Hydrodynamic pressures on rigid walls subjected to cyclic and seismic ground motions
Hydrodynamic pressures on rigid walls subjected to cyclic and seismic ground motions
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/eqe.4020
复制
发表时间：
2023-09
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Karim AlKhatib;Y. Hashash;K. Ziotopoulou;Brian Morales
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Karim AlKhatib;Y. Hashash;K. Ziotopoulou;Brian Morales
挡水建筑物的抗震设计在很大程度上依赖于挡水结构对地震的响应。水动力响应已通过分析，数值和实验方法进行了评估。在实践中，通常使用简化的基于规范的方法来评估水晃动所带来的附加需求。然而，这种方法是在一套固有的假设下制定的，这可能会限制其应用。或者，数值模拟方法提供了一种更准确的量化水响应的方法，并且通常使用1 g振动台实验进行验证。在这项研究中，进行了一系列独特的五个离心试验，目的是通过改变水的高度和长度来研究水的流体动力学行为。此外，正弦波和地震运动被施加到检查在不同类型和水平的激励水的反应。然后开发任意拉格朗日-欧拉有限元模型，以重现文献中可用的1 g振动台实验以及本研究中进行的离心试验。数值模拟的结果，以及简化和分析方法进行了比较的实验测量，在自由表面高程和动水压力，以评估其适用性和局限性。比较结果表明，数值模型能够合理地捕捉到所有配置在地震和正弦波运动下的水响应。解析解表现良好的情况下，除了谐振下的谐波运动。对于简化的方法，它们提供了可以接受的结果，峰值反应在地震运动。然而，在正弦波运动，对流晃动是显着的，他们低估了响应。此外，超过0.5 g的峰值地面加速度，测量到峰值动态压力的轻微非线性增加，这偏离了简化方法中假定的线性响应。该研究证实了数值模型在捕获水动力响应方面的可靠性，证明了它们在流体-结构-土壤相互作用的复杂问题中的广泛适用性。
Seismic design of water retaining structures relies heavily on the response of the retained water to shaking. The water dynamic response has been evaluated by means of analytical, numerical, and experimental approaches. In practice, it is common to use simplified code‐based methods to evaluate the added demands imposed by water sloshing. Yet, such methods were developed with an inherent set of assumptions that might limit their application. Alternatively, numerical modeling methods offer a more accurate way of quantifying the water response and have been commonly validated using 1 g shake table experiments. In this study, a unique series of five centrifuge tests was conducted with the goal of investigating the hydrodynamic behavior of water by varying its height and length. Moreover, sine wave and earthquake motions were applied to examine the water response at different types and levels of excitation. Arbitrary Lagrangian‐Eulerian finite element models were then developed to reproduce 1 g shake table experiments available in the literature in addition to the centrifuge tests conducted in this study. The results of the numerical simulations as well as the simplified and analytical methods were compared to the experimental measurements, in terms of free surface elevation and hydrodynamic pressures, to evaluate their applicability and limitations. The comparison showed that the numerical models were able to reasonably capture the water response of all configurations both under earthquake and sine wave motions. The analytical solutions performed well except for cases with resonance under harmonic motions. As for the simplified methods, they provided acceptable results for the peak responses under earthquake motions. However, under sine wave motions, where convective sloshing is significant, they underpredict the response. Also, beyond peak ground accelerations of 0.5 g., a mild nonlinear increase in peak dynamic pressures was measured which deviates from assumed linear response in the simplified methods. The study confirmed the reliability of numerical models in capturing water dynamic responses, demonstrating their broad applicability for use in complex problems of fluid‐structure‐soil interaction.