Design of support systems for underground powerhouse of Sardar Sarovar project based on stress analysis using discrete element

modeling
R. Venugopala Rao National Institute of Rock Mechanics R.N. Gupta National Institute of Rock Mechanics

ABSTRACT: Stress analysis using numerical modeling is widely accepted for design of underground excavations due to their ability to incorporate most of the complexities and their reliability to produce realistic information. The paper presents results of stress analysis of underground powerhouse of sardar sarovar project, using discrete element modeling to model number of shear zones. The factor of safety values and deformations around the excavations were considered for design of support system. Support system consists of 25m long cable anchors at 1.5m spacing was recommended in the regions affected by the wedge formation and 7m long bolts at 1.5m spacing in other regions. The deformations were monitored for a particular stage of excavation. The predicted deformation using the numerical modeling compare well with instrument observations.

1 INTRODUCTION The Sardar Sarovar Project, which is under construction on the right bank of river Narmada, includes an underground powerhouse. The underground powerhouse complex consists of powerhouse 23m wide, 57m high and 210 m long. There are six pressure shafts of 9m diameter for intake of water from the reservoir to the powerhouse and six draft tubes of 16m wide double D shaped for drawing out water to collection pool. On the downstream side, there are three D-shaped bus galleries of 12m wide and 7.5m high connected to bus shafts. The rock mass is basically basaltic with dykes and agglomarate. The major discontinuities comprise seven shear seams. During the excavation, large cracks were o b s e r v e d i n t h e w a l l s o f t h e powerhouse. The excavation was stopped, leaving a ramp, 8.5m wide with height increasing from 0 to 20m, on the downstream wall and turbine pits. The behavior of the rock mass is to be investigated to ascertain the causes of the damage. Suitable support measures required for safety of the structure are to be estimated. This paper presents the results of Stress Analysis using Elastic Discontinuum Modeling of the rock mass around the excavations. The Analysis

considers FOUR stages of excavation and loading, they are Stage 1. Construction stage with ramp and without support system Stage 2. Final stage of excavation after ramp removal and without support system Stage 3. Final stage of excavation with support system Stage 4. Final stage of excavation with support system and dam loading and impounding

2 COMPUTATIONAL MODEL A large three-dimensional model of 250m wide, 185m high and 325m long is considered in the analysis, placing the boundaries far from the excavations to be simulated. The three dimensional model incorporated the SEVEN shear zones shown in Figure 1. The actual topography was considered with varying rock cover. The cable anchors are simulated as axial members. The rock bolts are simulated as flexural as well as axial member, and they resist axial, and shear deformation at joints. The in-situ stresses and rock

mass parameters considered in the study are given in the following sections.

The analysis will yield the results in terms of displacement and stresses at each tetrahedral zones. The factor of safety can be computed at any point as follows Let 1, 3 be the major and minor principal stresses then the major principal stress at failure can be computed as

3 INPUT PARAMETERS The following input data has been used in the analysis.

1f = 3 tan 2 (45 + /2) + 2c tan

(45 + /2)

3.1 Physico-mechanical parameters The physico-mechanical properties of the rock mass and the shear zones are Shear Modulus G Bulk Modulus K Density = 2.92 GPa = 3.89 GPa = 2650 kg/m3

Where c and a r e t h e M o h r-Coulomb parameters for rock mass. The factor of safety can be computed as FOS = 1f/1 The principal stress vectors, colored by the values factor of safety (of less than 1.2), are shown in the figures. The extents of rock mass failure will provide the criterion for the length of support system. Normally, the cable and rock bolts are designed to a length, which extends them beyond the envelopes failure zones by few meters.

Mohr - Coulomb Parameters for Rockmass Cohesion Friction angle Tensile strength Shear Zone Properties Shear Stiffness JKs Normal Stiffness JKn Cohesion Friction angle 3.2 Insitu Stresses Based on insitu test results the following horizontal stress ratios have been used in the analysis Major Horizontal Stress ratio KH Minor Horizontal Stress ratio Kh = 3.0 = 1.4 = 0.4 GPa/m = 1.0 GPa/m = 0.0 MPa = 36.5 = 3.0 MPa = 45 = 0.5 MPa

4.1 Factor of safety values The factor of safety values over the plan view at EL 10 and EL 20 are shown in figures 1 and 2 for complete excavation without the design support system (Stage 2). The failure zones at EL10 extend up to 20m near the bus gallery 3 on the downstream wall of the powerhouse and up to 10m on the upstream walls are observed. At EL 20 rock mass failure is observed up to 20m in the downstream between bus gallery 2 and 3 and near the pressure shaft two in the upstream wall.

4.2 Horizontal displacements The horizontal displacement variations, along the length of the cavern on the downstream and upstream walls, at different elevations are plotted. These figures depict the movement of the walls after each stage of excavation/loading. 4.2.1 Downstream Wall Horizontal displacement values at EL0 for all stages are shown in Figure 3. It can be seen that ramp removal causes additional deformation ranging from 3mm to 14mm at different chainages. Support installation reduces the deformations to the extent of 2mm between CH1575 to CH1475. Impounding and dam construction increases the horizontal displacement by 1 to 2mm. Horizontal displacement values at EL10, and EL20 are shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5. Maximum displacements of the order of

The direction of major horizontal stress is along the longitudinal axis of the powerhouse cavern.

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results in terms factor of safety values at different elevations and cross sections for different stages of excavation and loading are presented in the following sections. Horizontal displacement variation at different elevations on downstream and upstream walls for all four stages of simulations are shown in the following sections to understand the rock mass behavior at different stages of excavation.

42mm and 32mm are observed at CH1555 at EL 10 and EL20 respectively after stage 2. The maximum additional deformation due to ramp removal is of the order of 20mm occurs at EL10 at CH1515. The support system reduces deformations marginally and the impounding causes maximum additional deformation of the order of 2mm. 4.2.2 Upstream Wall The horizontal displacement values at EL0, EL10, and EL20 are presented in Figure 6 to Figure 8. Maximum horizontal displacement of the order 32mm is observed on the downstream wall at EL20 at CH1555. The maximum increase in the wall movement, due to ramp removal, is of the order of 12mm. The reductio n in the horizontal movement due to support system is minimal and the maximum reduction is of the order of 3mm. The increase in horizontal displacement due to impounding is of the order of 2mm.

5 CONCLUSIONS The results from stress analysis indicate large movements up to the order of 35mm on the downstream wall near the pressure shaft 3 due to wedge formation. Horizontal displacements in excess of 40mm are observed on the downstream wall between the bus galleries 2 and 3 due to wedge formation. Ramp removal increased horizontal displacements up to a maximum extent of 20mm on the downstream wall at CH1515 at EL10 and up to 10mm on upstream wall at CH1555 and CH1535 at EL10 The support system consisting of cable anchors and rock bolts could reduce the horizontal displacement in the walls of the powerhouse at EL0, EL10 and EL 20 by about 2mm and the reduction is minimal near the crown. The dam loading and impounding causes maximum additional deformation less than 0.5mm. The support system is effective in reducing the horizontal movement of the walls of the powerhouse and seems to be adequate. The zones of failure in the rock mass are also confined to the wedges formed in the upstream wall and downstream wall. As the extent of failure zones in the wedge regions are less than 20m, the additional support system consisting of 25m cable bolts on the downstream side, is adequate. The cable bolts on the upstream wall are to be taken beyond the shear zones.

4.3 Instrumentation To calibrate the numerical model and to assess the long term stability of the excavations, extensometers were installed in the upstream and down stream walls of the powerhouse before the removal of ramp excavation (after stage 1). The locations of the instruments were selected based on the results of numerical modeling, where the maximum deformations are expected. The results of instrumentation and numerical modeling are shown in Table1. The column 2 indicates the predicted deformation from stage 1 to 2. The column 3 indicates the observed deformations. The predicted displacements compare well with those observed through instrumentation.
Table 1. Observed and Predicted surface movements of the powerhouse walls in mm Chainage Predicted Observed

REFERENCES
Ven u g o p a l a R a o , R . & G u p t a R . N . ( 2 0 0 0 ) , StressAnalysis of Underground Powerhouse Cavern of Sardar Sarovar Project, Technical Report, NIRM Venugopala Rao, R. et. al (2000), Instrumentation and Data Analysis of Underground Powerhouse Cavern of Sardar Sarovar Project, Technical Report, NIRM 3DEC 2.0 (1999) Users Guide, Itasca Consulting G r o u p I n c . U S A

CH 1595 10.91 (EL 10) 8.0 (EL 7) D/S CH 1540 12.03 (EL 10) 11 (EL 7) D/S CH 1515 11.54 20 EL 0 D/S CH 1515 22.14 8.0 * EL 10 D/S CH 1515 12.13 6.0 * EL 20 D/S CH 1545 11.72 14.0 EL 0 U/S * These extensometers were installed after 6 months of start of ramp excavation.

Figure 1. Factor of safety values over plan view at EL 10

Figure 2. Factor of safety values over plan view at EL 20

Figure 3. Horizont al displacements of downstream wall surface at EL 0

Figure 4. Horizontal displacements of downstream wall surface at EL 10

Figure 5. Horizontal displacements of downstream wall surface at EL 20

Figure 6. Horizontal displacements of upstream wall surface at EL 0

Figure 7. Horizontal displacements of upstream wall surface at EL 10

Figure 8. Horizontal displacements of upstream wall surface at EL 20