软土地基上高填方刚性涵洞地基承载力分析

›› 2013, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (2): 353-358.

软土地基上高填方刚性涵洞地基承载力分析

陈保国¹，骆瑞萍²，徐颖¹

1.中国地质大学（武汉）工程学院，武汉 430074；2.湖北省建筑科学研究设计院，武汉 430071

收稿日期:2011-11-22 出版日期:2013-02-11 发布日期:2013-03-01
作者简介:陈保国，男，1981年生，博士，讲师，主要从事地基处理、土与结构物相互作用机制的研究工作
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目（No. 51108434，No. 50978112）；湖北省自然科学基金资助项目（No. 2010CDB04201）；中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目（No. CUG130408，No. CUGL090212）

Soft ground bearing capacity under high fill rigid culverts

CHEN Bao-guo¹, LUO Rui-ping², XU Ying¹

1. Engineering Faculty, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China; 2. Hubei Institute of Building Research and Design, Wuhan 430071, China

Received:2011-11-22 Online:2013-02-11 Published:2013-03-01

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 山区沟谷软土地基上高填方刚性涵洞的应用较为广泛，然而，现有的计算理论对该类条件下涵洞地基承载力的认识还不够充分，对地基承载力提出过高的要求，反而为结构带来了不利影响。通过数值模拟和试验手段对涵洞的地基承载力进行深入分析。探讨基础埋深、宽度及软土固结对涵洞地基承载力的影响。研究表明，当基础埋深系数 5时，涵洞地基承载力特征值随着基础埋深的增大近似线性增加，当 5时，基础埋深对地基承载力特征值影响逐渐减小；但基础宽度对软土地基上刚性涵洞地基承载力特征值的影响甚小，实际工程中可不予考虑。此外，试验结果表明，固结度和固结压力对软土的黏聚力和内摩擦角有复合影响，固结度较大时，黏聚力和内摩擦角随固结压力的增大而明显增大。固结度和固结压力对内摩擦角的影响比对黏聚力的影响要大。高填方涵洞地基极限承载力随着软土固结度的增大而提高，当固结度达到90%时，地基极限承载力通常可提高36%以上；地基极限承载力随固结压力的增加呈非线性增大，其提高的幅度逐渐减小。

关键词: 软土地基, 刚性涵洞, 承载力, 高填方, 固结

Abstract: High fill rigid culverts have been widely used in trenches of mountain area over soft ground. However, the present theories can not address the soft ground bearing capacity under the high fill rigid culvert very well; so an extremely need of ground bearing capacity may involve in some improper ground treatments, which probably induces adverse effect on culverts. In this study, a finite element numerical simulation and lab tests are carried out to investigate the soft ground bearing capacity under high fill rigid culverts. The influence factors including foundation embedded depth, foundation width and consolidation of soft soil are discussed in detail. This research reveals that the characteristic values of ground bearing capacity approximately linearly increase with the embedded depth of culvert foundation as the foundation embedded coefficient is less than 5. However, the influence of embedded depth of culvert foundation on bearing capacity gradually decrease with increasing the value of N while N is larger than 5. The influence of culvert foundation width on the characteristic value of soft ground bearing capacity is tiny, that can be ignored in the design of practical engineering. Moreover, lab tests results show that consolidation degree and consolidation pressure have inter-affect on the cohesion and/or frictional angle of soft ground soil. The cohesion and/or frictional angle increase with the consolidation pressure; the increasing rates will be faster for higher consolidation degrees. The frictional angle of soft soil is more easily affected by consolidation degree and consolidation pressure than cohesion. The ultimate bearing capacity of soft ground under high fill rigid culvert increases with increasing the consolidation degree of soft soil; the total increment is generally more than 36% while the consolidation degree reaches to 90%. Furthermore, it also nonlinearly increases with increasing the consolidation pressure; however, the increment decreases with the increasing of the consolidation pressure.

Key words: soft ground, rigid culvert, bearing capacity, high fill, consolidation

中图分类号:

TU 470

陈保国，骆瑞萍，徐颖 . 软土地基上高填方刚性涵洞地基承载力分析[J]. , 2013, 34(2): 353-358.

CHEN Bao-guo , LUO Rui-ping , XU Ying . Soft ground bearing capacity under high fill rigid culverts[J]. , 2013, 34(2): 353-358.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	朱彦鹏, 陶钧, 杨校辉, 彭俊国, 吴强, . 框架预应力锚托板结构加固高填方边坡设计与数值分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 612-623.
[2]	涂园, 王奎华, 周建, 胡安峰, . 有效应力法和有效固结压力法在预压地基强度计算中的应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 645-654.
[3]	程涛, 晏克勤, 胡仁杰, 郑俊杰, 张欢, 陈合龙, 江志杰, 刘强, . 非饱和土拟二维平面应变固结问题的解析计算方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 453-460.
[4]	蒙宇涵, 张必胜, 陈征, 梅国雄, . 线性加载下含砂垫层地基固结分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 461-468.
[5]	刘忠玉, 夏洋洋, 张家超, 朱新牧. 考虑Hansbo渗流的饱和黏土一维弹黏塑性固结分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(1): 11-22.
[6]	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.
[7]	王钦科, 马建林, 陈文龙, 杨彦鑫, 胡中波, . 上覆土嵌岩扩底桩抗拔承载特性离心模型试验及计算方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3405-3415.
[8]	张雷, 王宁伟, 景立平, 方晨, 董瑞, . 电渗排水固结中电极材料的对比试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3493-3501.
[9]	张玉国, 万东阳, 郑言林, 韩帅, 杨晗玥, 段萌萌. 考虑径向渗透系数变化的真空预压竖井地基固结解析解[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3533-3541.
[10]	邱金伟, 蒲诃夫, 陈训龙, 吕伟东, 李磊. 污染泥堆场处置中自重固结与污染物迁移的耦合分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3090-3098.
[11]	张治国, 黄茂松, 杨轩, . 基于衬砌长期渗漏水影响的隧道施工扰动诱发超孔隙水压消散及地层固结沉降解[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3135-3144.
[12]	李称, 吴文兵, 梅国雄, 宗梦繁, 梁荣柱, . 不同排水条件下城市固废一维降解固结解析解[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3071-3080.
[13]	袁维, 刘尚各, 聂庆科, 王伟, . 基于冲切破坏模式的嵌岩桩桩端溶洞顶板临界厚度确定方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(7): 2789-2798.
[14]	穆锐, 浦少云, 黄质宏, 李永辉, 郑培鑫, 刘旸, 刘泽, 郑红超, . 土岩组合岩体中抗拔桩极限承载力的确定[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(7): 2825-2837.
[15]	杨德欢, 颜荣涛, 韦昌富, 潘雪瑛, 张芹, . 饱和黏土平均粒间应力的确定方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2075-2084.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed