岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (1): 1-10.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2019.1852

• 基础理论与实验研究 •    下一篇

满流条件下管道破损诱发渗流侵蚀的试验研究

刘成禹1, 2,陈博文1,罗洪林1,阮家椿1   

  1. 1. 福州大学 环境与资源学院,福建 福州 350116;2. 地质工程福建省高校工程研究中心,福建 福州 350116
  • 收稿日期:2019-10-29 修回日期:2019-12-12 出版日期:2020-01-13 发布日期:2020-01-05
  • 作者简介:刘成禹,男,1970年生,博士,教授,博士生导师,主要从事工程地质、隧道与地下工程方面的研究工作。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(No. 41272300)

Experimental study of seepage erosion induced by pipeline damage under full pipe flow condition

LIU Cheng-yu1, 2, CHEN Bo-wen1, LUO Hong-lin1, RUAN Jia-chun1   

  1. 1. College of Environment and Resources, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, Fujian 350116, China; 2. Fujian Provincial Universities Engineering Research Center of Geological Engineering, Fuzhou, Fujian 350116, China
  • Received:2019-10-29 Revised:2019-12-12 Online:2020-01-13 Published:2020-01-05
  • About author:LIU Cheng-yu, male, (1970-), PhD, Professor, doctoral supervisor, mainly engaged in the research of engineering geology, tunnel and underground engineering. E-mail: Liuchengyuphd@163.com
  • Supported by:
    The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41272300).

摘要: 针对富水砂层中地下管道破损诱发地面沉降的问题,设计了一套可视化试验装置,对骨架粒径d90 =1.45~8.45 mm的11种砂土样、5种满流流速下土体渗流侵蚀诱发地表沉降的规律进行了研究。研究表明:(1)管道破损诱发的土体渗流侵蚀有3种模式,分别为:只突水无沉降、形成土拱并发生沉降和溃砂沉降;(2)土体骨架粒径、破损口尺寸、厚跨比是决定土体产生何种渗流侵蚀模式的主要因素,满流流速主要影响土体沉降范围;(3)管道破损口上方土体形成土拱或溃砂时,土体骨架粒径d90与厚跨比r的关系为:当8.0≥r≥4.2时,d90随r的增大呈抛物线下降;当12.5≥r≥8.0时,d90保持不变;(4)管道破损口上方土体形成土拱或溃砂时,流速为0的初始沉降半径、沉降深度由破损口直径D与土体平均粒径d50的比值(D/d50)决定;沉降半径、沉降深度均随满流流速的增大而线性增大;形成土拱时,沉降半径、沉降深度随流速增大的扩展速度(VL、VH)与D/d50呈对数关系;溃砂时,沉降半径随流速增大的扩展速度VL规律如下:当23.0≥D/d50≥6.0时,VL随D/d50的增加而线性增大,当42.0≥D/d50≥23.0时,VL随D/d50的增大呈对数减小。

关键词: 渗流侵蚀, 沉降, 厚跨比, 流速, 粒径

Abstract: Aiming at the problems of ground settlement induced by the underground pipeline damage in water-rich sand layer, a set of visualization experimental device was designed. For these cases of 11 kinds of sand samples with particle size of skeleton d90=1.45?8.45 mm and 5 kinds of full pipe flow velocity, the law of ground settlement induced by seepage erosion was studied. Research show that: 1) There are three modes of seepage erosion induced by pipeline damage: only water inrush without settlement, soil arching formation with settlement and sand crushing with settlement; 2) The particle size of soil skeleton , damaged mouth size and thick-span ratio are the main factors to determine the seepage erosion mode of soil; 3) When the soil arching or sand crushing is formed in the soil above the damaged mouth of pipeline, the relationship between the particle size of skeleton d90 and the thick-span ratio r is that: when 8.0≥r≥4.2, the d90 decreases parabolically with the increase of r; when 12.5≥r≥8.0, d90 remains unchanged; 4) When the soil arching or sand crushing is formed in the soil above the damaged mouth of pipeline, the initial settlement radius and settlement depth with the flow velocity equal to 0 are determined by the ratio (D/d50) of the damaged mouth diameter D and the average particle size of soil d50; the settlement radius and depth increase linearly with the increase of full pipe flow velocity; when the soil arching is formed, the expansion velocity (VL、VH) of settlement radius and settlement depth with the increase of flow velocity is logarithmic to D/d50. When the sand crushing is formed, the expansion velocity VL of settlement radius with the increase of flow velocity is that, when 23.0≥D/d50≥6.0, it increases linearly with the increase of D/d50; when 42.0≥D/d50≥23.0, it decreases logarithmically with the increase of D/d50.

Key words: seepage erosion, settlement, thick-span ratio, flow velocity, particle size

中图分类号: TU 470
[1] 张治国, 陈胤吉, 朱正国, 魏纲, 孙苗苗, . 软土小曲率盾构隧道开挖诱发黏弹性地层沉降的解析解[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(S1): 309-321.
[2] 潘申鑫, 蒋关鲁, 袁胜洋, 刘先峰, 何梓雷, 曹丽君, 周诗广, . 高速铁路整体刚性面板加筋土挡墙地震作用下服役性能研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(S1): 519-530.
[3] 鲍树峰, 董志良, 莫海鸿, 张劲文, 于立婷, 刘攀, 刘晓强, 侯明勋, . 浮泥−流泥静态间歇沉降与低压固结沉降计算方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(9): 2763-2772.
[4] 来志强, 白盛元, 陈林, 邹维列, 徐书岭, 赵连军, . 环式管袋堆场蓄淤脱水特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(9): 2805-2815.
[5] 宋牧原, 杨明辉, 陈伟, 卢贤锥, . 基于自注意力-循环神经网络模型的盾构引发的土体沉降预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(8): 2613-2625.
[6] 崔纪飞, 吴祯祯, 李林, 饶平平, . 考虑土体流变的新旧混合群桩变刚度调平研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(6): 1897-1906.
[7] 杨校辉, 赵子毅, 郭楠, 钱豹, 朱彦鹏, . 横观各向同性非饱和黄土蠕变特性及沉降预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(5): 1489-1500.
[8] 武孝天, 姚仰平, 魏然, 崔文杰. 基于统一硬化模型的隧道施工引发土体变形数值模拟[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(3): 1013-1024.
[9] 杜常博, 张程玮, 梁冰, 易富, 张相国, 李江山, 孙琦, 黄惠杰, . 壳聚糖协同EICP固化/稳定化石墨尾矿性能及机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(10): 3143-3156.
[10] 黄大维, 刘家璇, 谭满生, 邓翔浩, 黄永亮, 翁友华, 陈升平, . 盾构隧道底部注浆抬升模拟试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 371-381.
[11] 王楚鑫, 王迎超, 董传新, 武佩锋, 张政, . 基于时间序列聚类和粒模型的地面沉降模式分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 631-644.
[12] 高旭, 宋琨, 李凌, 晏鄂川, 王卫明, . 基于迭代协同克里金反演的非均质地基固结沉降预测研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 761-770.
[13] 赖汉江, 刘润明, 陈志波, 崔明娟, . 粒径效应对大豆粗脲酶固化砂土效果的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 25-32.
[14] 杨耀辉, 辛公锋, 陈育民, 李召峰, . 排水桩-网复合地基处置可液化路堤地基的振动台试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 178-186.
[15] 张文松, 贾磊, 姚荣涵, 孙立, . 基于Self-CGRU模型的地铁基坑周边地表沉降预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(8): 2474-2482.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!