软岩三轴加-卸载试验的破坏特征及抗压强度取值方法研究

›› 2014, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (4): 959-964.

软岩三轴加-卸载试验的破坏特征及抗压强度取值方法研究

邓华锋^{1, 2}，原先凡^{1, 2}，李建林^{1, 2}，胡亚运^{1, 2}，周美玲^{1, 2}

1. 三峡地区地质灾害与生态环境湖北省协同创新中心，湖北宜昌 443002；2. 三峡大学三峡库区地质灾害教育部重点实验室，湖北宜昌 443002

收稿日期:2014-01-26 出版日期:2014-04-10 发布日期:2014-04-18
作者简介:邓华锋，男，1979年生，博士，副教授，主要从事岩土工程方面的研究工作
基金资助:
中国水利水电科学研究院流域水循环模拟与调控国家重点实验室开放研究基金(No. IWHR-SKL-201316)；国家自然科学基金资助项目 (No. 51309141)；三峡大学土木与建筑学院优秀硕士学位论文培育项目(No. PY201314)。

Research on failure characteristics and determination method for compressive strength of soft rock in triaxial loading and unloading tests

DENG Hua-feng^{1, 2}，YUAN Xian-fan^{1, 2}，LI Jian-lin^{1, 2}，HU Ya-yun^{1, 2}，ZHOU Mei-ling^{1, 2}

1. Collaborative Innovation Center for Geo-Hazards and Eco-Environment in Three Gorges Area of Hubei Province, Yichang, Hubei 443002, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Geological Hazards on Three Gorges Reservoir Area of Ministry of Education, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, Hubei 443002, China

Received:2014-01-26 Online:2014-04-10 Published:2014-04-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 软岩三轴加、卸载试验中的抗压强度参数取值是一个非常关键的问题，目前还没有比较确定的方法，通常根据经验或工程要求确定。基于此，结合一组砂质泥岩的三轴加、卸载试验进行了详细研究，试验结果表明：（1）当围压大于10 MPa时，不论是三轴加载试验还是卸载试验，砂质泥岩均表现出明显的应变硬化特性；（2）砂质泥岩在三轴压缩和三轴卸荷两种应力路径的力学响应差别明显，在卸荷条件下通常只存在一条完整的剪切破坏面，而压缩条件下岩样没有明显的控制破裂面，并且剪胀效应明显；（3）将半对数法引入到软岩三轴加、卸载试验数据分析中，可以比较方便地确定软岩三轴加、卸载试验的抗压强度；（4）基于三轴加、卸载试验过程中的应力、应变增量分析，将软岩变形破坏过程分为3个阶段：平滑阶段、规则跳跃阶段和急剧跳跃阶段，各阶段划分的意义明确，可以作为抗压强度确定时的重要参考，因此，在软岩三轴试验数据分析时，可以综合采用这两种方法。研究提出的抗压强度确定方法可操作性强，在其他软岩三轴试验数据分析中值得参考借鉴。

关键词: 软岩, 抗压强度, 破坏特征, 半对数法

Abstract: In triaxial loading and unloading tests of soft rock, the determination of compressive strength is a critical problem, which always tends to use empirical method，while less corresponding standards at present. Based on this, a set of triaxial loading and unloading tests of sandy mudstone were carried out and the experiment results show that: (1) Sandy mudstone samples always show obvious strain hardening characteristics in both triaxial loading and unloading tests when the confining pressure is more than 10 MPa. (2) The mechanical response differences of sandy mudstone under triaxial loading and unloading tests are obviously, the samples always have only one macro shear failure surface in triaxial unloading tests; while the samples have no obvious control fracture surface under the condition of triaxial loading, and the dilatancy effect is obvious. (3) The semi-log method was introduced into the data analysis of soft rock triaxial loading and unloading tests, which can determine the compressive strength more conveniently. (4) Based on the analysis of stress and strain increment in the process of triaxial loading and unloading tests, the deformation and failure process of soft rock can be divided into three stages: smooth stage, rule jump stage and sharp jump stage; the division has obvious physical significance, which can be used as an important reference for determining the compressive strength. Therefore, the two methods can be integrated used to determine the compressive strength of soft rock in triaxial loading and unloading tests. The methods for determining the compressive strength is very applicable, and can also provide reference for similar soft rock tests.

Key words: soft rock, compressive strength, failure characteristics, semi-log method

中图分类号:

TU 45

邓华锋，原先凡，李建林，胡亚运，周美玲 , . 软岩三轴加-卸载试验的破坏特征及抗压强度取值方法研究[J]. , 2014, 35(4): 959-964.

DENG Hua-feng ，YUAN Xian-fan ，LI Jian-lin ，HU Ya-yun ，ZHOU Mei-ling , . Research on failure characteristics and determination method for compressive strength of soft rock in triaxial loading and unloading tests[J]. , 2014, 35(4): 959-964.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	周翠英, 孔令华, 崔光俊, 于磊, 刘镇, . 基于天然红层材料的软岩成型模拟研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 419-427.
[2]	宋文成, 梁正召, . 承压水上开采倾斜底板破坏特征与突水危险性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 624-634.
[3]	郑坤, 孟庆山, 汪稔, 余克服, . 珊瑚骨架灰岩三轴压缩声发射特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(1): 205-213.
[4]	周翠英, 梁宁, 刘镇, . 红层软岩压缩破坏的分形特征与级联失效过程[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 21-31.
[5]	高运昌, 高盟, 尹诗, . 聚氨酯固化海砂的静力特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 231-236.
[6]	雷江, 陈卫忠, 李翻翻, 于洪丹, 马永尚, 谢华东, 王富刚, . 引红济石引水隧洞围岩力学特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(9): 3435-3446.
[7]	沈泰宇, 汪时机, 薛乐, 李贤, 何丙辉, . 微生物沉积碳酸钙固化砂质黏性紫色土试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3115-3124.
[8]	陈卫忠, 田云, 王学海, 田洪铭, 曹怀轩, 谢华东, . 基于修正[BQ]值的软岩隧道挤压变形预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3125-3134.
[9]	周翠英, 黄思宇, 刘镇, 陆仪启, . 红层软岩软化的界面过程及其动力学模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3189-3196.
[10]	张传庆, 刘振江, 张春生, 周辉, 高阳, 侯靖, . 隐晶质玄武岩破裂演化及破坏特征试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(7): 2487-2496.
[11]	储昭飞, 刘保国, 任大瑞, 宋宇, 马强, . 软岩流变相似材料的研制及物理模型试验应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2172-2182.
[12]	王东星, 肖杰, 肖衡林, 马强, . 武汉东湖淤泥碳化-固化试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1805-1812.
[13]	王岗, 潘一山, 肖晓春, . 单轴加载煤体破坏特征与电荷规律研究及应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1823-1831.
[14]	杨骐莱, 熊勇林, 张升, 刘干斌, 郑荣跃, 张锋, . 考虑温度影响的软岩弹塑性本构模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1898-1906.
[15]	王钦科, 马建林, 胡中波, 王滨, . 浅覆盖层软质岩中抗拔桩承载特性现场试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1498-1506.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed