Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.    2020, Vol. 14 Issue (3) : 731-745     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-020-0614-7
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Centrifuge experiments for shallow tunnels at active reverse fault intersection
Mehdi SABAGH, Abbas GHALANDARZADEH()
School of Civil Engineering, University College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran 11155-4563 , Iran
Download: PDF(4445 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Tunnels extend in large stretches with continuous lengths of up to hundreds of kilometers which are vulnerable to faulting in earthquake-prone areas. Assessing the interaction of soil and tunnel at an intersection with an active fault during an earthquake can be a beneficial guideline for tunnel design engineers. Here, a series of 4 centrifuge tests are planned and tested on continuous tunnels. Dip-slip surface faulting in reverse mechanism of 60-degree is modeled by a fault simulator box in a quasi-static manner. Failure mechanism, progression and locations of damages to the tunnels are assessed through a gradual increase in Permanent Ground Displacement (PGD). The ground surface deformations and strains, fault surface trace, fault scarp and the sinkhole caused by fault movement are observed here. These ground surface deformations are major threats to stability, safety and serviceability of the structures. According to the observations, the modeled tunnels are vulnerable to reverse fault rupture and but the functionality loss is not abrupt, and the tunnel will be able to tolerate some fault displacements. By monitoring the progress of damage states by increasing PGD, the fragility curves corresponding to each damage state were plotted and interpreted in related figures.

Keywords reverse fault rupture      continuous tunnel      geotechnical centrifuge      ground surface deformations      fragility curves     
Corresponding Author(s): Abbas GHALANDARZADEH   
Just Accepted Date: 24 March 2020   Online First Date: 11 May 2020    Issue Date: 13 July 2020
 Cite this article:   
Mehdi SABAGH,Abbas GHALANDARZADEH. Centrifuge experiments for shallow tunnels at active reverse fault intersection[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(3): 731-745.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-020-0614-7
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2020/V14/I3/731
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Mehdi SABAGH
Abbas GHALANDARZADEH
parameters model prototype
faulting simulator box dimensions 100 cm × 60 cm × 60 cm
model dimensions 93 cm × 50 cm × 30 cm 56 m × 30 m × 18 m
tunnel length 93 cm × 93 cm 56 m
external diameter of tunnels 11.2 and 16.2 cm 6.72 and 9.72 m
internal diameter of tunnels 10.0 and 15 cm 6.00 and 9.00 m
tunnel lining thickness 0.6 cm 36 cm
Young’s modulus 18 GPa 18 GPa
Tab.1  Scale model and prototype dimensions
Fig.1  Faulting simulator box: (a) schematic view; (b) realistic picture.
Fig.2  Firouzkuh #161 sand grading chart.
specific gravity maximum void ratio emax ? minimum void ratio emin ? coefficient of uniformity Cu mean grain size D50(mm) D10(mm) D90(mm) Fc(%) internal friction angle F (degree) Cohesion C (kPa)
2.698 0.87 0.608 1.49 0.24 0.18 0.39 0 37 0
Tab.2  Firouzkuh #161 sand properties
Fig.3  Load-displacement curve of transverse loading test in 100 mm diameter PVA fiber-cement cylinder.
Fig.4  (a) Continuous tunnel placed in the fault simulator box; (b) soil surface of the model that is meshed by dyed sand.
Fig.5  The model installed in the centrifuge basket. (a) Side view; (b) front view.
Fig.6  Fault rupture propagation in free field model. (a) Before faulting; (b) after faulting.
Fig.7  Schematic view of the tunnel model affected by reverse faulting. (a) Before faulting; (b) after faulting.
Fig.8  Longitudinal view of damaged tunnel subjects to reverse faulting: (a) D= 100 mm; (b) D= 150 mm.
Fig.9  Monitoring of internal view at different stages of failure in test 1. (a) PGD in model= 2.3 mm, PGD in prototype= 0.14 m, a tiny crack is observed; (b) PGD in model= 11.9 mm, PGD in prototype= 0.71 m, the crack is opened, and some soil is poured into the tunnel; (c) PGD in model= 19.6 mm, PGD in prototype= 1.18 m, the crack expands, more soil pours and it blocks the tunnel.
Fig.10  Ground surface deformed through reverse faulting. (a) D= 100 mm; (b) D= 150 mm.
Fig.11  3D View of ground surface deformed through reverse faulting. (a) D= 100 mm; (b) D= 150 mm.
Fig.12  Vertical displacement contours of the ground surface. (a) D= 100 mm; (b) D= 150 mm.
Fig.13  Horizontal relative displacement contours of the ground surface. (a) D= 100 mm; (b) D= 150 mm.
Fig.14  Longitudinal profile of ground surface deformed shape in tunnels A and B.
Fig.15  Lateral profile of ground surface deformed shape at intersection with the sinkhole in tunnels A and B.
Fig.16  Lateral profile of ground surface deformed shape in tunnel A at different distances from the fault.
Fig.17  Fault rupture propagation in soil deposit surrounding the tunnel. (a) Tunnel diameter= 6 m; (b) tunnel diameter= 9 m.
Fig.18  Vertical displacement of ground surface adjacent to the plexiglass.
Fig.19  The gradual progress of damage state with an increase in PGD in test 3. (a) PGD= 0, damage state= 1, no damage; (b) PGD= 0.59 m, damage state= 2, a tiny crack is observed; (c) PGD= 0.70 m, damage state= 2, the crack is opened a little, and a soil discharge is low; (d) PGD= 0.96 m, damage state= 2, more soil is poured; (e) PGD= 1.35 m, damage state= 3, the crack expands and soil blocks the path; (f) PGD= 1.55 m, damage state= 3, the crack expands and more soil is poured; (g) PGD= 1.66 m, damage state= 4, more cracks begin to appear; (h) PGD= 2.15 m, damage state= 4, proportional more cracks; (i) PGD= 2.50 m, damage state= 4, complete tunnel collapse.
Fig.20  Fragility curves of tunnels at different damage states subject to reverse faulting.
Fig.21  Tunnel Slope (a) and damage state (b) variations with increases in PGD in tunnels of different diameters.
1 A Ghalandarzadeh, M Moradi, M Ashtiani, M Kiani, M Rojhani. Centrifuge model tests of fault rupture effect on some geotechnical structures. Japanese Geotechnical Society Special Publication, 2016, 2(3): 212–216
https://doi.org/10.3208/jgssp.VPS-06
2 M Kiani, T Akhlaghi, A Ghalandarzadeh. Experimental modeling of segmental shallow tunnels in alluvial affected by normal faults. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2016, 51: 108–119
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.10.005
3 C J Hung, J Monsees, N Munfah, J Wisniewski. Technical Manual for Design and Construction of Road Tunnels—Civil Elements. New York: US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, National Highway Institute, 2009
4 K Konagai, M Hori, K Meguro, J Koseki, T Matsushima, J Johansson, O Murata. Key Points for Rational Design for Civil Infrastructures near Seismic Faults Reflecting Soil-Structure Interaction Features. Japan Geotechnical Society. Report of JSPS Research Project, Grant-in-aid for Scientific Research (A) Project. 2006
5 C S Prentice, D J Ponti. Coseismic deformation of the Wrights tunnel during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake: A key to understanding 1906 fault slip and 1989 surface ruptures in the southern Santa Cruz Mountains, California. Journal of Geophysical Research. Solid Earth, 1997, 102(B1): 635–648
https://doi.org/10.1029/96JB02934
6 G N Owen, R E Scholl. Earthquake Engineering of Large Underground Structures. NASA STI/Recon Technical Report N. 1981
7 V A Kontogianni, S C Stiros. Earthquakes and seismic faulting: Effects on tunnels. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 2003, 12: 153–156
8 C H Dowding, A Rozan. Damage to rock tunnels from earthquake shaking. Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental, 1978, 104: 175–191
9 G Bäckholm, R. MunierEffects of Earthquakes on the Deep Repository for Spent Fuel in Sweden on Case Studies and Preliminary Model Results. SKB: TR-02-24. Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., 2002
10 H R Pratt, W Hustrulid. Earthquake Damage to Underground Facilities. Aiken, SC: Du Pont de Nemours (EI) and Co., 1978
11 H J Pincus, J D Bray, R B Seed, H B Seed. 1 g small-scale modelling of saturated cohesive soils. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 1993, 16(1): 46–53
https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10266J
12 F E Garcia, J D Bray. Distinct element simulations of earthquake fault rupture through materials of varying density. Soils and Foundations, 2018, 58(4): 986–1000
13 N K Oettle, J D Bray. Fault rupture propagation through previously ruptured soil. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2013, 139(10): 1637–1647
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000919
14 N K Oettle, J D Bray. Numerical procedures for simulating earthquake fault rupture propagation. International Journal of Geomechanics, 2017, 17(1): 04016025
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000661
15 D A Cole Jr, P V Lade. Influence zones in alluvium over dip-slip faults. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1984, 110(5): 599–615
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1984)110:5(599)
16 J D Bray, R B Seed, L S Cluff, H B Seed. Earthquake fault rupture propagation through soil. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1994, 120(3): 543–561
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:3(543)
17 J W Lee, M Hamada. An experimental study on earthquake fault rupture propagation through a sandy soil deposit. Structural Engineering/Earthquake Engineering, 2005, 22(1): 1s–13s
https://doi.org/10.2208/jsceseee.22.1s
18 N Tali, G R Lashkaripour, N Hafezi Moghadas, A Ghalandarzadeh. Centrifuge modeling of reverse fault rupture propagation through single-layered and stratified soil. Engineering Geology, 2019, 249: 273–289
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.12.021
19 G Gazetas, I Anastasopoulos, M Apostolou. Shallow and deep foundations under fault rupture or strong seismic shaking. In: Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering. Dordrecht: Springer, 2007, 185–215
20 M Ashtiani, A Ghalandarzadeh, M Mahdavi, M Hedayati. Centrifuge modeling of geotechnical mitigation measures for shallow foundations subjected to reverse faulting. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2018, 16: 103–110
21 M Davoodi, M K Jafari, F Ahmadi. Comparing the performance of vertical and diagonal piles group at the normal fault rupture. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 2014, 55(8): 1130–1143
22 S Yang, G P Mavroeidis. Bridges crossing fault rupture zones: A review. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2018, 113: 545–571
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.03.027
23 B Qu, R K Goel. Fault-rupture response spectrum analysis of a four-span curved bridge crossing earthquake fault rupture zones. In: Structures Congress 2015. Oreqon: American Society of Civil Engineers Structures, 2015
24 J Sherard, L Cluff, C Allen. Potentially active faults in dam foundations. Geotechnique, 1974, 24(3): 367–428
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1974.24.3.367
25 C R Allen, L S Cluff. Active faults in dam foundations: An update. In: Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. WCEE, 2000
26 M M Zanjani, A Soroush. Numerical modeling of reverse fault rupture propagation through clayey embankments. International Journal of Civil Engineering, 2013, 11: 122–132
27 G Gazetas, A Pecker, E Faccioli, R Paolucci, I Anastasopoulos. Preliminary design recommendations for dip-slip fault-foundation interaction. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2008, 6(4): 677–687
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-008-9082-5
28 M Moradi, M Rojhani, A Galandarzadeh, S Takada. Centrifuge modeling of buried continuous pipelines subjected to normal faulting. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2013, 12(1): 155–164
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-013-0159-z
29 M Rojhani, M Moradi, A Galandarzadeh, S Takada. Centrifuge modeling of buried continuous pipelines subjected to reverse faulting. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2012, 49(6): 659–670
https://doi.org/10.1139/t2012-022
30 P B Burridge, R F Scott, J F Hall. Centrifuge study of faulting effects on tunnel. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1989, 115(7): 949–967
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1989)115:7(949)
31 M G Varnusfaderani, A Golshani, R Nemati. Behavior of circular tunnels crossing active faults. Acta Geodynamica et Geomaterialia, 2015, 12: 363–376
https://doi.org/10.13168/AGG.2015.0039
32 M G Varnusfaderani, A Golshani, S Majidian. Analysis of cylindrical tunnels under combined primary near fault seismic excitations and subsequent reverse fault rupture. Acta Geodynamica et Geomaterialia, 2017, 14: 5–27
33 M L Lin, C F Chung, F S Jeng, T C Yao. The deformation of overburden soil induced by thrust faulting and its impact on underground tunnels. Engineering Geology, 2007, 92(3–4): 110–132
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.03.008
34 M H Baziar, A Nabizadeh, C Jung Lee, W Yi Hung. Centrifuge modeling of interaction between reverse faulting and tunnel. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2014, 65: 151–164
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.04.008
35 T Rabczuk, T Belytschko. Cracking particles: A simplified meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2004, 61(13): 2316–2343
https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1151
36 T Rabczuk, S Bordas, G Zi. On three-dimensional modelling of crack growth using partition of unity methods. Computers & Structures, 2010, 88(23–24): 1391–1411
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2008.08.010
37 T Rabczuk, G Zi, S Bordas, H Nguyen-Xuan. A simple and robust three-dimensional cracking-particle method without enrichment. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(37–40): 2437–2455
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2010.03.031
38 H Ren, X Zhuang, Y Cai, T Rabczuk. Dual-horizon peridynamics. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2016, 108(12): 1451–1476
https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.5257
39 H Ren, X Zhuang, T Rabczuk. Dual-horizon peridynamics: A stable solution to varying horizons. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 318: 762–782
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.12.031
40 P Areias, T Rabczuk, D Dias-da-Costa. Element-wise fracture algorithm based on rotation of edges. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2013, 110: 113–137
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2013.06.006
41 S Zhou, T Rabczuk, X Zhuang. Phase field modeling of quasi-static and dynamic crack propagation: COMSOL implementation and case studies. Advances in Engineering Software, 2018, 122: 31–49
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2018.03.012
42 S Zhou, X Zhuang, T Rabczuk. A phase-field modeling approach of fracture propagation in poroelastic media. Engineering Geology, 2018, 240: 189–203
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.04.008
43 S W Zhou, C C Xia. Propagation and coalescence of quasi-static cracks in Brazilian disks: An insight from a phase field model. Acta Geotechnica, 2018, 14: 1195–1214
44 P Areias, J Reinoso, P P Camanho, J César de Sá, T Rabczuk. Effective 2D and 3D crack propagation with local mesh refinement and the screened Poisson equation. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2018, 189: 339–360
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.11.017
45 X Zhuang, C Augarde, K Mathisen. Fracture modeling using meshless methods and level sets in 3D: Framework and modeling. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2012, 92(11): 969–998
https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.4365
46 P Areias, M Msekh, T Rabczuk. Damage and fracture algorithm using the screened Poisson equation and local remeshing. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2016, 158: 116–143
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.10.042
47 P Areias, T Rabczuk. Steiner-point free edge cutting of tetrahedral meshes with applications in fracture. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 2017, 132: 27–41
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2017.05.001
48 S Zhou, X Zhuang, H Zhu, T Rabczuk. Phase field modelling of crack propagation, branching and coalescence in rocks. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2018, 96: 174–192
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2018.04.011
49 H MRl. Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology: Earthquake model. Washington, D.C.: Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, 2003
50 M J O’Rourke, X Liu. Response of Buried Pipelines Subject to Earthquake Effects. Buffalo: Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, 1999
51 M Russo, G Germani, W Amberg. Design and construction of large tunnel through active faults: A recent application. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Tunnelling and Underground Space Use. Istanbul, 2002
52 G Madabhushi. Centrifuge Modelling for Civil Engineers. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2014
53 M Moradi, A Ghalandarzadeh. A new geotechnical centrifuge at the University of Tehran, IR Iran. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Physical Modeling in Geotechnics. London: Talor & Francis Group, 2010
54 M Bayat, A Ghalandarzadeh. Stiffness degradation and damping ratio of sand-gravel mixtures under saturated state. International Journal of Civil Engineering, 2017, 16: 1261–1277
55 S M Haeri, A Kavand, I Rahmani, H Torabi. Response of a group of piles to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading by large scale shake table testing. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2012, 38: 25–45
56 A Aashto. Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Washington, D.C.: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2001
57 A Peyvandi, P Soroushian, S Jahangirnejad. Structural design methodologies for concrete pipes with steel and synthetic fiber reinforcement. ACI Structural Journal, 2014, 111: 83–92
58 O C Young, J Trott. Buried Rigid Pipes. New York: CRC Press, 2014
59 A Fahimi, T S Evans, J Farrow, D A Jesson, M J Mulheron, P A Smith. On the residual strength of aging cast iron trunk mains: Physically-based models for asset failure. Materials Science and Engineering A, 2016, 663: 204–212
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2016.03.029
60 R Rafiee, M R Habibagahi. Evaluating mechanical performance of GFRP pipes subjected to transverse loading. Thin-walled Structures, 2018, 131: 347–359
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.06.037
61 R Rafiee, M R Habibagahi. On the stiffness prediction of GFRP pipes subjected to transverse loading. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 2018, 22(11): 4564–4572
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-018-2003-5
62 M E Kabir, B Song, B E Martin, W Chen. Compressive behavior of fine sand. Sandia National Laboratories, 2010.
63 M F Bransby, M C R Davies, A El Nahas, S Nagaoka. Centrifuge modelling of reverse fault-foundation interaction. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2008, 6(4): 607–628
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-008-9080-7
64 M Bransby, M Davies, A E Nahas. Centrifuge modelling of normal fault-foundation interaction. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2008, 6(4): 585–605
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-008-9079-0
65 C W Ng, Q Cai, P Hu. Centrifuge and numerical modeling of normal fault-rupture propagation in clay with and without a preexisting fracture. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2012, 138(12): 1492–1502
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000719
66 J Burland, J Standing, P Jardine. Assessing the risk of building damage due to tunnelling-lessons from the Jubilee Line Extension, london, Geotechnical Engineering: Meeting Society’s Needs. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Southeast Asian Geotechnical Conference. Hong Kong, China: CRC Press, 2001
67 J B Burland, J R Standing, F M Jardine. Building Response to Tunnelling: Case Studies from Construction of the Jubilee Line Extension. London: Thomas Telford, 2001
68 C Camós, O Špačková, D Straub, C Molins. Probabilistic approach to assessing and monitoring settlements caused by tunneling. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2016, 51: 313–325
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.10.041
69 S R Dindarloo, E Siami-Irdemoosa. Maximum surface settlement based classification of shallow tunnels in soft ground. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2015, 49: 320–327
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.04.021
70 Y S Fang, C T Wu, S F Chen, C Liu. An estimation of subsurface settlement due to shield tunneling. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2014, 44: 121–129
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2014.07.015
71 X Xie, Y Yang, M Ji. Analysis of ground surface settlement induced by the construction of a large-diameter shield-driven tunnel in Shanghai, China. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2016, 51: 120–132
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.10.008
72 M Som, S Das. Theory and practice of foundation design. Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd., 2003
73 K Terzaghi. Settlement of structures in Europe and methods of observation. In: American Society of Civil Engineers Proceedings. New York: ASCE, 1937
74 D H MacDonald. A survey of comparisons between calculated and observed settlements of structures on clay. In: Proceedings of the Correlation between Calculated and Observed Stresses and Displacements in structures Conference. London: Institution of Civil Engineers, 1995
75 T W Lambe, R V Whitman. Soil mechanics SI version. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2008
76 G Sowers. Foundation Engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1962
77 L Bjerrum. Discussion on proceedings of the European conference of soils mechanics and foundations engineering. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute Publication, 1963, 3: 1–3
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Mohammad Reza AZADI KAKAVAND, Reza ALLAHVIRDIZADEH. Enhanced empirical models for predicting the drift capacity of less ductile RC columns with flexural, shear, or axial failure modes[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(5): 1251-1270.
[2] Chu MAI, Katerina KONAKLI, Bruno SUDRET. Seismic fragility curves for structures using non-parametric representations[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2017, 11(2): 169-186.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed