岩土力学 ›› 2023, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (10): 3031-3038.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2023.0803

• 岩土工程研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于标准贯入试验的土壤液化判别公式锤击数 基准值研究

贾端阳1, 2,陈龙伟1, 2,谢旺青1, 2,李鑫洋1, 2   

  1. 1. 中国地震局工程力学研究所 地震工程与工程振动重点实验室,黑龙江 哈尔滨 150080; 2. 地震灾害防治应急管理部重点实验室,黑龙江 哈尔滨 150080
  • 收稿日期:2023-06-13 接受日期:2023-07-24 出版日期:2023-10-13 发布日期:2023-10-16
  • 通讯作者: 陈龙伟,男,1983年生,博士,研究员,博士生导师,主要从事岩土地震工程、土动力学等方面的研究。E-mail: chenlw@iem.ac.cn E-mail: jiady97@163.com
  • 作者简介:贾端阳,男,1997年生,硕士研究生,主要从事岩土地震工程、土动力学等方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:
    中国地震局工程力学研究所基本科研业务费专项资助项目(No.2020B01);黑龙江省自然科学基金(No.LH2022D020)。

Reference blow counts of standard penetration tests used in soil liquefaction evaluation formulae

JIA Duan-yang1, 2, CHEN Long-wei1, 2, XIE Wang-qing1, 2, LI Xin-yang1, 2   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150080, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Earthquake Disaster Mitigation, Ministry of Emergency Management, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150080, China
  • Received:2023-06-13 Accepted:2023-07-24 Online:2023-10-13 Published:2023-10-16
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the Scientific Research Fund of Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration (2020B01) and the Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province (LH2022D020).

摘要: 我国抗震设计规范中基于标准贯入试验(standard penetration test,SPT)锤击数的砂土液化判别公式是我国科学家提出的适于我国国情、具有中国特色且工程应用最广泛、最权威的液化判别公式。该公式的基本原理是采用场地地下水位和饱和砂层埋深修正SPT锤击数基准值得到临界锤击数。该方法中SPT基准锤击数取决于液化数据,而构建规范判别公式所采用的数据库主要来自我国20世纪六七十年代发生的几次地震的震后勘察测试数据及震害经验,但数据一直未得到系统地更新。通过搜集、整理、吸收近期国内地震的液化数据,极大地扩充了我国液化数据库。借鉴我国规范液化判别方法的理论框架,通过数据分析给出不同烈度下SPT锤击数基准值,构建新的液化判别公式。利用新的判别公式对液化数据进行回判检验。结果显示,新公式能够较好地判别液化数据和非液化数据,保持较高、且液化数据和非液化数据均衡的回判成功率。该研究结果可为我国规范液化判别方法的改进提供支撑。

关键词: 标准贯入试验, 液化判别公式, 锤击数基准值, 液化数据

Abstract: The sand liquefaction evaluation formulae based on the standard penetration test (SPT) blow count in China’s seismic design code are the most widely used and authoritative liquefaction evaluation formula proposed by Chinese scientists, which are suitable for China’s national conditions. The basic principle of this formula is to use the groundwater level of the site and the burial depth of the saturated sand layer to correct the reference value of SPT blow count to obtain the critical blow count. The SPT reference blow counts in this formulae depend on liquefaction data. However, the database used to construct the evaluation formulae in the codes mainly comes from post earthquake survey and testing data as well as earthquake damage experience of several earthquakes that occurred in China in the 1960s and 1970s, but the data has not been systematically updated. By adding liquefaction data from recent earthquakes in China, the number of liquefaction data is significantly increased. Drawing on the theoretical framework of liquefaction discrimination methods in China’s codes, this paper gives the benchmark values of SPT blow counts under different intensities through data analysis, and constructs a new liquefaction discrimination formula. To verify the formulae, back-judgement on the data were performed, and the results indicate the success rates of the new formulae are fairly satisfactory and keep balance between liquefaction data and non-liquefaction data. The analytical results presented herein can be helpful for revising liquefaction evaluation methods in seismic design codes.

Key words: standard penetration test, liquefaction evaluation formulae, reference SPT-blow counts, liquefaction data

中图分类号: 

  • TU435
[1] 王维铭, 陈龙伟, 郭婷婷, 汪云龙, 凌贤长, . 基于中国砂土液化数据库的标准贯入试验液化 判别方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(1): 279-288.
[2] 李兆焱, 袁晓铭, 孙锐. 液化判别临界曲线的变化模式与一般规律[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3603-3609.
[3] 董 林,王兰民,夏 坤,袁晓铭,. 基于台湾集集地震数据的CPT与SPT液化判别方法比较[J]. , 2017, 38(12): 3643-3648.
[4] 胡长明 ,梅 源 ,王雪艳 . 离石地区湿陷性黄土地基强夯参数的试验研究[J]. , 2012, 33(10): 2903-2909.
[5] 李仁平. 基于原位试验成果的地基非线性沉降分析[J]. , 2009, 30(2): 345-351.
[6] 刘松玉,席培胜,储海岩,宫能和. 双向水泥土搅拌桩加固软土地基试验研究[J]. , 2007, 28(3): 560-564.
[7] 张 超,杨春和. 细粒含量对尾矿材料液化特性的影响[J]. , 2006, 27(7): 1133-1137.
[8] 唐世栋 ,林华国,. 上海地区扁铲侧胀试验与其他原位试验结果的相关性分析[J]. , 2005, 26(3): 392-396.
[9] 邓斌; 李江;. “沙洋电力跨越”塔位基础下饱和砂土液化势分析[J]. , 1986, 7(2): 37-44.
[10] 刘颖; 朱莉; 仝筠;. 论抗震规范的砂土液化判别方法[J]. , 1979, 1(2): 1-12.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 王 刚,李术才,王明斌. 渗透压力作用下加锚裂隙岩体围岩稳定性研究[J]. , 2009, 30(9): 2843 -2849 .
[2] 介玉新,杨光华. 基于广义位势理论的弹塑性模型的修正方法[J]. , 2010, 31(S2): 38 -42 .
[3] 杨建民,郑 刚. 基坑降水中渗流破坏归类及抗突涌验算公式评价[J]. , 2009, 30(1): 261 -264 .
[4] 周 华,王国进,傅少君,邹丽春,陈胜宏. 小湾拱坝坝基开挖卸荷松弛效应的有限元分析[J]. , 2009, 30(4): 1175 -1180 .
[5] 叶 飞,朱合华,何 川. 盾构隧道壁后注浆扩散模式及对管片的压力分析[J]. , 2009, 30(5): 1307 -1312 .
[6] 罗 强 ,王忠涛 ,栾茂田 ,杨蕴明 ,陈培震. 非共轴本构模型在地基承载力数值计算中若干影响因素的探讨[J]. , 2011, 32(S1): 732 -0737 .
[7] 王云岗 ,章 光 ,胡 琦. 斜桩基础受力特性研究[J]. , 2011, 32(7): 2184 -2190 .
[8] 龚维明,黄 挺,戴国亮. 海上风电机高桩基础关键参数试验研究[J]. , 2011, 32(S2): 115 -121 .
[9] 汪成兵. 均质岩体中隧道围岩破坏过程的试验与数值模拟[J]. , 2012, 33(1): 103 -108 .
[10] 宋义敏 ,姜耀东 ,马少鹏 ,杨小彬 ,赵同彬 . 岩石变形破坏全过程的变形场和能量演化研究[J]. , 2012, 33(5): 1352 -1356 .