Construction of the Plastic Concrete Cut-off Wall at Hinze Dam

Steve O’Brien1, Christopher Dann2, Gavan Hunter3, Mike Schwermer4

1
Associate Civil Engineer, URS, Melbourne
2
Senior Principal, URS, Brisbane
3
Principal Geotechnical Engineer, URS, Melbourne
4
Project Manager, BAUER Foundations Australia, Brisbane

One of the principal geotechnical issues identified for the Hinze Dam Stage 3 project was the potential for
internal erosion and piping within the extremely complex geology at the right abutment. A plastic concrete
cut-off wall was selected as the best solution to reduce the risk of piping to acceptable levels and careful
planning of this work was required to manage a range of key project risks that included complex technical
challenges, potential risks to dam safety, the environment, the surrounding community as well as delivering
the works on a tight construction schedule to an agreed budget value. Construction of the 220m long and
up to 53m deep cut-off wall, the largest wall of this type constructed to date within Australia, was
undertaken by Bauer Foundations Australia and completed in January 2009. A major key to the success of
the project was the planning and risk reduction measures that were undertaken during both the design and
construction phases, a summary of which is presented in this paper.
Keywords: Cutoff Wall, Plastic Concrete, Hinze Dam.

• High piezometric conditions within the

Background foundation, impacting on embankment stability;
Hinze Dam is a zoned earth and rock fill embankment and
located on the Nerang River some 30 km west of Gold • Uncontrolled seepage out of the foundation
Coast. Stage 1 of the dam was constructed in the mid emanating downstream of the embankment.
1970’s with a maximum embankment height of 47.5m These seepage areas would be unsightly and
and Stage 2 works raised the dam by 16m in the late elevated groundwater conditions present
1980’s. Stage 3 works are currently being undertaken to potential local instability issues.
raise the dam by a further 15m. A number of remedial options were investigated including
The right abutment at Hinze Dam is a geologically grouting, cut-off walls, filter buttresses, re-alignment of
complex region of the foundation. The mid to lower the embankment and blanketing options. However the
slopes on which the embankment is founded are underlain construction of a cutoff wall was selected as the “best for
by extremely weathered greywacke (up to 25 m deep). project” solution providing the best technical solution and
The mid to upper slopes of the right abutment around to the lowest delivery risk.
the saddle dam are within greenstone. The greenstone is
deeply weathered (up to 30 to 40 m depth) and below this Plastic Concrete Cut Off Wall
generally grades to slightly weathered and then to fresh Construction of the 220m long and up to 53m deep Cut
over a short depth. Off Wall (COW) was commenced by Bauer Foundations
The upper deeply weathered zone within the greenstone Australia (BFA) in May 2008 and was completed in
comprises extremely to highly weathered greenstone with January 2009 approximately six weeks ahead of schedule.
layers of chert and silicified greenstone. An extremely The wall was excavated from ground level using a
weathered rind of greenstone is present around the chert combination of “clamshell” grab and hydraulic trench
and silicified bodies. These chert and silicified cutter. When higher rock strengths were encountered, a
greenstone inclusions are typically highly fractured, chisel was used to assist in breaking the rock for
highly permeable and of very high to extremely high excavation. A general view of the excavation operation is
strength. Further details of the geology of the right shown in Plate 1 and a view of the trench cutter is shown
abutment are provided in Chamberlain et al (2008). in Plate 2.
Grouting works undertaken during Stage 2 construction
were not successful in grouting the foundation,
particularly in the highly permeable chert and silicified
greenstone bodies. Post construction monitoring
confirmed that the grout curtain was not effective and
areas of high permeability were still present within the
grouted zone.
Possible leakage through the right abutment foundation
presented several issues for the Stage 3 embankment
operation and dam safety risk profile including:
• Seepage paths along which internal erosion and
piping could initiate in erodible soils;

Plate 1 – General View of COW Operation

1 ANCOLD Proceedings of Technical Groups

The 830 mm thick wall was constructed in an alternating processes, together with the mitigation strategies that
sequence of primary and secondary panels. Primary were developed to manage these risks.
panels consisted of 3 bites for a combined total of 7m
length. Secondary panels were excavated once the Design Development
adjacent primary panels were complete. The secondary During the early studies to develop a scope of work to
panels were 2.8m long and were overcut into the plastic address the risk of piping at the right abutment, concerns
concrete of the adjacent primary panels. During were raised by the Independent Peer Review Panel that it
excavation, the sides of the excavated trench were may not be physically possible to construct the wall and
supported by a bentonite slurry. Upon completion of the risks associated with constructing the wall may
excavation of a panel, low strength plastic concrete was actually be greater than leaving the abutment in its natural
poured into the trench using the tremie method. As the state. A significant amount of work was undertaken
concrete level in the trench rises during placement, excess during the design phase to identify and manage these risks
bentonite is drawn off and pumped to the plant station for which included:
treatment and re-use. 1. The complex geological conditions.
2. The ability to construct a cut off wall.
3. Certainty in delivering the work to an agreed
budget and timeline.
These risks and the measures undertaken to address these
risks are discussed further below.
Geological Conditions
Understanding the geological conditions at the right
abutment was key to evaluating the foundation
requirements for the Stage 3 works and extensive
geotechnical investigations were undertaken. The Stage 2
investigation data and construction records were reviewed
prior to scoping the Stage 3 geotechnical investigations.
Key issues that drove the scope of the Stage 3
investigations at the right abutment included:
1. Surface mapping of exposures at the right
abutment showed a series of inclined, irregular
shaped chert bodies and zones of extremely to
highly weathered greenstone that were
potentially highly erodible .
2. The Stage 2 grouting programme blew out from
an initial 13 week programme to a 52 week
programme and closure had not been achieved in
the right abutment when a decision was made to
stop the grouting work.
These key issues also led to the concerns regarding the
possible high volume seepage paths and potential piping
Plate 2 – General View of Cutter issues at the right abutment.
Key successes achieved during this work included: The site investigation drilling program was subsequently
• Excavation through the core of the embankment revised to include the drilling of 10 deep, angled
while under full reservoir conditions. boreholes to depths of up to 75 m with borehole water
• Excavation through zones of silicified pressure testing. Eight of these boreholes were “imaged”
greenstone with estimated unconfined using geophysical equipment. These boreholes
compressive strengths of up to 160MPa. supplemented the existing borehole data from Stage 2 (6
• Achieving the target founding criteria into boreholes were available close to the final COW
slightly weathered to fresh greywacke and alignment). Key outcomes from the site investigation
greenstone. included:
1. Detailed geological sections based on the 16
• Meeting the requirements that verify the integrity
borehole dataset (and numerous test trenches)
of the constructed wall including panel
provided a high level of confidence in the
verticality and panel joint construction
complex geological conditions within the right
requirements.
abutment.
• Meeting acceptable strength, ductility and
2. The extent of irregular shaped chert bodies was
permeability requirements for the plastic
defined – an average borehole spacing of about
concrete.
15m was achieved along the COW alignment.
• Delivering the works ahead of schedule and The investigations also confirmed that these
under budget. chert bodies comprised zones of extremely high
This paper outlines the key risks that were identified permeability.
during the design development and construction
Dams; where to next in climates of change
 3. The highly weathered and potentially erodible cost for each of the options was developed with a
greenstone with the chert bodies extended to transparent “open book” approach considering:
depth. 1. The direct project costs associated with the
4. Fresh greenstone was encountered at depth and works.
this material would provide a base to cut off the 2. A probabilistic risk cost for each option. For the
potentially erodible weathered greenstone COW option this included an agreement on
material. where the certain risks would be allocated. For
Specialist Contractor example, the Alliance accepted the risks of
variation in geological conditions, in particular
Hinze Dam Stage 3 was delivered under an Alliance
the extent of hard chert materials and BFA
framework and a key to success in the design and
construction of the wall was the engagement of a accepted the risk of achieving the target
specialist contractor early within the design phase of the production rates in each material type.
3. A risk/reward framework that was focussed on
project. An Expression of Interest was issued to specialist
ensuring that BFA mobilised to site by an agreed
foundation contractors for a plastic concrete cut-off wall
date and then completed the works by an agreed
solution to the right abutment works. Bauer Foundations
date.
Australia (BFA) was selected as the preferred contractor
based on their specialist capabilities and extensive COW Key outcomes from the cost development approach
experience. include those described in the section that discusses the
benefits of the early involvement of BFA as well as
A specialist team from BFA worked with the Hinze Dam
satisfying the project owner that the cost of the works
Alliance (HDA) during the design phase to develop the
represented value for money for the project.
preliminary design of the COW. The COW layout,
design requirements and foundation conditions were Construction Planning
presented to BFA who then determined how the wall
would be constructed including selecting the equipment There were a number of significant risks associated with
and plant required, agreeing the estimated time for the construction of the COW which included:
construction of the works, in particular coordinating with 1. Selecting appropriate equipment to construct the
other activities at the site and developing a detailed cost COW, in particular to be able to excavate
estimate. through the extremely high strength chert and
Following selection of the COW as the preferred solution silicified greenstone.
to address piping risks at the right abutment, BFA was 2. Piping induced by the head of bentonite slurry on
engaged as a sub-Alliance partner to undertake the a defect within the dam or the foundation.
construction of the plastic concrete cut-off wall. 3. Loss of bentonite within a trench panel leading
Key outcomes from the early involvement of BFA in the to collapse of the trench
development of the COW solution included: 4. The integrity of the wall joints including panel
1. A high level of confidence that the COW could alignment, overlap and concrete joint integrity
be constructed, in particular through the very 5. Integrity of the wall itself with groundwater
high strength chert bodies. flows under high head possibly impacting
2. Certainty in the timeframe and cost to deliver the concrete placement.
COW. 6. Financial risks associated with the uncertainties
3. A clear understanding of the key risks associated of the geotechnical model.
with the COW construction and a transparent A more detailed discussion of each of the risks identified
framework to manage financial impacts is provided as follows:
associated with these risks.
Construction Cost and Schedule Equipment Selection

BFA was initially selected when there was limited Selection of equipment that had the capability to construct
definition of the scope of the COW works and was the COW was a key risk to the project, in particular the
initially engaged to work with the Alliance only to ability to excavate through the extremely high strength
develop a detailed cost estimate and construction chert and silicified greenstone. The consequences of
schedule. The Alliance had selected two possible mobilising equipment to the site that could not complete
foundation treatment options at the right abutment: the works would have significant impacts on the project
• A plastic concrete cut off wall. costs and delivery schedule.
BFA mobilised an equipment specialist from their head
• Realignment of the main embankment and
office to work with the Alliance team to select the best
blanketing of the upstream area of the right
equipment to undertake the works. Key information that
abutment with compacted clay.
was considered in the selection of equipment included:
Evaluation of these two options was undertaken in
parallel to assess the technical feasibility of each option • The results of the site investigation work, in
and to maintain a competitive pricing environment. A particular inspection of the core recovered from
key concern at this time was that one of the proposed the boreholes.
solutions may not actually meet the design criteria or have • Review of previous BFA experience in similar
an unacceptably high construction risk. The construction strength materials.
• The design requirements for the COW.

3 ANCOLD Proceedings of Technical Groups

The cutter machine was specifically developed for the • If the loss was detected between 0.3m to 2m per
Hinze Dam project. A Bauer BC40 cutting frame was hour then the viscosity of the bentonite would be
used together with Bauer BC50 gearboxes to achieve the increased.
following specific properties: • If the bentonite losses continued or if the loss
• Minimising the wall width to 830mm (a BC50 was greater than 2m per hour then the trench
frame requires a minimum width of 1.2m); would be backfilled with sand.
• Gain more weight for better cutting performance; • Should the bentonite loss continue then the
• BC 50 gearboxes maximise the power which is trench would be backfilled with a concrete mix.
delivered to the cutting teeth. An emergency stockpile of 30m3 of sand was kept
adjacent to the excavation works to enable an immediate
Piping backfilling of the trench if required. At no stage during
The COW was constructed from a platform level of the works did any sudden large bentonite losses or trench
collapse occur.
EL95.0m and bentonite slurry would be placed to this
During construction of the COW a maximum of three
level during the construction of each panel, which is
panels were allowed to be open at a single time. This was
approximately 13m above the Stage 2 full supply level.
This increased the hydraulic gradient and potentially the based on having sufficient bentonite quantities available
risk of piping during construction of each panel of the to deal with bentonite losses and to reduce the risk of
bentonite losses in multiple panels. The possibility of
wall.
having communication between panels also meant that
Key factors that were considered in assessing the piping
adjacent primary panels were not opened at the same
risk during construction included the highly permeable
time.
zones that are adjacent to potentially highly erodible
materials, potential defects within the foundation, in Silicified Greenstone Bodies
particular at the greenstone/greywacke contact and a The silicified greenstone and chert bodies comprised very
“window” in the Stage 2 filters that was located close to high to extremely high strength material with unconfined
this geological contact. compressive strengths of up to 160MPa and the difficulty
A piping incident would be a serious event that had the of excavating through this material was a key risk to the
potential to impact the integrity and safety of the dam. delivery of the COW solution. In addition the high
The risk of inducing piping during construction of the strength chert bodies were surrounded by relatively low
COW was managed by careful design of the bentonite strength weathered greenstone which posed significant
slurry and the development of a bentonite management risks to maintaining alignment of the wall panels. The
plan and backfill procedures as detailed later in this paper. nature and extent of the silicified greenstone and chert
bodies were also key risks to the cost and time to
Bentonite Losses construct the COW.
BFA was able to demonstrate that equipment to similar
During excavation of the panels the open trench is
that proposed for Hinze Dam Stage 3 had successfully
stabilised with a bentonite-water suspension. A rapid loss
excavated through rock material of similar high strength.
of this bentonite suspension can lead to collapse of the
panel and potentially impact the integrity of the dam. The Bauer also provided a range of teeth to the cutter that
factors that can lead to a rapid loss include high included “rock” teeth that were proposed as the primary
method for excavation through the high strength rock.
permeability zones, defects within the foundation or a
Bauer also had access to cutter wheels with “roller bit”
piping incident as described above.
devices that could excavate material with greater than
The consequences of a large bentonite loss were
160MPa UCS. However this equipment was not
significant and had the potential to fail the dam or cause
damage that would require significant remedial works. mobilised to the site initially. The COW works
This potential was also increased due to the wall being commenced where the highest strength rock was expected
to see if the “rock” teeth could excavate the material.
constructed under full reservoir conditions.
This would allow the works to proceed in other areas if
An effective management strategy to deal with the risk
the roller bit equipment had to be mobilised to the site, if
was implemented, including appropriate management of
required. Fortunately the rock teeth were able to excavate
the bentonite, provision for emergency backfill
procedures and development of a suitable panel the high strength material and the additional cost of
excavation sequence. mobilising the roller bit was not incurred.
The various cutting options considered by BFA are shown
To manage the bentonite suspension the levels within the
in Plates 3 and 4.
panels were continuously supervised during the
excavation. During the night and on the weekends the
bentonite levels were checked by security at the site every
four hours. If the loss was more than 1.2m over any
period then the level would be topped up by Bauer staff.
This occurred twice during construction of the wall.
An emergency plan was in place to deal with large
bentonite losses included:

Dams; where to next in climates of change

 with concreting bentonite. The panel is then
ready to be concreted
This method proved to be very successful. A number of
joints were exposed following completion of the wall, the
quality of the joints meant that it was typically difficult to
detect where the joint actually was.

Plate 3 – Cutter Wheels with Rock Teeth

Plate 5 – Cleaning Brush for Joints

Integrity of Wall
The cut-off wall was required to be a continuous plastic
concrete wall with a design thickness of 830mm. A risk
associated with constructing the wall through variable
geology was possible misalignment of panels which could
leave a defect in the wall allowing piping to occur.
Therefore, careful control of the verticality of each panel
was required to meet the required overlap between
adjacent panels.
In order to control and guide the trench cutter or grab
during the initial excavation of each panel, and to ensure
the position, alignment and verticality of the cut-off wall,
Plate 4 – Cutter Wheels with Roller Bits guide walls were constructed. The guide wall was
constructed as a continuous cast-in-situ reinforced
Wall Joints concrete element that was to be removed following
The wall was constructed in an alternating sequence of completion of the cut-off wall.
primary and secondary panels. When excavating During cutter excavation, the verticality is controlled by
secondary panels, a bentonite cake forms on the plastic an inbuilt electronic inclinometer (B-Tronic) which
concrete of the adjacent primary panels, it is required that measures the cutter’s vertical deviation in two directions.
this is cleaned prior to the concreting of the secondary The deviations are continuously displayed on the
panels to ensure a continuous plastic concrete wall is computer monitor mounted inside the operator’s cabin
achieved. and the cutter can be “steered” to compensate for any drift
The cleaning was conducted using the following method: in verticality.
• After completion of excavation of the panel, the A “Koden” measuring device was used to verify the
majority of the working bentonite within the verticality of each panel after excavation was finished.
trench is replaced with a more viscous bentonite. This is an ultrasonic measuring device which uses a cable
• The sides of the adjacent primary panels are suspended ultrasonic probe that is lowered into the trench.
cleaned using the brush shown in Plate 5. This The device is capable of measuring the verticality of the
device is slightly wider than the cutter so that the panel of both directions.
brushes scrape down the side of the panel. The The combination of the guidewall, B-Tronic and Koden
brush is also pulled across by the crane to the devices allowed careful control of the verticality. All
side being cleaned to ensure the brushes are records were thoroughly reviewed to ensure the
bearing on the side of the panel. appropriate overlap and overcut requirements were
• The trench cutter is then sent back down the achieved. This process led to a successful alignment being
secondary panel to clean any material from the achieved for all panels.
base of the panel and to replace the bentonite

5 ANCOLD Proceedings of Technical Groups

Construction A concrete mix was produced with sufficient workability
so that it could be placed over a maximum 10 hour pour.
The following details some of the investigations The main issue that was observed during the field trials
conducted during the construction phase including issues was ensuring a homogeneous product. A number of the
that arose and how these were resolved. trials produced inconsistent concrete from one end of the
Plastic Concrete truck to the other, with the last cubic metre in the truck
Prior to mobilising to site, laboratory trials were often being poorly mixed. The batching procedure was
conducted to determine the design plastic concrete mix. modified and trialled a number of times to ensure that an
The mix had to meet the following requirements: appropriate procedure and mixing time was adopted to
• Sufficient workability of the fresh concrete to be produce a homogeneous mix.
placed by the tremie method, the concrete had to The concrete was discharged directly from the truck
displace the bentonite-water suspension and it mixer into the hopper of the tremie pipe string as shown
had to be ensured the concrete was self levelling in Plate 6. It was required that the base of the tremie be
and self compacting. kept continuously immersed in the fresh concrete for a
• A stable mix of the fresh plastic concrete with minimum embedment depth of 3 metres. As the concrete
respect to bleeding and segregation. level in the panel rose, sections of the tremie pipe were
• Sufficient strength to ensure resistance against periodically removed whilst always maintaining a 3 metre
earth-pressure and erosion. embedment into fresh concrete.
• Ductile to accommodate the deformations and For the primary panels either 2 or 3 tremie pipes were
stresses imposed by the subsequent embankment used depending upon the height differential of the base of
construction. each of the 3 bites. Where there was a differential greater
The technical requirements for the plastic concrete were than 1m between each of the bites a 3 tremie arrangement
as follows. was used, but this was only required on 1 occasion.
• A 28 day unconfined compressive strength Otherwise two tremies were used for the primary panels.
between 2MPa and 4MPa. For secondary panels only a single tremie pipe was
• Ductile stress-strain properties to accommodate required.
differential stresses and deformation without Where two or three tremies pipes were used, each pipe
cracking (Axial strain at maximum compressive was charged independently, but concurrently, by separate
strength of greater than 0.6% and 50% of peak concrete trucks. The level of the concrete at each tremie
strength at 7% strain) location was checked following each truck in order to
• Low permeability ( < 1 * 10-9 m/s.) ensure that the level of the rising concrete surface in the
In total, 13 different trial mixes were batched with panel was as close to horizontal as possible to avoid
variations in aggregate proportions, maximum size of inclusions in the panel.
aggregates, aggregate volume, water-cement ratio, The concrete was over-cast at ground level to ensure that
bentonite dosage and binder. The final mix quantities that all contaminated concrete (in contact with the bentonite)
were adopted are listed in Table1, these were based on the had been removed.
required performance criteria, site conditions and
materials available.
Table 1 – Mix Design Quantities
Material Quantity Unit
(per m3)
5 to 10mm aggregate 437.4 kg
0 to 5mm aggregate 1013.0 kg
GP Cement 154.5 kg
Bentonite Suspension 0.239 m3
Water 0.172 m3

Field trials were also conducted prior to construction of

the COW to confirm the following:
• The most efficient batching procedure for the
design mix
• The selected laboratory trial mix could be Plate 6 – Concreting of Primary Panels
produced under site conditions
• The field mixes show similar behaviour and The main issue that arose with the concrete during
properties to the small scale lab mixes construction of the wall was that at one stage the batch
• The fresh properties of the plastic concrete are plant operator noticed that less cement was being used
suitable for the pouring of the panel using the than predicted. This was picked up by the quantities that
“tremie” system. were being loaded into the cement silo. The batch plant
• Uniformity of the mix throughout each agitator calibration was checked and it was found to be incorrectly
truck with negligible balling. measuring the weight of the cement for a number of
panels, some with up to 20% less cement than required,

Dams; where to next in climates of change

some with up to 20% more cement. The electrical system
was replaced and production continued. The testing of the
cylinders from these panels found that all of the
associated panels still met the permeability and ductility
requirements. One panel was found to have a slightly
lower compressive strength (1.7MPa) than the specified
2MPa at 28 days. Three panels were also found to have a
higher strength than the specified 4MPa with a maximum
value of 4.4MPa.
The higher strength panels were accepted as the
permeability and ductility requirements were met and the
extra strength did not affect the integrity of the wall. For
the lower strength panel further testing was conducted
that included hole erosion tests of the available samples.
No erosion of the samples occurred under the expected
differential hydrostatic pressures that would be applied to
the wall. The combination of permeability and ductility
results led to the panel being accepted and re-excavation
of the panel was not required.

Cohesive Plastic Concrete

During the pouring of the initial primary panels, it was
observed that the concrete at the top of the panel appeared
cohesive, see Plate 7, and was extruded up between the
guidewalls. At times this meant the concrete could not be
Plate 8 – Dye testing of concrete
pushed out of the top of the panel or pushed out over the
full width of the panel. Investigations and testing into the
From further investigations it was determined that over
reasons for the cohesive concrete included the following:
the time it takes to pour an entire primary panel, typically
• Tests on the concrete for water loss, thixotropic
6 to 8 hours, the concrete was going through its initial set
effect and setting of concrete.
and therefore appeared to be cohesive/stiff at the surface
• Introduction of red dye (iron oxide) into the of the panel. The testing of the cohesive concrete and
initial 10 trucks of two of the panel concrete observations made gave no suggestions that there were
pours to determine if it was the initial concrete in any adverse effects to the concrete. The main concern was
the pour coming to the surface. that the concrete extends to the full width and length of
• Laboratory trials incorporating a retarder into the the panel to fill in any voids, particularly for the
mix. secondary panels.
To prevent the early setting of the concrete during
pouring on future primary panels and for all secondary
panels, a retarder was included into the mix. The amount
of retarder was 2.5% by weight of cement and was
included for the first 8 trucks for a primary panel and first
4 trucks for a secondary panel. For the majority of the
panels poured after the retarder was introduced the
concrete came up reasonably fresh. However there were
still occasions, particularly in the primary panels, where
there was some initial set to the concrete. It was decided
not to increase the amount of retarder in the mix as it was
towards the upper limit of the recommended percentage
by weight of cement.
To ensure that there were no joints or defects in the
Plate 7 – Panel 25 Concrete Pour
cohesive concrete, the top 5 to 6m of each of the
It was determined that it was the concrete from the initial
secondary panels was excavated by the grab without the
trucks that gets pushed to the surface of the panel. This
use of bentonite. This meant that the sides of each of the
effect can be seen in Plate 8 where the red dyed concrete
primary panels could be visually inspected. A couple of
from the initial trucks is clearly apparent above the later
minor joint defects were found in the top portion of two
non dyed concrete.
of the panels. However as the top 1.5m of the wall was to
be removed prior to construction of the overlying
embankment, the defects would be removed.
Once construction of the COW was completed, the
guidewalls were removed and the top 1.5m of the plastic
concrete was excavated. This allowed a detailed

7 ANCOLD Proceedings of Technical Groups

inspection of the joints within the wall. It was typically depths between 30 and 35m within the foundation. The
difficult to detect the position of the joint which indicated finding of this plastic concrete in cutting samples
that the cleaning process was effective in removing any indicates that plastic concrete was moving through voids
excess bentonite. The quality of the joints can be seen in or infilled defects in the foundation at least up to 2m in
Plate 9 which shows the joint between a panel with dyed length. In one of the panels the plastic concrete detected
concrete and a panel without. had 10mm aggregate in it which suggests that the
voids/defects in the foundation were relatively large.
Base of COW at Saddle Dam End
The key design conclusions for the saddle dam end of the
wall were as follows:
• The depth of potentially erodible materials was
shallow (approx 12m deep) compared with the
rest of the COW.
• The moderately weathered greenstone below the
erodible material in this area was assessed to
generally have a low permeability and could be
grouted with a single line grout curtain prior to
construction of the COW.
Therefore, the design was for a shallow wall terminating
in the non-erodible MW greenstone. The MW greenstone
was to be grouted to fresh greenstone prior to construction
of the COW. During the grouting of this area, very high
Plate 9 – View of joint between primary and secondary grout takes were identified.
panels Based on the additional information obtained from the
grouting programme it was evident that the foundation
Founding Depths conditions in the high grout take areas were different from
A critical aspect of the construction of the COW was those assumed during the original design, in particular the
ensuring that the base of the wall was sufficiently permeability, and that a review of the extent of the COW
socketed into slightly weathered to fresh greenstone or was warranted.
greywacke to ensure no seepage paths could develop The options available were to move to a triple line grout
beneath the wall. The arrangement of the desanding plant curtain or to deepen the COW in this area to cutoff the
was such that samples could be taken by placing an high permeability zones. The key concerns with the triple
excavator bucket beneath the discharge point for the line grout curtain option were as follows:
larger cuttings. This gave large high quality samples for • This would have had an impact on grouting
assessment as shown in Plate 10. Once the samples were resources, which may have delayed grouting
observed by the HDA geologist to have none or minimal works being undertaken on the saddle dam.
traces of weathering in the rock then the excavation • Although a triple line grout curtain was
would continue for an additional 0.5m to ensure the panel successfully implemented in areas beyond the
was socketed into rock. COW, there was no guarantee that closure would
be achieved.
• The grouting would have impacted the program
for the construction of the COW.
Given the above, and the certainty of outcome achieved
with the deepening of the COW, it was decided to deepen
the COW in this area, with a 0.5m socket into slightly
weathered to fresh greenstone.

Conclusion
The potential for internal erosion and piping of the right
abutment of Hinze Dam was a critical issue in the
development of the Hinze Dam Stage 3 project. The
Hinze Dam Alliance in conjunction with Bauer
Plate 10 – Typical sample in slightly weathered to fresh Foundations Australia developed an innovative cutoff
greenstone wall design that provided a positive cut-off of the seepage
that could not be achieved during Stage 2. The COW was
Communication between Primary Panels successfully constructed and met all the key criteria with
On two occasions, plastic concrete was observed within a major key to the success being the planning and risk
the desander cuttings when excavating a primary panel. reduction measures that were undertaken during both the
The distance between adjacent panels is typically design and construction phases.
approximately 2m. The communications occurred at

Dams; where to next in climates of change

References
Chamberlain, C., Macfarlane, D. and Eades, G. 2008.
Hinze Dam Stage 3 – Development of the geological
model and the implications for design. ANCOLD
Conference Proceedings.
Hunter, G. Chamberlin, C. Foster, M. 2009. Innovative
solution to foundation piping on the right abutment.
ANCOLD Conference Proceedings.

9 ANCOLD Proceedings of Technical Groups