土钉支护结构破坏模式和加固机制分析

›› 2008, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (1): 197-202.

土钉支护结构破坏模式和加固机制分析

贺若兰^{1, 2}，李宁³，张平⁴

1.中南大学土建学院，长沙 410075；2. 长沙理工大学桥梁与结构工程学院，长沙 410076； 3.西安理工大学岩土工程研究所，西安 710048；4.湖南大学土木工程学院，长沙 410082

收稿日期:2006-04-14 出版日期:2008-01-10 发布日期:2013-07-18
作者简介:贺若兰，女，1975年生，博士生，讲师，从事岩土工程教学研究工作
基金资助:
湖南省自然科学基金项目资助（No. 06JJ3026）；湖南省教育厅科研基金项目资助（No. 05C264）

Failure mode and reinforcement mechanism of soil-nailing structure

HE Ruo-lan^{1, 2}, LI Ning³, ZHANG Ping⁴

1. School of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China; 2. School of Bridge and Structure Engineering, Changsha University of Science and Technology, Changsha 410076, China; 3. Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, Xi’an University of Technology, Xi’an 710048, China; 4. College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China

Received:2006-04-14 Online:2008-01-10 Published:2013-07-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 对不同土质中土性参数和支护参数共同影响下基坑土钉支护结构的内力和位移进行了系统的数值试验研究。结果表明，从砂土到粉土，再到软黏土介质变化时，基坑位移大小剧增，位移形态也发展成下部凸出的流鼓状，而且中下部土钉不能满足承载力要求。土性参数中，内摩擦角和凝聚力是导致位移形态发生改变的主要因素，侧压力系数主要引起位移大小的变化。支护参数中，土钉密度突出控制钉间土体位移；土钉长度在砂土中控制上部位移显著，软黏土中抑制下部位移更明显；土钉刚度的影响体现为钉土刚度比的影响，主要由插筋刚度控制，而随土类变化并不明显；并得出了各支护参数的临界值。

关键词: 土钉支护, 破坏模式, 加固机制, 数值试验, 土类, 土性参数, 支护参数

Abstract: A series of numerical tests for soil-nailing structure in the sandy, silty and soft soil media are performed. Test results show that, in soft soil medium, the pit displacement is much larger than sandy medium, and the failure mode will change from overturning mode of sandy soil to flowing mode of soft clay; and the structure can not meet the demand of bearing capacity. Among soil parameters, c & ? values are the main factors causing above-mentioned change of failure mode; otherwise K0 value mainly change the magnitude of displacement. Among supporting parameters, nail-density evidently controls the displacement of soil between two rows nails. Nail-length remarkably controls the displacement of upside soil in sandy medium and of underside soil in soft soil medium respectively. The influence of nail-rigidity is embodied as that of rigidity ratio of nail to soil, which is not basically controlled by soil type, but reinforcing bars. Also, the critical supporting parameters are achieved.

Key words: soil-nailing supporting, failure mode, reinforcement mechanism, numerical test, soil type, soil parameters, supporting parameters

中图分类号:

TU 476

贺若兰，李宁，张平 . 土钉支护结构破坏模式和加固机制分析[J]. , 2008, 29(1): 197-202.

HE Ruo-lan , LI Ning , ZHANG Ping . Failure mode and reinforcement mechanism of soil-nailing structure[J]. , 2008, 29(1): 197-202.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	许江, 瞿佳美, 刘义鑫, 彭守建, 王威, 吴善康, . 循环剪切荷载作用下充填物对结构面剪切特性影响试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1627-1637.
[2]	李世俊, 马昌慧, 刘应明, 韩玉珍, 张彬, 张嘎, . 离心模型试验与数值模拟相结合研究采空边坡渐进破坏特性[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1577-1583.
[3]	柯志强, 王环玲, 徐卫亚, 林志南, 吉华, . 含横向节理的柱状节理岩体力学特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 660-667.
[4]	雷华阳, 刘广学, 周骏, . 吹填场区双层软黏土地基承载特性及破坏模式[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(1): 260-268.
[5]	袁亮, 刘业娇, 田志超, 唐春安, 薛俊华, 段昌瑞, 张寒, . 地面垂直钻孔预抽特厚煤层瓦斯数值试验与应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(1): 370-378.
[6]	郭红仙, 周鼎. 软土中基坑土钉支护稳定性问题探讨[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 398-404.
[7]	乐慧琳，孙少锐. 注浆材料和预制裂纹缺陷角度对类岩石试件单轴抗压强度及破坏模式的影响[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 211-219.
[8]	曹帅，宋卫东，薛改利，. 考虑间歇充填和浓度效应的充填体长期强度试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 341-347.
[9]	尹君凡，雷勇，陈秋南，刘一新，邓加政,. 偏心荷载下溶洞顶板冲切破坏上限分析[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 2837-2843.
[10]	程红战，陈健，胡之锋，黄珏皓, . 考虑砂土抗剪强度空间变异性的盾构开挖面稳定性分析[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 3047-3054.
[11]	韩智铭，乔春生，朱举. 含两组交叉贯通节理岩体的强度及破坏特征分析[J]. , 2018, 39(7): 2451-2460.
[12]	李清川，李术才，王汉鹏，张红军，张冰，张玉强,. 上覆流沙层隧道开挖面稳定性分析与数值试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(7): 2681-2690.
[13]	曹文贵，谭建辉，胡卫东, . 水平加筋地基极限承载力的极限上限分析法[J]. , 2018, 39(6): 1955-1962.
[14]	黄俊杰，王薇，苏谦，李婷，王迅,. 素混凝土桩复合地基支承路堤变形破坏模式[J]. , 2018, 39(5): 1653-1661.
[15]	陈子全，何川，吴迪，甘林卫，徐国文，杨文波. 深埋碳质千枚岩力学特性及其能量损伤演化机制[J]. , 2018, 39(2): 445-456.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed