A REVIEW OF DAMAGE CASE HISTORIES AND METHODS FOR THE PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND STRUCTURES IN CASE OF EARTHQUAKE AND BLAST LOADS

Azlan Adnan, Yousef Karimi Vahed, Norazah Arjuna, Babak Farmanbordar

Abstract


Underground facilities are an integral part of the infrastructure of modern society and are used for a wide range of applications, including subways and railways, highways, material storage, and sewage and water transport. Underground facilities built in areas subject to earthquake activity must withstand both seismic and static loading. Historically, underground facilities have experienced a lower rate of damage than surface structures. Nevertheless, some underground structures have experienced significant damage in recent large earthquakes, including the 1995 Kobe, Japan earthquake, the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake and the 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake. In order to understand the behavior of underground structure during earthquake and blast loads, a wide collection of case histories has been reviewed from the available literature and some of them have been described in detail. Criteria are also shown in the papers which are used to classify the damage database. Such a classification involves entity and type of damage and is aimed to highlight the possible causes of damage, in order to improve performance- based seismic design of tunnels. This article presents a summary of the current state of seismic analysis and design for underground structures.

Keywords


Underground structure, earthquake, case histories, blast loads

Full Text:

PDF

References


AFPS/AFTES, (2001), Earthquake design and protection of underground structures.

ASCE, (1974), Earthquake damage evaluation and design considerations for underground structures, Febbraio, American Society of Civil Engineers, Los Angeles Section.

Bach P. J., (1977) “A Summary of Studies on Underground Nuclear Power Plant Siting,” Underground Space, 2(1) pp. 47-51 (1977).

Bardet J.P., Davis C.A., 1999, Response of large-diameter buried pipes to earthquakes, Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering.

Bender H. F., (Ed.) Proceedings of a Symposium on Underground Siting of Nuclear Power Plants, E. Schweizerbart’scheVerlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, Germany (1982).

Dowding C.H., Rozen A., (1978), Damage to rock tunnels from earthquake shaking, American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division,Vol.104, p. 175-191.

Forni, M. (2010).Guidelines proposal for seismic isolation of Nuclear Power Plant.

Haque M.N, Zisan M.B. & Bhuiyan A.R. (2013), Seismic Response Analysis Of Base Isolated Building: Effect of Lead Rubber Bearing Characteristics. Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 25(2), pp. 154-167

Hashash Y.M.A., Tseng W.S., Krimotat A., 1998, Seismic soil-structure interaction analysis for

immersed tube tunnels retrofit, Geotech. Earthquake Eng. Soil Mech. III 2, 1380-1391.ASCE

Special publication n°75.

Hashash, Y.M.A., Hook, J.J., Schmidt, B., Yao, J.I-C.(2001), Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 16,247-293.

Hetenyi M., 1976, Beam on elastic foundation, University Michigan Press.

Huang T.H., Ho T.Y., Chang C.T., Yao X.L., Chang Q.D.,Lee H.C., 1999, Quick investigation and assessment on tunnel structure after earthquake, and the relevant reinforced methods.

Report for Public Construction Commission, Taipei, Taiwan.

Iida H., Hiroto T., Yoshida N., Iwafuji M., (1996), Damage to Daikai subway station, Soils and Foundations, Japanese Geotechnical Society, Special issue on geotechnical aspects of the 17 January 1995 Hyogoken-Nambu Earthquake, p.283-300.

Kawashima K., (2000), Seismic design of underground structures in soft ground: a review,Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction in Soft Ground, Kusakabe, Fujita& Miyazaki (eds). Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5809 1066.

Kramer S.L., (1996), Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering,.653 pp., Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.

Miyajima M., Hashimoto T.; (2001), Damage to water supply system and surface rupture due to fault movement during the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake in Taiwan, Proceedings Fourth International

Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, San Diego, California, Marzo 2001.

Myers C. W., Elkins N. Z., Kunze J. F. and Mahar J. M., (2006) “Potential Advantages of Underground Nuclear Parks,” Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Nuclear

Engineering, 14-8913, Miami, Florida, July, 17-20, 2006

Myers W. and Elkins N., (2003) “Concept for an Underground Nuclear Park and National Energy Supply Complex at Carlsbad, N.M.,” Report LA-24064, Los Alamos National

Laboratory,.

Owen G.N., Scholl R.E., (1981), Earthquake engineering of large underground structures, Report no. FHWA/RD-80/195.Federal Highway Administration and National Science Foundation.

Power M.S., Rosidi D., Kaneshiro J.Y., (1998), Seismic vulnerability of tunnels and underground

structures revisited, Proceedings of North American Tunneling ’98, Newport Beach, CA, Balkema Rotterdam, p. 243-250.

Sovacool, B. K. (2008). The costs of failure: a preliminary assessment of major energy accidents, 1907–2007. Energy Policy, 36(5), 1802-1820.

Wang J., (1993), Seismic Design of Tunnels: A Simple State-of-the-art Design Approach, Monograph 7, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc, New York.

Wang W.L., Wang T.T., Su J.J., Lin C.H., Seng C.R., Huang T.H., (2001), Assessment of damage in mountain tunnels due to the Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake, Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 16, p.133-150.

Yeh G.C.K. (1974), Seismic analysis of slender buried beams, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 64,5 pp.1551-1562.

Yoshida N., (1999), Underground and buried structure, Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Seco e Pinto (ed.)1999 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5




DOI: https://doi.org/10.11113/mjce.v27n2.377

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2018 Penerbit UTM Press, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Disclaimer : This website has been updated to the best of our knowledge to be accurate. However, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused by the usage of any information obtained from this web site.
Best viewed: Mozilla Firefox 4.0 & Google Chrome at 1024 × 768 resolution.