2015 AASRI International Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (IEA 2015)

Seismic Performance of Non-overflow Gravity Dam Considering Dam-rock

Coupling Effect

Cong Zeng1, Dongxue Hao1, Liqun Hou1, Wen Pan2, Hexian Su2
1
Department of Architectural Engineering, Northeast Dianli University, Jilin, 132012, China
2
Department of Architectural Engineering, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, 650500, China

AbstractTheoretical profile stress and displacement of a considered. The seismic loads to be considered are
certain non-overflow gravity dam in a key water-control earthquake inertia force, hydrodynamic pressure under
project was studied in this paper. Plane finite element lateral earthquake. Other acting forces such as the uplift
method and dam-rock coupling effect were both considered. pressure, silt pressure, dynamic earth pressure and
It is concluded that the tensile stress concentration was hydrodynamic pressure under vertical earthquake are
appeared at the heel and toe of dam, especially the dam heel ignored. The representative value of hydrodynamic
with significant compression. Therefore, the former position pressure under lateral earthquake can be converted to the
is of great importance in the design. However, the stress is corresponding added mass in the dam surface.
still less than the strength of dam concrete and foundation
Two loading combination patterns were considered as
rock, which is means the seismic design of the non-overflow
gravity is reasonable. Moreover, it is indicated that the dam-
follows: basic combination of normal pool level;
rock coupling effect will significantly affect the simulation accidental combination of earthquake and check flood.
results. The basic combination is including dead weight of dams
concrete, static water pressure in both upstream and
Keywords-dam-rock coupling effect; plane finite element downstream and uplift pressure. In the accidental
method; non-overflow gravity dam; seismic performance combination, earthquake action is composed of lateral
earthquake and 2/3 vertical earthquake, along with the
I. INTRODUCTION overall consideration of static and dynamic response.
The non-overflow gravity dam means the dam without
III. PLAN FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION ON THE NON-
overflow. In most of the key gravity dam engineering, the
OVERFLOW DAM
overflow dam are always in the middle riverbed or main
stream, and the non-overflow dams are in the both side, A. Parameters and FEM model
connecting to the bank and isolated by abutment pier and FEM software ANSYS was adopted in this paper to
guide wall. The engineering background of this paper is simulate the non-overflow dam and its foundation. Firstly,
the non-overflow gravity dam in Yunnan province, the theoretical profile according to the self-weight,
Nujiang drainage basin. The foundation is weak- hydrostatic pressure and seepage pressure is modelled by
weathered calcite dolomite and dolomite limestone. The ANSYS, which can satisfy the requirements of strength,
width and height of dam is 5.0m and 34.5m separately stability, construction and economy. To accurately
with the top elevation EL.824.50m. The grade of consider the dam-rock coupling effect and reflect the
upstream side is 90, and the downstream side is 1:0.75. elastic dynamic effect of foundation, the foundation rock
For the small cross section, C20 concrete (W8, F100, 3- was modelled, and its dimension on upstream,
gradingis adopted. The site of dam is located in the downstream and depth are all set the value of twice height
region of 7 degree seismic fortification intensity, where is of the dam. Plane42 element in ANSYS was selected both
the interface between 7 and 8 degree. The peak value of in the dam concrete and foundation rock. The reversed
earthquake acceleration is 0.15g, predominant period is added mass of hydrodynamic pressure was modelled by
0.3s. To guarantee the seismic safety, the non-overflow MASS21 element in ANSYS [2]. The material parameters
dam was numerical simulated by ANSYS based on plane are shown in the Table 1.
finite element method. The deformation and stress
distribution in different earthquake cases were studied, TABLE I. MATERIAL PARAMETERS IN THE ANSYS SIMULATION
meanwhile, the weak parts were revealed according to the
Dynamic
simulation results. Material
Elasticity modulus Poisson's Density compressive/tensile
(Mpa) ratio (Kg/m3)
strength Mpa
II. CALCULATION ASSUMPTION AND CASE SETTING
concrete 2.55E+10 0.2 2450 8.93/1.67
It is specified in the Chinese code [1] that: during the
rock 2.5E+09 0.28 2600 1.31/-
seismic calculation of non-overflow dam, only normal
pool level is considered on the upstream water level, and
the earthquake also only combine with the normal pool For the non-overflow dam is constructed by concrete,
level situation. Only the earthquake along the river is the following terms are regulated by current specification

2015. The authors - Published by Atlantis Press 171

 in China [1]: in earthquake case, the dynamic modulus of
elasticity and bearing capacity of concrete can be 30%
increase compare to static case; the dynamic modulus of
deformation and bearing capacity of rock can also be 30%
increase compare to static parameters; Shearing strength
for both earthquake and static cases are the same.
4-node plane strain element was chosen to simulate
the dam and rock. A 2D FEM model was established,
which is consist of a concrete gravity dam and a
foundation 2 times higher than the dam. The boundary
condition of the bottom and surroundings is defined as
linkage constraints. The total quantity of FEM model is
6786 with 7012 joints. Concern to the coordinate system,
along the river to the downstream is X axis positive,
straight up is Y axis positive. In the ANSYS stress results,
positive value is tensile stress, and negative value is
pressure stress. The 2D ANSYS model is shown in Fig 1.
(a) First order (b) Second order (c) Third order
Figure 2. First 3 orders of vibration modes

C. Stress results by ANSYS

Firstly, the stress distribution of normal pool level
case (case ) and check flood case (case ) were studied.
Then the static case of normal pool level was combined
with the other two dynamic cases, such as frequently
occurrence earthquake case (case ) and rarely
occurrence earthquake (case ). The obtained contour
lines of theoretical profile on stress distribution under
above mentioned cases were demonstrated in Fig.3.

30 30

Figure 1. Plane finite element model of the non-overflow dam 25 25

20 20

B. Mode analysis results

According to the mode analysis results, low order 15 15

frequency dominated the earthquake response of the non- 10 10

overflow gravity dam. The effective mass ratio of first 3

orders reached up to 98.9%, whereas, the first 6 orders of 5 5

modes were extracted in the spectral analysis. The results

indicated that the mode shape conformed to the general 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
0 5 10 15 20 25

rules, as shown in Fig.2. No adverse mode shape appeared. (a) Case (b) Case
The natural frequency of reservoir full is less than the
reservoir empty. The first 8 orders of nature frequencies 30
30

were combined by SRSS method, which were listed in 25

table 2. 25

20
20
TABLE II. FIRST 6 ORDERS NATURAL FREQUENCY OF THE NON-
OVERFLOW DAM UNIT: HZ 15
15

Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 10
Full 4.1010 7.8714 11.069 24.011 43.928 45.759
Empty 4.6966 8.0209 12.579 25.862 48.825 54.582 5 5

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25

(c) Case + (d) Case -

172
 IV. INFLUENCE ON ANSYS RESULTS BY DAM-ROCK
30 30 COUPLING EFFECT

25 25
It is indicated that the value of rock elasticity modulus
may affect the displacement significantly. Take the results
20 20
of case as example. When the rock elasticity modulus
valued as infinity, which means that the boundary
15 15

condition was treated as completely rigid constraint

10 10
without considering the dam-rock coupling effects, the
maximal displacement along the river appeared at the top
5 5
of dam with the value of 0.49mm and the vertical
displacement of dam top was 0.14mm and no
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
displacement at the dam heel, shown as Fig.4(a). However,
(e) Case + (f) Case -
when the dam-rock coupling effects was considered, and
Figure 3.Von Mises of theoretical profile of the non-overflow gravity the rock elasticity modulus valued as 2.9Gpa, the maximal
dam
displacement along the river appeared at dam heel with
the value of 1.32mm, and the maximal displacement along
By analyzing the Fig.3, the maximum stress and its
the river at the dam top was 0.52mm. The vertical
position were listed in Table 3. It can be concluded that
displacement at the dam heel was -2.93mm, and the value
stress concentration appeared in the heel of upstream and
at dam top was -0.34mm, as shown in Fig.4(b). According
toe of downstream, where need to be carefully pay
to the above results, it is concluded that the rock elasticity
attention to. Moreover, no maximum stress listed is
modulus significantly affect the dam top displacement in
exceeding the strength of concrete and rock listed in Table
the direction of along the river and vertical, but no
1.
noticeable influence on the displacement of dam heel
TABLE III. MAXIMUM AND POSITION OF VON MISES STRESS along river direction. Therefore, all the obtained
displacements in ANSYS were global. Because the heel
UNIT: MPA displacement along the river is more than the dam top,
makes it seem to incline to the back of dam.
Stress in the upstream Stress in the downstream
Case
maximum position maximum position

-0.489 dam heel -0.398 dam toe

-0.631 dam heel -0.528 dam toe
+ 0.334 dam heel 0.470 dam toe
- -1.099 dam heel -0.955 dam toe
+ 0.493 dam heel 0.626 dam toe
- -1.301 dam heel -1.148 dam toe

D. Displacement results by ANSYS

Displacement of the non-overflow dam was listed in Figure 4. Dam displacement under different rock elasticity modulus
Table 4. The maximal displacement along the river
appeared at the upstream dam heel, and the maximal V. CONCLUSIONS
vertical displacement is at upstream dam top. This According to the numerical simulation results, adverse
conclusion seems strange. It will be explained in next stress state may appear in the non-overflow dam during
section. earthquake. Noticeable stress concentration may occur in
dam heel, dam toe and toe corners, especially tensile
TABLE IV. SUMMERY OF MAXIMAL DISPLACEMENT UNIT: MM
stress. After the combination of static and dynamic
Along the river Vertical response, the displacement was not enough to cause the
CASE dam leakage. By considering all kinds of cases and dam-
maximum position maximum position rock coupled effect, the maximal Von Mises stress was
1.32 Heel upstream -3.04
Top still in safe range.
upstream
Toe VI. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
2.14 Top downstream -2.35
upstream
Top The research work was supported by National Natural
9.37 Top downstream -6.06
upstream Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 51308094,
Toe No. 51308095.
12.19 Heel upstream -7.07
upstream

173
 REFERENCES [2] Su Hexian, Pan Wen, Yang Jianrong, Lai Zhengcong. Study on
Seismic Performance of the Non-overflow Gravity Dam. Science
[1] Specification for Seismic Design of Hydraulic Structure (DL5703- Technology and Engineering,10(26), pp.77-83,2010. (in Chinese)
2001). The State Economic and Trade Commission of China, 2001.
(in Chinese)

174