Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cushion Layer Effect on the Impact of a Dry Granular Flow Against a Curved Rock Shed

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The dry granular flow produced by a landslide or mountain collapse represents an intense threat to road structures, including rock sheds in mountainous areas. In this study, we designed a set of experiments to investigate the impact mechanism of dry granular flow against a rock shed. The experimental rock shed model was characterized by a curved surface and a cushion layer of granular materials. Based on a video recording and the time history of the impact force, we determined the impact force characteristics and found that for cases without a cushion layer, the maximum normal and tangential force components are close to the end of the rock shed directly facing granular flow impact. With the addition of a cushion layer, the maximum impact force decreases and shifts approximately 30°–45° away from the end, which indicates that a cushion layer can not only reduce the magnitude of the impact force, but also change its distribution mode. We also verified the stronger energy dissipation capability of a cushion layer made of finer granular material. Finally, we performed a stiffness analysis, calculated the internal forces, and found that cushion layers can reduce the internal bending moment and internal shear force and increase the internal axial force. From the engineering perspective, all the changes introduced by a cushion layer positively contribute to rock shed safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

\( \beta \) :

The polar angle from 0°

\( F \) :

Total normal force (N)

\( F_{i} \) :

Normal sub-forces (N), i = 1–8

\( T \) :

Total tangential force (N)

\( T_{i} \) :

Tangential sub-forces (N), i = 1–8

\( D_{ 5 0} \) :

Mean particle diameter (m)

\( \gamma_{\hbox{max} } \) :

Maximum dry unit weight (N/m3)

\( \gamma_{\hbox{min} } \) :

Minimum dry unit weight (N/m3)

\( X \) :

Vector of primary unknowns for a tunnel

\( X_{i} \) :

Component of X, i = 1, 2, 3

\( E \) :

Elastic modulus of the rock shed (GPa)

\( E^{{\prime }} \) :

Elastic modulus of the load cell (GPa)

\( I \) :

Inertia moment of the cross section of the rock shed (m4)

\( I^{{\prime }} \) :

Inertia moment of the cross section of the load cell (m4)

\( A \) :

Area of the cross section of the rock shed (m2)

\( A^{{\prime }} \) :

Area of the cross section of the load cell (m2)

\( \Delta_{i,j} \) :

The displacement in X i direction caused by unit force in F j direction (m), i = 1–3, and j = 1–16

\( \delta_{i,j} \) :

The displacement in X i direction caused by unit force in X j direction (m), i = 1–3, and j = 1–3

\( M_{i}^{i} \) :

Internal bending moment caused by the unit force which is in X i direction (N/m)

\( N_{i}^{i} \) :

Internal axial force caused by the unit force which is in X i direction (N)

\( Q_{i}^{i} \) :

Internal shear force caused by the unit force which is in X i direction (N)

\( M_{j}^{e} \) :

Internal bending moment caused by the unit force which is in F j direction (N/m)

\( N_{j}^{e} \) :

Internal axial force caused by the unit force which is in F j direction (N)

\( Q_{j}^{e} \) :

Internal shear force caused by the unit force which is in F j direction (N)

\( s \) :

The domain along the rock shed periphery (m2)

\( \mu \) :

Bending moment stiffness (Pa)

\( \delta \) :

Basal friction angle (°)

\( \Delta W \) :

The energy increment (J)

\( \Delta D_{i} \) :

The corresponding normal displacement increment (m), i = 1–8

\( \Delta T_{i} \) :

The tangential force increment in a time interval on segment (m), i = 1–8

\( \Delta \omega_{i} \) :

The corresponding deflection increment (m), i = 1–8 (m)

\( H \) :

The height of the load cell (m)

References

  • Abdul QB, Norimitsu K (2010) Impact response of RC rock-shed girder with sand cushion under falling load. J Nucl Eng Des 240:2626–2632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albaba A, Lambert S, Nicot F, Chareyre B (2015) Relation between microstructure and loading applied by a granular flow to a rigid wall using DEM modeling. Granul Matter 17:603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ANSYS Inc. (2013) ANSYS mechanical APDL theory reference ver. 15.0

  • Gottardi G, Govoni L (2010) Full-scale modeling of falling rock protection barriers. Rock Mech Rock Eng 43(3):261–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Japan Road Association, Japanese Rockfall Protection Measures Handbook (2000) Japan Road Association

  • Jiang YJ, Towhata I (2013) Experimental study of dry granular flow and impact behavior against a rigid retaining wall. Rock Mech Rock Eng 46(4):713–729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang YJ, Zhao Y (2015) Experimental investigation of dry granular flow impact via both normal and tangential force measurements. Geotech Lett 5(1):33–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang YJ, Zhao Y, Towhata I, Liu DX (2015) Influence of Particle characteristics on impact event of dry granular flow. Powder Technol 270(A):53–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karnovsky IA, Lebed O (2010) Advanced methods of structural analysis. 1st edn. Springer, New York, XXIV, p 593

  • Kawahara S, Muro T (2006) Effects of dry density and thickness of sandy soil on impact response due to rockfall. J Terrramech 43:329–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsten H (1982) Design and construction of Kowyon’s pass rockfall shelter. Trans S Afr Inst Civ Eng 24:477–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Kishi N, Konno H, Ikeda K (2002) Prototype impact tests on ultimate impact resistance of PC rock-sheds. Int J Impact Eng 27:969–985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masuya H, Amanuma K, Nishikawa Y, Tsuji T (2009) Basic rockfall simulation with consideration of vegetation and application to protection measure. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(6):1835–1843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MATLAB and Statistics Toolbox Release 2014a (2014) The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, United States

  • McGuire W, Gallagher RH, Ziemian RD (2004) Matrix structural analysis, MATSTAN 2 version 2.0. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Peila D, Ronco C (2009) Technical note: design of rockfall net fences and the new ETAG 027 European guideline. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(4):1291–1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peila D, Pelizza S, Sassudelli F (1998) Evaluation of behaviour of rockfall restraining nets by full scale tests. Rock Mech Rock Eng 31(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pichler B, Hellmich C, Mang HA (2005) Impact of rocks onto gravel design and evaluation of experiments. Int J Impact Eng 31:559–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pichler B, Hellmich C, Mang HA (2006) Loading of a gravel-buried steel pipe subjected to rockfall. J Geotech Geoenviron 11:1465–1473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spadari M, Giacomini A, Buzzi O, Hambleton JP (2012) Prediction of the bullet effect for rockfall barriers: a scaling approach. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45(2):131–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valentino R, Barla G, Montrasio L (2008) Experimental analysis and micromechanical modelling of dry granular flow and impacts in laboratory flume tests. Rock Mech Rock Eng 41(1):153–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volkwein A, Schellenberg K, Labiouse V, Agliardi F, Berger F, Bourrier F, Dorren LKA, Gerber W, Jaboyedoff M (2011) Rockfall characterisation and structural protection—a review. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11:2617–2651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Wang F, Sun P (2009) Landslide hazards triggered by the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, Sichuan, China. Landslides 6:139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshida H (1999) Recent experimental studies on rockfall control. In: Masuya P, Labiouse V (eds) Proceedings of Joint Japan–Swiss Scientific Seminar on impact load by falling rocks and design of protection structures. Kanazawa, Japan, pp 69–78

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

First, the authors sincerely acknowledge the CAS Pioneer Hundred Talents Program for making possible the completion of this research. The research presented in this paper was also jointly supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41502334) and fund of the Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment (Grant No. SDS-135-1705 and Grant No. SDS-135-1704). The authors wish to acknowledge these financial contributions and convey our appreciation to these organizations for supporting this basic research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 9#, Section 4, RenMinNanLu Avenue, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China

    Yuan-Jun Jiang, Yue Song & Si-You Xiao

  2. School of Civil Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, People’s Republic of China

    Zheng-Zheng Wang

  3. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

    Yue Song & Si-You Xiao

Authors
  1. Yuan-Jun Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zheng-Zheng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yue Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Si-You Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zheng-Zheng Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jiang, YJ., Wang, ZZ., Song, Y. et al. Cushion Layer Effect on the Impact of a Dry Granular Flow Against a Curved Rock Shed. Rock Mech Rock Eng 51, 2191–2205 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-018-1478-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-018-1478-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation