1T N G 15 0002 B Dewatering 3D Model

PO
List of Contents
1.
Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................5
2.
References ............................................................................................................................................................6
2.1
Tractebel Engineering/Coyne et Bellier design documents ....................................................................................6
2.2
EFNAB JV technical offer......................................................................................................................................6
2.3
Other documents ..................................................................................................................................................6
3.
Current geometry and Project details ..................................................................................................................7
3.1
Project Context .....................................................................................................................................................7
3.2
The cofferdam ......................................................................................................................................................8
3.3
Diaphragm walls geometry.................................................................................................................................... 8
3.4
Dewatering and excavation stages...................................................................................................................... 11
4.
Data inventory and hypothesis........................................................................................................................... 12
4.1
Ground surface elevation .................................................................................................................................... 12
4.2
Geotechnical model ............................................................................................................................................ 12
4.3
Water levels........................................................................................................................................................ 15
5.
Modelling approach ............................................................................................................................................ 16
5.1
Introduction......................................................................................................................................................... 16
5.2
Modelling stages: ................................................................................................................................................ 16
5.3
3D modelling ...................................................................................................................................................... 17
5.3.1
Description of the model ................................................................................................................................... 17
5.3.1.1 The model development ................................................................................................................................... 17

5.3.1.2 The mesh of the different models...................................................................................................................... 20
5.3.1.3 Boundary conditions ......................................................................................................................................... 20
5.3.2
Model Validation by the initial state ................................................................................................................... 21
5.3.3
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 24
6.
Results in steady state flow for construction stages ........................................................................................ 25
6.1
Net flow .............................................................................................................................................................. 25
6.2
Modelled pumping system description................................................................................................................. 26
6.3
Pumping rates .................................................................................................................................................... 29
6.4
Influence of the project on the closest vicinity ...................................................................................................... 29
7.
Sensitivity assessment of the 3D modelling ...................................................................................................... 31
8.
General conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 32
Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................................... 33
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER
Folio
None
Pages
A4
3/51
Originator
DEWATERING 3D MODELING
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Attached documents
List of figures
Figure 1 : Project location.................................................................................................................................................. 7
Figure 2 : Temporary cofferdam geometry ......................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 3: Location of the diaphragm walls.......................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 4 : Temporary slurry wall ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 5 : Power house diaphragm walls ......................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 6 : Sluice way diaphragm walls ............................................................................................................................. 10
Figure 7 : Permanent cut-off wall below the sluice way and powerhouse ......................................................................... 11
Figure 8 : Geotechnical section ....................................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 9 : EFNABJV suggestion for Deep Wells location ................................................................................................. 14
Figure 10 : 3Dimensional model extent............................................................................................................................ 17
Figure 11 : 3D visualization of the project area ................................................................................................................ 18
Figure 12 : Location of the waterproof organs .................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 13 : Mesh Project stage 4 ..................................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 14 : Fixed head cells limit conditions .................................................................................................................. 21
Figure 15: Boundary conditions applied for the new 3D model ......................................................................................... 22
Figure 16 : Initial state - calculated heads in longitudinal section (section location on fig 15) ............................................ 23
Figure 17 : Initial state - calculated heads in transversal section (section location on fig 15)............................................. 23
Figure 18 : 3D view of Hydraulic head - Initial state ......................................................................................................... 24
Figure 19: 3D view of flowlines - stage4 .......................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 20 : stage 2 dewatering layout .............................................................................................................................. 26
Figure 21 : stage 3 dewatering layout .............................................................................................................................. 27
Figure 22 : Stage 4 dewatering layout ............................................................................................................................. 28
Figure 23 : 3D model - hydraulic heads - Initail stage Vs construction stage 4 (optimized number of wells) ...................... 30
List of tables
Table 1: Soils permeability coefficients ............................................................................................................................ 13
Table 2 : Geotechnical works characteristics ................................................................................................................... 13
Table 3 : Piezometric data............................................................................................................................................... 22
Table 4 : 3D model Assessed flow................................................................................................................................... 29
Table 5: Permeability assessment extracted from Ref.[1]................................................................................................. 31
Table 6: Parametric study results .................................................................................................................................... 31
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
4/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
1. INTRODUCTION
The following document aims at assessing the seepage flow to be pumped for the construction of the new Assiut barrage
and hydropower plant. The project is located approximately at 450 m downstream of the existing Assiut barrage.
The solution considered for construction works within Nile riverbed requires to set up a temporary closed cofferdam (ring
dam) in order to carry out construction works in a dry pit.
Considering the geometry of the project and the important issue of dewatering, it has been decided to perform a 3
Dimensional model using finite difference software MODFLOW.
According to the construction pit dewatering design report, the top of the temporary cofferdam varies from +49.0 m.a.s.l. A
temporary slurry wall will be set up within the cofferdam to reduce the seepage into the temporary excavation pit.
The different excavation stages are expected to be achieved by using deep wells for groundwater lowering.
A previous axisymmetric model has been carried out by EFNABJV and was based on a former geometry of the cofferdam.
Some modifications of the cofferdam geometry have been made since the development of previous model. This
modification of geometry resulted in a reduction of the temporary cofferdam. This new element has been integrated to this
model.
The first purpose of this calculation note is to verify in what extent the pumping system and the different measures
foreseen can be used during the construction stage: new geometry of the cofferdam, integration of the environment of the
project (banks of the river and existing Assiut barrage). In order to do so, steady state simulations have been performed to
assess the global flows required to achieve the different excavation stages.
Then the second goal to reach is to assess the impact of such work on the closer vicinity: influence of the dewatering on
the water table compared with the initial stage.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
5/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
2. REFERENCES
2.1 Tractebel Engineering/Coyne et Bellier design documents

[1] Geotechnical data - Soil Permeability interpretation - Tractebel engineering Coyne & Bellier -1T-N-G-00-0005-B;
2.2 EFNAB JV technical offer

[2] Preliminary designs, geotechnical evaluation , group I documents 12.1 Technical offer, April 2011;
[3] Preliminary designs, numerical model for the temporary phase , group I document 12.4 technical offer, April
2011;
[4] Construction pit dewatering, Design report , calculation note referenced HC-07-CNO-0P-001-1 rev0, March
2011;
[5] Review of existing studies , draft note on hydraulic models referenced CB-01-ENO-00-001-0 rev0, January
2011;
[6] Dewatering calculations sensitivity analysis and impact , engineering note referenced VT-03-ENO-0G-002-0,
January 2011;
[7] New Assiut barrage Groundwater Model Final report ABDC December 2010;
[8] Dewatering scheme deep wells schedule, scheduled plan for the deep wells locations 1JDH-15-10002-A EFNABJV - October 2012;
[9] Preliminary guide drawings 03 - Power house Sections A-A & B-B 1JDK-03-0130-A - EFNABJV - July 2012;
[10] Preliminary guide drawings 03 - Power house Sections 1-1 & 2-2 1JDK-03-0140-A - EFNABJV - July 2012;
[11] Preliminary guide drawings 04 Sluiceway Sections A-A & B-B 1JDK-04-0130-A - EFNABJV - July 2012;
[12] Construction pit dewatering Scheduled plan for dewatering stages Tender documents - EFNABJV - March
2011;
2.3 Other documents

[13] Processing Modflow Pro version 7.0 notice document.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
6/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
3. CURRENT GEOMETRY AND PROJECT DETAILS
3.1 Project Context

The project is located on the Nile River south of Bani Murr Island in the city of Assiut. The old Assiut Barrage, made of
masonry, is located 450 m upstream of the project site.
In the vicinity of the project, the infrastructures are composed of build-up areas, agricultural lands and hydraulic structures
(irrigation canals, piezometer locations, the existing Assiut Barrage, siphons). This kind of infrastructures could be
influenced in term of settlements if the project has an important impact on the water table.
Figure 1 : Project location
The New Assiut Barrage & Hydropower Plant construction involves different geotechnical elements. Parts of them are
temporary or permanent. A temporary cofferdam made of sand fill and protected by riprap, is used to delineate a dry area
where construction works will be performed. To ease up the dewatering process, a temporary slurry wall is entrenched
within this cofferdam.
Then, three other permanent diaphragm-walls are part of the structure of the hydropower plant. Each lateral sluiceway
and the hydropower pits are achieved between diaphragm walls. The last geotechnical element is the permanent cut off
wall that is used to reduce hydraulic gradient. The details of these structural elements are described in the following
section.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
7/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
3.2 The cofferdam

The current geometry of the cofferdam corresponds to the following plan:
Figure 2 : Temporary cofferdam geometry
This drawing shows that the surrounding ring dam is no longer attached to the Bani Mur Island. The current design, in
green continuous line, downsizes the pit surface by the North face of the dam compared with the initial design in red
dotted line. The North side of the ring dam is now straight and closer to the powerhouse of about 50.0 m.
3.3 Diaphragm walls geometry

The different geotechnical elements introduced previously described in this section are the following:
-
The temporary slurry wall;

The permanent sluiceway diaphragm walls;
The permanent hydropower plant diaphragm walls;
The permanent cut off wall.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
8/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Permanent
sluiceway
diaphragm walls
Temporary slurry wall
Permanent powerhouse
plant diaphragm walls
Sluiceway pit
Cut off wall
Permanent powerhouse
diaphragm walls
Powerhouse
pit
Permanent
sluiceway
diaphragm walls
Sluiceway
pit
A temporary slurry wall set up in the surrounding ring dam is present to reduce the incoming water seepage. This
temporary slurry wall is done till after the ring dam constructions. Its bottom reaches +10.0 m.a.s.l.
Figure 4 : Temporary slurry wall
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
9/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Permanent diaphragm walls of the two sluiceways and of the powerhouse are realized when the excavation level reaches
+38.0 m.a.s.l. Those structures will also be used as permanent deep foundations for the future hydropower plant.
Nota: The thicknesses of the structural elements will be confirmed at later stage.
Figure 5 : Power house diaphragm walls
38.0 m.a.s.l
16.8 m
0.8 m
0.8
24.7 m.a.s.l
Reinforced concrete
Diaphragm Walls
17.5 m.a.s.l
17.5 m.a.s.l
Figure 6 : Sluice way diaphragm walls
38.0 m.a.s.l
11.0 m
0.8 m
0.8 m
33.0 m.a.s.l
Reinforced concrete
Diaphragm Walls
26.5 m.a.s.l
26.5 m.a.s.l
The last diaphragm wall of the project is the permanent cut-off wall of the barrage. It is foreseen all across the river that is
roughly 820 m long. A part of this wall is built within the temporary cofferdam from the excavation level +38.0 m.a.s.l.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
10/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Figure 7 : Permanent cut-off wall below the sluice way and powerhouse
3.4 Dewatering and excavation stages

The proposed dewatering system is composed of sumps, trenches and wells. It is adapted and structured according to the
different excavation stages performed during the project:
-
Construction stage 1: Construction of the sandy gravel fill ring dam.
Construction stage 2: Construction of the temporary slurry wall within the cofferdam.
Construction stage 3: The first excavation work is executed dredging the riverbed bottom. The
excavation level reached is located at +39.0 m.a.s.l.
Construction stage 4: Water level is lowered down within the cofferdam area using a floating pumping
system. Once the riverbed is reached some deep wells are added on the emerged platform within the
cofferdam to lower the water table 1.0m below the dredge platform that is +38.0m.a.s.l.
Construction stage 5: Construction of the permanent sluiceway D-wall, powerhouse D-wall and of the
permanent cut-off wall described in section 3.3 of this document.
Construction stage 6: Water table lowering in the sluiceway pit and in the powerhouse pit area. The
targeted water table levels are respectively :
+32.0 m.a.s.l for the two sluiceways pits;

+26.5 m.a.s.l for the first powerhouse platform.
Construction stage 7: Performing of the excavation work for the two sluiceways and the central
hydropower house. The targeted excavation levels of this stage are respectively +33.0 m.a.s.l(lowest
elevation for the sluiceway slab) for the two sluiceways pits and +27.15 m.a.s.l for the powerhouse
pit(lowest elevation for downstream powerhouse slab, beyond axis C-C).
Construction stage 9: Last pumping phase within the powerhouse chamber. The targeted level is +22.4
m.a.s.l.
Construction stage 9: Last excavation works within the powerhouse pit. A second platform is achieved
at the level +24.70 m.a.s.l (lowest elevation of the upstream powerhouse slab) from where the central pit
is carried out. The targeted excavation level is +22.9 m.a.s.l in the central powerhouse pit (lowest
elevation of the underside slab in the central pit).
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
11/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
The excavation levels given in the former description are extracted from the guide drawings Ref.[9] to [11].
4. DATA INVENTORY AND HYPOTHESIS
4.1 Ground surface elevation

The site topography is rather flat. As a consequence, outside of the riverbed, on the banks of the Nile, the elevation of the
ground surface is assumed to be constant: roughly +51.0 m.a.s.l.
The bathymetry of the riverbed has been generated from the data used to develop the hydraulic physical model. According
to that information, the bathymetry varies between +39.5 m.a.s.l at the south of the ring dam and +44.0 m.a.s.l just before
the existing barrage due to an accumulation of sediments.
Regarding the elevation within the working area, the slopes and shapes of the excavations come from the tender
documents (see Ref.[12]). Those data have been updated to take into account the last excavation levels known (see
Ref.[9] to [11]).
4.2 Geotechnical model

The geology of the model has been assessed from the different investigation campaigns performed on site. The total
amount of geological data comprises the geotechnical investigation performed from 1982 to 2012.
According to the past investigations, the boreholes carried out till the depth of 50 m below the ground level or riverbed
revealed that the soil was more or less made of silty sand or gravely sand.
During the previous geotechnical investigations and even during the current investigations, the base of this aquifer has not
been reached. Nevertheless for this study, we have assumed that the depth of the main aquifer is -200.0 m.a.s.l. A
sensitivity study carried out during the tender stage revealed that considering a deeper substratum and lowering the base
of the diaphragm walls had low impact on the calculations as long as the deepest excavation level is set at +22.9 m.a.s.l.
The values of permeability used in this study are the ones defined in the Ref. [1]. These values have been updated from
the results of the pumping tests, permeability tests and other geotechnical tests. In this context of fluvial deposits, the
coefficient of permeability is ordinarily maximum in the direction of the stratification and minimum in the direction normal to
5 (mean value assumed in the
that of the stratification. The ratio between horizontal and vertical permeability is set at
Ref. [1]).
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
12/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
The figure hereafter shows the geotechnical section applied to the different models
Figure 8 : Geotechnical section
U material cofferdam material
+47.6 m.a.s.l
+49.5 m.a.s.l
+42.0 m.a.s.l
1-Silty sand
+40.0 m.a.s.l
2-Fine sand
+30.0 m.a.s.l
3-Gravely sand
+0.0 m.a.s.l
4-Fine to medium sand
-200.0 m.a.s.l
The adopted values of soil permeability coefficient and anisotropy are extracted from the geotechnical report Ref. [1].
Base level of the
formation
m.a.s.l
Horizontal
Permeability
coefficient kh(m/s)
U material
+42.0
10-3
Silty sand
+40.0
10-5
Fine sand
+30
4.2*10-4
Gravely sand
+0.0
7*10-4
Fine to medium sand
-200.0
2.1*10-4
Soil
Anisotropy
Kh/kv
Table 1: Soils permeability coefficients

-
Geotechnical data
The following table presents the geometrical characteristics of the geotechnical works set up for the construction:
Geotechnical organ
Top
Bottom
Thickness
Powerhouse D-walls
+38.0 m.a.s.l
+17.0 m.a.s.l
0.80 m
Sluiceway D-walls
+38.0 m.a.s.l
+26.5 m.a.s.l
0.80 m
Cut-off wall
+38.0 m.a.s.l
+10.0 m.a.s.l
0.80 m
Temporary cofferdam slurry

wall
+49.5 m.a.s.l
+10.0 m.a.s.l
0.80 m
Table 2 : Geotechnical works characteristics

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
13/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
The concrete permeability used for modelling the diaphragm walls is assumed to be equal to 1.0x10-8 m/s.
From this permeability an equivalent is calculated to take into account the size of the cells for the 3D model. The detail of
this calculation is shown in appendix 1.
-
Assessed dewatering system
Dewatering stage 1: The dewatering system proposed here is composed of floating pumps and deep wells to lower down
the water level within the cofferdam.
Dewatering stage 2: After a first excavation to the level +39.0 m.a.s.l, a system of relief wells is activated to carry out the
diaphragm walls avoiding the gradient effect. The relief wells are vertical pits filled with a high permeability material. The
dewatering of this stage is performed using part of the deep wells described in the following stage.
The relief wells and their impact on the dewatering are not taken into account in this calculation note.
Dewatering stage 3: Then the dewatering of the third excavation stages: first powerhouse platform and sluiceways pits, is
fulfilled by deep wells. The location of the wells and the depth of the bottom come from EFNABJV layout for deep well
location (see ref.[8]). The details are shown on the following figure.
Figure 9 : EFNABJV suggestion for Deep Wells location
The imposed flow on each well is the same: 120 m3/h. The total amount of the dewatering system is composed of 100
deep wells: 46 whose bottoms are located at +5.0 m.a.s.l (well groups W-A ; W-B ; W-C; W-H ;W-I ; W-J) and 54 whose
bottoms are located at +10.0 m.a.s.l (well groups W-D ;W-E ; W-F ;W-G). Nevertheless only 65% of the system is
supposed to be used to achieve the deep excavation works. The 35% remaining devices are foreseen as an additional
safety.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
14/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Dewatering stage 4: The dewatering system proposed for the last excavation stage of the deep powerhouse platform and
the central pit requires additional 5.0m bottom deep wells in comparison to the previous stage.
In this calculation note an optimization of the foreseen layout is proposed. On the basis of the calculation results we got
thanks to the proposed well layout, the goals of this optimization are the following:
-
To set up the deep wells outside of the working area that are still in progress;
To set up the deep wells on the platform and not in the slopes foreseen to reach the excavation levels;
To make the dewatering fit as well as possible with the excavation performed;
To limit the gradient effect in soils on the vicinity of the different diaphragm walls performed.
4.3 Water levels

According to the tender documents the Nile water level during construction is set at its maximum value: +47.6 m.a.s.l
corresponding to a discharge of 2,200 m3/s.
The model developed here required information about water levels upstream of the existing Assiut barrage. The final
report on the groundwater model for the New Assiut Barrage (December 2010) developed by ABDC, shows in its
APPENDIX K-7 a local Assiut focused view of the groundwater levels where the water levels of the Nile upstream of the
existing Assiut barrage is roughly +49.5 m.a.s.l. This value and the general groundwater flow shape will be taken as
reference to build the initial condition of the model.
Still upstream of the existing barrage, the Ibrahimia Canal used for irrigation is also present at the west side of the project.
Its water level is defined at +49.5 m.a.s.l because it is regulated by the existing Assiut barrage according to the
groundwater model report for the New Assiut Barrage (December 2010) developed by ABDC ref [7].
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
15/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
5. MODELLING APPROACH
5.1 Introduction
The dewatering calculations are performed using finite difference based software named Processing MODFLOW Pro
developed by USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). A 3 dimensional model is used to represent the construction pit. The posttreatment of the results has been performed on the software 3D Master.
The finite difference method aims at discretizing a continuous middle in plane-parallel volumes. The whole cells gathered
generate an orthogonal mesh made up of columns, rows and layers. In a same line or row, the thickness is constant but
the height of the cells of a same layer can be modified. This last aspect will be used to generate the topography of the site
and to integrate the geological formations.
In the model construction, the following information must be provided for each cell:
-
Geometrical data: height, length and width,

Value of horizontal permeability coefficient,
Value of vertical permeability coefficient.
Three types of cells are defined in the model: inactive cells where no flow is allowed, fixed head cells where an initial and
constant head value is imposed and the calculated cells where the seepage equations are solved by the finite difference
method.
Using the different elements described previously, a complete three dimension numerical model has been performed. It
allows assessing the seepage rates required to be pumped in order to have dry areas during different excavation stages.
The major goal of this model is to integrate the current geometry of the temporary ring dam, the different diaphragm walls
introduced in part 4.2 and assess the global seepage values required to achieve dry excavation works.
5.2 Modelling stages:

The modelled stages represent the major excavation work achieved during the construction. These stages are described
in the following section:
-
Modelling stage 0: Scaling the model with piezometric data
Modelling stage 1: After the establishment of the cofferdam, the slurry wall and the dredged platform,
the construction pit is dewatered by floating pumps till reaching the bottom of the riverbed. The targeted
water level is +41.0 m.a.s.l. The dredged platform is still filled of water. The pumping system is simulated
using a surface drainage for this stage where a fix hydraulic head is set up.
Modelling stage 2: Once the former water level is reached, deep wells are used to lower the water table
till reaching the level +38.0 m.a.s.l that is one meter above the dredged platform. This stage introduced
the wells location and number required to ensure the feasibility of the dry construction of the diaphragm
walls.
Modelling stage 3: The following stage of construction consisted in performing the excavation work for
the two sluiceways and the central hydropower plant. The whole diaphragm walls, as described in section
3.3, are already performed. The targeted excavation levels of this stage are respectively +33.0 m.a.s.l
(lowest elevation for the sluiceway slab) for the two sluiceways pits and +27.15 m.a.s.l for the first
powerhouse platform (lowest elevation for downstream powerhouse slab, beyond axis C-C). In those
areas the water table level is lowered down 0.50 m under the excavation levels using deep wells. The
three pits excavations are performed in the same time.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
16/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Modelling stage 4: This last stage concerns the excavation of the local deep pit in the centre of the
powerhouse axis and of the second powerhouse platform. The excavation level of the two works are
respectively level of +22.9 m.a.s.l for the central pit (lowest elevation of the underside slab in the central
pit) and +24.7 m.a.s.l for the second platform (lowest elevation of the upstream powerhouse slab) . To
allow a dry excavation the water table will be lowered down to +22.4 m.a.s.l using wells located all around
this deeper excavation pit.
5.3 3D modelling
5.3.1
Description of the model
5.3.1.1 The model development

The whole project and the different excavation stages have been modelled using 5 different models. All of those five have
the same extents. The first one represents the actual conditions without the project and was used to set up the initial
piezometric conditions of the model. The four remaining models represent the main stages of the project.
The following figures show the 3 dimensional model limits as well as a visualisation of the project area:
Figure 10 : 3Dimensional model extent
Initial state
Bani Murr Island

Existing Assiut barrage
N
Ibrahimia canal
Model thickness
Bottom -200 m.as.l
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
17/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Figure 11 : 3D visualization of the project area
Project stage 4
Surrounding
cofferdam
Excavation pit
Sluiceway
pits
+32.5 m.a.s.l
Powerhouse pits
+21.4 m.a.s.l
The local topography and the bathymetry of the Nile River have been generated with the data gathered and used for the
creation of the hydraulic physical model.
The elements of geometry used in the four remaining models that represent the excavation works within the cofferdam
have been generated using the current information described in section 3.2 of this document.
The model extension has been chosen to include all important features of the current situation of the project. The south
limit is located at about 200 m upstream of the Ibrahimia canal and the North one is roughly located at about 500 m
downstream of the project location. The western limit has been extended on 1km to generate a boundary condition with
the Ibrahimia canal that sets up a constant water level till the eastern limit. Eventually, the eastern boundary is far enough
of the project to avoid boundary condition effects and also to be able to see the impact on the water table generated by
the project construction compared with the initial stage.
On this topographic base, the structural elements of the project described in appendix 1 have been added. Their location
and representation are listed and represented next:
-
The existing Assiut barrage,

The surrounding ring dam,
The temporary slurry wall,
The sluiceway and powerhouse diaphragm walls,
The permanent cut-off wall.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
18/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Figure 12 : Location of the waterproof organs
Existing Assiut
barrage
N
Sluiceway
D-walls
Powerhouse
D-walls
Cut-off wall
Temporary
slurry wall
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
19/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
5.3.1.2 The mesh of the different models

Figure 13 : Mesh Project stage 4
2220 m
2565 m
The four previous models correspond to the following excavation stages:

1st: Lowering down of the water level till reaching Nile River bed at +42.0m.a.s.l using the floating
pumps
nd
2 : Dewatering of the dredged platform using deep wells. Targeted water level of +39.0m.a.s.l.
3rd: Excavation of the sluiceway pits (+33.0 m.a.s.l) and of the first powerhouse plateform (+27.15
m.a.s.l)
4th: Last excavation stages of the local deep pit in the centre of the powerhouse (+22.4 m.a.s.l)
and of the second powerhouse platform (+22.90 m.a.s.l)
They are discretized using two kinds of cells: square cells of 5x5 m in the project area and of 15x15m far from the project.
Using refined mesh allows improving the accuracy of the model. The layers are also discretized using the same principles
in high gradients areas under the d-walls bases.
The surface covered by the model is a rectangle 2220 m long (North to South) and 2565 m wide (West to East). The
global mesh includes 226 rows and 251 columns which represents 56726 cells per layer.
5.3.1.3 Boundary conditions

The boundary conditions proposed by MODFLOW software influence the cells hydraulic activity. Three options given by
the software are described in section 5.1 Introduction to the modelling approach:
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
20/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Inactive cells;
Fixed head cells;
Calculated cells.
The boundary conditions of this model are set by fixed head cells that represent the Nile water level and canals water
level. Outside of the Nile riverbed, the cells are calculated even on the border the model. The base of the model located at
-200.0 m.a.s.l is automatically considered by the software as a no flow boundary.
The upstream of the project is located in the south direction, in the opposite direction of the river flow whereas the
downstream is located at the North boundary of the model, following the River flow (see fig.17).
The model boundary conditions are varying on the model and will be developed in a following section.
Figure 14 : Fixed head cells limit conditions
Bani Murr Island
Project downstream
Works area
Nile river
Ibrahimia canal
Project upstream
N
5.3.2
Model Validation by the initial state
The first model performed in this study represents the initial condition. It was performed to set up the boundary condition
and also to compare the results of the calculations with observed data. The information we used to generate the model
boundary conditions are extracted from the final report on the groundwater model dated December 2010 and elaborated
by ABDC [7]. The results introduced in this report were based on piezometric measurements and water levels
observations.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
21/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Figure 15: Boundary conditions applied for the new 3D model
Transversal section
Longitudinal section
In the closer vicinity of the project, two piezometers have been used to check the model results in the initial state (see
location fig 15). The imposed water level in the model corresponds to the one observed during summer time. The following
table shows the measured and the calculated heads for the two piezometers placed on figure 15 (piezometers data,
extracted from ref [7], have been gathered in appendix 3):
Piezometer
Location
Measured head
during summer time
m.a.s.l
Calculated heads
m.a.s.l
48.50
48.45
48.40
48.55
Easting : 632003
66
Northing : 499547
Easting : 633194
3
Northing : 499727
Table 3 : Piezometric data
The general assumption made here is that the groundwater is fully supplied by the Nile River and its different canals.
The two following figures represent respectively the initial hydraulic heads in longitudinal and transversal section on the
initial state of the project. The locations of the two following sections have been added to the previous figure 15:
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
22/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Figure 16 : Initial state - calculated heads in longitudinal section (section location on fig 15)
Hydraulic heads m.a.s.l
Direction of Nile flow
Figure 17 : Initial state - calculated heads in transversal section (section location on fig 15)
Those sections show the initial hydraulic head and will be compared to those made in the different stages of the project.
At the North boundary the higher water level is 50.0 m.a.s.l whereas at the South it is lowered at 47.0 m.a.s.l. The general
gradient generated by the topography and the existing Assiut barrage is roughly of 0.15%.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
23/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Figure 18 : 3D view of Hydraulic head - Initial state

In the initial state, we saw that in the different layers, the hydraulic head follows the imposed head values in the Nile River.
In a steady state the hydraulic head is roughly constant vertically in the initial state. Those observations are fitting with the
natural behaviour observed of the system.
5.3.3
Conclusion
This previous step gave us the possibility to set up the boundary conditions for the new 3D model. We observed that the
size of the model is sufficient to avoid boundary conditions effects and the results fit well with the reference data.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
24/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
6. RESULTS IN STEADY STATE FLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION STAGES

The results are introduced in the following sections with tables and graphs. These results are explained in term of isopressure surfaces, current net and hydraulic flows for each construction stage.
The results are generated from the steady-state seepage flow simulation for the four constructions stages. The models
integrate the waterproof elements foreseen for the project.
For each modelled stage, the flow is assessed either using surface drainage (stage 1) or deep wells (stage 2 to 4).
6.1 Net flow

The following section aims at analysing the flow path induced by the dewatering system. To do so, the following figures
show on 3D view and in cross-sections current flow lines.
Figure 19: 3D view of flowlines - stage4
Longitudinal section of the project area
Transversal section of the project area
The presence of waterproof barriers forces the flow lines to go underneath and exit at the bottom of the excavation. The
path of flow lines seems to be extended thanks to the waterproof barriers. As a result these barriers seem to play their
roles efficiently by reducing hydraulic gradients.
It can be noted that the influence of the project extends quite far from the work area in all layers on the right bank of the
Nile River. The left bank in the area of the project is not significantly affected by the seepage flow since there is a recharge
on the left bank water table by the Ibrahimia Canal and also by the Nile River.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
25/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
6.2 Modelled pumping system description

The first dewatering stage is performed using floating pumps. A dredging area is already performed at the level
+39.0m.a.s.l. The targeted water level for this stage is +41.0 m.a.s.l. The dredged area is still filled of water after this
stage.
Surface drainage. Fixed

hydraulic
head
at
+41.0m.a.s.l.
On the basis of the layout introduced by ENFABJV (cf. section 4.2) the optimized layout modeled in the successive stages
are shown in the following sections. The modeled stage two requires all the wells that bottom are located at +10.0
m.a.s.l. Parts of the deep wells which bottoms are located at +5.0 m.a.s.l are also activated to achieve the targeted water
levels in the vicinity of the powerhouse.
Downstream
12 Deep wells bottom

+5.0m.a.s.l
27 Deep wells bottom
+10.0m.a.s.l
Upstream
Figure 20 : stage 2 dewatering layout
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
26/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
The deep wells used for this stage are all part of the design proposed by EFNABJV. A rearrangement compared to the
initial layout has been adopted among the 5.0 m.a.s.l bottom wells located in the upstream part of the project. It aims at
improving the system for the next excavation by moving those deep wells as close as possible of the powerhouse pit.
Those wells have been implanted outside of the next excavation stage and sufficiently far away from the slurry wall (in the
downstream direction) to avoid excessive gradient effects. In total, the modeled stage two appeal to 39 deep wells. The
imposed flow for each well is 120m3/h.
The modeled stage 3 corresponds to the excavation of the two sluiceways and of the first platform within the
powerhouse. The number of 5.0 m.a.s.l deep wells has been increased upstream and downstream of the project
Downstream
29 additional Deep wells

bottom +5.0 m.a.s.l
Upstream
Figure 21 : stage 3 dewatering layout
The 29 additional 5.0 m.a.s.l bottom wells have been apportioned at the upstream and downstream part of the
powerhouse pit, as closed as possible of the excavation to limit as much as possible excessive hydraulic gradients in the
ring dam.
This allows a dry excavation of the first platform avoiding seepage issues on the slopes. The additional number of wells
allows the water table downsize for the lateral sluiceways.
3
As a total, the modeled stage two requires 62 deep wells. The imposed flow of each well is 120m /h.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
27/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
The modeled stage 4 examines the excavation of the last platform in the powerhouse pit and of the central deep
powerhouse pit.
2 of the former deep

wells are stopped (see
on the former stage
location)
10 additional deep wells

bottom at +5.0 m.a.s.l
on the platform at
+27.15m.a.s.l
2 additional deep wells are

needed at the upstream
part of the cut-off wall
Figure 22 : Stage 4 dewatering layout

This last stage deep wells configuration takes advantage of the work phasing to perform the dewatering. Setting up the
deep wells within the powerhouse pit enhances the wells efficiency while limiting the gradients close to the slurry wall. In
total this last stage requires 72 deep wells to fulfill the dewatering requirements.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
28/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
6.3 Pumping rates

The following table sum up the flow assessed for the different excavation stages modelled.
Stage
Assessed flow
(m3/day)
Dewatering system established
1: Lowering of the Nile water

level to +41.0 m.a.s.l
60480
Floatingpumps
112320
39wellspositionedwithintheworking
areaarerequiredtoperformthestage
twodewatering
118850
65wellsarerequiredtofulfillthe
dewateringneededforthe2
sluicewaysandforthefirstplatformin
thepowerhousepit.
207360
Additionaldeepwellspositionedon
thefirstpowerhouseplatform.Partof
thestage3wellscanbedeactivatedto
minimizethegradienteffect.72wells
arerequiredtofulfillthelast
dewateringstage.
2: Excavation of the first

platform to the
level+39.0m.a.s.l. Water level
lowered to +38.0 m.a.s.l and
work of the d-walls.
3: Excavation of the two
sluiceways and of the
powerhouse pits. Water table
downsized using an optimized
number of wells.
4: Excavation of the central
deep powerhouse pit using
the optimized number of deep
wells.
Table 4 : 3D model Assessed flow

The hydraulic heads computed (surface hydraulic head isovalues, longitudinal and transversal section) for each modelling
stages are gathered in appendix 3 of this document.
An additional appendix 4 gathered extended views of the piezometric lines generated by the dewatering.
Concerning the piezometric lines shown in annex 3 & 4, the values printed outside of the ringdam are lowering during the
different stages. This phenomenon results of a combined effect of:
-
The rapid hydraulic head loss generated in the first layer;

The graphical printout of the results that are given in the middle of each cell.
The hydraulic head to consider at the top of the Nile riverbed is still +47.6m.a.s.l.
6.4 Influence of the project on the closest vicinity

Observations made on flow lines revealed that the project in the final stage could have an influence quite far from the
project. The concerned area regarding the influenced zone of the project is the right bank of the Nile. The following figures
shows the transversal sections of the hydraulic heads computed in the final stage of the model and in the initial state.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
29/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Figure 23 : 3D model - hydraulic heads - Initail stage Vs construction stage 4 (optimized number of wells)
Hydraulic Heads in transversal section in the works
area Initial state
Hydraulic Heads in transversal section in the works

area Stage 4
Direction of Nile
flow
Hydraulic head m.a.s.l
Hydraulic head m.a.s.l
In the initial state of the project the computed head on the right bank of the Nile River was roughly between 47.0 and 47.5
m.a.s.l. In the construction stage of the project, where the pumping rate is the highest, we can see that on the right bank
the computed hydraulic head is reduced to a value in the range of 38.0 and 39.0 m.a.s.l. Thus, the impact of the project on
the water table represents a water level reduction of 8.0 to 9.5 m. The area affected by this phenomenon goes from the
cofferdam, to the eastern border of the model. On the transversal section this area is roughly 600.0 m long.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
30/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
7. SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT OF THE 3D MODELLING

The model sensitivity is assessed on the basis of the modelling stage 4 whose design and hypothesis are described in the
previous sections: wells layout, flow assessment and soil parameters.
The parameters tested are the permeability coefficients and the anisotropy of the different layers. The geotechnical
analysis, reported in Ref.[1], introduced a range of those parameters. The following table sums up the analysis:
Soil Profile
Horizontal Permeability
Base level
Min.
Max.
Adopted
Value
m.a.s.l
(m/s)
(m/s)
(m/s)
Silt Sand
40
4,0E-06
1,4E-05
Fine Sand
30
1,6E-04
Sand with Gravel
2,8E-04
Anisotropy (KH/KV)
Deviation of
the adopted
value
Min.
Max.
Adopted
Value
KH/KV
KH/KV
KH/KV
1,0E-05
5,6E-04
4,0E-04
1,0E-03
7,0E-04
Soil
From
Min.
-60%
Fine to Medium
Sand, some Gravel
-200
8,0E-05
2,8E-04
From
Max.
+40%
2,0E-04
Table 5: Permeability assessment extracted from Ref.[1]

The purpose of the calculation is to assess the flow required to perform the dewatering considering the limit values of the
range gave in the previous table.
Two calculations have been performed:
-
The maximum value of the data range is assessed taking the maximum value of the horizontal
permeability and the minimum value of anisotropy in all the layers;
Conversely, the lower range boundary is assessed taking the minimum value of the horizontal
permeability and the maximum value of anisotropy in all the layers.
The flow value is assessed modifying the imposed flow in each wells of the modeling stage 4. The imposed flow is
changed till reaching the same dewatering level as the one found in the design case (model stage 4 performed with the
adopted values of the table above). The results in terms of flow variations are sums up in the following table.
Case
Horizontal
permeability
coefficients
values
Anisotropy kh/kv
Computed
flow
3
(m /day)
Fixed flow
3
/well (m /h)
1- Design case
Adoptedvalues
Adoptedvalues=5
207360
120
2- lower limit estimation
Min
Max=7
65670
38
3- upper limit
estimation
Max
Min=2
380160
220
Table 6: Parametric study results

In as much as the well unit flow given in this section are either much lower or much greater than the well unit capability,
the number of wells and their location will need to be updated according to the considered situation.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
31/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
8. GENERAL CONCLUSION
The model performed here confirmed the feasibility of the dewatering based on the last construction stages foreseen. The
flow generated by the dewatering system is in the same order of magnitude of the one found in the previous stages of the
project.
Nevertheless several observations can be made on the results we get:
-
For the model stage two, the solution of relief wells will need to be verified to see in what extent they can downsize
the gradient effect during the construction of the diaphragm walls
Based on the current parameters, the solution proposed to fulfil the requirements in terms of dewatering consists in
using 27 wells whose bottoms are located at 10.0 m.a.s.l and respectively 35 and 45 wells whose bottoms are
located at +5.0 m.a.s.l for the stages 3 and 4.
The dewatering proposed for the stages 3 and 4 are relying on the works phasing to downsize the hydraulic head
loss, close to slurry wall, and to improve the efficiency of the system.
The wells location proposed will be updated to take into account the final site conditions. The layout for the deep wells
locations will also need to take into account the gradient generated within cofferdam material, in the vicinity of the d-walls
and also during the construction of the d-walls.
The parametric analysis gave two limit flow values. It allows considering the uncertainties on the permeability coefficient
and anisotropy estimations. The results in terms of flow are very sensitive to those parameters: the flow required for the
design case (adopted value of permeability and anisotropy) is roughly three times superior to the flow computed for the
lower parameter range limit(min horizontal permeability an max anisotropy) and is twice lower than the upper parameter
range limit.
Nevertheless, those two values are computed taking into account the maximum Nile water level known for a 50 years
return period flow.
Combination of the different parameters could be assessed to have a better definition of the influence of each soils
specification on the calculations.
The presence or not of the silty sand layer in the Nile riverbed has not been considered in this parametric analysis. This
layer identified at the top of the geotechnical model has a lower permeability than the other and creates an important head
loss under the Nile River. The influence of this parameter need to be discussed for the final layout for the detailed layout of
wells.
Regarding the influence of the project on neighbouring areas, the model shows that it is more on the right bank of the Nile
River where the drop in hydraulic head is generated by the project pumping. This drop is in the range of 8.0 to 9.5 m. The
affected area can exceed 450 m according to the simulation. A specific study will be needed to assess the consequences
in term of settlement.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
32/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
APPENDIX
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
33/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Appendix 1: Assessment of the equivalent permeability for waterproof organs
Inasmuch as the most little cells are 5.0 m width*5.0m length in the 3D model and 1.0 m width*1.0 m length in the 2D
model , positioning diaphragm walls of 0.80 m width within this cells require to calculate an equivalent permeability. This
permeability must take into account the proportion of soil and the proportion of slurry wall within a cell. For this type of
analysis, the D-walls equivalent permeability can be estimated assuming that we have a flow normal to stratification.
Layer 1
Layer 2
Flow direction Q
Layer 3
K1 K1 K2
L1 L1 L2
Several types of cells have been used to build this study: the cells dimensions are between squares of 15.0 m side and
squares of 5.0 m side in the 3D model and square of 1.0 m side in the 2d model. The slurry wall permeability used for Dwall is set up at 1.0*10-8 m/s.
The soils hydraulic parameters are the one chosen in the design criteria note:
Soil
Horizontal coefficient of
permeability
(m/s)
Vertical coefficient of
permeability
(m/s)
Sandy gravel fill

cofferdam material
1.0x10-4
1.0x10-4
Subground sand
5.0x10-4
1.0x10-4
The following graph represents the analysis carried out for the determination of the equivalent permeability of waterproof
organs. It is based on the previous formula to determine equivalent permeability in a multi-layer soil under a normal flow.
The thickness of D-walls is constant and equal to 0.80 m.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
34/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Equivalentpermabilityforthedifferenttypeofcells
usedinthemodellisatione=0,80m
Soil permeabilityrangekh [1.0*105;1.0*103]
Equivalenthorizontalpermeabilitykeq(m/s)
2,00E07
1,80E07
1,60E07
1,40E07
1mwidthcells
1,20E07
2.5mwidthcells
1,00E07
5mwidthcells
8,00E08
7.5mwidthcells
15mwidthcells
6,00E08
4,00E08
2,00E08
0,00E+00
Horizontalpermeabilityofsoilkh(m/s)
We can see on the previous graph that in our case where horizontal permeability is comprise between 1.0*10-3 and 1.0*10m/s, till cells are smaller than 7.5 m width, the soil permeability has no impact on the equivalent permeability determined
with the method exposed previously.
As a consequence in the 3D model where refined mesh on the project area is composed of 5.0 m width cells, the D-walls
are represented by a constant horizontal permeability of 6.1*10-8m/s.
By the same token, in the 2D model where D-walls are represented in 1.0 m width cells, the equivalent permeability
-8
calculated is 1.0*10 m/s.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
35/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Appendix 2: Piezometric data

Groundwater level at piezometer 66 (extracted from ref [7])
Groundwater level at piezometer 3 (extracted from ref [7])
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
36/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Appendix 3: 3D model sections computed hydraulic heads

-
Modelling stage 1:
After the establishment of the cofferdam and of the slurry wall, the construction pit is dewatered by floating pumps till
reaching the bottom of the riverbed. The dredged platform at the level +39.0m.a.s.l is still filled of water. The targeted level
is roughly +41.0 m.a.s.l.
Transversal section
Surface drainage
3D Visualization of the work area stage 1
Surrounding ringdam
First excavation stage
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
37/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Computed hydraulic heads dewatering +41.0m.a.s.l

(Vertical scale factor of 3)
Longitudinal section of model stage 1

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
38/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Transversal section of model stage 1

The pumping rates assessed for the model stage 1 is 60480m3/day.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
39/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Modelling stage 2
Once the riverbed is reached, trenches and sumps are lowered down within the cofferdam till the water table is lowered to
the targeted level of +37.5 m.a.s.l. Then the first excavation work is executed from the riverbed top to +38.0 m.a.s.l. Once
the excavation level is reached, a relief well system is set up around the location of the diaphragm walls to avoid the
gradient effect. The whole diaphragm walls are assumed to be performed in the same time.
Transversal section
Deep wells
Wells location model stage 2

wells
Diaphragm walls equivalent permeability is kh=6.1x10-8m/s. This equivalent permeability takes into account a 0.80 m
width Diaphragm-wall within a 5.0 m side square cell.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
40/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B

(Vertical scale factor of 3)

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
41/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
42/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Modelling stage 3:
The following stage of construction consisted in performing the excavation work for the two sluiceways and the central
hydropower plant. The targeted excavation levels of this stage are respectively +32.5 m.a.s.l for the two sluiceways pits
and +27.15 m.a.s.l for the powerhouse first platform. In those areas the water table level is lowered down 0.50 m under
the excavation levels using deep wells. The three pits excavations are assumed to be performed in the same time.
For this third stage the foreseen configuration of 65 wells doesnt meet the requirement of the dewatering. The results
shown here correspond to an adaptation of the wells location.
Transversal section
Deep well location
The number of wells foreseen for this stage is 62 withDiaphragm

27 whose bottoms are located at +10.0 m.a.s.l and 35 whose
bottom are located at +5.0 m.a.s.l.
walls:
Powerhouse
Sluiceways
Deep wells location
Cut-off
Temporary slurry
wall
Diaphragm walls equivalent permeability is kh=6.1x10-8m/s.
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
43/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B

(vertical scale factor of 3)
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
44/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
45/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Modelling stage 4: This last stage concerns the excavation of the local deep pit in the centre of the powerhouse axis and
of the last platform at. Their excavation levels are respectively +22.9m.a.s.l for the central deep pit and +24.7 m.a.s.l . To
allow a dry excavation the water table will be lowered down to +22.4 m.a.s.l under the pit and to 24.2m.a.s.l under the
second platform using wells located all around this deeper excavation pit and surface drainage.
Transversal section
Powerhouse central
deep pit
The dewatering system set up for the stage 3 doesnt fully fulfill the needs for the excavation of the deep powerhouse pit.
Additional wells are added at the rear of the cut off wall and on the first powerhouse plateform.
Diaphragm walls:
Deep wells location
Powerhouse
Sluiceways
Cut-off
Diaphragm walls equivalent permeability is kh=6.1x10-8m/s.

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
46/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B

(vertical scale factor of 3)

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
47/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B

Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
48/51
Originator
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Dewatering stage 2
Appendix 4 : Hydrualic heads isovalues
+39.0m.a.s.l
+39.0m.a.s.l
+39.0m.a.s.l
+39.0m.a.s.l
Issuer
Type
Color
Dewatering -3D
modeling
Scale
Originator
Folio
None
Div
Type
A4
Element
T N G 1
Pages
49/51
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Dewatering stage 3
+38 0m a s l
+38.0m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
+37.0m.a.s.l
+37.0m.a.s.l
+27.15 m.a.s.l
+33.0m.a.s.l
+27.15 m.a.s.l
+33.0m.a.s.l
+27.15 m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
50/51
Originator
DEWATERING 3D MODELLING
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B
Dewatering stage 4
+38.0m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
+27.15m.a.s.l
+33.0m.a.s.l
+24.2m.a
.s.l
+
2
2.
9
m
+33.0m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
+38.0m.a.s.l
Issuer
Type
Scale
Color
Folio
None
Pages
A4
51/51
Originator
DEWATERING 3D MODELLING
Div
Type
Element
T N G 1
Number
Ind
0 2 B

1T N G 15 0002 B Dewatering 3D Model

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1T N G 15 0002 B Dewatering 3D Model

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PO

Tractebel Engineering/Coyne et Bellier design documents ....................................................................................6

EFNAB JV technical offer......................................................................................................................................6

Other documents ..................................................................................................................................................6

Current geometry and Project details ..................................................................................................................7

Project Context .....................................................................................................................................................7

The cofferdam ......................................................................................................................................................8

Diaphragm walls geometry.................................................................................................................................... 8

Dewatering and excavation stages...................................................................................................................... 11

Data inventory and hypothesis........................................................................................................................... 12

Ground surface elevation .................................................................................................................................... 12

Geotechnical model ............................................................................................................................................ 12

Modelling approach ............................................................................................................................................ 16

Modelling stages: ................................................................................................................................................ 16

Description of the model ................................................................................................................................... 17

5.3.1.1 The model development ................................................................................................................................... 17

Model Validation by the initial state ................................................................................................................... 21

Results in steady state flow for construction stages ........................................................................................ 25

Net flow .............................................................................................................................................................. 25

Modelled pumping system description................................................................................................................. 26

Pumping rates .................................................................................................................................................... 29

Influence of the project on the closest vicinity ...................................................................................................... 29

Sensitivity assessment of the 3D modelling ...................................................................................................... 31

General conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 32

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

2.1 Tractebel Engineering/Coyne et Bellier design documents

2.2 EFNAB JV technical offer

2.3 Other documents

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

3. CURRENT GEOMETRY AND PROJECT DETAILS

3.1 Project Context

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

3.2 The cofferdam

3.3 Diaphragm walls geometry

The temporary slurry wall;

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

Figure 6 : Sluice way diaphragm walls

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

3.4 Dewatering and excavation stages

Construction stage 1: Construction of the sandy gravel fill ring dam.

+32.0 m.a.s.l for the two sluiceways pits;

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

4.1 Ground surface elevation

4.2 Geotechnical model

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

4-Fine to medium sand

Fine to medium sand

Table 1: Soils permeability coefficients

Temporary cofferdam slurry

Table 2 : Geotechnical works characteristics

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

Assessed dewatering system

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

4.3 Water levels

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

Geometrical data: height, length and width,

5.2 Modelling stages:

Modelling stage 0: Scaling the model with piezometric data

TRACTEBEL ENGINEERING/COYNE ET BELLIER

Description of the model