岩土力学 ›› 2019, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (2): 678-683.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2017.1571

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

红层泥岩及其改良填料路基动力响应试验研究

徐 鹏1, 2,蒋关鲁1, 2,任世杰1,田鸿程2,王智猛3   

  1. 1. 西南交通大学 土木工程学院,四川 成都 610031;2. 西南交通大学 高速铁路线路工程教育部重点试验室,四川 成都 610031; 3. 中铁二院工程集团有限责任公司,四川 成都 610031
  • 收稿日期:2017-07-26 出版日期:2019-02-11 发布日期:2019-02-14
  • 通讯作者: 蒋关鲁,男,1962年生,博士,教授,主要从事道路与铁道工程方向研究。E-mail: wgljiang@swjtu.edu.cn E-mail:sdxplt@163.com
  • 作者简介:徐鹏,男,1988年生,博士研究生,主要从事高速铁路路基及地基处理设计等方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:
    中国铁路总公司科技研究开发计划项目(No. 2014G003-C);铁道部科技研究发展计划项目(No. 2005K004-C(G))

Experimental study of dynamic response of subgrade with red mudstone and improved red mudstone

XU Peng1, 2, JIANG Guan-lu1, 2, REN Shi-jie1, TIAN Hong-cheng2, WANG Zhi-meng3   

  1. 1. School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610031, China; 2. Key Laboratory of High-Speed Railway Engineering of Ministry of Education, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610031, China; 3. China Railway Eryuan Engineering Group Co., Ltd., Chengdu, Sichuan 610031, China
  • Received:2017-07-26 Online:2019-02-11 Published:2019-02-14
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the Project of Science and Technology Research and Development Plan of China Railway Corporation (2014G003-C) and the Project of Science and Technology Research and Development Plan of the Ministry of Railways (2005K004-C(G)).

摘要: 基床作为路基结构的重要组成部分,其填料的质量对路基、轨道、列车的动力响应影响显著。在实际工程中,基床填料通常可根据设计规范取为A、B组填料,但考虑到经济因素、力学性能等,也可采用既有填料或改良的既有填料。为了研究红层泥岩,A、B组填料,石灰改良红层泥岩分别作为基床填料时对路基动力响应的影响,进行了不同基床填料的现场激振试验。通过对动应力、加速度及沉降等数据的对比分析,得到以下结论:红层泥岩作为基床填料时,动应力与路基沉降在加载激振次数内可满足设计要求;与红层泥岩相比,当基床填料为A、B组填料与石灰改良红层泥岩时,路基表面的动应力与加速度分布更加均匀,因而此时路基的整体承载性能更优越。除此之外,后两种填料时路基内部动应力与加速度的衰减相对前者更显著,并且路基的沉降变形更小,特别是为石灰改良红层泥岩时。

关键词: 路基, 动力响应, 动应力, 加速度, 沉降

Abstract: As an important part of the subgrade, the filling material quality of subgrade bed has a significant influence on the dynamic response of the subgrade, track, and train. In practical engineering, although filling material of group A, B can be directly used according to the design code in China, improved soils and even unimproved soils also may be used if the economic factors and mechanical properties are considered to meet the requirements. In order to study the influence of different filling materials, such as red mudstone, filling material of group A, B, and improved red mudstone, on dynamic response of subgrade, field vibration tests are carried out. According to the comparative analysis of the tested data, the following conclusions about dynamic stress, acceleration, and settlement have been obtained. When the red mudstone is used, the dynamic stress and settlement can meet the design requirements during the loading period. Compared with the responses when using red mudstone, the distributions of dynamic stress and acceleration along the cross-section of the subgrade surface are more uniform when filling material is group A, B and lime-modified red mudstone, so the overall bearing capacities of these subgrades are better at this time. Besides, the attenuations of the dynamic stress and acceleration along the depth of the subgrade are more obvious than that in the red mudstone; the settlement of the subgrade is smaller, especially when the improved red mudstone is used.

Key words: subgrade, dynamic response, dynamic stress, acceleration, settlement

中图分类号: 

  • U 416
[1] 杨长卫, 童心豪, 王栋, 谭信荣, 郭雪岩, 曹礼聪, . 地震作用下有砟轨道路基动力响应 规律振动台试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2215-2223.
[2] 乔向进, 梁庆国, 曹小平, 王丽丽, . 桥隧相连体系隧道洞口段动力响应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2342-2348.
[3] 何静斌, 冯忠居, 董芸秀, 胡海波, 刘 闯, 郭穗柱, 张聪, 武敏, 王振, . 强震区桩−土−断层耦合作用下桩基动力响应[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2389-2400.
[4] 禹海涛, 张正伟, 李 攀, . 地下结构抗震设计的改进等效反应加速度法[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2401-2410.
[5] 王康宇, 庄妍, 耿雪玉, . 铁路路基粗粒土填料临界动应力试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 1865-1873.
[6] 任洋, 李天斌, 赖林. 强震区隧道洞口段边坡动力响应 特征离心振动台试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1605-1612.
[7] 张卢明, 周勇, 范刚, 蔡红雨, 董云. 强震作用下核安全级反倾层状软岩高陡边坡组合支挡结构抗震性能研究与加固效果评价[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1740-1749.
[8] 王立安, 赵建昌, 侯小强, 刘生纬, 王作伟. 非均匀饱和半空间的Lamb问题[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1790-1798.
[9] 冯立, 丁选明, 王成龙, 陈志雄. 考虑接缝影响的地下综合管廊振动台模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1295-1304.
[10] 芦苇, 赵冬, 李东波, 毛筱霏. 土遗址全长黏结式锚固系统动力响应解析方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1377-1387.
[11] 周恩全, 宗之鑫, 王琼, 陆建飞, 左熹. 橡胶-粉土轻质混合土中管道动力响应特性[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1388-1395.
[12] 张恒源, 钱德玲, 沈超, 戴启权. 水平和竖向地震作用下液化场地群桩基础 动力响应试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 905-914.
[13] 徐进, 王少伟, 杨伟涛. 水位变化下可压缩土层的黏弹性耦合变形分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 1065-1073.
[14] 陈仁朋, 王朋飞, 刘鹏, 程威, 康馨, 杨微, . 路基煤矸石填料土-水特征曲线试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 372-378.
[15] 吴琪, 丁选明, 陈志雄, 陈育民, 彭宇, . 不同地震动强度下珊瑚礁砂地基中桩-土-结构 地震响应试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 571-580.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!