砂土中扩体锚杆承载特性模型试验研究

›› 2012, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (12): 3645-3652.

砂土中扩体锚杆承载特性模型试验研究

郭钢¹，刘钟^{1, 2}，邓益兵³，杨松^{1, 2}，马利军^{1, 2}

1.中冶建筑研究总院有限公司，北京 100088；2.中国京冶工程技术有限公司，北京 100088； 3.上海海事大学海洋环境与工程学院，上海 201306

收稿日期:2011-08-31 出版日期:2012-12-12 发布日期:2012-12-15
作者简介:郭钢，男，1986年生，硕士研究生，主要从事岩土锚固方面的研究工作
基金资助:
新型扩体锚固技术及机具装备研发（No. 财企[2012]171）。

Model test research on bearing capacity characteristics of underreamed ground anchor in sand

GUO Gang¹, LIU Zhong^{1, 2}, DENG Yi-bing³, YANG Song^{1, 2}, MA Li-jun^{1, 2}

1. Central Research Institute of Building and Construction of MCC Group, Beijing 100088, China; 2. China Jingye Engineering Corporation Limited, Beijing 100088, China; 3. College of Ocean Environment and Engineering, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China

Received:2011-08-31 Online:2012-12-12 Published:2012-12-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 在25个室内模型试验基础上，研究了均质砂土中竖向拉拔扩体锚杆的几何尺寸及埋深对其承载特性的影响。试验结果表明，根据深径比的不同，扩体锚杆可以分为浅埋与深埋扩体锚杆2种形式，它们在拉拔过程中均经历了土体弹性变形阶段、非扩体锚固段-土界面剪切破坏阶段、土体弹塑性变形阶段以及剪切破坏阶段，破坏特征分别表现为整体剪切破坏与局部剪切破坏。通过扩体锚杆与普通拉力型锚杆模型试验对比发现：与普通拉力型锚杆相比，扩体锚杆极限承载力、承载比与安全性均有大幅度提高。而通过增大扩体锚固段直径的方式提高扩体锚杆承载力的优势较为明显。此外，根据承载比分析，扩体锚杆存在最优扩体锚固段直径，因此，在实际工程中应寻找一个满足需要的最优扩体锚固段尺寸以取得较好的经济效益。

关键词: 扩体锚杆, 深径比, 极限承载力, 承载比, 砂土

Abstract: The effects of size and embedment depth of underreamed ground anchor under vertical pullout on its bearing capacity characteristics were researched through 25 model tests. The test results exhibited two different modes of underreamed ground anchor depending on depth/diameter ratio, namely shallow and deep underreamed ground anchor. During pullout, the two type underreamed ground anchors experienced several phases, such as soil elastic deformation, shear failure on normal anchor section-soil interface, soil elastoplastic deformation phase and shear failure as well. And they manifested general shear failure and local shear failure. In comparison between underreamed ground anchor and normal tension-type anchor, the test results indicated that in ultimate bearing capacity, bearing capacity ratio and safety, underreamed ground anchor had substantial superiority in comparison with normal tension-type anchor. In order to improve the bearing capacity, expanding diameter of underreamed section had more obvious advantages. Furthermore, there was an optimal diameter of underreamed section by the bearing capacity ratio analysis. So it is highly recommended to seek an optimal dimension of underreamed ground anchor to get more economic benefits in practice.

Key words: underreamed ground anchor, depth/diameter ratio, ultimate bearing capacity, bearing capacity ratio, sand

中图分类号:

TU 432

郭钢刘钟，邓益兵，杨松，马利军 . 砂土中扩体锚杆承载特性模型试验研究[J]. , 2012, 33(12): 3645-3652.

GUO Gang , LIU Zhong , DENG Yi-bing , YANG Song , MA Li-jun . Model test research on bearing capacity characteristics of underreamed ground anchor in sand[J]. , 2012, 33(12): 3645-3652.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	覃玉兰, 邹新军, 曹雄. 均质砂土中水平简谐荷载与扭矩联合受荷单桩内力、位移分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(1): 147-156.
[2]	孔亮, 刘文卓, 袁庆盟, 董彤, . 常剪应力路径下含气砂土的三轴试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3319-3326.
[3]	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.
[4]	孙逸飞, 陈成, . 无状态变量的状态依赖剪胀方程及其本构模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1813-1822.
[5]	谷淡平, 凌同华, . 悬臂式型钢水泥土搅拌墙的水泥土承载比和墙顶位移分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1957-1965.
[6]	魏星, 张昭, 王刚, 张建民, . 饱和砂土液化后大变形机制的离散元细观分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1596-1602.
[7]	庄海洋, 付继赛, 陈苏, 陈国兴, 王雪剑, . 微倾斜场地中地铁地下结构周围地基液化与变形特性振动台模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1263-1272.
[8]	张勋, 黄茂松, 胡志平, . 砂土中单桩水平循环累积变形特性模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 933-941.
[9]	陆勇, 周国庆, 杨冬英, 宋家庆, . 砂土剪胀软化、剪缩硬化统一本构的显式计算[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 978-986.
[10]	张成功, 尹振宇, 吴则祥, 金银富, . 颗粒形状对粒状材料圆柱塌落影响的三维离散元模拟 [J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 1197-1203.
[11]	董建勋, 刘海笑, 李洲. 适用于砂土循环加载分析的边界面塑性模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 684-692.
[12]	王东伟, 陆武萍, 唐朝生, 赵红崴, 李胜杰, 林銮, 冷挺, . 砂土微观结构样品制备技术及量化方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(12): 4783-4792.
[13]	周翠英, 赵珊珊, 杨旭, 刘镇, . 生态酯类材料砂土改良及工程护坡应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(12): 4828-4837.
[14]	王冬勇, 陈曦, 于玉贞, 吕彦楠, . 基于二阶锥规划有限元增量加载法的条形浅基础极限承载力分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(12): 4890-4896.
[15]	冯君, 王洋, 张俞峰, 黄林, 何长江, 吴红刚, . 玄武岩纤维与钢筋锚杆锚固性能现场对比试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(11): 4185-4193.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed