141 Yildiz PDF

2nd International FLAC/DEM Symposium
February 14 - 16, 2011
Melbourne , Australia
Dynamic Behaviour of a 170 m

High Rockfill Dam
on a Highly Seismic Area

Ersan YILDIZ, Rt GNER
Temelsu Int. Eng. Serv. Inc., Ankara, TURKEY
16.02.2011
Melbourne, Australia
Brief Information About the Dam

Typical Cross-Section of the Dam
1 : Clay Core
2,3 : Transition Layers
Alluvium Layer (shown as AL) of

about 20 m in depth beneath the shells
over the bedrock of limestone
4 : Rockfill
16.02.2011
Brief Information About the Dam

Dam and Material Properties
Height of the Dam
: 170 m
Dam Type
: Rockfill with Central Clay Core
Seismicity
: Dam Site at some 11 km distance to a strike-slip major

fault capable to produce Mw = 8.2 earthquake
PGA for MDE
: 0.65 g
Dam Foundation
: 20 m Alluvium Beneath the Shells Overlying Bedrock
Freeboard
: 5 m for normal operation level
16.02.2011
Alluvium Layer Beneath the Shells
16.02.2011

Test Results on Alluvium
Poorly Graded Gravel (GP-GM-GC) including Sand and Fine Material Layers,
Lenses or Spots from Place to Place
Relative Density, DR : Varies between 65% - 79% with an average of 71%
Corresponding to Upper Bound or Slightly Above
Medium Dense
SPT and PMT Test Results Corroborate DR
16.02.2011

Test Results on Alluvium
Downstream
0
2010
3020
4030
5040
>60
50
>60
100
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
30.0
16.02.2011
100
Upstream
2010
3020
4030
N1,60 Correlated
N1,60 Correlated
from Dr from Dr
N1,60 Correlated
N1,60 Correlated
from Dr from Dr
N1,60 from N
SPT
Data
from SPT Data
1,60
N1,60 from N
SPT
Data
from SPT Data
1,60
N1,60 Correlated
N1,60 Correlated
from PMT from PMT
30.0
30.0
5040
>60
50
>60
N1,60 Correlated
N1,60 Correlated
from PMT from PMT
30.0
Methods on Dynamic Stability of Rockfill Dams

Pseudo-Static Methods
Methods Based on Equivalent Linear Analyses

Non-linear Analyses
Empirical Methods
16.02.2011
FLAC Model of the Dam

Finite Difference Grid
16.02.2011

Material Properties
Zone
c
(kPa)
f
(deg.)
E
(MPA)
G*
(MPa)
K2,max**
Clay Core
10
26
40
0.45
14
16
Transition Zones
35
80
0.30
31
32
Rockfill (Deep)
40
100
0.25
40
40
Rockfill(Shallow)
45
100
0.25
40
40
Alluvium
33
50
0.30
19
20
Bedrock
100
45
3000
0.25
1200
***
For Constant Shear Modulus
**
***
For Varying Shear Modulus; Gmax = 1000 K2,max (s0)1/2 [Seed & Idriss, 1970]
G for Bedrock Constant for Both Cases
16.02.2011

Liquefaction Model for Alluvium
Coupled Mechanical Groundwater Flow Calculations in FLAC
Pore Pressure Change
Change in Pore Volume
Finn Byrne Liquefaction Model Built-in FLAC

Devd / g = C1 exp [ -C2(evd / g]
evd : Accumulated Irrecoverable Vol. Strain
g : Engineering Shear Strain
C1, C2 : Constants (can be derived from DR)
16.02.2011
10

Earthquake Motion Used in the Calculations
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
Acceleration (g)
0.2
0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (seconds)
Kocaeli EQ on NAFZ, 17 Aug. 1999, Mw = 7.4, Scaled to PGA = 0.65 g

16.02.2011
11
Results
Total Deformation Vectors (AL Under Shells, Constant G)
16.02.2011
12
Results
Total Deformation Vectors (AL Under Shells, Varying G)
16.02.2011
13
Results
Total Deformation Vectors (AL Replaced, Constant G)
16.02.2011
14
Results
Total Deformation Vectors (AL Replaced, Varying G)
16.02.2011
15
Results
Deformed Grid in True Scale (AL Under Shells, Constant G)
16.02.2011
16
Results
Deformed Grid in True Scale (AL Under Shells, Varying G)
16.02.2011
17
Results
Deformed Grid in True Scale (AL Replaced, Constant G)
16.02.2011
18
Results
Deformed Grid in True Scale (AL Replaced, Varying G)
16.02.2011
19
Results
Time History for Settlement
of the Middle of the Crest
1.00
AL Under Shells
AL Replaced
0.00
-1.00
Disp. (m)
-2.00
Base Motion
0.80
-3.00
0.60
-4.00
0.40
Acc. (g)
0.20
-5.00
0.00
-0.20
-6.00
-0.40
-7.00
-0.60
-0.80
0
10
15
20
25
10
15
20
25
30
Time (s)
Time (s)
16.02.2011
30
20
Results
Pore Pressure Time History
3000
Pore Pressure (kPa)
2500
2000
1500
1000
AL Under Shells
AL Replaced
500
10
15
20
25
30
Time (s)
16.02.2011
21
JOB TITLE : .
(*10^2)
FLAC (Version 6.00)
Results
7.000
LEGEND
30-Jan-11 19:52
step 537510
Flow Time
1.3463E+08
Dynamic Time 3.0000E+01
-7.424E+01 <x< 1.398E+03
-6.487E+02 <y< 8.235E+02
Post-EQ Shear Strains
5.000
Alluvium Under Shells
3.000
Max. shear strain increment

0.00E+00
6.00E-02
1.20E-01
1.80E-01
2.40E-01
3.00E-01
Contour interval= 3.00E-02
Extrap. by averaging
1.000
-1.000
-3.000
-5.000
0.100
16.02.2011
0.300
0.500
0.700
(*10^3)
0.900
1.100
1.300
22
JOB TITLE : .
(*10^2)
FLAC (Version 6.00)

LEGEND
30-Jan-11 20:27
step 521167
Flow Time
1.3463E+08
Dynamic Time 3.0006E+01
-7.424E+01 <x< 1.398E+03
-6.496E+02 <y< 8.227E+02
7.000
Results
5.000
Post-EQ Shear Strains

Alluvium Replaced by Rockfill
3.000
Max. shear strain increment

0.00E+00
3.00E-02
6.00E-02
9.00E-02
1.20E-01
1.50E-01
1.000
-1.000
Contour interval= 3.00E-02

Extrap. by averaging
-3.000
-5.000
0.100
16.02.2011
0.300
0.500
0.700
(*10^3)
0.900
1.100
1.300
23
Results
Summary of the Crest Settlements
Description
Maximum
Settlement (m)
Average
Settlement (m)
Minimum
Settlement (m)
AL Under Shells
(Constant G)
12.6
7.7
3.7
AL Under Shells
(Varying G)
8.0
6.7
5.4
AL Replaced
(Constant G)
8.6
4.8
2.1
AL Replaced
(Varying G)
6.2
4.9
4.3
16.02.2011
24
Comparison with Empirical Methods

Bureau et al, 1985
ESI = PGA x (M-4.5)3
Mw = 8.2, PGA = 0.65 g

ESI 33
Settlement 2.0% - 3.0% H
(f = 45 40 degrees)
16.02.2011
25

Pells & Fell , 2003
Mw = 8.2, PGA = 0.65 g
Damage Zone 4/5
Zone 4
Severe Damage
Settlement of 1.5% - 5% H
Zone 5
Collapse
Settlement > 5% H
16.02.2011
26

Swaisgood , 2003
Mw = 8.2, PGA = 0.65 g
Settlement = 1.8% H
16.02.2011
27
Conclusions
The deformation behaviour is not based on single failure plane as
assumed in simplified methods (such as pseudo-static, Makdisi-Seed).
Accumulated plastic deformations at both upstream and downstream
zones during the earthquake designate the earthquake behaviour.
The alluvium layer should be removed in order to reduce settlement

below free-board. (Analyses assume max. cross-section under planestrain; real settlements will be smaller due to 3-D effects)
Results by FLAC are in good agreement with empirical methods.
16.02.2011
28
THANK YOU
16.02.2011
29

141 Yildiz PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

141 Yildiz PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2nd International FLAC/DEM Symposium

February 14 - 16, 2011

Dynamic Behaviour of a 170 m

on a Highly Seismic Area

Brief Information About the Dam

Alluvium Layer (shown as AL) of

Brief Information About the Dam

: Rockfill with Central Clay Core

: Dam Site at some 11 km distance to a strike-slip major

PGA for MDE

: 20 m Alluvium Beneath the Shells Overlying Bedrock

: 5 m for normal operation level

Alluvium Layer Beneath the Shells

Alluvium Layer Beneath the Shells

SPT and PMT Test Results Corroborate DR

Alluvium Layer Beneath the Shells

Methods on Dynamic Stability of Rockfill Dams

Methods Based on Equivalent Linear Analyses

FLAC Model of the Dam

FLAC Model of the Dam

For Constant Shear Modulus

FLAC Model of the Dam

Change in Pore Volume

Finn Byrne Liquefaction Model Built-in FLAC

C1, C2 : Constants (can be derived from DR)

FLAC Model of the Dam

Kocaeli EQ on NAFZ, 17 Aug. 1999, Mw = 7.4, Scaled to PGA = 0.65 g

Pore Pressure (kPa)

FLAC (Version 6.00)

Post-EQ Shear Strains

Alluvium Under Shells

Max. shear strain increment

FLAC (Version 6.00)

Post-EQ Shear Strains

Max. shear strain increment

Contour interval= 3.00E-02

Comparison with Empirical Methods

Mw = 8.2, PGA = 0.65 g

Comparison with Empirical Methods

Comparison with Empirical Methods

The alluvium layer should be removed in order to reduce settlement

Results by FLAC are in good agreement with empirical methods.

You might also like