岩土力学 ›› 2022, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (3): 719-728.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2021.1000

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

超重力振动台柔性叠层箱剪切效能评价方法

王体强1,王永志1,张雪东2,汤兆光1,段雪锋1   

  1. 1. 中国地震局工程力学研究所 地震工程与工程振动重点实验室,黑龙江 哈尔滨 150080; 2. 中国水利水电科学研究院 岩土工程研究所,北京 100048
  • 收稿日期:2021-07-05 修回日期:2021-12-15 出版日期:2022-03-22 发布日期:2022-03-22
  • 通讯作者: 王永志,男,1984年生,博士,副研究员,主要从事动力离心试验方法、地基基础抗震设计研究。E-mail: yong5893741@163.com E-mail:wangtiqiang0313@126.com
  • 作者简介:王体强,男,1992年生,博士研究生,主要从事动力离心模型试验测量与数据处理方法方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:
    中国地震局工程力学研究所基本科研业务费专项项目(No.2019EEEVL0203);国家自然科学基金项目(No.51609218);黑龙江省自然科学基金资助项目(No.YQ2019E035)。

Shear performance evaluation of a flexible laminar container with hypergravity shaking table tests

WANG Ti-qiang1, WANG Yong-zhi1, ZHANG Xue-dong2, TANG Zhao-guang1, DUAN Xue-feng1   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150080, China; 2. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing 100048, China
  • Received:2021-07-05 Revised:2021-12-15 Online:2022-03-22 Published:2022-03-22
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the Scientific Research Fund of Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration(2019EEEVL0203), the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51609218) and Heilongjiang Natural Science Foundation(YQ2019E035).

摘要: 针对超重力振动台试验场地边界效应和新研制的一套柔性叠层箱,设计与开展干砂、纯水离心模型对比试验,引入加速度峰值误差EPGA、归一化均方误差NMSE、峰值频率误差EF等指标,评价了该叠层箱的剪切效能和边界效应。结果表明:与土体中心加速度相比,干砂模型叠层梁的EPGA、NMSE和EF,最大分别为21.50%、21.36%和3.1%,表明该叠层箱具有较好剪切效能。相同动荷载条件下,干砂模型各叠层梁的加速度峰值和峰值频率,最高是纯水模型的2.37倍和2.23倍,说明干砂试验中叠层梁的响应被土体响应控制,进一步验证了叠层箱具有良好剪切效能。干砂模型叠层梁与土体中心的剪切模量和阻尼比基本一致,误差分别为3%和18%;纯水模型叠层梁的剪切模量为干砂模型的1/3,仅为9.22 MPa;但阻尼比较大,为34.8%。以加速度峰值误差5%为边界效应临界距离,该叠层箱中心处约90 cm×24 cm范围内的测试结果是有效和可靠的。提出的方法与结论,对评价超重力振动台叠层箱边界效应具有重要指导意义和应用价值。

关键词: 超重力振动台, 柔性叠层箱, 边界效应, 评价指标, 校验方法

Abstract: Aiming at the site boundary effects on the hypergravity shaking table, with the benefits of a newly developed flexible laminar container, we design and carry out comparison tests between the dry sand and the water centrifugal model. We introduce the metrics including the acceleration peak error EPGA, the normalized mean square error NMSE, and the peak frequency error EF, to evaluate the shear efficiency and boundary effects of the laminar container. The results show that compared with the center accelerations of the soil, the maximum values of EPGA, NMSE and EF for the laminar beams can be 21.50%, 21.36% and 3.1%, respectively, with the dry sand model, indicating the shear efficiency of the laminar container. Under the same dynamic load conditions, the peak acceleration and the peak frequency of each laminar beam in the dry sand model are 2.37 and 2.23 times of those of the water model, indicating that the response of the laminar beams in the dry sand model is controlled by the response of the soil, which further verifies the excellent shear efficiency of the laminar container. The shear modulus and the damping ratio are similar between the laminar beams and the center of the soil in the dry sand model, with the relative differences of 3% and 18%, respectively; the shear modulus of laminar beams in the water model is 1/3 of that in the dry sand model, which is only 9.22 MPa; but the damping ratio is relatively large, which is 34.8%. Taking 5% of the acceleration peak error as the threshold of the boundary effect, the test results are valid and reliable in the range of about 90 cm×26 cm at the center of the laminar container. The proposed methods and conclusions should have important guiding significance and application value for evaluating the boundary effect of the laminar container of the hypergravity shaking table.

Key words: hypergravity shaking table, flexible laminar container, boundary effect, evaluation indexes, verification methods

中图分类号: 

  • TU411
[1] 吴小锋, 汪玉冰, 朱斌, . 地震序列作用下干砂与饱和砂地基动力响应 离心模拟试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(10): 3385-3394.
[2] 吴小锋, 朱斌, 汪玉冰, . 水平环境荷载与地震动联合作用下的海上风机 单桩基础动力响应模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(10): 3937-3944.
[3] 张传庆,卢景景,陈 珺,周 辉,杨凡杰. 岩爆倾向性指标及其相互关系探讨[J]. , 2017, 38(5): 1397-1404.
[4] 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.
[5] 贺 鹏,肖 杰,张 健,徐 飞,张云鹏,. 膨胀土堑坡稳定性动态风险评估 FAHP模型及工程应用[J]. , 2016, 37(S2): 502-512.
[6] 廖一蕾 ,张子新 ,张冠军. 大直径盾构进出洞加固体稳定性判别方法研究[J]. , 2011, 32(S2): 256-260.
[7] 刘东燕,郑志明,侯 龙. 边坡模型边界效应及材料孔隙率敏感性研究[J]. , 2010, 31(S1): 23-27.
[8] 吴振君,王水林,葛修润. LHS方法在边坡可靠度分析中的应用[J]. , 2010, 31(4): 1047-1054.
[9] 张召千,徐明德,刘泉声. 煤巷围岩稳定性加权平均评价方法研究[J]. , 2009, 30(11): 3464-3468.
[10] 汪明元 ,包承纲 ,丁金华 ,蔡剑韬 , . 试验条件对土工格栅与膨胀土界面拉拔性状的影响[J]. , 2008, 29(S1): 442-448.
[11] 钱岳红 ,唐德高 ,宋志文 ,姜鹏飞 ,曲 霞,. 脉冲荷载作用下地下结构动力特性及钢板抗层裂性能数值模拟[J]. , 2007, 28(S1): 778-782.
[12] 尚 敏,陈剑平,王征亮,肖云华,吴春勇,阙金声. 向家河大桥库岸地质灾害危险性分区的可拓学评价[J]. , 2007, 28(11): 2445-2450.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 姚仰平,侯 伟. 土的基本力学特性及其弹塑性描述[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2881 -2902 .
[2] 徐金明,羌培,张鹏飞. 粉质黏土图像的纹理特征分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2903 -2907 .
[3] 向天兵,冯夏庭,陈炳瑞,江 权,张传庆. 三向应力状态下单结构面岩石试样破坏机制与真三轴试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2908 -2916 .
[4] 石玉玲,门玉明,彭建兵,黄强兵,刘洪佳. 地裂缝对不同结构形式桥梁桥面的破坏试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2917 -2922 .
[5] 夏栋舟,何益斌,刘建华. 土-结构动力相互作用体系阻尼及地震反应分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2923 -2928 .
[6] 徐速超,冯夏庭,陈炳瑞. 矽卡岩单轴循环加卸载试验及声发射特性研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2929 -2934 .
[7] 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 .
[8] 张其一. 复合加载模式下地基失效机制研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2940 -2944 .
[9] 易 俊,姜永东,鲜学福,罗 云,张 瑜. 声场促进煤层气渗流的应力-温度-渗流压力场的流固动态耦合模型[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2945 -2949 .
[10] 陶干强,杨仕教,任凤玉. 崩落矿岩散粒体流动性能试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2950 -2954 .