›› 2008, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (10): 2683-2686.

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

条形板抗拔承载力塑性极限分析

刘华强1,殷宗泽1, 沈珠江2   

  1. 1.河海大学 岩土力学与堤坝工程教育部重点实验室,南京 210098;2.清华大学 水利水电工程系,北京 100084
  • 收稿日期:2006-09-15 出版日期:2008-10-10 发布日期:2013-08-03
  • 作者简介:刘华强,男,1979年生,博士研究生,主要从事土体极限稳定的理论研究

Plastic limit analysis of vertical uplift capacity of strip plates

LIU Hua-qiang1, YIN Zong-ze1, SHEN Zhu-jiang2   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education for Geomechanics and Embankment Engineering , Hohai University ,Nanjing 210098, China; 2. Department of Hydraulic and Hydropower Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
  • Received:2006-09-15 Online:2008-10-10 Published:2013-08-03

摘要: 从土塑性力学极限分析上限定理出发,建立了条形锚板上拔时条分式平移破坏机构。根据外部作用荷载和土体自重所做的外功率与塑性变形区的内部能量耗损率相等的条件,建立起虚功率方程,并由此得到了抗拔极限承载力计算公式,该公式概念清楚,使用方便。分析了承载力系数,表明黏聚力项受强度的响应系数m值影响较大,而重力项和超载项受其影响很小。通过与前人的试验资料和Meyerhof-Adams计算理论得出的结果进行比较,表明了建议方法的可靠性,对土体抗拔问题具有一定的实用意义。对比的结果同时也验证了强度响应系数m只对抗拔承载力的黏聚力部分产生明显影响的结论。

关键词: 锚板, 抗拔力, 对数螺旋线, 极限分析

Abstract: Based on the logarithmic spiral failure surface and combined with the upper bound theorem of soil plasticity mechanics, a technique of slice for analyzing translational failure mechanism of the stability problem of strip foundations subjected to uplift loads was proposed. According to the term that the rate of work done by external loads and soil weight is equal to the rate of energy dissipation in the kinematically admissible velocity field, the virtual work rate equation was deduced, through which the vertical uplift capacity can be calculated. Bearing capacity factors have been determined which showed that the part of uplift capacity corresponds to cohesion is affected by respond coefficient m and the other two parts which correspond to surcharge and weight separately, can hardly be affected by it. Through the comparision of results which obtained by predecessor's experimental materials and Meyerhof and Adams’s computation theory, the correction and feasibility of the suggested method is indicated, and the conclusion that m only affects cohesion term Fc remarkably is validated by the results in sand and cohesive soils.

Key words: anchor plate, uplift capacity, logarithmic spiral line, limit analysis

中图分类号: 

  • TU 431
[1] 陈峥, 何平, 颜杜民, 高红杰, 聂奥祥, . 超前支护下隧道掌子面稳定性极限上限分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2154-2162.
[2] 王 珍, 曹兰柱, 王 东, . 非均质边坡稳定性上限分析评价研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 737-742.
[3] 王 哲, 王乔坎, 马少俊, 薛 毅, 许四法, . 扩大头可回收预应力锚索极限抗拔力计算方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 202-208.
[4] 郭红仙, 周 鼎. 软土中基坑土钉支护稳定性问题探讨[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 398-404.
[5] 徐 鹏,蒋关鲁,邱俊杰,林展展,王智猛,. 基于二楔块法的加筋土挡墙屈服加速度及破坏模式极限分析[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 2765-2770.
[6] 尹君凡,雷 勇,陈秋南,刘一新,邓加政,. 偏心荷载下溶洞顶板冲切破坏上限分析[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 2837-2843.
[7] 严敏嘉,夏元友,刘婷婷. 地震作用下预应力锚索加固顺层岩坡极限分析[J]. , 2018, 39(7): 2691-2698.
[8] 曹文贵,谭建辉,胡卫东, . 水平加筋地基极限承载力的极限上限分析法[J]. , 2018, 39(6): 1955-1962.
[9] 李 泽,刘 毅,周 宇,王均星,. 基于混合离散的砌石挡土墙边坡极限承载力下限分析[J]. , 2018, 39(3): 1100-1108.
[10] 陈春舒,夏元友. 基于全局极限响应面的预应力锚索加固边坡抗震可靠度分析[J]. , 2017, 38(S1): 255-262.
[11] 郑 刚,聂东清,刁 钰,程雪松,. 基坑多级支护破坏模式研究[J]. , 2017, 38(S1): 313-322.
[12] 雷 勇,尹君凡,陈秋南,杨 威,. 基于极限分析法的溶洞顶板极限承载力研究[J]. , 2017, 38(7): 1926-1932.
[13] 胡卫东,曹文贵,袁青松,. 基于非线性破坏准则的临坡地基承载力上限分析[J]. , 2017, 38(6): 1639-1646.
[14] 杨子汉,杨小礼,许敬叔,李永鑫,孙志彬,. 基于上限原理的两种岩溶隧道岩墙厚度计算方法[J]. , 2017, 38(3): 801-809.
[15] 张奇华,李玉婕,余美万,罗 荣,邬爱清. 隧道锚围岩抗拔机制及抗拔力计算模式初步研究[J]. , 2017, 38(3): 810-820.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 符策简. 高含盐粉土的力学特性试验研究[J]. , 2010, 31(S1): 193 -197 .
[2] 丁文其,袁森林,高小庆,谢东武. 电力隧道超大直径顶管施工扰动特性研究[J]. , 2010, 31(9): 2901 -2906 .
[3] 刘其鹏,武文华. 颗粒材料平均场理论的多尺度方法:理论方面[J]. , 2009, 30(4): 879 -884 .
[4] 吕玺琳,黄茂松,钱建固. 真三轴状态下砂土的强度参数[J]. , 2009, 30(4): 981 -984 .
[5] 李雄威,孔令伟,郭爱国. 气候影响下膨胀土工程性质的原位响应特征试验研究[J]. , 2009, 30(7): 2069 -2074 .
[6] 宋勇军,胡 伟,王德胜,周军林. 基于修正剑桥模型的挤密桩挤土效应分析[J]. , 2011, 32(3): 811 -814 .
[7] 鲁 涛,王孔伟,李建林. 库水压力作用下砂岩破坏形式的探究[J]. , 2011, 32(S1): 413 -0418 .
[8] 张 磊 ,龚晓南 ,俞建霖. 考虑土体屈服的纵横荷载单桩变形内力分析[J]. , 2011, 32(8): 2441 -2445 .
[9] 魏明尧,王恩元,刘晓斐,王 超. 深部煤层卸压爆破防治冲击地压效果的数值模拟研究[J]. , 2011, 32(8): 2539 -2543 .
[10] 侯天顺 ,徐光黎 ,楼建东. 轻量砂变形及强度特性三轴试验研究[J]. , 2011, 32(10): 2989 -2998 .