2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104394
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seismic response analysis of subway station in deep loose sand using the ALE method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In recent years, scholars have carried out importance research focusing on the seismic responses and damage mechanisms of subway stations in liquefied layers, obtaining abundant research results. Wang, Jianning, Zhuang, and Haiyang et al [1][2][3] analyzed the seismic response law of a hetero-span subway station in a liquefied field through the use of shaking table tests and numerical simulations; Tang Bozan, and Chen Su et al [4,5] utilized a correlation analysis of the seismic responses of a subway station with irregular cross-sections in a liquefied site by means of shaking table tests; Chen Xiangsheng et al [6] proposed and designed a replacement method for non-liquefied clay based on the concept of a "resilient city", and, through numerical simulation analysis, proved that this method has a good effect on resisting the liquefaction of the soil and reducing the uplift of the station structure; Liu Chunxiao et al [7,8] conducted a detailed study on the seismic performance of monolayer two-span subway interval structures under different liquefaction location conditions through shaking table tests, and found that the liquefaction of soil at the bottom of the structure is the main cause of structural movement and inclined uplift; Zhang ZiHong and Xu ChengShun et al [9,10] investigated the effect of liquefied interbedded soil on the seismic response of underground structures via centrifuge tests; Duan Yagang [11] conducted a shaker test to investigate the seismic response of subway stations in liquefied soil layers; Xu Minze et al [12] analyzed the seismic response of burial depth on subway stations in liquefied sites; An Junhai et al [13][14][15][16][17] studied the seismic performance of shield-expanded subway stations and frame subway stations in liquefied sites by means of shaking table tests and numerical simulations, investigating the damage mechanism of shield-expanded subway stations and the deformation mechanism of frame subway stations; Shun Liu et al [18] conducted a numerical simulation to analyze the seismic response of a subway station embedded in saturated sand soil, revealing that the primary cause for the uplift of the station structure is the flow of liquefied sand soil beneath the station's base slab.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, scholars have carried out importance research focusing on the seismic responses and damage mechanisms of subway stations in liquefied layers, obtaining abundant research results. Wang, Jianning, Zhuang, and Haiyang et al [1][2][3] analyzed the seismic response law of a hetero-span subway station in a liquefied field through the use of shaking table tests and numerical simulations; Tang Bozan, and Chen Su et al [4,5] utilized a correlation analysis of the seismic responses of a subway station with irregular cross-sections in a liquefied site by means of shaking table tests; Chen Xiangsheng et al [6] proposed and designed a replacement method for non-liquefied clay based on the concept of a "resilient city", and, through numerical simulation analysis, proved that this method has a good effect on resisting the liquefaction of the soil and reducing the uplift of the station structure; Liu Chunxiao et al [7,8] conducted a detailed study on the seismic performance of monolayer two-span subway interval structures under different liquefaction location conditions through shaking table tests, and found that the liquefaction of soil at the bottom of the structure is the main cause of structural movement and inclined uplift; Zhang ZiHong and Xu ChengShun et al [9,10] investigated the effect of liquefied interbedded soil on the seismic response of underground structures via centrifuge tests; Duan Yagang [11] conducted a shaker test to investigate the seismic response of subway stations in liquefied soil layers; Xu Minze et al [12] analyzed the seismic response of burial depth on subway stations in liquefied sites; An Junhai et al [13][14][15][16][17] studied the seismic performance of shield-expanded subway stations and frame subway stations in liquefied sites by means of shaking table tests and numerical simulations, investigating the damage mechanism of shield-expanded subway stations and the deformation mechanism of frame subway stations; Shun Liu et al [18] conducted a numerical simulation to analyze the seismic response of a subway station embedded in saturated sand soil, revealing that the primary cause for the uplift of the station structure is the flow of liquefied sand soil beneath the station's base slab.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Shirkhani et al [ 19 23 ] studied the seismic damping systems for structures and evaluated their effectiveness. In addition, the dynamic soil characteristics and seismic response law of underground structures under special soil conditions were also investigated through various research methods by some scholars, such as liquefiable soil [ 24 – 28 ], soft soil [ 29 33 ], and other special soils [ 34 36 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, the stratum in coastal cities is mainly composed of saturated soft clay rich in groundwater. When subjected to dynamic loads such as earthquakes, the strata are highly susceptible to collapse with large deformation, which leads to a large number of engineering problems such as structural uplift, uneven settlement, and damage to underground structures (Liu et al, 2021, Shen et al, 2022, Zheng et al, 2021). Previous research has primarily focused on the study of sandy soil layers (Huang et al, 2019, Hu et al, 2018, Kheradi et al, 2018, Liu et al, 2021, Tao et al, 2020), and the results showed that the liquefaction degree of far-field soil is greater than that of near-field soil (An et al, 2021), indicating that the presence of underground structures inhibits sand liquefaction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their study demonstrates that the acceleration of the stratum surface was lower than that of the bottom layer, and the liquefied soil provided effective cushioning. The internal force of the underground structure under earthquakes were also examined, proved that the middle column is a weak member in the earthquake process (Su et al, 2021, Wang et al, 2021, 2022, Zhu et al, 2021), and some structural protection measures were proposed to prevent underground structure damage under earthquake loads (He et al, 2020, Hu and Liu, 2017, Liu et al, 2021, Wang et al, 2021, Yue and Zheng, 2019) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%