Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userA Comparative Study between Pseudostatic and Dynamic Analysis in Seismic Safety for Rock- Fill Dams
مقارنة بين التحليل شبه السكوني و الديناميكي في حساب الأمان الزلزالي للسدود الركامية
2119
2 51
0
(
0
)
Created by
Shamra Editor
Ask ChatGPT about the research
تم في هذا البحث اجراء مقارنة بين اسلوبي التحليل شبه السكوني و الديناميكي في حساب الأمان الزلزالي للسدود باستخدام برنامج Geostudio.
This study aims at conducting a comparative study between the Pseudostatic Approach that is based on the limit equilibrium theory and the Dynamic Analysis using to the finite element theory using Geostudio software.
Artificial intelligence review:
Research summary
تتناول هذه الدراسة مقارنة بين أسلوبي التحليل شبه السكوني والتحليل الديناميكي في حساب الأمان الزلزالي للسدود الركامية. يُعتمد التحليل شبه السكوني على مبدأ القوى الثابتة باستخدام نظرية التوازن الحدي، بينما يعتمد التحليل الديناميكي على نظرية العناصر المحدودة ويأخذ في الاعتبار القوى المتغيرة تحت تأثير العطالة. تم استخدام برنامج Geostudio لإجراء التحليلين ومقارنة نتائج معامل الأمان لسد الرستن في سوريا. أظهرت النتائج أن التحليل الديناميكي يعطي نتائج أكثر دقة وموثوقية، حيث يأخذ في الاعتبار التغيرات الزمنية والمكانية للإجهادات والخواص الديناميكية للتربة. كما أظهرت الدراسة أن التحليل شبه السكوني قد يؤدي إلى تقدير غير دقيق للأمان الزلزالي، مما يستدعي الانتقال إلى التحليل الديناميكي لتقييم أمان السدود بشكل أفضل.
Critical review
دراسة نقدية: تعتبر هذه الدراسة خطوة مهمة نحو تحسين تقييم الأمان الزلزالي للسدود الركامية، إلا أن هناك بعض النقاط التي يمكن تحسينها. أولاً، الدراسة تعتمد بشكل كبير على برنامج Geostudio، وكان من الأفضل تضمين مقارنات مع برامج أخرى لتعزيز موثوقية النتائج. ثانياً، لم يتم إجراء تجارب ميدانية للتحقق من صحة النتائج النظرية، مما يضعف من قوة الاستنتاجات. ثالثاً، كان من الممكن توسيع نطاق الدراسة لتشمل أنواع أخرى من السدود وليس فقط السدود الركامية. وأخيراً، يجب أن تتضمن الدراسة توصيات أكثر تفصيلاً حول كيفية تطبيق نتائج التحليل الديناميكي في تصميم السدود المستقبلية.
Questions related to the research
-
ما هو الفرق الأساسي بين التحليل شبه السكوني والتحليل الديناميكي في حساب الأمان الزلزالي للسدود؟
التحليل شبه السكوني يعتمد على مبدأ القوى الثابتة باستخدام نظرية التوازن الحدي، بينما يعتمد التحليل الديناميكي على نظرية العناصر المحدودة ويأخذ في الاعتبار القوى المتغيرة تحت تأثير العطالة.
-
لماذا يعتبر التحليل الديناميكي أكثر دقة من التحليل شبه السكوني؟
لأن التحليل الديناميكي يأخذ في الاعتبار التغيرات الزمنية والمكانية للإجهادات والخواص الديناميكية للتربة، مما يوفر تقديرًا أكثر دقة للأمان الزلزالي للسدود.
-
ما هي البرامج المستخدمة في هذه الدراسة لإجراء التحليلين؟
تم استخدام برنامج Geostudio لإجراء التحليلين شبه السكوني والديناميكي ومقارنة نتائج معامل الأمان.
-
ما هي التوصيات الرئيسية التي خلصت إليها الدراسة؟
توصي الدراسة بعدم الاعتماد على التحليل شبه السكوني فقط لتقييم الأمان الزلزالي للسدود، والانتقال إلى التحليل الديناميكي الذي يعطي نتائج أكثر دقة وموثوقية.
References used
CANADIAN DAM ASSOCIATION CDA 2007-Dam Safety Guidelines. CDA, Canada, p300
CHIEH, Z and HWANG, R2004-1999 Chi Chi Earthquake of Taiwan. National Taiwan University, Taiwan, p8
INCORPORATED RESEARCH INSTITUTIONFOR SEISMOLOGY IRIS 2015-Map of Faults Around World. IRIS, American United States, p10
rate research
Read More
Structural design for seismic loading, which is traditionally done for most types of common structures by the means of equivalent lateral static loading or modal spectrum analysis, is no longer a preferred methodology for design of modern structures
with complex topology and functionality under extreme loading scenarios. Nonlinear response history evaluation, on the other hand, is becoming a practical tool due to availability of high performance computing and recommendations of the new seismic guidelines, and due to the increase of available strong ground motion database. Therefor using and scaling real recorded accelerograms is becoming one of the most contemporary research issues in this field.
Seismological characteristics of the records, such as earthquake magnitude, epicentral distance and site classification are usually considered in the selection of real records, as they influence the shape of the response spectrum, the energy content and duration of strong ground shaking, and therefore the expected demand on structures. After real seismic records selection it is necessary to scale these records to match the intensity of the earthquake expected for the site. Generally, scaling can be made by ground motions uniform scaling in time domain which is simply scaled up or down the ground motions uniformly to best match (in average) the target spectrum within a period range of interest. It’s an engineer’s job to find the best scaling factors to best match the target spectrum, which is a complex task, so we employed the Genetic Algorithm (GA) in finding them to achieve the best results.
When testing the selected and scaled ground motions, it’s a standard procedure to use the nonlinear time history analysis to validate the results in terms of structural responses and their variation. this proves the efficiency of the presented procedure.
In this study, basic methodologies for selecting and scaling strong ground motion time histories are summarized, the selection and scaling criteria of real time history records to satisfy the Syrian design code are discussed. The GA scaling procedures are utilized to scale 10 set of records, every set consists of seven records of available real records to match the Syrian design spectra. The resulting time histories are investigated and compared in terms of suitability as input to time history analysis of civil engineering structures, by mean of time history analyses of SDOF systems which are conducted to examine the efficiency of the scaling method in reducing the scatter in structural response. The nonlinear response of SDOF systems is represented by bilinear hysteretic model. Assuming 5 different Periods, yield strength reduction factor, R= 4.5, α=3% post-yield stiffness, a number of 700 runs of analysis are conducted. The results are described for elastic displacement D.
: Nonlinear response history evaluation is becoming a practical tool due to availability of high performance computing and recommendations of the new seismic guidelines, and due to the increase of available strong ground motion database. When testing
the selected and scaled ground motions, it’s a standard procedure to use the time history analysis to validate the results in terms of structural responses and their variation. this proves the efficiency of the presented procedure.
In this study the selection and scaling criteria of real time history records to satisfy the Syrian design code are discussed. Ten set of records have been selected and scaled, every set consists of seven records of available real records, to match the Syrian design spectra. The resulting time histories are investigated and compared in terms of suitability as input to time history analysis of civil engineering structures, by mean of time history analyses of SDOF systems which are conducted to examine the efficiency of the scaling method in reducing the scatter in structural response. The nonlinear response of SDOF systems is represented by bilinear hysteretic model. Assuming 5 different Periods, α=3% post-yield stiffness, a number of 700 runs of analysis are conducted. And a number of 280 runs of analysis are conducted for MDOF systems.
The phenomenon of impact between the adjacent buildings is one of the most important reasons for collapse of buildings during the
earthquakes for that most of the codes resort to avoid impact by
increasing the distance between adjacent buildings, b
ut on the other hand high cost of land requires us to take advantage of the largest possible area in addition to the difficulty of making the separation architecturally and in particularly for high buildings the separation may offer up to 50 cm.
We tried to have this research one of the studies that discuss the
subject of seismic pounding where we discussed the methods for
modeling the pounding and the most appropriate way to study the impact depending on the program dynamic analysis Ansys
(Autodyn Ver. 11) then chose several cases for study seismic
impact in three-dimensional models to cover most of the study
variables that may affect this phenomenon, and we doer non- linear dynamic analysis for all cases, with applying acceleration function is defined by equation its constants are changing with processing the seismic records data.
After finishing the analysis for all the models we have discussed
changing the transitions and stresses and strains , and studied the
factors affecting the impact , and discussed results of study and
then we have summarizes the recommendations in that we see fit
through this search.
This study amid at investigating the consistency between
judgment and factor analysis employed as indicators of validity for many
psychological concepts. Subjects were 861 ninth and tenth students.
Data of the performance on two scales (psychologi
cal stress & rebellion)
were taken from a previous study used judgment to determine concepts’
factors. Results showed consistency in number of factors determined by
both methods for the Psychological Stress Scale. However, agreement
was not found for the Rebellion Scale; two main factors revealed by the
judgment method and five factors were explored by factor analysis. The
study emphasized the necessity of utilizing factor analysis beside
judgment when checking for validity.
chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair is an adverse outcome that affects
about 12 % to 54 % of patients. Ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric ( IG – IH ) nerve block has been widely
used in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair.
Ketorolac is
indicated for the short term (less than 5 days)management of pain and appears to be
particularly useful in the immediate postoperative period. A standard dose of Ketorolac provides
analgesia equivalent to 6 – 12 mg of morphine administered by the same route. The interval to onset is
also similar to morphine, but Ketorolac has a longer duration of action (6 – 8 h).
what is the best method for pain management after inguinal procedures? Is there any difference between
(IG – IH) nerve block, and Ketorolac IV postoperatively (pain scores, early movement, nausea, vomiting
...)?
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
