Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
2D and 2.5D Responses of Long Underground Tunnels to Moving Train Loads: A Comparison Study
Abstract In this paper, a comparative study is conducted for the responses of soil-tunnel systems to moving train loads using the 2D and 2.5D finite/infinite element approaches, considering the effects of train speed, rail roughness and floating slab. Specific account is taken of the wheel-rail interaction forces. The following are the major findings of the numerical studies: (1) For all the cases studied, the soil response predicted by the 2D approach is always higher than the 2.5D approach. (2) The 2D result based on plane strain condition can be regarded as the limit of the 2.5D analysis with infinite train speed for smooth rails. (3) The 2D frequency response function (FRF) is contributed by frequencies of the whole range of the half space, but less sensitive to variation in roughness frequencies, while the 2.5D FRF is concentrated around the frequencies of rail roughness. In summary, the 2D approach saves a huge amount of computation time, due to the use of relatively smaller system matrices. But the 2.5D approach is more realistic in that it can cope with wave transmission along the tunnel axis.
2D and 2.5D Responses of Long Underground Tunnels to Moving Train Loads: A Comparison Study
Abstract In this paper, a comparative study is conducted for the responses of soil-tunnel systems to moving train loads using the 2D and 2.5D finite/infinite element approaches, considering the effects of train speed, rail roughness and floating slab. Specific account is taken of the wheel-rail interaction forces. The following are the major findings of the numerical studies: (1) For all the cases studied, the soil response predicted by the 2D approach is always higher than the 2.5D approach. (2) The 2D result based on plane strain condition can be regarded as the limit of the 2.5D analysis with infinite train speed for smooth rails. (3) The 2D frequency response function (FRF) is contributed by frequencies of the whole range of the half space, but less sensitive to variation in roughness frequencies, while the 2.5D FRF is concentrated around the frequencies of rail roughness. In summary, the 2D approach saves a huge amount of computation time, due to the use of relatively smaller system matrices. But the 2.5D approach is more realistic in that it can cope with wave transmission along the tunnel axis.
2D and 2.5D Responses of Long Underground Tunnels to Moving Train Loads: A Comparison Study
Yang, Y. B. (Autor:in) / Liang, Xujie (Autor:in) / Hung, Hsiao-Hui (Autor:in) / Wu, Yuntian (Autor:in)
28.06.2017
13 pages
Aufsatz/Kapitel (Buch)
Elektronische Ressource
Englisch
Half space , Soil , Train load , Tunnel , Wave transmission , 2D approach , 2.5D approach Engineering , Geoengineering, Foundations, Hydraulics , Geotechnical Engineering & Applied Earth Sciences , Vibration, Dynamical Systems, Control , Monitoring/Environmental Analysis , Building Repair and Maintenance , Transportation Technology and Traffic Engineering
Comparative study of 2D and 2.5D responses of long underground tunnels to moving train loads
| British Library Online Contents | 2017
Comparative study of 2D and 2.5D responses of long underground tunnels to moving train loads
| British Library Online Contents | 2017
Comparative study of 2D and 2.5D responses of long underground tunnels to moving train loads
| British Library Online Contents | 2017
On computation of soil vibrations due to moving train loads by 2.5D approach
| Online Contents | 2017