| Literature DB >> 29084157 |
Kai Wang1,2, Shaojie Zhang3, Jiang Chen4, Pengxiao Teng5, Fangqiang Wei6, Qiao Chen7.
Abstract
A new detection device was designed by integrating fiber Bragg grating (FBG) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tube in order to monitor the slip surface of a landslide. Using this new FBG-based device, a corresponding slope model with a pre-set slip surface was designed, and seven tests with different soil properties were carried out in laboratory conditions. The FBG sensing fibers were fixed on the PVC tube to measure strain distributions of PVC tube at different elevation. Test results indicated that the PVC tube could keep deformation compatible with soil mass. The new device was able to monitor slip surface location before sliding occurrence, and the location of monitored slip surface was about 1-2 cm above the pre-set slip surface, which basically agreed with presupposition results. The monitoring results are expected to be used to pre-estimate landslide volume and provide a beneficial option for evaluating the potential impact of landslides on shipping safety in the Three Gorges area.Entities:
Keywords: FBG; PVC tube; slip surface monitoring; slope model
Year: 2017 PMID: 29084157 PMCID: PMC5712886 DOI: 10.3390/s17112486
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Sketch of FBG-PVC integration device for measuring sliding surface position.
Figure 2Schematic diagram of relationship between PVC pipe and sliding surface.
Properties of PVC tube.
| Outer Diameter D/cm | Inner Diameter d/cm | Wall Thickness t/cm | Radius R/cm | Length L/cm | Inertia Moment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.0 | 3.0 | 1.5 | 3.0 | 200.0 | 59.7 |
Figure 3Mounting of FBGs.
Figure 4Cross section of FBG installation.
Figure 5Slope model. (Z axis is perpendicular to the “xoy” plane).
Figure 6Particle size distribution of test soil.
Figure 7Construction process of slope model.
Figure 8Monitoring points arrangement.
Experiment schemes.
| Case | Dry Density | Compaction Degree | Water Content (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.68 | 89% | 15 |
| 2 | 1.75 | 93% | 16 |
| 3 | 1.82 | 96% | 19 |
| 4 | 1.58 | 84% | 18 |
| 5 | 1.78 | 94% | 18 |
| 6 | 1.49 | 79% | 22 |
| 7 | 1.63 | 86% | 13 |
Figure 9Time history curves of strain in cases 1–7 (Horizontal coordinate axis: the loading time; Vertical coordinate axis: the strain of measure points).
Measuring results of maximum strain in cases 1–7.
| Cases | Maximum Compressive Strain | Maximum Tensile Strain | Loading Time/s | Maximum Loading Force/kN | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value/ | Location | Value/ | Location | |||
| 1 | 2644.05 | 4 | 2753.80 | 3 | 188 | 3.05 |
| 2 | 3113.72 | 4 | 2694.19 | 3 | 202 | 3.48 |
| 3 | 3996.87 | 4 | 2931.82 | 3 | 257 | 4.57 |
| 4 | 2285.83 | 4 | 2220.15 | 3 | 178 | 2.61 |
| 5 | 3357.88 | 4 | 2013.24 | 3 | 342 | 3.92 |
| 6 | 1913.45 | 4 | 1342.16 | 3 | 218 | 2.18 |
| 7 | 2412.17 | 4 | 2343.55 | 3 | 260 | 2.83 |
Figure 10Strain curves under different loading moments (red solid lines represent PVC tube, red circles represent the monitoring points location). (a) Loading time: 140 s; (b) Loading time: 160 s; (c) Loading time: 180 s; (d) Final loading moment.