›› 2017, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (5): 1397-1404.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2017.05.022

• 岩土工程研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

岩爆倾向性指标及其相互关系探讨

张传庆,卢景景,陈 珺,周 辉,杨凡杰   

  1. 中国科学院武汉岩土力学研究所 岩土力学与工程国家重点实验室,湖北 武汉 430071
  • 收稿日期:2015-06-18 出版日期:2017-05-11 发布日期:2018-06-05
  • 作者简介:张传庆,男,1977年生,博士,研究员,博士生导师,主要从事地下工程高应力灾害调控机制与方法方面的研究工作。
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金(No. 51279201);国家重点基础研究发展计划(973)项目(No. 2014CB046902)。

Discussion on rock burst proneness indexes and their relation

ZHANG Chuan-qing, LU Jing-jing, CHEN Jun, ZHOU Hui, YANG Fan-jie   

  1. State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430071, China
  • Received:2015-06-18 Online:2017-05-11 Published:2018-06-05
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of China( 51279201) and the National Program on Key Basic Research Project of China (2014CB046902).

摘要: 岩石岩爆倾向性评价是地下工程岩爆风险评估的基础,评价指标众多,且各有特点,应用存在误区。在澄清岩爆倾向性概念的基础上,通过系统文献调研,对岩爆倾向性评价指标进行了归纳和分类,从获取方法的角度重点分析了岩爆倾向性指数Wet和强度脆性系数B。针对Wet获取中卸载点难以准确控制的传统难题,建议了以体积应变反弯点作为卸载控制点的试验方法,试验结果表明,该方法科学、有效。基于对岩石Wet和B值的充分调研总结,分析了二者的相互关系,改进了B值评价标准,为更科学合理地评价岩石岩爆倾向性奠定了坚实基础。

关键词: 岩爆倾向性, 评价指标, 体积应变, 裂纹损伤应力

Abstract: The evaluation of rock burst proneness is the basis of risk assessment of rock burst in underground engineering. However, existing numerous evaluation indexes with different characteristics results in application errors frequently. After clarifying the concept of rock burst proneness, the evaluation indexes of rock burst proneness were summarized and categorized through a comprehensive literature review. From the perspective of acquisition methods of their values, the index of rock burst proneness (Wet) and the coefficient of intensity brittleness (B) were analyzed. The inflection point of volumetric strain, as unloading control point in test process, was recommended to determine the value of Wet. Thus, the traditional difficulty that the unloading point was hardly controlled during the test process, was solved. According to testing results, this method was proved to be scientific and effective. By comprehensively investigating the values of Wet and B for different kinds of rock, the relationship of these two indexes was analyzed and the evaluation standard of B value was further improved. Therefore, this study provides a significant guidance for scientifically and reasonably evaluating rock burst proneness.

Key words: rock burst proneness, evaluation index, volumetric strain, crack damage stress

中图分类号: 

  • O 389

[1] 窦锦钟, 邵雪莹, 廖晨聪, 陈锦剑, . 不同夯点布置形式下群夯加固效果研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 527-534.
[2] 毛小龙, 刘月田, 关文龙, 任兴南, 冯月丽, 丁祖鹏, . 一种适用于孔隙体积应变的有效应力方程[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(8): 3004-3010.
[3] 崔德山, 陈 琼, 项 伟, 王菁莪, . 黄土坡滑坡饱和滑带土三轴压缩应力松弛试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 209-216.
[4] 贺 鹏,肖 杰,张 健,徐 飞,张云鹏,. 膨胀土堑坡稳定性动态风险评估 FAHP模型及工程应用[J]. , 2016, 37(S2): 502-512.
[5] 张传庆 ,俞 缙,陈 珺,卢景景,周 辉,. 地下工程围岩潜在岩爆问题评估方法[J]. , 2016, 37(S1): 341-349.
[6] 崔宏环 ,刘建坤 ,张立群 ,田亚护 , . 考虑冻融循环的季冻区高等级公路路基填土本构模型研究[J]. , 2015, 36(8): 2228-2236.
[7] 张春会 ,赵莺菲,王来贵 ,于永江,. 采动煤岩渗透率演化模型及数值模拟[J]. , 2015, 36(8): 2409-2418.
[8] 裴启涛 ,李海波 ,刘亚群 ,张国凯,. 基于组合赋权的岩爆倾向性预测灰评估模型及应用[J]. , 2014, 35(S1): 49-56.
[9] 周 辉,孟凡震,卢景景,张传庆,杨凡杰. 硬岩裂纹起裂强度和损伤强度取值方法探讨[J]. , 2014, 35(4): 913-918.
[10] 刘汉龙、费 康、. 考虑残余体应变的土石坝地震永久变形分析[J]. , 2013, 34(6): 1687-1695.
[11] 申 昊 ,唐晓武 ,牛 犇 ,刘 续 , . 车辆荷载作用下软土地基塑性变形的计算[J]. , 2013, 34(12): 3561-3566.
[12] 汪 洋 ,曾雄辉 ,尹健民 ,肖国强. 考虑卸荷效应的深埋隧洞围岩分区破坏数值模拟[J]. , 2012, 33(4): 1233-1239.
[13] 廖一蕾 ,张子新 ,张冠军. 大直径盾构进出洞加固体稳定性判别方法研究[J]. , 2011, 32(S2): 256-260.
[14] 何剑平 陈卫忠. 地下结构碎石排水层抗液化措施数值试验[J]. , 2011, 32(10): 3177-3184.
[15] 阎 岩,王恩志,王思敬,胡 昱. 岩石渗流-流变耦合的试验研究[J]. , 2010, 31(7): 2095-2103.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!