A

PROJECT
ON
SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF CONCRETE ARCH DAMS

BY

VVKS SAI CHARAN

GUIDED BY

Dr. D. NEELIMA SATYAM

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

HYDERABAD
(Deemed University)

September 2008
ABSTRACT:

The analysis of seismic response of dam-reservoir systems is an important problem in the

field of earthquake engineering, which cannot be studied considering the structure as an
isolated body under the influence of uniform base motion. These are important effects due to
space distribution of the excitation, the dam-water, dam-foundation, water-foundation, that
make necessary of 3D models and interaction between them. The water is assumed to be
compressible leading to little amplitudes. The water level in the reservoir has an significant
effect on the (non-linear) dynamic analysis of an dam. Mainly, the response of arch dam due
to earthquake motion is studied. The dynamic effects of earthquake along with above
mentioned interactions are studied through computed results. An computer programmed tool
which is very efficient in finite element analysis is to be choosen and used to study dynamic
response of arch dam along with above mentioned interactions.
SL.NO. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO.
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 RESERVOIRS
1.2 Dams
1.3 ARCH DAMS
1.4 BASICS OF ARCH DAMS
2 DEFINITION OF SAFETY OF ARCH DAM
3 METHOD OF ANALYSIS
4 EVALUATION OF STATIC LOADING
5 EVALUATION OF SEISMIC LOADING
6 POST EARTHQUAKE SAFETY EVALUATION
7 SLIDING STABILITY
8 LOADING
8.1 DEAD LOAD
8.2 NORMAL WATER LOADS
8.3 FLOOD LOADS
8.4 UPLIFT
8.5 SILT LOAD
8.6 ICE LOAD
8.7 STATIC LOAD
8.8 ICE IMPACT
8.9 HYDRAULIC LOADING OF SPILLWAYS
8.1
0 THERMAL LOADING
8.1
1 TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION
8.1
2 EARTHQUAKE LOADING
9 LOAD COMBINATIONS
10 STATIC ANALYSIS
11 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS
12 HISTORIAL FAILURES OF DAMS
13 CONCLUSIONS
14 REFERENCES
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Reservoir:

A reservoir is a large, artificial lake created by constructing a dam across a river. Broadly
speaking, any water pool or a lake may be termed a reservoir. However, the term reservoir
in water resources engineering is used in a restricted sense for a comparatively large body
of water stored on the upstream of a dam constructed for this purpose. Thus a dam and a
reservoir exist together. The discharge in a river generally varies considerably during
different periods of a year. This is especially so for a country like India in which about 75% of
the total precipitation occurs during the monsoon season from June to September. Most of
the rivers carry very little or no water during non-monsoon period, except the Himalayan
rivers, which also carry a substantial discharge in the non-monsoon period due to melting of
snow. During the period of low flow, it is not possible to meet the water demands for various
purposes such as irrigation, water supply and hydroelectric power. To regulate the water
supplies, a reservoir is created on the river to store water during the rainy season. The
stored water is later released during the period of low flows to meet the demand. In the
monsoon season, the reservoir store excess water when the discharge in the river is high.
Thus besides releasing the water during the period of low flows, the reservoirs also
help in flood control.

Types of Reservoirs
If a reservoir serves only one purpose, it is called a single-purpose reservoir. On the other
hand, if it serves more than one purpose, it is termed a multipurpose reservoir. Because in
most of the cases, a single purpose reservoir is not economically feasible, it is the general
practice in India to develop multipurpose reservoirs.

Figure-01: Pictorial view of Dam, Reservoir and Spillway

Some Basic Definitions Related to Reservoir:

1. Full reservoir level (FRL): The full reservoir level (FRL) is the highest water level to
which the water surface will rise during normal operating conditions. The effective storage of
the reservoir is computed upto the full reservoir level. The FRL is the highest level at
which water is intended to be held for various uses without any passage of water through the
spillway. In case of dams without spillway gates, the FRL is equal to the crest level of the
spillway. However, if the spillway is gated, the FRL is equal to the level of the top of the
gates.

2. Maximum water level (MWL): The maximum water level is the maximum level to
which the water surface will rise when the design flood passes over the spillway. The
maximum water level is higher than the full reservoir level so that some surcharge storage is
available between the two levels to absorb flood. The maximum water level is also called the
maximum pool level (MPL) or maximum flood level (MFL).

3. Minimum pool level: The minimum pool level is the lowest level up to which the
water is withdrawn from the reservoir under ordinary conditions. The minimum pool level
generally corresponds to the elevation of the lowest outlet (or sluiceway) of the dam.
However, in the case of a reservoir for hydroelectric power; the minimum pool level is fixed
after considering the minimum working head required for the efficient working of turbines.
The storage below the minimum pool level is not useful and is called the dead storage.

1.2 DAMS:

A dam is a hydraulic structure of fairly impervious material built across a river to

create a reservoir on its upstream side for impounding water for various purposes e.g., flood
control, water supply for humans or livestock, irrigation, energy generation, recreation, or
pollution control. A dam and a reservoir are complements of each other. A distinction should
be made between a weir and a dam. A weir is also a structure built across a river; however,
its purpose is not to store water but to divert it.Dams are generally constructed in the
mountainous reach of the river where the valley is narrow and the foundation is good.
Generally, a hydropower station is also constructed at or near the dam site to develop
hydropower.

1.3 Arch Dams:

Arch dam is a solid concrete dam, curved upstream in plan. In addition to resisting
part of the pressure of the reservoir by its own weight, it obtains a large measure of stability
by transmitting the remainder of the water pressure and other loads by arch action into the
canyon walls. Successful arch action is dependent on a unified monolithic structure, and
special care must be taken in the construction of an arch dam to ensure that no structural
discontinuities, such as open joints or cracks, exist at the time the structure assumes its
water load. The complete design of a concrete arch dam includes not only the determination
of the most efficient and economical proportions for the water impounding structure, but also
the determination of the most suitable appurtenant structures for the control and release of
the impounded water consistent with the purpose or function of the project. This manual
presents the basic assumptions, design considerations, methods of analysis, and
procedures used by designers within the Engineering and Research Center, Bureau of
Reclamation, for the design of an arch dam and its appurtenant works.
 Figure -2: Basic alignment of Arch Dam

1.4 Basics of Arch Dams

Arch dams require a high level of stress and force analysis in order to create a sufficient
design. The main forces against an arch dam is the hydrostatic pressure provided by the
reservoir behind it, uplift which is water pressure beneath the dam, the weight of the dam
itself and finally all the forces combined. Other forces that effect a dam include but are not
limited to are temperature, chemical reactions, settling, silt accumulation and earthquakes.
The arch squeezes together as the water pushes against it. The weight of the dam also
pushes the structure down into the ground.
 Figure-3: Basic Forces acting on Arch Dams

Most often, the arch dam is made of concrete and placed in a "V" shaped valley. The
foundation or abutments for an arch dam must be very stable and proportionate to the
concrete. There are two basic designs for an arch dam: constant radius which have constant
radius of curvature and variable radius dams which have both upstream and downstream
curves that systematically decreasing in radius below the crest. A dam that is double-curved
in both its horizontal and vertical planes may be called a dome dam. Arch dams with more
than one contiguous arch or plane are described as multiple-arch dams. At an increased
cost, an arch dam can have steel rods or pre-stressed steel cables reinforcements and
therefore requires less concrete than does a gravity dam or arch-gravity dam. As arch dams
are commonly constructed in remote mountainous areas, less material is beneficial when it
has to be delivered with difficulty to the site.

Arch dams are generally classified as thin, medium or thick. If width of an arch dam's base is
2/10 of the dam's height or less it is thin. Any base and height ratio greater than 2/10 but
less than 3/10 is considered medium. Thick is a ratio of 3/10 or greater. Additionally, an arch
dam's base is historically just as thick as the crest but often it is twice as thick as the crest. [10]
Contraction joints are normally placed every 20 m in the arch dam and are later filled with
grout after the control cools and cures.

2 DEFINITION OF SAFETY OF ARCH DAM:

Safety is defined as their adequacy against an uncontrolled release of reservoir water.

The structural integrity is maintained and the dam is considered safe if overstressing,
sliding, and other possible modes of failure will not occur. A safety evaluation, therefore,
should identify all significant failure modes and conduct appropriate analyses to assure
that the structural stability of the dam is maintained. Overstressing of concrete arch dams
may exhibit a tendency toward developing a partial failure, if large tensile stresses from the
linear-elastic analysis indicate extensive joint opening and cracking . Considering that the
ultimate load-resisting capacity of an arch dam is limited by the compressive strength of the
concrete (unless foundation or other mode of failures occur first), severe and widespread
joint opening and cracking might eventually exhaust the capacity of the concrete to carry
compression due to subsequent load redistributions, or might form surfaces along which
partial sliding could occur. Whether such partial failures could actually occur is unknown,
because they have not been observed previously, and also because of the inherent
redundancy in arch dams and the fact that arch action might restrain movements of the
portions separated by joint opening and cracking. With respect to sliding failures, two types
of potential foundation sliding instability cases should be considered. The first type is
potential sliding of rock wedges within the foundation and in contact with the dam, and the
second is potential sliding along the contact between the dam and foundation rock. The
sliding of rock wedges typically occurs along one potential failure plane (plane sliding) or
along the line of intersection of two of these planes (wedge sliding). For a rock wedge to be
kinematically capable of failure, the direction of sliding must intersect or "daylight" a free
surface downstream from the dam.

While an arch dam might be capable of bridging a small unstable foundation block at the
bottom, large, unstable wedges of rock in the abutments could endanger the safety of the
dam. In fact, the first failure of an arch dam at Malpasset Dam in 1959 resulted from
displacements of a large wedge of rock in the left abutment. Sliding stability along the dam-
foundation contact of a concrete arch dam is less likely because of the wedging produced by
arch action and embedment of the structure into the rock. However, arch dams with
relatively flat abutment slopes, or arch dams with abutment thrust blocks supported by rock
foundations with inadequate shear strength could be susceptible to sliding along the
foundation contact and should be considered.

Other cases requiring special considerations include structural deformations and

deterioration of concrete caused by alkali-aggregate reactions, and foundation or abutment
erosion due to overtopping, which if severe, could lead to instability.

3 METHOD OF ANALYSIS:

Usually, three dimensional finite-element analysis is preferred for the static and dynamic
analysis of arch dams. Trial load method may be used for static stress analysis only, if the
dam has a simple geometry and uniform material parameters can be assumed for the
concrete and for the foundation rock. Other mathematical formulations and approaches can
also be employed, but the accuracy of such methods should be verified by comparison with
the finite-element analyses.

4 Evaluation for Static Loading

The performance of concrete arch dams under static loading conditions should be evaluated
using deflections and stresses. Concrete and foundation rock material parameters used in
the analyses should be determined on the basis of field and laboratory investigations
In situations where determination of certain material parameters is neither cost effective nor
conclusive, their effects on the dam response should be evaluated by parameter sensitivity
analyses. All applicable static loads should be considered and combined according to their
probabilities of occurrence in three categories of Usual, Unusual, and Special loading
combinations.

The basic results of analyses should include both deflections and stresses developed in the
dam. Plots of computed deflections provide a visual means for checking the numerical
results, and whenever possible they should be correlated with the observed deflections
measured by instrumentation monitoring (Section 11-7), in order to verify and possibly
calibrate the mathematical model. The initial position and temperature of the dam is not
typically known. For this reason, when comparing computed deflections to observed
deflections, it is the differential deflection rather than the absolute deflection that is
meaningful. Stress results are used to evaluate the dam performance in the response to
each loading combination.

5 Evaluation for Seismic Loading

The performance of concrete arch dams under earthquake loading should be evaluated by
conducting a three-dimensional linear-elastic dynamic analysis using the finite-element
method. The FE model of the dam system should account for the damwater and the dam-
foundation rock interaction effects. Material parameters for the concrete and foundation rock
should be established by giving due consideration to the effects of the rate of loading typical
of earthquake response. The design earthquake for the safety evaluation of arch dams is the
maximum credible earthquake (MCE). The MCE is an extremely rare event capable of
producing the largest ground motion that could ever occur at the dam site. An MCE should
be considered to be an extreme loading condition, for which significant damage would be
acceptable, but the dam must not rupture and thus threaten life and property downstream.
Seismic input ground motions for the MCE should be developed from a deterministic ground
motion analysis, but may be supplemented by a probabilistic ground motion analysis should
evaluation of the likelihood of the MCE ground motions become desirable. The earthquake
response of the dam may be computed using the response-spectrum mode-superposition
method, but if maximum stresses exceed the allowable values a linear time-history analysis
can be helful to assessing the severity of joint opening and tensile cracking .The dam may
be considered safe for the MCE if, after the effects of crack and joint opening have been
accounted for, it can be shown that the concrete is not over-compressed and free cantilevers
do not topple.

6 Post-earthquake Safety Evaluation

A post-earthquake safety evaluation is required to assure the safety of the dam if, a
damaging MCE should occur near the dam site, or the predicted performance of the dam
due to a postulated MCE should indicate substantial damage. This evaluation should
consider the effects of static loads as well as severe aftershock earthquakes that invariably
occur after any major quake. Factors of safety for the post-earthquake conditions are the
same as those given for the usual case.

7 Sliding Stability

To assure safety against sliding along identified kinematically admissible failure planes in
the dam , at the dam foundation/interface, or in the foundation, the shear friction factor of
safety assuming no cohesion shall be 1.5 for normal and unusual loading, and greater than
1 for extreme loading. These safety factors assume that stability has been evaluated with
respect to conservative shear strength parameters.

8 LOADING:

Arch dams are subjected to various loads. Loads can be categorized into 2 basic types,
static and dynamic. Static loads are sustained loads that do not change, or change very
slowly compared to the natural periods of vibration of the structure. A dam’s response to
static loads is governed by its stiffness. Examples of static loads include dead load, hydraulic
load from normal or flood conditions, forces from flowing water changing direction, uplift,
forces from ice expansion, and internal stresses caused by temperature changes. Dynamic
loads are transitory in nature. They are typically seconds or less in duration. Because of the
speed at which they act, the inertial and damping characteristics of the dam as well as its
stiffness affect the dam's behavior. Examples of dynamic loads include earthquake-induced
forces, blast-induced forces, fluttering nappe forces, or forces caused by the impact of ice,
debris, or boats.

8.1 Dead Load

Dead load in arch dams is the weight of the concrete plus appurtenant structures such as
gates, bridges, and outlet works. The unit weight of the concrete is based on the laboratory
test results of the mix design and/or physical measurements of concrete cores. However,
mass concrete containing natural sand and gravel or crushed-rock aggregates generally
weighs about 150 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). In the absence of measured data,
this unit weight can be assumed for the concrete. Dead load is normally imposed on
cantilever monoliths prior to the grouting of the contraction joints. This should be taken into
account when analyzing then dam.
Compared to the dam itself, the weight of appurtenances is typically negligible and may
be ignored in the stress analysis. Massive outlet works and overflow-ogee-weir spillways,
however, may have noticeable effects on the static and dynamic stresses and their
weight should be considered.

Hydraulic Loading

8.2 Normal Water Loads

Normal water loads include hydrostatic pressures on the dam faces resulting from the
reservoir and tailwater during the normal operation of the hydroelectric project. The reservoir
levels should correspond to the maximum normal-high-water-level (NHWL), which is usually
the level of the spillway crest for ungated spillways and the top of the spillway gates for
gated spillways. Normal tailwater can be obtained from historical operation records.

For computation of normal water loads, headwater and tailwater pressures are considered
to vary linearly with depth and to act normal to the dam surfaces. In addition to the dam
surface, headwater pressures should also be applied on the foundation rock at the valley
floor and flanks since reservoir water load causes foundation rock to deform and produce
additional deformations and stresses in the dam. In computation of water loads, a constant
unit weight of 62.4 pcf may be assumed for fresh water.

Acting in the opposite direction, tailwater generally produces stresses with opposite signs
of those induced by the headwater. The effect of tailwater, therefore, is to reduce both
tensile and compressive stresses below the tailwater elevations. This effect diminishes
when the tailwater depth is less than 20% of the dam height. For these reasons, it is
generally considered conservative to ignore tailwater loads in an arch dam stress analysis,
and may be omitted for simplicity. If, however, tailwater effects uplift pressure on a failure
plane on which sliding stability is being analyzed, uplift should be considered.

8.3 Flood Loads

The basic flood loads include hydrostatic pressures on the dam faces resulting from the
reservoir and tailwater elevations which occur during the passage of the inflow design
flood (IDF). The water pressures due to flood are also assumed to vary linearly with depth
and to act normal to the dam surfaces and to valley floor and flanks of the foundation rock.

8.4 Uplift

Uplift or pore water pressures develop when water enters the interstitial spaces within the
body of an arch dam as well as in the foundation joints, cracks, and seams. Under static
loading conditions, the effect of pore water pressure is to reduce normal compressive
stresses within the concrete and to increase the corresponding normal tensile stresses
should they exist (NRC 1990). A computer analysis of these effects on Morrow Point
Dam, a 465-ft-high thin arch dam, and on a thick arch dam of similar height and crest
length, showed a stress change of less than 20 psi -- i.e. about less than 5% of the tensile
strength of the concrete. Because of this minor change in stress, the effects of pore water
pressure on stresses within an arch dam may be ignored in the absence of any cracks.
When the stress results and field conditions for a gravity (thick) arch dam indicates that
tensile cracking will develop at the dam-foundation interface, uplift should be considered
and applied as external loads on both faces of the crack. Uplift does not need to be
considered in the stress analysis for thin arch dams.

Uplift should always be considered in the sliding stability analysis of the potential failure
planes within the foundation or along the dam-foundation interface When required,
distribution of uplift pressure at the contact surface between an arch dam and the foundation
rock can be determined using the field data from piezometer readings or by performing
seepage analysis. In general, the distribution of uplift pressure is influenced by the
geological conditions of the foundation rock near the base of the dam, by location and length
of drain, and by the crack length.

8.5 Silt Load

Existing arch dams are usually subjected to silt pressure due to sedimentary materials
deposited in the reservoir over many years. However, the significance of silt pressure as an
additional static load depends on the sediment depth. For U-shaped and broad base arch
dams, sediment depth of less than 1/4 of the dam height produces negligible deformations
and stresses (10 to 15 psi), and thus their effects may be ignored.

8.6 Ice Load

Ice can produce significant loads against the face of an arch dam. For this reason, ice load
must be considered where reservoir freezing can be expected. Ice loads can be categorized
into 2 different types; static loads, produced by the ice in contact with the damwhen the
reservoir is completely frozen, and dynamic loads, caused by the impact of large floating
sheets of ice colliding with the dam.

8.7 Static load

This type of ice load is caused by the thermal expansion of the ice or by the wind and
current drag. Pressures generated by the thermal expansion depend on the temperature
rise and the ice properties. Wind drag depends on properties of the exposed surface and
on the direction and velocity of the wind. The magnitude of ice loading depends on the
thickness of the ice cover. When actual measurements of ice pressure are not available, ice
loading may be taken as 5 kips per square foot along the contact surface with the dam.

The radial distribution of ice pressure is of some concern, especially for thin arch dams.
Arch dam design assumes that loads will be radially uniform. If this is not the case, large
bending stress in the arch direction could result. Radial variation of the ice load could be
caused by un-even heating, differences in thickness, or the absence of ice over part of the
arch due to powerhouse intakes.

8.8 Ice Impact

Another possible source of ice loading is ice impact. In many northern rivers, large ice
sheets, sometimes weighing many tons, can float down river under the influence of high
spring discharges. The force of these impacts can be roughly calculated by equating the
kinetic energy of the moving ice sheet and the energy dissipated in crushing ice against
the object that it impacts.

8.9 Hydraulic Loading of Spillways

The hydraulic loading induced by operation of the spillway is only of concern when the
spillway is located on the dam. Forces produced by discharge are usually not significant
and are typically ignored in the analysis of arch dams. However, if it is determined that
hydrodyanmic forces could effect dam stability.

8.10 Thermal Loading

Temperature loads in arch dams result from the differences between the closure
temperature when construction joints between cantilever monoliths are grouted or filled by
concrete to bind them together, and the concrete temperatures during the operation of the
dam.

8.11 Temperature Distribution

Variation of temperatures through the dam thickness primarily depends on the thickness
of the dam. For relatively thin arch dams, a linear temperature distribution from the reservoir
temperature on the upstream to the air temperature on the downstream face provides
a reasonable approximation.

Air Temperature

Estimates of air temperatures at a dam site are based on the past air temperatures
measured at the dam site or at nearby locations. Data from the nearby station should be
adjusted for the differences in elevation and latitude that may exist between the station and
the dam site.
The actual air temperature data for a period of 5 years or longer is required to assemble a
chart showing various mean temperatures as well as the maximum and minimum recorded
temperatures.

Reservoir Water Temperature

The reservoir water temperatures vary with depth and season. Estimates of temperatures
for the impounded water are obtained by measuring temperatures directly at and below
the water surface at locations near the dam. Such data usually include one recording per
month for several months each year and for a period of several years.

Solar Radiation

Solar radiation on the exposed faces of a dam increases the temperature of the structure.
The solar radiation, therefore, has the net effect of reducing temperature loads for the
winter conditions and increasing for the summer conditions. The mean concrete
temperatures should be adjusted for the effect of solar radiation on the downstream face and
on the portion of upstream face not covered by reservoir water. The amount of temperature
rise due to solar radiation depends on the slope and orientation of the exposed surface as
well as the latitude.

Concrete Temperatures

The range or amplitudes of concrete temperatures arising from exposure to air and water
can be determined by a simplified method or the finite-element method. In the simplified
method assumed external sinusoidal temperature variations are applied to the edges of a
theoretical flat slab, whereas in FEM they are applied to the faces of a finite-element
model of the dam using a conductive boundary condition.

8.12 Earthquake Loading

Safety Evaluation Earthquakes and Associated Ground Motions

The safety evaluation earthquake for analysis of existing arch dams requiring earthquake
loading is the maximum credible earthquake (MCE).

Response Spectrum Earthquake Input

Site-specific response spectra of earthquake ground motions are required. The response
spectrum must be smoothly enveloped to avoid the possibility of low energy notches in the
response spectrum coinciding with the natural frequencies of the dam. Response spectra
should be developed for both horizontal and vertical ground motions. The spectra should be
developed for 5% damping. In addition, These relationships or factors may be based on a
documented site-specific study; alternatively, the relationships presented by Newmark and
Hall (1982) may be used.

Spatial Variation of Ground Motion

Recorded earthquake ground motions at Pacoima Dam during the 1994 Northridge
earthquake (CDMG, CSMIP, 1994) indicated that the seismic input for arch dams should
vary along the dam foundation interface. However, the recorded abutment motions at
Pacoima Dam included contributions from both the canyon topography and the dam-
foundation interaction. These motions, therefore, are not free-field accelerograms that would
have been recorded if the dam were not there. Except for one recording at an arch dam in
Taiwan, which included free-field motions at locations on the canyon slopes and valley
floor away from the dam, other cases of measured free-field ground motions across the
canyon suitable for analysis of arch dams have not been reported.

9 LOAD COMBINATIONS

Arch dams should be evaluated for all appropriate load combinations using the safety
factors. Depending on their probabilities of occurrence, three basic loading combinations,
Usual, Unusual, and Extreme should be considered. The usual loading combination
considers the effects of all loads that may exist during the normal operation of the dam. The
unusual loading combination refers to the loads acting on the dam during the flood stage.
The extreme loading combination includes any of the usual loading combinations plus the
effects of the Maximum Credible Earthquake. When a very low water level or empty
reservoir may be expected, its effects should be considered by a special loading
combination.

Usual Loading Combinations

a. Summer Condition:
• Maximum mean concrete temperatures
• Normal high water level (NHWL), or the most probable water level occurring at the time of
maximum mean temperature
• Dead load
• Silt load (if applicable)
• Tailwater (if applicable)

b. Winter Condition:
• Minimum mean concrete temperatures
• Normal high water level (NHWL), or the most probable water level occurring at the time of
minimum mean temperature
• Dead load
• Silt load (if applicable)
• Ice load (if applicable)
• Tailwater (if applicable)

Unusual Loading Combinations (IDF)

Depending on the time of flooding, one or both of the following unusual loading combinations
should be considered. The maximum mean concrete temperatures should be used with the
summer flooding and the minimum mean concrete temperatures should be employed with
the winter flooding, unless the most probable mean concrete temperatures at the time of
respective flooding can be established.

a. Summer Flooding:
• Flood water level
• Maximum mean concrete temperatures, or mean concrete temperature occurring at the
time of flood
• Dead load
• Silt load (if applicable)
• Tailwater (if applicable)

b. Winter Flooding:
• Flood water level
• Minimum mean concrete temperatures, or mean concrete temperature occurring at the
time of flood
• Dead load
• Silt load (if applicable)
• Ice impact (if applicable)
• Tailwater (if applicable)

c. Special Loading Combination:

Special loading combinations correspond to the seasonal minimum water level (NLWL)
or a complete reservoir drawdown condition. They are considered as a safeguard against
possible instability conditions due to the reduced or lack of water pressures.

• Minimum (NLWL) or no headwater, whichever applicable

• Most probable mean concrete temperatures at that time
• Dead load
• Silt load (if applicable)
11-62
• Tailwater (if applicable)

Extreme Loading Combinations (MCE)

Extreme loading combinations include any of the usual loading combinations plus the
effects of the maximum credible earthquake.

• Summer usual loading combination + MCE

• Winter usual loading combination + MCE

When more than one MCE ground motions governs, the effects of each MCE should be
combined with each of the usual loading combinations described above.
10 STATIC ANALYSIS

The acceptable methods of analysis for computing deflections and stresses developed in the
dam include three dimensional finite element (FE) and in certain cases continuum solution
procedures, as applicable. The FE stress analysis should be conducted by developing an
accurate three-dimensional model of the dam-foundation system. The manner by which
various static loads are applied should be described.
The results of analyses should be presented appropriately in order to facilitate examination,
interpretation, and evaluation of the findings.

Finite Element Analysis

The finite element procedure is the numerical method most often used for the structural
analysis of arch dams. This guideline assumes that the reader is already familiar with the
general theory of finite element analysis of elastic solids (Zienkiewics, 1971; Bathe and
Wilson, 1976).

Figure-5: Single Finite Element models

Then, the static loads are to be applied and the results to be studied. Maximum tensile and
compressive stresses in an arch dam usually occur at the faces of the dam, therefore
evaluation of stresses on the faces of the dam is required. In addition to the arch and
cantilever stresses, the magnitudes of the shear stresses caused by the bending and
twisting moments should be examined, especially for very thin arch dams and those with
cracked sections.

11 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS

All dams in seismic zone 3 and higher should be evaluated using dynamic analysis
techniques. Dams in zone 2 may also require dynamic analysis on a case by case basis.
Currently, three-dimensional linear-elastic finite-element analysis is the most common
technique used for dynamic analysis.

A linear-elastic dynamic analysis of arch dams typically consists of the following four
basic steps:
1. Determination of design or evaluation earthquakes and the associated ground motions;
2. Development of appropriate three-dimensional finite-element models including
dam-foundation and dam-water interaction effects;
3. Specification of dynamic material properties, damping, and reservoir-bottom absorption,
if applicable; and
4. Computation of the earthquake response and presentation, interpretation, and
evaluation of the results.

The design or evaluation earthquake for arch dams is the maximum credible earthquake
(MCE). The earthquake ground motions include the horizontal and vertical response spectra,
or three components of acceleration time histories. They are applied uniformly at the fixed
boundaries of the foundation model.

Three-dimensional finite-element models for the arch dam and the foundation rock are
essentially identical to those described for the static analysis, except that the dam-water
interaction effects should also be represented by the added hydrodynamic mass models or
by the frequency-dependent hydrodynamic terms, as appropriate. A seismic safety
evaluation of an arch dam should be based on the dynamic material properties of the dam
concrete, foundation rock, and the energy loss at the reservoir bottom, if applicable.
Dynamic modulus of elasticity and dynamic strength of the concrete for earthquake
excitation are determined. Damping associated with dissipation of energy in the concrete
arch structure and the foundation rock must be consistent with the level of ground shaking,
amount of non-linear responses developed in the dam and foundation, and the properties of
the foundation rock. For the purpose of safety evaluation, a damping value of 5% or 10%
should be used. A 5% damping should be applied to stress and sliding stability analysis of all
dams.
Total stresses required for the evaluation of the earthquake performance of the dam are
obtained by algebraic addition of the initial static stresses due to the usual loading
combinations and the dynamic stress histories. In a linear response analysis, static and
dynamic responses are usually computed by two separate analyses and combined
afterwards to obtain the total response.

Reservoir and Foundation Effects

Dynamic response of arch dams to earthquake ground motion is affected by interaction

between the dam and impounded water, interaction between the dam and foundation
rock, damping, and the characteristics of earthquake ground motion. A realistic appraisal
of the seismic safety of the dam is achieved, if the effects of these factors are understood
and properly represented in the analysis.

Dam-Water Interaction
Interaction of an arch dam with the impounded water leads to an increase in the dam
vibration periods. This is because the dam cannot move without displacing the water in
contact with it. The fact that water moves with the dam increases the total mass that is in
motion. This added mass increases the natural periods of the dam, which in turn affects
the response spectrum ordinates and hence the effective earthquake inertia forces. It can
also cause an increase in damping due to partial absorption of pressure waves at the
reservoir boundary and radiation towards the upstream. These effects tend to change the
earthquake response of the dam with respect to that for the dam with empty reservoir,
with the net result depending on the characteristics and component of earthquake ground
motion and on the dam-water interaction model used.

Dam-Foundation Interaction

Interaction of the dam with the foundation rock leads to an increase in vibration periods,
primarily due to flexibility of the foundation rock. Dam-foundation interaction also decreases
the dam response if damping arising from material damping in the foundation rock and the
radiation damping associated with wave propagation away from the dam are considered in
the analysis. These effects of dam-foundation interaction depend on the foundation flexibility
(Chopra and Tan 1996). As the foundation rock becomes more flexible, radiation damping
increases and vibration periods elongate further.
In practice, dam-foundation interaction effects are typically represented by a "standard"
massless foundation model, in which only flexibility of the foundation rock is considered
but its inertia and damping are ignored.
12 Historical incidents and failures involving arch dams:

Arequipa, Peru. This thin-arch concrete dam failed in 1965 as a result of fractures
caused by a vibrating penstock which passed through the dam. Inflow was normal at the
time.

Matilija, California. The concrete dam was completed in 1949 and was a combination of
gravity and arch structure. It was 163 feet high with a crest length of 620 feet. In 1965
the dam was judged to be unsafe as a result of deterioration of the concrete due to
expansive aggregate. Foundation conditions were also judged to be poor. The reservoir
was drained, the dam was eventually demolished, and the site was submerged by a new
dam downstream.

Vajont, Switzerland. This thin-arch concrete dam, which is 905 feet high, was
overtopped by a huge landslide-generated wave. Inflow to the reservoir was normal at
the time. The resulting overtopping was estimated to be as much as 300 feet. The dam
11-141 itself suffered little damage, but the reservoir was a total loss. The resulting flood
caused great loss of life in the downstream areas.

Malpasset, France This thin-arch concrete dam, which was 218 feet tall, failed due to a
movement of the left abutment in December 1959. The movement was thought to be
due to sliding on a rock wedge formed by intersection of a fault with gneissic foliation in
the rock of the left abutment. The principle cause of the failure was not directly due to
the passage of a flood in that the dam was never overtopped. However, a very large flood
was being passed when the failure occurred. The official death toll was 396 people killed
in the ensuing flood, which suddenly struck the village of Frejus. The dam was a
complete loss.

Le Gage, France This Very thin 150’ high arch dam developed extensive cracking on
both faces of the dam after first filling of the reservoir in 1955. Cracking continued to
worsen for the next 6 years. After the failure of Malpasset dam, Le Gage was abandon
and a new thicker arch dam was constructed upstream.

El Fryle Dam, Peru This 200’ high arch dam experienced a major slide on one of the
abutments during filling. The dam did not collapse. A concrete thrust block abutment
was constructed and the dam was saved.

Moyie River, Idaho This 53-foot high concrete arch dam, located on the Moyie River,
was approximately 64 feet thick at the base and 24 feet wide at the crest. During passage
of a major flood in 1926, the spillway, which was located on one abutment, was
undermined. The erosion completely washed out one of the abutments. The abutment
was replaced and the dam is still in use.

Alla Sella Zerbino, Allessandria, Italy This concrete arch-gravity structure was only 39
feet high with a crest length of 262 feet and a reservoir capacity of 14,000 AF. It failed
on August 13, 1935, as a result of overtopping and sliding on its foundation. One
hundred lives were lost.

Lake Lanier, North Carolina This constant-radius concrete arch dam was constructed in
1925. It had a thickness of 12-1/2 feet at the base and 1 foot at the top. It was 62' high
with a crest length of 236 feet. One of the abutments (cyclopean masonry) washed out as
a result of the failure of soft rock in the abutment on January 21, 1926. The remainder of
the dam was unharmed.

Gleno, Italy This multiple-arch concrete dam contained 25 arches for a total length of
250 feet. Concrete gravity sections made up the ends of the dam. Total crest length was
863 feet. The dam was 143 feet high. It was completed in 1923 and failed on December
1, 1923 only 30 days after filling. Nine arches fell due to a poor masonry base. Some
600 persons lost their lives.

Lake Hodges, California This multiple-arch concrete dam was completed in 1918 by the
City of San Diego. It was 136 feet high with a crest length of 616 feet and a reservoir
capacity of 33,550 AF. The dam was damaged by cracked piers in 1918 but did not
completely fail.

Manitou, Colorado This concrete arch dam was 50 feet tall with a crest length of 300
feet. A portion of the dam failed in 1924 due to deterioration of the concrete.

Tolla, France This very thin arch dam was 295' high with a crest length of 435 feet.
Owned by Electricite DeFrance, the dam experienced severe cracking. It was buttressed
in response. Cracking may have been the result of large temperature stresses.

Koelnbrein, Austria Cracks and substantial leakage appeared in the lowest foundation
gallery when the reservoir was 80% full two years after first filling. Full uplift pressure
was observed over the entire base in the central portion of the dam. Major repair was
undertaken between 1989 and 1994.

Zeuzier, Switzerland The dam behaved satisfactorily for 20 years, then began to deflect
upstream due to riverward movement of the left abutment.

Leguaseca, Spain This concrete multiple-arch dam, which was 66 feet high with a crest
length of 230 feet and held a reservoir volume of only 16 AF, was constructed in 1958
and failed in 1987. The dam body failed structurally, apparently due to deterioration due
to both aging and the effects of freezing and thawing. No details of the failure are given
in the literature.

Meihua (Plum), China This experimental masonry arch dam was 72 feet high and had a
crest length of 211 feet. It was completed in 1981 held a reservoir of only 93 AF. It
failed shortly after filling in 1981. The dam failed as a result of structural failure due to
excessive uplift movement along a peripheral joint as described in Section 11-8.3.2. The
scheme was abandoned after failure.

Idbar, Yugoslavia This concrete arch dam was 125' high with a crest length of 354 feet.
It was completed in 1959 and failed in 1960. Failure was during first filling and resulted
from piping and erosion of the foundation.

Vaughn Creek, USA This concrete arch dam was 62' high with a crest length of 312
feet. The dam was completed in 1926 and failed during first filling. Seepage and poor
materials in the dam caused failure.
13 CONCLUSIONS:

1. The dynamic (either linear or non-linear) to be studied in coordination with dam-

water, water-foundation, and dam-foundation interaction under seismic forces as the
arch dam cannot be analysed as isolated body.
2. The water level in the reservoir has a greater effect on the both linear and non-linear
analysis of arch dams.
3. The arch dams are more economical, safer than gravity dams, provided the proper
geography conditions exist for natural abutments.
4. Design of abutments is very major importance in case of arch dams especially,
because the water pressure which is exerted on the arch is laterally carried to
abutments because of the arch action.
5. In case of finite element analysis, loads to be applied in the way they start acting on
the dams.ie Dead load acting starts the moment the blocks are placed even though
there is no proper bonding occurring between the contraction joints.
14 REFERENCES:

1. Design of Arch Dams – Design Manual for Concrete Arch Dams by Water Resources
Technical Publication.
2. “Model for seismic analysis of arch dams including interaction effects” by
J.Dominguez and O.Maeso.
3. “Crack Analysis of Concrete arch dams using Micro Planes Damage based
constitutive relations” by M. Labibzadeh and S. A. Sadrnejad.
4. Information on Wikipedia