英标和国标标贯设备试验结果相关性分析

›› 2013, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (1): 143-147.

英标和国标标贯设备试验结果相关性分析

廖先斌，郭晓勇，杜宇

中交第四航务工程勘察设计院有限公司，广州 510230

收稿日期:2012-02-27 出版日期:2013-01-10 发布日期:2013-01-10
作者简介:廖先斌，男，1971年生，本科，高级工程师，主要从事工程地质方面的研究工作.

Correlation analysis of standard penetration test results on British and Chinese standard equipments

LIAO Xian-bin，GUO Xiao-yong，DU Yu

Fourth Harbor Engineering Investigation and Design Institute Co., Ltd., China Communications Construction Company, Guangzhou 510230, China

Received:2012-02-27 Online:2013-01-10 Published:2013-01-10

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为了在国内岩土设计中很好利用英国标准（BS）标贯设备的试验结果，对英国标准和中国标准（GB）标贯设备及试验结果进行分析，研究相关性。BS和GB标贯设备主要的区别是前者的锤垫质量大于后者，造成试验时两者锤击能量有差别，因此，获得的标贯击数不同。通过采用标贯能量分析仪，测量配置不同直径钻杆的BS和GB设备试验时的实际锤击能量，计算两者不同的实际锤击能量与理论锤击能量的能量比，利用能量比的差别分析BS与GB标贯击数的相关性，建立相关公式。分析显示，试验时BS标贯设备比GB标贯设备的锤击传递能量要小，标贯击数要大；钻杆直径为50 mm比直径为42 mm传递的锤击能量略高，标贯击数略低。通过研究，最终建立了BS与GB标贯设备试验结果的相关关系，英标标贯设备获得的数据从而能更好运用于中国标准中，并提供符合中国利用标贯评价的岩土设计参数。

关键词: 标贯试验（SPT）, 英国标准（BS）, 中国标准（GB）, 锤垫质量, 锤击能量

Abstract: In order to make good use of the standard penetration test (SPT) results on British Standard (BS) equipment during the Chinese geotechnical design, BS and Chinese Standard (GB) SPT equipment and results are analyzed to evaluate their correlation. The main difference between BS and GB equipment is that BS anvil quality is larger than GB; and different hitting energy and SPT values are caused. SPT analyzer has been used to measure the actual hitting energy of SPT on BS and GB equipments configured with different diameter rods. In order to analyze the correlation between SPT values of BS and GB, and establish correlation formula, the BS and GB energy ratio that actual hitting energy was divided by theory hitting energy are calculated. The conclusions are as follows: BS equipment is smaller hitting energy and the value of SPT is higher than GB equipment. The rod 50 mm in diameter has higher hitting energy and smaller value of SPT than the rod 42 mm in diameter. Correlation of the standard penetration test results on BS and GB has been set up. Therefore the data based on BS SPT equipments will be more reliable to be utilized in GB and also evaluate the appropriated geotechnical parameter in terms of GB SPT results.

Key words: standard penetration test (SPT), British Standard (BS), Chinese Standard (GB), anvil quality, hitting energy

中图分类号:

TU 411

廖先斌，郭晓勇，杜宇. 英标和国标标贯设备试验结果相关性分析[J]. , 2013, 34(1): 143-147.

LIAO Xian-bin，GUO Xiao-yong，DU Yu. Correlation analysis of standard penetration test results on British and Chinese standard equipments[J]. , 2013, 34(1): 143-147.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	冯大阔，张建民, . 法向刚度对土与结构接触面三维特性影响的试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(11): 3929-3936.
[2]	崔猛，刘洁，韩尚宇，洪宝宁,. 土体拉伸破坏过程微细结构变化测试系统研发与应用[J]. , 2018, 39(11): 4278-4286.
[3]	邹德高，田继荣，刘京茂，周晨光，宁凡伟，. 堆石料三维形状量化及其对颗粒破碎的影响[J]. , 2018, 39(10): 3525-3530.
[4]	王家全，张亮亮，刘政权，周圆兀. 土工格栅加筋砂土地基大模型动载试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(10): 3539-3547.
[5]	段晓梦，曾立峰, . 非饱和土的承载结构与岩土广义结构性[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3103-3112.
[6]	王新志，翁贻令，王星，陈伟俊, . 钙质土颗粒咬合作用机制[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3113-3120.
[7]	付自国，乔登攀，郭忠林，李克钢，谢锦程，王佳信. 超细尾砂胶结充填体强度计算模型及应用[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3147-3156.
[8]	范宁，年廷凯，赵维，鲁双，宋雷，印萍,. 海底泥流的流变试验及强度模型[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3195-3202.
[9]	吴野，王胤，杨庆. 考虑钙质砂细观颗粒形状影响的液体拖曳力系数试验[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3203-3212.
[10]	王丽琴，邵生俊，赵聪，鹿忠刚,. 黄土初始结构性对其压缩屈服的影响[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3223-3228.
[11]	冯晓伟，王伟，王如宾，袁双双，朱其志, . 考虑水化学损伤的砂岩流变损伤本构模型[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3340-3346.
[12]	黄伟，项伟，王菁莪，程超杰，崔德山，刘清秉，. 基于变形数字图像处理的土体拉伸试验装置的研发与应用[J]. , 2018, 39(9): 3486-3494.
[13]	王海波，吴琪，杨平,. 细粒含量对饱和砂类土液化强度的影响[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 2771-2779.
[14]	吉恩跃，朱俊高，余挺，金伟,. 橡皮膜嵌入解析解及试验验证[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 2780-2786.
[15]	王俊，王闯，何川，胡雄玉，江英超，. 砂卵石地层土压盾构掘进掌子面稳定性室内试验与三维离散元仿真研究[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 3038-3046.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed