原状非饱和Q3黄土的土压力原位测试和强度特性研究

›› 2010, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (2): 433-440.

原状非饱和Q3黄土的土压力原位测试和强度特性研究

李加贵¹, ²，陈正汉²，黄雪峰²，李佳³

1.解放军后勤工程学院研究生大队，重庆 400016；2.解放军后勤工程学院军事建筑工程系，重庆 400041； 3.兰州理工大学土木工程学院，兰州730050

收稿日期:2009-03-16 出版日期:2010-02-10 发布日期:2010-03-24
作者简介:李加贵，男，1978年生，博士研究生，主要从事非饱和土理论与工程应用研究。

In-site test on earth pressure and saturating collapse test for unsaturated loess Q3 on high slope

LI Jia-gui¹, ², CHEN Zheng-han², HUANG Xue-feng², LI Jia³

1. The Graduate Student Administrant Department of Logistical University Engineering of PLA, Chongqing 400016, China; 2. Department of Architecture Engineering, Logistical University Engineering of PLA, Chongqing 400041, China; 3.College of Civil Engineering, Lanzhou Science and Technology University, Lanzhou 730050, China

Received:2009-03-16 Online:2010-02-10 Published:2010-03-24

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了揭示原状黄土的土压力的分布规律及其在开挖过程和浸水过程中的变化规律，对兰州市一个高18 m的Q3黄土边坡进行了现场试验，量测了边坡的位移、土压力、基质吸力和含水率，观测了该边坡的破坏过程，同时进行了一组控制吸力的原状黄土的非饱和三轴剪切试验。研究结果表明：①原状Q3黄土的表观黏聚力和有效摩擦角与吸力之间均为非线性关系。②原状黄土边坡的土压力随着土坡开挖深度的增加而不断增大。边坡开挖结束后的土压力分布大致呈中间大，两端小的三角形，最大土压力位置在大约坡高的1/3位置处。与朗肯土压力理论计算结果相比，实测黄土边坡的土压力远小于计算值。在浸水条件下，非饱和黄土的边坡土压力增速较大，浸水是边坡产生破坏的直接原因。

关键词: 非饱和黄土, 土压力, 吸力, 强度特性, 浸水试验, 原位测试

Abstract:

In order to obtain the distributed rule of the earth pressure for unsaturated loess Q3 at the original state and its rules of changes during the process of excavating or saturating, an in-site test was done on an 18 m high slope, which included displacement, earth pressure, suction and the process of collapse. Meanwhile, a series of indoor triaxial shear tests on unsaturated loess Q3 at the original state were also conducted. The outcome as follows: ①For the unsaturated loess Q3 at the original state, the relation between the apparent cohesion and suction is nonlinear, between the effective friction angle and suction is nonlinear too. ②The earth pressure of unsaturated loess Q3 at the original state increases with the excavating depth, which results in the shape of triangle at the end of excavation, high in the middle, low at the two ends; and the maximum earth pressure at the 1/3 height of the slope. Compared with the calculated result from Rankine’s theory, the tested earth pressure is relatively lower, whereas it increases rapidly on the condition of saturation. In short, saturation is the direct cause of the slope collapse.

Key words: unsaturated loess, earth pressure, saturating, suction, in-site test

中图分类号:

TU 411

李加贵，陈正汉，黄雪峰，李佳. 原状非饱和Q3黄土的土压力原位测试和强度特性研究[J]. , 2010, 31(2): 433-440.

LI Jia-gui, CHEN Zheng-han, HUANG Xue-feng, LI Jia. In-site test on earth pressure and saturating collapse test for unsaturated loess Q3 on high slope[J]. , 2010, 31(2): 433-440.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	王立业, 周凤玺, 秦虎, . 饱和盐渍土分数阶蠕变模型及试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 543-551.
[2]	李潇旋, 李涛, 彭丽云, . 控制吸力循环荷载下非饱和黏性土的弹塑性双面模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 552-560.
[3]	章定文, 刘志祥, 沈国根, 鄂俊宇, . 超大直径浅埋盾构隧道土压力实测分析及其计算方法适用性评价[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 91-98.
[4]	戴国亮, 朱文波, 郭晶, 龚维明, 赵学亮, . 软黏土中吸力式沉箱基础竖向抗拔承载特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 119-126.
[5]	王欢, 陈群, 王红鑫, 张文举, . 不同压实度和基质吸力的粉煤灰三轴试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 224-230.
[6]	严健, 何川, 晏启祥, 许金华. 雀儿山隧道冰碛地层冻胀力原位测试及计算分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3593-3602.
[7]	朱彦鹏, 杜晓启, 杨校辉, 栗慧王君, . 挤密桩处理大厚度自重湿陷性黄土地区综合管廊地基及其工后浸水试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 2914-2924.
[8]	黄大维, 周顺华, 冯青松, 罗锟, 雷晓燕, 许有俊, . 地表均布超载作用下盾构隧道上覆土层竖向土压力转移分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2213-2220.
[9]	陈建旭, 宋文武, . 平动模式下挡土墙非极限主动土压力[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2284-2292.
[10]	洪本根, 罗嗣海, 胡世丽, 王观石, 姚康, . 基质吸力对非饱和离子型稀土抗剪强度的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2303-2310.
[11]	汪大海, 贺少辉, 刘夏冰, 张嘉文, 姚文博. 地层渐进成拱对浅埋隧道上覆土压力影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2311-2322.
[12]	李书兆, 王忠畅, 贾旭, 贺林林, . 软黏土中张紧式吸力锚循环承载力简化计算方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1704-1712.
[13]	芮瑞, 叶雨秋, 陈成, 涂树杰. 考虑墙壁摩擦影响的挡土墙主动土压力非线性分布研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1797-1804.
[14]	王娟娟, 郝延周, 王铁行. 非饱和压实黄土结构特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1351-1357.
[15]	邵生俊, 陈菲, 邓国华, . 基于平面应变统一强度公式的结构性黄土填料挡墙地震被动土压力研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1255-1262.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed