Seismic Response of Cross-fault Tunnel Based on Fluid-structure Interaction
-
摘要: 为研究跨断层隧道在渗流-地震耦合作用下的动力响应，以宣绩铁路周湾村隧道穿越富水断层为背景，基于Biot固结动力方程，采用有限差分软件FLAC 3D进行多场耦合数值计算。本文主要分析了断层破碎带宽度对隧道衬砌特征点加速度、孔压、位移及应力响应规律的影响。研究结果表明，对隧道结构不同位置而言，加速度响应规律一致，均为正常段加速度<破碎带加速度<交界面加速度。耦合场作用下，地层与破碎带交界处围岩位移及应力均发生突变。随着断层宽度的增加，应力及位移突变范围有所增大，孔隙水压力峰值也进一步扩大。此时隧道受压区增大，衬砌结构易发生局部破坏。通过加设注浆层的方式，可有效减少耦合场作用引起的拱圈应力分布不均现象。
-
关键词:
- 铁路隧道 /
- 断层破碎带 /
- 流固耦合动力模型 /
- 地震响应 /
- Biot固结动力方程
Abstract: Taking the Zhouwancun tunnel along Xuanji railway crossing the water-rich fault as the case, we applied the FLAC 3D finite difference software to carry out multi-field coupling calculation which is based on the Biot consolidation dynamic coupling equation, in order to study the dynamic response of the cross-fault tunnel under seepage-earthquake coupling. The influence of the width of the fault fracture zone on the acceleration, pore pressure, displacement and stress response law of the tunnel lining characteristic point is mainly analyzed. The results show that the existence of the fault fracture zone causes the peak acceleration at the arch foot to increase by 30.8% compared with the ordinary segment, and the peak acceleration at the vault increases by 11.4% compared with the ordinary segment. Under the action of the coupling field, the principal stress at the interface between the tunnel and the fault fracture zone undergoes an obvious mutation, and the range of the stress mutation expands with the increase of the fault width. As the fault width increases, the pore pressure and principal stress peaks also further expand. By adding a grouting layer, the phenomenon of uneven stress distribution of the arch ring caused by the action of the coupling field can be effectively reduced. -
图 4 衬砌各特征点x向加速度时程曲线
Figure 4. Time-history curve of acceleration of each characteristic point of lining in x direction
图 5 不同位置处特征点孔压时程曲线
Figure 5. Pore pressure time history curves of characteristic points at different positions
图 6 不同断层宽度下孔隙水压力云图
Figure 6. Cloud map of pore water pressure under different fault widths
图 7 不同断层破碎带宽度下x方向位移云图
Figure 7. Displacement clouds in x direction for different fault fragmentation zone widths
图 8 不同断层破碎带宽度下z方向位移云图
Figure 8. Displacement clouds in z direction for different fault fragmentation zone widths
图 9 拱腰特征点水平位移时程曲线
Figure 9. Horizontal displacement time-history curve of arch waist feature point
图 10 拱顶特征点竖向位移时程曲线
Figure 10. Vertical displacement time-history curve of the characteristic point of the vault
图 11 特征点最大主应力纵向分布规律
Figure 11. Longitudinal distribution law of maximum principal stress at characteristic points
图 12 不同断层宽度下隧道各特征点最大主应力峰值
Figure 12. Peak principal stress at each characteristic point of the tunnel under different fault thicknesses
表 1 模型材料参数
Table 1. Material parameters of the model
介质 密度/（kg·m−3） 弹性模量/GPa 内摩擦角/（°） 黏聚力/MPa 泊松比 μ 渗透系数/（m·s−1） 砂岩 2000 1.3 27 0.20 0.35 3.0×10−6 初期支护 2300 28.0 — — 0.30 — 注浆层 2000 3.0 33 0.25 0.40 6.0×10−8 断层 1700 0.8 22 0.15 0.40 1.5×10−5 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 接触面参数取值
Table 2. Values for contact surface parameters
名称 法向刚度 $ {k_{\rm{n}}} $/（N·m−3） 切向刚度 $ {k_{\rm{s}}} $/（N·m−3） 黏聚力 c/kPa 内摩擦角$ \varphi $/（°） 接触面参数 109 109 50 17
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 隧道各特征点水平位移峰值
Table 3. Peak value of horizontal displacement of each characteristic point of the tunnel
破碎带宽度/m 水平位移峰值/mm 拱顶 拱肩 拱腰 拱脚 拱底 10 46.9 46.8 45.0 43.5 43.3 20 46.6 46.6 45.0 43.4 42.6 30 46.3 46.4 44.9 43.4 43.0 40 46.0 46.0 44.6 43.1 42.8
下载: 导出CSV
-
班改革, 2020. 流固耦合作用下隧道开挖模拟研究. 现代交通技术, 17（2）: 33—37 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9889.2020.02.007Ban G. G. , 2020. Study of tunnel excavation simulation under fluid-structure coupling action. Modern Transportation Technology, 17(2): 33—37. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9889.2020.02.007 陈育民, 徐鼎平, 2009. FLAC/FLAC3D基础与工程实例. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社. 陈育民, 徐鼎平, 2013. FLAC/FLAC3D基础与工程实例. 2版. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社. 程选生, 王建华, 杜修力, 2013. 渗流作用下海底隧道的流-固耦合地震响应分析. 现代隧道技术, 50（6）: 44—51 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6582.2013.06.008Cheng X. S. , Wang J. H. , Du X. L. , 2013. Fluid-solid coupling based seismic response analysis of subsea tunnels during seepage. Modern Tunnelling Technology, 50(6): 44—51. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6582.2013.06.008 程选生, 俞东江, 刘博等, 2016. 渗流和双向地震下跨海减震隧道的稳定分析. 铁道科学与工程学报, 13（5）: 882—890 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7029.2016.05.014Cheng X. S. , Yu D. J. , Liu B. , et al. , 2016. Stability analysis of cross sea tunnel with shock absorption subjected to seepage and bi-directional earthquake. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, 13(5): 882—890. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7029.2016.05.014 邓洋, 2021. 地震作用下含地下水边坡动力响应耦合分析. 路基工程, （5）: 180—185Deng Y. , 2021. Analysis on dynamic response coupling of slope with groundwater under earthquake. Subgrade Engineering, (5): 180—185. (in Chinese) 何川, 李林, 张景, 等, 2014. 隧道穿越断层破碎带震害机理研究. 岩土工程学报, 36（3）: 427—434 doi: 10.11779/CJGE201403004He C. , Li L. , Zhang J. , et al. , 2014. Seismic damage mechanism of tunnels through fault zones. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 36(3): 427—434. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE201403004 李亮, 吴利华, 王相宝等, 2016. 基于流固耦合动力模型的饱和土体-隧道体系地震反应研究. 地震工程学报, 38（6）: 862—868Li L. , Wu L. H. , Wang X. B. , et al. , 2016. Seismic response of saturated soil-tunnel system based on fluid-solid coupling dynamic model. China Earthquake Engineering Journal, 38(6): 862—868. (in Chinese) 李廷春, 吕连勋, 刘建章等, 2016. 基于隧道与断层破碎带距离因素的震害规律分析. 现代隧道技术, 53（1）: 52—61Li T. C. , Lv L. X. , Liu J. Z. , et al. , 2016. Analysis of the seismic damage rule based on the distance between the tunnel and the fractured fault zone. Modern Tunnelling Technology, 53(1): 52—61. (in Chinese) 李旭伟, 苏天宝, 2014. 高烈度区黄草坪山岭隧道地震动破坏机理研究. 施工技术, 43（10）: 127—130Li X. W. , Su T. B. , 2014. Research on the failure mechanism of Huangcaoping mountain tunnel in high intensity zone subjected to earthquake. Construction Technology, 43(10): 127—130. (in Chinese) 梁波, 杨仕恒, 赵冯兵, 等, 2020. 特大断面隧道断层段地震响应与断层构造关系. 科学技术与工程, 20（34）: 14272—14277 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1815.2020.34.047Liang B. , Yang S. H. , Zhao F. B. , et al. , 2020. The relationship between seismic response and fault structure in fault section of extra-large section tunnel. Science Technology and Engineering, 20(34): 14272—14277. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1815.2020.34.047 刘积魁, 方云, 刘智等, 2011. 钓鱼城遗址始关门破坏机制研究与FLAC3 D地震动力响应模拟. 岩土力学, 32（4）: 1249—1254 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7598.2011.04.049Liu J. K. , Fang Y. , Liu Z. , et al. , 2011. Study of damage mechanism and FLAC3 D simulation of the seismic dynamic response of Shiguan gate in Diaoyucheng ruins. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 32(4): 1249—1254. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7598.2011.04.049 刘子阳, 曹小平, 严松宏等, 2019. 棋盘石隧道断裂破碎带地震动力响应分析. 世界地震工程, 35（3）: 161—167Liu Z. Y. , Cao X. P. , Yan S. H. , et al. , 2019. Seismic dynamic response analysis of fault fracture zone in Qipanshi Tunnel. World Earthquake Engineering, 35(3): 161—167. (in Chinese) 彭文斌, 2008. FLAC 3D实用教程. 北京: 机械工业出版社. 苏建锋, 2017. 基于FLAC3 D的土层非线性地震反应分析. 地震工程学报, 39（5）: 883—889 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-0844.2017.05.0883Su J. F. , 2017. Nonlinear seismic response analysis of soil layers based on FLAC3 D. China Earthquake Engineering Journal, 39(5): 883—889. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-0844.2017.05.0883 王涛, 2015. FLAC3D数值模拟方法及工程应用-深入剖析FLAC3D 5.0. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社. 颉永斌, 董建华, 2021. 断层破碎带内隧道纵向受荷特征和变形分析. 中国公路学报, 34（11）: 211—224 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7372.2021.11.017Xie Y. B. , Dong J. H. , 2021. Analysis of longitudinal deformation and stress characteristics of tunnel crossing fault fracture zone. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 34(11): 211—224. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7372.2021.11.017 杨步云, 陈俊涛, 肖明, 2020. 跨断层地下隧洞衬砌结构地震响应及损伤机理研究. 岩土工程学报, 42（11）: 2078—2087 doi: 10.11779/CJGE202011013Yang B. Y. , Chen J. T. , Xiao M. , 2020. Seismic response and damage mechanism of lining structures for underground tunnels across fault. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 42(11): 2078—2087. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202011013 杨涛, 张杰, 林海飞等, 2021. 隔水土层孔隙水压畸变与顶板突水灾变的时空响应特征模拟研究. 采矿与安全工程学报, 38（2）: 317—325Yang T. , Zhang J. , Lin H. F. , et al. , 2021. Spatial-temporal characteristics simulation of pore water pressure in aquiclude and roof water inrush. Journal of Mining & Safety Engineering, 38(2): 317—325. (in Chinese) 禹海涛, 陈功, 2021. 深部富水岩石拱形隧道地震响应解析解. 中南大学学报（自然科学版）, 52（8）: 2783—2792 doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7207.2021.08.024Yu H. T. , Chen G. , 2021. Analytical solution for seismic response of deep arch tunnels in saturated rock. Journal of Central South University (Science and Technology), 52(8): 2783—2792. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7207.2021.08.024 臧万军, 2017. 汶川地震公路隧道震害规律研究. 现代隧道技术, 54（2）: 17—25Zang W. J. , 2017. Damage to highway tunnels caused by the Wenchuan earthquake. Modern Tunnelling Technology, 54(2): 17—25. (in Chinese) 张海东, 2018. 断层破碎带宽度对逆断层活化规律影响的模拟研究[J]. 煤炭工程, 50（1）: 96—99, 104 doi: 10.11799/ce201801027Zhang H. D. , 2018. Simulation study on the influence of fault zone width on reverse fault activation law. Coal Engineering, 50(1): 96—99, 104. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11799/ce201801027 周佳媚, 程毅, 邹仕伟等, 2019. 断层错动及地震作用下隧道力学特性研究. 铁道标准设计, 63（11）: 138—144Zhou J. M. , Cheng Y. , Zou. S. W. , et al. , 2019. Research on mechanical characteristics of tunnel under fault movement and seismic. Railway Standard Design, 63(11): 138—144. (in Chinese) 朱长安, 李海清, 林国进等, 2012. 断层破碎带隧道地震反应规律的数值模拟研究. 公路, 57（4）: 254—259 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0451-0712.2012.04.054Zhu C. A. , Li H. Q. , Lin G. J. , et al. , 2012. A study on numerical simulation of seismic response of tunnel in fault-rupture zone. Highway, 57(4): 254—259. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0451-0712.2012.04.054 Mao Z. J. , Wang X. K. , An N. , et al. , 2020. Water leakage susceptible areas in loess multi-arch tunnel operation under the lateral recharge conditions. Environmental Earth Sciences, 79(15): 368. doi: 10.1007/s12665-020-09083-3 -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 61
- HTML全文浏览量: 19
- PDF下载量: 7
- 被引次数: 0
