Validation of Dynamic Analyses of Dams and Their Equipment: Edited Contributions to the International Symposium on the Qualification of Dynamic Analyses of Dams and their Equipments, 31 August-2 September 2016, Saint-Malo, France

658 Pages·2018·231.55 MB·English

by  Fry

VALIDATION OF DYNAMIC ANALYSES OF DAMS
AND THEIR EQUIPMENT
ICOLD Proceedings series
ISSN: 2575-9159 (Print)
ISSN: 2575-9167 (Online)
Book Series Editor:
ICOLD / CIGB (International Commission on Large
Dams / Commission Internationale des Grands Barrages)
Paris, France
Volume 1
EDITED CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON THE
QUALIFICATION OF DYNAMIC ANALYSES OF DAMS AND THEIR EQUIPMENTS,
31 AUGUST–2 SEPTEMBER 2016, SAINT-MALO, FRANCE
Validation of Dynamic Analyses
of Dams and Their Equipment
Editors
Jean-Jacques Fry
EDF-CIH, Le Bourget-du-Lac, France & EURCOLD Working Group on Dams and
Earthquakes
Norihisa Matsumoto
JCOLD, Tokyo, Japan
CRC Press/Balkema is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2018, CIGB/ICOLD. All rights reserved. Published by Taylor & Francis Group plc.
Typeset by V Publishing Solutions Pvt Ltd., Chennai, India
All rights reserved. No part of this publication or the information contained herein may
be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, by photocopying, recording or otherwise, without written prior
permission from the publisher.
Although all care is taken to ensure integrity and the quality of this publication and the
information herein, no responsibility is assumed by the publishers nor the author for any
damage to the property or persons as a result of operation or use of this publication and/or
the information contained herein.
Published by: CRC Press/Balkema
Schipholweg 107C, 2316 XC Leiden, The Netherlands
e-mail: [email protected]
www.crcpress.com – www.taylorandfrancis.com
ISBN: 978-1-138-59017-5 (Hbk)
ISBN: 978-0-429-49116-0 (eBook)
Validation of Dynamic Analyses of Dams and Their Equipment – Fry & Matsumoto (Eds)
© 2018 CIGB/COLD, ISBN 978-1-138-59017-5
Table of contents
Preface by JCOLD ix
Preface by CFBR xiii
Editorial Board xv
Part 1: Introduction
Analysis on acceleration data of dams collected by JCOLD 3
T. Sasaki, T. Ohmachi & N. Matsumoto
Practical guide for selecting seismic parameters and numerical models in earthquake
analysis of dams 31
Z. Cao, N. Matsumoto, B. Tardieu, J.-J. Fry, E. Bourdarot & E. Robbe
Part 2: Validation of dynamic analysis of embankment dams
Introduction
Lessons learn in seismic analysis of embankment dams during the JCOLD-CFBR symposia 57
J.-J. Fry & N. Matsumoto
Material properties and performance of embankment dams
Modelling of stress-strain behaviour of compacted soils for seismic stability
analysis of earth-fill dams 67
F. Tatsuoka
Soil properties and seismic stability of old and new Fujinuma dams 119
F. Tatsuoka, T. Tanaka, K. Ueno, A. Duttine & Y. Mohri
Performance and analysis of the faced rockfill dams (AFRD and CFRD) 171
N. Matsumoto, H. Yoshida, T. Tsukada, M. Kashiwayanagi & H. Okumura
Evaluation of seismic performance of asphaltic concrete facing 195
Y. Nakamura & K. Narita
Validation of simplified analysis of embankment dams
A new simplified seismic stability analysis taking into account degradation of
soil undrained stress-strain properties and effects of compaction 215
A. Duttine, F. Tatsuoka, T. Shinbo & Y. Mohri
Dynamic response of embankments on soft soils: A parametric study on the
relevance of Sarma’s simplified method 235
C. Durand, E. Chaljub, P.-Y. Bard, L. Baillet, J.-J. Fry, R. Granjon & F. Renalier
v
A simplified method for estimating seismic performance of small homogeneous
earth dams 247
L.-H. Luu, G. Veylon, S. Mercklé, C. Carvajal & P.-Y. Bard
The FR-JP simplified dynamic analysis—development and validation 255
J.-J. Fry, M. Jellouli & A. des Garets
Validation of analysis of embankment dams
Analyses on earthquake-induced settlement of the Aratozawa dam due to the 2008
Iwate-Miyagi Nairiku earthquake, Japan 277
T. Ohmachi & T. Tahara
Comparison of linear and nonlinear earthquake response analyses of
Aratozawa Dam 291
Z. Cao, N. Matsumoto, P. Kolmayer & J.-J. Fry
Elasto-plastic dynamic response of fill-type dams: Total stress and effective
stress analyses 313
T. Tanaka
Effects of strong earthquakes on already strongly shaken rockfill large dams.
Application to Aratozawa Dam (Japan) 343
B. Touileb, M. Roy, F. Andrian & G. Veylon
Investigation on the dynamic characteristics and seismic behavior of Aratozawa Dam 353
N. Matsumoto, N. Yasuda, M. Naruoka & Z. Cao
Dynamic analysis of Aratozawa dam including the effect of occluded air and
pore fluid compressibility 367
L. Boutonnier & D. Mahmutovic
The reproduction analysis of Aratozawa dam during 2008 earthquake 389
N. Yasuda, N. Matsumoto, M. Naruoka & Z. Cao
Uncoupled elasto plastic dynamic response of dams 403
F. Lopez-Caballero & A. Modaressi-Farahmand-Razavi
Application of non-linear constitutive models to three-dimensional simulation
analysis of Aratozawa Dam 417
S. Tsukuni, H. Ogino, N. Yasuda & N. Matsumoto
Part 3: Concrete dams
Introduction-Context-Main results
Framework, results and lessons learned from the CFBR-JCOLD cooperation
on concrete dams 443
B. Tardieu, E. Bourdarot, E. Robbe, T. Sasaki & M. Kondo
Dynamic analysis, experimental and in-situ results, calibration and validation
for concrete dams 457
E. Bourdarot, M. Kashiwayanagi & T. Sasaki
Dynamic records on dams
Characteristics of predominant frequency of an existing arch dam—for better
safety assessment against seismic impact 471
M. Kashiwayanagi & H. Oonishi
vi
Dynamic behavior of concrete dam: Lessons learned from the JCOLD database 481
E. Robbe & B. Pallu
Characterization of the dynamic behavior of an arch dam by means of forced
vibration tests 493
J.P. Gomes & J.V. Lemos
Spatial variability of the seismic ground motion at the dam-foundation interface
of an arch dam 503
E. Koufoudi, E. Chaljub, F. Dufour, N. Humbert, E. Robbe & E. Bourdarot
Comparison between numerical analyses and seismic records on dams
3-D reproduction analysis of the Kasho concrete gravity dam during the October 6,
2000 earthquake 519
T. Sasaki, Y. Ozawa & N. Matsumoto
Seismic behaviour of Monticello Dam: A comparison between numerical results and
experimental measures 535
G. Faggiani & P. Masarati
Seismic analyses of concrete dams—comparison between finite-element analyses
and records 553
E. Robbe
Effects of radiative boundary conditions on seismic analyses of gravity dam 567
F. Andrian & P. Agresti
Simplified analyses for gravity dam
Prediction of gravity dams behavior under strong earthquakes (Part I) 583
B. Tardieu, A. Beraki & A. Si-Chaib
Prediction of gravity dams behavior under strong earthquakes (Part II): Application
to Beni-Haroun dam 593
A. Si-Chaib, B. Tardieu, M.-K. Abidi, X. Molin & P. Lignier
Towards displacement-based seismic assessment of concrete dams 609
A. Andonov, A. Iliev & K. Apostolov
Improving gravity dams simplified models: Why we should go on 621
S. Mével
Part 4: Seismic validation of equipment
A comparison of mechanical design criteria for gates, between Japan and France,
and their relevant consequences on earthquake resistance 637
P. Bouquier & M. Kashiwayanagi
Seismic analysis characterizing the behavior of one of “H72” dam’s spillway gates:
Test/calculation comparison 643
D. Graveleine & V. Lhuillier
Author index 657
vii

Validation of Dynamic Analyses of Dams and Their Equipment – Fry & Matsumoto (Eds)
© 2018 CIGB/COLD, ISBN 978-1-138-59017-5
Preface by JCOLD
Technical exchanges between CFBR and JCOLD was decided officially in 24th ICOLD
Congress 2012 in Kyoto, which was proposed by CFBR to aim at improvement and simpli-
fication of the seismic analysis method in cooperation with JCOLD according to revision
of the French seismic standards. Based on the exchange program, both representative mem-
bers had repeated to make inspections of the various dam types and to compare the revised
analysis method results with the actual measured seismic vibration on them. These activities
reached to hold the final workshop in Mont-Saint Michel in August 2016. In addition, the
1st symposium of working group “Dams and Earthquakes” of the ICOLD European Club
in Saint-Malo was held to reflect our results. I am very pleased the book is published as our
achievement of 3-year activity after the peer review by three academic experts of both France
and Japan, and I am honored to write the preface on behalf of JCOLD.
I want to devote a few pages in this preface on the efforts of earthquake and seismic design
about dams in Japan. As anyone knows, the Japanese Islands are located at the western
edge of the Pacific Ocean. This area is “the Subduction Zone” where the oceanic plates of
the Pacific Plate and the Philippine Sea Plate slip under the continental plates of the Eura-
sian Plate and the North American Plate. And Japan is one of the most famous earthquake
countries because various earthquakes such as plate type and inlands type occur in this area.
Checking damaging earthquake records for the past about 1700 years since the dawn of
history, the earthquakes with the magnitude of more than 7.0 defined by the Japan Mete-
orological Agency, which occurrence date is recorded, count 176, and among them the great
earthquakes with the magnitude of more than 8.0 count 27.
The pioneer of the seismic design of dam in Japan is “the Seismic Coefficient Method”
proposed by Dr. Nagaho Mononobe, the professor of the University of Tokyo, at the time of
the Great Kanto Earthquake with the magnitude of 7.9 hitting the Tokyo capital on Septem-
ber 1, 1923. This method was initially adopted for the design of the Komaki dam completed
in 1930. This dam still fulfills the function as the exclusive use for power generation. In no
computer era different from these days, the Seismic Coefficient Method gives the sufficient
aseismic capacity to the dam with the horizontal force by multiplying the dam deadweight
by the coefficient on the basis of the size of earthquakes in consideration of sufficient safety,
under the condition that investigation and construction are properly carried out. About 1100
dams have been constructed after the completion of the Komaki dam, and almost all of them
are designed based on the Seismic Coefficient Method. There is an undeniable fact that these
dams have not fallen into significant trouble under the above-mentioned many earthquakes
with big seismic forces up to now. I interpret the Seismic Coefficient Method becomes the
safe way including many uncertain factors because of having its primitive characteristics.
The most influential earthquake in the recent Japanese seismic design is Kobe Earth-
quake with the magnitude of 7.3 in 1995. The death toll and the completely destroyed houses
reached 6500 and about 100000, respectively. It’s not too much to say that the city lifeline
such as railways, roads, power and gas facilities was suffered a fatal damage. As for the dam
structure, most of dams in definition of ICOLD showed the satisfactory aseismic capacity,
and a few dams were suffered only slight damage. The earthquake recorded the maximum
acceleration of 818 gal at the Kobe local meteorological office, and it was a big opportunity
that the stability of dam in the seismic design was verified and evaluated by not only the
Seismic Coefficient Method but also the dynamic analysis. “Level 2 Earthquake” as the larg-
est class of earthquake motions at each region from the present into the future was defined
ix