arc centre of excellence for geotechnical

GEOPHYSICAL TESTING STAGE 1 REPORT GEOTECHNICAL TESTING FACILITY, BALLINA

ARC Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science & Engineering

GEOPLCOV00172AA-AC 31 January 2014

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd ABN 93 056 929 483 GEOPLCOV00172AA-AC 31 January 2014

31 January 2014

ARC Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science & Engineering

University of Newcastle Building EA Room 222 Callaghan NSW 2308

Attention: Dr Richard Kelly

Dear Richard

RE: GEOPHYSICAL TESTING STAGE 1 REPORT

GEOTECHNICAL TESTING FACILITY, BALLINA

We are pleased to provide the results for the geophysical testing carried out at the Geotechnical Testing Facility at Ballina.

We draw your attention to the enclosed sheet titled ‘Important Information about your Coffey Report’ which should be read in conjunction with this report.

For and on behalf of Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd

SIMON STEWART

Principal Geophysics Manager

Distribution: 1 electronic copy ARC Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science & Engineering

1 electronic copy Coffey Pty Ltd Library

CONTENTS

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd ABN 93 056 929 483 GEOPLCOV00172AA-AC 31 January 2014

i

1 INTRODUCTION 2

2 METHODOLOGY AND FIELD PROCEDURES 3

2.1 Electrical Resistivity Imaging (ERI) 3

2.2 Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) 4

2.3 Electromagnetics (EM) 6

3 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS 6




4 RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION 7




4.4 Geophysical-Geotechnical Model 9

5 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR COFFEY REPORT 11

Tables

Table 1: Geophysical line coordinates

Table 2: Interpreted Geophysical-Geotechnical Model for the Ballina Test Facility site

Photos

Photo 1: ERI system on ERI 2 at the toe of the all-weather embankment

Photo 2: MASW Landstreamer system along MASW 2 atop all-weather track

Photo 3: Seismic source generation along MASW 1

Figures

GPLCOV172AA_1: Site Plan

GPLCOV172AA_2: East-West Profiles: MASW 1 and ERI 1

GPLCOV172AA_3: North-South Profiles: MASW 2 and ERI 2

GPLCOV172AA_4: Apparent Conductivity Plan (15kHz)



2

1 INTRODUCTION

The first stage (Stage 1) geophysical testing at the Geotechnical Testing Facility, Ballina was completed 25 to 28 June 2013 prior to embankmenk construction. The objectives of the testing were to:

• Establish a baseline Shear wave (S-wave) and Electrical Resistivity data set, prior to embankment construction,

• Assist in the geotechnical site characterisation of ground materials prior to embankment construction.

Geophysical testing included Electrical Resistivity Imaging (ERI), Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) and Electromagnetics (EM).

The ground conditions at the test facility included saturated clays and silts. Standing water was observed in channels orientated East-West across the site and were generally inaccessible to the field crew and equipment used. The University of Newcastle (UoN) field representative noted that the standing water and adjacent Emigrant Creek are tidally influenced. Vegetation cover (sugar cane) had been slashed and remained as ground cover which prevented direct access to the ground surface (soils). Vehicular access was restricted to the all-weather access track from which geophysical equipment was hand carried along the geophysical lines.

Figure GPLCOV172AA_1 shows the location of the geophysical lines and the in situ geotechnical testing undertaken onsite by the UoN and includes geotechnical boreholes, Seismic flat Dilatometer Test (SDMT) and Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) results. The limits of the existing all-weather road and a fill material (fill) stockpile present next to the site are also included in GPLCOV172AA_1.

All field operations were undertaken with due care for utilities and onsite vehicular traffic in accordance with Occupational Health and Safety requirements. The geophysical fieldwork was completed in accordance with industry practice and Coffey’s Quality System (ISO 9001 accredited). Field operations were supported by approved Coffey Environmental and Safety Work Method Statements and Operational Health and Safety Plans supplied by the UoN.

All reasonable measures were undertaken to ensure safety and quality of the acquired geophysical data for analysis and interpretation. In general, these measures included:

• A site specific induction;

• Daily assessment and monitoring of weather forecasts;

• Adherence to QA procedures and QC checks on all acquired geophysical and position data;

• Safe Work Method Statements for all tasks; and

• Prestart safety toolbox discussions and vehicle prestart checks.

No reportable incidents occurred during the field geophysical investigation. Weather observations included moderate (5 to15 mm) rainfall prior and during fieldwork operations which had a relatively low impact on the saturated ground conditions across the site. Geophysical ERI and MASW lines were completed across two alignments selected by the UoN field representative and the EM was completed across the cleared pad area.



3

2 METHODOLOGY AND FIELD PROCEDURES

ERI and MASW geophysical tests were undertaken on two lines, an East-West and North-south alignments, which are included in figure GPLCOV172AA_1. The North-South geophysical line is located at the eastern edge of all-weather access track and along which the ERI and MASW tests were laterally offset by approximately 1 to 2m with a vertical offset of approximately 0.6m. MASW 2 was undertaken with a landstreamer on top of the all-weather access track whereas ERI 2 was undertaken by inserting electrodes into the natural ground material at the toe of the embankment. MASW 2 and ERI 2 are presented in GPLCOV172AA_1.

The East-West geophysical line started at approximately Ch 80m along the North-South lines. MASW 1 and ERI 1were not offset along this alignment and were located approximately 8m north of an existing earthen material stockpile embankment located onsite.

Geophysical lines were marked at the start, end and intermediate chainage positions with wooden stakes at ground level which were later surveyed by the UoN.

The geophysics fieldwork was completed from the 25 to 28 June 2013.

Table 1 lists the coordinates of the ERI and MASW lines and the start and end relative chainages.

Table 1: Geophysical line coordinates

Line ID Start

Ch.(m) Easting (m) Northing (m)

Elevation

(mAHD)

End

Ch.(m) Easting (m) Northing (m)

Elevation

(mAHD)

East-West

ERI 1 0 511889.8 6809424.2 0.57 142 552031.2 6809415.3 0.34

MASW 1 0* 511889.8 6809424.2 0.57 127* 552016.6 6809416.2 0.20

North-South

ERI 2 0 551890.2 6809558.5 0.54 213 551884.0 6809346.1 0.60

MASW 2 40* 551884.7 6809386.5 1.54 187* 551888.1 6809538.9 1.19

Geodetic Datum: MGA Zone 56 Elevation Datum: Australian Height Datum (mAHD) *MASW Start and End Chainage indicate chainage of start and end geophone of first and last spread respectively

2.1 Electrical Resistivity Imaging (ERI)

The Electrical Resistivity Imaging (ERI) technique measures the distribution of subsurface electrical resistivity from electrodes placed on the ground surface. The subsurface resistivity distribution is affected by lithology, water content, porosity, pore connectivity, pore fluid chemistry and temperature. The ERI procedure exploits Ohm’s Law and the variable electrical conductivity of earth materials and their contained fluid, and involves injecting an electric current into the ground via two (current) electrodes whilst measuring the potential difference between selected (potential) electrodes.



4

The measured potential difference is an indication of the electrical resistance of the subsurface, or the difficulty of the current flow through the subsurface.

A fully automated Syscal Pro resistivity system with 72 electrodes was used to make the resistivity measurements with the Dipole-Dipole electrode array and an electrode spacing of 2 or 3m and injection of current with metal stake electrodes were used to achieve a depth of investigation of approximately 20 to 24m. Two (2) ERI lines were completed at the site. An East-West line (ERI 1) located to north of the existing onsite stockpile and a North-South line (ERI 2) which was located parallel to the all-weather access track.

Photo 1 shows ERI field equipment at the toe of the all-weather road embankment.

Photo 1: ERI 2 at the toe of the all-weather embankment (looking North)

2.2 Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW)

Seismic surface wave testing of Rayleigh waves uses multi-channel digital seismographs to record the vertical component of in-situ shear (SV) wave velocities which may be correlated with the dynamic stiffness of soils and fill materials. The surface wave testing method enables the SV-wave velocity distribution in the subsurface to be recovered from dispersion and numerical inversion of Rayleigh wave seismic data produced by surface impact sources and recorded on standard digital seismographs.



5

MASW is distinct from downhole shear wave testing and SDMTs which often incorporate the use of horizontal shear waves (SH).

Two (2) MASW lines were completed at the site. The East-West line (MASW 1) located to north of the existing onsite stockpile (Section 1) and the North-South line (MASW 2) which was located parallel to the all-weather access track and .

MASW 2 was completed using a custom-built 48 channel landstreamer in tow behind a 4WD vehicle while MASW 1 was completed using a hand placed 48 channel geophone spread due to vehicle access limitations. Both the landstreamer and hand placed spreads included 4 Hz geophones spaced at 1m intervals seismically coupled to the ground material using metal plates and tapered spikes respectively. Seismic source positions were located at common offset distances of 3m and 8m from the first inline receiver.

Seismic spreads were completed at 5m intervals along MASW 1 and MASW 2. Seismic data was acquired with two Geode 24-channel digital seismographs and Geometrics Multiple Geode Operating Software (MGOS) and a Toughbook. A sample interval of 0.25 ms and a recording time of 1.75 seconds were used.

Photo 2 shows the surface MASW field operations along line MASW 2.

Photo 2: MASW Landstreamer system along MASW 2 located on top all-weather track (looking South)

Photo 3 shows the surface MASW field operations along line MASW 1 extending into a cleared slot within the sugar cane.



6

Photo 3: Seismic source generation along MASW 1 (looking East)

2.3 Electromagnetics (EM)

EM profiling records the secondary response from a primary electromagnetic field. The recorded response is generally generated by the ground material and is measured via the In Phase (InPhase) and Out-of-Phase (Quad) components (sampled in parts per million, PPM) which may be used to calculate the apparent conductivity (σa). The recorded response is generally related to subsurface electrical conductivity which is influenced by electrically conductive pore water, ground material composition, pore water chemistry, pH and temperature.

A GSSI EM-Profiler (EMP-400) was used to collect electromagnetic information with a transmitter to receiver coil spacing of 1.219m using three selected frequencies of 6, 8 and 15 kHz at a sample interval of 0.5 seconds. The system was calibrated for field and operator variations before data acquisition commenced. The EM profiling was undertaken at a line spacing between 2 to 3m where access allowed and was controlled by the operator using a DGPS positioning system capable of sub meter position accuracy.

3 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS

Geophysical data collected in the field was digitally recorded, transferred to disk for processing and archived in accordance with Coffey’s ISO9001 accredited system. Below describes the steps involved in processing the data acquired.



7


The ERI data was downloaded and assessed using Prosys II, an IRIS instruments software program for the Syscal Pro unit.

The resistivity data was then edited and inverted using the least squares inversion model in RES2DINV commercial software, in accordance with accepted practice. Constraints or priori information from geotechnical investigations were not used to limit the ERI model.


The MASW data was transformed to phase velocity–frequency space and subjected to dispersion analysis. S-wave velocities were computed as a function of depth assuming the standard ten-layer earth model using Surfseis® (Kansas Geological Survey) and in house software.

The MASW data were processed as successive inline 1D shear wave soundings using a common starting model for each sounding. The final 2D S-wave velocity profile was obtained by minimum curvature gridding the inline 1D sounding results which is undertaken in Surfseis ®. Constraints or priori information from geotechnical investigations were not used to limit the MASW model.


The EM data was processed following Coffey's standard procedures which include combining GPS position data with collected EM data, gridding and plotting of the data for assessment.

4 RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION


Interpreted MASW 1 and MASW 2 sections and available in situ geotechnical testing are included in Figure GPLCOV172AA_2 and GPLCOV172AA_3 respectively.

The MASW testing show Sv-wave velocities range from 40 to 150m/s. In general, MASW 1 and MASW 2 have similar velocity distributions including a lower Sv-wave velocity region of 40 to 90m/s between -2m and -8m AHD below which the velocities increase with depth to 150m/s. Sv-wave velocities on MASW 1 are approximately consistent with SH-wave velocities from SDMT1 from 0m to -9m AHD. However, from -9m to -13m AHD, SDMT 1 SH-wave velocities measurements are approximately two times larger than the MASW SV-wave velocity.

Figure GPLCOV172AA_3 shows a shallow high velocity raft in MASW 2 between +1 to -2m AHD which is consistent with the compacted fill of the track. In general MASW 2 shows the deepening of the 90 m/s contour to -14m AHD beyond Ch 110m which is confirmed by CPT-7. This suggests a lateral change in material composition, grain structure and lowering of soil stiffness beyond Ch 110m. MASW 2 also shows two low S-wave velocity zones located between Ch80 to 105m and 120 to 145m from -12m to -14m AHD. Similarly, MASW 1 shows a low S-wave velocity zone at -13m AHD and approximately Ch 85m. While this zone is isolated, it is consistent with a low velocity material near this elevation shown in MASW 2.



8


Interpreted ERI profiles and available in situ geotechnical testing are included in Figure GPLCOV172AA_2 and GPLCOV172AA_3 respectively. The ground electrical resistivities range from about 0.2 to 3 ohm m which is consistent with the borehole logs which include organics, clay, silts and sands.

Resistivity profile ERI 2 is consistent with the with the HPT8 conductivity (mS/m) cone, which for the purposes of this report is presented as resistivity (Ohm m) in GPLCOV172AA_3. HPT8 has been positioned based on anecdotal information provided by UoN and he lateral offset of HPT8 form ERI 2 is unknown. Regardless, HPT8 shows resistivities > 1 Ohm m between -4m to -11m AHD which is consistent with chainages greater than Ch 165 along ERI 2. Below -11 m AHD resistivities closer to 0.5 are observed which are consistent with similar elevations along ERI 2.

ERI 1 and ERI 2 present resistivities >1 Ohm m between the ground surface and -2m AHD and again at elevations less than approximately -20m AHD which is near the limit of the resistivity testing. Geoelectric layering of lower and higher resistivities can be observed between elevations -2 and -16m AHD. Borehole INCLO3 suggests resistivity typically <1 Ohm m are likely to include saturated sands and clays. Borehole VWP3, INCLO3 and Standpipe indicate the resistive intermediate layer >1 Ohm m is consistent with silts and clays. The intermediate resistive layer is observed on ERI 2 between -5 and -9m AHD. This layer is present at similar elevations ERI 1 between Ch. 10 and 35m however it does not appear to be laterally extensive.


Figures GPLCOV172AA_4 shows the bulk apparent electrical conductivity plans in mS/m from a 15kHz frequency system. This represents the averaged electrical conductivities to approximately 2 m depth. The soils detected by the EM system have an apparent conductivity of about 140 to 300mS/m which are consistent with shallow saturated clays, silts and sands observed at the site

Contoured apparent conductivity measurements appear as East-West linear features across the site. These features correlate observed standing water with areas of elevations below 0.3m AHD represented by the hatched areas. The 0.3m AHD level is near the approximate high tide level (mAHD) for Ballina. Tidal influences of surface water were observed at the site and have been identified by the UoN. The linear depressions at the surface are likely to be silted drainage channels and connected to Emigrant Creek to the North and to a smaller tributary to the East.

Figure GPLCOV172AA_4 show the zones of higher apparent conductivity reduce in size and correlation with elevation levels (<0.3m AHD) towards the southern portion of the site. This reduction in correlation suggests the gain in elevation corresponds to a change in material composition, water content and a thickening of the shallow silty, clayey sediments.



9

4.4 Geophysical-Geotechnical Model

Figure GPLCOV172AA_2 and GPLCOV172AA_3 include MASW and ERI sections and in situ geotechnical test results including borehole logs, CPT cone resistance (qc MPA) soundings, CPT conductivity soundings (presented as resistivity Ohm m) and an SDMT SH-wave velocity (m/s) soundings. In situ geotechnical testing results were provided by the UoN and were located, on average, approximately 20m laterally offset from the geophysics profiles with the exception of SDMT 1 which was located on ERI 1/MASW 1 at Ch 31m.

The in situ geotechnical and geophysical test results consistently identify a surface layer of alluvial sandy clayey silts to -2m AHD which is a resistive and low S-wave velocity. The poor correlation of conductivity cone HPT8 at these elevations is possibly due to poor coupling to the surrounding material often observed in organic material and detritus.

Beneath the shallow alluvial layer is a low resistivity (i.e. conductive), low S-wave velocity layer which corresponds to estuarine deposits of soft, saturated silty clays and sandy clays. This is supported in by CPT7, at Ch 151m on MASW 1 and ERI 1, which show the base of this layer is closer to -15 m AHD.

Mixed material deposits are observed between -9 and 15m AHD. Figure LCOV172AA_2 shows SDMT SH-wave velocity measurements are approximately two times the corresponding MASW 1 SV-wave velocity, for velocities greater than 90 m/s and below -9m AHD. In general, the 90m/s SV-wave velocity is present at -9m AHD in MASW 1 and between Ch 40 to 110m on MASW 2. The 90 m/s level drops beyond Ch 110m on MASW 2 to approximately -14m AHD. The 90m/s SV-wave velocity interval can be observed within the velocity inversion in MASW 2 between Ch 80 and 110m and between -11m and -15m AHD. While geotechnical test were not undertaken near the velocity inversion, at Ch 118m on MASW 2, INCLO3 includes a loose sand layer near -10m AHD which is consistent with lower shear wave velocity.

In Figure GPLCOV172AA_3, ERI 2 shows a geoelectric layer from -6 to -9 m AHD with resistivities >1 Ohm m which represents a change in material composition including silts, sands and gravels. ERI 1, Figure GPLCOV172AA_2, shows a resistive zone (>1 Ohm m) at a similar level be between Ch10 and 35m.

In general, MASW and ERI sections show material resistivities and SV-wave velocity increase below -15m AHD. This is supported by the rapid increase in cone resistance of CPT-7 and CPT-6A near -15m AHD. At these levels Sv-wave velocities are approximately 95 to 110m/s and resistivities are near 0.8 Ohm m. This level supported by borehole INCLO3 which indicates increasing stiff and very stiff sandy silty clay material.

Table 2 includes an interpreted geophysical-geotechnical model for the Ballina Test Facility.



10

Table 2: Interpreted Geophysical-Geotechnical Model for the Ballina Test Facility site

Interpeted SV-wave

Velocity (m/s)

SDMT 1 SH-wave Velocity

(m/s)

Interpreted Resistivity (Ohm m)

HPT8 Resistivity (Ohm m)

Correlated Geotechnical Material Description

Layer Elevation (mAHD)

MASW 1 MASW 2 ERI 1 ERI 2

1 1 to -2 60 to 75 60 to 100 53 to 131 1 to 3 1 to 3 0.003 to 0.5 Sandy Clayey Silt (Alluvial) – Soft to Stiff

2 -2 to -5 50 to 70 45 to 60 58 to 65 0.5 to 0.9 0.5 to 1 0.5 to 1.2 Silty Clay (Estuarine) - Soft

3 -5 to -9 60 to 90 60 to 90 63 to 77 0.7 to 1 1 to 1.3 1 to 1.4 Silty Clay (Estuarine) - Soft

4 -9 to -15 90 to 130 70 to 140 77 to 261 0.5 to 1 0.5 to 1 0.5 to 1.4 Increasign Sand Content - Soft to Firm

Clayey Sand (Estuarine) - Loose

5 -15 to -18 110 to 150 140 to 150 NA 1 to 3 1 to 3 0.6 to 1.04 Sand – Medium Dense to Dense



11

5 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR COFFEY REPORT

The reader’s attention is drawn to the important information about this report, which follows the main text

For and on behalf of

COFFEY GEOTECHNICS PTY LTD

DR BOB WHITELEY

SENIOR PRINCIPAL

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd ABN 93 056 929 483

As a client of Coffey you should know that site subsurface conditions cause more constructionproblems than any other factor. These notes have been prepared by Coffey to help youinterpret and understand the limitations of your report.

Your report is based on project specific criteria

Your report has been developed on the basis of yourunique project specific requirements as understoodby Coffey and applies only to the site investigated.Project criteria typically include the general nature ofthe project; its size and configuration; the location ofany structures on the site; other site improvements;the presence of underground utilities; and the additionalrisk imposed by scope-of-service limitations imposedby the client. Your report should not be used if thereare any changes to the project without first askingCoffey to assess how factors that changed subsequentto the date of the report affect the report'srecommendations. Coffey cannot accept responsibilityfor problems that may occur due to changed factorsif they are not consulted.

Subsurface conditions can change

Subsurface conditions are created by natural processesand the activity of man. For example, water levelscan vary with time, fill may be placed on a site andpollutants may migrate with time. Because a reportis based on conditions which existed at the time ofsubsurface exploration, decisions should not be basedon a report whose adequacy may have been affectedby time. Consult Coffey to be advised how time mayhave impacted on the project.

Interpretation of factual data

Site assessment identifies actual subsurface conditionsonly at those points where samples are taken andwhen they are taken. Data derived from literatureand external data source review, sampling and subsequent laboratory testing are interpreted bygeologists, engineers or scientists to provide anopinion about overall site conditions, their likelyimpact on the proposed development and recommendedactions. Actual conditions may differ from those inferredto exist, because no professional, no matter howqualified, can reveal what is hidden by

Your report will only givepreliminary recommendationsYour report is based on the assumption that thesite conditions as revealed through selectivepoint sampling are indicative of actual conditionsthroughout an area. This assumption cannot besubstantiated until project implementation hascommenced and therefore your report recommendationscan only be regarded as preliminary. Only Coffey,who prepared the report, is fully familiar with thebackground information needed to assess whetheror not the report's recommendations are valid andwhether or not changes should be considered asthe project develops. If another party undertakesthe implementation of the recommendations of thisreport there is a risk that the report will be misinterpretedand Coffey cannot be held responsible for suchmisinterpretation.

earth, rock and time. The actual interface betweenmaterials may be far more gradual or abrupt thanassumed based on the facts obtained. Nothing canbe done to change the actual site conditions whichexist, but steps can be taken to reduce the impact ofunexpected conditions. For this reason, ownersshould retain the services of Coffey through thedevelopment stage, to identify variances, conductadditional tests if required, and recommend solutionsto problems encountered on site.

Your report is prepared forspecific purposes and personsTo avoid misuse of the information contained in yourreport it is recommended that you confer with Coffeybefore passing your report on to another party whomay not be familiar with the background and thepurpose of the report. Your report should not beapplied to any project other than that originallyspecified at the time the report was issued.

Important information about your Coffey Report

* For further information on this aspect reference should bemade to "Guidelines for the Provision of Geotechnicalinformation in Construction Contracts" published by theInstitution of Engineers Australia, National headquarters,Canberra, 1987.

Interpretation by other design professionals

Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretationsof a report. To help avoid misinterpretations, retainCoffey to work with other project design professionalswho are affected by the report. Have Coffey explainthe report implications to design professionals affectedby them and then review plans and specificationsproduced to see how they incorporate the reportfindings.

Data should not be separated from the report*

The report as a whole presents the findings of the siteassessment and the report should not be copied inpart or altered in any way.

Logs, figures, drawings, etc. are customarily includedin our reports and are developed by scientists,engineers or geologists based on their interpretationof field logs (assembled by field personnel) andlaboratory evaluation of field samples. These logs etc.should not under any circumstances be redrawn forinclusion in other documents or separated from thereport in any way.

Geoenvironmental concerns are not at issue

Your report is not likely to relate any findings,conclusions, or recommendations about the potentialfor hazardous materials existing at the site unlessspecifically required to do so by the client. Specialistequipment, techniques, and personnel are used toperform a geoenvironmental assessment.Contamination can create major health, safety andenvironmental risks. If you have no information aboutthe potential for your site to be contaminated or createan environmental hazard, you are advised to contactCoffey for information relating to geoenvironmentalissues.

Rely on Coffey for additional assistance

Coffey is familiar with a variety of techniques andapproaches that can be used to help reduce risks forall parties to a project, from design to construction. Itis common that not all approaches will be necessarilydealt with in your site assessment report due toconcepts proposed at that time. As the projectprogresses through design towards construction,speak with Coffey to develop alternative approachesto problems that may be of genuine benefit both intime and cost.

Responsibility

Reporting relies on interpretation of factual informationbased on judgement and opinion and has a level ofuncertainty attached to it, which is far less exact thanthe design disciplines. This has often resulted in claimsbeing lodged against consultants, which are unfounded.To help prevent this problem, a number of clauseshave been developed for use in contracts, reports andother documents. Responsibility clauses do not transferappropriate liabilities from Coffey to other parties butare included to identify where Coffey's responsibilitiesbegin and end. Their use is intended to help all partiesinvolved to recognise their individual responsibilities.Read all documents from Coffey closely and do nothesitate to ask any questions you may have.

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd ABN 93 056 929 483

Important information about your Coffey Report

ERI2

ERI1

CH.0m

CH.10m

CH

.20m

CH.30m

CH.40m

CH.50m

CH.60m

CH.70m

CH.80m

CH.90m

CH.100m

CH.110m

CH.120m

CH.130m

CH.140m

CH.150m

CH.160m

CH.170m

CH.180m

CH.190m

CH.200m

CH.210m

CH.213m

CH.70m

CH.80m

CH.90m

CH.100m

CH.110m

CH.120m

CH.130m

CH.140m

CH.150m

CH.160m

CH

.0m

CH

.10m

CH

.20m

CH

.30m

CH

.40m

CH

.50m

CH

.60m

CH

.70m

CH

.80m

CH

.90m

CH

.100m

CH

.110m

CH

.120m

CH

.130m

CH

.140m

CH

.142m

551850 E

551850 E

551900 E

551900 E

551950 E

551950 E

552000 E

552000 E

6809350 N

6809350 N

6809400 N

6809400 N

6809450 N

6809450 N

6809500 N

6809500 N

6809550 N

6809550 N

CH

.24m

CH

.99m

CH.64m

CH.164m

WP1

WP2 WP3

WP4

WP5

WP6

WP7

WP8

WP9

WP10

WP11WP12

Scale (metres) 1:750

LEGEND

CPT LOCATION

MASW INVESTIGATION LINE

100 30 4010 20

drawn

approved

date

scale

original

size

project no:

project:

title:

client:

figure no:

AF / LH

-

13 / 01 / 14

A3

ARC CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE FOR GEOTECHNICAL SCIENCE &

ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE

GEOTECHNICAL TESTING FACILITY

BALLINA, NSW

GEOPLCOV00172AA

PL

OT

D

AT

E: 1

3/0

1/2

01

4 3

:4

0:2

5 P

M D

WG

F

IL

E: F

:\G

EO

PH

YS

IC

S\1

. P

RO

JE

CT

S\G

EO

PL

CO

V\G

EO

PL

CO

V0

01

00

-0

01

99

\G

EO

PL

CO

V0

01

72

AA

- B

AL

LIN

A T

ES

T F

AC

IL

IT

Y\0

9. F

IG

UR

ES

\S

IT

E P

LA

N\G

EO

PL

CO

V0

01

72

AA

.D

WG

GPLCOV172AA_1

1:750 SITE PLAN

ERI INVESTIGATION LINE

ACCESS TRACK

GATE 8 STOCKPILE FILL EXTENT

INSITU GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS

vwp3 CPT-6

INSITU GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS

PROJECTED ONTO GEOPHYSICAL PROFILES

ARC Centre for Excellence for Geotechnical Science & Engineering,University of Newcastle

Geotechnical Testing Facility,Ballina, New South Wales

EAST-WEST PROFILES: ERI 1and MASW 1

GPLCOV172AA_2GEOPLCOV00172AA

AF

RJW

16 July 2013

AS SHOWN

A3

East - West MASW and ERI alignment AF RJW 16 July 2013

0.4

0.6

0.6

0.6 0.8

0.80.80.8

0.8 0.8

0.8

1

1

1

1

1.2

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Chainage (m)

ERI 1

-20

-18

-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

Level (m

AHD)

60

60

70 7080 8090 90100

10011

0

110120

30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Chainage (m)

MASW 1

-18

-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

Level (m

AHD)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

Resistivity(Ohm m)

S-Wave Velocity(m/s)

0 10 20 30 40

0 5 10 15 20Y Scale (1:400)

X Scale (1:600)

0 5qc (MPa)

CPT-6Aqc (MPa)(21.5m South)

WEST EAST

0 5qc (MPa)

SDMT 1Vs (m/s)

(0.2m North)

100 200

Vs (m/s)

Sandy Clayey SILT - HPSilty CLAY - S and HP

BOREHOLE LEGEND

VWPGRBOREHOLE(19m North)

CPT-6Aqc (MPa)(21.5m South)

SDMTVs (m/s)

(0.2m North)

VWPGRBOREHOLE(19m North)

100 200

Vs (m/s)



NORTH-SOUTH PROFILES: ERI 2 and MASW 2


AF

RJW

16 July 2013

AS SHOWN

A3

North - South MASW and ERI alignment AF RJW 16 July 2013

0.6

0.60.8

0.8

0.8 0.8

0.8

0.8 0

.8

0.80.8

0.8 0.8

1

1 1

111 1

11

1.2

1.2

1.21.2

1.4

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Chainage (m)

ERI 2

-20

-18

-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

Level (m

AHD)

50 5060 60 6070 70 7080 80

80

8080

90

90

90 90

70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

Chainage (m)

MASW 2

-18

-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

Level (m

AHD)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

Resistivity(Ohm m)

S-Wave Velocity(m/s)

0 10 20 30 40

0 5 10 15 20Y Scale (1:300)

X Scale (1:600)

0 5 10 15qc (MPa)

CPT-7qc (MPa)(18m West)

CPT-7qc (MPa)(18m West)

SOUTH NORTH

0.5 1Ohm m

-18

-16

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

HPT8(Ohm m)

(Unknown location*)

0 5 10 15qc (MPa)

StandpipeBorehole

(19m West)

StandpipeBorehole

(19m West)

VWP3Borehole

(22m East)

INCLO3Borehole(19m East)

VWP3Borehole

(22m East)

INCLO3Borehole(19m East)

Sandy Clayey SILT - HPSilty CLAY - S and HP

Increasing Sand Content

Clayey SAND - L

SAND - MD/D

Sandy Silty CLAY - St/VSt and HP

BOREHOLE LEGEND

MASW 1/ERI 1

MASW 1/ERI 1

190

190

190

190

190190

551870 551880 551890 551900 551910 551920 551930 551940 551950 551960 551970 551980 551990 552000 552010 552020 552030

EASTING (m)

6809360

6809370

6809380

6809390

6809400

6809410

6809420

6809430

6809440

6809450

6809460

6809470

6809480

6809490

6809500

6809510

6809520

6809530

6809540

6809550

6809560

NORTHING (m)

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

Apparent Conductivity (mS/m)



Apparent Conductivity (mS/m)


AF

RJW

24 December 2013

1:700

A3

0 20 40 60 80

Scale 1:700

Ground Elevation<0.3m AHD

MASW Alignment

ERI Alignment

LEGEND

Track Boundary

arc centre of excellence for geotechnical

Documents