¶óÆæÆ®¦¢Ä«Æä¦¢ºí·Î±×¦¢´õº¸±â
¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì Ȩ ¸í»çƯ°­ ´ëÇבּ¸½Ç޹æ Á¶°æ½Ç¹« µ¿¿µ»ó°­ÀÇ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÀüÅëÁ¤¿ø ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®
ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹°ÇÃà½Ã°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹µµ·ÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀܵðÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ý¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ

Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ / v.26, no.6, 2010³â, pp.71-85
ÅͳΠȾ¹æÇâ ÁöÁøÇؼ® Part II: µ¿ÀûÇØ¼®À» ÅëÇÑ ÅͳÎÀÇ ÁöÁøÀÀ´ä ¿¹Ãø
( Seismic Analysis of Tunnel in Transverse Direction Part II: Evaluation of Seismic Tunnel Response via Dynamic Analysis )
¹ÚµÎÈñ;½ÅÁ¾È£;À±¼¼¿õ; ÇѾç´ëÇб³ °Ç¼³È¯°æ°øÇаú;ÇѾç´ëÇб³ °Ç¼³È¯°æ°øÇаú;ÇѾç´ëÇб³ °Ç¼³È¯°æ°øÇаú;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
ÅͳÎÀÇ µ¿Àû ÁöÁøÇؼ®Àº ½Ç¹«¿¡¼­ ³Î¸® ¼öÇàµÇ°í ÀÖ´Ù. µ¿ÀûÇØ¼®Àº ÇϺΠ¹× Ãø¸é °æ°è Á¶°Ç, Deconvolution, ±¸¼º¸ðÇü, µ¿Àû ¹°¼ºÄ¡ µîÀ» Àû¿ë ¶Ç´Â °áÁ¤Çϱ⠾î·Á¿ö¼­ ÇØ¼® ¼öÇà ½Ã ÁÖÀÇÇØ¾ß ÇÏÁö¸¸ ÀÌ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¸íÈ®ÇÑ °¡À̵å¶óÀÎÀÌ Á¦½ÃµÈ ¹Ù ¾ø´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ¸¹Àº °æ¿ì¿¡´Â ÅͳÎÀÇ µ¿ÀûÇØ¼® ÀÚü°¡ ÇÊ¿ä¾øÁö¸¸ ÀÌ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Çʿ伺°ú Á¤ÀûÇØ¼®°úÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀÌÇØ ¾øÀÌ ¹«ºÐº°ÇÏ°Ô »ç¿ëµÇ°í ÀÖ´Â ½ÇÁ¤ÀÌ´Ù. º» ³í¹®¿¡¼­´Â ÀÏÂ÷ÀûÀ¸·Î 2Â÷¿ø µ¿Àû ÇØ¼®À» ¿Ã¹Ù¸£°Ô ¼öÇàÇϱâ À§ÇÑ °¡À̵å¶óÀÎÀ» Á¦½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌÂ÷ÀûÀ¸·Î´Â Á¦½ÃµÈ °¡À̵å¶óÀÎÀ» ÁؼöÇÑ 2Â÷¿ø µ¿ÀûÇØ¼®À» ¼öÇàÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç ÇØ¼®°á°ú¸¦ ÀÀ´äº¯À§¹ýÀ» ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÀ´äº¯À§¹ý°ú µ¿ÀûÇØ¼®À» ºñ±³ÇÑ °á°ú, µÎ ÇØ¼®±â¹ý°£ÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ´Â Å©Áö ¾ÊÀº °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. Áï, ÅͳΠ°»±¸ºÎ, ÃÊ¿¬¾àÁö¹Ý, ¶Ç´Â °ø°£Àû º¯À̼ºÀ» °í·ÁÇØ¾ß ÇÏ´Â °æ¿ì¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇϰí´Â ÅͳÎÀÇ È¾¹æÇâ ÁöÁøÇؼ®Àº ÀÀ´äº¯À§¹ýÀ¸·Îµµ ÃæºÐÈ÷ Á¤È®ÇÏ°Ô ÅͳÎÀÇ ÀÀ´äÀ» ¿¹ÃøÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆÇ´ÜµÈ´Ù.
Dynamic analyses of tunnels are widely performed in practice in Korea. Accurate performance of a dynamic analysis is very difficult, requiring appropriate application of lower and lateral boundary conditions, deconvolution, constitutive model, and selection of dynamic soil properties etc. Lack of a systematic guideline on how to perform the dynamic analysis makes it even more difficult to perform an analysis. In addition, dynamic analyses are not needed in most cases and pseudo-static analyses are more than adequate. However, they are performed without a clear understanding on the need for the dynamic analysis and differences between the two methods. In this study, firstly, a guideline for correctly performing a 2D dynamic analysis is developed. Secondly, the differences in the tunnel responses using dynamic and pseudo-static analyses are discussed and compared. The results show that the discrepancies between the dynamic and static analyses are not significant for most cases. It is therefore recommended that the dynamic analyses be performed at tunnel portal, very soft ground, or in cases where spatial variation of the ground motion needs to be considered in the seismic analysis of tunnels in transverse direction.
 
Ű¿öµå
Bending stress;Dynamic analysis;Pseudo-static analysis;Seismic analysis;Tunnel;
 
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ³í¹®Áý / v.26, no.6, 2010³â, pp.71-85
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1229-2427
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO201030853095386)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î
³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø
¸ñ·Ïº¸±â
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ ±¤°í¾È³» ÀÌ¿ë¾à°ü °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æÄ§ Ã¥ÀÓÀÇ ÇѰè¿Í ¹ýÀû°íÁö À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý °ÅºÎ °í°´¼¾ÅÍ
   

ÇÏÀ§¹è³ÊÀ̵¿