RESEARCH ARTICLE

Kun XIONG, Yunlong HE, Yunfeng PENG

Adaptability to geological faulted foundation of Hardfill dam

E Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag 2008

Abstract Hardfill dam is a new type of dam which has

the advantages of low stress level and even stress distri-

bution in a dam body, resulting in low demands to foun-

dations. Based on 2D linear elastic and elasto-plastic

calculations of gravity dam and Hardfill dam using finite

element method (FEM), the stress distribution in a dam

body and anti-sliding stabilization is analyzed on the geo-

logical faulted foundations with weak weathered rock and

soft interlayers. It is concluded that Hardfill dams have

better adaptability to geological faulted foundations than

gravity dams and is more secure and economically sound.

Keywords Hardfill dam, geological fault, dam founda-

tion, weak weathered rock, soft interlayer

1 Introduction

It has been proven in practice that there are always vary-

ing degrees of defects in natural foundations. With hydro-

power development, favorable geological conditions for

dams have been almost exhausted and the others that

remain usually have many problems, such as strong

weathered rock, soft zone, fault zone, etc. Therefore, the

geologically faulted foundations impact on the safety of

the dam has been given more attention by hydraulic engi-

neers. Usually, in order to satisfy the demands of the dam

on the foundation, some reinforcements have to be made.

When the flaws are on the surface, including weak weath-

ered rock, joints and soft interlayer, only a certain degree

of excavation can easily acquire a reliable and economical

effect; but when these defects are buried deep, it is clearly

not economical to cope with them by just relaying on

excavation. And measures such as consolidation grouting,

curtain grouting and anchor bolts are combined with it.

Moreover, in some cases, although the condition of

foundation is good enough to build a dam, conservative

design and engineering measures are still adopted due to

the uncertain security. Thus, if it is able to have an accur-

ate estimate on the stabilization of dam foundation, the

security and economic rationality can be obtained at the

same time.

The idea of Hardfill material and Hardfill dam was put

forward by Raphael [1] and Londe et al. [2]. The Hardfill

material is produced by adding water and a small quantityof cement into river-bed sand and gravel or excavation

waste which can be obtained easily near the dam site.

And the Hardfill dam is constructed using Hardfill mater-

ial. From the 1990s, the idea has been carried out widely in

Japan. The cemented sand & gravel (CSG) damming tech-

nology has been developed, applied and promoted [3].

As a new recommended type of dam, the prominent

advantage of the Hardfill dam is low stress level in dam

body, resulting in low demand on foundations [4,5]. Onthe face of a geologically faulted foundation, if the

Hardfill dam can also have a high level of safety, little

to no reinforcing measures are needed and thereby cost

is reduced.

Meanwhile, with a shape intermediate between gravity

dam and concrete faced rockfill dam (CFRD), the struc-

ture of Hardfill dam is more like that of CFRD. The earth

and rockfill dam have good adaptability to various foun-dations because of its local material for dam construction.

However, for little cement content in Hardfill material, it

is obvious that the modulus of elasticity of Hardfill mater-

ial is much smaller than common concrete, but still much

larger than rockfill. Thus, the adaptability to foundations

of Hardfill dam must not be as good as that of the earth

and rockfill dam. Compared with CFRD, the great

advantages of Hardfill dam are erosion resistance of thedam material, the spillway is set on the dam body and the

low construction cost [6,7]. Therefore, only the gravity

dam is chosen to compare with the Hardfill dam in this

paper. Based on 2D linear elastic and elasto-plastic calcu-

lations of gravity dam and Hardfill dam with FEM, the

stress distribution in dam body and anti-sliding stabiliza-

tion are analyzed on the geologically faulted foundations

with weak weathered rock and soft interlayers.Consequently, the adaptability to geologically faulted

foundation of Hardfill dam is studied.

Received December 14, 2007; accepted September 9, 2008

Kun XIONG, Yunlong HE (*), Yunfeng PENGState Key Laboratory of Water Resources and HydropowerEngineering Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, ChinaE-mail: ylhe2002@yahoo.com.cn

Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2008, 2(4): 343349DOI 10.1007/s11709-008-0057-z

2 Characteristics of Hardfill material andHardfill dam

2.1 Characteristics of Hardfill dam

The typical profile shown in Fig. 1 reflects the character-

istics of Hardfill dam, which is symmetrical trapezoid-

shaped or approximately symmetrical. The shape of the

dam body is intermediate between gravity dam and

CFRD, and the dam slope can be determined from some

facts of the specific project, such as foundation condi-

tions, height of dam, performance of the filling material,

etc. The range of slope is commonly from 1:0.5 to 1:0.8.

The impervious concrete facing upstream acts as an

impervious barrier like CFRD. The spillway can be placed

on the dam body and water can flow over during the

construction period.

2.2 Mechanical properties of Hardfill material

The mechanical behavior will change along with the ag-

gregate gradation, the quantity of cement, and unitage ofwater. In Ref. [8], the mechanical properties of Hardfill

material was tested. The main aggregate is river-bed sand

and gravel or excavation waste. Based on the results, the

typical stress-strain relationship is shown in Fig. 2, which

indicates that the Hardfill is a type of elastic-plastic mater-

ial. In the design the Hardfill dam is considered as elastic

mass and the design compressive strength is taken accord-

ing to the elastic range strength, not the peak strength.

Table 1 lists the mechanical properties of three Hardfill

material specimens, of which the unit quantity of cement

is 60 kg/m3 and aged for 91 days. Because the unitage of

water is changed, the values of the properties given in this

table have a scope. It is obvious that the modulus of elasti-

city of Hardfill material is much smaller than common

concrete because of little cement content. But the modulus

of elasticity is still much larger than rockfills. Like the

modulus of elasticity, other mechanical properties are also

intermediate between concrete and rockfills. And accord-

ing to Refs. [8,9], the strength and elasticity modulus were

improved with the increase in cement content.

3 Adaptability to foundation with weakweathered rock

Weak weathered rock is the most common defect in dam

foundations. Weathering induces transformation of the

rocks physical properties and the strength of the rock is

greatly reduced. In the past, due to the hope of placing the

dam on considerably fresh and integrated bedrock, the

entire weathered rock would be removed. This will not

only increase the amount of excavation and backfilling

concrete to increase the investment and prolong the con-

struction period, but also enlarge the area of water pres-

sure. Whats more, excessive excavation will bring the

fresh rocks stress relaxation owing to unloading. And

weathering damage occurs. Sometimes digging too deep

will worsen the stress state of the dam because of the large

stiffness of bedrock [10].

It is pointed out in Design Specification for Concrete

Gravity Dams (SL3192005) that, in principle, after cer-

tain reinforcements, the amount of excavation should be

reduced if the requirements for the dams strength and

stability are met. Through a great amount of engineering

practice and theoretical research, some experiences have

been gained in the use of weathered rock in dam founda-

tion [11]. For example, the lower weathered rock has been

partly used in Three Gorges Dam; in Er Tan project, the

lower weathered rock has been directly used, the mid

weathered rock has been used entirely after proper dis-

posal and the upper weathered rock has been partly used

after proper disposal.

3.1 Comparison of different dam base levels

Because of the trapezoid shape, the weight of Hardfill dam

increases by about 80% of that of gravity dam while thearea of the base increases by about 80%. As the upstreamslope results in more weight of water, the anti-sliding res-

istance greatly increases. Hence, the amount of excavation

Fig. 1 Typical profile of Hardfill dam

Fig. 2 Typical stress-strain curve of Hardfill material

344 Kun XIONG, et al.

will be reduced effectively to build a Hardfill dam rather

than a gravity dam on the foundation with weak weath-

ered rock of certain depth to achieve the economic and

security purposes.

Set up a favorable foundation without important faults

and fissures, but with some weak weathered rocks of cer-

tain depth which include the upper layer and the lower

layer of same thickness of 1 m. The material parameters

are listed in Table 2. The dam base level can be chosen on

the surface of upper weak weathered rock, the surface of

lower weak weathered rock or the surface of slightly

weathered rock, as shown in Fig. 3.

In the calculating with FEM, the height of the Hardfill

dam is 70 m and the crest width is 8 m, so is the gravity

dam. The calculation domain of the foundation extends

by 1.5 times the height of the dam in the upstream, down-

stream and the depth, and the boundaries of the founda-

tion are all constrained normally. Four-node isopara-

metric element is used.

Compared with gravity dam with a downstream slope

of 0.8, the upstream and downstream dam slope of

Hardfill dam are all 1:0.7. In analysis, the loads contain

the deadweight of the dam, water pressure on the

upstream face and the foundation uplift pressure. The

water level is 66 m upstream, and 0 downstream. It is

assumed that the uplift pressure to upstream water pres-

sure is 1/2 in the drain hole and water-tight diaphragm.

The uplift pressure is 0 at the toe of the dam and its

distribution is linear along the dam base. The material

parameters of the dam are also listed in Table 2.

Assuming seepage demands can be met at every base

level, the result of calculation shows that the demands of

deformation and compressed stress are also satisfied both

for gravity dam andHardfill dam. As no crucial faults and

fissures exist, the anti-sliding along the base level is themain problem. According to the criterion, the shear for-

mula is chosen to calculate the safety factors. The mean

normal stress and shear stress of each element in the worst

sliding surface can be obtained with FEM first, and then

the anti-sliding safety factor is calculated with stress

algebraic sum method in term of Eq. (1)

K 0~(Pn

i~1

siDli)f0z(

Pn

i~1

Dli)c0

Pn

i~1

tiDli

, 1

where si, ti are the normal stress and shear stress of ele-ment i on sliding surface respectively, Dli is the length ofelement i on sliding surface.

Table 3 shows the anti-sliding safety factors. According

to the criterion in Ref. [12], the safety factor should be

greater than or equal to 3.0 at the basic load combination,

regardless of the project grade. The result shows that, on

the same foundation, the anti-sliding safety factors of

70 m Hardfill dam is about 100% higher than gravitydam with the same height. During the construction of

gravity dam, if the dam is built on the surface of weakweathered rock, the safety factors are all less than 3.0,

which cannot guarantee its stability against sliding. And

the only choice is to build the dam on the surface of

slightly weathered rock, or use consolidation grouting to

reduce the excavation. For Hardfill dam, the stability

requirement can be met comfortably even if the dam is

built on the surface of upper weak weathered rock.

Consequently, the excavation is reduced effectively so asto obtain economic benefits.

Table 1 Mechanical properties of Hardfill material

Hardfill material elasticity modulus/GPa compressive strength/MPa tensile stength/MPa

river-bed sand gravel 1 2.05.0 1.54.0 0.30.8

excavation waste 1.02.0 1.02.0 0.60.7

river-bed sand gravel 2 1.02.0 2.05.5 0.40.7

Table 2 Material properties for 2D linear elastic analysis

item elasticity

modulus/GPa

Poissons

ratio

unit mass/

kg?m23

upper weak weathered rock 6 0.250 2000

lower weak weathered rock 8 0.250 2000

slightly weathered rock 10 0.250 2000

concrete 20 0.167 2400

Hardfill 2 0.200 2200

Fig. 3 Sketch map of choices of dam base level

Table 3 Anti-sliding safety factors according to three base levels

dam base level c9/MPa f9 K

gravity dam Hardfill

dam

surface of upper weak

weathered rock

0.3 0.7 1.98 4.44

surface of lower weak

weathered rock

0.5 0.8 2.65 5.87

surface of slightly weathered

rock

0.7 0.9 4.39 8.95

Adaptability to geological faulted foundation of Hardfill dam 345

3.2 Hardfill dam on weak weathered foundations with

different thickness and intensity

In the above, the stability of different dam base levels is

contrastingly analyzed for gravity dam and Hardfill dam

on weak weathered foundation with certain thickness. The

adaptability of Hardfill dam is obviously better than grav-

ity dam. But in fact the thickness and intensity of weak

weathered rock varies in the foundation. In the following,

using different thickness and strength of the weak weath-

ered rock foundation, the adaptability of Hardfill dam is

analyzed. The model of FEM is the same as above; how-

ever, the upper and lower weak weathered rocks are com-

bined to one layer with the thickness varying from 1 m to

20 m, the modulus of elasticity varies from 1 GPa to 8

GPa. Other parameters are the same as that in Table 2.

The result of FEM shows that, in each case of weak

weathered foundation with different thickness and intens-

ity, the stress distribution is quite even in the Hardfill dam.

The vertical normal stress is compressive stress and no

tensile stress occurs. Figures 4 and 5 show the curve of

s1max and s3min against the weathered rocks thicknessand intensity. If the calculation result is a positive value,

it means the stress is tensile, and vice versa.

In any case, s1max of the dam body always appears atthe dam heel. From Fig. 4, no matter what the thickness

is, s1max always increases along with the increase of therocks modulus of elasticity. During the case when the

thickness is 1 m and the elasticity modulus is 8 GPa,

s1max achieves its maximum value. Contrast to Table 1,even in this case, the maximum still does not exceed the

design tensile strength of Hardfill material. In any case,

s3min of the dam body always appears in the middle of thedam bottom. From Fig. 5, no matter what the thickness

is, s3min almost does not change. The minimum of s3min is

21.14 MPa. And contrast to Table 1, this value also doesnot exceed the design compressive strength of Hardfillmaterial. Besides, the design compressive strength is taken

according to the elastic range strength, not the peak

strength, which hides some reserved strength.

Therefore, the trapezoid-shaped Hardfill dam has less

demands than gravity dam on weak weathered founda-

tion. In every case in this paper, the stress extremum of

dam body always remains in the range of design strength

of Hardfill material. The adaptability of Hardfill dam toweak weathered foundation is favorable.

4 Adaptability to foundation with softinterlayers

The unfavorable soft interlayer is also a common geo-logical defect in foundations, which is usually the crucial

problem to the safety of the dam base. Therefore, in the

design of dams, it is not only needed to check the stability

against sliding along the base level, but also to verify the

possibility of the sliding along soft layers. Usually, there

are two types of the distribution, including single sliding

surface and double sliding surfaces. In this paper, the

foundation contains two soft interlayers.

4.1 Elasto-plastic model of foundation with soft interlayers

Set up a foundation containing two adverse soft inter-

layers, and the gravity dam and Hardfill dam of the same

height will be built on this base. In the 2D elasto-plastic

analysis with FEM, the dam structure, load conditions

and boundary conditions are the same as the example

above. The FEM mesh is shown in Fig. 6 and materialparameters are listed in Table 4.

The material properties are shown in Table 4. The con-

stitutive model is elasto-plastic and the yielding criterion

adopts Drucker-Prager criterion:

f~aI1zJ1=22 {H~0, 2

where I1 is the first invariant, J2 is the second stress devi-

ator invariant. And

a~2 sin Q

3

p3{ sin Q , 3

H~6c cos Q3

p3{ sin Q , 4

where c is the cohesion,Q is the friction angle.

4.2 Comparison of different stress distributions

Figures 7 and 8 show the distribution of principal stress

s1, s3 of gravity dam and Hardfill dam respectively. If the

Fig. 4 s1max against weathered rocks thickness and intensity

Fig. 5 s3min against weathered rocks thickness and intensity

346 Kun XIONG, et al.

Fig. 6 FEM mesh(a) Gravity dam; (b) Hardfill dam

Table 4 Material properties for 2D elasto-plastic analysis

item modulus of elasticity/GPa Poissons ratio unit mass/kg?m23 c/kPa Q/(u)

foundation 10 0.250 2000 700 42

concrete 20 0.167 2400 1 100 50

Hardfill 2 0.200 2200 500 45

soft interlayers 0.5 0.350 2000 20 30

Fig. 7 Distribution of principal stress s1/MPa

Fig. 8 Distribution of principal stress s3/MPa

Adaptability to geological faulted foundation of Hardfill dam 347

calculation result is a positive value, it means the stress is

tensile, vice versa.

From Fig. 7, the stress distribution of Hardfill dam is

more even. Especially in the position close to the base

level, the stress varied largely in gravity dam while the

stress almost does not change along the flow direction in

Hardfill dam, where the contour is nearly horizontal.

Shown in Fig. 8, the principal stress s3 is also distributedhorizontally in Hardfill dam and does not show stress

concentrations which exist at the toe in gravity dam.

Table 5 shows the comparison of maximum stresses of

the dam body on the foundation with soft interlayers. The

maximum of principal stress s1 in Hardfill dam is com-pressive, which means that no tensile stress exists on the

whole profile. And the minimum of the principal stress s3is about 50% and the maximum of the horizontal shearstress t in Hardfill dam is nearly 37% of that in gravitydam. Obviously, the stress level has been reduced largely.

4.3 Comparison of anti-sliding safety

The overloading analysis is made to explore the integer

safety factors using the method of overloading the water

density [13]. And the integral safety of the dam is esti-

mated synthetically by the convergence of interactive pro-

cess and extending through of the plastic zone.

Figures 9(a) and 10(a) show the distribution of the plas-

tic zone of gravity dam andHardfill damwith geologically

faulted foundation. The subscript 1 of K means before

reinforcement and 2 means after reinforcement. From

Fig. 9(a) of gravity dam, the plastic zone appears along

soft interlayers and almost links through when K is equal

to 1.0. As the overload factor is 1.9, the plastic zones along

the soft interlayers link through completely. On the same

foundation, there is also an area of plastic zone in the heel,

which is shown in Fig. 10(a). As the overload factor is 3.9,

the plastic zones just link through completely.

The overloading analysis is conducted again after

grouting and the soft interlayers are enhanced

(c5 0.5 MPa, Q5 40u). When the overload factor is 1.0,there is no plastic zone in the gravity dam and the Hardfill

dam. Figures 9(b) and 10 (b) show the distribution of

plastic zone at the unstable period after reinforcement.

Due to the reinforcement, the integer safety factors have

been improved largely. When the dam is unstable, the

plastic zones extend through along the base of the gravity

dam and the Hardfill dam. There is also a great area of

plastic zone at the heel because of great water pressure.

The anti-sliding safety factors along the base level and

the soft interlayers are calculated separately according to

Eq. (1) and

K~

1

2cH0H0

1

2c0H0H0

~c

c0~Kc, 5

where Kc is the over loading factor of the unit weight.

Table 6 shows the anti-sliding safety factors of the grav-

ity dam and the Hardfill dam with stress algebraic sum

method and overload method in the condition of natural

Table 5 Comparison of dam stresses/MPa

type of dam dam body

s1 s3 t

gravity dam 0.01 22.32 0.95

Hardfill dam 20.01 21.17 0.35

Fig. 9 Distribution of plastic zone of gravity dam(a) K15 1.0; (b) K15 1.9; (c) K25 3.3

Fig. 10 Distribution of plastic zone of Hardfill dam(a) K15 1.0; (b) K15 3.9; (c) K25 5.8

348 Kun XIONG, et al.

faulted foundation and reinforced foundation respect-

ively.

On the natural faulted foundation, the anti-sliding

safety factors along the base level are all above 3.0, sat-

isfying the demand of the criterion. But the anti-sliding

safety factor along the soft interlayers and the integer

safety factor of gravity dam are quite low. After some

reinforcements, the anti-sliding safety factor along the

soft interlayers is barely 3.12, which just meets the demand

of the criterion. To the Harfill dam before reinforcements,

the anti-sliding safety factor along the soft interlayers is

2.34 and the integer safety factor is already 3.9, which is

close to the usual control safety in the design. In fact, this

means that nearly no reinforcement is needed. Even if the

same reinforcements are applied, the safety factors of

Hardfill dam improve more. All of these reflect that

Hardfill dam has good adaptability to the foundation

with soft interlayers and simultaneously achieve security

and economic objectives.

5 Conclusions

Hardfill dam is a new type of dam which has some unique

advantages due to the even and low stress level. Based on

FEM, the adaptability to geologically faulted foundation

of Hardfill dam is studied. Some conclusions are drawn as

follows:

1) On the foundation with weak weathered rock of cer-

tain depth, it can reduce the amount of excavation effec-

tively and satisfy the demand of anti-sliding comfortably

to build a Hardfill dam rather than a gravity dam. The

purposes of economy and security can be achieved at the

same time.

2) In each case of weak weathered foundation with dif-

ferent thickness and intensity in certain scope, the stress

distribution is quite even in the Hardfill dam. The vertical

normal stress is compressive stress and no tensile stress

occurs. The stress extremum of dam body always remains

in the range of design strength of Hardfill material.

3) On the foundation with two soft interlayers, the dis-

tribution of stress is quite even and the stress level is rather

low in the body of the Hardfill dam. The anti-sliding

safety factors along the base level and soft interlayers

and the integer safety factor are about twice those of the

gravity dam. Compared with gravity dam, little to no

reinforcement is needed to build a Hardfill dam on this

type of foundation.4) It is shown that the Hardfill dam has a better adapt-

ability to geologically faulted foundation with weak

weathered rock and soft interlayers of the types in this

paper.

Acknowledgements This study was supported by the National NaturalScience Foundation of China (Grant No. 50679058).

References

1. Raphael J M. The optimum gravity dam. In: Proceedings ofRoller Compacted Concrete III, ASCE, SanDiego, California.1992, 519

2. Londe P, Lino M. The faced symmetrical Hardfill dam: a newconcept for RCC. International Water Power and DamConstruction, 1992, 44(2): 1924

3. Hirose T. Design concept of trapezoid-shaped CSG dam. In:Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on RollerCompacted Concrete Dams, Madrid. 2003, 457464

4. Peng Yunfeng, He Yunlong, Xiong Kun. Study on the struc-ture safety of Hardfill dam. China Water Resources, 2007,(21): 5557 (in Chinese)

5. Peng Yunfeng, He Yunlong, Wan Biao. Hardfill dama newdesign RCC dam. Water Power, 2008, 34(2): 6163 (inChinese)

6. Wang Xiaoqiang. Material Dissolution and EngineeringApplication of Cement Sand and Gravel (CSG) Dam. ChinaInstitute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research,2005:45 (in Chinese)

7. Lu Shuyuan, Tang Xinjun. Brief introduction to a new type ofdam called face-plate-cementing rockfill dam. Journal ofYangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 1998, 15(2): 5456 (in Chinese)

8. Hirose T. Concept of CSG and its material properties. In:Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on RollerCompacted Concrete Dams, Madri. 2003, 465473

9. Tang Xinjun, Lu Shuyuan. Preliminary research on mech-anical behaviors of cemented rockfill material. Journal ofWuhan University of Hydraulic and Electric Engineering,1997, 30(6): 1518 (in Chinese)

10. Wang Tao, Wu Xubin, Zhu Jianmin. Study on selection offoundation base of gravity dam. Hubei Water Power, 2004,(3): 3032 (in Chinese)

11. Yu Bo, Xu Guangxiang. Thinking about research status &development of dam foundation rock for hydropower pro-jects. GuiZhou Water Power, 2007, 21(1): 17 (in Chinese)

12. Design Specification for Concrete Gravity Dams (SL-319-2005), 2005 (in Chinese)

13. Xiong Kun, He Yunlong, Xiao Wei. Numerical analysis ofstability of Sanglang arch dam. Engineering Journal ofWuhan University, 2007, 40(4): 2225 (in Chinese)

Table 6 Safety factors with three methods

before reinforcement after reinforcement

gravity dam Hardfill dam gravity dam Hardfill dam

along base level 3.12 7.81 3.10 7.60

along soft interlayer 1.47 2.34 3.12 6.16

integer safety factor 1.90 3.90 3.30 5.80

Adaptability to geological faulted foundation of Hardfill dam 349

/ColorImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorImageDict > /AntiAliasGrayImages false /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 150 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict > /GrayImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayImageDict > /AntiAliasMonoImages false /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 600 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict > /AllowPSXObjects false /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (None) /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org?) /PDFXTrapped /False

/Description >>> setdistillerparams> setpagedevice