静动载下共面非贯通裂隙贯通机制分析

›› 2006, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (S2): 774-778.

静动载下共面非贯通裂隙贯通机制分析

张平^1，2，李宁³，李夕兵¹

1. 中南大学资源与安全工程学院，长沙 410083；2. 湖南大学土木工程学院，长沙 410082； 3. 西安理工大学岩土工程研究所，西安 710048

收稿日期:2006-11-21 发布日期:2006-12-16
作者简介:张平,男，1975生，博士，讲师，主要从事岩体动力学与岩土工程数值仿真分析方面的研究工作。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目（50479023）；高校博士学科点专项科研基金项目（20040700008）；湖南省自然科学基金资助项目（06ED013）

Analysis of coalescence mechanism of coplanar intermittent flaws under static and dynamic loading

ZHANG Ping^1，2，LI Ning³，Li Xi-bing¹

1. School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China; 2. College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China; 3. Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, Xi’an University of Technology, Xi’an 710048, China

Received:2006-11-21 Published:2006-12-16

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 共面非贯通裂隙的贯通机制对于确定外载下岩质边坡的滑动面位置及滑动面综合抗剪强度至关重要。采用预制共面非贯通裂隙石膏模型试样单轴静动载对比试验，对不同裂隙倾角共面排列裂隙的扩展、贯通过程进行了观测，研究显示：共面非贯通裂隙不同倾角下的贯通模式存在较大差异，裂隙倾角为0o～35o时以裂隙面发生闭合变形为主；45o～65o时裂隙间较易出现剪切型破坏模式；75o～90o预制裂隙面较难产生滑动，裂隙试样主要产生劈裂形式的破坏。动载下预制裂隙试样裂尖翼裂纹及次生共面裂纹起裂后易朝原起裂方向快速发展；易在两预制裂隙内端部产生直接贯通，这与静载下岩桥处的贯通常通过分支裂纹拐折扩展、相连不同。含共面非贯通裂隙试样在裂隙倾角为35o左右时强度呈现最小值，这与贯通性裂隙试样裂隙倾角为60o左右呈现最小值相差较大，这是因为裂隙面摩擦强度没来得及发挥作用所致。因此，含非贯通节理裂隙岩体的综合抗剪强度公式应引入强度发挥系数，以充分考虑岩桥胶结强度与裂隙面摩擦强度不能同步发挥作用的破坏本质。

关键词: 动载, 共面非贯通裂隙, 贯通机制, 抗剪强度

Abstract: The coalescence mechanism of coplanar intermittent flaws under static and dynamic loading is important in determining the position and shear strength of sliding face of rock slope. The process of the fracture propagation and coalescence between two coplanar intermittent flaws is studied under uniaxial static and dynamic loading. The specimens made of sandstone-like modeling material contain two pre-existing coplanar flaws with different flaw angles from 0o to 90o. The result indicates that the coalescence modes are different for different flaw angles. When the flaw angles are between 0o and 35o, the flaw surfaces produce close deformation mostly; when the flaw angles are between 45o and 65o, the fractures coalesce in shear modes; when the flaw angles are between 75o and 90o, the splitting failures are prone to appear. Moreover, the growth of the wing fracture and secondary co-planar fracture tends to the original propagation direction, and the immediate coalescence is taken place easily between two pre-existing flaws. But the fracture coalescence path is winding under static loading, which is different from dynamic loading. Additionally, the lowest strength is observed when the flaw angle is 35o for specimens containing intermittent flaws, which is different from specimens containing persistent flaws whose lowest strength is observed at 60o. The reason is that the strength of fracture surface is not mobilized when the specimen fails. Because the rock bridge’s strength and fracture surface’s friction can’t be mobilized simultaneously, the shear strength formula for rock mass containing intermittent flaws should introduce a strength mobilization factor.

Key words: dynamic loading, coplanar intermittent flaws, coalescence mechanism, shear strength

中图分类号:

TU43

张平，李宁，李夕兵，. 静动载下共面非贯通裂隙贯通机制分析[J]. , 2006, 27(S2): 774-778.

ZHANG Ping ，LI Ning ，Li Xi-bing，. Analysis of coalescence mechanism of coplanar intermittent flaws under static and dynamic loading [J]. , 2006, 27(S2): 774-778.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	洪本根, 罗嗣海, 胡世丽, 王观石, 姚康, . 基质吸力对非饱和离子型稀土抗剪强度的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2303-2310.
[2]	周小文, 程力, 周密, 王齐, . 离心机中球形贯入仪贯入黏土特性[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1713-1720.
[3]	付宏渊, 刘杰, 曾铃, 卞汉兵, 史振宁, . 考虑荷载与浸水条件的预崩解炭质泥岩变形与强度试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1273-1280.
[4]	张景科, 单婷婷, 王玉超, 王南, 樊孟, 赵林毅, . 土遗址锚固土体-浆体（CGN+C）界面力学性能[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 903-912.
[5]	邱敏, 袁青, 李长俊, 肖超超, . 基于孔穴扩张理论的黏土不排水抗剪强度计算方法对比研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 1059-1066.
[6]	王家全, 张亮亮, 赖毅, 陆梦梁, 叶斌, . 加筋土挡墙静动力学特性大模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 497-505.
[7]	陈曦, 曾亚武, 孙翰卿, 任树林, 刘伟. 岩石节理峰值抗剪强度新模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 123-130.
[8]	张磊, 刘慧, 王铁行. 固结与不固结条件下黄土-混凝土接触面剪切试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 238-244.
[9]	陈瑞锋，田高源，米栋云，董晓强,. 赤泥改性黄土的基本工程性质研究[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 89-97.
[10]	董金玉，王闯，周建军，杨继红，李严威，. 泡沫改良砂卵石土的试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 140-148.
[11]	许年春，吴同情，皮海洋，游磊，吴越,. 基于柔性承载板载荷试验的土抗剪强度参数反演研究[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 227-234.
[12]	崔国建，张传庆，刘立鹏，周辉，程广坦,. 锚杆杆体–砂浆界面力学特性的剪切速率效应研究[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 275-281.
[13]	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.
[14]	曾志雄，孔令伟，李晶晶，李聚昭, . 干湿-冻融循环下延吉膨胀岩的力学特性及其应力-应变归一化[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 2895-2904.
[15]	杨和平，唐咸远，王兴正，肖杰，倪啸，. 有荷干湿循环条件下不同膨胀土抗剪强度基本特性[J]. , 2018, 39(7): 2311-2317.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed