s4 ROCK ENGINEERING References Campbell, D.S., Christian, J.T. and Einstein, LX. *Computeriosd Analysts of Rock Slope Stability", A808 Spectalty Conference, Teck Rnginoering for Foundations and Slopes, Uhiversity of Colorado, Boulder, August, 1976, WoL. Ts Hondron, AJ+, dr-, 1968 ~ Mock Machantes in Engineering Practice™. Dilted ty Stagg and Glenklevics, Wiley, New York, 1968, Hendon, Aedey deep Conting, EsJ. and Alyer, Atl, 1971 ~ Ménalytioad and Graphical Methods for the analysis of Slopes in Rock Matos". WG Technteal Report No. 36, 162 pagen. Kausel, Eiuando, Roeeeet, J.M- and Vase, G. "Dynamic donlyets of Footings on Layered Media", J, Bnginsering Moshantes Division, ASCE, October, 1975, Proceedings Paper 12652. Link, Hey 1968 = "On the Correlation of Setantoally ant Statically Determined Moduli of Hastietty of Rock Masses", Sick Mechanics and Engineering Geolog, Supplement TY, 1968, Molotova, LV. and Vasalev, Yu I, "On the Value of the Ratio of ‘the Velocstitee of Longitiatinal and Transverse aves in Rocks, Part ZI", Acadeay of Science, USSR, Institute of Piysios of the Zarth, 1959. Trensiated ty 12 Gooptyetoal Service, 1960, pages 1097-1116,6 ROCK ENGINEERING [INTRODUCTION Dams exert varying magnitudes of compressive stresses, shearing stresses, and seepage stresses in the abutment and foundation mater als. The design engineers must guarantee that these stresses are within acceptable levels for their particular type of dam and for ‘their particular foundation conditions. Oestaners must treat the foundation matertals and the dan as a unit with certain interaction responses. [A prime design consideration 1s the settlenent of the dan. The settlenent must be sufficiently smal1 so that the tensile stresses in ‘the dam are seat] enough to prevent harnful cracking, or are otherwise handled (such as by re-shaping or providing tensile reinforcenent in concrete dans or by providing thick filters in earth dams). For checking the anticipated settTesent the modulus of the In-situ rock materials must be known, [A second and probably more serious design consideration is the determination of the factor of safety for sliding stabtlity of the dam and its abuteents and foundations, as a unit or as 2 local sec~ tion. The factor of safety must be calculated, assessed, and judged to be adequate, The calculations require a knowledge of the shearing resistance of the foundation materials, particularly in an upstream downstream direction. The permeability of the abutnent and foundation materials is a third design consideration--from the points-of-view both of cost and DAMS ON ROCK 7 of safety. The loss of mater leaking past the dan say or may not be an important econonic factor for a given project. However, the magnt- tude and distribution of the hydrostatic pressures 1s a key factor in cetermining Sliding stability, potential for piping and blow-outs, and the need for costly grouting and drainage provistons. The calculations of Flow loss and uplift distribution require a knowledge of the in-situ permeability of the abutment and foundation naterials--only approxi setely in magnitude but specifically in distribution, ‘The designers face a difficult task in assenbling all the data necessary for making the required calculations and judgement decistons. They must arrive at a final design for a safe and econontical dan of & siven type with a given shape, @ given foundation excavation depth, and a given set of specifications regarding foundation excavation and treatment. It fs quite clear that while the modern designer of dams WITT use structural mechanfes in all of 4ts sophistication, the major ‘input regarding one-half of the structure-foundston system must cone from the engineering geologist and his co-workers in soi] and rock mechanics. In this paper some questions are raised regarding two of the three main design problens--s1iding stability and permeability consid- erations (nainly grouting and drainage). The third point, settienent, is not discussed, rot because of its unizportance but because of Timi- tation in tine and space, nd the fact that settlenent 4s usually not 4 problem for dans with rock foundations with the exception of arch ans with weak abutwents.58 ROCK ENGINEERING SLIDING STABILITY OF OAKS General Typicel Problens.--The assessnent of stability against sliding is much nore critical for certain types of dans than for others. Earth dans have flat stopes and the induced shearing stresses are normally low so that most rock foundations can easily resist thes. Only in the case of a very weak, adversely oriented geologic plane of weakness, particularly where porewater pressures could develop, would a sTiding problen exist with an earth dam. Similarly, sliding fs not a problen with most rockti11 dans although the she ‘ing stresses in the founda- tion rock may be higher than for an equivalent earth dam because of the steeper side slopes. Concrete gravity dams present the classical problen of stiding stabitity. The design of a gravity dam typtcally 1s accompanied by analyses of sliding resistance in which different assumptions are made regarding the distribution of uplift pressure, the depth of sliding, and the shear strength parameters. Practice varies with respect to the acceptable value for the factor of safety. Very few concrete gravity dams actually fail by sliding but there are some instances (9) Concrete arch dams present the classical problen of abutnent, stability. The stability 1s influenced by the downstream topography and the presence and orientation of one or sore geologic planes of weakness. Rock wedges of substantial size, formed by intersecting geologic planes in the abutment, must typically be checked for poten- tial stiding (@, 10,10), Special Problens with Gravity Intake Structures.--ATthough per haps not generally recognized, sone of the most critical stability DAMS ON ROCK 9 problens are associated with concrete gravity intake structures for powerhouses and spittnays. These structures are comon not only to concrete dams but to earth and rockfiI1 dams. They may be perched high on the abutnént along side the main dan where the topography falls off abruptly downstrean. Almost any weak, continuous geoTogic plane of weakness, whether horizontal or slightly upstreen- or domstrean- ‘ipping, wiTl day-Tight in the valley wall. The shearing resistance long the weakest geologic plane determines the stability of the structure--and the stabiTity may be found to be marginal. Rock wedges ‘formed by intersecting planes may also be critical here, as for arch ans. ‘The intake structures for wide valleys are often founded on the valley floor rather than on the abutnents. In these cases there st remain potential stability problens for both the power intakes and the SptTIways. The power intakes are founded on the rock at as high an elevation as possible for econowy. The powerhouses immediately dow stress require deep excavations, often in the range of 30 to 100 ft (10 to 30m). Thus, a high rock face 4s present and 1f horizontal or ‘pstrean- or downstrean-dipping weak geologic planes accur, they ‘outcrop on the rock face and could present a serous sTiding hazard. The hazard my be reduced at a cost, either by lowering the foundetion Tevel of the concrete intake block, requsring both additional rock ‘excavation and additional concrete, or by Joining the powerhouse and ‘intake structures together so as to act as a unit with a much grenter resistance to the horizontal thrust of the reservoir water. Spiltnay gravity structures do not present as difficult @ prob- Jen as power intake structures because they normally do not require as,o ROCK ENGINEERING deep an excavation. Also, horizontal and downstrean-dipping weak planes will not intersect the rock surface downstream. Therefore, it 4s the upstrean-dipping planes that are critical, particularly those with a low dip (5° to 15°) that stiTl surface fairly close to the exca- vation, Allowances must be made in the analysis for future erosion that might be caused by flood discharges, especially in the case of plunge pools. Adverse Geologic Conditions SH ding problens are not related to weak rock material in a general sense but rather to weak planes or weak zones within the rock imss. The orientation of these planes 1s also fnportant but, as has been shown, a domstrean-dtpping plane may not always be the most adverse direction, Weak planes of alt orfentation must be considered because they could be assocfated with other intersecting planes to form large rock wedges susceptible to failure, Weak planes or zones ‘include Joints, bedding planes, foltation surfaces, shear zones, and fault zones. Joints.--A11 rock masses are jointed to a greater or lesser degree. Three sets of Joints, mutually perpendicular or nearly 30, are often present, Joints exhibit great variations in thelr degree of continutty, surface roughness, chentcal alteration, and soft in- Fi1ingse-factors which influence the shearing resistance slong their surfaces. In fresh rock below the depth of weathering, Joints are often continuous only over a distance of several meters; their sur- faces tend to be somewhat rough and irregular and to be hard, unal~ tered, and clay-free. In these circunstances Joints are not particu- larly weak and they may not adversely affect sitding stability. It 1s DAMS ON ROCK o probable that too much emphasis has been given to normal hard-rock Joints tn the Field of rock mechanics, Certain classes of joints, however, have proven to be weak and harnfut to engineering projects. These include the foTToving: 1: Weathered joints 2. taster joints 3. Shear fotnts Weathered joints tend to have greater continutty and to be sore open because of stress relief near the surface, They also may contain clay and have Tittle interlocking strength because of chemical alter- ation and weakening of the surface asperities. taster Joints my for part of a Joint systen but at @ much Targer spacing than the inter- imdiate, Tess-continuous, parallel Joints--often 100 f¢ to 1000 ft (20 m to 300 m) spacing. Because of their continuity they often are ore open and secondarily altered (weathered, hydrothermally altered, or in-filled) than normal Joints. The third class of Joints, shear Joints, may be wisely spaced as the mster Jofnts or they may be closely spaced. They often are striated and grooved in one direction and may contain secondary mineralization such as chlorite, iron oxides, sericite, etc. The past movenents in geologic tise were probably small, perhaps only centineters, since crush zones and gouge are not cmon. The shearing resistance parallel to the direction of the shear striations wit] be Tess than that at any other direction. Bedding Planes.--Bedding planes typically represent contacts between layers of sedimentary racks of different Titholoay. Thay noticeably separate materials of differing color, grain size, or com position. Because of discontinuity of physical properties, the beddinga ROCK ENGINEERING planes may becone planes of separation under stress changes, such as by stress relief near the surface, and bedding plane Joints are formed Uniess weathered or sheared, the bedding plane Joints may be tight, Irregular, and moderately strong, stmtar to normal Joints. Foliation Planes,--Foliation planes, or surfaces, since they are usually undulating rather than planar, are present in the metanorphic gneisses and schists. Unless weathered or sheared, these surfaces may present soderately high shear resistance. However, sone of the schists such as sertctte schist, chlorite schist, end tale schist have tnher~ cent low material strengths and where interbedded with stronger meta~ morphic rocks, such as quartzite, marble, or gneiss, they form zones of weakness. Not only would the weak schists have Tow compress ve strengths and coheston intercepts but the frictfon values would be Tow because of the igh percentage of platy minerals. Shear Zones.--Shear zones occur in all rock types and at 211 orientations. However, there are two classes so weak and so prevalent fas to merit special mention: the bedding-plane shear zone and the foliation shear zone (2,3), The first type occurs in sedimentary rocks, usually in the softer shale or Tignite layers betieen harder beds of sandstone or limestone; the second type occurs in metasorphtc rocks, usuaTly in the weaker layers of schist between harder beds of gnetss, quartzite, ete, The two types are sisilar in many ways--they are usually ust a few centimeters thick, they are continuous over a tox tens to a few hundreds of meters, are comprised of ground-up rock ranging from clay-size to sand-size, are roderately twpermeable, and are weak. Although the shearing displacenent in the geologic past has probably only been in the range of centineters to meters, it has been DAMS ON ROCK a suffictent to shear off the aspertties of the Joint surfaces and to reduce the effective cohesion to zero and the effective friction angle to the residual value. The residual friction value will be a function of the grainesize distribution and mineralogy of the ground-up naterfal Shear zones are so inportant in rock engineering because they possess the two requisites for a really weak layer: (1) continuity over a Targe area, and (2) a zone of very Tow strength, ie., essen tiaMly zero coheston and a Tow friction angle close to or at the reside al value. Faults.--Faults of tectonic origin and of large or small dts Placenent possess all the bad properties mentioned above for shear zones and little additional need be said. Goth may also affect the permeabiTity of & rock mass since they comonly contain a central zone of fine-grained gouge of low perneabiTity and bordering zones of per ineable shear fractures or brecctated rock. Thus they act as dens for perpendicular flow and as drains or conduits for parallel flow. Determination of Shear Strength Paraneters Engineering Geological Exploration.--By far the sost important step in the study of sliding stability for a dam 4s the exploratton conducted for determining the Jointing, shearing, and faulting at the site, This will consist of geologic mapping, digging of test pits and trenches, setsmic refraction and perhaps electrical resistivity sur- veying, and normal dianond core éri11ing. However, orientation of the geologic discontinuities must be done in several of the boreholes, either by borehole photography or sone core orientation method. calyx holes of man-size diameter, test shafts, or horizontal exploratory adits are almost mandatory to enable inspection and description of the ARTHUR LAKES Lanai SoLORADE AY ARO SCHOOL OF Rte:cy ROCK ENGINEERING physical characteristics of the different discontinuities, for sam- pling of the discontinuities for laboratory testing, and possibly for in-situ direct shear testing. The locations of these special large- scale exploratory openings should be chosen so as to cover particularly critical areas of the dam and appurtenant concrete structures. ‘he results of the above should be shown on naps, cross sections. and statistical polar nets. Continuous weak zones should be emphasized {perhaps by coloring in red). For detailed analysis of stability the actual position and orfentation of the weak zones, as shown on the plan view and sections, are needed rather than the statistical plots. The statistical polar plots are useful, however, in relating structural features and in searching out intersecting planes of weakness that could form potentially critical rock wedges Laboratory Tests.--Ivo types of laboratory tests my be helpful (1) classification tests of clayey, sheered gouge or mylontte from shear or fault zones, and (2) direct shear tests. The classification ‘ests would include grain-size analysis and the Atterberg Timits. The results ave useful in comparing different sylonites or gouge and in correlating with the residual friction angle. Direct shear tests on either undisturbed or resolded samples of the gouge may be used for determining the residual friction angle. The tests should be drained tests and may take from a few hours to several days per load tncrenent depending upon the clay content and the permeability of the sanpte (7). sypical results show cohesion intercepts of near zero and érained friction angles of 6°-15° for the clayey samples, 16°-23° for inter- aediate samples, and 24°-32° for sandy samples. The typical shear stress-displacenent curve shows Tittle or no peak, even for undis~ DAMS ON ROCK 6s ‘turbed samples of eylonite. Laboratory direct shear tests may also be of value for studying Joint surfaces fn hard rock. In this case it is advised that a few smooth, planar surfaces be prepared by cutting with a dianond saw and by grinding smooth (7). Direct shear tests on these surfaces will atve ‘the basic angle of sliding friction ¢, for a planar surface of the rock type tested. To this value may be added the angle of inclination i of any undulation or waviness along the Joint surface (1 1s measured as ‘the angle between the average direction of the Joint surface and the steepest part of the undulation), The t-value may be determined by reasurenents in field exposures, or for small undulations, by labora ‘tory measurements. The i-angle 1s often in the range of 5°=15* but ray range from 0°-2° for planar joints to 20°-40° or greater for very irregular joint surfaces. Thus, a sasple of sandstone ray give a smooth friction angle of 30° and with an tangle of 12 6 measured, have a total friction angle of 42° for the natural Joint surface. Direct shear tests may be made in the laboratory on natural Joint surfaces. The obtained range of friction values could be quite Tange because of variations in the {-angle fron sample to sample iso, a cohesfon intercept {s often obtained from the Coulonb plot of ‘normal oad vs shearing load. Patton (4) and Oeere et al. (6) have explained the mechanism of shearing displacenent as prinartly s11¢ing up the steepest part of the undulations under low norsal loads and progressive shearing off of the steeper undulations at higher normal Toads. This 4s the so-called multiple-node of shear failure wnich leads to the curved failure envelope in the Coulonb shear strength plot ‘The Commission on Standardization of Laboratory and Field Tests,6 ROCK ENGINEERING International Soctety for Rock Hechantes, in its publication (7) suggested Methods for Determining Shear Strength" show a typical Couleeb shear strength-normal stress graph in which both the peak shear strength and residual shear strength envelopes are shown (Fig. 1) The following terminology and coments are quoted: tp residual friction angle 4, = apparent friction angle below stress ogi point A 45 a break in the peak shear strength curve resul= ‘ting from the shearing off of major trregularities on the sheer surface. Between points 0 and A, Will vary somewhat; moasure at stress level of interest. Note also 4, = 6, +1, where ¢, 15 the friction angle obtained for snooth surfaces of rock on rock and angle 4 4s the inclination of surface asperities.. ty © apparent friction angle above stress level oy (Point A); note that 9, will usually be equal to or slightly greater than 4, and will vary somewhat with stress level; measure at the stress level of interest. ‘c! = cohesion intercept of peak shear strength curves it may be zero, = apparent cohesion at a stress level corresponding *0 ty ‘The Suggested Method also recomends square specinens of 2500 mn? (3.88 in®) minimum size. In-Situ Direct Shear Tests.--These are made only after a criti cally located geologte discontinutty has been found and, usuatly, only if 1¢ appears to be weak. The Suggested Method referred to above (7) reconmends that at Teast five tests be made for each geologic feature to be tested, each at should be 700 mn (27.6 in) square. The interpretation of the test \ifferent normal stress. The test blocks DAMS ON ROCK oa results 4s the sane as described for the laboratory direct shear tests. In-situ direct shear tests are time-consuming and expensive, perhaps 1-2 months to perform and §10,000 for a single test (suite of Five blocks). Yet, there fs no better nay for a design organtzation to build up experience and no better way for determining the shear strength paraneters to be used in design. Certainly, the integrity of a dan against stiding 4s worth mary tlees the cost of several suites of in-situ tests, The engineering geologists, rock mechantes specia~ ist, and design engineer must work closely together in selecting the crucial locations for tests, tn interpreting the results, and in cor relating with the goology and with the results of laboratory direct shear and classification tests. ‘Shear Strength Paraneters for Design.--AIthough sone shear test ‘ng was done two to three decades ago at dam sites where problen foundations were recognized, by far the majority of dams have been designed without the benefit of laboratory or in-situ shear tests, and sliding fatlures have been very few. In the past decade there has been more testing and it 1s probable that this trend will continue as higher dams and poorer sites are used, particularly tn countries which are now rapidly developing thetr water resources. There would appear to be three approaches to the selection of ‘the design shear strength parameters: (1) use of traditional values of 4 and c, (2) use of rational values of ¢ and c based on evaluation of geological conditions and rock mechanics characterization of the ‘surface roughness and alteration, and (3) use of values obtained fron coabinat ion of (2) and of laboratory and in-situ testing, (1). Traditional_values of ¢ and c are often quite high, typi-6 ROCK ENGINEERING cally 40°-45° and cohesion of 15, 75, or even 150 pst (1, 5, or 10 kg/en?), respectively. The difficulty is in selecting the values, par- ticularly the cohesion. The Joint ASCE-USCOLD Committee on Current United States Practice in the Design and Construction of Arch Oams., Exbanknent Dans, and Concrete Gravity Dams in their report (1) of 1967 state the following with respect to concrete gravity dans, "...Sliding stability fs assured by requiring a resistance, based upon combined shear and friction, severe! times greater than the load tending to pro- duce sliding." They do not conment on the values of shear and frictfon ‘to use other than to say that large blocks of rocks may be carefully removed from the foundation and tested in the Taboratory in direct. shear for a stnulated in-situ test. They also note the need for re search and study 4p wathods for measuring in-place properties of rock, ‘such as strength and modulus of elasticity. In the same publication (1) the report on arch dans points out "...the type and condition of ‘the dam foundation 1s of utnost importance in an estinate of the factor of safety" but the report has no coments on the values of the shear strength paraneters to use or of methods for determining then. It is rot surprising that 4n the final section entitled "Areas of Greatest. Ignorance in the Design, Construction, and Behavior of Arch Dans" the following statenent appea ssThere 45 unantnous agreement anong the four organt- zations that the area of greatest ignorance is in the fleld of rock mechanics, as related to the foundation condition and tts behavior under imposed loading from ‘the dam and reservoir... (2). Rational values of ¢ and c may be obtained in many cases, by comparing the results of direct shear tests from other sites with DAMS ON ROCK Cy ‘similar rock types and sinilar joint surface characteristics. A dif- ficulty with this procedure 1s in obtaining the joint surface ch teristics as they are often not reported in detail. A preliminary estimate may be made by assuaing that ¢ fs zero and that 4, for a smooth-surface would be in the following ranges: 30°-35° for hard, iassive rocks of well-cemented or interlocking texture (sandstones, basalt, granite, getss, linestone, ete.); 25°-20° for hard, sbaley or schistose rocks (hard shale, slate, ph Tite, mica schist):and 20"-25° for softer laminated or schistose rocks (clay-shale, tale schist, eMorite schist). To these values must be added the measured or assumed {-angle for the geotogte discontinuity tn question, The sbove values are for umeathered rock and would have to be reduced 5 for 2 weathered surface, For fault gouge or mylonite the approxinate values given in the section under Laboratory Tests my be used for a preliminary estimate. (3). Test values obtatned from 2 combination of laboratory and Field testing of the critical geologic features 4s the preferred method, even though there are still problens of scale effects, tine effects, and representativeness of the sonples tested. However, inter~ pretation and extrapolation of the data must be made 1n the light of the geometry and geological characteristics of the potential sifding surfaces as described above. Yethods of Analysis and Deston WLitt Pressure,--Before an analysis of the sliding resistance can be nade it 1s necessary to make @ judjemant regarding the distri- bution of water pressure along the potential fatlure surface. The conmon assumption is made that the pressure varies in a straight-line5 ROCK ENGINEERING asnion from full reservoir head at the upstream face of the dam to ful tattwater head at the downstream face of the dam. For most con ‘crete dans a drainage and grouting gallery is provided sear the up- ‘stream base, The drains are considered to be effective in reducing the uplift pressure at the row of drains to a value equal to 1/4 t9 1 of the head difference (reservoir head minus tafTwater nead)- The uplift diagram, then, 4s draun as two stratght THnes, one fron fulT reservoir head at the upstream face to the reduced velue at the drains ‘and the other Tine fron the reduced value at the drain to the tat]~ water level. Sone design firms are more conservative and use 3/4 rather than 1/4 or 1/3 of the head difference at the Tine of drains. here appears to be anple data fron plezasetric observattons to accept ‘the usual value of 1/3. or checking the stability against sliding along 2 deep plane in the rock ft 1s generally assumed that the full reservoir head acts af the Vine of the grout curtain, varying Tinearly to the ine of drains to a value of tallwater head plus 1/3 of the dtfference of reservoir and tattwater, and then Vinearly to tatlwater at the Tige where the geologic plane intersects the free tafTvater, If the drains are rot deep enough to intersect the plane, then no reduction should be nade in the uptitt (novever, if eriticaT, the drains should be extended deeper in order to intersect the plane) reins may eventually becoee ‘noperable due to the deposition of calette at the drain outlets. Concefvably, 4f the drains were to 217 recone cTogged, there would be no decresse in uplift at the Tine of “draing and the uplift pressures would trerease to the value without drains. Thus, during the design a check is usually made on the factor DAMS ON ROCK n of safety against sliding for the case of "drains inoperable." A low factor of safety can be accepted for this case since routine mainte- nance of the operating dam would require reaming out of any plugged Grains, reduéing the probability of ever reaching the condition of ‘total plugging. Sidi Stability Analysis.--The normal analysis of sliding has been by relating the resistance to sliding along a horfzontal or gently sloping plane to the driving force of the reservoir water (plus siIt Toad or earthquake Toad on the dan, 4f any). The factor of safety F then 1s the ratio of the resisting forces to the driving forces. The following so-called “shear-friction® formula has most often been used OM: fs el pest a where, for a horizontal potential fatlure plane V = total vertical force (per unit length of dam) due to weight of dam + weight of water above stoping upstream face + weight of rock above failure plane, U_ = total vertical uplift force acting on the failure plane (per unit length of can), + = angle of friction along plane, © = unit cohesion along plane, A = base area of potential sliding plane (per unit of length of a 4. = horizontal thrust of reservoir water, plus silt, ice, or earthqua Toad (per unt length of dan). A factor of safety of # 4s comonly required. This requiresent of a high safety factor would indicate a lack of confidence in then ROCK ENGINEERING equation, the driving forces, or the resisting forces. Primarily, tt 4s uncertainty of the shear strength paraneters that calls for the con- servatisn, For instance, analyses are commonly made with ¢ of 45° and of 15 psi or 75 pst (1 or 5 kg/en*) and for most geometries of dans the factor of safety of 4 1s readily attetned. Thus, for hard rock foundations with normal Jointing ‘t 4s probable that a sliding stabi1- ity analysts 1 not needed. The actual factor of safety may range from 1.5 or 2 to probably greater than 10, depending on the Joint orienta- ‘ions and Joint roughnesses. . There are two situations that do call for careful checks. how ever, of the sliding stabtTtty: (1) the condition where # continuous weak plane (or rock wedge) underties the foundetion or sbutnent, and (2) the condition of hard rock and norsal jointing but with a very close downstream excavatfon or natural slope. Of course, both condt- tons may be conbined Into e single, quite critical situation. ‘The recomended design approach ts to make 8 srtes of siting analyses using étfferent assunptfons regarding uplift pressure distri- bution ond shearing reststance (and possibly design excavation depth). ‘hese parametric studtes will indicate the severity of the problem and the effect of changing the shear strength paraneters and uplift condi= tions. For the continuous weak plane the assunption of zero cohesfon should be made, and this wiT1 probably not be far fron the truth. For ‘the first checks, the friction angle may be taken as the values given ‘in thts report for the appropriate type of rock or gouge. Laboratory and inesitu shear tests would be required for the final analysis. A factor of safety of 1.5 to 2 would be considered acceptable including the appropriate earthquake effect; the actual value required would be DAMSONROCK a 2 judgenent by the designers regarding the uncertainties associated with the uplift pressure distribution and the character, uniformity, and shear strength parameters of the weak zone. A further check should he made for the assuned, severe condition of inoperable drains, for vihich case a factor of safety of at Teast 1.0 is suggested. Hock and Londe (6) propose for a very large structure such as arch dam designed to last more than 100 years that the design be based ‘on zero cohesion and the residual frfction angle ¢,. They do not indi cate what factor of safety should be used. For a weak plane containing sheared mylonite or gouge one should certainly use zero coheston and ‘the residual friction angle. For other cases of weak layers where no evidence of past shearing is present, the design friction angle could well be more than the residual angle, depending on the results of the ‘geological observations and the in-situ direct shear tests. For either case, a factor of safety ranging from 1.5 to 2 would be applied. If a friction value higher than residual 1s indicated and used in the design, it would be well to check to see that a factor of safety of at Teast 1.1 exists for the residual friction value (with normal uplift and with earthquake). For the second critical case mentioned above, that of hard, Jointed rock and 9 free sTope inmediately downstream, the stability requirenent is severe because of the short length of a potential fail- lure plane, There is no extra resistance from enbednent and passive resistance. A careful assessment must be made of the undulations, irregularities, and continufty in assessing the frictional resistance of the joints. Again, in-situ testing may be needed. A factor of safety of 1.5 to 2 1s recommended, using the peak friction value andsame ” ROCK ENGINEERING the cohesion intercept deterained from the shear tests but tn no case greater than 15 pst (1 kg/en), As an additonal checks the factor of safety should be at least 1.1 using the peak friction value but assur {ng no cohesion. The Hoek-Londe criterion would not appear 0 be applicable for hard rock surfaces. ane! ot al. (5) in @ conpanton paper submitted to this specialty conference show that for hard shales, siTtstones, and sandstones form {ng the foundation for the Haboning Oan the traditfonal analyses using pesk values gave factors of safety of 4 to 5 or greater, while using residual values, factors of safety of 1.2 to 1.4 were obtained, thus satisfying the Hoek-Londe criterton of "adequate" stability with zero cohesion and residual friction. They therefore conclude for this case that the old ertterton of a factor of safety of 4 to 5 using peak strengths and the new criterion of Hoek-Londe using residual frictton only both satisfy the stability requiresents. The question remains fas to what 15 a1 radequate® factor of safety for the Hoek-Londe ci Hanet et a1. (6) also point out the advantages of using the Hor genstern-Price method of analysis (2 and of defining the factor of safety as the ratio of available to required shear strength. It 4s probable that thts type of Viniting equiltbrisn analysis (12 will be used more tn the future. Pertinent Design Questfons 1. Should exploratory adits and test shafts be generally required as part of the design investigation for every dam over, 100 ft (30 m) nigh? 2, should both Taboratory and in-situ direct shear testing be one at every site where erittcatly located and critically Nechantes and Foundation Division, ASCE DAMS ON ROCK, 7s oriented Joint, shear, or fault planes are encountered? And should the testing procedures follow the International Soctety for Rock Nechanics* Suggested Procedure? 3. Should the cohesion value be assumed to be zero in the case of weak zones (weathered, altered, or sheared), and assuned to ‘be no greater than 15 psi (1 kg/m”) even for hard rock surfaces, regardless of the test results? 4. May the factor of safety be as low as 1.5 to 2 when besed on ‘the results of representative shear tests, assuming the restric tions given above to the cohesion? 5. May the uplift pressure at the Tine of drains be assuned to be tattwater head plus 1/3 the difference of headwater and tal water? 6. Should the case of drains inoperable and full uplift be checked? And, if s0, 18 a factor of safety of 1 sufficient? 7. Is the conon analysis method acceptable of comparing the resisting forces to sliding with the driving forces for conpu- ting the factor of safety? ROUTING AND DRAINAGE Gan A recent sumary of grouting and dratnage {s available in the report by the Committee on Embankment Dans and Slopes of the Soi? It 48 pubtished together with seven companion papers in the October 1972 Journal of the SoiT Wechantes and Foundations Division (15). These papers give a good sum rary of current practice in grouting, drainage, and abutment and foundation treatnent and serve as a valuable reference work.6 ROCK ENGINEERING The material covered {n the present paper will not repeat the detailed information of the above papers but will focus only on @ few points which might be debatable, Also, the above papers treat high cexbanksent dans and not concrete dans. Discussion of foundation treat rent for concrete dans is included in the 1967 ASCE-USCOLD Comittee Report (1) previously referred to. Grouting Procedure Dri11ing of Grout Holes.--Many specifications require that grout, holes be drilled by rotary methods. Rotary drilling ts to to five ‘ines more expensive than percussion drilTing and 1s sTower. tunerous projects have been and are being designed and buflt outside the United States with percussion dr{Iling. It is recomended that percussion driT1 ing be peraitted tn sore contracts: ackers.--In good quality, hard rock St 1s not difficult to seat nechantcally leather or hard rubber packers. It is most difficult in fractured rock, Excellent success has been achteved on several pro= Jects with pneunatfcally inflatable packers of 12-24 in length (30-60 con). They may be inflated by nitrogen or compressed air. Although such packers may be purchased, they may also be made on the jobsite out of old radiator hoses, ete. Grouting Pressure.--Grouting pressures are usually limited in the United States and in most South Anerican countries to the weight ‘of overburden at the point of packer setting, {.e., approximately 1 pst per ft of depth (or 1/4 kg per meter of depth). This 1s advis- able where horizontal beds or relief joints exist parallel to the sur- face. Where such a condition does not exist, {t fs recomended that acceptable grouting pressures be increased by 50 percent, provided that DAMS ON ROCK n uplift eeasurenents are continuously made to monitor the surface heave while grouting is betng done at depths Yess than 30 ft (10 m). Packer Grouting.--It 1s recomended that a11 grouting be done by packer grouttrig--from the botton up where possible, and from the top down when rock conditions are poor and it fs difficult to maintain an open ote, Inclined Grout Curtain.--rt is recommended that grout curtains be {Inclined from 15°20" upstream to induce a longer seepage line betveen ‘he grout curtain and the drain holes in order to reduce seepage arad fents, erosion, and seepage quentittes. Solution of the caTciun car- bonate from the grout may also be @ problem over the long term, resul~ ting both In progressive deterforstion of the grout curtain and plug- ging of the drains. Grouting Pattern for Grout Curtain Explorator Grouting.--For dams Tess than 100 ft (30 m) high, ‘routing ¥s often onftted--and for earthfi11 dams for even greater hefghts. An alternative but more expensive procedure 1s to do an ex ploratory grout curtain with holes on 20-25 ft centers (6-8 m). The urpose 1s to extend the exploration to a greater degree than was pos- sible with the design dri11 holes, which probably were on 100-200 Ft spacing (33-66 m). The hole depths would be in the range of 0.5-0.75 tines the head. Shallow relief Joints parallel to the surface which may be quite ‘open are picked up by this method as well as inclined permeable fea- tures. However, 2 vertical feature could be missed because of the Wide spacing of the holes. here the great take {s moderate (50-100 kg cement per linear meter of grout hole, or approximately 1/3-2/3 sack6 ROCK ENGINEERING DAMS ON ROCK ” per Tinear foot) adéttional holes would not normally be reqsired. For ‘ine should be dried 6 ft (2m) or so dowstrean so as to form a larger grout absorptions split-spaced holes or one or two additional Felder] routed coat Weretsertionisme titi marl eet rows of holes could locaTly be grouted. The value of the exploratory the fractures, it would be preferable to have the wider curtain. Also, ‘grout curtain 1s that 4 reduces the possibility that really permeable ‘if the grout absorption in the secondary holes were stil! moderately. high (100-200 kg cenent per m, or 2/3-1 1/3 sacks per ft), preference would be for the wider curtain, features such as open relief joints, solution features, or fault com plexes cut across the ine of the dan. Designed Progressive Grouting.--For higher dans and for condi The second curtain would only be in the area where results indi- ‘tons where @ ful? grout curtain 4s destred, sone form of a grouting cated its need and it would follow essentially the sane order, depth, plan {s devised where progressively more holes are added as the grout- and spacing as the primary and secondary holes as the first Tine. An ‘ng results show that they are needed. Usuelly, a single-line grout assessnent would be made at the completion of the secondary holes to curtain 15 designed but with provisions for extending it as needed into see Af the rock had been tightened up to the prerequisite degree. The 4 double-Tine and, locally, even into triple-Tine curtain, foTlowing Indicates what are considered to be reasonable grout takes ood practice would tndfcate that first a number of exploratory for different degrees of tightne ‘grout holes would be done on a wide spacing, say on 100-Ft (30-m) cen- Very Tow grout absorption = 0 to 12 1/2 kame ters to a depth of 1H (H = hydraulfc head), These holes would be Low grout absorption + 12 1/2 to 25 cored (NX), water-pressure tested, and grouted. In any section where Woderately tow grout shsorption = 25 to 50 three such holes were completed, the results would be analyzed and the Phderate grout. absorption 5 a primary holes driTed and grouted to a depth of 2/3 H, or as otherwise: Yoderately high grout absorption - 100 to 200 findte by the exploratory holes. The holes would be approxtnately | High grout absorption eee on 2.1/2 to 3 in (6-8 en) dianeter percussion holes without water pressu Yery high grout absorption _-- Greater than 400 testing, located on 25-ft (S-) centers. For high dans the final grout holes should arrive at Low Grout Absorptions of 12 1/225 kg/m. If not, a decision must be made as to art¥1ing and grouting locally of either tertiary holes in the second Secondary holes would next be autoratically dried end grouted an splttespacing to depths ranging from 1/3 H to 1/2 H depending on the results of the prinary holes. ATT results would then be analyzed to oH or of @ third row of holes betveen the First two. The latter fs deternine 4 further grouting were needed at any Tocal ares of either ee ae ae one eae lateral or vertical extent. A decision would then have to be made if von. tertiary holes should be drilled in the permeable areas or if a second : TEDDY WHE Wats by 0.0087 to gt the approximate quantities tn cks per foot.% ROCK ENGINEERING Plotting Data.--The grout consumption in terms of kilogram of conent. per neter of hole my conveniently be plotted against depth for The grout intervals. 05 ft), each grout interval for each graut hote (Fig. 2). are usually 10 m (30 ft) except for the upper to which are and the results of water Such 1095 may pressure tests, 1f available, may be plotted as well. 130 show the geologic prof Summary diagrans of frequency of different. group absorptions (Fi and the primaries with the secondaries, etc. 13) are also helpful in comparing different parts of the curtain Drainage Drain holes dritted from grouting and drainage gaTleries below ‘or in the base of the dan should be dr stream so es to increase the Tength of the flow path from the grout at 15°25" angle dovn- curtain, Te 48 conventent to have by-pass valves at the discharge to allow pressure gauges to be installed for measuring the water pressure when the drains are closed. rain holes must be checked for chenical precipitation, and must occastonatTy be cleaned by reaming out. ‘An increased use has been noted of dri age galleries in the downstream abutment areas. This practice provides 8 more positive ‘means of securing abutnent drafnage and thereby enhancing the abutnent stebitity. It 4s likely that this practice will continue to increas Pertinent Questions 1. Is percussion detiting acceptable for grout and drain hotest If so, of what size? And to what depth? 2, Should inflatable packers be required, at Teast as a standby ten? DAMS ON ROCK at SHEAR STRENGTH NORMAL STRESS ‘On (MPa) Fig. 1 Shear Strength - Normal Stress Graph GROUT TAKE (kg com/m of hole) i on 0 Bie 2880100 Mod, Low i > V. Low Mod. High High 200 _400(ka com./mof hole) Fig. 2 Grout Takese 82 % OF INTERV. % OF INTERV. ROCK ENGINEERING GROUT TAKE (kg com./m of hole) DAMS ON ROCK 3. Should atTovable grouting pressures be increased over normal Fig. 3. Distribution Diagrams of Grout Take ¥. . Now | vow | MSH | aoa. | HER | ion |v. Hion .s. practice? Y ‘ o> 0 00 ‘4. Is the concept of upstream inclination of the grout curtain downstream inclination of the drains a recormended one? foe SUMMARY OF J. what are the advantages and disadvantages of the exploratory ag PRIMARY HOLL Toe “LEFT ABUT yout curtain for Tow and moderate dans? | 1s the cmcapt of “esgned prarssivegrtig os des cok | ribed herein en acceptable method? }. re the terminology and related numerical values of grout “0 | lake tn kg/m of value for purposes of record keeping and com i nication? 20 A, Are downstrean drainage galleries in the abutnents @ enerally good 4dea? La me) a) eae SUMMARY OF PRIMARY HOLE RIGHT ABUT cot avg Take ao Lil 20 ° VAROCK ENGINEERING tion Shear Zone--An Adverse Engineering Geologie Feature ef ftanorgnie Rocker® Jour, Engineers, Vol. 60, No. 4, Oct., 1973, pp. T6176. {Engineering Geologist's Respons Prac. Of the Engineering Foundation Conferences on Pe Deere, D, Us, Hendron, A. 3 Hock, nm Rock,” Proc. ard Congress’ Int. Soc. for'fock Mechanics, Vol. 2, 1974, pp. 613-654, Internat onal Society for Rock Mechanics, Suggested Nethods for Getermining Shear Strength, Commission oratory an February 1974, 23 pe ‘Graphical Stability Analysis of Slopes in Jointed nur of the soit Mechanics abd Foundations Division ASCE, vaT. 94, Morgenstern, N. 10, Rock echar Rock Structures,” Chapt. ved. by K. 8. Staggy —— DAMS ON ROCK ® fatton, FD.» "Multiple Nodes of Shear Falure fn Rock Rock Nech., VOT. 1, Liston, 1966, pp. 50 Seed, HW. 8., Chmn., "Foundation and Abutment Treatment for High Embaint bas on'nock by the Com tte on Eebankwent Dos an 7 Hechantcs. and Foundations Division," Journal_of Vol. BH He Slopes of the ioe Sot Wechanics and Foundations Division,