An Eulerian Approach For Dynamic Analysis of Reservoir Adjacent To Concrete Gravity Dam
An Eulerian Approach For Dynamic Analysis of Reservoir Adjacent To Concrete Gravity Dam
An Eulerian Approach For Dynamic Analysis of Reservoir Adjacent To Concrete Gravity Dam
Abstract
The present paper deals with the finite element analysis of infinite reservoir adjacent to gravity dam. Two-dimensional
eight-node isoparametric elements are used to discretize the domain. In order to reduce the degrees of freedom in the
domain, the equation of motion for fluid motion is simulated by pressure-based Eulerian formulation. Different artificial
boundary conditions are compared to obtain most suitable boundary condition. In this comparison of boundary condi-
tions, it is noted that almost all the boundary conditions are frequency dependent. Some of the conditions are suitable
for the exciting frequency less than the fundamental frequency of reservoir. However, the boundary condition proposed
by Gogoi and Maity is suitable for all ranges of exciting frequencies. Further, the force vibration analysis is carried out
with and without considering compressibility of water. The hydrodynamic pressure on dam is independent of exciting
frequency when the compressibility of water in the reservoir is neglected. However, the effect of exciting frequency
on the performances of reservoir is distinct for compressible fluid. Similarly, the magnitude and location of maximum
hydrodynamic pressure change continuously, if the inclination of upstream face of dam is considered.
Keywords Infinite reservoir · Absorbing boundary · Compressibility · Finite element analysis · Time history analysis
* Kalyan Kumar Mandal, [email protected] | 1Department of Civil Engineering, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India.
Received: 28 February 2019 / Accepted: 29 May 2019 / Published online: 11 June 2019
Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z
boundary condition at the reservoir bottom to simulate the If the viscosity of fluid is neglected, Eq. (5) becomes
reservoir bottom absorption. In some cases, the reservoir
Tij = −p𝛿ij (6)
is considering water to be incompressible [17–19]. On the
other hand, Maity and Bhattacharya [13], Gogoi and Maity Generalized Navier–Stokes equations of motion are given
[7], Mirzabozorg et al. [8]. Mandal and Maity [9, 10, 20], Adhi- by
kary and Mandal [21] considered water to be compressible.
𝜕Tij
( )
It is apparent from the literatures referred above that for 𝜕vi 𝜕v
𝜌 + vj i = + 𝜌Bi (7)
precise estimation of hydrodynamic pressure on concrete 𝜕t 𝜕xj 𝜕xj
gravity dam, finite element analysis is considered to be an
efficient numerical tool in which water in the reservoir can where Bi is the body force and ρ is the mass density of
be modelled as either compressible or incompressible fluid. fluid.Substituting Eq. (6) in Eq. (7), the following relations
Several truncation boundary conditions are available in the are obtained.
existing literatures. However, the suitability of these bound- ( )
ary conditions is not explained. In the present study, a com- 𝜕vi 𝜕v 𝜕p
𝜌 + vj i = 𝜌Bi − (8)
puter code in MATLAB environment has been developed to 𝜕t 𝜕xj 𝜕xi
compare existing boundary conditions. Further, the study is
extended to observe the effect of compressibility of water If u and v are the velocity components along x and y axes,
and the inclination of dam upstream face. respectively, and fx and fy are body forces along x and y direc-
tion, respectively, and if the convective terms are neglected,
the equation of motion may be written as
2 Theoretical formulation 1 𝜕p 𝜕u
+ = fx (9)
𝜌 𝜕x 𝜕t
The state of stress for a Newtonian fluid is defined by an iso-
tropic tensor as
1 𝜕p 𝜕v
+ = fy (10)
� 𝜌 𝜕y 𝜕t
Tij = −p𝛿ij + Tij (1)
′ Neglecting the body forces, Eqs. (9) and (10) become
where Tij is total stress. Tij is viscous stress tensor which
depends only on the rate of deformation in such a way 1 𝜕p 𝜕u
+ =0 (11)
that the value becomes zero when the fluid is under rigid 𝜌 𝜕x 𝜕t
body motion or rest. The variable p is defined as hydrody-
namic pressure whose value is independent explicitly on 1 𝜕p 𝜕v
+ =0 (12)
the rate of deformation, and 𝛿ij is Kronecker delta. For iso- 𝜌 𝜕y 𝜕t
′
tropic linear elastic material, the most general form of Tij is
The continuity equation of fluid in two dimensions is
� expressed as
Tij = 𝜆Δ𝛿ij + 2𝜇Dij (2) ( )
𝜕p 𝜕u 𝜕v
+ 𝜌c 2 + =0 (13)
where μ and λ are two material constants. μ is known as 𝜕t 𝜕x 𝜕y
first coefficient of viscosity or viscosity and (λ + 2μ/3) is sec-
ond coefficient of viscosity or bulk viscosity. Dij is the rate where c is the acoustic wave speed in fluid. Now, differen-
of deformation tensor and is expressed as tiating Eqs. (11) and (12) with respect to x and y, respec-
tively, the following relations are obtained.
1 𝜕vi 𝜕vj 1 𝜕2p 𝜕 𝜕u
( )
Dij = ( + ) and Δ = D11 + D22 + D33 (3) + =0 (14)
2 𝜕yj 𝜕xi 𝜌 𝜕x 2 𝜕x 𝜕t
Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z Research Article
Differentiating Eq. (13) with respect to time, the following And if the surface weave is neglected, the condition
expression can be obtained. becomes
𝜕2p
{ ( ) ( )}
2 𝜕 𝜕u 𝜕 𝜕v p(H, x) = 0 (21b)
+ 𝜌c + =0 (17)
𝜕t 2 𝜕x 𝜕t 𝜕y 𝜕t (ii) At surface II
Thus, from Eqs. (16) and (17), one can find the following At water–tank wall interface, the pressure should satisfy
expression:
𝜕p
(0, y, t) = 𝜌f aei𝜔 t (22)
1 𝜕2p 1 𝜕2p 1 𝜕2 p
( )
𝜕n
+ − =0 (18)
𝜌 𝜕x 2 𝜌 𝜕y 2 𝜌c 2 𝜕t 2
where aei𝜔 t is the horizontal component of the ground accel-
Simplifying Eq. (18), the equation for compressible fluid eration
√ in which 𝜔 is the circular frequency of vibration and
may be obtained i = −1. n is the outwardly directed normal to the element
surface along the interface. 𝜌f is the mass density of the fluid.
1
∇2 p(x, y, t) = p(x,
̈ y, t) (19) (iii) At surface III
c2
If the compressibility of fluid is neglected, Eq. (19) will be If this surface is considered as rigid, then pressure
modified as should satisfy the following condition
∇2 p(x, y, t) = 0 (20) 𝜕p
(x, 0, t) = 0.0 (23a)
The pressure distribution in the fluid domain may be 𝜕n
obtained by solving Eq. (19) with the following boundary And if the reservoir bottom absorption is considered,
conditions. A typical geometry of tank–water system is Eq. (23a) is modified as [16]
shown in Fig. 1.
𝜕p
(x, 0, t) = −qp(x,
̇ 0, t) (23b)
(i) At surface I 𝜕n
where
Considering the effect of surface wave of the fluid, the
1 1−𝛼
( )
boundary condition of the free surface is taken as q= (23c)
c 1+𝛼
1 𝜕p
p̈ + =0 (21a) 𝛼 is the frequency-independent reflection coefficient.
g 𝜕y
(iii) At surface IV
The specification of the far-boundary condition is one
of the most important features in the FE analysis of a semi-
infinite or infinite reservoir. This is due to the fact that the
Y Surface I
developed hydrodynamic pressure, which affects the
response of the structure, is dependent on the truncation
boundary condition. Application of Sommerfeld [11] radia-
tion condition at the truncation boundary leads to
Surface IV 𝜕p
=0 (24a)
Reservoir 𝜕n
Surface II
L represents the distance between the structure and the
truncation boundary. Incorporating the effect of reservoir
8
Rigid Dam
bottom absorption, Sharan [12] has incorporated the fol-
lowing condition.
Point A
𝜕p 𝛱 1
= − p − ṗ (24b)
Surface III
𝜕n 2H c
x
L According to Maity and Bhattacharya [13] and Gogoi and
Maity [7], the following boundary condition at truncation
surface is proposed.
Fig. 1 A typical geometry of dam–reservoir system
Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z
𝜕p ( 1
)
∫
[ ]T 𝜕p
(24c)
∑
= 𝜁m − ṗ
{ } { } { } { }
𝜕n c [F] = Nr d𝛤 = Ff + Ffs + Ffb + Ft
𝜕n
𝛤
According to Maity and Bhattacharya [13], (32)
Here the subscripts f, fs, fb and t stand for the free sur-
(−1)m+1 ∕(2m − 1) e(−f m x∕H) cos(𝜆m y∕H)
∞
[ ]
𝜁m = −
𝛴m=1 face, fluid–structure interface, fluid–bed interface and
(−1)m+1 ∕(2m − 1) fm e(−f m x∕H) cos(𝜆m y∕H) truncation surface, respectively. For surface wave, Eq. (21a)
∞
[ ]
𝛴m=1
(25a) may be written in finite element form as
And from Gogoi and Maity [7], { } 1[ ]
Ff = − Rf {p}
g
̈ (33)
2
∞ 𝜆 m Im
e(−k m x ) 𝛹m
( )
i 𝛴m=1
𝜁m = −
𝛽m
(25b) in which
∞ 𝜆 2m Im (−k x ) ( )
𝛺� c 𝛴m=1 e m 𝛹m
𝛽m km [ ]T [ ]
∫
[ ] ∑
Rf = Nr Nr d𝛤 (34)
2.1 Finite element formulation for fluid domain 𝛤f
By using Galerkin approach and assuming pressure to be At the dam–reservoir interface, if {a} is the vector of
the nodal unknown variable, the discretized form of Eq. (19) nodal accelerations of generalized coordinates, {Ffs} may
may be written as be expressed as
{ } [ ]
Ffs = −𝜌 Rfs {a} (35)
∫
1 ∑
[ ∑ ]
Nrj ∇2 Nri pi − 2 Nri p̈ i d𝛺 = 0 (26) in which
c
𝛺
∫
[ ] ∑ [ ]T [ ]
where Nrj is the interpolation function for the reservoir and Rfs = Nr [T ] Nd d𝛤
(36)
Ω is the region under consideration. Using Green’s theo- 𝛤fs
rem, Eq. (26) may be transformed to
∫ c ∫ ∫
1 ∑
− pi + pi d𝛺 − 2 Nrj Nri d𝛺 p̈ i + Nrj d𝛤 pi = 0 (27)
𝜕x 𝜕x 𝜕y 𝜕y 𝜕n
𝛺 𝛺 𝛤
in which i varies from 1 to total number of nodes and Γ where [T] is the transformation matrix at fluid structure
represents the boundaries of the fluid domain. The last interface and Nd is the shape function of dam. At reser-
term of the above equation may be written as voir–bed interface,
{ }
Ffd = 0 (37)
∫
𝜕p
{F} = Nrj d𝛤 (28)
𝜕n And at the truncation boundary:
𝛤
{ } [ ] 1[ ]
The whole system of Eq. (27) may be written in a matrix Ft = 𝜁m Rt {p} − Rt {p}
̇ (38)
C
form as
Ē P̈ + Ḡ {P} = F
∫
[ ]{ } [ ] { }
(29) [ ] ∑
Rt =
[ ]T [ ]
Nr Nr d𝛤
(39)
where 𝛤t
∫
1 ∑ [ ]T [ ] After substitution all terms, Eq. (29) becomes
Ē = 2
[ ]
Nr Nr d𝛺 (30)
C
[E] P̈ + [A] Ṗ + [G]{P} = Fr
{ } { } { }
𝛺 (40)
[ ] where
∫
[ ] ∑ 𝜕 [ ]T 𝜕 [ ] 𝜕 [ ]T 𝜕 [ ]
Ḡ = N N + N N d𝛺 (31) [ ] 1[ ]
𝜕x r 𝜕x r 𝜕y r 𝜕y r [E] = Ē + Rf (41)
𝛺 g
Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z Research Article
1 3.121 3.115
[G] = Ḡ + 𝜁m Rt
[ ] [ ]
(44)
2 4.812 4.749
For any given acceleration at the fluid–structure inter- 3 8.101 7.796
face, Eq. (40) is solved to obtain the hydrodynamic pres- 4 9.897 9.300
sure within the fluid. 5 10.324 9.958
Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z
1 0.2 0.95 0.1073 0.8080 653.03 0.3152 193.8 Not defined 0.10378 − 3.30
0.5 0.6937 546.51 0.3171 195.5 0.10872 1.38
0.2 0.5 0.1414 4.2313 2892.4 0.2930 107.2 0.14609 3.316
0.5 0.2657 8.80 0.2939 107.8 0.14359 1.54
4 0.2 0.95 4.4364 33.01 644.07 0.6969 − 84.2 Not defined 4.46194 0.57
0.5 4.864 9.63 1.1068 − 75.0 4.46040 0.53
1.0 6.488 46.24 2.0032 − 54.9 4.43624 0.0
0.2 0.5 1.2187 56.998 4577 0.6838 − 43.8 1.86418 52.9
0.5 12.658 93.86 1.0729 − 9.74 1.28262 5.19
1.0 11.661 852.90 1.3630 11.59 1.24975 2.48
100 0.02 0.95 0.7431 25.618 3347.4 0.6550 − 11.8 0.7402 − 0.04 0.74247 − 0.07
0.1 0.5 0.7430 5.1551 593.7 0.7064 − 4.93 0.7423 − 0.01 0.7431 0.00
0.02 25.697 3347.4 0.6550 − 11.8 0.7402 − 0.04 0.74236 − 0.08
0.1 5.1710 593.7 0.7064 − 4.92 0.7422 − 0.01 0.74301 0.00
0.8
y/H
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Pressure coefficient
Fig. 2 Distribution of hydrodynamic pressure coefficient along an
inclined surface for Tc/H = 1
Fig. 3 Distribution of hydrodynamic pressure coefficient along an
inclined surface for Tc/H = 4
3.3 Analysis of infinite reservoir with different
inclinations of upstream face for compressible
fluid 1.2
30 degree inclinaon 45 degree inclinaon
60 degree inclinaon
1
In this section, the hydrodynamic pressure at the upstream
0.8
face of concrete gravity dam having different inclinations
is computed against harmonic excitations of different fre- 0.6
y/H
Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z Research Article
0.8 0.3
Pressure coefficient
0.6 0.1
y/H
0.4 -0.1
0.2
-0.3
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 -0.5
0 5 10 15 20
Pressure coefficient
Time (sec)
3 60 degree inclinaon
2
Pressure coefficient
-1
-2
-3
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Time (sec)
1
0.1
Pressure coefficient
0 0.05
-1 0
-0.05
-2
-0.1
-3
-0.15
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Time(sec) -0.2
-0.25
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fig. 7 Variation of hydrodynamic pressure at point A for Tc/H = 4
Time (sec)
Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z
with the increase in angle of inclination, the maximum 30 degree inclinaon 45 degree inclinaon
60 degree inclinaon
hydrodynamic pressure occurs when the angle of the 0.5
0° and this increase is more
upstream face of the dam is 6
when the reflection coefficient is 0.95. 0.3
Pressure coefficient
0.1
3.4 Analysis of infinite reservoir with different
inclinations of upstream face for incompressible -0.1
fluid
-0.3
Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2019) 1:709 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0693-z Research Article
this slope. The variation is almost parabolic for vertical 10. Mandal KK, Maity D (2016) Transient response of concrete grav-
upstream face, and the maximum pressure occurs at the ity dam considering dam-reservoir-foundation interaction. J
Earthq Eng 00:1–23
heel of the dam. However, for other upstream slope the 11. Sommerfeld A (1949) Partial differential equations in physics.
distribution is something different and maximum hydro- Academic Press, New York
dynamic pressure occurs just above the hell of rigid dam. 12. Sharan SK (1992) Efficient finite element analysis of hydrody-
namic pressure on dams. J Comput Struct 42:713–723
13. Maity D, Bhattacharya SK (1999) Time domain analysis of infinite
reservoir by finite element method using a novel far-boundary
Compliance with ethical standards condition. Int J Finite Elem Anal Des 32:85–96
14. Lotfi V (1986) Analysis of response of dams to earthquakes.
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of Geotechnical engineering report, GR86-2. Department of Civil
interest. Engineering, University of Texas, Austin
15. Chandrashaker R, Humar JL (1993) Fluid-foundation interaction
in the seismic response of gravity dams. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn
22:1067–1084
References 16. Tan H, Chopra AK (1995) Earthquake analysis of arch dams
including dam-water-foundation rock interaction. J Earthquake
1. Westergaard HM (1933) Water pressure on dams during earth- Eng Struct Dyn 24:1453–1474
quakes. Trans ASCE 98:418–472 17. Pasbani-Khiavi M, Gharabaghi ARM, Abedi K (2008) Dam-reser-
2. Olson LG, Bathe KJ (1983) A study of displacement-based fluid voir interaction analysis using finite element model. In: The 4th
finite elements for calculating frequencies of fluid and fluid– world conference on earthquake engineering
structure systems. Nuclear Engg Des 76(6):137–151 18. Ghorbani MA, Pasbani-Khiavi M (2011) Hydrodynamic modeling
3. Chen HC, Taylor RL (1990) Vibration analysis of fluid solid sys- of infinite reservoir using finite element method. Int J Civil Envi-
tems using a finite element displacement formulation. Int J ron Struct Constr Archit Eng 5(8):465–481
Numer Methods Eng 29(4):683–698 19. Zeidan BA (2015) Seismic finite element analysis of dam-res-
4. Bermudez A, Duran R, Muschietti MA, Rodriguez R, Solomin J ervoir-foundation interaction. In: International conference on
(1995) Finite element vibration analysis of fluid–solid systems advances in structural and geotechnical engineering
without spurious modes. SIAM J. Numer Anal 32(5):1280–1295 20. Mandal KK, Maity D (2017) Performance of aged dam-reservoir-
5. Maity D, Bhattacharyya SK (1997) Finite element analysis of foundation coupled system with absorptive reservoir bottom.
fluid-structure system for small fluid displacement. Int J Struct ISET J Earthq Technol 54(1):1–16
17(2):1–18 21. Adhikary R, Mandal KK (2018) Dynamic analysis of water storage
6. Pelecanos L, Kontoe S, Lidija ZL (2013) Numerical modelling of tank with rigid block at bottom. Ocean Syst Eng 8(1):57–77
hydrodynamic pressures on dams. J Comput Geotech 53:68–82 22. Sami A, Lotfi V (2007) Comparison of coupled and decoupled
7. Gogoi I, Maity D (2006) A non-reflecting boundary condition for modal approaches in seismic analysis of concrete gravity dams
the finite element modeling of infinite reservoir with layered in time domain. Finite Elem Anal Des 43:1003–1012
sediment. J Adv Water Res 29:1515–1527 23. Bouaanani N, Paultre P, Proulx J (2003) A closed-form formula-
8. Mirzabozorg H, Varmazyari M, Ghaemian M (2010) Dam-reser- tion for earthquake-induced hydrodynamic pressure on gravity
voir-massed foundation system and travelling wave along res- dams. J Sound Vib 261:573–582
ervoir bottom. J Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(8):746–756
9. Mandal KK, Maity D (2016) Earthquake response of aged con- Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
crete dam considering interaction of dam reservoir coupled jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
system. Asian J Civil Eng 17(5):571–592
Vol.:(0123456789)