Shaking table test on a tunnel-group metro station in rock site under harmonic excitation

doi:10.1007/s11709-024-1089-8

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.

2024, Vol. 18

Issue (9) : 1362-1377 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-024-1089-8

Shaking table test on a tunnel-group metro station in rock site under harmonic excitation

Ruozhou LI¹, Weiguo HE², Xupeng YAO¹, Qingfei LI², Dingli ZHANG³, Yong YUAN¹(

)

¹. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
². China Railway Liuyuan Group Co., Ltd., Tianjin 300308, China
³. Key Laboratory of Urban Underground Engineering of Ministry of Education, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China

Download: PDF(5233 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

A tunnel-group metro station built in rock site is composed of a group of tunnels. Different tunnels and their interconnections can show inconsistent responses during an earthquake. This study investigates the dynamic responses of such a metro station in a rock site, by shaking table tests. The lining structures of each tunnel and surrounding rock are modeled based on the similitude law; foam concrete and gypsum are used to model the ground-structure system, keeping relative stiffness consistent with that of the prototype. A series of harmonic waves are employed as excitations, input along the transverse and longitudinal direction of the shaking table. The discrepant responses caused by the structural irregularities are revealed by measurement of acceleration and strain of the model. Site characteristics are identified by the transfer function method in white noise cases. The test results show that the acceleration response and strain response of the structure are controlled by the ground. In particular, the acceleration amplification effect at the opening section of the station hall is more significant than that at the standard section under transverse excitation; the amplification effect of the structural opening is insignificant under longitudinal excitation.

Keywords metro station tunnel-group shaking table test harmonic excitation dynamic response

Corresponding Author(s): Yong YUAN

Just Accepted Date: 09 July 2024 Online First Date: 22 August 2024 Issue Date: 18 September 2024

Cite this article:

Ruozhou LI,Weiguo HE,Xupeng YAO, et al. Shaking table test on a tunnel-group metro station in rock site under harmonic excitation[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2024, 18(9): 1362-1377.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-024-1089-8
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2024/V18/I9/1362

Fig.1 Prototype metro station.

Fig.2 Cross section of prototype metro station (unit: m).

Fig.3 Schematic diagram of the connecting passages: (a) horizontal passage; (b) vertical passage (unit: m).

Fig.4 Schematic diagram of cross-sectional dimensions of the main structure: (a) hall; (b) platform (unit: m).

Parameter	Expression	Scale factor
Geometrical dimension	$S l$	1/30
Density	$S ρ$	1/3.33
Dynamic shear modulus	$S G$	1/100
Elastic modulus	$S E = S G$	1/100
Acceleration	$S a = S G S l ? 1 S ρ ? 1$	1/1
Time	$S t = S l S ρ 1 / 2 S G ? 1 / 2$	1/5.48
Frequency	$S f = S l ? 1 S ρ ? 1 / 2 S G 1 / 2$	5.48/1

Tab.1 Similitude relations for the test

Tab.2 Properties of prototype rock and foam concrete

Tab.3 Properties of prototype lining and plaster

Fig.5 Model preparation: (a) schematic diagram of the mold; (b) assembly the lining structure; (c) the formwork for foam concrete.

Fig.6 The shaking table and the complete test model.

Fig.7 Layout of sensors: (a) accelerometers of rock (AS1, AS2, AS3, AS0); (b) accelerometers of lining (A1 to A8); (c) strain gauges (SVL1?4 and SHR 1?4) (unit: mm).

Fig.8 The series of seismic excitations employed in the tests.

Tab.4 Input sequence for seismic excitations

Fig.9 Comparison of the acceleration curves at AS1 & AS2: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.10 Surface amplification response versus 1D TF.

Fig.11 Acceleration amplification factors of the model along the rock height: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.12 Acceleration time history curves of the hall and platform: (a) hall: transverse direction of excitation; (b) hall: longitudinal direction of excitation; (c) platform: transverse direction of excitation; (d) platform: longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.13 Dynamic strain time histories within the two observation sections: (a) VL: transverse direction of excitation; (b) HR: transverse direction of excitation; (c) VL: longitudinal direction of excitation; (d) HR: longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.14 Comparison of the TF under white noise excitation (WN1) and the surface amplification factors: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.15 Comparison of the TFs of the ground surface in cases WN1 & WN2: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.16 Acceleration PSD of AS0, AS1, and AS2: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.17 Comparison of acceleration PSD ratio: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.18 Frequency response curves of the lining under harmonic excitation: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

Tab.5 Difference in acceleration amplification factors of measurement points

Fig.19 Peak tensile strains of the structure with harmonic excitations in: (a) VL: transverse direction of excitation; (b) VL: longitudinal direction of excitation; (c) HR: transverse direction of excitation; (d) HR: longitudinal direction of excitation.

Fig.20 Peak tensile strain curve fitting: (a) transverse direction of excitation; (b) longitudinal direction of excitation.

1	W L Wang, T T Wang, J J Su, C H Lin, C R Seng, T H Huang. Assessment of damage in mountain tunnels due to the Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2001, 16(3): 133–150 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-7798(01)00047-5
2	Z Wang, B Gao, Y Jiang, S Yuan. Investigation and assessment on mountain tunnels and geotechnical damage after the Wenchuan earthquake. Science in China Series E: Technological Sciences, 2009, 52(2): 546–558 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-009-0054-z
3	Y Shen, B Gao, X Yang, S Tao. Seismic damage mechanism and dynamic deformation characteristic analysis of mountain tunnel after Wenchuan earthquake. Engineering Geology, 2014, 180: 85–98 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.07.017
4	H T Yu, J T Chen, Y Yuan, X Zhao. Seismic damage of mountain tunnels during the 5.12 Wenchuan earthquake. Journal of Mountain Science, 2016, 13(11): 1958–1972 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-016-3878-6
5	H Yu, J Chen, A Bobet, Y Yuan. Damage observation and assessment of the Longxi tunnel during the Wenchuan earthquake. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2016, 54: 102–116 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2016.02.008
6	X Wang, J Chen, M Xiao. Seismic damage assessment and mechanism analysis of underground powerhouse of the Yingxiuwan Hydropower Station under the Wenchuan earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2018, 113: 112–123 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.05.027
7	Z Chen, C Shi, T Li, Y Yuan. Damage characteristics and influence factors of mountain tunnels under strong earthquakes. Natural Hazards, 2012, 61(2): 387–401 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9924-3
8	X Zhang, Y Jiang, S Sugimoto. Seismic damage assessment of mountain tunnel: A case study on the Tawarayama tunnel due to the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2018, 71: 138–148 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.07.019
9	Y M Hashash, J J Hook, B Schmidt, I John, C Yao. Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2001, 16(4): 247–293 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-7798(01)00051-7
10	C M St John, T F Zahrah. Aseismic design of underground structures. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 1987, 2(2): 165–197 https://doi.org/10.1016/0886-7798(87)90011-3
11	X Wang, J Chen, M Xiao, D Wu. Seismic response analysis of concrete lining structure in large underground powerhouse. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2017, 2017: 4106970 https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4106970
12	X Wang, Q Xiong, H Zhou, J Chen, M Xiao. Three-dimensional (3D) dynamic finite element modeling of the effects of a geological fault on the seismic response of underground caverns. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2020, 96: 103210 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.103210
13	Z Cui, Q Sheng, X Leng, J Chen. Seismic response and stability of underground rock caverns: A case study of Baihetan underground cavern complex. Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, 2016, 39(1): 26–39 https://doi.org/10.1080/02533839.2015.1066941
14	Z Cui, Q Sheng, X Leng. Control effect of a large geological discontinuity on the seismic response and stability of underground rock caverns: a case study of the Baihetan #1 surge chamber. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 2016, 49(6): 2099–2114 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-015-0908-6
15	Z Cui, Q Sheng, X Leng. Effects of a controlling geological discontinuity on the seismic stability of an underground cavern subjected to near-fault ground motions. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2018, 77(1): 265–282 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-016-0936-9
16	S P ChangJ M Seo. Seismic fragility analysis of underground rock caverns for nuclear facilities. In: Transactions of the 14th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 14). Lyon: IASMIRT, 1997
17	J Chen, Y Yuan, H Yu. Dynamic response of segmental lining tunnel. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 2020, 43(3): 660–682 https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ20170419
18	J Chen, H Yu, A Bobet, Y Yuan. Shaking table tests of transition tunnel connecting TBM and drill-and-blast tunnels. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2020, 96: 103197 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.103197
19	S Li, R Cudmani, M Xiao, Z Guo, Y Yuan. Ground motion amplification pattern with TBM tunnels crossing soil−rock interface: Shaking table test. Underground Space, 2023, 12: 202–217
20	X Zhao, R Li, Y Yuan, H Yu, M Zhao, J Huang. Shaking table tests on fault-crossing tunnels and aseismic effect of grouting. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2022, 125: 104511 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2022.104511
21	Y S Shen, Z Z Wang, J Yu, X Zhang, B Gao. Shaking table test on flexible joints of mountain tunnels passing through normal fault. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2020, 98: 103299 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.103299
22	Ö AydanY ShimizuM Karaca. The dynamic and static stability of shallow underground openings in jointed rock masses. In: Proceedings of International Symposium on Mine Planning and Equipment Selection. Istanbul: MPES, 1994, 851–858
23	M GenisÖ Aydan. Evaluation of dynamic response and stability of shallow underground openings in discontinuous rock masses using model tests. In: Proceedings of Korea−Japan Joint Symposium on Rock Engineering. Seoul: JSRE, 2002, 787–794
24	Ö Aydan, T Kawamoto. The damage to abandoned lignite mines caused by the 2003 Miyagi-Hokubu earthquake and some considerations on its causes. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Asian Rock Mechanics Symposium. Kyoto: ARMS, 2004, 30: 525–530
25	Ö AydanM Geniş. Assessment of dynamic stability of an abandoned room and pillar underground lignite mine. Turkish National Bulletin of Rock Mechanics, 2008: 23–44
26	M GenisÖ Aydan. Assessment of dynamic response and stability of an abandoned room and pillar underground lignite mine. 12th IACMAG, 2008: 3899–3906
27	Ö Aydan, Y Ohta, M Geniş, N Tokashiki, K Ohkubo. Response and stability of underground structures in rock mass during earthquakes. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 2010, 43(6): 857–875 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-010-0105-6
28	G Chen, S Chen, X Zuo, X Du, C Qi, Z Wang. Shaking-table tests and numerical simulations on a subway structure in soft soil. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2015, 76: 13–28 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.12.012
29	J Liang, A Xu, Z Ba, R Chen, W Zhang, M Liu. Shaking table test and numerical simulation on ultra-large diameter shield tunnel passing through soft−hard stratum. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 147: 106790 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106790
30	Z Chen, W Chen, Y Li, Y Yuan. Shaking table test of a multi-story subway station under pulse-like ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2016, 82: 111–122 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.12.002
31	H L Langhaar. Dimensional Analysis and Theory of Models. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1951
32	X Yan, H Yu, Y Yuan, J Yuan. Multi-point shaking table test of the free field under non-uniform earthquake excitation. Soil and Foundation, 2015, 55(5): 985–1000 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.09.031
33	R LiY Yuan. Seismic experiment of tunnel-group metro station in rock site. In: Expanding Underground-Knowledge and Passion to Make a Positive Impact on the World. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2023, 3174–3181
34	A J Brennan, N I Thusyanthan, S P Madabhushi. Evaluation of shear modulus and damping in dynamic centrifuge tests. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2005, 131(12): 1488–1497 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:12(1488
35	S L Kramer. Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Chennai: Pearson Education India, 1996
36	Y Yuan, Y Yang, S Zhang, H Yu, J Sun. A benchmark 1 g shaking table test of shallow segmental mini-tunnel in sand. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2020, 18(11): 5383–5412 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00909-w
37	Z Zhang, E Bilotta, Y Yuan, H Zhao. Experiments of an atrium-style metro station under harmonic excitation. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2020, 103: 103463 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.103463
38	P Welch. The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra: A method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms. IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics, 1967, 15(2): 70–73 https://doi.org/10.1109/TAU.1967.1161901
39	J Zhang, Y Yuan, H Yu. Shaking table tests on discrepant responses of shaft-tunnel junction in soft soil under transverse excitations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2019, 120: 345–359 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.02.013

[1]	Ruohan LI, Yong YUAN, Hong CHEN, Xinxing LI, Emilio BILOTTA. Seismic responses of an intensively constructed metro station-passageway-shaft structure system[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2024, 18(5): 760-775.
[2]	Yuye ZHANG, Mingli HU, Wei FAN, Daniel DIAS-DA-COSTA. Dynamic response of precast segmental bridge columns under heavy truck impact[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(3): 327-349.
[3]	Wenchang SUN, Nan JIANG, Chuanbo ZHOU, Jinshan SUN, Tingyao WU. Safety assessment for buried drainage box culvert under influence of underground connected aisle blasting: A case study[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(2): 191-204.
[4]	Linlin GU, Wei ZHENG, Wenxuan ZHU, Zhen WANG, Xianzhang LING, Feng ZHANG. Liquefaction-induced damage evaluation of earth embankment and corresponding countermeasure[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2022, 16(9): 1183-1195.
[5]	Tiancheng WANG, Yu LIANG, Xiaoyong ZHANG, Zhihuan RUAN, Guoxiong MEI. Investigation of the seismic behavior of grouted sandy gravel foundations using shaking table tests[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2022, 16(9): 1196-1211.
[6]	Jianling HOU, Weibing XU, Yanjiang CHEN, Kaida ZHANG, Hang SUN, Yan LI. Typical diseases of a long-span concrete-filled steel tubular arch bridge and their effects on vehicle-induced dynamic response[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(4): 867-887.
[7]	Zhijie HUANG, Xiaodan REN, Zuyu CHEN, Daosheng LING. Centrifuge experiment and numerical analysis of an air-backed plate subjected to underwater shock loading[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(6): 1350-1362.
[8]	Tian ZHANG, He XIA, Weiwei GUO. Analysis on running safety of train on the bridge considering sudden change of wind load caused by wind barriers[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2018, 12(4): 558-567.
[9]	Yan XU, Shijie ZENG, Xinzhi DUAN, Dongbing JI. Seismic experimental study on a concrete pylon from a typical medium span cable-stayed bridge[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2018, 12(3): 401-411.
[10]	Pengfei LIU, Dawei WANG, Frédéric OTTO, Markus OESER. Application of semi-analytical finite element method to analyze the bearing capacity of asphalt pavements under moving loads[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2018, 12(2): 215-221.
[11]	Mengfei QU,Qiang XIE,Xinwen CAO,Wen ZHAO,Jianjun HE,Jiang JIN. Model test of stone columns as liquefaction countermeasure in sandy soils[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2016, 10(4): 481-487.
[12]	Mehmet Bar?? Can üLKER. Modeling of dynamic response of poroelastic soil layers under wave loading[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2014, 8(1): 1-18.
[13]	Jianzhuang XIAO, Tao DING. Research on recycled concrete and its utilization in building structures in China[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(3): 215-226.
[14]	Yundong SHI, Tracy C BECKER, Masahiro KURATA, Masayoshi NAKASHIMA. H_∞ control in the frequency domain for a semi-active floor isolation system[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(3): 264-275.
[15]	Linjia BAI, Yunfeng ZHANG. Collapse fragility assessment of steel roof framings with force limiting devices under transient wind loading[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2012, 6(3): 199-209.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed