Geomechanics and Engineering

  • 제45권6호
  • /
  • Pages.753-765
  • /
  • 2026
  • /
  • 2005-307X(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2092-6219(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Full-scale assessment of spacing and array configuration in multi-conduit underground distribution systems

  • Jun-Beom An (Department of Geotechnical Engineering Research, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology (KICT)) ;
  • Song-Hun Chong (Department of Civil Engineering, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Gye-Chun Cho (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST))
  • 투고 : 2025.11.28
  • 심사 : 2026.05.20
  • 발행 : 2026.06.25
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Underground power distribution cables are typically installed using multi-conduit systems, in which the minimum spacing between adjacent conduits is prescribed primarily for electrical and thermal safety. However, such considerations are less critical for medium-voltage distribution systems and do not reflect the geotechnical behavior of closely buried conduits. This study presents a full-scale laboratory investigation to evaluate how conduit spacing affects soil-structure interaction and mechanical response under static and repetitive loading. Two configurations, a conventional spaced arrangement and a non-spaced arrangement, are constructed in a large instrumented soil chamber. Miniature cone penetration tests are conducted prior to loading to verify that the prepared backfill satisfied the target compaction level. Measurements of vertical soil pressure and conduit deformation reveal clear behavioral differences between the two configurations. The non-spaced configuration shows stress redistribution behavior consistent with the formation of a continuous arching mechanism, which is associated with reduced deformation under both static and cyclic loading. In contrast, the spaced configuration develops localized arching above individual conduits and exhibited greater deformation accumulation during repetitive loading. Supplemental uniaxial compression testing confirms that the stress levels mobilized in the full-scale experiments remain well within the elastic range of the polyethylene conduit, indicating minimal risk of structural yielding regardless of spacing. Overall, the results indicate that eliminating spacing does not compromise structural safety and produces favorable stress redistribution and deformation responses under the tested installation conditions. These findings suggest the need for further geotechnical evaluation of configuration requirements in medium-voltage distribution conduits.

키워드

과제정보

The work was supported by a grant (RS-2023-00245334) funded by Korea of Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT).

참고문헌

  1. IEEE standard 525 (2025). IEEE guide for the design and installation of cable systems in substations, IEEE Power and Energy Society.
  2. CIGRE Technical Brochure 398 (2009). Third-party damage to underground and submarine cables, WB B1.21, CIGRE.
  3. KEC (2024). Korea electro-technical code, Ministry of Trade, Industry and Resources, Republic of Korea.
  4. Seed, R.B., Duncan, J.M. (1986). FE analyses: compaction-induced stresses and deformations. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 112(1), 23-43. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1986)112:1(23).
  5. McGrath, T.J., Selig, E.T., Webb, M.C., Zoladz, G.V. (1999). Pipe interaction with the backfill envelope (No. FHWA-RD-98-191). University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Transportation Center.
  6. Wu, J., Kouretzis, G., Suwal, L. (2021). Bearing capacity mechanisms for pipes buried in sand. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 58(6), 834-847. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2020-0109.
  7. Srivastava, A., Babu, G.S. (2011). Deflection and buckling of buried flexible pipe-soil system in a spatially variable soil profile. Geomechanics and Engineering, 3(3), 169-188. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2011.3.3.169.
  8. Elshimi, T.M., Moore, I.D. (2013). Modeling the effects of backfilling and soil compaction beside shallow buried pipes. Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, 4(4), 04013004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000136.
  9. Xie, T.C., Zhu, H.H., Tan, D.Y., Shukla, S.K. (2024). Modeling pipe-soil interaction under surface loading using material point method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 147, 105709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2024.105709.
  10. Anzum, S., Dhar, A.S. (2024). Three-dimensional finite-element modeling of polyethylene pipes in dense sand subjected to a lateral force. Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, 15(3), 04024018. https://doi.org/10.1061/JPSEA2.PSENG-1531.
  11. Agbo, S., Roy, K., Adeeb, S., Li, Y. (2024). A systematic literature review on permanent ground deformation patterns imposed on buried steel pipelines. Journal of Pipeline Science and Engineering, 4(2), 100151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpse.2023.100151.
  12. Roy, K., Hawlader, B., Kenny, S., Moore, I. (2015). Finite element modeling of lateral pipeline-soil interactions in dense sand. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 53(3), 490-504. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0171.
  13. Roy, K., Hawlader, B., Kenny, S., Moore, I. (2018). Upward pipe-soil interaction for shallowly buried pipelines in dense sand. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 144(11), 04018078. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001957.
  14. Cicek, E., Guler, E., Yetimoglu, T. (2014). Comparison of measured and theoretical pressure distribution below strip footings on sand soil. International Journal of Geomechanics, 14(5), 06014009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.00003.
  15. Khan, M.U., Shukla, S.K. (2021). Vertical load on a conduit buried under a sloping ground. Geomechanics and Engineering, 24(6), 599-610. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2021.24.6.599.
  16. Huang, C., Chen, J., Sun, Y. (2022). Mechanical simulation and calculation methodology of buried steel pipes under multiple loads. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 17, e01662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01662.
  17. Bildik, S., Laman, M. (2015). Experimental investigation of the effects of pipe location on the bearing capacity. Geomechanics and Engineering, 8(2), 221-235. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2015.8.2.221.
  18. Li, G., Xu, C., Shen, P., Han, J., Zhang, X. (2024). Effects of reinforcement on two-dimensional soil arching development under localized surface loading. Geomechanics and Engineering, 37(4), 341-358. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2024.37.4.341.
  19. Kang, J., Parker, F., Yoo, C.H. (2007). Soil-structure interaction and imperfect trench installations for deeply buried concrete pipes. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 133(3), 277-285. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:3(277).
  20. Kang, J., Parker, F., Yoo, C.H. (2008). Soil-structure interaction for deeply buried corrugated steel pipes Part II: imperfect trench installation. Engineering Structures, 30(3), 588-594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.04.006.
  21. Katona, M.G. (2016). Influence of soil models on structural performance of buried culverts. International Journal of Geomechanics, 17(1), 04016031. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000684.
  22. Oner, C., Bildik, S., Frost, J.D. (2023). Numerical investigation of effect of geotextile and pipe stiffness on buried pipe behavior. Geomechanics and Engineering, 34(6), 611-621. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2023.34.6.611.
  23. Hassankhani, E., Esmaeili-Falak, M. (2024). Soil-structure interaction for buried conduits influenced by the coupled effect of the protective layer and trench installation. Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, 15(2), 04024012. https://doi.org/10.1061/JPSEA2.PSENG-1547.
  24. Zhang, Y., Liu, B., Meng, L. (2023). Structural behavior and soil arching state of underground corrugated steel utility tunnel. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 203, 107798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.107798.
  25. Chong, S.H., An, J.B., Cho, G.C. (2022). Full-scale test of direct-buried cable in sand under repetitive loading. Transportation Geotechnics, 37, 100877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2022.100877.
  26. Lee, C., Kim, R., Lee, J.S., Lee, W. (2013). Quantitative assessment of temperature effect on cone resistance. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 72(1), 3-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-012-0454-3.
  27. Jamiolkowski, M., Lo Presti, D.C.F., Manassero, M. (2003). Evaluation of relative density and shear strength of sands from CPT and DMT. Soil Behavior and Soft Ground Construction, 201-238. https://doi.org/10.1061/40659(2003)7.
  28. Kim, J.H., Eun, J.W., Park, Y.H., Hwang, S.W., Kim, M.K., Lee, J.H. (2006). Development of the structural analysis model for asphalt pavement foundations considering vehicle loads. Proceedings of the KSCE Annual Conference, 4128-4131.
  29. Bolton, M.D., Gui, M.W., Garnier, J., Corte, J.F., Bagge, G., Laue, J., Renzi, R. (1999). Centrifuge cone penetration tests in sand. Géotechnique, 49(4), 543-552. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1999.49.4.543.
  30. Tatsuoka, F., Toki, S., Miura, S., Kato, H., Okamoto, M., Yamada, S.I., et al. (1986). Some factors affecting cyclic undrained triaxial strength of sand. Soils and Foundations, 26(3), 99-116. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.26.3_99.
  31. Youd, T.L. (1972). Compaction of sands by repeated shear straining. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, 98(7), 709-725. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSFEAQ.0001762.
  32. Meyerhof, G.G. (1976). Bearing capacity and settlement of pile foundations. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 102(3), 197-228. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000243.
  33. Puech, A., Foray, P. (2002). Refined model for interpreting shallow penetration CPTs in sands. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, OTC Houston, Texas, USA.