21st Century Dam Design

Advances and Adaptations

31st Annual USSD Conference

San Diego, California, April 11-15, 2011

Hosted by
Black & Veatch Corporation
GEI Consultants, Inc.
Kleinfelder, Inc.
MWH Americas, Inc.
Parsons Water and Infrastructure Inc.
URS Corporation

On the Cover
Artist's rendition of San Vicente Dam after completion of the dam raise project to increase local storage and provide
a more flexible conveyance system for use during emergencies such as earthquakes that could curtail the regions
imported water supplies. The existing 220-foot-high dam, owned by the City of San Diego, will be raised by 117
feet to increase reservoir storage capacity by 152,000 acre-feet. The project will be the tallest dam raise in the
United States and tallest roller compacted concrete dam raise in the world.

U.S. Society on Dams

Vision
To be the nation's leading organization of professionals dedicated to advancing the role of dams
for the benefit of society.
Mission USSD is dedicated to:
Advancing the knowledge of dam engineering, construction, planning, operation,
performance, rehabilitation, decommissioning, maintenance, security and safety;
Fostering dam technology for socially, environmentally and financially sustainable water
resources systems;
Providing public awareness of the role of dams in the management of the nation's water
resources;
Enhancing practices to meet current and future challenges on dams; and
Representing the United States as an active member of the International Commission on
Large Dams (ICOLD).

The information contained in this publication regarding commercial projects or firms may not be used for
advertising or promotional purposes and may not be construed as an endorsement of any product or
from by the United States Society on Dams. USSD accepts no responsibility for the statements made
or the opinions expressed in this publication.
Copyright 2011 U.S. Society on Dams
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Control Number: 2011924673
ISBN 978-1-884575-52-5
U.S. Society on Dams
1616 Seventeenth Street, #483
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: 303-628-5430
Fax: 303-628-5431
E-mail: stephens@ussdams.org
Internet: www.ussdams.org

SELECTING STRENGTH INPUT PARAMETERS FOR STRUCTURAL

ANALYSIS OF AGING CONCRETE DAMS
Timothy P. Dolen1
ABSTRACT
The Bureau of Reclamation Dam Safety Program performs periodic examinations and
risk analysis of all of their dams. Structural analysis results are typically used during a
risk analysis to estimate the failure probabilities of concrete dams under static,
hydrologic, and seismic loadings. The probability of failure is estimated, often
considering average, high, and low strength properties of mass concrete. Not all dams
have a complete history of construction and the strength properties must be assumed. A
database of mass concrete core tests from the past 50 years was analyzed to determine
bond strength input parameters. The average direct tension and shear properties of lift
lines were compared for different state-of-the-practice construction methods in the 20th
Century. The properties were estimated for three primary construction eras and
separately for dams suffering from alkali-aggregate reaction. In addition to bond
strength, the percent of bonded lift lines greatly influenced the input parameters for these
construction eras.
INTRODUCTION
The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is responsible for about 370 storage dams and
dikes that form a significant part of the water resources infrastructure of the western
United States. As owner of these facilities and in accordance with the mission of the
Dam Safety Program, Reclamation is committed to ensure that Reclamation facilities do
not present unreasonable risks to the public, public safety, and/or the environment.
Reclamation has established a risk-based framework to assess the safety of their
structures, to aid in making decisions to protect the public from the consequences of dam
failure, to assist in prioritizing the allocation of resources, and to support justification for
risk reduction actions where needed. Structural analysis results are typically considered
during the risk analysis to better assess the performance of concrete dams under static,
hydrologic, and seismic loads and the likelihood of a structural failure resulting in the
uncontrolled release of water and loss of life. Concrete materials properties are needed
for structural analysis programs. In some cases, the materials properties for a given
concrete dam are unknown. Concrete materials properties are estimated from the aging
concrete information system (ACIS) database of historical mass concrete core test results
(Dolen 2005). Since the properties of mass concrete dams evolved throughout the 20th
Century, the estimates must reflect the state-of-the-practice at the time of construction.
Therefore, the average properties are estimated from test results of dams with comparable
construction methodology and quality. In addition, the range in materials properties can
be used to better estimate the range of levels of risk of structural failure. Of particular
interest is the range in tensile and shear properties of lift lines. Estimating the materials
1

Bureau of Reclamation, P.O. Box 25007, 86-68180, Denver, Colorado, 80225, 303-445-2380, Fax: 303445-6341, tdolen@do.usbr.gov.

Strength Input Parameters

227

properties of mass concrete is only a part of the overall risk analysis and risk assessment
program.
Risk-based Framework for Dam Safety Decision Making
Risk is defined as the probability of adverse consequences, and is estimated as the
product of the loading probability, the probability of failure given the load and the
consequences of that event. The annualized loss of life is estimated from the product of
the annual loading probability and the probability of failure given the load. Reclamation
identifies potential failure modes for each dam in our inventory and estimates annual
probability of failure and risk for plausible failure modes that could result in an
uncontrolled release of water from the reservoir. Risk analysis is the quantative
calculation of risk. Risk assessment is performed at a given dam once a risk analysis is
completed and is the process of deciding whether risk reduction actions are needed.
Annual probability of failure estimates and risk estimates are compared to Reclamations
Public Protection Guidelines as part of risk assessments (Reclamation 2003). For a given
dam, Reclamation considers potential failure modes in three different loading categories static, hydrologic, and seismic, and risk are estimated over a full range of loading
conditions for each potential failure mode. Reclamation may take measures to reduce
risk and/or to better quantify the uncertainties associated with the risk before taking
action. Reclamation considers risks greater than 0.01 lives per year to require expedited
action to reduce risk. For risk estimates between 0.01 and 0.001 lives per year and for
annual probabilities greater than 0.0001, there is justification for taking action to reduce
risk, normally within the scheduled dam safety program budget or evaluation process.
For risk estimates to be less than 0.001 lives per year and for annual failure probability
estimates less than 0.0001 there is diminishing justification to implement risk reduction
measures, or actions considered reasonable and prudent are implemented.
Risk Analysis and Structural Analysis
For many potential failure modes related to concrete dams, a structural analysis provides
valuable information on stresses and stability of the structure. During risk analysis, the
probability of failure for each failure mode is estimated, based on the risk teams
evaluation of structural analysis results using assigned materials properties of mass
concrete.
Strength Input Parameters for Risk and Structural Analysis
Reclamation became concerned that variations in the estimates of materials properties
and the range of these estimates were significant factors when estimating the risk of dam
failure. In some cases, the range of estimates for mass concrete strength was enough to
produce a wide range of potential risk. Reclamation began a research program to better
identify the materials properties of mass concrete and in particular, the bond strength of
concrete at horizontal construction joints, or lift lines. Lift lines are planned
interruptions in the placement, the concrete has chemically set and gained sufficient
strength before the next placement. Practically defined, the lift lines are nearly horizontal
concrete surfaces resulting from planned work stoppages, usually corresponding to the
end of a work day or shift, or topping off formed placements. Lift lines usually must be

228

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

cleaned to remove top surface laitance and debris just before placing the subsequent lift
to assure impermeability, adequate bonding, and monolithic behavior. Typical lift lines
are the regularly spaced construction joints resulting from topping off a formed
placement. The bond strength of lift lines normally represents the weakest concrete from
a strength perspective.
ACIS Database
The ACIS database is a relational database of historical mass concrete tests. The
database was originally created to investigate the properties of aging concrete compared
to other like concretes without aging (Dolen 2005). Concrete data can be categorized by
date, structure, mixture properties, specimen size, and various aging mechanisms for later
sorting. For this investigation, the database was modified to add individual direct tension
and direct shear tests, including failure mechanisms. Figure 1 shows an example
histogram of direct tension strength tests showing the distribution of lift line tests that
failed at the lift line bond, average of 155 lb/in2, and those that failed away from the lift
line, average of 195 lb/in2. Figure 2 shows the distribution of direct tension tests of
parent (no lift line) concrete that failed near the center of the specimen, average of 215
lb/in2, and those that failed near end plates, average of 220 lb/in2. Neither the center, nor
near-platen failure histograms follow a typical normal distribution. This is attributed to
combined data from different dams with both low strength and high strength concrete in
the same sample populations. Based on the failure mode analysis, lift line versus no lift
line test failures were considered separate data populations, whereas the parent center and
end plate failure mechanisms were combined into a single population. From these overall
sample populations, generational subgroups were identified based on the year of
construction and lift line surface preparation methods. When sorted by specimen
diameter, there was little difference between the average direct tensile strength of 6 in
diameter tests compared to larger diameter test specimens, 9 to 18 in diameter (for each
characteristic population). The individual shear, break-bond tests were added to the
database to produce subgroups based on the year of construction and lift line surface
preparation methods. The data includes the test normal stress and shear failure strength
for both lift line and parent concrete test specimens.
TIMELINE FOR CONCRETE DAM CONSTRUCTION AND LIFT LINE
SURFACE PREPARATION
A historical timeline was developed to identify bond strength input parameters for dams
constructed in different eras by different lift surface cleaning and placement methods.
Reclamation analyzed construction records, drilled core logs, and test results to determine
the average bond strength properties for different construction methods.
Lift Surface Cleaning and Preparation Methods
Reclamation concrete dam evolution followed the rapidly developing state-of-thepractice in mass concrete construction throughout the 20th Century. Initially, dams were
constructed using relatively rudimentary techniques, equipment, and materials. As dams
became larger and more complex, the construction techniques also evolved. The

Strength Input Parameters

229

construction of Hoover Dam from 1933 to 1935 led to a vast advancement in mass
concrete technology. Figure 3 shows a historical timeline of the evolution of lift line
surface cleaning methods.

Frequency

25
20
15
10
5
0
0

40

80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440

Direct Tensile Strength - lb/in2

Direct Tension No LL Failures
Avg. 195 lb/in2

Direct Tension Lift Line Failures

Avg. 155 lb/in2

Figure 1. Histogram of direct tensile strength of mass concrete lift lines and failure
modes.
30

Frequency

25
20
15
10
5
0
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520

Direct Tensile Strength - lb/in2

DT Parent - Center Break Failures
Avg. 210 lb/in2

DT Parent - Near Platten Failures

Avg. 230 lb/in2

Figure 2. Histogram of direct tensile strength of parent mass concrete and failure modes.

230

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Uncontrolled W/C Mortar Bonding Mortar

No Mortar
Hydro-demolition
(Old Concrete)

High-pressure Water
Jetting
Wet Sandblasting
Primary
Sand Blasting
Secondary
Green-cutting
Primary
Brooming
Air-Water Jetting
Brooming
Washing

1890

1900

1910 1920 1930 1940 1950

1960

1970

1980 1990 2000

Figure 3. Timeline of Reclamation concrete dam lift line surface cleaning methods.
The properties of lift lines were affected by the available equipment, the speed of
construction, ambient temperature and humidity, the strength of the underlying concrete,
and quality control and inspection practices. There is a narrow lift line cleaning
window from about 8 to 96 hours where the concrete strength is low enough to be
effectively cleaned by the available equipment and methods before placing subsequent
lifts of concrete. As the strength of concrete increased, the window of opportunity for
effective lift surface cleaning decreased. New equipment and methods were therefore
needed to compensate for the ever-increasing strength and performance requirements.
About five types of lift line surface cleaning methods were identified:

wire brooming and washing,

brooming and air-water jetting,
early age green-cutting,
delayed, wet sand blasting, and
high-pressure water blasting.

There is some overlap between when one method was abandoned in favor of a more cost
efficient and effective method.
Aging Concrete Dams
The properties of aging concrete dams form a subset of the overall properties of mass
concrete. Aging dams include those affected by freezing and thawing deterioration

Strength Input Parameters

231

and/or alkali aggregate reaction (AAR). The strength input parameters of AAR affected
dams were separated from the properties of unaffected dams.
CONCRETE CORING AND TESTING
Reclamation has drilled hundreds of feet of concrete cores from dams up to 100 years
age. These cores are tested for a variety of strength parameters. Core drilling and test
methods have evolved over the years. Test specimens themselves can be subject to
sample bias, depending on the specific purpose of the core drilling program. In some
cases, the drilled cores are biased to investigate specific areas of poor quality in a dam,
perhaps in areas of low strength or deterioration. The test data was carefully examined
before summarizing strength input parameters. The test averages represent primarily
vertically drilled cores tested in the saturated moisture condition.
Estimating the Percent Bonded Lift Lines
Without incorporating the percent bonded lift lines, bond strength test results represent a
somewhat biased sample record. An un-bonded lift line cannot be tested for strength,
only friction parameters. Thus, the results must be evaluated to determine if they are
truly representative of the overall dam quality. A drill core log represents the best
available information on the integrity of lift lines. The percent of bonded lift lines was
estimated based on the available records from the number of lift lines obtained intact
compared to the total number of lift lines intercepted. Figure 4 shows the change in
percent of bonded lift lines over time. The moving average was used to smooth trends.
One factor affecting lift line bond strength was placing overly wet mixtures with
excessive bleeding and laitance. Additional water was added to transport concrete in
long chutes and to consolidate the mass concrete in higher lifts. Introduction of the
highline bucket method of placing mass concrete about 1930 and the internal mass
concrete vibrator in 1934 allowed placing lower slump concrete, with a subsequent
improvement of lift line properties. In addition, Reclamation required placement of about
a to inch thick layer of mortar broomed into the cleaned lift line surface immediately
before placing mass concrete up to about 1965. The average properties with and without
mortar were compared where appropriate.
Broken lift lines must be examined carefully to determine if they are un-bonded or caused
by mechanical breaks. The percent of bonded lift lines was considered a significant
factor in overall mass concrete dam performance, and can be correlated to better lift line
cleaning methods. The average and range of percent bonded lift lines are summarized in
Table 1. There is more uncertainty if only a single core is drilled from a dam than from
multiple spaced drill holes which provide a more global estimate of the percent of bonded
lift lines. If multiple core holes indicate there is a continuous, un-bonded lift line,
additional analysis should evaluate this condition.
From these estimates, the designer may choose a more conservative estimate of the direct
tensile strength or cohesion of bonded lift lines by reducing the average values by the
estimated percent of bonded lift lines. Or, appropriate bond strength values could be
applied to bonded lift lines and apparent cohesion applied to un-bonded lift contact

232

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

surfaces, based on the estimated percent bonded lift lines. The most conservative
approach is to perform analysis assuming the lift lines are un-bonded with only apparent
cohesion and sliding friction resistance. The estimated percent bonded lift lines are
added with the average values for shear and tension tests in the ACIS database.
As shown in Table 1, early Reclamation dams averaged about 50 percent bonded lift lines
until about 1930. After Hoover Dam, the average percent bonded lift lines increased to
about 80 percent. The increase in percent bonded lift lines after Hoover Dam may be the
result of several factors including:

introduction of controlled, green-cutting and/or wet-sand blasting,

increased overall concrete strength,
improved quality control methods and inspection, and
introduction of internal vibrators for consolidating concrete.

A few dams had noticeably lower intact lift line recovery including several AAR affected
dams, dams with high early strength concrete, and the first dam to use high-pressure
water blasting as the primary lift line surface cleaning method.
(combined shear and direct tension data sets)
100

Hoover & Grand

Coulee Dams

90

Percent bonded lift lines

80
70
60

early high-pressure water

jetting

50

high strength arch

dams

40
30

with mortar

AAR
dams

without mortar

20
10

green-cut / wet sandblast

brush / wash
0
1/0/1900

9/8/1913

5/18/1927

1/24/1941

10/3/1954

high pressure water jet

6/11/1968

2/18/1982

10/28/1995

Date introduced
Shear DT Combined Moving

Figure 4. Moving average of estimated percent bonded lift lines for mass concrete dams
constructed from 1905 to 1993.

Strength Input Parameters

233

Table 1. Estimate of percent bonded lift lines observed from drilled cores of
Bureau of Reclamation concrete dams.
Year Constructed
Average bond
Range low
Range high
percent
percent
percent
1905 - 1933
50
9
83
1933 - 1964
85
66
100
1965 - 1993
74
23
96
1965 - 1993 *
83
66
96
AAR** 1925 - 1938
40
12
89
* Average for 1965 to 1993 not including early development of high-pressure water blasting, lift
surface cleaning technology.
** Alkali aggregate reaction affected dams constructed between 1925 and 1938.

Sample Selection and Bias

This study analyzed the direct tensile and biaxial shear tests of parent concrete (no lift
lines) and of lift lines. Laboratory tests of parent concrete represent the in-situ properties
of the mass concrete. Lift lines are normally centered in the test specimen. The shear
and tensile properties of good quality concrete and construction methods of lift lines
approach the properties of the parent mass concrete. Poor quality concrete and
construction practices significantly lower lift line properties compared to parent concrete.
The ratio of strength between lift lines and parent concrete gives an indication of the
quality of lift line treatment and construction.
Direct Tension Test
The direct tension test is performed according to USBR No. 4914, Procedure for Direct
Tensile Strength, Static Modulus of Elasticity, and Poissons Ratio of Cylindrical
Concrete Specimens in Tension (Reclamation 1992). The current test method, shown in
Figure 5, uses doublebolted, steel platens bonded to each end of the specimen with
epoxy resin to distribute the tensile stress evenly at the platen - concrete interface. The
results of parent concrete and lift line tests should be used cautiously since they normally
represent the better quality concrete of testable size, and/or the bonded lift lines. During
a test program, the direct tension lift line specimens are visually examined to determine if
the concrete is in fact failed or broken at the lift line surface, or at another plane of
weakness. In some cases, the strength of testable lift lines may be quite adequate, but a
low percentage of bonded lift lines will significantly bias the analysis by reducing the
bond strength for the entire dam (monolith) section, which could conclude the dam is
potentially unsafe to operate.
Bi-axial Direct Shear Test
McLean and Pierce described the current practices of Reclamation bi-axial shear strength
testing according to USBR No. 4915, Procedure for Direct Shear of Cylindrical
Concrete Specimens (McLean and Pierce 1988, Reclamation 1992). Four data sets may
be obtained from these tests:

234

break-bond test cohesion and coefficient of internal friction of parent mass

concrete,

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

break-bond test cohesion and coefficient of internal friction of bonded lift lines,
apparent cohesion and sliding friction resistance of the broken surfaces of the
parent concrete or, of lift lines after initial break bond failure, and
apparent cohesion and sliding friction resistance of un-bonded lift lines.

Figure 5. Direct tensile test performed on 18 - inch diameter drilled concrete core using
double-bolted, steel end plates.
Several specimens are required for each sample set to determine the cohesion and internal
friction angle of parent concrete and bonded lift lines. Three or more break-bond
specimens are tested with different (constant) normal loads until there is a failure, or
large horizontal displacements of the specimen are recorded. A graph of each normal
versus shear strength test specimen is plotted and a linear, best fit curve is used to
determine the cohesion, C (intercept at zero normal stress) and the internal friction angle,
as shown in Figure 6.

Strength Input Parameters

235

600

500

Shear Stress - lb/in2

Break - bond Tests (bonded

lift lines)

Break-bond
(Intact specimens)
y = 2.53x + 95
R = 0.87

Sliding Friction (broken

and/or un-bonded lift lines)

400

300

Linear (Break - bond Tests

(bonded lift lines))

Average Sliding Friction

(broken or un-bonded lift lines)
y = 0.95x + 67
R = 0.99

200

Linear (Sliding Friction

(broken and/or un-bonded
lift lines))

100

0
0

100

200

300

400

Normal Stress - lb/in

500

600

Figure 6. Example combined plots of shear break-bond (BB) and sliding friction data
sets.
The coefficient of internal friction, tan , is obtained from the slope of the linear
regression equation. For each broken or un-bonded lift line test specimen, three to six
sliding tests are performed on each specimen with the normal stress increased after large
displacements are recorded. Apparent cohesion, Ca is the projected intercept of the linear
best fit equation at zero normal stress; obtained from sliding tests of broken surfaces, or
of un-bonded lift lines. Phia is the sliding friction angle obtained from the slope of the
linear regression equation of sliding tests. A second sliding equation is also projected
from the origin of the graph (0, 0) up to the first recorded sliding test. This would be
used assuming no apparent cohesion, but has a steeper friction angle. The broken shear
specimen surfaces, Figure 7 are examined visually and with a depth profile gauge to
investigate surface asperities and/or possible encapsulating cement interference.
Individual Versus Weighted Average Properties
The individual direct tension and shear test results were added to the database for each
dam. The bond strength averages are based on all of the individual tests representing
each subgroup. In a few of the smaller sub-groups, the overall average of these tests may
show bias due to one dam test program with a larger number of tests. Weighted averages
were calculated for compressive strength and elastic properties, and splitting tensile
strength based on the average strength weighted by the number of tests. Thus, the
average strength for many tests from one dam outweighs those where only a few
specimens were tested.

236

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Figure 7. Lift line surface after direct shear, break bond test.
BOND STRENGTH INPUT PARAMETERS
The following tables summarize the input parameters for direct tensile and shear strength
of mass concrete for use in risk analysis. The average properties and the range are
suggested for estimating risk for most projects. The range is shown as plus or minus one
standard deviation from the average strength. The lowest values are used for worst
case conditions. However, the estimated percent of bonded lift lines, Table 1, is critical
to using strength input parameters estimates correctly for risk analysis. Dams constructed
before about 1933 have a higher probability for many un-bonded lift lines and the
potential for a completely un-bonded lift line across the entire dam (monolith) section.
The lift line cleaning methods and effectiveness is the most prominent factor influencing
the bond strength of mass concrete. The tests indicate that parent concrete strength is not
necessarily a good indicator of lift line strength.
Dams suffering from alkali-aggregate reaction have differing strength input parameters.
In addition, these dams have the potential for a significant percentage of un-bonded lift
lines. Even AAR dams with high lift line bond, where the concrete has little reaction,
show degrading lift line strength where the reaction is more severe (Joy 2010). In these
instances, the dam should be analyzed assuming no tensile strength across lift lines.
Direct Tensile Properties of Parent Mass Concrete and Bonded Lift Lines
The direct tensile properties of parent mass concrete and bonded lift lines are summarized
in Table 2. This table includes the average properties for all direct tension tests, followed
by the average properties for three construction eras, 1905 to 1933, 1934 to 1965, and
1965 to 1993. The lift line averages of sub-groups represent those tests that were
identified as having failed at the lift line. The average lift line strength is about 80
percent of the parent concrete strength. The average strength of lift line specimens that
Strength Input Parameters

237

did not fail at the lift line interface is about 90 percent of the parent mass concrete
strength. The average direct tensile strength of bonded lift lines of dams from the preHoover Dam construction era is about half the parent concrete strength.
Table 2. Direct tensile strength of parent mass concrete and bonded lift lines (no AAR).
Average
Standard
strength
deviation Minimum Number of tests
All parent mass
concrete
1905 1933
(1905 1933)*
1934 - 1964
1965 - 1993
All bonded lift lines
1905 - 1933 [50]**
1934 - 1964 [85]
1965 - 1993 [74]
Lift line failures
Not lift line failures

lb/in2

lb/in2

lb/in2

220

80

40

230

225
(195)*
220
220

85
80
75

60
40
70

53
53
112

175
100
165
195
155
195

80
75
70
85
90
70

10
10
70
70
10
50

154
28
16
27
65
81

* (Parent direct tensile strength average of six dams; not weighted)

** [Estimated percent bonded lift lines for each subgroup].

Direct Shear Properties of Parent Mass Concrete and Bonded Lift Lines
The average direct shear properties of parent mass concrete and bonded lift lines are
summarized in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. Example data sets for tests of parent
concrete and bonded lift lines are shown in Figures 8 and 9, respectively. The average
cohesion and internal friction angles are derived from a linear regression of all tests for
specific subgroups. This may include both stronger and weaker concrete in the same data
set, resulting in very low correlation coefficients. The 90 percent exceeding cohesion
values were obtained by projecting the average linear regression line with the average phi
angle to the point where 90 percent of test values were above it. The average cohesion of
all bonded lift lines is similar to the direct tension results, about 80 percent of the average
parent mass concrete strength.
Table 3. Direct shear, break-bond properties of parent mass concrete, 1905 to 1993.
Average 90 percent Internal friction
Number of tests
cohesion
exceeding
angle,
2
2
lb/in
lb/in
degrees
All parent mass
575
160
48
25
concrete
1905 - 1933
515
210
12
8
[estimated]*
[435]
[145]
[45]
1934 - 1964
495
350
61
11
1965 - 1993
595
500
75
6
1934 - 1993
635
440
53
17
* [1905 to 1933 data extrapolated with equal to 45 degrees].

238

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Table 4. Direct shear break-bond and sliding friction properties of bonded mass
concrete lift lines, 1905 to 1993.
Average
90 percent Internal friction
Number
cohesion
exceeding
angle,
of tests
2
2
degrees
lb/in
lb/in
All bonded lift lines
470
160
49
107
1905 - 1933 [50]*
415
250
32
46
1934 - 1964 [85]
505
250
54
35
1965 - 1993 [74]
575
380
53
26
1934 - 1993[80]
540
340
53
61
(Ca)
(a)
Sliding friction
1905 - 1993
70
46
130
* [Estimated percent bonded lift lines].

The data representing parent concrete from dams constructed between 1905 and 1933
show an unusually low phi angle. Another estimate for cohesion was found by projecting
a dashed line with a 45 degree slope through the 1905 to 1933 data in Figure 8.
1600
Parent Concrete 1934 - 1993
y = 1.31x + 636
R2 = 0.48 Phi = 53 deg
90 % exceed C = 440 psi

Shear (Break bond) Stress - lb/in2

1400

1200

1000
90 %
Exceedance

800

Parent Concrete 1905 - 1924

y = 0.21x + 516
R2 = 0.005 Phi = 12 deg
90 % exceed C = 225 psi

600
All Parent 1934 - 1993
400
All Parent 1905 - 1924
90 %
Exceedance

200

Linear (All Parent 1934 - 1993)

Linear (All Parent 1905 - 1924)

0
0

200

400

600

800

Normal Stress -

1000

1200

1400

1600

lb/in2

Figure 8. Shear break-bond properties of parent mass concrete from 1905 to 1933 and
from 1934 to 1993.
The internal friction angle of bonded lift lines for dams constructed between 1905 and
1933 is also low. This could have been caused by relatively low strength concrete at lift
lines and related to early 20th Century placing techniques using the chuting transport
method. Overly wet mixtures with slumps of 6 in or more were used to facilitate
transporting and consolidating concrete in the absence of suitable mechanical equipment.
These lift surfaces had excessive bleed water, and little aggregate interlock due to

Strength Input Parameters

239

settlement. An example of this condition was found at Gerber Dam, Oregon, which had
good parent concrete strength properties but only 5 percent bonded lift lines (Joy 2010).
1400
Sand Blasting, Green Cutting, HPWJ
with / without Mortar (1934 - 1993)
y = 1.33x + 540
R = 0.48 Phi = 53 deg
90 % exceed C = 340 psi

Shear (break-bond) Stress - lb/in2

1200

Broom - Wash
with Mortar (1905 - 1924)
y = 0.62x + 414
R2 = 0.10 Phi = 32 degrees
90 % exceed C = 250 psi

1000
90 %
Exceedance
800

600
90 %
Exceedance

All BB LL 1934-1993 GC-WSB HPWJr

All BB LL 1905-1924 Br/Wash
w/Mortar
Linear (All BB LL 1934-1993 GCWSB - HPWJr)
Linear (All BB LL 1905-1924
Br/Wash w/Mortar)

400

200

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Normal Stress - lb/in2

Figure 9. Shear, break-bond properties of bonded mass concrete lift lines; effects of
different lift surface cleaning methods.
The shear strength of early 20th Century dams is about 70 to 80 percent of the strength of
the Hoover and later dams. There were two notable changes in lift placing methods after
about 1930. Mass concrete mixtures were placed using the overhead highline and bucket
method after about 1930 and the first internal vibrators were introduced for mass concrete
consolidation about 1934. These two changes led to noticeably superior concrete and
improved bond strength at lift lines. Mass concrete could now be placed at a slump of
about 2 in; the reduced water content decreased the paste volume, resulting in less surface
laitance from bleeding and less aggregate settlement. Coupled with the introduction of
more efficient wet sand-blasting, lift lines now had a more undulating profile with better
aggregate interlock. The 1934 to 1964 and 1965 to 1993 data represent lift lines with and
without a inch layer of bonding mortar spread over lift surfaces. For convenience,
Figures 8 and 9 compare the 1905 to 1933 data to the combined 1933 to 1993 mass
concrete test data for parent concrete and for bonded lift lines, respectively.
Lift Line Properties of Alkali Aggregate Reaction Affected Dams, 1925 to 1938
Lift line properties for dams suffering from AAR were noticeably lower than comparable
dams of that generation. Table 5 summarizes the average direct tensile properties of
mass concrete suffering from AAR. The tests are compared to other dams constructed
during the same time frame not suffering from AAR. The average direct tensile strength
of AAR-affected parent concrete is about 40 percent, of the non-affected concrete. Lift
line strength of AAR-affected dams is about 30 percent of comparable non-affected
240

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

dams. It should be noted the few tests performed on bonded lift lines is indicative of the
low percent of testable, bonded lift lines recovered from AAR affected dams. This may
be the result of both AAR and/or the placing conditions during construction (in arid
climate). A few dams suffering from AAR with comparatively good lift line bond also
seemed to be de-bonding in specific areas with the more severe reaction and expansion.
Table 6 shows the shear and sliding friction properties of lift lines for AAR affected dams
compared to un-affected dams built between 1925 and 1938. The cohesion is about 70
percent of comparable concrete and the internal friction angle is reduced by about 10
percent.
Table 5. Direct tensile strength of parent mass concrete and bonded lift lines with and
without alkali aggregate reaction.
Average
Standard
Minimum
Number of tests
strength
deviation
AAR parent mass
concrete 1925 - 1938
AAR bonded lift
lines 1925 - 1938
[40] *
No AAR** parent
mass concrete 1925 1938
No AAR** bonded
lift lines [80]

lb/in2
100

lb/in2
50

lb/in2
10

81

70

60

30

225

90

90

235

85

100

17

* [Estimated percent bonded lift lines].

** Results of tests from comparable dams with no AAR.

Table 6. Direct shear, break-bond and sliding friction properties of AAR affected lift
lines and comparable unaffected mass concrete, 1925 to 1938.
Average
90 percent
Internal
Number of
Lift lines
cohesion
exceeding
friction (phi)
tests
AAR 1925-1938 [40]*
No AAR** 1925-1938 [80]
AAR sliding friction
1925 - 1938

lb/in2
365
505
(Ca)
65

lb/in2
200
275

degrees
49
56
(phia)
47

28
23
88

* [Estimated percent bonded lift lines].

** Results of tests from comparable dams with no AAR.

Weighted Average Strength Properties

Table 7 summarizes the weighted average compressive strength and elastic properties of
mass concrete dams for different construction eras. The weighted average takes into
account the average strength for various test programs weighted by the number of tests
for each program. The average compressive strength and elastic properties of early 20th
Century dams is about two-thirds of those completed after Hoover Dam, indicating better
quality concrete and improved construction methods. The properties of AAR affected
dams are compared to un-affected dams constructed from about 1925 to 1938. The
average compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of AAR affected concrete is
about 30 percent lower than un-affected mass concrete. In many cases, the AAR data are

Strength Input Parameters

241

biased with better quality concrete due to the inability to test severely deteriorated
concrete.
Table 7. Weighted average compressive strength and elastic properties of mass concrete,
1905 to 1993, and with or without alkali aggregate reaction, 1925 to 1938.
Average
Modulus of
Poissons
Number
Strength
Elasticity
ratio
of tests
lb/in2
106 lb/in2
All concrete
4550
4.14
0.19
565
1905 - 1933
3680
3.16
0.20
256
1934 - 1964
5040
5.19
0.19
185
1965 - 1972
5940
4.73
0.20
63
1973 - 1993
5300
4.51
0.16
63
AAR dams
1925 - 1938
No AAR ** dams
1925 - 1938

4230

3.21

0.11

399

5800

4.62

0.23

23

* Results of tests from comparable dams with no AAR.

The weighted average splitting tensile strength of parent mass concrete is about 415
lb/in2, and ranges from about 375 lb/in2 for dams constructed before 1933 to about 515
lb/in2 for dams constructed after about 1933. The weighted average splitting tensile
strength of AAR affected dams was about 340 lb/in2, about 25 percent lower than unaffected dams built between 1925 and 1938, about 450 lb/in2.
Roller Compacted Concrete Dams
Roller-compacted concrete (RCC) dams form another subgroup of dams constructed after
about 1981. There is less data available on cores obtained from RCC dams. Generally,
the bond strength of RCC dams, particularly early RCC dams is significantly affected by
compaction at the bottom of lifts (Drahushak-Crow 1988). Lift line strength is also
affected by the age after placing the subsequent lift and the lift surface cleaning methods
(Dolen 2004). Although there is less data available on modern RCC dams, the lift
surface data is currently being compiled for RCC dams, where available.
CONCLUSIONS
Risk evaluation is an accepted practice for dam safety decision making. Structural
analysis is used during a risk analysis to estimate the probability of failure for a given
event. The range of probability of failure was found to depend on the range of concrete
materials properties assumed in the analysis. A database of concrete materials properties
was examined to better estimate the average bond strength and the range of strength for
dams constructed between 1905 and 1993. The data analysis shows there is sufficient
justification to apply separate strength input parameters in risk analysis for dams
constructed with different state-of-the-art lift line preparation methods. Both the percent
of bonded lift lines and the average and range of strength are considered significant. Of
particular interest is the difference in bond strength properties of early 20th Century dam
construction methods compared to improved methods developed for Hoover Dam. The
introduction of the internal vibrator for consolidating mass concrete is under appreciated
242

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

with regards to improved lift line performance. The average and range of properties of
AAR affected dams are also noticeably lower than comparable dams with similar
construction.
REFERENCES
Bureau of Reclamation, Concrete Manual, 9th Edition, Direct tensile strength, static
modulus of elasticity, and Poissons ratio of cylindrical concrete specimens in tension,
US Department of the Interior, Denver, Colorado, USA, 1992, pp. 726-731.
Bureau of Reclamation, Concrete Manual, 9th Edition, Direct shear of cylindrical
concrete specimens, US Department of the Interior, Denver, Colorado, USA, 1992, pp.
732-737.
Bureau of Reclamation, Guidelines for achieving public protection in dam safety
decision making, U.S. Department of the Interior, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2003.
Dolen, T.P., Materials properties model for aging concrete, Bureau of Reclamation Dam
Safety Program Report No. DSO-05-05, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2005.
Dolen, Timothy P., Long-term performance of roller compacted concrete at Upper
Stillwater Dam, Utah, USA, Berga and Buil, (ed.), Roller Compacted Concrete Dams,
Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Roller Compacted Concrete Dams,
17-19, Nov. 2003, Madrid, Spain, Taylor and Francis, London, UK, 2006, pp. 1117 1126.
Drahushak-Crow, R. & Dolen, T.P., Evaluation of cores from two RCC gravity dams,
K. Hansen & F. McLean (ed.), Roller Compacted Concrete II, ASCE Proceedings of the
2nd Conference on RCC Dams, San Diego, California 1988, New York, NY, USA, pp.
203-219.
Joy, W.T. Seminoe Dam 2009 concrete coring - laboratory testing program, Bureau
of Reclamation Report No. MERL-2010-07, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2010.
Joy, W.T., Gerber Dam 2009 and 2010 concrete coring and laboratory testing
program, Bureau of Reclamation, Report No. MERL-2010-22, Denver, Colorado, USA,
2010.
Mc Lean, F. G. & Pierce, J.P. Comparison of joint shear strengths of conventional and
roller compacted concrete, K. Hansen & F. McLean (ed.), Roller Compacted Concrete
II, ASCE Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on RCC Dams, San Diego, California 1988,
New York, NY, USA, pp.151 169.

Strength Input Parameters

243