The RCC Sloped Layer Construction Method

Brian A Forbes BSc.(Civil Eng), C.P.Eng., MIE Aust., F.A.S.C.E.* Manager, Dams Engineering, GHD Pty Ltd., Brisbane, Australia.

ABSTRACT The RCC technique achieves significant time and cost savings in the construction of concrete dams. However this often compromises quality and water tightness, as shown by many structures built since the inception of RCC dams in the early 1980s. With RCC dams nearing 200m in height (Miel 1 in Colombia at190m, Longtan China 192m) and those presently being designed for 200m plus (Ta Sang Myanmar 227m), the issues of lift joint strength and impermeability are crucial. For example in the Ta Sang Dam where the volume of RCC is about 8 million m3, the total lift joint surface area for 0.3m thick lifts exceeds 2,700 hectares and the total length of lift joints exposed at the upstream face will be more than 350km! This paper describes and discusses the Sloped Layer Method recently developed at Jiangya Dam (131m) in China and used since at the Fenghe No2 (88m), Mianhuatan (110m) and Dachaoshan (111m) dams which are also in China, Tannur Dam (60m) in Jordan and in portion of Lajeado Dam in Brazil. SLM largely overcomes the concerns of lift joint bonding whilst at the same time enables increased RCC placing rates to be achieved INTRODUCTION A significant difference between a conventionally placed concrete dam and a roller compacted concrete dam are the number of horizontal construction joints, otherwise referred to as lift or layer joints. In order to achieve required compacted densities by roller compaction, RCC lift thickness is typically maintained at 0.3m, whilst for internally vibrated conventional concrete, lifts are typically 1.5m, i.e. 5 times more lift joints occur with RCC. There is no doubt that, in achieving a monolithic structure, the bonding of lift joints is the key issue. Failure of a concrete gravity dam is far more likely to occur along its contact with the foundation, or along a lift joint, than through the RCC or concrete itself. Lift joints always exhibit lower tensile strength, shear strength and impermeability than the RCC. This is due to ageing of the lift surface concrete, tendency for segregation of the overlying RCC at the joint and the potential for lower rolled density at depth. Experience has shown that seepage through RCC dams occurs generally along lift joints and not through the body of the RCC lift, this is clear evidence of non-monolithic construction. The 100m plus high RCC gravity dams constructed since the mid 1990s (Pangue, Porce 2, Jiangya, etc) all require significant vertical tensile strength capacity and horizontal shear resistance of the RCC and the lift joints. Typically shear strengths of 1-1.5 MPa and cohesion strengths of 0.51.0 MPa are required under extreme load cases. RCC dams now being planned to exceed 200m in height will require nearly 700 lift joints. For example the 8million m3 RCC to be placed in the 227m high Ta Sang
* email : bforbes@ghd.com.au phone : 61-7-3316 3601.
1

dam in Myanmar will entail the preparation and bonding of 2,700 hectares of lift surface and expose nearly 350 km of lift joint line at the upstream face! With high placing rates, night work and the urgency to prepare lift surfaces for the rapidly advancing new RCC lift, it is inevitable that sub standard work will occur on lift joints on some occasions. A dam will only fail once; which lift it will fail on is unknown until it happens! It is considered the task of the inspecting engineer to ensure that every lift joint is properly constructed, so that this one defective lift joint is not left behind in the completed dam. Clearly this task cannot be realistically achieved. The risk of such a lift existing therefore needs to be reduced. In order to achieve homogeneous, monolithic RCC across a lift joint the overlying lift must be placed within the initial set time of the lower lift. Without the use of set retarders this time is usually 1.5-2.5 hours; with set retarders this can be extended out to 5-8 hours. Horizontal lifts on major dams can usually be placed from one abutment across to the other within 15-30 hours. Notwithstanding the care taken to minimize tracking of equipment (RCC trucks, conventional concrete transit mixers, dozers, rollers, vehicles and dragged hose pipes etc) over completed lift surfaces, the repeated compressed air clean off, the application of curing water, or the use of RCC with high content fly ash or slow hydrating pozzolan, it is simply not possible to achieve completely homogenous, monolithic RCC across horizontally placed lift joints. Inevitably zones of lower strength will exist in the lift joints of such a dam. This paper describes the use of sloping RCC lift layers, i.e. the Sloped Layer Method (SLM), where lifts of RCC can be placed within 45 minutes of each other, as at Tannur Dam (Forbes et al 2001), or within whatever time may be necessary to ensure lifts are placed within the initial set time of the RCC. DEVELOPMENT AND PROCEDURE The Sloped Layer Method of placing RCC was conceived during the construction of Jiangya Dam (131m high, Human Province, China) in late1997 and adopted from about mid height onwards. Placing rates increased considerably and the project was able to be competed on target as a direct result of changing to the sloped layer method. Up to this time the procedure on Jiangya had been to divide the dam into monoliths, or blocks, about 60m wide by erecting a 3m high vertical steel form along one of the transverse joints, then to place 10 horizontal layers of RCC each 0.3m thick to complete one 3.0m thick lift between the formed upstream face and the 1m high stepformed downstream face. The contained area of placement within the form was such that the 0.3m layers of RCC could be placed within 5-6 hours of each other, which was within the retarded initial set time of the RCC. On completion of the monolith the transverse form was relocated and the adjacent block constructed. The cold joint at the top of the 3m lift was green cut and a thin layer of bedding mortar applied when the next 3m lift was placed on it, as would occur in any conventional concrete dam. The cost of the transverse form and the GE-RCC along both sides of it, the difficulties of maintaining a ramp access through it for the RCC trucks and the cost of the set retarder were negative aspects of the monolith system. Nevertheless excellent bond and homogeneity of RCC across the lift joint were achieved using this approach. By removing the transverse form and placing the 0.3m thick layers of RCC on a slope, in a direction from one abutment to the other between the formed upstream and
2

downstream faces, as shown in the sketch below, the same 3m lift could be built up as a continuous process across the entire dam without the need for a transverse form. The slope of the layer could by changed if necessary when a new 3m thick RCC lift commenced. The volume of RCC placed in any 0.3m thick sloped layer can be altered by changing the slope of the layer. For example, using 3m high forms a width between upstream and downstream faces of W, RCC mixer output of 500m3/hr and an initial set time of 2 hours, the slope S of the 0.3m thick RCC layers must be: S 2 x 500 W x 3 x 0.3 i.e. 1000 W approx.

Hence at lower elevations, where a width W of say 100m might occur, a slope of 1 on 10 is required. At upper elevations near the crest, when the width has reduced to say 25m, a flatter slope down to 1 on 40 could be used should the time between placing RCC layers of 0.5 hours be too short. Initial trials at Jiangya confirmed a slope as steep as 1 on 8 was possible with the smooth double drum steel vibratory rollers operating in an up-down slope direction.
0.3m thick RCC sloped layer

Top of newly completed 3m lift

trea Dows

m form

1o

nS

Prev

ious

3m li

ft
eam fo rm

3.0m

Upstr

Abutment

Abutment

Fig 1 Sloped Layer procedure.

Using this method the final clean up and surface preparation of the lower lift, including application of bedding mortar, is restricted to a narrow strip along the toe of the sloped layer. For slopes of 1 on 10 the width of the strip is about 3m and for slopes of 1 on 40 it would be about 13m. The surface of the completed upper 3m lift can be green-cut whilst the RCC is still young and the upstream (and downstream) face forms can be erected (lifted from below) in anticipation of placing resuming at this position in about 10 days, assuming the equivalent of one 0.3m horizontally placed lift of RCC were to be placed per day in the traditional method. If 0.3m thick sloped layers are placed within the initial set time of the RCC no surface preparation, clean up or bedding mortar is required prior to placing the overlying sloped layer. For 3m thick formed lifts this potentially reduces the surface preparation required by 90%. It also reduces the number of lift joints (and potential failure surfaces through the RCC dam) by 90%. Using sloped layers to build up 3m
3

thick lifts therefore results in half the number of lifts which would be expected in a conventional concrete dam constructed with 1.5m thick concrete pours. To overcome the existence of a series of feather edges, or thin wedges, at the toe of each sloping layer as the layers run out on the lower 3m lift surface, and where RCC aggregates could easily be crushed under the steel roller, the solution derived at Jiangya Dam was to first place a 4-5m wide horizontal layer 0.15-0.3m thick along the top of the previous lift as a foot. This is placed and rolled in an upstreamdownstream direction. The sloping layer then commences from about the centre of the foot as shown in the sketch. The front of the foot is later trimmed back 0.1-0.2m to firm RCC as part of the surface preparation work that is progressing ahead of the advancing sloped layer construction, and covered with bedding mortar just prior to placing the foot for the start of the next sloping layer.
0.3m

1 on

Foot

Fig 2 Preventing feather edges developing (diagrammatic).

The feather edges which occur at the top of the sloping layers, as they run out to form the top of the 3m lift, need to be cut back to 50-70 mm thick as part of the green cutting and lift joint preparation process. This is easily achieved using high pressure air-water jetting to lift off any poorly bonded feather edge material. Besides ensuring improved lift joint quality, the Sloped Layer Method removes most of the ancillary work from the critical path; surface preparation, curing and lifting of formwork can all be carried out largely independent of the RCC placing. In addition, the amount of time available for lift surface clean up and preparation is increased ten fold when using 3m lifts. The slope of the sloping layers is controlled during placing by paint lines marked on the upstream and downstream forms and by survey methods. To date the projects known to have adopted the Sloped Layer Method (Jiangya, Fenghe No2, Mianhuatan, Dachaoshan, Tannur and Lajeado dams) have used trucks for RCC delivery. At Ralco Dam (155m high, Chile), where RCC placing commenced in January this year with a full conveyor system and crawler placer unit to deliver the RCC, the contractor is considering adopting the sloped layer method once a height of 25-30m is reached. Using a slope of 1 on 10 and lifts of 2.4m the crawler placer with its extending conveyor will be able to remain on either the upper or the lower lift and still be able to reach the base or top of the slope 24m away. Because 0.3m thick layers of RCC can be placed within the initial set time of the previously placed layer, a greater RCC load on the formwork will be experienced before the lower layers reach final set condition. The design of the upstream and downstream formwork and its anchorage back into the RCC, needs to take account of this increased loading when using the sloped layer method. For inclined downstream faces the best arrangement appears to be to use vertical steps, if formwork is used then the step height would be equal to the lift height. At Tannur a lift height of 1.2m, i.e. 4 x 0.3m thick sloped layers, was adopted. This matched the design height of the steps on the downstream face, suiting the formwork
4

system provided which anticipated horizontal layer construction. At Jiangya precast concrete blocks to form 1m high steps provided the downstream formwork. Blocks were re-used as the dam progressed. When the change was made to sloping layers with 3m lift heights, the same block system was used. Blocks were simply added ahead of the advancing layers as the horizontal RCC steps were constructed and a base for the blocks became available. The blocks were separated from the RCC by placing sheets of steel plate against the blocks. The sheets extended beyond the leading block some 1.5-2m to provide interim support for the zone of sloping RCC just ahead of the horizontal surface of the step completed behind. This step/precast block/steel plate system would appear to be an ideal method where more than one step is required to match the selected SLM lift height. Relocation of the blocks and steel plate is simple and repetitive; it can be easily achieved with a few labourers and a small mobile crane or front end loader.

Fig 3 Tannur-downstream form for 1.2m step.

Fig 4 Jiangya-downstream precast blocks and steel plate for 1m step.

The sloped layer method has been shown to work well with the use of GE-RCC for facing the upstream and downstream faces of the dam and the connection of the RCC to the rock abutments. In particular RCC progress is not delayed whilst awaiting delivery and placing of conventional concrete facing. Placing a sloped layer generally involves commencing at the downstream face and moving across to the upstream face, working on the full height of the layer and compacting up-down slope. At lower elevations, where the sloped layer is wide enough, the placement area can be roughly divided into 3 sub areas, placing commencing on the downstream third and progressing through the central and upstream thirds with the placing spreading compacting operations occurring accordingly. The upstream crossfall of 2-3% adopted in placing the traditional horizontal RCC layers for drainage purposes, can be retained for the sloped layer method, i.e. sloped layers will have a true slope directed slightly upstream of the dam axis. The resulting crossfall of the completed 3m lift (or whatever lift height is selected) will therefore be as in the horizontal layer method. Such a crossfall is very helpful in lift surface green cutting, clean up and preparation works, facilitating drainage of wash water as well as rainfall run off. At lower elevations, when coming up off the foundation, the layers can be sloped from downstream to upstream until such time as the distance between the upstream and downstream equals the abutment-abutment distance i.e. the placement surface is essentially square. At this stage the slope of the layers would be changed to slope from abutment to abutment as shown in Fig 1 above. Obviously it is not appropriate to slope the layers from upstream to downstream, since should a cold joint of a sloped
5

layer occur, the shear resistance along that joint would be severely affected by the reduction in the effective angle of friction.

Fig 5 Tannur-placing a sloped layer.

Figure 6 Jiangya-placing a sloped layer starting from the downstream stepped form.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES In summary the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the sloped layer method are seen as follows: Advantages Provides for homogenous, monolithic RCC across the joints of the 0.3m layers; potential to reduce the number of horizontal lift joints by up to 90% or half those in a conventional internally vibrated concrete dam, resulting in an overall safer, more secure structure. Reduces the clean up, lift joint treatment and bedding mix application by up to 90% with associated cost savings. Potential to limit the number of cold lift joints to one every 3m. Takes green cutting and initial lift joint preparation off the critical path giving up to 10 days for this work to be done before placing the next lift of RCC; wash down/cleanup waste does not encroach on current placing area. Takes the final lift joint clean up off the critical path and allows up to 90% more time for joint preparation prior to placing next layer of RCC. Green cutting and layer surface preparation of GE-RCC or CVC facing is not required. The material is so fresh that the poker vibrators penetrate into the previously placed layer of facing. Allows upstream and downstream formwork to proceed off the critical path and potentially some days ahead of being required. Permits formwork to be left on longer for curing or thermal protection purposes or, by adopting a leap frog type procedure, will reduce the quantity of formwork required on site by up to 4050%. Reduces the total surface area of RCC required to be cured. Reduces the area of exposed young RCC that could be damaged by rainfall or freezing conditions and, as a consequence, the volume of RCC that may require removal and replacement. Reduces the potential for cooled RCC to gain heat from hot ambient conditions. Provides (for most of the time) a notch in the crest of the dam which is capable of passing floods in excess of the normal diversion capacity; thereby also
6

provides a more secure plant and equipment parking zone above flood water level and potentially reduces the clean up work following the flooding, permitting an earlier resumption of RCC placing. Overall increase in RCC placing rates, potentially by 30-50%. Downstream formwork options limited requires either the use of high steps (equal to the selected lift height) or use of the precast concrete block/steel plate step construction system with some associated minor complications in progressive block placing. Rate of rise against the formwork is faster and additional anchorages may be required. Need for care and attention of the toe of the sloped layer to ensure thin feather edges, where aggregate is easily crushed under the roller, do not occur and which might result in a preferred path of seepage. Survey control is a little more complex with slopes both parallel and transverse to the dam axis; can be accommodated by laser systems. Need to remove during the green cutting process the thin feather edges of RCC that can occur at the top of the lift where the sloped layer ends. Finishing off the downstream step horizontal lift surface concrete facing (GERCC or conventional internally vibrated concrete) is a little more difficult. Disadvantages

CONCLUSIONS After nearly 20 years of designing and constructing RCC dams, new techniques to improve quality and productivity are still being developed. This shows the versatility of the material and its basic procedure, as well as the interest and innovative stimulation it has provided to the dam engineering profession since the inception of RCC to concrete dam construction. The recent development of placing multiple layers on a slope to achieve a much thicker lift largely eliminates the vexing problem of lift joint bond; monolithic, homogeneous RCC is now feasible in lifts up to 3m thick, or whatever lesser thickness as may be selected. This is a significant advancement, particularly for the 200m high dams now being planned where lift joint cohesion and high RCC placing rates are vitally important. Convincing results are evident from vertical cores extracted from Chinese RCC dams where layers have been placed within the initial set time, such as Jiangya, Mianhuatan, Dachaoshan etc (Shen Chonggang 2002), where complete lengths of 8 to10m of monolithic unbroken core, without evidence of lift joints, have been recovered. Evidence of this sort is needed to impart the confidence sought by designers to tackle the 200m plus high RCC dams of the future. It is essential that we continually question and seek out better and more effective ways of constructing RCC dams, particularly as they become higher, more costly and time consuming to build, looking for ways to improve their quality and safety and to reduce their cost and impact on the local environment. The Sloped Layer Method described in this paper is but one more step in this process.

REFERENCES Forbes, B.A., Lichen, Y., Guojin, T. and Kangning, Y. (1999). Jiangya Dam, China: some interesting techniques developed for high quality RCC construction. Proc. of the International Symposium on Roller Compacted Concrete Dams, Chengdu, China, April 1999, 716-729. Forbes, B.A. (2000). Solving some long-standing RCC concerns. International Journal on Hydropower and Dams, June, Volume7, Issue 3, 2000, 52-54. Forbes, B.A., Iskander, M.M. and Malkawi, A.I.H. (2001). High RCC standards achieved at Jordans Tannur Dam. International Journal on Hydropower and Dams, June, Volume 8, Issue 3, 2001, 58-62. Ortega Santos, F. and Gross, C. (2002). Experience gained during the first RCC dam in Bolivia. Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Roller Compacted Concrete Dam Construction in the Middle East, Irbid Jordan, April 2002. Shen Chonggang (2002). Chinese innovations and experiences in RCC dam construction. Proc. of the United States Society on Dams Conference, San Diego, July 2002.