtNT
consultant
CONTRACTOR
WMF Support:
Lagged by
Daniel G.
Remark an excavation termination:
Cherked byjpn..iTTi^TTTurTTjrTTii^TjTiiriiin-piI:pilip
Decth (m)
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
Test Pit Log
OF/WWDSE/411
PROJECT
SITE: CLAY BORR
OW-J
fest Pit No:
IK Fasting 4m]i
?04375
G W. L(rr»);
Started Da?e: 06/<Jt/2Q07
Etrvated Detrth (m)i
TP. Northing (m):
I 1Z444 I
Excavation Method:
rnmerfeted Date. O9/Q6/2OO7
O.G.L. (m):
Machine;
Mjndal
Street
larrturfc
Light brownish to reddish,,fine to medium
grained, cohesive.stlff Silty Clay with Mrta
woTcanieJ
Greenish to light grey, moderately to highly weathered Jointed .weak Meta Volcanic intercalated with ckjy
KEY
CLIENT
CONTRACTOR
Logged toy
□inid G.
»em*rtc on excavation termination;
Cheeked toyGE
Esrnpanr tJsne-
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
@
TO-: "—
Test Pit Log
Ehsnnen!
OF/WWDSE/411
Imie Ita
1
Page Ma. 1 of 1
PROJECT; DABUS DAM ANO IRRIGATION PROJECT
rest Wt No; '
~BtBP-2A TP. Fastng (m) WS41
Elevated Depth (m)i_______ J*0
l.SN’l.SM
IP, Northing (m); 112456/
D.G.t (m).
G, W l.fm}!
ExCAvaUfin Method:
Machwir:
SITE: CLAY BORROW-2
Started Date 12/06/200? Completed Date 15706/700?
Manual
Mmole
Sheet
Soil Description
t Fghl browntsli to reddKh fine to medium
r
grained c&he!dve,4tirbfow plasticity Silty Clay
t
with traces Meta wnlcnnlc.
CUfNT
CONSULTANT
contractor
Wall Support:
I egged by
Daniel G-
Remark on e^cava^on termination;
Checked by
rUIIIIIIIII,(£E
Caepany Marr.*
Waterworks Design & Supervision EnterpriseE
Tfr
Test Pit Log
1 Qgcuntent Jlu
OF/WWDSE/411
Jta. 1
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AMD IRRIGATION PROJECT
SJTE: CLAY BORROW-3____________ __________
Test M N&:
Elevated Depth (m): _ S.O
TCTft-4-T
TP. Easting (m).
TP. Northing {m)
713-0?*
1115400
G. W. L(m); Excavation Method’
Started Date; 3S/06/2Q07 CompHsd Oace: 28/06/20°^
Test pit dimension.
15M*1,5m
Machine
KwtL
Sheet
Soli Oeicription
I Ight brawnwh tn reddish,fine to medium
grBlnedxolwivc*stltT,low plasticity Silty Clay
wMth traces Meta volcanic.
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
CONTRACTOR
SUB.-CONTRA CTOR
Waif Suepa-wt
Remurk on estivation termination;
Logged
In™ 
«____■ J l__.
--- “
----------------------------- -=—________
Daniel G,
CtuJ UKSC L j ||| | L ILLh-ET^;
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
fx
TOe
■-
Dseux.en? Na.
- Ma.
3*05 - «a-
Test Pit Log
OF/W/DSE/411
1
1 oft
PROTECT; bADUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJCCT
Test P>1 No;
Extvalcd Depth (m)-               3.0 Ttsl pH dimcnaJqh; I.5M J.5H
B
TP. EAtbng (m |: /13074
TP. Northing (m): 11154BD
O f. l. (m):
G. W.
SITE; CLAY JIORROW-J
Started Dae*! 25/06/2007
EiravnEJon Hf+hfld _________
Machine;
Manual
Ccmpieted Date: JW/Gfi^qO?
Sheet
Soil OftcrJpUon
light brownish to reddtsh,fine to medium
grained, cohesiye^tiff, tow ptasbciCy Si tty day
with traces Meta voir ariir
t'.T!!, tS *1
C * Ji
T' n.‘
_
REY
consultant
CONTRACTOR
Support:
Rtmsr1<
w
rrTTl    aUun;
I DQged. by Danld G,
i     |„
Checked by
Approved by
Depth (mJN®n*
Waterworks Design & Supervision Enterprise
ni Na:
Poge He.
Test Pit Log
0F/WWD5E/411
1 of 1
PROJECT; DABUS DAM AMD IRRIGATION PROJECT
T«t pit No:
Excvated Depth (m):              3 0
Test pct dimensAjc: 1.5M*i,5M
n*. Easting (rn);
/1307A
TP. Ncwlhuvj (mJ; 1115*23
O.G.L (m)r
5OH a«cr[prison
1013
G. W. L,(fn):
Excavation Method:
Machine:
Manual
Started Date. 75/DS/2OQ7 CompTeted Date- 28/06/2007
Sheet
1
3
Light brownish to reddl*h,fine to medium
grained,coheMve.stiff,tow plasticity,moist
Silty Clay
t
1
1
J
1
1
J
I 1
u
fc-r--
.< '.'jX
client
CONSULTANT
CONTRACTOR
W*ir Support!
tern«k on »iraMBon Icrm^on;
’L
1
Cfiedred by
II
Logged by
Dari»H G.
Apuraved by
ncn ----------------------- 1
[TTTriTTTTpMiiiiH^nHii. i im 11! 11 i|imrnn “55^]
1
J
J
Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise
Lbarr.ent Ila
Isuf Ito.
Test Pit Log
OF/VWVDSE/411
1
Page Ila.
1 of 1
PROJECT: DABUS DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT
Test Ptt No:
BCTE3-4"
Excvated Depth (m): _ 3-0 Test pA dimension: L5M*1.5N
TP Narth.n0 (m). 11155BJ
O.G.L (hi):
G. W. L(m>.
Excavation Method
Maclxne
SITE. CLAY BORROWS
St Art cd Dale: 25/06/200/
Completed Date: 78/06/20Q7
Sheet
iqht brownish to reddish,fine to medium
grained, cohesive^ tiff, low plasticity,moist
Silty Clay
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
CONTRACTOR
^•-contractor
LogQctJ by
Daniel G.
Remark on CKsvatlon termination:
Checked by
iiniilii 11 n tiTI it 11111 i?l H111! 11 n 111, ^7"j '-W—i
Project: Dabus Dam and Irrigation Project UH ID: WBH-?
Perth: S.Q-IJ.Om
® i: ■{’ W^::                  ’
‘^jiX*w*»V*"4^—f^rCji’■
l
JeJ^jBBSnW*niilM4. FSS^fr rr , .. .'
1
4«__-
■rr,Trx>i^
Project: Dabus Dam and Irrigation Project BH ID: WBH-2
Depth: 18 0 - 24, 97m
?1■
1
1IProject
Project: Dabus Dam and Irrigation Project UH ID: DSWI-I
Project: Dabus Dam and Irrigation ProjectMinistry of Waler and Energy
Dabus Irrigation SULrdy  » tjesign Project
J
Volume iU-Part I Head work Geplqgtoaf Geotechnrcal Invesbgabon Report
Annex III: Geological Cross-Sections
Water  Works  Design  and Supervision Enterprise
A ugu5l,20’t5Geological Cross-section along the new proposed
Spilway Alignment
□
sa
tEZlJ
AliMji deposit/Residual soil
Coliwial matenal
EHJ Pegmatite Vien
S
Fresh granitic gneiss
1
J
Top of DBH-1
S
ss
r-'<l
ID
o
IN
8
o
o
__rs—
R
I
s
s 5>
5
n
N
N
8
88
8
r3t
9
ui m
Js
s
o
8
-E.
8 S’
sss
oS8
r*
u *
55 S          J
_
§ |fj
88 S
§ § _i
£25 8 3
d
ooo
o         8  Ji—
’ c ** /
■v'1 Z
-—-
H"1        8
s $ _ i.
88
a8
8       8-t 8       §§”?
o        ooo
iioij* i 5§    ?    i ii
-
?§It
£
r.
Fr
[ L. I L
i.L1
I
iII
Ir
r
I][ I1JI'1
(1♦r- H1
1
f■
t
IDabus krigal'or Study
__ _____ _____
Volume III- Pad I Headwork Geological A Gcote-’incal Inveslrgalion Report
Annex V’ Geophysical Survey
1
-I
6UD1
BM DI 2A
UM QI -7
I *113000
1117000
1111000
legend
1110000
WEIR SITE • 2
Resistivity imatfhQ survey line
River
VES point
Contour line
707000
JOBOCO
705000
706000
. 1109000
704000
701 uoo
702000
703000
Figure 2.1. Arrangement of resistivity imaging survey lines
nd vESP°inls
August .2015
Waler Works Design and Supervision EnterpriseMinistry of Waler, Tn^ahon and Energy 
□ahj3 Irrigation Study and Design Project
HeadwarSt Geological
7?luff» 111 Pfft J
A GeotCG^ricol inv<?-»figaf o-i Report
_____ Anrwt V Geepfryvcal Sur/^y
3- LOCAL GEOLOGY AND STRUCTURES OF STUDY AREA
According to the gecfogical observation on the both weir sites during the process of
geophysical survey, around the proposed weir sites the river valley narrows and hilL on In
sides of the river bank are composed of granite and schist The riverbed also •$ characters 
by granite and schist The local geology and structure al the individual weir sites is as follows
3.1       Weir Site -2
The relief of river valley at Weir Site - 2 is relatively gentle. Alluvial and colluvial deposits are developed mainly around river valley and the rock exposure is represented al higher level of both sides of the weir axis Chlorite schist is observed at the left side (around index point 1 of geophysical survey  line GP1) but mica schist at the right side (around index  point 14 of geophysical survey  line GP1). These rocks  have very  well developed schistosity. These rocks dip southwestward as the attitude elements are 240* Z45* and 2SO*Z43\ respectively The sub vertical joints  (attitude elements are 160*Z75* and 320* Z80*. respectively) oriented sub-parallel to the survey line GP1 displayed on lhe outcrop surfaces of the chlorite schist at the left side and the mica schist at the right side Accordingly, the altitude elements  of the schist exposed at both sides  of lhe weir axis  are similar to each other Therefore, it is considered that chlorite and mica schist al lhe left and right side are situated on one limb of the fold trending towards NW-SE and the joints displayed on these outcrop surfaces are the axial plane cleavage developed in lhe axla! plane of this  fold. The chlorite schist at lhe left side is relatively fresher than the mica schist at lhe right side In this area, the two types of schists abovementioned formed lhe bedrock of Weir Site - 2.
3.2      Weir Site - 3
In this area, the width of lhe river valley is relatively wide but the topographical slope of both banks  is  sleeper than Weir Site - 2. As  at Weir Site - 2. alluvial and colluvial deposits  are developed around river valley and the rock exposure is represented at higher level of the weir axis. The outcrops observed at abutments as well as riverbed is granites
The rock exposure ^displayed around Index-paint 1 of geophysical survey line GP4 at Vur left bank and fractures With the attitude element of 1B5*ZS5* is developed on this outcroo surface But fractures are not long and don't have lhe opening Therefore, it can be seen iha« the bedrock is very fresh.
The rock exposure covering large is also represented at the i .
sub-vertical joints with trend of 80’ and 70* are found at thA i rJL 3t n9hl The 1114266m N. 707547m E and 1114267m N. And lhe verti^i^^10316 707511,71 E and
found at the UTM coordinate 707556m E and 1114277m IM Th ’ ™ 
trend of 10’ is
the  cock  has  been  relatively  more  fractured  than  the  left  barn,  k   !°<ntS   Wetl   e,on9aied  and ’ Dank’ appears to be fresh.
VMerWo*s”DffSb9'?and
Supervision Enterprise
AugusT2015Ministry of Water. Inxjntion and Energy Dabus Irrigation Study and Oslgn Projecl
Haodwark GeokXTlcai 5
Vo/urn* HL Pail I G«cfe^r:icjtf rn-/vstiqa5cn Report
Arnrrx V Gecyhy^cat Survey
4, GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS
4.1      Geo-Electrical Property of Rock in the Study Area
In the study area, the bedrock consists of schist at Weir Site -2 and granite at Weir Srt- Accordingly, the resistivity values of these schist and granite are from 30 rn
0 m and also relatively higher than the resistivity of overburden
The electrical property  of these rocks  may  be considered as  best geophysical survey condition to characterize the geological features  of foundations  for the weir shGj / electrical survey method
4.2    Volume of Work
On  the  basis  of  previous  geological  data,  6  electrical  imaging  survey  lines  with  a  total  ■ length of 2200 m and 4 VES points with AB/2 = 100 m were conducted
The coordinates and work volumes following each electrical imaging line and VES point are given in Table 4.1 and 4.2, respectively.
e 4. 1. Coordinates and work volumes of resistivity Imaging survey lines
Coordinate (UTM)
Survey
Starting
Ending
Length af
survey hne
Remark
Easllng   Northing      Easting       Northing
Deplh
of
investigation
(mj
530
GP2 240
7022 Id
1109393
702710
1109577
702291
1109544
702301
1109325
Wetr Site - 2
GP3 GP4
GPS
GP6_.
702455
1109611
702534
1109387
*■
706900
1114704
707490
1114315
706992
1114502
707129
1114693
Wetr Site - 3
702264.
: 114315
70Z465 .
U .144
Total
240
710
240
63   240
2200
Table 4. 2. Coordinates and work volumes of VES points
Coordinate (UTM)
No
VES point VL O 1
Length of AH/2
East
702334
Worth
(m)
Remark
1
2
.
VES2
^02485
11J/
1109505
100
100
Weir Site _ ?
3
VES 3
707061
1114592
100
4
VES4
707378
1114404
100
Weir Site - 3
-yi^r Works Design and
Supermen Enterprise
August ,Minstry of Water. Irrigation and Energy Dabu* Irrgabon Study and Dnsrgn Project
4.3 Weir Site - 2
Vofuma III- Part I Headword Gootoglcrt & OoEecJtnical frr/w*flgafion Report
Ann<x 7 Gepphyttesd Svr/wy
Three resistivity imaging survey lines and 2 VES points were conducted at Wetr $**^2 (see Figure 4.1). The interpretations and discussions on these survey lines ara bne y described below.
4.3.1 Resistivity Imaging
The resistivity imaging suiveys of Weir Site - 2 were earned out along survey lines_G GP2 and GP3 (see Figure 4.1). The investigation depth of these survey fanes ts 50 m and the electrode interval used is 5 m.
LEGEND
riasaogi _ 702100
Figure 4.1. Arrangement of resistivity imaaino survev
and VES points on Wslr Site - °
’ nd®x p<"n,s
Water Works Desfgn and
Supervision Enteqirrsa
AufiusCZO! SMinistry of Walrr. Irrigation and Energy Dabus irrigation Study and Design Project
GP1
Headwork Geological & G*altxhr.xai
Volumn III- Pari f Repot
Ar.rw V Geop^r/SMud Sur/rry
This survey line is located and conducted along the weir axis as shown in Figure 4 1 Th_ coordinates of index points are listed in Table 4 3; whereas the resistivity imaging section is shown in Figure 4.2.
In Ibis survey line, the electrodes between 1 and 40 were located at the left side and the other electrodes at the right side
On this resistivity imaging section, the relatively high resistivity values of 30 to 600 Q m a-e reflected except the upper part between electrode number 18 and 78. and it is interpreted to be the response of lhe schist in the area. The depth of bedrock at the weir site is estimated to be less than 6 m. Moreover, the bedrock at lhe left side may be relatively fresher than al the right side.
According  to  lhe  resistivity  imaging  section  on  lhe  GP1,  it  is  interpreted  thal  there  may  be geological structures around electrode number 25 located at the left side
Furthermore, it is considered that lhe sub-section marked with elliptical block between electrical number 62 and 77 at the right side may be fractured zone.
njyitef Walks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
8 -------------------------- — ——— 
Alj g-osF^oisr
NllmaUy of Water, kmgertion and Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Volumo IIJ- Pert I Headwork GeologJcaJ & Gootochnlcal Invoetigation Report
________________Annex V Geophysical Survey
I
Resistivity imaging section 
Legend
12 95 3194 ?5 92 138 88 222 84 327 78 45371
Resistivity In ohm.m
Anticipated structure
Fraclured/weottaied
■ack or sediment Index point number Electrode number
Figure 4, 2. Resistivity Imaging section along survey line GP1
Water Works Design and
S<jpen/s»0D Enterprise
August .*C15VolufTO III- PJ,r* 1 Mrhlsijy Water, Irrigation antf Energy
□abus Irrigation Study and Design Project
GP2
This survey line was located and conducted at the left side of Weir S»te -2 (Figure 41) locations of index points and the resistivity imaging section on the survey line are s <r Table 4 4 and Figure 4.3 respectively..
As showed on the resistivity section of the survey line, the resistivity values observed increase with depth that indicates the response of weathering degree with depth m area.
su
line GP2
No.
Coordinate
Remark
Easting
Northing
Elevation
1
702291
1109544
1DO1
Start point
Around river
2
702 3 03
1109511
1002
3
702320
1109475
1002
4
702334
1109437
1003
5
702350
1109400
1004
6
702366
1109363
1004
7
702381
1109325
1004
End point
GP3
This survey line was conducted at the right side of Weir Site - 2 (Figure 4.1) The locations of index points on the survey line are shown in Table 5 and the resistivity imaging section is shown in Figure 4.4
As  described in Figure 4 4. it is  interpreted that the bedrock  at the downstream has  been relatively  weathered and fractured than at the upstream. Also, the resistivity  values observed are increasing with depth such as  the resistivity  imaging section on the GP^ which is expected to be the response of degree weathering with depth.
Table 4.S. Coordinates of index points along survev line CiPt
--- ---- -—-----
Coordinate
No
Easting
Northing
Elevation
Remark
1
7024S5
1109611
1006
Start point
2
702465
1109572
1007
3
702475
1109534
1008
4
702486
1109496
1008
5
702502
1109460
1008
’ ’------------------------------------------------------—
6
702520
1109419
1009
~ —-------------------------------------------- ----
7
702534
1109337
1010
End pen nt
io
Supeivislofi Enterprise
August ,2015'V-
' *=? rr=*
- A A            k . I
1=5 rte=j4 Fj=^?
L114
r
-■      ■*
Ministry of Water, irrigation and Energy Debus irrigation Study and DniQn Project
|
Volume III- Pert I Headwork Geological & Geotectinicel Inwoaligauon Report
Annex V Gfrophyelcal Survoy
E
a*
£
Q.
o
Q
f" I 1—ZM
1186           1894
33 12 54.37 62 72 118 15 160 67
Resistivity in ohm.m
i
Anticipated structure
Fractuced/weathered rock or sediment Index paint number Electrode number
Figure 4.3 Resistivity Imaging section along eurvoy line GP2
Waif’ Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
n
Must .2015I
Minlttry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Dabus irrigation Study and Design Project
Vorume ill- Part HeadwoFk Geological a Gaotochnical Investigation Report
Annex V Geophysical Survey
E
£*
X
0
Q
Resistivity Imaging section
Legend
12.94 19 08 33.76 54 58 82.34 117 03 158 67
Resistivity in ohm.m
Anticipated structure
F r ac tured/weathered rock or sediment Index point number Eteclrode number
Figure 4.4. Resistivity imaging section along survey line GP3
Waterworks Design and
Skpervision Enterpr/so
12
August .2015Ministry of Waler, Irngatior and Er-e/gy 
Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
4.3.2 Vertical Electrical Sounding (VES)
Volume III- Part I Headwork Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Reporl
Annex V Geophysical Survey
In order to determine the position of basement for Weir Site VES2) were conducted.
VES1
2 \/FS skJrvsys (vtvi aim
VES1 was conducted al the left side of Weir Site - 2 (Figure 4 1) and *hc 
VES point is shwn in Tabie 4 2. The interpretation results □> VES1 are d.sPiayed tn Figure
Fiqure
4.5 and Table A 6.
Figure 4. 5 Model used for the interpretation with VES1 data
Table 4.
Layer
6. Interpretation model of VES1
— Reslstivtty- i nicxness
(nm)_____
28.6 1.2
jpj— 
ueptn
. (HU
Expected lithology
-
2
3.2
13
1.2               Top dry soil
2.5
Sill and highly weathered schist
3
71.9
2.1
4.S
4                    6447.4
”"’
Moderately weathered and fractured schist
- --
Fresh schist
VES2
VES2 was located and conducted at the right side of W ' q-
location of the VES point is listed in Table 4.2 Thr inT S‘'e ' 2 (F'9Ure <1) and the
shown in Figure 4.6 and Table 4,7.
er Pretation results of VEST are
Waler Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
13
Augusl ,2015Ministry of Waler, Irrigation and Energy Gabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Volume III Part I I le.idwork Geological & Geotechnical Investigation Report
___ Annex_V Geophysteal Survey
Figure 4. 6. Model used far the interpretation with VES2 data Table 4.7. Interpretation model of VES2
Layer
Resistivity
Thickness 
(m)
Depth
(m)
Expected lithology
1
12.0
0.9
0.9
Top soil
2
4.2
1.1
1.9
Sill and highly weathered mica
schist
3
70 2
1.4
3.4
Moderately weathered and fractured mica schist
4
281.0
—
Slightly weathered and fractured mica schist
4.4 Weir Site - 3
4.4/1 Resistivity Imaging 
The resistivity imaging surveys of Weir Site - 3 were Carriprt , ,
GP5 and GP6 (see Figure 4.7). The investigation depth'of thn^ °n9 interpretations and discussions on these survey lines are des cribed b^io^
lines GP4'
S            1005 5° ™ The
GP4
This survey line was conducted along the weir-3 axis (Fiaum a vx -r points on the survey line are shown in Table 4 8 and the resist ' 
In Figure 4.S.
In this survey line, the electrode number 1 nnd ,ia « decode ember49 and 98 on (be slope o(
® l0Ca‘ions of index l,y imaging section is shown on the slope of the left side.
WaieFWorks Design and Supervision Enterprise
14         —------------------ -—------ -------- ------- ----- August .2015Volume Hl- Pnjnt I
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
Dabus lirgalKin Study and Oesrgn Project
Analysing the nature of the resistivity imaging section, it is estimated that the bed
weir axis may be granite and the depth of bedrock may be Fess than 7 m.
On [he basis of the resistivity rmaging section of the Figure 4 8. the relative v ow
values are recorded at the sub sections marked with elliptical block around e e e 25 (left side) and 66 (right side), and it is considered that the bedrock has been re a >ve y fractured
.
Table 4.6 Coordinates of index points along survey line GP4
Coordinate
No
Easting
Northing
Elevation
Remark
r_ —
“706900
1114704
1019
Start point
2
706932
■                    —         — -             ■» II                 i
1114684
1000
3
706966
1114862
992
------------- —
4
707000
1114640
987
------------ _—
5
707033
1114619
984
6
707067
1114597
981
- —---- ----------- -
~7
707096
1114578
979
Around river
‘8
707329
1114424
980
Around river
9
707359
1114406
980
I     10
707391
1114382
983
™"   “■—--------------- -—
707424
1114359
995
Jo
13 J
707457
707400
1114337
1114315
1000
1010
End point
-wi£Fv**ta D’s'9n and
15
*
uper
vi^E"<^
August ,2015NVmiifty ot Water, Imgatoon and Energy tiabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
I
i r
i
Volume Ilf- Pari I HeaoworK Geological & Geotechmcai Irwesi'gafon Report
____________________ Ann ax V Geophysical Survey
Resistivity imaging section
Legend
Anticipated structure
9.72
3876
96 03        183 93      300.06      445 23       619 43
Fracluredtaeathered
Resistivity in ohm,m
rack or sediment
Index point number
Electrode number
Figure 4. 8. Resistivity Imaging section along survey line GP4
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
15
August .2015Maisky of Water, Irrigation and Energy Uabu'? fr ngati&n Study ana' Design Project
GPS
Headwvrk Geological &
Volume III- Part I Geotechnical Investigation Report
Annex V^opJzy^^Sjjrvey
This survey line was conducted al the left side of Weir Site -3 (Figure 4 7) The o
index points on the survey line are shewn in Table 4 9 and the resistivity imaging sec shown in Figure 4 9,
Observing the resistivity imaging section on the survey line, the relatively low resistivity values recorded al the sub seclion marked with elliptical block around electrical num er
are interpreted to be due to relatively fractured granite such as the resistivity imaging ..uctinn on the GP4. Moreover, fl. is interpreted that the bedrock at the upstream has been relatively 
fractured than at the downstream
Table £
.9. Coordinates of index points along survey line GPS
No.
Coordinate                                       _
Easting
No-rthing
Fleval ion
Remark
1
706992
1‘114502
985
Start point
2
707013
1114530
904
3
707036
1114562
904
4
707060
1114594
931
5
707 084
1114626
930
6
707106
1114660
981
7
707129
1114693
981
End point
GPG
This survey line was conducted at the right side of Weir Site - 3 (Figure 4.7). The locations of index  points  on the survey  line are shown in Table 4.10 and the resistivity  imaging section is shown in Figure 4,10
On this  resistivity  imaging section, the relatively  high resistivity  values  of 60 to 550 D m are reflected except the lop part, and it is  expected to be the response of the relatively  fresh granite developed in this area. The depth of this fresh granite is very shallow
AS   it   is   obviously   d.5playe0    ,a   the   resistiv.ly   imaging   section,   lhe   relatively   low   resistivltv values_arerecorded _al the_small sub sedionsmarked wilh elliotirai hi^i, J
a "d "iS “"SidB,ed ,hal lha bed™* ” 'h’s part ha= ^relatively t^eiTthan
Table
.10. Coordinates of index points alono survey Coordinate
---- ----- ,
No
1
2
3
Easting
___ Northing
707284
Elevation
1114315
1J14342
900
707313
707342
900
Aemark
Start point
1114370
980
4
5
6 7_
707370
707403
707436
707465
1114399
981
1114421
983
1114444
1114463
985
987
Erid point
'WarerWorks Design and
Supervise Fnwrpiiso
August .201:i=4
it—I -ft—i
MknMry □! Water, Irrigation and Energy Oabus Irrigation Study and Deugn Project
I
fc—i           »—I
Volume III- Part I Hcaoworx Geological & Geotechnical investigation Report
______________ _____  An max V Geophysical Survay
Resistivity imaging section
Legend
Anticipated structure
i.. i i m
9,44          28 94
67 93 126 42 204 00 30L8B 418 86
Resistivity in ohm.m
Fractured/weathered rock or sediment Index point number Electrode number
Figure 4. 9, Resistivity imaging section along survey line GP5
' Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
10
August .2015Ministry o! Water, Irrigation ind Energy Dabus 'irrigation Study and Dea.gn Project
I
I
Volume Ilk Part I Headwo*k Geological 4 Geotechnical Investigation Report
______________________________ Annex V Geophysical Survey
E
i
□
Resistivity imaging section
Legend
Anticipated structure
F ractured/weathered
148 88      220.33       309 65        416 84
rock or sediment
Resistivity in ohm.m
Index point number
Electrode number
Figure 4.10 . Resistivity imag
Ing section along survey line GP6
Waterworks Design and
Supervision Enterprise
19
August ,2015Ministry WattiB firlgalion and Energy Dabus Imgaimn Sludy and Design Prqjecl
Volume III Part I Headwork Geological S Geotechnical lovesligahon Report
Annex V Geophysical Survey
4.4.2   Vertical Electrical Sounding (VES)
- j—* o                surveys were conducted (see
In order to determine positions of basement at Weir Site 3,
Figure 8). The coordinates of these VES points arc shown in Table -
VES3
VES3  was conducted  al  the  left  side ot  Weir  Site  •  3  (Figure  4.7)  The .nterpretat.on results o( VES3 are shown in Figure J 11 and Table 4.11
Figure 4. 11 Model used for the interpretation with VES3 data Table 4.11. Interpretation model of VES3
Layer
Resistivity 
(Sim)
Thickness
imj
Depth
fm)
Expected lithology
1
02 2
35
35
Top soul
2
16 5
4,1
76
Silt and highly weathered aranlh*
3
73.3
20
97
Moderately fractured granite
4
2694.0
---- -----------
___
Slightly fractured granite
□fVES4 are shown in Figure 4.12 and Table 4.12.
Waler Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
VES4
VES4  was  conducted  at  the  rtght  3ide  of  Weir  Site  -  3  (F,gu,e   4  7).  The  interpretation  r„ul,s
H n result*
2C
August .2015-Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Volume III Pnrt I I leadwork Geological A Geotechnical Investigation Report
Annex V Goophysrcal Survey
RMS-error 4d
■ i nrr---- 1—   ----------! Tn1
.■d.i- - il-mh 'iir.i17miw
rnieK Dunin g oi n 4
I
JO
5
£■
»    1B*2
■-
O C.
2    &S.2 9 1
3.5
+
3 i^G.O
1-
z
+
.                  4   ■*. I
i0"0
UFO
I>l----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
10*1
UF2
10*3
Cwrenl EMcIrfltle Distance |rn|
Figure 4.12 Model used for the interpretation with VES4 data Table 4,12. Interpretation model of VES4
Layer
Resistivity
(Q m)
Thickness 
(ml
Deplh
(m)
Expected lithology
1
426
0.4
04
Top dry soil
2
662
91
9.5
Moderately weathered and fractured granite
3
13626.0
—
—
Fresh granite
Watef WL^ks Dcs'gn and Supen'ision Enterprise
21 ------------------------ —-------- - --------- ----- ----- ------ August k20!I
Jj^nisfry of Water, Irrigation and Energy Dabus Irrigation Study ond Design Prefect
Volume 111- Pait I n^oaical 5 GpolecfinK^I Investigation Report
..
Headwork G«Mogicai
v Geophysical Survey
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5,1       Conclusion
According to the geological and geophysical survey carried out at We«r oite -2, it is indicated that the bedrock of 1he weir axis consists of schist and the depth of lhe bedrock is less than o m. On (he bas^s of (he resistivity imaging section along GP1 carried out along the weir axis, it is  estimated  that  the  sub  section  marked  with  elliptical  block  between  electrical  number  62 and 77  at the rrght side may be fractured zone (Figure 4 2). Moreover, the bedrock at the left stde  may  tie  relatively  fresher  than at  the right srde. The bedrock at the downstream of right side has been relatively weathered and fractured than at the upstream (Figure 4 4). From the resistivity  imaging  section  along  GP1,  it  is  estimated  that  there  may  be  geological  structures around electrode  number  25 located at the left side At the weir  site, fault  of NW-SE direction and the joints with NE-SW trend are developed;
At Weir Site -3 area, il is considered that the bedrock at the weir axis is granite and the depth of bedrock is less than 7 m Analyzing the resistivity Imaging section of GP4 carried out along the weir axis, the relatrvefy low resistivity values are recorded at (he sub sections marked with elliptical  block  around  electrical  number  25  (left  side)  and  66  (right  side),  and  it  is  considered that   the   bedrock   has   been   relatively   fractured   than   other   ptace   (Figure   4.8).   It   is   also, interpreted  that  lhe  bedrock  at  the  upstream  of  left  side  has  been  relatively  fractured  than  at the downstream (Figure 4.9) At lhe weir site joints with NE-SW trend are devetoped.
5.2      Recommendations
The   geophysical   investigations   carried   out   to   evaluate   the   geological   features   (depth   to
bedrock,  subsurface  structures,  etc)  of  lhe  foundations  of  (he  alternative  weir  sites  /Weir  7
and Weir-3).
V
fn  order  to  confirm  (he  sub-surface  geological  features  of  weir  site,  additional  geotechnical
.investigation using core drilling is recommended to be carried out.
' Water Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
Augu ( 2015
SMinistry of Water Irrigation and Energy Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
Volume 111- Part I HeodworK Geological A Geo technical Invesbgjlron Report
Annex V Geophysical Survey
6
Tefera, M., Chernel, T and Haro, W. Explanation of the Geological map of Ethiopia, scale 1.2.000,000, 2nd edition. Ethiopian Institute of geological Surveys, Ministry  of Mines  and
Energy, Addis Ababa. 1996
- references
Waler Works Design and
Supervision Enterprise
23
A ugijs| ,2015Mini El ry of Water an tf Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Stydyi Design Prajec !_ _ Head work_GeologicaM u _ _ _ .
Volume ill-Pa-it *
„      ,         . „ n e o1cchnical I n ves ifgaUortRegort
—
Annex Vi: Seismic Hazard AssessmentFederal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Waler, Irrigation and Energy Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
DABUS IRRIGATION DEVELOPMEN i FEASIBILITY STUDY AND DETAlu DESIGN PROJECT
volume - III
Geological and Geotechnical investigation Report
Part I: Head work Geological and Geotechni cal investi gati on Report
Annex VI: Seismic Hazard Assessment August ,2015
Water Works Design and Supervision Enterorl«»
P.O.Box-2561
Tei + 251 11 661 45 01 Fax 4- 251 11 661 08 98 Email: w.w.d.s.e@ethione.ei Bob Marley Avenue,
Addis Ababa Ethiopia
upriseM - I Volume III
Dabu T Water. Irrigation and Energy Headuvo/k Geological Investigation
1 —- JI'SSton Study andpes>gnpfQjwd________________ ________Annex VI SesimicHoward Assessment Report
Dabus IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT STUDY and DESIGN project
Site Specific Hazard Assessment Report
August, 2015
ISSUE AND REVISION RECORD
I
I "rev. date
ORIGINATOR                     CHECKER
APPROVER
DESCRIPTION
Airgust, 2015
Atatay Aycle (Fhd) Tesfaye K (Dr.)
□awil N
Jemal K.
Tilahun D. (Dr.)
This document has been prepared for the titled project or named upon or used for any other project without 3n independent check nV
s|lould no‘ be relied
3 nd prk>r written authority of water works design and supervisionJX®              °Ut 35 ,0 lability accepts no responsibly or HablHly for the consequence of th,, Z            ° be,n9 ob(f”ned WWDsr
other than the purposes for which it was commissioned Any Der.             K be'ns U5ed for a purpose
tor such other purpose agrees, and will by such use  or  rel.-.nr  Z n ? ?'n9  °r  relV,n9 the document
.ndemnrfy WWDSE fm all loss or damage resulting there from ' V^DSF 
a9ree^t\o
AWbalielirty Wfoo<rks thDis esidgoncuanmd ent to any party other than the person by wh^ ut
5uparvisron Enterprise
n ° ^"sibitlty was commissioned
August. 2015Volume Hl
Minislry of Wafer, Irngalion and Energy
_Dabus> irrigation Study and_Dcslgn Project
TABLE OF CONTENTS.. LIST OF FIGURES....
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ji
_ii
iii
2.      METHOD™.............. ........................ .......... .......... —..................... ................. *.............................. . ......................................... 3.      DATA5
3 I Earthquake Source Zones  ........ ■■
3.2        Characterization Of The Seismicity Ol Source Zones ........................................................... -■■■
5
3.3        Strong Ground Motion Attenuation.  • -.............................................................................................................................®
4 RESULTS-7
5.      CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS-9
6.      LESSONS FROM OTHER DAMS;—10
1.   Kariba.......................................................................... ........................................................... 10
2.      Auburn dam .......................................................................................................................................................................... 10
7.      DAM-INDUCED SEISMICITY ............................. ........................................................................................................................i 2
8 RESERVOIR INDUCED SEISMICITY„13
9, REFERENCES............................................................... ..............................................„15
LIST OF FIGURES
“V^Ler Works Deilgn and
Supervision Enterprise
iii
August, 20isMinistry of Waler, Irrgalion and Energy
Dabus Irrigation Sludyand Design Project
LIST OF TABLES
Volume III Headwork Geological Investigation
Ann ex VI Sesimic Hazard Assessment
Table 3.1 the main seismotectonic area source zones defined by polygons having i parameters (b-values, activity rate v,. and               Wnr fork and soil sites al different
Table 4. 1 Ground motion amplitude in percentage of gravity ( periods of motion and for different return period, a .
Mu lt,purpose Dam project velocity 310 m/s
site For the soil site, an average thickness of 30 meters with shear wav e velocity          , is adopted for all periods consicferpd (Boore el al. 1997) .
Wafer Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
August, 2Q15Ministry of Waler, Irrigation and Energy
_ Dabus legation Sludy and Design Proiecl _
executive summary
Volume III Headwork Geological Investigation
Annex V[Sestmic Hazard Assessment
The  Dabus  Multipurpose  dam  project  site  (10.0768»N.  34  8909“E)  is,'^d western plateau where seismic activity is uncommon The site is ove -
far away from the Elhiopian rift and the South Sudan seismica y acive re.
secund period and for the worst assumption of a soil site, a P va ue
estimated with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years return perto
relatively lower than what we could have found for sites close to the rift axis 
worth considering the aporopriate design measures as larger magnitude eart qua e a
nG75o is
n IS
is -
ow ’
the rift may trigger the corresponding ground motion al the planned Dabus dam site. e a so recommend a detailed geotechnical investigation of the site for subsurface weakness anr sub-areal fractures which may manifest after reservoir impoundment which wi(» be useful for data interpretation and safety measures.
Water Works Design and
SLjp<!Jvrsior Enterprise
August,Volume Ilf Headwork Ge^iogic^ 'r|ves,i^'^ .
1
Ministry of Water, Irrrflalkwi rwi Energy r a busjnigaton Study and Design Project
1.    INTRODUCTION
Anix VI
j         r’l ’ rn I Africa. W3S
During the Triassic-Cretaceous time, northern and . ' lithospheric extension associated with NE-SW extension (
. h . 1988) This formed ,
several NW trending Mesozoic rift basins including the Mugla . t e e u .
by
Nile and Bosellini
the Anza rin basins (Figure 1 1. Me Hargue ct at 1992; Births and Fa,.head 199« Bosemn, (1989 1992) and Russo et al. (1994) interpreted these structures as 
aulacogen-like (failed) rift basins extending north-westward from the N r 9 Th rif. which was formed in Late Paleozoic-Jurassic Ornes during Gondwana brea -up, ’ basins terminate sharply in the northwest against (he Nt trending en ra ncan Zone, which is considered to be a major dextral strike-slip shear zone (Figure , c a et al. 1992. Binks and Fairhead 1992).
The Blue Nile Basin (Figure 1.1) is one of the group Of M has been active from 252 Io 66 million years ago The Chnn2 Dabus River (F ure 1.2) is found deep in the tectonically staht
Ig
where earthquake activity is not common. However the Mine (he main Ethiopian rift and the Afar depressiOn (23 million yeZ’, active region (Figure 1.3) that need to be assessed fof
<he re9'°n which ‘° be built °n the
P 'ateau of F'hiopia
" ft ,ha( include
t a              ent) Is a seiSrnica,,
“VVaier Works Design and Supervi5’on Enterprise
1
August, 2015Ministry of Water, IrrjgHbon and Energy
Dgbu^jrrigaNon jjudy and Design Project________________
Volume HI Hpadwork Geological Investigation
AnnexVI Sesimjc Hazar^A^essmcM
which  can  damage  property  and  human  life  due  to  the  booming  construction  n  ry Ethiopia tor buildings, dams and roads
The closes! active rifting near the planned Dabus dam occurs either along the main Ethiopian rift or in the South Sudan which are over 500 and 600 kilome ers distance), respectively
quaternary
Figure 1. 2 closer took of the Dabus dam project site from Google earth map.
The Dabus dam project site (Figures 1.1, 1 2 & 1.3) is located at the most seismically stable western plateau It is prudent though to calculate the possible ground motion at this site of interest due to major earthquakes that can be sourced from the Main Ethiopian rift and South Sudan_______
“vvata' Works Design and
Supervision Enterpn**
2
Au 9ust. 2015'Minrsiry of Water, Imgalw and Energy
_ Dabus Irrigation Study_and nesjgn_Projeci
Volume III
Headwork Geological Investigation
Annex VI Sesimlc Hazard Assessment
30-
35'                               40
45'
5U“
Figure 1. 3 Seismicity data for the Hom of Africa; blue circles represent earthquakes that occurred for the last 110 years in the region and size of the circles Is proportional with magnitude. The green star shows the location of the Dabus dam project site.
On the other hand, we can't rule out the possibility of Reservoir Induced Seismicity (RIS) at Dabus  dam that needs  monitoring before and after impoundment like any  other dams located elsewhere in the world The water load can possibly trigger earthquakes on fractures following the okl Mesozoic structures shown in Figure 1.1.
VValerWorics Design and
Supervision Enterprise
3
August, 2015MinifyWaler, Irrigation and Enwgy
□abut Irrigation Study arid DetignProjad
2.     METHOD
Volume III Headwork Geological rrwesbgation
Annex VI                  HazardAssessmenl
The earthquake hazard evaluation for the Dabus Multipurpose Darr project site (10 0768 N, 34.89O9°E) is  based on lhe method of Cornell (1968) as  Implemented by  Maguire (1995) and has been accepted as a worldwide standard by the Global Seismic Hazard Assessmer I Program (Giardini. 1999) The method has  since been used by  the RADIUS Project under the International Decade for Natural Disasters (IDNDR) I he analysis made in Ibis report is using licensed software (EZ-FRISK 4 4) from Risk  Engineering, Inc., Boulder, Colorado (USA).
The  seismic  hazard  calculation  can  be  represented  by  the  following  equation,  which  is  an application of the total probability theorem.
H(aj = E, vJJ P[A>;i I m.i•|/Mj tim /wi |m< (rim) dr dm
where the hazaro H(a) is  the annual rale of earthquakes  that produce a ground motion amplitude A. higher than a The parameter A could be peak  ground acceleration velocity,, displacement, or it could be spectral acceleration for given frequencies  The integration in the equation is  carried out over individual source areas  or faults  which correspond to seismogenic zones of interest Seismic sources may be either faults or area sources but only area sources arc considered in this assessment as there are no well-studied active faults in
□ur region.
•    V| is the annual rate of occurrence of earthquakes with magnitude higher than a minimum magnitude designated as (Table 1)
f M, iiui mid faihhtr I inn
• 
distance
are the probability density functions of magnitude and
P (A > a/m. '} is the probability that an earthquake nl magnitude m at djstance r produces a ground motion amplitude al the required site which is greater than a
“^ttir Works DESitrr. and
5tfpe«iPloO Enterprise
J
August. aoiVolume IM Headwork Gcoloflicar I nv Million
Mirljiry  F Water,
0
ln^alkw Dfi<1 Energy 
Anr,EX
vi SesimicJ^awrdAssessmerii
Dabus irrigation Sludy Qes.'gn Project
3.     DATA
3.1      Earthquake Source Zones
tn East Africa, (Staffed study of faults by measuring slip rate, rupture length and depth of
energy release are virtually non-existent On rhe other hand records of ea qua es - 1
different regions in Ethiopia and the neighborhood with different seismicity ma mg . pos 
to use area sources in evaluating seismic hazard (Table 3.1).
In Ethiopia earthquake records, bolh historical and instrumental. exist and the crustal dynamics  is  relatively  better known than in the rest of the East African Rift System. Earthquake distribution, map of quaternary faults and volcanoes together with plate tectonic, cons  ide rations  are used to delineate different seisrnogenre source areas  (zones) as displayed in Table 3 1
3.2     Characterization of the Seismicity of Source Zones
The b-value which is a fundamental inpul characterizing the seismicity, of a given source is defined by Gutenberg and Richter (195*3) in the form'
Log N (m) = a - b rn
Where N (m) is the cumulative number of earthquakes with magnitude m and above. In this report b-value and the activity rate a are calculated using Wizmap II software by R. Musson (1998) from the British Geological Survey for each delineated source zones shown in Table
3.1   A  doubly  truncated  magnitude  distribution  could  be  obtained  in  exponential  form  km the  above  equation  by  setting  an  upper  magnitude  and  a  lower  magnitude  M,nir|   in  I  he form
f.vHiin) = Ki P, evp i-pi
lAJhnra = D’ Clip l-(3< Where
’ Mikdnbl
is a normalizing constant The depth of
occurrence o( earthquakes m Ethiopia is generally shallow and rarely exceeds 20 km The b value_foLlhe_East African .RiftwithiriEthiopia-ranges from 0.5 to 1.3 following research resells in the region. B values for the Red Sea. Gulf of Aden and southern Sudan arbTVn included within these hounds whose seismicity may contribute Io the hazard nf irL
Within Ethiopia (Table 3.1).
° naZ&rd Of lhe
The main seismotectonic area source zones defined by potvaons having hih paramos cwato. -Wy rate v„ Mmax and Minin ar!HXI
T'""'’
yValff Wfr'ks design and
Supervision Enterprise
£> ---------------------- —-------------- — ----- _ .Ministry of Waler. Irriga’KJn arwf Energy
Dafaus rriga!i on Study and Desjg n_Prqjecl____
Table 3. 1 the main seismotectonic area source rones
different seismicity parameters (b-values, activity ra e v<,
Zones
riifftin
Volume III Headwork Geotogical Investigation
Annex VI Sesin* c Hazard Assessment
refined bV DOlygons
_____
rrirp.ii
-
P(mmin)
A( Olin ip)
1 695
1 southern Red Sea"
40
-------- ——---------
77___ ,
_2 (eastern Eritrea 1
4.2
4.0
7«2
5.88
■14.HaUn
127
4 (southwest Yemen}
41
670
5 icenlral-Sijdan;         __ ___ __ _____
4.5
6 ;central Afar) 7 I’GuIf of Aden}
4.U
4
5.50
fi 60
1.33
227
1 59
0.885_ _ 0.181
1.585
7.60
,
1.60
6 Aisha block)
40
6.30
1.43
9 I’Ankober areai
4.0
689
2 14
10 I'Maari Flhlopian Rift'S
41
6 61
1.39
11 ^southwestern Ethiopia
4.3
7.20
1 78
12 (south Sudan i
4.5
7.70
1 12
1.20S
0,540
5.332
0.519
1.318
0,472
0 593
0 B62
13 (Albert nil} ,
43
. 6 50
1 da .
1.144
3.3     Strong Ground Motion Attenuation
Frequency  dependent strong ground motion has  been given by  different workers. The equations  developed by  Joyner, Boore and Fumal rock  site (1993) and Boore Joyner and Fumal soil site (1997) are used in the current evaluation of strong ground motion attenuation. For example the frequency dependent strong ground motion due to Boore Joyner and Fumal (1997) for random horizontal component is given in the form:
LogY = bi + b2(M«- 6) + bn(Mw-6)? + bjr+ bs Log r + bsGa+ bz Gc Eo Where r - (d2 + hJ) Y is the ground motion (velocity or acceleration as % of gravity) Mw  is the  moment  magnitude,  d  is  the  d.stance  in  km  Ga   and  Gc   are  dependent  on  the  type  of faulting whi'e  c,  and e.  relate to the variability of data In this relatton the coefficient M ho
. b7 are frequency dependent and g.ve spectral ground motion for different freXTes
The tectonics in Ethiopia is of the extensions! type and the depth of occurrence nr earthquakes which controls strong ground motion is shallow and similar to that in /fi r In the absence of strong ground motion attenuation data for a reaion th
c a>'fomia.
« 6on rr^t-Bo^oyne.-and
'X,y
of Spudich el al (1996) .alldales the application ol these attenualZTj^ T* extenslonal tectonics as we have in Ethiopia. Earlier in 1976 the r 1005 ° reg'ons with
cap o< Ethiopia (Godin, ,976) wa  prepared us no aXXnT."
s
Un     ted     States.     It     Is     now     Known     that     the     East     Atncao     t£T"tT     WeSter"
earthquakes   of   magnitude   7   and   above.   Different   maximum   and   ™   •   P    °   genora’iri9
used for different source zones as per the fit for the b-value rnrvo displayed in Table 3.1.
ma9n',udes are
particular area which is
-jftw Warks  and
Supervisor1 Enle-fwisc
/• jqusl, 20T5Ministry or Waler, Irrigation And Energy
-JjgjKJ£_lrrigabofi study and Design Projecl
< RESULTS
Voiurne 111
H«dwork Geological Irrigation
Annex VI Ses.mhc Hazard Assessm*"!
Results of the hazard assessment for lhe Dabus Multipurpose dam p™*eC , summarized in Table 4.1, Figures 4.1 5, 4.2 below. The seismic hazard can be
the probability that a ground motion at a specific site Will be exceeded during a ime i e return period, T {years). Alternatively, it is the probability that a ground mo ion wi exceeded with an annual frequency of 1/T.
‘
in general, seismic hazard due to natural earthquakes is, rather haphazardly. the  probability  (hat  a  PGA  will  be  exceeded  in  T-  475  years  (Bommer  and  Pinho,  2 GSHAP.  1999).  An  alternative  interpretation  is  a  10%  probability  that  this  PGA  will  be exceeded in 50 years. For the 0 2 second period and soil site listed in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.2,  for  instance,  for  the  T=100  and  500  years  return  periods  it  can  alternatively  be interpreted as 10% probability of exceeding the PGA values of 0 0550g and 0.0675g once in 10 and 50 years, respectively at the Dabus Multipurpose dam project site.
Table 4, 1 Ground  motion  amplitude in percentage of gravity (%9) r'oeA and soil sites at different periods of motion  and  for different return  periods at the Dabus Multipurpose Dam project site. For the soli site, an  average thickness of 30 meters with shear wav e velocity 310 mis is adopted for all periods considered (Boore et ai.r 1997).
Total Hazard for Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project
UM
3—
■8 1e>4
A
S I o-T -
<3
*        to-B
S' i*-*
S Ir-ID -
£ 1e-11 j
2 10-11
10-13 -
14
D(
n
l!=<i
-= ------ ^=fc--------
.:1—
Xj
=
j—*
ks
0.1
1
Amplitude in
Figure  4.  1  Total  Hazard  for  Dabus  Irrigation  Project  Site
amplitude in g.
tie
The Xaxi» represents
yyg-  WW*SD«  9 '
ar
S,  r BM
7      ----- “ ---------------- — ——,
Supermen Errterprae
A ^gu«t,’5oT£"Minfstry of Water, Imgabnn iM Enorgy uatMJsjrr|jiakjn_stifdyj n dOesign Pr o|ect_
Volume III
Headway Geological Investigation
Annex V!_Sc:«m«; Ha.rn '« Assessment
r
Uniform Hazard Specif a for Dabus Irrigation Siudy and Design Pro] eel
Probability 2.0m 401
SmJtTnn-rwnJ (1 Off) Soil
Figure  4.  2 Uniform  hazard  spectra  where  the  x-axis  represents  period  in seconds and the y-axis is amplitude in fraction of g.
WerWks^.gn and Supervision enterprise
a
August. 2015Mlniitry or Water, Irrigation and Energy 
Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Pfpjsct
5, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Volume III Headwork Geological Investigation
Annex VI Sosimic Hazard Assessment
The PGA values in Table 4.1 Figures 4.1 and 4.2 are relatively low due to the location of the dam site deep into the stable western plateau. Dams  are normally  allocated a hazard category using !he method of ICOLO bulletin 72 which takes into account reservoir capacity, dam height, number of persons  at risk  and potential downstream damage. The important implication here is that the location of the Dabus Multipurpose dam project site is less active rift in earthquake and volcano manifestations.
On the other hand the dam can be affected by distant and damaging earthquakes that can be sourced from the rift margin border faults. Specific  location may  have pre-existing weakness  which needs  onsite surface and subsurface investigations  with multidisciplinary geophysical methods and geotechnical considerations. On the other hand if the dam Site is a fractured zone, which is potentially possible from its location, with no seismicity before it may  be susceptible to-induced seismicity  after the waler load This  needs  monitoring with appropr ale instruments before and after the dam is finalized and Filled with water.
' Water Worts Design and
Supervision Enterprise
9
Augusl, 2015_9lb usjfffaajlon SUid^and Deafen p£ J ec!______________ __________ _____ Annex VlSeafrnj cJHaz ajdAs ses n wit _
Minrsiry of Water. 'rrigalKin and Eneiw
Volume Hi Headwork Geological Investigate"
0
6. LESSONS FROM OTHER DAMS;
1- Kariba
The Kariba dam is  a hydroelectric  dam in the Kariba Gorge of the Zambezi River brisin (28.74778 E and 16.51222 S) A double curvature concrete arch dam it was  constructed between 1955 and 1959 at a cost of 3135m for the first stage with only the Kariba South power cavern Final construction and the addition of the Kariba North Power cavern was not completed Limit 1977 due to largely political problems for a total cost of $40Om. Around 100 workers were killed during construction. Il is one of the largest dams in the world at 600 rn high and 580 m long. The Kariba supplies 1320MW of electricity to parts of both Zambia (the Copper belt) and Zimbabwe (6400GWI1 per annum). Kariba Lake, the reservoir created by the dam. extends for 280 km with a storage capacity of 180 km .
3
The creation of the reservoir forced resettlement of a bo JI 57,000 people living along the Zambezi. In 1960-61. 'Operation Noah1 captured and removed around 6,000 large animals and numerous small ones threatened by the lake's rising waters. Since its construction and filling in. the early 1960s, Kariba has caused numerous earthquakes in the area. 20 of them in excess  of magnilude 5 on the Richter scale. Engineers  and seismologists  are still uncertain as to the reason for these effects but the effects of 180 billion tons of water cannot be avoided More on this  can be read in a report entitled Reservoir-Induced Earthquakes and Engineering Policy.
2. Auburn dam
The polenlial for reservoir-induced seismicity, which is  the triggering qf earthquakes  bv  the physical processes  that accompany  the impoundment of large reservoir was  reconned during the seismic hazard studies for the original Auburn dam It remains an important issu^ for the present project because of the potential to increase the probability  of earthauak-
near the dam
The  reservoir  created  by  the  flood-control-only  dam  is  proposed  to depth of 50S feet (155 m) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1991? L *
Storage dam.wodd create a resewoioviih a maximum water death
These water depths  place the proposed reservoirs) as  did (he r 77
J
r
water
6f >6_feet (200 m).
water   depth   of   the   original   dam,   in   a   worldwide   o|ass     of     reservn,   Ot     {203     Maximum
red)  to  very  deep  (deeper  than  150  m,  492  feet).  Deep  and  ve  h  ' de&P  (6° m- 263
the majority of reported examples of reservoir-induced seismicity reservoirB account for Based  on  analysis  of  55  reported  cases  of  reservoir  • h
geologic and aeismologic data for 16 selected d
""°,UCed a«Wticity worta„lde
WCC (1977) reached two sets of conclusions ah.. . d reservoirs in lire s err„„ < .T 
,
wild Auburn dam as proposed al that time First if the^ oX°'f’'"dl,<:ed “'wnlclty as sod no! to be reservoir induced, then lhe likelihood of , J9?5 O,°uilte earthquake \ ;lalerJ me Oroville event (5.7) or terger is 2% ,0 5 ° T “ M"h^ake oX ma 7“'™ 
Oroville earthquake ts assumed to be resertok 9 ,ha “e '»« dam n2?9™lude °< earthquake ot the magnitude of the OrM e ear)hqX “To %
„
TValcr Works Design Bnd
Supervision Enterprise
1G
® lifetime of the
Augusi, 20i5 'Ministry of Water, Irrigation and t-nergy 0abusIrrigation Study andOesrgnProject
Volume III Headwork Geological Investigation
Annex VI Sesirnic Hazard Assessment
dam We have not been able to reconstruct the basis for these probab lilies ant o endorse them, The specific probabilities of an induced earthquake of M j o 9 associated with an Auburn reservoir are open for revaluabon
Waler Works Design arid Supervision Enterpnse
11Ministry of Water irrigator and Energy 
Dabus Jrngarjon Study and Design -_______ ____
7. DAM-INDUCED SEISMICITY
Volume III Headwork Geological investigation
Annex VI Sesirnic Hazard Assessment
Every dam site has unique geological characteristics Gaining a tho.oug un
these characteristics is expensive and lime-consuming. millions of 0 3^s fT
spent on a geological survey before it finds lhat a site is unsuitable for a am
normal for dams to be designed with only a partial knowledge of toca si e co
bmlders just have to hope that they will not find any unstable formations which will rail
been therefore
support their foundations or cause ihe roofs of their tunnels to come crasf mg
More  than  three-quarters  of  49  projects  assessed  in  a  1990  Wor  d  ^ank hydropower construction costs were found to have experience unexp
-Aninrur -I
problems of some kind. The study concluded lhat for hydradams the absence o g probfems should be treated as the exception rather than the norm
August, 201
’ Water Works Design and
Sjpcrvition Enterprise
12Ministry ©(Water, Irrigation and Energy
Dabus ifrigalion Study and Design Project ______ ________ —---------
8 RESERVOIR-INDUCED SEISMICITY
Volume III Headwork Geological Investigation
Annex VI Scsimlc Hazard Assessment
Il is welt established (although little known by the general public) that large dams tan trigger earthquakes. The first observation of possible reservoir-induced seismicity (RIS) was note for Algeria's Quedd Fodda dam in 1932; the first extensive study of the correlation between increased  earthquake  activity  and  variations  in  reservoir depth was made in the 1940s for Hoover dam. Today there is evidence linking earth tremors and reservoir operation for more than 70 dams Reservoirs are believed to have induced five out of the nine earthquakes on the Indian peninsula in the 19B0s which were strong enough to cause damage.
As with most aspects of seismology, the actual mechanisms of RIS are not well understood, and it is impossible to predict accurately which dams will induce earthquakes or how strong the tremors  are likely  to be. Most of the strongest cases  of RIS have been observed for dams  over 100 metres  high - but dams  just.half these heights  are also believed to have
nduced quakes  Reservoirs  can both increase the frequency  of earthquakes  in areas  of already high seismic activity and cause earthquakes to happen in areas previously thought to be seismically  inactive The latter effect is  the most dangerous  as  structures  in areas thought to be quiescent are not built ta withstand even minor earthquakes. Complicating the picture further are five reservoirs, including Tarbela in Pakistan, where a reduction in local seismic activity was noted after impoundment The most widely accepted explanation of how dams cause earthquakes is related to the extra water pressure created in the microcracks and fissures in the ground under and near a reservoir. When the pressure of the water in the rocks increases, it acts to lubricate faults  which are already  under tectonic  strain, but are prevented from slipping by the friction of the rock surfaces.
For most well-studied cases of RIS. the intensity of seismic activity increased within around 25 kilometres of the reservoir as it was filled The strongest shocks normally occured relatively soon - often within days but sometimes within several years - after the reservoir reached its greatest depth After the initial filling of the reservoir. RIS events normally continued as the water level rose and fell but usually with less frequency and strength than before The pattern of RIS is. however, unique for every reservoir.
The most powerful earthquake thought to have been indu^H k, ^Tremor wfiich fattened the Vlli^e of KoyHanagTrTi
— 3 ma9nit“de
December. >967 «„g around ,80
X™ > 500 T WeS,e"’T™*. °‘"~1---------------------------------
homeless. The dam was seriously damaged and power cut off tn rendenn9 thousands 
among its populace, who were able Io feel the quake 230 kilom ° B°mbay- losing panic 
epicenter of the tremor and numerous fore- and aftershocks uwT dam or under its reservoir.
its ^center The re a11 either near the Koyna
RIS is suspected to have contributed to one of the world1 o rer>opp.ng of Vatenl dam in the Italian Alps |„ 1963 T * ™ ' °
8    Bod|
(parti, highest dam - was completed |„ 19B0             . ||m
’
y aa"> disaster. the
Vi >lc,ot _ the ’
«
As  soon  as  lhe  resersorr  started  to  m,.
se smic
|
5hocks    OOTge  al  the  base
0(
Moun,
5
,oc» debns on the s.de of the mountain started to SMo towaX ma.,mum depth of 130 meters in late 196O. the rGS
a mass « unstebto
d J*” reBervoir. After ,eachina !
Partially rtrarnen
Waler Works Design and Supervision Enterprise
13
A ^ust,2ai5'Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy —Study and Desrgr* Project
Volume II* Headwork Geological Investigation
Annex Vi SwmjcH azard Assessment
seismic  activity  and slope movement almost slopped. The reservoir was  then filled again, provoking a new increase in tremors  Despite Lhe tremors, engineers  and geologists, according to a later engineering report, decided "that the mass would keep moving so slowly that no problems would occur.”
The experts were wrong Heavy late summer rains in 1963 swe'led the reservoir In I he first half of September, 60 shocks were registered and the movement on Mount Toe started to accelerate. On the night of 9 October, 350 million cubic meters of rock broke off Mount Toe and plunged into the reservoir The gargantuan wave resulting from the impact overtopped the dam by  110 metres  - the height of a 2&-storey  building. About two minutes  later the downstream town of Long a rone was levelled and almost all its inhabitants killed. Altogether 2,600 people died
The actual relationship between lhe seismic activity and the landslide is not certain, but it is likely that the numerous shocks al the very leas! hastened the collapse of lhe mountainside.
Leonardo Seeber, a seismologist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University.  New  York,  believes  that  official  maps  which  show  the  area’s  most  at  risk  of earthquakes  should  also  indicate  the  increased  risk  near  many  reservoirs.  If  this  were  to happen,    communities    near    reservoirs    could    presumably    demand    compensation    to ''earthquake-proof  buildings,  greatly  increasing  the  cost  of  dams.  The  dam  industry  would probably   strongly   oppose   any   such   measures   which   would   raise   awareness   of   RIS. Seismologist Harsh Gupta, Vice Chancellor of Cochin University in India and a professor at the University of Texas, notes a ’'general reluctance in parts of lhe engineering community, worldwide, to accept the significance or even the existence of the phenomenon of reservoir— induced   seismicity.1’"Action   in   the   courts   could   force   the   dam   industry   to   accept   the importance  of  RIS:  a  1994  article  in  the  Joumaf  of  Environment/  Law  and  Lrt/gafron concluded that people who suffer from induced quakes would have grounds under US law to sue the operators of a reservoir
Waler wixks Design and
SUPefV,54On Enterprise
14
August 201s--- -----
Ministry of Waler Irrigalton and Energy Dabus Irrigation SUidy and Design Project
Volume III Headwork Geological Investigation
Annex VI Sesarwc Hazard Mses&rncnL
9- references
1      Asfaw. L. & Ayele, A. 2004. Report of the Dcb> Graben Earthquake Swarm of Au just 1989. Proceedings of the Fourth EGMEA (Ethiopian Geosciences & Mineral Engineering Association) Congress, December 19-21,2C03, Addis Ababa.
2     Bastow. I D., A. A Nyblade. G W. Stuart, T. O Rooney, and M. H Benoit (2008).
3   Upper mantle seismic structure beneath the Ethiopian Hot spot. Rifting at the edge u.
the African law-velocity anomaly, Geochem. Geophys. Geos yst , 9, Q12022,
dor 10 1029/2008GC002107
4.    Benoit,  M  H  .  A  A  Nybiadc,  and  J.  C  VanDecar  (2006a).  Upper  mantle  P  wave speed  variations  beneath  Ethiopia  and  [tie  origin  of  the  Afar  hotspot.  Geology.  34, 329-332,doi10 113O/G22201.1
5.   Scare. D.M , W.B. Joyner and I ,E Fumai, 1993. Estimation of response and peak accelerationsfrom Western North American Earthquakes. An intemm Report, U S Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-509,72p
6.    Boore,  D  M.,  Joyner,  W.  B.,  and  T.  E  Fumai,  1997,  Equations  for  estimating horizontal  response  spectra  and  peak  acceleration  from  western  North  American earthquakes: A summary of recent work, Seism. Res, Letters, v. 68. p. 128-153
7.   Bommer, J.J. and R. Pinho, 2006. Adapting earthquake actions in Eurocode-8 for performance based seismic design. Earthquake Engmeeiing & Structural Dynamics,
35, 29-55
8.  Cornett. C A. ,1968. Engineering seismic risk analysis, Bulletin of Seismological
Society of America, Vol. 58,5,1583-1606
9.  Giardini D, 1999 The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program, ILP Publication Annali Di Geofisica, Vol 42, 6
!0. Gouin, P. 1976. Seismic Zoning in Ethiopia. Bull of Geophysical ObserVatorv numhor 16GSHAP, 1999 The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP'i igqo 1999  Ann  Geofis  42(6).Gutenberg,  B.,  and  Richter,  Q.F„  1954.  Seismicity  of  thP earth and associated phenomena. Princeton University Press Princeton NJ 31 o
11 Ketr, D,, Ebinger, C.J., Stuart. G.W., Daly, E. & Ayele accommodation by magmatism and faulting as rifting proceeds to of the northern Ethiopian rift, j geophys Res
doi:10.1029/20Q5JB003748
A-,    2006a.    Strain breakup: seismicity
H1(B5) B05314
12, Maguire, R K. 1976 ■Computer program (or sersmie risk analysts." US Geological
Water Works Design and Supervision Eftterprtee
August, 2015M
._
ni&tr        y        of        Water.        If        fixation        and        Energy        .
Headwork Geological
Volume lH lnvesti{pt,on
q            imjc
Hazard
Assessment
Dabus Irrigation Study and Design Project--------------
---  ----------------------- n
----- -----------—------
Survey Open- File Report 76-67, 90 p Maguire, R.K 1995
hazard analysis and design earthquakes. Closing the loop, j- ’
-
1284,Musson, R M W. 1996 Wizmapll. Rritish Geological Survey n erna
13 Risk Engineering, Inc 1987 Seismic hazard methodology for
United States Vol 1 Methodology, Elec. Power Res Inst Rep NP-472^CCMP. Vol. 1. April.Spudich, P. el. ale 1996 Earthquake ground motion tn ex tectonic regimes, U S Geological Survey Open file Report 96-292.
'
CCMP
Wafer Works Design and Sup&rvisian Enterprise
August. 20i5

Summery

Dabus Irrigation Project - Geological and Geotechnical Investigation Summary

Dabus Irrigation Development Feasibility Study - Geological and Geotechnical Investigation Summary

1. Project Overview

The Dabus Irrigation Development Feasibility Study and Detailed Design Project was conducted by the Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise (WWDSE) for the Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy (MoWIE) of Ethiopia. This report (Volume III, Part I) focuses on the geological and geotechnical investigation for the head works.

2. Project Location

The project is located in Benshangui Gumuz Regional State (Asosa Zone) in Ethiopia, approximately 55km northeast of Asosa. The headwork site is near Fudindu, with planned irrigation land of about 10,000 hectares.

3. Key Findings

3.1 Geological Setting

The project area is underlain by Precambrian basement rocks including:

Meta-granite (dominant rock type at dam site)
Pegmatite veins
Alluvial and residual deposits

3.2 Dam Foundation Conditions

Location	Description	Depth (m)
Left Abutment	Highly to completely weathered granite under residual soil	Up to 15m
Riverbed/Channel	2.5m alluvial sand/silt over fresh granite	2.5m
Right Abutment	Fresh to slightly weathered granite outcrops	Variable

3.3 Geotechnical Properties

Bearing Capacity:

Weathered materials: 200-500 kPa
Fresh granite: 11-13 MPa (with safety factor of 3)

Permeability:

Alluvial/residual soils: Impervious
Rock foundation: 0-11 Lugeon (dam site), higher at spillway

3.4 Seismic Hazard

The site is in a stable seismic zone with recommended horizontal acceleration of 0.1g for design.

4. Construction Materials

4.1 Clay Core Materials

Borrow Area	Characteristics	Suitability
Clay Borrow-1	Dark brown, high plasticity, expansive	Not recommended
Clay Borrow-2	Reddish brown, low plasticity	Suitable (limited quantity)
Clay Borrow-3	Reddish brown, low plasticity	Recommended (best option)

4.2 Other Materials

Shell Material: Not free-draining, not recommended
Rockfill: Available from spillway excavation and nearby quarries
Sand: Available from Shaga and Mana Rivers
Aggregates: Can be produced from local granite

5. Key Recommendations

Remove all unconsolidated deposits (3-5m general excavation, up to 15m for cutoff)
Implement curtain grouting (maximum depth 18m) for water tightness
Use clay from Borrow Area 3 for impervious core
Utilize rock from spillway excavation for rockfill
Conduct trial embankments before main construction
Implement controlled blasting for spillway excavation

6. Conclusion

The investigation revealed suitable foundation conditions for the dam construction, with fresh granite providing adequate bearing capacity at depth. Appropriate construction materials are available within economic distances, though some materials (particularly shell material) require careful selection and processing. The recommendations provided address all major geotechnical considerations for safe and effective project implementation.