Exam 2 – CE595 S.

Ramesh

Two loading Conditions

• full water head (hydrostatic pressure) no gravity.
• full water head (hydrostatic pressure) with gravity.

f’c=3500psi

Water

1 mile
350 ft.

40 ft. 30 ft. 230 ft.

Finite Element Model (For both Load Cases):
Finite Element Mesh (For both Load Cases):
 Explain your choice of finite element for performing the analysis

• 2D plane strain is assumed (Length of dam>>>width, height of dam). Loading Conditions are
taken to be constant along the length of the dam.

• The varying hydrostatic pressure and only in one side of the dam produces non-uniform moment distribution
along the height of the dam.

• Stress and as well as strain distribution is not uniform along the height of the dam.

• Non-rectangular elements have to be selected if quadrilateral elements are to be selected because of

the geometry of the cross section of the dam.

• Hence, Q8 Element (CPE8R)(which has quadratic strain variation within the element) is better than other
2D elements to represent this model. (Strain is constant within the element in CST, Strain is linear within the
element in LST, The linear variation of the strain does not change along the length of the element in Q4 and
Q6 elements).

• Reduced integration is used to reduce the effects from the over stiffness.

•Total Number of Elements : 1134

•ABAQUS/CAE Version 6.6-1 is used for FE analysis.

Load and Boundary Conditions (For Load case 1: Hydrostatic Pressure):
Load and Boundary Conditions (For Load case 2: Hydrostatic pressure with gravity):
Explain the boundary conditions used in the model.

Two loading Conditions

1) full water head (hydrostatic pressure) no gravity.
2) full water head (hydrostatic pressure) with gravity.
have been analyzed. The calculations of the forces are shown below.

Boundary Condition Selected:

Keys are generally constructed to prevent the movement (in 1- and 2-directions)and rotation
(about 3-direction) of the dam mounted on soil profile. In this model also it is assumed to be
the same and it is assumed that the keys are provided all along the base of the dam to enough
depth to prevent movement and rotation of the dam. (However the actual situation is not
generally like this). Fixed boundary condition is assumed all along the base of the dam.
Calculations associated with:
(a) defining the material properties, and (b) defining the loading conditions.
a) Calculations for Material Properties
Homogeneous, isotropic, elastic behavior
of concrete is assumed.
Given
fc  3500psi All the units entered in the ABAQUS are in kips and inches
Hence, the results are in kips and inches.
fc 3
Ec  57 ksi Ec  3.37217  10 ksi
psi

For concrete, the poission ratio is in a range of 0.15~0.20

Assume a poission ratio v  0.17

Assume a unit wieght of concrete  Concrete  150pcf

ft
g  32.2
2
sec

 Concrete
MassDensityOfConcrete 
g

2
7 sec 1
MassDensityOfConcrete  2.24652  10 kip  
in 3
in
b) Calculations for Loading Conditions

Hydrostatic Pressure

Say the unit wieght of water  water  62.4pcf

h water.datum  4200in
At the datum (base of the dam) the height of the water

HydrostaticPressuredatum   water h water.datum

HydrostaticPressuredatum  0.15167 ksi

At dam top (at a height of 4200 in from the datum)

HydrostaticPressuredamtop   water 0.0

HydrostaticPressuredamtop  0 ksi

Gravity Load

in
GravityAcceleration  386.4 Entered as -386.4 in component 2
2
sec
2) Present the results from the finite element analysis of each loading condition. For each analysis, present
the contour plots of all the normal, shear, and principal stresses. Indicate the maximum values (locations
and magnitudes) on the plots.

Load Case 1:

S11
S22 Load Case 1:
S33 Load Case 1:
S12 Load Case 1:
Maximum in-plane principal stresses
Load Case 1:
Minimum in-plane principal stresses
Load Case 1:
Out-of-plane principal stresses
Load Case 1:
Load Case 2:

S11
S22 Load Case 2:
S33 Load Case 2:
S12 Load Case 2:
Maximum in-plane principal stresses Load Case 2:
Minimum in-plane principal stresses Load Case 2:
Out-of-plane principal stresses
Load Case 2:
3]. Calculation of Applied forces and Comparison with Reactions got from FEM Analysis

Water
A

1 mile
350 ft.

B C

40 ft. 30 ft. 230 ft.

Reactions Load case 1

Distance from B
Node (1_direction) (in) RF1 (kip) RF2 (kip)
1 0 -1.01E+06 -1.59E+06 1217 1900 -1.27E+06 -2.51E+06
2 100 -7.98E+05 -7.86E+05 1221 2000 -1.25E+06 -1.34E+06
3 200 -5.40E+05 -4.84E+05 1224 2100 -1.04E+06 -8.41E+05
4 300 -4.88E+05 -3.39E+05 1227 2200 -9.24E+05 -5.55E+05
5 400 -4.35E+05 -2.16E+05 1230 2300 -8.32E+05 -3.34E+05
6 500 -3.96E+05 -1.18E+05 1233 2400 -7.62E+05 -1.48E+05
7 600 -3.65E+05 -3.04E+04 1236 2500 -7.06E+05 1.91E+04
8 700 -3.41E+05 4.96E+04 1239 2600 -6.61E+05 1.74E+05
9 800 -3.20E+05 1.25E+05 1242 2700 -6.24E+05 3.20E+05
10 900 -3.04E+05 1.96E+05 1245 2800 -5.96E+05 4.59E+05
11 1000 -2.92E+05 2.63E+05 1248 2900 -5.73E+05 5.89E+05
12 1100 -2.82E+05 3.26E+05 1251 3000 -5.57E+05 7.09E+05
13 1200 -2.76E+05 3.83E+05 1254 3100 -5.47E+05 8.16E+05
14 1300 -2.72E+05 4.33E+05 1257 3200 -5.41E+05 9.04E+05
15 1400 -2.70E+05 4.71E+05 1260 3300 -5.38E+05 9.66E+05
16 1500 -2.68E+05 4.95E+05 1263 3400 -5.33E+05 9.91E+05
17 1600 -2.65E+05 4.97E+05 1266 3500 -5.18E+05 9.60E+05
18 1700 -2.42E+05 4.65E+05 1269 3600 -4.76E+05 8.22E+05
19 1800 -7.51E+04 1.59E+05 Total -20180601 2306349

Reactions are reported in the “Reaction” Files also.

RF1-Load case 1
RF 2-Load case 1
RF Magnitude-Load case 1
Reactions Load case 2

Distance
from B
(1_directi
Node on) (in) RF1 (kip) RF2 (kip)
1 0 -7.08E+05 -7.45E+05 1217 1900 -8.16E+05 4.18E+04
2 100 -5.49E+05 4.45E+05 1221 2000 -8.74E+05 1.12E+06
3 200 -3.90E+05 7.29E+05 1224 2100 -7.79E+05 1.57E+06
4 300 -3.79E+05 8.60E+05 1227 2200 -7.44E+05 1.82E+06
5 400 -3.63E+05 9.55E+05 1230 2300 -7.18E+05 1.97E+06
6 500 -3.54E+05 1.02E+06 1233 2400 -7.04E+05 2.08E+06
7 600 -3.49E+05 1.06E+06 1236 2500 -6.96E+05 2.15E+06
8 700 -3.46E+05 1.09E+06 1239 2600 -6.92E+05 2.20E+06
9 800 -3.46E+05 1.11E+06 1242 2700 -6.93E+05 2.22E+06
10 900 -3.47E+05 1.12E+06 1245 2800 -6.96E+05 2.23E+06
11 1000 -3.50E+05 1.11E+06 1248 2900 -7.03E+05 2.22E+06
12 1100 -3.53E+05 1.10E+06 1251 3000 -7.11E+05 2.19E+06
13 1200 -3.58E+05 1.08E+06 1254 3100 -7.21E+05 2.13E+06
14 1300 -3.63E+05 1.05E+06 1257 3200 -7.29E+05 2.04E+06
15 1400 -3.67E+05 9.97E+05 1260 3300 -7.35E+05 1.92E+06
16 1500 -3.68E+05 9.27E+05 1263 3400 -7.32E+05 1.76E+06
17 1600 -3.63E+05 8.33E+05 1266 3500 -7.08E+05 1.53E+06
18 1700 -3.31E+05 7.03E+05 1269 3600 -6.47E+05 1.19E+06
19 1800 -1.02E+05 2.16E+05 Total -20180602 48044323
RF1-Load case 2
RF2-Load case 2
RF Magnitude-Load case 2
Calculation of Applied Forces:

HydrostaticPressuredatum  0.15167 ksi

HydrostaticPressuredamtop  0 ksi

Total Force due to hydrostatic Pressure:

Say the forward face of the dam (the sloped fac e near to the water) make an angle  with
horizontal

Ldam  5280ft
Length of the Dam

BC  40ft AC  350ft

2 2
AB  BC  AC AB  352.2783 ft

AC
AC BC Sin 
Tan  Cos  AB
BC AB

1

FHydrostaticPressure  HydrostaticPressuredatum  HydrostaticPressuredamtop  AB Ldam
2


7
FHydrostaticPressure  2.03115  10 kip
acting in an angle  with vertical
 Total Force due to Gravity:

 Concrete  150pcf

1
CrossSectionalAreaofDam   ( 30ft  300ft)  350ft
2 4 2
CrossSectionalAreaofDam  5.775  10 ft

Ldam  5280ft
Length of the Dam

FGravity   Concrete CrossSectionalAreaofDam Ldam

7
FGravity  4.5738  10 kip
acting downward
Comparison of Applied Forces with the Reactions got from the FEM Analysis for Loading
Case1

Total Horizontal Froce

FH1  FHydrostaticPressure Sin

7
FH1  2.01802  10 kip

From the FEM Analysis

7
RF1  2.01806  10 kip
The Total Reaction in the 1-direction

For equlibrium the Applied Forces (FH1)+The Reactions(RF1)=0 O.K

Total Vertical Froce

FH2  FHydrostaticPressure Cos

6
FH2  2.3063  10 kip

From the FEM Analysis

6
RF2  2.30635  10 kip
The Total Reaction in the 2-direction

For equlibrium the Applied Forces + The Reactions=0

Forces and reactions are almost equal in magnitude and opposite in direction O.K
Comparison of Applied Forces with the Reactions got from the FEM Analysis for Loading
Case 2

Total Horizontal Froce

FH1  FHydrostaticPressure Sin

7
FH1  2.01802  10 kip

From the FEM Analysis

7
RF1  2.01806  10 kip
The Total Reaction in the 1-direction

For equlibrium the Applied Forces (FH1)+The Reactions(RF1)=0 O.K

Total Vertical Froce

FH2  FHydrostaticPressure Cos  FGravity

7
FH2  4.80443  10 kip
From the FEM Analysis
7
RF2  4.80443  10  kip
The Total Reaction in the 2-direction

For equlibrium the Applied Forces + The Reactions=0

Forces and reactions are almost equal in magnitude and opposite in direction O.K
Are there any other simple calculations you can suggest or perform to check
the analysis results?

• For a point in a horizontal section along the length of the dam (can be base of the dam), stress due to gravity
of the part above that section (P/A + Pey/I) and the stress due to moment coming from the hydrostatic
pressure (My/I) can be calculated and checked with S22 obtained from the FE Analysis.

• One of the principal stresses would be zero at the free boundary.

• One of the principal stresses would be equal to (-) Hydrostatic pressure at the boundary adjacent to the Water.
Hydrostatic pressure can be calculated along the face of the dam and checked with the principal stresses.

• Can pick one element and check for equilibrium. This is normally approximately satisfied.

• Displacements at fixed points are zero. For example at Node 1: U1=725.362E-33 in, U2=1.61748E-30 in
 Checking the Finite Element model for convergence

Load Case 1: Mesh is refined with 4752 Elements (almost 4 times)instead of 1134 elements
(which were earlier) and the displacements are compared.

Mesh with 1134 Elements Mesh with 4752 elements

Max U1= 0.3579 in Max U1= 0.3579 in

Max U2= 0.08462 in Max U2= 0.08464 in
Max U magnitude = 0.3662 in Max U magnitude = 0.3662 in
Load Case 2: Mesh is refined with 4752 Elements (almost 4 times)instead of 1134 elements
(which were earlier) and the displacements are compared.

Mesh with 1134 Elements Mesh with 4752 elements

Max U1= 0.1984 in Max U1= 0.1985 in

Max U2= -0.1224 in Max U2= -0.1224 in
 Max U magnitude = 0.2301 in Max U magnitude = 0.2301 in

The displacement pattern and the values are seemed to be very similar. This implies the convergence of the model.
Stresses and reactions are calculated from the displacements by FEM. They are generally approximately similar.
4) From your analysis results, identify the maximum compressive and tensile stresses
in the concrete dam. Determine whether the structure will crack (in tension) or crush
(in compression) under the given loading conditions?

Let us use Rankine Theory for concrete (Brittle Material).

Compressive strength of the concrete = 3.5 ksi

Modulus of Rupture of the concrete =7.5*(3500)^0.5*1/1000 ksi =0.44 ksi

For Load case 1:

From the FE Analysis the maximum maximum principal stress =0.713 ksi (Tension) >0.44 ksi cracking
(0.889 ksi (Tension) from refined mesh>0.44 ksi)

max. (in magnitute ) minimum principal stress =0.1925 ksi (compression) <3.5 ksi No Crushing
(0.1944 ksi (Com.) from refined mesh <3.5 ksi)

For Load case 2:

From the FE Analysis the maximum maximum principal stress =0.3457 ksi (Tension) <0.44 ksi No cracking
(0.4737 ksi (Tension) from refined mesh>0.44 ksi
cracking )

max. (in magnitute ) minimum principal stress =0.2927 ksi (compression) <3.5 ksi No Crushing
(0.2927 ksi (Com.) from refined mesh <3.5 ksi)

[Note: Tensile strength of the concrete = 6(f’c)^0.5. ACI 318-2005 suggest to consider the modulus of rupture to check for cracking.
US Army Corps of Engineers Manual also recommends to consider modulus of rupture for checking for cracking.]
5) From the analysis results, discuss which of two loading conditions (i) or
(ii) dominates the problem.
For mesh with 1134 elements (coarse mesh)

Loading σp1 σp3 U1 U2 U(mag)

Condition (max) (max in (max) (max) (max)
(ksi) mag.) (in) (in) (in)
(ksi)

1 0.713 0.1925 0.3579 0.08462 0.3662

2 0.3457 0.2927 0.1984 - 0.231

0.01224

The tensile stresses and deflections are higher for loading condition 1. Hence, we could say that the loading
condition 1 dominates the Problem.

Due to the gravity, compressive stress increases and tensile stress decreases. Concrete can take up to 3.5 ksi
of compressive stress (with out no load factors and reduction factors). Hence the loading case 2 is more safe
than loading case 1.
 6) Identify some of the other loading conditions or design criteria that must be checked for the
concrete dam structure. Provide a reference (citation only) that you used to determine these.
Will the finite element model you developed be useful for these additional cases?

US Army Corps of Engineers Manual for gravity dam design list the following loading
cases to be considered.

(1) Uplift.
(2) Forces due to temperature effects.
(3) Earth and silt pressures.
(4) Ice pressure.
(5) Earthquake forces.
(6) Wind pressure
(7) Wave pressure. (hydro dynamic forces).
(8) Reaction of foundation.

Citation: US Army Corps of Engineers Manual for gravity dam design (1995)
http://www.usace.army.mil/publications/eng-manuals/em1110-2-2200/toc.htm

If there is life load during construction or after construction, vehicle loads if there
will be a road along the top of the dam they also should be considered.

The Finite element model developed here will be useful for these additional cases. Dynamic analysis For
earthquake and hydrodynamic forces, and thermal analysis for forces due to temperature effects should be done.