Effect of Soil Structure Interaction on Gravity...

International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR)

Volume 4, Issue 4, April 2015

1046 ISSN: 2278 – 7798 All Rights Reserved © 2015 IJSETR

Abstract— In the proposed study, the effect on gravity dam has

been examined using finite element analysis software ANSYS

14. The gravity dam is completely resting on soil media and

surrounded by soil media. The relevant amount of soil around

and bottom of the gravity dam has been modeled to simulate the

in-situ conditions. The gravity dam has been analyzed using

dynamic loading in transient analysis using Imperial Valley

(1940) earthquake record are included. Analysis of the gravity

damhas been carried out and the influence of soil properties has

been studied at the region of transverse sections, which

exhibited the response in terms of stress and deformation with

significant difference.

Index Terms— Gravity dam, finite element method, Soil

Structure Interaction, transient analysis

I. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Soil Structure Interaction

Soil-Structure Interaction is a challenging

multidisciplinary subject which covers several areas of Civil

Engineering. Virtually every construction is connected to the

ground and the interaction between the artifact and the

foundation medium may affect considerably both the

superstructure and the foundation soil. The Soil-Structure

Interaction problem has become an important feature of

Structural Engineering with the advent of massive

constructions on soft soils such as nuclear power plants,

concrete and earth dams. Buildings, bridges, tunnels and

underground structures may also require particular attention

to be given to the problems of Soil-Structure Interaction.

We have seen earlier that considering the soil as a

deformable elastic medium the stiffness of soil gets coupled to

the stiffness of the structure and changes it elastic property.

Based on this the characteristic response of the system also

gets modified. This we can consider as the local effect of soil.

On the other hand consider a case of a structure resting on a

deep layer of soft soil underlain by rock. It will be observed

that its response is completely different than the same system

when it is located on soft soil which is of much shallow depth

or resting directly on rock. Moreover the nature of foundation,

(isolated pad, raft, pile), if the foundation is resting or

embedded in soil, layering of soil, type of structure etc. has

profound influence on the overall dynamic response of the

system. The complexity of the problem, due also to its

multidisciplinary nature and to the fact of having to consider

Manuscript received April 2015.

First Author name: Dept. of Civil Engg., JSPM’s Imperial College of

Engineering & Research, Pune, Pune, India,

bounded and unbounded media of different mechanical

characteristics, requires a numerical treatment for any

application of engineering significance. The Finite Element

Method appears to be well suited to solve problems of Soil-

Structure Interaction through its ability to discretize only the

boundaries of complex and often unbounded geometries.

1.2 Categories of Interaction

1.2.1 Structures Supported By Ground

It is important to distinguish between two broad objectives

in carrying out soil structure interaction analyses: first and

perhaps of most concern to the engineer, is the need to

estimate the form and magnitude of the relative deflections.

This information is used to assess the likelihood of damage

and to investigate the merits of different foundations and

structural solutions. Secondly is the much more specialized

requirement of calculating the distribution of forces and

stresses within the structure.

1.2.2 Ground Supported By Structures

Earth retaining structures are unique in that the walls are

integral components of soil structure systems deriving both

loading and support from the soil. Strain and time- dependent

forces and movements cause variations in ground pressure

and retaining structures respond to these changes in order to

maintain a state of balance.

1.3 Aim of the Study

The aim of work is twofold. First includes working on the

analysis of gravity dam section neglecting soil structure

interaction. Second includes working on the correct modeling

of structures considering soil structure interaction. Some of

the procedures currently practiced by structural designers for

this are studied and a modeling procedure is selected. Based

on this procedure a model is generated for future work.

The other part is includes to determine the dynamic

interaction of concrete dams with soil foundation and to

check the displacement and stresses induced in dam-soil due

to earthquake forces. The Third part parametric studies of

different height of dam and changing different soil model

dimensions.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

Dams are Failure quite rapidly without adequate prior of

warning with a large potential of by excessive calamity. Jerry

Foster, H. Wayne Jones, studied a project using by

Effect of Soil Structure Interaction on

Gravity Dam

Ms. Patil Swapnal V.

Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engg., JSPM’s Imperial College of Engineering & Research, Pune.




Computer-Aided Structural Engineering (CASE) Committee

on FEM this method of analysis for gravity dam. They

discussed of the various studies that was various types of

foundation models and the size of the foundation according to

Base Width of the concrete gravity dam, they found the

foundation size and stiffness the effect on the stresses in the

structure. G. N. Bycroft and P. N. studied SSI effect that

considering seismic ground motion of long trapezoidal

section dam and foundation. They analytically proved that

when optimum seismic design of considering triangular cross

section of dam of their SSI effect is lower, when the strain

occurring in the dam section. Mohammad Mehdi Heydari and

Shiva Khosravi (Iran, 2013) they investigated developing 2D

Finite Element model different geometrical shape of concrete

gravity dam of considering dam-reservoir-foundation

interaction effect by using ANSYS modal analysis they

proved that Dam soil water interaction is very important for

safety design of dam. Brijesh Singh and Pankaj Agarwal

(2009) have investigated the seismic ground motion response

of high concrete gravity dam-reservoir water-foundation

system. They have studied the effect of flexibility foundation

and reservoir by dynamic transient analysis. The dam has

been considering analysis of plane stress effect on structure to

the different dimension of soil model of with and without

SSI. They also proved that, increasing the soil model

dimension there is no effect of soil structure interaction on

structure. Anil K. Chopra (2012) has discussed the 3D

analysis of arch dam by various influence the viz. semi

unbounded size of the reservoir and foundation-rock

domains, dam-water interaction, wave absorption at the

reservoir boundary, dam–foundation rock interaction, and

variations in seismic ground motion in the dam-rock

interface.

III. FORMULATION OF PROBLEM

In a gravity dam the force of the water is held back by the

self-weight of the dam, with some assistance from shearing

resistance and bond. Analysis of structure with soil structure

interaction effect is done by Finite Element Method (FEM).

The FEM has become a powerful tool for the numerical

solution of a wide range of engineering problems. In this

method all the complexities of the problems like varying

shape, boundary conditions and loads are maintained as they

are but the solution obtained are approximate. Because of its

diversity and flexibility as an analysis tool, it is receiving

much attention in engineering.

The earthquake response of gravity dams under strong

ground motion could be determined by considering the two

dimensional independent vibration of the dam. A general

analytical procedure to evaluate the response of concrete

gravity dams subjected to strong ground motion is developed

by the substructure method approach. In this work, the

response for modeling of dam soil is formulated by

discrediting the system into two substructures which are

Gravity Dam Section without and with SSI for Dynamic

Analysis (Transient Analysis). In the formulation of the Dam

and Soil interaction, a substructure method is used. The

coupling is done using the interfaces that take into account

the interaction forces between the dam and Soil. Here

ANSYS 14 is used for the analysis of the gravity dam section.

3.1 Data for the Gravity Dam

In the properties of dam, geometry variables of dam and

material properties are mentioned. The geometry variables of

dam are given in Table 3.1.Shape of dam with geometry

variables is shown in Figure 3.1.The concrete is assumed to

be homogeneous and isotropic. Material properties of dam

[12], foundation are mentioned in Table 3.2.

14.8 m

103 m

70 m

Figure 3.1: Geometry variables of dam for validation

Table 3.1: Geometry parameters of dam Koyna dam

Table 3.2: The material properties of dam and foundation

Dam

Density 2400 kg/m3

Modulus of elasticity 31027 MPa

Poisson’s ratio 0.2

Foundation

(soil)

Density 1800 kg/m3

Modulus of elasticity 31027 MPa

Poisson’s ratio 0.18

3.2 FEM in Structural Analysis (Basic Steps)

In engineering problems there are some basic unknowns,

from which behavior of entire structure can be predicted.

These variables are displacement in solid mechanics. In a

continuum these unknowns are infinite. The finite element

procedure reduces such unknowns to a finite element number

by dividing the solution region into parts called elements.

The material properties and governing relationships are

considered over these element corners. An assembly process,

duly considering the loading and constraints, results in a set

of equations. Solution of these equations gives us

approximate behavior of continuum.

Dam

a 14.8 m

b 70 m

Hs 103 m

Foundation D 100 m

B 350 m




Steps:

1. Divide the structure into pieces (elements with nodes )

2. Evaluation of element stiffness

3. Connect (assemble) the elements at nodes to form an

approximate system of equations for whole structure, i.e.,

assemblage of element stiffness matrices for the system.

4. Introduction of boundary conditions.

5. Solve system of equations involving unknown quantities

at nodes (e.g., displacements).

6. Calculate desired quantities (e.g., strains and stresses) at

selected elements

3.3 Problem Solution by Software ytivarGdam section is modeled as ax symmetric problem.

Analysis of the ytivarG dam neglecting and considering soil

structure interaction effect is done by Finite Element Method

.Finite Element Method based software ANSYS is used for

the analysis.

Result for gravity dam 1. Results for gravity dam section considering fixed base

2. Results for gravity dam section considering soil structure

interaction effect.

3. Comparison of results with ANSYS modeling.

3.4 Finite Element Analysis

Finite element analysis (FEA) has become commonplace

in recent years, and is now the basis of a multibillion dollar

per year industry. Numerical solutions to even very

complicated stress problems can now be obtained routinely

using FEA. Ray Clough was the first to use the Finite

Element procedure. From the time remarkable advances have

been made in the last many years both on the mathematical

foundations and generalization of method to solve field

problems in various areas of engineering analysis.

IV. VALIDATION OF PROBLEM SOLUTION BY

SOFTWARE

In this problem of dam with and without soil structure

interaction system is analyzed using simplified analysis of

fundamental mode response and validated with ANSYS

results. And results of numerical problem from previous

research papers are compared with results of same problem

using ANSYS 14 software.

The formulation which is adopted for the present study is

valid to solve dam-soil interaction effect for calculating

fundamental natural period as the present results show good

agreement with the target results available in the literature.

4.1 Results of Modal Analysis

The mode shapes are in modal analysis of gravity dam

without SSI and with SSI shown in Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2

for. When dam flexibility and soil stiffness interference

effects are activate in finite element model by adding the

soil-structure interface at dam and soil surface.

4.1.1 Result in Modal analysis without SSI effect:

(a) First Mode (b) Second Mode

(c) Third Mode (d) Fourth Mode

Figure 4.1: Mode shapes of dam without SSI

4.1.2 Result in Modal analysis with SSI effect:

Here the modeling of soil is done in addition to the

structural modeling of Gravity Dam with reference of Shiva

Khosravi’s. As the soil is also modeled, effect of soil stiffness

on the structure can be evaluated. As the soil stiffness is

attached to the structure change in stress and displacement

result of the structure can be evaluated. Flexibility of demand

soil stiffness interaction effects is activated in finite element

model by adding the soil-structure interface at dam and soil

surface.

(a) First Mode (b) Second Mode




(c) Third Mode (d) Fourth Mode

Figure 4.2: Mode shapes of dam with SSI

4.1.3 Results Comparison of Gravity Dam Section with and

without SSI

Results of comparison of first four modal natural

frequencies & total displacement of Gravity Dam without

and with SSI Effect are shown in Table 4.1and Table 4.2.

Table 4.1: Results of Gravity Dam without and with SSI

Effect natural frequencies of first four modes in Modal

Analysis

Mode no. Natural Frequencies

Without SSI (m)

Natural Frequencies

With SSI (m)

1 3.1892 5.3667

2 8.4690 2.7152

3 11.500 7.4343

4 16.865 6.6695

Table 4.2: Results of Gravity Dam without and with SSI

effect total displacement of First four modes in Modal

Analysis

Mode no. Total displacement

of Without SSI (m)

Total displacement of

With SSI (m)

1 0.0018878 0.00056234

2 0.0010528 0.00010366

3 0.00069651 0.00064757

4 0.00103170 0.00018794

From Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 it is seen that for higher

modes of the dam with SSI has natural frequencies and total

displacement less than the dam without SSI.

4.1.4 Validation of Result

The validated results of gravity dam are tabulated in Table

No 4.3. Results of modal analysis of present work and

compared with Shiva Khosravi’s studied work.

Table No 4.3: A comparison of natural frequencies with

reference to FE model

Mode

No.

Shiva Khosravi’s

Work

The Present

Work % Error

Natural Frequencies (Hz)

1 3.01 3.1892 0.0595

2 8.00 8.469 0.0586

3 10.855 11.500 0.0594

4 15.803 16.865 0.0672

From this analysis of the problem of dam with and without

soil structure interaction system are analyzed using

simplified analyses of fundamental mode response and

validated with ANSYS results. The results of problem from

previous research papers are compared with results of same

problem using ANSYS software.

The formulation which is adopted for the present study is

valid to solve dam-soil interaction effect for calculating

fundamental natural period as the present results show good

agreement with the target results available in the literature.

4.2 Finite Element Analysis Using ANSYS Software

In the paper work finite element analysis is done using

ANSYS 14 version software in ANSYS workbench. ANSYS

Workbench combines the strength of CPU with the project

management tools necessary to manage the project

workflow. In ANSYS Workbench, analyses are built as

systems, which can be combined into a project. The project is

driven by a schematic workflow that manages the

connections between the systems. From the schematic, you

can interact with applications that are native to ANSYS

Workbench (called workspaces) and that display within the

ANSYS Workbench interface and you can launch

applications that are data-integrated with ANSYS

Workbench, meaning the interface remains separate, but the

data from the application communicates with the native

ANSYS Workbench data.

V. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

5.1 considering various cases

In these work results of various cases as refer in previous

section analyzed by ANSYS 14 software are presented and

discussed in connection with soil structure interaction.

Displacement and stresses induced in the soil -dam system is

checked by software. Results of transient analysis using

Imperial Valley (1940) earthquake record are included.

Results are also obtained by considering various cases viz.

height of dam, modulus of elasticity of soil and soil model

dimensions.

As soil structure interaction effect on structure is there up

to certain dimension of soil model, after increasing the soil

model dimension there is no effect of soil structure

interaction on structure.




5.2.1 Results of transient analysis of dam section without SSI

Effect (changing the height of dam)

Transient analysis of dam without SSI for various heights

of dam viz. 60 m, 80 m, 100 m and 120 m is carried out, peak

values of displacement and equivalent stress are obtained and

tabulated in Table 5.1 and presented in Figure 5.1 & 5.2.

Table 5.1: Result of displacement & stresses in various height

of dam without SSI

Height

of

Dam

(m)

X-displace

ment

(m)

Y-displace

ment

(m)

Equivalent

stress

of dam

(MPa)

60 4.3767 x

10-12

2.0474 x

10-12

0.0013123 x

10 6

80 2.5665 x

10-13

5.8101 x

10-13

0.0013764 x

10 6

100 1.2024 x

10-12

3.3791 x

10-12

0.002327 x

106

120 2.1538 x

10-11

1.8790 x

10-11

0.042303 x

106

Figure 5.1: X and Y- displacement for various heights of

dam without SSI

Figure 5.2: Equivalent stresses of various heights of dam

without SSI

The total X and Y displacements and equivalent stresses

for various heights of dams without SSI are presented in

following Figure 5.3, Figure 5.4and Figure 5.5 respectively.

(a) for dam 60 m (b) for dam 80 m

(c) for dam 100 m (d) for dam 120 m

Figure 5. 3: X-displacements of various heights of dam

without SSI i.e. (a) For 60 m dam (b) For 80 m dam, (c) For

100 m dam, (d) For 120 m dam



Figure 5.4: Y-displacements of various heights of dam

without SSI i.e. (a) For 60 m dam (b) For 80 m dam, (c) For


-5.00E-12

0.00E+00

5.00E-12

1.00E-11

1.50E-11

2.00E-11

2.50E-11

0 50 100 150

Peak

D

isp

lacem

en

t (

m )

Height of Dam ( m )

Peak X-Displacement

Peak Y-Displacement

-5.00E+03

0.00E+00

5.00E+03

1.00E+04

1.50E+04

2.00E+04

2.50E+04

3.00E+04

3.50E+04

4.00E+04

4.50E+04

0 50 100 150

Pea

k E

qu

iva

len

t S

tres

s (

MP

a)

Height of Dam ( m )

Equivalent stress






Figure 5.5 : Equivalent Stress of various heights of dam

without SSIi.e. (a) For 60 m dam (b) For 80 m dam, (c) For


4.3 Results of transient analysis of dam section with SSI

Effect

In these section results of transient analysis for various

cases mentioned for SSI. The peak value of displacement and

equivalent stress (von-mises) obtained. If the soil structure

interaction effect is considered, soil stiffness is assumed to be

attached to the structural stiffness. Hence, the stiffness of the

structure is reduced. As the dimension of soil model

surrounding the structure increases the effect of soil on

structure gets reduced. After some limitation, even increase

in soil dimension does not affect the displacement and stress

result in the structure.

4.3.1 Results of Transient analysis changing height of

demand depth of soil model

The peak values of X-Directional and Y-Directional

displacements of Dam with Soil Structure Interaction are

tabulated shown in Table 5.2 and Table 5.3 respectively and

presented graphically in Figure 5.6 and Figure 5.7. The peak

value of equivalent stress of Dam with Soil Structure

Interaction is tabulated shown in Table 5.4 and graphical

variation in Figure 5.8.

Table: 5.2: Peak values of X- Displacement of dam with SSI.

Soil model

( m x m) 60 m 80 m 100 m 120 m

Peak X–Displacement of dam with SSI (m)

in x 10-10

224 x 84 4.172 4.172 4.172 4.172

224 x 112 20.625 20.625 20.625 20.625

224 x 140 27.929 27.929 27.929 27.929

224 x 168 38.394 38.394 38.394 38.394

224 x 196 50.745 50.745 50.745 50.745

224 x 224 23.609 23.609 23.609 23.609

224 x 252 32.671 32.671 32.671 32.671

224 x 280 0.104 0.104 0.104 0.104

Table 5.3: Peak values of Y- Displacement of dam with SSI

Soil mode

( m x m) 60 m 80 m 100 m 120 m

Peak Y–Displacement of dam with SSI (m) in

x 10-10

224 x 84 3.685 17.217 1.837 47.130

224 x 112 1.910 5.5281 12.266 24.622

224 x 140 11.730 9.155 7.392 53.780

224 x 168 7.133 11.540 121.550 99.831

224 x 196 4.283 8.759 38.749 1.671

224 x 224 10.792 110.18 101.500 44.205

224 x 252 14.019 16.599 30.318 96.286

224 x 280 0.404 93.689 22.624 34.901

Table 5.4: Peak values of Equivalent Stress of dam with SSI

Soil mode

( m x m)

60 m 80 m 100 m 120 m

Peak Equivalent Stress of dam with SSI in

x 10 -6

(MPa)

224 x 84 0.00916 0.05601 0.007469 0.26755

224 x112 0.00188 0.01072 0.025848 0.006298

224 x 140 0.00838 0.01742 0.020276 0.1806

224 x 168 0.01041 0.02964 0.023909 0.15663

224 x 196 0.01268 0.00536 0.042038 0.001725

224 x 224 0.04059 0.15313 0.13922 0.11223

224 x 252 0.03111 0.02049 0.06021 0.076471

224 x 280 0.00057 0.20431 0.029239 0.019566




Figure 5.6: For modulus elasticity of soil variation on of

Peak X–Displacement w. r. to size of soil model and Height

Figure 5.7: For modulus elasticity of soil variation on of Peak

X–Displacement w. r. to size of soil model and Height of dam

with SSI.

Figure 5.8: For modulus elasticity of soil variation on of Peak

Equivalent stress w. r. to size of soil model and Height of dam

with SSI.

From all above observation, it is noted that as height of

dam increases maximum total equivalent stress is at lower

depth. It is observed that these can be critical depth as

equivalent stresses are maximum at for these depths and for

any other combination. The given height the values are

equivalent stresses less than that observed at these depths.

These cases it is observed from, dam of 100 m height is more

susceptible to damage.

All above results of with and without soil structural

interaction of dam comparisons of peak values tabulated in

Table 5.4.

Table 5.4: Comparisons of peak values of displacement in

Dam with and without SSI

Ht. of

Dam

(m)

Peak

X-displacement

(m)

Peak Y-displacement

(m)

Without

SSI

With SSI Without

SSI

With SSI

60 4.3767

x 10-12

50.745 x

10-10

2.0474

x 10-12

14.019 x

10-10

80 2.5665

x 10-13

64.633 x

10-10

5.8101

x 10-13

110.180

x 10-10

100 1.2024

x 10-12

120.660

x 10-10

3.3791

x 10-12

121.550

x 10-10

120 2.1538

x 10-11

113.490

x 10-10

1.8790

x 10-11

99.831 x

10-10

Table 5.4: Comparisons of Peak Equivalent stress values in

Dam with and without SSI

Ht.of Dam

(m)

Peak Equivalent

stress of dam (MPa)

Without SSI With SSI

60 0.0013123 x 10-6

0.040585 x 10-6

80 0.0013764 x 10-6

0.20431 x 10-6

100 0.002327 x 10-6

0.13922x 10-6

120 0.042303 x 10-6

0.26755 x 10-6

From above table, discussed the results all cases in

connection with soil structure interaction. In all cases of dam

with SSI, peak X-Displacements and Y- displacements are

decreases. In this discussion it is observed that, peak

equivalent stresses are maximum in at bottom of dam section.

In table 6.18 it is observed that the peak Y- displacements and

Equivalent stresses of without SSI of Dam are minimum as

compare to with soil SSI of Dam.

VI. CONCLUSION

From the analysis, it can be concluded that, if soil

stiffness and mass of the soil is considered the

displacement is higher for the soil structure

interaction compared to that of without soil structure

interaction (fixed base).

Also concluded that, if soil is considered the stress

at the toe in the gravity dam section increase. Also,

after some soil depth the effect of soil on gravity

dam section can be neglected. From the results, after

soil depth equal to 280 m gravity dam stress and

displacement in the gravity dam section become

constant.

It can be concluded that, if SSI is considered the

peak equivalent stress at the bottom of the gravity

dam section decreases.

Also as the depth of soil increases peak

displacement in X and Y direction increases.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

224 x 84 224 x 112

224 x 140

224 x 168

224 x 196

224 x 224

224 x 252

224 x 280

PE

AK

DIS

PL

AC

EM

EN

T X

10

^-1

0 (

m )

SIZE OF SOIL MODEL (m x m)

60 m

80 m

100 m

120 m

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

224 x 84

224 x 112

224 x 140

224 x 168

224 x 196

224 x 224

224 x 252

224 x 280P

EA

K Y

-DIS

PL

AC

EM

EN

Tin

x 1

0^

-

10

( m

)

SIZE OF SOIL MODEL ( m x m )

60 m

80 m

100 m

120 m

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

224 x 84

224 x 112

224 x 140

224 x 168

224 x 196

224 x 224

224 x 252

224 x 280

PE

AK

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T S

TR

ES

S in

x

10

^-6

( M

Pa

)

SIZE OF SOIL MODEL ( m x m )

60 m

80 m

100 m

120 m




From the analysis of Dam with SSI, it can be

concluded that 100 m height of dam is more

susceptible to damage.

As height of dam increases maximum total

equivalent stress is observed at lower modulus of

elasticity and at lower depth.

For the Gravity Dam construction if there is no hard

rock available at greater depth also then it is very

important to check effect of soil structure

interaction.

REFERENCES

[1] Dr. K. Rama Mohan Rao , Nagul Nanne Shaik , “Finite

Element Modeling and Seismic Response Evaluation of Large

Concrete Gravity Dams - An Approach based on Indian Standard

Codal Guidelines”, International Journal of Emerging Engineering

Research and Technology Volume 2, Issue 2, May 2014, PP

178-186.

[2] Pratik Patra, “Development Of Mythology For Seismic Design

Of Concrete Gravity Dam”, Ph.D. Theisis ,National Institute Of

Technology Rourkela Odisha,,pp -1-49, May 2014

[3] Behnam Mehdipour, “Effect of Foundation on Seismic

Behavior of Concrete Dam Considering the Interaction of Dam –

Reservoir”, Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research , Text

Road Publication, Res. 3(5) Pp 13-20, 2013

[4] Amina Tahar Berrabah , Nazzal Armouti, Mohamed Belharizi

and Abdelmalek Bekkouche, “Dynamic Soil Structure Interaction

Study”, Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 6, No. 2, pp

161 - 173 , 2012

[5] Amina Tahar Berrabah, “Dynamic Soil-Fluid-Structure

Interaction Applied For Concrete Dam”, Thesis Doctorate Degree

In Civil Engineering CRIL Technology Paris, Pp 1-172 , 2012

[6] M. Khatibinia, J. Salajegheh, M.J. Fadaee And E. Salajegheh

“Prediction Of Failure Probability For Soil structure Interaction

System Using Modified ANFIS By Hybrid Of FCM-FPSO”, Asian

Journal Of Civil Engineering (Building And Housing) Vol. 13, No.

1 Pp1-27, 2012

[7] Shiva Khosravi, Mohammad Mehdi Heydari Javad Salajegheh,

Kerman Branch, Islamic Shahid Bahonar, “Simulating of Each

Concrete Gravity Dam with Any Geometric Shape Including

Dam-Water-Foundation Rock Interaction Using APDL”, World

Applied Sciences Journal 17 (3): ISSN 1818-4952 , pp 354-363,

2012

[8] T Subramani, D.Ponnuvel, “Seismic and Stability Analysis of

Gravity Dams Using Staad PRO”, International Journal of

Engineering Research and Development ISSN: 2278-067X,

Volume 1, , PP.44-54, Issue 5 June 2012

[9] Kaushik Das ,Pankaj Kumar Das Lipika Halder “Seismic

Response of Concrete Gravity Dam”, Civil Engg Department NIT

Agartala, htc, pp 1-13, 2011

[10] Tahar Berrabah, A. Bekkouche, A. Aboubekr Belkaid

University, Tlemcen Algeria, Belharizi, M., “Behavior of Dam

Reservoir Foundation System”, EJGE, Vol. 16 [2011], Bund. T pp

1593-1605, 2011

[11] A. Burman, D. Maity, S. Sreedeep, “Iterative analysis of

concrete gravity dam-nonlinear foundation interaction”,

International Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, Vol.

2, No. 4, pp. 85-99, 2010

[12] Helgi S. Ólafsson, Eyþór R. “Concrete walls founded on

earthquake areas”, Þórhallsson School of Science- and Indriði S.

Ríkharðsson Engineering, Id no: 030479-4679, pp 1-100, 2010

[13] Burman, B. V. Reddy , D. Maity , “Seismic Analysis of

Concrete Gravity Dam Considering Foundation Flexibility and

Nonlinearity”, The 12th International Conference of International

Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics

(IACMAG) Goa, India, pp 2882-2888 ,1-6 October, 2008

[14] P.G. Asteris, A.D. Tzamtzis, “Nonlinear Seismic Response

Analysis of Realistic Gravity Dam-Reservoir Systems”, Freund

Publishing House Ltd. International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences

and Numerical Simulation, pp 329-338, 4 , 2003

[15] Kramer, S. L., Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice

Hall, New Jersey, 1996.

[16] Wilson E. L., “Three -Dimensional Static and Dynamic

Analysis of Structures- a Physical Approach with Emphasis on

Earthquake Engineering”, Computers & Structures, Inc. University

Avenue Berkeley, California, USA., pp.390, 1995.

First Author: Patil Swapnal Vinayak was born in Dhule District, Maharashtra. She has received Bachelor Degree from North Maharashtra

University. She has submitted her project for Master Degree of Structural

Engineering. She also published 2-3 papers in International Journals. Her paper has been selected for International Conference to be held on 2nd to 4th

July, 2015 in SNJB college of Engineering, Chandwad, Dist. Nasik.

Date post:	05-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	letuong
View:	235 times
Download:	5 times

Effect of Soil Structure Interaction on Gravity...

Documents