International Journal Of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM)

Volume 1, Issue 5, November - 2014.

Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dam under Different Reservoir Water Level

V. Swami Srinath1, Pandimani2
1

departement of Civil Engineering, Jogaiahinstitute Technology and Sciences, Kalagampudi, Palakol, West Godavari (Dist), Andhra Pradesh, India.
(Email id: Sree.08649@Gmail.Com)
2
assistant Professor,Departement Of Civil Engineering, Universal College Of Engineering And Technology, Medikonduru (Md), Guntur (Dist),
Andhra Pradesh ,India
(Email id: Pandimani918@Gmail.Com)

-------------------------------- -------------------------------Abstract: Dams are supposed to be very important structures as they play a vital role in the economic and social development of the
area in which being constructed as well many a times useful in Hydro power generation. The effect of failure of dam structures can be
imagined by studding the area covered by the dam on downstream side. Though, there are very few cases of failure of dams, every
designer shall think of zero probability of failure of such structure.
Here Finite element approach is used to analyse the dam which is proved to be realistic for such structure. The present study
investigates and analyses the behaviour of a concrete gravity dam under different reservoir water level using ANSYS 14. The elements
taken here is 2D Quadrilateral 4 node PLANE182 having two degrees of freedom at each nodes. The modal in this thesis is a structure
of gravity dam.
The non over flow section has 54m height; top width 9.675m, base width is 37.51m. The upstream face of the dam has a slope
of 10:1 up to 45.720m and then straight up to top level of the dam. The dam has downstream slope of 1:0.85 up to 38.54m and t hen
straight up to top level. The upstream water level at F.R.L is 45.720m elevation and the maximum tail water level is 31.66m.
The objective of this project is to perform (2D) analysis of IndirasagarPolavaram dam for different reservoir water levels
and constant tail water level. In static analysis parameters like displacements, stresses and strains are calculated in x, y-directions at
each node and corresponding contour diagrams are plotted. In dynamic analysis only free vibration analysis (Modal analysis) due to
self-weight of dam is done and different mode shapes and natural frequencies are obtained and contour diagrams are plotte d.
Keywords: Gravity Dam, ANSYS, Stress, Strain Contours, Displacement Contours, Natural Frequency and Mode Shapes, PLANE
182 Elements, Different Reservoir Water Levels, Constant Tail Water Level.

-------------------------------- -------------------------------1. Introduction

In this the modelling of dam for static and modal analysis followed by commands and descriptions for modelling the dam using Ansys
software are neatly presented.
The Finite Element Analysis (FEA) method originally introduced by Turner et al. (1956) is a powerful computational technique for
approximate solutions to a variety of real-world
Engineering problems having complex domains subjected to general boundary conditions. FEA has become an essential step in the design or
modelling of a physical phenomenon in various engineering disciplines. A physical phenomenon usually occurs in a continuum of matter (solid,
liquid, or gas) involving several field variables. The field variables vary from point to point, thus possessing an infinite number of solutions in the
domain.
The Finite Element Method (FEM) is a numerical method for determining responses (deformation, strain, stress, etc.) of a body under
external loads. The Finite Element Method uses a concept of piecewise approximation. In theory, the elements can be of different shapes and sizes.
Until developing FEM it was almost difficult to calculate point to point responses (approximately) of a body of any geometric shape and any
complex type of loading conditions. In this method, the entire dam body is divided by using equivalent system of small triangle element for obtaining
responses within and boundary (node) of the element. This method determines first the global deformations at the nodes of the element then
determines successively other responses such as strains, stresses, etc. Nowadays, this method is available as a commercial FE programming or
software (ABAQUS, ANSYS, STADD.Pro, SAP, etc.) for solving large problems. Most of the FE programming used for either general purpose or
special purpose follows the same basic procedure of finite element method.

2. Modelling of Dam
The modelling of concrete gravity dam is done by one of the Finite Element Method (FEM) commercial package software ANSYS 14.The
dam is modelling in two dimensional (2D) and the element type taken here is Quadrilateral 4node PLANE182. The behaviour of the dam element
here is plane stress and the mesh size length is taken as 5. The degree of freedom (Displacement) at the base of the dam is kept zero (Fixed).

3. Analysis
In this chapter the Gravity dam is analysed by using FEM commercial package software ANSYS. Here the dam is analysed for different
cases of reservoir water depth levels (that is for 35.72m, 30m, 25 m) and constant tail water (21.66m) levels, then it is studied for free vibration
analysis. The forces considered for analysis of dams are self-weight of dam, upstream pressure, uplift pressure and tail water pressure. The water on
upstream side up to full reservoir level is 45.72m and the maximum tail water level is up to 31.66m. It has also a live storage capacity of 2130 million
cusecs provided between the FRL of +45.72m and the minimum drawdown level of +41.15m. The non over flow section of the dam is 54 m height.
The non-overflow section has been designed with the deepest foundation level at EL+10m.

Page 59

Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dam under Different Reservoir Water Level

In this chapter the loads (i.e. u/s pressure, uplift pressure and tail water pressure) acting over dam for different cases of reservoir water depth and
constant tail water conditions are studied and calculated. Material property and poisons ratio, damping ratio and generation of key points, nodes,
elements, area, meshing and different cases of loadings are presented.
3.1 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION:
Full Reservoir level (FRL)
Low water level (MDDL)
Maximum tail water level
Height of the dam (H)
Sound rock level
Width of dam at bottom
Width of the dam at top
Upstream slope
Downstream slope

= + 45.72 m
= + 41.15 m
= + 31.66 m
= + 54.00 m
= + 10.00 m
= + 37.51 m
= + 9.675 m
= 1:10
= 0.85:1

Fig 3.1 (a) non over flow section of Indirasagar gravity dam

4. Cases of Analysis
The dam is analysed for different reservoir water levels and constant tail water level to find the critical points of stress, strain
displacements and to study the stress variation over the body of the dam. Different cases adopted for analysis of dam are:
1. for 35.72 m of reservoir water level and constant tail water.
2. for 30 m of reservoir water level and constant tail water.
3. for 25 m of reservoir water level and constant tail water.

Shows generation of Nodes in Ansys for dam model

5. Results
5.1 Static Analysis:
In static analysis the dam is analyzed for different cases of u/s water level (i.e. for 35.72m, 30m, 25m) and constant tail water
level of (21.66m). The forces considered for analysis are reservoir pressure, uplift and tail water pressure. The displacements, stresses

Page 60

Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dam under Different Reservoir Water Level

and strain at critical points are analyzed and their values presented in tabular form and variations of these parameters under different
cases are shown in contour diagrams and graphs.
CASE 1: FOR 35.72 M WATER HEIGHT:

In this case the dam is subjected to 35.72m height u/s water level and constant tail water (21.66m) level. The u/s pressure
acting on dam is 0 MPa at top and 0.3572 MPa at bottom. The uplift pressure of 0.3572 MPa acting at heel and 0.2166 MPa acting at
toe respectively. The tail water pressure at d/s is 0 MPa at free surface and 0.2166 MPa at bottom respectively. For this case of
loading, the displacement, stress and strain values in x, y-direction for each node is given in table below and their variations are shown
in contour diagram below.

Fig 5.1(a) shows contour displacement in x-direction for 35.72m height of u/s water level and constant tail water level.

Fig 5.1(b)shows contour displacement in y-direction for 35.72m height u/s water level and constant tail water level.

Page 61

Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dam under Different Reservoir Water Level

Fig 5.1(c)shows contour stress in x-direction for 35.72mheight u/s water level and constant tail water level.

Fig 5.1(d)shows contour stress in y-direction for 35.72mheight u/s water level and constant tail water level.

Fig 5.1(e)shows contour strain in x-direction for 35.72mheight u/s water level and constant tail water level.

Page 62

Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dam under Different Reservoir Water Level

Fig 5.1(f)shows contour strain in y-direction for 35.72mheight u/s water level and constant tail water level.

DISPLACEMENTS(mm)

8.00E-04
7.00E-04
6.00E-04
5.00E-04
4.00E-04
3.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-04
0.00E+00
1
2
3
LOAD CASE
Fig: 5.1(g) shows variations in maximum displacement for different load cases of u/s water level and constant tail water level

6. Conclusions
In this study the concrete gravity dam is analyses for three different reservoir water levels with constant tail water level conditions and the
parameters such as stresses, strain, displacements for each node are calculated and their contour diagrams are plotted then free vibration analysis is
done where natural frequency and mode shapes and their corresponding contour diagrams are plotted. Finally the following conclusions are obtained.
1. The maximum deflection (UX = 6.99E-4) in x-direction is found at node number 13 which is located at extreme top right on the downstream side
and comes under case 1.
2. The maximum deflection (UY = 1.49E-4) in y-direction is found at node number 8 which is located at upstream face just below the FRL and
comes under case 1.
3. The maximum stress (SX= 8.25E-2) in x-direction is found at node number 1 which is located at extreme left bottom of heel and comes under
case 1.
4. The maximum stress (SY= 8.25E-2) in y-direction is found at node number 1 which is located at extreme left bottom of heel and comes under
case 1.
5. The maximum elastic strain (EPELX = 1.71E-7) in x-direction is found at node number 31 of case 5, and is located at bottom near to the toe.
6. The maximum elastic strain (EPELY = 1.70E-5) in y-direction is found at node number 1 of case 1, and is located at extreme left bottom of heel.
7. Maximum displacement, maximum stress and natural frequency are found to be high for mode number 5.

REFERENCE
[1]
[2]
[3]

Anil K. Chopra, Dynamics of Structures, Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering (2nd Edition), Prentice Hall of India Private
Limited, New Delhi, 2005.
Bureau of Indian standards IS: 1893-1984. Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures. ManakBhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar
Marg, New Delhi 110003.
Bureau of Indian standards IS: 6512-1984. Criteria for design of solid gravity dams. ManakBhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New
Delhi 110003.

Page 63

Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dam under Different Reservoir Water Level

[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]

Burman.A, Reddy.B.V, Maity.D (2008) Seismic Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams Considering Foundation Flexibility and Non
Linearity. The 12th International Conference of International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics.
Fenves, G. and A.K. Chopra, 1984. Earthquake Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams Including Reservoir Bottom Absorption and Dam-WaterFoundation Rock Interaction, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 12: 663-680.
GaurvaVerma, Verma. M.K, Tripati. R.K (2012) Dynamics Analysis of Hirakund dam due to Seismic Forces. International Journal of
Scientific Research Publications, ISSN 2250-3153, Volume 2, Issue 9.
Karim M Pathan, 2012. Finite Element Analysis of 99.60m High Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Gravity dam Special Emphasis on
Dynamic Analysis, Volume3,pp. 387-391.
Leclerc.M, Leger.P, Tinawi.R (2012). Computer Aided Stability Analysis of Gravity Dams, 4 th Structural Speciality Conference of the
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering.
Mohammad Mehdi Heydari and Abbas Mansoori(2012) Dynamic Analysis of Dam-Reservoir Interaction in Time Domain.World Applied
Sciences Journal 15 (10): 1403-1408, 2011.
S. K. Garg, Irrigation Engineering and Hydraulic Structures, 24th revised Edition, Khanna Publishers, Delhi 2011.
Shiva Khosravi and Mohammad Mehdi Heydari, 2013.Modelling of Concrete Gravity Dam Including Dam-Water-Foundation Rock
Interaction 22 (4): 538-546.

Page 64