上游坝面坡度对胶凝砂砾石坝强震破坏模式的影响

Influence of upstream face slope on earthquake failure pattern of hardfill dam

摘要

为揭示上游坝面坡度对胶凝砂砾石坝强震破坏模式的影响，对不同坡度的胶凝砂砾石坝开展非线性地震响应分析。以 Oyuk 坝为背景，建立不同上游坝面坡度的胶凝砂砾石坝有限元模型。以混凝土塑性损伤模型模拟坝体材料的非线性力学特性，采用地震超载法研究不同坝面坡度胶凝砂砾石坝的强震破坏模式，并综合抗滑稳定性和破坏指标评估其极限抗震承载能力。结果显示：不同坡度胶凝砂砾石坝的宏观破坏区分布基本一致，主要集中于坝踵、坝趾和上下游坝面等部位；不同坡度坝体的控制性破坏模式有显著差异，坡度较陡时为上下游坝面破坏区的贯通，坡度较缓时为上游坝面至坝趾破坏区的贯通；在极限抗震承载能力方面，上游坝面坡度为 1∶0.5、1∶0.7 和 1∶0.9 的胶凝砂砾石坝贯通破坏区出现时，对应的地面加速度峰值分别为 0.55g～0.60g、0.65g～0.70g及 0.70g～0.75g。降低上游坝面坡度并未改变胶凝砂砾石坝的宏观破坏区分布规律，但会改变大坝的控制性破坏模式，并增加其极限抗震承载能力。

Abstract

The seismic performance of hardfill dams is directly influenced by their upstream slope. Investigating the earthquake failure patterns of hardfill dams with varying upstream slopes is critical for engineering aseismic design. Finite element models with varying upstream slopes were created using the Oyuk Dam as a case study. These models employed the Westergaard method to depict hydrodynamic pressure and the concrete damaged plasticity model to simulate the nonlinear behavior of dam materials. The earthquake failure pattern and the ultimate seismic capacity of three hardfill dam models were studied through the seismic overload method. The findings show that: (1) Tensile damage accounts for the majority of hardfill dam damage during strong earthquakes, and the tensile damage zone is much larger than the compressive damage zone. Tensile damage is present in all compressive damage zones within the dam body, but not all tensile damage zones are compressive. (2) The macroscopic failure zones in all three dam models appear in the same locations: the dam heel, dam toe, and upstream and downstream faces. The earthquake failure pattern for models with slopes of 1∶0.5 and 1∶0.7 is characterized by a V-shaped failure zone penetrating from the upstream face to the downstream face. In contrast, for the model with a slope of 1∶0.9, the failure pattern manifests as a straight-line penetration from the upstream face to the dam toe. (3) Macroscopic failure zones appear in the same order in all three models during seismic excitation: dam heel, upstream face, dam toe, and downstream face. The failure zone at the downstream face is significantly influenced by the upstream slope gradient. (4) The sliding stability of the hardfill dam gradually improves as the upstream slope becomes gentler. The safety factor against sliding along the dam-foundation interface progressively declines for the three models under analysis as peak ground acceleration (PGA) increases. Nevertheless, the hardfill dam stays stable along the interface even after the failure zones have completely penetrated. (5) The ultimate seismic capacity of the hardfill dam increases progressively as the upstream slope becomes gentler. Based on sliding stability and failure index of the dam body, the ultimate seismic capacity for dams with upstream slopes of 1∶0.5, 1∶0.7, and 1∶0.9 is within the ranges of 0.55 g to 0.60g, 0.65g to 0.70g, and 0.70g to 0.75g, respectively. This study elucidates the influence of the upstream slope on the seismic performance of hardfill dams. Reducing the upstream slope does not alter the distribution of the macroscopic failure zone but changes the earthquake failure pattern and increases the ultimate seismic capacity of the hardfill dam.

关键词

胶凝砂砾石坝 / 上游坝面坡度 / 混凝土塑性损伤模型 / 强震破坏模式 / 抗震承载能力

Key words

hardfill dam / upstream face slope / concrete damaged plasticity model / earthquake failure pattern / ultimate seismic capacity

参考文献

[1] Jia Jinsheng, Michel L, Jin Feng, et al. The cemented material dam: A new, environmentally friendly type of dam[J]. Engineering, 2016, 2(4): 490-497. DOI: 10.1016/J.ENG.2016.04.003.

[2] Cai Xin, Zhang Yanan, Guo Xingwen, et al. Review on research progress of cemented sand and gravel dam[J]. Science and Engineering of Composite Materials, 2022, 29(1): 438-451. DOI: 10.1515/secm-2022-0168.

[3] 丁泽霖, 徐良杰, 王肖楠. 基于多元优化的百米级胶凝砂砾石坝设计方法[J]. 水力发电学报, 2023, 42(12): 119-131. DOI: 10.11660/slfdxb.20231212.

[4] 刘田田, 陈少林, 张娇, 等. 淤砂层对重力坝地震响应的影响分析[J]. 地震工程与工程振动, 2023, 43(6): 203-215. DOI: 10.13197/j.eeed.2023.0622.

[5] 李志龙, 刘云贺, 刘托弟, 等. 基于地表设计地震动的成层地基-混凝土重力坝系统损伤特性[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2025, 23(4): 1015-1024. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2025.0102.

[6] Londe P, Lino M. The faced symmetrical hardfill dam: A new concept for RCC[J]. International Water Power & Dam Construction, 1992, 44(2): 19-24.

[7] Omran M E, Tokmechi Z. Sensitivity analysis of symmetrical hardfill dams[J]. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 2010, 6(3): 251-256.

[8] Chen Jianyun, Liu Pengfei, Xu Qiang, et al. Seismic analysis of hardfill dams considering spatial variability of material parameters[J]. Engineering Structures, 2020, 211: 110439. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110439.

[9] 刘艳华, 严俊, 杨玉坚, 等. 基于反应谱法的胶凝砂砾石坝地震反应有限元分析[J]. 水利水电技术（中英文）, 2023, 54(增刊 1): 68-73. DOI: 10.13928/j.cnki.wrahe.2023.S1.012.

[10] 何卫平, 刘旺, 宋俊杰, 等. 复杂波场效应对胶凝砂砾石坝地震响应影响研究[J]. 振动工程学报, 2026, 39(3): 896-906. DOI: 10.16385/j.cnki.issn.1004-4523.202403029.

[11] 熊堃, 何蕴龙, 陈涛. 百米级硬填料坝结构安全度分析[J]. 人民长江, 2012, 43(2): 74-77. DOI: 10.16232/j.cnki.1001-4179.2012.02.024.

[12] Arefian A, Noorzad A, Ghaemian M. Seismic evaluation of cemented material dams: A case study of Tobetsu Dam in Japan[J]. Earthquake and Structures, 2016, 10(3): 717-733. DOI: 10.12989/eas.2016.10.3.717.

[13] 张建伟, 武佳谋, 杨世锋, 等. 胶凝砂砾石坝应力及变形特点研究[J]. 华北水利水电大学学报（自然科学版）, 2020, 41(4): 39-45. DOI: 10.19760/j.ncwu.zk.2020047.

[14] Mahmoodi K, Noorzad A, Mahboubi A, et al. Seismic performance assessment of a cemented material dam using incremental dynamic analysis[J]. Structures, 2021, 29: 1187-1198. DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2020.12.015.

[15] 刘鹏飞. 地震作用下胶凝砂砾石坝随机响应分析及动力参数反演方法研究[D]. 大连: 大连理工大学, 2023. DOI: 10.26991/d.cnki.gdllu.2023.000010.

[16] Liu Pengfei, Chen Jianyun, Xu Qiang, et al. Seismic stability analysis of CSG dams considering the effect of tension crack based on genetic algorithm with an improved initial population strategy[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2023, 175: 108210. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.108210.

[17] 刘中伟, 贾金生, 冯炜, 等. 胶凝砂砾石坝在中小型水利工程中的最新应用与实践[J]. 水利水电技术, 2018, 49(5): 44-49. DOI: 10.13928/j.cnki.wrahe.2018.05.007.

[18] 赖韩. 基于田口方法的胶凝砂砾石材料特性研究[D]. 西安: 西安理工大学, 2020. DOI: 10.27398/d.cnki.gxalu.2020.000959.

[19] 郭兴文, 明宇, 杨杰, 等. 基于新型本构模型的胶凝砂砾石坝抗震工作性态研究[J]. 水电能源科学, 2013, 31(12): 90-93. DOI: 10.20040/j.cnki.1000-7709.2013.12.024.

[20] Fujisawa T, Nakamura A, Kawasaki H, et al. Material properties of CSG for the seismic design of trapezoid-shaped CSG dam[C]// Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. 2004: 391-402.

[21] Liapichevy P. Seismic stability and stress-strain state of a new type of FSH-RCC dams[C]. Proceedings 4th International Symposium on Roller Compacted Concrete Dams, Madrid, 2003: 485-492.

[22] Kim S, Choi W, Kim Y, et al. Investigation of compressive strength characteristics of Hardfill material and seismic stability of Hardfill dams[J]. Applied Sciences, 2023, 13(4): 2492. DOI: 10.3390/app13042492.

[23] 王能龙, 徐兴倩, 肖思友, 等. 胶凝风化料配合比三轴试验颗粒流细观模拟[J]. 铁道科学与工程学报, 2024, 21(9): 3622-3635. DOI: 10.19713/j.cnki.43-1423/u.T20231988.

[24] 董辉, 谭凤鸣, 程子华, 等. 砂砾土渗流侵蚀中细粒迁移-沉积-滤通的物理水力临界条件[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2024, 51(1): 69-81. DOI: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.202301023.

[25] 周书东, 张彤炜, 王新生, 等. 基于弹塑性理论的层状岩体隧道围岩塑性区初探[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2025, 52(5): 140-149. DOI: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.202411049.

[26] 白卫峰, 李思蕾, 朱小超, 等. 硅灰掺量对 CSG 材料力学性能影响的试验研究[J]. 人民长江, 2021, 52(4): 219-224. DOI: 10.16232/j.cnki.1001-4179.2021.04.035.

[27] Lubliner J, Oliver J, Oller S, et al. A plastic-damage model for concrete[J]. International Journal of Solids & Structures, 1989, 25(3): 299-326. DOI: 10.1016/0020-7683(89)90050-4.

[28] Lee J, Fenves G L. A plastic-damage concrete model for earthquake analysis of dams[J]. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 1998, 27(9): 937-956. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199809)27:9<937::AID-EQE764>3.0.CO;2-5.

[29] 张敬宜, 李明超, 张佳文, 等. 基于增量动力分析与多层感知机的混凝土坝地震易损性评估[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2023, 21(5): 1030-1039. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2023.0099.

[30] 李玉倩, 陈健云, 徐强, 等. 坝前滑坡涌浪压力分布对震损拱坝损伤影响的研究[J]. 水利学报, 2024, 55(2): 214-225. DOI: 10.13243/j.cnki.slxb.20230671.

[31] 张宇, 张志伟, 徐强, 等. 盐浸-干湿-冻融耦合作用下混凝土坝强震开裂机理[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2024, 22(1): 158-165. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2024.0021.

[32] 曹绪文, 何卫平, 刘聪宇, 等. 泄洪中孔对重力坝溢流坝段强震破坏过程的影响[J]. 水资源与水工程学报, 2025, 36(4): 138-145. DOI: 10.11705/j.issn.1672-643X.2025.04.17.

[33] 陈灯红, 徐英浩, 潘子悦. 考虑混凝土老化影响的高拱坝非线性地震响应分析[J]. 自然灾害学报, 2025, 34(6): 171-179. DOI: 10.13577/j.jnd.2025.0616.

[34] 李清富, 匡一航, 郭威. CDP 模型参数计算及取值方法验证[J]. 郑州大学学报（工学版）, 2021, 42(2): 43-48. DOI: 10.13705/j.issn.1671-6833.2020.06.002.

[35] 李晓琴, 张田. 循环荷载下混凝土开裂-闭合行为计算方法研究[J]. 振动与冲击, 2021, 40(9): 254-263. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2021.09.033.

[36] Ren Honglei, Wu Yingli, Li Wei, et al. Seismic damage assessment using frequency characteristics of acceleration records in centrifugal vibration table tests for CSG dam[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2026, 203: 110000. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2025.110000.

[37] 邱奕翔, 魏楚函, 武志刚, 等. 库水模拟对拱坝动力特性的影响分析[J]. 水力发电学报, 2020, 39(6): 109-120. DOI: 10.11660/slfdxb.20200610.

[38] 何卫平, 刘聪宇, 乐明锴, 等. 底部基座对重力坝强震破坏模式的影响[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2024, 41(8): 150-156. DOI: 10.11988/ckyyb.20230447.

[39] 王静, 袁瑞, 申家辰, 等. 考虑细部构造的引水坝段抗震安全性能评价[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2026, 24(2): 495-502. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2026.0048.

[40] GB 51247−2018 水工建筑物抗震设计标准[S].

基金资助

国家自然科学基金项目(51809152)