Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Study on Collapsible Deformation and
Research on Deformation Law of Loess Layer with Microstructure of Loess in Xining Area
Ying Gao, Yanxia Ma, Wuyu Zhang et al.
Buried Pipeline under Earthquake - Study on the effect of resistivity and meso-
structure evaluation of alkali solution
strengthening loess: A case study
To cite this article: Simeng Zhang et al 2023 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2449 012021 Wenle Hu, Hua Liu and Tiehang Wang

- Microstructure Characteristics and

Quantitative Analysis of Collapsible Loess
in Xining Area
Ying Gao, Yanxia Ma, Wuyu Zhang et al.
View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 181.224.238.162 on 08/08/2023 at 20:08

AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

Research on Deformation Law of Loess Layer with Buried

Pipeline under Earthquake

Simeng Zhang1,*, Yong Zhang2, Yumin Lv3, Hao Liu2 and Jiangtao Huo2
1
School of Civil Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an
710055, China
2
School of Management, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an
710055, China
3
Hanjiang-to-Weihe River Valley Water Diversion Project Construction Co.,Ltd,
Wuhan, China
Email: 1042512639@qq.com

Abstract. Previous earthquake damage studies have shown that loess has strong seismic
vulnerability under strong earthquakes, and the water pipelines buried in loess are prone to
engineering disasters due to displacement around the soil. Therefore, it is necessary to study
and analyze the deformation law of the loess layer with buried pipelines under earthquake. In
this paper, based on the actual project of the water pipeline Hanjiang-to-Weihe River Water
Diversion Project, using FLAC3D finite difference software, taking vertical dynamic
displacement, dynamic stress, and dynamic acceleration as indexes, the deformation law of
loess layer with water pipeline buried under earthquake is studied. The results show that: With
the continuous attenuation of seismic wave energy, the dynamic displacement of the model
gradually increases from bottom to top, and the maximum displacement is located at the top of
the model. After the earthquake, the soil showed obvious uneven settlement, and the uneven
settlement gradually decreased with the increase of soil depth. The overall dynamic stress of
the model shows a trend of decreasing from top to bottom. Based on the above analysis results,
this paper studies the influence of five factors, such as seismic amplitude, Young's modulus of
soil, cohesion, internal friction angle, and pipeline radius, on the seismic subsidence of loess
with buried pipelines. The results show that the primary and secondary order of factors
influencing seismic subsidence of loess is seismic amplitude, cohesion, internal friction angle,
pipeline radius, and Young's modulus.

Keywords: Pipeline, Loess, Influencing Factors, Deformation Law, Orthogonal Test

1. Introduction
In recent years, water transmission lines have been widely used in long-distance water transfer and
have become the arteries of modern industry and urban life. However, during earthquakes, the pipeline
is damaged due to the displacement of soil around the pipeline [1]. Especially in the loess area, once
the pipeline cracks and leaks, the loess around the pipeline will quickly collapse, which will induce the
engineering disaster of loess moistening and seismic subsidence.
In order to solve the problem of the dynamic response of loess layer to earthquake, Wang, Shao et al.
[2] based on historical records and field investigation, analyzed the failure mode, development
characteristics and formation conditions of seismic subsidence of loess, based on the dynamic triaxial
experiment, the regional variation law of physical property indexes of loess seismic subsidence is

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

analyzed. Zhang, Wang, et al. [3] applied the finite element method to the prediction of seismic
subsidence of loess foundation, and the correlation between seismic subsidence characteristics of loess
foundation and site conditions, foundation form, soil dynamic characteristics and other factors are
quantitatively studied. The results are in good agreement with the existing research results, experimental
results and earthquake damage examples. Liu [4] used FLAC3D to select typical points in the study area
to establish a three-dimensional site model for numerical simulation of seismic subsidence of loess sites
under strong earthquakes. Han Junyan etc. [5] studied the seismic response of buried pipeline soil layer
under non-uniform excitation by shaking table test. Ren [6], Guo [7], Qiu [8], and Che [9] studied the
seismic subsidence characteristics of loess based on experiments. Wang et al. [10] studied the general
influence law of tubular underground structure on foundation subsidence of soft soil sites based on the
finite difference software FLAC3D. The above kinds of literature have studied and analyzed the seismic
subsidence characteristics of loess sites, most of which are based on experiments, and relatively few
studies have been conducted on the deformation law of the loess soil layer with pipelines buried under
earthquake.

Table 1. Physical and mechanical indexes of each layer of soil.

Densit Compress Angle of Volum Shear
Compressio Cohesi Poiss
y ion internal e modul Depth
n modulus on on's
(g/cm3 coefficien friction modulu us (m)
(MPa) (kPa) ratio
) t (MPa) (°) s (MPa) (MPa)
7-1 the
1.45 0.40 5.50 36.5 18.5 0.35 24.44 8.15 10
loess
7-2
paleos 1.69 0.26 9.4 53.0 19.0 0.28 28.48 14.68 5
ol

In conclusion, based on the second phase of the Hanjiang-to-Weihe River Water Diversion Project,
this paper uses FLAC3D finite difference software to simulate the stress change and displacement
change of the loess layer with the buried pipeline under earthquake action. On this basis, the
sensitivity analysis of five influencing factors [11-12] such as seismic wave amplitude, Soil Young's
modulus, cohesion, internal friction angle and pipeline radius is carried out by using the orthogonal
test method, based on this, the deformation law of loess layer with buried pipeline under earthquake
action is revealed.

2. Project Profile
The Hanjiang-to-Weihe River Water Diversion Project in Shaanxi province is one of the major water-
saving hydraulic engineerings in our country. It consists of the first phase of the water diversion
project and the second phase of the water transmission and distribution project, phase III of the project
is designated as the section between the Yangwu Water outlet and Jinghe New City Water outlet of the
North Trunk Line. The route passes through Wugong County, Xingping, Liquan County, Xixian New
Area, Airport Xincheng and Jingyang County, covering a total distance of 67.75 km. This paper
selects 75+388.49~77+238.49 sections of the north trunk line for analysis. The geomorphic unit of this
section belongs to a loess tableland. The upper part is dominated by the loess and paleosol formed by
the Quaternary Upper Pleistocene aeolian, while the lower part is dominated by the loess-like soil
formed by the Middle Pleistocene flushing machine. The water pipeline is located in the upper loess
and paleosoil, and the diameter of the prestressed tubular concrete pipe (PCCP) is 2.4m, the interface
mode is flexible socket interface, and the depth of the pipe base is 6m.

3. The Establishment of the Calculation Model

In this paper, the FLAC3D model is established for numerical simulation. The whole simulation
process is divided into two steps: the first step is the static calculation stage, that is, the initial stress

2
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

equilibrium state is obtained before the seismic load is applied. The second step is the dynamic
calculation stage, which is after the static calculation reaches the equilibrium, the seismic load is
applied at the bottom of the model to simulate the dynamic response of the model under the
earthquake.The basic dynamic equation of the whole structure is:

M u   C u   K u  F ( t )

 
(1)
   
Among them, M  is the overall quality matrix of the system; C  Is the overall damping matrix of
the system; K  Is the overall stiffness matrix of the system; u Is the node displacement;

u 
 
Is the
  
node velocity vector, u  is the node acceleration vector and F ( t ) is the seismic load vector.
 

3.1. Model Parameters

In this model, the simulated soil layer from bottom to top is paleosol and loess, and the PCCP pipeline
is buried in the middle. The Mohr-Coulomb constitutive model was used as the soil constitutive
model. The thickness and mechanical parameters of each soil layer were shown in table 1. The
material of the pipeline is concrete, and the linear elastic material model is selected. The specific
parameters are shown in table 2.

Table 2. Physical parameters of pipeline.

Elastic Angle of Volume Shear Tensile

Density Cohesion Poisson's
modulus internal modulus modulus strength
(g/ cm3) (kPa) ratio
(MPa) friction (°) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
2.50 31.5 2.3 58.7 0.167 15.77 13.50 354

3.2. The Boundary Conditions

In the static calculation stage, fixed boundary conditions are used on the bottom and side of the model
to limit the vertical and horizontal displacement and velocity, and the surface of the model is a free
boundary. Through trial calculation and reference to other literature, combined with the actual
geological conditions of weibei tableland, the horizontal calculation length of soil is 35 m, the
longitudinal length is 10 m, and the depth is 15m.
In the dynamic calculation stage, the static boundary condition is used at the bottom of the model,
the free field boundary condition is used around the model, and the free boundary is used at the upper
part. In dynamic problems, the selection of boundary conditions around the model is an important
content, because there will be wave reflection on the boundary, which will affect the results of
dynamic analysis. In FLAC3D, two boundary conditions are provided to reduce the reflection of
waves on the boundary of the model, namely the static boundary and the free field boundary. Static
boundary is the model of normal and tangential set free damper respectively so as to realize the
purpose of absorption of the incident wave, free field boundary is two-dimensional and one-
dimensional grids were generated around the model, the main body of the grid side coupling boundary
grid through the damper and freedom, freedom of the grid unbalanced force applied to the boundary of
the main body of the grid, Since the free field boundary provides the same effect as the infinite field,
the upward surface wave will not produce distortion on the boundary [13].In this paper, static
boundary and free-field boundary are adopted to reduce the reflection of waves on the model
boundary, and the free-field boundary imposed by them is shown in figure 1.

3.3. Material Damping

The main source of damping is the internal friction of the material and the possible sliding of the
contact surface. For damping in dynamic problems, it is necessary to reproduce the damping

3
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

magnitude of the natural system under dynamic load in numerical simulation. FLAC3D dynamic
calculation provides three damping forms, which are Rayleigh damping, local damping, and hysteresis
damping. Rayleigh damping was originally applied in dynamic calculations of structures and
elastomers to attenuate the amplitude of the natural vibration mode of the system.

Figure 1. Free field boundary.

The acceleration response law obtained by Rayleigh damping is quite in line with reality, but the
biggest drawback is that the calculation time step of Rayleigh damping is too small, which leads to a
long time of dynamic calculation. Local damping converges by increasing or decreasing the mass at
the nodes or structural elements during the vibration cycle, and the local damping coefficient does not
need to solve the natural vibration frequency of the system, so it does not reduce the time step
compared with Rayleigh damping. Hysteresis damping is a method to describe the nonlinear
characteristics of soil by using the modulus attenuation coefficient. It can be applied to any material
model, but it has too many limitations. Considering the advantages and disadvantages of the three
models and the object of this study, local damping is used in this simulation, and the local damping
coefficient is 0. 167.

3.4. Seismic Wave Input

In this paper, we selected the intercepted EI-Centro seismic wave (N-S direction) with a peak
acceleration of 0. 30g. We used SeismoSignal software to filter and baseline correction the EI-Centro
seismic wave, and filtered out the components with a frequency greater than 5 Hz in the seismic wave.
To ensure that the cumulative velocity and cumulative displacement of the seismic wave after the
baseline correction are approximately zero, the software is used for the following amplitude
modulation processing [14]. Since the model in this paper is a flexible foundation, according to the
provisions of FLAC3D, the acceleration or velocity cannot be directly applied to the bottom. The
acceleration and velocity need to be converted into the stress time history through equations (2) and
(3) and then applied to the bottom of the model.
 n  2( C P ) n (2)

 s  2( C s ) s (3)
Type in the  n ,  s are the normal stress and tangential stress applied to the static boundary
respectively. The coefficient -2 in the formula means that only half of the applied energy propagates
upward as dynamic input and the other half propagates to the lower part of the boundary.  n , s are the
velocity components in the normal and tangential directions on the model boundary, respectively.  is
the medium density, C P , Cs are the wave velocity of P wave and S wave respectively.

3.5. Monitoring Nodes

The locations of monitoring points in each layer of soil and around the pipeline are shown in figure 2.

4
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

4. Analysis of Deformation Law Under Earthquake

In this paper, the deformation law of the three-dimensional model under the action of earthquake
ground motion is analyzed with the indexes of vertical dynamic displacement, vertical dynamic
acceleration and vertical dynamic stress.

Figure 2. Location of monitoring points.

4.1. Analysis of Dynamic Displacement Law

Figure 3 is the vertical displacement cloud diagram, from which it can be seen that with the continuous
attenuation of seismic wave energy in the transmission process, the dynamic displacement of the
model gradually increases from bottom to top. The maximum displacement is located at the top of the
model, that is, above the pipeline. In figure 4, the horizontal axis represents the coordinate value of the
model along the X-axis, x=20 is the center of the model, z represents different depths, and Z =15
represents the distance of 15m from the bottom of the model. After the earthquake, the soil body
showed an obviously uneven settlement. As can be seen from figure 4, the uneven settlement
gradually decreased with the increase of soil depth. However, the soil at the same depth above the
pipeline shows a downward concave trend, and the soil at different depths below the pipeline shows an
upward convex trend.

Figure 3. Nephogram of vertical dynamic Displacement. Figure 4. Uneven settlement at different

depths.

4.2. Analysis of Dynamic Stress Law

According to figure 5, the overall dynamic stress of the model decreases with the propagation of
seismic waves in the longitudinal direction. The dynamic stress in the soil conforms to the basic law
that the upper part is small and the lower part is large, and the larger dynamic stress appears at the

5
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

bottom of the model. However, there is a downward concave trend around the pipeline, which shows
that the stress of soil around the pipeline is less than that of soil at the same depth, because the pipeline
makes the propagation medium of seismic waves no longer continuous, and the wave energy is much
lost in the propagation process, leading to more attenuation of dynamic stress.

Figure 5. Nephogram of vertical dynamic stress. Figure 6. Nephogram of vertical dynamic acceleration.

Figure 7. Vertical displacement curve of soil. Figure 8. Lateral displacement curve of soil.

4.3. Analysis of Dynamic Acceleration Law

According to figure 6, there is a certain fluctuation of acceleration in the area near the pipeline, and the
fluctuation amplitude is linearly affected by the magnitude of ground motion, which will pose serious
harm to the pipeline. Besides, the acceleration of soil outside the area remains stable.

4.4. Displacement of Monitoring Points

Figure 7 shows the vertical displacement curve of the monitoring point after the soil around the
pipeline experiences seismic load. From the perspective of the overall trend, the displacement curves
of each layer depth are roughly the same, which change rapidly in the first 5S, and then decrease
slowly. As can be seen from figure 7, the settlement displacement at point A and point B is relatively
large, which is due to the fact that the soil has the effect of amplifying seismic acceleration, and also
because these two points are above the pipeline. Since point C is located at the bottom of the model
and the seismic load starts to propagate upward from the bottom, it will show an upward trend of
displacement. From the slope of subsidence displacement, the displacement changes of point A and
point B are relatively fast, while the displacement changes of point C are relatively slow. This
indicates that the vertical effect of seismic load on the shallow soil is more intense, while the lower
soil is not sensitive due to the heavy upper load. Figure 8 shows the lateral displacement curves of the
corresponding monitoring points. Point B and point C fluctuated greatly in the first 5S because they
were located around the pipeline, while point B located in the upper part of the pipeline had a larger
displacement than point C located in the lower part of the pipeline.

5. Sensitivity Analysis of Influencing Factors of Loess Seismic Subsidence

The orthogonal test is designed based on the orthogonal Latin method, which can only do some tests
instead of all tests, and analyze the results of some tests, so as to understand the situation of all tests,
which can greatly reduce the consumption of manpower and material resources, and improve the

6
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

efficiency. In this paper, a set of orthogonal tests are designed to quantitatively analyze the influencing
factors of seismic subsidence of loess with buried pipelines and to provide a reference for similar
underground projects. Five factors, including seismic amplitude, Young's modulus of soil, cohesion,
internal friction Angle, and pipeline radius, were analyzed to study their influence on seismic
subsidence in this area. The design range of Young's modulus, cohesion, and internal friction Angle of
soil are all from the range measured in the geological survey report of this section.

5.1. Orthogonal Test Design

The five factors of the experimental design are seismic wave amplitude, Young's modulus of soil,
cohesion, internal friction Angle and pipeline section radius, and each factor has four levels of
variation. The seismic amplitude was divided into 0.15g, 0.25g, 0.35g and 0.45g. The Young's
modulus of soil is 70MPa, 90MPa, 110MPa, 130Mpa. The cohesive force was divided into 24kPa,
34kPa, 44kPa, 54kPa. Internal friction Angle was divided into 14°, 18°, 23°, 28°. The radius of
pipeline section is divided into 1.2m, 1.3m, 1.4m and 1.5m. The orthogonal test of five factors and
4
four levels was adopted without considering the interaction between various factors. The L16( 5 )
orthogonal test table was selected, and the test conditions were set in table 3. The test is based on the
FLAC3D finite difference software used above, and the displacement in the Z-axis direction at the top
of the model is regarded as the amount of subsidence. The final amount of subsidence is calculated by
changing the model parameters, soil parameters and seismic parameters [15].

Table 3. Orthogonal test scheme and results.

Assessment
factors
indicators
Test
Young's Cohesive Internal Pipe
number Seismic The settlement
modulus of soil force of friction angle radius
amplitude (g) amount (mm)
(MPa) soil (kPa) of soil (°) (m)
1 0.15 70 24 14 1.2 7.32
2 0.15 90 34 18 1.3 3.24
3 0.15 110 44 23 1.4 2.91
4 0.15 130 54 28 1.5 2.71
5 0.25 70 34 23 1.5 5.59
6 0.25 90 24 28 1.4 6.87
7 0.25 110 54 14 1.3 6.42
8 0.25 130 44 18 1.2 6.58
9 0.35 70 44 28 1.3 4.62
10 0.35 90 54 23 1.2 5.52
11 0.35 110 24 18 1.5 24.34
12 0.35 130 34 14 1.4 16.12
13 0.45 70 54 18 1.4 9.84
14 0.45 90 44 14 1.5 15.66
15 0.45 110 34 28 1.2 9.18
16 0.45 130 24 23 1.3 17.32

5.2. Range Analysis

In order to study the primary and secondary relations of seismic wave amplitude, Young's modulus,
cohesion, internal friction angle and pipeline cross-section radius to seismic subsidence, the range
analysis of the above orthogonal test results is carried out, the results of the analysis are shown in table 4.

Table 4. Range analysis results.

factors Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅲ Ⅳ Ⅴ
K1j 16.18 27.37 55.85 45.52 28.6

7
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

K2j 25.46 31.29 34.13 44 31.6

K3j 50.6 42.85 29.77 31.34 35.74
K4j 52 42.73 24.49 23.38 48.3
k1j 4.05 6.84 13.96 11.38 7.15
k2j 6.37 7.82 8.53 11.00 7.90
k3j 12.65 10.71 7.44 7.84 8.94
k4j 13.00 10.68 6.12 5.85 12.08
Rj 8.955 3.87 7.84 5.535 4.925

In the table: j=1,2,3,4,5 are column numbers; Kij represents the sum of seismic subsidence for level i in
column j; kij denotes the average value of seismic subsidence for level i in column j, with range R= kij -max

k ij ,i =1,2,3,4 are the level numbers. The range of mean values Rj reflects the variation range of seismic
min

subsidence when the level of factors in column j changes. The larger the variation range Rj , the greater the
influence of this factor on seismic subsidence. According to the range analysis, the main order of the
factors affecting the seismic subsidence of loess with buried pipelines is as follows: seismic amplitude >
cohesion > internal friction Angle > pipeline radius > Young's modulus. The range distribution is shown in
figure 9.

(a) (b)

8
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

(c) (d)

(e)

Figure 9. Range Analysis Chart. (a) The effect of seismic amplitude on loess subsidence; (b) the effect
of Young's modulus on loess subsidence; (c) the effect of cohesion on seismic subsidence of loess; (d)
Influence of internal friction Angle on seismic subsidence of loess; (e) the influence of pipe radius on
loess subsidence.

5.3. Analysis of Variance

Due to poor analysis steps of range analysis is relatively simple, but can not test in the process of test
error caused by data fluctuation and test conditions change caused by fluctuations, also can't judge a
index of significant, and analysis of variance is the columns caused by various data volatility with test
error caused by data separate one way [16-17]. In order to reduce the impact of errors, the significance
level of each factor on the seismic subsidence was studied. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was
used to analyze the experimental data. The results are shown in table 5.

Table 5. Analysis of variance table.

Ms(mean
SS(sum of Df
Differences between sum of The F
squared (degrees of F Significant
the source squared value
deviations) freedom)
deviations)
Effects of
Earthquake amplitude 243.267 3 81.089 5.152
small
Young's modulus of Effects of
47.215 3 15.738 1.000
soil small
Cohesiveness of the Effects of
142.200 3 47.400 3.012
soil small
Internal friction Effects of
83.899 3 27.966 1.777 F0.1 (3,3)  5.39
Angle of the soil small
Effects of
Pipe radius 56.366 3 18.789 1.194 F0.05 (3,3)  9.28
small
error 47.215 3 15.738 1.000 F0.01 (3,3)  29 .5
The sum of the 572.9472 15

According to figure 9 and table 5: (1) Seismic subsidence of loess is positively correlated with
seismic wave amplitude, Young's modulus of soil and pipeline radius. Among them, the most sensitive

9
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

factor is the seismic wave amplitude. When the seismic wave amplitude is 0.45g, the seismic
subsidence of loess reaches the maximum value.
(2) The seismic subsidence of loess is negatively correlated with the cohesion and internal friction
Angle of the soil. That is, with the increase of soil cohesion and internal friction Angle, the seismic
subsidence of loess gradually decreases. Compared with these two factors, cohesion has a greater
impact on the seismic subsidence of loess.

6. Conclusion
In this paper, the numerical simulation method is used to explore the deformation law of the loess
layer with buried pipelines under the action of the earthquake, and the following conclusions are
obtained.
 With the continuous attenuation of seismic wave energy in the transmission process, the dynamic
displacement of the model gradually increases from bottom to top, and the maximum
displacement is located at the top of the model, that is, above the pipeline. After the earthquake,
the soil body showed obvious uneven settlement, which gradually decreased with the increase of
soil depth.
 The overall dynamic stress of the model decreases with the propagation of seismic waves in the
longitudinal direction. The dynamic stress in the soil conforms to the basic law that the upper part
is small and the lower part is large, and the larger dynamic stress appears at the bottom of the
model. However, there is a downward concave trend around the pipeline, which shows that the
stress of soil around the pipeline is less than that of soil at the same depth, because the pipeline
makes the propagation medium of seismic wave no longer continuous, and the wave energy loss
during the propagation process leads to more attenuation of dynamic stress.
 There is a certain fluctuation of the acceleration in the area near the pipeline, and the fluctuation
amplitude is linearly affected by the magnitude of the ground motion, which will cause serious
harm to the pipeline. Besides, the acceleration of the soil outside the area remains stable.
 The soil located above the pipeline has a large settlement displacement, and the soil located at the
bottom of the model shows an upward displacement trend due to the propagation direction of
seismic waves. From the slope of settlement displacement, the settlement of the upper soil is
faster than that of the lower soil, which indicates that the seismic load has a stronger vertical
effect on the shallow soil, while the lower soil is not sensitive due to the heavy upper load.
 The main and secondary influencing factors of seismic subsidence of loess with pipelines are as
follows: seismic amplitude > cohesion > internal friction Angle > pipeline radius > Young's
modulus. The seismic subsidence of loess is positively correlated with seismic wave amplitude,
soil Young's modulus and pipeline radius, and negatively correlated with soil cohesion and
internal friction Angle.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Basic Research Program of Natural Science of Shaanxi Province
(2021JLM-52).

References
[1] Sun S P, Han Y 2003 State-of-the-art of the research on lifeline earthquake engineering China
Civil Engineering Journal (05) pp 97-104
[2] Wang Q, Shao S J, Wang J, et al. 2016 Review on disaster characteristics of the seismic
subsidence of loess site and its formation causes Journal Of Seismological Reserach 39(04)
pp 692-702
[3] Zhang D L,Wang L M and Wang Y H 2002 The application of the FEM in the prediction of
seismic subsidence of loess ground Northwestern Seismological Journal (03) pp 17-23.
[4] Liu S P 2020 Seismic Subsidence Evaluation of Loess Sites under Strong Earthquakes (Xi’an:
Chang’an University)

10
AMDS-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2449 (2023) 012021 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2449/1/012021

[5] Han J Y, Li M J, Zhong Z L, et al. 2020 Seismic response of soil under non-uniform excitation
based on shaking table test of buried pipelines Rock and Soil Mechanics 9(5) pp 1653-1662
[6] Ren S, Deng L S, Fan W, et al. 2021 Characteristics of loess seismic subsidence and
corresponding micro-zonation for the Fu Ping Country, Shaanxi The Chinese Journal of
Geological Hazard and Control pp 1-12
[7] Guo L, Wang J D and Gu T F 2012 A study of loess seismic subsidence of tableland to the north
weihe river in Baoji Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology 39(2) pp 61-65
[8] Qiu J 2018 Response characteristics and preventions for seismic subsidence of loess in
Northwest China Natural Hazards 95(3) pp 1909-1935.
[9] Che G 2021 Experimental study on the influence of seismic subsidence of loess under
bidirectional loading modes Earthquake Research Advances 1(4) 100064
[10] Wang Y L, Wang J, Yuan X M, et al. 2021 Study on the influence of underground tubular
structure on seismic subsidence of shallow raft foundation in soft applied numerical
simulation of soil site Rock and Soil Mechanics 42(12) pp 3485-3495
[11] Wang J 2020 Study on the influence of underground tubular structure on earthquake subsidence
of soft soil field Institute of Engineering Mechanics,China Earthquake Administration
[12] Zhu C S, Zhu Q J and Jia X F 2006 Influence of site condition on damage of buried pipeline
under earthquake load Rock and Soil Mechanics 27(S2) pp 997-1001.
[13] Chen Y M, Xu D P 2013 FLAC/FLAC3D Foundation and Engineering Example 2nd Ed
(Beijing: China Water Resources and Electric Power Press)
[14] Li N 2015 Research on earthquake-induced differential settlement and its influencing factors
based on OpenSees Institute Of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration
[15] Dong J J, Yang D, Yan B, et al. 2022 Study on safety and stability of high altitude dumps under
intense drying-wetting alternation China Safety Science Journal 32(3) pp 75-83
[16] Wang S Y, Li Y and Zhang Y 2016 Comparison between range analysis and variance analysis of
concrete orthogonal test results Development Orientation of Building Materials 14(12) pp 44-
48
[17] Zhang M, Liu H L and Qiao W G 2021 Significance study of on depressed factors of dump
stability China Safety Science Journal 31(2) pp 69-75

11