construction report of retaing wall of under ground dam

1. Report On
Design of water retaining wall at
-5mRL and +13mRL
GUIDED BY SUBMITTED BY
GOVIL SINGLA SIR VIKAS MEENA
ASSOCIATE MANGER (CIVIL) III YR B.TECH.(CE)
HINDUSTHAN ZINC LTD. (UG) JEC GROUP OFCOLLEGES
AGUCHA (Dist. Bhilwara) Jaipur

2. Content
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 TIME LINE OF PROJECT
 INTROUCTION
 THEORTICAL ASPECTS OF DAMS CONSTUCTION
Design consideration
 Estimation of dam thickness
 Estimation of thickness of dam based on the Crushing
strength
 Estimation of thickness of dam based on the Shear strength
 Estimation of thickness of dam based on the tensile
strength of its material
 Estimation of depth of cut
 ANALYSIS OF RAINFALL DATA AND POSSIBLE
WATER HEAD AT DAM
 CALCULATION OF WATER HEAD FOR DAM
 EVALUATION OF DAM THICKNESS AND DEPTH OF
CUT
 CONSTUCTION AND DESIGN OF DAM
 GROUND MONITORING PLAN
 CONCLUSIONS

3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I express my gratitude to management of Hindustan Zinc Limited, Vedanta
Resources who has shown confidence on me and bestowed upon me this
valuable task.
I want to express my deepest gratitude and special thanks to Mr. Praveen
Kumar Jain, Location Head, Rampura Agucha Mines for allowing me to carry
out my project at their esteemed organization.
I would like to express my sincerethanks to my project mentor Mr. Govil Singla
Associate Manager - Civil, Rampura Agucha Underground Mines) for his kind
guidance throughoutthe courseof the project. Without his help I was helpless.
I am also thankful to Mr. Nathu Singh Choudhary, Manager – Mining, RAUG
Mines; Mr. Amit Jain, Manager - Mechanical and all other engineers of RAUG
Mine with whom I interacted during the internship.
I am also thankful to Ms. Urvashi Jindal and Ayush Diwedi Executive, Human
Resources Department, for her continued support and invaluable
encouragement.
I perceive this opportunity as a big milestone in my career development. I shall
always be indebted to Vedanta Resources for providing me this opportunity.

4. Timeline of the Project
 03/06/2016 – 12/06/2016
•Overview and understanding of mine
•Visit of all the respective departments
 13/06/2016 – 12/07/2016
•Underground Visit
•Data Collection
 13/07/2016 – 20/07/2016
•Analysis of Collected Data
•Identification of parameters affecting
 22/07/2016 – 26/07/2016
•Report Preparation and Submission

5. INTRODUCTION
Hindustan Zinc Limited is planning to extract lead- zinc deposit by underground
stopping methods at deeper horizons below the currently operating open-pit
mine. The open pit has reach an RL of +80mRL and is planned to go further
deep up to -40mRL with a depth of about 440m from the surface. The mine
management has planned for exploiting the continuing ore body by
underground trail stopping.
The current pit bottom is at about +80mRL. The ultimate pit shall go beyond
the trial stopping level between -5mRL and +13mRL. As the pit planned to be
deepened down to -40mRL the entries to the stopping region need to be
plugged to prevent flooding of pit water into the underground working.
Currently the trail stopping level between -5mRL and +13mRL is completed in
the central portion between 390N and 420S with all the primary stops
extracted in this region and all the intervening secondary stops remaining like
supports rib pillar.
In the current study the above scenarios of isolation requirement are analysed.
The possibility of water accumulation in the pit and water head development
are analysed for the above scenario. Further, water retaining bulk head are
designed using well established statutory norms for temporary and permanent
bulk head requirements.
Finally some recommendations on its mode of construction and a ground
monitoring scheme are made.

6. Fig. A schematic LVS showing the proposed production plan from open pit and
Underground.

7. THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF DAM CONSTUCTION
Design consideration
In mines, underground dams are constructed mainly to prevent inundation of
dip side working by isolating the adjacent flooded areas. They are also used to
flood a portion of a mine in the case of a fire and to limit the amount of
pumping and to keep water under control so that it may be drawn off as and
when required. In some instance a dam is also fitted with bulk head door
whilst approaching old working.
The factors which govern the design of a dam are the size of roadway, the
nature of adjacent strata, the estimated water pressure and form of dam. Care
should be taken while estimating the maximum water pressure on the dam.
The most important parameter in the design of an underground dam is the
estimation of its safe thickness under a given set of conditions. The factors
which are normally considered are:
a) The maximum water head to be resisted
b) The nature and the geotechnical properties of the surrounding
strata
c) The crushing strengths of the materials to be used
d) The cross-sectional area of the gallery
e) The form of dam –flat or straight, cylindrical or arched and
f) The type of the dam –temporary or permanent

8. Estimation of dam thickness
Various approaches have been adopted to estimate the safe thickness of dam.
Estimation of the thickness of a dam based on the crushing strength
Kalmykov suggests the following equation to estimation the safe thickness of a
cement concrete wedge shaped straight dam:
t =
𝐵+ℎ
4 tan∝
(√
4𝜆𝑝𝐵ℎ
4𝜎
𝑓
(𝐵+ℎ)2
+ 1-1)
where
t= thickness of the dam
B= width of the gallery
α= angle of inclination of dam
σ= ultimate crushing strength of concrete
λ= coefficient of overloading = 1.25
k= coefficient of strength variation = 0.6
p= water pressure of dam
f= safety factor

9. The Director-General of Mine Safety in India recommends the following
empirical equation for estimating the thickness of cement concrete dams
t =
0.3𝑝𝐵1.5
𝜎′
t= thickness of dam in ft
σ’= safe permissible crushing strength of cement concrete
Professor Aldis in the UK suggests the following equation to estimate the
thickness of a cylindrical dam
t= r(1- √1 −
20𝑝
𝜎
)
where
r= the shorter or the external radius of dam
p=total water pressure on the dam
σ= ultimate crushing strength of concrete
Estimation of the thickness of a dam based on the shear strength
The thickness of a rectangular dam to resist shear is
t=
𝐵ℎ𝑝
2(𝐵+ℎ) 𝜎
𝑓⁄
where
σ= ultimate crushing strength of concrete
f= safety factor

10. Estimation of the thickness of a dam based on the tensile strength
of its material
Peele suggests that the thickness of a dam can be estimated by the use of the
thick beam formula
t=√
𝑝𝐵2
2𝜎𝑡′
where, σt’= the safe permissible tensile strength of dam concrete
R.N. Gupta also propose a formula for the estimation the thickness of a dam
t=3 4⁄ √
ℎ2 𝐾𝑝(𝑀+1)
𝜎𝑡
𝑓
𝑚
where
p= water pressure of dam
f= safety factor
m= poison number of the dam material
K= coefficient which depends on the ratio of the two sides of the dam
σt= ultimate tensile strength of concrete

11. Fig. Comparison b/w calculation equations for the thickness of the dam
Estimation of depth of cut
The depth of cut to be provided on the four sides can be estimated from the
following expression:
e=t tan 𝛼
where
e= depth of cut
t= thickness of the dam
α= abutment side angle of dam (generally α= 12 to 20 degree)

12. ANALYSIS OF RAINFALL DATA AND POSSSIBLE WATER
HEAD AT RAM
Initially the possibility of water accumulation in the open pit is analysed from
the available rainfall data in the region for past 10 - 12 years. The daily
recording of rainfall in the region for past 12 years (2003 to 2014) is given
below:
Maximum rainfall recorded for a day : 225mm
Maximum rainfall recorded for a month : 420mm
Maximum rainfall recorded for a year : 1017 mm
Cummulative rainfall in the past 12 years (2003 to 2014) : 8044mm
Catchment area of the current pit (2014 - 2015) : 16,42,395 sq.m.
The volume of open pit with respect to the height of water head from pit
bottom has been estimated for the pit about 400m and for a height of 100m
from pit bottom.
The corresponding pit volume and water head for the maximum rainfall data is
shown below:
Max. possible volume of rain &water head in the pit in a day : 3.69 lakh m3
; 4m
Max. possible volume of rain &water head in the pit in a month: 6.89 lakh m3
13m
Max. possible volume of rain&water head in the pit in a year: 16.7 lakh m3
28m
Cumulative volume of rain for 12 years: 132.1 lakh m3
; 92m

13. Fig. Pit volume v/s water head for the entire pit.
Fig. Pit volume with respect to height for 100m from pit bottom

14. Apart from the rainfall, the other factors controlling the water head
development in the pit include ground water seepages into the pit, water
percolating into the strata from the pit and also the water evaporation rate.
These factors may be in some case cancels each other and therefore will not
be significant in the calculations.
W total = W R +(W gw-in - W gw-out -W E)
where
W total : total water accumulation in the pit
W R : rain water
Wgw-in : ground water seepages into the pit
Wgw-out: ground water percolating into strata from the pit
WE : quantity of water evaporation out of the pit
The annual water pumping data and the estimation of the rainfall volume
based on current pit area of Rampura Agucha Mines:

15. Fig. Pumping and rain fall data based on current pit area
The pit area was significantly lower in the yester years; hence the rainfall
volume calculated may be higher than the pumping data of the previous years.
The most significant observation is that for the recent years, the rainfall
volume estimated matches well with the water pumped out from the pit. This
indicates that the other factors(K) is self- compensatory in this case, and it is
safe to calculate the water head based on the rain water data.
CALCULATION OF WATER HEAD FOR
RAM
Water head formation has been seen in three scenarios as given below:
1. Water head in the working pit -5mRL and +13mRL footwall drive
during the remaining stopping in north and south side of trail
stopping level.
2. Water head in the working pit at +20mRL near decline connection
to the central portion of trial stopping level.

16. 3. Water level in ultimate pit +20mRL decline connection to north
1and south side of trail stopping level for permanent isolation.
Calculation of the water head in all the three scenarios has been done as
given below:
 Water Head in the working pit for isolation of North and South
side stopping
The requirement of bulk head to safely isolate North and South stopping in
the trial stopping horizon is limited to 2-3 years, as threes stopping are
expected to be exhausted in the year 2016-2017. These bulk heads are to be
constructed in the footwall drives of -5mRL and +13MRL in the South side and
in +13mRL in the North side; there is no connection currently existing in the
North side of -5mRL footwall drive.
The roof of the top drill drives and cross-cut exist at +18mRL. The 60m barrier
between the open pit bottom and the top drill drive shall be breached when
the pit is deepened to +70mRL. In a working pit, there will be regular pumping
of water to continue production from of open pit. The Maximum period for
which the pumping may be stopped, in the worst scenario, shall be for a
period of 7 days, or at the maximum for a month. Though must unlikely, if
on year cumulative maximum rainfall data is considered, a maximum of
1.017m of rain ( year 2011) corresponding to about 28m of water head in the
work pit work pit (till year 2020) may be at +100mRL (+70mRL+30m). Hence
the water head to be considered for temporary bulk head design at -5mRL and
+13mRL shall be 105m and 87m respectively.

17. As the pit is deepened and widened, this likely water level in the working pit
remains the highest possibility. The bulk head requirement for the footwall
drivages at -5mRL and +13mRL shall be only temporary in nature(less than 5
years).
Water level for decline connection at centre portion (+13mRL)
For complete isolation of the central stopping region between 390Nand 420S
of trial stopping level, the decline connections need to be plugged at about
+20mRL. This isolation water dams will be serve temporarily during the North
and South side stopping in the same level. The decline is connected to the
bottom level at about +70mRL. Further after the stopping is completed and the
pit is deepened to its ultimate bottom level of -40mRL, the bulk heads will
serve for permanent isolation of the central stopping region between -5 and
+13mRL.
For the temporary isolation phase of the decline connection to the central
region, the maximum possible water head to be considered will be same as
that of the footwall drives towards North and South trial stopping which
means the maximum water level in the pit at +100mRL need to be considered.
The bulk heads are to be constructed about +20mRL in the decline accesses,
the maximum possible water head, which to be guarded against is therefore
80m up to the period of 5 years on a temporary basis.
For permanent isolation, the ultimate pit bottom needs to be considered,
which will be at -40mRL by the end of year 2020. When the pit is exhausted,
there may be chance that more water may be accumulated in the pit.
Considering past 12 years rainfall record, the water accumulation in the pit for
about 12 years without water pumping may lead to a water head of about 92m
from the pit bottom. Taking some additional precautions and uncertainties,
one may considered a 100m height of water accumulation in the ultimate pit,
which means the maximum possible height of water level could be up to

18. +60mRL. The permanent bulk heads in the central decline access at (+20mRL)
should be designed therefore for 40m of water head.
Hence it is advisable to construct the bulk heads taking the temporary
requirement withmaximumof 80mwater head and permanent requirement
with maximum of 40m water head and permanent requirement with
maximum of 40m water head, whichever is large.
Water level for decline connection at south and north side
(+13mRL)
After temporarily isolating the central stopping region, stopping shall continue
in North and South side of the samelevel till 2016-17 by connecting the decline
to South and North side +13mRL. It also necessary to permanently plug the
stopping level. The water head calculation for these permanent bulk heads will
be same that of the permanent dams of the central decline access.
Hence, the maximum possible water head which may be encountered by
these bulk heads shall be about 40m.

19. EVALUATION OF DAM THICKNESS AND
DEPTH OF CUT
1The dam thickness has been evaluated using DGMS formula for safety factor
of 8.0 for temporary dams and safety factor of 15.0 for permanent dams as
given below:
T=(H*W*√W)/(8*S)
Roadway dimension of 5.6mX 5.3mis taken and a compressivestrength of only
25.8 MPa is used here, which means for SF=8.0, the crushing strength (S) taken
in the above formula is 3.23 MPa and that for SF=15.0 it will be 1.72 MPa.
Following dam thickness are obtained for three scenarios discussed earlier.
In +13mRL and -5mRL footwall drives towards North and South sides
The maximum possiblewater head calculated for working pit : 105m for -5mRL
and 87m for +13mRL.
Safety factor: 8.0
Thickness of dam (t) = 5.3m at -5mRL and 4.4m at +13mRL
Depth of cut (d) = 1.5m at -5mRL and 1.25m at +13mRL
In +20mRL decline connection at Central portion
The maximum possible water head for working pit : 80m

20. Safety factor : 8.0
Thickness of temporary dam : 4.0m
Depth of cut : 1.15m
Maximum possible water head for ultimate pit : 40m
Safety factor : 15.0
Thickness of permanent dam : 3.8m
Depth of cut : 1.1m
In +20mRL decline connection at South and North side
Maximum possible water head for ultimate pit : 40m
Safety factor : 15.0
Thickness of permanent dam : 3.8m
Depth of cut : 1.1m
Construction And Design Of Dam
Arch shaped bulk head dams are suggested for effective protection against the
water head. A schematic showing the construction and design of the bulk
heads is given figure as a part and longitudinal section views. The pressure
grouted methods should be adopted for effective sealing of the roadways and
preventions of seepages while constructing the bulk head.

22. GROUND MONITORING PLAN
The roadway near all the bulk to a distance of 10-20m need to be
monitored using borehole extensometers (telltales) and convergence
indicators.
CONSLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
From the empirical calculation for the thickness of the water dam and depth of
the cut following conclusions and recommendations are made:
1. The 60m barrier between the current working open pit and the
underground trial stopping level will be breached when the pit is
deepened to +70mRL. Hence the proposed stopping areas in the North
and South sides of the trial trail stopping level and the central decline
connection needs to be plugged at the footwall drives in +13mRL and -
5mRL and near the decline access to +13mRL using temporary bulk
heads prior to deepening the open pit.
2. From the analysis of rainfall data and pumping from the open pit in the
recent years it can be concluded that rain water alone falling into the pit
pretty much accounts for the possible water accumulation in the pit. The
other factor such as groundwater seepages into the pit, percolation from
the pit to the neighbouring strata and evaporation from the pit
compensate each other.

23. 3. The maximum possible water level in the working pit will be at +100mRL
when the pit bottom is at +70mRL. When the pit is deepened, this level
will only further reduce.
4. It is recommended that here to use M30 grade of concrete for the dam
construction, a crushing strength of only 25.86Mpa was considered in
the calculation which means the SF=8.0, the crushing strength taken is
3.23MPa and for SF=15.0 it will be 1.72MPa.
5. The depth of cut (d) into the roadway sides, floors and roof required for
ensuring good contact of the dam with the rock mass.
6. During construction, it should be ensured that the rock mass which
housethe dam is strong, freefromfissures and not likely to be disturbed
by the subsequent workings.
7. Dam should be of arch shape and made up of M30 cement concrete.
Pressure grouting needs to be used using injection holes to ensure
complete filling to the top of the notched region.
8. The dam must be fitted with a drain pipe of 150 to 200mm diameter, an
air vent pipe, and pressure gauge and control valves. Any weak rock
mass found in the sides, roof and floor should be strengthened by the
cement injection, fully grouted bolts, and shotcrete.
9. It should be ensured that peak particle velocities near the dam sites
should not exceed 25mm/s due to the blasting from the open pit as well
as underground.