›› 2016, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (4): 998-1004.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2016.04.012

• Fundamental Theroy and Experimental Research • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison of aseismic behavior between geo-encased stone columns composite foundation and stone columns composite foundation

OUYANG Fang,ZHANG Jian-jing,HAN Jian-wei,WANG Zhi-jia,WU Jin-biao,YANG Yi-kui   

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610031, China
  • Received:2014-12-16 Online:2016-04-11 Published:2018-06-09
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the Research Planning of National Defense Basic (B0220133003).

Abstract: The geo-encased stone column is a new type of column which is wrapped with geosynthetics. Because the stone colume is encased by geosynthetic materials, its stiffness and shear strength is effectively improved. Thus far, however, limited research efforts have been devoted to the geo-encased stone column, especially in terms of aseismic behavior. In this study, shaking table tests on the composite foundations of geo-encased stone columns and stone columns were carried out to investigate the dynamic responses and aseismic behaviors of the two types of foundations. The acceleration, column-soil stress ratio, displacement of two composite foundations are monitored, and the failure phenomena were observed under the action of seismic waves of different types and amplitudes during the test. It is shown that the acceleration amplification factors in the horizontal direction at the top of the geo-encased stone columns and the soils between these columns are about two times that of the stone columns, and for the same saismic wave, the peak column-soil stress ratio of geo-encased columns is about three times that of stone columns. Compared with the stone column composite foundation, the geo-encased stone columns foundation forms narrower cracks in a larger area with the excitation of a 0.9g artificial seismic wave. The geogrid decreases the final settlement of the stone columns by 51%. It can be concluded that the geo-encased stone columns performs better than the stone columns during shaking.

Key words: geo-encased stone column, stone column, shaking table test, acceleration amplification coefficient, pile-soil stress ratio, failure phenomena

CLC Number: 

  • TU 473

[1] XU Chao, LUO Min-min, REN Fei-fan, SHEN Pan-pan, YANG Zi-fan. Experimental study on seismic behaviour of reinforced soil flexible abutment composite structures [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(S1): 179-186.
[2] XU Cheng-shun, DOU Peng-fei, DU Xiu-li, CHEN Su, HAN Jun-yan, . Study on solid-liquid phase transition characteristics of saturated sand based on large shaking table test on free field [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(7): 2189-2198.
[3] YANG Chang-wei, TONG Xin-hao, WANG Dong, TAN Xin-rong, GUO Xue-yan, CAO Li-cong, . Shaking table test of dynamic response law of subgrade with ballast track under earthquake [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(7): 2215-2223.
[4] QIAO Xiang-jin, LIANG Qing-guo, CAO Xiao-ping, WANG Li-li, . Research on dynamic responses of the portal in bridge-tunnel connected system [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(7): 2342-2348.
[5] HE Jing-bin, FENG Zhong-ju, DONG Yun-xiu, HU Hai-bo, LIU Chuang, GUO Sui-zhu, ZHANG Cong, WU Min, WANG Zhen, . Dynamic response of pile foundation under pile-soil-fault coupling effect in meizoseismal area [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(7): 2389-2400.
[6] REN Yang, LI Tian-bin, LAI Lin. Centrifugal shaking table test on dynamic response characteristics of tunnel entrance slope in strong earthquake area [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(5): 1605-1612.
[7] HAN Jun-yan, LI Man-jun, ZHONG Zi-lan, XU Jing-shu, LI Li-yun, LAN Jing-yan, DU Xiu-li. Seismic response of soil under non-uniform excitation based on shaking table test of buried pipelines [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(5): 1653-1662.
[8] ZHANG Lu-ming, ZHOU Yong, FAN Gang, CAI Hong-yu, DONG Yun. Seismic behavior research and reinforcement effect evaluation of composite retaining structures with nuclear safety level anti-dip layered soft rock slope under strong earthquakes [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(5): 1740-1749.
[9] PAN Dan-guang, CHENG Ye, CHEN Qing-jun. Shaking table test of the effect of underground shopping mall structure on ground motion [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(4): 1134-1145.
[10] LI Ping, ZHANG Yu-dong, BO Tao, GU Jun-ru, ZHU Sheng. Study of ground motion effect of trapezoidal valley site based on centrifuge shaking table test [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(4): 1270-1278.
[11] FENG Li, DING Xuan-ming, WANG Cheng-long, CHEN Zhi-xiong. Shaking table model test on seismic responses of utility tunnel with joint [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(4): 1295-1304.
[12] ZHANG Heng-yuan, QIAN De-ling, SHEN Chao, DAI Qi-quan. Experimental investigation on dynamic response of pile group foundation on liquefiable ground subjected to horizontal and vertical earthquake excitations [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(3): 905-914.
[13] WU Qi, DING Xuan-ming, CHEN Zhi-xiong, CHEN Yu-min, PENG Yu, . Seismic response of pile-soil-structure in coral sand under different earthquake intensities [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(2): 571-580.
[14] HUANG Yu-hua, XU Lin-rong, ZHOU Jun-jie, CAI Yu, . Calculation of pile-soil stress in pile-net composite foundation based on improved Terzarghi method [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(2): 667-675.
[15] XIA Kun, DONG Lin, PU Xiao-wu, LI Lu. Earthquake response characteristics of loess tableland [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(1): 295-304.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!