127

CHAPTER 5

EARTH DAMS


5.1 INTRODUCTION
Earth dams for the storage of water for irrigation have been built since the earliest
times. These dams were however, limited in height but not necessarily in extent. Earth dams
are now being built to unprecedented heights. Sites which have hitherto been considered unfit
for the construction of darns are now being exploited. Development of soil mechanics, study of
behavior of earth dams, and the development of better construction techniques have all been
helpful in creating confidence to build higher dams with improved designs and more ingenious
details. The result is that the highest dam in the world today is an earth dam. The highest
earth/rockfill dams in the world are Roguni U.S.S.R ( 335 m ) Nurek, U.S.S.R. ( 300 m );
(Fig. 5.1) Mica, Tehri India ( 260 m ) Canada ( 244 m ) and Oroville, U.S.A. ( 235 m ).









Fig. 5.1 Nurek dam U.S.S.R.

In spite of these developments it is difficult to establish mathematical solutions to the
problems of design, and many of its components are still guided by experience or judgment.
For a realistic design of an earth dam it. is necessary that the foundation conditions and
materials of construction are thoroughly investigated. It is also necessary that controlled
methods of construction are used to achieve necessary degree of compaction at predetermined
moisture.
The discussion in the text is limited to design procedure for earth dams which are rolled
fill type of construction. This type of construction is now being used almost entirely for the
construction of earth dams to the exclusion of hydraulic and semi-hydraulic fills. In this type,
the major portion of the embankment is constructed in successive mechanically compacted
layers of 150 mm to 220 mm thickness.






128
5.2 Foundation for Earth Dams

The essential requirements of a foundation for an. earth dam are (i) that it provides
stable support for the embankment under all conditions of saturation and loading, and (ii) that
it provides sufficient resistance to seepage to prevent piping and excessive loss of water.
In general foundations may be grouped into three main classes according to their
predominant characteristics.
1. Rock foundations,
2. Pervious foundations, and
3. Impervious foundations.

Rock Foundations
These foundations, including shale generally do not present any problem of bearing
strength. The principal considerations are erosive leakage, excessive loss of water through
joints, fissures, crevices, permeable strata and along fault planes, etc. Grouting is usually done
to treat this type of foundation.
Shale may however present foundation problems specially if they contain joints, faults,
seams filled with soft material and weak layers. Such defects and excess pore water pressure
may control the overall strength of foundation.


FOUNDATI ON FOR EARTH DAMS

Pervious Foundations
Often the foundations for earth dams consist of recent alluvial deposits composed of
relatively pervious sand and gravels overlying impervious geological formations like rock or
clay. There are two basic problems with which these types of foundations are associated viz. (i)
excessive amount of under seepage, and (ii) piping and boils caused by forces exerted due to
seepage. The treatment which may be provided to control these problems is governed by the
thickness of pervious strata viz, whether the pervious foundation extend to a moderate depth or
to an infinite depth.
Loose fine sand or coarse silt deposits in a foundation present one of the most difficult
problems. The difficulty arises not only due to low strength or high compressibility of the loose
sand, but also through a phenomenon known as liquefaction. A certain fine uniform sand in a
loose condition when subjected to sudden applications of shock (as in earth quake) loses all its
shear strength and behaves as though it were a heavy viscous fluid. This phenomenon is
exhibited by uniform sands which are very fine and consists of rounded grains and their
relative density is less than 50%.
Fortunately no failures of this type have occurred. At Obra dam in U.P., the foundations
were thick loose sands and its susceptibility to liquefaction was carefully evaluated by field
and laboratory investigations of the foundation material and by actual blasting tests. It was
concluded that the foundations were not likely to liquefy.
129
Impervious Foundations
Foundations of silt and clay extending to large depths are sufficiently impermeable to
preclude the necessity of providing treatment for under seepage and piping. The main problem
with these, foundations may be excessive pore water pressure and significant deformations.
Where the embankments are constructed on foundations consisting of brittle, highly
plastic or over-consolidated clays, serious investigations are required as their presence may
cause excessive deformations. The embankment design in such cases would be controlled by
likely strains in the foundations. If there is silt and clay to large depths, then there is not
much necessity of providing treatment for under seepage and piping. The main problem with
these foundations is of stability for which generally the slopes of the embankments are made
flatter or berms on either side are provided.
If the structure crosses swampy or similar area where the foundation material will be of
plastic nature, the matter would require serious investigations as plastic clays are very
deficient in shear strength.
An approximate method to determine the safety of foundation material against the shear
stress is as follows :

(i) Determine the total horizontal shear under the slope of dam by the formula,
S =

2
45 tan
2
h h
1 2
2
2
2
1

(5.1)

where, h
1
= vertical distance from top of dam down to the rigid boundary
such as rock, the strength of which is great as compared to the
overlying material.
h
2
= vertical distance from base of dam to the rigid boundary.
= effective weight per cubic metre of material.

1
= equivalent angle of internal friction given by,
tan
1
=
1
1
h
tan h C

+
(5.2)
(ii) Calculate the average unit shear by the formula
S
a
= S/b
where S
a
= average horizontal foundation shear per sq. m.
b = horizontal distance along base from top shoulder
of slope to the toe of dam.






Fig. 5.2 Location of maximum Shear-Definition sketch


130
(iii) The maximum unit shear may be obtained by multiplying the average
unit stress by 1.4 i.e. S
max
=1.4 S
a
. The location of the point of maximum shear may be taken
0.4 b from upper shoulder of the slope as shown in fig. 5.2.

5.3 Causes of Failures of Earth Dams

Like most other damages to engineering structures, earth dam failures are caused by
improper design frequently based on insufficient investigations, and lack of care in
construction and maintenance.
Failures of earth darns may be grouped into the following basic causes
(a) Hydraulic failures
(b) Seepage failures and
(c) Structural failures

Hydraulic Failures

They account for about one third of the failure of dams and are produced by surface
erosion of the dam by water. They include wash-outs from overtopping (Fig. l-5-3a), wave
erosion of upstream face, scour from the discharge of the spillway etc. and erosion from
rainfall.

Seepage Failures
Seepage of water through the foundation or embankment has been responsible for more
than one third of earth dam failures. Seepage is inevitable in all earth dams and ordinarily it
does no harm. Uncontrolled seepage; may however, cause erosion within the embankment or
in the foundation which may lead to piping (Fig. 5.3 b). Piping is the progressive erosion
which develops through under the dam. It begins at a point of concentrated seepage where the
gradients are sufficiently high to produce erosive velocities. If forces resisting erosion i.e.
cohesion, inter-locking effect, weight of soil particles, action of downstream filter etc. are less
than those which tend to cause, the soil particles are washed away causing piping failure.
Seepage failures are generally caused by (a) pervious foundations, (b) leakage through
embankments, (c) conduit leakage and (d) sloughing.

Pervious Foundations
Presence of strata and lenses of sand or gravel of high permeability or cavities and
fissures in the foundation may permit concentrated flow of water from the reservoir causing
piping. Presence of buried channels under the seat of dam have also been responsible for this
type of failure.





131
Leakage Through Embankrnents
The following are the common causes of embankment leaks which lead to piping:
(i) Poor construction control which includes insufficient compaction adjacent
to outlet conduits and poor bond between embankment and the foundation
or between the successive layers of the embankment.
(ii) Cracking in the embankment or in the conduits caused by foundation
settlement (Fig. 5.3 c),
(iii) Animal burrows
(iv) Shrinkage and dry cracks (Fig. 5.3 d)
(v) Presence of roots, pockets of gravel or boulders in the embankment.

Conduit Leakage
Conduits through the dam have been responsible for nearly one third of the seepage
failure and more than one eighth of all failures. Failures are of two types (i) contact seepage
along the outside of the conduit which develops into piping and (ii) seepage through leaks in
the conduit which may also develop into piping.
Contact seepage along the conduit wall is caused either by a zone of poorly compacted
soil or small gap between the conduit and remainder of the embankment. Seepage through
poorly compacted zones soon develops into piping.
Conduit cracking is caused by differential settlement or by overloading from
embankment.

Sloughing
Failure due to sloughing takes place where downstream portion of the dam becomes
saturated either due to choking of filter toe drain, or due to the presence of highly pervious
layer in the body of the dam. The process begins when a small amount of material at the
downstream toe is eroded and produces a small slide. It leaves a relatively steep face which
becomes saturated by seepage from the reservoir and slumps again, forming a higher and more
unstable face. This process is continued until the remaining portion of the dam is too thin to
withstand the water pressure and complete failure occurs.

Structural Failures
Structural failures of the embankment or its foundation account for about one fifth of
the total number of failures. Structural failures may result in slides in foundation or
embankment due to various causes as explained below.

Foundation Failures (Fig. 5.3 e). Faults and seams of weathered rocks, shale, soft clay strata
are responsible for the foundation failure in which the top of the embankment cracks and
subsides and the lower slope moves outward and large mud waves are formed beyond the toe.
Another form of foundation failure occurs because of excessive pore water pressure in
confined seams of silt or sand. Pore water pressure in the confined cohesionless seams, artesian
pressure in the abutments or consolidation of clays interbedded with the sands or silt, reduces
132
the strength of the soil to the extent that it may not be able to resist the shear stresses
induced by the embankment. The movement develops very rapidly without warning. Excess
settlement of foundation may also cause cracking of the embankment (Fig.5.3 c).













Fig. 5.3 Types of failuresEarth dams

Slides in Embankment (Fig 5.3 f and g) An embankment is subjected to shear stresses
imposed by pool fluctuations, seepage or earthquake forces. Embankment slides may occur
when the slopes are too steep for the shear strength of the embankment material to resist the
stresses imposed.
Usually the movement develops slowly and is preceded by cracks on the top or the
slope near the top. Failure of this type are usually due to faulty design and construction. In high
dams slope failure may occur during dissipation of pore pressure just after construction. The
upstream slope failure may occur due to sudden drawdown as shown in fig. 5.3 f. The
downstream slope is critical during steady seepage condition.

5.4 Design Criteria of Earth Dams
Based on the experience of failures, the following main design criteria may be laid
down for the safety of an earth dam.
1. To prevent hydraulic failures the dam must be so designed that erosion of the
embankment is prevented.
This implies that the following conditions are satisfied.
(a) Spillway capacity is sufficient to pass the peak flow.
(b) Overtopping by wave action at maximum water level is prevented.
(c) The original height of structure is sufficient to maintain the minimum safe
freeboard after settlement has occurred.
(d) Erosion of the embankment due to wave action and surface run-off does not
occur.
(e) The crest should be wide enough to withstand wave action and earthquake
shock.

133

2. To prevent the seepage failures, the flow of water through the body of the dam
and its foundation must not be sufficiently large in quantity to defeat the purpose of the
structure nor at a pressure sufficiently high to cause piping.

This implies that

(a) Quantity of seepage water through the dam section and foundation should be limited.
(b) The seepage line should be well within the downstream face of the dam to
prevent sloughing.
(c) Seepage water through the dam or foundation should not remove any
particle or in other words cause piping. The driving force depends upon the
pressure gradient while the resisting force depends upon the strength
characteristics of the boundary material.
(d) There should not be any leakage of water from the upstream to downstream
face. Such leakage may occur through conduits, at joints between earth and
concrete sections or through holes made by aquatic animals.

3. To prevent structural failures, the embankment and its foundation must be stable under all
conditions.

This implies that
(i) The upstream and downstream slopes of the embankment should be stable under all
loading conditions to which they may be subjected including earthquake.
(ii) The foundation shear stresses should be within the permissible limits of shear
strength of the material.

5.5 Prevention of Erosion-Embankment Details

Spillway Capacity
It must be calculated and fixed by relevant hydrological studies and flood routing such that
sufficient freeboard is available between the maximum flood level and top of the dam.

Freeboard for wave action
The required allowance for waves is based on the effect of wind of maximum velocity
blowing down the reservoir and setting up a wave splash on the dam face. Various empirical
formulae depending on wind velocity and reservoir fetch have been suggested for computing
wave heights. The MolitorStevenson formulas are normally used which are
hw = 0.032
4
271 . 0 763 . 0 F FV +
where F< 32 km. (5.4)
hw = 0.032 FV , where F > 32 km. (5.5)

134
where hw = wave height in meters measured between trough and crest.
V = wind velocity in km per hour
F = fetch in kilometers.
On a sloping surface the wave rides along the slope upto a vertical height of 1.5 times the wave
height above the reservoir level hence 1.5 hw is provided as freeboard.
According to U.S.B.R. criteria distinction is to be made between the normal and minimum
freeboards. Normal freeboard is defined as the difference in elevation between the crest of the
dam and normal reservoir water surface. According to the fetch of reservoir the freeboard may
be provided as given in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1
Recommended Values of Freeboards

Fetch in km Normal freeboard Minimum freeboard
in meter in meter

Less than 1.5 1.25 1.00
1.5 1.50 1.25
4.0 1.80 1.50
8.0 2.50 1.80
15.0 3.00 2.20

It is also recommended that freeboard shown in, Table 5.1 be increased by 50 percent
if a smooth pavement is provided as protection on the upstream slope.

Settlement allowance
Settlement of an embankment will be caused by consolidation in the foundation and in
the fill. A settlement allowance of 2% is considered adequate and is generally provided.
However, in case of dams of more than 30m height, an extra 1% allowance is provided to
account for the settlement due to earthquake.

Upstream slope protection
Surface protection of upstream slope is meant to prevent the destructive wave action.
Usual type of surface protection for the upstream slope is stone rip-rap either dry dumped or
hand placed. When a thin layer is used, hand placed rip-rap may be more economical than
dumped rip-rap.
There are several empirical methods to find out the thickness of rip-rap. These methods
take into account the wave height, embankment slope, weight of average size rock and its
specific gravity.



135
Hand placed rip-rap
The hand placed rip-rap for upstream protection is very common in this country. The
size of stones used for hand placed rip-rap may be determined with the following formula,

d
m
= 2.23 C. hw
) 2 (
1
.
2
+
+
s s
s
w
w

(5.6)

where d
m
= diameter of stone brought to form a ball, in metre, in the zone of maximum
blow of the wave.

w
= unit weight of water in t/m
3

= unit weight of stones in t/m
3

s = slope of embankment.
h
w
= height of wave in metre.
C = factor depending on the type of protection

For hand placed rip-rap C = 0.54
For rock fill or dumped rip-rap C = 0.80
Average size of stone required d
av
= d
m
/O.85 (average shape)
The average weight of the stone can be found out by the formula

W
av
=

. ) d (
6
3
av
(5.7)

Filter below rip-rap
A layer of filter material consisting of gravel Or crushed rock is always required under
rip-rap to prevent waves from eroding the underlying embankment material. No definite rule
can be given for the minimum necessary thickness of the filter layer. Most filters are
constructed with thickness ranging from 20 cm to 75 cm.
The following factors govern the thickness of the filter layer
(i) Wave action
The less the wave action, the less the need for a thick filter under the rip-rap.

(ii) Gradation of rip-rap
If the rip-rap is well graded with plenty of quarry fines to fill the larger voids there is less
stress on the filter.

(iii) Plasticity and gradation of embankment materials
If the embankment material is well graded granular soil with a tough clay hinder it needs
less protection against erosion than if it is fine silty sand.



136
(iv) The cost of filter
If the material for the filter is obtained without washing or screening as a pit run natural
gravel and quarry wash, and is not expensive as compared to the cost of average embankment
material, there is no reason not to use maximum filter thickness.
The following limits are recommended to satisfy stability criteria for graded uniform filters:

(1)
material base of D
filter of D
15
15
= 5 to 40, provided that the filter does not contain more than 5
percent of material finer than 0.075 mm ( I.S. sieve no.-minus
75 micron ).
(2)
base of D
filter of D
85
15
= 5 or less
(3)
drain pipe of opening Max.
filter of D
85
= 2 or more

(4) The grain size curve of filter should be roughly parallel to that of the base material.
D
15
or D
85
is the size at which 15 percent and 85 percent (respectively) of the total soil
particles are smaller. The percentage is by weight as determined by mechanical analysis.
If more than one filter layer is required; the same criterion is followed; the finer filter is
considered as the base material for selection of the coarser filter.
Horizontal filter layers can safely be made thinner than steeply inclined or vertical filters.
Minimum thickness of each horizontal layer is 15 cms for sand and 30 cms for gravel. If the
filter contains excessive fines or coarse material such that
base of D
filter of D
15
15
> 4 but < 5 or
base of D
filter of D
15
15
> 5 but < 6, the thickness of filter layer may be increased by 50 percent.

Design Criteria The following criteria of upstream protection is being adopted by
Central Design Directorate of Irrigation Department, Uttar Pradesh.
(i) Upto 5 m height of bound No pitching
(ii) Between 5 m and 10 m 0.25 m stone pitching over 0.15 m graded shingle or
spalls.
(iii) Above l0m and upto 15m 0.30 m stone pitching over 0.15 m graded shingle or
spalls.
(iv) Above 15 m and upto 25 m 0.5 m stone pitching over 0.25 m graded shingle or spalls.

(v) Above 25 m and upto 50m 0.5 m stone pitching over 0.3 m grade shingle or spalls.
(vi) Above 50 m and upto 75 0.75 m stone pitching over 0.5 m graded shingle or spalls.
(vii) Above 75 m 1.0 m stone pitching over 0.75 m graded shingle.
The entire upstream face should be pitched right upto the top of bund.

137
Downstream Slope Protection
The problem of erosion of downstream slopes due to surface runoff may be effectively
controlled by turfing. In area too deficient in rainfall during parts of the year to maintain a
proper cover, berms and other erosion control be applied.

Crest Width
The crest or top width of an earth dam should not be less than 4 m for maintenance
purposes. However, the width depends on several considerations such as (i) nature of emban-
kment material and minimum allowable percolation distance through the embankment at
normal reservoir water level (ii) height and importance of structure (iii) required width to
provide embankment mass for resistance to earthquake shock and (iv) roadway requirements.
Common practice is fairly well represented by the formula,
B
t
= 5/3. H

5.6 Seepage Through Dams
Phreatic or Seepage line
The two dimensional flow of fluid through porous soil can be expressed by Laplaces
equation
0
2
2
2
2
=

z x



Graphically, the equation can be represented by two sets of curves that intersect at right
angles. The combined representation of two sets of lines is called a flow net (Fig. 5.4). With
the help of a flow net, the seepage problems can be analyzed at any point within the section of
the embankment.
The seepage or phreatic line may be defined as the line within a dam section below
which there are positive hydrostatic pressures in the dam. On the line itself, the hydrostatic
pressure is zero. Above the line, there will be a zone of capillary situation. The phreatic line
represents the top flow line or the boundary condition for drawing the flow net.






Fig. 5.4 Flow net through earth dam

The location of the phreatic line is necessary in order to draw accurately the flow net. It
is also useful in analyzing stability of the dam. It may be noted that the location of the seepage
line is dependent only on the cross section of the dam. Its position is not influenced by the
permeability of the material composing the dam so long as the material is homogeneous.


138
According to A. Cassagrande the phreatic line for the homogeneous fill section is a
basic parabola except at the ingress and egress points. The presence of a pervious stratum
below the dam does not influence the position of the phreatic line. For graphical construction
of the phreatic line the following procedure may be adopted.

Stepwise procedure for locating phreatic line

1. With horizontal drainage filter (Fig.5.5)
(i) The horizontal distance between upstream toe A and the point B where water
surface meets the upstream face is calculated or measured (say L). The point B
0
is then located
on the water surface at a distance 0.3 L from B.
(ii) The basic parabola has to pass through B
0
and have its focus at F which is the starting
point of the horizontal







Fig. 5.5 Phreatic line with horizontal filter

drainage. With these points known the basic parabola may be constructed graphically.
(iii) With centre B
0
and radius B
0
F, draw an arc to meet the water line at C. Draw the
vertical line CD which is the directrix. Let FD, the focal distance = y
o
. Bisect the distance FD
to get the point E, the vertex of the parabola. Draw FG parallel to CD and equal to y
o
.
Knowing B
o
,G and E the basic parabola can be drawn.
The focal distance y
0
can also be determined on the consideration that if (x y) is one point
on the parabola,
= +
2 2
y x x+y
o
(5.9)
Since the point B
0
of coordinates d, h lies on the equation.
y
o
= d h d
2 2
+ (5.10)
(iv) The ingress portion of phreatic line is joined to the base parabola from point B,
keeping the starting end normal to the upstream face.

2. With inclined discharge face (Fig. 5.6)
For embankments with no drainage measures the base parabola cuts the discharge face at
point G
0
at a distance (a +
a
) along the discharge face from point F, and extends beyond the
limits of the embankments. The actual seepage line meets the discharge face (at point G) at a
distance a below the point G
0
. The value of a can be worked out from the curve (5.7) after A.

139
Cassagrande giving the value of

a
a
a
for different angles () of discharging face. The
value of (a+
a
) can either be measured directly on the face when the parabola has been drawn
or its value determined from the equation,
a +
a
=
cos - 1
y
o
(5.11)
3. With rock toe (Fig. 5.8)
The basic parabola may be drawn in a similar way taking F








Fig. 5.6 Phreatic line with inclined discharge face


as focus. As already shown this parabola it self is the seepage line for a horizontal filter. (For a
horizontal filter = 180).
For a rock toe, an appropriate value of , measured clockwise from the horizontal base
should be taken and the value of

a
a
a
read from the curve given in fig. 5.7. The parabola
is corrected at the egress point.










Fig. 5.7 Fig. 5.8

For values of between 30 to 180, the distance a measured along the slope from the
toe may be determined as explained above. However, if it is less than 30, the distance a or
the point of emergence of the phreatic line at the downstream slope may be determined with
the help of Schaffernaks equation.


140



2 2
2
sin cos cos
h d d
a = (5.12)

or
2 2 2 2 2
cot h d h d a + = (5.13)

where d and h are the coordinates of the initial point B, as explained in fig. 5.5
Quantity of Seepage
Consider earth embankment of homogeneous material given in fig. 5.4.
Flow net through the dam section has been drawn by trial and error method. If h is the total
hydraulic head and N
d
is the number of potential drops (9 in fig. 5.4) the potential drop h =
d
N
h
Consider a field of length l, the field being an approximate square its width is also equal
to l, the hydraulic gradient across the field
l
h
.
The discharge through the field is given by

d
N
h
K h K l
l
h
K q = =

= . .
If N
f
is the total number of flow channels ( N
f
= 3 in fig. 5.4 ) the seepage per unit width
of embankment is


d
f
N
N
Kh q = (5.14)
The discharge through a homogeneous embankment with horizontal filter may also be
calculated with the help of equation 5.9.
The equation of base parabola under steady seepage condition may be written as
y =
2
0 0
. . 2 y y x +
For a unit length, y represents the area of flow.
[ ]
2
0 0 0
2 / 1
2
0 0
2 / 2
. .
y xy y y xy
dx
d
dx
dy
y
dx
dy
K q
+ = + =
=

Since discharge passing through any vertical plane is the same, at x = 0 we have 1 =
dx
dy
and
y = y
0.
q = K y
0
(5.15)
The equation although is applicable to embankments with horizontal filters but hold
good for determining approximate discharge in all other cases.


141
Example 5.1
For the homogeneous dam section shown in fig. 5.9, draw the pheratic line if a
horizontal filter of length 10 m is provided. Also determined discharge per m length of dam if
K 10
-5
m / sec.
Solution
The angle of discharge face = tan
-1/1.5
= 33.69'
From Fig. 5.7, =
+

a
a
a
0.35








Fig. 5.9 Design example 15.2 Dam section

h = 22, L = 22 x 2.5 = 55, 0.3 L = 16.5m
d = l6.5 + (2.5 + 1.5) 3 + 6 + 1.5 x 22 -10
= 57.5 m.

Equation 5.10




d h d y + =
2 2
0


06 . 4 5 . 57 22 5 . 57
2 2
= + =

Equation of the parabola is

06 . 4
2 2
+ = + x y x

with the help of this equation, the pheratic line can be drawn.
For example at x = 10, y = 9.88
at x = 20, y = 13.37
Discharge per metre length q = K y
o

q = 4.06 x 10
-5
m
2
/ sec.





142
Flow net in Anisotropic Soil
Natural deposits made by flowing water and rolled earth dam sections are horizontally
stratified. Such stratifications display much higher horizontal permeability (K
h
) than vertical
permeability (K
v
).
When the horizontal and vertical permeability differ in a dam section, the flow net may be
drawn in the usual manner in a transformed section. To make a transformed section the
horizontal dimensions are multiplied by
h
v
K
K
while vertical dimensions remain unchanged.
After drawing the flow net in the transformed section, the flow net is restored back in the
original section. The procedure is illustrated in .Fig. 5.10 in case when the horizontal
permeability is 4 times the vertical permeability. It may be noted that while the fields are
approximate squares in the transformed section, they get distorted when restored back in the
original section. The higher the ratio between the horizontal and vertical permeability the more
would be the distortion in the flow net. The flow lines tend to come near the downstream face
of the dam, and for a certain ratio the flow lines may even intersect the section making it
unsafe. The discharges, seepage force, pore water pressure can be determined with help of the
flow net in the original section.










Fig 5.10 Transformation of section having different permeability in horizontal
and vertical directions.

The quantity of seepage in an anisotropic section can also be determined by using an
effective permeability coefficient (K') in equation 5.15, K' is given by
K' =
h v
K K (5.16)

5.7 Control of Seepage Through Foundations
Different methods to control seepage of water through foundations are described
below. The suitability of the method of treatment depends primarily on the nature of
foundation.
1. Grouting and grout curtain
2. Cut off trenches.
3. Partial cut-off

143
4. Sheet piling cutoff
5. Cement bound curtain cutoff
6. Cast in situ concrete diaphragm
7. Upstream blanket
8. Pressure relief wells.

Grouting and grout curtain
Certain materials when infected as grout in the foundation strata acts as a binder and
fills the voids, thus reducing the permeability and increasing its stability. Cement, asphalt, clay
and various chemicals are used as grouting materials.
The choice of grouting material, pattern, depth and sequence of grouting are related to
the foundation conditions, type and height of the dam and objective desired. Cement grouting
is extensively used in rock foundations. In pervious foundations the choice of a suitable grout
depends primarily upon the grain size of the material and its permeability. Table 5.2. indicates
approximate range of grain sizes that can normally be grouted by different types of grout
materials and mixtures.

Table 5.2
Diameter of the material
Type of grout that can be grouted
mm

Cement 0.5 to 1.4
Clay-cement bentomite 0.3 to 0.5
Clay-chemical, bentomite-chemical 0.2 to 0.4
Chemical 0.1 to 0.2

Blanket grouting is done to a depth of 5 to 10 m through holes spaced 3 to 5 m to prevent
piping. Curtain grouting is done to much greater depth to reduce seepage through foundation.
The number of lines and spacing of holes depends upon the nature of foundation and width of
grout curtain which is usually 1/3 to 1/5 of the water head. A single line of grout holes has
been adopted in a number of dams. It is however desirable to have two lines of holes.
The pervious zones should be grouted first with coarse grouts with holes spaced apart
followed by finer grouts in further stages with holes spaced closely.

Cut off trenches (Fig. 5.11 a)
The cut-off trenches with side sloping or vertical are excavated below the dams and
filled with well compacted impervious material. These trenches are located well upstream of
the centre line of the dam but within a point where the cover of the impervious embankment
above the trenches is sufficient to resist the percolation at least to the extent offered by the
trench itself. The centre line of the trench is kept parallel to the centre line of the dam. The
trench should be provided up to bed rock or other impervious strata. The bottom width of the
144
trench is governed by the space required for treatment of foundation and type of equipment
used for rolling. Usually minimum 5 m width is adopted. Other method of cut-off may be
economical as compared to deep cutoff trenches. The maximum depth of trench is governed by
economical considerations. For moderate pervious foundations positive cut-off up to hard
stratum is provided. The cut-off may be (i) sheet pile (ii) cement bound curtain, (iii) concrete
diaphragm.

Partial cut-off trench (Fig. 5.11 c)
A partial cut off trench is effective in stratified foundation by intersecting more impervious
layer in the foundation and by increasing the vertical path of seepage. In a uniform pervious
strata the role of partial cut off in reducing percolation is very limited. A cut off going to 80%
of the total depth of pervious




















strata reduces the seepage discharge by only 50%. Thus with a partial cut off the reliance is
primarily on the length of the seepage path. Therefore for treatment of deep pervious
foundation where it is not economically possible to provide a positive cut-off, partial cut-off
along with upstream blanket is provided to reduce the discharge and seepage pressures.







145
Sheet piling cut-off ( Fig. 5.11 b )
Steel sheet piling cut off can be used in silty, sandy and fine



















Fig 5.11 Typical foundation treatment and trenches details


gravel foundations. If the foundation strata contains boulders the sheet piles will not easily
penetrate. It is very difficult to make sheet pile cut off water tight. There are always chances of
leakage through the joints and at contact with bed rock.
These disadvantages and limitations of sheet pile cut off have been overcome by use of
cellular sheet pile wall back filled with concrete. Another method of sealing the interlocks is to
drill arrow of boles and fill them with bentonite before driving the sheet pipe line across the
holes.

Cement bound curtain cut off
This type of cut off is used in pervious foundations which do not contain large cobbles
and boulders. The grout is pumped through hollow rotating drill rod which is fixed with a
mixing head on the end. The grout is forced down with vanes provided for in the mixing head
which results in the formation of cylindrical elements of cement impregnated sand and gravel.
A continuous curtain is formed by successive over lapping of such cylinders.






146
Cast in-situ concrete diaphragm
In this process a trench 5 to 10 m long and up to 1.2 m wide is made by a percussion
tool of the required diameter connected to a rigid tube through which drilling mud is circulated
from the bottom to the top. The mud retains the walls of the trench by hydrostatic pressure as
.well as by forming a cake of bentonite along the side of the trench. The excavating tool and
the pipes travel horizontally to and fro over the length of the panels. The vertical percussion
motion of the tool along with the horizontal movement of the assembly excavates a trench
equal in length to the horizontal movement and the excavated material is sucked out through
the rigid tube along with the drilling mud. This drilling mud is then led into large tanks where
the excavated material settles down. The mud is replanished with bentonite and is returned to
the trench. After excavating the trench to the full depth, it is backfilled by tremic concrete.
Alternate panels are first completed, and the intervening panels are subsequently excavated and
backfilled with concrete.
This process is suitable for making of cut-offs in sand material and it is for the first
time that this process has been adopted in Obra dam in India (Fig. 5.12)








Fig. 5.12 Cross section of Obra Dam U.P.








Fig. 5.13 Upstream blanket

Upstream Blanket
(i) Advantages
An impervious clay blanket placed upstream of a dam and connected to the impervious
section is a convenient way of effecting moderate reduction in the amount of seepage (Fig.
5.13). The quantity of seepage is some what less than inversely proportional to the total length
of impervious material. The effectiveness of a blanket depends upon the proportionate increase
in number of equipotential drop that results from its addition to the dam. A blanket is
advantageous only when an appreciable length of the path of flow can be affected by a blanket
of reasonable length.


147
(ii) Length of blanket
Usually the material of the blanket is so tight in relation to pervious stratum that it is not
necessary to consider flow through the blanket in determining the blanket length. The length of
the blanket is given by (Fig. 5.13).

pq
b q p d h K
L
. . . .
= (5.17)
in which L = length of upstream blanket in metres.
K = mean horizontal permeability coefficient of the pervious stratum.
h = gross head in metres on impervious upstream blanket.
d = depth of pervious stratum in metres
p = percentage (stated as a decimal) of flow under the dam without a blanket,
to which it is desired to reduce the seepage by means of the blanket. For
example, if the seepage is required to be reduced to 25% of its original
value, then p = 0.25.
b = length of impervious portion of base of dam in metres.
q = flow under dam, without a blanket, per metre of dam K. (h/b). d.

(iii) Thickness of blanket
The thickness of the blanket is a function of the relative permeability of the blanket,
permeability of the foundation material and its depth. Theoretically it should vary in thickness
from zero at its upper edge to the maximum where it joins the impervious section of the dam.
The thickness of blanket t at distance h from upstream toe of blanket may be
determined from the equation,
t = ( K
2
/K
1
) x b x ( B/d ) (5.18)
where
t = thickness of blanket at point under consideration,
b = distance from point under consideration to upstream toe of blanket,
K
1
=

average permeability of stratum,
K
2
= permeability of blanket,
B = length of blanket from upstream toe to impervious section
d = depth of pervious stratum in meter.
For normal condition the thickness of upstream blanket is kept between 1.5 to 3.0 m
and length about 10 times the head of ponded water. In case of fine sand or silty foundations,
the length of blanket is kept 15 times the head.


Pressure Relief Wells
The primary purpose of relief wells is to reduce artesian pressures which otherwise
would cause formation of sand boils and piping. Relief wells also intercept and provide
controlled outlets for seepage which otherwise would emerge uncontrolled downstream of the
dam. Theoretically, piping occurs when the uplift pressure at a point at some level in the
foundation near downstream toe reaches, is greater than the combined weight of soil and water
148
above it. If the thickness of impervious layer is equal to the reservoir head, h
1
, the uplift
pressure beneath the layer cannot exceed the weight of layer, because the saturated weight of
soils equals approximately twice of water. Thus, if the thickness of the top impervious
structure is equal to the reservoir head, there is no danger against piping. In this situation no
further treatment of foundation is required. If the thickness of the top impervious stratum is
less than reservoir head, h, but is too thick for treatment by drainage trenches or if the pervious
foundation is stratified, pressure relief wells are required.
Relief wells should be designed to penetrate into the principal pervious strata to obtain
efficient pressure relief, especially where the foundation is stratified. Whereas full penetration
is desirable in case of shallow depth of pervious aquifers (6 m to 9 meter thickness), at least
0.50 percent penetration should be ensured into thicker aquifers. Generally depths of wells
equal to the height of the dam is satisfactory.
Wells should be spaced sufficiently close together (generally 15 metre apart) to
intercept seepage and reduce uplift pressures between wells. The wells must offer little
resistance to infiltrator of seepage and discharge there of. The wells must be so designed that
they do not become ineffective due to clogging or corrosion.
Where no control measures are present, relief wells should be so designed that pressure
gradients between wells or downstream from the wells do not exceed 0.5 to 0.6. Where down-
stream berms are provided pressure gradient between wells should not exceed 0.6 to 0.7.
The slots in the well screen must have adequate area and at the same time be of such
size as to prevent movement of filter through the screen after development of the well and shall
satisfy the following criteria.

slotwidth
filter D
85
1.2
or
er Holediamet
filter MinD
85
1.0

The gradation of the filter must also comply with the following criteria

sand D Min
filter D Max
85
85
) (
) (
5.0
and
sand D Max
filter D Min
15
15
) (
) (
4.0

The well screen consists of G.I. pipe 10 cm to 15 cm diameter slotted with 4.75 mm to
6 mm by 50 mm size opening covering about 10 percent of the circumferential area of the pipe.
Vertical slotting is preferable to horizontal slotting. The pipe should be coated with anti-
corrosive paint or regularized after slotting. A type design of pressure relief well is illustrated
in fig. 5.14.



149


















Fig. 5.14 Type design of relief well


In fig. 5.11 appropriate treatments for the following foundation conditions are
illustrated.
1. Pervious foundation for shallow depth.
2. pervious foundation extending to a moderate depth.
3. Pervious foundation extending to great depth.
4. Thin impervious layer underlain by pervious foundation.
5. Impervious layer of thickness greater than 3 m and less than the height of the dam.

5.8 Drainage In Earth Dams
Drainage in earth dams is primarily provided to bring the phreatic line well within the
downstream face. A proper drainage system also helps in avoiding heaving and piping by
arresting the soil particles, which may otherwise move by seepage discharge. The drainage
system also reduces the pore water pressure in the downstream portion of the dam and thus the
stability of the downstream face is increased.
Design of drainage arrangement is governed mainly by the height of the dam,
availability of pervious material, and the permeability of the foundation. Different types of
arrangements are shown in fig. 5.15 and short description of each follows.





150
Horizontal drainage blanket
The horizontal blanket is provided over that portion of the foundation downstream from
the impervious zone of the dam where high upward seepage forces exist. The blanket must be
pervious to drain off effectively and its design should fulfill the usual filter criteria, in order to
prevent the movement of particles of the foundation or embankment by seepage discharge.
They may be provided on homogeneous pervious foundations overlain by thin impervious
layers, in order to stabilize the foundation and relieve pressures that may break through the
impervious layer. The requirement of the length of blanket may be determined theoretically by
means of flow net, provided the horizontal and vertical permeability of the foundation are
known. Generally a length three times the height of dam is sufficient. The horizontal blanket is
generally combined with a rock toe (Fig. 5.15 a).

Chimney Drains
The main disadvantage of the horizontal drainage blankets is to make the earth dam
embankment stratified and consequently more pervious in the horizontal direction. The
inclined or vertical chimney drains are thus provided in many homogeneous dams to intercept
seepage water before it reaches the downstream slope. A number of dams with chimney
arrangements have recently been constructed in this country.( Fig. 5.15)




Fig.5.15 Types of drainage arrangements


Rock Toe
The rock toe consists of sizes usually varying from 15 cm to 20 cm ( Fig. 5.16 ).
Transition filter is required to be provided between the homogeneous fill and the rock toe. The
filter usually comprises



151
30 cm thick layer of fine sand (15% size = 0.09 mm)
45 cm thick layer of coarse sand (15% size 0.81 mm)
60 cm thick layer of gravel (15% size = 7.3 mm).










Fig. 5.16 Rock toe and filter


The capacity of the filter should as a rule be kept twice the discharge calculated by the
Darcys formula.
The minimum required height of rock toe is governed by two factors
(a) The minimum allowable cover on the phreatic line.
(b) Downstream water level.
A minimum cover of 1 m between the seepage line and downstream slope is considered
adequate. The height of rock toe is generally kept between 1/3 to 1/4 the height of the dam.
The top of rock toe must be sufficiently higher than the tail water level to prevent any
wave splashes on the downstream face. Sometimes it may not be economical to raise the level
of rock toe for this purpose. In such cases stone pitching extending to a minimum vertical
height of 1.5 m above the downstream-H.F.L. is provided in continuation of the rock toe.
Generally the discharge face (inward face) of rock toe is kept at slope of 1:1 and the
outer face is a continuation of the downstream slope. In case of high dams, considerable
economy can be affected by providing a berm 3 m to 6 m wide at top of the rock toe and
reducing its outer slope to 1.5:1 to 2:1.

Toe Drains and Drainage Trenches
The purpose of these drains is to collect the seepage from the horizontal blanket which
discharges into the spillway stilling basin or into the river channel below the dam. Toe drains
are also used on impervious foundations to ensure that any seepage that may come through the
foundation or the embankment is collected and the ground water is kept below the surface to
avoid the creation of boggy areas below the dam. The toe drains ( Fig. 5.17 ) may be of
vitrified clay or perforated asphalt dipped corrugated metal pipe. Drainage trenches can be
used to control seepage where the top stratum is thin and pervious foundation is shallow so that
the trench can be built to penetrate the aquifer substantially. Where the pervious foundation is
deep, a drainage trench of any reasonable depth would attract only a small portion of under

152
seepage, its effect would be local and detrimental because the under seepage would bypass
the trench. A typical design of drainage trench is shown in fig. 5.18









Fig 5.17 Typical toe drain








Fig. 5.18 Details of drainage trench

The filter comprising the drainage layers should be designed in accordance with the
filter criteria.

5.9 Stability of Slopes
Methods of Investigating Stability of Slopes
Every soil mass which has slope at its end is subjected to shear stresses on internal
surfaces in the soil mass, near the slope. This is due to the force of gravity which tries to pull
down the portions of the soil mass, adjoining the slope. If, however, the shearing resistance of
the soil is greater than the shearing stress induced along the most severely stressed or critical
internal surface, the slope will remain stable; and if on the other hand the shearing resistance of
the soil, at any time after the construction of the slope becomes less than the induced shearing
stress, the portion of soil mass between the slope and the critical internal surface will slide
down along this surface, until, the new slope formed by the sliding mass makes the shearing
stress less than the shearing strength of the soil. (The stability of slopes of earth-structures thus
depends on the shear resistance or strength of the soil.)
The well known method of investigating stability of slope is Swedish method, devised
by Swedish Engineers in 1922 which is simple, and therefore, is more commonly used.
In this method, the curved slip surface is taken to be an arc of circle with a certain
centre. There will be a number of such likely slip circles with their respective centres. It is
necessary to pick up the most dangerous of critical slip circle i.e. that circle along which the


153
soil has the least shear resistance. The centre of this circle is located by trial and error.
Below are shown methods of locating the critical slip circle in the case of various types of
soils, assuming that the soil slope is of homogeneous structure, i.e., it consists of one type of
soil only.

(i) Cohesive soil
Let PHV ( Fig.5.19 ) be any one slip circle with center O
1
, x is the distance of the
centroid G of area DVHP from the centre O
1
. The position of G can be obtained in the same
manner as the centroid of an irregular plane area.
Actuating moment which may
= W.x kg metres
cause a slip along surface PHV












Fig. 5.19 Slip circle method

where, W = weight of soil mass of area DVHP and length one metre.
For cohesive soil = 0 and, its shearing resistance depends on cohesion only and is the
same along the entire surface VHP.
The maximum resisting moment mobilized by the soil to prevent the likely Occurrence
of a slip.
= cohesive shear resistance developed along VHP
= (L x 1) x c x R kg metres
= cLR kg metres
where L = length of arc VHP in meters
c = unit cohesion in kg/m
2

R = radius of likely slip circle in metres
But, L = R where is the angle of arc VHP, in radians
Maximum resisting moment = c R R kg metre
= c R
2
kg metre



154
Factor of safety against slipping = Maximum resisting moment
along surface VHP actuating moment

x W
cR
.
2

=
Various other slip circles like the above said one, e.g. QH
1
V, SH
2
V, TH
3
V, etc. are
drawn to scale and the factor of safety is found, as shown above, for each such slip circle. The
slip circle giving the minimum factor of safety is the critical slip circle, because, the failure, if
it occurs, will occur along this, slip circle. This critical slip circle is located as shown below.
The values of the factor of safety worked out for various slip circles say four, are
plotted as shown in fig. 5.19, and a curve is drawn passing through the tops of the ordinates
representing the four values of the factors of safety corresponding to four slip circles. The
lowest point on this curve is noted and a vertical line is drawn through it, meeting the top of
soil mass at a point say Z; V and Z then mark the two points through which the required
critical slip circle will pass.

(ii) c- Soil
The shear strength of such a soil due to cohesion and internal friction varies from point
to point along the slip circle. The equation for shear strength of this soil is, S = c + p
n
tan ,
kg/m
2
where, c is constant along the slip circle but p
n
which is the pressure normal to the slip
circle due to weight of soil varies from point to point along the slip circle. The method of
locating the critical slip circle is as follows:
The whole soil mass adjoining the slope, is divided into vertical strips or slices as
shown in fig. 5.20 (i).
The fifth strip from the left in the figure it taken for the study and is shown on a bigger
scale in fig. Fig. 5.20 (ii). Taking one running metre of the strip, its equilibrium is practically
due to two forces only viz; its weight W
5
and its shearing strength S
5
along the curved surface
of length l
5
in at the bottom of the strip. The weight W
5
is equivalent to two forces,












Fig. 5.20 Swedish method for c - soil



155
namely, W
n5
which is normal to the curved surface and, the tangential force W
t5
which is
tangential to the curved surface as shown in fig. 5.20. We will, therefore have the equation,
S
5
= ( c. l
5
+ W
n5
tan ) kg
where, c.l
5
=

cohesive strength per metre length of the strip and W
n5
tan = frictional strength
per metre length of the strip.
The moment of this shear strength is
= R. S
5
, kg metres
= R ( c.1
5
+ W
n5
tan ) kg metres
and the moment of shear strength
along the entire slip surface VHP = R ( c.1
5
+ W
n5
tan )
= R ( c
t5
+ W
n5
tan )
= R (c.L.+ tan W
n5
) kg.m
where, L = length of the whole slip surface VHP.
The actuating moment along slip surface at bottom of the strip R.. W
t5
kg metres
The actuating moment along
the entire slip surface PHV = R W
t5
kg metres
The factor of safety, against shear = resisting moment
failure, along slip surface PHV actuating moment
or, in general, the factor of safety =
t
n
W
W L c

+ tan .


The weight of each strip one metre long, is proportional to its area and this latter can be
found approximately by the trapezoidal formula, or, accurately by a planimeter. W
n
and W
t
of
each strip can be found graphically by drawing the triangle of forces for each strip as shown in
fig. 5.20 (i).
The factor of safety is found for each of other slip circles and the critical circle is
located as usual. It should be carefully noted, that, the tangential components of the weights of
the first few strips near the toe of the slope, will resist the slipping tendency and these
components must therefore, be taken with their proper sign.

Location of critical slip surface
The location of critical slip surface by trial and error entails much loss of time. To save
time in locating the centre of critical slip circle for homogeneous sections, Fellenius
construction, for locating the line on which the centre of the critical circle is most likely to lie,
is generally adopted. Various circles with center on this line are tried until the one with
minimum factor of safety is found.
According to the Fellenius construction, the position of the line on which the centre of the
critical circle lies depends only



156











Fig . 5.21 Fellenius method of locating line of center for critical slip circle

on the height and slopes of the embankment. Referring to fig. 5.21, the values of , and are
taken from Table 5.3 for the embankment slope. From point A and B these angles are drawn to
meet at point 01. Point 02 is then located at horizontal distance of 4.5 H, starting directly below
point A, and at a depth equal to H, the height of the embankment. The line joining 01 and 02
points is the line on which the centre of the critical circle lies. The maximum depth to which
the rupture can occur is limited by the presence of hard stratum underneath.

Table 5.3
Recommended values of and - Fellenius construction

Slope
hor: vertical

1:1 27.5 37
2:1. 25 32

3:1 25 35
4:1 25 36
5:1 25 37

Pore Water Pressure
When moist soil mass is loaded without permitting air/or water to escape, part of the load
causes the soil grains to deform elastically or to undergo non-elastic rearrangement but without
significant change in their solid volume. This part of the load is carried on the soil skeleton as
effective stress. The remaining portion of the load is carried by stress in the air and water
contained in the voids and is known as pore-water pressure.
The pore-water pressures below the phreatic line reduces the shearing strength of the soil mass
in accordance with Coulombs equation.
S = c + ( pn u ) tan

157
The practice of accounting for pore pressures in drawdown and steady-seepage
conditions is different from that of end of construction conditions.

Pore Pressures in drawdown and steady conditions:
Pore pressures on any slice of a failure are taken to act normally on the arc surface and are
equivalent to the weight of water transmitted by that slice. Consider a slice ( Fig. 5.22 ) below
phreatic line and above dead storage level or tail water level. If h is the average height and d its
width, force due to pore pressure.
u = h.w x arc length
= h x w x d sec .
The resisting force due to pore pressure will, be reduced to u tan .

= ( h d.w. sec ) tan
= (h x arc length) x w tan










Fig. 5.22 Pore water pressure

If are length for a small slice be taken approximately equal to the width of the slice, the
contribution of pore pressure becomes (h.b.w.) tan
With the above approximation the effect of pore pressures will amount in reducing the
saturated weight W of the soil by the weight of water of the same volume. This would mean
that submerged weight may he taken for saturated weight of soil while calculating the resisting
component. Hence a_steady seepage an drawdown conditions, weigh of soil below phreatic
line and above dead storage level is taken as submerged for calculating resisting forces and
saturated for actuating forces.

Pore Pressure just after construction
In this condition the pore pressures are maximum and hence their correct evaluation
from proper consolidation test is advisable. It has been found that the pore pressure generally
varies from 1.1 H to 1.25 H. In the absence of a reliable test it is reasonable to adopt a value of
pore pressures equal to 1.25 H.
The effect of pore pressures estimated on above principle is calculated separately as u
tan u being 1.25 H sec , and is deducted from the value of pn tan .

158
Critical cases for analysis

Reservoir drawdown The upstream slope of the dam is subjected to most adverse
condition during sudden drawdown. When sudden drawdown takes place, the water pressure
acting on the upstream slope is removed above the drawdown level while the saturation line
remains higher. Since the drainage is not as rapid as the drawdown, this means that the
resisting forces are reduced in comparison to actuating forces. To take account of this fact in
stability computations, the resisting forces are calculated for submerged weight of the material
below water surface, and the actuating forces are calculated for the saturated weight of the
material below water surface. All materials below drawdown level are submerged, and
therefore, resisting and actuating force below the drawdown level are calculated on the basis of
the submerged weight of the materials.
It has been observed for homogeneous section that drawdown to an intermediate pool level
usually presents a more critical case than complete draw down. In all upstream slope stability
analysis, therefore, such a condition should be tested. For each slip circle, the intermediate
surface of the pool is assumed to intersect the embankment slope directly below the centre of
the circle. This represents the worst condition for assumed failure arc.

Steady Seepage Condition
The effect of seepage through the embankment is to reduce embankment stability by
increasing the actuating forces and decreasing the resisting forces. For the analysis of this
condition, reservoir is assumed to be at the normal storage level in which case the phreatic line
is assu
1
riecl to have fully developed. The upstream slope will be subjected to water pressure
from the reservoir while the rest of darn will be subjected to pore pressure from the established
flow net. This condition is critical for the downstream slope only.

End of Construction Condition
Stability at the end of construction is most critical for homogeneous embankments
constructed of plastic materials. Immediately on completion of embankment there would be
construction pore pressure due to consolidation of fill under the embankment load. There
would be no water loads.

Earthquake
There is little experience on the performance of earth dams shaken by earthquakes in
seismically active regions. Practice to account the horizontal acceleration caused by earthquake
is, however, a common practice in stability computations for darns lying in seismic active
regions.
It is recommended that applicable values of seismic coefficient may be taken into
account in stability computation for steady seepage conditions, while half of its values be
adopted in case of sudden drawdown and end of construction conditions.


159
Factor of Safety
Factor of safety in the present context is known as the ratio of forces resisting
movement to these tending to produce movement.
The minimum required factor of safety in earth dams never exceeds 1.5, which may
seem to be quite a low figure. There are several reasons for the apparent lowness of the
acceptable factor of safety in earth dam designs.
(a) The figures used for the strength of earth materials are necessarily taken quite close
to the minimum values obtained, and the strength which would be mobilized before disastrous
failure could occur would usually be much greater.
(b) Usually the factor of safety increases with the passage of time owing to
consolidation etc. so that a factor of safety which was originally 1.5 may eventually become 2.
(c) In most cases the forces tending to produce movement are taken at the upper
possible limit but may actually be materially less than the assumed values.
According to the U.S.B.R. practice a factor of safety of 1.5 is adopted for all
conditions.
The factor of safety as recommended by U.S.B.R. are on higher side, High dams have
recently been designed with lower factor of safety up to 1.25 for reservoir drawdown and end
of construction conditions. When under earthquake condition, factor of safety of unity is
considered adequate.

Tentative section
For fixing tentative section of earth dams the upstream and downstream slopes may be
taken from table 5.4 given by Terzaghi.
Table 5.4
Recommended Dam Slopes-Terzaghi

Type of material U.S. slope D.S. slope

Homogeneous well graded h : v h : v
material 2 : 1 2 : 1
Homogeneous coarse silt
Homogeneous silt clay or clay 3 : 1 2 : 1
Height less than l5m or so 2 : 1 2 : 1
Height more than 15m or so 3 : 1 2 : 1
Sand or sand and gravel with
clay core 3 : 1 2 : 1
With R.C. core wall 2 : 1 2 : 1





160
5.10 Selection of Type of Earth Dams

The selection of type of dam i.e. earth, rock fill, concrete, concrete gravity, concrete
arch, buttress etc. When a particular site favours an earth dam, a further decision must be made
as to the type of earth dam.
The type of earth dam would be dictated essentially by the materials available at or near
the site as also the foundations. In the interest of economy, the design of earth dam should be
adopted to the full utilization of the available materials. Thus, if nothing but sand is available
the design should utilize the sand in the natural state for the bulk of the dam, limiting the
imported material like clay or silt fore providing impervious member to the minimum.
Earth dams may be classified into three main types :
1. Homogeneous type
2. Zoned type and
3. Diaphragm type

Homogeneous Type

A purely homogeneous type of dam is composed entirely of a single type of material as
shown in fig. 5.23 a. Since the action of seepage is not favourable in such a purely homogen-
eous section, the upstream slope should be, relatively flat for safety in rapid drawndown (when
embankment is relatively impervious, and the downstream slope must also be flat to provide a
slope sufficiently stable to resist the forces resulting from a high saturation level. For a
completely homogeneous section, it is inevitable that seepage emergence will occur in the
downstream slope approximately at about one third the water depth regardless of permeability
of material or slope flatness. Though formerly very common, the pure homogenous section has
fallen into disuse because of the development of a modified homogeneous section (Fig. 5.23 b)
in which small amount of carefully placed drainage materials control the action of seepage
and thus permit much steeper slopes.












Fig . 5.23 Homogenous type earth dams


161
A fully homogeneous section might be found convenient where the slopes are
required to be flat because of a weak foundation, although even in this case some drainage
measures may be necessary. The modified homogeneous type of embankment is most suitable
in localities where readily available soils show practically no variation in permeability.

Zoned type
It is the most common type of dam section in which a central impervious core is
flanked by shells of materials considerably more pervious. The shells enclose and protect the
core; the upstream shell affords stability against rapid drawdown and the downstream shell acts
as a drain that controls the line of seepage. For most effective control of steady seepage or
drawdown seepage, the section should have a progressive increase in permeability from the
centre towards each slope ( Fig. 5.24 ). Innumerable modifications might be made of the zoned
type section depending upon the arrangements of seepage control and drainage arrangements.









Fig. 5.24 Zone type earth dam section

The width, of core in the zoned type can be chosen, within reasonable limits, to meet
the best adjustment in the quantity and the cost of impervious soils available. The minimum
width should be adequate to reduce seepage and permit ease of construction. The minimum
base width should be equal to the height of the embankment. If the width is less than the height
of the embankment, the dam is considered as diaphragm type. Similarly if the core is larger
than the size shown in fig. 5.25 the dam may be considered as homogeneous type.











Fig. 5.25 Size range of impervious cores in zoned embankment-after U.S.B.R.


162
All transitions between materials, of different gradations subject to seepage must be
checked for filter action. If the gradation range between adjacent zones of the dam or founda-
tion is so great that a natural filter will not be established, a special filter zone will be required
to provide the necessary filter action.

Diaphragm type ( Fig. 5.26 )
In this type the entire dam is composed of pervious material i.e. sand, gravel or rock
and thin diaphragm of impervious materials is provided to retain water. The diaphragm may
consist of earth, cement concrete, or other material in the central or upstream face of the dam.
The position of the impervious diaphragm may vary to extreme limits-upstream face on one
side and central core on the other end. The intermediate cases are termed as burned blanket or
inclined diaphragm type as shown in fig. 5.27.


Fig. 5.26 Diaphragm type earth dam


Fig. 5.27 Inclined diaphragm type earth dam

Internal diaphragm of rigid materials like concrete have the disadvantage of getting
ruptured due to settlement of the dam.









Fig. 5.28 (a) Nanak Sagar dam (Constructed after breach) U.P.




163








Fig. 5.28 (b) Section of the u.s. riprap


It is, therefore, preferable to have core of the earth. The width of the earth core at the
base should be 0.3 to 0.5 times the height of dam. There are certain advantages and
disadvantages in locating the core centrally or in an inclined position. However, the
construction convenience dictates the position of the core. An inclined diaphragm provides
slightly better stability against earthquake.

5.11 MAINTENANCE & TREATMENT OF COMMON TROUBLES IN EARTH
DAMS

Proper maintenance of an earth dam is very essential. Small defects arising from the
negligence may cause breach which may lead to serious damage and devastation.
In spite of good design, some problems may be subsequently met with during the
operation of the reservoir. The following are the most common troubles which may need
proper and timely treatment.
1. Horizontal piping through embankment.
2. Boils.
3. Boggy areas downstream of the dam, and
4. Cracks in the embankment.
15.12 DESIGN OF EARTH DAM

Design Example 5.2
An earth dam has to be constructed at a place where soils have the following
characteristics:
(i) Sand mixed with gravel
(a) Saturated unit wt 2 gm/cc (2 tIm
3
)
(b) Sp. Gravity 2.65
(c) Angle of internal friction 33
(d) Cohesion nil
(e) Dry unit wt. 1.6 gm/cc (1.6 t/m
3
)
This material constitutes the foundation to a depth of 15.Om, below the base of the dam
after which rock is available.

164
(ii) Silty clay
(a) Saturated unit wt. 1.76 gm/cc (1.76 tim
2
)
(b) Specific Gravity 2.55
(c) Angle of internal friction 12
(d) Cohesion 3.t/m
2

The material has to be obtained from an average distance of 1.5 km.
(iii) Levels
(a) River bed level 103.0 m
(h) Dead storage level 123.0 m
(c) F.S.L. 155.0 m
(d) H.F.L. 158.0 m

Assume the material above phreatic surface to be 40% saturated.
(e) Earthquake factor
(i) For sudden drawdown = 0.15
(ii) For steady seepage = 0.10
(iii)For just after construction = 0.05
Design a suitable section of the earth dam and indicate the position of seepage line. Also
draw cross section of the dam.

Design

1. Type of Dam Section
As both pervious and impervious materials are available in the close proximity, the dam
shall consist of a composite section. The shell of the dam will consist of pervious material and
core of impervious material. A cutoff trench up to rock level with 1: 1 side slopes shall also be
provided to check the seepage through the foundation material.

2. Tentative cross section of the Dam
(i) Freeboard
(a) Freeboard for wave action:
h
w
= 0.032 VF + 0.763 - 0.27 1
4
F
where h
w
= height of wave in metres
V = wind velocity in km. p.h.
F = fetch in kms.
Assume V = 150 km. ph. and F = 20 kms.
Then h
w
= 0.032 20 150x + 0.763 - 0.271
4
20
=1.958 metres
Along slopes, the waves rides to a height of 1.5 h
w
.
1.5 h
w
= 150 x 1958 = 2.94 metres
(b) Freeboard due to settlement
165
Settlement allowance of 2% is generally taken both for the foundation and the
embankment.
Settlement = 60 x
100
2
= 1.20 m (Assuming dam height to be 60 m)
For earth dam more than 30 m in height, an extra settlement allowance of 1% due to
earthquake is also taken.
Settlement due to earthquake =
100
1 60x
= 0.6 m
Total freeboard due to settlement = 1.20 + 0.60 m
= 1.80m.
Thus total freeboard required both due to wave action and settlement = 2.94 + 1.80 m
= 4.74 m.
Provide a freeboard of 5.0 m above H.F.L.
(ii) Top level and width
(a) Top R.L. of dam = 158 + 5 = 163.0 m
Height of dam above bed level = (163.0103.0) = 60m
(b) Crest width :
B
t
= H
3
5

where B
t
= Crest width in metres
H = Height of dam in metre
B
t
= 60
3
5
= 12.90 m

Provide crest width of dam as 13.0 m.
(iii) Slopes : For 60.0 m height of the dam adopt 3.5: 1 slope in the upstream and 3 : I in
the downstream; Adopt slopes of the core material 1 : 1.

(iv) Pitching
Upstream : To prevent destructive wave action, the upstream slope shall be provided with
0.75 m thick stone pitching over 0.5 m thick graded shingle right up to the top of the dam.
Downstream The downstream slope shall be provided with 0.5 m stone pitching to check
the erosion due to surface runoff.

3. Foundation
(3) Shear stress in the foundation
The horizontal shear under the slope of dam is given by
S =

2
45 tan
2
1 2
2
2
2
1

o
h h

where
1
= Equivalent angle of internal friction for composite section.
= Effective wt/cum of the composite material, and h
1
and h
2
are heights top
166
and toe of the dam respectively to the rock level.
Here h
1
= 75m, h
2
=15m, b = 2l0m

a
= Average effective wt. of the composite material
=
210
60 76 . 1 150 2 x x +
= 1.93 t / cum.
Equivalent angle of internal friction for C soil is given by
tan
1
=
1
1
tan
h
h C

+

For shell material, C = 0,
1
= 33
For core material, C = 3 t /m
2
= 12
tan
1
=
60 76 . 1
12 tan 60 76 . 1 3
x
x x
o
+
= 0.239

1
= 13.5 (for core material).
Since the dam is of composite section, the equivalent value of internal friction
=
210
5 . 13 60 33 150
o o
x x +
= 27.4 (for composite section)
Total shear S =

2
4 . 27
45 tan 93 . 1
2
15 75
2
2 2 o
o
x
= 1926.5 t say 1900 tonnes.
Average unit shear in the foundation (Sa) =
210
1900

= 9.05 t/m
2
Maximum unit shear = 1.4 Sa = 1.4 x 9.05= 12.67 t/m
2

(ii) Factor of Safety against foundation shear :
We should now work out the factor of safety in the foundation against shear at the point of
maximum unit shear which occurs at 84 m (0.4 b) from shoulder. The mean effective unit wt. r
at this location.
=
51
1 15 2 36 x x +
= 1.706 t /m
3

Shear strength at point of maximum shear = c + h tan
1

Substituting c = 0,
1
= 33
r = 1.706t/m
2
and h =51 m, we get
Shear strength = l.706 x 51 x tan 33
= 1.706 x 51 x O.65 = 56.5 t m
2

Factor of safety against shear at point of maximum shear
=
67 . 12
5 . 56
= 4.45 okay



167
4. Position of Seepage Line in the Composite Section
The shells of the dam which consist of sand and gravel are several times as pervious as the
central portion of the dam consisting of silty clay. The upstream pervious shell has practically
no effect on the position of seepage line and the downstream shell will act as a drain. Hence in
computing the position of the seepage line, the effect of the outer shell should be neglected.
(a) Construction of base parabola:
The focus of the base parabola is located at the downstream toe of the core denoted by F.
Taking focus as origin, the equation of base parabola is given by
x =
0
2
0
2
2y
y y

where x and y are the points on the parabola and y
0
is the focal distance which is given by y
0

y
0
=
2 2
d h + - d


Fig.5.29 Design Problem Dimension





From figure 5.29, h = 52 m and d = 96.6 m

Y
0
=
2 2
6 . 96 52 + - 96.6 = 13.106 say 13.0 m
Thus x =
13 2
13
2 2
x
y
or y = 169 26 + x

168
The values of y for different values of x are given below :
x = 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 80 96.6
y = 13 20.7 26.2 30.8 348 38.3 41.6 44.6 47.4 50.1 52.0
Thus the base parabola is plotted for the above computed values of x & y.
(b) Correction at ingress and egress points
The base parabola intersects the downstream face at a distance a + a along the face from
the point A.
a + a =
cos 1
0

y

Substituting y
0
= 13 m and = 45, we get
a + a =
o
45 cos 1
13

= 44.4m
From fig. 15.7,
a a
a
+

= 0.34
or a = 034 x 44.4 = 151 m.
Thus the seepage line meets the downstream face tangentially at point C, 15.1 m along the
face from the point Co. The seepage line is completed at the downstream end by sketching a
short transition curve from point C to the base parabola.
The upstream end of seepage line is sketched with short transition curve as shown in fig.
5.30. The upstream shell material is so excessively pervious as compared to the central section
that it wi1I have no effect on the seepage line. Hence through this section the seepage is drawn
as a straight line. As the foundation material is also very pervious, the seepage line will pass
beneath the base of the dam (figure 5.29).

5. Stability Computation of Upstream and Downstream Slopes
The stability of upstream slope has been computed for the following conditions
(i) Sudden drawdown condition
(ii) Just after construction condition
Both the conditions shall be analysed with and without earthquake. The stability of the
downstream slope shall be computed for the following conditions:

(i) Steady seepage condition
(ii) Just after construction condition
Both the conditions shall be analysed with and without earthquake.
For calculating the actuating forces in sudden drowdown condition, the saturated weight of
soil is taken in drawdown range between f.s.l. and d.s.l. Below d.s.l. the submerged weight of
soil is taken while above f.s.l., the weight of soil is takesn as 40% saturated.
The unit weight of soil are being calculated hereinafter for different conditions.
(a) Sand mixed with gravel
Weight of fully saturated soil = 2 gm/cc (2 t /m
3
)
Submerged weight = 2 - 1 = 1 gm/cc = (1t / m
3
) 40% saturated weight
Let V be the volume of solids in unit volume of soil then
169
V x 2.65 +(l - V)1 = 2 or V = 0.606
Weight of 40% saturated soil
= 0.606 x 2.65 + 0.394 x
100
40
= 1.76
say = 1.75 gm / cc (1.75 t/m
3
)
(b) Silty Clay
Submerged weight = 1.76 - 1 = 0.76 gm/cc = 0.76 t/m
2

Weight of 40% saturated clay
Let V be the volume of solids in unit volume of soil then
V x 2.55 + (l-V) x 1 = 1.76; V = 0.49
Weight of 40% saturated earth = 0.49 x 2.55 + 0.51 x
100
40

= 1.45 t / m
3

For just after construction condition no pore pressure effect in sandy soil is taken into
account. Thus an amount equivalent to the value corresponding to pore pressure is to be
deducted from (W tan + c.L.).
The value of unit weight of dry sand i.e. of shell material is taken as 1.6.
The values of unit weight of shell and core material under various conditions of stability
analysis both for upstream and downstream slopes are given in Table 5.5

Table 5.5
Values of unit weight under different stability conditions

For Calculation of N For Calculation of T
Condition
Moist
Core
Moist
Shell
Shell
above
d.s.l
Shell
below
d.s.l
Core
above
d.s.l
Core
below
d.s.l
Moist
Core
Moist
Shell
Shell
above
d.s.l
Shell
below
d.s.l
Core
above
d.s.l
Core
below
d.s.l
U.S. Slopes
(i) Sudden drawdown
(a) Without Earthquake
(b) With Earthquake
(ii) Just after Const.
Condition
(a) Without Earthquake
(b) With Earthquake


1.45



1.45


1.75



1.75



1.00



1.60




1.00



1.00


0.76



1.45




0.76



0.76




1.45



1.45




1.75



1.75




2.00



2.00




1.0



1.0




1.76



1.45




0.76



0.76

Condition For Calculation of N For Calculation of T
Moist
Core
Shell
above
d.s.l
Shell
below
d.s.l
Core
below
d.s.l
Core
above
d.s.l
Moist
Core
Shell
above
d.s.l
Shell
below
d.s.l
Core
above
d.s.l
Core
below
d.s.l
D.S. Slope
(i) Steady Seepage
Condition
(a) Without Earthquake
(b) With Earthquake
(ii) Just after Construction
(a) Without Earthquake
(b) With Earthquake



1.45


1.45










1.75


1.60



1.0


1.0



0.76


0.76




0.76


1.45





1.45


1.45











1.75


1.60





1.00


1.00



1.76


1.45



0.76


0.76


170
A STABILITY COMPUTATION OF THE UPSTREAM SLOPES:
(1) Sudden Drawdown Condition
(a) Without Earthquake
Adopting the above values of the weight of different types of soils under different
conditions, the stability computations have been worked out in Table 5.6. A slip circle has been
drawn with a radius of 150 m as shown in figure 5.31. The entire circle has been divided into
nine slices.
Actuating force T = 1 [99.7 x 1.45 + 58.2 x 1.75 + 297 x l.76 + 757.6 x 2 + 92 x 0.76 + 119 x
1]
= 1 [144.60 + 102.00 + 523.00 + 1515.20 + 69.90 + 119.00]
= 2473.76 t say 2474 t.
Resisting force N = 1 [79.6 x 1.45 + 57.3 x 1.75 + 322 x 0.76 + 1694.8 x 1 + 140.5 x
0.76+3411 x 1]
= 1 [115.50 + 100.00 + 245.00 + 1694.80 + 107.00 + 3411.OO]
= 5673.3 t.
Radius of slip circle = 150 m.
Length of arc in the core material
= 2 x 150 x
360
35
=91.5m
Factor of safety =
T
L c N

+ . . tan .

N for shell material = 100 + 1694.8 + 3412
= 5205.8 say 5206 t
N for core material = 115.5 + 245.0 + 107
= 467.7 t

for shell material is 33 and for core is 12 and C = 3 t / m
2
F.S. =
2474
5 . 91 3 12 tan 5 . 467 33 tan 5206 x + +
o o

=
2474
5 . 274 2125 . 0 50 . 467 65 . 0 5206 + + x x

=
2474
5 . 274 4 . 9 3380 + +
=
2474
0 . 3749

= 1.515 Okey.








171
Table 5.6
Stability analysis of upstream slope for sudden draw down condition
S
.
N
o

Slice No.
Are
a
Sin cos
Area x
sin
Area x
cos
1 1 (Submerged shell below d.s.l.) 390 -20.5 -0.35 0.936 -136.5 365.0
2 2 (Submerged shell below d.s.I 550 -12.5 -0.208 0.978 -114.4 538.0
3
4
5
6
3
3
4
4
(Submerged shell below d.s 1.)
(Submerged shell above d.s 1.)
(Submerged shell below d.s 1.)
(Submerged shell above d.s 1.)
953
72
930
406
-3.5

10.0

-0.061

0.174.
0.998

0.984
-58.0
-4.4
162.0
70.5
951.00
71.00
915.0
400.0
7
8
5
5
(Submerged shell below d.s 1.)
(Submerged shell above d.s 1.)
497
410
20.0

0.342 0.939 170.0
140.0
467.0
385.00
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
(Submerged shell below d.s 1.)
(Submerged shell above d.s 1.)
(Submerged core below d.s 1.)
(Moist shell),
(Submerged shell above d.s 1.)
(Submerged core below d.s 1.)
(Submerged core above d.s 1.)
200
518
82
12
418
88
188
28.5


37.0
0.477


0.602
0.878


0.798
95.40
247.0
39.0
7.2
252.0
53.0
113.0
176.0
455.0
72.0
9.6
334.0
70.22
150.0
16
17
18
19
8
8
8
8
(Moist shell),
(Submerged shell above d.s 1.)
(Moist core)
(Submerged core above d.s 1.)
70
72
58
252
47.0 0.731 0.682 51.0
52.6
42.3
184.0
47.7
49.0
39.6
172.0
20 9 (Moist core) 70 55.0 0.819 0.573 57.4 40.0

Values of Area x cos
Moist Core = 39.6 + 40 = 79.6
Moist shell = 47.7 + 9.6 = 57.3
Submerged shell above d.s.l.
= 71.8 + 400.0 + 385.0 + 455.0 + 334.0 + 49.0 = 1694.8
Submerged shell below d.s.1.
= 365 + 538 + 951 + 915 + 467 + 176 = 3412
Submerged core above d.s.l. = 150 + 172.0 = 322
Submerged core below d.s.1. = 70.22 + 72.0 = 142.22

Values of Area x sin
Moist core = 42.3 + 57.4 = 99.7
Moist shell= 51.0 + 7.2 = 58.2
Submerged shell above d.s.l.
= - 4.4 + 70.5 + 140.0 + 247.0 + 252.0 + 52.60
= - 4.4 + 762.6 = 757.7
172
Submerged shell below d.s,1.
= - (136.5 + 114.4 + 5.8) + (162:0 + 170.0 + 95.4)
= - 308.9 + 427.4 = 1 18.5
Submerged core above d.s.1. = 113 + 184 = 297
Submerged core below d.s.l. = 53.0 + 39.0 = 92.0



Fig . 5.31 Graphical method of stability computation Design example


(b) With Earthquake
Earthquake factor for sudden drawdown condition, = 0.05
Increase in T = 0.05 x 5673.3
= 288.7 t.
Reduction in N tan
T for shell material =.102 + 1515.2 + 119 = 1736.2 t
T for core material = 144.8 + 523 + 69.9 = 737.7 t
Reduction in N tan = 0.05 (737.7 x 0.2125 + 1736.2 x 0.65)
= 0.05 (157 + 1130) = 64.4t
Factor of Safety with earthquake
=
7 . 2757
60 . 3684
7 . 283 0 . 2474
4 . 64 0 . 3749
=
+

= 1.34 Okay.






173
(ii) Just After Construction Condition
(a) Without Earthquake
In this condition the shell material should be assumed to be dry and the clay core material
as moist with unit weight as 1.45 tIm
3
.

Actuating forces T = 1 (99.7 x 1.45 + 58.2 x 1.75 + 297 x 1.45 + 757.6 x 1.6 + 92 x 0.76 +
119.x 1.0)
= 1 (144.8 + 102.0 + 430 + 1210.0 + 70.0 + 119.0)
= 2075.8 say 2076 t
N tan = (79.6 x 1.45 x 0.2125 + 57.3 x 1.75 x 0.65 + 322 x 1.45 x 0.2125 +
1694.8 x 1.6 x 0.65 + 140.5 x 0.76 x 0.2125 + 3411 x 1 x 0.65)
= 1 (24.6 + 65.0 + 99.4 + 1760 + 22.7 + 2220.0)
= 4191.7 t say 4192 t
Pore Pressure
For slice 6, head is 8 m; sec = 1.138, width of strip = 20 m
h x 1 sec = 182.0 t
For slice 7, head = 14m; sec = 1.252, width of strip = 20 m
h . 1 sec = 351.0 t
For slice 8, head = 18 m; sec = 1.743, width of strip = 10 m
h . 1 sec = 498.0 t
For slice 9, head = 10 m; sec = 1.743, width of strip = 10 m
h . 1 sec = 174.3 t

h. 1 sec = 182.0 + 351.0 + 498.0 + 174.3 = 1205.3 t
Now P = w h l sec = l x 1205.3
= 1205.3
P tan = 1205.3 x 0.2125
= 256 t
Factor of safety =
2076
5 . 4210
2076
256 5 . 274 0 . 4192
=
+

= 2.03 Okey.
(b) With Earthquake ( = 0.05)
Increase in T = 0.05 x 1 (79.6 x 1.45 + 57.3 x 1.75 + 322 x 1.45 + 1694.8 x 1.6 + 140.5 x 0.76
+ 34ll x l)
= 0.05 (115.5 + 100.1 + 467.0 + 2710.0 + 106.8 + 3411.0)
= 0.05 x 6910.4 = 345.5 t
Decrease in N tan
= 0.05 x 1 (99.7 x 1.45 x 0.2125 + 58.2 x 1.75 x 0.65 + 297 x 1.45 x 0.2125 + 757.6 x 1.6 x
0.65 + 92 x 0.76 x 0.2125 + 119 x l x 0.65)
= 0.05 {644.8 x 0.2125 + 1431 x 0.65}
= 0.05 x 1069.5 = 53.5 t
174
F.S.=
0 . 2421
0 . 4157
5 . 345 2076
5 . 53 5 . 4210
=
+

= 1.72 O.K

B STABILITY COMPUTATION OF DOWNSTREAM
SLOPE
(i) Steady Seepage Condition:
(a) Without Earthquake:
The stability computation have been worked out in Table 5.7. A slip circle has been drawn
with a radius of 150 m passing near the toe and touching the impervious rock. The entire slip
surface has been divided into 9 slices.
Actuating forces T = 1 x (90.8 x 1.45 + 817.5 x 1.75 + 127 x 1.76 + 17 x 0.76 + 376.3 x 1)
= 1 x (132 +1430 + 224 + 12.9 + 376.3)
= 2175.2t
N tan = 1 x {(71.3 x 1.45 + 138.3 x 0.76 + 30.6 x 0.76) 0.2125 + (l3229 x 1.75 + 3333.1 x
l) 0.65}
= {(103.3 + 105 + 23.2 ) 0.2125 + (2320+3330) x 0.65}

Table 5.7
Stability analysis of D.S. slope under steady seepage condition
S
.
N
o
.

Slice No. Area sin cos
Area x
sin
Area x
cos
1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
1

2
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
(Submerged shell below d.s.l
of fail water level)
(Submerged shell below d.s.l.)
(Submerged shell below d.s.l.)
(Submerged shell below d.s.l.)
(Moist shell)
(Submerged shell below d.s.l.)
(Moist shell below d.s.l.)
(Submerged shell below d.s.l.)
(Moist shell)
(Submerged shell below d.s.l.)
(Submerged shell below d.s.l.)
(Moist shell)
(Submerged core below p.l)
(Moist core above P.l.)
(Moist shell)
(Submerged core below p.l)
(Moist core above p.l.)
(Moist shell)
(Moist core)
260

502
655
743
89
956
380
320
420
35
23
550
135
6
206
53
59
52
51
-19

-10
- 2
+ 7

19

29


40



49


56
-0.325

-0.174
-0.035
0.122

0.325

0.485


0.643



0.755


0.835

0.945

0.935
0.999
0.992

0.945

0.875


0.766



0.656


0.550
- 84.5

-87.5
-23.0
90.5
10.8
311.0
213.5
155.0
204.0
17.0
14.8
290.0
87.0
3.8
155.6
40.0
44.5
43.5
42.5
246

495
654
737.5
88.3
903.0
359.0
280.0
367.0
30.6
17.6
345.0
103.5
4.6
135.0
34.8
38.7
28.6
28.0

175
Values of Area x sin
Moist core = 42.5 + 44.5 + 3.8 = 90.8
Moist shell above d.s.l. = 10.8 + 123.5 + 290.0 + 155.6 + 43.5 = 817.5
Submerged shell = - (84.5 + 87.5 + 23.0)+ 90.5 + 311.0 + 155.0 +14.8
= -195.0 + 571.3 = 376.3
Saturated core = 87.0 + 40.0 = 127.0
Submerged core below d.s l. = 17.0

Values of Area x Cos
Moist core = 4.6 + 38.7 + 28.0 = 71.3
Moist shell above d.s1. = 88.3 + 359.0 + 345.0 + 135.0 + 28.6 = 1320.9
Submerged core above d.s.l. or below p.1. = 103.5 + 34.8 = 138.3
Submerged core below d.s.1. = 30.6
Submerged shell below d.s.l. = 246 + 495.0 + 654.0 + 737.5 + 903.0 + 280.0 + 17.6
= 3333.1
= (231.5 x 0.2125 + 5653 x 0.65)
= 3659.2 say 3659 t.
Factor of Safety

T
L c N

+ . . tan

Length of arc (L)
= 2 x 137 x
360
36

= 86 m
cL = 3 x 86 = 258t
F.S. =
2 . 2175
3916
2 . 2175
258 3669
=
+

= 1.8
(b)With Earthquake (Earthquake factor = 0.1)
Increase in T = 0.1 x 1 (71.3 x 1.45 + 138.3 x 0.76 + 30.6 x 0.76 + 1320.9 x 1.75+3333)
= 0.1 (439 + 5653)
= 609.3t
Decrease in N tan = 0.1 [(90.8 x 1.45 + 127.0 x 1.76 + 17 x 0.76) x 0.2125 + 0.65 (817.5 x
1.75 + 376.3 x 1)]
= 0.1(368.9 x 0.2125 + 1806.3 x 0.65)
= 125.2 t
Factor of Safety =
pq
b q p d h K
L
. . . .
=
= 1.377
(ii) Just after Construction Condition:
(a) Without Earthquake Effect


176
Actuating forces T = 1 (90.8 x l.45 + 817.5 x 1.6 + 127 x 1.45 +19 x 0.76 + 376.3 x 1)
= (132 + 1313 + 184 +13 + 376)
= 2015 t
N tan = 1 [(71.3 x 1.45 + 138.3 x 1.45 + 30.6 x 0.76) 0.2125 + (1321 x 1.6 + 3333 x 1)
0.65].
= (327.4 x 0.2 125 + 5448 x 0.65)
= 3609.60 t

Pore Pressure
For slice 6, head = 2 m, sec = 1.14
Width of strip 1 = 20 m
P = wh 1 sec = 1 x 2 x 2O x l.14 = 45.6t
For slice 7, head = 8m, sec = 1.3
Width of strip 1 = 20 m
P = wh l sec = l x 1.3 x 20 = 208t
For slice 8, head = 10 m, Sec = 1.525
Width of strip 1 = 14 m
P = wh l sec =1 x lO x 14 x l.525 = 213 t
For slice 9, head = 4 m, Sec = 1.81
Width of strip 1 = 13 m
P = wh l sec = l x 4 x 1.81 x 13 = 94 t
P = 45.6 + 208 + 213 + 94 = 560.6 t
P tan = 560.0 x 0.2125 = 121 t
F.S. =
2015
6 . 3746
2015
121 258 6 . 3609
=
+
= 1.86 Okay
(b) With Earthquake:
Earthquake factor = 0.05
Increase in T = 0.05 (71.3 x 1.45 +1321 x l.6 + 1383 x 1.45 + 30.6 x 0.76 + 3333 x 1)
= 0.05 (103.2 + 2115 + 201 + 23.2 + 3333)
= 288.87 t
Decrease in tan
= 0.05 {(90.8 x 1.45 + 123 x 1.45 + 17 x 0.76) 0.2125 + (817.5 x 1.6 + 376.3 x 1)
x 0.65}
= 0.05 (329 x 0.2125 + l686.3 x 0.65) = 58.5t
F. S. =
8 . 2303
1 . 3698
8 . 288 2015
85 . 5 6 . 3746
=
+

= 1.6 O.K




177
The values of Factor of Safety under different conditions for upstream and
downstream are given in Table 5.8
The factor of safety in normal case for all conditions without earthquake is greater than 1.5
and that with earthquake is more than unity. Hence the assumed slopes of the dam section both
in the upstream and downstream are safe under all conditions. But the slip circles as marked in
fig. 5.30 may not be the critical, one; other slip circles should be drawn and for each condition
the factor of safety be calculated. The critical circle is one with minimum factor of safety.
The detailed design has been illustrated in figure 5.30

Table 5.8
Factor of Safety Under Different Conditions

Factor of Safety
SL. No. Conditions of Analysis
Without E. Q. With E. Q.
A






B
UPSTREAM SLOPE
(i ) Sudden drawdown


(ii) Just after
construction

DOWNSTREAM SLOPE
(i ) Steady Seepage


(ii) Just after
construction

1.515
Safe
> 1.5
2.03
Safe
> 1.5

1.80
Safe
> 1.5
1.86
Safe
> 1.5

1.34
Safe
> 1.0
1.72
Safe
> 1.0

1.377
Safe
> 10
1.60
Safe
> 1.0