• 全国中文核心期刊
  • 中国科技核心期刊
  • 美国工程索引(EI)收录期刊
  • Scopus数据库收录期刊
黄营, 陈国兴, 戚承志, 杜修力. 可液化场地框架式地铁车站结构振动台模型试验与数值模拟的对比分析[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2013, 35(zk2): 471-478.
引用本文: 黄营, 陈国兴, 戚承志, 杜修力. 可液化场地框架式地铁车站结构振动台模型试验与数值模拟的对比分析[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2013, 35(zk2): 471-478.
HUANG Ying, CHEN Guo-xing, QI Cheng-zhi, DU Xiu-li. Comparative analysis between shaking table model test and numerical simulation of frame subway station structure in liquefiable ground[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2013, 35(zk2): 471-478.
Citation: HUANG Ying, CHEN Guo-xing, QI Cheng-zhi, DU Xiu-li. Comparative analysis between shaking table model test and numerical simulation of frame subway station structure in liquefiable ground[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2013, 35(zk2): 471-478.

可液化场地框架式地铁车站结构振动台模型试验与数值模拟的对比分析

Comparative analysis between shaking table model test and numerical simulation of frame subway station structure in liquefiable ground

  • 摘要: 根据可液化地基土-地铁车站结构动力相互作用大型振动台模型试验结果,以ABAQUS软件为平台,将地基土-地铁车站结构体系视为平面应变问题,采用动塑性损伤模型描述地铁车站结构混凝土的动力特性,采用修正的Davidenkov黏弹性动力本构模型和孔压应变模型分别描述土体的动力非线性特性和孔隙水压力的发展过程,建立地基土-地铁车站结构非线性动力相互作用有限元分析模型。对不同试验工况下地基土-地铁车站结构体系的地震反应进行数值模拟,分别与试验结果进行了对比分析。结果表明:模拟值与试验值基本一致,呈现出相似的规律性,相互验证了数值模拟结果和振动台试验结果的正确性。

     

    Abstract: Based on the results of the large shaking table test on frame subway station structure in liquefiable ground, considering the influence of the soil-structure nonlinear dynamic interaction by 2D finite element method, the nonlinear dynamic interaction of soil-subway station is modeled by ABAQUS software. In the modeling, the dynamic plastic-damage model is used to simulate the dynamic characteristics of station concrete, the modified Devidenkov viscoelastic constitutive model is used to simulate the dynamic characteristics of soil, and the dynamic pore water pressure strain model is used to simulate the development of pore water pressure. The seismic response of soil and subway station system under different test conditions is analyzed by means of the numerical simulation method. And then, the simulated results and the shaking table test records are compared. The results show that the simulated results are basically identical with the shaking table test records. So that, the modeling results and the shaking table test results are proved to be correct.

     

/

返回文章
返回