Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Extended Abstract 67427.... Rast Llogarites Gjeomembraat
Extended Abstract 67427.... Rast Llogarites Gjeomembraat
Abstract
The principal subject of this thesis is the geomembrane sealing systems on embankment dams. The evolution of
the knowledge is marked by the continuously deepening of the questions related to these systems, finishing the present work
with an effective design of a real case of an embankment dam.
It’s analysed general considerations on dams and their different types, basic concepts of geosynthetics and their
different applications, these knowledge has been obtained mostly on the last century with a certain emphasis in these last
decades due to pressures from various origins: the demographic explosion and its needs, environmental matters, new laws
and regulations and, even, new technologies. An effective dynamization of these solutions is needed as well as a correct
formation of the dam designers.
The geomembrane sealing system is demystified on this thesis as well as new concepts and procedures. All this
accumulated knowledge is put into practice in a real case of an embankment dam in Madeira Island, Portugal. The
preliminary design is done using the limit equilibrium method and then it’s made an analysis with finite elements method
(FEM). This last analysis consists in obtaining the stress-strain state of the structure of all the construction phases and during
the first filling of the reservoir, to ensure that the preliminary design is right. The FEM is also used to study the consequences
of defects on the geomembrane.
Based on all the information gathered and analysis made, one can conclude that GSS solutions are valid and
technically suitable to grant imperviousness to a dam.
Key-words: embankment dams, geossynthetics, geomembranes, waterproofing, dam project, leakage control
1
been used for quite some time and consists of a geomembranes, like elastomeric ones, fell into disuse
Geomembrane Sealing System - GSS, greatly developed because of its inconvenient characteristics.
in the last three decades. The adequate design and
selection of the water tightness system is extremely We can also take some conclusions about the
important and requires a full understanding of it. problems that some of these projects had with their GSS:
inadequate connections, deterioration due to wind action,
3.2 Historical introduction punching due to falling materials and misshapen
subgrade, localized deformation of the supporting soil
During the Second World War, polymers and and the inevitable phenomenon of aging. If adequately
products made from polymers were created and installed and explored, a GSS can have a good
developed. They had been used to produce performance for about 200 years (estimated values for
geosynthetics and these products are used in a lot of covered system in [1]), surpassing the lifetime usually
hydraulic and geotechnical structures. The use of considered in dams design (100 years).
geosynthetics systems started after the war in drainage
canals and reservoirs. Due to its success and the Because of that, it’s very important to make the
practical experience of these solutions, it allowed to gain right choice and selection of the GSS. The installation
confidence and to implement it on another and larger phase is also a crucial step to the lifetime expectancy of
structures. the geosynthetic system.
The first installation of a GSS in dams was in an Currently, the GSS technology is used in all types
embankment dam in Italy. Contrada Sabetta dam was of dams, new or existing ones. It’s a well-accepted
built in 1959 with a covered system composed of a technique in all over the world. According to ICOLD data
double polyisobutylene geomembrane with 2,0 mm of [2] there’s more than 270 dams where the main
thickness as the only waterproofing system. After one waterproofing system is made of a GSS, of which over
year, in 1960, the same technology was used in the 183 are embankment dams.
Dobsina dam in Slovakia with a 0,9 mm PVC
3.3 Design Criteria
geomembrane in a covered system. In 1967, in France,
the water tightness of Miel dam was provided by a
A GSS design has to ensure safety and to prevent
covered geomembrane made of butylic rubber with 1,0
failure or excessive changes on the stress-strain state of
mm of thickness. Throughout the history it has been
the dam by the seepage phenomenon.. It has to
achieved other important goals to the development and
guarantee a good connection to the foundation and to the
rooting of this kind of technology. An internal system of
concrete structures of the dam. It must have good
geosynthetics was firstly used on the spanish Odiel dam
characteristics of flexibility to adapt to the dam
in 1970. The first repair of a dam with a GSS was in
movements. For last and not least, the sliding
Czech Republic with a 0,9 mm PVC geomembrane on
mechanism created by the layers of the system has to be
the Obenice dam, in 1971. The first time an exposed
verified and prevented. If the friction force doesn’t
GSS was installed was in 1973 on the Banegon dam, in
guarantee the stability, then it has to comprise an
France, with a 4 mm bituminous geomembrane. Other
anchorage systems.
great milestone achieved by this solution happened in
1997, when the first underwater installation was made in A GSS is a system that has a geomembrane on it
the Lost Creek dam, in USA. for the purpose of granting imperviousness to the dam.
Due to its nature, the geomembranes are easily
From the analysis of its evolution and the
damaged, so the system may comprise other
completed projects, we can learn and optimize the
geosynthetics, like geotextiles to support and protect the
solution. We can take some conclusions of its history of
geomembrane, and geogrids, behind the watertight
development like the choice of the best polymeric
element, to grant an adequate drainage.
material, its thickness and durability, some design details,
anchorage systems and failure mechanisms, etc. 3.3.1 Types of GSS
The choice of the GSS is made from its availability,
There’s three types of GSS [3]:
personal experience, design specifications and available
information. We can see that the choice has also a Simple liner;
regional influence. For example, the use of bituminous Double liner;
geomembranes is emphasized in France. Other types of
2
Composite liner. watertight systems without compromising their capacity
of waterproofing the structure.
The simple liner is comprised by just one
geomembrane. There’s many examples of it, it is most Other great advantage of GSS is their capacity to
used one. For example, the Miel dam from France deform without tearing apart. Their elongations are large
already presented. Jibiya dam in Nigeria, from 1989, has enough to say that these systems are the recommended
a geocomposite consist of a PVC geomembrane ones when large deformations are expected. Their
reinforced with a non-woven PP geotextile. flexibility allows the system to adapt perfectly to the
subgrade and its movements.
The double and composite liners are composed by
two consecutive elements of low permeability. The The systems with geosynthetics are so much
composite liner consists on a set of a mineral component easier to deal with. They are not highly dependent of their
and a synthetic component, frequently, a geomembrane availability near the construction site. The characteristics
with a soil layer behind it with very low permeability, clay of traditional clay cores are dependent of the construction
for instance. The double one is a set of two synthetic quality; their permeability and durability vary with
components like two consecutive geomembranes. These experience and performance of its appliers. The
type liners were created to minimize the possible leakage characteristics of geosynthetics are very much controlled
from a hole or a defect on the more external during fabrication and simplify a lot the construction.
geomembrane. They only demand special attention with their integrity
during its transport, storage and installation. The time of
These solutions have a problem with the water construction can be reduced when using a GSS instead
entrapped between the two consecutive layers with low of the traditional solutions. They present less constraints;
permeability or inside the mineral layer from a possible their installation can be made in accordance with other
leakage. If a rapid drawdown of the reservoir level parallel works and it’s not affected by the weather
occurs, the entrapped water can provoke excessive conditions.
pressure in the geomembrane and the materials above it.
It may cause the loss of stability of the system or the 3.3.3 Location of the GSS
uplifting of the system and the materials above it.
Nowadays, it’s common to put a drainage layer (possibly The GSS can be positioned in the dam adopting
a geogrid) between the systems or behind it. When the several configurations. There are three kinds of positions:
solution is covered permanently and with enough weight,
this may not be a concern. These solutions guarantee a External system with a covered GSS;
redundancy of the system, improving its reliability. External system with an exposed GSS;
Internal system.
3.3.2 Advantages of a GSS
The next picture seeks to catalog the different
GSS has been used many times now and its usage possible arrangements of geosynthetic system (Figure 1).
is increasing due to its various advantages when All of them have some advantages and disadvantages,
comparing it to the conventional solutions [3]. but almost 90% of the GSS used in embankment dams
are positioned at the upstream face. Essentially this
The first desirable characteristic of geomembranes configuration is the most used because of the following
is the cost of it. These systems are more economical reasons:
than the traditional ones, unless the material of the
traditional solution like clay is very near the construction The vertical component of the water pressure
site. Their supply, transport, storage and installation can contributes to the stability of the dam;
be optimized to make a very economical proposal. It has less complications in the construction phase;
It allows visual inspection and maintenance on the
Their permeability is much lower than the one exposed solutions;
presented by the conventional materials. This Their eventual repair or replacement is easier than
characteristic is very important in various applications, the internal system.
like wastewater or contaminated water reservoirs. In
dams, this advantage is not so emphasized because the
priority is the structural and hydraulic safety and the
purpose of the dam. Geomembranes allow thinner
3
The chemical resistance is only put into analysis
when the retained liquid is other than water. Mechanical
resistance is the responsible characteristic for the choice
of the type of geomembrane. Normally the geomembrane
is usually axially tensioned and its axial resistance is the
most important characteristic of it. Proper design of the
various system forces is essential, from its installation to
its operation.
4
𝑡𝑔 𝛿𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 > 𝑡𝑔 𝛽 𝑇 cos 𝛽 = 𝜎𝑛 𝐿𝑅𝑂 tg 𝛿𝑈 + 𝜎𝑛 𝐿𝑅𝑂 tg 𝛿𝐿 + 0,5 (
2𝑇 sen 𝛽
𝐿𝑅𝑂
) 𝐿𝑅𝑂 tg 𝛿𝐿 −
1 1
( (𝛾𝐴𝑇 𝑑𝐴𝑇 ) + 𝜎𝑛 ) 𝐾𝐴 𝑑𝐴𝑇 + ( (𝛾𝐴𝑇 𝑑𝐴𝑇 ) + 𝜎𝑛 ) 𝐾𝑃 𝑑𝐴𝑇
where 𝛿𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 represents the friction angle of the 2 2
5
The installation is usually made vertically along the restitution system and the lining of a natural water
slope and then, if applicable, opened in its full extend of course.
width. Sometimes it’s made horizontally in cases where
we have berms along the upstream slope. It’s very Its water feeding is going to be made by Ribeira do
important to leave an adequate overlapping between rolls Alecrim and Levada Velha do Paul, in a pressurized way.
or panels of geomembranes to make a good connection, When the full filling of the reservoir is done, the water is
10 to 30 cm. As soon as the connections are made, it’s going to be at elevation 1352.00 m. It’s going to have a
used a loading system to prevent its uplift. spillway and an intake structure at elevation 1330.45 m.
Pico da Urze has an impervious curtain made by
The connections of GSS are very important and geosynthetics on its upstream face and reservoir.
can determine their success. There are many types of
connections, Figure 5 presents some. The choice depends It has been executed an investigation campaign
on the type of geomembrane and the specific conditions and a characterization analysis of the intervening soils. It
found “in situ”. It should be known that different types of allowed concluding that the foundation is very
connections require different procedures and conditions. heterogeneous and not suitable for foundation of a dam.
The method must be chosen taking into account the They present high deformability. It was considered
temperature, pressure and productivity. sufficient a general excavation of 1.5 to 2.0 m.
4.1 Preliminary-design
6
expected. For that, it must calculate the effective fetch of Table 4: Tension forces of solution A.
the reservoir, the wave’s significant height and period.
F1-F2 F3-F4
The table 1 shows the results for the different slope TGTX TGTX Tgeocomposite Tgeocomposite
Inclination F1 F2=F3 F4=F5
inclinations considered. (kN/m) (kN) (kN/m) (kN)
1:1,5 2.85 1.93 2.33 0.92 29.13 -0.40 -12.61
1:1.75 2.98 2.02 2.43 0.96 33.99 -0.41 -14.72
Table 1: W and r values for the various slope inclinations.
1:2 3.07 2.08 2.51 0.99 38.84 -0.43 -16.82
Inclination
1:1.5 1:1.75 1:2
Table 5: Tension forces of solution B.
W (kN) 0.188 0.161 0.141
r (m) 0.212 0.201 0.193
F1-F2
Tgeocomposite
Inclination F1 F2=F3 Tgeocomposite (kN)
As the area of the reservoir is small, the thickness (kN/m)
needed of the riprap is also small, but there’s a minimum 1:1,5 2,85 2,33 0,52 16,52
1:1,75 2,98 2,43 0,54 19,27
value. The same method allows an estimation of its 1:2 3,07 2,51 0,56 22,02
dimension and the maximum diameter found is 0.30 m.
So, the average thickness adopted is 0.35 m. For these values of the tension forces, it was
performed a design analysis to determine the length of
For the stability analysis, it has been considered the anchorage system. At the same time, it has been
the parameters displayed at Table 2. made a sensibility analysis of it, changing the inclination,
Table 2: Data used for the stability analysis
the thickness of the cover layer in the anchorage zone,
changing the solution and considering the case of a
Friction angles: ' Cover layer: Transition layer: possible anchorage at the middle of the upstream slope.
GTX/SL (°) 25 20 r (kN/m3) 22 AT (kN/m3) 18 It should be noted that the negative tension force in
GTX/GMB (°) 21 16.8 r (m) 0.35 AT (°) 38 Ka 0.328
CL/GTX (°) 30 24 W (kN/m2) 7.7 'AT (°) 30,4 Kp 3.049
geocomposite of the solution A doesn’t mean that it’s
going to be in compression, it indicates that the friction
The different values of the friction angles force is more than sufficient to ensure the stability.
presented in table 2 are divided by 1.25, as EC7
Tables 6 to 8 resume the results obtained for the
recommends in the design approach 1, combination 2, of
the horizontal part of the anchorage length, LRO, with an
the GEO limit states. The considered interfaces are
index A for solution A and B for solution B and an index 2
between the support layer and the geotextile (GTX/SL),
when it’s considered an anchorage at the slope middle.
between the smooth PVC geomembrane and the
geotextile (GTX/GMB) and the geotextile with the cover Table 6: Values for the anchorages length in a slope with the
layer (CL/GTX). These values came from bibliography. So, inclination of 1:1.5.
the respective tests must be carried out specifically for Cover
each case.. thickness LROA (m) LROA2 (m) LROB (m) LROB2 (m)
(m)
Firstly, the stability was checked and the 0.5 7.125 3.563 3.178 1.589
1 3.563 1.781 1.589 0.794
conclusions are presented in table 3 for the different 1.4 2.545 1.272 1.135 0.567
slopes. LROA dATA LROA2 dATA2 LROB dATB LROB2 dATB2
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
0.5 1 0.464 1 0.231 1 0.236 1 0.073
Table 3: Verification of the stability condition.
1 1 0.252 1 0.083 1 0.076 0.5 0.039
1.4 1 0.162 0.5 0.083 0.5 0.082 0.5 0.009
Inclination ° < ’GTX/SL < 'GTX/GMB < 'CL/GTX
1:1.5 33.69 No No No
1:1.75 29.74 No No No
Table 7: Values for the anchorages lengths in a slope with the
1:2 26.57 No No No inclination of 1:1.75.
Cover
As the table presents, the stability is not ensured thinckness LROA (m) LROA2 (m) LROB (m) LROB2 (m)
just by the intervening friction forces. So an anchorage (m)
0.5 8.986 4.493 4.046 2.023
system is needed. The tension force calculations are 1 4.493 2.247 2.023 1.011
made for solutions A and B and are shown in tables 4 1.4 3.209 1.605 1.445 0.722
and 5. LROA dATA LROA2 dATA2 LROB dATB LROB2 dATB2
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
0.5 1 0.566 1 0.299 1 0.311 1 0.122
1 1 0.332 1 0.130 1 0.129 1 0.002
1.4 1 0.227 1 0.066 0.5 0.121 0.5 0.029
7
It should be noted that usually the anchorage cover
Table 8: Values for the anchorages lengths in a slope with the layer isn’t horizontal as the anchorage itself, so its
inclination of 1:1.2.
thickness isn´t constant. Because of that, these values
Cover must be corrected and the length values increase about
thickness LROA (m) LROA2 (m) LROB (m) LROB2 (m) 1.2 m.
(m)
0.5 10.856 5.428 4.919 2.460
1 5.428 2.714 2.460 1.230 With the upstream face’s inclination and the
1.4 3.877 1.939 1.757 0.878 possible solutions defined, it is missing the stability of
LROA dATA LROA2 dATA2 LROB dATB LROB2 dATB2
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
the downstream slope and the excavation slope of the
0.5 1 0.659 1 0.361 1 0.380 1 0.167 reservoir. For that analysis, it was used the program
1 1 0.408 1 0.175 1 0.179 0.5 0.093 GeoStudio 2007 and performed a Slope/w analysis. The
1.4 1 0.289 1 0.101 0.5 0.159 0.5 0.050
results are shown in the igure 6 and figure 7,
respectively. The safety was verified for a 1:2 of
These results allow the following conclusions:
inclination of the downstream slope. For the slopes of
When the cover thickness is double, the anchorage the reservoir, the inclination 1:3 was found adequate.
length is reduced to half;
The same happens when the tension is divided by
two due to the consideration of an anchorage at the
middle of the slope; the the anchorage length is
also only half of the previous case;
The lengths increase with the decrease of the
inclination of the upstream slope of the dam. This Figure 6: Downstream stability analysis for an inclination of 1:2.
occurs because as the inclination decreases, the
vertical component of the weight of the riprap layer
increases, increasing the intervening friction forces;
The length values of the solution B are smaller than
the values of the solution A, due to the level of
tension in the geosynthetics.
8
Figure 8: Cross section of the Pico da Urze dam.
Besides that, it’s executed a seepage study to Figure 9: Permeability vs. matric suction curve for the rockfill.
understand the consequences of a defect on the
geomembrane. We'll try to link the consequences with 4.3.1 Stress-strain analysis
the characteristics of the defect, essentially, the influence
of the defect location and also the differences of various For this analysis, it was used the PLAXIS program
dispersed defects and a larger concentrated one. to simulate the staged construction and to obtain the
stress and strains states of Pico da Urze dam. To turn
For these analyses, the soil parameters considered the simulation more realistic, the construction of the
are the following: rockfill was made in 17 phases of 2 m height each. The
results of the last stage of the rockfill construction are
Table 9: Parameters to the finite elements analysis. shown in figure 10. The results of the maximum
displacements (1.048 m) along the critical vertical axis)
Transition Unit
Parameter Name Rockfill Foundation Riprap are shown in figure 11, where it can conclude that the
material
Material
Model
Mohr- Mohr- Mohr- Mohr-
- largest displacement occurred at the rockfill interface with
model Coulomb Coulomb Coulomb Coulomb
Behaviour Type Drained Drained Drained Drained -
the foundation, emphasizing the high deformability of the
Unit weight 19 16 18 22 kN/m3 foundation. About the first filling of the reservoir, the total
Oedometric
Eoed 120 000 10 000 90 000 90 000 kN/m2 deformation verified was at the bottom of the reservoir,
Modulus
Poisson’s
where the horizontal displacement was 0.73 m and
0.23 0.3 0.3 0.3 -
coefficient vertical displacement was 0.51 m.
Internal
52 35 38 35 °
friction angle
Permeability
Figure 9 10-7 10-3 10-4 m/s
coefficient
9
Table 11: Flow results of the dispersion analysis
1360
Defect Elevation (m) Flow (l/s)
1330 A+B+C - 4.6813
A2 1351.4 3.0192
B2 1343.875 3.0342
1300 C2 1335.22 2.3481
0 0,5 1 1,5
As expected, the flow is larger. The disperse
Figure 11: Total displacements of the dam along a vertical axis. defects presents more severe consequences than the
others. Obviously, the best case is when the defects are
The GSS presents 0.60 m of total displacement
concentrated in a specific zone. By the results, it is better
during the first filling and an additional tension force of
in terms of performance and it is also better to repair just
0.010 kN/m induced by its differential displacements.
a specific zone.
This tension force increase can be neglected and it can
be concluded that the preliminary design is well done. 5. Conclusion
10