PDF
Full
Outline
The geotechnical isolation system based on glass beads and sand cushion (referred to as GSI-GBSC) has exhibited good seismic isolation performance on a one-story masonry building, but its effectiveness for two-story or higher rural buildings remains not determined. This study carried out a shake table test on a 1/4-scale model of a two-story masonry building. The first model was a two-story brick masonry structure without seismic isolation (the non-isolated model), and the second model was a two-story brick masonry structure equipped with the GSI-GBSC seismic isolation system (the isolated model). The acceleration and displacement responses of the two models were evaluated and compared, and compared with the results of the one-story rural building test conducted in previous studies. The results indicate that the glass-bead-sand-pad layer in the GSI-GBSC seismic isolation system tends to slip and slide, resulting in relative slippage between the foundation soil and upper structure of the isolated model. This ultimately reduces the seismic response of the upper structure. Under different peak acceleration input conditions, the upper structure of the isolated model was observed to move predominantly in a horizontal direction. In contrast, the displacement response of the non-isolated model increases as peak acceleration input values increase, leading to an increasing gap between horizontal displacement peaks in each layer. Furthermore, it was found that inter-story deformation in the isolation model is significantly reduced. Specifically, when peak acceleration input values are 0.2 g and 0.4 g respectively, it was observed that acceleration responses at top structures were 28% and 36% lower in comparison to those from non-isolated models. In summary, it can be concluded that while GSI-GBSC isolation system demonstrates good effects on one-story and two-story rural masonry structures, however, increasing weight and height-to-width ratio will reduce its effectiveness.
PDF
58
31
| 科 Family | 属数 Number of genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) | 属 Genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae | 2 | 11 | 5.26 | 鹅膏菌属 Amanita | 10 | 4.78 |
| 小菇科 Mycenaceae | 2 | 12 | 5.74 | 丝盖伞属 Inocybe | 5 | 2.39 |
| 多孔菌科 Polyporaceae | 8 | 14 | 6.70 | 蜡蘑属 Laccaria | 5 | 2.39 |
| 红菇科 Russulaceae | 3 | 23 | 11.00 | 小皮伞属 Marasmius | 6 | 2.87 |
| 小菇属 Mycena | 11 | 5.26 | ||||
| 光柄菇属 Pluteus | 5 | 2.39 | ||||
| 红菇属 Russula | 17 | 8.13 | ||||
| 栓菌属 Trametes | 5 | 2.39 |
关闭全屏
No. 86 Xueyuan South Road, Haidian District, Beijing
010-62199257
qkjq@cast.org.cn
Copyright © 2025 China Association for Science and Technology. All rights reserved. For all open access content, the relevant licensing terms apply.
Sponsored by the Office of the Leading Group for Cybersecurity and Informatization of CAST, and supported by Science and Technology Review Publishing House
