加勁材料末端固接的窄加勁擋土牆之受震反應

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：48

、訪客IP：3.135.196.234

姓名

譚瓦蒂(Atika Praptawati) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

土木工程學系

論文名稱

加勁材料末端固接的窄加勁擋土牆之受震反應
(Dynamic Response of Narrow Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil Walls with Interface Connection to Stable Face)

相關論文

★ 以離心振動臺試驗模擬緩衝材料中廢棄物罐之振動反應	★ 緩衝材料在不同圍壓下之工程性質
★ 具不同上部結構之樁基礎受振行為	★ 基盤土壤液化對上方土堤位移的影響
★ 回填與緩衝材料之動態強度	★ 砂質土壤中柔性擋土牆在動態載重下的行為
★ Effect of Vertical Drain Methods on The Soil Liquefaction	★ Centrifuge Modelling on Failure Behaviours of Sandy Slope Caused by Gravity, Rainfall and Earthquake
★ 微生物膠結作用對砂質土壤性質的影響	★ 基盤土壤液化引致的側潰對上方土堤之影響及其改善對策
★ 土壤液化引致側向滑移對樁基礎之影響及其對策	★ 挖掘機鏟斗上土壤黏附問題的基礎研究
★ 低放射性廢棄物最終處置回填材料於不同配比下之工程力學特性	★ 以離心振動台試驗探討基盤振動方向與坡向夾角對側向滑移之反應
★ 應用時域反射法於地層下陷監測之改善研發	★ Seismic response of sheet pile walls with and without anchors by centrifuge modeling tests

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 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 (2024-12-31以後開放)

摘要(中)

近年來，隨著人口日益增加，都市化的活躍導致交通頻繁。透過窄加勁擋土牆(NGRS) ，可縮減現有擋土牆的體積，以便於在有限的空間內拓寬道路。根據美國聯邦公路總署的加勁擋土牆設計，加勁擋土牆的長寬比(L/H，牆寬 L 與牆高 H 之比)需小於0.7，需設置於既存穩固的牆前(或是有支撐的牆)。在牆頂的窄加勁擋土牆及既存擋土牆的交界處，常形成裂縫及溝槽，容易導致擋土牆破壞 (Yang et al. 2008b)。然而，目前仍未有對於避免既存擋土牆和窄加勁擋土牆之間的張力裂縫之形成的深入研究。本研究進行了一系列動態離心模型試驗，了解在基盤震動下，既存擋土牆與窄加勁擋土牆有無連結的動態反應。
本研究以17 cm高的NGRS牆模型，在60 g的離心力場中，模擬原型尺寸為10.2 m 高的 NGRS 牆，其長寬比為0.5，並使用聚酯材料和人造纖維布作為加勁材料，回填土為相對密度 70% 的矽砂。實驗結果顯示，NGRS牆與既存擋土牆若有連結，會使NGRS牆的正規化水平位移量 [(∆x/H)/g] 從29.2%（未連接）減少到 5.1%（連接）；正規化沉陷量 [(∆y/H)/g] 從 51.7%（未連接）下降到 12.8%（連接）。無連結的模型由於牆體變形導致不對稱加速度反應，牆頂向牆外加速度為向內加速度的 1.9 倍。由加速度反應結果得知，有連結牆受最大基盤加速度超過0.3 g的振動時，依然可有效的控制變形量，此外當振動的最大基盤加速度小於0.3 g時，有連結牆及無連結牆均可控制變形量。與Rankine主動土壓力的理論值相較之下，有連結的窄加勁擋土牆中，左牆（慣性力朝向牆內）的土壓力為理論值的3.23倍，右牆（慣性力朝向牆外）為1.79倍。在沒有連結的窄加勁擋土牆中，左牆為3.55倍，右牆為2.39倍。

摘要(英)

Recently, increasing population and urbanization have led to increasing traffic demand. One solution to increase road capacity is to expand the existing roadways by constructing narrow geosynthetic-reinforced soil (NGRS) walls adjacent to previous stable walls. In the case where the space is limited, the construction of GRS walls has to be narrower than the conventional walls. The NGRS walls have an aspect ratio, L/H, (ratio of wall width, L, to wall height, H) less than 0.7 as suggested by FHWA Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) wall design guidelines and placed in front of an existing stable wall (or shored wall). At the upper boundary zone between the reinforced soil and the stable wall, there easily forms a gap, crack, or even trench, triggering ultimate failure (Yang et al. 2008b). However, the interface connections to avoid tension cracks between the existing stable walls and NGRS walls are still not thoroughly investigated. Accordingly, series of dynamic centrifuge modeling tests are conducted to quantitatively investigate the dynamic response of NGRS walls with interface connection under base shaking excitation.
The wall model′s height was 17 cm and carried out under gravitational acceleration 60 g to simulate NGRS walls models with 10.2 m height in prototype scale. The wall models have 0.5 aspect ratio and use polyester and rayon geotextiles as the reinforcement material. The backfill material used in this study is silica sandy soil with 70% relative density. The results from this study indicated that interface connection has the most contribution to the deformation reduction. Connecting the reinforcement to the stable wall leads the independent normalized horizontal displacement [(∆x/H)/g] decreases from 29.2% (unconnected) to be 5.1% (connected). The independent normalized settlement [(∆y/H)/g] decreases from 51.7% (unconnected) to be 12.8% (connected). The narrow GRS wall without interface connection has a significant asymmetric acceleration response due to wall deformation. At the top walls, the outward acceleration response is about 1.9 times larger than the inward. Connecting the narrow GRS wall to the stable wall/slope can efficiently help control the wall deformation significantly in PBA > 0.3 g. Besides, the narrow GRS wall without interface connection still performs well in PBA < 0.3 g. Compared to Rankine′s active earth pressure, in the narrow GRS wall with interface connection to stable face, the left wall (inertia force moves to the inward of the wall) is 3.23 times larger and the right wall (inertia force moves to the outward of the wall) is 1.79 times larger. In the narrow GRS wall without interface connection, the left wall is 3.55 times larger and the right wall is 2.39 times larger.

關鍵字(中)

★ 離心模型試驗
★ 窄土工合成加筋土牆
★ 加速度放大係數
★ 沉降
★ 水平位移
★ 側土壓力

關鍵字(英)

★ centrifuge modeling test
★ narrow geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls
★ acceleration amplification factor
★ settlement
★ horizontal displacement
★ lateral earth pressure

論文目次

摘要 i
ABSTRACT i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF TABLES ixx
LIST OF FIGURES xii
NOTATIONS xvii
ABBREVIATIONS xviiiii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
1-1 Research motivations 1
1-2 Problem statement 2
1-3 Research objectives 3
1-4 Outline 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2-1 Geosynthetic-reinforced soil structure 5
2-1-1 Conventional mechanically stabilized earth wall 5
2-1-2 Narrow mechanically stabilized earth wall 7
2-2 Narrow GRS wall design considerations 9
2-2-1 Backfill selection 9
2-2-2 Geometric considerations 9
2-2-3 Narrow GRS wall system design recommendations 13
2-3 Overview of previous studies on narrow GRS wall 14
2-3-1 Overview of research on failure behaviors of narrow GRS wall 14
2-3-2 Overview of research on lateral earth pressure of narrow GRS wall 21
2-3-3 Overview of studies on the displacement of narrow GRS wall under different situations 28
2-4 Overview of internal stability by Rankine’s active earth pressure theory 31
2-5 Earthquake intensity 32
2.6 Site Classification for seismic design 35
2.7 Summary of the previous studies 35
CHAPTER 3: TEST APPARATUS AND MATERIALS 37
3-1 Principles of centrifuge modeling 37
3-1-1 Scaling law and scale effect 38
3-1-2 Principle of Modeling of Models 40
3-1-3 Limitations and advantages in Centrifuge Modeling 40
3-2 Experimental apparatus 43
3-2-1 NCU Geotechnical Centrifuge 43
3-2-2 Servo-hydraulic shaking table 45
3-2-3 Data acquisition system 45
3-2-4 Accelerometers (ACCs) 46
3-2-5 Specimen containers 47
3-2-6 Traveling Pluviation Apparatus 48
3-2-7 Lateral support system 52
3-2-8 Lateral earth pressure measurement instrument 54
3-2-9 Observation systems 56
3-3 Soil and reinforcement material 58
3-3-1 Properties of Sibelco quartz sand 58
3-3-2 Characteristics of reinforcement materials 60
CHAPTER 4: TEST PROGRAMS 63
4-1 Configuration of centrifuge models of narrow GRS wall 63
4-1-1 Design parameters of narrow GRS wall models 63
4-1-2 Variables of narrow GRS wall model 64
4-1-3 Invariables of narrow GRS wall model 67
4-2 Preparation of narrow GRS walls model 69
4-3 Procedures of testing and test repeatability 70
4-4 Test data analysis method 71
4-4-1 Criteria for assessing shaking events 71
4-4-2 System detection-Pre-shaking 74
4-4-3 Acceleration amplification factor 76
4-4-4 Predominant frequency 76
CHAPTER 5: TEST RESULTS 78
5-1 Test with interface connection to stable walls (Test 1) 78
5-1-1 Shear wave velocity (Vs) 79
5-1-2 Predominant frequency 80
5-1-3 Acceleration response 81
5-1-4 Horizontal displacement 89
5-1-5 Settlement at the wall crest 93
5-1-6 Lateral earth pressure of narrow GRS wall 94
5-2 Test without interface connection to stable walls (Test 2) 96
5-2-1 Shear wave velocity (Vs) 97
5-2-2 Predominant frequency 98
5-2-3 Acceleration response 100
5-2-4 Horizontal displacement 108
5-2-5 Settlement at the wall crest 111
5-2-6 Lateral earth pressure of narrow GRS wall 112
5-3 Comparisons and discussions 115
5-3-3 Acceleration response 115
5-3-4 Horizontal displacement 127
5-3-4 Settlement at the wall crest 129
5-3-5 Lateral earth pressure of narrow GRS wall 131
5-4 Summary of test result 131
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS 135
6-1 Conclusions 135
6-2 Limitations and suggestions 136
REFERENCES 137
APPENDIX I – FACTOR OF SAFETY OF NARROW GRS WALL 141

參考文獻

1. AASHTO, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Sixth ed, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials., Washington, D.C, USA (2012).
2. Abramson, L.W., Lee, T.S., Sharma, S., and Boyce, G.M. Slope stability and stabilization methods. John Wiley & Sons (2001).
3. Aubertin, M., Li, L., Arnoldi, S., Belem, T., Bussière, B., Benzaazoua, M. and Simon, R., “Interaction between backfill and rock mass in narrow stopes,” Soil and rock America, Vol. 1, pp. 1157-1164 (2003).
4. ASTM D.4253-06, Standard test methods for maximum index density and unit weight of soils using a vibratory table, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, USA (2006).
5. ASTM D.4254-16, Standard test methods for minimum index density and unit weight of soils and calculation of relative density, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, USA (2006).
6. ASTM C.136-06, Standard test method for sieve analysis of fine and coarse agGRSgates, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, USA (2014).
7. ASTM D.3080, Standard test method for direct shear test of soils under consolidated drained conditions, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, USA, (2011).
8. ASTM D.4595-2005, Standard test method for tensile properties of geotextiles by the wide-width strip method, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, USA (2005).
9. Bathurst, R. J., Miyata, Y., Allen, T. M. "Facing Displacements in Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Walls," American Society of Civil Engineers Earth Retention Conference (ER), Bellevue, Washington, United States, pp. 442–459 (2010). http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/41128(384)45
10. Benmebarek, S., Attallaoui, S. and Benmebarek, N., “Interaction analysis of back-to-back mechanically stabilized earth walls,” Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 697-702 (2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.05.005
11. Berg, R.R., Christopher, B.R. and Samtani, N.C., Design of mechanically stabilized earth walls and reinforced soil slopes–Volume I. U.S., Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FHWA-NHI-10-024. (2009).
12. Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC), "NEHRP Recommended Provisions for seismic Regulations for New buildings and other Structures", Part1: Provisions, FEMA 368, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. (2003).
13. Chen, H.T., Lee, C.J. and Chen, H.W., “The traveling pluviation appartus for sand specimen preparation,” Proceedings of the International Conference Centrifuge, pp. 143-148 (1998).
14. Chou, N. N. S., Tang, A., and Wu, S., "An Application of the Connecting System between MSE Wall and Soil Nail", International Symposium on Design and Practice of Geosynthetics-Reinforced Soil Structures (2013).
15. Dobie, M., “Internal stability of reinforced soil structures using a two-part wedge method,” Indonesian Geotechnical Conference and Annual Scientific Meeting, Jakarta (2011).
16. Elias, V., Christopher, B.R. and Berg, R.R., Mechanically stabilized earth walls and reinforced soil slopes design and construction guidelines. U.S., Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FHWA-NHI-00-043 (2001).
17. Frydman, S. and Keissar, I., “Earth pressure on retaining walls near rock faces,” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 6, pp. 586-599 (1987). http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1987)113:6(586)
18. Hejazi, S.M., Sheikhzadeh, M., Abtahi, S.M. and Zadhoush, A., “A simple review of soil reinforcement by using natural and synthetic fibers,” Construction and building materials, Vol. 30, pp. 100-116 (2012). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.11.045
19. Hung, W.Y., “Breaking failure behavior and internal stability analysis of geosynthetic reinforced earth walls,” Ph.D. Dissertation, National Central University, Jhongli, Taiwan (2008).
20. Hung, W.Y., Pham, T.N.P. and Weng, C.C., “Experimental study of the effect of different backfilled soils on the stability of mechanically stabilized earth walls,” Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/02533839.2019.1694445
21. Kazimierowicz-Frankowska, K., “A case study of a geosynthetic reinforced wall with wrap-around facing,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 107-115 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2004.05.001
22. Kniss, K.T., Yang, K.H., Wright, S.G. and Zornberg, J.G., “Earth pressures and design considerations of narrow MSE walls,” Proc. Texas Section ASCE (2007).
23. Ko, H.Y., “Summary of the state-of-the-art in centrifuge model testing,” Centrifuges in soil mechanics, pp. 11-18 (1988).
24. Koerner, R.M. Designing with geosynthetics. Xlibris Corporation (2012).
25. Lawson, C. and Yee, T., “Reinforced soil retaining walls with constrained reinforced fill zones,” Geo-Frontier (2005). http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/40787(166)10
26. Lee, Y.B., Ko, H.Y. and McCartney, J.S., “Deformation response of shored MSE walls under surcharge loading in the centrifuge,” Geosynthetics International, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 389-402 (2010). http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/gein.2010.17.6.389
27. Morrison, K.F., Harrison, F.E., Collin, J.G., Dodds, A.M. and Arndt, B., Shored mechanically stabilized earth (SMSE) wall systems design guidelines, U.S., Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FHWA-CFL/TD-06-001 (2006).
28. NCMA, Design manual for segmental retaining walls, National Concrete Masonry Association, Herndon, Virginia, USA (2010).
29. Pham, T.N.P., “Failure mechanism and deformation - based - design of narrow geosynthetic reinforced earth walls,” Ph.D. Dissertation, National Central University, Jhongli, Taiwan (2019).
30. Taylor, R.N., Centrifuges in modelling: principles and scale effects, Geotechnical centrifuge technology, pp. 19-33 (1995).
31. Taylor, R.E. Geotechnical centrifuge technology. CRC Press (2014).
32. Woodruff, R., “Centrifuge modeling of MSE-shoring composite walls,” Master Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, the University of Colorado (2003).
33. WSDOT M.46-03, Geotechnical Design Manual, Chapter 15 Abutments, retaining walls, and reinforced slopes, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, Washington, USA (2005).
34. Woodruff, R., “Centrifuge modeling of MSE-shoring composite walls,” Master Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, the University of Colorado (2003).
35. WSDOT M.46-03, Geotechnical Design Manual, Chapter 15 Abutments, retaining walls, and reinforced slopes, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, Washington, USA (2005).
36. Wu, Jonathan T.H., Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil (GRS) Walls, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, (2019)
37. Xu, C., Luo, Y.S., Chen, H.S. and Jia, B., “Effects of interface connections on narrowed mechanically stabilized earth walls,” Environmental Earth Sciences, Vol. 75, No. 21, pp. 1411 (2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6226-9
38. Yang, K.H. and Liu, C.N., “Finite element analysis of earth pressures for narrow retaining walls,” Journal of GeoEngineering, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 43-52 (2007). http://dx.doi.org/ 10.6310/jog.2007.2(2).1
39. Yang, K.H., Zornberg, J.G., Hung, W.Y. and Lawson, C.R., “Location of failure plane and design considerations for narrow geosynthetic reinforced soil wall systems,” Journal of GeoEngineering, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 27-40 (2011). http://dx.doi.org/10.6310/jog.2011.6(1).3
40. Yang, K.H., Zornberg, J.G. and Wright, S.G., “Numerical modeling of narrow MSE walls with extensible reinforcements,” Texas. Dept. of Transportation. Research and Technology Implementation Office, No. FHWA/TX-08/0-5506-2. (2008).
41. Zornberg, J.G., Mitchell, J.K. and Sitar, N., “Testing of reinforced slopes in a geotechnical centrifuge,” Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 470-480 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10413J
42. Central Weather Bureau, Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Taiwan: “What is "intensity"?”, January 28, 2021, taken from https://scweb.cwb.gov.tw/en-us/guidance/faqdetail/182
43. Central Weather Bureau, Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Taiwan: “What is the classification of earthquake-resistant standards for buildings in Taiwan?”, January 28, 2021, taken from https://scweb.cwb.gov.tw/en-us/guidance/faqdetail/194
44. Earthquake Hazards Program. U. S. Geological Survey: "ShakeMap Scientific Background. Rapid Instrumental Intensity Maps". January 28, 2021, taken from https://web.archive.org/web/20110623092131/http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/shakemap/background.php#intmaps

指導教授

洪汶宜(Wen-Yi Hung)

審核日期

2021-9-15

推文