Rio Tuba FR Vol - I Main Report 090618

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.
2 Final Report
Volume I Main Report
June 2009
Sumitomo Mitsui Construction Co., Ltd.
Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2 Constitution of the Report
Volume I Volume II Volume III Volume IV Volume V Main Report Drawings Specification Design Calculation Quantity Calculation
Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2
Final Report Volume I Main Report
Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2 Volume I Main Report
Table of Contents
Page Chapter 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Chapter 2. 2.1 2.2 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 Background........................................................................................................... 1 Scope of This Document....................................................................................... 2 Work Excluded ..................................................................................................... 3 References provided by CBNC............................................................................. 4 Guidelines and Standards...................................................................................... 5 Design Conditions ............................................................................................... 6 Topographical Conditions..................................................................................... 6 Geological Conditions .......................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Regional Geology........................................................................................... 6 2.2.2 Structural Geology ......................................................................................... 8 2.2.3 Site Geology................................................................................................... 9 Natural and Social Environment........................................................................... 13 Precipitation and Runoff Analysis ........................................................................ 13 Design Philosophy of TSF No.2 ........................................................................... 13 Design Seismic Coefficient................................................................................... 14 Design Review of Dam Embankment ................................................................ 17 Topographical and Geological Condition ............................................................. 17 3.1.1 Topography and Geology of Dam Site........................................................... 18 3.1.2 Topography and Geology of Reservoir .......................................................... 20 3.1.3 Fault at Right Side of southern Dam site ....................................................... 21 Staged Construction .............................................................................................. 23 Dam Type.............................................................................................................. 24 3.3.1 Southern Dam................................................................................................. 24 3.3.2 Northern Dam................................................................................................. 25 Dam Foundation ................................................................................................... 26 3.4.1 Additional Boring Test ................................................................................... 26 3.4.2 Test Pit Investigation...................................................................................... 28 3.4.3 Geological Investigation Result ..................................................................... 29 Dam Axis .............................................................................................................. 31 Zoning and Embankment Materials...................................................................... 32 3.6.1 Zoning of Rockfill Dam ................................................................................. 32
2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 Chapter 3. 3.1
3.2 3.3
3.4
3.5 3.6
(i)
3.6.2 Possible Borrow Areas of Embankment Materials......................................... 34 3.6.3 Borrow Areas of Embankment Materials....................................................... 40
3.7
Material Properties for Each Zone........................................................................ 52 3.7.1 Core Zone....................................................................................................... 52 3.7.2 Filter Zone...................................................................................................... 54 3.7.3 Rock Zone ...................................................................................................... 58 Instrument ............................................................................................................. 59 3.8.1 Objectives of Instrumentation ........................................................................ 59 3.8.2 Function and Arrangement of Instruments ..................................................... 60 3.8.3 Data Collection............................................................................................... 62 Design Review of Water Management............................................................... 64 Hydrological Analysis........................................................................................... 64 4.1.1 Precipitation ................................................................................................... 65 4.1.2 Peak Discharge............................................................................................... 69 4.1.3 Probable Maximum Flood for Dam Safety .................................................... 71 4.1.4 Precipitation and Peak discharge in Dry Season ............................................ 75 Consideration of Precipitation Data at Rio Tuba .................................................. 79 Diversion Method ................................................................................................. 82 4.3.1 Required Function .......................................................................................... 82 4.3.2 Diversion Procedure....................................................................................... 82 4.3.3 Hydraulic Design ........................................................................................... 83 Spillways............................................................................................................... 87 4.4.1 Required Function and Freeboard .................................................................. 87 4.4.2 Spillway for First Stage.................................................................................. 88 4.4.3 Spillway for Final Stage ................................................................................. 90 Structural Analysis.............................................................................................. 92 Stability Analysis of Foundation and Embankment.............................................. 92 5.1.1 General ........................................................................................................... 92 5.1.2 Factor of Safety .............................................................................................. 92 5.1.3 Slope Stability Analysis ................................................................................. 94 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................... 102 General.................................................................................................................. 102 Necessity of Trial Embankment............................................................................ 102 Quality Control ..................................................................................................... 103
3.8
Chapter 4. 4.1
4.2 4.3
4.4
Chapter 5. 5.1
Chapter 6. 6.1 6.2 6.3
LIST OF TABLES IN REPORT

Page
Table R 2.2.1 Table R 2.4.1 Table R 2.5.1 Summary of Regional Geology by HATCH ........................................................... 8 Average Monthly Rainfall at Mangingidong .......................................................... 13 Storage Capacity of TSF-2...................................................................................... 14
(ii)
Table R 3.4.1 Table R 3.4.2 Table R 3.4.3 Table R 3.4.4 Table R 3.4.5 Table R 3.6.1 Table R 3.6.2 Table R 3.6.3 Table R 3.6.4 Table R 3.6.5 Table R 3.6.6 Table R 3.6.7 Table R 3.7.1 Table R 3.7.2 Table R 3.7.3 Table R 3.7.4 Table R 3.7.5 Table R 3.7.6 Table R 3.7.7 Table R 3.7.8 Table R 3.7.9 Table R 3.7.10 Table R 3.7.11 Table R 3.7.12 Table R 3.7.13 Table R 4.1.1 Table R 4.1.2 Table R 4.1.3 Table R 4.1.4 Table R 4.1.5 Table R 4.1.6 Table R 4.1.7 Table R 4.1.8 Table R 4.1.9 Table R 4.2.1 Table R 4.2.2 Table R 4.2.3 Table R 4.2.4 Table R 4.2.5 Table R 4.3.1 Table R 4.3.2 Table R 4.3.3
Results of Additional Boring Test at Southern Dam Foundation............................ 27 Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487) ............................................... 28 Falling Head Permeability Test Results at Borehole............................................... 28 Test Pit Excavation Result at FTP-1 ....................................................................... 29 Test Pit Excavation Result at FTP-2 ....................................................................... 29 Test Pit Excavation Result at CTP-1....................................................................... 41 Test Pit Excavation Result at CTP-2....................................................................... 42 Results of Additional Boring Test at Rock Quarry ................................................. 46 Results of Specific Gravity Test of Additional Boring Core Samples .................... 46 Samples for Laboratory Test of Embankment Material .......................................... 49 Required Laboratory Tests for Materials in Their Natural States ........................... 50 Required Laboratory Tests for Blended Core Material........................................... 50 Gradation Limits of Core Zone ............................................................................... 52 Assumed Density of Core Zone .............................................................................. 53 Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Core Zone ............................................... 53 Filter Criteria........................................................................................................... 55 Gradation Limits of Fine Filter Zone ...................................................................... 56 Assumed Density of Fine Filter Zone ..................................................................... 56 Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Fine Filter Zone ...................................... 56 Gradation Limits of Coarse Filter Zone .................................................................. 57 Assumed Density of Coarse Filter Zone ................................................................. 57 Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Coarse Filter Zone .................................. 57 Gradation Limits of Rock Zone .............................................................................. 58 Assumed Density of Rock Zone.............................................................................. 58 Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Rock Zone .............................................. 59 Parameter for Rainfall Intensity Curve for Puerto Station ...................................... 65 Design Precipitation and Design Duration for Rio Tuba TSF-2 ............................. 67 Peak Discharge for Each Return Period .................................................................. 70 Annual Maximum Daily Precipitation .................................................................... 73 Parameters for PMP ................................................................................................ 74 Peak Discharge for PMP ......................................................................................... 74 Mean Monthly Precipitation and Number of Rainy Days at Puerto Princesa (1961 to 2000) ......................................................................................................... 75 Maximum Daily Precipitation in Dry Season............................................................ 76 Peak discharge in Dry Season for 25-year Return Period ....................................... 77 Precipitation Data at Puerto Princesa (1961 to 2000) ............................................. 79 Precipitation Data at CBNC Rio Tuba (2004 to 2008)............................................ 79 Maximum Daily Precipitation at CBNC Rio Tuba (2004 to 2008)......................... 80 Comparative Table of Probable Daily Precipitation ............................................... 81 Revised Design Flood for Each Return Period ....................................................... 81 Flow Capacity of Existing Channel (Stage 1) ......................................................... 84 Reservoir Water Level during Stage 1 .................................................................... 84 Reservoir Water Level during Stage 2 .................................................................... 85
(iii)
Table R 4.4.1 Table R 4.4.2 Table R 4.4.3 Table R 4.4.4 Table R 4.4.5 Table R 4.4.6 Table R 5.1.1 Table R 5.1.2 Table R 5.1.3 Table R 5.1.4 Table R 5.1.5 Table R 5.1.6 Table R 5.1.7 Table R 5.1.8 Table R 5.1.9 Table R 6.3.1
Flow Capacity of Spillway (First Stage) ................................................................. 88 Revised Design Flood ............................................................................................. 89 Reservoir Water Level of First Stage during 1000-year Probable Flood ................ 89 Flow Capacity of Spillway (First Stage) ................................................................. 90 Revised Design Flood ............................................................................................. 91 Reservoir Water Level of Final Stage during Probable Maximum Flood............... 91 Minimum Required Factors of Safety for Slope Stability by Agencies .................. 93 Minimum Required Factors of Safety for Slope Stability in this Study.................. 93 Design Values of Each Zone for Slope Stability Analysis (Southern Dam) ........... 94 Cases of Slope Stability Analysis............................................................................ 95 Results of Slope Stability Analysis (First Stage) .................................................... 96 Results of Slope Stability Analysis (Final Stage) ................................................... 97 Design Values of Each Zone for Slope Stability Analysis for Northern Dam ........ 98 Cases of Slope Stability Analysis for Northern Dam.............................................. 99 Results of Slope Stability Analysis for Northern Dam ........................................... 100 Items of Quality Control Test for Embankment...................................................... 104
LIST OF FIGURES IN REPORT

Page
Fig. R 1.1.1 Fig. R 1.1.2 Fig. R 2.1.1 Fig. R 2.2.1 Fig. R 2.6.1 Fig. R 3.1.1 Fig. R 3.1.2 Fig. R 3.1.3 Fig. R 3.2.1 Fig. R 3.2.2 Fig. R 3.2.3 Fig. R 3.4.1 Fig. R 3.4.2 Fig. R 3.4.3 Fig. R 3.5.1 Fig. R 3.6.1 Fig. R 3.6.2 Fig. R 3.6.3 Fig. R 3.6.4 Fig. R 3.6.5 Fig. R 3.6.6 Fig. R 3.6.7 Fig. R 3.7.1 Location of Rio Tuba Mine..................................................................................... 1 Layout of TSF-2 planed by HATCH....................................................................... 2 Catchment Area of TSF-2 (1:50,000 Scale Map).................................................... 6 Regional Geology of South Palawan (1:1,000,000 Scale Map) .............................. 7 Seismicity of the Philippines 1907-2000 by PHIVOLCS ....................................... 16 1/50,000 Map around Rio Tuba Mine ..................................................................... 17 Birds-eye View of Rio Tuba Mine.......................................................................... 17 Estimated Fault at right side of Southern Dam ....................................................... 21 Construction of a tailings embankment using Upstream Method ........................... 23 Construction of a tailings embankment using Downstream Method ...................... 23 Construction of a tailings embankment using Centerline Method .......................... 24 Location of Additional Boring Test at Southern Dam Foundation ......................... 26 Results of Additional Boring Test at Southern Dam Foundation............................ 27 Location of Test Pit Excavation at Southern Dam Foundation ............................... 29 Layout of Southern and Northern Dams (from HATCH Report) ........................... 31 Typical Section of Rockfill Dam with Sloping Upstream Core.............................. 32 Location of Possible Borrow Areas of Filter Material ............................................ 36 Location of Additional Boring Test of Possible Quarry Site .................................. 37 Location of Fine Core Borrow Area and Rock Quarry Site .................................... 40 Planned Borrow Area of Fine Components of Core Material ................................. 40 Planned Quarry Site of Coarse Components of Core Material ............................... 43 Location of Additional Boring Test and Planned Rock Quarry .............................. 45 Gradation Limits of Core Zone ............................................................................... 52
(iv)
Fig. R 3.7.2 Fig. R 3.7.3 Fig. R 3.7.4 Fig. R 4.1.1 Fig. R 4.1.2 Fig. R 4.1.3 Fig. R 4.1.4 Fig. R 4.1.5 Fig. R 4.1.6 Fig. R 4.1.7 Fig. R 4.1.8 Fig. R 4.1.9 Fig. R 4.1.10 Fig. R 4.1.11 Fig. R 4.1.12 Fig. R 4.1.13 Fig. R 4.1.14 Fig. R 4.1.15 Fig. R 4.1.16 Fig. R 4.1.17 Fig. R 4.1.18 Fig. R 4.1.19 Fig. R 4.1.20 Fig. R 4.1.21 Fig. R 4.1.22 Fig. R 4.1.23 Fig. R 4.1.24 Fig. R 4.2.1 Fig. R 4.2.2 Fig. R 4.3.1 Fig. R 4.3.2 Fig. R 4.3.3 Fig. R 4.3.4 Fig. R 4.3.5 Fig. R 4.4.1 Fig. R 4.4.2 Fig. R 5.1.1 Fig. R 5.1.2
Gradation of Core Material (Maximum Diameter: 4.75 mm) ................................. 55 Gradation Limits of Fine Filter Zone ...................................................................... 56 Gradation Limits of Coarse Filter Zone .................................................................. 57 Procedure for Hyetograph and Hydrograph Preparation......................................... 64 Location of Puerto Princesa .................................................................................... 65 Rainfall Intensity Curve for Short Duration in Puerto Station ................................ 66 Rainfall Intensity Curve for Long Duration in Puerto Station ................................ 66 Flood Arrival Time and Rainfall Intensity Curve ................................................... 67 Hyetograph for 2-year Return Period...................................................................... 68 Hyetograph for 5-year Return Period...................................................................... 68 Hyetograph for 10-year Return Period.................................................................... 68 Hyetograph for 25-year Return Period.................................................................... 68 Hyetograph for 50-year Return Period.................................................................... 69 Hyetograph for 100-year Return Period.................................................................. 69 Hydrograph for 2-year Return Period ..................................................................... 70 Hydrograph for 5-year Return Period ..................................................................... 70 Hydrograph for 10-year Return Period ................................................................... 70 Hydrograph for 25-year Return Period ................................................................... 71 Hydrograph for 50-year Return Period ................................................................... 71 Hydrograph for 100-year Return Period ................................................................. 71 Calculation Procedure for PMP and PMF............................................................... 73 Hyetograph for PMP ............................................................................................... 75 Hydrograph for PMF............................................................................................... 75 Monthly Precipitation for 40 Years (1961 to 2000) ................................................ 76 Probable Daily Precipitation in Dry Season............................................................ 77 Hydrograph in Dry Season for 25-year Return Period............................................ 78 Hydrograph in Dry Season for 25-year Return Period............................................ 78 Differences of Precipitation between at CBNC Rio Tuba and at Puerto Princesa .. 80 Probable Daily Precipitation at CBNC Rio Tuba.................................................... 80 Diversion Procedure (Stage 1) ................................................................................ 82 Diversion Procedure (Stage 2) ................................................................................ 83 Reservoir Water Level during Stage 1 .................................................................... 84 Reservoir Water Level during Stage 2 (All Season) ............................................... 85 Reservoir Water Level during Stage 2 (Dry Season) .............................................. 85 Reservoir Water Level of First Stage during 1000-year Probable Flood ................ 89 Reservoir Water Level of Final Stage during Probable Maximum Flood............... 91 Calculation Model of Southern Dam ...................................................................... 94 Calculation Model of Southern Dam ...................................................................... 98
(v)
LIST OF PICTURES IN REPORT

Page
Picture R 1.1.1 Picture R 3.1.1 Picture R 3.1.2 Picture R 3.1.3 Picture R 3.1.4 Picture R 3.1.5 Picture R 3.1.6 Picture R 3.1.7 Picture R 3.1.8 Picture R 3.3.1 Picture R 3.4.1 Picture R 3.5.1 Picture R 3.5.2 Picture R 3.6.1 Picture R 3.6.2 Picture R 3.6.3 Picture R 3.6.4 Picture R 3.6.5 Picture R 3.6.6 Picture R 3.6.7 Picture R 3.6.8 Picture R 3.6.9 Existing TSF-1 and HPAL (high-pressure acid leaching) Plant.............................. 1 Open Channel and Small Faults .............................................................................. 18 Serpentinite exposed along Right Abutment of Southern Dam .............................. 19 Boundary between Serpentinite and Mudstone (Open Channel) ............................ 19 Boundary between Serpentinite and Mudstone (Northern Dam) ............................ 19 Magas-Magas Siltation Pond .................................................................................. 20 Fault between Serpentinite and Mudstone observed at Location A ........................ 21 Fault between Serpentinite and Mudstone observed at Location B ........................ 22 Fault between Serpentinite and Mudstone observed at Location C ........................ 22 Available Embankment Material for Homogeneous Earthfill Type Dam............... 26 Siltstone Boring Core (Sedimentary Structure is Broken) ...................................... 28 Axis of Southern Dam............................................................................................. 31 Axis of Northern Dam............................................................................................. 32 Whitish Soil at Downstream of Southern Dam ....................................................... 35 Condition of Existing Concrete Aggregate Production Site.................................... 36 Basalt exposed along Valley ................................................................................... 37 Serpentinite exposed at Left Abutment of Southern Dam....................................... 38 Condition of Existing Mined Area at Left Abutment of Southern Dam ................. 38 Reforestation around Mined Land........................................................................... 38 Mined Land located at 1.5 km Northwest of TSF-2................................................ 39 Mined Land located at Northern Part of TSF-1 ...................................................... 39 Mined Land located at 1.5 km Northwest of TSF-1................................................ 39
Picture R 3.6.10 Dusky-read Silty Sand or Sandy Silt, Low Viscosity, 0.5m to 3.2m Depth............ 41 Picture R 3.6.11 Brownish Yellow Silt or Clayey Silt, High Viscosity, 3.2 to 4.0m Depth .............. 41 Picture R 3.6.12 Partially Weathered Serpentinite, 4.0 to 4.6m Depth.............................................. 41 Picture R 3.6.13 Reddish Silty Sand or Sandy Silt, Low Viscosity, 0.8 to 2.0m depth ..................... 42 Picture R 3.6.14 Brownish Yellow Silt or Clayey Silt, High Viscosity, 2.0 to 2.9m Depth .............. 42 Picture R 3.6.15 Sand and Gravel at Planned Coarse Core Borrow Area 1....................................... 44 Picture R 3.6.16 Sand and Gravel at Planned Coarse Core Borrow Area 2....................................... 44 Picture R 3.6.17 Planned Rock Quarry Viewed from the North ........................................................ 47 Picture R 3.6.18 Serpentinite exposed by Mining.............................................................................. 47 Picture R 3.6.19 Highly Weathered Rocks with Siliceous Smaller Vain........................................... 48 Picture R 3.6.20 Crumbled Serpentinite at BH-1, 15.0 to 16.5m depth............................................. 48
(vi)
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Coral Bay Nickel Corporation (CBNC), nickel mining and refinery processing project in Rio Tuba at the southernmost tip of Palawan Philippines, plans to expand its annual output to 20,000 ton. Tailings from existing plant are pumped to Tailings Storage Facility No.1 (TSF-1) located about 100m to the north of the plant. TSF-1 has a maximum impoundment capacity of 12 million m3.
Palawan Island
Rio Tuba Mine
Fig. R 1.1.1
Location of Rio Tuba Mine
Picture R 1.1.1
Existing TSF-1 and HPAL (high-pressure acid leaching) Plant
In order to achieve storage of tailings to be increased, CBNC proposed to construct a large valley impoundment (TSF-2) within a broad bowl shaped valley to the northwest of the existing Tailings facility (TSF-1). The works include the construct of:
A staged approx. 50 m high dam (Southern Dam) along the southern boundary of the facility, A saddle dam (Northern Dam) along the northern perimeter of the facility, and. Ancillary works including a new slurry pipeline, supernatant water return pipeline and return water pond, associated road works and drainage interceptor trenches
In this project, HATCH (Australia) has been finished the basic design of TSF-2 for bidding. (Herein referred to as Hatch Report).
Northern Dam (Plan)
TSF-2 (Plan) Southern Dam (Plan)
Return Water Pond Plan)
Existing TSF-1
200 400 600 800 1000m
HPAL Plant
Fig. R 1.1.2 1.2
Layout of TSF-2 planed by HATCH
SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT
The scope of work includes revision of work designed by HATCH compiled as the Hatch Report. The main part of revision is on zone constitution and material characteristics based on the results of additional geological investigation and laboratory tests executed in this study. Structural calculation including re-bar arrangement for appurtenant structures of starter dam (southern dam, initial stage), if necessary. Technical specification for embankment, excavation and so on are also included in this study.
1.3
WORK EXCLUDED
The following items are excluded from the Scope of Work:

Basic design data such as geography, hydrology, geology, earthquake, material parameters has been collected and analyzed in Hatch Report, which will be presented by SMM. The revisional design work will be performed with those data. Hence, following tasks and evaluation are excluded from the Scope of Work: Survey drawing and geographical plan; Collection and analysis of hydrology data such as probable runoff and probable maximum flood; Geological survey at the dam site, the analysis of the survey result (includes geological plan) and the analysis of the parameters used for the design; Collection of earthquake data, the analysis of the collected data and the evaluation of design seismic coefficient and design seismic acceleration; Geological investigation of embankment material, the analysis of the test result (includes geological plan), laboratory soil test and evaluation of material parameters such as internal friction angle. Above-mentioned data, the result of analyses and parameters shall be presented by CBNC and those data are used as initial condition of the work. The construction of the tailings dam consists of two stages as proposed by CBNC. The elevation of the dam crest is at RL 60 in the first stage, then at RL 80m in the final stage. Revision of the height of the dam crest with the design storage of tailings is excluded from this work. The design of the utilities such as the return water pond, decant system, underdrainage system in the reservoir and the slurry distribution pipeline is referred in Hatch Report and excluded. The permission of the construction by Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) may be required before TFS is constructed. The preparation of the documentation for this process is excluded. According to CBNC, tailings and sediments disacidified in the facilities includes no toxic chemicals such as heavy metals. Hence, leakage prevention at the bottom and the side of TSF-2 is not necessary and not presented in this work. The quality of seepage water and its effect to the underground water is not evaluated in this work. Structural details including calculation and drawings are studied for starter dam (southern dam, initial stage) only. Technical Specification stipulates the works for starter dam (southern dam, initial stage) only.
1.4
REFERENCES PROVIDED BY CBNC
Following references are proposed to be presented by CBNC.

Geographical PlanAutoCAD file Slope stability analysis (Static Analysis, Dynamic Analysis in each stage of the construction) and the results; Seepage analysis of the bedrock and the embankment, and the results; Drawings of the embankment, the spillway and the related structures (AutoCAD file) Hydrological data (e.g. precipitation, intensity of rainfall and runoff data) and the result of the analyses (e.g. probable rainfall, probable runoff, flood hydrograph with different return periods, probable maximum flood and probable maximum flood hydrograph) Geological survey data (including accumulation layer) and the result of the analyses (e.g. Location map of boring, geologic column section, photograph of boring core, geological longitudinal and lateral profile, permeability test results and laboratory test results) Embankment material data and the result of the analyses (e.g. geographical and geological data at the quarry and borrow pit, and laboratory soil test results) Hatch, Sumitomo Metal Mining, Tailings Storage Facility No.2, Design Progress Report, December 2006, H323681-RPT-AU02-10005 Hatch, Coral Bay Nickel Corporation, Tailings Storage Facility No. 2, Embankment Construction Materials, May 2007, H323681-00-C-24-0001 Hatch, Sumitomo Metal Mining, Coral Bay Nickel Corporation, Geotechnical Investigation for TSF-2, November 2007, H323681-00-C-24-0003 Hatch, Sumitomo Metal Mining, Tailings Storage Facility No.2, Supernatant and Storm water Recovery System Options Assessment and System Recommendation, April 2007, H323681-RPT-AU02-10006 Hatch, Tailings Storage Facility No.2, Addenda to December 2006 Design Progress Report, January 2007, H323681-MP-AU01-100016 ARS, Factual Report Geotechnical investigation, CBNC Existing Tailings Dam, January 2009, ARS-13689-13631-09 Guria Consulting, Seismic Review of the Tailings Dam in Bataraza, Palawan Island, 2006 Hatch, Sumitomo Metal Mining, Coral Bay Nickel Corporation, Concept Study for New Tailings Dam, July 2006, H322605-0000-C-24-0001 Hatch, Sumitomo Metal Mining, Coral Bay Nickel Corporation, Final Design Report for TSF-2, 200?, H?-0000-?-000?
1.5
GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS
The following guidelines and standards will be followed for the review design. (1)
-
Standards on TSF
Philippines DENR Memorandum Order No. 99-32; Guidelines on the Safe Design and Operating Standards for Tailings Storage, Department of Minerals and Energy, Western Australia; ICOLD Bulletin 106-1996 A Guide to Tailings Dams and Impoundments - Design, Construction, Use and Rehabilitation; ANCOLD, 1999 Guidelines on Tailings Dam Design, Construction and Operation.
(2)
-
Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Design Criteria and Standards
National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP); Guidelines, Criteria and Standards for Public Works and Highways, Volumes I and II; DPWH : Department Orders; Philippine National Standards (PNS).
(3)
-
Others
Design of Reinforced Concrete: ACI 318-05 Code Edition, American Concrete Institute; American Association of the State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Standard Specifications, 17th Edition, 2002; American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM); Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS).
CHAPTER 2. DESIGN CONDITIONS

Design conditions are recognized in the HATCH reports presented by CBNC. 2.1 TOPOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS
HATCH Report summarized topographical condition around TSF-2 as follows; The site of the new TSF-2 is located within a broad valley approximately 2.5km north west of the existing CBNC plant site. The base of the valley is approximately 30m above sea level. In plan the valley is bowl shaped with a broad straddling the northern perimeter of the site. A very sharp ridgeline with steep densely forested slopes forms the western abutment of the southern dam. The eastern abutment is obscured by a low-grade laterite ore stockpile. The ore stock pile will be removed and processed prior to commencement of construction. The total catchment area upstream of the proposed dam site has been estimated to be 240ha (2.4km2). This was estimated by HATCH from the 1:50,000 topographical map published by the NMRIA (National Mapping and Resource Information Authority).
Northern Dam Site
Southern Dam Site
Basin Boundary
Fig. R 2.1.1 2.2
Catchment Area of TSF-2 (1:50,000 Scale Map)
GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
HATCH Report summarized geological condition around TSF-2 as follows: 2.2.1 Regional Geology
1
Based on the 1:1,000,000 scale regional geological map of Southern Palawan
(Ref. Fig.
R 2.2.1) and the 1:50,000 scale site geology map (1990), the regional geology consists of:
Mines and Geosciences Bureau, 1989, Department of Environment and National Resources
Cobble and boulder alluvial deposits along all major river systems with finer grained clayey alluvium to the south of the mining prospects,
Sedimentary rocks, typically comprising quarts sandstone, mudstone and siltstone with minor calcareous limestone beds,
Quarts sandstone to the north and east of the mining prospects, Urtramafic rocks including Serpentinised Periodotite, Harzburghite and Dunite, Pillow Basalts with intruded Granodiorites (Quarts Diorite intrusion), and Karstic Limestone to the northeast of the mining prospect.
Rio Tuba Mine
Fig. R 2.2.1 R 2.2.1.
Regional Geology of South Palawan (1:1,000,000 Scale Map)
The major geological units mapped within the RTN mining lease are summarized in Table
Table R 2.2.1
Geological Unit Qa Ma Ebu KEbp Keb
Summary of Regional Geology by HATCH

Unit Name Alluvium Sayab Formation Quarts Sandstone Mt. Beauford Ultramafics Sepentinised Peridotite and Dunite Panas Formation Sandstone interbedded with Mudstone and Shale Espina Basalt Pillow Basalt and Basalt flow with Chert
Age Holocene Miocene Eocene Eocene Cretaceous
The existing Rio Tuba Nickel mine is located on a prominent hill comprising ultramafic bedrock units from the Mt. Beauford ultramafic units. The ultramafic hill is extensively weathered and is the principal source of low-grade lateritic nickel ore used in the plant. The hill is typically gently sloping and protrudes some 60m above the surrounding landscape. The low-lying regions to the south and east of the site comprise alluvial sediments overlying interbedded sandstone, shale and mudstone units of the Panas formation. To the west of the existing mining areas, the Bulanjao mountain range has been thrust partially over the Panas formation to the south and the Espina basalt to the northwest. The contact between the basalt and sedimentary rocks has been partially obscured by the over-thrust ultramafics, although north of the mining lease region geotechnical mapping did encounter the basalt units, which are distinguishable by change in vegetation. 2.2.2 Structural Geology
The ultramafic rock at the site is part of the Palawan ophiolite, which consists of a complete ophiolite sequence that ranges from basal mantle Harzburgnite to a pillow lava-chert sequence. The major geological structure at the site is associated with the boundary of the ultramafic unit, which has been thrust over the underlying sedimentary and pillow-lava bedrock to form the Guintalunan deposit and Mt. Bulanjao ranges. The contact between the ultramafic unit and underlying rock has been mapped as alow angle thrust fault dipping to the south west. Based upon regional history, the fault has been mapped as inactive and unlikely to reactivate in the future due to limited seismic activity within the study region. A number of high angle faults have been mapped as part of the initial 1:50,000 geological survey undertaken during exploration for the existing mine. The high angle faulting in the location of the new TSF has been inferred from aerial photography and trends NNE to SSW. These faults are likely to be associated with stress relief during regional thrust faulting. No ground proofing of these structures exists on the geological mapping.
2.2.3
Site Geology
1) Site Geology of Southern Dam The results from the geotechnical investigation indicate that there are six major geotechnical units within the footprint of the Southern Dam. These units include:
Fill from the low grade stokpiles, Alluvial sediments and slopewash from the surrounding highland, Residual soils derived from weathering of the mudstone, siltstone and ultramafics rock units, Highly shared mudstones and siltstones with minor interbedded indurated sandstone beds, Predominantly intact, albeit closely fractured, ultramafic rocks comprising Peridotite, Harzburghite and Dunite. All are slightly to moderately serpentinised with minor Talc filled defects, Highly shared and broken Dunite and Peridotite. These rocks have been metamorphosed to Serpentinite, with abundant Talc and clay minerals. This unit is typically associated with thrust faulting during from the formation of the Mt. Bulanjao ranges.
The southern dam will be constructed across a broad valley located at the site of the existing Magas-Magas siltation pond. The valley floor is generally flat with minor stream channels, which have been incised through the surficial soils. The valley floor comprises silty to clayey alluvial soils derived from the transportation of weathered ultramafic rocks within the upstream cathments. The alluvial soils are of variable thickness and are typically thickest along the eastern side of the valley, corresponding to the alignment of an old natural stream channel. The channel has since been obscured by the L1 low-grade ore stockpile, however boreholes within this area confirm the approximate alignment of the original channel. The alluvial soils overly residual soils, which are clearly evident in the sidewalls of the existing Magas-Magas spillway channel. The residual soils in the base of the valley are derived from the weathering of mudstone, claystone and siltstone, and therefore comprise a high percentage of silt and clay size particles (generally with more than 80% passing the 0.075 mm sieve). The fines are typically of medium to high plasticity and classify as Sandy Clays to Clays (CL-CH) rather than Silts (ML-MH). The inverse is true of the residual soils derived from weathering of the ultramafics rocks. The bedrock beneath the valley floor comprises siltstone and mudstone rocks with minor indurated quarts sandstone beds. The siltstone and mudstone intersected during the investigation was typically highly shared with distinct slickensided surfaces present
throughout the core samples. Bedding planes could not be measured due to the fractured nature of the rockmass. Where sandstone beds were intersected, the recovered core was highly fractuated with very close to closely spaced jointing. The rockmass structure of the siltstones and sandstones suggest historical large scale regional faulting within the site of the proposed dam. The results from the field data tends to confirm the existence of a regional thrust fault along the base of the Mt. Bulanjao ranges, which has been mapped from aerial photography. The valley side slopes are generally moderate to steep with minor ultramafics rock outcrop along the eastern abutment. The northern most section of the Magas-Magas spillway has been cut through highly shared dunite. Residual soils within the cutting consist of elastic clayey silts and sandy silts (MH) and had an average thickness of between 1.5 to 2.0m. The eastern abutment has been completed obscured by the existing L1 low grade ore stockpile, which will be processed prior to construction of the dam. Rock exposures within old mine workings upslope of the proposed crest of the southern dam comprise highly altered peridotites and hazburghites. In places these rocks have been completely altered to serpentinites with minor talc seams intersected during investigations. The thickness of the overburden residual soils were difficult to determine particularly since the lateritic ore stockpile is of identical origin to the residual soils derived from weathering of the peridotite and harzburghite rock. However, in exposed mine workings to the north of the southern dam, the combined thickness of the limonite and saprolite horizons were in excess of 10m. The relative relationships between the major geological units are defined by a number of major geological structures. These geological structures include some near vertical normal faulting along the abutments and a low angle thrust fault within the western abutment of the dam. Six multi-staged Consolidated Un-drained (CU) Tri-axial tests were performed on undisturbed 63mm diameter thin walled tube samples taken from within the foundation of the southern embankment (BH07S, BH11S, BH12S, BH13S, BH15S and BH16S). Two of the tests were carried out on low plasticity clay, indicative of the alluvial soils within the valley. The remaining four tests were conducted on sandy clay derived from the weathering of the mudstone and siltstone units. The strength parameters for the alluvial and residual foundation soils (grouped together due to their similar characteristics) indicated peak effective strength parameters, ranges from 23 to 33 and c from 0 to 11 kPa. Upon analyzing the results, a corrected average line of best fit with values of = 30 and c = 0 kPa, and a corrected lower bound limit of = 26 and c = 0 kPa were obtained.
10
2) Site Geology of Northern Dam The results from the geotechnical investigation have identified five major geotechnical units within the footprint of the Northern dam. These units are:
Residual clayey silts associated with the Laterite and Limonite soils profiles, Residual clayey mudstones within the central southern sections of the alignment, Extremely weathered ultramafics rock comprising cobbles and boulders in a soil matrix (Saprolite horizon), Highly shared mudstones and siltstones, and Predominantly intact, albeit closely fractured ultrafic rocks coprising Periodite and Harzburghite. All are slightly to moderately serpentinised and comprise minor Talc filled defects.
The majority of the northern embankment alignment is situated on residual ultramafics comprising ferruginised clayey silts overlying extremely weathered rock. The extremely weathered rock comprises low to medium strength serpentinised peridotite and harzburghite boulders in a clayey silt to sandy silt matrix. The upper residual material is commonly termed the limonite horizon and is currently mind for low grade feed ore to the HPP facility. The underlying saprolite horizon is higher grade ore which is dried, stockpiled and then direct shipped to Japan for refining. Remnant structures were observed in a number of road cuttings and the old mine workings to the north east of the proposed alignment. These structures are generally sub-vertical and reflect the major joint sets within the underlying bedrock and may form conduits for seepage through the foundations. The serpentinised peridotite and harzburghite bedrock underlying the saprolite zone is typically highly to moderately weathered and highly altered in places. Brecciation was also observed in the core samples recovered during the geotechnical investigations, indicating some re-cementation of the fractured rock. Based on the site history the rock is likely to have been shared during formation of the Mt. Bulanjao rock is generally of low strength with the matrix materials comprising calcite, serpentinite and minor talc. At the location of BH04N and BH05N, siltstone and laminated sandstone was intersected. The rock appears to be part of the Panas formation and is continuous through the footprint of the proposed TSF-2 impoundment. The boundary of the sedimentary rock appears to correspond with the base of the saddle and has a plan thickness of approximately 150m to 200m.
11
Two multi-staged Consolidated Un-drained Tri-axial Tests were performed on undisturbed 63mm diameter thin walled tube samples taken from within the foundation of the northern embankment (BH07N). Both samples are representative of low plasticity clayey silt typical of the residual limonitic soils developed on the ultramafics rocks at the northern embankment site. The strength parameters for the limonitic soils indicated peak effective strength parameters, ranges from 40 to 50 and c from 0 to 5 kPa. Upon analyzing the results, a corrected average line of best fit with values of = 42 and c = 0 kPa, and a corrected lower bound limit of = 40 and c = 0 kPa were obtained.
12
2.3
NATURAL AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT
HATCH Report mentioned impact on surrounding environment and community as follows: Since the proposed impoundment will be located over an existing sedimentation pond (Magas-Magas). A large proportion of the site has already been sterilized and partially cleared. The eastern perimeter has already been cleared during stockpiling and therefore requires little additional clearing. Clearing along the western abutment will be staged to maintain at minimum clearance above the tailings level as it gradually increases over the life of the plant. The impoundment site is located in the center of CBNC mining lease, and no communities currently inhabit this area. 2.4 PRECIPITATION AND RUNOFF ANALYSIS
HATCH Report mentioned rainfall around TSF-2 as follows: Average monthly rainfall values, expressed as mm/month, are presented for three distinct rainfall zones, namely Mangingidong at 90m ASL, Guintalunan at 50m ASL, and Pier Site at 5m ASL. The totaled annual rainfall values for the three areas are 2,198mm, 906mm and 1,487mm respectively. The highest rainfall values, recorded at 90m ASL, were used for the water balance. Table R 2.4.1
Month Rainfall (mm) Jan. 84 Feb. 52 Mar. 58 Apr. 81
Average Monthly Rainfall at Mangingidong

May 162 Jun. 243 Jul. 246 Aug. 271 Sep. 276 Oct. 376 Nov. 208 Dec. 141 Total 2,198
In HATCH Report, detail data about annual maximum daily rainfall, average annual rainfall and intensity is not available. Hydrological analysis and run-off analysis are not executed by HATCH. 2.5 DESIGN PHILOSOPHY OF TSF NO.2
Design philosophy of TSF-2 instructed by CBNC is summarized as follows:

TSF-2 has two dams; A approx. 50 m high dam (Southern Dam) along the southern boundary of the facility and saddle dam (Northern Dam) along the northern perimeter of the facility, Ancillary works including a new slurry pipeline, supernatant water return pipeline and return water pond, associated road works and drainage interceptor trenches are constructed during first stage, TFS-2 is constructed in two discrete stages which will occur approx. 5 years apart. The initial stage includes the construction of the larger southern dam to a crest elevation of RL 60m. The second stage includes a downstream lift to the southern dam to increase the crest level from RL 60m to RL 80m. At the same time a saddle dam (Northern Dam) will be constructed at
13
the northern perimeter to RL 80m. A final overflow spillway will be constructed during this stage of the work. In this study, storage capacity of TSF-2 is estimated using the topographic map, which was prepared by CBNC. The cumulative volumes for each reservoir surface are shown in Table R 2.5.1.
Table R 2.5.1
Elevation (EL. m) 36 37 38 39 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Height (m) 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Storage Capacity of TSF-2

Average Area (m2) 140,000 165,000 195,000 230,000 330,000 480,000 605,000 720,000 860,000 1,030,000 1,245,000 1,435,000 Volume (m3) 0 140,000 165,000 195,000 230,000 1,650,000 2,400,000 3,025,000 3,600,000 4,300,000 5,150,000 6,225,000 7,175,000 Accumulative Volume (m3) 0 140,000 305,000 500,000 730,000 2,380,000 4,780,000 7,805,000 11,405,000 15,705,000 20,855,000 27,080,000 34,255,000
Area (m2) 130,000 150,000 180,000 210,000 250,000 410,000 550,000 660,000 780,000 940,000 1,120,000 1,370,000 1,500,000
2.6
DESIGN SEISMIC COEFFICIENT

2
The ICOLD (International Commission on Large Dams) publications
cover comprehensively the
subject of selecting appropriate earthquake input for dam design. Two levels of design earthquakes are generally considered: the operating basis earthquake (OBE) for normal operations; and the maximum design earthquake (MDE) for extreme conditions. Suggested procedures in common practice for seismicity assessment of major and/or important tailings dams are mentioned in Tailings Dams and Seismicity ICOLD Bulletin 98, 1995. According to this Bulletin, OBE and MDE are explained as follows: Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) The OBE is usually selected using probabilistic seismic hazard evaluation procedure. The hazard level selected for the OBE varies from project to project but often is chosen as the earthquake which has a 10% probability of exceedance in a 50-year period, or an annual probability of exceedance of one in 475. The tailings dam is expected to function in a normal manner after the passage of the operating basis earthquake.
Seismicity and Dam Design (Bulletin 46 1983), Dam Design Criteria The Philosophy of Their Selection (Bulletin 61, 1988b), Selecting Seismic Parameters for Large Dams Guidelines (Bulletin 72, 1989c)
14
Maximum Design Earthquake (MDE) For the MDE, damage of the dam is acceptable as long as the integrity of the dam is maintained and the release of the impounded tailings is prevented. For major tailings dams, the failure of which could have severe downstream consequences, the maximum credible earthquake (MCE) is usually used as the MDE. By definition, the MCE does not have any probabilistic connotation, and its selection involves a deterministic assessment. However, in practice, this design level earthquake is sometimes associated with earthquakes of very low probability of exceedance (Corresponding to e.g., an annual probability of exceedance in the order of one in 10,000). From these considerations, HATCH requested that Guria Consulting (Australia) carry out the seismic review for a tailings dam at Rio Tuba using database such as Seismicity of the Philippines (Fig. R 2.6.1), Earthquake density Map in the Philippines and so on. Concluding remarks Guria Consulting are given as follows:
Concluding Remarks (by Guria Consulting) 1. Generally, the corresponding seismic hazard results for medium soil sites in the Philippines determined by Thenhaus and others (1994) are in general agreement with those presented by the GSHAP (*1). Unfortunately, however, the former results do not extend to Palawan Island. Hence the GSHAP (*2) results for the site on this island become important. Using these, it is estimated that there is a 90% chance that the PGA will not exceed 0.08-0.16 g in a 50-year period. 2. The reviewer of this report has pointed out that LP (*3) structures may experience potentially damaging intensities during their lifetime. This is due to the frequency of destructive earthquakes in the vicinity of the main Philippines archipelago. Although these events are typically several or many hundreds of kilometres from the site, they are strong generators of LP strong ground motion; their energy is transmitted more efficiently over these distances than SP (*4) motion and their shaking duration is significantly greater giving rise to a greater capacity for damage. For example, a PGA of 0.08 g (or more) at a ground period of more than 0.5 s is estimated to have occurred in 1948. 3. It is recommended that a new seismic hazard study be commissioned for the site to include the following topics:i) Establish the Background Seismicity in the region of Palawan Island leading to a more accurate assessment of the seismic hazard than has hitherto been possible; ii) Long period (LP) strong ground motion effects at the site. This is critical for structures with natural periods of 0.5 s or more. iii) Output for i) and ii) should enable dynamic analyses of the structure for particular design events for specific site geology;
3
by
iv) A study on the potential for liquefaction and tsunamigenic effects;

*1: Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program *2: Peak Ground Acceleration *3: Long Period *4: Short Period
Report of Seismic Review of the Tailings Dam in Bataraza, Palawan Island, Guria Consulting (Australia)
15
Rio Tuba Mine
Fig. R 2.6.1
Seismicity of the Philippines 1907-2000 by PHIVOLCS
A new seismic hazard study has not yet been done following the recommendation by Guria Consulting. In addition, HATCH Report does not mention the parameters of the OBE and the MCE. Without final seismic assessment, there is no way to use the following parameters in this study:
Peak Ground Acceleration of the OBE : Peak Ground Acceleration of the MCE : 0.15g 0.25g
The parameters mentioned-above meet the guidelines of Philippines DENR Memorandum Order No. 99-32 4.
Section 15 Guidelines to Design Dam Embankment of On-land Mill Tailings Storage, b. n which seismic consideration in the design of impoundment shall not be less than 0.15 and 0.25g under Operation Base Earthquake (OBE) and Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) respectively.
16
CHAPTER 3. DESIGN REVIEW OF DAM EMBANKMENT

3.1 TOPOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGICAL CONDITION
TSF-2 is located at uppermost stream of Tuba River which runs between mine and Bulanjao Mountain. TSF-2 consists of one dam located at south (southern dam) and one saddle dam located at north (northern dam). Northern dam is placed at the uppermost stream of Tuba River to reinforce the enclosure. Southern dam is placed at the downstream to block up the tailings. Planned dam site is located at 5 km upstream of river mouth.
Bulanjao Mountain Northern Dam (Plan) Southern Dam (Plan) TSF-2 (Plan) Existing TSF-1
Tuba River
HPAL Plant
0.5
1.5
2.5km
Fig. R 3.1.1
1/50,000 Map around Rio Tuba Mine
Northern Dam
Existing TSF-1
Bulanjao Mountain
TSF-2 (Plan) HPAL Plant
Southern Dam
200
400
600
800 1,000m
Fig. R 3.1.2
Birds-eye View of Rio Tuba Mine
17
Site survey was held on January 14, 2009 to January 17, 2009. Findings are described below. 3.1.1 Topography and Geology of Dam Site
Geography at south dam and north dam are described below:

Dam site is located at uppermost stream of Tuba River. Peat bog exists at north of south dam, which is located at the south of TSF-2 dam reservoir. Elevation of bottom of valley at dam site is about RL 35m and its width is about 250m. Angle of abutment at right bank is about 20 degree. Angle of abutment at left bank is considered to be about 20 degree although original angle is unclear due to surface excavation. Both of the angle at right and left bank are gentle slope. Abutment of right bank is covered with shrub, and rock are exposed here and there. Shape of the abutment is relatively thin in river flow direction. At the abutment of left bank, surface soils have been mined as ore. In the following picture, north dam is planned over the forest from left to right. Although small hill is shown in the map, original geology could not be observed due to large storage of mine.
Geography at southern dam and northern dam are described below:

At the location of southern dam, deposition of sandstone and mudstone are found in river bed. Serpentinite are found in mountain slope of right and left bank. Fault is expected to exist at the boundary of geological stratum. At the location of northern dam, mudstone deposition are found at the center of planned site. Boundary of geological stratum, or fault, runs from north to south across the northern dam, and serpentinite are found at the west of fault. Depositions of sandstone and mudstone are considered to form geology of valley. There is a 5 m-wide open channel (no surface protection, jut excavated) on the right abutment of southern dam. Weathered serpentinite and small fault (N40E, V) are found at the surface of this channel (Ref. Picture R 3.1.1).
Picture R 3.1.1
Open Channel and Small Faults
18
Serpentinite are exposed along the right abutment of the southern dam, which is not weathered as sandstone (Ref. Picture R 3.1.2).
Picture R 3.1.2
-
Serpentinite exposed along Right Abutment of Southern Dam
Boundary between serpentinite and mudstone are found at the downstream of excavated open channel (Ref. Picture R 3.1.3). Direction of this boundary is N46E, 70S. Serpentinite and mudstones are weathered, red clayey soil.
Picture R 3.1.3
-
Boundary between Serpentinite and Mudstone (Open Channel)
Un-weathered sandstone are found in red weathered clayey soil on rare occasions. Boundary between mudstone and serpentinite (N35E, 40-80E) might exist near the thrust which is located at downstream of northern dam, running along the road (Ref. Picture R 3.1.4).
Picture R 3.1.4
Boundary between Serpentinite and Mudstone (Northern Dam)
19
Boundary of mudstone and serpentinite is found near the northern dam, running across the ditch. This boundary is fault and its inclination is N40E, V.
Low-angle fracture zone was found at the outcrop located at downstream of northern dam, which is considered to be thrust (low-angle fault, N30E, 20). Some serpentinite are fractured in low angle, or 20 degree, and brecciated.
Although geological survey has been done at this dam site, geological structure cannot be checked because the boring core has already been disposed. Therefore, it is important to re-confirm the status of rocks, degree of weathring and permeability for standard soil at river bed.
3.1.2
Topography and Geology of Reservoir
Topography and geology of reservoir are listed below.

The area of dam reservoir is now used for siltation pond, which is called Magas-Magas Siltation Pond. Moreover, lot of mine is piled at the left bank of northern dam, which makes it difficult to check the planned dam axis with eyes.
Picture R 3.1.5
-
Magas-Magas Siltation Pond
Details of geographical condition is not clear at reservoir area because of no outcrop. According to existing survey and observation, geology at bottom of reservoir (bottom of Tuba River) is considered to be sandstone or mudstone and those of right and left bank is considered to be serpentinite.
Boundary between sandstone/mudstone and serpentinite is considered to be the fault, which runs along the Tuba River, from northern dam to southern dam. That fault exists at the foundation rock of northern and southern dams in a transversal direction. Conditions of the fault is required to be studied with geology survey.
Deposition of mud was found at the bottom of Magas-Magas Siltation Pond. Depth or some other details of this mud layer is not clear.
20
3.1.3
Fault at Right Side of southern Dam site
Fault located at right side of the southern dam site was confirmed at three locations, which is mentioned as a boundary between serpentinite and mudstone in HATCH Report (Ref. Fig. R 3.1.3).
Location A Mt. Bulanjao Location B Serpentinite Estimated Fault Mudstone Existing Magas-Magas Siltation Pond
Southern Dam Axis (Plan)
Fault ??? Serpentinite TSF-1 Reservoir
Location C
HPAL Plant
0 200 400 600 800 1,000m
Fig. R 3.1.3
Estimated Fault at right side of Southern Dam
Fault between serpentinite and mudstone at right side of the southern dam was observed at three locations as follows:
At location A in Fig. R 3.1.3, excavated slope of drainage near northern dam site (Ref. Picture R 3.1.6). Serpentinite has been strongly weathered.
Serpentinite
Mudstone
Fault
Picture R 3.1.6
-
Fault between Serpentinite and Mudstone observed at Location A
At Location B in Fig. R 3.1.3, excavated temporary channel bed (Ref. Picture R 3.1.7).
21
Serpentinite and mudstone have been strongly weathered.
Serpentinite
Mudstone
Fault
Picture R 3.1.7
-
Fault between Serpentinite and Mudstone observed at Location B
At Location C in Fig. R 3.1.3, existing borrow area for TSF-1 embankment (Ref. Picture R 3.1.8). Strength of serpentinite and mudstone have been lowered by slaking phenomenon.
Mudstone
Serpentinite
Fault
Picture R 3.1.8
-
Fault between Serpentinite and Mudstone observed at Location C
Fault between serpentinite and mudstone at left side of the southern dam has not yet observed.
22
3.2
STAGED CONSTRUCTION
The staged embankment design is the most common construction technique used in tailing storage facilities. It can minimize up-front capital works and improve overall economies. Depending on the quality of tailings, there are three main methods for constructing tailings embankment using the tailings as a major construction material 5:
Upstream Method, Downstream Method, Centerline Method.
Fig. R 3.2.1
Construction of a tailings embankment using Upstream Method
Fig. R 3.2.2
5
Construction of a tailings embankment using Downstream Method
Geotechnical Engineering of Embankment Dams, Robin Fell, Patrik MacGregor and David Stapledon
23
Fig. R 3.2.3
Construction of a tailings embankment using Centerline Method
One of the earliest and the most common types of construction is by the upstream method. However, the upstream method is the most common design to fail. The low relative density of the tailing, if saturated, may liquefy and lead to slope failure and flows of the tailings. There are more incidents with dams built by the upstream method than with other types The centerline method is a compromise between the upstream and downstream methods. It is more stable than the upstream method but still have a risk of failure during earthquake condition. The tailings produced by HPAL plant are very fine. Therefore, they can not support loads of next stage embankment. In this study, the downstream method is selected as an optimum staged construction method. 3.3 3.3.1 DAM TYPE Southern Dam
Height of southern dam is more than 50m at final stage. Fill type dams are largely classified into two (2) types, namely, rockfill dam and homogeneous earthfill dam based on the materials comprising the dam body. Structural characteristics of rockfill dam and homogeneous earthfill dam are given as follows: Rockfill Dam Rockfill dam has a smaller restraint from the strength of foundation rock because it transmits the external loads onto the broader area of the foundation. The dam body can be divided into at least three (3) zones, namely, impervious, semi-pervious and pervious zones. Impervious zone filled
24
with earth materials provides watertightness. Pervious zone filled with rock of all sizes supports the less stable impervious material and provide the stability of the dam body. Homogeneous Earthfill Dam Homogeneous earthfill dam is constructed entirely or almost entirely of a single embankment material. It has been built since the earliest times and is used today whenever only one type of material is economically available. However, the possible height is limited within 30 m in general, because it is usually composed of impervious or semi-pervious soil with small shear strength, especially internal friction angle. In addition, when fine material such as silt/clay is used, it can not be avoided to increase excess pore pressure in embankment. The excess pore pressure affects the safety of dam. Since southern dam has about 50m in height, if applied, upstream and downstream slopes shall be much gentler than those of rockfill type dam. Finally, It will be much costly. Rockfill Dam with Center Core or Sloping Upstream Core In rockfill dam, the impervious zone is placed in a vertical position near the center of the embankment or sloped upstream. Generally, they are called the center core type and sloping upstream core type respectively. Both types can be adopted as water retention dam. However, considering the following matters, rockfill type with sloping upstream core type is selected as an optimum dam type for southern dam of TSF-2:
Staged construction is facilitated by positioning the impervious core at near the upstream slope, The impervious core material and filters may be placed after the downstream rockfill, allowing rock fill construction to proceed in wet weather when placement of earthfill may be impracticable, The downstream slope of the dam may be steepened.
3.3.2
Northern Dam
Although height of northern dam is about 20m at final stage, homogeneous earthfill type can not be adopted for northern dam. Available embankment material near the dam site is silt/clay with gravel, which is used as embankment material for TSF-1 raising (Ref. Picture R 3.3.1). As mentioned in the previous section, when fine material such as silt/clay is used, it can not be avoided to increase excess pore pressure in embankment. If applied, in order to secure the dam safety, upstream and downstream slopes shall be much gentler than those of rockfill type dam. From the above consideration, rockfill type with center core type is selected as an optimum dam type for northern dam of TSF-2
25
Picture R 3.3.1 3.4
Available Embankment Material for Homogeneous Earthfill Type Dam
DAM FOUNDATION
Although geological survey has been done at this dam site, geological structure cannot be checked because the boring core has already been disposed. 3.4.1 Additional Boring Test
Resulting from the site investigation in January 2009, Geological structures such as highly weathered mudstone were observed at the riverbed around the southern dam site. However, faults and fracture zone mentioned in the geological section prepared by HATCH could not be investigated. From these conditions, in order to clarify the thickness of alluvial formation and status of foundation rock, additional boring tests and soil tests has been carried out at southern dam site in February, 2009. Additional investigations have been done at four points and length of boring test is about 20m. Location of additional tests is shown in Fig. R 3.4.1.
Existing Magas-Magas Siltation Pond
BH09-2
BH09-1
BH09-4
BH09-3
0 50 100 150 200 250m
Fig. R 3.4.1
Location of Additional Boring Test at Southern Dam Foundation
Result of additional boring tests and soil tests are shown below.
26
SC SM MH SC CH ML RK RK RK RK CL CH MH CH
Fig. R 3.4.2 Table R 3.4.1

Depth (m) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BH09-3 (Left Bank)
Results of Additional Boring Test at Southern Dam Foundation Results of Additional Boring Test at Southern Dam Foundation
BH09-1 Ground EL RL.31.036m USCS MH MH MH MH CL CL CL RK RK PI 24 20 18 N Value 5 8 10 12 14 27 USCS MH MH CH CH CH RK RK RK RK BH09-2 Ground EL RL.32.400m PI 22 32 30 31 N Value 10 8 10 14 BH09-4 (Right Bank) Ground EL RL.31.712m USCS SC CH CH CH RK RK RK RK RK PI 40 51 30 26 N Value 21 13 9 4 9 80 -
Ground EL RL.32.140m USCS SM SM SM SC CH CH ML ML RK PI 9 25 48 27 19 10 N Vlaue 8 5 4 8 30 60 -
*1 USCS: Unified Soil Classification System ASTM D2487 *2 PI: Plasticity Index
27
Table R 3.4.2
Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487)
Picture R 3.4.1 Table R 3.4.3

Test No. 1 No. 2
Siltstone Boring Core (Sedimentary Structure is Broken) Falling Head Permeability Test Results at Borehole
BH09-1 7.4 x 10 cm/s 1.7 x 10-7 cm/s
-7
BH09-3 (Left Bank) 4.9 x 10 cm/s 1.6 x 10-5 cm/s

-6
BH09-2 1.6 x 10 cm/s 4.8 x 10-8 cm/s

-7
BH09-4 (Right Bank) 3.1 x 10-6 cm/s 1.8 x 10-7 cm/s
3.4.2
Test Pit Investigation
In April 2009, two test pit excavations have been done at foundation of southern dam, at the bottom of valley. Pit excavation was done by backhoe. Location of pit excavation is shown below.
28
Existing Magas-Magas Siltation Pond FTP-2 FTP-1
BH09-2
BH09-1
BH09-4
BH09-3
0 50 100 150 200 250m
Fig. R 3.4.3
Location of Test Pit Excavation at Southern Dam Foundation Table R 3.4.4 Test Pit Excavation Result at FTP-1
Picture
Depth (m) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Condition
Existing earth fill to the depth of 2.0m
Black colored sandy silt with yellow patch to the depth of 3.0m, including root of plants, groundwater at 3m depth from surface Brownish yellow clay to the depth of 4.0m
Brownish Yellow Clay
Table R 3.4.5
Depth (m) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 Condition
Test Pit Excavation Result at FTP-2

Picture
Surface soil to the depth of 0.5m, including root of plants Black silty sand to the depth of 2.5m, groundwater at 2m depth from the surface Fawny sandy silt with yellow patch to the depth of 3.5m Ash gray clay to the depth of 4.5m
3.4.3
Geological Investigation Result
Findings of geological investigation are listed below.

Bedrock at the boring location is siltstone, and no boundary between siltstone and serpentinite was observed.
29
Sedimentary structure of the siltstone has been once broken by fault movement then re-connected firmly, which is found by the boring core observation. Permeability of the siltstone is small.
Depth of the bedrock from the ground is 4m at the right bank, and 8m at the left bank, which is going deeper gradually.
Alluvial formation over the bedrock consists of sandy silt, silt and clay, and thickness of the alluvial formation is 4m to 8m. Clay layer over the siltstone is considered to be highly weathered siltstone, not the alluvial formation. N value of the silty layer and clayey layer ranges 4 to 14, which is not so weak.
Permeability of alluvial formation is very small, 1.6 x 10-5 cm/s at a maximum, 5 x 10-6 cm/s other than the maximum. It was measured by the falling head permeability test at the borehole.
Water retention dam normally founded on rock and grouting is often required, whereas tailings dams normally are founded on soil and do not require grouting. This is because the deposited tailings constitute an extensive and effective source of fine material for self sealing of cracks. Foundation of southern dam is soil with comparatively low permeability. Therefore special seepage control measures for foundation are not necessary.
Looking at all these conditions, it is considered that silty layer and clayey layer can be used as foundation for core zone, not to remove or replace. However, methodology of compaction of core zone should be carefully examined to avoid insufficient compaction. If vibration roller is used for compaction of core materials, compaction may be insufficient due to waving. It is recommended to use tamping roller to avoid this problem.
30
3.5
DAM AXIS
Southern Dam Due to the geological shape of right bank and left bank, planned location for southern dam axis is considered to be appropriate. Weathered rock at the embankment of right bank is relatively thin. Although fault is expected to exist at alluvial bedrock, it seems to be no problem because the fault seems to be adhered firmly. Weathered layer at the abutment of left bank is thick. Since laterite is under mining at this location, foundation rock is expected to appear in the near future. Northern Dam
According to the 1/50,000 map, hill is located at the northern dam axis. However, the hill was not observed because of huge amount of stockpile.
Northern Dam
Southern Dam
Fig. R 3.5.1
Layout of Southern and Northern Dams (from HATCH Report)
Axis of Southern Dam
Picture R 3.5.1
Axis of Southern Dam
31
Axis of Northern Dam
Picture R 3.5.2 3.6 3.6.1
Axis of Northern Dam
ZONING AND EMBANKMENT MATERIALS Zoning of Rockfill Dam
1) General Rockfill dam with sloping upstream core consists of three major zones within the proposed embankment, namely Core Zone, Filter Zone and Rock Zone, depending on the range of variation in the character and gradation of the available material. The permeability of each zone is designed to increase toward the outer slopes.
Fig. R 3.6.1
Typical Section of Rockfill Dam with Sloping Upstream Core
The purpose of each zone are given as follows:

Core zone filled with impervious earth material provides watertightness. Rock zone filled with rock of all sizes support the less stable core material and provide the stability and durability of the dam body. Selected rock zone shall be filled with hard
32
and durable rock, which are slightly weathered to fresh rock, and provide the stability and especially durability of the dam body. Filter zone is further classified into 2 zones, namely fine filter zone and coarse filter zone. Fine filter zone shall be filled with well graded sand which will form a fine filter on the downstream face of the clay core to prevent piping of fines within core zone. Coarse filter zone shall be filled with well graded gravel which is grading compatible with fine filter material.
2) Core Zone Generally, core zone constructed of most fine-grained soils is impervious. Such fine-grained soil normally has less shear strength. Consequently, from the standpoint of stability, the thinner the core zone is made the better. On the other hand, a thick core zone has more resistance to piping, especially to piping that may develop in differential settlement cracks. In addition, core zone with a thickness of 30 % to 50 % of the water head have proved satisfactory at existing many dams under diverse conditions. Considering the above discussion, horizontal width of core zone is designed to 4.0 m at the top and inclined shape with 1.0 vertical to 1.3 horizontal on upstream side and 1.0 vertical to 1.0 horizontal on downstream side. The width corresponds to about 35 % of the water head at the bottom. 3) Filter Zone Filter zone consists of 2 zones, namely fine filter zone and coarse filter zone. These zones shall be embanked between core zone and rock zone to serve as a transition and filter. Theoretically, protective layers of properly graded filter material can be very thin. The minimum width is usually that which can be constructed by common method and it is most often the case that the horizontal widths are more than 2.5 m. However, sand and gravel for filter zone are distributed in the very limited area near the dam site. They may be purchased from a supplier and be much costly. Therefore, the horizontal widths of the fine and coarse filter zone are fixed at 1.0 m with special construction method. 4) Rock Zone Rock zone composes most part of the dam body at the outer side of filter zones. The upstream slope and downstream slope of final stage dam are designed at 1.0 vertical to 2.2 horizontal and 1.0 vertical to 2.8 horizontal respectively. In this regard, The downstream slope of first stage dam is designed at 1.0 vertical to 2.5 horizontal Stability of these slopes shall be confirmed by slope stability analysis using the seismic coefficient.
33
Selected large size rocks shall be provided to prevent the upstream slope from being eroded. Upstream surface can be constructed by pushing the larger rocks from the adjacent rockfill zone to the face of the embankment, and finishing the face of the embankment by positioning rocks with excavator.. 3.6.2 Possible Borrow Areas of Embankment Materials
Data from HATCH Report and the results of site investigation executed in January 2009, borrow areas of embankment materials are studied as follows: 1) Borrow Area of Core Material Laterite around southern dam might be suitable for core material. This laterite, however, is fine-grained soil with 80% of silt, and it is required to adjust the grain size distribution by mixing with crashed rock (serpentinite) or river sand. Otherwise compaction work might be difficult and amount of settlement might be quite large. River sand for mixing material could be taken from alluvial fun located at north of dam, south of Bohoy village. The quality of this material should be examined because details of the quality are unknown. Permeability of 1.0 x 10-5 (cm/s) can be achieved by following conditions;
Maximum diameter: 15 cm; Amount of silt : 20 to 30 %.
In order to make good core material, laterite (silty material) and river sand are recommended to be mixed by following method;
Make a layer of laterite (e.g. 30cm thick) by bulldozer, then make a layer of river sand over the laterite layer (thickness to determine by mixing ration) in the stockpile yard; Continue the above work till 20 to 30 layers; Hew the surface of layered soil by bulldozer from the top of the soil to the bottom and; Mix the hewed soil by bulldozer or back hew.
In HATCH report, it is proposed to use whitish soil for core material which is available at the downstream of southern dam. This material, however, contains lots of clay. If this material is used for core material without mixing, compaction may be quite difficult. If this material is used as a mixture of sand and gravel, mixing may be difficult due to particulate of clay
34
Picture R 3.6.1
Whitish Soil at Downstream of Southern Dam
2) Borrow Area of Filter Material In many cases, river sand is used for filter material. In this case (Rio Tuba TSF-2), however, river sand of serpentinite is not suitable for filter material because it is so brittle as to crash into small particle or silty sand. It may be difficult to achieve required permeability, or 10-3 ~ 10-4 cm/s, and required grain size distribution to prevent spillage of core materials. Therefore, best borrow area location for filter materials is proposed to be existing concrete aggregate production site (Location A, Ref. Fig. R 3.6.2). In this site, there are many hard sand and gravel and most of them are basalt or sandstone. Moreover, particle size distribution is appropriate for filter material. Although some weathered diabase is mixed, it doesnt affect the quality of sand. Therefore, this site is appropriate for filter borrow area, but there is one problem; it is located far from construction site. The distance between this borrow area and construction site is 6 km by slant distance, and 15 km along with road. If new road is constructed along the base of mountain, transportation distance will be shortened. It is recommended to examine the total cost including the construction cost of this road. One of the other borrow areas might exist at northern part of northern dam. At 3 to 4 km north of southern dam, basalt rock (pillow-shape molten rock) is exposed along the Valley and good sand and gravel are expected to exist around the downstream of this valley as fun deposition. It is important to examine this site in detail (Location B, Ref. Fig. R 3.6.2). Other expected borrow area is river deposit of Okayan River. This is located at 4 km east of southern damsite. River deposit was found to be clay and silt, not sand and gravel. It is also important to examine this site along the river (Location C, Ref. Fig. R 3.6.2). River deposit at Sumbiling River, under Sumbiling Bridge, was found to be clay and silt, not sand and gravel, which was located 8 km southwest of Rio Tuba along national highway (Location D, Ref. Fig. R 3.6.2).
35
At the coastal line of Rio Tuba embarkation port, deposition was not observed due to high tide. Since there is a forest of mangrove, there might be no sand deposition. (Location E, Ref. Fig. R 3.6.2) For coarse filter materials, crashed rock materials (serpentinite) might be used after adjustment of grain size distribution. Additional material test (crushing test etc.) is required.
Location A - Existing Concrete Aggregate Production Site Basalt exposed along Valley Location B - Good Sand and Gravel are expected around Alluvial Fun Northern Dam (Plan) Southern Dam (Plan) Location C River Deposit of Okayan River
Location D River Deposit of Sumbiling River
Location E Coastal Line
Fig. R 3.6.2
Location of Possible Borrow Areas of Filter Material
Picture R 3.6.2
Condition of Existing Concrete Aggregate Production Site
36
Picture R 3.6.3 3) Quarry of Rock
Basalt exposed along Valley
At the proposed place for quarry, most of the surface soil has been excavated for laterite extraction and the base rock (serpentinite) has been exposed. Since the base rock is highly weathered, relative density varies in high range. Moreover, it is brittle and hard to extract large rocks. Although quality of material is not so good, it is economical because it is located near to construction site and removal of surface soil has already been finished. Outcrop of serpentinite on the left bank of dam site is one of the proposed sites for rock material. Further examination is required together with the result of boring test..
Northern Dam
Southern Dam
Additional Boring Test
Fig. R 3.6.3
Location of Additional Boring Test of Possible Quarry Site
37
Picture R 3.6.4
Serpentinite exposed at Left Abutment of Southern Dam
Details of proposed site for rock quarry are described below.

At the left bank of southern dam site, mining is on going at the proposed site for rock quarry. Although mass of rocks are found here and there, there are many sand, too. Many fracture of weathered serpentinite are found at this site and the density seems to be relatively light. Since lattice-shaped cracks are found at the surface of weathered rock, the quality of serpentinite is more likely to be deteriorated (Ref. Picture R 3.6.5).
Picture R 3.6.5
-
Condition of Existing Mined Area at Left Abutment of Southern Dam
At the crest of left bank around TSF-2, bedrock of serpentinite is exposed at EL.100 m. Since the area has already been forested (Ref. Picture R 3.6.6), this area is considered to be mined land
Picture R 3.6.6
Reforestation around Mined Land
38
Picture R 3.6.7 is mined land located at 1.5 km northwest of TSF-2 planned site. Although this area is widely forested, large rocks (serpentinite) are found along the valley.
Picture R 3.6.7
-
Mined Land located at 1.5 km Northwest of TSF-2
Picture R 3.6.8 shows northern part of TSF-1. This is a mined land and bedrocks of serpentinite are exposed. Excavation of rock material in deep elevation seems to be difficult due to shallow groundwater.
Picture R 3.6.8
-
Mined Land located at Northern Part of TSF-1
Picture R 3.6.9 shows northwest of TSF-1. This is a mined land and large rocks of serpentinite (about 2 m in diameter ) are found, which is considered to be artificially collected.
Picture R 3.6.9
Mined Land located at 1.5 km Northwest of TSF-1
39
3.6.3
Borrow Areas of Embankment Materials
Discussions with CBNC and the results of site investigation executed in April 2009, borrow areas of embankment materials are selected. Details of them are described as follows: 1) Borrow Area of Fine Component of Core Material and Its Property Test pit excavations have been done at the planned borrow area for fine component of core material (CTP-1 and CTP-2 in below picture). CTP-1 and 2 are located at upstream of southern dam, on the gentle slope of left bank. Excavation was done by backhoe.
Mt. Bulanjao Existing Magas-Magas Siltation Pond Planned Core Borrow Site
Southern Dam (Plan) Route of Field Investigation
100
200
300
400
500m
Planned Rock Quarry Site
TSF-1 Reservoir
Fig. R 3.6.4
Location of Fine Core Borrow Area and Rock Quarry Site
CTP-2 CTP-1
Planned Quarry Site of Core Material Area: 50,000m2 (approx)
50
100
150
200 250m
Fig. R 3.6.5
Planned Borrow Area of Fine Components of Core Material
40
Table R 3.6.1
Depth (m) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.2 3.5 4.0 4.6
Test Pit Excavation Result at CTP-1

Picture
Condition Surface soil to the depth of 0.5m, including roots of plants
Dusky-read silty sand or sandy silt to the depth of 3.2m, low viscosity
Brownish yellow silt or clayey silt to the depth of 4m, strongly weathered serpentinite, high viscosity Bedrock, partially weathered serpentinite
Picture R 3.6.10 Dusky-read Silty Sand or Sandy Silt, Low Viscosity, 0.5m to 3.2m Depth
Picture R 3.6.11 Brownish Yellow Silt or Clayey Silt, High Viscosity, 3.2 to 4.0m Depth
Picture R 3.6.12 Partially Weathered Serpentinite, 4.0 to 4.6m Depth
41
Table R 3.6.2
Depth (m) 0.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 2.9 >2.9
Test Pit Excavation Result at CTP-2

Picture
Condition
Surface soil to the depth of 0.8m, including root of plants
Reddigh silty sand or sandy silt to the depth of 2.0m, low viscosity
Brownish yellow silt or clayey silt to the depth of 2.9m, strongly weathered serpentinite, high viscosity Bedrock, partially weathered serpentinite
Picture R 3.6.13 Reddish Silty Sand or Sandy Silt, Low Viscosity, 0.8 to 2.0m depth
Picture R 3.6.14 Brownish Yellow Silt or Clayey Silt, High Viscosity, 2.0 to 2.9m Depth Findings of geological investigation are listed below.
Reddish silty sand or sandy silt to the depth of 2.0m at CTP-1 and 3.0m at CTP-2 is low in viscosity. Although it plasticity index (PI) might be less than 15, it can be used for fine component of core materials after mixing with deeper soils with high viscosity. Brownish yellow silt or clayey silt exists to the depth of 3.0m at CTP-1 and 4.5m at CTP-2, under reddish silty sand or sandy silt. This is the strongly weathered serpentinite and composition of serpentinite remains. This soil is suitable for fine component of core material because of high viscosity and brittle behavior.
42
Soil deeper than 3.0m at CTP-1 and 4.5m at CTP-2 is partially weathered serpentinite. Gravel can be extracted at this site by backhoe excavation and be used for coarse components of core material.
When fine core materials are extracted from this site, it is recommended to remove surface soil, approximately 0.5m thickness, then excavate to the depth of 3.0m at CTP-1 and 4.5m at CTP-2, and mix well.
If 2.0m to 4.0m are assumed to be used as fine components of core material, after removal of surface soil, 150,000m3 of fine core material is estimated to take; calculated by area 50,000m2 multiplied by depth 3m.
Following soil tests are required for these fine components of core material in order to design mixing ratio or amount with coarser materials; natural moisture content, plasticity index and optimum moisture content etc.
2) Borrow Area of Coarse Component of Core Material and Its Property Distribution of available sand and gravel has been investigated for coarse component of core materials. There are alluvial cone of serpentinite sand and gravel at the west side of Rio Tuba mine which was brought by mountain stream. At this site, material excavation for raising Rio Tuba TSF-1 is on going.
Southern Dam (Plan)
Present Quarry Site of Embankment Material Coarse Core Material Borrow Area (Planned Site 1) Impounding Reservoir Sedimentation Pond
Coarse Core Material Borrow Area (Planned Site 2, Old Borrow Area)
200
400
600
800 1,000m
Fig. R 3.6.6
Planned Quarry Site of Coarse Components of Core Material
43
Picture R 3.6.15 Sand and Gravel at Planned Coarse Core Borrow Area 1
Picture R 3.6.16 Sand and Gravel at Planned Coarse Core Borrow Area 2 Findings of geological investigation are listed below.
Many sands and gravels are expected at planned borrow area 1. Thickness of gravel layer is about 3.0m to 4.0m. Grain size is larger at the mountain side, and it becomes smaller as it goes apart from the mountain. Therefore, amount of available sand is more at mountain
44
side and decrease when it goes apart from the mountain. Bedrock of this gravel layer is serpentinite at upstream and weathered mudstone at downstream. At the planned borrow area 2, which is the old quarry site located at the south of main road, sand and gravel in 3m thickness (approx.) were observed. Although bedrock could not be observed, weathered gravel of serpentinite was found here and there. Gravel at planned borrow area 1 and 2 are both serpentinite and easy to be fractured. Amount of sand tends to be fewer compared with those of gravel. It is recommended to carry out following soil test in order to design mixture ratio or amount with fine component of core material; sieve analysis for more than 1m3 materials to obtain the amount of bolder (150mm or more), cobble (64mm to 150mm), gravel (2mm to 64mm) and sand (less than 2mm).
3) Quarry of Rock Material and Its Property Conditions of rock materials have been confirmed by the result of boring test. Location of boring test is shown in the below figure. Length of boring test is about 20m and number of borehole is 13.
Mt. Bulanjao Existing Magas-Magas Siltation Pond

BH-1 BH-2
BH-3
BH-4
BH-5
Southern Dam (Plan)

BH-6 BH-13 BH-9 BH-10 BH-11 BH-12 BH-7 BH-8
Planned Rock Quarry (Need to evaluate Constructability)

0 100 200 300 400 500m
TSF-1 Reservoir
Fig. R 3.6.7
Location of Additional Boring Test and Planned Rock Quarry
45
Table R 3.6.3
Depth (m) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Ground RL. m Length of Rock Zone m Availability of Rock Material BH1
------------O O O O A O O O X A A A X X
Results of Additional Boring Test at Rock Quarry

BH3
--------------X X X X X X X X X X X X X
BH2
X X O O O X X X X X X X O O O O O O O O
BH4
------------A A A A A A O O O A A X A A
BH5
----A O A X X X A A A X X O O X A O O O
BH6
X X X X X A A X X X A A A
BH7
------------------------------------X X
BH8
--------------X X X X X X X X X X X X X
BH9
--------------------O O O X X X X X X X
BH10
----X X X X X X X X X X A A X X A A A A
BH11
----O O O O X X X O O O O O O X A O O O
BH12
------------------------O O O O O O O O
BH13
------O O O O O X X X X X X X X X X X X
42.8 14 64%
64.5 20 55%
48.1 13 0%
69.8 14 57%
78.9 18 50%
93.4 13 19%
110.8 2 0%
106.4 13 0%
96.3 10 30%
55.0 18 17%
62.1 18 75%
96.4 8 100%
84.9 17 29%
*1 Availability of Rock material:
Blue-100% available O, Green-50% available A, Orange-unavailable due to sand and silt X---
Table R 3.6.4
(m)
Results of Specific Gravity Test of Additional Boring Core Samples

BH1
------------O 2.36 2.24 O 2.47 O O O X A 2.03 2.09 2.42 X
BH2
1.76 1.61 O O 2.25 X X X X 2.11 X X O O O O O O O O
BH3
--------------1.75 1.73 X X 2.01 2.02 X X X X X X X
BH4
------------1.91 1.93 A A 1.64 A O O O 2.28 A X A A
BH5
----1.94 2.07 A X X 1.84 A A A X 2.10 O O X A O O O
BH6
2.01 2.04 X X X 1.76 A X X 1.64 A A A
BH7
------------------------------------2.38 1.88
BH8
--------------1.52 1.70 X X X X 2.20 X X X 1.97 X X
BH9 BH10 BH11 BH12 BH13

--------------------1.99 1.86 O X 1.72 X X X X 1.46 ----X X 1.96 1.93 1.55 X X X X 1.66 A A X X A A A A ----2.43 2.40 O O 1.78 X X O O 2.26 O O O X A O O O ------------------------2.11 2.10 O O 1.97 O O 2.02 ------2.29 2.29 O O 2.00 X X X X 2.15 X X X X X X X
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Specific Gravity of 100% Available Material Specific Gravity of 50% Available Material Specific Gravity of Unavailable Material
Maximum 2.43Minimum 1.86Average 2.17 Maximum 2.47Minimum1.64Average 2.02 Maximum 2.38Minimum 1.46Average 1.85
*1 Availability of Rock material:
Blue-100% available O, Green-50% available A, Orange-unavailable due to sand and silt X---
46
Picture R 3.6.17 Planned Rock Quarry Viewed from the North Findings of geological investigation are listed below.
Majority of the rock quarry site is formulated by serpentinite. Weathered surface soils and rocks are mined for Nickel extraction (Ref. Picture R 3.6.18).
Picture R 3.6.18 Serpentinite exposed by Mining

Majority of exposed bedrocks are weathered with lots of crevice at the surface, but some of them are fresh. It is not reported by the geological reconnaissance that suitable rock materials, hard and fresh rocks, are concentrated at the certain location or certain direction. Mass of rocks are exposed here and there, which is about several meters in width, length and height. There is no distinguished tendency of distribution or direction of these rocks. There are many siliceous smaller vain at the surface of rocks which is several millimeters in thickness. It is confirmed that these rocks are highly weathered and friable (Ref. Picture R 3.6.19).
47
Picture R 3.6.19 Highly Weathered Rocks with Siliceous Smaller Vain

It was not confirmed by the boring test that rocks in deeper elevation is fresh and stiff. Crumbled serpentinite was confirmed at BH-1, at the depth of 15m to 16.5m, which was not confirmed at the other borehole (Ref. Picture R 3.6.20). It was not confirmed that this was caused by expansive clay mineral.
Picture R 3.6.20 Crumbled Serpentinite at BH-1, 15.0 to 16.5m depth

Specific gravity of materials suitable for rock material is 2.43 as a maximum, 1.86 as a minimum, and 2.17 as an average. Specific gravity of materials unsuitable for rock material is 2.38 as a maximum, 1.46 as a minimum, and 1.85 as an average. These values are obtained by specific gravity test of borehole samples. As a result of these observations, it is not expected to obtain large amount of rock materials at some part of the planned quarry site. Extraction rate of rock material is expected to be around 50%. Therefore, it is recommended to excavate widely, putting a high priority on the place where surface rock is in good quality.
48
Following laboratory tests are required for rock materials; specific gravity, water absorption, strength etc.
4) Laboratory Test for Embankment Material a) Collection of Sample Samples listed in Table R 3.6.5 are collected for soil test in order to obtain design parameter of embankment design. Table R 3.6.5
Materials Fine components of core materials Coarse components of core materials Fine filter materials Rock materials
Samples for Laboratory Test of Embankment Material

Sample No. CF1-1 CF1-2 CF2-1 CF2-2 CC1 FF1 R1 R2 Sample Extraction Site Upper layer of CTP-1 Lower layer of CTP-1 Upper layer of CTP-2 Lower layer of CTP-2 Cutting slope of planned quarry site 1 for coarse components of core materials Existing quarry site for concrete fine aggregate Planned quarry site for rock material, near BH-10&12 Note Plasticity index is low. Plasticity index is high. Plasticity index is low. Plasticity index is high.
Specific gravity is low. Specific gravity is high.
b) Laboratory Test Required laboratory tests are summarized in Table R 3.6.6.
49
Table R 3.6.6
Materials
Required Laboratory Tests for Materials in Their Natural States

Sample No. Item of Tests Natural moisture content Grain size distribution Specific gravity Liquid and plastic limit Standard compaction test Permeability Consolidated un-drained (CU) tri-axial compaction test (with pore pressure measurement) Grain size distribution Specific gravity, water absorption Grain size distribution Specific gravity, water absorption Relative density Permeability Consolidated Drained (CD) tri-axial compression test Grain size distribution Specific gravity, water absorption Relative density Permeability Consolidated Drained (CD) tri-axial compression test Code or Standard ASTM AASHTO D2216 T265 D422, C136 T27, T88 D854 T100 D4318 T89, T90 D698 T99 D2434 T215 D4767 C136 C127, C128 C136 C128 D4253, D4254 D2434 C136 C127 D4253, D4254 D2434 T297 T27 T84, T85 T27 T84 T215 T27 T85 T215 -
Fine components of core materials
4 samples x 1 cases/sample =4 case
Coarse components of core materials
1 sample x 3 cases/sample = 3 case
Fine filter materials
1 sample x 3 cases/sample = 3 case
Rock materials
2 samples x 3 cases/sample = 6 case
ASTM: American for Testing and Materials AASHTO: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
After mixing ratio of core materials are determined for fine components and coarse components, soil tests for blended core materials will be carried out. Table R 3.6.7
Materials
Required Laboratory Tests for Blended Core Material

Sample No. Item of Tests Grain size distribution Specific gravity Liquid and plastic limit Standard compaction test Permeability Consolidated un-drained (CU) tri-axial compaction test (with pore pressure measurement) Code or Standard ASTM AASHTO D422, C136 T27, T88 D854 T100 D4318 T89, T90 D698 T99 D2434 T215 D4767 T297
Blended core materials
2 samples x 3 cases/sample =6 case
50
c)
References American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)

D422 D698 D854 : Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils : Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12 400 ftlbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3)) : Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by Water Pycnometer
D2216 : Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass D2434 : Test Method for Permeability of Granular Soils (Constant Head) D4253 : Test Methods for Maximum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils Using a Vibratory Table D4254 : Test Methods for Minimum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils and Calculation of Relative Density D4318 : Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils D4767 : Test Method for Consolidated Un-drained Tri-axial Compression Test for Cohesive Soils C29 C127 C128 C136 : Test Method for Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregate : Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity), and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate : Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity), and Absorption of Fine Aggregate : Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates
D2487 : Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System)
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)

T 88 T 99 : Standard Method of Test for Particle Size Analysis of Soils : Standard Method of Test for Moisture-Density Relations of Soils
T 100 : Standard Method of Test for Specific Gravity of Soils T 265 : Laboratory Determination of Moisture Content of Soils T 215 : Standard Method of Test for Permeability of Granular Soils (Constant Head) T 89 T 90 : Standard Method of Test for Determining the Liquid Limit of Soils : Standard Method of Test for Determining the Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index of Soils
T 297 : Standard Method of Test for Consolidated, Un-drained Tri-axial Compression Test on Cohesive Soils T 19 T 85 T 84 T 27 : Standard Method of Test for Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregate : Standard Method of Test for Specific Gravity and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate : Standard Method of Test for Specific Gravity and Absorption of Fine Aggregate : Standard Method of Test for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates
M 145 : Standard Specifications for Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures for Highway Construction Purposes
51
3.7
MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR EACH ZONE
Material properties for each zone are studied hereinafter. 3.7.1 Core Zone
1) Regular Core Material The material for the core zone must be impervious material and have the required coefficient of permeability with a smaller compressibility after compaction, and must be easy to be compacted, and must not contain organic substances. The core zone shall have the following properties:
The in-situ permeability shall be less than 1.0 x 10-5 cm/sec. The gradation limits for this zone are given as follows:
Table R 3.7.1
Gradation Limits of Core Zone

Passing by Weight (%) 100 65 100 50 85 40 75 20 40
Diameter of Particle (mm) 150.0 50.8 19.0 4.75 0.075
Fig. R 3.7.1
-
Gradation Limits of Core Zone
Its plasticity index (PI) shall not be less than 15. This requirement considers that the core zone constructed of clays, which have plasticity index less than 15, is probably more susceptible to cracking when compacted in dry condition.
The thickness of each layer shall be not more than 25 cm after the required compaction.
52
The core material shall be compacted at optimum moisture content to 4 % wet of optimum during and after compaction. The moisture content shall be uniform throughout the material.
The degree of compaction shall be checked by the density ratio. It shall be minimum 95 % of the maximum dry density obtained using the standard compaction method in the laboratory.
Density of core zone is assumed as follows (These values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.2
Assumed Density of Core Zone

Unit g/cm3 g/cm3 g/cm3 Density 2.00 2.00 1.00
Item Wet Density (t) Saturated Density (sat) Submerged Density (sub)
Cohesion and internal friction angle of core zone is assumed as follows (These values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.3 Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Core Zone

Item Effective Cohesion (C) Effective Angle of Internal Friction () Unit kN/m2 degree Value 5.0 30
2) Contact Material Before embankment of the regular core material, the foundation rock shall be covered by finer impervious material and compacted by small compactor so as not to affect the foundation rock during the compaction by the heavy vibrating roller. It has the maximum diameter of 50 mm and is more plastic than the regular core material. The contact material shall be placed over the full area of the foundation for core zone in approximately horizontal layers of 20 to 30 cm thick when compacted. In the abutments, it is placed being sloped so that the material can be compacted directly against the abutment. Layers of contact material on the abutment always precede the layers of regular core material in the core zone. Moisture contents of each layer shall be adjusted to achieve the most effective bonding and adherence of contact material to the foundation. The moisture content of 1st layer is controlled to be suitably higher (+10% to +20%) than the optimum moisture content (OMC) and those of 2nd and 3rd layers are gradually decreased but will be relatively wet side of OMC (+5% to +10%).
53
The degree of compaction shall be checked by the wet density ratio (C value). It shall be minimum 98 % of the wet density obtained using the standard compaction method in the laboratory. 3) Contact Slurry Immediately before placing contact material on the foundation rock of the core zone, spreading contact slurry is necessary to moisten the foundation and to ensure proper bonding between the contact material and the foundation surface. In particular, considering the rugged and cracked foundation surface, spreading contact slurry is the adequate measure. This slurry is made of contact material by blending with water and has moisture content from 150 % to 200 %. It is spread manually on the foundation rock. 3.7.2 Filter Zone
Filter zone consists of 2 zones, namely Fine Filter Zone and Coarse Filter Zone. These zones shall be embanked between core zone and rock zone to serve as a transition and filter. 1) Downstream Filter Zone As water from the reservoir seeps through the pores of the core zone, seepage forces are exerted on the soil particles in the direction of the flow. It is possible for the finer soil particles to be washed into the void spaces of the downstream coarser material. This movement will endanger the embankment. In case of the center core rockfill dam, the difference of particle sizes between the core and rock zones is so great. Therefore, to prevent the internal piping failure, filter zones with special gradation characteristics of semi-pervious material are necessary as a filter and the most important element in the dam body. The following filter criteria developed by many years of experience are used to design the filter zones that will prevent the movement of the protected core material into the filter material. This criterion is mainly studied by USSCS (United States Soil Conservation Service) based on the grain-size relationship between the protected soil and the filter. In the following table, the lower case d is used to represent the grain size for the protected material and the upper case D the grain size for the filter material.
54
Table R 3.7.4
Protected Material * Percent Finer Category than 0.075 mm 1 Fine silts and Clays More than 85 % finer 40 to 85 % finer 15 to 40 % finer Less than 15 % finer
1
Filter Criteria
Filter (Semi-pervious) Material D15 Size 9d85 0.7 mm (40-A)/(40-15) (4d85-0.7mm)+ 0.7mm *2 4d85 *3 D60 Size 4.75 mm or 20D10 *4 4.75 mm or 20D10 4.75 mm or 20D10 20D10 D100 Size (Dmax.) 50 mm 50 mm 50 to 150 mm 50 to 150 mm
D5 Size 0.075 mm 0.075 mm 0.075 mm 0.075 mm
Sands, silts, 2 clays, and silty and clayey sands Silty and clayey 3 Sands and Gravels Sands and 4 gravels Notes *1 :
Category designation for the protected material containing particles finer than 0.075 mm is determined from a gradation curve of the base protected material that has been adjusted to 100 % passing the 4.75 mm sieve. 15 A < 40, A = percent passing the 0.075 mm sieve after any regrading. When 4d85 is less than 0.7 mm, use 0.7 mm. d85 can be based on the total protected material before regrading. It means that the uniformity coefficient D60/D10 should not exceed 20 (D60 on coarse limit of filter, D10 on fine limit of filter). Robin Feel, Patrick Macgregor and David Stapledon (1992), Geotechnical Engineering of Embankment Dams (Chapter 7), BALKEMA
*2 : *3 : *4 : Source :
From the above discussions, the filter zones shall have the following properties:
It shall be more pervious than the protected core zone in order to act as a drain. The in-situ permeability shall not be less than 1.0 x 10-4 cm/sec. It shall be fine enough to prevent particles of the protected material. The core material contains about 50 % of fine particles passing the 0.075 mm sieve when it was adjusted to 100 % passing the 4.75 mm sieve as shown below.
Fig. R 3.7.2
Gradation of Core Material (Maximum Diameter: 4.75 mm)
55
From the filter criteria above-mentioned, the gradation limits for the fine filter to protect the core material are given as follows:
Table R 3.7.5
Gradation Limits of Fine Filter Zone

Passing by Weight (%) 100 60 80 15 63 0 10 not more than 5 Description D100 50 mm D60 4.75 mm, D60 20D10 D15 0.7 mm D60 20D10 D5 0.075 mm
Fig. R 3.7.3
-
Gradation Limits of Fine Filter Zone
Density of fine filter zone is assumed as follows (These values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.6 Assumed Density of Fine Filter Zone

Item Wet Density (t) Saturated Density (sat) Submerged Density (sub) Unit g/cm3 g/cm3 g/cm3 Density 2.00 2.10 1.10
Cohesion and internal friction angle of fine filter zone is assumed as follows (These values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.7 Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Fine Filter Zone
Item Effective Cohesion (C) Effective Angle of Internal Friction () Unit kN/m2 degree Value 0.0 35
From the same filter criteria, the gradation limits for the coarse filter to protect the fine filter are given as follows:
56
Table R 3.7.8
Gradation Limits of Coarse Filter Zone

Passing by Weight (%) 100 60 100 15 60 not more than 10 not more than 5 Description D100 150 mm D60 20D10 D15 4d85 D60 20D10 D5 0.075 mm
Fig. R 3.7.4
-
Gradation Limits of Coarse Filter Zone
The filter material is sufficiently durable so as not to break down excessively during the mechanical action of placement in the dam, under chemical action of seepage water, and under wetting and drying within the dam.
The thickness of each layer shall be not more than 50 cm after the required compaction. Density of coarse filter zone is assumed as follows (These values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.9 Assumed Density of Coarse Filter Zone

Item Wet Density (t) Saturated Density (sat) Submerged Density (sub) Unit g/cm3 g/cm3 g/cm3 Density 1.90 2.10 1.10
Cohesion and internal friction angle of coarse filter zone is assumed as follows (These values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.10
Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Coarse Filter Zone

Unit kN/m2 degree Value 0.0 35
Item Effective Cohesion (C) Effective Angle of Internal Friction ()
57
2) Upstream Filter Zone The upstream transition between the core and rock zones is not subject to continuous seepage exit gradients or to the risk of high exit gradients if the core zone cracks. Therefore, the upstream filter zone does not be designed. It is common only to require that rocks in the rock zone shall be distributed such that smaller-sized rocks are placed at the boundary between the core and rock zones.. 3.7.3 Rock Zone
1) Rock Zone Rock material for rock zone shall consist of a well-graded mixture of hard and durable particles. And it shall be slightly weathered to fresh rock to secure the durability and stability of dam body. The rock zone shall have the following properties:
After compaction, the rock zone and selected rock zone shall be free draining. The in-situ permeability shall not be less than 1.0 x 10-3 cm/sec. The gradation limits for these zones are given as follows:
Table R 3.7.11
Gradation Limits of Rock Zone

Passing by Weight (%) Rock Zone 100 not more than 55 not less than 15 not more than 5 not more than 5
Diameter of Particle (mm) 750.0 88.9 9.52 0.075
The dry density of embankment shall not be less than 1.80 tf/m3 in the rock zone. The thickness of each layer shall not be more than 1.0 m after the required compaction. The small size rock shall be placed toward the zone boundary with the filter zone and the large size rock shall be placed toward the both upstream and downstream slopes.
Density of rock zone is assumed as follows (These values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.12
Item Wet Density (t) Saturated Density (sat) Submerged Density (sub)
Assumed Density of Rock Zone

Unit g/cm3 g/cm3 g/cm3 Density 1.65 1.90 0.90
Cohesion and internal friction angle of rock zone is assumed as follows (These
58
values should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests):
Table R 3.7.13
Cohesion and Internal Friction Angle of Rock Zone

Unit kN/m2 degree Value 5.0 36
Item Effective Cohesion (C) Effective Angle of Internal Friction ()
2) Upstream Surface of Rock Zone The upstream surface of rock zone shall have the following properties:
The upstream surface of rock zone shall have the average rock size not less than 30 cm in diameter and the maximum rock size about 80 cm in diameter. The rock material is required to have a minimum bulk specific gravity (dry) of 2.3 t/m3 and maximum water absorption of 6 %. The rock material shall be dumped and spread without compaction in a manner which ensure the stability of the zone and the absence of large voids.
3.8 3.8.1
INSTRUMENT Objectives of Instrumentation
The principal objectives of instrumentation plan for embankment dams are generally grouped into four categories: (1) analytical assessment; (2) prediction of future performance; (3) legal evaluation; and (4) development and verification of future design. Instrumentation achieves these objectives by providing quantitative data to assess pore water pressure, deformation of dam body and foundation, ground water level, seepage water and seismic event. Total movements as well as relative movements between zones of an embankment and its foundation also need to be monitored. A variety of instruments can be utilized in a comprehensive monitoring plan to ensure that all critical conditions are covered sufficiently. The required data and instruments are as follows:
59
Pore Pressure Deformation
Core and Filter Zone Foundation Embankment Foundation
: Piezometer : Piezometer : Movement Marker Probe Extensometer : Probe Extensometer : Seepage Measuring Device : Strong Motion Accelerograph
Seepage Seismic Events
3.8.2 1)
Function and Arrangement of Instruments
Measurement of Piezometric Pressure A piezometer is a measuring device that is sealed within the ground, embankment or borehole so that it responds only to groundwater or pore water pressure around itself and not to pressure at other elevations. Electrical piezometers, which are based on the pressure sensor, are installed in the core and filter zones, and in the foundation downstream of the centerline to check . Applications for piezometers fall into two general categories: first, for monitoring the pattern of water flow and second, to provide an index of soil strength. The safety of a dam is affected by hydraulic pressure that develops in the dam and foundation by seepage and by compression of soil. Piezometers are used to check such conditions and are useful for determination of the effectiveness of the drainage during reservoir filling and for monitoring the development of excess pore pressure during construction. Monitoring of pore pressure during consolidation of soil material and the effect of rapid drawdown allows an estimate of effective stress to be made. Knowledge of this condition is of great importance during construction and operation and for assessment of design assumptions.
2)
Measurement of Deformation Measurement shall be made on deformation of the exterior surface of embankment as well as the foundation and the interior elements of the dam to find out the deformation characteristic of embankment materials. a) Surface Movement Markers Surface movement markers are used to monitor the magnitude and rate of horizontal and vertical deformations of the embankment dam. These are installed along the crest of the
60
dam and along the upstream and downstream slopes. The horizontal and vertical deformation of these markers can be observed by surveying methods. All surveying methods shall be referenced to a stable reference datum, which is a benchmark for vertical deformation measurements and a horizontal control station for horizontal deformation measurements. Great care shall be taken to ensure stability of reference datum. b) Probe Extensometer Probe extensometers with magnet/reed switch transducer are installed for monitoring the changing distance between two or more points along a common axis by passing a probe through a pipe. The pipe anchored on the foundation rock is vertically installed around dam axis in the rock zone. Measuring points along the pipe are identified by the magnet/reed switch system. It is an on/off position detector, arranged to indicate when the reed switch is in a certain position with respect to a ring magnet. The switch contacts are normally open and one of the reeds shall be magnetically susceptible. The ring magnets are anchored to the embankment by horizontal steel channel cross arms. The cross arms, which are installed at vertical intervals of 5.0 m during construction of embankment, ensure conformance with deformation of the rock materials, which support inclined core zone. The distance between points is determined by measurements of probe position. For determination of absolute deformation data, the position of one measuring point with respect to a reference datum shall be periodically determined by surveying methods. Data of this nature are needed to estimate the camber of the embankment crown at final stage. 3) Measurement of Seepage Seepage measuring devices are used to measure amounts of seepage through, around, and under the core (impervious) zone. Monitoring the seepage that emerges downstream is essential to assessing the behavior of a dam during first reservoir filling. The first indication of a potential problem is often given by an observed change of seepage rate. Also monitoring the solids content in the seepage water can provide important information. Seepage flows through pipes installed on foundation of rock zone are measured by container such as measuring cylinder. 4) Measurement of Seismic Event The strong motion accelerographs are installed in the internal gallery and on the crest of dam.
61
It can measure acceleration tri-axially. These accelerations are mutually perpendicular and are called vertical, longitudinal and transverse acceleration. Two accelerographs installed at the dam crest and in the foundation shall be aligned in the same direction with the longitudinal axis parallel with the dam axis. 3.8.3 Data Collection
Data collection shall begin with a well-defined established schedule. The schedule is dependent on instrument characteristics, site conditions, construction activity and the occurrence of unusual events. Instrumentation data shall include the instrument reading and also any information that identifies instrument, readout unit, reader, date, visual observations, climate, remarks, and any site conditions that might affect the value of the reading. The schedule of the data collection is discussed as below: 1) During Construction The installation of instruments shall be in accordance with the progress of works, and the Data collection shall begin immediately after installation. The data collection during construction is very important regarding the control of works and safety of the embankment dam. The pore pressure, which may arise during the course of embankment, shall be strictly checked. In case that excess pore pressure is observed, its allowable limit shall be confirmed by stability analysis and the embanking speed may be required to be slower in order to release the pore pressure to the allowable extent. The items and frequency of data collection are given as follows: During Construction (First Stage and Final Stage)
Pore Pressure Deformation Seepage Piezometer Movement Marker Probe Extensometer Seepage Measuring Device : : : : Read Weekly Read Weekly Read Weekly Read Weekly
2)
During Operation The observation of the behavior of dam is also important during first reservoir filling and for several years after filling for the safety control of the dam, and frequent data collection of the instruments will be required. The frequency after several years may be reduced when the behavior of the dam has become stable, considering the degree of importance of the measuring items and change of measured values.
62
The items and frequency of data collection are given by classifying the period as follows: During Operation (First Stage and Final Stage)
Pore Pressure Deformation Seepage Seismic Events Piezometer Movement Marker Probe Extensometer Seepage Measuring Device Strong Motion Accelerograph : Read Weekly : Read Monthly : Read Monthly : Read Weekly : Read at Every Earthquake
After Operation (Final Stage)

Pore Pressure Deformation Seepage Seismic Events Piezometer Movement Marker Probe Extensometer Seepage Measuring Device Strong Motion Accelerograph : Read Annually : Read Annually : Read Monthly : Read annually : Read at Every Earthquake
63
CHAPTER 4. DESIGN REVIEW OF WATER MANAGEMENT

4.1 HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS
In HATCH Report, no hydrological analysis is mentioned. Therefore, hyetograph and hydrograph have been newly prepared for diversion and spillway design. Procedure for hyetograph and hydrograph preparation is described in Fig. R 4.1.1. First, peak precipitation and hyetograph are calculated based on precipitation intensity curve (Chapter 4.1.1), and hydrograph is calculated by hyetograph and rational formula (Chapter 4.1.2) for 2, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100-year return period. These calculation for probable maximum precipitation (PMP) is described in Chapter 4.1.3 and those for 25 year return period for dry season only is described in Chapter 4.1.4.
Calculation Procedure for Hyetograph and Hydrograph

Purpose : Preparation of hyetograph and hydrograph for different return period for diversion and spillway design - Calculation Procedure Collection of precipitation data - Methodoloy Puerto Princesa Station near Lio Tuba TSF is used. - Reference Fig.R 4.1.2
Hyetograph preparation for different return period 1. Selection of precipitation intensity curve
= = = = = =
2. Calculation of storm arrival time or duration 3. Calculation of peak precipitation by precipitation intensity curve and duration 4. Calculation to prepare hyetograph
Precipitation intensity curve for different return period made by short duration and long duration rainfall at Puerto Princesa Station (DPWH and JICA report) "Kadoya formula" adopted in "Technical Standard for Sabo Structure" Combination of 1(precipitation intensity curve) and 2 (Kadoya formula). Centralized hyetograph (see picture below)
(Table R 4.1.1, Fig. R 4.1.3 R.4.1.4) (Formula in Chp.4.1.1) (Fig. R 4.1.5, Table R 4.1.2) (Fig. R 4.1.6 R 4.1.11
Hydrograph preparation for different return period 1. Calculation of peak flow volume 2. Calculation to prepare hydrograph Rational formula adopted in "Technical Standard for Sabo Structure" Combination of unit hydrograph and rational formula (Table R 4.1.3 Fig.R 4.1.12 R 4.1.17
Fig. R 4.1.1 Procedure for Hyetograph and Hydrograph Preparation
64
4.1.1
Precipitation
Precipitation data has been obtained from following JICA report done in Philippine.
Specific Discharge Curve, Rainfall Intensity Duration Curve, Isohyet of Probable 1-day Rainfall / March 2003 / Project for the Enhancement of Capabilities in Flood Control and Sabo Engineering of the DPWH / DPWH and JICA
In the above report, there is one observation station in Palawan Island, which is Puerto Princesa Synoptic Station (hereinafter Puerto Station), located at the center of the island along the southern coast. Rainfall intensity curves at Puerto Station are shown in Table R 4.1.1, Fig. R 4.1.3 and Fig. R 4.1.4 for short duration and long duration. Rainfall intensity curves are shown as following 2 equations; Type 1 and Type 2.
Palawan Island (Microsoft Encarta)
Puerto Princesa
Rio Tuba Mine
Fig. R 4.1.2 Location of Puerto Princesa Type 1:
A R= (C + T b )
R= A (C + T ) b
Type 2:
Where R : precipitation (mm/hr) T : duration (min) A, C, b : coefficient in Table R 4.1.1
Table R 4.1.1
Parameter for Rainfall Intensity Curve for Puerto Station

b 0.90 0.94 0.96 0.98 0.99 0.99 Long Duration Curve (~ 1440 min) Return Period Type A C 2 yr 1 1560.99 21.32 5 yr 2 1987.21 48.87 10 yr 2 2418.63 50.73 25 yr 2 3399.19 60.81 50 yr 2 4032.14 64.83 100 yr 2 4650.43 68.04 b 0.81 0.80 0.80 0.82 0.83 0.84
Short Duration Curve (~ 60 min) Return Period Type A C 2 yr 1 1836.92 13.16 5 yr 1 2987.81 14.07 10 yr 1 3766.89 14.55 25 yr 1 4808.70 15.39 50 yr 1 5548.92 15.85 100 yr 1 6150.94 15.84
65
300 250 Rainfall (mm/hr) 200 150 100 50 0 0 10 20 30 Duration (min) 40
2 yr 10 yr 50 yr
5 yr 25 yr 100 yr
50
60
Fig. R 4.1.3
100
Rainfall Intensity Curve for Short Duration in Puerto Station
2 yr 80 Rainfall (mm/h) 10 yr 50 yr 60
5 yr 25 yr 100 yr
40
20
0 0 360 720 Duration (min) 1080 1440
Fig. R 4.1.4
Rainfall Intensity Curve for Long Duration in Puerto Station
In order to determine the design duration and design precipitation, flood arrival time for Rio Tuba TSF-2 has been considered. In order to achieve the values, following equation (Kadoya formula) for flood arrival time was used. This Kadoya formula is adopted for Technical Standard for Disaster Prevention Pond etc. by River Association in Japan and Technical Standard for Basic Planning of Sabo Structure by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism in Japan. Basic theory of this equation is kinematic wave method.
T f = K pl A 0.22 Pe
Where Tf :
0.35
flood arrival time (min)
Kpl : Coefficient (120 in Sabo Technical Standard) A: catchment area (km2, A=2.4 km2 for Rio Tuba TSF-2)
66
Pe :
effective precipitation intensity (mm/hr)
Curve for Precipitation and flood arrival time in above equation is plotted together with the rainfall curve in Fig. R 4.1.3 and Fig. R 4.1.4, which is shown in Fig. R 4.1.5. By these intersection points of flood arrival curve and each rainfall intensity curve (e.g. return period 2 year, 5 year etc.), design duration and design precipitation for Rio Tuba Projects TSF-2 can be obtained (Ref. Table R 4.1.2).
240 220 200 180 160 Rainfall (mm/hr) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Duration (min) 80 90 100 110 120 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 25 yr 50 yr 100 yr Flood Arrival
Fig. R 4.1.5 Table R 4.1.2 Return Period 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 25 yr 50 yr 100 yr
Flood Arrival Time and Rainfall Intensity Curve
Design Precipitation and Design Duration for Rio Tuba TSF-2 Design Duration (min) Design Precipitation (mm/hr) 38.0 46.4 32.2 74.3 29.8 92.9 27.5 117.0 26.1 134.8 25.0 153.7
Using above design precipitation and design duration, hyetographs for Rio Tuba TSF-2 have been calculated for each return period. Center concentration type is selected to make these hyetographs (Ref. Fig. R 4.1.6 to Fig. R 4.1.11).
67

Hyetograph (Return Period: 2 Year)
180 160 140 Rainfall (mm/hr) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 188 226 264 302 340 378 416 454 492 530 568 606 644 682 720 758 796 834 872 910
948
986
1024
1062
1100
1138
1176
1214
1252
1290
Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.6
180 160 140 Rainfall (mm/hr) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 269 301 333 366 398 430 462 495 527 559
Hyetograph for 2-year Return Period

591
623
656
688
720
752
784
817
849
881
913
945
978
1010
1042
1074
1107
1139
1171
1203
Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.7
180 160 140 Rainfall (mm/hr) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 303 333 363 392 422 452 482 511 541 571 601

631
660
690
720
750
780
809
839
869
899
929
958
988
1018
1048
1077
1107
1137
1105
1167
1132
Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.8
180 160 140 Rainfall (mm/hr) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 335 363 390 418 445 473 500 528 555 583

610
638
665
693
720
747
775
802
830
857
885
912
940
967
995
1022
1050
1077
Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.9
68
1440
1440
1440
1440

180 160 140 Rainfall (mm/hr) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 354 380 406 432 459 485 511 537 563 589 615 642 668 694 720 746 772 798 825 851
877
903
929
955
981
1008
1034
1060
1086
1070
1112
1095
Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.10
180 160 140 Rainfall (mm/hr) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 370 395 420 445 470 495 520 545 570 595 620

645
670
695
720
745
770
795
820
845
870
895
920
945
970
995
1020
1045
Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.11
4.1.2 Peak Discharge
Using above hyetographs, hydrographs for Rio Tuba TSF-2 have been calculated. Following rational formula has been adopted to calculate hydrographs. Calculated peak discharges for each return period are shown in Table R 4.1.3. Specific discharge, daily precipitation and daily discharge are shown in the same table. Calculated hydrographs for each return period are shown in Fig. R 4.1.12 to Fig. R 4.1.17.
Q=
1 CI A 360
Where Q : C: A: I: peak discharge (m3/sec) runoff coefficient (0.6 for Rio Tuba TSF-2) catchment area (ha, 240 ha for Rio Tuba TSF-2) precipitation within flood arrival time (mm/hr)
69
1440
1440
Return Period 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 25 yr 50 yr 100 yr

70 Flow Rate (m3/sec) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0
Table R 4.1.3 Peak Discharge for Each Return Period Peak Peak Specific Daily Daily Duration Precipitation Discharge Discharge Precipitation Discharge (min) (mm/hr) (m3/sec) (m3/s/km2) (mm/day) (103 m3/day) 38.0 46.4 18.6 7.7 97.8 141 32.2 74.3 29.7 12.4 138.1 199 29.8 92.9 37.2 15.5 167.9 242 27.5 117.0 46.8 19.5 202.8 292 26.1 134.8 53.9 22.5 223.1 321 25.0 153.7 61.5 25.6 238.7 344
Hydrograph for Lio Tuba (Return Period: 2 Year)
120
240
360
480
600
720 Time (min)
840
960
1080
1200
1320
1440
Fig. R 4.1.12
70 Flow Rate (m3/sec) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 120 240 360 480
Hydrograph for 2-year Return Period

600
720 840 Time (min)
960
1080
1200
1320
1440
Fig. R 4.1.13
70 Flow Rate (m3/sec) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 120 240 360 480

600
720 Time (min)
840
960
1080
1200
1320
1440
Fig. R 4.1.14
70
70 Flow Rate (m3/sec) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 120 240 360 480 600
720 840 Time (min)
960
1080
1200
1320
1440
Fig. R 4.1.15
70 Flow Rate (m3/sec) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 120 240 360 480 600 720 Time (min) 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 Hydrograph for Lio Tuba (Return Period: 50 Year)
Fig. R 4.1.16
70 Flow Rate (m3/sec) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 120 240 360 480

600
720 Time (min)
840
960
1080
1200
1320
1440
Fig. R 4.1.17
4.1.3 1)
Probable Maximum Flood for Dam Safety Spillway for Dam Safety
To make the extraordinary flood pass through the dam body safely, an emergency spillway with enough flow capacity is indispensable. The design discharge of emergency spillway is determined so as to cope with Probable Maximum Flood (PMF), which is calculated from Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) through the flood runoff model, taking the flood routing effect in the dam reservoir into account.
71
2)
Outline of Hershfield Method for PMP Estimation
There are two (2) kinds of method for estimating PMP, namely meteorological method and statistical method. Statistical procedures for estimating PMP are used wherever sufficient precipitation data are available, and are particularly useful for making quick estimates or where other meteorological data, such as dew point and wind records, are lacking. The Hershfield Method, or statistical methods, is employed to estimate PMP for this Study, since it is most commonly used and recommended by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The following equation has been developed as the principal approach of the Hershfield Method: Xp = Xn' + Km * Sn'
where, Xp: Sn': Point PMP Adjusted standard deviation of a series of the annual maximum precipitation
Xn': Adjusted average of a series of the annual maximum precipitation
Km: Statistical coefficient
The adjusted average and standard deviation values (Xn' and Sn') in the above equation are estimated from the unadjusted values (Xn and Sn) calculated by the observed annual maximum precipitation, multiplied by the adjustment factors developed by Hershfield. The statistical coefficient (Km) in the above equation is also estimated from the relationship of the Km and Xn values developed by Hershfield. The point PMP could be estimated through the above procedures and converted into the areal average PMP using the area reduction factor curves. The area reduction curves were developed by WMO based on average values obtained from the depth-area-duration (DAD) analysis of major general-type storms in the world.
3) Calculation of PMP and PMF
Probable maximum precipitation (PMP) has been calculated by Hershfield Method as per Manual for Estimation of Probable Maximum Precipitation published by World Meteorological Organization (WMO No.332). Calculation procedures of PMP and PMF are shown in Fig. R 4.1.18.
72
Calculation Procedure for PMP and PMF

Purpose : Calculation of probable maximum precipitation for emergency spillway design.
Collection of precipitation data (daily precipitation) Calculation of PMP for 24 hour (mm/24hr) 1. Calculation of mean (X) and standard deviation (Sn) 2. Calculation of mean and standard deviation other than maximum item (Xn-m and Sn-m) 3. Calculation of adjustment factor by Xn, Sn, Xn-m and Sn-m 4. Calculation of adjusted mean and standard deviation (Xn' and Sn') 5. Calculation of coefficient Km by Xn' 6. Calculation of PMP by adjusted Xn', Sn' and Km 7. Calculation of adjustment factors by observation unit, duration and catchment area 8. Calculation of PMP' by adjustment factor and PMP Calculation of Hyetograph 1. Calculation of PMP for different duration by depth-duration curve 2. Preparation of centralized hyetograph Calculation of Hydrograph 1. Calculation of peak discharge by rational formula 2. Preparation of hydrograph
Fig. R 4.1.18
Calculation Procedure for PMP and PMF
Daily precipitation data at Puerto Princesa station in Palawan were collected for 40 years (from 1961 to 2000) and annual maxima of daily precipitation were extracted to shown in Table R 4.1.4. Table R 4.1.4
Year Annual Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) Year Annual Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) Year Annual Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) Year Annual Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) 1961 104.7 1971 132.4 1981 123.3 1991 77.4 1962 93.5 1972 75.7 1982 137.5 1992 105.5
Annual Maximum Daily Precipitation

1963 96.5 1973 154.0 1983 226.0 1993 156.0 1964 72.1 1974 102.3 1984 97.0 1994 63.8 1965 105.7 1975 269.3 1985 74.4 1995 87.5 1966 110.2 1976 72.5 1986 96.0 1996 60.2 1967 145.6 1977 73.2 1987 77.9 1997 56.2 1968 99.0 1978 107.9 1988 186.0 1998 78.9 1969 68.8 1979 91.9 1989 117.2 1999 104.1 1970 104.5 1980 194.1 1990 97.3 2000 74.9
Maximum : 269.3mm/day,
Minimum : 56.2mm/day,
Average : 109.28mm/day
Based on these annual maxima and parameters shown in Table R 4.1.5, 24hr PMP has been calculated as 840.2 (mm/day). Daily discharge is estimated as 1,210 (103 m3/day) (Ref. Table R 4.1.6).
73
Table R 4.1.5
Item Length of record Observation.units Duration Catchment area Mean of annual maximum precipitation Mean other than maximum Ratio Xn adjustment factor Adjustment factor Adjusted Xn Standard deviation of annual maximum precipitation Standard deviation other than maximum Ratio Sn adjustment factor Adjustment factor Adjusted Sn Coefficient PMP PMP Adjustment factor (1) PMP Adjustment factor (2) Adjusted PMP (2) Code/Unit (year) (nos) (hr) (km2) Xn Xn-m Xn-m/Xn C1 C2 Xn' Sn Sn-m Sn-m/Sn C3 C4 Sn' Km PMP C5 C6 PMP
Parameters for PMP

Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) Value 40 1 24 2.4 109.28 105.17 0.96 0.99 1.00 107.85 45.50 37.86 0.83 0.93 1.02 42.95 14.80 743.50 1.13 1.00 840.15 Related Factor or Calculation Calculated by Table R 4.1.4 Calculated by Table R 4.1.4 =(6)/(5) Obtained by (1), (7) Obtained by (1) =(5)*(8)*(9) Calculated by Table R 4.1.4 Calculated by Table R 4.1.4 =(12)/(11) Obtained by (1), (13) Obtained by (1) =(11)*(14)*(15) Obtained by (3), (5) =(10)+(17)*(16) Obtained by (2) Obtained by (3), (4) =(18)*(19)*(20)
In order to calculate probable maximum flood (PMF), 24hr PMP were calculated into precipitation intensity for different duration (e.g. 1hr, 2hr, 3hr). Maximum depth-duration curve in the reference has been used for this calculation. This is the relationship with duration (hour) and percentage of 24-hour PMP, which can be used where only daily measurement of precipitation is available. Using this PMP intensity for different duration, flood arrival time was calculated as 20min. PMP intensity within flood arrival time (20min) was calculated as 327.7(mm/hr) and peak discharge were calculated as 131.1(m3/s). Specific discharge is 54.6 (m3/s/km2) Table R 4.1.6
Return Period PMP Duration (min) 20 Peak Precipitation (mm/hr) 327.7
Peak Discharge for PMP

Peak Discharge (m3/sec) 131.1 Specific Discharge (m3/s/km2) 54.6 Daily Precipitation (mm/day) 840.2 Daily Discharge (103 m3/day) 1,210
By using PMP intensity and duration curve, hyetograph for PMP and hydrograph for PMF have been calculated as in Fig. R 4.1.19 and Fig. R 4.1.20 respectively.
74
350 300 Rainfall (mm/hr) 250 200 150 100 50 0 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780 840 900 960 1020
Hyetograph for Rio Tuba (PMP)
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
1380
Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.19
140 Flow Rate (m3/s) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 120 240 360 480 600
Hyetograph for PMP

Hydrograph for Rio Tuba (PMF)
720 Time (min)
840
960
1080
1200
1320
1440
Fig. R 4.1.20
4.1.4 1)
Hydrograph for PMF
Precipitation and Peak discharge in Dry Season Purpose
In this section, calculation procedure for precipitation and discharge volume in dry season are detailed. They are to be used for designing drainage facility at the final stage of dam construction when closing the river by the dam completely.
2) Precipitation in Dry Season
Mean monthly precipitation in Table R 4.1.7 are mean monthly precipitation calculated by the daily precipitation data from 1961 to 2000. Monthly precipitation is low in January to April and high in October and November. From the numbers of rainy days, shown in this table, it is clear that rainy days in January to April are just a few. Table R 4.1.7 Mean Monthly Precipitation and Number of Rainy Days at Puerto Princesa (1961 to 2000)
Jan 30.5 4.5 Feb 19.7 2.4 Mar 30.5 3.3 Total Mean Monthly Precipitation (mm/month) Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec (mm/yr) 38.9 130.7 175.6 174.2 172.1 183.6 207.7 213.0 138.1 1511.9 Mean Number of Rainy Days per Month 5.2 11.2 15.3 16.7 18.0 16.0 17.5 13.7 9.3
75
1440
60
Distributions of monthly precipitation from 1961 to 2000 are shown in Fig. R 4.1.21. If you look at the upper reach of each month, May has relatively low precipitation as well as January to April. Therefore, dry season for outlet design is defined as January to May. Based on the daily precipitation from January to May, from 1961 to 2000, maximum daily precipitation in dry season are extracted (Ref. Table R 4.1.8). By probability calculation with these maxima, probable daily precipitation in dry season is calculated. In Fig. R 4.1.22, dotted circles are plotting position and lines are estimation curve for different probability distribution. In this figure, 25-year probable daily precipitation in dry season is estimated as 100(mm/day).
800 Monthly Precipitation (mm/month) 700
Average monthly precipitation (mm/month)
600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 1 2 3 4 5
10
11
12 Month 13
Fig. R 4.1.21
Monthly Precipitation for 40 Years (1961 to 2000)
Table R 4.1.8
Year Dry Season Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) Year Dry Season Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) Year Dry Season Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) Year Dry Season Maximum Rainfall (mm/day) 1961 104.7 1971 92.7 1981 70.0 1991 27.2
Maximum Daily Precipitation in Dry Season

1962 27.2 1972 16.5 1982 67.4 1992 21.7 1963 15.2 1973 65.3 1983 12.0 1993 25.8 1964 52.0 1974 47.0 1984 33.8 1994 63.8 1965 57.6 1975 54.4 1985 70.2 1995 21.0 1966 44.7 1976 72.5 1986 28.2 1996 40.4 1967 73.7 1977 48.8 1987 50.6 1997 45.0 1968 40.6 1978 49.0 1988 37.4 1998 31.6 1969 53.3 1979 51.1 1989 91.6 1999 53.3 1970 41.6 1980 41.4 1990 97.3 2000 56.8
Maximum : 104.7mm/day,
Minimum : 12.0mm/day,
Average : 49.9mm/day
76
Fig. R 4.1.22
3) Peak discharge in Dry Season
Probable Daily Precipitation in Dry Season
Since probable daily precipitation in dry season for 25-year return period is close to those in 2 years shown in Table R 4.1.3, duration is set as same value (38min). Peak precipitation and peak discharge are calculated by modification of those in 2 years. Daily discharge has been calculated by daily precipitation, runoff coefficient and catchment area by rational formula. Calculated peak precipitation and discharge volumes are summarized in Table R 4.1.9. Table R 4.1.9
Return Period 25 yr Duration (min) 38
Peak discharge in Dry Season for 25-year Return Period

Peak Precipitation (mm/hr) 47.5 Peak discharge (m3/sec) 19.0 Specific Discharge (m3/s/km2) 7.9 Daily Precipitation (mm/day) 100.0 Daily Discharge (103 m3/day) 144
77
By using hyetograph and hydrograph for two-year return period, where daily precipitation is close to those of dry season, hyetograph and hydrograph have been calculated (Ref. Fig. R 4.1.23 and Fig. R 4.1.24).
180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Hyetograph for Lio Tuba, Dry Season (Jan to May, Return Period: 25 Year)
Rainfall (mm/hr)
70 Flow Rate (m3/sec) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 120 240 360
0 188 226 264 302 340 378 416 454 492 530 568 606 644 682 720 758 796 834 872 910 948 986 1024 1062 1100 1138 1176 1214 1252 1290 1440 Time (min)
Fig. R 4.1.23
Hydrograph in Dry Season for 25-year Return Period

Hydrograph for Rio Tuba, Dry Season (Jan to May, Return Period: 25 Year)
480
600
720 Time (min)
840
960
1080
1200
1320
1440
Fig. R 4.1.24
Hydrograph in Dry Season for 25-year Return Period
78
4.2
CONSIDERATION OF PRECIPITATION DATA AT RIO TUBA
Precipitation data at Puerto Princesa Synoptic station (PAGASA : Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration), where is the only place in Palawan Island, have been obtained. Period of data is 40 years, from 1961 to 2000. Format of these data is daily precipitation (mm/day), and hourly precipitation (mm/hr) is not available. In addition, precipitation data measured at CBNC Rio Tuba site have been collected for reference. Format of these data is daily precipitation (mm/day) and period of data is 5 and half years only from 2004 to 2009. Precipitation data at both stations is summarized as follows: Table R 4.2.1
Jan 30.5 Feb 19.7
Precipitation Data at Puerto Princesa (1961 to 2000)

Sep Oct Nov Dec Total 1511.9 (mm/yr)
A. Mean Monthly Precipitation (mm/month) Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 30.5 38.9
130.7 175.6 174.2 172.1 183.6 207.7 213.0 138.1
B. Maximum Daily Precipitation per Month (mm/day) 57.6 50.8 75.6 92.7 104.7 194.1 93.6
Maximum 269.3 137.5 226.0 110.2 186.0 269.3 (mm/day) 18.0 16.0 17.5 13.7 9.3 Total 133.1 (days) 11.4 (mm/day)
C. Mean Number of Rainy Days per Month (day) 4.5 2.4 3.3 5.2 11.2 15.3 16.7
D. Daily Precipitation per Rainy Day (A./C.) 6.8 8.2 9.2 7.5 11.7 11.5 10.4 9.6 11.5 11.9 15.5 14.8
Table R 4.2.2
Jan 97.0 Feb 49.3
Precipitation Data at CBNC Rio Tuba (2004 to 2008)

Sep Oct Nov Dec Total 2,616.5 (mm/yr)
A. Mean Monthly Precipitation (mm/month) Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 67.5 57.8
247.9 280.5 412.5 247.6 369.3 330.9 222.7 233.7
B. Maximum Daily Precipitation per Month (mm/day) 97.0 60.4 70.0 44.0 133.6 107.3 200.0 85.0
Maximum 200.0 103.0 135.0 180.4 120.0 (mm/day) 16.0 16.0 12.2 11.8 132.0 (days) 19.8 (mm/day)
C. Mean Number of Rainy Days per Month 7.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 11.4 14.6 16.4 12.8
D. Daily Precipitation per Rainy Day (A./C.) 13.9 10.7 14.7 12.6 21.7 19.2 25.2 19.3 23.1 20.7 18.3 19.8
79
450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Month at Puerto Princesa at CBNC Rio Tuba Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Daily Precipitation per Rainny Day (mm/day)
Mean Monthly Precipitation (mm/month)
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Jun Month
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
at Puerto Princesa
at CBNC Rio Tuba
Fig. R 4.2.1
Differences of Precipitation between at CBNC Rio Tuba and at Puerto Princesa
From the above tables and figures, mean annual precipitation and daily precipitation per rainy day recorded at CBNC Rio Tuba show almost 1.7 times as large as them at Puerto Princesa. Although period of data at CBNC Rio Tuba is 5 years only, the differences between both data should be considered. Probability calculation using data at CBNC Rio Tuba is executed as shown below: Table R 4.2.3
Year Maximum Daily Rainfall (mm/day)
Maximum Daily Precipitation at CBNC Rio Tuba (2004 to 2008)

2004 83.0 2005 200.0 2006 117.0 2007 180.4 2008 133.6 Max. 200.0
Fig. R 4.2.2
Probable Daily Precipitation at CBNC Rio Tuba
80
Results of probability calculation using data at CBNC Rio Tuba are given in Table R 4.2.4. By comparison with probability at Puerto Princesa, Probable daily precipitation at CBNC Rio Tuba shows about 1.3 times bigger than it at Puerto Princesa. Table R 4.2.4
Return Period 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 50 yr 100 yr
Comparative Table of Probable Daily Precipitation

A./B. 1.37 1.32 1.28 1.28 1.32
Daily Precipitation (mm/day) A. Puerto Princesa B. CBNC Rio Tuba 97.8 133.8 138.1 182.4 167.9 214.6 223.1 285.5 238.7 315.4
From the above discussions, design flood calculated in section 4.1 should be increased by 50% (1.37 x 1.1 = 1.50) because of limited period of data at CBNC Rio Tuba. Revised design flood for each return period are given in Table R 4.2.5. Table R 4.2.5
Return Period 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 25 yr 50 yr 100 yr 1000 yr 25 yr (Dry Season) PMF
Revised Design Flood for Each Return Period
Original Design Flood Revised Design Flood (from Data at Puerto Princesa) (Considering Data at Rio Tuba) Daily Peak Daily Daily Peak Daily Precipitation Discharge Discharge Precipitation Discharge Discharge (mm/day) (m3/sec) (103 m3/day) (mm/day) (m3/sec) (103 m3/day) 97.8 18.6 141 146.7 27.9 212 138.1 29.7 199 207.2 44.6 299 167.9 37.2 242 251.9 55.8 363 202.8 46.8 292 304.2 70.2 438 223.1 53.9 321 334.7 80.9 482 238.7 61.5 344 358.1 92.3 516 564.1 88.0 812 846.1 132.0 1,218 100.0 840.2 19.0 131.1 144 1,210 150.0 1,260.3 28.5 196.7 216 1,815
81
4.3 4.3.1
DIVERSION METHOD Required Function
The objective of the diversion facilities is to divert the streamflow around or through the damsite during the construction period. It can minimize serious potential flood damage to the work in progress. Diversion facilities consist of upstream cofferdam, temporary channel and downstream cofferdam. Those are designed to be capable of managing a 25-year probable flood.
4.3.2 Diversion Procedure
Temporary open channel (existing channel) with cofferdam method is adopted during embankment construction. Stage 1: Except existing channel located at right side, the river is closed by cofferdam. Streamflow is diverted by existing channel. Embankment at left side can be started. Stage 2: Existing channel is closed by cofferdam. Streamflow is diverted by decant pipe (RL. 36.5m, flow capacity 0.3m3/s6). Embankment at right side can be started. Procedure of diversion is illustrated as follows:
Existing Channel
Existing Channel Cofferdam
Dry Condition
Dam Embankment
Fig. R 4.3.1
Diversion Procedure (Stage 1)
HATCH Report
82
Existing Channel
Cofferdam
Dam Embankment Decant Pipe
Decant Pipe
Dam Embankment Decant Pipe
Dam Embankment
Dam Embankment
Fig. R 4.3.2
4.3.3 1) Hydraulic Design
Diversion Procedure (Stage 2)
Reservoir Water Level during Stage 1
Existing channel located at right side of riverbed can be used as a temporary channel. The discharge capacity of this channel is calculated in accordance with the hydraulic formula as shown below:
H = (1 + fe )
2g
+h
Q=VA=
Where,
H fe V h Q R A B m P n i
1 A R 2 / 3 i1 / 2 n
: reservoir water depth (m) : entrance energy loss coefficient (0.2) : velocity at channel (m/s) : channel water depth (m) : discharge (m3/s) : hydraulic radius (m) = A/P : flow sectional area = h (B + m h) (m2) : channel width (m) : side slope of channel (1:1.5) : wetted perimeter (m) : Mannings roughness coefficient = 0.035 : longitudinal gradient = 1/150
83
Table R 4.3.1
Reservoir Water Level (RL. m) 36.00 36.24 36.49 36.74 37.00 37.26 37.51 Reservoir Water Depth H (m) 0.00 0.24 0.49 0.74 1.00 1.26 1.51
Flow Capacity of Existing Channel (Stage 1)

Channel Width B (m) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 A (m2) P (m) R (m) V (m/s) 0.00 0.77 1.19 1.52 1.80 2.04 2.26 Q (m3/s) 0.00 1.28 4.09 8.11 13.23 19.39 26.59
Channel Water Depth h (m) 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
0.00 1.66 3.44 5.34 7.36 9.50 11.76
8.00 8.72 9.44 10.16 10.88 11.61 12.33
0.00 0.19 0.36 0.53 0.68 0.82 0.95
During Stage 1, maximum reservoir water level can be calculated as shown below : Table R 4.3.2
Inflow Return Period 25-year (All Season)
40 39 RESERVOIR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION (m) . 38

Calculation results Daily Discharge 438,000 m3/day Maximum Reservoir Water Level RL.37.3m Maximum Outflow 20.9 m3/s
200 180 160
Peak Inflow 70.2 m3/s
Maximum Water Level RL.37.3m

37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 0.0 6.5 7.9 9.3 10.6 12.0 (Hour) 13.4 14.7 16.1 17.5 18.9 140 120 100 DISCHARGE (m3/s) .
80 60 40
Peak Outflow 20.9 m3/s
20 0
RESERVOIR ELEVATION (RL.m)
INFLOW (m3/s)
OUTFLOW (m3/s)
Fig. R 4.3.3
2)
During Stage 2, streamflow can be diverted to the downstream by decant pipe only. Its inlet elevation is RL.36.5m and its flow capacity is 0.3 m3/s. During Stage 2, reservoir water level can be calculated as shown below :
84
Table R 4.3.3
Inflow Return Period 25-year (All Season) 25-year (Dry Season) Peak Inflow 70.2 m3/s 28.5 m3/s

Calculation results Daily Discharge 438,000 m3/day 216,000 m3/day Maximum Reservoir Water Level RL.38.8m RL.37.7m Maximum Outflow 0.3 m3/s 0.3 m3/s
* Dry Season (from January to May)

40 39 RESERVOIR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION (m) . 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 0.0 6.5 7.9 9.3 10.6 12.0 (Hour) 13.4 14.7 16.1 17.5 18.9 200
180 160 140 120 100 DISCHARGE (m3/s) .
80 60 40 20 0
INFLOW (m3/s)
OUTFLOW (m3/s)
Fig. R 4.3.4
40 39 RESERVOIR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION (m) . 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 0.0 4.4 6.3
Reservoir Water Level during Stage 2 (All Season)

200 180
160 140 120 100 80 60 DISCHARGE (m3/s) .
40 20 0
8.2
10.1
12.0 (Hour)
13.9
15.8
17.7
19.6
21.5
INFLOW (m3/s)
OUTFLOW (m3/s)
Fig. R 4.3.5
Reservoir Water Level during Stage 2 (Dry Season)
85
3)
Required Crest Level of Upstream Cofferdam
From the results of calulation during Stage 1 and Stage 2, required crest level of upstream cofferdam are given as follows : - In case that crest level of dam embankment can over RL.38.5m during dry season. Crest Level of Upstream Cofferdam = Maximum Water Level RL.37.7m + Freeboard = RL.37.7m + 0.8m = RL.38.5m - In case that crest level of dam embankment can not over RL.38.5m during dry season. Crest Level of Upstream Cofferdam = Maximum Water Level RL.38.8m + Freeboard = RL.38.8m + 0.7m = RL.39.5m
86
4.4 4.4.1 1)
SPILLWAYS Required Function and Freeboard
Design Discharge
Spillways are provided to release surplus or flood water, which can not be contained in the allotted storage capacity of the reservoir. Spillway for first stage should have sufficient capacity to pass the entire volume of the 1000-year return period flood into the reservoir. Meanwhile, spillway for final stage should have the probable maximum flood (PMF) into the reservoir.
2) Freeboard during Operation (First Stage)
Design method of freeboard follows Australian Guideline. HATCH Report shows that the following ANCOLD publications are relevant to design of spillway and freeboard: (a) Guidelines on Design Floods for Dams, 1986; (b) Guidelines on Tailings Dam Design, Construction and Operation, 1999; and (c) Guidelines on Selection of Acceptable Flood Capacity for Dams, 2000. These guidelines enable a dam to be assigned a hazard rating of Low, Significant or High, according to the possible consequences of dam failure. Each hazard rating has an assigned recommended spillway and freeboard requirement which satisfies both operational and closed facilities. TSF-2 qualifies as a High Hazard dam, and during its operational life requires spillway/ freeboard to cater for the most stringent of the following:
1 in 1000 AEP (Annual Exceedance Probability) storm on highest pond level in normal year with 0.3m additional freeboard.
3)
Freeboard at Closure
The ANCOLD guidelines state that at closure the following spillway/ freeboard requirements should be satisfied:
Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) on the highest pond level (i.e. when TSF2 is full) in a normal year, (with no additional freeboard required).
The DENR and ANCOLD guidelines are therefore in agreement in relation to the management of the PMF event. The point of difference is that the ANCOLD guidelines provide the additional requirement relating to the worst wet season on record. ANCOLD guidelines have been adopted for the closure design.
87
4.4.2 1)
Spillway for First Stage
Layout of Structure
Spillway for first satage is located on the right abutment adjacent to the dam body and can be connected with the downstream channel smoothly. The standard type of channel spillway is adopted keeping in view the topographic conditions. Inlet level is set at RL.57.5m and width is 5m. Stilling basin is founded on RL.39.0m. Open cut excavation is basically applied.
2) Hydraulic Design
The discharge capacity of spillway for first stage is calculated in accordance with the hydraulic formula as shown below:
H = (1 + fe )
VC + hC 2g
Q2 (B + 2 m h C ) Vc g
Q = A Vc = 3
Where,
H fe Vc hc Q A B m : reservoir water depth (m) : energy loss coefficient (0.3) : critical velocity at channel (m/s) : critical water depth (m) : discharge (m3/s) : flow sectional area (m2) : channel width ( 5.0 m) : side slope of channel (1:1.0)
Table R 4.4.1
Flow Capacity of Spillway (First Stage)

Channel Critical Water Depth hc (m) 0.00 0.45 0.71 0.91 1.09 1.25 1.40 Channel Width B (m) 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 A (m2) 0.00 2.47 4.03 5.39 6.64 7.82 8.95 Vc (m/s) 0.00 2.03 2.48 2.78 3.01 3.20 3.35 Q (m3/s) 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
Design flood should consider the following matters :

Increase in TSF No.2 surface area, which has Runoff Coefficient C=1.0.
88
Runoff from the catchment above the TSF No.2, which has Runoff Coefficient C=0.6, with corresponding allowance for reduction in area as the TSF No.2 expands into the catchment.
Table R 4.4.2
Design Flood
Revised Design Flood
Return Period
1000 yr
Design Flood after considering Increase in TSF No.2 Surface Area Surface Level of Tailings = RL.36.5m Surface Level of Tailings = RL.57.5m Catchment Area (C=0.6) = 240 ha Catchment Area (C=0.6) = 168 ha TSF No.2 Surface Area (C = 1.0) = 0 ha TSF No.2 Surface Area (C = 1.0) = 72 ha Average Runoff Coefficient C = 0.6 Average Runoff Coefficient C = 0.72 Daily Peak Daily Daily Peak Daily Precipitation Discharge Discharge Precipitation Discharge Discharge (mm/day) (m3/sec) (103 m3/day) (mm/day) (m3/sec) (103 m3/day) 846.1 132.0 1,218 846.1 158.4 1,462
During 1000-year probable flood, maximum reservoir water level can be calculated as shown below : Table R 4.4.3 Reservoir Water Level of First Stage during 1000-year Probable Flood
Inflow Return Period 1000-year
61 60 RESERVOIR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION (m) . 59 58 57 56 55
Calculation results Daily Discharge 1,462,000 m3/day Maximum Reservoir Water Level RL.59.0m Maximum Outflow 16.9 m3/s
500 450
400 350 300 250 200 DISCHARGE (m3/s) .

54 53 52 51 0.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 (Hour) 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 20.0 150 100
50 0
INFLOW (m3/s)
OUTFLOW (m3/s)
Fig. R 4.4.1
Reservoir Water Level of First Stage during 1000-year Probable Flood
Crest level of core zone for first stage is designed at RL.59.5m. Maximum reservoir water level is calculated at RL.59.0m during design flood. It means that 0.5m of freeboard is secured, which is bigger than 0.3m of minimum freeboard requirement.
89
4.4.3 1)
Spillway for Final Stage
Layout of Structure
Spillway for final satage is located on the right abutment adjacent to the dam body and can be connected with the downstream channel smoothly. The standard type of channel spillway is adopted keeping in view the topographic conditions. Inlet level is set at RL.77.5m and width is 5m. Stilling basin is founded on RL.42.0m. Open cut excavation with concrete wall is basically applied.
2) Hydraulic Design
The discharge capacity of spillway for final stage is calculated in accordance with the hydraulic formula as shown below:
H = (1 + fe )
VC + hC 2g Q2 (B + 2 m h C ) Vc g
Q = A Vc = 3
Where,
H fe Vc hc Q A B m : reservoir water depth (m) : energy loss coefficient (0.3) : critical velocity at channel (m/s) : critical water depth (m) : discharge (m3/s) : flow sectional area (m2) : channel width ( 5.0 m) : side slope of channel (1:0)
Table R 4.4.4
Flow Capacity of Spillway (First Stage)

Channel Critical Water Depth hc (m) 0.00 0.47 0.74 0.97 1.18 1.37 1.54 Channel Width B (m) 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 A (m2) 0.00 2.34 3.71 4.86 5.89 6.83 7.71 Vc (m/s) 0.00 2.14 2.70 3.09 3.40 3.66 3.89 Q (m3/s) 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
Design flood should consider the following matters :

Increase in TSF No.2 surface area, which has Runoff Coefficient C=1.0.
90
Runoff from the catchment above the TSF No.2, which has Runoff Coefficient C=0.6, with corresponding allowance for reduction in area as the TSF No.2 expands into the catchment.
Table R 4.4.5
Design Flood
Revised Design Flood
Return Period
PMF
Design Flood after considering Increase in TSF No.2 Surface Area Surface Level of Tailings = RL.36.5m Surface Level of Tailings = RL.77.5m Catchment Area (C=0.6) = 240 ha Catchment Area (C=0.6) = 96.5 ha TSF No.2 Surface Area (C = 1.0) = 0 ha TSF No.2 Surface Area (C = 1.0) = 143.5 ha Average Runoff Coefficient C = 0.6 Average Runoff Coefficient C = 0.84 Daily Peak Daily Daily Peak Daily Precipitation Discharge Discharge Precipitation Discharge Discharge (mm/day) (m3/sec) (103 m3/day) (mm/day) (m3/sec) (103 m3/day) 1,260.3 196.7 1,815 1,260.3 275.2 2,541
During probable maximum flood (PMF), maximum reservoir water level can be calculated as shown below : Table R 4.4.6 Reservoir Water Level of Final Stage during Probable Maximum Flood
Inflow Return Period PMF
81 80 RESERVOIR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION (m) . 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 0.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 (Hour) 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 20.0
Calculation results Daily Discharge 2,541,000 m3/day Maximum Reservoir Water Level RL.79.0m Maximum Outflow 13.4 m3/s
500 450
400 350
300 250 200 150 100 50 0
INFLOW (m3/s)
OUTFLOW (m3/s)
Fig. R 4.4.2
Reservoir Water Level of Final Stage during Probable Maximum Flood
Crest level of core zone for final stage is designed at RL.79.5m. Maximum reservoir water level is calculated at RL.79.0m during design flood. It means that 0.5m of freeboard is secured, which is bigger than 0.0m of minimum freeboard requirement.
91
DISCHARGE (m3/s) .
CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

5.1 STABILITY ANALYSIS OF FOUNDATION AND EMBANKMENT
5.1.1 General
Slope stability analysis was performed using COSTANA ver. 15, a 2-D limit equilibrium slope stability program developed by Fujitu FIP Corporation. As mentioned in the Guideline 7, the Bishop simplified, Spencer, Fredlund and Krahn, Janbu Generalised, Morgenstern Price and Sarma methods will all give similar results for analysis of stability and are acceptable methods. The Janbu Simplified and so called standard, or Fellenius method underestimate the factor of safety and should not be used. In this analysis, the Simplified Bishop Method is applied basically, however at the case of End of Construction, revised Fellenius Method should be applied to consider the residual pore pressure derived from construction. According to the Engineer Manual EM 1102-2-1902 8 , the Simplified Bishop Method was developed by Bishop (1955) and this procedure is based on the assumption that the inter-slice forces are horizontal. A circular slip surface is also assumed in the Simplified Bishop Method. Forces are summed in the vertical direction. The resulting equilibrium equation is combined with the Mohr-Coulomb equation and the definition of the factor of safety to determine the forces on the base of the slice. Finally, moments are summed about the center of the circular slip surface to obtain the factor of safety.
5.1.2 Factor of Safety
There are no rules for acceptable factor of safety. However, the following documents shows several existing recommendation.
Guidelines on Tailings Dam Design, Construction and Operation, October 1999, Australian National Committee on Large Dams Engineer Manual EM 1110-2-1902 Slope Stability, October 2003, Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
92
Table R 5.1.1
Minimum Required Factors of Safety for Slope Stability by Agencies

Required Minimum Factor of Safety US Corps of ANCOLD JCOLD (*3) Engineer (*1) (*2) Short Term Long Term Short Term Long Term 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.2 1.2
Analysis Condition End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure Rapid Drawdown Maximum Storage Pool (Steady Seepage) End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure with 1/2 x OBE OBE MDE or MCE
Static Condition
Earthquake Condition
- (*4)
1.1 (*5)
1.2 1.2 (*6) - (*7)
*1 Engineer Manual EM 1110-2-1902 Slope Stability, October 2003, Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers *2 Guidelines on Tailings Dam Design, Construction and Operation, October 1999, Australian National Committee on Large Dams *3 Design Criteria for Dams, August 1978, Japan National Committee on Large Dams *4 For earthquake loading, see ER 1110-2-1806 for guidance. An Engineer Circular, Dynamic Analysis of Embankment Dams is still in preparation. *5 The pseudo-static analysis is only used for a preliminary screening evaluation of the stability condition. A higher level of assessment should be carried out. *6 The pseudo-static analysis can be used for a detailed design. *7 A higher level of assessment such as dynamic finite element analysis is recommended. 9
From above Table and differences between Water Retention Dam and Tailings Storage dam, the minimum factors of safety are decided in this study as follows: Table R 5.1.2 Minimum Required Factors of Safety for Slope Stability in this Study
Required Minimum Factor of Safety Short Term Long Term Short Term Short Term Short Term Long Term Long Term 1.3 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 (*1) 1.0 (*2)
Static Condition
Analysis Condition End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure Maximum Storage Pool (Steady Seepage) End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure with 1/2 x OBE OBE (First Stage) 1/2 x OBE (First Stage) OBE (Final Stage) MDE or MCE (Final Stage)
*1) The tailings dam is expected to function in a normal manner after the passage of the operating basis earthquake. 10 *2) For the MDE or MCE, damage of the dam is acceptable as long as the integrity of the dam is maintained and the release of the impounded tailings is prevented. 9
9
Technical Note on Seismic Performance Evaluation of Dams Against Large Earthquake, Technical Memorandum, No. 3965, 2005, (in Japanese), Public Works Research Institute Tailings Dams and Seismicity, ICOLD Bulletin 98, 1995
10
93
5.1.3 1)
Slope Stability Analysis
Southern Dam a) Design Values
Design values of the zones are listed as follows. Table R 5.1.3 Design Values of Each Zone for Slope Stability Analysis (Southern Dam)
Description Core Zone Fine Filter Zone Coarse Filter Zone Rock Zone Lean Clay/Silt Clayey Sandy Silt Residual Clay-stone Wet Density (g/cm3) 2.00 2.00 1.90 1.65 1.50 1.50 1.60 Saturated Density (g/cm3) 2.00 2.10 2.10 1.90 1.50 1.50 1.60 1.80 Submerged Density (g/cm3) 1.00 1.10 1.10 0.90 0.50 1.50 1.60 0.80 Effective Cohesion (kN/m2) 5.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 10.0 0.0 Effective Internal Friction Angle (degree) 30 35 35 36 25 22 25 0
Embankment
Foundation Tailings
*1 *2
The values of embankment should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests. The values of foundation were adopted from the results of laboratory test by HATCH
b) Model
Calculation model are given as follows:

First Stage
Final Stage
Fig. R 5.1.1
Calculation Model of Southern Dam
94
c)
Cases of Slope Stability Analysis
The varieties and combination of loads to be considered in embankment stability against sliding failure shall be determined in accordance with the construction stage and seismic condition. In principle, self weight, hydrostatic pressure, pore pressure and seismic body force shall be considered. Load to be considered and the required minimum factor of safety for each condition of the dam are tabulated below: Table R 5.1.4
Case 1 2 3 First Stage 4 Earthquake Condition Static Condition Stage Load Condition End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure During Operation (Steady Seepage) After Operation (Steady Seepage) End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure with 1/2 x OBE During Operation with 1/2 x OBE After Operation with OBE End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure During Operation (Steady Seepage) After Operation (Steady Seepage) End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure with 1/2 x OBE During Operation with x OBE After Operation with OBE After Operation with MDE or MCE

Term Short Term Short Term Short Term Method Revised Fellenius Bishop Bishop Revised Fellenius Bishop Bishop Revised Fellenius Bishop Bishop Revised Fellenius Bishop Bishop Bishop Required Minimum Factor of Safety 1.3 1.3 1.3
Short Term
1.1
5 6 7 8 9 Final Stage
Short Term Short Term Short Term Short Term Long Term
1.2 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.5
Static Condition
10
Short Term
1.1
11 12 13
Short Term Long Term Long Term
1.1 1.2 1.0
d) Results of Slope Stability Analysis
In accordance with the aforesaid discussions, stability of slope of dam embankment has been studied by means of the Simplified Bishop Method. Results of analysis are shown below:
95
Table R 5.1.5
Case
Results of Slope Stability Analysis (First Stage)

Slope Calculated Model Factor of Safety
Minimum Required
Load Condition
Load Condition
Upstream 1 End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure Downstream
1.33
1.3
ok
1.52
1.3
ok
Upstream 2 Static Condition During Operation (Steady Seepage) Downstream
1.91
1.3
ok
1.71
1.3
ok
Upstream 3 After Operation (Steady Seepage) Downstream
2.51
1.3
ok
1.71
1.3
ok
End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure with 1/2 x OBE
Upstream
1.11
1.1
ok
Downstream
1.28
1.1
ok
Upstream 5 Earthquake Condition During Operation with 1/2 x OBE Downstream
1.56
1.2
ok
1.38
1.2
ok
Upstream 6 After Operation with OBE Downstream
1.69
1.1
ok
1.15
1.1
ok
96
Table R 5.1.6
Case
Results of Slope Stability Analysis (Final Stage)

Slope Calculated Model Factor of Safety
Minimum Required
Load Condition
Load Condition
Upstream 7 End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure Downstream
1.33
1.3
ok
1.70
1.3
ok
1.66
1.3
ok
1.90
1.3
ok
2.28
1.5
ok
1.90
1.5
ok
10
Upstream
1.15
1.1
ok
Downstream
1.39
1.1
ok
Upstream 11 During Operation with OBE Downstream Earthquake Condition Upstream 12 After Operation with OBE Downstream
1.16
1.1
ok
1.25
1.1
ok
1.51
1.2
ok
1.25
1.2
ok
Upstream 13 After Operation with MDE or MCE Downstream
1.20
1.0
ok
1.00
1.0
ok
97
From these results, it is concluded that designed slopes of the dam embankment satisfy the required minimum factor of safety. These analysis should be reviewed based on results of laboratory tests for embankment materials.
2) Northern Dam a) Design Values
Design values of the zones are listed as follows. Table R 5.1.7 Design Values of Each Zone for Slope Stability Analysis for Northern Dam
Description Core Zone Fine Filter Zone Embankment Coarse Filter Zone Rock Zone Foundation Tailings Wet Density (g/cm3) 2.00 2.00 1.90 1.65 1.50 Saturated Density (g/cm3) 2.00 2.10 2.10 1.90 1.50 1.80 Submerged Density (g/cm3) 1.00 1.10 1.10 0.90 0.50 0.80 Effective Cohesion (kN/m2) 5.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 Effective Internal Friction Angle (degree) 30 35 35 36 35 0
*1 *2
The values of embankment should be reviewed based on the results of laboratory tests. The values of foundation were adopted from the results of laboratory test by HATCH
b) Model
Calculation model are given as follows:
Fig. R 5.1.2
c)
Calculation Model of Southern Dam
The varieties and combination of loads to be considered in embankment stability against sliding failure shall be set same as the case of Southern Dam.
98
Table R 5.1.8
Case 1 2 3 Static Condition Load Condition
Cases of Slope Stability Analysis for Northern Dam

Term Short Term Short Term Long Term Method Revised Fellenius Bishop Bishop Revised Fellenius Bishop Bishop Bishop Required Minimum Factor of Safety 1.3 1.3 1.5
4 Earthquake Condition
5 6 7
End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure During Operation (Steady Seepage) After Operation (Steady Seepage) End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure with 1/2 x OBE During Operation with OBE After Operation with OBE After Operation with MDE or MCE
Short Term
1.1
Short Term Long Term Long Term
1.1 1.2 1.0
d) Results of Slope Stability Analysis
In accordance with the aforesaid discussions, stability of slope of dam embankment has been studied by means of the Simplified Bishop Method. Results of analysis are shown below:
99
Table R 5.1.9
Case
Results of Slope Stability Analysis for Northern Dam

Load Condition Slope Calculated Model Factor of Safety
Minimum Required
Load Condition
End-of-Construction considering residual pore pressure
Upstream
1.46
1.3
ok
Downstream
1.88
1.3
ok
1.65
1.3
ok
2.10
1.3
ok
2.76
1.5
ok
2.10
1.5
ok
Upstream
1.26
1.2
ok
Downstream
1.57
1.2
ok
Upstream 5 During Operation with 1/2 x OBE Downstream
1.41
1.2
ok
1.68
1.2
ok
Upstream After Operation with OBE Downstream
1.79
1.2
ok
1.39
1.2
ok
Upstream
1.40
1.0
ok
After Operation with MDE or MCE Downstream 1.01 1.0 ok
100
From these results, it is concluded that designed slopes of the dam embankment satisfy the required minimum factor of safety. These analysis should be reviewed based on results of laboratory tests for embankment materials.
101
CHAPTER 6. RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 GENERAL
The main objective of the geological and soil mechanical investigations during the design stage, which covered a wide area, is to make the selection of possible borrow areas and volume estimation of available materials near the damsite. Therefore, the information provided by the explorations of the selected borrow areas is limited compared with that obtained during construction stage. Conditions different from those anticipation are often encountered because the natural material which is available at the selected borrow area is sometime so erratic that it can not be relied upon to have the consistent properties. For this reason, it must be considered that the design process is not completed until the dam construction is completed and the reservoir is in successful operation. To secure the requirement of each zone specified in the foregoing section, the embankment work shall be controlled in an appropriate manner. An outline of the quality control of dam embankment work is described hereunder.
6.2 NECESSITY OF TRIAL EMBANKMENT
Before the commencement of dam embankment construction, field rolling trials shall be executed to assure the soil mechanical and rock mechanical properties before and after compaction. They shall be carried out simulating normal construction conditions using all equipment and methods proposed for mixing, blending, placing and compacting the materials. Some of the items that can be profitably studied with field rolling trials are:
Observation of material behavior during excavating, processing, hauling, placing and compacting. Suitability of method and type of construction machinery for above operation. For core (impervious) material such as cohesive soil, relationship of gradation, density with number of passes at moisture content recommended in the design and layer thickness. For filter (semi-pervious) and rock (pervious) materials such as sand-gravel and rock, relationship of gradation, degree of compaction with number of passes, layer thickness and water application.
During the trial embankment, variations shall be made in lift thickness, number of passes of vibratory roller, type of vibratory roller and the water application. For the core (impervious) material, the in-situ permeability shall be lower than the design value. The compaction results shall be evaluated in terms of the density ratio based on the in-situ density and the maximum dry density obtained in a laboratory using standard compaction test.
102
Density ratio =
In-situ dry density Maximum dry density
For the filter (semi-pervious) and rock (pervious) materials, the in-situ permeability shall be higher than the design value. The percentage decrease in the thickness of a layer under repeated roller passes should be checked. The compaction results shall be evaluated in terms of the density index based on the in-situ density, and the maximum and minimum density determined in the laboratory using relative density test method.
Density index = Where, e emin : voids ratio in place (calculated from in-situ dry density) : voids in most compact state (calculated from minimum dry density) emax : voids ratio in loosest state (calculated from maximum dry density)
e max e x100 % e max e min
6.3
QUALITY CONTROL
The execution of embankment work should be controlled in a manner to assure that the zones are relatively homogeneous and that the average properties are equal in quality to the values assumed in the design. Routine quality control during embankment work must be done by tests of the density, gradation, moisture content and the like to supplement the visual evaluation and to provide an engineer with guides to judgment. In case of core (impervious) zone, in-situ permeability tests are not used for routine quality control because of the long time required. The relationship between density ratio and permeability is established in advance, and the in-situ permeability is controlled indirectly through tests of the embankment density. Items of quality control tests are summarized in the table below.
103
Table R 6.3.1
Zone Core Zone Contact Material
Items of Quality Control Test for Embankment

Standard to be followed
Core Zone Regular Impervious Material
Filter Zone
Rock Zone
Item Moisture Content Gradation Specific Gravity Atterberg Limits Standard Compaction In-situ Density Moisture Content Gradation Specific Gravity Atterberg Limits Standard Compaction Permeability In-situ Density In-situ Permeability Tri-axial Compressive Strength Gradation Specific Gravity Relative Density Permeability In-situ Density In-situ Permeability Gradation Specific Gravity In-situ Density In-situ Permeability
10 cm in diameter, Water Replacement Method
30 cm in diameter, Water Replacement Method 30 cm in diameter, Constant Head Method CU Test with Pore Pressure Measurement
Max. and Min. Dry Density Constant Head Method 40 cm in diameter, Water Replacement Method 40 cm in diameter, Falling Head Method
100 cm in diameter, Water Replacement Method 100 cm in diameter, Falling Head Method
104

Rio Tuba FR Vol - I Main Report 090618

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rio Tuba FR Vol - I Main Report 090618

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.

Volume I Main Report

Sumitomo Mitsui Construction Co., Ltd.

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 Chapter 3. 3.1

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

Chapter 6. 6.1 6.2 6.3

LIST OF TABLES IN REPORT

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

LIST OF FIGURES IN REPORT

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

LIST OF PICTURES IN REPORT

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

Rio Tuba Mine

Location of Rio Tuba Mine

Existing TSF-1 and HPAL (high-pressure acid leaching) Plant

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

Northern Dam (Plan)

TSF-2 (Plan) Southern Dam (Plan)

Return Water Pond Plan)

200 400 600 800 1000m

Fig. R 1.1.2 1.2

Layout of TSF-2 planed by HATCH

SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

The following items are excluded from the Scope of Work:

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

REFERENCES PROVIDED BY CBNC

Following references are proposed to be presented by CBNC.

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

CHAPTER 2. DESIGN CONDITIONS

Northern Dam Site

Southern Dam Site

Fig. R 2.1.1 2.2

Catchment Area of TSF-2 (1:50,000 Scale Map)

Based on the 1:1,000,000 scale regional geological map of Southern Palawan

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

Rio Tuba Mine

Fig. R 2.2.1 R 2.2.1.

Regional Geology of South Palawan (1:1,000,000 Scale Map)

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2

Final Report Volume I Main Report

Summary of Regional Geology by HATCH

Age Holocene Miocene Eocene Eocene Cretaceous

Coral Bay Nickel Corporation Tailings Storage Facility No.2