Y. Miyamoto, T. Nakano, T. Kobayashi | 2024 | Open Journal of Earthquake Research
DOI 10.4236/ojer.2024.131002Review state
Last reviewed
Not reviewed yet
Last approved reanalysis
No approved reanalysis yet
This paper investigates the response properties of structures built on lunar regolith using static and cyclic triaxial compression tests and shaking table experiments. The study utilizes the regolith simulant FJS-1 and highlights the mechanical behavior of lunar regolith under dynamic loads. This paper investigates the mechanical properties of lunar regolith simulant FJS-1 through static and cyclic triaxial compression tests, as well as shaking table experiments. The simulant's response to seismic disturbances and its behavior under varying confining pressures and loading frequencies are analyzed. The study compares the simulant's dynamic deformation characteristics with Earth soils. This paper investigates the dynamic response properties of structures built on lunar regolith simulant, focusing on shaking table tests and Fourier amplitude ratios. It compares different foundation types and analyzes the effects of input amplitude and frequency on ground response. Y. Miyamoto et al. DOI: 10.4236/ojer.2024.131002 39 Open Journal of Earthquake Research factors increased. In contrast, the buried foundation showcased notably reduced response. Moreover, within the pile foundation, larger i
These are the records this paper contributes to the simulant, returned sample, method, and property browsers.
No returned samples extracted yet.
static and cyclic triaxial compression tests
mechanical testing
Free ground response
shaking table test | ground response to seismic waves
Fourier amplitude ratio analysis
shaking table test | nonlinear ground response
Pile foundation response
shaking table test | foundation vibration characteristics
Rocking component response
shaking table test | structure rocking behavior
Pile foundation separation phenomenon
shaking table test | pile-ground interaction
Nonlinearity in regolith ground
shaking table test | ground nonlinearity
Frequency and amplification factor analysis
shaking table test | seismic wave propagation
reference strain
smaller compared to sandy soil on Earth
equivalent damping factor
smaller compared to sandy soil on Earth
internal friction angle
approximately 45
cohesion
approximately 8 kN/m 2
Friction angle
derived from triaxial or shear-strength testing