Response spectrum and modal dynamic analyses of gravity dams using ground motion accelerations modified to account for hydrodynamic effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research proposes simplified methods for response spectrum and modal dynamic analyses of gravity dams using time‐history and spectral seismic accelerations modified to directly account for hydrodynamic effects. The developed methods waive the need for specialized fluid‐structure interaction software. They also lead to more accurate assessment of coupled structural flexibility and hydrodynamic effects due to each vibration mode than the static correction method commonly used in traditional simplified methods. The methodology utilizes analytical formulations of hydrodynamic pressure or simplified added masses to obtain the contributions of the selected vibration modes to the total seismic response. A hydrodynamic modification factor characterizing the amplification/de‐amplification of acceleration seismic demands due to earthquake‐induced hydrodynamic effects is also introduced. The application of the proposed methods is illustrated numerically through examples of two typical gravity dam‐reservoir systems subjected to four earthquakes. The obtained results are in excellent agreement with the classical reference solutions. Time‐history and spectral seismic acceleration demands modified by hydrodynamic effects as well as selected key response indicators, such as relative displacements and stresses within the studied gravity dams, are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".