位于高地震烈度区的支挡结构时刻面临着特大震灾的严峻考验，迄今国内外还没有人针对加筋土挡墙系统地做过易损性方面的研究。采用增量动力分析法，考虑地震动输入的不确定性，选取地震峰值加速度(PGA)为地震强度参数，加筋土挡墙的位移指数为性能参数，基于振动台模型试验和对震害资料的分析划分了其抗震性能水准，利用ABAQUS软件对加筋土挡墙进行了地震易损性分析。研究表明：挡墙的位移指数随着PGA的增大而增大，墙体发生局部变形是加筋土挡墙在地震作用下的主要破坏模式，中震作用下加筋土挡墙以损伤破坏为主，大震作用后其损伤程度进一步加剧;当地震强度持续增大时，出现严重损坏和毁坏的概率也将进一步加大;另外，增加筋材的长度和减小铺设间距均可减小加筋土挡墙的破坏概率。
Abstract
The retaining structure located in high seismic intensity area is always facing the severe test of catastrophic earthquake. So far, no one has done systematic study on the vulnerability of reinforced earth retaining wall at home and abroad. Here, the incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) method was adopted, considering the uncertainty of seismic input, the peak ground acceleration (PGA) was selected as seismic intensity parameter, and the displacement index of reinforced earth retaining wall was selected as performance parameter. Based on shaking table model tests and analyzing seismic damage data, the aseismic performance level of a reinforced earth retaining wall was divided, and its seismic vulnerability was analyzed by using the software ABAQUS. The results showed that the displacement index of retaining wall increases with increase in PGA, and its local deformation is its main failure mode under earthquake action; under medium earthquake action, retaining wall is mainly damaged and its damage degree is further aggravated after large earthquake action; when earthquake intensity increases continuously, the probability of serious damage and destruction can further increase; the failure probability of retaining wall can be reduced by increasing length of reinforcement and reducing geogrid laying spacing.
关键词
加筋土挡墙 /
抗震性能 /
增量动力分析 /
地震易损性
{{custom_keyword}} /
Key words
reinforced earth retaining wall /
aseismic performance /
increment dynamic analysis (IDA) /
seismic vulnerability
{{custom_keyword}} /
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
［1］朱宏伟，姚令侃，张旭海. 两种加筋土挡墙的动力特性比较及抗震设计建议［J］. 岩土工程学报, 2012, 34(11): 2072-2080.
ZHU Hongwei, YAO Lingkan, ZHANG Xuhai. Comparison of dynamic characteristics between netted and packaged reinforced soil retaining walls and recommendations for seismic design［J］. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2012, 34(11): 2072-2080.
［2］SHINOZUKA M, FENG M Q, LEE J, et al. Statistical analysis of fragility curves［J］. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 2000, 126(2):1224-1231.
［3］陈志强, 郑史雄, 陈志伟,等. 高墩大跨连续刚构桥梁IDA分析结果离散原因 ［J］.铁道科学与工程学报, 2018, 4(3): 962-969.
CHEN Zhiqiang, ZHENG Shixiong, CHEN Zhiwei, et al. The cause of the discreteness of IDA analysis results for high pier and long span continuous rigid frame bridge［J］. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, 2018, 4(3): 962-969.
［4］宋帅, 王帅, 吴刚,等.中小跨径桥梁地震易损性研究 ［J］. 振动与冲击, 2020, 39(9):118-125.
SONG Shuai, WANG Shuai, WU Gang, et al. Seismic vulnerability analysis of small and medium span girder bridges［J］. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2020, 39(9):118-125.
［5］马智勇, 张伟, 周强, 等. 基于位移的重力坝地震易损性分析方法［J］. 振动与冲击, 2017, 36(22):51-58.
MA Zhiyong, ZHANG Wei, ZHOU Qiang, et al. A deformation-based method for seismic fragility analysis of gravity dam［J］. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2017, 36(22):51-58.
［6］孔宪京. 混凝土面板堆石坝抗震性能［M］.北京:科学出版社, 2015.
［7］尹超. 平原区路堤地震灾害风险评价研究［D］. 西安: 长安大学, 2015.
［8］Design of structures for earthquake resistance, part 5: foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical Aspects: Eurocode 8［S］. Brussels: CEN, 2003.
［9］HWANG H, 刘晶波. 地震作用下钢筋混凝土桥梁结构易损性分析［J］.土木工程学报, 2004, 37(6):47-51.
HWANG H, LIU Jingbo. Seismic fragility analysis of reinforced concrete bridges［J］. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2004, 37(6):47-51.
［10］Transit New Zealand. Bridge manual plus amendment No.1［S］.Wellington: Transit New Zealand, 1995.
［11］DEIERLEIN G G,LIEL A B,HASELTON C B,et al.ATC-63 methodology for evaluating seismic collapse safety of archetype buildings［R］. Redwood City, CA: ATC, 1996.
［12］张建经, 冯君, 肖世国. 支挡结构抗震设计中的2个关键技术问题［J］. 西南交通大学学报, 2009, 44(6): 321-325.
ZHANG Jianjing, FENG Jun, XIAO Shiguo. Discussions on two key technical problems for seismic design of retaining wall［J］. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2009, 44(6): 321-325.
［13］中国地震局工程力学研究所.生命线工程地震破坏等级划分:GB/T 24336—2009［S］. 北京：中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会,2009.
［14］VAMVATSIKOS D. Seismic performance, capacity and reliability of structures as seen through incremental dynamic analysis［D］. Stanford: Stanford University, 2002.
［15］廖燚. 汶川地震公路路基震害调查分析及易损性研究［D］. 成都:西南交通大学,2012.
{{custom_fnGroup.title_cn}}
脚注
{{custom_fn.content}}
PDF(2328 KB)
