›› 2018, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (1): 173-180.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2016.0056

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

三类边坡失稳判据的统一性

涂义亮1, 2, 3,刘新荣1, 3,钟祖良1, 3,杜立兵1, 3,王 鹏1, 3   

  1. 1. 重庆大学 土木工程学院,重庆 400045;2. 重庆交通大学 土木工程学院,重庆 400074; 3. 重庆大学 山地城镇建设与新技术教育部重点实验室,重庆 400030
  • 收稿日期:2016-01-06 出版日期:2018-01-10 发布日期:2018-06-06
  • 作者简介:涂义亮,男,1989年生,博士研究生,主要从事边坡工程理论与数值计算等方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金资助项目(No. 51108485,No. 41372356);高等学校博士学科点专项科研基金资助项目(No. 20110191120033)。

The unity of three types of slope failure criteria

TU Yi-liang1, 2,3, LIU Xin-rong1, 3, ZHONG Zu-liang1, 3, DU Li-bing1, 3, WANG Peng1, 3   

  1. 1. College of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China; 2. School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing Jiaotong University, Chongqing 400074, China; 3. Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area, Ministry of Education, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China
  • Received:2016-01-06 Online:2018-01-10 Published:2018-06-06
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51108485, 41372356) and the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (20110191120033).

摘要: 将热力学理论中材料破坏的能量机制引入边坡工程中,推导了强度折减过程中边坡的能量方程,利用FLAC3D二次开发了能量的计算程序,并应用于某经典边坡算例中。通过与Spencer法的计算结果对比发现:强度折减法中边坡的稳定性与能量变化关系紧密,由此提出了4种新的失稳判据——能量突变失稳判据,且4种能量突变失稳判据理论上是统一的。通过对比发现:动能突变判据与数值计算收敛性判据、重力势能降突变判据与特征点垂直位移突变判据、耗散能增量突变判据与塑性区贯通判据分别存在对应关系,证明了常见的3类失稳判据也是统一的。通过算例试算发现,3类判据判定结果不相等主要是由收敛标准和网格精度等人为因素造成的,本质上是因为数值计算是一种近似解。工程应用中,可通过3类失稳判据判定结果的一致性来自评安全系数的计算精度,一致性越好,精度越高。提高计算精度的根本办法是严格收敛标准和精细网格划分,但应同时兼顾数值计算的时长,从而实现计算效率最大化。

关键词: 边坡, 有限元强度折减法, 失稳判据, 能量, 统一性

Abstract: The energy mechanism of material damage in thermodynamic theory was introduced to slope engineering. An energy conservation equation that was applicable in strength reduction period was deduced. Then, a calculation procedure for the slope energy was developed with FLAC3D, which was applied to a traditional slope example. Compared with the result from Spencer method, the slope’s energy change was closely related to its stability in the strength reduction method, hence four new slope failure criteria-energy catastrophe criteria which were theoretically in unity were proposed. By comparison, the criterion of the kinetic energy catastrophe is in correspondence with the criteria of numerical calculation non-convergence, the loss of gravitational potential energy catastrophe is in correspondence with the criteria of dramatic increase in the marked nodal displacements, and the dissipated energy catastrophe is in correspondence with the criteria of a plastic zone going through the slope. In summary, the aforementioned correspondences demonstrate the unity of the three common failure criteria. Several examples demonstrate that the different results from the three common failure criteria are because of artificial factors such as mesh generation precision and numerical convergence criteria. In essence, the different results stem from the fact that numerical calculation is a kind of approximate solution. In application, the accuracy of safety factor can be evaluated by the consistency of the results from various slope failure criteria. The better the consistency is, the higher the accuracy is. The basic method of improving the accuracy of safety factor is strict convergence standard and fine mesh precision, but achieving strict convergence standard and fine mesh precision may require extremely long numerical calculation time. Therefore, a moderate numerical calculation time should be chosen to maximize the computational efficiency.

Key words: slope, strength reduction finite element method, failure criterion, energy, unity

中图分类号: 

  • TU 434

[1] 李任融, 孔纲强, 杨庆, 孙广超. 流速对桩−筏基础中能量桩换热效率 与热力耦合特性影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 264-270.
[2] 蒋长宝, 魏 财, 段敏克, 陈昱霏, 余塘, 李政科, . 饱水和天然状态下页岩滞后效应及阻尼特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 1799-1808.
[3] 陈光波, 秦忠诚, 张国华, 李谭, 李敬凯, . 受载煤岩组合体破坏前能量分布规律[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 2021-2033.
[4] 荣驰, 陈卫忠, 袁敬强, 张铮, 张毅, 张庆艳, 刘奇, . 新型水玻璃−酯类注浆材料及其固沙体特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 2034-2042.
[5] 胡盛斌, 杜国平, 徐国元, 周天忠, 钟有信, 石重庆, . 基于能量测量的声呐渗流矢量法及其应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 2143-2154.
[6] 任洋, 李天斌, 赖林. 强震区隧道洞口段边坡动力响应 特征离心振动台试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1605-1612.
[7] 肖明清, 徐晨, . 基于临界稳定断面的隧道围岩稳定性分析方法探讨[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1690-1698.
[8] 张卢明, 周勇, 范刚, 蔡红雨, 董云. 强震作用下核安全级反倾层状软岩高陡边坡组合支挡结构抗震性能研究与加固效果评价[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1740-1749.
[9] 韩超, 庞德朋, 李德建. 砂岩分级加卸载蠕变试验过程能量演化分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(4): 1179-1188.
[10] 王青元, 刘杰, 王培涛, 刘飞, . 冲击扰动诱发蠕变岩石加速失稳破坏试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 781-788.
[11] 周子涵, 陈忠辉, 王建明, 张凌凡, 年庚乾. 爆破荷载作用下露天矿边坡稳定性的突变研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 849-857.
[12] 史振宁, 戚双星, 付宏渊, 曾铃, 何忠明, 方睿敏, . 降雨入渗条件下土质边坡含水率分 布与浅层稳定性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(3): 980-988.
[13] 苏永华, 李诚诚. 强降雨下基于Green-Ampt模型的边坡稳定性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 389-398.
[14] 朱彦鹏, 陶钧, 杨校辉, 彭俊国, 吴强, . 框架预应力锚托板结构加固高填方边坡 设计与数值分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 612-623.
[15] 李剑, 陈善雄, 余飞, 姜领发, 戴张俊. 预应力锚索加固高陡边坡机制探讨[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 707-713.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!