Historic Dam Failures in Earthquake

Safety Concerns in seismic design of Dams

Overtopping:
1. When crest falls below the reservoir surface, erosion occurs because of overtopping
2. Various reasons for overtopping due to earthquake:
a) Movement on a fault through reservoir or embankment foundation
b) An earthquake induced landslide
c) A large seiche wave generated by earthquake

Instability:
Cracking lead to instability from sliding and overturning.

Foundation induced:
1. Consists of irregular joints and planes of weakness due to different materials.
2. Strength is estimated from small fraction of material. So, key zones are hard to detect.

Piping:
Internal erosion caused by seepage

What Earthquake Action Does a Dam Have to Withstand?

1. To prevent uncontrolled rapid release of water from the reservoir of a storage dam during strong
earthquake, the dam must be able to withstand the strong ground shaking.
2. The main load in dams is the water load.
a) Concrete dams: Upstream water acts horizontal
b) Embankment dams: Water load acts normal to the impervious core
3. Large dams are designed to withstand earthquake with a return period of 10,000 years

Multiple hazards of earthquake on Dams:

1. Ground shaking causing vibrations in dams, appurtenant structures and equipment (e.g. Sefid Rud
dam, Manjil earthquake, June 20,1990 in Iran)
2. Fault movements in the dam foundation or discontinuities in dam foundation near major faults
which can be activated during strong nearby earthquakes causing structural distortions (e.g., Shih-
Kang weir, Chi-Chi earthquake of 1999 in Taiwan. Movement of Chelungpu fault).
3. Fault displacement in the reservoir bottom causing water waves in the reservoir or loss of
freeboard.
4. Rockfalls causing damage to gates, spillway piers (cracks), retaining walls (overturning), surface
powerhouses (cracking and puncturing), electro-mechanical equipment, penstocks, switchyards,
transmission lines (e.g. Wenchuan earthquake of 2008 in China, rockfalls blocking access roads).
5. Mass movements (landslides and rockfalls) into the reservoir causing impulse waves and
overtopping of dams.
6. Mass movements blocking rivers and forming landslide dams and lakes whose failure may lead to
overtopping of downstream run-of-river power plants or the inundation of powerhouses and the
electromechanical equipment.
7. mass movements blocking access roads to dam sites and appurtenant structures

By Harshwardhan Pagare CEE 559 Final presentation

 8. ground movements and settlements due to liquefaction or densification of soil, causing distortions
in dams and appurtenant structures
9. Shear slide of dam

Reservoir triggered Earthquake (Koyna, India)

1. The Koyna dam was not designed for seismic forces.
2. Dimensions: 2400 feet long and 340 feet high.
3. M = 6.5, Koynanagar earthquake
4. Dam suffered structural damage in the body and auxiliary structures at roadway level. Most
spectacular damage was horizontal crack in the tower over the elevator shaft in the tallest
monolith, 2060 feet.
5. The tallest monolith is unsymmetrical, east half overflow and west half non-overflow. West half
contains elevator which reduced the cross sectional area about 7%. Additional bending moment
due to the 50 feet extension above the roadway.

LOWER VAN NORMAN DAM, CALIFORNIA, USA

Specifications regarding dam:
1. Material: Majority was hydraulic fill. Upstream and downstream consisting of sands and silts and
central core of clayey soil.
2. Embankment raised several times between 1916 and 1930 with 135 feet in 1930.
3. Thin blanket of shale and gravel material was placed in 12-inch layers for seepage control.
4. Final addition a 4.5H : 1V berm on d/s.

1971 San Fernando (SF) Earthquake:

1. M = 6.5, 11.2 km from the dam
2. Thrust faulting which was not shown on geological maps
3. Fault now considered to be a part of San Gabriel (SG) and Sierra Madre mountains. SF Valley lies
under the SG mountains. Earthquake caused by readjustment of SG block.

Observations during and after the earthquake:

1. Three cross sections indicated triangular liquefied zone near hydraulic fill. It moved upward
between the intact blocks 250 feet from the toe.
2. A 15 feet thick loose silty fine sand layer at the base was critical from liquefaction standpoint

Why is the study significance?

1. Confirmed the vulnerability of embankments built of loose and sandy fill
2. Led to significant progress being made in developing numerical analysis of dams.
3. Triggered the implementation of a systematic re-evaluation program of existing dams in
California

References
1. Observed Performance of Dams During Earthquakes Volume I (July 1992), II (October 2000), III
(February 2014), United States Society on Dams
2. Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety Earthquake Analyses and Design of Dams (May 2005)
3. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/publications/la-damstory/

By Harshwardhan Pagare CEE 559 Final presentation