SEISMIC SAFETY EVALUATION OF THE 250 M HIGH DERINER ARCH DAM

M. WIELAND
Chairman, ICOLD Committee on Seismic Aspects of Dam Design

Pyry Energy Ltd., Zurich, Switzerland

Location of Deriner Dam Site, Turkey

Deriner

Layout Deriner HPP

1. arch dam, 2. diversion tunnel, 3. surface spillway 4. power intake 5. upstream cofferdam 6. cable crane

Dam Site, view from downstream

Cable cranes Hangsicherung: loading platform 2300 vorgespannte Anker
Batching plant, Arch cement silos dam crest el. 397

Cofferdam Switchyard

Diversion tunnel outlet

Dam Site, view from upstream

Technical Project Data

Hydrology
Catchment area Mean annual flow at dam site Mean annual discharge at dam site Design flood
18,839 km 4,847 million m 154 m/s 10,110 m/s 1,969 million m 963 million m 11.70 m, 876 m long 1,804 m/s

Reservoir storage
Total Active

Diversion Tunnel
Horseshoe tunnel, diameter Number1 Design discharge

Dam Type
Double curvature arch dam Max. height Length at crest
250 m 740 m

Technical Project Data

Overflow spillways
Type: Tunnel, diameter 8.00 m, with frontal inlet Number: 2 Design discharge 2 x 1,125 = 2,250 m/s

Orifice spillways
Type: 8 Orifices in the dam body: size (W x H) 2.80 x 5.60 m Design discharge 8 x 875 = 7,000 m/s

Powerhouse: Underground, concrete lined

Size (W x H x L) Gross head Design discharge Installed capacity Firm Secondary
20 m x 45 m x 126 m 206 m 4 x 90 = 360 m/s 4 x 167.5 = 670 MW 2,118 GWh GWh GWh 1,212 906

Turbines: 4 Francis vertical

Total annual energy production

Crushing and sieving plant 2 x 1000 m3/h

Betonierarbeiten

Cable Cranes

Capacity 3 x 9 m3 buckets Supplier: KRUPP, Germany

Loading platform

Batching plant
Capacity 360 m3/h

Arch Dam Site installations

Batching Plant Cement Silos

Concrete Lab

Arch Dam - Batching plant loading station

Arch Dam Formwork

Arch Dam Battery of vibrators

Arch Dam Start of concreting Dec. 2005

Arch Dam Concreting

Arch Dam

Nov 2003 Nov 2003

Arch Dam Post cooling system

Arch Dam - Concreting

Toe gallery

Joint grouting system Post-cooling pipes

Arch Dam Grouting tests from gallery

Deriner Dam & HEPP: > 2000 rock anchors

Overflow Spillway RB - Excavation

Power Cavern

Tailrace Tunnels

Nov 2003 Nov 2003

SEISMIC ASPECTS OF DAM DESIGN

Seismic hazard multiple hazard

ground shaking: vibrations in dams,
appurtenant structures, equipment and foundations

fault movements in dam foundation fault displacement in reservoir bottom: water

waves in reservoir or loss of freeboard

mass movements into reservoir: impulse

waves in reservoir

Ground shaking
Earthquakes affect all components of a dam project at the same time: dam foundation safety devices pressure system underground works appurtenant structures hydro-mechanical equipment electro-mechanical equipment etc.

Seismic design criteria

Dam and safety-relevant elements: Operating basis earthquake, OBE (145 years) Safety evaluation earthquake, SEE/MCE (ca. 10,000 years) Appurtenant structures Use of seismic building codes (ca. 475 years) Temporary structures: Use of seismic building codes (< 475 years)

Design Earthquake

Title

Element / Component
CE DBE

OBE/ SEE

Diversion Facilities - Civil - Geotechnical

Intake/outlet structures Tunnel, tunnel liner Rock slopes Underground facilities Cofferdams

X X X X X X X OBE X X X X X X X X X X X X

- Electrical/Mechanical Dam: Dam Body

Gate equipment Dam body - Individual Blocks Crest bridge Crest spillway cantilevers Bottom Outlet cantilevers

Foundation/Abutments Bottom Outlet

Abutment wedges Main gates, Valves Guard gate Operating equipment

Dam: Electrical/Mechanical

Essential parts

Design Earthquake

Title

Element / Component
CE DBE

OBE/ SEE

Underground powerhouse - Excavation and Rock Support - Service Bay Civil Design Surface powerhouse - Civil

Rock slopes Substructure Superstructure Excavation, foundation Substructure Superstructure

X X X X X X X X X X X X X

- Architectural Layout and Finishes - Cranes and Lifting Devices - Generators & Exciting System - Turbine - Transformers and other components Cranes Support structures Stationary components Rotating components

SEISMIC STABILITY ANALYSIS OF DETACHED CONCRETE BLOCKS

SEE/MCE analysis of Deriner arch dam

Dam-foundation model

MCE (horizontal PGA: 0.35 g)

Results of linear-elastic dynamic analysis

Large dynamic responses in central upper portion of dam Very high accelerations Large tensile stresses (exceeding dynamic tensile strength of mass concrete) Consequences Contraction joints open Horizontal cracks develop along lift joints

Crest deflection under different MCEs

Selection of detached concrete blocks

Simplified dynamic stability analysis of cracked dam

Step 1: Linear-elastic 3D analysis assuming incompressible (or compressible) reservoir and massless foundation; Step 2: Nonlinear 2D rocking-sliding analysis of detached concrete blocks

Simplified dynamic stability analysis of concrete blocks: Methodology

1. Linear-elastic dynamic time history analysis; 2. Selection of detached concrete blocks; 3. Calculation of absolute acceleration response at
base of each block; 4. Dynamic rocking-sliding analysis of detached concrete blocks using 2D FE models; and 5. Calculation of the maximum sliding and crack opening displacements.

Main assumptions

1.Cracks are assumed to form along the

vertical contraction joints and horizontal lift joints only.
2. Damping ratio for MCE: 7%. 3. The acceleration response in the central upper
portion of the dam can be obtained from a linearelastic dynamic analysis. 4. Detached concrete blocks can slide only towards the upstream due to the geometry of the arch dam. 5. Effect of shear keys in contraction joints ignored.

Selection of detached concrete blocks

Finite element model for dynamic stability (rocking-sliding) analysis of 20 m high block

Rocking-sliding analysis of 20 m high block

Initial state

During earthquake shaking

Final state

Typical results of rocking-sliding analysis

Horizontal displacement (sliding)

Crack opening displacement at downstream face (rocking)

Results of dynamic stability analysis

Input ground motion A) Empty reservoir MCE1 MCE1* MCE2 MCE2* MCE3 MCE3* MCE1 MCE1* MCE2 MCE2* MCE3 MCE3* Max. sliding displacement along crack at lift joint (mm) 272 580 525 622 708 1045 346 193 307 233 280 284 Max. crack opening displacement at upstream edge (mm) 129 154 149 110 142 179 136 65 143 93 110 144 Max. crack opening displacement at downstream edge (mm) 58 47 40 55 76 66 96 36 86 39 30 47

15 s 25 s 32 s

B) Full reservoir

MCE1* reversed MCE1 etc.

Results of dynamic stability analysis Final displacement towards upstream (sliding response)
Empty reservoir: max. 1045 mm Full reservoir: max. 346 mm A sliding displacement of about 1 m is

acceptable (dam thickness: 17 m).

Results of dynamic stability analysis Maximum crack opening displacement (rocking response)
Empty reservoir condition:

Upstream: max. 179 mm Downstream: 76 mm Full reservoir condition: Upstream: 144 mm Downstream: 96 mm Weaker rocking towards upstream

Discussion of results

Full resevoir: final sliding displacement is small due

to the restoring effect of the water pressure.

Empty reservoir: The sliding movement towards

the upstream tends to be cumulative.

Discussion of results
The dynamic impulse is shared by a combination
of rocking and sliding motions. Thus, smaller rocking response towards the upstream is accompanied by a larger sliding response.

For a symmetrical concrete block, the final sliding

movement of the block towards the upstream would be considerably smaller.

Sensitivity analyses: 20 m block, empty reservoir

Input ground motion A) Friction coefficient: 0.7 MCE2 (PGA: 0.35 g) 2 MCE2 (PGA: 0.70 g) 3 MCE2 (PGA: 1.05 g) B) Friction coefficient: 0.5 MCE2 (PGA: 0.35 g) 2 MCE2 (PGA: 0.70 g) 3 MCE2 (PGA: 1.05 g) 437 1691 2339 18 168 515 525 1067 2648 149 336 588 Max. sliding displacement (mm) Max. crack opening displacement at upstream edge (mm)

Sensitivity analyses: 20 m block, empty reservoir

Effects of lower friction coefficient Higher sliding response, and smaller

rocking response However, not necessarily higher maximum sliding displacement (as lower friction also increases likelihood of reversed sliding)

Conclusions
1. Maximum sliding and rocking displacements can
vary considerably. Dynamic stability analyses shall be carried out for several statistically independent input earthquakes. 2. As the effect of the shear keys in the vertical contraction joints has been neglected, the results of simplified rocking-sliding analysis are conservative. 3. The computation of the inelastic response of detached concrete blocks needs careful checks, because the results are sensitive to several numerical integration parameters.