EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
RossRr B. JeNseN
Consulting Civil Engineer
B e llingham, Washington
Rrcnnno W. Knelren
Civil Engineer
U.S. Bureau of Reclanwtion
Denver, Colorado
INTRODUCTTON
Rosenr B. JnNseN
Earthfill dams may be designed with any of a wide range
of cross sections and compositions, depending upon the
setting. They must be optimum products of the local ma-
terials and must harmonize with their sites. One of their
principal merits is adaptability to foundarions rhar mighr be
unsuitable for other types of dams. Although earth dams
can accommodate difficult site conditions, they still must
be provided with foundation support that will keep defor-
mations within acceptable limits.
The simplest earthfill dam is the one commonly classi-
fied as homogeneous. This type is composed essentially of
the same material throughout the embankment. Many em-
bankments of this type have become saturated to such a
high level that their stability has become questionable. In
some cases, the emergence of seepage on the downstream
face has been followed by retrogressive erosion that, if un-
arrested, could have resulted in breaching.
In present practice, the earth embankment is likely to be
designed with a core composed of relatively impervious
material enclosed by coarser shells. Zoning is an important
safeguard against failure. Selecting the appropriare mare-
rials for each zone and ensuring proper construction will
provide control of normal seepage as well as leakage aris-
ing from distortion of the fill or from foundation displace-
ment. Important internal changes that occur in embank-
ments result from uncontrolled migration of fines, chemical
alteration, compression, shear strain, and/or plastic defor-
2s6
JoHN Lowe III
Consuking Engineer
Yonkers, New York
Sreve J. Poulos
President
GEI Consultants, Inc.
Winche ste r, Mas sachus ett s
mation of the materials in the dam and in its foundation.
In an earthfill dam with several internal zones having dif-
ferent material characteristics, degrees of compaction, and
moisture content, there almost inevitably will be apprecia-
ble interzonal adjustments in response to the various im-
posed forces.
The design and analysis of an earthfill are governed
Iargely by the engineering properties of the available ma-
terials; the topography and geology of the site; the cli-
matic, hydrologic, and seismic settings; and the relation-
ships to other developments upstream and downstream.
The possible compositions and gradations of soils are
practically unlimited, as are the conditions to which they
may be subjected when incorporated into embankment
dams.
Design criteria for earthfill dams require (l) embank-
ment and foundation stability under all reasonably postu-
lated conditions, including flood and earrhquake; (2) con-
trol of seepage quantities and pressures in the embankment
and its foundation; (3) safeguards against overtopping; and
(4) control of surface erosion.
Earth dams require special attention to details. For ex-
ample, the design and trcatment of filters, drains, and in-
terfaces may be critical to the contrcl of concentrated leaks
with destructive potential.
A dam will change the natural balance of conditions at
its site. As water is brought into storage, a new seepage

patternwill develop in the barriers that confine the reser-
voir. Unless seepage is intercePted and conveyed away
safely, it may exert detrimental pressures or rcmove essen-
tial materials. The integrity of a dam depends upon a proP-
erly designed and well-maintained drainage system.
The panem of seepage through an embankment and its
foundation will be influenced by the reservoir operating
regimen and the vertical and horizontal permeabilities of
materials in the dam and in the underlying foundation.
In the course of time, an earth dam may undergo changes
that have an impact on its performance. The materials in
its zones may become more anisotropic. Drain elements
may become obstructed because of deterioration, deposi-
tion, displacement, or biological gro*th. Advene foun-
dation adjustments may occur. Usually the changes are
gradual.
In analyzing Potential seePage pattems, one must be
careful not to idealize too much. For instance, conven-
tional flow nets in some cases may be too'dePendent on
assumptions of average properties of materials. Real hy-
draulic gradients may not be as gentle as they are drawn in
the theoretical scenario. Irregularities may apPear quickly
in the presence of cracks or nonuniform zones in the em-
bankment or in its foundation.
To the extent possible in the design of dams, adverse
conditions must be mitigated by introducing controlling
elements to ensure that the performances of the structure
and of its foundation would not be significantly altered even
during extreme events. The necessary controls for an earth-
fill may be provided by such features as filter-protected
chimney drains, horizontal drain blankes, foundation cut-
offs, relief wells, and abutment drainage curtains. The con-
trol of seepage through and under the embankment must be
as complete as possible to ensure stability and resistance to
piping. Interception of seepage immediately downstream
from the core not only enhances stability but allows eco-
nomical placement of a wide range of materials in the
downstream shell.
An earthfill dam is most likely to be vulnerable at its
interzonal boundaries, its foundation contact, and its inter-
faces with other structures. In each case, the stability
needed to preclude internal erosion of the fine materials in
the embankment must be ensured by confinement. At the
interface of the earthfill core with a concrete dam block,
for example, the contact may be enhanced by appropriate
sloping of the concrete face. Some designen also advocate
enlarging the area of the transverse interface. On the other
hand, an impervious zone that is wrapped around a rigid
structure may be susceptible to cracking due to its move-
ment at the comers. To accommodate such deformation
safely, upstrqtm and downstream filters should be placed
to control the potential seepage paths.
High pore pressures in foundations may be of special
concern where overburden restraint is minimal, as in the
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 257
area immediately downstream from the dam. The shear
strcngths of foundation materials in these zones may be
reduced to less than those in the prcproject conditions. Carc
must also be taken to remove or treat foundation soils that
might tend to collapse upon saturation, and those suscep
tible to liquefaction under dynamic loading.
Damsites crossed by active faults are generally consid-
ered to be unacceptable. However, earthfills have been
placed on such foundations by taking precautions to ac-
commodate displacement. More often, designers are con-
fronted with the need to build dams on sites that' though
free of suspect faults, are in seismically active regions. [n
such settings, earth dams must be provided with the capa-
bility to undergo vibratory loading without suffering ex-
cessive deformation. Conventional measures to ensure re-
sistance include heightening the crest, widening the
embankment zones, building the upper part of the core of
relatively plastic material, flanking the core with filten at
both its faces, and avoiding or treating sands and silts of
relatively low density in the embankment and in its foun-
dation.
New analytical methods enable more accurate determi-
nation of the ultimate level of resistance of an earth dam.
ln many cases, the calculated reserye of capability beyond
that required to carry the postulated loads is substantial,
yet there is not much tendency to reduce the traditional
conservatism in earthfill design and analysis. This caution
may be well justified in view of the intrinsic uncertainties
related to materials properties and foundation interaction.
While conventional safety factors in limit equilibrium
stability analyses are still important, other considerations
of an embankment's adequacy need to be evaluated also,
including its deformation Potential and its resistance to the
effects of seepage.
The finite-element method and other advanced tech-
niques for analysis of dams have enabled the study of
earthfill behavior under a wide range of conditions. The
expanding volume of data from numerous analyses has fa-
cilitated the drawing of envelopes of predictable dam per-
formance. By coupling this with observations of real re-
sponse, a basis has been provided for testing the capability
of embankments and, by simplified examination, screening
those that are clearly adequate from others that may require
morc comprehensive evaluation. However, the finite-ele-
ment method is not yet developed to analyze soils that are
dilatant during shear. Also, appreciable differences in
stress/strain characteristics may exist between laboratory-
compacted and field-compacted soils.
Simulation oldam performance by a mathematical model
may entail unknowns, especially for old earthlills that were
not constructed under strict quality control. Material
strengths and internal water pressurcs may range widely.
Also, any foundation must be expected to be hetemge-
neous. The nonuniform conditions must be kept in mind in
 258 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERTNG FOR OESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEILTTATION
evaluating the results of any numerical analysis, whether it
be simplified or comprehensive. Numbers computed from
averages can be misleading. Whatever the method em-
ployed, several analyses may be advisable, using para-
metric variations of material properties to bracket the pos-
sible embankment and foundation behavior.
Although substantial progress has been made in safe-
DESIGN FEATURES
RoseRr B. JnNseru
Alignment
In usual practice, the alignment of an earthfill is designed
to conform optimally with the topographical and geological
conditions of the site. Thin abutment ridges are avoided if
possible. Any changes in the centerline preferably should
be gradual so that the potential for transverse cracking is
minimized. At some narrow sites, embankments have been
curved with convexity upstream to introduce longitudinal
compression under reservoir loading, thus reducing sus-
ceptibility to transverse cracking.
Freeboard
Earthfill dams particularly need freeboard as a margin of
safety to accommodate unusual events. Because of their
relatively high erodibility, they should be safeguarded
against even temporary overtopping during floods or earth-
quakes. Customary practice requires calculation of possi-
ble water rise and wave characteristics under the most ex-
treme postulated conditions. Criteria for freeboard
allowances vary from agency to agency. For earthfills with
highest hazard ratings, there is general agreement that free-
board should be adequate to pass the probable maximum
flood or to survive an extreme earthquake without overtop-
ping. However, in recognition of the need to consider site
specifics, universal mles for determining freeboard re-
quirements have not been adopted. The factors to be
weighed at each project would include flood durations,
wave potential, and resistance to erosion of the crest and
slopes.
Crest Details
The top width of an earthfill dam may be governed by re-
quirements for passage of vehicles, both during construc-
tion and in service. Zone dimensions in the upper part of
the dam must be adequate to accommodate heavy equip-
guarding earthfills against most forces from operations and
natural events, their vulnerability in the event of overtop-
ping remains essentially undiminished. The best protection
from this hazand is still provision of adequate flood reten-
tion and spill capability. Measures for increasing an em-
bankment's resistance to erosion during overpour deserve
continuing development.
ment for placement and compaction of fill (Fig. 9-l). The
minimum zone width normally is about l0 ft (3 meters).
Although the stability of the embankment usually is not
influenced significantly by details of the top, some struc-
tural aspects musr be considered. A width of at least 25 ft
(7.6 meters) is advisable to allow for general weathering,
traffic wear, cracking, and damage in extreme events. In
conventional practice, some camber is built into the top to
compensate for future settlement, and the finished surface
is given a slight transverse slope toward the reservoir to
drain runoff away from the more erodible downstream
slope.
At some older embankment dams, stbrage levels have
been increased by adding fill or constructing a parapet. In
such enlargements, care must be taken to extend the im-
pervious element so that seepage near the top is well con-
trolled. Long-term settlement of the original core is not
uncommon. Embankments are sometimes heightened by
local slope steepening or by construction of bins backfilled
with earth. Reinforced earth is an alternative that has been
developed in recent years. Parapets originally designed as
ornamental features or guard walls may be structurally
marginal. They may have to be strengthened to support the
added load.
Zoning
Core. The seepage barrier in a zoned earth dam usually
consists of a core of compacted impervious soil located
centrally or sloping upstream. Its dimensions will depend
on the availability and properties of materials in and near
the site, and the need ro avoid high seepage gradients. A
commonly used rule specifies that the base width of the
core should be at least 25% of the maximum difference
between reservoir and tailwater elevations. However, thin-
ner cores have been successful where appropriate materials
were selected. Thin cores preferably are flared at their bases
 EARTHFILL DAM OESIGN AND ANALYSIS 259
te&
9CE.
E
gE E E{ and at the abutments to increase the contact area for
Ets t:G
seepage control. Where thc core is thin at its interface with
Eg E: i
E
:E
the natural formation. effective filter pmtection is essential.
i EE $$E
d
Another important consideration in the dimensioning and
s
the selection and placemcnt of materials for the core is the
E EE need to minimize the potential for horizontal cracking due
5 hE
'6 to arching of this zon,: between the shells.
Eo
si' A core may be made resistant to cracking in its upper
-.8 part by selection of materials of high plasticity and by com-
e€ -,;.
paction at a relatively high water content in this zone. [n
ta I
some cases, core flexibility has been enhanced by addition
E
of a proportion of clay. For example. part o[ the core of
g6 // td Sugar Pine Dam at a potentially seismically active site in
i 8l California was made more plastic by adding Wyoming
o
,,i
,l
,= bentonite to silty sand from the borrow area (Fig. 9-2).
-t Mixing was done by a pugmill. The proportion was 6.6%
e
ao powdered bentonite by dry weight of the minus-No. 4 ma-
!
terial (5% by wet weight of excavated borrow material).
q- This material was placed in the top 33 ft (10 meten) of the
Us
o9
a= core and at the core-foundation contact' This treatment
<cc
(.) served to increase resistance to cracking and erosion.l The
Pr tA
>l-i lower part of a core, as well as adjacent shells, should be
f/-'\ 5l
T r\ EI;
\l
well compacted to reduce compressibility and thereby re-
Xli.l duce the tendency for cracking in the upper part.
ei €l { o-.lI
>-lH :-o
Trenching has been used effectively to place nalrow cores
\I rq l-
I :l l.-
u,.JS
lo
tu
I -.! i
U
;a in both new and existing embankments. Backfilling has in-
ol 6i
lu {o
o cluded various materials. A typical plastic concrete core
Yt -o ql ? wall constructed by this technique, for instance, might be
_L *: o.1
.-l{
(i
B
composed of portland cement, bentonite or other clay, silt,
\---.,' ^{.=
""J d,
o- sand and small-sized gravel. There is a wide range of ac-
J.-

<6 ceptable proportions and gradations of aggregates. A de-

l-=
I lll- sirable objective is to obtain a wall stiffness compatible with
( o3
\
a that of the enclosing embankment. Trenchin-q has also been
P @{ .9 used to place chimney drains.
€ F.
-i -i Outer Zones. The shells of an earthfill dam may be con-
!) structed from a wide range of materials at or near the site.
\\ 6
r\\ r' l!
{ Preferred properties include adequate shear strength and
drainage capability to ensure economical slopes. With filter
G:
Eq
\\i protection at interzonal boundaries and filtered drainage
outfall facilities at the foundation contact, as needed, ran-
EE dom materials of lesser quality may be enclosed in down-
sb' stream shells. The upstream shell generally should be free-
draining for stability during drawdown and for resistance
6r o
H-E
to liquefaction during earthquake.
o

a Berms. Many earthfill dams have been constructed with

qi
lir"
/ l3< berms. On the upstream face, a berm at thc base of the
h ltI l; t
i l*i riprap facilitates placement and retention of the slope pro-
s
.E
. ;s
-
i
E!
xa
tection. Berms also have been common t'eatures on down-
stream slopes, where they have been regarded as useful in
s
3 tE controlling erosion. However, runoff interccpted by clown-
kits
35 ; stream bemrs must be positively directed to prevent spill-
ing over their edges, or concentrated tlows may seriously
 260 AOVANCED OAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEITTTATION

E MSANKMENT EXPLANATI ON () Sond fitter

@ Setecta cby, srtt,nnd ond grovel Grovet fitter -
@ minus 75 mm
@ Selecta cloy,silt,sond oN grovel lhooughly nrred in Rockfitl - minus ts
pugmill rilh 5t by volune of dry po*derd &,nlonrte @ mm

Mottnum rofer surfoce, @ Rochfitt - plus 7s mm

EL t09.t (vifhdtf ptes) Cresl of dom
Togof octive conserroton EL noz.5 l--€
copoctfy, EL ttOe.e - Crest EL nt2.5
tt: t
z!:t
l.O n Loyer of lorqer \ 2t: t
L!*!_1--EL tt02.s
rockftll mofertol ---1 i
zt, t
Lorqer noternl lo be
ploced odjocenf to
downstreon foce

,a'"@;
._ o./o/
"

Slripping os directed
2:l
3.0 n Thick Zone 2A blonkel ptaced
l.o m Loyer of Zone 3.O ogoinsl downstreom ohrl nenls under
Ortginol qround surfoce Zone 3 noleriol
sur{oce of firm fumotion
MAXIMUM SECTION Grout holes of 3 m t centers
rooro2030ao
1,,i.1,,,,1'ltlrlrl
SCALE Of METERS

Figure 9-2. Maximum section, sugar pine Dam. courtesy: u.s. Bureau of Recramation.

erode the slope. Such problems have caused berms to lose
favor. When they are added to existing embankments, pre-
cautions must be taken so that internal drainage is not im-
paired. Safe channeling of surface runoffshould be ensured
by sloping the berm inward for water collection and by
providing pipes or lined ditches that are secure and of suf-
ficient capacity to carry flows from extreme storms. The
armoring of the groins of the embankment is useful to pre-
vent erc,sion. This may be accomplished by concrcte or
shotcrete paving, grouted cobbles, riprap, or gabions. In
very wet climates, where large flows can be expected, drop
structures or other means for energy dissipation may be
required.
Drains. Safe interception and conveyance ofseepage are
necessary to ensure that vital embankment or foundation
materials are not washed away, or that internal water pres-
surcs do not jeopardize stability. placement of more per-
vious materials in the outer zones is a fundamental ap-
pmach to seepage control. Where materials available for
the shells may be of widely ranging quality, internal drain-
age elements are advisable. These may be relatively nar-
row, vertical or inclined zones immediately downstream
from the core, a filtered drainage blanket at the foundation
contact (including abutments) under the she[, a zone at the
toe of the embankment, trenches filled with pervious ma-
terial, or combinations of these measures. Horizontal drain
blankets preferably should be used as companions and ex-
tensions of inclined drain zones or chimneys. The need for
filter protection at drains and zone interfaces must be as-
sessed thoroughly.
An argument can be made in favor of seepage intercep_
tors (chimney drains and filters) inclined (dipping) up-
stream.2 They ensure downward stabilizing pressures.
However, if the chimney drain is near the centerline of the
dam, seepage forces usually are not critical. Capacities of
chimney and blanket drains must be established conserva-
tively. Most designers provide for many times the calcu-
lated seepage. Such allowances are prudent to compensate
for possible reduction in capacity by excessive fines,
compression, vibration, or long-term contamination by
chemical or biological prc,cesses.
The possibility of gradual adulreration of originally
cohesionless embankment zones must be considered. Ctog-
ging could result from migration of clayey fines or depo-
sition of chemicals from seepage. Clean, hard, crushed rock
and sand and gravel in embankments may not undergo sig-
nificant changes during the life of a reservoir. In contrast,
some weathered alluvial materials and soft rocks suscepti-
ble to deterioration and/or recementation should not be used
where cohesionless zones are specified.
Pervious materials incorporated in an embankment
should be compacted to attain about g5% of relative den-
sity. This is sufficient to preclude detrimental volume de-
crease due to saturation and loading.
Careful consideration must be given to the selection of

permeable material for drainage of an embankment or of a
natural reservoir barrier. Aggregate drains must function
as filters to retain soil or rock particles and as conduits to
convey water safely to discharge points. To meet the first
requirement, a graded filter-a coarse aggregate layer pro-
tected by one or more layers of finer aggregate-is effec-
tive. In controlling large seepage flows, filter aggregates
fine enough to resist piping are not usually sufficiently
coarse to meet the full discharge requirement. The neces-
sary capacity can be provided either by pipes or by the
coarse element of a graded filter. If the seepage outfall must
extend over a relatively long distance, water can be col-
lected by open-jointed, slotted, or perforated drainpipe and
conveyed to a closed pipe discharge system. All pipe open-
ings must be sized to prevent the entrance of the surround-
ing aggregates. As a general guideline, drainpipes should
be placed only where they will be accessible for repair,
replacement, or cleaning.
Earthfill dams on permeable foundations should be de-
signed so that uplift will be limited, and seepage will be
controlled without internal erosion of foundation or em-
bankment materials. At sites where an effective cutoff
would be infeasible, the necessary control can be provided
by upstream impervious blanketing, pervious downstream
shells, horizontal drain blankets, relief wells, and/or toe
drains. If foundation water is confined by more imperme-
able strata at ground level, relief wells or trenched drains
can be effective. For enhanced stability, the embankment
can be extended downstream to lengthen seepage paths and
to provide weight to counter uplift.
Trench or finger drains may be used as alternatives to
continuous blankets, especially where drain materials are
very expensive. If such drains are used, the material must
be thoroughly compacted to ensure that it does not consol-
idate on saturation. Otherwise, an open seepage conduit
may develop in the top of the trench, bridged by the over-
lying embankment. Sufficient tests should be made on the
compacted drain material to verify that it will not be sub-
ject to excessive consolidation. In view of this potential
weakness, as well as the Possibility of contamination, fin-
ger drains require special attention to ensure adequate long-
term performance.
In usual practice, drainpipes are not incorporated deep
in an earthfill, because of the possibility of breakage, de-
terioration, or joint opening. However, pipes a:e com-
monly used in toe drains, where there is ready access for
inspection, maintenance, and repair. To permit monitor-
ing, manholes are sometimes provided along the drain, and,
to facilitate maintenance, cleanout fittings are installed at
frequent intervals.
Slope Protection
Earthfill dams must be protected from erosion. Where se-
vere wave action can be expected, the upstream slope will
EARTHFILL OAM DESTGN AND AI{ATYSIS 261
need to be armorcd effectively. The downstrcam face may
require less extensive treatment to provide rcsistance to
runoffand general weathering. An embankment is not likely
to be jeopardized suddenly through failure of its slope cov'
ering. The protection may be reduced gradually by a
succession of storms. Regular maintenance is necessary.
The initial cost and the expense of continuing care of the
embankment facing may amount to a substantial part of the
investment in the dam. Slope protection thereforc requires
much attention.
Upstream Slope. The extent of treatment required at the
upstream face will depend on the operational regimen' the
size and the shape of the reservoir, the climate, and the
typical wind patterns. Heavy armoring may not be essential
below the usual operating range. The erodibility of mate-
rials in the main upstream zone may govem the amount of
protection, if any, needed on the Iower part of the slope.
The primary protection is conventionally extended from the
top to about 5 to l0 tt (1.5 to 3 meters) below the active
storage range. The slope cover at and below the minimum
pool should be designed with a view toward the operational
criteria during first reservoir filling and during other pe-
riods when the water level may be held close to the mini-
mum for a relatively long time. In such circumstances, ex-
tra material may be needed to compensate for, or to prevent,
erosion.
In estimating the characteristics and effects of waves that
may have an impact on the dam, consideration must be
given to the wind velocity, duration, and direction, the res-
ervoir configuration, and the orientation and slope of the
embankment. The duration of exposure is also an impor-
tant factor. For example, earthfills of moderate size that
serve exclusively for flood control, and so are subjected to
water loading only for short periods, may need less than
normal slope protection.
Riprap is the most common armor for upstr€am faces of
earth dams. Specifications typically have required that it be
well graded from small to large sizes, and.that it be dura-
ble. However, uniformly graded riprap having the same
D5o size is actually more effective than weil-graded riprap.
Riprap should be placed upon bedding material that is com-
patible with it so that it will remain in place while retaining
the soils in the main body of the embankment.
Determination of required riprap rock sizes and layer
thickness usually entails considerable judgment, taking into
account the expected wave height. Although rock dimen-
sions and weights sometimes are tightly specified' require-
ments must be based practically on the materials available
and on comparison of combined initial cost and future
maintenance expense. For the range ofconventional earth-
fill slopes, depen<ling on the estimated severity of wave
attack, required average rock sizes may vary from 8 in. (20
cm) to 24 in. (61 cm), and specified riprap thickness may
range from 12 in. (30 cm) to 36 in. (91 cm). The required
 262 ADVANCED OAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHASILITATTON
total bedding layer thickness is commonly between 6 in.
(15 cm) and 24 in. (61 cm). Two layers of bedding may
be necessary to satisfy filter criteria for both rhe adjoining
embankment zone and the riprap. Typically, the minimum
allowable thickness of each of the layers would be 6 in.
(15 cm).3
In the placement of riprap, care must be taken to prevent
segregation, which.could result in erosion of areas where
small stones are concentrated or in washing of bedding ma-
terials through pockets of large stones. Specifications must
be enforced strictly to ensure that the riprap is composed
of sound rock that will be adequately resistant to weather-
ing and wave pounding.
Where acceptable riprap is not available at a reasonable
cost, soil-cement or roller-compacted concrete can be con-
sidered as an altemative. Soil-cement typically is placed
and compacted to a thickness of 2 ft (61 cm) normal to the
slope in a series of horizontal layers approximately 8 to l0
ft (2.4 to 3 meters) wide and 6 in. (15 cm) thick (Fig. 9-3).
The soil-cement preferably is mixed in a central plant.
Nearly any type of soil may be used, except those with
significant amounts of organic or alkali-reactive constitu-
ents. Sandy and gravelly materials with low plasticity are
preferred. (If only about l0% or less passes the No. 200
sieve, the material can be considered to be roller-com-
pacted concrete.) Maximum sizes of such a mix can range
up to 6 in. A desirable gradation would be limited to sizes
smaller than 2 in. (5 cm). Nonorganic, low-plasticity soils
with at least 85 % finer than the No. 4 sieve and l0 to 25%
passing the No. 200 sieve require the minimum amount.of
cement. For soil-cement, fine materials (passing the No.
200 sieve) normally should nor be less than 5% and should
not exceed 35% of the total. The plasticity index of soils
SOIL-CEMENT Crcsl of dan
RIPRAP
Figure 9-3. Typical slope pmtecrion.
used in soil-cement is usually limited to 8. However, ad-
equate soil-cement has been made of silty and clayey soils.
Uniformity of the materials is an important requirement.
Large amounts of clays are objectionable because they may
prevent adequate bonding of the soil-cement layers.
Soils with large percentages of fines or soils that are rcl-
atively plastic need extra cement to attain comparable
strength and resistance to wetting and drying cycles. The
cement content may range from about lVo to l4Vo of tle
dry weight of the soil, depending on the soil properties and
the expected severity of weather and wave attack. Type I
cement is commonly used in soil-cement mixes, but Type
II may be preferred if sulfates are present in the soil or
water.a
Standard tests are made of soil-cement for moisture and
density relationships, wetting and drying, freezing and
thawing, and strength. Typically specified compressive
strength requirements range from 600 psi (4.1 Mpa) ar 7
days to 875 to 1000 psi (6.0 MPa to 6.9 Mpa) ar 28 days.
Compressive strengths of soil-cement in service have inj
creased from abour 1000 psi (6.9 MPa) at 28 days to 2000
psi (13.8 MPa) or more ar one year and to nearly 3000 psi
(20.7 MPa) after 20 years.s
In designing the mix and establishing the dimensions of
the soil-cement facing, the severity of wave action must be
considered. At large reservoirs subjected to strong winds,
waves as high as 8 ft (2.4 meters) might be expecred.
The necessary thickness of the facing normal to the em-
bankment slope is determined by construction require-
ments as well as by the conditions to which the dam will
be subjected. Thicknesses of 2.0 to 2.5 ft (0.61 to 0.76
meter) have been adequate. Although a 6-in. compacted
layer thickness has been common, facings with 8-in. and
9-in. layers have been constructed successfully. Layers of
l2-in. thickness have been used with roller-compacted
concrete. The heavier layen provide greater resistance to
wave pounding and runup.
At 425-ft (130-meter)-high Castaic Dam in southern
California, completed in 1973, approximately 250,00O yd3
(191,000 m3; of soil-cement wasplaced oniZ.ZS: I slope
with a minimum normal thickness of 2 ft (0.61 meter). The
average gradation of the materials was 100% 0.75-in. or
smaller, with 8l% passing the No. 4 sieve and ll Vo pass-
ing the No. 200 sieve. The soil-cement was prepared in
continuous-mixing pugmills. Average cement content was
about 87o. Hauling was by bottom-dump tnrcks. Layen
were dressed by a Jersey spreader, with the objective of
limiting compacted thickness to 6 in. Compaction was done
by a l2-ton pneumatic roller. (ln present practice, some
engineers would prefer a 50-ton roller.) Minimum required
compaction was 95% of laboratory density, but field tests
averaged close to 1007o. Curing wiis accomplished by
water sprinkling for a minimum of 7 days. Reported av-
erage strength of a limited number of core specimens was
1660 psi ( I 1.4 MPa) after 28 days.

As at Castaic Dam, construction is generally accom-
plished with conventional heavy equipmenr. The soil-ce-
ment mix may be transported from the central plant to the
dam by trucks or conveyor belts. Compaction has been
done by pneumatic-tired roller, and vibrating rollers also
have been used. At Castaic Dam, finishing of the edge of
each layer was accomplished by a nearly horizontal, hy-
draulically controlled, rubber-tired wheel on the side of the
compactor. To ensure adequate bonding of the soil-cement
layers, care muit be taken to clean and lightly moisten the
surfaces. Some specifications have required roughening of
each layer by a power-driven steel broom after compaction,
as well as conventional brooming immediately before
placement of the next layer. In current practice. many en-
gineers believe that scarification should not be done, and
edge finishing is unnecessary.
The facing will tend to crack transversely. Where suit-
able mixes and construction procedures have been used,
crack spacing may be in the range of l0 to l5 ft (3.0 to 4.6
meters). The resulting large blocks of soil-cement have
been demonstrated to be resistant to displacement under
wave impact. Where there may be a potential uplift due to
water passing through cracks or unbonded layers ofthe fac-
ing, underdrainage can be provided. Additional drainage
may be provided by pipes through the facing. Drains should
have sufficient filter protection. At Castaic Dam, pressure
relief during drawdown was ensured by placing under the
soil-cement a layer of streambed sands and gravels in which
particles passing the No. 200 sieve were less than 3% by
weight.
Other kinds of slope protection include conventional
concrete, shotcrete, and asphaltic concrete. These are not
widely used at present for large-scale facing of earthfill
dams, but are found on some older embankments and are
employed sometimes for repairs. The current technology
for construction of upstream slabs of portland cement con-
crete or asphaltic concrete provides satisfactory results, as
has been demonstrated recently at a few large projects.
In comparing riprap and other facings, wave runup must
be considered. Runup will be less on a dumped rock sur-
face than on a smooth lining. In the design of Castaic Dam,
wave runup was investigated for a 60-mph wind, an effec-
tive fetch of 1.6 miles (2.6 km), and an embankment slope
of 3.25: l. The vertical runups on riprap and smooth (soil-
cement) facings were determined to be 2.4 ft {0.73 meter)
and 6.1 ft (1.86 meters), respectively. Forconservatism in
that study, the soil-cement was assumed to be smooth.
However, on the usual stepped surface resulting lrom con-
struction in horizontal layers, with the edgcs lcft un-
trimmed, the runup would be less than on a smooth face.
The difference would be important in setting freeboard al-
lowances. At San Antonio Dam, in California's Monterey
County, a band of riprap was placed in the area of greatest
wave action, extending between the embankment crest and
the top of the soil-cement facing.
EARTHFITL DAM OESIGN AND ANALYSIS 263
Downstream Slope. The prutection nccdcd on the
downstream face will be govemed by thc extcnt of expo-
sure to runoff, wind, general weathering. and tailwatcr
washing. Embankment materials vulnerable to erosion can
be covered by a blanket of gravel or broken rock, usually
not less than 12 in. (30 cm) thick. On long slopes, runoff
may attain enough volume and velocity to cut gullies in
such blankets if the slope protection is too thin. Unless
carelully controlled, retrogressive erosion could seriously
jeopardize the embankment. Gullies should be backfilled
promptly with resistant materials. The potential for erosivc
damage can be reduced by using the proper thickness of
free-draining surfacing or suitable grass cover. tf intercep-
tor ditches are used, they must be conservatively sized.
Otherwise, their failure mi_eht intensify runoff problems.
Where the soils are sditable and the climate is favorable.
grass may protect a downstream face adequately. This re-
quires seeding and maintenance based on knowledge of lo-
cal conditions. To the extent possible, the placement of
topsoil and the planting should be done as construction of
the embankment progresses, and as the season allows.
Grass may not be easy to mow on slopes steeper than about
2.5:I. Earthfills should be kept free of trees and brush,
which hamper turf maintenance and slope inspection and
could eventually weaken the dam.
If part of the downstream slope is subject to submer-
gence by tailwater, a filter-protected riprap layer or a rock-
fill toe zone may be placed to control erosion.
Foundation Preparation
Design of an earthfill necessarily entails design of the foun-
dation treatment. If the natural formation at the site is in-
capable of supporting an embankment with economical
slopes, the deficient materials must be removed or im-
proved. Irregular rock surfaces in the foundation increase
the potential for differential strain and consequent embank-
ment cracking: so careful attention to foundation shaping
under the core and the adjoining transitions is necessary.
Overhangs should be eliminated, and rock protuberances
should be trinrmed. To preclude disturbing acceptably
sound foundation rock. this excavation preferably should
be done without blasting. In conjunction with rock exca-
vation, or as an alternative, concrete may be placed under
overhangs or at other irregularities to give the foundation
an acceptable shape.
Secpage through a rock joint or crack imnrecliately un-
derlying erodible nraterial in the enrbankment nray cause
fatal darnage. Fine sands, silts, ancl dispersive clays are
susceptiblc to such erosion. In sonre cases, an initial con-
tact layer o[ plastic clay has becn placed on the foundarion
for protection. While the benclits ol this may be argucd,
there should bc no qucstion ol the value of sealing tbun-
dation openings with grout or concrere to isolate the em-
bankment from potentially danraging underflow, In com-
 254 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR OESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILITATION

mon practice on many projects, this is accomplished
effectively with slush gmut, mortar, dental concrete, or
shotcrete. An additional line of defense is provided by fil-
ters and drains in the downstream part of the embankment.
Abutment Details
Shaping of abutments to provide gradual changes in slope
is particularly important where materials with a large dif-
ference in deformation modulus must be used, such as
rockfill and a sloping clay core with a high moisture con-
tent. In these cases, substantial shaping with concrete may
be needed if the rock contours are irregular (Fig. 9a).
At abutments composed of relatively weak materials,
special measures may be advisable in detailing the adjoin-
ing embankment zones. Stability may be enhanced by wid-
ening the fill at the ends, which may be more economical
than removing weak foundation materials. The seepage
paths in the abutments and in the valley bottom can be
lengthened by flaring the impervious zone. A broadened
section, particularly on the upstream side, may subsran-
tially improve seepage control where the abutment is highly
permeable. In such cases, the impervious cover of the nat-
ural slope can be extended further by blanketing if neces-
sary.
On steep abutments, measures must be taken to reduce
the effects of differential settlement. In construction of
earthfills at such sites, relatively higher placement water
contents are sometimes used. At potential tension zones,
the core and its adjacent transitions and filters may be
broadened so that any cracks that develop will heal more
readily. In some projects, selected soils or blended soil
mixes with higher plasticity have been placed on steep or
irregular foundations to improve the embankment ability to

Re nove ol I orc rho nrt ----_-\r - -/- Allslapes to be lflnmed or

presphl lo 0.5:t or flotler

Miniqun
_ /-0.3n
Fotn swfaces itl!
os directed 0.5: t or floller-
Covtfies ond deoressioos to be f,lled rtth
denlol coocrele os dtrecled. Dental concrelc
Slush qroulinq, cortor
or reDoir os d,rected

---\-5195; groul os dtrected

Excorote lo groding plon

ar'
\-t
Slush grouf os a.ecfed

ties ond deD?c5'ions

fo be bockf illed nth
dentol concrafc os direcfed

(cl

Figurc 9-4. Typical foundation shaping requirements.


Covities ond depnssions
lo be bockfilled rith Slush grouring, morlor
denfol coocrcta ot dtftc4
L@se blocl
(e)
Figure 94. (Continued .)
deform without excessive cracking. It is also beneficial to
defer placement of the upper part of the ftll, if possible, to
minimize the effects of settlement.
Foundation Seepage Control
Grouting. In designing to control foundation seepage, a
reasonable balance must be aftained between drainage and
provisions for reducing flows (i.e., blankets, cutoffs, and
grout curtains). The conditions peculiar to each site will
dictate the optimum combination of protective measures.
A primary function of a seepage barrier is to prevent ex-
cessively concentrated flows through foundation disconti-
nuities. Grouting, for example, tends to close the largest
mck openings and thus to distribute flows more evenly so
that drainage downstream from the treated zone can be en-
hanced. Grouting may not be very beneficial by itself, but
often it is dependable when combined with adequate drain-
age systems. The grout must be mixed to proper pmpor-
tions for the site conditions and has to be injected undcr
controlled pressures to avoid damaging the dam or the
foundation. In establishing a grout curtain under an em-
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN ATTID ANALYSIS 255
or regoir os dirccled
Slush grout os directed
Remove lasc debris ond
weather$ rocl os directed
Dentol concrete
ond depressions la be
bockfi ile d vith concrete os
directed
bankment, several rows of grout holes are generally pref-
erable to a single row.
lmpervious Blankets. Where an effective foundation
cutoff is not feasible, the impervious zone of the embank-
ment can be extended upstream as a blanket. In combina-
tion with downstream drain wells, this alternative may pru.
vide economical seepage control. A complete blanket
would extend into an impervious contact along its full
boundary. Partial blanketing is sometimes done to lengthen
the path of seepage. The availability of materials and the
reservoir topography at the dam will influence the design-
To be most effective, an earth blanket normally should have
at least a 3-ft (0.9-meter) thickness and should be thor-
oughly bonded to the adjoining impcrvious elements. In
locations where thc blanket might be subjected to erosion,
it should bc covered by protective material.
The arca of the blanket is usually determined by balanc-
ing costs with the value of the desired degree of seepage
control. The benefits of future sealing by reservoir silution
also should be considercd. Although upstream blankets can
be useful in dccreasing water losses and uplift pressur€s,
 266 ADVANCED DAM ENGIN€ERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEILITATION
they may have limitations that should be recognized. Even
with extensive blanketing, a potential for piping may still
exist due to high internal water pressures at downstream
exits of foundation strata. Hydraulic gradients through
blankets may be very high. A typical upstream blanket may
be placed upon a nonuniform foundation without a filter
Iayer. The thin earth element is subjected directly to heavy
reservoir loading. Under such conditions, a blanket could
be susceptible to cracking and/or piping, as was observed
at Tarbela Dam in Pakistan. These possible disadvantages
must be weighed carefully in analyzing seepage control op-
tions. Often a partial cutoff under the embankment will be
safer and more effective than a blanket, because of hori-
zontal stratification of foundation materials.
At some sites, the natural soil on the reservoir basin may
have superior qualities as a seepage barrier, including filter
capability. In such cases, particularly where a positive cut-
off would be difficult to secure, care should be taken to
preserve the natural blanket and to incorporate it into the
embankment design.
Cutoffs. Seepage under an earthfill dam is controlled
most effectively by a cutoff into an impervious foundation.
At many sites this can be accomplished by excavating a
trench and backfilling with compacted earth, which is in
effect part of the embankment core. Such a cutoff should
be sufficiently wide to ensure an acceptably low seepage
gradient, and its excavated slopes should be flat enough to
preclude excessive stress concentrations. The base width
of the cutoff trench is commonly specified to be at least
one-fourth, and preferably should be at least one-half, the
maximum net head on the dam. If there is any possibility
of piping of the backfilled material into the pervious foun-
dation, a filter layer should be placed on the downstream
face of the trench to separate the incompatible materials.
If the cutoff trench would have to be extended to an un-
economical depth, a slurry trench might be a feasible al-
ternative. Trenches of this type can be placed practically
to maximum depths of at least 180 ft (55 meters), usually
by means of dragline, clamshell, backhoe, or other trench-
ing equipment. The walls of the trench are stabilized by a
pool of bentonitic slurry. The backfill that finally displaces
the slurry must contain enough fine-grained soils to be ef-
fectively impervious and sufficient coarse material to min-
imize settlement. A generally acceptable range for mate-
rials passing a No. 200 sieve is from 10 to 30Vo. To obtain
and retain a uniform slurry mix, backfill components of
clay, well-graded sand and gravel, and bentonite prefera-
bly should be weight-batched into mixers for blending with
a predetermined quantity of water. On some projects, the
trench backfill has been mixed by windrowing, dozing, or
blading. Although mechanical mixing with aggregate or
concrete mixers is generally superior, mixing on the ground
has been sufficient in many cases. Properly constnrcted soil-
bentonite slurry trench cutoffs have properties similar to
those of stiff clay. Their effectiveness has been demon-
strated in many projects where they have adjusted to em-
bankment or foundation deformations without significant
cracking. Preferably, they are located just upstream from
the dam where their settlement would not affect lhe em-
bankment. They have been incorporated into original de-
signs of dams, and they can also be effective in remedial
work at existing structures.
Another method that offers many advantages involves
addition of cement to the bentonite-water slurry just before
its introduction into the trench. The cement-bentonite slurry
remains to set up and form the permanent cutoff wall.
Techniques have also been developed for the installation
of concrete walls or diaphragms through the use of slurry
trenches. Tremie concrete has been placed successfully in
this way to achieve a positive cutoff. Concrete diaphragms
have been built at several major dams, including N{ani-
couagan 3 in Qudbec. This 350-ft (107-meter)-high earth-
fill is founded on alluvium over 107 meters deep, consist-
ing of sand, gravel, cobbles, and boulders. The cutoff
through this material was established by two parallel con-
crete walls 2 ft (0.6 meter) thick, spaced with centerlines
l0 ft (3 meters) apart, composed of interlocking piles and
panels.
When a cutoff is to be constructed at an existing dam,
its influence on stability must be carefully analyzed. The
preferable location for the cutoff may be at or near the up-
stream toe.
One ofthe least effective alternatives for seepage reduc-
tion is sheet piling. Although it was installed at many early
dams, it has not proved dependable. The use of steel sheet
piling cannot be regarded as a positive means of controlling
seepage. Vibrating pile hammers and other measures may
improve pile alignment, and bentonitic slurry may be help-
ful in sealing the piling interlocks; but sheet piling in most
applications cannot be expected to provide a watertight
barrier.
Foundation Drainage. Usually an earthfill can be made
impermeable enough that it will not pass much seepage.
Reservoir water losses are likely to be greater through the
underlying natural formations. Underseepage can be con-
trolled by grouting, cutoffs, and/or earth blanketing, in
combination with drain layers, foundation galleries, toe
drains, and/or relief wells. Drainpipes have been placed
under embankments and under the earth linings of reser-
voirs. However, such installations have possible disadvan-
tagcs that should be considered carefully. A conduit laid
under an embankment must not be susceptible to rapid de-
terioration. Any failure may be difficult to detect and to
remedy. Access for monitoring and repair is highly desir-
able.
In designing a pipe system for drainage of the abut-

ments, two preferred guidelines are: (l) provide two out-
falls connected together so that. ifone outfall fails because
of crushing under construction or movement or plugging
during operation, there will still be a reserve discharge line;
and (2) extend the upper end of each abutment drain to
serve as access for cleaning and testing.
Underdrains in zones subject to movement should be di-
vided into sections with separate outfall systems so that
areas of leakage can be identified. Drains on one side of a
foundation shear can be isolated from those on the other
side to avoid possible fracturing of lines at the shear.
Rigid pipes commonly used for drains, such as clay tile
and asbestos cement, require extra care in handling and
bedding because they are relatively brittle and easily dam-
aged. Some metal pipes are very susceprible to corrosion,
particularly when located in a moist embankment. Al-
though such pipes are found at many older dams, their use
in new construction or in rehabilitation would have to be
thoroughly justified in comparison with usually preferred
alternatives such as sand and gravel drains.
The need for filters must be assessed in designing drains.
Also, filter layers may be required at the foundation contact
beneath pervious shells if there is a possibility of flushing
foundation material into the embankment. This is particu-
larly important on soil foundations. In some cases, the em-
bankment zones may be fully compatible with the under-
lying material. Thorough investigation is necessary,
however, to ascertain that conditions at the contact are suf-
ficiently uniform to justify omission of a filter.
Relief wells are used in combination with various other
schemes to control water pressures in the downstream zones
of the embankment and in its foundation. Wells drilled in
erodible material must be prorected from piping. Under
usual conditions, the well casing inside diameter should be
at least 6 in. (15 cm) so that seepage head loss will be
minimized. A filter of not less than 6-in. thickness should
be provided around the well screens. The recommended
minimum ratio of the 85% size of the filter to the size of
the screen opening is 2.0.
6" Min
Figure 9-5. Typical toc dr.rin.
EARTHFITL DAM DESIGN ANO ANALYSIS 267
Relief wells are especially beneficial where an impcr-
vious foundation laycroverlies pervious material. The wells
should be drilled deep enough into the underlying forma-
tisn that destabilizing water pressurcs are reduced to safe
limits. Well spacing may vary from abour 25 fr (7.6 mc-
ters) in very pervious foundations to l0O ft (30.5 merers)
in less pervious materials. Spacing of wells generally
should not be more than about one-half their depth.
In common practice, a pressure relief system is devel-
oped in stages, with a minimum numbcr of wells installed
initially and others added later based on monitoring of
foundation pressures as the reservoir operatin_e regimen is
established. The wells should be designed to be accessible
for maintenance. Even with periodic cleaning, their effi-
ciency may gradually decline, so that rehabilitation and/or
supplemental wells may be needed eventually.
Where the upper part of the foundation is permeable,
relief wells may not be effective seepage interceptors. A
toe drain may be beneficial in collecting and conveying
flows issuing from the embankment and the foundation.
This kind of drain typically consists of a filter-protected
pipe in a trench under the toe of the dam. Toe drains often
are placed in combination with drain blankets. They are
installed also on impervious foundations to lower the
groundwater level immediately downstream from the em-
bankment. For any earthfill, they may be useful in detect-
ing and monitoring seepage sources.
Because properly designed toe drains are accessible for
maintenance and repair or replacement, various kinds of
pipe may be used in their construction. including concrere,
clay tile, plastic, or comrgated steel. The minimum trench
depth usually specified is about 3 or 4 ft ( I .0 or I .2 meters)
(Fig. 9-5). The maximum depth normally is dictated by the
need for a continuously positive drain slope on each abut-
ment. The pipe size is determined by drainage require-
ments and may range from a minimum of 6 in. (15 cm) up
to 30 in. (76 cm) or larger. Collector pipes are open-jointed
or perforated and are surrounded by filter material. Two-
layer filters may be necessary to prevent foundation piping
, _.-L,m,ts of speaol
- \ c1moocton
t2" Corrugoled polfelhttcnc
tubing fli lh pcrforofiaos
Envclope of r'narmol morimum
og9rcqot€
 €.18' 0lo, perfordted
relnforceo concrete
toe droln

€i6' Dlo. perforoted

reln{orced corcrafe ouffol plN

Danr s+o. 4 llOO

JA
2-0 Nortple openl
t 84' t .D. precosf relnforced Cost lnploce bose collor
cotErote rlser vlth cutouts
0-6 N ln.
l8' Dlo. perforoted
relnforced concreta l-0 Relnforced corErete bose slob
toe draln

OUTFALL INSPE.CT ION WELL NO. I . PLAN V IEW

Nontole cover oN fr@n€ cover

No. R-5902-E Neenoh Foundry
Conpony or equol
f'.';: Irspect lon we II

l-O M ln-

Et. 2t89.O
2-O Hortpl€ openlng 0-6 Precost relnforced concre+e
flot slob top

f relnforced concreta
rlser vlth bose collor ond cutouts

t8. Dto. Nrforoled toe

dro I n, lnvert E1.2174.

36- Dlo. perforoted relnforced

cortcrele ouffoll plp€
Cat lnploce bose co I lor

-1_
?l

2t 72.0

Rglfrforcad corcrele bose stob

OUTFALL INSPECTION WELL NO. I.SECTION A-A

figure 9{. Typical inspection well, Calamus Dam. Courtesy: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
268
 Itef aell collector
l8 lil. Corcrdto Dl@

12 tN. 1utfotl
d lnsDectlon val I

Seol edges of plote

v/fi ca.,/k/rx?L-: _1
_T
I lN. Corcrete
Stoff goge outfol I plN
I

lnlass sfsol
onchors oN balls I

I I
V-Notch rclr plote
"i
9 Sfolnless sfeel
orolprs orl bo I

I
I

OU|FALL INSPECTION flELL NO.

PLAN V IEW
TO SCALE

I lN. Corvrele
outfol I DIN

aASose slob--d-

SECTION 8-8
IA SCAL€

Figure 9-7. Typical inspection well with weir, Calamus Dam. Courtesy: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
269
 27O ADVANCED OAM ENGINEERING FOR OESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILITATION
and drain clogging. To facilitate inspection, maintenance,
and flow measurement, manholes may be installed for ac-
cess into the toe drain at convenient intervals (Figs. 9-6
and 9-7).
Galleries or tunnels sometimes are provided to drain the
SEEPAGE ANALYSIS
JoHN Lowe
Filters
Filterdesign is a critical item in the design of earthfill dams.
Filter criteria must be met wherever water is seeping from
less pervious into more pervious materials. Sirch seepage
occurs at various places in an eafthfill dam and its foun-
dation: from the core of the dam to the downstream shell;
from the upstream portion of a dam of homogeneous sec-
tion to the chimney drain; from the foundation to a hori-
zontal drainage blanket; from the foundation to relief wells;
from the upstream shell of the dam into riprap slope pro-
tection, due to drainage out of the shell upon drawdown of
the reservoir and/or due to surging of wave action; and
from the core of the dam into the upstream shell, due to
drainage from the core upon drawdown of the reservoir.
Fundamentally, Terzaghi's filter criterion based upon
tests performed by Bertram is correct. Terzaghi's criterion
is that the diameterof the 15% size of the filter (D,r) should
be no more than 4 or 5 times the diameter of the 85% size
of the material being held back (Dss). The concept is that
the size of the voids of the filter is about one-tenth the Ds5
size. Thus, if the D6 size of the material being held back
is one-fourth or one-fifth the D,, size, there is a factor of
safety of about 2 against the Dr5 size fitting into the voids
of the filter. The assumption is made that if the Ds5 size of
a material is held back, then this size togerher wirh the 15%
of the material that is coarser will hold back the remaining
85Vo.
Recently at Balderhead Dam, Tarbela Dam, and others
it has been found that if the material being protected is
skip-graded or very broadly graded, the Dr5 and coarser
sizes will not necessarily retain the finer fraction of the ma-
terial. The broad gradations of the Balderhead and Tarbela
Dam core materials are shown in Fig. 9-8. Also shown is
the skip-graded alluvial material of the Tarbela Dam foun-
dation.
It has been found that the Terzaghi criteria can be used
to check the self-filtering ability of broadly graded and skip-
graded materials. The material can be checked by separat-
ing the grain size curve into two parts at any arbitrary point
foundations of embankments. They enable supplemental
drainage by drilling, and they also may be used for grout-
ing. Because of the cost of such facilities, they may be
uneconomical for many projects.
III
of separation, as indicated in Fig. 9-9. For a self-filtering
material the D,, size of the coarser fraction should be no
more than 5 times the Dr5 size of the finer fraction. As is
evident from Fig. 9-9, whenever the slope of the grain size
curve is flatter than 15% per a 5-time change in grain size,
the material is not self-filtering. When such is the case,
then the D,, of the filter should be based upon the D* of
the finer fraction rather than on the D6 of the total mate-
rial. An illustration of this design is given in Fig. 9-10.
Here the grain size curve for the portion of material coarser
than 0.I mm is too flat. By trial it is found that if the grain
size curve for only the minus 1.0 mm fraction is plotted,
then the entire grain size curve is steeper than l5 % /5+ime
change in grain size. The D,, of the filter is then set at 5
times the D* of the minus 1.0 mm fraction.
A broadly graded, low-plasticity impervious material
may be self-filtering if well compacted, whereas if not so
well compacted, it may not be self-filtering. This phenom-
enon was observed at Tarbela Auxiliary Dam No. l. Leads
for instruments located in the sloping core of the dam were
taken through a series of risers and horizontal sections
through the core to instrumentation readout houses. Hori-
zontal double fluid settlement devices passed close to a
dozen or so of the risers. In all cases the settlement device
indicated that at least several feet of settlement had oc-
curred at the adjacent riser. In one instance a sinkhole de-
veloped at the riser. The area in the immediate vicinity of
the riser had been compacted by small compactors, whereas
elsewhere the core had been well compacted with 100-ton
rubber+ired rollers. Laboratory tests showed that the well-
compacted broadly graded core material could resist a gra-
dient of at least 40 without piping (40 was the largest gra-
dient used in the laboratory tests), whereas material rela-
tively poorly compacted, as in the immediate vicinity of
the risers, would pipe under the gradients of 2 to 3 that
actually occurred across the core at the risers.
Generally, concrete sand is a satisfactory filter for silt
and clay soils. Clay soils usually are not readily erodible
because of their stickiness and the fact that they pass very
little water. Concrete sand is an adequate filter for clay
 EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 271

Srzt - rrcHCt I arava eEilxo - lrcx!! - l- Ul. tttvl twl[it

'TAilOAAO

FIN€R BALOERHEAO DAI( CORE iIAIERIAL

F
t I
I 3
i
o
a 4
G
= o
F
z
o TARBELA OAM RIVER ALLUVIUM
2
o
E

!4I 2 '€ 6
to I .t
GRAIN SIzE IN MILLIMET

SILT AND CLAY SOILS

Figure 9-8. Grain size curves, Balderhead core. Tarbela core. and Tarbela foundation alluvium.

soils even though its D,5 size may exceed 5 times the Ds5 size of the filter not exceed 5 times the Dr5 size of the silt
size of the clay. On the other hand, dispersive clays and or dispersive clay gradation.
nonplastic silt soils are readily erodible, and even though Filter gradations coarser than concrete sand generally
the water that they pass is small, it is prudent that the D15 should be narrow, having no more than about a 2-time vari-

FIN€R FRACTION

F
z
6
E
(D15)gSHOULD 8E NOMORE
E

l*
lz
ln
F
6
G
THAN 5 TIMES ( DB5 lF

t:
lo
ld
lu (15r(X1(x)-XI
t
( r59il{ X
^ }

I
(xt
I
lD15 )s ( osg )p

+
roo.o ro.o ,.o o.' o.or o.oor mm
I I I
SILT & CLAY SIZES

Figure 9-9. Criteria for self-filtering material.

 272 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABTLITATION

o GRAIN OIAUETER IN UILLIUETERS

q
so o o-

loo-F 8..o.. * ;o
Ya€ola d Jaool6 d
-o
OoOata ( (,a60?6 e
o
o

80
F F
(-,70
I
(,
tr
504
]>50 '
@
ao@
E
E lr,l
(,
Hro 50E
E J
i40
l,
so!
o ll,
o
Eso
A
to oa
l,
o.
20

GRAIN OIAMETER IN MILLIMETERS

to 20
F F
g?O
50;
lrJ
]
'>6 60 roi
o. E
tr, lrJ
z3o 508
t!
F J
zao
trJ
608
(, lrJ
()
frso
o.
708UJ
o-
?o 80

10

Figure 9-10. Example of filter design for widcly graded material.

ation in sizes in order to minimize segregation during Fig.9-ll, the D6 of the fine side of the band of the ma-
placement. Concrete sand having the gradation band shown terial being protected should be compared with the D,, of
in Fig.9-11 coutd be filtered by in. to No.4 concrete
! the coarse side of the filter band. It simplifies construction
coarse aggregate, and this in turn could be filtered by 3 in. if the same aggregates can be used for filters as those used
to 1.5 in. coarse aggregate. The 3 in. to 1.5 in. material for concrete aggregates. However, filter sand need not al-
would be suitable for bedding of riprap overriding a gnzzly ways be as clean as concrete sand.
having, say, a 9-in. opening between bars. As shown in Filter layers for horizontal drainage blankets in dams and
 EARTHFILL OAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 273

3[VE AUtVttt tsYOaqtTtl aialYtra

rlsf Fl trzl .- sr!lrrtTti! ---l

rrzE - rEHt! tl:vE oPENltO - rExtt I u.t. 3T^rcaao ttEv€

I o" 24 r2E6 l 2t

E
;3
3 60
o
6 E
G
z
o
I
F
z
q
,o E

I .l I

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMET€RS

Figure 9- I l. T1 pical filter grrdations.

for bedding underneath riprap slope protection should be layer is required. If two layers are required. they may be
at least I ft (30 cm), and preferably 2 ft (60 cm). thick. each one-half lane wide and placed simultaneously by
Filter layers between core and pervious downstream shell spreader box. A photograph of such placement is shown in
generally should be one construction lane wide if only one Fi-e. 9-12. To minimize the quantiry of filter required tbr a

Figurc 9-11. Simultaneous phcentent oi two filter larcrs, Etnborcaqio Dant' Brazil
274 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILITATION

SANC ILT€R
\
\
\i \ \
F I
ti
- EFOOIBLI sll T
o
3
>60
\
@

tol OF SLOTI tn

T
P.V.C, PIPE

=
!40
a
E

\ \
\
I
I

o.o?
S o.oo5 0.002

SILT AND CLAY SOIL

Figure 9-13. Gradations of emdible silt and filtersand at spillway drainage cunain, Tarbela Dam Project.

single layer chimney drain where filter material is expen-
sive, the following procedure has been used. Several lifts
of impervious rnaterial are placed without incorporating the
chimney drain, and then a trench is dug with backhoe
through the several lifts of impervious fill to contact the
chimney drain placed in the underlying fill. This trench is
then backfilled with filter material, placed in layers, and
compacted. The procedure is repeated for the full height of
the chimney drain. A vertical chimney drain is most suir-
able for this type of operation.
In placing filter packs in relief wells it is also imporrant
that the filter be narrowly graded in order to avoid segre-

FILTER SAND

2" EPOXY SEAL

FILTEFED OBAIN HOLE

FILTER SANO

GLUEO & PINNED

2. EPC'XY SEAL
DRAINAGE ADIT

SLOTTEO P.V.C, PIPE TYPICAL DRAINAGE

AND SANO FILTES ARRANGEMENT

Figure 9-14. Sandwich filter drain, Tarbela Dam Project.


gation. This is particularly the case for filten placed into
water below the groundwater table. Filter packs generally
should be designed to prevent migration of the strata of
finer emdible material in the foundation. In the case of the
foundation for Tartela Dam, the alluvium contained opcn-
work cobble/gravel layers, fine sand layers, and cobblei
gravel choked with sand. The relief well filter pack had to
be designed to retain the fine sand. However, the main
water-bearing layers were the openwork. A very narow
gradation of filter pack was important so that the maximum
permeability of a fine filter pack could be obtained.
To install filters in flowing abutment drain holes, it is
STABILITY ANALYSIS
JoHN Lorve
lntroduction
Stability analyses for earthfill dams generally are made by
limit equilibrium methods. Whenever the total driving force
along any surface through the embankment or through the
embankment and its foundation exceeds the total resisting
force along that surface, stability failure occurs. The trace
ofthe surface ofsliding on a cross-sectional view generally
may be approximated by an arc of a circle or two or three
straight lines. However, other curves, such as the log spiral
or a combination of surfaces, may be used. The stability
analysis is made by considering various possible surfaces
and computing the factor of safety against stability failure
for each. The factor of safety is defined as the total avail-
able shearing resistance divided by the total driving shear-
ing force. The sliding surface with the lowest facror of
safety is the critical one.
The various cases of loading for which embankment
slopes are analyzed. together with the minimum factors of
safety recommended for these cases, are tabulated below:
Min. factor
Condition of sdfery
End of construction case, both upstream
and downstream slopes 1.25
With earthquake loading in addition
(pseudostatic) I.0
Steady seepage at partial pool. upstream
slope t.5
With earthquake loading in addition
(pseudostatic) 1.25
Steady seepage, downstream slope
t.5
With eanhquake loading in addition
(pseudostatic) 1.25
Rapid drawdown, upstream slope 1.25
With earthquake loading in addition
(pseudostatic) 1.0
EARTHFILL OAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 275
helpful to install drainpipe equippcd with filten. Thesc
drainpipes may have filter material bonded to them wirh
epoxy. or a double drainpipe may be used with lilter sand
in the annular space between the two pipes. Such a "sand-
wich" system was used in the spillway ridge druina-ee sys-
tem at Tarbela Dam Project to prevent piping of erodible
silt, which occurred in joints and seams in the sedimentary
limestone/phyllite foundation. The gradations of the silt and
filter are shown in Fig. 9-13. and a sketch of the drainpipe
and filter in Fig. 9-14. The filter pipes were fabricated in
5-ft len-gths and inserted in both the up drainage holes and
the down drainage holes extending from the draina,ee adit.
III
The shearing strengths of the embankment and founda-
tion materials are different for each of the cases mentioned
above. The differences are due primarily to differences in
the conditions of consolidation and drainage that obtain in
each of the cases. Selection of the test method and of the
way to express the shear strength for analysis of particular
cases is described below. The shear strength to use is that
found at 15 to 20% strain in laboratory tests. Because of
the possibility of progressive failure due to the significant
strains that develop in earthfill dams, it is not prudent to
assume that the peak strength. which usually occurs at small
strains, will obtain along the entire assumed failurc sur-
face.
Laboratory test specimens compacted dry of the opti-
mum water content for compaction usually have peak
strengths higher than those compacted wet of optimum.
Also different methods of compaction, such as tamping,
kneading, and static, give different peak strengths. How-
ever, the strength at 15 to 20% strain usually is about the
same for a particular soil at a particular unit weight irre-
spective of water content for compaction and method of
compaction.
The slices method and the sliding block method are the
two most common methods for carrying out linrit equilib-
rium analyses. The slices method may be carried out as-
suming: (a) that no lorces exist on the sides of the slices;
(b) that the forccs on the sides of thc slices are horizontal:
and (c) that the forces on thc sidcs of the sliees acr at a
reasonable angle to the horizontal. The last assurnption is
the most realistic. and the one that is rccommended for use.
At tirnes it makes a significant difference in the factor of
safety conrputed. Because computer progranls now are
available for carrying our the slices method, assumptions
(a) and (b), which are simplitying assumptions, are no
longer justified. The infinite slope and sliding block meth-
 276 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION. ANO REHABILITATION
ods of analysis are special cases of the slices method. These
three methods are discussed in more detail below.
The Newmark method of analysis may be used to deter-
mine the possible slumping of a dam under earthquake
loading. The basic assumption in this method is that move-
ment along limit equilibrium sliding surfaces in the dam
occurs due to the portions of the accelerations applied by
the earthquake that exceed the acceleration that would re-
sult in a factor of safetyof 1.0 in the limit equilibrium
analysis. If
the earthfill material is dilatant during the
shearing caused by the earthquake, no further movement
will occur on the sliding surface once the excess accelera-
tion stops. A time history of the earthquake adopted for
design must be known, and from it the time history of ac-
celerations for the sliding mass determined. Because of the
triangular shape of earthfill dams, accelerations near the
crest are greater than ground motion accelerations applied
at the base of the dam by the earthquake. The total move-
ment of the sliding mass is then the sum of ttie movements
during cycles where excess accelerations occur. During
shearing, earthfill materials invariably first tend to com-
press under initial increments of deviator stress and then,
if they are granular and reasonably well compacted, tend
to dilate. In the earthquake situation, the dam material
would have been subjected to shear stresses below the fail-
ure condition due to static loadings, and consolidated under
these stresses. Thus, during earthquake loading, as a gran-
ular, reasonably well-compacted material was brought to
shear failure, it would tend to dilate. On the other hand,
materials that are strain-softening may continue to fail once
they are brought to failure by the earthquake acceleration.
The finite-element method of analysis can be used to de-
termine the major and minor principal stresses throughout
an earthfill dam and its foundation. From the principal
stresses, the shear stresses can be determined, and these
may be compared with the shear strength throughout the
dam and its foundation. At this writing, however, dilatant
soils cannot be properly handled in the finite-element
method of analysis. This is a limitation to the use of the
finite-element method of analysis, as it is desirable to use
soils that dilate upon shearing in earthfill dams.
lnfinite Slope Analysis
Where the shell of an earthfill dam is composed of cohe-
sionless, relatively incompressible semipervious material,
the infinite slope analysis can be used to determine the fac-
tor of safety of the slope. The method applies to the case
of a long shallow sliding mass where the length of the mass
is great compared with the depth, so that end effects on the
sliding mass are negligible. The forces acting on a typical
element in the infinite slope analysis are shown in Fig.
9-15.
For the case of no seepage, the factor of safety, F, can
be computed as:
J. SatP GE
roicc
DRIVII.G FORCES
F.,
lt.
/t. i
lr t,
lP
rN
RESISTING FORCES
," l->
l./
I
coxEsrotLEas sorL r.- la6 6
tan i
Figure 9-15. Forces acting on element in infinite slope analysis.
F: tan $/tan i
where d is the angle of internal friction, and i is the angle
of the slope. (Nore: These and other symbols used in this
section are defined in a symbols list at the end of the sec-
tion.) Thus, to have a factorof safety of 1.5 forshell ma-
terial having an angle of friction of 33 o , a slope of angle i
= 23.4" , or of I V on 2.5H, would be required.
For the case of saturated cohesionless material and
seepage parallel to the face of the shell, rhe facror of safety
can be computed as:
P : (tan g/tan i) x (t*o-/y*,)
It is assumed that all pore pressures in the shell of the dam
are being created by the pattern of seepage, and that no
pore pressurcs due to changes in loading conditions are
present. Seepage more or less parallel to the face of the
upstream shell of a dam occurs upon relatively rapid draw-
down of the reservoir. In the upper paft of the shell,
seepage is somewhat steeper than the angle of the slope.
In the middle part of the shell, seepage is more or less
parallel to the face. At the bottom of the slope when the
shell is founded upon relatively impervious material,
seepage is horizontal out of the slope. In the upper part of
the shell, the factor of safety is greater than for the middle
part where seepage is more or less parallel to the face. At
the bottom where seepage is horizontal, the factor of safety
is slightly less. For example, if the angle of internal fric-
tion of the shell material is 30o, and the ratio 7",6*/7*, =
0.5, for a factor of safety of 1.25 for the rapid drawdown
case, a slope of lV on 4.45 would be required where seep-
age is parallel to the slope, and lV on 4.7 5 where seepage
is horizontal. Where the seepage is parallel to rhe slope, the
seepage gradient is closely approximated by sin i; where
seepage is horizontal at the botiom of the slope, the gra-
dient is closely approximared by tan i.
 EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 277

A-
For the case of partial drawdown, where the lower part
of the slope is submerged, seepage is out of the slope in a
direction normal to the face of the slope, and the factor of
safety for the submerged part of the slope is greater for flat
slopes but less for steep slopes. For example, for a factor
of safety of 1.0, a 20o slope would require a friction angle
of 36.5' for seepage parallel to the slope, and a friction
angle of 30o for seepage that is perpendicular out of the
I

slope. On the other hand, a 30o slope would require a fric-

/,- I

Er i' lrt
tion angle of 48.5" for seepage parallel to the slope, and
tol
'l2l^
55o for seepage that is perpendicular out of the slope. The \*
highest friction angle required for a factor of safety of 1.0 <J
is for seepage that is out of the slope upward at an angle
with the horizontal equal to the angle of the slope.
The stability of shells subjected to seepage can be im- Figure 9-16. Method of slices-only eanh forces shown.
proved by overlaying them with free-draining slope protec-
tion, thus making steeper slopes possible. Detailed stability
analyses of such cases have been made by Reinius,6 who
has presented his findings in chart form. Eniering the charts
with the angle of the slope and the effective thickness of
slope protection, one can obtain the required angle of in-
ternal friction of the slope.
Another situation where flow occurs parallel to the face
of a dam is that of rain runoff flowing in slope protection
overlying impervious embankment material. Seepage is
parallel to the face of the dam, and it increases in quantity
with distance below the crest of the dam because the sur-
face area that can collect rainfall similarly increases. For
the slope protection to be stable at a slope steeper than on
the order of lV on 4H to lV on6H, the runoff must saturate \"
only part of the thickness of the slope protection. There
Figure 9-17. Forces acting on a slice in slices method.
must be sufficient unsaturated material to weigh down and
stabilize the lower portion in which water is flowing. Anal-
ysis is made by considering an element of the slope pro-
tection at various positions on the slope and including the either hydrostatic excess pore pressure due to consolidation
proper seepage force parallel to the slope in checking the or pore pressure developed during shearing.
stability of the elements. The force polygon for a typical slice is shown in Fig'
9-18. The weight force, W, and the water forces, Un, UL,
and Us, are determined for each slice. The solution for the
Slices Method
magnitude of the lateral earth forces and the magnitude and
In the slices method, the stiding mass is divided into slices,
as illustrated in Fig. 9-16. The eanh forces acting on the
typical slice are shown in Fig. 9-17. The earth forces con-
sist of: the weight force, ll/i the lateral earth forces on the
slides of the slice, Ep and EI and the resultant earth force
on the base of the slice, P. A reasonable direction has to
be assumed for the lateral earth forces. Generally this di-
rection is taken as about midway between the direction of
the top and bottom faces of the slice. However, the obliq-
uity of the earth force should be somewhat less than the
developed friction angle for the case being considered. In
addition to the earth forces, water forces frequently are
present on the sides, U3 and [J2, and on the bottom of the
slice, Us. These water forces generally are computed only
for the fully consolidated condition and do not include Figurc 9-18. Foree polygon for a slice.
 278 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTBUCT]ON, AND REHABILTTATION
direction of the force P depends upon the factor of safety.
The proper value of the factor of safety is determined by
trial and error. The shear strength of the soil is expressed
as .r = c * on tan d. The shear strength that must be de-
,F 9- +
veloped to resist the driving forces is sp, and equals
ootan 6
T t , where F is the factor of safety. The cohesion de-
veloped, cp, is equal to c f F, and the angle of friction de-
veloped, Sp, is equal to arc tan
value of factor
ry. ^ for sliding, or when a planar layer in the foundation or shell
safety is assumed, and a first trial carried out. Starting at
the topmost slice, the magnitude of the E force on this
slice is determined. An equal but opposite force is the E^
force on the adjoining slice. With F assumed, c, and g,
are determined, and with Ep known, the E force on the
second slice is determined. In similar manner the forces on
each slice are obtained until the Ep force on the bottommost
slice is determined as equal and opposite to the E4 force on
the next-to-bottommost slice. If a prcper value has been
assumed for the factor of safety, the forces on the bottom-
most slice should close. If they do not, additional trial fac-
tors ofsafety should be assumed, as needed, until practical
closure of the forces on the bottommost slice occurs. At
times some adjustment in the direction of the lateral earth
forces facilitates closure also. An example of a trial force
polygon and the closing force polygons is shown in Fig.
9- 19.
Computer solutions for the above-described slices
method of stability analysis are available. One of the first
was that of Morgenstern and Price.? When computer so-
lutions are used, it is well to display graphically the failure
Pl-
w
TRIAL CLOSIriG
Figure 9-19. Method of slices-rrial and closing force polygons.
mass divided into slices, and also the closurc force poly-
gons, to check the reasonableness of the solution.
Sliding Block Analysis
Examples of the sliding block method of stability analysis
are shown in Fig. 9-20. The sliding block method is ad-
vantageous when the critical sliding surface can best be
represented by planes. Such is the case when the upstream
face of the central core of the dam is the critical surface
of
of the dam is critical.
The method is basically the same as the slices merhod.
The factor of safety required to cause the active or driving
forces to balance the passive or resisting forces is deter-
mined by trial. The forces of the active and the passive
wedges, E^and 86, respectively, can be determined from
earth pressure charts when the sliding surface of the wedge
is not controlled by a plane of weakness. as, for example,
the upstream face of the core of the dam. The shear strength
parameters to use in entering the eanh pressure charts are
cohesion developed, cp, and friction angle developed, do.
Curved and/or composite curved and planar surfaces should
be used for the sliding surface of the active and passive
wedges when such surfaces give the critical active and pas-
sive forces.
A sliding block analysis and an analysis by the slices
method for a circular sliding surface approximating the
composite planar surfaces of the sliding block will give
comparable factors of safety, provided comparable
strengths are used for lengths along the circular surface and
along the composite planar surfaces that are comparable.
Figure 9-20. Sliding block anulysis.

In all methods of limit equilibrium stability analysis it is
critical that the shear strength used in the analysis be the
proper one for the case being analyzed, as determination
of the proper strength is the key part of a stability analysis.
Laboratory tests for determination of the shear strength
must duplicate site loading and drainage conditions. The
basic types of tests are: unconsolidated (under overbunden
loading) undrained (during shear loading)-the UU test;
consolidated undrained-the CU test; and consolidated
drained-the CD test. Consolidation in consolidated un-
drained tests may be under all-around equal loading, that
is, the three major principal stresses are equal, ok = o?,
= o3ri or consolidation may be under anisotropic condi-
tions where 06 ) o2": o3". ID all consolidated undrained
tests on materials saturated in situ, it is essential that the
soil be 100% saturated; otherwise, larger shear strengths
generally will be obtained than actually occur in situ. Dur-
ing consolidated undrained tests, it is customary to mea-
sure pore pressures. With these pore pressures known, the
effective angle of friction, d', can be determined. For nor-
mally consolidated soils, a plot of shear strength versus
effective normal stress usually passes through the origin;
effective cohesion is zero. For soils that are overconsoli-
dated, by either loading or compaction, the best-fitting
straight line for the plot of shear strength versus effective
normal stress in the range below overconsolidation fre-
quently intercepts the ordinate axis, resulting in a small
effective cohesion. Unless consolidated undrained sheartest
data show effective stress plots passing through the origin
or having only a small cohesion intercept, and have effec-
tive friction angles typical for the material being tested, the
data should not be used until a satisfactory explanation for
the discrepancies is obtained.
In consolidated undrained tests with pore-pressure mea-
surements, the pore-pressure coefficients /y and B can be
determined. Coefficient z{y is the ratio of pore pressure at
failure to the deviator stress causing failure. For normally
consolidated soils it varies from about 0.7 to 1.0; the greater
the plasticity of a soil, the higher the ^47 value. For soils
that are 100% saturated, coefficient B should be 1.0. The
coefficients are useful for predicting porc pressures in the
field and for conducting stability analyses using effective
stresses; also, coefficient B is useful in checking for 100%
saturation in the laboratory. If a small increase of all-around
pressure is applied to the triaxial test specimen under un-
drained conditions, an exactly equal increase in pore pres-
sure should result.
The shear strength of proposed embankment materials is
determined by tests on specimens compacted to the unit
weight proposed for the earthfill material. Saturation for
consolidated undrained specimens is achieved by using
back pressures of 100 psi (690 kPa) or more as necessary.
The shear strength of existing foundation and embank-
ment materials is determined on undisturbed samples of the
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 219
material. Undisturbed samples of softer materials can bc
obtained using stationary piston thin-wall tube samplers.
Stiff materials may be sampled using a Denison double-
tube core banel with liners. If the material is saturated in
situ, it should be saturated in the laboratory with back pres-
sure. To determine the in-situ consolidated undrained
strength ideally, the material should be consolidated to the
anisotropic consolidation conditions obtaining in situ. Al-
tematively, the soil may be consolidated to an all-around
pressure, which is the average of 01. &tld o3..
When earthfill materials contain gravel and cobble sizes,
large specimens must be tested, and such testing equipment
generally is not readily available. The diameter of a spec-
imen should be at least six times the diameter of the max-
imum-size particle, and preferably eight times. An approx-
imation of the shear strength of clean coarse granular
material can be determined by testing a model material with
particles of the same shape and mineralogical content as
the prototype particles, but with all particles being some
fraction of the size of the particles in the protorype mate-
rial. A report on such testing is given by Lowe.E
On the other hand, if the material is widely graded from
coarse to fine particles, it may be possible to approximate
the strength of the prototype material by testing its matrix
material. Generally if the fine fraction amounts to 307o or
more of the total material, it acts as a matrix and controls
the strength of the total material. This is particularly true
ifthere is a break in the grain size curve indicating that the
prototype is a mix of materials from two different geolog-
ical sources. If the matrix material is tested at the unit
weight at which it occurs in the compacted prototype ma-
terial, it should give a reasonable approximation of the
strength of the prototype material.
Control of drainage during shear can be done far better
in the triaxial test than in the direct shear test; thus the
triaxial test generally should be used for determination of
shear strength. Slow direct shear tests may be used for de-
termination of the effective angle of friction and for deter-
mination of the residual strength of certain clay soils. The
determination of residual shear stren-eth requires very large
strains, and special direct shear test apparatus is needed.
The apparatus may have an annular shear box or a shear
box that can shear back and forth.
The triaxial shear test should duplicate the major and
minor principal stresses that occur in the field. The prin-
cipal stresses that occur along a typical failure surface are
shown in Fig. 9-2 t. These are the orientations of principal
stresses at the time of theoretical failure, that is, when the
actual shear strength, s, has been divided by the factor of
safety to give the shear resistance clevcloped, sp. A factor
of safety is provided to take care of inaccuracies that occur
in location of the most critical failure surface and in the
method of slices analyses, as well as in the determination
of shear strength. However, uncertainties regarding shear
280 ADVANCED OAM ENGINEERING FOR OESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILITATION

struction, is illustrated in Fig. 9-22. The dam is con-

structed in layers, with each layer compacted in a narrow
range of water contents close to the optimum water content
for compaction. Under these conditions the embankmcnt
material usually has a degree of saturation in the range of
85 to 95%. As construction proceeds, the dam rises pro-
gressively to levels B, C, and D" and more and more load
is applied to the element. Initially, when the element is
placed, the directions of the major and minor principal
stresses are vertical and horizontal, respectively. By the
time the end of construction is reached, the principal
Figure 9-2 l. Principal stresses along failurc surface.
stresses have rotated until they are close to the orientations
required for failure of the element on the assumed failure
strength are by far the greatest; so the factor of safety can plane. If, at the end of construction, the factor of safety
be considered primarily intended for it. were 1.0, then the orientations would be those required for
failure of the element on the assumed failure plane.
Construction Case A conservative assumption to make for material of rel-
atively low permeability. say less than l0-3 cm/sec, is
The sequence of loading that an element on ihe prototype that no drainage will occur during construction. On this
assumed failure surface undergoes, up to the end of con- basis the triaxial test specimen is tested without drainage.

(il FI€LO 5€OUENCE QICONY€NTIOilAL LAAORATORT

PROC€OURE
- IA q'
'1'I;
r'q
#
tqi

,r
th
1/
Codwctd
(qs*tstd
,r,*-/ t
fr il,r^W
Conwctd Le*n
b@rroAd ffiibtd
&aoo tt* @14
udil loilu.;udroqd

IJ) R€SULT5 OF UUU TRIAXIAL T€ST

lr1

-//
--L

I
al Normdl 5 lrcss

Figure 9-22. Construction case-stresses and shear strength determination.


An all-around equal pressure is applied first, and then a
deviator stress is applied and increased until 15 to 2O%
strain is reached, again without drainage.
The results of a series of UU tests are represented by the
UU envelope of Fig. 9-22. Also shown are the applied
stress and effective stress Mohr failure circles for a single
test. The shear strength is determined by the point of tan-
gency of the effective stress Mohr failure circle and the
effective angle of internal friction. The UU s v€6us 06en-
velope is not tangent to the applied stress Mohr failure en-
velopes but rather through the points where the 45 + 6' f 2
line intersects the circles of the series of tests. The differ-
ence between the applied stresses and the effective stresses
of a test at failure is the pore pressure that occurs at failure,
rg. Normally pore pressures are not measured in UU tests.
The effective friction angle is obtained from CU tests with
pore pressure measurement or from fully drained direct
shear tests. The pore pressure developed at. failure, a7. is
positive (compressive) for all points on the UU envelope
to the right of the effective friction angle line and negative
(tensile) for all points to the left. The UU test automatically
incorporates the effects of pore-pressure development. The
factor of safety is in effect applied to the shear strength
determined by the effective normal stress on the failure
plane, o6', and the effective friction angle. The effective
normal stress is the total normal stress developed on the
failure plane at time of failure, og, minus the pore pressure
at failure, ay.
s c, on! tan $'
,r:F:F_ F and perhaps 100 or more if appropriate. The transformed
Limit equilibrium analyses carried out using the UU
strength envelope for shear strength will give the factor of
safety for the construction case. As time passes and the
positive pore pressures dissipate, the factor of safety will
improve.
If there is a possibility that prototype pore pressures may
be greater than those that developed during the UU tests
because greater water contents or lesser degrees of com-
paction obtain during construction than in the laboratory
tests, it is prudent to install piezometers in the earthfill to
check on pore-pressure development. For the case where
the laboratory test specimen is at the same dry unit weight
as the prototype, the laboratory test indicates that failure
would occur at pore pressure ao. The most likely location
for development of high pore pressures is in the central
portion of the dam where the weight of overlying material
is the greatest.
Steady Seepage and Partial Pool Cases
The sequence of loading that an element on the prototype
assumed failure surface undergoes until consolidation un-
EARTHFILL DAM OESIGN AND ANATYSIS 281
der the steady seepage condition is illustrated in Fig. 9-23.
Generally, under steady seepage conditions the down-
stream portion of thc dam remains dry because the dam has
either a free-draining downstream shell or a chimney drain.
The core, however, after compaction and being subjected
to the weight of overlying material, becomes saturated un-
der the steady seepage condition and readjusts (consoli-
dates) under this latter loading. Under such circumstances
the consolidated drained strength of both the core and shell
materials may be used in the stability analysis.
The consolidated drained shear strength test would also
be representative of conditions for the upstream slope for
the case of steady seepage, and for the case where the up-
stream slope is dry for a long period of time.
The critical reservoir level for stability of the upstream
slope under steady seepage conditions is at partial pool. At
full pool the driving weight of most of the upper part of the
sliding mass would be computed on the basis of the sub-
merged unit weight of the material, whereas under partial
pool conditions it would be computed on the basis of the
wet unit weight of the material, which would be about two
times as great as the submerged unit weight. Stability anal-
yses have to be made at several paftial-pool levels to de-
termine the level resulting in the lowest factor of safety.
Where seepage is occurring in the sliding mass. the water
forces on the sides and bottom of slices should be obtained
from a proper flow net. Because stratification occurs una-
voidably in compacted embankment material, the flow net
generally should be drawn on a transformed section having
a ratio of horizontal to vertical permeability of at least 9
flow net should be brought back to natural scale for use in
determining water pressures on the slices.
Rapid Drawdown Case
Reservoirs may be drawn down in a matter of days or
weeks. Under such rates of drawdown, practically no
drainage of impervious earthfill material occuts. Thus the
assumption of hypothetical instantaneous drawdown is not
unreasonable for analysis. The critical situation occurs
when a reservoir has been at high level for an appreciable
period of time so that the embankment material has come
to equilibrium (consolidated) under the high reservoir con-
dition. Generally, the upstreanr face of the impervious zone
of the dam is critical for stability. The deeper the sliding
surface is assumed in the impervious zone, the larger the
seepage force applied to the sliding nlass at time of con-
solidation under high reservoir. The result is that the deeper
the sliding surface is, the greater its consolidation load, ancl
thus the greater its shearing strength as compared with ma-
terial at the face of the impervious zone. The critical po-
tential sliding surface for a dam with central impervious
core and free-draining upstream shell is shown in Fig.
 242 ADVANCED DAM ENG]NEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION. ANO REHABILITATION

(D-FIELD SEOUENCE 14cotvv€ilrtoNAL LAS0RATORT

la lo'o;
_v
N
CotlNH
t 8oitdcd
Coaslnrtoa
lod opplicd
Reservoir filled:
the molcrtblof corc
Cat.pa:tc< Al oround lhfur pfuPl
asotvord caBoli&o,
o;r'oJ

tlrcss hcrc6cd
qsofuroled, bccomcs solumlcd lad oppLl lill foilue- droiocd
drolcnol cotlsoli- ond coo solidolcd
undcr lhc slcdd,

'
sccpogc looding ./
I,}RESULTS OF
'CO TEST
condilioo-
/4:-
5
or
\c L

Droincd foilurc
t\ circlc

s\
a
g-''?
s
I

Figure 9-23. Steady seepage-stresses and shear strength determination.

9-24. ln the case of a dam with impervious upstream shell,
the critical surface for sliding frequently is at a shallow
depth below the riprap slope protection.
The sequence of loading of an element on the prototype
assumed failure surface together with the laboratory test
procedure and results of ACU triaxial tests are also shown
in Fig. 9-24. To determine the stresses under which the
material along the rapid drawdown sliding surface is con-
solidated at time of high reservoir, it is necessary to carry
out a steady seepage type analysis for this surface under
high reservoir. The consolidated drained strength would be
used in the steady seepage case analysis. From the analysis
the shear stress, r/c, and the normal stress, o/c, on the po-
tential failure surface are determined at time of consolida-
tion under high reservoir. The shear stress, r4, is equal to
the shear strength developed, sp". The major and minor
principal stresses existing at the time of consolidation can
be closely approximated by making the construction using
the 45 * $' f 2line, as shown in Fig. 9-25. If the effective
angle of internal friction is, say, 30o, then the ratio of ma-
jor to minor principal stresses at failure is 3. If the factor
of safety under high reservoir is 1.5, then the ratio of major
to minor principal stresses at time of consolidation is 2.
Thus, depending upon the effective angle of internal fric-
tion and the factor of safety at high reservoir, the ratio of
major to minor principal stresses at time of consolidation
usually falls in the range 1.8 to 2.2.
Proper testing requires that the test specimen be consol-
idated anisotropically to a ratio of major to minor principal
stresses ofabout 2 and then sheared undrained. Because all
materials initially tend to compress when the deviator stress
is increased to cause shearing, and many that are well com-
pacted tend to expand in the later part of the test before 15
to 20% strain is reached, allowing consolidation under a
major to minor principal stress ratio of about 2 tends to
eliminate much of the pore pressure that would develop
under the initial tendency for compression. If the soil tends
to expand as the principal stress ratio is increased from
about 2 to failure, tensile pore pressures would develop
instead of compressive pore pressures, and much greater
strength would be obtained for the soil. Although the term
tensile pore pressures is used above, because of high back
pressures used in testing, pore pressures measured in test-
ing are always reasonably high compressive pore pres-
 EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANATYSIS 283

Frcc &ahiq
thall
,ry38r l€vel olt€t
prd dru*dm

(I}- FI€LD S€OUENCE {* LA EORATOR Y PRA CEOU1E

ls, fic h t4 *ll ;

,1,c1/r.sl, Itl
lA 1S1*1M--"
,W I
^#'fli#"w 'ry'tr',fly
CfficlcC
uraucld
6,t^ain
bd q;d
@sotlcl4
ffaserwt
lill.d,
Nlcrbl
Otu$vd bC
cr7lid @dEfrd
lo ilv soluoled
ffi#,g tib cvt?W.*
!P{,"ffib
qdrorcd @hl
molciol bM| notsbl b tg\ te@? fo,l,rc xc6
Cetoldd gluftled, cqtdn@, frtuod
cqsdtdot$
qder ne( 72'ir:
B} RESULTS OFACU TilAXIALTESTS

O.
Kc'oo

#
/r,t
/
,/t'
forol ond €ffcclirc
Foilurc Circlcs
Coincide ol uS: O
y'r
\\

ll Consolidolion Circle
Kc= 2'o \
I
I

Figure 9-24. Rapid drawdown-stresses and shear strength detemlination.

sures. Tensile pressure in this case amounts to a reduction

in compression.
A plot can be made of shear strength versus nolrnal stress
on the failure plane at time of consolidation, as shown by
the heavy solid line in Fig. 9-24. This same figure shows
the Mohr circles for consolidation and for failure for the
particular point where no excess pore pressure exists at the
time of failure. For ACU tests at lower consolidation pres-
(,
2_ sures (same anisotropic consolidation ratio). negative Pore
(r pressures develop during shearing, and for tests at higher
t!
consolidation pressures, compressive pore pressures de-
o
velop.
Because air bubbles may come out of the pore water in
nature when compressive porc water pressures are reduced
significantly, it is conservative not to rely on shear strengths
greater than the Limit Line shown in Fig. 9-24. The shear
Figurc 9-25. Relationship of the resultant stress on potential failure sur'
strength used in the limit equilibriunr analysis would then
face to principal stresses. be represented by the heavy line portion of the Linit Line
 284 AOVANCED DAM ENGINEER]NG FOR OESIGN, CONSTRUCTION. AND REHABILITATION
and the portion of the J versus or plot to the right of the
Limit Line. Different r versus o/r plots and Limit Lines
would be obtained for different anisotropic consolidation
ratios. Interpolation between the results of tests at two, or
possibly three, different anisotropic consolidation ratios can
be done to obtain the shear strengths for the actual aniso-
tropic consolidation determined in the high reservoir limit
equilibrium analysis.
If anisotropically consolidated undrained tests are not
available, but conventional all-around equal prcssure con-
solidated undrained tests are, a close approximation of
ACU strengths can be computed from the conventional CU
tests. From pore-pressure measurements made during the
progress of a conventional CU test, the ratio of major to
minor principal stresses can be computed. Their ratio starts
at 1.0 and increases progressively to the failure value, usu-
ally in the range of 2.5 to 3.5 for impervious materials.
The shear strength obtained in the test may b.e considered
to apply to the normal stress on the failure plane accom-
panying each ratio of major to minor effective principal
stresses occurring during the test. In a similar manner if an
ACU test were performed at a ratio of 1.5, when the ratio
reached 2.0 it could be assumed that the shear strength also
applied to that ratio and the intergranular normal stress act-
ing at that time upon the ultimate failure plane in the test.
The ultimate failure plane makes an angle of 45 + g' f2
with the major principal stress plane.
An example of stability computations for the rapid draw-
down case is given in pp. 18-47 of reference 9.
Earthquake Loading
A pseudostatic limit equilibrium stability analysis can be
made for earthquake loading. Generally, a horizontal seis-
mic load is applied to each slice of the analysis, the mag-
nitude of the load depending upon the seismic zone in which
the dam is located. A tabulation of seismic coefficients is
given below:
Seismic Sersmic
zone Description of seismic zone coeficient
I Minor damage, distant earthquakes may 0.005
cause damage to structures with
fundamental periods greater than 1.0 sec;
corresponds to intensities V and VI of
the Modified Mercalli scale.
2 of slices or blocks)
Moderate damage; corresponds to 0. l0
Modificd Mercalli Scale Vll.
3 Major damage; corresponds to Modified 0. r5
Mercalli Scale VIll and highcr.
4 Those areas within Zone 3 detcrmincd by 0.20
the proximity to ccnain nrajor fault
systenrs.
A seismic risk map showing the four zones for the United
States is given in the "Uniform Building Code," published
by the International Conference of Building Oflicials,
copyright 1979 (1982) (1985), and elsewhcre. The hori-
zontal seismic load is the weight of the slice times the coef-
ficient. At times an upward vertical seismic load is also
applied to each slice concurrent with the horizontal seismic
load. The magnitude of the vertical load is generally taken
as one-half the magnitude of the horizontal load.
The analysis as developed by Seedro is made in a manner
similar to the rapid drawdown analysis described above.
That is, the normal stress on the failure plane at time of
consolidation prior to the earthquake togethcr with the ma-
jor to minor principal stress ratio is determined first. Then
the stability analysis is made, including the earthquake
loads and using the undrained shear strength for the above-
mentioned normal stress and principal stress ratio. Gener-
ally it is found that if an earthfill dam and its foundation
do not contain liquefiable materials, and if the limit equi-
librium factors of safety are equal to or greater than the
minimum specified in the table in the introduction to this
section (particularly for the cases of steady seepage), lim-
ited deformation and slumping of the dam will result during
earthquake loading. Movement on limit equilibrium slip
surfaces would occur only for the portion of seismic ac-
celerations in excess of the acceleration corresponding to
the horizontal load required for a factor of safety of 1.0.
Further information on stability analysis is provided in
reference I [.
List of Symbols
A Pore pressure coemcient
ACU Anisotropically consolidated undrained
shear
B Pore pressure coefficient
c Shear strength parameter, "cohesion"
force per unit area
c' Shear strength parameter, "cohesion"
force per unit area, used in effective stress
expression
Cp Developed "cohesion" force per unit area
C "Cohesive" force
CD Developed "cohesive" force
CD Consolidated drained shear
CU Consolidated undrained shear
E^, Eu E, E* Earth pressure forces (acting on the sides
F Factor of safety
i Slope angle
J Seepage force
K" Ratio of major to minor principal stress at
the end of consolidation
L Length
N Normal force
P, P^, Pc, Pp Reaction forces, acting on the failure sur-
face
 EARTHFILI DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 285

Pt "Frictional" part of reaction force acting 6' Shear strength parameter, "angle of fric-
on the failure surface tion."used in effective stress expression
s Shearing strength per unit area 6o' Developed "angle of friction" effective
Sp Developed shearing strength per unit area o Normal stress
.s Resisting shear force o' Effective normal stress
sD Developed resisting shear force O1' O3 Major and minor principal stresses
T Tangential force 01', 03' Effective major and minor principal
u stresses
Porc pressure
uf
og6' o2q, O3, Principal stresses at the end of consoli-
Pore pressure at failure
dation
up Pore pressure at load application
ok Normal stress on the failure plane at the
UR, UL, UB Water forces acting on the sides and bot-
end of consolidation
toms of slices or blocks
o rf, olf Major and minor principal stresses at flail-
UU Unconsolidated, undrained shear ure
W Weight force of, Normal stress on the failure plane at fail-
a Angle of obliquity, inclination of result- ure
ant stress to normal oj Effective normal stress on the failure plane
,Y
Unit weight at failure
?sat Saturated unit weight 7 Shearing stress
Tsubm Submerged unit weight rk Shearing stress on the failure plane at end
lw Unit weight of warer of consolidation
6 Shear strength parameter, "angle of fric- 0l 45o + 6'f 2, inclination of failure plane
tion" to the major principal plane

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Roernr B. JexseN

Differential Settlement and Cracking
An earthfill dam may be susceptible to cracking under cer-
tain circumstances. As not all cracking can be prevented,
the design must incorporate provisions to minimize the ad-
verse effects. Transverse cracking is of primary concern.
This may be caused by tension related to differential em-
bankment settlement or to differential foundation consoli-
dation. It may also result from shrinkage. Differential set-
tlement may be most severe at steep abutments or at
adjoining structures where compaction is difficult. Fill
placed against irregular rock foundations or concrete sur-
faces should have enough plasticity to accommodate move-
ment without severe cracking. Differential settlement in the
lower part of the embankment is usually not of serious con-
sequence, because of high compression and the relatively
broad section. In contrast, at and near the top there is not
much confining weight to oppose tensile cracking, and
transverse seepage paths are short. Filter protection in these
areas may be essential.
Horizontal cracking of the impervious zone may be
caused by its tendency to settle and arch across the less
compressible adjacent zones. Arching may also occur over
foundation soils subject to settlement when saturated.
Longitudinal cracking may result from settlement of up-
stream shells due to initial saturation by the reservoir or
due to drawdown. It may also be caused by differential
consolidation in adjacent materials or by seismic shaking.
Although any tendency of the embankment to crack must
be carefully assessed, strictest attention must be directed
to those parts ofthe dam where seepage paths through frac-
tures would be short and direct.
The potential tension zones in an earthfill danr can be
analyzed by the finite-element merhod, taking into account
the boundary conditions and the stress-strain characteris-
tics of materials, Such analyses have shown that suscepti-
bility to cracking can be reduced by (l) eareful shaping of
thc foundation and srructural intertaces, (2) thorough com-
paction of the upstreanr shell to mininrizc settlenrent from
saturation, (3) selcction and treatmcnt of core materials in
the uppcr part of the dam to ensure relatively high plastic-
ity, and (4) stagcd consrruction to lessen the ellects of ser-
tlement of the foundation and the lower parts of the enr-
bankment.
 286 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR OESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILITATION
Wherc prevention of cracks cannot be ensured. as in
cases of shrinkage or seismic impact, wide transition or
filter zones may be valuable safeguards. Full consideration
must be given to the vulnerability of the upper part of an
earthfill to transverse cracking and to separation at the con-
tact with the abutment. Because leakage paths are short,
and intemal embankment pressures may be too low to close
cracks at that level, special prccautions are required. A
well-graded sand and fine gravel mixture placed as a zone
on the upstream side ofthe core can be an effective stopper
for cracks.
Hydraulic Fracturing
Hydraulic fracturing of the cores of embankment dams has
been known to be caused by excessive fluid pressures in-
troduced while dritling. Some authorities also suggest that
hydraulic fracturing of impervious earthfill zones com-
monly develops as a result of reservoir water pressures.12
Preexisting unbonded internal faces could be separated
where water pressurcs exceed earth pressures. New cracks
could propagate where water pressures exceed earth pres-
sures, and the strenglh of the materials is insufficient to
prevent cracking. Such conditions could exist as a result of
arching of the fill at structural interfaces or at abrupt
changes in the foundation contact profile, or as a result of
arching of a relatively narrow vertical core between the ad-
joining zones. Calculations by the finite-element method
have indicated that even a small differential settlement may
. reduce embankment pressures sufficiently to allow hy-
draulic fracturing. Low earth pressures may also result from
shrinkage of the core material. Because of these various
possibilities, some geotechnical specialists believe that hy-
draulic fracturing occurs in embankment dams of nearly
any size, and in both cohesive and cohesionless core ma-
terials. Most earthfills can accommodate such cracking to
a considerable extent without detrimental leakage. The es-
sential safeguard against the consequences of any kind of
cracking is a fully intercepting system of filters and drains.
Simplified Estimating of Deformation under Seismic
Loading
An essential measure of the adequacy of an embankment
is its ability to deform safely within prescribed limits. Al-
though conventional safety factoB are useful indicators, the
evaluation of an important dam should not be regarded as
complete until its potential deformation under extreme
loadings has been considered.
A factor of safety greater than unity, as determined by
conventional pseudostatic (seismic coefficient) analysis,
does not necessarily ensure that the dam will not be altered
by an earthquake. Any embankment may tend to deform to
some extent when subjected to severe seismic vibrations.
The real margin of safety is measured by the rcsidual frce-
board.
To evaluate the capability of an embankment under
earthquake loading, an estimate can be made of the yield
acceleration at which initial significant mass deformation
would occur. Then the cumulative displacement due to mo-
tions above this threshold can be computed. This will de-
pend upon the time history of foundation and dam motion
during the earthquake. The response of a dam to a strong
shake relates to its ability to dissipate energy. It will tend
to resonate with ground motions that have periods equal to
its own. Hence. cumulative deformation should be esti-
mated by consideration of all the embankment properties
and the total pattern of the postulated earthquake.
In making a simplified deformation estimate, the yield
acceleration can be calculated by pseudostatic analysis. For
this purpose, the consolidated undrained (CU) strength is
customarily used for materials that are not highly perrnea-
ble. The potential increase in pore pressures due to shak-
ing, which is not accounted for in the conventional CU
test, can be factored into the analysis by using a lower
strength, sometimes recommended to be about 80 to 90%
of the laboratory-indicated CU strength. However, many
soils, including some sandy clays and certain dense cohe-
sionless materials, will retain essentially the total original
strength, even under sustained cyclic loading.
The yield acceleration has often been assumed as con-
stant for purpose of simplified analysis. However, it really
varies with the resistance along the assumed slip surface,
which increases or decreases in response tp the earthquake
motions and to pore-pressure variations. In a more com-
prehensive analysis, these factors must be taken into ac-
count. For some kinds of soils, particularly those in which
substantial pore pressures may be induced by seismic
forces, yielding may occur over a range of accelerations.
In some embankment zones assumed to be free-draining,
there actually may be enough fine-grained material from
natural grain-size distribution or from segregation or crush-
ing to limit pore-pressure dissipation under dynamic load-
ing.
If an earthfill and its foundation are not susceptible to
liquefaction, deformation can be expected generally to be
within tolerable limits if all of the following conditions ap-
ply:t3
l. The embankment is well compacted.
2. Peak bedrock acceleration is not higher than 0.2 g.
3. The dam slopes are not steeper than 3: l.
4. The static factor of safety is not less than 1.5 with
reservoir full.
5. The design freeboard is at least 2Vo sf the dam height.
Franklin and Hynes-Grifhnra have reviewed the well-
known methods of Newmark.s' Makdisi-Seed,s8 and oth-

ers and have concluded that, unless there is a liquefaction
potential, many embankments with acceptable static safety
factors would not undergo excessive displacement under
seismic loading. They suggest a pseudostatic analysis for
screening those dams with adequate earthquake resistance
from those requiring more extensive study. For pervious
materials, they cite the Corps of Engineers' use of a com-
posite shear strength envelope based on the consolidated
drained test at low confining pressures and the consolidated
undrained test at high confining pressures. This conserva-
tively allows for possible dissipation of negative pore pres-
sures in the dam that would not occur in an undrained test
in the laboratory. For materiais of low permeability, they
recommend use of the undrained strength envelope.
The following equation has been developed by Jansen
for estimating the settlement of an embankment subjected
to acceleration greater than the yield threshold:15
(J- x(M/ lo)r(k, -
k-")
(e-l )
t"
where:
U: total settlement in feet
M: magnitude of earthquake
&- : maximum crest or neat-crest acceleration factor
k, : average horizontal acceleration coefficient of the
potential sliding mass that results in a safety factor
of 1.0
X : an empirical coefficient
Y : an empirical exponent
Tentative values of X and Y, which appear to be repre-
sentative for observed settlements, are l9 and 8, respec-
tively. Using these values in equation (9-l), the estimated
total settlement is:
U_
tg(M/to)E(k^ - k")
(e-2)
&ro't
As a rough yardstick for estimating settlement caused by
seismic shaking, this equation seems to give credible re-
sults, approximating the order of actual settlements in ma-
jor events at Leroy Anderson and Coyote dams in northern
California; Santa Felicia Dam in southern California; Co-
goti, Culimo, and Lliu-Lliu dams in Chile; Infiernitlo and
La Villita dams in Mexico; Miboro Dam in Japan; and
Hebgen Dam in Montana. Because the data base is small,
with no measured settlement greater than 6 ft, adjustment
of the coefficient and the exponents in the tentative equa-
tion undoubtedly will be advisable as the collection of field
EARTHFILL DAM OESIGN AND ANALYSIS 2A7
measurcments is expanded. The term k-u in the Jansen equa-
tion must take into account the factors that differentiate
earthfills from rockfills. and dumped rOckfills from zoned
and compacted mckfills. The influence of the embankment
age and history also must be considered. For example, in-
vestigators of Cogoti Dam concluded that the 1943 earth-
quake in Chile precipitated settlement of the embankment
that possibly would have occurred eventually anyway. The
implication is that recurrence of such a quake would cause
no more than minor settlement in the well-seasoned Cogoti
embankment. This view appeam to conflict with recent ob-
servations of La Villita Dam in Mexico, where progres-
sively increased settlement was recordcd in successive.
comparable earthquakes.
The methods that have been discussed are approximate,
and are applicable only where the potential for liquefaction
is negligible. Because the quality of the materials in an
embankment will not be completely uniform, some local-
ized differences in performance must be expected within
zones of the dam. Also, the yield acceleration may vary
with time, depending on the changing condition of the em-
bankment and/or its foundation. For example, La Villita
(Jos6 Marfa Morelos) Dam is a 197-ft (60-meter)-high
earth-and-rockfill embankment founded on alluvium (boul-
ders, gravel, sand, and silt) as deep as about 250 ft (76
meters), through which an ICOS-type concrete cutoff wall
was extended into bedrock. The dam was completed in
1968. It has been subjected to several earthquakes, ofwhich
the more important were in 1979 (M,7.6), l98l (M,7.3),
and 1985 (M" 8.1 main shock followed by M, 7.5 after-
shock).16 The incremental crest settlements resulting from
these events were reported to be 4.5 cm in 1979, 14 cm in
1981, and 45 cm after the two 1985 shocks. The peak hor-
izontal crest accelerations recorded in 1979 and 198 I were
0.38 g and 0.34 g, respectively. Comparable reported 1985
crest accelerations were 0.45 g in the main quake and 0.16
g in the aftershock. The increases in incremental settle-
ments in l98l and 1985, compared with the settlement in
1979, may be attributable partly to changes in ernbankment
and foundation capabilities following the earlier quakes. or
possibly to other influences. However, considering the
many factors involved, including the durations and orien-
tations of seismic loading, such differences in response may
be expected.
In contrast to the performance of La Villita Dant, the
settlements of El Infiernillo Dam. a 492-ft ( 150-meter)'high
rockfill in the same region, were not progressively greater
in the cited events, even though its erest accelerations in
these earthquakes were comparable to those at La Villita.
lts incremental settlement caused by the 1985 events was
about I I cm. El Infiernillo Dam is foundecl on bedrock.
288 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABITITATTON

CASE HISTORIES
RtcHnno W. Knl,Nlsn

Sugar Pine Dam*Seismic Design
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Sugar Pine Dam is a
central-core rockfilldam, having a height of 184 ft (56 me-
ters) above streambed, a crest length of 594 ft (l8l me-
ters), and a volume of approximately 980,000 yO3 IZSO,OOO
m3; 1Figs. 9-2 and 9-26). Core material is of CL and ML
types, and the rockfill shells are of quarried serpentinite
and excavated amphibolite.
Seismic Potential. Sugar Pine Dam is located in the
foothills segment of the relatively stable Sierra Nevada
block in California. Prior to the 1975 Oroville earthquake,
the Foothills fault system, a north and northwest trending
system within the Sierran block, was considered seismi-
cally inactive. Following this event, however, it was real-
ized that portions of the Foothills fault system, including
the Melones fault, which passes immediately upstream of
Sugar Pine damsite, may be seismically active.
A seismotectonic hazand evaluation was made for the
damsite with the following objectives:
l. Define the regional geology and tectonic setting.
2. Evaluate the historical seismicity of the region.
3. Assess the age and earthquake potential of faults in
the immediate vicinity.
4. Estimate the potential for other seismically induced
hazards including surface faulting, slope failure, and
reservoir seiche.
Several Maximum Credible Earthquakes (MCEs) were
proposed for estimation of potential ground motion at Sugar
Pine damsite. Those of interest are:
l. The Melones fault, Richter magnitude {M) 6.5, at
an epicentral distance of 0.43 km.
2. The Tahoe fault, an M 7.5, at an epicentral distance
of 50 km.

Figurc 9-26. Sugar Pine Dam.


3. The San Andreas fault, an M 8.5. at an epicentral
distance of 205 km. All events considered were es-
timated to have focal depths of 8 km.
Earthquake-Resistant Design To compensate for the
potential seismic effects, numerous earthquake-resistant
features were incorporated in the dam. The major deterrent
to earthquake damage is the mass of the rockfill shell ma-
terial. In addition, the core material was compacted to
100% of the Bureau's standard Proctor density. A key ele-
ment of the earthquake-resistant design is the system of
wide, graded filters and drains located upstream and down-
stream of the central earthen core and beneath the down-
stream rockfill shell (Fig. 9-2). The upstream graded filter
acts as a transition zone between the pervious rockfill shell
and the impervious core, and prevents core fines from mi-
grating into the upstream shell during rapid drawdown. It
also will seal cracks that may develop in the core due to an
earthquake, differential settlement, or cross-valley tensile
strai ns.
The downstream fine filter and chimney drain, Zone 2,
serve to filtercore fines, carry normal seepage to the drains,
reduce seepage pressures, and will prevent concentrated
flows from eroding the core if cracking should develop.
The fine filter has also been placed between the core and
the downstream cutoff trench face to prevent movement of
the core fines into the foundation due to either normal
seepage or potential cracks resulting from earthquakes. A
coarse filter and drain, Zone 2A, has been placed between
the fine filter and the rockfill material, Zone 3, to ensure
drainage capacity for concentrated flows. This drain ex-
tends as a blanket beneath Zone 3 to transfer flow to the
downstream shell and toe.
In the top 33 ft (10 meters) of the core, which would be
particularly sensitive to cracking from an earthquake or to
differential or tensile cracking and to the erosive flows of
water, a more plastic impervious core material was used.
The material is a mixture of core material and 57o by vol-
ume dry powdered bentonite. The resulting higher-plastic-
ity material was also placed as a l-meter layer along the
bottom and upstream face of the cutoff trench.
Other earthquake-resistant features include larger than
usual freeboard and a much widened contact between the
core and the foundation. The crest width is 39.4 ft (12 me-
ters).
lnstrumentation. Sugar Pine Dam is comprehensively
instrumented. The instrumentation package enables exten-
sive monitoring of embankment stresses, horizontal and
vertical displacements, and pore-water pressures in the em-
bankment, abutments, and foundation. Information on em-
bankment seepage and seismic motion is also recorded. An
array of instrumentation was specified to closely follow
embankment movements and settlements in the transverse
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 289
and longitudinal dircctions. Embankmcnt measurcment
points, internal vertical movement (crossaml) dcviccs' in-
clinometeru, and extcnsometer monumcnts werc positioned
to provide detailed information at thosc locations whcrc
significant displacements might occur. Extensomcteni pro-
vide an especially important rccord oI matcrial bchavior at
the sensitive contact between the core and the spillway
walls. Porous tube, pneumatic, and hydraulic (twin tube)
piezometers monitor embankment pore pressures.
Pneumatic total pressure cells measure stresses at se-
lected points rvithin the embankment and allow the reso-
lution of possible stress concentrations, which in conjunc-
tion with displacement measurements, aid in evaluating the
potential for cracking.
Strong-motion instrumentation is designed to obtain data
on the nature of strong ground motion and on the perfor-
mance of the dam when subjected to earthquake loading.
Remote recording borehole-type strong-motion accelero-
graphs were located at several elevations within the em-
bankment, and surface-type accelerographs were placed on
the abutments.
Rockfill Test Section. In order to establish'compaction
requirements for the serpentinite rockfill material to be used
in the dam shell, a rockfill test section was constructed dur-
ing the design phase of the project. The test section was
intended to provide information about placement tech-
niques and the characteristics of the compacted rockfill, that
is, optimum placement thickness and number of roller
lift
passes, the density of the compacted rockfill. and the ex-
tent of the material breakdown under conrpaction. The
quarried rock selected for the test section had a maximum
size of about 0.6 meter and contained an average 35% mi-
nus 75 mm material. The test section was constructed with
lift thicknesses of 0.6 meter and 0.9 meter. Measurements
of the lift surflace were taken after two, four, five, and eight
passes ofa l0-ton (9072-kg) self-propelled vibratory roller.
In-place density tests were also made on each lift.
The rockfill test section provided useful indications of
material behavior and optimal placement methods. Test re-
sults suggested that compaction in 0.6-meter lifts with four
passes of the roller was the most efficient placement pro-
cedure. Degradation of the serpentinite rockfill was not
found to be a problem. Additionally, the excess of fines
naturally occurring in the quarried material was felt to in-
hibit compaction and the free-draining character of the
rockfill. Therefore, a zoned rockfill was designed with the
outer shell comprised of plus 75 mnr material compacted
in 0.9-meter lifts and the inner-zone consisting of minus
75 mm material compacted in 0'6'meter lifts.
Unique Spillway and Outlet Works Designs. The
spillway is an ungated concrete crest with chute and ter-
minal structure. Topography ancl certain other restrictions
29O ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR O€SIGN, CONSTRUCTION. AND REHABILTTATION
dictated that the spillway be located on rhe left abutment
and terminate in the channel at an angle of approximately
60' with the existing stream. Because there was insuffi-
cient space to locate a normal hydraulic jump stilling basin
without seriously undercutting the dam, and a flip bucket
would have caused water to impact on the opposite abut-
ment resulting in unacceptable erosion, another solution
was necessary.
Hydraulic model studies were undertaken to determine
the shape of a terminal structure that would (l) tum and
contain the flow forthe design flood and (2) provide energy
dissipation for the flow of a 1000-year flood.r7 The termi-
nal structure emerged as a curved stilling basin with direc-
tional vanes, baffie blocks, and a high end sill.
Because of the steep gradient of the stream at the dam-
site, the stream is approximately 92 ft (28 meters) below
the outlet works tunnel at the downstream end. Because of
the limited space available for an energy dissipator at stream
level, two-stage energy dissipation is utilized. Energy is
dissipated at the downstream portal in a stilling well with
a 54-in. (1372-mm) ported sleeve valve. The flow from the
stilling well is then discharged into a chute and flipped into
the stream channel for the second-stage dissipation.
Calamus Dam-Seepage Contro! Measures
Dominant in Design and Construction
lntroduction. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Cala-
mus Dam (Fig. 9-27) on the Calamus River in Nebraska
has a structural height of about 95 ft (29 metes) and a crest
length of 7200 ft (2195 meters). The foundation for Cala-
mus Dam required comprehensive investigations, testing,
analyses, and design to formulate the treatment required.
Calamus Dam is near the southeastern edge of the Sand-
hills region, a rolling expanse of sand dunes and interdune
depressions that overlie extensive alluvial and fluvial de-
posits, which in turn overlie the Ogallala Formation. The
Ogallala Formation, an aquifer in the central United States,
consists of weakly indurated sands and silts interlayered
with unconsolidated silts, sands, and gravels.
The surficial deposits overlying the Ogallala Formation
are 30 to 150 ft (9 to 46 meters) thick and consist of fluvial
deposits in the old river channel (Fig. 9-28). On the abut-
ments, the alluvial-fluvial deposits have been capped by
sand dunes that were derived from wind erosion of the ex-
tensive Ogallala Formation and alluvial and fluvial deposits
in the area.
Design. The erodible nature of the foundation and avail-
able embankment materials, the highly variable perrnea-
bilities in foundation deposits, the moderately to highly
compressible peat and loess, and the sand dune deposits
were the significant physical features controlling the de-
sign. The control of high volumes of seepage and the ex-
cessive exit gradients in these erodible soils were major
factors compounding design requirements. Effects of con-
solidation of the foundation during and after construction
of the embankment were considered in the design of the

Lorss
\
Sond ond Siliy Sond
Slntcrbcddcd
Fine Son<l ond Silt u----->--
--
Figure 9-28. Calamus Dam, profile looking downstreanr.
internal filter and drainage features. A three-dimensional
seepage analysis was Perfonned to evaluate potential
seepage volumes, gradients, exit locations, and control mea-
sures. The effects ofoutlet channels ofthe outlet works and
spillway on seepage, and the colresponding effectiveness
of design features such as the slurry wall, impervious up-
stream blanket, chimney drain, toe drain, relief wells, and
downstream drainage blanket in controlling the seepage'
were evaluated.
The permeability and density of foundation materials are
shown in Table 9-1. Pump-out tests were used in conjunc-
tion with ring permeameter tests to evaluate Ks f Kv ratios'
The slurry wall and the relief wells were modeled to
evaluate their effects on seepage. The total flow for the
right and left valley without slurry wall and relief wells was
calculated to be 37 cfs. The calculated seepage flow for the
case with the slurry wall and relief wells was 34 cfs. Even
though the calculated change in quantity was small, it was
considered prudent to construct the features to mitigate the
potential for concentrated flows and their effects' and to
provide some redundancy in a complex foundation'
Foundation Trench. The foundation trench serves as a
cutoff through low-density silty sand surficial deposits, dis-
persive clay strata near the left abutment, the upper portion
of loess deposits near the left abutment, diatomaceous earth
deposits, and highly compressible organic deposits varying
in thickness up to 4.5 ft (1.4 meter). The lower-density
dune sands were replaced with compacted earthfill for ap-
proximately 300 ft (90 meters) beyond the normal water
surface contacts with the abutments. The dispersive clay
stratum is isolated between the foundation trench at the
center of the dam and the collector drain trench at the
downstream toe of the dam. The loess deposit was partially
Table 9-1. PermeabilitY.
Density Permeability
Ceologic units (tblfc) (ft /yr)
A, B, and C 81.8 to 103.6 15.000
D 103.6 to I 18.0 30,000
E 104.3 to I 15.5 12.000
F 100.5 to I18.0 140,000
3.500
CandH 91.8 to 126. I
EARTHFILL DAM OESIGN ANO ANALYSIS 291
lntrD.ddcd Sond ond 9liy Sond
Crcst ol oom tlat lvfk! Dunc Sond
originol ground P.ol
I rEAr
->r--
---a---
G\tl'-:t7.--V'
ogollolo Fcmoiion /.a..,,-
excavated and prewetted to maximize compression during
construction and correspondingly preclude collapse during
reservoir filling. Diatomaceous earth and organic deposits
were removed between the upstream limit of the loundation
trench and the downstream toe of the dam.
Upstream Blanket.
Natural deposits of peat. loess. and
clay offer variable degrees of impervious blanketing over
the reservoir floor. It was considered necessary to include
an impervious blanket. -qenerally extending 800 to 1300 ft
(240 to 400 meters) upstream of the centerline of the crest
of the dam for the full length of the dam, to control en-
trance conditions to the foundation and to increase the
length of the seepage path through the foundation.
Slurry Wall. The decision to construct a slurry wall was
made following extensive analyses. A major advantage of
the slurry wall is that it provides a physical barrier in the
alluvium and minimizes Potential for uncontrolled seepage
through the foundation. Three-dimensional finite-element
analyses indicated that the slurry wall would not. by itself,
reduce seepage quantities and exit gradients to be within
safe limits. The calculated reductions in seepage are less
than anticipated because of the relatively high permeability
of the Ogallala Formation. The combination o[ the fully
penetrating slurry wall on the right bank with a partially
penetrating slurry wall on the left bank was selected as the
most effective treatment.
The slurry wall was located upstream of the foundation
trench because:
o Analyses indicated the seepage and exit gradients are
not significantly influenced by the slurry wall loca-
tion.
r There was concern for the stability of the slurry trench
located within the foundation trench.
. The potential effects of failure ol the trench on the
embankment and rivcr outlct works structure had to
K,, / K, be considercd.
o Construction of the slurry wall upstream would not
r.5
25 delay the completion of the foundation trench.
50
t0 Toe Drain. The toe drain will intercept near-surfacc
25
seepage near the toe of the dam. The toe drain was de-
 292 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERTNG FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEILITATION
signed using a factor of five times flow predicted by model
studies.
Relief Wells. The construction of the relief wells is con-
sidered to be a very important feature in the design. These
wells will control exit gradients at the downstream toe. The
wells are variably spaced, depending upon the permeability
of the foundation materials, ranging from 50 ft in highly
pervious coarse sand to 200 ft in fine-to-medium sand de-
posits. The relief wells are fully penetrating to the Ogallala
Formation. Relief wells designed for free flow and for
pumping are located around the stilling basins for the river
outlet works and spillway.
Hydraulic Structures. The spillway is a morning-glory-
type structure, with a 20-ft-diameter steel-lined free-flow
conduit. The river outlet works consist of a box+ype, l0-
foot steel-lined upstream conduit and a l4-ft 6-in. down-
LTOUEFACTION AND RELATED PHENOMENA
Srsve J. Poulos
Currently there is a sense among members of the geotech-
nical profession in civil engineering that there are different
schools of thought with respect to the mechanism causing
liquefaction and the appropriate methods for analyzing and
designing to prevent liquefaction. Two of these schools can
be traced to differences between the use of the term lique-
faction by Professor Arthur Casagrande and his students at
Harvard Univenity, of which the author is one, and the
use of the same term by Professor
H. Bolton Seed, himself
a former student of Professor Casagrande, and his students
at Berkeley.
The distinction arose originally when Seed and Leeas
published research on cyclic load tests on sands in which
they measured momentary 100% pore pressures in labo-
ratory tests, with concomitant large cyclic strains. This
stage of the tests was referred to as "initial liquefaction,"
probably because at that time it was the prevalent feeling
that liquefaction entailed near-zero shear strength and that
100% pore pressure always meant zero shear strength.
Laboratory cyclic load tests were then used by those au-
thors to analyze earthquake-triggered ..liquefaction. "
Casagrande interpreted the data by Seed and Lee to mean
that resistance to "liquefaction," as Seed and Lee defined
it based on the laboratory cyclic load tests, increased with
consolidation pressure, since the cyclic shear stress needed
to reach a given strain in a given number of cycles in-
creased with confinement. But Casagrande, based on his
strcam horseshoe conduit containing a 9-ft pressurized steel
pipe. At the river outlet works control srructure. the pipe
branches allow for releases to both the Calamus River and
the Mirdan Canal. The Mirdan Canal has a 9-ft stecl-lined
pressurized conduit.
Experience with similar structures on similar founda-
tions has indicated that settlement can be anticipated. The
designs have allowed for settlement by providing steel con-
duit linen welded into a watertight conveyance system after
the embankment or backfill was placed to its full height
above the structures. A drop structure was provided in the
river channel to set the tailwater elevation for the spillway
and river outlet works stilling basins. The "artificial" tail-
water prevents the highly erodible outlet channels from de-
grading to an elevation such that the stilling basins would
not operate as designed. The drop structure will establish
a control for exit gradients and will also prevent erosion of
filter material in the outlet channels.
own study of the 1938 Fort Peck dam liquefaction and his
concept of "critical void ratio" in sands (which should not
be confused with the present use of the term ..critical
state") had previously concluded that rhe likelihood ofliq-
uefaction became greater as the consolidation pressure in-
creased. He and his students in 1938 had measurcd a de-
crease in the "critical void ratio" of sands with increasing
consolidation pressure, which meant that sand in the ground
at a given void ratio would behave more like a ..loose"
soil as the pressure was increased. Seeing the dichotomy
between his long-held views and the results published by
Seed and Lee he wondered why there was this apparent
difference.
Gonzalo Castro, also a student of Arthur Casagrande,
demonstrated liquefaction, as Casagrande used the term. in
monotonically-loaded undrained tests, soon after the pub-
lication by Lee and Seed. Castroae also measured the de-
crease in the "critical void ratio" with increasing pressure
in undrained tests. That result had previously been ob-
tained mainly in drained tests, and it was inferred fronr the
results of undrained tests, but the nreasurements had not
been considered definitive. Castro was able to explain the
Fort Peek dam failure based on his test data.
As a result of Castro's tests and his own evaluation of
the cyclic load tests on sands, Casagrande conclueled (a)
that the large cyclic strains measured in the cyclic tests on
sands were due largely to test error and probably did not

bear any relation to field behavior of sands at the same void
ratio, and (b) that the development of 100% Pore Pressure
in cyclic tests in the laboratory was essentially unrelated to
the mechanism of "liquefaction" in the field, as Casa-
grande understood the term.
During the late 1960s Professor Casagrande tried to clar-
ify the situation by corresponding with various people in
an attempt to reach consensus on terminology. The term
"cyclic mobility" was introduced and apparently accepted
by many as the name of the phenomenon of large strains
that occur during cyclic loading of saturated soils, partic-
ularly sands, in the laboratory.
During this period the author, then teaching at Harvard,
recognized that the results of cyclic load tests being re-
ported at that time, whether they were or were not an ac-
curate representation of field behavior, were measurements
of deformations, not of stability failure. The author had
suggested use of the term ''cyclic deformation" to refer to
the movements measured in cyclic load tests. Thus "liq-
uefaction" as observed by Seed and Lee in undrained cyclic
load tests and "liquefaction" as it was observed by Castro
in undrained monotonic tests were two different phenom-
ena. One was a phenomenon of excessive deformation and
the other was a stability failure.
The author taught the above information in a course on
stability analysis in the fall of 1969, making clear the dis-
tinction between strength and deformation problems with
the aid of the concept of steady state deformation, which
he had introduced in 1968.re Based on the steady state of
deformation, one can understand within a consistent frame
of reference the behavior of soils in (l) undrained cyclic
load tests leading to large deformations with or without sta-
bility failure (even though 100% pore pressure can develop
momentarily in some cases) and (2) monotonic undrained
triaxial tests in which stability failure occurs. Understand-
ing the principle of steady state deformation also permits
one to understand the cases for which progressive failure
becomes important in practice so that it can be taken into
account in stability analysis.
The author feels that the apparent differences among the
so-called "schools of thought" now revolve around the
following items:
l. The definition of the term "liquefaction" itself-
should it be used for a class of field phenomena in
loose, saturated soils or should it be applied only to
the stability problem to which it was applied origi-
nally, even though the mechanism was not then well
understood,
2. The need to distinguish between stability and defor-
mation problems for practical applications,
3. Whether or not earthquake shaking causes significant
changes of the undrained steady state strength due to
redistribution of water content in situ in the soils that
cause the failure,
EARTHFILL DAM DESTGN AND ANALYSIS 293
4. Whether the state of laboratory testing is satisfactory
to measure the undrained steady state strength. u/ith
sulficient accuracy for practical applications.
4. Whethe r laboratory cyclic load tests can or should be
used to predict liquefaction,
6. Whether and under what conditions laboratory cyclic
load tests are accurate enough to be useful for pre-
dicting deformations due to earthquake shaking,
7. Whether the condition of 100% pore pressure in-
duced by cyclic loading in the laboratory means the
strength of the soil is zero and whether that condition
is or is not related to liquefaction in'situ, and
8. Whether the state of the art is sufficiently modest that
we should rely at present principally on index tests
(such as blowcounts) measured for past cases in
which "liquefaction" or other inadequate behavior
occurred on level ground during earthquake to judge
whether measures need be taken to modify a design
or an existing embankment to avoid liquefaction-
whatever its definition may be.
The author has attempted to clarify the above questions
in the following section based on the complementary prin-
ciples of effective stress and steady state deformation. Much
more work needs to be done to improve laboratory and field
testing for design for both the stability problem and the
deformation problem and to disseminate understanding of
this interesting and wide-ranging subject among geotech-
nical engineers.
The term liquefaction has been associated with the fail-
ure ofdeposits ofsaturated loose sands and "quick" clays.
In this section the phenomena that occur due to seismic
loading of saturated soils at all densities will be described.
Emphasis will be placed on the undrained shear behavior
of loose, saturated sands within and beneath embankments.
The phenomena described are liquefaction, due to static
or seismic undrained loading, the "quick" or quicksand
condition, sand blows, and deformation during seismic
loading. The phenomena that occur within a slope and be-
neath level ground are discussed.
PART 1. PRINCIPLES
Effective Stress and Steady State Deformation
The stress-strain behavior of soils and the phenomena gov-
erned by stress-strain behavior (e.g., liquefaction) require
understanding of two principles of particulate mechanics.
These are the principle of effective strcss't'2-'and the prin-
le'20
ciple of steady state dcformation. .
The principlc of efl'ective stress may be stated as fol-
lows:
The strcss-strain behavior of soils is controlled by the effective
stress, which is defined as the load, P, transmitted through the
 294 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILTTATION

soil particles in a dircction normal to a total cross-sectional area,
,{, divided by the area z{.
This principle means that changes in the pore fluid pressure
should have no effect on stress-strain properties, as long
as the effective stress remains unchanged. It also means
that the strength of uncemented soils will be zero if the
effective stress remains zero during shear.
The principle of steady state deformation may be stated
as follows:
cepts of critical void ratioz' and residual strength.?:':6.:?
This principle is useful for understanding the selection and
measurement of shear strength for stability analysis, which
includes evaluation of liquefaction potential.
Factors that Control Stress-Strain Behavior of Soils
The variety of parameters that affect the stress-strain curves
of soils is conveniently divided into the following four fac-
torsl

There exists a unique steady state line for any given soil which o Soil composition
is the locus of points at which the soil mass can strain continu- o Structure
ously at constant: void ratio, shear stress, effective norrnal stress, . State
and strain rate. r Loading method
When a soil specimen is sheared to large enough strains
To remember these four factors, it is helpful to use the
to reach the steady state, the state (i.e., the shear stress,
acronym SSSL.
effective normal stress, and void ratio) will lie on a steady-
The stress-strain curve of a given soil specimen usually
state line that is unique foreach soil. A series of tests used
has both a peak and a steady state strength. Evaluation of
to determine the steady state line for one sand is shown in
stability is best done if one knows both of these strengths
Fig.9-29. At large strains, all tests ended up on a single
for the soils involved because the relationship between the
line.
two often govems the factor of safety that should be used
The steady state of deformation is reached at strains that
in design.
normally would be considered extremely large, and that
Table 9-2 is a breakdown of each of the four factors that
have been discussed in the past only in connection with
control stress-strain curves. Table 9-3 is a list oftests used
residual strength.2l'22'27 For clean sands, triaxial tests can
to measure the parameters, either quantitatively or quali-
be used to approach the steady state fairly closely, which
tatively.
is the case for the tests shown in Fig. 9-29.
The soil composition is the basic soil material. It is de-
The friction angle at steady state, d' generally is con-
fined by the grain size distribution, the grain sizes, the
stant for a wide range of effective stresses of interest in
shapes of the particles and the edges of the particles, the
engineering practice. It is a fundamental constant for each
mineralogy of the particles, the ions adsorbed on the sur-
soil.
faces, and the pore fluid, be it water or gas, together with
Corollaries to the principle of steady state deformation
the ions in the pore fluid and the water content. In other
are: (a) soil samples subjected to drained shear reach a cer-
words, the term soil refers to the basic soil material. This
tain steady-state void ratio that is a function only of the
term preferably should not be used to refer to the "struc-
effective minor principal stress,* and (b) soil samples sub-
ture" or the "state" of a particular sample.
jected to undrained shear reach a certain effective minor
The structure refers to the arrangement of the particles
principal stress at steady state that is a function only of the
within a specific soil sample in the ground or in the labo-
initial void ratio. In this sense the principles of effective
ratory. Structurt includes such parameters as the number
stress and steady state deformation are complementary
of contacts per grain and the manner in which the particles
principles governing the behavior of particulates, including
of the soil are packed or distributed.2s'2e qualitative terms
soils.
that have been used to describe structure include: undis-
The principle of steady state deformation was introduced
turbed, disturbed, remolded, compacted; flocculent,
in 1969.2a It is a generalization and clarification of the con-
honeycombed, single-grained; stratified, layered, lami-
+At steady state the effective minor principal strcss, 7r,. and the nated, varved; openwork; card-house, flocculated, defloc-
shear
stressr L, arc constant. Hence the effective major principal slress, 7,,. culated;3o and isotropic, anisotropic, Although structure
also is constant. being related to 83, and r, thruugh the steady state friction cannot yet be specified quantitatively. it nevertheless has a
angle, @,, as follows:
strong influence on the shapc ofthe stress-strain curve prior

.",=f.n.d, to reaching steady state delormation.

The structure of a sample has its most important influ-
=q,cosd, ence on the modulus of deformation, on the peak strength,
Thercfore, at steady state 73" or 7,, can be used as the intlepcndent vari- and on the decay of strength after peak, That is, the srruc-
able that represents effective normal stress. ture affects the first part of the stress-str.rin curve. Once a
 EARTHFILL DAM OESIGN AND ANALYSIS 295

0.9
(a)

O RIO
o.8 - o.o

o Rro
I
o.oet

t o.7
,E
AOY STAT L IN]
o
I

\36 { R o
;
G
o I

o 0'6
-o Rto2

LEGEN D

O Al and ofcon3olido ron

<
a Al tlcod, rlolG -rf
o293 Fros

o.5
Slop. of E, vt. C
a242
b.tr.ane:l5o/oond
25o/o , 9si / olo ,
Scolc I i^.2 ?o/o
e min

- = O.4 ? tat-l 8.6 pc

o.4 loo 200
o.l

EFFECTIVE MINOR PRINCIPAL STRESS, d. , Psi

loo
(b)

80

Q. '3t'to
a
a
'so
.l
bl
,l*
b-l
--R lO5
rr 40

>/
B
STEADY ST
LINE -F roz

20

x'o'
o 20 .o 60 80 loo l2o l4O 160

{'r,
-P=-;-,Ort
srress gath diagram. Both diagrams are needed to dofioo th€ sl€ady stale,

Figure 9-29. Determination of steady state line using undrained triaxial tests.
296 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILITATION

Table 9-2. Factors that lnfluence Strength Table 9-3. Tests for Observing or Measuring
Properties of Soils. Factors that lnfluence Strength Properties of Soils.
Factor Defi ning Characteristics Factor Typc of Mcasuremcnt

Soil composition Mineralogy Soil composition X-ray and diffcrrntial thermal analysis
Grain size and shape distribution Chemical and petrugraphic
Porc fluid type and content examination
Ions on grains and in pore fluid Surface area measurcment
Specific gravity of solids
Stnrcture La; ers. panings lanisotropy)
Gradation, grain shape. edge shape
Joints, slickensides. voids. inclusions.
Crain photographs
pockets (nonhomogeneity)
Pore fluid analysis
Cementation
Water content
Terms used: single-grained,
Atterberg limits
fl occulent, honeycombed,
Maximum and minimum density
undisturbed. remolded, compacted,
consolidated from liquid limit Structure Visual description of aoisotropy and
nonhomogeneities aided by
State (initial) Minor principaI effective stress
breaking a section or scraping and
Shear stress (stress ratio)
partial drying
Void ratio (density)
Photographs, microphotographs
. Degree of saturalion-computed
Etching
from water content and void ratio
Anisotropic properties: modulus.
Temperature
Poisson's rntio, strength
Loading method Effective stress path
State (initial) Density and specific gnvity
o Total srress path (test type)
. Degree of drainage (drained. Total stress minus pore pressure
(effective stress)
undrained. intermediate)
Shear stress
Type of loading
Temperature
o lrlagnitude (amplitude)
o Rate (static, dynamic) Loading method Consolidation ( l-D, 3-D. constant
o Time history (monotonic, stress ratio )
repeated, variable) Triaxial. direct shear. true triaxial.
simple shear, rotation shear,
Shear stength:
torsion. vane shear. unconfined.
c 'fhe pcak strengr[ in situ is affected by all the above factom to varying degrces, plane strain, cone. and torvane tests
o The srccd-y state stength in situ is dependent chiefly on the soil composition
and (a) the nomal effective stress for droined tests and (b) the void mlio for
Drained, undrained
urulrained tests . Static. repeated (cyclic). dynamic
Vibratory (axial, torsional) test for
Strength entelopes: moduli-resonant column test
o The peat srreng/r envelope plotted in tems of effective stress. i.e.. the enve-
lope of peak strengths measurcd for one soil at varying effeciive consolidation
stress. is usually affected by a// the factoN.
. Tests show that the sread) srdle slrengtlr envelope is affected only by soil com-
position- represents a shear strain, tan 7, of 400%. Small ground
movements can reflect strains not usually reached in the
sample has been sheared to very large strains, the initial laboratory tests most commonly used. Thus, natural phe-
structure has been completely destroyed and no longer has nomena, especially liquefaction, are governed not only by
any influence on the shear resistance or the rate of strain the shape of the stress-strain curve at low strain but also
under a given shear stress. In a sense, one can say that the by its shape at very large strains, that is, at the steady state
early part of the stress-strain curve is a response to the of deformation.
initial structure for the particular sample. At large strains The selection of strength for stability analysis generally
the sample loses all memory of its initial structure.2o has been based on the peak strength.lr Skemptonll pointed
During the history of development of soil mechanics, out that the drained steady state friction angle of stiff clays
most attention has been paid to the peak strength, which is (the residual friction angle) controls their ultimate stability.
measured at low strains, that is, at shear strains in the range In spite of Skenrpton's work, it is not yet gcnerdlly rec-
0 to 40%, which are low enough, in all but relatively clean ognized that the peak strength, which is greatly influenced
sands, so that the original structure of a sample is not by initial structure, whethcr nleasured in drained or un-
greatly altered by the shear stresses applied. Very large drained tests, is ephemeral-it can be lost. Only the steady
strains, well beyond those reachable in a triaxial test, fre- state strcngth can be relicd upon. The major effon of re-
quently occur in the ground and are responsible for fail- search in geotechnical engineering has been focused on the
ures. A movement of, say, I ft of a zone that is 3 in. thick factors aft'ecting the peak strength, that is, initial structure,

state, and loading method; but stability ultimately is con-
trolled by the steady state strength.
.Slale is defined by the void ratio, effective normal stress,
and the shear stress on the sample just prior to the loading
condition of interest in practice. Note that state, as the term
is used for particulates, is related to but not the same as the
state of a fluid. For fluids the state is defined by two co-
ordinates-specific volume and pressure. (Temperature is
assumed constant.) For particulates, one must add the ini-
tial shear stress to define state.
The above distinction between the state of a fluid and the
state of a particulate (soil) is important for undentanding
liquefaction, and it also permits a clear definition of the
difference between a liquid suspension and a loose soil. A
soil, or a particulate, may be defined as a collection of par-
ticles packed at a dense enough state that they can sustain
a shear stress even if the rate of strain is zero.
On the other hand, a liquid suspension of particles has
no shear strength when the strain rate is zero. As soils be-
come looser and looser, they eventually reach a condition
in which they become suspensions. Suspensions have vis-
cosity. A clay at the liquid limit still has a very low shear
strength; hence it is still a soil. But a normally consolidated
quick clay, after it has been remolded completely but be-
fore any water is allowed to drain, can be so loose that it
is a liquid suspension rather than a soil. Mexico City clay,
which reaches void ratios as high as 16 (6% solids by vol-
ume) is essentially a liquid suspension after it is remolded.
Similarly, some quick clays have zero shear strength after
being remolded.
The states of a specimen are described by a variety of
terms. The telms to be used in this section are as follows:le
o Contactive state: that state in which a specimen tends
to decrease in volume when subjected to pure shear
stress. Such soils as undisturbed "quick" clays, Mex-
ico City clay, loose sands, normally consolidated
(soft) glacial clays, and medium- to low-density sands
and silty sands generally are contractive. Specimens
having a void ratio and effective stress above the
steady state line in Fig.9-29a are chiefly contractive.
t Dilative state: that state in which a soil specimen tends
to increase in volume when subjected to pure shear
stress. Specimens that lie below the steady state line
in Fig. 9-29a are chiefly dilative. Specimens at the
same void ratio may be dilative at low effective stress
and contractive at high effective stress. Stiff clays,
heavily overconsolidated clays, dense or medium-
dense sands, silty sands, and sandy or silty clays are
usually dilative.
When a specimen is prepared at a state lying on the
steady state line in Fig. 9-29a, it is said to be in a neutral
state. However, it is not at the steady state unless it is de-
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN ANO ANALYSIS 297
forming continuously. The specimcn must be subjectcd to
shear strain to get it into a steady state of deformation.
The above definitions show that the commonly used
terms-loose, dense, overconsolidated, soft, and so on-
describe the state of a specimen. From the standpoint of
understanding stress-strain behavior, they can be replaced
by more specific terrns, contractive and dilative.
The temperature of a sample during loading does not
often enter into soil mechanics. However, the stress-strain
curve of a soil sample and its steady state of deformation
can be expected to be affected by temperature.
The loading method (or test method) refers to all param-
eters that define the loading condition. Loading conditions
of interest with respect to liquefaction include eanhquake
shaking, blasting, toe erosion, construction loadin-e, foun-
dation movement, and tidal action. The extreme loading
conditions for soils in nature are drained (free flo*'of water
during shear) and undrained (no volume change during
shear). Monotonic axial extension, axial compression, pure
shear, torsion, and direct shear represent various ways in
which the total stresses can be changed to shear a speci-
men. Specimens sheared continuously in one direction
eventually will reach a steady state of deformation at large
unidirectional strains. Cyclic and vibratory loadings,-be
they regular or irregular, and the rate of monotonic loading
or frequency of cyclic loading, if they are variables, also
are needed to define the loading method. [f the temperature
is changed during loading, it too forms part of the loading
method.
In summary, to understand stress-strain behavior and to
interpret or predict the shape of stress-strain curves, one
should ask:
o What is the soil composition?
o What is the initial structure of the soil sample?
o What is the initial state of the soil sample?
. How will the sample be loaded?
The Two Strengths of Soil Samples-Progressive
Failure
In soil mechanics several definitions of shear strength have
been used. But for a particular soil sample-as defined by
the soil composition, its structure, and state-subjected to
a given loading, two strengths are significant in practice.
These are the shear resistance at peak and the shear resis-
tance during steady state deflormation. These two stages of
the stress-strain curve for a given sample and loading
method will be referred to as the peak shear strength (or
peak strength) and the stcady state shear strength (or steady
state strengrh).
When load is applied to a soil in the ground, it responds
by straining along the stress-strain curve that exists at each
point in the ground for that loading. At any given point in
298 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEILITATION
Figurc 9-30. Stress-strain curves along failure surface in situ. undrained.
the gmund, the peak strength is reached first. As strain is
continued, the strain at peak strength is surpassed, and the
resistance drops down toward the steady state strength. The
stress-strain curves also vary from point to point in any
given embankment that is being loaded, as shown in Fig.
9-30. Thus the shear resistance that is mobilized along any
continuous potential failure surface varies widely from
point to point. This variation in mobilized shear resistance
often is referred to as progressive failure or progressive
strain.32-x It is evident that the maximum possible shear
resistance that can be simultaneously mobilized along a po-
tential failure surface is equal to the sum of the peak
strengths. Similarly, the minimum possible shear resis-
tance that can be simultaneously mobilized is the sum of
the steady state strengths.
Using the notation So for peak shear strength and S" for
steady state shear strength, the above limits can be defined
as follows:
: It is convenient to separate stability and deformation prob-
Maximum shear resistance
ft,o,
J* r.
Minimum shear resistance : which the supported structure fails or behaves poorly be-
where L is length along the potential failure surface.
Failure cannot occur, and the mass is stable, if the shear
stresses in the mass, integrated over the potential failure
surface, I ra dL, are smaller than J S, dL. The value ra is
called the driving shear stress. It is caused by any constant
loads on the mass, such as weight. Failure will always oc-
cur-the mass is unstable-if the integral of the driving
shear stresses is greater than J S, dL.
The analysis of stability of slopes, retaining walls, and
footings in geotechnical engineering practice is basically
an attempt to evaluate whether the loads exceed I Sn dL or
are less than J S, dL. lf the loads lie between these two
extremes, one must be cautious because the mass is meta-
stable. Such a mass can fail if the strains caused by the
loading are sufficient to strain a sufficient portion of the
potential failure surface beyond the peak strain. Clays re-
quire so much strain to reach steady state3s that a large
percentage of the quantity J S, dL often can be mobilized
in situ, at least for short time periods.2l But clean sands
that have a peak in their stress-strain curve. such as loose,
saturated sands sheared undrained. have such a low strain
at peak that one normally should not rely in practice on
being able to mobilize more resistance than that given by
i s, dL.3t.,u
Some soil samples in situ do not have a peak in the
stress-strain curve. For example, contractive bulky-grained
sands sheared drained have no peak. Their shear resistance
rises to the drained steady state strength without passing
through a peak. Also dilative sands sheared undrained do
not usually display a peak. The stress-strain curve displays
a peak for most other cases.re Examples of soil samples
that have both peak and steady state strengths are: quick
clays sheared drained or undrained, contrdctive sands
sheared undrained, cemented soils (e.g., loess), normally
consolidated and overconsolidated clays sheared drained or
undrained. and clayey silts sheared drained or undrained.
For stability analysis of slopes containing soils that have
no peak in their stress-strain curves, progressive strain still
occurs during loading; but this progressive strain only af-
fects the deformations that develop at various stages of
loading. If all the soils along the potential failure surface
have stress-strain curves in situ with no peak, then the mass
will be unstable when the loads exceed J S, dL. That is, the
metastable state does not exist if none of the stress-strain
curves has a peak. The mass is either stable or unstable
under the in situ shear stresses.
Stability and Deformation Problems in Geotechnical
Engineering Practice
lems for the purpose of analysis. A stability problem is one
in which the soil fails. A deformation pmblem is one in
cause of deformation, rather than failure, of the soils.le'33
For example, footing settlement is a deformation problem.
Bearing capacity is a stability problem.
Figure 9-31 contains a list of typical stability and defor-
mation problems. As load is applied to a mass of soil, it
deforms and eventually fails. In the case of an earth dam,
the deformations that precede failure of the soil may cause
settlement and cracking of the dam, a central core wall, or
other structure supported thereon. If the deformations are
large enough, the dam will not perform adequately, in
which case the deformations must be limited by flattening
slopes, densifying the soils, decreasing the loads, or de-
signing or operating the dam to enable it to perform even
if the predicted deformations occur. Thus it is important to
have procedures available to estimate embankment defor-
mations.
To understand liquefaction and related phenomena, as
they witl be described and defined in the following sec-
tions, it is helpful to separate deformation and stability
problems for the purposes of design.
 EARTHF]LL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 299

STABILITY AND DEFORMATION PROBLEMS ples that are at a void ritio and effective stress that lies
IN GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING below the steady state line are dilative; that is. they tend
to increase in volume when subjected to shear stress. Sam-
ples that lie above the steady state line in Zone II, which
STABILITY DE FORMATION is between the steady state line and a horizontal line through
point Q, are contractive.* Zone III lies above the horizon-
BearlnS capaclty seEtlehenc of foocinE3 tal line through point O. Soil samples that are subjected to
SEabtllty Earth pregsures beaween acllve shear stress at initial states lying in Zone III are extremely
and passlve
Suddeo draudoHn contractive.
Movedent3 durlot €arEhquakes
ConscrucEion loads (excepc ltquefaccton) The steady state line is shown in Fig. 9-32 to intersect
Llquefactlon (flow Sheec lng d lsplacemenE the zero effective stress axis at point Q. Measurements have
slides)
CrackinS of burled plpe not been made in detail to demonstrate that this intersection
DurlnS, earEhquakes
AllouabIe plle load exists, or whether the intersection is really a trdnsition.
Durlng, construcclon (partlcularly end bearing,)
Physically, this point, or range rvhere the steady state line
other (c ldes, Eoe Pave[ent EovehenEs due to traffic
eros lon) frosc act(on, Eolsture change reaches zero effective stress, is the demarcation between a
Ex cavaE lon crackinq of dans liquid suspension of soil particles and a true soil. At void
ratios smaller than that at point Q, the soil has shear
Active pressure strength; that is, the mass can sustain a shear stress with a
Pags lve pressure strain rate of zero. A clay at the liquid limit is generally
PiIe capaclcy attributed an undrained shear strength of about 50 psf (2.5
(part lcularLy f ricc ion
piles) kPa), which is a very small shear strength.ls Thus the void
Cracking of daos ratio at the liquid limit probably is close to the void ratio
at point Q. For a perfectly spherically grained, mono-sized
Figure 9-31. Stability and deformation problems in geotechnical engi- sand, the void ratio just at the point when the grains no
neering.
lon-9er have to touch ifthey are subjected to undrained shear
is about O.g2.3e
At void ratios above point Q, the soil prior to shear is at
Distinction between Liquefaction and Related
such a loose state that it breaks down to a tiquid suspension
Phenomena Using the Steady State Line
when it is remolded (strained) in undrained shear. Al-
Figure 9-32 is an arithmetic plot of the projection of a though the sample has a peak stren-eth, its undrained steady
steady state line for a given soil on the plane of void ratio, state shear strength is zero. An example of a soil that would
e, versus effective minor principal stress, o3. lie in Zone III is Norwegian "quick" clay. After being
Figure 9-32 can be divided into three major zones of fully remolded, this material would display viscosity but
interest. ZoneI lies below the steady state line. Soil sam- would have no undrained shear strength. It would have
shear resistance only if the strain rate is greater than zero-
it would be viscous.
To summarize, soil samples having an initial state in
Zone I on the state diagram in Fig. 9-32 will be dilative.
z
They will increase in volume when subjected to drained
9 ro3!r!Lf - shear, and the effective normal stresses in the sample will
ErrPar€tY L@3f
I hatrrLtY-cEx€rlo increase if they are sheared undrained. Dense sands, heav-
I !rLrt
-+- o ily overconsolidated clays, and clay shales usually can be
expected to exist in nature at states in Zone I.
I

I
,orsrll[ -
= !oo3f 9ro! Soil samples having states in the ground that lie in Zone
$at cLlY!
-i
OF
ZONE II II generally will be contractive. When subjected to drained
FA CONTRACfIVE
Sur LAaGER OafOFrAl*! shear, their volume will decrease, and when subjected to
'O
ijo undrained shear, the effective normal stresses will de-
NO
STEAOY STATE LIN€

rc? @ratE -
oar!( gr0!. rThere is a narrow zone above thc steady state line (e, vs.7.,) in which
!'Llt lro CLIY!
soil srmples are (irst contractive and then dilative until they rcach the
Lrrltfo oa/oaulor! sleady stile tine. In some cascs the steady state line is crossed as dilation
occurs, but with further strain thc specimen returns to the stcady state
line.:o The line above which the specinrens arc contractive throughout
03 monotonic shear is called the dilative-contrretive bountJary. or DC'
boundary.lq lts position is a function of the sample's strueturc, state. and
Figure 9-32. Zones on the state diagram. lo;rding method uscd.
 3OO AOVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTTON. ANO REHAEILITATION
crease. Samples in Zone II will have a finite undrained
shear strength when they reach the condition of steady state
deformation. Loose sands and silts and normally or lightly
overconsolidated clays, clayey silts, and silty clays gener-
ally will lie in Zone II.
. Soil samples that are in Zone III in the ground might
include the "quick" clays, silts, and silty clays, Mexico
City clay, and possibly extremely loose silts that are de-
posited in such a manner that the bonds between particles
hold them in a flocculent or honeycomb structure. These
materials, when sheared undrained to large enough strains
to completely remold their structure, would be left with
zero shear strength and would become suspensions of soil
particles in liquid.
Terminology
There are several terms used in the practice of geotechnical
engineering for the same or overlapping phenomena. To
aid the reader, the terms to be used in this section are de-
fined below. Alternate terms used are given for reference.
Liquefaction (alternative terrn now used: flow
slide). Liquefaction is a stability failure due ro undrained
shear of highly contractive, fully saturated masses of soil.
This case is one in which the driving shear stresses, ra, ara
greater than the undrained steady state strengths, S,,, such
that the failure involves an acceleration of the mass. It
comes to rest as the driving shear stresses are reduced, and
the inertia of the accelerated mass is overcome by the un-
drained steady state shear strength. re'36'37
When the soils involved in a liquefaction failure are
sands, the mass appears to "flow." For this reason Hazenal
stated that the Calaveras Dam, a hydraulic fill dam that
failed during construction, appeared to have "liquefied."
When the soil involved is a "quick" clay, a progressive
series of slips occurs,x and as the mass strains, the
"quick" clay turns into a viscous suspension. Its void ratio
lies above point Q in Fig. 9-32.
The failure of a soft clay due to undrained loading during
constructiona2{o can be viewed as a "local" liquefaction.
The failure surface is circular, and the shear strength along
that surface drops from the peak to steady state. But the
failure does not look like a liquefaction because the clay
has low permeability. The pore pressures become high in
the thin failure zone only, but the adjacent soil retains most
of its peak strength and does not deform greatly.
Z-Condition (altemative terrns now used: liquefaction,a5
initial liquefaction,a6 100% pore pressure,45 cyclic mobil-
ity,o''t'momentary zero effective stress52l. The Z-condi-
tion is defined herein as rhar stage during seismic. blast-
induced, or other shaking when the effective stress within
the soil momentarily becomes zero. The Z-condition can
occur only if the shear stresses in the soil are reversed in
sign so that adjacent particles are sheared in opposite di-
rections. If the shear stresses are reversed a sufficicnt num-
ber of times, the effective stress can momcntarily pass
through zero. In laboratory triaxial and direct sample shear
tests, this condition results in a rapid incrcase in
strain45'48'4e for contractive specimens. It has been postu-
lated to occur in situ.50
The Z-condition occurs when the point representing the
state of the specimen in Zones I or II in Fig. 9-32 moves
to the left to the zero stress axis, while in Fi-e. 9-33 the
stress path goes through the origin. When the Z-condition
is reached, the soil sample is dilative because its position
lies below the steady state line in Fig. 9-32.
The undrained steady state shear strength is not affected
by the shaking, that is, by the fact that the Z-condition
occurred,sr'52 as long as the void ratio of the specimen re-
mains constant. If shear stress is reapplied, the state point
moves to the ri_ght toward the steady state line.
The moment when the Z-condition first occurs during a
cyclic load test has been referred to as "initial liquefac-
tion."i6 The use of this terrn was reasonable because, at
that time, it seemed to be the prevailing impression of geo-
technical engineers that liquefaction meant that the soil had
reached a condition of zero shear strength.
Subsequently, it was pointed outsl'sl that the Z-condi-
tion does not imply zero shear strength. Also Casagrande{7
suggested that the Z-condition probably occurs only, or
much more severely, in the laboratory than in situ. To date
the writer knows of no cases for which the Z-condition has
been observed in the field.
It has been inferred52 that the Z-condition probably oc-
curs much more quickly (fewer cycles and lower cyclic
shear stress) in a laboratory cyclic test on sands than in
situ-so much more quickly that the test data cannot be
used to predict field behavior. For c/a,rs, however, cyclic
load test results may be reliable indicators of the defor-
mations that will occur under similar loading conditions in
ri,r.3s' 52
The above description of the Z-condition indicates that
it is a momentary phenomenon that can occur during shak-
ing, but only if the seismic shear stress causes stress re-
IEST LC 146
HEo8€RG (SEE 591
Figure 9-33. Undrained cyclic triaxial test showing the Z-condition

versal. When the Z-condition does occur. the measured
strains begin to increase more rapidly in laboratory tests.
The more contractive the specimen. the more rapid is the
development of strains after the Z-condition first occurs.{6
There is no information available yet on the extent to which
the Z-condition occurs in situ. Since cyclic loading can
cause the Z-condition, which has been (incorrectly) asso-
ciated with zero strength, one can obtain the impression
that liquefaction and the Z-condition are one and the same
thing.
It is important to distin-suish liquefaction from the Z-
condition for several reasons:
l. Dilative soils can reach a condition of zero effective
stress during cyclic loading. However, dilative soils
are not susceptible to liquefaction. Nevertheless'
there are cases in which even dilative soils could de-
form enough during cyclic loading in situ to cause
undesirable behavior of a structure.
2. To analyze whether liquefaction can occur, one needs
to compare z; with S,,. Cyclic load tests are not
needed.
3. Liquefaction is a catastrophic failure; the Z-condition
implies that large deformations may occur that may
or may not be critical to a particular structure.
Deformations during Cyclic Loading. The cyclic load
test, as developed, is a method for measuring the cyclic
and cumulative strains during loadings that are intended to
model dynamic cyclic loading, such as earthquakes. As a
means for usin,e the data of cyclic load tests (Fig. 9-33),
the number of cycles of a given shear stress required to
cause a defined strain, most commonly 5%, has been re-
ferred to as the c1'clic shear strengtlr.sl This term is used
even though it represents a specific deformation, just as in
the past the strength from a triaxial test has been arbitrarily
defined at, say, 15% strain.il
The cyclic shear strength has been used most often to
mean the cyclic shear stress which gives 5% double am-
plitude strain or cumulative axial strain in l0 cycles. How-
ever, it can be used for any combination of strain and num-
ber of cycles.
If the laboratory test were a perfect model of in-situ be-
havior, then application of the cyclic shear strength would
cause 5% strain in l0 cycles. But 5vo strain is not neces-
sarily failure and usually is not important for embank-
ments. Therefore, use of the term cyclic shear strength
seems inappropriate and perhaps misleading. Castro and
Poulos52 proposed the term cyclic mobility ratio to replace
cyclic shear strength, to eliminate the inference that it is a
strength.
Cyclic strain and cumulative cyclic strain are terms that
the writer prefers to apply to the strains that occur during
cyclic load tests, but one must be careful to distinguish
EARTHFILL OAM OESIGN AND ANALYSIS 301
between laboratory measured stnins and those that occur
in situ. The conventional cyclic load test does not modcl
in-situ seismic loading for two important reasons:
First, the inertia of the mass in situ is not modeled. Thc
deformations that accumulate during a cyclic load test are
not directly related to deformations in situ. Softening of the
soils and the inertia of the mass above any given surface
in situ both cause a reduction ol the seismic shear strcss.
Thus, as strain occurs in situ due to cycling. the stress
drops, and the motions are then smaller than one would
predict based on the assumption of constant seismic shear
stress.
Second, there are test errors in the undrained cyclic
triaxial test that, to date, have not been well evaluated. A
cyclic triaxial test is a repeated load test. Therefore, the
errors that occur in a conventional monotonically loaded
test7o are increased with each cycle. Because of the cy-
cling, the water in the specimen can redistribute and cause
void ratio differences to develop in certain zones. The
looser zones then would tend to strain more, with the result
that the strains are larger than would occur if redistribution
did not occur. The degree of redistribution is affected by
the rate of cycling and the soil permeability.
The question arises of rvhether the same kind of redis-
tribution occurs in siru during the one-minute or so dura-
tion of an earthquake. To date there is no information
available to enable direct comparison between cyclic load
test results and in-situ deformations. To study the erron,
it would be useful to apply cyclic loads of varying fre-
quency to specimens of varying permeability. With such
tests it might be possible to gain insight into the magnitude
of the errors.
Sand Blows (altemate terms now used: sand boils, sand
volcanoes. quicksand, liquefactions6;. when earthquakes
strike loose deposits of fully saturated sands, the develop-
ment of sand blows during and soon after the eafthquake
is often observed. Housnet's described the cause and
mechanism of sand blows. which represent a consolidation
(deformation) phenomenon as opposed to a stability fail-
ure.
Sand blows are caused on level ground by the following
sequence of events:
l. A loose saturated sand exists in situ. The looser the
sand, the more likely it is that a sand blow will occur.
Also, a relatively low-pcrmcability stratum of soil
over the sand tends to favor the development of sand
blows.
2. An earthquake or other disturbance causes the loose
structurc of the soil to tcnd to collapse to some de-
gree, depending on the magnitude and duration of the
disturbance.
3. The structural collapse causes a near-instantaneous
drop in eftective stress as the structure tries to de-
 302 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DES]GN. CONSTRUCTION, ANO REHAEITITATION
crease in volume but is prevented from doing so be-
cause drainage cannot occur instantaneously. The
pore pressure rises above hydrostatic. There is excess
POre pressure.
4. Drainage takes place. Assuming that lateral and
downward drainage is negligible, drainage takes place
upward. If the maximum instantaneous upward gra-
dient is greater than about 1.0, a momentary zero ef-
fective stress condition occurs. The Mohr stress cir-
cle is a point at the origin whenever this condition
arises.
5. Two events can occur at this stage. If the soil stratum
is homogeneous and no cracks develop during drain-
age, then water drains upward, the effective stress
gradually rises to its original value, and settlement
occurs as the grains reach a denser packing due to the
disturbance.
6. However, if local cracks occur, or if the overlying
soil cracks, then the flow of water concefltrates at the
crack. The gradients can locally reach values consid-
erably higher than 1.0. Such gradients can carry sand
grains until the gradient tapers off. This process
causes a sand blow to form at the crack.
Note that the above process occurs on level ground, and
it can occur on sloping ground if the shear stresses in the
sand due to the slope are smaller than the undrained steady
state strength. Thus sand blows occur in level or fairly flat
slopes. Ifthe slope is too steep and sand too loose, instead
of a sand blow, liquefaction may be triggered. Of course,
sand blows can occur even within a liquefied mass because
the pore pressures after liquefaction can be much greater
than hydrostatic, and the mass will be cracked in many
places by the movements that occur.
Sand blows reflect a consolidation phenomenon that is
triggered by an earthquake or other undrained loading. The
loose structure is disturbed, it tries to collapse, drainage
occurs into cracks, and sand blows form above. Sand blows
are not the same as liquefaction, which is a catastrophic
shear failure. The similarity between sand blows and liq-
uefaction lies only in the fact that the soil involved in both
cases is saturated and usually highly contractive; that is,
the void ratio and effective stress in situ lie above the steady
state line.
Quicksand (altemate tcrms now used: quick condition,
liquefactions6l. quicksand occurs for the ,i*" ."rron ,, ,
sand blow, namely, because of a strong upward gradient
that causes a zero effective stress condition. Whereas a sand
blow occurs because of gradients that are high enough to
carry soil grains, quicksand can exist with a gradient of
only 7' f 7* (about 1.0) or slighrly grearer.
Quicksand is a condition of zero effective stress that per-
sists. It starts with an upward flow of water due to an up-
ward gradient. As upward flow continues, the soil swells
along a swelling curve. As the volume increases, the effec-
tive stress drops until, finally, if the upward gradient
is equal to or greater than 7' f 7*. the effective strcss be-
comes zero, and the void ratio has reached its maximum
value at or above point Q on rhe steady state line. euick-
sand then has been formed.
When a soil is in the quicksand condition, it is really a
suspension of soil in water; it no longer is a true soil. The
mass has zero shear strength no matter how it is sheared;
it now has only viscosity.
Quicksand is a condition of constant flow that is achieved
under drained conditions, not undrained conditions. To
achieve a quicksand state, the void ratio of the soil must
increase-inflow of water must occur. A sand blow is a
local quicksand condition that is so violent, because ofthe
upward gradient, that soil particles are brought to the sur-
face.
Quicksand also can develop due to undrained shear of a
soil that lies in Zone III of Fi-e. 9-32, as nored earlier.
PART 2. PMCTICE
Steps in the Evaluation of Seismic Stability and
Deformations of Embankments
Figure 9-34 is a flow chart showing the principal steps in
the evaluation of seismic effects on embankments, based
on the principles and terminolo-ey described in Part l. These
effects include stability, that is, liquefaction, and the de-
formations that occur during and after seismic events.
After determination of the shape of the embankment and
surrounding ground in locations that are expected to be most
critical, usually the best first step is to drill borings to de-
termine the stratification and water pressures within the
mass. For new dams the foundation is investigated, and the
cross section is developed based on available materials and
foundation conditions. During the drilling operarions, stan-
dard penetration tests (SPT) using ASTM Test Designation
D1586 are very useful. The blowcounts (N-values) give an
idea of which zones are the loosest and weakest. When
they are combined with thorough descriptions of the sam-
ples, one can develop a conservative cross section or model
for analysis.
It is quite advisable to take continuous N-values, at least
in some of the boreholes, because weak zones may be thin
and can be missed. If the local geology shows evidence of
the presence of loose or weak layers, extra cautions should
be taken at this stage to develop a clear picture of the in-
ternal distribution of weaker or looser soils. Many stability
failures have occurred not because thc analysis was im-
properly done but because thin weak layers were missed.
During the drilling operarions, observation wells or pie-
zometers are installed to measure the horizontal and veni-
cal distribution of water pressure. It is often worthwhile to
 EARTHFILL DAM OESIGN AND ANALYSIS 303

Ext.rn. I lowed by the reader as the analyses in the rcmainder of this

Ceofr! t ry part are discussed.

Case Histories
L tqu. f.c t Lon Da rn. t ton
fo
EY.lu.tlon Ev. lu. t ton
Many engineers have emphasized the need to correlate case
histories of failures with analytical techniques and with
simple index propertiesTl as an overall check to relate en-
gineering evaluations with actual behavior. With respect to
liquefaction there are few satisfactory case histories avail-
BortnBr or able, because of both the relative rarity of liquefaction fail-
Haerure S u! ccophtt lcel
R (cu) Tcsta Tcstr for ures and the lack of good index tests or engineering proP-
erties on which to base a correlation or analyses. Seedm
C.lcul.t! has collected a number of cases that can be used as a first
CalcuI.t! td S.limlc Shc.r step in judging from standard penetration tests and calcu-
Straatct
lation of in-situ driving shear stresses in critical zones
Cycllc Load Tc!tr whether liquefaction is unlikely or questionable.
or R Tclts to Based on the mechanics of a liquefaction failure (as de-
06t.tn Ylcld
fined in Part l), the geometry of the mass before and after
Calculate Detorn.- failure, the weights of the soils involved in the failure, and
tlon! 157, 58' 59) the distances traveled by the failure mass, one can estimate
For cl.y!, cstlhrte
deformtlonc bared the average shear strength that was mobilized during the
on cycllc !.!t! 135).
failure. On the other hand, the standard penetration test
involves shear of the penetrated soil. Therefore, with proper
attention to details that affect both the back-figured mobi-
lized shear strength for a particular case and the corre-
Ch.ck ltqu.- sponding N-values, one might expect a reasonable corre-
factlon poteq-
t16 I end lation between the two.
def orutlon! One can also make direct measurements of the undrained
steady state strength of the soils that may be involved in
the failure to determine how they compare with the
strengths backfigured from a failure or from those expected
by analyzing the standard penetration test. This approach
Figure 9-34. Flow chan for evaluation of seismic effects. will demonstrate whether or not laboratory measurements
of S,, are usable for liquefaction stability analyses.ao
Based on the above discussion, several steps are desir-
able to obtain a correlation and to check the laboratory
make in-situ permeability tests if there might be a subse- measurements and analytical techniques:
quent question about whether the seismic loading will be
mostly drained or undrained. Care should be taken to de-
termine whether upward gradients exist or might exist after
l. Compute the mobilized shear strength in situ, S-,
construction. from a liquefaction failure.
Based on this information and the estimated unit weights,
2. Obtain proper N-values for the weakest soils that par-
ticipated in the liquefaction failure.
one can judge, based on past case histories as described in
the next section, whether there is clearly no problem, or 3. Measure the undrained steady state strengths, S.,, of
whether further study is needed. At this point one should the weakest soils that participated in the failure.
make an economic comparison of (1) the cost of subse- 4. Calculate the in-situ driving shear stresses. 7.r, priot
quent investigations and (2) the cost of using an obviously to and after failure.
conservative design to avoid the investigation. For small
dams, less than 30 ft high, it is often the case that the sav- To back-figure the mobilizcd shear strength cturing a liq-
ings in design achievable by more detailed field, labora- uclaction, the concepts provicled by Westergaardte'61 were
tory, and analytical studies are not sufficient to justify their used. The assumption is marJe that after very little defor-
cost using current techniques. mation in situ, the strength drops down to its undrained
The subsequent steps shown in Fig. 9-34 can be fol- steady state strength, S,,. It is also assumed that during the
304 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEILITATION

few seconds or minutes of the failure, little drainage takes
place, so that the S,,-value remains essentially constant.
Thus, at the start of failure, ra ) Su, so the mass is
accelerated. Then as the slope decreases, r7 drops below
S,, so that deformation of the moving mass is retarded and
ultimately stopped.
As a simplifying first step in back-figuring the field value
of .t ,, which will be referred to by the symbol S- (mobi-
lized strength), it was assumed that the final slope was zero.
One can think of a liquefaction failure as the movement of
the center of gravity of the mass from the original position
to a new lower position. For this simplified approach the
mass accelerates down an original steep slope inclined at
angle 0, encounters the zero slope at the base, and de-
celerates to zero velocity. The equation from which the
value of mobilized strength can be estimated is:
J,, : Of ru sin 0
(e-:;*
GF 6r
where:
w : weight per unit width of sliding mass
0 : angle of slope down which the mass accelerates
6r : distance a failure mass moves down the original
steep slope, 0, during liquefaction, m
6z : distance that failure mass moves along zero slope
before it comes to rest, rn
the cmss sections prior to and after failure. The range of
S--values was obtained from equation (9-3) by assuming a
range of values of 6,, 6., and the slope anglc 0. The S--
value used in the plot Fig. 9-35 is a "best guess" in the
range shown.
Also shown in Table 9*4 are the N-values. Measure-
ments after the failure were made for the first five cases.
For the last two cases, the N-values rvere guessed, based
on descriptions of the way in which the embankmenr rvas
built or on measured percent compaction or on relarive
density. The N1-values in Table 9-4 rvere obtained using
the correction recommended by Seed.6:
Figure 9-35 is a plot of the information shown in Table
9-4. It represents an approximate correlation between N,-
values and the back-figured, mobilized strength, S-, based
on equation (9-3). It is seen that the strength. S-. increases
rapidly with the N,-value, but the correlation tends ro bend
to the right at an N,-value of about 3.
For comparison, a straight line is drawn in Fig. 9-35 that
was computed by direct analysis of the standard penetra-
tion test. Based on the assumption that the penetration oc-
curs undrained, it is possible to relate the measured N-r.alue
to the S,,-value during penetration. For this purpose. it is
necessary to know the dynamic forces generated at the
sampler. Data obtained by Schmenmann63 were used for
this purpose. The equation has the form:
S,, : KrNr + K: (e-+)

Table 9-4 is a listing of the cases analyzed. The driving where:

shear stresses were computed by static stability analysis of
S- : Mobilized steady state shear strength durin_s
*Equation (9-3) *,as developed by S. Liao and the writer.
standard penetration test

Table 9-4. Details of liquefaction case histories: strength/blowcount correlation.

Blowcount Data
Driving Stress S.
Below o"
Pre Post Range Use l/ water Liner Energy Post Fines
Name Cause psf psf psf psf Post ?? % psf -200
STABILITY FAILURES (LIQUEFACTION)
Lower San Femando 0.6 g l00O 500-t000 750 t2lts Both No 70 10.000 50 31.3 E.-5
7.t 1.8
7 Fort Peck Const. 1800 50 500-1 100 700 3s/40 No2? 1.1.000 30 13 5.3
3 Mochikoshi Tailings 0.25 g 540 <50 50-l t0 60 0 Yes?? >60 0 0
Dike I
Mochikoshi Starter 0.25 g 470 470 No failure >170 1/1 Ycs??3.60040-8031.2
Dike I
Mochikoshi Tailings 0.25 g 390 100 75-200 130 0/r Yes ? '! 750 >60 0 0
Dike 2
6 Calavens Dam Const. 1500 250 600-1 100 700 None 76%
Percent conrpaction approx. >60 I 2
7 Solfatara Canal EI 105 0 >0 >0 None Relatividensiry-32% <5 0 0
Dikes Centro
'40,
on
faul'
 EARTHFlLL DAM DESIGN ANO ANALYSIS 305

0
CL

E
U'
!
F
(,
z
lr,
E
F
(tt
(r
trJ
-(/)
o
uJ
N
J
a
o
=

Nr- VALUES
Figure 9-35. Mobilized shear strength from liquefaction case histories vs. N,-values. nonplastic soils.

Nr : Blowcount corrected for depth using Cn'62
Kr, Kz : Constants that are a function of weight of sam-
pler and rods, penetration length, ratio of side
friction to strength of soil inside and outside
sampler, the undrained sensitivity of the soil,
S,,o/ Su", and the sampler dimensions
Equation (94) is plotted in Fig. 9-35 for the weight of
sampler plus 20 ft of rods. Because this weight is about
2201b, the line in Fig. 9-35 intersects the S--axis at a pos-
itive value and then drops vertically to zero. Reasonable
agreement is observed between the S--values calculated
from field failures and that calculated by analyzing the
standard penetration test.
Two blowcounts are shown for the case of the Lower
San Fernando Dam failure. The one at the right is obtained
by correcting the measured blowcount, which is shown in
Table 9-4 to be about 21. The permeability of the sand in
the Lower San Fernando Dam is high enough that one can
expect drainage to occur between blows, especially be-
cause the measured blowcount is so high. If indeed the
strength measured in such a standard penetration test is
closer to a drained steady state strength, the measured
blowcount would be correlated with a drained rather than
an undrained strength.
For this case the undrained strength was estimated to be
one-third of the drained strength based on the effective
stresses and the friction angle, @,, in the critical zone of
the dam. Therefore, a point is shown at an N-value one-
third as large as the N,-value based on the measured blow-
count.
The above discussion demonstrates one of the precau-
tions that should be used when correlating S--values with
blowcounts. Atthe blowcount increases, and as the perme-
ability of the soil increases, the blowcount tends more to-
ward bein-e a drained rather than an undrained blowcount.
Hence the correlation in Fig. 9-35 should be used only in
the low blowcount range, probably below Nr : 10.
Another limitation of Fig. 9-35 is that it applies only for
nonplastic, uncemented soils with little "structure." For
clays or cemented soils, the N-values would reflect
strengths nearer to the peak strength, rather than the steady
state strength that becomes mobilized as liquefaction oc-
curs.
Numcrous additional limitations should be noted in con-
nection with Fig. 9-35:
l. The strengths o[ the soils throughout the failure sur-
face are not well known for each case. Hence the S--
values are approximate.
306 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, AND REHABILITATION

2. The weights of the soils in the failure mass and the
shape of the mass are not well known based on the
available literature, except for the Lower San Fer-
nando Dam.
3. The measured blowcounts may be in error because of
the effects of test procedure, such as the energy
losses, wear of the cutting edge, hammer weight,
turns of rope on the spool, and so on. They are also
affected by the ratio of peak to steady state strength
and the possible presence of gravel sizes.
4. The blowcounts were measured after the failure event
in a zone that is estimated to contain soil similar to
that which had participated in the failure, but which
had not failed.
5. Blowcount measurements are relatively insensitive at
low values, that is, in the range where Fig. 9-35
would be most useful.
In a recent case,oo measurements of both N-values and
.S,"-values were obtained at side-by-side locations in an em-
bankment and its foundation. The data are plotted in Fig.
9-36, together with the band from Fig. 9-35. The lowest
laboratory-measured S,,-values show very good agreement
with the band of .S--values obtained from case histories.
Part of the reason for the large scatter in the data of Fig.
9-36 lies in the difficulty of measuring the N-value in the
same layer as the one in which the undisturbed sample was
taken.
Based on Fig. 9-36, one clearly should be conservative
when selecting the S,,-values from laboratory tests on un-
disturbed samples. The technique now used by the writer
is described in the next section.
Figure 9-35 can be used for a preliminary evaluation of
whether liquefaction is unlikely or sufficiently questionable
to warrant more detailed study. Knowledge of the geome-
try of the embankment is required, and, preferably, rhe
water pressure within it. The N,-values in a representative
zone of the dam also are needed, particularly in the weakest
zone.
From Fig. 9-35, the S--value is obtained, based on case
histories. Then one computes the driving shear stress, 14,
in the critical zone using stability analyses, as described in
the next section. If za is conservatively below S-, it can be
assumed that liquefaction will not occur. However, one
may have to compute the deformations, especially if the
design earthquake is intense, to be confident that they will
be tolerable. If ra is near the S--value in Fig. 9-35, then
the methods described in the next sections should be used
to enable a better judgment of the stability of an embank-
ment against liquefaction failure.

q
(r cl
ld-
FO
u- i-
<3
u, g.
Ho
fo
?a
;o
o; t!
s6
(rF
)l)
U'luJ
<E
UJ(r
>o()

Nr - VALUES
Figurc 9-36. Comparison of strength/blowcount correlation from case histories anct fmm labontory tests.

Liquefaction Evaluation Based on Laboratory Tests
If the preliminary evaluation shows that the embankment
has questionable stability, and if the costs of subsequent
studies are justified, one may use the following liquefac-
tion evaluation procedures, which are adopted with minor
modification from reference 36.
The determination of liquefaction potential is a stability
analysis, which requires that the undrained steady state
shear strength, S,", and the in-situ driving shear stress, tr,
be determined. The steps of the analysis involve the fol-
Iowing determinations :
l. In-situ void ratio.
2. Steady state line for compacted specimens.
3. Undrained steady state strengths for "undisturbed"
specimens.
4. Correction of strengths for void ratio.
5. In-situ driving stress and factor of safety.
Step 1. ln-Situ Void Ratio. As shown in Fig. 9-34,
undisturbed samples are required. Their purpose is to en-
able estimation of the in-situ S,,-value, which is dependent
solely on the soil composition and the void ratio, as noted
in Part l. The undisturbed samples should be taken in the
loosest zones of the embankment or foundation to be con-
servative. Zones that have the lowest blowcounts, most
narrowly graded soils, and most rounded grains are the
zones likely to give the lowest S,,-values.
Currently, there are at least three satisfactory ways to
obtain suitably undisturbed samples of loose sand at depth
in situ: (l) fixed-piston sampling, (2) sampling in test pits,
and (3) freezing of the ground and coring. A satisfactory
method not only should cause minimal volume changes but
should provide sufficient data to estimate the volume
changes that do occur during sampling. All three methods
listed above require care. For clays, it is relatively simple
to measure the in-situ void ratio using the procedures de-
veloped by Hvorslev.fl For sands, considerably more carc
is needed. Some of the important sampling details are dis-
cussed below.
Fked-Piston Sampling. The fixed-piston sampler con-
tains a piston that is fixed at the bottom of the hole by a
rod that extends to ground surface. One pushes a thin-wall
tube into the ground past the piston while holding the pis-
ton rod fixed.
The clearance ratio of the cutting edge of the sampling
tube should be adjusted for the particular sand so that the
ratio has the minimum value necessary for sample reten-
tion. This ratio might vary from near zero to l%. The stroke
length during sampling must be measured within approxi-
mately 0.2%. It should be corrected for rod compression
if the hole is deep.
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 3O7
Trial sampling is needed to select the maximum hy-
draulic pressure that can be used without deforming the
cutting edge. Short samples are acceptable for measuring
void ratio and laboratory testing. The tube should not be
hammered. Removal of the tube from the hole should be
extremely slow (approximately I mm/sec or even slower)
to reduce the vacuum at the bottom. withdrawal should oc-
cur without vibration, and the dritling water or mud should
be kept above the water table.
When the sample is removed from the hole, the gap be-
tween the piston and the top of the soil should be measured.
This gap is caused by ( I ) compression of the sample during
penetration, (2) downward movement as the soil fills the
gap between the cutting edge and the inside wall, and (3)
sample slippage during removal from the hole. To be con-
servative, it is usually assumed that, except for item 2, the
gap is caused entirely by sample compression. The in-situ
sample volume is the stroke length times the area of the
tube inside the cutting ed-ee. The measured gap is prorated
to each specimen tested. Thus when one knows the speci-
men dry weight, specific gravity of solids, and specimen
volume, one can calculate the void ratio it had in situ.
Use of the above values to compute void ratio without
accounting for possible downward slippage of the soil in
the tube during removal from the hole is conservative. If
slippage occurs, the void ratio will be overestimated. At
present there is no satisfactory way for estimating slippa-ee
except when it is large enough that the calculated void ratio
is unreasonable. Thus trial sampling with various clearance
ratios is helpful in judgin-e the clearance ratio needed to
control slippage.
The above discussion shows that it is very difficult to
measure in-situ void ratio accurately at depth in a borehole,
particularly for a sand. UnfortunatelY, one cannot evaluate
Iiquefaction potential of sands directly without knowing the
undrained steady state strength in situ. Therefore, at pres-
ent the in-situ void ratio has to be measured and used with
a procedure like that described in subsequent steps, to ob-
tain a suitable measurement of the undrained steady state
strength. The writer's experience has shown that careful
fixed-piston sampling techniques will provide good void
ratio measurements. One usually need not reso( to freez-
ing,65 deep shafts, or test pits.
Step 2. Steady State Line for Compacted Speci-
mens. "Undisturbcd" samples of loose sand always
have a lower void ratio in the laboratory than in situ.
Therefore, a procedure for correcting laboratory measured
steady state strengths to the in-situ void ratio is required.
For sands the d,,-value is quite sensitive to void ratio;
therefore, conservative techniques for making this correc-
tion are important.
Even if a sample is obtained by freezing the ground and
coring, the density may increase significantly during re-
 308 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERTNG FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, ANO REHABILITATION
consolidation in the laboratory to in-situ stresses. In seveml
cases studied, the density increase during consolidation has
been 3 to 8 pcf. Such changes often cause a soil that is
contractive in situ to become dilative in the laboratory. The
sample is converted from a state in which it is liquefiable
to a state in which it is not liquefiable.
One can judge the influence of apparently minor changes
in void ratio on undrained steady state strength from Fig.
9-37, which shows the results of measurements of steady
state strengths for a clean subangular, quartz tailings sand
as a function of density. An increase in density of only 3
pcfchanges the undrained steady state shear strength from
400 psf to 2600 psf.
In subsequent discussions the term "steady state line"
will be used. It is the line drawn through points that show
the steady state void ratio versus the effective minor prin-
cipal stress during steady state deformation. The effective
stress may be plotted on an arithmetic or logarithmic scale.
The procedure for correcting laboratory-measured un-
drained steady state strengths to the in-situ void ratio is
based on two obsewations: (l) the slope of the steady state
line on a semilog plot is affected chiefly by the shape of
the grains in a given soil, and (2) the vertical position of
the steady state line is affected even by small differences in
grain-size distribution.36' 37
One correction procedure now used requires that the
steady state line be obtained by testing five or six com-
pacted specimens of identical soil. Any suitable test method
may be used. For clean, narrowly graded sands, the triaxial
test is satisfactory. It is advisable to check the steady state
line using a second type of test, for example, a rotation
shear test or a direct sample shear test. For soils with a
substantial percentage of fines, it is often necessary to use
a rotation shear test to achieve steady state deformation.
For clays the vane test can be used.35
o.9
9 90,;
F
; o.8
I ,
0
o.7
IIARROWLY. GRAO€O OUARTZ
SUSAilGULAR CRAINS
o.6
o.or
BAXIMUM SHEAR SIRESS AT IH€ STEAOY SfATEI q!,I!f
. Figure 9-37. Steady state line for a clean sand.
The soil used should be as nearly as possible the same
soil as that in the ground. Often several "undisturbed.'
samples from the upper part of sampling tubes can be thor-
oughly mixed, as these zones may tre more disturbed than
the lower samples, which are used for subsequent steps. At
this stage only the grain shape distribution need be well
preserved because it has the major effect on the slope of
the steady state line. It is also desirable to preserve the
grain-size distribution. The slope of the steady state line
for the compacted specimens then will be as close as pos-
sible to that for the associated undisturbed specimens to be
tested in Step 3.
Each compacted specimen should be placed in the test
apparatus at a void ratio and effective stress combination
that is well above the steady state line. Such a specimen
will be highly contractive, and the strain needed to reach
steady state will be minimized.
Figure 9-38 gives plots of the data for one undrained
test. These graphs are suggested as a standard method for
plotting stress-strain data.
A typical stress-strain curve from an undrained triaxial
test on a contractive specimen is shown in Fig. 9-38c. The
steady state is reached at that strain where the shear stress
and the effective minor principal stress are no longer
changing as deformation continues. This is point .S in
graphs (a) and (c) of Fig. 9-38. Note rhar the srrain at peak
shear stress, point P in Fig. 9-38c, must be exceeded
greatly to rcach the steady state of deformation.
The results of the tests on compacted specimens are plot-
ted on one "state diagram," such as Fig. 9-29. The best
fit line through the points representing the steady state is
the steady state line. Each point on this line represents a
condition of continuous deformation. The original struc-
ture is completely remolded at the steady state. Therefore,
the method of specimen preparation, which controls the
original structure, has no influence on the position or slope
of the steady state line for the particular soil used.
As it is the steady state shear strength that is needed for
liquefaction analysis, it is convenient to plot the results of
85
the undrained triaxial tests in terms of void ratio versus
undrained steady state shear strength on the failure plane,
S,r, as shown in Fig. 9-39. To compute Su, from the results
of each consolidated undrained triaxial test, one uses the
'
!z following equations:
95o
Su, = 4, cos d, (e-s )
roo
and:
sin S, : :i- = (9-6)
o* * e, (or" - u,) * e"
-L-
(e-7)
Q,:(drc-d*)/2
 ETFECIIVE SIF€SS o
SI^ IE tEsr oErllLs
1 TSSL Oc: 7.a cr
o
9r
\- Lc: t6. a ci
Stratn rata-
Fo O.3tl ./rtn
E. \ 6c-0. 96
q gc; Uc-t06., pst
a c,
;
tb
>n
o
:
o
! t0 t0
(r3. ps I
o

o
o
a;

10 I
AXIAI. STBAIN, 6'. ps t
SOIL I Satch Elx. B.orn stlty tlne STAIE I u3c-28.5
sand about 30I non plrsttc ttn€s. lSHl
= P!l cc'0.762
Corilo3 Oon RlO3 qclf3c -0.0 Ydc-95.6 9ct
SIRUCIUREI .otst rt lo.5t
Conpactrd LOAorN6 |
Fatrr cont€nt ln !l layers to a Undratned. nonotonlc,.rlal compnas8lon
9rcdet?nntn€d sp€clmen helght.

Figure 9-38. R-test on compacted specimen from Casitas Dam.

o.8

a STEADY SIATE SHEAR STRENGTH MEASUREO

ON UNOISTURBEO SPECIMEN. PLOTTEO AT
VOIO RATIO OF SPECIMEN AFTER LA8
o.7 CONSO LI DATI ON.

o CORRECTEO STEAOY STATE SHEAR STRENGTH

AT VOIO RATIO IN TUBE MEASURED UPON
REMOVAL FROM BOREHOLE.
t 0.6
9
F
E STEADY STATE LINE FOR
COMPACTEO SPECIMENS
o
6 o.s
o-_-tlFzoz \
G.-
- - _]-
O- -!u.oo
-nzoz
o.4 _--
-! Faoo
tiloTE S ur . gr cor Qr l t|r: 36o
TESTS PERFORMEO MAY 1982
o.3
roo l0oo to,ooo l0o,0oo
STEADY STATE STRENGTH, Q,, PSf

Figure 9-39. Sready state strength vs. void rario. compacte<J and undisrurbcct specinrens.

309
 310 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCT]ON, AND REHABILITATION

where:

dr, - d:, = Principal stress difference at the steady state

from the triaxial test littoY l?ltt url
r0i rx3 corzrfito
6s, = Effective minor principal stress at the steady ttfctrEi!
state o
tr --\.,
dr" : Effective minor principal stress at start of c rr.3fru vof o aarto
rorc?xt -uiorlrui!ro'l
I
I x\ 7^!3urEO !lt^d nlrz
,a ttaztorr Ltit rca txtt
o tEqrri
shear (after consolidation) 6 o. ,-1'urotsrurtto'
&" : Pore pressure induced in the test specimen .T\
.l

- voro llYro \
at the steady state of deformation lI\ AtIti grrllr0.
I EXIiUSION AO
@, = Steady state friction angle ESTTTAtEO il.Srro
uroalrrED tlt^oY I
co{3oLlo^floi
ut0rrr{f0 SEAoY ntroTx
3tlTE tri€ictk
Ir , ror frt3 .lJtotsyut!!o'spEctgEf,

The quantities q' d3., and l" are obtained directly during rooo to.ooo

the triaxial tests. STEA0y STATE SHEAR STRENcTH, Ssq,gsf

The steady state srrength line, Fig. 9-39, obtained from
the compacted specimens is used to correct the strengths of
"undisturbed" specimens, which are determined in the
following step.
Step 3. Undrained Steady State Strengths for ,,Un-
disturbed" Specimens. A series of consolidated un-
drained triaxial or other appropriate tests is performed on
"undisturbed" specimens from the zone being evaluated.
Sufficient tests are needed to determine the average steady
state strength reliably.
To define the steady state well in a triaxial test-at strains
achievable in that test-it is best to ensure that the undis-
turbed specimen is contractive, just as was done for the
compacted specimens. One procedure is to consolidate the
undisturbed specimens to high effective stresses but not so
high that the correction needed in Step 4 becomes exces-
sive. At high effective stresses sandy soils are more con-
tractive than at low effective stresses. If the stresses used
are not high enough to make the specimens contractive, the
steady state still can be dbtermined. However, the accuracy
of the measurement is poorer than for contractive speci-
mens. Substantially more redistribution of void ratio prob-
ably occurs during tests on dilative specimens.
The stress-strain data for the tests on contractive, undis-
turbed specimens are similar to those shown in Figs. 9-29
and 9-38. The steady state point for each ..undisturbed"
specimen is plotted on the state diagram, together with the
steady state line for the compacted specimens, as shown in
Fig. 9-39. The vertical distance berween the individual
points and the steady state line for compacted specimens is
assumed to be due chiefly to minor differences in grain-
size distribution. For rhe case in Fig. 9-39, all o[ the rests
on undisturbed specimens fetl below the steady state line
for the compacted specimens. However, they may fall
above and/or below in other cases.
The undrained steady state shear strengths shown by the
solid dots in Fig. 9-39 were obtained at rhe void ratio afrer
consolidation, not at the in-situ void ratio. Therefore, cor-
Figure 9-40. Correction of measurcd S*-values.
rection of the results to the in-situ void ratio must be made,
as described in the next step.
Step 4. Correction of Strengths for Void Ra-
tio. From the measurements made during undisturbed
sampling, the in-situ void ratio for each of the tested "un-
disturbed" specimens can be computed. Using the in-situ
void ratio, the correction procedure given in Fig. 9-40 is
applied for each test in Fig. 9-39 on the undisturbed spec-
imens. The dashed line is drawn through the point that
shows the measured undrained steady state strength of the
"undisturbed" specimen at its void ratio in the laboratory.
The dashed line is drawn parallel to the steady state strength
line for the compacted specimens.
A horizontal line is drawn from the ordinate axis starting
at the calculated in-situ void ratio to intersect the dashed
line for the test on that undisturbed specimen. The esti-
mated in-situ undrained steady state strength is selected
from the abscissa.
Steps 3 and 4 are carried out for the tests on the undis-
turbed specimens. Enough data should be obtained to cat-
culate a conservative average undrained steady state
strength along a trial failure surface in the zone being eval-
uated. Depending on the distribution of the looser and den-
ser zones in the embankment being analyzed, and using the
case histories cited as a guide, one canjudge the degree of
conservatism needed. Based on the procedures described
herein, it has been found that the average of the lower two-
thirds of the d,,-values is reasonable after extraneous high
and low values are discarded.
Step 5. ln-Situ Driving Shear Stress and Factor of
Safety. The in-situ driving shear stress, 17, in the zone
being evaluated is calculated by conventional methods of
stability analysis. It is the shear stress required to maintain
static equilibrium.

The shear stresses along the potential failure surface in
the zone being evaluated can be computed by using limit-
ing equitibrium approaches. such as the slices method of
the circular arc types{ or the wedge type," or by using a
noncircular surface.6
To calculate this shear stress, one must make an as-
sumption about the distribution of stresses along the failure
surface. Often the trial failure surface used in stability anal-
ysis passes through dilative and contractive soils. The un-
drained steady state strength of the dilative soils is greater
than their drained strengths. But to develop the full un-
drained strength of dilative soils, negative pore water pres-
sures must be induced in situ. It has been recommended by
Casagrandesa that such negative pore pressures not be re-
lied upon in most cases. Dissolved gases can come out of
solution. Therefore, in zones where the soils are dilative'
it is conservative to use the drained strength when estimat-
ing the factor of safety. The drained steady state strength
at the bottom of each slice is given by:
54, : o7 tan {, (e-8 )
where:
57, : drained steady state strength
d7 = effective normal stress on failure surface at base
of slice, computed from the stability analysis
{, : steady state friction angle' Drained and undrained
tests give the same @,-value.
In the zones of contractive soils, if the loosest zones are
tested, it is appropriate to use the average of the lowest
two-thirds of the S,,-values, as recommended in Step 4.
This combination of assumptions in the contractive and di-
lative zones takes into account the effects of pore-water
redistribution during or after an earthquake.
The factor of safety against undrained stability failure
(liquefaction), F",, is:
Fu,
I Steady state shear strengths
X Sh"u. stress required to maintain static equilibrium
j {t,, r, + sd, ctL)
F,, (e-e)
\ o, r't
The undrained and drained steady state strengths in the
above equation are the minimum strengths that a soil mass
can have at the void ratio in situ. Therefore, the factor of
safety need only be enough greater than 1.0 to ensure that
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 311
any uncertainty in the void ratio is accounted for. For ex-
ample, a value of F,, = l.l can be considered safe for
sands and silts if the highest in-situ void ratios are known
with sufficicnt confidence. and the undrained steady state
strengths arc based on these void ratios. If, on the other
hand, a best estimate of the undrained steady state strength
is used in the analysis, then a substantially higher factor of
safety should be required. The more narrowly graded and
more rounded grained soils in the failure mass should be
tested because they seem to be most susceptible to lique-
faction.
When F,, is less than 1.0, such that I 2 dL > I (Su, dL
+ Sd, dL), the entire mass is metastable (see below, Fig.
9-48). Erosion at the toe of the slope, a foundation move-
ment, an earthquake, a blast. or any other disturbance that
subjects the mass to undrained loading may trigger lique-
faction. But the disturbance must be large enough, as il-
lustrated in Fig. 9-41 and discussed in the next section.
Therefore, factors of safety against liquefaction smaller
than 1.0 can be tolerated in some cases.
When F,,., is greater than 1.0, liquefaction physically
cannot occur. The mass is in stable equilibrium. In such a
case, an earthquake or other temporary disturbance cannot
cause liquefaction regardless of its intensity. The strains
that occur in this case during an earthquake do depend on
the earthquake intensity, but such strains stop (except for
consolidation effects) when the earthquake stops and do not
lead to liquefaction. The driving shear stress is too small
relative to the undrained steady state strength to cause a
stability failure.
Dilative soils are not susceptible to liquefaction because
their undrained strength is greater than their drained
strength. If a slope is safe in the drained condition, and the
undrained steady state strength is greater than the drained
strength, then F,,., is greater than 1.0.
Loadings That Trigger Liquefaction. The in-situ driv-
ing shear stresses cause the large unidirectional deforma-
tions (stability failure) of a soil mass during liquefaction.
The driving shear stress is due to the static loads. not due
t' ' --^
I a,erEroc,on orE to
STRAIN
Figure 9-4t. Triggcring liquefaction with cyclic loading.
 312 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEILITATION

to any temporary load such as a blast or an earthquake. The
undrained steady state strength is a function only of the soil
and its in-situ void ratio. It is not related to the structure of
the soil or the existing effective stress in situ. It is not re-
Iated to the nature or magnitude of the temporary loading
that may cause liquefaction, or to the pore pressure or the
strains that may accumulate during undrained cyclic load-
ing. For this latter reason, cyclic load tests are not required
for evaluating susceptibility to liquefaction.
Only if a soil mass rs susceptible to liquefaction do the
magnitude and duration of cyclic loading govern whether
or not liquefaction actually will be triggered.
The magnitude and duration of the disturbance needed
to cause liquefaction is a liquefiable mass can be expected
to be dependent on three principal factors:
1. The factor of safety against liquefaction. When d,,
small (well below 1.0), small disturbances can cause
liquefaction.
2. The strain required to reach the peak undrained
strength at the in-situ void ratio.
3. The rate at which the peak undrained strengrh decays
with continued strain.
These factors depend on the shape of the stress-strain curve
in situ. Thus the soil type, the initial soil structure, and the
driving shear stresses all affect the intensity and duration
of the disrurbance needed to trigger liquefaction.
The strains measured in undrained cyclic load tests on
specimens that arc flo, susceptible to liquefaction arc re-
lated to the deformations that may occur in situ. However,
the considerable test errors that arise during cyclic load tests
on sands make extrapolation from the laboratory to the 6eld
deformations very uncertain. These extrapolations proba-
bly are far more uncertain, for example. than conventional
settlement estimates for buildings founded on clays. In spire
of these test errors, if one wishes to estimate strains due to
earthquake loading, one must either have in-situ measure-
ments or make use of the laboratory cyclic load test. This
topic is covered below.
Triggering Analysis Based on Laboratory Tests
If an embankment is susceprible to liquefaction, that is. F,,
< l.l, the question arises of under what conditions might
is liquefaction be triggered. The strains required to trigger
liquefaction are quite different for narrowly graded sands
and for clayey soils, as illustrated in Fig. 942. For nar-
rowly graded sands, very small strain-small energy in-
put-is needed to trigger liquefaction. For clayey soils,
much larger strain-far more energy input-is needed. For
this reason the engineer should be very hesitant to allow an
embankment composed of or placed on a sand that is sus-
ceptible to liquefaction to remain in place. The failures of
the Calaveras and Fort Peck Dams are examples of lique-
faction-susceptible embankments that were caused by con-
struction loading alone. No earthquake was needed to trig-
ger the failures. But embankments on clayey soils or soils

50

40
o UNORAINED TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TEST ON
o_ BANOING SAND (37, F - 605}
ta

$n
trJ
tr
F
a UNORAINEO VANE SHEAq TEST ON
THICKENED TAILINGS (CLAYEY SILTI
20
G,
Lrj
-
oro oRtvlNG 5HEAR STRESS. tO kPo _ :
- LIMIT OF STRAIN IN TRIAXIAL
TESTS, 30 %

S
too 200 300
ESTIMATED SHEAR STRAIN, TAN tr , % -r-
Figurc 942. Comparison of strains ro trigger liquefacrion.

that have a large strain at peak and are liquefaction-suscep-
tible can remain in place in some cases because design
earthquakes may not cause sufficient strain to trigger fail-
ure . that the ratio
To evaluate whether liquefaction will be triggered in
liquefiable mass, it is necessary to estimate the strains that
will be caused by the seismic or other triggering stresses.
For this purpose, cyclic load tests in the triaxial cell, cyclic
vane tests, or centrifuge models might be used.
In this section a technique is described for judging
whether seismically induced strains can trigger liquefaction
in clayey soils. Comments on determination of triggering
potential in sandy, nonplastic soils are given at the end of
this section.
Probability of Triggering Liquefaction in Soil with
Plasticity. If an embankment is susceptible to liquefac-
tion, it has previously been determined that F,, ( l.l in
part or all of the embankment or its foundation. This, in
tum, means that J za dL > J 5,, dL. Such soils as saturated
soft'or quick clays, slightly plastic, narrowly graded silts,
and more widely graded silty fine sands or sands with slight
to low plasticity can exist in situ at F,,-values less than l. I
if: (l) the earthquake or other undrained loadings that struck
them in the past were not intense enough; or (2) one builds
an embankment on them slowly enough that drainage takes
place during construction, but the soils remain sufficiently
contractive after consolidation under the new loads.
One procedure for testing and evaluating such a case is
as follows:
l. Determine the critical sliding surface for the design
earthquake or other undrained loading.
2. Estimate the pre-earthquake stresses, which include
(a) the driving shear stress, (b) the undrained steady
state strength, and (c) the range of effective normal
stresses for the soils in the critical zone(s).
3. Calculate the equivalent cyclic loading for the design
earthquake.6T
4. Perform cyclic load tests on specimens that model the
in-situ pre-earthquake stresses and the seismic or
other undrained loading.
5. Evaluate the test results to judge whether liquefaction
will be triggered as a result of the strains caused in
the critical zone(s) by the design undrained loading.
More details of this procedure are given below. It is as-
sumed that an earthquake loading is the potential triggering
mechanism. A previously published case3s is used to illus-
trate the procedures.
Critical Sliding Surface during Earthquake. The crit-
ical conditions may arise in the zone where the ratio (1 *
r)/ S,o or the ratio (ra * rr)f 5,. is at its peak value. The
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 313
strcss 7,v is the equivalent seismic shear strcss, and S* is
the peak undrained strength. For soils in situ that have
strains at peak larger than about 40%, it may be morc likely
( 1 + rr)/ S,e would control the strains during
a cyclic loading, and hence the likelihood of triggering liq-
uefaction. But for soil masses with lower strain at peak, it
may be that the ratio (27 * r,)f S* has more influence on
the strains during seismic loading.
It is necessary to judge or make preliminary tests to es-
timate which ratio controls, so that the critical zone can be
modeled in the laboratory. For the case of one silty clay (a
mine tailing), the strains at peak were large enough that it
was assumed the ratio (r, + r")f S,o controls. The plot in
Fig. 943 was made to estimate the critical zone in the em-
bankment. However, if there is any question about whether
the .S,o- or S,,-values may control, check tests are war-
ranted.
It should be noted in Fig. 943 that the shear stresses,
including the seismic shear stress, did not exceed the peak
undrained strength S,o. Thus it is likely that the ratio (2
* r,)f S* may control the cyclic strains. If this ratio is
greater than 1.0, cyclic load tests that are stress-controlled
(which do not model in-situ inertial effects) most likely will
trigger liquefaction in the laboratory even though failure
may not be triggered in situ. Such tests would give con-
servative results, but they may be so consenvative as to be
unreasonable. In this case the deformations in situ should
be estimated using the procedures suggested by New-
mark.sT See "Design Considerations" (below).
Pre-Earthquake Stresses and Strengths. The cyclic
load test specimens should be set up so that the F,,- and
.S,o-values in the laboratory are similar to those in situ. Also
the effective consolidation pressures, E3., in situ should be
modeled. AII these variables, S,p, .S,,, ra, and d3. c&onot
be modeled simultaneously in any practical manner. There-
fore, a judgment, or check tests, must be made as to which
parameters have the most important effect on the strains
measured during the tests.
For mor'e plastic soils with large strains at peak, if the
ratio (ra + r)/S* is less than 1.0, it is likely to be im-
portant to model this ratio properly in the tests, even if the
ratio (ra * r")f S* is not modeled well. Also it may be
more important to model (ra I rr)f S,,p than to carry out
tests at just the right effective consolidation stress, d3..
There are no data available at present on which to make
the above judgments in advance. Therefore, they should be
made conservatively, to exaggerate the measured strains,
or check tests should be made to aid the judgment.
Seismic Shear Stresses. The earthquake-induced shear
stresses may be determined utilizing the computer program
SHAKE.68 The spectrum of the design earthquake should
be adjusted to the design peak ground acceleration and used
 314 ADVANCED OAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, ANO REHABTLTTATION

SHEAR STRESS, KPO (Tr '1)/T0,"/"

20 40 60 80 roo 20 40 60 80
o

(b)
E5

I
UJ
(J
tr-
Eto PRoBABLE I
l OEPIH RANGE I
a FoR cRrr rcAL I
FAILURE sunrnce
u')
(9
z15 -,[
1
F
o
=20
J
td
m
T. 25
F
(L
s ,s Td fd rfy
ttJ x peok seismic sheor slress
o T._ =
lt
O.65
from SHAKE onotysis (68)

Figure 943. Shear stresses and strengths vs. depth.

to calculate the corresponding peak seismic shear stresses.
The dynamic shear modulus and damping as a function of
strain for the SHAKE analysis should be determined from
resonant column or equivalent tests. One set of such data
is shown in Fig. 944.3s
The peak cyclic shear stress obtained from SHAKE anal-
yses usually occurs once during the earthquake. In the
triaxial tests, the cyclic shear stress, r-y, is usually applied
in uniform, sinusoidal Cycles. To account for this differ-
ence, the magnitude of the cyclic shear stress in the labo-
ratory is taken as 0.65 times the computed peak seismic
shear stress.67 The ratio of seismic stress to the effective
normal stress on the failure plane prior to the earthquake is
set to be close to the in-situ value.
Cyclic Load Tests. Perform cyclic load tests on speci-
mens that represent the critical zones in situ. The stress
conditions during the tests should be selected based on the
discussions under the previous subheadings.
The results of a typical undrained cyclic triaxial test are
shown in Fig. 9-45. The resulrs of a series of undrained
cyclic triaxial tests are plotted in Fig. 946 in terms of the
double amplitude shear strain reached for a given number
ofcycles versus cyclic shear stress ratio. The axial strains,
e1, from the triaxial tests were converted to shear strain
using the formula tan 7 = (l + y) e, where y(: 0.5) is
Poisson's ratio. From such a plot one can estimate the strain
that will be caused by the earthquake loadings.
The strains measured during cyclic load tests for a clayey
soil may be reasonably representative of the strains that
would occur in situ under the same stress conditions. For
cyclic load tests on sands, this is not the case because their
permeability is high enough that during cycling there is time
for redistribution of the void ratio.
Although the strains measured in cyclic triaxial tests may
not be greatly in error for plastic soils, the test itself is not
a good model of in-situ shaking, principally because the
inertia of the mass in situ restrains movement.5e Therefore,
the predicted strains, based on cyclic triaxial tests, should
be on the high (conservative) side.
Evaluation of Test Results. To estimate the intensity
of shaking that will trigger liquefaction, one needs to know
(a) the strain that is necessary to reduce the resistance be-
low the driving shear stress, and (b) rhe srrain that will be
caused by a given shaking intensity.
The strain needed to reduce the strength below the driv-
ing shear stress is obtained from data such as shown in Fig.
947, which represents an undrained vane test for a silty
clay tailing. The driving shear stress is l0 kPa. Thus a
shear strain tan 7 (Vo) of about 300% is needed to cause
the resistance to drop below the driving shear stress. The
acceleration caused by the difference between the driving
shear stress and the decreased resistance when the local
strains exceed 300% would result in a liquefaction failure.
The strains caused by a given cyclic loading are obtained
 EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN ANO ANALYSIS 315

(9
z9 -o (o)
ski
ac
50 tPo
roorPo
o l5O hPo
l'-n
loo,ooo

SIRESS. TIME. VOIO RAIIO (b)

80, ooo
24 OAYS, rc . I 46
o
o*
I

(9 . IOO tpo, l2 DAYS, !c . I 50

60,ooo
-f
J .sokPo, lO DAYS,
f
o
o 40,ooo

(r
UJ
I 20,ooo TORSIONAL VIBRATORY
a LOAOING
olc'_c
3c
H IOO mm Dio TOmm

to-5 lO-4 tO'5 tg-z tO-|

SINGLE AMPLITUDE SHEAR STRAIN , lon tr, 7o

Figure 9'1.4. Shear modulus and damping ratio vs. strain.

from Fig. 946. Extrapolation of the test data shows that a
300% shear strain would be caused by ten cycles ofa cyclic
shear stress ratio of 0.49. About ten cycles of a cyclic shear
stress ratio of 0. 14 are equivalent to the 0. I -g design earth-
quake on the critical surface. Thus the cyclic shear stress
needed to cause liquefaction is over three times larger than
that induced by the design earthquake. It is reasonable to
conclude that a 0. l-g earthquake would not trigger lique-
faction in this soil.

o 6c'l2t rPo
(o Strains Due to Design Earthquake. One can enter Fig.
)
--g dlc'roo rPo 9-16 with the design earthquake loading to estimate the
oe dr" ra
Q, z ' o'
strains in the vicinity of the critical surface. For the cyclic
2e==o
coMPRESsroN

c
Fe
@a-
rt t
I
I:'"j,]. -\uA
- --*==-?At
I !LLLL;-
10 ll{1il
sH€AR srREss REvERsAL vJ I I I
6= (q.O) OCCURS wrer qrzt*-0.t \lli I
o1o
oz -lO rN EXTENSToN V I
9; \ arra*.,on =trd
fFF
6u
z I
t
Ooubfa omglrlud! / -
throl ttrorn lor' az/
"::,:::i':T'_
MEASURE9 PCRE PRESSURES OO NOT FEFLECT
THOSE AT C:NTER OF SP€CIMEN EECAUSE RA1E

--f'::# --
&
- rO0
OF CyC:jNG {AS too aasi f0 PSIMTT PORE
PFESSUR€ EOUALIZATION

. U,.
---j-lyT
------f;t':':l--'- -
rb EXTENSIOil PEAK
COMPRESSION PEAX O.I e EARI}IOUAXE
6, ot rtrody rrot..3 lPo (b)
oo o

LOAD CYCLE NUMBER OOUBLE AMPLITUOE SHEAR STRAIN, TAN 7N

',
Figurc 9-{6. Cyclic stress r.rtio vs. stmin and nurnber of loatling eyclcs.
Figure 9-d5. Results of a cyclic triaxial test.
 316 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION. AND REHABILITATION

c
Ate. 50 lpo o.

ls'l'61 o
o
U
G
o F
0
o_
-v E
U
I
(^
3.o
l! oaat2
E VANE DISPLACEMENT. mm
F O 20 /aO
U)
rrr I. y"
820
LrJ
:tr
U)
-tO kpo
Jrd

lo too t,ooo

ESTIMATED SHEAR STRAIN, TAN tr,7"

Figure 9-.t7. Undrained vane test on a silty clay tailing.

shear stress ratio of 0. 14 and for, say, ten cycles of load-
ing, a shear strain far less than 0. I % would occur. These
movements are judged to be negligible forembankment de-
sign. This approach for estimating strains to be expected
in clayey soils due to seismic loading probably is conserv-
ative, although reasonable. The water content redistribu-
tion during cyclic load tests on low permeabiliry soils may
cause only small errors.
Design Considerations
Deformations during Seismic Loading. The defor-
mations that occur due to seismic shaking in a mass that is
not susceptible to liquefaction, as opposed to the complete
failure and extreme deformations that follow a liquefac-
tion, can be important to the design of an embankment. In
most cases, new embankments are designed so conserva-
tively, using standard procedures, that neither liquefaction
nor seismic deformations are likely to have significant in-
fluence on the design. However, for the foundations of new
dams and for existing dams that are being reevaluated, it
may be cost-effective to evaluate potential seismic defor-
mations.
In the section on "Triggering Analysis" (see above), a
procedure was described for estimating whether strains
during seismic shaking of clayey soils may become large
enough to cause failure. A similar procedure could be used
to estimate deformations of clayey soils even if they are
not susceptible to liquefaction, that is, F^ ) 1.0. How-
ever, use of such a procedure for nonplastic soils is not
advisable because the strains measured during cyclic load
tests are likely to be greatiy in error.s2
For the above reason, it is preferable to estimate defor-
mations of those embankments that are not susceptible to
liquefaction by the methods of Newmark,sT Makdisi and
Seed,sE Castro,se and GEI.6e These methods are beyond
the scope of this section.
For design purposes the deformation that may be allow-
able is dependent on the embankment. The pertinent con-
siderations are: (l) the steepness of the valley walls; (2)
available freeboard; (3) the ability of a dam to withstand
the effects of transverse or longirudinal cracking; (4) the
quality of the core wall, if one is used; (5) the suscepribiliry
of supported structures to differential settlement; and (6)
the frequency of rccurrence of deformation-producing
events.
To date the deformation of embankments during seismic
shaking has not usually had an important influence on de-
sign. However, if the factor of safety against liquefaction,
F*, is below 1.5, and if the design seismic event may ex-
ceed about 0. 15 g peak ground acceleration, it is worth-
while to estimate the deformations and evaluate their po-
tential effects.
Methods for Reducing Liquefaction potential. To
increase the factorof safety against liquefaction, 2., must
be decreased or S* increased.
The driving shear stress can be decreased by reducing
the slope of the embankment, adding a berm at the toe, or

reducing the internal water pressurc. If practical, one could
remove water from the critical zone to unsaturate it. In this
way a seismic loading would permit the drained shear
strength, Sa, to act, rather than the undrained strength.
The undrained steady state strength may be increased by
densifying the critical layer, by replacing it with a com-
pacted material, by adding drainage columns so that sum-
cient drainage will occur during an earthquake to develop
a strength nearer to the drained strength, or by adding re-
inforcement, such as piles, caissons, cellular cofferdams,
or slurry walls.
For embankment dams one could control the effects of
liquefaction potential by operating the dam with a low op-
erating pool. The level should be low enough to cause tol-
erably low downstream damage if a liquefaction were to
occur.
Selection of Factor of Safety against Liquefac-
tion. The factor of safety against liquefaction, Fu', com-
puted using the procedures given above in the section on
"Liquefaction Evaluation Based on l-aboratory Tests,"
should be selected based on the nature of the soils, the de-
sign loading conditions, and the consequences of failure.
The F^-value should be considered in the same light as
a factor of safety against the residual shear strength,22
which is often used when considering the long-term stabil-
ity of clay slopes in drained shear. Both are based on the
minimum strength (i.e., the steady state strength) that can
be developed under the design loading, be it drained or
undrained shear.
For the case of seismic loading of loose saturated sandy
soils, the factor of safety, F,", needs to be only slightly
greater than 1.0 if the S,r-values are conservatively se-
lected based on sufficient test data. To use F^-values near
1.0, it is necessary to carry out enough standard penetra-
tion tests to locate the l<iosest zones reliably and then to
perform tests on sdmples from those zones. As the data
become less reliable, higher factors of safety should be
used. This approach is similar to that used in clay slopes
that may contain weak laYers.
In zones where the seismic loadings are significant, the
deformations of the embankment may control design. If
that is the case, then measures taken to limit deformations
will also cause an incrcase in the factor of safety, Fu'. Thus
when one increases Fu,, the likelihood of liquefaction and
the magnitude of deformation during the design seismic
event are both reduced.
Closing Remarks. Liquefaction as defined in this sec-
tion is the undrained failure of an embankment that con-
tains loose-saturated sands. Liquefaction may be triggered
by construction loads, earthquakes, tide changes, and other
undrained loading. To judge whether liquefaction is pos-
sible, the engineer needs to determine whether the in-situ
driving shear loads in the embankment are less than or
EARTHFILL DAM DESIGN AND AilALYSIS 3T7
fa - vel.l
I
(xsT^&E
Itrrt'/rrtt
I
o I
o
J
G
I
J,.n, IETASTAALE
-o
lr,
I
AVERAG€ LOAO.O€FORUATION
CTJNVE ALONG FAILNE SURFACE
",1*,
.frr", = /",r,
SHEAR DEFORMATION
Figure 9-48. Stability states in situ'
greater than the corresponding steady state shear resis-
tances, as illustrated in Fig. 948, using the methods de-
scribed in this section.
If an embankment is found to be in the metastable state,
liquefaction is possible. For sands, one should avoid leav-
ing the embankment in that condition. For clays, it is
sometimes reasonable to leave the embankment in the
metastable state. One should assure that the strains that will
be caused by future loading, taking into account progres-
sive failure, will not be large enough to reduce the shear
resistance below the driving shear stress. However, if this
is done, the deformations that may occur should be checked
to judge whether they will be tolerable.
Any embankment that is found not to be susceptible to
Iiquefaction may, nevertheless, deform excessively during
a sufficiently intense earthquake. The more intense the de-
sign earthquake, the lower the factor of safety against liq-
uefaction and the more sensitive the structure to deforma-
tions that may cause undesirable behavior, the more
important it is to estimate and evaluate those deformations.
Methods have been developed for evaluating liquefac-
tion potential and the probability of triggering liquefaction,
and for estimating deformations due to seismic loading. The
following areas require further study by members of the
geotechnical profession and related fields:
l. Evaluation of case histories to compare measute-
ments of undrained steady state strcngth with the
strengths mobil ized during liquefaction failures.
2. Procedures for calculating mobilized strengths during
liquefaction failures.
3. Methods for measuring the undrained steady state
strength under dcsign conditions and for determining
the uniqueness of the steady state line.
4. Evaluation of case histories of deformations during
seismic shaking and comparison with comPuted de'
formations.
5. Procedures for selecting parameters required to make
deformation estimates, namely, shear moduli, damp-
 318 ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEITITATION

ing ratios, equivalent seismic shear stresses, the yield ur Induced pore pressurc at steady state. kpa
strength, and the rate of softening due to continued w Weight of failurc mass, Newrons
shaking.
6. The relationship between strains measured in cyclic
Subscripts
load tests on sands and in-situ strains due to seismic
c After consolidation
loading; also the evaluation of test errors in cyclic p At peak in a strength test
load tests.
s At steady state in a strength test
Notations, Definitions, and Abbreviations
Greek
English cr Slope of line through origin and steady
state point on g-p- plot
Clearance ratio Inside diameter (ID) of tube minus ID of I Shear strain (radians)
cutting edge divided by ID ofcutting edge "Ya, Maximum dry unit weight from compac-
CPT Cone Penetration Test, ASTM D344172 tion test, N/m3
CU test Consolidated undrained test (R-test) 'f n Unit weight of water, N/m3
D Damping ratio, Vo ^[' Buoyanr unit weight of soil, N/m3
e Void ratio 6l Distance a failure mass moves down the
F Factor of Safety original steep slope, 0, during liquefac-
Fu" Factor of safety using undrained steady tion, meters
state strengths 62 Distance a failure mass moves along zero
G Shear modulus, kPa slope before it comes to rest after lique-
kPa Kilopascals (l kPa = 20 psf) faction, meters
L Length measured along failure surface, € Strain
meters €1 Axial or major principal strain
N-value Blowcount (per foot) measured using 0 Slope angle down which failure mass
Standard Penetration Test moves during liquefaction before encoun-
Nl N-value after correction for depth tering zero or near-zero slope
p One-half of sum of major and minor prin- v Poisson's ratio
cipal effective stresses on a specimen, kPa ol Major principal effective stress, kPa
q One half of principal stress difference on Er, Same, at steady state
a specimen, kPa at Minor principal effective stress, kPa
Q, q-value after consolidation 6t, Same, after consolidation
Qt q-value at steady state 6r, Same, at steady state
Q:' Cyclic component of q applied in cyclic oI Effective normal stress on failure surface,
load test.(single amplitude), kPa kpa
o Point where steady state line (e" vs. o-3") du Vertical effective normal stress in situ,
intersects dr" : 0 kPa
R-test Same as CU Test. A bar over the R sig- Tp Shear stress at peak ( = {, cos dp), kPa
nifies measurement of pore pressure dur- 7s Shear stress at steady state, kPa
ing shear. Ty Cyclic shear stress ( = {, cos d), kPa
s Shear strength, kPa oP Peak friction angle plotted in terms of ef-
Sap Drained peak shear strength, kPa fective stresses at peak points on stress-
sa, Drained steady state strength, kPa strain curves
.s_ Mobilized shear strengrh in situ or during 6, Same, but at steady state (same value for
a Standard Penetration Test, kPa drained and undrained shear)
sp Peak shear strength, kPa
s. Steady state shear strength, kPa
REFERENCES
Sap Undrained peak strength, kPa
.s,. Undrained steady state strength, kPa l. Davidson, Luther W., "Upgrading the Inrpervious Core eualiry at
SPT Standard Penetration Test, ASTM Sugar PineDam." Iran.vrclinrrs. Founeenth Congress. Intemational
Commission on Large Dams, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Vol. IV, pp.
Dl5g672
589-60?. May 1982.
tan ? Tangent of the shear strain 2. de Mello. V. F. 8.. "Reflections on Design Deeisions of practical
u Induced pore pressure, kPa Significance to Embankment Dams." Seventecnth Rankine Lecture.

British Gcotcchnical Socicty, Giotechnique, Vol. 27. No. 3, pp. 279-
355. Mar. 1977.
3. Taylor, Karl V., "Slope Protection on Earth and Rockfill Dams,"
Transactions, Elevcnth Congress, Intemational Commission on large
Dams. Madrid, Spain, Vol. III, pp. 215-235, June 1973.
:1. Intemational Commission on [:rge Dams, Bulletin 54, "Soil-Ce-
ment for Embankment Dams," prepared by Kenneth D. Hansen on
behalf of USCOLD for the Committee on Materials for Embankment
Dams, 1986.
5. Holtz, Wesley, G., and Hansen, Kenneth D., "The Use of Com-
pacted Soil-Cement in Water Control Structures," Transactions,
Twelfth Congress. lnternational Commission on Large Dams, Mex-
ico City, Vol. I, pp. 251-278, Mar.-Apr. 1976.
6. Reinius. E., "The Stability of the Upstream Slope of Earth Dams,"
Swedish State Committee for Building Research, Bull. 12, Victor
Petersons Bokindustriaktiebolag, Stockholm. I 948.
7. Morgenstern, N. R., and Price. V. 8., "The Analysis of Stability of
General Slip Surfaces," Giotechnique, Vol. 15, No. I, pp. 79-93,
1965.
8. Lowe, John, III, "Shear Strength of Coarse Embankment Dam Ma-
terials," Eighth International Congress on Large Dams, Edinburgh,
Transactions, Vol. III, pp.745-761, May 1961..
9. Lowe, John, III, "Embankment Dams," Section 18, Davis Hand'
bookof Applied Hydraulics, 3nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969.
10. Seed, H. 8., "A Method for Earthquake Resistant Design of Eanh
Dams," Joumal of the Soil Mechanics and Fourukttions Division,
,{SCE, Vol.92, No. SMt, Proc. Paper4616, pp. l3-41, Jan. 1966.
I l. Lowe, John. III, "stability Analysis of Embankments." Journal
the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,ISCE, Vol. 93, No.
SM4, Proc. Paper 5305, pp. t-33, July 1967.
12. Sherard, James L., "Hydraulic Fracturing in Embankment Dams."
Proceedings, Symposium Sponsored by Geotechnical Engineering
Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Denver, CO, May
5, 1985.
13. Interagency Committee on Dam Safety, Design Earthquake Task
Group Subcommittee, "Federal Guidelines for Eanhquake Analyses
and Design of Dams," Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Mar. 1985.
14. Franklin. A. G., and Hynes-Griffin, M. E., "Rationalizing the Seis-
mic Coefficient Method." Miscellaneous PaperCLS.{-13. U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, July 1984.
15. Jansen, Robert 8., "Evaluation of Seismic Effects on Embankment
Dams," Hawaii Dam Safety Conference, Honolulu. Dec. 5. 1985.
16. Bureau. G., and Campos-Pina, J. M., "Performance of Mexican
Dams-Earthquake of 1985," Newsletter, U.S. Committee on [:rge
Dams, Mar. 1986.
17. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. "Model Studies of the Sugar Pine Dam
Energy Dissipator," CR-79-3, Engineering and Research Center.
18. Tezaghi. K..Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons. New
York, 19.13.
19. Poulos, Steve J.. "The Stress-Strain Curves ofSoils," Geotechnical
Engineers lnc., Winchester, MA. Jan. l97l (unpublished).
20. Poulos, Steve J.. "The Steady State of Deformation," Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ,{SCE. Vol. 107. GT5, pp.
5513-5562, May l98l; closure discussion in Vol. 108, No. GT8.
pp. 1087-1091. Aug. 1982.
21. Poulos, Steve J., "Effect of Large Strains on Shear Strength Selec-
tion for Stability Analysis," Lecture Series on Enrbankment Dams-
Design and Construction, Lecturc 6, Boston Society Section, ASCE.
pp. l-18, Falt 1979.
22. Skempton. A. W., "Long-Term Stability of Clay Slopes." Giotech-
nir1ue, London, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. ?7-101, 1964.
23. Tezaghi, K., Erclbaumechanik auf boclenphysikulischer Grundlage,
Dcuticke, Vienna, 1925, 399 pp.
EARTHFILT DAM DESIGN AND ANATYSIS 319
24. Poulos. Steve J.. Coursc entitlcd "Stability Analysis," Hanvarrd Uni-
versity. Fall Semcstcr, [969.
25. Casagrande, A.. "Chcancteristics of Cohcsionlcss Soils Affecting
the Stability of Slopes and Earth Fills." Joarnal of thc &.tston &>
ciery of Civil Engineers, Vol. 23, No. l. pp. 13-22. Jan- 1936: rc-
printed in Contributions to Soil Mechanics, 1925-1910, BSCE. pp.
257-276, t940.
26. Haefeli. R., "lnvestigation and Measurements of the ShcrrStrcngths
ofSaturated Cohcsive Soils," GdorecAnique,Yol.2, No. 3. pp. 186-
208. June 1950.
27. Casagrande. A.. "Discussion of'Excavation of Slopes in the Pan-
ama Canal.' by W. V. Binger and T. F. Thompson," Tratsactions
,{SCE. Vol. I 14, Paper No. 2378. pp. 870-874. 1949.
28. Marsal. Raul J., "Mechanical Propenies ofRockfill." Enbankment-
Dam Engineering, Casagrande Volume, John Wiley and Sons, New
York. 1973.45;t pp.
29. Rowe, Peter W., "The Stress-Dilatancy Relation for Sutic Equilib-
rium of an Assembly of Panicles in Contact." Proceedings of the
Ro.tal Sociery, Series A, Mathematical and Physical Scicrces, Lon-
don, VoI.269. No. 1339, pp. 500-527. Oct. 1962.
30. Lambe, T. William, "The Structure of Inorganic Soil." Proceedings
ISCE, Vol.79, Separate No. 315. pp. l-a9. 1953.
31. Bishop, Alan W.. and Bjemrm, Laurits. "The Relevance of the
Triaxial Test to the Solution of Stability Problems," ASCE Research
Conference on Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, Boulder. CO, pp.
437-501, June 1960.
32. Taylor. Donald W., Fundamentals of Soil Mechania5, \\'iley, New
of York.1948.
33. Poulos, Steve J., "The Two Strengths ofSoils." Lecture at Univer-
sity of Massachusetts. Amherst, Iv{ar. 27, 1984. 29 pp.
34. Bjerrum. Laurits, "Mechanism of Pmgressive Failure in Slopes of
Overconsolidated Plastic Clays and Clay-Shales." The Third Ter-
zaghi Lecture, ASCE Structural Engineering Conference. lttiami, pp.
l-67.1966.
35. Poulos. Steve J., Robinsky. Eli L. and Keller, Thomas O.. "Liq-
uefaction Resistance of Thickened Tailings." Journol of Geotech-
nical Engineering, ASCE. Vol. lll. GTl2. pp. l3E0-1391, Dec.
1985.
36. Poulos. Steve J., Castro. Conzalo. and France, John W.- "Lique-
faction Evaluation Procedure." Journal of Geotechnical Enginecr'
ing, ASCE. Vol. I I l. GT6. pp. 772-795, June 1985; disrssions in
Vol. l14. GT2. pp.232-259, Feb. 1988.
37, Castro. Gonzalo. Poulos. Steve J., France, John W., and Enos. John
L.. "Liquefaction Induced by Cyclic Loading," Report to National
Science Foundation, Contract PFR-7924731. Geotechnical Engi-
neers Inc., 1982, 79 pp.
38. Casagrande. A., "Notes on the Design of the Liquid Limit Device."
Gdotechnique, Vol. 8, No. 2. June 1958 (Harvard Soil }lechanics
Series No. 57).
39. Scott. Ronald F., Principles of Soil Mcchanics, Addison-Wesley.
Reading, MA. 1963. 550 pp.
40. Geotechnical Engineers Inc., "Response to FERC Questions. Meet-
ing of January 9. t987, Hinckley Dam." Ceotechnical Engineers
Inc.. Winchestcr. MA. Prcject 85808. Feb.5, 19E7. ll pp. plus
Appcndices A and B (unpublished).
41. Hazcn, Allen. "Hydraulic Fill Dams." Transactions,lSC6. vsl.
83. pp. l7l3-1745. 1920.
42. Lo, K. Y., and Stenuac, A. G.. "Failure of an Embanknrent Founded
on Varved Clays," Coralian Gcoteclnieal Jorrrnrll, Vol. l. No. 3.
1965 (scc also Closure. Vol. 3, No. l).
43. Ladd. Charlcs C.. "Test Embankntent on Sensitive Clay," Proceed-
/ags ASCE, Spccialty Confcrence on Eanh lnd Eanh Suppons Struc-
tures. Purdue. Vol. l. Part I, pp. l0l-128, 1972.
44. Golder, H. Q., and Palnrer, D. J.. "lnvestigation ola Bank Failure
 32O ADVANCED DAM ENGINEERING FOR DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, AND REHAEILITATION
at Scrapsgatc, Islc ofShcppey. Kcnt." Glotechaigaa. London, Vol.
5, No. I, pp.55-?3, 1955.
45. Seed, H. Bolton. and [-ec. Kenncth L., "Liquefaction of Saturated
Sands During Cyclic Loading," Jouraal ol Soil Mechaaics and
Foundation Division, ASCE, Vol. 92, SM6, pp. 105-134, Nov. 1966.
46. Seed, H. Bolton, Arango, Ignacio, and Chan, Clarcncc K., ..Eval-
uation ofSoil Liquefaction Potential During Eanhquakes." Univer-
sity of Califomia, Earthguake Enginecring Research Ccnter, Berke-
ley, Report EERC 75-28, Oct. 1975, 106 pp.
47. Casagrande, A., "Liquefaction and Cyclic Deformationof Sands, A
Critical Review ," Proceedings 5th Panamerican Confercnce on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Buenos Aires, Vol. 5, pp.
79-133, 1975.
48. Casagrande. A., and Rendon, F., "Gyratory Shear Apparatus De-
sign, Testing Procedures and Test Results on Undrained Sand," Har-
vard Soil Mechanics Series No. 89, 1978 (U.S. Army Warerways
Experiment Station. Technical Report S-78-15, Oct. 1978).
49. Castro, Gonzalo, "Liquefaction of Sands," Harvard Soil Mechanics
Series No. 81, Hanand Universiry, Cambridge, MA, Jan. 1969, t l2
pp.
50. Seed, H. Bolton, Idriss, I. M., and Makdisi, F. I., 'The Slides in
the San Femando Dams during the Earrhquake of February 9, I 97 1, "
tournal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ISCE, Vol. l0l,
SM7, pp.65l-688, 1975.
51. Castro, Gonzalo, and Christian, John T., "Shear Strengrh of Soils
and Cyclic Loading," Joumal of Geotechnical Engineering Divi-
sion, ASCE, Vol. 102, GT9, pp. 887-894, 1976.
52. Castm, Gonzalo, and Poulos, Steve J., "Factors Affecting Lique-
faction and Cyclic Mobility," Journal of the Geotechnical Engi-
neering Dirision, ASCE, Vol. 103, No. GT6, pp.50l-516, 1977.
53. Seed, H. Bolton, Lee, Kenneth L., and ldriss, I. M., "Analysis of
Sheffield Dam Failure," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foun-
dations Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, No. SM6, pp. 1453-1490, 1969.
54. U.S. Army Corps of Engineen, "The Stability of F.arth and Rockfill
Dams," Engineering ManualEMlllG.2-1902, pp. l-29, 1970.
55. Housner, George W., "The Mechanism of Sand Blows." Bulletin
ofthe Seismological Sociery ofAmerica, No. 58, pp. 155-161, 1958.
56. Whitman, Robert V., "On Liquefaction," Proceedings of rhe Elev-
enth lntemational Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation En-
gineering, San Francisco, pp. 1923-1926, Aug. t985.
57. Newmark, Nathan M., "Effects of Earthquakes on Dams and Em-
bankments," Fifth Rankine Lecture, Giotechnique, London, Vol.
15, No.2, pp. 139-159, 1965.
58. Makdisi, F. I., and Seed, H. Bolton, "simplified Procedure for Es-
timating Dam and Embankment Earthquake-lnduced Deforma-
tions," Jorrrnal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE,
Vol. 104, No. GT7, pp. 849-867, 1978.
59. Castro, G,, "scismic Subility of Eanh anr! Eanh-supponcd Srnrc-
turcs-Liqucfaction." Sratc-of-thc-en papcr prcscnrcd 8t thc grh ln-
tcrnational Symposium in Eanhquake Enginccring in lndia. Dcc.
t986.
6O. Seed. H. Bolron. "Dcsign Problcms in Soil Liqucfacrion.. (draft).
prcsented at Intragovcrnmcnial Confcrcncc. St. L,ouis, MO, 1996.
61. Casagrande A.. "The Role of thc 'Calculared Risk' in Eanhwork
and Foun&tion Enginecring." Second Terzaghi L€crurc (Ift;l).
ASCE, Iccag&i Lectures 1963-19n, O71.
62. Seed, H. Bolton, "Soil Liquefacrion and Cyclic Mobility Evaluarion
for Level Ground during Eanhquakes," Joumal ofthc Geotechnica!
Engineering Division, Vol. 105, No. GT2, pp. 201-255, 1979.
63. Schmertmann, John H., and Palacios, Alejandro, ,.Energy Dynam-
ics of SPT," Journal ol Geotechnical Engineering Ditision, ASCE,
Vol. 105, CT8. pp. W-926, Aug. t979.
64. Hvorslev, M. 1., Subsurface Erploration and Sampling of Soits for
Civil Engineering Purposes, ASCE Engineering Foundarion. Nov.
1949,521 pp.
65. Marcuson, William F.. III and Franklin, A. Gus, "Srate-of-rhe-Arr
of Undisturbed Sampling of Cohesionlcss Soils," Miscellaneous pa-
per GL 79-16. Waterways Experiment Station. July 1979.
66. Janbu, Nilmar. "Slope Stability Computations," Emban*nenr-Dam
Engineering, Casagrande Volume, John Wiley and Sons, New york,
1973, pp. 47-86.
67. Lee, Kenneth L., and Chan, Kwok, "Number of Equivalent Signif-
icant Cycles in Stmng Motion Eanhquakes,', proceedings Inrema-
tional Conference on Microzonation, University of Washington. Vol.
2, p.609, Oct. 1972"
68. Schnabel. P. B., Lysmer, J., and Seed, H. B., ..SHAKE," Report
No. EERC 72-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Cenrer, Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley, CA. t972.
69. Geotechnical Engineers Inc., "Effect of Densification on Seismic
Response of Foundation Soils, Jackson Lake Dam,'. project g{-116,
Vols. I and 2 with Appendices, May 17, 1985, 27 pp. (unpublished).
70. Shockley, W. G., and Ahlvin, R. C., '.Non-uniform Conditions in
Triaxial Test Specimens." ASCE Research Conference on Shear
Str€ngth ofCohesive Soils, Boulder, CO, pp. 341-357, June 196O.
71. Seed, H. 8., and ldriss, I. M., "simplified pmcedure for Evaluating
Soil Liquefaction Potential." Journal of the Soit Mechanics and
Foundations Division,,{SCE, Vol. 97, No. SM9, pp. l}4g-1273,
t97 t.
72. ASTM Annual Book of Standards, Section 4-..Construcrion.'.
04.08-Soil and Rock. Building Stones, penetration Test and Split-
Barrel Sampling of Soils-D1586 and Deep, euasi-Static, Cone and
Friction-Cone Penetration Testing of Soils-D3,14 l, 1986.