Ground Improvement (1999) 3, 111±117
Permeability evaluation of soft-rock foundations for
dams
Y. YAMAGUCHI and N. MATSUMOTOy
 Fill Dam Division, Public Works Research Institute, Ministry of Construction, 1, Asahi,
Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki-ken, 305-0804 Japan; y Japan Dam Engineering Center, 2-4-5,
Azabudai, Minato-Ku, Tokyo, 106-0041 Japan
Because many of the recent dam sites in Japan are
composed of soft rocks with low strength, the injection
pressure should be carefully controlled when performing
the Lugeon water test (LWT). Particularly, where the
groundwater level is low, the minimum injection pressure
for the LWT generated by pressure control at the ground
surface is extremely high in deep parts of the foundation.
Consequently, there is a possibility of overestimating the
permeability because of fracturing of the rock mass
surrounding the test section. Under these circumstances,
injection pressure should be applied by adjusting the
water level inside the borehole to begin the test at a low
effective injection pressure.
Keywords : ®eld testing & monitoring; soft rock
Introduction
It is extremely important to investigate the permeability of
the foundation when designing a dam foundation grouting.
The Lugeon water test (LWT) using drilled holes is the most
common in situ permeability test for dam foundations, and
there are technical guidelines for the LWT in Japan (River
Bureau, Ministry of Construction, 1984).
The sites of many recent dams in Japan are composed of
soft rocks, which have far lower strength than hard rocks.
The high injection pressure suitable for a hard-rock founda-
tion could fracture the soft rock surrounding the test hole,
particularly in the shallow part of the foundation with small
overburden loading. Therefore, when such a high injection
pressure is used for a soft-rock foundation, there is a
possibility of overestimating the permeability. Small pulsa-
tions in the injection pressure and an increase of injection
pressure in small steps have been proposed on the basis of
many case studies as effective countermeasures against this
problem (Shibata, 1980; Shibata et al., 1981).
Most dam engineers believed that the problem only oc-
curred in the shallow parts of soft-rock foundations with
small overburden loading. But recently, it has been revealed
that in the case of an extremely low groundwater level, the
problem also occurs in the deep part of soft-rock foundations.
(GI 059) Paper received 14 August 1998; accepted 21 January 1999
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA] on [12/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
111
Au Japon, les sites sur lesquels sont construits de nom-
breux barrages sont composeÂs de roche tendre aÁ faible
reÂsistance, et la pression d'injection doit eÃtre, depuis peu,
controÃleÂe de treÁs preÁs lorsque l'on proceÁde au test de
surcharge hydrique Lugeon (LWT; Lugeon water test). En
particulier lorsque le niveau d'eau en sous-sol est bas, la
pression d'injection minimum pour le LWT geÂneÂreÂe par la
commande de la pression aÁ la surface du sol est extreÃme-
ment eÂleveÂe aux endroits profonds de la fondation. Par
conseÂquent, il peut y avoir surestimation de la permeÂabi-
lite due aux ®ssures dans le bloc rocheux entourant la zone
de test. Dans ces conditions, une pression d'injection doit
eÃtre appliqueÂe en reÂglant le niveau de l'eau aÁ l'inteÂrieur du
trou de sonde a®n de commencer le test aÁ une faible
pression d'injection effective.
Because the groundwater level is low, even if strict control is
maintained over the injection pressure at the ground surface,
simply ®lling the injection pipe with water applies a very
large effective injection pressure on the test section. Conse-
quently, there have been cases where it was suspected that
the permeability was assessed after the rock around the test
section had been fractured. This paper describes a case study
to clarify the problem associated with the LWT when
conducted in the deep part of soft-rock foundations and to
establish countermeasures to solve the problem.
Geological pro®le at test site and
test procedure
The ground on the left bank of the dam site where the test
was conducted is mainly composed of mudstone, tuff
breccia and tuff of the Miocene. Figure 1 is a geological map
along the dam axis and also indicates the locations of the
test holes for the LWTs.
Among the permeability test holes, four boreholes, B-21,
B-22, B-34 and B-62-23, had already been used for perme-
ability studies. Boreholes B-62-24, B-1-21 and B-1-22 were
used in this investigation for permeability reassessment.
Furthermore, boreholes 1-P-1 to 7-P-1, excavated from the
grouting tunnel, were pilot holes to con®rm the permeability
1365-781X # 1999 Thomas Telford Ltd
 Yamaguchi and Matsumoto

B-1-22 B-1-21
El. 152.20 m El. 152.20 m
L 5 80 m L 5 80 m

B-62-23 B-34
B-62-24 B-22
El. 150.20 m El. 151.78 m
L 5 100 m L 5 80 m El. 148.80 m El. 140.89 m
Elevation L 5 80 m L 5 75 m
0 0
150 0 B-21
10 10 0
10 El. 131.00 m
20 0 L 5 70 m
20 Ms 10 Tb Grouting tunnel
Ms 20
30 30 20 10
30
40 Tb Tf 20
40 30
40
50 50 Tf 40 30 TOD El. 100.50 m
100
50 SWL El. 96.0 m
60 60 50 40 Tb
Tb 60 1
70 70 Tb 50 Tf
1 60 Spillway
Tf 70
80 80 Tf 60
70
Tb m 80 75
90 m m 70
Tb m
50 100
m

0 20 40 m

Elevation
110
Grouting tunnel

100

m
45
90 5
,L
m

-1
7-P
45

5-P-1, L 5 65 m

4-P-1, L 5 65 m

3-P-1, L 5 60 m

2-P-1, L 5 60 m

1-P-1, L 5 60 m
L5

80
Spillway
-1,
6-P

70

60

50

40
0 10 20 m

30

Ms Mudstone
Tf Tuff
Tb Tuff breccia
Tb1Tf Alternating beds of Tb and Tf
TOD Top of dam
SWL Surcharge water level

Fig. 1. Geological pro®le of test site and locations of permeability test holes

of the foundation and to determine suitable grouting was increased varied for each borehole, while a pump was
speci®cations prior to the main grouting work. used to inject the water in each case. Figure 2 presents a
summary of the Lugeon values, water level in the borehole,
critical pressure and minimum injection pressure in the
Previous permeability investigation pressure-increase stage at various depths. The Lugeon
values obtained were generally high. Figure 3 shows
The results of LWTs conducted in the four boreholes B-21, representative p±q (injection pressure±¯ow rate) curves
B-22, B-34 and B-62-23 are summarized below. obtained at boreholes B-34 and B-62-23. These test results
The injection pressure was controlled at the ground indicate that from shallow depths from the ground surface
surface. The number of steps by which the injection pressure to 60 or 70 m in depth, the permeability is high: 20 Lu or

112
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA] on [12/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Permeability of soft-rock foundations

Lugeon value: Lu Pressure: 1021 MPa Lugeon value: Lu Pressure: 1021 MPa
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10
0 0
(27.4)
Min. injection pressure
10 Lugeon value (30.4) 10 Lugeon value Min. injection pressure
Critical pressure
(27.5) BBH (57.4)

01
BBH

. d
(43.7) 20 WLBH (40.0)
20 WLBH

0
. 2d
(30.5) (26.0)

0
. 2d
Depth d : m

(38.3) 30 (23.2)
30

Depth d : m
(28.6)

40 40

0. 05d
(27.0)

0. 05d
50 50

60 60 (25.7)

01
. d
(11.8)

70 70
0 20 40 60 80 100
BBH, WLBH: m
80
0 20 40 60 80 100
(a) BBH, WLBH: m

(b)

Lugeon value: Lu Pressure: 1021 MPa

0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
Lugeon value Min. injection pressure
10
Lugeon value: Lu Pressure: 1021 MPa BBH Critical pressure

0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10 WLBH
0 20

30

0
Lugeon value

. 2d
10 Min. injection pressure
BBH
WLBH 40
Depth d : m

20
(26.1)

30 50
Depth d : m

0
. 2d

01
. d
60
0. 1

40

0. 05d
0. 05d

50 70

60 80

70 90

80 100
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
BBH, WLBH: m BBH, WLBH: m

(c) (d)

Fig. 2. Results of previous LWTs: (a) B-21, (b) B-22, (c) B-34, (d) B-62-23; BBH, bottom of borehole; WLBH, water level in borehole

greater. Figure 4 shows the distribution of permeability in
the ground, based on the test results.
The lateral extension of foundation grouting is deter-
mined in accordance with the sideways rise of the ground-
water level as well as the distribution of permeability. The
scope usually extends to those points where the surcharge
water level (SWL), that is, the maximum water storage level
during a ¯ood, intersects the groundwater table (River
Bureau, Ministry of Construction, 1983). The SWL at the
dam site is at an elevation of 96´0 m. The ®nal stable water
levels in the four test holes, which can be considered to
have equilibrated with the surrounding groundwater level,
were extremely deep, ranging from 45 to 65 m below the
ground surface. Because the water level in boreholes B-21
and B-22 was below the SWL and the estimated permeabil-
ity of the ground was extremely high overall, there was
some concern that the grouting range would expand
substantially.
However, in the deeper foundation, there were test
sections with a critical pressure ranging from 0´6 to 1´3 MPa,
and the critical pressure tended to rise as the depth
increased, as shown in Fig. 2. The critical pressure is de®ned
as the injection pressure at the point where the ¯ow rate
rises rapidly in the p±q curve. On the other hand, in the
shallower foundation, even when the injection pressure was
raised to about 1 MPa, a critical pressure was not found, as
shown in Fig. 3. The higher critical pressure predicted in the
shallower foundation is inconsistent with the critical pres-
sure in the deeper foundation. Additionally, as stated earlier,
because the groundwater level at the site is low, the
minimum injection pressure was extremely high in the test,
which was conducted by controlling the injection pressure at
the ground surface. Consequently, at many stages where
high permeability was indicated, it is supposed that the test
was done using a pressure greater than the critical pressure,
and that the permeability was overestimated.

113
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA] on [12/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Yamaguchi and Matsumoto

12

10
10

Effective injection pressure p : 1021 MPa

Effective injection pressure p : 1021 MPa

8 8

6 6

4 4

Lu 5 16.0
2
2 Lu 5 21.8

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Flow rate q : l/min per metre Flow rate q : l/min per metre

(a) (b)

Fig. 3. Examples of p±q curves obtained from previous permeability investigation: (a) B-34, 75±80 m section; (b) B-62-23, 60±65 m section

B-62-23
B-34 B-22

Elevation B-21
150

20 # Lu
20 # Lu 20 # Lu TOD El. 100.50 m
100 SWL El. 96.00 m

Lu , 2
10 # Lu
, 20 Spillway
2 # Lu
,5 10 # Lu , 20
20 # Lu 2
Lu , 2 ,
2# , 10 Lu
Lu
,5 5 # Lu
Lu
50 ,
2
Lu Lugeon value
SWL Surcharge water level
0 20 40 m

Fig. 4. Permeability distribution map based on previous investigation

Re-evaluation of permeability
deep, water was injected inside the test hole as the water
In the re-evaluation of the permeability, LWTs were level inside the borehole was adjusted, to start the test from
conducted in three newly excavated boreholes B-62-64, B-1- a low effective injection pressure. The minimum injection
21 and B-1-22. Boreholes B-1-21 and B-1-22 were excavated pressure was altered appropriately for each test, but in the
close to B-34 and B-62-23, respectively, in order to simplify lower injection pressure range, in principle, it was increased
comparison of the new and previous results. Because the in steps of 50 or 100 kPa.
groundwater level at the site was known to be extremely Figure 5 summarizes the results of these LWTs. Figure 6

114
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA] on [12/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Permeability of soft-rock foundations

Lugeon value: Lu Pressure: 1021 MPa 10

0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10
0

Effective injection pressure p : 1021 MPa

Min. injection pressure
10 Lugeon value Critical pressure 8
BBH
20 WLBH

0
30

. 2d
6
Depth d : m

01
. d
40

0. 05d
50 4

60

70 2
Lu 5 0.5
80 pcr 5 0.34 MPa
0 20 40 60 80 100
BBH, WLBH: m 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
(a) Flow rate q : l/min per metre

(a)

10

21
Lugeon value: Lu Pressure: 10 MPa
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10
Effective injection pressure p : 1021 MPa
0 8

Lugeon value Min. injection pressure

10
Critical pressure
BBH
20 WLBH 6
01
0. 05d

. d

30
0
. 2d
Depth d : m

40 4

50

60 2
Lu 5 0.3
pcr 5 0.44 MPa
70

0
80 0 5 10 15 20 25
0 20 40 60 80 100
BBH, WLBH: m Flow rate q : l/min per metre

(b) (b)

Fig. 6. Examples of p±q curves obtained from re-evaluation of permeability:

(a) B-1-21, 75±80 m section; (b) B-1-22, 60±65 m section

Lugeon value: Lu Pressure: 1021 MPa

0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10
0 shows the p±q curves for boreholes B-1-21 and B-1-22 at
depths almost identical to those where the p±q curves for
10 Lugeon value Min. injection pressure
Critical pressure B-34 and B-62-23 shown in Fig. 3 were obtained. Figure 7
BBH
20 WLBH
shows the relationship between the critical pressures ob-
tained in B-1-21 and B-1-22 and the minimum injection
0. 05d

30 pressure in B-34 and B-62-23. These ®gures reveal the

Depth d : m

0
. 2d

following.
01
. d

40
(a) Lugeon values of 10 Lu or greater were obtained in the
50
35 to 40 m deep section of B-62-24 and the 45 to 50 m
60 deep section of B-1-22, but Lugeon values obtained in
the other sections were extremely small. Because these
70 two sections are higher than the SWL at the site, there
will be no problem with grouting design.
80
0 20 40 60 80 100 (b) The p±q curves obtained for all sections are, as shown
BBH, WLBH: m in Fig. 6, shaped in a manner that permits a clear
(c)
assessment of the critical pressure.
(c) The ®nal stable borehole water level was found to be
Fig. 5. Results of re-evaluation of permeability: (a) B-62-24, (b) B-1-21, (c) between 45 and 60 m below the ground surface, just as
B-1-22 it was in the case of the previous study, which

115
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA] on [12/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Yamaguchi and Matsumoto

Pressure: 1021 MPa

0 2 4 6 8 10
0

B–1–22 Critical pressure

10 B–62–23 Min. injection pressure

Pressure: 1021 MPa

0 2 4 6 8 10
0 20

B–1–21 Critical pressure

B–34 Min. injection pressure 30
10

20 40

Depth d : m
30 50

Critical pressures were recognized even in B–62–23

Depth d : m

40 60

50 70

60 80

70 90

80 100
ELMBH: B–34 151.78 m ELMBH: B–62–23 150.20 m
B–1–21 152.20 m B–1–22 152.20 m

(a) (b)

Fig. 7. Minimum injection pressure in previous tests and critical pressure in re-evaluation tests: (a) B-34 and B-1-21; (b) B-62-23 and B-1-22; ELMBH,
elevation of mouth of borehole

B–1–22
B–1–21 B–62–24

Elevation
150

5 # Lu
, 10
2 # Lu
,5

10 # Lu , 20

20 # Lu Lu # 2 TOD El. 100.50 m

100
20 # Lu SWL El 96.00 m
2 # Lu , 5
Lu # 2 10 #
5 # Lu , 10 Lu
Lu # 2 5 # Lu , 10 , 20
2 # Lu , 5 2 # Lu , 5 20 # Lu Spillway
2 # Lu , 5 5 # Lu , 10

Lu , 2 2 # Lu , 5
-I

Lu , 2
6-P

5 # Lu , 10
50 2 # Lu , 5
0 20 40 m 20 , Lu
3-P-I

2-P-I

1-P-I
5-P-I

4-P-I

Fig. 8. Re-evaluated permeability distribution map

116
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA] on [12/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.

recon®rmed that the groundwater level at the test site
was very low.
(d) In the test sections in B-34 and B-62-23 where the critical
pressure could not be recognized and the permeability
was evaluated to be high, the minimum injection
pressure was greater than the critical pressure at the
same depth stage in boreholes B-1-21 and B-1-22.
The above ®ndings show that because the groundwater
level at the test site is low, the minimum injection pressure
exceeded the critical pressure in the previous LWTs, and the
permeability was assessed after the soft rock surrounding
the test sections was fractured. The results also show that
the permeability on the side of borehole B-62-24 towards the
mountain was extremely low. On the basis of the results of
this reassessment of the permeability, dam foundation
grouting was performed on the river side of borehole B-62-
24 by excavating a grouting tunnel at a base altitude of
elevation 100´0 m, as shown in Fig. 1. The LWTs were
performed in pilot holes before main grouting. The distribu-
tion of the Lugeon values obtained in the pilot holes shows
that even in areas where the previous permeability investi-
gation in B-21 and B-22 indicated overall high permeability,
the permeability was, in fact, extremely low except for
localized areas of high permeability.
Figure 8 is a permeability distribution map drawn on the
basis of the Lugeon values obtained at the three newly
excavated boreholes and the pilot holes for the grouting. The
large difference between this map and that shown in Fig. 4
is very clear.
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA] on [12/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Permeability of soft-rock foundations
Conclusions
When the groundwater level is low in a soft-rock founda-
tion, in deep parts of the foundation the minimum injection
pressure for an LWT generated by pressure control at the
ground surface is extremely high. Consequently, there is a
possibility of overestimating the permeability because of
fracturing of the rock mass surrounding the test section.
Under these circumstances, the injection pressure for the
LWT should be applied by adjusting the water level inside
the borehole to begin the test at a low effective injection
pressure.
References
River Bureau, Ministry of Construction (1983) Technical Guide-
lines for Grouting. Ministry of Construction, Tokyo [in Japanese].
River Bureau, Ministry of Construction (1984) Technical Guide-
lines for Lugeon Water Test. Ministry of Construction, Tokyo [in
Japanese].
Shibata I. (1980) A Study on Permeability and Waterproof Design in
Soft Rock Foundations for Dams. Public Works Research Institute,
Tsukuba, Report 153-1 [in Japanese with English summary].
Shibata I., Iida R. and Matsumoto N. (1981) Procedures for the
investigations of permeability and seepage control on soft rock
foundations for dams. Proceedings of the International Symposium
on Weak Rock, pp. 503±508.
Discussion contributions on this paper should reach the
editor by 24 December 1999
117