See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331801730

Curtain Grouting, a Tool Used for Stopping the Seepage from an Existing Dam
Curtain Grouting, a Tool Used for Stopping the Seepage from an Existing Dam

Technical Report · March 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 647

4 authors, including:

Keshav Rai Dhawan Sanjay Burele

Central Water and Power Research Station Central Water and Power Research Station
17 PUBLICATIONS 77 CITATIONS 15 PUBLICATIONS 16 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

I am working for investigations of a Rail Tunnel under construction near MP -Rajasthan Border View project

River Kosi View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Keshav Rai Dhawan on 16 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Curtain Grouting, a Tool Used for Stopping
the Seepage from an Existing Dam

K. R. Dhawan, Sanjay Burele & Khalil

Bagwan

Indian Geotechnical Journal

ISSN 0971-9555

Indian Geotech J
DOI 10.1007/s40098-019-00355-9

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Indian
Geotechnical Society. This e-offprint is for
personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-019-00355-9
ORIGINAL PAPER
Curtain Grouting, a Tool Used for Stopping the Seepage
from an Existing Dam
K. R. Dhawan1 • Sanjay Burele1 • Khalil Bagwan1
Received: 5 April 2018 / Accepted: 25 February 2019
Ó Indian Geotechnical Society 2019
Abstract Hidkal dam, also known as Raja Lakhamagouda
dam, was constructed in the year 1974 across the river
Ghataprabha in Krishna River Basin. In this dam, there are
two dykes—Dyke I and Dyke II, each of length 5227 and
506 m, respectively. After impounding the dam, it was
observed that there is seepage at a distance 3 km down-
stream of Dyke I. To overcome the situation, seismic
refraction studies in the upstream of Dyke I were con-
ducted by CWPRS, Pune, for delineating the stretch of the
seepage zone. After identifying the seepage zone, trial
boreholes of Nx size were made to determine the perme-
ability of the strata for designing effective treatment
measures. Recovery of material from the trial boreholes
was examined to identify the rock type met with in the
foundation along with the degree of weathering. The rock
extracted is Deccan Trap Basalt with various degrees of
weathering ranging from highly weathered to disintegrated
variety including the presence of quartzite. The perme-
ability values vary between 26 and 498 Lugeons. So to
make the strata impermeable, curtain grouting was carried
out in three rows, 1.5 m apart from each other from Ch.
4650 to 5330 m near the upstream heel through Nx size
borehole. The spacing of the boreholes is 3 m c/c, and
boreholes are staggered and up to depth of 20 m are sug-
gested to be carried out. During the grouting process,
CWPRS engineers inspected the process of grouting from
bottom of borehole to the surface. After the completion of
grouting, post-permeability tests were conducted and it was
seen that the permeability values had drastically reduced.
& K. R. Dhawan
dhawankr2008@yahoo.com
1
Geotechnical Engineering Division, Central Water and Power
Research Station, Pune 411024, India
The data obtained during investigations were used in the
preparation of a mathematical model (FEM). After the
seepage analysis of the model, it was observed that there
was drastic reduction in the seepage.
Keywords Lugeons  Curtain grouting  Permeability 
Seepage velocity  Pore pressure
Introduction
Hidkal (Raja Lakhamgowda reservoir) dam is situated near
Hidkal in Hukkeri taluk of Belgaum District, Karnataka
(latitude 16°180 North and longitude 74°380 East). It was
constructed in 1974 as a part of Ghataprabha Project of
Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited across the river
Ghataprabha, a tributary of river Krishna. The dam is to
provide irrigation to 3, 31,000 ha of land in Belgaum,
Bagalkot and Bijapur districts of Karnataka and also to
generate 32 MW of hydropower. The important features of
the 53.34-m-high dam are: 4481-m-long composite dam
with 149.35-m-long concrete spillway, two earthen
dykes—Dyke I and Dyke II—of length 5227 m and 506 m,
respectively, and a reservoir with a gross storage capacity
of 51.16 TMC.
The FRL and MDDL of the dam are 662.94 m and
633.83 m, respectively. Excessive seepage on the down-
stream side at the end stretch of Dyke I was predominant
when the reservoir level rose above 655 m. Based on the
report of the seismic studies conducted by Central Water
and Power Research Station, Pune, during 1994 and 1996
and suggestions of the technical advisory committee of
Karnataka Government, the seepage zone was delineated
between Ch. 4650 and 5330 m along the downstream toe of
Dyke I. A view of the entire Ghataprabha Project showing
123
 Author's personal copy
the location of the Dyke I based on the satellite imagery
Earth is shown in Fig. 1.
In order to provide remedial measures to prevent foun-
dation seepage, CWPRS has recommended curtain grout-
ing on the upstream side of Dyke I near heel line for the
zone vulnerable to seepage. The procedure adopted for
preventing the seepage from foundation is as follows:
(a) initially permeability tests were carried out in the trial
boreholes. The recovered material from the boreholes was
also examined. (b) The permeability values and examined
borehole strata features were used in the mathematical
model, for deciding the seepage quantity through founda-
tion and further to decide rows and spacing of boreholes for
the curtain grouting. (c) The outcome of mathematical
model was used to decide the number of rows and spacing
of the curtain grouting. (d) Post-grouting permeability tests
were also carried out in the new locations to confirm the
impermeability of the strata.
Literature Review
Khoei and Mohammadnejad [1] proposed a dynamic model
to simulate the coupling of the solid deformation, water
flow and airflow in the porous medium under isothermal
conditions. The comparative study between three-phase
model and two-phase model results showed that the two-
phase model with static air phase is insufficient to reliably
predict the response of unsaturated soil structures under
complex loading conditions.
Mukhopadhyay [2] attempted to combine the two
methods, namely the finite element method which was used
to determine the nodal potentials of four-node quadrilateral
elements and flow nets which were drawn on the basis of
the FEM nodal potentials and bilinear shape functions. An
Fig. 1 View of the entire
Ghataprabha Project showing
the location of the Dyke I
123
Indian Geotech J
attempt was made to analyse the seepage characteristics
below the impermeable rock structure resting on pervious
layer of finite depth underlain by an impervious stratum.
Richard et al. [3] have focused on piping of cohesive
materials, in particular dispersive clays, piping in natural
soils, or filter criteria. Very little work has been done with
respect to piping in cohesion-less soils. Although some
headway is being made with the recent focus on related
failures, dams are still failing by piping and more work
remains to be done in this field. A large number of inci-
dents occur due to concentrated leakage or formation of
sinkholes in embankment dams.
Berilgen [4] studied that, because of the rapid draw-
down, there will be a decrease in the slope stability during
drawdown depending on the soil permeability, drawdown
rate and drawdown ratio, nonlinear material characteristics
and loading conditions. For this purpose, a coupled tran-
sient seepage and deformation analyses (including con-
solidation), together with the stability analysis, were
performed using FEM for the submerged slopes. Nonlinear
elastoplastic behaviour of the soil slope was taken into
account with dissipation of pore pressure for carrying out
the analysis.
Duncan [5] discussed the importance of realistic anal-
ysis of deformations of slopes and embankments. Slope
stability analysis were computed by using finite element
method. According to author, development and adoption of
FEM has made slope stability analysis possible. Author
stated that, principal requirement for attaining reasonably
accurate and useful results after the analysis, makes the
suitable representation of the stress–strain behaviour of the
soils. Further he states that, FEM for past 25 years for
dams, embankments, and slopes has provided valuable
lessons regarding the advantages and limitations of this
method for use in practical engineering problems.
Study area
Dyke-1
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J
Duncan et al. [6] conducted studies on the drawdown
problem with a fully coupled flow deformation problem for
saturated/unsaturated conditions. Some fundamental con-
cepts are first discussed in a qualitative manner and, later,
explored in more detail through the analysis of two
embankment dams. In Shira Earth dam, pore pressures
were recorded at different points inside the embankment as
a consequence of a controlled drawdown. Predictions of
four calculation procedures (instantaneous drawdown, pure
flow, coupled flow–elastic and coupled flow–elastoplastic,
all of them for saturated/unsaturated conditions) are com-
pared with measured pressure records. Only the coupled
analysis provides a consistent and reasonable solution.
Naylor [7] conducted studies for finite elements and
slope stability, and the author states that limit equilibrium
methods can be misleading when used to compute factors
of safety. Also, they do not provide information about the
development of failure. The finite element method is shown
to be particularly useful for showing how failure initiates
and the likely collapse mechanism. It can also be used to
determine the safety factor. There are two methods: the
‘‘direct’’ and the ‘‘enhanced limit’’ method. These have a
research role for checking safety factors computed using
conventional limit analyses. The direct method appears to
have the most potential.
The seepage through impervious structure and through
semi-pervious foundations is modelled by many authors.
Some studies have been carried out by finite element
technique. In this paper, desk studies by using finite ele-
ment model were correlated with site details to provide the
remedial measures for stopping the seepage from subsur-
face strata.
Lefebvre et al. [8] conducted studies for seepage anal-
ysis of two dams on semi-pervious foundations using finite
element technique in order to assess the relative effec-
tiveness of seepage control elements in reducing the
downstream exit gradient. They made assumptions about
the anisotropy ratio of the hydraulic conductivity in the
foundations which are known to have a tremendous effect
on seepage analysis results. The problem is illustrated by
two series of analyses: firstly, the anisotropy ratio is varied
in the upper part of the foundation, and secondly a more
pervious horizon in the foundation is simulated. Results
show that assumptions about the anisotropy ratio influence
drastically the results of seepage analyses. The results of
seepage analysis are likely to prove more helpful to the
designer in evaluating the relative effectiveness of various
design elements and thus optimizing his choice. This is
mainly on underground piping and drawdown conditions in
the dam.
Brief description of strata
At Hidkal dam site, it is observed that the principal rock
formation at the upstream as well as at the downstream side
of Dyke I is weathered basalt, though stretches of quartzite
at depths have also been encountered. The rock mass has
been found to have undergone various degrees of weath-
ering and disintegration from ground level to depths
ranging from 0.6 to 20 m. Beyond this, the rock mass
formation of basalt or quartzite is sound and watertight.
The stratum up to 13.0 m from ground level is highly
weathered. A close examination of the bore logs drilled at
the upstream side of the Dyke I near heel line reveals the
high degree of weathering of basalt close to ground level.
Inspection of Rock Cores
After inspecting the rock cores and the permeability test
results at the Ch. 4650 to 5330 m, it is observed that core
recovery is very poor and the strata are not improving even
at depth of 15 m as shown in Fig. 2. So it was suggested to
the Project Authorities to arrange to drill the inspection
boreholes up to 20 m depth from Ch. 4650 to Ch 5330 m.
All the cores have been inspected as per the core logs
prepared by the site geologist. The layout of investigation
hole of Dyke I of Hidkal dam is shown in Fig. 3. For
deciding the number of rows and centre-to-centre distance
of grouting holes for curtain grouting, a FEM model was
prepared. Considering IH03 (Fig. 4) as a typical borehole
data, the permeability values and examined strata features
were used in the model. For deciding the severity of
seepage through foundation and to decide curtain grouting
depth, FEM model was made by using data obtained by
making the boreholes. For conducting FEM studies,
MIDAS GTS NX software was used.
Finite Element Model Studies
Seepage Analysis
The seepage analysis [9] is normally divided into steady-
state analysis and transient analysis. Steady-state analysis
calculates a time-independent solution, whereas transient
analysis calculates a time-dependent solution as a result of
changing inflow/and or outflow conditions.
Seepage Flow Rule
Midas GTS provides solution for seepage analysis based on
laminar flow using Darcy’s law [10]. Darcy’s law is
expressed by the following equation:
123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Fig. 2 Borehole details of the strata of Dyke I of Hidkal dam

Fig. 3 Layout of investigation

holes upstream of Dyke I of
Hidkal dam

Fig. 4 Typical rock cores from

borehole no. IH03 from depth
a 0–7.5 m, b 7.5–15 m and
c 15–20 m at chainage 5130 m

q ¼ ki ð1Þ coefficient of unsaturated soil is not a constant but is a

where q is the seepage quantity of water per unit area, k is
the permeability coefficient, and i is the hydraulic gradient.
Darcy’s law was originally derived for saturated soil and
is verified to be applicable to the flow of unsaturated soil
according to the published studies (Darcy [10], Whitaker
[11], Cunningham and Williams [12], Pant et al. [13],
Kerkhof [14], Klinkenberg [9], Brinkman [15] and Jin et al.
[16]). The only difference is that the permeability
function, and indirectly varies with the change of pore
water pressure. Darcy’s law is expressed in Eq. (2) as
follows:
v ¼ ki ð2Þ
where v is known as the Darcian velocity. When the water
flows through permeable or porous media, the actual
average velocity can be calculated by dividing the Darcian
velocity by the porosity of soil.

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Governing Equation pw
H ¼ þy ð6Þ
cw
Midas GTS uses the differential equation (3) for the
where H is the total head, pw is the pore pressure, cw is the
seepage analysis:
      unit weight of water, and y defines the height.
o oH o oH o oH oH Equation (6) is written as:
kx þ ky þ kz þQ¼ ð3Þ
ox ox oy oy oz oz ot pw ¼ c w ð H  y Þ ð7Þ
where H defines the total water head causing the flow; kx is Substituting Eq. (7) into Eq. (5) gives Eq. (8):
the permeability coefficient in the direction of x; ky is the
permeability coefficient in the direction of y; kz is the oH ¼ mw cw oðH  yÞ ð8Þ
permeability coefficient in the direction of z; Q is the flow Substituting Eq. (8) into Eq. (3) gives Eq. (9):
quantity; H is the volumetric water content; and t is the      
o oH o oH o oH
time. kx þ k y þ k z þQ
The above equation shows that the change of volumetric ox ox oy oy oz oz
oð H  y Þ
water content equals the difference between the inflow and ¼ m w cw ð9Þ
outflow quantities over a large volume in an arbitrary ot
location during an arbitrary time. In brief, the flow rates in Since height is constant, the derivative of y is
the directions of x-, y- and z-axes plus external flow eliminated, but the following differential equation still
quantity are same as the rate of change of volumetric water holds:
content.      
o oH o oH o oH oH
The governing equation is the seepage equation for the kx þ ky þ kz þ Q ¼ m w cw
ox ox oy oy oz oz ot
transient flow. Since the flow quantities of inflow and
outflow over the large volume are constant regardless of ð10Þ
the time in the steady-state flow, the governing equation The in situ permeability values at various depths of the
(Eq. 4) is obtained by assigning Eq. (3) equal to zero. borehole and the strata properties observed in the test
     
o oH o oH o oH borehole are used in the FEM model.
kx þ ky þ kz þQ¼0 ð4Þ
ox ox oy oy oz oz
The change of volumetric water content depends on the Input Data Used
change of stress state and the characteristics of soil. The
saturated and unsaturated stress state conditions are For determining the in situ permeability of the zone vul-
expressed as two state variables. These are (r - pa ) nerable to leakage, 20 Nx-sized holes of 20 m depth were
where r is the total stress,pa is the pore air pressure, and drilled at a spacing of 30 m. The results of a typical
pw is the pore water pressure. borehole IH03 are presented in Table 1. It shows percent-
The seepage analysis in Midas GTS consists of the age recovery and permeability of a test bore IH03 for stage-
conditions of constant total stress. The loading and wise depths. The bore logs were prepared for all the 20
unloading on soil do not exist. The pore air pressure is boreholes.
constant under the atmospheric pressure during unsteady The in situ permeability values at various depths of the
flow state since unloading on the soil by itself does not borehole and the strata properties observed in the test
exist. (r - pa ) is a constant and does not affect the change borehole (Table 2) have been used in the analysis of FEM
of volumetric water content. Thus, the change of volu- model.
metric water content is only a function of the change of
pore pressure since it depends on the change of stress state
(pa  pw ) and pa is constant. Pre-grouting FEM Model (Results and Discussion)
The change of volumetric water content is related to the
change of pore pressure according to the stress state and the As per IS Code 5529 (part 2) [17] pre grouting studies and
characteristics of soil, and the relation can be expressed in post grouting permeability studies were conducted from Ch
Eq. (5) as follows: 4650 to Ch 5330m. For seepage analysis, MIDAS–GTS
oH ¼ mw ouw ð5Þ software was used [18]. The properties presented in
Tables 1 and 2 were used as an input to the model. Pre-
where mw is the storage coefficient. grouting steady-state seepage flow is adopted for the
Also, the total head is expressed as the summation of analysis of the model (Fig. 5) with 20 m water head on the
pressure head and potential head as shown in Eq. (6):

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Table 1 Pre-grout results showing permeability values in Lugeons and percentage core recovery
From depth To depth Core length (m) Core recovery (%) Permeability (Lugeons)

0 1.20 0.27 23 Casing fixing

1.20 2.00 0.25 31 147.58
2.00 3.50 1.15 77 83.80
3.50 4.50 0.86 86 137.22
4.50 4.70 0.12 60 78.20
4.70 6.00 0.98 75 144.76
6.00 7.50 1.28 85 141.26
7.50 9.00 0.80 53 81.26
9.00 9.80 0.55 69 81.45
9.80 10.50 0.7 100 26.71
10.50 12.00 0.5 33 88.33
12.00 12.30 0.15 50 85.97
12.30 12.40 0.075 75 89.89
12.40 13.50 0.47 43 76.77
13.50 15.00 0.93 62 89.39
15.00 16.50 0.84 56 84.05
16.50 17.00 0.5 100 31.0
17.00 18.00 0.78 78 70.68
18.00 19.50 0.85 57 62.13
19.50 20.00 0.19 38 54.89

Table 2 Subsurface strata properties used for the analysis Curtain Grouting of the Strata Near the Heel
S. No. Properties Values
of the Dyke

1 Elastic modulus (E) 50,000 KN/m2
2 Poisson’s ratio 0.3
3 Unit weight 20 KN/m3
4 Unit weight saturated 21 KN/m3
5 Initial void ratio 0.5
6 Cohesion (C) 30 KN/m2
7 Frictional angle 36°
upstream side. After the analysis, Fig. 6 shows total head
with equipotential lines. Steady-state seepage pore pressure
contours are shown in Fig. 7. Maximum flow rate of
6.21747 9 10-5 m3/s, i.e. 5.372 m3/day, can be observed
in Fig. 8. The depth of boreholes initially planned was
16 m, but later on by observing the core recovery, the
depth of the boreholes was extended up to 20 m. The
influence of flow velocity can be seen up to a depth of
18.8 m in Fig. 9a, b, and a flow velocity of
5.70496 9 10-6 m/s is observed. Observing the high flow
velocity causing seepage through this zone, some measures
are required to be adopted to stop the seepage. The mea-
sures adopted are creating a grout curtain by three rows of
Nx-sized holes at 3 m c/c with a spacing of 1.5 m and
extending up to depth of 20 m.
Curtain grouting was carried out from chainage 4650 to
5330 m in three rows with borehole spacing of 3 m c/c and
row spacing of 1.5 m up to depth of 20 m. The cement
consumption for each row for different chainage lengths is
given in Table 3.
Post-grouting Results
After the completion of curtain grouting, 19 boreholes were
drilled up to depth of 20 m and permeability tests were
carried out. Permeability values of strata at various stages
of the boreholes pre- and post-grouting are presented in
Table 4.
Post-grouting FEM Model Studies (Results
and Discussion)
At many places, the initial values of permeability before
grouting were greater than 100 Lugeons. It is obvious that
initially highly permeable sections are to be effectively
grouted. At many places, the initial test section could not

123
 Indian Geotech J
Author's personal copy

Fig. 5 Typical cross section of Dyke I showing alignment of curtain grouting and subsurface strata details obtained from bore log details

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Fig. 6 Equipotential lines in

pre-grouting condition EQUI-POTENTIAL LINE
DYKE EM BANKM ENT
U/S SIDE

D/S SIDE

Fig. 7 Pore pressure contours PORE PRESSURE

in steady-state seepage in pre-
grouting condition CONTOURS
U/S SIDE DYKE EM BANKM ENT

D/S SIDE

Fig. 8 Flow rate obtained after

the analysis in pre-grouting
condition U/S SIDE DYKE EM BANKM ENT

D/S SIDE

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Fig. 9 a 3D view of the FEM a

model showing seepage velocity
in pre-grouting condition. b 1D
view of the FEM model U/S SIDE SEEPAGE VELOCITY
showing influence of seepage
flow velocity in pre-grouting
condition

D/S SIDE

b SEEPAGE VELOCITY

U/S SIDE D/S SIDE

Table 3 Cement consumption from Ch. 4650 to 5300 m

S. No. Chainage (m) Cement consumption in rows (kg)
A B C

1 4650–4800 42,100 13,150 61,850

2 4800–4900 29,745 21,500 26,475
3 4900–5000 18,300 15,600 11,650
4 5000–5100 14,250 15,475 13,337.5
5 5067.5–5100.5 7767.06 6703.62 6310.07
6 5100.5–5150 11,642.99 11,113.40 10,799.64
7 5150–5201 9604.34 9118.71 9534.10
8 5201–5250.5 7592.46 8173.06 7000.42
9 5250.5–5300 8711.64 7668.59 6809.51
10 5301.5–5330 5968.80 5300.17 5942.13

be isolated for testing and at some places permeability in
the initial 3 m depth portion was high. So for the depth of
3 m, a trench of 5 m width was excavated and filled with
impervious clay.
By adopting the properties as shown in Table 5 with
20 m water head on the upstream side of the embankment,
a steady-state seepage model was analysed. Figure 10
shows contours of equipotential lines in post-grouting
condition. Figure 11 shows pore pressure contours, with no

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Table 4 Pre- and post-grouting permeability values

Post-grouting permeability values Pre-grouting permeability values
Borehole Chainage (m) Stage (m) Permeability (Lugeon) Chainage (m) Permeability (Lugeon)

IH A 4650 03/04 52.63 4650 35–52.63

06/7.5 7.86
7.5/09 4.19
09/10.5 5
10.5/12 5.79
12/13.5 6.13
13.5/15 7.81
IH B 4750 7.5/09 7.34 4750 [ 50
09/10.5 9.28
10.5/12 7.78
12/13.5 6.96
13.5/15 8.53
IH C 4850 3.5/5 8.87 4850 [ 50
7.5/09 4.79
09/10.5 5.92
10.5/12 6.10
12/13.5 6.03
13.5/15 7.80
IH D 4950 03/4.5 10.92 4950 [ 50
06/7.5 6.95
13.5/15 7.34
IH E 5050 06/7.5 9.93 5050 [ 50
09/10.5 7.89
10.5/12 7.86
12/13.5 9.08
IH01 5073.75 02/05 42.10 5075 C 60
04/07 8.50–14.55
07/10 2.79–5.13
10/13 0.64–1.28
13/16 0.00–1.04
IH02 5098.75 02/05 0.00–0.00 5100 C 60
04/07 0.00–0.00
07/10 0.00–0.00
10/13 0.00–0.00
13/16 12.38–30.96
IH03 5123.75 02/05 10.38–17.54 5130 60–147
04/07 2.43–7.27
07/10 2.09–5.12
10/13 7.69–10.26
13/16 0.00–1.02
IH04 5148.25 02/05 16.15–35.08 5160 54–203
04/07 0.00–0.41
07/10 0.00–0.00
10/13 1.28–1.28
13/16 0.00–0.18

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Table 4 continued
Post-grouting permeability values Pre-grouting permeability values
Borehole Chainage (m) Stage (m) Permeability (Lugeon) Chainage (m) Permeability (Lugeon)

IH05 5173.5 02/05 13.31–24.56 5075 C 60

04/07 1.23–2.46
07/10 6.16–10.25
13/10 5.76–7.69
16/13 0.00–0.00
IH06 5198.75 3.5/6.5 25.77–50.66 5100 C 60
6.5/9.5 0.90–1.80
12.5–9.5 0.00–0.44
12.5–15.5 0.00–0.00
18.5–15.5 0.45–0.90
IH07 5223.75 04/07 1.21–4.93 5130 60–147
07/10 1.68–2.53
10/13 0.00–0.00
13/16 0.00–0.00
16/19 0.00–0.29
IH08 5248.5 03/06 11.90–17.59 5075 C 60
05/08 3.22–4.30
08/11 0.00–0.00
11/14 0.00–2.42
14/17 0.00–0.00
20/17 0.00–0.28
IH09 5273.5 05/08 0.00–2.15 5100 C 60
08/11 1.55–7.17
11/14 0.61–2.40
14/17 0.00–1.00
20/17 0.00–1.73

Table 5 Pre- and post-grouting permeability values adopted in the model

S. No. Depth of strata (m) Pre-grouting Permeability (m/s) Post-grouting Permeability (m/s)

1 0–1.2 1.4758e-5 1.2e-6

2 1.2–2 1.4758e-5 1.2e-6
3 2–3.5 8.38e-6 1.2e-6
4 3.5–4.7 1.3722e-5 8.89e-7
5 4.7–6 1.467e-5 8.89e-7
6 6–7.5 1.4126e-5 8.89e-7
7 7.5–9.8 8.126e-6 2.79e-7
8 9.8–10.5 1.4571e-5 2.79e-7
9 10.5–12.3 8.833e-6 8.4e-8
10 12.3–13.5 7.677e-6 8.4e-8
11 13.5–15 8.939e-6 1.038e-7
12 15–17 8.405e-6 1.038e-7
13 17–18 7.068e-6 1.038e-7
14 18–20 6.213e-6 1.038e-7
15 Bottom 1e-7 1e-7
16 Dam 5e-8 5e-8

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

Fig. 10 Equipotential lines in

post-grouting condition EQUI-POTENT IAL LINES
U/S SIDE

D/S SIDE

Fig. 11 Pore pressure contours

with steady-state seepage PORE PRESSURE CONT OURS
condition after grouting
U/S SIDE

D/S SIDE

Fig. 12 Flow rate in post-

grouting condition
U/S SIDE

D/S SIDE

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J

a
SEEPAGE
VELOCITY
U/S SIDE

D/S SIDE

b SEEPAGE
VELOCITY

U/S SIDE D/S SIDE

Fig. 13 a 3D view of model showing seepage velocity in post-grouting condition. b 1D view of model showing seepage velocity and influence
of flow velocity in post-grouting condition

Table 6 Comparisons of pre- and post-grouting results

S. No. Description Pre-grouting results Post-grouting results

1 Total head 20 m 20 m
2 Pore pressure 8.920 9 102 KN/m2 8.990 9 102 KN/m2
-5 3
3 Flow rate 6.217 9 10 m /s 2.427 9 10-6 m3/s
-6
4 Flow velocity 5.704 9 10 m/s 4.579 9 10-7 m/s

variation as shown in Fig. 7 of the pre-grout model. A flow
rate with maximum value of 6.21747 9 10-5 m3/s, i.e.
5.372 m3/day in pre-grouting analysis, is reduced drasti-
cally to 2.42729 9 10-6 m3/s, i.e. 0.209 m3/day in post-
grouting situation (Fig. 12). The influence of flow velocity
is seen up to a depth of 18.8 m in pre-grouting studies,
which has come down to 12.7 m in post-grouting analysis.
Similarly, there is high reduction in seepage flow, i.e. from
5.70496 9 10-6 to 4.57997 9 10-7 m/s (Fig. 13a, b). The
comparisons of results are also shown in Table 6. From the
results of the post-grouting analysis, it is seen that there is a
drastic reduction in seepage through the foundation of
embankment.
Summary and Conclusion
After impounding of the dam in rainy season, it was
observed that there was seepage at a distance 3 km
downstream of Dyke I. For stopping the seepage,

123
 Author's personal copy
hydrological studies were conducted by CWPRS, Pune, for
delineating the stretch of the seepage zone and trial bore-
holes to determine the quantum of seepage for designing
effective treatment measures.
Permeability tests were carried out in the trial boreholes,
and permeability values were found to vary between 26 and
498 Lugeons. The data received from test bores were used
for conducting FEM studies (GTS-MIDAS software). The
FEM model results show that flow rate through seepage
zone was 6.21747 9 10-5 m3/s, i.e. 5.372 m3/day, seepage
flow was 5.70496 9 10-6 m/s and the influence of flow
velocity was up to the depth of 18.8 m. Severity of seepage
flow helps in deciding the curtain grouting depth and
location.
It was found that proposed curtain grouting has helped
in drastic reduction in permeability values. The data
obtained from the above studies are used for FEM studies.
After the analysis, it was observed that there was drastic
reduction in the seepage zone. A flow rate through seepage
zone, in pre-grouting studies, is 6.21747 9 10-5 m3/s, i.e.
5.372 m3/day, which has reduced drastically to
2.42729 9 10-6 m3/s, i.e. 0.209 m3/day in post-grouting
analysis. The influence of flow velocity was up to the depth
of 18.8 m in pre-grouting studies; it further reduced to
12.7 m in post-grouting studies, and similarly there is
reduction in flow velocity from 5.70496 9 10-6 m/s to
4.57997 9 10-7 m/s. This suggests that there is a drastic
reduction in seepage from foundation. The same was
observed due to the water level in well present downstream
of dyke going down after curtain grouting and seepage
previously observed had stopped.
Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to Dr.(Mrs.) V.
V. Bhosekar, Director, CWPRS, Pune, for their encouragement and
guidance. The assistance of Mr. J.M. Deodhar, Laboratory Assistant,
is acknowledged during the field and laboratory investigations.
References
1. Khoei AR, Mohammadnejad T (2011) Numerical modelling of
multiphase fluid flow in deforming porour media; A comparison
123
View publication stats
Indian Geotech J
between two- and three-phase models for seismic analysis of
earth and rockfill dams. Comput Geotechn 38(02):142–166
2. Mukhopadhyay S (2008) Seepage analysis through foundation
using F.E.M. and flownet. In: 12th international conference of
international association for computer methods and advances in
geomechanics (IACMAG), Goa, India, pp 4175–418
3. Richard KS, Reddy Krishna R (2007) Critical appraisal of piping
phenomena in earth dams. Bull Eng Geol Environ 66:381–402
4. Berilgen M (2006) Investigation of stability of slope under
drawdown conditions. Comput Geotech 34:81–91
5. Duncan JM (1996) State of the art: limit equilibrium and finite
element analysis of slope. J Geotech Eng 122(7):577–596
6. Duncan JM, Wright SG, Wong KS (1990) Slope stability under
rapid drawdown conditions. In: British library conference
proceedings
7. Naylor DL (1982) Finite elements and slope stability. In: Martins
JB (ed) Numerical methods in geomechanics. D. Reidel Pub-
lishing Company, Dordrecht, pp 229–244
8. Lefebvre G, Lupien C, Pare JJ, Tournier J-P (1981) Effectiveness
of seepage control elements for embankments on semipervious
foundations. Can Geotech J 18(4):572–576
9. Klinkenberg LJ (1941) The permeability of porous media to
liquids and gases. In: Drilling and production practice. American
Petroleum Institute, pp. 200–213
10. Darcy H (1856) Les fontaines publiques de la ville de Dijon.
Dalmont, Paris
11. Whitaker S (1986) Flow in porous media I: a theoretical
derivation of Darcy’s law. Transp Porous Media 1:3–25
12. Cunningham RE, Williams RJJ (1980) Diffusion in gases and
porous media. Plenum Press, New York
13. Pant LM, Mitra SK, Secanell M (2012) Absolute permeability
and Knudsen diffusivity measurements in PEMFC gas diffusion
layers and micro porous layers. J Power Sources 206:153–160
14. Kerkhof P (1996) A modified Maxwell-Stefan model for trans-
port through inert membranes: the binary friction model. Chem
Eng J Biochem Eng J 64:319–343
15. Brinkman HC (1949) A calculation of the viscous force exerted
by a flowing fluid on a dense swarm of particles. Appl Sci Res
1:27–34
16. Jin Y Uth, Kuznetsov M-F, Herwig AV (2015) Numerical
investigation of the possibility of macroscopic turbulence in
porous media: a direct numerical simulation study. J Fluid Mech
766:76–103
17. IS 5529(Part 2):2006, In-situ permeability test, pert 2, test in
bedrock, 2nd edn
18. Midas GTX-NX, Part-1, Analysis case manuel
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.