Page 1 of 4
EMP
For The Proposed Residential Project
“Attur Century Star”
Environment Management Plan The Environment Management Plan would consist of all mitigation measures for each item wise
activity to be undertaken during the construction, operation and the entire life cycle to minimize
adverse environmental impacts as a result of the activities of the project. It would also delineate
the environmental monitoring plan for compliance of various environmental regulations. It will
state the steps to be taken in case of emergency such as accidents at the site including fire.
DURING CONSTRUCTION PHASE Air Management
- Dust arising during construction will be mitigated by water spraying to prevent dust during construction rising into atmosphere.
- Use of ready mix concrete will be maximized so as to minimize the quantity of cement
dust due to on-site mixing.
- Vehicles maintained in proper conditions will be used to minimize the noise and emission
pollution.
- Construction area will be covered.
- Vehicles bringing construction materials will be covered.
- Budgetary allocation will be earmarked towards Air Management is Rs.1.05 Lakhs/A
Page 2 of 4
Water Management
- 19KLD is the water demand. (15 KLD for construction & 04 KLD potable water for domestic requirement).
- 15 KLD will be sourced from BWSSB TTP / Onsite Mobile STP and 04 KLD will be sourced
from Tankers.
- Sufficient number of toilets will be provided in the site.
- Waste water generated from the site will be treated in mobile STP. Treated water from mobile
STP will be reused for dust suppression.
- Run off from the construction activities will be contained within the project site to avoid flooding. - Budgetary allocation will be earmarked towards Water Management including site sanitation is
Rs.54 Lakhs/A
Noise Management Noise generation during construction phase will have minimal adverse impact and the gestation
period is short.
The main source of noise pollution, which is short term, is from the construction activity during the
project due to movement of vehicle carrying construction materials and other equipments used for construction. This will be properly managed by regulating the vehicular traffic, using well serviced
vehicles and construction equipments.
Solid Waste Management Excavated earth : 58070 CUM Reused at site for Backfilling : 23288 CUM for Landsape : 9291.20 CUM for Roads & walkways : 13356.10 CUM Site Formation : 13356.10 CUM. Soil will not be carted away from site.
DURING OPERATIONAL PHASE
Air Management
The main source of Air pollution is flue gas from Gensets, which constitutes SOx, NOx and SPM.
Gen-sets of 2 nos x 320 KVA are proposed.
Page 3 of 4
Chimney (height as per KSPCB Consent) is proposed to be installed to reduce the impact
on air environment.
CNG & diesel having low sulphur content (0.05%) will be used as a fuel to Gen-sets.
Flue gas monitoring will be carried out to ensure that the emissions are within the KSPCB
standards.
Water Management
296 KLD Water will be sourced from BWSSB.
Waste water generated from the proposed project will be treated in onsite STP.
90 KLD towards flushing and 123 KLD for landscape purpose.
Separate pipelines are proposed for raw water and treated water. Dual piping plumbing
system is proposed. Treated wastewater from the sewage treatment plant will be analyzed
for its quality as per KSPCB standards.
Budgetary capital cost towards STP installation will be Rs.31.67 Lakhs and Rs. 7.2 lakhs /year towards O&M is proposed.
22 CUM of terrace water will be harvested.
4 nos of percolation pits will be provided to percolate 58 CUM of surface runoff rain water.
Implementation cost planned is Rs.1.12 Lakhs.
Noise Management
Major noise producing sources are expected to be Gen-sets.
Gen-sets will be provided with acoustic enclosures to control the noise levels in such a way that the noise levels are within the permissible limits specified for ambient noise
levels.
The Gen-sets will be operated only during the emergencies when there is power failure.
Solid Waste Management Total occupancy will be 1995 nos.
539 kgs/day of Organic waste will be treated in onsite OWC and balance 359 kgs/day of Inorganic
waste will be disposed to Vendors /Re-Cyclers.
Budgetary allocation will be made towards solid waste management is Rs.4.5 Lakhs and Rs.0.3
Lakhs/year towards O&M cost.
Traffic Management
Sufficient parking is proposed as per the by-laws.
438 nos of Car parking provision are proposed .
Page 4 of 4
Study on Present level of traffic and the proposed increase in the traffic due to the
proposed project is done by external Traffic Consultant.
Recommendations given by them will be implemented.
Greenbelt development 20991.62 Sq Mtrs ( 33 %) of greenbelt is proposed on natural ground with 266 trees in native
species in the proposed project site. EMP Monitoring
Treated water from STP will be analyzed periodically.
Flue gas from Gen sets will be monitored periodically as specified by KSPCB.
Compliance report will be submitted as per the consent conditions.
EMP will be reviewed periodically.
Solid waste disposal will be done scientifically.
G(B)8676
1
G(B)8676 -GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS REPORT for
proposed Group Housing Complex, at Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
M/s Century Group propose to construct Multistoried Buildings for a Group Housing Complex,
at Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore.
The proposed Multistoried Buildings will be RCC Framed Structures, and will have ground floor
(stilts) and four upper floors
Soil investigations programme has been undertaken at the site, as per the scope of investigations,
stipulated by the Client. The scope of work consisted of 10 bore holes of 6.0m depth, in soil
strata.
The bore hole investigations indicate the presence of top surface layers of brown, clayey silty
sand to silty clayey sand, underlain by strata of grey, bluish grey with yellow, and grey with
brown, silty clayey sand. These top surface layers extend down to about 2.50m depth below
present ground level. Thereafter, the subsoil encountered is bluish grey with yellowish brown,
to yellowish brown with grey, silty clayey sand to silty sandy clay. These lower strata extend
down to 6.0m depth, at which level, the bore holes were terminated, as per scope of work.
The N-values (N : 17 - 27) indicates that the subsoil encountered at the site is generally medium
dense down to about 3.0m depth below present ground level. Below this level, the subsoil
encountered is medium dense to dense (N : 20- 49). However, the high N-values recorded in the
lower depths are due to the apparent hardness of the subsoil in its dry and desiccated state.
Ground water table was not encountered in any of the bore holes, at the time of investigations,
which was carried out in the month of November, 2009.
Considering the type of structure involved, and the subsoil characteristics as determined from the
subsoil investigations, Shallow Foundations have been recommended at a minimum depth of
1.50m below Top of Natural Ground Level. A Net Allowable Bearing Pressure value of
1.40kg/cm2 have been recommended for design of foundations, for a permissible settlement of
40mm.
G(B)8676
2
REPORT ON SOIL INVESTIGATIONS FOR PROPOSED
MULTISTORIED BUILDINGS, FOR GROUP HOUSING COMPLEX, AT ATTUR,
YELAHANKA, BANGALORE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 M/s Century Group propose to construct Multistoried Buildings for a Group Housing
Complex, at Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore.
1.2 Detailed soil investigations, comprising of 10 bore holes and various laboratory tests,
have been carried out, in order to get relevant subsoil data required for design of
foundations, of the proposed Multistoried Building. This report presents the results and
analysis of these investigations, and includes recommendations for design of foundations
of the proposed Multistoried Buildings.
2.0 AUTHORITY
2.1 The Soil Investigations for the proposed Group Housing Complex, at Attur, Yelahanka,
Bangalore, has been carried out on the Authority of Work Order No : AP/WO/2009-
10/003 dated 20th October, 2009, issued by M/s Century Group, No.36, St Marks Road,
Bangalore 560 001.
3.0 OBJECT & SCOPE OF WORK
3.1 The object of the soil investigations programme has been to gain sufficient data regarding
physical and engineering properties of subsoil, required for evaluating allowable bearing
pressure on foundations of the proposed Multistoried Building.
3.2 The scope of work, as specified by the Client, included the following :
a) Sinking 10 bore holes to a minimum depth of 6.0m, or refusal strata, whichever
is encountered earlier
b) Conducting field investigations and relevant laboratory tests, on soil samples
collected from the bore holes.
c) Preparing a detailed report, giving recommendations for design of foundation of
the proposed Multistoried Buildings.
4.0 PROJECT DETAILS
G(B)8676
3
4.1 The Site
4.1.1 The site for the proposed Group Housing Complex is located in Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc,
Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore. The site is having a gentle slope. The site is located
on the downstream side of an irrigation tank. The site was formerly agricultural land. The
site is about 3.0m to 4.0m below the Tank Bund Road.
4.1.2 High tension power lines are located on the northern and southern boundary of the plot.
There are few wells in the site.
4.2 The Structures
4.2.1 The proposed Multistoried Buildings will be RCC Framed Structures, and will have
ground floor (stilts) and four upper floors.
4.3 Weather Conditions
4.3.1 Weather was bright and sunny, at the time of investigations
4.4 Seismic Zone
4.4.1 The site for the proposed Group Housing Complex is located at Attur, Yelahanka,
Bangalore, which comes under Seismic Zone II, as per IS 1893 (Part 1) - 2002.
5.0 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
5.1 Preliminary Details
5.1.1 10 bore holes were sunk to study the subsoil conditions of the site. The bore holes were
progressed using hand operated auger. The bore holes have been designated as BH-1 to
BH-10, in this report.
5.1.2 The field investigations were carried out from 31st October to 5th November, 2009.
5.1.3 All the bore holes were progressed to 6.0m depth, and the boring was terminated, as per
scope of work.
5.2 Standard Penetration Tests
5.2.1 Standard Penetration Tests were conducted at various depths of the bore holes to
determine N-values, and thereby, the relative density / stiffness of the subsoil is evaluated.
5.3 Sampling
5.3.1 Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were collected from various depths of the bore
holes, for conducting relevant laboratory tests. Undisturbed soil samples were collected
using thin walled shelby tubes. The disturbed soil samples were collected in polythene
bags and labeled.
5.4 Site Plan
5.4.1 The site plan with location of bore holes, are given in figure no 1.
G(B)8676
4
5.5 LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
5.5.1 The soil samples brought to the laboratory were tested, to evaluate the following
properties:
a) Type of soil and its gradation
b) Consistency limits
c) Natural Density
d) Natural Water Content
e) Shear Strength Properties
f) Deleterious Chemicals.
5.5.2 In order to determine the above properties, the following tests have been conducted:
a) Sieve analysis and Hydrometer analysis
b) Liquid and plastic limits
c) Natural Density and Water Content Tests
d) Triaxial Shear Tests
e) Unconfined Compressive Strength Tests
f) Chemical Analysis of Soil Samples.
6.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF INVESTIGATIONS
6.1 Bore Holes
6.1.1 The results of field investigations conducted in the bore holes, and laboratory tests
conducted on the soil samples collected from the bore holes, have been presented, in the
form of soil profile tables.
6.1.2 The soil profile tables (Table Nos. 1 to 10) give the details of the soil strata including their
classification, and strength properties, as ascertained from the tests conducted.
6.1.3 The soil profile tables include the following :
a) Standard Penetration Test Values (i.e N-values observed) at various depths
b) Soil description, identifying the type of soil
c) Grain size analysis, indicating composition of subsoil
d) Consistency limits
e) Natural Bulk Density and Water Content
f) Triaxial Shear Test results.
6.2 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
6.2.1 Soil Profile
6.2.2 10 bore holes were sunk to study the subsoil conditions of the site.
G(B)8676
5
6.2.3 The bore hole investigations indicate the presence of top surface layers of brown, clayey
silty sand to silty clayey sand, underlain by strata of grey, bluish grey with yellow, and
grey with brown, silty clayey sand. These top surface layers extend down to about 2.50m
depth below present ground level. Thereafter, the subsoil encountered is bluish grey with
yellowish brown, to yellowish brown with grey, silty clayey sand to silty sandy clay.
These lower strata extend down to 6.0m depth, at which level, the bore holes were
terminated, as per scope of work.
6.2.4 The results of field investigations and laboratory tests, and the details of each strata i.e.
its thickness, classification, soil type, percentage of each fraction (namely – gravel, sand,
silt and clay) present in the subsoil, can be had from compiled soil profile figure no.2, and
in individual soil profile figure nos 3 to 7 , and table nos 1 to 10. The Grain Size Analysis
curves are given in figure nos. 8 to 13.
6.3 N-values
6.3.1 Standard Penetration Tests were conducted at various depths of each bore hole, to
determine N-values. The N-values are also presented in table nos.1 to 10, in compiled soil
profile figure no.2, and in individual soil profile figure nos 3 to 7.
6.3.2 The N-values (N : 17 - 27) indicates that the subsoil encountered at the site is generally
medium dense down to about 3.0m depth below present ground level. Below this level,
the subsoil encountered is medium dense to dense (N : 20- 49). However, the high N-
values recorded in the lower depths are due to the apparent hardness of the subsoil in its
dry and desiccated state.
6.3.3 The curve showing N-values (observed) vs depth is given in Fig nos 14 and 15.
6.4 Consistency Limits (Refer Table nos 1 to 10)
6.4.1 The liquid limit of the subsoil ranges between 24 % and 55 %, and the plastic limit varies
from 13 % to 27 %. Subsoil samples containing low percentage of fines, or mica, did not
exhibit any plastic limit.
6.5 Natural Bulk Density & Natural Water Content (Refer Table nos. 1 to 10)
6.5.1 The Natural Bulk Density of the subsoil ranges between 1.94 g/cm3 and 2.05g/cm3, and
the Natural Water Content varies between 12.1 % and 28.2 %.
6.6 Tri-axial Shear Tests (Refer Table nos. 1 to 10)
G(B)8676
6
6.6.1 Tri-axial shear tests were conducted on the soil samples, collected from the bore hole.
The angle of shearing resistance (Ø), determined from tri-axial shear tests, ranges
between 15 0 and 29 0. The Cohesion (C) values of the subsoil vary between
0.15kg/cm2 and 0.50 kg/cm2.
6.7 Unconfined Compression Tests (Refer Table No.11)
6.7.1 The Unconfined Compressive Strength of the subsoil ranges from 1.37 kg/cm2 to
1.71kg/cm2 .
6.8 Specific Gravity Test (Refer Table No.15)
6.8.1 The Specific Gravity of the subsoil determined from representative soil samples ranges
from 2.59 to 2.63.
6.9 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL SAMPLES (Refer Table No. 11)
6.9.1 Chemical Analysis of representative soil samples was carried out. The results of the
chemical analysis of the soil samples indicate that the pH of the subsoil ranges between
6.7 and 7.3 . The Chloride content (cl) of the subsoil ranges from 0.011 % to 0.036 %,
and the Sulphate (SO3) content ranges from 0.024 % to 0.060 %.
6.9.2 The results indicate that the pH, Chloride and Sulphate content in the soil samples are
within permissible limits. Hence, no special precaution need be taken against chemical
action on concrete in foundation. (Ref. Foundations Design and Construction by M.J
Tomlin son, pg, 758 and IS 456).
6.10 Water Table
6.10.1 The water table was not encountered in any of the bore holes, at the time of
investigations. However, as the site is located on the downstream side of an irrigation
tank, water table can be expected during rainy seasons. The observations were made in
the month of November, 2009.
7.0 DESIGN CRITERIA AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Type of Foundations
7.1.1 The type of foundations for any structure, depends upon the subsoil conditions, as well
as, the loading intensity.
7.1.2 The subsoil encountered at average founding levels is medium dense, and is further
G(B)8676
7
underlain by medium dense to dense strata, respectively. Hence, the load of the
superstructure can be supported on Shallow Foundations. The Shallow Foundations may
be Isolated or Combined Footings, depending upon the column loads, their spacing, and
configuration.
7.2 Depth of Foundations
7.2.1 The depth at which the foundations of the proposed buildings should be laid, will be
governed by the following criteria :
a) Foundation should be below top weak zone or “filled-up” soil, which is generally
filled with root holes and other cavities
b) Depth of top weak zone / “filled-up” soil
c) Securing of adequate bearing capacity
d) Requirement of structure.
7.2.2 Hence, based on the criteria given above, the minimum depth of foundations
recommended is 1.50m below Top of Natural Ground Level.
7.2.3 Note : The site is having a slope and hence, site leveling and grading will be carried out.
Therefore, in areas where filling is carried out, the foundations must be taken to a
minimum depth of 1.50m depth below Top of Natural Ground Level.
7.3 Allowable Bearing Pressure
7.3.1 Taking into consideration the data of the bore holes, the allowable bearing pressure on
foundations has been evaluated based on the following criteria:
a) Shear failure criterion
b) Settlement criterion
i From N-values
ii From elastic modulus determined from tri-axial shear tests.
7.3.2 Note :
a) The Water Table was not encountered in any of the bore holes. However, as the
site is located on the downstream site of an irrigation tank, as a measure of
abundant precaution, Full Submergence has been assumed. Hence, the Reduction
Factor for Water Table R’w = 0.50, has been applied, while calculating Safe
Bearing Capacity, based on Shear Failure Criterion. For calculation of Overburden
G(B)8676
8
Pressure, Submerged Density has been considered.
b) For calculations based on settlement criterion, the permissible total settlement has
been taken to 40mm.
c) Average Soil Parameters :
i Cohesion : 0.30kg/cm2
ii Angle of Shearing Resistance : 220
iii Bulk Density of Virgin Soil : 2.00g/cm3
7.3.3 Based on the above criteria, the allowable bearing pressure recommended for design
of foundations, resting at a minimum depth of 1.50m below Top of Natural Ground
Level, is given in the following table (Refer Appendix -A for sample calculations) :
Depth below Top ofNatural Ground Level
Allowable Bearing Pressure (kg/cm2) for Width of Foundations(cm)
150 300 & above
1.50m 1.40 1.40
7.4 Precautions
7.4.1 Loose pockets of soil, wherever encountered, should be completely removed and backfilled
with well compacted earth. A 15cm thick layer of 40-50mm size gravel should be laid and
rammed into the backfilled earth. A layer of sand should be placed and compacted in order
to fill the voids. A leveling course of lean concrete can then be laid over the gravel, and
construction of foundations can be taken up subsequently.
7.4.2 The site is having a slope. Hence, site leveling and grading will be carried out. Therefore,
in areas, where filling is carried out, the foundations must be taken to the specified
minimum depth of 1.50m depth below Top of Natural Ground Level.
7.5 Special Note
7.5.1 Wherever localised loose pockets of soil are encountered, it will be necessary to increase
the depth of foundations.
7.6 LIMITATIONS
7.6.1 The recommendations given in the report are based on the results of bore hole
investigations at 10 locations, as specified by the Client. In case there is any substantial
variation in the substrata conditions, from those encountered at the bore hole locations,
G(B)8676
9
additional investigations may be carried out, if necessary.
8.0 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS
8.1 Principle
8.1.1 Reliability analysis is the analysis of the degree of variability of all the data collected
during the detailed geotechnical investigations and thereafter considered for providing the
recommendations and consequently, the reliability or in other words the degree of risk
involved in adopting the recommendations.
8.1.2 The reliability analysis of any geotechnical investigations involves the assessment of
degree of variability of :
a) In-situ densities determined from various undisturbed samples collected from
various depths in different boreholes, during the investigations
b) N-values or Standard Penetration Test values recorded at various depths in
different boreholes
c) Settlements due to imposed loads determined by considering the results of tests
conducted in each individual boreholes.
8.2 Reliability Analysis of In-situ Density
8.2.1 The coefficient of variation in the measured in-situ dry densities at various depths in all the
boreholes ranges from 0.3% to 4.6% with an average of about 1.9%.
8.2.2 This is well within the typical value of coefficient of variation of about 5% (and maximum
of 7%) as per general state of practice and hence, is acceptable.
8.3 Reliability Analysis of N-values
8.3.1 The coefficient of variation in the observed N-values at various depths in all the boreholes
varies from 14.0% to 16.8% with an average of about 15.1%.
8.3.2 This is well within the typical value of coefficient of variation of about 30% (and
maximum of 45%) as per general state of practice and hence, is acceptable.
8.4 Reliability Analysis of Settlement (from N-values)
8.4.1 The Coefficient of Variation of settlement of foundations determined based on N-values
observed in each individual borehole has been determined to vary from 10.2% to 11.1%
for different widths of foundations giving an average coefficient of variation of about
10.7%.
G(B)8676
10
8.4.2 Considering an allowable differential settlement of 20mm, the acceptable maximum
settlement of any foundation will be the mean allowable total settlement + 10mm.
8.4.3 In carrying out the reliability analysis, a factor of safety of 3 has been considered for the
case when the settlement of foundations is equal to the mean allowable total settlement and
the factor of safety is considered to reduce to 1 when the settlement is mean allowable total
settlement ± 10mm.
8.4.4 Accordingly, the standard deviation and coefficient of variation of the factor of safety has
been determined corresponding to the assessed values of the same for the settlement of the
foundations.
8.4.5 Based on the above mean targeted value of factor of safety of 3 and the coefficient of
variation of the factor of safety determined along the lines given above, the reliability
analysis has shown that the reliability index ‘����’ varies from 5.9 for larger widths of
foundations to 8.0 for the smaller widths of foundations giving an average reliability index
of 6.9.
8.4.6 A reliability index of 3.4 indicates that the probability of the factor of safety of settlements
of the foundations falling below 1, is Nil.
9.0 REFERENCES
9.1.1 A list of IS Codes referred for providing the recommendations, and that which might be
required to implement the same has been given in Appendix-B.
M. PRIYAKUMAR
for NAGADI CONSULTANTS PVT LTD
Appendix - A
ANALYSIS FOR ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURE
Data
(i) Soil Properties :
c = 0.30 kg/cm2 � = 22 0 �b = 2.00 g/cm3
(ii) Depth of Foundation, D = 1.50m below Top of Natural Ground Level
(iii) Allowable Settlement, s = 40mm
G(B)8676
11
( )q 13
23
c N p N 1 0.5 B N Rs c'
q' '
w'= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ + ⋅ − + ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅�
��
���γ γ
qs E
0.7 Hsa = ⋅⋅
Shear Failure Criterion (Ref. IS : 6403)
Nc' = 13.93 Nq' = 5.88 N�' = 4.89 Rw' = 0.50 p =�sub.d = 0.15 kg/cm2
B (cm) 150 300
qs (kg/cm2) 1.30 1.42
Settlement Criterion (Ref. IS : 8009)- Allowable Settlement, s = 40mm, Rw' =0.50
(i) From N :values
B (cm) 150 300
Hs (cm)
300 600
Nav
25 25
qa (kg/cm2) 2.19 1.84
(ii) From Triaxial Compression Tests :
s (mm) 40 40
B (cm) 150 300
Hs (cm) 300 600
E (kg/cm2) 75 150
qa (kg/cm2) 1.43 1.43
ADOPTB (cm) 150 300 & above
q (kg/cm2) 1.40 1.40
Note : qs and qa are NET VALUES, Weight of backfill etc. need not be added to the loadingexcept in case of filling above original G.L
Appendix - B
LIST OF IS CODES
Field Investigation
1. IS : 1498 - 1970 : Classification and identification of soils for general engineering
purposes (First Revision) (Amendment 2)
2. IS : 1888 - 1982 : Method of load test on soil (Second revision)
G(B)8676
12
3. IS : 1892 - 1979 : Code of practice for sub surface investigations for foundations
(First revision)
4. IS : 2131 - 1981 : Method of Standard Penetration Tests for soils (First revision)
5. IS : 2132 - 1986 : Code of practice for thin walled tube sampling of soils (Second
revision)
6. IS : 3043 - 1966 : Code of practice for earthing (Third reprint) January 1979.
Laboratory Tests
1. IS : 2720 - 1983 (Part 1) : Methods of test for soils: Preparation of dry soil samples for
various tests (Second revision)
2. IS : 2720 - 1980 (Part 2) : Method of test for soils: Determination of water content
(Second revision) Amendment 1
3. IS : 2720 - 1980 (Part 3/Sec 1) : Method of test for soils : Determination of Specific
Gravity : Fine grained soils. (First revision)
4. IS : 2720 - 1980 (Part 3/Sec 2) : Method of test for soils : Determination of Specific
Gravity : Fine, Medium & Coarse grained soils.
(First revision).
5. IS : 2720 - 1985 (Part 4) : Method of test for soils : Grain size analysis (Second
revision)
6. IS : 2720 - 1985 (Part 5) : Method of test for soils : Determination of liquid and
plastic limit (Second revision)
7. IS : 2720 - 1977 (Part 40) : Methods of tests for soils: Determination of free swell
index of soils
8. IS : 2720 - 1977 (Part 41) : Methods of tests for soils : Determination of swelling
pressure of soils.
Foundation Construction
1. IS : 1080 - 1986 : Code of practice for design and construction of shallow foundations
on soils (other than raft, ring and shell) (Second revision)
2. IS : 1904 - 1986 : Code of practice for design and construction of foundation in soils:
General requirements (Third revision)
3. IS 6403 - 1981 : Code of practice for determination of bearing capacity of shallow
G(B)8676
13
foundations : First revision (Amendment 1)
4. IS 8009 - 1976 (Part 1) : Code of practice for calculation of settlements of
foundations : Shallow foundations subject to symmetrical
static vertical loads (Amendment 2)
5. IS 1893 - 1984 : Criteria for Earthquake resistant design of structures (Fourth
revision).
1
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 1
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
25
40
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Grey silty clayey sand
Light bluish grey with yellowish brown siltyclayey sand with traces of gravel
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Yellow with grey and red silty clayey sand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
3
0
45
42
66
16
19
12
39
36
22
46
-
24
21
-
13
2.01
2.05
15.6
17.0
CD
CD
0.40
0.30
17
24
2
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 2
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
17
27
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Bluish grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Brownish yellow with grey silty clayey sand
Brownish yellow with grey and red silty clayeysand
Brownish yellow with grey and red silty clayeysand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
42
46
21
22
37
32
44
41
23
20
1.98
1.96
13.6
12.5
CD
CD
0.35
0.25
22
25
3
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 3
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
37
45
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Grey silty sandy clay
Brownish yellow with grey silty clayey sandwith gravel
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
5
0
30
62
66
22
12
14
48
21
20
55
-
27
27
-
15
2.00
2.00
25.3
15.2
CD
CD
0.45
0.20
17
27
4
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 4
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
24
37
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Grey silty clayey sand
Grey with brown silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
0
63
72
54
15
12
19
22
16
27
-
-
35
-
-
16
1.98
1.99
12.5
14.1
CD
CD
0.15
0.20
27
26
5
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 5
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
34
46
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Light grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Grey with yellowish brown silty clayey sand
Grey with yellowish brown silty clayey sand
Brownish yellow with light bluish grey siltyclayey sand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
65
68
15
13
20
19
26
-
13
-
2.03
1.96
16.8
12.1
CD
CD
0.20
0.20
24
28
6
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 6
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
25
48
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown silty clayey sand
Dark grey with brown silty clayey sand
Greyish brown silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Dark yellow with light bluish grey silty clayeysand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
0
0
55
62
62
55
20
16
15
21
25
22
23
24
34
-
-
31
18
-
-
16
1.99
1.97
14.4
13.1
CD
CD
0.25
0.30
24
24
7
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 7
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
24
46
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground
Brown clayey silty sand
Dark grey silty sandy clay
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with light grey silty clayeysand
Yellowish brown with light grey silty gravellyclayey sand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
18
35
45
44
17
18
15
48
37
23
55
-
28
23
-
15
1.94
2.01
28.2
16.3
CD
CD
0.50
0.35
15
22
8
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 8
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
27
49
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Dark grey with brown silty clayey sand
Light bluish grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with light bluish grey siltysandy clay
Yellowish brown with light bluish grey siltysandy clay
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
0
37
45
38
26
20
13
37
35
49
-
42
54
-
22
25
2.02
2.00
20.0
17.4
CD
CD
0.40
0.45
40
18
9
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 9
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
20
32
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Dark bluish grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Light grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
0
57
47
48
17
25
24
26
28
28
32
-
38
15
-
17
2.02
2.03
18.2
17.5
CD
CD
0.25
0.30
22
23
10
G(B
)8676
SOIL PROFILE Project : Group Housing Complex at Sy Nos 78,79, 80 etc, Attur, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore
B.H. Location : Water Table : Nil Term. Depth : 6.00m B.H. No.: 10
� N
- Value
Depth
(m) Soil Description
Grain Size AnalysisAtterberg
LimitsIn-situ
propertiesTriaxial Test
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Silt
(%)
Clay
(%)
Liquid (%
)
Plastic
(%)
Density
�b (g/cm
3)
Water
Cont (%
)
Type
c(kg/cm2)
�( O)
17
32
0.00
0.50
1.50
3.00
4.50
6.00
Existing ground level
Brown clayey silty sand
Grey silty clayey sand
Grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Yellow with grey clayey gravelly sand with silt
Yellow with grey clayey gravelly sand with silt
Note : 1) �N-Value (Observed) 2) �b : Bulk Density
0
0
30
53
58
51
20
16
8
27
26
11
-
31
-
-
15
-
2.03
2.00
16.5
13.0
CD
CD
0.20
0.15
25
29
G(B)8676
1
TABLE NO . 11RESULTS OF UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TESTS
Bore Hole No
Depth (m)
Unconfined CompressionStrength (qu) kg/cm2
3 1.50 1.37
7 4.50 1.71
8 6.00 1.55
TABLE NO :12 RESULTS OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY TESTS
Bore Hole No
Depth (m)
Specific Gravity (Gs)
2 1.50 2.62
3 6.00 2.60
4. 3.00 2.65
7 1.50 2.60
9 4.50 2.59
10 6.00 2.63
TABLE NO :13RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL SAMPLES
Bore Hole No
Depth (m)
pH Chloride (cl) %
Sulphate (SO3) %
3 1.50 6.7 0.036 0.060
9 4.50 7.3 0.011 0.051
10 3.00 7.1 0.018 0.024
BH1 BH2
Soil Profile Legend
25 : N – value (Observed)E.G.L. : Existing ground level
E.G.L. E.G.L.
6.0
E.G.L.
De
pt
h (
m)
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
G(B
)8676
3 Note : Water table not encountered
25
40
17
27
Brown clayey silty sandBrown clayey silty sand
Grey silty clayey sand
Light bluish grey with yellowish brownsilty clayey sand with traces of gravel
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand
Yellow with grey and red silty clayeysand
Bluish grey with yellow silty clayeysand
Brownish yellow with grey siltyclayey sand
Brownish yellow with grey and redsilty clayey sand
Project :Group Housing Complex,SyNo.68,69/1(p),etc.,Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
BH3 BH4
Soil ProfileLegend
37 : N – value (Observed)E.G.L. : Existing ground level
E.G.L. E.G.L.
6.0
E.G.L.
De
pt
h (
m)
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
G(B
)8676
4
Note : Water table not encountered
37
45
24
37
Brown clayey silty sandBrown clayey silty sand
Grey silty sandy clay
Brownish yellow with grey silty clayeysand with gravel
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayeysand Yellowish brown with grey silty
clayey sand
Grey silty clayey sand
Grey with brown silty clayey sand
Project :Group Housing Complex,SyNo.68,69/1(p),etc.,Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
BH5 BH6
Soil Profile Legend
34 : N – value (Observed)E.G.L. : Existing ground level
E.G.L. E.G.L.
6.0
E.G.L.
De
pt
h (
m)
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
G(B
)8676
5
Note : Water table not encountered
34
46
25
48
Brown clayey silty sand Brown silty clayey sand
Light grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Grey with yellowish brown silty clayeysand
Brownish yellow with light bluish greysilty clayey sand
Dark grey with brown silty clayeysand
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayeysand
Greyish Brown silty clayey sand
Dark yellow with light bluish grey siltyclayey sand
Project :Group Housing Complex,SyNo.68,69/1(p),etc.,Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
BH7 BH8
Soil ProfileLegend
24 : N – value (Observed)E.G.L. : Existing ground level
E.G.L. E.G.L.
6.0
E.G.L.
De
pt
h (
m)
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
G(B
)8676
6 Note : Water table not encountered
24
46
27
49
Brown clayey silty sand Brown clayey silty sand
Dark grey silty sandy clay
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayeysand
Yellowish brown with light grey silty clayey sand
Dark grey with brown silty clayey sand
Light bluish grey with yellow silty clayeysand
Yellowish brown with light bluish greysilty sandy clay
Yellowish brown with light grey siltygravelly clayey sand
Project :Group Housing Complex,SyNo.68,69/1(p),etc.,Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
BH9 BH10
Soil ProfileLegend
20 : N – value (Observed)E.G.L. : Existing ground level
E.G.L. E.G.L.
6.0
E.G.L.
De
pt
h (
m)
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
G(B
)8676
7
Note : Water table not encountered
20
32
17
32
Brown clayey silty sand Brown clayey silty sand
Dark bluish grey with yellow siltyclayey sand
Grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Light grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Yellowish brown with grey silty clayeysand
Grey silty clayey sand
Grey with yellow silty clayey sand
Yellow with grey clayey gravelly sand with silt
Project :Group Housing Complex,SyNo.68,69/1(p),etc.,Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
Compiled Soil Profile
Legend
: N – value (Observed)
E.G.L. : Existing Ground Level
Sheet No. 2
Nagadi Consultants Pvt. Ltd.,Geotechnical Consultants,Bangalore.
Job No.G(B)8676
U2/1 : Second Undisturbed Sample in Bore Hole No. 1
25
Note : Water table not encountered
BH1 BH2
6.0
E.G.L.
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
25
40
17
27
U1/1
U2/1
U1/2
U2/2
De
pt
h (
m)
BH3
37
45
U1/3
U2/3
24
37
U1/4
U2/4
BH4 BH5
34
46
U1/5
U2/5
25
48
U1/6
U2/6
BH6 BH7
24
46
U1/7
U2/7
BH8
27
49
U1/8
U2/8
BH9
20
32
U1/9
U2/9
BH10
17
32
U2/10
U1/10
Brown, clayey silty sand toSilty claayey sand[gravel(0%)sand(55%)silt(20%)clay(25%)]
Bluish grey with yellow,and grey with brown,Silty clayey sand[gravel(0%)sand(30-63%)silt(10-22%)clay(20-48%)]
Bluish grey with yellowish brown,to yellowish brown with grey,silty clayey sand,tosilty sandy clay[gravel()%)sand(30-66%)silt(8-24%)clay(11-49%)]
Project : Group Housing Complex,SyNo.68,69/1(p),etc.,Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
G(B)8676
1
Legend::Bore Hole
NOTE: Sketch Not To Scale
Site Plan and Location Of Bore Holes
To Yelahanka Satellite Town
To Ananthapura
High Tension Line
High Tension Line
N
28m
40m
40m
BH-2
BH-1
40m 44mBH-3
BH-4
BH-5
40m
57m
29m
45m
BH-9
36m
55mBH-6
LAKE
BH-10
BH-7
19m
8m
38m29m
20m
25m32m
BH-8
108m
48m
Fencing
Fencing
Project :Group Housing Complex,SyNo.68,69/1(p),etc.,Attur, Yelahanka, Bangalore
Symbol Bore hole
Depth (m) Description Gravel
(%)Sand (%)
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
d60 d10 U
1 1.5 Grey silty clayey sand 0 45 16 39 0.13 - -
1 3.0Light blusih grey with yellowish brown silty clayey sand with traces of gravel 3 42 19 36 0.13 - -
1 6.0Yellow with grey and red silty clayey sand 0 66 12 22 0.4 - -
2 1.5Bluish grey with yellow silty clayey sand 0 42 21 37 0.09 - -
2 4.5Brownish yellow with grey and red silty clayey sand 0 46 22 32 0.13 - -
G(B
)86768
0102030405060708090
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
grain size (mm)
perc
enta
ge fi
ner
SiltClaySand
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
Fine Coarse
0.002 0.075 0.425 2 204.75
Symbol Bore hole
Depth (m) Description Gravel
(%)Sand (%)
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
d60 d10 U
3 1.5 Grey silty sandy clay 0 30 22 48 0.018 - -
3 3.0Brownish yellow with grey silty clayey sand with gravel 5 62 12 21 0.29 - -
3 6.0Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand 0 66 14 20 0.32 - -
4 1.5 Grey silty clayey sand 0 63 15 22 0.2 - -
4 3.0 Grey with brown silty clayey sand 0 72 12 16 0.7 - -
G(B
)86769
0102030405060708090
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
grain size (mm)
perc
enta
ge fi
ner
SiltClaySand
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
Fine Coarse
0.002 0.075 0.425 2 204.75
Symbol Bore hole
Depth (m) Description Gravel
(%)Sand (%)
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
d60 d10 U
4 4.5Yellowisih brown with grey silty clayey sand 0 54 19 27 0.17 - -
5 1.5Light grey with yellow silty clayey sand 0 65 15 20 0.23 - -
5 4.5Grey with yellowish brown silty clayey sand 0 68 13 19 0.28 - -
6 0.5 Brown silty clayey sand 0 55 20 25 0.18 - -
6 1.5 Dark grey with brown silty clayey sand 0 62 16 22 0.17 - -
G(B
)867610
0102030405060708090
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
grain size (mm)
perc
enta
ge fi
ner
SiltClaySand
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
Fine Coarse
0.002 0.075 0.425 2 204.75
Symbol Bore hole
Depth (m) Description Gravel
(%)Sand (%)
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
d60 d10 U
6 3.0 Greyish brown silty clayey sand 0 62 15 23 0.21 - -
6 6.0Dark yellow with light bluish grey silty clayey sand 0 55 21 24 0.19 - -
7 1.5 Dark grey silty sandy clay 0 35 17 48 0.02 - -
7 4.5Yellowish brown with light grey silty clayey sand 0 45 18 37 0.11 - -
7 6.0Yellowish brown with light grey silty gravelly clayey sand 18 44 15 23 0.8 - -
G(B
)867611
0102030405060708090
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
grain size (mm)
perc
enta
ge fi
ner
SiltClaySand
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
Fine Coarse
0.002 0.075 0.425 2 204.75
Symbol Bore hole
Depth (m) Description Gravel
(%)Sand (%)
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
d60 d10 U
8 1.5 Dark grey with brown sitly clayey sand 0 37 26 37 0.12 - -
8 3.0Light bluish grey with yellow silty clayey sand 0 45 20 35 0.29 - -
8 6.0Yellowish brown with light bluish grey silty sandy clay 0 38 13 49 0.15 - -
9 1.5Dark bluish grey with yellow silty clayey sand 0 57 17 26 0.21 - -
9 3.0 Grey with yellow silty clayey sand 0 47 25 28 0.19 - -
G(B
)867612
0102030405060708090
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
grain size (mm)
perc
enta
ge fi
ner
SiltClaySand
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
Fine Coarse
0.002 0.075 0.425 2 204.75
Symbol Bore hole
Depth (m) Description Gravel
(%)Sand (%)
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
d60 d10 U
9 6.0Yellowish brown with grey silty clayey sand 0 48 24 28 0.13 - -
10 1.5 Grey silty clayey sand 0 53 20 27 0.2 - -
10 3.0 Grey with yellow silty clayey sand 0 58 16 26 0.2 - -
10 4.5Yellow with grey clayey gravelly sand with silt 30 51 8 11 1.14 0.002 570.0
G(B
)867613
0102030405060708090
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
grain size (mm)
perc
enta
ge fi
ner
SiltClaySand
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
Fine Coarse
0.002 0.075 0.425 2 204.75
G(B)8676
14
N Values vs Depth Curves
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
N Value (Observed)
Dep
th (m
)
BH1
BH2
BH3
BH4
BH5
LEGEND
G(B)8676
15
N Values vs Depth Curves
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
N Value (Observed)
Dep
th (m
)
BH6
BH7
BH8
BH9
BH-10
LEGEND
BWSSB/Bought out Water
Roof Top
Rain Water
80% after diversity
90% of available STP water is 213 KLD
Domestic water reqt179 KLD
Flushing water reqt90 KLD
Total water reqt296 cum/day
Waste water generated237 cum/day
Landscaping123 KLD
Roof water22 cum/day(Seasonal)
Flushing water is90.0 KLD
Sewage Treatment Plant240 KLD
FEASIBILITY REPORT ONWATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMFORPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTSBUILDINGSBANGALORE
1) INTRODUCTION.
M/s.Century Builders, which is setting up a Residential development at Yelahanka, Hobli, Bangalore in
with a view to conserve fresh water resources and adopt re cycle and re-use measures. They propose
to set up a water pollution control and re-use system for the wastewater generated from entire complex
and also
proposed to harvest and recharge ground water as storm water management. The only
sources of wastewaters are from toilets, kitchen and washbasins etc in the lay out and
therefore domestic in nature.
This report details the following from the proposed facility. Collection, Treatment and
Disposal of Domestic Effluents.
2) QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF WASTE WATERS
The Total no. of flats of the residential project is 399 and projected occupants are 1995 nos. averagewater demand considered is 135 LPCD. Flushing water requirement is 45 LPCD..The wastewater quantity from domestic sources is considered at maximum of80% of water consumed. Hence the quantity of wastewater generated is as below.
Quantity of water consumed = 296 cum/dayQuantity of wastewater flow = 237 cum/day
Treatment plant for treating sewage in the project has been proposed for a capacity of 240cum/day
Proposed quality of raw and treated sewage is as below
Quality of raw wastewater:pH = 6 – 8TSS = 400 Mg / LitBOD5 = 300 Mg/LitCOD = 450 Mg/Lit
Quality of treated wastewater:pH = 6.5 – 7.5TSS = <20 Mg / LitBOD5 = <10 Mg/LitCOD = <150 Mg/LitColor = unobjectionableOdor = unobjectionableTurbidity = < 2Ecoli = noneRes cl2 = < 1
3) PROPOSED TREATMENT SCHEME
Based on the quantity & quality of wastewater & also to substantiate the StatePollution Control Board requirements, it is proposed to treat the wastewater underbiological process known as Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) process is a sequential suspendedgrowth (activated sludge), followed by Filtration & Disinfection.
The treatment methodology comprises of the following units.a) Bar screen
b) Collection and equalization
c) SBR 1 & 2
d) Decant tank.
e) Sludge holding tank
f) Final Sump
g) Pressure Sand Filtration & Activated Carbon Filtration
l) On-line Chlorination
Following is a description of individual treatment units, with their design criteria,dimensions, mechanical equipment selection etc.,
DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT UNITS
A. BAR SCREEN
In the incoming channel, a chamber medium screen shall be fitted, the purpose ofwhich is to filter out coarse trashy matter from introducing into succeeding unitsof the treatment plant. Screens shall be made of M.S Construction with EpoxyPainted.
Channel Size :
Type of screen : M.S Construction manually cleaned with MS flatsplaced at 20 mm c/c with MS hand rake withhandle all epoxy painted.
B. EQUALISATION TANKIn order to homogenize the quality of wastewater, as well as to feed wastewaterat a uniform rate to the rest of the treatment plant, an equalization tank isproposed. In order to mix the contents, as well as to provide a degree ofpreparation, diffused aeration by means of membranes and blowers areproposed.
Capacity : 75 CumAeration : Coarse diffuser
C. SBR TANK 1 & SBR TANK 2Biological stabilization of the wastewater is accomplished in the aeration tank inthe presence of microorganisms, for the respiration of which, oxygen is suppliedby means of diffused aeration comprising membrane diffusers and Air blowers.
BOD in expected : 300 mg/LBOD out desired : 20 mg/LTank Volume : 200 cumDiffusers : Fine pore diffusers.F: M : 0.1MLSS : 4000 Mg/Lit
D. AIR BLOWERS
Type : Twin lobe compressorCapacity : 350M3/Hr
E. DECANT TANK
The mixed liquor (waster water with micro-organism) exiting in the aerationtank has to be clarified in a clarifier tank having hopper bottom, in order toreduce the T.S.S. in the clarified waster, as well as to thicken the biomass forrecirculation back to the aeration tank in order to maintain the design MLSS(Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids)
Overflow Rate : 18 Cum/Sqm/DayRecirculation : 85%D.P. : 2 Hrs
F. SLUDGE DISPOSAL
The biomass in the aeration tank stabilizes BOD in wastewater by consuming theorganic matter in the wastewater. The metabolic activity results in growth of thebiomass population in the aeration tank. Consequently, in order to contain thelevel of M.L.S.S. in the aeration tank to the design level of 4000 Mg/L, it will benecessary to bleed off or waste the excess activated sludge. For this purpose aSludge holding tank of 23 cum for residential has been provided for dewatering sludge.
G. PRE FILTER WATER SUMP
The settled water from the settling tank is expected to meet the standards withrespect to BOD and TSS for discharge to inland surface waters. However it is ourintention to improve the quality of treated water further in order to be able to reuse.For this reason, further treatment in the form of coagulation, filtration anddisinfection’s is proposed. The clear water from the settling tank shall be fed toclarified water tank and pumped to filters for tertiary treatment.
Tank capacity : 40 cumFilter feed pump : 18 cum / hr at 35 M head.
H. PRESSURE SAND FILTERVertical down flow type with graded gravel / sand bed. Under drain plate withpolystyrene strainers.
Diameter : 1400 diaDepth of media : 1000 MMTest Pressure : 5 Kg. / Sq.cmRate of filtration : 10 cum /Sq.m / hr.
AC FILTERS
As above but with 1400 mm GAC
J. CHLORINATOR100 Lit tank & 4 LPH Metering Pump for STP.
K. FINAL SUMP
One No. Final Sump of 120 cum for residential is also provided to hold Filtered water, beforepumping to gardens and toilet flushing purpose.
Schematic of Sequential Batch reactor
To filter press
DESIGN DETAILS
Rational formula for calculating runoff = Q = (C I A) / 360Q = Runoff in m3/secI = Intensity of rainfall in mm/ hr.A = Drainage area in hectares.C = Co-efficient of run off as belowRun-off co-efficient for various types of surfacesOpen grounds, unpaved street 0.3Parks, lawns, gardens 0.1Macadam roads, pavements 0.7Asphalt pavements 0.85Water tight roof surface 0.95
Total Run-off : ROOF TOPQ = Runoff 0.024975 m3/secI = Intensity of rainfall 75 mm/hrA = Drainage area in hectares. 0.1332 hecC = Co-efficient of run off 0.9 cum
Data assumed:Considering 15 min of rainfallVolume of rainwater available for harvesting 22.4775 cumexisting RWH sump 22.4775
Total Run-off : GARDEN AREA
Q = Runoff 0.043733 m3/secI = Intensity of rainfall 75 mm/hrA = Drainage area in hec 2.09916C = Co-efficient of run off 0.1
Data assumed:Considering 15 min of rainfallVolume of rainwater available for recharging is 40% 15.7437 cum(Losses due to runoff, evaporation, absorption and evap-transpiration is 60%)
Total Run-off : HARDSCAPE & DRIVEWAYQ = Runoff 0.119656 m3/hrI = Intensity of rainfall 75 mm/hrA = Drainage area in sqm 0.8205C = Co-efficient of run off 0.7
Data assumed:Considering 15 min of rainfall
43.07625 cumVolume of rainwater available for recharging is 40%total run off 58.81995
Rain Water Harvesting : Century Square
total depth of chamber 3mtr and 2mtr. Diaeach recharge pit will take care of about 14 cum 0.05 cusec4 nos of recharge pits considered to take the water 4total water to internal drain 2.81995
Traffic Impact Assessment Studiesfor
Proposed Residential Building of Attur Village, Yelahanka Hobli,
Bangalore.
Prepared by,
M/s Consortia Of Infrastructure EngineersVijayanagar, Bangalore-40
Email: [email protected]
Traffic Impact Assessment
Before Construction
Road Geometrics
Road Connectivity
Speed
Vehicular Noise
Traffic VolumeV/C & LOS
During Construction
Addition Trucks(constructionMaterials)
Impact in V/C & LOS
Requirements for operation
Traffic Projection
Traffic dataFrom tptDept
MathematicalModeling
IRC Methodfor projection
ProjectedTraffic
V/C & LOS
After Construction
Parking
Traffic flow logistics
Modified Scenario of V/C &LOS
Impact
Changed Scenarioif any for reductionin V/C & LOS
Traffic ManagementMeasures
Google Image
Project Site
Location Plan
Project site
Site Plan
Road Geometric Scenario
Note: A – Available NA – Not Available
Road
ROW(m)
Surface Condition
Street lights
Drainage width (m)
Road
RemarksMarking Signs
CW(m)
Lanes
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided)
12
Good A A NA NA
Road marking has to has to be
marked &Sign board has to be
installed.
7
2
New Town Road(2+2 lanes divided)
24
Good A AAvailablebut faded
outNA
Road marking has to has to be
marked &Sign board has to be
installed.
8+8
2+2
The project is located along Attur Road having RoW of 12m.
Attur road is 2 lanes undivided road which connects to Ananthpura on
one side and New town Road on another side.
New Town Road is (2+2) lanes divided road having 24m RoW which
connects Doddballapur Road one side and Vidyaranyapura on another
side.
The project can also be accessed from other places of Bangalore city
such as Ananthapura, Attur, Yelahanka Road, Bettahalli Layout,
Doddaballapur Road, Airport Road etc.,
Hence pressure will not develop to any one particular road and traffic
gets distributed to various roads as stated above.
Road Connectivity
12m RoW, 7m CW, 2.5m FCD on
either side of the road
24m RoW, 8+8m CW, 1m Median, 1m drain on
either side of the road, 2m FP on one side & 3m FP on another side of the
road.
Existing Road Geometry Scenario
Project site
New Town RoadNew Town Road
Photos of Study Roads Date:28/03/2017
Doddaballapur RoadVidyaranyapuraVidyaranyapura
Doddaballapur Road
Ananthpur
Attur Road
New Town roadAnanthpurNew Town road
Speed spectrum for the study road (kmph)
Road Towards
2 Wh 3 Wh 4 Wh (C,J,V) B/L
Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided) 42 25 24 18 42 25 29 24
New TownRoad
(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 43 27 29 22 50 38 32 26
Vidyaranyapura 40 26 26 20 48 33 35 23
The observed speed indicates that the vehicles are well within the speed limits andhence the road safety is ensured.
Real time traffic scenario along Attur Road (2 lanes undivided)
Note: The highest peak observed is 425 PCU’s as per IRC-106:1990 during 9.00 am to 10.00 am.
Timing 2Wh 3Wh 4Wh B/L Total V/C
7.00-8.00am 197(99) 30(23) 96(96) 15(45) 338(262) 0.12
8.00-9.00 291(146) 44(33) 121(121) 17(51) 473(351) 0.16
9:00-10:00 372(186) 48(36) 146(146) 19(57) 585(425) 0.19
10:00-11:00 314(157) 35(26) 158(158) 16(48) 523(389) 0.18
4:00-5:00pm 201(101) 29(22) 102(102) 14(42) 346(266) 0.12
5:00-6:00 234(117) 38(29) 110(110) 18(54) 400(310) 0.14
6:00-7:00 278(139) 53(40) 171(171) 15(45) 517(395) 0.18
7:00-8:00 257(129) 41(31) 134(134) 22(66) 454(359) 0.16
Vehicle Composition and Traffic flow distribution along Attur Road(2 lanes undivided)
Real time traffic scenario along New Town Road towards Doddaballapur Road (2 lanes)
Note: The highest peak observed is 1511 PCU’s as per IRC-106:1990 during 6.00 pm to 7.00 pm.
Timing 2Wh 3Wh 4Wh B/L Total V/C
7.00-8.00am 276(138) 68(51) 328(328) 86(258) 758(775) 0.35
8.00-9.00 482(241) 91(68) 549(549) 112(336) 1234(1194) 0.54
9:00-10:00 504(252) 142(107) 647(647) 139(417) 1432(1423) 0.65
10:00-11:00 410(205) 129(97) 428(428) 130(390) 1097(1120) 0.51
4:00-5:00pm 332(166) 83(62) 386(386) 102(306) 903(920) 0.42
5:00-6:00 463(232) 106(80) 529(529) 125(375) 1223(1215) 0.55
6:00-7:00 549(275) 154(116) 674(674) 149(447) 1526(1511) 0.69
7:00-8:00 379(190) 138(104) 587(587) 157(471) 1261(1351) 0.61
Vehicle Composition and Traffic flow distribution along New Town Road towards Doddaballapur Road (2 lanes)
Real time traffic scenario along New Town Road towards Vidyaranyapura (2 lanes)
Note: The highest peak observed is 1481 PCU’s as per IRC-106:1990 during 9.00 am to 10.00 am.
Timing 2Wh 3Wh 4Wh B/L Total V/C
7.00-8.00am 316(158) 87(65) 351(351) 84(252) 838(826) 0.38
8.00-9.00 415(208) 127(95) 439(439) 143(429) 1124(1171) 0.53
9:00-10:00 601(301) 189(142) 637(637) 134(402) 1561(1481) 0.67
10:00-11:00 434(217) 128(96) 543(543) 125(375) 1230(1231) 0.56
4:00-5:00pm 348(174) 112(84) 384(384) 74(222) 918(864) 0.39
5:00-6:00 406(203) 145(109) 496(496) 91(273) 1138(1081) 0.49
6:00-7:00 562(281) 168(126) 598(598) 128(384) 1456(1389) 0.63
7:00-8:00 485(243) 151(113) 662(662) 103(309) 1401(1327) 0.60
Vehicle Composition and Traffic flow distribution along New Town Road towards Vidyaranyapura (2+2 lanes divided)
Road Towards V C Existing V/C Ratio LOS
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided) 425 2200 0.19 A
New Town Road(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 1511 2200 0.69 D
Vidyaranyapura 1481 2200 0.67 D
V= Volume in PCU’s/hr & C= Capacity in PCU’s/ hr LOS = Level of Service
V/C LOS Performance
0.0 - 0.2 A Excellent
0.2 - 0.4 B Very Good
0.4 - 0.6 C Good
0.6 - 0.8 D Fair/Average
0.8 - 1.0 E Poor
1.0& Above F Very Poor
Existing Traffic Scenario for Study roads
Note: IRC is accepting the fact that, in Indian roads the real congestion starts when V/C ratio is >1, i.e., for
forced flow. Till this limit the road is free for traffic movement without any impediments. Hence it is
acceptable as normal upto V/C =1 and the performance will be taken as good only
Road TowardsAs per study (per minute)
2wh 3wh 4wh Buses/ Lorries
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided) 6 or 7 1 or 2 2 or 3 1 or 2
New Town Road(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 9 or 10 2 or 3 10 or 11 2 or 3
Vidyaranyapura 10 or 11 3 or 4 10 or 11 2 or 3
The Project is located along Attur road, the entry and exit is provided through thesame.
All types of vehicles i.e., 2Wh, 3Wh, 4Wh, Trucks and Buses/Lorries move along allthe study roads.
The observed speed indicates that the vehicles are well within the speed limits and hence theroad safety is ensured.
Real Time Traffic Scenario
425 PCU’s/ hr9.00 to 10.00 am
Real Time Traffic Scenario
Project site
During Construction The addition of 10 Lorries per day carrying construction material do not change any
significantly the traffic flow. Hence OK.
V/C during construction (Lorries) =0.19, 0.69 & 0.67
The present level of service will remain “ A, D & D” along Attur Road and Newtown road towards Doddaballapur Road and Vidyaranyapura respectively.
Number of trucks coming to the site (Off peak hours)
Day time –10 no’s.
The addition do not make any significant change for traffic movement at any giventime.
Vehicles carrying construction materials are well covered to prevent any spillage.
Vehicles hired for construction material will be in good condition and conforms tonoise and air emission standards.
Vehicles will operate only during non peak hours.
Parking logisticsParking required
Parking Provided-438 PCU’s
Activity Units Car Parking at Total required
Residential398 1 Car/Unit 398
10% visitors 40
Total no. of car required 438
Traffic Flow Logistics Since the activity is Residential, the vehicles will move from & to the
Project between 8:00am to 11:00am as egress & 6:00pm to 9:00pm as ingress.
Total traffic generated from this project =438 PCU’s.
Therefore, the hourly volume in PCU’s will be 438/3 = 146 PCU’s/hr.
This hourly generated traffic of 146 PCU’s/hr will distribute as follows.
100% of the generated traffic will first exit on to Attur Road and 20% of the
traffic moves towards Ananthapura remaining 80% moves towards New Town
Road along Attur Road .
i.e., 20% x 146 = 29 PCU’s/hr will move along Attur Road towards
Ananthapura.
80% x 146 =117 PCU’s/hr will move along Attur Road towards New
Town Road
Out of 117 PCU’s/hr , 70% of the traffic moves towards Vidyaranyapura from New
Town Road and remaining 30% move towards Doddaballapur Road from New Town
Road.
i.e., 70% x 117 = 82 PCU’s/hr will move towards Vidyaranyapura from New
Town Road.
30% x 117 = 35 PCU’s/hr will move towards Doddaballapur Road from
New Town Road.
Contd…
Modified V/C and LOS after adding generated traffic to existing traffic
Road Towards Existing Modified
V C V/C LOS V V/C LOSAttur Road
(2 lanes undivided) 425 2200 0.19 A 425+146= 571 0.26 B
New TownRoad
(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 1511 2200 0.69 D 1511+35=1546 0.70 D
Vidyaranyapura 1481 2200 0.67 D 1481+82= 1563 0.71 D
Projected traffic for next three years based on individual vehicular growth as per IRC : 37-2001
(Exponential Growth is considered)
RoadVehicle Type 2Wh 3Wh 4Wh B/L
Total% Growth 7.68 6.53 11.82 7.14Towards
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided) 464(232) 58(44) 204(204) 23(69) 750(549)
New TownRoad
(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 685(343) 186(140) 942(942) 183(549) 1997(1974)
Vidyaranyapura 750(375) 228(171) 891(891) 165(495) 2034(1932)
Note : Considering the neighboring development if any along with traffic growthpotential based on the socio-economic growth. The equation as recommended by IRCto work out the future generated traffic.
Modified V/C and LOS
Road Towards
Projected Traffic for next three year
Modified V/C and LOS after adding the generated traffic
V C V/C LOS V V/C LOS
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided) 549 2200 0.25 B 549+146=695 0.32 B
New TownRoad
(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 1974 2200 0.90 E 1974+35=2009 0.91 E
Vidyaranyapura 1932 2200 0.88 E 1932+82=2014 0.92 E
BDA-CDP Map
Note: As per BDA-CDP Map, Attur Road is already widened
`
Project site
Changed Scenario after Commuter Rail System in Operation
Commuter Rail System (CRS) is also proposed from Chikkaballapur to Yelahanka. Asper the studies, about 15% of road traffic will be shared by CRS.
0.15 x 695= 104 Then the traffic reduces to 695– 104 = 591 along Attur road.
0.15x 2009 = 301 Then the traffic reduces to 2009 – 301= 1708 along New town
road towards Doddaballapur Road.
0.15x 2014= 302 Then the traffic reduces to 2014– 302= 1712 along New town road
towards Vidyaranyapura.
Road Towards
Modified V/C and LOS after adding the generated traffic
Changed Scenario(After introducing Commuter
Rail)
V C V/C LOS V C V/C LOS
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided) 695 2200 0.32 B 591 2200 0.27 B
New TownRoad
(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 2009 2200 0.91 E 1708 2200 0.78 D
Vidyaranyapura 2014 2200 0.92 E 1712 2200 0.78 D
Changed Scenario
Road Towards
Existing traffic
Changed V/C and LOS by adding
generated traffic
Projected traffic after three years
Modified V/C and LOS by adding the
generated traffic
Changed Scenario 2
(After introducing Commuter
Rail)
V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS
Attur Road(2 lanes undivided) 0.19 A 0.26 B 0.25 B 0.32 B 0.27 B
New TownRoad
(2+2 lanes divided)
Doddaballapur Road 0.69 D 0.70 D 0.90 E 0.91 E 0.78 D
Vidyaranyapura 0.67 D 0.71 D 0.88 E 0.92 E 0.78 D
Consolidated V/C and level of service for changed scenarios
Note : There will be only a marginal shift in V/C and do not have any impact.
Structural and Non structural intervention measures:
Structural measures:As per BDA-CDP Map, Attur Road is already widened.
Commuter Rail System (CRS) is also proposed from Chikkaballapur to Yelahanka.
Since this being a residential activity, safe footpath must be created and barricaded for
safety of along the roads.
Rubber humps will have to be introduced for the outgoing vehicles from the project
site at the exit gate drive way, not more than 3m from the gate.
To establish smooth entry & exit of vehicles, bell mouth shape geometry is provided
at the gates. This ensures smooth transition for merging of vehicles.
Merging of vehicles will be performed only to left traffic from the exit gates,
this ensures safety.
All gates are manned with efficient security who can guide the entry and exit
of vehicles.
All precautionary measures are ensured for the safety of construction
laborers while working at the site.
Adequate sign & guide posts for traffic as per IRC (Indian Roads Congress)
or ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers USA) to be installed along study
roads.
Road marking (edge markings in yellow and lane markings in broken white)
must be clearly painted so as to guide the drivers along study roads.
Non -Structural measures:
Date:Project: Century AtturElectrical Power Consumption - Residential
Description Type Power No. Of Total of Allocated C.L
Flat In KW Units in kW
1) TYPE - 1 2 BHK UNIT 3 399 11972) TYPE - 2 3 BHK UNIT 0 03) 04) LIFTS @ 10 KW 10 8 805) COMMON AREA LIGHTING 30 1 306) EXTERNAL LIGHTING 35 1 357) CLUB HOUSE 0 1 08) Pumps9) PHE /STP 45 1 4510) Commercial Loads 0 1 0
TOTAL 1387
Maximim demand in kW at 0.6 diversity factor 832
Consumption of power for 12 hours per day 9986 (1)
Minimum demand in kW at 0.2 diversity factor 277
Consumption of power for 12 hours per day 3329 (2)
Total consumption of power per day 13315 ( 1 + 2 )
Total consumption of power per year 48.60 Lakh Units
Date:Project: CenturyElectrical Power Consumption - Residential
Number of flat
Allocated in KW Units
Total C.Lin kW
1 SOLAR STREET LIGHT 0.3 15 4.5
2 CLUB HOUSE 0 0 0
TOTAL 4.5
Maximim demand in kW for solar Gyeser 0
Consumption of power for 3 hours per day 0
Maximim demand in kW for solar street light 4.5
Consumption of power for 6 hours per day 27
Total consumption of power per year 0.10 Lakh Units
Equivalent Power Savings by using Solar 0.10 Lakh Units
Date:Project: Century Electrical Power Consumption - on HF ballast
Power loss using conventional ballast 25%Power loss using HF ballast 14%Savings in power loss using HF ballast 11%
DescriptionType of
Flat
Power Allocated In
KWNo. Of Units
Total C.L in kW
1 BASEMENT LIGHTING 14.4 1 14.40
TOTAL 14.4
Maximim demand in kW at 0.8 diversity factor 11.52
Consumption of power for 4 hours per day 46.08 (1)
Minimum demand in kW at 0.4 diversity factor 5.76
Consumption of power for 8 hours per day 46.08 (2)
Total consumption of power per day 92.16 ( 1 + 2 )
Total consumption of power per year 0.33638 Lakh UnitsSavings in power loss using HF ballast 0.04 Lakh Units
Date:Project: Century Electrical Power Consumption - on Cu. Wound transformer
Power loss using Al. wound transformer 2.48%Power loss using CU. wound transformer 1.25%Savings in power loss using Cu. Wound transformer 1.23%
Description Type of Flat
Power Allocated In
KWNo. Of Units
Total C.L in kW
1) TYPE - 1 2 BHK UNIT 3 399 11972) TYPE - 2 3 BHK UNIT 4 0 03) LIFTS @ 5.5 KW 0 8 04) LIFTS @ 7.5 KW 10 8 805) COMMON AREA LIGHTING 30 1 306) EXTERNAL LIGHTING 35 1 357) CLUB HOUSE 0 1 08) Pumps9) PHE /STP 45 1 4510) Commercial Loads 0 1 0
TOTAL 1387
Maximim demand in kW at 0.4 diversity factor 555
Consumption of power for 12 hours per day 6658 (1)
Minimum demand in kW at 0.1 diversity factor 139
Consumption of power for 12 hours per day 1664 (2)
Total consumption of power per day 8322 ( 1 + 2 )
Total consumption of power per year 30.38 Lakh UnitsSavings in power loss using CU.wound 0.37 Lakh Unitstransformer
Date:Project:Century Electrical Power Consumption - on CFL
Savings in power Using leed as against Fluorescent Lamps 60%
Description Type of Flat
Power Allocated In
KWNo. Of Units
Total C.L in kW
1) TYPE - 1 2 BHK UNIT 3 399 11972) TYPE - 2 3 BHK UNIT 4 0 03) COMMON AREA LIGHTING 50 1 504) EXTERNAL LIGHTING 50 1 505) CLUB HOUSE 45 1 456) Commercial Lighitng 0 1 0
TOTAL 1342
Maximim demand in kW at 0.6 diversity factor 805
Consumption of power for 6 hours per day 4831 (1)
Minimum demand in kW at 0.1 diversity factor 134
Consumption of power for 18 hours per day 2416 (2)
Total consumption of power per day 7247 ( 1 + 2 )
Total consumption of power per year 26.45 Lakh UnitsSavings in power using leed 10.58 Lakh Units
Project:Century Savings in Electrical Power Consumption - SUMMARY
Description
Consumption per year in lakh
kWH
Saving using solar energy in lakh kWH units
Savings using HF ballast in
lakh kWH units
Savings using Cu. wound
transformer in lakh kWH
Savings using leed in
lakh kWH
Savings in Lakh kWH
unitsSavings in percentage
1Residential ( Percentage savings )
48.60 0.1 0.04 0.4 10.6 11.1 22.8
TOTAL 48.60 0.1 0.04 0.4 10.6 11.1
TOTAL percentage 0.2 0.08 0.8 21.8 22.8
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year
Record high °C (°F) 32.8(91)
35.9(96.6)
37.3(99.1)
39.2(102.6)
38.9(102)
38.1(100.6)
33.3(91.9)
33.3(91.9)
33.3(91.9)
32.4(90.3)
31.7(89.1)
31.1(88)
39.2(102.6)
Average high °C (°F) 27.6(81.7)
30.2(86.4)
33.2(91.8)
35.0(95)
33.8(92.8)
29.4(84.9)
28.1(82.6)
27.5(81.5)
28.3(82.9)
28.0(82.4)
27.0(80.6)
26.2(79.2)
29.4(84.9)
Average low °C (°F) 15.3(59.5)
17.2(63)
19.6(67.3)
21.8(71.2)
21.5(70.7)
20.2(68.4)
19.8(67.6)
19.6(67.3)
19.7(67.5)
19.4(66.9)
17.7(63.9)
16.0(60.8)
19.0(66.2)
Record low °C (°F) 7.8(46)
9.4(48.9)
11.1(52)
14.4(57.9)
16.7(62.1)
16.7(62.1)
16.1(61)
14.4(57.9)
15.0(59)
13.2(55.8)
9.6(49.3)
8.9(48)
7.8(46)
Average rainfall mm (inches) 1.8(0.071)
7.9(0.311)
7(0.28)
40(1.57)
110.2(4.339)
89.1(3.508)
108.9(4.287)
142.5(5.61)
241(9.49)
154.5(6.083)
54.1(2.13)
17.5(0.689)
974.5(38.368)
Average rainy days 0.2 0.5 0.8 3 6.9 6 7.4 10 10.3 7.9 3.9 1.6 58.5
Average relative humidity (%) 60 52 30 43 60 72 76 79 76 73 70 68 63.3
Mean monthly sunshine hours 262.3 247.6 271.4 257.0 241.1 136.8 111.8 114.3 143.6 173.1 190.2 211.7 2,360.9
Source #1: Indian Meteorological Department[75][76]
Source #2: NOAA (humidity and sun: 1971–1990)[77]
Climate data for Bangalore