Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dynamic response of a flexible rectangular underground structure in sand: centrifuge modeling

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Major earthquakes such as Kobe (1995), Kocaeli (1999) and Chi–Chi (Taiwan) have shown that underground structures have suffered significant damage due to dynamic loading. Therefore, recently, much priority has been given to seismic safety of underground structures located in earthquake-prone regions. There is, however, not much experimental research on the dynamic response of buried structures. This research aims to better understand the dynamic behavior of relatively flexible rectangular underground structures embedded in dry sand. To achieve this purpose, a series of dynamic centrifuge tests were conducted on a box-shaped flexible underground structure under harmonic motions with different accelerations and frequencies. Thus, response of soil and buried structure model was examined considering the dynamic soil structure interaction. Accelerometers were placed in the soil and on the buried structure model to evaluate the shear strain and acceleration response. Moreover, a special attempt was made to investigate the racking deformations by installing extensometers inside the tunnel model. Measurements obtained from those extensometers were compared with the predictions of analytical solutions. Results show that, Penzien’s approach gives reasonable estimates of racking deformation for the rectangular shaped flexible underground structure.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

References

  • Ali H, Reiffsteck P, Thorel L, Gaudin C (2010) Influence factors study of cone loading test in centrifuge. In: Proceedings CPT10, Huntington Beach, May

  • Bobet A, Fernández G, Huo H et al (2008) A practical iterative procedure to estimate seismic induced deformations of shallow rectangular structures. Can Geotech J 45(7):923–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolton MD, Gui MW, Garnier J, Corte JF, Bagge G, Laue J, Renzi R (1999) Centrifuge cone penetration tests in sand. Geotechnique 49(4):543–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chian SC, Madabhushi SPG (2012) Effect of buried depth and diameter on uplift of underground structures in liquefied soils. J Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 41:181–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cilingir U, Madabhushi SPG (2011a) Effect of depth on the seismic response of circular tunnels. Can Geotech J 48(1):117–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cilingir U, Madabhushi SPG (2011b) A model study on the effects of ınput motion on the seismic behavior of tunnels. J Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:452–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cilingir U, Madabhushi SPG (2011c) Effect of depth on the seismic response of square tunnels. Soils Found 51(3):449–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clough RW, Penzien J (1993) Dynamics of structures, 2nd edn. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dashti S, Hushmand A, Ghayoomi M, McCartney JS, Zhang M, Hushmand B, Mokarram N, Bastani A, Davis C, Yangsoo L, Hu J (2013) Centrifuge modeling of seismic soil-structure-ınteraction and lateral earth pressures for large near-surface underground structures. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Paris

  • Escoffier S (2008) Conteneur ESB. LCPC ınternal report no: 2007-1-13-1/1-a

  • Ha D, Abdoun TH, O’Rourke MJ et al (2010) Earthquake faulting effects on buried pipelines-case history and centrifuge study. J Earthq Eng 14(5):646–669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin BO, Drnevich VP (1972) Shear modulus and damping in soils: design equation and curves. J Soil Mech Found Eng Div ASCE 98(7):667–692

    Google Scholar 

  • Hashash Y, Hook JJ, Schmidt B (2001) Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 16(4):247–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huo H, Bobet A, Fernandez G et al (2006) Analytical solution for deep rectangular underground structures subjected to far field shear stresses. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 21(6):613–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iglesia GR, Einstein HH, Whitman RV (2011) Validation of centrifuge model scaling for soil systems via trapdoor tests. J Geotech Geoenv Eng 137(11):1075–1089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iida H, Hiroto T, Yoshida N, Iwafuji M (1996) Damage to Daikai subway station. Soils Found 36:283–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishibashi I, Zhang X (1993) Unified dynamic shear moduli and damping ratios of sand and clay. Soils Found 33(1):182–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanzano G, Bilotta E, Russo G, Silvestri F, Madabhushi SPG (2012) Centrifuge modeling of seismic loading on tunnels in sand. Geotech Test J 35:854–869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee SH, Choo YW, Kim DS (2013) Performance of an equivalent shear beam (ESB) model container for dynamic geotechnical centrifuge tests. Soil dyn Earthq Eng 44:102–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Escoffier S, Kotronis P (2013) Using centrifuge tests data to identify the dynamic soil properties: application to Fontainebleau sand. Soil dyn Earthq. Eng. 52:77–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ling HI, Mohri Y, Kawabati T, Liu H, Burke C, Sun L (2003) Centrifugal modeling of seismic behavior of large-diameter pipe in liquefiable soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 129:1092–1101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madabhushi SPG (1994) Dynamic response of the equivalent shear beam (ESB) container. İn: Technical report TR270. Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge

  • O’Rourke M, Gadicherla V, Abdoun T (2003) Centrifuge modeling of buried pipelines. In: Advancing mitigation technologies and disaster response for lifeline systems, proceedings of the 6th U.S. conference and workshop on lifeline earthquake engineering, August 10–13, 2003, Long Beach, pp.757–768

  • Ozkan MY, Ulgen D, Saglam S, Vrettos C, Chazelas JL (2013) Centrifuge modeling of dynamic behavior of box shaped underground structures in sand. Series Project Web: http://www.series.upatras.gr/sites/default/files/SERIES_Dresbus_Final%20Report.pdf. Accessed July 2013

  • Pelli E, Yiouta-Mitra P, Sofianos AI (2006) Seismic Behaviour of Square Lined Underground Structures. In: Proceedings of world tunnel congress, Seoul

  • Penzien J (2000) Seismically induced racking of tunnel linings. J Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 29(5):683–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitilakis K, Tsinidis G, Anastisiadis A, Pitilakis D, Heron C, Madabushi SPG, Stringer M, Paolucci R (2013) Investigation of several aspects affecting the seismic behaviour of shallow rectangular underground structures in soft soils. Series Project Web: http://www.series.upatras.gr/sites/default/files/file/SERIES_TUNNELSEIS_Final_Report.pdf

  • Power MS, Rosidi D, Kaneshiro JY (1998) Seismic vulnerability of tunnels and underground structures revisited. In: Ozdemir L (ed) Proceedings of the North American tunneling conference, Newport Beach, pp 243-250

  • Schofield AN (1980) Cambridge geotechnical centrifuge operations. Geotechnique 30(3):227–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silver ML, Seed HB (1971) Volume changes in sands due to cyclic loading. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 97(9):1171–1182

    Google Scholar 

  • Sitar N (1995) Geotechnical reconnaissance of the effects of the January 17, 1995, HyogokenNanbu Earthquake, Japan. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, report no. 95-01

  • Taylor RN (1995) Geotechnical centrifuge technology. Blackie Academic & Professional, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Teymur B, Madabhushi SPG (2003) Experimental study of boundary effects in dynamic centrifuge modelling. Geotechnique 53(7):655–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tokimatsu K, Seed HB (1987) Evaluation of settlements in sands due to earthquake shaking. J Geotech Eng ASCE 113(8):861–878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang JN (1993) Seismic design of tunnels: a state of the art approach. Monograph 7, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Diuglas Inc., New York

  • Wang WL, Wang TT, Su JJ, Lin CH, Seng CR, Huang TH (2001) Assessment of damage in mountain tunnels due to the Taiwan ChiChi Earthquake. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 16(3):133–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeghal M, Elgamal AW (1994) Analysis of site liquefaction using earthquake records. J Geotech Eng ASCE 120(6):996–1017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng X, Schofield AN (1996) Design and performance of an equivalent-shear-beam container for earthquake centrifuge modelling. Geotechnique 46(1):83–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007–2013] under Grant Agreement No. 227887 [SERIES]. The authors would like to thank IFSTTAR centrifuge team for their valuable supports throughout the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Mugla Sıtkı Kocman University, 48100, Mugla, Turkey

    Deniz Ulgen

  2. Adnan Menderes University, Aydın, Turkey

    Selman Saglam

  3. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    M. Yener Ozkan

Authors
  1. Deniz Ulgen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Selman Saglam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Yener Ozkan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deniz Ulgen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ulgen, D., Saglam, S. & Ozkan, M.Y. Dynamic response of a flexible rectangular underground structure in sand: centrifuge modeling. Bull Earthquake Eng 13, 2547–2566 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9736-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9736-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation