• ISSN 0258-2724
  • CN 51-1277/U
  • EI Compendex
  • Scopus
  • Indexed by Core Journals of China, Chinese S&T Journal Citation Reports
  • Chinese S&T Journal Citation Reports
  • Chinese Science Citation Database
XU Kunpeng, JING Liping, BIN Jia, CHENG Xinjun, LIANG Haian. Experimental Study on Coefficient Value of Subgrade Reaction in Seismic Analysis of Underground Structures[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2021, 56(5): 1035-1042. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20191073
Citation: XU Kunpeng, JING Liping, BIN Jia, CHENG Xinjun, LIANG Haian. Experimental Study on Coefficient Value of Subgrade Reaction in Seismic Analysis of Underground Structures[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2021, 56(5): 1035-1042. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20191073

Experimental Study on Coefficient Value of Subgrade Reaction in Seismic Analysis of Underground Structures

doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20191073
  • Received Date: 07 Nov 2019
  • Rev Recd Date: 03 Mar 2020
  • Available Online: 12 Mar 2020
  • Publish Date: 15 Oct 2021
  • In seismic analysis of underground structures, the precision of the coefficient of subgrade reaction directly determines the accuracy of response displacement method. Considering the deficiencies of relevant research on the coefficient of subgrade reaction, a quasi-static test method was proposed, a large quasi-static model box was developed, and two groups of tests with and without axial load in sandy soil were carried out. On this basis, a correction method for the coefficient of subgrade reaction along depth is proposed and verified by an example. Results indicate that the horizontal coefficient of subgrade reaction decreases with an increase in the pushover level and increases with the soil depth. Moreover, the additional stress has great influence on the coefficient value; using modified coefficient can significantly improve the accuracy of the response displacement method. Compared with the result adopting the coefficient in terms of static finite element method in the code, the maximum bending moment error of the underground structure can be reduced from 16.7% to 9.1%, and the relative displacement error between roof and floor can be reduced from 35.0% to 18.8%. Thus, the feasibility of the new coefficient measuring method and the rationality of the coefficient modified method are validated.

     

  • 程新俊,景立平,崔杰,等. 不同场地沉管隧道振动台模型试验研究[J]. 西南交通大学学报,2017,52(6): 1113-1120.

    CHENG Xinjun, JING Liping, CUI Jie, et al. Research of shaking table model tests on immersed tunnels under different conditions[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2017, 52(6): 1113-1120.
    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
    川岛一彦. 地下构筑物の耐震设计[M]. 茨城: 鹿岛出版社, 1994: 11-26.
    中华人民共和国国家标准. 核电厂抗震设计规范: GB 50267—1997[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 1997.
    中华人民共和国国家标准. 城市轨道交通结构抗震设计规范: GB 50909—2014[S]. 北京: 中国计划出版社, 2014.
    Japan Society of Civil Engineers. Earthquake resistant design codes in Japan[S]. Tokyo: Waco Co., Ltd., 2000.
    朱令,丁文其,王瑞,等. 考虑成层土变异性的等效基床系数分析[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2014,33(S1): 3036-3041.

    ZHU Ling, DING Wenqi, WANG Rui, et al. Analysis of equivalent coefficient of subgrade reaction considering variability of layered soils[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2014, 33(S1): 3036-3041.
    李英民,王璐,刘阳冰,等. 地下结构抗震计算地基弹簧系数取值方法研究[J]. 地震工程与工程振动,2012,32(1): 106-113.

    LI Yingmin, WANG Lu, LIU Yangbing, et al. Analysis of methods for determining the spring constant of ground foundationin seismic design of underground structures[J]. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2012, 32(1): 106-113.
    NAEINI S A, TAHERABADI E. Numerical and theoretical study of plate load test to define coefficient of subgrade reaction[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Transportation Engineering, 2015, 1(2): 38-42.
    刘益平,孙焯. 基床系数试验测试与取值方法比选[J]. 电力勘测设计,2018(增刊1): 130-135.

    LIU Yiping, SUN Chao. Comparison of test and evaluation methods of coefficient of subgrade reaction[J]. Electric Power Survey and Design, 2018(S1): 130-135.
    韩相超,雷醒民,吕远强. 渭北黄土塬地基土基床系数空间分布规律探索[J]. 陕西煤炭,2016,35(2): 51-55.

    HAN Xiangchao, LEI Xingmin, LYU Yuanqiang. Research on the spatial distribution of subgrade coefficient of the foundation soil in Weibei loess tableland[J]. Shanxi Coal, 2016, 35(2): 51-55.
    王沛,魏丽,王晓燕,等. 旁压试验在车站基坑工程勘察中应用[J]. 土工基础,2019,33(2): 228-231.

    WANG Pei, WEI Li, WANG Xiaoyan, et al. Application of pressuremeter tests in the geotechnical investigations of a metro station[J]. Soil Engineering and Foundation, 2019, 33(2): 228-231.
    牛真茹,李飞飞,庞炜. 合肥地区黏性土基床系数分布规律及相关性研究[J]. 铁道勘察,2018,44(4): 87-89.

    NIU Zhenru, LI Feifei, PANG Wei. Study on distribution and correlation analysis of reaction coefficient of subgrade cohesive soil in Hefei area[J]. Railway Investigation and Surveying, 2018, 44(4): 87-89.
    BURHAN A, AYHAN G. Modulus of subgrade reaction that varies with magnitude of displacement of cohesionless soil[J]. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 2018, 11(13): 351-358. doi: 10.1007/s12517-018-3713-1
    禹海涛,张正伟,朱春成,等. 关于反应位移法中地层变形模式的讨论[J]. 结构工程师,2018,34(2): 145-151.

    YU Haitao, ZHANG Zhengwei, ZHU Chuncheng, et al. Discussion on the ground deformation mode in response displacement method[J]. Structural Engineers, 2018, 34(2): 145-151.
    中华人民共和国国家标准. 城市轨道交通岩土工程勘察规范: GB 50307—2012[S]. 北京: 中国计划出版社, 2012.
  • Relative Articles

    [1]CUI Haomeng, SHAO Changjiang, WANG Chunyang, XUE Hao, GAO Jian, LI Zhizhong, ZHUANG Weilin, QI Qiming. Experimental Study on Friction and Sliding Performance of Laminated-Rubber Bearings Based on Shear Aging Resistance[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20240180
    [2]OU Zhijing, CHEN Weilong, CAO Lei. Seismic Performance of Concrete Composite Columns of Ultra-High Performance Concrete Precast Pipe[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2025, 60(1): 63-71. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20230073
    [3]ZHAO Hua, YUAN Weiguang, WEI Chengjin, LENG Donghang, CHEN Peng. Experimental Study on Seismic Performance of Concrete Frame Structures Reinforced with High-Strength Steel Bars[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20250036
    [4]CHENG Xinjun, JING Liping, CUI Jie, LIANG Haian, XU Kunpeng. Seismic Performance and Damping Measures of Shear Keys for Immersed Tunnel Joints[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2022, 57(6): 1208-1216. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20200548
    [5]SHAO Changjiang, QI Qiming, WEI Wang, XIAO Zhenghao, HE Junming, RAO Gang. Experimental Study on Ductile Seismic Performance of Rectangular Hollow Concrete Columns[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2022, 57(1): 129-138, 157. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20200092
    [6]OU Zhijing, XIE Mingqin, QIN Zhiqing, LIN Shangshun, YU Jie. Seismic Performance Test and FEM Analysis of Assembled Concrete Pier with Sleeve and Steel Tube Shear Connector[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2021, 56(6): 1169-1175, 1191. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20191177
    [7]HAO Runxia, WANG Mouting, JIA Shuo, LI Gang. Static Pushover Analysis of Frame Structure Based on Force Analogy Method[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2020, 55(5): 1028-1035. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20180100
    [8]CHEN Weihong, QIAO Zehui, SHOU Weirong. Experimental Study on Seismic Performance of Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastics-Retrofitted Earthquake-Damaged Non-ductile Reinforced Concrete Frames[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2020, 55(5): 1009-1016. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20181068
    [9]TAO Yi, GU Jinben, XIN Ren, YAO Jitao. Seismic Performance of Multi-storey Masonry Wall Repaired by Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer Grids[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2019, 54(6): 1258-1267. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20170491
    [10]WEN Yang, MENG Chuncai, GUO Hongling. Performance-Based Experiment Research on Three-Story Concrete-filled Steel Tubular Frame[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2017, 30(1): 45-53. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.2017.01.007
    [11]FANG Youzhen, DAI Yaping, WANG Chenyu, ZHAO Hongkang, YANG Bin. Test Study on Seismic Performance of PEC Column Fabricated with Thin-Walled Steel Plates-Steel Beam (Reduced Beam Section) Composite Frame[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2017, 30(4): 715-724. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.2017.04.009
    [12]SU Qiwang, ZHANG Yan, XU Ziyi, CAI Hongru. Full-Scale Tests on Seismic Behavior of RC Frames Infilled with Hollow Bricks[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2017, 30(3): 532-539. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.2017.03.013
    [13]YAN Qi-Xiang, MA Ting-Ting, WU Lin, HE Chuan. Comparison Research of Some Approximate Analytical Methods for Seismic Design of Circular Tunnel[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2011, 24(1): 12-17. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.2011.01.002
    [14]LIWei, HE Chuan, ZHANG Zhi-qiang. M odelTest ofConstructing Shield Tunnel under Large Underground Structure[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2005, 18(4): 478-483.
    [15]LIU Shan-hong, HE Guang-han. Test Study on Segmental Model of a PPC Box Girder[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2001, 14(5): 491-494.
    [16]CAOXin一wen, CAIying, SUjian. ModelTestS加dyofDynamiePerformancesof theSubgradeRelnforcedwithGeocellandGeonet[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2001, 14(4): 350-354.
    [17]CAOXin-wen, LUO Qiang, XUEShuang-gang. Model Test of the Effects of Geocells and Geonets on Subgrade Strengthening under Static Loads[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2001, 14(3): 322-326.
    [18]XIONG Feng, TONG Qiang, LAI Xi-ling. Matrix Displacement Method for Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Arch Structures[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2000, 13(5): 480-483.
    [19]Lu Helin. A Mimetic Statics Numeric Method on Earthquake Resistance Analysis of Shallow Buried Tunnels[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 1999, 12(3): 315-319.
  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(6)

    1. 马熙伦,杨傲雄,罗小烨,马伟. 不同引板形式延伸桥面板无缝桥受力性能分析. 公路工程. 2025(01): 1-7+97 .
    2. 刘洪涛,胡炳麟,韩润波,许成顺,杜修力. 基于非线性弹簧约束作用的矩形单跨地下结构抗震性能简化分析研究. 地震工程与工程振动. 2025(02): 14-21 .
    3. 石卫,王瑞,王启耀. 地下结构抗震设计反应位移法的研究综述. 科学技术与工程. 2024(01): 61-71 .
    4. 程新俊,许翔,景立平,崔杰,梁海安. 一种基床系数计算方法及其在反应位移法中的应用. 岩土工程学报. 2023(12): 2604-2613 .
    5. 徐琨鹏,景立平,程新俊,梁海安,宾佳. 基于边界位移法的地下结构推覆试验可行性研究. 岩土力学. 2022(01): 127-138 .
    6. 景立平,徐琨鹏,程新俊,梁海安,宾佳. 水平推覆作用下土–地下结构反应特性研究. 岩土工程学报. 2022(09): 1567-1576 .

    Other cited types(1)

  • Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Amount of accessChart context menuAbstract Views, HTML Views, PDF Downloads StatisticsAbstract ViewsHTML ViewsPDF Downloads2024-092024-102024-112024-122025-012025-022025-032025-032025-042025-052025-062025-0705101520
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Class DistributionFULLTEXT: 48.9 %FULLTEXT: 48.9 %META: 47.9 %META: 47.9 %PDF: 3.2 %PDF: 3.2 %FULLTEXTMETAPDF
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Area Distribution其他: 3.2 %其他: 3.2 %Baden: 0.3 %Baden: 0.3 %China: 0.6 %China: 0.6 %Taoyuan District: 0.5 %Taoyuan District: 0.5 %上海: 1.3 %上海: 1.3 %东莞: 0.5 %东莞: 0.5 %临汾: 0.3 %临汾: 0.3 %包头: 0.5 %包头: 0.5 %北京: 24.4 %北京: 24.4 %十堰: 0.3 %十堰: 0.3 %南京: 1.9 %南京: 1.9 %台湾: 0.2 %台湾: 0.2 %合肥: 0.2 %合肥: 0.2 %呼和浩特: 0.2 %呼和浩特: 0.2 %哈尔滨: 0.2 %哈尔滨: 0.2 %哥伦布: 0.3 %哥伦布: 0.3 %多伦多: 0.3 %多伦多: 0.3 %大连: 0.2 %大连: 0.2 %天津: 0.5 %天津: 0.5 %宁波: 0.2 %宁波: 0.2 %安康: 0.2 %安康: 0.2 %宣城: 0.2 %宣城: 0.2 %广州: 0.2 %广州: 0.2 %张家口: 1.9 %张家口: 1.9 %成都: 2.2 %成都: 2.2 %扬州: 0.2 %扬州: 0.2 %杭州: 0.2 %杭州: 0.2 %武汉: 0.5 %武汉: 0.5 %池州: 0.3 %池州: 0.3 %深圳: 0.2 %深圳: 0.2 %温州: 0.3 %温州: 0.3 %漯河: 0.5 %漯河: 0.5 %石家庄: 2.2 %石家庄: 2.2 %芒廷维尤: 12.9 %芒廷维尤: 12.9 %芝加哥: 0.3 %芝加哥: 0.3 %荆门: 0.2 %荆门: 0.2 %莱芜: 0.2 %莱芜: 0.2 %西宁: 35.9 %西宁: 35.9 %西安: 0.3 %西安: 0.3 %贵阳: 0.2 %贵阳: 0.2 %运城: 1.0 %运城: 1.0 %邯郸: 0.2 %邯郸: 0.2 %郑州: 0.6 %郑州: 0.6 %长沙: 2.1 %长沙: 2.1 %雷德蒙德: 0.3 %雷德蒙德: 0.3 %青岛: 0.3 %青岛: 0.3 %鹤岗: 0.6 %鹤岗: 0.6 %其他BadenChinaTaoyuan District上海东莞临汾包头北京十堰南京台湾合肥呼和浩特哈尔滨哥伦布多伦多大连天津宁波安康宣城广州张家口成都扬州杭州武汉池州深圳温州漯河石家庄芒廷维尤芝加哥荆门莱芜西宁西安贵阳运城邯郸郑州长沙雷德蒙德青岛鹤岗

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(8)  / Tables(3)

    Article views(683) PDF downloads(19) Cited by(7)
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return