可液化场地 T 型挡土墙的地震响应和缓解措施

IF 4.7 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL Geotextiles and Geomembranes Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI:10.1016/j.geotexmem.2024.10.003
Gao Hongmei , Zhou Yongjie , Wang Zhihua , Zhang Xinlei , Ji Zhanpeng , Huang Kai
{"title":"可液化场地 T 型挡土墙的地震响应和缓解措施","authors":"Gao Hongmei ,&nbsp;Zhou Yongjie ,&nbsp;Wang Zhihua ,&nbsp;Zhang Xinlei ,&nbsp;Ji Zhanpeng ,&nbsp;Huang Kai","doi":"10.1016/j.geotexmem.2024.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Focusing on a T-shape cantilever retaining wall in a liquefiable site, a series of shaking table model tests were conducted to investigate the seismic stability characteristics of the wall when using EPS composite soil isolation piles (WEP), EPS composite soil isolation walls (WEW), and backfilled natural fine sand from Nanjing (WSS). The seismic response characteristics of the model ground soil and the retaining wall for the three models were comparatively analyzed regarding the acceleration, displacement, dynamic earth pressure and excess pore water pressure ratio. Moreover, the seismic performance of anti-liquefaction measures in the liquefiable ground with EPS composite isolation structures were discussed from the view of the phase characteristics and energy consumption. The results indicate that under the same peak ground acceleration, the excess pore water pressure in the WEP and WEW models is significantly lower than that in the WSS model. Different from WSS, WEP and WEW exhibit a segmented distribution with the buried depth in acceleration amplification factors. The embedding of isolation structures in liquefiable sites can reduce the wall sliding and rotational displacements by approximately 25%–50%. In addition, the out-of-phase characteristics of dynamic earth pressure increment are evidently different among WEP, WEW and WSS. There is an approximate 180° phase difference between the dynamic earth pressure behind the wall and the inertial force in the WEP and WEW models. EPS composite soil isolation structures show good energy dissipation characteristics, and especially the isolation wall is better than isolation pile. The displacement index of WSS retaining wall is significantly larger than that of WEW and WEP, indicating that EPS composite isolation piles and wall play an important role in the mitigating damage to the retaining wall. This study can provide references for the application of isolation structures in the liquefiable ground soil regarding the seismic stability.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55096,"journal":{"name":"Geotextiles and Geomembranes","volume":"53 1","pages":"Pages 331-349"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Seismic response and mitigation measures for T shape retaining wall in liquefiable site\",\"authors\":\"Gao Hongmei ,&nbsp;Zhou Yongjie ,&nbsp;Wang Zhihua ,&nbsp;Zhang Xinlei ,&nbsp;Ji Zhanpeng ,&nbsp;Huang Kai\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.geotexmem.2024.10.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Focusing on a T-shape cantilever retaining wall in a liquefiable site, a series of shaking table model tests were conducted to investigate the seismic stability characteristics of the wall when using EPS composite soil isolation piles (WEP), EPS composite soil isolation walls (WEW), and backfilled natural fine sand from Nanjing (WSS). The seismic response characteristics of the model ground soil and the retaining wall for the three models were comparatively analyzed regarding the acceleration, displacement, dynamic earth pressure and excess pore water pressure ratio. Moreover, the seismic performance of anti-liquefaction measures in the liquefiable ground with EPS composite isolation structures were discussed from the view of the phase characteristics and energy consumption. The results indicate that under the same peak ground acceleration, the excess pore water pressure in the WEP and WEW models is significantly lower than that in the WSS model. Different from WSS, WEP and WEW exhibit a segmented distribution with the buried depth in acceleration amplification factors. The embedding of isolation structures in liquefiable sites can reduce the wall sliding and rotational displacements by approximately 25%–50%. In addition, the out-of-phase characteristics of dynamic earth pressure increment are evidently different among WEP, WEW and WSS. There is an approximate 180° phase difference between the dynamic earth pressure behind the wall and the inertial force in the WEP and WEW models. EPS composite soil isolation structures show good energy dissipation characteristics, and especially the isolation wall is better than isolation pile. The displacement index of WSS retaining wall is significantly larger than that of WEW and WEP, indicating that EPS composite isolation piles and wall play an important role in the mitigating damage to the retaining wall. This study can provide references for the application of isolation structures in the liquefiable ground soil regarding the seismic stability.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geotextiles and Geomembranes\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 331-349\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geotextiles and Geomembranes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266114424001237\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geotextiles and Geomembranes","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266114424001237","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

针对液化场地中的 T 型悬臂挡土墙,进行了一系列振动台模型试验,研究了采用 EPS 复合土隔离桩(WEP)、EPS 复合土隔离墙(WEW)和回填南京天然细砂(WSS)时挡土墙的地震稳定性特征。比较分析了三种模型的加速度、位移、动土压力和孔隙水超压比等模型地基土和挡土墙的地震响应特性。此外,还从相位特征和能耗的角度讨论了采用 EPS 复合隔震结构的液化地层抗液化措施的抗震性能。结果表明,在相同的地表加速度峰值下,WEP 和 WEW 模型的过剩孔隙水压力明显低于 WSS 模型。与 WSS 模型不同的是,WEP 和 WEW 模型的加速度放大系数随埋设深度呈分段分布。在可液化场地嵌入隔离结构可将墙体滑动和旋转位移减少约 25%-50%。此外,WEP、WEW 和 WSS 的动土压力增量的非相位特性明显不同。在 WEP 和 WEW 模型中,墙后动土压力与惯性力之间存在大约 180° 的相位差。EPS 复合土体隔震结构表现出良好的消能特性,尤其是隔震墙的消能特性优于隔震桩。WSS 挡土墙的位移指数明显大于 WEW 和 WEP 挡土墙的位移指数,说明 EPS 复合隔震桩和隔震墙在减轻挡土墙破坏方面发挥了重要作用。本研究可为可液化地基土中隔震结构的抗震稳定性应用提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Seismic response and mitigation measures for T shape retaining wall in liquefiable site
Focusing on a T-shape cantilever retaining wall in a liquefiable site, a series of shaking table model tests were conducted to investigate the seismic stability characteristics of the wall when using EPS composite soil isolation piles (WEP), EPS composite soil isolation walls (WEW), and backfilled natural fine sand from Nanjing (WSS). The seismic response characteristics of the model ground soil and the retaining wall for the three models were comparatively analyzed regarding the acceleration, displacement, dynamic earth pressure and excess pore water pressure ratio. Moreover, the seismic performance of anti-liquefaction measures in the liquefiable ground with EPS composite isolation structures were discussed from the view of the phase characteristics and energy consumption. The results indicate that under the same peak ground acceleration, the excess pore water pressure in the WEP and WEW models is significantly lower than that in the WSS model. Different from WSS, WEP and WEW exhibit a segmented distribution with the buried depth in acceleration amplification factors. The embedding of isolation structures in liquefiable sites can reduce the wall sliding and rotational displacements by approximately 25%–50%. In addition, the out-of-phase characteristics of dynamic earth pressure increment are evidently different among WEP, WEW and WSS. There is an approximate 180° phase difference between the dynamic earth pressure behind the wall and the inertial force in the WEP and WEW models. EPS composite soil isolation structures show good energy dissipation characteristics, and especially the isolation wall is better than isolation pile. The displacement index of WSS retaining wall is significantly larger than that of WEW and WEP, indicating that EPS composite isolation piles and wall play an important role in the mitigating damage to the retaining wall. This study can provide references for the application of isolation structures in the liquefiable ground soil regarding the seismic stability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Geotextiles and Geomembranes
Geotextiles and Geomembranes 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
21.20%
发文量
111
审稿时长
59 days
期刊介绍: The range of products and their applications has expanded rapidly over the last decade with geotextiles and geomembranes being specified world wide. This rapid growth is paralleled by a virtual explosion of technology. Current reference books and even manufacturers' sponsored publications tend to date very quickly and the need for a vehicle to bring together and discuss the growing body of technology now available has become evident. Geotextiles and Geomembranes fills this need and provides a forum for the dissemination of information amongst research workers, designers, users and manufacturers. By providing a growing fund of information the journal increases general awareness, prompts further research and assists in the establishment of international codes and regulations.
期刊最新文献
Experimental study on vacuum preloading combined with intermittent airbag pressurization for treating dredged sludge Corrigendum to “Seismic response and mitigation measures for T shape retaining wall in liquefiable site” [Geotext. Geomembranes. 53(1), (2025) 331–349] Seismic response and mitigation measures for T shape retaining wall in liquefiable site Stress-strain responses of EPS geofoam upon cyclic simple shearing: Experimental investigations and constitutive modeling A large-size model test study on the consolidation effect of construction waste slurry under self-weight and bottom vacuum preloading
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1