四川珙县下软上硬山岭地貌斜坡地震动响应特征

赵方彬; 王运生; 寇瑞斌; 毕杨杨; 向超

doi:10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2022.0156

四川珙县下软上硬山岭地貌斜坡地震动响应特征

doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2022.0156

成都理工大学地质灾害防治与地质环境保护国家重点实验室, 成都 610059

基金项目:

国家重点研发计划项目 2017YFC1501000

国家自然科学基金项目 41877235

国家创新研究群体科学基金项目 41521002

详细信息

作者简介:
赵方彬(1998—), 男, 现正攻读地质工程专业博士学位，主要从事地质工程和地质灾害研究工作。E-mail: zfbdqqyx@qq.com

通讯作者:
王运生(1960—), 男, 教授, 博士生导师, 主要从事工程地质力学方向的教学与科研工作。E-mail: wangys60@163.com

中图分类号: P642
计量
- 文章访问数: 539
- PDF下载量: 40
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-08-17

Seismic dynamic response characteristics of the lower soft and upper hard mountain slopes in Gongxian, Sichuan

State Key Laboratory of Geohazard Prevention and Geoenvironment Protection, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China

摘要

摘要:
强震中下软上硬坡体同震崩塌发育, 为了揭示这类坡体地震动的响应特征, 在珙县五同村安置了强震监测仪, 对斜坡表面和不同岩性的地震动响应进行监测, 并记录到不同方位、不同震中距的2次地震。研究表明: ①地震动响应规律有极强的方向性和距离性。2次地震相距监测站台的方向和距离不同, 使Ms 4.0级地震的峰值加速度和阿里亚斯强度反而比Ms 3.2级地震小。②0~30 Hz的地震波在低地山岭的高陡临空面附近有放大效应。1^#监测点的主频小于3^#与5^#监测点, 3^#监测点的主频最高。5^#点的幅值范围为0.018~0.055 m/s^-2, 3^#点幅值范围为0.036~0.087 m/s^-2, 3^#点相较于5^#点, 其三向最高幅值同比放大了1.58~2.0倍。③泥质砂岩的主频为4.8~8.4 Hz, 灰岩的主频为5.5~21.4 Hz, 不同的岩层共振频率不同, 灰岩对地震波的选频放大效应强于泥质砂岩。④地震波在不同高程的山岭斜坡部位具有选择放大作用, 在一定范围内高程越大地形放大效应越明显。
- 珙县地震 /
- 斜坡地震动响应 /
- 地震方向效应 /
- 放大效应 /
- 山岭地貌斜坡
Abstract:
The coseismic collapse of lower soft and upper hard slopes develops during strong earthquakes. To reveal the response characteristics of such slopes under dynamic loads, a strong-earthquake monitor was installed in Wutong Village, Gongxian County, to collect the slope surface and the ground motion with respect to different lithologies, and two earthquakes with different azimuths and epicentral distances were also recorded. Research shows that: ①The response law of ground motion has strong directivity and distance. The two earthquakes are in different directions and distances from the monitoring station, making the peak acceleration and Arias intensity of the Ms 4.0 earthquake smaller than those of the Ms 3.2 earthquake. ②The 0-30 Hz seismic wave has an amplification effect near the high and steep open surface of the lowland mountains. The main frequency of monitoring point No.1 is lower than that of monitoring points No.3 and No.5, and the main frequency of monitoring point No.3 is the highest. The amplitude range of point No.5 is 0.018-0.055 m/s^-2, while the amplitude range of point No.3 is 0.036-0.087 m/s^-2. Compared with point No.5, point No.3 has the highest three-way amplitude magnified by 1.58-2.0 times year-on-year. ③The dominant frequency of argillaceous sandstone is 4.8-8.4 Hz, and the dominant frequency of limestone is 5.5-21.4. Different rock formations have different resonance frequencies. The frequency-selective amplification effect of limestone on seismic waves is stronger than that of argillaceous sandstone. ④Seismic waves have a selective amplification effect on mountain slopes with different elevations. The larger the elevation within a certain range, the more obvious the terrain amplification effect is.
- Gongxian earthquake /
- slope seismic dynamic response /
- seismic directional effect /
- amplification effect /
- mountain slope

HTML全文

图 1 珙县五同村北东向山岭(a)及监测点剖面图(b)

Figure 1. Section of north-facing Mountain (a) and monitoring point (b) of Wutong Village in Gongxian

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 地震监测点与震中位置关系图

Figure 2. Map of seismic monitoring points and epicentre locations

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 Ms 3.2级地震时程曲线图

Figure 3. Time history curve of the Ms 3.2 earthquake

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 Ms 4.0级地震时程曲线图

Figure 4. Time history curve of the Ms 4.0 earthquake

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 Ms 3.2级地震傅里叶频谱图

Figure 5. Fourier spectrum of the Ms 3.2 earthquake

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 Ms 4.0级地震傅里叶频谱图

Figure 6. Fourier spectrum of the Ms 4.0 earthquake

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 Ms 3.2级地震加速度反应谱

Figure 7. Ms 3.2 earthquake acceleration response spectrum

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 Ms 4.0级地震加速度反应谱

Figure 8. Ms 4.0 earthquake acceleration response spectrum

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 3^#监测点附近斜坡变形

Figure 9. Slope deformation near monitoring point 3^#

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 监测点场地属性

Table 1. Properties of each monitoring site

监测点编号	绝对高程/m	监测点所在部位	场地类型	场地坐标
1^#	690	一级台阶	泥质砂岩	28°13′43.52″N，104°49′29.64″E
2^#	719	一级台阶	泥质砂岩	28°13′29.82″N，104°49′30.30″E
3^#	910	二级台阶临空面附近	灰岩	28°13′19.71″N，104°49′53.07″E
4^#	900	二级台阶中部	灰岩	28°13′23.47″N，104°49′41.18″E
5^#	916	二级台阶中后部	灰岩	28°13′34.18″N，104°49′47.97″E

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 Ms 3.2级地震动响应参数

Table 2. Parameters of seismic responses of Ms 3.2 earthquake

监测点编号	峰值加速度/gal			阿里亚斯强度/(cm·s^-1)			主频/Hz
监测点编号	EW	SN	UD	EW	SN	UD	EW	SN	UD
1^#	15.5	13.0	11.3	0.053	0.040	0.029	6.5	8.3	4.8
3^#	67.1	95.7	49.8	0.80	0.850	0.410	21.4	18.2	20.3
5^#	25.9	13.2	11.4	0.207	0.041	0.030	7.2	9.6	5.1
注：1 gal=1 cm/s²；EW.东西向；SN.南北向；UD.垂直向

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 Ms 4.0级地震动响应参数

Table 3. Parameters of seismic responses of the Ms 4.0 earthquake

监测点编号	峰值加速度/gal			阿里亚斯强度/(cm·s^-1)			主频/Hz
监测点编号	EW	SN	UD	EW	SN	UD	EW	SN	UD
1^#	3.3	5.3	3.2	0.008	0.022	0.007	5.2	6.4	5.8
3^#	16.1	21.7	9.7	0.124	0.123	0.031	7.8	7.5	11.5
5^#	12.2	11.2	7.5	0.094	0.059	0.021	6.8	5.5	8.2
注：1 gal=1 cm/s²

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 峰值加速度放大系数监测点(3^#/1^#)

Table 4. Amplication factors of the peat ground acceleration (3^#/1^#)

震级	峰值加速放大系数
震级	EW	SN	UD
Ms 3.2	4.32	7.36	4.40
Ms 4.0	4.87	4.09	3.03

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 阿里亚斯强度放大系数监测点(3^#/1^#)

Table 5. Amplication factors of the Arias intensity (3^#/1^#)

震级	阿里亚斯强度放大系数
震级	EW	SN	UD
Ms 3.2	15.09	21.25	14.13
Ms 4.0	15.50	5.59	4.42

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(20)

[1]	黄润秋. 汶川地震地质灾害后效应分析[J]. 工程地质学报, 2011, 19(2): 145-151. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201102001.htm Huang R Q. After effect of geohazards induced by the Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2011, 19(2): 145-151(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201102001.htm
[2]	王飞, 梁旭黎, 杜建波. 地震荷载作用下岩石边坡的高倾覆稳定性分析及可靠度研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 2016, 24(6): 1126-1135. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201606012.htm Wang F, Liang X L, Du J B. Stability analysis and reliability study of anti-over-turning stability of rock slope under seismic load[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2016, 24(6): 1126-1135(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201606012.htm
[3]	王凤山, 戎全兵, 朱万红, 等. 地下工程地震灾害综合风险要素体系研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 2016, 24(6): 1064-1071. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201606004.htm Wang F S, Rong Q B, Zhu W H, et al. Comprehensive earthquake risk element system on under-ground engineering[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2016, 24(6): 1064-1071(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201606004.htm
[4]	文广超, 苏林雪, 谢洪波, 等. "5·12"汶川地震前后四川省主要地质灾害时空发育规律[J]. 地质科技通报, 2021, 40(4): 143-152. doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2021.0430 Wen G C, Su L X, Xie H B, et al. Spatio-temporal development characteristics of major geohazards in Sichuan Province around "5·12" Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2021, 40(4): 143-152(in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2021.0430
[5]	罗永红, 王运生. 汶川地震诱发山地斜坡震动的地形放大效应[J]. 山地学报, 2013, 31(2): 200-210. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SDYA201302010.htm Luo Y H, Wang Y S. Mountain slope ground motion topographic amplification effect induced by Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 2013, 31(2): 200-210(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SDYA201302010.htm
[6]	Çelebi M. Topographical and geological amplifications determined from strong-motion and aftershock records of the 3 March 1985 Chile earthquake[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 1987, 77(4): 1147-1167. doi: 10.1785/BSSA0770041147
[7]	黄润秋, 李为乐. "5·12"汶川大地震触发地质灾害的发育分布规律研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2008, 27(12): 2585-2592. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSLX200812032.htm Huang R Q, Li W L. Research on development and distribution rules of geohazards induced by Wenchuan earthquake on 12^th May, 2008[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2008, 27(12): 2585-2592(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSLX200812032.htm
[8]	罗永红, 王运生, 何源, 等. "4·20"芦山地震冷竹关地震动响应监测数据分析[J]. 成都理工大学学报: 自然科学版, 2013, 40(3): 232-241. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CDLG201303001.htm Luo Y H, Wang Y S, He Y, et al. Monitoring result analysis of Lengzhuguan slope ground shock response of Lushan earthquake of Sichuan, China[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology : Science and Technology Edition, 2013, 40(3): 232-241(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CDLG201303001.htm
[9]	Tripe R, Kontoe S, Wong T K C. Slope topogtaphy efficts on ground motion in the presence of deep soil layers[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2013, 50: 72-84. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.02.011
[10]	许强, 李为乐. 汶川地震诱发滑坡方向效应研究[J]. 四川大学学报: 工程科学版, 2010, 42(增刊1): 7-14. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SCLH2010S1003.htm Xu Q, Li W L. Study on the direction effects of landslide triggered by Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Journal of Sichuan University: Engineering Science Edition, 2010, 42 (S1): 7-14(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SCLH2010S1003.htm
[11]	段书苏, 姚令侃, 郭沉稳. 芦山地震触发崩塌滑坡的优势方向与机理[J]. 西南交通大学学报, 2015, 50(3): 428-434. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNJT201503007.htm Duan S S, Yao L K, Guo C W. Predominant direction and mechanism of landslides triggered by Lushan earthquake[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2015, 50(3): 428-434(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNJT201503007.htm
[12]	李宗超, 高孟潭, 陈学良, 等. 九寨沟Ms 7.0地震强地震动模拟及漳扎镇地震动强度预测[J]. 地球物理学报, 2019, 62(7): 2567-2581. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQWX201907016.htm Li Z C, Gao M T, Chen X L, et al. Simulation of ground motion by the 2017 Jiuzhaigou Ms 7.0 earthquake and estimation of ground motion intensity in the Zhangzha Town[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2019, 62(7): 2567-2581(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQWX201907016.htm
[13]	金刚, 王运生, 明伟庭, 等. 宜宾长宁Ms 6.0级地震斜坡动力响应特征[J]. 山地学报, 2019, 37(6): 943-954. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SDYA201906015.htm Jin G, Wang Y S, Ming W T, et al. Characteristics of seismic response of the 6.0 magnitude earthquake, Changning County of Yibin in southwest China's Sichuan Province[J]. Mountain Research, 2019, 37(6): 943-954(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SDYA201906015.htm
[14]	李长海, 赵伦, 刘波, 等. 碳酸盐岩裂缝研究进展及发展趋势[J]. 地质科技通报, 2021, 40(4): 31-48. doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2021.0403 Li C H, Zhao L, Liu B, et al. Research status and development trend of fractures in carbonate reservoir[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2021, 40(4): 31-48(in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2021.0403
[15]	陈国平, 温留汉·黑沙, 王帅. 多种表征强震动记录特性的参数对比分析[J]. 华南地震, 2011, 31(2): 45-53. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNDI201102005.htm Chen G P, Win L H, Wang S. Comparisons of various characteristic parameters of strong motions[J]. South China Journal of Seismology, 2011, 31(2): 45-53(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNDI201102005.htm
[16]	刘洪兵, 朱晞. 地震中地形放大效应的观测和研究进展[J]. 世界地震工程, 1999, 15(3): 20-25. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SJDC199903002.htm Liu H B, Zhu X. Progress in observation and research on topographic amplication in earthquakes[J]. World Earthquake Engineering. 1999, 15(3): 20-25(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SJDC199903002.htm
[17]	贺建先, 王运生, 罗永红. 康定Ms6.3级地震斜坡地震动响应监测分析[J]. 工程地质学报, 2015, 23(23): 383-393. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201503003.htm He J X, Wang Y S, Luo Y H. Monitoring result analysis of slope seismic response during the Kangding Ms 6.3 earthquake[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2015, 23(23): 383-393(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCDZ201503003.htm
[18]	典德济. 地震波主特性参数的提取[J]. 石油地球物理勘探, 1989, 24(2): 155-165. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYDQ198902004.htm Dian D J. Extraction of main characteristic parameters of seismic wave[J]. Oil Geophysical Prospecting. 1989, 24(2): 155-165 (in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYDQ198902004.htm
[19]	Boit M A. A michanical analyzer for prediction of earthquake stress[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 1941, 31: 151-171(in Chinese with English abstract).
[20]	李杰. 几类反应谱的概念差异及其意义[J]. 世界地震工程, 1993, 9(4): 9-14. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SJDC199304002.htm Li J. Concept difference and significance of several reaction spectra[J]. World Earthquake Engineering. 1993, 9(4): 9-14(in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SJDC199304002.htm