Evaluation of Numerical Models in the Analysis of Pine Flat Dam Presentation draft Version – June 21,2018 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop Proposed Formulation Dr. Jerzy Salamon & Ms Hillery Venturini (Bureau of Reclamation) Dr. M. A. Hariri-Ardebili (University of Colorado, Boulder) Dr. Richard Malm (KTH) & Ms Giorgia Faggiani (RSE S.p.A) July 1, 2018

Background 2018 USSD Workshop Lesson Learned: Evaluation of Numerical Models and Input Parameters in the Analysis of Concrete Dams – Pine Flat Dam Case Study (Linear analysis) [1] The ultimate goal of analysis was to: identify key uncertainties causing differences in results determine the need for future workshops determine research needs and develop best practices in the advanced dynamic analysis of concrete dams. Lesson Learned: Little is gained if participants analyze identical modes with the same input parameters and get similar answers Likewise, little is gained if participants perform analyses with widely varying input parameters and get widely varying answers, so that key factors cannot be clearly identified 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Case Study Selection Pine Flat Dam is proposed for the case study during the ICOLD workshop The dam is located east of Fresno, California The dam was constructed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in 1954 The structural height is 121.91 m (400 feet) The dam consists of thirty-six (36) 15.24 m (50 foot) and one (1) 12.19 m (40 foot) wide monoliths 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Problem Formulation Analysis of a tallest non-overflow dam monolith 16 at Pine Flat Dam is proposed Extensive studies was performed by UC Berkley studies in 1970’s and 1980’s 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Physical Model The model consists of: Single 121.91 m (400 feet) high and 15.24 m (50 feet) wide dam monolith Foundation rock block 701.0 m (2300 feet) long and 121.91 (400 feet) deep The geometry of the model can be provided to the participant in a Cad format 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Case Studies Case A – Modal Analysis Perform modal analysis of the dam-foundation-reservoir. Case B – Simulation of Experimental Tests Pine Flat Dam was vibrated by eccentric-mass-vibration generators (EMVG) in 1971 [2]. Workshop Contributors will be asked to perform dynamic analysis to simulate the test results. Case C – Dam-Reservoir-Foundation Model (Foundation Properties P1) Analysis of the model for ETAF dynamic signal with foundation properties P1 (rock). Determine potential failure mode (PFM) and the corresponding ETAF-based failure time, and other analysis results for comparison. Case D – Dam-Reservoir-Foundation Model (Foundation Properties P2) Perform analysis as for Case “C” with foundation properties P2 (stiff rock). (Which is the aim of performing the analyses with two sets of rock forundation properties?) 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Load Case – Simulation of EMVG Eccentric-Mass-Vibration Generator (EMVG) Number of combination of eccentric mass and rotation speed resulted in the output exciding forces being applied at the crest of Monolith 16. As you know, vibration tests are generally performed to characterize the modal response of structures. Which is the aim of this request? Does the structural response relevant to EMVG test be provided to participants to calibrate the model for the following analyses? 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Load Case - ETAF Endurance Time Acceleration Function (ETAF) ETAF is a specially designed intensifying acceleration time history record, where the acceleration and response spectrum linearly increase with time. ETAF acceleration (or velocity) time history is applied in upstream/ downstream direction at the base of the foundation. ETAF will be generated for a response spectrum corresponding to the Taft Lincoln School Tunnel (Taft), Kern County, California earthquake occurred on July 21, 1952. 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Non-linear Material Typical material properties for concrete and rock will be provided Density Modulus of elasticity Poisson ratio Compressive strength Tensile strength Two sets of foundation properties will be defined P1 (rock) and P2 (stiff rock) The non-linear materials are also related to foundation? If so, how can be managed the wave propagation in a non-elastic domain? The typical massless approach – very often adopted according to European standards – cannot be applicable. 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop Objectives: Estimate natural frequencies of a dam-foundation interacting with reservoir Calibrate the FE model with the Eccentric-Mass-Vibration Generator results Develop Potential Failure Modes for a gravity dam for two sets of foundation properties (rock and stiff-rock) (How do you define a “Failure Mode”? In terms of non-convergence of the analysis? This seems a weak criteria. In terms of excessive displacements? Others? This aspect should be better clarified.) Compare the results of the non-linear time-history analyses for ETAF signal Discuss accuracy of the solutions Two further aspects could be taken into account: Modelling of the dam-foundation interface; this is «by definition» a weak surface; Considering that the valley has a «V» shape, a 3-D model of the dam should be considered. 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation

2019 ICOLD Workshop References USSD White Paper EVALUATION OF NUMERICAL MODELS AND INPUT PARAMETERS INTHE ANALYSIS OF CONCRETE DAMS, 2018 (draft) Rea D., Liaw C.Y., Chopra A. K., Dynamic Properties of Pine Flat Dam, Report No. EERC 72-7, University of California at Berkeley, December 1972 2019 ICOLD Benchmark Workshop - Formulation