Buchanan Dam Arch Study Peer Review - Stories Told · PDF fileFREESE AND NICHOLS STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS BUCHANAN DAM ARCH STUDY PEER REVIEW PAGE 2 Peer Review Goal: Code Compliance

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

Buchanan Dam Arch Study Peer Review

Lower Colorado River Authority

January 21, 2009

10814 Jollyville Road, Building 4, Suite 100 Austin, TX 78759 512 617-3100 512 617-3101 fax www.freese.com

January 21, 2009 Katherine Berbel

Senior Category Manager

Lower Colorado River Authority

Statement of Qualifications – Buchanan Dam Arch Study Peer Review Dear Ms. Berbel: LCRA’s Buchanan Dam is one of the largest and most recognized multiple arch and buttress dams in

the United States. We fully recognize the importance of involving uniquely qualified engineers to

conduct a peer review of URS’ Buchanan Dam Structural Analysis – 35-Foot and 70-Foot Multiple Arch Sections. Each of our project team members has participated in the engineering analysis and/or

rehabilitation of concrete buttress dams. Our experience includes:

• Engineering for nearly 90 percent of the concrete buttress dams over 30 feet tall in Texas

• Analysis and rehabilitation for 16 large multiple arch and slab and buttress dams across the

United States, and others throughout the world

Freese and Nichols has inspected, analyzed and designed more than 500 dams, mostly in Texas,

during the past 10 years. We are confident that our team has the experience and technical capability

to keep public safety in the forefront, safeguard LCRA’s interest, and complete the project within the

required time period.

Familiarity with LCRA and National Expertise In addition to Freese and Nichols’ dam engineering specialists – known by many of your staff from

their involvement in LCRA’s Dam Modernization Program and the Engineering and Dam Safety

Program – we have enlisted internationally recognized concrete buttress dam specialists Mete

Sozen, Ph.D., S.E., and Eric Kollgaard, P.E. to help in the assessments and interpretation of the

engineering code.

(continued on page 2)

FREESE AND NICHOLS STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

BUCHANAN DAM ARCH STUDY PEER REVIEW PAGE 2

Peer Review Goal: Code Compliance or Safety Issues Our peer-review goal will be to carefully evaluate the analyses and failure modes identified in the URS

report. Older structures like Buchanan Dam often will not be in compliance with current American

Concrete Institute 318 codes, and we will evaluate whether the failure modes were defined simply by

engineering code limitations or whether Buchanan Dam is at risk for brittle failure, potentially creating

serious operational and safety issues. The team will use its combined experiences to evaluate the failure

modes and, if required, recommend appropriate testing and remedies to strengthen Buchanan Dam.

Risk Management LCRA is facing the risks of costly repairs at Buchanan Dam. Our project team has managed similar

project risks on previous dam evaluations and rehabilitation projects. We fully understand the

importance of due diligence in each segment of the evaluation and, if needed, the design of any

necessary rehabilitation. A key factor in the overall peer review is related to unwarranted repairs. We

will thoroughly review the Buchanan Dam analysis according to contemporary dam safety standards

and engineering practices and provide recommendations in light of the peer review findings. We are

experienced in presenting the results of our dam evaluations in a clear, concise manner to stakeholder

groups and decision-making bodies.

Freese and Nichols has enjoyed the trust that LCRA has placed in our firm for nearly 20 years, and we

appreciate your consideration of our qualifications for the peer review of Buchanan Dam Structural Analysis – 35-Foot and 70-Foot Multiple Arch Sections.

Thank you for this opportunity. Please feel free to contact me with any comments or questions.

Sincerely,

John S. Wolfhope, P.E. Project Manager / Principal (512) 617-3118; [email protected]

Freese and Nichols Statement of Qualifications – Buchanan Dam Arch Study Peer Review

Table of Contents

Section OneQualifi cations in Structural Evaluation of Dam Structures

Section TwoProposed Project Approach

Section ThreeProposed Project Team

Section FourSchedule

AppendixSelected Publications

Mete Sozen, Ph.D., P.E.•

Eric Kollgaard, P.E.•

Contact Information

John S. Wolfhope, P.E.Project Manager / PrincipalFreese and Nichols, Inc.10814 Jollyville Road, Building 4, Suite 100Austin, Texas 78759(512) 617-3118 [email protected]

Page 1Freese and Nichols Statement of Qualifications – Buchanan Dam Arch Study Peer Review

Section One – Qualifications in Structural Evaluation of Dam StructuresSlab-and-buttress dams and multiple-arch dams are both considered concrete buttress dams. The Freese and Nichols Team has unmatched experience in the analysis and rehabilitation of Concrete Buttress Dams, including both fl at slab-and-buttress dams and multiple arch dams. Every member of the Freese and Nichols team has direct experience evaluating concrete buttress dams.

Project Team ExperienceFreese and Nichols team members have analyzed and/or rehabilitated:

Nearly 90 percent of the • remaining concrete buttress dams over 30 feet in Texas (see map above)

16 high-hazard and large concrete buttress dams throughout the United • States and others internationally

We also have enlisted two highly respected international experts on concrete buttress dams – Mete Sozen, Ph.D., P.E., and Eric Kollgaard, S.E. – to manage the Structural Assessment (Sozen) and Rehabilitation and Repairs (Kollgaard) functions of our project approach.

Freese and Nichols also has inspected, analyzed and designed more than 500 dams during the past 10 years.

Project Team

John Wolfhope, P.E. – Project Manager

John Wolfhope has been Project Manager and Engineer for the analysis of three concrete buttress dams, including the interpretation of Finite Element Modeling results for the rehabilitation of two fl at slab-and-buttress dams. He has served as Project Manager or Lead Engineer for all of the dams rehabilitated as part of LCRA’s Dam Modernization Program.

Our team has analyzed

and/or rehabilitated

nearly 90 percent of the

concrete buttress dams

over 30 feet in height

remaining in Texas.

See Appendix for a listing of papers and presentations prepared by Dr. Sozen and Mr. Kollgaard on dam analysis and rehabilitation.


Victor Vasquez, P.E. – Project Engineer

Victor Vasquez served as Project Engineer for the rehabilitation of Tom Miller Dam, including mapping of concrete cracks throughout the fl at slab-and-buttress portions of the dam. He has signifi cant experience supporting LCRA for its Dam Modernization Program and has substantial experience in construction management and inspection for reinforced concrete dams.

Les Boyd, P.E. – Structural Coordination and Stability

Les Boyd has more than 36 years experience in the engineering, construction, and rehabilitation of concrete dams. He has served as Project Engineer and Resident Inspector for the rehabilitation of two concrete buttress dams including the Brazos River Authority’s Morris Sheppard Dam, the tallest fl at slab-and-buttress dam in the United States. Mr. Boyd has managed construction phase inspection programs for construction of repairs to all of the LCRA Highland Lakes Dams.

Brad Watson, P.E. – Structural Engineering

Brad Watson is Freese and Nichols’ Structural Group Manager and a fi rm Associate. He brings substantial experience in the Finite Element Modeling of reinforced concrete dams. He has provided structural engineering services to support LCRA’s Dam Safety Team and Engineering Program.

Antonio Diaz, P.E. – Quality Control and Review

Antonio Diaz is a fi rm Associate with more than 45 years experience in the structural engineering for reinforced concrete dams, including more than 30 large and high-hazard dams. He has been responsible for the technical oversight and interpretation of Finite Element Modeling of four concrete buttress dams.

Ron Lemons, P.E. – Principal-in-Charge

Ron Lemons is Freese and Nichols’ Chief Operating Offi cer, Senior Vice President and a Principal of the fi rm. He is former President of the U.S. Society on Dams and has served as Project Manager for the Trinity River Authority’s $65-million Richland Chambers Reservoir, the Colorado Municipal River Authority’s $30-million Simon W. Freese Dam, and the Palo Duro River Authority’s $13-million Palo Duro Dam and Reservoir.

Mete Sozen, Ph.D., P.E. – Structural Assessment

Mete Sozen has more than 50 years experience in the development of reinforced concrete engineering practices. He is an international expert in the analysis of concrete buttress dams and the interpretation of the American Concrete Institute (ACI) reinforced concrete code. His long-standing participation as an active member of the ACI 318 committee provides a thorough understanding of the intent of the design code, its limitations, and the ability to apply the code to unconventional structures including massive concrete dams.

Section One – Qualifications in Structural Evaluations of Dam Structures

REFERENCES

Warren Samuelson, P.E.

Dam Safety Program CoordinatorTexas Commission on Environmental QualityP.O. Box 13087Austin, Texas 78711(512) 239-5195 [email protected]

Ricky Garrett

Water Utilities DirectorCity of WacoP.O. Box 2570 Waco, Texas 76702(254) 750-8049 [email protected]

Gregor Forbes

Program ManagerLower Colorado River Authority3700 Lake Austin BoulevardAustin, Texas 78767(512) 473-3200 [email protected]


Eric Kollgaard, P.E. – Rehabilitation and Repair

Eric Kollgaard has more than 50 years experience leading the engineering design and rehabilitation of concrete dams, including fi ve concrete buttress dams. He has served on Freese and Nichols teams for 12 years, including the rehabilitation of two concrete buttress dams. Mr. Kollgaard is recognized as the leading expert in the analysis and rehabilitation of reinforced concrete dams throughout North America.

The Freese and Nichols Team’s Relevant Dam Experience

Project Team MemberM

ultip

le A

rch

Dam

s

Slab

-and

-Bu

ttre

ss D

ams

Butt

ress

Dam

Re

habi

litat

ion

Ana

lysi

s of

Cor

bel

Stre

ngth

enin

g

Fini

te E

lem

ent

Mod

elin

g of

Bu

ttre

ss D

ams

John Wolfhope, P.E.Project Manager

Victor Vasquez, P.E.Project Engineer

Les Boyd, P.E.Structural Coordination and

Brad Watson, P.E.Structural Engineering

Antonio Diaz, P.E.Quality Review

Ron Lemons, P.E.Principal-in-Charge

Mete Sozen, Ph.D., P.E.Structural Assessment

Eric Kollgaard, P.E.Rehabilitation and Repair

Featured ProjectsThe following pages feature three major projects that demonstrate Freese and Nichols’ experience with concrete buttress dams and with LCRA. See pages 21-23 for Dr. Sozen’s and Mr. Kollgaard’s resumes that feature their impressive lists of projects related to concrete buttress dams and corbel rehabilitation.



Morris Sheppard Dam Rehabilitation

Brazos River AuthorityFreese and Nichols has continuously provided engineering services for the Brazos River Authority’s (BRA) Morris Sheppard Dam since 1987. It is a 188-foot-high, 1,655-foot-long concrete buttress dam built from 1938-41, and is the highest slab-and-buttress dam in the United States.

1987 – Emergency Rehabilitation

and Modifi cations

In 1987, Freese and Nichols discovered signs of movement and structural distress during a fi ve-year Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) inspection. Buttresses along the spillway had moved downstream as much as 4.5 inches, enough to crack the hearth and its downstream defl ector toe wall. Freese and Nichols recommended immediate corrective actions, which included stabilizing and strengthening the slab-and-buttress section of the dam. The plan lowered the lake 13 feet to increase the factor of safety and drilling 145 relief wells to alleviate the hydrostatic pressure. Freese and Nichols also worked closely with BRA, FERC and the Texas Water Commission (now TCEQ) to quickly resolve the problem and signifi cantly reduce the dam’s potential for disaster.

1993 – Stilling Basin Extension

In 1993, Freese and Nichols designed a stilling basin extension, which included construction of a Roller Compacted Concrete Wall and erosion protection around the basin.

1994 – Bear Trap Gates Replacement #1

In 1994, Freese and Nichols designed upgraded replacements for four of the nine, 50-year-old bear trap gates, using a dynamic wave model to more accurately simulate the actual PMF loading conditions. Freese and Nichols prepared plans and specifi cations for the installation, which the BRA staff managed. The replacement design also was less susceptible to corrosion and provided for easier maintenance.

1998 – Bear Trap Gates Replacement #2

In 1998, Freese and Nichols designed replacements for the remaining fi ve bear trap gates, effi ciently incorporating cost-saving measures from the initial gate replacement design and adapting the design to accommodate the capabilities of the BRA staff .

1997, 2003, 2007 – FERC Part 12 Inspections

Freese and Nichols performed FERC Part 12 Inspections in 1997, 2003 and 2007.

1989

Outstanding Engineering Achievement, Consulting Engineers of Texas and National Society of Professional Engineers; one of only eight presented that year



Wesley Seale Dam

City of Corpus ChristiFreese and Nichols has been the City of Corpus Christi’s trusted advisor for dam services for the Wesley Seale Dam since 1992. The 80-foot-high, 5,680-foot-long dam was completed in 1958. It has three earth embankment sections and two 40-foot-high Ambursen, fl at-slab-and-buttress spillways that accommodate 60 gates.

Those services have included:

Dam safety inspections•

Design of spillway stabilization for the slab-and-buttress structures•

Design for the rehabilitation of crest gates and sluice gates•

Update of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)•

Section 404 Permitting•

Breach analysis and inundation mapping•

Construction phase monitoring•

Instrumentation evaluation•

Design of a parapet wall•

Freese and Nichols evaluated the dam in 1996 and found concrete bulges in the hearth slabs, cracking of buttresses and abutment members, and downstream off sets in alignment of the spillways of up to four inches.

Freese and Nichols studied failure modes to explain the observed movements in the structure, and developed advanced Finite Element Models to analyze the structural behavior of the concrete buttress dam.

The design stabilized the slab-and-buttress spillways with 70,520 cubic yards of concrete. It also included reference monuments and extensometers for precision monitoring of any future spillway movement.

Freese and Nichols’ $23-million rehabilitation design saved the City about $5 million and achieved a 50-percent increase in the sliding factor of safety. The project was completed one year ahead of schedule. One time-saving method involved fi lling the spillway with sand to provide temporary stabilization, allowing the contractor to use conventional drilling instead of a barge to more effi ciently install drains in the spillway.

Freese and Nichols signifi cantly reduced the cost of modifi cations by using a dynamic wave model to update the PMF, reducing the level of overtopping from more than 10 feet to less than four feet. The PMF was easily contained by the addition of a parapet wall on the embankment sections.

2002 Top Engineering Excellence Award (Water Resources), Consulting Engineers of Texas’; National Finalist

2001 National Rehabilitation Project of the Year, Association of Dam Safety Offi cials

2001

Award of Excellence, Texas Construction Best of 2001



Dam Modernization Program

Lower Colorado River AuthorityFreese and Nichols provided engineering services for the Lower Colorado River Authority’s dam safety program since 1994. The three-phase dam modernization program has included comprehensive dam evaluation, hydraulic and structural analysis, design of modifi cations, and construction phase services for Buchanan, Inks, Starcke, Tom Miller and Wirtz Dams.

Freese and Nichols completed the following:

Developed a new PMF for each dam based on the use of • a state-of-the-art dynamic wave model

Reduced fl ood levels at Buchanan and Inks Dams, using • modeling, to save LCRA about $40 million in repairs

Identifi ed possibly signifi cant structural and hydraulic • inadequacies at Tom Miller, Wirtz and Buchanan Dams

Performed structural analysis of non-overfl ow sections, • parapet walls, core walls and various other sections of the dams using the following analytical methods: internal stress analysis, overturning stability analysis and sliding stability

Identifi ed minor problems at Inks and Starcke Dams•

Analyzed the strength and stability of Inks, Wirtz and • Tom Miller Dams, using advanced Finite Element Models to predict the structural behavior under various loads

Analyzed PMF at Buchanan and Inks Dams and • determined the dams’ hydraulic adequacies

Projects Summaries

Buchanan Dam – Stabilization of the gravity non-• overfl ow sections and stabilization of the multiple-arch foundation and spillway structures

Inks Dam – Stabilization of the gravity spillway section, • stabilization and investigation of the gravity non-overfl ow section

Wirtz Dam – Design of a soil-cement overlay for the • embankment section and stabilization of the gravity non-overfl ow sections, spillway and powerhouse intake with post-tensioned anchors

Starcke Dam – Foundation repair at the toe of the dam•

Tom Miller Dam – Stabilization of the masonry overfl ow • section and powerhouse intake structure and structural strengthening of the fl at slab-and-buttress sections

LCRA dams, from top, Buchanan, Inks, Tom Miller,

Starcke and Wirtz Dams



Section Two – Proposed Project ApproachThis section will address:

Project Approach•

Risks•

Statement of Work•

Deliverables•

Project ApproachFreese and Nichols’ approach begins with the development of a clear understanding of the URS’ report for the Buchanan Dam Structural Analysis – 35-Foot and 70-Foot Multiple Arch Sections. We will evaluate the thought processes utilized in arriving at statements regarding “under-reinforced” corbels and possible “brittle failures.” This approach is based on the limited information currently available from the report’s executive summary.

Our peer review of the analysis report will include the following evaluations:

Independent review of the • structural analysis, fi ndings, and recommendations contained in the report

Review of corbel conditions • and investigation of repair alternatives

Initial Review of Structural

Analysis’ Executive Summary

Our project team has reviewed the structural analysis’ Executive Summary, incorporated our knowledge of the Buchanan Dam, our team’s extensive experience with similar concrete buttress dams, and published accounts of concrete buttress dam rehabilitation.

An Approach Built on the Freese and Nichols

Team’s Experience with Concrete Buttress Dams

Multiple-arch dams are part of a class of structures known as concrete buttress dams. Less than 35 multiple-arch dams over 30 feet in height remain in service in the United States.

Flat slab-and-buttress dams are the other signifi cant type of concrete buttress dams. Less than 70 fl at slab-and-buttress dams over 30 feet in height remain in service in the U.S.

All concrete buttress dams are similar in that they consist of a structural element (fl at slab or arch section) that retains the reservoir and is supported by a series of buttresses.Texas and California are the two states having the most concrete buttress dams over 30 feet in height remaining in service.

The Freese and Nichols Team has unmatched experience in the analysis and rehabilitation of concrete buttress dams, especially in Texas, including both fl at slab-and-buttress dams and multiple arch dams.

Our team has analyzed • and/or rehabilitated nearly 90 percent of the concrete buttress dams over 30 feet in height remaining in Texas, including the tallest fl at slab-and-buttress dam in the United States (Morris Sheppard Dam, Brazos River Authority).

Members of the Freese • and Nichols team have analyzed and/or rehabilitated more than 16 high-hazard and large concrete buttress dams throughout the United States.

Every member of the • Freese and Nichols team has direct experience analyzing or rehabilitating concrete buttress dams.


According to the Executive Summary, URS indicates that the arches and buttresses (in their current condition), have adequate safety. Our team agrees with the fi rst task expressed in the RFQ: perform a structural analysis review of the arch and buttress structure.

By fully understanding the behavior of the arches and the buttresses under the assumed loads, our team expects to verify, or nullify, any structural concerns and failure modes that can reasonable be identifi ed. We will critically evaluate the failure modes that the analysis identifi es.

Our initial assessment is that the concerns may be more related to URS’ interpretation of American Concrete Institute requirements outlined in ACI 318 – Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete than to actual strength concerns.

Current ACI Codes and Evaluation of Dam Safety

Older structures often will not be in compliance with current code or design practices. As a result, we do not expect Buchanan Dam to meet all of the detailing requirements of the current ACI 318 codes, which have changed since the design and construction.

Changes to ACI design codes can be driven by the need for a correction to the design practice due to identifi ed problems or simply by improved design practice and methodology. Our project team members have long tenures in applying ACI design codes to dam design and evaluation throughout Texas and across the United States. We also have a thorough understanding of what drivers have been behind changes in ACI 318 since the construction of Buchanan Dam.

Our approach will be to evaluate the dam in terms of safety with the benefi t of understanding those code changes.

Section Two – Proposed Project Approach

Typical Corbel from

current ACI 318

Typically, American Concrete Institute (ACI) codes are developed for buildings and may not

account for the peculiarities associated with dams and their load conditions (see above).

Buchanan Dam Corbel

(buttress head)

Concrete Buttress Dams: Service Issues

Typical issues associated with concrete buttress dams during service include: inadequate spillway capacity, inability to withstand seismic events, leakage at the construction joints, and deterioration of the concrete due to freeze-thaw cycles or aggregate alkali reaction (AAR).

There are isolated cases in the literature where buttress heads have been locally repaired due to concrete deterioration, particularly in cold climate locations. There are no published cases of concrete buttress dams that have been rehabilitated due to inadequate shear capacity of the buttress heads, unless the repair was associated with other defi ciencies such as seismic instability.


Initial Review of Corbels

Our initial review of available drawings for the 35-foot and 70-foot arches indicate that the corbels are not reinforced according to today’s standards, but are consistent with the standard practices of their design period. We also noted that the buttresses for the 70-foot arches widen in size as they approach the foundation. We believe any problems, if any exists, may be restricted to the upper portions of the corbels (see graphic at right).

Evaluation of the Need for Corbel Rehabilitation

The Executive Summary states that “the results for the corbels indicate that they are under-reinforced, and possibly subject to brittle failure.” We will evaluate two alternative possibilities for these fi ndings:

Insuffi cient Corbel Strength Independent Of 1.

Ductility

If the full report indicates that the corbels do not have suffi cient strength independent of ductility, we will evaluate the corbels using the latest analysis techniques, including Finite Element Modeling (FEM) and strut-and-tie modeling.

Our experience in these analysis techniques, particularly on concrete buttress dams, will help select the most appropriate technique for Buchanan Dam.

Insuffi cient Corbel Strength Based On Lack Of Ductility2.

If the report indicates that the corbels do not have suffi cient strength based purely on the lack of ductility, we will investigate the necessity for the upgrade.

Incorporating Dam-Specifi c Evaluation Criteria•

We understand the importance of applying the proper interpretation of corbels, corbel reinforcing and performance expectations to the structure.

In order to provide increased ductility, the 1971 and subsequent editions of ACI 318 require a minimum amount of corbel web reinforcement to increase ductility.

We have the expertise on our team to assess the issue from the perspective of the building codes and

We want to be cautious in considering code provisions built on tests of precast concrete corbels, as commonly used in the building industry, and applying those standards to continous corbels (buttress heads) used on concrete buttress dams. Please see Typical Corbel graphic at top of previous page for sample design diff erences.

Freese and Nichols has used Finite Element Modeling for evaluations of:

Tom Miller Dam, • Lower Colorado River Authority

Wesley Seale Dam, • City of Corpus Christi

Morris Sheppard • Dam, Brazos River Authority

3-D Finite Element

Modeling of a slab-and-

buttress dam

Buttress at Top of

Arch

Widened Buttress at

Lower Portions



dam-specifi c codes and that of academia. We also will look at other dams of similar construction to determine the consensus of the industry on this issue. We will review studies of similar structures in other low seismic areas to help evaluate the need to repair these corbels.

Understanding Load Transfer from Arch to Buttress

The geometry on each arch section is diff erent, and the structural behavior under load will depend on the load path into the buttress. It should be noted that the load path for the 35-foot arches passes through the center of the buttress head (see graphic above).

Team Experience to Cost-Eff ective Corbel Rehabilitation

If rehabilitation of the corbels is required, our team has more than 250 years of experience working with dams (see resumes in Section Three). The team includes Eric Kollgard, P.E., and Mete Sozen, Ph.D., P.E., national experts with specifi c experience in rehabilitation of similar concrete buttress dams in low- and high-seismic areas. Our experience includes addressing the comprehensive challenges of concrete buttress dam design, monitoring and rehabilitation.

This broader perspective will guide us in developing a cost-eff ective rehabilitation design, if needed, that considers the entire life-cycle cost.

RisksOur team has identifi ed three major risks associated with this project:

Design Risk•

Physical Risk•

Unwarranted Risk•

Design Risk

Engineering design has the inherit risk of making overly conservative on unconservative assumptions to describe structural behavior. It is critical that the correct structure is modelled, load transfer mechanisms are properly evaluated, and design codes are correctly interpreted on unconventional structures.

Freese and Nichols’ Approach and Lessons Learned

Our team’s approach to this risk is to perform due diligence in every aspect of this evaluation and investigation. All of our conclusions must be based upon non-questionable methods, adequate research and test programs, if necessary.

Sample corbel

rehabilitation designs

from River Miller Dam

(above)



Our experience has taught us that our fi ndings should withstand the utmost scrutiny and that our team members should be able to convey these fi ndings in a clear, concise manner to any group of relevant stakeholders.

Physical Risk

There also are three obvious physical risks if rehabilitation is required: Accessibility, near-constant hydrostatic load and corbel failure.

Accessibility for Repairs and Long-term Maintenance•

Repair alternatives will likely involve drilling or coring into the corbels at hard-to-reach locations, i.e. elevated positions that are not readily accessible for drilling, tensioning, and work in general. Accessibility also will be an issue if the corbel solution requires periodic inspections to assess performance or possible deterioration.


Our team’s approach to these issues will be to develop installation methods that will minimize potential damage to existing structural components including reinforcing and to keep in mind the development of a system which will be resistant to exposure conditions to minimize maintenance.

Near-Constant Load•

Another physical risk can arise from the work on corbels that are under a near constant load, i.e., reservoir head.


Depending on the limits determined for corbel repairs, we will develop temporary bracing/shoring, etc., and evaluate this approach versus the benefi ts of either reducing reservoir pools or scheduling the repair work during periods of low reservoir levels. We also recognize the risk of starting work during low reservoir periods and not being able to complete the repairs before the reservoir rises.

Unwarranted Repairs

Unwarranted repair of the structure results in expending signifi cant resources and potentially detrimental modifi cations to the structure.


Our fi rst eff ort would be to identify a sound engineering basis for leaving the structure as is. If modifi cations are required, we would try to minimize the construction impact on the structure.

Statement of WorkCoordinate a kickoff meeting with LCRA and all team members to obtain 1. relevant project information share ideas and concerns, and to discuss project expectations.

Disseminate documents to project team for Peer Review to begin. 2.

Coordinate phone conferences to discuss evaluations and address any 3. additional questions.



Research history and service performance of concrete buttress dams and 4. remedies used on identifi ed structural problems.

Determine need for additional evaluation models, analyses or physical 5. tests.

Convene a team meeting to discuss the Peer Review fi ndings and to 6. develop summary report outline on the fi ndings.

Assign team members to develop each report chapter.7.

Disseminate draft report to all team members for review and comment.8.

Incorporate comments, as appropriate, and prepare draft Peer Review 9. Report for presentation to LCRA.

Await LCRA’s comments on draft report .10.

Finalize Peer Review Report after receipt of Owner’s comments.11.

Determine additional tasks to proceed to next level, if necessary.12.

If corbel repairs are deemed necessary, perform the following:13.

a. Determine analyses to be performed or test programs.

b. Develop list of similar structures to be observed or contacted.

c. Develop up to three repair alternatives.

d. Present alternatives to project team for discussion and concurrence of applicability.

e. Develop preliminary details for corbel repairs.

f. Develop cost opinions for each repair alternative.

g. Prepare summary report presenting recommendations, costs and discussions of each proposed repair method.

Present summary report to LCRA for comment and guidance.14.

Meet with LCRA to task the next phase of work as appropriate.15.

DeliverablesMinutes of kickoff meeting1.

Monthly Progress Report (Updates)2.

Draft Peer Review Report3.

Final Peer Review Report4.

Summary Report of Corbel Repair Alternatives5.



Proposed Project Team

Project Manager

John Wolfhope, P.E.Principal-in-Charge

Ron Lemons, P.E.Quality Review

Antonio Diaz, P.E.

Project Engineer

Victor Vasquez, P.E.

Structural Coordination and Constructability

Les Boyd, P.E.

Structural Engineering

Brad Watson, P.E.

Evaluation and Repair

Eric Kollgaard, P.E.Structural Assessment

Mete Sozen, Ph.D., S.E.


Project Manager

JOHN WOLFHOPE, P.E.

John Wolfhope is a Principal of Freese and Nichols and is the fi rm’s Central Division Water Resources Group Manager. His 20-year career has focused on the planning, design, and construction of signifi cant water resources projects including dams, hydraulic structures, and water supply systems. Mr. Wolfhope has substantial experience in the design, rehabilitation, stabilization, and replacement of concrete dams, including gated spillways, gravity dams, fl at slab and buttress spillways, multiple arch dams and labyrinth spillways. He has broad experience in dam assessments including dam safety inspections, structural assessments, geotechnical investigations, physical and numerical hydraulic modeling, development of risk assessments, emergency action planning, and vulnerability assessments.

He was Project Manager for the Lake Brazos Dam Replacement Project which received the USSD’s 2008 Award of Excellence in the Constructed Project. His work also has been recognized through awards that include the 2006 ASDSO Regional Award of Merit, Texas Section ASCE Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement Award, Texas Chapter of APWA Public Works Project of the Year, Texas Council of Engineering Companies Gold Medal for Engineering Excellence, and USACE’s Safe Contractor of the Year.

Relevant Project Experience

Engineering and Dam Safety Team and Peer Review, Lower Colorado River •

Authority (LCRA) – Project Manager for technical support of the Highland Lakes Dams and Dam Safety Team. Provided peer review of reports prepared by other consultants, including the Buchanan Dam Radial Gate Inspection and Analysis and the Buchanan Dam Comprehensive Facility Review.

Dam Modernization Program, LCRA• – Project Manager for the rehabilitation of four of the Highland Lakes Dams, including Wirtz Dam, Buchanan Dam, Inks Dam, and Tom Miller Dam. Project included structural strengthening of the 500-foot-long, gated fl at slab-and-buttress spillway, and involved three-dimensional Finite Element Modeling, modeling of crack propagation, hydraulic model studies, detail geotechnical investigation program, geologic mapping, destructive and non-destructive structural testing program.

Mansfi eld Dam Comprehensive Facility Review, Lower Colorado River •

Authority – Project Manager for a Comprehensive Facility Review Report of the conditions and operations of Mansfi eld Dam to evaluate the adequacy of the dam’s design, construction and performance; determine the likely modes of dam failure, related risks and consequences; and identify needed improvements for on-going performance monitoring of the dam.

Section Three – Proposed Project Team

Experience

20 years•

Education

M.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Texas at Austin

B.S., University of • Pittsburgh

Registration

Professional • Engineer, Texas #82128

Location

Austin•

Availability

25%•


Choke Canyon Dam Rehabilitation and Site Improvements, City of Corpus •

Christi – Project Manager for rehabilitation and upgrades to spillway and inlet/outlet works at a three-mile long high-hazard dam. Improvements included rehabilitation and replacement of protective coatings for spillway tainter gates, stoplogs systems, gate hoists and intake trash racks.

Lake Brazos Dam Replacement Project, City of Waco• – Project Manager for the design and construction of the 3,000-foot labyrinth spillway, retaining walls, and outlet works. Project included the development and interpretation of fi nite element models to analyze the reinforced concrete structures for all hydraulic loading scenarios.

Wesley E. Seale Dam Gates and Spillway Rehabilitation, City of Corpus •

Christi – Design Engineer for the stabilization of the two 1200-feet long fl at slab and buttress spillway structures. Project included 3-D fi nite element modeling of the reinforced concrete buttress dam, including strengthening and stabilization of the structures. Project received ASDSO Outstanding Project of the Year Award in 2001.

Olmos Dam Rehabilitation, Bexar County – • Technical Leader on the evaluation of existing post-tensioned anchors as part of an overall dam assessment for Olmos Dam. The project included geotechnical investigations, dam stability analysis, hydraulic and hydrologic analysis, and evaluation on existing anchor test data.

City Lake Dam, City of Temple• – Project Manager for the inspection and rehabilitation of a 90-year old concrete channel dam. Project included hydraulic modeling, analysis of foundation erodability, scour analysis, spillway rehabilitation and undermining repairs.

Project Manager

JOHN WOLFHOPE, P.E. continued



Project Engineer

VICTOR VASQUEZ, P.E.

Victor Vasquez’s experience includes the design, rehabilitation, expansion and replacement of dams and hydraulic structures. He specializes in the development of construction documents and bid packages for the evaluation, rehabilitation, and design of dams including channel dams, concrete spillways and earthen embankments. He has considerable experience leading dam inspections involving structural assessment, geotechnical investigation programs and foundation scour analysis.


Mansfi eld Dam Comprehensive Facility Review, Lower Colorado River •

Authority (LCRA) – Project Engineer for a Comprehensive Facility Review Report of the conditions and operations of Mansfi eld Dam to evaluate the adequacy of the dam’s design, construction and performance; determine the likely modes of dam failure, related risks and consequences; and identify needed improvements for on-going performance monitoring of the dam.

Tom Miller Dam Modernization Project, LCRA • – Project Engineer for program to modernize the 105-year old dam. Project included stabilization of concrete overfl ow spillway and structural strengthening of 500-foot-long gated fl at-slab and buttress spillway. Tasks involved a detailed geotechnical investigation program, geologic mapping, a destructive and non-destructive structural testing program, three-dimensional fi nite element analyses, modeling of crack propagation and hydraulic model studies.

Engineering and Dam Safety Team and Peer Review, LCRA• – Engineer for technical support of the Highland Lakes Dams and Dam Safety Team. Provided peer review of reports prepared by other consultants, including the Buchanan Dam Radial Gate Inspection and Analysis and the Buchanan Dam Comprehensive Facility Review.

Lake Brazos Dam Replacement Project, City of Waco• – Lead Engineer for the design and construction of the 3,000-foot labyrinth spillway, retaining walls, and outlet works. Project included in-depth hydraulic and hydro-dynamic modeling, and fi nite-element modeling of foundation and reinforced concrete structures.

Olmos Dam Rehabilitation, Bexar County• – Project Engineer on the geotechnical investigation, post-tensioned anchor evaluation, and stability analysis of Olmos Dam. The project included geotechnical investigations, dam stability analysis, hydraulic and hydrologic analysis, and evaluation on existing anchor test data.

Inks Dam Modernization Project, LCR• A –Engineer for geotechnical investigation, hydraulic analyses and design for modernization of 1,800-foot-long concrete dam. Project involved demolition, stabilization and replacement of the concrete spillway, while maintaining the pool at normal operating elevation.

Experience

11 years•

Education

M.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Texas at Austin

B.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Texas at Austin

Registration


Location

Austin•

Availability

50%•



Structural Coordination and Constructability

LES BOYD, P.E.

Les Boyd is a Senior Structural Design Engineer and a fi rm Associate with more than 36 years experience in design and evaluation of new and existing reinforced concrete dams. He also is Freese and Nichols Central Division technical leader for constructability reviews and construction support.

Mr. Boyd has served the LCRA for 15 years in the repair and strengthening of LCRA’s dams. He served as the chief construction representative for the modernization of Wirtz Dam, Buchanan Dam, Inks Dam, and Tom Miller Dam. He specializes in analyzing the behavior of hydraulic structures including concrete buttress dams. He lead the rehabilitation of Morris Sheppard Dam (the tallest fl at slab and buttress dam in the United States). His is often recognized by his clients for his practical solutions and innovative approaches in dam rehabilitation and strengthening.


Murphy Dam Repairs, City of Taylor – • Structural Engineer for repairs to a multiple arch dam. Project included evaluation of the dam, replacement of training walls, and grouting of voids beneath the buttresses and apron slab.

Dam Modernization Program, LCRA • – Lead Engineer and Resident Construction Representative for the rehabilitation of four of the highland Lakes Dams, including Wirtz Dam, Buchanan Dam, Inks Dam, and Tom Miller Dam. Project included structural strengthening of the 500-feet long gated fl at-slab and buttress spillway. Project included three-dimensional fi nite element analyses, modeling of crack propagation, hydraulic model studies, detail geotechnical investigation program, geologic mapping, destructive and non-destructive structural testing program.

Gilboa Dam Emergency Stabilization (New York), Dvirka and Bartilucci• – Assistant Resident Representative for emergency dam stabilization.

Morris Sheppard Dam, Brazos River Authority• – Resident Engineer for rehabilitation of Morris Sheppard Dam. Project included three separate contracts for construction of an emergency spillway, modifi cations to primary spillway, stabilization of the dam and rehabilitation of spillway gates.

Spillway Gate Rehabilitation, Wesley E. Seale Dam, City of Corpus Christi •

– Lead Engineer for rehabilitation of 60 spillway gates for slab and buttress spillways. Included structural modifi cations for safely passing the probable maximum fl ood and replacement of protective coatings and side seals.

Lake Brazos Dam Replacement Project, City of Waco • – Structural Engineer for the design and construction replacement of 3,000-foot labyrinth spillway, retaining walls, and outlet works. Project included in-depth hydraulic and hydro-dynamic modeling, and fi nite-element modeling of foundation and reinforced concrete structures

Experience

36 years•

Education

M.S., Civil • Engineering, Vanderbilt University

B.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington

Registration


Location

Austin•

Availability

50%•



Structural Engineering

BRAD WATSON, P.E.

Brad Watson is Freese and Nichols’ Structural Group Manager. He has signifi cant experience in the design and evaluation of new and existing dams. He manages the group of structural engineers responsible for the development and fi nite element analysis of reinforced concrete dams. He has managed the structural analysis of concrete buttress dams over the past 10 years. He has consulted with the USACE regarding corbel repairs for their reinforced concrete structures.


Engineering and Dam Safety Team and Peer Review, LCRA• – Structural Engineer for technical support of the Highland Lakes Dams and Dam Safety Team. Provided peer review of reports prepared by other consultants, including the Buchanan Dam Radial Gate Inspection and Analysis and the Buchanan Dam Comprehensive Facility Review.

Tom Miller Dam Modernization Project, Lower Colorado River Authority •

(LCRA) – Structural Engineer providing oversight of the 3-D fi nite element modeling of the concrete buttress sections and the gravity overfl ow sections.

Lake Brazos Dam Replacement Project, City of Waco• – Lead Structural Engineer for the design replacement of 3000-feet labyrinth spillway, retaining walls, and outlet works. Lead the development and interpretation of fi nite element models to analyze the reinforced concrete structures for all hydraulic loading scenarios.

Lake Livingston Dam Evaluation, Trinity River Authority • – Structural Engineer for comprehensive inspection and evaluation of 14,000-foot-long Lake Livingston Dam, including the general condition of the gated spillway structure and the service outlet.

Richland Chambers Seawall Improvements, Tarrant Regional Water •

District – Project Manager for construction of seawall and associated landscape improvements along 700 feet of Richland Chambers Reservoir.

Olmos Dam Rehabilitation, Bexar County • – Lead Structural Engineer for the stabilization and Finite Element Modeling of reinforced concrete structures.

Dam Modernization Program, Upper Brushy Creek Water Control •

and Improvement District –Structural Engineer for evaluation and modernization of 23 Upper Brushy Creek WCID dams, including 21 high-hazard dams.

Wells Branch Regional Erosion/Flood Control Pond, City of Austin• – Structural Engineer for preparation of structural construction documents for a 30-foot tall concrete fl ood wall and weir basin. Stability was provided by a combination of gravity design and rock anchors.

Experience

18 years•

Education

M.S., Structural • Engineering, University of Texas at Austin

B.S., Civil • Engineering, Texas Tech University

Registration

Professional • Engineer, Texas #80318 (two states total)

Location

Fort Worth•

Availability

25%•



Quality Reviews

ANTONIO DIAZ, P.E.

Antonio Diaz is Freese and Nichols’ most experienced senior structural engineer and serves as technical advisor for the analysis and design of reinforced concrete structures. He has 45 years experience in the structural design and construction of hydraulic structures including concrete buttress dams. He oversees the development, interpretation, and peer review of fi nite element models to analyze complex reinforced concrete structures. He is recognized for his practical solutions for stabilizing and strengthening existing concrete structures


Morris Sheppard Dam FERC Part 12 Inspection, Brazos River Authority•

Lake Houston Comprehensive Dam Evaluation, Coastal Water Authority•

Wesley Seale Dam Spillway Stability Rehabilitation, City of Corpus Christi•

Engineering and Dam Safety Team and Peer Review, Lower Colorado River • Authority

Dam Rehabilitations and Modernizations for Buchanan, Inks Lake, Starke, • Tom Miller and Wirtz Dams, Lower Colorado River Authority

Comal Dam Rehabilitation, Lower Colorado River Authority•

Richland Chambers Reservoir and Dam Design, Tarrant Regional Water • District

Lake Livingston Dam Condition Assessment, Trinity River Authority•

Morris Sheppard Dam Rehabilitation, Brazos River Authority•

Alan Henry Dam Miscellaneous Engineering Services, Brazos River • Authority

DeCordova Bend Dam Investigation and Repairs, Brazos River Authority•

Choke Canyon Dam Improvements, City of Corpus Christi•

Lake Brazos Rehabilitation, City of Waco•

Mountain Creek Dam Inspections and Repairs, TXU•

Squaw and SSI Dam Inspectiosn, TXU•

Lake Creek Dam Spillway Assessment, TXU•

Trinidad Dam Gate Rehabilitation, TXU•

Lake Conroe Dam Gate Overtopping and Extension, San Jacinto River • Authority

Lake Conroe Dam Rock Riprap Damage Repairs, San Jacinto River Authority•

Hubbard Creek Dam Rehabilitation, West Central Texas Municipal Water • District

Experience

45 years•

Education

B.S., Civil • Engineering, Arlington State College

Registration


Location

Fort Worth•

Availability

10%•



Principal-in-Charge

RON LEMONS, P.E.

Ron Lemons is Freese and Nichols’ Chief Operating Offi cer, Senior Vice President and a Principal of the fi rm. Mr. Lemons understands Freese and Nichols’ clients’ needs and has spent his entire career working on large projects requiring close coordination with water districts, TRA, TxDOT, EPA, NCTCOG, TCEQ, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and various other regulatory agencies. The majority of Mr. Lemons’ engineering experience is in the planning, design and construction administration of major water supply facilities. He specializes in the design of water retaining/storage structures such as reservoirs, dams, levees and canals, and has considerable experience in the rehabilitation of concrete and earthen dams.

Mr. Lemons has provided Principal-In-Charge and QC/QA direction to a wide range of Freese and Nichols’ projects, mentoring both experienced and younger engineers to encourage outstanding client service and top quality workmanship. He also is an experienced Project Manager, having led the fi rm’s eff orts for many large-scale projects such as the Texas Water Development Board’s Senate Bill 1 Comprehensive State Water Plan (the fi rm developed seven of the state’s 16 regional water plans).

Mr. Lemons is also heavily involved in several professional societies in his fi eld for which he currently holds and has held signifi cant leadership positions. Mr. Lemons has served as President of the U.S. Society on Dams and was elected chairman of the Committee on Global Climate Change and Dams, Reservoirs and the Associated Water Resources for the International Commission on Large Dams.

Mr. Lemons has served as Project Manager for the Trinity River Authority’s $65-million Richland Chambers Reservoir, the Colorado Municipal River Authority’s $30-million Simon W. Freese Dam, and the Palo Duro River Authority’s $13-million Palo Duro Dam and Reservoir.

Experience

36 years•

Education

M.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington

B.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington

Registration

Professional • Engineer, Texas #41753 (seven states total)

Location

Fort Worth•

Availability

5%•



Structural Assessment

METE SOZEN, PH.D., S.E.

Dr. Mete Sozen has over 50 years experience in the development of reinforced concrete engineering practice. He is recognized as an expert in the structural analysis of concrete buttress dams and hydraulic structures. His research focus is on the behavior of building, transportation, and hydraulic structures under static and dynamic loads. Through his research and professional committee leadership, he has contributed to the development of the current design procedures used in the ACI Building Code for Structural Concrete and the European Concrete Committee model code for fl exural and shear strength of prestressed concrete and reinforced concrete slabs. His long-standing participation as an active member of the ACI 318 committee provides a thorough understanding of the intent of the design code, its limitations, and the ability to apply the code to unconventional structures including massive concrete dams.

Dr. Sozen is a tenured professor at Purdue University and teaches courses in behavior of reinforced concrete structures. He received the National Science Foundation Award in 1998 for his research titled, “Performance in Shear of Concrete Bridges.”

See Appendix for Dr. Sozen’s selected publications.

Multiple Arch and Slab-and-Buttress Dams Florence Lake Dam, Fresno County, California • – Structural evaluation of multiple arch dam in south fork of the San Joaquin River. 149-ft high dam was constructed in 1926 and owned by Southern California Edison Company.

PIT4 Dam, Shasta County, California• – Structural evaluation of fl at slab dam in the Pit River. 74-ft high dam was constructed in 1927 and is owned by Pacifi c Gas and Electric Company.

Mountain Dell Dam, Salt Lake County, Utah • – Structural evaluation of high hazard multiple arch and fl at slab-and-buttress dam in Parleys Creek. 105-ft high dam was constructed in 1916 and is owned by Salt Lake City Corporation.

Crane Valley Dam, Madera County, California• – Structural evaluation of fl at slab and buttress dam in the north fork of the Willow Creek. 145-ft high hydropower dam was constructed in 1910 and is owned by Pacifi c Gas and Electric Company.

Other Dam Evaluation Experience

Middle Fork Dam•

Bradbury Dam•

Urra Dam (Colombia)•

Lake Almanor Dam•

Experience

51 years•

Education

Ph.D., Civil • Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana

M.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana

B.S., Civil • Engineering, Robert College, Istanbul

Registration

Structural Engineer, • Illinois

Location

Lafayette, Indiana•

Availability

10%•




ERIC KOLLGAARD, P.E.

Eric Kollgaard is recognized through the international dam engineering community as an expert in the design, evaluation, and construction of arch dams, multiple arch dams, and slab and buttress dams. He has 54 years experience in safety and rehabilitation evaluations of dams and hydraulic structures including, stress and stability analysis, structural and hydraulic model testing and geotechnical and foundations investigations.

Specifi c Project Experience in Corbel and Buttress

Strengthening and Reinforcement

River Mill Dam, Oregon • – Project included infi lling for stability, spillway slab strengthening, corbel post-tensioned anchor bolting, and structural lateral bracing

Pacoima Dam, California • – Project included fi nite element analysis, abutment stabilization, and post-earthquake concrete crack repair

Cushman Dam Nos. 1 & 2, Washington • - Project included Finite Element Modeling of abutment deformation, strengthening for seismic stability, concrete buttressing, and foundation remediation

Seymour Falls Dam, Washington• - Strengthening of buttresses by structural plates, static stability strengthening, and post-tensioning for spillway gate trunions

Tom Miller Dam, Austin, Texas • - Spillway slab concrete strengthening and infi lling to strengthen areas of buttresses and provide support for upstream structural elements

Mr. Kollgaard has completed Finite Element Modeling and analysis, rehabilitation, and FERC safety evaluations for the following dams:

Multiple Arch - Stability Evaluation

Bartlett Dam, USBR, Arizona (287 feet high) • Rock Creek Diversion Dam and Pitt Dam No. 3, PGE, California• Murray Dam and Lake Hodge Dam, City of San Diego, California•

Slab-and-Buttress Dams

Wesley Seale Dam, City of Corpus Christi, Texas• River Mill Dam, Portland General Electric, Oregon• Tom Miller Dam, LCRA, Texas• Pit Dam 4, PGE, California• Seymour Falls Dam, Greater Vancouver Water Department, Washington •

Single Arch – Final Design

Amaluza Dam, ENECEL, Ecuador (558-foot high arch dam)• Ross High Dam, Seattle City Light, Washington (121-foot raise of 540-foot • high dam)

Experience

54 years•

Education

B.S., Civil • Engineering, University of Michigan

Registration

Professional • Engineer, Texas, California, Colorado and Washington; New Brunswick, Canada

Location

Concord, California•

Availability

25%•



Single Arch – Stress Analyses, Rehabilitation and/or FERC Part 12

Safety Evaluations

Diablo Dam, Boundary Dam, Ross Dam and Gorge Dam, Seattle City Light, • WashingtonAlder Dam, Tacoma Light and Water, Washington• Cushman Dam No 1 and Cushman Dam No. 2, Tacoma Light and Water, • WashingtonMossyrock Dam, Tacoma Light and Water, Washington• Mayfi eld Dam, Tacoma Light and Water, Washington• Pacoima Dam, LA Flood Control District, California• Matilija Dam, Ventura County, California• Sweetwater Dam, Southern California• Spaulding Dam, PGE, California• Roosevelt Dam, USBR, Arizona• Auburn Dam Design Review, USBR, Sacramento, California• Karapiro Dam, New Zealand, Electric Corporation of New Zealand • McKay’s Point Dam, Northern California Power Association, California• Casad Arch Dam, City of Bremerton, Washington• Big Box Canyon Dam, Washington•


ERIC KOLLGAARD, P.E. continued



Section Four – Proposed ScheduleOur proposed schedule demonstrates that the project can be completed prior to LCRA’s deadline due to the working knowledge experience that we have with Buchanan Dam and other multiple arch dams, as well as the unique team of professionals assembled for this important project.

However, completing the project by May 5, 2009 assumes that LCRA provides Freese and Nichols with a Notice to Proceed during the fi rst week of February.

Please see the following page for Freese and Nichols proposed schedule.


IDW

BS

Task

Nam

eD

urat

ion

Sta

rtFi

nish

11

Proj

ect S

tart

16 d

ays

Mon

2/2

/09

Mon

2/2

3/09

21.

1N

otic

e to

Pro

ceed

0 da

ysM

on 2

/2/0

9M

on 2

/2/0

9

31.

2R

eque

st U

RS

Rep

ort

0 da

ysM

on 2

/2/0

9M

on 2

/2/0

9

41.

3R

eque

st A

dditi

onal

Per

tinen

t Inf

orm

atio

n fro

m L

CR

A C

once

rnin

g B

ucha

nan

Dam

0 da

ysM

on 2

/2/0

9M

on 2

/2/0

9

51.

4K

icko

ff M

eetin

g w

ith L

CR

A (a

t LC

RA

)1

day

Wed

2/4

/09

Wed

2/4

/09

61.

5R

ecei

ve U

RS

Rep

ort

1 da

yM

on 2

/2/0

9M

on 2

/2/0

9

71.

6R

ecei

ve A

dditi

onal

Per

tinen

t Inf

orm

atio

n fo

r Buc

hana

n D

am2

days

Mon

2/2

/09

Tue

2/3/

09

81.

7D

isse

min

ate

Rep

ort t

o P

roje

ct T

eam

3 da

ysW

ed 2

/4/0

9Fr

i 2/6

/09

91.

8R

evie

w P

roje

ct In

form

atio

n (R

epor

ts, D

ata,

etc

)10

day

sM

on 2

/9/0

9Fr

i 2/2

0/09

101.

9In

tern

al K

icko

ff M

eetin

g1

day

Mon

2/2

3/09

Mon

2/2

3/09

112

Rev

iew

Sec

tion

2: P

aram

eter

Ass

umpt

ions

5 da

ysW

ed 2

/4/0

9Tu

e 2/

10/0

912

2.1

Con

cret

e P

rope

rties

, Bui

ldin

g C

odes

, etc

5 da

ysW

ed 2

/4/0

9Tu

e 2/

10/0

9

132.

2Fo

unda

tion

Pro

perti

es3

days

Wed

2/4

/09

Fri 2

/6/0

9

143

Rev

iew

Sec

tion

3: E

valu

atio

n C

riter

ia, L

oads

, & M

etho

ds20

day

sTu

e 2/

3/09

Mon

3/2

/09

153.

1E

valu

atio

n C

riter

ia6

days

Tue

2/3/

09Tu

e 2/

10/0

9

163.

2Lo

adin

g C

ombi

natio

ns &

Crit

eria

3 da

ysTu

e 2/

3/09

Thu

2/5/

09

173.

335

ft &

70

ft D

iam

eter

Arc

h &

Cor

bel A

naly

sis

15 d

ays

Tue

2/3/

09M

on 2

/23/

09

183.

4P

aram

etric

Stu

dies

5 da

ysTu

e 2/

24/0

9M

on 3

/2/0

9

194

Rev

iew

Sec

tion

4: S

truc

tura

l Ana

lysi

s R

esul

ts (f

ailu

re m

odes

)12

day

sTu

e 3/

3/09

Wed

3/1

8/09

204.

135

ft &

70

ft D

iam

eter

Arc

hes

5 da

ysTu

e 3/

3/09

Mon

3/9

/09

214.

235

ft &

70

ft D

iam

eter

Arc

h B

uttre

sses

8 da

ysTu

e 3/

3/09

Thu

3/12

/09

224.

335

ft &

70

ft D

iam

eter

Arc

h C

orbe

ls12

day

sTu

e 3/

3/09

Wed

3/1

8/09

235

Rev

iew

Sec

tion

5: S

truc

tura

l Ass

essm

ent &

Rec

omm

enda

tions

14 d

ays

Tue

3/10

/09

Fri 3

/27/

0924

5.1

35 ft

& 7

0 ft

Dia

met

er A

rche

s5

days

Tue

3/10

/09

Mon

3/1

6/09

255.

235

ft &

70

ft D

iam

eter

Arc

h B

uttre

sses

5 da

ysFr

i 3/1

3/09

Thu

3/19

/09

265.

335

ft &

70

ft D

iam

eter

Arc

h C

orbe

ls7

days

Thu

3/19

/09

Fri 3

/27/

09

276

Proj

ect U

pdat

e M

eetin

g w

ith L

CR

A12

day

sM

on 3

/30/

09Tu

e 4/

14/0

928

6.1

Pro

duce

and

Pre

pare

Dat

a / F

indi

ngs

5 da

ysM

on 3

/30/

09Fr

i 4/3

/09

296.

2P

roje

ct M

eetin

g w

ith L

CR

A C

once

rnin

g P

relim

inar

y Fi

ndin

gs0

days

Tue

4/7/

09Tu

e 4/

7/09

306.

3R

ecei

ve L

CR

A C

omm

ents

0 da

ysTu

e 4/

14/0

9Tu

e 4/

14/0

9

317

Dev

elop

Pre

limin

ary

Rep

ort /

Mem

oran

dum

of F

indi

ngs

13 d

ays

Wed

4/1

5/09

Fri 5

/1/0

932

7.1

Rep

ort P

rodu

ctio

n5

days

Wed

4/1

5/09

Tue

4/21

/09

337.

2S

ubm

it R

epor

t to

LCR

A0

days

Fri 4

/24/

09Fr

i 4/2

4/09

347.

3R

ecei

ve L

CR

A's

Com

men

ts5

days

Mon

4/2

7/09

Fri 5

/1/0

9

358

Dev

elop

Fin

al R

epor

t3

days

Mon

5/4

/09

Wed

5/6

/09

368.

1P

rodu

ctio

n3

days

Mon

5/4

/09

Wed

5/6

/09

378.

2S

ubm

it to

LC

RA

0 da

ysW

ed 5

/6/0

9W

ed 5

/6/0

9

2/2

2/2

2/2

4/7

4/14

4/24

5/6

1/11

1/18

1/25

2/1

2/8

2/15

2/22

3/1

3/8

3/15

3/22

3/29

4/5

4/12

4/19

4/26

5/3

5/10

Febr

uary

Mar

chA

pril

May

Task

Crit

ical

Tas

k

Pro

gres

s

Mile

ston

e

Sum

mar

y

Rol

led

Up

Task

Rol

led

Up

Crit

ical

Tas

k

Rol

led

Up

Mile

ston

e

Rol

led

Up

Pro

gres

s

Spl

it

Ext

erna

l Tas

ks

Pro

ject

Sum

mar

y

Gro

up B

y S

umm

ary

Dea

dlin

e

Pro

pose

d P

roje

ct S

ched

ule

for

LCR

A's

Buc

hana

n D

am A

rch

Stu

dy P

eer R

evie

w

Pag

e 1

Pro

ject

: Pee

r Rev

iew

of B

ucha

nan

Ar c

Dat

e: T

ue 1

/20/

09

Section Four – Schedule


Appendix – Selected Publications

Selected Publications – Mete Sozen, Ph.D., P.E.M. A. Sozen, E. M. Zwoyer and C. P. Siess, “Strength in Shear of Beams without Web Reinforcement,” Engineering Exp. Station 1.

Bulletin No. 452, University of Illinois, Urbana, 1959.

J. Warwaruk, M.A. Sozen and C. P. Siess, “Strength and Behavior in Flexure of Prestressed Concrete Beams,” Eng. Exp. Station 2.

Bulletin No. 464, University of Illinois, Urbana, 1962.

M. A. Sozen, “Multiple-Panel Reinforced Concrete Floor Slabs: Design Methods-Their Evolution an Comparison,” Journal of the 3.

American Concrete Institute, No. 8, August 1963, pp. 99-1028.

H.E.H. Roy and M. A. Sozen, “Ductility of Concrete,” American Society of Civil Engineers special publication Flexural Mechanics 4.

of Concrete, 1965, pp. 213-236.

M. D. Vanderbilt, M. A.Sozen, and C. P. Siess, “Defl ections of Multiple-Panel Reinforced Concrete Floor Slabs,” Journal of the 5.

Structural Division, Proceedings of the ASCE, V. 91, No. ST4, August 1965, pp. 77-101.

R. J. Lenschow and M. A. Sozen, “A Yield Criterion for Reinforced Concrete Slabs,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute, V. 6.

64, No. 5, May 1967, pp. 266-273.

W. G. Corley and M. A. Sozen, “Time-Dependent Defl ections of Reinforced Concrete Beams,” Journal of the American Concrete 7.

Institute, V. 63, No. 3, March 1966, pp. 373-386.

W. A. Welsh and M. A. Sozen, “Analysis and Control of Anchorage-Zone Cracking in Prestressed Concrete,” University of Illinois, 8.

Engineering Experiment Station Bulletin No. 497, V. 66, Number 17, 1968, 77 p.

S. O. Olesen, M. A. Sozen, and C. P. Siess, “Strength in Shear of Prestressed Concrete Beams with Web Reinforcement,” 9.

University of Illinois, Engineering Experiment Station Bulletin No. 493, V. 64, Number 134, 1967, 46 p.

M. F. Stocker and M. A. Sozen, “Bond Characteristics of Strand,” Eng. Exp. Station, Bulletin No. 503, University of Illinois, Urbana, 10.

1970.

B. I. Karlsson and M. A. Sozen, “Prestressed Concrete Deep Slabs with Openings,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 24, 1973, 11.

pp. 1-11.

S. Otani and M. A. Sozen, “Simulated Earthquake Tests of Reinforced Concrete Frames,” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 12.

ST3, March 1974, pp. 687-701.

M. A. Sozen, “Hysteresis in Structural Elements,”Applied Mechanics in Earthquake Engineering, ASME, AMD, V. 8, November 13.

1974, pp. 63-73.

J. K. Wight and M. A. Sozen, “Strength Decay of Reinforced Concrete Columns under Shear Reversals,” Journal of the Structural 14.

Division, ASCE, ST5, May 1975, pp. 1053-1065.

P. Gulkan and M. A. Sozen, “Inelastic Response of Reinforced Concrete Structures to Earthquake Motions,” Journal of the 15.

American Concrete Institute, V. 71, No. 12, December 1974, pp. 104-126.

A. Shibata and M. A. Sozen, “Substitute Structure Method for Seismic Design in Reinforced Concrete,” Journal of the Structural 16.

Division, ST1, January 1976, pp. 1-18.

M. A. Sozen and H. Aoyama, “Impact of Laboratory and Field Observations on Earthquake-Resistant Design of Reinforced 17.

Concrete Structures,” Structural and Geotechnical Mechanics, Prentice-Hall, 1977, pp. 305-333.

M. A. Sozen, “Earthquake Simulation in the Laboratory,” Proceedings, Earthquake Resistant Constructions, Berkeley, 1978, pp. 18.

1606-1630.

M. A. Sozen, “Earthquake Response of R/C Buildings with a View to Drift Control,” Proceedings, 7th World Conference on 19.

Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul, September 1980.

M. Saiidi and M. A. Sozen, “Simple Nonlinear Seismic Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures,” Journal of the Structural 20.


Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, V. 107, N. ST5, May 1981, pp. 937-962.

M. A. Sozen, “Lateral Drift of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Strong Ground Motion,” Bulletin of the New Zealand 21.

National Society for Earthquake Engineering, V. 16, No. 2, June 1983, pp. 107-122.

D. G. Morrison and M. A. Sozen, “Lateral-Load Tests of R/C Slab-Column Connections,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 22.

American Society of Civil Engineers, V. 109. No. 11, November 1983, pp. 2698-2714.

K. Shimazaki and M. A. Sozen, “Seismic Drift of Reinforced Concrete Structures,” Technical Research Report of Hazama-Gumi, 23.

Tokyo, 1984, pp. 145-166.

D. Wolfgram, D. Rothe, P. Wilson and M. Sozen, “Earthquake Simulation Tests of Three One-Tenth Scale Models,” Earthquake 24.

Eff ects on Reinforced Concrete Structures, U.S.-Japan Research, American Concrete Institute, SP-84, 1985.

M. A. Sozen, “Toward A Behavior Based Design of Reinforced Concrete Frames to Resist Earthquakes,” Proceedings, Ninth 25.

Congress of Turkish Society of Structural Engineers, November 1987, V. 1, pp. 1-45.

M. A. Sozen and J. Bariola, “Notional Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Frames in Earthquakes,” Proceedings, Earthquake 26.

Engineering Research Institute, Mesa, Arizona, February 1988.

M. A. Sozen, “Earthquake Response of Buildings with Robust Walls,” Proceedings, Fifth Chilean Conference on Earthquake 27.

Engineering, Santiago, Chile, August 1989.

M. A. Sozen, “A Frame of Reference,” The Art and Science of Geotechnical Engineering: A volume honoring Ralph B. Peck, 28.

Prentice-Hall, 1989, pp. 240-247.

M. E. Kreger and M. A. Sozen, “Seismic Response of Imperial County Services Building in 1979,” Journal of Structural 29.

Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, V. 115, No. 12, December 1989, pp. 3095-3111.

M. A. Sozen, “The Chilean Formula for Earthquake-Resistant Design of Medium-Rise Reinforced Concrete Structures,” 30.

Proceedings, Turkish Association of Structural Engineers, Conference on Design Technology, V. 1, September 1989, pp. 283-

314.

M. A. Sozen, “Deferring Payments: Management of the Earthquake Risk in Central United States,” Proceedings, Workshop on 31.

Evaluation, Repair and Retrofi t of Structures, UJNR, Washington, DC, May 1990.

L. E. Garcia, A. Sarria, and M. A. Sozen, “Observed Behavior Under Lateral Load of A Five Story Large Panel Precast Building and 32.

Its Mathematical Modeling,” Proceedings, International Conference on Building with Load Bearing Concrete Walls in Seismic

Zones, Association Francaise du Genie Parasismique, Paris, June 1991.

M. A. Sozen and J. J. Dragovich, “Experiments to Study Dynamic Torsional/Translational Response of Reinforced Concrete,” 33.

Proceedings, National Science Foundation Meeting on Earthquake Engineering, Phoenix, Arizona, August 1991.

M. A. Sozen, P. Monteiro, J. P. Moehle, and H. T. Tang, “Eff ects of Cracking and Age on Stiff ness of Reinforced Concrete Walls 34.

Resisting In-Plane Shear,” Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium on Nuclear Power Plant Structures, Equipment, and Piping,

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, December 1992, pp. 3.1-3.13.

M. O. Eberhard and M. A. Sozen, “Behavior-Based Method to Determine Design Shear in Earthquake-Resistant Walls,” Journal 35.

of Structural Engineering, V. 119, No. 2, February 1993, pp. 619-640.

C. Konwinski, J. A. Ramirez, and M. A. Sozen, “Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete Columns Subject to Seismic Loading,” in 36.

Proceedings, National Seismic Conference on Bridges and Highways, San Diego, CA, Section 6C, 1995, pp. 1-11.

A. F. Hassan and M. A. Sozen, “Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Low-Rise Buildings in Regions with Infrequent Earthquakes,” 37.

ACI Structural Journal, V. 94, No. 1, January-February 1997, pp. 31-39.

M. A. Sozen, “Drift-Driven Design for Earthquake Resistance of Reinforced Concrete,” Proceedings, The EERC-CUREe 38.

Symposium in Honor of Vitelmo V. Bertero, Berkeley, CA, Jan.-Feb., 1997

Mete A.Sozen, Charles H. Thornton, W. Gene Corley, and Paul F. Mlakar Sr., “The Oklahoma City Bombing: Structure and Failure 39.

Mechanisms of the Murrah Building,” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, V. 12, No. 3, August 1998, pp. 120-136.



P. Gulkan and M. Sozen, “Procedure for Determining Seismic Vulnerability of Building Structures,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, 40.

No. 3, May-June 1999, pp. 336-342.

M. A. Sozen, “The Simplicity of Complexity,” Proceedings, U. Ersoy Symposium on Structural Engineering, Ankara, July 1999.41.

M. A. Sozen, “Earthquake Resistance of Reinforced Concrete Building Structures,” Proceedings, Mesa Symposium, Ankara, 42.

October 1999.

M. A. Sozen, “The Third Alternative for Proportioning of Earthquake-Resistant Buildings,” Proceedings, International Workshop 43.

on the Taiwan 921 Earthquake, Taichung, December, 1999, 14 p.

S. Pujol, M. Sozen, and J. Ramirez, “Transverse Reinforcement for Columns of RC Frames to Resist Earthquakes,” ASCE Journal 44.

of Structural Engineering, April 2000, V. 126, No. 4, pp. 461-466.

M. A. Sozen, “Notes on the 1999 Kocaeli-Golcuk and Duzce-Bolu Earthquakes in Turkey,” ASCE Proceedings of the 2nd 45.

Congress of Forensic Engineering, May 2000, San Juan, Puerto Rico, pp. 1-17.

R. J. Frosch and M. A. Sozen, “Challenge for Civil Engineering-Autoadaptive Media,” Structural Engineering & Mechanics, Vol. 46.

10, No. 6, December 2000, pp. 651-655.

M. A. Sozen, “Measured Ground Shaking and Observed Damage: Do Recent Events Confi rm a Direct Connection?” Proc., U.S.-47.

China Earthquake Symposium, Beijing, 2000.

M. A. Sozen, “From Duzce to the City: A Prognostication of Probable Damage,” Graeco-Turkish Symposium on Earthquake 48.

Engineering, Athens and Istanbul, January 2001.

M. A. Sozen, “As Simple As It Gets: The Anatolian Formula for Earthquake-Resistant Design,” Proceedings, Turkish Structural 49.

Engineering Association Meeting, November 2001.

M. A. Sozen, “Measured ground shaking and observed damage: Do recent events confi rm a direct connection?,” Proceedings, 50.

U.S.-China Symposium, Beijing, 2001.

A. B. Matamoros and M. A. Sozen, “Drifts Limits of High-Strength Concrete Columns Subjected to Load Reversals,” approved 51.

for publication, American Society of Civil Engineers, Structural Journal, April 2002.

S. A. Kilic and M. A. Sozen, “An Evaluation of the Eff ect of the 17 August 1999 Marmara Earthquake on Two Tall Reinforced 52.

Concrete Chimneys,” American Concrete Institute, Structural Journal, v.100, No. 3, 2003 pp. 357-364.

A. M. Johnson, K. M. Johnson, J. Durdella, M. A. Sozen, and T. Gur,”An Emendation of Elastic Rebound Theory: Main rupture and 53.

adjacent belt of right-lateral distortion detected by viaduct at Kaynaşlı, Turkey 12 November 1999 Düzce Earthquake,” Journal

of Seismology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 6:329-346, 2002.

M. A. Sozen, “The Velocity of Displacement,” Seismic Assessment and Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, edited by S. Tanvir 54.

Wasti and Guney Ozcebe, NATO Series IV: Earthquake and Environmental Sciences, Vol. 29, May 2003, pp. 11-28.

M. A. Sozen, S. Pujol, and J. Ramirez, “The Theory of Almost Nothing,” Proc., 5th U.S.-Japan Workshop, Tokyo/Hakone, Japan, 55.

September 2003.

M. A. Sozen, “On First Reading Westergaard’s ‘Measuring Earthquake Intensity,’ Engineering News Record, 20 April, 1933,” 56.

Performance-Based Engineering Earthquake Resistant Reinforced Concrete Structures, A Volume Honoring Shunsuke Otani,

September 2003, pp. 317-320.

M. A. Sozen, “From Pragmatism to Scholasticism in Engineering,” Proc., XIV Mexican National Conference on Earthquake 57.

Engineering, Leon, November 2003.

M. A. Sozen, “The Yin and Yang of Proportioning Reinforced Concrete Structures for Earthquake Resistance,” Proc., ACI-Peru 58.

International Convention, Lima, December 2003.

P.E. Mlakar, D.O. Dusenberry, J.R. Harris, G.F. Haynes, L.T. Phan, and M.A. 59.

Sozen, “The Pentagon Building Performance Report,” American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 2003, 75p.60.



C. Hoff man, V. Popescu, S. Kilic, and M. Sozen, “Modeling, Simulation, and 61.

Visualization: The Pentagon on September 11th,” Computing in Science and Engineering, 62.

Jan/Feb, 2004, pp.52-60.63.

S. Pujol, M.A. Sozen and J.A. Ramirez, “Displacement History Eff ects on Drift Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Columns,” 64.

American Concrete Institute, Structural Journal, v.103, No. 2, 2006 pp. 253-262.

Selected Publications – Eric Kollgaard, P.E.Kollgaard, E. B., Cai Heming, and Ma Zhonghang, “The Design and Construction of Shuikou Project RCC Diversion Wall,” 1.

presented at ASCE Specialty Conference RCC III, San Diego, 1992.

Kollgaard, E. B., and Jackson, H. E., “Design and Construction of Quail Creek South RCC Dam,” presented at International 2.

Symposium on Roller Compacted Concrete, Beijing, China, 1991.

Kollgaard, E.B., Brewer, J.W., Eakin, J.A., and Pujol-Rius, A., “Rehabilitation of Milner Dam,” published for 17th ICOLD Congress, 3.

Vienna, Austria, 1991.

Kollgaard, E.B., Publication Chairman and Editor, “Development of Dam Engineering in the United States”, Commemorative 4.

Book for 1988 ICOLD Congress in San Francisco, CA, Published by Pergamon Press, 1988.

Kollgaard, E. B., D. D. Curtis, S. H. Fischer, D. E. Bowes and J. P. Aglawe, “Non-linear Static and Dynamic Analysis of the Cushman 5.

Arch Dams using Distinct Elements”, www.hatchenergy.com Technical Papers, 2004

Kollgaard, E.B., “Criteria for Seismic Safety-Approaches for Evaluation of Analytical Results”, for Proceedings of Workshop on 6.

Earthquake Behavior of Arch Dams, Beijing, China, 1987.

Kollgaard, E.B., “Response of Concrete Dams-Evaluation of Dynamic FEM Results”, for Proceedings of International Symposium 7.

on Earthquakes and Dams, Beijing, China, 1987.

Kollgaard, E. B., and Jackson, H. E., “Design Innovations for Roller-Compacted Concrete Dams”, published for 15th ICOLD 8.

Congress, Lausanne, Switzerland, 1985.

Kollgaard, E. B., Cepeda, L., and Engebretsen, A.R., “Design and Construction of Paute Hydroelectric Project”, for Water Power 9.

85, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1985.

Kollgaard, E. B., “Inter-Relations of Dams and Appurtenant Structures”, presented at International Symposium on Layout of 10.

Dams in Narrow Gorges, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1982.

Kollgaard, E. B., “Ecuador’s Quest for Energy Leads to a Jungle River”, published by World Construction Magazine, May 1981.11.

Kollgaard, E. B., and Sundquist, D. C., “Design and Construction of Ross Dam in Successive Stages”, for 13th International 12.

Conference on Large Dams, New Delhi, India, 1978.

Kollgaard, E. B., and Sharma, R. P., “Seismic Stability Evaluation of Existing Concrete Dams”, for Evaluation of Dam Safety 13.

Conference, Pacifi c Grove, California, 1976.

Kollgaard, E. B., “Application of New Methods of Structural Analysis for Safety Investigations of Concrete Dams”, for 14.

Engineering Foundation Asilomar Conference on Inspection, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Old Dams, Pacifi c Grove,

California, 1973.


Freese and Nichols, Inc.

Austin10814 Jollyville Road, Bldg. 4, Suite 100

Austin, Texas 78759

www.freese.com

I n n o v a t i v e a p p r o a c h e s . . . p r a c t i c a l r e s u l t s . . . o u t s t a n d i n g s e r v i c e

Brazos River Authority’s Morris Sheppard Dam, the tallest concrete slab-and-buttress dam in the United States

Documents

Buchanan Dam Arch Study Peer Review - Stories Told · PDF fileFREESE AND NICHOLS STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS BUCHANAN DAM ARCH STUDY PEER REVIEW PAGE 2 Peer Review Goal: Code Compliance