Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Review
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 8 December 2014
Received in revised form 29 May 2015
Accepted 31 May 2015
Available online 25 June 2015
Keywords:
Asphalt concrete core dam
Deep overburden
Concrete cut-off wall
Plastic-damage model
Damage degree
a b s t r a c t
Asphalt concrete core dams (ACCDs) are becoming more widely used worldwide. ACCDs with concrete
cut-off walls (for controlling foundation seepage) have been constructed in deep overburden. It is important to assess dam safety by analysing the stress and deformation behaviour of the concrete cut-off wall.
In this study, a 3D nite element (FE) procedure was developed to simulate the dam construction and
water impounding processes of an ACCD. Rockll/gravel materials were described using a Duncan
Chang model, and the interface between the concrete cut-off wall and the foundation gravel was
modelled using interfacial elements that follow a tangential hyperbolic stressstrain model. The linear
elastic and plastic-damage models were employed to model the concrete cut-off wall. The
stress-deformation behaviour and the damage distribution of the concrete cut-off wall were numerically
simulated and analysed. The results indicate that the plastic-damage model was more reliable than the
elastic model in describing the mechanical behaviour of the concrete cut-off wall. The plastic-damage
model can be used to evaluate the safety of concrete cut-off walls constructed in deep overburden.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Constitutive model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.
Plastic-damage model for concrete material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.
Hyperbolic model for interface material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3.
DuncanChang model for rockfill/gravel material. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dam FE model and material parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Basic information about the dam case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
FE mesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.
Material parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.
Deformation behaviour of the concrete cut-off wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.
Elastic analysis results of the concrete cut-off wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3.
Plastic-damage analyses of the concrete cut-off wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.
Constructing the cut-off wall with plastic concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corresponding author at: School of Hydraulic Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China.
E-mail address: kongxj@dlut.edu.cn (X. Kong).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.05.015
0266-352X/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
463
463
463
464
464
465
465
465
465
467
467
467
469
471
471
472
472
463
1. Introduction
In the past half-century, over one hundred asphalt concrete
core dams (ACCDs) have been built worldwide due to the
advanced waterproof and deformation-adaptive behaviour [1].
As evidenced by past studies [26], China is experienced in the
construction of ACCDs. A few ACCDs are over 100 m in height,
such as the Maoping Xi Dam [7] and the Yele Dam [8]. The
Quxue dam (on the Shuoqu River, Sichuan Province), which is
currently in the design stage, will be approximately 170 m tall
[9]. However, the rapid development of dams in China has
resulted in ACCDs being built on overburden. Table 1 lists
ACCDs that have been built on overburden in China [1012].
Because of this, foundation seepage control is an important issue
to address in ACCD construction.
A concrete cut-off wall is a popular and effective way to control
foundation seepage and is an indispensable component of an
impervious system. However, it is important to assess dam safety
by properly analysing the stress and deformation behaviour of
the concrete cut-off wall. Past studies have adopted linear elastic
models to describe the stressstrain relationship of concrete
cut-off walls [1317]. However, many testing results have indicated that concrete exhibits nonlinear behaviour, such as
multi-axial strength and strain-softening properties [1820],
which cannot be characterized by linear elastic models.
Moreover, a concrete cut-off wall built in deep overburden presents a complex 3D stress state due to the forces of the dam body,
the retained water and the foundation pressures. An advanced
model is required to accurately describe these variable features.
The nonlinear behaviour of concrete at the macroscopic level is
dependent on the formation of micro-cracks. Consequently, it is
important to simulate crack initiation and propagation in the analysis of concrete structures [21]. Hillerborg [22] proposed a theoretical crack model in which fracture energy [2325] was rst
introduced. The crack was assumed to form as the stress reached
sufcient strength. The fracture energy was applied to control
the propagation of the crack. A crack band model presented by
Banzant and Oh [26] modelled the fracture as a blunt smeared
crack band. The fracture energy, uniaxial strength and width of
the crack band were adopted to characterize the fracture properties. Lubliner et al. [27] presented a plastic-damage model (i.e.,
the Barcelona model) with consistent and physically relevant constitutive relations originating from plasticity theory and a scalar
damage variable based on the fracture energy used to represent
damage states. Lee and Fenves [28] proposed a modied
Barcelona model (i.e., the Lee-Fenves model) in which
multiple-hardening variables were applied to account for the different damage states. They also derived a return-mapping
Table 1
Basic information of ACCDs built on overburden.
Dam name
Basin location
Dam
height
(m)
Maximum overburden
thickness (m)
Yele
125.5
400
70.0
70
78.0
148
72.0
200
41.5
40
95.5
130
Longtoushi
Xiabandi
Pangduo
Nierji
Huangjinping
e ee ep
where ee and ep are the elastic and the plastic components, respectively. Then, the stressstrain relationship can be written as
r 1 Dr 1 DE0 : e ep
r@ ep f @0 1 a@ expb@ ep a@ exp2b@ ep
j@
1
g@
Z
0
ep
r@ ep dep ; g @
r@ ep dep
D@ j@ 1
p d@ =b@
1
1 a@ /@ j@
;
a@
/@ j@ 1 a@ 2 a@ j@
464
D 1 1 Dc jc 1 sDt jt
; j
Fr
p
1
^ max i cj
aI1 3J 2 bjhr
1a
^
max is the maximum
where a and b are dimensionless parameters, r
principal stress, I1 and J2 are stress invariants, c is the cohesion
strength, and hi denotes the Macaulay bracket function. The
DruckerPrager yield function and Mises yield function can be
obtained by setting b = 0 and a = b = 0, respectively. Fig. 1 shows
the relationship between the yield functions.The normality plastic
ow rule is applied as
p
2J 2 ap I1
40
-3.0
35
-2.5
+ 1
Stress 1 (MPa)
Stress 1 (MPa)
30
25
+ 2
20
15
1/2
10
1/1 (Experimental)
1/0 (Experimental)
Numerical
5
0
-2.0
1/ 2
-1.5
-1/-1 (Experimental)
-1/ 0 (Experimental)
Numerical
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
Strain 1 (mm/m)
Strain 1 (mm/m)
Fig. 2. Numerical solution of uniaxial and biaxial loading compared with experimental result.
-0.4
-0.5
465
Fig. 4. Maximum cross section of dam (r: Bedrock; s: Overburden; t: Concrete Cut-off Wall; u: Dam Rockll; v: Transition Layer; w: Asphalt Concrete Core.).
466
Interface
Cut-off Wall
Core
Water
Pressure
Plinth
Water
Pressure
2-2
Table 2
Parameters for concrete cut-off wall.
qsat (kg/m3)
E (GPa)
ft0 (MPa)
Gt (N/m)
fc0 (MPa)
fb0 (MPa)
Gc (N/m)
2400
30
0.17
2.50
325
16.0
18.4
32,500
Table 3
Parameters for interfaces.
Location
k1
u ()
Rf
C (kPa)
757
2022
0.86
0.63
11.7
32.4
0.89
0.83
10.5
19.5
467
cs (KN/m3)
cd (KN/m3)
u0 ()
Du ()
C (kPa)
Rf
Kb
Dam Rockll
Transition Layer
Overburden Gravel
Asphalt Concrete
13.0
12.0
11.0
21.4
21.1
25.4
51.7
50.6
43.5
27.3
9.1
7.2
3.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
140
810
910
850
303
0.25
0.31
0.48
0.24
0.65
0.63
0.93
0.81
265
396
280
719
0.20
0.34
0.15
0.59
Table 5
Parameters for plinth.
Material
q (kg/m3)
E (GPa)
Plinth
2400
28
0.17
C.EL.2105m
C.EL.2136m
I.EL. 2115m
I.EL. 2130m
-0.02
2080
-0.04
Vertical Direction/Y(m)
Horizontal Displacement/m
Vertical Settlement/m
0.00
-0.06
-0.08
0.20
0.16
0.12
2060
2040
2020
C.EL.2105m
C.EL.2136m
I.EL. 2115m
I.EL. 2130m
0.08
2000
0.04
0.00
-0.04
1980
50
100
150
200
250
Axial Direction/Z(m)
300
0.00
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
Vertical Settlement/m
-0.08
Horizontal Displacement/m
468
(m)
(m)
2080
Y/m
2070
2060
2050
200
220
240
260
280
Z/m
Fig. 10. Deformation vector of the concrete cut-off wall at the end of construction stage.
1.2
0.8
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-10.0
C.EL.2105 m
1.3
0.8
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-10.0
C.EL.2136 m
Fig. 11. Minor principal stress contour of elastic analysis for dam construction (Unit: MPa).
decreased at the tip of the upper region on the upstream side of the
wall due to the uplifting action of water. Meanwhile, the tension
region expanded on the downstream side with serious bending
due to the increased water pressure and the restraint of the
bedrock.
As indicated by the deformation behaviour of the wall, the
development of bending was noticeable during impounding. To
more accurately capture the bending behaviour of the wall, the
nonconforming element presented by Wilson [58] was employed
to represent the wall. The minor principal stress of the downstream side at two different water levels is shown in Fig. 13.
Despite minimal change in the stress distribution rule, expansion
in the tension range of the wall was observed based on a comparison with the result acquired using normal isoparametric elements.
Moreover, the tensile stress increased in the original tensile zone.
The wall exhibited more exibility due to the adoption of the
469
1.4
1.0
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-9.0
I.EL.2115
1.5
1.0
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-9.0
I.EL.2130 m
1.4
1.0
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-9.0
I.EL.2115
1.5
1.0
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-9.0
I.EL.2130 m
1.4
1.0
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-9.0
I.EL.2115 m
1.5
1.0
0.0
-2.5
-5.0
-9.0
I.EL.2130m
4.00
Wall
2.00
2080
z
+M
0.00
-2.00
Vertical Direction/Y(m)
Fig. 13. Minor principal stress contours of concrete cut-off wall representing with nonconforming element (Unit: MPa).
-4.00
2.00
1.00
x
0.00
Wall
-1.00
+ FN
-2.00
2.00
Wall
1.00
+ FS
0.00
2060
+FS
+FN
+M
Y
2040
Wall
Wall
Wall
2020
2000
-1.00
-2.00
1980
50
100
150
200
250
300
Axial Direction/Z(m)
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 0
Moment/106Nm
Axial Force/107N
5 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Shear Force/106N
Fig. 14. Internal force at typical locations of concrete cut-off wall at the impounding completed stage.
470
1.2
0.8
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
C.EL.2105 m
1.3
0.8
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
C.EL.2136 m
1.4
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
I.EL.2115 m
1.4
1.0
0.5
0.0
-1.0
-2.0
I.EL.2130 m
0.70
0.55
0.40
0.20
0.10
C.EL.2105 m
0.70
0.55
0.40
0.20
0.10
C.EL.2136 m
Fig. 16. Evolution of tensile damage variable (rt) during dam construction.
0.70
0.55
0.40
0.20
0.10
I.EL.2115 m
0.70
0.55
0.40
0.20
0.10
I.EL.2130 m
0.70
0.55
0.40
0.20
0.10
I.EL.2115 m
0.70
0.55
0.40
0.20
0.10
I.EL.2130 m
24.0
22.0
20.0
16.0
10.0
4.0
C.EL.2136 m
24.0
22.0
20.0
16.0
10.0
4.0
C.EL.2136 m
Fig. 18. Maximum principal stress at the end of construction stage (Unit: MPa).
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.01
C.EL.2136 m
Fig. 19. Compression damage variable (rc) at the end of construction stage.
1.5
1.0
0.0
-0.5
-1.5
-3.5
I.EL.2130 m
14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
5.0
2.0
C.EL.2136 m
471
5. Conclusions
In this study, the linear elastic and plastic-damage analyses of a
concrete cut-off wall with a height of 87 m in deep overburden of
an ACCD were performed using GEODYNA, a 3D FE program. A
plastic-damage model proposed by Lee-Fenves was used to conduct the plastic-damage analysis. The existing monotonic uniaxial
and biaxial loading tests of concrete were simulated, and the predicted results were compared with experimental data from the literature. Furthermore, the stress, deformation and damage
behaviour of the concrete cut-off wall during dam construction
and water impounding were investigated.
The deformation modes of the concrete cut-off wall were distinct at different construction stages. During dam construction,
the settlement at the centre was obvious. The deformation at the
tip of the upper part of the wall was signicantly restricted, which
may give rise to an unfavourable stress state. As the water level
rose, the horizontal displacement signicantly increased, and serious bending occurred in the downstream side near the bedrock
where high tensile stresses were observed.
The stress distribution from the linear elastic analysis can be
explained by the deformation mode and the distribution of internal
forces at the different stages; nonconforming element should be
adopted to capture the behaviour of the wall in the deep overburden more precisely. However, the linear elastic model is not able to
reasonably express the nonlinear behaviour of concrete; thus, the
obtained tensile stress of a few regions exceeded the tensile
strength. It is not accurate to rely on the linear elastic analysis
results to assess the safety of the concrete cut-off wall.
The tensile area in the concrete cut-off wall was signicantly
reduced, and the maximum tensile stress rarely exceeded
2.0 MPa, as computed by the plastic-damage model. Furthermore,
the damage distribution indicated that most portions of the wall
exhibited no damage or only slight tensile damage. The tensile
damage that did occur was mainly concentrated at the restricted
upper tip of the wall and at the bending locations on the downstream side near the bedrock. The result also indicated that the
compression stress would have little effect on the safety of the
wall. To improve the anti-seepage capability of the wall, particular
engineering measures should be practiced at these positions. The
plastic-damage model reasonably predicated the nonlinear properties of concrete in a 3D stress space, including strain softening,
stress redistribution and damage accumulation. The numerical
results of the concrete cut-off wall using the plastic-damage model
were more reasonable and useful for design and construction.
The reinforcement cage was not considered in this study, and
the use of remedial measures to prevent damage requires further
research. Moreover, safety evaluations of concrete cut-off walls
utilizing plastic-damage analyses would be more meaningful if
the relationship between the damage variables and concrete
permeability was addressed. Furthermore, more efforts should be
devoted to investigate the nonlinear damage behaviour of plastic
concrete under different stress states.
472
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of
China (Nos. 51138001, 51279025, 91215301) and the Program for
New Century Excellent Talents in University (No. NCET-12-0083).
These nancial supports are gratefully acknowledged.
References
[1] Wang WB, Heg K. The asphalt core embankment dam: a very competitive
alternative. In: Jia JS et al., editors. Modern rockll dams-2009; the 1st
international symposium on rockll dams. Chengdu: China Water & Power
Press; 2009. p. 627.
[2] Heg K. Asphaltic concrete cores for embankment dams-experience and
practice. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Norway: StikkaTrykk; 1993. ISBN
82-546-0163-1.
[3] Miao QS. Analysis of prototype observation results of several asphalt concrete
core rockll dams. Large Dam and Safety 1994;28:5366 [in Chinese].
[4] Heg K. Earthquake resistance of asphalt core embankment dams. Norwegian
Geotechnical Institute (NGI) 2005.
[5] Hao JT. Important topics in development of asphalt concrete technology in
China. J Hydraul Eng 2008;39(10):12139 [in Chinese].
[6] ICOLD. Bituminous cores for ll dams state-of-the-art. International
Commission on Large Dams, Bulletin 42. Paris; 1992.
[7] Zhu S, Cao GJ, Zhang CR, Zhou LJ. Verication of rockll dam safety according to
back analysis of monitoring data. J Hydraul Eng 2004;11:1248 [in Chinese].
[8] Wang WB, Heg K, Zhang YB. Design and performance of the Yele asphalt-core
rockll dam. Can Geotech J 2010;47:136581.
[9] Wu H, Deng G, Ji H, Wang JW. High asphalt concrete core rockll dam built in
narrow asymmetric valley. International Conference on Dam Technology and
Long-Term Performance. ZhengZhou, HeNan; 2011 [in Chinese].
[10] Chen CL, Hu ZQ, Xie DY, Feng ZY. Research on dynamic characteristic of sand
lens for the foundation of Xiabandi key water control project. Earthquake Eng
Eng Vibr 2006;26(5):26470 [in Chinese].
[11] Xu YB, Wang BW, Li K. Analysis of wrong-estimate thickness of deep
overburden for Pangduo dam foundation. Water Resour Hydropower
Northeast China 2011;11:534 [in Chinese].
[12] Dang LC, Fang GD. The practice and development of dam with
overburden. Beijing: China Water Power Press; 2009 [in Chinese].
[13] Li NH, Mi ZK, Li GY, Shen ZJ. Numerical analysis of stress deformation
behaviour of concrete diaphragm wall in supper-deep overburdened layer of
Yele Hydropower Station. Hydro-Sci Eng 2004;1:1823 [in Chinese].
[14] Pan Y, He YL, Zhou XX, Cao XX. Analysis of effect of canyon terrain on stress
and displacement of cutoff wall in dam foundation with deep overburden.
Rock Soil Mech 2013;34(7):202370 [in Chinese].
[15] Gao LS, Yu QH. Stressstrain analysis for high earth-rockll dam and its
foundation cutoff. Chin J Geotech Eng 1983;5(2):7387 [in Chinese].
[16] Li NH, Mi ZK, Sun DW. Study on affecting factors of stress-deformation of
diaphragm walls for concrete face rockll dams built on thick alluvium
deposit. Chin J Geotech Eng 2007;29(1):2631 [in Chinese].
[17] Ding YH, Zhang QG, Zhang BY. FEM analysis of stress-deformation
characteristics of cut-off walls in high core rockll dam. J Hydroelectr Eng
2013;32(3):1627 [in Chinese].
[18] Karsan ID, Jirsa JO. Behaviour of concrete under compressive loading. J Struct
Div 1969;95(12):253563.
[19] Kupfer H, Hilsdorf HK, Rusch H. Behaviour of concrete under biaxial stresses.
ACI J 1969;66(8):65666.
[20] Gopalaratnam VS, Shah SP. Softening response of plain concrete in direct
tension. ACI J 1985;82(3):31023.
[21] Lee J, Fenves GL. Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete
structures. J Eng Mech, ASCE 1998;124(8):892900.
[22] Hillerborg A, Modeer M, Petersson PE. Analysis of crack formation and crack
growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and nite elements.
Cement Concr Res 1976;6:77382.
[23] Petersson P. Comments on the method of determining the fracture energy of
concrete by means of three-point bend tests on notched beams. Lund Institute
of Technology-Division of Building Materials 1982.
[24] Bazant ZP. Concrete fracture models: testing and practice. Eng Fract Mech
2002;69:165205.
[25] Bazant ZP, Becq-Giraudon E. Statistical prediction of fracture parameters of
concrete and implications for choice of testing standard. Cement Concr Res
2002;32(4):52956.
[26] Bazant ZP, Oh BH. Crack band theory for fracture of concrete. Mater Struct
1983;16:15577.
[27] Lubliner J, Oliver J, Oller S, Onate E. A plastic-damage model for concrete. Int J
Solid Struct 1989;25(3):299326.
[28] Lee J. Theory and implementation of plastic-damage model for concrete
structures under cyclic and dynamic loading. Ph.D Thesis, Berkeley: University
of California; 1996.
[29] Lee J, Fenves GL. A return-mapping algorithm for plastic-damage models: 3_D
and plane stress formulation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 2001;50:487506.
[30] Lee J, Fenves GL. A plastic-damage concrete model for earthquake analysis of
dams. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 1998;27:93756.
[31] Pan JW, Zhang C, Wang J, Xu Y. Seismic damage-cracking analysis of arch dams
using different earthquake input mechanisms. Sci China Ser E: Technol Sci
2009;52(2):51829.
[32] Guo SS, Chen H, Li DY, Ma HF. Study of element-size effect on dynamic plasticdamage analysis of concrete. J Hydroelectr Eng 2011;30(6):526 [in Chinese].
[33] Zhang SR, Wang GH, Pang BH, Du CB. Inuence of strong motion duration on
accumulated damage of concrete gravity dam. J Hydroelectr Eng
2013;32(2):2017 [in Chinese].
[34] Dakoulas P. Nonlinear seismic response of tall concrete-faced rockll dams in
narrow canyons. Soil Dynam Earthquake Eng 2012;34(1):1124.
[35] Zou DG, Kong XJ, Xu B. User manual for geotechnical dynamic nonlinear
analysis. Dalian: Institute of Earthquake Engineering, Dalian University of
Technology; 2005 [in Chinese].
[36] Kong XJ, Zhou Y, Zou DG, Xu B, Yu L. Numerical analysis of dislocations of the
face slabs of the Zipingpu Concrete faced rockll dam during the Wenchuan
earthquake. Earthquake Eng Eng Vibr 2011;10(4):5819.
[37] Xu B, Zou DG, Liu HB. Three-dimensional simulation of the construction
process of the Zipingpu concrete face rockll dam based on a generalized
plasticity model. Comput Geotech 2012;43:14354.
[38] Zou DG, Xu B, Kong XJ, Liu HB, Zhou Y. Numerical simulation of the seismic
response of the Zipingpu concrete face rockll dam during the Wenchuan
earthquake based on a generalized plasticity model. Comput Geotech
2013;49:11122.
[39] Zou DG, Zhou Y, Ling HI, Kong XJ, Xu B. Dislocation of face-slabs of Zipingpu
concrete face rockll dam during Wenchuan earthquake. J Earthquake
Tsunami 2012;6(2):117.
[40] Xu B, Zhou Y, Zou DG. Numerical simulation on slabs dislocation of Zipingpu
concrete faced rockll dam during the Wenchuan earthquake based on a
generalized plasticity model. Sci World J 2014;7(1):15.
[41] Oliver J. A consistent characteristic length of smeared cracking models. Int J
Numer Method Eng 1989;28:46174.
[42] Goodman RE, Taylor RL, Brekke TL. A model for the mechanics of jointed rock. J
Soil Mech Found Div, ASCE 1968;94(SM3):63759.
[43] Clough GW, Duncan JM. Finite element analysis of retaining wall behaviour. J
Soil Mech Found Eng 1971;97(12):165772.
[44] Desai CS, Drumm EC, Zaman MM. Cyclic testing and modelling of interfaces. J
Geotech Eng 1985;111(6):793815.
[45] Liu HB, Song EX, Ling HI. Constitutive modelling of soilstructure interface
through the concept of critical state soil mechanics. Mech Res Commun
2006;33:51531.
[46] Liu HB, Ling HI. Constitutive description of interface behaviour including cyclic
loading and particle breakage within the framework of critical state soil
mechanics. Int J Numer Anal Method Geomech 2008;32:1495514.
[47] Zhang G, Zhang JM. Unied modelling of monotonic and cyclic behaviour of
interface between structure and gravelly soil. Soil Found 2008;48(2):23145.
[48] Liu JM, Zou DG, Kong XJ. A three-dimensional state-dependent model of soilstructure interface for monotonic and cyclic loadings. Comput Geotech
2014;61:16677.
[49] Pastor M, Zienkiewicz OC, Chan AHC. Generalized plasticity and the modelling
of soil behaviour. Int J Numer Anal Method Geomech 1990;14(3):15190.
[50] Ling HI, Liu HB. Pressure-level dependancy and densication behaviour of sand
through a generalized plasticity model. J Eng Mech 2003;129(8):85160.
[51] Liu HB. Unied sand modelling using associated or non-associated ow rule.
Mech Res Commun 2013;50:6370.
[52] Liu HB, Zou DG, Liu JM. Constitutive modelling of dense gravelly soils
subjected to cyclic loading. Int J Numer Anal Method Geomech
2014;38(14):150318.
[53] Duncan JM, Chang C-Y. Nonlinear analysis of stress and strain in soil. J Soil
Mech Found Div, ASCE 1970;96(SM5):162953.
[54] Ozkuzukiran S, Ozkan MY, Ozyazicioglu M, Yildiz GS. Settlement behaviour of
a concrete faced rock-ll dam. Geotech Geol Eng 2006;24:166578.
[55] Wang WB, Zhang YB, Zhu Y, Zhao YH. Finite element analysis of asphalt
concrete core rock-debris dam. J Hydroelectr Eng 2010;29(4):1738 [in
Chinese].
[56] Moayed RZ, Nazari M, Kamalzare M. Static stressstrain analyses of
embankment dam with asphalt core. J Appl Sci 2011;11(1):12531.
[57] Tschernutter P. Inuence of soft rockll material as dam embankment with
central bituminous concrete membrane. Front Architecture Civ Eng China
2011;5(1):6370.
[58] Wilson EL, Taylor RL, Doherty WP, Ghaboussi J. Incompatible displacement
models. In: Fenves SJ et al., editors. Numerical and computer methods in
structural mechanics. Academic Press; 1973.
[59] Taylor RL, Beresford PJ, Wilson EL. A nonconforming-element for stress
analysis. Int J Numer Method Eng 1976;10:12119.
[60] Cheng H, Zhang LJ. Study of damage and cracking in high arch dam subjected
to strong earthquake. J Hydroelectr Eng 2011;30(6):1437 [in Chinese].
[61] Omidi O, Lot V. Finite element analysis of concrete structures using plasticdamage model in 3-D implementation. Int J Civ Eng 2010;8(3):187203.
[62] Li QY, Cheng ZL. Analysis of the behaviour of stage II cofferdam of TGP. Chin J
Geotech Eng 2005;27(4):4103 [in Chinese].
[63] Fu H, Zhang Wi. Experimental study on the contact behaviour between dam
concrete cutoff wall and the slurry. The First Chinese Rock Mechanics and
Engineering Symposium, Kunming, China; 2006. p. 4857 [in Chinese].
[64] Zhang ZJ, Rao XB, Gong BW, Ding HS. Experimental study on mechanical
behaviors of interface between asphalt concrete and aggregate. J Yantze River
Sci Res Inst 2006;23(2):3841 [in Chinese].
473