Login
Registrieren
Passwort zurücksetzen
Veröffentlichen & Verteilen
Verlagslösungen
Vertriebslösungen
Themen
Allgemein
Altertumswissenschaften
Architektur und Design
Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft, Buchwissenschaft
Biologie
Chemie
Geowissenschaften
Geschichte
Industrielle Chemie
Informatik
Jüdische Studien
Kulturwissenschaften
Kunst
Linguistik und Semiotik
Literaturwissenschaft
Materialwissenschaft
Mathematik
Medizin
Musik
Pharmazie
Philosophie
Physik
Rechtswissenschaften
Sozialwissenschaften
Sport und Freizeit
Technik
Theologie und Religion
Wirtschaftswissenschaften
Veröffentlichungen
Zeitschriften
Bücher
Konferenzberichte
Verlage
Blog
Kontakt
Suche
EUR
USD
GBP
Deutsch
English
Deutsch
Polski
Español
Français
Italiano
Warenkorb
Home
Zeitschriften
Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Band 40 (2018): Heft 2 (October 2018)
Uneingeschränkter Zugang
On consistent nonlinear analysis of soil–structure interaction problems
Andrzej Truty
Andrzej Truty
| 03. Okt. 2018
Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Band 40 (2018): Heft 2 (October 2018)
Über diesen Artikel
Vorheriger Artikel
Nächster Artikel
Zusammenfassung
Artikel
Figuren und Tabellen
Referenzen
Autoren
Artikel in dieser Ausgabe
Vorschau
PDF
Zitieren
Teilen
Article Category:
Research Article
Online veröffentlicht:
03. Okt. 2018
Seitenbereich:
86 - 95
Eingereicht:
23. Apr. 2018
Akzeptiert:
20. Aug. 2018
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2018-0019
Schlüsselwörter
soil–structure interaction
,
constitutive modelling
,
deep excavations
,
finite elements
© 2018 Andrzej Truty, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.
Figure 1
Problem of coupling shear and volumetric plastic mechanisms during triaxial CD test carried out on normally or lightly overconsolidated samples.
Figure 2
OCR profiles for assumed pre-overburden pressure values qPOP.
Figure 3
Setting the initial position of the plastic surfaces of the HS model.
Figure 4
FE model of deep excavation protected with a diaphragm wall.
Figure 5
Envelope of characteristic bending moments (Cases A1 and A2) and corresponding membrane forces (Case A1 only) at the time instance when the foundation raft is installed.
Figure 6
Comparison of characteristic bending moment envelopes (Case A1 only) based on all time instances registered until the last excavation step and then until the time instance at which the foundation raft is installed.
Figure 7
Comparison of wall deflections (Cases A1 and A2) at the time instance corresponding to the last excavation step (dashed lines) and at the time instance when the foundation raft is installed (solid lines).
Figure 8
Checking the ULS condition at any point of the structure by projecting the stress resultant pairs {Nxx, Mxx · γ̃} on the domain bound by the N – M interaction diagram.
Figure 9
Envelope of characteristic bending moments (Case B1) and corresponding membrane forces at the time instance when the foundation raft is installed.
Figure 10
Comparison of characteristic bending moment envelopes based on all time instances registered until the last excavation step (B1∗) and then until the time instance at which the foundation raft is installed (B1).
Figure 11
Comparison of wall deflections at the time instance corresponding to the last excavation step (dashed lines) (Cases A1∗, B1∗ and B2∗) and at the time instance when the foundation raft is installed (solid lines) (Cases A1, B1 and B2).
Figure 12
Envelope of characteristic bending moments (Case B2) and corresponding membrane forces at the time instance when the foundation raft is installed.
Preliminary design of reinforcement in the wall based on the results achieved for Case A1.
Depth range, m
A
s1
, cm
2
/m
A
s2
, cm
2
/m
–7
12.5
12.5
–10
25.0
12.5
–18
50.0
12.5
–20
12.5
12.5
–26
12.5
18.75
Vorschau