Tian Sing Ng, David Gardiner
Spillway structures play an important part in regulating the designed reservoir water level and are paramount to protect the structural integrity of the dam structure. Impermeability and tight crack control are prime importance in the design and construction of the spillway lining in order to minimise the potential failure modes of cavitation damage and stagnation pressure related failure. A spillway chute is essentially continuously restrained by the roughness of the rock surface and the ground anchors. The provision of control joints, i.e. expansion, contraction and movement joints,are therefore of little benefit due to the restraint as open cracks will still occur. Steel fibre reinforced concrete has been used for resisting erosion of the surface due to abrasion and/or cavitation. Steel fibres combined with conventional reinforcement also provide an amazing synergy to effectively reinforce concrete due to their ability to provide an effective restraining tensile force across open cracks. For the spillway chute,this means any concrete panel size or shape can be considered, even when the chute is fully restrained. Most importantly, this cost effective solution can be constructed joint free while maintaining watertightness. This paper presents some basic principles governing the design of joint free dam spillways employing steel fibre combined with conventional reinforcement. The focus of this paper describes the design and construction of the 400 m long Happy Valley Dam Outfall Channel together with overseas project examples.
Simon Lang, Chriselyn Meneses, Peter Hill, Kristen Sih
In Australia to date, the empirical method developed by Graham (1999) is the most widely applied approach for estimating loss of life from dambreak flooding. However, as the move to risk-based approaches of dam safety management has gathered momentum internationally, increasingly sophisticated techniques for estimating loss of life have emerged. One of these models is the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) HEC-FIA model. HEC-FIA models the influence of flooding, structure characteristics, and warning and evacuation assumptions on loss of life in a spatially distributed manner. In contrast to Graham (1999), HEC-FIA also allows the user to model the loss of life for both dambreak and natural flooding.
This paper presents the results from the first Australian application of HEC-FIA to two dams in southeast Australia. The application of empirical methods developed by Graham (2004) and Reiter (2001) is also discussed.
Kirsty Carroll, Kelly Maslin, Richard Rodd
Melbourne Water manages over 210 retarding basins across Greater Melbourne ranging in size from 4ML to 4700 ML with embankment heights from 0.3m to 10m. Over the years the basins have been designed and constructed by a range of different owners and authorities. Varying design and construction standards with the majority of retarding basins generally being located in highly urbanised areas, has resulted in Melbourne Water having a large portfolio of assets that have potential to pose a significant risk to the downstream communities they are designed to protect.
High level hazard category assessments completed over the last10 years identified that approximately 90 structures were either High or Extreme hazard categories based on the ANCOLD Guidelines on Assessment of the Consequences of Dam Failure.
In an attempt to identify retarding basins requiring priority consideration for remedial works Melbourne Water embarked on a process of completing a dam safety risk assessment for five of the retarding basins in accordance with the ANCOLD Guidelines on Risk Assessment. The objective of the risk assessment was to develop an understanding of the key risk issues that might affect retarding basins as distinct from water supply storages, identify potential remedial works and develop a prioritised risk management strategy for the five basins considered. In completing the risk assessment there was also significant discussion about ways to streamline the process to allow assessment of the remaining basins.
This paper details the results obtained from the risk assessment, investigates the application of the base safety condition and implementation of a risk management strategy. It also looks at similarities between sites to enable common upgrades to be implemented across the range of retarding basins. This paper also discusses the need for guidelines specific to retarding basins to be developed.
How do you solve a problem like retarding basins? An asset owner’s perspective
Rod Westmore, Andrew George& Robert Wilson
A 2007 risk assessment of Hume Dam concluded that the dam did not satisfy the ANCOLD societal risk criteria for existing dams. The Spillway Southern Junction (SSJ) and its associated failure modes was one of the main contributors to the risk profile.
Upgrade works at the SSJ involved the retro-installation of additional filter and drainage materials in the 40m high embankment immediately downstream of the tower block and central core wall by installation of more than 10,000m of secant caisson drilled columns backfilled with filter and/or drainage materials.
This paper describes the design and construction issues associated with the upgrade works, the equipment and methodologies developed to achieve the principal design objectives of coverage and connectivity of filter and drainage columns, and optimisation of compaction of the backfill materials. It also describes how these requirements were met whilst minimising adverse affects such as vertical deviation, excessive vibration, subsidence of secant filter columns during construction, and clay smearing of the perimeter of individual columns.
Hume Dam Spillway Southern Junction Filter and Drainage Works
Rob Campbell, Tom Kolbe, Ron Fleming, Christopher Dann
Hinze Dam is an Extreme hazard category water supply dam situated in the Queensland Gold Coast hinterland, owned and operated by Seqwater (formerly owned by Gold Coast City Council). The Hinze Dam Stage 3 works involved raising the previously 65m high central core earth and rockfill embankment approximately 15m to a maximum height of approximately 80m.
The Stage 3 works included a program of foundation curtain grouting, consisting of six discrete grout panels, five of those beneath areas where the embankment was extended and one beneath part of the spillway enhancement works. Five of the six grout panels were essentially single row panels, with one or more partial rows added in specific areas of high grout take. The remaining grout panel (Panel 4) was constructed as a triple row panel.
A number of challenges were encountered and overcome during the Stage 3 foundation grouting works due to highly variable foundation conditions, ranging from extremely low strength residual soil to highly fractured and permeable high strength rock.
The grouting works were undertaken using downstage grouting techniques, with manual recording of data, manual control of grout pressures and injection rates and use of predominantly neat cement grout mixes.
A key issue in the execution of the foundation grouting works was the maximum grout pressures applied to the foundation and this was discussed in detail between the project design team and external review panel. This paper presents the results from project specific grout trials and production grouting to demonstrate that closure of the foundation was consistently achieved (with one exception discussed herein), which supports the grouting approach employed and the adopted grout pressures.
This paper presents a case study description of the Stage 3 foundation curtain grouting works, including a summary of key learnings which may be of benefit to future dam foundation curtain grouting projects.