Uncertainty quantification of stability and damage detection parameters of coupled hydrodynamic-ground motion in concrete gravity dams

  • Nazim Abdul Nariman
  • Tom Lahmer
  • Peyman Karampour
Research Article
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, models of the global system of the Koyna dam have been created using ABAQUS software considering the dam-reservoir-foundation interaction. Non coupled models and the coupled models were compared regarding the horizontal displacement of the dam crest and the differential settlement of the dam base in clay foundation. Meta models were constructed and uncertainty quantification process was adopted by the support of Sobol’s sensitivity indices considering five uncertain parameters by exploiting Box-Behnken experimental method. The non coupled models results determined overestimated predicted stability and damage detection in the dam. The rational effects of the reservoir height were very sensitive in the variation of the horizontal displacement of the dam crest with a small interaction effect with the beta viscous damping coefficient of the clay foundation. The modulus of elasticity of the clay foundation was the decisive parameter regarding the variation of the differential settlement of the dam base. The XFEM approach has been used for damage detection in relation with both minimum and maximum values of each uncertain parameter. Finally the effects of clay and rock foundations were determined regarding the resistance against the propagation of cracks in the dam, where the rock foundation was the best.

Keywords

massed foundation hydrodynamic pressure Box-Behnken method meta model Sobol’s sensitivity indices 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ilinca C, Varvorea R, Popovici A. Influence of dynamic analysis methods on seismic response of a buttress dam. Mathematical Modelling in Civil Engineering, 2014, 10(3): 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mohsin A Z, Omran HA, Al-Shukur A H K. Dynamic response of concrete gravity dam on random soil. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 2015, 6(11): 21–31Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mehdipour B. Effect of foundation on seismic behavior of concrete dam considering the interaction of dam - Reservoir. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2013, 3(5): 13–20Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang G, Wang Y, Lu W, Zhou C, Chen M, Yan P. XFEM based seismic potential failure mode analysis of concrete gravity damwater-foundation systems through incremental dynamic analysis. Engineering Structures, 2015, 98: 81–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu L, Li X, Zhou J, Chen G, Yun D. Numerical simulation of shock response and dynamic fracture of a concrete dam subjected to impact load. Earth Sciences Research Journal, 2016, 20(1): 1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Huang J. Seismic Response Evaluation of Concrete Gravity Dams Subjected to Spatially Varying Earthquake Ground Motions. Dissertation for PhD degree. Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA, 2011Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ghasemi H, Park H S, Rabczuk T. A level-set based IGA formulation for topology optimization of flexoelectric materials. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 313: 239–258MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghasemi H, Brighenti R, Zhuang X, Muthu J, Rabczuk T. Optimum fiber content and distribution in fiber-reinforced solids using a reliability and NURBS based sequential optimization approach. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2015, 51 (1): 99–112MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang C, Nanthakumar S S, Lahmer T, Rabczuk T. Multiple cracks identification for piezoelectric structures. International Journal of Fracture, 2017, 206(2): 151–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nanthakumar S, Zhuang X, Park H, Rabczuk T. Topology optimization of flexoelectric structures. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 2017, 105: 217–234MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nanthakumar S, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Park H S, Rabczuk T. Topology optimization of piezoelectric nanostructures. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 2016, 94: 316–335MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nanthakumar S, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Zi G, Rabczuk T. Detection of material interfaces using a regularized level set method in piezoelectric structures. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 2016, 24(1): 153–176MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nanthakumar S, Valizadeh N, Park H, Rabczuk T. Surface effects on shape and topology optimization of nanostructures. Computational Mechanics, 2015, 56(1): 97–112MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nanthakumar S S, Lahmer T, Rabczuk T. Detection of flaws in piezoelectric structures using extended FEM. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2013, 96(6): 373–389MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. A software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for computationally expensive models. Advances in Engineering Software, 2016, 100: 19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vu-Bac N, Silani M, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. A unified framework for stochastic predictions of mechanical properties of polymeric nanocomposites. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96: 520–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vu-Bac N, Rafiee R, Zhuang X, Lahmer T, Rabczuk T. Uncertainty quantification for multiscale modeling of polymer nanocomposites with correlated parameters. Composites Part B: Engineering, 2015, 68: 446–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rabczuk T, Akkermann J, Eibl J. A numerical model for reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2005, 42(5–6): 1327–1354MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bažant Z P. Why continuum damage is nonlocal: micromechanics arguments. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 1991, 117(5): 1070–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thai T Q, Rabczuk T, Bazilevs Y, Meschke G. A higher-order stress-based gradient-enhanced damage model based on isogeometric analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 304: 584–604MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fleck N A, Hutchinson J W. A phenomenological theory for strain gradient effects in plasticity. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 1993, 41(12): 1825–1857MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J. Simulation of high velocity concrete fragmentation using SPH/MLSPH. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2003, 56(10): 1421–1444MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J, Stempniewski L. Numerical analysis of high speed concrete fragmentation using a meshfree Lagrangian method. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2004, 71(4–6): 547–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rabczuk T, Xiao S P, Sauer M. Coupling of meshfree methods with nite elements: basic concepts and test results. Communications in Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2006, 22(10): 1031–1065MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J. Modelling dynamic failure of concrete with meshfree particle methods. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2006, 32(11): 1878–1897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Etse G, Willam K. Failure analysis of elastoviscoplastic material models. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 1999, 125(1): 60–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Miehe C, Hofacker M, Welschinger F. A phase field model for rateindependent crack propagation: robust algorithmic implementation based on operator splits. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(45–48): 2765–2778MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Amiri F, Millan D, Arroyo M, Silani M, Rabczuk T. Fourth order phase-field model for local max-ent approximants applied to crack propagation. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 312(C): 254–275MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T, Msekh M. Phase-field analysis of finite-strain plates and shells including element subdivision. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 312(C): 322–350MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Msekh M A, Silani M, Jamshidian M, Areias P, Zhuang X, Zi G, He P, Rabczuk T. Predictions of J integral and tensile strength of clay/epoxy nanocomposites material using phase-eld model. Composites Part B: Engineering, 2016, 93: 97–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hamdia K, Msekh M A, Silani M, Vu-Bac N, Zhuang X, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. Uncertainty quantication of the fracture properties of polymeric nanocomposites based on phase field modeling. Composite Structures, 2015, 133: 1177–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Msekh M A, Sargado M, Jamshidian M, Areias P, Rabczuk T. ABAQUS implementation of phase-field model for brittle fracture. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96: 472–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Amiri F, Millán D, Shen Y, Rabczuk T, Arroyo M. Phase-field modeling of fracture in linear thin shells. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 102–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hamdia K M, Zhuang X, He P, Rabczuk T. Fracture toughness of polymeric particle nanocomposites: evaluation of Models performance using Bayesian method. Composites Science and Technology, 2016, 126: 122–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T, Xiao S P. Stable particle methods based on Lagrangian kernels. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2004, 193(12–14): 1035–1063MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Adaptivity for structured meshfree particle methods in 2D and 3D. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2005, 63(11): 1559–1582MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nguyen V P, Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Duflot M. Meshless methods: a review and computer implementation aspects. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 2008, 79(3): 763–813MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhuang X, Cai Y, Augarde C. A meshless sub-region radial point interpolation method for accurate calculation of crack tip elds. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 118–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhang X, Zhu H, Augarde C. An improved meshless Shepard and least square method possessing the delta property and requiring no singular weight function. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(2): 343–357MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhuang X, Augarde C, Mathisen K. Fracture modelling using meshless methods and level sets in 3D: framework and modelling. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2012, 92(11): 969–998MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chen L, Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Liu G R, Zeng KY, Kerfriden P. Extended finite element method with edge-based strain smoothing (ESm-XFEM) for linear elastic crack growth. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2012, 209–212: 250–265MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Belytschko T, Black T. Elastic crack growth in finite elements with minimal remeshing. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 1999, 45(5): 601–620MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Moës N, Dolbow J, Belytschko T. A finite element method for crack growth without remeshing. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 1999, 46(1): 131–150MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Vu-Bac N, Nguyen-Xuan H, Chen L, Lee C K, Zi G, Zhuang X, Liu G R, Rabczuk T. A phantom-node method with edge-based strain smoothing for linear elastic fracture mechanics. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2013( 2013): 978026MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bordas S P A, Natarajan S, Kerfriden P, Augarde C E, Mahapatra D R, Rabczuk T, Dal Pont S. On the performance of strain smoothing for quadratic and enriched finite element approximations (XFEM/GFEM/PUFEM). International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2011, 86(4–5): 637–666MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bordas S P A, Rabczuk T, Hung N X, Nguyen V P, Natarajan S, Bog T, Quan D M, Hiep N V. Strain Smoothing in FEM and XFEM. Computers & Structures, 2010, 88(23–24): 1419–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G, Gerstenberger A, Wall W A. A new crack tip element for the phantom node method with arbitrary cohesive cracks. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2008, 75(5): 577–599MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Chau-Dinh T, Zi G, Lee P S, Rabczu kT, Song J H. Phantom-node method for shell models with arbitrary cracks. Computers & Structures, 2012, 92–93: 242–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Song J H, Areias P M A, Belytschko T. A method for dynamic crack and shear band propagation with phantom nodes. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2006, 67(6): 868–893MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Areias P M A, Song J H, Belytschko T. Analysis of fracture in thin shells by overlapping paired elements. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2006, 195(41–43): 5343–5360MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Rabczuk T, Areias P M A. A meshfree thin shell for arbitrary evolving cracks based on an external enrichment. CMESComputer Modeling in Engineering and Sciences, 2006, 16(2): 115–130Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zi G, Rabczuk T, Wall W A. Extended meshfree methods without branch enrichment for cohesive cracks. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 40(2): 367–382MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Zi G. A three-dimensional meshfree method for continuous multiple-crack initiation, propagation and junction in statics and dynamics. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 40(3): 473–495MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G. A meshfree method based on the local partition of unity for cohesive cracks. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 39 (6): 743–760MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rabczuk T, Areias P M A, Belytschko T. A meshfree thin shell method for nonlinear dynamic fracture. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2007, 72(5): 524–548MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bordas S, Rabczuk T,Zi G. Three-dimensional crack initiation, propagation, branching and junction in non-linear materials by extrinsic discontinuous enrichment of meshfree methods without asymptotic enrichment. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008, 75 (5): 943–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G, Bordas S, Nguyen-Xuan H. A geometrically nonlinear three dimensional cohesive crack method for reinforced concrete structures. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008, 75 (16): 4740–4758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rabczuk T, Gracie R, Song J H, Belytschko T. Immersed particle method for fluid-structure interaction. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2010, 81(1): 48–71MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Zi G. On three-dimensional modelling of crack growth using partition of unity methods. Computers & Structures, 2010, 88(23–24): 1391–1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Amiri F, Anitescu C, Arroyo M, Bordas S, Rabczuk T. XLME interpolants, a seamless bridge between XFEM and enriched meshless methods. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(1): 45–57MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Talebi H, Samaniego C, Samaniego E, Rabczuk T. On the numerical stability and mass-lumping schemes for explicit enriched meshfree methods. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2012, 89(8): 1009–1027MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Zhou K, Zhuang X, Areias P, Nguyen-Xuan H, Bazilevs Y, Rabczuk T. Isogeometric analysis of large-deformation thin shells using RHTsplines for multiple-patch coupling. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 316: 1157–1178MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Valizadeh N, Nguyen M N, Nguyen-Xuan H, Zhuang X, Areias P, Zi G, Bazilevs Y, De Lorenzis L, Rabczuk T. An extended isogeometric thin shell analysis based on Kirchho-Love theory. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 284: 265–291MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Jia Y, Anitescu C, Ghorashi S, Rabczuk T. Extended isogeometric analysis for material interface problems. IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2015, 80(3): 608–633MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ghorashi S, Valizadeh N, Mohammadi S, Rabczuk T. T-spline based XIGA for fracture analysis of orthotropic media. Computers & Structures, 2015, 147: 138–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Cracking particles: a simplified meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2004, 61(13): 2316–2343MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Rabczuk T, Areias PMA. A new approach for modelling slip lines in geological materials with cohesive models. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2006, 30 (11): 1159–1172MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Application of particle methods to static fracture of reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Fracture, 2006, 137(1–4): 19–49MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. A three dimensional large deformation meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 196(29–30): 2777–2799MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rabczuk T, Areias P M A, Belytschko T. A simplied meshfree method for shear bands with cohesive surfaces. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2007, 69(5): 993–1021MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Rabczuk T, Samaniego E. Discontinuous modelling of shear bands using adaptive meshfree methods. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2008, 197(6–8): 641–658MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Rabczuk T, Song J H, Belytschko T. Simulations of instability in dynamic fracture by the cracking particles method. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2009, 76(6): 730–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G, Bordas S, Nguyen-Xuan H. A simple and robust three-dimensional cracking-particle method without enrichment. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(37–40): 2437–2455MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Cai Y, Zhuang X Y, Zhu H. A generalized and ecient method for nite cover generation in the numerical manifold method. International Journal of Computational Methods, 2013, 10(5): 1350028MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Liu G, Zhuang X, Cui Z. Three-dimensional slope stability analysis using independent cover based numerical manifold and vector method. Engineering Geology, 2017, 225: 83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Nguyen H B, Zhuang X, Wriggers P, Rabczuk T, Mears M E, Tran H D. 3D Isogeometric symmetric Galerkin boundary element methods. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 323: 132–150MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Nguyen B H, Tran H D, Anitescu C, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. An isogeometric symmetric Galerkin boundary element method for two-dimensional crack problems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 306: 252–275MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Zhu H, Wu W, Chen J, Ma G, Liu X, Zhuang X. Integration of three dimensional discontinuous deformation analysis (DDA) with binocular photogrammetry for stability analysis of tunnels in blocky rock mass. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2016, 51: 30–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Wu W, Zhu H, Zhuang X, Ma G, Cai Y. A multi-shell cover algorithm for contact detection in the three dimensional discontinuous deformation analysis. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 72: 136–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Cai Y, Zhu H, Zhuang X. A continuous/discontinuous deformation analysis (CDDA) method based on deformable blocks for fracture modelling. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2013, 7 (4): 369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Nguyen-Xuan H, Liu G R, Bordas S, Natarajan S, Rabczuk T. An adaptive singular ES-FEM for mechanics problems with singular eld of arbitrary order. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2013, 253: 252–273MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T. Steiner-point free edge cutting of tetrahedral meshes with applications in fracture. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 2017, 132: 27–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Areias P, Reinoso J, Camanho P, Rabczuk T. A constitutive-based element-by-element crack propagation algorithm with local mesh refinement. Computational Mechanics, 2015, 56(2): 291–315MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Areias P M A, Rabczuk T, Camanho P P. Finite strain fracture of 2D problems with injected anisotropic softening elements. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 72: 50–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T, Dias-da-Costa D. Element-wise fracture algorithm based on rotation of edges. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2013, 110: 113–137MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T, Camanho P P. Initially rigid cohesive laws and fracture based on edge rotations. Computational Mechanics, 2013, 52(4): 931–947MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T. Finite strain fracture of plates and shells with congurational forces and edge rotation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2013, 94(12): 1099–1122MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Silani M, Talebi H, Hamouda A S, Rabczuk T. Nonlocal damage modeling in clay/epoxy nanocomposites using a multiscale approach. Journal of Computational Science, 2016, 15: 18–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Rabczuk T. Concurrent multiscale modelling of three dimensional crack and dislocation propagation. Advances in Engineering Software, 2015, 80: 82–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Silani M, Talebi H, Ziaei-Rad S, Hamouda A M S, Zi G, Rabczuk T. A three dimensional extended Arlequin method for dynamic fracture. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96: 425–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Silani M, Ziaei-Rad S, Talebi H, Rabczuk T. A semi-concurrent multiscale approach for modeling damage in nanocomposites. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 74: 30–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Bordas S, Kerfriden P, Rabczuk T. A computational library for multiscale modelling of material failure. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(5): 1047–1071MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Bordas S P A, Kerfriden P, Rabczuk T. Molecular dynamics/XFEM coupling by a three-dimensional extended bridging domain with applications to dynamic brittle fracture. International Journal for Multiscale Computational Engineering, 2013, 11(6): 527–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Yang S W, Budarapu P R, Mahapatra D R, Bordas S P A, Zi G, Rabczuk T. A meshless adaptive multiscale method for fracture. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96: 382–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Budarapu P, Gracie R, Bordas S, Rabczuk T. An adaptive multiscale method for quasi-static crack growth. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(6): 1129–1148MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Budarapu P, Gracie R, Yang S W, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Ecient coarse graining in multiscale modeling of fracture. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 126–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Zhuang X, Wang Q, Zhu H. Multiscale modelling of hydromechanical couplings in quasi-brittle materials. International Journal of Fracture, 2017, 204(1): 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Zhu H, Wang Q, Zhuang X. A nonlinear semi-concurrent multiscale method for fractures. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2016, 87: 65–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Zhuang X, Wang Q, Zhu H. A 3D computational homogenization model for porous material and parameters identication. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96: 536–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Kouznetsova V, Geers M G D, Brekelmans W A M. Multi-scale constitutive modelling of heterogeneous materials with a gradientenhanced computational homogenization scheme. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2002, 54(8): 1235–1260MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Rabczuk T, Ren H. Peridynamic formulation for the modelling of quasi-static fractures and contacts in brittle rocks. Engineering Geology, 2017, 225: 42–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Amani J, Oterkus E, Areias PMA, Zi G, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. A non-ordinary state-based peridynamics formulation for thermoplastic fracture. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2016, 87: 83–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Ren H, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. A new peridynamic formulation with shear deformation for elastic solid. Journal of Micromechanics and Molecular Physics, 2016, 1(2): 1650009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Ren H, Zhuang X, Cai Y, Rabczuk T. Dual-horizon peridynamics. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2016, 108(12): 1451–1476MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Ren H, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Dual-horizon peridynamics: a stable solution to varying horizons. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 318: 762–782MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Gaun F, Moore I D, Lin G. Seismic Analysis of Reservoir-Dam-Soil Systems in the Time Domain. The 8th international conference on Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Siriwardane & Zaman (Eds), 1994, 2: 917–922Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Zeidan B. State of Art in Design and Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams. Tanta University, 2014, 1–56Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Wieland M, Ahlehagh S. Dynamic stability analysis of a gravity dam subject to the safety evaluation earthquake. 9th European club symposium IECS2013, Venice, Italy, 10–12 April, 2013Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Benerjee A, Paul D K, Dubey R N. Estimation of cumulative damage in concrete gravity dam considering foundatiom-reservoir interaction. Tenth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering, Anchorage, Alaska, USA, 21–25 July, 2014Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Shariatmadar H, Mirhaj A. Modal Response of Dam-Reservoir-Foundation Interaction. 8th International Congress on Civil Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran, 11–13 May, 2009Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Berrabah A T, Belharizi M, Bekkouche A. Modal behavior of dam reservoir foundation system. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2011, 16: 1593–1605Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Khosravi S, Heydari M. Modelling of concrete gravity dam including dam-water-foundation rock interaction. World Applied Sciences Journal, 2013, 22(4): 538–546Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Benerjee A, Paul D K, Dubey R N. Modelling issues in the seismic analysis of concrete gravity dams. Dam Engineering, 2014, 24(2): 18–38Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Joghataie A, Dizaji M S, Dizaji F S. Neural Network Software for Dam-Reservoir-Foundation Interaction. International Conference on Intelligent Computational Systems (ICICS'2012), Dubai, UAE, 7–8 January, 2012Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Hung J, Zerva A. Nonlinear analysis of a dam-reservoir-foundation system under spatially variable seismic excitations. The 14thWorld Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 12–17 October, 2008Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Heirany Z, Ghaemian M. The effect of foundation’s modulus of elasticity on concrete gravity dam’s behavior. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 2012, 5(5): 2738–2740Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Berrabah A T. Dynamic Soil-Fluid–Structure Interaction Applied for Concrete Dam. Dissertation for PhD degree. Chetouane, Algeria, Aboubekr Belkaid University, 2012Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Zeidan B. Effect of foundation flexibility on dam-reservoirfoundation interaction. Eighteenth International Water Technology Conference (IWTC18), Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, 12–14 March, 2015Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Burman A, Maity D, Sreedeep S. Iterative analysis of concrete gravity dam-nonlinear foundation interaction. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 2010, 2(4): 85–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Chopra A K. Hydrodynamic pressures on dams during earthquakes. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 1967, 93(6): 205–223Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Fereydooni M, Jahanbakhsh M. An analysis of the hydrodynamic pressure on concrete gravity dams under earthquake forces using ANSYS software. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 2015, 5(S4): 984–988Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Berrabah AT, Armouti N, Belharizi M, Bekkouche A. Dynamic soil structure interaction study. Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 2012, 6(2): 161–173Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Pekan O A, Cui Y Z. Failure analysis of fractured dams during earthquakes by DEM. Eng Struct, 2004, 26: 1483–1502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Patil S V, Awari U R. Effect of soil structure interaction on gravity dam. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR), 2015, 4(4): 1046–1053Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Chopra A K, Chakrabarti P. The earthquake experience at Koyna dam and stress in concrete gravity dam. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamic, 1972, 1(2): 151–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Pal W. Seismic cracking of concrete gravity dam. Journal of Structural Division, 1976, 102 (ST9): 1827–1844Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Pasma S A, Daik R, Maskat M Y, Hassan O. Application of boxbehnken design in optimization of glucose production from oil palm empty fruit bunch cellulose. International Journal of Polymer Science, 2013, 2013: 104502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Qiu P, Cui M, Kang K, Park B, Son Y, Khim E, Jang M, Khim J. Application of Box–Behnken design with response surface methodology for modeling and optimizing ultrasonic oxidation of arsenite with H2O2. Central European Journal of Chemistry, 2014, 12(2): 164–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Tekindal M A, Bayrak H, Ozkaya B, Genc Y. Box Behnken experimental design in factorial experiments: the importance of bread for nutrition and health. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 2012, 17(2): 115–123Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Amenaghawon N A, Nwaru K I, Aisien F A, Ogbeide S E, Okieimen C O. Application of Box-Behnken design for the optimization of citric acid production from corn starch using aspergillus niger. British Biotechnology Journal, 2013, 3(3): 236–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Souza A S, dos SantosWN L, Ferreira S L C. Application of Box–Behnken design in the optimization of an on-line pre-concentration system using knotted reactor for cadmium determination by flame atomic absorption spectrometry. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, 2005, 60(5): 737–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Aslan N, Cebeci Y. Application of Box-Behnken design and response surface methodology for modeling of some Turkish coals. Fuel, 2007, 86(1–2): 90–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nazim Abdul Nariman
    • 1
  • Tom Lahmer
    • 1
  • Peyman Karampour
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Structural Mechanics, Faculty of Civil EngineeringBauhaus Universitat WeimarWeimarGermany
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringArak UniversityArakIran

Personalised recommendations