| 摘要(英) |
According to Burland (1987), the uncertainty of geotechnical analysis can be divided into three types of models: Geologic model, Ground model and Geotechnical model. The geologic model includes various geological characteristics of the study area, such as dip angle, groundwater and interface of stratum, etc. The ground model includes engineering parameters that are based on the geologic model, such as cohesion and friction angle. The geotechnical model is a tool for predicting and analyzing by adding design parameters to the ground model, such as the limit equilibrium method and numerical analysis models. This study takes the uncertainty of the geological model as the main discussion aspect and takes the sources of different dip angles and their critical groundwater pressure as the basis for the uncertainty. It is assumed that there are three types of failure modes: rail pile erosion, stability rail pile and in front of the rail pile with tension crack. The failure modes and the analysis scenarios of four combinations of dip angles and groundwater pressure uncertainties are analyzed using the limit equilibrium method and Monte Carlo simulation. Finally, the influence of failure probability on slope stability is discussed. The analysis result is that the failure probability in the dry state is inversely proportional to the precision of the standard deviation of the dip angles. The influence of different failure modes on the failure probability is that the failure probability of the mode in front of the rail pile with tension crack is the largest, which is consistent with the situation observed in the field investigation. The results under the condition of considering the critical groundwater pressure, if do not consider the difference in dip angle precision, the overall analysis results show that the sensitivity of dip angle variability to failure probability is higher than groundwater pressure variability. In this study, a three-dimensional numerical model is also used to explore the failure conditions of the study area under extreme conditions of changing the different combinations of discontinuity cohesion and friction angle. The results show that the overall study area is fairly stable under non-extreme conditions. |
| 參考文獻 |
1. Burland, J. B. (1987). The teaching of soil mechanics-a personal view. Proc. 9th ERCSMFE, Dublin, 1987, 1, 1427-1447.
2. Christian, J. T., Ladd, C. C. and Baecher, G. B. (1994). "Reliability applied to slope stability analysis." Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 120(12): 2180-2207.
3. ISRM (1981) Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring (ISRM Suggested Methods).
4. Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. (2003). 3 Dimensional Distinct Element Code User’s Guide. Minneapolis, MN: Itasca Consulting Group Inc.
5. Juang, C. H., Zhang, J., Shen, M., & Hu, J. (2019). Probabilistic methods for unified treatment of geotechnical and geological uncertainties in a geotechnical analysis. Engineering geology, 249, 148-161.
6. Juang, C. H., Jhi, Y.-Y. and Lee, D.-H. (1998). "Stability analysis of existing slopes considering uncertainty." Engineering Geology 49(2): 111-122.
7. Phoon, K. K., & Ching, J. (Eds.). (2015). Risk and reliability in geotechnical engineering. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
8. Raychaudhuri, S. (2008, December). Introduction to monte carlo simulation. In 2008 Winter simulation conference (pp. 91-100). IEEE.
9. Sandersen, P. (2008). "Uncertainty Assessment of Geologic Models–A Qualitative Approach." Proceedings of ModelCARE 2007 Conference, Denmark, IAHS Press.
10. Varnes, D. J. (1978). Slope movement types and processes. Special report, 176, 11-33.
11. Web page of British Geological Survey.
https://www2.bgs.ac.uk/reportalandslide/reportForm.html
12. Wellmann, J. F., Horowitz, F. G., Schill, E., & Regenauer-Lieb, K. (2010). Towards incorporating uncertainty of structural data in 3D geological inversion. Tectonophysics, 490(3-4), 141-151.
13. Wyllie, D. C., & Mah, C. (2004). Rock slope engineering. CRC Press.
14. Yeh, C. H., Dong, J. J., Khoshnevisan, S., Juang, C. H., Huang, W. C., & Lu, Y. C. (2021). The role of the geological uncertainty in a geotechnical design–A retrospective view of Freeway No. 3 Landslide in Northern Taiwan. Engineering Geology, 291, 106233.
15. Yeh, C. H., Yu-Chang, C., Kuo-Jen, C., Ming-Lang, L., & Yu-Chung, H. (2014). Derivation of strike and dip in sedimentary terrain using 3D image interpretation based on airborne LiDAR data. TAO: Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, 25(6), 775.
16. 台灣世曦工程顧問股份有限公司(2020)，109年山坡地總體檢及設施檢測委託技術服務案期末報告書。國立陽明交通大學委託之山坡地總體檢期末報告。國立陽明交通大學。
17. 行政院農業委員會水土保持局(2020年3月9日)。水土保持技術規範。水土保持技術規範-行政院農業委員會水土保持局全球資訊網。https://www.swcb.gov.tw/Home/laws/laws_more?id=72279a8c50f3445e8d564a8d4577342e
18. 經濟部中央地質調查所地質資料整合查詢系統。https://gis3.moeacgs.gov.tw/gwh/gsb97-1/sys8/t3/index1.cfm
19. 黃鑑水(1988)，臺灣地質圖說明圖幅第四號-臺北，經濟部中央地質調查所。
20. 鄭鈺翰(2022)，探討順向坡滑動機率與塊體運移特性受地質模型不確定性影響-以2010年國道三號3.1k崩塌事件為例。國立中央大學土木工程學系。
|
[Endnote RIS 格式]
[相關文章]
[文章引用]
[完整記錄]
[館藏目錄]
至系統瀏覽論文 (2026-8-1以後開放)
plurk
funp
live
udn
HD
myshare
netvibes
friend
youpush
delicious
baidu
Google bookmarks
del.icio.us
hemidemi
facebook
twitter
google
reddit