岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 1635-1642.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2019.0750

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同固结状态下黄土坡滑坡滑 带土的蠕变试验研究

陈琼1,崔德山1,王菁莪2,刘清秉2   

  1. 1. 中国地质大学(武汉)工程学院,湖北 武汉 430074; 2. 中国地质大学(武汉) 教育部长江三峡库区地质灾害研究中心,湖北 武汉 430074
  • 收稿日期:2019-04-28 修回日期:2019-09-20 出版日期:2020-05-11 发布日期:2020-07-07
  • 通讯作者: 崔德山,男,1981年生,博士,副教授,主要从事地质灾害演化与防治方面的教学与研究。E-mail: cuideshan@cug.edu.cn E-mail:chenqiong@cug.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:陈琼,女,1983年生,博士,讲师,主要从事地质灾害防治方面的研究工作。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金青年基金项目(No. 41602313);国家自然科学基金项目(No. 41772304, No. 41572286)。

An experimental study of creep characteristics of sliding zone soil of Huangtupo landslide under different consolidation stresses

CHEN Qiong1, CUI De-shan1, WANG Jing-e2, LIU Qing-bing2   

  1. 1. Faculty of Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China; 2. Three Gorges Research Center for Geohazard, Ministry of Educations, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China
  • Received:2019-04-28 Revised:2019-09-20 Online:2020-05-11 Published:2020-07-07
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the Young Scholars of National Natural Science Foundation of China (41602313) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41772304, 41572286).

摘要: 为了研究黄土坡滑坡滑带土在不同固结状态下的蠕变特性,首先采用单向加载、加载-卸载、加载-卸载-再加载的方式分别固结滑带土,然后开展滑带土在不同固结状态下的剪切蠕变试验。试验结果表明:滑带土初始孔隙比为0.49,压缩系数a1-2介于0.37~0.45 MPa?1之间,属中等压缩性土;滑带土在单向加载至上覆压力后的孔隙比最大,压缩量最小,加载-卸载至上覆压力后的孔隙比最小,压缩量最大,加载-卸载-再加载至上覆压力后的孔隙比和压缩量介于二者之间。对于初始状态相同的滑带土,在经历不同加载-卸载-再加载固结状态后,在正应力和水平剪应力相同条件下,单向加载后的蠕变剪切应变最大,加载-卸载后的蠕变剪切应变最小,说明滑带土的剪切蠕变特性与加载路径和加载后的孔隙比密切相关。采用Burgers模型拟合蠕变试验数据,得出了不同固结状态下Maxwell模型和Kelvin模型的蠕变参数,拟合曲线和试验曲线能够很好地吻合,说明Burgers模型能够较好地反映滑带土在不同固结状态下的蠕变特性。

关键词: 滑带土, 固结状态, 孔隙比, 蠕变特性, Burgers模型

Abstract: In order to study the creep characteristics of the sliding zone soil of the Huangtupo landslide under different consolidation stresses, the unidirectional load, load-unload, load-unload-reload tests were used to consolidate the sliding zone soil, and then the shear creep tests of the sliding zone soils in different consolidation states were carried out. The experimental results showed that the initial void ratio of the sliding zone soil was 0.49 and the compressibility coefficient a1-2 was between 0.37 and 0.45 MPa?1, belonging to the moderate compressibility soil. After unidirectional loading to the predetermined pressure, the void ratio of sliding zone soil reached to the maximum and the compression amount the minimum. After loading-unloading to the predetermined pressure, the void ratio of sliding zone soil was the minimum and the compression amount the maximum. The void ratio and compression amount after loading-unloading-reloading to the predetermined pressure was somewhere in the middle. For the same initial state sliding zone soil, after different loading-unloading consolidation states, under the same normal stress and shear stress level, the creep shear strain of unidirectional loading was the largest, but the creep shear strain of loading-unloading was the minimum. The creep shear characteristics of sliding zone soil were closely related with the loading state and the void ratio after loading. The Burgers model was used to fit the creep test data and the creep parameters of Maxwell model and Kelvin model were obtained. The fitting and test curves were in good agreement, which indicates that Burgers model can reflect the creep characteristics of sliding zone soil under different consolidation stresses.

Key words: sliding zone soil, consolidation stress, void ratio, creep characteristics, Burgers model

中图分类号: TU 411
[1] 张海燕, 胡新丽, 刘欣宇, 李亚博. 含水率和剪切速率对黏性滑带土剪切行为及损伤演化的影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(8): 2471-2482.
[2] 张海燕, 胡新丽, 李亚博. 周期性渗流-应力耦合下滑带土的蠕变特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(7): 2189-2198.
[3] 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.
[4] 孟佳佳, 吴益平, 晏鄂川, 汪洋. 基于荷载-干湿循环耦合试验的三峡库区石龙门滑坡滑带土强度特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(5): 1511-1520.
[5] 杨松, 王俊光, 韦忠跟, 辛天宇, 梁冰, 王立轩, 任凌冉. 衰减振荡扰动下砂岩蠕变特性与模型初探[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3485-3500.
[6] 宋二波, 姚仰平, 牛玺荣, . 基于加速度峰值的填土智能压实质量评价方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(10): 3054-3064.
[7] 王军, 张凯宇, 陈晟凯, 秦伟, 倪俊峰, 高紫阳, 张一帆, . 爆破挤淤法中炸药埋深对土体参数影响的模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(1): 123-132.
[8] 王长虹, 魏永青, 张海东, 李飞. 地铁车站下水平冻结过程中冻胀的热−水−力耦合模型研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(9): 2775-2785.
[9] 樊赖宇, 吴志军, 储昭飞, 翁磊, 王智洋, 刘泉声, 陈结, . 动态冲击下红砂岩蠕变特性及损伤本构模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(6): 1608-1622.
[10] 李泽闯, 张昊, 程培峰, 王艳丽, . 含粗粒滑带土剪切带演化及空间展布规律研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(4): 1067-1080.
[11] 周恩全, 白宇航, 姚缘, 王龙, 陆建飞, . 橡胶混合黏土小应变剪切模量特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(3): 705-713.
[12] 程光, 范文, 于宁宇, 姜程程, 陶宜权, . 土−石混合体土−水特性和微观结构的相关性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(S1): 365-374.
[13] 洪义, 郑博文, 姚梦浩, 王立忠, 孙海泉, 许冬, . 深海硅藻土微观结构及一维压缩特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(S1): 268-276.
[14] 潘家军, 孙向军, 左永振, 王俊鹏, 卢一为, 韩冰. 骨架孔隙比对粗粒土强度变形特性的影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(8): 2186-2194.
[15] 周恩全, 姚缘, 崔磊, 王龙. 非饱和橡胶粉土抗剪强度特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(7): 1949-1958.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!