Nonlinear Dyn (2009) 58: 655673 DOI 10.

1007/s11071-009-9508-x

O R I G I N A L PA P E R

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response of damreservoirfoundation systems
Alemdar Bayraktar Ahmet Can Altuniik s Bar Sevim Murat Emre Kartal Temel Trker s Yasemin Bilici

Received: 27 October 2007 / Accepted: 3 April 2009 / Published online: 17 April 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Abstract In this paper, it is aimed to compare the near- and far-fault ground motion effects on the nonlinear dynamic response of dams including dam reservoirfoundation interaction. Two different types of dams, which are concrete arch and concrete faced rockll dams, are selected to investigate the near- and far-fault ground motion effects on the dam responses. The behavior of reservoir water is taken into account using Lagrangian approach. The DruckerPrager material model is employed in nonlinear analyses. Near and far-fault strong ground motion records, which have approximately identical peak ground accelera-

tions, of Loma Prieta (1989) earthquake are selected for the analyses. Displacements, maximum and minimum principal stresses are determined using the nite element method. The displacements and principal stresses obtained from the analyses of dams subjected to each fault effect are compared with each other. It is clearly seen that there is more seismic demand on displacements and stresses when the dam is subjected to near-fault ground motion. Keywords Concrete arch dam Concrete faced rockll dam Damreservoirfoundation interaction DruckerPrager model Far fault ground motion Finite element method Near fault ground motion

A. Bayraktar ( ) A.C. Altuniik B. Sevim T. Trker s Y. Bilici Department of Civil Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University, 61080, Trabzon, Turkey e-mail: alemdar@ktu.edu.tr A.C. Altuniik s e-mail: ahmetcan8284@hotmail.com B. Sevim e-mail: bsevim18@hotmail.com T. Trker e-mail: temelturker@hotmail.com Y. Bilici e-mail: biliciyasemin@hotmail.com M.E. Kartal Department of Civil Engineering, Zonguldak Karaelmas University, 67100, Zonguldak, Turkey e-mail: murat_emre_kartal@hotmail.com

1 Introduction Near fault ground motions recorded in recent major earthquakes (1999 Taiwan Chi-Chi, 1989 Loma Prieta, 1994 US Northridge and 1995 Japan HyogokenNanbu) are characterized by a ground motion with large velocity pulse. It produces high input energy on structures in the beginning of the earthquake. Comparison of the near-fault strong ground motion velocities with far-fault strong ground motions is shown in Fig. 1. These pulses are strongly inuenced by the orientation of the fault, the direction of slip on the fault and the location of the recording station relative to the fault which is termed as directivity effect due

656 Fig. 1 The time-histories of two different strong ground motion velocities

A. Bayraktar et al.

to the propagation of the rupture toward the recording site [16]. The effects of near-fault ground motion on many civil engineering structures such as buildings, tunnels, bridges, nuclear station, etc., have been investigated in many recent studies [721]. It can be clearly seen from these studies that the importance of near-fault ground motion effect on the response of the structures have been highlighted. Dynamic responses of damreservoirfoundation systems have been investigated using the Eulerian and Lagrangian approaches by many researches [2232]. In these studies, stochastic and deterministic responses, earthquake analyses, linear and nonlinear behavior of the dams were determined. Also, hydrodynamic effects on dam were calculated. But, there is no sufcient research about the near-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear earthquake behavior of dams. The main objective of this paper is to compare the nonlinear earthquake response of damreservoir foundation systems subjected to near-fault and farfault ground motion excitations. For this purpose, concrete arch and concrete faced rockll (CFR) dams are utilized. The Loma Prieta earthquake records that displayed a ground motion with apparent velocity pulse are selected to represent the near-fault earthquake characteristics. In this study, the term nearfault ground motion is referred to the ground motion record obtained in the vicinity of a fault with apparent velocity pulse (pulse duration larger than 1.0 s), and the peak ground velocity/peak ground acceleration (PGV/PGA) value (unit is second) which is larger than 0.1 s. For comparison, earthquake ground motions recorded at the same site from Loma Prieta earthquake, the epicenter of which is far away from the site, are employed as the far-fault ground motions, to illustrate the difference between the near-fault and far-fault earthquake characteristics. Only the horizontal component of the ground motions is used as input to determine the dynamic behavior of the dams.

2 Formulation of damreservoirfoundation interaction It is known that reservoir water considerably affects dynamic response of dams during earthquakes. Three approaches are used to consider reservoir effects in the analyses: Westergaard, Eulerian and Lagrangian approaches. In the Westergaard approach, reservoir water is considered as a vibrated mass dispersion with the dam, which is similar to being hydrodynamic effect dispersion towards the dam upstream face. In the Eulerian approach, though displacements are the variables in the structure, the pressures are the variables in the uid. However, in the Lagrangian approach, the displacements are the variables in both the uid and the structure. Therefore, there is no need for any extra interface equations in the Lagrangian approach. For that reason, compatibility and equilibrium are automatically satised at the nodes between uid and structure along the interfaces. The formulation of the uid system based on the Lagrangian approach is given according to references [30, 3337]. In this approach, the uid is assumed to be linearly elastic, inviscid and with irrotational ow eld.

3 Earthquake response of dams subjected to nearand far-fault ground motions In this study, a near-fault ground motion record is selected as an input ground motion from 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake (Mw = 7.1). This record is taken from station number CLS090. On the contrary, another set of earthquake record, recorded at the same site condition from the same earthquake event with epicenter far away from the site (Mw = 7.1), is selected to illustrate far-fault ground motion characteristics. PGA and PGV, surface projection distances from the site to the fault

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response Table 1 Properties of selected near-fault and far-fault ground motion records Ground Motion Earthquake 1989 Near-fault Far-fault Loma Prieta Loma Prieta CLS090 CYC285 Station PGA (m/s2 ) 0.48 g 0.48 g PGV (cm/s) 45.2 39.7 PGV/PGA (s) 0.10 0.08 7.1 7.1 Mw

657

Distance to fault (km) 5.1 21.8

Fig. 2 The time-histories of near-fault ground motion acceleration, velocity and response spectra for 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake

and PGV/PGA values are depicted in Table 1. The ground motion records are obtained from the PEER Strong Motion Database [38]. The databases have information on the site conditions and the soil type for the instrument locations. The acceleration and velocity time-histories and also the acceleration response spectra of the eastwest component of the near-fault ground motion recorded at station CLS090 are shown in Fig. 2. The farfault ground motion acceleration, velocity and spectra recorded at station CYC285 are shown in Fig. 3

for comparison. The velocity pulse of the near-fault ground motion seems signicantly different as compared to the far-fault ground motion. The near-fault ground motion possesses signicantly long period velocity pulse. The long period response of the near-fault ground motion is more excessive than the one of the far-fault ground motion. In order to investigate the near- and far-fault effects on the response of damreservoirfoundation systems, the earthquake analyses of the dams are performed.

658 Fig. 3 The time-histories of far-fault ground motion acceleration, velocity and response spectra for 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake

A. Bayraktar et al.

Fig. 4 The sight of magnitudedistance distribution

The Loma Prieta (1989) earthquake was recorded with the magnitude of 7.1 and this magnitude is the same for both records considered in this study. The distance of the recording site from the source is ranged from 5.10 to 21.8 km. A scatter plot of the magnitude distance pair for the records of strong ground mo-

tions is shown in Fig. 4. The record characterizing near-fault ground motion is obtained from the distance less than 10 km to epicenter and the other record characterizing far-fault ground motion is obtained from the distance more than 10 km to epicenter.

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response

659

4 Numerical examples This paper is focused on comparison of near- and far-fault strong ground motion effects on the earthquake response of dams including damreservoir foundation interaction. This is achieved by performing nonlinear transient analyses considering the Lagrangian (displacement-based) approach. For this purpose, two nite element models belong to Type-5 arch dam and Torul CFR dam are used in numerical analyses. The nite element method is used to investigate the nonlinear dynamic response of the dams and to compare the near- and far-fault effect on dam behavior. The dam and foundation are represented by solid elements and the reservoir water is represented by uid elements in all nite element models using ANSYS software [39] which includes solid and 2D and 3D contained uid elements, uidstructure interactions, material nonlinearity and transient analysis. Plane42 element is used for dam and foundation and Fluid79 element is used to dene reservoir water in the nite element model of Torul CFR dam. In addition, Solid45 element is used to represent the dam and foundation, and Fluid80 element is used for

reservoir water in the nite element model of Type-5 arch dam. In the selection of the nite elements, it is considered that stressstrain relationship of the uid elements was suitable with the Lagrangian approach given in the literature [30, 3337]. In this study, material nonlinearity based on DruckerPrager model is considered for dam and foundation soil in nite element analyses. The DruckerPrager model is widely used for frictional materials such as rock and concrete. The cohesion and the angle of internal friction of dam and foundation soil materials form the material constants of the convenient yield function of the DruckerPrager model. These parameters are dened in the nite element analyses. Also, in the time domain analyses, Newmark Algorithm is used to obtain nonlinear response of damfoundationreservoir systems. The DruckerPrager model is considered for dam and foundation soil. Massless foundation is used in all nite element models. At the reservoirdam and reservoirfoundation interfaces, coupling length is chosen as 0.001 m. The main objective of the couplings is to hold equal the displacements between two reciprocal nodes in direction normal to the interface. The length of the reservoir and foundation in the upstream direction is taken three times that of the dam

Fig. 5 The plan view and vertical crown cross section of Type-5 arch dam

660

A. Bayraktar et al.

height in all nite element models. Reservoir depth is assumed to be constant. In addition, the depth of the foundation of the models is taken into account as the dam height. In the downstream direction, the length of the foundation is considered as the dam height. Element matrices are computed using the Gauss numerical integration technique [30]. Damping ratios of up to 10% should generally be allowed only in dams show-

ing energy dissipation through joint opening and tension cracking. In concrete dams constructed on competent rock, where cracking of the concrete does not occur, the viscous damping ratio is usually assumed to be 5% of the critical value [40]. The Rayleigh damping in the analyses is considered to be 5%. 4.1 Earthquake response of Type-5 arch dam In this part of the study, a double curvature Type-5 arch dam suggested in Arch Dams symposium in England in 1968 is selected [41]. Type-5 arch dam model is developed considering reservoir and foundation. The geometric properties and 3-D model of Type-5 arch dam are given in Fig. 5. The height of the dam is 120 m and the computed thickness of the dam at the crest and base is 5.35 m and 23.35 m, respectively. 3D and 2D nite element mesh models of Type-5 arch dam are given in Figs. 67. There are three unknown displacements at each nodal point in the dam, foundation and reservoir nite element model. The values of the material properties used for the dam model are presented in Table 2.

Fig. 6 3D nite element mesh model of Type-5 arch dam

Fig. 7 2D nite element mesh model of Type-5 arch dam

Table 2 The material properties of Type-5 arch dam Material Material Properties Modulus of Elasticity MPa Dam (Concrete) Foundation Reservoir Water 3.310E4 2.100E4 0.207E4 0.152 0.3 Poissons Ratio Mass per Unit Vol. kg/m3 2476 1000 2.0 2.0 35 35 Cohesion MPa Friction Angle

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response Fig. 8 The time-histories of the horizontal displacements at the crest of Type-5 arch dam

661

4.1.1 Displacements The time-histories of the horizontal displacements (upstreamdownstream direction) at the crest point of Type-5 arch dam obtained from nonlinear analysis for both ground motions are presented in Fig. 8. The maximum displacements at this point for Loma Prieta near- and far-fault ground motions occurred as 11.1 cm and 9.71 cm, respectively. As it is seen from Fig. 8 the displacements that resulted from near-fault ground motion are higher than the ones resulted from far-fault ground motion. The variation of displacements by the height of Type-5 arch dam subjected to Loma Prieta 1989 earthquake ground motions is shown in Fig. 9. It can be easily seen from Fig. 9 that the horizontal displacements increase along the height of the dam and those corresponding to near-fault ground motion are the highest. Figure 10 points out the contours of maximum horizontal displacement corresponding to both earthquake ground motions. These displacement contours represent the distribution of the peak values reached by the maximum displacement at each point within the section. It can be seen that maximum displacements take place at the crest of the arch dam for each record of these earthquakes. 4.1.2 Principal stresses The maximum and minimum principal stresses at sections II, IIII and IIIIII in Fig. 7 are respectively

Fig. 9 Maximum horizontal displacements along the height of Type-5 arch dam

given for both ground motions in Figs. 1113. The maximum and minimum principal stresses resulted from Loma Prieta earthquake are yielded in Table 3. At all sections, it can be seen that maximum and minimum principal stresses are generally higher for nearfault ground motion. The time-histories of the maximum and minimum principal stresses of Type-5 arch dam subjected to near- and far-fault ground motions of Loma Prieta 1989 earthquake, respectively, are demonstrated in Fig. 14. It is clear that the highest maximum and minimum principal stresses occur under near-fault ground motion effects.

662 Fig. 10 Maximum displacement contours of Type-5 arch dam

A. Bayraktar et al.

Fig. 11 The maximum and minimum principal stresses at section II of Type-5 arch dam subjected to near- and far-fault ground motions

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response Fig. 12 The maximum and minimum principal stresses at section IIII of Type-5 arch dam subjected to nearand far-fault ground motions

663

Fig. 13 The maximum and minimum principal stresses at section IIIIII of Type-5 arch dam subjected to nearand far-fault ground motions

Table 3 The max. compression and tensile principal stresses obtain from Type-5 arch dam Earthquake (Loma Prieta 1989) II MCPS* (MPa) 7.33 4.92 IIII MCPS (MPa) 11.19 7.07 IIIIII MCPS (MPa) 7.82 4.37

MTPS** (MPa) 7.44 6.18

MTPS (MPa) 9.84 9.99

MTPS (MPa) 6.31 6.76

Near-fault Far-fault
* MCPS:

Maximum Compression Principal Stress Maximum Tensile Principal Stress

** MTPS:

Figures 15 and 16 show the contours of maximum and minimum principal stresses corresponding to near- and far-fault ground motions, respectively. These stress contours represent the distribution of the peak values reached by the maximum principal stress at each point within the section. It is obvious that max-

imum and minimum principal stresses appear at the crest of the dam for both ground motions. 4.2 Earthquake response of Torul Concrete Faced Rockll dam Torul CFR dam, located approximately 14 km northwest of Torul, Gmhane, is constructed in 2008 s

664 Fig. 14 The time-histories of maximum and minimum principal stresses of Type-5 arch dam subjected to nearand far-fault ground motions

A. Bayraktar et al.

by General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (Fig. 17) [42]. It is established on the Har it River. s This dam was projected as a concrete faced rockll dam. The dam crest is 320 m in length and 12 m wide, and the maximum height and base width are 142 m and 420 m, respectively. The dam consists of a concrete face slab, 2A, 3A, 3B, 3C and 3D zones from upstream to downstream. The 2D largest cross section and some dimensions of the dam are shown in Fig. 18. In this study, the contact allowing slippage is considered in concrete slabrockll interface using interface elements. The nite element model including damreservoir foundation interaction of Torul CFR dam is shown in Fig. 19. The material properties used in the nite element model of Torul CFR dam are shown in Table 4 [42].

4.2.1 Displacements The time-histories of horizontal displacements at the crest point of Torul CFR dam obtained from nonlinear analyses for both ground motions are presented in Fig. 20. The maximum displacements at this point for Loma Prieta near- and far-fault ground motions occur as 18.5 cm and 10.6 cm, respectively. It is clear that maximum displacements occurred as a redult of nearfault ground motion. The variation of the horizontal displacements along the height of Torul CFR dam for near- and far-fault ground motions of 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake is shown in Fig. 21. It can be seen that the horizontal component of the displacements increases by the height of the dam, and maximum displacement occurs at the top of the dam. It should also be indicated that there is more seismic demand on displacements when the dam is subjected to near-fault ground motion.

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response Fig. 15 Maximum and minimum principal stress contours of Type-5 arch dam subjected to near-fault ground motion

665

Figure 22 shows the contours of maximum horizontal displacements corresponding to both ground motions. These displacement contours represent the distribution of the peak values reached by the maximum displacement at each point within the section. 4.2.2 Principal stresses The maximum and minimum principal stresses at the sections II, IIII, and IIIIII in Fig. 18 for each record of the earthquake are shown respectively in Figs. 23 25. The maximum and minimum principal stresses attained from near- and far-fault ground motion of 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake are given in Table 5. It is seen that maximum and minimum principal stresses are re-

vealed by the near-fault ground motion, and their values are higher on concrete slab at the section II. At all sections, maximum and minimum principal stresses are higher for near-fault ground motion than far-fault. The time-histories of the maximum and minimum principal stresses of Torul CFR dam are plotted in Fig. 26. It is clear that near-fault ground motion is more inuential on both principal stress components, particularly in the middle region of the selected time interval. It can be seen that the maximum and minimum principal stresses occur at the foundation of the concrete slab for each record of the earthquake. Also, principal stress contours point out that there are more seis-

666 Fig. 16 Maximum and minimum principal stress contours of Type-5 arch dam subjected to far-fault ground motion

A. Bayraktar et al.

Fig. 17 The pictures of Torul CFR dam [53]

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response Fig. 18 2 D largest cross section of Torul CFR dam [53]

667

Fig. 19 2D nite element model of Torul CFR dam

Table 4 The material properties of Torul CFR dam Material

*D max

Material Properties Modulus of Elasticity MPa Poissons Ratio Mass per unit Vol. kg/m3 0.18 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.40 0.40 2395.5 2905.2 2854.2 2833.8 2803.3 2752.3 1000 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Cohesion MPa Friction Angle

(mm)

Concrete 2A (lling with sifted rock or alluvium) 3A (lling with selected rock) 3B (lling with quarry rock) 3C (lling with quarry rock) 3D (selected rock) Foundation (volcanic tufa) Foundation (limestone) Reservoir Water
* Maximum

150 300 600 1000 2000

3.420E4 1.400E4 1.350E4 1.250E4 1.150E4 1.100E4 1.050E4 1.250E4 0.207E4

particle size

668 Fig. 20 The time-histories of horizontal displacements at the crest of Torul CFR dam

A. Bayraktar et al.

principal stress contours point out that there is more seismic demand on minimum principal stresses when the dam is subjected to near-fault ground motion.

5 Conclusion The comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effects on the nonlinear dynamic behavior of dams involving damreservoirfoundation interaction is studied in this paper. Nonlinear transient analyses are performed according to DruckerPrager material model for Type-5 arch dam and Torul CFR dam. Reservoir effects are also considered using Lagrangian approach. It is concluded from the study that the displacements increase along the height of each dam type for both ground motions. The maximum and minimum principal stresses have a decreasing trend along the height from bottom to top of Torul CFR dam. However, the maximum and minimum values of principal stresses are obtained at 30 m above the base of the dams. The maximum and minimum principal stresses have an increasing trend by height from bottom to top of Type-5 arch dam, and peak values are obtained at top of the dam. Performed nonlinear analyses refer that there is more seismic demand on displacements when the dam is subjected to near-fault ground motion. The horizontal displacements, which resulted as maximum at the

Fig. 21 Maximum horizontal displacements along the height of Torul CFR dam

mic demand on stresses when the dam is subjected to near-fault ground motion. Contours of maximum and minimum principal stresses corresponding to near- and far-fault earthquake ground motions are given in Figs. 27 and 28, respectively. These stress contours represent the distribution of the peak values reached by the maximum principal stress at each point within the section. It is obvious from these gures that the maximum and minimum principal stresses occur at the base of the concrete slab for each record of the earthquake. Also, the

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response Fig. 22 Maximum displacement contours of Torul CFR dam

669

Fig. 23 The maximum and minimum principal stresses at the section II of Torul CFR dam subjected to nearand far-fault ground motions

Fig. 24 The maximum and minimum principal stresses at the section IIII of Torul CFR dam subjected to nearand far-fault ground motions

670 Fig. 25 The maximum and minimum principal stresses at the section IIIIII of Torul CFR dam subjected to near- and far-fault ground motions

A. Bayraktar et al.

Fig. 26 The time-histories of maximum and minimum principal stresses of Torul CFR dam subjected to nearand far-fault ground motions

crest of the dams, are greater for near-fault ground motion effects. Moreover, the near-fault ground motion is generally inuential on principal stress components as well. It should be claried that the near-fault ground

motion effects appear for the duration of the earthquake. It is also seen that the maximum displacements and principal stresses do not occur at any time when the near-fault earthquake has peak acceleration value.

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response Fig. 27 Maximum and minimum principal stress contours of Torul CFR dam subjected to near-fault ground motion

671

Fig. 28 Maximum and minimum principal stress contours of Torul CFR dam subjected to far-fault ground motion

672 Table 5 The max principal compression and tensile stresses obtained from Torul CFR dam Earthquake (Loma Prieta 1989) II MCPS* (MPa) Near-fault Far-fault
* MCPS:

A. Bayraktar et al.

IIII MTPS** (MPa) 2.44 2.35 MCPS (MPa) 19.67 10.01 MTPS (MPa) 2.39 2.35

IIIIII MCPS (MPa) 31.67 17.32 MTPS (MPa) 2.44 2.35

31.34 17.08

Maximum Compressive Principal Stress Maximum Tensile Principal Stress

** MTPS:

According to this study, the earthquake record of the near-fault ground motion, forming of the combination of numerous waves, has remarkable effect on the nonlinear earthquake response of the dams. In the following studies related to the earthquake responses of engineering structures such as dams, bridges, tunnels and buildings, in order to obtain more realistic results, the near-fault ground motion records should be taken into account.

References
1. Agrawal, A.K., He, W.-L.: A closed-form approximation of near-fault ground motion pulses for exible structures. In: 15th ASCE Engineering Mechanics Conference, New York (2002) 2. Bray, J.D., Marek, A.R.: Characterization of forwarddirectivity ground motions in the near-fault region. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 24, 815828 (2004) 3. Somerville, P.G.: Magnitude scaling of the near-fault rupture directivity pulse. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 137, 201 212 (2003) 4. Megawati, K., Higashihara, H., Koketsu, K.: Derivation of near-source ground motions of the 1995 Kobe (Hyogo-ken Nanbu) earthquake from vibration records of the Akashi Kaikyo Bridge, and its implications. Eng. Struct. 23, 1256 1268 (2001) 5. Wang, G.-Q., Zhou, X.-Y., Zhang, P.-Z., Igel, H.: Characteristics of amplitude and duration for near-fault strong ground motion from the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 22, 7396 (2002) 6. Pulido, N., Kubo, T.: Near-fault strong motion complexity of the 2000 Tottori earthquake (Japan) from a broadband source asperity model. Tectonophysics 390, 177192 (2004) 7. Makris, N.: Rigidity-plasticity-viscosity: can electrorheological dampers protect base-isolated structures from nearsource ground motions? Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 26, 571 591 (1997) 8. Chopra, A.K., Chintanapakdee, C.: Comparing response of SDF systems to near-fault and far-fault earthquake motions in the context of spectral regions. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 30, 17691789 (2001)

9. Bertero, V.V., Mahin, S.A., Herrera, R.A.: A seismic design implications of near-fault San Fernando earthquake records. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 6, 3142 (1978) 10. Hall, J.F., Heaton, T.H., Halling, M.W., Wald, D.J.: Nearsource ground motion and its effects on exible buildings. Earthq. Spectra 11, 569605 (1995) 11. Corigliano, M., Lai, C.G., Barla, G.: Seismic response of rock tunnels in near-fault conditions. In: First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 38 September, 2006 12. zturk, B.: A simple procedure for the assessment of seismic drift response of building structures located in seismically active and near-fault regions. In: First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 38 September, 2006 13. Ghahari, F., Jahankhah, H., Ghannad, M.A.: The effect of background record on response of structures subjected to near-fault ground motions. In: First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 38 September, 2006 14. Galal, K., Ghobarah, A.: Effect of near-fault earthquakes on North American nuclear design spectra. Nucl. Eng. Des. 236, 19281936 (2006) 15. Dicleli, M., Buddaram, S.: Equivalent linear analysis of seismic-isolated bridges subjected to near-fault ground motions with forward rupture directivity effect. Eng. Struct. 29, 2132 (2007) 16. Liao, W.-I., Loh, C.-H., Lee, B.-H.: Comparison of dynamic response of isolated and non-isolated continuous girder bridges subjected to near-fault ground motions. Eng. Struct. 26, 21732183 (2004) 17. Liao, W.-I., Loh, C.-H., Wan, S.: Earthquake responses of moment frames subjected to near-fault ground motions. Struct. Des. Tall Build. 10, 219229 (2001) 18. Malhotra, P.K.: Response of buildings to near-fault pulselike ground motions. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 28, 1309 1326 (1999) 19. Chandler, A.M., Lam, N.T.K.: Scenario predictions for potential near-fault and far-fault earthquakes affecting Hong Kong. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 22, 2946 (2002) 20. Bhasker Rao, P., Jangid, R.S.: Performance of sliding systems under near-fault motions. Nucl. Eng. Des. 203, 259 272 (2001) 21. Sarkar, I., Hamzehloo, H., Khattri, K.N.: Estimation of causative fault parameters of the Rudbar earthquake of June 20, 1990 from near-fault SH-wave data. Tectonophysics 364, 5570 (2003)

Comparison of near- and far-fault ground motion effect on the nonlinear response 22. Bayraktar, A., Hancer, E., Dumano lu, A.A.: Comparison g of stochastic and deterministic dynamic responses of gravity damreservoir systems using uid nite elements. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 41, 13651376 (2005) 23. Bayraktar, A., Haner, E., Akkse, M.: Inuence of baserock characteristics on the stochastic dynamic response of damreservoirfoundation systems. Eng. Struct. 27, 1498 1508 (2005) 24. Zienkiewicz, O.C., Nath, B.: Earthquake hydrodynamic pressures on arch damsan electric analogue solution. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 25, 165176 (1963) 25. Chopra, A.K., Chakrabarti, P.: Earthquake analysis of concrete gravity dams including damwaterfoundation rock interaction. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 9, 363383 (1981) 26. Fenves, G., Chopra, A.K.: Earthquake analysis of concrete gravity dams including reservoir bottom absorption and damwaterfoundation rock interaction. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 12, 663680 (1984) 27. Greeves, E.J., Dumano lu, A.A.: The implementation of an g efcient computer analysis for uidstructure interaction using the Eulerian approach within SAP-IV. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol (1989) 28. Singhal, A.C.: Comparison of computer codes for seismic analysis of dams. Comput. Struct. 38, 107112 (1991) 29. Greeves, E.J.: The modeling and analysis of linear and nonlinear uidstructure systems with particular reference to concrete dams. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol (1991) 30. Calayr, Y., Dumano lu, A.A., Bayraktar, A.: Earthg quake analysis of gravity damreservoir systems using the Eulerian and Lagrangian approaches. Comput. Struct. 59, 877890 (1996)

673

31. Bayraktar, A., Dumano lu, A.A., Calayr, Y.: Asynchrog nous dynamic analysis of damreservoirfoundation systems by the Lagrangian approach. Comput. Struct. 58, 925 935 (1996) 32. Fenves, G., Chopra, A.K.: Earthquake analysis of concrete gravity dams including reservoir bottom absorption and damwaterfoundation rock interaction. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 12, 663680 (1984) 33. Wilson, E.L., Khalvati, M.: Finite elements for the dynamic analysis of uidsolid systems. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 19, 16571668 (1983) 34. Calayr, Y.: Dynamic Analysis of Concrete Gravity Dams using the Eulerian and Lagrangian Approaches. Ph.D. Thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey (1994) (in Turkish) 35. Bathe, K.J.: Finite Element Procedures in Engineering Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1996) 36. Clough, R.W., Penzien, J.: Dynamics of Structures. McGraw-Hill, New York (1975) 37. Akka, N., Akay, H.U., Ylmaz, C.: Applicability of s general-purpose nite element programs in soliduid interaction problems. Comput. Struct. 10, 773783 (1979) 38. PEER (Pacic Earthquake Engineering Research Centre), http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat/data (2006) 39. ANSYS, Swanson Analysis System, US (2003) 40. FEMA, Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety, Earthquake Analyses and Design of Dams, May (2005) 41. Dams, A.: A review of British research and development. In: Proceedings of the Symposium Held at the Institution of Civil Engineers, London, England (1968) 42. DSI, General Directorate of State Hydraulic, Ankara, Turkey, http://www.dsi.gov.tr/english/ (2006)