Construction and Monitoring of Cement/Bentonite Cutoff Walls: Case Study of Karkheh Dam, Iran

Iman Faridmehr; Mohammad Reza YazdaniPour; Mohammad Javadi Jokar; Togay Ozbakkaloglu

doi:10.2478/sgem-2019-0019

.blurhash-client-img { display: none !important; }

Construction and Monitoring of Cement/Bentonite Cutoff Walls: Case Study of Karkheh Dam, Iran

Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica

Volume 41 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019)

By: Iman Faridmehr, Mohammad Reza YazdaniPour, Mohammad Javadi Jokar and Togay Ozbakkaloglu

Open Access

|Dec 2019

Figures & Tables

Cross-section and connection details between the cutoff wall and dam foundation.

Longitudinal section of Karkheh Dam showing dam geological layers.

Plan of the Karkheh dam showing old and complementary cutoff wall.

Excavation with BC30 machine alongside the guide wall.

Maximum compressive strength variation and Young’s modulus in plastic concrete, with different aggregate size (a) with different loading rates (b).

Plastic concrete mix strength and modulus design chart.

3-D model of Karkheh Dam developed in Seep-3D software.

Typical instrumentation at one profile of Karkheh Dam “scale 1:500”.

Three-dimensional contours and the piezometric pore-water surface under steady-state analysis.

Variation of piezometric pore-water surface resulted from instrumentation.

Variation of piezometric pore-water surface resulting from numerical simulation.

Pressure distribution and flow direction under transient analysis.

Comparison between numerical and piezometers pore-water pressure for time interval dt = 4800s.

Variation in the reservoir water level and piezometers after complementary cut-off walls project.

Comparison between numerical and piezometric pore-water surface resulting from transient analysis_

Reservoir	156.87
Level(m)

Time	3 DAY			3 DAY		3 DAY		3 DAY		38 DAY
steps	dt = 3600s			dt = 4800 s		dt = 5400s		dt = 7200s		dt = 4800s

Ins. No.	Measured pore-water surface	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)	Real pore-water surface	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)
EP 4-1	143.28	191.94	-33.96	190.61	-33.03	189.29	-32.11	186.88	-30.43	144.69	189.35	-30.87
EP 4-2	166.42	192.32	-15.56	191.36	-14.99	190.44	-14.43	188.55	-13.29	166.51	190.43	-14.36
EP 4-3	182.16	192.01	-5.41	191.63	-5.20	191.23	-4.98	190.31	-4.47	182.22	191.21	-4.94
EP 4-4	172.85	177.25	-2.55	177.01	-2.40	176.74	-2.25	176.09	-1.88	171.81	176.71	-2.85
EP 4-5	172.45	173.27	-0.47	173.07	-0.36	172.86	-0.23	172.31	0.08	172.89	172.83	0.03
EP 4-6	155.23	165.06	-6.34	164.85	-6.20	164.62	-6.05	164.05	-5.68	154.18	164.59	-6.76
EP 4-7	183.65	161.21	12.22	160.99	12.34	160.76	12.47	160.19	12.77	182.01	160.73	11.69
EP 4-11	219.09	193.36	11.75	193.01	11.90	192.31	12.22	191.63	12.54	187.24	192.64	-2.89
EP 4-12	199.10	186.20	6.48	186.16	6.50	186.06	6.55	185.99	6.59	198.99	186.12	6.47
EP 4-13	199.69	176.65	11.53	176.65	11.54	176.64	11.54	176.62	11.55	199.76	176.64	11.57
EP 4-15	185.01	197.03	-6.50	196.57	-6.25	195.26	-5.54	194.29	-5.01	185.03	196.09	-5.97
EP 4-16	196.04	196.31	-0.14	196.15	-0.05	195.47	0.29	195.39	0.33	195.71	195.98	-0.14
EP 4-17	190.37	194.40	-2.12	194.35	-2.09	194.18	-2.00	194.14	-1.98	191.09	194.30	-1.68
EP 4-19	189.73	180.00	5.13	180.01	5.13	180.01	5.12	180.04	5.11	191.43	180.01	5.97
RP 4-2	123.36	137.84	-11.74	137.00	-11.06	136.22	-10.43	134.81	-9.28	124.07	136.25	-9.82
RP 4-3	149.93	189.91	-26.67	188.35	-25.63	186.84	-24.62	184.18	-22.85	151.32	186.93	-23.54
SP 4-1	140.88	193.04	-37.02	191.77	-36.13	190.49	-35.22	187.97	-33.43	144.30	190.50	-32.02
SP 4-2	149.80	192.43	-28.46	191.16	-27.61	189.90	-26.77	187.52	-25.18	151.47	189.94	-25.40
SP 4-3	195.17	185.44	4.99	185.37	5.02	185.28	5.07	185.09	5.17	194.98	185.29	4.97
SP 4-5	185.62	191.82	-3.34	191.63	-3.24	191.23	-3.02	190.86	-2.82	184.50	191.42	-3.75
SP 4-6	202.01	193.58	4.17	179.63	11.08	179.60	11.09	179.54	11.12	202.08	179.60	11.12

Drilling mud properties of the cutoff wall of Karkheh Dam

PH	Bentonite Cake (mm)	Gel Resistance after 10 Minutes (g/cm³)	Filtration Losses (cm³)	Density (g/cm³)	Marsh Funnel Viscosity (s)
7~10	<3	60~75	<30	1.04~1.10	32~50

Mix proportion design of a cubic meter of plastic concrete of the Karkheh Dam cutoff wall_

f'c−28${{f'}_{c-28}}$days MPa	4.02
f'c−7${{f'}_{c-7}}$days Mpa	2.30
Slump mm	180~190
sand 0~5 kg	780
gravel 0~9.5 kg	294
gravel 9.5~19 kg	555
wc$\frac{w}{c}$	1.425
Bentonite kg	25
cement kg	200

Comparison between numerical and piezometric pore-water surface resulted from steady-state analysis_

Reservoir Level(m)	175.49			193.56			201.00			210.37

Instrument No.	Measured pore-water surface	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)	Measured pore-water surface	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)	Measured pore-water surface	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)	Measured pore-water surface	Calculated pore-water surface	Fault (%)
EP4-1	163.27	185.62	-13.69	167.77	192.88	-14.97	172.18	196.14	-13.91	177.31	200.37	-13.00
EP4-2	179.00	184.93	-3.32	202.78	191.67	5.48	202.55	194.71	3.87	201.93	198.67	1.62
EP4-3	194.73	183.51	5.76	195.18	189.07	3.13	199.40	191.56	3.93	203.15	194.79	4.12
EP4-4	181.56	171.64	5.46	182.33	175.50	3.74	185.83	177.24	4.62	189.36	179.50	5.21
EP4-5	184.16	168.80	8.34	195.53	172.01	12.03	201.77	173.46	14.03	209.26	175.34	16.21
EP4-6	157.64	161.79	-2.64	156.87	164.10	-4.61	159.72	165.14	-3.40	162.44	166.50	-2.50
EP4-7	170.47	158.62	6.95	175.83	160.76	8.57	177.14	161.73	8.70	179.98	163.00	9.43
EP4-11	202.49	183.83	9.22	201.27	191.02	5.10	203.87	194.50	4.60	206.98	199.19	3.76
EP4-12	207.42	178.36	14.01	210.98	183.66	12.95	211.25	185.85	12.02	212.51	188.77	11.17
EP4-13	208.94	171.54	17.90	211.10	174.76	17.21	210.97	175.62	16.75	211.84	176.63	16.62
EP4-15	173.20	186.78	-7.84	191.87	195.00	-1.63	199.20	199.63	-0.22	209.01	206.23	1.33
EP4-16	209.84	185.71	11.50	204.90	193.18	5.72	205.83	196.90	4.34	206.60	201.87	2.29
EP4-17	203.02	185.25	8.75	198.15	191.69	3.26	197.72	194.64	1.56	197.19	198.04	-0.43
EP4-19	208.79	175.79	15.80	197.94	180.27	8.93	196.90	181.49	7.83	196.36	181.72	7.46
RP4-2	132.47	140.24	-5.86	131.97	140.65	-6.58	133.45	140.83	-5.53	135.13	141.06	-4.39
RP4-3	169.98	187.24	-10.15	186.22	191.72	-2.95	192.20	193.69	-0.77	200.11	196.22	1.94
SP4-1	156.72	180.59	-15.23	164.90	191.30	-16.01	168.32	195.88	-16.38	172.76	201.73	-16.77
SP4-2	171.63	186.80	-8.84	189.06	193.12	-2.15	196.03	195.98	0.03	204.14	199.69	2.18
SP4-3	208.39	178.83	14.19	206.49	183.74	11.02	208.35	185.97	10.74	209.20	188.93	9.69
SP4-5	204.02	183.58	10.02	204.92	189.56	7.49	207.55	192.42	7.29	207.95	196.24	5.63
SP4-6	217.79	174.74	19.77	212.81	177.94	16.39	213.85	179.03	16.28	213.67	180.46	15.54

Plastic concrete properties of the cutoff wall_

3~7 MPa	Compressive Strength
1×10^-8 m/s	Permeability
500~1000 MPa	Young’s Modulus
170~220 mm	Slump

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2019-0019 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 184 - 199

Submitted on: Nov 19, 2018

Accepted on: Jun 14, 2019

Published on: Dec 30, 2019

Published by: Wroclaw University of Science and Technology

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

Keywords:

sealing,

Related subjects:

Physics,

Mechanics and fluid dynamics

© 2019 Iman Faridmehr, Mohammad Reza YazdaniPour, Mohammad Javadi Jokar, Togay Ozbakkaloglu, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 41 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019)

Construction and Monitoring of Cement/Bentonite Cutoff Walls: Case Study of Karkheh Dam, Iran

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Figure 16

Comparison between numerical and piezometric pore-water surface resulting from transient analysis_

Drilling mud properties of the cutoff wall of Karkheh Dam

Mix proportion design of a cubic meter of plastic concrete of the Karkheh Dam cutoff wall_

Comparison between numerical and piezometric pore-water surface resulted from steady-state analysis_

Plastic concrete properties of the cutoff wall_

Paradigm

My account