VGI7148 S19 Pipeline Realignment Typset For Mail PDF

PIPELINE REALIGNMENT, BLUEBELL STREET,
CARLETONVILLE: DOLOMITE STABILITY

INVESTIGATION
VGI7148 S19
Compiled by:
VGIconsult Projects
P.O. BOX 604
FOURWAYS
2055
TEL : (011) 469 0854

FAX : (011) 469 0961
FAX : 0866892847
e-mail: jhb@vgiconsult.co.za
Consulting Engineering Geologists & Engineers VGIconsult
VGIconsult Projects (Pty.) Ltd.
Registration number 2003/015042/07
MORAD CONSULTING PTY LTD P.O. Box 604

274 VOORTREKKER ROAD Fourways
NOORDHEUWEL 2055
MOGALE Gauteng
1740
Telephone
Direct : (011) 469 0854
Fax : (011) 469 0961
ATTENTION: MR NORMAN DUMA Fax : 0866892847
E-mail jhb@vgiconsult.co.za
Your reference Our reference Date

VGI7148 S19 23 JUNE 2017
PIPELINE REALIGNMENT, BLUEBELL STREET, CARLETONVILLE: DOLOMITE STABILITY
INVESTIGATION
SUMMARY
This report presents the results of a dolomite stability investigation carried out along the proposed
pipeline route in Bluebell Street, Carletonville, which will realign a section of the existing water
pipeline which has been affected by a sinkhole.
The boreholes intercept chert and dolomite residuum of variable thickness. Cavernous
conditions, including disseminated voids, are intercepted in some of the boreholes.
Weathered dolomite bedrock/hard rock dolomite is intercepted atvariable depths (0m to 48m).
All the boreholes were recorded as “dry” 24 hours after drilling. The groundwater level is
anticipated at 200m depth, whilst the OWL is at 1469m AMSL or 81m deep.
The pipeline alignment is characterised by two dolomite hazard areas as follows:
Dolomite Hazard
Description
Hazard Zone Classification
Area largely reflecting a medium to high susceptibility of large-size
sinkhole and subsidence formation with respect to ingress of water
1 4/7//1
and a low susceptibility of all-size sinkhole and subsidence
formation with respect anthropogenic groundwater level drawdown.
Area largely reflecting a high susceptibility of small- to medium-
size sinkhole and subsidence formation (sub-areas may comprise a
medium susceptibility of medium-size sinkholes and subsidences)
2 5/6(3)//1
with respect to ingress of water and a low susceptibility of all-size
sinkhole and subsidence formation with respect anthropogenic
groundwater level drawdown.
The report presents precautionary measures as well as recommendations in terms of

improvement of the sub-surface soils around boreholes which intercepted problematic conditions,
monitoring activities to minimise the risk of sinkhole occurrence in future.
Directors: D.B. Buttrick Ph. D. (Eng. Geol.), MSAIEG, Pr. Sci. Nat. ; A.A. Gerber B. Eng., Pr. Eng.
ASB: N.Y.G. Trollip M. Sc. (Eng. &Env.), Pr. Sci. Nat., AMSAIEG ; I. Kleinhans M. Sc. (Eng. &Env.), Pr. Sci. Nat.
PIPELINE REALIGNMENT, BLUEBELL STREET, CARLETONVILLE: DOLOMITE STABILITY
INVESTIGATION
SUMMARY Preface
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NUMBER
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
2. TERMS OF REFERENCE ..................................................................................................... 1
3. AVAILABLE INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 1
3.1. Topographic Data....................................................................................................... 1
3.2. Geological Information ............................................................................................... 1
3.3. Industry Standards ..................................................................................................... 1
3.4. Geohydrological Information ...................................................................................... 2
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ................................................................................ 2
5. PROCEDURES USED IN THIS STUDY ................................................................................ 2
5.1. Assimilation of Available Data .................................................................................... 2
5.2. Map Production (Projection, Co-ordinate System and Datum).................................... 3
5.3. Geophysics (Gravity Method) ..................................................................................... 3
5.4. Rotary Percussion Boreholes ..................................................................................... 3
5.5. Hazard Characterisation Procedure ........................................................................... 4
5.6. Monitoring Designations ............................................................................................. 8
6. GEOLOGY AND GEOHYDROLOGY ...................................................................................10
6.1. General Geology .......................................................................................................10
6.2. Local Geology ...........................................................................................................11
6.3. Geohydrology............................................................................................................12
6.4. Background: July 2016 Sinkhole ...............................................................................12
7. DOLOMITE HAZARD CHARACTERISATION .....................................................................13
7.1. Site investigation and Dolomite Hazard Assessment Procedures ..............................13
7.2. Dolomite Hazard Zone 1 (Hazard Class 4/7//1) .........................................................13
7.3. Dolomite Hazard Zone 2 (Hazard Class 5/6(3)//1) .....................................................15
8. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................17
8.1. Results of the Drilling Programme .............................................................................17
8.2. Dolomite Hazard Characterisation .............................................................................17
9. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................18
9.1. Improvement of subsoil conditions ............................................................................18
9.2. Precautionary Measures ...........................................................................................19
9.3. Open works and general construction activities .........................................................19
9.4. Stormwater Management ..........................................................................................19
9.5. Monitoring Actions.....................................................................................................20
9.6. Database of Ground Movement and Stability Conditions ...........................................20
10. GENERAL ............................................................................................................................20
TABLES
SUMMARISED BOREHOLE INFORMATION AND INHERENT HAZARD

TABLE 1
CHARACTERISATION
FIGURES
LOCALITY PLAN FIGURE 1

TOPOGRAPHICAL SHEET LEGEND FIGURE 1A
SITE LAYOUT WITH GROUND ELEVATION CONTOURS FIGURE 2
REGIONAL GEOLOGY FIGURE 3
GEOLOGY LEGEND FIGURE 3A
REGIONAL GEOHYDROLOGY FIGURE 4
DRAWINGS
RESIDUAL GRAVITY, BOREHOLE POSITIONS AND DOLOMITE HAZARD

VGI7148S19/1
ZONATION WITH PROPOSED REHABILITATION AREA
APPENDICES
BOREHOLE PROFILES APPENDIX 1

1
1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a dolomite stability investigation carried out along the
proposed pipeline route in Bluebell Street, Carletonville, which will realign a section of the
existing water pipeline which has been affected by a sinkhole.
The purpose of the investigation is to determine the subsurface conditions along the proposed
alignment and provide recommendations on the way forward in terms of wet service design and
dolomite risk management.
These investigations involved field inspections, a drilling programme, analysis and reporting.
2. TERMS OF REFERENCE
VGIconsult is appointed by Morad to conduct dolomite stability investigations at various sinkhole

sites in the Merafong City Local Municipality area.
3. AVAILABLE INFORMATION
Information sources include:
3.1. Topographic Data
Topographic Map, 1: 50 000 Scale Series: issued by the Chief Directorate: Surveys and
Mapping, Department of Land Affairs:
Sheet Name Reference

Carletonville 2627AD
3.2. Geological Information
Geological Map, 1: 250 000 Scale Series: issued by the Geological Survey of South
Africa (Council for Geoscience):
Sheet Name Reference

West Rand 2626
3.3. Industry Standards
o South African National Standard SANS 1936 Parts 1 – 4 (2012).
o South African National Standard SANS 2001-BE3: 2012, Construction works Part
BE3: Repair of sinkholes and subsidences in dolomite land.
o South African National Standard SANS 633:2012, Edition 1 (ISBN 978-0-626-

27631-7), Soil profiling and rotary percussion borehole logging on dolomite land in
Southern Africa for engineering purposes.
o Environmental Earth Sciences, Springer-Report: “A Performance Based Approach

to Dolomite Risk Management” by D Buttrick, N Trollip, R Watermeyer, N Pieterse,
A Gerber, Volume 64, Issue 4, p1127 – p1138, dated 2011.
o South African National Standards: The Application of the National Building Code:
SANS 10400, Part A: General principles and requirements and Part B: Structural
Design, (2004).
2
o Council for Geoscience/South African Institute of Engineering and

Environmental Geologists (2003): Guideline for engineering-geological
characterisation and development of dolomitic land.
o Council for Geoscience (2007): Consultants Guide: Approach to Site on Dolomite

Land.
o Department of Public Works (PW344), September 2010: Appropriate

Development of Infrastructure on Dolomite. Manual for Consultants.
o Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa: “Subsurface subsidences and

sinkholes caused by lowering of the dolomitic water-table on the Far West Rand
Gold Field of South Africa” by RJ Kleywegt and DR Pike, Volume 16, p77 – p105,
dated 1982.
3.4. Geohydrological Information
Groundwater information is made available by the Department of Water Affairs through the
National Groundwater Information System (NGIS) which offers read-only access to data
from:
o National Groundwater Archive (NGA);

o Water Management System (WMS); and
o Hydstra [http://www.dwa.gov.za/chart/]).
In addition, the report “Geohydrology Guideline Development: Implementation of Dolomite

Guideline – Phase 1, Activities 19 & 28: Desktop development of a Dolomite
Hydrogeological Compartment Map and explanation booklet (Report), dated November
2009, Project Number: 14/14/5/2, Authors: Martin Holland: Water Geosciences
Consulting, Frans Wiegmans: Golder Associates”, was consulted.
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA
The location of the affected area is displayed on Figure 1.
The proposed pipeline alignment and sinkhole location are displayed on Figure 2.
The regional topography of the area falls from 1550m AMSL in the east to 1540m AMSL in the
west.
5. PROCEDURES USED IN THIS STUDY
As dolomite hazard assessment is an empirical science that is constantly changing, these

succinct background notes are provided to contextualise the procedures used in these
investigations, in time and content. The objective is to provide an understanding of the process
currently followed in classifying the site and the determination of appropriate risk management
requirements, should it be required at some future date.
5.1. Assimilation of Available Data
Data collected from the client, the Council for Geoscience and the VGIconsult databases
together with available geological and geohydrological data are first assimilated.
3
5.2. Map Production (Projection, Co-ordinate System and Datum)
All the drawings in this report are produced using a Geographic Information System (GIS).
The projection information of the figures and drawings in this report listed below:
Projection surface: Mercator (cylinder)

Projection orientation: Transverse aspect
Datum or reference ellipsoid: World Geodetic System 84
Central Meridian: In degrees (27 for this study)
False easting and northing: Zero degrees
Scale factor: 1
The drawings and figures are co-ordinated in metres latitude (7 digit value) and longitude
(5 or 6 digit value).
5.3. Geophysics (Gravity Method)
The gravity method is the most widely used remote sensing technique applied on dolomite
land. Variations in the earth’s structure and composition give rise to variations in density.
Indirectly the density variations are determined by measuring the gravity field which allows
the determination of location, form and distribution of causative geological factors. A
gravity survey of a dolomitic terrain can be used to help determine dolomite bedrock
configuration (bedrock topography) and allows various deductions to be made about
tectonic processes.
The existing gravity survey contour data is displayed in Drawing VGI7148 S19/1.
5.4. Rotary Percussion Boreholes
5.4.1. Current investigation
Eleven (11) boreholes were drilled along or near to the pipeline alignment:
Drilling method: Rotary percussion

Drilling Contractor: JK Developments
Drilling Machine: Thor 5000
Hammer diameter: 165 mm
Hammer type: Button
Compressor: Atlas COPCO
Delivery: 21,1m3/min @ 1800kPa
The borehole logs are presented in Appendix 1 and summarised in Table 1.The co-
ordinates of the boreholes drilled during this investigation follow:
1
Co-ordinates
Borehole Number
Y X
7148-01 -39831 2918504
7148-02 -39864 2918503
7148-03 39908 2918493
7148-04 -39915 2918490
1
The X- and Y-coordinates conform to the South African Coordinate System as set in the national control survey
network maintained by the Chief Directorate: Surveys and Mapping of the Department of Land Affairs. The X- and
Y-values are given in metres latitude (7 digit value) and longitude (5 or 6 digit value). These coordinates are
projected using the Gauss Conform Projection which is the Transverse aspect of the Mercator projection. The
reference ellipsoid is the WGS84 (Hartebeeshoek 1994) ellipsoid.
4
1
Co-ordinates
Borehole Number
Y X
7148-05 -39962 2918480
7148-06 -39988 2918476
7148-07 -39785 2918503
7148-08 -39756 2918495
7148-09 -39931 2918497
7148-10 -39716 2918483
7148-11 -39699 2918441
7148-17 -39923 2918500
7148-18 -39919 2918501
7148-19 -39915 2918502
7148-20 -39911 2918503
7148-21 -39901 2918506
7148-24 -39731 2918486
The positions of the boreholes are displayed on Drawing VGI7148 S19/1. Boreholes
drilled around the sinkhole are included in this list for completeness sake.
5.5. Hazard Characterisation Procedure
New National standards (SANS 1936, 2012) require use of internationally accepted
terminology. The applicable terminology and its definition (with previous term used) are
given below:
5.5.1. Terminology
5.5.1.1. Hazard
Source of potential harm. Hazard is the function of magnitude (of the

events), area, and frequency.
5.5.1.2. Inherent Susceptibility (Inherent Risk)
A reflection of the geological susceptibility of a karst area to an event

(sinkhole or subsidence). Inherent Susceptibility is expressed in terms of
three broad categories, namely low, medium and high, typically, but not
exclusively, denoting anticipated number of events per area over time.
5.5.1.3. Inherent Hazard Class (Inherent Risk Class)
A site is characterised in terms of eight standard inherent hazard classes,

denoting the likelihood of an event (sinkhole or subsidence) occurring
(susceptibility) as well as its likely size (diameter). The larger the Inherent
Hazard Class (IHC) number, the greater the likelihood of the event occurring
and the larger its potential size should it occur, for each respective inherent
susceptibility category (low, medium, high).
5.5.1.4. Hazard Rating
The number of events per hectare that have occurred over a 20 year period
due to human impact.
5.5.1.5. Tolerable Hazard Rating (Acceptable Development Risk)
The hazard rating is expressed as tolerable where the number of events

experienced is less than and including 0.1 events per hectare per 20 years
(preferably tending to 0 per hectare) that is exceeding the return period of
5
200 years and intolerable where the number of events experienced

exceeds 0.1 events per hectare per 20 years (return period less than 200
years).
5.5.1.6. Return Period
Known as a recurrence interval and is an estimate of the interval of time

between events of a certain size.
5.5.1.7. Subsidence (Doline)
Shallow, enclosed depression. In past South African literature subsidence,

as defined above, is synonymous with doline. The term subsidence is
substituted to prevent contradiction with international literature.
5.5.1.8. Sinkhole
A feature that occurs suddenly and manifests itself as a hole in the

ground.In international literature the term sinkhole is often synonymous with
doline.
5.5.1.9. Dolomite Land
land underlain by dolomite or limestone residuum or bedrock (or both),

within the Malmani Subgroup and Campbell Rand Subgroup, typically at
depths of no more than
a) 60min areas where node-watering has taken place and the local
authority has jurisdiction, is monitoring and has control over the
groundwater levels in the areas under consideration; or
b) 100 m in areas where de-watering has taken place or where the local
authority has no jurisdiction or control over groundwater levels.
5.5.1.10. Event
Occurrence [or change of a particular set of circumstances], in the context

of this standard referring to a sinkhole or subsidence. An event can be one
or more occurrences, and can have several causes. An event can consist
of something not happening.
An event can sometimes be referred to as an “incident” or “accident”.
5.5.1.11. Potential Loss of Support
Refers to the removal of support below the foundation due to a nominal

sinkhole or subsidence event. In proposing suitable foundation types in D3
areas, consideration should be given to the potential loss of support which
could be anticipated for the designated Inherent Hazard Class based on the
nascent2 sinkhole size.
The philosophy to be applied to the design of the foundations is that in the

event of catastrophic loss of support, there is sufficient time for occupants to
safely escape after the occurrence of the sinkhole, and the level of expected
damage associated with soil movements unrelated to sinkhole formation in
near surface horizons is kept within reasonable limits.
2
Adj. beginning to develop
6
5.5.2. Assessment Procedure
The hazard characterisation procedure (previously referred to as “risk”

characterisation procedure in South African literature) is in accordance with
the peer reviewed paper “A performance based approach to dolomite risk
management”:
The available information, geophysical data, borehole data and geohydrological

information gathered during the investigation has been pooled and reviewed
permitting the formulation of a perspective concerning the characterisation of the
stability of the site.
The predominant mobilising agencies considered in this investigation are major

groundwater level fluctuations (>6m), ingress of water, ground vibrations and gravity.
Use is made of a generalised list of evaluation factors to evaluate the hazard.
These factors are as follows:

o Receptacle development;
o Mobilising agencies, particularly ingress of water from leaking services;
o Potential sinkhole development space;
o Nature of the blanketing layer;
o Mobilisation potential of the blanketing layer;
o Bedrock morphology.
Receptacles or disseminated receptacles refer to any voids or cavities in the dolomite

bedrock or in the overburden capable of receiving mobilised materials. Receptacles
are assumed to be present as no reliable geophysical tool exists to determine the
location of these features. Consequently the information gathered from boreholes,
including penetration times, air loss, hammer action, etc, combined with geophysical
and geological information are used to formulate an impression of the degree of voids.
The potential sinkhole development space, where used, refers to the expected
maximum size sinkhole that conservatively may be anticipated to be generated if
sustained ingress of water were to occur. This factor is related to the depth of the
receptacles or disseminated receptacles. The gravity survey, combined with borehole
information strongly guides the appraisal of this factor.
The nature of the material covering the receptacles, be they above or in the bedrock,
determines the susceptibility of the subsurface material to erosion by ingress of water.
The presence of materials such as shales or intrusives, which can act as aquitards,
serve to reduce the mobilisation potential and enhance the stability.
In the case of dramatic groundwater level fluctuations the susceptibility of the soil
material to mobilisation (i.e. consolidation settlement - subsidence formation, or
ravelling and arch failure - sinkhole formation, due to pore pressure changes in soils),
is strongly influenced by the position of the original groundwater level in the
subsurface profile. In assessing the susceptibility of a subsurface profile to sinkholes
and subsidences due to groundwater level drawdown, attention is given to the
nature and extent of the material below the groundwater level.
For example in the case of compressible dolomite residuum, as the groundwater

recedes, pore pressures in the residual dolomite soils, typically characterized by
high void ratios, gradually dissipate and the effective stress on the soil increases
causing consolidation of the compressible material.
7
A surface depression may occur gradually due to the load of the near-surface
materials on the deeper lower density materials that settle into a denser state.
The general maximum magnitude of natural groundwater fluctuation in the Gauteng

dolomites is in the order of 5m (Hobbs, 2004; Holland, 2007). Hence artificial
groundwater level drawdown is generally defined as drawdown exceeding 6m.
Experience shows that groundwater level drawdown (beyond seasonal variations) has
the greatest negative impact on dolomite stability in areas of shallow groundwater
levels (30 m or shallower) i.e. deeper (> 30 m) groundwater levels, pose less of a
negative impact on stability, in the event of groundwater level drawdown or dewatering.
However, where groundwater drawdown occurs in areas of deeper groundwater, the
size of instability is typically anticipated to be large to very large.
In view of the factors discussed above the following characteristics have been
extracted from the gathered information during the assessment process:
o borehole position relative to the gravity data.
o collar elevation.
o depth to dolomite bedrock*.
o depth to potential receptacles.
o depth to the present and original groundwater level.
o nature and thickness of blanketing layer i.e. material type, penetration times,
etc.
o position of the bedrock with respect to the present and original
groundwaterlevel.
o thickness and nature of the soil materials above and below the present and
original groundwater level.
*In the context of this report the concepts of thickness and depths for subsurface
horizons are used as follows:
Thicknesses
Depths
(Alluvium / Colluvium / Residuum)
Range in m Appellation Range in m Appellation
0-2/4 Near-surface 0-8/12 Thin
2/4-8/12 Shallow 8/12-16/24 Intermediate
8/12-16/24 Intermediate 16/24-36/44 Thick
16/24-36/44 Great Depth 36/44 and greater Very Thick
More than 40 Very Great Depth - -
Inherent susceptibility is a reflection of the geological susceptibility of a karst area to

an event (sinkhole or subsidence formation) andis expressed in three broad
categories, namely low, medium and high. The following reference to incidences,
gives a perspective of the magnitude of problems encountered in each of the of
hazard zones in research areas.
It is important to note that these figures are largely derived from developments not
effectively and appropriately designed or maintained.
Inherent
Anticipated events per hectare over time (magnitude of problem)*
Susceptibility
0 up to and including 0.1 events per hectare anticipated but occurrence of
LOW
events cannot be excluded. Return Period is greater than 200 years.
Greater than 0.1 and less than and equal to 1.0 events per hectare. Return
MEDIUM
period is between 200 and 20 years.
8
Inherent
Anticipated events per hectare over time (magnitude of problem)*
Susceptibility
Greater than 1.0 events anticipated per hectare. Return period is less than
HIGH
20 years.
* that have occurred per hectare in a 20 year period in the "type" areas (statistics based on poor service
design and maintenance)
The study area is characterised in terms of eight standard Inherent Hazard Classes.
These classes denote the chance of a sinkhole or subsidence occurring as well as its
likely size (diameter).
The terminology used in terms of likely size of an event (sinkhole or subsidence) is

defined as follows:
Maximum diameter of surface

Terminology
manifestation (in metres)
<2 Small-size
2-5 Medium-size
5-15 Large-size
> 15 Very large-size
The larger the Inherent Hazard Class number, the greater the chance of a sinkhole or
subsidence occurring and the larger its potential size should it occur for each of the
inherent susceptibility categories.
The meaning/definition of each Inherent Hazard Class is as follows:
Inherent
Characterisation of Area
Hazard Class
Areas characterised as reflecting a low inherent susceptibility of all sizes
Class 1 Areas
of events occurring.
Areas characterised as reflecting a medium inherent susceptibility of
Class 2 Areas
small-size events occurring.
Class 3 Areas
medium-size events occurring.
Class 4 Areas
large-size events occurring.
Areas characterised as reflecting a high inherent susceptibility of small-
Class 5 Areas
size events occurring.
Areas characterised as reflecting a high inherent susceptibility of
Class 6 Areas
medium-size events occurring.
Areas characterised as reflecting a high inherent susceptibility of large-
Class 7 Areas
size events occurring.
Areas characterised as reflecting a high inherent susceptibility of very
Class 8 Areas
large-size events occurring.
In this report Inherent Susceptibility is defined in terms of ingress of water and

groundwater level drawdown reflected by two Inherent Hazard Class designations
separated by a double forward slash, i.e.-
Inherent Hazard Class (ingress of water) // Inherent Hazard Class (groundwater level
drawdown)
5.6. Monitoring Designations
According to SANS 1936 Part 4 (2012) Monitoring Designations must be identified and
delineated according to the Inherent Susceptibility characterisation of the site and
9
knowledge of problems which could impact on the infrastructure on site.
The generic Monitoring Activities considered appropriate for dolomite land are as follows:
Annotation Activity* Reaction Purpose

Visual inspections of ground,
structures and above ground
infrastructure (e.g. buildings, taps,
gardens, private and public open space
etc.) and dry services, sleeves, ducts,
manholes and facility chambers for Any evidence of
water ingress: cracking or ground
Examine buildings for cracks. settlement should
A Visual checks for outside dripping immediately be
taps and pressure valves. reported and
Visual checks for damp or moss investigated. Any
grown areas. evidence of blockages
should be reported and
Visual check for over-wetting of
cleared immediately,
gardens.
or cracks repaired
Visual check for blocked drainage
once settlement is
ports in garden walls. Monitor,
halted.
Visual check for cracks in the ground. control and
Visual inspection of stormwater Any water ingress in prevention of
systems: dry services, sleeves, concentrated
Visual checks for debris in open storm ducts, manholes and ingress of
water channels at, for example, the facility chambers water
start of the rainy season and after shall be reported, and
heavy storms. point of entry repaired
B
Visual checks for water flowing out of and investigated.
stormwater manholes at the start of
the rainy season and after heavy
storms.
Search for ground cracks and cracks
in lined and unlined channels.
Testing of wet-services for leaks:
Regular air and water tests on wet-
services. Any leaks to be
C In waste water and stormwater pipes reported and repaired
with a diameter greater than 100mm immediately.
wet-services to be inspected by
camera.
Monitoring of structures and ground
levels:
In many instances visual inspections may Monitor the
not be sufficient: It may be necessary to Any evidence of effects of
undertake precision ground-surface movement must be concentrated
levelling, particularly in areas that have reported and ingress of
D
been rehabilitated after a ground investigated and water or
movement event. Such levelling must be appropriate repair work groundwater
undertaken by a surveyor, recorded and undertaken. level
stored in the databank and appropriate drawdown
actions taken when excessive settlement
continues.
10
Annotation Activity* Reaction Purpose

Monitoring of the groundwater level:
This activity not only entails the
measuring and recording of the
groundwater level, but also the analysis
and understanding of groundwater level
trends over time and the control of
excessive [beyond seasonal fluctuations]
groundwater level drawdown: Evidence of lowering
Drill and equip strategic boreholes (exceeding 6m) must
with the necessary equipment to be reported to
measure the groundwater level. Monitor,
Municipality and the
control and
Recorded groundwater level, Department of Water
prevention of
E monitoring well number, date and Affairs and appropriate
groundwater
other relevant observations. action taken to ensure
level
Analyse groundwater level trend over the groundwater level
drawdown
time on a regular basis. returns to within
Report artificial/excessive natural seasonal
groundwater level drawdown to fluctuations.
Municipality and the Department of
Water Affairs.
Investigate cause of
artificial/excessive groundwater level
drawdown.
Arrest artificial/excessive groundwater
level drawdown.
*If there is no evidence of a particular problem, this result should be recorded.
Note that in SANS 1936 Part 4 (2012), pg 15, the visual inspection of dry services, sleeves,
ducts, manholes and facility chambers is included as a separate monitoring activity (as
Annotation D), with the Annotations D and E as listed above, annotated as E and F. For
simplicity sake this activity has been included in Annotation A above.
The Frequency with which each Activity is to be performed is selected from the following
categories:
Annotation Frequency
DAILY
() Activities to be undertaken daily.
WEEKLY
() Activities to be undertaken weekly.
1
() Activities to be undertaken once a month.
3
() Activities to be undertaken quarterly.
6
() Activities to be undertaken bi-annually.
12
() Activities to be undertaken annually.
24
() Activities to be undertaken once every two years.
NA
() NO ACTION REQUIRED CURRENTLY
tbd
() TO BE DETERMINED
6. GEOLOGY AND GEOHYDROLOGY
6.1. General Geology
The site is underlain by chert and dolomite of Malmani Subgroup of the Chuniespoort
Group, Transvaal Supergroup with the possibility of intrusive materials in the form of
dykes.
The various lithological units and their weathered derivatives, recorded on the site are as
follows:
11
Lithostratigraphic Unit Lithology

Intrusive Syenite and associated soil derivatives.
Eccles Formation, Malmani Subgroup,
Dolomite, chert and associated soil derivatives.
Chuniespoort Group, Transvaal Supergroup
Unconsolidated materials deemed to be various recent deposits (most likely 24 Ma

[Miocene Epoch] and younger) are anticipated to mantle the hard rock geology (and
residual product thereof). The material varies in thickness, sedimentological- and
geotechnical properties:
Post-Gondwana Deposits
Colluvium Soils of sandy, silty or clayey composition or gravels
6.2. Local Geology
A summary of the material intercepted in boreholes drilled on the site is reported here for
ease of reference:
Blanketing Layer
Dolomite Bedrock
(m) – (m)
Highly weathered
Chert Dolomite
(mAMSL)
(m) – (m)
BH No.
dolomite
Residuum Residuum
(m) – (m)
Colluvium
(Collar Cavity
Residual
Syenite
Fines sub-
ordinate
Elev. (m)–(m)
Ferroan
Mangani-
Soils
ferrous
m AMSL)
Soils
7148-01 15-24
- 0-9 - - - 9-15 -
1545 1530
7148-02 26-29
- 0-21 - 22-26 - 21-22 -
1545 1524
7148-03 - 14-20
- 0-2 - - 2-14 -
1545 1531
7148-04 23-29
- 0-6 - 6-9, 16-21 - 21-23 9-16
1546 1523
7148-05 9-15
- - - - - 0-9 -
1549 1540
7148-06 12-18
- 0-2 - - - 2-12 -
1551 1539
7148-07 15-36, 46-52
- 0-15 - 36-41 - -
1543 41-46 1497
7148-08 30-46
- 0-6 - 26-30 - 6-26 -
1542 1512
7148-10 49-55
- 0-18 - 18-42 - 48-49 44-48
1541 1492
7148-11 27-30
- 0-10 - 10-25 - 25-27 -
1539 1512
7148-24 48-54
- 0-40 - - - 40-48 -
1541 1493
o Chert residuum
Chert residuum is intercepted at surface. The horizon is of variable thickness (2m to

21m).
12
o Dolomite residuum (manganiferous material)
Dolomite residuum (manganiferous material /wad) is intercepted at variable depths

(3m to 24m). The horizon is of variable thickness.
o Problematic conditions in the overburden above the groundwater level:
Cavernous conditions including disseminated voids are intercepted in Borehole

7148-04 from 9m to 16m and from 44m to 48m in Borehole 7148-10. Sample- and
air loss are reported in seven boreholes drilled along the proposed alignment and
around the sinkhole.
o Dolomite bedrock conditions:
Dolomite rock, either weathered or hard rock is confirmed at variable depths (0m to
48m).
6.3. Geohydrology
The site is located in the Oberholzer Dolomite Groundwater Compartment. During the
1960’s and 70’s interest focussed on mining related issues of control and disposal of
inflow water. A policy of dewatering was implemented for the Venterspost and Oberholzer
Compartments (1964), Bank Compartment (1969) and Gemsbokfontein West
Compartment (late 1980’s). The OWL depth and elevation in proximity to the site is 81m
and 1469m AMSL respectively.
During the drilling process the driller notes the depth of groundwater strike/s. The driller also
observes the hole after drilling (typically 24 hours after completion) for the presence of
groundwater, using a dip meter tool. According to the driller all boreholes were dry.
According to Sibanye Mine data (2005) the current groundwater level is 1220m AMSL (i.e.
330m deep or 249m below OWL) in the general site area.
6.4. Background: July 2016 Sinkhole
A sinkhole occurred south of No 40 Bluebell Road and north of the R501 National Road,
Carletonville on 13 July 2016.
A site inspection was conducted by VGIconsult on 15 July 2016. The following was
observed:
An 8m x 4m diameter sinkhole extending to a depth of approximately 7m.

An exposed broken and leaking 200mm diameter (cement or asbestos) water line in
sinkhole area.
Various clamps (X3) on the waterline within 2m (on both sides) from the current
broken position of the waterline indicating problems previously encountered on this
line.
An existing water runoff channel has been compromised by previous ground works
and is shaped as such allowing surface water ponding at the position of the sinkhole.
Subsurface erosion of highly erodible and compressible dolomite residuum (wad) at depth
and the development of the sinkhole is likely to have taken place over a prolonged period of
time. In addition, surface run-off water ponds in the area of the sinkhole, potentially
contributing to the formation of the sinkhole.
13
7. DOLOMITE HAZARD CHARACTERISATION
7.1. Site investigation and Dolomite Hazard Assessment Procedures
Summarised information concerning the hazard characterisation of the proposed

alignment is provided in Table 1 of this report and the dolomite hazard zonation is
displayed on Drawing VGI7148S19/1.
7.2. Dolomite Hazard Zone 1 (Hazard Class 4/7//1)
A summary of subsurface conditions within Dolomite Hazard Zone 1 follows:
a) Blanketing Layer
The blanketing material is intercepted in boreholes drilled within the zone are
summarised in the table below:
Borehole Chert Residuum

material (m-m)
Transported
Number
Pre or Post
Subgroup
Malmani
material
with (m-m) Dolomite
collar Fines Fines Residuum
elevation subordinate predominant (m-m)
in m (m-m) (m-m)
AMSL
7148-10
- - - 0-18 18-42
1541
7148-11
- - - 0-10 10-25
1539
7148-24
- - - 0-40 -
1541
b) Dolomite Bedrock
Hard rock dolomite is typically intercepted at great depth:
Borehole Soft and weathered Dolomite Bedrock

Number with dolomite rock (Malmani Subgroup)
collar elevation (Malmani Subgroup) m
in m AMSL (m-m) and m AMSL
7148-10 49-55
48-49
1541 1492
7148-11 27-30
25-27
1539 1512
7148-24 48-54
40-48
1541 1493
c) Gravity Data
According to the gravity data this zone straddles a gentle gravity gradient (refer to
Drawing VGI7148 S19/1.
d) Dolomite bedrock relative to OWL
The OWL is 1469m AMSL or approximately 81m deep. The gravity data indicates
that dolomite bedrock is above the OWL, which is confirmed by the drilling
programme.
14
A summary of the hazard characterisation follows:
e) Hazard Characterisation
i. Blanketing Layer
The blanketing layer is relatively thick. The blanketing layer consists of chert
and dolomite residuum. These materials are anticipated to be characterised by
good internal drainage characteristics. Prolonged ingress may readily lead to
erosion and sinkhole or subsidence formation.
ii. Potential Development Space
In general the depth to dolomite bedrock, as well as the groundwater level

(which acts as a base level for erosion) and the potential receptacles determine
the Potential Development Space (PDS).
The PDS is characterised as, typically, large.
iii. Hazard Classification (with Ingress of Water as a Triggering Mechanism)
The blanketing layer is relatively thick. Dolomite residuum (wad) typically

blankets the dolomite bedrock. Sample and air loss was recorded.
The zone is characterised as largely reflecting a medium to high susceptibility of

large-size sinkhole and subsidence formation with respect to ingress of water,
i.e. Inherent Hazard Class 4/7.
iv. Hazard Classification (with Groundwater Drawdown as a Triggering

Mechanism)
The original groundwater level is anticipated at 81m and is currently at over

300m depth. Experience during the initial period of dewatering indicated that the
effect of major drawdown was most pronounced when the OWL was 30m or
shallower, which is not the case for this site. The OWL and current groundwater
level are well within dolomite rock. The susceptibility to sinkhole and subsidence
formation in the event of anthropogenic groundwater drawdown is considered to
below, i.e. Inherent Hazard Class //1.
v. Impact of Lowering of the Groundwater Level/Base Level of Erosion on the

Action of Ingress
In the event that the groundwater level is drawn down significantly (6m or
more), the hazard classification remains unchanged.
vi. Composite Hazard Classification
The composite hazard classification is Inherent Hazard Class 4/7//1, defined

as an area largely reflecting a medium to high susceptibility of large-size
sinkhole and subsidence formation with respect to ingress of water and a low
susceptibility of all-size sinkhole and subsidence formation with respect
anthropogenic groundwater level drawdown.
15
7.3. Dolomite Hazard Zone 2 (Hazard Class 5/6(3)//1)
A summary of subsurface conditions within Dolomite Hazard Zone 1 follows:
a) Blanketing Layer
The blanketing material is intercepted in boreholes drilled within the zone are
summarised in the table below:
Borehole Chert Residuum
material (m-m)
Transported
Number
Pre or Post
Subgroup
Malmani
material
with Dolomite
(m-m)
collar Fines Fines Residuum
elevation subordinate predominant (m-m)
in m (m-m) (m-m)
AMSL
7148-01
- - - 0-9 -
1545
7148-02
- - - 0-21 22-26
1545
7148-03
- - - 0-2 -
1545
7148-04
- - - 0-6 6-9, 16-21
1546
7148-05
- - - - -
1549
7148-06
- - - 0-2 -
1551
7148-07
- - - 0-15 36-41
1543
b) Dolomite Bedrock
Dolomite is typically intercepted at shallow depths:
Borehole Soft and weathered Dolomite Bedrock

Number with dolomite rock (Malmani Subgroup)
collar elevation (Malmani Subgroup) m
in m AMSL (m-m) and m AMSL
7148-01 15-24
9-15
1545 1530
7148-02 26-29
21-22
1545 1524
7148-03 14-20
2-14
1545 1531
7148-04 23-29
21-23
1546 1523
7148-05 9-15
0-9
1549 1540
7148-06 12-18
2-12
1551 1539
7148-07 46-52
15-36, 41-46
1543 1497
c) Gravity Data
According to the gravity data this zone straddles a gravity high area (refer to Drawing
VGI7148 S19/1.
16
d) Dolomite bedrock relative to OWL
The OWL is 1469m AMSL or approximately 81m deep. The gravity data indicates
that dolomite bedrock is above the OWL, which is confirmed by the drilling
programme.
A summary of the hazard characterisation follows:
e) Hazard Characterisation
i. Blanketing Layer
The blanketing layer is typically thin. The blanketing layer consists of chert and
dolomite residuum. These materials are anticipated to be characterised by
good internal drainage characteristics. Prolonged ingress may readily lead to
erosion and sinkhole or subsidence formation. The shallow rock is anticipated to
be incised by relatively narrow grykes infilled by low density, and even
cavernous, dolomite residuum.
ii. Potential Development Space
In general the depth to dolomite bedrock, as well as the groundwater level

(which acts as a base level for erosion) and the potential receptacles determine
the Potential Development Space (PDS).
The PDS is characterised as, typically, medium.
iii. Hazard Classification (with Ingress of Water as a Triggering Mechanism)
A typical shallow dolomite environment is anticipated in this zone and the area
of the sinkhole. Sample and air loss was recorded.
The following is typically known of shallow dolomite areas (based on
experience):
Existence of a highly variable dolomite bedrock topography with deep
weathering along linear features such as fractures;
Occurrence of insoluble weathering product of dolomite rock. This
material is highly compressible and mobilisable;
Particularly problematic environment mainly due to the fact that the
overburden is thin and smaller quantities of water are required to
mobilize the overburden resulting in sinkholes or subsidences;
Dolomite may outcrop at surface, sometimes as actual rock masses, but
often as isolated pinnacles and large floaters (detached from main
bedrock);
The undulating micro-topography of a shallow dolomite environment
may typically not be discerned in gravity data.
The zone is characterised as largely reflecting a high susceptibility of small- to

medium-size sinkhole and subsidence formation (sub-areas may comprise a
medium susceptibility of medium-size sinkholes and subsidences) with respect
to ingress of water, i.e. Inherent Hazard Class 5/6(3).
iv. Hazard Classification (with Groundwater Drawdown as a Triggering

Mechanism)
The original groundwater level is anticipated at 81m and is currently at over

300m depth. Experience during the initial period of dewatering indicated that the
17
effect of major drawdown was most pronounced when the OWL was 30m or
shallower, which is not the case for this site. The OWL and current groundwater
level are well within dolomite rock. The susceptibility to sinkhole and subsidence
formation in the event of anthropogenic groundwater drawdown is considered to
be low, i.e. Inherent Hazard Class //1.
v. Impact of Lowering of the Groundwater Level/Base Level of Erosion on the

Action of Ingress
In the event that the groundwater level is drawn down significantly (6m or
more), the hazard classification remains unchanged.
vi. Composite Hazard Classification
The composite hazard classification is Inherent Hazard Class 5/6(3)//1,

defined as an area largely reflecting a high susceptibility of small- to medium-
size sinkhole and subsidence formation (sub-areas may comprise a medium
susceptibility of medium-size sinkholes and subsidences) with respect to
ingress of water and a low susceptibility of all-size sinkhole and subsidence
formation with respect anthropogenic groundwater level drawdown.
8. CONCLUSIONS
8.1. Results of the Drilling Programme
The boreholes intercept chert and dolomite residuum of variable thickness. Cavernous
conditions, including disseminated voids, are intercepted in some of the boreholes.
Weathered dolomite bedrock/hard rock dolomite is intercepted atvariable depths (0m
to48m).
All the boreholes were recorded as “dry” 24 hours after drilling. The groundwater level is
anticipated at 200m depth, whilst the OWL is at 1469m AMSL or 81m deep.
‘
8.2. Dolomite Hazard Characterisation
The pipeline alignment is characterised by two dolomite hazard areas as follows:
Dolomite
Hazard
Hazard Description
Classification
Zone
Area largely reflecting a medium to high susceptibility of large-
size sinkhole and subsidence formation with respect to ingress of
1 4/7//1 water and a low susceptibility of all-size sinkhole and subsidence
formation with respect anthropogenic groundwater level
drawdown.
Area largely reflecting a high susceptibility of small- to medium-
size sinkhole and subsidence formation (sub-areas may comprise
a medium susceptibility of medium-size sinkholes and subsidences)
2 5/6(3)//1
with respect to ingress of water and a low susceptibility of all-size
sinkhole and subsidence formation with respect anthropogenic
groundwater level drawdown.
18
9. RECOMMENDATIONS
The measures and recommendations outlined below are aimed at reducing the likelihood of
sinkhole or subsidence formation along the new pipeline route. Recommendations are based on
experience gained during the investigation and rehabilitation of more than 100 instability
features (sinkholes and subsidences) in the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (EMM), City of
Tshwane and West Rand District Area.
9.1. Improvement of subsoil conditions
Along the eastern portion of the pipeline alignment the dolomite bedrock is encountered at
relatively shallow depths below natural ground level. Based on the subsurface conditions
encountered during the drilling programme around the sinkhole, disseminated receptacles
and cavernous conditions are recorded above the OWL within dolomite residuum (wad) in
Boreholes 7148-4 (9m to 17m), 7148-9 (1m to 10m) and 7148-21 (21m to 31m).
A backfill grouting programme is required in the area of Boreholes 7148-2 and 7148-10. In
Borehole 7148-2 a cavity in bedrock is intercepted between a depth of 22m and 25m. In
Borehole 7148-10 a void is intercepted between a depth of 44m and 48m. It is
recommended that two boreholes be drilled, east and west of the position of these two
boreholes where a void and a cavity were encountered i.e. within 3m to the west and east.
The position of the two problematic boreholes should also be re-drilled on its original
position.
Based on the above findings, Improvement of the subsurface conditions in the area
surrounding the sinkhole will require a backfill grouting programme to fill erosion voids,
zones of very soft dolomite residuum (wad) and cavities, intercepted in Boreholes 7148-4
(9m to 17m), 7148-9 (1m to 10m) and 7148-21 (21m to 31m).
Multi stage grouting should be planned at a series of primary and secondary points, with
the possibility of a tertiary stage if found necessary. All the primary points will be drilled
first on a 3m grid spacing, followed by the secondary points some days later. The
secondary points will be positioned midway between the primary points.
The grouting of each point will be carried out from the bottom up, which is referred to as
upstage grouting, or a combination of methods may be required, depending on condition
and results, also including downstage grouting. The pumping rates and pressure induced
to inject the grout should be selected carefully and monitored throughout the grouting
process as excessive pressure will cause fracturing of the overburden resulting in ground
heave and potentially more damage. The grouting mixture generally used, with a slump of
between 25mm and 75mm, does not need to meet any strength requirements as the
objective is not to form a structural element in the ground but to backfill voids and compact
problematic zones.
As a point of departure provision should be made for the following grouting points in the
bill of quantities:
Area Number of Boreholes Depth (m)

Surrounding Sinkhole Area
7148-4 11 26
Erosion tunnel west of 7148-3 4 36
7148-9 5 18
7148-21 5 36
Along new pipeline route
7148-2 3 30
7148-10 3 53
19
It should be noted that the above recommended grouting depths are an estimate based
on existing borehole information.
All the grouting boreholes should be drilled into at least 4m of solid dolomite bedrock. The
injection of grout should not exceed 0,1 MPa (or 10 Bar). It is recommended that very low
grout pressures are used (less than 3 Bar). Provision should be made in the bill of
quantities for 1,5m3 per meter drilling 2MPa strength grout. Clear and landscape
(contouring) of the site will be required after completion of the grouting programme.
Provision should be made in the bill of quantities for 1 concrete cube test per day.
The field report on the grouting programme, should include the applied pressure per
meter (bar) and volume of grout (litre/metre) pumped at each grouting point. Also record
any voids and their height. Care should be taken during the grouting programme to
ensure that no damage is caused to surrounding structures. A crack survey is
recommended before grouting work commences (both of the structures and the ground).
9.2. Precautionary Measures
Water is a triggering mechanism, in the majority of cases, of distress in

dolomitic/limestone areas. It is therefore imperative that the concentrated ingress of water
into the ground be avoided at all times.
SANS 1936, Part 3 (2012): “Design and construction of buildings, structures and
infrastructure” is in the public domain. The contents of SANS 1936 should be applied
except where more stringent requirements are specifically required by the local authority.
In accordance with SANS 1936, Part 3 (2012) all subsurface wet services should comprise
of HDPE butt-welded pipes.
It is recommended that HDPE butt-welded pipes, as specified by SANS 1936 Part 3 for
areas underlain by dolomite, be used.
9.3. Open works and general construction activities
Trenches and open works should be inspected by a Dolomite Risk Specialist to:
o permit the assessment and development of a comprehensive record of the surficial

conditions and
o assess if adverse ground conditions are present e.g. palaeo-karst structures.
This procedure allows for the adjustment of construction methods, i.e. special bedding
requirements, additional excavation and compaction, or pipe protection measurements.
Delineated problems can then be treated with greater vigilance during the ongoing
maintenance of the line.
Ongoing interaction between the Dolomite Risk Specialist and the Consulting Engineers
responsible for the project is recommended.
9.4. Stormwater Management
Absolutely no ponding of water should be permitted along the route. An essential

component of risk management is ensuring that stormwater is efficiently and effectively
removed from the proximity of infrastructure and safely distributed or deposited into either
the municipal stormwater system or natural river courses.
20
9.5. Monitoring Actions
The long term monitoring actions for the pipelineis presented as follows:
Monitoring Designation
(ABC)3(DE)na
Explanation
A Visual inspections of ground and above ground infrastructure quarterly.
B Visual inspection of stormwater flow quarterly.
C Testing of pipeline for leaks quarterly.
D Monitoring of structures and ground levels not required.
Although not applicable to the site, any substantial lowering of the
groundwater level may induce ground subsidence events in the general
E area. The groundwater level should be maintained within natural seasonal
fluctuation limits i.e. dewatering resulting from the artificial drawdown of the
groundwater level cannot be permitted.
9.6. Database of Ground Movement and Stability Conditions
It is recommended that the sinkholes that occurred and all repair, upgrade and soil
improvement work conducted is added to the Municipal’s database of ground movement
events. Detailed historical records of this nature are most useful in developing a clearer
perspective on the stability situation on site and management of a pro-active maintenance
strategy.
10. GENERAL
These findings are based upon our interpretation of the data recovered during these
investigations. While every effort has been made, within the limits of the project budget, time
and present-day insight, to determine overall ground conditions on this site, poorer sub-areas
may have been missed.
VGIconsult Projects (Pty.) Ltd.

P.O. BOX 604
FOURWAYS
2055
TEL : (011) 469 0854

FAX : (011) 469 0961
FAX : 0866892847
e-mail: jhb@vgiconsult.co.za
TABLES
SUMMARISED BOREHOLE INFORMATION AND INHERENT HAZARD
TABLE 1
CHARACTERISATION
TABLE 1: BOREHOLE DATA AND DOLOMITE INHERENT HAZARD CHARACTERISATION
Blanketing Layer
Hazard Characterisation
(m) – (m)
BH No. Chert Dolomite
Ingress Water Groundwater Drawdown
(Collar Elev. Residuum Residuum Air & Cavity
m AMSL) Sample
(m)
Losses
Level
dolomite
(m) – (m)
(mAMSL)
(m AMSL)
Subsidence Sinkhole Subsidence Sinkhole
Syenite
Residual
Soils
Fines
Formation Formation Formation Formation
Colluvium
Soils
(m)–(m) (m)–(m)
Ferroan
Highly weathered
Dolomite Bedrock
dominant
ferrous
Mangani-
Ground-water Rest
7148-01 15-24
- 0-9 - - - 9-15 Dry - - MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
1545 1530
7148-02 26-29 MEDIUM- MEDIUM-
- 0-21 - 22-26 - 21-22 Dry 22-29 - LOW LOW
1545 1524 HIGH HIGH
7148-03 - 14-20
- 0-2 - - 2-14 Dry - - HIGH HIGH LOW LOW
1545 1531
7148-04 6-9, 23-29
- 0-6 - - 21-23 Dry 9-29 9-16 HIGH HIGH LOW LOW
1546 16-21 1523
7148-05 9-15
- - - - - 0-9 Dry - - HIGH HIGH LOW LOW
1549 1540
7148-06 12-18
- 0-2 - - - 2-12 Dry - - HIGH HIGH LOW LOW
1551 1539
7148-07 15-36, 46-52
- 0-15 - 36-41 - Dry 36-52 - MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
1543 41-46 1497
7148-08 30-46
- 0-6 - 26-30 - 6-26 Dry 26-29 - MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
1542 1512
7148-10 49-55 MEDIUM- MEDIUM-
- 0-18 - 18-42 - 48-49 Dry 42-55 44-48 LOW LOW
1541 1492 HIGH HIGH
7148-11 27-30
- 0-10 - 10-25 - 25-27 Dry 10-30 - HIGH HIGH LOW LOW
1539 1512
7148-24 48-54
- 0-40 - - - 40-48 Dry - - MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
1541 1493
FIGURES
LOCALITY PLAN FIGURE 1
TOPOGRAPHICAL SHEET LEGEND FIGURE 1A
SITE LAYOUT WITH GROUND ELEVATION CONTOURS FIGURE 2
REGIONAL GEOLOGY FIGURE 3
GEOLOGY LEGEND FIGURE 3A
REGIONAL GEOHYDROLOGY FIGURE 4
FIGURE 1
27°23'0"E 27°23'30"E 27°24'0"E 27°24'30"E 27°25'0"E
Bank
.
!
26°21'30"S
26°21'30"S
Welverdiend
!
.
.
!
Carletonville
Fochville
.
!
26°22'0"S
26°22'0"S
26°22'30"S
26°22'30"S
26°23'0"S
26°23'0"S
26°23'30"S
26°23'30"S
27°23'0"E 27°23'30"E 27°24'0"E 27°24'30"E 27°25'0"E
0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
μ
Kilometres
2627AD CARLETONVILLE 1:50 000
Coordinate System: LO27

Projection: Transverse Mercator
Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994
False Easting: 0.0000
False Northing: 0.0000
Central Meridian: 27.0000
Scale Factor: 1.0000
Latitude Of Origin: 0.0000
Units: Metres
39700 39750 39800 39850 39900 39950 40000 No. DATE AMENDMENT D.P.W.
2350 2269 2278 2279

2351 2270
2333 2277
2271 22 2276
2
7
-2918350
-2918350
7
5
22
227
±
2273
235
2 lace
2332
2303
os P
Cosm
3
2302
235
5
154
2301
4
1
233
235
-2918400
-2918400
2300
05
2299
2355
15
232
2298
2356
0
2
3
23
co-ordinate system
SUB DIVISION NR. Transverse Mercator False Northing = 0°
Y -39750
Y -40000
Central Meridian = 27° Scale Factor = 1

2321
ID: CARLTONVILLE
90 False Easting = 0° Datum = WGS 84
°
9
BE
2
ND
2323
as-built drawings
23
LIGH T POLE
P P6
232
2324
5
GV EXIS
Dolom
GAT certified as-built drawings as per Centralised Drawing
-2918450
-2918450
Archive AS-BUILT DRAWING REQUIREMENTS

EGAT
E
name:
2328
ite Str
TE
date:
LIGH T POLE
GA
23
GAT
E
eet
23
2
SAM4
2
LIGH T POLE
professional registration no.:
7
P1
6
Propose
GAT
EGAT
E
d 300
Carletonville Ext 4 mm GV
cad file name page type
0
IL=1547.983
CL 16
4
WATER CHAMBER
D
dia HD
ROA LL TE A3
8.428
IL=154
PE PIP
WATER
GA
CHAMBE
EB E BLUEBE E
R
15
E BLU LL RO
AD
SAM7
PIP EXIS
SAM5
SV TING
Dolom
2480
DPE AS BE
11 1/4° BEND
ia H STOS
P5 PIP
LIGH T POLE
E LIN
16d GATE E
LIGH T POLE LIGH T POLE
GAT
E
P2
IL=1540.109
CL
CULVERT
45
° m
ite Str
BE
ND 00m 3 SINK
ed HOLE
eet
pos 8m x 4m DIA, 7m DEEP
FIRE HYDRANT SAM6
GV Pro P4
P3
CHAMBER
WATER
-2918500
-2918500
11 AV
1/4 22
° 1/
BE 2°
ND BE
ND
consultant
VGIconsult
2 MULBERRY HILL
bell Road OFFICE PARK
Blue BROADACRES DRIVE
PIP E LI NE MA RK ER
ad DAINFERN VALLEY
LIGH T POLE
ell Ro PO BOX 604
Blueb FOURWAYS
2055
ROA
D TEL: (011) 469 0854
FAX: (011) 469 0961
R501
E-mail: vgijhb@mweb.co.za
-2918550
-2918550
discipline
GEOTECHNICAL
service
VGI7148: S19:
BLYVOORUITZICHTSUB DIVISION NR. 00032 WATER PIPELINE REALIGNMENT
ID: T0IQ00000000011600032 BLUEBELL ROAD, CARLETONVILLE:
DOLOMITE STABILITY INVESTIGATION
LEGEND
ROADS
Project Number
GROUND ELEVATION CONTOURS (mAMSL) VGI7148
55
drawing title
SITE LAYOUT WITH
15
GROUND MOVEMENT INCIDENTS: SINKHOLES

GROUND ELEVATION CONTOURS
-2918600
-2918600
STANDS
ref.no.VGI7148 designed N.T.
SUBURBS
scale 1:1 100 drawn AR.G.
FARMS date MAY 2017 checked N.T.
0 10 20 30 40 50
metres Drawing number
FIGURE 2
39700 39750 39800 39850 39900 39950 40000
-2906000
-2906000
±
-2911000
-2911000
co-ordinate system
Transverse Mercator False Northing = 0°
False Easting = 0° Datum = WGS 84
as-built drawings
certified as-built drawings as per Centralised Drawing

name:
-2916000
-2916000
date:

AREA OF INVESTIGATION
A3
-2921000
-2921000
consultant
VGIconsult
2 MULBERRY HILL
OFFICE PARK
BROADACRES DRIVE
DAINFERN VALLEY
PO BOX 604
FOURWAYS
2055
TEL: (011) 469 0854
FAX: (011) 469 0961
discipline
GEOTECHNICAL
service
VGI7148: S19:
WATER PIPELINE REALIGNMENT
-2926000
-2926000
BLUEBELL ROAD, CARLETONVILLE:

Project Number
VGI7148
drawing title
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
(REF.: MAP 2626 WEST RAND 1:250 000
GEOLOGICAL SERIES)

LEGEND
scale 1:100 000 drawn AR.G.
AREA OF INVESTIGATION date JUNE 2017 checked N.T.
0 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000
metres Drawing number
-2931000
-2931000
FIGURE 3
26000 31000 36000 41000 46000 51000 56000
No. DATE AMENDMENT D.P.W.
co-ordinate system
as-built drawings

name:
date:

A3
consultant
VGIconsult
2 MULBERRY HILL
OFFICE PARK
BROADACRES DRIVE
DAINFERN VALLEY
PO BOX 604
FOURWAYS
2055
TEL: (011) 469 0854
FAX: (011) 469 0961
discipline
GEOTECHNICAL
service
VGI7148: S19:
Project Number
VGI7148
drawing title
GEOLOGY LEGEND
(REF.: MAP 2626 WEST RAND 1:250 000
GEOLOGICAL SERIES)

scale drawn AR.G.
date JUNE 2017 checked N.T.
Drawing number
FIGURE 3A
26000 36000 46000 26000 36000 46000 38500 41000 No. DATE AMENDMENT D.P.W.
4 R41 4 R41 ELEV: 1510

N1 LEGEND N1 LEGEND OWL: 41 (1469) m LEGEND
m
40
9)
13
20
14
QUATERNARY CATCHMENTS GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS (WMA) GROUNDWATER CONTOURS
(146
GENERAL LEGEND
C23F
L: 46 1515
E
AREA OF INVESTIGATION
OW LEV:
GROUNDWATER CONTOURS
RIVERS
25
V: 15(1469)
DOLOMITE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
ELE AREAS
L: 56
9)
OW
20
DOLOMITE GROUNDWATER COMPARTMENTS
±
(146
m
80 OBERHOLZER
ELEV: 1530
13
L: 51
EL
OWL: 61 (1469)
-2906000
-2906000
-2906000
-2906000
OW EV: 15
1540
)
ELEV: 69)
69
71 (14
OWL:
(14 5
66 53
m m
ELEV: 1445
L: V: 1
00 m 1220
13 60 OWL: 76 (1469)
OWELE
C23G 12
1550
ELEV:
C23E C23D (1469)
OWL: 81
OBERHOLZER 5
ELEV: 155 9)
(146
OWL: 1469m AMSL OWL: 86
-2916000
-2916000
-2916000
-2916000
R501 R501 60 )
Upper Vaal Oberholzer R501 :15 469
(1
EV
-2918500
-2918500
EL : 91
L
R50
0
OW
m
1180
R5
R5
00
00
980m co-ordinate system
0 m 0m
114 90 Central Meridian = 27° Scale Factor = 1
Kra
Kra
alko
alko
p sp
p sp
-2926000
-2926000
-2926000
-2926000
ruit
ruit
as-built drawings
C23G
C23J it it Archive AS-BUILT DRAWING REQUIREMENTS
u u
pr pr
0m
ps ps
94
R5
o o name:
Lo Lo
00
Loop Loop
spru spru date:
it it
it it m
ru ru 00
2 sp 2 sp 11 m
N1 1:200 000 N1 1:200 000 60 1:24 000
op op 10
Lo Lo
QUATERNARY CATCHMENTS GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS (WMA) DOLOMITE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS AND DWA REPORTS A2
C23K
-2936000
-2936000
-2936000
-2936000
26000 36000 46000 26000 36000 46000 38500 41000
38500 41000 43500 38500 41000 43500 38500 41000 43500
LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND

DOLOMITE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT UNITS (GMU) DOLOMITE GROUNDWATER RESOURCE UNITS (GRU) RGW1 !
( NGIS HYDSTRA: IN USE
INLAND WATER AREAS !
(
INLAND WATER AREAS !
( NGIS HYDSTRA: STATUS UNKNOWN
C2N0001
DAM DAM !
( NGIS HYDSTRA: DISCONTINUED
RW56
LARGE RESERVOIR LARGE RESERVOIR !
(
SEWERAGE WORKS SEWERAGE WORKS C2N0008
C2N0198
!
(
R50
C2N0204
R50
0
0
!
(
-2916000
-2916000
-2916000
-2916000
-2916000
-2916000
consultant
VGIconsult
JI6 2 MULBERRY HILL
!
(
C2N0110 OFFICE PARK
BROADACRES DRIVE
DAINFERN VALLEY
PO BOX 604
PH20 FOURWAYS
!
(
2055
C2N0109
TEL: (011) 469 0854
FAX: (011) 469 0961
discipline
GEOTECHNICAL
-2918500
-2918500
-2918500
-2918500
-2918500
-2918500
service
VGI7148: S19:
R501 R501
Project Number
VGI7148 S19
drawing title
-2921000
-2921000
-2921000
-2921000
-2921000
-2921000
R5
R5
REGIONAL GEOHYDROLOGY
00
00
(REF.: MAP 2627 BD GRASMERE 1:25 000)
ref.no. VGI7148 S19 designed N.T.

scale drawn AR.G.
1:50 000 1:50 000 1:50 000 date JUNE 2017 checked N.T.
Drawing number
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT UNITS (GMU) GROUNDWATER RESOURCE UNITS (GRU) NATIONAL GROUNDWATER INFORMATION SYSTEM
FIGURE 4
38500 41000 43500 38500 41000 43500 38500 41000 43500
DRAWINGS
RESIDUAL GRAVITY, BOREHOLE POSITIONS AND DOLOMITE HAZARD
VGI7148S19/1
ZONATION
2272 2274
JI 54
2
2273
0
JI54
2332
-0.
0.
2352
± .3
+0
.1
2302
+0
53
.1
23
-0
2301
4
31 .2
235
+1.1
23
-2918400
-2918400
+1
2300
.4
+0
+0.8
+0.7
2299
2355
.2
+0.9
2356
2298
232
2
+0
30
23
.5
2321
+0
+1.0
Y -39750
Y -40000
7148-11
10-23
+1.0
SUB DIVISION NR.
+0.
NSR
9
ID: CARLTONVILLE
90
LDDR
°
+1.1
R@23
BE
29
!
(
2323
ND
23
LIGHT POLE
P6
co-ordinate system
232
+1.0
2324
5
+1.2
+1.1
-2918450
-2918450
2328
ce
os Pla
TE Cosm
2
as-built drawings
23
LIGHT POLE
GA GAT
.
23
SAM4
27
+0.9
2
0
6
-
+0.4
Propos
GAT
E
GAT
ed
E
0 .

300mm
IL=1547.983
CL 16
7148-10
dia +1.0
+0.6
WATER CHAMBER name:
AD O
7148-05 !
( 7148-06
HDPE
TE
Cavity LL R GA 7148-04 IL=1548.428
WATER
CHAMBE
PIPE
EBE BLUEBE
Carletonville Ext 4 R@0 R@2 R date:
BLU LL RO
44-48
E AD
SAM79-16 !
(
PIP
R@49
EXIS
SAM5
SV
Cavity TIN
!
(
DPE G AS
16-21
11 1/4° BEND
BEST
O
+1.2
ia H
!
(
P5 S PIP
NSR
+0.5
LIGHT POLE
E LIN
4/7//1 16d GATE E
7148-24 LIGHT POLE
GAT
E LIGHT POLE
R@23 cad file name page type
IL=1540.109
CL P2
CULVERT
!
( A2
45
R@48 7148-08
°
7148-03
mm
R@6? or 30 (
- 0 . 1
R@2 !
BE 300
7148-02
SINK
!
( 7148-09
ND ed HOL
E
22-26 (
0
7148-17 !
pos
+0.1
0.0
FIRE HYDRANT SAM6
GV P4
Cavity
5/6(3)//1
1
(
Pro 6/7(5)//1 7148-19
! !
P3
CHAMBER
7148-07 R@21-22&26 !
( (
-2918500
-2918500
! !
( 7148-18
!
( WATER
0 .
( R@15 !
( AV
7148-20
7148-01
!
11
1/4
R@9
22 ( 7148-21
° 1/
.9
BE 2°
0 . 2
ND - 0 .B
+0
ND 1E
0
. 1
+
o ad 0
bell R consultant
Blue
+
Dolo
PIPE LINE MARKER
VGIconsult
2 MULBERRY HILL
mite
LIGHT POLE
0 l Road
B luebel OFFICE PARK
.6
.7
BROADACRES DRIVE
Stree
+0
t
+0
DAINFERN VALLEY
ROA
D PO BOX 604
FOURWAYS
R501
2055
.0
-2918550
-2918550
TEL: (011) 469 0854

+1 FAX: (011) 469 0961
+0.9
.2
+0.8
discipline
+0
LEGEND
BLYVOORUITZICHTSUB DIVISION NR. 00032 GEOTECHNICAL
!
( VGIconsult DATABASE BOREHOLES ID: T0IQ00000000011600032 service
.3
VGI7148: S19:
+0
!
( WATER PIPELINE REALIGNMENT
+0
VGI7148 S19 PIPELINE BLUEBELL ROAD, CARLETONVILLE:

.9

!
( VGI7148 S19 SINKHOLE
+1.
Dolo
5
0
ROADS
mite
+0.
Stre
RESIDUAL GRAVITY (mGals)
et
Project Number
CARLETONVILLE REGIONAL RESIDUAL GRAVITY (mGals) VGI7148
4
+0
drawing title
.8
+0.
GROUND MOVEMENT INCIDENTS: SINKHOLES RESIDUAL GRAVITY WITH
BOREHOLE POSITIONS AND
-2918600
-2918600
.3
STANDS DOLOMITE HAZARD ZONATION
+0
.8 designed
+0 ref.no. VGI7148 N.T.
SUBURBS
scale 1:700 drawn AR.G.
date checked
+0.
FARMS MAY 2017 N.T.

7
0 10 20 30 40 50 Drawing number
metres
DRAWING VGI7148 S19/01
39700 39750 39800 39850 39900 39950 40000
APPENDICES
BOREHOLE PROFILES APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 1
BOREHOLE PROFILES
MORAD HOLE No: 7148-01
BLUE BELL Sheet 1 of 1
JOB NUMBER: 7148 S19
Scale 0.00
0.22 1:150 Reddish brown clayey SAND with minor
angular white highly weathered chert gravel;
0.26
CHERT RESIDUUM
0.23
0.18
1540
0.21 5
0.32
0.36
0.34
0.38
9.00
1535
1.04 10 Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft
rock DOLOMITE.
1.16
1.23
1.20
18.00
1.27
Subangular blue grey unweathered hard rock
1530
1.41 15 DOLOMITE.
24.00
1.45
2.33 NOTES
2.46 1) Driller reports solid conditions between 18 m

3.02 to 24 m.
1525
3.00 20
2) No groundwater intercepted.
3.06
3) Groundwater rest level recorded as dry on
3.11 2017/05/23
3.08 4) Original Dolomite Aquifer Groundwater Level
3.16 (OWL) 1469m AMSL
5) Oberholzer Groundwater Compartment
6) Water added between 8 m to 10 m and 13 m

to 16 m.
7) Driller reports no air or sample loss.
8) Projection Information: CM 27 degrees,

Transverse Mercator, WGS 84
12 3
REDUCED Penetr Air SampleHammer
LEVEL time return recov rate
min:s/m
CONTRACTOR : J.K. DEVELOPMENTS INCLINATION : 90 DEGREES ELEVATION : 1545 m AMSL
MACHINE : THOR 5000 DIAM : 165mm X-COORD : 2918504
DRILLED BY : J.G MALULEKE DATE : 2017/05/23 Y-COORD : -39831
PROFILED BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 2017/05/31
HOLE No: 7148-01
TYPE SET BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 23/06/17 14:53
SETUP FILE : SETUP.SET TEXT : ..C:\DOTFILES\201706~1.TXT
D055 DBB dot.PLOT 5006 J&W
MORAD HOLE No: 7148-02 MORAD HOLE No: 7148-02
BLUE BELL Sheet 1 of 2 BLUE BELL Sheet 2 of 2
JOB NUMBER: 7148 S19 JOB NUMBER: 7148 S19
Scale 0.00
angular white highly weathered chert gravel; NOTES
0.27
CHERT RESIDUUM
to 29 m.
0.36
0.33 2) No groundwater intercepted.
1540 5
0.39 3) Groundwater rest level recorded as dry on
2017/05/23
0.31
(OWL) 1469m AMSL
0.27
0.20 5) Oberholzer Groundwater Compartment
1535 10
0.18 6) No water added.
0.23
12.00 7) Driller reports total air and sample loss from
0.28 Brown silty CLAY with minor angular 22 m to 29 m.
translucent blue grey highly weathered chert
0.34 8) Projection Information: CM 27 degrees,
fragments; CHERT RESIDUUM
0.32 Transverse Mercator, WGS 84
1530 15
0.30
0.28
0.23
0.31
1525
0.26 20
0.24
21.00
1.02 Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft
rock DOLOMITE.
0.01 22.00
0.01 NO SAMPLE RETURN; interpreted as
dolomite residuum
1520
0.03 25
0.08
26.00
3.02 NO SAMPLE RETURN; interpreted as hard
rock dolomite
3.06
3.04
29.00
12 3
min:s/m
12 3 DRILLED BY : J.G MALULEKE DATE : 2017/05/23 Y-COORD : -39864
REDUCED Penetr Air SampleHammer PROFILED BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 2017/05/31
HOLE No: 7148-02
LEVEL time return recov rate TYPE SET BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 23/06/17 14:53
min:s/m
MORAD HOLE No: 7148-03
Scale 0.00
1545
0.40
CHERT RESIDUUM
1.36 2.00
Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft
1.48 rock DOLOMITE.
1.42 5
1540
2.16
2.24
1.05
1.07
1.13 10
1535
1.05
1.07
2.31
14.00
2.46
Subangular blue grey unweathered hard rock
3.02 15 DOLOMITE.
20.00
1530
3.05
3.07 NOTES

3.14 to 20 m.
3.18 20

2017/05/23
4) Original Dolomite Aquifer Groundwater Level

(OWL) 1469m AMSL
6) Water added between 1 m to 4 m, 5 m to 7 m

and 8 m to 9 m.

12 3
min:s/m
DRILLED BY : J.G MALULEKE DATE : 2017/05/23 Y-COORD : -39908
PROFILED BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 2017/05/31
HOLE No: 7148-03
TYPE SET BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 23/06/17 14:53
Scale 0.00
1545
0.40
CHERT RESIDUUM
to 29 m.
0.38
5
1540
6.00
2017/05/23
0.39 Brown silty CLAY with minor angular
translucent blue grey highly weathered chert 4) Original Dolomite Aquifer Groundwater Level
0.27
fragments and black silt ( WAD); DOLOMITE (OWL) 1469m AMSL
0.31 RESIDUUM
9.00
10 CAVITY
1535
0.01 6) Water added between 1 m to 3 m
0.01
7) Driller reports medium air loss between 23 m
0.02 to 28 m, total air loss between 9 m to 23 m, 28
m to 29 m and total sample loss from 9 m to
0.01 29 m
0.03 15
1530
0.02 Transverse Mercator, WGS 84
16.00
dolomite residuum
0.06
0.07
0.23 20
1525
0.38
21.00
1.15 NO SAMPLE RETURN; interpreted as soft
rock dolomite
2.38
23.00
rock dolomite
3.09 25
1520
3.11
3.08
3.13
3.05
29.00
12 3
min:s/m
HOLE No: 7148-04
min:s/m
Scale 0.00 Scale 0.00

1.07 1:150 Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft 1550
rock DOLOMITE. angular white highly weathered chert gravel;
1.18 0.49
CHERT RESIDUUM
1.26 1.06 2.00
Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft
1545
1.34 1.08 rock DOLOMITE.
1.48 5
1.15 5
2.17 1545
1.19
2.24 1.22
2.31 1.37
1540
2.56 1.49
9.00
3.02 10 Subangular blue grey unweathered hard rock 2.16 10
DOLOMITE.
3.08 1540
2.27
3.05 2.34
12.00
3.11 3.06 Subangular blue grey unweathered hard rock
DOLOMITE.
1535
3.09 3.11
3.06 15
3.09 15
15.00
18.00
1535
3.14
NOTES
3.08 NOTES
1) Driller reports solid conditions between 9 m to 3.03 1) Driller reports solid conditions between 12 m
15 m.
to 18 m.
2017/05/23
2017/05/23
(OWL) 1469m AMSL
(OWL) 1469m AMSL
and 11 m to 15 m.
and 7 m to 11 m
12 3 12 3
REDUCED Penetr Air SampleHammer REDUCED Penetr Air SampleHammer
LEVEL time return recov rate LEVEL time return recov rate
min:s/m min:s/m
CONTRACTOR : J.K. DEVELOPMENTS INCLINATION : 90 DEGREES ELEVATION : 1549 m AMSL CONTRACTOR : J.K. DEVELOPMENTS INCLINATION : 90 DEGREES ELEVATION : 1551 m AMSL
MACHINE : THOR 5000 DIAM : 165mm X-COORD : 2918480 MACHINE : THOR 5000 DIAM : 165mm X-COORD : 2918476
DRILLED BY : J.G MALULEKE DATE : 2017/05/23 Y-COORD : -39962 DRILLED BY : J.G MALULEKE DATE : 2017/05/23 Y-COORD : -39988
PROFILED BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 2017/05/31 PROFILED BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 2017/05/31
HOLE No: 7148-05 HOLE No: 7148-06
TYPE SET BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 23/06/17 14:54 TYPE SET BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 23/06/17 14:54
SETUP FILE : SETUP.SET TEXT : ..C:\DOTFILES\201706~1.TXT SETUP FILE : SETUP.SET TEXT : ..C:\DOTFILES\201706~1.TXT
D055 DBB dot.PLOT 5006 J&W D055 DBB dot.PLOT 5006 J&W
1.38
Scale 0.00
0.18 1:150 Reddish brown clayey SAND with minor 1.41 35
0.22
CHERT RESIDUUM 1.39
36.00
1540
0.26
0.34 dolomite residuum
1505
0.09
0.31 5 0.11
0.30
0.07 40
0.28
0.05
41.00
1535
0.35
0.37 rock dolomite
1500
1.32
0.41 10 1.56
0.43
2.31 45
0.39
2.43 46.00
1530
3.01
0.42 rock dolomite
3.11 52.00
1495
0.40 15 15.00 3.07
NOTES
1.03 Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft 3.05 50
rock DOLOMITE. 1) Driller reports solid conditions between 46 m
1.10
3.00 to 52 m.
1525
1.07
3.09
1.17 20
2017/05/22
1.23
(OWL) 1469m AMSL
1520
1.27
1.16 25 6) Water added between 18 m to 22 m, 23 m to

0.52 26 m, 27 m to 33 m, 34 m to 36 m, 41 m to 46
m, 47 m to 48 m and 50 m to 51 m.
0.55
7) Driller reports medium air loss from 36 m to
1515
0.49
52 m and total sample loss from 36 m to 52 m
1.06
1.17 30 Transverse Mercator, WGS 84
12 3
1.08 REDUCED Penetr Air SampleHammer
1.21 min:s/m
1510
1.26 MACHINE : THOR 5000 DIAM : 165mm X-COORD : 2918503
3
1 21.38 DRILLED BY : J.G MALULEKE DATE : 2017/05/22 Y-COORD : -39785
HOLE No: 7148-07
min:s/m
1.34
Scale 0.00
0.09 1:150 Reddish brown clayey SAND with minor Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft
1.19 35
angular white highly weathered chert gravel; rock DOLOMITE.
1540
0.13
CHERT RESIDUUM 1.38
0.19
1505
1.33
0.36
2.25
0.39 5 2.35
0.31
6.00 2.39 40 40.00
1535
1.12 Brown silty CLAY with minor angular 3.10 Subangular blue grey unweathered hard rock
1.26 DOLOMITE.
fragments and black silt ( WAD); DOLOMITE 1500
3.09
1.20 RESIDUUM
3.11
1.09 10 3.06
1.30
3.02 45
1530
1.34
3.08
46.00
1.36
1.19 NOTES
1.30 15 1) Driller reports solid conditions between 40 m

1.34 to 46 m.
1525
1.54
1.32 2017/05/19
1.40 20 4) Original Dolomite Aquifer Groundwater Level
1.55 (OWL) 1469m AMSL
1520
1.39
6) Water added between 0 m to 3 m and 14 m to
1.4 21 m.
1.49 25 7) Driller reports medium air loss between 26 m
1.53 to 29 m and total sample loss between 26 m to
26.00
29 m
1515
dolomite residuum 8) Projection Information: CM 27 degrees,
0.31
0.38
29.00
1.02 30 Brown silty CLAY with minor subangular
brown grey highly weathered dolomite 12 3
fragments and black silt ( WAD); DOLOMITE LEVEL time return recov rate
1.28 RESIDUUM min:s/m
1510 30.00
3
HOLE No: 7148-08
min:s/m
0.39
Scale 0.00
1540
0.28
CHERT RESIDUUM 1505
0.52
0.25
3.00 0.48
0.31 Brown silty CLAY with minor angular 0.35
0.32 5 fragments; CHERT RESIDUUM 0.37 42.00
1535
0.42 40
0.41 dolomite residuum
1500
0.45 44.00
0.40 CAVITY
0.43
48.00
0.34
0.46 10
rock dolomite
0.05 49.00
1530
0.01 45
0.52 rock dolomite
1495
0.01 55.00
1.07
0.03
NOTES
1.10
0.01
15 1.16
to 55 m.
1525
1.12
3.02 50
1490
3.00
18.00 3.07
1.03 2017/05/22
Brown silty CLAY with minor angular 3.11
1.16 20
fragments and black silt ( WAD); DOLOMITE 3.08
(OWL) 1469m AMSL
1.18 RESIDUUM
1520 3.04 55
1.27 6) Water added between 7 m to 10 m, 15 m to
1.32 17 m, 19 m to 24 m, 30 m to 31 m, 32 m to 33
m, 34 m to 36 m, 37 m to 40 m, 48 m to 51 m
1.26 25 and 53 m to 55 m.
1515
1.30
7) Driller reports medium air loss from 48 m to
1.36 49 m, total air loss between 42 m to 48 m, 49
m to 55 m and total sample loss from 42 m to
1.22
55 m
1.34
12 3
1510
0.51 min:s/m
3
HOLE No: 7148-10
min:s/m
Scale 0.00
0.47
CHERT RESIDUUM
0.52 1) Driller reports no solid conditions, rods getting
stuck.
1535
0.50
5
2017/05/29
1.23
(OWL) 1469m AMSL
1530
1.31
10 10.00
0.15 NO SAMPLE RETURN; interpreted as 6) Water added between 0 m to 2 m and 3 m to
dolomite residuum 6m
0.10
0.13 7) Driller reports slight air loss between 18 m to
20 m, 22 m to 23 m, 24 m to 25 m, 26 m to 30
1525
0.16 m, medium air loss from 10 m to 18 m, 20 m to
0.12 22 m, 23 m to 24 m, 25 m to 26 m and total
15
sample loss from 10 m to 30 m
0.10
0.15 8) Projection Information: CM 27 degrees,
0.11
1520
0.36
0.53 20
0.17
0.15
0.30
23.00
1515
rock dolomite
1.15 25 25.00
dolomite residuum
0.41
27.00
rock dolomite
1510
1.33
1.15 30 30.00
12 3
min:s/m
HOLE No: 7148-11
min:s/m
2.03
Scale 0.00
1540
0.40
CHERT RESIDUUM 1505
1.47
0.36
1.44
0.53
1.45
0.59 5 1.43
1535
1.05
6.00 1.56 40 40.00
0.47 Brown silty CLAY with minor angular
1500
2.01 Subangular brown grey highly weathered soft
1.18 rock DOLOMITE.
fragments; CHERT RESIDUUM 2.06
1.32
1.46
2.03 10 1.53
1530
1.07
1.46 45
1.43
1495
1.49
1.35
2.03
1.42
2.07 48.00
1.53 15 Subangular blue grey unweathered hard rock
3.11
DOLOMITE.
1525
2.00 54.00
3.08 50
2.07
1490
3.09 NOTES
2.03
3.10
3.01 to 54 m.
2.18 20 3.07
1520
2.05
2017/05/29
2.41
(OWL) 1469m AMSL
2.00 25
1515
2.05 6) Water added between 21 m to 40 m.
2.03
7) Driller reports no air or sample loss
2.17
12 3
1510
2.09 min:s/m
3
HOLE No: 7148-24
min:s/m
MORAD LEGEND
SAND {SA04}
SILTY {SA07}
CLAY {SA08}
CLAYEY {SA09}
DOLOMITE {SA13}
WAD {SA22}
CONTRACTOR : INCLINATION : ELEVATION :

MACHINE : DIAM : X-COORD :
DRILLED BY : DATE : Y-COORD :
PROFILED BY : DATE :
LEGEND
TYPE SET BY : J.MEINTJES DATE : 23/06/17 14:54 SUMMARY OF SYMBOLS

VGI7148 S19 Pipeline Realignment Typset For Mail PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

VGI7148 S19 Pipeline Realignment Typset For Mail PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PIPELINE REALIGNMENT, BLUEBELL STREET,

CARLETONVILLE: DOLOMITE STABILITY

TEL : (011) 469 0854

MORAD CONSULTING PTY LTD P.O. Box 604

Your reference Our reference Date

The pipeline alignment is characterised by two dolomite hazard areas as follows:

The report presents precautionary measures as well as recommendations in terms of

SUMMARISED BOREHOLE INFORMATION AND INHERENT HAZARD

LOCALITY PLAN FIGURE 1

RESIDUAL GRAVITY, BOREHOLE POSITIONS AND DOLOMITE HAZARD

BOREHOLE PROFILES APPENDIX 1

VGIconsult is appointed by Morad to conduct dolomite stability investigations at various sinkhole

Information sources include:

3.1. Topographic Data

Sheet Name Reference

3.2. Geological Information

Sheet Name Reference

3.3. Industry Standards

o South African National Standard SANS 1936 Parts 1 – 4 (2012).

o South African National Standard SANS 633:2012, Edition 1 (ISBN 978-0-626-

o Environmental Earth Sciences, Springer-Report: “A Performance Based Approach

o Council for Geoscience/South African Institute of Engineering and

o Council for Geoscience (2007): Consultants Guide: Approach to Site on Dolomite

o Department of Public Works (PW344), September 2010: Appropriate

o Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa: “Subsurface subsidences and

3.4. Geohydrological Information

o National Groundwater Archive (NGA);

In addition, the report “Geohydrology Guideline Development: Implementation of Dolomite

4. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

The location of the affected area is displayed on Figure 1.

5. PROCEDURES USED IN THIS STUDY

As dolomite hazard assessment is an empirical science that is constantly changing, these

5.1. Assimilation of Available Data

5.2. Map Production (Projection, Co-ordinate System and Datum)

Projection surface: Mercator (cylinder)

5.3. Geophysics (Gravity Method)

5.4. Rotary Percussion Boreholes

5.4.1. Current investigation

Drilling method: Rotary percussion

5.5. Hazard Characterisation Procedure

Source of potential harm. Hazard is the function of magnitude (of the

5.5.1.2. Inherent Susceptibility (Inherent Risk)

A reflection of the geological susceptibility of a karst area to an event

5.5.1.3. Inherent Hazard Class (Inherent Risk Class)

A site is characterised in terms of eight standard inherent hazard classes,

5.5.1.4. Hazard Rating

5.5.1.5. Tolerable Hazard Rating (Acceptable Development Risk)

The hazard rating is expressed as tolerable where the number of events

200 years and intolerable where the number of events experienced

5.5.1.6. Return Period

Known as a recurrence interval and is an estimate of the interval of time

5.5.1.7. Subsidence (Doline)

Shallow, enclosed depression. In past South African literature subsidence,

A feature that occurs suddenly and manifests itself as a hole in the

5.5.1.9. Dolomite Land

land underlain by dolomite or limestone residuum or bedrock (or both),

Occurrence [or change of a particular set of circumstances], in the context

5.5.1.11. Potential Loss of Support

Refers to the removal of support below the foundation due to a nominal

The philosophy to be applied to the design of the foundations is that in the

5.5.2. Assessment Procedure

The hazard characterisation procedure (previously referred to as “risk”

The available information, geophysical data, borehole data and geohydrological