¶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.25, no.4, 2009³â, pp.19-29
ź¼Ò¼º ¹æ¹ý°ú À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼Ò¹ý¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ºØ±« Åä·ùº®ÀÇ °Åµ¿Â÷ÀÌ ºÐ¼®
( Characteristics of Collapsed Retaining Walls Using Elasto-plastic Method and Finite Element Method )
Á¤»ó¼¶;±è¿µÈ£; ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Åä¸ñ°øÇаú;¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Åä¸ñ°øÇаú;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â ½ÇÁ¦ ºØ±«°¡ ¹ß»ýÇÑ Åä·ùº®À» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÇØ¼® ±â¹ý¿¡ µû¸¥ ½Ã°ø´Ü°èº° °Åµ¿Æ¯¼ºÀ» ºÐ¼®Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿©, ´Ü°èº° ±¼Âø¿¡ µû¸¥ Åä·ùº®ÀÇ º¯À§, ÈÚ¸ð¸àÆ®, Åä¾ÐºÐÆ÷, ¿¹»ó Ȱµ¿ ÆÄ±«¸éÀ» ¼öÄ¡ÇØ¼®À» ÅëÇØ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ƯÈ÷ ¼öÄ¡ÇØ¼®¿¡ »ç¿ëµÇ´Â ÇØ¼®±â¹ýÀ¸·Î, º®°è¿Í Áö¹ÝÀÇ »óÈ£ÀÛ¿ëÀÌ °í·ÁµÇ´Â Àü´Ü°­µµ °¨¼Ò±â¹ý°ú »óÈ£ÀÛ¿ëÀ» °í·ÁÇÏÁö ¾Ê´Â ź¼Ò¼º ÇØ¼®À¸·Î ³ª´©¾î ÇØ¼®±â¹ý¿¡ µû¸¥ º®Ã¼ÀÇ °Åµ¿ Â÷À̸¦ ºñ±³ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸°á°ú, º®Ã¼ÀÇ ÈÚ¸ð¸àÆ®¿Í Åä¾ÐÀº ÇØ¼®±â¹ý¿¡ µû¸¥ Â÷À̰¡ Å©Áö ¾Ê¾ÒÁö¸¸, ÁöÇ¥ ±Ùó¿¡¼­ÀÇ º®Ã¼ º¯À§´Â Å« Â÷À̸¦ ³ªÅ¸³Â´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ½ÇÃø µ¥ÀÌÅÍ¿ÍÀÇ ºñ±³°á°ú ź¼Ò¼º ÇØ¼®À» ÅëÇÑ ÇØ¼® °á°ú°¡ Àü´Ü°­µµ °¨¼Ò±â¹ýÀ» ÅëÇÑ ÇØ¼® °á°úº¸´Ù ÀüüÀûÀ¸·Î º¯À§ ¹× ÆÄ±«¸é ¿¹Ãø¿¡¼­ °ú¼Ò Æò°¡ µÇ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. µû¶ó¼­, Àü´Ü°­µµ °¨¼Ò±â¹ýÀ» ÅëÇÑ À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼Ò ÇØ¼®Àº º®Ã¼ÀÇ ½Ã°ø ¾ÈÁ¤¼º ¹× ºØ±« ÈÄ ¿øÀÎ ºÐ¼® µîÀÇ Á» ´õ ¼¼¹ÐÇÑ °ËÅä°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÑ ÀÛ¾÷¿¡¼­ À¯¿ëÇÏ°Ô »ç¿ëÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ¸¸ç, ź¼Ò¼º ÇØ¼®±â¹ýÀº 1Â÷ÀûÀÎ ¼³°è Á¤µµ¿¡ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿©¾ß ÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆÇ´ÜµÈ´Ù.
In this study, a numerical analysis was performed to predict the sequential behavior of anchored retaining wall where the failure accident took place, and verified accuracy of prediction through the comparisons between prediction and field measurement. The emphasis was given to the wall behaviors and the variation of sliding surface based on the two different methods of elasto-plastic and finite element (shear strength reduction technique). Through the comparison study, it is shown that the bending moment and the soil pressure at construction stages produce quite similar results in both the elasto-plastic and finite element method. However, predicted wall deflections using elasto-plastic method show underestimate results compared with measured deflections. This demonstrates that the elasto-plastic method does not clearly consider the influence of soil-wall-reinforcement interaction, so that the tension force (anchor force and earth pressure) on the wall is overestimated. Based on the results obtained, it is found that finite element method using shear strength reduction method can be effectively used to perform the back calculation analysis in the anchored retaining wall, whereas elasto-plastic method can be applicable to the preliminary design of retaining wall with suitable safety factor.
 
Ű¿öµå
Anchored retaining wall;Elasto-plastic method;Finite element method;Shear strength reduction technique;Sliding surface;
 
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ³í¹®Áý / v.25, no.4, 2009³â, pp.19-29
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1229-2427
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200919463915715)
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¿