岩土力学 ›› 2025, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (S1): 195-204.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2024.0466CSTR: 32223.14.j.rsm.2024.0466

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

考虑不同凸起体宽度的规则形态土−岩界面剪切试验研究

杨烜宇1, 2, 3,王勇1, 2   

  1. 1. 中国科学院武汉岩土力学研究所 岩土力学与工程安全全国重点实验室,湖北 武汉 430071;2. 中国科学院大学,北京 100049; 3. 山西省智慧交通研究院有限公司,山西 太原 030026
  • 收稿日期:2024-04-17 接受日期:2024-08-12 出版日期:2025-08-08 发布日期:2025-08-27
  • 通讯作者: 王勇,男,1977年生,博士,研究员,主要从事多尺度土力学与特殊土灾害防治方面的研究。E-mail: wangyong@whrsm.ac.cn
  • 作者简介:杨烜宇,男,1993年生,博士研究生,高级工程师,主要从事边坡地质灾害机制与防护方面的研究工作。E-mail: yxy_sxti@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(No.52127815);山西省应用基础研究(青年科技研究基金)项目(No.202203021222426,No.202203021222428)。

Experimental study on shear behavior of regular soil-rock interface considering asperity widths

YANG Xuan-yu1, 2, 3, WANG Yong1, 2   

  1. 1. State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Safety, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430071, China; 2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China, 3. Shanxi Intelligent Transportation Research Co., Ltd., Taiyuan, Shanxi 030026, China
  • Received:2024-04-17 Accepted:2024-08-12 Online:2025-08-08 Published:2025-08-27
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (52127815) and the Shanxi Provincial Basic Research Program (Youth Science Research Fund) (202203021222426, 202203021222428).

摘要: 界面力学行为是岩土工程领域的研究热点问题,其中土−岩接触面作为广泛存在于各类地质体中的界面,其力学行为与工程稳定和地质灾害发育密切相关。几何形态是影响土−岩界面力学行为的重要因素,以不同形态的土−岩接触面为对象,通过3D打印技术还原了天然接触面形态,并分别打印了含矩形接触面、锯齿状接触面以及弧形接触面的基岩模具,制备了含不同界面形态的土−岩试样。在此基础上,开展了室内剪切试验,研究了不同凸起体宽度下,规则界面形态对试样剪切行为的影响。研究发现:(1)相同材料中,天然界面具有明显的剪切峰值,规则界面无显著的峰值。凸起体宽度占比低于35%时,弧形界面剪切强度最大,其次为锯齿状界面,矩形界面的剪切强度最低;当凸起体宽度占比超过35%,锯齿状界面剪切强度最大,其次为弧形界面,矩形界面的剪切强度最低。并且随着凸起体宽度的增加,剪切强度逐渐增大。(2)界面的黏聚力按照从大到小排序为锯齿状>弧形>矩形,内摩擦角按照从大到小排序为矩形>锯齿状>弧形。(3)含凸起体界面在剪切过程中有两个剪切面,位于土−岩界面的主剪切面和凸起体中的次剪切面,次剪切面是造成不同形态界面剪切行为差异的主要原因。

关键词: 土?岩界面, 剪切强度, 几何形态, 破坏机制

Abstract: The mechanical behavior of interfaces is a hot research topic in the field of geotechnical engineering. The soil-rock contact surface, as a widely existing interface in various geological bodies, its mechanical behavior is closely related to engineering stability and geological hazard development. Geometric shape is an important factor affecting the mechanical behavior of soil-rock interfaces. Different shapes of soil-rock interfaces were regarded as objects, and the natural contact surface morphology was restored through 3D printing technology. Bedrock models containing rectangular, serrated, and arc-shaped contact surfaces were printed, and soil-rock samples with different interface shapes were prepared. On this basis, indoor shear tests were conducted to investigate the influence of regular interface morphology on the shear behavior of specimens under different asperity widths. The results indicate that: (1) For the same material, natural interfaces have obvious shear peaks, while regular interfaces have no significant peaks. When the proportion of asperity width is less than 35%, the curved interface exhibits the highest shear strength, followed by the serrated interface and then the rectangular interface. When the proportion of asperity width exceeds 35%, the serrated interface shows the highest shear strength, followed by the curved interfaces and then the rectangular interface. Additionally, as the asperity width increases, the shear strength gradually increases. (2) Interface cohesion decreases in the order: serrated>arc-shaped>rectangular, whereas the internal friction angle decreases in the order: rectangular>serrated>arc-shaped. (3) During shear process, two shear planes form at the interface of a protruding body: a primary shear plane at the soil-rock interface and a secondary shear plane within the protrusion. The secondary shear plane primarily accounts for the differences in shear behavior of interfaces with different shapes.

Key words: soil-rock interface, shear strength, geometric morphology, failure mechanism

中图分类号: TU411
[1] 沈扬, 沈嘉毅, 梁晖, 樊科伟. 基于3D打印技术的仿真钙质砂三轴试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(8): 2353-2362.
[2] 田雷, 谢强, 段军, 陶富涛, 班宇鑫, 傅翔, 晏彬淇, . 三向斜锚短桩基础拉拔荷载作用下桩锚节点的受力特性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(1): 278-288.
[3] 李永威, 徐林荣, 傅金阳, 商拥辉, . 列车荷载作用下铁路路基填料渗透破坏机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 299-308.
[4] 孙杰豪, 郭保华, 程胜锦, 田世轩, 陈岩, . 不同控制方式和卸荷应力路径下类岩石节理剪切强度特征研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(7): 2061-2071.
[5] 王树英, 钟嘉政, 倪准林, 郑响凑, . 带压环境下泥浆-泡沫组合改良级配不良砂剪切特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(10): 2879-2888.
[6] 魏明星, 朱永建, 任恒, 李鹏, 王希之, 王平, 唐成, . 三轴卸荷损伤砂岩单轴再承载力学特性及其破坏机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(10): 3047-3057.
[7] 杨凯丞, 吴曙光, 廖海成, 张辉, . 双锚杆受力机制分析及模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(S1): 495-503.
[8] 张院生, 雷云超, 强小俊, 吴东东, 王东坡, 王计华, . 多排微型桩框架结构加固边坡离心模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(7): 1983-1994.
[9] 姜海波, 付龙龙, 周顺华, 郭培军, 叶伟涛, . 高频振动下散粒体−结构界面临界状态强度特征试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(3): 810-820.
[10] 张志飞, 黄曼, 唐志成, . 估算异性岩石不连续面峰值剪切强度的经验公式[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(2): 507-519.
[11] 王元战, 龚晓龙, 王轩, 陈艳萍, 谢涛, . 偏压固结下碱渣土循环累积孔压及强度弱化规律研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(2): 373-380.
[12] 林海, 曾一帆, 周创兵, 董平霄, 施建勇, . 褶皱土工膜+针刺钠基膨润土防水毯复合衬里的剪切试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(2): 355-361.
[13] 信春雷, 杨飞, 冯文凯, 李文惠, 廖军, . 多期地震作用的台阶式顺层岩质边坡震裂破坏机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(12): 3481-3494.
[14] 牛庚, 朱晓凤, 李俊星, 吕梦缘, 安荔琪, 陈子晗, . 宽广吸力范围非饱和土剪切强度试验研究及其预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(12): 3349-3359.
[15] 张雷, 吕延栋, 王炳辉, 金丹丹, 竺明星, 方晨, . 絮凝−真空−电渗联合加固滩涂软土的模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(9): 2383-2390.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!