1. State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210024, China 2. College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210024, China
High-rise intake towers in high-intensity seismic areas are prone to structural safety problems under vibration. Therefore, effective and low-cost anti-seismic engineering measures must be designed for protection. An intake tower in northwest China was considered the research object, and its natural vibration characteristics and dynamic response were first analyzed using the mode decomposition response spectrum method based on a three-dimensional finite element model. The non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II (NSGA-II) was adopted to optimize the anti-seismic scheme combination by comprehensively considering the dynamic tower response and variable project cost. Finally, the rationality of the original intake tower antiseismic design scheme was evaluated according to the obtained optimal solution set, and recommendations for improvement were proposed. The method adopted in this study may provide significant references for designing anti-seismic measures for high-rise structures such as intake towers located in high-intensity earthquake areas.
description of structure vibration characteristics
empty reservoir
full reservoir
1
3.251
2.911
overall bending vibration around the x-axis
2
4.329
4.136
overall bending vibration around the y-axis
3
9.549
8.676
overall rotation about the z-axis
4
11.677
11.174
overall up and down vibration
5
13.797
11.868
upper part of the tower bends around the x-axis
Tab.3
Fig.4
load case
scale factors
static state
dynamic state
Ⅰ
1.0
0.35
Ⅱ
1.0
–0.35
Tab.4
Fig.5
Fig.6
Fig.7
Fig.8
load case
physical quantity
item
maximum value
position
Ⅰ
displacement
U11
2.770 mm
upstream left bank side of the top plate
U22
8.091 mm
upstream right bank side of the top plate
U33
–4.883 mm
middle of the top plate
stress
σmax
2.659 MPa
joint between tower right bank and backfill
σmin
–2.516 MPa
bottom plate of the intake tower
σ33
2.169 MPa
joint between tower right bank and backfill
Ⅱ
displacement
U11
–4.628 mm
the top of the plate
U22
–7.169 mm
the top of the plate
U33
–7.135 mm
upstream left bank side of the top plate
stress
σmax
1.100 MPa
upstream side of the bottom plate
σmin
–5.235 MPa
joint between tower right bank and backfill
σ33
–4.925 MPa
joint between tower right bank and backfill
Tab.5
factor
number
1
2
3
4
backfill concrete grade
μ1
C15
C20
C25
C30
bottom elastic modulus (GPa)
μ2
4.49
5.52
6.56
7.59
net height of backfill (m)
μ3
4.00
9.00
14.00
19.00
consolidation depth (m)
μ4
1.00
4.00
7.00
10.00
Tab.6
Fig.9
schemes
net height of backfill (m)
top elevation of tower backfill concrete (m)
contact height of tower back (m)
relative height of backfill
1
4.00
1397.00
13.00
0.31
2
9.00
1402.00
18.00
0.50
3
14.00
1407.00
23.00
0.61
4
19.00
1412.00
28.00
0.68
Tab.7
item
unit
price (yuan)
C30 concrete
m−3
300.00
C45 cement mortar
t−1
430.00
excavation cost
m−3
100.00
anchor arm
−
160.00
Tab.8
sequence number
factor
objective
Euclidean distance
−1
−2
−3
−4
f (K)
g (K)
1
C25
6.93
14.8
1
2.414
33.59
0.3345
2
C20
7.57
14.8
1
2.428
33.31
0.3372
3
C20
7.19
15.4
1
2.413
34.84
0.3385
4
C20
7.19
14.8
1
2.437
33.07
0.3409
5
C25
7.19
15.4
1.2
2.406
36.05
0.3422
Tab.9
Fig.10
1
H Y Zhang, T C Li, Z K Li. Modeling in SolidWorks and analysis of temperature and thermal stress during construction of intake tower. Water Science and Engineering, 2009, 2(1): 95–102
2
C L GongH LiuJ Zhang. Study on dynamic properties of the intake tower with finite element method. Applied Mechanics & Materials, 2014, 501–504: 1888–1891
3
Y Wang, Z T Lin, C Song, B Y Dong. Seismic analysis of a water release integrated structure part I: Response spectrum analysis of intake tower. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2014, 470: 938–941
4
Y Z YanC X XiongX H WenW H Li. Structure seismic analysis on intake tower of spillway tunnel. Advanced Materials Research, 2015, 1065–1069: 1427–1432
5
M Alembagheri. Earthquake response of solitary slender freestanding intake towers. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2016, 90: 1–14 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.08.024
6
H Y Zhang, L J Zhang. Tuned mass damper system of high-rise intake towers optimized by improved harmony search algorithm. Engineering Structures, 2017, 138: 270–282
7
G Bartoli, M Betti, L Galano, G Zini. Numerical insights on the seismic risk of confined masonry towers. Engineering Structures, 2019, 180: 713–727
8
X K Zou, C M Chan. An optimal resizing technique for seismic drift design of concrete buildings subjected to response spectrum and time history loadings. Computers & Structures, 2005, 83(19): 1689–1704 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2004.10.002
S Gorai, D Mait. Seismic response of concrete gravity dams under near field and far field ground motions. Engineering Structures, 2019, 196: 109292
11
A Aldemir. Prediction equation for the fundamental vibration period of concrete gravity dams with impounded water. Earthquake Spectra, 2021, 37(3): 1710–1725 https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293020981965
12
51247-2018 GB. Standard for Seismic Design of Hydraulic Structures. Beijing: China Planning Press, 2018 (in Chinese)
13
Y ZhangS Y LiK XiaJ J GuoG J He M Li. Seismic study on backfill height of tower-back for high-rise intake tower structure. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, 2018, 49(11): 62−67 (in Chinese)
14
G YangS Y LiL LiY XiaoZ X Zhang Y Yang. Effect of backfill height on seismic performance of high intake tower. Journal of Water Resources & Water Engineering, 2019, 30: 6 (in Chinese)
15
W J ZhangW B LuM ChenP YanC B Zhou. Analysis of consolidation grouting effect of rock mass based on comparison of wave velocity before and after grouting. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics & Engineering, 2012, 31(3): 469–478 (in Chinese)
L Esteva, O Díaz-López, J García-Pérez. Life-cycle optimization in the establishment of performance-acceptance parameters for seismic design. Structural Safety, 2002, 24: 187–204
18
P Zheng, B Hobbs, J Koonce. Optimizing multiple dam removals under multiple objectives: Linking tributary habitat and the Lake Erie ecosystem. Water Resources Research, 2009, 45(12): 1699–1702 https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007589
19
M Lozano, J Ramos, L Serra. Cost optimization of the design of CHCP (combined heat, cooling and power) systems under legal constraints. Energy, 2010, 35(2): 794–805 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2009.08.022
20
D H ZhongZ LiB P WuW HuP Lü. Time-quality-cost tradeoff optimization of rockfill dam construction based on pareto solution. Journal of Tianjin University (Science and Technology), 2016, 49(10): 1001−1007
21
K Z BuY ZhaoX C Zheng. Optimization design for foundation pit above metro tunnel based on NSGA2 genetic algorithm. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, 2021, 18(2): 459−467 (in Chinese)
22
W B Zhang, D D Shi, Z Z Shen, X H Wang, L Gan, W Shao, P Tang, H W Zhang, S Y Yu. Effect of calcium leaching on the fracture properties of concrete. Construction & Building Materials, 2023, 365: 130018 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.130018
23
W B Zhang, D D Shi, Z Z Shen, W Shao, L Gan, Y Yuan, P Tang, S Zhao, Y S Chen. Reduction of the calcium leaching effect on the physical and mechanical properties of concrete by adding chopped basalt fibers. Construction & Building Materials, 2023, 365: 130080 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.130080
24
Z M Chao, Y B Dang, Y Pan, F Y Wang, M Wang, J Zhang, C X Yang. Prediction of the shale gas permeability: A data mining approach. Geomechanics for Energy and the Environment, 2023, 33: 100435
25
L Chang, F Chang. Multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for operating parallel reservoir system. Journal of Hydrology, 2009, 377(1−2): 12–20 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.07.061
26
O Zare, B Saghafian, A Shamsai, S Nazif. Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms for qualitative and quantitative control of urban runoff. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 2012, 9: 777–817
27
S P Wang, D M Zhao, J Z Yuan, H J Li, Y Gao. Application of NSGA-II algorithm for fault diagnosis in power system. Electric Power Systems Research, 2019, 175: 105893
28
H Ghasemi, R Rafiee, X Zhuang, J Muthu, T Rabczuk. Uncertainties propagation in metamodel-based probabilistic optimization of CNT/polymer composite structure using stochastic multi-scale modeling. Computational Materials Science, 2014, 85: 295–305 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2014.01.020
29
H Ghasemi, R Brighenti, X Zhuang, J Muthu, T Rabczuk. Optimal fiber content and distribution in fiber-reinforced solids using a reliability and NURBS based sequential optimization approach. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2015, 51(1): 99–112 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-014-1114-y
30
18306-2015 GB. Seismic Ground Motion Parameters Zonation Map of China. Beijing: China Earthquake Administration, 2015 (in Chinese)
31
744-2016 SL. Specification for Load Design of Hydraulic Structures. Beijing: China Water Power Press, 2016 (in Chinese)
32
A Goyal, A K Chopra. Hydrodynamic and foundation interaction effects in dynamics of intake towers: Earthquake responses. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1989, 115(6): 1386–1395 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1989)115:6(1386
33
A Goyal, A K Chopra. Earthquake analysis of intake-outlet towers including tower-water-foundation-soil interaction. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 1989, 18(3): 325–344 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290180303
34
E Miranda, V V Bertero. Evaluation of strength reduction factors for earthquake-resistant design. Earthquake Spectra, 1994, 10(2): 357–379 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585778
35
K Deb. Multi-objective genetic algorithms: Problem difficulties and construction of test problems. Evolutionary Computation, 1999, 7(3): 205–230 https://doi.org/10.1162/evco.1999.7.3.205
36
C J Ye, M X Huang. Multi-objective optimal power flow considering transient stability based on parallel NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2015, 30(2): 857–866 https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2014.2339352
37
D Liu, Q Huang, Y Y Yang, D F Liu, X T Wei. Bi-objective algorithm based on NSGA-II framework to optimize reservoirs operation. Journal of Hydrology, 2020, 585: 124830 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124830
