INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

NON-LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS OF LARGE CONCRETE DAM CONSIDERING NEAR FIELD EFFECT
Presented By: Ravi Sharma Bhandari M. Sc. Structural Engineering Thesis Defense November 12, 2013

Supervisor: Dr. Hari Ram Parajuli

1

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Introduction Research Objective Research Methodology Near-Fault Earthquake Characteristics Ground Motion and Their Characteristics Finite Element Modeling of Gravity Dam Structural Performance and Damage Criteria Linear Time History Analysis Technique Nonlinear Time History Analysis Techniques Conclusion and Recommendation
2

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

Several numbers of large hydropower projects are planned in Nepal for near future. Proper Analysis of Seismic forces is a matter of concern before the construction of these dam. Since the Northridge and Kobe earthquakes, there has been much discussion about the adequacy of design practice of concrete dams. Two significant damage to concrete dam occurred in the 1960s: Hsinfengkiang in China and Koyna in India. The damage was severe enough but no complete collapse, required major repairs and strengthening.
3

INTRODUCTION

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Performance Study of concrete gravity dams under near field earthquake pulse and comparison to the far field earthquake effects. To illustrate the application of linear and nonlinear time history methods to earthquake response analysis of gravity dams. To assess stability condition of the dam. Locations of occurrence of probable cracks on dam during Earthquake.
4

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Data collection and review of literatures Preparation of Finite Element model of dam (SAP2000 V14) Perform Linear time history analysis of Dam Perform non linear time history analysis of Dam Interpretation of results Evaluation, conclusion and recommendation

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

NEAR-FAULT EARTHQUAKE CHARACTERISTICS

The near-field of an earthquake is the region within which distinct pulse-like particle motion are observed due to a coherent release and propagation of energy from the fault rupture process. The near-field ground motions are characterized by high peak acceleration (PGA), high peak velocity (PVG), high peak displacement (PGD), pulse-like time history and unique spectral content.
Source of Ground Motion Data: (peer.berkeley.edu/peer_ground_motion_database)
6

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

NEAR-FAULT EARTHQUAKE CHARACTERISTICS CONTD.

Near-Fault Earthquake record Characteristics: i. Peak horizontal ground acceleration (PHGA) ii. Cumulative absolute velocity (CAV), iii. Peak horizontal ground velocity (PHGV) iv. Arias intensity (IA) , v. The damage potential parameter proposed by Fajfar et al. (1990), (I), vi. The root mean square acceleration (arms),
7

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

NEAR-FAULT EARTHQUAKE CHARACTERISTICS CONTD

Table :Ground motion parameters, measured characteristics and lower-bound values

Source: The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China Identification of Near-Fault Earthquake Record Characteristics Ch.A. Maniatakis, I.M. Taflampas and C.C. Spyrakos

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

NEAR-FAULT EARTHQUAKE CHARACTERISTICS CONTD

SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NGA# 181 182 779 821 825 828 879 1044 1063 1084 1085 1086 1106 1119 1120 Event Imperial Valley-06 Imperial Valley-06 Loma Prieta Erzican- Turkey Cape Mendocino Cape Mendocino Landers Northridge-01 Northridge-01 Northridge-01 Northridge-01 Northridge-01 Kobe- Japan Kobe- Japan Kobe- Japan Year 1979 1979 1989 1992 1992 1992 1992 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1995 1995 1995 Station El Centro Array #6 El Centro Array #7 LGPC Erzincan Cape Mendocino Petrolia Lucerne Newhall - Fire Sta Rinaldi Receiving Sta Sylmar - Converter Sta Sylmar - Converter Sta East Sylmar - Olive View Med FF KJMA Takarazuka Takatori Mag. 6.53 6.53 6.93 6.69 7.01 7.01 7.28 6.69 6.69 6.69 6.69 6.69 6.9 6.9 6.9 Mechanism Strike-Slip Strike-Slip Reverse-Oblique Strike-Slip Reverse Reverse Strike-Slip Reverse Reverse Reverse Reverse Reverse Strike-Slip Strike-Slip Strike-Slip Epc. Dist. (km) 0 0.6 0 0 0 0 2.2 3.2 0 0 0 1.7 0.9 0 1.5 Low. freq (Hz) 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.07 0.1 0.12 0.11 0.41 0.41 0.12 0.06 0.36 0.36 9

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

GROUND MOTION AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS

Selection of Ground Motion: 15 Near Field and 5 Far Field Ground Motions data are selected for this study. Ground Motion Data recorded within about 10 m from the fault is assumed as near-field data. Ground Motion Characteristics: 1. Amplitude 2. Frequency Content 3. Duration of Motion These Characteristics differ dramatically between nearfield and Far-field ground Motions.
10

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

Near-Field Ground Motion Time History: Imperial Valley-06 PGA = 0.44 g

GROUND MOTION AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS CONTD.

PGA = 0.40 g

Fault Normal acceleration time history

Fault Parallel acceleration time history

Pulse Like Ground Motion

Fault normal velocity time history

Fault parallel velocity time history

Fault Normal Fourier amplitude Spectrum

Fault parallel Fourier amplitude Spectrum

11

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING OF GRAVITY DAM

Properties of Concrete: Youngs Modulus = 22360 N/mm2 Poisson's Ration = 0.19 Density = 2400 kg/m3 Number of Elements = 9900 Height = 140 m Base = 150 m Concrete Grade: M20 Properties of Foundation Rock: Rock Type: Dolomite Youngs Modulus = 38000 N/mm2 Poisson's Ration = 0.15 Density = Massless for modeling purpose Number of Elements = 7500 Size: 450 m X 150 m

Figure : Standard Finite Element Model of Gravity Dam

12

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING OF GRAVITY DAM CONTD

Equation Of Motion:

Forces acting on the Dam:

Self Weight of Dam Hydrostatic Force Uplift Force Hydro-Dynamic Force Horizontal and Vertical Ground Motions

Hydro-Dynamic Force: Westergaard Added Mass Model

13

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE AND DAMAGE CRITERIA

1. Demand-Capacity Ratio: of plain concrete is defined as the ratio of computed tensile stress to tensile strength of the concrete. Tensile Strength of Concrete: Dynamic Tensile Strength of Concrete =
Where, fc is the compressive strength of concrete in psi.

14

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE AND DAMAGE CRITERIA

Structural Performance and Damage Criteria Contd..

15 Figure : Basis for upper limit demand-capacity ratio and cumulative inelastic duration

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE AND DAMAGE CRITERIA CONTD.

2. Cumulative Inelastic Duration 3. Extent of Damage or Nonlinear Behavior

Load Combinations:
Seismic Loads Case 1 2 3 4 Vertical (V) + + Horizontal (H) + + Static Loads (Stress) + + + +

16

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE

Equation of Motion Method Of Time History Analysis: 1. Direct Integration Method 2. Mode Superposition Method
Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Period, Seconds 0.47 0.23 0.19 0.13 0.09 0.0855 0.071 0.067 0.054 0.044 Frequency, Hz 2.12 4.35 5.26 7.69 11.11 11.69 14.08 14.92 18.51 22.73

17

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Near-Fault Response (Proposed Section)
Load Case: V + H (FN) + Static Load

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

Far-Fault Response (Modified Section)

Load Case: V + H (FN) + Static Load S11,heel = 13.2 MPa S22,heel = 7.4 MPa

Load Case: V + H (FP) + Static Load

Load Case: V + H (FP) + Static Load S11,heel = 11.37 MPa S22,heel = 6.35 MPa

Figure: Horizontal Stress Contours

Figure: Vertical Stress Contours

Figure: Horizontal Stress Contours

Figure: Vertical Stress Contours

18

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Effect of Upstream profile change: By changing sharp change of u/s profile to smooth curved profile, stress at u/s face reduced drastically and stress concentration problem is reduced.

Fig. Modified Section

19

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Stress
Principal Stress, N/mm2
8 6 4 2 0 0 -2 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

2.4 MPa

4.8 MPa

Time, Seconds

Figure: Time history of major principal stress at the heel of dam for Imperial Valley-06 (Recording station: El Centro Array #6) Earthquake (FN + V)
20

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Stress 8 Principal Stress, N/mm2 6 4 2 0 -2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Time, Seconds 2.4 MPa 4.8 MPa

Figure: Time history of major principal stress at the heel of dam for Imperial Valley-06 (Recording station: El Centro Array #6) Earthquake (FP + V)
21

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Figure: Time History of horizontal displacement at top of the dam due to Imperial Valley-06 (Recording station: El Centro Array #6) Earthquake, Left: FN-Component, Right: FP Component

22

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Performance of Dam Section For Near-field Earthquake
Imperial Valley-06 (Recording Station:El Centro Array #6) FN 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 Limit

Area [%]

15 1.2 1.4 1.6 Demand-Capacity Ratio 1.8 0 2

Figure: Comparison of percentage of overstressed areas with acceptance limits

23

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Performance of Dam Section For Near-field Earthquake Contd..
6 5 Cumulative Inelstic Duration [Sec] Limit NGA#181, PGA= 0.44g, PGV=111.87 cm/s NGA#182, PGA = 0.46g, PGV = 108.97 cm/s NGA#779, PGA = 0.94g, PGV = 97.02 cm/s NGA#821, PGA = 0.49g, PGV = 95.42 cm/s NGA#825, PGA = 1.27g, PGV = 59.55 cm/s NGA#828, PGA = 0.61g, PGV = 82.10 cm/s NGA#879, PGA = 0.71g, PGV = 141.02 cm/s NGA#1044, PGA = 0.72g, PGV = 120.27 cm/s NGA#1063, PGA = 0.87g, PGV = 167.20 cm/s NGA#1084, PGA = 0.59g, PGV = 130.27 cm/s NGA#1085, PGA = 0.84g, PGV = 116.56 cm/s NGA#1086, PGA = 0.73g, PGV = 122.72 cm/s NGA#1106, PGA = 0.85g, PGV = 96.27 cm/s NGA#1119, PGA = 0.65g, PGV = 72.65 cm/s NGA#1120, PGA = 0.68g, PGV = 169.58 cm/s NGA#166 NGA#826 NGA#832 NGA#948 NGA#1105 24

0 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 Demand-Capacity Ratio 1.8 2

Figure : Comparison of cumulative inelastic duration of stress cycles with acceptance stresses at the heel of the dam

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Performance of Dam Section For Near-field Earthquake Contd..
Crest Displacement and Stresses due to Near Field Earthquake (Envelop FN) Crest Displacement (mm) Horizontal Stress (S11) Vertical Stress (S22) NGA# x y Heel Toe Heel Toe 181 115.56 54.67 13.2 6 7.4 3 182 103.16 37.07 10.5 9.68 7.34 5.91 -72.96 13.2 11.78 6.28 779 821 99.09 -30.88 10.42 3.9 5.48 1.77 -50.93 3.01 5.12 1.5 825 828 153.82 -43.15 14.52 7.47 7.78 3.42 879 94.62 -36 11.34 5.11 5.95 2.24 1044 170.62 -57.01 18.28 10.61 9.93 4.95 1063 231.83 -76.39 20.65 12.54 11.64 6.04 1084 125.54 -44.28 13.62 6.03 7.32 2.77 1085 176.05 -57.98 14.24 7.43 7.67 3.49 1086 188.63 -51.6 16.02 8.8 8.66 4.1 -70.9 15.25 13.02 7.13 1106 1119 132.6 -48.34 12.94 6.1 6.65 2.7 25 1120 139.41 -40.96 14.8 7.36 7.92 3.38

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

Performance of Dam Section For Near-field Earthquake Contd..

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Crest Displacement and Stresses due to Near Field Earthquake (Envelop FP) Crest Displacement (mm) Horizontal Stress (S11) Vertical Stress (S22) NGA# x y Heel Toe Heel Toe 181 92.68 49.93 11.37 4.5 6.35 2.3 182 68.23 -25.98 7.62 1.61 3.98 0.84 779 123.54 -41.78 13.7 6.77 7.38 3.19 821 98.04 -33.87 8.65 2.49 4.39 1.08 825 206.73 -72.82 17.53 9.6 9.37 4.47 828 115.21 -35.78 11.08 4.56 5.76 2.03 879 86.86 -35.29 8.37 2.76 4.31 1.2 1044 131.98 -49.49 11.48 5.05 6.2 2.44 1063 148.65 -60.69 14.3 7.39 7.94 3.6 1084 137.59 -45.12 14.51 6.86 7.83 3.16 1085 116.26 -40.2 12.03 5.37 6.33 2.46 1086 89.9 -32.52 7.7 1.85 3.84 0.79 -64.24 16.3 9.13 8.76 4.26 1106 212.44 1119 292.93 -80.81 22.64 14.6 12.43 6.89 26 1120 191.27 -61.9 17.62 10.08 9.44 4.67

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

Performance of Dam Section For Near-field Earthquake Contd..

10 9 8 Factor of Safety 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 5 10 15 20 Time [Sec] 25 30 35 40

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Figure: Time history of instantaneous factor of safety for near field earthquake [NGA#1084]

27

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Performance of Dam Section For Far-field Earthquake Contd..

Figure 7. 95 Envelops of maximum stresses (N/mm2), Left: Horizontal Stress, Right: Vertical Stress

Maximum horizontal stress at heel = 5.24 N/mm2 and at toe = -0.25 N/mm2 Maximum vertical stress at heel = 2.47 N/mm2, and at toe = -0.21 N/mm2 Maximum top displacement = 49.9 mm to right and -17.69 mm to down.
28

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE COND

Performance of Dam Section For Far-field Earthquake Contd..

Principal Stress, N/mm2 6 4 2 0 0 5 10 15 20 Time, Seconds 25 30 35 Stress 2.4 MPa 4.8 MPa

-2

Figure: Time history of major principal stress at the heel of dam for Imperial Valley-06 (Recording station: Coachella Canal #4) Earthquake
Crest Displacement and Stresses due to Far Field Earthquake
Crest Displacement (mm) NGA# Case Horizontal Stress, N/mm2 (S11) Vertical Stress, N/mm2 (S22)

x 166 826 832 948 1105 Envelop Envelop Envelop Envelop Envelop 49.9 47.43 42.64 42.55 49.4

y -17.69 -17.45 -17.4 -17.3 -17.22

Heel 5.24 4.97 4.81 4.76 5.6

Toe -0.25 -0.46 -0.73 -0.71 0.04

Heel 2.47 2.35 2.28 2.37 2.69

Toe -0.21 -0.28 -0.42 -0.32

29 -0.71

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

Tensile strength of the dam-rock contact is expected to be lower than

NON LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE

that of the concrete. The nonlinear response in the form of tensile cracking is likely to start at the base. Gap-friction elements are introduced at the base of the dam to simulate cracking and sliding response of the dam. For nonlinear model time-history analysis (FNA), only the nonlinear behavior of the Link/Support elements is included.

Where is the stiffness matrix for the linear elastic elements (all elements except the Links/Supports); C is the proportional damping matrix; M is the diagonal mass matrix; is the vector of forces from the nonlinear degrees of freedom in the Link/Support elements; u, , and are the relative displacements, velocities, and accelerations with respect to the ground; and r is the vector of applied loads.
30

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

NON LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE

Figure: Dam finite-element model with gap-friction elements

Figure: Constitutive relations of gapfriction element

31

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

NON LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE

Displacement [mm] 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 Time [Sec] 40 50 Heel Toe

Figure: Time history of sliding displacements of nodal points (heel and toe) at the base of the dam (NGA#1120)

Figure: Deflected shape at the time of maximum displacement. 31 gap elements out of 51 experienced opening and sliding (NGA#1120)

Figure 8. 5 Time history of horizontal displacement 32 at the top of dam (NGA#1120)

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

CONCLUSION
Smooth curved profile perform better than sharp profile changed

section. This study conclude that acceleration only may not be sufficient to cause damage to the structures, pulse type velocity time history is also may be the major factor for destruction. Thus cannot be ignored in design of large structures. This research conclude that while performing analysis of large concrete dam in tectonically active country like Nepal, it would be better to use near-fault earthquake records rather than code based or far-field records. In general Fault-normal component cause more damage than Faultparallel component. Result shows that, entire base will undergo sliding with a permanent displacement offset of about 40 mm in the downstream direction.
33

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY

Response of dam may be checked for increasing numbers of

nodes and also for shell elements. Soil-Structure interaction can be modeled in different ways and compared to present study. Fluid-structure interaction can be modeled in different ways and compared to the present study by Westergaard Added Mass method. Cracked at other places than base also can be checked by Discrete crack modeling or smeared crack modeling.

34

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

ACKNOLODGEMENTS
Dr. Hari Ram Parajuli Prof. Dr. Prem Nath Maskey and All Faculty Members

of M.Sc. Structural Engineering and Civil Engineering Department Dr. Roshan Tuladhar Dr. Krisnna Prasad Dulal and Er. Sandip Upreti Er. Mahesh Acharya, NEA Er. Soyuz Gautam

35

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING PULCHOWK CAMPUS

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?

36