岩土力学 ›› 2019, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (3): 998-1004.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2017.1663

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

整体刚性面板加筋土挡墙振动台模型试验研究

徐 鹏1, 2,蒋关鲁1, 2,邱俊杰1,高泽飞2,王智猛3   

  1. 1. 西南交通大学 土木工程学院,四川 成都 610031;2. 西南交通大学 高速铁路线路工程教育部重点试验室,四川 成都 610031; 3. 中铁二院工程集团有限责任公司,四川 成都 610031
  • 收稿日期:2017-08-11 出版日期:2019-03-11 发布日期:2019-04-04
  • 通讯作者: 蒋关鲁,男,1962年生,博士,教授,主要从事道路与铁道工程方向的研究工作。E-mail: wgljiang@swjtu.edu.cn E-mail:sdxplt@163.com
  • 作者简介:徐鹏,男,1988年生,博士研究生,主要从事高速铁路路基及地基处理设计等方面的研究工作
  • 基金资助:
    中国铁路总公司科技研究开发计划项目(No.2014G003-C)。

Shaking table tests on reinforced soil retaining walls with full-height rigid facing

XU Peng1, 2, JIANG Guan-lu1, 2, QIU Jun-jie1, GAO Ze-fei2, WANG Zhi-meng3   

  1. 1. School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610031, China; 2. Key Laboratory of High-speed Railway Engineering, Ministry of Education, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610031, China; 3. China Railway Eryuan Engineering Group Co., Ltd., Chengdu, Sichuan 610031, China
  • Received:2017-08-11 Online:2019-03-11 Published:2019-04-04
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the Project of Science and Technology Research and Development Plan of China Railway Corporation (2014G003-C).

摘要: 加筋土挡墙在大量地震中显示了优越的抗震性能。地震荷载作用下,加筋土挡墙的设计中通常采用拟静力法将动荷载等效为静力荷载。为了对比加筋土挡墙拟静力设计值与实际动力响应值的差异,开展了整体刚性面板加筋土挡墙振动台模型试验。通过位移、加速度、土压力、筋材拉力的测试,得到以下结论:加筋土挡墙内部的加速度分布不均匀并呈现面板、加筋体加速度大于填土加速度的趋势,同时测试的响应加速度值大于设计规范建议值;面板背面土压力作用点高于设计值,但合力仅为物部?冈部理论值的15%~20%;受加速度放大效应及动土压力作用点的影响,墙体的主要变形模式为转动变形;筋材拉力沿墙高非线性分布并且测试合力大于铁路规范建议值。

关键词: 加筋土挡墙, 地震, 拟静力法, 振动台模型试验, 加速度

Abstract: Reinforced soil retaining walls showed excellent seismic performance in a large number of earthquakes. In the design of reinforced earth retaining wall under seismic loading, the dynamic load can be regarded as equivalent to the static load according to the quasi-static method. A shaking table test of reinforced soil retaining wall with full-height rigid (FHR) facing was carried out to compare the difference between the response obtained by pseudo-static method and the actual dynamic response. The facing displacement, response acceleration, dynamic earth pressure, and the reinforcement load were measured and analyzed. The following conclusions have been drawn: the distribution of the response acceleration in the reinforced soil retaining wall is non-uniform, and the accelerations in the facing and the reinforced zone are larger than those in the retained zone; the response accelerations measured are larger than those calculated from the current design guidelines; although the location of the dynamic earth pressure at the back of the facing is higher than the design value, the resultant force is only 15%-20% of that calculated by the Mononobe-Okabe method; as a result of the effects of acceleration amplification along the facing and the higher location of the dynamic earth pressure, the predominant deformation mode of the FHR facing is rotation; the distribution of the reinforcement tensile force along the wall facing is nonlinear, and the measured force is larger than that calculated from the code in China.

Key words: reinforced soil retaining wall, earthquake, pseudo-static method, shaking table test, acceleration

中图分类号: 

  • U417.1+15
[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] 杜文杰, 盛谦, 付晓东, 汤华, 陈贺, 杜宇翔, 周永强, . 地震作用下岩羊村滑坡稳定性与失稳机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2461-2469.
[3] 肖世国, 刘航, 于昕左. 水平柔性拉筋式重力墙−坡体地震整体 稳定性分析方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 1836-1844.
[4] 韩俊艳, 李满君, 钟紫蓝, 许敬叔, 李立云, 兰景岩, 杜修力. 基于埋地管道非一致激励振动台 试验的土层地震响应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1653-1662.
[5] 张卢明, 周勇, 范刚, 蔡红雨, 董云. 强震作用下核安全级反倾层状软岩高陡边坡组合支挡结构抗震性能研究与加固效果评价[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1740-1749.
[6] 潘旦光, 程业, 陈清军. 地下商场结构对地面运动影响的振动台试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1134-1145.
[7] 李平, 张宇东, 薄涛, 辜俊儒, 朱胜. 基于离心机振动台试验的梯形河谷场地 地震动效应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1270-1278.
[8] 张雪东, 蔡红, 魏迎奇, 张紫涛, 梁建辉, 胡晶. 基于动力离心试验的软基尾矿库地震响应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1287-1294.
[9] 冯立, 丁选明, 王成龙, 陈志雄. 考虑接缝影响的地下综合管廊振动台模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1295-1304.
[10] 张恒源, 钱德玲, 沈超, 戴启权. 水平和竖向地震作用下液化场地群桩基础 动力响应试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 905-914.
[11] 于一帆, 王平, 王会娟, 许书雅, 郭海涛, . 堆积层滑坡地震动力响应的物理模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 172-180.
[12] 王体强, 王永志, 袁晓铭, 汤兆光, 王海, 段雪锋. 基于振动台试验的加速度积分位移方法可靠性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 565-573.
[13] 聂秀鹏, 逄焕平, 孙志彬, 谢松梅, 侯超群. 三维加筋边坡地震稳定性上限分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3483-3492.
[14] 刘新荣, 邓志云, 刘永权, 刘树林, 路雨明, . 地震作用下水平层状岩质边坡累积损伤与 破坏模式研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(7): 2507-2516.
[15] 韩俊艳, 钟紫蓝, 李立云, 赵密, 万宁潭, 杜修力. 纵向非一致激励下自由场土体的非线性 地震反应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(7): 2581-2592.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!