›› 2018, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (6): 1955-1962.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2016.1800

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

水平加筋地基极限承载力的极限上限分析法

曹文贵1,谭建辉1,胡卫东1, 2   

  1. 1. 湖南大学 岩土工程研究所,湖南 长沙 410082;2. 湖南理工学院 土木建筑工程学院,湖南 岳阳 414000
  • 收稿日期:2016-09-23 出版日期:2018-06-11 发布日期:2018-07-03
  • 作者简介:曹文贵,男,1963年生,博士,教授,主要从事岩土工程教学与研究工作。
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金项目(No.51378198);高等学校博士学科点专项科研基金项目(No.20130161110017)。

Upper bound of ultimate bearing capacity for the reinforced grounds

CAO Wen-gui1, TAN Jian-hui1, HU Wei-dong1, 2   

  1. 1. Geotechnical Engineering Institute, Hunan University, Changsha, Hunan 410082, China; 2. College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Hunan Institute of Science and Technology, Yueyang, Hunan 414000, China
  • Received:2016-09-23 Online:2018-06-11 Published:2018-07-03
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51378198) and the Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (20130161110017).

摘要: 水平加筋是广泛应用的软土地基处理方法之一,而水平加筋地基极限承载力的确定是其地基处理设计的重要依据。因此,首先结合条形基础下水平加筋地基的工程特点,在探讨其承载机制和破坏特点的基础上,考虑破坏间断面上筋材与地基土体的变形协调,构建出反映加筋参数变化影响的可变破坏模式及机动允许速度场;然后,在此基础上,通过重点研究筋材的能量耗散分析方法,并引入上限极限分析理论,建立出条形基础下水平加筋地基极限承载力分析模型,再引入序列二次规划优化分析理论,建立出条形基础下水平加筋地基极限承载力确定方法,它能充分反映加筋设计参数对地基破坏模式及承载力的影响;最后,通过试验结果与该方法及现有同类分析模型结果的比较分析,表明了该模型与方法的合理性与可行性。

关键词: 水平加筋地基, 极限承载力, 上限极限分析, 可变破坏模式, 变形协调

Abstract: The horizontal reinforcement is a method of ground treatment for soft soil. The calculation of the ultimate bearing capacity of the reinforced grounds is important to the design of ground foundation treatment. Firstly, combined with the engineering characteristics of reinforced grounds, a changeable failure mode varying with the reinforcement parameters and the kinematically admissible velocity field are established by its failure mechanism considering the influence of the coordinate deformation between soil and the horizontal reinforcement. Secondly, with the upper limit analysis, the ultimate bearing capacity calculation was deduced by the method of energy dissipation for the level reinforcement. Thirdly, a new approach for determining the ultimate bearing capacity of the reinforced grounds is introduced by the sequential quadratic programming optimization algorithm. Finally, the comparisons with experimental results find that this proposed method is reasonable, feasible, and superior to other existing methods, also can reflect the reinforcement design parameters effect on the failure mode and its ultimate bearing capacity.

Key words: reinforced grounds, ultimate bearing capacity, upper limit analysis, movable failure mode, deformation coordination

中图分类号: 

  • TU 432

[1] 李超, 李涛, 荆国业, 肖玉华. 竖井掘进机撑靴井壁土体极限承载力研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 227-236.
[2] 赵明华, 彭文哲, 杨超炜, 肖尧, 刘亚楠. 斜坡地基刚性桩水平承载力上限分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 727-735.
[3] 杨学祥, 焦园发, 杨语驿, . 充气膨胀控制锚杆的研制与试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 869-876.
[4] 穆锐, 浦少云, 黄质宏, 李永辉, 郑培鑫, 刘 旸, 刘 泽, 郑红超, . 土岩组合岩体中抗拔桩极限承载力的确定[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(7): 2825-2837.
[5] 王冬勇, 陈曦, 于玉贞, 吕彦楠, . 基于二阶锥规划有限元增量加载法的条形浅基础极限承载力分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(12): 4890-4896.
[6] 冯君, 王洋, 张俞峰, 黄林, 何长江, 吴红刚, . 玄武岩纤维与钢筋锚杆锚固性能现场对比试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(11): 4185-4193.
[7] 宗钟凌,鲁先龙,李青松,. 静压钢管注浆微型桩抗压与抗拔对比试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 362-368.
[8] 周 勇,朱亚薇, . 深基坑桩锚支护结构和土体之间协同作用[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3246-3252.
[9] 尹君凡,雷 勇,陈秋南,刘一新,邓加政,. 偏心荷载下溶洞顶板冲切破坏上限分析[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 2837-2843.
[10] 李 泽,刘 毅,周 宇,王均星,. 基于混合离散的砌石挡土墙边坡极限承载力下限分析[J]. , 2018, 39(3): 1100-1108.
[11] 崔 凯,王东华,谌文武,任晓峰,刘 建,杨 光,. 基于改性糯米灰浆的3种锚杆锚固性能对比研究[J]. , 2018, 39(2): 498-506.
[12] 姜文雨, 刘 一, . 刚性桩复合地基中性面深度与桩土应力比计算[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(12): 4554-4560.
[13] 陈昌富, 曾松林, 刘一俊. 考虑预应力损失桩-锚结构内力计算的加权残值法[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(12): 4569-4576.
[14] 孔纲强,彭怀风,朱 希,顾红伟,周立朵,. 水平荷载下纵截面异形桩承载特性试验[J]. , 2018, 39(1): 229-236.
[15] 雷 勇,尹君凡,陈秋南,杨 威,. 基于极限分析法的溶洞顶板极限承载力研究[J]. , 2017, 38(7): 1926-1932.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!