- 2075 Ashwin · 8 marks
Gravity dam stability: flotation, overturning, sliding
Short answer
The dam is safe against flotation (FS 1.89) but unsafe against overturning (FS 1.07 < 1.5). Sliding safety factor using shear-friction is 2.94, marginal; tension develops at the heel. The base width is insufficient for stability.
A concrete gravity dam of the given profile is proposed by a designer for implementation. The unit shear resistance and angle of resistance are 500 kN/m² and 35° respectively. kN/m³. Check the stability of the dam against flotation, overturning and sliding. [Figure: dam section with crest width 6 m, 5 m dimension at the top, 15 m dimension on the downstream face, dam height 60 m, tail water depth 40 m, base width 26 m.]
Assumptions
- Height 60 m, crest width 6 m, base width m. Water level 5 m below the crest, so m. Tail water m. U/s face vertical; the d/s face is vertical for the top 15 m, then slopes to the toe (20 m run over 45 m).
- , kN/m³. Uplift (no drainage): kN/m² at the heel and kN/m² at the toe (linear).
- Unit shear resistance kN/m², angle of shear resistance .
6 m
+----+
| | 5 m freeboard
~|~~~~| water 55 m
| |
| \ 15 m vertical d/s
| \
| \ slope (20 m run)
| \ ~~ tail water 40 m
+--------\
B = 26 m
Forces and moments about the toe
| Force | Magnitude (kN/m) | Arm from toe (m) | Moment about toe (kN·m/m) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vertical (resisting) | |||
| Rectangle 6 × 60 | 8,640.0 | 23.00 | 198,720 |
| D/s triangle (20 × 45) | 10,800.0 | 13.33 | 144,000 |
| Tail water on d/s face | 3,488.0 | 5.93 | 20,670 |
| ΣW (downward) | 22,928.0 | 363,390 | |
| Horizontal / uplift (overturning) | |||
| Water thrust | 14,837.6 | 18.33 | 272,023 |
| Uplift part 1 (upward) | 10,202.4 | 13.00 | 132,631 |
| Uplift part 2 (upward) | 1,913.0 | 17.33 | 33,158 |
| Uplift U | 12,115.4 | ||
| Tail water thrust (resisting) | 7,848.0 | 13.33 | 104,640 |
| Total overturning | ΣM_O = 437,812 |
Total resisting moment: kN·m/m (weights plus the tail water thrust).
Checks
1. Flotation (uplift):
The dam does not float (its weight is 1.89 times the uplift).
2. Overturning:
This is far below the required 1.5, so the dam is not safe against overturning.
3. Sliding (shear-friction): kN/m and kN/m.
Friction alone gives . With the shear resistance, , which is below the usual 3-5, so sliding is also marginal.
4. Position of the resultant: m from the toe, m m, so tension develops at the heel ( kN/m², kN/m²).
Conclusion: the profile is safe against flotation but unsafe against overturning, and it is marginal in sliding and has tension at the heel. The base must be widened or the uplift reduced by drainage.
✓ Answer checked by Claude Opus 5.5 (high effort)
Related questions
- Gravity dam stability with seismic load · Hydropower Engineering, chapter 4
- Gravity dam section: shear stress near toe (2082) · Hydropower Engineering, chapter 4
- Gravity dam stability and shear stress at toe (2081) · Hydropower Engineering, chapter 4
- Gravity dam forces and stability checks (2081 Baishakh) · Hydropower Engineering, chapter 4
- Gravity dam equilibrium and overtopping discharge coefficient · Hydropower Engineering, chapter 4
- Gravity dam stability (SG 2.4, RL 0-70) · Hydropower Engineering, chapter 4
- Sliding and overturning check of gravity dam · Hydro Power, chapter 4
- Overturning and sliding check with shear strength · Hydro Power, chapter 4
- Elementary profile and 40 m gravity dam stability · Hydro Power, chapter 4
- Stability of gravity dam (crest 1530 m) · Hydro Power, chapter 4