Advertisement

Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 203–218 | Cite as

Seismic analysis of dam-foundation-reservoir system including the effects of foundation mass and radiation damping

  • Hamid Mohammadnezhad
  • Mohsen GhaemianEmail author
  • Ali Noorzad
Article
  • 44 Downloads

Abstract

One of the main concerns in using commercial software for finite element analyses of dam-foundation-reservoir systems is that the simplifying assumptions of the massless foundation are unreliable. In this study, an appropriate direct finite element method is introduced for simulating the mass, radiation damping and wave propagation effect in foundations of dam-foundation-reservoir systems using commercial software ABAQUS. The free-field boundary condition is used for modeling the semi-infinite foundation and radiation damping, which is not a built-in boundary condition in most of the available commercial software for finite element analysis of structures such as ANSYS or ABAQUS and thus needs to be implemented differently. The different mechanism for modeling of the foundation, earthquake input and far-field boundary condition is described. Implementation of the free-field boundary condition in finite element software is verified by comparing it with analytical results. To investigation the feasibility of the proposed method in dam-foundation-reservoir system analysis, a series of analyses is accomplished in a variety of cases and the obtained results are compared with the substructure method by using the EAGD-84 program. Finally, the massed and massless foundation results are compared and it is concluded that the massless foundation approach leads to the overestimation of the displacements and stresses within the dam body.

Keywords

dam-foundation interaction radiation damping free-field boundary condition massed foundation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Mr. Pedram Ezzatyazdi for his useful advice in solving some issues in part of the numerical modelling of the problem.

References

  1. Akköse M, Bayraktar A and Dumanoglu AA (2008), “Reservoir Water Level Effects on Nonlinear Dynamic Response of Arch Dams,” Journal of Fluids and Structures, 24: 418–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basu U and Chopra AK (2003), “Perfectly Matched Layers for Time-Harmonic Elastodynamics of Unbounded Domains: Theory and Finite-Element Implementation,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 192: 1337–1375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Basu U and Chopra AK (2004), “Perfectly Matched Layers for Transient Elastodynamics of Unbounded Domains,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 59: 1039–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bayraktar A, Hancer E and Akköse M (2005), “Influence of Base-Rock Characteristics on the Stochastic Dynamic Response of Dam-Reservoir-Foundation systems,” Engineering Structures, 27: 1498–1508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayraktar A, Turker T, Akkose M and Ates S (2010), “The Effect of Reservoir Length on Seismic Performance of Gravity Dams to Near-and Far-Fault Ground Motions,” Natural Hazards, 52: 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berenger JP (1994), “A Perfectly Matched Layer for the Absorbing of Electromagnetic Waves,” Journal of Computational Physics, 114: 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bettess P (1977), “Infinite Elements,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 11: 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouaanani N and Lu FY (2009), “Assessment of Potential-Based Fluid Finite Elements for Seismic Analysis of Dam-Reservoir Systems,” Computers & Structures, 87: 206–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chew WC and Liu QH (1996), “Perfectly Matched Layers for Elastodynamics: a New Absorbing Boundary Condition,” Journal of Computational Acoustics, 4: 72–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chew WCh and Weedon WH (1994), “A 3D Perfectly Matched Medium from Modified Maxwell’s Equations with Stretched Coordinates,” Microwave and Optical Technology Letters, 7: 599–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chopra AK (2008), “Earthquake Analysis of Arch Dams: Factors to be Considered,” Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  12. Chopra AK and Chakrabarti P (1972), “The Earthquake Experience at Koyna Dam and Stresses in Concrete Gravity Dams,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 1: 151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chopra AK and Chakrabarti P (1981), “Earthquake Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams Including Dam-Water-Foundation Rock Interaction,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 9: 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clough RW (1980), “Non-Linear Mechanisms in the Seismic Response of Arch Dams,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Skopje, Yugoslavia.Google Scholar
  15. Clough RW and Penzien J (1975), Dynamics of Structures, No. Monograph.Google Scholar
  16. Deeks AJ and Randolph MF (1994), “Axisymmetric Time-Domain Transmitting Boundaries,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 120: 25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Du X and Zhao M (2010), “A Local Time-Domain Transmitting Boundary for Simulating Cylindrical Elastic Wave Propagation in Infinite Media,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30: 937–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fahjan YM, Borekci OS and Erdik M (2003), “Earthquake-Induced Hydrodynamic Pressures on a 3D Rigid Dam-Reservoir System Using DRBEM and a radiation matrix,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 56: 1511–1532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fenves G and Chopra AK (1984a), “Earthquake Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams Including Reservoir Bottom Absorption and Dam-Water-Foundation Rock Interaction,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 12: 663–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fenves G and Chopra AK (1984b), “EAGD-84: A Computer Program for Earthquake Response Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams,” Report No. UCB/EERC-84/11, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  21. Galavi V, Petalas A and Brinkgreve RBJ (2013), “Finite Element Modelling of Seismic Liquefaction in Soils,” Geotechnical Engineering Journal of Ihe SEAGS and GSSEA, 44: 55–64.Google Scholar
  22. Gao Y, Gu Q, Qiu Z and Wang J (2016), “Seismic Response Sensitivity Analysis of Coupled Dam-Reservoir-Foundation Systems,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 142(10): 04016070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ghaemian M and Ghobarah A (1998), “Staggered Solution Schemes for Dam-Reservoir Interaction,” Journal of Fluids and Structures, 12: 933–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Givoli D (2004), “High-order Local Non-Reflecting Boundary Conditions: a Review,” Wave Motion, 39: 319–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Huang Y and Zhu CQ (2016), “Safety Assessment of Antiliquefaction Performance of a Constructed Reservoir Embankment. I: Experimental Assessment,” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities (ASCE), 04016101.Google Scholar
  26. Humar J and Roufaiel M (1983), “Finite Element Analysis of Reservoir Vibration,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 109: 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Itasca Consulting Group, Inc (2004), FLAC (Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua), Version 4, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  28. Kramer SL (1996), Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  29. Léger P and Boughoufalah M (1989), “Earthquake Input Mechanisms for Time-Domain Analysis of Dam—Foundation Systems,” Engineering Structures, 11: 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu J, Du Y, Du X, Wang Z and Wu J (2006), “3D Viscous-Spring Artificial Boundary in Time Domain,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 5: 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Løkke A and Chopra AK (2014), “Response Spectrum Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams Including Dam-Water-Foundation Interaction,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 141(8): 04014202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lysmer J and Kuhlemeyer R (1969), “Finite Element Model for Infinite Media,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 95: 859–877.Google Scholar
  33. Michou FE and Koumousis VK (2005), “Absorbing Boundary Conditions and Perfect Matched Layer Models for Plane Soil-Structure Interaction Problems,” Proceedings of the 5th GRACM International Congress on Computational Mechanics, Limassol.Google Scholar
  34. Rajendran K and Harish CM (2000), “Mechanism of Triggered Seismicity at Koyna: An Evaluation Based on Relocated Earthquakes,” Current Science, 79: 358–363.Google Scholar
  35. Saleh S and Madabhushi SPG (2010), “Response of Concrete Dams on Rigid and Soil Foundations under Earthquake Loading,” Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami, 4: 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Samii A and Lotfi V (2012), “Application of the H-W Boundary Condition in Dam-Reservoir Interaction Problem,” Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 50: 86–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sharan SK (1992), “Efficient Finite Element Analysis of Hydrodynamic Pressure on Dams,” Computers and Structures, 142: 713–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Song Liangfeng, Wu Mingxin, Wang Jinting and Xu Yanjie (2016), “Seismic Damage Analysis of the Outlet Piers of Arch Dams using the Finite Element Sub-Model Method,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 15: 617–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tan H and Chopra AK (1995a), “Earthquake Analysis of Arch Dams Including Dam-Water Foundation Rock Interaction,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 24: 1453–1474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tan H and Chopra AK (1995b), “Dam-Foundation Rock Interaction Effects in Frequency-Response Functions of Arch Dams,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 24: 1475–1489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ungless RF (1973), “An Infinite Finite Element,” MSc. Thesis, Dept. of Civil Eng., University of British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  42. Wang G, Wang Y, Lu W, Zhou C, Chen M and Yan P (2015), “XFEM Based Seismic Potential Failure Mode Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dam-Water-Foundation Systems Through Incremental Dynamic Analysis,” Engineering Structures, 98: 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wolf JP (1988), Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis in Time Domain, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  44. Yilmazturk SM, Arici Y and Binici B (2015), “Seismic Assessment of a Monolithic RCC Gravity Dam Including Three Dimensional Dam-Foundation-Reservoir interaction,” Engineering Structures, 100: 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhu CQ and Huang Y (2016), “Safety Assessment of Antiliquefaction Performance of a Constructed Reservoir Embankment. II: Numerical Assessment,” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities (ASCE), 04016102.Google Scholar
  46. Zienkiewicz OC, Bicanic N and Shen FQ (1989), “Earthquake Input Definition and the Transmitting Boundary Vonditions,” Advances in Computational Nonlinear Mechanics, 300: 109–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hamid Mohammadnezhad
    • 1
  • Mohsen Ghaemian
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ali Noorzad
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringSharif University of TechnologyTehranIran
  2. 2.Faculty of Civil, Water and Environmental EngineeringShahid Beheshti UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations