基于可液化场地离心机振动台试验的地下结构地震响应研究

张梓鸿; 闫冠宇; 许成顺; 杜贺港

doi:10.11779/CJGE20231101

基于可液化场地离心机振动台试验的地下结构地震响应研究 English Version

1.
中国铁道科学研究院集团有限公司城市轨道交通中心, 北京 100081
2.
北京工业大学城市与工程安全减灾教育部重点实验室, 北京 100124

基金项目:

国家杰出青年科学基金项目 52225807

国家自然科学基金面上项目 52078020

详细信息

作者简介:
张梓鸿（1990—），男，博士，助理研究员，主要从事岩土地下结构抗震等方面的研究工作。E-mail: zhangzihong2021@126.com

通讯作者:
许成顺, E-mail: xuchengshun@bjut.edu.cn

中图分类号: TU433
计量
- 文章访问数: 307
- HTML全文浏览量: 38
- PDF下载量: 78
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-11-23
- 网络出版日期: 2024-07-11
- 刊出日期: 2025-01-31

Seismic responses of underground structures based on centrifuge shaking table test in liquefiable site

1.
China Academy of Railway Sciences Corporation Limited, Urban Rail Transit Center of CARS, Beijing 100081, China
2.
Key Laboratory of Urban Security and Disaster Engineering, Ministry of Education, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China

摘要

摘要: 为研究场地液化对地下结构地震响应的影响，开展了可液化场地条件下的离心机振动台试验，得到液化场地地下结构地震响应规律，并通过Pushover分析方法确定场地不同液化程度下土体刚度的衰减程度。研究结论如下：在4种加载工况下，模型结构的侧墙及顶板总应变峰值响应完全处于弹性范围内，中柱应变在大震作用下略超过混凝土的弹性应变限值，损伤程度较低，模型结构表现出良好的抗震性能；四种加载工况下，可液化场地中结构层间位移较结构等高处场地层间位移衰减了63%~76%；由场地水平位移和土-结构体系位移衰减比来看，尽管饱和砂土层液化后会出现较大的水平位移，但场地液化后土-结构刚度比降低仍会避免结构出现较大的层间位移和严重破坏；在实际工程应用Pushover分析方法对液化场地地下结构进行简化分析时，可考虑最不利工况，将土体模量折减为初始模量的3%进行计算。
- 地下结构 /
- 地震响应 /
- 可液化场地 /
- 离心机振动台试验
Abstract: In order to study the effects of site liquefaction on the seismic responses of underground structures, the centrifuge shaking table tests under liquefiable site conditions are carried out. The seismic response laws of underground structures in liquefiable site are obtained. The attenuation degree of soil stiffness under different liquefaction degrees of the site is obtained by using the Pushover analysis method. The conclusions are drawn as follows: (1) The peak total strain responses of the sidewalls and plates of the model structures are within the elastic range under the four loading conditions. The strains of the center column just exceed the elastic strain limit of concrete under large earthquakes, with a low level of damage. The underground structures conforming to the existing codes exhibit good seismic performance. (2) The inter-story drifts of the structures in the liquefiable site are attenuated by 63%~76% compared with those in the site at the structural equivalent height under the four loading conditions. (3) From the horizontal displacement of the site and the displacement attenuation ratio of the soil-structure system, although the liquefaction of the saturated sandy soil layer will lead to a larger horizontal displacement of the site, the reduction of the soil-structure stiffness ratio caused by the liquefaction of the site will still avoid the structures from experiencing a larger inter-story drift and serious damage. (4) When applying the Pushover analysis method to simplify the analysis of underground structures in liquefiable sites, the most unfavorable conditions should be considered, and the soil modulus can be discounted to 3% of the initial modulus for calculation.
- underground structure /
- seismic response /
- liquefiable site /
- centrifuge shaking table test

HTML全文

图 1 土-结构模型示意图

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of soil-structure model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 模型结构制作过程及实际模型结构

Figure 2. Model structures and production process

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 混凝土受压应力-应变曲线

Figure 3. Compressive stress-strain curve of concrete

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 模型场地制备示意图

Figure 4. Diagram of preparation of model site

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 土-结构模型饱和示意图

Figure 5. Diagram of model saturation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 试验监测方案示意图

Figure 6. Schematic diagram of monitoring program for tests

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 Kobe地震动加速度时程及频谱

Figure 7. Time histories of acceleration and spectra of Kobe earthquake

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 饱和砂土层不同测点超孔压比时程

Figure 8. Time histories of EPPR in saturated sandy soil at fully liquefiable site

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 场地加速度放大系数

Figure 9. Amplitude factors of acceleration of site

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 加速度时程及时-频变换

Figure 10. Time histories of acceleration and corresponding time-frequency spectra

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 锤击法

Figure 11. Hammering method

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 试验前后结构基频测试

Figure 12. Fundamental frequencies of structures before and after tests

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 结构总应变时程

Figure 13. Time histories of total strain of structures

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 结构应变峰值

Figure 14. Peak values of strain of structures

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 地下结构性能曲线

Figure 15. Performance curve of structures

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 结构层间位移时程曲线

Figure 16. Time histories of inter-story drift of structures

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 17 场地水平位移模式

Figure 17. Patterns of horizontal displacement of site

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 18 结构层间位移与场地层间位移的时程

Figure 18. Comparison between time histories inter-layer drift of structure and site

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 19 土-结构有限元模型示意图

Figure 19. Finite element model for numerical simulation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 20 侧向变形刚度S₁计算示意图

Figure 20. Calculation of lateral deformation stiffness S₁

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 21 测点WP2超孔压比时程曲线

Figure 21. Time history curves of excess pore pressure ratio at measuring point WP2

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 离心机试验相似比

Table 1 Scaling laws of centrifuge tests

物理量	量纲	模型/原型
密度	[M][L]^-3	1
尺寸	[L]	1/55
渗透系数	[L][T]^-2	55
动力时间	[T]	1/55
渗透时间	[T]²	1/55²
水头	[L]	1/55
孔隙水压力	[M][L]^-1[T]^-2	1
频率	[T]^-1	55
加速度	[L][T]^-2	55
应力	[M][L]^-1[T]^-2	1
应变	—	1

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 高岭土的物理参数

Table 2 Basic physical parameters of kaolin

G_s	SiO₂/%	Al₂O₃/%	液限/%	塑限/%
2.68	47~53	32~38	65.35	40.04

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 福建标准砂的物理参数

Table 3 Physical properties of model sand

G_s	e_max	e_min	e	D₅₀/mm	φ/(°)
2.645	0.961	0.615	0.78	0.16	39

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 数值模拟土体参数设置

Table 4 Soil parameters for numerical simulation

土层	质量密度ρ/ (g·cm^-3)	参考剪切模量G_r/MPa	参考体积模量B_r/MPa	黏聚力c/kPa	八面体剪应变γ_max	摩擦角 $\varphi$ /(°)	参考围压p'_r/kPa	压力相关系数d	屈服面数n	剪胀角ϕ_PT/(°)	剪缩参数C₁	剪缩参数C₃	剪胀参数D₁	剪胀参数D₃	孔隙比e
砂土	1.9	49	119	—	0.1	33.5	101	0.5	20	22.5	0.045	0.15	0.06	0.15	0.7
黏土	1.75	51/56	164/184	30	0.1	0	100	0	20	—	—	—	—	—	—

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 钢筋混凝土本构参数

Table 5 Material parameters of reinforcement and concrete

本构模型	参数	取值
Steel02	抗拉强度f_y	335 MPa
	弹性模量E₀	200 GPa
	应变硬化率b	0.00001
ConcreteD	弹性模量E	13 GPa
	抗压强度f_c	16.3 MPa
	峰值压应变ε_c	0.001915
	抗拉强度f_t	1.43 MPa

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 Pushover多工况土结体系位移衰减比分析

Table 6 Pushover multi-condition analysis of displacement attenuation ratio for soil-structure system

目标试验加载工况	Pushover初始模量折减系数(折减后/折减前)/%	土结刚度比F	结构层间位移峰值/m	场地层间位移峰值/m	土-结构体系位移衰减比/%
Kobe-0.1g	100	3.03	0.00508	0.005616	9.54
	50	1.515	0.00508	0.007199	29.43
	25	0.7575	0.00508	0.012390	59.00
	22	0.6666	0.00508	0.013715	62.96
	21	0.6363	0.00508	0.013793	63.17
	20	0.606	0.00508	0.013842	63.30
Kobe-0.32g	100	3.03	0.00951	0.010849	12.34
	50	1.515	0.00951	0.013670	30.43
	25	0.7575	0.00951	0.023476	59.49
	20	0.606	0.00951	0.026184	63.68
	11	0.3333	0.00951	0.034632	72.54
	10	0.303	0.00951	0.035222	73.00
Kobe-0.52g	100	3.03	0.01272	0.014791	14.00
	50	1.515	0.01272	0.018368	30.75
	25	0.7575	0.01272	0.031532	59.66
	10	0.303	0.01272	0.047445	73.19
	5	0.1515	0.01272	0.049961	74.02
	4	0.1212	0.01272	0.049417	74.26
	3	0.0909	0.01272	0.049882	74.50

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(26)

[1]	IIDA H, HIROTO T, YOSHIDA N, et al. Damage to Daikai subway station[J]. Soils and Foundations, 1996, 36: 283-300. doi: 10.3208/sandf.36.Special_283
[2]	WANG Z Z, GAO B, JIANG Y J, et al. Investigation and assessment on mountain tunnels and geotechnical damage after the Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Science in China Series E: Technological Sciences, 2009, 52(2): 546-558. doi: 10.1007/s11431-009-0054-z
[3]	YAMAGUCHI A, MORI T, KAZAMA M, et al. Liquefaction in Tohoku district during the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake[J]. Soils and Foundations, 2012, 52(5): 811-829. doi: 10.1016/j.sandf.2012.11.005
[4]	HASHASH Y M A, HOOK J J, SCHMIDT B, et al. Seismic design and analysis of underground structures[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2001, 16(4): 247-293. doi: 10.1016/S0886-7798(01)00051-7
[5]	SUN Q Q, DIAS D, RIBEIRO E SOUSA L. Impact of an underlying soft soil layer on tunnel lining in seismic conditions[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2019, 90: 293-308. doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2019.05.011
[6]	唐军平, 李建强, 孙双祥, 等. 佛山市城市轨道交通二号线南庄站砂土液化分析及处理措施[J]. 路基工程, 2017(1): 189-193, 212. TANG Junping, LI Jianqiang, SUN Shuangxiang, et al. Analysis of sand liquefaction at Nanzhuang Station of Foshan urban rail transit line 2 and treatment measure[J]. Subgrade Engineering, 2017(1): 189-193, 212. (in Chinese)
[7]	MENG F Y, CHEN R P, KANG X. Effects of tunneling-induced soil disturbance on the post-construction settlement in structured soft soils[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2018, 80: 53-63. doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2018.06.007
[8]	ZHENG G, FAN Q, ZHANG T Q, et al. Multistage regulation strategy as a tool to control the vertical displacement of railway tracks placed over the building site of two overlapped shield tunnels[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2019, 83: 282-290. doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2018.09.040
[9]	AN J H, TAO L J, JIANG L Z, et al. A shaking table-based experimental study of seismic response of shield-enlarge-dig type's underground subway station in liquefiable ground[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 147: 106621. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106621
[10]	凌道盛, 郭恒, 蔡武军, 等. 地铁车站地震破坏离心机振动台模型试验研究[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2012, 46(12): 2201-2209. doi: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-973X.2012.12.010 LING Daosheng, GUO Heng, CAI Wujun, et al. Research on seismic damage of metro station with centrifuge shaking table model test[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science), 2012, 46(12): 2201-2209. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-973X.2012.12.010
[11]	CHEN G X, CHEN S, QI C Z, et al. Shaking table tests on a three-arch type subway station structure in a liquefiable soil[J]. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2015, 13(6): 1675-1701. doi: 10.1007/s10518-014-9675-0
[12]	CHEN S, TANG B Z, ZHUANG H Y, et al. Experimental investigation of the seismic response of shallow-buried subway station in liquefied soil[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2020, 136: 106153. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106153
[13]	TANG B Z, YU B Y, ZHUANG H Y, et al. Seismic behavior of irregular underground structures in saturated sand[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2024, 179: 108478. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2024.108478
[14]	王刚, 张建民, 魏星. 可液化土层中地下车站的地震反应分析[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2011, 33(10): 1623-1627. http://cge.nhri.cn/article/id/14212 WANG Gang, ZHANG Jianmin, WEI Xing. Seismic response analysis of a subway station in liquefiable soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2011, 33(10): 1623-1627. (in Chinese) http://cge.nhri.cn/article/id/14212
[15]	WU Q, DING X M, ZHANG Y L, et al. Experimental and numerical study on dynamic response of underground structure in coral sand under earthquakes[J]. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2024, 28(1): 62-84. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2023.2173491
[16]	CHEN S, TANG B Z, ZHAO K, et al. Seismic response of irregular underground structures under adverse soil conditions using shaking table tests[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2020, 95: 103145. doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2019.103145
[17]	邹炎, 景立平, 李永强. 隧道穿过土层分界面振动台模型试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2014, 33(增刊1): 3340-3348. ZOU Yan, JING Liping, LI Yongqiang. Study of shaking table model test of tunnel through soil interface[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2014, 33(S1): 3340-3348. (in Chinese)
[18]	刘春晓, 陶连金, 边金, 等. 可液化土层对地下结构地震影响的振动台试验[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2021, 55(7): 1327-1338. LIU Chunxiao, TAO Lianjin, BIAN Jin, et al. Shaking table test of seismic effect of liquefiable soil layer on underground structure[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science), 2021, 55(7): 1327-1338. (in Chinese)
[19]	CHEN R R, TAIEBAT M, WANG R, et al. Effects of layered liquefiable deposits on the seismic response of an underground structure[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2018, 113: 124-135. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.05.037
[20]	ZHU T, WANG R, ZHANG J M. Evaluation of various seismic response analysis methods for underground structures in saturated sand[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2021, 110: 103803. doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2020.103803
[21]	城市轨道交通结构抗震设计规范: GB 50909—2014[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2014. Code for Seismic Design of Urban Rail Transit Structures: GB 50909—2014[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2014. (in Chinese)
[22]	张梓鸿, 许成顺, 闫冠宇, 等. 液化夹层场地地铁车站结构离心机振动台试验方案设计[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2022, 44(5): 879-888. doi: 10.11779/CJGE202205011 ZHANG Zihong, XU Chengshun, YAN Guanyu, et al. Experimental design for dynamic centrifuge tests on a subway station structure in liquefied interlayer site[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2022, 44(5): 879-888. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202205011
[23]	KUTTER B L. Dynamic centrifuge modeling of geotechnical structures [J]. Transportation Research Record, 1992: 24-30.
[24]	BANERJEES. Centrifuge and Numerical Modelling of Soft Clay-pile-raft Foundations Subjected to Seismic Shaking[D]. Singapore: National University of Singapore, 2009.
[25]	MONTOYA-NOGUERA S, LOPEZ-CABALLERO F. Effect of coupling excess pore pressure and deformation on nonlinear seismic soil response[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2016, 11(1): 191-207. doi: 10.1007/s11440-014-0355-7
[26]	DU X L, JIANG J W, EL NAGGAR M H, et al. Interstory drift ratio associated with performance objectives for shallow-buried multistory and span subway stations in inhomogeneous soil profiles[J]. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2021, 50(2): 655-672.