ARBAMINCH UNIVERSITY

ARBAMINCH UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF POST GRAADUATE STUDIES

DEPARTMENT OF HYDRAULIC AND WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING

PROGRAM OF HYDRAULIC AND

HYDROPOWER ENGINEERING

DAM ENGINEERING I
ASSIGNMENT
by : abebe tarko

BY: ABEBE TARKO

ID : RMSc/097/2005

SUBMITTED TO: FIKADU F.

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Question ###1
For the data given below, design a non-overflow solid gravity dam;
a) By Zone (or Multiple-step) design method,
b) By Single step design method, and
c) Sketch the sections of the dam designed by the two methods of design

Given Data

 H ( maximum water depth to be retained)=45 m

 Tail water depth, h=0
 Top (or crest) width, L =4m
 Unit weight of concrete, =25 KN/m3
 Unit weight of water, w=10 KN/m3
 Uplift intensity factor, = 1.0
 Allowable coefficient of friction within concrete and between concrete and foundation, f = 0.65
 Ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation, Sa = 4MPa
 Minimum permissible shear friction safety factor, S.F.F = 5
 Wind velocity over water, UA = 100Km/h
 Fetch, F = 30 km
 Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation, =3MPa
 Assume there is no earth quake

Solution

a) Design the gravity dam by zone (or multiple step) design method.
 Free board
Hs = 0.032√( A F) + 0.76 – 0.24F1/4
= 0.032√(100*30) + 0.76 – 0.24(30)1/4 =1.951
HS = 1.951 ………………………significant wave height

The theoretical rise above the still water level is

1- HS= 4/3 HS = 4/3 * 1.95 = 2.60 take 3.0

Free board = 3.0m

Wave pressure

Pwave Hs

still water

0.375Hs

Total load due to wave action (PWAVE) is computed

PWAVE = 2 W
Hs2 = 2*10* (1.95)2= 76.05

PWAVE = 76.05KN

Lever arm from maximum still water level

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 01

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

= 0.375 HS = 0.375* 1.95 = 0.73

Top details Of the manipulated 3.0m free board, 2m parapet wall

1m extension of the dam section above Max- still wave load

2m parapet

MSWL 1m

1 2

4m sketch - I

ZONE 1

consists of the part above section 1 -2 it resists a new action and requires new design
computation

ZONE 2

Pwave Pm1 1m

1 Pm2 2

Pwh2 4m bm sketch - II

4/3 4/3 4/3 d/s middle third

Puv2

RESERVOIR FULL CASE

Assumptions

Neglect the weight of parapet an and assume zone 1 to be purely rectangular and the
center of gravity of this zone (zone 1) to act at center of the bottom width of the slice

By so doing we achieve safe design by dimension regarding stabilizing weight of parapet

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 02

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Manipulation of table 1

For a straight gravity dam, a moment equation may be written about the downstream middle
third involving known dimensions and forces and the unknown distance from high water to the
bottom of zone 2.

Weight and pressure forces

A.Weight of zone 1 B. Weight of zone 2

Pm1 = 4*1*1* C Pm2 = 4*1*h* C
= 4*1*1*25 = 4*1*h*25
= 100KN Pm2 =100h KN
Pm1 =100KN

C.Hydrostatic pressure force

Pwh2 = ½ * C *Z12 = ½ * 10* h2
Pwh2 = 5h2 KN

D.Uplift pressure force

For a dam slice of uniform thickness the total uplift force is obtained by applying
pressure intensity diagram to that portion of the area of the base of the dam ( slices)
on which it is assumed to act .
Puv= C w [ Za+ ½* (Z1 – Z2 ]] A
Where;
C = cohesion
Z1 = head water depth
Z2 = tail water depth
A = area of the base (bottom of Zone 2)
Cohesion C, and uplift intensity factor
When tail water depth is zero, C and are interchangeable
i.e.
when; C = 0.5,= 1.0
C =1.0,= 0.5
C = 2/3,= 0.75
So for our case, since = 1.0 (given), the value of C = 0.5
.’. P uv2 = 0.5* 10{ 0+1/2* 1[h-0])*4*1
= 0.5*10*0.5h*4*1
P uv2 = 10h (KN)
A. Wave pressure
WWAVE =76.05KN (already calculated)

Lever arm of weight is pressure forces (from d/s middle third)

PM1 ………….1/2*4-4/3 = (12-8)/6 =4/6m

PM2……………4/6 m

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 03

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

PWH2 ………….1/3 *h = h/3

PUV2 …………...2/3*4 – 4/3 = 4/3

PWAVE ………….0.73 + h

Refer table 1 for calculation of moment

Table 1. Loads and their moments

Forces (KN)
Lever arm from Moment about
S.No item Horizontal Vertical ( +ve down d/s middle third d/s middle third
(+ve force) KN ward) KN m KN-m
1 PM1 4/6 66.667
100

2 PM2 100h 4/6 66.667h

3 PWh2 5h2 h/3 -1.667h

4 PUV2 -10h 4/3 -13.333h

76.05 0.73 + h -55.517 – 76.05h

5 PWAVE

The moments are assembled or equated as

∑Mabout d/s middle =0

66.667 + 66.667h -1.667h3 – 13.333h – 55.517 –76.05h = 0

-5h3 – 68.15h + 33.449 = 0

Simplifying and rearranging

H3 + 13.63h – 6.69 = 0

Adopt Newton Raphsonmethod

F(h) = h3 + 13.63h + 6.69 F’(h) = 3h2 + 13.63

 First trial
H = 0.5 F(0.5) = 0.53 +13.63(0.5) – 6.69 = 0.25

F’(0.5) = 3* (0.5)2 + 13.63 = 14.38

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 04

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

( . ) .
H=-
' =- = -0.0174
( . ) .

 New trial
a + h = 0.5 + - 0.0174 = 0.48

 Second trial

a =0.48 f (0.48) = -0.037008

f’(0.48) = 14.3212

( . ) ( . )
h=- =- = 0.00258
( . ) .

New a = 0.48+ 0.003 = 0.48258 take 0.48

.’. h = 0.48m

Inserting the value of h into table 1 and summating horizontal and vertical forces, determine theinclination of the
resultant

∑horizontal forces = 5h2 + 76.05 = 5* ( 0.48)2 + 76.05 = 77.202

∑vertical forces = 100 + 100h -10h = 100 + 100*0.48 – 10 *0.48 = 143.2 KN

R 2 ∑

4/3 4/3 4/3

tanө = ∑horizontal forces/∑vertical forces

Where ,ө = inclination of the resultant

tanө = 77.202/143.2 = 0.53912

ө = tan -1 ( 0.53912) = 28.330

C.G

e P’ u

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 05

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

P’u= = 2*143.2KN/4m*1m= 71.6KN/m2

It is given that maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation is

 =3pa= 3000KN/m2

Since p’u<  ……………………………….Safe

Reservoir empty case

It is evident from inspection that the resultant is at the center of the block for reservoir empty
case.

Zone III [block 1] trial solution

Reservoir full
Below 0.48m depth, the D/S face must be battered to keep the resultant within the middle third.

Increments approximately equal to 15% of the depth below the top of dam within a minimum of
10ft (3.048m)

15*45m/100= 6.75m

The depth of the first block will made at

3 -0.48= 2.52m

To bring the joint to an even depth of 5m below the high water level.

Since, 2.52 < 6.75 . . . . . it is allowed.

Analytical solution

The first block in zone III is of the form shown in the fig. below

Moments are taken about point ‘o’

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 06

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

p’ =wait (load burden) above the top of the block

p2’= pm1 +p m2 =100+100h= 100+100*0.48 =148m

pm31a =2.52*4*1*γc=2.52*4*1*25= 252KN

pm31b =1/2*2.52*Δl* 1*γc=.5*2.52*25*Δl =31.5Δl (KN)

puv31 =C*γW*(Z2 +0.5Y (Z1 – Z2))*A

Where C=.5 Z1=3m , Z2 =0m, Y=1 ,A= L*1=( 4+ΔL)*1

γW= 10 =0.5*10*(0+.5*1*(3-0))*( 4+ΔL)*1

puv31 =(7.5ΔL+30 )KN

pwh31 = .5γwZ12 =.5*10*9=45KN

pw,ave=76.05KN. . . . . . . already calculated

Lever arm of weight & pressure forces (from U/S FACE or point ‘o1 ’)

P2’ =.5*4 =2m Puv31= (1/3)L = (1/3)(4+ΔL) =ΔL /3 + 4/3

Pm31a =.5*4= 2m Pwh31 = (1/3)*3 =1m

Pm31b= 4+(1/3)Δl Pw,ave=3 + .73 =3.73m
Detail calculations are presented in table-2

No. item Forces KN Lever arm Moment about the toe.

HOR.(+VE VER.(+VE, from the +ve, counter -ve, clockwise, KN.m
,d/s) KN downward), KN heel, m clockwise, KN.m
1 P2’ 148 2 296
2 Pm31a 252 2 504
3 Pm31b 31.5Δl (1/3)Δl +4 10.5Δl2-126Δl
4 Puv31 -7.5Δl-30 (1/3)Δl +4/3 2.5Δl2+20Δl+40
5 Pwh31 45 1 45
6 Pw, ave 76.05 3.73 283.667
7 ∑PH=121.0 ∑PV=24Δl+370 ∑M+VE ∑M-VE
5 =800+10.5Δl2-126Δl =368.667+2.5Δl2+20Δl
2
∑P=491+24Δl ∑M =1168.67+13Δl -106Δl

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 07

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

If vertical forces and all moments are summated, there results

ΣV=148+252+31.5∆ℓ-7.5∆ℓ-30

ΣV=(24∆ℓ+370)KN

ΣM=-296-504-10.5∆ℓ2-126∆ℓ+2.5∆ℓ2+20∆ℓ+40-45-283.6665

ΣM=-8∆ℓ2-106∆ℓ-1088.6665

ΣM=-(8∆ℓ2+106∆ℓ1088.6665) KN-m

ΣM=8∆ℓ2+106∆ℓ1088.6665 KN-m (clockwise)

The distance from the center of moments (point o) to the resultant is

xo31 =ΣM/ ΣV

which must equal ⅔ ℓ or ⅔(4+∆ℓ)

(8∆ℓ2+106∆ℓ1088.6665)/ (24∆ℓ+370)=⅔ ∆ℓ +8/3

Simplifying and re-arranging

8∆ℓ2+204.6667∆ℓ-102=0

∆ℓ2+25.5833∆ℓ-12.75=0

F(∆ℓ)=∆ℓ2+25.5833∆ℓ-12.75

Adopting Newton raphsonmethod

1st trial
a=1 F(∆ℓ)=∆ℓ2+25.5833∆ℓ-12.75

F’(∆ℓ)=2∆ℓ+25.5833

F(1)=13.8333 F’(1)=27.5833

H=- F(1)/ F’(1)= 13.8333/27.5833=-0.50151

New a=1+(-0.50151)=0.4985≈0.50

2nd=trial
a=0.5 f(0.5) =0.291665 F’(0.5)=26.5833

h=-0.291665/26.5833=-0.011

Now a=0.5+(-0.011)= 0.489

3rd trial
a=0.489 f(0.489)=-0.0006453

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 08

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

f’(0.5)=26.5833

h=-0.0006453/26.5613=0.000024

now≈0.489+0 take∆ℓ=0.49m

Reservoir empty case

ΣV=148+252+31.5∆ℓ=148+252+31.5*0.49=415.485KN

ΣM=-296-504-105.5∆ℓ2-126∆ℓ=-296-504-10.5*0.492-126*0.49=-864.26KN (clock wise)

Xav31 =ΣM/ ΣV=864.26/415.435=2.08m

⅓ ℓ =⅓(∆ℓ+4)=⅓(0.49+4)=1.497

⅔ℓ= ⅔(∆ℓ+4)=⅔(0.49+4)=2.993

Since 1.497 < Xav31 <2.993 it is safe. (It lies within the middle third)
ℓ=∆ℓ+4=0.49+4=4.49m

ZONE -3 (BLOK-2) trial solution

The value of ∆ℓ for block 2 will be found by trial

Pwave

Zone II

2.1m P’31 zone III (block 1) 3m

O1

Pwh32 l = 4.49m 3m

O2 Pm32a Pm32b
∆

Pu32

L
∆ℓd>0.58

let we take ∆ℓd =0.7m

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 09

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

weight pressure forces calculation of P’31

P’31 =P’2+Pm31a+Pm31b=148+252+31.5*0.49

P’31=415.435KN

Level arm of P’31

P’31*Xav31=P’2*X’av2+ Pm31a*Xavpm31a+ Pm31b*Xavpm31b

415.435*Xavp’31=148*2 + 252*2 + 10.5 (0.49)2 +126*0.49

Xavp’31=2.08m

Calculation of Pm32a
Pm32a= 4.49*3*25*1=336.75KN

Level arm Pm32a→ ½*4.49=2.245m

Refer table 3 for calculation of moments

s.no item Forces,(KN) Level arm Moment about u/s face o2(KN)
HorizontalVertical (-ve from u/s
(+ve u/s) downward) face (point
KN KN o2) m M(⤽) M(⤼)
1 P31 +415.435 2.08
2 Pm32a +336.75 2.245 864.261
3 Pm32b +26.25 4.723 756.004
4 Puv32 -77.85 1.73 123.980
5 Pwh32 180 2 134.681 360
6 Pwave 76.05 6.73 511.817
Calculation of P =

Pm32b=½*3*0.7*25=26.25KN

Level arm Pm32b→ 4.49 + ⅓*0.7= 4.723m

Calculation of , Puv32

Puv32 = c w(z2+½ (z1-z2))A=0.5*10(0+½*1(6-0))(4.49+0.7)=77.85

Puv32= 77.85KN

Level arm Puv32=⅓*(4.49+0.7)=1.73m

Calculation of wave

Pwave=76.05KN

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 010

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Pwave→6+0.73=6.73m

Level arm
Calculation of Pwh32=½*10*62=108KN

ΣV=700.585KN

ΣM=-1937.381KN-m (1937.381KN-m clock wise)

Xav32= ΣM/ ΣV=1931.381/700.585=2.765m

Lev el arm Pwh32→⅓*6=2

Limit ⅔*(4.49+0.7) =3.46

General equation (full reservoir level)

Both u/s batter and D/s batter refer the sketch on page 19

Weight and pressure forces

Pmm=∆Z*L*25=25∆ZL (middle rectangular slice)

Pmu=½∆Z*∆Lu*25=12.5∆Z∆Lu (U/s batter triangular slice)

Pmd=½∆Z*∆Ld*25=12.5∆Z∆Ld (D/s batter triangular slice)

Puv=0.5*10(0+½*(z-0))*(L+∆Lu+∆Ld) (up lift pressure force)

=2.5 Z(L+∆Lu+∆Ld)
Pwh =½*10*z2 =5z2 (horizontal hydrostatic pressure force)

Pwave=76.05

Pwv=½∆Lu (Z+Z-∆Z)* w (weight of water on the U/s batter of the slice)

Pwv=½∆Lu(2Z - ∆Z)*10=5∆Lu(2Z - ∆Z)

Level arm P’ →Yav+∆Lu + Xav Pmm→ Yav+∆Lu + L/2

Pmu→ Yav+⅔∆Lu Pmd → Yav+∆Lu + L+⅔∆Ld/3

Puv→ Yav+(∆Lu+ L+⅔∆Ld) ⅓ Pwh→ ⅓Z

Pwave→Z+0.73 Pwv→Yav+∆Lu (Z - ⅔∆Z)/(2Z-∆Z)

Clock wise moment →

Sign convention
Anti-clock wise moment →
⤽
⤼

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 011

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Vertical down ward → ⇣+ve

Vertical up ward → ⇡-ve
Horizontal D/s → ⇢+ve
Horizontal U/s → ⇠_ve

−∆ P’

Z Pwv L

Pwh Pmu Pmm Pmd

∆

O Y’ ∆

Puv L+∆ +∆

ΣV=P’+2.5L (10∆Z -Z)+7.5∆Z∆Lu +2.5∆Ld(5∆Z-Z)+2.5∆Lu (4Z-

∆Lu)
ΣM= P’(Yav+∆Lu+Xav)+
25∆ZL(Yav+∆Lu+L/2)+
12.5∆Z∆Lu(Yav+⅔∆Lu)+12.512.5∆Z∆Ld(Yav+∆Lu+Ld/3+5/
3Z3
+76.05(Z+0.73)+5∆Lu(2Z-∆Z)( Yav+∆Lu(Z-⅔∆Z)/(2Z-∆Z)- 2.5Z(L+∆Lu+∆Ld)( Yav+∆Lu/3
+ L/3
+∆Ld/3)
U/s middle third Yav+⅓ (L+∆Lu+∆Ld)

D/s middle third Yav +⅔ (L+∆Lu+∆Ld)

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 012

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone 1

(Trial 1)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle Middle

third. U/S third. D/S

0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 4.000 0.000 1.333 2.667

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 0 0.000 0
2 pmm 100 2 200
3 pmu 0 0 0
4 pmd 0 0 0
5 puv 0 0.000 0
6 pwh 0 0 0
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 0.73 55.517
9 Total Empty condition 0 100 2 200.00
10 Total Full reservior 76.05 100 2.555 255.517

f=allowable coefficient of friction=0.65

r= ratio of average to the maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5

A= area of the joint (A=T*1)
Sa= ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation=4000KN/m2

Minimum permisible shear friction factor SFFMax. =5

Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3000KN/m2

Empty condition
Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=50.000

Full reservoir condition

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.761
Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=50.000

Shear friction factor, SFF=(fV+rsaA)/106.049

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 013

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone 2
(Trial 1)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

0.480 0.000 0.000 0.480 4.000 0.000 1.333 2.667

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 100 2.000 200
2 pmm 48 2 96
3 pmu 0 0 0
4 pmd 0 4 0
5 puv -4.8 1.333 -6.4
6 pwh 1.152 0.16 0.18432
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 1.21 92.021
9 Total Empty condition 0 148 2 296.000
10 Total Full reservoir 77.202 143.2 2.668 381.805
f=allowable coefficient of friction=0.65

r= ratio of average to the maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5

A= area of the joint (A=T*1)
Sa= ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation=4000KN/m2

Minimum permisible shear friction factor SFFMax. =5

Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3000KN/m2

Empty condition
Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=74.000

Full reservoir condition

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.539
Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=71.600

Shear friction factor, SFF=(fV+rsaA)/104.830

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 014

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone 3 Block 1
(Trial 1)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

3.000 0.000 0.300 2.520 4.000 0.000 1.433 2.867

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 148 2 296
2 p mm 252 2 504
3 p mu 0 0 0
4 p md 9.45 4.1 38.745
5 p uv -32.25 1.433 -46.225
6 p wh 45 1 45
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 3.73 283.667
9 Total Empty condition 0 409.45 2.048 838.745
10 Total Full reservior 121.05 377.2 2.972 1121.187

Zone 3 Block 1
(Trial2)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

3.000 0.000 0.400 2.520 4.000 0.000 1.467 2.933

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 148 2 296
2 pmm 252 2 504
3 pmu 0 0 0
4 pmd 12.6 4.133 52.08
5 puv -33 1.467 -48.4
6 pwh 45 1 45
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 3.73 283.667
9 Total Empty condition 0 412.6 2.065 852.080
10 Total Full reservior 121.05 379.6 2.983 1132.347

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 015

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone 3 Block 1
(Trial 3)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

3.000 0.000 0.450 2.520 4.000 0.000 1.483 2.967

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 148 2 296.000
2 p mm 252 2 504.000
3 p mu 0 0 0.000
4 p md 14.175 4.15 58.826
5 p uv -33.375 1.483 -49.506
6 p wh 45 1.000 45.000
7 Pwv 0 0.000 0.000
8 Pwave 76.05 3.73 283.667
9 Total Empty condition 0 414.175 2.074 858.826
10 Total Full reservior 121.05 380.8 2.988 1137.987

Zone 3 Block 1

(Trial 4)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

3.000 0.000 0.490 2.520 4.000 0.000 1.497 2.993

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 148 2 296
2 pmm 252 2 504
3 pmu 0 0 0
4 pmd 15.435 4.163333 64.26105
5 puv -33.675 1.496667 -50.40025
6 pwh 45 1 45
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 3.73 283.6665
9 Total Empty condition 0 415.435 2.08 864.26105
10 Total Full reservior 121.05 381.76 2.993 1142.5273

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 016

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

f=allowable coefficient of friction=0.65

r= ratio of average to the maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5

A= area of the joint (A=T*1)

Sa= ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation=4000KN/m2
Minimum permissible shear friction factor SFFMax. =5

Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3000KN/m2

Empty condition
Stability against sliding, Fss=0

Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=185.049

Full reservoir condition

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.317084

Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=170.049

Shear friction factor, SFF=(fV+rsaA)/76.23415

Zone 3 Block 2
(Trial 1)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

6.000 0.000 0.700 3.000 4.490 0.000 1.730 3.460

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 415.435 2.080376 864.2611
2 pmm 336.75 2.245 756.00375
3 pmu 0 0 0
4 pmd 26.25 4.723333 123.9875
5 puv -77.85 1.73 -134.6805
6 pwh 180 2 360
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 6.73 511.8165
9 Total Empty condition 0 778.435 2.241 1744.2524
10 Total Full reservior 256.05 700.585 3.542 2481.3884

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 017

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone 3 Block 2
(Trial 2)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

6.000 0.000 0.900 3.000 4.490 0.000 1.797 3.593

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 415.435 2.080376 864.2611
2 pmm 336.75 2.245 756.00375
3 pmu 0 0 0
4 pmd 33.75 4.79 161.6625
5 puv -80.85 1.796667 -145.2605
6 pwh 180 2 360
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 6.73 511.8165
9 Total Empty condition 0 785.935 2.267 1781.9274
10 Total Full reservior 256.05 705.085 3.558 2508.4834

Zone 3 Block 2
(Trial 3)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

6.000 0.000 0.840 3.000 4.490 0.000 1.777 3.553

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 415.435 2.080376 864.2611
2 pmm 336.75 2.245 756.00375
3 pmu 0 0 0
4 pmd 31.5 4.77 150.255
5 puv -79.95 1.776667 -142.0445
6 pwh 180 2 360
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 6.73 511.8165
9 Total Empty condition 0 783.685 2.259 1770.5199

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 018

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

10 Total Full reservior 256.05 703.735 3.553 2500.2919

f=allowable coefficient of friction=0.65

r= ratio of average to the maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5

A= area of the joint (A=T*1)

Sa= ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation=4000KN/m2

Minimum permisible shear friction factor SFFMax. =5

Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3000KN/m2

Empty condition
Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=294.0657
Full reservoir condition
Stability against sliding, Fss=0.3638443
Maximum allowable inclined stress, p’v=264.0657
Shear friction factor, SFF=(fV+rsaA)/43.41897

Zone 3 Block 3
(Trial 1)

Z Iu Id Z L Y Middle third. U/S Middle third. D/S

9.000 0.000 1.100 3.000 5.330 0.000 2.143 4.287

S.No. Item Descriptions and Force(KN) Lever arm(m) Moment

dimensions horizontal Vertical
1 P’ 783.685 2.259224 1770.52
2 p mm 399.75 2.665 1065.3338
3 p mu 0 0 0
4 p md 41.25 5.696667 234.9875
5 p uv -144.675 2.143333 -310.08675
6 p wh 405 3 1215
7 Pwv 0 0 0
8 Pwave 76.05 9.73 739.9665
9 Total Empty condition 0 1224.685 2.507 3070.8413
10 Total Full reservior 481.05 1080.01 4.366 4715.721

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 019

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 3 BLOCK 3

(Trial 2)

Z ∆l u ∆ld ∆Z L Y Middle third u/s Middle third d/s

9 0 1.23 3 5.33 0 2.187 4.373

s.no. Item FORCE(KN)

Description and Moment
Moment
dimension Horizontal Vertical Arm(m) Force(KN*m)

1 p' 783.685 2.259 1770.52

pmm 399.75 2.665 1065.3336
2
3 pmu 0 0 0

pmd 46.125 5.74 264.7575

4
5 puv -147.6 2.186667 -322.752
pwh 405 3 1215
6
pwv 0 0
7
8 pwave 76.05 9.73 739.9665
9 Total Empty condition 0 1229.56 2.522 3100.611
10 Total Full reservoir 481.05 1081.96 4.374 4732.8258

Empty condition:
Stability against sliding, FSS=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress,p’v=374.866 KN/m2

Full reservoir condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.445
Maximum allowable inclined stress, pv= 329.866 KN/m2
Shear friction factor,FSF= (ķV+rsa)/28.736
ƒ-allowablecoefficient of friction=0.65
r=ratio of average to maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5
A=area of the joint (A=T*1)
Sa=ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation =4000KN/m2
Minimum permissible shear friction factor FSF MAX=5
Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3000KN/m2

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 020

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 3 BLOCK 4

Trial(1)

Z ∆lu ∆ld ∆z L Y midle third u/s middle third d/s

12 0 1.5 3 6.56 0 2.687 5.373

s.no. Item Description FORCE(KN) Moment Moment

and horizontal Vertical Arm(m) Force(KN
dimension *m)
1 p' 1229.56 2.522 3100.611
2 p mm 492 3.25 1613.76
3 p mu
4 p md 56.25 7.08 397.125
5 puv 241.8 2.667 849.830
6 p wh 720 4 2680
7 p wv
8 pwave 76.05 12.73 988.117
9 Total empty 1777.81 2.875 5111.938
condition
10 Total Fullreservior 796.05 1536.01 5.41 8309.977

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 021

 DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 3 BLOCK 4 (Trial 2)

Z ∆lu Δld Δz L Y midle third u/s middle third d/s

12 0 1.56 3 6.56 0 2.707 5.413

s.no. Item Description FORCE(KN) Moment Moment

and horizontal vertical Arm(m) Force(KN*m)
dimension
1 p' 1229.56 2.522 3100.611
2 p mm 492 3.28 1613.76
3 p mu
4 p md 58.5 7.08 414.13
5 puv -243.6 2.707 -659.344
6 p wh 720 4 2880
7 p wv
8 pwave 76.05 12.73 968.117
9 Total empty 1780.06 2.8813 5128.551
condition
10 Total Fullreservoir 798.05 1536.46 5.413 8317.324

Empty condition
Stability against sliding, FSS=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress,p’v=374.866 KN/m2

Full reservoir condition

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.445
Maximum allowable inclined stress, pv= 329.866 KN/m2
Shear friction factor,FSF= (ķV+rsa)/28.736
Ƒ-allowable coefficient of friction=0.65
r=ratio of average to maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5
A=area of the joint (A=T*1)
Sa=ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation =4000KN/m2
Minimum permissible shear friction factor FSF MAX=5
Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3000KN/m2

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 022

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 3 BLOCK 5

(Trial 1)

Z ∆lu ∆ld ∆Z L Y midle third u/s middle third d/s

15 0 1.56 3 8.12 0 3.227 6.453

s.no. Item Description FORCE(KN) Moment Moment

and horizontal Vertical Arm(m) Force(KN*m)
Dimension
1 p' 1780.06 2.881 5128.551
2 p mm 609 4.06 2472.54
3 p mu
4 p md 58.5 8.64 505.44
5 puv -363 3.227 -1171.28
6 pwh 1125 5 5625
7 pwv
8 pwave 76.05 15.73 1196.267
9 Total empty 2447.56 3.312 8106.531
condition
10 Total Fullreservoir 1201.05 2084.56 6.599 1201.

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 023

 DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 3 BLOCK 5

Trial 2

∆lu ∆ld ∆Z L Y midle third u/s middle third

Z d/s
15 0 1.8 3 8.12 0 3.307 6.613

s.no. Description FORCE(KN) Moment Moment

Item and horizontal Vertical Arm(m) Force(KN*m)
dimension
1 p' 1780.06 2.881 5128.551
2 pmm 609 4.06 2472.54
3 pmu
4 pmd 67.5 8.72 588.6
5 puv -372 3.307 -1230.08
6 pwh 5 5625
1125
7 pwv
8 pwave 15.73 1196.267
76.05
9 Total empty 2456.56 3.334 8189.691
condition
10 Total Fullreservoir 2084.56 6.611 13780.878
1201.05

RESERVIOR EMPTY CONDITION

Stability against sliding, FSS=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress,pv=495.274 KN/m2
Full reservoir condition
Stability against sliding, FSS=0.576
Maximum allowable inclined stress, PV= 420.274 KN/m2
Shear friction factor ,FSF=(ķV+rsa)/17.647
ƒ-allowable coefficient of friction=0.65
r=ratio of average to maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5
A=area of the joint(A=T*1)
Sa=ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation =4000KN/m2
Minimum permissible shear friction factor FSFMAX=5
Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 024

 DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 4 BLOCK 1

Trial 1

Z ∆lu ∆ld ∆Z L Y midle third middle third d/s

u/s
18 0.2 1.85 3 9.92 0 3.973 7.980

s.no. Item Description FORCE(KN) Moment Moment

and horizontal vertical Arm(m) Force(KN*m)
dimension
1 p' 2456.56 3.534 8681.483
2 pmm 744 5.16 3839.04
3 p mu 7.5 0.133333 1
4 p md 69.375 10.72 723.6
5 puv -538.65 3.973 -2131.296
6 p wh 1620 6 9720
7 p wv 33 0.09697 3.2
8 p wave 76.05 18.73 1424.417
9 Total empty 3310..435 4.003 13245.123
condition
10 Total Fullreservoir 1696.05 2771.785 8.03 22261.444

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 025

 DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 4 BLOCK 1

Trial 2

Z ∆lu ∆ld ∆Z L Y midle third middle third

u/s d/s
18 0.2 1.85 3 9.92 0 3.9990 7.980

s.no. Item Description FORCE(KN) Moment Moment

and horizontal vertical Arm(m) Force(KN*m)
dimension
1 p' 2456.56 3.534 8681.483
2 p mm 744 5.16 3839.04
3 p mu 7.5 0.133333 1
4 p md 69.375 10.73667 744.85625
5 puv -538.65 3.990 -2149..2135
6 p wh 1620 6 9720
7 p wv 33 0.09697 3.2
8 pwave 76.05 18.73 1424.417
9 Total 3310..435 4.007 13266.379
10 Total 1696.05 2771.785 8.033 22264.782

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 026

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONES 4 BLOCK

(Trial 3)

Z ∆lu ∆ld ∆Z L Y middle middle

third u/s third d/s
18 0.3 2 3 9.92 0 3.973 7.980

s.no. Item Description FORCE(KN) Moment Moment

and horizontal vertical Arm(m) Force(KN*m)
dimension
1 p' 2456.56 3.634 8927.139
2 p mm 744 5.28 3913.44
3 p mu 11.25 0.2 2.25
4 p md 75 10.88667 8.16.5
5 puv -549.9 4.073 -2239.926
6 p wh 1620 6 9720
7 p wv 49.5 0.145455 7.2
8 pwave 76.05 18.73 1424.417
9 Total 3336.31 4.094 13659.329
10 Total 1696.05 2786.41 8.1 22571.020
RESERVIOR EMPTY CONDITIO
Stability against sliding, FSS=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress,pv=546.041 KN/m2
Full reservoir condition
Stability against sliding, FSS=0.609
Maximum allowable inclined stress, PV= 456.041 KN/m2
Shear friction factor ,FSF=(ķV+rsa)/15.478
ƒ-allowable coefficient of friction=0.65
r=ratio of average to maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5
A=area of the joint(A=T*1)
Sa=ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation =4000KN/m2
Minimum permissible shear friction factor FSFMAX=5
Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 027

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

ZONE 4 BLOCK 2

(Trial 1)

Z ∆lu Δld Δz L Y midle third middle third

u/s d/s
21 0.3 2 3 12.22 0 4.48 9.68

s.no. Item descriptions FORCE(KN) Moment Force

and horizontal vertical arm (m) Moment(KN*
m)
1 p' 3336.31 4.394 14659.746
2 pmm 916.5 6.41 5874.765
3 pmu 11.25 0.2 2.25
4 pmd 75 13.18667 989
5 p uv -762.3 4.84 -3689.532
6 pwh 2205 7 15435
7 pwv 58.5 0.14615 8.55
8 pwave 76.05 21.73 1652.567
9 Total empty condition 0 4397.56 4.895 21525.761
10 Total Fullreservoir 2281.05 3635.26 9.609 34932.346

RESERVIOR EMPTY CONDITION

Stability against sliding, FSS=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress,pv=605.725 KN/m2
Full reservoir condition
Stability against sliding, FSS=0.627
Maximum allowable inclined stress, PV= 500.725 KN/m2
Shear friction factor ,FSF=(ķV+rsa)/13.767
ƒ-allowable coefficient of friction=0.65
r=ratio of average to maximum shear stress on the joint=0.5
A=area of the joint(A=T*1)
Sa=ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation =4000KN/m2
Minimum permissible shear friction factor FSFMAX=5
Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 028

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-3:
(Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

24.00 0.300 2.00 3.00 14.520 0.000 5.607 11.213

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal vertical from A about A
1 P’ 4397.56 5.195 22845.324
2 Pmm 1089 7.56 8232.84
3 Pmu 11.25 0.2 2.25
4 Pmd 75 15.49 1161.5
5 Puv -1009.2 5.607 -5658.25
6 Pwh 2880 8 23040
7 Pwv 67.5 0.1467 9.9
8 Pwave 76.05 24.73 1880717
9 Total, Empty 0 5640.31 5.716 32241.914
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 2956.05 4631.11 11.124 51514.283

ƒ=Allowable coefficient of friction=0.65

r=Ratio of average to the maximum storage shear stress on the joint=0.5

Area of the joint, A=T*1

Sa=Ultimate shear resistance of dam and foundation=4000KN/m2

SFF min=Minimum permissible shear friction factor = 5
Maximum allowable inclined stress in dam or foundation=3000KN/m2

Empty Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=670.667KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.638
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=550.667KN/m2
Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/12.398

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 029

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-4: (Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

27.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 16.820 0.000 6.607 13.213

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal Vertical from A about A
1 P’ 5640.31 6.716 37880.322
2 Pmm 1261.5 9.41 11870.715
3 Pmu 37.5 0.667 25
4 Pmd 75 18.487 1386.5
5 Puv -1337.85 6.607 -8838.729
6 Pwh 3645 9 32805
7 Pwv 255 0.4902 125
8 Pwave 76.05 27.73 2108.867
9 Total, Empty 0 5640.31 5.716 32241.914
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 3721.05 5931.46 13.043 77362.674

Empty Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=733.533KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.627

Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=598.533KN/m2

Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/11.689

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 030

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-5:

(Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

30.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 19.820 0.000 7.940 15.880

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal vertical from A about A
1 P’ 7269.31 9.038 65700.024
2 Pmm 1486.5 11.91 17704.215
3 Pmu 75 1.333 100
4 Pmd 75 22.487 1686.5
5 Puv -1786.5 7.94 -14184.81
6 Pwh 4500 10 45000
7 Pwv 570 .982 560
8 Pwave 76.05 30.73 2337.017
9 Total, Empty 0 9475.81 8.99 85190.739
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 4576.05 7689.31 15.463 118902.945

Empty Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0

Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=795.618KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.595
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=645.618KN/m2
Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/11.503

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 031

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-6:
(Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

33.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 23.820 0.000 9.273 18.547

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal vertical from A about A
1 P’ 9475.81 10.99 104139.15
2 Pmm 1786.5 13.91 24850.215
3 Pmu 75 1.333 100
4 Pmd 75 26.487 1986.5
5 Puv -2295.15 9.273 -21283.691
6 Pwh 5445 11 59895
7 Pwv 630 .984 620
8 Pwave 76.05 33.73 2565.167
9 Total, Empty 0 12042.31 10.885 131075.867
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 5521.05 9747.16 17.736 172872.342

Empty Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=865.730KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.566
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=700.730KN/m2

Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/11.225

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 032

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-7:
(Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

36.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 31.820 0.000 11.940 23.880

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal vertical from A about A
1 P’ 12042.3 12.885 155165.04
2 Pmm 2386.5 17.91 42742.215
3 Pmu 75 1.333 100
4 Pmd 75 34.487 2586.5
5 Puv -3223.8 11.94 -38492.172
6 Pwh 6480 12 77760
7 Pwv 690 0.985 680
8 Pwave 76.05 36.73 2793.317
9 Total, Empty 0 15268.8 13.137 200593.751
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 6556.05 12045 20.202 243334.895
Empty Reservoir Condition:
Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=852.529KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.544

Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=672.529KN/m2

Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/12.122

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 033

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-8:
(Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

39.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 35.820 0.000 13.273 26.547

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal vertical from A about A
1 P’ 15268.8 15.170 231627.7
2 Pmm 2686.5 19.91 53488.215
3 Pmu 75 1.333 100
4 Pmd 75 38.487 2886.5
5 Puv -3882.45 13.273 -51533.053
6 Pwh 7605 13 98865
7 Pwv 750 0.987 740
8 Pwave 76.05 39.73 3021.467
9 Total, Empty 0 18855.3 15.28 288102.411
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 7681.05 14972.85 22.654 339195.825

Empty Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=947.027KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.513
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=752.027KN/m2

Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/11.635

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 034

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-9:
(Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

41.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 39.820 0.000 14.607 29.213

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal vertical from A about A
1 P’ 18855.3 17.28 325819.58
2 Pmm 2986.5 21.91 65434.215
3 Pmu 75 1.333 100
4 Pmd 75 42.487 3186.5
5 Puv -4491.55 14.607 -65606.574
6 Pwh 8405 13.667 114868.33
7 Pwv 790 0.987 780
8 Pwave 76.05 41.73 3173.567
9 Total, Empty 0 22781.8 17.318 394540.299
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 8481.05 18290.25 24.481 447755.625

Empty Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=1039.79KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.464
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=834.79KN/m2

Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/11.735

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 035

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Zone-4: Block-10:
(Trial-1):

Z ΔIu ΔId ΔZ L Y Middle third U/S Middle third D/S

45.00 1.50 2.00 4.00 43.82 0.000 15.773 31.547

S.No Item Description Force, KN Moment arm, m Moment , KN.M

Horizontal vertical from A about A
1 P’ 21205.4 18.818 399043.22
2 Pmm 4382 23.41 399043.22
3 Pmu 75 1 75
4 Pmd 100 45.987 4598.667
5 Puv -5323.5 15.773 -83969.34
6 Pwh 10125 15 151875
7 Pwv 645 0.7384 476.25
8 Pwave 76.05 45.73 3477.767
9 Total, Empty 0 26407.4 19.173 506299.504
condition
10 Total, Full Reservoir 10201.05 21083.9 27.422 578159.18

Empty Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0

Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=1116.12KN/m2

Full Reservoir Condition:

Stability against sliding, Fss=0.484
Maximum allowable inclined stress, P’v=891.12KN/m2
Shear friction factor, Sff= fΣV+rSaA/10.621

AMU HYD RAULICS AN D HYYD ROPOWER ENGINEERING 036

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 037

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Single Stage Design Method

Step one: Let to derive the base width of base of the elementary profile
B= = 45 = 36.9m ==37m
( / ) ŋ √ .
Now it is possible to calculate the base width of the triangular profile
b=37-4 =33m
Let’s consider the downstream inclination (Φd)
1
( ) = = 0.82
( −1
Using this value we can calculate the height of the triangular profile:
33
ℎ = = = 40.24
0.82
Before checking whether this dam is stable or not first lets determine the free board of the dam as
follow:
Computing the significant wave height:-
Hs = significant wave height for this we use the equation :-
Hs = 0.0032√ +0.76-0.24∜ = 0.0032√100 ∗ √30+0.76-0.24√100 = 1.95m
Wave rise above still water level (Freeboard), FB = 4/3Hs = 4/3 ∗ 1.88m = 2.6m then
 Take the free board 3.0 m
 Therefore, height of the dam , Hdam = H + FB = 45 + 3 = 48m

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 38

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Fig 2: the cross section of the dam

Step 2: Now let’s check the stability of the dam for empty reservoir condition
Computation of forces:-

Item Description and Force KN Moment arm Moment

dimension Vertical force Horizontal from heel about the toe
force
Weight of dam
W1 4*48*25 4800 35 168000
W2 0.5*33*40.2*25 16582.5 22 364815
Sum 21382.5 532815

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 39

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Step 3: Cheek whether the resultant is oust the middle third (kern) i.e.

∑M 532815
X = = = 24.92m
∑v 21382.5

, = − = − 24.92 = −6.42 (The negative sign indicates the resultant

passes towards the heel)

> = 6.03 The resultant force was outside of the middle third at empty reservoir
condition. Hence it needs to provide an upstream batter.

Step 4: With the upstream provided, take moment the upstream the u/s middle third point, for
the now base width.

Dam with upstream flare (batter)

Figure 3: free body diagram force analysis for the providing upstream batter

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 40

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

 By Applying Moment Area Method,, lets calculate the centroid of the crest mass
( ̅)
Total area ( AeF)* BE = 4(3) (2) + 4.9*0.5*4(2.67)
(12 + 9.8)BE = 24 + 26.17
BE = 2.3 m

From triangle similarity theorem ∆ACD~∆ABE

= =

45 37/3
= ↔ ℎ = 8.4
ℎ 2.3
Y= 45- 8.4=36.6m

Now consider the dam for empty reservoir condition For reservoir empty condition (Taking
summation of moment aboutthe new upstreammiddle third)

item Description and dimension Force in KN Lever arm Moment about point m
from point ‘m’
Vertical Horiz Antic lock wise Clockwise
force ontal (+ve) (-ve)
force

self weight
W1 0.5*25*Bf*36.6 457.5Bf 12.33 - Bf 5640.98Bf-305

W2 4*48*25 4800 10.33-2/3BF 49584-3200Bf

W3 0.5*25*40.2*33 16582.5 Bf-1.33 11055Bf-
22054.73

∑Mm = o ↔ 5640.975Bf − 305 2 + 49584 − 3200Bf − 11055Bf + 22054.7) = 0

−305 2 − 8614.02 + 71638.7 = 0 Using quadratic equation we can solve the values of
Bf = 6.72( take 7m )
Take the positive value of Bf = 7m
 Check the stability of the dam for this section about the heel for reservoir empty
condition.
Table1: Stability analysis for empty reservoir including upstream batter

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 41

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

item Description and dimension Force in KN Lever arm Moment about point m
Vertica Horiz from the toe Antic lock wise Clockwise
l force ontal (+ve) (-ve)
force
self-weight
W1 0.5*25*Bf*36.6 3202.5 39.33 125954.33
W2 4*48*25 4800 35 168000
W3 0.5*25*40.2*33 16582. 24.67 409090.28
5

∑ = 24585 ∑ =703044.61
∑m 703044.61
X = = = 28.6
∑v 24585
B 44
e = − x = − 28.6 = −6.6 < /6 = 44/6 = 7.33 − − − −ok
2 2
 Therefore the resultant force lies in the middle third.
Now let’s Check the stability of the dam for reservoir empty condition

For Empty Reservoir Condition

A. Stability against overturning

Not necessary since it is stable in empty condition!

B. overstress
∑ 6 1061.63 3000
= 1+ = = < −−−−
2 2
C. Vertical stress
∑ 6 24585 6 ∗ 6.6 3000
ℎ = 1+ = 1+ = 1061.63 < −−−−
44 44 2
∑ 6 24585 6 ∗ 6.6 3000
= 1− = 1− = 55.8 < −−−−
44 44 2

D. Horizontal Normal Stress

= (tan2 ∅ )
= 1061.36(0.19 ) =38.32< —

= ∗ ( (∅ ))
= 55.8(0.82 )

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 42

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

=37.6< −−

E. Shear stress
=( − ) ∅
= −1061.63 ∗ 0.19
= −201.71
=( ′− ) ∅
= −55.8 ∗ 0.82
= 45.76

F. Principal Stress

Upstream

= ∗ ∅
= 1061.63 ∗ (1 + 0.0361)
=1099.95 kpa
Down stream

= ∗ ( (∅ ))
= 55.8 ∗ (1 + 0.656)
=92.45Kpa

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 43

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

For Full Reservoir Condition

Figure 4: Free body diagram for full reservoirs condition

 The detail force analysis in the below table

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 44

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Table: Force analysis for full reservoir condition

Item Description and dimension Force KN Lever Moment about from the toe
Vertical Horizontal arm Anticlockwise Clockwise
force force From (+ve) (-ve)
the toe
I/self-weight
W1 0.5*7*36.6*25 3202.5 39.33 125954.33
W2 0.5*25*37*45 4800 35 168000
W3 25*3.6*3+(0.5*3.6*4.25*25) 16582.5 24.67 409090.28
Sum 24585 703044.61
II/water pressure
Ph 0.5*10*(45)2 10125 15 151875
Pv1 7*8.4*10 588 40.5 23814
Pv2 .5*10*7*36.6 1281 41.67 53379.27
lll. Wave Pressure
Pwave 2*10*1.95 76.13 48 3654.24
lV.uplift pressure
Pv 10*44*.5*45 -(9900) 29.33 290400
16544 780237.9 445929.24

Including uplift pressure,∑ =16544KN ∑ += 780237.61

∑ = 10201.13 ∑ −=445929.24(Including Up lift)
∑ =334308.4
Excluding uplift pressure,∑ = 26454
Check the resultant force in kern
∑ 334308.4
= = = 20.21
∑ 16544
= /2 − = 44/2 − 20.21 = 1.79 < /6 = 7.33 − − − − − − −
Check the stability
I) stability against overturning
∑ + 780237.61
= = = 1.75 > 1.5 − − − − − − −
∑ − 445929.24
II) Stability against sliding
∑ .
Sliding factor ,Fss = ∑ = = 0.62 < 0.75 − − − − − − − − − −

Shear friction factor , =∑ where S - shear resistance ,

= + , ℎ = 0.65
= (4 ∗ 9.81 ∗ 44 ∗ 1) + 16544 ∗ 0.65
= 12480.16

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 45

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

12480.16
ℎ = = 1.22 < 3 − − − − − −
10201.13
 Limit equilibrium factor , LLE = FSS since α = 0
So that FLE = 1.04
III) stability against stressing (here All computation of stress is Excluding Uplift)
v = 26454
= 3MPa
∑ Mx 344208.66 B
X =
= = 20.79m, e = − X = 1.21m
∑v 26454 2
 Vertical normal stress ,σz
∑ .
At upstream, σzu = 1−6∗ = 502.02 < -------safe
∑ 6∗
, = 1+ = = 700.43 < −−−
44 37.16

 Shear stress
 Upstream face
=( − ) ∅ = , ∅ = 7/36.6 = 0.19
= (9.81 ∗ 45 − 502.02) ∗ 0.19=−11.51 / 2

 Downstream face,
∅ = 33/40.2 = 0.82
= ∗ ∅ = 700.43 ∗ 0.82 = 574.98 / 2
 Horizontal normal stress , σy
 Upstream face
= + ( − )( ∅ )2
= (9.81 ∗ 45) + (502.02 − 9.81 ∗ 45) ∗ (0.19)2
= 443.64 / 2

 Downstream face,

= ∗ ( (∅ ))
= 700.43 ∗ (0.82) = 470.97 /

 Principal Stresses ( )

Up stream

= ∗ ∅ − ∅ = 502.02 ∗ (1 + 0.0361)-450(0.0361)
= 503.89 kpa

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 46

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Downstream
= ∗ ∅ = 700.43(1 + 0.656)--here P’= 0 (no tail water)
=1159.91 kpa

Figure 5: Final profile of the dam

Conclusion and recommendation

 Silt load ,tail water and earthquake acceleration are neglected

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 47

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Question 2

A remote steep sided and narrow valley in a given water course for Hydropower generation
Catchments area 60 Km2, Flood 180-200 m3/s ,Thin superficial mantle, frequent intensive rock
exposure, minimum hydrological data, and Access to valley is difficult from ground survey. And
the options are:

 Site A, Dam height = 50m nominal height and 450m length b/n steep valley and sides
 A deep deposit of fills overlying rock on the valley floor Site B, Located at 300m d/s of
the site A with crest 320m b/n steep rocky abutments but requires a dam of 60m height.

Valley floor has competent rock at the shallow depth

i. Determine site and justify, the type of dam, likely to prove most appropriate on each site
A and B.
ii. Define & explain a programme of further investigations design to confirm the
suitability of each site to the type of dam proposed under (i).

Solution
During the early stages of planning and design, selection of the site and the type of dam should
be carefully considered, It is only in exceptional circumstances that only one type of dam or
appurtenant structure is suitable for a given dam site. Generally, preliminary designs and
estimates for several types of dams and appurtenant structures are required before one can be
proved the most suitable and economical. It is, therefore, important to understand that the project
is likely to be unduly expensive unless decisions regarding the site selection and the type of dam
are based upon adequate study.

The selection of the type of dam requirescooperation among experts representing several
disciplines-including planners; hydrologists; geotechnical, hydraulic, and structural engineers;
and engineering geologists-to ensure economical and appropriate designs for the physical factors,
such as topography, geology and foundation conditions, available materials, hydrology, and
seismicity.

Among theimportant physical factors in the choice of the type of dams are:

1). Topography: - Topographic considerations include the surface configuration of the dam site
and of the reservoir area and accessibility to the site and to construction materials. Topography,
in large measure, dictates the first choice of the typeof dam. A narrow stream flowing between
high, rocky walls would naturally suggest a rock fill or concrete overflow dam. On the other
hand, low, rolling plains would suggest an earth fill dam. Intermediate conditions might suggest
other choices.

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 48

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

If the reservoir rim is high compared with the dam height, and it is unbroken, a chute or tunnel
spillway might be necessary. The spillway considerations can influence the type of dam. In a
deep, steep-walled canyon, it might be more economical to construct a concrete dam with an
overflow spillway than to provide a spillway for a rock fill dam.

2).Geology and Foundation Conditions: -The suitability of the various types of rock and soil as
foundation and construction materials is geologic questions that must be considered. The foundation
geology at a dam site often dictates the type of dam suitable for that site. The strength, thickness, and
inclination of strata; permeability; fracturing; and faulting are all important considerations in selecting the
dam type.
3).Materials Available
4). Hydrology
5). Earthquake.
6). Spillway.Spillway is a vital appurtenance of a dam. Frequently, its size and type and the
natural restrictions in its location are the controlling factors in the choice of the type of dam.
Spillway requirements are dictated primarily by the runoff and stream flow characteristics,
independent of site conditions or type or size of the dam. The selection of specific spillway types
should be influenced by the magnitudes of the floods to be passed. Thus, it can be seen that on
streams with large flood potential, the spillway is the dominant structure, and the selection of the
type of dam could become a secondary consideration.
The cost of constructing a large spillway is frequently a considerable portion of the total cost of
the project. In such cases, combining the spillway and dam into one structure may be desirable,
indicating the selection of a concrete overflow dam. In certain instances, where excavated
material from separate spillway channels can be used in the dam embankment, an earth fill dam
may prove to be advantageous.

Therefore as far as we see the selection criteria the available data is not efficient to specifies the
type of dam in the site but from the given Hydrological data, foundation characteristics and
topographical arrangement site A and B is easily recommended for rock fill and concrete gravity
dam but;
When we compared the two site; the narrowness of the topography and the geological condition
in the floor and in the abutments are clearly shows that the site is suitable for concrete gravity
dam than rock fill dam and also further investigation may lead us site B will be best and
economical to construct a Concrete Arch Dam.
From the given data there is180-200 m3/s floods and the constructed dam should have adequate
spillways. Further geological investigation on site A may lead us to construct either concrete
gravity dam or rock fill dam. If the geological conditions of site A is rocky especially in the
abutment side the excavated rock used for dam body construction and it might reduce the cost of
the project un less it is easily recommended to construct an over flow gravity dam.

In order to specify the appropriate dam type and site location the following further Investigation
and exploration has to be carried out for both site A and B;
1. Project Design:involves the computation of dimensions of the dam.
 Hydrologic design (max. lake elevation + spillway cap. + crest elevation)

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 49

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

 Hydraulic design (static & dynamic loads + spillway profile + outlet

dimensions)
 Structural design (stress distribution + required reinforcement)

2.Planning Study: includes the following activities:

Site Investigation: Check of dam planning for appropriate purposes

Meteorological and hydrological surveys
Topographical and geological investigations
Landform, terrace, geological time, outcrop, lithofacies, folding, fault,
discontinuity, erosion, weathering, sedimentation, stratum…
Foundation Survey: Check of required conditions for a base foundation like
Geophysical exploration (seismic prospecting, electrical prospecting, ...)
Boring exploration (core drilling, sampling, sounding), /Test pitting
In-situ testing (permeability, grouting, bearing capacity, compressibility)
Rock classification
Fill Materials: Check of required quality and quantity of materials
Geological survey (stratum, volume)
Laboratory testing (shear strength, compressibility, compaction, permeability...)
In-situ testing (roller compaction, density log, field permeability, sampling)
Reservoir operation study:(is to be performed periodically)

Environmental, social and ecological impact survey

Question 3

a) What is the significance of survey work in the planning of a concrete dams and extent of
survey work to be carried out?

Solution

Extensive and detailed surveys are required to establish the location and extent of potential
sources of construction materials, catchment property in reasonable proximity to the site. Study
existing topographic map and aerial photographs will indicate possible dam sites. An estimate of
the catchment area and storage capacity can also be made

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 50

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Surveys required are:-

1. contour survey
2. water shed traverse
3. stability of site
4. Cadastral surveys
 contour survey

• Following selection of possible site an aerial survey should be under taken to provide a
more detailed contour of the storage area

• Typical scale1 : 10000 with 2m contour interval

• Allows a more accurate computation of storage capacity

• If a site is visible the survey provides amore concise design location of the dam wall

 Traverse survey

Where insufficient information exists to accurately determine the catchment area, it may be
necessary to carry out water shed traverse

 Stability of site
 Dam must be position where it will be stable and where the storage area does not
have excessive underground leakage
 soil rock features must be carefully examined
 Large dams may require test pits, bore holes and geological survey
 Small dams may require only test holes to determine sub surface features
 The position of each investigation must be accurately allocated
 Cadastral survey
 Land to be inundated is resumed by the constructing authority
 Cadastral surveys required to delineate the land to be resumed
 Surveys will also be required to close roads passing through inundated land.

Surveys in dam wall area

General location of the dam has been decided from earlier surveys and further surveys are
required within this area to aid final design and computation of volumes of excavation and fill.

Further surveys are also taken

 detail surveys
 definition dam wall on plan
 location of limits of dam on ground
 by wash

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 51

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

 clearing of site
 pipe line surveys
 road access
 pumping stations

b) What are the various stages of investigation?

Investigations/surveying is gathering of information on foundation and reservoir conditions and

on the natural materials available as well as environmental impact all dams. Investigation
conducted in the field and in the laboratory, and analyses and reference work are performed in
the office. For efficiency, these investigations must be properly planned. Subsurface explorations
should not be started until all available geologic and soils data have been evaluated.
Geological investigations for large engineering projects such as dams are divided into four
stages:

1. Reconnaissance or Pre-Feasibility Stage…………..….. PFR Stage

2. Preliminary Investigation or Feasibility Stage...…..…… FR Stage
3. Detailed investigation or DPR Stage…………….....…...Bankable DPR Stage
4. Construction Stage…………………………….…………During Construction

 Reconnaissance or Pre-Feasibility Stage:

This stage involves Selection of suitable sites on the basis of regional geology, topography and
surface features. Many alternatives are identified

.Data Collection and Desk study: All the available geologic information reports etc are gathered.
Broad assessment of depth to bed rock, hazard identifications, rock types their strength and
weaknesses. Thrusts, Folds and faults in the area are broadly identified and recorded for the area
of interest before the site visit is undertaken.

Reconnaissance: Alternatives sites are examined on ground and geological assessment is made.
General geological maps and sections are prepared and given in the geological report. Tentative
lay-out of the dam is formulated in this stage. Further explorations for FR Stage are identified and
estimates are prepared for quantities etc.

 Preliminary Investigation or Feasibility Stage:

Engineering geological data is collected for the most preferred dam site. Geological explorations
should cover for establishing techno-economic feasibility of the dam. Investigations should be
done to minimize the geological uncertainties.

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 52

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Methods:

1. Surface geotechnical mapping on 1:1000 scale for the dam site and ancillary structures
with sufficient coverage as given in IS code.
2. Remote sensing studies
3. Sub-Surface geological exploration:
 Geophysical surveys for thickness of overburden, ground water and
characteristics of rock mass.
 For Dams up to 30m height, trial pits, trenches and drill holes are undertaken.
 For Dams more than 100m height, trial pits, trenches, drill holes, drifts and
shafts may be required depending on geological complexity.
 Rock mechanic tests, in-situ and laboratory
 Construction material investigations: Assessment and related testing.

The feasibility report is prepared at the end of feasibility stage investigations. It should contain
the following: geological plan and sections of the dam site, pit, trench and drift logs as required
with rock mass classifications. Drill whole logs with photographs of cores and permeability test
analysis and results. Field and laboratory test reports and geological evaluation of the dam site.
Availability of construction materials particularly aggregates for concrete dam is to be discussed.
Preliminary layout of the dam superimposed on geologic and exploration plans. Further detailed
investigations during the DPR stage are to be outlined as well.

 Detailed Investigation or DPR Stage:

1. Surface geotechnical mapping

On 1:1000 scale for the dam site and ancillary structures with sufficient coverage as given in IS code.

2. Remote sensing studies: Use of satellite imageries and aerial photography is made right from the PFR
or FR stage.
3. Sub-Surface geological explorations:
 Geophysical surveys:-for thickness of overburden, ground water and
characteristics of rock mass.2.
 Drill holes: - Three to five drill holes in river bed/channel portion; two holes on
each abutment are to be completed. Two holes are suggested in toe portion also.
Core samples for laboratory tests are to be obtained. Permeability tests are to be
conducted in all the drill holes. For diversion tunnel three holes are required.
Inclined holes in river bed or drift below the river bed may be required.
Geological logging of the core samples and presentation of data on specified
formats shall be done.
 Drifts: For dams up to 50m height one drift at mid height is recommended for
ascertaining the abutment conditions. In case of 50-100m high dams, two drifts
are necessary and for over 100m high dams, three or more drifts are to done

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 53

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

 Grout ability tests: - are required.

 Rock mechanic tests:-are to be carried out in
 Laboratory Tests
 In-situ Tests:
 Construction Material Surveys:
Suitable sites for obtaining the construction materials shall be identified. Mainly the requirement
is for:

A. Coarse and fine aggregates

B. Rock fill material for coffer dam
C. Impervious material for clay core.

For coarse and fine aggregates the sources could be river shoals, terrace depositor rock quarries.
Similarly other materials are also located and the quantities assessed with respect to the
requirement. Then the process of testing for suitability is further taken forward which was
initiated in the feasibility stage itself. There is also a chance for review the work completed in the
FR stage and go for additional sources if required. In entire process of the construction materials,
environmental considerations are to be given priority and maximum use of materials from the
excavations in the project shall be made. Different tests for the construction materials are:-

 Physical properties tests

 Rapid chemical test
 Petrographic study.
 Mortar bar tests for alkali aggregate reactivity.
 Suitability tests for clay core materials
 Suitability tests for rock fill materials.

Considering all the above explorations and the finalized layout, the geotechnical assessment
should be given. The bankable DPR may thus contain fairly detailed description of geological
conditions, geological maps and sections, geological logs of drill holes and drifts, geophysical
survey reports and their correlation with geology, rock mechanic tests reports and discussion of
results and their implications on the structures, detailed account of geological structure, geo-
hydrology, foundation and abutment conditions. A separate volume is devoted to the
construction materials as it is the availability of the same which sometimes governs the choice of
dam. The engineering remedial measures are also to be included in the DPR so that deviations
are avoided.

 Construction Stage:

Foundation mapping is done in the construction stage as the bed rock/founding levels are
exposed. Treatment of shear zones etc. is to be given as the work progresses. Foundation grade
maps are prepared on 1:100 scales after proper cleaning of the foundation by water jet etc.

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 54

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

c) Explain magnitude of investigation required for the construction of a concrete dam of height
100m and above.

The specification (extent of investigation for concrete dams having height greater than 100m is
described in the above question( 4B ) which is highlighted in yellow color.

Question 4

a) Enumerates the type of geophysical investigation? What are the objectives of such investigations?
Explain any one of them which most relevant according to you as an in charge of design of concrete
dams.

Solution

Geophysical surveys have been used for civil engineering investigations since the late 1920's,
when seismic and electrical resistivity surveys were used for dam siting studies Geophysical
surveys are now used in an almost routine manner to complement engineering geology
investigations and to provide information on site parameters (e.g., in place dynamic properties,
cathodic protection values, depth to bedrock) that in some instances are not obtainable by other
methods. Nevertheless, where some site parameters are obtainable by other means (e.g.,
laboratory testing), the values derived from geophysical surveys are still useful for checking.

Geophysical surveys can be used in a number of geotechnical investigations. With a basic

understanding of the geophysical methods available and of the engineering problems to be
solved, useful geophysical programs can be designed for geotechnical investigations
All geophysical techniques are based on the detection of contrasts in different physical properties
of materials. If such contrasts do not exist, geo- physical methods will not function. These
contrasts range from those in the acoustic velocities to contrasts in the electrical properties of
materials. There are two types of geophysical investigations;

1) Seismic methods
2) Electrical methods

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 55

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Seismic methods, both reflection and refraction, depend on the contrast in the compressional or
shear-wave velocities of different materials. While Electrical methods depend on contrasts in
electrical resistivity.
The validity of the safety assessment of the large-scale infrastructure, such as dams, bridges, etc.,
is largely dependent on the knowledge of the mechanical parameters of the actual construction,
as well as its geological substratum. A large number of these constructions have survived much
longer than the initial plan and their mechanical parameters have suffered a gradual degradation
that may cause serious concern today (Bond et al., 2000). On top of this, a strong earthquake
may have had a deteriorating effect to thesafety of the structure by directly damaging the
structure itself and its foundations.

The objective of the surface geophysical investigation is to use noninvasive methods to delineate
possible buried chemical zones within the site boundary. The lack of historical information about
the chemicals buried at the site requires that noninvasive methods be used to minimize the
possibilities of causing further damage at the site.

The gravity dams are structures calling for special attention to the topic of leakages since a
leakage at its foundations may result to highly dangerous uplifting forces. The monitoring of its
quality is of high importance and must include investigations on the structure and the
surroundings of the dam.The specific targets of the investigation work must include the
following.

 Appraisal of the mechanical properties of thebody of the dam and its

geological setting, suchas seismic P- and S-wave velocities,
elasticitymodulus, Poisson ratio, etc.;
 Tracing of possible leakages;
 Tracing of possible frustration in the structure;
 Detection of degraded areas of the constructionmaterial;
 Determination of degraded areas at its foundation basement;

c) Describe the Ethiopia large concrete gravity dams and discuss their foundation and reservoir site
condition related to suitability, problems, mitigation and lesson you gained from them.

Currently in Ethiopia there are many huge projects undergoing especially in water development
works like Dams, Weirs, canals, hydropower development projects, etc. among the recent
projects are;

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 56

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

1). THE BELES MEGA POWER PROJECT:

Beles mega project is a multi-functional project located on the shores of the Lake Tana, 370 km
north of the Addis Ababa. Includes a 12 km pressure tunnel that carries water from the lake (at
some 1800 m asl) through a 300m deep penstock to the underground Hydro Power Plant (at 1460
m asl), where there are 4 Francis turbines. A 7 km long tailrace tunnel returns water into the river
Beles. While the installed power capacity is 460 MW, power production ranges at about 1720
GWh / year. The project also includes hydraulic works for irrigation purposes, namely, 3 dams, a
1100 m long irrigation channel and a bypass for water distribution.

2). THE GIBE II & III HYDRO POWER PROJECT:

The Gibe II & III project is the second and third of the five hydroelectric plants part of the Omo-
Gibe cascade series. It is located in the Oromia region in Ethiopia, at approximately 250 km
southwest of Addis Ababa and some 80 km north-east of Jima. Gibe II project has a 49 m high
gravity dam and has a 140 m crest length, a 26 km long power tunnel, two 1180 m long
penstocks for a 505 m high jump. The tunnel and penstocks connect the Gibel Gibe valley with
the Omo valley. The plant equipped with four 105 MW Pelton turbines and a total installed
power capacity of 420 MW, has an average production of 1635 GWh/year.

Gibe II Gibe II

The Gibe III hydropower plant project is an RCC gravity dam type and has a crest length of 670
m and a height of 240 m, making it the highest dam in the world among those realized using the
same technique. The installed power, which will be of 1,870 MW, will be generated by 10

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 57

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Francis turbines in an outdoor power plant for the production of 6,500 GWh /year to be
distributed by means of a 65 km long high voltage transmission line.

The Gibe III project is part of far more prodigious venture: in fact, the plant is the third of the
Omo-Gibe cascade series that includes the two plants already operating upstream, namely, the
Gilgel Gibe I (IP = 200 MW) and Gibe II (IP = 420 MW), and envisages the construction of
further two facilities downstream entitled the Gibe IV and Gibe V. In addition to the already
described main dam and power plant, the project foresees 9 spillways, 2 headrace tunnels, 3 river
diversion tunnels, a temporary rock fill dam with an impermeable membrane for flow diversion.

According to The INTERNATIONAL RIVERS people.water.life report on Gibe III

hydroelectric plant project has an environmental and social impact to the upstream and
downstream society and ecology. According to the report the project has downstream and trans
boundary impact.

1. Downstream Social impact:

500,000 populations in the downstream most directly affected by the project is made up of
indigenous peoples who are geographically remote and politically vulnerable. The region has
virtually no modern infrastructure, such as roads, electricity, and phones. Few members of these
communities speak Amharic, Ethiopia’s national language, and even fewer speak English, the
language in which the ESIA project documents have been produced.

Indigenous peoples in the Lower Omo Valley are placed at great risk due to the dam’s
regulationof the river flow, which will lead to the elimination of the river’s natural flood cycle.

Downstream farmers cultivate the river’s banks after the annual flood, a practice known as flood
retreat cultivation. The annual flood also supports the renewal of grazing lands for herders, and
signals migratory fish species to begin spawning. The dam’s impacts on these food sources could
ultimately devastate the local food security and economy. Without adequate mitigation, people
will suffer from food insecurity, chronic hunger, poor health, food aid dependence, and a general
unraveling of the region’s economy and social safety net.

The project proposes an artificial flood to mitigate these impacts. The proposed flood would
however last only 10 days, while the natural flood builds gradually over several months until it
peaks in August or September. A truncated 10-day flood would not reach all the areas now
nurtured by annual flooding, and would likely fall far short of supporting current agricultural
productivity. The artificial flood would also depend on the goodwill of the dam operator. This
will create a conflict of interest, since the artificial flood will eat into the operator’s profits. Even
if implemented, the artificial flood is so inadequate it would fail to maintain the local ecology,
livelihoods and economy.

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 58

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

2. Trans boundary Impact

The Omo River and Lake Turkana constitute the Omo-Turkana Basin, shared by Ethiopia
andKenya. The Gibe III Dam poses serious hydrological risks to Lake Turkana, which receives
up to 90% of its water from the Omo River and supports 300,000 people. Over recent years, the
lake has been shrinking and becoming progressively more salty, leaving the region highly
vulnerable to climate change impacts. If the water level continues to fall, the lake’s fragile
balance could be stressed to the brink of ecological collapse.

Gibe III Dam will reduce the available river flow to Lake Turkana in several important ways.
First, the lake will be particularly vulnerable during the filling of Gibe III’s reservoir,
whosestorage capacity (11.75 billion m 3) will likely take two years or more to fill. The Omo
River’s inflow to Lake Turkana is predicted to be cut by 50% or more during reservoir filling.
While the ESIA has identified an alarmingly low, minimum flow release of 25 m3/ second,
Salini is contractually required to only release 15 m3/ second during reservoir filling, far below
the average flow during the driest month (61 m3/ sec) and only a fraction of the average annual
flow(438 m3/ sec).

After reservoir filling, Lake Turkana will remain vulnerable as inflow from the Omo River is
reduced by three factors.

A. First, the ARWG study predicts that 50 – 75% of the reservoir water could be
lost due to underground cracks in geological rock formations.
B. Additional water will be lost to evaporation in the massive reservoir.
C. Finally, the government of Ethiopia hopes to attract large scale irrigation
schemes to the Omo Valley, which would require further abstraction of waters
available to Lake Turkana.

3). THE GRAND RENAISSANCE DAM (ETHIOPIAN MILLENNIUM DAM)

This project is located in the national regional state of Benishangull Gumuz in Ethiopia. This
exceptionally large hydroelectric plant will have an installed capacity of 5250-6000 MW
generated by the 15 Francis turbines located in two outdoor power stations and will be able to
produce a total of 15,128 GWh/year.

Also the dimensions of the reservoir to be built are notable with a total volume of 63,000 Mm3.
Besides the main dam, that will be constructed in RCC with a 1780 m crest length over a 155 m
height, the project also foresees a 45m high and 4800m long rock fill saddle dam with a
bituminous core, six 10,500 m3/s spillways, fifteen 180 m long penstocks with a 8.5m diameter,
four 4,210 m long diversion culverts with an 8m average diameter, two outdoor power plants
with fifteen 350MW Francis turbines for a total installed capacity of 5,250-6000 MW with the
total investment cost of 3561 M€.

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 59

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

Before the implementation of this project there was five proposed site with power production
potential in Blue Nile basin and thus are;

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 60

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

1. GRD (5 250 MW)

2. KARADOBY (1 650 MW)
3. MENDAIA (1 580 MW)
4. MABIL (1 650 MW)
5. BESHILO ( 700 MW)

Graphically as shown below.

The Grand Renaissance dam selected based on different selection criteria and it is best and
feasible in terms of economy of construction and return, environment, social and political
perspectives.

According to the SaliniCOSTRUTTORI S.P.A. Method statement for RCC DAM Foundation
Preparation Report the GRD foundation has a sound rock foundation which is most suitable for
RCC dams because they provide high bearing capacity, prevent excessive settlement, and have

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 61

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

high degree of erosion and seepage resistance. For fault and fissures of rock proper foundation
treatments are accomplished.

The environmental impact and Mitigation of GRD can be shown in two groups as upstream and
downstream effect.
1). Upstream impact → almost negligible since:

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 62

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

• There are NO VILLAGES in the reservoir area (probably due to the fact that the
elevation is very low -500 masl- and therefore the climatic conditions are unfavorable)
• There are some scattered fishermen’s huts ONLY ALONG THE RIVER (approximately
800 people). These huts will have to be moved a short distance to the banks of the
reservoir.
• There is NO ORGANISED FISHING ACTIVITY (the fishermen act individually).
• The only cultivated areas are found at the extremity of the reservoir area

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 63

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

2). Downstream impact

SHORT TERM impact (only during reservoir impounding):

Reduced
Reduced
water
energy
availability
generation in
in d/s
d/s plants
countries

LONG TERM impact:

Reduction of water spillage in d/s plants = MORE

ENERGY

Reduction of solid transport to d/s plants =

LONGER LIFE

Increase of stored water = DROUGHT RELIEF

More energy available for

INTERCONNECTION

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 64

DAM ENGINEERING I ASSIGNMENT by : abebe tarko 2013

As we see earlier there are many huge projects are under design and implementation in Ethiopia,
among these are a heavy duty multi and single purpose dam reservoir and hydropower plant are
the leading infrastructures instillation in no a days. The implementation of such a huge projects
are is not an easy task but it need skilled man power, financial capability, poeticalstability,
proper and appropriate design and construction handling and monitoring and finally standardize
surveillance and maintenance are required.

Meanwhile we have mentioned some undergoing projects but to get there detail information is
really a big task and difficult to access it. But we can understand that every single project should
have passed through project Reconnaissance survey – maintenance operation paths/stages. As we
see from Gibe III and Grand Renaissance Dam projects the project implemented under a concise
feasibility study and design criteria and the selection of the site also based on:

 Topography
 Geology and dam foundation
 Available of construction materials
 Flood hazard
 Seismic hazard
 Spillway location and possibilities
 Construction time
 Climate
 Diversion facilities
 Sediment problem
 Water quality
 Transportation facilities
 Right of way cost etc.

And these large gravity dam projects should approve the above selection and evaluation criteria
and should provide a sound promise in terms of economy, environmentally, structurally and
politically within and trans boundary. From my understanding detail environmental survey and
geological investigation should be a g deal coz it influence the entire stability and life of the
structure. Suitable foundation with proper treatment is always playing the role.

The other thing is Environmental impact assessment and mitigation measures should handled and
conducted for ay projects. Because any project implementation imposed to the ground and that
change and alter the natural ecological and ecosystem life cycle. Especially, as we saw in Gibe
III project there was a real debut between the government and the international community
especially the funders due to the environmental cases and its mitigation measures.

AMU HYDRAULICS AND HYYDROPOWER ENGINEERING 65