바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

(사)한국터널지하공간학회

ISSN : 2233-8292

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.18 No.2

Citation Share

Dynamic shear behavior of geosynthetic-soil interface considering thermal- chemical factors

(사)한국터널지하공간학회 / (사)한국터널지하공간학회, (P)2233-8292; (E)2287-4747
2016, v.18 no.2, pp.213-220
https://doi.org/10.9711/KTAJ.2016.18.2.213



& (2016). Dynamic shear behavior of geosynthetic-soil interface considering thermal- chemical factors. (사)한국터널지하공간학회, 18(2), 213-220, https://doi.org/10.9711/KTAJ.2016.18.2.213

Abstract

The needs for the utilization of space in the urban ara due to the increasing population and traffic volume. A Double-deck tunnel can be an appropriate solution. Geosynthetics are inevitably installed between ground and tunnel lining, therefore, geosynthetic-soil interface is also comprises. Dynamic shear behavior of geosynthetic-soil interface affects the dynamic behavior of tunnel, and experimental study is required since the behavior is very complicated. In this study, chemical factors such as acid and basic element in the groundwater and temperature are considered in the laboratory test. Multi-purpose Interface Apparatus(M-PIA) is utilized and submerging periods are 60 and 960 days. Consequently, dynamic shear degradation of geosynthetic-soil interface considering chemical and thermal factors are verified.

keywords
복층터널, 반복단순전단시험, 토목섬유-흙 접촉면, 동적전단거동, 열-화학적 인자, Chemical factors, Cyclic simple shear tests, Soil-geosynthetic interface, Dynamic shear behavior, Waste landfill

Reference

1.

1. Armaleh, S.H., Desai, C.S. (1990), Modeling Include Testing of Cohesionless Soils under Disturbed State Concept, Report to the NSF, Dept. of Civil Engrg. and Engrg. Mech., Univ. of Arizona, Tuscon, Arizona.

2.

2. Christensen, T.H., Kjeldsen, P., Albrechtsen, H.J., Heron, G., Noelsen, P.H., Bjerg, P.L., Holm, P.E. (1994), Attenuation of Landfill Leachate Pollutants in Aquifers, Crit, Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 24, pp. 119-202.

3.

3. Kwak, C.W., Park, I.J., Park, J.B. (2013)a, “Modified cyclic shear test for evaluating disturbed function and numerical formulation of geosynthetic-soil interface considering chemical effect”, Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 553-567.

4.

4. Kwak, C.W., Park, I.J., Park, J.B. (2013)b, “Evaluation of disturbance function for geosynthetic-soil interface considering chemical reactions based on cyclic direct shear tests”, Soils and Foundations, Vol. 53, No. 5, pp. 720-734.

5.

5. Ladd, R.S. (1978), “Preparing test specimens using undercompaction”, Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 16-23.

6.

6. Park, I.J., Desai, C.S. (2000), “Cyclic behavior and liquefaction of sand using disturbed state concept”, Jouranal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 126, No. 9, pp. 834-846.

7.

7. Park, I.J. Yoo, J.H., Kim, S.I. (2000), “Disturbed state modeling for dynamic analysis of soil-structure interface”, Journal of KGS, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 5-13.

8.

8. Seo, M.W., Park, J.B., Park, I.J. (2007), “Evaluation of interface shear strength between geosynthetic under wet condition”, Soils and Foundations, Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 845-856.

(사)한국터널지하공간학회

e-Submission OA Policy