DEGREE PROJECT IN

CIVIL ENGINEERING AND URBAN MANAGEMENT

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2018

Designing Roller compacted

concrete (RCC) dams
SHAYMA AL BAGHDADY

LINNEA KHAN

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Designing Roller compacted
concrete (RCC) dams

SHAYMA AL BAGHDADY
LINNEA KHAN

Master of Science Thesis

Stockholm, Sweden 2018
TRITA-ABE-MBT-18366, 2018 KTH School of ABE
ISBN 978-91-7729-869-4 SE-100 44 Stockholm
SWEDEN

© Shayma Al Baghdady & Linnea Khan 2018

Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering
Division of Concrete Structures
Abstract

Concrete is the most common building material in the world and it consists of aggregates,
cement and water that harden over time, it is also known as a composite material. The use of
concrete is very versatile due to its resistance to wind and water and its ability to withstand
high temperature. These qualities make concrete a suitable building material for large
structures such as dams.

A dam is a huge construction that needs massive amount of concrete to build it with and that
leads to high cost, so alternative methods should be considered to minimize the cost of
constructing the dams. One method is building the dams with Roller Compacted Concrete
(RCC), which by definition is a composite construction material with no-slump consistency in
its unhardened state and it has achieved its name from the construction method. The definition
for a no-slump consistency is a freshly mixed concrete with a slump less than 6 mm. The
RCC is placed with the help of paving equipment and then it is compacted by vibrating roller
equipment. The RCC ingredients are the same as for the conventional concrete but it has
different ratios in the materials that are blended to produce the concrete. It differs when it
comes to aggregates because both similar aggregates used in conventional concrete or
aggregates that do not fulfill the normal standards can be used in the RCC mixtures. This
means, for example that aggregates found on the construction site can be used for the RCC.

Compared to when constructing a conventional concrete dam, which is usually built in large
blocks, the RCC dam are usually built in thin, horizontal lifts, which allows rapid
construction. This reduces the amount of formwork, but also the demand for man-hours are
less due to the usage of machines for spreading and compacting, ultimately making it a
cheaper method. Building with RCC has become very popular around the world because of its
advantages and new methods have been developed over the past two decades, adapted to the
experience gained after each project. All RCC dams that has been built, usually faces
challenges both during and after construction, and it includes everything from temperature
variations, cracks to leakage.

The main purpose of this master thesis is to create a guideline for how to design and construct
dams with RCC and the idea is to be able to use it as a basis for future dams. The
requirements of Eurocode 2 and RIDAS are the basis of the criteria that the dam must fulfill
and information of what is expected of the RCC is presented in this thesis. Furthermore an
example for design of an existing embankment dam to an RCC dam has been presented in this
thesis. The embankment dam needs to be rebuilt in order to increase the safety of the dam and
the goal of the case study was to determine the dimensions of the new RCC dam.

Keywords: Roller Compacted concrete, Massive concrete structures, Dams, Concrete

i
Sammanfattning

Betong är det vanligaste byggmaterialet i världen och det är ett material som består av ballast,
cement och vatten som härdas över tiden, även känt som ett komposit material. Användningen
av betong är mycket mångsidig tack vare dess motståndskraft mot vind och vatten och dess
förmåga att motstå höga temperaturer. Dessa egenskaper gör betong ett lämpligt byggmaterial
för stora strukturer som dammar.

En dam är en enorm konstruktion som kräver massiva mängder av betong för att bygga den
med och det leder till höga kostnader, därför bör alternativa metoder övervägas för att
minimera dessa. Ett förslag till en metod är att bygga dammar med Roller Compacted
Concrete (RCC), som per definition är ett komposit material med ett sättmått på mindre än 6
mm i sitt ohärdade tillstånd. RCC har erhållit sitt namn från sin byggmetod, då den sprids med
hjälp av utrustning för att lägga vägar och sedan kompakteras den med en traktordriven
vibratorvält. Ingredienserna för RCC är samma som för konventionell betong, men den stora
skillnaden utgörs av att det är olika mängd-förhållanden av de material som blandas för att
producera denna betong. Det skiljer sig också när det gäller ballasten, eftersom både liknande
ballast som används i konventionell betong eller ballast som inte uppfyller de normala
standarder kan användas för RCC. Det betyder att exempelvis, ballast som man erhåller på
byggarbetsplatsen kan användas för att producera RCC.

I jämförelse med när man bygger en traditionell betongdamm, som vanligen byggs i stora
block, så bygger man oftast en RCC damm i horisontella lager vilket ger möjligheten för
snabbt byggande. Detta reducerar behovet av att använda gjutformar, men även antalet
mantimmar på grund av användningen av maskiner för spridning och kompaktion. De här
faktorerna gör det till en billigare metod. RCC dammar har blivit populärt att bygga runt om i
världen på grund av dess fördelar och nya metoder har utvecklats under de senaste 20 åren
anpassade efter erfarenheten man har erhållit efter varje projekt. Alla RCC dammar som
byggts stöter ofta på utmaningar både under och efter byggandet och det har med, allt från
temperatur variationer, sprickor, och läckage, att göra.

Huvudsyftet med det här examensarbetet är att skapa en guide för hur man designar och
bygger en RCC damm och tanken är att man ska kunna använda den som en grund för
framtida dammbyggen. Kraven från Eurokod 2 och RIDAS är grunden för kriterierna som
dammen ska uppfylla och information om vad som förväntas av RCC är presenterat. En
fallstudie har gjorts, där ett exempel på en design för en RCC damm som ska ersätta en
befintlig fyllningsdamm i Hylte är presenterad. Fyllningsdammen är i behov av ombyggnation
för att höja säkerheten av dammen och målet med fallstudien är att avgöra dimensionerna för
den nya RCC dammen som ska placeras där.

Nyckelord: Vältbetong, Massiva betong konstruktioner, Dammar, Betong

iii
Preface

This is a Master of Science thesis written at the Division of Concrete Structures, Department
of Civil and Architectural Engineering at KTH Royal Institute of Technology during the
period of January-June 2018. Dr. Richard Malm, KTH, supervised the thesis subject.

We would like to thank Dr. Richard Malm for the support and guidance he has given us
during this period. We would also like to express our gratitude to adj. Erik Nordström for
providing us with guidance and material for our case study.

Stockholm, June 2018

Shayma Al Baghdady & Linnea Khan

v
Contents

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... i

Sammanfattning ......................................................................................................................iii

Preface ....................................................................................................................................... v

1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Purpose and limitations ........................................................................................... 4
1.3 Scope of the thesis ................................................................................................... 5

2 Roller compacted concrete (RCC) and dams ................................................................ 7

2.1 Definition of RCC ................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Material ................................................................................................................... 8
2.2.1 Selection of material................................................................................... 8
2.2.2 Mixture proportions.................................................................................. 11
2.2.3 Properties of hardened concrete ............................................................... 18
2.3 Construction .......................................................................................................... 32
2.3.1 Foundation considerations........................................................................ 32
2.3.2 Construction method ................................................................................ 32

3 Challenges during construction.................................................................................... 39

3.1 During construction ............................................................................................... 39
3.2 After construction.................................................................................................. 40
3.3 Construction of existing dams ............................................................................... 42
3.3.1 Upper Stillwater ....................................................................................... 42
3.3.2 Willow Creek ........................................................................................... 43

4 Design of new RCC dams.............................................................................................. 45

4.1 Design criteria ....................................................................................................... 45
4.2 Loads ..................................................................................................................... 46
4.3 Loading combinations ........................................................................................... 47

vii
 4.3.1 Load cases for calculation of stability...................................................... 47
4.3.2 Load cases for cross-section analysis....................................................... 48
4.4 Design of cross-section ......................................................................................... 49
4.4.1 Load values and combinations ................................................................. 49
4.4.2 Material values ......................................................................................... 52
4.5 Stability conditions................................................................................................ 53
4.5.1 Safety against sliding, μ ........................................................................... 53
4.5.2 Safety against overturning, s .................................................................... 55

5 Case study....................................................................................................................... 59
5.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 59
5.2 Calculation & CADAM......................................................................................... 60
5.3 Results ................................................................................................................... 60

6 Conclusions..................................................................................................................... 63
6.1 Discussion ............................................................................................................. 63
6.2 Future studies ........................................................................................................ 64

Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 65

A CADAM & calculation ................................................................................................ 69

viii
1 Introduction

1.1 Background
Concrete is the most common building material in the world and it is a composite material. It
consists of a mixture of coarse aggregates, water and cement that hardens over time. The use
of concrete is versatile due to its resistance to wind and water and its ability to withstand high
temperature (PCA, 2018). These qualities make concrete a suitable building material for large
structures such as dams and hydropower plants.

The main reasons for building dams in today’s society are water supply, irrigation, flood
control, navigation, sedimentation control and hydropower. Most of the dams that have been
constructed are single-purposed, where irrigation and hydropower are the most common ones.
There are also multipurpose dams, which are increasing in number especially in developing
countries. The importance of these projects for the developing countries is a great deal, due to
a single investment contributes to economic and domestic benefits for the population.
(ICOLD, 2017)

There are different types of dams, and in Sweden the most common ones are embankment-
and concrete dams, see Figure 1.1. Embankment dams are typically referred as “rock fill” or
“earth fill” dams depending on the material used. Commonly used materials are natural rock,
soil or waste materials which are obtained from mining operations. Concrete dams are
categorized in three common types: arch, gravity and buttress. See Figure 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4.
The main difference is the way they are designed. The arch dam is somewhat thin in the
cross-section and it resembles a part of an ellipse or a circle. The gravity dam is built up of
vertical concrete blocks that are joined together by seals in the joints. The buttress dam is also
vertical concrete blocks but with reduced concrete mass. (ASDSO, 2017)

Figure 1.1 Example of an embankment dam, consisting of (1) clay, (2) a drainage layer, (3) gravel, (4)
(5) stone, and (6) a drainage well. (Vattenkraft.info, 2009)

1
 Figure 1.2 Gordon Dam, Tasmania, an arch dam. (Wikiwand, 2018)

Figure 1.3 Grand Coulee dam, Washington, a gravity dam. (Wikiwand, 2018)

2
 Figure 1.4 A buttress dam in the village Rätan. (Vattenkraft.info, 2009)

A concrete dam is a large construction that needs massive amount of concrete, resulting in the
use of a large amount of cement. This leads to both a high cost and a negative impact on the
environment due to CO2 emissions from cement production. Therefore alternative methods
should be considered to minimize the cost of constructing the dams and to minimize the use
of cement. One method is building the dams with Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC), which
is a concrete that is compacted by vibrating roller equipment. RCC ingredients are the same as
the conventional concrete but it has different ratios in the materials that are mixed to produce
the concrete. It is known for its rapid construction method. An example of an RCC dam is
shown in Figure 1.5.

3
 Figure 1.5 'RZQVWUHDPIDFHRI%H\GD÷ dam

1.2 Purpose and limitations

The purpose of this Master thesis is to develop a guideline for how to design and construct a
roller compacted concrete dam in Sweden, which may be of use in the future. This thesis will
bring all the basic knowledge needed about RCC and bring up critical parts for when
designing a dam. The research questions that have governed this thesis are:

 What are the differences in design of conventional concrete dams and roller
compacted dams?
 Would it be possible to build a roller compacted dam in the Sweden, taken into
account the cold Swedish climate?
 Which design standards are used for RCC dams internationally?

This thesis will not include a life-cycle analysis; however, it will be discussed how CO2
emissions from RCC affects the environment. A life-cycle cost will not either be considered
in this thesis. The case study, which is performed in this thesis, will not include a cross-
section analysis. It will only consider stability calculations.

4
1.3 Scope of the thesis
This thesis begins with a theory chapter, Chapter 2, which provides what materials are chosen
and used; along with what properties are expected for the roller compacted concrete.

Chapter 3 brings up the typical challenges with this type of dam during and after construction,
giving example of dams that had similar challenges.

Chapter 4 constitutes the design of the roller compacted concrete, with criteria’s of the cross-
section and stability presented from Eurocode 2 and RIDAS, which is the Swedish guideline
for dam safety.

Chapter 5 constitutes the case study, where a dam is designed, with the help of stability
calculations, on a given topography.

Chapter 6 the discussion is presented, bringing up the possibility of constructing RCC dams in
Sweden.

Chapter 7 presents the proposed future study.

Appendix A provides the full calculations that were made for the case study in Chapter 5 and
the inputs in CADAM.

5
6
2 Roller compacted concrete (RCC)
and dams

2.1 Definition of RCC

Roller compacted concrete, also known as RCC, is a composite construction material with no-
slump consistency in its unhardened state. It has achieved its name from the construction
method where the RCC is placed with the help of standard or high-density paving equipment
and then it is compacted or consolidated with rollers. The definition of a no-slump concrete is
a freshly mixed concrete with a slump less than 6 mm, where the slump is the difference
between the height of the mould and the highest point of the specimen, see Figure 2.1 (Maxi,
2017).

Figure 2.1 The consistency of the concrete is tested with the help of the slump test (Maxi, 2017)

This consistency allows that the following lifts can be placed directly after a previous lift has
been compacted. Compared to conventional concrete, the materials that are used for the RCC
are usually of a wider range. When mixing the RCC the philosophy is to use adequate paste
volume to fill the aggregate voids, without using more water than is needed for a decent
workability. (USACE, 2000)

The hardened RCC and conventional concrete have similar properties, when it comes to
durability, and RCC can therefore be used for building dams. Constructing RCC dams has
become immensely popular throughout the world due to the advantages it comes with. The
main advantages are the rapid construction process, reduced costs and smaller environmental
impact due to less cement. (ACI, 2011)

7
2.2 Material

2.2.1 Selection of material

2.2.1.1 Cementitious materials

Cement is one of the key components in concrete production and the most used type is the
Portland cement. Cement consists of a mixture of limestone and clay which is then heated,
producing a substance called “clinker” that contains calcium, silicate, alumina and iron oxide
(PCA, 2018). There are different types of cement depending on the concretes application and
these are listed in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 Types of Portland cement and their general features (Jennings H et al., 2010)

Portland cement type Description Applications

Type I Normal General construction (most

buildings, bridges,
pavements, pre-cast units etc.)

Type II Moderate sulfate resistance Structures exposed to soil or

water containing sulfate ions.

Type III High early strength Rapid construction, cold

weather concreting.

Type IV Low heat hydration (slow Massive structures such as

reacting) dams. (Nowdays rare.)

Type V High sulfate resistance Structures exposed to high

levels of sulfate ions.

When selecting type of cement for RCC and conventional concrete, some factors must be
taken into account such as; the quality and the type of the cement, how it reacts with
pozzolan, the manufacturer’s capability to deliver sufficient quantities and the delivery cost to
site.

The most commonly used cement in the RCC mixture is the type II due to the low heat
generation at early ages and the longer set times, which may lead to control or reduction of
thermal cracking. Generally for cements with low heat generation, the development of
strength is slower than e.g. for cements of type I and type III. (USACE, 2000)

Cement in RCC mixtures can be partially replaced with pozzolan for the following reasons
(ACI, 2011):

1. To reduce heat generation;

2. To reduce costs;
3. To be used as supplemental fines in the mixture;
4. Reduce CO2 emissions.

8
Natural pozzolans and fly-ash are example of different types of pozzolans. According to SS
EN 206, the amount of pozzolan in a RCC mixture can vary from none to up to 25% by
volume depending on the exposure class. There are different ways to add the fly ash, either
during the production of cement or it can be added directly to the concrete mixture. There are
two methods the fly ash may be added, if it is added directly to the concrete mixture: the k-
value concept or EPCC.

According to ASTM C618 (2018), pozzolans are classified into three categories shown and
described in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 Classes of pozzolan, according to ASTM C618 (2018)

Class Description

N Raw or calcined natural pozzolan

F A low-calcium fly ash

C A high-calcium fly ash

Class F fly ash is the used pozzolan in both RCC and conventional concrete, and it gives the
concrete enhanced properties such as decreased permeability and thereby higher seepage
control. It has also the ability to control the heat gain effectively as well as it provides
resistance against sulfates and sulfides. (Headwaters Resources, 2017)

2.2.1.2 Aggregates

Aggregates can be obtained from excavations for the dam or from rock quarries. The quality
and the grading of the aggregates have a great effect on the properties of the RCC. The
grading influences the workability of the mixture, the total void ratio and the capability to
efficiently consolidate or compact the RCC. (USBR, 2017)

The common nominal maximum size, also known as NMSA, of coarse aggregate particles
can vary from project to project, but usually 25 mm has been used to prevent segregation
during transportation, spreading and compacting. However, there are projects that has used up
to 75 mm sized coarse aggregate. On the other hand, for fine aggregates the preferable size is
commonly 75 μm for RCC with low cementitious material content, (USACE, 2000). Typical
grading curve that may be used for aggregates in RCC is shown in Figure 2.2.

Too great amount of fine aggregates may cause a reduction of the workability, demand for
more water, followed by a loss of strength. If plastic fines are used in the mixture, it is of
great importance that an analysis of durability is made. This will determine, from a practical
point of view, how to meet the structural design requirements. (ICOLD, 2003)

9
 Figure 2.2 Suggested combined aggregate grading with coarse and fine aggregate gradation bands

In Sweden, the aggregate standard is governed by the Swedish Standards Institute and the
aggregates are with high quality which results in concrete with good strength properties.

2.2.1.3 Chemical admixtures

There are two types of admixtures that are commonly used in RCC mixtures: water-reducing
admixtures and air-entraining admixtures.

According to ASTM C494 (2018), the chemical admixture is categorized in to eight types, all
described in Table 2.3, depending on the desired properties of the RCC mixture.

Table 2.3 Types of admixtures, according to ASTM C494 (2018)

Type Purpose

A Water-reducing admixture

B Retarding admixture

C Accelerating admixture

D Water-reducing and retarding admixture

E Water-reducing and accelerating admixture

F Water-reducing, high range admixture

G Water-reducing, high range and retarding

admixture

S Specific performance admixture

10
The most commonly used admixture is type D, which gives increased workability of RCC and
longer setting times. (ACI, 2011)

The air-entraining admixture is added to create small bubbles of air uniformly through the
RCC, as well as in conventional concrete. The benefit of this admixture is that the concrete
gains damage resistance when it is exposed to repeated cycles of freezing and thawing when
saturated. It is on the other hand not commonly used in RCC, because it is hard to create the
voids of the proper size and distribute it evenly due to the no-slump consistency. However, if
this type of admixture is to be used, a Vebe time (see Section 2.2.2.3, Figure 2.5) less than 20
seconds is typically required. (ACI, 2011)

2.2.2 Mixture proportions

2.2.2.1 RCC mixing

The mixture proportioning procedure for RCC and conventional concrete are about the same,
except that for RCC, some differences due to no-slump consistency and the relatively low
water content can appear. The consistency RCC has to be sufficiently stable to tolerate the
vibratory roller’s weight and other heavy machines, but at the same time, it must have
sufficient workability to fill up the voids between the aggregate particles with mortar or paste
during the compaction. (ACI, 2011)

The main difference between the RCC and conventional concrete is the ratios of the
components which are represented in Figure 2.3 and 2.4 below. It also differs when it comes
to aggregates because RCC mixtures can use similar aggregates used in conventional concrete
or aggregates that do not fulfill the normal standards. (USBR, 2017)

Conventional concrete
Cementitious
material, 11%
11
Water, 16%

41 16 Air, 6%

6 Fine aggregate, 26%

Coarse aggregate,
26 41%

Figure 2.3 Typical mixture proportions for conventional concrete (PCA, 2018)

11
 Roller compacted concrete

Cementitious material,
10 10%
Water, 13%
13
40.5
1.5 Air, 1.5%

Fine aggregate, 35%

35
Coarse aggregate,
40.5%

Figure 2.4 Typical mixture proportions for RCC (PCA, 2018)

As can be seen in Figure 2.4, the RCC has a low proportion of air voids, which means that air-
entraining admixtures are required to increase the air voids and thereby obtain a frost resistant
concrete. When the air voids are developed artificially, they are not filled with water and
therefore remain filled with air. Ice can form in these empty voids without applying pressure
on the pore walls and by that capillary saturation can be achieved without exceeding the
critical limit. (Rosenqvist, 2016)

In Table 2.4, some examples are shown of RCC mixture proportions from different dam
projects that have been constructed over the years. All the quantities for each component are
given.

Table 2.4 Examples of mixture proportions of RCC dams (ACI, 2011)

Dam Water Cement, Pozzolan, w/c Fine Coarse Air- Air Water-
[kg/m3] [kg/m3] [kg/m3] aggregate, aggregate, entrained [%] reducing
[kg/m3] [kg/m3] admixture, admixture
[cm3/m3] [cm3/m3]

Al 25 70 60 0.4 910 1365 13 2 -

Wehdah

Camp 90 82 82 1.1 750 1344 4 3.6 2

Dyer

Santa 101 76 75 1.3 728 1365 4 2.3 2

Cruz

Upper 94 79 173 1.2 729 1292 - 1.5 7

Stillwater

Willow 110 104 47 1.1 645 1625 - 1.2 -

Creek

12
The water-cement ratio law, which is exemplified in Table 2.4, is generally used for fully
consolidated mixtures, where the compressive strength of RCC is a function of the water-
cementitious material ratio for mixtures that are fully compacted. This general relationship is
represented in Figure 2.5.

Figure 2.5 General relationship between the compressive strength and the w/c (ACI, 2011)

For mixtures with dry consistency, where the voids are not fully filled with paste, the
compressive strength is determined by the moisture-density relationship.

In general, poorly compacted mixtures consist of less-than-optimum moisture, which leads to

a loss in strength and density. This can be counteracted by adding water to the mixture and
thereby increasing the paste volume to fill the voids. A mixture that is fully consolidated and
exceeds the optimum moisture usually creates a higher compressive strength. The tensile and
shear strength, along the lift surfaces, typically determines the design strength while the
compressive strength is more of an indicator of the quality of the concrete. (ACI, 2011)

2.2.2.2 Classification of RCC mixtures

The RCC mixture may vary when it comes to the amount of cement and this leads to the
classification of RCC mixtures according to Table 2.5.

Table 2.5 Classification of RCC mixture (Chryso, 2018)

Classification Cement [kg/m3]

Lean paste RCC <100

Medium paste RCC 100-150

High paste RCC >150

13
The lean paste RCC is a mixture containing low amounts of cementitious material and these
mixes are drier in consistency, leading to a less workable mixture with a Vebe time (See
2.2.2.3, Figure 2.6) less than 30 seconds. The minimized use of the cement or/and pozzolan
leads to cost saving. An advantage with lean mixtures is that the concrete, which is created,
has low internal temperature during the hydration and low elastic modulus but the concrete
tend to have high creep rates which are important to consider.

For a lean mixture, compared to a high paste mixture, the quality of the bond is reduced
between the lifts of the RCC is reduced. Lean mixtures provide adequate strength for sliding
stability, but seepage is expected and measures needs to be taken to control it and this is
described in section 3.2 After construction.

When constructing with high paste RCC the goal is that it performs just as well as a
conventional concrete dam. This type of mixture contains a greater amount of pozzolan and
cement, more than 150 kg/m3, to be able to obtain a density near the theoretical air-free
density. (Hansen K.D et al.,1991)

2.2.2.3 Considerations

Workability

The workability is a way of determining the RCC capacity to be situated and compacted
without damaging segregation. The definition of segregation is the separation of the concrete
ingredients from each other and thereby resulting in a non-uniform mix. It is affected by
cement, water, fly ash and fine aggregates. To check if the mixture is workable, a Vebe
apparatus is typically used to measure the mixture consistency. (USACE, 2000)

The Vebe apparatus is connected to a vibrating table and filled with fresh concrete, which is
compacted into a conical mould, see Figure 2.6. The mould is then removed and a clear
plastic disc is placed on the top of the concrete. The vibrating table is started and the time it
takes for the whole disc to fully come in contact with the concrete is the Vebe time.

Figure 2.6 Vebe apparatus (The Concrete Society, 2018)

14
The Vebe time, which is achieved for the RCC mixture, is used very similarly to the slump
test for conventional concrete mixtures. According to SS-EN 12350-3:2009, to obtain an
adequate workability, a Vebe consistency of 5-30 seconds is desired which will contribute to
a uniform density through the whole lift, good bonding between the lifts, support of
compaction equipment and easy compaction.

Durability

The durability of RCC will depend on the quality of the materials that are used, the exposure
conditions and the expected performance level of the structure. Freezing-thawing and erosion
caused by e.g. aggressive waters are processes that affect the durability and can be avoided by
protecting the external sides, exposed to water, with conventional concrete. This can be done
on both the upstream- and downstream face, all depending on if the faces are exposed of
deterioration due to water or chemicals. (USACE, 2000)

Segregation

In order to reduce the risk of segregation of RCC during placing, spreading and transporting,
it is of great importance to produce a cohesive mixture. Segregated material lead to a loss of
properties of the RCC and this occurs in low-cementitious content mixtures due to its grainy
consistency. By adding fine aggregates and controlling the moisture content this can be
prevented. Mixtures with high paste-content are generally less likely to segregate due to being
more cohesive. (ACI, 2011)

Heat generation

The heat generation during hydration of cementitious materials needs to be considered when
designing massive RCC structures. Figure 2.7 shows an example of how the hydration heat of
cement governs the rise of the temperature. The goal is to minimize the heat that is developed
during the hydration to avoid the risk of thermal cracking but at the same time achieve
sufficient strength growth by creating a suitable combination of pozzolan and cement. To
achieve the optimal combination, tests on different percentages of pozzolan and cement
mixtures are typically conducted. (ACI, 2011)

Figure 2.7 An example of adiabatic temperature rise due to hydration heat (Amberg, 2003)

15
Construction-conditions

The use of equipment and the requirements for construction is important to consider, due to
the possibility of damaging the compacted RCC when it is placed. When rollers and hauling
trucks are exposed to a RCC mixture with high workability it tends to leave wheel-tracks,
which is also known as rut. For that reason, there should be a restriction from operating on a
compacted surface until it reaches final set. (ACI, 2011)

2.2.2.4 Proportioning approaches

Two different proportioning techniques may be used when designing a new RCC dam and
two main approaches has been developed. The first approach is the concrete approach and it is
appropriate for high paste RCC mixtures, while the second approach is the soil approach and
it suits RCC mixtures that are lean. These approaches are further explained below.

In the concrete approach RCC is considered to be a true concrete and that it is composed by
clean and well-graded aggregates. When the RCC mixture is fully consolidated, the strength
will be inversely proportional to its water-cement ratio. The consistency of the mixture using
this approach is usually more viscous and the concept of having an adequate amount of paste
to fill all the voids in the aggregate is applied. This is because fully compaction needs to be
achieved with a no-slump consistency. However, it is important that a measurable slump does
not appear which could occur if the mixture contains more paste than necessary. According to
ICOLD (2003), the concrete approach is used in several methods that all has minor
differences but still follow the general process described in the following steps:

1. Increase the coarse and fine aggregates gradation to achieve minimum voids in the
mixture.

2. Fill the voids in the fine aggregate with paste by choosing a suitable paste/mortar
ratio. The material used should pass 75 μm sieve to be acceptable.

3. Adjust the proportion of the concrete components (cement, water, fly ash and
admixtures) to obtain the appropriate mean strength.

4. Use the Vebe apparatus to achieve coarse aggregate volume that will lead to an
acceptable workability.

5. Investigate if there is enough cementitious material and added fines to obtain the
desired permeability.

6. Investigate that the fine/coarse aggregate ratio is as optimized as possible by

comparing it to gradation curves.

7. Investigate that the generated heat during hydration does not exceed the expected
limits.

8. Make any modifications that are needed and re-check the design.

The soil approach is based on the moisture-density relationship. Compared to the concrete
approach, the RCC is considered as a processed soil which is enriched with cement. To find
optimum moisture content for a specific amount of cement and aggregates, the mixture has to
be able to carry a compaction effort corresponding to the vibratory rollers. Thereby a

16
maximum dry density can be obtained. It is common that all the voids in the aggregate are not
filled with paste after compaction when using the soil approach. (USBR, 2017) When using
the soil compaction method, the following steps are usually used (Harrington D et al., 2010):

1. Select well-graded aggregates

2. Choose a mid-range cementitious content

3. Develop plots of the moisture density relationship and verify that the moisture ratio is
acceptable

4. Cast samples to measure the compressive strength

5. Test the specimens and choose required cementitious content

6. Calculate the mixture proportions

For conventional concrete, the mix design is similar to the RCC procedure based on the
concrete approach, where the strength and water-cement ratio are the main aspects. The
difference when testing the consistency of the conventional concrete is that slump is allowed.
Some examples of slump values, suitable for different kinds of concrete, are presented in
Table 2.6. (ACI, 2017)

Table 2.6 Recommended slumps for different types of concrete applications, according to ACI (2017)

Slump [mm]

Conventional concrete Maximum Minimum

constructions

Reinforced foundation and walls 75 25

and footings

Plain footings, caissons and 75 25

substructure walls

Beams and reinforced walls 100 25

Building columns 100 25

Pavements and slabs 75 25

Mass concrete 75 25

17
2.2.3 Properties of hardened concrete

2.2.3.1 Durability

Concrete and RCC dams are in general exposed to deterioration effects from abrasion/erosion,
freezing/thawing and chemical attacks, which lead to degradation of the concrete. The interior
of RCC can experience internal frost damage, due to ice-crystallization in the pore system.
However, this can generally be counteracted with the help of air-entraining admixtures, which
create larger volume of air voids for the water to spread out on. An alternative could be to
have a higher quality concrete on the exterior than the interior concrete to avoid cracking,
spalling and loss of material from the surface, thereby achieving a high durability.

Abrasion/erosion damage may occur in RCC dams because it is subjected to factors such as
ice and waterborne sediments, see Figure 2.8. The quality of aggregates and the compressive
strength determines the RCC’s resistance against abrasion/erosion. (ACI, 2011)

Figure 2.8 A spillway that has been subjected to hydro-abrasion (Eriksson D, 2018)

Generally, RCC has a poor resistance to freezing/thawing but by using conventional concrete
or air-entrained admixture the risk of frost damages can be reduced (USBR, 2017). Figure 2.9
shows typical frost damages that can appear on hydraulic structures.

Figure 2.9 Frost damage in a hydraulic structure (Eriksson D, 2018)

18
2.2.3.2 Strength

Similarly to conventional concrete, the mixture proportions of the components and the degree
of compaction influence the strength of the RCC. The voids between aggregates in the
mixture can be completely filled with paste or not, depending on the classification the mixture
according to Table 2.5, and this determines the basic strength relationship for the RCC. Table
2.7 gives a general view of the compressive and tensile strength for the different classification
of RCC mixtures. (USACE, 2000)

The compressive strength is an indicator for the total strength of RCC and it increases with
time. It is comparable to that of conventional concrete, generally ranging from 28 to 41 MPa.
(Roller Compacted Concrete, 2013) During the design phase, tests of the compressive
strength are performed on cores that are drilled out from the built structure. The cores
compressive strengths are compared to the compressive strengths of cylindrical specimens of
trial mixtures see Table 2.8. These specimens are prepared typically 7, 28, 90, 180 days, and 1
year to be able to follow the mixtures strength gain. The modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s
ratio can also be determined with the help of these specimens. (ACI, 2011)

The factors that influence the compressive strength of the RCC are water/cementitious
material content, aggregates and the degree of compaction. For fully compacted RCC, the
reduction in water content leads to increase in compressive strength. Although, water content
below the optimum will cause voids in the mixture and that gives a weaker compressive
strength. To obtain a compressive strength that is equal to conventional concrete, high-quality
aggregates have to be used. (USBR, 2017)

Table 2.7 Strength for RCC (ICOLD, 2003)

Lean paste RCC Medium paste RCC High paste RCC

Compressive strength [MPa]

Mean 11.6 15.2 20.7

Direct tensile strength [MPa]

Mean 0.35 - 1.35

19
 Cylinder strength [MPa] Core strength [MPa]
2011)

Dam Cement Pozzolan w/c NMSA

[kg/m3] [kg/m3] [mm] 28 days 90 days 365 Age, Strength Age, Strength
days days days

Elk Creek 70 33 1.00 75 3 9 16 90 9 730 17

Middle 66 0 1.43 75 9 11 - 42 14 0 0
Fork

20
Stacey 125 62 0.82 37.5 18 21 - 28 14 90 18
Spillway

Stagecoach 71 77 0.93 50 2 - 9 180 14 365 13

Upper 79 173 0.39 50 13 18 74 180 34 365 36

Stillwater
Table 2.8 Comparison of compressive strength of RCC: construction control cylinders vs. cores (ACI,
The tensile strength is the main consideration for the loading design and, compared to the
compressive strength, it is mainly governed by the bond of the aggregates. In a RCC structure,
the lift joints are the weakest zones and, as for a conventional concrete structure, the tensile
strength in these points is an important property. (USACE, 2000)

The most suitable way to test the tensile strength between the lifts is with a direct tensile
strength test. The result from this type of test depends on the lift joints maturity, the
preparation of joint surface etc. If the tensile strength of the parent (unjointed) RCC is of
interest, then a splitting tensile strength test of horizontal cores is generally used. This test is,
compared to the direct tensile strength test, easier to carry out and is not as sensitive to micro-
cracking from drying and thereby gives more consistent results. The tensile strength in the
RCC joints is always lower than in the parent (unjointed) concrete and therefore, the tensile
strength in the lifts will determine the design. In Table 2.9, the tensile strength and percentage
of bonded joint strength are represented from some projects. (USACE, 2000)

21
 Table 2.9 Tensile strength of drilled cores of RCC dams (ACI, 2011)

Test type

DT

DT
% bonded
joins

95

90
strength
Tensile

[MPa]

0.9

1.6
Compres

strength
[MPa]

31.9
sive

14

5000
Age,
days

90
Joint
type

NB

P
NMSA
[mm]

50

50
0.63

0.35
w/c
Pozzolan
[kg/m3]

121

195
Cement
[kg/m3]

74

89
Olivenhain

Stilllwater
Upper
Dam

Notes: Joint type: NB = no bedding; B = bedding mortar or concrete; P = parent concrete.

Test type: DT = direct tensile test; ST = splitting tensile test.

22
One of the most important properties of RCC is shear strength of lift joints, which is the sum
of the cohesion and the internal friction for bonded, intact lift joints. It can generally, be
described by using Coulomb’s equation, shown below. (USACE, 2000)

‫ ܿ = ݏ‬+ ‫ ݌‬tan ߶ (eq. 2-1)

Where:
s = unit shear stress
c = unit cohesion
p = unit normal stress
߶ = the angle of internal friction

Parent shear strength test and lift joint shear strength test are two types of test that are
typically performed when determining the shear strength of the RCC and examples of values
from different projects are shown in Table 2.10. The parent shear strength test can be
developed from cylinder specimens made in the laboratory or from cores drilled from a
finished RCC dam. The RCC shear strength is usually similar to those for conventional
concrete. The cohesion in this test varies with the amount of cement, paste and age, while the
friction angle is affected by the aggregate type. (USACE, 2000)

The other test that is performed is the lift joint shear strength and it generally determines the
critical shear strength for design. Compared to the shear strength of conventional concrete
dam, the RCC shear strength for lift joints can be lower. The cohesion varies, as in the
previous test, with the amount of cement paste but also the preparation of the lift joint and the
exposure. Conditions improving the cohesion, and thereby strengthen the bond between the
lifts, can be done by placing the RCC lifts rapidly over a fresh joint surface, applying an
additional bonding mixture concrete or bedding mortar between lifts or increasing the cement
content of the mixture. (USACE, 2000)

23
 Core Peak Shear Residual Residual
Dam Cement Pozzolan w/c NMSA Joint type Age, compress cohesion ߶,deg shear shear
[kg/m3] [kg/m3] [mm] days ive [kPa] cohesion ߶,deg
strength [kPa]
[MPa]

Galesville 51 51 1.09 75 NB 415 14 758 67 552 40

Upper 79 173 0.37 50 P 120 27 2068 55 207 42

Stillwater

24
Victoria 67 66 0.80 50 B 365 18 1586 69 69 44

Zintel 74 0 1.50 63 NB 345 10 586 56 69 40

Canyon
Table 2.10 Examples of shear strength of drilled cores in RCC dams (ACI, 2011)

Notes: Joint type: NB = no bedding; B = bedding mortar or concrete; P = parent concrete.

2.2.3.3 Permeability

Permeability of RCC can be controlled by the degree of compaction, placement method,

mixture proportioning and the use of bedding mortar on the lift surfaces. Due to the
construction method of RCC dams, seepage can occur between horizontal lifts and through
vertical contraction joints or cracks which leads to a reduction in tensile and shear strength.
(USACE, 2000)

The main concern for permeability in concrete dams is the seepage in lift joints. To produce
watertightness, high cementitious content mixtures are needed to provide sufficient bond with
a newly placed lift. Lower cementitious content mixture does usually not provide adequate
watertightness and needs to be treated with bedding mortar between the lifts. According to
ACI (2011), RCC mixtures containing a paste and fine aggregate volume of 18-22% will
contribute generally to a sufficient level of impermeability, which is similar to conventional
concrete.

2.2.3.4 Density

The definition of density is the mass per unit volume and the RCC density relies on the degree
of compaction and the density of the aggregate. Many RCC mixtures have low water content
and insufficient entrained air that leads to a slightly higher density compared to conventional
concrete. The conventional concrete has a density of approximately 2400 kg/m3 and can vary,
whereas the density for RCC can be 1-3% greater and land on a density of 2424-2472 kg/m3.
(USACE, 2000)

2.2.3.5 Elastic properties

The modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio are the elastic properties of RCC, as well as for
conventional concrete, and they are affected by factors such as strength, age, paste volume
and aggregate type. (ICOLD, 2003)

The modulus of elasticity is the ratio between the normal stress and the corresponding strain
and is generally, for a given aggregate type, a function of strength. It is usually assumed that
the modulus of elasticity in compression is the same as in tension. When designing dams, it is
desirable to have a low modulus of elasticity to decrease the possibility of cracking at a
particular stress level, but this leads to greater deformation. To determine an acceptable low
modulus of elasticity is important and can be done with laboratory tests on specimens. The
stresses and strains, obtained from the strength tests, are plotted and the ratio between stress
and strain will give the proper modulus of elasticity.

The poisson’s ratio is the ratio between the transverse strain and the axial strain due to a
uniformly distributed axial stress. Conventional concrete and RCC has generally similar
values of Poisson’s ratio and it varies typically between 0.17-0.22. (ACI, 2011)

Table 2.11 shows typical modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio for some cases of RCC
mixtures.

25
 Compressive Strength [MPa] Modulus of elasticity [GPa] Poission’s ratio

Dam NMSA w/c

[mm] 7 days 26 90 365 7 days 26 90 365 7 days 26 90 365
days days days days days days days days days

Concep 75 1.03 4.4 6.8 8.6 11.7 - 7.58 13.17 22.82 - 0.17 - -
cion

Santa 50 0.88 4.4 8.9 15.0 21.0 9.38 12.41 15.58 22.34 0.13 0.14 0.19 0.21
Cruz

26
Upper 50 0.47 9.4 14.7 24.2 36.0 - 7.10 9.10 11.79 - 0.13 0.14 0.14
Stillwat
er

Willow 75 1.06 6.9 12.7 18.3 26.1 15.17 18.41 19.17 - - 0.19 0.18 -
Creek

Zintel 75 2.0 19 4.3 7.5 10.7 4.69 10.62 14.82 17.72 - - 0.21 -
Cnayon
Table 2.11 Examples of elastic properties for different completed dams, according to ACI (2011)
2.2.3.6 Creep

Creep is a time-dependent deformation and under sustained long term loading, the creep will
continue at a decreasing rate and increase in strain. High modulus of elasticity and high
strength in the RCC will cause low creep, while low strength and modulus of elasticity leads
to larger creep values. The desired creep values are typically high to gradually relieve stress
and strain development caused by foundation restraint and exterior and thermal loading.
According to Eurocode 2, the creep can be represented by the formula:
ఙ
ߝ௖௖ (λ, ‫ݐ‬଴ ) = ߮(λ, ‫ݐ‬଴ ) ή ቀா೎ቁ (eq 2-2)
೎

where,

ߝ = creep deformation
߮(λ, ‫ݐ‬଴ ) = final value of creep coefficient
ߪ௖ = compressive strength, MPa
‫ = ܧ‬static modulus of elasticity, GPa
‫ = ݐ‬time after loading, days

The first part of the above equation represents the long-term effect of creep after loading,
while the second part represents initial elastic strain from the load. Some examples of creep
properties are given in Table 2.12.

27
 Dam Cement Pozzolan w/c Loading Creep coefficients Compressive Modulus
[kg/m3] [kg/m3] age, days strength of
[MPa] elasticity
[10- f(K) [GPa]
6
/KPa]

90 0 1.20 7 0.20 0.12 4 -

Concepcion
90 0 1.20 28 0.11 0.08 7 10

90 0 1.20 90 0.07 0.03 9 14

28
77 170 0.43 28 0.10 0.04 14 10

Upper
Stillwater 77 170 0.43 180 0.08 0.01 29 12

77 170 0.43 365 0.08 0.02 35 13

47 19 1.61 7 0.29 0.20 3 8

Willow Creek
47 19 1.61 28 0.16 0.11 8 11

47 19 1.61 90 0.08 - 12 13
Table 2.12 Strain and creep properties of some laboratory RCC mixtures, according to ACI (2011)
2.2.3.7 Volume change – shrinkage

It is important, for all massive concrete structures, to minimize uncontrolled cracking due to
volume changes. These volume changes are divided into different types such as, drying
shrinkage, autogenous shrinkage and thermal contraction.

Drying shrinkage is defined as the volume reduction that the concrete exhibit due to the
moisture migration when it is exposed to lower relative humidity environment. It depends on
the water content and the features of the aggregate that are used. Due to the lower water
content in RCC, the drying shrinkage is either similar or lower than for conventional concrete.
Compared to autogenous shrinkage, drying shrinkage takes place over a longer period of time.
(USACE, 2000)

Autogenous shrinkage is the deformation that occurs during constant temperature with no
exchange of moisture with its environment. The chemical shrinkage is the driving force and
when hydration develops a volume change in the interior of the concrete occurs, without
losing or gaining moisture in the concrete. Autogenous shrinkage is dependent on the
properties of the used materials and the mixture proportions. Generally, higher strength
properties may lead to higher autogenous shrinkage. (Barcelo L et al., 2005)

The thermal contraction takes place when the hydration process causes the concrete to reach
temperature higher than the ambient temperature. When the hot concrete starts to cool down
to the surrounding temperature, it contracts and reduces in volume. (BASF, 2014)

2.2.3.8 Thermal properties

The thermal properties, which include specific heat, coefficient of thermal expansion,
conductivity and adiabatic temperature rise, are of great importance for both RCC and
conventional concrete. In Table 2.13, examples of thermal properties for various projects are
presented. It is recommended to test the mixture because the thermal properties vary
significantly depending on aggregate and cementitious type and content. (ACI, 2011)

The adiabatic temperature change depends on the total cementitious content and percentage of
pozzolan in the mixture. Compared to conventional concrete, RCC with low cementitious
material content has lower temperature rise (ICOLD, 2003).

29
 Adiabatic temperature rise

Dam Cement Pozzolan Aggregate Specific Diffusivity Conductivit Coefficient Initial

[kg/m3] [kg/m3] type heat [m2/h] y [W/m ϶K] of ϶C Change in ϶C
[J/kg ϶C] expansion
[millionths/
϶C]
3 days 7 days 28
days

Concepcion 90 0 Ignimbrite 1047 0.003 1.9 11 19.4 11.7 13.3 13.9

30
Elk Creek 56 23 Sandstone 754 0.003 1.7 7 6.7 7.2 8.9 11.1

Sata Cruz 66 66 Alluvial 1089 0.004 2.9 5.4 16.1 13.9 16.1 18.3
granite

Upper 93 204 Quarts - - - - 12.2 13.3 20.2 26.7

Stillwater
Table 2.13 Thermal properties of some laboratory RCC mixtures, according ACI (2011)

Willow 47 19 Basalt 921 0.003 1.8 7 11.7 7.2 0 12.2

Creek
2.2.3.9 Tensile strain capacity

Cracks occur when a restrained volume change causes strain which exceeds the tensile strain
capacity. There are several factors that affect the tensile strain capacity such as rate of
loading, cementitious content, type of aggregate, age and strength of the concrete and
aggregate shape (natural round vs. angular, which is produced by crushing). Development of
tensile strains in the concrete occurs due to volume changes and external loads applied to the
structure. (ACI, 2011)

31
2.3 Construction

2.3.1 Foundation considerations

For RCC dams, the foundation considerations are the same as for the conventional concrete
dams. When designing, several aspects must be taken into consideration such as the loads
from the dam and the stresses that are distributed on the foundation, the suitableness of the
rock foundation, and the required quantity of surface treatment and excavation to achieve a
suitable foundation.

The friction angle of the joint surfaces, the orientation and dip angles of key joint sets and the
loads that are transmitted to the foundation must be taken into account when evaluating the
foundation stability. Cohesion between the foundation and the dam is important to control
sliding resistance of the contact surface. (USBR, 2017)

Conventional concrete is generally used to build a platform between the foundation and the
RCC dam because this is the most critical point of the structure. After this, the RCC is placed
in layers on a leveled surface. However, there are projects that directly have started with RCC
on the foundation.

The goal when designing a new RCC dams is to reduce the amount of leveling concrete due
to the use of conventional concrete is generally more expensive than RCC and it may have
different properties. To avoid the use of leveling concrete, a thin layer of high-slump bedding
concrete can be placed onto the rock and then spread over the RCC and compact it while the
bedding concrete is fresh. This way the two materials merge into one after compaction and the
mortar and grout of the bedding concrete creates sufficient bond. (ACI, 2011)

2.3.2 Construction method

When designing a new RCC dam it is important to consider the basic purpose of the dam and
assure that the set requirements, e.g. cost, watertightness, appearance etc, are fulfilled. These
aspects will determine for instance the mixture proportions of the RCC and the shape of the
dam.

Aggregates that are used for RCC mixtures can be found on the construction site or it can be
transported from an aggregate producer. Stockpiling aggregates is necessary for an RCC dam
construction and before starting the RCC work. Huge stockpiles are needed because the
aggregate production capability might be exceeded by the usage rate of the aggregate during
the placement of the RCC. (ICOLD, 2003)

When producing aggregates it is critical to stockpile it cold or warm, depending on the time of
the year that the production is done. There is a specified maximum temperature for the
aggregates during placement and if warm weather is anticipated, then pre-cooling of the
aggregates may be required which can be done by sprinkling water on the stockpiles to create
evaporative cooling. It is however, important to consider the moisture of the aggregates when
it is time to mix the RCC mixture. In general, if low placement temperatures are desired then
stockpiling during the winter is the best option. (USBR, 2017)

32
The most crucial part of construction is that the RCC is transported, placed, spread and
compacted as rapidly as possible. The time from the start of mixing to after it has been
compacted should not exceed the initial set time of the RCC mixture. For mixtures containing
no or little pozzolan the placing, spreading, and compacting should be executed within 30-45
minutes of mixing and this general rule is suitable for mixtures containing retarding
admixtures. However, this time can be adjusted depending on the weather conditions. For
warmer weather the time should be reduced, while for cooler weather the time can be
extended. (ICOLD, 2003)

Compared to when constructing a conventional concrete dam, RCC dam differs in the aspects
of the layout, planning and equipment. Rather than building in blocks the RCC dam are
usually built in thin, horizontal lifts which are advanced from one abutment to the other.
When constructing RCC dams, the demand for man-hours are less compared to conventional
concrete due to the usage of machines for compacting and spreading the concrete (see Figure
2.10), reduced amount of formwork and decreased joint preparation. RCC dams can be built
with curved or straight axes, with inclined or vertical upstream face and with a downstream
face with a vertical or an inclined slope depending on what is suitable for the given site. With
time there has been a development of placing methods and the goal has been to place multiple
RCC lifts in a short amount of time, before the initial set of the concrete is reached. This leads
to an improved bond between each lift and the need for placing bonding mortar can be
avoided.

Figure 2.10 RCC compaction (Shaw, 2010)

The sloped layer placing method (SLM) is one of the newer methods, where 10 small-volume
lifts are rapidly placed on slopes from 1:10 to 1:40 that are later built up to a single layer
which may have a thickness up to 3 m, see Figure 2.11. (ACI, 2011)

33
 Figure 2.11 Sloped layer placing method, according to ACI (2011)

Bulldozers are the general equipment that is used for spreading RCC and it is typically placed
in a 300-350 mm thick layers. An uncompacted lift gives the dozers the ability to work on the
surface without damaging it. When it comes to the thickness after compaction, the most
common lift thickness is 300 mm because it is suitable to work with in the field but it can be
up to 500 mm thick. Factors such as maximum approved exposure time of a lift before
placing the following one, affect the selection of the RCC layer thickness. Another factor is to
use the maximum allowable lift thickness of a RCC mixture and to obtain the specified
minimum density after spreading and compaction. For minimum potential weaknesses in the
dam, thicker lifts are chosen which leads to longer exposure times but fewer joints between
the lifts. If instead improved bond is required, then thinner lifts are chosen which
consequently means more joints but these can be covered a lot sooner. It has to be taken into
consideration that each project is unique and different lift thicknesses may be optimal.
(ICOLD,2003)

Upholding the bond between lifts is important for both RCC and conventional concrete dams
in order to fulfill the necessary factors of safety for usual, unusual and extreme loading
conditions. The following requirements are essential to obtain an adequate bonding between
the lifts (USBR, 2017):

1. Having a RCC mixture with adequate workability and sufficient amount of paste and
mortar.

2. To control segregation when placing the RCC.

3. Achieving an adequate compaction with the vibrating roller.

4. Thorough cleanup of the lift surfaces.

5. Using a bonding layer of concrete or mortar between lifts.

6. Placing RCC rapidly and thereby reducing the exposure time of the lifts.

34
As mentioned earlier, the bond between the lifts are important especially for hydraulic
structures. The quality of the bond relies on the type of joint treatment that is required. The
joint treatment is dependent on the time between placements of the lifts and the time relies
upon the RCC mixture and the surrounding temperature at the site. There are three types of
joints, which are explained further. (USBR, 2017)

x Hot joint (fresh joint) appears when placing a new RCC lift over the earlier placed lift
that has not reached its initial set (between 6-12 hours from placement). The common
cleanup treatment (Type 1) includes the removal of loose materials and free water and
then cleaning the lift surface with vacuum equipment. If the mixture contains no
pozzolan or if the placing occurs during warm temperature conditions, then the time
period 6-12 hours is reduced down to 4 hours.
x Cold joint appears between the initial and final set (6-24 hours after placement). The
cleanup treatment (Type 2) includes cleaning with air- or air water jetting to remove
concrete that is defected then vacuuming the surface to remove remaining loose
materials or water. Depending on the design conditions bonding mortar may be
needed.
x Construction joint appears after the final set of the concrete (24-48 hours after
placement). The cleanup treatment (Type 3) is important and it includes high-pressure
water jetting or wet sand blasting to remove loose materials and water, then a
mechanical broom and vacuum is followed. Bonding mortar is commonly needed.

To control cracking caused by thermal volume change, contraction joints are used and is an
important part of the design. Contraction joints formed by a crack inducing plate is done by
firstly spreading the RCC to the contraction joint alignment and then prepare a vertical form
plate for the joint with some external support to keep the plate vertical. On both sides of the
vertical plate, RCC is spread with manual labor. It is common to use plastic sheets around the
vertical plate which is later on removed, leaving the plastic to act as a bond breaker. See
Figure 2.12. Another method to create a contraction joint is with a vertical plate attached to an
excavating machine called backhoe, which has a bucket attached to its arm. The galvanized
steel plate is installed by vibrating it into the compacted lifts into pre-made joint location and
these acts like bond breakers due to they are left in the RCC. The joints placing and spacing is
determined by the temperature change and the time period it develops, the foundation
restraints, the creep relaxation, the tensile strain capacity of the concrete, the applied loads
and the coefficient of thermal expansion (USBR, 2017). According to Cotoi (2015), a general
rule could be to place the contraction joints every 15 m throughout the dam.

35
Figure 2.12 Induced joints placed with RCC placement (Shaw, 2010)

36
The construction of contraction joints can vary from a superficial crack and control of
seepage, to detailed joints with drain holes, tubes for grouting and water stops. If the
contraction joint consists of the superficial crack and seepage control construction, then a
wood strip of 40x45 mm is installed as a crack inducer and treated or sealed with a joint sealer
and a foam. A contraction joint that consists of a water stop and a drain, commonly places the
water stop in conventional concrete at a certain distance from the dams upstream face and
joint filler is placed on both downstream and upstream of the water stop. Contraction joints
with drain holes are formed during the time when the RCC is placed and the drain hole is
connected to the drainage gallery through an outlet pipe. (ACI, 2011)

Galleries are important to have in dams over 30 m in height in order to create places that are
used for inspection and observing the behavior of the dam, drilling drain and grout holes into
the foundation and seepage draining. It is important to place the galleries so that they do not
interfere with the construction of the dam. There are many construction methods for designing
galleries e.g. conventional forming method with or without the use of conventional concrete
or excavation of gravel in-fill from the gallery area. (ACI, 2017)

The design of spillways that is used for conventional concrete dams is applicable for RCC
dams. There are four kinds of spillways, when overtopping is desired, for RCC dams and they
are: naturally sloped RCC spillways, stepped RCC spillways, stepped conventional concrete
spillways and sloped conventional concrete spillways. It is common to use conventional
concrete steps for the spillways when constructing RCC dams and it can be constructed either
after the RCC is complete, similar to how it is done to most smooth spillway facings, or it can
be done lift by lift with the RCC. If the spillway is not strengthened with conventional
concrete, then the RCC can be used if the water flow velocity is less than 8 m/sec. (USACE,
2000)

When the RCC has been placed and compacted, continuous curing is important just as for
conventional concrete. The RCC is a drier mixture and the surface tends to dry faster during
warm weather. Therefore, it should be maintained in a moist condition with water for 14 days
or until the next lift is placed. The RCC must be protected from extreme temperature changes
until it gains adequate strength and the construction should cease if the rain exceeds 2-3
mm/h. If vehicles are allowed on the surface during rain, the tires may damage the surface and
turn the material soft. This situation may need waiting until the RCC has hardened and
cleanup can be done or removal of the entire lift is done. (USBR, 2017)

37
38
3 Challenges during construction

3.1 During construction

The main reasons for designing new RCC dams are the economy, the speed of constructing it
and the positive environmental affect due to less cement use. As for every other type of dam,
the RCC dam may face challenges during construction. There are typical conditions which
need to be taken into consideration, and those are topography, foundation, geology, access
conditions, climate conditions, available materials and characteristics of the river flow. The
handling of these conditions can be found from earlier experience from previous projects.
However, there is no standard solution when designing a RCC dam, or any other type of dam,
due to characteristics of the specific site, which makes every project unique in design. (Griggs
T et al., 2012)

Nowadays, RCC dams are being constructed in all types of climate all over the world. This
means that the circumstances for construction can be exposed to extreme cold or warm
climate conditions, which both can lead to cracking in the structure. During construction,
when the placing of the lifts takes place, the initial hydration can affect the maximum
temperature to increase or decrease depending on the ambient condition and exposure time.
The major concerns when cracking in the RCC occurs are leakage control, durability and
appearance. The most difficult factor to control after construction is the leakage and often
results in an unwanted loss of water and is problematic to maintain. (ACI, 2011)

When constructing a RCC dam in cold climate, it is important to consider possible difficulties
due to rapid cooling of the massive RCC construction and how this could be handled can be
seen in the project of Xingjiang Shimenzi Reservoir. The region has temperatures below zero
around 1/3 of the year and temperature can reach -36°C, making this a very harsh climate to
build in. Important measures were taken, where the first step was to create a mixture with
good freezing and thawing resistance with the help of air-entraining admixture. When the
RCC mixture was transported to site it was insulated and the placement area was fully
insulated with insulating layers. Actions were taken to protect the existing RCC against frost
by using weaving cloth, gravel and grass cushions to enclose the surface of the RCC during
the time when there was low activity in the construction phase. (Berga L et al., 2003)

Constructing in warm climate can be challenging as well. When placing the RCC lifts in
warm conditions, the surface will absorb the direct heat from the sun which will cause an
increase of the mixtures temperature and it will generate the hydration more rapidly. If the
surface of the lift is exposed during a long time, it will have the chance of absorbing so much
solar energy that it will force the internal temperature to increase. (ACI, 2011) That is why
rapid placement is suitable in this case and an example of a dam that was built during warm
conditions is the Al Wehdah dam on the border between Jordan and Syria. This project started
May 2003 and during the summer months the temperature could reach up to 40ͼC. This was
taken into account by incorporating chilled water into the mixture and thereby reducing the
placement temperature of the RCC. Also, the coarse aggregates were kept chilled with the
help of a moving wet belt system, which in other words is a cooling tunnel and it used water
that was chilled down to 3ͼC. (Water Power, 2009)

39
3.2 After construction
The design and construction develops with time and each completed project and this provides
experience and knowledge, which can be used in future RCC dam designing. Therefore, it is
important to achieve reports or records with accurate results of the performance and to learn
from earlier mistakes that has lead to unsatisfactory performance. After the construction is
completed core samples are drilled out and they often contain the joints between the lifts
which can be examined and tested for strength.

A new RCC dam will experience thermal stresses that are directly related to volume changes
of the concrete, due to the hydration process and the ambient temperature variations leading
to cracks. The dam may be exposed to temperature differences up to 60-70ͼC, within a
summer to winter period, resulting in opening and closing of cracks and joints in the RCC
dam. (USBR, 2017) These temperature variations are commonly considered when designing
the dam and can be anticipated with the help of FE- analysis. An example of the temperature
distribution is shown in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1 Example of temperature distribution in a concrete dam according to USBR (2006).

Cracking can be expected in any type of concrete dam and develops because of tensile strain,
caused by the cooling of the concrete from the peak temperature. A common thing to do to
prevent cracks, is to install crack or joint inducers in the bigger dam constructions to help
control the cracking and they are placed every 15 m, see Section 2.3.2, with drain holes and
upstream water stops. The cracks that are of concern, when the dam is in use, are the ones that
are below the waterline and are wide enough to let water pass through. These cracks can be
repaired or sealed with different method and materials and one way is to use a sealant
consisting of polysulfide and polyurethane or cement grouting. The repairing could be done
when the water reservoir is lowered or underwater crack sealing can be implemented with e.g.
quick-set cement. (ACI, 2011)

Seepage can be one of the most challenging parts after construction. If it is not handled
properly, it can lead to internal failure modes where the lifts will slide, see Figure 3.2, due to
water flowing through the cracks causing a hydrostatic pressure. Due to the water, leaching of
the concrete will occur, which will increase the deterioration.

40
 Figure 3.2 Internal failure modes due to seepage.

Seepage can consist of leakage through cracks and joints, seepage through the RCC material
itself and seepage through the foundation materials. The characteristics of the voids in the
mixture, which can develop due to segregation of large aggregate near the bottom of the lift,
is what determines if the water has a chance to pass through the RCC. However, this can be
counteracted in the mixture stage where higher cementitious contents, higher fines content
and the construction method can be adapted. During construction, it is important to put
weight on installing water stops and applying sealants at the joints because this minimizes the
seepage through the dam. The permeability of the placed RCC can then be controlled by
water-pressure testing in vertical drilled holes in the dam’s body. Leakage is defined as the
water that passes through cracks and joints in the structure and is usually easier to repair than
seepage through the entire RCC dam. (ACI, 2011)

The RCC material on existing dams has proven to have high erosion resistance due to a high
aggregate content, both coarse and fine. The RCC resistance against erosion should be
evaluated when high velocity and high volume flow over the surface is involved. An example
of a dam which had all of the above mentioned factors was the Kerrville Ponding dam in
Texas which had a total height of 6.4 m. The dam was overtopped with as much as 4.4 m at
one point and the erosion was hardly noticeable except for some uncompacted material
washed away on the downstream side. (Beene R.R.W et al., 1988) A problem that could
develop due to overtopping, however, is erosion in the foundation. This can lead to losing the
support of the foundation and thereby causing entire failure of the dam.

41
3.3 Construction of existing dams

3.3.1 Upper Stillwater

Upper Stillwater is an RCC dam in Utah, which began its construction in 1985 and was
completed in 1987. The dam has a height of almost 90 m and a crest length of approximately
815 m and the dam itself needed 1 125 000 m3 of RCC to build it. The mixture that was used
was a high paste RCC; see Table 2.4 for cementitious material content and 2.5 for
classification of RCC, with a wet consistency. The downstream stepped face of the central
spillway and the upstream vertical face were slip formed with conventional concrete and due
to the use of a high paste RCC mix, a high tensile strength was achieved leading to a
reduction of the cross-section of the dam. The high paste mixture and the conventional
concrete facing on the upstream side also provided improved sealing and prevented seepage
through the lift joints. (Abdo, 2008)

Upper Stillwater did not incorporate contraction joints and vertical thermal cracks did develop
at a spacing of approximately 58 m. Most of the cracks were not significant in a structural
point of view, however, one specific crack became critical and produced excessive leakage of
water and necessary waterproofing repairs were made with the help of chemical grout and
embedded steel barriers in the cracks. (USBR, 2006)

Figure 3.3 Upper Stillwater dam

42
3.3.2 Willow Creek

Willow Creek is an RCC dam in Oregon and it was constructed in 1982 and was originally
planned to be built as a rock fill embankment dam. The dam was needed around 331 000 m3
of RCC and it was placed in less than five months, which proved that an RCC dam could be
built faster than a comparable concrete gravity dam or an earthfill dam.

The dam used a lean paste RCC, see Table 2.12, and no transverse joints were included in the
structure. The downstream face was unformed, while the upstream face used precast concrete
panels. The biggest issues after construction with this dam was large leakage of water
occurred and this was handled with the help of cement grouting. (Abdo, 2008)

Figure 3.4 Willow Creek dam

43
44
4 Design of new RCC dams

4.1 Design criteria

When designing a RCC dam the most influential considerations are the owner’s requirement
for cost, time-schedule, appearance, water-tightness, method of construction and maintenance.
The most common type that has been built up to date is the gravity RCC dam and therefore
this type will be highlighted when designing in this chapter. There is no absolute difference
between the design of a RCC gravity dam and a conventional concrete gravity dam and for
that reason the same formulas and principles are used.

When designing dams in Sweden, RIDAS is used, which is the power producing company’s
guideline for dam safety. It states requirements for durability, strength and stability of the dam
as well as what criteria it needs to fulfill.

There are three essential criteria that must be fulfilled when designing RCC dams and they are
(Hansen K.D et al., 1991):

1. No sliding – due to the layer construction method sliding can occur between the
horizontal planes of the dam or at the connection between the foundation material and
the dam, which needs to be avoided.

Figure 4.1 Sliding failure

2. No overturning – overturning must be prevented and it can take place at the

connection with the foundation or in the foundation.

45
 Figure 4.2 Overturning failure

3. Cross-section – the stresses that develop in the foundation or the concrete must not
exceed the allowable stresses for the cross-section.

4.2 Loads
The RCC dam is typically subjected to horizontal and vertical loads and these are illustrated
Figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3 Loads acting on the dam (Broberg L et al., 1991)

The loads that are acting on the dam are explained in Table 4.1

46
Table 4.1 Loads and their description (Hansen K.D, 1991)

Loads Description

P1, P2 Hydrostatic pressure on the upstream face of the

reservoir.

P3, P4 Hydrostatic pressure of tail-water against the

downstream face.

P5 Uplift pressure on any horizontal plane and

internal hydrostatic pressure.

P6 Gravity dead load of the dam and additions such

as bridges and gates.

P7 Ice load acting on the face of the dam.

P8 Silt pressure*.

P9, P10, P11 Seismic loads, horizontal and vertical

accelerations caused by earth quakes*.

NOTE: The silt pressure (P8) is low in Sweden. The loads P9, P10 and P11are not considered in RIDAS.

4.3 Loading combinations

The design and analysis of dam stability should be performed by using safety factors for
overturning and allowed friction coefficient for sliding, all according to RIDAS. For cross-
section analyses, Eurocode 2 and partial coefficient method is used.

4.3.1 Load cases for calculation of stability

It is of great importance that the RCC dam is designed for all reasonable types of loading
combinations with the loadings that are mentioned above and it can be categorized in to three
combinations (Hansen K.D, 1991):

Normal load case

1. The water surface at the retention water level, maximum ice pressure and closed gates.

2. The water surface at the retention water level, temporary shutdowns, no ice pressure
during ice-free maintenance.

3. The water surface at the retention water level combined with closed gates in a spillway
and shut adjacent spillway, no ice pressure during ice-free maintenance.

4. The water surface at the retention water level and the most unfavorable combination of
open and closed spillways and associated water level on the downstream side.

47
 5. The water level at discharge of flows of flood design category II. For existing dams
this load case may involve flooding.

Exceptional load case

1. The water surface at the concrete dams crest or to the lowest level of the top edge of
the adjoining embankment dam, no ice pressure, the most unfavorable combination of
open and closed spillways.

2. The surface of the water at discharge of the design flow. This only applies for dams in
flood design category I. For existing dams this load case may lead to flooding.

3. If the drainage function cannot be controlled, the dams with drainage shall be checked
with the load case with clogged drain, i.e. the dam is calculated for the same uplift
pressure as a dam without drainage.

4. Asymmetrical ice pressure, such as one-sided pressure from spillway-pillar.

5. Load cases that may occur during the construction time.

Accidental load case

1. Exceptionally high water level due to a spillway is out of operation at the design flow.
This load case is applied where a spillway for some reason are liable to fail, e.g. due to
failing to open the gates.

2. Exceptionally high water level as a result of large amount of water drains down into a
small water magazine.

3. Sabotage, explosion or other accidents that may cause extreme loads.

4.3.2 Load cases for cross-section analysis

There are limit states that are divided into three categories; serviceability limit state, ultimate
limit state and accidents and each of these has load cases that can occur and be analyzed.
(RIDAS, 2017)

Serviceability limit state

1. The water surface at the retention water level, maximum ice pressure and closed gates.

Ultimate limit state

2. The water surface up to the retention water level, maximum ice pressure (or load) and
closed gates.

3. The water surface up to the concrete dam crest, no ice pressure, unfavorable
combination of temporary shutdowns, open or closed spillways and he associated
water at the downstream side.

48
 4. If the drainage function cannot be controlled, the dams with drainage should be
checked for the load case clogged drainage, i.e. the dam is calculated for the same
uplift pressure as dams without drainage.

5. Asymmetrical ice pressure.

6. Load cases that may occur during the construction period.

Accidental load case

7. The same load cases as for the stability calculations.

4.4 Design of cross-section

The design of the cross-section of the dam should according to RIDAS be performed in
accordance with Eurocode 2 and is based on the partial coefficient method, according to
which design load values are obtained by multiplying characteristic values with partial
coefficients. Design material values are obtained in a similar way by dividing characteristic
material values with the partial coefficients which is shown in Section 4.4.2.

4.4.1 Load values and combinations

There are partial coefficients ߛௗ and ߛ௄ for different dam safety classes which are shown in
Table 4.1 and since both of them are to be used for unfavorable loads, the partial coefficient
ߛௗ௄ is introduced. It should be taken into account that in some cases under the dam´s lifetime
the dam safety class changes so the dam owner should consider increasing the safety class of
at least one level when designing new constructions. When evaluating or changing an existing
dam, the safety level of the current dam safety class can be used.

Table 4.2 Partial factors ࢽࢊ , ࢽࡷ and ࢽࢊࡷ for different dam safety classes (RIDAS, 2017)

Dam safety class ߛௗ ߛ௄ ߛௗ௄

A 1.1 1.2 1.3

B 1.0 1.2 1.2

C 0.91 1.2 1.1

RIDAS-class D and E 0.83 1.2 1.0

49
Table 4.3 Loading combinations for serviceability- and ultimate limit state (RIDAS, 2017)

Ultimate limit state Serviceability limit state

Combination of 6.10a 6.10b 6.14b 6.15b 6.16b

loads

Permanent load (G)

Unfavorable ߛௗ௄ 1,35 ‫ܩ‬௄ ߛௗ௄ 1,2 ܲ௄ 1,0 ‫ܩ‬௄ 1,0 ‫ܩ‬௄ 1,0 ‫ܩ‬௄

Favorable 1,0 ‫ܩ‬௄ 1,0 ‫ܩ‬௄

Tension force (P)

Unfavorable ߛௗ௄ 1,35 ܲ௄ ߛௗ௄ 1,35 ܲ௄ 1,0 ܲ௄ 1,0 ܲ௄ 1,0 ܲ௄

Favorable 1,0 ܲ௄ 1,0 ܲ௄ 1,0 ܲ௄ 1,0 ܲ௄ 1,0 ܲ௄

Variable load (Q)

Leading load - ߛௗ௄ 1,5 ܳ௞,௜ 1,0 ܳ௞,௜ ߰ଵ,ଵ ܳ௞,ଵ

Other variable loads ߛௗ௄ 1,5 ߰଴,௜ ܳ௞,௜ ߛௗ௄ 1,5 ߰଴,௜ ܳ௞,௜ ߰଴,௜ ܳ௞,௜ ߰ଶ,௜ ܳ௞,௜ ߰ଶ,௜ ܳ௞,௜
σ ߰૙,࢏ ܳ࢑,࢏

According to Table 4.3 above the variable loads has to be multiplied with a load reduction
factor ߰. The following Table 4.4 shows the load reduction factor for loads, that are relevant
for dam constructions.

50
According to Eurocode 2, two load combinations in the ultimate limit state are specified:

෍ ߛீ,௝ ‫ܩ‬௞,௝ + ߛ௉ ܲ + ߛொ,ଵ ߰଴,ଵ ܳ௞,ଵ + ෍ ߛொ,௜ ߰଴,௜ ܳ௞,௜ (6.10ܽ)

௝ஹଵ ௜வଵ

෍ ߦ௝ ߛீ,௝ ‫ܩ‬௞,௝ + ߛ௉ ܲ + ߛொ,ଵ ܳ௞,ଵ + ෍ ߛொ,௜ ߰଴,௜ ܳ௞,௜ (6.10ܾ)

௝ஹଵ ௜வଵ

The first equation is used for design when the permanent load is the dominant one. Water load
at the retention water level should be regarded as permanent load and water load above this
level should be regarded as variable. There are also three loading combinations in the
serviceability limit state are specified:

෍ ‫ܩ‬௞,௝ + ܲ௞ + ܳ௞,ଵ + ෍ ߰଴,௜ ܳ௞,௜ (6.14ܾ)

௝ஹଵ ௜வଵ

෍ ‫ܩ‬௞,௝ + ܲ + ߰ଵ,ଵ ܳ௞,ଵ + ෍ ߰ଶ,௜ ܳ௞,௜ (6.15ܾ)

௝ஹଵ ௜வଵ

෍ ‫ܩ‬௞,௝ + ܲ + ෍ ߰ଶ,௜ ܳ௞,௜ (6.16ܾ)

௝ஹଵ ௜ஹଵ

The loading combinations in these limits states are presented in Table 4.3.

51
Table 4.4 Load reduction factor (RIDAS, 2017)

Load Load reduction factor

߰଴ ߰ଵ ߰ଶ

Variable water load 0.8 0.8 0

Wave loads 0.4 0.4 0

Stream pressure 0.4 0.4 0

Surging pressure 0.6 0 0

Wind load 0.3 0.2 0

Snow load 0.8 0.6 0.2

Ice load 0.8 0.6 0

Variable soil pressure 0.5 0.3 0

Temperature change 0.6 0.6 0.5

Moving-machine parts 0.8 vertical load 0.7 vertical load 0.6 vertical load

0.5 horizontal load 0.5 horizontal load 0 horizontal load

Traffic load 0.75 0.75 0

4.4.2 Material values

In the ultimate limit state the design values for concrete are calculated according to:

Compressive strength: ݂௖ௗ = ݂௖௞ /ߛ஼ (eq 3-1)

Tensile strength: ݂௖௧ௗ = ݂௖௧௞଴,଴ହ /ߛ஼ (eq 3-2)

Modulus of elasticity: ‫ܧ‬௖ௗ = ‫ܧ‬௖௠ /ߛ஼ா (eq 3-3)

Where ߛ஼ = 1.5 is the concrete partial material safety factor and ߛ஼ா = 1.2 is the partial
safety factor for the modulus of elasticity of concrete.

52
4.5 Stability conditions
There are two types of safety factors which must be checked for the normal, exceptional, and
accidental load case, one for sliding and one for overturning.

Loads will be calculated without partial coefficient, although in some cases additional
estimations are implemented appropriately for calibration of coefficients. Control is
performed for both individual and monolithic constructions. This ensures that the structure
has sufficient stiffness and strength so that monolithic interaction prevails.

4.5.1 Safety against sliding, μ

Safety against sliding is controlled by making sure that the horizontal forces can be
transmitted from the structure to the foundation.

In Sweden, cohesion in the intersection between the dam and the foundation is generally not
considered when calculating the total sliding resistance.

Sliding control is performed for the abutment surface between the rock and the concrete as
well as for possible weaknesses in the foundation. Moreover, sliding control must be done for
weak points in the RCC dam structure itself, for example, the lift joints. The cohesive strength
can vary and must be carefully selected when executing a sliding analysis. Lift joints that has
been treated with bedding mortar can have an initial cohesion design of 5 percent of the
compressive strength. Whereas, lift joint surfaces that has no bedding mortar the cohesion is
assumed to be 0. The friction angle can be assumed to be 45 degrees when doing preliminary
design studies, but it can vary between 40 to 60 degrees. To be able to verify if the assumed
values are acceptable, testing is done on samples that are prepared in the laboratory and on
drilled out cores from the design stage. The tests give an idea whether the shear resistance of
the lift joint fulfills or exceeds the design requirements. (USACE, 2000)

The safety against sliding is satisfied if the current calculated sliding factor μ does not exceed
the permitted value Ɋ௧௜௟௟ 7KHYDOXHȝH[SUHVVHVWKHUHODWLRQVKLSEHWZHHQWKHUHVXOWLQJIRUFHV
in parallel respectively perpendicular to the sliding plane.

According to RIDAS (2017), the value Ɋ௧௜௟௟ is obtained by dividing the ultimate capacity of
the friction angle with a safety factor ‫ݏ‬௚ as shown in Table 4.5 below. The value of tan ߜ௚ is
determined based on the examined results.
ோಹ ௧௔௡ఋ೒
ߤ= ோೇ
൑ ߤ௧௜௟௟ = ௦೒
(eq 3-4)

where,

ܴு = Resulting forces parallel to the foundation

ܴ௏ = Resulting forces perpendicular to the foundation

‫ߜ݊ܽݐ‬௚ = Ultimate capacity for the coefficient of friction in the sliding surface

53
‫ݏ‬௚ = Safety factor

Table 4.5 Safety factor ࢙ࢍ for calculating ࣆ࢚࢏࢒࢒ (RIDAS, 2017)

Foundation Normal load case Exceptional load case Accidental load case

Rock 1.35 1.10 1.05

Moraine, gravel, sand 1.50 1.35 1.25

Silt 1.50 1.35 1.25

For rock foundation that has a good quality of moraine, gravel, sand and coarse silt, the Ɋ௧௜௟௟
values are used according to Table 4.6 below for checking the gliding safety in the section
between the dam and the foundation.

Table 4.6 Allowed friction coefficient Ɋ௧௜௟௟ when the foundation consists of good rock or packed
moraine, gravel, sand or silt. (RIDAS, 2017)

Foundation Normal load case Exceptional load Accidental load ‫ߜ݊ܽݐ‬௚ values at
case case failure

Rock 0.75 0.90 0.95 1.00

Moraine, gravel, 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.75

sand

Silt 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.60

The impact of a slope of the sliding plane can be considered by dividing action forces into
components along the sliding plane and perpendicular to the plane. When checking the sliding
plane, the allowable coefficient of friction is determined based on the examined foundation
tests.

With a foundation based on friction materials, sliding stability must produce in the contact
area between the dam structure and the foundation, but also along the lower weak layer under
the dam structure.

54
4.5.2 Safety against overturning, s

The relationship between stabilizing and overturning moment must be higher than the given
value for safety against overturning, see equation 3-5. Moreover, the resultant force at usual
load combinations should be located within the core boundary. However, the requirement for
resultant in the core boundary cannot be regarded as safe against overturning. Instead with the
core boundary condition, the entire foundation area is compressed which causes a linear
decrease of the distribution of the uplift pressure under the dam. It is particularly important
for dams with a thin front plate to be pressed against the bottom of the dam otherwise leakage
can appear at the weak parts of the foundation. For unusual load combination the resultant can
appear outside the core area but within the “3/5” area. A part of the bottom area will not be
compressed and fully developed uplift pressure is assumed over this area. For non-rectangular
bottom shapes, the “3/5” area is undefined, but is suggested to be designed as follows:

Figure 4.4 For a continuous massive dam the “3/5”-area is the area in the middle of the three fifths.

55
 Figure 4.5 If the same ratio is chosen between the core boundary and the “3/5”-area, the distance
is moved outside the core area for a monolith with a rectangular bottom area.

Figure 4.6 For a monolith with irregular bottom area the core area is first calculated on the bottom
area, which, with regard to stiffness, is included in the monolith. A base area is defined by the
lines that surround the bottom area. The “3/5”-area is formed by increasing the limit of 40 %
towards the nearest edge of the base area.

The position of the overturning axis is determined in the relation to the stiffness and strength
of the concrete or the foundation. The overturning axis can normally be placed at the
downstream edge of the dam for foundation placed on rock. When determining the
overturning axis the strength and stiffness of the structure and the foundation must be
considered.

56
The safety against overturning, ‫ݏ‬, is calculated as the ratio between stabilizing and
overturning moment:
௦௧௔௕௜௟௜௭௜௡௚ ௠௢௠௘௡௧
‫=ݏ‬ (eq 3-5)
௢௩௘௥௧௨௥௡௜௡௚ ௠௢௠௘௡௧

When relevant, the hydrostatic water pressure should be divided into overturning and
stabilizing components e.g. for the sloping upstream side of the dam.

The safety factors against overturning are defined by RIDAS are presented in Table 4.7.

Table 4.7 Safety factors against overturning (RIDAS, 2017)

Type of load combinations Safety factor, s

Normal load case 1.5

Exceptional load case 1.35

Accidental load case 1.1

57
58
5 Case study

5.1 Background
Hylte hydropower plant, owned by Statkraft Sverige AB, is located approximately 4.5 km
northeast of Halmstad in Hyltebruk and is one of the top hydropower plants in Nissan. Hylte
consists of 18 dams, where the regulating dam is a concrete dam (Dam 17) and the remaining
dams are embankment dams. The locations of the dams are shown in Figure 5.1.

Figure 5. 1 Overview of the dams included in Hylte power planet (SWECO, 2014)

The Hylte hydropower plant consists of dams that were built in the beginning of 1900s and
the design requirements has gotten stricter since the dam was built. (Hylte, 2018). Therefore,
the dams of Hylte power plant requires an increase in dam safety, and in order to satisfy the
new design criteria’s, Statkraft intends to build a new regulating dam of concrete (dam 17)
and new connecting embankment dams (dam 18 and partially dam 16), located 50 m
downstream from the current regulating dam. The existing regulating dam (dam 17) and
embankment dam 18 will be used as coffer dams during the construction of the new dams.
When the new downstream control dam is taken into operation, the existing control dam and
parts of the existing embankment dam 18 are demolished. (SWECO, 2014)

The purpose of this case study is to investigate whether a RCC dam could be built, and in
such case what approximate dimensions would be required for it.

59
5.2 Calculation & CADAM
The tools that were used for this case study were hand calculations and the computer program
CADAM, which is a tool used to analyze safety and structural behavior for massive concrete
dams (Leclerc et al., 2001).

Hand calculations were made with the help of Chapter 4, where the main focus was on the
stability analysis. Dimensions of the dam were determined by checking it for both overturning
and sliding. No cross-section analysis was made.

CADAM was used to analyze sliding in the horizontal lift and to create the model of the dam
with the achieved dimension from the hand calculations.

5.3 Results
The foundation, which the RCC dam is to be placed on, varies in height. It consists of rock,
sandy soil and moraine and for that reason we have different limits for the safety factor
against sliding that ranges from 0.50 to 0.75 for normal load case. To achieve a dam that is
safe from overturning the safety factor must exceed the value of 1.5 according to RIDAS
(2017). The water level varies due to the uneven topography between 3.9-8.2 m and that is
why the height of the dam also varies, see Table 5.1.

The dam was divided into four sections; see Figure 5.2, due to the variation of the height of
the topography. The geometry of the dam was governed by the roadways width. The width of
the dam, placed on the rock, could have been less, and still fulfil the criteria’s in RIDAS.
However, in this case study the slope 1:1.5 was chosen.

Figure 5.2 Hylte dam

60
Table 5.1 Results from hand calculations

Section Water level [m] Dam height [m] Safety factor Safety factor
against sliding against
overturning
130 8.2 9.5 0.3 2.8

220 5.2 6.5 0.2 3.4

285 3.9 5.2 0.2 3.8

320 4.1 5.4 0.2 3.7

The results from CADAM is presented in Table 5.2 and 5.3.

Table 5.2 Global force and moments from CADAM, for section 130

Normal force -1521.828 kN

Shear force 379.812 kN

Uplift force 466.56 kN

Moment 42.731 kNm

Resultant position 50.266%

Table 5.3 Safety factors from CADAM, for section 130.

Peak sliding safety factor 3.0193

Residual sliding safety factor 3.0193

Overturning safety factor towards downstrem 2.789

Uplifting safety factor 4.262

As can be seen from Table 5.1, section 130, and Table 5.3, the overturning factor is the same
for both hand calculation and CADAM.
ଵ ଵ
For the sliding factor, in Table 5.3 the ‫ݏ‬௚ = 3.0193 that gives ߤ = ௦ = ଷ.଴ଵଽଷ = 0.33.
೒
Compared to the sliding safety factor from the hand calculations presented in Table 5.1 for
section 130, CADAM sliding safety factor is the same.

61
Figure 5.2 shows a cross section of the RCC dam for the maximum height of the dam.

Figure 5.3 Cross-section 130 of the dam, model from CADAM

62
6 Conclusions

6.1 Discussion
Building with roller compacted concrete (RCC) has become very popular over the past two
decades. It has been used for both building new dams, improving existing conventional
concrete dams that has been in need for repair and used as cofferdams. The most leading
countries of constructing RCC dams are the United States and China.

The advantages of RCC are applicable for certain types of mixtures, production methods,
structural design weather or among other conditions. Same goes for the disadvantages, which
only applies for specific designs and site conditions. From a construction point of view, RCC
is generally practical to build with and has four main advantages: high-speed construction,
being cost-effective, good performance and smaller CO2 emissions than conventional
concrete. (The Constructor, 2017) There are, however, situations when RCC may not be
suitable and can become very costly compared to other types of dam. These factors could be
e.g. poor quality of the rock foundation and not reasonably available aggregate material.

The RCC has the same basic ingredients as conventional concrete, where the main difference
being the ratios of the input materials. RCC has a no-slump consistency, which is stiff enough
to be compacted by a vibratory roller. The aggregates that are used in RCC may have the
same standard as for conventional concrete, but it can also use aggregates that do not fulfill
the normal standards. This makes RCC easier to create since the aggregates from site can be
used.

When designing an RCC dam, the same standards are used as for conventional concrete
whereas in Sweden, RIDAS is used. The same type of stability and cross-section analysis are
applied, which means that the RCC dam has to fulfill the same type of criteria as a
conventional concrete dam. See Chapter 4.

In Chapter 3, challenges for constructing the RCC were presented. It is of importance to

understand that RCC dams are built all over the world, in all types of climates. This means
that every project is unique when it comes to the challenges it meets. Weather conditions are
one of the challenges the RCC dam building needs to handle, both during and after
construction.

If an RCC dam were to be built in Sweden, the environment would be one of the main
challenges. The dam would be exposed to temperature differences to up to 60-70ͼC, within a
summer to winter period, making it move through thermal shrinkage and expansion. Another
challenge with building an RCC dam in Sweden would be to give it adequate frost resistance.
Due to the cold climate, the risk for frost deterioration is high in Sweden and it could lead to
severe consequences to the functionality, safety and the durability of the dam since it
diminishes the strength of the concrete.

63
The fly ash use in concrete in Sweden is not as common as in e.g. the United States.
According to USACE (2000), generally up to 50 % by volume of fly ash can be used to
replace cement in the RCC mixture. In Sweden, however, only 25 % or less by volume is
allowed according to SS EN 206 in conventional concrete, indicating how fly ash is not as
commonly used and it can therefore be a challenge to motivate to utilize larger quantities of it.

6.2 Future studies

Further studies can focus on the use of fly ash, because compared to international standards;
fly ash is not as widely used in concrete in Sweden. Therefore, finding a motivation to use
more fly ash, if RCC dams are to be built, could be reasonable.

Investigating how to improve the frost resistance could be another future study. Building
dams in cold climates, such as in Sweden, frost will always be an upcoming problem and
finding efficient ways to handle it is of great importance.

64
Bibliography

Abdo F (2008): Roller-Compacted concrete dams: Design and Construction Trends.

Accessible from [2018-06-18]
https://www.hydroworld.com/articles/hr/print/volume-27/issue-7/technical-articles/roller-
compacted-concrete-dams-design-and-construction-trends.html

ACI (2017): ACI mix design. Accessible from [2018-04-08]

http://www.ce.memphis.edu/1112/notes/project_2/beam/ACI_mix_design.pdf

ACI (2011): Report on Roller-Compacted Mass concrete, ACI 2017.5R-11, American

Concrete Institute.

Amberg F (2003): Thermal Analysis of a RCC dam during construction. Accessible from
[2018-06-18]
https://www.lombardi.ch/it-it/SiteAssets/Publications/1198/Pubb-0378-L-
Thermal%20analysis%20of%20a%20RCC%20dam%20during%20construction.pdf

Andersson O & Seppälä M (2015): Verification of the response of a concrete arch dam
subjected to seasonal temperature variations, MSc Thesis, TRITA-BKN MSc Thesis 458,
KTH Royal Institute of Technology

ASDSO (2017): What are the different types of dams and how do they work?. Association of
State Dam Safety Officials. Available from [accessed 2018-01-24]
https://damsafety.org/different-types-dams

ASTM C494 (2018): Standard Specification for Chemical Admixtures for Concrete,
American Society for Testing and Materials.

ASTM C618 (2018): Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural
Pozzolan for Use in Concrete, American Society for Testing and Materials.

Barcelo L, Clavaud B, Moranville M (2005): Autogenous shrinkage of concrete: a balance

between autogenous swelling and self-destruction. Cement concrete research 35.

BASF (2014): Concrete Technology in focus – Shrinkage of concrete. Accessible from [2018-
06-12]
https://assets.master-builders-
solutions.basf.com/Shared%20Documents/EB%20Construction%20Chemcials%20-
%20US/Admixture%20Systems/Brochures/Shrinkage_Of_Concrete_CTIF.pdf

Beene R.R.W, Stroman W.R, Thornhill P.D (1988): Kerrville Ponding Dam, Guadalupe
River, Texas. Missouri University of Science and Technology.

Berga L, Buil J.M, Jofré C, Chonggang S (2003): Roller compacted Concrete Dams.
Netherlands . p 390.

65
Broberg L, Thorwid M (2015): Evaluation of failure modes for concrete dams, MSc Thesis,
TRITA-BKN. Master Thesis 455, KTH Royal Institute of Technology

Chryso (2018): Roller Compacted Concrete. Accessible from [2018-05-03]

http://za.chryso.com/p/6465/4/1668/en

Cotoi T (2015): Dam engineering GRV BUTT. Available from [accessed 2018-05-10]
http://www.scribd.com/doc/280436707/Dam-Engineering-GRV-BUTT

Eriksson D (2018): Numerical models for degradation of concrete in hydraulic structures due
to long-term contact with water, Licentiate thesis, TRITA-ABE-DLT-185, KTH Royal
Institute of Technology.

Eurocode 2 (2008): Design of concrete structures. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for
buildings. SS EN 1992-1-1:2005, SIS.

Griggs T, Herweynen R (2012): Unique challenges influencing the design and construction of
three recent Australian RCC dams. International Commission of Large Dams (ICOLD).

Hansen K.D & Reinhardt W.G (1991): Roller-Compacted Concrete Dams. McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Harrington D, Abdo F, Adaska W, Hazaree C (2010): Guide for Roller Compacted Concrete
Pavement. Accessible from [2018-05-17]
https://www.irmca.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/cp_tech_center_-_rcc_guide.pdf

Headwaters Resources (2017): Fly ash types & benefits, Technical Bulletin, Headwaters
Resources. Accessible from [2018-01-25]
http://flyash.com/data/upfiles/resource/TB%201%20Fly%20Ash%20Types%20&%20Benefit
s%202015_2.pdf

Hylte (2018): Ombyggnad av Hylte damm och Jakobs sjö. Accessible from [2018-05-21]
http://www.hylte.se/byggabomiljo/energiochklimat/dammprojektet.4.77497d4f15515b08358f
88.html

ICOLD (2003): Roller-compacted concrete dams – State of the art and case histories, Bulletin
126, International Commission of Large Dams (ICOLD).

Jennings H, Thomas J (2010): 3.8 Types of Portland cement. Accessible from [2018-03-17]
http://iti.northwestern.edu/cement/monograph/Monograph3_8.html

Leclerc M, Léger P, Tinawi R (2001) : Cadam User´s Manual. Montréal, version 1.4.3.

Maxi (2017): What concrete slump do you need for your project?. Accessible from [2018-06-
10] https://maxi.co.uk/what-concrete-slump/

PCA (2010): Guide for Roller Compacted concrete pavements. Accessible from [2018-06-13]
http://cncement.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/A-SR298-Guide-to-RCC-Pavements-8-
10_21.pdf

PCA (2018): How Concrete is made. Accessible from [2018-04-20]

http://www.cement.org/cement-concrete-applications/how-concrete-is-made

66
PCA (2004): Roller-Compacted Concrete Density: Principles and Practices. Accessible from
[2018-04-28]
http://rccpavementcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/RCC-Density-Principles-
Practices.pdf

RIDAS (2017): Swedish Hydropower companies guidelines for dam safety; application
guideline 7.3 Concrete dams (In Swedish). Svensk energi.

Roller Compacted Concrete (2013): Mix Design. Accessible from [2018-03-15]

http://www.rollercompacted.org/mixdesign.html

Rosenqvist M (2016): Frost-induced deterioration of concrete in hydraulic structures, MSc

Thesis, ISRN LUTVDG/TVBM. Lund University

Shaw Q.H.W (2010): A new understanding of the early behaviour of Roller Compacted
concrete in large dams. PhD Thesis. University of Pretoria.

SWECO (2014): PM- Geoteknik. Statkraft Sverige AB

SWECO (2013): Markteknisk undersökningsrapport (MUR). Statkraft Sverige AB.

The Constructor (2017): Roller Compacted Concrete. Accessible from [2018-05-19]

https://theconstructor.org/concrete/roller-compacted-concrete-pavement-dams/5863/

The Concrete Society (2018): Vebe test. Accessible from [2018-05-16]

http://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips-nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=979#

USACE (2000): Roller compacted concrete, EM 1110-2-2006. US Army Corps Engineers.

USBR (2017): Design and Construction Considerations for Hydraulic structures – Roller
compacted concrete, Second edition. US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation.

USBR (2006): State-of-Practice for the Nonlinear Analysis of Concrete, US Bureau of

Reclamation

Vattenkraft.info (2009): Info om Svensk vattenkraft. Accessible from [2018-06-10]

https://vattenkraft.info/?page=23

Water Power (2009): Building an RCC dam in the Jordan valley. Accessible from [2018-05-
03]
http://www.waterpowermagazine.com/features/featurebuilding-an-rcc-dam-in-the-jordan-
valley/

Wikiwand (2018): Dam. Accessible from [2018-06-10] http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Dam

67
68
Appendix A

CADAM & calculation

69
 CADAM - Model parameters 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

*HQHUDO,QIRUPDWLRQ
3URMHFW
'DP
2ZQHU
'DPORFDWLRQ
3URMHFWHQJLQHHU
$QDO\VLVSHUIRUPHGE\
'DWH 

U
*HRPHWULFDO'LPHQVLRQV &RQFUHWH9ROXPHWULF0DVV

/
*

)
/
/

'2:1675($0
(

83675($0
       
   
   
   
   
    ' ,
    + &
   
   
   
$ %
   
    /
   
   
   
    L1 = 11,600 m
   
    L2 = 0,000 m
   
   
L3 = 5,300 m
   
   
   
L4 = 5,300 m
   
    Elev. A = 0,000 m
   
    Elev. B = 0,000 m
   
    Elev. C = 0,000 m
   
    Elev. D = 0,000 m
       
        Elev. E = 9,500 m
Elev. F = 9,500 m
Elev. G = 9,500 m
Elev. H = 0,000 m
Elev. I = 0,000 m

U 2400,00 kg/m³

 ILOHQDPH&?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Model parameters 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

0DWHULDO3URSHUWLHV

2SWLRQ 2SWLRQ
&RQFUHWHVWUHQJWK 6KHDUVWUHQJWK
0DWHULDOQDPH I
F IW &RKHVLRQ I
$QJOH V
Q &XUYHW\SH
N3D N3D N3D GHJ N3D N3D
Joint 30000,0 0,000 Peak: 0,000 35,000 0,000 Option 2
Residual: 0,000 35,000 0,000 Option 2
Base joint 30000,0 0,000 Peak: 0,000 37,000 0,000 Option 2
Residual: 0,000 37,000 0,000 Option 2

5RFN3DVVLYH6KHDU6WUHQJWK3URSHUWLHV
&RQVLGHUDWLRQRI 8QLWPDVV &RKHVLRQ )ULFWLRQDQJOH )DLOXUHSODQHDQJOH
SDVVLYHVKHDUVWUHQJWK NJPñ N3D GHJ GHJ
1R    

/LIW-RLQWV
8SVWUHDPHQG 'RZQVWUHDPHQG
,' 0DWHULDOQDPH (OHYDWLRQ 3RVLWLRQ[ (OHYDWLRQ 3RVLWLRQ[ /HQJWK ,QHUWLD
P P P P P PA
1 Joint 9,300 0,000 9,300 5,433 5,433 13,361325
2 Joint 9,000 0,000 9,000 5,632 5,632 14,883644
3 Joint 8,700 0,000 8,700 5,831 5,831 16,517413
4 Joint 8,400 0,000 8,400 6,029 6,029 18,266568
5 Joint 8,100 0,000 8,100 6,228 6,228 20,135047
6 Joint 7,800 0,000 7,800 6,427 6,427 22,126786
7 Joint 7,500 0,000 7,500 6,626 6,626 24,245723
8 Joint 7,200 0,000 7,200 6,825 6,825 26,495795
9 Joint 6,900 0,000 6,900 7,024 7,024 28,880939
10 Joint 6,600 0,000 6,600 7,223 7,223 31,405093
11 Joint 6,300 0,000 6,300 7,422 7,422 34,072193
12 Joint 6,000 0,000 6,000 7,621 7,621 36,886176
13 Joint 5,700 0,000 5,700 7,820 7,820 39,850981
14 Joint 5,400 0,000 5,400 8,019 8,019 42,970543
15 Joint 5,100 0,000 5,100 8,218 8,218 46,248801
16 Joint 4,800 0,000 4,800 8,417 8,417 49,689691
17 Joint 4,500 0,000 4,500 8,616 8,616 53,297150
18 Joint 4,200 0,000 4,200 8,815 8,815 57,075117
19 Joint 3,900 0,000 3,900 9,014 9,014 61,027527
20 Joint 3,600 0,000 3,600 9,213 9,213 65,158318

 ILOHQDPH&?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Model parameters 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD
21 Joint 3,300 0,000 3,300 9,412 9,412 69,471427
22 Joint 3,000 0,000 3,000 9,611 9,611 73,970792
23 Joint 2,700 0,000 2,700 9,809 9,809 78,660350
24 Joint 2,400 0,000 2,400 10,008 10,008 83,544037
25 Joint 2,100 0,000 2,100 10,207 10,207 88,625791
26 Joint 1,800 0,000 1,800 10,406 10,406 93,909549
27 Joint 1,500 0,000 1,500 10,605 10,605 99,399249
28 Joint 1,200 0,000 1,200 10,804 10,804 105,09883
29 Joint 0,900 0,000 0,900 11,003 11,003 111,01222
30 Joint 0,600 0,000 0,600 11,202 11,202 117,14337
31 Joint 0,300 0,000 0,300 11,401 11,401 123,49620
32 Base joint 0,000 0,000 0,000 11,600 11,600 130,07467

3UH&UDFNHG/LIW-RLQWV
8SVWUHDPHQG 'RZQVWUHDPHQG
,' 0DWHULDOQDPH (OHYDWLRQ &UDFNOHQJWK (OHYDWLRQ &UDFNOHQJWK
P P RIMRLQWOHQJWK P P RIMRLQWOHQJWK
1 Joint 9,300 9,300
2 Joint 9,000 9,000
3 Joint 8,700 8,700
4 Joint 8,400 8,400
5 Joint 8,100 8,100
6 Joint 7,800 7,800
7 Joint 7,500 7,500
8 Joint 7,200 7,200
9 Joint 6,900 6,900
10 Joint 6,600 6,600
11 Joint 6,300 6,300
12 Joint 6,000 6,000
13 Joint 5,700 5,700
14 Joint 5,400 5,400
15 Joint 5,100 5,100
16 Joint 4,800 4,800
17 Joint 4,500 4,500
18 Joint 4,200 4,200
19 Joint 3,900 3,900
20 Joint 3,600 3,600
21 Joint 3,300 3,300
22 Joint 3,000 3,000
23 Joint 2,700 2,700
24 Joint 2,400 2,400
25 Joint 2,100 2,100
26 Joint 1,800 1,800
27 Joint 1,500 1,500
28 Joint 1,200 1,200

 ILOHQDPH&?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Model parameters 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD
29 Joint 0,900 0,900
30 Joint 0,600 0,600
31 Joint 0,300 0,300
32 Base joint 0,000 0,000

5HVHUYRLUV,FH 6LOW
:DWHUYROXPHWULFZHLJKW &UHVWRYHUWRSSLQJSUHVVXUH ,FH

J 9,810 kN/m³ 8SVWUHDPSUHVVXUH 100,00% Load = 50,000 kN

2SHUDWLQJUHVHUYRLUHOHYDWLRQV
'RZQVWUHDPSUHVVXUH 50,00% Thickness = 0,600 m
Elevation = 7,900 m
8SVWUHDP 'RZQVWUHDP
8,200 m 0,000 m 6LOW )ORDWLQJGHEULV
Elev. = 0,000 m Load = 0,000 kN
)ORRGUHVHUYRLUHOHYDWLRQV
Jƒc 7,000 kN/m³ Apply at elev. = -1,000 m
8SVWUHDP 'RZQVWUHDP
I 20,000 deg Max. elevation = 2,000 m
9,000 m 0,000 m Assumption: At rest

8SOLIWSUHVVXUHV
8SOLIWSUHVVXUHVDUHFRQVLGHUHGDVDQH[WHUQDOORDGOLQHDULVDWLRQRIHIIHFWLYHVWUHVVHV

&UDFNLQJRSWLRQV
Cracking is considered for all combinations ? YES

7HQVLOHVWUHQJWK
8VXDO )ORRG 6HLVPLF 3RVWVHLVPLF
Crack initiation: ft = 0 ft / 2,000 ft / 1,000 ft / 3,000
Crack propagation: ft = 0 ft /10,000 ft /10,000 ft /10,000
Dynamic magnification: ft * 1,500

8SOLIWSUHVVXUHXSGDWHV
Static analyses: Full uplift pressures applied to the crack section
Seismic analyses: Uplift pressures remain unchanged
Post-seismic analyses: Full uplift pressures applied to the crack section
Downstream closed crack:Restore uncracked uplift condition
Drain effectivness: No drain effectiveness upon cracking

1XPHULFDORSWLRQV
Convergence method: Bracketing + Bi-section method
Accuracy: Medium (1E-6)

3UREDELOLVWLF$QDO\VHV0RQWH&DUOR6LPXODWLRQ
,QSXWSDUDPHWHUVYDULDEOHV 8QLW 0HDQ 6WGGHYLDWLRQ /RZHUERXQG +LJKHUERXQG 'LVWULEXWLRQ
Ice load kN 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000 Uniform

 ILOHQDPH&?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Model parameters 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

Number of analyses Load combination joint considered

50000 Normal Base joint

2XWSXWSDUDPHWHUV

— Upstream Crack Length (% of Joint) — Uplifting Safety Factor

— Downstream Crack Length (% of Joint) — Maximuim Normal Compressive Stress

— Sliding Safety Factor (Peak) — Maximuim Normal Tensile Stress

— Sliding Safety Factor (Residual) — Resultant Position (% of Joint from U/S)

— Overturning Safety Factor (Toward U/S) — Final Uplift Force

— Overturning Safety Factor (Toward D/S)

2XWSXWILOHV
Input parameters: Statistic.in
Output parameters: Statistic.out

,QFUHPHQWDO/RDG$QDO\VHV
Perform Analyses = Yes
Load combination = Usual combination First step = 8,200 m
Incremental load = Normal Upstream Reservoir Elevation Last step = 15,000 m
joint considered = # 31 Elev.= 0,000 Increment by = 0,100 m
2XWSXWSDUDPHWHUV

— Upstream Crack Length (% of Joint) — Overturning Safety Factor (Toward D/S)

— Downstream Crack Length (% of Joint) — Uplifting Safety Factor

— Sliding Safety Factor (Peak) — Maximum Normal Compressive Stress

— Sliding Safety Factor (Residual) — Maximum Normal Tensile Stress

— Overturning Safety Factor (Toward U/S) — Resultant Position (% of Joint from U/S)

2XWSXWILOH

— File name = Incremental.out

 ILOHQDPH&?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Results report 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ5HVHDUFK(QJLQHHU
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

*HQHUDO,QIRUPDWLRQ
3URMHFW
'DP
2ZQHU
'DPORFDWLRQ
3URMHFWHQJLQHHU
$QDO\VLVSHUIRUPHGE\
'DWH 

/RDG&RPELQDWLRQ)DFWRUV
8VXDO )ORRG 6HLVPLF 6HLVPLF 3RVWVHLVPLF
6HOIZHLJKW 1,0000 1,0000
+\GURVWDWLFXSVWUHDP 1,0000 1,0000
+\GURVWDWLFGRZQVWUHDP 1,0000 1,0000
8SOLIWSUHVVXUHV 1,0000 1,0000
6LOWV
,FH 1,0000
SRVWWHQVLRQLQJ
$SSOLHGIRUFHV
)ORDWLQJGHEULV
6HLVPLFKRUL]RQWDO
6HLVPLFYHUWLFDO

&RPELQDWLRQ5HTXLUHG6DIHW\)DFWRUV
8VXDO )ORRG 6HLVPLF 6HLVPLF 3RVWVHLVPLF
3HDNVOLGLQJIDFWRU 1,5000 1,5000 1,3000 1,3000 2,0000
5HVLGXDOVOLGLQJIDFWRU 1,3500 1,3500 1,0000 1,0000 1,1000
2YHUWXUQLQJIDFWRU 1,5000 1,5000 1,1000 1,1000 1,1000
8SOLIWLQJIDFWRU 1,0000 1,0000 1,1000 1,1000 1,1000

&RPELQDWLRQDOORZDEOHVWUHVVHV
8VXDO )ORRG 6HLVPLF 6HLVPLF 3RVWVHLVPLF
7HQVLRQRIIW 0,0 50,0 90,9 90,9 66,7
&RPSUHVVLRQRII
F 33,3 50,0 90,9 90,9 66,7

 &?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Results report 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ5HVHDUFK(QJLQHHU
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

8VXDO&RPELQDWLRQ6WUHVVHV
-RLQW &UDFNLQJ 1RUPDOVWUHVVHV $OORZDEOHQRUPDOVWUHVV 6KHDUVWUHVVHV
,' 86HOHYDWLRQ 8SVWUHDP 'RZQVWUHDP 8SVWUHDP 'RZQVWUHDP 7HQVLRQ &RPSUHVVLRQ 8SVWUHDP 0D[LPXP 0D[LPXPDW 'RZQVWUHDP
P RIMRLQW RIMRLQW N3D N3D N3D N3D N3D N3D RIMRLQW N3D
1 9,300 -4,821 -4,482 0,000 -9990,000
2 9,000 -12,424 -10,427 0,000 -9990,000
3 8,700 -20,393 -15,563 0,000 -9990,000
4 8,400 -28,653 -20,011 0,000 -9990,000
5 8,100 -36,097 -23,932 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -3,542 29,929 15,871
6 7,800 -40,906 -28,199 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,318 11,445 18,700
7 7,500 -44,950 -32,934 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 21,840 100,000 21,840
8 7,200 -49,020 -37,371 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,016 2,492 24,783
9 6,900 -53,282 -41,368 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,198 7,808 27,433
10 6,600 -57,675 -45,005 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,397 10,283 29,846
11 6,300 -62,149 -48,352 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,532 11,331 32,065
12 6,000 -66,663 -51,466 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,587 11,509 34,130
13 5,700 -71,183 -54,395 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,568 11,073 36,073
14 5,400 -75,682 -57,180 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,490 10,147 37,920
15 5,100 -80,139 -59,854 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,372 8,789 39,693
16 4,800 -84,536 -62,447 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,237 7,017 41,412
17 4,500 -88,857 -64,981 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,111 4,825 43,093
18 4,200 -93,093 -67,478 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 -0,022 2,183 44,748
19 3,900 -97,234 -69,954 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 46,391 100,000 46,391
20 3,600 -101,274 -72,424 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 48,029 100,000 48,029
21 3,300 -105,206 -74,900 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 49,671 100,000 49,671
22 3,000 -109,028 -77,393 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 51,323 100,000 51,323
23 2,700 -112,736 -79,909 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 52,992 100,000 52,992
24 2,400 -116,328 -82,457 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 54,682 100,000 54,682
25 2,100 -119,805 -85,043 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 56,397 100,000 56,397
26 1,800 -123,165 -87,671 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 58,140 100,000 58,140
27 1,500 -126,409 -90,345 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 59,913 100,000 59,913
28 1,200 -129,537 -93,069 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 61,719 100,000 61,719
29 0,900 -132,550 -95,845 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 63,560 100,000 63,560
30 0,600 -135,451 -98,674 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 65,437 100,000 65,437
31 0,300 -138,239 -101,560 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 67,350 100,000 67,350
32 Base joint -129,287 -133,097 0,000 -9990,000 0,000 88,265 100,000 88,265

 &?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Results report 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ5HVHDUFK(QJLQHHU
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

8VXDO&RPELQDWLRQ6WDELOLW\
-RLQW 6DIHW\IDFWRUV 5HVXOWDQWVRYHUOLJDPHQW )LQDOXSOLIW 5RFNZHGJH
,' 86HOHYDWLRQ 6OLGLQJ 2YHUWXUQLQJ 8SOLIWLQJ 1RUPDO 6KHDU 0RPHQW 3RVLWLRQ 1RUPDO 5HVLVWDQFH
P 3HDN 5HVLGXDO WRZDUG86 WRZDUG'6 N1 N1 N1āP RIMRLQW N1 N1
1 9,300 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 -25,27 0,00 -0,8 49,39217 0,00 0,000
2 9,000 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 -64,34 0,00 -5,3 48,54292 0,00 0,000
3 8,700 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 -104,82 0,00 -13,7 47,76136 0,00 0,000
4 8,400 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 > 100 -146,71 0,00 -26,2 47,04030 0,00 0,000
5 8,100 15,61592 15,61592 86,58707 48,42974 62,19152 -186,94 8,38 -39,3 46,62252 3,06 0,000
6 7,800 4,55780 4,55780 25,79716 13,45678 18,61091 -222,08 34,12 -43,7 46,93523 12,61 0,000
7 7,500 3,44792 3,44792 17,13774 8,42485 12,34177 -258,04 52,40 -44,0 47,42866 22,75 0,000
8 7,200 3,75987 3,75987 13,61595 6,56363 9,80643 -294,82 54,91 -45,2 47,75280 33,48 0,000
9 6,900 3,99322 3,99322 11,66552 5,61952 8,42176 -332,42 58,29 -49,0 47,90205 44,79 0,000
10 6,600 4,15085 4,15085 10,40912 5,04559 7,54182 -370,84 62,56 -55,1 47,94345 56,69 0,000
11 6,300 4,24090 4,24090 9,52265 4,65686 6,92850 -410,08 67,71 -63,3 47,91904 69,17 0,000
12 6,000 4,27430 4,27430 8,85819 4,37357 6,47351 -450,13 73,74 -73,6 47,85593 82,24 0,000
13 5,700 4,26266 4,26266 8,33839 4,15580 6,12043 -491,01 80,66 -85,5 47,77197 95,89 0,000
14 5,400 4,21690 4,21690 7,91870 3,98142 5,83700 -532,71 88,46 -99,1 47,67902 110,13 0,000
15 5,100 4,14649 4,14649 7,57157 3,83721 5,60339 -575,23 97,14 -114,2 47,58503 124,96 0,000
16 4,800 4,05919 4,05919 7,27897 3,71485 5,40674 -618,56 106,70 -130,4 47,49528 140,37 0,000
17 4,500 3,96111 3,96111 7,02858 3,60883 5,23832 -662,72 117,15 -147,7 47,41326 156,36 0,000
18 4,200 3,85690 3,85690 6,81164 3,51536 5,09203 -707,70 128,48 -165,9 47,34122 172,95 0,000
19 3,900 3,75000 3,75000 6,62176 3,43179 4,96341 -753,49 140,69 -184,7 47,28050 190,11 0,000
20 3,600 3,64290 3,64290 6,45411 3,35619 4,84918 -800,11 153,79 -204,0 47,23185 207,86 0,000
21 3,300 3,53734 3,53734 6,30501 3,28712 4,74683 -847,54 167,77 -223,7 47,19558 226,20 0,000
22 3,000 3,43449 3,43449 6,17158 3,22352 4,65444 -895,80 182,63 -243,5 47,17171 245,13 0,000
23 2,700 3,33511 3,33511 6,05151 3,16454 4,57047 -944,87 198,38 -263,2 47,16002 264,64 0,000
24 2,400 3,23967 3,23967 5,94294 3,10953 4,49372 -994,77 215,00 -282,7 47,16018 284,73 0,000
25 2,100 3,14841 3,14841 5,84436 3,05798 4,42321 -1045,48 232,52 -301,8 47,17174 305,41 0,000
26 1,800 3,06142 3,06142 5,75451 3,00946 4,35812 -1097,01 250,91 -320,3 47,19419 326,68 0,000
27 1,500 2,97868 2,97868 5,67235 2,96365 4,29780 -1149,37 270,19 -338,0 47,22701 348,53 0,000
28 1,200 2,90010 2,90010 5,59699 2,92024 4,24168 -1202,54 290,34 -354,7 47,26962 370,96 0,000
29 0,900 2,82553 2,82553 5,52767 2,87902 4,18930 -1256,53 311,39 -370,3 47,32148 393,98 0,000
30 0,600 2,75481 2,75481 5,46375 2,83977 4,14026 -1311,35 333,31 -384,6 47,38202 417,59 0,000
31 0,300 2,68776 2,68776 5,40468 2,80234 4,09422 -1366,98 356,12 -397,3 47,45069 441,79 0,000
32 Base joint 3,01933 3,01933 5,91636 2,79095 4,26178 -1521,83 379,81 42,7 50,24206 466,56 0,000
5HTXLUHG 1,500 1,350 1,500 1,500 1,000

 &?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Results report 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ5HVHDUFK(QJLQHHU
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

0RQWH&DUOR6LPXODWLRQV3UREDELOLVW$QDO\VHV
2XWSXW PHDQ VWDQGDUG 0LQLPXP 0D[LPXP 3HUIRUPDQFH 3UREDELOLW\
3DUDPHWHUV GHYLDWLRQ YDOXH YDOXH LQGH[ RIIDLOXUH
U/S crack length (% of joint) 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000 1,00000 0,00000
D/S crack lenght (% of joint) 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000 1,00000 0,00000
Sliding Safety Fact. peak 3,017 0,074 2,688 3,187 1,00000 0,00000
Sliding Safety Factor (residual) 3,017 0,074 2,688 3,187 1,00000 0,00000
Overturning Safety Factor toward U/S 5,919 0,041 5,829 6,121 1,00000 0,00000
Overturning Safety Factor toward D/S 2,789 0,042 2,595 2,884 1,00000 0,00000
Uplifting Safety Factor 4,262 0,000 4,262 4,262 1,00000 0,00000
Maximum Normal Stress -134,325 2,350 -149,594 -131,192 - -
Minimum Normal Stress -128,059 2,350 -131,192 -112,790 - -
Resultant position (% of joint) 50,266 0,420 49,347 52,338 - -
Final Uplift Force 466,564 0,000 466,564 466,564 - -

 &?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Results report 3DJH 
E\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ5HVHDUFK(QJLQHHU
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV
­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD

,QFUHPHQWDO/RDG$QDO\VHV
,QFUHPHQWDO/RDGLQJ &UDFNLQJ 6DIHW\IDFWRUV 0D[LPXPQRUPDOVWUHVV 5HVXOWDQW
1RUPDO8SVWUHDP5HVHUYRLU 8SVWUHDP 'RZQVWUHDP 6OLGLQJ 2YHUWXUQLQJ 8SOLIWLQJ &RPSUHVVLRQ 7HQVLRQ 3RVLWLRQ
P RIMRLQW RIMRLQW 3HDN 5HVLGXDO WRZDUG86 WRZDUG'6 .SD .SD RIMRLQW
8,200 0,000 0,000 3,019 3,019 5,916 2,791 4,262 -133,097 -129,287 50,242
8,300 0,000 0,000 2,945 2,945 5,866 2,745 4,210 -134,809 -126,594 50,524
8,600 0,000 0,000 2,737 2,737 5,725 2,613 4,064 -140,163 -118,297 51,410
8,800 0,000 0,000 2,608 2,608 5,638 2,530 3,971 -143,920 -112,578 52,037
9,000 0,000 0,000 2,487 2,487 5,557 2,450 3,883 -147,831 -106,705 52,693
9,300 0,000 0,000 2,319 2,319 5,446 2,337 3,758 -153,994 -97,599 53,736
9,500 0,000 0,000 2,215 2,215 5,377 2,266 3,679 -158,305 -91,326 54,472
9,700 0,000 0,000 1,968 1,968 4,651 2,175 3,369 -131,659 -98,450 52,405
9,900 0,000 0,000 1,880 1,880 4,442 2,109 3,252 -133,694 -93,903 52,914
10,200 0,000 0,000 1,936 1,936 3,976 2,175 3,094 -114,823 -109,091 50,427
10,400 0,000 0,000 1,853 1,853 3,824 2,114 2,998 -116,601 -104,912 50,879
10,600 0,000 0,000 1,776 1,776 3,687 2,056 2,909 -118,447 -100,711 51,349
10,900 0,000 0,000 1,673 1,673 3,504 1,976 2,788 -121,330 -94,380 52,082
11,100 0,000 0,000 1,611 1,611 3,396 1,927 2,713 -123,322 -90,145 52,590
11,300 0,000 0,000 1,553 1,553 3,296 1,881 2,644 -125,362 -85,907 53,113
11,500 0,000 0,000 1,500 1,500 3,205 1,837 2,579 -127,448 -81,668 53,649
11,800 0,000 0,000 1,426 1,426 3,081 1,777 2,489 -130,648 -75,323 54,477
12,000 0,000 0,000 1,382 1,382 3,006 1,740 2,434 -132,822 -71,108 55,044
12,200 0,000 0,000 1,340 1,340 2,936 1,704 2,382 -135,022 -66,911 55,622
12,500 0,000 0,000 1,283 1,283 2,839 1,655 2,309 -138,363 -60,660 56,507
12,700 0,000 0,000 1,248 1,248 2,780 1,624 2,264 -140,609 -56,531 57,108
12,900 0,000 0,000 1,214 1,214 2,724 1,595 2,221 -142,863 -52,437 57,717
13,200 0,000 0,000 1,169 1,169 2,647 1,555 2,162 -146,252 -46,374 58,642
13,400 0,000 0,000 1,141 1,141 2,599 1,529 2,125 -148,507 -42,392 59,265
13,600 0,000 0,000 1,114 1,114 2,553 1,505 2,090 -150,754 -38,463 59,891
13,900 0,000 0,000 1,077 1,077 2,489 1,472 2,040 -154,098 -32,680 60,834
14,100 0,000 0,000 1,055 1,055 2,449 1,451 2,010 -156,301 -28,907 61,464
14,300 0,000 0,000 1,033 1,033 2,411 1,431 1,980 -158,479 -25,204 62,093
14,500 0,000 0,000 1,013 1,013 2,374 1,412 1,952 -160,625 -21,578 62,719
14,800 0,000 0,000 0,985 0,985 2,322 1,385 1,913 -163,775 -16,291 63,651
15,000 0,000 0,000 0,968 0,968 2,289 1,369 1,889 -165,822 -12,877 64,265

 &?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Stability drawing 3DJH 

%\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD
3URMHFW 'DPORFDWLRQ $QDO\VLVSHUIRUPHGE\
'DP 'DWH  3URMHFWHQJLQHHU
2ZQHU

Usual combination (effective stress analysis)

Joint # Crack Normal Principal Uplift Crack Normal Principal Uplift

(% joint) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (% joint) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

 ILOHQDPH&?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
 CADAM - Stability drawing 3DJH 

%\0DUWLQ/HFOHUF0,QJ
16(5&+\GUR4XHEHF$OFDQ,QGXVWULDO&KDLURQ6WUXFWXUDO6DIHW\RI&RQFUHWH'DPV­ÅFROH3RO\WHFKQLTXHGH0RQWU­‹DO&DQDGD
3URMHFW 'DPORFDWLRQ $QDO\VLVSHUIRUPHGE\
'DP 'DWH  3URMHFWHQJLQHHU
2ZQHU

Usual combination (stability analysis)

Joint # SSF SSF OSF OSF USF Normal Shear Moment Res. Pos.
(peak) (residual) (U/S <-) (-> D/S) (kN) (kN) (kNām) (% joint)
 ! ! ! ! !    
 ! ! ! ! !    
 ! ! ! ! !    
 ! ! ! ! !    
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         

1,500 1,350 1,500 1,500 1,000

 ILOHQDPH&?8VHUV?VKHPR?'HVNWRS?&$'$0?GDPGDP
,1'$7$

E  P 'DPZLGWK
E  P 'DPXSSHUZLGWK

O  P 'DPOHQJWK

N1
γZ   :DWHUGHQVLW\

P

N1
γF   &RPFUHWHGHQVLW\

P

 HFWLRQ
6

KB  P 'DPKHLJKW

KB  P :DWHUOHYHO

6
 HFWLRQ

KB  P 'DPKHLJKW

KB  P :DWHUOHYHO

6
 HFWLRQ

KB  P 'DPKHLJKW

KB  P :DWHUOHYHO

 HFWLRQ
6

KB  P 'DPKHLJKW

KB  P :DWHUOHYHO

/2$'6

N1
+   ,FHORDG
P

6
 HFWLRQ


KB N1
+B  γZ˜  ˜ +\GURVWDWLFORDG
 P

 N1
ZB  γF˜ E˜ KB  u  ˜
P

 E  E N1
ZB  γF˜ ˜ KB  ˜
 P

 N1
9B  ZB  ZB  u  ˜ 'HDGORDGSHUPHWHU
P OHQJWK

E N1
9B  γZ˜ KB˜  ˜ 8SOLIWSUHVVXUH
 P

6HFWLRQ


KB N1
+B  γZ˜  ˜ +\GURVWDWLFORDG
 P

N1
ZB  γF˜ E˜ KB  ˜
P

 E  E N1
ZB  γF˜ ˜ KB  ˜
 P

 N1
9B  ZB  ZB  u  ˜ 'HDGORDGSHUPHWHU
P OHQJWK

E N1
9B  γZ˜ KB˜ ˜ 8SOLIWSUHVVXUH
 P
 6HFWLRQ

KB N1
+B  γZ˜ ˜ +\GURVWDWLFORDG
 P

N1
ZB  γF˜ E˜ KB ˜
P

 E  E N1
ZB  γF˜ ˜ KB ˜
 P

 N1
9B  ZB  ZB  u  ˜ 'HDGORDGSHUPHWHU
P OHQJWK

E N1
9B  γZ˜ KB˜  ˜ 8SOLIWSUHVVXUH
 P

6HFWLRQ


KB N1
+B  γZ˜ ˜ +\GURVWDWLFORDG
 P

N1
ZB  γF˜ E˜ KB ˜
P

 E  E N1
ZB  γF˜ ˜ KB ˜
 P

 N1
9B  ZB  ZB  u  ˜ 'HDGORDGSHUPHWHU
P OHQJWK

E N1
9B  γZ˜ KB˜  ˜ 8SOLIWSUHVVXUH
 P
6WDELOLW\FRQGLWLRQV

6
 HFWLRQ

VOLGLQJ

 +B  +
6)6  
 9B  9B

2YHUWXUQLQJ

ªZB˜ > ˜ E   E  E @  ZB˜ ª ˜  E  Eºº

« « »»
6)2 
¬ ¬  ¼¼ 
§ +˜ KB  9B˜ ˜ E  +B˜ KB ·
¨ ¸
©   ¹

6
 HFWLRQ

VOLGLQJ

 +B  +
6)6  
 9B  9B

2YHUWXUQLQJ

ªZB˜ > ˜ E   E  E @  ZB˜ ª ˜  E  Eºº

« « »»
6)2 
¬ ¬  ¼¼ 
§ +˜ KB  9B˜  ˜ E
 +B˜
KB ·
¨ ¸
©   ¹
6HFWLRQ

VOLGLQJ

 +B  +
6)6  
 9B  9B

2YHUWXUQLQJ

ªZB˜ > ˜ E   E  E @  ZB˜ ª ˜  E  Eºº

« « »»
6)2 
¬ ¬  ¼¼ 
§ +˜ KB  9B˜  ˜ E
 +B˜
KB ·
¨ ¸
©   ¹

6
 HFWLRQ

VOLGLQJ

 +B  +
6)6  
 9B  9B

2YHUWXUQLQJ

ªZB˜ > ˜ E   E  E @  ZB˜ ª ˜  E  Eºº

« « »»
6)2 
¬ ¬  ¼¼ 
§ +˜ KB  9B˜  ˜ E
 +B˜
KB ·
¨ ¸
©   ¹
/  P

/  P

/  P
 
9 ª>  E˜ KB  > ˜  E  E ˜ KB@ @ ˜ /  º   u  ˜ P
¬ >  E˜ KB  > ˜  E  E ˜ KB@ @ ˜ / ¼
 ª>  E˜ KB  > ˜  E  E ˜ KB@ @ ˜ /  º
¬ >  E˜ KB  > ˜  E  E ˜ KB@ @ ˜ / ¼
TRITA-ABE-MBT-18366
ISBN 978-91-7729-869-4

www.kth.se