Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Walbanke HJ 1976 PHD Thesis PDF
Walbanke HJ 1976 PHD Thesis PDF
by
November 1975
SYNOPSIS
clays. In these cases long-term pore pressures are greater than those
at end of construction.
Peterborough, Bough Beech and Grafham Water dams and records from
Grafham Water, Foxcote and Aldenham dams. From this data it has been
Edgwarebury and Potters Bar have made it possible to show that pore
cases due to the long time scale therefore an indirect study of the
grassed slopes with the effect of slope angle and roughness studied.
made.
ii
in clay fills. The pore pressures within clay slopes with permeability
embankment slopes.
111
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
many people without whom this thesis would not have been possible.
this research.
The work was carried out under the auspices of the Soil Mechanics
of the equipment came from the Water Resources Board and for the
Permission for the work on various sites has been given by the
access to their records. They are Binnie and Partners for Foxcote and
Grafham Water, Howard Humphreys and Sons for Edgwarebury, Rofe Kennard
and Lapworth for Peterborough, Bough Beech, Aldenham and Cow Green
Mr. P.R. Walton the manager of the CEGB Land Reclamation Scheme
and his assistant, Mr. Thompson; Mr. K.J.H. Saxton, formerly manager
of the Great Ouse Water Division and his new works engineers
of Bucks Water Board and Mr. J. Mayer the pumping station superintendent
borough engineer of Barnet, and his assistants Mr. E.H. Start and
Mr. W.B. Emms of the Chief Civil Engineer's office, Eastern Region
Mr. R.L. Brown of Binnie & Partners and Dr. H.T. Lovenbury of Rofe
Kennard and Lapworth. I am very grateful for the help with installation
given by Messrs. P. Bryan, F. Kindred and Dr. A.D. Burnett and help
with readings by Messrs. J.P. Apted, D.T. Evans and F.D. Evans.
who willingly made and mended equipment, usually at short notice, and
Mrs. E.M. Gibbs who makes life in the Soil Mechanics Section better
Dr. L.D. Wesley, Dr. M.L.G. Werneck, Messrs. M.W. Baldwin, W.M. Maguire,
CONTENTS
Page
SYNOPSIS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
CONTENTS vi
SYMBOLS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Development of research programme and
questions studied 3
1.3 The design of clay slopes in practice 6
vii
Page
2.5 Longterm pore pressures in clay dams 26
2.5.1 Aldenham 26
2.6 Other available data 28
viii
Page
CHAPTER If PRESENTATION OF DATA - EMBANKMENTS
4.1 Piezometric records from dams 66
4.1.1 Peterborough 66
4.1.2 Grafham Water 67
4.1.3 Bough Beech 69
4.2 Downstream boundary pore pressures 71
4.2.1 Slopes without drainage 71
4.2.2 Slopes with drainage 73
4.3 Permeability tests 74
-1 74
4.3.1 Bough Beech
4.3.2 Grafham Water 78
4.4 Moisture contents 8o
CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION
6.1 End of construction pore pressures 87
6.1.1 Fill slopes 87
6.1.2 Cut slopes 89
6.2 Rate of equilibration 92
6.2.1 Fill slopes 92
6.2.2 Cut slopes 100
6.3 Ultimate pore pressures 105
6.3.1 Cut and natural slopes 105
6.3.2 Fill slopes 107
6.3.3 Stability of equilibrated slopes 108
ix
Page
REFERENCES 140
APPENDICES
Appendix A Peterborough drawdown records 148
Appendix B End of construction pore pressures
in clay dams 149
SYMBOLS
i hydraulic gradient
K0 coefficient of earth pressure at rest
k coefficient of permeability
k0 permeability at depth z = 0
k1 soil permeability
k ceramic permeability
3
kc permeability measured in constant head test
kf permeability measured in falling head test
kH permeability at depth z = H
kH horizontal permeability
kv vertical permeability
L length
LL liquid limit
m coefficient of soil compressibility
mf coefficient of pore fluid compressibility
p pressure
PL plastic limit
n1,2 = 1/2{P±(112-401/2 )
A = k1/k3 (a1/a3 - 1)
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
changes are a function of the total stress and they are a dependent
variable.
Au = f( Aa ) 1.2
and the pore pressures are:
u = u + f( Acr )
o 1.3
Total stress stability analysis can therefore be used.
drainage:
Au = f (c , At,- boundary conditions) 1.4
v o; s
complete then
unless construction rates are very slow, the drainage paths are very
on B, where
Au = BAa1 1.7
which itself is dependent on plasticity and placement water content.
For all clay fills some suctions are set up at low stresses. At
construction, for example Usk Dam (Sheppard and Aylen, 1957) and
much deeper and quite high fills can have depressed pore pressures,
for example Bough Beech Dam (Hallas & Titford, 1971). The equilibration
long-term pore pressures are required for design. These are cut
plastic clays.
shown that a flow-net solution was not valid for the pore pressures
in the Boulder Clay slope at Cow Green. Apart from this one case
steady state had been approached and information from which steady
4
state pore pressures could be predicted. This work on fills was part
and initially the three dams, Peterborough, Grafham Water and Foxcote
were studied.
long way from equilibrium, even Foxcote,then 15 years old, and it was
except where closely spaced drainage blankets had been used. Indirect
The interdependent questions studied for both cut and fill slopes
were: What is (i) the rate of swelling, (ii) the magnitude of the
ultimate pore pressure and how can these two be predicted and controlled?.
failure.
strength may reduce with increased loading time (de Lory, 1957;
Henkel, 1957), or with the release of strain energy due to the reduction
predicting field rates from the results of laboratory tests can then
be suggested.
by the use of flow nets which assumes uniform permeability for the
clay layer and a phreatic surface which is a flow line. In clay slopes
this free surface concept is likely to be invalid as the clay can remain
saturated above the zero pressure line and pore water suctions exist.
6 -r
This zero pressure line, which has been equated with a phreatic surface,
is not a flow line and considerable flow from the slope surface occurs
across it. The flow across this boundary can be greater than the
flow through the body of the slope. Also the permeability is probably
not uniform due to both stress and weathering effects. The slope at
Canal and then the Railway eras. Most railway cuttings were excavated
between 1850 and 1930 and James (1970), who made a study of cutting
which have failed. The steepest slopes used are of the order of 1 on 2
the Lower Lias and Oxford Clays. The steepest slope quoted is 1 on 1.7
Many slopes on the M.1. motorway in the chalky Boulder Clay were
also used in Boulder Clay on the early part of the M6, built 1958,
where stability problems also occurred. Since the early 1960's clay
order of 1 on 4 or 1 on 5.
-r The slopes used for embankment dams are shown in table1:3 along with
or 1:2 as, except for Aldenham and Muirhead, these are at present
stable slopes. The majority of the dams are of Glacial Till of low
have been critical for stability and dams which are now stable should
remain stable; On the other hand, the dams constructed using clays
The slopes used at Aldenham are too steep and have given trouble
2:14.
Table 1.1
Note:-
Based on failed cutting slope data from James (1970).
- Table 1.2
Cutting and embankment slopes used on recent major roads
Road County Date Material Slopes used Remarks
M1 Herts to 1959 Boulder Clay 1 on 11/2 -+ 1 on 2 97 cases of instability quoted - 45 in
Northampton cuttings & 62 in embankments, generally
where H > 5m. 60% of slips occured in
1965-66.
M1 Leicester 1964-65 Boulder Clay 1 on 3 3 failures quoted, 2 in cuttings 1 in
embankment.
M6 Stafford 1962-63 Soft clay over 1 on 2 3 cutting failures quoted.
Coal Measures
M6 Cheshire 1963 Boulder Clay 1 on 2 or flatter Failure in 7 m deep cutting
M6 Lancashire 1958-63 Boulder Clay 1 on 11/2 in 1968 9 cutting and 6 embankment failures.
1 on 21/2 later
Al Huntingdon 1956 Boulder Clay 1 on 2 Failures in 6 m deep cutting
or later Lias Clay 1 on 3 Failures in 10 m deep cutting
Al Lincoln 1956 Clays, general 1 on 2 Probably both Lias & Boulder Clay.
or later Lias Clay 1 on 41/2 Grantham By-pass.
2.5
3.25
3.5
4
4.5
equipotential A =0
0 method applicable
a)
a A=0
-1- A=1
1
F c', 0' method )
0
0
time
fig. 1.1
9
Chapter II
about 30 yrs by Rofe, Kennard & Lapworth (Kennard 1967), was built in
a worked out brick pit for the Central Electricity Generating Board's
are being reclaimed using P.F.A. from several East Midlands power
The Kellaways Sand is mainly silt and clayey silt. The 'redeposited'
clay used for the core and downstream toe is 'callow' from the
by the brick makers and dumped in the worked out pits. The natural
in Fig.2:2.
'callow' core was used to guard against a possible sand layer through
the dam.
rough, unmown or grazed and rutted in places. The top 4-5 m, which
are above surrounding ground level and visible from the main London -
Edinburgh railway, have been planted with trees. Rabbits are also
positions shown in Fig.2:2. They are all twin tube hydraulic piezometers,
with high air entry Imperial College type ceramic filters and polythene
Fig.2:2.
designed for the Great Ouse Water Authority (now part of the Anglian
pump storage water supply scheme, water being pumped from the River
Ouse and thence supplying parts of the East Midlands. The reservoir
fishing. Details of the scheme are given in Hammond & Winder (1967).
from the Oxford Clay in the area. The geotechnical properties of the
till differ very little from those of the remoulded parent material.
This till forms both foundation and fill for the embankment.
1963 and was completed that year. The construction of the main dam
commenced in the summer of 1963 and was completed by the end of 1964.
upstream slope has a 0.9 m gravel layer beneath 0.2 m concrete slabbing.
fill without any internal drainage and was used as a trial bank for
the main dam. The area between the two embankments has been filled
a hydraulic piezometer with a high air entry ceramic tip, the other
partly saturated soil (Bishop et al, 1964) so none were used in the
(Fig.2:5 & 2:6). Those in the foundations are the Maihak electrical
type and the remainder are hydraulic. All the hydraulic piezometers
are of the Imperial College type and have high air entry filters and
Saran leads. In the gauge house the road embankment piezometers are
is
13
pump storage reservoir drawing water from the River Ouse and it is
used to supplement the supply from the river during dry periods.
The scheme was designed by Binnie & Partners for the Bucks Water
Board (now part of the Anglian Water Authority). The quality of the
said to be Gault Clay and some Forest Marble. This till forms both
the fill and the foundation of the embankment (Little 1958 and Little
clay fill dams built in Britain (Civil Engineering & Public Works
by 1957/58.
was apparent when hand augering within the two zones. The 1 on
2.75 downstream shoulder slope (see Fig.2:7) has a 0.3 m gravel layer
below 0.5 m of top soil and the grassed surface is kept short by
mowing and grazing of sheep. A drainage blanket runs under the lower
Penman (1956) quotes Foxcote among the first British dams to have
low air entry ceramic tips, polythene leads and a Bourdon gauge pressure
14
(see Chapter 3) records of tips 2 & 19 show small negative pore pressures
the soil.
During June 1971 the manometer system for the main dam piezometers
from the mercury manometer and modified to be read with the portable
main installation have been taken from 1971 to 1974 except on D which
slope and four,(U,V,W & X,)are in the 1 on 15 slope weight block where
between two drainage layers and Z at the lower third point between the
between 1971 and 1974 except at X which was damaged by a site vehicle
in 1973.
Six shallow piezometers 1to 6,of the same type as used at Peterborough,
were installed in Foxcote dam at depths between 1.2 & 4.2 m during
tables were being formed in the downstream slopes but it was still
slopes. The Peterborough data indicated that they may well be. permanent.
very low field values of cv & cs for the fill materials, of the same
orders of magnitude greater than the laboratory values and the resulting
in order to obtain evidence for long term perched water table effects.
17
after 1959. Because of this short time scale only slopes with closely
spaced drains had any chance of being at equilibrium. The two dams
chosen for this part of the study were Bough Beech and Grafham Water.
& Lapworth for the East Surrey Water Company (now part of the Thames
is from the River Eden, a tributary of the Medway and the supply is
used to augment water taken direct from the Eden and from wells.
& Titford, 1971). The reservoir is also used for sailing and trout
fishing.
of over 30 m across the site. Within the clay are a series of siltstone,
September 1968 but the reservoir was immediately drawn down again.
Impounding proper started during the winter of 1968-69 and was completed
type high air entry tips and polythene coated nylon 11 leads were
placed in the lower drain, seven at 0.3 m intervals through the clay
were de-aired in June 1974. After allowing the pore pressures to readjust
head tests were also carried out on the same piezometers as a check
after de-airing the pore pressures in the downstream shoulder were all
The upstream shoulder, except in one case, all showed pore pressures
were closer than those at Bough Beech and it was decided to carry out
60 yrs for small to medium size excavations in London Clay (de Lory,
1957; Henkel, 1957; Skempton, 1948, 1964, 1970 & James, 1970).
for comparison with back analysis data and young enough for equilibration
has been very few cuttings of any depth excavated in the London Clay
since the extension of the railway network in the 1930's (45 yrs old)
until the recent road programme. Edgwarebury, then 9 years old, was
chosen.
Motorway length of the M.1, designed by Howard Humphrey and Sons, was
completed in 1964.
The site is in the upper part of the London Clay, just below the
base of the more silty Claygate Beds. Silty laminations were noted
between the weathered brown and the unweathered blue London Clay,
fissuring of the clay a little further east along the same cutting
that the ground water level is near the base of the Woolwich & Reading
in Fig.2:10. The surface of the cutting has been grassed and young
trees, mixed deciduous and coniferous, and gorse bushes have been
Five twin tube piezometers with high air entry ceramic tips of
the same type as used in the dam slopes were installed in April 1972
the blue-brown junction but otherwise all the piezometers were in the
blue clay. To remedy the lack of brown clay information two further
*The proximity and level of the chalk outcrop is such that the site
would be about half under drained before pumping.
22
clay whereas nearby all the case records of London Clay cutting failures
in the brown clay. Also it was decided to look for both a rather
older site, say 20-25 yrs and a mature one, say 100 years old.
The site is within the London Clay and the junction between
10.5 m below original ground level. The boreholes for the tunnel
is:
23
{Om
London Clay to 49m
Lower Eocene Woolwich & Reading Beds'
49m to 60m
Thanet Sands
at the base of the London Clay. Therefore the site is now fully
under drained!
The line was first opened in 1850 and was two track throughout.
Between New Barnet and Potters Bar are three tunnels, a total length
of the widening work was carried out soon after 1882 but in view of
the great cost of duplicating the three tunnels the stretch between
Greenwood Box and Potters Bar Station remained two track until 1959
1956 has been taken for the widened (new) side of the cutting.
the base width was increased by 16 m and the love' 6 m of the new
*The site will always have been under drained to some extent due to
the proximity and relative level of the chalk outcrop.
24
been lowered by about 1 m and a small retaining wall built at the toe
on the old side. The area instrumented is free from bushes. A few
the cutting but none could be found in the vicinity of the instrumented
section. Counterfort drains in the new side vary between 2 and 3.5 m
rather steep area over the tunnel portal where several minor slips
occurred in places along the old side but not at the instrumented
high air entry ceramic tips. Piezometers 4.& 6, in the blue clay,
standpipe. On the old side the two shallow piezometers, 8 & 11, in
the brown clay, are twin tube. Piezometers 9, in the brown clay,
and 10, 12 & 13 in the blue clay are all standpipes. The piezometers
position without trees. This result gave rise to the question whether
the slope.
on the British Railways' east coast main line out of Kings Cross.
This part of the line is south of the Potters Bar to Greenwood Box
stretch which was widened in 1956 and would therefore have been
side of the cutting was widened and therefore a date of 1885 has been
The site is within the London Clay and from a nearby well record
London Clay
fOm to 37m
Lower Eocene Woolwich & Reading Beds 37m to 49m
Thanet Sands 49m to 54m
Upper Cretaceous Upper Chalk 34m to 137m
penetrated
26
The trees, which are mature, are mainly silver birch with some oak.
The eastern side has a 1 on 3 slope and is grass covered. The grass
from installation to July 1975. The two standpipes on the wooded side
clay dam.
Aldenham Dam, was built for the Grand Junction Canal Company to
More recently the reservoir has been used for water supply by the Colne
Woolwich & Reading Beds (taken from the well record at Aldenham
House). The London Clay was used for the fill of the dam.
The dam in its original form was completed in 1795 and the
'headbank' was raised in 1802. It would seem that the dam gave a
no danger as the slips were on the inside (upstream) and only occur
sand and gravel to prevent cracking and that the downstream face should
in addition be covered with a thin layer of earth and sown with rye
grass.
recurring troubles it seems that the water level was lowered not
long after. One other recent slip is known, that took place in
January 1959 in the upstream shoulder. Apart from the two upstream
puddle clay core. Two sections, at peg 11 and peg 19, are shown in
28
Fig.2:13 and 2:4. These show the dam as it is in 1975. The wave
the dam close to section 19. The cinvert of the culvert is at about
acting as a drain.
March 1975 and the positions of these are shown in Figs.2:13 and 2:14.
Piezometer 3, like 1 and 2, goes through the crest of the dam into
17 are Casagrande standpipes while 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 & 16 are twin
tube hydraulic piezometers with high air ceramic tips. The remaining
two, 4 & 5, are also twin tube hydraulic piezometers but have low
air entry tips and were installed in sand pockets like Casagrande
piezometers.
1974.
29
and at regular intervals until 1974. These records have been made
Readings have been irregular since. The readings until 1971 have
Grafham Water dams (Al-Dhahir, 1967; Bishop & Al-Dhahir, 1970) which
The piezometer records from Barnsdale by Dr. R.J. Chandler, from The
University of Kent by Harris & Sutherland and from Cow Green by Rofe
In the London Clay, de Lory (1957) and Skempton & Henkel (1960)
Herne Bay.
embankment data.
Records from other clays are presented by Muir Wood (1971) for
the Gault at Folkestone, by Lutton & Banks (1970) for the Panama Canal,
by Kwan (1971) for the Welland Cut and by Kankare (1969) for the
Kimola Canal.
A
/
% ‘
22.5/ .,
.„ ..._._,
/ r/ ----__25 ____ _ _
1
/
/ N
1 •
\
I
/ / N I
%
// / 1
/ / N %
\IC) Peterborough
I
I
11 I 1
I f
I I
% 1
\ )
\
. °Graf ham Water!
, ,, 1
0 Foxcote
22.5/
275
.
._- O'Bough Beech--
-
, -- _
30,-
- - ,\ ,
- -, , ..... - ,
-- .
32.5
- U7J1j1j1
T.W.L. 3
5
1 23• 24• 2 5•
C1,
18 • 19• 22 • 4
C2Y Ao
0B
11• 12• 'Oxford' Clay 13• 17o
`Redeposited' Clay
7 8 'Redeposited Clay 9 29 Oxford Clay 10
•4 50 Kellaways Sand •6
Kellaways Clay
1• 2• Cornbrash Limestone e3
O 1971 piezometers
• 1970 piezometers
0 10 20 30
metres • 1963 piezometers
rolled clay fill rolled clay core - drainage mattress road embankment-
0 10 20 30 40 50
metres
OR1
Chainage 1707.5
GRAFHAM WATER
Hydraulic piezometers 0
1====a Electrical piezometers 0
0 10 20
metres
-t.
N
01
c=ernoimar
0 10 20 Hydraulic piezometers o high air entry
0 low air entry
metres Electrical piezometers o
2.75
3.25 \03
TJ
go 10° 110
5 6%
80 o 6 \ \120
W&X 15
D10 1
U&
Chainage Tips
ft. (approx.)
1707 D10, R6
1740
1760 X
1900 P.Q,R,U,V,Y &Z
2000 D4,R3,4,8,9&10
121===ant
0 1 2 3 4 5
metres
Road embankment
a R4
N S
v
Weald Clay fill
Weald Clay
Detail of piezometer
clusters 4-12 &
0 25 50
21 - 29
metres
lD
BOUGH BEECH
130
S N
0
0 /A\ Blue London Clay
100
EDGWAREBURY
4
120
110
3 • - - • • - • - -
Original Ground Level
(D
3
"` z,z1 1
••••••..
U)
Brown 1956
1
100 4
London Clay •
10
90 13
Blue London Clay
Twin tube hydraulic piezometer
POTTERS BAR
w E
4
London Clay
OAKLEIGH PARK
105
S N
100 London Clay fill
V
3
CD 1
1 010
CD 110
(/)
95
0 1
6
London Clay
90 Twin tube hydraulic piezometer
Casagrande standpipe piezometer
=====
0 5 10 Twin tube piezometer in sand
85 metres pocket
S N
100 London Clay f ill
V
3
013
(fl 14
95 16
15
0
•■■• 11.■•
■ WIMP ,101.■ ■••■■ .•■■ OEM MM. ,■■• ■•■• OM ■■•■
■mws ■■■•• ••■•• •■•• =MD ■
••■••■ =MM. ••■
017
.r■Ia ••••••• ■■•••■ ■••• ••■■■■ .•■• •■■ •■•■■• ••■•
5
90 London Clay 07 Twin tube hydraulic piezometer
Chapter 3
3.1 PIEZOMETERS
water and in saturated soils will equalise to the pore water pressure.
absolute zero) as the free water in the cavity will not sustain
by the U.S.B.R. (Armstrong, 1946) for Anderson Ranch Dam. The filter
air entry value of less than 0.5 psi (see fig.3:1)• Where a
recorded at Foxcote and Hanningfield (Little & Vail 1960). This was
probably because the constant de-airing of the system that had been
found necessary had created a wet zone around the piezometers free
a piezometer with a high air entry value filter was developed (Bishop
de-airing and is less likely to leak. All seals must of course have
the results is more simple than with the low air entry type since the
greatly reduced since the only way air can enter is by diffusion through
the water filling the pore space of the filter. This not only reduces
The choice of suitable tubing for these twin tube piezometers has
has a large water absorption and Nylon 6 has been found to be chemically
unstable. Nylon 11 has proved the most satisfactory and is now used
the polythene coated nylon 11, has the two disadvantages of greater
measured and their calibrations were not stable under field conditions.
large dams. The measuring systems used for the dams studied in this
at shallow depths. The porous plate used was of sintered glass with a
Using plates of a smaller average pore size they were able to measure
small diameter tubing meant that carefully de-aired water could withstand
gauges have generally been used where the signal has.to be transmitted
long distances. Resistance strain gauges are now being used for short
metal filter and is saturated with neatsfoot oil. The air entry value
is about 1.5 psi. Thus in partly saturated soils the Maihak instruments
behave in a similar manner to the low air entry value hydraulic tips
and record pore air pressure where this differs significantly from
Bishop et al (1964).
except fully saturated soils, even if a high air entry ceramic filter
is used they can only measure pore water pressures for a short time.
is made.
activated when the gas pressure applied is equal to the fluid pressure
on the other side of the diaphragm. In some systems the valve shuts
small response time but has the same disadvantage as the electrical
over hydraulic piezometers that the relative level of the tip and the
and two to valves in the hydraulic system, and two hydraulic lines,
(see Fig.3:2). The relative levels of the tip and the measuring system
3.2.1 Foxcote
the original B.R.S. low air entry value piezometers (Penman 1956).
dam and all leads from the piezometer tips to the gauge house are
5 mm O.D. polythene. Each tube led via a sleeve packed klinger valve
20 psi pressure, each pair of tubes to one gauge. Via another valve
each tube led to the de-airing manifolds, one of each pair to the
input side, the other to the return (see fig.3:3). All pipework
Measurement was made by opening the valve between the input limb
and the Bourdon Gauge and taking a reading. The value obtained was
gauge. The pore pressure was this value less the height of the tip
above the return tank of the de-airing system which was used as datum.
As a check, after closing the valve on the input side, the return
was opened to the gauge and a second reading taken. If these readings
differed by more than 0.3 m of water it indicated that there was air
predecessor of that used on all the other dams and is shown in fig.3:3.
via a filling funnel. This process gave the water every opportunity
only method was to allow the returning water to set up a pressure and
to control it by allowing the air to bleed via the valve on the suction
pump line.
system to allow flow. Little & Vail (1960) and Bishop et al.(1964)
point out the importance of keeping the pressure at the tip unchanged,
through the filter element to flush it. Large pressure changes at the
tip during the de-airing can cause anomalous pore pressures for
sometime afterwards.
The gauge house and the de-airing system have since been removed
above the valves and the two valves linked with a loop of copper tube.
The valves and Bourdon gauges are now suspended in a manhole and
3.2.2 Peterborough
the improvements made since the mid 1950's. All piezometers are of
the Bishop high air entry type described in section 3.1.1 and all
tubing leading from the piezometer tips to the gauge house is polythene
coated nylon 11,2.8 mm I.D. (3/16" 0.D.). The piezometer tubes each
38
(see Fig.3:4). This was an improvement over the two valves used at
cocks.
One limb from the three way valve leads to a mercury manometer
a known level and used as the datum. The scales on the manometers
The second limb led to the de-airing manifold which is in 2" O.D.
nylon 11. The de-airing system, fig. 3:4, had some improvements over
in the supply side so that water was pumped into the bladder instead
air-water cylinder and the return cylinder. The advantages were the
with intermittent pumping and the volume of water supplied and returning
Vaughan (1965).
39
the piezometers in 1971 the three valves were removed and the
attached to the third limb of the tee, which was then used for
de-airing lines.
required pressure. 3/8" O.D. polythene tube was used from the water
container to the gauge house. The back pressure on the return side
containers were used and the tubing was 3/8" O.D. polythene. If
the head of water, h, varies linearly along the tube, being 0 at the
is the elevation of any point in the tube then the pressure in the tube
is
p = (h - E) yw 3.1
40
With the coil of tubing at the same level as the upper container,
pmin, which occurs where the tube leaves the coil and drops down the
slope, is less than absolute zero the water cavitates and air comes
out of solution. It does not go back into solution but comes out as
relationship between the length of tubing in the coil and that up the
slope is important.
improve the quality of the de-airing, the water can be run through
be moved unless they are completely full and sealedl or air becomes
re-dissolved.
block with key operated klinger sleeve packed valves which are
The hydraulic piezometers leads from the main dam come to the
section gauge chambers at the toe of the road embankment. Here the
valves the transducer can read the pressure on either side of the
gauge chamber and from there the signal is transmitted through a multi-
core cable to the selector unit and receiver in the pumping station.
taken directly to the slave units in each section gauge chamber and
gauge chambers but otherwise it has the same features as that used at
The piezometer tips in Bough Beech Dam are all Bishop type high
air entry with O.D. polythene coated nylon 11 leads. The pressure
installed using a shell and auger rig, are in hand augered boreholes
long was used and the grout mix was 1:1:4, bentonite:cement:water.
1
This grout mix when used at Balderhead had a permeability of 5 x 10 m/sec
in 100 mm dia. hand augers boreholes with 0.5 m sand pockets. The
standpipe diameter used was I.D. for more rapid response. Otherwise
Two twin tube piezometers with coarse low air entry filters were
0.7 m long. As the piezometers tips, being plastic, were very light
and the tubing flexible, it was necessary to weight the tips to stop
required final depth. All but the last 150 mm were drilled in 52 mm
special auger.
It had been de-aired and then pressure tested for any leaks using
leads were attached and no volume change valves fitted to each lead.
The whole system was filled with de-aired water and the valves closed.
As soon as the borehole was ready the piezometer tip was lowered
down the hole on rods with a left-handed thread connector to the tip.
The tip was pushed firmly home into the pocket and the ground level
marked on the rods. The tip was then removed from the borehole. A
place the piezometer tip was replaced in the hole and pushed back to
its previous position. This ensured the best possible constant between
the piezometer tip and the soil and any voids would be filled with
plaster of Paris.
Once the plaster of Paris had set the hole was backfilled with
plastic soil pipe was thsapushed into the top ofthe borehole until
it was about 50 mm below ground surface. A hole was then dug over
the borehole to take a 0.3 m square paving slab flush with the
ground surface. The ends of the leads, which were long enough to
extend 0.5 m above ground level were kept coiled inside the soil pipe.
return lead. While the grout was setting, polythene bags were kept
the tapered Bishop tips. For these the final 250 mm of borehole
was identical.
45
block. A length of small bore copper tubing, about 0.5 m long, was
connected to the first of these valves, the other end of the tube has
a male coupling with an '0' ring seal which would fit the female
coupling on the valves of the piezometer. Copper was used for this
of the bag. A by-pass line to the peristatic pump was also fitted.
polythene coated nylon 11. The equipment fits into a box which can
to the closed valve on the input side of the piezometer with de-aired
water being allowed to trickle through the system from the supply bag.
This stops any air being trapped between the transducer and the
container and this is used as the datum, the level of the water above
ground level at the piezometer being measured. Once the datum reading
has been taken the pump by-pass valve is closed and a suction applied
to the pressure transducer and copper tubing until the reading obtained
This reduces response time. The valve between the pump and the
transducer block is then closed and the strain meter watched for a
few moments to check for leaks. If the system is not losing suction
more than 2-3 minutes. This strain meter reading taken from the
container and the piezometer, and then the valve on the return line
are opened. The head difference between the de-aired water container
and the return valve causes a flow of de-aired water through the
was performed after each reading. This regularity was very necessary
section 3.5.
parts (i) hydrostatic time lag which is defined as 'the time required
ratio at time t is
Fkt
u -ut = e Vyw
c g 3.3
ug- u
1
E — n
{ exp(n2T).erfc(n 2) — n exp(n 2T).erfc(n T1/2 )}
n -n 1 1 1T 2 2 2
1 2
3 4
where
n 1 = 1/2{1.1 ± ( p 2-40 1/2 } 3.5
2
the soil.
50
to:
6 = exp(-47rakt/A) 3.9
F = 47a (Hvorslev, 1951) 3.10
a = F/471- 3.11
F = 2711, 3.12
c1)2)1/2 1
logA + (1 + (1
approximation in eqn.3.9.
Vaughan (1974) quotes typical response times :for piezometers,
plastic yield of the soil Soderberg found 80% & 95% equalisation at
2
the surface of the cylinder occurred at times of approximately 10 r /c
2
and 30 r /c respectively, where r is the radius of the, cylinder and
levels against log time are plotted in fig.3:9 for four of the
(Vaughan 1974).
52
values of 4.3 and 5.2. days respectively. The response of the upstream
in Fig.3:11. For both tests the de-airing time was 30 sec and in
the first test equalisation was from the de-airing pressure. In the
21- orders of
commenced. In this case equalisation was at least 1:'
magnitude more rapid than in the first case. Thus resetting cavity
the change of slope of the equalisation plot for the first test.
This occurs where the pore pressure changes from positive to negative.
3.6.1 Theory
The Gibson (1963) equations for time lag can be used to evaluate
and
c
k
= --- 3.14
my
and Grafham Water Dams. At Bough Beech the piezometers all had mercury
manometers suitable for falling head tests and the de-airing system
shown in Fig.3:6.
in Fig.3:13. The board carried five manometers each with a two metre
together and the lower half of the manometers could be fixed to the
board on site.
The atmospheric limb of each manometer was connected to a manifold
which led to a bucket which acted as a head tank. The other limb
was taken over the top of the board and down the back to a no volume
change valve. Beyond the valve there was a tee piece, one limb
leading to the three way valve block on the piezometer. The other
On this lead was a screw ram pressure pump protected by valves C & D
on either side. From the lower valve of the pump a lead went to a
For initial site assembly the two halves of the board were bolted
together and the lower half of the manometer pinned to the board with
cable clips. The manifold was then removed and all manometers filled
with de-aired water. Mercury was then added until each manometer limb
was filled to the 1 m mark, the water being displaced. The manometer
valves were then closed and the manifold replaced. All other de-airing
three-way block were closed on the input side, the manifold lead then
lead was also connected to the same manometer and de-aired water from
the pump used to flush all leads. Valve A was then opened and with
valves B & C open the manometer was set to the measured pore pressure.
55
The next step was to open the two valves in the three way block
between the manometer and the piezometer and allow the manometer to
complete, the pump was used to apply the required excess pressure.
The pressure was held steady by means of the pump for 2 to 5 mins
then valves B and C were closed and timing commenced. As the test
until 90% equalisation was passed. Once the first 30 min of any test was
were in use.
the procedure used at Grafham Water. The valve on the return lead
of the piezometer was closed throughout the test and only the input
side used. The excess pressure was applied using the compressor and
Once the manifold valve was closed readings were taken on the input
made, plotted to the same scales as the test results. This was placed
over the test curve to obtain the best fit. Where p < 2 (which
occurred in all cases except one) the Hvorslev equation was used.
56
Fkt
= exp ( --)
VYw
3.3
For a Bishop high air entry tip 100 mm x 45 mm dia. the shape
Then
k = 1.41 x 10-6 m/sec 3.17
t90 (sec)
For example
t = 537min then
90
1.41 x 10-6
k m/sec
537 x 60
— Fkt
3.19
Vyw
Qt = 47a h f 1 + 1- ) Au 3.21
Yw /TT
4Tra Y
— Au 3.22
w
a ) Au
u = u o + (— 3.23
tip. The radial and time variation of the pore water pressure in the
Fk Au { 1 + 2---
Qt —
yw 3.24
viTT,
Fk
= Au 3.25
w
59
Qc„,,F
n = 3.26
4Tr"c2
results plotted on this basis. But Gibson (1969) extends the theory
to show that c can only be obtained directly when the pore pressure
coefficient A = 1,
/3
3.7.2 Equipment and Test Procedure
The constant head supply was obtained using a five gallon container
polythene tube ran from the water supply to the gauge house. Once
inside the gauge house the polythene tube was divided into two
on the return side. The second branch was taken via a pair of double
linked at the base. The two fluids used were paraffin (dyed red)
and water. Flow enters upwards through one burette, down through
its outer cylinder and into the outer cylinder of the second burette,
and finally downwards and out of the second burette. A four valve
the piezometer tubes to the manifold were closed and those to the
commence the test the valve to the return manifold was opened and the
excess pressure applied. Readings were commenced after the first hour
of test. To take a reading the valve to the return manifold was closed
and that to the input manifold opened. After allowing five minutes
for any perturbations, due to switching the flow from one piezometer
lead to the other, to die away, a flow reading was taken on the burette.
total flow. Only one piezometer was allowed to flow through the
burette at any time. From time to time while the flow was being
The rate of flow was calculated from the burette readings and
-1/2
plotted against t . Readings were continued for at least 5,
t = co (t 2 = 0). For most of the tests the plot showed not one
straight line as expected from the theory, but two with the change
All = Ah 3.27
Y
F is the same as that used for the falling head tests for a Bishop
Q.
k — 3.28
FAh
Q. x 10-6
k — m/sec
Ah x 0.402 x 60
Q. x 4.146 x 10-8
m/sec 3.29
Ah
62
For example
and Ah = 4.135 m.
k = 0.060 x 4.146 x 10-8 m/sec
4.135
= 6.02 x 10-10 m/sec 3.30
and Ah = 3.34 m.
-8
k = 0.0058 x 4.146 x 10 m/sec
3.34
-11
= 7.21 x 10 m/sec 3.31
for evaluating cs
v = —ki 3.32
k is the permeability
I = V/R 3.33
V is the voltage
scaled to total head and within the flow field, electrical conductivities
The vector flow areas associated with each resistor are indicated
in Fig.3:16.
(Oh)x (Ah),
kx Ay and q = k Ax 3.34
Ax Y Ay
and if
AV AV
Rx = x and R - --Y 3.35
Ix
and AV « Ah and I « q then
R
x
=
C
Ax
and R = C AY— 3.36
kxAy k Ax
The resistors are variable with a range over 10 turns from 100 Q
is 0.25%.
Piezometer system V F t
5
cm /gm cm hrs
x10-4 (6 = 0.05)
cD A
0
3
0
CD 3
7 3
•
10 11
50 mm
38 mm
50mm
50 mm
Casagrande BR S 'pot' Bishop high air 'butt-nosed' tip
standpipe entry tip high air entry
-,
0
C
(J)
-
mm
N
0
CD
cD
(1)
38 mm
38 mm-el H
suction pump
~
... I 1-1- filling funnel
.n ~
i- Hg manometer
compound
Bourdon gauge
5mm 0
I; >
6 pressure gauge./
~ 1-1-- pressure
cylinder
\~
to
" ~
piezometer tips
,'/
foot pump
-k
(Q
Piezometer installation FOXCOTE
w
w
-.,
to
W
(.1 to head tank
return cylinder
"" de-aired water
~ r-
~
l-
I-
l-
f-
r-
f-
f-
manometer
f-
I-
t:=
f-
l-
~-
i-- de -airing
-r--- ;:::= I- ;::: ~ manifolds
pressure
~( )
( )
gauge
=®=! de-airing
( )
:
I~~ manifolds
~
r- me cury
'.
-- ma nometers
: I
pressure
f- . --
sec Ie cylinder - ~
-f-
-f-
I-
:
to suction
- f- . \ pump
-~
,'-
~
-:-1'\
~ ~ t water trap
to piezometer tip to pressure pump inp'ut cylinder
.,.I Ia·
N
De-airing
fig. 3.5
to head
tank
de-airing
manifold
water oil
O
to slave unit
INN
vacuum9 pressure
+
to pressure pump,,_
to 4- 0
vacuum
pump
(P input
, ,,
\ \\\\ \17\: \\.\\
-71\------150mm 0 plastic pipe
52 - 100mm 0
plaster of Paris
52mm 0
tapered to 38mm 0
fig. 3.7
no volume change valve
A de-aired water in flexible polythene coated nylon container
B 2.8mm bore polythene coated nylon 11 tubing
C peristaltic pump
D brass transducer block
E pressure transducer
F small bore copper tubing
G connecter to valve on piezometer
H battery operated strain meter
fig. 3.8
GL
1
•
e .
E ,.
. c"
2
'5.,,ZT \t=
12
a)
-o
3
3
0
4
0
a)
-o
5
o_ Standpipes 7, 9 & 12
a)
-Q Twin-tube ,
hydraulic 6
6
8
10 50 100 500
days
POTTERS BAR
fig. 3.9
49
10
t =5.2 days
90
48
47
46
3
C tgo.4.3 days
0
45
X 44
a)
E
43
42
41
0.1 1 10 100
days
BOUGH BEECH
fig. 3.10
0
20
40
0
_ o
n
.1 60 6—
-
tx,...
t ip
o- level
w
80 c,--
....,.,,, a„
--a
21---c---0-c)----
100
0.1 1 10 100
minutes
PETERBOROUGH
fig. 3.11
r T
Variation of 6 with jjT [Gibson 19631
to head tank A
V
cp-
y to
piezorneter
0
0
0
OD
ts,
GRAFHAM WATER
fig. 3.13
1·0
0·8
0·6
u- uo
au
0·4
6 8
r/
a
fig .3.14
A
parafin /water burettes
to head tank
on dam crest
---
input manifold crossover
6
3-way valves
Valve return
to piezometer tip7.
Hg manometers
x, kx
fig. 3.16
66
Chapter 4
4.1.1 Peterborough
complete are the most accurate. By 1971 a zone of positive pressure had
67
wet 'redeposited' clay in the downstream toe had also become a zone
of positive pressure and is the only part of the dam which can be
to 4:16. The foundation piezometers, Figs.4:7 and 4:8, are all of the
Maihak vibrating wire type and only five of the original ten are still
in operation. Three were lost within the first two years. Readings
taken during the winter of 1972/73 are clearly in error. This was
due to the reading unit not being checked against the built in standard
show a mixture of negative and positive pressures but they all respond
closely spaced drainage layers. By 1968 only piezometers U7, U8 & U11
were not recording reservoir level, these three being in zones where
the drain spacing was considerably greater than the standard 1.5 m. By
have dissipated more slowly. By 1967 they were close to tip level
but even in 1974 they are all recording negative pressures to some
In the core (see fig.4:13 & 4:14) all piezometers except C2 &
ratios of between 40 and 60% assuming a linear head loss across the core.
& 4:16 are for the hydraulic piezometers only. As in the core,
was carried out in 1968 has not had any effect on the pore pressure
readings, very noticeably R6, R7 & R8, and it would appear that the
Figs.4:17 to 4:25.
ground level. This accounts for the swelling which No.39 is recording,
hydrostatic.
water level and the shoulder has reached equilibrium, see table 4:1.
Two piezometers, 21 and 29, in the upstream cluster are in the sand
drainage layers which are 2.4 m apart. The sand in these layers was
a million times greater than that of the fill (Gibson and Shefford, 1968).
layers, at least 1.1 m from a drain have responded more rapidly than
lag of these piezometers in the middle of the clay layer (24 to 26)
behind the two piezometers in the drain, is only about 75% of the lag
The large negative pore pressures, as low as 7.5 m below tip level,
pore pressures are tending towards tip level but the readings taken
exist, see Table 4:1 and figs.4:23 to 4:25, and the shoulder is far
Grafham Water weight block and road embankment, and Aldenham section 11.
Figs.4:26 to 4:28. Readings were taken from July 1971 to March 1972
and from March 1973 to May 1974, thus obtaining two seasonal maxima
and minima.
Water are plotted on Fig.4:29 to 4:31 for the same periods as those
until after October 1973. After that date the pore pressure reverted
was small,no greater than had been obtained on other occasions, thus
air in the system does not seem to be cause of the apparent breakdown
surface cracking occurred during the very dry late summer of 1973.
This could have opened a fissure through the grout allowing water
and 4:31. The pairW&X were installed in a wet patch (at Binnie &
in that area. The results however are comparable with those from the
other pair U & V. V and X were installed using dry bentonite instead
72
not on this section but has the same drainage conditions is also
fluctuations and the pore pressures obtained can be taken as equilibrium. No.4
water level and no readings have been taken since the end of April
The shallow piezometer records for the same section are shown
in Fig.4:33. The readings during March, April and May 1975 are
winter values and after a very wet spring are maximum values. An
indication of the summer minimum values are given by the July 1975
main dam and Aldenham section 19, the drainage conditions differing
plotted on Fig.4:35.
It was clear at an early stage that number 6 had not equalised after
It was found on the July 1972 reading that despite four months
marked and it was this experience which led to the practice of allowing
Dam are in the middle third of the layer between 15 m spaced drainage
blankets and with a surface gravel layer beneath the topsoil. The
winter values but only one summer reading so mean values will not be
at Bough Beech and falling head tests at Grafham Water. The equipment,
long term and (b) where pore pressures are negative the test is less
reliable and effective stresses are known with less accuracy. Of the
seven cluster piezometers installed in the fill, only three were chosen
for testing, otherwise all the upstream fill piezometers were tested.
allowed between two tests on any one piezometer. The test curves are
The Gibson (1963) curves of 6 against TIT are fitted over the-
In some cases the Gibson curves are a good fit, for example No.25, 30
and 38 (Figs.4:43, 4:45 & 4:51). In other cases the fit is poor,
e.g. 23, 27 & 34 (Figs.4:42, 4:44 & 4:48). Where the fit is poor,
minute and less after commencement of the test. During this part
of the test when the manometer level is moving rapidly, small timing
these errors would not account for the deviation from the Gibson
The constant head test results can be divided into three groups.
The first group, and by far the largest, are 20,23,27,30,35 & 38.
n -
QF
4 7T 1.5 c 2
4.1
defined as
k l a1
=— (—-1) 4.2
k 3 a 3
For A < 0.05 (k < 10-9) the curvature should be very small
For A > 0.05 (k > 10 9) which is the rest of the group, the
curvature and inaccuracy increases with increasing A . At the
This piezometer also showed a bad fit on the Gibson curves for the
and the dry lumpy structure of the compacted clay. This effect, which
where the comparison between constant and falling head test results
greater than the overburden pressure. None of the test curves show any
78
acceptable. One of the constant head tests was also carried out
was also run with a small negative effective stress and could have
the falling head method are plotted against those obtained by the
constant head method for the same piezometer. Eight results are
Except for No.20 the results of the falling head tests are
to carry out, falling head tests only at Grafham Water with some
Grafham Water, nine in the downstream shoulder and nine in the upstream
4:64.
D5, D6, D7, U2, U3, U4, U7, U8 and U10 (Figs.4:56, 4:57, 4:58, 4:59,
4:61 & 4:62). Several of this group tend to drop across the Gibson
group includes D2, D3, D4, U6 & U11 (Figs.4:54, 4:55, 4:60 & 4:62).
D4, the best example of this group, has t 90 = 7.5 mins, calculated
using the intercept of the two straight lines on the log plot as
100% equalisation, the test was allowed to carry on and after about
200 mins the equalisation began again. The curve crosses the 90%
The early part of the test was repeated on both D3 and D4 with
low and air is continuous, the permeability of the soil to water may
again towards saturation (Barden 1974). This may partly explain the
than the supply to the upstream one and the degree of saturation upstream
even with an abundant water supply, may never occur. This may explain
Moisture content profiles were obtained for the shallow hand auger
during the winter to observe any seasonal changes. The results are
used. The range of moisture contents lies between 20 and 35% with
14 and 18%.
and 30% and the profiles themselves more consistent. The placement
moisture content was between 18.5 and 21.5%. The only deep hale,
Downstream shoulder
Upstream shoulder
* This is greater than the permeability of the ceramic of the piezometer tip. Therefore
there is probably a leak in the piezometer system.
Table 4.3
Piezometer Level Piezometric level Pore pressure Effective stress kN/m2 Permeability
No m O.D m O.D. m of water before test minimum used m/sec
U2 22.9 42.8 19.9 174.8 125.4 3.63x10-11
U3 22.9 42.5 19.6 237.2 200.1 2.64x10-11
U4 30.1 42.7 12.6 93.8 69.1 1.43x10-9
U5 30.3 42.7 12.4 144.9 95.5 1.68x10-11
U6 38.1 42.7 4.6 61.2 36.5 8.55x10-11
U7 25.9 42.6 16.7 142.5 93.1 2.79x10-11
U8 26.2 42.5 16.3 198.7 149.3 1.26x10-11
U10 34.9 42.6 7.7 100.1 50.7 1.77x10-11
Ull 41.1 41.9 0.8 54.4 17.3 1.62x10-10
D1 23.6 23.2' -0.4 404.0 354.5 3.74x10-12
D2 23.8 22.9 -0.9 228.3 178.9 8.74x10-10
-9
D3 30.9 30.6 -0.3 249.8 200.4 4.85x10
D4 30.7 30.5 -0.2 74.4 49.7 3.40x10-9
D5 38.7 36.5 -2.2 93.8 69.1 2.35x10-1 2
D6 26.8 26.7 -0.1 332.9 283.5 4.18x10-11
D7 26.7 25.3 -1.4 171.5 122.1 7.43x10-19-
D8 -12
35.6 35.2 -0.3 150.6 101.2 6.62x10
Dll 41.8 39.1 -2.7 45.5 20.7 2.75x10-12
Reservoir level 42.8 m O.D. Piezometers de-aired between 30th August and 6th September 1974
Fill on ~
12
v ,- r-- ,\ M
I I
V D
--
:
I
8 I
,
/ I
~
I- - - ..........
r
~ 4
I 'iJ
IL~
, ..,"
...... J -
'-."./
.-. t
~ - ~
--..... ... ... ....
.
m ~~
-- __ L--IV- 1
.,
__ I -
3
?
_... - .... -----.
-4
~
A ..,j j~/'
-----
-l/
I
,
0"
-_ ... --
---
~"--
1-_ -/t--"~
... '
"
"
J 8 .
-8 '-
~~
J "- ~
-- ill---- J IAls olNlo J1 F1M ---IAul---rr
J IAIs OINlo J IFIM A1M IJ JJAls OINI::ls OINlo J IF 1M AIMIJ J IAIs -- -- --
~ 1963 1964 1966 1967 1968 1971 1972 1973 197~
12
v ~ r-- -"'\
I V*'---.. , ~
"
I .
8
.. 1
~ ,.
----L
r
.,. v - ..... .' I
-4 -0-9
.... (\
I
j/ '"
~
~"'V
....... ,- 5
---
'"
-~
- " .----_. r---
.........
....
.. ..
.. ,..-.......",
..........
-'
............ --... ..
-, ---. ---' ~
,,
.~
, ,{
~
\.. 5
9
-- -----.--- -_e
• ______ e_ - -_e
-0-5,)
-8
I
J I A Is OINlo J IFIM
-0-2 1963 1964
A IM I J J I A I s o I NI :: J s OINlo JIFIM AI M I J JIAIS
1966 1967
::m:::
1968
Jl A Iso I NI 0 J I F I M -::: IAul.::K
1971 1972 . 1973 197~
J ~
Fill on ~
12
V
r-' r--- "\ ...
8 I I
I
\.rF h-
I i
.,.
I
r-
et)
< 4 I 'V
.
~
et)
V
j
OD ~
J
3
II' ~r . . ..._. . . ...-:=.;:
~! 1
~- -- -- .;'" - .... . . . . . . 'it ;..--
- -:::~=-==!= :. ::.:
6 --/--" P\-:-
- ---- ----
.lI.
-4
29,.j /::::;, t\..ll ") ~
..........
~~ ~
G 10' • ____ e ____
~ .. IJ.
"ib V 1 ~: --
:~"'C
roo-
29
'"-
7'- - - - -
., ...
., ........
r--
\L .1-- ;"
29
-8
<>s 10
- - - I---
I
J I A I 5 OINlo JIFIM AIMIJ J IAIs I NI :~ I 5 OINlo JIFIM AIMIJ JIAIS --00-- JIAIS o N 0 J I F IM -- ~.--I[
1963 1964
0
--1968 -- -- Au -- 0
1966 1967 1971 1972 1973 197~
3
(Q
'"w
-.,
tp
'"
'"
,...,
12
I ,.- ....... 11\ V
.......... -- I~ ..,~ r--.....-...-=.:-,,:. ..
~ .-.---- -- .. ---~-..
I . .,..- ~
11 .,-- ... e----
I
-.
8
~4 / ~~" 1. . . /
23 _,~
I
__ i.
I
~/ 23
.,'"__ e
., "'~
... ....
1 _\t 24
__ e _ _
r
~ 4 ~~,J.
_J I
\/
24',
, .,)~r\ V :
/1.. .. 1
/" , . . .<
/ I
- H:1
..;"""'" ~
..--
\
\
I \l ~
- 18
-
/ ~
'/ \
A8- / ..
.-
(l) e \
24/ I '"
18'1\.
:::~
r.~ ~ -:.I" r---...
- ll._ --19
~ -........
- ,,'
I
-f";'- ---
,
19 i" ......
.," \
'"\" ,.
19
. ....
00 ,
h1 -
\ I
foil11 / ~ 7 ,--
10
-
\ .... , __ , .... e I
,I
12 ............ ,I'
., ... .,
~- "'\
---_ .
\
-._-- ...I~
•
3
I ""
~I , ~' :
~~_ . . '1
~'"
-4
11 / ,
I
A
12 _. .,
~
I~
"--
~
,,
v -
-8
1
'--"'"
~ L -I"-'
12
~
... ,t-
• ••• - "' K.
12
I r-" ""'- I,
I...,,.. fu; ~
'21 .. I
I
V- ~
8
~25
I
,
I
~= -<:~
25 _ ---.
, .- -
..
---- --.,..-.:.. --
-' - -- --- -\
~
?6 ~-~\. ,
-----L
r p ,\
~ 4 r 'V
-
.... ,..
I ...
" ...
,-- ..... .. ~
e-- 20 ~
, \- 26
,- -"'~--.----.
,
m "20 ~
L~_
V ~' ... "" "- ~'
/ L-----"' ...
--
t \ "Y ~n~
A25 ~ '~V:r
~~
N
14
- -- _.... , ...... ~i \
"JArr",.~
00 --" .i
~
14
I -~- -
13 ~ - - -e_
-- ~ I \ - - - ... -- _.
~
3
~ __ -
I.J~ ~
-4
V'( \v / ~ _e-_:":-~
13
-8
(Q
'"
tTl
-+I
tp
.t"-
O)
....
12
I
,, r-- I-- 1-"\
V- ~
n
,
8
~7 I ,I
I
27 _ ~ - ---\ i
... -- ... --
~
\ I
r ,I
~ 4
1\27
I..,.., I 'iJ ~
I
~
r---
.,.., \
\
31- - ..
~A,J I L~ '--..
/
V
/.... "
~ ~ j\ - _e __ ~_
\
jJ Ir .1
.. -I- _-. ....:.:;,."..
_J
,
__ e·
\ -w
-
~ 21
ct)
21 f, .......~ "'~Io .. ~ A
?1
, 71
I
.... ~~
22 ./
V'
/" ,
.. ~ "
,
,>' -~~ '\
I
"- - --o-e- __ ..
00
~I '~
"-
1~
-t- ..
v-:
~"
~'-
- - ~~
....
" -
17
./-
27
/
r--...
~,
"
_.. -.. -- -
--...."
17
-' ---,
\
\
....... ,.. ........
I ';;--/
.,.~
17 ~I _e
J .. ~.
.....
-
_\
3 ........
,'~ V~ A
,- V
1S
lb.J jlV,7(
,,' - - . / - - ;:;; ~--.--- 15 === =.,.-c.;.,-"
- __ e
:
,, --
\ I
-4 ~1 ~
/\ ~ - ---r6 16
N ~~ ,,
V\~/ \
r ....
-8
~ J'\ 16 _
~
1'.--
I
J -~
~ t
End of Construction 1963
C,2L=:J:::_:_'':c=:J
o 20
rnetres
1971
fig. 4.60
4
,......
'---- ...
~~
~ ,.V" -r----
,0
(~
~
/
V f'---- ~
" ~- r-Q -
--- ~
\
'"
1=1
/ ~ -- -- - /
rN
.6 ' I ..
'\ll-
/
-- rFiil- \ /
~ I {~
~--.~
VI ,
I
~
/ on
",
~
., - --- ---- ~ -. --- .-- .... -..
~---'
,,"-,-,
~~----
~-- . ---- ...---- -,-- .... .......... ,,---
I
-
~ -'-'
I ,-' 1"'-
~2
r
C\)
<
(Ji 'A. /" ,)
:r~
"- ~I I
~
"C
C\)
2/ j G::f. I "- ~ ~
/ . I
18
I~ J
I
,.• ~ - --.....
I
~
--- -~ .--J
----
3 II ~ r.l i'\.. -iFi;--
r
I
A
II "- , ...........
~ \
---------
L i-- I
J4
o
p
JO r1
~ If'- I ' ~
V ,.
I
~
---- """'- - F6
---- r---
----
F5
- i"---
--'1\
\- /
I / ' .........
J
i
I
~
\Y
I
I
'J
i
I ~ J
1 3 I !
I "' I
~6 -
4
! ! I
_IJ
~2
I
I/~ F5 ,
--:-00- ~6
F2
"
Jbf4
F3 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 --
1968 - -_.- ---
1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
54
())CP fl
l~
I ~ "- i
50
V "-. ~9 I
~
46 ,- ~ -Fiil- on-~- --_.".~ I
,I
- --- " --- --- "","""---. f---- -,
,
--
r--J
42
I
F'Z
I I
~ I
~ ~--
.......
........ "'--""" . """- .... ~- .... ,...-_.I--:L _
r
-- . """ """"' .... ..... , ...., " -- ~-
JN rff. '\ ~
r I
m /
<
Z~ ",rlJI --
.......
"~ :------
X-.
I
m
38 r--_
IJ I
/
~ --........ r\
3
F8
J Ir l
.I
-
~
\ /
- - ~
P
34
I
r•
I
I
I
I
---- \F10
'-- J
I
o I
I
'---
-~ h
I
------ \
~
30
J I -
f /
.J
26
'" I
22
F~7
.:0..'
?i~F9
18 1967 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
1963 1964 1965 1966 1968
--1 "'" 4-
46 ,
,
-- roo'
. ". --I.
-- -
~
Uh ~ Ul. t
~ ~
I
, r- ---- 0
- ------
U6.. _ _
~
--
\/'--...
~
r--- ....
I
~
~
~
--.--- ...
- .- ---:...;;;:;:;,
j r
'- ... ...... ........
42
, )
v
I"
~
,.
.-'"
"... "V'
_
IVV, ~
i ,... + ;ff;;v L
~
38 "'""
U6
r : I(\; \\(;1(// /
"If VI
I'D
< r-" /
co
-34 I
I ~ II
I
'I
1/1
IIV /
30
us
~ -' / lUG l I / I
3
U4
J
I
u~ / rI /
26
V J
I)UI.
I il f
I
t 'd\/< I
U~'
II? (\. n~ /
22
I U2~
9
o
A ~
18
J.J
~
;U; W
11963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
....,
to
".
\.0
GRAFHAM WATER - Upstream shoulder I piezometric levels
-..
(Q
.t'
,,--
. - . ....
~ 46
~
- -
-I-
o
:
I
f1-~
--
...
-
v
~ - U9
! U,o
-- ---- ,. ......
--_
J ./'\.
...." ~
l
E --- -
J - --............ l
-::-- t:::-:.
-
I
~ ~/ '\..-, :::...... ~ ... /
, x
I
I ".-- ~
42 .............. / ....... "-
~ 11 ~/
?--::::---
I
-0- I
#' I
I
/ /'" un ..-----
U11
, I ./
I
!! ,'k! - -U8 IV/"
v/ / ---
~
r
m
38
I ~' './ f/
-- ~
I
I
rL
.J
<
to ,-
-34 ~, ,II ,~
I
u;}i-;V
110
V _J
..,-
rv'
, )~~ U9 ~v /J
If/'
j 1\/
1J~ .,,''-vi
3
30
J
I
IN j I
U8
.0-.. )1
:U8
1\ ~
U7 ' /
I i
26
Ui(fVv
....
Ir-'
'\/
22
a
!='
18
-.., ~ ...
~ I I I II
~ (1 ---" '-~---TI ___ ~~_ -_l-'_-_f-'~-.t- I ~ , __ I _---r----I----t~\ I ,'""i, --+-
Fill on I
46[ I!
'
I ~!I. ~
" - - _ .... .,r- ........ __ .to _ _ J... -- I"
42r-U011
{___ [I\~~ I I I I I I \1 ~ \1 ~-I'--h 1
1 1 1 1 1
IlJ[ff:f Et\ fl I V: ~I
r
~41
3
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I
o
p
181 JC1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
.....
to
~ ~ ~ tit I _1 1 l!
I! 1~ .
46 r Fi II on r I I I
.,~. , r
:..,. II
.1
-r-
•I
roo- ",
I ~ ~------ -'"- - - - - - - ---t----.t-_ ~_
1 1-- _ -,..... _... .._ _--t----.. - ___\--I-....
__...
. . ,. J ",_ I _.......r
-4--
-L ,
I ~
42 ~ : _l ) ;
I /
I
I
, l' /
/
38 I 08 / .
r ~..., (
m
~ -<>-08
31.~0 ,"'J ~~~
r~ ~r
J .r _~f.-. a
r-~~~--
-______.----r-.- \
~~~
l
__ ~ '----r---L.-----~
\ r .....
~~
010
'\ L
L I I
3 09 / ~r;-og ; ~V 09 I I I
~
30
J
I I,
,010 ,
I ,
I
V-
o
.
06
~J~
. :,.....-:::::::
~--
.1 --.-:::::. -=:::t.A.
,r-,-r-, ./
v--- ~ __
/~
_. ~
.-I
r~
26 /7"'" I I I \ if ___ ~ !~~ ~1---....1 -
u, IIJ\A_
...·"106 ,,-I--::__~_ I ~ 1 .LV- - I 107~ I I-'
I I
v
181~---+----4-----+----4-----r----4-----r----+----~----+-----r----+-----r----+-----r----+-----r----+---~~---+--~-r----+----1
1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 ,1973 1974
-~ ... .L
Fill on ~
46
, /-- - '. --- too-
I ~ ~ ! !
42 I
-0--
C7
~
trl.
I
V~ ~
I
t
I ~
I
</ ~
~
/
t?S..- --- -=-=--
~ t--
" t- ----
C7
cs
---- ----- ~,- .... -
--,
r--.l
~",- .... to- ...... _.
l.--/
~---
~
---- ~--- I-~
\ ... _. '"
"".-~
... ...
.....
,/
V
....-- ~-
C7
Ij
,I \ j>< r---.......\,../ ...--- ~ ~ .~ ~ ~
~
'f
'\...
I7C- -
'[J L-=V ~[
~~
res
38
~ "V 1/ -~ C6...,...... ~
r
CD
<
I
JA ,
/
/
~ ""./V
- \ I -'I...., ~
....... Z " , - ~1
- r I
~ ~- C4
~~ J\ .......- ~
L---- Vc2" C6
---
CD J
34
,/ ,I / A
-yv
~
- /' k.......-::::::
lfcifcs) ~~ r-.,.' . /V ~ ~ I--"""
./
C5 I ......... ~1.
-0- I V~
Jj
, r , I
v y
--- ~
J
A ~
~
V
30
J
I IV
I'
I
w /
V 1(- I
3 let I-"""
II
26
c:d~ V
I,...., I ~ / /
~\f
,... V 7
--
C2
22
l---/~
P ~
o
/ ./
~
y-\JY-
Cl ~
18
L ~
V
1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
--t\
to
l"-
~
GRAFHAM WATER - Core I piezometric levels
W
.......
tp
+" Fill on ~
~46 ~ I- -- I-- -
t
l'
fi ~ .,,-- -- \/ ~
--- -. ! !
--- ............. , .... -.... ......... _. . .... -- ---- ---- ~'"
..........
~ ~
I' '- ~
~
-
~
;- " C10
,. l' -1 r----
\ r- ---.
~
~~
- --- --
-- ~ --~ ---- -------
~
~1
,""-,L~
~:o
--
-----r ""
38
J I ~ ......... -G...9
r- ............ ~I v--- '-- ~V ~ ~~
m 1i I ..
C9 C8
<
CD
34
~10
I
r.l i
I
r I
I
---.I
, \ -./
./
~
\
I
,
(
I
I
J
, I I V
,
..""
3 II I
,.......
J C~ ~
30 I I V
o J
r-1 l
r""
/
P
26
~9 I) ~ /~
.) I /
22
~81 r0 ~/
18
.... '" ;
1.0
36
J ! ! ! !
32 -
r-
eo
< - )
v----.. LB.2 -..... ~ 1"- ..
--- ............. 1
h~
J R3
eo
J~
\ II R2
3
28
-0-
R10
1
I
~
~
R/.
I'...R10
~""""--
r
r----
-.....
~
-- 100
.fi.
R3
- """
~
I
~r
f-.
. ~/
~
21. R8
~9
. 'I
"' ..--
......
RL.
----
~
9 011
RJ?V
~ ~
I~\ L1 ~ L
9 R9~ rl \ L V\ ~~ V
20
vrv
~
VR7 '~
""I~
-/
~~ h ~
n"" ,
W I
16
12
1963 1961. 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
-t'I
(Q
+"
~
GRAFHAM WATER - Road embankment I piezometric levels
U1
~
to
......
~
1.0
en
36
l ~ 1 ! ~ ! l
32
r
m
< I
m
28
3 r~ - '- - R1
--.......
-
!
~/\ R5
I-v L 11
-- -- ... _---
i'--... ~
/r---- v ti
24 1-- __
~
R6 • \ ....... R6
I
-
,.....
~
~
9 C
'" I
~
....
t U 1\
-0-
P R1 !
20
~\j v
'I
16
12
1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
-.I :......, J
1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1971.
70
s'-
I---- _
- 19
~
a
A
I
f Yo 19
36-
1//''" K
60
tf)
OJ
.....OJ
L- 117
E
55
. //' ~
."v
/
OJ
I~/V'\: ~
>
OJ
,;[ ..L /
50
('" ~
1
u
.-
.....OJ
L-
{;/
I
0
N
E
/ ld
OJ 45
.-
Q.
V
(
- --- -
-- 39
---
1
;H;31
1.0
~ >
J\.r-f
311~3!
19
~
to
'"
~
-.....:J
35
I
1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
70
i
'""'f'\ I
(f)
.f'
-a.
fill on ~
65
CO I .-L.
o /'~ -=-~
~
V
~
o
/
If sic
(/) 60 I
(l)
.....,
'-
I 30
!Jr/
(l)
30 E
J J
r
-0-
55
(l)
J 1//
33
"'V'
>
(l)
50 fA 3~ /1
~2
u 32
30 ,-
,/ f:-jV f
.....,
'- ~
~
~
(l)
3~~
20 E
-
2Q.. 20
~ ;3
-0-
r /
~45
/
(l)
33
a.. \
\
vV
40
35
65 , fi 11 on rt.
..Y
-
~~
~ ~~
--- :
o
~/
lIP
i
o
(/) 60
!I
OJ
.....OJ
L..
J
I
III V
j ~ f{
E
55 ~
35
IJ/~r0/ ~
..JI
V I
34
-0-
37
OJ
>
OJ
.....L..
50
34
rIfr Is3'7
/35
.!J
A
!
38
OJ
E r."--
M 1/ ----./
-0- o 3~1 U
N ~5 I
<37
OJ
a...
A
V
V\ lJ
40
-oft
(Q
+' 35
-loo
to
Upstream Shoulder Piezometers II BOUGH BEECH
1958 1959 1970 1971 1972 1973 1971.
70
to
.....
N
o 65 ,fill on ~
~
~-:-.........,
0 ./ .- ~
--
~
II I ~
0
(/)
<l>
L-
-+-
60
J
II
II II r
~ If
<l>
E
<l>
55
IJ r -
Id
/ h~l
>
<l>
50
2~ _
I
:r7~-- ~~~ ~[/
u
!: 22 I f\
i
¥~
<l> l , 'j
21 I
~fI
E
0
'\ &3
It:Ii , I iI
~ 45
a..
I
~t1
I~ '-:J vV
"- ~\~ VLzs1
~, " J
I
I
25V22 I,
40 I
35
fi II on ~
65 I
-3-
'-:- .........
0 /' ....~ ~
."
0
60
!/
I
/ // I
(/)
Q)
L..
..- J / (f /
/
I
j ~ ,I
Q)
Q)
>
Q)
55
!J
,_ J:J __
7=fr= ~----
r
-/ll--
-
.... 29
. . . ----..I
if
r;
- -I ____
'"r
u 50 2f;--...J
/26
L..
....-
Q) ,
_\28 .N I
E
vU ~ -2U
0
~ 1.5 ~r
""""
a.
'.
40
(Q
..... 35
N
-a.
Upstream Shoulder Piezometers VI BOUGH BEECH
1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1971. I
70
I
to
I
/' """"""
"- "-
o
o
60
I //
-----
Vl
ClJ
I 18
L-
J J
18 ...-
ClJ
Il 18
E
j .:J
-0- ClJ
55
IJ r -
17 >
ClJ
50 / -' ~
~
1..§..--
U
L-
...-
'/ V
~ c.---- ~
-0- ClJ
~~/ 16 _
-~
V
16 E
~ 45 IF - ~~~ L
"'V'
V
V
~
ClJ
.-
D- ~V ~ / '~ ~- r--
.7
~
~
-o!5 . 1S ~
~
~
40
""""
~/V ....
35 ---.~ - --- -- - I
fill on i
65
I ....5L.
iii"'" -:- ........
0 ./ "'-
/
0
60
I)
~
(/)
ClJ
L..
+--
J. /
ClJ
E
55
j ,- ~
ClJ
IJ ,..",. 13
/
13 ~
>
ClJ
50 /
u
L..
+--
ClJ
V
E
0 ~
~ 45
.-
n. 14 _
-. ---Ir ~--j:
.. I ...
, ''II , -, -__ 2~--. --- ,,--........ -.... ,. - 2 ,-- ~ --_---s.... ~- ... - ---- ~
- ---
------ 10-----
.--"l
-"2--- ~3
-~
1-' ,
'-. ""------
, 10"',' ..........
~"
~....~'Jlt.- ... .- ~----
---'
---
...~"
10---
~
40
}fj \~ ~ -----
-f'I
to
.... 35
N
W
Downstream Shoulder Piezometers I BOUGH BEECH
1958 1959 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
70
-t'\
to
.t'
N
fi II on t
55
.t' ...sL.
o ~ "'" -=- . . . . ~
o
50 II ~
/
(/)
Q)
'-
...... J /
J
Q)
E
l:bJ
->
Q)
Q)
55
7 r -
8~
5;~
4
5 u 50
'-
......
Q)
5
\.7
- roo-
\.... £t .. ~.
-~
/ B/ ~/\
~ ~liS7
7. . . .
E
o
N
17'
5
~~ '\J.,; ~ t'----
.... '-.~ r\. 5 - 7_ ~
_
~
C----- ~ 1'5
8
Q) 45
0.. ~V V
80 -
40
35
65 , f i \I on rt
,- .........
I
0 - -. / "'- V I
- I
60
1/
J
/
(/)
<U
'-
o+J
J /
~
<U
E
J I
r
55 -
<U
1.A2: I
>
7
I
OJ I 12
",, 12 ...... '" ... ----:?- 9
,, ,
1--"
50 ,, ,, -,..----- ~ -- .-ll.-.
u
~~
.~ .~ ...... , ,
' ... --- --.--
----
',,,'
-~-- ---
'-
o+J 10
OJ
- ~ """---
~
_ 11
- - ~
11"-V '/ bI
\10
E
0
- .--::
--r-- 9
I
N 45
ill~
(l)
I
a. 10
-
40
-h
to
+' 35
N
(J1
Downs tream Shoulder Piezometers III BOUGH BEECH
....,
lC 1971 I 1972 1973 1974
'"
N GL
fJ AISI 01 NIDI J 1 FIM M A M J J A S 0 N D J F M A
en
~ ~
.............
~~ t:----.-~ ~ /
V .A
-......--.....
~~~
A0 -1.0 - .-
_~,'r""
'Q' - ~
rtr
~
~
B0 -2.0 t
-u
CD
~ -3·0 ,I -,-t--t---t--i--I--+--L--1
3
CD
.......
::!.
()
co -4·0 I
<
CD
3
~
CD
-6·0 1.-1-t---+-+--t----1:---t--I-r-i
(Jl
.. >d _,t {
1971 I 1972 1973 197L~
GL I J I A Is I 0 IN I 0 IJ I F 1M tv1 A M J J A S 0 N 0 J F M A
If~-;-~lp/~I I I
'\' .~
!!
I r---.-;,-C-r-r '-.l ,
J.
''"
~, ~{~J~(\~--_?! I 12
r IF! w" 1\\ i ~7r~d~-!f I
'lJ
ro'
'N
o I, I \,!/ I
!
1\./~
CD I I I
< I I I I
CD
Ii! I I ,! I !
I
,
IL_1_-'_-'
I_I_~I
I
-5·0 I
I
I
T I
I I 1 I I , I : 1
I
I I I
to
!
W
-6·0
M
I I
I
I I I I I I 1-
I! I I
I _________ ~_
,--__ L IJ I I I
"
.l:'- -/·0
N
'-J PE-rER BOROUGl-l - Do\vnstream shoulder pie 7 orneter.s
-t\
~ ~"
~~ ~.~
G
o -1·0
~
~\
V
~ - V
~ 1""""-"'"' ~
n
-"" ~
IV - --ED
-.
"""t:I
.",.~ 1-1
r:t .~ H M- _
I~ .,.---
H -2·0
~r
'...
... ,.. ~
~ 1- ",[:.J
"'U -3·0
roe
N
0
3
ro
S- -4·0 ,
()
--I-.-~ -.~
CD
<
ro -5·0
3 -6.0
ro
..,
.-+-
ro
(Jl
-7·0
PETERBOROUGH - Berm piezometers
. 1 ,L I
"I1 a LJ'i
~ I I 1G~ 7:) Go._ 1973 ~19/4
\1 \I( I I ! ,I i I 'I I /1 I i i
r-rr
-3· 0 I I' ! I II I \ I: II
3 d I I I \ Ii' !I , i 1
;?. il I I! I I I i
~!.
I I I
:. -£.·0 I
~
¥
~1[-'4=
II '..
I
I!
H---Hi
I
:
I ;
II I
I
l!t/H-1
~{)_'__L
II II I I
!.
I
- ~ r0--!I ·_--}..-.2 I II L
I I I I I
I ....!
, I I
I"
I I I I I 'I'
-
'"
f.
,r--
J'/' I I t
L..- -.....,..,
!---+-=!~.,..
,
__ I I . I •__ ~~""'''f=--==t....r::l I
-:;.01-1 J I I I I ,~- -r~~'~~I! I ~I--+--+-+---~--7----i
3
I I I I
Q
.-t-
-,
~ -6·0
I i I I
to
+" -7.0
N
LO ,.... 0 \ r
LJ('\KC' /-\i vl
H /\ P,,~ \ ~
fIJI--
I \ 1- r-t= Kr, n
i-x.OGO
-.S .' J }..
e rnDQrl~rnerl( Die70mer ers
I
i
II
~
~ ./
r1rr- ~
---- ~~
T0- r---... r----.... ~
1/ r---..
+
~,
--- ro) ~ V
V V
,
J
-u -2.0
,Vu \ ~
/
CD
N
o
3 .~
. !J /1
CD
~ -3·0
~
~ III \ J
n
10V \ /
CD
<
CD -4.0 11 i ~
'\ /
~ J~
3 -5·0
CD
.
Vl!I
.,-+- -
CD
(J)
-6·0
-7·0
GRAFHAM WATER - Weig~t block piezometers
r\ Aol
}. (
(/)
L.
0)
...:-....
QJ
E
o
1'1
OJ
'0...
- d
(1.)
~--
d
.. 7-.-....
.1::
c.))
'(jj
~.
>.
0::
UJ
!--
<l
--<.:
. level
Piezornetrlc
fig.4.31
GL
,V 6 .J:l
-E 1 fA-'
~-
~ -
~-
L.:.J
- 2
Q. ,(3-. .. ----6).
3 ------ ~-0
G
~1 ~ ......
-
-E)
-Q)
3
>
Q) roo
4
6
-0 I'"'
C ...
:J l,
0 5
L-
en
3 6
-0
Q)
~
.0 1
..c. 7
...- n'
c...
0
Q)
8
.
II
113
u
10
M A M J J
1975
ALD E.NHAM
fig.4.32
1
-E ~-..{ - - - - I
,~:
N~
2 f_O,_8___ ~____~____~____~__~_\__~
o11
Q)
> 3
OJ
u
C ~-----~----~----4-------·~----
::J A M J J
o
t- 1975
tJ) GL
o
1
(lJ
..0 _.0-0-
9 -10
4 ' __ . 1 - -_ __
ALDENI-Il-\M
......
<.C
~
w
~
---- - - - - -I T - - - - - -. - - - - - - - _________ _
t )- f- I
1971 1972 1973 I 1974
GL IJTAfSTolNloi JIF IMHMI JIJ IAISlolNlol J IFIM[AjMI J IJIAISIOINlol J IFIMIAIMI J
.h I ~~
-1·0
u 10
CD
N
0 2003
3 . -2·0
ro
.,
-to-
-.
()
CD
<
5°04
-3·0 I I I I I I I ~~':~TL- I
~ ~~~:L
1---~ I __~
j ~plt~r I
CD \
<.0
~
-7.0 iL
· __L-~___~~L--L--~~--~---~~---~~~~--~~--~--~--
w
U1
FOXCOTE - Piezometers
T.W.L.
2.75
3
I-1
rotted clay fill \ '---•4
=====t • piezometer
0 5 10 15 pore pressure (-ye)
metres •---{ Oa
(+ye)
-1.0
YZ -- L.-.
0 ...------!..- .;3*1..2
%1■50.......A......
OM=
, r-P.------------
„..,....-.....,...
- -----.....
Z .-c
-2.0
Opl a WOZaki
? ;
-3.0 .-...-.‘.., 4
-4.0 Li
g -5.0
-5.0
-7,0
GRA=HAM WATER - Downstream shoulder piezometers
GL
E
2
3
a)
7
4
-o
0 5
L._
cn 2
5
6
a)
7
_c
a)
0 8 2
10
M A M J J
1975
ALDEN HAM
fig. 4.38
GL
1
17
E
15
-117 t.,_.:
2
> 3
•
IV ..c
4
M A M J J
0 1975
GL G js ,
ta) v7. 16
at---;-(------ 14
0 1 1%-"---ES— ,_=
N 13
n ,..0-0-
14 16
—0-
13
A LDENH AM
fig. 4.39
13
0- .••••••••
14
-0 16
13
•••••••••
max —
0 5 min Piezometric level
metres
.\ \
\ \.
C 40 \1 .14
0
2 1/44i„:\
\
\,
...,
tn \\ te
= 60
0 t 900 = 1 05 min
• Nk.:\i
20
u =1 \\ ,
,
0- k= 2.23x1010 m/sec -,,;:i.\
80 ..,,
....
100
0.1 100
10
Time ( minutes)
0.2
0
E
0.1
0 Q.cr-.. 0.117 mt /min
20 k- 1.25x10-9 m/sec
0
LL
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
/rf hrs
fig. 4.41
-. '•04
— 20 . .
-. I.J .-- 0.2 tgo = 3.35 min
T3 .
\
23 Jk = 7.22 x10-9 m /sec
c 40
1:5
tn
60
O \
■
\ \
L1.1 80
V 6
100
0.1 1 10 100
Time (minutes )
1.0
o
0.8
E
0.6
Q.= 0.59 ml /min
a 23 -s
k = 6.40 x10 m/sec
0.4
0
LT:
0.2
0
0 02 04 06 08 10 12 1.4
hrs
fig. 4.42
..... . __ __ k
._.--__
-_,----_,- ,_.-I..., -
...... . -....
"C \ '...•
''' ,, ''''‘:‘*••• 0
20
I.
.2 ON, \
O tD\ \
---- 40
)
\ \
\
p = 0.04 t90-= 537 min \
25 \ ,
k =4.38x 0-11 m /sec .
10 100 1,000
Time ( minutes)
0.02
Clcc= 0.0055 ml / min
C
25 k =6.16x10-11 m /sec
E
E
0.01 ,,,..
C „...------15
....----a---'''
-,-)
--r-- C)
O
0
02 04 0 8 10 1.2 1.4
1 (hrs)
fig. 4.43
0
— 20 ... „ N
. t 90=3•72 min
..
■ . 2 \ '' 4 06X10_9 m /sec
'7 Pk=5
40 N N N4 .
0 \ . .
10 \ \ \
N 60 \
N \ \
N \ \
N
Cr 80
...., .
---. .....
100
0.1 1 10 100
Time (minutes)
2.0
C
- E 1.6
E
1.2
.., t.
0.8
Q. = 0.44 ml /min
0
27 k= 5.32X10-9 m /sec
0.4
0
0 02 08 10
04 06 1.2 1.4
1 (hrs)
fig. 4.1.4
_.
, -------;
- -1 -. ---2. .
..-,-.., .
0 •2 N.-. \ \
.. ,.-)
20
---- 40 \
\ i)
\--
\
C \
0
— 60
u =0.02 t 90 = 32.4 min
30 k- =7.25x10-1° m /sec \),
\\N
\\,‘
0 80
CT
LIJ . .,
\-•(-D
100
0.1 1 10 100
Time ( minutes )
0.10
4.••■•••••
o
Eaos
I
0.06
0.04
Q. = 0.060 ml / min
0
30 k = 6.0200 10 m /sec
0.02
0
0 02 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
1/IF ( hrs)
fig. 4.45
0
20
t 90 = 15.2 sec
32 k=9.3x10-8 m/see
40
C
0
60
0
72; 80
cr
1.1.1
100
0.1 1 10 100
Time (minutes)
10
••■•■...
0,1'0 -0 -0 6 o 0 -0
E8
6
0
4
Q, = 8.4 ml/min *Note:- k of piezometer
0
LL
32 tip =.1x10-8 m/sec, prob-
k = 8.90100-8 m /sec* able leak in system.
2
02 04 06 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
1/11-t-
(hrs)
fig. 4.46
--0-c-p- -
20 r -.,04
-\\;„,
.\
.•
\ '
.\
40 ■
.2-)
C
0 \\\
\
-1-* GO
0 ,FI = •1 t 90=912 min
cr)
3 k= •57x10-11 misec
80
CT
100
1 10 100 1,000
Time (minutes)
fig. 4.47
0
.f.. N.
3 \
20 Ilk \
■
\ 4\ \
N4
\ \
40
\
c--
0
60
tn
=0.1 t90 :: 89.5 min \
\
34 k =2.63x10-1° m/sec
D 80
cr
y...
100
0.1 1 10 100
Time (minutes)
0.10
3 4 Clec=0.047 ml/min
E k = 5.14x10-10 m/sec
'0.08
0.06
0 0
0
0
--
0
0.04
0
0.02
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 8 1.0 1.2 1.4.
1
( hrs )
fig. 4.48
:).„---:-
-,..-',N, ,
.....-, N
20 N .)\
\N
\c,\\
.04\
-\\
40 \ \‘
\•
C \
\ k
60
ji.to.oi t90= 2 98 min
35 k = 7.88 x 10-11 m /se
\
\I
80
Lil
100
10 100
Time (minutes)
. , .
35 O., =0.0058 ml/min
k =7.21x10 -11 m/sec
0.02
E
0.01 -----5----
C .,1)---
/co .
0
0 02 04 0•G
6 8 1.0 1.2 1.4
14
(hrs)
fig. 4.49
0
20
. ji =0.2 t 90=1.66 min
37
-2
. \ .04 -8
k=1.42x10 m /sec
40 . \
.7 \
C . \
0
-4.= 60
.
ci \\
\\
,„,\
6 80 \
0 t
N 4
100
0.1 1 10 100
Time (minutes)
0 0
c
1.2
0
r
_ 0.8
0
LL
0
G 3 7 (ICC unobtainable
0.4
0
0 02 04 06 08 10 12 1.4
(hrs)
\
0 \
:47 60
0 L
\
\
\1/4
-.1E-5 80
CT
LIJ
10(
0.1 10 100
Time (minutes)
0.5
C
C 0.4
0...=0.128 ml/min
E 38 k=1.58x10-9 m/sec
0.3
C5 ,-._...e.. ,
0.2 (IL
0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
(hrs)
fig. 4.51
Permeability (m/sec)
10-11 le°
-40
-20
35
03
340n 8
30 `'
35
El 37
38
34
30W
60
0 270
CI 25 0
cn. 33 23
0) 80
■‘.0
(1)
100
a) LI 27 ell
25
.&•0 0
20 23 1.
120
CD
t4■
140
2013
160
2"
10
10- 10-g 10-a
BOUGH BEECH
fig. 4.53
0
L.e...0...
20
... '
■ i„.
.
40 „
^ 60
•0 p =1 t90 = 6770 min .
.. ..
Di 3 - x10-12 m/sec
k =47 .
-4.
80 ....
ti 100
10 100 1,000 10,000
0
Time ( minutes)
CT
w
1 10 100 1,000
0 1 I
60
80
t9 0)
100 — 46■.mimm■I.•■■•■
GRAFHAM WATER
fig. 4.54
GO
80 N. .
0 t90 ' •-n-i71.41c I ..,9_+__ _......_+_...4
0
100
10 100 1,000
Time ( minutes
w
10 100 1,000
0
0
a)
20
t 90 = 7. 5 (3070) min Run 1 0
D
D4 k= 3.40 x10
9 12
(7.65x10 ) m/sec 2 +
40
GO
tor,
80 -- \-- 0--<-4,_-::%7---(-r--c-------
-o---0,--..J...„,..
\ cb-
U90 )
100
GRAFHAM WATER
fig. 4.55
o
40
- 60
~
-
0
I
o5 }J =0·2 tgo= 10,000 min
k =2 . 3 5 x 10-12 m I sec
C 80
0
...-
a
. (/) 100
-a 10 100 1,000 10,000
:J
0- Time ( minutes)
W
1 10 100 1,000
\of- 0 --- - ....... ....
~~
o
- ~ r--..
--- -
- ........... ~
...
- 0
"-
....
OJ
OJ 20
.......
.
~" .....
......
"
~ ~
", ~
"-
en "-
ClJ ·7 ··2 , " ' \
o
40
~
" ' . ~ 1\
\
,
~
" ,, ,l
~
~
~
,
~
\ \
\ \
60 ~
80 .,
"~
~
~~ ~
100
G R A F I~ AM WATE R
fig.4.56
--
.... ..
---C-. 75- -,- --- .
20
,, %.,
..--, •
2
\
7 \
40 \ 11")
"t-,
2 ,... \
. , \
60 \ -N,
\ N \.
1)=-0.7
tin= 3160 min \ .,
\,,,\.,
D7 12
, .,
k = 7•43 x10 m/sec
80
C
0
C100
10 100 1,000 10,000
c5
Time (minutes)
CT
w
10 100 1,000
0
0 --o--;--i
-
--- :*----
-..
......____,- -...
a) 20 -. --...
.2
0)
..-.
A- N
° 40 N
2
60 \
p=0.7 6=3550 min
D8 l<=6 62 x 10-12 m/sec \,
80 N.' \
N. \
-N,
100
GRAFHAM WATER
fig. 4.57
20
40
(1) 100
10 100 1,000 10,000
0
0
1±1
1 10 100 1,000
0
96
s.. s.
+.5...
o 20
Al s..,
9:
-*\
L._ \
.. \ %."
'`. 's
W
%
5 \
40 ■ \
2 "\
.
\
\ \
\ N \
\
60 t
\ \
p=0.5 tgo = 646 min . \ \ ..,
U2
\
N..
_
100
GRAFHAM WATER
fig. 4.58
'-'7,----:::•-7.--,- - _21 ,
-- ‘... -r....... --. --- -...
--- %.2....;-.
.s" ---. -‘,r. .04 -
20 ..,.._::_
•....,
\ ' ,•2 ,
--.,.::--;
.. „.. „
.7 ,..,,..
. \
40
\ \
\ k)
%
— 60 Nt-\___\___
p =-- 0.2 t90 = 891 min \ . \`
••■■•■••• U k = 2.64 x10-11 m /sec
\:.>
\ ,..
L-
80 .
,
Equalisat ion
...„
•.
100
1 10 100 10 00
Time (minutes)
0 I II
-.-. .... p = 0.2 t 90 = 16.4 min
O .....,„,s
.. .. .
U4 k = 1.43 x 10-9 m /sec
,, ....,•••„.,
(1) 20 '`.
C) '■ "...Nt \
,..4,
ci) 1
0) 1N L\ 04
40
•7
60 0\
. \
'\
80
-ate- -̀ }
'
100
1 10 100
20
t 90 = 1400 min
U5 k =1.68x1011 m/sec
40 ,
'60
43
C 80 . •
0 t.
•-100
1 10 100 1,000
0
CT Time (minutes)
11.1
10 100 1,000
6 0
4-
ai 20
t90
0)
0
40
60
t90::: 275 min
U6 k= 8.55 x10-11 m/sec
80
100
GRAFHAM WATER
fig. 4.60
0
0
...0 .".• ......
=a.
20
1\...
.s.\\
40 1 \
2
,--o.:."4.;
4 \
N -\..
N.
60
N \
N '
w. C 80 N‘N
,
0 ‘-o-o-J-,....,,,G
L,t_
...... _, , ----
, .,
a)
a) 20 \ -,--\-:, .. -,
-,,
.2
A \ \
40
\ \
60 \\\
---\ \
\ \\
\ \\
■\ \
80 .\
4.N,,
L.1 = 0 . 7 t90 :-- 860 min ,,,,
U8 'k=1.26x10-11 m /sec leak
•
N
k:s -...
100 . ,
GRAFHAN/1 WATER
fig. 4.61
0
)72
:■'...c—: -- -. '--
-.. -- -..
20
■ .
40
4 \ \ \
\ \
\ \ \
60 \ \ s\
o \ \
\ N
N -41
C (80 ■ N
0 p=2 t90= 1330 min .. ■ ss.
-.......-
-...
U10 k =1.77 x10-11 m /sec
c5
cn 100
•— 1 10 100 1,000
ci
CT Time ( minutes)
1 10 100 1,000
0
0
tg
■ Imemin.
0120
Cr)
a)
40
60
t90 =145 min
U11 k=1. 62X10-10 m/sec
80
100
GRAFHAM WATER
fig. 4.62
.•••••••••■
40
w
z U6 Li U11
- 80
UU4
(n120
to Li
U7
160
a)
U2
1"...)200 a
i
a) U8
4▪ -
1-11 U3
240
280
10-12 10-1°
Permeability (m/sec)
fig. 4.63
0
40
011
D4
(Ni D5
E
Z 120
D8
160
D2
240
0.)
D3 0.3
280
4-
320
D6
360
01
400-D
10-11 10-1°
Permeability ( m/sec)
0.4
' A/B Feb 72
t
A, July 71—
0.8
,-,
1.2 4
E
1.6
2.0
-o
0 10 20 30 40 50
0)
Moisture Content
0
-o
C/D, Feb '72
o
0.4 . ..\.„ ,s.,
0
1.2 r.
1.6
20 1),
1
Moisture Content Prof ices
0.8
Feb '72
1.2 1_
1.6
F July '71
a)
>
a) 2.0
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
rn Moisture Content
3 0
0
a)
— 0.4
H
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
fig. 4.66
PETERBOROUGH
0.4
0.8
1.2
E
1.6
2.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Moisture Content
0.8
0.8
1.2
Z
1.6
0.8
1.2
E
1.6
0 10 20 30 40 50
a)
a)
Moisture Content
0
below ground
0.4
_c 0.8
a)
0
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.8
fig. 4.68
FOXCOTE
0
0.4
0.6
3
1.2
E
1.6
a)
2.0
6 c-5
0
2.4
0
a)
_c 2.8
CD
3.2
3.6 •
4.0
4.4
0 10 20 30 40 50
Moisture Content
Chapter 5
PRESENTATION OF DATA - LONDON CLAY CUTTINGS
The six piezometers in the old side at Potters Bar have been
installation due to grout pressure. Therefore once the grout set the
when pore pressure is plotted against log time, they have left the
the last pore pressure reading, taken 10/7/75, differs from the
83
13.
The depth of the zero pressure line has been estimated from Fig.6:24
which shows depth to zero pressure line against slope angle for
embankment, cuttings and natural slopes. For a one on three slope with
a rough grassed surface a value of 0.9 m has been taken. The same
distribution has been fitted to all three sections. Apart from 10,
over estimated.
5.2.1 Edgwarebury
and 1975 are plotted in Figs.5:5 to 5:7. The records of the two
suspect as the inside of the casing has been used as a short tailed
voles' nest and the piezometer tubing has been eaten by them. It seems
probable that they have caused a slight leak as the piezometer has
probably longer than the pei-iod for which this piezometer could sustain
84
its full suction. Therefore, for this piezometer, the 1972 values have
been used instead of 1973 on the pore pressure summary drawing (Fig.5:9)•
over a long period, for example 3 and 6 which have on occasions reverted
to tip level.
when the de-airing has been more successful than normal, has reached
or even passed it. Thus the water was carrying a small tension without
10.2 m below ground level and has not risen past this value during the
the lack of readings in the second half of 1972 but 1 and 2 would
appear to have equalised in the first month while the others did not.
in six months, but like those at Potters Bar it has been possible to
estimate the final pore pressures. The last reading and this estimate
For the other piezometers the 1973 and 1975 pore pressures, 9
kept surface gives a mean value of 1.0 m (from Fig.6:24) below ground
The seven piezometers in the new side at Potters Bar have been
read since installation in October 1974 until July 1975. The pore
a section in Fig.5:13.
early 1975 and show a small fluctuation. The pore pressure range
is plotted in Fig.5:13.
the soil response to boring and installation is very slow. The use
of water during boring may have increased the softening of the walls
This more rapid response is probably due to the claystones which stopped
transport to site the valves had been knocked open and a considerable
quantity of air had entered the piezometer. It was not flushed out
de-airing at, perforce, a pressure well above the pore pressure, would
have forced water out of the tip increasing pore pressure. No.6 is
shown plotted against log time in Fig.3:9 where it can be seen to have
left the straight line portion of the log plot, thus it has been
equilibrium but it too has left the straight line when plotted against
side at Potters Bar are also plotted on Fig.5:13, and the zero pore
Piezometer 1 was dry for the first two readings after installation.
The grass and thistles on the grassed side have grown to about
pore pressures are normally at their highest and only one summer
reading has been obtained therefore maximum and minimum pore pressures
1 ,$)
E
2
‹
—0—
3
a)
a)
-0 4
C
0
5
0)
0
6
0 —0-
9
7
0
O
8
S 0 N DJ F MA M J J A
1974 11975
fig. 5.1
GL
,
1 '\
v
-E
~ /~ ~
..r::t
- 2
10
........
~
~~
3
OJ
>
-
-0
OJ 4
C
~ 5
'-
rn
o~ 6
(l)
..c -0-
10
..c::. 7
-+-
c.
OJ
o 8
9
-0,-3
1-0
S I0 N I0 J I F MIA MI J J I A
1974 1975
1
t
E 1:).
........ ....,4
12
2 x-,„ l ..x
X111
3
a)
4
c
0
5
a) 6
-0- .
12
8
SONDJIFMIAMJ J A
1974 1975
fig. 5.3
8
\.
pore pressure
110 •. 9
x on 10.7.75
--I equalised
12 0
13* -H seasonal variation
EMEErn=EM I I 1 1 111[1
0 5 0 2 1. 6 8
metres U m of water
rcI\
2
E
3
1 r
/
/
4 * r
a)
-0—
2 x
1 .
_ -- --- — d
5
C
/
0 6 /
/
0) 2 /
,
-....., ...__
/
0 7
/ ,
/
-o
10
11
1972 19 73 19 74 19 75
EDGWARE BURY
fig. 5.5
GL
E
3 0 I'
3 / )3
,
4
a) 0 /
a) /
5
c
0 6 ,
s-
0)
.o 7
a) /
_a
\ / es....ee
8 . i
\.
0 \ i
/
\ ve€03.6_
9
10
11
1972 1973 1974 1975
EDGWAREBURY
fig. 5.6
GL
E
3 0
5
4
a)
...06.. l
k
5
0 6 I
0) /
\ I
\ i i
\ 1/
\ //
8
\ i/
‘ 41 c\,.., 2
■ I/
a)
\ X
0
9 cei
‘ ,...5_...c - - - - - -1-A9/
V„,....._:
—'`-' -
.
. 6 ‘-.- --
10
11
1972 1973 1974 1975
EDGWAREBURY
fig. 5.7
GL
E -0-
4
-0-
a)
8
N
5
C
0 6
01
0 7
a)
_c 8
Q.
0
9
10
11
1972 1973 1974 1975
EDGWARE BURY
fig. 5.8
2
Pore pressure
o
5 \\
1973 (9yrs)
0
5
1— 1975 (11yrs)
1 x 23.5.75 where unequalised
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4
U m of water
--- equilibrium from Potters Bar
0
metres 5
E
•••••••••
2
.. 1 -
-
-0--
1
a) 3
0)
, 2
4
0
Co 5
O
6
-0-
2
SONIDJIFMAMJ J A
1974 11975
fig. 5.10
GL
3 , e
1
E
2
-0-
3
3
.4.'
a) L.11
a) 4
C
0 5
a
rn
0 6 O
4
cu
ir.
CL
CD
CD
8
7
10 -0-
S 0 NID JIF M A M_J J A
1974 1 1975
r) 4
C
0
CD
- 5
0
a) 6
.0
—6
o_ 7
D
8
S 0 NID JIF M A MiJ J A
1974 1 1975
fig. 5.12
Pore pressure
equalised 1975 (19yrs)
x 10.7.75 where unequatised
-1-1 seasonal variation 4 0-1
--- equilibrium from Old Side
70 Ix
t
0 5 0 2 4 6 8
metres U m of water
E 2
a)
> 3
a)
1
'a "0=0-
4
SONDJFMAMJ J A
0
1974 1975
GL
O
a) 1
46_ 2
O
a
3
3
-0-
-0-
4
4
Piezometric Levels
OAKLEIGH PARK
fig. 5.14
87
Chapter 6
DISCUSSION
They conclude, in agreement with Sherard et al (1963), that the major factor
Fig.6.1.
This is better defined for the soils dry of optimum, again in good
between soil type and ru, and that other variables exerted an over-riding
influence. However, almost all the dams which they studied were
At low stress levels negative r values are obtained, even for soils
u
placed as much as 3% wet of optimum, as shown in Fig.6.1b. Many of
negative as they were measured using unsuitable low air entry value
as much as 600 kN/m2 for clays placed dry of optimum. Only those high
i.e. Usk (Sheppard & Aylen, 1957) and Selset (Bishop & Vaughan, 1962),
that may be set up in a 30m high dam without drainage. The core being
The total stress, pore pressure relationship being taken from Fig.6.1.
The plastic clay shows pore pressures ranging from -90 kN/m2 in the
2
centre of the shoulder to 350 kN/m at the base of the core. On the
other hand, the sandy clay shows a range of zero on the surface to
125 kN/m2 at the base of the shoulder and 450 kN/m2 at the base of
the core.
carried out by Sodha (1974), will increase the accuracy of the estimate
in the sandy clays and very wet plastic clays where the end of construction
condition is less stable than long term. In the dry plastic clays
the long term design is the most important. The dams studied in this
thesis all come into the dry plastic clay group which swell rather
initial stress condition and the magnitude of the loads being removed.
using finite element techniques, and this has been done by Duncan &
calculated using:
(Skempton 1954)
Using the stress changes obtained by Duncan & Dunlop (1969) &
for their four cases, 3:1 and 12:1 slopes with Ko = 1.6 and 0.81.
with the two dimensional finite element solutions under the central
of pore pressures. Case records in the literature are rare, but two
clays with comparatively steep slopes and are therefore not directly
the pore pressures from both sides of the cut, the pore pressures
under the slope are plotted in Fig.6:6 with those calculated from
Au = yAz for comparison. Even for this steep slope where the
influence of change of Lys much greater than for shallow slopes, the
during the excavation of the lower half of the cut below a berm.
Eigenbrod (1972 & 1975) gets a reasonable fit throughout using his
the base of the Welland Cut. There are also pore pressure changes
from its end of construction to its long term pore pressure depends
structures.
can also increase the amount of water in the soil around the tip
for six dams and a trial road embankment are summarised in table 6.1.
from Rowe(1970) whether the laboratory value comes from the core
material only or from a mixture of core and general fill. The general
fill material is more plastic than the core. The second exception is
Cow Green. Here the laboratory values overestimates the field results
till, the range of values of c obtained is much greater than for the
v
other dams.
94
for the fill at Grafham Water and Werneck (1974) found considerable
The tests reported in this thesis also show some high values in the
shoulders both at Grafham Water and Bough Beech despite pore pressures
available.
Table 6:2. Some laboratory test. data, available from the literature,
has been assumed. The width of the core has been taken as (a)
its true width 2B and (b) 3B to allow for the retarding influence
95
the dam slope. The initial values, which are negative in the
obtained.
of final pore pressures has been made, see Fig.6:15, and from
are of c . Only a design value has been obtainable for Bough Beech.
v
The field values, see table 6.2, are on average about twice those
from the laboratory. The values from Bough Beech core are suspect
(a) There is less laboratory data available for the three dams.
(b) Where negative pore pressures occur, field values are harder to
obtain.
222
k 6.3
yw (m + mf ) ay e
m will become zero as the soil is saturated and the equation will
f
revert to the standard form:
k @ 2 p = Dip
6.4
ywm 9174
If c is defined as
s
k
c — 6.5
s (m + m )
f
However the results are close enough, in both sandy and plastic
if it is well compacted.
long. Using the field values of c or c obtained, the time for 90%
s v
equilibration (t90) has been calculated for Peterborough, Grafham Water
Two values are quoted for Bough Beech core, 60 yrs is considered
2
more, reliable as the high c value of
s
6.8 m /yr is probably due to
The values for the upstream shoulders of Bough Beech and Grafham
Water are for the zones with closely spaced drainage blankets and
drains at Bough Beech, 21 and 29, show that the drains themselves take
permeability to supply all the water the clay requires to swell than
The need for a drain to supply water, rather than remove it,
the downstream shoulder. On both Grafham Water and Bough Beech there
plastic clay fills there could be some advantage in laying the drains
This could speed the ingress of water without any detrimental effects
Over this period, which, for the small dams considered in this thesis,
may be more than 150 yrs and for large structures such as Empingham
Act (1930) increases in importance as the dam grows older and monitoring
will be required over much greater periods than are at present envisaged.
or two orders of magnitude better than they are today, i.e. 100 to
fissures and tend to close them again. If the clays are cemented,
as in the basement beds of the Upper Lias Clay, swelling may not
marked.
plotted against depth below ground level for the brecciated Upper
Lias and London Clays. The Lias data is from Chandler (1974) and the
London Clay data from Garga (1970). A straight line trend is shown
on the log permeability plot, the laboratory tests defining the lower
London Clay the effect of weathering may be small. The data is from
of sea cliffs. Lutton & Banks (1970) quote some piezometric levels
below canal level in the Culebra and Cucaracha Shales at the Panama
Canal after about 60 yrs. Muir Wood (1971) and Hutchinson (1972) discuss
in the London Clay in the cliffs at Herne Bay. Here, in the centre
having taken place this century. Lewis (1972) also quotes piezometric
levels below mean sea level in the London Clay cliffs at Herne Bay.
Chandler (1974) and James (1970) both discuss an Upper Lias Clay
of soils consolidating much more rapidly than would have been assumed
(Skempton 1948, 1964, 1970; de Lory 1957; Henkel 1957; & James 1970).
re-analysis was made of the data presented by James (1970) who analysed
the slips using the method of Morgenstern & Price (1967). The new
stress remained constant and were equal to c' = 0 and 0' = 20°.
increasing time. The data from some sites where accurate measurements
blue and brown London Clay. These measured values differ slightly
from the values assumed by James, who used the observations to justify
for the brown London Clay. This suggests that pore pressure equilibration
have been excluded as, in these cases, pore pressures after excavation
clay as there is good evidence (i.e. Northolt, James 1970) that the
slips are restricted to the brown clay. The values obtained using
mean pore pressures were ru = 0.11 for the new side after 19 years and
r = 0.30 for the old side after 125 years. These are shown on
u
Fig.6:10 and are a reasonably good fit on the curve, being within the
the new side has not been taken into account. From the analogue
new side. Thus it can be stated that the equilibration time scale
The long term mean pore pressures from Potters Bar, old side,
can be written as
uz = 0.82 (z - 1)yw 6 . 6
Au = yAz 6.2
and 11 years are plotted for the Edgwarebury sections in Fig.6:11 and
those at 19 years for Potters Bar new side in Fig.6:12. The measured
Laboratory values of cs for the London Clay are rare but for an
values of c (Rowe 1972). Table 6:4 gives some results from triaxial
v
dissipation tests on blue London Clay from Wraysbury (Garga 1970).
105
The 300 mm tests give results 1.4 times those from 100 mm samples.
The values of c for the blue London Clay obtained from field
s
data is comparable with cv measured on large samples in the laboratory.
but no large sample results are available. At the low stress levels
which will operate in the brown clay in the field the effect of
which seems generally true for the London and brecciated Upper Lias
The pore pressures in the old side of Potters Bar cutting, now 125
the fluctuation zone the mean values are plotted which show ru
varying with depth and zero pressure on average 0.9 m below ground
*With double drainage, one dimensional swelling, and cv = 0.8 m /yr, full
equilibrium will require something in excess of 500 yea rs. However,
two dimensional effects and open fissures at depth in cemented clay would
decrease this time, and the effect of k decreasing with depth is to give
pore pressure close to final equilibrium near the surface even when
swelling at depth is incomplete (see Fig. 6:40). In these circumstances
surface seasonal fluctuations may dominate the slight upward trend due
to continuing swelling at depth.
106
within the brown London Clay, the average ru is 0.30. The winter
0.3 at 4 m depth.
The London and Upper Lias Clay cuttings have similar long term
pore pressures in the top few metres which would indicate similar
is the chalk under Potters Bar. Thus pressure at the lower boundary
at,or just above,the level of the River Tees. The piezometers show
a perched water table in the Boulder Clay. Near the surface pore
decreasing with depth. The pore pressures near the surface, in the
range where most slips occur, are controlled almost entirely by the
107
modern embankments have reached equilibrium and less data has been
One of the few cases available is Aldenham Dam, which was not
its full depth. Here the perched water table is a transitory winter
Fig.4:40, the mean pore pressures near the surface of the embankment
are only slightly reduced and the fluctuations are of the same
which was constructed of the wet 'callow' with fairly high pore pressures.
equilibrium pore pressure has been added to the figure. This indicates
that the perched water table formed in the upper part of the slope
in the clay fill which would account for the perched water tables.
in section 6.2.2, had not quite reached equilibrium but were tending
towards zero excess pore pressure between the drains. Any excess pore
From the above cases it can be seen that clay slopes would
conditions on the lower boundary unless the clay layer is thin. The
magnitude of the pore pressure in the upper part of the clay layer is
dependent on (a) the surface boundary pore pressures and (b) the
Stability of the old side at Potters Bar and the downstream toe
mean and winter maximum pore pressures, the effective cohesion required
having the same entry and exit points on the slope, see Fig.6:16.
109
and the Bishop (1955) routine method of slices was used. With these
conditions, the most critical slip depth was 3 m where, under winter
infinite slope method (Skempton & de Lory 1967) the c'rel is 6.6
kN/m2 at 3 m. As this section has not yet failed, it must clearly
2
have a c' greater than 6.5 kN/m . Other sections along the slope
much greater than 6.5 kN/m2. Chandler & Skempton (1974) show that
circular slip surface and (b) infinite slope. Considering first the
top 2m, r is 0.25 and 0' is (a) 19° and (b) 18.4°. 0' from
u req
o
laboratory tests was 27 (c' = 0) therefore the factor of safety is
1.47 and 1.53 respectively. For a deeper slip, involving the whole
toe, the r value reduces to 0.1 and, using Bishop & Morgenstern,
u
0' reduces to 16.5° (F = 1.72). Thus the factor of safety for
req
the toe is now close to the design value of 1.5. This may drop further
the toe may occur but the planned infilling of the brick pit with
No strength data is available but Vaughan (1975) has combined the data
for several compacted plastic clay fills (Kellaways & Oxford, Weald and
0' = 20°.
and F = 1.5 were calculated for various values of c', assuming 0' = 20°
c' ru
kN/m2 F . 1 F = 1.5
0 0.0 - 0.44
5 +0.36 - 0.04
10 +0.56 + 0.18
At equilibrium the pore pressures may be quite high in the upper part
of the slope and ru could reach as much as 0.25. If this occurs the
should form a regular part of the inspection of this dam and that
and Chan (1969)_ point out, the ultimate flow pattern is not necessarily
condition are based on assumptions which are correct only for coarse
111
condition and (b) flow above the phreatic line in the partly saturated
the phreatic surface at right angles, showing that the phreatic surface
more significant than the flow from the reservoir and can control
the pore pressures in that zone. Sweeney (1970) shows that a flow
net does not predict the measured pore pressures in the Boulder
from section 6.3 that the pore pressures are controlled by the
occurs in the winter and pressures rise again. The pore pressure
except in areas of very high rainfall and low evaporation, the mean
the body of the clay. Both the magnitude of the fluctuation and the
piezometers with slow response times will also show a time lag.
is complete but the magnitude of the fluctuation and the depth to which
old sides at Potters Bar show this behaviour (Figs.5:4 and 5:13).
well as climate.
Laboratory (Black et al., 1958) and readings taken from 1954 to 1956.
and 3.65 in the London Clay slope at Sudbury Hill ( Skempton & Henkel
Barnsdale and Gretton are two examples from the Upper Lias Clay.
P4 does not fit quite the same pattern as the other three as it has
a lower mean level and smaller fluctuations. The 4.0 m deep piezometer,
The three examples from Gretton (Pachakis 1974) all show the
in summer and its minimum can only be assumed with reference to piezometer 1.
The maximum and minimum values from the piezometers from these
Fig.6:23. They are all from grassed slopes without drainage measures.
Other data from the London and Upper Lias Clays are plotted and are
The results are fairly consistent despite various clays and slope
0.5 and the fluctuation depth is some 6 m.*The mean zero pressure
is at 1 m below ground level and ru tends to 0.33 below about 4 m.
The minimum values are more variable and negative values are recorded
down to 2.2 m. Below the zone of fluctuation the pore pressures are
for the brown London Clay back calculated from the Edgwarebury and
Potters Bar data of 2.55 m2/yr. Two reasons can be suggested for
(b) The effect of cracking, which occurs in these clay slopes during
surface into the body of the clay, thus increasing the depths over
and most slips occur during the winter. James (1970) showed 80%
of his quoted slips occurred in the six months October to March and
Apart from the retaining wall failures, none of the London Clay slips
quoted by James are more than 8 m deep thus most of the slip surface
level and surface conditions for piezometers from the dam sites are given
in table 6:5. All piezometers are shallow, between 0.9 and 1.7 m
below ground level. The mean piezometric levels from these and other sites are
plotted against the slope, cot 0) in Fig.6:24. The depth of the mean
piezometric level below ground level decreases (a) as the slope flattens
(Fig.4:37) with a drain beneath them as well show about 0.2 m fluctuation.
most of the transpiration and evaporation losses and can also retain
some free water increasing minimum pore pressures. Maximum values are
also reduced if the gravel can drain freely, maximum piezometric levels
being at, or just above the base of the gravel. The mean value for
number 3 at Foxcote is consistent with its slope and well kept grass
cover.
and is in the most susceptible zone. The use of gravel layers to stop
cracking has been known for a long time. Jessop (1802) suggested it
soil and one with grass cover. During the winter period the maximum
were recorded below the grass compared with -2 m below the bare soil
118
transpiration reduces the mean boundary pressure and thus the pore -
infiltration.
the question, how much more effective are trees? The data presented
to be similar to those under grass but with lower summer values due
depth over which pressures are lowered. The mean boundary pressure
roots carried out by Endo and Tsuruta (1969) and laboratory tests
carried out by Manbeian (1973) and Kassif and Kopelovitz (1968) are
reported by Gray (1974). Their tests show root fibres increase the
the critical top few metres where winter pore pressures are still
interfere with drains and filter layers. Therefore they are best
The effect of those in the new side slope at Potters Bar was studied
using the electric analogue. The clay layer at the site was taken as
gave a reasonable fit with the old side pore pressures, Fig.6:25.
1:1, 2:1, 5:1 and 10:1 were modelled. At base of drain level, the
*
maximum pore pressure reduction on this section is 0.7 m. However,
pressures recorded on the new side are also plotted, showing that the
present pore pressures are well below those which can be accounted for
20th September and 8th October 1973 and pore pressures have been
recorded for 1973 and 1974. Fig.6:26 shows the records from six
much changed by the drainage but both maximum and minimum values have
reduction of minimum values is 0.9 m overall but these values are not
rather late pore pressure fall after the wet July/August of 1973,
level has been plotted for both 3 m and 5 m drains in Fig.6:27. These
show the influence of the drain becoming more marked as the permeability
solifluction layer and the underlying Weald Clay and is therefore not
121
6.5.5 Summary
the body of the clay layer are controlled by the mean surface pressure.
ground level in winter and can drop to 2-3 m below ground level in summer,
body of the clay and fluctuations can occur to approximately 6m. Both
cracking.
(a) Gravel layers under the topsoil and grass. These reduce
pressures and can hold some free water thus reducing cracking.
122
but do not appear to have much effect in winter. Thus the mean
(c) Counterfort drains, unless they are deep and closely spaced
have far less effect on pore pressures than the seasonal pressures
the Upper Lias Clay and the London Clay (Fig.6:9) suggest a relationship
of the form:
k
z = e- az 6.7
0
A
123
k
k
z e -a1Acc
v 6.8
o
log k cc e 6.9
and
e cc 1
log cs;.7 6.10
hence
k = C (a' ) -n 6.11
1
Eqn.6.8 implies a straight line on a log k/av plot and eqn. 6.11
(1970). Thus we have three equations 6.7 , 6.8 and 6.11 which
= C2
6.12
Using eqn.6.7 and substituting in6 .12
an -az = C
az • k0 . e 2 6.13
and from 6.7
kH -aH
177 = e 6.14
0
and
1 k
a = In ( o- ) 6.15
H
Integrating 6.13
C2 1
az
h =
ko a . e + C3 6.16
z = 0, h = H 6.17
z =H, h = hi/ 6.18
The pore pressure u at depth z is given by
u = { h - (H - z) } y w 6.19
az . ko . = C 6.20
4
4
125
then at depth z
or
Aa'
v = a + bz - ch
6.22
where
a = Fh(14 6.23a
b = y - yw 6.23b
c = yw 6.23c
Integrating
C4 a a
a1 c.e a1ch = k
--.e 1 .a1.b.ea1bz + C5 6.25
0
a, may be evaluated from 6.8 for given values of
k and k at the two boundaries.
0 H
C and C may be evaluated from the boundary conditions
4 5
6.17 and 6.18.
z = 0, h = H
6.17
z = H, h = hH 6.18
126
6.26
Dh
-5.7.C1 (a2 + bz - ch) n = C
6 6.27
a' = a
3 - ch 6.28
and
Dh = 6.az
6.29
(a3 - ch) n C1
with depth.
maximum r ranges from 0.23 in the 2:1 case to 0.20 in the 8:1 case.
u
However, without the vertical permeability gradient, the pore pressures
sections through the slope in fig.6:34 and compared with two two-
128
one and two dimensional solutions give comparable answers. The two
There could be some argument that the high pore pressures obtained
in the old side slope at Potters Bar are residual pore pressures due
which outcrop within 800 m of the site. The measured pore pressure
in the Oldhaven Beds is 1.2 m of water at the base of the clay. The
water table in the overlying gravels is now 1 m above the top of the
London Clay, but was 2 m at the time of the original site investigation.
was recorded at 10.5 m below ground level (7.5 m into the London Clay).
ko
To obtain this a permeability gradient of= 100 is required
ko
using eqn.6:7 and 200 using eqn.6:8 with 1m of water in gravels.
kH
This reduces to 30 & 50 respectively with 2 m of water in the gravel.
129
than half hydrostatic before pumping due to the proximity and level
and 4:64. The results are shown to scatter over three orders of
at or below optimum and the resulting dry lumpy structure can give
show that perched water tables can develop in fills which indicates
thick with koitkil 30, fully under drained and with zero pore pressure
and is > 0.40 for the upper 8 m, see fig.6:37. A single drain placed
layers of 0.075.
The effect of drainage layers at 3 m intervals is shown on fig.6:38-.,
The top drain is the most efficient in reducing ru values with the
second having nearly as marked an effect. The drains become less and
a series of stub drains as have been used in the upper part of the
shoulders at Grafham Water. They should extend far enough into the
body of the dam so that all vertical sections pass through at least
have negligible effect near the top of the layer. In deep cuttings
homogeneous clay layers. They plot the excess pore pressure isochrone
the conventional theory and can deviate from it by as much as 30%. The
swelling after excavation. Both the ultimate pore pressures and the
50% isochrones, based on Schiffman& Gibson (1964), are shown for the
rates in the upper half of the clay layer are shown. Swelling is
and hence c . The two layer system used for Potters Bar and
s
Edgwarebury goes some way towards calculating this effect but will
near the surface, calculated using the two layer, system are still
overestimated.
equilibration time scales in the critical top few metres where most
failures occur.
Table 6.1
Selset 3.1 0.9 2.0 3.6 1.4 2.7 Bishop & Vaughan
(1962)
Balderhead 15.8 2.3 9.0 11.9 9.3 10.6 Bishop & Al-Dhahir
(1970)
* These values depend on fully efficient drains and should be taken as times after pressure
in drains reaches top water level.
Assuming zero pore pressure line to be lm below ground level (mean).
Table 6.4
Blue London Clay, Triaxial dissipation. 300 dia. 0.97 138 Garga, 1970
Wraysbury vert. drainage 0.51 372
100 dia. 0.79 185
0.26 508
Brown London Clay Triaxial consolidation 100 dia. 0.99 190 Skinner, 1967
vert. drainage 0.92 550
Aldenham 9/10 0.3 1.8 0.8 1 on 4.5 Very rough, uncut grass
approx and tree roots
0.8
0+3 (a)
•r3 ;;.• 04-3 434.3 •
0+3
64.3 6.3
0.6 o+3
• e#4. 6,3
• 43
0.4 •
411
00 • lb+,
oil eS
•f .0,1
0.4 044. • •12.-i
6_1
0
9+3
• alj.
0
47-
0 0.2 „4.1.k Sandy Clay Fills
cr ,0
Opt. m/c
a)
cr) 0
(n
o)
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
0
Total Stress kN /m2
ci
` 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
0.6
0 I (b)
0 'ot3
or3 (0.3
/ 04
0.4 4242
042
C
0
*0
°'2
C
0-1
0-4
/
0
4 :#3 43 0+3
1'1 41
40 •3„. DO
+3 °V O-4 3
1.3
0-1
-0.2 /14
/
Plastic Clay Fills
0+1 ;
•-1
-0.4 Opt. m/c >15%
•-;
-0.6
.-4
1
-0.8
fig. 6.1
Plastic Clay Fill
Shoulder:- opt. -1 0
50
Core:- opt.+3 100
150 30m
200
- 300
- 1.0
- 0.5
-1.0
-0.5
01 0.2 0.3 0.4 05 = ru
Based on Au = X Az
-1.0
-0.5
0
0.1
0.2 0.3 ru -- 0.4
Ko = 1.6
-1.0
-0.5
0
0.1 0.2 0.3 ru -- 0.4
Ko=0.81
Based on stresses from Duncan & Dunlop (1969
-1.0
-0.5
fig. 6.4
End of Construction Pore Pressures [Eigenbrod,
19721
1
2
3
1.
5
Au = XAz assumption
fig. 6.5
O.G.L.
O.W.L.
\
\ ■ \
\
• \ \ 0.8
■
\
dry0
4 I
\ \ edry
\ 0
■
Pore pressure, m of water 7.3 ■ \ ` 3.6
7.3 \ ■ 04.1 1.8 •
e 0
• measured ‘ 5-2_..
.. \\ 3
based on measured 1
X5.5 3.05
values
---using Au -7.)5Az 10.9 11.8
• •
u = 3 m of water r==
16.10
• 14.3 • 12.2 10.7•
• 15.8
0 metres 5
----Au r-nz
23 ; \
2 -0- / 0 \
•possible \possible t =co
24 4 t =0
-0- \
4
Cl
-0- x \
19 \
6 -0- I
\
12 (ii) t =9 yr
-0- ‘
8
C2 f
-0-
d rct. x 1
10 I
ti
m I
\
. I
12 \ I
\ /
14 \ /
—'OG L
-0-
8 \
16
\
\
fo undat ion
N. \
18 \x
-°- 0 End of construction
4-5
x After 9 years
2
■N,
2 -0-
(1) 1-2
_J
PETERBOROUGH - Pore pressures in
fig. 6.8 upstream shoulder section
A
2
x +
cm* o 00_4.
0
4 0
4. c 0
6
0 0 0 0 00
8 0
o % co
10
E
12
o •
16- 0
0
X
0 0--0 CO
18
Upper Lias Clay
Empinghom: Rising head tests
Constant head tests •
London Clay Laboratory tests X
0
Wraysbury : Constant head tests 0 Wothorpe Rising head tests 0
22
Laboratory tests es Constant head tests 0
Laboratory tests
24 *sits 11.11,
fig. 6.9
co
n 0
Potters Bar
Sudbury Hill
Potters Bar b
Northolt Wembley Hill
Edgwarebury
-0.4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time to failure years
A
OGL
.82
1
9.75m
GL
3 •\
\t=co
blue London Clay
t =0
12m OGL
T
5 5m 1
GL GL
\ \
\
, s -1\
\ '
- 6 \ \
9 yrs \ .
-8 "--11 yrs \ %:-11 yrs \
E
-10
\t co - o
\
-12 \
\ t ...a\s.
‘
.
\
-14 --E
c) \
-16" t= 0 \ o piezometer
measured pore pressure
-18
+ 9 years
-20
• 11 years
0 I 0 I
OGL
4.2 m
GL
-0
-2
brown \
\
-6
-8
10 blue
London 19 yrs' .co
12 Clay t =0
-14
- 16
18
I I
-8 -6 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
pore pressure m of water
OGL
o piezometer
\(-6 x measured pore
6.4m pressure, 19 years
GL 'o
-o
-2
-4
-6 N
E
-8
19 yrs
-10 -c
-12 .8
t=co•
-14
-16
- - - -2 0 10
fig. 6.12
Pore Pressure
m of water
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
1\\\
t\\\
I \ \ \\
\ \ ‘
1 -1._
\ \ c \\
\ ,. • \
E \ %. \
1 \ ,‘ \ '‘,. \
2
\ \
1 \
\'•\'
•
k
\
\'.
\
• •"
‘
4 \ ‘
\\ \
\
1
\77-.\ 7\
it
\ \\
\ • \ ‘
k \ \ • .\ \
\ \ \*
\ \ \
1 \
\ \
\ \
V--- \
\ \ \
1 \ ♦
.
\
‘
\ \
•1
ru=0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
5
fig. 6.13
COW GREEN - Pore Pressures in a Boulder Clay Slope
‹.-- Annual fluctuation
1
GL °-... N, -‘,
+2 •-■ \ \
A0
220 x
\-\\
,c-
B0 .t\I
OD
170 : , %_. Probable equilibrium
x 6
. \ pore pressure distribution
2
*-. 1
a After 11 years --p:.. 1 .
'.. i
4 *.- I
. i
SGL 0 i':..1\
10
N.
6
6 0 cu o. x
N•
-8
Foundation
\
\•
\
-10 \
. \
\\
3 N
0 12 x u
•
-14
-4 -2 0 +2 +4 +6 +8 +10
Pore pressures metres of water
0 Piezometer level
x Pore pressure - end of construction
o — minimum recorded
- after 11 years
6
winter
c' required
4 20°
/ 7
0 2 winter
meaii\
4-
0 2 4 6 8 **•-••
/
//
depth of slip surface m ... 2 . ....- . ..- .. / / 6-
..-
....- ...--
..-- .....- .....- , / /
..-- ...-
/ /
m
....- ,.-- ..-- .... ....- , ,, ..--• .. / , 8-
_- ---__
_ .._..-- --- , - ....- - - ,
- 4 ...-
-- ,
..-- . /
...-
_...- ---
- - ___ _-
..- _ _ , , „ - 5 ..-- . .. /
,.,-...,
,__-___ , ..
- - „ .67-_., --- , 10 -
-
....-... ___ .._________ -_ --
_.
----
.... ___ _ ......
-. -
-'
-...__
...... ...... - -
...... .-- edil
. M.Mb ,... ... ■•■••
1 1
2 2
3 "1
3
E
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
8
tr)
10
E
12
14
16
18
20t
713
24
C
( )) 5
N
a)
0
6
cn UXBRIDGE - Tensiometer Readings after Black, Croney & Jacobs,
1958]
1956 1957
JFMAMJ J ASONDJ FMAMJ J A
GL
1 9
Depth ., .--... --.
m , N.... --, .......... -- ... , . _.. --- .. .
,---- ...-- 12%-
2 e ... ....'
1 1r
9 i
-0- i
3 l
4
—0 -2
•
5
GL
A
.
1
.$ rI$ , % , ‘%,
A1 -a '\
,
P2 / %N I' %v.%
% s.
s%. ... \ s
s \ \ i\ _i S
2 --V---\
\
■....
\I
PP'21
3
19 72 197 3 1974
MAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJA
GL
H -.)
E installed
nstalled
P3
1 • I Cr'
P3
. .
s2 v I ,
v.i %■
.
. V Ii``, P4 r". I .
a) 4 •------- I ‘.1.
3 t , \ ,.\
I
.• %,......* w•
ii •••■•• ... j
3
GL
1
C5B
4 c 5B
fig. 6.21
1971 1972
NDJFMAMIJJASONDJFMAMJ
GL ...- ...•..
- •••••..., ...
.',...
1 i/ •
..... •
Depth 5 -.'" ...., ........... ..... --_
m
-----------• .
2
1.-- 2 dry 'I
,....
0
II■11 .■■■
0 ....
..IMIO
...
.
F
GC
g■P .- .
2 N y \
0 ' )( ‘
(D A \
"II
Annual pore pressure fluctuation Q \A l'-
A AA \
IP 0O 0 00 '
3
in clay slopes under grass cover N A `\
N
0 \ 0 \
A \ A \
xo
4 ‘°
min. max. A \A A
& E3 0.5
3 Natural slope o 0 a AoA
\ \
Natural slope with head + x \ \
5
Cutting A A
\ ‘ 0.4
Embankment o a '
‘
6
ru =0.1 ' 0.2 0.3 \P‘
A•
•\
, 1 1 , 1 1 ...t
GL
0.4
.......
,..._. _.--
- ..••••••.'
._. _
E • .....- ....-. ....-
0.8 ....... ....-
....- ..-
a© .- increasing rough ess
V „ --
...-- ....4-34
1.6
2.0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Slope Cot
fig. 6.24
pore pressure m of water
00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20 m ,I
"
~
1 ..
Pore pressures
o Potters Bar - old side
E1 Potters Bar - new side
11~----~----~----~----~----~----~--~
03
3 I
& I
04
1973 1974
GL~~~-+~~~~,~,~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I I
I I
1 I
1·
05
3
.c.
o+-J
& I '\, .... J
1
0-
w
06 I I
0 , I
GL
08
3
& , 1
010
kFr
• kV
•
•• • "
:.• /
• 1:1
•••.,
`•••
••
• 2 :1
•••••.
••••-
••••,.
T
•••••• •••••••
•.••••
5:1
—.•••••
••••••••
10 :1
' : • : • .,
•: . : . : .
i •
••••••.
• : • :::
::::
.... --- ....... -- - - - - _ ... ...... - . - . .
- -- •.'t '
.:. -- --- -- -- .... -... •.••••
••••••. -••••••• "• •
0 - - • - - --....;-1.......:
•` •
0
C;cf.D°. 4.o° 0
90°0e° DG, 04e0 c.C70 0 =0, - k=k0,
- -r
Clay layer
fig. 6.28
0.1 "' 0.2 0.3
0.2
0.4
z
H
0.6
T"
0.8
1.0
kz
10 = e-az
ko
•-
kz
ko
k z = k o - a3 z
5
kz
kH
I I I J
1
0 100 cr, (H=i0m) 200
v
fig. 6.30
1-0
flow
Case A Case B
Boundary conditions
H 212m
•••
--
.....
■■• ••• •••
-------0.4--------
.....
•M/ ■••• •
......... ..
••• co•
•• •••
1
•••■■• ■■■■ ■■••■• •■■■• •■■ ■■■••
H 12m
0.35- --4
•••
— 0.3 ,
or.
0.4
L —J
Case B average ru on slip surface = 0.28
fig. 6.31
0 4 I 8 I 12
u m of water
k0
=0
kH = 2k V .........
............•=
.............
..... ........
........... ....,...
........... / .., , .... •••• )
......
, --- „ — — —
0 .15 -
' _--
_—
''
/
/
l
--- —' —____ ______
-- -- ■ — — — — — 0 .1
'
••■• ..- '
•••••••
. 0 5_
•■■■ ■■• ■•• ■■• .■ 0
■■• .1■■ •■• ■•• ■■■
••■• ■•• ■■•■ ■■••■ •■■
........... ....
..:1 ' . 0.... ..... ■.... ■ —0.05
,... ...
— ....
....
c_— _ _ _ _—_— _ _.7_ _
--- -- — — — — — — — — — — — —
fig. 6.33
0 4
u, m of water
Ill
U)
—I
-<
0
--1,
M London
Z
---I Cloy
A21 nEld3INV3
(xi
pore pressure m of water
0 4 8 . 12 16 20 24
12
16
\
20
kH \
E
20 \
24 full 30
-c underdrainage 50 \\
as 100
-0 half
28 _ underdrainage 30
measured 0
pore pressure
32
1
i
36
I
I
40 /
I
/
/
24
28
ILII
fig. 6.37
u m of water
ru
8 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
fig. 6.38
L
r
-
H = 20 m
my const.
co t
T-
H2
fig. 6.40
133
Chapter 7
clays and very wet plastic clays. In these cases the end of construction
pore pressures are required for design. These are best obtained by
pressures are set up and even at high stress the pore pressures may be
less than the equilibrium values. Therefore for design purposes the
are always less than the long term values and are therefore not
Au = yAz 6.2
This eqn. does not hold for very steep cuts and will overestimate
the pore pressure change under the base of the excavation. At the
vertical unloading.
131+
performance data are comparable with the values obtained from laboratory
tests. In plastic clays the dry lumpy structure, which produces large
be long, for large structures several hundred years. For the smaller
dams considered in this thesis the time scale is of the order of 100
years.
during this period and the stability decreasing. This highlights the
slopes of dams with internal drainage swell more rapidly than downstream.
clay fills the equilibrium pore pressures are those required for
can be made:
embankment dams have no surface drainage measures and are just top
(taken as minus the depth to the mean zero pressure line) can be
These values are based on data from areas where the rainfall is
only be tentative.
surface the drains will not effect the boundary pressures which will
remain the same as for the grassed slope. A curvature of both the
reduced by 0.5 m, based on young trees, perhaps more for mature trees.
Fluctuations are therefore larger than for grass and would appear,
Fig.7:1.
with growth and young trees planted at the end of construction will
base of the layer and, from the Grafham Water data, almost damp out
of the gravel layer. This is probably caused by the gravel not being
are damped, pore pressures within the top few metres are improved.
3) The base boundary head, hH, is not required with any great
pressure line, then the pressures throughout the layer are hydrostatic
half of a thick clay layer (20 m or more thick) are not effected
greatly by the base pressure. For example at Potters Bar the difference
between full and half underdrainage was a maximum of 0.5 m in the top
10 m of clay.
k
0
20 loge 30
loge (1--) = — 7.1
The results obtained with effective stress eqn.6:27, are very similar
to those obtained using the more simple eqn.6:16. This will give
eqn.6:16 or 6:27.
treated on its own. In other cases the fill and foundation must be
the fill then it may act as a complete drain but requires checking
from these design suggestions and making a comparison with the slopes
Counterfort
Drains
°r°cz (750? .
cohesion .Z9ca.,2_ce=2_02.
increased
by roots
Trees Free-draining
Gravel
fig. 7.1
1 140
REFERENCES
Bishop, A.W. (1955). The use of the slip circle in the stability
analysis of slopes. Geotechnique 5 1: 7-17.
Bishop, A.W. & Vaughan, P.R. (1962). Selset Reservoir: Design and
Performance of the Embankment. Proc.Instn.Civ.Engrs. 21, 305-346.
Bishop, D.M. & Stevens, M.E. (1964). Landslides on logged areas in-
south east Alaska. U.S. Forest Service Res.Paper NOR-1.
Little, A.L. & Vail, A.J. (1960). Some developments in the measurement
of pore pressure. Proc.Conf.Pore Pressure & Suction in Soil.
Butterworths. 75-80.
Lucks, A.S. (1966). The measurement of construction pore pressures
in earth dams. Instn.Civ.Engrs. Medal & Premium. Unpublished paper.
144
Lutton, R.J. & Banks, D.C. (1970). Study of clay shale slopes along
the Panama Canal. Report No.1. East Culebra & Culebra slides
and the model slope. U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Expt.Station
Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Miss.
Mackellar, D.C.R., Nunn, D.J. & Pells, P.J.N. (1974). Instrumentation
of some embankment dams in Southern Africa. Proc.Symp.Field Inst.
in Geotechnical Engng. Butterworths, London, 249-261.
Skempton, A.W., Schuster, R.L. & Petley, D.J. (1969). Joints and
fissures in the London Clay at Wraysbury and Edgware.
Geotechnique 19, 2: 205-217.
(1962)
Soderberg, L.O.X Consolidation theory applied to foundation pile time
effects. Geotechnique 12, 3:217.
Terris, A.K. & Morgan, H.D. (1961). New Tunnels near Potters Bar in
the Eastern Region of British Railways. Proc.Instn.Civ.Engrs.
18, 289-304.
Twort, A.C., Hoather, R.C. & Law, F.M. (1974). Water Supply.
2nd Ed. Arnold, London. p.150.
r^-
147
Vaughan, P.R. & Walbancke, H.J. (1973). Pore pressure changes and
the delayed failure of cutting slopes in overconsolidated clay.
Geotechnique 23, 4:531-539.
148
APPENDIX A
The recorded pore pressures are plott'ed with the reservoir level in
Fig.A:1.
is exceptionally slow.
I ,
r- \IReservoir level
~ !
•
- _. . . . - - -
"V
- " ' , . - - - ..
-'''.
- -
~
......... 1
.!=
(l)
I
-"""::-
..
I--
Q) E
(l)
+4 " ~:
~ J
> 19 ~
~ 0 Q)
L. >
(l)
(l)
+2 1.._.: ..··..···,···......,..·.. ····1··..··..·,.........,...
a;
E
o
~ ""'" t·- """-.. . . . . . . . ,. .--..-.. . . . . . . ". _. ,. . . .-.., -1- --- f.- ...,f 1"-=-1' I =F ~ ~-, 19
±
...."~........ ........... I
'+
N
.~
E /' .}--- _ .- - .. - . - - ....... -~--". - - - -='~""'f----to-
a.. ~
(l) 0.0. 1 9 ' ,,
,/
. _ ',
a.. __
I 1
~
I I
L-
I 1
,I
1 1
I
l I
I.-J.....J...
-, ·r- I
I I
I
I
1 I I
ITT 71 I1
' I
7
-21 ,," I I ~ I I
i.
18, "
"1 ~ i ~ i t~ ~ b ~
12
. 8-.,,:"<;<~~~~~~·:~ :~=:~~.~ :~:~~ :=:=~=<=~·:-~=·:===:~><;:::~·~=·~~:·. ··t~::~~::~,,···....I· · · · ·I· . ···"~,,. . ·l. · . ·I···~:+~~:·t::4 1~ I
08
-4.
I 11 !f II
-61 JUly 'I Aulgus t I~ ~ _ Se~tern~e~ _~ I ___O~t«:)b~~_ No'vemher
1 0(-11·6)
~
to
_3 I