岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4): 1347-1356.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2019.1053

• 岩土工程研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

锦屏一级水电站工程岩体对穿声波与单孔声波 关联性探讨

杨静熙1,黄书岭2,刘忠绪1   

  1. 1. 中国电建集团成都勘测设计研究院有限公司,四川 成都 610072;2. 长江科学院 水利部岩土力学与工程重点实验室,湖北 武汉 430010
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-14 修回日期:2019-07-27 出版日期:2020-04-11 发布日期:2020-07-01
  • 通讯作者: 黄书岭,男,1978年生,博士,教授级高级工程师,主要从事水工岩石力学理论与技术研发工作。E-mail: huangsl@mail.crsri.cn E-mail: 2817482585@qq.com
  • 作者简介:杨静熙,男,1968年生,硕士,教授级高级工程师,主要从事水电工程地质方面的勘测与设计研究工作。
  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划项目(No. 2017YFC1501305);国家自然科学基金(No. 51779018,No. 51539002)。

Study on the relationship between cross-hole sonic wave and single-hole sonic wave of rock mass at Jinping I hydropower station

YANG Jing-xi1, HUANG Shu-ling2, LIU Zhong-xu1   

  1. 1. Chengdu Engineering Corporation Limited, Power China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610072, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Geotechnical Mechanics and Engineering of Ministry of Water Resources, Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, Wuhan, Hubei 430010, China
  • Received:2019-06-14 Revised:2019-07-27 Online:2020-04-11 Published:2020-07-01
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC1501305) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51779018, 51539002).

摘要: 声波波速作为可以评价岩石(体)致密与坚硬程度、完整程度、嵌合紧密程度等工程地质特性的综合性单一指标,在工程岩体质量检测和固结灌浆效果评价中获得了广泛的应用。锦屏一级前期勘察阶段开展了22 000多米平洞与承压板变形模量试验配套的对穿、单孔声波测试,11 400多米钻孔单孔声波测试;施工阶段坝基、左岸抗力体开展了11 000多米单孔声波测试,263孔2 380 m的对穿、单孔声波测试,58点承压板变形模量试验配套的对穿、单孔声波测试。依据不同的统计方法(孔段长度、孔数)分别对两个阶段的对穿、单孔声波测试成果进行分析,研究结果表明:单孔声波波速Vp总体上高于对穿声波波速Vcp,且Vp /Vcp比值在1.05~1.20范围;单孔声波波速和对穿声波波速之间的定量关系,可以采用公式Vcp= 1.160 8Vp?1.023 2来描述,且由该式获得的岩体变形模量(Eo50)与单孔声波波速的相关公式,可用于不同岩体等级的变形模量预测。该研究成果可为类似水电水利工程岩体对穿声波波速和岩体变形模量的预测提供依据。

关键词: 锦屏一级水电站, 岩体, 对穿声波, 单孔声波, 关联性

Abstract: Acoustic wave velocity is a comprehensive single index for evaluating the engineering geological characteristics of rock mass, such as compactness and hardness of rock, integrity, inlay and so on. It has been widely used in the rock quality inspection and consolidation grouting evaluation. In the prophase prospecting of Jinping I hydropower station, more than 22 000 meters cross-hole and single-hole sonic wave tests by the pressure plate in horizontal tunnel, as well as over 11 400 meters single-hole borehole sonic wave test were carried out. During the construction phase, more than 11 000 meters single-hole sonic wave test, 2 380 meters cross-hole and single-hole sonic wave tests in 263 holes as well as cross-hole and single-hole sonic wave tests by the pressure plate at 58 test points were carried out at the dam foundation and resistance body on the left bank. Then, the cross-hole and single-hole sonic wave tests of the two stages were analyzed based on the different statistical methods (length of hole and number of holes). The results show that the velocity of single-hole sonic wave (Vp) is generally higher than that of cross-hole sonic wave (Vcp). The ratio of Vp /Vcp ranges from 1.05 to 1.20. The velocity relationship between the single-hole sonic wave and the cross-hole sonic wave can be described by the formula Vcp =1.160 8Vp?1.023 2. And the correlation formula between the deformation modulus of rock mass and the single-hole acoustic wave velocity obtained by this formula can be used to predict the deformation modulus of different rock mass grades. The results above can provide basis for predicting the velocity of cross-hole sonic wave and deformation modulus of rock mass in similar hydropower and water conservancy projects.

Key words: Jinping I hydropower station, rock mass, cross-hole sonic wave, single-hole sonic wave, relationship

中图分类号: 

  • TU 455
[1] 彭述权, 王培宇, 樊玲, 周子龙, 张珂嘉. 节理岩体弹塑黏性疲劳本构模型研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(2): 379-389.
[2] 张雨霏, 李建春, 闫亚涛, 李海波, . 基于SHPB试验的粗糙节理面动态损伤特征研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(2): 491-500.
[3] 王旭一, 黄书岭, 丁秀丽, 周火明. 层状岩体单轴压缩力学特性的 非均质层面影响效应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(2): 581-592.
[4] 王珂, 盛金昌, 郜会彩, 田晓丹, 詹美礼, 罗玉龙, . 应力−渗流侵蚀耦合作用下粗糙裂隙渗流特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 30-40.
[5] 李利平, 朱宇泽, 周宗青, 石少帅, 陈雨雪, 屠文锋. 隧道突涌水灾害防突厚度计算方法及适用性评价[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 41-50.
[6] 陈庆发, 杨承业, 尹庭昌, 王宇, . 金属矿山矿块单元结构体组合关系研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 74-82.
[7] 杨钊, 乔春生, 陈松. 基于蒙特卡罗法的岩体变形模量统计 特征及参数权重分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 271-278.
[8] 周洪福, 刘彬, . 考虑荷载方向效应的软硬相间层状岩体 综合变形模量取值研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(9): 3066-3076.
[9] 高玮, 胡承杰, 贺天阳, 陈新, 周聪, 崔爽, . 基于统计强度理论的破裂岩体本构模型研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2179-2188.
[10] 黄巍, 肖维民, 田梦婷, 张林浩, . 不规则柱状节理岩体力学特性模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2349-2359.
[11] 潘锐, 程桦, 王雷, 王凤云, 蔡毅, 曹广勇, 张朋, 张皓杰, . 巷道浅层破碎围岩锚注加固承载特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 1887-1898.
[12] 洪陈杰, 黄曼, 夏才初, 罗战友, 杜时贵, . 岩体结构面各向异性变异系数的尺寸效应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 2098-2109.
[13] 夏才初, 王岳嵩, 郑金龙, 吕志涛. 裂隙岩体不均匀冻胀性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1161-1168.
[14] 王凯兴, 窦林名, 潘一山, OPARIN V N . 块系岩体非协调动力响应特征试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1227-1234.
[15] 孟庆彬, 钱唯, 韩立军, 蔚立元, 王丛凯, 周星, . 极弱胶结岩体再生结构的形成机制 与力学特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 799-812.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 张力霆,齐清兰,魏静,霍倩,周国斌. 淤填黏土固结过程中孔隙比的变化规律[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2935 -2939 .
[2] 张其一. 复合加载模式下地基失效机制研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2940 -2944 .
[3] 张明义,刘俊伟,于秀霞. 饱和软黏土地基静压管桩承载力时间效应试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3005 -3008 .
[4] 冷伍明,杨 奇,刘庆潭,聂如松. 软基高桥台桩-土相互作用计算新方法研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3079 -3085 .
[5] 吴 亮,钟冬望,卢文波. 空气间隔装药爆炸冲击荷载作用下混凝土损伤分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3109 -3114 .
[6] 周晓杰,介玉新,李广信1. 基于渗流和管流耦合的管涌数值模拟[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3154 -3158 .
[7] 吴昌瑜,张 伟,李思慎,朱国胜. 减压井机械淤堵机制与防治方法试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3181 -3187 .
[8] 崔皓东,朱岳明. 二滩高拱坝坝基渗流场的反演分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3194 -3199 .
[9] 徐 晗,黄 斌,饶锡保,何晓民,徐言勇. 三轴试样钻孔灌砂固结排水效果试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(11): 3242 -3248 .
[10] 贾宇峰,迟世春,林 皋. 考虑颗粒破碎影响的粗粒土本构模型[J]. , 2009, 30(11): 3261 -3266 .