Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
DOI 10.1007/s10706-012-9512-7
ORIGINAL PAPER
Application of New Theories and Technology for Grouting
of Dams and Foundations on Rock
H. Stille • G. Gustafson • L. Hassler
Received: 29 May 2011 / Accepted: 5 April 2012 / Published online: 17 April 2012
 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012
Abstract Permeation grouting is used to improve
rock conditions under dams and foundations. During
recent decades, there has been a substantial increase of
understanding of the mechanism behind grout spread
in fractured rock. It is the penetrability of the grout mix
and the spread in the joints which will be the governing
factors for the quality of the grout curtain. The flow
properties and the pressure will give the required time
to achieve the quality. The empirical based refusal and
completion criteria of today can be replaced by a more
engineering based grouting process. An active control
method has been developed in order to govern the
grout spread during the grouting operation based on
the new theory of spreading of grout. The concept is
called the ‘‘real time grouting control method’’. The
concept and the latest finding of the mechanism of
spreading of the grout in the fractures of the rock mass
are presented in the paper. The application of the
method on two dam projects is also presented.
H. Stille (&)
Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering,
KTH, Stockholm, Sweden
e-mail: hakan.stille@byv.kth.se
G. Gustafson
Division of Geology and Geotechnical Engineering,
Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden
L. Hassler
Dr. Golder Associates, Stockholm, Sweden
Keywords Dams  Foundations  Permeation
grouting  Cement based grout  Penetrability 
Theory of grout spread  Case histories
1 Introduction
In connection to dam and foundation work grouting is
used to improve the ground conditions. The objective
of the grouting is mainly to reduce the hydraulic
conductivity but also to improve the stiffness of the
ground under the dam or foundation. These two
special features are called curtain grouting and
consolidation grouting. The type of grouting in both
cases is permeation grouting which means that the
grout has to penetrate into the fractures and thus spread
into the rock mass. Many textbooks in this subject such
as Ewert (1985), Houlsby (1990), Weaver (1991) and
Warner (2004) describe the traditional grouting oper-
ation and the empirical based methods of designing a
grout curtain.
Up to 1990, the understanding was more or less
based on empirical knowledge. During recent decades,
there has been a substantial increase in a deeper
understanding of the mechanism behind the spreading
of grout in jointed rock. The deeper theoretical
understanding of the mechanism as manifested in
Lombardi (1985), Hässler et al. (1988), Gustafson and
Stille (1996) and Eriksson et al. (2000) has had an
impact on the development of new stop criteria and
new grouting materials.
123
604 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624

The research has also given a better understanding • Design of the drainage gallery and drainage bore
of the water-bearing structures of the rock mass holes related to pumping costs, maintenance of
(Gustafson and Fransson 2000; Fransson 2001, 2002a, drainage holes and risk for adverse uplift.
b; Hernqvist et al. 2009) and analytical solutions of the
The water losses mainly depend on the gradient
grout spread as a function of pressure and time
over the curtain, the hydraulic conductivity and the
(Gustafson and Stille 2005). An active control method
depth of the grout curtain. Water losses through a
has been developed for governing the grout spread
curtain normally will be acceptably low when the
during the grouting operation. The concept is called
hydraulic conductivity is\10-6 m/s. This corresponds
the ‘‘real time grouting control method’’ see Kobay-
to an effective value of \10 LU, which is the unit for
ashi et al. (2008) and Stille et al. (2009).
hydraulic conductivity commonly used in dam engi-
In Sweden and Scandinavia the main focus of
neering, based on water pressure tests. In areas where
grouting research has been related to tunneling and
the water is more valuable or when the risk of
permeation grouting in fractured hard crystalline rock.
hazardous flows is prevailing much lower tightness
The reason of this focus is high requirements of water
can be required down to what is required for many
tightness and the practice of using unlined or only
tunnels (\1 LU).
shotcrete lined tunnels in rock. The requirements in
The risk of dam instability and clogging of the
many cases correspond to Lugeon values of the sealed
drains due to internal erosion (piping) of clay and silt
rock mass of 0.1–0.5 LU (the Lugeon unit is defined as
infilling are related to the water velocity in the
1 l/min and meter borehole and 1 MPa excess water
fractures of the rock mass. Local erosion may be
pressure). In Sweden the main research has been
regarded to be acceptable since this will not affect the
carried out at Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
dam stability. The water velocity depends on the
and Chalmers University of Technology and often in
gradient, geometric pathway properties and the poros-
joint research programs.
ity of the rock mass. Prudent engineering (Houlsby
This substantial increase of understanding of the
1990) recommends that if piping of foundation
mechanisms of grout spreading has also been applied
material needs to be prevented, the hydraulic conduc-
to dam and foundation grouting even if there may be
tivity should correspond to a Lugeon value \3 LU.
large differences in in situ stresses and other hydro
The maximum acceptable value depends on the type of
geological conditions between tunnels and dams.
dam and curtain and the actual geological situation.
The objective of this paper is to summarize the
The risk of adverse uplift of the dam is related to the
research work, carried out in Sweden, on permeation
function of the drains under the dam. These issues
grouting of fractured rock with cement based
depend on the design of the drainage gallery and
grout mixes and to present the application to dam
drainage bore holes as well as the maintenance of the
and foundation grouting also in other geological
system. This issue normally depends on the flow
regime.
through the curtain and the risk for internal erosion.

2.2 Conceptual Model of Curtain Grouting

2 Design Requirements of Water Tightness
of Dams and Foundations
2.1 Design Issues
In the design work the acceptable level of water
tightness should be established. Normally the design
of the grout curtain should address the following
issues:
• Water loss due to leakage under the dam.
• Risk of internal erosion of clay and silt infilling due
to high water velocity in the rock mass.
In dam grouting a curtain of grouted rock is created in
order to reduce the groundwater flow, and risk for
adverse uplift, under the dam. From this follows that
most of the pressure drop through the rock is taken
over the curtain giving a substantially reduced uplift as
well as hydraulic gradient downstream the curtain
minimizing the risk of erosion at the most sensitive
areas at the dam toe. It may, however, be pointed out
that the gradient through the curtain is significantly
increased compared to the gradient downstream with
an increasing risk of internal erosion.

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
Fig. 1 Outline of a grouting curtain (D depth of the grout curtain and 2L spacing between the primary holes)
The outline of a grouting curtain is shown in Fig. 1.
A suite of boreholes, D deep, are drilled along a line.
The final distance between them, L, is reached after
one or more batches of boreholes in a split-spacing
configuration. Each batch of boreholes is normally
drilled, tested and grouted before the next batch is
executed. The advantage with this is that the effect of
grouting of the previous batch may be controlled by
the new boreholes positioned between the boreholes of
the previous batch. Normally at least three batches of
holes are drilled and grouted (primary, secondary and
tertiary holes).
For a fractured rock, the objective will be to inject
grout in the fractures to such a distance from the
boreholes that the critical fractures in the gap between
them are sufficiently filled with grout to significantly
reduce the hydraulic conductivity in the grouted
curtain. This is achieved by having a penetration
length in these fractures that is more than half the final
distance between the boreholes. This can be done with
a design based on the hydraulic properties of the
fractured rock, a proper choice of grout and a well
adapted grouting technique.
3 Hydraulic Properties of Fractured Rock
3.1 Transmissivity of Fractured Rock
The water bearing capacity of the rock mass can be
described by the hydraulic conductivity or the trans-
missivity of the fractured rock. Flow models for
hydraulic tests in fractured rock have been discussed
605
by many; see for example Barker (1988). Methods for
determining flow dimensions for water has been
proposed see Beauheim et al. (2004). The dimension
of water flow is, however, not the same as dimension
of grout flow, since the flow properties is quite
different. A fundamental assumption is that the rock
matrix itself is impermeable compared to the water
bearing capacity of the fractures in the rock mass. This
is valid for most types of rock except for very porous
sedimentary rock. From this follows, that the proper-
ties of the fractures and joints and how they are
connected also governs the hydraulic properties of the
rock. In connection to grouting transmissivity is
preferable since it is directly connected to fracture
aperture which is essential for estimating of grout
penetration.
A fracture is basically a 2-D structure with an
aperture, a, that varies over the fracture surface. The
ability of the fracture to let through a flow of water is
characterized by the fracture transmissivity, Tf. The
water flux, qf [m3/s 9 m] through the fracture can be
calculated in analogy with Darcy’s law as:
dhw
qf ¼   Tf ð1Þ
dx
Here  dhdx ¼ i is the hydraulic gradient. For a
w
smooth fracture with a constant aperture b the
transmissivity may be calculated as (Snow 1970):
qw g b3
Tf ¼  ð2Þ
lw 12
Here b is the (hydraulic) aperture, qw and lw are the
density and viscosity of water and g the gravity
123
606
acceleration. These equations are valid for a flow of
water in a slot independently if the flow is 1-D like in a
channel or 2-D in a disc. The gradient will depend on
the dimensionality of the flow. The hydraulic aperture
for a rough fracture is related to the physical distri-
bution of the aperture, a, such that the hydraulic
aperture may be approximated by its median (Zim-
mermann and Bodvarsson 1996): b  a50 : Equation 2
is called the cubic law since the transmissivity is
proportional to the cube of the hydraulic aperture.
Any borehole through a fractured rock will thus
collect water from a number of fractures. A simple
conceptual model, which in general is sufficient for
grouting design purposes (Fransson 2001), that the
penetrated fractures are sub-parallel and independent
implies that the transmissivity of the borehole, T, is the
sum of the transmissivity of the fractures penetrated by
the borehole:
X
N Tf,max is the transmissivity of the largest fracture. k is
T¼ Tf ð3Þ
n¼1
The transmissivity of boreholes and borehole
sections may be determined by water pressure tests
(WPT) and evaluated by Moye’s formula (Moye
1967):
  
Qw qw g L
T¼ 1 þ ln ð4Þ
2p  DPw 2rb
Here DPw ¼ dhw  qw g is the injection over-pres-
sure, L is the test interval length, Qw is the water flow
rate and rb is the radius of the borehole. For a short
duration test the transmissivity may be approximated
by the specific capacity (Fransson 2001):
T  Qw =dhw ð5Þ
where dhw is the hydraulic head change in the borehole
during the test. In most cases the WPTs suffer from a
short duration of the test (transient conditions), which
means that the measured value represents a local
value. This overestimates the connectivity of the
fracture system. In order to estimate an effective bulk
ability of the rock to conduct water the median of a
reasonably large number of tests seems to be a fair
approximation (Gustafson et al. 2010). It should then
be borne in mind that the median is significantly
smaller than the average transmissivity. The use of the
transmissivity is not common practice in dam con-
struction. The usual measure of the ability of the rock
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
to conduct water is the Lugeon unit. For reasons that
will be clear later the Lu-unit tells little of the
properties of the section of the borehole to grout and its
ability to take grout and the predicted sealing caused
by grouting.
The statistical distribution of the fracture transmis-
sivity in a borehole based on WPTs was investigated
by Gustafson and Fransson (2000). They found that
the transmissivity of a borehole in fractured crystalline
hard rock approximately followed a Pareto (power
law) distribution. The distribution describes data sets
which are dominated by a few very high values
compared to many small value data. The transmissiv-
ity of the fractures penetrated by a borehole may thus
be estimated to be (Gustafson and Fransson 2000):
Tf ðrÞ ¼ Tf ;max =r 1=k ð6Þ
Here r is the rank of the fracture transmissivity and
the distribution parameter which commonly has a
value 0.4–0.5 in a normally fractured rock. Given this,
a borehole section with some 10s of fractures, the most
transmissive fracture carries more than 75 % of the
flow. For a longer borehole with 100–1,000 fractures,
the largest fracture still carries about 50 % of the flow
in a fractured crystalline rock. The magnitude of the
fracture transmissivity decreases rapidly with the rank
leading to the conclusion that only a few groutable
fractures carry significant water flows. These are
critical for the design and performance of grouting and
the aperture of these are critical for grout penetrability
and penetration length. The averages, which the
Lugeon value represents, are not significant for that,
which is the reason why transmissivity is the better
parameter.
Several studies (Gustafson and Stille 1996; Eriks-
son 2002; Funehag and Fransson 2006; Axelsson
2009) have been made to assess the penetration of
grout in well characterized fractures. The conclusion is
that the hydraulic aperture is a reasonable predictor for
penetration length. Recently the critical aperture for
field penetrability was investigated and verified by
data from grouting projects (Gustafson et al. 2009;
Fransson 2009). Also in this case the hydraulic
aperture is the suitable predictor. Bearing in mind
the consequence of the Pareto distribution that only a
few large fractures carry the water and take the grout
and that the hydraulic aperture is proportional to the
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624 607

3rd root of the transmissivity a value of the maximum qw g 2

aperture bmax for normal test interval lengths of 3–5 m
may be estimated by using the transmissivity, T, for
the whole section as:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
3 12lw T
bmax ffi k ð7Þ
qw g
where k is a constant depending on the number of
fractures and the geology. Based on the above discus-
sion the k value may vary from 0.5 to 1.0. In massive
rock with few fractured in the test interval the k value
may be close to 1.0 while in more fractured rock mass
and with one dominate joint set the value may be as low
as 0.5. Further investigations have to be carried out in
order to get a better base to evaluate the k value.
v¼ b i ð9Þ
12lw
However, calculations of the water velocity and the
erosion capacity are uncertain. Old investigations and
rules of thumb from grouting work indicate that
erosion of gouge material may occur if the water
velocity is[10–20 mm/s. This has been confirmed in
recent work by Axelsson (2009). Figure 2 can be used
as a design guideline.
The WPT carried out during the pre-investigation
stage may indicate that there are infilling which may
be erodible (see Fig. 3), which may be found in many
text books, for example (Houlsby 1990 and Palmström
and Stille 2010).

3.2 Residual Transmissivity After Grouting
It is obvious that by sealing the larger fractures, here
called bg, in a given rock volume, the flow through this
volume related both to the quantity and mean velocity
will be substantially reduced if the gradient will be the
same. This is especially important when grouting with
suspensions like cement based grouts since the limited
penetrability of such grouts depends on that the grains
of the cement are too large to penetrate into the finer
fractures. Normally it is enough to seal the most open
fractures in order to reduce the flow and velocity to an
acceptable level.
The grouted aperture may be compared to the
4 Strategy for Grouting of Fractured Rock Mass
in Dam Foundations
4.1 Introduction
The strategy for grouting of the jointed rock mass will
be divided in (1) describing a grout mix and grouting
procedure in order to achieve the requirements and (2)
a control and observational approach to be followed
during the grouting itself to guide the work to a
successful completion. For this both refusal crite-
rion and completion criteria are needed. Due to
10 Crtical velocity

hydraulic aperture determined by hydraulic tests. A 9

measure of the transmissivity of the remaining ungro-
uted fractures crossing a grouted borehole can in 8
25 µm
Hydraulic gradient [m/m]

principle be calculated from the grouted apertures and 7 50 µm

the hydraulic apertures before grouting by: 75 µm
6
qg hX 3 X 3 i 100 µm
Tresidual ¼  b  bg ð8Þ 5
12lw
4
where bg are the apertures of the grouted fractures. The
150 µm
determination of bg will be discussed in Sect. 4.3 3

theory for grout spread. 2

200 µm
250 µm
1
3.3 Internal Erosion 300 µm
0

Water flow in the fracture may give a risk of erosion of 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Water velocity [m/s]
the infilling of the fractures. Higher velocity will give
a higher risk. The velocity depends on the gradient, i, Fig. 2 Water velocity as a function of the hydraulic gradient
and the fracture aperture, b according to following: and the fracture aperture (Axelsson 2009)

123
608
Fig. 3 Staged Lugeon tests
LAMINAR FLOW
and different interpretations
(Palmström and Stille 2010) Q Q
HYDRAULIC JACKING
Q Q
PLUG FORMATION
Q Q
comprehensive research during the last 10 years the
penetrability and flow properties of cement based
grouts have been surveyed and better understood. This
is also relevant for the new theories behind spreading
of grout in rock fractures which have created possi-
bilities to understand and predict what is going on.
This new knowledge has changed grouting from
handicraft to engineering.
The general design issues as discussed in Sect. 2
shall be used in order to establish the technical
specifications for the sealing work of the water bearing
fractured rock. The requirements of maximum accept-
able water loss or flow under the dam and safety
against internal erosion will give the minimum of
aperture to be sealed and the minimum acceptable
grout spread.
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
TURBULENCE FLOW
P P
EROSION
Pc
P P
LEAKAGE AROUND PACKER
P P
4.2 Penetrability into Constrictions
Penetrability determines the maximum aperture of the
unsealed fractures and thus the achieved tightness of
the grouted zones. Penetrability depends on type of
cement and therefore is decisive for designing the
grout mix and grouting procedure. Many factors
influence the testing results, among others the used
testing device. Eriksson and Stille (2003) proposed a
penetrability meter for measuring cement-based
grouts. In this device, the grout is pressed from a
pressure chamber through meshes with different size
of openings. This device is commonly used in Sweden
to estimate the penetration ability of cement-based
grouts. It has been noticed that there are two levels.
One is the minimum aperture, which the grout can not
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624 609

penetrate at all, denoted bmin. The other one is the 180

+ cement mixtures
inert mixtures
smallest aperture in which the grout can freely 160 +
bcrit = 3 times d95

Critical aperture, bcrit

penetrate, called bcritical. 140
+
+ + +
Very few tests have been done to estimate the 120
relationship between the apertures of the maximum 100 + +

unsealed fractures and these two levels. Tests carried 80

+
out by Draganovic and Stille (2011) indicate that the 60
penetrability into slots is better than through meshes. 40
Eklund and Stille (2008) suggested that 75 % of 20

bcritical could be a practical level to secure that enough 0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
grout will penetrate the fracture, thus defining the
Maximum grain size, d95 (µm)
minimum aperture of the fractures which are expected
to be sealed. Fig. 4 Critical fracture aperture (lm) to be penetrated as a
Investigations of a corresponding aperture charac- function of maximum grain size from Eklund and Stille (2008)
terizing the rock were made by Fransson (2009) and
Gustafson et al. (2009). They found based on both
theoretical considerations and empirical data that the Table 1 Measured penetrability of grout cement, INJ30, for
different conditions and mixing equipments
effective entrance aperture for grout to penetrate can
be approximated by the hydraulic aperture, b. INJ30 cement bmin bcrit Relative
(lm) (lm) remaining
The following factors may influence the penetration
hydraulic
ability of a grout mix: conductivity
• Maximum grain size of the cement that will give Cement from the market w/c =
the lowest limits for penetration. 0.6 66 119 1.69
• Flocculation tendency of the cement that increases 0.8 62 123 1.86
especially with the content of particles between 2 1.0 54 90 0.73
and 5 lm. Fresh cement from factory, 65 100 1.00
• Thorough mixing. Testing has shown that a high w/c = 0.8, laboratory mixer
speed of the mixer is essential, [1,700 rev/s. Fresh cement from factory, 62 157 3.9
• Water cement ratio. Higher w/c will give a better w/c = 0.8, standard field
penetrability. mixer
• Higher grouting pressure can erode partially built Fresh cement from factory, 64 99 0.97
w/c = 0.8, temp. = 25,
plugs and thus increase the penetrability. laboratory mixer
Tests carried out by Eklund and Stille (2008)
regarding the critical aperture (bcritical) have shown
that the rule of thumb that joint aperture must be at remaining transmissivity of the borehole may be
least 3 times the maximum grain size is valid for estimated by Eq. (8) for the different grout mixes given
coarser cement. For micro cement the joint aperture in the first column of Table 1 relatively the penetrabil-
must be as big as 10 times the maximum grain size to ity of a grout based on fresh cement and mixed in the
be penetrated without filtration because of adhesion laboratory if it is assumed that bcritical defines the
and chemical reactions between the particles. The aperture of the largest ungrouted fracture. The results
results are shown in Fig. 4. The minimum aperture are given in the last column of Table 1. With the same
(bmin) is, however, much smaller and is in the order of cement and water/cement ratio the achieved remaining
2 times the maximum grain size (see Table 1). hydraulic conductivity can vary up to four times. This
Special attention should be given the handling and emphasises the importance of a proper mixing and
mixing of the micro cement in order to get a better handling of the cement and grout mix.
penetration than ordinary grouting cement. Testing It can also be shown that the penetrability will
indicates also that the bmin is not so sensitive for depend on the type of used super plasticiser (see
poor handling and mixing compared to bcritical. The Table 3).

123
610 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624

The recommendation will be to measure both the 1

minimum and critical apertures in the laboratory under
0.8
as realistic conditions as possible and to use 75 % of
the bcritical in the analysis of maximum value of the 0.6
unsealed fracture aperture until further knowledge has

ID
been achieved. 0.4

0.2
4.3 Theory for Grout Spread
0
1.E-06 1.E-04 1.E-02 1.E+00 1.E+02
Cement based grout can accurately enough be
tD
described as a Bingham material. This has been
verified in many tests. The grout will then stop when
the shear stresses are less than the yield value of the
grout mix, s0. The maximum grout spread, Imax, can be Fig. 5 The relative penetration as a function of the relative
calculated according to the following equation (Gus- grouting time in a logarithmic x-axis. (c = Imax/rb, rb the radius
of the injection borehole) (Gustafson and Stille 2005)
tafson and Stille 1996):

Dpg
Imax ¼ b ð10Þ 1
2s0
0.8
where Dpg is the effective grouting pressure (grouting
pressure reduced with the ground water pressure in the 0.6
ID

fractures), s0 is the yield value of the grout and b is the

0.4
fracture aperture. However, the velocity of the
spreading of the grout will be slower and slower with 0.2
time and therefore the grouting process terminates
0
long before the ultimate stop. 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
The theories of the grout spread were first devel- tD
oped by Hässler (1991) in a channel network and have
later been solved both analytically and numerically for
channels and two dimensional discs, see Gustafson
and Stille ( 2005). The interesting results were that the Fig. 6 The relative penetration as a function of the relative
grouting time in a linear x-axis (Gustafson and Stille 2005)
flow only depends on the dimensionality (1-D corre-
sponds to flow in a channel and 2-D to radial flow in
the fracture plane) and the relative grouting time tD, if I
the spread was expressed as the relative penetration ID ID ¼ ð12Þ
Imax
(see Figs. 5, 6).
In order to obtain analytical solutions for grout is the same in all fractures grouted from a borehole at
penetration, the characteristic grouting time t0, is the same time. The relative penetration in turn is a
defined according to Gustafson and Stille (2005) as: function of the relative time, tD, which is defined
according to Eq. (13) (see Figs. 5 and 6):
6Dpg  lg t
t0 ¼ ð11Þ tD ¼ ð13Þ
s20 t0
where s0 is the yield value, lg the plastic viscosity of The relative borehole radius expressed by the ratio
the grout and Dpg is the excess grouting pressure. The between the maximum penetration and the radius of
characteristic time determines the time-scale for the the injection borehole rb (c = Imax/rb) will to some
grout injection. After t0 the penetration has reached degree influence the relative penetration for the 2-D-
about 60 % of the maximum grout spread, Imax. It can case. Normal range of the ratio will be in the order of
also be shown that the relative penetration: 300–1,000.

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624 611

Table 2 Relation between grouting parameters [after Gustafson and Stille (2005)]
Grouting situation Pressure Viscosity Yield value Time to reach Flow at grout
penetration I spread of I

Reference p l s0 t Q
Double pressure 2p l s0 *1/3t *3.5Q
Half viscosity p 0.5 lm s0 1/2t 2Q
Double yield value p l 2s0 *1.5t *0.7Q

The most practical conclusion which can be drawn
from this theory is that the time to achieve a given grout
spread depends on the grout pressure and the flow
properties of the grout mix, all parameters that are chosen
by the grouter (see Table 2). The prerequisite is that the
dimensionality of the grout spread can be assessed.
On the other hand, if a certain grout spread is
required, the time to spread the grout can be reduced if
the rheological properties of the grout mix are improved.
For dam grouting the objective is to build a curtain
with a certain width and tightness in order to fulfill the
discussed requirement related both to flow and veloc-
ity. The theories of grout spread in fractures will then
provide the possibility to estimate desired grouting
borehole distances and the minimum and maximum
width of the grout curtain for a given rock mass.
During the grouting operation it will be possible to
determine the dimensionality and the fracture aper-
tures by applying the theories. The dimensionality can
be determined by a curve fitting procedure by mea-
suring the grout flow rate, Qg, and the grouted volume
V and calculate the following ratio for different time t:
Qg  t
Dim ¼ ð14Þ
V
If the value Dim = 0.8–1.0 it is a 2-D flow and if
0.4–0.6 it is 1-D. This relation is valid if the pressure is
constant. Otherwise it has to be adjusted (see Kobay-
ashi et al. 2008).
P P
The factor b3g for the 2-D case and wb2g for the
1-D case can be determined by measuring volume and
time and the assessed dimensionality. Even for these
estimations a curve fitting procedure has to be applied
(Stille et al. 2009). For the 2-D case the following
equation should be used:
 2
X 4V s0
b3g ¼  ð15Þ
p Dpg  I2D
For the 2-D case the maximum grouted aperture,
bg;max can then be estimated by:
qXffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
3
bg;max  b3g ð16Þ
Or for the 1-D case:
X V  s0
wb2g ¼ ð17Þ
Dpg  I1D
For this 1-D case the width of the channel has first
to be estimated in order to calculate the maximum
grouted aperture. However, in most cases the flow
starts as a 2-D flow and then continues as a channel
flow. This means that the maximum grouted aperture
could be estimated during the first minute of flow from
the bore hole.
The estimated grout apertures seem to be larger
than corresponding hydraulic apertures based on both
theoretical considerations and empirical data (Kobay-
ashi et al. 2008). This issue has to be further
investigated.
The interesting thing is that all parameters of
Eqs. 14–17 may be estimated from data determined by
grout choice, grouting procedures and the measured
grout volume V, and grout flow Qg, with time t.
The application of this theory has been called ‘‘real
time grouting control (RTGC)’’ since it provides the
grouter to follow the grouting procedure during the
work in real time (Gustafson and Stille 2005; Kobay-
ashi et al. 2008).
4.4 Rheology
From the above given equations it is obvious that
required pumping time to achieve a certain penetration
depends on flow properties such as viscosity and yield
value. These properties depend on many parameters,
such as:
• Type of cement
• Water/cement ratio
• Additives and admixtures
• Mixing procedure

123
612 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624

• Age of cement foundation grouting with longer time for transporta-

• Temperature tion and pumping.
In Table 4 the principal relationships between flow
The results indicate that both the penetrability and
properties and different factors are shown. The
flow properties depend on the type of cement ant type
negative effect of bentonite such as higher viscosity
and amount of super-plasticiser. Some mixes will have
and poorer penetrability has implied that in Sweden
very good flow properties but a poorer penetrability.
this additive is no longer used, especially in combi-
Depending on the actual requirements different mix-
nation with finer grained cements.
ing may be required.
The flow properties are preferably measured by
It is therefore essential to establish by measurement
rheometer in the laboratories. Suitable procedure can
the actual properties for the chosen cement and the
be found at Hässler (1991) and Håkansson (1993). In
mixture procedure. Standard field mixers may give
the field indirect measurements have to be carried out.
different results compared to lab mixers and fresh and
Marsh flow cone is normally used. There are several
old cement have different properties. Some values
types on the market but the cone with an opening of
measured for different cements are given in the
4.76 mm is more or less standard. The time of efflux of
Table 3.
1 l of water is 28 s. The time for emptying the cone
The properties are also time dependent, as shown in
depends both on the yield value and the viscosity and
Fig. 7. This has to be considered especially at dam
these cannot be separated directly. The efflux of grout
with Bingham properties has been analyzed by
Table 3 Testing of different types of cements in the labora- Håkansson (1993). If the yield value is estimated by
tory and with the same testing equipment
Type of grout Viscosity Yield bmin bcrit 6
Yield strength (Pa)

+
(Pas) value (lm) (lm) 5 + +
(Pa) 4 + +
+
R650 ? RB 1 % 0.006 0.36 40 115 3
+
w/c = 0.8, d95 = 30 lm 2 +

INJ30 ? SCII 2 % 0.017 6.2 40 85 1

w/c = 0.8, d95 = 30 lm 0
0 0:2 0:4 1 1:2 1:4 2
OPC type III black 0.016 0.39 95 310
diamond ? rheobuild 718 Elapsed time (hour:min)
1.2 % w/c = 0.65,
d95 = 40 lm Fig. 7 Development of yield value versus time for INJ 30
(personal communication with Stille B)

Table 4 Effect of additives on flow properties (based on Håkansson 1993 and Eklund and Stille 2008)

Effect of additives

Object Manipulation Yield value Plastic bcritical

viscosity
Water/cement Increase
ratio
Fineness, blaine Increase

Bentonite Addition

Plasticizers Addition

Accelerators Addition

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624 613

decrease with decreasing water/cement ratio and finer

Fig. 8 Relation between Marsh cone flow time (s) and the
rheological properties for a Bingham material [viscosity l (Pas)
and yield value s0 (Pa)] for different density q (kg/m3) of the
grout after Håkansson (1993)
some other methods as suggested by Lombardi (1985),
Håkansson (1993) or Axelsson (2009) the true
viscosity can be calculated (see Fig. 8).
4.5 Bleeding
Bleeding is normally measured in a cylinder with a
height of 300 mm. The requirement often is that the
maximum acceptable bleeding should be\5 % after 1
or 2 h. It is found that normally the bleeding will
cements (see Fig. 9b). However, this measure may not
be representative for the behaviour in fine (thin) joints.
Bleeding is a result of two processes, sedimentation
and consolidation. It is also influenced by flocculation
and hardening of the cement. Influences of these
processes have been tested by Draganovic (2009). The
bleeding was found to depend on the sample height.
Some of the results are shown in Fig. 9a. The studies
have shown that consolidation has little influence on
bleeding in fractures, Draganovic (2009). It is mainly
the result of sedimentation. Sedimentation in a hori-
zontal fracture occurs very fast and during grouting
itself. The void space created by bleeding will
therefore be refilled at least partially. In vertical or
inclined fractures arching and hydration will resist the
bleeding since the separation process occurs slowly, so
a high bleeding will not develop.
The results measured by standard measuring meth-
ods are therefore not representative of bleeding in the
fractures in rock. The bleeding will be considerably
less, if any, in rock fractures. Based on these results
bleeding is expected to be negligible in fine cracks.
However, for other reasons such as risk for fingering
and short longevity, the water–cement ratio should be
kept as low as possible. With modern super plasticizer
it may be possible to have a w/c ratio of 1 or less and
still have a good workability and penetrability of the
grout.

W/C = 2 Cement: UF 12, INJ 30, ANL

(a) 70 (b) 70 w/c = 2
INJ30; m. by cylinder
ANL; m. by cylinde r w/c = 1
60 60 w/c = 0.8

50 50
Final bleeding [%]

Final bleeding [%]

40 40
measured by slot measured by slot

30 30

measured by slot
20 20

10 10

0 0
-1 0 1 2 3 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
10 10 10 10 10
Sample height [mm] Max grain diameter [µm]

Fig. 9 Bleeding. Left a as a function of sample height for two maximum grain size of 12 lm was not measurable and was
types of cement (ANL and INJ30). Right b as a function of w/ therefore omitted in the left figure (from Draganovic 2009)
c ratio and maximum grain size. The bleeding of UF12 with

123
614 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624

4.6 Grouting Pressure

By grouting the effective stresses in the ground will be

changed. The fracture deformations can be modeled
based on the stiffness of the fractures as proposed by
Fransson et al. (2007) up to the initial stress level but
one must take in account the non linearity of the
fracture behavior. However, as long as the grouting
pressure is less than the initial normal stress acting on
the fractures, the deformations can normally be
negligible. This has been confirmed both by experi-
ment, Cornet et al. (2003) and theoretical consider-
ations, Gothäll and Stille (2008). When the grouting
pressure, pg, exceeds the initial normal stress, pc, the
grouted fracture will open up. It is only the exceeding
pressure pe (grouting pressure, pg, reduced with the
initial normal stress), that loads the rock mass.
If the excess is small compared to the total pressure
and the grout penetration relatively short, only a small
region close to the bore hole will be loaded, this due to
the drop in pressure with distance from the injection
point. The radius of this region, Ic can be estimated if a
linear pressure drop is assumed by following
 
pe
Ic ¼ I  ð18Þ
Dpg
The deformation during jacking will be completely
governed by how the rock mass reacts to the additional
load. The exact expression will vary greatly from case
to case. As a first approximation the Boussinesque’s
solution for a solitary fracture with a triangular shaped
load inside an infinite homogenous rock mass can be
used. The deformation can then be approximated by
following expression:
4 ð1  m2 Þ pe
Daj ¼   pe  I  ð19Þ
3 E Dpg
where E is the Young’s modulus of the rock mass and m
is the Poisson’s ratio. This expression will approxi-
mate the dilation with the average dilation in the
jacked region. If the dilation of the fracture is large, the
dilation, Dau, may spread to a considerable distance
away from the borehole, even past the penetrated
distance of the grout (see Fig. 10).
The jacking will be connected to the largest fracture
and it can be anticipated that the minor fractures will to
some degree be closed. The majority of these defor-
mations are expected to be elastic. With increasing
Fig. 10 Principle figure of pressure and jacking deformations
due to grouting after Gothäll and Stille (2008) without any
ground water pressure. The in situ normal stress acting on the
fracture has been denoted, pc in the figure
pressure and grout spread the deformations increase and
at the end ultimate hydraulic jacking can take place.
The risk for ultimate hydraulic jacking has been
discussed by Lombardi and Deere (1993). They
proposed the GIN-value to evaluate the risk for
jacking. They used the product of grouted volume
and pressure to describe the risk. The reason to use
volume instead of the theoretically correct penetration
was practical. However, it has been questioned if the
GIN-value will not overestimate the penetration
length (Rombough et al. 2006 and Shuttle et al.
2007) The limitation with the method was the
difficulty to estimate the so called GIN-value of the
rock mass. With the new development which gives a
possibility to estimate the grout spread a more direct
approach can be used. Brantberger et al. 2000
proposed an equation for estimate the maximum
pressure to get uncontrolled uplift (ultimate jacking)
in mainly horizontal fractures based on the grout
spread, I. This equation has been modified in order to
take the ground water pressure in account:
pw 1 1
pn þ 1þ þ 2 ð20Þ
qgh In 3In
where In is the relative grout spread expressed by the
ratio between the grout spread and the depth to the free
surface, h. pn is the relative grout pressure expressed
by following equation:
Dpg  k2
pn ¼ ð21Þ
3qgh
where Dpg is the effective grout pressure, q is the
density of the rock mass and k2 is a parameter

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
describing the open part of the fractures, normally set
to 1, corresponding to (1 - ca) where ca is the relative
contact area (contact area divided with total area).
The equations are illustrated in Fig. 11 but with the
assumption that the water pressure is set to zero. The
equations indicate that the pressure for ultimate
hydraulic jacking will be the weight of the overburden
at infinite grout spread which is reasonable. At limited
grout spread a pressure with a magnitude much larger
than the overburden stress can be accepted.
However, the fractures will be jacked at much
smaller pressure. If an acceptable opening of the
fracture can be defined, daccept, the Eq. (19) can be used
to calculate the maximum allowable relative pressure,
pn, according to Eqs. (22) and (23). In the equations the
effect of the ground water pressure has also been
assessed
pw k 1
pn þ  þ ð22Þ
3qgh 3In 3
where k is:
3 E daccept Dpg
k¼    ð23Þ
4 ð1  m2 Þ qgh2 pe
No general consensus exists about the level of
acceptable jacking. The positive effect of jacking may
be that the penetration of the grout will improve and
that the spread of the grout will go faster. This will,
Fig. 11 Maximum relative pressure as a function of relative
penetrations both for the ultimate limit state (Eq. 19) and the
serviceability limit state (Eq. 21). The curves are calculated for
pw = 0
615
however, only be valid in the largest fractures. In the
smallest fractures the aperture will instead decrease
and the penetration be reduced. The deformations are
elastic and may go back when the pressure is relieved
depending on the flow properties of the grout mix.
Larger jacking is expected not to be reversible. The
smallest fractures can then be unsealed which may
have a negative effect on the achieved hydraulic
conductivity of the grouted zone. The conclusion may
be that if the target is only to seal the largest fractures
an elastic jacking can be positive but if the target is
also to seal smaller apertures the jacking may have a
negative effect. Special attention should be considered
if the fracture orientations are unfavorable and the
rock surface is steep since fracture deformations may
occur at lower stress levels than what the overburden
gives. However, an analysis of the flow curves based
on the RTGC may reveal that jacking occurs, which is
an interesting possibility (Stille et al. 2009) (see Sect.
5.2).
The acceptable grouting pressures to avoid jacking
\10 lm have been calculated for good and weak
rocks. The results are shown in Table 5. If the results
are compared with the practice of today (Fig. 12) an
explanation of the use of higher pressure in good rock
could be connected to the fact that good rock has
normally both smaller apertures and larger stiffness
and thus reduced grout spread.
5 Application of the Proposed Method
The proposed method based on RTGC (Kobayashi
et al. 2008) and described in chapter 4 has been applied
for some dam projects. Results from some bore holes
are presented. The objective is to discuss the merit of
the method as well as the problems.
5.1 THXP Project in Laos
The results from grouting and water pressure testing of
two stages in two different boreholes for the grouted
curtain under the dam are presented. The geology at
the dam site is a sedimentary rock formation built up
with layers of siltstones and sandstone with gentle
dipping bedding. The investigated stages of the two
boreholes were situated about 37 m below the surface
of the dam crest, which was under construction,
corresponding to a vertical stress of 0.93 MPa. The
123
616 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624

Table 5 Comparison
Rock quality kn In pn pg (bar) pg (bar) practice
between theoretical calculated
grouting pressure, pg, and Good rock 0.36 0.4 (I = 4 m) 0.63 5.0 5.5 (Normal rock,
practice (1 bar = 0.1 MPa) Swedish practice)
H = 10 m
E = 60 GPa
b = 200 lm
Weak rock 0.060 0.8 (I = 8 m) 0.35 2.6 2.3 (Weak rock,
H = 10 m US practice)
E = 10 GPa
b = 400 lm

Table 6 Flow and penetrability properties of cement used in

THXP project
Type of cement Viscosity Yield bmin bcrit
(Pas) value (lm) (lm)
(Pa)

OPC type III black 0.016 0.39 95 310

diamond ? rheobuild
718 1.2 % w/c = 0.65,
d95 = 40 lm

Fig. 12 Grouting pressure according to practice in Sweden and
US (Weaver 1991) (1 bar = 0.1 Mpa)
rock was sandstone with RQD of 45–90 %. The
average joint spacing was about 0.2 m. The grouting
pressure was 10 bars (1 MPa). The ground water
pressure was 0.1 MPa or 10 m of water column. The
rock mass modulus has been estimated to 20 GPa. It
means that some jacking may have occurred and can
be estimated by Eqs. (22) and (23) to 47 lm for a grout
spread of 10 m. However, this cannot be observed by
studying the corresponding flow curves. The equation
may be slightly conservative since it is based on the
assumption of triangular shaped pressure and that no
head losses occurring in the hoses.
The flow properties and penetrability of the grout
mix have been measured (see Table 6). The flow and
pressure curves have been recorded. Based on the
presented theories of grout spread (RTGC method) the
dimensionality and grouted fracture aperture
P 3
expressed as bg have been calculated from the
recorded curves (see Figs. 13 and 14). The grout
spread has also be calculated (see Table 7).
It is interesting to notice that the calculated
maximum aperture, bg,max, for borehole 308 is \the
suggested level of 0.75 times bcritical for undisturbed
passing of the grout mix but higher than bmin.
However, this seems not to have given any stop of
the grout flow. It may depend on that the suggested
level is conservative or that the penetrability of the
grout mix is better than the single measurement at the
laboratory indicated.
The boreholes or adjacent holes have been water-
pressure tested before and after the grouting. A clear
reduction in Lugeon values has been recorded. The
remaining hydraulic conductivity according to Eq. (8)
has been calculated based on the evaluated values of
P 3
bg (see Table 8).
Based on the theories an estimation of the flow
versus time at the actual pressure can be calculated.
See for example Gustafson and Stille (2005) or Stille
et al. (2009). In Figs. 13 and 14 the predicted flows
have also been shown. The agreement is acceptable.
The application of the approach seems to work well.
However, there are many factors which have to be
investigated before the approach can be scientifically
proven but the theoretical support is strong.
The water velocity in the ungrouted fractures can
also be estimated. The result is presented in Table 9. It
indicates that there may be a risk of internal erosion.

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
Fig. 13 THX project,
grouting in borehole 308.
a Pressure and flow versus
time, b dimensionality
(red line is the value for 2-D
flow and the green for 1-D
flow). Conversion factors
1 bar 0.1 MPa and
1 l/min = 1.67 9
10-4 m3/s
However, according to prudent engineering the results
are acceptable.
5.2 Gotvand Dam Project in Iran
The rock at the dam a site belongs to sedimentary
formations of different types. Three stages in one
borehole for the grout curtain in the right abutment of
the dam are presented (Rafi 2010). The rock at the
stages is siltstone inter bedded with layers of sand-
stone and is sparsely jointed. The RQD-value was
around 95 %. The holes were drilled from a grout
gallery in elevation at 153 m above see level. The flow
properties and penetrability of the grout mix have been
measured. In this case a high water/cement ratio was
used and no super-plasticizer (see Table 10).
The stages were situated about 50 m below the
gallery and about 150 m below the surface corre-
sponding to a vertical stress of 3.75 MPa. The grouting
pressure was 25 bars (2.5 MPa). The stages were
situated above the ground water level. No jacking
617
should have occurred since the vertical in situ stresses
exceeded the grout pressure.
The flow and pressure curves have been recorded
(see Figs. 15, 16 and 17.
Based on the presented theories of grout spread
(RTGC method) the dimensionality and grouted
P 3
fracture aperture expressed as bg have been calcu-
lated from the recorded curves. The grout spread has
also been calculated (see Table 11).
Even in this case no obvious filtration seems to have
occurred even if the calculated aperture is less than the
suggested level for penetration. The recorded aperture
is slightly more than 2 times the maximum grain size
which is considered as the lower bound for penetra-
tion. Based on the theories an estimation of the flow
versus time at the actual pressure can be calculated.
See for example Gustafson and Stille (2005) or Stille
et al. (2009). In the Figs. 15, 16 and 17 the predicted
flow has also been shown. The agreement is acceptable
and there is no tendency of jacking. The application of
the approach seems to work well.
123
618 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624

Fig. 14 THX project,

grouting in borehole 314.
a Pressure and flow versus
time, b dimensionality (red
line is the value for 2-D flow
and the green for 1-D flow).
Conversion factors 1 bar
0.1 MPa and 1 l/
min = 1.67 9
10-4 m3/s

Table 7 Calculated dimensionality of the grout flow, maximum grouted fracture aperture and grout spread in the maximum and
minimum grouted fracture, THX project
qPffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Bore hole Dimensionality bg;max ¼ 3 b3g (lm) Grout spread Grout spread in minimum
in bg,max (m) penetrable fracture [95 lm] (m)

308 2–1-D 160 7.3 (after 10 min) 5.0

314 2-D 250 15.7 (after 17 min) 6.5

Table 8 Measured Lugeon values and calculated remaining hydraulic conductivity after grouting, THXP project
Bore Lugeon value before Lugeon value after Remaining hydraulic Sealing effect based Sealing effect based on
hole grouting (LU) grouting (LU) conductivity Eq. (9) (LU) on LU values (%) measured Rb3 (%)

308 7 0.2b 0.64 97.2 91.8

a
314 25 0.3b 1.25 98.8 95.0
a
Estimated from other borehole based on grout take
b
Measured in borehole at a distance of 1.5 m
P 3
The boreholes have been water-pressure tested the evaluated value of bg (see Table 12). The
before the grouting. The remaining hydraulic conduc- P
negative values means that the value of b3g based on
tivity according to Eq. 8 has been calculated based on the grouting will be greater than measured initially by

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624 619

Table 9 Velocity of the water flow in the largest ungrouted Table 10 Properties of used grout mix at Gotvand dam project
fracture, THXP project
Type of cement Viscosity Yield bmin bcrit
Grout Head Type of Gradient bmin Water velocity (Pas) value (Pa) (lm) (lm)
spread (m) curtain (lm) in the fracture
(m) (m/s) OPC, w/c 2.0, 0.004 0.35 61 122
d95 = 32 lm
5–6.5 60 One row 5.0 95 0.037

Fig. 15 Gotvand dam,

borehole DP49, depth
45–50 m. a Recorded
pressure and flow and
predicted flow.
b Dimensionality (red line is
the value for 2-D flow and
the green for 1-D flow).
Conversion factors
1 bar = 0.1 MPa and
1 l/min = 1.67 9
10-4 m3/s

the WPT. Probably the accuracy in the measurements
in both cases is not enough to measure small values of
fracture openings or low values of the transmissivity.
An alternative explanation may be that the aperture
measured by the grout take may overestimate the
hydraulic apertures.
The water velocity in the ungrouted fractures can
also be estimated. The result is presented in Table 13.
It indicates that the risk of internal erosion is
acceptable.
Another borehole DP 56 shows quite a different
behavior. The actual stage is situated close to the floor
of the grouting gallery at a depth of 10 m. The flow
curve can be analyzed regarding unexpected behavior.
The theory of jacking can be applied based on applied
grouting pressure and calculated grout spread.
The flow curve indicates that the flow increases
drastically after about 7 min instead of decreasing.
The calculated dimensionality has also been changed
(see Fig. 18). The flow seems to reach an upper limit
of about 16 l/min (0.27 9 10-3 m3/s) which may
correspond to the maximum capacity of the pump. At
constant flow the pressure should be increase with
time. This has not happened indicating that the jacking

123
620 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624

Fig. 16 Gotvand dam,

borehole DP49, depth
50–55 m. a Recorded
pressure and flow and
predicted flow.
b Dimensionality (red line is
the value for 2-D flow and
the green for 1-D flow).
Conversion factors 1 bar
0.1 MPa and 1 l/
min = 1.67 9 10-4 m3/s

is ongoing. The predicted flow based on the observa-
tion during the first 7 min (b = 0.093 mm and 2-D
flow) is also presented in the Fig. 18.
With the theories given in Sect. 4.6 the expected
jacking has been calculated. The jacking depends on
the penetration which has been calculated based on
RTGC for every minute after the spread started. The
spread value is based on the assumption that the flow is
2-D and that no jacking has occurred. The actual
spread is probably less since the injected volume will
help to jack the fractures and not only give an increase
in penetration. The results are presented in Fig. 19.
The jacking is evident. Even if the jacking has been
calculated based on elasticity theory the movements
are not automatically reversible since the fractures
have been filled up with grout. In order to be reversible
the induced stresses in the rock have to squeeze out the
grout first. It is therefore less probable that the
reduction of jacking at the pressure drop will be
noticed.
In this case both the observations from the flow
curves and calculations based on the theories of
jacking indicate a clear jacking. The grouting pressure
relatively to the overburden stress has been too high
and has given an unwanted jacking of the rock mass.
6 Conclusions
In dam and foundation work permeation grouting is
used to reduce the hydraulic conductivity but also
improve the stiffness of the ground. It means that the
grout has to penetrate into the fractures and thus spread
into the rock mass.
During recent decades, there has been a substantial
increase of understanding of the mechanism behind
the spreading of grout in jointed rock and the flow
properties of the grout mix. The research during recent
years has also given a better understanding of the
water-bearing structures of the rock mass. An active

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624 621

Fig. 17 Gotvand dam,

borehole DP49, depth
55–60 m. a Recorded
pressure and flow and
predicted flow.
b Dimensionality (red line is
the value for 2-D flow and
the green for 1-D flow).
Conversion factors
1 bar = 0.1 MPa and
1 l/min = 1.67 9
10-4 m3/s

Table 11 Calculated dimensionality of the grout flow, maximum grouted fracture aperture and grout spread in the maximum and
minimum grouted fracture, Gotvand dam
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P 3ffi
Bore hole DP 49, Dimensionality bg;max ¼ 3 bg (lm) Grout spread in Grout spread in minimum
depth (in m) bg,max (m) penetrable fracture [61 lm] (m)

45–50 1–2-D 76 13.0 10.4

50–55 2-D 65 10.7 (after 16 min) 10.0
55–60 2-D 70 13.7 (after 27 min) 11.9

Table 12 Measured Lugeon

Bore hole DP 49, Lugeon value before Remaining hydraulic Sealing effect based
values and calculated
depth in meter grouting (LU) conductivity on measured Rb3 (%)
remaining hydraulic
conductivity, Gotvand dam 45–50 0.15 Negative [100
50–55 0.12 Negative [100
55–60 0.24 Negative [100

Table 13 Velocity of water flow in the largest ungrouted fracture, Gotvand dam
Grout spread (m) Head (m) Type of curtain Gradient bmin (lm) Water velocity in the
fracture (m/s)

10.0–11.9 180 Three rows 6.4 61 0.020

123
622
Fig. 18 Godvand dam,
borehole DP 56. a Flow and
pressure curves indicating
that jacking has occurred.
b Dimensionality (red line is
the value for 2-D flow and
the green for 1-D flow)
Conversion factors 1 bar
0.1 MPa and
1 l/min = 1.67 9
10-4 m3/s
control method has been developed based on the new
theory of grout spread and measurement of grout flow
and pressure versus time in order to govern the grout
spread in real time during the grouting operation. The
concept is called the ‘‘RTGC method’’. The concept
was developed for pre-grouting of tunnels in fractured
hard rock.
In the paper the new theory and the concept has
been described and applied for dam grouting in
sedimentary rock. The concept seems to be applicable.
The evaluation of the dimensionality of the flow seems
to work satisfactory. The flow itself versus time for
actual grout pressure follows quite well was has been
measured as long as jacking has not occurred. The
prediction that jacking will start when the pressure
exceeds the normal joint stress seems to be slightly
conservative. The penetrability of the grout seems to
be better than was anticipated indicating that the old
rule of thumb that the opening has to be three times the
maximum grain size may be conservative for modern
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
grout mixes. The sealing efficiency has been in the
order of 90–99 %. The observed hydraulic conductiv-
ity of the grouted zone expressed as Lugeon value has
been \0.3 and confirms the experiences from tunnel
grouting of fractured hard rock that modern grouting
cement can give results much lower than the old rule
of thumbs of 1 Lugeon.
In the paper the possibilities of this concept to
optimize dam and foundation grouting have been
demonstrated. The concept implies that the empirical
based refusal and completion criteria of today can be
replaced by a grouting process based on a fundamental
understanding of the hydraulic properties of the rock,
the properties of the grout and the advancement of
grout during injection. Grouting of today is thus more
of engineering than handicraft. It is the penetrability of
the grout mix and the spread which will be the
governing factors for the quality of the grout curtain.
The flow properties and the pressure give the required
time to achieve the quality. Even though there are
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624 623

Fig. 19 Gotvand dam,

borehole DP 56.
a Calculated relations
between relative grout
spread In and relative
pressure pn and
b corresponding theoretical
jacking expressed as total
fracture aperture, d in m, as a
function of relative
penetration In

many factors that require further studies the concept
can be applied today to optimize dam and foundations
grouting.
References
Axelsson M (2009) Prevention of erosion of fresh grout in hard
rock. Doctoral thesis, Division of GEO Engineering,
Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden
Barker JA (1988) A generalized radial flow model for hydraulic
tests in fractured rock. Water Resour Res 24(10):1796–1804
Beauheim R, Roberts R, Avis J (2004) Well testing in fractured
media: flow dimensions and diagnostic plots. J Hydraul
Res 42:69–76
Brantberger M, Stille H, Eriksson M (2000) Controlling the
grout spread in tunnel grouting—analyses and develop-
ments of the GIN-method. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
15(4):343–352
Cornet F, Li L, Hulin J-P, Ippolito I, Kurowski P (2003) The
hydromechanical behaviour of a fracture: an in situ
experimental study. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 40:1257–
1270
Draganovic A (2009) Bleeding and filtration of cement-based
grout. Doctoral thesis, Division of Soil and Rock
Mechanics, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stock-
holm, Sweden
Draganovic A, Stille H (2011) Filtration and penetrability of
cement based grout: study performed with a slot. Tunn
Undergr Space Technol 26:548–559
Eklund D, Stille H (2008) Penetrability due to filtration ten-
dency of cement-based grout. Tunn Undergr Space Tech-
nol 23:390–397

123
624
Eriksson M (2002) Prediction of grout spread and sealing
effect—a probabilistic approach. Doctoral thesis, Division
of Soil and Rock mechanics, Royal Institute of Technol-
ogy, Stockholm, Sweden
Eriksson M, Stille H (2003) A method for measuring and
evaluating the penetrability of grouts. In: International
conference of grouting and ground treatment, New
Orleans. Geotechnical special publication no. 120, ASCE,
pp 1326–1337
Eriksson M, Stille H, Andersson J (2000) Numerical calcula-
tions for prediction of grout spread with account for fil-
tration and varying aperture. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
15(4):353–364
Ewert FK (1985) Rock grouting with emphasis on dam sites.
Springer, Berlin
Fransson Å (2001) Characterisation of fractured rock for
grouting using hydrogeological methods. Doctoral thesis,
Department of Geology, Chalmers University of Tech-
nology, Göteborg, Sweden
Fransson Å (2002a) Characterization of a fractured rock mass
for a grouting field test. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
6(4):331–339
Fransson Å (2002b) Non-parametric method for transmissivity
distributions along boreholes. Ground Water 40(2):
201–204
Fransson Å (2009) Selection of grouting material based on a
fracture hydraulic aperture assessment. In: Nordic sym-
posium of rock grouting, Finnish tunnelling association,
Helsinki, Finland, pp 55–61
Fransson Å, Tsang C-F, Rutqvist J, Gustafson G (2007) A new
parameter to assess hydromechanical effects in single-hole
hydraulic testing and grouting. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
44:1011–1021
Funehag J, Fransson Å (2006) Sealing narrow fractures with a
Newtonian fluid: model prediction for grouting verified by
field study. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 21(5):492–498
Gothäll R, Stille H (2008) Fracture dilation during grouting.
Tunn Undergr Space Technol 24:126–135
Gustafson G, Fransson Å (2000) The use of transmissivity data
from probe holes for predicting tunnel grouting: analyses
of data from the access tunnel to the Äspö hard rock lab-
oratory. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 15(4):365–368
Gustafson G, Stille H (1996) Prediction of groutability from
grout properties and hydrogeological data. Tunn Undergr
Space Technol 11(3):325–332
Gustafson G, Stille H (2005) Stop criteria for cement grouting.
Felsbau 23:62–68
Gustafson G, Fransson Å, Butron C, Hernqvist L (2009)
Effective aperture for grout penetration. In: Nordic sym-
posium of rock grouting, Finnish tunnelling association,
Helsinki, Finland
Gustafson G, Hernqvist L, Fransson Å, Funehag J (2010) The
use of proxy parameters in pre-investigation, design and
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:603–624
construction of tunnels with application to grouting. In:
Proceedings of the rock mechanics in the Nordic countries
2010, Kongsberg, Norway
Håkansson U (1993) Rheology of fresh cement-based grouts.
Doctoral thesis, Division of Soil and Rock Mechanics,
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Hässler L (1991) Grouting of rock—simulation and classifica-
tion. Doctoral thesis, Division of Soil and Rock Mechanics,
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Hässler L, Stille H, Håkansson U (1988) Simulation of grouting
in jointed rock. In: Proceedings of the 6th international
congress on rock mechanics, Montreal, vol 2, pp 943–946
Hernqvist L, Fransson Å, Gustafson G, Emmelin A, Eriksson M,
Stille H (2009) Analyses of the grouting results for a sec-
tion of the APSE tunnel at Äspö hard rock laboratory. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 46:439–449
Houlsby AC (1990) Construction and design of cement grout-
ing. Wiley, USA
Kobayashi S, Stille H, Gustafson G, Stille B (2008) Real time
grouting control method: development and application
using Äspö HRL data. R-08-133, Swedish Nuclear Fuel
and Waste Management Company, Stockholm, Sweden
Lombardi G (1985) The role of cohesion in cement grouting
of rock. In: 15th ICOLD congress, Lausanne, vol III,
pp 235–261
Lombardi G, Deere D (1993) Grouting design and control using
the GIN principle. Water Power Dam Constr 45(6):15–22
Moye DG (1967) Diamond drilling for foundation exploration.
Civ Eng Trans Inst Eng Aust 45(17):95–100
Palmström A, Stille H (2010) Rock engineering. Thomas Tel-
ford, London, Great Britain
Rafi JY (2010) Applying ‘‘real time grouting control method’’ in
sedimentary rock with gotvand dam data. Master of Sci-
ence thesis, Division of Soil and Rock Mechanics, Royal
Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Rombough V, Bonin G, Shuttle DA (2006) Penetrability control
of GIN mixes during fractured rock grouting. In: Pro-
ceedings of the sea-to-sky geotechnique—59th Canadian
geotechnical society, 1–4 October, pp 528–535
Shuttle D, Rombough V, Bonin G (2007) GIN distilled. Geotech
News. September 3–6, http://www.groutline.com
Snow DT (1970) The frequency and aperture of fractures in
rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 7:23–40
Stille B, Stille H, Gustafson G, Kobayashi S (2009) Experience
with the real time grouting control method. Geomech Tunn
2(5):447–459. doi:10.1002/geot.2009.00036
Warner J (2004) Practical handbook of grouting—soil, rock and
structures. Wiley, New Jersey, USA
Weaver K (1991) Dam foundation grouting. ASCE, New York,
USA
Zimmermann RW, Bodvarsson GS (1996) Hydraulic conduc-
tivity of rock fractures. Transp Porous Media 23:1–30