Risk Assessment of Aged Concrete Gravity Dam Subjected to Material Deterioration Under Seismic Excitation
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This paper proposes an approach to assess and predict the seismic risk of existing concrete gravity dams (CGDs) considering the ageing effect. The combination of fragility function and cumulative absolute velocity (CAV) depending on two failure states has been used in the analysis. It represents the time-variant degradation of the concrete structure and the conditional change of structural vulnerability in the case of the seismic excitation. Therefore, the seismic risk assessment captures here the nonlinear dynamic behavior of a concrete gravity dam through the fragility analysis. Incremental dynamic analysis for the fragility curves is adopted to state the performance of the dam in terms of different intensity measures. To assess the capacity of the aged concrete gravity dam, this research introduces a way to estimate the CAVlimit of CGDs with varying time. For a case study, an existing concrete gravity dam in Korea has been taken into consideration to apply this approach. The numerical finite element model is validated by optimizing the recorded field data. The proposed approach and its findings will be helpful to CGDs operators to ensure whether a dam needs to stop after a specific time using the extracted mathematical model. Furthermore, as this mathematical model is the function of time, the operator can get an idea about dam conditions at any specific time and can take necessary steps.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dam Engineering and Safety · Seismic Performance and Analysis · Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (61)
Show source-provided references
1. Alembagheri, M., & Ghaemian, M. (2013). Seismic assessment of concrete gravity dams using capacity estimation and damage indexes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 42(1), 123–144. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2196.10.1002/eqe.2196 ↗
2. Al-Shadeedi, M. B., & Hamdi, E. J. (2017). Stability evaluation of small concrete gravity dams. Journal of Engineering and Sustainable Development, 21(5), 15–38.
3. Ansari, M. I., & Agarwal, P. (2016). Categorization of damage index of concrete gravity dam for the health monitoring after earthquake. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 20(8), 1222–1238. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1138167.10.1080/13632469.2016.1138167 ↗
4. Ansari, M. I., Saqib, M., & Agarwal, P. (2018). Geometric configuration effects on nonlinear seismic behavior of concrete gravity dam. Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami, 12(01), 1850003. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793431118500033.10.1142/S1793431118500033 ↗
5. ATC, & FEMA. (2009). Quantification of building seismic performance factors. Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA P695.
6. Baker, J. W. (2015). Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthquake Spectra, 31(1), 579–599. https://doi.org/10.1193/021113EQS025M.10.1193/021113EQS025M ↗
7. Bangert, F., Grasberger, S., Kuhl, D., & Meschke, G. (2003). Environmentally induced deterioration of concrete: Physical motivation and numerical modeling. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 70(7–8), 891–910. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(02)00156-X.10.1016/S0013-7944(02)00156-X ↗
8. Bangert, F., Kuhl, D., & Meschke, G. (2001). Finite element simulation of chemo-mechanical damage under cyclic loading conditions. Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures, 1, 145–152.
9. Birtel, V., & Mark, P. (2006). Parameterised finite element modelling of RC beam shear failure. In ABAQUS users’ conference (pp. 95–108), Boston, USA.
10. Brincker, R., Zhang, L., & Andersen, P. (2000, February 7-10). Modal identification from ambient responses using frequency domain decomposition. In Proc. of the 18th international modal analysis conference (IMAC) (pp. 625–630). Texas, USA.
11. Campbell, K. W., & Bozorgnia, Y. (2012). Cumulative absolute velocity (CAV) and seismic intensity based on the peer-nga database. Earthquake Spectra, 28(2), 457–485. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.4000012.10.1193/1.4000012 ↗
12. Cao, A.-T., Nahar, T. T., Kim, D., & Choi, B. (2019). Earthquake risk assessment of concrete gravity dam by cumulative absolute velocity and response surface methodology. Earthquakes and Structures, 17(5), 511–519. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.17.5.511.10.12989/eas.2019.17.5.511 ↗
13. Champiri, M. D., Mousavi, M. M. R., Willam, K. J., & Gencturk, B. (2018). Effect of alkali-silica reactivity damage to tip-over impact performance of dry cask storage structures. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials, 12(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40069-018-0248-5.10.1186/s40069-018-0248-5 ↗
14. Chopra, A. K. (2011). Dynamics of structures: Theory and applications to earthquake engineering. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
15. Cornelissen, H., Hordijk, D., & Reinhardt, H. (1986). Experimental determination of crack softening characteristics of normalweight and lightweight. Heron, 31(2), 45–46.
16. Dong, Y., Frangopol, D. M., & Saydam, D. (2013). Time-variant sustainability assessment of seismically vulnerable bridges subjected to multiple hazards. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 42(10), 1451–1467. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2281.10.1002/eqe.2281 ↗
17. Du, W., & Wang, G. (2013). A simple ground-motion prediction model for cumulative absolute velocity and model validation. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 42(8), 1189–1202. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2266.10.1002/eqe.2266 ↗
18. Ellingwood, B., & Tekie, P. B. (2001). Fragility analysis of concrete gravity dams. Journal of infrastructure systems, 7(2), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2001)7:2(41).10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2001)7:2(41) ↗
19. Fenves, G. L., & Chopra, A. K. (1986). Simplified analysis for earthquake resistant design of concrete gravity dams. California: Ucbieerc-85/10, University of California, Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
20. Ghosh, J., & Padgett, J. E. (2010). Aging considerations in the development of time-dependent seismic fragility curves. Journal of Structural Engineering, 136(12), 1497–1511. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000260.10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000260 ↗
21. Ghrib, F., & Tinawi, R. (1995). An application of damage mechanics for seismic analysis of concrete gravity dams. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 24(2), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290240203.10.1002/eqe.4290240203 ↗
22. Gogoi, I., & Maity, D. (2007). Influence of sediment layers on dynamic behavior of aged concrete dams. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 133(4), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:4(400).10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:4(400) ↗
23. Grigoli, F., Cesca, S., Rinaldi, A. P., Manconi, A., Lopez-Comino, J. A., Clinton, J. F., et al. (2018). The November 2017 mw 5.5 pohang earthquake: A possible case of induced seismicity in South Korea. Science, 360(6392), 1003–1006. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat2010.10.1126/science.aat2010 ↗
24. Hardy, G., Merz, K., Abrahamson, N., & Watson-Lamprey, J. (2006). Program on technology innovation: Use of cumulative absolute velocity (cav) in determining effects of small magnitude earthquakes on seismic hazard analyses. EPRI report MD. 1014099, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, and the US Department of Energy, Germantown.
25. Hartford, D. N. D., & Baecher, G. B. (2004). Risk and uncertainty in dam safety. Heron Quay: Thomas Telford Publishing.10.1680/rauids.32705 ↗
26. Heo, Y., & Kunnath, S. K. (2013). Damage-based seismic performance evaluation of reinforced concrete frames. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials, 7(3), 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40069-013-0046-z.10.1007/s40069-013-0046-z ↗
27. Ibarra, L. F., & Krawinkler, H. (2005). Global collapse of frame structures under seismic excitations, PEER Report 2005/06. Stanford: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center P. E. E. R. Center.
28. KCSC. (2016). Korean design standard. (Design criteria for the Dam). KDS 54 10 15.
29. KCSC. (2019). Korean design standard. (Code for seismic design of buildings). KDS 41 17 00.
30. Kim, J. H., Choi, I.-K., & Park, J.-H. (2011). Uncertainty analysis of system fragility for seismic safety evaluation of npp. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 241(7), 2570–2579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2011.04.031.10.1016/j.nucengdes.2011.04.031 ↗
31. Ko, S., Cho, S. G., Kim, D., & Cui, J. (2009). Modal identification of cabinets of nuclear power plant based on experimental study. , 826–829.
32. Kuhl, D., Bangert, F., & Meschke, G. (2004a). Coupled chemo-mechanical deterioration of cementitious materials part ii: Numerical methods and simulations. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 41(1), 41–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.08.004.10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.08.004 ↗
33. Kuhl, D., Bangert, F., & Meschke, G. (2004b). Coupled chemo-mechanical deterioration of cementitious materials. Part i: Modeling. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 41(1), 15–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.08.005.10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.08.005 ↗
34. Lupoi, A., & Callari, C. (2011). The role of probabilistic methods in evaluating the seismic risk of concrete dams. In M. Dolšek (Ed.), Protection of built environment against earthquakes (pp. 309–329). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1448-9_15.10.1007/978-94-007-1448-9_15 ↗
35. Manandhar2b, S., & Cho, H.-I. (2018). New site classification system and design response spectra in korean seismic code. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.15.1.001.10.12989/eas.2018.15.1.001 ↗
36. Mandal, T. K., Ghosh, S., & Pujari, N. N. (2016). Seismic fragility analysis of a typical indian phwr containment: Comparison of fragility models. Structural Safety, 58, 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2015.08.003.10.1016/j.strusafe.2015.08.003 ↗
37. Mandal, K. K., & Maity, D. (2015). Influence of hygro-chemo-mechanical degradation on performance of concrete gravity dam. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering, 9(2), 199–204. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1107467.10.5281/zenodo.1107467 ↗
38. Mazılıgüney, L., Yakut, A., Kadaş, K., & Kalem, İ. (2013). Fragility analysis of reinforced concrete school buildings using alternative intensity measure-based ground motion sets. In 2nd Turkish conference on earthquake engineering and seismology (pp. 25–27) Hatay, Türkiye.
39. Mirza, S. A., MacGregor, J. G., & Hatzinikolas, M. (1979). Statistical descriptions of strength of concrete. Journal of the Structural Division, 105(6), 1021–1037.10.1061/JSDEAG.0005161 ↗
40. Mridha, S., & Maity, D. (2014). Experimental investigation on nonlinear dynamic response of concrete gravity dam-reservoir system. Engineering Structures, 80, 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.09.017.10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.09.017 ↗
41. Myers, R. H., Montgomery, D. C., & Anderson-Cook, C. M. (1995). Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed experiments. Hoboken: Wiley.
42. Nakamura, H., Nanri, T., Miura, T., & Roy, S. (2018). Experimental investigation of compressive strength and compressive fracture energy of longitudinally cracked concrete. Cement & Concrete Composites, 93, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2018.06.015.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2018.06.015 ↗
43. Nayak, P., & Maity, D. (2013). Seismic damage analysis of aged concrete gravity dams. International Journal for Computational Methods in Engineering Science and Mechanics, 14(5), 424–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/15502287.2013.784380.10.1080/15502287.2013.784380 ↗
44. Nguyen, D. V., Kim, D., Park, C., & Choi, B. (2019). Seismic soil–structure interaction analysis of concrete gravity dam using perfectly matched discrete layers with analytical wavelengths. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2019.1595222.10.1080/13632469.2019.1595222 ↗
45. Nie, J., Braverman, J., Hofmayer, C., Choun, Y. S., Kim, M. K., & Choi, I. K. (2010). Fragility analysis methodology for degraded structures and passive components in nuclear power plants illustrated using a condensate storage tank, KAERI/TR-4068/2010; BNL-93771-2010, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute.10.2172/1015132 ↗
46. O’Hara, T. F., & Jacobson, J. P. (1991). Standardization of the cumulative absolute velocity, EPRI-TR-100082, Electric Power Research Inst. & Yankee Atomic Electric Co.
47. Pakzad, S. (2018). Dynamics of civil structures, volume 2: Proceedings of the 36th imac, a conference and exposition on structural dynamics 2018. Springer.
48. Pan, J., Zhang, C., Wang, J., & Xu, Y. (2009). Seismic damage-cracking analysis of arch dams using different earthquake input mechanisms. Science in China Series E: Technological Sciences, 52(2), 518–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-008-0303-6.10.1007/s11431-008-0303-6 ↗
49. Prassinos, P. G., Ravindra, M., & Savy, J. B. (1986). Recommendations to the nuclear regulatory commission on trial guidelines for seismic margin reviews of nuclear power plants: Draft report for comment. NUREG/CR-4482, UCID-20579, Lawrence Livermore National Lab.
50. Reed, J., & Kennedy, R. (1994). Methodology for developing seismic fragilities epri tr-103959. Palo Alto: Electric Power Research Institute.
51. Sadhukhan, B., Mondal, N. K., & Chattoraj, S. (2016). Optimisation using central composite design (ccd) and the desirability function for sorption of methylene blue from aqueous solution onto lemna major. Karbala International Journal of Modern Science, 2(3), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kijoms.2016.03.005.10.1016/j.kijoms.2016.03.005 ↗
52. Sen, U. (2018). Risk assessment of concrete gravity dams under earthquake loads. Master’s Thesis, Louisiana State University Louisiana, USA. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/4730/.
53. Shah, C. (2002). Mesh discretization error and criteria for accuracy of finite element solutions. In Ansys users conference.
54. Tekie, P. B., & Ellingwood, B. R. (2003). Seismic fragility assessment of concrete gravity dams. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 32(14), 2221–2240. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.325.10.1002/eqe.325 ↗
55. Vamvatsikos, D., & Cornell, C. A. (2002). Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 31(3), 491–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141.10.1002/eqe.141 ↗
56. Wahalathantri, B. L., Thambiratnam, D., Chan, T., & Fawzia, S. (2011). A material model for flexural crack simulation in reinforced concrete elements using abaqus. In Proceedings of the first international conference on engineering, designing and developing the built environment for sustainable wellbeing (pp. 260–264).
57. Wan, K., Li, Y., & Sun, W. (2012). Application of tomography for solid calcium distributions in calcium leaching cement paste. Construction and Building Materials, 36, 913–917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.06.069.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.06.069 ↗
58. Wang, J., Jin, F., & Zhang, C. (2011). Seismic safety of arch dams with aging effects. Science China Technological Sciences, 54(3), 522–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-010-4279-7.10.1007/s11431-010-4279-7 ↗
59. Wang, J., Yun, X., Kuo-Chen, H., & Wu, Y.-M. (2018). CAV site-effect assessment: A case study of taipei basin. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 108, 142–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.02.028.10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.02.028 ↗
60. Washa, G. W., Saemann, J. C., & Cramer, S. M. (1989). Fifty-year properties of concrete made in 1937. Materials Journal, 86(4), 367–371.
61. Westergaard, H. M. (1933). Water pressures on dams during earthquakes. Transaction of ASCE, 95, 418–433.