Effective Safety Assessment of Aged Concrete Gravity Dam based on the Reliability Index in a Seismically Induced Site
Source abstract
Abstract
The seismic performance of the aged-concrete gravity dam (aged-CGD) by safety assessment based on the reliability-index is the main focal point of this study. Determination of reliability-index has been handled by the site seismic hazard analysis with the help of PSHRisk-tool (developed by the authors) and risk assessment. Incorporated with the uncertainties, the failure probability has been carried out by the IDA and fragility analysis. For the nonlinear finite element model of the CGD, the concrete damage plasticity (CDP) model is adopted. To investigate the aging effect, the hygro-chemo-mechanical model has been taken for different years consideration. Through the failure risk assessment of serviceability and safety level, the target reliability index has been determined here for an existing CGD in Korea. Despite several types of research on the CGD safety assessment, the main novelty of this proposed approach will help the dam operator to check the safety barrier for the aged-CGD. A safety index is investigated by comparing the target reliability-index of the age-CGD with the reliability-index for two potential earthquake levels. However, the proposed approach can implement to check the safety range of any seismic site for any set of earthquakes.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dam Engineering and Safety · Seismic Performance and Analysis · Rock Mechanics and Modeling
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kunsan National University, Gunsan-si, Jeollabuk-do 54150, Korea
Department of Civil Engineering, Pabna University of Science and Technology, Pabna 6600, Bangladesh
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kongju National University, Cheonan-si, Chungnam 31080, Korea
Funding
Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning · Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy
References (68)
Show source-provided references
1. Structural reliability index versus behavior factor in RC frames with equal lateral resistance10.12989/eas.2015.8.5.995 ↗
2. Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry10.1016/j.talanta.2008.05.019 ↗
3. Application of the central composite design for condition optimization for semi-aerobic landfill leachate treatment using electrochemical oxidation10.2166/wst.2010.018 ↗
4. Optimum design of composite plates using response surface method10.1016/S0263-8223(98)00109-3 ↗
5. Modelling of the performance of asphalt pavement using response surface methodology—the kinetics of the aging10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.10.013 ↗
6. Regression of the response surface of laminated composite structures10.1016/S0263-8223(03)00095-3 ↗
7. Ghanaat, Y., Patev, R., and Chudgar, A. (2015, January 13–17). Seismic fragility for risk assessment of concrete gravity dams. Proceedings of the 35th United States Society on Dams Annual Meeting and Conference, Louisville, KY, USA.
8. Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis10.1193/021113EQS025M ↗
9. Risk management concepts in dam safety evaluation: Mosul dam as a case study
10. Development of the site-specific uniform hazard spectra for Korean nuclear power plant sites10.1016/j.nucengdes.2008.12.026 ↗
11. Sørensen, J.D. (2004). Notes in Structural Reliability Theory and Risk Analysis, Building Technology and Structural Engineering.
12. Melchers, R.E., and Beck, A.T. (2018). Structural Reliability Analysis and Prediction, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [3rd ed.].10.1002/9781119266105 ↗
13. Marelli, S., Schöbi, R., and Sudret, B. (2018). UQLab User Manual–Structural Reliability (Rare Event Estimation), UQLab-V1.1-107; Chair of Risk, Safety & Uncertainty Quantification.
14. Jeppsson, J. (2003). Reliability-Based Assessment Procedures for Existing Concrete Structures. [Ph.D. Thesis, Lund University].
15. Time-dependent reliability of aging structures in the presence of non-stationary loads and degradation10.1016/j.strusafe.2014.10.003 ↗
16. Ditlevsen, O., and Madsen, H.O. (1996). Structural Reliability Methods, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.. [1st ed.].
17. Thoft-Cristensen, P., and Baker, M.J. (1982). Structural Reliability Theory and its Applications, Springer Science & Business Media. [1st ed.].10.1007/978-3-642-68697-9 ↗
18. Tichý, M. (2012). Applied Methods of Structural Reliability, Springer Netherlands. [1st ed.].
19. An efficient sampling method for probability of failure calculation10.1016/0167-4730(86)90012-3 ↗
20. A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code10.1080/00401706.2000.10485979 ↗
21. Estimation of small failure probabilities in high dimensions by subset simulation10.1016/S0266-8920(01)00019-4 ↗
22. Selection of ground motion intensity measure for reinforced concrete structure10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.219 ↗
23. Risk assessment of aged concrete gravity dam subjected to material deterioration under seismic excitation
24. Sen, U. (2018). Risk Assessment of Concrete Gravity Dams under Earthquake Loads. [Master’s Thesis, Louisiana State University].
25. Seismic fragility assessment of concrete gravity dams10.1002/eqe.325 ↗
26. Incremental dynamic analysis10.1002/eqe.141 ↗
27. Seismic performance uncertainty estimation via IDA with progressive accelerogram-wise latin hypercube sampling10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001030 ↗
28. Seismic fragilities for nuclear power plant risk studies10.1016/0029-5493(84)90188-2 ↗
29. Seismic fragility analysis of a typical Indian PHWR containment: Comparison of fragility models10.1016/j.strusafe.2015.08.003 ↗
30. Seismic reliability and risk assessment of structures based on fragility analysis–A review10.1260/1369-4332.18.10.1653 ↗
31. Seismic risk prioritization of a large portfolio of dams: Revisited
32. Kramer, S.L. (1996). Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall.
33. Baker, J.W. (2008). An Introduction to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA), Stanford University. White Paper, Version 1.3.
34. CU-PSHA: A Matlab software for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis10.1142/S1793431114500080 ↗
35. Frequency of earthquakes in California10.1785/BSSA0340040185 ↗
36. Nahar, T.T., Rahman, M.M., and Kim, D. (2020). PSHRisk-Tool: A python-based computational tool for developing site seismic hazard analysis and failure risk assessment of infrastructure. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10217487 ↗
37. Bensoussan, A. (2005). Reliability index. Optimal Control and Dynamic Games, Springer.10.1007/0-387-25805-1_18 ↗
38. ICOLD, and CIGB (2005). Risk Assessment in Dam Safety Management: A Reconnaissance of Benefits, Methods and Current Applications, International Comission of Large Dams.
39. Earthquake risk assessment of concrete gravity dam by cumulative absolute velocity and response surface methodology
40. Rahman, M.M., Nahar, T.T., and Kim, D. (2019, January 25–27). Seismic reliability assessment of calibrated concrete gravity dam using high-dimensional model representation and cornell’s approach: A case study. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Post Disaster Reconstruction Planning, Bhaktapur, Nepal.
41. Chopra, A.K. (2011). Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall. [4th ed.].
42. Løkke, A. (2013). Earthquake Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams: Review and Modernization of Two Analysis Procedures. [Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology].
43. Wahalathantri, B.L., Thambiratnam, D., Chan, T., and Fawzia, S. (2011, January 27–29). A material model for flexural crack simulation in reinforced concrete elements using ABAQUS. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Engineering, Designing and Developing the Built Environment for Sustainable Wellbeing, Jogjakarta, Indonesia.
44. Birtel, V., and Mark, P. (2006, January 23–25). Parameterised finite element modelling of RC beam shear failure. Proceedings of the ABAQUS Users’ Conference, Boston, MA, USA.
45. Bolted shear connectors vs. headed studs behaviour in push-out tests10.1016/j.jcsr.2013.05.003 ↗
46. Experimental determination of crack softening characteristics of normalweight and lightweight
47. Statistical descriptions of strength of concrete10.1061/JSDEAG.0005161 ↗
48. Coupled chemo-mechanical deterioration of cementitious materials Part II: Numerical methods and simulations10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.08.004 ↗
49. Influence of sediment layers on dynamic behavior of aged concrete dams10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:4(400) ↗
50. Gogoi, I., and Maity, D. (2004, January 1–6). Vulnerability of aged concrete gravity dams. Proceedings of the World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
51. On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions10.1111/j.2517-6161.1951.tb00067.x ↗
52. Optimization of machining parameters and wire vibration in wire electrical discharge machining process10.1186/s40759-017-0017-1 ↗
53. Myers, R.H., Montgomery, D.C., and Anderson-Cook, C.M. (2016). Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization using Designed Experiments, John Wiley & Sons. [3rd ed.].
54. Cao, A.-T., Tran, T.-T., Nahar, T.T., and Kim, D. (2020). A Proposed Method for Inspecting and Predicting the Seismic Vulnerability of Dam Structures in Korea. ICSCEA 2019, Springer.10.1007/978-981-15-5144-4_99 ↗
55. The november 2017 Mw 5.5 Pohang earthquake: A possible case of induced seismicity in South Korea10.1126/science.aat2010 ↗
56. Brincker, R., Zhang, L., and Andersen, P. (2000, January 7–10). Modal identification from ambient responses using frequency domain decomposition. Proceedings of the 18th International Modal Analysis Conference (IMAC), San Antoni, TX, USA.10.1088/0964-1726/10/3/303 ↗
57. Ko, S., Cho, S.G., Kim, D., and Cui, J. (2009, January 21–23). Modal identification of cabinets of nuclear power plant based on experimental study. Proceedings of the 35th Regular Academic Conference and Civil Expo, Gangwon, Korea.
58. Shah, C. (2002, January 5–6). Mesh discretization error and criteria for accuracy of finite element solutions. Proceedings of the 4th ASEAN ANSYS User Conference, Central Region, Singapore.
59. Development of hysteretic energy compatible endurance time excitations and its application10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.09.089 ↗
60. Seismic hazard reassessment of an existing NPP in Slovenia10.1016/S0029-5493(97)00039-3 ↗
61. A computationally efficient ground-motion selection algorithm for matching a target response spectrum mean and variance10.1193/1.3608002 ↗
62. Choun, Y.S., Choi, I.K., Ohtori, Y., Shiba, Y., and Nakajima, M. (2003). Korea-Japan Joint Research on Development of Seismic Capacity Evaluation and Enhancement Technology Considering Near-Fault Effects, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute. KAERI/RR-2688/2006.
63. Commission, U.N.R. (2007). A Performance-Based Approach to Define the Site-Specific Earthquake Ground Motion, Regulatory guide 1.208.
64. Damage-based seismic performance evaluation of reinforced concrete frames
65. Jalayer, F., and Cornell, C.A. (2003). A Technical Framework for Probability-Based Demand and Capacity Factor (DCFD) Seismic Formats, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. PEER-2003/08.
66. Seo, J.M., Choun, Y.S., and Choi, I.K. (1999). Reduction of Uncertainties in Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute. KAERI/CR-65/99.
67. Seismic motion and response prediction alternatives10.1002/eqe.4290070402 ↗
68. FEMA (2000). Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, FEMA 356.