Chapter 3 PDF
Chapter 3 PDF
3.1
Buttress dams
A buttress dam consists of a slopping u/s membrane which transmits the water load to
a series of buttress at right angle to the axis of the dam.
Buttress dam principally fall in to two groups, massive diamond or round-headed buttress
dams. The earlier but now largely obsolete flat slab (Amburson) & decked buttresses
constitute the minor types.
Relative to gravity dam, buttress dam has the advantages of saving in concrete, major
reduction in uplift and also offers greater ability to accommodate foundation deformation
without damage. However, the advantages offset by considerably higher finished unit
costs as a result of more extensive & non repetitive formwork required. It also requires
more competent foundation because of stress concentration.
The form of buttress dam has two important consequences w.r.t. primary loads.
Uplift pressure confined to buttress head & result in modified uplift pressure
distribution; pressure relief drains are only necessary in exceptional cases
Pwv vertical component of water load enhanced. The concept of stability against
overturning is no longer valid.
In structural terms, massive buttress constructed of a series of independent units, each
composed of one buttress head & a supporting buttress or web (length along the axis of
the dam of about 12-15 m for each unit). Structural analysis is therefore conducted w.r.t
the unit as a whole.
FSS or more usually FSF shear friction factor analyzed in same way as gravity profile with
comparable minimum values for these factors.
Stress analysis of a buttress unit is complex & difficult. Modern practice is to employ
finite element analysis to assist in determining the optimum shape for the buttress head to
avoid undesirable stress concentrations @ its function with the web.
Approximate analysis is possible by modified gravity method for parallel sided d/s webs.
The root of the buttress is usually flared to increase sliding resistance & control the
contact stress.
Profile design for buttress is not subject simplification as gravity dam. A trial profile is
established on the bases of previous experience. The profile details are then modified &
refined as suggested by initial stress analysis.
3.2
Arch Dams
The single curvature arch dam & the double curvature arch or cupola were introduced
with concrete dams previously and the rock & valley conditions which various arch dam
were outlined in the first chapter.
Valley suited for arch dams
Narrow gorges
Crest length to dam height ratio should be less than / equal to 5
b H ( Sec1 Sec 2 ) B
For Sr 5, arch dam may be feasibly
Sr
H
H
B
F1
F2
Arch dam transfers its loads to the valley sides than to the floor. Overturning & sliding
stability have little relevance here. If the integrity & competence of the abutment is
assured, failure can occur only as a result of overstress. Arch dam design is therefore
3
centered largely up on stress analysis and the definition of an arch geometry which avoids
local tension stress concentration and /or excessive compressive stress. The area of
cupola dam offer great economics in volume of concrete.
Associated with saving may also be realized in foundation excavation & preparation, but
the sophisticated form of arch dam leads to very much increased unit costs. In case of
complex geology of abutment saving can also be negated by requirement of ensuring
abutment integrity under all conditions.
Arch geometry and profile.
The horizontal component of arch thrust must be transferred in to the abutment at a safe
angle as shown in the figure below. In general abutment entry angle of 450 to 700 is
acceptable.
average rock cont our
ta
ng
en
t
In symmetrical valley minimum concrete volume when 2 =1330, but entry angle
preclude this & 2 110. The profile is suited to relatively symmetrical U-shaped valley.
ii) Constant angle profile: Central angle of different arch have the same magnitude
from top to bottom & uses up to 70% of concrete as compared to constant radius
arch dam. But it is more complex as demonstrated in the figure. It is best suited to
narrow & steep-sided V-shaped valleys.
4
iii) Cupola profile. Has a particularly complex geometry & profile, with constantly
varying horizontal & vertical radii to either face.
Design & Analysis of Arch Dams
Loads on arch dams:
- Loads on arch dams are essentially the same as loads on gravity dams.
- Uplift forces are less important, if no cracking occurs it can be neglected.
- Internal stresses caused by temperature change, ice pressure, and yielding of
abutment are very important.
- An arch dam transfers loads to the abutments and foundations both by cantilever
action and through horizontal arches.
The design /analysis can be based on.
-The thin cylinder theory
-The thick cylinder theory.
-The elastic theory.
Thick & thin Ring (cylinder) theory.
-
The theory envisages that the weight of concrete & that of water on the dam is
carried directly to the foundation not to the abutment
The horizontal water load is borne entirely by arch action.
The discrete horizontal arch elements are assumed to form part of a complete ring
subjected to uniform radial pressure, Pw, from the water load & hence it is
assumed to have uniform radial deformation.
T
h
dh
Ru
Ri
B/2
B/2
Let
Ru = extrados radius
Ri = intrados radius
Forces parallel to stream axis
2F sin = 2Ru sin. wh.
F = wh Ru
h.R
F
The transverse unit stress
w u
T *1
T
hR
For given stress the required thickness is T w u
Since Ru = Rc+0.5T = Ri + T ;
w hRc
hR
w i
0.5 w h w h
2
V KR K
sin / 2
dV
0 , gives = 1330341. (Most economical angle of arch with minimum volume)
d
2
For 2 =1330341;
R= 0.544B
Ru
Ri
Ru
R
Ri
T
Pu
pi
Ru2 Ru2 Rd 2 / R 2
p w
2
2
R
u
d
2 w Z 1 Ru
Tr ( Ru Rd )
2
2 w Z 1 Ru
( Ru Rd )
Tr
For analysis
Note in theory, T should diminish towards crown & increase towards abutments. In
practice, T usually is constant at any elevation on a simple arch profile, and correction for
maximum stress at abutment made by factor, Kr, determined as a function of & Ru /T
from curves.
For thin rings theory, therefore,
K r w Z1 Ru
Tr
at abutment .
crown
?
p=
h
Ho
Mo
Ru
R
Rd
Ma
abu
tm
ent
Ha
Thrust @ crown
H o PR
where
PR
T2
2 sin
is in radians.
D
R
1 T 2
sin 2
2
D
if shear is neglected .
2 sin
2
2
12
R
T2
D 1
2
12 R
Moment @ crown:
sin 2
T2
sin 2
2
(
)
2 sin 3
2
2
2
12 R
sin
M 0 PR H o R1
if shear is included .
Moment @ abutments: M a R PR H o
cos
After calculating thrusts & moments, stresses at intrados & extrados are calculated from
H 6M
2 .
T
T
3rd year
2nd year
1st year
14A
13A
12A
11A
10A
9A
8A
7A
12-15m
8B
7B
6B
6A
5A
5B
4A
3A
2A
4B
3B
2B
1A
5C
4C
3C
A,B,C= variable concrete quality
2C
1B
1C
Fig:Concrete zoning
11
heating
150-230
NM
)
m2
tesile strength t
(
c)
Compressive
Concrete mix
Facing
250-320
20-35
0.50-0.70
0-25
0.45-0.65
18-30
25-40
0.10-0.15
0.07-0.10
23-25
30-45
0.15-0.22
0.02-0.05
9-12
12
13