Investigation on Rupture Initiation and Propagation of Traffic Tunnel under Seismic Excitation Based on Acoustic Emission Technology
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Experimental Setup
2.1. Tunnel Similar Model Preparation
2.2. Deployment of AE Sensors and Strain Gauges
2.3. Shaking Table System and Working Cases
3. Results
3.1. Apparent Cracks
3.2. Variation of AE and Strain in Various Working Cases
3.2.1. Variation of AE and Strain at the Arch Foot
3.2.2. Variation of AE and Strain at the Arch Vault
4. Discussion
4.1. Further Verification of the Tunnel Model Rupture Initiation
4.2. Failure Mechanism of Tunnel during Earthquake
5. Conclusions
- (1)
- As an effective non-destructive testing method, AE technology is also suitable for tunnel rupture process monitoring in shaking table tests, and also rupture initiation and propagation characteristics of the tunnel, which are vital for deep understanding of dynamic responses of tunnels under seismic wave excitation. For the analysis of AE signals, centroid frequency can well characterize the distribution state of AE signal frequency components; it is an effective parameter to pick out waveforms which contain rupture AE signals in shaking table test. Furthermore, wavelet de-noising and two-layer lifting wavelet decomposition and reconstruction techniques are particularly suitable for non-stationary AE signals processing in complex shaking table tests, where the signals collected by AE sensors are the superposition of vibration and rupturing. Through wavelet decomposition and reconstruction, the rupture signals of the tunnel can be well separated from the vibration signals; the rupture AE signal frequency of the tunnel under seismic excitation in this research was found to be in the range of 20–30 kHz. However, the AE signal frequency is significantly related to the distance from rupture source to sensor, material properties, and the sensor resonant frequency; therefore, caution should be aroused when frequency characteristics of the tunnel model-rupturing AE signal in this research is used to make comparative analysis by other researchers.
- (2)
- The vault and arch foot of the tunnel model are prone to rupture under seismic excitation in shaking table test. However, the damage of the arch foot will continue to deteriorate with the subsequent vibrations after the initiation of rupture, while the ruptures in vault do not continue to expand under the subsequent seismic excitation after the initiation of rupture. This indicates that arch foot and vault of the tunnel have different dynamic responses to seismic excitations. In addition, the results in this research show that the Kobe wave drive the shaking table to make the tunnel model generate more ruptures than the El wave, which means that the seismic wave with high energy, short duration, and significant low-frequency components has a higher degree of damage potential to underground tunnels. Therefore, great attention should be paid to the arch foot for underground tunnel design in earthquake-prone areas; also, materials with good resistance to seismic wave with short duration and significant low-frequency components should be selected as much as possible for tunnel construction in earthquake-prone areas.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- ASAKURA, T.; KOJIMA, Y. Study on the Damage Mechanism of Mountain Tunnel under Earthquake and Improvement of Earthquake Resistance; Railway Technical Research Institute: Kyoto, Japan, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Qian, Q.H.; He, C.; Yan, Q.X. Dynamic Response Characteristics of Tunnel Engineering and Earthquake Damage Analysis of Wenchuan Earthquake Tunnel and Its Enlightenment. In Proceedings of Investigation Analysis of Earthquake Damage in Wenchuan Earthquake Engineering; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2009; pp. 702–706. [Google Scholar]
- Shrestha, R.; Li, X.; Yi, L.; Mandal, A.K. Seismic Damage and Possible Influencing Factors of the Damages in the Melamchi Tunnel in Nepal Due to Gorkha Earthquake 2015. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2020, 38, 5295–5308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Shi, X.J.; Li, J. Shaking Table Test of Utility Tunnel under Non-Uniform Earthquake Wave Excitation. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2010, 30, 1400–1416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xin, C.L.; Wang, Z.Z.; Zhou, J.M.; Gao, B. Shaking Table Tests on Seismic Behavior of Polypropylene Fiber Reinforced Concrete Tunnel Lining. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2019, 88, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.H.; Yuan, Y.; Bao, Z.; Yu, H.T.; Bilotta, E. Shaking Table Tests on the Intersection of Cross Passage and Twin Tunnels. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2019, 124, 136–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moss, R.E.; Crosariol, V.; Kuo, S. Shake Table Testing to Quantify Seismic Soil Structure Interaction of Underground Structures. In Proceedings of the Fifth international conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics and Symposium, San Diego, CA, USA, 24 May 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Moss, R.E.S.; Crosariol, V.A. Scale Model Shake Table Testing of an Underground Tunnel Cross Section in Soft Clay. Earthq. Spectra 2013, 29, 1413–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, H.T.; Yan, X.; Bobet, A.; Yuan, Y.; Xu, G.P.; Su, Q.K. Multi-Point Shaking Table Test of a Long Tunnel Subjected to Non-Uniform Seismic Loadings. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2018, 16, 1041–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.T.; Yu, H.T.; Bobet, A.; Yuan, Y. Shaking Table Tests of Transition Tunnel Connecting Tbm and Drill-and-Blast Tunnels. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2020, 96, 103197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.Z.; Jiang, Y.J.; Zhu, C.A.; Sun, T.C. Shaking Table Tests of Tunnel Linings in Progressive States of Damage. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2015, 50, 109–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, J.H.; Lu, C.C. Seismic Capacity Assessment of Old Sanyi Railway Tunnels. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2007, 22, 433–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, T.C.; Yue, Z.R.; Gao, B.; Li, Q.; Zhang, Y.G. Model Test Study on the Dynamic Response of the Portal Section of Two Parallel Tunnels in a Seismically Active Area. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2011, 26, 391–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, H.T.; Yuan, Y.; Xu, G.P.; Su, Q.K.; Yan, X.; Li, C. Multi-Point Shaking Table Test for Long Tunnels Subjected to Non-Uniform Seismic Loadings-Part Ii: Application to the Hzm Immersed Tunnel. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2018, 108, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guan, Z.C.; Zhou, Y.; Gou, X.D.; Huang, H.W.; Wu, X.Z. The Seismic Responses and Seismic Properties of Large Section Mountain Tunnel Based on Shaking Table Tests. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2019, 90, 383–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, H.; Li, T.B.; Xia, L.; Zhao, J.X.; Wang, D. Shaking Table Tests on Seismic Measures of a Model Mountain Tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2016, 60, 197–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xin, C.L.; Wang, Z.Z.; Gao, B. Shaking Table Tests on Seismic Response and Damage Mode of Tunnel Linings in Diverse Tunnel-Void Interaction States. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2018, 77, 295–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mogi, K. Magnitude-Frequency Relation for Elastic Shocks Accompanying Fractures of Various Materials and Some Related Problems in Earthquakes (2nd Paper). J. Univ. Tokyo Earthq. Res. Inst. 1963, 40, 831–853. [Google Scholar]
- Scholz, C.H. Microfracturing of Rock in Compression. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1967. [Google Scholar]
- Shigeishi, M.; Ohtsu, M. Acoustic Emission Moment Tensor Analysis: Development for Crack Identification in Concrete Materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2001, 15, 311–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rui, Y.; Zhou, Z.; Cai, X.; Dong, L. A Novel Robust Method for Acoustic Emission Source Location Using Dbscan Principle. Measurement 2022, 191, 110812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.; Li, S. Damage Degree Evaluation of Masonry Using Optimized Svm-Based Acoustic Emission Monitoring and Rate Process Theory. Measurement 2022, 190, 110729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Z.; Chen, B.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, S. Multi-Sensing Investigation of Crack Problems for Concrete Dams Based on Detection and Monitoring Data: A Case Study. Measurement 2021, 175, 109137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lei, X.L.; Masuda, K.; Nishizawa, O.; Jouniaux, L.; Liu, L.Q.; Ma, W.T.; Satoh, T.; Kusunose, K. Detailed Analysis of Acoustic Emission Activity During Catastrophic Fracture of Faults in Rock. J. Struct. Geol. 2004, 26, 247–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, D.L.; Liu, X.L.; He, W.; Xia, C.G.; Gong, F.Q.; Li, X.B.; Cao, X.Y. Effect of Attenuation on Amplitude Distribution and B Value in Rock Acoustic Emission Tests. Geophys. J. Int. 2022, 229, 933–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.L.; Han, M.S.; He, W.; Li, X.B.; Chen, D.L. A New B Value Estimation Method in Rock Acoustic Emission Testing. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2020, 125, e2020JB019658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.L.; Liu, Z.; Li, X.B.; Gong, F.Q.; Du, K. Experimental Study on the Effect of Strain Rate on Rock Acoustic Emission Characteristics. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 2020, 133, 104420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, Q.; Li, S.X.; Liu, X.L.; Gong, F.Q.; Li, X.B. Effect of Loading Rate on Fracture Behaviors of Shale under Mode I Loading. J. Cent. S. Univ. 2020, 27, 3118–3132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grosse, C.; Ohtsu, M. Acoustic Emission Testing: Basics for Research-Applications in Civil Engineering; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 1–404. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, S.W.; Yang, C.H.; Wang, G.B.; Li, E.B.; Chen, L. Experimental Study of Acoustic Emission Monitoring in Situ Excavation Damage Zone of Beishan Exploration Tunnel. Rock Soil Mech. 2017, 38, 349–358. [Google Scholar]
- Spies, T.; Hesser, J.; Eisenblätter, J.; Eilers, G. Monitoring of the Rock Mass in the Final Repository Morsleben: Experiences with Acoustic Emission Measurements and Conclusions. In Proceedings of the DisTec (Disposal Technologies and Concepts), International Conference on Radioactive Waste Disposal, Berlin, Germany, 26–28 April 2004; pp. 26–28. [Google Scholar]
- Spies, T.; Hesser, J.; Eisenblätter, J.; Eilers, J.; Potvin, Y.; Hudyman, M. Measurements of Acoustic Emission During Backfilling of Large Excavations. In Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Rock Bursts and Seismicity in Mines, Perth, Australia, 9–11 March 2005; pp. 379–384. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, Y.Y.; Li, Z.J. Frequency Characteristic Analysis on Acoustic Emission of Mortar Using Cement-Based Piezoelectric Sensors. Smart Struct. Syst. 2011, 8, 321–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aggelis, D.G.; Mpalaskas, A.C.; Matikas, T.E. Investigation of Different Fracture Modes in Cement-Based Materials by Acoustic Emission. Cem. Concr. Res. 2013, 48, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Megid, W.A.; Chainey, M.A.; Lebrun, P.; Robert Hay, D. Monitoring Fatigue Cracks on Eyebars of Steel Bridges Using Acoustic Emission: A Case Study. Eng. Fract. Mech. 2019, 211, 198–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savage, J.C.; Mansinha, L. Radiation from a Tensile Fracture. J. Geophys. Res. 1963, 68, 6345–6358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antonini, M.; Barlaud, M.; Mathieu, P.; Daubechies, I. Image Coding Using Wavelet Transform. IEEE Trans. Image Processing 1992, 1, 205–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, X.L.; Liu, Z.; Li, X.B.; Rao, M.; Dong, L.J. Wavelet Threshold De-Noising of Rock Acoustic Emission Signals Subjected to Dynamic Loads. J. Geophys. Eng. 2018, 15, 1160–1170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hao, Q.S.; Zhang, X.; Wang, Y.; Shen, Y.; Makis, V. A Novel Rail Defect Detection Method Based on Undecimated Lifting Wavelet Packet Transform and Shannon Entropy-Improved Adaptive Line Enhancer. J. Sound Vib. 2018, 425, 208–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chai, M.; Hou, X.; Zhang, Z.; Duan, Q. Identification and Prediction of Fatigue Crack Growth under Different Stress Ratios Using Acoustic Emission Data. Int. J. Fatigue 2022, 160, 106860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janeliukstis, R.; Clark, A.; Papaelias, M.; Kaewunruen, S. Flexural Cracking-Induced Acoustic Emission Peak Frequency Shift in Railway Prestressed Concrete Sleepers. Eng. Struct. 2019, 178, 493–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, H.T.; Chen, J.T.; Bobet, A.; Yuan, Y. Damage Observation and Assessment of the Longxi Tunnel During the Wenchuan Earthquake. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2016, 54, 102–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udwadia, F.E.; Trifunac, M.D. Comparison of Earthquake and Microtremor Ground Motions in El Centro, California. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 1973, 63, 1227–1253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maher, A.; Takemiya, H. Seismic Wave Amplification in Kobe During Hyogo-Ken Nanbu Earthquake. In Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (11WCEE), Acapulco, Mexico, 23–28 June 1996; p. 1885. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, Q.H.; Kamogawa, M.; Ouchi, T. Localization of Strong Ground Motions a Possible Cause of Localized Damage During the 1995 M=7.2 Kobe Earthquake. Proc. Jpn. Acad. Ser. B 2001, 77, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Feng, Z.J.; Zhang, C.; He, J.B.; Dong, Y.X.; Yuan, F.B. Shaking Table Test of Time-History Response of Rock-Socketed Single Pile under Strong Earthquake. Rock Soil Mech. 2021, 42, 3227–3237. [Google Scholar]
- Hashash, Y.M.; Park, D.; John, I.; Yao, C. Ovaling Deformations of Circular Tunnels under Seismic Loading, an Update on Seismic Design and Analysis of Underground Structures. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2005, 20, 435–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Parameter | Prototype | Similarity Ratio | Model | Parameter | Prototype | Similarity Ratio | Model | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Geometry (m) | 48 | 2.4 | Buried depth (m) | 40.00 | 2.00 | |||
Active fault thickness (m) | 7.0 | 0.35 | Section height (m) | 9.59 | 0.48 | |||
Young’s modulus/GPa | 6.50 | 0.20 | Sectional area (m2) | 60.99 | 0.15 | |||
Density (kg/m3) | 2.4 | 1.92 | Lining thickness (m) | 0.4 | 0.062 | |||
Time (s) | 30 | 7.19 | Acceleration (g) | 0.20 | 0.20 | |||
Frequency (Hz) | El wave | 6.5 | 29.07 | Velocity (m/s) | 58.8 | 13.15 | ||
Kobe wave | 6.2 | 27.73 |
Threshold (dB) | Analogue Filter (kHz) | Sample Rate (kHz) | Pre-Trigger (μs) | PDT (μs) | HDT (μs) | HLT (μs) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
40 | 1~1000 | 2000 | 256 | 50 | 200 | 300 |
Working Cases | Seismic Wave | Scale | X Direction | Y Direction | Z Direction |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | El wave | 0.2 × g | 1 | / | / |
2 | 0.2 × g | / | 1 | / | |
3 | 0.2 × g | / | / | 1 | |
4 | 0.2 × g | 1 | 1 | / | |
5 | Kobe wave | 0.2 × g | 1 | / | / |
6 | 0.2 × g | / | 1 | / | |
7 | 0.2 × g | / | / | 1 | |
8 | 0.2 × g | 1 | 1 | / | |
9 | El wave | 0.4 × g | 1 | / | / |
10 | 0.4 × g | / | 1 | / | |
11 | 0.4 × g | / | / | 1 | |
12 | 0.4 × g | 1 | 1 | / | |
13 | Kobe wave | 0.4 × g | 1 | / | / |
14 | 0.4 × g | / | 1 | / | |
15 | 0.4 × g | / | / | 1 | |
16 | 0.4 × g | 1 | 1 | / | |
17 | El wave | 0.6 × g | 1 | / | / |
18 | 0.6 × g | / | 1 | / | |
19 | 0.6 × g | / | / | 1 | |
20 | 0.6 × g | 1 | 1 | / | |
21 | Kobe wave | 0.6 × g | 1 | / | / |
22 | 0.6 × g | / | 1 | / | |
23 | 0.6 × g | / | / | 1 | |
24 | 0.6 × g | 1 | 1 | / |
Working Cases | S4(2) | S711 | S3(4) | S5(4) | S64 | S44 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 10.987 | 47.61 | 13.43 | 25.64 | 34.18 | 39.06 |
2 | 8.545 | 57.38 | 29.29 | 56.16 | 67.14 | 35.41 |
3 | 9.766 | 41.51 | 34.18 | 37.85 | 54.93 | 41.51 |
4 | 8.55 | 48.83 | 69.58 | 61.04 | 69.10 | 54.57 |
5 | 9.766 | 57.371 | 14.65 | 34.18 | 89.11 | 42.73 |
6 | 0.00 | 10.987 | 35.40 | 56.16 | 73.31 | 48.83 |
7 | 0.00 | 30.519 | 26.86 | 45.17 | 90.34 | 37.84 |
8 | 2.44 | 10.99 | 39.06 | 67.14 | 68.61 | 48.83 |
9 | 9.77 | 52.49 | 20.75 | 18.31 | 24.42 | 13.43 |
10 | 15.87 | 19.53 | 85.45 | 48.83 | 70.81 | 24.42 |
11 | 20.75 | 76.91 | 47.61 | 36.62 | 28.08 | 23.19 |
12 | 13.43 | 32.961 | 92.78 | 62.26 | 73.25 | 31.74 |
13 | 18.31 | 134.29 | 21.97 | 29.30 | 48.83 | 30.52 |
14 | 24.42 | 173.35 | 87.90 | 84.23 | 70.81 | 53.71 |
15 | 158.7 | 148.93 | 52.49 | 51.27 | 47.61 | 29.30 |
16 | 126.96 | 393.09 | 96.44 | 95.22 | 85.74 | 51.27 |
17 | 15.87 | 125.74 | 31.74 | 37.84 | 35.40 | 21.97 |
18 | 37.84 | 275.9 | 103.77 | 84.23 | 93.99 | 29.30 |
19 | 283.22 | 198.99 | 74.47 | 92.78 | 54.93 | 24.42 |
20 | 175.79 | 277.12 | 111.09 | 113.53 | 91.56 | 31.74 |
21 | 202.65 | 365.01 | 45.17 | 51.27 | 67.14 | 52.49 |
22 | 274.67 | 355.25 | 106.21 | 44.05 | 85.45 | 61.04 |
23 | 1567.48 | 449.25 | 80.57 | 126.96 | 78.13 | 40.29 |
24 | 636.03 | 976.62 | 91.56 | 39.16 | 45.28 | 50.05 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, X.; Zeng, Y.; Fan, L.; Peng, S.; Liu, Q. Investigation on Rupture Initiation and Propagation of Traffic Tunnel under Seismic Excitation Based on Acoustic Emission Technology. Sensors 2022, 22, 4553. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22124553
Liu X, Zeng Y, Fan L, Peng S, Liu Q. Investigation on Rupture Initiation and Propagation of Traffic Tunnel under Seismic Excitation Based on Acoustic Emission Technology. Sensors. 2022; 22(12):4553. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22124553
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Xiling, Yuan Zeng, Ling Fan, Shuquan Peng, and Qinglin Liu. 2022. "Investigation on Rupture Initiation and Propagation of Traffic Tunnel under Seismic Excitation Based on Acoustic Emission Technology" Sensors 22, no. 12: 4553. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22124553
APA StyleLiu, X., Zeng, Y., Fan, L., Peng, S., & Liu, Q. (2022). Investigation on Rupture Initiation and Propagation of Traffic Tunnel under Seismic Excitation Based on Acoustic Emission Technology. Sensors, 22(12), 4553. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22124553