岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (12): 3910-3918.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2020.0425

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

爆破荷载下围岩及支护锚杆动力响应特征 模型试验研究

陈士海1, 2,宫嘉辰1,胡帅伟1   

  1. 1. 华侨大学 土木工程学院,福建 厦门 361021;2. 华侨大学 福建省隧道与城市地下空间工程技术研究中心,福建 厦门 361021
  • 收稿日期:2020-04-13 修回日期:2020-07-07 出版日期:2020-12-11 发布日期:2021-01-15
  • 作者简介:陈士海,男,1964年生,博士,教授,博士生导师,主要从事岩土工程防灾减灾方面的研究工作。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(No.51974136);爆炸冲击防灾减灾国家重点实验室开放课题(No.DPMEIKF201307);华侨大学科研基金项目(No.13BS402)。

Model test study on dynamic response characteristics of host rockmass and supporting bolt under blasting load

CHEN Shi-hai1, 2, GONG Jia-chen1, HU Shuai-wei1   

  1. 1. College of Civil Engineering, Huaqiao University, Xiamen, Fujian 361021, China; 2. Fujian Research Center for Tunneling and Urban Underground Space Engineering, Huaqiao University, Xiamen, Fujian 361021, China
  • Received:2020-04-13 Revised:2020-07-07 Online:2020-12-11 Published:2021-01-15
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51974136), the Fund of the State Key Laboratory of Disaster Prevention & Mitigation of Explosion & Impact(PLA University and Technology) (DPMEIKF201307) and the Huaqiao University Research Foundation(13BS402).

摘要: 为了研究爆破荷载下围岩及支护锚杆动力响应特征,借助地下工程模型试验系统,开展了三维动态加载物理模型试验,采用电火花震源代替传统炸药,测试了爆破地震波在围岩中的传播规律和支护锚杆的动力响应特征。试验研究表明,电火花震源具有冲击荷载特性,能够很好地代替传统烈性炸药。爆破地震波的径向加速度峰值以及轴向和环向应变峰值沿洞室径向不是逐级递减,而是呈现正负交替波浪式衰减;加速度峰值沿洞室轴向基本上呈现非线性逐渐递减。加速度峰值受震源荷载幅值的影响较大,即震源荷载越大,同一测点加速度峰值越大。另外,测量了爆破荷载作用下支护锚杆的振动特性,发现对于加长锚固锚杆,自由段主要以受拉状态为主,锚固段拉压状态都存在。锚固段和自由段的最大拉应变大致相同,而锚固段的最大压应变远大于自由段,而且锚固段和自由段振动持续时间大致相同。对于全锚锚杆,锚杆既存在拉伸状态,又存在压缩状态,拉伸应变大于压缩应变。对于端锚锚杆,其受力状态主要以受拉状态为主,拉伸应变远大于压缩应变。研究结论不仅具有重要的理论意义,也能够为地下洞室支护设计提供可预见性指导。

关键词: 模型试验, 电火花震源, 爆破地震波, 支护锚杆, 动力响应

Abstract: To study the dynamic response characteristics of host rockmass and supporting bolt under blasting load, a three-dimensional dynamic loading physical model test was performed using an underground engineering model test system. The propagation law of blasting seismic wave and the dynamic response characteristics of supporting bolt were tested using electric spark source instead of traditional explosives. Experimental research results show that the electric spark source has the characteristic of the impact loading, which can well replace traditional high explosives. The radial acceleration peak values and the axial and hoop strain peak values of blasting seismic wave within host rock do not decrease gradually as the increasing of the radial distance along the excavation, but show a wave-like attenuation pattern of positive and negative alternating. In addition, the acceleration peak values show a nonlinear and decrease gradually along the excavation axial direction. The peak acceleration values are affected largely by the seismic load amplitude, that is, the higher the source load, the higher the peak acceleration value at the same measurement point. In addition, the vibration characteristics of the supporting bolt were measured under blasting load. It is found that the extension anchor bolt, the free section of the anchor bolt is mainly in tension state, but the anchor section of the bolt is in the state of both tension and compression. The maximum tensile strain of the anchor and free section is approximately the same, while the maximum compressive strain of the anchor section is much larger than that of the free section. The vibration duration of anchor section and free section is also approximately similar. As for the full-anchored bolt, the bolt has subjected both a tensile state and a compressive state, and the tensile strain is greater than the compressive strain. As for the end-anchored bolt, the stress state is mainly in the tension state, and the tensile strain is much greater than the compressive strain. The research conclusion not only has important theoretical significance, but also can provide predictable guidance for the ground support design of underground excavation.

Key words: model test, electric spark source, blasting seismic wave, supporting bolt, dynamic response

中图分类号: 

  • TU457
[1] 陶志刚, 任树林, 郝宇, 李强, 付强, 何满潮, . 层状反倾边坡破坏机制及NPR锚索控制效果 物理模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(4): 976-990.
[2] 张纪蒙, 张陈蓉, 张凯, . 砂土中大直径单桩水平循环加载模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(3): 783-789.
[3] 郑俊杰, 邵安迪, 谢明星, 景丹, . 不同填土宽度下设置EPS垫层挡土墙试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(2): 324-332.
[4] 万志辉, 戴国亮, 龚维明, 高鲁超, 徐艺飞, . 钙质砂后压浆桩水平承载性状模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(2): 411-418.
[5] 肖捷夫, 李云安, 胡勇, 张申, 蔡浚明, . 库水涨落和降雨条件下古滑坡变形特征 模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(2): 471-480.
[6] 史江伟, 范燕波, 裴伟伟, 陈永辉, 张显, . 盾构下穿非连续管线变形特性及预测方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(1): 143-150.
[7] 刘春林, 唐孟雄, 胡贺松, 岳云鹏, 侯振坤, 陈航, . 考虑桩底沉渣的随钻跟管桩竖向承载 特性模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(1): 177-185.
[8] 李建东, 王旭, 张延杰, 蒋代军, 刘德仁, 李盛, . 水蒸气增湿非饱和黄土热湿迁移规律研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(1): 186-192.
[9] 徐刚, 张春会, 于永江, . 综放工作面覆岩破断和压架的试验研究及预测模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 106-114.
[10] 李福秀, 吴志坚, 严武建, 赵多银, . 基于振动台试验的黄土塬边斜坡 动力响应特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(9): 2880-2890.
[11] 刘润, 曹添铭, 陈广思, 张海洋, 李成凤. 插拔桩靴对临近桩靴承载力的影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(9): 2943-2952.
[12] 曾超峰, 薛秀丽, 宋伟炜, 李淼坤, 白宁. 开挖前降水引发基坑变形机制模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(9): 2963-2972.
[13] 胡伟, 孟建伟, 姚琛, 雷勇, . 浅埋平板圆锚竖向拉拔极限承载力计算方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(9): 3049-3055.
[14] 庄妍, 李劭邦, 崔晓艳, 董晓强, 王康宇, . 高铁荷载下桩承式路基动力响应及土拱效应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(9): 3119-3130.
[15] 罗易, 张家铭, 周峙, 契霍特金, 米敏, 沈筠, . 降雨-蒸发条件下土体开裂临界 含水率演变规律研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(8): 2592-2600.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 姚仰平,侯 伟. 土的基本力学特性及其弹塑性描述[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2881 -2902 .
[2] 夏栋舟,何益斌,刘建华. 土-结构动力相互作用体系阻尼及地震反应分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2923 -2928 .
[3] 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 .
[4] 张其一. 复合加载模式下地基失效机制研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2940 -2944 .
[5] 王淑云,鲁晓兵,赵 京,王爱兰. 粉质黏土周期荷载后的不排水强度衰化特性[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2991 -2995 .
[6] 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 .
[7] 刘振平,贺怀建,李 强,朱发华. 基于Python的三维建模可视化系统的研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3037 -3042 .
[8] 杜佐龙,黄茂松,李 早. 基于地层损失比的隧道开挖对临近群桩影响的DCM方法[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 3043 -3047 .
[9] 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 .
[10] 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 .