Study of Slope Stability of Ash Dyke Raisings Under Static Condition

IJITE
Vol.03 Issue-03, (March, 2015)

Impact Factor- 3.570
ISSN: 2321-1776
STUDY OF SLOPE STABILITY OF ASH DYKE RAISINGS UNDER STATIC CONDITION

Nazimali N. Chinwala
Assistant Professor,
Civil Engineering Department, Parul Institute of Engg. & Tech., Waghodia, India
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
Author is very thankful to Essar Engineering Services - Hazira for providing software facility for
stability analysis of slopes.
ABSTRACT
There are more than 85 thermal power plants in India; of which majority are coal based
producing approximately 100 million tons of coal ash yearly. With increased utilization of
generated ash through usage in concrete, brick making and other embankment constructions,
the utilization of the ash has increased considerably. However, the percentage of utilization is
still insufficient and for most of the power plants ash is deposited in form of ash-pond in the
vicinity of power plant as waste material covering several acres of valuable land. Moreover, for
new power plants the land acquisition is a major issue and with limited area, rapid vertical
expansions of Ash-dykes are inevitable. Present paper describes static analysis carried out on the
ash-dyke sections with various raising stages. Based on the state of the art practice in the India,
starter dyke section and subsequent raising geometry is selected. Using the in-situ test data
performed on the existing ash-dykes, geotechnical properties of the deposited ash ponds are
selected to perform the static analysis of the ash-dyke sections. A series of stability runs are
carried out to map the factor of safeties at various stages of ash-dyke raising. Sensitivity analysis
is carryout out to examine the influence of the geotechnical properties of the deposited ash in
the ash-dyke. Present study helps the geotechnical professionals to choose better geometries of
ash-dykes during planning stage to ensure sustainable performance.
KEY WORDS: Ash-dyke; static; slope stability; factor of safety; Sensitivity analysis.
A Monthly Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed Open Access International e-Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
International Journal in IT and Engineering

http://www.ijmr.net.in email id- irjmss@gmail.com
Page 104
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
INTRODUCTION
In India, in step with progressively increasing the capacity of coal-fired thermal power
plants, the amount of fly ash generated is increasing very fast. Increase in number of coal
based thermal power plant is also responsible for high amount of generation of flyash. Table 1
below shows data related to its generation and use in different year.
The utilization of fly ash in India varies between 40-50% and rests are disposed and are
restored. Fly ash storage require huge amount of land area. So to reduce the land wastage, it is
stored using ash dyke construction. Ash dyke is an important structure, located few
kilometres away from the hydraulic power stations for storing the coal ashes. Ash dyke
construction is continuous process and it is raised each step through dyke construction.
Year
1993-94
2004-05
2006-07
2011-12
2031-32
Table 1: Fly ash generation and use in India

Generation
Use
(Metric
% Use of generation
(Metric tons)
tons)
40
1.2
3
112
42
38
130
60
46
170
170
100% use mandated
600
Not yet planned; innovation essential
Ash dyke construction is a great challenge for civil engineers as the failure of ash dyke
has an adverse effect on surrounding environment as well as it can affect the smooth
functioning of power stations. It also causes havoc among the surrounding people about
safety of their life. It causes economic losses. It pollutes the surrounding river water which is
dangerous for aquatic life as well as human being. So ash dyke should be constructed with
proper safety and precautions.
Gandhi S. R. and Mathew G. V. (1996) presented an investigation on the filter requirements for
ash dykes. Very uniform sand with different particle size was used as filter. The relationship
between d50 of filter and penetration of fly ash through different size sand filter as well as fly
ash by passed verses time and amount of fly ash trapped at various depth was presented and
filter criteria were proposed based on experiments conducted on clogging and bypassing of fly
ash through the filter. Gupta K. K., Raju V.S., and Manoj Datta (1999) published a paper
Gradation, Compaction and Strength of Coal Ash in which they reviewed the engineering
properties of coal ash. The engineering properties of bottom ash and pond ash (inflow point)
are similar to those of sands whereas the engineering properties of fly ash and pond ash

Page 105
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
(outflow point) are similar to those of silty soils. Gandhi S. R. (2005) published a paper Design
and Maintenance of Ash Pond for Fly Ash Disposal in which he explained various methods of
raising the dyke by describing its advantage and disadvantage. He also suggested that ash dyke
should be supervised regularly and necessary remedial measures should be taken and
highlighted important issues related to design, construction, operation and maintenance of ash
pond.
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Material properties used for the study and analysis, were taken from the published project data
of site Rajpura Thermal Power Project, Punjab, and are as shown in Table 2. Typical cross
section used for the analysis is shown in Fig. 1:
Fig. 1: Typical layout of the section

Table 2: Material properties used for the analysis
C
Material No. & (Color)

Soil Type
(KN/m3)
(KN/m2)
1
Clayey Silt
90
0
18
(Orange)
2
Fill Material
35
0
17
(Brown)
3
Sand
0
36
17.8
(Gold)
4
Loose Flyash
0
29
12.2
(Light Blue)
5
Compacted Flyash
0
32
14.2
(Grey)
k (m/sec)
1 x 10-7
1 x 10-7
1 x 10-3
1 x 10-5
1 x 10-7

Page 106
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
OBJECTIVES
The focus of this research project was to design an optimum ash dyke and use fly ash for
construction of ash dykes. More specifically the following two objectives were identified:
1) To design an ash dyke for optimum factor of safety by analyzing the dam section using finite
element based software SLIDE
2) To recommend the optimum design for the ash dyke by considering factor of safety in Static
condition.
ANALYSIS
For the analysis purpose, a three-stage dyke was considered stage wise by upstream method on
the starter dyke with different U/S and D/S slopes under different conditions by finite element
based software SLIDE by using Morgenstern-Price Method. Soil properties were assigned and
slope stability was carried out for Static condition, and the seepage study along with sensitivity
analysis was also carried out. In all the raisings of different slopes for the computation of slip
surface, Global Failure of ash dyke is taken into consideration.
STARTER DYKE
For the static stability analysis the starter dyke was taken of three different slopes i.e. D/S (1:2)
U/S (1:2), D/S (1:2) U/S (1:1.5) and D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2). The height of starter dyke was kept as
6m. The top width was also kept as 6m. Fig. 2 shows the analysis of Starter dyke with D/S (1:2)
U/S (1:2) slopes and Table 3 shows FOS for different slopes in starter dyke.
Fig. 2: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2) (FOS = 2.337)


Page 107
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
Table 3: FOS for different Slopes of Starter dyke

FOS in Static
Starter Dyke
Remarks
Condition
D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2)
2.337
D/S Slope
D/S (1:2) U/S (1:1.5)
2.334
D/S Slope
D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2)
2.674
D/S Slope
RAISINGS
Starter Dyke with D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2) Slopes
For starter dyke with D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2) slopes different raisings (Stage I, Stage II, and Stage III)
were done with slopes D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2) respectively. Fig. 3 shows typical analysis of Stage III
stability analysis. The result of Stage I and Stage II analysis is shown in Table 4.
Fig. 3: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2), Stage I D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2), Stage II D/S (1:2) U/S
(1:2), Stage III D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2) (FOS = 2.214)
were done with slopes D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2.5) respectively. Fig. 4 shows typical analysis of Stage
III stability analysis. The result of Stage I and Stage II analysis is shown in Table 4.

Page 108
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
Fig. 4:Starter Dyke D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2), Stage I D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2.5), Stage II D/S
(1:2.5) U/S (1:2.5), Stage III D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2.5) (FOS = 2.24)
Fig. 5: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2), Stage I D/S (1:3) U/S (1:3), Stage II D/S (1:3)
U/S (1:3), Stage III D/S (1:3) U/S (1:3) (FOS = 2.552)
Starter Dyke with D/S (1:2) U/S (1:1.5) Slopes

For starter dyke with D/S (1:2) U/S (1:1.5) slopes different raisings (Stage I, Stage II, and Stage III)

Page 109
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
Fig. 6: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2) U/S (1:1.5), Stage I D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2), Stage II D/S (1:2)
Fig. 7: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2) U/S (1:1.5), Stage I D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2.5), Stage II D/S

Page 110
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
Fig. 8: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2) U/S (1:1.5), Stage I D/S (1:3) U/S (1:3), Stage II D/S (1:3)
Starter Dyke with D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2) Slopes

For starter dyke with D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2) slopes different raisings (Stage I, Stage II, and Stage III)

Page 111
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
Fig. 9: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2), Stage I D/S (1:2) U/S (1:2), Stage II D/S (1:2)
Fig. 10: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2), Stage I D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2.5), Stage II D/S

Page 112
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
Fig. 11: Starter Dyke D/S (1:2.5) U/S (1:2), Stage I D/S (1:3) U/S (1:3), Stage II D/S (1:3)
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
For the sensitivity analysis in static condition, for Starter dyke D/S (1:2) & U/S (1:1.5), Stage I D/S
& U/S (1:2.5) slopes the properties of flyash which are taken into consideration for loose flyash
(Material 4), and Compacted flyash (Material 5) are given in the Table 5 and the graphs of
comparison of unit weights v/s FOS and Phi v/s FOS for different materials are shown in Figures
12 and 13.
Table 5: Ash properties taken into consideration in Sensitivity analysis

Page 113
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
3.2
Loose Ash
Compacted Ash
Factor of Safety
3.0
2.8
2.6
11
12
13
14
15
16
Unit Weight (kN/m3)
Fig. 12: Comparison of Unit weights v/s FOS for Loose and Compacted ash in Static
condition
Loose Ash
Compacted Ash
Factor of Safety
3.5
3.0
2.5
26
28
30
32
34
Phi (deg)
Fig. 13: Comparison of Phi v/s FOS for Loose and Compacted ash in Static condition
CONCLUSION
1) In Static condition the ash dyke constructed using upstream method gives factor of safety
above 2.137 for all different types of slopes which are found to be safe.
2) For the Sensitivity analysis in Static condition, for Starter dyke D/S (1:2) & U/S (1:1.5), Stage I
D/S & U/S (1:2.5) slopes the value of FOS decreases from 2.86 to 2.8 and 2.92 to 2.8 for loose
ash and compacted ash respectively with increase in the unit weight from 10.5 to 16 KN/m 3 in
both compacted ash and loose ash. While, the value of FOS increases from 2.78 to 2.92 and 2.81
to 2.89 for loose ash and compacted ash respectively with increase in the value of phi from 26
to 35 for both compacted ash and loose ash.

Page 114
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
REFERENCES
1. IS 7894 1975: Stability Analysis of Earth Dams, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
2. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE. Vol. 110, No GT6, pp. 701-718.
3. Sherard J. L., Dunnigan L. P., and Talbot J. R. (1984), Basic Properties of Sand and Gravel
Filters, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE. Vol. 110, No GT6, pp. 684-699.
4. Gandhi S. R. and Mathew G. V. (1996), Granular Filter for Ash Dykes, Proceeding, Indian
Geotechnical Conference, Vol. 1, pp. 532535.
5. Gandhi S. R., Dey A. K. and Selvam S. (1999), Blast Densification of Pond Ash, Fly Ash
Disposal and Deposition: Beyond 2000 AD.
6. Sridharan A., Pandian N. S., and Srinivas S. (1999), Shear Strength Characteristics of Pond
Ash for Use as Structural Fills, Fly Ash Disposal and Deposition: Beyond 2000 AD.
7. Gupta K. K., Raju V. S., and Manoj Datta (1999), Gradation, Compaction and Strength of
Coal Ash, Fly Ash Disposal and Deposition: Beyond 2000 AD.
8. Gandhi, S. R. (2005), Design and Maintenance of Ash Pond for Fly Ash Disposal,
Proceeding, Indian Geotechnical Conference, Vol. 1, pp. 8590.
9. Choudhary A. K., Jha J. N. and Verma B. P. (2009), Construction of an Ash Pond with
Waste Recycled Product, Fly Ash and Locally Available Soil - A Case Study,
Proceeding, IGC 2009, Guntur, pp. 565-568.

Page 115
IJITE

ISSN: 2321-1776
Table 4: FOS for all slopes in Static condition

Starter Dyke
Stage I
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)

D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)

D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2) U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S & U/S (1:3)

D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
Stage II
D/S & U/S (1:2)

D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)

D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:3)

D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
FOS in
Static
Condition
2.337
2.753
2.526
2.214
D/S Slope
Global Failure
Global Failure
Global Failure
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
2.337
2.785
2.706
2.24
D/S Slope
Global Failure
Global Failure
Global Failure
D/S & U/S (1:3)
2.337
2.841
2.839
2.552
D/S Slope
Global Failure
Global Failure
Global Failure
2.334
D/S Slope
2.645
Global Failure
2.43
Global Failure
2.137
Global Failure
2.334
D/S Slope
2.691
Global Failure
2.609
Global Failure
2.255
Global Failure
2.334
D/S Slope
2.744
Global Failure
Stage III
D/S & U/S (1:2)

D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)

D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
Remarks

Page 116
IJITE
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2)
U/S(1:1.5)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)
D/S(1:2.5)
U/S(1:2)

D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
ISSN: 2321-1776
D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:2)

D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)

D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:2.5)
D/S & U/S (1:3)

D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
D/S & U/S (1:3)
2.742
Global Failure
2.475
Global Failure
2.674
D/S Slope
3.01
Global Failure
2.733
Global Failure
2.284
Global Failure
2.674
D/S Slope
3.07
Global Failure
2.911
Global Failure
2.505
Global Failure
2.674
D/S Slope
3.14
Global Failure
3.091
Global Failure
2.64
Global Failure

Page 117

Study of Slope Stability of Ash Dyke Raisings Under Static Condition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Study of Slope Stability of Ash Dyke Raisings Under Static Condition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IJITE

Vol.03 Issue-03, (March, 2015)