Dynamic response characteristics of tunnel-subgrade structure under high-speed rail and aircraft dynamic loads
-
摘要: 为研究高铁隧道下穿机场飞行区时飞机与列车耦合动载下的响应特性，以渝昆高铁下穿昆明长水机场为背景，采用ABAQUS建立“隧道-道面-围岩-道基”三维精细化有限元模型，通过ABAQUS表格函数施加CRH380列车交会振动荷载，并采用Fortran编写DLOAD子程序模拟A380-800飞机滑行荷载，基于Newmark-β法求解动力方程，系统对比了飞机滑行、列车振动及两者耦合3种工况下结构与道基的响应特性；通过在道基不同深度与隧道衬砌特征部位布置监测点，获取了动峰值位移、竖向动应力、动加速度及衬砌内力等响应规律。研究结果表明：耦合动荷载作用下隧道拱顶上方道基竖向位移呈“倒锅底形”分布，瞬态峰值达48.33 mm，并随深度呈线性衰减；耦合效应显著扩大动力影响范围，按动应力为自重应力10%的标准，影响深度增至31.53 m，是飞机滑行荷载时的2.93倍；按加速度0.1 m·s-2阈值的隧底围岩影响深度为22.2 m，为列车振动荷载时的1.28倍；道基加速度响应具有空间异质性，上部道基近似线性衰减，影响深度小于24.2 m，隧底围岩则呈指数衰减；衬砌位移主要由列车振动控制，飞机滑行荷载的附加影响可忽略；耦合工况下拱脚动拉应力为530 kPa，远低于材料强度，衬砌全断面最小安全系数达720.62，安全储备充足。研究提出了峰值加速度为0.1 m·s-2与动应力为10%自重应力的双重阈值控制标准，建立的耦合分析方法可为空铁联运枢纽下穿工程的振动安全评估与设计优化提供理论依据。Abstract: To investigate the dynamic response characteristics under coupled dynamic loads of aircraft and trains during the underpassing of a high-speed rail tunnel through an airport airfield, with the Chongqing-Kunming High-Speed Railway underpassing Kunming Changshui Airport as the background, a "tunnel, pavement, surrounding rock, and subgrade" three-dimensional refined finite element model was established using ABAQUS. Vibration loads from CRH380 trains were implemented using Abaqus's tabular function, while aircraft taxi loads of the A380-800 were modelled with a Fortran-based DLOAD user subroutine. The dynamic equations were solved based on the Newmark-β method. Response characteristics of structure and subgrade were systematically compared under three working conditions: aircraft taxiing, train vibration, and their coupling. By arranging monitoring points at different depths of the subgrade and characteristic locations of the tunnel lining, response laws such as peak dynamic displacement, vertical dynamic stress, dynamic acceleration, and lining internal forces were obtained. Research results indicate that under coupled dynamic loads, the vertical displacement of the subgrade above the tunnel crown presents an "inverted trough-shaped" distribution. The transient peak reaches 48.33 mm, and it decays approximately linearly with depth. The coupling effect significantly expands the dynamic influence range. Based on the criterion of dynamic stress being 10% of the self-weight stress, the influence depth increases to 31.53 m, which is 2.93 times that under the aircraft taxiing load. Based on the acceleration threshold of 0.1 m·s-2, the influence depth of the surrounding rock at the tunnel bottom is 22.2 m, which is 1.28 times that under the train vibration load. The acceleration response of the subgrade exhibits spatial heterogeneity; the acceleration in the upper subgrade shows an approximate linear attenuation with an influence depth of less than 24.2 m, whereas that in the surrounding rock at the tunnel bottom exhibits an exponential attenuation. The lining displacement is primarily controlled by the train vibration, and the additional influence of the aircraft taxiing load is negligible. Under coupled conditions, the dynamic tensile stress at the arch foot is 530 kPa, which is far below the material strength. The minimum safety factor of the full lining cross-section reaches 720.62, indicating a sufficient safety reserve. A dual threshold control criterion of a peak acceleration of 0.1 m·s-2 and a dynamic stress of 10% self-weight stress is proposed, and the established coupled analysis method provides a theoretical basis for the vibration safety assessment and design optimization of underpass projects beneath air-rail intermodal hubs.
-
图 1 下穿隧道与飞行区滑行道交互
Figure 1. Interaction between underpass tunnel and flight airfield taxiway
图 8 道基与隧道衬砌结构监测点布置
Figure 8. Layout of monitoring points in subgrade and tunnel lining structure
图 9 耦合动荷载下拱顶上方道基位移分布
Figure 9. Displacement distribution in subgrade above tunnel crown under coupled dynamic loads
图 10 耦合动荷载作用下隧底与拱顶上部道基竖向动应力沿深度变化曲线
Figure 10. Variation curves of vertical dynamic stress with depth at tunnel floor and in subgrade above tunnel crown under coupled dynamic loads
图 11 不同动荷载作用下道基中竖向动应力对比
Figure 11. Comparison of vertical dynamic stress in subgrade under different dynamic loads
图 12 耦合动荷载下道基中竖向加速度响应曲线
Figure 12. Vertical acceleration response curves in subgrade under coupled dynamic loads
图 13 不同动荷载作用下道基中竖向加速度衰减曲线对比
Figure 13. Comparison of vertical acceleration attenuation curves in subgrade under different dynamic loads
图 14 耦合动荷载下衬砌竖向位移
Figure 14. Vertical displacement of lining under coupled dynamic loads
图 15 不同动荷载下衬砌结构中关键点竖向位移时程曲线对比
Figure 15. Comparison of vertical displacement time-history curves at key points of lining structure under different dynamic loads
图 16 动荷载下衬砌结构第一主应力及分布
Figure 16. First principal stress and distribution of lining structure under dynamic loads
图 17 耦合动荷载与围岩压力作用下衬砌截面径向应变
Figure 17. Radial strain of lining cross-section under coupled dynamic loads and surrounding rock pressure
图 18 耦合动荷载与围岩压力作用下衬砌截面内力分布
Figure 18. Internal force distributions of lining cross-section under coupled dynamic loads and surrounding rock pressure
表 1 地层与结构材料物理力学参数
Table 1. Physical and mechanical parameters of strata and structural materials
结构层 弹性模量/MPa 泊松比 密度/（kg·m-3） α/s-1 β/s 黏聚力/kPa 内摩擦角/（°） 厚度/m 水泥混凝土面层 36 000 0.15 2 450 0.1 0.001 0 0.38 贫混凝土基层 15 000 0.20 2 100 0.1 0.002 0 0.40 人工压实素填土 18 0.35 1 950 1.0 0.001 0 45 16.0 16.60 膨胀性黏土 10 0.32 1 850 1.0 0.001 0 34 14.5 4.45 灰岩夹白云岩 14 450 0.28 2 150 1.0 0.002 0 42 18.0 3.95 白云岩 18 740 0.28 2 200 1.0 0.002 0 50 25.0 衬砌结构 30 000 0.18 2 450 0.1 0.001 0 0.70 仰拱 30 000 0.18 2 450 0.1 0.001 0 2.24 道面板 32 500 0.18 2 450 0.1 0.001 0 0.35 钢轨 210 000 0.20 7 850 0.1 0.000 5 0.18 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 A380-800飞机滑行荷载计算参数
Table 2. Calculation parameters of A380-800 aircraft taxiing load
飞机机型 A380-800 轮载/kN 272.57 机轮滑行荷载计算公式 P（t）=272.57+38.43sin（17.3t） 机轮滑行荷载压强计算公式 p=1 473.35+207.7sin（17.3t）
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 隧道衬砌截面内力与安全系数
Table 3. Internal forces and safety factors of tunnel lining cross-section
截面位置/（°） 轴力/kN 弯矩/（kN·m） 安全系数 0 -17.44 -0.46 845.91 15 -17.77 0.11 829.97 30 -16.18 -0.29 911.63 45 -20.47 0.49 720.62 60 -11.77 -0.52 1 253.37 75 -11.32 -0.62 1 302.88 90 -5.14 -0.37 2 867.35 105 10.07 -0.81 1 464.13 120 0.47 0.24 31 128.92 135 -1.65 0.20 8 966.05 150 -3.02 0.17 4 887.97 165 -6.84 -0.12 2 156.40 180 -17.03 0.44 866.26 195 -8.34 0.07 1 768.78 210 -4.67 0.31 3 156.44 225 -5.84 0.57 2 526.89 240 -2.17 -1.22 6 802.41 255 -4.37 -0.17 3 373.32 270 -11.52 0.19 1 280.21 285 -12.40 -0.07 1 189.56 300 -8.06 -0.36 1 829.33 315 -15.10 0.82 976.61 330 -16.72 0.53 882.32 345 -16.51 0.06 893.29
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 周正峰, 凌建明. 基于ABAQUS的机场刚性道面结构有限元模型[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2009, 9(3): 39-44. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1671-1637.2009.03.007ZHOU Zheng-feng, LING Jian-ming. Finite element model of airport rigid pavement structure based on ABAQUS[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2009, 9(3): 39-44. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1671-1637.2009.03.007 [2] 张甲峰, 钱建固, 吕玺琳, 等. 飞机移动荷载作用下跑道地基响应范围变化规律[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2019, 41(增1): 101-104.ZHANG Jia-feng, QIAN Jian-gu, LÜ Xi-lin, et al. Influence scope of airport runway ground under aircraft moving loads [J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2019, 41(S1): 101-104. [3] 王志新, 王波, 李昊, 等. 飞机荷载引起的层状地基附加应力及对下穿隧道的影响范围研究[J]. 土木工程学报, 2020, 53(增1): 258-264, 271.WANG Zhi-xin, WANG Bo, LI Hao, et al. The additional stress of layered foundation caused by aircraft load and its influence scope on the underpass tunnel[J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2020, 53(S1): 258-264, 271. [4] LI F L, JIANG C S, CAI G Q, et al. Impact of aircraft load on additional stress depth in soil foundations beneath cement-concrete pavements[J]. Geotechnical & Geological Engineering, 2024, 42(8): 7893-7910. [5] 凌道盛, 张凡, 赵云, 等. 飞机荷载作用下非均匀道基动力响应分析[J]. 土木工程学报, 2017, 50(2): 97-109.LING Dao-sheng, ZHANG Fan, ZHAO Yun, et al. Dynamic response analysis of inhomogeneous subgrade subjected to moving aircraft loads [J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2017, 50(2): 97-109. [6] TANG C X, LU Z, YAO H L, et al. Vibration characteristics of unsaturated runways under moving aircraft loads[J]. International Journal of Structural Stability & Dynamics, 2021, 21(5): 2150065. [7] LOPRENCIPE G, ZOCCALI P. Comparison of methods for evaluating airport pavement roughness[J]. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 2019, 20(7): 782-791. doi: 10.1080/10298436.2017.1345554 [8] TIAN Y, LIU S F, LIU L, et al. Optimization of international roughness index model parameters for sustainable runway[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 13(4): 2184. doi: 10.3390/su13042184 [9] LIU S F, LING J M, TIAN Y, et al. Random vibration analysis of a coupled aircraft/runway modeled system for runway evaluation[J]. Sustainability, 2022, 14(5): 2815. doi: 10.3390/su14052815 [10] BAZI G, HAJJ E, ULLOA-CALDERON A, et al. Finite element modelling of the rolling resistance due to pavement deformation[J]. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 2020, 21(3): 365-375. doi: 10.1080/10298436.2018.1480778 [11] 凌建明, 王增逸, 刘诗福, 等. 飞机滑跑激振和着陆冲击的动载预估模型[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2026, 26(8): 1-19.LING Jian-ming, WANG Zeng-yi, LIU Shi-fu, et al. Dynamic load predictive model for aircraft taxiing excitation and landing impact[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2026, 26(8): 1-19. [12] 郑飞, 翁兴中. 飞机荷载下水泥混凝土道面板应力计算方法[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2010, 10(4): 8-15. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2010.04.002ZHENG Fei, WENG Xing-zhong. Calculating methods of stress for cement concrete pavement slab under plane loads[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2010, 10(4): 8-15. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2010.04.002 [13] 穆一凡, 夏海廷, 胡桂章, 等. 冲击荷载作用下机场刚性道面动力响应与影响因素分析[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2023, 23(7): 3029-3037.MU Yi-fan, XIA Hai-ting, HU Gui-zhang, et al. Analysis of dynamic response and influencing factors of airport rigid pavement under impact load[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2023, 23(7): 3029-3037. [14] 魏保立, 郭成超, 崔璨. 飞机滑行荷载对机场道面的随机振动效应分析[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2018, 18(16): 101-106.WEI Bao-li, GUO Cheng-chao, CUI Can. Random vibration analysis of airport pavement in condition of aircraft taxing[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2018, 18(16): 101-106. [15] 王兴涛, 陈建峰, 叶观宝, 等. 波音747型飞机跑道滑行力学响应[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2016, 16(2): 1-9. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2016.02.001WANG Xing-tao, CHEN Jian-feng, YE Guan-bao, et al. Mechanical responses of Boeing 747 running on runways[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2016, 16(2): 1-9. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2016.02.001 [16] 蔡靖, 张鑫, 李岳. 多机型影响下跑道结构层动态响应分析[J]. 南京航空航天大学学报, 2020, 52(6): 930-936.CAI Jing, ZHANG Xin, LI Yue. Analysis on dynamic response of runway structure layers under multiple aircraft types' impact[J]. Journal of Nanjing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, 2020, 52(6): 930-936. [17] 刘诗福, 赵家福, 侯天新, 等. 不平整激励对飞机-跑道系统动力响应的作用机制[J]. 振动与冲击, 2025, 44(10): 198-207.LIU Shi-fu, ZHAO Jia-fu, HOU Tian-xin, et al. Mechanism of uneven excitation on the dynamic response of aircraft-runway system[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2025, 44(10): 198-207. [18] 黄博, 王宇, 盛文军, 等. 飞机制动滑行作用下跑道的动力响应[J]. 中南大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 53(8): 3052-3061.HUANG Bo, WANG Yu, SHENG Wen-jun, et al. Dynamic response of runway during aircraft braking taxiing[J]. Journal of Central South University (Science and Technology), 2022, 53(8): 3052-3061. [19] NAM B H. In-situ super accelerated pavement test for the fatigue evaluation of in-service airfield rigid pavement—A case study at Mecham Airport[J]. Construction and Building Materials, 2022, 353: 129115. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129115 [20] WANG H, LI M Y, GARG N, et al. Multi-wheel gear loading effect on load-induced failure potential of airfield flexible pavement[J]. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 2020, 21(6): 805-816. doi: 10.1080/10298436.2018.1511783 [21] PARK H W, KIM D H, SHIM C S, et al. Behavior of airport concrete pavement slabs exposed to environmental loadings[J]. Applied Sciences, 2020, 10(7): 2618. doi: 10.3390/app10072618 [22] DONG Q, WANG J H, ZHANG X M, et al. Dynamic response analysis of airport pavements during aircraft taxiing for evaluating pavement bearing capacity[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University Science A, 2021, 22(9): 736-750. doi: 10.1631/jzus.A2000378 [23] HU C, WENG X Z, ZHANG J, et al. Experimental study on fatigue strength of airport concrete pavement slab[J]. Construction and Building Materials, 2021, 270: 121493. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121493 [24] ROBINSON W J, HOWARD I L, TINGLE J S, et al. Analysis of full-scale geosynthetic reinforced airfield pavement subjected to accelerated aircraft loading[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part B: Pavements, 2020, 146(3): 04020052. doi: 10.1061/JPEODX.0000212 [25] 魏晓刚, 杨柳川, 刘会丽, 等. 机场跑道下穿隧道结构稳定性影响因素研究[J]. 工业建筑, 2022, 52(1): 165-173.WEI Xiao-gang, YANG Liu-chuan, LIU Hui-li, et al. Research on influencing factors of structural stability of airport runway underpass tunnel[J]. Industrial Construction, 2022, 52(1): 165-173. [26] 魏晓刚, 秦志帆, 王世翱, 等. 飞机滑跑作用下隧道结构的稳定性分析[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2025, 25(8): 3425-3437.WEI Xiao-gang, QIN Zhi-fan, WANG Shi-ao, et al. Stability analysis of tunnel structure under the action of aircraft running[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2025, 25(8): 3425-3437. [27] 李飞龙, 姜昌山, 蔡国庆, 等. 飞机滑行荷载对水泥混凝土道面及下穿通道的动力响应影响[J]. 土木工程学报, 2024, 57(增2): 80-87.LI Fei-long, JIANG Chang-shan, CAI Guo-qing, et al. Effect of aircraft taxiing load on dynamic response of cement concrete pavement and underpass [J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2024, 57(S2): 80-87. [28] 孙晓静, 谭忠盛, 周思震, 等. 飞机荷载对隧道结构的动力影响分析[J]. 现代隧道技术, 2018, 55(1): 156-163.SUN Xiao-jing, TAN Zhong-sheng, ZHOU Si-zhen, et al. Analysis of the dynamic influence of aircraft load on a tunnel structure[J]. Modern Tunnelling Technology, 2018, 55(1): 156-163. [29] 巴振宁, 符瞻远, 付继赛, 等. 地铁列车振动对颐和园北宫门古建筑木结构影响的实测与分析[J]. 振动工程学报, 2023, 36(6): 1602-1612.BA Zhen-ning, FU Zhan-yuan, FU Ji-sai, et al. Measurement and analysis of the influence of metro train vibration on the ancient wooden structures of north palace gate of the Summer Palace [J]. Journal of Vibration Engineering, 2023, 36(6): 1602-1612. [30] 陈娟, 宋耀, 高广运, 等. 高架桥段高铁与地铁列车荷载共同作用下地面振动特性实测研究[J]. 振动与冲击, 2025, 44(13): 97-105.CHEN Juan, SONG Yao, GAO Guang-yun, et al. Actual testing study on ground vibration characteristics under combined load actions of high-speed trains passing through viaduct and subway trains [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2025, 44(13): 97-105. [31] 吴雪, 周兴龙, 钟瑞, 等. 时速350 km高速列车下穿机场对跑道区道面的影响[J]. 铁道建筑, 2021, 61(8): 154-158.WU Xue, ZHOU Xing-long, ZHONG Rui, et al. Influence of 350 km/h high speed train under-crossing airport on runway area pavement[J]. Railway Engineering, 2021, 61(8): 154-158. [32] 高盟, 李佳文, 李丹阳. 双线列车移动荷载作用下饱和地基振动响应特性分析[J]. 噪声与振动控制, 2025, 45(3): 228-235.GAO Meng, LI Jia-wen, LI Dan-yang. Analysis of vibration response characteristics of saturated foundation under moving load of double-track trains[J]. Noise and Vibration Control, 2025, 45(3): 228-235. [33] 中国民用航空局机场司. 铁路、城市轨道交通下穿机场飞行区影响分析研究[R]. 北京: 中国民用航空局机场司, 2022: 7-43.Airports Department of Civil Aviation Administration of China. Impact analysis of railway and urban rail transit under-crossing airport flight area[R]. Beijing: Airports Department of Civil Aviation Administration of China, 2022: 7-43. [34] GOLOV E, EVTYUKOV S, PROTSUTO M, et al. Influence of the road surface roughness (according to the international roughness index) on road safety[J]. Transportation Research Procedia, 2022, 63: 999-1006. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2022.06.099 [35] YANG L C, WEI X G, FA J Y, et al. Numerical study of influencing factors of safety and stability of tunnel structure under airport runway[J]. Applied Sciences, 2022, 12(20): 10432. doi: 10.3390/app122010432 [36] 高峰, 付钢, 胡文亮. 移动飞机荷载对机场下部隧道的影响[J]. 重庆交通大学学报(自然科学版), 2012, 31(2): 218-222.GAO Feng, FU Gang, HU Wen-liang. Influence of moving aircraft loads on airport tunnel[J]. Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University (Natural Sciences), 2012, 31(2): 218-222. [37] 潘昌实, PANDE G N. 黄土隧道列车动荷载响应有限元初步数定分析研究[J]. 土木工程学报, 1984, 17(4): 19-28, 18.PAN Chang-shi, PANDE G N. Preliminary deterministic finite element study on a tunnel driven in loess subjected to train loading[J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 1984, 17(4): 19-28, 18. [38] 刘晶波, 王振宇, 杜修力, 等. 波动问题中的三维时域粘弹性人工边界[J]. 工程力学, 2005, 22(6): 46-51.LIU Jing-bo, WANG Zhen-yu, DU Xiu-li, et al. Three-dimensional visco-elastic artificial boundaries in time domain for wave motion problems[J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2005, 22(6): 46-51. [39] 马笙杰, 迟明杰, 陈红娟, 等. 黏弹性人工边界在ABAQUS中的实现及地震动输入方法的比较研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2020, 39(7): 1445-1457.MA Sheng-jie, CHI Ming-jie, CHEN Hong-juan, et al. Implementation of viscous-spring boundary in ABAQUS and comparative study on seismic motion input methods[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2020, 39(7): 1445-1457. [40] 陆飞云. 地下结构动力计算中地层弹簧参数和地层边界研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2020: 44-48.LU Fei-yun. Research on stratum spring parameters and stratum boundary in dynamic calculation of underground structure[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2020: 44-48. [41] 闵博. 非对称连拱隧道衬砌开裂特征及其对结构承载能力的影响研究[D]. 北京: 北京交通大学, 2021: 24-26.MIN Bo. Study on the cracking characteristic of asymmetric double-arch tunnel linings and its influence on structural bearing capacity[D]. Beijing: Beijing Jiaotong University, 2021: 24-26. [42] LI F L, JIANG C S, CAI G Q, et al. Study on force characteristics and safety of segment structure and bolts with and without cavity behind lining with multi-field coupling[J]. Buildings, 2023, 13(8): 2108. doi: 10.3390/buildings13082108 -
计量
- 文章访问数: 34
- HTML全文浏览量: 19
- PDF下载量: 3
- 被引次数: 0
