›› 2017, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (2): 377-384.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2017.02.010

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

考虑起始水力坡降的软土大变形非线性固结分析

李传勋1,董兴泉1,金丹丹1,谢康和2   

  1. 1. 江苏大学 土木工程与力学学院,江苏 镇江 212013;2. 浙江大学 滨海和城市岩土工程研究中心,浙江 杭州 310058
  • 收稿日期:2016-01-12 出版日期:2017-02-11 发布日期:2018-06-05
  • 作者简介:李传勋,男,1978年生,博士,副教授,主要从事岩土工程方面的教学和科研。
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金项目(No. 51109092,No. 11272137);中国博士后基金项目(No. 2013M530237,No. 2014T70479)

Nonlinear large-strain consolidation analysis of soft clay considering threshold hydraulic gradient

LI Chuan-xun1, DONG Xing-quan1, JIN Dan-dan1, XIE Kang-he2   

  1. 1. Faculty of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu 212013, China; 2. Research Center of Coastal and Urban Geotechnical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310058, China
  • Received:2016-01-12 Online:2017-02-11 Published:2018-06-05
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51109092, 11272137) and the Foundation for Post-doctoral Scientists of China (2013M530237, 2014T70479).

摘要: 软黏土中渗流存在起始水力坡降的现象已逐渐为人们所认识,但变荷载下考虑起始坡降的软土大变形非线性固结理论还很鲜见。考虑土中渗流存在的起始水力坡降及非线性压缩渗透特性,在拉格朗日坐标系中建立变荷载下以超静孔压为变量的软土大变形非线性固结模型并给出其有限差分解。在此基础上,通过与达西定律下大变形固结半解析解对比分析,验证了解的可靠性。最后着重分析起始水力坡降对软土大、小变形固结性状影响的差异。结果表明,无论采用小变形假定还是采用大变形假定,考虑起始坡降后超静孔压的消散速率及最终沉降量均比达西定律下小。大、小变形假定下起始坡降均会引起超静孔压不能完全消散的现象,且大变形假定下超静孔压残留值要小于其小变形假定下的残留值,致使大变形假定下土层最终沉降量要比其小变形假定下大。起始水力坡降和几何变形假定均会影响固结性状,且起始坡降值无疑影响更明显,故在软黏土中渗流存在的起始水力坡降在固结计算中不容忽视。

关键词: 软土, 起始水力坡降, 大变形固结, 有限差分法, 非线性固结

Abstract: It has been gradually recognized that threshold hydraulic gradient of seepage exists in soft clay. However, nonlinear large-strain consolidation of soft clay with threshold gradient, which takes time-dependent load into account, has rarely been reported in the literature so far. By employing the excess pore water pressure as variable, and considering both threshold hydraulic gradient and characteristics of nonlinear compression and permeability, a model for large-strain consolidation is developed in Lagrangian coordinate system. On that basis, the corresponding finite difference solutions for this model are provided. Meanwhile, compared with the semi-analytical solutions of large-strain consolidation under Darcy's law, the numerical solutions for the proposed consolidation model are verified. Finally, the differences in the influence of threshold hydraulic gradient on consolidation behaviors of clay between large- and small-strain conditions are emphatically investigated. The results show that, no matter large- or small-strain condition is considered, both the dissipation rate of excess pore water pressure and the settlement of clay layer become smaller than that under condition of Darcy's law when considering the influence of threshold hydraulic gradient. The excess pore water pressure in clay with threshold hydraulic gradient is not completely dissipated under both large- and small-strain conditions, moreover, the residual value of excess pore water pressure under large-strain condition is smaller than that under small-strain condition, which leads to a larger settlement of clay layer under large-strain condition than that under small-strain condition. Both threshold hydraulic gradient and different deformation conditions have influences on the consolidation behavior, while the influence of threshold hydraulic gradient is more evident. Therefore, the threshold hydraulic gradient of seepage in soft clay cannot be ignored during the consolidation calculation of soft clay layer.

Key words: soft clay, threshold hydraulic gradient, large-strain consolidation, finite difference method, nonlinear consolidation

中图分类号: 

  • TU 433

[1] 姚宏波, 李冰河, 童磊, 刘兴旺, 陈卫林. 考虑空间效应的软土隧道上方卸荷变形分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2453-2460.
[2] 江留慧, 李传勋, 杨怡青, 张锐. 变荷载下双层地基一维非线性固结近似解析解[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1583-1590.
[3] 张雪东, 蔡红, 魏迎奇, 张紫涛, 梁建辉, 胡晶. 基于动力离心试验的软基尾矿库地震响应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1287-1294.
[4] 王国辉, 陈文化, 聂庆科, 陈军红, 范晖红, 张川, . 深厚淤泥质土中基坑开挖对基桩 影响的离心模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 399-407.
[5] 贺志军, 雷皓程, 夏张琦, 赵炼恒. 多层软土地基中单桩沉降与内力位移分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 655-666.
[6] 刘忠玉, 夏洋洋, 张家超, 朱新牧. 考虑Hansbo渗流的饱和黏土 一维弹黏塑性固结分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(1): 11-22.
[7] 雷华阳, 胡垚, 雷尚华, 祁子洋, 许英刚, . 增压式真空预压加固吹填超软土微观结构特征分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 32-40.
[8] 张治国, 李胜楠, 张成平, 王志伟, . 考虑地下水位升降影响的盾构施工诱发地层 变形和衬砌响应分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 281-296.
[9] 叶观宝, 郑文强, 张 振, . 大面积填土场地中摩擦型桩负摩阻力分布特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 440-448.
[10] 陈栋, 王恩元, 李楠, . 不同煤岩介质模型的波场特征研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 449-458.
[11] 刘忠玉, 崔鹏陆, 郑占垒, 夏洋洋, 张家超. 基于非牛顿指数渗流和分数阶Merchant模型的 一维流变固结分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2029-2038.
[12] 龚文惠, 赵旭东, 邱金伟, 李逸, 杨晗. 饱和软土大应变自重固结非线性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2099-2107.
[13] 张 奎, 赵成刚, 李伟华. 海底软土层对海洋地基场地动力响应的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2456-2468.
[14] 蒲诃夫, 宋丁豹, 郑俊杰, 周 洋, 闫 婧, 李展毅. 饱和软土大变形非线性自重固结模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1683-1692.
[15] 金丹丹, 王 素, 李传勋. 考虑起始水力坡降的天然非均质地基固结分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1433-1440.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!