Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
3.1
3.8
Journals
Buildings
Special Issues
Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Structure
share announcement

Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Structure

A special issue of Buildings (ISSN 2075-5309). This special issue belongs to the section "Building Structures".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 July 2024 | Viewed by 2820

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Jingqi Huang

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Civil and Resources Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing, China
Interests: underground structure; tunnel seismic response; numerical simulation method; analytical method; seismic resistance
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Xu Zhao

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100022, China
Interests: construction methods of underground structures; seismic response of tunnels; failure mechanism of tunnels across fault during construction and in earthquakes; low-carbon strategy of underground engineering
Dr. Fanchao Kong

E-Mail
Guest Editor
Department of Civil Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100022, China
Interests: analytical methods of tunnels; intelligent geotechnical engineering; urban underground engineering; machine learning methods; dynamic analysis of underground structure; optimization theory of underground engineering
Dr. Huifang Li

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Intelligent Construction, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 102627, China
Interests: soil structure interaction; artificial boundary condition; theoretical and numerical methods; seismic resistance of underground engineering; seismic response analysis method; seismic reinforcement method

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue aims to encourage and enhance the role of mechanics, dynamics, analytical methods and other disciplines in relation relate to earthquake engineering by providing opportunities for the publication of research into applied mathematicians, engineering and other applied sciences adjacent to the field of earthquake engineering and geotechnical engineering.

Fields Covered:

  • Seismology and geology relevant to earthquake engineering problems, with a particular emphasis on modeling, methodologies and the consideration of their effects on the analysis and design of structures.
  • Wave propagation, wave scattering and dynamic crack propagation in soils and rocks under elastic or inelastic material behavior.
  • Dynamic constitutive behavior of materials.
  • Dynamic interaction problems (soil–structure interaction, fluid–structure interaction and tsunamis if only related to its geotechnical and structural systems).
  • Seismic analysis and design of steel structure and tunnels, metro station, retaining walls, dams, slopes.
  • Instrumentation and experimental methods in earthquake engineering.
  • Applied mathematical methods and artificial intelligence for earthquake engineering analysis and design.
  • Performance-based seismic design of structures.
  • Seismic reinforcement of civil engineering structures.
  • Probabilistic methods in earthquake engineering including risk analysis and reliability earthquake case histories and lessons learned from catastrophic ground motions.
  • Earthquake case histories and lessons learned from catastrophic ground motions only if they include modeling and geotechnical/structural analysis.
  • Design and construction of anti-seismic measures in underground structures.
  • Techniques related to scale laws, materials, model fabrication and data analysis in underground structure model tests.

Dr. Jingqi Huang
Dr. Xu Zhao
Dr. Fanchao Kong
Dr. Huifang Li
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Buildings is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • earthquake engineering
  • underground structure
  • soil–structure dynamic interaction
  • analytical method
  • numerical method
  • experimental method
  • material constitutive
  • seismic response
  • seismic reinforcement

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

15 pages, 2733 KiB  
Article
Methods of Assessing the Damage Capacity of Input Seismic Motions for Underground Structures
by Yilin Li and Hanlin Wei
Buildings 2024, 14(4), 996; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14040996 - 04 Apr 2024
Viewed by 340
Abstract
This paper investigates a method for improving the selection of seismic motions for designing earthquake-resistant underground structures. It is found that PGV alone is unreliable as a predictor of structural damage with increasing earthquake intensity. Therefore, based on characterizing seismic intensity by using [...] Read more.
This paper investigates a method for improving the selection of seismic motions for designing earthquake-resistant underground structures. It is found that PGV alone is unreliable as a predictor of structural damage with increasing earthquake intensity. Therefore, based on characterizing seismic intensity by using PGV, another parameter, referred to here as “the severest parameter”, is introduced to distinguish potential damage capacity for different seismic motions. A numerical model of a soil–underground structure system was established using the finite element software OpenSees. A total of 120 real ground motions were selected for the model, considering the influences of eight different site groups on the underground station and the rupture distances of the input seismic motions. The results show that as seismic intensity increases, substantial variability in the response of underground structures emerges under the same amplitude of PGV, diminishing the effectiveness of the relationship between PGV and structural damage. When assessing the potential damage capacity of seismic motions with similar or close amplitudes of PGV, VSI is an appropriate severest parameter for Class III sites and ASI is suitable for Class II sites. When the correlation coefficient between the severest parameter and the structural response is greater than 0.8, it can be used to reliably assess seismic damage capacity based on the size of the severest parameter. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Structure)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 22506 KiB  
Article
Research on the Reinforcement Effect and Bearing Characteristics of High-Pressure Jet-Grouting Piles on Covered Road Composite Ground in Landfill Sites
by Tao Wang, Xu Liu, Liyuan Liu, Wang Xiong and Zhenyun Li
Buildings 2024, 14(2), 444; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14020444 - 06 Feb 2024
Viewed by 539
Abstract
There is a notable difference between garbage pile foundations and general site foundations; due to their uneven particles, complex structure, and diverse composition, there are relatively few cases that can be used for reference. In this study, with the aim of renovating a [...] Read more.
There is a notable difference between garbage pile foundations and general site foundations; due to their uneven particles, complex structure, and diverse composition, there are relatively few cases that can be used for reference. In this study, with the aim of renovating a landfill in Shenzhen, bearing-layer reinforcements were introduced in the overlying road of a garbage heap dominated by construction waste. The bearing capacity of a single-pile composite foundation was studied through a core-pulling test of high-pressure jet-grouting piles, a static load test of the bearing capacity of the single-pile composite foundation, design estimation, and numerical analysis. The results show that the obtained eigenvalue of the design estimate was 267.8 kPa, and the eigenvalue of the field test was between 182.58 kPa and 196.89 kPa, meeting the design requirement of an eigenvalue of no less than 175 kPa. The bearing capacity of the composite foundation of the single jet-grouting pile was analyzed using the ABAQUS numerical simulation software; the characteristic value of the bearing capacity of the single-pile composite foundation was 186.01 kPa, and the variation trend of its settlement–load curve was the same as that of the field test results, which met the design requirements. High-pressure jet-grouting pile technology has achieved remarkable results in the reinforcement of foundations that are mainly composed of construction waste. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Structure)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 7915 KiB  
Article
Longitudinal Seismic Response of Metro Tunnels Crossing a Fault with Multi-Slip Surfaces
by Qiyao Wang, Yawu Yang, Hongquan Teng and Yifei He
Buildings 2024, 14(1), 207; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14010207 - 12 Jan 2024
Viewed by 577
Abstract
There are multiple seismic fault zones near Xi’an in China, among which the Li Piedmont Fault has multiple slip surfaces. A 3D finite element dynamic Soil–Fault–Tunnel model was established based on the engineering background of the Xi’an Metro tunnel orthogonally crossing the Li [...] Read more.
There are multiple seismic fault zones near Xi’an in China, among which the Li Piedmont Fault has multiple slip surfaces. A 3D finite element dynamic Soil–Fault–Tunnel model was established based on the engineering background of the Xi’an Metro tunnel orthogonally crossing the Li Piedmont Fault. The input seismic loads used the Chi-Chi, El-Centro, and artificial seismic waves, and the latter was artificially synthesized based on seismic conditions and site conditions of actual engineering. The Chi-Chi seismic wave with larger PGV/PGA and wider acceleration-sensitive area is a near-field seismic wave, while the others are far-field seismic waves. The seismic loads were transformed into the equivalent nodal force on the boundary nodes of the model, and nonlinear dynamic calculation was carried out to obtain the longitudinal seismic response of the structure. The main results show that the fault amplifies the seismic response of the tunnel, and the tunnel at the position of the fault slip surfaces is more vulnerable to failure, especially near the slip surface between the hanging wall and the fault, where the maximum acceleration, soil pressure, and internal force of the tunnel structure occur. In addition, the seismic response of the tunnel and soil caused by near-field seismic motion is significantly stronger than that caused by far-field seismic motion. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Structure)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 12678 KiB  
Article
Seismic Response Comparisons of Prefabricated and Cast In Situ Subway Station Structures in Liquefiable Site
by Junhai An, Qiaofeng Liu, Yanhua Zhang and Xuehui Zhang
Buildings 2023, 13(12), 3071; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13123071 - 09 Dec 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 891
Abstract
Based on the engineering practice of the first prefabricated subway station (Shuangfeng Station) in Changchun, China, the applicability of prefabricated subway station structures (PSSSs) in liquefiable sites in seismically defended areas is investigated. In this paper, the finite difference software FLAC3D 5.0 is [...] Read more.
Based on the engineering practice of the first prefabricated subway station (Shuangfeng Station) in Changchun, China, the applicability of prefabricated subway station structures (PSSSs) in liquefiable sites in seismically defended areas is investigated. In this paper, the finite difference software FLAC3D 5.0 is used to carry out the seismic response analysis of the PSSS in liquefiable ground, and the calculation results of the PSSS are compared with those of the same type of cast-in-place subway station condition. The results show that the trend of foundation excess pore pressure ratio (EPPR) in the PSSS condition is similar to that of the cast-in-place condition. For different ground vibration inputs, there is not much difference between the PSSS and the cast-in-place structure on the pore pressure (PP) of the surrounding liquefiable soil. The acceleration response of the PSSS is slightly smaller than that of the cast-in-place structure, and it has a better ability to adapt to ground deformation. The deformation of the upper part of the PSSS is slightly larger than that of the lower part, which is an important part of its deformation control, and the middle part is the key part of its strength control due to the presence of the center plate, which results in a significant increase in stiffness and stress. The flexible connection of the PSSS is easier to adapt to a larger vertical deformation than rigid connection, and its ability to resist overturning is better. Under the premise of ensuring static waterproofing, the PSSS can be constructed in liquefiable sites in earthquake-proof areas. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Structure)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-4
Back to TopTop