Volume 29 Issue 3
Jun.  2023
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Abstract
References
Article Navigation >  Journal of Geomechanics  > 2023  >  29(3): 442-452
LI Z Z，YANG W C，ZHANG P，et al.，2023. In-situ stress measurement and inversion analysis of a large hydropower project in southeast Tibet[J]. Journal of Geomechanics，29（3）：442−452 doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.20232912
Citation: LI Z Z，YANG W C，ZHANG P，et al.，2023. In-situ stress measurement and inversion analysis of a large hydropower project in southeast Tibet[J]. Journal of Geomechanics，29（3）：442−452 doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.20232912
shu

In-situ stress measurement and inversion analysis of a large hydropower project in southeast Tibet

doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.20232912
  • 1.

    Northwest Engineering Corporation Limited, Xi’an 710065, Shannxi, China

  • 2.

    Institute of Geomechanics, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing 100081, China

More Information
    Abstract

  • As a control and regulating project, the hydropower station in the Yigongzangbu basin of Tibet plays a vital role in meeting the electricity demand of the Tibetan power grid. Identifying this hydropower station’s present-day in-situ stress environment and understanding the characteristics of in-situ stress distribution at critical locations such as underground plants and diversion tunnels are essential to ensure its engineering safety. Based on the tectonic and geological background and rock conditions of the project area, we carried out hydraulic fracturing in-situ stress measurements by placing boreholes and obtained in-situ stress data from 4 measurement points (8 boreholes). A finite element three-dimensional geological model was established according to the existing geological conditions. The measured stress state revealed the loading conditions, and the inverse analysis of the stress field in the engineering area was made. The maximum horizontal principal stress ranges from 4.17 to 16.93 MPa in the 2D test and 14.2 to 16.23 MPa in the 3D test. The maximum horizontal principal stress orientation is NE 38°to NE 47°, and the NE direction dominates the present-day tectonic stress field. In the 2995-meter elevation horizontal plane of the underground plant area of the power station, the stress values of σ1, σ2, and σ3 range from 11.70 to 12.12 MPa, 9.81 to 10.74 MPa, and  5.22 to 6.85 MPa, respectively. The maximum principal stress value of σ1, σ2, and σ3 along the diversion tunnel range from 11.8 to 14.05 MPa, 10.13 to 12.83 MPa, and  4.56 to 8.49 MPa, respectively. The axis direction of this hydropower station’s underground plant and the diversion tunnel’s axis direction intersect at a slight angle with the direction of the measured maximum principal stress, and the ground stress field is favorable to the stability of the project cavern. It is necessary to consider the actual geological conditions and adopt suitable tunnel construction technology in the later construction process. The construction monitoring should also be strengthened to ensure the project’s safe construction.

     

    • Full-text Translaiton by iFLYTEK

    The full translation of the current issue may be delayed. If you encounter a 404 page, please try again later.
    FullText(HTML)
    • References(61)
  • [1]
    CAI H C, WANG W T, DUAN L, et al. , 2022. Paleomagnetic evidence of Cenozoic tectonic deformation in Lulehe area, Qaidam basin, northeastern margin of Tibet Plateau[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 96(10): 3345-3359. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [2]
    CHENG W R, ZHANG W C, LIU Y, 2021. Inversion of in-situ stress field in underground powerhouse area of a hydropower station[J]. Journal of Jilin Jianzhu University, 38(6): 12-18. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [3]
    ENGLAND P, MOLNAR P, 1997. Active deformation of Asia: from kinematics to dynamics[J]. Science, 278(5338): 647-650. doi: 10.1126/science.278.5338.647
    [4]
    FAN Q X, LIN P, JIANG S, et al. , 2020. Review on the rock mechanics and engineering practice for large hydropower stations along the downstream section of the Jinsha River[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 60(7): 537-556. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [5]
    FENG C J, LI B, LI H, et al. , 2022. Estimation of in-situ stress field surrounding the Namcha Barwa region and discussion on the tectonic stability[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 28(6): 919-937. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [6]
    FU C H, WANG W M, CHEN S H, 2006. Back analysis study on initial geostress field of dam site for XILUODU hydropower project[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 25(11): 2305-2312. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [7]
    HAIMSON B C, CORNET F H, 2003. ISRM suggested methods for rock stress estimation-part 3: Hydraulic Fracturing (HF) and/or Hydraulic Testing of Pre-existing Fractures (HTPF)[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 40(7-8): 1011-1020. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2003.08.002
    [8]
    HAN B, XIAO Q, DING X C, et al. , 2022. Study on the initial geostress distribution law of surrounding rock of underground cavern of Jinchuan hydropower station[J]. Northwest Water Power(2): 67-70. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [9]
    HARRISON T M, COPELAND P, KIDD W S F, et al. , 1992. Raising Tibet[J]. Science, 255(5052): 1663-1670. doi: 10.1126/science.255.5052.1663
    [10]
    HOU J, WU Z, LIU N, et al. , 2019. Research on key technical problems of hydropower design in high-altitude deep gorge area of Tibet[J]. Water Power, 45(2): 14-17, 38. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [11]
    KIM K, FRANKLIN J A, 1988. ISRM: Suggested methods for rock stress determination[J]. ZHANG S T, trans. Chinese Journal Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 7(4): 357-388. (in Chinese)
    [12]
    LEE S G, 1973. Introduction to geomechanics[M]. Beijing: Science and Technology Press. (in Chinese)
    [13]
    LI B, YIN Y P, TAN C X, et al. , 2022. Geo-safety challenges against the site selection of engineering projects in the eastern Himalayan syntaxis area[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 28(6): 907-918. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [14]
    LIU Y F, 2000. Geostress and engineering construction[M]. Wuhan: Hubei Science and Technology Press. (in Chinese)
    [15]
    LIU Y F, ZHONG Z W, WANG J, 2002. Interpretation of 3-dimensional geostress results measured by hydraulic fracturing technique[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 21(6): 833-838. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [16]
    MENG W, TIAN T, SUN D S, et al. , 2022. Research on stress state in deep shale reservoirs based on in-situ stress measurement and rheological model[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 28(4): 537-549. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [17]
    MOLNAR P, ENGLAND P, MARTINOD J, 1993. Mantle dynamics, uplift of the Tibetan Plateau, and the Indian monsoon[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 31(4): 357-396. doi: 10.1029/93RG02030
    [18]
    QUAN H, 2017. Application of 3-dimensional hydraulic fracturing method to in-situ stress measurement in hydropower engineering[J]. Sichuan Water Power, 36(1): 75-80. (in Chinese)
    [19]
    REN Y Q, TANG B L, CHEN X M, et al. , 2021. Inversion analysis of the Three dimension Geostress field in a tunnel[J]. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 643(1): 012047. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/643/1/012047
    [20]
    ROYDEN L H, BURCHFIEL B C, KING R W, et al. , 1997. Surface deformation and lower crustal flow in eastern Tibet[J]. Science, 276(5313): 788-790. doi: 10.1126/science.276.5313.788
    [21]
    SUN Y, TAN C X, LI K S, et al. , 1998. Quantitative assessment and research of regional crustal stability[M]. Beijing: Geology Press. (in Chinese)
    [22]
    TAN C X, SUN W F, SUN Y, et al. , 2006. A consideration on in-situ crustal stress measuring and its underground engineering application[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 80(10): 1627-1632. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [23]
    TAPPONNIER P, XU Z Q, ROGER F, et al. , 2001. Oblique stepwise rise and growth of the Tibet Plateau[J]. Science, 294(5547): 1671-1677. doi: 10.1126/science.105978
    [24]
    WANG E Q, BURCHFIEL B C, JI J Q, 2001. Calculation of the Cenozoic crustal shortening in eastern Himalayan syntaxis and its geological evidences[J]. Science in China (Series D), 31(1): 1-9. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [25]
    WANG X G, WANG J D, HOU T S, et al. , 2016. Geostress test and analysis of the Tibet Bangpu mining area[J]. International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 11(2): 156-162.
    [26]
    XIAO B Z, 2008. Measurement and study of geo-stresses for underground plant Area of Yantan hydropower station[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 25(1): 65-69. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [27]
    XIAO L, LUO S W, CHEN R H, et al. , 2019. Three-dimensional simulation inverse analysis of initial Geostress field of a hydropower station[J]. Northwest Hydropower(5): 86-89. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [28]
    XIE F R, CHEN Q C, CUI X F, et al. , 2007. Fundamental database of crustal stress environment in continental China[J]. Progress in Geophysics, 22(1): 131-136. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [29]
    XIE H Q, XIAO M L, HE J D, et al. , 2008. Regression analysis of initial Geostress for dam region of Jinping hydropower station[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 25(5): 50-54. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [30]
    YUAN F B, LIU J, LI P J, et al. , 2007. Back analysis and multiple-factor influencing mechanism of high geostress field for river valley region of Laxiwa hydropower engineering[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 28(4): 836-842. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [31]
    ZHANG P, QU Y M, GUO C B, et al. , 2017a. Analysis of in-situ stress measurement and real-time monitoring results in Nyching of Tibetan Plateau and its response to Nepal MS8.1 earthquake[J]. Geoscience, 31(5): 900-910. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [32]
    ZHANG P, SUN Z G, WANG Q N, et al. , 2017b. In-situ stress measurement and stability analysis of surrounding rocks in the north section of deep buried tunnel in Muzhailing[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 23(6): 893-903. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [33]
    ZHANG Y X, SONG C S, CAI M F, et al. , 2010. Geostress measurements by hydraulic fracturing method at great depth of boreholes and numerical modelling predictions of stress field[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 29(4): 778-786. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [34]
    ZHOU Y, LI Q C, PAN B, et al. , 2018. Back analysis of initial geostress field in deep-cut valley of Yangfanggou hydropower station[J]. Yangtze River, 49(24): 44-48, 71. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [35]
    ZOBACK M D, HEALY J H, 1992. In situ stress measurements to 3.5 km depth in the Cajon Pass scientific research borehole: Implications for the mechanics of crustal faulting[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 97(B4): 5039-5057. doi: 10.1029/91JB02175
    [36]
    蔡火灿, 王伟涛, 段磊, 等, 2022. 青藏高原东北缘柴达木盆地路乐河地区新生代构造变形的古地磁证据[J]. 地质学报, 96(10): 3345-3359.
    [37]
    程王润, 张文春, 刘英, 2021. 某水电站地下厂房区地应力场反演[J]. 吉林建筑大学学报, 38(6): 12-18.
    [38]
    樊启祥, 林鹏, 蒋树, 等, 2020. 金沙江下游大型水电站岩石力学与工程综述[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 60(7): 537-556.
    [39]
    丰成君, 李滨, 李惠, 等, 2022. 南迦巴瓦地区地应力场估算与构造稳定性探讨[J]. 地质力学学报, 28(6): 919-937.
    [40]
    付成华, 汪卫明, 陈胜宏, 2006. 溪洛渡水电站坝区初始地应力场反演分析研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 25(11): 2305-2312.
    [41]
    韩斌, 肖清, 丁新潮, 等, 2022. 金川水电站地下洞室围岩初始地应力分布规律研究[J]. 西北水电(2): 67-70.
    [42]
    侯靖, 吴忠, 刘宁, 等, 2019. 西藏高海拔深切峡谷地区水电设计关键技术问题研究[J]. 水力发电, 45(2): 14-17, 38.
    [43]
    基姆, 弗兰克林, 1988. 国际岩石力学学会试验方法委员会确定岩石应力的建议方法[J]. 张受天, 译. 岩石力学与工程学报, 7(4): 357-388.
    [44]
    李滨, 殷跃平, 谭成轩, 等, 2022. 喜马拉雅东构造结工程选址面临的地质安全挑战[J]. 地质力学学报, 28(6): 907-918.
    [45]
    李四光, 1973. 地质力学概论[M]. 北京: 科学出版社.
    [46]
    刘允芳, 2000. 岩体地应力与工程建设[M]. 武汉: 湖北科学技术出版社.
    [47]
    刘允芳, 钟作武, 汪洁, 2002. 水压致裂法三维地应力测量成果计算与分析的探讨[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 21(6): 833-838.
    [48]
    孟文, 田涛, 孙东生, 等, 2022. 基于原位地应力测试及流变模型的深部泥页岩储层地应力状态研究[J]. 地质力学学报, 28(4): 537-549.
    [49]
    全海, 2017. 三维水压致裂法地应力测试在水电工程中的应用[J]. 四川水力发电, 36(1): 75-80.
    [50]
    孙叶, 谭成轩, 李开善, 等, 1998. 区域地壳稳定性定量化评价[M]. 北京: 地质出版社.
    [51]
    谭成轩, 孙炜锋, 孙叶, 等, 2006. 地应力测量及其地下工程应用的思考[J]. 地质学报, 80(10): 1627-1632.
    [52]
    王二七, BURCHFIEL B C, 季建清, 2001. 东喜马拉雅构造结新生代地壳缩短量的估算及其地质依据[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 31(1): 1-9.
    [53]
    肖本职, 2008. 广西岩滩水电站地下厂房区地应力测试与分析[J]. 长江科学院院报, 25(1): 65-69.
    [54]
    肖蕾, 骆世威, 陈仁宏, 等, 2019. 某水电站初始地应力场三维模拟反演分析[J]. 西北水电(5): 86-89.
    [55]
    谢富仁, 陈群策, 崔效锋, 等, 2007. 中国大陆地壳应力环境基础数据库[J]. 地球物理学进展, 22(1): 131-136.
    [56]
    谢红强, 肖明砾, 何江达, 等, 2008. 锦屏水电站坝区初始地应力场回归反演分析[J]. 长江科学院院报, 25(5): 50-54.
    [57]
    袁风波, 刘建, 李蒲健, 等, 2007. 拉西瓦工程河谷区高地应力场反演与形成机理[J]. 岩土力学, 28(4): 836-842.
    [58]
    张鹏, 曲亚明, 郭长宝, 等, 2017a. 西藏林芝地应力测量监测与尼泊尔MS8.1级强震远场响应分析[J]. 现代地质, 31(5): 900-910.
    [59]
    张鹏, 孙治国, 王秋宁, 等, 2017b. 木寨岭深埋隧道北段地应力测量与围岩稳定性分析[J]. 地质力学学报, 23(6): 893-903.
    [60]
    张延新, 宋常胜, 蔡美峰, 等, 2010. 深孔水压致裂地应力测量及应力场反演分析[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 29(4): 778-786.
    [61]
    周勇, 李啟常, 潘兵, 等, 2018. 杨房沟水电站深切河谷地应力场反演分析[J]. 人民长江, 49(24): 44-48, 71.
    • Relative Articles

  • Relative Articles

    2025: Characteristics of in-situ stresses and engineering stability analysis on the south section of the cross-Bohai Strait passage project. Journal of Geomechanics. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2023169
    BAI Jinpeng, DONG Yan’an, GAN Jun, ZHAO Xiaoyang, LI Hongli, CHAI Bao. 2023: In-situ stress state in critical areas of the Taiyuan pumped storage power station and its application in pivot project layout. Journal of Geomechanics, 29(3): 375-387. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.20232907
    ZHANG Bin, SUN Yao, MA Xiumin, PENG Hua, JIANG Jingjie, MAO Jiarui, ZHANG Wenhui, ZHAI Yudong. 2023: Analysis of in-situ stress field characteristics and tectonic stability in the Motuo key area of the eastern Himalayan syntaxis. Journal of Geomechanics, 29(3): 388-401. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.20232908
    CHEN Dongsheng, JI Hongguang, YUAN Yongzhong, LI Qintao. 2023: Influence of rock inhomogeneity degree on the crustal stress results measured by hydraulic fracturing method. Journal of Geomechanics, 29(3): 365-374. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.20232906
    ZHU Mingde, WANG Zhaoya, ZHANG Yuezheng, LI Wenguang, HOU Kuikui, JI Hongguang, YIN Yantian, FU Zhen, HAO Yingjie. 2023: In-situ stress measurement and inversion analysis of the deep shaft project area in Sanshan Island based on hydraulic fracturing method. Journal of Geomechanics, 29(3): 430-441. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.20232911
    LI Bin, ZHANG Wen, WEN Ran. 2022: Study on the hydraulic fracturing in-situ stress measurement in super-long highway tunnels in southern Shaanxi:Engineering geological significance. Journal of Geomechanics, 28(2): 191-202. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2021053
    WANG Chenghu, GAO Guiyun, WANG Hong, WANG Pu. 2020: Integrated determination of principal stress and tensile strength of rock based on the laboratory and field hydraulic fracturing tests. Journal of Geomechanics, 26(2): 167-174. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2020.26.02.016
    ZHANG Peng, SUN Zhiguo, WANG Qiuning, FENG Chengjun, SUN Mingqian, TAN Chengxuan, WU Yongdong, GAN Weiping. 2017: IN-SITU STRESS MEASUREMENT AND STABILITY ANALYSIS OF SURROUNDING ROCKS IN THE NORTH SECTION OF DEEP BURIED TUNNEL IN MUZHAILING. Journal of Geomechanics, 23(6): 893-903.
    CHEN Li-zhong, HONG Bo, ZHANG Quan-feng, ZENG Lian-bo, QIU Jun, LI Ran, DAI Jin-xiong. 2017: A STUDY ON IN-SITU STRESS MEASUREMENT IN A CANDIDATE SITE FOR CNNC NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIAL PARK IN GANSU PROVINCE. Journal of Geomechanics, 23(3): 475-486.
    BAI Jin-peng, PENG Hua, ZHENG Zhe-xia, LIU Chong, MA Xiu-min, JIANG Jing-jie, LI Zhen. 2013: IN-SITU STRESS MEASUREMENT BY DIFFERENTIAL STRAIN ANALYSIS METHOD IN THE WELL TUN-1. Journal of Geomechanics, 19(2): 117-124.
    ZHAO Wei-hua, SUN Dong-sheng, WANG Hong-cai, LIANG Jun-yi, WANG Ping, ZHANG Jun-hong, WANG Jun. 2008: MEASUREMENT OF ROCK STRESS OF HONGLING COAL MINE. Journal of Geomechanics, 14(3): 286-291.
    WU Man-lu, LI Guo-jun, LIAO Chun-ting, DONG Cheng. 2006: MEASUREMENTS OF IN-SITU STRESS IN THE PUSHIHE HYDROPOWER STATION, LIAONING. Journal of Geomechanics, 12(2): 191-196.
    WANG Xi-hai. 2002: COMPARISON OF GEOSTRESS MEASUREMENT BETWEEN AE METHOD WITH STRESS RELIEF BY OVERCORING IN SILIN POWER STATION,GUIZHOU PROVINCE. Journal of Geomechanics, 8(2): 136-140.
    DONG Cheng, WANG Lian-jie, YANG Xiao-cong, WANG Hong-cai, WANG Wei. 2001: STRESS MEASUREMENT OF ANQING COPER MINING. Journal of Geomechanics, 7(3): 259-264.
    CHEN Qun-ce, LI Fang-quan, MAO Ji-zhen. 2001: APPLICATION STUDY OF THREE DIMENSIONAL GEO-STRESS MEASUREMENTS BY USE OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING METHOD. Journal of Geomechanics, 7(1): 69-78.
    WU Man-lu, LIAO Chun-ting. 2001: THE MEASUREMENT AND STUDY ON IN SITU STRESS IN THE CENTRAL AREA OF THE HUANGCOU ACCUMULATION POWER STATION, HEILONGJIANG. Journal of Geomechanics, 7(1): 61-68.
    WU Man-lu, LIAO Chun-ting. 2000: STRESS MEASUREMENTS AND STUDY OF STABILITY OF THE DAMAO TUNNEL. Journal of Geomechanics, 6(2): 71-76.
    Chen Qunce, An Meijian, Li Fangquan. 1998: THEORETICAL DISCUSSION ON 3-D HYDRAULIC FRACTURING IN SITU STRESS MEASUREMTNT. Journal of Geomechanics, 4(1): 37-44.
    Wang Lianjie, Ding Yuanchen, Liu Qisheng, Shao Zhaogang, Tan Chengxuan, Wang Wei, Chert Guizhong. 1996: ROCK STRESS MEASUREMENTS IN A PLANNED TUNNEL FOR DIVERSION OF WATER FROM THE YELLOW RIVER. Journal of Geomechanics, 2(1): 62-69.
    Zhang Fan, Pan Lizhou. 1996: NUMERICAL TREATMENT OF MEASURING GROUND STRESS BY THE BOREHOLE DEFORMATION METHOD USING PRE-PRESSED PROBES OF CONTACT TYPE. Journal of Geomechanics, 2(2): 75-82.
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By

  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(2)

    1. 田旭文，王彦兵，朱姝，姚鑫，李显鑫. 藏东南输电走廊北线区域地质环境与主要地质安全问题. 地质力学学报. 2025(01): 91-108 . 本站查看
    2. 梁珍，乔国文，李治财，王涛，赵龙，曾召田. 中天山花岗岩深埋隧道高地应力测试及工程影响分析. 现代隧道技术. 2024(S1): 332-341 .

    Other cited types(3)

  • Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Amount of accessChart context menuAbstract Views, HTML Views, PDF Downloads StatisticsAbstract ViewsHTML ViewsPDF Downloads2024-042024-052024-062024-072024-082024-092024-102024-112024-122025-012025-022025-0301020304050
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Class DistributionFULLTEXT: 16.4 %FULLTEXT: 16.4 %META: 72.2 %META: 72.2 %PDF: 11.3 %PDF: 11.3 %FULLTEXTMETAPDF
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Area Distribution其他: 6.4 %其他: 6.4 %三亚: 0.1 %三亚: 0.1 %上海: 1.3 %上海: 1.3 %东京: 0.3 %东京: 0.3 %东莞: 0.3 %东莞: 0.3 %中卫: 0.8 %中卫: 0.8 %临汾: 0.1 %临汾: 0.1 %乌兰察布: 0.1 %乌兰察布: 0.1 %乌鲁木齐: 0.1 %乌鲁木齐: 0.1 %兰州: 0.8 %兰州: 0.8 %加利福尼亚州: 0.8 %加利福尼亚州: 0.8 %北京: 12.0 %北京: 12.0 %南京: 0.7 %南京: 0.7 %南充: 0.1 %南充: 0.1 %南昌: 0.3 %南昌: 0.3 %南通: 0.1 %南通: 0.1 %合肥: 0.4 %合肥: 0.4 %吉安: 0.1 %吉安: 0.1 %吕梁: 0.1 %吕梁: 0.1 %呼和浩特: 0.1 %呼和浩特: 0.1 %和田: 0.3 %和田: 0.3 %哈密: 0.1 %哈密: 0.1 %哈尔滨: 0.3 %哈尔滨: 0.3 %哥伦布: 0.1 %哥伦布: 0.1 %嘉兴: 0.1 %嘉兴: 0.1 %大同: 2.3 %大同: 2.3 %大连: 0.3 %大连: 0.3 %天津: 0.4 %天津: 0.4 %太原: 0.1 %太原: 0.1 %安阳: 0.4 %安阳: 0.4 %宜春: 0.3 %宜春: 0.3 %宣城: 0.1 %宣城: 0.1 %巴音郭楞: 0.1 %巴音郭楞: 0.1 %常德: 0.1 %常德: 0.1 %广州: 0.4 %广州: 0.4 %张家口: 4.1 %张家口: 4.1 %徐州: 0.1 %徐州: 0.1 %惠州: 0.1 %惠州: 0.1 %成都: 2.1 %成都: 2.1 %扬州: 0.1 %扬州: 0.1 %拉萨: 0.1 %拉萨: 0.1 %日喀则: 0.1 %日喀则: 0.1 %昆明: 0.7 %昆明: 0.7 %晋中: 0.1 %晋中: 0.1 %朝阳: 1.0 %朝阳: 1.0 %本溪: 0.1 %本溪: 0.1 %杭州: 0.4 %杭州: 0.4 %枣庄: 0.1 %枣庄: 0.1 %柳州: 0.3 %柳州: 0.3 %武汉: 0.8 %武汉: 0.8 %永州: 0.1 %永州: 0.1 %泉州: 0.1 %泉州: 0.1 %济南: 0.3 %济南: 0.3 %济宁: 0.4 %济宁: 0.4 %温州: 0.1 %温州: 0.1 %湖州: 0.1 %湖州: 0.1 %漯河: 0.4 %漯河: 0.4 %潍坊: 0.1 %潍坊: 0.1 %烟台: 0.3 %烟台: 0.3 %焦作: 0.1 %焦作: 0.1 %甘孜: 0.1 %甘孜: 0.1 %盐城: 0.3 %盐城: 0.3 %石家庄: 0.1 %石家庄: 0.1 %秦皇岛: 0.3 %秦皇岛: 0.3 %红河: 0.1 %红河: 0.1 %肇庆: 0.1 %肇庆: 0.1 %舟山: 0.7 %舟山: 0.7 %芒廷维尤: 18.1 %芒廷维尤: 18.1 %芝加哥: 0.1 %芝加哥: 0.1 %苏州: 0.1 %苏州: 0.1 %萍乡: 0.3 %萍乡: 0.3 %衡阳: 0.1 %衡阳: 0.1 %衢州: 0.1 %衢州: 0.1 %西宁: 21.2 %西宁: 21.2 %西安: 1.4 %西安: 1.4 %西雅图: 0.1 %西雅图: 0.1 %诺沃克: 5.2 %诺沃克: 5.2 %贵阳: 0.8 %贵阳: 0.8 %达州: 0.4 %达州: 0.4 %运城: 1.8 %运城: 1.8 %通辽: 0.1 %通辽: 0.1 %郑州: 0.6 %郑州: 0.6 %酒泉: 0.1 %酒泉: 0.1 %重庆: 0.6 %重庆: 0.6 %银川: 0.1 %银川: 0.1 %长春: 0.4 %长春: 0.4 %长沙: 1.0 %长沙: 1.0 %阿坝: 0.1 %阿坝: 0.1 %青岛: 0.4 %青岛: 0.4 %鞍山: 0.1 %鞍山: 0.1 %黄石: 0.3 %黄石: 0.3 %其他三亚上海东京东莞中卫临汾乌兰察布乌鲁木齐兰州加利福尼亚州北京南京南充南昌南通合肥吉安吕梁呼和浩特和田哈密哈尔滨哥伦布嘉兴大同大连天津太原安阳宜春宣城巴音郭楞常德广州张家口徐州惠州成都扬州拉萨日喀则昆明晋中朝阳本溪杭州枣庄柳州武汉永州泉州济南济宁温州湖州漯河潍坊烟台焦作甘孜盐城石家庄秦皇岛红河肇庆舟山芒廷维尤芝加哥苏州萍乡衡阳衢州西宁西安西雅图诺沃克贵阳达州运城通辽郑州酒泉重庆银川长春长沙阿坝青岛鞍山黄石

Catalog

    Figures(7)  / Tables(5)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (509) PDF downloads(80) Cited by(5)
    Proportional views
    Related

    Website Copyright © Journal of Geomechanics  京ICP备18031784号  Total visits：6189334

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd.    

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return