3rd International ASRANet Colloquium 10 12th July 2006, Glasgow, UK.

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF EARTH DAMS: CASE OF EL HOUAREB DAM KAIROUAN - TUNISIA

Z. Mrabet, Geo-Risk Consulting, USA Mohamed Ridha El ouni, Institut National Agronomique de Tunis, Tunisia Khaled Kheder, Institut Superieur des Etudes Technologiques de Nabeul, Tunisia ABSTRACT
The reliability index of an earth dam in commonly taken as the value corresponding to the failure surface associated with minimum reliability index. However, embankment dams are considered as systems composed of several infinite number of possible failure surfaces associated with different reliability indices. In this paper, the reliability analysis has been performed on El Houareb embankment dam (Tunisia). Here, basic assumption, which considers soil properties of the embankment dam are statistically homogeneous, has been followed. Special attention has been paid to the global probability of failure. The calculated global probability of failure value is found to be close to the value associated with the critical ellipsoid failure mechanism. Hence, the concept of global probability of failure is coherent; should be considered, later, as the probability of failure of the project.

1.

INTRODUCTION

There is growing need within geotechnical engineering for rational ways of handling uncertainty and taking it into account for decisionmaking. Many problems still facing geotechnical engineers regarding the reliability analysis and its applicability for practical problems. The following relevant questions should be addressed: What factors most strongly influence the level of uncertainties in earth structures evaluations? Where are improvements most needed to reduce uncertainty in these evaluations? And what level of reliability of earth structures would be achieved under average conditions? Unfortunately, general responses are very difficult to these questions. The demand for risk analyses is growing in all scientific and technical fields. Increasing attention is being paid to risk and uncertainty in geotechnical and civil engineering, because of the drive for improved reliability and safety. The engineer is confronted with uncertainty associated with the random nature, spatial variability of geotechnical properties, and in the complexity of engineering projects. The engineer is expected to make dependable and clear decisions. To do so requires an understanding of both the nature of uncertainty and appropriate techniques to manage it. Unfortunately, many geotechnical engineers are still skeptical of the outcomes of reliability methods in geotechnical engineering. They prefer

to use conventional methods that are more straightforward. The engineer has often resorts to simple criteria to evaluate the safety of an earth structure (i.e. earth dam). In general, these criteria are used to test if the function of the structure is fulfilled. Engineer, for example, use a criteria for existing structures based on consideration of lifetime. For a given highway, for instance, a life cycle is a criterion associated with traffic, which expressed in cycle numbers and verify that the fatigue strength withstands the traffic. For an earth dam, the approach is more complex, constraints and criteria are multiple. Lifetime is not a criterion. However, the risk of failure could be one. Thus, the philosophy regarding to the safety of these structures should reconciled two points of view: A partial evaluation issued from the engineering practice and based on either the factor of safety or the uncertainty. A global theoritecal evaluation strongly anchored in the theory of probabilities and notably the optimization theory of the global cost of the structure. Reliability analyses can be used in routine geotechnical engineering practice. How should probabilistic methods be introduced to practicing geotechnical engineers who have no background in the probabilistic theory? These simple reliability analyses require a little effort more that involved in conventional geotechnical analyses. They provide a means of evaluating the combined

effects of uncertainties in the parameters involved in the calculations, and they offer a useful supplement to conventional analyses. The additional parameters needed for the reliability analyses standard deviations of the parameters can be evaluated using the same amount of data and types of correlations that are widely used in geotechnical engineering practice. During last two decades a significant body of literature has been published including several methodologies and applications (Magnan, 1982, Benjamin and Cornell, 1970, Li et al., 1987a, Vanmarcke, 1983). Probabilistic methods have been developed to solve geotechnical design problems (Harr, 1987). The geotechnical engineering designer has to provide a way to systematically incorporate uncertainty into the design process in a rational manner and to must take it into account the soil variability and optimize design (Cherubini, 1987, Fenton, 1996, Mrabet, 1999, Mrabet and Giles, 2002, Mrabet, 2004). Within the literature, there is a multitude of examples illustrating probabilistic techniques for a wide variety of problems in areas such as slope stability, embankments, seepage, offshore structures, foundation settlement, pillar stability and bearing capacity. On the other hand, reliability assessment techniques should be recognized as an additional tool to existing deterministic methods in the evaluation of, par example, risk of failure of an earth dam. 2. RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

on these structures in order to develop an inspection and maintenance program. The reliability evaluation of most geotechnical structures, in particular existing earth dams, the capacity-demand model is the most simplest utilized, as the question of interest is the probability of failure related to a load event rather than the probability of failure within a time interval. Reliability assessment methods are being adopted for use to develop rigorous risk-management programs. Implementing the programs will ensure that safety is maintained to a robust and acceptable level. Any simple reliability analysis should include the following steps: Establishing limit states Identifying failure modes Formulating limit state functions Analyzing uncertainty Evaluating reliability Assessment results The reliability index of an earth dam is commonly taken as the value corresponding to the failure surface associated with minimum reliability index. Thus, the conventional factor of safety is defined as the ratio of limit capacity of soil to a demand in terms of loads:

F=

R S

(1)

Geotechnical engineering reliability analysis is concerned with finding the reliability or probability of failure (or reliability index) of a structure or a system. The benefit of reliability analysis in geotechnical engineering can be summarized in the following points: to highlight the uncertainties in design of these structures; reliability analysis plays a major role in considering the uncertainties influencing the design of earth structures. For example, an optimum procedure for design of an embankment can be discussed where there are uncertainties with regard to a stability problem. allow the geotechnical engineer to quantify the effect of various failure preventive measures

in which R= capacity (resisting force or resisting moment); and S= demand (driving force or driving moment). In probabilistic modeling of safety, R and S are assumed to be random variables. Let fR(r) and fS(s) be the probability densities functions of variables R and S. The probabilistic measure of safety is the probability of failure, Pf in which should be smaller than certain reference values set a priori. The probability of failure is defined as (failure occurs if R<S):

R Pf = P 1 S

(2)

Assuming statistical independence between the variable R and S the probability of failure can be expressed as:

Pf =

r =s f S (s ) f R (r )dr ds
+

(3)

The use of later formulation of probability of failure makes the simplification possible only for certain types of distribution of R and S such a normal distribution. In such case the notion of safety margin, MS=R-S (cornell 1970) can be introduced. It is Possible to derive the density function fMS(MS) of the random variable MS and the risk of failure is given as:
Pf =

f (MS )d (ms)
MS

(4)

In general, the calculus of the integrals in the preceding equations is particularly cumbersome. In this case, safety is defined by the reliability index, , as (Cornell 1970):

E{MS }

MS

(5)

in which E{MS} = expected value of MS; and MS = standard deviation of MS, provides a simple quantitative basis for assessing risk i.e. probability of failure. An advantage of reliability index is that it can be determined from two first statistic moments (mean value and variance) of probability density functions of R and S without any assumption on the specific shape of these functions.

3. PROBABILISTIC MODELING AND RELIABILITY OF EARTH STRUCTURES

Probabilistic approaches have considered the uncertainty of natural and compacted material properties as random variables (Mrabet, 1993, 1997). Early, random variable model in geotechnical concept has been introduced and discussed in Benjamin and Cornell (Benjamin and Cornell, 1970). Where random variable of geotechnical property is not available due to, for example, a lack of sitespecific data, uncertainty can be characterized by assuming that the coefficient of variation of a geotechnical parameter is similar to that observed

at other sites. Harr (1987) reported typical values of coefficients of variation for soil properties. However, caution should be taken when using typical values, as coefficients of variation solely does not reveal much in accordance with the correlation structure of soil properties (Mrabet, 2004). Li and White (1987a) pointed out that the probability of failure may be reduce by three orders of magnitude if the auto-correlation function is taken into account. Cherubini (1997) pointed out that integration of the fluctuation scale (i.e. auto-correlation distance) in probabilistic models in the geotechnical context generates failure probabilities consistent with frequencies of failure observed in practice. In geotechnical engineering, the reliability analysis of earth fills (earth dams, for example) can be performed using Bayesian Updating technique in conjunction with conditional random field to evaluate the uncertainty related to spatial variation of the materials properties within a dam based on quality control results during construction (Mrabet, 1997, 1999, Mrabet and Bouayed, 2000). Thus, the mathematical expectation and variance of the average shear strength along failure surface have been estimated from these results. Standard quality control programs has incorporated the results of control tests in reliability analysis as soon as they were available in order to take decision based on actualized evaluation of the reliability of earth structures (Mrabet, 1999, 2004). Stochastic finite element method (SFEM) is a good alternative for solving the geotechnical problem associated with material variability. The formulation of this method is described in Ghanem & Spanos (1989). The following points are relevant when performing stochastic finite element modeling in a geotechnical engineering context: SFEM is useful in evaluating a range of variation of finite element modeling in a geotechnical engineering context. SFEM is a useful tool in providing a quick insight into the relative importance of different parameters of soil constitutive laws i.e. sensitivity analysis. SFEM can be used as part of reliability analysis leading to more robust designs for geotechnical structures. Recently, Random Finite Element Method (RFEM) has been introduced to solve a variety of practical problems in geotechnical engineering

design. RFEM combines random field theory (Fenton, 1990) with the finite element method (Smith and Griffiths, 1998) and Monte Carlo simulation to produce probabilistic results. They estimated the slope failure probability and investigated resulting probability as a function of the soils statistical parameters. Mrabet (2002) and Mrabet and Bouayed (2003) have used a methodology (figure 1) based on random field theory in conjunction with stochastic finite element method (SFEM) to describe the uncertainty in both the input material properties of a geotechnical system and the result of the analysis of an embankment dam.
External Parameters Geometry Loading Boundary conditions Internal parameters Soil parameters (Material properties)

Wadi Floods. El Houareb reservoir is a man-made water-body built on the Oued Merguellil, 35 km east of Kairouan, for flood-control and watersupply purposes. Where the river emerges from the Dorsale the reservoir is bordered by higher land, but also has extensive flat shores. It retains the waters, which once flowed into Sebkha Kelbia (Kairouan city, Tunisia). It has an average depth of nearly 20 m, but in periods of poor rainfall, it can remain completely dry for several years on end. The water plant grows commonly in the reservoir and provides the main food-source for wildfowl. The hydraulic characteristics of El Houareb dam are shown in Table 1
Table 1. Hydraulic characteristics of El Houareb dam Area of basin pouring 1140 km2 Total capacity 110 .106 m3 Yearly average contribution 70,00 106 m3

Parameter uncertainty

Uncertainty modelling Random variable Random field (Simple, conditional)

Finite Element Algorithm

Output response Displacements Strains Stresses Pore pressure

Uncertainty modeling

Reliability analysis Figure 1 A flow chart of the methodology (Mrabet and Bouayed, 2003)

El Houareb dam is founded on a sedimentary basin. It is filled with a Triassic, Cretaceous and Tertiary aged marine and fluvial sedimentary fractured rock masses on its right side. The dam has a height of 32 m and crest width of 8.5 m. A berm of 40 m long located at the downstream shoulder contributes into the stability of the structure. The clayey core, which provides impermeable barrier within the body of the dam, has a sloppy upstream 1V: 0.45H, 6 m wide at the top and 21 m wide at the foundation level. The outer slopes of the dam are made of 1V: 4H upstream shoulder and 1V: 3H and 1V: 2.65H below and above the berm platform located at the downstream shoulder respectively. Engineering analyses for the proposed dam were performed to evaluate suitable dam sections for the site conditions and available on-site construction materials (figure 2).
Filter Core Drain Downstream shoulder Berm Foundation Figure 2. General cross section schematic of El-Houareb dam.

4.

CASE STUDY

Upstream shoulder

4.1 DESCRIPTION AND PRESENTATION OF EL-HOUAREB DAM El Houareb dam (Central Tunisia) is selected as a case study to perform the reliability analysis. The main objective of this dam is to contain Merguellil

4.2

PROPERTIES OF THE DAM AND FOUNDATION MATERIALS

The compacted materials were evaluated according to their maximum dry unit weight (dmax), optimum water content (wopt), specific gravity (s), liquid limit (LL) and plasticity index (Ip), all the parameters except specific gravity indicated the desirable characteristic as an impervious fill material. The construction material for embankment and foundation were: Material A- Filter zone: granular material Material B- downstream shoulder zone: granular material Material C- Core zone: very plastic clay has been selected in order to withstand any eventual settlements and to resist into water seepage in case of occurrence of fissures. Material D- soil foundation and upstream shoulder zones: clay with medium plasticity The main physical and shear strength parameters are reported in Table 2.
Table 2. Physical properties and shear strength parameters. Material A B C D Properties WL (%) IP (%) W (%) d/w 33,30 30 (Degree) 0 0 c (kPa) c= cohesive strength,=friction

The former method has been selected to evaluate the safety factor. Due to the foundation layers and the structures of the embankment dam, two mechanisms of failure have been considered; ellipsoid failure and wedge failure mechanisms. Minimum safety factors of 2.01 and 1.94 for ellipsoid and wedge failure mechanisms have been found respectively. An example of Clara 3D analyses of El Houareb dam is shown in figure 4.

53 31 13,5 1,91 23 25

37 21 15 1,89 25,30 10

Figure 3: Analysis of upstream slope of El Houareb dam using limit equilibrium to find the ellipsoid failure surface (3D extension of Bishops simplified method, Clara 3D)

Subsequently, for the reliability analysis of El Houareb dam, only the ellipsoid failure mechanism will be considered.

4.3 PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS OF EL-HOUAREB DAM The stability analysis of El Houareb embankment dam and its foundation is carried out using a deterministic approach. The three-dimensional limit equilibrium CLARA program (Hungr 1987) is used here to evaluate the factor of safety against different mechanisms of failure. Different modes of failures are implemented in CLARA program which provides a choice of methods of analysis including the following: Fellenius's method, Bishop's method, Spencer's method, Janbu's method and 3D extensions of Bishop's Simplified.

5.

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

Spatial correlation has long been ignored in modeling variability of soil properties. However, the spatial dependency within the medium should be considered, particularly in a strongly compacted soil i.e earth dams (Mrabet and Bouayed 2003). To take into account spatial correlation, it is possible to model the spatial variability of soil properties with a spatial stochastic process also known as random field (Mrabet, 1999) in which the variable exhibits autocorrelation, the tendency for values of the variable at one point to be correlated to values at nearby points.

Recently, special attention has given to the role of spatial correlation. Some recent papers dealing with the concept include those by Mrabet and Giles (2002) Many studies stressed out the effect of existing auto-correlation on the results of probabilistic models of compacted earth slopes analysis. Ignoring auto-correlation is conservative and considerably more than desired (Mrabet 1998). The analysis that considers typical auto-correlation distances results in reduction of probability of failure (Cherubini 1997). Extensive measurement program performed on earth dams such Mirgenbach and Vieux-Pre dams (Rossa & Fry 1988) and others led to the conclusion that, for such structures, a significant spatial correlation exists. The influence distance at which auto-covariance becomes negligible is sensitive to the construction procedure as well as the material nature, but is practically identical for all properties. A pronounced anisotropy of the auto-covariance exists with a vertical distance of influence of the order of meters and horizontal distance of influence of the order of tenth of meters [Mrabet, 1999, Mrabet and Giles 2002]. Similar pattern have been found for mechanical properties and the exponential auto-correlation function between two different points within the compacted soil of the El Houareb dam has been retained. Due to the lack of data concerning the horizontal auto-correlation function, we were reported to Andersons work (1981) to establish one. We therefore, obtained the following function:

constitutes a lower limit of the global probability of failure of El Houareb dam. Subsequently, we calculate the global probability of failure in respect to the following conditions: -Cross-section of El Houareb dam as considered in the above analysis (figure 2). -Horizontal auto-correlation distance =60 m -Vertical auto-correlation distance =3 m -Coefficient of variation of the cohesion of the El Houareb dam= 0.35 Hence, the dam is divided into different ellipsoids. They are considered independents and vertically separated by 3 m.
Table 3. Failure Probability Hi (m) Fi Pfi i 0m 2.01 3.45 0.025 Contact DamFoundati on 2.63 4.00 0.00013 3 2.95 4.23 0.0003 6 3.50 4.55 0.00002 9 3.78 4.80 0.000003 12 5.14 5.23 0.0000023 15 7.02 5.40 0.0000001 18 9.04 5.63 0.000000025 21 15.02 5.90 0.000000004 24 18.3 6.13 0.0000000032 27 25 6.23 0.0000000005 30 Hi = depth of the ellipsoid regarding the interface dam-foundation (or the bottom of the dam) Fi = Factor of Safety corresponding to the ellipsoid failure Surface number i. i = Minimum Reliability index corresponding to the ellipsoid failure surface number i. Pfi = Failure probability corresponding to the ellipsoid failure surface i, The global failure probability is calculated using the following equation:

hor 9 x ) = exp(0,065 x)

(6)

The reliability index of earth dam in commonly taken as the value corresponding to the failure surface associated with minimum reliability index. However, embankment dams are considered as systems composed of several infinite number of possible failure surfaces associated with different reliability indices. Therefore, the global probability of failure of embankment dam is however, at least for the moment, a complicated problem to handle since correlation exists between different failure surfaces. In practice, the reliability of whole system may be governed by a few subsystems or components. The calculated probability associated to the critical failure surface

Pglobal = 1 (1 Pfi )
n i =1

(7)

The global probability of failure is P = 0.02. This value is close to the value associated with the critical ellipsoid failure surface. This calculation shows that the concept of global probability is coherent; should be considered, later, as the global probability of the project.

In reality, these results show that other sources of uncertainty that should be taken into account including, but not limited to: ignorance of mechanisms of failure ignorance of the entire history of dam behavior ignorance of the horizontal auto-correlation length.

5.

CONCLUSIONS

The probabilistic approach applied to clayey embankment dams seems, from now on, an interesting tool for the engineer who has to deal with the safety and reliability of these structures. However, the reliability analysis should be considered as an efficient tool that complemented a conventional deterministic analysis such as the equilibrium limit analysis. A complete reliability analysis should include all sources of uncertainty. Particularly, correlations between different properties that characterize compacted materials and their corresponding horizontal auto-correlation lengths generate main uncertainties in the probabilistic model. Similar reliability analysis could be performed using conditional random field to evaluate the uncertainty related to spatial variation of the material properties within the dam based on quality control.

REFERENCES

1. Benjamin, J., and Cornell, C.A. 1970. Probability, Statistics and Decision for Civil Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York. 2. Cherubini, C.1997. Data and consideration on the variability of geotechnical properties of soils. Proceedings of the Conference on advances in Safety and Reliability: ESREL 1997. pp. 1583-1591. 3. El ouni M. R, 2004. Calcul en deformation dun barrage. Colloque Materiaux, Sols et Structures MS2 2004. 4. Hungr, O. 1987. An extension of Bishops Simplified method of slope stability to three dimensions. Geotechnique 37 (1): 113-117. 5. Magnan, J. P. 1982. Les methodes statistiques et probabilistes en mecanique

des sols. Presse de lEcole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussees, France. 6. Mrabet, Z., 1998. Geostatistics and shortterm reliability analysis of homogeneous compacted earth fills. Journees Gestatistique, ENSMP, Fontainebleau, France, Cahiers de Geostatistique, (6): pp 91-104. 7. Mrabet, Z., 1999. Reliability analysis of homogeneous earth fills, A new approach. Proceeding of the eight International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, ICASP8, 12-15 December 1999, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia pp 499 - 507 8. Mrabet, Z. and Bouayed, A. 2000. Reducing Uncertainty on the Results of Reliability Analysis of Earth Fills Using Stochastic Estimations. Second International Conference on Computer simulation in Risk Analysis and Hazard Mitigation, Risk Analysis 2000, Bologna, Italy, 13 October 2000.pp 203-214 9. Mrabet, Z. 2002. Reliability analysis of earth fills using stochastic estimation methods. Third International Conference on Mathematical Methods in Reliability, MMR 2002, Trondheim, Norway, 17 - 20 June 2002. 10. Mrabet, Z. & A. Bouayed. 2003. Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Homogeneous Earth Dams. Proceeding of the Ninth International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, ICASP9, July 6-9, 2003, San Francisco, California pp. 367 372 11. Mrabet, Z. & D. Giles. 2002. Probabilistic risk assessment: a key tool for reducing uncertainty in geotechnical engineering. Invited paper. Third International Conference on Computer Simulation In Risk Analysis and Hazard Mitigation, RISK 2002, Sintra, Portugal, 19 - 21 June 2002, pp. 3-14. 12. Mrabet, Z. 2004. Invited paper. Some aspect on reliability in geotechnical engineering. Fourth International Conference on Computer Simulation In Risk Analysis and Hazard Mitigation,

RISK 2004, Rhodes, Greece, 19 - 21 June 2004, pp. 75-84 13. Mrabet, Z., El Ouni, Kheder, K. 2006. Probabilistic modeling and reliability analysis of earth structures in geotechnical engineering. Paper accepted to be presented in the First Euro Mediterranean in Advances on Geomaterials and Structures, Hammamet 3-5 May Tunisia 14. Rossa, O. and Fry, J.J. 1988. Exploitation des donnees recueillies sur la digue Aube. Rapport interne. 15. Vanmarcke. E.H. 1983. Random fields: Analysis and synthesis. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1983.