岩土力学 ›› 2023, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (9): 2707-2716.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2022.1583

• 岩土工程研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

软土地区超深圆形竖井的坑底隆起特性与机制

乔亚飞1, 2,闫凯1, 3,赵腾腾4,丁文其1, 2   

  1. 1. 同济大学 土木工程学院 地下建筑与工程系,上海 200092;2. 同济大学 岩土及地下工程教育部重点实验室,上海 200092; 3. 上海市政工程设计研究总院(集团)有限公司,上海 200082;4. 上海城投水务工程项目管理公司,上海 200002
  • 收稿日期:2022-10-12 接受日期:2023-01-03 出版日期:2023-09-11 发布日期:2023-09-02
  • 通讯作者: 丁文其,男,1969年生,博士,教授,博士生导师,主要从事隧道及地下工程的教学和科研工作。E-mail: dingwq@tongji.edu.cn E-mail:yafei.qiao@tongji.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:乔亚飞,男,1990年生,博士,副教授,主要从事岩土力学及隧道工程方面的科研工作。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金重大项目课题(No.52090083);上海市晨光计划项目(No.20CG26);上海市苏州河深隧项目横向课题。

Characteristics and mechanism of soil heave at the bottom of ultra-deep circular shafts in soft soil areas

QIAO Ya-fei1, 2, YAN Kai1, 3, ZHAO Teng-teng4, DING Wen-qi1, 2   

  1. 1. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Geotechnical and Underground Engineering of Ministry of Education, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China; 3. Shanghai Municipal Engineering Design Institute (Group) Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200092, China; 4. Engineering Project Management Company, Shanghai Chengtou Water Group, Shanghai 200002, China
  • Received:2022-10-12 Accepted:2023-01-03 Online:2023-09-11 Published:2023-09-02
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation Project (52090083), Shanghai Chengaung Program (20CG26) and Consulting Project on Shanghai Deep Tunnel Project.

摘要: 依托上海某超深圆形竖井工程,收集了施工期坑底土体隆起的实测数据,总结了坑底土体隆起的竖向分布模式、演变规律和主要影响因素;建立并验证了轴对称数值模型,探讨了开挖卸荷、降水、地下连续墙和土体力学特性对坑底土体隆起的影响规律,探明了坑底土体的隆起机制。土体隆起是开挖卸荷、降水和地下连续墙约束作用下土体力学响应的综合结果,其中开挖卸荷和墙体挤压会引起隆起,降水和墙体的负摩阻力会抑制隆起。开挖卸荷存在主要影响深度,卸荷回弹主导了该深度范围内土体的隆起,而土体剪切变形则控制了该深度范围外的土体隆起。土体流变以及负孔隙水压的消散共同导致了土体隆起的时间依赖性。软土地区小直径超深竖井的坑底隆起沿深度方向减小近似线性,最大值位于开挖面中心处;土体隆起随开挖先缓慢增加后近似线性快速增大,而在非开挖阶段,土体隆起随时间有缓慢增大趋势。

关键词: 超深圆形竖井, 土体隆起, 机制, 监测数据, 数值模拟

Abstract: Based on an ultra-deep circular shaft project in Shanghai, the field data of soil heave at the bottom of the pit during the construction were collected, and the vertical distribution pattern, evolution law and main influencing factors of soil heave at the bottom of the pit were summarized. An axisymmetric numerical model was then built and verified to investigate the effect of the excavation-induced unloading, dewatering, diaphragm wall and soil mechanical properties on the soil heave, then the mechanism of soil heave was revealed. Soil heave was the combined result of the soil mechanical response under the excavation-induced unloading, dewatering, and diaphragm wall restraint, in which the excavation-induced unloading and the deflection of the diaphragm wall caused the soil heave, and the dewatering and the negative frictional resistance inhibited the soil heave. Excavation-induced unloading had a prominent influence on the depth, and the unloading rebound mechanism dominated the soil heave within that depth, while the shear deformation controlled the soil heave beyond that depth range. Soil rheology and dissipation of negative pore water pressure jointly led to the time dependence of soil heave. The soil heave at the pit bottom of small-diameter ultra-deep shafts in soft soil areas decreased approximately linearly along the depth, and its maximum value was located at the center of the excavation face. The soil heave first increased slowly and then increased near linearly and rapidly with the increase of excavation depth. However, the soil heave tended to increase slowly with time in the non-excavation stage.

Key words: ultra-deep circular shaft, soil heave, mechanism, monitoring data, numerical simulation

中图分类号: 

  • TU443
[1] 曾召田, 张瀚彬, 邵捷昇, 车东泽, 吕海波, 梁珍, . MX-80膨润土高温老化时间效应的细微观分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(增刊): 145-153.
[2] 龙开荃, 方祥位, 申春妮, 张熙晨, 王明明, . 复合型早强土壤固化剂固化淤泥强度特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(增刊): 309-318.
[3] 彭阳, 高永涛, 王文林, 甫尔卡特, 温建敏, 周喻, . 单侧限压缩煤岩组合体的破裂机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(增刊): 387-398.
[4] 杨凯丞, 吴曙光, 廖海成, 张辉, . 双锚杆受力机制分析及模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(增刊): 495-503.
[5] 黄生根, 张义, 霍昊, 陈常青. 软土地区深基坑支护工程格构柱变形规律研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(增刊): 533-538.
[6] 王凯, 付强, 徐超, 艾子博, 李丹, 王磊, 舒龙勇, . 原生煤岩组合体界面力学效应数值模拟研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(增刊): 623-633.
[7] 孙闯, 兰思琦, 陶琦, 关喜彬, 韩希平, . 深埋隧道软弱围岩拱顶三维渐进性塌落机制上限分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(9): 2471-2484.
[8] 曾召田, 崔哲旗, 孙德安, 姚志, 潘斌, . 南宁膨胀土持水性能的温度效应及微观机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(8): 2177-2185.
[9] 李文炜, 占鑫杰, 王保田, 朱群峰, 许小龙, 左晋宇, 王家辉, . 冲击碾压加固松散堰塞坝料的细观机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(8): 2297-2307.
[10] 卢钦武, 关振长, 林林, 吴淑婧, 宋德杰. 基于静力推覆试验的山岭隧道衬砌-地层相互作用机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(8): 2318-2326.
[11] 张坤勇, 张梦, 孙斌, 李福东, 简永洲, . 考虑时空效应的软土狭长型深基坑地连墙变形计算方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(8): 2389-2399.
[12] 熊超, 黄中伟, 王立超, 史怀忠, 赫文豪, 陈振良, 李根生, . 锥形聚晶金刚石复合片齿破岩特征与机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(8): 2432-2444.
[13] 于洋, 王泽华, 唐才萱. 单轴压缩下酸腐蚀花岗岩能量演化与分形特征[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(7): 1971-1982.
[14] 张院生, 雷云超, 强小俊, 吴东东, 王东坡, 王计华, . 多排微型桩框架结构加固边坡离心模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(7): 1983-1994.
[15] 尹鑫晟, 舒营, 梁禄钜, 张世民, . 考虑渗流的饱和粉土地层盾构开挖面稳定分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(7): 2005-2016.
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 .