1.

Following are the results of a sieve analysis:

US Seive No.
4
10
20
40
60
100
200
Pan
Mass of soil
0
21.6
49.5
102.6
89.1
95.6
60.4
31.2
retained (gm)
Liquid Limit (LL) = 25 % and Plastic Limit (PL) = 15 %
a. Determine the percentage finer than each sieve size and plot a grain size distribution
curve.
b. Determine D10, D30 and D60 from the grain size distribution curve.
c. Calculate the uniformity coefficient, Cu.
d. Calculate the coefficient of gradation, Cc.
e. Classify the soil as per ASTM, USCS and AASHTO.
Solution:
a. The percentage finer is determined in the table below and the grain size distribution
curve (semi-log graph) is also shown.
US Seive
Opening
Mass of Soil
Total mass of
Total Mass of
Percentage
No
(mm)
Retained
soil retained
soil passsing
Finer than
(gm)
(gm)
(gm)
I

II

Pan
200
100
60
40
20
10
4
b.

c.
d.
e.

III

IV

V = Total-IV

VI = (V/Total)*
100
0.0
6.933
20.356
41.6
61.4
84.2
95.2
100.0

0.000
31.2
450.0
0.00
0.075
60.4
418.8
31.2
0.152
95.6
358.4
91.6
0.251
89.1
262.8
187.2
0.422
102.6
173.7
276.3
0.853
49.5
71.1
378.9
2.000
21.6
21.6
428.4
4.750
0.00
0.0
450.0
Total =
450.00 gm
From the Grain-size distribution curve,
For 10 % finer, D10= 0.09 mm
For 30 % finer, D30= 0.2 mm
For 60 % finer, D60= 0.4 mm
So, Coefficient of Uniformity (Cu) = D60/D10 = 0.4/0.09 = 4.44
And, Coefficient of gradation (Cc) = (D30)2 /(D60xD10) = 0.22/(0.4x0.09) = 1.11
For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 6.93 % .So, the soil is coarse grained soil
All of the soil (100%) passes through No 4 sieve so the soil is categorized as sand. As
the percentage of fines (passing No 200 sieve = 6.93%) lies between (5-12) % it is a
borderline case requiring dual symbol.
Since Cu=4.44 < 6 and Cc=1.11 > 1 the soil is poorly graded sand.
Plasticity Index (PI) = LL- PL = 25-15 = 10 %
From A-line equation,
PI=0.73 (LL-20) = 0.73 (25-20) = 0.73x5 = 3.65 < 10 so, it plots above A-line.
Hence the soil contains clay.
The symbol for the given soil in USCS classification system is SP-SC.
For ASTM classification,

1|Page

Percentage of gravel = %age retained on No 4 sieve = 0% <15so, in ASTM

classification the soil is poorly graded sand with clay.
For AASHTO classification,
Percentage passing no 200 sieve = 6.933 % < 35% so, soil is granular materials
Percentage passing No 40 sieve = 6.40% >51% and,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 6.933% < 10% so, the soil is classified into A-3
group as per AASHTO classification.
2. The moist mass of 2.8x10-3m3 of soil is 5.53 Kg.If the moisture content is 10% and the
specific gravity of soil solids is 2.72, determine the following:
a. Moist density; b. Dry density; c. Void ratio; d. Porosity; e. Degree of Saturation; f.
Volume occupied by water.
Solution:
Mass of Soil (M) = 5.53 Kg; Volume of Soil (V) = 2.8 x 10-3 m3;
Moisture Content (Wc) = 10%; Specific Gravity of soil solids (Gs) = 2.72
a. Moist/Bulk density of Soil () = M/V = 5.53/2.8*10-3 = 1975 Kg/m3
b. Moisture content (Wc) = Mw/Ms = (M-Ms)/Ms= (M/Ms)-1
Ms= M/(1+Wc) = 5.53/ (1+0.1) = 5.027 Kg
Dry density (d) = Ms/V = 5.027/2.8*10-3= 1795 Kg/m3
c. Also, Dry density (d) = Gs.w/(1+e)
e= (Gs.w/d)-1= (2.72x1000/1795)-1 =0.5153 = 51.53 %
d. Porosity () = e/(1+e) = (0.5153/1.5153) = 0.34 = 34%
e. Degree of saturation (Sr) = Wc.Gs/e = (0.1x2.72)/0.5153 = 0.5278 =52.78%
f. Volume occupied by water (Vw) = (M-Ms)/w = (5.53-5.027)/1000=5.03x10-4m3
3. For a sandy soil emax=0.75, emin=0.52 and Gs=2.7. What are the void ratio and the dry unit
weight at Dr=80%.
Solution:
We have,
Relative Density(Dr) = (emax-e)/(emax-emin)
e=emax-Dr(emax-emin)= 0.75-0.8x(0.75-0.52) = 0.566
Dry Unit Weight (d) = Gs.w/(1+e) = 2.7x9.81/(1+0.566) =16.913 KN/m3
4. Classify the following soils using the Unified Soil Classification System. Give the Group
Symbols and Group Names (ASTM)
Sieve Analysis % finer
Liquid
Plastic
Soil
Cu
Cc
Limit
Limit
No. 4
No. 200
1
70
30
33
12
2
48
20
41
19
3
95
70
52
24
4
100
82
30
11
5
88
78
69
31
6
71
4
NP
3.4
2.6
7
99
57
54
28
8
71
11
32
16
4.8
2.9
9
100
2
NP
7.2
2.2
10
90
8
39
31
3.9
2.1
Solution:
2|Page

Grain-Size distribution Curve (Semi-log Plot)

4.75, 100.00

100
2.00, 95.20

90
0.85, 84.20

80

Percentage finer than

70
0.42, 61.40

60
50
0.25, 41.60

40
30

0.15, 20.36

20
10
0.08, 6.93

0
0.010

0.100

1.000

10.000

Seive Sizes
Figure 1: Grain Size Distribution Curve for Question 1

3|Page

Soil 1: For USCS classification,

Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 30 % < 50%. So, the soil is coarse grained.
Percentage passing No. 4 sieve = 70 % > 50%. So, the soil is Sand.
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 30 % > 12% Sands with fines.
PI= LL-PL = 33-12 = 21
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (33-20) = 9.49 < 21
So, it plots above A-line. Sand with clay
Hence, USCS Classification: SC
For ASTM classification,
Percentage of Gravel = 30% > 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Clayey sand with Gravel
Soil 2: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 20 % < 50%. So, the soil is coarse grained.
Percentage passing No. 4 sieve = 48 % < 50%. So, the soil is Gravel.
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 20 % > 12% Gravel with fines.
PI= LL-PL = 41-19 = 22
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (41-20) = 15.33 < 22
So, it plots above A-line. Gravel with clay
Hence, USCS Classification: GC
For ASTM classification,
Percentage of Sand = (48-20) %= 28%> 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Clayey Gravel with Sand
Soil 3: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 70 % > 50%. So, the soil is fine grained.
Liquid Limit = 52 % > 50%. So, the soil is High Plasticity silt or clay.
PI= LL-PL = 52-24 = 28
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (52-20) = 23.36 < 28
So, it plots above A-line. Clay with High Plasticity
Hence, USCS Classification: CH
For ASTM classification,
Percentage retained on No. 200 sieve = (100-70) % = 30%
And, Percentage of Sand = (95-70) % =25%> Percentage of Gravel (5%) < 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Sandy Fat Clay
Soil 4: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 82 % > 50%. So, the soil is fine grained.
Liquid Limit = 30 % < 50%. So, the soil is Low Plasticity silt or clay.
PI= LL-PL = 30-11 = 19
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (30-20) = 7.3 < 19
4|Page

So, it plots above A-line. Clay with Low Plasticity

Hence, USCS Classification: CL
For ASTM classification,
Percentage retained on No. 200 sieve = (100-82) % = 18 % < 30% and lies between 15
and 29 %
And, Percentage of Sand = (100-82) %= 18%> Percentage of Gravel (0%)
Hence, ASTM Classification: Lean Clay with Sand
Soil 5: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 78 % > 50%. So, the soil is fine grained.
Liquid Limit = 69 % > 50%. So, the soil is High Plasticity silt or clay.
PI= LL-PL = 69-31 = 38
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (69-20) = 35.77 < 38
So, it plots above A-line. Clay with High Plasticity
Hence, USCS Classification: CH
For ASTM classification,
Percentage retained on No. 200 sieve = (100-78) % = 22% < 30% and lies between 15
and 29%
And, Percentage of Sand = (88-78) % = 10% < Percentage of Gravel (12%)
Hence, ASTM Classification: Fat Clay with Gravel
Soil 6: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 4 % < 50%. So, the soil is coarse grained.
Percentage passing No. 4 sieve = 71 % > 50%. So, the soil is Sand.
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 4 % < 5% Clean Sand.
Cu= 2.4 < 4 and 1 Cc = 2.6 3
So, the Sand is poorly graded
Hence, USCS Classification: SP
For ASTM classification,
Percentage of Gravel = (100 71) % = 29% > 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Poorly graded Sand with Gravel
Soil 7: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 57 % > 50%. So, the soil is fine grained.
Liquid Limit = 54 % > 50%. So, the soil is High Plasticity silt or clay.
PI= LL-PL = 54-28 = 26
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (54-20) = 24.82 < 26
So, it plots above A-line. Clay with High Plasticity
Hence, USCS Classification: CH
For ASTM classification,
Percentage retained on No. 200 sieve = (100-57) %= 43%> 30%
And, Percentage of Sand = (99-57) % =42%> Percentage of Gravel (1 %) < 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Sandy Fat Clay

5|Page

Soil 8: For USCS classification,

Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 11 % < 50%. So, the soil is Coarse grained.
Percentage passing No. 4 sieve = 71 % > 50%. So, the soil is Sand.
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 11 % lies between (5 12) % Dual Symbol.
Cu= 4.8 > 4 and 1 Cc = 2.9 3
So, the Sand is poorly graded (SP).
PI=LL-PL=32-16=16
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (32-20) = 8.76 < 16
So, it plots above A-line. Sand contains clay (SC).
Hence, USCS Classification: SP-SC
For ASTM classification,
Percentage of Gravel = (100 71) % = 29% > 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Poorly graded Sand with Clay and Gravel
Soil 9: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 2 % < 50%. So, the soil is Coarse grained.
Percentage passing No. 4 sieve = 100 % < 50%. So, the soil is Sand.
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 4 % < 5% Clean Sand.
Cu= 7.2 > 6 and 1 Cc = 2.2 3
So, the Sand is well graded
Hence, USCS Classification: SW
For ASTM classification,
Percentage of Gravel = (100 100) % = 0% < 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Well graded Sand
Soil 10: For USCS classification,
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 8 % < 50%. So, the soil is Coarse grained.
Percentage passing No. 4 sieve = 90 % > 50%. So, the soil is Sand.
Percentage passing No. 200 sieve = 8 % lies between (5 12) % Dual Symbol.
Cu= 3.9 < 4 and 1 Cc = 2.1 3
So, the Sand is poorly graded (SP).
PI=LL-PL=39-31= 8
From A-line Equation,
PI=0.73x (LL-20) = 0.73x (39-20) = 13.87 >8
So, it plots below A-line. Sand contains silt (SM).
Hence, USCS Classification: SP-SM
For ASTM classification,
Percentage of Gravel = (100 90) % = 10% < 15%
Hence, ASTM Classification: Poorly graded Sand with Silt
Soil
1
2

Summary
Unified Soil Classification System
American Society of Testing Materials
(USCS)
(ASTM) Classification
SC
Clayey Sand with Gravel
GC
Clayey Gravel with Sand
6|Page

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

CH
CL
CH
SP
CH
SP-SC
SW
SP-SM

Sandy Fat Clay

Lean Clay with Sand
Fat Clay with Gravel
Poorly graded Sand with Gravel
Sandy Fat Clay
Poorly graded Sand with Clay and Gravel
Well graded Sand
Poorly graded Sand with Silt

5. Laboratory compaction test results on a clayey soil are listed in the table
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Unit Weight (KN/ m3)
6
14.80
8
17.45
9
18.52
11
18.9
12
18.5
14
16.9
Following are the results of a field unit weight determination test on the same soil with the
sand cone method.
Calibrated dry density of Ottawa sand = 1570 Kg/ m3
Calibrated mass of Ottawa sand to fill the cone = 0.545 Kg
Mass of Sand+ Cone +Jar (before use) = 7.59 Kg
Mass of Sand+ Cone +Jar (after use) = 4.78 Kg
Mass of moist soil from hole = 3.007 Kg
Moisture content of Moist soil = 10.2%
Determine
a. Dry unit weight in field
b. Relative compaction in field
Solution:
Given, Mass of soil from hole (M) = 3.007 Kg
Mass of Sand+ Cone +Jar (before use) (M1) = 7.59 Kg
Mass of Sand+ Cone+ Jar (after use) (M2) = 4.78 Kg
Mass of Ottawa sand to fill the cone (M3) = 0.545 Kg
Calibrated dry density of Ottawa sand (sand) = 1570 Kg/ m3
Moisture content of moist soil (Wc) = 10.2%
Volume of the excavated hole (V)
= (M1-M2-M3)/sand= (7.59-4.78-0.545)/ 1570
= 2.265/ 1570= 1.443*10-3 m3
Density of soil (field)
= M/V = 3.007/ 1.443*10-3 = 2083.85 Kg/ m3
a. Dry unit weight in field (d,field)
= field*g/ (1+Wc)

7|Page

= 2083.85x 9.81/ (1.102) = 18.55 KN/ m3

Moisture Content V/s Dry Unit Weight

Dry Unit Weight (KN/ m3)

20
18.90

18.52

19

18.50

17.45

18

16.90

17
16
14.80

15
14
13
12
0

10

12

14

16

Moisture Content (%)

Figure 2: Dry Unit Weight Vs Moisture Content for Question 5

b. For max dry unit weight,

From the graph of Moisture content V/s Dry unit weight, the dry unit weight corresponding
to the Optimum Moisture Content is
d = 18.9 KN/m3
Relative Compaction = d,field/ d = 18.55/ 18.9 = 0.9815 = 98.15 %
6. Calculate the seepage loss per unit length of the sheet pile (at right angles to the cross section
shown) using flownet and analytical method.
H1= 5m; D= 4m; H2 = 0.7m; D1 =10 m
Solution:
The flow-net diagram for the given problem is as
shown in the attached graph sheet.
From the graph,
The no. of flow channels (Nf) = 5
No. of potential drop (Nd) = 10
Head Loss (h) = 5 - 0.7 = 4.3 m
Seepage Loss (Q)

= k.h.

Nf
Nd

5
10
= 0.13975 cm3/ (sec.cm)
= 1.2074 m3/ (day. m)
From analytical method (Method of fragments),
As shown in figure alongside both the regions 1 and 2
are type II fragments as per Pavlovsky,
= 6.5x10-4x4.3x100x

2
1

8|Page

Figure 3: Selection of regions for Question 6

For type II fragment,

S = D = 4m
T = D1 = 10m
S/T = 4/10 = 0.4
From the graph for S/T = 0.4
(1/2) = 0.58
Form factor () = 0.86
Discharge (Q)

= k.

4.3x102
= 6.5x 10 x
2 * 0.86
-4

= 0.1625 cm3/ (sec.cm)

= 1.404 m3/ (day. m)
7. A gravity dam 35m wide is retaining 20m of water. The dam was constructed 2m deep in a
silty sand layer of 30m thickness overlying an impermeable basalt. In order to reduce seepage
a cut-off wall 15m deep was constructed exactly at the downstream face. The horizontal
coefficient of permeability of the silty sand layer is 2.25x10-3m/ sec while in the vertical
direction is 10-3 m/sec.
i)
Construct the flow net in graph adopting a scale of 1:400 in vertical direction.
ii)
Calculate seepage.
iii)
Investigate safety factor against piping at theexit.
iv)
Determine the distribution of hydraulic pressure across the base of the dam at interval
distance of 5m.
v)
Solve ii-iv using method of fragments.
vi)
If instead of downstream face the cut off wall is placed at the upstream face of the
dam, determine the seepage using method of fragments. Determine also the
distribution of hydraulic pressure at the base of the dam at 5m intervals.
vii)
What effect does the position of cut-off wall have on the seepage and hydrostatic
pressure?
Solution:
Here, Permeability in Vertical direction, Kz = 2.25x10-3m/ sec
Permeability in Horizontal direction, Kx = 10-3 m/sec
Scale adopted in Vertical direction = 1:400
For Anisotropic soil, Reduction in horizontal scale = (Kz/Kx) = 2.25 = 1.5
Horizontal Scale = 1: (400x1.5) = 1: 600
i) The flow-net diagram for given problem adopting above scale is shown in attached graph
sheet.
ii) From the flow-net diagram
No of flow channels (Nf) = 5
No. of potential drops (Nd) = 11
Head Loss (h) = 20m

9|Page

 Seepage Loss (Q)

= K.h.
=

Nf
Nd
.

= 2.25 10
10 = 1.5 10 m/ sec
5
= 1.5x10-3x20x
11
= 0.0136 m3/ (sec. m)
iii) For Safety factor against piping,
Assuming Critical gradient, (ic) = 1
Length of flow field (s) = 4.8 m (from graph)
Potential Drop (h) = 20/11 = 1.82 m
Exit gradient (ie) = h/ s = 1.82/4.8 = 0.38
Factor of safety against piping = ic/ ie = 1/ 0.38 = 2.63
iv) Determination of pressure distribution at the base of dam from flow net (refer to the graph)
No of Equipotential drop (Nf) = 11
Total drop in potential (H) = 20 m
Potential drop in each equipotential line = H/ Nf = 20/11 = 1.81 m
No of Equipotential drop at the base of the dam = 4
Total length along which this equipotential drop takes place = 23.33 m (Hz.) +4 m (Vt.)
= 27.33 m
Equipotential drop per meter length of the base of dam = 4*1.81/27.33 =0.265 m/m
Elevation head (z) = -2m
If A, B, C and H be the points at the base of the dam along the horizontal direction at
distance 0m, 5m, 10m..and 35m respectively from the heel of the dam then pressure
heads at these points are given by:
Pressure head at the base of dam at point A (hA) = 20 1.81-(-2) = 20.19 m
Pressure head at the base of dam at point B (hB) = 20.19 3.33* 0.265 = 19.31 m
Pressure head at the base of dam at point C (hC) = 19.31 3.33* 0.265 = 18.43 m
Pressure head at the base of dam at point D (hD) = 18.43 3.33* 0.265 = 17.55 m
Pressure head at the base of dam at point E (hE) = 17.55 3.33* 0.265 = 16.67 m
Pressure head at the base of dam at point F (hF) = 16.67 3.33* 0.265 = 15.79 m
Pressure head at the base of dam at point G (hG) = 15.79 3.33* 0.265 = 14.91 m
Pressure head at the base of dam at point H (hH) = 14.91 3.33* 0.265 = 14.02 m

10 | P a g e

35m

5m

5m

14.02 m

5m

14.91 m

5m

15.79 m

18.43 m

19.31 m

20.19 m

5m

16.67 m

5m

17.55 m

5m

Figure 4: Pressure Head Distribution at the base of dam using flow net for Question 7

v) Using Method of Fragments,

The flow path though the soil may be divided into two regions 1 and 2 as shown in figure
below. Here, region 1 is fragment type III and Flow region 2 is fragment type II.
For flow region 1 (Type III fragment)
b/ T = 35/ (1.5x30) = 0.778 and s/ T = 17/ 30 = 0.567
For these values of b/ T and s/ T from Polubarinova-Kochinas graph
1/2 = 0.325 = 1.538

20m

30m

35m
35/1.5 = 23.33 m in reduced Hz scale

15m

17m

Figure
5: Selection
of regions for Question 7 using method of fragments
For flow region
2 (type
II fragment)

11 | P a g e

For, s/ T = 17/ 30 = 0.567 and b/ T =0 from Polubarinova-Kochinas graph

1/2 = 0.45 = 1.111
Seepage Loss (Q)

= K.h.

Where, =
.
= 2.25 10
10 = 1.5 10
And = 1.111+1.538 = 2.649
Q = 1.5x10-3x20/2.649 = 0.011325 m3/ (sec. m)
Factor of safety against piping
Critical gradient (ic) = 1
Head loss in region 2 (h2) = h. = 20x

.
.

m/ sec

= 8.388 m of water

Embedded length of from ground surface (s) =17m

Total depth of silty-sand layer (T) = 30m
From graph of exit-gradient of type II fragment shown below
For (s/T)= 0.567, (iexs)/h2= 0.565
Where, ie=Exit Gradient
ie =0.565*8.388/17 = 0.279
Factor of safety against piping at exit = ic/ ie = 1/ 0.279 = 3.587

For pressure head distribution at the base of the dam

Head Loss in region 1 (h1) = h. = 20x

.
.

= 11.61 m of water

As the head loss is assumed to be linearly distributed along the base of dam
Distance through which head loss occurs = 2+23.33+15 = 40.33 m
Rate of head loss (R) = 11.61/40.33 = 0.2879 m head of water/ m
Elevation Head (z) = -2m
At the heel of the dam (point A) Pressurehead = 20 - 0.2879 x 2- (-2) = 21.424 m head of
water
In reduced horizontal scale,
12 | P a g e

5m along the base of dam in Horizontal direction = 5/1.5 =3.33 m in reduced scale
So If A, B, C and H be the points at the base of the dam along the horizontal direction at
distance 0m, 5m, 10m..and 35m respectively from the heel of the dam then pressure
heads at these points are given by:
hA = 20 - 0.2879 x 2 (-2) = 21.424 m head of water
hB = 21.424 -1*3.33*0.2879 =20.465 m head of water
hC = 21.424 -2*3.33*0.2879 =19.506 m head of water
hD = 21.424 -3*3.33*0.2879 =18.548 m head of water
hE = 21.424 -4*3.33*0.2879 =17.589 m head of water
hF = 21.424 -5*3.33*0.2879 =16.63 m head of water
hG = 21.424 -6*3.33*0.2879 =15.672 m head of water
hH = 21.424 -7*3.33*0.2879 =14.713 m head of water
35m

5m

5m

14.713 m

5m

15.672 m

5m

16.63m

19.506 m

20.465 m

21.424 m

5m

17.589m

5m

18.548 m

5m

Figure 6: Pressure Distribution at the base of dam for Question 7 using method of fragments

Hydraulic pressure head at the endpoint of cutoff wall (hI)

= hH 0.2879*15
= 14.713 4.325
= 10.388 m head of water
vi) When the cut-off wall is placed at the upstream end of dam instead of downstream end,

13 | P a g e

20m

17m 15m
30m

35m
35/1.5 = 23.33 m in reduced Hz scale
A

Figure 7: Selection of regions for Question 7 when the cut-off wall in moved to upstream

As shown in above figure the flow path may be divided into two regions 1 and 2 where region
1 is type II fragment and region 2 is type III fragment.
For region 1 (Type II fragment)
b/ T = 0 and s/ T = 17/ 30 = 0.567, from Polubarinova-Kochinas graph
1/2 = 0.45 = 1.111
Similarly for region 2 (Type III fragment)
b/ T = 35/ (1.5x30) = 0.778 and s/ T = 17/ 30 = 0.567
For these values of b/ T and s/ T from Polubarinova-Kochinas graph
1/2 = 0.325 = 1.538
Seepage Loss (Q)

= K.h.

Where, =
.
= 2.25 10
10 = 1.5 10
And = 1.111+1.538 = 2.649
Q = 1.5x10-3x20/2.649 = 0.011325 m3/ (sec. m)
For pressure head distribution at the base of the dam
Head Loss in region 1 (h1) = h. = 20x

.
.

m/ sec

= 8.388 m of water

Total head at the lowermost end of cutoff wall (hA) = 20 8.388 = 11.612m head of water
Head loss in region 2 (h2) = 20-8.388 = 11.612 m of water
Alternately, Head loss in region 2 (h2) = h. = 20x

.
.

= 11.612 m of water

As the head loss is assumed to be linearly distributed along the base of dam
Distance through which head loss occurs = 15+23.33+2 = 40.33 m
14 | P a g e

Rate of head loss (R) = 11.61/40.33 = 0.2879 m head of water/ m

In reduced horizontal scale,
5m along the base of dam in Horizontal direction = 5/1.5 =3.33 m in reduced scale
Elevation Head (z) = -2m
So If B, C, D and I be the points at the base of the dam along the horizontal direction at
distance 0m, 5m, 10m..and 35m respectively from the heel of the dam as shown in
above figure then pressure heads at these points are given by:
hB = 11.612 - 0.2879 x 15 (-2)= 9.2935 m head of water
hC = 9.2935 -1*3.33*0.2879 =8.334 m head of water
hD = 9.2935 -2*3.33*0.2879 =7.376 m head of water
hE = 9.2935 -3*3.33*0.2879 =6.417 m head of water
hF = 9.2935 -4*3.33*0.2879 =5.459 m head of water
hG = 9.2935 -5*3.33*0.2879 =4.5 m head of water
hH = 9.2935 -6*3.33*0.2879 =3.541 m head of water
hI = 9.2935 -7*3.33*0.2879 =2.5826 m head of water
35m

I
2.5826 m

5m

3.541 m

5m

4.5 m

5m

5.459 m

5m

6.417 m

5m

7.376 m

8.334 m

5m

9.2935 m

5m

Figure 8: Pressure Head distribution at the base of dam for Question 7 when the cut-off wall is moved upstream.
The reduction in head is apparent when this diagram is compared with that of figure 6 (where the cut-off was
placed at downstream).

vii) The location of cut-off wall does not affect the seepage through the soil as seen from above
case where in both cases the Seepage discharge (Q) remains 0.011325 m3/ (sec. m).
However placing the cut-off wall close to the upstream side reduces the uplift pressure
considerably on the base of the dam as seen from the pressure distribution diagrams.

15 | P a g e

16 | P a g e

17 | P a g e