NONLINEAR SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF A HISTORICAL DAM FOR DIFFERENT SOIL GROUPS

Year 2018, Volume: 36 Issue: 4, 1009 - 1022, 01.12.2018

Musa Yetkin Yusuf Calayır Erkut Sayın Muhammet Karaton

Abstract

In this study, effect of soil flexibility on non-linear seismic response of historical Sultan Mahmut dam which is constructed as masonry arch dam type is investigated. Crest displacement and damage of the dam are evaluated. Smeared crack model which includes the strain softening is used in the nonlinear analysis for the behavior of dam material. Reservoir and soil domains are assumed to be linear elastic. Solid-fluid interaction is considered by Eulerian approach. For seismic input, artificial acceleration records are generated for four different soil groups (A, B, C and D) considering D2 seismic level. These records are acted in the stream direction to the dam-soil-reservoir system. Effect of soil flexibility on seismic response of the dam is evaluated for each soil group. ANSYS finite element program is used for the solutions

Keywords

Solid-fluid interaction, smeared crack model, artificial acceleration records, nonlinear seismic analysis.

References

• ⦁ Modena, C., Valluzzi, M.R., Tongini, F.R., and Binda L., “Design choices and intervention techniques for repairing and strengthening of the Monza Cathedral Bell-Tower”, Constr. Build. Mater., 16, 385-395, 2002.
• ⦁ Betti, M., and Vignoli, A., “Modelling and analysis of a Romanesque Church under earthquake loading: Assessment of seismic resistance”, Engineering Structures, 30, 352–367, 2008.
• ⦁ Riva, P., Perotti, F., Guidoboni, E., and Boschi, E., “Seismic analysis of the Asinelli Tower and earthquakes in Bologna”, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 17(7-8), 525-550, 1998.
• ⦁ Fanning, P.J., and Boothby, T.E., “Three-dimensional modeling and full-scale testing of stone arch bridges”, Computers and Structures, 79, 2645-2662, 2001.
• ⦁ Bernardeschi, K., Padovani, C., and Pasquinelli, G., “Numerical modeling of the structural behavior of Buti’s Bell Tower”, J. Cultural Heritage, 5, 371-378, 2004.
• ⦁ Bayraktar, A., Şahin, A., Özcan, D., and Yıldırım, F., “Numerical damage assessment of Hagia Sophia Bell Tower by nonlinear FE modelling”, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 34, 92-121, 2010.
• ⦁ Mridha, S., and Maity, D., “Experimental investigation on nonlinear dynamic response of concrete gravity dam-reservoir system”, Engineering Structures, 80, 289-297, 2014.
• ⦁ Soumya, Pandey, A.D., Das, R., Mahesh, M.J., Anvesh, S., and Saini, P., “Structural analysis of a historical dam” Procedia Engineering, 144, 140-147, 2016.
• ⦁ Sayın, E., “Nonlinear seismic response of a masonry arch bridge”, Earthq. Struct., 10(2), 483–494, 2016.
• ⦁ Sayın, E., Karaton, M., and Calayır, Y., “Nonlinear seismic analyses of historical Topuzlu Dam under different seismic loads”, Gradevinar, 68(11), 919-925, 2016.
• ⦁ Karaton, M., Aksoy, H.S., Sayın, E., and Calayır, Y., “Nonlinear seismic performance of a 12th century historical masonry bridge under different earthquake levels”, Engineering Failure Analysis, 79, 408–421, 2017.
• ⦁ Zacchei, E., Molina, J.L., and Brasil, R., “Seismic hazard and structural analysis of the concrete arch dam (rules dam on Guadalfeo river)”, Procedia Engineering, 199, 1332–1337, 2017.
• ⦁ Yazdani, Y., and Alembagheri, M., “Nonlinear seismic response of a gravity dam under near-fault ground motions and equivalent pulses”, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 92, 621–632, 2017.
• ⦁ Wang, G., Wang, Y., Lu, W., Yu, M., and Wang, C., “Deterministic 3D seismic damage analysis of Guandi concrete gravity dam: A case study”, Engineering Structures, 148, 263–276, 2017.
• ⦁ Chung, J., and Hulbert, G.M., “A Time integration algorithm for structural dynamics with improved numerical dissipation: the generalized-α method”, Journal of Applied Mechanics, 60, 371-375, 1993.
• ⦁ Çeçen, K., “Taksim ve Hamidiye Suları”, İSKİ Yayınları, İstanbul, 1992 (in Turkish).
• ⦁ Lourenço, P.B., “Computational strategies for masonry structures”, Ph.D. Thesis, Delft Technical University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1996.
• ⦁ Manfredi, C., and Ramasco, R., “The use of damage functionals in earthquake engineering: A comparison between different methods”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 22(10), 855-868, 1993.
• ⦁ Rajgelj, S., Amadio, C., and Nappi, A., “An internal variable approach applied to the dynamic analysis of elastic-plastic structural systems”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 22(10), 885-903, 1993.
• ⦁ William, K.J., and Warnke, E.P., “Constitutive model for the triaxial behaviour of concrete”, Proceeding of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, ISMES, Bergamo, Italy, 1975, 19.
• ⦁ Zeinkiewicz, O.C., and Taylor, R.L., “Finite Element Method”, vol. 2, McGraw-Hill, 1991, 84-95.
• ⦁ Cavicchi, A., and Gambarotta, C., “Collapse analysis of masonry bridges taking into account arch fill interaction”, Engineering Structures, 27, 605-615, 2005.
• ⦁ ANSYS, (2015), Swanson Analysis System, USA.
• ⦁ DLH-2007, “Earthquake technical regulations relating to coastal, harbor, railway and airport constructions”, Ministry of Transportation, Ankara, Turkey, 2007, 6-9 (in Turkish).