2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2011.08.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seismic behavior of slopes by lower bound dynamic shakedown theory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Studies of the impact of cyclic loading on pore pressure have shown different excess pore water pressure development, which was dependent on the stress state [4][5][6][7][8][9]. The cyclic loading of normally consolidated cohesive soil samples in undrained conditions causes movement of the effective stress path toward the deviator stress axis, which can be recognized as a consolidation state [10][11][12][13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies of the impact of cyclic loading on pore pressure have shown different excess pore water pressure development, which was dependent on the stress state [4][5][6][7][8][9]. The cyclic loading of normally consolidated cohesive soil samples in undrained conditions causes movement of the effective stress path toward the deviator stress axis, which can be recognized as a consolidation state [10][11][12][13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Benfratello et al (2014) proposed a linear programming format using the lower bound dynamic shakedown theorem which is applied to the plane frame structure under stochastic seismic load. Arvin et al (2012) discussed the stability of seismic behavior of slopes using the lower bound dynamic shakedown theorem and discovered that the load capacity was underestimated as inadaption might occur under minor seismic load. Wang et al (2018) evaluated the response of a slab track substructure under moving train load especially with critical speed using lower bound dynamic shakedown theorem and proposed the conclusion that dynamic shakedown load is related to the ratio of the train speed and the critical speed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this format, the static load is fixed and the seismic load is generated by using Monte Carlo method. Arvin et al (2012) discussed the stability of seismic behavior of slopes using the lower bound dynamic shakedown theorem and discovered that the seismic load was underestimated as inadaption might occur under minor seismic load. Wang et al (2018) evaluated the response of a slab track substructure under moving train load especially with critical speed using lower bound dynamic shakedown theorem and brought forth the conclusion that dynamic shakedown load is related to the ratio of the train speed and the critical speed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%