›› 2011, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (7): 2184-2190.

• 数值分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

斜桩基础受力特性研究

王云岗1, 2,章 光1,胡 琦3   

  1. 1. 武汉理工大学 资源与环境工程学院,武汉 430070;2. 浙江大学 城市学院,杭州 310015; 3. 浙江工业大学 建筑工程学院,杭州 310014
  • 收稿日期:2010-08-10 出版日期:2011-07-10 发布日期:2011-06-30
  • 作者简介:王云岗,男,1968年生,博士,教授级高工,主要从事岩土工程研究和设计等工作
  • 基金资助:

    博士后科研基金资助项目(No. 20080441232)

Study of force characteristics of battered pile foundation

WANG Yun-Gang1, 2,ZHANG Guang1,HU Qi3   

  1. 1. School of Resources and Environmental Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China; 2. City College Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310015, China; 3. College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310014, China
  • Received:2010-08-10 Online:2011-07-10 Published:2011-06-30

摘要: 斜桩在群桩中起到承受较大水平荷载的作用,被广泛应用于桥梁、码头以及大型输电线路等建构筑物的基础中。群桩基础中,斜桩对竖向和水平荷载的分担作用不仅是力的分解问题,还与群桩中斜桩与直桩的单桩轴向和侧向刚度有关,进行斜桩群桩基础分析需要考虑轴向与侧向刚度的耦合。通过对直桩、斜桩的单桩侧向和轴向承载特性的分析以及群桩基础荷载分担情况的分析,揭示了斜桩基础的受力性状。负斜桩单桩侧向刚度最大,直桩次之,正斜桩最小。桩长对单桩轴向刚度的影响非常明显,桩长越长,轴向刚度越大,轴向刚度与侧向刚度之间的差异也就更加显著。群桩基础大部分竖向荷载由桩轴向力承担;当轴向刚度与侧向刚度的比值较小,基础水平荷载主要由桩侧向力承担;当轴向刚度与侧向刚度的比值很大,基础水平荷载主要由桩轴向力承担;当桩的倾斜角较小时,由基础水平荷载引起的桩轴向力较大。

关键词: 斜桩, 侧向刚度, 轴向刚度, 群桩, 荷载分担

Abstract: Due to the carrying capacity of horizontal load, battered piles were generally used in the foundations of bridge, wharf and transmission power line. The horizontal and vertical load sharing of piles is not only force decomposition, which is related with the axial and lateral stiffness of inclined and vertical piles. The influence of axial and lateral stiffnesses coupling should be considered in the analysis of inclined group piles foundation. According to the studies of the axial and lateral stiffness of inclined and vertical piles and the analysis of load sharing of group piles, the force characteristics of battered pile foundation were gained. First, the lateral stiffness of positive inclined pile is biggest; and the lateral stiffness of vertical pile is bigger than that of negative inclined pile. Second, the influence of pile length on the axial stiffness is very significant. When the pile was lengthened, the axial stiffness was increased; and the differences between axial stiffness and lateral stiffness were expanded. Last, most of the vertical load was borne by the axial force of piles. When the ratio of axial stiffness and lateral stiffness is small, most of the horizontal load was borne by the lateral force of piles. When the ratio of axial stiffness and lateral stiffness is large, most of the horizontal load was borne by the axial force of piles. At the same time, due to the inclined angle of pile is small, the large axial force is created to resist horizontal load

Key words: battered pile, lateral bending stiffness, axial compressive stiffness, group piles, load sharing

中图分类号: 

  • TU 473
[1] 吴琪, 丁选明, 陈志雄, 陈育民, 彭宇, . 不同地震动强度下珊瑚礁砂地基中桩-土-结构 地震响应试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 571-580.
[2] 高广运, 谢伟, 陈娟, 赵宏, . 高铁运行引起的高架桥群桩基础地面振动衰减分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3197-3206.
[3] 方金城, 孔纲强, 陈斌, 车平, 彭怀风, 吕志祥, . 混凝土水化作用对群桩热力学特性影响现场试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 2997-3003.
[4] 张治国, 张瑞, 黄茂松, 宫剑飞, . 基于差异沉降和轴向刚度控制的竖向荷载作用下群桩基础优化分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2354-2368.
[5] 蔡奇鹏, 甘港璐, 吴宏伟, 陈星欣, 肖朝昀, . 正断层诱发砂土中群桩基础破坏及避让距离研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 1067-1075.
[6] 孔令刚, 肖方初, 樊继营, 陈云敏, . 水平偏心受荷群桩p乘子计算[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(12): 4659-4667.
[7] 杨耀辉,陈育民,刘汉龙,李文闻,江 强, . 排水刚性桩群桩抗液化性能的振动台试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(11): 4025-4032.
[8] 马学宁,付 江,王 军,王 旭,. 不同堆载形式对群桩负摩阻力的影响[J]. , 2018, 39(10): 3531-3538.
[9] 辛冬冬,张乐文,宿传玺. 基于虚土桩模型的层状地基群桩沉降研究[J]. , 2017, 38(8): 2368-2376.
[10] 徐 江,龚维明,张 琦,戴国亮,霍少磊,杨 超, . 大口径钢管斜桩竖向承载特性数值模拟与现场试验研究[J]. , 2017, 38(8): 2434-2440.
[11] 王家全,刘垒雷,朱庆盛,张 昊,. 红黏土地层静压闭口管桩残余应力模型试验分析[J]. , 2017, 38(7): 1878-1886.
[12] 刘林超,闫启方,闫 盼. 考虑三维波动的饱和土中管桩群桩的水平振动研究[J]. , 2017, 38(10): 2817-2825.
[13] 冯 君,张俊云,朱 明,江 南,. 软土地层高承台桥梁群桩基础横向承载特性研究[J]. , 2016, 37(S2): 94-104.
[14] 孔纲强,顾红伟,周立朵,彭怀风, . 低承台扩底楔形桩群桩效应系数研究[J]. , 2016, 37(S2): 461-468.
[15] 马少坤,邵 羽,吕 虎,WONG K S ,吴宏伟,陈 欣,江 杰,. 地下水位循环变化时隧道开挖对群桩的长期影响研究[J]. , 2016, 37(6): 1563-1568.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 魏 丽,柴寿喜,蔡宏洲,王晓燕,李 敏,石 茜. 麦秸秆加筋材料抗拉性能的实验研究[J]. , 2010, 31(1): 128 -132 .
[2] 赵延林,王卫军,曹 平,王 军,赵阳升. 不连续面在双重介质热-水-力三维耦合分析中的有限元数值实现[J]. , 2010, 31(2): 638 -644 .
[3] 孙德安,陈 波. 重塑超固结上海软土力学特性及弹塑性模拟[J]. , 2010, 31(6): 1739 -1743 .
[4] 汪 洋,唐雄俊,谭显坤,王元汉. 云岭隧道底鼓机理分析[J]. , 2010, 31(8): 2530 -2534 .
[5] 雷金波,陈从新. 基于双曲线模型的带帽刚性桩复合地基荷载传递机制研究[J]. , 2010, 31(11): 3385 -3391 .
[6] 王登科,刘 建,尹光志,韦立德. 突出危险煤渗透性变化的影响因素探讨[J]. , 2010, 31(11): 3469 -3474 .
[7] 王 军,曹 平,李江腾,刘业科. 降雨入渗对流变介质隧道边坡稳定性的分析[J]. , 2009, 30(7): 2158 -2162 .
[8] 唐世斌,唐春安,李连崇,张永彬. 湿度扩散诱发的隧洞时效变形数值模拟研究[J]. , 2011, 32(S1): 697 -0703 .
[9] 张俊峰 ,郭 莹. 主应力方向和初始成样含水率对饱和重塑粉土单调剪切特性的影响[J]. , 2011, 32(S2): 324 -328 .
[10] 黄 阜,杨小礼,赵炼恒,黄 戡. 基于Hoek-Brown破坏准则的浅埋条形锚板抗拔力上限分析[J]. , 2012, 33(1): 179 -184 .