Abstract

This study deals with the sedimentological and geo-engineering characteristics of some soil
samples of the Department of Geological Sciences area at Jahangirnagar University, Savar,
Dhaka. The results of all the tests are presented, compared, and evaluated to delineate the sub-
surface ground condition. The soil samples of the studied area are sand-dominated. The clay is
not found for each sample in the study area.
The studied soil might be defined as silty sand based on grain size analysis. The sand
percentages are increased with increasing depth whereas silt percentage values are decreased
with increasing depth. The specific gravity values range from 2.55 to 2.63 which are nearer to
the typical values for kaolinite. The plastic limit ranges from 37.2% to 56.6%, the liquid limit
ranges from 16.48% to 25% and the plasticity index ranges from 16.27% to 13.91%. The
obtained results suggest that the studied soil is low to high plasticity silty sand. All the
Atterberg limit values are nearer to the typical values for kaolinite clay minerals.
The textural characteristics suggest that the sediments are fine-grained, poorly to moderately
sorted, approximately positively skewed, and leptokurtic to very leptokurtic in nature. The
results also suggest that the sediments are mostly bedload sediments and were deposited by
rolling and suspension mechanisms.
Considering the Atterberg consistency limit values and grain size distribution as well as their
position on the plasticity chart, the top layer of the studied soil is cohesive. The study soil is
broadly divided into cohesive and non-cohesive soils and the SPT values increase with
increasing depth. The top layer consisting soft to medium plastic silty clay and has a very soft
and medium consistency. The subsequent deep layers of non-plastic sand-silt mix, silty fine
sand, and fine sand show medium-dense to dense consistency. The SPT value suggests that a
deep foundation preferably a pile may be provided in the study area.

1
 Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I wish to express all of my devotion to the almighty God, the most gracious
and merciful beneficent creator who has enabled me to perform this research work and to
submit the research work of the same.
I am extremely delighted to express my deepest sense of gratitude and sincere thanks to my
reverend teacher Professor Dr. M. Julleh Jalalur Rahman, Professor Md Mahfuzul Haque,
Professor Dr. Hossain Md. Sayem and Professor Dr. Abu Sadat Md. Sayem Department of
Geological Sciences, Jahangirnagar University for his constant encouragement, untiring
efforts, keen interest, and thoughtful suggestions throughout the progress of the research works.
I would like to offer my thanks to Professor Dr. HossainMd.Sayem, Department of Geological
Sciences, Jahangirnagar University for his indispensable guidance, encouraging inspiration,
and help during the research at this university.
I also like to offer my thanks to my friends who are one of the most important parts of the
research work.
I am indebted to my parents for their loving support and inspiration in all aspects of my life.

Rafia Islam Redi

2
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 4
1.1 Rational ......................................................................................................................................... 4
1.2 Location ........................................................................................................................................ 4
1.3 Aims and Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 5
1.5 General Geology of the Study Area .............................................................................................. 5
Chapter 2: SEDIMENTOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 8
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Lithological interpretation ............................................................................................................ 8
2.3 Grain Size Analysis..................................................................................................................... 14
2.3.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 14
2.3.3 Textural parameters: ............................................................................................................ 15
2.4 Interpretation of Depositional Environment ............................................................................... 19
Chapter 3: ENGINEERING GEOLOGY ............................................................................................. 22
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 22
3.2 Site Investigation ........................................................................................................................ 22
3.3 Drilling Techniques and Sample Collection ............................................................................... 23
3.4 Standard penetration test (SPT) .................................................................................................. 28
3.5 Basic geo-engineering properties ................................................................................................ 29
3.5.1 Moisture Content.................................................................................................................. 29
3.5.2 Specific Gravity ................................................................................................................... 30
3.5.3 Liquid Limit ......................................................................................................................... 31
3.5.4 Plastic Limit ......................................................................................................................... 33
3.5.5 Plasticity index ..................................................................................................................... 34
3.5.6 Engineering soil classification of the studied soils .............................................................. 35
3.5.7 Linear shrinkage................................................................................................................... 36
Chapter 4: CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 39

3
 Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Rational
Dhaka, the capital city, is quickly developing into the Savar region. Rapid urbanization in this
area has sparked renewed interest in geo-engineering features of underlying earth conditions.
Geo-engineering information is critical for proper urbanization in a city. Every project
involving earth constructions that require a soil or rock foundation or are developed below the
ground surface requires knowledge of the geotechnical qualities of soil.
This subsurface research included the drilling of one borehole up to 70 feet deep, the
performance of the needed field, and laboratory testing of many geotechnical parameters. We
have collected 14 Disturbed and 5 Undisturbed samples.
This report describes and examines grain size analysis, depositional environment, and basic
geotechnical properties and evaluates the shallow subsurface geology of the study area.
1.2 Location
The studied area is the Department of Geological Sciences located at the Jahangirnagar
University in Savar Upazila of Dhaka district. Geographically this area lies in 23°52'740.51''N
and 90°16'0.64''E.

Figure 1.2.1: Location map of the studied area.

4
1.3 Aims and Objectives
The primary goal of the fieldwork is to depict the researched area's shallow subsurface
geological condition. The major goals are:
 To assess the soil's engineering qualities (moisture content, plastic limit, and liquid
limit) using samples obtained at various depths.
 To assess grain size analysis and depositional environment based on lithology
 Finally, produce a report on the planned area's inquiry.
1.4 Methodology
The field research is mostly based on data from interviews, empirical field observations, and
previous research. After gathering information and conducting a preliminary site inspection,
various field approaches for sample collection were used.
1.5 General Geology of the Study Area
The research region encompasses a large portion of the Dhaka Terrace (Alam, 1988), which is
located in central Bangladesh and is part of the Madhupur Tract. The tract is a structural high
that appears as a terrace and is exposed as a monoclonal limb. The terrain is sloping to the
south and southeast. The terrace has become a center of urban and industrial growth due to its
higher elevation than the surrounding alluvial plains. Understanding the geomorphology,
geotechnical behavior, stratigraphy, and tectonic or structural setting of the terrace is crucial
for its continued expansion and sustainable development.
Madhupur Ghar in the north, Bhawal Ghar in the middle, and Dhaka Terrace in the south are
the three primary tablelands that make up the Madhupur tract. The research area is located on
the Madhupur Tract's Dhaka terrace (Alam, 1988). The area's height varies between 1.5 and 7
meters and slopes south and southeast. The high ground in the Savar area is still above the
current flood level, with an average elevation of more than 7 meters above mean sea level. It
covers almost 40% of the land area in the examined region and extends northward in a long
line where the Madhupur clay deposit is exposed. The drainage pattern of the area is dendritic
to trellis and has intensively been dissected by tributaries of the Turag, the Buriganga, the Balur
and the Bansi rivers and formed numerous rounded and elongated hillocks (Alam, 1988).
According to some Authors, the Madhupur and the Barind Tracts represent a tectonically
uplifted surface. The reason for the uplift was explained by Fergusson (1963), Morgan and
McIntire (1959) and others. Fergusson (1963) believed that the Madhupur region has been
uplifted in very recent time and he referred to the earthquake of 1762. He suggested that the
Madhupur Jungle occurs along the axis of the belt of "Volcano Action" which extends in a
5
north-western direction through Chittagong and Dhaka. Fergusson (1963) considered
numerous low lakes in the Sylhet basin to be caused by the subsidence compensatory to the
elevation of the Madhupur Tract. The terrace is formed of several blocks separated by plastic
deformation due to compression forces during the last phases of Himalayan upliftment. A series
of dendritic to trellis drainage patterns have been developed on the terrace following the
fractures or shear zones that have produced a unique geomorphic outlook.
The sediments that make up the Pleistocene of Bengal differ from the surrounding floodplain
sediments, demonstrating local diversity based on the degree of oxidation and the amount of
organic material they contain (Morgan and McIntire, 1959).

Figure 1.5.1: Generalized stratigraphic succession of the Madhupur area (after Monsur 1995).
The highland of the Madhupur Tract in the Dhaka city and Savar area represents the Madhupur
Clay Formation, the oldest exposed rock of the area. It is unconformably underlain by the
DupiTila Formation and overlain by Recent Alluvium Formation. The so-called Madhupur
Clay Formation has recently been named by Alam et al. (1990) as the Madhupur Clay
6
Residuum and by Monsur (1990) as the Madhupur Clay and Sand Formation. The Alluvium
Formation was proposed as the Basabo Silty-Clay Formation by Monsur (1990). The
development of actual stratigraphic succession in this area is not possible because no deep drill
hole has so far been drilled in this area. So overall stratigraphic succession of Bengal Foredeep
can be considered for the study area is given in Table 2.1.

7
 Chapter 2: SEDIMENTOLOGY
2.1 Introduction
Sedimentology is a scientific field that focuses on studying the physical and chemical
characteristics of sedimentary rocks, as well as the processes involved in their creation,
including sediment transportation, deposition, and lithification (the process of turning sediment
into rock). Sedimentology encompasses the five essential processes that are encompassed by
the term sedimentation, namely weathering, erosion, transit, deposition, and diagenesis.
Sedimentology and geomorphology both investigate the surface characteristics of the Earth.
Sedimentology and hydrology both investigate river channels.
The drilling borehole is 70 ft deep which consists of about 14 disturbed samples and 5
undisturbed samples. Each of the samples is very crucial for identifying the formation, facies,
and depositional setting or environment of this area. From the previous intervention of this
geological area, it was found that the drilling site belongs to the Madhupur Formation. From
the sedimentological point of view, the Madhupur formation belongs to the Plio-Pleistocene
Terrace deposits. The Madhupur tract is underlain by unconsolidated Madhupur clay. There
are five types of relief patterns in the region: level areas, poorly-drained areas (which are mostly
found in the Barind Tract and a few small areas in the Madhupur Tract), high uplifted areas
(specifically along the 15m high western edge of the Barind Tract), broadly dissected areas
(mainly in the Madhupur Tract with some minor areas in the Barind Tract), closely dissected
areas (found only in the Madhupur Tract), and broadly dissected valleys (also in the Madhupur
Tract).
Khandoker (1987 & 1989), Huq et al. (1991), Coates et al. (1988, 1990 & 1991), A1am (1988
& 1995) and Kamal (1998, 2005) have posited that Madhupur, Barind, and Lalmai tracts are
indicative of a surface that has undergone tectonic uplift. According to Monsur (1995) and
other experts, a small part of Madhupur is believed to be blocks that have been elevated due to
tectonic activity. However, most of the Madhupur tracts are thought to have formed by erosion
rather than structural forces.
2.2 Lithological interpretation
Lithology is used as the foundation for breaking rock sequences into distinct lithostratigraphic
units, which is done to simplify mapping and correlation across different locations. To obtain
lithological information from excavating boreholes, approximately 19 samples were analyzed.
These samples were further subdivided based on the discernible contacts, color, and
composition of distinct rock strata. The mineralogy, sorting, and general particle size of the
8
rocks (which are all discernible in the field) were estimated with an approximation using the
necked eyes. Several techniques and methods have been applied to determine the lithological
characteristics.
A lithogical log has been developed from the interpretation of data. 4 major sequences has been
found from the lithology which has been expressed in a table and lithology.
Type Depth (ft)
Clay 0-18.5
Sandy clay 18.5-23.5
Clayey Sand 23.5-30
Fine Sand 30-70

Figure 2.2.1: Litholog of the BH1

Facies Analysis:
Facies analysis entails the identification, description, and interpretation of several facies types present
in sedimentary succession. Geologists can analyze sedimentary facies to recreate previous habitats,

9
comprehend the geographical and temporal fluctuations in sedimentation, and interpret the geological
past of a particular region.

Facies can be distinguished by different sedimentary attributes, such as grain size, sediment
composition, sedimentary structures (such as bedding, cross-bedding, and ripple marks), and fossil
content, and geochemical markers. These traits are utilized to distinguish one facies from another and
explain the processes and conditions of deposition.

Sedimentary facies can undergo lateral or vertical transitions within a sedimentary basin, indicating
Facies are categorized according to three distinct characteristics:

 Lithofacies refers to the classification of rocks based on their lithology, which encompasses
their composition and physical characteristics.
 Bio facies are determined by the composition of plant and animal communities.
 Ichnofacies is a field of study that specifically examines the trace fossils found in rocks.

Lithofacies
Sedimentary facies represent a snapshot of a specific depositional environment at a particular time. It
can provide insights into the paleoenvironmental conditions, such as the presence of a river, a beach, a
deep-sea setting, or a desert, during the deposition of sediments.

Sample Facies Facies Thickness

Description Interpretation
no code name (cm)
1 Grey color, clay,
moderately plasticity, It was deposited in
medium compaction, low-energy
Massive
Fm 45.72 organic matter & iron environmental
clay
concretion present, conditions in
Reduction floodplain areas.
environment.
2 Light olive brown, fine It was deposited in
clay, stiff, high low-energy
Massive
Fm 45.72 plasticity, organic environmental
clay
matter & iron conditions in
concretion present. floodplain areas.
3 Brownish-yellow, fine
Slightly clay, stiff, high
Deposited in mixed
Fsc sandy 45.72 plasticity, sand lens,
flats environments
mud organic matter & iron
concretion present.
4 The deposition took
Yellowish brown,
place on a
sandy clay, manganese
horizontal surface,
Fm Sandy clay 45.72 nodules, transition
in a quiet
zone & iron concretion
sedimentary
present.
environment
10
 5 Yellowish brown,
Clayey clayey sand, Deposited in mixed
Sm 45.72
sand manganese nodules, flats environments
transition zone present.
6-8 Rapid
sedimentation of
Yellowish brown, fine sands probably due
Massive
Sm 45.72 to medium sand, mud to a high supply of
sandstone
Strick. sediment and/or
rapid decrease in
flow velocity
9-14 Deposited in lower
flow regime
condition where
Greyish brown, very
moderate flow
Laminated fine, very dense,
Sl 45.72 velocity allowed the
sandstone laminated, Mica
migration of ripples;
present.
characterized by
rapid sedimentation
from suspension

Facies Association
The concept of facies association is essential for interpreting the environment in which
sedimentary rocks were deposited. Facies associations refer to groups of facies that are found
together and are believed to have a genetic or environmental connection. By identifying distinct
associations, it becomes easier to interpret the depositional environment compared to analyzing
each facies separately.

In our studied area, the observed facies types have been categorized into four facies
associations based on their specific depositional conditions. The types of facies and their
corresponding associations are provided below.

Clay: From depths 0 to 15 feet, the D1, D2, and D3 represent grey to brownish yellow in color,
clay-sized particles, high plasticity, organic matter, and iron concretion present. It indicates
floodplain deposits, formed in a quiet, low-energy freshwater environment.

11
 Figure 2.2.2: Disturbed clay sample (D2)
Sandy Clay: From depth 18.5 to 20 feet the D4 represents sandy clay which is Yellowish
brown in color, clay dominated with some sand-sized particles, dense sandy clay, manganese
nodules, mica, and iron concretion present. It represents a Transitional environment between
high-energy and low-energy depositional settings such as river deltas, and nearshore marine
environments.

Figure 2.2.3: Disturbed sandy clay sample (D4).

Clayey sand: From depths 23.5 to 30 feet, D5 and D6 represent clayey sand formation which
Is yellowish brown in color sand dominated with some clay-sized particles, manganese nodules
present, Deposits in river floodplains, deltaic environments, or shallow marine settings.

12
 Figure 2.2.4: Disturbed clayey sand sample (D6)
Fine to very fine sand: From depths 30 to 70 feet, D7 to D14 represents Brownish-yellow in
color, very fine to fine sand-sized grain, very dense sand loosely compacted, laminated, and
mica present which indicates periods of sedimentation and possibly fluctuating environmental
conditions. Commonly found in environments with moderate to low energy, such as river
channels, tidal flats, or nearshore marine settings.

Figure 2.2.5: Disturbed fine sand sample (D10)

13
2.3 Grain Size Analysis
Grain size analysis encompasses the examination of sediment properties through mechanical analysis
and mineralogical investigation. The objective of this study is to analyses the sediment samples and
ascertain their lithological properties. We conducted grain size analysis in the laboratory.

Grain size is a fundamental characteristic of siliciclastic sedimentary rocks and therefore one of the
significant descriptive features of these rocks. Sedimentologists focus on three specific aspects related
to particle size:

 Develop methods to measure grain size and represent it using a suitable grain size or grade scale.
 Presenting the data in graphical or statistical formats to facilitate analysis.
 Investigating the genetic implications of these data.

Various techniques, such as the sieve method, are employed to analyze the grain size of sedimentary
rocks. We employed the sieve technique to analyze the particle size. This is the conventional approach
for laboratory analysis. The laboratory has estimated the following parameters:

 A cumulative curve is created on logarithmic graph paper by graphing the weight percent
retained on the y-axis and the appropriate grade size on the x-axis.
 A frequency curve is a smooth curve that represents the limiting situation of a histogram. It is
calculated for a frequency distribution of a continuous distribution when the number of data
points is extremely enormous.

2.3.1 Methodology
To conduct this study, extensive fieldwork was conducted in the Geopark located in the Department of
Geological Sciences (Fig. 1a, b).

The sediment samples were obtained from the borehole at regular intervals of around 5 feet, reaching
depths of up to 70 feet. Inadequate cleaning. The disturbed samples were stored in polythene bags,
whereas the undisturbed samples were stored in aluminum foil paper and transported to the laboratory
for analysis. A total of 19 sediment samples were gathered to conduct laboratory analysis.

This study conducted grain size analysis to differentiate the sediment depositional processes and
mechanisms. In this investigation, approximately 100 grams of each dried sample were used. The
samples were then sieved using a "Ro-Tap sieving machine" for a duration of 15 minutes. Different
mesh sizes (2mm, 1mm, 0.500mm, 0.250mm, 0.125mm, 0.063mm) were used, and the resulting size
distributions were recorded.

The grain size characteristics were acquired by the methodology established by FOLK & WARD
(1957). The samples were analyzed at the Department of Geological Sciences, Jahangirnagar
University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

14
2.3.3 Textural parameters:
Various grain size parameters, such as graphic mean, sorting, skewness, and kurtosis, were
used to evaluate the depositional environment of sediments. These parameters are calculated
using the formula after FOLK & WARD (1968). The graphical representation of the grain size
data is the most important and meaningful method for understanding the environments of
deposition of sediments (FOLK 1968). The statistical parameters are tabulated in Table 1 and
described as follows:
Table 2.3.3.1. Results of the statistical parameters of the sediments
Sample Graphic Standard Skewness Kurtosis M(micron) C(micron)
No mean deviation
06 2.24 1.21 -0.13 1.79 197.51 1815.04

Fine sand Poorly sorted Negative skewed Very

leptokurtic
07 2.22 1.05 0.06 1.35 208.77 262.05
Fine sand Poorly sorted Near Leptokurtic
symmetrical
08 2.58 0.97 0.10 2.00 176.78 720.94
Fine sand Moderately Near Very
sorted symmetrical leptokurtic
09 2.73 0.76 0.38 1.67 166.09 249.67
Fine sand Moderately Strongly positive Very
sorted skewed leptokurtic
10 2.62 0.93 0.13 1.50 171.94 256.78

Fine sand Moderately Positive skewed Leptokurtic

sorted
11 2.87 1.00 0.14 1.49 152.83 253.88
Fine sand Moderately Positive skewed Leptokurtic
sorted
12 2.85 0.88 0.28 1.24 156.04 374.58
Fine sand Moderately Positive skewed Leptokurtic
sorted
13 2.71 0.67 0.38 1.58 163.80 946.06

Fine sand Moderately Strongly positive Very

well sorted skewed leptokurtic
14 2.93 0.96 0.45 1.47 160.43 624.17

fine sand Moderately Strongly positive Leptokurtic 197.51

sorted skewed

15
Figure 2.3.3.1: Cumulative Curve of 9 samples from BH1

Figure 2.3.3.2: Frequency Curve of 9 samples from BH1

16
Graphic mean (Mz): The mean value indicates the relative size of clastic grains (BOGGS
2009). The sediments show a variable mean size range between 2.22 to 2.93. The average mean
value of the investigated samples is 2.64, indicating the excess of fine-grained sand. The
predominance of fine-grained sediments also reflected the slow-energy condition of deposition.

Figure 2.3.3.3: Spatial distribution of the mean size of borehole sand in Jahangirnagar
University. The dashed arrow line indicates increasing mean size along the depth

Graphic Standard Deviation (SD): The uniformity of grain size or sorting of clastic sediment
is determined by the inclusive standard deviation. It clarifies to understand the hydrodynamics
of the sedimentary basin mechanism. The sorting results are 0.67 to 1.21 which demonstrates
that the sediments are moderately sorted. Moderately sorting of sediments is attributed to the
regular winnowing practice of the depositing agents, probably due to the medium level of
energy of the depositional media (BOGGS 2009).

Fig. 2.3.3.4. Spatial distribution of sorting of borehole sand in Jahangirnagar University. The
dashed line indicates decreasing sorting along depth.

17
Graphic Skewness (SK): Skewness measures the symmetry of grain size distribution. It
indicates the supremacy of coarse and fine-grained sediments in the cumulative frequency
curves. The skewness of the studied sediments varies from -0.13 to 0.45, indicating a coarse
skewed to strongly fine-skewed nature. The fine skewed character of sediments suggests
excessive riverine input. The positive skewness of these sediments demonstrates the
unidirectional channel transport or the deposition of sediments in low to medium level of
energy environment (RAMANATHAN et al. 2009; HAKRO et al. 2021)

Graphic kurtosis (KG) Graphic kurtosis estimates the proportion of sorting in the middle of the
frequency curves, which represents the sharpness of the frequency curves. The kurtosis of the
investigated sediments varies between 1.24 to 2. Most samples show leptokurtic to very
leptokurtic, which suggests a periodic variability of the sediment transporting agent.

Fig. 5.
Figure 2.3.3.5: Scatter plots of the textural parameters for borehole sand in Jahangirnagar
University: a) mean vs. standard deviation; b) mean vs. skewness; c) mean vs. kurtosis and d)
skewness vs. kurtosis.
18
2.4 Interpretation of Depositional Environment
The text discusses the behavior of sediment deposits in a river-link system, as described by
Friedman in 1979. The prevalence of positive skewness and the transition from mesokurtic to
leptokurtic characteristics of sediments indicate that they were deposited in a single peak and
relatively well-sorted manner, in an environment with moderate energy levels.

Figure 2.4.1: Depositional environment analysis from Median (phi) vs Skewness (phi)

Although a small number of samples exhibit negative skewness and mesokurtic characteristics
(as shown in Fig. 5b, c), these are caused by the constant inclusion of finer modes alongside
the dominant sand modes.

In their study, STEWART (1958) employed the comparison of median and skewness to
differentiate between the depositional processes of rivers, waves, and calm water slow
deposition environments (see Fig. 9). Based on the diagram, the majority of the samples that
were examined are located inside the river area, while a few samples are scattered between the
river and areas where sediment deposition occurs at a slower rate.

19
 Figure 2.4.2: Depositional environment analysis from Media (phi) vs Skewness (phi)

The results indicate that the sediments were mostly deposited in a river environment
characterized by moderate energy conditions. The plot that shows the relationship between the
average size of grains and the degree of sorting is a dependable method for reconstructing
fluvial ecosystems. The model suggested by MAKHLOUF et al. (1991) aims to delineate
regions of high and low energy within fluvial settings. The map (Fig. 10) in this study
demonstrates that all sediment samples are evenly distributed within the fluvial zone, which is
defined by stream episodes.

In their study, KANHAIYA et al. (2017) presented a graphical representation that compares
the average size of sediment grains with their level of sorting. This plot was used to distinguish
between deposits found in channels and those found in floodplains within a river setting. The
activity diagram (Fig.11) illustrates the discrimination of borehole data sediments into channel
deposits. The utilization of grain size parameters and the analysis of CM (C = 1 percentile; M
= median) patterns aids in the differentiation of sediments from various river depositional
environments (PASSEGA & BYRAMJEE 1969). This work aims to detect the sediment
deposition modes in the higher sections of the Borehole sediments using the CM pattern (Fig.
12). The relationship between C and M is determined by the impact of sorting caused by bottom
turbulence. The examined sediments indicate that samples from the highest section of the
borehole are dispersed in the OP segment of the CM diagram (Fig. 12), implying that the

20
sediment deposition occurred by rolling and suspension. In contrast, the samples collected from
the lower section are scattered within the PQ segment, suggesting that the sediments were
moved through rolling and suspension (Fig. 12) prior to their deposition. Some of the samples
are also included in the RQ section, indicating that graded suspension occurred during
deposition.

The sorting of values exhibits a consistent variation with the average size in both beach
sediments and river sand. In their 2007 study, SING et al. introduced a model that uses
skewness and standard deviation to identify the sand deposition environment. The utilization
of this model (Fig. 13) in the examined samples indicates that the borehole sediments were
primarily transported through the processes of rolling and suspension.

Figure 2.4.3: C-M diagram showing the transport mechanism

21
 Chapter 3: ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
The field research is mostly based on data from interviews, empirical field observations, and
previous research. After gathering information and conducting a preliminary site inspection,
various field approaches for sample collection were used.
3.2 Site Investigation
In brief discussion of the site investigation, drilling, and collection of disturbed and undisturbed
natural samples are discussed in this section. Different stages of site investigation activities are
listed in Table 3.2.1.

Table 3.2.1: Stages of site investigation (modified from IAEG, 1981 & BS.5930).

22
3.3 Drilling Techniques and Sample Collection
One borehole was drilled in the Department of Geological Sciences, Jahangirnagar University
campus, with the technical assistance of the engineering firm "Creative Soil Investigation" (Fig
4.1).
The light cable percussion drilling method was used for collecting samples and the wash boring
technique was used as a means of advancing the borehole to enable the tube samples to be
taken. This technique is used because it helps to take relatively undisturbed soil immediately
below the hole. Thin wall-opened Shelby tubes (U75 & U100) samplers were used to collect
the undisturbed samples. The U75 thin-walled Shelby tube (Outer diameter 76mm and inner
diameter 75mm) and The U100 thin-walled Shelby tube (Outer diameter 100mm and inner
diameter 96mm) have been penetrated the undisturbed soil information at the bottom of the
borehole by applying continuous force. When the tube was brought to the surface, some soil
was removed from each end and molten wax was applied in thin layers to form a seal to keep
the soil at its natural state. On the other hand, a split spoon sampler (Fig. 4.2) was used for
collecting disturbed soil samples. Samples both in the undisturbed and disturbed state were
collected continuously each 5 it intervals. A total of 4 undisturbed and 7 disturbed samples
were collected in the Shelby tube from the study area.

Figure 3.3.1: Light Cable Percussion drilling during field investigation.

23
 Figure 3.3.2: Samples collected from the site with a split spoon
Drilling equipment: A typical mobile, lightweight cable tool percussion on a drilling system
includes a winch of 1– 2-ton capacity with a hand-operated friction clutch, a small diesel
engine, and a frame derrick about 6m in height. Three sets of temporary casing of 10//, 8//, and
6// diameters are also required a Split Spoon sampler is used with a drilling rig.

Drilling operations: Drilling is affected by the repeated raising, dropping, and rotating of a
chisel drilling bit, suspended by a drill cable, with a hole containing water, water is derived
from the formation or added from the borehole top. A slurry of disturbed sediment and water
is formed that is removed using a bailer. Sizes of casing and tool were generally for disturbed
samples of geological horizons penetrated are obtained at regular intervals using a bailer for
lithological analysis. Additional lithological data can be obtained from standard penetration
rates and by taking open tube or piston core sediment samples.

Bore Log Data: Bore log data obtained during the field investigation is given below:

24
 FIELD REPORT
Drilling Company Name: Creative Soil Investigation Ltd.
Location: Department of Geological Sciences
D = disturbed U.D= undisturbed
Depth Standard Penetration Test Samples Visual Classification
Zone (SPT)
(ft) 6” 6” 6” Total Dis U.D.
0-2 Wash boring
2-3.5 U.D-1
3.5-5 4 7 11 18 D-1 Gray in color, Clay sized particle, Presence of organic matter, very stiff,
high plasticity, presence of iron concretion
5-7 Wash boring
7-8.5 U.D-2
8.5-10 7 11 14 25 D-2 Light Olive Brown colored, Clay sized particle, Presence of Organic &
Carbonaceous matter, very stiff, high plasticity, iron concretion present
10-12 Wash boring
12-13.5 UD-3
13.5-15 5 11 14 25 D-3 Brownish Yellow colored, Clay sized particle, Presence of Manganese
nodule & Organic matter, sand lenses present, stiff, high plasticity
15-17 Wash boring
17-18.5 UD-4
18.5-20 4 9 11 20 D-4 Yellowish Brown colored, Sandy clay (Transitional Zone from Clay to
Sand), Micaceous matter, Manganese nodule & iron concretion present
20-22 Wash boring
22-23.5 UD-5
23.5-25 7 16 20 36 D-5 Yellowish Brown colored, Clayey Sand, fine grained sand, Manganese
nodule present
25-28.5 Wash boring
28.5-30 8 13 15 28 D-6 Yellowish Brown colored, Clay to Sand contact, fine grained sand,
presence of mud strike, dense sand
30-33.5 Wash boring
33.5-35 8 20 34 54 D-7 Yellowish Brown colored, dense sand, fine grained, iron concretion
present
35-38.5 Wash boring
38.5-40 12 28 38 66 D-8 Yellowish Brown colored, very dense sand, fine grained

40-43.5 Wash boring

43.5-45 13 30 35 65 D-9 Greyish Brown colored, very dense sand, very fine grained, presence of
mica (majority micaceous), shows lamination
45-48.5 Wash boring
48.5-50 17 26 24 50 D-10 Greyish Brown colored, very dense sand, very fine grained, micaceous,
laminated, iron concretion present
(4”) (10”)
50-53.5 Wash boring
53.5-55 18 29 21 50 D-11 Greyish Brown colored, very dense sand, fine grained, micaceous,
laminated
(2”) (8”)
55-58.5 Wash boring
58.5-60 12 32 21 53 D-12 Greyish Brown colored, very dense sand, fine grained, micaceous,
laminated
(3”) (9”)
60-63.5 Wash boring
63.5-65 17 38 12 50 D-13 Greyish Brown colored, very dense sand, fine to medium grained,
laminated, presence of iron concretion
(1”) (7”)
65-68.5 Wash boring
68.5-70 15 32 18 50 D-14 Greyish Brown colored, very dense sand, fine to medium grained,
laminated
(1”) (7”)

25
D-1 D-2

D-3 D-4

D-5 D-6

26
D-7 D-8

D-9 D-10

D-11 D-12 D-13

Figure 3.3: Disturbed samples collected from the site with a split spoon

27
3.4 Standard penetration test (SPT)
In the SPT test, a split spoon sampler of 2 inches (50 mm) outer diameter and 35 mm inner
diameter is made to penetrate 18// (6// +6//+6//) or 450 mm into the soil by dropping a 65 Kg
hammer, falling freely from a height of 30 inches (750 mm). The number of hammer blows
required for penetration of each inch’s length of the sampler is recorded. The number of blows
for the last 12// penetration of the total 18// is known as the standard penetration value as
specified by ASTM and is plotted as the SPT value at the particular depth (Smith, 1990).
Table 3.4.1: Relative density scale for cohesive soil (e.g., clay) (after BS 5930)

The variation of SPT will respect to depth is shown in figure 3.4.1. The result suggests that the
SPT increases with depth in the Madhupur clay soil.

Figure 3.4.1: SPT vs depth.

28
3.5 Basic geo-engineering properties
3.5.1 Moisture Content
Moisture content plays an important role in understanding the behavior of fine-grained soils.
Soil having a higher moisture content is organic soil (Mitchell, 1976). It is the moisture content
that changes the soil from a liquid state to a plastic and solid state. Consolidation and
compaction of soils in the field are also controlled by the quality of water present. Natural
moisture content has been determined by oven dry method. The detailed data for each test is
mentioned in the appendix. It can be calculated by the following form
Wn = (M2−M3) / (M3−M1) × 100
Where M1 is the mass of the container
M2 is the mass of the container and wet soil
M3 is the mass of the container and dry soil
Table Variations of the natural moisture content values for depth
Sample No Depth(m) Moisture Content (%)
UD-1 1.07 16.22
UD 2 2.59 18.34
UD-3 4.11 19.76
UD-4 5.64 18.26
UD-5 7.16 21.69
The moisture content values of the studied soils lie between 16.22% to 21.69% and are given
in Table 4.4 it is found that the moisture content value increases with depth (Figure 4.5)

Figure 3.5.1.1: Variation of Moisture content to Depth for BH-01

29
Haque (1994) mentioned that the natural moisture content of the Madhupur clay formation lies
between 18 to 28%. Islam (1997) mentioned that the natural moisture content of the Madhupur
clay formation ranges from 17 to 29%. Nairuzzaman (2000) pointed out that the natural
moisture content of Madhupur clay ranges from 29.06 to 45.23%. Ahammed, et al. (2006)
mentioned that the natural moisture content of the Madhupur clay formation lies between 15
to 36%. Haque et al., 2013 also mentioned that the moisture content of the Madhupur clay
ranges from 17.89 to 30.38%. According to Sayem et al., (2007), the natural moisture content
values of the soils of the Naraygang area range from 25.35 to 32.23% and the value decreases
with increasing depth. The obtained result is very close to the values obtained by Haque (1994),
Islam (1997), and Ahammed, et al., (2006).
3.5.2 Specific Gravity
The observed specific gravity values of all samples in the investigated area range from 2.56 to
2.63, as indicated in the table. The particular gravity values varied depending on the depth and
location.
Table 4.5 Variations of the natural specific gravity values to depth
Sample No Depth(m) Specific Gravity

D-1 1.524 2.63

D-2 3.048 2.56

D-3 4.572 2.55

D-4 6.096 2.58

D-5 7.62 2.56

30
 Figure 3.5.2.1: Variation of Specific gravity to depth for BH-01
In the figure, a linear trend line showing specific gravity decreases with increasing depth which
means specific gravity decreases with increasing particle size.
Lambe (1956) mentioned that the specific gravity values of most soil lie between 2.65 and 2.85.
Bowles (1984) pointed out that the specific gravity of soils generally ranges from 2.55 and 2.80
but most soils are between 2.60 to 2.75. Rao et al. (1988) analyzed some tropical soil and
reported that the specific gravity values range from 2.50 to 2.79. Hossain & Chowdhury (1994)
pointed out that the specific gravity is from 2.40 to 2.68 for the Gault Clay of England, Haque
(1994) mentioned that the specific gravity of Madhupur Clay soils of Dhaka City ranges from
2.37 to 2.63, Islam (1997) pointed out a specific gravity of 2.51 to 2.70 for Madhupur Clay of
Gazipur area. Islam² (1997) mentioned that the specific gravity of the Madhupur Clay of North
Western Dhaka City lies between 2.64 and 2.69. Nairuzzaman (2000) pointed out that the
specific gravity values of the Madhupur Clay Formation of greater Dhaka City range from 2.44
to 2.71, the average being 2.59. The obtained result is very close to the values obtained by
Haque (1994) and Islam (1997).
3.5.3 Liquid Limit
The liquid limit is defined as the moisture content below which the soil behaves as a plastic
material. The liquid limit is sometimes used to estimate settlement in consolidation problems.
According to the standard practice a small portion of soil sample was chopped into small pieces
and mixed thoroughly with distilled water on the glass plate until it became a homogeneous
paste. A portion of the paste was then placed in the cup and leveled off with the spatula. Then
this cup is put under the Cone Penetrometer. The measurement of penetration was noted after
each free fall of the cone.
The test was repeated at least twice at different moisture content. The sample was then dried to
determine the moisture content. The moisture content corresponding to 20mm cone penetration
indicates the liquid limit of the soil. In our study, the liquid limit of the upper eight samples
was determined according to BS 1377 (1975) by using the Cone Penetrometer Apparatus. The
relation between depth and liquid limit is shown in the following figure (3.5.3.1)
Sample No Depth(m) Liquid limit
D-1 1.524 50.25
D-2 3.048 52
D-3 4.572 56.6
D-4 6.096 41.5
31
 D-5 7.62 37.2

Figure 3.5.3.1: Average variation of Liquid limit to depth for BH 1

The obtained result from our survey the liquid limit lies from 40% to 52.50%. According to
Haque and Hossain (2000), the liquid limit values of the Madhupur clay formation lie from
46.5% to 60% in the cone penetrometer method. Nairuzzaman (2000) pointed out that the liquid
limit value of Madhupur clay value ranges from 28.5% to 59%, averaging 45.72%. Ahammed,
et al. (2006) reported that the liquid limit value of the Madhupur clay formation lies from
36.25% to 60.27%.
The liquid limit values of any clay mineral may vary over a wide range, even for a given
absorbed cation type (Mitchell, 1976). For any given clay mineral, the range in liquid limit
values is greater than the range in plastic limit values. Serajuddin and Ahmed (1967) mentioned
that the liquid limit value of Madhupur clay ranges from 26% to 66%. WASA (1991) reported
that the liquid limit value of the Madhupur clay ranges from 47% to 52%. Islam (1997)
mentioned that the liquid limit values of the Madhupur clay formation range from 32.24% to
62.68%. The observed values are closer to the quoted values of Haque and Hossain (2000),
WASA (1991), Islam (1997), Nairuzzaman (2000), and Ahammed, et al. (2006). British
Standard 1377 (1975) and Head (1992) mentioned that in low plasticity clays, the liquid limit
is 50%. The obtained results suggest that the studied soil is high-plasticity clay.
From the liquid limit data, it is seen that the maximum samples show a gradual increase in
liquid limit with depth. The liquid limit of the samples varied due to variations in grain size,
mineralogical composition, clay structure, and different water content of the soil.

32
3.5.4 Plastic Limit
The plastic limit depends on the amount and type of clay present in the soil. The plastic limit
is the lowest water content at which the soil remains in a plastic state. A portion of the collected
sample was mixed with distilled water in a glass plate until it became homogeneous and plastic
enough to be shaped into a ball. The ball of soil was molded between the fingers and rolled
between the palms of the hands until slight cracks appeared on its surface. The soil was then
made into a thread of about 6mm diameter and the moisture content was determined. The
detailed data obtained during the tests are given in Table. The relation between depth and
plastic limit is shown in following Figure 3.5.4.1
Sample No Depth(m) Plastic limit
D-1 1.524 16.48
D-2 3.048 25
D-3 4.572 22.69
D-4 6.096 19.6
D-5 7.62 20.93

Figure 3.5.4.1: Average variation of Plastic limit to depth for BH 1

According to Haque (1994) and Hossain (2000), the plastic limit values of the Madhupur clay
formation lie from 14% to 30%. Nairuzzaman (2000) pointed out that the plastic limit value of
Madhupur clay value ranges from 18.3% to 34.77%; the average is 25.57%. Ahammed, et al.
(2006) reported that the plastic limit value of the Madhupur clay formation ranges from 16.54%
to 20.0%.
33
Serajuddin and Ahmed (1967) mentioned that the plastic limit value of Madhupur clay Ranges
from 5% to 27%. WASA (1991) reported that the plastic limit value of the Madhupur clay
ranges from 25% to 26%. Islam (1997) mentioned that the plastic value of the Madhupur clay
formation ranges from 16.54% to 20.0%. The observed plastic limit values of the studied area
are closer to the quoted values of Haque and Hossain (2000) and Nairuzzaman (2000).
Craig (1990) mentioned that most fine-grained soils exist naturally in the plastic state and the
plasticity is due to the presence of clay minerals or organic minerals. The soil exhibits no
permanent deformation and simply fractures with no plastic deformation (Smith, 1990). White
(1955) mentioned that the plastic limit values of montmorillonite, illite, and kaolinite range
from 51% to 97%, 34% to 43%, and 26% to 38% respectively. Grim (1962) pointed out that
montmorillonite and illite have higher plastic limits, whereas kaolinite has generally lower
values. He also mentioned that the plastic limit values vary from 48% to 97% for
montmorillonite, 21% to 26% for illite, 30% to 37% for kaolinite, and from 25% to 36% for
mixtures of illite and montmorillonite. Gillot (1987) pointed out that plastic limit values vary
from about 60% to 100% for montmorillonite, about 35% to 50% for illite, and from 25% to
35% for kaolinite. So, the investigated soil sample of the study areas is mainly composed of
kaolinite and illite.
3.5.5 Plasticity index
To determine the soil classification plasticity index of the sample must be determined. The
plasticity index is the difference between the liquid limit and the plastic limit. The relation
between depth and plasticity index is shown in the following Figure 4.9
Sample No Depth(m) Plasticity index
D-1 1.524 33.77
D-2 3.048 27
D-3 4.572 33.91
D-4 6.096 21.9
D-5 7.62 16.27

34
 Figure 3.5.5.1: Plasticity index to depth
According to Haque (1994) and Hossain (2000), the plasticity index of the Madhupur clay
formation ranges from 10% to 31%. Nairuzzaman (2000) pointed out that the plasticity index
value of Madhupur clay value ranges from 10.2% to 27.4%. Ahammed, et al. (2006) reported
that the plasticity index value of the Madhupur clay formation ranges from 19.71% to
43.29.0%. Serajuddin and Ahmed (1967) mentioned that the plasticity index value of
Madhupur Clay ranges from 9% to 38%. WASA (1991) reported that the plasticity index value
of the Madhupur Clay ranges from 22% to 26%. In the present study, the obtained values of
the plasticity index are closer to the value recommended by Islam (1997), Serajuddin and
Ahmed (1967), Haque (1994), and Ahammed, et al. (2006).
According to Bell (2000), if the plasticity index value is 35% then termed as slightly plastic,
moderately plastic, highly plastic, and extremely plastic. So, the studied soil might be highly
plastic in nature.
Grim (1962) mentioned that montmorillonite has a plasticity index value of 75% to 60%, illite
23% to 50%, and kaolinite has 1% to 40%, with the usual value of about 25%. Grim (1962)
also pointed out that the illite-smectite mixture shows a higher plasticity index value. The
obtained values are closer to the values recommended by Grim (1962) for kaolinite.
3.5.6 Engineering soil classification of the studied soils
According to the plasticity chart, (after BS 5930, 1981) soil classification is shown in figure
3.5.6.1. It is observed that all values lie over the 'A'-line (indicated area) and generally occupy
the field of clay soils which represents low to high plasticity clay (CL to CH) and might be
composed of kaolinite type clay minerals. Considering the Atterberg consistency limit values

35
and grain size distribution as well as their position on the plasticity chart, the top layer of the
studied soil classified as high plasticity clayey soil.

Figure 3.5.6.1: Plasticity chart of the studied soils (modified after BS 5930, 1981).
3.5.7 Linear shrinkage
The linear shrinkage value varies slightly in different places and at different depths, and it
decreases as depth is increased.
Sample No Depth(m) Linear shrinkage
D-1 1.524 13.93
D-2 3.048 13.57
D-3 4.572 14.64
D-4 6.096 11.43
D-5 7.62 8.92
The linear shrinkage values obtained range between 8.92 percent and 14,64 percent, with an
average of 12.49 percent

36
 Figure 3.5.7.1: Linear shrinkage to depth
According to Altmeyer (1955), clays with linear shrinkage of 8% are "critical". Hobbs et al.
(1982) mentioned that, the linear shrinkage values of the Gault Clay range from 10% to 15%,
of Kimmeridge Clay from 10% to 12%, and of Oxford Clay from 8% to 12%. Hossain (1992)
pointed out that the linear shrinkage values of Gault Clay range from 11% to 13%. Haque
(1994) mentioned that the linear shrinkage values of the Madhupur Clay range from 12.72% to
18.54%.
Islam (1997) pointed out that the linear shrinkage values of the Gazipur area lie between 9%
to 12%, averaging 10.67% by using the method of Head (1992) and 5% to 11%, averaging
8.50% by using ASTM (1974) and suggest as 'critical'. Islam² (1997) reported that the linear
shrinkage values for the Madhupur Clay of the Ibrahimpur area are 15% to 17% and the
Bhashantek area is 14% to 17% and considered critical. Haque and Hossain (2002) analyzed
the clay minerals and shrinkage behavior of some Madhupur Clay samples of Dhaka and
reported that the linear shrinkage value of that clay ranges from 12.72% to 18.54%.

37
 Figure 3.5.7.2: Relationship between linear shrinkage and liquid limit, plasticity, and plastic
limit values of the studied soils.
From these figures, it is observed that the linear shrinkage values increase with increasing
liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index values of the studied soils.

38
Chapter 4: CONCLUSION
The geo-engineering characteristics of the study area are investigated, analyzed, evaluated, and
compared with the previous works based on fieldwork and experimental results. The major
findings of this research work are here.
The borehole stratigraphy of the study area has been divided mainly into four lithofacies: there
are clay, sandy clay, clayey sand, and fine sand. The studied soil is mainly composed of fine
sand-size particles. The observed specific gravity values of all samples are in the range of 2.58
to 2.73 and are nearer to the typical values for kaolinite clay minerals.
The liquid value ranges from 35% to 60%. The obtained results suggest that the studied soil is
intermediate plasticity to high plasticity clay. The plastic limit values range from 37.2% to
56.6% The studied soil is classified as CI from their position on the plasticity chart. The plastic
limit values range from 16.48% to 25%. The obtained plasticity index values lay between
16.27% and 31.6%. The obtained value suggests that the study soil might be highly plastic in
nature. From the SPT values, soil generally has been observed in a medium-dense to dense
state.
In our studied area, the observed facies types have been categorized into four facies
associations based on their specific depositional conditions. These are Clay, sandy clay, clayey
sand, and fine sand.
The sediments of Jahangirnagar University are fine-grained (2.64φ), moderately sorted (0.94
φ), platykurtic in nature, and strongly positively skewed (0.20 φ). All of these parameters are
suggestive of excessive floodplain and channel deposits.
The CM diagram and bivariate plot of skewness vs. sorting indicate the sediments were
deposited under graded suspension, rolling, and suspension processes.

39
 REFERENCES

Alam, M.K., et al., 1990, Geological Map of Bangladesh; Geological Survey of

Bangladesh.
Alam, M.K., 1988, Geology of Madhupur Tract and its Adjoining Areas in
Bangladesh;Records of the Geological Survey of Bangladesh, vol. 5, part 3.
ASTM Standards, 1974, Annual Book of ASTM Standards; Vol. 19, 464 p.
Bell, F.G., 2000, Engineering properties of soils and rocks; 4th edition, Black well
Science Ltd., London, 482 p.
British Standard 1377, 1975, Methods of Test for Civil Engineering Purpose;
BritishStandards Institution, London, p. 13-26.
British Standard 5930, 1981, Code of practice for site investigations; British
StandardsInstitution, London, 146 p.
Casagrande, A., 1932, Research of Atterberg limits of soils; Public Roads, Vol. 13
(8),121– 136.
Grim, R.E., 1962, Applied Clay Mineralogy; McGraw Hill, New York, p. 205.
Head, K.H., 1992, Manual of soil laboratory testing; 2nd edition, Pentech Press, London,
Vol. 1, 1-388.
Hossain, A.T.M.S., 2001, The engineering behavior of the tropical clay soils of Dhaka,
Bangladesh; Ph.D Thesis, University of Durham, England, U.K. (unpublished), 348 p.
Hossain, A.T.M.S. & Islam, F., 1997, Swelling characteristics of some Madhupur Clay
samples of Gazipur and adjacent areas; Bangladesh Geoscience Journal, Vol. 3, 33-48.
Islam, F., 1997, Swelling and Shrinkage Characteristics of Madhupur Clay, M.Sc. Thesis
(unpublished), Department of Geological Sciences, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka.
Morgan, J.P., and McIntire, W.G., 1959, Quaternary Geology of the Bengal Basin, East
Pakistan and India; Geological Society of America, Bull. 70, p. 319-320.

40
 Monsur, M.H., 1990, Stratigraphical and Paleomagnetical Studies of some Quaternary
Deposits of the Bengal Basin, Bangladesh; Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Vrije University,
Brussel, Belgium, p. 1-3.
Monsur, M.H., 1995, An Introduction to the Quaternary geology of Bangladesh; City Press
& Publications, Dhaka, 90 p.
Nairuzzaman, M., 2000, Influence of clay minerals on consolidation behavior of
Madhupur Clay of Greater Dhaka city; M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Geological Sciences,
Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka, (unpublished), 120 p.
Nairuzzaman, M., Haque, M.E. & Rahman, M.J.J., 2000, Influence of clay minerals on
consolidation behavior of Madhupur Clay: a case study from some samples of Greater Dhaka
city; Bangladesh Geoscience Journal, Vol. 6, 173-152.
Sayem, H.M., Hossain, A.T.M.S. & Bashar, K., 2007, Geo-engineering properties and
threedimensional deformation characteristics of some ultimate disposal site clay soils of
Rajshahi City Corporation, Bangladesh; Jahangirnagar University Journal of Science, Vol. 30
(1), 147- 163.
Sayem, A.S., M, Zoha.K.F. , Rokonuzzaman, M, Abeden, M.J, Bari,Z. 2021, Textural
and heavy mineral characteristics of the bar sediments from the upper reaches of the Atrai
River, northwest Bangladesh, Vol. 27, P. 17-41.
Smith, D.M.A., 1985, Suggested modes operandi for research into natural lateratic soil;
proceedings of 1st international conference on Geomechanics in Tropical Lateritic and
Saprolitic Soils, Vol. 3, 300-306.
Terzaghi, K., 1955, Influence of geological factors on the engineering properties of
sediments; Economic Geology, 5th Anniversary Volume, 557-618.
Terzaghi, K. & Peck, R.B., 1948 & 1967, Soil mechanics in engineering practice (first &
second edition); John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, 566 p.
WASA, 1991, Dhaka Region Groundwater and Subsidence Model; Dhaka Water and
Sewerage Authority.
White, W.A., 1955, Water sorption properties of Homoionic clay minerals;

Appendix

41
Tables for the Sieve analysis Data of the samples
Sample 6
Mash Size ɸ Size Raw Individual Cumulative
(d) (mm) weight Weight Weight Percentage
(gm) Percentage
2 -1 0.14 0.14 0.14
1 0 7.82 7.87 8.01
0.5 1.0 4.14 4.17 12.18
0.25 2.0 22.14 22.28 34.46
0.125 3.0 46.9 47.20 81.66
0.063 4.0 8.02 8.07 89.73
Pan 5 10.2 10.27 100.00
Total= 99.36 100.00
Sample 7
Mash Size ɸ Size Raw Individual Cumulative
(d) (mm) weight Weight Weight Percentage
(gm) Percentage
2 -1 0.05 0.05 0.05
1 0 1.25 1.26 1.31
0.5 1.0 8.6 8.68 9.99
0.25 2.0 28.45 28.71 38.70
0.125 3.0 42.75 43.14 81.84
0.063 4.0 6.75 6.81 88.65
Pan 5 11.25 11.35 100.00
Total= 99.10 100.00
Sample 8
Mash Size ɸ Size Raw Individual Cumulative
(d) (mm) weight Weight Weight Percentage
(gm) Percentage
2 -1 0.46 0.46 0.46
1 0 1.52 1.52 1.99
0.5 1.0 6.32 6.34 8.33
0.25 2.0 10.3 10.33 18.66

42
 0.125 3.0 57.76 57.94 76.60
0.063 4.0 11.66 11.70 88.29
Pan 5 11.67 11.71 100.00
Total= 99.69 100.00

Sample 9
Mash Size ɸ Size Raw Individual Cumulative
(d) (mm) weight Weight Weight Percentage
(gm) Percentage
2 -1 0.01 0.01 0.01
1 0 0.62 0.62 0.63
0.5 1.0 3.52 3.52 4.15
0.25 2.0 6.03 6.04 10.19
0.125 3.0 64.9 64.96 75.16
0.063 4.0 12.12 12.13 87.29
Pan 5 12.7 12.71 100.00
Total= 99.90 100.00

Sample 10
Mash Size ɸ Size Raw Individual Cumulative
(d) (mm) weight Weight Weight Percentage
(gm) Percentage
2 -1 0.05 0.05 0.05
1 0 0.32 0.32 0.37
0.5 1.0 4.53 4.54 4.91
0.25 2.0 16.42 16.44 21.35
0.125 3.0 52.49 52.57 73.92
0.063 4.0 16.17 16.19 90.12
Pan 5 9.87 9.88 100.00
Total= 99.85 100.00

43
Sample 11

Mash Size (d) ɸ Size Raw Individual Cumulative Weight

(mm) weight Weight Percentage
(gm) Percentage

2 -1 0.15 0.15 0.15

1 0 2.11 2.12 2.27

0.5 1.0 4.17 4.19 6.45

0.25 2.0 6.29 6.31 12.77

0.125 3.0 52.48 52.67 65.44

0.063 4.0 22.18 22.26 87.70

Pan 5 12.25 12.30 100.00

Total= 99.63 100.00

Sample 12

Mash Size (d) ɸ Size Raw Individual Cumulative Weight

(mm) weight Weight Percentage
(gm) Percentage

2 -1 0.26 0.26 0.26

1 0 1.14 1.14 1.40

0.5 1.0 2.46 2.47 3.87

0.25 2.0 7.55 7.57 11.44

0.125 3.0 54.97 55.11 66.55

0.063 4.0 21.01 21.06 87.62

Pan 5 12.35 12.38 100.00

Total= 99.74 100.00

44