Simulation of the progressive failure of an embankment on soft soil

A pragmatic strain-softening constitutive model, which is based on Modified Cam Clay, was applied to the simulation of the progressive failure of an embankment constructed on a deposit of sensitive (strain-softening) clay in Saga, Japan. A comparison of the predictions for this case indicates that if softening is ignored, only relatively small deflections and consolidation settlements are predicted, especially after construction. In contrast, for the case where softening is included in the analysis, progressive failure within the clay induces large shear deformations and finally failure of the embankment is predicted. This comparison suggests that softening-induced progressive failure should be considered in the design of embankments on such soils, and the residual strength of the deposit may have an important influence on the overall factor of safety of the construction. Detailed analyses of predicted excess pore water pressures, shear strains and shear stress levels in the ground indicate that considering the strain-softening process: (a) is associated with the buildup of excess pore water pressure; (b) promotes strain localization; and (c) results generally in a larger zone of soil involved in the failure.     

某水电站坝前左岸古滑坡成因机制分析

古滑坡坐落于Ⅱ级阶地台面上,堆积物最大厚度可达50m余。利用FLAC^3D数值模拟得到的滑面在前缘位于基覆界面附近,与野外调查的结果一致。结合雅砻江河谷演化历史,从斜坡演化机制、边坡岩体的变形破坏模式,分析了古滑坡成因机制。研究表明：雅砻江快速下切使岸坡岩体浅表改造程度较为剧烈,不断增加的重力堆积静荷载与崩塌形成的瞬时冲击荷载加速了岩体的弯曲一拉裂变形进程,造成Ⅱ级阶地基座岩体发生突发性折断破坏．从而导致古滑坡失稳。     

The Fault Block''s Framework in Boli Basin and its Control Over the Deposition

Boli basin, between Yishu fracture belt and Dunmi fracture belt, is the biggest Mesozoic coal basin in the east of Heilongjiang Province. Now it is a fault - fold remnant basin. The basin' s shape is generally consistent with the whole distribution of the cover folds, an arc protruding southwards. The basement of the basin can be divided into three fault blocks or structural units. The formation and evoluation of the basin in Mesozoic was determined by the basement fault blocks' displacement features rusulted from by the movement of the edge faults and the main basement faults.     

Historical Sediment Record of ~(137)Cs, δ-HCH,and δ~(13)C Reflects the Impact of Land Use on Soil Erosion

This paper reports the concentrations of 137 Cs, hexachlorocyclohexane(HCH), dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethanes(DDT) and its main degradation products, δ13C, and organic carbon in pond sediments(0-210 cm, sectioned by 2-20 cm interval) and surface soils(the 0-3 cm horizon) collected in 2010 from Chenjia catchment, which is located in Yanting county in the hilly central Sichuan of China. α-, δ-, and γ-HCH, DDT, and DDD were not detected throughout the sediment profile. Trace concentrations of δ-HCH(0.89-29.31 ng g-1) and p,p′-DDE(1.85-6.02 ng g-1) were detected only in top 40 cm sediment. The 137 Cs fallout peak in 1963(corresponding to the 55-60 cm depth), the sedimentary signature left by the last year of HCH use in 1989(an additional indicator at 20-25 cm), and the obvious original channel bed prior to the construction of the pond in 1956 were used as temporal markers to estimate changes in average sedimentation rate between different periods due to changes in land use. Continuous, marked decrease in average sedimentation rate(i.e., 3.79, 1.35 and 1.07 cm year-1 in 1956-1963, 1963-1989, and 1989-2010, respectively)over time was observed, probably due to the reforestation, abandoning of steep sloping farmland for afforestation and natural re-vegetation(implementation of the Grain for Green Program), and the conversion of part of gently sloping farmland terraces to orchard land since the 1980 s, especially since the 1990 s. This was corroborated by the observed decrease(more negative) in δ13C of sediment towards the surface, which indicates increased relative contribution of eroded soil particles coming from slopes with increased tree cover in sediment source area. Combined use of 137 Cs, δ-HCH, and δ13C record in sediments has been demonstrated to be a powerful approach to reconstruction of response in sedimentation rate to historical land use changes.     

华机构造单元划分及其特征

华南（研究区）由杨子地块东南部和华夏地块组成。前者划分为三个次级构造单元;江南构造城,怀玉山—浙西北构造域,彭庐构造域;后者划分为二个次级构造单元;闽北—浙东南构造域,桂粤湘赣闽构造域。华夏地块相对于扬子地块是比较活动的构造单元。     

中国古代太阳中天观测及二至点测算精度

研究了元代《授时历议))所保存的天象观测和推步资料，得出：(1)在AD1277—1280年问所作的98次太阳中天观测的时刻及地平高度的绝对值平均误差分别为2．64min和6．78′．(2)6部古历——《大衍历》、《宣明历》、《纪元历》、《统天历》、《重修大明历》和《授时历》推步BC522年前的3个冬至时刻的误差范围为0．97—3．51d；而AD435—1280年间的45个冬至时刻的绝对值平均误差则分别为9．35、10．42、5．54、2．97、5．68、3．36h．(3)古代确定的AD442—1280年间的16个二至时刻的绝对值平均误差为199．59min，其中元代的误差为27．89min．     

中国古历定朔推步综述

“朔”简言之表日月黄经相等，先民对其认识经历了一个从平朔到定朔的过程，通过研究古历，文中分析并归纳了不同时期中国古历日制度的基本元素之一－朔的两种推步方法：“积年法”和“《授时历》法”，其中包括平朔，日躔，月离，及定朔的推步方法等；得出了由各历的基本历数直接推出的中国古历定朔计算的一般公式，同时亦给出了《授时历》的推朔法和部分算例。     

古本今本《竹书纪年》的天象记载和纪年

对《竹书纪年》记载的天象和纪年进行了初步的分析研究,结果表明,今本《竹书纪年》中新增的天象如日食等,并非汲冢出土佚书的原有内容,而为宋元以后学者所加.     

中国历代荧惑守列宿与四星聚、五星聚考查

利用授时历法和现代天文计算方法,对中国历代天文志记录的荧惑(火星)守列宿、四星聚、五星聚进行分析研究,结果表明:65条荧惑守列宿,正误率分别为49%和51%.如果把荧惑留、留守、在某宿等运动形态也考虑为守的范围,共有95条,其正误率分别为56%和44%.12条四星聚正误率各占一半,即50%.11条五星聚正误率分别为82%和18%(其中含五星并见).并对错误记录的原因做了初步探讨.     

Sunspot numbers based on historic records in the 1610s: Early telescopic observations by Simon Marius and others

Hoyt & Schatten (1998) claim that Simon Marius would have observed the sun from 1617 Jun 7 to 1618 Dec 31 (Gregorian calendar) all days, except three short gaps in 1618, but would never have detected a sunspot – based on a quotation from Marius in Wolf (1857), but mis‐interpreted by Hoyt & Schatten. Marius himself specified in early 1619 that for one and a half year... rather few or more often no spots could be detected... which was never observed before (Marius 1619). The generic statement by Marius can be interpreted such that the active day fraction was below 0.5 (but not zero) from fall 1617 to spring 1619 and that it was 1 before fall 1617 (since August 1611). Hoyt & Schatten cite Zinner (1952), who referred to Zinner (1942), where observing dates by Marius since 1611 are given but which were not used by Hoyt & Schatten. We present all relevant texts from Marius where he clearly stated that he observed many spots in different form on and since 1611 Aug 3 (Julian) = Aug 13 (Greg.) (on the first day together with Ahasverus Schmidnerus); 14 spots on 1612 May 30 (Julian) = Jun 9 (Greg.), which is consistent with drawings by Galilei and Jungius for that day, the latter is shown here for the first time; at least one spot on 1611 Oct 3 and/or 11 (Julian), i.e. Oct 13 and/or 21 (Greg.), when he changed his sunspot observing technique; he also mentioned that he has drawn sunspots for 1611 Nov 17 (Julian) = Nov 27 (Greg.); in addition to those clearly datable detections, there is evidence in the texts for regular observations. For all the information that can be compared to other observers, the data from Marius could be confirmed, so that his texts are highly credible. We also correct several shortcomings or apparent errors in the database by Hoyt & Schatten (1998) regarding 1612 (Harriot), 1615 (Saxonius, Tard´e), 1616 (Tard´e), 1617–1619 (Marius, Riccioli/Argoli), and Malapert (for 1618, 1620, and 1621). Furthermore, Schmidnerus, Cysat, David & Johann Fabricius, Tanner, Perovius, Argoli, and Wely are not mentioned as observers for 1611, 1612, 1618, 1620, and 1621 in Hoyt & Schatten. Marius and Schmidnerus are among the earliest datable telescopic sunspot observers (1611 Aug 3, Julian), namely after Harriot, the two Fabricius (father and son), Scheiner, and Cysat. Sunspots records by Malapert from 1618 to 1621 show that the last low‐latitude spot was seen in Dec 1620, while the first high‐latitude spots were noticed in June and Oct 1620, so that the Schwabe cycle turnover (minimum) took place around that time, which is also consistent with the sunspot trend mentioned by Marius and with naked‐eye spots and likely true aurorae. We consider discrepancies in the Hoyt & Schatten (1998) systematics, we compile the active day fractions for the 1610s, and we critically discuss very recent publications on Marius which include the following Maunder Minimum. Our work should be seen as a call to go back to the historical sources. (© 2016 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)