岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (S1): 347-354.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2019.0832

• 数值分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

桩承式路堤土拱效应三维离散元分析

鲍宁1,魏静1,陈建峰2   

  1. 1. 北京交通大学 土木建筑工程学院,北京 100044;2. 同济大学 地下建筑与工程系,上海 200092
  • 收稿日期:2019-05-08 修回日期:2019-08-22 出版日期:2020-06-19 发布日期:2020-06-09
  • 通讯作者: 魏静,女,1973年生,博士,副教授,主要从事路基与岩土工程的科研与教学工作。E-mail: jingwei@bjtu.edu.cn E-mail:17121184@bjtu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:鲍宁,男,1994年生,硕士研究生,主要从事路基工程方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(No.41772289)。

Three dimensional discrete element analysis of soil arching in piled embankment

BAO Ning1, WEI Jing1, CHEN Jian-feng2   

  1. 1. School of Civil Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China; 2. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
  • Received:2019-05-08 Revised:2019-08-22 Online:2020-06-19 Published:2020-06-09
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(41772289).

摘要: 为探究桩承式低路堤的空间土拱效应演化规律,采用PFC3D软件建立了3种不同高度低路堤三维活动门颗粒流模型。将试验结果与既有解析解进行对比,分析路堤内部竖向土压力分布特点、土拱发展模式和土体的沉降变形规律。研究结果表明, 桩土荷载分担比达到稳定状态时4桩顶部形成力链球状拱结构,构成荷载传递路径,应力拱拱高随填土高度的增加表现出先增加后稳定的变化;挡板不同位置土拱率 的变化特点显示土压力分布不均匀,呈现出4桩中心大于2桩中心大于2桩中心两侧的分布特点,土拱率 稳定值处于0.2~0.4内;从变形的角度来看,依据土体竖向沉降量沿高度的分布可判断等沉面高度约为1.2B(B为桩净间距),等沉面以下桩间土上部沉降量大于桩顶上部土体,随埋深的增加差异沉降不断增大,总体呈现下凸状;土体的滑裂面形状存在三角形扩展式和等沉面式,在等沉面破坏模式中土体内部滑裂面呈现为穹顶状。

关键词: 桩承式路堤, 土拱效应, 三维离散元, 土拱率, 土体变形

Abstract: To explore the evolution law of the spatial arching effect of pile-supported low embankment, three kinds of three- dimensional movable gate particle flow models with different heights and low embankments were established by PFC3D software. Comparing the test results with the existing analytical solutions, the distribution characteristics of vertical earth pressure inside the embankment, the development mode of soil arches, and the settlement and deformation law of soil are analyzed. The results show that the spherical arch structure, which forms the path of load transfer, is composed of force chains at the top of piles after the pile-soil load sharing ratio reaches a steady state. The height of stress-arch increases first and then stabilizes as the filling height increases. Stable soil arching rate ? is in the range of about 0.2-0.4 at various positions on the trapdoor, which reflects the uneven earth pressure distribution. The vertical stress at the center of four piles is higher than that between two piles, and also larger than that at adjoining two-pile-centers. From the perspective of deformation, it can be judged that the height of equal settlement plane is about 1.2B times the net spacing of piles(B represents pile clear spacing) from the pile top, based on the contour of vertical displacement at different filling heights. The differential settlement, between particles above the pile top with larger settlements and particles above subsoil, grows with the increase of buried depth and presents an overall convex shape. As the settlement deepens, two different patterns of the external slip surface are observed according to surface deformation: triangular expansion pattern and equal settlement pattern. Particularly, the internal slip is dome-shaped under equal settlement plane.

Key words: piled embankment, soil arching effect, three-dimensional discrete element method, soil arching ratio, soil deformation

中图分类号: 

  • TU473
[1] 刘克奇, 丁万涛, 陈瑞, 侯铭垒, . 盾构掌子面三维破坏模型构建与极限支护力计算[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2293-2303.
[2] 黄宇华, 徐林荣, 周俊杰, 蔡雨, . 基于改进Terzarghi方法的桩网地基桩土应力计算[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 667-675.
[3] 芮 瑞, 叶雨秋, 陈 成, 涂树杰. 考虑墙壁摩擦影响的挡土墙 主动土压力非线性分布研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1797-1804.
[4] 陈 峥, 何 平, 颜杜民, 高红杰, . 考虑土拱效应的管棚合理间距计算方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1993-2000.
[5] 刘 洋, 于鹏强. 刚性挡土墙平移模式的土拱形状 与主动土压力分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 506-516.
[6] 尹志强,佘成学,姚海林,卢 正,骆行文,. 考虑土拱效应的黏性填土排桩桩后土压力研究[J]. , 2018, 39(S1): 131-139.
[7] 王 俊,王 闯,何 川,胡雄玉,江英超,. 砂卵石地层土压盾构掘进掌子面稳定性室内试验与三维离散元仿真研究[J]. , 2018, 39(8): 3038-3046.
[8] 赖丰文,陈福全,万梁龙,. 考虑不完全土拱效应的浅层地基竖向应力计算[J]. , 2018, 39(7): 2546-2554.
[9] 徐长节,梁禄钜,陈其志,刘元昆,. 考虑松动区内应力分布形式的松动土压力研究[J]. , 2018, 39(6): 1927-1934.
[10] 刘路路,宋 亮,焦玉勇,王 浩,张秀丽,谢壁婷, . 库水位波动条件下黄土坡临江1#崩滑堆积体稳定性研究[J]. , 2017, 38(S1): 359-366.
[11] 杨 贵,王阳阳,刘彦辰, . 基于曲线滑裂面的挡墙主动土压力分析[J]. , 2017, 38(8): 2182-2188.
[12] 李瑞林,周国庆,林 超,赵光思,陈国舟,. 考虑土拱效应的滑移面间非极限状态土压力解答[J]. , 2017, 38(11): 3145-3153.
[13] 孙潇昊,缪林昌,林海山. 不同埋深砂土盾构隧道掘进开挖面前方土拱效应研究[J]. , 2017, 38(10): 2980-2988.
[14] 朱冰儿,齐昌广,鲍娇蕾. 路堤荷载下塑料套管桩荷载传递机制的现场试验研究[J]. , 2016, 37(S2): 658-664.
[15] 张 昕 ,乐金朝,刘汉东,. 砂土中群锚锚周土体变形特性模型试验研究[J]. , 2016, 37(S1): 240-248.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!