Non-linear Behavior of a Concrete Gravity Dam During Seismic Excitation: A Case Study of the Pine Flat Dam

Enzell, Jonas; Malm, Richard; Abbasiverki, Roghayeh; Ahmed, Lamis

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-51085-5_2

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data analyzed in this paper is derived from the findings presented in the following publications. [86][87][88][89][90][91][92][93][94][95][96][97][98][99][100][101][102][103][104] Table 2 provides an overview of key modeling variations observed across each study. These modeling variabilities encompass factors such as mesh type (2D, 3D slice, full 3D), mesh size (which holds significance for DI assessment), time step utilized in the numerical simulation, criteria for convergence, the specific foundation model and its associated boundary conditions for wave propagation and absorption (including considerations for the free-field), choice of fluid element and approach for FSI, the selected concrete constitutive model and its response to dynamic loading-induced damage, the time integration scheme employed for stability control, and finally, the software package employed for analysis.…”

Section: Analysis and Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The following scalar and vector quantities were analyzed: crest and heel displacements, relative crest displacement compared to heel, net hydrodynamic pressure at the dam's heel, ratio of crest‐to‐heel amplitude acceleration spectrum, crack profile, area‐based and length‐based damage index (DI), and failure time (for IAA only). The data analyzed in this paper is derived from the findings presented in the following publications 86–104 . Table 2 provides an overview of key modeling variations observed across each study.…”

Section: Analysis and Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantifying modeling uncertainties in seismic analysis of dams: Insights from an international benchmark study

Hariri‐Ardebili

2023

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in nonlinear dynamic analysis of dams have not completely resolved concerns over modeling confidence and analysis accuracy. Verification and validation offer accuracy assessment, but uncertainties persist during performance evaluation due to both epistemic (modeling) and aleatory (parametric) sources. Epistemic uncertainties arise from simplifications and modeling techniques. This paper addresses epistemic uncertainties in a gravity dam seismic analysis using data from the International Comnission on Large Dams (ICOLD) benchmark study. While the benchmark formulation included the finite element model of the dam, mechanical material properties, and dynamic loads, participants retained the flexibility to opt for best‐practice modeling assumptions, simplifications, and other specifics. Notable response variability emerged, particularly in crack profiles and damage predictions. This study examines sources of variability, quantifying modeling uncertainty for the benchmark problem. More specifically, the modeling variability is quantified using the logarithmic standard deviation, also known as dispersion. This metric enables its incorporation into other seismic risk assessment and fragility studies. Under relatively low‐intensity motion (peak ground acceleration [PGA] of 0.18 g in this case), modeling dispersion of 0.45, 0.30, 0.32, and 0.30 were calculated for the maximum dynamic crest displacement, maximum hydrodynamic pressure at the heel, heel and crest maximum acceleration, respectively. Additionally, the dispersion of the failure PGA was determined to be 0.7. Findings underscore the need for systematic seismic response modeling in dam engineering to enhance prediction accuracy. A better understanding of the sources and magnitudes of modeling uncertainties can help improve the reliability of dam seismic analysis and contribute to the development of more effective risk assessment and mitigation strategies.

show abstract

Section: Analysis and Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysis and Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying modeling uncertainties in seismic analysis of dams: Insights from an international benchmark study

Hariri‐Ardebili

2023

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…is is because for two-dimensional models, the free-field system is a one-dimensional column for both the direct FE method and the analytical method. e analytical method has been used for linear two-dimensional modelling of concrete gravity dams, e.g., by Enzell et al [48] and Chen et al [49].…”

Section: Influence Of the Free-field Modelling Of The Foundation On The Computed Response Of The Dammentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonlinear Behaviour of Concrete Buttress Dams under High‐Frequency Excitations Taking into Account Topographical Amplifications

Abbasiverki

Malm

Ansell

et al. 2021

Shock and Vibration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concrete buttress dams could potentially be susceptible to high-frequency vibrations, especially in the cross-stream direction, due to their slender design. Previous studies have mainly focused on low-frequency vibrations in stream direction using a simplified foundation model with the massless method, which does not consider topographic amplifications. This paper therefore investigates the nonlinear behaviour of concrete buttress dams subjected to high-frequency excitations, considering cross-stream vibrations. For comparison, the effect of low-frequency excitations is also investigated. The influence of the irregular topography of the foundation surface on the amplification of seismic waves at the foundation surface and thus in the dam is considered by a rigorous method based on the domain-reduction method using the direct finite element method. The sensitivity of the calculated response of the dam to the free-field modelling approach is investigated by comparing the result with analyses using an analytical method based on one-dimensional wave propagation theory and a massless approach. Available deconvolution software is based on the one-dimensional shear wave propagation to transform the earthquake motion from the foundation surface to the corresponding input motion at depth. Here, a new deconvolution method for both shear and pressure wave propagation is developed based on an iterative time-domain procedure using a one-dimensional finite element column. The examples presented showed that topographic amplifications of high-frequency excitations have a significant impact on the response of this type of dam. Cross-stream vibrations reduced the safety of the dam due to the opening of the joints and the increasing stresses. The foundation modelling approach had a significant impact on the calculated response of the dam. The massless method produced unreliable results, especially for high-frequency excitations. The free-field modelling with the analytical method led to unreliable joint openings. It is therefore recommended to use an accurate approach for foundation modelling, especially in cases where nonlinearity is considered.

show abstract

Assessing Seismic Vulnerability of Concrete Gravity Dams: A Comparative Analysis of Damage Indexes

Hussein,

kadir,

Alzabeebee

et al. 2024

Transp. Infrastruct. Geotech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-linear Behavior of a Concrete Gravity Dam During Seismic Excitation: A Case Study of the Pine Flat Dam

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Quantifying modeling uncertainties in seismic analysis of dams: Insights from an international benchmark study

Quantifying modeling uncertainties in seismic analysis of dams: Insights from an international benchmark study

Nonlinear Behaviour of Concrete Buttress Dams under High‐Frequency Excitations Taking into Account Topographical Amplifications

Assessing Seismic Vulnerability of Concrete Gravity Dams: A Comparative Analysis of Damage Indexes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About