Seepage Theories

Blighs Creep Theory :

The design of the impervious floor, or the apron is directly
dependent on the possibilities of percolation in the porous soil on
which the apron is built.
Bligh assumes as an approximation that the hydraulic slope or
gradient is constant throughout the impervious length of the apron.
He further assumed the percolating water to creep along the
contact of the base profile of the apron with the sub-soil, losing
head enroute, proportional to the length of its travel.
He designated the length of the travel as the creep length, which
is the sum of horizontal as well as vertical length of creep.

 Bligh asserted that no amount of sheet piling or another cut-off

could ever stop the percolation unless the cut-off extends upto the
impermeable sub-soil strata.

 Thus, according to Blighs theory, the total creep length L from fig (a) is

For the case of fig (b) is, the total creep length is

This means that in calculating the length of creep, the depth of every
cutoff (i.e. Vertical creep) is multiplied by the coefficient 2.
If H is the total loss of head, the loss of head per unit length of the
creep would be

He called the loss of head per unit length of creep as percolation

coefficient.

 The reciprocal (L/H) is called the coefficient of creep (C) and

Bligh assigned its safe values for different soils in the table
below :
Type of soil

1.
2.
3.
4.

Light sand and mud

Fine micaceous sand
Coarse grained sand
Boulders or shingle, gravels & sand
mixed

Value of C

18
15
12
5 to 9

Design Criteria : Bligh gave two criteria for design

1. Safety against piping: The length of should be sufficient to
provide a safe hydraulic gradient according to the type of soil.
Thus, the safe creep length is given by :
L = CH
where C = coefficient of creep = 1/c.

2. Safety against uplift pressure: Let h be uplift pressure head at any

of the apron.
The uplift pressure = wh

point

If t = thickness of the floor at the point

& = specific gravity of the floor material
W = unit weight of water

Then, downward force (resisting force) per unit area =

equating the two, we get

Where h = ordinate of the hydraulic gradient line measured above the top of
the floor.

Limitations of Blighs Theory :

1. Bligh made no distinction between horizontal and vertical creep.
2. Blighs method holds good so long as the horizontal distance
between the pile lines is greater than twice their depth.
3. Bligh did not explain the idea of exit gradient. The safety against
undermining cannot simply be obtained by considering a flat
average gradient but by keeping this gradient well below critical.

4. Bligh makes no distinction between outer and inner faces of sheet

piles or the intermediate sheet pile, whereas according to
investigations, the outer faces of the end sheet piles are much more
effective than inner ones. Also, intermediate sheet piles of shorter
length than the outer ones are ineffective except for local
redistribution of pressure.
5. Loss of head does not take place in the same proportion as creep
length. Also, the uplift pressure distribution is not linear but
follows a sine curve.
6. Bligh does not specify the absolute necessity of providing a sheet
pile at d/s end whereas it is absolutely essential to have a deep
vertical cut off at d/s end to prevent undermining.

LANE'S WEIGHTED CREEP THEORY :

Based on statistical investigations of as many as 278 dams, weirs
and barrages all over the world, Lane observed that vertical creep is
more effective than the horizontal creep.
He therefore modified Blighs creep theory by evolving Lanes
weighted creep theory.
According to this theory, the weighted creep length (Lw) is given by

Where = the sum of all horizontal contacts and all the sloping contacts
having slope less than 455
V= sum of all the vertical contacts and all the sloping contacts
steeper than 455

To ensure safety against piping, lane suggested that the weighted

creep length must not be less than the following :

where Lw = weighted creep length

Cw = Lane's creep coefficient, the value of which depends on
the type of soil.

Khoslas Theory :
Provisional conclusions led by Khosla are :
1. The outer faces of the end sheet piles were much more effective than
the inner ones and the horizontal length of the floor.
2. The intermediate piles if smaller in length than the outer ones were
ineffective except for the local redistribution of pressure.
3. Undermining of the floor started from the tail end. If the hydraulic
gradient at exit was more than the critical gradient for the particular
soil, the particles would move with the flow of water, thus causing
progressive degradation of the sub-soil, resulting in cavities and
ultimate failure.
4. It was absolutely essential to have a reasonably deep vertical cutoff at
the downstream end to prevent undermining.
Khosla and his associates took into account the flow pattern
below the impermeable base of hydraulic structures, to calculate
the uplift pressure and exit gradient

Specific Cases :
1. Straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with pile
either at the upstream end or at the downstream end.
2. Straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with pile
at some intermediate point.
3. Straight horizontal floor depressed below the bed, but
with no cutoff.

Case 1 : Pile at some intermediate point

These cases were analysed by Khosla and his associates
with the help of Schwarz-Christoffel transformation.

For Pile at intermediate point :

The uplift pressures, PE, PD, PC at the three key points E, D and C are
given by the following equations :

Khoslas curve for intermediate sheet pile

Case 2 : Pile at downstream end

The uplift pressure at the key points E, D and C are
given by the following equations :

Khoslas curve for cutoff at d/s end

Case 3 : Pile at upstream end

If the pile is provided at the upstream end, the pressure at the
key points E1, D1 and C1 are given by the following equations :

Khoslas curve for exit gradient

Exit Gradient :
For the case of horizontal impervious floor with cutoff
at the down stream end, the exit gradient (GE) is given
by the following expression :

Depressed Floor :
A depressed floor is a straight horizontal apron or floor of
finite thickness (or depression) d penetrating into the
foundation. Khosla also solved this case empirically and gave
uplift for
at point D.

where

are the corresponding values for an

equivalent horizontal apron of negligible thickness of length

b with d/s cutoff of depth d.

Permissible Exit Gradient :

For alluvial soils, the critical hydraulic gradient may be approximately equal
to 1.
The permissible hydraulic gradient can be found by adopting a suitable factor
of safety of 5 to 7.
The permissible exit gradient for three soils are given below :

Khosla's method of independent variables

To know that how the seepage below the foundation of a hydraulic
structure is taking place, it is necessary to plot flownet. This can be
accomplished by Mathematical solution of the Laplacian equations
Electrical analogy method
Graphical method

These methods are complicated and are time consuming.

Therefore, for designing hydraulic structures such as weirs or
barrages on pervious foundations, Khosla has evolved a simple, quick
and an accurate approach, called Method of Independent Variables.
This method consists of breaking up a complex profile into a number
of simple profiles, each of which is independently amenable to
mathematical treatment, and then applying corrections due to the
mutual interference of pile and due to the thickness and slope of the
floor

 The complex profile can be broken up into the following simple

profile and pressures at key points can be obtained 1. A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile
line on the u/s end and d/s end
2. A straight horizontal floor depressed below the bed but without any
vertical cut-offs
3. A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile
line at some intermediate point
. The pressure obtained at the key points by considering the
simple profile are then corrected for the following1. Correction for thickness of the floor
2. Correction for mutual interference of the piles
3. Correction due to the sloping floor

1. Correction for thickness of the floor

Graphs 1 and 2 give pressure at key points assuming thickness of
the floor to be negligibly small. Thus the pressure at key points E
and C pertain to the level at the top of the floor ,while actually the
junction of the pile is at the bottom (points E1 & C1) of the floor.
The pressure at actual points E1 & C1 are computed by
considering linear variation of pressure between point D and the
hypothetical points E and C.

When the pile is at u/s end-

For the intermediate pile-

When the pile is at the d/s endwhere

d2

t2

2. Correction for the mutual interference of piles-

The correction (C) is given by

The correction is positive for points in the rear or back water and subtractive for points forward in
the direction of flow.

3. Correction for slope

A correction is applied for a sloping floor and is taken as +ve for
the down slopes, and -ve for the up slopes following the direction
of flow.

The correction factor given above is to be multiplied by the

horizontal length of the slope and divided by the distance between
the two pile lines between which the sloping floor is located.
This correction is applicable only to the key points of the pile line
fixed at the start or end of the slope.