COLLAGE OF NATURAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY
Senior project on: Geotechnical Characterization of Gidabo Dam Foundation and

Construction Materials, Southern Ethiopia.

Advisors: Mr. Kasahun. M

Ms. Netsanet. M

Prepared By:

1. EnquahoneTefera ………………………………………………………019/15

2. Saba mekonnen…………………………………………………………..037/15

3. Ahimed Mama …………………………..………………………………003/15

4. Mohamud Alemu………………………………..………………………..029/15

5. Elbetel kelemwork………………………………………………………..017/15

June, 2019

Dilla, Ethiopia

1
Acknowledgement

Above all, we thanks to the super almighty God that let us to accomplish this project
successfully.

Next, we would like great appreciation to Dilla University, collage of natural and computational
science particularly department of geology for its financial support to carry out our senior project
work on the Gidabo dam site.

We also want to forward the special thanks to the advisors, Kassahun Misgana and Netsanet
Mulugeta who advise and encourage us to do the tasks before, during and after the field works.
We would like to provide a heat full thanks to Ato Melaku, for his guidance during field work at
Gidabo dam site. Lastly, we want to thanks the community of Gidabo dam irrigation and the bus
driver for this service during field work.

i
Abstract

The study area located at southern part of Ethiopia in South Nation, Nationalities and Peoples of
Regional state and borders of Oromia Regional state in Bornean and Sidama zones near Dilla
town to east of Lake Abaya, a distance at 377 km from Addis Ababa.

The main objective of this study is geological and geotechnical characterization of Gidado Dam
Foundation and Construction Materials, Southern Ethiopia. The general methodology followed
for the present study was based on laboratory test such as atterberg limit, specific gravity ,bulk
density , free swell, standard Procter test, direct shear test and dispersivity. Although field tests
include falling head permeability, paker test, SPT.

Gidabo dam found in the Ethiopian rift within zone four which is the most dangerous zone. For
the design and construction of Gidabo dam, 0.159 and 0.075 horizontal and vertical coefficient
of acceleration were taken respectively. The hydro geological characteristics of the area is
affected by geological formations, Structures, topography and Climatic conditions. The effects of
these factors changes the groundwater table fluctuation and flow direction. From the output of
this study, the dam area is available for the earth dam which is utilized for irrigation project.
Engineering geologically, the materials (soils and rock) of the study area is tight, stiff and very
good barriers of water leakage. Additionally, even though the area geology is weak and thick
layers of material, it is strong enough to carry the proposed dam load and resistant to the
geologic processes.

ii
Table content

Contents
Acknowledgement……………………..................……..……...………………………………….i

Abstract………………………….…………………..…………………...........……………………………ii

Table content…………………………....……....…………………………................……………………iii

List of figure…………………………………...…………………………..............………………………vi

List of table…………………………………………....………………….............,………………………vii

List of photo…………………….…………………………………………...............……………………viii

Acronomy………………………..…………………………………………...........………………………ix

CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................................1
1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background of the Project.................................................................................................................1
1.2. Description of the Study area...........................................................................................................3
1.2.1 Location and Accessibility...............................................................................................................3
1.2.2 Accessibility....................................................................................................................................4
1.2.3 General Climate..............................................................................................................................4
1.2.4 Vegetation......................................................................................................................................5
1.2.5 Land use and settlement................................................................................................................5
1.2.6 Topography.....................................................................................................................................5
1.3 Statement of the problem.................................................................................................................5
1.4 Objectives of the project works.........................................................................................................6
1.4.1 General Objectives..........................................................................................................................6
1.4.2 Specific Objectives..........................................................................................................................6
1.5 Methodology.....................................................................................................................................6
1.5.1 General methodology.....................................................................................................................6
1.5.2 Pre-field phase................................................................................................................................6
1.5.3Field work phase..............................................................................................................................6

iii
 1.5.4 Post- field work phase....................................................................................................................6
1.6 Equipment Used................................................................................................................................7
1.7 Scope of the study.............................................................................................................................7
CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................................................................8
2. LITRATUR REVIEW................................................................................................................................8
2.1. Dam Construction.............................................................................................................................8
2.2 Types of Dams according to Type of material....................................................................................9
2.2.1. Embankment Dams........................................................................................................................9
2.2.2 Concrete Dams.............................................................................................................................11
2.2.3 Gravity dam..................................................................................................................................11
2.2.4 Buttress dam.................................................................................................................................11
2.2.5 Arch dam......................................................................................................................................11
2.3Types of Dams Based on functions...................................................................................................12
2.3.1Storage dams.................................................................................................................................12
2.3.2 Diversion dams.............................................................................................................................12
2.3.3Detention dams..............................................................................................................................12
2.3.4 Debris dams..................................................................................................................................12
2.3.5 Coffer dams..................................................................................................................................13
2.4 Criteria to construct and select types of dam..................................................................................13
2.4.1 Topography and inflow in the catchment area.............................................................................13
2.4.2Morphology of the river valley......................................................................................................13
2.4.3Geology and foundation condition................................................................................................14
5.2.5 The design principles of earth dams.............................................................................................14
5.2.6 Dam and Reservoir Site investigation...........................................................................................15
2.6 Laboratory Tests..............................................................................................................................17
2.7 Field Tests........................................................................................................................................18
2.7.1 Investigation of Construction material for dam............................................................................18
2.7.2Field and laboratory investigation of quarry site...........................................................................18
2.8 Characteristics of construction material..........................................................................................19
2.8.1 Soil as Embankment Material.......................................................................................................19
2.8.2 Riprap...........................................................................................................................................19
2.8.3Aggregate and Concrete Aggregate...............................................................................................20

iv
 2. 9 History of Dam Constructions in Ethiopia.......................................................................................20
2.9.1 Gilgel Gibe I Dam..........................................................................................................................20
2.9.2 Gilgel Gibe II Power Station..........................................................................................................21
2.9.3 Gilgel Gibe III Dam........................................................................................................................21
2.9.4 The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam........................................................................................21
2.4.5 Gidabo dam..................................................................................................................................22
CHAPTER THREE........................................................................................................................................23
3. GEOLOGICAL SETTING OF THE GIDABO DAM....................................................................................23
3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY........................................................................................................................23
3.2 Local Geology...................................................................................................................................26
3.2.1 Lithological Units..........................................................................................................................26
3.2.2 Pyroclastic rocks....................................................................................................................27
3.2.3 Tuff Unit........................................................................................................................................28
3.2.4 Rhyolitic Rock.........................................................................................................................28
3.2.5 Alluvial deposits (River channel and Flood-plain deposits)...........................................................29
3.2.6 Colluvial Deposit...........................................................................................................................29
3.2.7 Residual Deposit....................................................................................................................29
CHAPTER FOUR..........................................................................................................................................30
4. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF GIDABO DAM..................................30
4.1 Field Investigation and characterization..........................................................................................30
4.1.1 Gidabo Dam Abutments...............................................................................................................30
4.2 In-situ test result interpretation and characterization of Foundation Material...............................31
4.2.1 Falling Head Permeability test......................................................................................................32
4.2.2 Lugeon (Packer) tests....................................................................................................................33
4.2.3 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)...................................................................................................35
4.3 Laboratory result interpretation and characterization of Construction Materials...........................36
4.3.1 Earth-fill Materials........................................................................................................................37
4.3.2 Rock- fill materials and Concrete aggregates................................................................................41
4.3.3 Shell materials..............................................................................................................................43
4.3.4 Sand Material...............................................................................................................................44
CHAPTER FIVE............................................................................................................................................46
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION....................................................................................................................46

v
 5.1. In-situ and Laboratory Test Results................................................................................................46
5.2 Groundwater depth and flow direction...........................................................................................48
5. 3 Reservoir Water Tightness..............................................................................................................48
5.4. Seismic Activity...............................................................................................................................49
CHAPTER 6.................................................................................................................................................50
6.1 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMANDATION.......................................................................................50
6.2 Recommendations...........................................................................................................................51
REFERENCE................................................................................................................................................52

List of Figure page

Figure 1.1.location map of Gidabo Irrigation project………………….....…………………….…2

Figur 3.1 Geological map of Gidabo Dam site……………………………………………………….…26

List of Table page

Table 4.1 Bore holes drilling summary at Gidabo dam site………………………...……………31

Table 4.2Falling Head Permeability Test Results in the Drilled Bore Holes at Gidabo dam……………32
Table 4.3Lugeon (Packer) Tests in Drilled Bore Holes at Gidabo dam…………………………………34
Table 4.4penetrate resistance value at different depth ………………………………………….35

Table 4.5Soil Properties of Gidabo Dam Site Area……………………………………………………..37

Table 4.6 Soil Properties of Gidabo Borrow Area (upstream and downstream borrow site……………39

Table 4.7 Soil properties of Gidabo Dam site area………………………………………………40

Table 4.8Laboratory test results of rock samples from boreholes……………………………….41

Table 4.9 Laboratory test results on rock samples from quarry sites………………………………..…42

vi
Table 4.10Laboratory test results of shellmaterial…………………………………………………..…44

Table 5. 1 vertical section for consistency of soil……………………………………………..…48

List of photo page

Photo 2.1.Riphrap………………………………….…………………………………………….20

Photo2.2Gidabo dam………………..………………………………………………….………..23

Photo 3.1 Ignimbrite………………....…………………………………………………………..27

Photo 3.2 Welded tuff………………………………..…………………………………………28

Photo 3.3 Rhyolite …..………………………………………………………………………….28

Photo 4.1 Left abutment……………………………….……………………………........…….31

Photo 4.2 Right abutment……………………………………………………………....……….31

vii
Acronomy

ASTM –American Standard for Testing of Materials

E -East

EARS -East Africa Rift System

GIBH –Gidabo Dam Bore Holes

GICTP –Gidabo Construction material area test pits

GIQH –Gidabo Dam Quarry Hole

GISH –Gidabo Shell material Sample

GITP –Gidabo Dam Test Pits

GIWTP –Gidabo Weir area test pits

Ma –million ages

MER –Main Ethiopia Rift

N -North

NE –North East

NNE –North North East

S -South

SNNPR –Southern Nation Nationalities and People Regions

SPT –Standard Penetration Test

SSW –South South West

SW –South West

USCS –Unified Soil Classification System

W -West

WFB –Wonji Fault Belt

WWDSE –Water Work Design and Supervision Enterprise

viii
CHAPTER ONE
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Project

Dams are massive barriers built across rivers and streams to confine and utilize the flow of water
for human purposes such as irrigation and generation hydroelectricity. This confinement of water
creates lakes or reservoirs.

The first known dam was built in 2900 B.C. across the Nile River to protect the city of Memphis
from flooding. Dam build was continued into the time of the Roman empire, after which dam
construction was literally lost until the 1800s. Dams are a structure also seen in nature - beavers
build dams to keep the water deep enough to cover the openings to their homes, protecting them
from predators .(http://www.arch.mcgil.ca)

Amongst innumerable engineering projects, dams construction and their industry involves major
challenges. Since more than 100 years ago, construction of embankment dams are more common
than other types of dams. The reasons for this common usage are: the method of construction is
based on ordinary technology with utilization of cheap raw soil materials, subsurface materials,
and does not depend on particular valley shape. Also geometry design of embankment dams
depends on borrowed soil materials, subsurface conditions and type of construction.
Consequently, feasible design can cause significant reduction on construction time, materials and
costs (Hasani, et al., 2013).

Embankment dams or fills type dams, which are constructed of earth and rock
materials.Embankment dams are categorized in to two based on types of soil mainly used in
construction material, such as earth fill dam and rock fill dam.The main body of rockfill dams,
which should have a structural resistance against failure, consists of rockfill shell and transition
zones, and core and facing zones have a role to minimize leakage through embankment. Filter
zone should be provided in any type of rock fill dams to prevent loss of soil particles by erosion
due to seepage flow through embankment. In earth fill dams, on the other hand, the dam body is
the only one which should have both structural and seepage resistance against failure with a
provided drainage facilities.(Narita,kunitomo,2000)

1
All embankment dams in service, regardless of their age, should be systematically evaluated for
their safe performance under all operational conditions. The principal requirement for dam safety
evaluation is to protect public safety, property and life. The structural safety of an embankment
dam is dependent primarily on the absence of excessive deformations and pore fluid pressure
buildup under all conditions of environments and operation, the ability of to pass flood flows,
and control of seepage to prevent migration of materials and thus preclude adverse effects on
stability. All embankment dams are deformed and settle in their service life. Deformations of
embankment dams may result in aesthetically unacceptable surficial appearance. However,
excessive deformations indicate distress of the dam, and can result in reduction (loss) of free
board and/or internal and/or external cracks. Either of these two consequences of settlements and
deformations can lead to dam failure (Chugh, 1990).

Ethiopia is called the water tower of Africa due to its combination of mountainous areas with a
comparatively large share of water resources in Africa. Only a fraction of this potential has been
harnessed so far, 1% at the beginning of the 21st century. In order to become the powerhouse of
Africa, Ethiopia is actively exploiting its water resources by building dams, reservoirs, irrigation
and diversion canals and hydropower stations. The benefits of the dams are not only limited to
hydropower. Many dams are multi-purpose dams that are also designed to provide water for
irrigation, drinking water and flood control. However, hydropower is expected to be the main
benefit of the dams.(http://en.m.wikipedia.org)

Gidabo earth fill dam which is under construction in Southern part of Ethiopia has been used for
the study. The dam is zoned earth fill dam having a height of 20 meter above the original ground
level and founded on around 30m thick sandy gravel foundation material. Around 8 to 10 meter
thick fine material has been removed and replaced by compacted alluvium for the shell part and
clay material for core section (WWDSE, 2009).

Gidabo dam will irrigate 27,043ha of land, 60pc of which lie in the former region. The Gidabo
Irrigation Dam, constructed with an estimated cost of 1.1 billion Birr. The Dam has a capacity of
holding 63 million cubic meters of water and stands 21.2 meters tall and is 350m wide. Its initial
completion was expected within two years of construction, beginning 2010 by the Ethiopian
Construction Works Corporation (ECWC) formed as a result of the merger between Ethiopian

2
Road Construction Corporation, Ethiopian Water Works Construction Enterprise and Ethiopian
Prefabricated Building Parts Production Enterprise.The completion period was modified after the
need to redesign the Dam to fully utilize Gidabo River’s potential as well as increases the dams’
capacity (WWDSE, 2009).

1.2. Description of the Study area

The present study was carried out at Gidabo Dam, which is constructed on Gidabo River in
Oromia Regional State of Ethiopia. The Gidabo dam is an earth fill dam with central clay core
filling. The proposed dam height is 23.8 m and crest length is 335 m. A central outlet conduit is
provided that will divert water towards right and left canals off take from dam. The reservoir
capacity is 250 million m3. The main purpose of the project is for irrigation and it is expected to
cultivate 13000 hectare of farm land. Initially, the project was planned to irrigate 5193 hectare of
land by Left bank main canal and 2181 hectare by Right bank main canal with total irrigation of
7374 hectare through its canal distribution network. However, due to additional fill of the
reservoir it may irrigate up to 13000 hectare of farm land (Hagos, 2008).

1.2.1 Location and Accessibility

The Gidabo dam is located in Oromia Regional State, 377 Km from capital city of Ethiopia. The
study area is accessible by 360 Km asphalt road from Addis Ababa to Dilla town and the rest 17
km by gravel road. The dam is constructed on Gidabo River which originates in the highland
area of Aleta Wondo Escarpment, joining numerous large streams, draining an extensive
catchment and flowing into the Lake Abaya as the Eastern tributary. The Gidabo catchment is
found in Borena zone in Oromia Region, Sidama Zone, and Gedeo Zone in SNNP Region
(Birhanu Debisso, 2009). The project area lies approximately between UTM co-ordinates
696000N to 726200N and 386000E and 422000E, a short distance east of Lake Abaya and just
south of Gidabo river flood plain, at an average elevation of 1190 a.m.s.l.

Gidabo irrigation project is found in Abaya district, Borena zone of Oromia region and Dale
district, Sidama zone of SNNPRS near Dilla town to east of Lake Abaya, located in Dibicha
Laluncha Kebele of Gelana Abaya district, which is situated in Borena zone. The project area
lies in the low land, very close to the Dure and Gola marsh. The command area is situated in the
northern part of Lake Abaya. The northern Lake Abaya area, which is located in the southern
part of the Main Ethiopian Rift (MER), encloses irrigable lands at different places.

3
Fig. 1.1 Location map of the study area

4
1.2.2 Accessibility
The study area can be accessed through Dilla town to Dilla university main campus and the road
is gravel. This road is eroded and crossed by streams at different areas. Thus, it is difficult for
transportation even for all vehicles.

1.2.3 General Climate

The study area falls within the Kola -climatic zone, which can be classified as semi-arid climate.
The average minimum temperature varies from 10.24oC in Dec to 12.32oC in July and the
maximum temperature ranges from 25.88oC to 30.52oC in February. The average annual rainfall
recorded so far in the project command is 1303mm with minimum of 34.9 mm in January and
maximum of 208.3 mm in April. The mean monthly sunshine hours in the project area varies
from 3.3 hours/day in July to 7.71 hours/day in January. The mean monthly relative humidity in
command varies from 56.19% in February to 80.33% in September influencing the evaporation,
disease prevalence, crop maturity etc. The wind speed at an elevation of 2 m influences the
evaporation and evapo-transpiration indicating the crop water requirement. The average wind
speed varies from 0.39 m/sec in July to 0.7 m/sec in March. The daily estimated reference evapo-
transpiration values ranges from 2.96 mm in July to 4.62 mm in March. (WWDSE, 2009)

1.2.4 Vegetation
The dam site and reservoir area of Gidabo dam is covered by dense vegetation (natural bushes
and trees). The study area is characterized by a moderate to scares vegetation and this area has
been commonly used for grazing.

1.2.5 Land use and settlement

The agriculture practices around Gidabo dam and reservoir area are generally rain fed resulting
uncertain crop yield. There is no settlement with in the dam and its surrounding, since it is highly
vegetate.

1.2.6 Topography
Physiographical appearance is imparted by the tectonic activity that took place in association
with the rifting episodes. The eastern parts of the catchments are topographically higher while
the western is lower, surface water is also draining from the eastern escarpments toward Lake
Abaya. Gidabo River has formed prominent delta that goes up to lake shore from the slope base.

5
The topographic elevation of the Gidabo basin is mostly an expression of landforms with hills.
Gidabo Dam site falls within two narrow steep hills downstream of confluence with its tributary.

1.3 Statement of the problem

Gidabo dam is the most significant and new dam in Ethiopia. The dam constructed for irrigation
purpose and it takes much money during construction. The major condition to motivate for the
selection of this research project is that Gidabo dam is constructed on area of different geological
features which has their own effect on the dam stability and future use of the dam. The stability
problems are due to volcanic activity, rifting and slope instability of the project area. The dam
constructed on volcanic terrain which have different features like fault, joint and stratification of
various lithology that have their own role on the failure of dam. Dam provides many benefits for
the society, but floods resulting from the failure of constructed dams have also produced some of
the most devastating disasters. The failure consequence is usually rapid downstream flooding
which is catastrophic to life and property. In such occasions, there is often little that can be done
to mitigate the magnitude of the downstream flood that will typically occur and its associated
damages.

1.4 Objectives of the project works

1.4.1 General Objectives

The main objective of the project work is the geological and geotechnical characterization of
Gidabo dam foundation and construction materials.

1.4.2 Specific Objectives

This senior project has the following specific objectives:

 To describe the geology of the project area.

 To characterize the soil and rock material of the dam foundation materials, abutments and
construction materials.
 To identify the possible hazards associated with the rifting processes.

6
1.5 Methodology

1.5.1 General methodology

The results of this study are based on the combination of the following fundamental works that
are conducted sequentially. In order to achieve the objectives of the present study, the following
systematic methodology were used;

1.5.2 Pre-field phase

Before the field work, various secondary data and information related to the study area were
collected from various sources. Previous works, papers and reports that concerned on geological,
structural, engineering geological and groundwater data of the study area were collected and
reviewed.

1.5.3Field work phase

Activities during field work are recording GPS reading at each station were studied, detail
description of geologic rocks, soils and structures that found on the study area, taking photo and
identifying field geotechnical characteristics of soil and rock material of the dam.

1.5.4 Post- field work phase

After the fieldwork, all field data and secondary data obtained from different sources were
combined. Laboratory test results were taken from the reports of the dam (WWDSE, 2008).
Finally, using the field data and test results the interpretations and recommendations were given.

1.6 Equipment Used

There are different materials used during field work. This are;

 GPS used to locate our self and also geological and engineering geological material on
the map.

 Compass used to measure orientation of structures.

 Topographical map as base map

 Geological hummer used to break fresh samples and field estimation of rock strength.

 Sample bag used to carrying samples.

 Mobile camera used to capture pictures.

 Hand lens to magnify grain size, note book, marks, pen, pencil and rules.

7
1.7 Scope of the study

The present project work mainly focuses on geotechnical field description of dam abutments,
reservoir slope section and downstream of the Gidabo dam. The lithological rock units,
geological structures, soil characteristics, degree of weathering and discontinuity characteristics
of rock mass were described and classified in accordance of British standards (BS, 5930). In
addition, the laboratory test results of dam foundation and construction material samples taken
from WWDSE report were analyzed and interpreted by acceptable laboratory standards (BS,
ASTM and USC system).

CHAPTER TWO
2. LITRATUR REVIEW

2.1. Dam Construction

The construction of dams is one of the earliest and most fundamental types of civil
engineering activities. The main objective for which dams are constructed is to provide for
the safe retention and storage of water. All great civilizations have been achieved with the
capability to construct water storage structures that are appropriate to the needs such as
irrigation and power generation purposes.

Dam construction represents a major investment in basic infrastructure within all nations.

8
The annual completion rate for dams of all sizes continues to expand steadily in many
countries, including some of the more industrialized nations.

Dams are designed in such a way that they are of specific solution to site circumstances.
The design thus represents an optimum balance of local technical and economic
considerations at the time of construction. As a result of this, dams are of numerous types,
and their classification is sometimes less clearly defined.

The predicted amounts of consolidation, movement and seepage should be determined by

analyses during the design stage. These analyses should be reviewed at the end of construction,
and modified if the as-constructed engineering characteristics are different from those assumed
during design (Robert, 1988)

Load conditions during construction are induced by the progressive placement of compacted
layers of material. The construction of an embankment dam is always associated with and
followed by a differential settlement of its crest and slopes. Under unfavorable conditions they
can be associated with the formation of open cracks across the impervious section of the dam.
After the dam has been completed, the crest continues to settle at a decreasing rate. If the dam
rests on sediments, the settlements of the crest and slopes is increased by the compression of the
foundation materials produced by the weight of the dam and of the impounded water at a later
stage (Terzaghi et al., 1993).

Dams can be classified in number of ways. But most usual ways of classification of dams are
mentioned below:

2.2 Types of Dams according to Type of material

A dam can be made of earth, rock, concrete or wood. Dams are classified according to the
materials used as under:

2.2.1. Embankment Dams

Earth embankments are massive structures that inherently have movements and seepage.
Consolidation of the embankment and the foundation occurs most rapidly during construction
and at a lesser rate for an extended period of time thereafter. The initial filling and its
accompanying saturation may temporarily accelerate the consolidation of the upstream section of

9
the embankment, and initial filling will also cause downstream seepage to develop.
Consolidation of the embankment and the foundation is accompanied by transverse and
longitudinal movements that may result in transverse and longitudinal cracks (Robert, 1988).

The conventional method of embankment dams to a stable slope for a given height may involve
considerable expenses in construction material, construction equipment, construction time and
extension to the base area of embankment dam. However, these issues can be minimized using
appropriate solutions. One of the solutions to this issue is to make the dam slopes much steeper
than obtained by conventional design procedure. The slopes of embankment dam can be made
steeper by reinforcing them with suitable reinforcing material. Reinforcement
has been used in four distinct types of applications (Duncan, et al., 2005).

Embankment dam is large artificial dam. It is typically created by the placement and compaction
of complex semi plastic mound of various composition of soil, sand, clay, or rock. It has a semi-
previous waterproof natural covering for its surface and dense, impervious core. Types of
embankment dams are;

a) Earthfill Dam: An earth dam is made of earth (or soil)built up by compacting successive
layers of earth, using the most impervious materials to form a core and placing more permeable
substances on the upstream and downstream sides. A facing of crushed stone prevents erosion by
wind or rain, and an ample spillway, usually of concrete, protects against catastrophic washout
should the water overtop the dam.

Earth dam resists the forces exerted upon it mainly due to shear strength of the soil .Although
the weight of the earth dam also helps in resisting the forces, the structural behavior of an earth
dam is entirely different from that of a gravity dam. The earth dams are usually built in wide
valleys having flat slopes at flanks (abutments).The foundation requirements are less stringent
than those of gravity dams, and hence they can be built at the sites where the foundations are less
strong. They can be built on all types of foundations. However, the height of the dam will depend
upon the strength of the foundation material.

These are constructed of selected soils (0.001 ≤ d ≤ 100 mm) compacted uniformly and
intensively in relatively thin layers (20 to 60 ± cm) and at controlled optimum moisture content.

10
Compacted natural soils form more than 50% of the fill Material. Dams may be designed as:
Homogeneous, Zoned or with impermeable core. Zoned part is made of relatively finer material
that reduces seepage flow, e.g. clay. The fill material is placed as rolled, hydraulic fill or semi-
hydraulic fill.

b) Rock fill dam: A rock fill dam is built of rock fragments and boulders of large size. An
impervious membrane is placed on the rock fill on the upstream side to reduce the seepage
through the dam. The membrane is usually made of cement concrete or asphaltic concrete. In
early rock fill dams, steel and timber membrane were also used ,but now they are obsolete. A dry
rubble cushion is placed between the rock fill and the membrane for the distribution of water
load and for providing a support to the membrane. Sometimes, the rock fill dams have an
impervious earth core in the middle to check the seepage instead of an impervious upstream
membrane. The earth core is placed against a dumped rock fill. It is necessary to provide
adequate filters between the earth core and the rock fill on the upstream and downstream sides of
the core so that the soil particles are not carried by water and piping does not occur.

Over 50% of fill material be of class ‘rock’ usually a graded rockfill (0.1 ≤ d ≤ 1000 mm) is
filled in bulk or compacted in thin layers by heavy plant. Some impervious membranes/materials
are placed in the interior or on u/s face of the embankment to stop/reduce seepage through the
dam embankment. Dams section may be homogeneous, zoned, with impermeable core, or with
asphalt or cement concrete face. Zoned part is made of relatively finer material that reduces
seepage flow, e.g. clay. Core is made of clay, concrete, asphalt concrete etc.

c) Earthfill–rockfill or Earth-rock dams: These dams are made of mix of large

proportions of earthfill and rockfill materials.

2.2.2 Concrete Dams

Concrete dams are formed of cement-concrete placed in the dam body. Concrete dam section
designed such that the loading produces compression stress only and no tension is induced any
where. The reinforcement is minimum mainly as temperature control. Concrete is placed in two
ways: Reinforced concrete dam (RC dam) or Roller compacted concrete (RCC) dams. The
variations of concrete dam include: Gravity dam, Buttress dam ,Arch dam.

11
2.2.3 Gravity dam

Stability due to its mass. Dam straight or slightly curved u/s in plan (no arch action). The u/s face
is vertical or nearly vertical, d/s sloping.

2.2.4 Buttress dam

It consists of continuous u/s face supported at regular intervals by d/s buttress (massive
buttress /Diamond Head, round head) with each section separate. Ambursen / flat slab buttress /
decked buttress.

2.2.5 Arch dam

Arch dam has considerable u/s plan curvature. U/s and d/s faces are nearly straight / vertical.
Water loads are transferred onto the abutments or valley sides by arch action. Arch dam is
structurally more efficient than concrete gravity dams (requires only 10-20% concrete). However
abutment strength and geologic stability is critical to the structural integrity and safety of the
dam.

2.3Types of Dams Based on functions

2.3.1Storage dams
They are constructed to store water during the rainy season when there is a large flow in the
river. Many small dams impound the spring runoff for later use in dry summers. Storage dams
may also provide a water supply, or improved habitat for fish and wildlife .They may store water
for hydroelectric power generation, Irrigation or for a flood control project. Storage dams are the
most common type of dams and in general the dam means a storage dam unless qualified
otherwise.

2.3.2 Diversion dams

A diversion dam is constructed for the purpose of diverting water of the river into an off-taking
canal (or a conduit). They provide sufficient pressure for pushing water into ditches, canals, or
other conveyance systems. Such shorter dams are used for irrigation, and for diversion from a
stream to a distant storage reservoir. A diversion dam is usually of low height and has a small
storage reservoir on its upstream. The diversion dam is a sort of storage weir which also diverts

12
water and has a small storage. Sometimes, the terms weirs and diversion dams are used
synonymously.

2.3.3Detention dams
Detention dams are constructed for flood control. A detention dam retards the flow in the river
on its downstream during floods by storing some flood water. Thus the effect of sudden floods is
reduced to some extent. The water retained in the reservoir is later released gradually at a
controlled rate according to the carrying capacity of the channel downstream of the detention
dam. Thus the area downstream of the dam is protected against flood.

2.3.4 Debris dams

A debris dam is constructed to retain debris such as sand, gravel, and drift wood flowing in the
river with water. The water after passing over a debris dam is relatively clear.

2.3.5 Coffer dams

It is an enclosure constructed around the construction site to exclude water so that the
construction can be done in dry. A cofferdam is thus a temporary dam constructed for facilitating
construction.

A coffer dam is usually constructed on the upstream of the main dam to divert water into a
diversion tunnel (or channel) during the construction of the dam. When the flow in the river
during construction of the dam is not much, the site is usually enclosed by the coffer dam and
pumped dry. Sometimes a coffer dam on the downstream of the dam is also required.

2.4 Criteria to construct and select types of dam

The criteria to be taken into account in choosing a dam site and typeare the following:
topography and inflow in the catchment area, morphology of the river valley,geological and
geotechnical condition, climate and flood regime.

2.4.1 Topography and inflow in the catchment area

If we ignore the case of lakes for recreational purposes and small dams for hydroelectricpower
generation, reservoir storage is the main factor influencing the entire damdesign. The objective is

13
in fact to have a volume of water available for increasing dryweather river flow, irrigation or
drinking-water supply, or free storage capacity toattenuate flooding.

2.4.2Morphology of the river valley

A dam is by nature linked to an environment. The morphology of the river valley thereforeplays
a vital role in the choice of a dam site and the most suitable type of dam.Of course, the ideal and
most economical location will be a narrow site where the valley widens upstream of the future
dam, provided that the dam abutments are sound (i.e. a narrowing with no zones prone to rock
fall or landslide).Such a site is rarely found, either because the natural structure of a valley does
not offer any point of narrowing or because the choice of the site is not solely dependent on
engineering considerations. As a first approach, a wide valley will be more suitable for
construction of a fill dam.
A narrow site will be suitable for a gravity dam as well, and a very narrow site will
be suitable for an arch. In every case, of course, provided that the foundation is acceptable.

2.4.3Geology and foundation condition

The nature, strength, thickness, dip, jointing and permeability of the geological foundations at
the site are a set of often decisive factors in selection of the dam type.

5.2.5 The design principles of earth dams

1. The filling material to be used for earth dams should be sufficiently less permeable.

2. The earth dams should be constructed by utilizing available materials in local area to serve the
intended purpose with low cost. In order to reduce the leads for carrying excavated earth, the
borrow pits should be as close to the dam site as possible.

3. Sufficient outlets and spillways should be provided to avoid the possibility overtopping during
design floods.

4. For frost action, wave action and earthquake motions, sufficient freeboard must be provided.

14
5. If the stability of foundations and embankments is not impaired by piping, sloughing etc.,
there should be little harm in seepage through a flood control dam. But a conservation dam
should be as water-tight as possible.

I6. To avoid sloughing of face of earth dam, the phreatic line i.e. seepage line should be within
the downstream face of the dam.
7. The downstream face must be protected properly against rain, waves, up to tail water and the
upstream face against wave action. To reduce erosion due to flow of rain water horizontal berms
may be provided at suitable intervals in the downstream face. Ripraps may be provided on the
entire upstream slope and on the downstream slope near the toe so as to prevent erosion.

8. By providing suitable horizontal filler drain or chimney drain or toe drain, the portion of the
dam and downstream of the impervious core should be properly drained.

9. There must be no possibility of free flow of water from upstream to downstream face.

10. The upstream and downstream slopes should be designed so as to be stable under worst
conditions of loading. Such critical conditions occur for the upstream slope during sudden
downstream of the reservoir and for the downstream slope during steady seepage under full
reservoir.

11. The upstream slope and downstream slope must be flat enough to provide sufficient base
width at the foundation level, such that the maximum shear stress developed remains well below
the corresponding maximum shear strength of the soil so as to provide suitable factor of safety.

12. Due to development of excessive pore pressure and consequent reduction in shear strength of
soil, the stability of the embankment and foundations is very critical during construction or even
after the construction during the period of consolidation. So under this critical condition the
embankment slopes must remain safe

5.2.6 Dam and Reservoir Site investigation

15
The primary purpose of geological site investigations for a dam project is provide the
information that dam designers require in order to design a safe dam structure and to be able to
estimate with reasonable accuracy how much the dam is going to cost. The aim of the dam
designers is to build the dam for the lowest cost consistent with currently accepted standards of
safety.

The engineering geologist must be able to answer the following questions;

 what is the depth of overburden that must be removed to reach an acceptable foundation
for the dam wall;
 what are the rock types which make up the foundation and to what extent are they
affected by surface weathering;
 what are the engineering properties of the foundation rock types (important properties are
strength, deformability and durability);
 what is the geological structure of the foundation (ie jointing, faulting and folding of the
rock strata). A full description of the defect pattern in the rock mass should include
orientation, spacing, extent or persistence and aperture or openess;
 how permeable is the rock foundation (i.e to what extent are the rock defects such as
joints, faults and bedding open);
 where can adequate supplies of construction materials such as clay, sand, gravel and rock
fill be obtained, preferably as close as possible to the dam site;
 will the rock that must be excavated to provide a spillway for the dam be acceptable for
use as rock fill in the construction of the dam embankment;
 will the spillway require concrete lining and an energy dissipation structure at its
downstream end or is the spillway rock sufficiently erosion resistant that these can be
omitted.

In order to be able to answer the above questions the dam site must be explored by an
experienced engineering geologist. Methods commonly used to explore sites for construction
projects are;

 geological mapping of surface rock outcrops;

16
  Geophysical surveys. Seismic refraction is often used to determine depth of overburden;
 excavation of trenches and pits using bulldozers, backhoes etc.;
 Diamond core drilling. As usually carried out this method recovers an undisturbed,
cylindrical sample (a core sample) about 50 mm in diameter from depths of a few metres
to hundreds of metres, if necessary. Other types of drilling which recover disturbed
samples may also be used in some circumstances;

The exploration methods above are listed in order of increasing cost. Most dam site
investigations will employ several different methods, the exact mix of methods and the timing
when each is carried out is something which is tailored to suit the particular geological problems
of each individual dam site. These geological site investigations allow the engineering geologist
to construct a "geological model" of the site which is then used by the dam designers as a basis
on which they can design a safe and economic dam structure appropriate to the geology of that
particular site.

It is important to realize that even the most comprehensive site investigation programme cannot
hope to reveal all the significant geological features of the site. It is therefore of critical
importance that the actual geological conditions revealed during construction be compared with
the geological model of the site derived from the site investigations. It is quite common for
unexpected geological conditions to be revealed during construction which require changes to
made to the original design. A record of the site geology "as found" during construction is also of
great value if problems develop later during the operation and maintenance phase.

2.6 Laboratory Tests

Laboratory testing of foundation material may include the performance of such routine tests as
direct shear, unconfined and triaxial compression, sliding friction, modulus of elasticity, tensile
strength, natural and dry density, moisture content, consolidation, Atterberg limits, grain-size
analysis, and permeability. Less frequently, and where unusual geological conditions exist, tests
for foundation rebound, slaking, collapsibility, dispersive characteristics, permeability,
compaction, and determination of the mineral and chemical composition of the rock and ground
water may be required. In addition, where liquefaction potential may need to be evaluated,

17
dynamic laboratory tests such as cyclic direct shear and/or cyclic triaxial compression tests may
be appropriate.

Laboratory tests may be needed to provide information regarding the behavior of foundation
rock under the various construction conditions to which it will be subjected, such as, rebound
due to removal of load, application of load, scour, exposure to weather, wet-dry, and freeze-thaw
cycles. Laboratory tests are also necessary to establish the quality of construction materials such
as concrete aggregate, impervious material, rock fill, and riprap. The interpretation, evaluation
and application of the test results to the design of the structures is a highly important phase and
depends to a great degree upon experience and judgment in correlating and weighing the data
accumulated in the test program.

2.7 Field Tests

Two of the most important field tests performed are permeability and grouting. Permeability tests
can be done either by pumping out or hydraulic pressure. These tests are discussed in the
(U.S.Army Corps of Engineers EM 1110-2-3506). The pumping-out test consists of bailing or
pumping water from wells or boreholes and observing the effect of this operation on the water
level in these and nearby holes. The test usually is performed in one or more of the exploratory
borings. The hydraulic pressure test consists of pumping water under pressure into an isolated
zone in the rock or overburden through a borehole and noting the quantity of water pumped at
any given pressure. Descriptions of pressure testing equipment and procedures are contained in
EM 1110-2-3506. Test grouting may be useful. It consists of performing experimental grouting
operations on exploratory boreholes to determine, during the design stage, the extent to which
subsurface materials are groutable. While the above field tests may be used to provide
information on the foundation, additional field (insitu) tests for evaluating the physical
characteristics of the rock mass.

2.7.1 Investigation of Construction material for dam

The materials used for construction of dam include earth, rock, tailings from mining, or milling,
concrete, masonry, steel, timber, miscellaneous materials such as plastic or rubber and any
combination of this material.

18
2.7.2Field and laboratory investigation of quarry site

Field Reconnaissance; Following the geologic research conducted during the preliminary
reconnaissance, a geologic field reconnaissance is conducted at the site under consideration for
quarry development. During field reconnaissance, records should be made on map overlays of all
the geologic and topographic features that may have a bearing on the suitability of the potential
of the quarry site. It is essential to obtain much information’s possible on land forms, soil types
and thickness, ground water conditions, bedrock types and structure, volume of construction
materials, etc. Techniques of con-ducting field reconnaissance usually include subsurface
borings, probings, wash borings, core drilling, wagon and jack hammer drilling, and excavator
test pits and trenches.

From the samples taken a quality and quantity determination must be made of the construction
materials for their intended use. Conventional geologic assessment techniques to determine
hardness, toughness, and durability ratings of the material should be conducted. A determination
of the quantity of and washing plant .the quarry material is important. Such a determination
considers the type of material found, the in place and broken pounds per cubic foot, cubic feet
per ton, and tons per cubic yard.

2.8 Characteristics of construction material

2.8.1 Soil as Embankment Material

Wherever possible construction materials for an earth dam should be obtained from within the
future reservoir basin. Investigation of the dam site & the surrounding area should determine the
availability of impervious and pervious materials for the embankment (sand & gravel) and stone
for riprap.

2.8.2 Riprap

Riprap is preferably a relatively thin layer of large, approximately equidimensional, durable

rock fragments or blocks placed on bedding to dissipate water energy and protect a slope,
channel bank or shore from erosion caused by the action of runoff, currents, waves or ice. It is
made from a variety of rock types, commonly granite or marble.

19
 Photo 2.1 Riprap of Gidabo dam

2.8.3Aggregate and Concrete Aggregate

Crushed or uncrushed materials derived from the natural sources such as

rocks, gravel, boulders and sand for production of concrete are called aggregates. Crushed stone
or angular rock is a form of construction aggregate, typically
produced by excavating a suitable rock deposit and breaking the removed rock down to the
desired size using crushers. It is distinct from gravel which is produced by natural processes of
weathering and erosion, and typically has a more rounded shape.Engineering structures made of
good quality concrete have the properties of strength, rigidity and water-tightness, and resistance
to wear, weather and other destructive agents. Concrete is high in compressive strength, or its
ability to resist crushing.

2. 9 History of Dam Constructions in Ethiopia

Ethiopia is called the water tower of Africa due to its combination of mountainous areas with a
comparatively large share of water resources in Africa. Only a fraction of this potential has been
harnessed so far, 1% at the beginning of the 21st century. In order to become the powerhouse of
Africa, Ethiopia is actively exploiting its water resources by building dams, reservoirs, irrigation
and diversion canals and hydropower stations. The benefits of the dams are not only limited to
hydropower. Many dams are multi-purpose dams that are also designed to provide water for

20
irrigation, drinking water and flood control. However, hydropower is expected to be the main
benefit of the dams.

2.9.1 Gilgel Gibe I Dam

The Gilgel Gibe I Dam is a rock-filled embankment dam on the Gilgel Gibe River in Ethiopia. It
is located about 57 km (35 mi) northeast of Jimma in Oromia Region. The primary purpose of
the dam is hydroelectric power production. The Gilgel Gibe I hydroelectric power plant has an
installed capacity of 184 MW, enough to power over 123,200 house holds.The dam is 1,700 m
(5,600 ft) long and 40 m (130 ft) tall. Construction on the dam began in 1988 but work was
halted in 1994. In 1995 construction restarted with a new construction firm. The power station
was commissioned in 2004.(http://en.m.wikipedia.org)

2.9.2 Gilgel Gibe II Power Station

It is a hydro electric power station on the Omo River in Ethiopia. It is located about 80 km
(50 mi) east of Jimma in Oromia Region. The power station receives water from a tunnel
entrance 7°55′27″N 37°23′16″E / 7.92417°N 37.38778°E on the Gilgel Gibe River. It has an
installed capacity of 420 MW and was inaugurated on January 14, 2010. Almost two weeks after
inauguration, a portion of the head race tunnel collapsed causing the station to shut down.
Repairs were completed on December 26, 2010.

2.9.3 Gilgel Gibe III Dam

is a 250 m high roller-compacted concrete dam with an associated hydroelectric power plant on
the Omo River in Ethiopia. It is located about 62 km (39 mi) west of Sodo in the Southern
Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples' Region. Once fully commissioned, it will be the third largest
hydroelectric plant in Africa with a power output of about 1870 Megawatt (MW), thus more than
doubling total installed capacity in Ethiopia from its 2007 level of 814 MW. The Gibe III dam is
part of the Gibe cascade, a series of dams including the existing Gibe I dam (184 MW) and Gibe
II power station (420 MW) as well as the planned Gibe IV (1472 MW) and Gibe V (560 MW)
dams. The existing dams are owned and operated by the state-owned Ethiopian Electric Power,
which is also the client for the Gibe III Dam.(http://en.m.wikipedia.org)

21
2.9.4 The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam

(GERD ) formerly known as the Millennium Dam and sometimes referred to as Hidase Dam, is
a gravity dam on the Blue Nile River in Ethiopia that has been under construction since 2011. It
is in the Benishangul-Gumuz Region of Ethiopia, about 15 km (9 mi) east of the border with
Sudan.At 6.45 gig watts, the dam will be the largest hydroelectric power plant in Africa when
completed, as well as the 7th largest in the world. As of August 2017, the work stood at 60%
completion.Once completed, the reservoir could take anywhere between 5 to 15 years to fill with
water, depending on hydrologic conditions during the filling period and agreements reached
between Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt. (http://www.arch.mcgil,ca)

2.4.5 Gidabo dam

gidabo isan embankment damThe Gidabo dam are located at southern part of Ethiopia in
between Borena and Sidama zones to Southwest of Dilla town. This dam is an earth fill type of
embankment dam. The dam type in a project is determined by considering various factors
associated with topography and geology of the dam site, and quality and quantity of construction
materials available. The purposes of Gidabo dam are to provide water for irrigation and flood
controls. The Gidabo irrigation dam has the capacity to hold 102 million metric cube of water.
The project is under construction and it is expected to be completed within a two years.(Gidabo
Dam Nears Fruition)

22
 Photo2.1 Gidabo Dam (Source: from https://allafrica.com)

For river diversion during Gidabo dam construction, a conduit (2 x 2m) will be laid on the left
side of the main river channel. The length of the conduit will be approximately equal to the
bottom width of the dam at the location of the conduit. The opening of the conduit is designed to
pass the dry season flow during the construction. The diversion conduit will serve effectively
only for dry season construction period and to be plugged after the construction of the dam and
appurtenant structures are over. Irrigation outlet structures are closed conduits. There are two
outlets, one at left bank and the other on the right. The irrigation and dry season diversion
conduits will all be constructed on pile foundations (WWDE, 2008).

CHAPTER THREE
3. GEOLOGICAL SETTING OF THE GIDABO DAM

3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The Main Ethiopian Rift (MER) is a NNE–SSW to N–S trending trough 80 km wide in its
central portion and 1,000 km long. It separates the southern Ethiopian plateau to the west from
the Somali plateau to the east. Northward, the MER progressively widens out into the complex
Afar triple junction, while at its southern end, a 200–300-km tectonically disturbed area (Baker
et al. 1972) marks the transition to the Kenyan Gregory Rift in the Turkana depression.

23
According to Corti (2009)the MER volcanic stratigraphy characterized as a lower basalt unit
with trachy basalts and subordinate silicic flows from 11 to 8 Ma old followed by a widespread
ignimbrite cover (e.g., Nazaret Group) ranging in age from 7 Ma in the northern sector to 2 Ma
to the south and up to 700 m thick. Most of the ignimbrite layers are believed to have formed by
catastrophic eruptions related to the collapse of large calderas, such as the 3.5-Ma old Munesa
caldera now buried beneath the Ziway–Shala lakes. From a morphological and geological point
of view, the MER has been subdivided into three main segments: the northern, central, and
southern (Mohr et.al. 1983;1990;1996) The northern MER funnels from the Afar depression,
where it is about 100 km wide, to the 80-kmlong Dubeta Col sill (north of Ziway Lake). The
central MER, which is 80 km wide, includes most of the lake region and extends southward up to
the W/E Goba–Bonga line. This portion of the MER has an average elevation of 1,600 m, and
the lowest altitude is at Lake Abiyata (1,580 m).

At the Bonga–Goba line, the southern MER narrows up to 60 km, shifts to a N–S trend, and
reaches an elevation of 2,000 m, decreasing southward to 1,000 m. From its middle portion to the
south, the southern MER bifurcates into two branches (the Lake Chamo and Galana river rifts)
separated by the 3,000-m-high Amaro horst (Mohr, 1967). The southern MER keeps its
morphological identity until the Sagan line.

The MER is continuously bordered on the two sides by crest lines, with abrupt transitory scarp
faces overlooking the rift valley floor. The eastern crest line elevations vary between 2500 m and
3000 m. On the western side, the elevations of rift shoulders are comprised between 1800 and
3500 m. The rift is segmented into graben basins, each one asymmetric, the graben fill dipping
east, and the major fault lying along the eastern side. A narrow fault zone, the Wonji Fault Belt
(Mohr et.al. 1962) obliquely crosses the MER between northwestern border in the north and
southeastern border in the south. The MER ends near Lake Awasa.

According to Abraham Mechal et. al (2016)the rocks covering the Gidabo River Catchment can
be categorized into three major groups: pre-rift volcanic rocks, rift volcanic rocks and post rift
sediments. The Pre-rift rocks (Oligocene-Middle Miocene) occur mainly in the escarpment and
highland and to a lesser extent in the rift floor. This group mainly comprises basalt and

24
ignimbrite and represents the oldest rocks in the area, likely separated from the underlying
basement by the residual sandstone to the south of the catchment (Abraham Mechalet. al, 2016).

Rift volcanic rocks (Upper Miocene Pleistocene) are mainly exposed in the rift floor and
dominated by silicic volcanic rocks. A thick succession of stratoid silicics comprising
predominantly ignimbrites with subordinate un-welded tuffs, ash flows, rhyolites and trachytes,
which is commonly known as the Nazreth group form parts of the rift floor and also outcrops in
the escarpment and highland. In the rift floor, the Nazreth group is unconformably overlain by
younger volcanic rocks called Dino formation which comprises coarse un-welded pumiceous
pyroclastics and a complex mixture of different pyroclastic materials such as ash, tuff and
ignimbrite (Abraham Mechalet. al, 2016).

Rhyolitic lava flows, composed of stratified ash, pumice and rhyolite flows mainly occur to the
north of Lake Abaya along the axial zone of the rift but similar prominent volcanoes also have
erupted pumice and un welded tuffs forming volcanic mountains in the highland. Post rift
sediments (Holocene) such as alluvial and lacustrine sediments mainly occur along the lower
reaches of the Gidabo River and as patchy deposit along the axial zone of the rift, respectively .

The volcanic sequences and sediments in the area are densely dissected by extensional fault
systems resulting from the rifting process. The major fault types are normal faults having
generally similar strike but some dip to the east and others to the west (Abraham Mechalet. al,
2016).

The Gidabo valley lies in the Ethiopian rift system, which forms a part of the complex tectonic
feature of down faulted troughs extending for approximately 5000 km from Mozambique in the
south, then northwards through East Africa, through the Red sea and into Israel, Jordan and
Syria. Ethiopia forms part of the Arabo-Ethiopian swell which was uplifted during upper Eocene
times. As a result of this uplift, fissures formed, up which basaltic lavas were extruded. These
lavas are known as the “Trap Series”. The upper part of these basalts is inter-bedded with more
silicic lavas, pyroclastic and lacustrine sediments. It is thought that the outcropping of lavas gave
rise to the crustal collapse that formed the rift valley (Raunet 1977), which followed after
extrusion of the trap series. The cause of the up swell is not known but it is almost certain that

25
the longitudinal arching caused a weakness to develop, which results faulting. A subdued
expression of this tectonic and volcanic activity is currently apparent as local thermal springs and
occasional low to moderate intensity earthquake.

Fig 3.1 Geological map of Gidabo Dam site (WWDSE, 2008)

3.2 Local Geology

3.2.1 Lithological Units

The rocks exposed on the hills and low-lying topography near the dam axis and reservoir area
consists of a sequence of inter-bedded pyroclastic fall deposits and rare Tertiary lava products.

26
The pyroclastic sequence consists of poorly welded ignimbrite, graded fall deposits that are
moderately to strongly weathered and volcanic ash.

3.2.2 Pyroclastic rocks

The pyroclastic fall and flow deposits that form the right and left abutment ridges show the
following stratigraphy from top to bottom:

 Reddish brown volcanic breccias

 Light gray, friable lithic tuff

 Welded tuff (Ignimbrite tuff)

 Ignimbrite

The volcanic breccias form the top most part of the left abutment ridge. It is blocky in nature and
very hard when hammered. It is light colored, moderately weathered, brecciate and rhyolitic in
composition. It contains angular fragmental rocks set in fine-grained to glassy groundmass.

The ignimbrite that forms the lower part of the above unit around the left abutment is light gray
to greenish gray, weakly weathered to fresh, moderately strong (strongly welded) porphyritic in
nature

Photo 3.1 showing ignimbrite rock units from left abutment of Gidabo dam

27
3.2.3 Tuff Unit

The friable lithic tuff contains undulated clasts of pumice set in sandy sized volcanic ground
mass. It is generally reddish brown to light gray, moderately friable. The tuff (or ignimbritic tuff)
below ignimbritic unit is weak rock (lateral variation in strength can be found) containing crystal
and lithic fragments. It is light gray to brownish gray in color.

Photo3.2 showing welded tuff rock unit from left abutment of Gidabo dam

3.2.4 Rhyolitic Rock

The rhyolite forms a very steep part of the right abutment or a plug. The unit is fine grained, light
in color and fresh on the outcrop. The Rhyolitic flow covers the surrounding area of the top of
the right abutment.

28
Photo3.3 showing Rhyiolte rock units from left abutment

3.2.5 Alluvial deposits (River channel and Flood-plain deposits)

These are sand, silt and clay with gravel that have been deposited in the channels and around
margins of Gidabo River. Fine silt and clay are deposited on thin horizontal layers during floods.
This is mainly observed on both the banks, right and left bank of the river. Clay or clayey silty
soil is commonly seen on marshy area.

3.2.6 Colluvial Deposit

Colluviums deposit forms the slopes of abutment sides. It covers the area between volcanic
breccias and pyroclastic fall deposit. This unit is characterized by gravel, silt and sandy material.

3.2.7 Residual Deposit

It is observed on top and gentle slope forming part of the left and right abutment ridges. Residual
deposit is characterized by silty to sandy soil derived from the underlying volcanic rock (mainly
tuff). It contains remnants of gravelly rocks.

29
CHAPTER FOUR
4. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF GIDABO DAM

The Gidabo dam is an earth fill dam with central clay core and the maximum height of the dam
over the deepest river bed is about 17m.The spillway is designed as a chute spillway. Due to
topographic constraints, the overflow portion of spillway is made curved so as to get more
length. The location of the spillway is at the left bank of the river. The main components of the
spillway are approach channel, ogee type overflow spillway, discharge channel with sub critical
slope and stilling basin as the terminal structure (WWDSE, 2008).
The geotechnical investigation (in-situ and laboratory test) results of the foundation and
construction materials was taken from the reports done by Water Works Design & Supervision
Enterprise (WWDSE) in association with consulting engineering services (India) in 2008.
Therefore, based on the international standards/schemes (ASTM, British Standard, EBCS and
other specifications) for dam (Earth-fill embankment) constructions were used to characterize
and interpret the test results in following tables of this chapter.

4.1 Field Investigation and characterization

The dam site is located in a relatively narrow stream valley consists of weak deposits and highly
weathered volcanic rocks. The bed materials mainly consist of sand, gravel, silt and clay. The
strata in general are heterogeneous.

4.1.1 Gidabo Dam Abutments

The Gidabo dam abutments (right and left) composed of different geological materials and
physical properties. The central portion of the left abutment are typically fresh or slightly
weathered ignimbrite and or ignimbritic tuff, where as upper and lower boundaries are
characterized by weak, friable tuff with minor loose ash layer that would not easily be grouted
using cement grouts.

30
 Photo 4.1: left abutment

The right abutment is characterized by thick weak formation (soil and weathered rock) and
highly weathered, weak ignimbritic rock.

Photo 4.2: right abutment

4.2 In-situ test result interpretation and characterization of Foundation

Material

Seven boreholes around Gidabo dam and reservoir sites and one borehole were drilled for descriptions,
in-situ testing and sampling for laboratory purposes. The information and results of the boreholes drilled
at the dam and reservoir sites are presented as below;

31
Table 4.1: Bore holes drilling summary at Gidabo dam site (WWDSE, 2008)
Drilled Coordinates In-situ tests
Identification Elevation;
depth Northing Relative location Falling Packer SPT
of Borehole Easting(m) m a.s.l.
(m) (m) head test
GIBH-1 40.16 407831 711290 1230 Left abutment 1 7 4
GIBH-2 45.25 407797 711391 1207 Foundation (left 6 2 10
bank-flood plain)
Foundation(upstream 8 - 9
leftbank-near
GIBH-3 47.26 407865 711455 1208
confluence of Gidabo
and Ameleke rivers)
Foundation (right 7 - 6
GIBH-4 45.06 407783 711438 1207
bank-near the river)
Right side (on the 5 - 2
GIBH-5 25.28 407743 711560 1211
foot of hill)
GIBH-6 45.26 407737 711625 1230 Right abutment - 5** 1

GIBH-7 16.25 407740 711171 1210 Spillway, downstream 1 - 6

GIQH-1 15.0 408414 709992 1289 Quarry site No

279.52 TOTAL test

28 14 38
SUM
** One packer test having test section of 25.26 to 30.67m is failed. It was very difficult to set the required pressure, due to high
fracture zone within this section, complete water loss was observed at 28.12.

The Table 4.1 above indicates the falling head permeability and packer test, and standard
penetration tests done at the dam abutments, foundation, spillway locations to determine the
hydraulic conductivity and potential leakage, and resistance to the applied loads.

4.2.1 Falling Head Permeability test

The falling head permeability has been conducted and the results are tabulated as below in table
4.2.

32
 Table 4.2: Falling Head Permeability Test Results in the Drilled Bore Holes at Gidabo dam site

Drilled hole identification Test sample no Depth (m) Permeability (k) Cm/sec.
GIBH-1 1 of 1 26.0-31.23 1.33 x 10-5
GIBH-2 1 of 6 5.00- 9.52 8.41 x 10-6
2 0f 6 9.52- 14.62 4.93x 10-6
3 0f 6 14.62- 20.30 4.37x 10-6
4 0f 6 20.30- 25.45 4.11x 10-6
5 0f 6 25.45- 30.08 4.32x 10-6
6 0f 6 30.08- 35.64 1.75x 10-6
GIBH-3 1 of 8 5.00- 10.00 1.18 x 10-5
2 0f 8 10.00- 14.50 4.31x 10-6
3 0f 8 14.50- 20.00 1.01x 10-6
4 0f 8 20.00- 24.75 1.09x 10-6
5 0f 8 24.75- 30.20 1.86x 10-6
6 0f 8 30.20- 34.10 2.45x 10-6
7 0f 8 34.10- 38.26 2.42x 10-6
8 0f 8 38.26- 44.00 1.01x 10-6
GIBH-4 1 of 5 5.00- 10.44 8.77 x 10-6
2 0f 5 10.44- 15.36 1.30x 10-5
3 0f 5 15.36- 20.40 1.69x 10-5
4 0f 5 20.40- 25.57 2.53x 10-6
5 0f 5 25.57- 30.76 2.36x 10-6
GIBH-6 1 of 5 000- 5.02 6.93 x 10-6
2 0f 5 5.02- 10.04 3.47x 10-6
3 0f 5 10.04- 15.45 3.98x 10-6
4 0f 5 15.45- 20.38 1.83x 10-6
5 0f 5 20.38- 25.28 1.3x 10-6

According to BS5930, the hydraulic conductivity (K) value should be with maximum limit 10 -3
and the minimum value is 10-7. From Table 4.2, the hydraulic conductivity of Gidabo dam ranges
between 1.69*10-5and 8.77*10-6 Cm/sec. This result shows that the Gidabo dam site has a low to
medium permeability. Except the four depth ranges which have 10 -5 Cm/sec, all boreholes have
more than 10-6 Cm/sec of hydraulic conductivity which indicates that the dam site is low
permeable which has a fair drainage conditions.

4.2.2 Lugeon (Packer) tests

Packer test is the most popular test in order to detect leakage under dams. This test was
performed in boreholes GIBH-1, 2 and 6 in section where the geological material permitted. The
packer tests were performed by using pneumatic rubber and mechanically inflated packer. After

33
the desired test section is drilled a packer assembled is lowered into the hole using drilling rods
by fitted with the top depth of the test section. Then water is injected thorough the rods and
packer to reach the test section.

Table 4.3: Lugeon (Packer) Tests in Drilled Bore Holes at Gidabo dam site.

Drilled bore hole identification Test sample no. Depth (m) Average Lugeon
GIBH-1 1 of 7 1.10 - 5.40 171.52
2 0f 7 5.49 - 11.00 64.82
3 0f 7 9.50 - 15.00 118.22
4 0f 7 15.00 - 20.00 59.73
5 of 7 20.0-26.0 29.63
5 0f 6 20.00-26.00 7.88
7 0f 7 33.6—40.16 39.52
GIBH-2 1 0f 2 35.06 – 40.75 5.15
2 0f 2 40.75 - 45.25 16.08
GIBH-6 1 of 5 19.80 - 2 5.26 53.15
2 of 5 25.26-30.67 Failed due to
fracture nature
GIBH-6 3 0f 5 29.87-35.54 21.3
4 0f 5 35.54-40.06 46.25
5 of 5 40.06-45.26 13.35

The permeability of the rock mass may be assessed by following various techniques however,
Lugeon’s criteria is most commonly used as it gives more reliable values for the first orientation.
According to Lugeon, for dams higher than 30m, the water loss in water pressure test should not
exceed 1 liter in 1 min. per 1 meter of the hole at 10 atmospheres pressure which should act at
least for 10 min. Permeability results are described in terms of Lugeon units; one Lugeon is
equal to a flow of 1 lit/m/min at pressure of 1 MN/m2. A Lugeon unit is approximately equal to a
coefficient of permeability of 10-7 cm/s. According to Lugeon (1933) a rock absorbing less than
one Lugeon unit can be considered as watertight.

Table 4.3 showed that except borehole (GIBH-6), all boreholes have an average lugeon value
greater than one, which are very weak to prevent the passage of water.

34
4.2.3 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

This site was under taken in several bore holes (GIBH). These boreholes are GIBH-1-GIBH-7
(Table 4.1). For borehole the test portion where taken at different depth to know the resistance of
penetration of the soil. More or less successful SPT have undergone accept GIBH-6 in which the
SPT was failed have to large our burden of soils (colluviums and residual soils). So, this
boreholes test is neglected.The dam obtained from different boreholes using SPT in Gidabo dam
sites are organized in the next table according to the depth. The depth interval is 5 m.

Table 4.4: penetrate resistance value at different depth.

Depth (M)e Penetration resistance(N)

0-5 2,4,9,
5-10 3,7,25,17,17,21,27,27
10-15 12,15,17
15-20 8,11
20-25 20,34
25-30 3,13,27,49
30-35 45,52
>35 8

The first 0-5 penetration resistance value N range from 2-9, which indicate very loose soil . but ,
5-10 m depth , the N value varies ;which indicate that the soil is a collection of loose to medium
dense, but dominated by dense soils, since, the dominant N value is 15-30.the soil found in10-30
m depth, is dominated by dense soils with some soils very dense as depth increase from 20-52m
,the consistency of soils become very dense . Therefore it ranges from very loose, loose, medium
dense, dense and very dense soil consistency. According to BS1777; 1990 the Gidabo dam
constructed on dense soil.

From Table 4.4, the N-value between 0-20 intervals are 15 in numbers which indicates that
according to Seed et al. (1985), the potential damage is high.

35
4.3 Laboratory result interpretation and characterization of Construction
Materials

Principally the Selection criteria for the types of embankment for dams are earth and rock-fill dams
depend on the predominant fill material to be used. The most economical type of dam will often be one
for which material can be obtained within a reasonable haul distances from the construction site,
including suitable material which may be utilized on the dam from the excavation of dam foundation,
spillway, outlet works, and other appurtenant structures ( WWDSE, 2008). Materials that are available
near or on the dam site include: -

 Earth-fill materials for embankment construction for core.

 Rock-fill materials for shell of dam, slope protection and rock toe and for masonry.

 Rock materials for concrete aggregates.

 Fine aggregate i.e. sand for concrete, mortar and filters.

716000N
LEGEND
A
A
A
A
A
A
m
12 75 m B
B
B
B
B
B Borrow site-1
12 40

13
13

Borrow site-2
45
30

m
m
m
10
13

Sand source
0
12 2

m
12 15
714000N Rock Quarry site
m
12 25

GIQH-1
GIQH-1
10
m Quarry site-1
12
1305 m

Q-2: Quarry site-2

05

B
B
12
m

80 m
1295 m

12 60 12 Dry weather road

90

m
12

A
A Tributeries
12

KK
45

iillkk
m
m
m
30

712000N
5

iillee
12
12 6

Dam axis
12
35
m

13

Gidabo River
65

12 00 m m
1250 m
55
m

12 m
AAM

70
R
Raabb

12
Swampy area
M

12
85
EELL

m
13 2
aa
EEKK

m0
EE

Q-2
Q-2
Q-2
Q-2
Q-2
Q-2
13 60
13 2

13
710000N
5

40
13 70
m

m
m
1335 m

GIQH-1
GIQH-1
GIQH-1
1350 m

GIQH-1
GIQH-1
GIQH-1
m

5
13 8
1300 m

13 55
m
m Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
13 15
Ministry of Water Resource
408000E 410000E 412000E 414000E Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise

0 1 2 In association with Consulting Engineering Service (India) PVT. LTD.

Project: Gidabo Irrigation Project

kilometres Final Feasibility Study

Title: Location Map of construction material sites (soil and rock)

Date: May 2008

36
 Fig. 1.1 Location map of construction material sites (Source: WWDSE, 2008)

4.3.1 Earth-fill Materials

Two types of borrow sites containing soils have been identified in the project area;

Type- I soil: which is dark brownish gray, brown and/or dark gray sand or silty soil with sand or gravelly
sand bands, is found in the area where a wide valley of Gidabo river exists, it is in the reservoir area and
downstream of the dam.

Type II borrow site: is around 11 km east of the dam site in the main accessed road from Dila to Dam
site and alternative site. The soil is characterized by reddish brown clayey silt probably derived from
ignimbrite. Such kind of borrow site can be found at least in two area between the mentioned site and
Dila University (from 11km to 15km east of the dam site).

The laboratory test results from soils around the dam site, upstream and downstream borrow sites and Soil
type II sites are tabulated as follows;

Table 4.5 Soil Properties of Gidabo Dam Site Area

Atterberg’s Spec Bul Standard Direct Shear

Limits (%) ific k Proctor test
Grain Size Analysis Fre Dispersi grav den
De e bility ity sity O MDD C(Kp Ø ( 0

pth sw (D, ND) M (gm/ a) )

Sample in Cla Sa Gra ell C cc)
Identifi m. y Silt nd vel PI SL (% (%
cation % % % % LL ) )
GITP-1 2.4- 35. 41. 22. - 55. 26. 13. 75 D - - 26. 1.408 48 22.29
(P2) 2.6 25 87 28 58 77 5 85
GITP-4 2.0- 46. 50. 2.4 - 67. 36. 12. 60 D - - 36. 1.313 - -
(P2) 2.2 55 98 7 58 22 89 6
GITP-3 1.1 69. 19. 10. - 71. 38. 16. 60 -- 2.64 1.42 - - - -
5 95 75 3 65 93 46
GIBH3- 36. 20 76. 3.4 - 65. 23. 7.6 57. -- 2.51 1.45 - - - -
CBS 1 53- 58 2 35 29 4 50
6.8
3
GIBH2- 7.1 44. 51. 4.1 - 72. 42. 17. 65 -- 2.65 1.78 - - - -
2-CBS1 0- 5 34 6 65 25 21
7.4
0
GIBH2- 17. 15. 56. 27. - 54. 20. 3 37. --- 2.35 1.54 - - - -
CBS2 45- 25 82 93 38 41 50
7.7
5
GIBH2- 20. 22. 45. 31. - 46. 15. 6.5 42. --- 2.46 1.64 - - - -
CBS4 0- 5 6 9 1 05 7 50
20.
30
GIBH4- 21. 26. 50. 23. - 65. 30. 12. 52. D 2.55 1.66 - - - -
CBS2 1- 25 15 6 45 6 25 5

37
 21.
3
GIBH5- 7.1 22. 24. 53. - 72. 51. 19. 12 D 2.52 - - - - -
CBS1 2- 25 1 65 3 64 46 0
7.5
2
GIBH6- 7.7 21. 72. 6.0 - 56. 30. 12. 67. D 2.66 - - - - -
CBS1 7- 75 24 1 15 73 82 5
8.3
4
GIDTP- 2.4 54. 42. 2.5 - 70. 36. 16. 80. D - - 32. 1. 3 2
6 0- 5 92 8 5 18 00 00 75 1 7. 7.
3.2 9 6 0
0 4 7 2
GIDTP- 2.9 30 41. 28. - 47. 21. 4.0 60. D - - 31 1.376 41.33 24.23
3 0- 06 94 25 01 0 00
4.0
0
GIDTP- 0.2 27. 68. 4.6 - 60. 29. 10. 75. D - - 35. 1.332 58.33 20.81
7 0- 25 15 7 67 75 00 4
2.0
0
Note: Dispersive (D), Non dispersive (ND)

From these tests, as indicated the optimum moisture content was 26..8-36.6 while maximum dry density
range was 1.313-1.408gm/cc the range confirm to the value expected out fine grained soils 35.25%of
clay,50.98% of silt and some amount of a clay soil. Soil whose grain is predominantly composed of clay
mineral which has plasticity or cohesion. Plasticity index of soil is a function of the amount of clay
mineral present in soil. Skelnpton(1953) observed that the plasticity index is directly proportional to the
percentage of clay sized particle by weight. The friction value found between 20-30 is very poor to
impervious. The Gidabo dam friction value is found between the maximum 27.02 and the minimum is
20.81 so this result show the dam has fair to poor friction value According to BS5930.

According to Holtz 1956 the free swell value is <50% is non-expansive, 50-100% intermediate
and >100% is expansive. Based on this, the Gidabo dam site (4.5) has a free swell ranges 37.50
to 120 percent. But, most of soil samples have a free swell between 50-100% which indicated
that the soil of dam site is intermediate expansive soil.

Compaction may be defined as the process of packing the soil particles by reducing the air in the
soil voids, by mechanical means. If the soil is not compacted well, and is piled up in a loose
state, it is likely to settle down in future, or wash away easily. It is, therefore, important to
compact the soils in the field to a desired extent. Water plays an important role in compaction.
The limiting moisture, which is most useful for compaction, is called the optimum moisture
content (OMC). At this moisture content, the soil would be compacted to a maximum possible

38
degree, and would have the maximum density or unit weight, i.e. the weight of soil grains in a
unit volume of compacted soil mass, would be maximum (Garg, 2005).

The soil in which the clay content has high percentage of sodium is dispersive. the clay fraction in
dispersive soil readly breaks down to form a suspension in water.

The angle of shearing resistance () of the cohesion less soil depends upon the number N. In
general, the greater the N-value, the greater is the angle of shearing resistance.

Standard Penetration Denseness Angle of Shearing Resistance ‘’

Number ‘N’ value

0-4 Very loose 250 – 320

4 - 10 Loose 270 – 350

10 - 30 Medium 300 – 400

30 - 50 Dense 350 – 450

> 50 Very Dense > 450

39
Table 4.6 Soil Properties of Gidabo Borrow Area (upstream and downstream borrow sites)

Sp. Atterberg’s Direct Dispersi

Gra Shear bility
vity Limits (%) Proctor test (D, ND)
Free
Grain Size Analysis swell SL O C Ø
Cla Silt Sa Gra % M MD (Kp ( 0)
y % nd vel C D a.)
Depth % % % (% (gm/
Sample in m. LL PI ) cc)
Identification
GITP-C-1- 0.20- 55. 20. 24. - _ 30 61. 35. 4.6 25 1.52 55 24. ND
(P2) 0.7 1 39 51 15 58 4 5 04
GICTP-1 0.30- 32. 64. 3.8 - - 65 50. 23. 8.6 28. 1.40 62. 23. D
2.60 15 05 52 16 1 45 9 33 27
GIWTP-3 2.65- 2.5 85. 11. - - 70 62. 30. 9.1 36. 1.24 65. 25. D
3.10 5 62 83 66 4 9 7 00 64
GIWTP-4 1.00- 24. 40. 35. - - 85 50. 23. 12. 26 1.46 69. 30. D
3.40 5 07 43 43 49 15 2 67 5
GIWTP-5 1.10- 27. 68. 4.1 - - 32.5 46. NP 3.7 28. 1.37 72. 10. D
2.00 85 03 2 72 5 75 3 67 20
GIWTP-5 2.00- 42. 36. 21. - 2.35 77.5 64. 28. 13. 35 1.20 65. 23. -
3.50 35 3 5 65 41 93 2 33 27
GICTP-7 0.8-1.5 24. 67. 7.8 - 2.5 80 49. 23. 13. 30. 1.37 69. 19. -
75 37 8 25 76 57 15 2 33 03
GICTP-8 - - - 117. 2.45 117.5 80. 43. 20. -
2.5-3.4 5 75 8 92
GICTP-5, 1.8-2.1 - - - 2.55 48. 24. -
USS* 49. 20. 33. 1.33 67 47
40 96 50 5

* USS: Undisturbed Soil Sample

These table show that the result of the compaction test carried out on the sample from dam site. From
these tests, as indicated the optimum moisture content was 25-36.9% while maximum dry density range
was 1.247-1.525%gm/cc the range confirm to the value expected out fine greind soils 55.1%of clay and
85.6% of silt thise means a clay soil soil whose grain are predominantly composed of clay mineral
which has plasticity or cohesion. plasticity index of soil is a function of the amount of clay mineral
present in soil. Skeln pton(1953) observed that the plasticity index is directly proportional to the
percentage of clay sized particle by weight.

According to BS5930 the friction value found between 20-30 is very poor to impervious. The Gidabo
dam friction value is found between the maximum 25.64 and the minimum is 10.20 so this result show
the dam has fair to poor friction value.

40
According to Holtz 1956 the free swell value is <50% is non expansive,50-100% intermediate
and >100% is expansive depending on these standard the Gidabo free swell ranges with
maximum of 117.5 and minimum of 30 these is mostly the dam ranges from intermediate to
expansive free swell.

4.3.2 Rock- fill materials and Concrete aggregates

Rock-fill materials are available mainly from two sources.

Rock Quarry-1: The ridge around 1.3 km south of the dam site can be used as a rock quarry. The
exposed rock unit on the steep slope part of the ridge is variegated color (due to weathering), moderately
weathered to fresh, moderately strong rhyolitic ignimbrite. Outcrop has blocky nature and highly affected
by geologic structure (small fractures and fault). The fresh rock would be available after removing the
overburden of about 3 to 5 m which would suffice for rock-fill, filter aggregate for dam and the aggregate
required for concrete for the spillway and its appurtenant works (WWDSE, 2008).

Rock Quarry-2: The area is situated around 1.5km downstream of the dam axis, ridge found on the left
side of Gidabo River. The top part of the ridge is mainly characterized by fractured rhyolitic ignimbrite
and/or ignimbrite: -mainly weakly weathered to fresh, moderate to highly strong. The bottom part is
fractured and bedded weakly weathered to fresh moderately to highly strong ignimbrite. The outcrop and
nature of rock in this quarry site is similar with the first preferred quarry site, preferred based on
proximity and easy access. Looking to the properties of the rock and its quality, presently this quarry is
not taken in to consideration looking to the sufficient availability of rock in Rock quarry-1. The estimated
area of the available rock material for masonry, riprap or aggregate of dam construction started at 5m
after removing the overburden (WWDSE, 2008).

41
Table 4.7: Laboratory test results on rock samples from quarry sites

Point Water
Depth (m) Sp.Gravity Unit wt. load USC absorption
Sample (SSD) (Kg/m3) (KN/m2)  Porosity (KN/m2) (%)
No. Id. (%)
GIRS- Around the left
1 1A abutment 2.84 1221 349 9.42 - 3.66
500m upstream of
the dam axis,
GIRS- Ameleke valley
2 1B margin 2.48 - 302.78 17.6 - 8.61
500m upstream of
the dam axis,
within the
3 GIRS-2 reservoir area 2.58 1264 320.07 15.9 - 7.33
1.3km south of
the dam axis,
4 GIRS-3 quarry site-1 2.69 1279 318.37 14.31 - 6.21
1.5km
downstream the
GIRS- dam axis, quarry
5 4A site-1 2.6 1283 281.53 9.35 - 3.95
GIRS-
6 4B >> 2.57 1283 206.45 11.69 - 5.15
*GIRS: Gidabo Rock Sample

BS 882 standard suggested that the concrete aggregates water absorption values are not usually
limited except in some structures (dams and marine protection), but the recommended maximum
value of 2.5% sometimes specified. However, aggregates with specific gravity between 2.42-3.0
are usually suspected of being potentially sound where there are heavy loads and interactions
with water. Thus, rock samples given in table 4.7 which have a specific gravity between 2.48-
2.84 satisfying the accepted range values.

According to Singh (1995), rocks with less than 2% of water absorption are durable and
important indicator of resistance to degradation. The rocks with water absorption greater than 6%
are very poor and porous with large free draining pores. Generally, the porosity and water
absorption values given in table 4.7 indicated that the rocks have a value below requirements.

Concrete aggregates are potentially available from the same sources as rock-fill; the aggregate
materials would also be available from the foundation excavation of the dam.

Table 4.8Laboratory test results of rock samples from boreholes of dam site

42
  Water
absorption
Point (%)
Sp. Gr. Unit wt. load Porosity USC
No. Sample Id. Depth (m) (SSD) (Kg/m3) (KN/m2) (%) (KN/m2)
GIBH- - 28282 -
1 1,CBR-1 5.9-6.2 2.69 2582 -
GIBH- - 5397 -
2 1,CBR-2 16.10-16.35 2.34 1494 -
GIBH- - -
3 2,CBR-1 35.10-35.44 2.42 2003 - 10252
GIBH- - -
4 2,CBR-2 44.44-44.9 2.63 2600 - 14684
GIBH-
5 6,CBR-1 31.62-31.96 2.59 - 17.3 22.2 2204 11.01
GIBH-
6 6,CBR-2 40.11-40.45 2.78 - 361.16 5.21 5061 1.98

In Table 4.8, the rock samples have good specific gravity values. According to Singh (1995), the
rocks with a point load index greater than 8Mpa are excellent, 1.5-8Mpa are good and less than
1.5Mpa are very poor, which indicates that low resistance to an applied load. Deer and Miller
(1966) stated that USC value ranges with greater than 20MN/m2 have very high strength, and between 5-
20MN/m2 have medium to high strength and a values less than 5 MN/m2 have low strength. Therefore,
table 4.8 showed that the rock samples have lower point load index values. The uniaxial
compressive strength value ranges from 2.20-28.28MN/m2, which generally indicates that the
rock samples have medium to high strength.

4.3.3 Shell materials

Based on proximity and type of material, three areas are preferably selected and described as follow:

Shell site-1: It is around 1.2km south of the dam site, the newly constructed access road cross the area.
One borehole, GIQH-1, was drilled in this area. Based on site observation and borehole data, the
geological material in this area is fragmented ignimbritic rock with different degree of weathering and
strength, moderately weathered tuff and residual soil derived from either ignimbritic rock or tuff which
has a thickness of 5.0m (based on drilled borehole). GIQH-1 is drilled in the gentle part of the ridge.
However, towards the steep slope and peak of the ridge, weakly weathered, moderate to highly strong
ignimbritic rock (rhyolitic ignimbrite) is dominantly seen. Sample GISH-1 is collected from this
site.Since weakly weathered to fresh, moderately strong ignimbrite is found from the depth 5.0 to 15.0m
on GIQH-1, this site is also be a quarry site for masonry, aggregate and rip-rap work.

43
Shell site-2: It is around 1.5km south of the dam site, the newly constructed access road cross the area.
The geological material in this area is tuff with different degree of weathering and strength and residual
soil derived from tuff. Sample GISH-2 is collected from this site.

Shell site-3: It is around 10km east of the dam site, on the existing access road from Dila to dam site. It is
fresh to completely weathered aphanitic basalt with residual soil. Sample GISH-3 is collected from this
site. Representative samples were collected for laboratory analysis and the results are summarized below.

Table 4.9.Laboratory test results of shell materials

Sp. Free Proctor Direct shear

Gr Atterberg limit Swell
Grain size analysis (%) (%) (%)
Sample Relative Clay Silt San Gravel L.L. P.I SL MDD OMC C Ø (0)
Id. location d (gm/cc) (%) (kpa)
GISH- 1.3km 3.25 20.75 18.4 57.6 2.47 43.2 - 5.1 50 1.81 14 85.33 27.92
1 south of
the dam
site
GISH- 1.5km 7.65 54.75 18.4 19.2 2.43 56.2 - 1 52 1.266 29.5 23.33 32.82
2 south of
the dam
site
GISH- 10km 1.75 9.65 6.9 81.7 2.61 38.2 - 2.9 20 1.935 13.5 53.67 25.64
3 east of
the dam
site
GISH- 5km 50 36.16 13.8 - 2.58 48.7 22.5 12 52.5 1.492 27 109.7 25.64
4 southeast
of The
dam site

According to Holtz, and Gibbs,1956 the free swell value of soil if <50% is non expansive ,50-100% is
intermediate degree of expansiveness and >100% is expansive based on this standard the Gidabo dam
free swell found between 50-100% value of free swell is indicate intermediate degree of expansive.

The change in moisture contents (Atterberg Limits) of a soil sample can be used to indicate the
degree for potential swell .A soil sample with liquid limit exceeding 70% and plasticity index
greater than 35% judged to have a very high potential swell. The LL measured at different depth of
Gidabo Dam is <70% and the PI at different depth is <35 so the free swell potential is low.

According to BS 5930, the friction value found between 25-35 degrees is fair to poor. The Gidabo dam
friction value is found between 32.82 -25.64 degrees (Table 4.9). This result showed that the dam has fair
to poor friction value.

44
4.3.4 Sand Material

This material is important for chimney/horizontal filters, for concrete and masonry works. After every
flood in the river the sand gets deposited and these deposits vary after every rainy season as per the flood
conditions.Sand is available in the upstream of the dam site, around the confluence of Gidabo and its
tributaries (Ameleke and Raba).

Sand site-1 (Ameleke river Channel): The Channel of Ameleke River starting from the confluence with
Gidabo River is filled by medium to coarse-grained sand to gravelly sand often-fine sand. An estimated
quantity nearby length of the channel filled by sand is 1.0 to 1.5km having width of 2.0-4.0m. Assuming
average width of 3.0m and average deposit thickness of 1.0 m, minimum of 4500 m3 sand can be found
around this area.

Sand site-2 (Raba river channel): It is around 2.5 to 3.0km upstream of the dam site, around the
confluence of Raba and Gidabo rivers. The site is the major sand source for construction purpose for Dila
town, especially for the newly constructed buildings of Dila University. The sand is on somewhat coarser
side and having good fineness modulus with almost no impurities the sand reserved can be used during
construction after checking the fineness modulus and silt impurities as these parameters changes after
every flood deposit.

Table4.10: Laboratory results of sand samples collected upstream of the dam axis, from Gidabo
tributaries.

Relative Grain size analysis (%) Impurity (silt content)

Sample identification location Fines Sand Gravel %
GISS-1 Ameleke stream 1.83 71.45 26.72 1.9
GISS-2 Ameleke stream 2.55 86.19 11.26 2.82
GISS-3 Raba stream 3.52 74.13 13.84 3.46

*GISS: GIdabo Sand

Table 4.10 shows that the sand has high percentage of grain size with small percentage of fine
(clay and silt) and gravel sizes. The sand used for Gidabo dam construction has impurity ranges
from 1.9-3.46 percent. According to BS 882, sand aggregate fine content (silt and clay) percent
should not exceed 4%. Therefore, the sand aggregate used for the Gidabo dam has less than 4%
of impurities and it is suitable for the dam construction.

45
CHAPTER FIVE
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Gidabo dam Site and reservoir area is located in the Southern sector of the main Ethiopian
rift where tectonics is proved to be active along the Wonji Fault Zone. One of the basic technical
investigations in feasibility and design study of Gidabo dam construction is geological and
geotechnical study. Surface and subsurface investigations at the site of structures and at possible
borrow areas were done to determine suitability of the foundation and abutments, required
foundation treatment, excavation slopes, availability and characteristics of embankment
materials. This information frequently governs selection of a specific site and type of dam.

5.1. In-situ and Laboratory Test Results

According to the geotechnical investigations, the foundation at the dam site consists of
considerably thick, loose silty sand layer at the left side of the valley floor and loose gravelly
sand layer at the right side. Since the bed material will remain saturated even after construction
of the dam, loose saturated sands may undergo large scale reduction in shear strength when
subjected to seismic effect. Reduction in shear strength may induce pore pressure reducing the
effective stress which result liquefaction of foundation material. Compaction of the river bed
material is necessary to reduce the risk of liquefaction. The work of compacting the bed is to be
taken up with the help of vibratory roller.

Different ranges of penetration resistance value (N-value) obtained from SPT test (Table 4.5)
indicates that the soil is collection of soft, medium and stiff soils. As depth increases, the
consistency of soil becomes very hard. Generally, the quality and resistance of soil increases
with increasing of depth. The soft soil and very soft soils are not advisable to use in engineering
structure activities like in dam. Therefore, soil of Gidabo dam is good quality as foundation
material for dam construction.

The permeability test was carried out to determine velocity of water that flow through the
different soil in the subsurface. So, knowing the coefficient of permeability (K) tells us the
behavior of the soil and the manner how the water flows (whether the subsurface soil is
permeable or impermeable). Soils found in the boreholes of the Gidabo dam have nearly uniform

46
coefficient of permeability. This indicates that the soils have similar hydraulic properties. But as
going down a depth k- value declines. Due to this, imperviousness of the soil increases down a
depth. Generally the k- value range from 1.01 *10-6 - 1.68 * 10-5cm/sec. (Table 4.4). Thus, those
soils behaving such velocity are silts and very fine sands. In some depths, the K value increases
abruptly, but this is due to the existence of weak zones (faults, deep weathering) effects.

A part from the right and left abutments, drilled bore holes and excavated test pits show that the
dam site is entirely underlain by layers of alluvial soil. Volcanic rocks are found on boreholes
drilled on the left and right abutments, with different degree of weathering, strength and fracture.
The abutments are suitably shaped and prepared in order to get good contact between impervious
materials of the embankment and foundation. The upper part of weathered materials is removed
and the fractures were grouted with concrete.

The laboratory test results of borrow area soils confirm that the soils are generally, clayey silt
and/or silty clay with sand having liquid limit (LL) from 46.7 to 80.8 and plasticity index (PI)
from 23.16 to 43.8. The soils are generally dispersive, shrinkage limit ranging from 3 to 21 with
free swell ranges from 30-117%. The soils are moderate to impervious as the permeability ranges
from 5.48 *10-8 to 2.12 * 10-6 cm/second.

The shell quarry exposed rock unit on the steep slope part of the ridge is variegated color (due to
weathering), moderately weathered to fresh, moderately strong rhyolitic ignimbrite. Outcrop has
blocky nature and highly affected by geologic structure (small fractures and fault). The fresh
rock would be available after removing the overburden of about 3 to 4 m. The laboratory test
results of the shell material indicates that the soils are clay, silt, sand and gravels having liquid
limit (LL) from 38 to 56 and plasticity index (PI) from 22.5. The soils have the swelling potential
from 20 to 52.5 and permeability ranges from 1 *10-5 to 3 * 10-5 cm/s. These results reveal that
the shell materials have low to medium plasticity behavior and swelling potential with low
permeability coefficient. Thus, the materials have good quality to use for construction.

47
5.2 Groundwater depth and flow direction
There is no available evidences concerning hydro geological characteristics of Gidabo
catchment, particularly reservoir area and command area, the recharge and discharge system can
be viewed from geological formations, Structures, Vegetation density and type, Human effect,
topography and Climatic conditions. The integrated effects of the above factors have to do with
groundwater inflow and out flow.

Precipitation is the major recharge inducing hydrological parameters; estimated annual recharge
in Gidabo is about 134.85mm corresponding evapotranspiration 806.21mm, rainfall 1348.47mm
and runoff 407.41mm (Shiferaw Lulu &Abebe G/Hiwot, 2004).

To characterize depth of groundwater in Gidabo catchment at this level cannot be achieved for
the area lacks sufficient data. The few available borehole data are outside the reservoir and
command area. However, there is a clue that the downstream part (command area) groundwater
can be taped at shallow depth because in this area notable part of the flood plain and Gidabo
delta is marshy and under water, suggesting the water table can be encountered at shallow depth.
The other indicatives of groundwater presence at shallow depth include fairly dense vegetation
such as savanna grass and big trees like acacia, and others.

Though no sufficient data to say so, groundwater flow direction may follow the same direction
that the surface water follows; this is because the Eastern ridges (fault escarpments) are dipping
toward the west. It is notably affected by faulting that run NNW-SSE and NNE-SSW and by E-
W (transversal faults), which determines groundwater flow direction as they are deep seated
regional and local faults.

5. 3 Reservoir Water Tightness

The reservoir basin is relatively narrow to wide valley, the slope forming part of the reservoir
margins are also relatively shallow.

Geology of reservoir area has been made up of volcanic products (mainly acidic); where
secondary porosity is more significant in supporting circulation and storage than primary
structures except principally brecciate lava flows. The ignimbrite unit is affected by regional and
local fault that has created conducive environment for both recharge and discharge. Generally,

48
the upper and Middle part of Gidabo is characterized by lava flows. Recharge appreciably takes
place along the weak zones. In the Dam axis area discharge occurs taking advantage of structural
and topographical controls.

The alluvial deposits silt and clay with sand, that covers the flat-lying floor of the reservoir is
slightly pervious to impervious forming a natural blanketing. On the other hand, the
slope/margin of the reservoir covered by the colluvial deposits, which are a breakdown product
of the pyroclastic rocks are less permeable and water would not easily reaches bedrocks. The
permeability tests carried out in borehole drilled on the reservoir area have permeability values in
the range of 10-6 to 10-7 cm/sec, which show that the reservoir is moderately water tight and there
would not be significant seepage from the reservoir.

5.4. Seismic Activity

The area is found within the Ethiopian rift valley. There is substantial evidence of movements
along the faults of the Wonji Fault belt having occurred during the last 10,000 years. The dam
axis is running from south to north (N-S), but the faults of the area runs NNE-SSW. These faults
are active but are located some away of the Gidabo site.

According to the Ethiopian seismic zone mapping, the study area is located in zone four (the
most dangerous and hazardous zone) seismic potential. There is no systematic monitoring of
ground motion or crust deformations in Ethiopia and the project site. Assessment of the
seismicity around the site was made based on the regional seismic hazard map of Ethiopia
produced by Geophysical Observatory of the Addis Ababa University. Based on this study
(Intensity map and Zoning map of Ethiopia), the Gidabo dam site area is found within the area
having 20% ground acceleration and VIII intensity with 100 years return period and probably of
0.01 per year of being exceeded and the site falls under zone 4 with a corresponding major
damage. The horizontal and vertical loads under pseudo-static analysis are represented by
seismic coefficient. For the design and construction of Gidabo dam, 0.159 and 0.075 horizontal
and vertical coefficient of acceleration were taken respectively (WWDSE, 2009). In general it
may be concluded that the site is situated in seismically very active locations of the country.

49
Landslides; Rock slides and landslides may affect dams directly by blocking a spillway or by
eroding and weakening abutments. Indirectly, a large landslide into a reservoir behind a dam can
cause an overflow wave that will exceed the capacity of the spillway and lead to failure. A
landslide (or mudslide) can form a natural dam across a stream which can then be overtopped
and fail. In turn, failure of such a natural dam could then cause the overtopping of a downstream
dam or by itself cause damage equivalent to the failure of a human-built dam.

50
 CHAPTER SIX
6.1 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMANDATION

The study area (Gidabo Dam) is located in the Southern sector of the Main Ethiopian rift at the
border of SNNPR and Oromia Regional State near Dilla town to east of Lake Abaya.

Geological and Geotechnical investigations have been conducted as per the required parameters
essential for the final design of dam and its appurtenant components. The entire Gidabo dam site
is under- lain by a sequence of river deposits and volcanic rocks. The materials (soils and rocks)
were slightly to highly weathered. The river valley around the dam site show much rock
exposure on left bank of the river, deep weathering and later volcanicano-tectonic activity have
result in weak nature of subsurface geological materials on the right abutment.

The drilled bore holes and excavated test pits at Gidabo dam site show the presence of series of
weathering and river deposit profiles. The permeability tests conducted in the bore holes at dam
site and the reservoir area indicates that the materials are slightly pervious. In the initial period of
if impounding water in the reservoir, the seepage losses would be on higher side, but in due course
this would reduce considerably afterwards. As such reservoir water tightness would not pose any
problem.

Permeability is moderate throughout the volcanic sequence except in the ignimbrite units in the left
abutment and highly fractured zone. The residual and transported soils derived from the under
lying volcanic rocks on the floor of the reservoir have formed a thick impermeable blanket within
the reservoir basin, which would restrict inflows of water in to the under lying rocks.

Construction materials such as, soil for core, rock-fill for shell, sand and aggregate for the dam
embankment, at Gidabo dam sites are within very economical permissible distances. The rock fill
materials are in abundance within shorter distance The available quantity of rock are also suitable
for constructing shell, boulder toe, filter aggregate and for concreting.

The dam site falls in the adverse and unfavorable conditions such as seismic activity, groundwater
table fluctuation, erosion and sedimentation. The groundwater table at the dam site occurs at
shallow depth and its flow direction is affected by tectonic settings, which flows toward Lake

51
Abaya. Tectonically, the dam is within a rift and the faults may induce seismic wave which
damage the dam structure.

6.2 Recommendations

The following recommendations are given below for the safety of the dam construction.

Gidabo dam site and reservoir area is located in southern section of the main Ethiopian rift.
where tectonics is proved to be active along wonji fault zone. Fresh fault scarp, fault breccia are
commonly observed. Together with this, there is active and dangerous seismic activity with a
return period of 100 years. This natural hazard will shake the area and results in overtopping of
the dam, settlement of the dam and generally total failure of the dam. Therefore, government
should take appropriate measures to protect such hazards before they will occur.

Regionally, the ground water level is found at greater depth. But, locally the ground water level
is shallow nearly 14m depth. So, the water table will fluctuated depending on the recharge or
discharge of the ground water. As the ground water decreases the settlement of the dam will
happen to cease such problems, hydrogeology of the area should be carefully studied in details.

The area is affected by geological structures like fault. Thus,the rocks will be fragmented and
broken. Rocks are soils that are poorly grouted with the bed rocks (instable soil and rocks)will
fall together with these geologically weathered rock fragment to fill the reservoir. Thesenon
massive fragments affect the dam not to accumulate the expected water rather by
siltation(sedimentation).To decrease such hazards, the respective body should try to excavate the
weak materials out of the reservoir.
Dam abutments are covered by weathered and fragmented rocks. Specially, the stripping of right
abutment slopes up to desired depth is required to provide a stable foundation for the dam. As
such conditions may pose problems of slope stability during construction stage and if left un-
attended may result into seepage problems during operational stage.In the river section alluvial
soil is present at dam foundation level which is underlain by fractured volcanic rocks. The
alluvial soils need to be assessed for its bearing capacity and seepage potential.

52
 REFERENCE
 Abraham M, Steffen B., Gerfried W., Thomas W., Aberra M. (2016).Characterizing
regional groundwater flow in the Ethiopian Rift: A multi-model approach applied to
Gidabo River Basin, Austrian Journal of Earth Sciences.109/1:68-83.
 AtakiltHagos 2008.Assessment of causes for partial settlement of Gidabo Dam,
SouthernEthiopia. Addis Ababa University.
 Baker B.H., Mohr P.A., Williams LAJ (1972) Geology of the eastern rift system of
Africa,GeolSoc Am Spec Pap.136:67.
 BirhanuDebisso. (2009). Groundwater Resource Assessment in the Gidabo River
Catchment. Unpublished MSc Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
 Chugh K. (1990). Evaluation of Embankment Dam Stability andDeformation.
 https://allafrica.comgidabo irrigation dam project complete construction.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dam_and_hydropower in Ethiopia.
 Mohr P. (1962).The geology of Ethiopia. University College of Addis Ababa
Press,Ethiopia,268 pp.
 Mohr P. (1967). The Ethiopian rift system. Bull Geoph. Obs. AddisAbaba,Ethiopia,11:1–
65.
 Narita, kunitomo (2000). Design and construction of Embankment Dams, Dept. of civil
Eng., Aichi institute of Technology

 Narita,kunitomo, 2000).Design and construction of embankment dams.

 Raunet, M. (1977). Gidabo Basin Morpho-Pedological Survey, Southern Rift
Valley,Sidamo Province.

 Robert B. J. (1988). Advanced Dam Engineering for Design, Construction, and

Rehabilitation, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 354 pp
 Terzaghi, K., Peck, R.B. and Gholamreza M. (1993). Soil mechanics in engineering
practice. 3rd ed., John Wiley and Sons INC., New York.Pp. 295-310

 US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering and Design (2004).General Design and

Construction Considerations for Earth and Rock-Fill Dams, EM 1110--2300, Washington,
DC.
 Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise (WWDSE)(2009).Final report of Gidabo
Irrigation report, Addis Ababa.
 WWDSE (Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise) (2008). Final
FeasibilityReport on Gidabo Dam Geological and Geotechnical investigation. Unpublished
technical report,WWDSE, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

53
 WWDSE (Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise) (2016). Report on
GidaboOutlet Foundation Settlement Investigation and Remedial Measures. Unpublished
technical report, WWDSE, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

54