Scholarlink

<p>Concrete gravity dams are vital elements of hydraulic infrastructure, and their design requires rigorous standards to ensure long-term safety and stability. This study provides a comparative evaluation of three major international design codes: the Chinese SL319, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the Swiss Federal Office of Energy (SFOE). Six representative case studies of high concrete gravity dams were analyzed to examine how each code addresses stress and stability under normal loading conditions. Additional analyses were performed on hypothetical dams of varying heights (50&#xa0;m, 100&#xa0;m, and &gt; 200&#xa0;m) to explore the influence of scale. The study also investigated hydraulic fracture resistance, with a focus on uplift pressure assumptions and crack initiation at the dam heel. Results reveal significant differences in design outcomes, with the Chinese code generally produces more smaller cross-sectional dimensions due to adapting no-tensile-stress criteria, while the USACE and SFOE codes enforce stricter stress and sliding stability criteria, leading to larger geometries. The three codes yield similar design behavior for low dams (50&#xa0;m) but diverge considerably for dams higher than 100&#xa0;m. Notably, both USACE and SFOE demonstrate higher resistance to hydraulic fracture when uplift is excluded from the analysis. Guxian dam as a new dam under construction it might have the possibility of hydraulic fracture occurrence, and it is recommended to enlarge the cross-sectional area to 18,888.1 m<sup>2</sup> and to strictly control initial crack depths below 2&#xa0;m to eliminate potential failure risks. Although existing design codes ensure structural safety using traditional methods, they may not fully address vulnerabilities to hydraulic fracturing. It is strongly recommended that hydraulic fracture risk assessments be incorporated into dam design codes alongside stress and stability evaluations. Furthermore, highlighting the theoretical differences between design codes is essential to developing more effective, economical, and resilient concrete gravity dam designs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparative evaluation of international design codes for concrete gravity dams considering hydraulic fracture

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月13日

查看全文
  • Mohamed Ramadan,
  • Jinsheng Jia,
  • Xu Li

摘要

Concrete gravity dams are vital elements of hydraulic infrastructure, and their design requires rigorous standards to ensure long-term safety and stability. This study provides a comparative evaluation of three major international design codes: the Chinese SL319, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the Swiss Federal Office of Energy (SFOE). Six representative case studies of high concrete gravity dams were analyzed to examine how each code addresses stress and stability under normal loading conditions. Additional analyses were performed on hypothetical dams of varying heights (50 m, 100 m, and > 200 m) to explore the influence of scale. The study also investigated hydraulic fracture resistance, with a focus on uplift pressure assumptions and crack initiation at the dam heel. Results reveal significant differences in design outcomes, with the Chinese code generally produces more smaller cross-sectional dimensions due to adapting no-tensile-stress criteria, while the USACE and SFOE codes enforce stricter stress and sliding stability criteria, leading to larger geometries. The three codes yield similar design behavior for low dams (50 m) but diverge considerably for dams higher than 100 m. Notably, both USACE and SFOE demonstrate higher resistance to hydraulic fracture when uplift is excluded from the analysis. Guxian dam as a new dam under construction it might have the possibility of hydraulic fracture occurrence, and it is recommended to enlarge the cross-sectional area to 18,888.1 m2 and to strictly control initial crack depths below 2 m to eliminate potential failure risks. Although existing design codes ensure structural safety using traditional methods, they may not fully address vulnerabilities to hydraulic fracturing. It is strongly recommended that hydraulic fracture risk assessments be incorporated into dam design codes alongside stress and stability evaluations. Furthermore, highlighting the theoretical differences between design codes is essential to developing more effective, economical, and resilient concrete gravity dam designs.