2020
DOI: 10.1007/s11440-020-00994-w
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Loading and unloading of a thick-walled cylinder of critical-state soils: large strain analysis with applications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to the data of experimental tests by Yang et al [ 18 ], the soil parameters of FSW were reasonably set as: E 1 = 300 MPa, ν 1 = 0.2, ϕ 1 = ψ 1 = 8°, C 1 = 3.5 MPa; the elastic parameters of the surrounding soil were then selected as E 2 = 100 MPa and ν 2 = 0.2. The calculation is focused on the shaft at a depth of 500 m, which has a mean stress condition of P 0 = 6.5 MPa (after Yang et al [ 21 ]).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…According to the data of experimental tests by Yang et al [ 18 ], the soil parameters of FSW were reasonably set as: E 1 = 300 MPa, ν 1 = 0.2, ϕ 1 = ψ 1 = 8°, C 1 = 3.5 MPa; the elastic parameters of the surrounding soil were then selected as E 2 = 100 MPa and ν 2 = 0.2. The calculation is focused on the shaft at a depth of 500 m, which has a mean stress condition of P 0 = 6.5 MPa (after Yang et al [ 21 ]).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The prediction of underground excavation-induced ground settlements has been developed by removing the initial stress of the cavity (i.e. cavity contraction), which contributes to the design of support systems to maintain stability and serviceability [ 11 , 15 – 18 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Very often GRC is predicted by the elastoplastic cavity contraction theory that studies the development of stresses and displacement around a contracting cylindrical cavity (Yu 2000). For example, a number of cavity contraction solutions were available for soils and rocks with various constitutive models, such as the Mohr-Coulomb model (Yu and Rowe 1999;Carranza-Torres 2003;Vrakas and Anagnostou 2014), Hoek-Brown failure criteria (Brown et al 1983;Zareifard 2020;Guan et al 2022;Cai et al 2023), strain hardening/softening Drucker-Prager model (Chen et al 2012;Chen and Abousleiman 2017), and critical state (Cam Clay) models (Yu and Rowe 1999; Chen and Abousleiman 2016; Mo and Yu 2017;Zhuang et al 2020). Also, some cavity contraction solutions were developed to investigate the influence of soil anisotropy (Chen H et al 2022), ground surface (Zhuang et al 2022), non-hydrostatic in-situ stress field (Ma et al 2023), seepage pressure (Sun et al 2023;Zhao et al 2023), and plane stress conditions (Yang et al 2022) on the characteristics of GRCs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then, a large number of scholars have continuously enriched and developed this theory and applied it to solve practical problems. In the field of geotechnical engineering, the research directions of cavity expansion theory include: theoretical research [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][11][12][13]15 ; numerical simulation and soil test [16][17][18][19] ; engineering application [20][21][22][23] ; and others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%