岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4): 1270-1278.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2019.0980

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于离心机振动台试验的梯形河谷场地 地震动效应研究

李平1, 2,张宇东1,薄涛2, 3,辜俊儒1,朱胜1   

  1. 1. 防灾科技学院 地质工程学院,河北 三河 065201;2. 中国地震局 工程力学研究所 中国地震局地震工程与工程振动重点实验室, 黑龙江 哈尔滨 150080;3. 北京市地震局,北京 100080
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-02 修回日期:2019-07-12 出版日期:2020-04-11 发布日期:2020-07-01
  • 作者简介:李平,男,1981年生,博士,副教授,主要从事岩土工程抗震等方面的教学和科研工作。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金青年基金项目(No.51508096)

Study of ground motion effect of trapezoidal valley site based on centrifuge shaking table test

LI Ping1, 2, ZHANG Yu-dong1, BO Tao2, 3, GU Jun-ru1, ZHU Sheng1   

  1. 1. School of Geological Engineering, Institute of Disaster Prevention, Sanhe, Hebei 065201, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150080, China; 3. Beijing Earthquake Agency, Beijing 100080, China
  • Received:2019-06-02 Revised:2019-07-12 Online:2020-04-11 Published:2020-07-01
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation for Young Scholars of China (51508096).

摘要: 研究河谷场地地震效应对场地选址和抗震设计具有重要的指导意义。基于离心机振动台试验分析,研究了梯形河谷场地地震动响应规律。结果表明:基岩河谷场地对地震动有一定的放大效应,放大效应随着地形的变化而变化,但放大效应不显著,场地不同位置对反应谱的影响较小;基岩?土模型基岩面地震动放大倍数明显增大,不同输入地震动情况下放大倍数不同,各个场点对频段为0.5~2.5 s的地震动有明显的放大作用,对地震动放大频域范围明显加大,这与纯基岩场地的有明显的不同,虽然各个场点的反应谱形状有一定的差别,但是反应谱的平台值和特征周期相差不大;由于河谷场地地形效应,河谷场地地表峰值加速度随着地形的变化放大倍数随之变化,阶地级数越高放大倍数越大,谷底放大倍数最小,随着输入地震动强度的增加,阶地级数越高反应谱的平台值越高,特征周期越大。

关键词: 离心机振动台试验, 河谷场地, 地震动, 抗震设计

Abstract: Studying the seismic effects of valley site has critical guiding significance for site selection and aseismic design. Based on the analysis of centrifuge shaking table tests, the ground motion response pattern of the trapezoidal valley was studied. The results showed that there was a certain amplification effect of ground motion in the bedrock valley site. The amplification effect varied with the change of terrain, but the amplification effect was not significant. Different site locations had a small influence on the response spectrum. In the bedrock-overburden model, an obvious increase of the ground motion magnification was observed at the bedrock surface. Different magnifications were found under different input ground motions. The amplification effect of the ground motion was particularly evident on different sites when the frequency band was in the range of 0.5?2.5 s. In this frequency band, the frequency range of ground motion amplification was increased significantly, which was different from the pure bedrock sites. In the case of the pure bedrock sites, although the shape of the response spectrum was somewhat different for individual sites, the plateau value and characteristic period of the response spectrum were similar. Due to the terrain effect of the valley site, the amplification factors of the peak surface acceleration of the valley site changed with the change of the terrain. The higher the terrace levels of the valley, the greater its magnification, and the amplification of valley bottom was the smallest. With the increase of the input ground motion intensity, the higher the terrace levels, the higher the plateau value, and the greater the characteristic period of the response spectrum.

Key words: centrifuge shaking table test, river valley site, ground motion, aseismic design

中图分类号: 

  • TU 417
[1] 禹海涛, 张正伟, 李 攀, . 地下结构抗震设计的改进等效反应加速度法[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2401-2410.
[2] 何颖, 于琴, 刘中宪, . 考虑散射效应沉积河谷空间相关多点地震动模拟[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(7): 2739-2747.
[3] 刘汉香, 许 强, 朱 星, 周小棚, 刘文德. 含软弱夹层斜坡地震动力响应过程 的边际谱特征研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1387-1396.
[4] 熊仲明, 张 朝, 陈 轩. 地震作用下地裂缝场地地震动参数试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 421-428.
[5] 吴红刚, 武志信, 谢显龙, 牌立芳, . 土质边坡微型桩组合结构大型振动台试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(10): 3844-3854.
[6] 许成顺, 豆鹏飞, 高畄成, 陈 苏, 杜修力, . 地震动持时压缩比对可液化地基地震反应 影响的振动台试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(1): 147-155.
[7] 张泽林, 吴树仁, 王 涛, 唐辉明, 梁昌玉, . 地震波振幅对黄土-泥岩边坡动力响应规律的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(7): 2403-2412.
[8] 付 晓,冀文有,张建经,曹礼聪,范 刚,. 锚索框架梁加固平面滑动型边坡地震动力响应[J]. , 2018, 39(5): 1709-1719.
[9] 朱 姣,许汉刚,陈国兴, . 苏州第四纪深厚沉积层一维等效线性和非线性地震反应对比分析[J]. , 2018, 39(4): 1479-1490.
[10] 韩俊艳, 杜修力, 侯本伟, 李立云, 钟紫蓝, 赵 密. 纵向非一致地震激励下管-土结构响应的 简化分析模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(12): 4651-4658.
[11] 周燕国,谭晓明,梁 甜,黄 博,凌道盛,陈云敏,. 利用地震动强度指标评价场地液化的离心模型试验研究[J]. , 2017, 38(7): 1869-1877.
[12] 李小军,王晓辉,李 亮,韩 杰,. 振动台试验三维层状剪切模型箱的设计及性能测试[J]. , 2017, 38(5): 1524-1532.
[13] 张国祥,王 敏. 新建筑边坡规范地震主动土压力计算公式的推导及完善[J]. , 2017, 38(4): 1097-1102.
[14] 付 晓,张建经,周立荣,. 多级框架锚索和抗滑桩联合作用下边坡抗震性能的振动台试验研究[J]. , 2017, 38(2): 462-470.
[15] 黄小福,张迎宾,赵兴权,余鹏程,邢 昊,张 珏,陈岩岩,. 地震条件下危岩崩塌运动特性的初步探讨[J]. , 2017, 38(2): 583-592.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 张力霆,齐清兰,魏静,霍倩,周国斌. 淤填黏土固结过程中孔隙比的变化规律[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2935 -2939 .
[2] 张其一. 复合加载模式下地基失效机制研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2940 -2944 .
[3] 李 磊,朱 伟 ,林 城,大木宜章. 干湿循环条件下固化污泥的物理稳定性研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3001 -3004 .
[4] 张明义,刘俊伟,于秀霞. 饱和软黏土地基静压管桩承载力时间效应试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3005 -3008 .
[5] 吴 琼,唐辉明,王亮清,林志红. 库水位升降联合降雨作用下库岸边坡中的浸润线研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3025 -3031 .
[6] 吴 亮,钟冬望,卢文波. 空气间隔装药爆炸冲击荷载作用下混凝土损伤分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3109 -3114 .
[7] 周晓杰,介玉新,李广信1. 基于渗流和管流耦合的管涌数值模拟[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3154 -3158 .
[8] 吴昌瑜,张 伟,李思慎,朱国胜. 减压井机械淤堵机制与防治方法试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3181 -3187 .
[9] 崔皓东,朱岳明. 二滩高拱坝坝基渗流场的反演分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3194 -3199 .
[10] 贾宇峰,迟世春,林 皋. 考虑颗粒破碎影响的粗粒土本构模型[J]. , 2009, 30(11): 3261 -3266 .