Frame Foundation-RA

LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD.
REQUEST FOR QUOTATION OF CIVIL WORKS FOR

JACKET UPENDING FRAME FOUNDATION
LAMPRELL DOC. NO. : 15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Prepared By Reviewed By Approved By
Name : Nripendra Mishra Kurinjivelan Palaniyandi Mohamed Taha Aboumalwa
Naval and Construction

Designation : Senior Engineer Senior Engineer Engineering Discipline
Manager
Signature :
Date : 15-07-2019 15-07-2019 15-07-2019

LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD. Page : 2 of 6
Rev. : A
REQUEST FOR QUOTATION OF CIVIL WORKS FOR JACKET
Issued : 15-07-2019
UPENDING FRAME FOUNDATION
REVISION STATUS AND HISTORY
Rev. Date Rev. Description
A 15-07-2019 ISSUED FOR ENQUIRY
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 4
2. SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................................................................ 5
3. RESPONSIBILITY ................................................................................................................................ 7
4. EXCEPTION/QUALIFICATION ........................................................................................................... 7
5. ATTACHMENTS .................................................................................................................................. 8
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
1. INTRODUCTION
Lamprell Energy Ltd (Company) is a leading provider of fabrication, engineering and contracting
services to the offshore and onshore oil & gas and renewable energy industries.
Company is planning to install a jacket upending frame similar to shown in below picture. The frame
will require open/pile foundation to be constructed at Hamriyah port.
The site location is highlighted in yellow colour in the below snapshot. The approximately size of
site is 200m x 250m.
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
Company would like to appoint a civil Contractor for Design and Construction of pile foundation for
Jacket upending frame.
Contractor to furnish the quotation for Design, Procurement and Construction of all Civil works, and
Earth work, as per the attached Scope of Work, Drawings, Specifications and Standards, including
any Site survey required, establishing existing services including those buried that foul with this
development, relocating or protecting these existing services as advised by the Engineer
2. SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of work includes (however not limited to).
1. Design of Pile foundation for Jacket upending frame. Drawings for frame, reactions and
geotechnical investigation report are attached for reference. Detailed design report to be provided
for company review and approval. Contractor to provide all the native files for calculations.
Contractor to quote for the design as optional.
2. Procurement and construction of foundation for Jacket upending frame. Preliminary drawings for
frame foundation are attached for reference. Drawings are provided for foundation of single
frame. Contractor to quote for two number of frame foundations .Two options for pile
foundations are provided in drawings. Contractor to quote both the options separately.
3. Contractor shall have the following three options in their quote.
 Design of foundation
 Procurement and construction of foundation as per option-1 for two frames
Option-1 Consists of four piles at the frame leg having tension. Other tow legs are having
two piles each. Depth of pile penetration is 30 m for all the piles. Depth of pile cap is 2 m.
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
 Procurement and construction of foundation as per option-2 for two frames.

In Option-2 all the three legs have tow pile at each leg. However depth of pile penetration
is 50 m for piles at tension leg and 30 m for other two legs. Depth of pile cap is 2 m.
(For details of option-1 and option-2 refer attached drawings)
4. All necessary Pile load tests to be performed as per relevant international standards. Contractor to
mention all the pile tests to be conducted in the offer.
5. Pile type (Precast, Cast in situ etc.) to be decided by contractor based on proper justification.
6. The work shall include mobilization of all required equipment, providing necessary engineering
supervision and technical personnel, skilled and unskilled labours as required to carry out the
entire work.
7. The entire work shall be supervised by a professional engineer with at least 10 years of
experience in respective work.
8. The personals visiting yards shall wear full “Personal Protective Equipment”. They also need to
go through Lamprell’s safety training as per company rules.
9. The Contractor shall provide a detailed method statement based on the scope of work providing
references to applicable codes and standards.
10. The Contractor shall provide the schedule of activities along with the detailed method statement
for company review and approval.
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
3. RESPONSIBILITY
Contractor is responsible for the following activities:

 Obtaining all NOC’s, permits and approvals required for the Works.
 Sourcing of all information related to the Works with the relevant authorities, entities and
stakeholders.
 General Site clearance, demolition and disposal of unsuitable materials.
 Earthworks, including excavation, backfill and others as necessary.
 Disposal of excess land excavated and fill materials, debris and dredged materials off the
Site.
 Temporary Works to ensure continuous safe operation of all existing electrical, potable water,
communications and other utilities and services present on the Site during the execution of
the Works.
 Maintain sea and land access to the Site and maintain uninterrupted operations of the area
during the execution of the Works.
 Maintain Health and Safety, Environmental and Quality Assurance systems for the design
and execution of the Works.
 Management of all authorities and project stakeholders
 Contractor shall confirm full compliance with drawings, specifications, Employment
requirements, HSSE and QC requirements.
 Contractor to propose Time work schedule.
 Contractor to consider cost of mobilisation, temporary site set up, demobilisation cost related
to man, material and equipment.
 Contractor shall consider all preparatory works associated with the proposed scope of works
and reinstatement of the site after completion of work.
 Contractor to comply all safety and quality procedure established by Client.
 Contractor to provide quality and safety plan.
 Contractor to ensure safe practice and comply enforced environmental regulation while
executing their scope of work.
 Deviation (IF ANY) shall be highlighted in writing.
 Third party approvals on NOCs, all civil related approval shall be considered in above
quotations.
4. EXCEPTION/QUALIFICATION
Contractor shall include exceptions/qualification list with the bid. Without exception/qualification
list, it is confirmed by contractor that he will perform all activities required to complete the work as
per project specifications without any cost variations.
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
5. ATTACHMENTS
 Soil investigation report

 Frame Reactions Loads
 Frame GA Drawings
 Preliminary foundation drawings. (Option-1 and Option-2)(For reference only)
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
 Land Geotechnical Investigation
 Geophysical Survey
 Topographic Survey
 Bathymetric Survey
 Packer Permeability
 Pressure meter Testing
 Jean Lutz drilling Parameter
 Acoustic Televiewer
 Soil Electrical Resistivity
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED LIFTING TOWER CRANE FOUNDATIONS
HAMRIYAH SEA PORT PHASE-1
FOR M/S. MORAY OFFSHORE WINDFARM EAST LTD
AT HAMRIYAH FREE ZONE
SHARJAH, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
M/S. LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD

GSI/0126/18/SHJ
Electrical Cone Penetration Testing
Marine Geotechnical Investigation
Report: GSI/0126/18/SHJ (Geotechnical Investigation for Hamriyah Sea Port Phase-1at Hamriyah Free Zone, Sharjah)
FOR M/S. MORAY OFFSHORE WINFFARM EAST LTD
nd
REPORT : GSI/0126/18/SHJ 22 April 2019
REPORT ISSUE STATUS
<01> 22-April-19 Final Engineering Report AC NA ZM
Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved
M/S. LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD MATERIAL LAB

P.O. BOX 42149 P.O. BOX 114717
SHARJAH DUBAI
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
M/S. LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD
P.O. Box No. 42149
Sharjah, U.A.E.
nd
Ref: GSI/0126/18/SHJ 22 April 2019
For the Attention of Ms. Mariann Cabilangan
Dear Madam,
We have pleasure in enclosing herewith two hard & one soft copy of our engineering report, together with
invoice for carrying out the work on the above project. If you should have any queries with regard to our
report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Please note that soil samples related to this project will be retained at our storage facility for 1 calendar
month, without charge, from the date of this final report, before disposal. In case you wish to extend the
storage period, please contact us before the intended disposal date.
We are pleased to have been of service on this occasion, and look forward to further co-operation on future
projects.
Yours faithfully,
MATERIAL LAB
________________________
Eng. Naseem Anwar
Geotechnical Manager
CONTENTS PAGE
SUMMARY (i)
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 1
3.0 LOCAL GEOLOGY 1
4.0 SCOPE OF WORK 2
5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 4
6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5
7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 7
8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS 15
PLATES
PLATE 1 LOCATION PLAN
PLATE 2 SITE PLAN
PLATE 3 SPT VALUES VS DEPTH
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A FIELD RESULTS

APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX C APPENDICES TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTS
APPENDIX D CORE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX E SEISMIC ZONES IN PENINSULA
SUMMARY
A geotechnical investigation, comprising of five (05) boreholes (i.e. 5 BHX 30m depth) and
supplementary field testing, was performed as instructed by M/s. Lamprell Energy Ltd for proposed Lifting
Tower crane foundations for Maoray Offshore Windfarm East Ltd in Hamriyah Sea Port Phase-1,
Hamriyah Free Zone, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Fieldwork for the investigation was undertaken on
th rd
between 05 December 2018 and 03 January 2019.
A subsequent programme of laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples recovered
from the site.
The subsurface conditions encountered on the site are consistent and medium dense soil is present up to
10m depth below existing ground level followed by dense to very dense soil (except at location of
borehole BH-01 in which loose soil as encountered up to 2.0m depth below existing ground level).
According of allowable bearing pressure for shallow foundations are given in section 7.0 of this report.
The corrosive potential of soil has also been considered with respect to appropriate concrete mix design
recommendations (section 7.4). Moreover, soil parameters for shoring has been given in section 7.3 and
the seismic soil design parameters are also mentioned in section 7.5 of the report.
During the period of site works groundwater level was encountered approximately at 2.20m depth below
existing ground level in the boreholes.
Report: GSI/0126/18/SHJ (Geotechnical investigation for Hamriyah Sea Port Phase-1at Hamriyah Free Zone, Sharjah)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Material Lab (MLAB) was commissioned by M/s. Lamprell Energy Ltd to perform a geotechnical site
investigation for the construction of Proposed Lifting Tower Foundations for Moray Offshore Windfarm
East Ltd. in Hamriyah Sea Port Phase-1, Hamriyah Free Zone, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. The
th
investigation has been based on MLAB proposal (ref. Q-NA-101018/1726/1/1) dated on 11 October
th
2018 and subsequent approval by the client on 14 October 2018. The work has been performed in
general accordance with the British Standards BS 5930: 1999 +A2:2010 “Code of practice for site
investigations”.
A total of five (05) boreholes of 30.0m depth were drilled on the site forthe proposed structure. The site
location is indicated on the location plan, Plate 1. Field test locations, relative to the proposed site
layout, and existing site features, are indicated on the site plan, Plate 2. Fieldwork for the investigation
was performed on 05th December 2018 and 04th January 2019. The factual field and laboratory data,
together with appropriate engineering interpretation and discussion of results, are presented herein.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The site was located at Hamriya Free Zone Phase -1, Hamriya Free Zone, Sharjah, United Arab
Emirates. The access on the site was available from the main gate after obtaining the gate passes.
There was existing oil refinery close to the site. The underground pipelines/ utilities were verified prior
to start the drilling on the site. Site was close to the ship unload / berth area. At the time of
investigation the site was relatively flat and undeveloped.
3.0 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY
The geology of the United Arab Emirates, and the Arabian Gulf area, has been substantially influenced
by the deposition of marine sediments associated with numerous sea level changes during relatively
recent geological time. With the exception of mountainous regions shared with Oman in the north-east,
the country is relatively low-lying, with near surface geology dominated by Quaternary to late
Pleistocene age, mobile aeolian dune sands, and sabkha/evaporite deposits.
The geologically stable Arabian Plate is separated from the unstable Iranian Fold Belt by the Arabian
Gulf. It is believed that a tilting of the entire Arabian Plate occurred during the early Permian period,
resulting in uplift in southern Yemen, and depression to the north-east. Crustal deformations and
igneous intrusions occurred in the north- east as a result of this movement. Subsequent tectonic
movements, peripheral to the folding of the Iranian Zagros Range, during the Plio-Pleistocene epoch,
probably contributed to the formation of both the Arabian Gulf depression, and the mountainous
regions shared by the United Arab Emirates and Oman in the north- east.
Report: GSI/0126/18/SHJ (Geotechnical Investigation for Lifting Tower Crane at Hamriyah Sea Port Phase-1, Sharjah) Page 1
The near surface geology of the region is dominated by aeolian dune sand deposits of Holocene to
Pleistocene age.These deposits typically comprise fine grained silty calcareous sand, which is
commonly dense and variably cemented beneath a shallow, loose, normally consolidated mobile layer.
Although variable, the degree of cementation generally increases with depth, such that the variably
cemented sand grades to predominantly calcareous sandstone. Very silty, gypsiferous sabkha and
evaporite layers occur occasionally within the aeolian sand deposits.
Although surficial sabkha deposits are found throughout the coastal belt of the Arabian Gulf, and far
inland in the western and southern parts of the United Arab Emirates, they are not particularly common
in the region. Sabkha is an Arabic name used to describe relatively fine grained, hypersaline, silt and
sand deposits, which are commonly saturated with brine, and salt encrusted. These deposits form in
natural evaporation pans where saline water, introduced by sea invasion or elevated saline
groundwater, is able to accumulate at or near ground surface level, assisted by capillary action.
4.0 SCOPE OF WORK
th th
A programme of subsurface investigation performed at the site on 05 December 2018 and 04
January 2019, included the following:
 Total five (05) exploratory boreholes were drilled up to 30.0m depth below existing ground
level with:
 Regular split-spoon sampling during Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) in soils
 Disturbed bulk soil sample from cable percussion drill cuttings
 Coring in core-able cemented material
 Ground water level measurement in boreholes
 Backfilling of boreholes with arising material
 Laboratory Testing
 Presenting engineering report
All of the investigation works were performed by experienced geotechnical personnel under the regular
supervision of an experienced geotechnical engineer. The works were performed in general
accordance with the British Standard BS 5930:1999 +A2:2010 “Code of practice for site
investigations”.
Borehole locations are indicated on Site Plan Plate 2 relative to the proposed site layout and existing
features. Field test results and observations are presented in Appendix A. The presentation of field
results is preceded by summarised explanations of borehole log symbols and classification systems,
and a summary of soil and rock strength definitions, on Plates A1.1 to A1.3, and A2 respectively.
4.1 Exploratory Boreholes
A total of five (05) boreholes of 30.0m depth were drilled on the site. Drilling was performed using a
trailer/ truck mounted DANDO-Geotech drilling rigs. The boreholes were advanced through soil
deposits, including variably cemented sands, using cable percussive equipments and techniques.
The borehole locations were set out by our engineer with the help of hand held GPS and is shown on
the site plan presented as Plate 2.
Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were conducted at regular intervals within the soil layers in order to
estimate the relative densities and obtain samples for classification purposes. Test intervals were 0.5m
to a depth of 2.5m and thereafter 1.0m to the top of rock encountered approximately at 26.0m depth
below existing ground level.
SPTs were conducted in accordance with the relevant British Standard (BS 1377- Part 9); “Methods of
test for soils for civil engineering purposes”. The test involves driving a 50mm external diameter thick
walled split spoon sampler into the bottom of the borehole with successive blows of a 63.5kg hammer
falling freely through 760mm. The sampler is driven through 6 intervals of 75mm and the number of
blows required to penetrate each interval is recorded. The initial 150mm interval is intended to ensure
“seating” of the sampler such that it penetrates beyond the zone of influence of any soil disturbance at
the base of the borehole. The aggregate number of blows to drive the sampler over the final 300mm is
termed the “N” value, and is considered indicative of the in-situ relative soil density.
In very dense and/or cemented soil layers it is often not possible to ensure complete penetration of the
SPT sampler, due to driving refusal, or the risk of damage to sampling equipment as a result of hard
driving. The practical driving limit is of the order of 50 blows for the final 300mm penetration. Where
driving resistance exceeds this limit, SPTs are usually terminated with incomplete penetration. In such
cases the total 50 blows for cemented soil and 100 blows for very weak to weak sandstone driven
against the actual penetration depth is recorded on the borehole logs. A plot of SPT versus Depths is
presented in Plate 3.
Disturbed SPT and bulk soil samples collected during drilling were retained in sealed, labelled plastic
jars.
All samples were transported to the Material Lab sample processing and storage facility for detailed
logging and sample processing. Representative samples were selected for laboratory testing to assist
with sample descriptions and determination of engineering material properties. Individual borehole logs
are presented in Appendix A, Plates A3.1.1 to A3.5.3.
During the period of site works groundwater level was encountered approximately at 2.20m depth
below existing ground level in the boreholes.
5.0 LABORATORY TESTING
A programme of laboratory testing was performed on selected samples of soil obtained during the
fieldwork. Test results have been used to assist with classifications, and determinations of relevant
physical and mechanical properties of soil and rock samples. Chemical test results have been used to
determine the corrosivity of soil. In general, laboratory testing has been performed in accordance with
ASTM and British Standard procedures.
Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. The type of laboratory tests performed for this
project with corresponding tests methods are listed in table 1 below.
Table 1: List of Laboratory tests performed
Quantity of
S/N Type of Test Test Specification
Test
1 Sieve Analysis Test Method:-BS 1377: Part 2: 1990: Amd.

9
9027: 1996: Cl: 9.2 (Wet Sieving)
2 Sulphate as SO3 , ( % ) BS 1377:Part 3: 1990 Cl. 5.2 & 5.5: Amd

4
9028:96
3 Chloride as Cl., (%) BS 1377: Part 3: 1990: Cl. 7.3: Amd 9028: 96 4
4 pH Value BS 1377: Part 3: Cl. 9: 1990: Amd 9028: 96 4
5 Unconfined Compressive ASTM D 7012.04.Cl.9

6
Strength
6 Point Load ASTM 5731-02 6
5.1 Particle Size Distribution
The particle size distribution was determined for nine (09) soil samples in accordance with the wet
sieving method described in BS 1377: Part 2. Compliance with the Standard, with respect to minimum
sample quantity is dependent on the maximum significant grain size and the method of sampling.
In particular, for SPT samples, the quantity of soil available for testing is typically about 100g. This
sample quantity is considered representative where grain sizes range up to 2mm (i.e. to coarse sand
size). Where significant quantities of coarser particles are present, the particle size distribution
obtained from SPT samples should be regarded as indicative only. It is particularly important to
recognize the limitations of SPT samples where medium to coarse grained gravels and/or cobbles are
present.
The test results are presented as particle size distribution curves on Plates B1.1 to B1.5.
5.2 Unconfined Compressive Strength
A total of six (06) unconfined compressive strength (UCS) tests were conducted on selected rock core
specimens in accordance with the methods outlined in ASTM D 7012.04.Cl.9.
Sample ends were carefully prepared by trimming with a circular saw, ensuring that each end was flat
and plane. During testing, applied load and axial strain were monitored, enabling measurement of the
UCS for each intact rock specimen. It is important to recognise that it is only possible to test intact
samples, and that the test results do not therefore represent the degree of fracturing or weathering of
the rock mass. These considerations are typically taken into account using empirical methods based
on rock quality designation (RQD) measurements.
Individual plots of stress versus strain are presented on Plates B2.1 to B2.6.
5.3 Point Load Tests
A total of six (06) Point Load Tests was conducted on selected rock core specimens in accordance
with ASTM 5731-02. Tests were performed on both axially and diametrically loaded samples.
Regional experience suggests that the following relationship between Is(50) and UCS is appropriate for
the carbonate rocks encountered:
UCS/Is(50) = 5 to 10
In this report conversion factor (K=10) can be used to obtain UCS values from the point load strength
Index Is(50). The chemical test results are summarised on Plate B3.1 to B3.2.
5.4 Chemical Analyses.
Chemical analysis was performed on four (04) soil samples to determine sulphate content, chloride
content, and pH levels. These analyses were performed in accordance with the BS 1377: Part 3
methods for testing acid soluble sulphate (expressed as percentage of sulfur trioxide) and chloride
contents.
The chemical test results are summarised on Plate B4.1 to B4.3.
6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface strata encountered during drilling are given on the Borehole Logs in Appendix A,
Plates A3.1.1 to A3.5.3. The borehole observations and test results indicate relatively consistent
subsurface conditions over the site (except at location BH-01 in which loose soil was encountered up
to 2.0m depth below existing ground level).
6.1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS FOR BH-01 TO BH-05
The boreholes revealed light brown to brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained, SAND with
frequent road base gravels up to 0.50m depth followed by Medium dense to dense, light brown to
brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained, SAND with some cemented sand pieces up to
2.50m depth (except in borehole BH-01 in which very loose to loose soil encountered up to 2.5m depth
below exiting ground level). Below this material medium dense, greyish brown to brown, slightly silty
to silty, fine to medium grained, shelly SAND with frequent tiny shell fragments <2mm in size. up to
8.50m depth followed by dense, grey, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained, SAND up to 9.50m
depth below existing ground level.
Below this material dense becoming very dense, light brown to brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to
medium grained, SAND up to 22.50m depth followed by medium dense, creamish brown, slightly silty
to silty, fine to medium grained, shelly SAND up to 7.50m depth followed by dense becoming very
dense, light brown to brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained, SAND up to 11.50m depth
very dense, light brown to brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained, SAND with some tiny
shell fragments up to 17.50m depth followed by very dense, light brown to reddish brown, slightly silty
to silty, fine to medium grained, SAND with slightly to moderately cemented sand pieces recovered as
SPTs sample up to 26.0m depth below existing ground level.
Below this fresh to slightly weathered, very weak to weak, light brown to brown, fine to medium grained
SANDSTONE up to 30.0m depth below existing ground level.
The design subsurface profile summarised below in table 2 is recommended for foundation design
purposes. For more detailed, location specific descriptions, reference should be made to the borehole
logs presented in Appendix A.
Table 2:- Recommended Design Subsurface Profile For BH-01 to BH-05
Range Material Description
Material Classification
(m) *begl
Light brown to brown, slightly silty to silty, fine
GL to 0.5
to medium grained, SAND with frequent road -
base gravels.
Medium dense to dense, light brown to brown,
slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained,
0.5m to 2.50m SAND with some cemented sand pieces. RD:
(except in borehole BH-01 in which very loose Medium dense, SAND
to loose soil encountered up to 2.5m depth
below exiting ground level)
Medium dense, greyish brown to brown,
2.50m to 8.50m slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained, RD:
shelly SAND with frequent tiny shell fragments Medium dense, SAND
<2mm in size.
Dense, grey, slightly silty to silty, fine to RD:
8.50m to 9.5m medium grained, SAND. Dense, SAND
Dense becoming very dense, light brown to RD:
9.50m to 22.5m brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium Dense to Very dense,
grained, SAND. SAND
Very dense, light brown to brown, slightly silty RD:
22.50m to 26.0m to silty, fine to medium grained, SAND with Very dense, SAND,
rare tiny shell fragments and some cemented
sand pieces.
Fresh to slightly weathered, very weak to RD:
26.0m to 30.0m weak, light brown to reddish brown, fine to Rock
medium grained SANDSTONE.
*begl= Below Existing Ground Level
During the period of site works groundwater level recorded from borehole was approximately at 2.20m
below existing ground level.
7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions with respect to the design
of foundations for the proposed construction on this site. It is understood from the information provided
by the client that it is proposed to construct tower foundation on this site. It is further understood that
shallow foundation is proposed to be constructed on this site. However, at the time of writing this
report detailed information regarding foundation layout or loadings had not been made available so
that only a general discussion can be undertaken.
The observed sub-surface conditions are such that medium dense soil are present up to 12.0m depth
followed by dense to very dense sand on this site (except in borehole BH-01 in which very loose to
loose soil encountered up to 2.5m depth below exiting ground level). Accordingly, recommendation for
shallow foundation for proposed tower foundations are given below in this section.
7.1 Shallow Foundation
Allowable bearing pressures are dependent on the shear strength of the soil and the tolerance of the
proposed structure to settlement. In granular soils, the latter factor is normally more critical. Settlements in
such deposits normally take place during construction and initial loading but, where more silty or cohesive
materials exist; there could be a degree of time dependent consolidation.
Based on the Standard Penetration Test (SPT’s) carried out in the boreholes, following allowable
bearing pressure given in table 3 can be used safe in order to keep the settlements within tolerable
limits. For wider, or raft type of foundation, an allowable bearing pressures with corresponding
settlement is given below.
Table 3:- Allowable Bearing pressure and Settlement for raft foundation (Meyerhof Method)
Vicinity of Type of Depth of Allowable Allowable Modulus of
Foundation
Boreholes Foundation Bearing Settlement Sub-grade
Pressure Reaction
2 3
(m *begl) (kN/m ) (mm) (kN/m )
Note 1
BH02-BH05 Raft 1.5 150 50 7,500
BH-01 Raft 1.5 150 Note 2 50 7,500
*begl= Below Existing Ground Level
Note 1: It is recommended to place at least one layer of engineered fill material not more than (200mm
thick) below the foundation. Layer of engineered fill material shall be thoroughly compacted to not less
than 95% of maximum dry density (MDD) as determined by the modified proctor test. At least one
plate load test for each building shall be performed on the final compacted layer to confirm the bearing
pressure.
Note 2: It is found that loose soil is present at BH-01 up to 2.0m depth below existing ground level. It is
recommended to excavate the site up to 2.0m depth and then backfill with engineered fill material in
layers up to required foundation level. Layer of engineered fill material shall not exceed more than
200mm in thickness and thoroughly compacted to not less than 95% of maximum dry density (MDD)
as determined by the modified proctor test. At least one plate load test for each building shall be
performed on the final compacted layer to confirm the bearing pressure at location BH-01.
The excavated surface should also be compacted to not less than 95% of soils maximum dry density
as determined from proctor. The compacted surface should then be protected by immediately covering
with a layer of concrete blinding.
It is recommended for confirmation of compliance with compaction requirements that field density
testing should be performed at a frequency of about two tests every 200m2.
When excavating to foundation level, care should be taken not to disturb strata underlying formation
level otherwise settlement in excess of those quoted above could occur. If any disturbance does occur,
or if any soft spots or gypsiferous soils are encountered, the material should be removed and replaced
by selected granular fill, which should be properly compacted before the foundations are constructed.
7.1.1 Piled Foundation
If preferred, piled foundation may be consider as an alternate to shallow foundations. The Bored or
augured, cast in-situ pile is considered suitable piling system in the ground condition encountered at
this site. Based on the field test results carried out in boreholes, allowable working capacities for
various pile diameters with different pile lengths were calculated as per following equation.
Qu = Qp + Qf
Qu = Total Ultimate Pile Capacity
Qp = Ultimate Load Carried in End Bearing (Pile base)
Qf = Ultimate Load Carried by Friction Along Perimeter of Pile
According to M.J. Tomlinson, (Fourth Edition, 1994), the following equations are used for the case of
cohesionless soils:
Qp = Nq .  vo . Ab
Qf = 1/2 . Ks .  vo . tan  . As
Where,
 vo = Effective overburden pressure at pile base level
Ab = Pile Base area
As = Pile shaft area in contract with soil
Nq = Bearing Capacity factor
Ks = Coefficient of horizontal soil stress
 = Angle of friction between pile and soil
A factor of safety of 2.5 was used to estimate the allowable working loads as provided in table 3.1
below. However the actual value obtained will largely depend upon the method of forming the pile. The
depth that a pile is set into the bearing stratum is a function of the type and diameter of pile used and
should be determined by the specialist piling contractor. However in general bored piles are founded
about two diameters into cemented sand to ensure that the base is adequately fixed into the bearing
stratum.
Table 4:- Theoretical Pile capacities in Compression with approximate cut off level= 2.0m begl
Pile Depth of Ultimate Working Allowable Allowable Ultimate
Diameter Pile Toe Load in Working Load in Working Load Lateral Pile
Compression Compression in Tension Capacity
Mechanism Mechanism Mechanism
(KN) (KN) (KN) (KN)
(mm) (m begl)
18 2275 910 246 1516
20 2371 948 277 1580
22 2466 986 307 1644
450 24 2563 1025 338 1708
26 2659 1063 369 1772
28 2755 1102 400 1836
30 2851 1140 430 1900
18 2713 1085 273 1809
20 2819 1127 307 1879
22 2926 1170 341 1950

500 24 3033 1213 376 2022
26 3140 1256 409 2093
28 3246 1298 443 2164
30 3353 1341 478 2235
18 3701 1480 327 2467
20 3830 1532 368 2553
22 3958 1583 410 2638
600 24 4430 1772 450 2953
26 4558 1823 492 3038
28 4686 1874 532 3124
30 4814 1925 573 3209
18 5464 2185 409 3542
20 5624 2249 461 3749
22 5784 2313 512 3856
750 24 5944 2377 563 3962
26 6104 2441 614 4069
28 6264 2505 665 4176
30 6425 2570 717 4283
18 7561 3024 492 5040
20 7753 3101 553 5168
22 7945 3178 615 5296
900 24 8137 3254 676 5424
26 8330 3332 737 5553
28 8522 3409 799 5681
30 8714 3485 860 5809
18 9145 3658 547 6096
20 9358 3743 614 6239
22 9572 3828 683 6381
1000 24 9785 3914 751 6523
26 9999 3999 819 6666
28 10212 4084 888 6808
30 10426 4170 956 6950
18 12759 5104 655 8506
20 13016 5206 738 8677
22 13272 5308 820 8848
1200 24 13528 5411 901 9018
26 13784 5513 983 9189
28 14040 5616 1065 9360
30 14297 5719 1147 9531
begl= below existing ground level
The lateral load capacity of a single pile depends not only on the horizontal subgrade modulus of
surrounding soil but also on the structural strength of the pile shaft against bending, consequent upon
application of a lateral load. While considering lateral loads on the piles, affect of other co-existent loads,
including axial load on the pile, should be taken into consideration for checking the structural capacity of
shaft. It is strongly recommended that the adequacy of design should be checked by an actual field load
test to be performed on the site. The lateral pile capacities calculated are based on the Bromes method for
analysis of single pile under lateral load.
However details of (fixed headed or free headed) has not been provided therefore below mentioned
values are calculated based on the available information. It is strongly recommended that structural
foundations should be consulted to determine the allowable lateral load capacities for the design.
Theoretical methods give an approximate working load and advice should be taken from specialist piling
contractors as to the actual working loads of the various proprietary piles available before foundation
designs are finalized. Pile load tests are considered the most satisfactory method to assess the carrying
capacity of a pile. It is therefore recommended that such tests be performed according to British Standard
Code of Practice 8004 on specially constructed piles installed before the start of the general construction
works during the foundation construction period. However, if pre-contract testing is carried out, significant
savings may result from a more economical pile design based upon specific test data.
At the allowable working loads given above, the settlement of piles will be small and differential settlement
will be minimal. However, load-settlement characteristics of piles assumed in design should be checked
by random pile tests.
With cast in-situ piles, care must be taken to avoid slumping or necking of concrete as the casing or auger
is withdrawn. If precautions are not taken the effective area of the piles and hence the working load could
be reduced and the pile reinforcement could become exposed to serious chemical attack.
It is recommended that the integrity of each pile should be checked, using, for example, an ultrasonic
testing technique. In order to be able to check for possible slumping or necking it is recommended
that preference should be given to a testing technique that can model the interaction between the pile
and the soil.
7.2 Dewatering and Excavation
Groundwater level encountered approximately at 2.20m depth below existing ground, accordingly the
site will not need dewatering in order to set the foundation approximately 1.5m depth on this site.
The excavation works should be carried out in accordance with good construction practice, such as
that embodied in British Standards BS 6031: 1981 “Code of Practice for Earthworks”, or a similar
recognized Standard.
In addition precautions should be taken to prevent any ingress of water into more silty horizons both
during and after construction otherwise settlement in excess of those quoted above could occur.
7.3 Soil Parameters
The soil parameters recommended below are based on the sub surface strata encountered on the site.
Table 4: Recommended Soil Parameters
Soil Properties
Soil Parameters Symbol
GL-10m
Angle of Shearing resistance  o
32
Unit weight of soil ( above water table ) d 1.75

Mg/m3
Unit weight of soil ( below water table ) s 0.75
3
Mg/m
Active Earth Pressure Ka 0.31
Passive Earth pressure Kp 3.22
Earth Pressure at rest Ko 0.48
In the above table active earth pressure (Ka), Passive Earth Pressure (Pa) and earth pressure at rest
(Ko) are calculated based on Rankine’s Theory for retaining structures.
7.4 Concrete Design For Foundation Purposes
Four (04) soil samples were tested for chemical analyses. For guidance for a suitable concrete design it
is recommended that reference should be made to CIRIA Special Publication 31 (The CIRIA Guide to
Concrete Construction in the Gulf Region published by the Construction Industry Research and
Information Association, London 1984). This publication considers both sulphate and chloride
contamination of soils and groundwater in various exposure conditions and is not restricted just to sub-
surface concrete.
Figure 6 and Table 13 from this publication is presented in Appendix C of this report and with
reference to this Figure it is considered that this site would be classed as significant sulphate and
chloride contamination. On the base of this consideration Exposure Condition d(IV) as per table 13 in
appendix C should be apply, and however it is recommended that an Sulphate Resisting Cement
(SRC)or an ASTM type II cement be used in a mix meeting the following criteria :-
 Minimum cement content for 20mm aggregates 320 to 380 kg/m3

 Maximum water : cement ratio 0.50 to 0.42
 Minimum cover for reinforcement 40mm to 50mm
In addition it is recommended that the surface of all concrete in contact with the soil should be covered
with a suitable waterproof membrane or coating. However, prior to finalising and adopting a mix design,
appropriate consultation with the structural engineer is advised.
7.5 Seismic Design Parameters and Soil Profile Type
As no geophysical testing (i.e. cross-hole or down-hole seismic testing) was performed at the site, so no
analysis was made in the report. It should be noted that the below reported values are considered to be
tentative and based on the results of the drilled boreholes as well as the classification mentioned in the
UBC and that only geophysical logging of boreholes can give exact value of the shear wave velocity.
The current practices in UAE are to follow the provision of UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1994 for seismic
design parameters. However, the latest version of code (i.e. UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1997) may also
to be adopted. Based on the provisions of (UNIFORM BUILDING CODE) and existing subsoil conditions
in the site, the following design parameters may be adopted:
According to Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997 for seismic design parameters and based on seismic
activity, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates has been grouped under Seismic Zone 2A with Seismic Zone
Factor (Z) 0.15.
The seismic design parameters for soil strata encountered at this site representing Soil Profile type Sc
(very dense soil) may be adopted for the design with a shear wave velocity within the range up to 360 to
760 m/sec. as per UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1997. In addition, following Seismic Coefficients Cv and
Ca can be considered depending on the Seismic Zone Factor Z:
 Soil Profile Type = Sc

 The seismic coefficient Ca = 0.18
 The seismic coefficient Cv = 0.25
However, the available data about the earthquake and seismic zone for Arabian Peninsula is also
attached in Appendix E, Fig 1 to Fig 3.
7.6 Construction Supervision
An experienced engineer or supervisor should be present on the site to oversee all earthworks and
foundation construction activities. In particular, it is recommended that all foundation excavations are
inspected by a suitably qualified geotechnical engineer, prior to foundation construction, to ensure that the
contact surface is properly prepared, and that exposed sub-surface conditions are consistent with design
assumptions.
In addition to above, at the time of foundation construction, this laboratory shall be contacted to carry out
in-situ field density, compaction, plate load, pile integrity tests (in case of piles recommendation) or other
tests recommended in this report at random locations selected by our engineer. Without which a letter of
confirmation cannot be issued for the safe bearing pressure and foundation levels.
8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS
As mentioned in the report the boreholes made were of 150/100mm in diameter. The information received
from the limited number and the diameter of boreholes may not represent the entire site and may not
reveal all the weak layers or conditions especially when they are localized. Hence no responsibility can be
borne for conditions not revealed by boreholes made on the site. In case of any such findings we shall be
contacted immediately to arrange a site visit by a geotechnical engineer to make an onsite study of such
conditions after which recommendations if it is deemed necessary will be revised.
The borehole logs and related information represent subsurface conditions only at the specific locations
and times where sampling was conducted. Any lines designating the changes between soil and/ or rock
layers represent approximate boundaries. The transition between deposits / strata may be gradual, or may
occur between recovered samples.
The recommendations and discussions given in this report are based on the subsurface conditions
encountered during the site investigation work and on the results of the field and laboratory testing on
samples obtained from the limited number of boreholes. There may be, however, conditions pertaining
to the site which has not been in to account due to the limited number of boreholes.
PLATES
LOCATION PLAN PLATE 1

SITE PLAN PLATE 2
SPT VALUES VS DEPTH PLATE 3
SITE LOCATION
Hamriyah Free Zone
SITE: Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1 TITLE: Location Plan

Hamriyah Free Zone
Sharjah,
JOB REF : GSI/0126/18/SHJ United Arab Emirates
DATE: 19-Jan-19 CLIENT: M/s. Lamprell Energy LTD PLATE No: 1

SITE LOCATION
Hamriyah Free Zone
SITE: Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1 TITLE: Site plan

Hamriyah Free Zone
Sharjah,

'N' VALUES
Very Loose Loose M.Dense Dense V.Dense
0
6
Design Profile
7
10
11
DEPTH (m)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1 10 100
BH 1-SPT BH 2-SPT BH 3-SPT BH 4-SPT BH 5-SPT Design Profile
SITE: Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1 TITLE:

Hamriyah Free Zone Summary of SPT
Sharjah, Values vs Depth
APPENDIX A
FIELD RESULTS
BOREHOLE LOG LEGEND & CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS PLATES A1.1 TO A1.3

SOIL STRENGTH DEFINITIONS PLATE A2
BOREHOLE LOGS PLATES A3.1.1 TO A3.5.3
SYMBOL LEGEND FOR GEOTECHNICAL LOGS
Appendix A: Plate A1.1

SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Based on BS 5930)

CARBONATE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Based on Clark & Walker)

SOIL AND ROCK STRENGTH DEFINITIONS
Appendix A: Plate A2
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTS PLATE B1.1 TO B1.5

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH PLATE B2.1 TO B2.6
POINT LOAD TEST PLATE B3.1 TO B3.2
CHEMICAL TESTS PLATE B4.1 TO B4.3
REPORT ON PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Client M/s. Lamprell Energy LTD Report No GSI/0126/18/SHJ
Project Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1 Location Hamriya Port Sharjah, UAE
100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
60.0
0.006
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.001
0.002
2.0
6.0
60.
0.01
20.0
0.06
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE MEDIUM COARSE
CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5836/BH01/1

Borehole No. Sample No Depth (m) Description Clay (%) Silt(%) Sand(%) Gravels%)
BH01 S4 1.50-1.95 Silty, SAND 0 5 95 0
100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.2
0.6
2.0
6.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.06
60.0
20.0
60.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0

CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5836/BH01/2

Borehole No. Sample No Depth (m) Description Clay (%) Silt(%) Sand(%) Gravels(%)
BH01 S5 2.00-2.45 Gravelly, Silty SAND 0 9 86 5
Tested By RPS Checked By MMR
Test Method:-BS 1377: Part 2: 1990: Amd. 9027: 1996: Cl: 9.2 (Wet Sieving).
Sample Preparation Method: BS 1377:Part 2:Cl.9.2.3 Amd. 9027:1996.
Note : This Test is Accredited by Dubai Accreditation Department. Plate :B 1.1

Result relates only to the item tested.
This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory.
100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
60.0
0.006
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.001
0.002
2.0
6.0
60.
0.01
20.0
0.06
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0
CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5836/BH02/1

BH02 S5 2.50-2.95 Silty, Gravelly SAND 0 6 88 6
100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.2
0.6
2.0
6.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.06
60.0
20.0
60.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0

CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5836/BH02/2

BH02 S6 3.50-3.95 Silty Gravelly, SAND with few Shells 0 6 70 24

100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
60.0
0.006
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.001
0.002
2.0
6.0
60.
0.01
20.0
0.06
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0
CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5836/BH02/3

BH02 S7 4.50-4.95 Silty, Gravelly SAND 0 7 70 23
100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.2
0.6
2.0
6.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.06
60.0
20.0
60.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0

CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
60.0
0.006
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.001
0.002
2.0
6.0
60.
0.01
20.0
0.06
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0
CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5853/BH03/1

BH03 S4 1.50-1.95 Silty, SAND 0 13 87 0
100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.2
0.6
2.0
6.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.06
60.0
20.0
60.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0

CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5853/BH03/2

BH03 S5 2.00-2.45 Silty, SAND and few Shell 0 6 94 0

100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
60.0
0.006
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.001
0.002
2.0
6.0
60.
0.01
20.0
0.06
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0
CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5853/BH04/1

BH04 S7 3.50-3.95 Gravelly, Silty SAND with few Shell 0 6 89 5
100
90
80
70
Percentage Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.2
0.6
2.0
6.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.06
60.0
20.0
60.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0

CLAY Cobble
SILT SAND GRAVEL
Lab. Ref. No. 18-5853/BH04/2

BH04 S8 4.50-4.95 Slightly Gravelly, silty SAND with few shell 0 6 90 4

REPORT ON UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST OF INTACT ROCK CORE
Page: 1 of 2
Client : M/s. Lamprell Energy LTD
Project name : Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1
Project Location : Hamriya Port Sharjah, UAE
Source of Sample : Site
Borehole No. : BH01
Depth (m) : 26.20
Sample Description : Rock
Formation Name : Sedimentary Rock
Visual description : Extremely weak, Gypsiferous SANDSTONE
Load Direction : Vertical
Condition of Sample : Moist Condition
Before Testing
Sample Received on : 23/12/2018 Report No : '5841

Date test Started : 25/12/2018 Lab Project No : GSI/0126/18/SHJ
Date test completed : 29/12/2018 Lab Sample No : 18- '5841/BH01/2
Reporting Date : 29/12/2018 Testing Temperature : 24°C
Moisture Content (%) : 10.0 Relative Humidity : 50%
3
Wet Density(Mg/m ) : 1.77 Failure Time Duration (min) : 2.1
3
Dry Density(Mg/m ) : 1.61 Tested By : SR
Rate of Loading mm/min : 0.04
Test Result
Sample Details Dimensions Maximum Compressive

L/D Ratio
Borehole ID Depth(m) Diameter (mm)Height (mm) Load(kN) Strength (MPa)
BH01 26.20 75 171 2.28 0.4 0.09
Limits
Straightness (Procedure S1) Maximum gap (mm) 0.40
≤ 0.50 mm
Maximum gap Δ(mm) 0.50
Perpendicularity (Procedure P2) ≤ 0.0043
Δ/L 0.0029
Mode of Failure Shear Failure
Test method Uniaxial Compressive Strength: ASTM D 7012:14 (Method C)

Test method Moisture Content : ASTM D -2216-10
Test Sample Preparation Method : ASTM D-4543-08 CLS (S1=9.1.1) (FP2=9.2.2) (P2=9.3.2)
Sampling Method : ASTM D 7012: 14 CL 8.0
Method Variation : None
Remarks : Compressive Strength Result is reported to the nearest 0.01 Mpa.
Note: This test is accredited by Dubai Accreditation Department .

Authorized Signatory
Plate B2.1
R-S-UCS-001Issue No.1
Rev. No. 1,
Results relate only to the items tested.This report shall not be reproduced except in full without the written approval of the laboratory. Date : 20/12/2017
End Flatness
Page: 2 of 2
Report No : '5841 Borehole No. : BH01
Lab Project No. : GSI/0126/18/SHJ Depth (m) : 26.20
End 1 Reading @ 0 End 2 Reading @ 0

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Maximum Deviation from straight line (micron) 18 Maximum Deviation from straight line (micron) 17
Acceptance Criteria (micron) 25 Acceptance Criteria (micron) 25

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Plate B2.1
Rev. No. 1,
Page: 1 of 2
Borehole No. : BH01
Depth (m) : 29.10
Before Testing

3
3
Test Result

L/D Ratio
BH01 29.10 75 150 2.00 1.5 0.33
Limits
≤ 0.50 mm
Δ/L 0.0033


Plate B2.2
Rev. No. 1,
End Flatness
Page: 2 of 2

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.08 0.068
0.066
0.06
0.064
0.04 0.062
0.06
0.02
0.058
0 0.056
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Plate B2.2
Rev. No. 1,
Page: 1 of 2
Borehole No. : BH02
Depth (m) : 28.20
Before Testing

3
3
Test Result

L/D Ratio
BH02 28.20 70 150 2.14 0.7 0.18
Limits
≤ 0.50 mm
Δ/L 0.0032


Plate B2.3
Rev. No. 1,
End Flatness
Page: 2 of 2

0.075 0.08
0.07 0.06
0.065 0.04
0.06 0.02
0.055 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Plate B2.3
Rev. No. 1,
Page: 1 of 2
Borehole No. : BH03
Depth (m) : 28.75
Before Testing

3
3
Test Result

L/D Ratio
BH03 28.75 75 150 2.00 0.4 0.09
Limits
≤ 0.50 mm
Δ/L 0.0029


Plate B2.4
Rev. No. 1,
End Flatness
Page: 2 of 2

0.08 0.085
0.078
0.076 0.08
0.074 0.075
0.072
0.07 0.07
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.075 0.08
0.075
0.07
0.07
0.065
0.065
0.06 0.06
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.082 0.075
0.08
0.07
0.078
0.065
0.076
0.074 0.06
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Plate B2.4
Rev. No. 1,
Page: 1 of 2
Borehole No. : BH03
Depth (m) : 29.13
Before Testing

3
3
Test Result

L/D Ratio
BH03 29.13 75 150 2.00 0.6 0.14
Limits
≤ 0.50 mm
Δ/L 0.0033


Plate B2.5
Rev. No. 1,
End Flatness
Page: 2 of 2

0.1 0.078
0.08 0.076
0.06
0.074
0.04
0.02 0.072
0 0.07
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.08 0.1
0.08
0.075 0.06
0.07 0.04
0.02
0.065 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.1 0.1
0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Plate B2.5
Rev. No. 1,
Page: 1 of 2
Borehole No. : BH04
Depth (m) : 27.00
Before Testing

3
3
Test Result

L/D Ratio
BH04 27.00 75 150 2.00 2.9 0.66
Limits
≤ 0.50 mm
Δ/L 0.0033


Plate B2.6
Rev. No. 1,
End Flatness
Page: 2 of 2

0.08 0.074
0.073
0.06
0.072
0.04 0.071
0.07
0.02
0.069
0 0.068
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

0.074 0.07
0.072 0.068
0.07 0.066
0.064
0.068 0.062
0.066 0.06
0.064 0.058
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Plate B2.6
Rev. No. 1,
REPORT ON POINT LOAD STRENGTH INDEX OF ROCKS

Project Name : Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1
Date sample received : 23/12/2018 Report No : 5841

Date test Started : 24/12/2018 Lab Project No. : GSI/0126/18/SHJ
Date test completed : 29/12/2018 Borehole No : BH02
Date Reported : 29/12/2018 Tested By : SR
Test Data
Platen
separation Failure Point Load Index
Lab Borehole Test Diameter
Depth (m) (mm) Load
Reference No. No. Type De (mm)
(kN) IS IS (50)
D D'
(Mpa) (Mpa)
18-5841/BH02/1 BH02 C3 / 29.00 Diametral 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.370 0.066 0.081
18-5841/BH01/1 BH01 C2 / 27.80 Diametral 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.135 0.024 0.029
Test Method : ASTM D 5731-2016

Method variation : None
Remarks : None
Results relate only to the item tested.

This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without written approval of the laboratory. Plate B 3.1
REPORT ON POINT LOAD STRENGTH INDEX OF ROCKS

Project Name : Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1
Date sample received : 03/01/2019 Report No : 5853

Date test Started : 06/01/2019 Lab Project No. : GSI/0126/18/SHJ
Date test completed : 14/01/2019 Borehole No : BH03 & BH04
Date Reported : 15/01/2019 Tested By : SR
Test Data
Platen
separation Failure Point Load Index
Lab Borehole Test Diameter
Depth (m) (mm) Load
Reference No. No. Type De (mm)
(kN) IS IS (50)
D D'
(Mpa) (Mpa)
18-5853/BH03/1 BH03 C1 / 26.65 Diametral 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.646 0.114 0.140
18-5853/BH03/2 BH03 C2 / 27.37 Diametral 70.0 70.0 70.0 0.543 0.111 0.131
18-5853/BH04/3 BH04 C1 / 26.30 Diametral 70.0 70.0 70.0 0.241 0.049 0.058
18-5853/BH04/4 BH04 C4 / 29.40 Diametral 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.287 0.051 0.062
Test Method : ASTM D 5731-2016

Method variation : None
Remarks : None
Results relate only to the item tested.

This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without written approval of the laboratory. Plate B 3.2
REPORT ON CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL ( WATER SOLUBLE)
Client : M/s. Lamprell Energy LTD Report No : 5836 S/N 1/1
Project : Hamriyah Sea Port Phase 1 Lab Project No : GSI/0126/18/SHJ
Project Location : Hamriya Port Sharjah, UAE Date sample Received : 18/12/2018
Sample Description : Soil Date test started : 18/12/2018
Source of sample : Site BH01 Date test completed : 22/12/2018
Date of sampling : 18/12/2018 Report Date : 23/12/2018
Sampled by : Material Lab Tested by : ABM
Sample brought in by : Material Lab
Test Data
Sulphate as Chloride as
SOIL SAMPLE pH Value
SO3 ( %) Cl. ( % )
Passing BS 1377:Part 3: 1990 BS 1377: Part 3:

Borehole Sample Depth BS 1377: Part 3: Cl. 9:
Lab Ref 2mm Cl. 5.3 & 5.5: Amd 1990: Cl. 7.2: Amd
No. No. (m) 1990: Amd 9028: 96
Sieve % 9028:96 9028: 96
O
BH01 S6 2.50-2.95 18-5836/BH01/1 88 0.03 0.19 8.9 @ 25.0 C
.
Test Specimen Preparation : Sulphate BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 Amd 9028-96 Cl. 5.3.2
Chloride BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 Amd 9028-96 Cl. 7.2.3.2
PH BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 Amd 9028-96 Cl. 9.4
Test Method Variation : None

Remarks : Water to Soil ratio for Sulphate and Chloride is 2:1.
Note : This Test is Accredited by Dubai Accreditation Department. Authorized Signatory
Results related only to the item tested.

This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory. Plate :B 4.1
Source of sample : Site BH02 Date test completed : 29/12/2018
Test Data
SO3 ( %) Cl. ( % )

No. No. (m) 1990: Amd 9028: 96
Sieve % 9028:96 9028: 96
O
BH02 S8 5.50-5.95 18-5841/BH02/1 89 0.04 0.17 9.1 @ 25.0 C
.
PH BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 Amd 9028-96 Cl. 9.4


Source of sample : Site BH03 & BH04 Date test completed : 08/01/2019
Test Data
SO3 ( %) Cl. ( % )

No. No. (m) 1990: Amd 9028: 96
Sieve % 9028:96 9028: 96
O
BH03 S6 2.50-2.95 18-5853/BH03/1 83 0.02 0.08 8.9 @ 25.0 C
O
BH04 S9 5.50-5.95 18-5853/BH04/2 63 0.02 0.04 9.0 @ 25.0 C
.
PH BS 1377 : Part 3 : 1990 Amd 9028-96 Cl. 9.4


APPENDIX C
APPENDICES TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTS
APPENDIX TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT PLATE C1

FIGURE 6 AND TABLE 13 FROM CIRIA SPECIAL PUBLICATION 31 PLATE C2
APPENDIX TO SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT
C- 1.1 GROUNDWATER
The water level recorded in a borehole during boring and / or drilling does not indicate the actual
level of the water table. The drilling process and dewatering in the vicinity, can affect the level of
groundwater, particularly when rotary drilling is in process, the water is normally used as the drilling
fluid.
To obtain a true indication and for long term observations of the stable groundwater level perforated
standpipe/ piezometer should be installed in a borehole.
C- 1.2 GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION
Factual evidence has been obtained from the results of the boreholes and other field tests. These
evidences only provide information about a relatively small column of the soil and rock and the
possibility of actual conditions differing must be recognised.
The comments and recommendations given in this report are subjected to the limitations imposed
by the inherent nature of the site investigation. Hence no responsibilities can be born for conditions
not revealed by boreholes or trial pits made on the site. In case of any such findings, we shall be
contacted immediately to arrange a site visit by our geotechnical engineer to make an onsite study
of such conditions after which recommendations if it is deemed necessary will be revised.
The interpretation and conclusions given in this report assume that the ground conditions do not
vary beyond the range revealed by the investigation. It is possible that different conditions may be
present on, or adjacent to the site which have not been investigated and therefore, have not been
considered.
The recommendations given in this report apply only to the proposed developments and should not
be used for any other project on the site or adjacent sites, without consulting this laboratory.
Appendix C: Plate C1.1

APPENDIX D
APPENDIX TO CORE PHOTOS
CORE PHOTOS PLATE D
CORE PHOTOGRAPHS
Report: GSI/0126/18/SHJ (Geotechnical investigation for Lifting Tower Crane at Hamriyah Sea Port Phase-1, Sharjah) Plate D1
CORE PHOTOGRAPHS
CORE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX TO SIESMIC ZONES IN ARABIAN PENINSULA
SEISMIC ZONES IN ARABIAN PENINSULA PLATE E
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
FRAME REACTIONS LOADS
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A1
Issued : 30.04.2019
DESIGN OF JACKET UPENDING TOWER
Figure 1: Model in SESAM Software – Weight 225 MT
5.0 LOAD AND LOADING COMBINATIONS
Loads considered:
1) Self-weight of upending tower

2) Hook load of 600 MT
3) Force due to Side-lead – Considering 2 Degree – 21 MT
4) Force due to Off-lead – Considering 2 Degree – 21 MT
5) Wind speed of 70 knots considered for storm condition
6) Wind speed of 30 knots considered for operational condition
With above load and load factors, WSD method is used for assessment.
Load Combinations as follows:
1) Self-weight of tower + (1.35 x Hook Load)
2) Self-weight of tower + (1.35 x Hook Load) + (1.35 x Side-lead Force in +Y Direction) + Wind in
Operational Condition (in +Y direction)
3) Self-weight of tower + (1.35 x Hook Load) + (1.35 x Side-lead Force in -Y Direction) + Wind in
Operational Condition (in -Y direction)
4) Self-weight of tower + (1.35 x Hook Load) + (1.35 x Off-lead Force in +X Direction) + Wind in
Operational Condition (in +X direction)
5) Self-weight of tower + (1.35 x Hook Load) + (1.35 x Off-lead Force in -X Direction) + Wind in
Operational Condition (in -X direction)
Rev. : A1
Issued : 30.04.2019
6) Self-weight of tower + Wind in Storm Condition (in Y direction)
7) Self-weight of tower + Wind in Storm Condition (in X direction) – this case excluded since the
tower is designed to carry higher moment during operation in X direction, hence this case may
not govern the design
6.0 BOUNDARY CONDITION
Bottom of the upending tower is supported by concrete foundation at the bottom, hence the ends
are provided with fixed boundary condition. All the displacements (Ux,Uy,Uz, Rx,Ry and Rz = 0) are
constrained.
Bottom Fixed
Condition
Figure 2: Boundary Condition

Rev. : A1
Issued : 30.04.2019
9.0 REACTIONS
Load Combination 1
Name FX [t] FY [t] FZ [t] MX [t*m] MY [t*m] MZ [t*m]

Sp1 -0.73 8.27 825.39 31.93 42.48 4.83
Sp2 -0.55 -0.53 -604.28 3.77 24.31 3.89
Sp3 1.28 -7.74 811.67 32.90 17.58 5.97
Load Combination 2

Sp1 6.05 -19.40 793.30 69.63 78.90 8.09
Sp2 0.94 -1.68 -778.92 13.10 40.15 7.77
Sp3 21.36 -21.46 1018.39 59.38 40.52 7.95
Load Combination 3

Sp1 -13.30 47.73 1000.49 -19.96 1.50 -13.40
Sp2 -0.32 -2.52 -605.08 14.91 25.21 -7.07
Sp3 13.62 -9.08 637.36 1.16 50.75 -9.21
Load Combination 4

Sp1 -17.70 -0.12 724.66 29.60 7.57 4.70
Sp2 -2.65 -0.47 -404.19 3.39 4.43 3.52
Sp3 -15.78 0.60 712.30 28.78 -14.33 5.50
Load Combination 5

Sp1 16.23 16.66 926.12 34.26 77.39 4.95
Sp2 1.56 -0.59 -804.38 4.14 44.19 4.25
Sp3 18.34 -16.07 911.03 37.02 49.48 6.44
Load Combination 6

Sp1 -6.12 -32.69 -27.73 40.84 5.72 3.43
Sp2 -1.14 -1.16 40.02 9.41 -3.75 3.94
Sp3 7.26 -8.68 210.48 26.29 -7.75 2.25
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
FRAME GA DRAWINGS
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
Rev. : A
Issued : 15-07-2019
PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION DRAWINGS.

(OPTION-1 AND OPTION-2)
(FOR REFERENCE ONLY)
15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
CLIENT:
P.O. Box 33455 Dubai, U.A.E.
TITLE: Tel. +971 4 8039308, Fax. +971 4 8873734
COST CODE SCALE HULL No. DESIGN CLASS
- - -
F CONTRACT No. DRAWING NUMBER SHT. No. REV. F
- - 1 1 A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
CLIENT:
P.O. Box 33455 Dubai, U.A.E.
TITLE: Tel. +971 4 8039308, Fax. +971 4 8873734
COST CODE SCALE HULL No. DESIGN CLASS
- - -
F CONTRACT No. DRAWING NUMBER SHT. No. REV. F
- - 1 1 A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A3

Frame Foundation-RA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Frame Foundation-RA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Frame Foundation-RA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the scope of work for the civil contractor?

What is the scope of work for the civil contractor?

What are the load combinations considered for design of the jacket upending tower?

What are the load combinations considered for design of the jacket upending tower?

LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD.

REQUEST FOR QUOTATION OF CIVIL WORKS FOR

LAMPRELL DOC. NO. : 15-2808-EN-N-000-SP-002 REV A

Prepared By Reviewed By Approved By

Name : Nripendra Mishra Kurinjivelan Palaniyandi Mohamed Taha Aboumalwa

Naval and Construction

Date : 15-07-2019 15-07-2019 15-07-2019

REVISION STATUS AND HISTORY

Rev. Date Rev. Description

A 15-07-2019 ISSUED FOR ENQUIRY

The scope of work includes (however not limited to).

3. Contractor shall have the following three options in their quote.

 Procurement and construction of foundation as per option-2 for two frames.

(For details of option-1 and option-2 refer attached drawings)

Contractor is responsible for the following activities:

 Soil investigation report

SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT

M/S. LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD

Electrical Cone Penetration Testing

Marine Geotechnical Investigation

REPORT ISSUE STATUS

<01> 22-April-19 Final Engineering Report AC NA ZM

Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved

M/S. LAMPRELL ENERGY LTD MATERIAL LAB

For the Attention of Ms. Mariann Cabilangan

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 1

3.0 LOCAL GEOLOGY 1

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK 2

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 4

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5

7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 7

8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS 15

APPENDIX A FIELD RESULTS

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.0 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK

Table 1: List of Laboratory tests performed

1 Sieve Analysis Test Method:-BS 1377: Part 2: 1990: Amd.

2 Sulphate as SO3 , ( % ) BS 1377:Part 3: 1990 Cl. 5.2 & 5.5: Amd

4 pH Value BS 1377: Part 3: Cl. 9: 1990: Amd 9028: 96 4

5 Unconfined Compressive ASTM D 7012.04.Cl.9

6 Point Load ASTM 5731-02 6

5.1 Particle Size Distribution

5.3 Point Load Tests

5.4 Chemical Analyses.

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

7.0 ENGINEERING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

BH-01 Raft 1.5 150 Note 2 50 7,500

*begl= Below Existing Ground Level

7.1.1 Piled Foundation

20 2371 948 277 1580

22 2466 986 307 1644

450 24 2563 1025 338 1708

26 2659 1063 369 1772

28 2755 1102 400 1836