›› 2018, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (2): 553-560.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2017.1133

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同因素对排水沟渠水平冻胀力的影响

田亚护1, 2,胡康琼1, 2,邰博文1, 2,沈宇鹏1, 2,王腾飞1, 2   

  1. 1. 北京交通大学 土木建筑工程学院,北京 100044;2. 北京交通大学 城市地下工程教育部重点实验室,北京 100044
  • 收稿日期:2017-06-06 出版日期:2018-02-10 发布日期:2018-06-06
  • 作者简介:田亚护,男,1974年生,博士,副教授,主要从事路基工程与冻土工程方面的研究与教学工作
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金项目(No. 41271072,No. 41772330)

Influence of different factors on horizontal frost heaving force against canal

TIAN Ya-hu1, 2, HU Kang-qiong1, 2, TAI Bo-wen1, 2, SHEN Yu-peng1, 2, WANG Teng-fei1, 2   

  1. 1. School of Civil Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Urban Underground Engineering of Ministry of Education, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China
  • Received:2017-06-06 Online:2018-02-10 Published:2018-06-06
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(41271072, 41772330).

摘要: 多年冻土地区的排水沟渠经常遭受水平冻胀力的破坏,严重影响构筑物的服役性能。根据青藏高原多年冻土区路基坡脚U型槽排水沟渠的现场试验,并通过数值计算与理论分析,分析了结构埋深、粗颗粒换填范围以及结构形式对其温度场和水平冻胀力的影响。结果表明:改变工况,对土体温度场分布的形状影响较小,仅对其大小有一定影响。不同工况下水平冻胀力均沿深度非均匀分布,最大水平冻胀力主要出现在结构中部,而其上部和下部较小,结构侧壁在1/2至1/3处易发生冻胀破坏。梯形结构所受的水平冻胀力较U型结构增大13%~15%左右,但其分布形式基本相同。因此,U型结构在降低水平冻胀力方面优于梯形结构。随着换填范围增大,排水沟渠的水平冻胀力最大值逐渐减小;对于埋深1.7 m的排水沟渠来说,其侧边的0~2.8 m是影响水平冻胀力的主要换填宽度范围,而当换填宽度超过2.8 m后,水平冻胀力几乎不再降低。

关键词: 多年冻土, 排水沟渠, 水平冻胀力, 数值模拟

Abstract: In permafrost regions, canal is usually subjected to the horizontal frost heaving force, which impairs service life of canal. Based on the field test of U-shape subgrade canal in permafrost regions of Qinghai-Tibet plateau and the results of numerical calculation, the influences of canal depth, water content and width of surrounding soil replacement on temperature field and horizontal frost heaving characters were analyzed. The results indicate that U-shape canal depth, water content of soils as well as the width of surrounding soil replacement only have influence on temperature values of surrounding soils, but not on the shape of temperature contour of soils. The horizontal frost heaving force firstly increases and then gradually decreases along the depth of the structure, exhibiting varying values. The maximum frost heaving force occurs at about 1/2-1/3 depth of canal, which has the highest probability to have frost force-induced failure. The horizontal frost heaving force against the trapezoidal canal is about 13%-15% more than against the U-shape canal with the same depth. However, the horizontal frost heaving forces against two different canals have almost the same contour characteristics. The U-shape canal is superior to the trapezoidal structure in the perspective of reducing the horizontal frost heaving force. The more the width of soil replacing, the less the maximum horizontal frost heaving force. For the U-shape canal with 1.7 m in depth, the horizontal frost heaving force changes obviously when the width of soil replacement is from 0 to 2.8 m. However, the change is hardly seen when the width is beyond 2.8 m.

Key words: permafrost regions, canal, horizontal frost heaving force, numerical simulation

中图分类号: 

  • TU 445

[1] 毛浩宇, 徐奴文, 李彪, 樊义林, 吴家耀, 孟国涛, . 基于离散元模拟和微震监测的白鹤滩水电站左岸地下厂房稳定性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2470-2484.
[2] 史林肯, 周辉, 宋明, 卢景景, 张传庆, 路新景, . 深部复合地层TBM开挖扰动模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 1933-1943.
[3] 张振, 张朝, 叶观宝, 王萌, 肖彦, 程义, . 劲芯水泥土桩承载路堤渐进式失稳破坏机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 2122-2131.
[4] 张明礼, 温智, 董建华, 王得楷, 岳国栋, 王斌, 高樯. 考虑降雨作用的多年冻土区不同地表土质 活动层水热过程差异分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1549-1559.
[5] 苏杰, 周正华, 李小军, 董青, 李玉萍, 陈柳. 基于偏振特性的下孔法剪切波到时判别问题探讨[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1420-1428.
[6] 杨高升, 白冰, 姚晓亮, . 高含冰量冻土路基融化固结规律研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 1010-1018.
[7] 马秋峰, 秦跃平, 周天白, 杨小彬. 岩石剪切断裂面接触算法的开发与应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 1074-1085.
[8] 李康, 王威, 杨典森, 陈卫忠, 亓宪寅, 谭彩. 周期振荡法在低渗透测量中的应用研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 1086-1094.
[9] 李翻翻, 陈卫忠, 雷江, 于洪丹, 马永尚, . 基于塑性损伤的黏土岩力学特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(1): 132-140.
[10] 夏 坤, 董林, 蒲小武, 李璐, . 黄土塬地震动响应特征分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(1): 295-304.
[11] 郭院成, 李明宇, 张艳伟, . 预应力锚杆复合土钉墙支护体系增量解析方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 253-258.
[12] 闫国强, 殷跃平, 黄波林, 张枝华, 代贞伟, . 三峡库区巫山金鸡岭滑坡成因机制与变形特征[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 329-340.
[13] 刘红岩. 宏细观缺陷对岩体力学特性及边坡稳定影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 431-439.
[14] 金爱兵, 刘佳伟, 赵怡晴, 王本鑫, 孙浩, 魏余栋, . 卸荷条件下花岗岩力学特性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 459-467.
[15] 韩征, 粟滨, 李艳鸽, 王伟, 王卫东, 黄健陵, 陈光齐, . 基于HBP本构模型的泥石流动力过程SPH数值模拟[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 477-485.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!