岩土力学 ›› 2022, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (3): 591-601.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2021.0827

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

整体桥高性能混凝土桩−土相互作用试验研究

黄福云1,周志明1,庄一舟2,刘帆1,刘名琦1   

  1. 1. 福州大学 土木工程学院,福建 福州 350108;2. 浙江工业大学 土木工程学院,浙江 杭州 310014
  • 收稿日期:2021-06-02 修回日期:2022-01-04 出版日期:2022-03-22 发布日期:2022-03-22
  • 作者简介:黄福云,男,1979年生,博士,教授,主要从事结构抗震和基础工程领域的研究。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(No.51578161,No.51778147);福建省交通运输科技项目(No.201905);福建省住建行业建设科技研究开发项目(No.2022-K-6)

Experiment on Interaction of High Performance Concrete Pile-Soil in IAJBs

HUANG Fu-yun1, ZHOU Zhi-ming1, ZHUANG Yi-zhou2, LIU Fan1, LIU Ming-qi1   

  1. 1. College of Civil Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, Fujian 350108, China; 2. College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310014, China
  • Received:2021-06-02 Revised:2022-01-04 Online:2022-03-22 Published:2022-03-22
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51578161, 51778147), the Transportation Science and Technology Project of Fujian Province(201905) and the Research and Development Project of Fujian Residential Construction Industry(2022-K-6).

摘要: 高性能混凝土(高性能复合水泥基材料engineered cementitious composite,简称ECC与超高性能混凝土ultra-high performance concrete pile,简称UHPC)桩基具有良好的抗开裂性能和较高的承载能力,能较好地满足整体桥纵桥向变形。开展了砂土中高性能混凝土桩低周往复拟静力试验,得到了桩基的破坏特点、抗开裂能力以及极限承载力,分析了其桩身变形、桩侧土抗力以及桩身应变等分布规律,并与钢筋混凝土(RC)桩进行了比较。在此基础上,讨论了几种常用规范的适用性。试验结果表明,ECC、UHPC材料能有效减轻桩基的破坏程度、提高桩基的抗开裂能力以及水平承载力;相比RC桩基,高性能混凝土桩基的破坏位置更深,桩基的有效桩长更大,抗震性能更好;其中,ECC桩基的抗开裂能力最强,开裂荷载可达5.8 kN,开裂位移可达15 mm。试验结果还表明,高性能混凝土桩基的变形沿埋深方向不断的减小,埋深1.5 m以下位置基本为0;桩侧土抗力先增大后减小,桩底土抗力和变形量为0;桩身应变分布较为对称,且呈“橄榄”形,在埋深4D~6D(D为桩径)区间内桩身应变较大。分析计算表明,当桩顶位移在10 mm以内时,“m”法与API新规范法均能较好地计算高性能混凝土桩的桩身变形;当位移超过10 mm后,“m”法与实际数值相差较大。“m”法与API新规范法均不能较好地计算桩身弯矩,适用性不高;桩侧土抗力建议采用API新规范法。

关键词: 桥梁工程, 整体桥, 高性能混凝土桩, 桩?土相互作用, 拟静力试验

Abstract: High-performance concrete (ECC and UHPC) pile foundations have the advantages of excellent crack resistance and high bearing capacity, which can better meet the longitudinal deformation of piles in integral abutment jointless bridges (IAJBs). Low-cycle reciprocating pseudo-static tests were carried out on interaction of high-performance concrete pile-soil. The failure characteristics, crack resistance and bearing capacity of the pile were obtained. The distribution laws of pile strain, pile deformation and pile side soil resistance were analyzed and compared with the reinforced concrete (RC) pile. Meanwhile, the usability of commonly used codes were discussed. Some findings were as follows. ECC and UHPC materials can significantly reduce the damage of the pile foundation, increase the horizontal bearing capacity and crack resistance compared to RC. The damage position of the high-performance concrete pile is deeper, the effective pile length of the pile is longer, and the seismic performance is better. In special, the ECC pile has the strongest anti-cracking ability, its cracking displacement and cracking load can reach 15 mm and 5.8 kN, respectively. The deformation of high-performance concrete piles continuously reduces along the buried depth, and approaches zero at 15 m and deeper. The soil resistance of pile side increases first and then decreases, the resistance and deformation of the pile bottom soil are both 0; the strain of the pile shaft is symmetrically distributed with an “olive” shape, and there is larger strain in the interval of 4D to 6D buried depth. Furthermore, both the “m” method and the new API standard method can estimate the high-performance concrete pile displacement better when the displacement of pile top is within 10 mm. When the displacement exceeds 10 mm, the “m” method is no longer applicable. Neither the “m” method nor the new API standard method can predict the bending moment of the high-performance concrete pile well, indicating poor applicability. The new API standard method is recommended for estimating soil resistance of pile side.

Key words: Bridge engineering, Integral abutment bridge, High performance concrete pile, Pile-soil interaction, Pseudo-static Experimental

中图分类号: 

  • TU 443.1
[1] 黄福云, 何凌峰, 单玉麟, 胡晨曦, 周志明, . 整体式桥台−混凝土桩−土相互作用拟静力试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(7): 1803-1814.
[2] 赵海鹏, 黎学优, 万建宏, 郑翔之, 刘思威, . 基于高性能有限单元法的多层地基水平 受荷桩受力分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(7): 1995-2003.
[3] 张小玲, 朱冬至, 许成顺, 杜修力, . 强度弱化条件下饱和砂土地基中桩−土 相互作用p-y曲线研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2252-2260.
[4] 张磊, 海维深, 甘浩, 曹卫平, 王铁行, . 水平与上拔组合荷载下柔性单桩 承载特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2261-2270.
[5] 赵明华, 彭文哲, 杨超炜, 肖尧, 刘亚楠. 斜坡地基刚性桩水平承载力上限分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 727-735.
[6] 周和祥, 马建林, 张凯, 罗朝洋, 杨柏, . 沉井下沉阻力离心模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(10): 3969-3976.
[7] 郭昭胜,贺武斌,白晓红. 桩-承台-土复合受力体的拟静力模型试验[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3321-3330.
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] 徐金明,羌培,张鹏飞. 粉质黏土图像的纹理特征分析[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2903 -2907 .
[3] 向天兵,冯夏庭,陈炳瑞,江 权,张传庆. 三向应力状态下单结构面岩石试样破坏机制与真三轴试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2908 -2916 .
[4] 石玉玲,门玉明,彭建兵,黄强兵,刘洪佳. 地裂缝对不同结构形式桥梁桥面的破坏试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2917 -2922 .
[5] 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 .
[6] 徐速超,冯夏庭,陈炳瑞. 矽卡岩单轴循环加卸载试验及声发射特性研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2929 -2934 .
[7] 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 .
[8] 张其一. 复合加载模式下地基失效机制研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2940 -2944 .
[9] 易 俊,姜永东,鲜学福,罗 云,张 瑜. 声场促进煤层气渗流的应力-温度-渗流压力场的流固动态耦合模型[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2945 -2949 .
[10] 陶干强,杨仕教,任凤玉. 崩落矿岩散粒体流动性能试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(10): 2950 -2954 .