7 Mellal A

Seismic safety of a buttress dam and appurtenant structures - 3D static and dynamic analyses Dr Assa Mellal, Civil Engineer
STUCKY SA, Switzerland
NUMERICS IN GEOTECHNICS AND STRUCTURES, ZSoil Day, 30 August 2010, Lausanne
Outline 1. Introduction: General context Description 2. Numerical model 2.1 Model assumptions 2.2 Geometry and FE mesh 2.3 Geomechanical parameters 3. Model calibration and validation 3.1 Methodology 3.2 Temperatures 3.3 Water level 3.4 Comparison model vs. measurements 4. Eigen modes and frequencies 5. Seismic safety assessment 5.1 Initial static conditions 5.2 Seismic load 5.3 Dynamic stress analyses 5.4 Verification of concrete strength (stresses) 5.5 Verification of global stability (sliding, overturning) 5.6 Verification of hydromechanical equipments (gates) 6. Conclusions and comments
Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
A. Mellal
Rossinire Dam
1. Introduction Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
A. Mellal
Swiss Seismic Hazard Map (10000 years return period)
Rossinire
A. Mellal
1.1 Main characteristics of the dam Type: gravity-buttress dam Construction period: 1969-1972 Height: 30 m Crest elevation: 862.50 m Volume of reservoir: 2.9 millions m3 Volume of concrete: 10000 m3 Crest length: 35 m Flap gates (2): 2.5 m x 5.0 m Outlet gates (2): 2.5 m x 5.0 m
A. Mellal
1.2 Context of the study The seismic safety assessment of Rossinire Dam is carried out following the requirements and recommendations of the Swiss Federal Office of Energy Dam category: classe I (H = 30 m, V = 2.9 millions m3)
Classement des barrages suisses selon lOSOA

60
Hauteur de la retenue (m)
50
Classe I
40
30
Classe II
20
Rossinire Dam
10
Bassins de Classe III rtention

0 0 250'000 500'000 750'000 Capacit de la retenue (m3) 1'000'000 1'250'000
A. Mellal
2.1 Model assumptions Linear isotropic elastic materials (concrete and rock) Monolithe structure: joints not modeled explicitly Perfect bonding at rock-concrete interface One-phase calculations: no fluid flow, uplift pressure not considered for stress analysis
2. Numerical model Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
A. Mellal
2.2 Model geometry and FE mesh Geometry of the dam (3D), appurtenanant structures and foundation, reconstructed on the basis of existing drawings and topographic maps. Finite element analyses performed using Z_Soil 3D v2009 (dynamic) and v2010_beta (eigen modes) Finite element model: 80279 nodes Dam and adjoining structures: 37259 volumetric 8-node elements (hexaedrons) Foundation : 28074 volumetric 8-node elements (hexaedrons) Gates: 3658 shell elements, 354 beams and 4 truss elements (jacks)
A. Mellal
A. Mellal
Downstream 3D view
86 m
Y Z X
Y Z X
Geometry
FE mesh
A. Mellal
Upstream 3D view
Y X Z X
Y Z
Geometry
FE mesh
A. Mellal
Y Z X
Y Z X
Geometry
FE mesh
A. Mellal
A. Mellal
Geometry
Right wing
Left wing
Central buttress
Lateral buttress
FE mesh
A. Mellal
Geometry
FE mesh
A. Mellal
Geometry
FE mesh
A. Mellal
Flap gate
Flap gate
Outlet gate
Outlet gate
Geometry
FE mesh
A. Mellal
2.3 Numerical model: geomechanical parameters Mechanical properties:
Rocher Stat/Dyn
Bton de masse Stat/Dyn 25 20/25 0.2 27/40 2.9/4.3
Bton arm et parties massives Stat/Dyn 25 30/37.5 0.2 40/60 3.8/5.6
Specific weight, [kN/m3] : Elastic modulus, E [GPa] : Poisson coefficient, [-] : Compressive strength, fc : Tensile strength, ft : Thermal properties: Thermal expansion coefficient, [1/C] : Thermal conductivity, K [kJ/m/hC] : Heat capacity, C* [kJ/m3/C] : Diffusivity, [m2/h] :
24/0 15/18.75 0.25 -
6.66 x 10-6 8 2200 36.36 x 10-4
A. Mellal
3.1 Methodology Calibration on displacements measurements for a static load (hydrostatic pressure + temperature) case over 1997-2008 period. Analysis procedure: 1. Initial state: dams self-weight 2. Application of measured ambient temperatures during the considered period => determination of temperature fields within the dam 3. Evaluation of displacements induced by temperatures evolution and water level variations during the considered period. 4. Comparison of calculated displacements with measurements over the considered period
3. Model calibration and validation Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
A. Mellal
3.1 Methodology: location of instruments
A. Mellal
3.2 Thermal load Thermal boundary conditions

T(dry) = T(air) + T(solar radiation) T(wet) = T(water) + T(surface)
Barrage de Rossinire - Temprature de l'air

30 25 20
Temprature de l'eau
18 16 14
Temprature [C]
15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20
Temprature [C]
12 10 8 6 4 2 0
Mesures journalires
Mesures mensuelles
Teau en profondeur (> 3m)
Teau en surface (< 3m)
Solar radiation: winter: +3, summer: +3C Twater (surface, 0-3m) : winter: 0, summer: +2C
Assumption on water temperature: Sinusoidal variation between 5C and17C at depth 03m and between 5 and 15 at depth >3m
(consistent assumption with measurements of the closestto-water thermometer (T2)).
A. Mellal
3.2 Calculated temperature fields in the dam
04.01.2001
01.02.2001
26.02.2001
04.04.2001
04.05.2001
01.06.2001
05.07.2001
08.08.2001
05.09.2001
09.10.2001
08.11.2001
05.12.2001
A. Mellal
3.2 Comparaison calculated vs. measured temperatures (thermometers)

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
Temprature [C]
Mesure T1
Calcul
Temprature [C]
Mesure T2
Calcul
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
Temprature [C]
Temprature [C]
Mesure T3
Calcul
Mesure T4
Calcul
A. Mellal
3.3 Hydrostatic load Applied loads on upstream face of the dam correspond to water level variation
Barrage de Rossinire - Niveau du lac
862 861 860
Niveau du lac [m]
859 858 857 856 855 854
A. Mellal
3.4 Comparison calculated vs. measured displacements Upstream-Downstream

Dpl. [mm] - Aval / + Amont
2 1 0 -1 -2 -3
Left-Right
Dpl. [mm] - Droite / + Gauche
3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3
Mesure R
Calcul
Mesure T
Calcul
Dpl. [mm] -Haut / + Bas
2 1 0 -1 -2 -3
Mesure Invar
Calcul
Vertical
A. Mellal
Dam Full reservoir
Y Z
Y X
Y X X Z
Mode 1
Frequency (Hz) 19.28
Mass contribution (%) X 0.00 Y 0.74 Z 47.98
4. Eigen modes and frequencies Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
A. Mellal
Dam Full reservoir
Y Z
Y X
Y X X Z
Mode 2
A. Mellal
Dam Full reservoir
Y Z
Y X
Y X X Z
Mode 3
A. Mellal
Dam Full reservoir
Y Z
Y X
Y X X Z
Mode 4
A. Mellal
Dam Full reservoir
Y Z
Y X
Y X X Z
Mode 5
A. Mellal
Dam Full reservoir
Y Z
Y X
Y X X Z
Mode 6
A. Mellal
Flap gate Full reservoir
Mode 1 : f = 12.99 Hz
Mode 2 : f = 13.33 Hz
Mode 3 : f = 13.94 Hz
Mode 4 : f = 15.63 Hz
Mode 5 : f = 17.00 Hz
Mode 6 : f = 18.06 Hz
A. Mellal
Outlet gate Full reservoir
Mode 1 : f = 5.14 Hz
Mode 2 : f = 10.87 Hz
Mode 3 : f = 12.69 Hz
Mode 4 : f = 14.51 Hz
Mode 5 : f = 15.85 Hz
Mode 6 : f = 16.79 Hz
A. Mellal
5.1 Initial static conditions Self-weight Hydrostatic pressure: full reservoir (860 msm upstream, 842.30 msm downstream) Silt load: 850 msm (constant), buoyant density 0.36 t/m3 Temperature load: Reference : annual average (daily measurements 1997-2008) Summer: thermal gradient T(summer)-T(reference) Winter: thermal gradient T(winter)- T(reference)
Temprature [C] Et Hiver moyenne (21.06 - 20.09) (21.12 - 20.03) 8 8 8 10 15 5 11 17 5 8.1 16.5 -0.3 11.1 19.5 2.7 Gradient [C] Max Min (t) (hiver) 0 0 +5 -5 +6 -6 +8.4 -8.4 +8.4 -8.4
Rocher Eau (< 3 m) Eau (> 3 m) Air Surface barrage (air + ensoleillement)
5. Seismic safety assessment Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
A. Mellal
5.1 Initial static conditions
860 msm
Normal water level
850 msm
Silt
Tailwater
842.30 msm
860 msm
850 msm
842.30 msm
Downstream view 5. Seismic safety assessment Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
Upstream view
A. Mellal
5.1 Initial static conditions : reference temperature field

Downstream 3D view
Longitudinal section
Upstream 3D view
A. Mellal
5.1 Initial static conditions : summer temperature field

Downstream 3D view
Upstream 3D view
A. Mellal
5.1 Initial static conditions : winter temperature field

Downstream 3D view
Upstream 3D view
A. Mellal
Selected zones for the assessment of static and dynamic stresses
A. Mellal
5.3 Initial static conditions Extreme static stresses

Poids propre Printemps, lac plein Et, Lac plein Hiver, Lac plein
Aile rive droite Aile rive gauche Contrefort1 rive gauche Contrefort2 central Contrefort3 rive droite Corps central Passerelle amont Passerelle aval Fondation niveau 838
s1 max (tractio s3 min (comp s1 max (tractio s3 min (comp s1 max (tractio s3 min (comp s1 max (tractio s3 min (compr 0.3 -0.4 0.2 -0.5 0.5 -2.5 2.6 -1.4 0.3 -0.4 0.3 -0.6 0.5 -2.0 2.3 -1.2 0.2 -0.5 0.3 -0.7 0.8 -2.3 1.4 -0.7 0.1 -0.5 0.1 -0.7 0.8 -2.2 1.8 -1.1 0.2 -0.5 0.3 -0.8 0.8 -2.8 1.6 -0.7 0.1 -0.4 0.4 -1.0 0.2 -2.4 2.1 -1.0 0.0 -0.8 0.0 -0.8 0.0 -3.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 -0.8 0.0 -0.6 0.1 -3.2 2.6 -0.1 0.0 -0.3 0.0 -0.4 0.0 -1.0 0.5 -0.3
Extreme static displacements

Gauche-DroiteVertical [mm] [mm] 0.00 0.00 -0.06 0.06 Amont-Aval Absolu [mm] [mm] 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.35 -0.86 1.22 1.55 1.72
Poids propre Poids propre + lac plein Et lac plein Hiver lac plein
0.00 0.06 0.86 -0.74
A. Mellal
5.2 Seismic load: MSK intensity map (10000 years return period)
Rossinire
IMSK = 8.6
log ah = 0.26 IMSK + 0.19
ah = 0.27 g
A. Mellal
5.2 Seismic load: accelerograms and correspondant spectra

srie 1 - composante horizontale amont-aval
3
10 9
srie 1 - composante horizontale amont-aval
Acclration spectrale [m/s2]
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0.01 0.1 1 10
Acclration [m/s2]
2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Temps [s]
Priode [s]
srie 1 - composante verticale
10 9
srie 1 - composante verticale
Acclration [m/s2]
ah = 0.27 g av = 0.18 g
3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0.01 0.1 1 10
Temps [s]
Priode [s]
srie 1 - composante horizontale rive-rive

3
10 9
srie 1 - composante horizontale rive-rive
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0.01 0.1 1 10
Acclration [m/s2]
2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Temps [s]
Priode [s]
A. Mellal
5.2 Seismic load

Hydrodynamic pressure: oscillating added masses
Left Right Oscillating water : total quantity between walls
Upstream Downstream Oscillating water : Westergaard
Vertical Oscillating water : water column height
Rayleigh damping (global): <5% between 10 Hz and 50 Hz HHT integration scheme ( = -0.3)
A. Mellal
5.3 Dynamic stress analyses: ENVELOPE OF DYNAMIC PRINCIPAL STRESSES
Enveloppe des contraintes principales - Et, Lac plein, Sisme 1

4000 3000 2000 1000 0
Contrainte (kPa)
-1000 -2000 -3000 -4000 0 5 10

S3min
15 Temps (s)
S1max
20
25
30
Stress (MPa) Compression (-) Tension (+) -3.78 0.97
Time (s) 13.00 18.68
A. Mellal
5.3 Dynamic stress analyses: ENVELOPE OF DYNAMIC PRINCIPAL STRESSES
Enveloppe des contraintes principales - Hiver, Lac plein, Sisme 1

4000 3000 2000 1000 0
Contrainte (kPa)
-1000 -2000 -3000 -4000 0 5 10

S3min
15 Temps (s)
S1max
20
25
30
Stress (MPa) Compression (-) Tension (+) -1.74 3.35
Time (s) 20.84 10.84
A. Mellal
5.3 Dynamic stress analyses: Extreme dynamic displacements (Winter, full reservoir, earthquake 1)
A. Mellal
5.3 Dynamic stress analyses: Extreme dynamic stresses (Winter, full reservoir, earthquake 1)
A. Mellal
5.3 Dynamic stress analyses: summary
Extreme dynamic stresses

Et, Lac plein Sisme 1
t max [MPa] c min [MPa]
Sisme 1
Hiver, Lac plein Sisme 2

Sisme 3
Aile droite Aile gauche Contrefort 1 (gauche) Contrefort 2 (central) Contrefort 3 ( droite) Corps central Passerelle amont Passerelle aval Fondation niveau 838
0.8 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.3 0.0
-3.0 -2.3 -3.1 -3.1 -3.7 -2.7 -3.5 -3.8 -1.1
3.2 2.5 1.7 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.1 3.4 0.5
-1.7 -1.7 -1.1 -1.3 -1.0 -1.7 -0.8 -0.8 -0.3
3.3 2.5 1.7 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.3 0.5
-1.7 -1.8 -1.1 -1.4 -1.0 -1.8 -0.8 -0.8 -0.3
3.2 2.5 1.7 2.5 2.3 2.4 2.1 3.2 0.5
-1.7 -1.7 -1.1 -1.4 -1.0 -1.8 -0.8 -0.8 -0.3
Extreme dynamic displacements and accelerations

Absolute displacement Value (mm) Summer Earthquake 1 Earthquake 1 Winter Earthquake 2 Earthquake 3 Time (s) Absolue acceleration Value (m/s2) Summer Earthquake 1 Earthquake 1 Winter Earthquake 2 Earthquake 3 7.67 Time (s) 10.82
1.70 2.42 2.41 2.55
18.68 10.84 6.52 16.02 7.67 9.31 10.49 10.82 21.36 13.32
A. Mellal
5.4 Verification of concrete strength (stresses) Compressive stresses estimated dynamic strength: 60 MPa maximum stress: 3.8 MPa (footbridge downstrem, in summer) => Compressive strength criterion satisfied Tensile stresses: estimated dynamic strength : 5.6 MPa maximum stress : 3.4 MPa (footbridge downstrem, in winter) => Tensile strength criterion satisfied
A. Mellal
5.5 Verification of global stability (sliding, overturning) Assumptions: Analysis of 3 buttresses with two half-openings self-weight Hydrostatic pressure (full reservoir) Silt load (850 msm) Uplift pressure (100% of total pressure, evolution according to average measurements) No thermal load Resisting lateral forces (3D) neglected Earthquake: horizontal and vertical components Evaluation of stresses at time of maximal US-DS crest displacement
A. Mellal
5.5 Dam stability
Buttress
Basin
Mass concrete
Potential pivot-point for overturning Potential sliding surface (838 msm)
Rock
A. Mellal
5.5 Dam stability
t (uA-A= max)
Normal and shear stresses on potential sliding surface
Efforts N, T and M
A. Mellal
5.5 Dam stability Sliding stability

= 55 ; c = 0 kPa
SG = ( N SP) tan FH
SR = MS M ( PP) = M R M ( PE + PS + SP + Sisme)
Overturning stability
sans sisme
SG [-] avec sisme
Contrefort rive droite Contrefort rive gauche Contrefort central Ensemble contreforts
1.97 2.78 3.96 2.99
1.47 1.50 2.19 1.77
Contrefort rive droite Contrefort rive gauche Contrefort central Ensemble contreforts
sans sisme
1.20 1.29
SR [-] avec sisme
1.03 1.18
1.47 1.33
1.28 1.17
Foundation bearing capacity

Pied amont S1 max [MPa] Contrefort rive droite Contrefort rive gauche Contrefort central Sous-pression [MPa] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.22 S3 min [MPa] -0.3 -0.5 -0.5 Pied aval S1 max [MPa] 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.05 S3 min [MPa] -0.3 -0.3 -0.3
=> Both local and global stability of the dam is satisfied

A. Mellal
5.6 Verification of gates: stresses

Flap gate
S1 (traction) S3 (compression) S1 (traction)
Outlet gate
S3 (compression)
vanne-clapet
Dplacement Amont-Aval max (mm) Et Hiver Sisme 1 Sisme 1 Sisme 2 Sisme 3 Contrainte de compression temps (s) max (MPa) 20.84 20.84 13.28 7.94 Contrainte de traction max (MPa)
vanne-secteur
Dplacement Amont-Aval max (mm) Contrainte de compression temps (s) max (MPa) 15.52 15.52 23.22 19.42 Contrainte de traction max (MPa)
4.35 5.11 5.32 5.16
-35.2 -35.3 -36.1 -37.1
56.4 58.7 64.4 59.8
4.81 4.91 5.04 5.70
-217.4 -209.2 -221.0 -220.5
126.0 126.7 134.9 133.1
=> Strength criterion of metallic gates is satisfied

A. Mellal
5.6 Verification of gates: blocking hazard

Summer
Dplacement relatif des contreforts [m] - cartement / + rapprochement
0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0 5 10
Vanne clapet
x 0.001
0.31 mm @ 11.00 s
Vanne clapet
0.12 mm @ 11.00 s
15 Temps (s)
20
25
30
Dpl. relatif haut
Dpl. relatif bas
Vanne secteur
0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 -0.01 0 5 10 15 Temps (s) Dpl. relatif haut Dpl. relatif bas
x 0.001
0.05 mm @ 18.62 s
Vanne secteur
0.01 mm @ 17.88 s
Dplacement relatif latral des contreforts
Opening width Gate width Wall-gate gap (mm)
Flap gate 4.90 4.82 40
Outlet gap 5.00 4.92 40
20
25
30
=> No risk of blocking of gates (earthquake in summer)

A. Mellal
5.6 Verification of gates: blocking hazard

Winter
0 -0.05 -0.1 -0.15 -0.2 -0.25 -0.3 -0.35 -0.4 0
Vanne clapet
0 mm @ 0.00 s
Vanne clapet
x 0.001
10
15 Temps (s)
20
25
30
Dpl. relatif haut
Dpl. relatif bas
Vanne secteur
x 0.001
0 -0.02 -0.04 -0.06 -0.08 -0.1 0 5 10 15 Temps (s) Dpl. relatif haut Dpl. relatif bas 20 25 30
0 mm @ 0.00 s
Vanne secteur
Dplacement relatif latral des contreforts
Opening width Gate width Wall-gate gap (mm)
Flap gate 4.90 4.82 40
Outlet gap 5.00 4.92 40
=> No risk of blocking of gates (earthquake in winter)

A. Mellal
5.6 Verification of jacks

Flap gate jack Bar diameter (mm) Area (mm2) Length (m) Critical Effort N (kN) 150 17671.5 6.35 Outlet gate jack 100 7854.0 5.27
N critique
1277.3
366.3
2 EI = 2 l0
Maximal compression (dynamic) of jacks:

Vrin vanne-clapet Contrainte de Compression temps compression N max (kN) (s) max (MPa) Et, Lac plein Hiver, Lac plein Sisme 1 Sisme 1 Sisme 2 Sisme 3 -418.9 -419.8 -432.0 -437.2 20.84 20.84 13.28 7.94 -23.7 -23.8 -24.4 -24.7 Vrin vanne-secteur Contrainte de Compression temps compression N max (kN) (s) max (MPa) -123.4 -199.8 -199.8 -199.8 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 -15.7 -25.4 -25.4 -25.4
Buckling safety afctors:

Vrin vanne-clapet Et, Lac plein Sisme 1 3.05 3.04 2.96 2.92 Vrin vanne-secteur 2.97 1.83 1.83 1.83
Hiver, Lac plein Sisme 1 Sisme 2 Sisme 3
=> No risk of buckling of jacks bars

A. Mellal
6. Conclusions and comments 3D numerical (FE) model of Rossinire dam including wing buildings, hydromechanical equipment (gates) and foundation was developed to evaluate seismic safety of the dam Model preparation and analyses were carried out using FE software Z_Soil 3D (versions 9 and 10beta) Large number of the programs features were successfully used Calibration and validation of the model showed very good agreement with measurements over several years (temperatures and displacements) Dynamic stress analyses show that compressive and tensile stresses remain below concrete strength Stability analyses of the dam indicate that neither sliding nor overturning may occur under the considered loads Assessment of the metallic gates stresses and deformations during earthquake indicates that: stresses fulfill strength criteria both in tension and in compression no risk of gate blocking between buttresses was identified no risk of jack bars buckling was identified Therefore, the seismic safety of Rossinire dam is fulfilled
6. Conclusions and comments Seismic safety of a buttress dam - 3D static and dynamic analyses Numerics in Geotechnics and Structures - ZSoil Day, 30-31 August 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland
A. Mellal

7 Mellal A

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7 Mellal A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seismic safety of a buttress dam and appurtenant structures - 3D static and dynamic analyses Dr Assa Mellal, Civil Engineer

STUCKY SA, Switzerland

NUMERICS IN GEOTECHNICS AND STRUCTURES, ZSoil Day, 30 August 2010, Lausanne

Swiss Seismic Hazard Map (10000 years return period)

Classement des barrages suisses selon lOSOA

Hauteur de la retenue (m)

Bassins de Classe III rtention

2.3 Numerical model: geomechanical parameters Mechanical properties:

Bton de masse Stat/Dyn 25 20/25 0.2 27/40 2.9/4.3

Bton arm et parties massives Stat/Dyn 25 30/37.5 0.2 40/60 3.8/5.6

24/0 15/18.75 0.25 -

6.66 x 10-6 8 2200 36.36 x 10-4

3.1 Methodology: location of instruments

3.2 Thermal load Thermal boundary conditions

Barrage de Rossinire - Temprature de l'air

15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20

Teau en profondeur (> 3m)

Teau en surface (< 3m)

3.2 Calculated temperature fields in the dam

3.2 Comparaison calculated vs. measured temperatures (thermometers)

Niveau du lac [m]

859 858 857 856 855 854

3.4 Comparison calculated vs. measured displacements Upstream-Downstream

Dpl. [mm] -Haut / + Bas

Dam Full reservoir

Frequency (Hz) 19.28

Mass contribution (%) X 0.00 Y 0.74 Z 47.98

Dam Full reservoir

Frequency (Hz) 25.95

Mass contribution (%) X 0.36 Y 0.07 Z 0.11

Dam Full reservoir

Frequency (Hz) 28.84

Mass contribution (%) X 5.42 Y 27.08 Z 12.69

Dam Full reservoir

Frequency (Hz) 28.94

Mass contribution (%) X 10.91 Y 8.24 Z 8.58

Dam Full reservoir

Frequency (Hz) 29.73

Mass contribution (%) X 0.02 Y 22.19 Z 16.77

Dam Full reservoir

Frequency (Hz) 31.34

Mass contribution (%) X 14.44 Y 0.12 Z 0.03

Flap gate Full reservoir

Outlet gate Full reservoir

5.1 Initial static conditions

Normal water level

5.1 Initial static conditions : reference temperature field

5.1 Initial static conditions : summer temperature field

5.1 Initial static conditions : winter temperature field

Selected zones for the assessment of static and dynamic stresses

5.3 Initial static conditions Extreme static stresses

Extreme static displacements

0.00 0.06 0.86 -0.74

log ah = 0.26 IMSK + 0.19

5.2 Seismic load: accelerograms and correspondant spectra

srie 1 - composante horizontale amont-aval

Acclration spectrale [m/s2]

srie 1 - composante verticale

srie 1 - composante verticale

Acclration spectrale [m/s2]

srie 1 - composante horizontale rive-rive

srie 1 - composante horizontale rive-rive

Acclration spectrale [m/s2]