Risk Analysis of Subway Crossing Irregular-Plate Bridge and Technical Scheme of Controllable Active Pile Underpinning

doi:10.23940/ijpe.18.12.p29.31953205

Abstract

Abstract:

As a kind of repeated extra-static fixed point supporting structure, the irregular-plate bridge is extremely sensitive about the settlement of various pier columns. The construction risk of the subway tunnel structure crossing the irregular-plate bridge is very high, and it is necessary to research a mature design analysis method and reliable construction control measures. This paper takes Beijing Subway crossing Xinxing Irregular-plate Bridge as a case study. Firstly, it analyzes the displacement changing rules of the subway passing through the irregular-plate bridge through comparing the deformation characteristics of the irregular-plate bridge under different working conditions. Secondly, it studies the judgment standard of pile foundation underpinning and key construction control points. Finally, it combines with the control of the construction process, and analyze the underpinning and stratum reinforcement construction data. It can be concluded that only the stratum reinforcement measures cannot control the settlement of the piers located at the center of the subsidence area within a reasonable range. After adopting the scheme of the underpinning pile foundation and then excavating the tunnel, the risks are more controllable. Then, the paper puts forward key points of the pile underpinning. Finally, the improvement measures is discussed.

Key words: risk analysis, irregular-plate bridge, pile underpinning

Yougang Hu and Ping He. Risk Analysis of Subway Crossing Irregular-Plate Bridge and Technical Scheme of Controllable Active Pile Underpinning [J]. Int J Performability Eng, 2018, 14(12): 3195-3205.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

Figures/Tables 21

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Table 1

Main material parameter table"

Name	E/MPa	μ	ρ/kg $?$ m^-3	C/kPa	φ/°	Noumenal Structural
C30 concrete	3×10⁴	0.2	2500	/	/	Elastic
C50 concrete	3.45×10⁴	0.2	2500	/	/	Elastic
Floury soil	10	0.24	1840	10	8	Mohr-Coulomb
Gravel	20	0.31	2010	24	20	Mohr-Coulomb
Mudstone	73	0.36	2250	20	50	Mohr-Coulomb

Table 1

Figure 5

Table 2

Figure 6

Figure 7

Table 3

Table 4

Figure 8

Figure 9

Table 5

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Table 6

References 10

[1]	J. M. Jara, E. Madrigal, M. Jara, B. A. Olmos , “Seismic Source Effects on the Vulnerability of an Irregular Isolated Bridge,” Engineering Structures, Vol. 56, No. 6, pp. 105-115, 2013
[2]	I.N. Sutarja and I. W. Redana, “The Study on Bore Piles Foundation of the Reinforced Concrete Arch Bridge Beams of Tukad Pekerisan and Tukad Penet,” Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 776, pp. 157-162, 2015
[3]	R. Akbari , “Cyclic Response of RC Continuous Span Bridges with Irregular Configuration in Longitudinal Direction,” Structure & Infrastructure Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 161-171, 2013
[4]	V.V. Ledenyov and T. H. A. Chu, “Defining a Horizontal Displacement of a Drilled Pile Foundation Using the i. a. Simvulidi Approach,” Scientific Herald of the Voronezh State University of Architecture, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 32, 2015
[5]	J. Sagaseta, L. Tassinari, M. F. Ruiz, A. Muttoni , “Punching of Flat Slabs Supported on Rectangular Columns,” Engineering Structures, Vol. 77, pp. 17-33, 2014
[6]	C.F. Leung, Y. K. Cho, R. F. Shen , “Behavior of Pile Subject to Excavation-Induced Soil Movement,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 26, No. 11, pp. 947-954, 2000
[7]	J. N. Franzius, D. M. Potts, J. B. Burland , “The Response of Surface Structures to Tunnel Construction,” in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 3-17, 2006
[8]	R. Mangushev, Geotechnics, A. Osokin, and Docent, “Construction of Deep Foundation Ditch under a Reconstructed Multi-Storey Building on the Main Avenue of st. Petersburg,” Procedia Engineering, Vol. 189, pp. 622-629, 2017
[9]	E. J. Wu , “Internal Force Analysis of Underpinning Structure at Adverse Construction Stage in Complex Moving Engineering,” Construction Technology, Vol. 337, No. 40, pp. 35-37, 2011
[10]	E. Santini-Bell, M. Sanayei, B. Brenner, A. Blanchard , “Nondestructive Testing for Design Verification of Boston's Central Artery Underpinning Frames and Connections,” Bridge Structures, Vol. 4. No. 2, pp. 87-98, 2008

Pile column No.	Pile column settlement without reinforcement measures/mm	Pile column settlement with reinforcement measures/mm
1	-0.56	-0.12
2	-0.55	-0.11
3	-0.58	-0.13
4	-0.92	-0.32
5	-0.61	-0.14
6	-0.59	-0.07
7	-0.59	-0.09
8	-0.55	-0.11
9	-0.60	-0.13
10	-0.59	-0.11
11	-0.55	-0.09

Pile column No.	Working Condition 1 pier column settlement/mm	Working Condition 2 pier column settlement/mm	Working Condition 3 pier column settlement/mm
1	-8.37	-2.79	-0.64
2	-8.40	-2.79	-0.64
3	-8.75	-3.19	-0.71
4	-9.37	-2.67	-0.61
5	-8.70	-3.73	-0.80
6	-8.45	-2.46	-0.68
7	-8.37	-2.43	-0.68
8	-8.40	-2.34	-0.67
9	-8.35	-2.37	-0.67
10	-8.28	-2.32	-0.65
11	-8.25	-2.27	-0.64

Pile Column No.	Settlement of Various Pier Columns after the Excavation of Underpinned Pile/mm	Settlement of Various Pier Columns after the Excavation of Tunnel/mm	Final Settlement/mm	Settlement Limit Value/mm
1	-0.12	-0.64	-0.76	3mm
2	-0.11	-0.64	-0.75
3	-0.13	-0.71	-0.84
4	-0.32	-0.61	-0.93
5	-0.14	-0.80	-0.94
6	-0.07	-0.68	-0.75
7	-0.09	-0.68	-0.77
8	-0.11	-0.67	-0.78
9	-0.13	-0.67	-0.80
10	-0.11	-0.65	-0.76
11	-0.09	-0.64	-0.74

Underpinned pier column No.		Jacking force/kN	Mid-span relative displacement of the girder/mm	Mid-span stress/MPa
17-3 (2010.10.7)	South	2333	6.0	/
17-3 (2010.10.7)	North	2357	6.0	/
17-10 (2011.01.10)	South	2525	6.2	/
17-10 (2011.01.10)	North	2522	6.2	/
8-3 (2011.11.9)	South	2903	5.6	97.72
8-3 (2011.11.9)	North	2454	5.6	97.72
8-10 (2011.11.15)	South	2666	5.9	117.11
8-10 (2011.11.15)	North	2719	5.9	117.11

Pier No.	Final settlement/mm	Pier No.	Final settlement/mm
17-1#	-1.3	8-1#	0.1
17-2#	0.5	8-2#	-1.7
17-3#	+3.5	8-3#	-1.3
17-4#	0.6	8-4#	-2.5
17-5#	-0.6	8-5#	-4.8
17-6#	-0.3	8-6#	-3.5
17-7#	-0.3	8-7#	-1.0
17-8#	0.4	8-8#	-0.4
17-9#	-0.8	8-9#	-0.4
17-10#	-2.6	8-10#	0.4
17-11#	-0.4	8-11#	-0.3