岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (6): 1829-1835.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2019.1078

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

考虑抗拉强度的黏性填土挡土墙主动土压力计算

陈建功1, 2, 3,杨扬1,陈彦含1,陈小兵1   

  1. 1. 重庆大学 土木工程学院,重庆 400045;2. 重庆大学 库区环境地质灾害防治国家地方联合工程研究中心,重庆 400045; 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 400045
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-18 修回日期:2019-11-26 出版日期:2020-06-11 发布日期:2020-07-31
  • 作者简介:陈建功,男,1967年生,博士,教授,主要从事岩土工程等方面的教学和科研工作
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金重点项目(No.51638002)

Calculation of active earth pressure of cohesive soil behind retaining wall considering soil tensile strength

CHEN Jian-gong1, 2, 3, YANG Yang1, CHEN Yan-han1, CHEN Xiao-bing1   

  1. 1. Department of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China; 2. National Joint Engineering Research Center of Geohazards Prevention in the Reservoir Area, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China; 3. Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area of Ministry of Education, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China
  • Received:2019-06-18 Revised:2019-11-26 Online:2020-06-11 Published:2020-07-31
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China(51638002).

摘要: 挡土墙后黏性土处于主动土压力状态时,墙顶一定深度范围内会产生裂缝,使其较大范围形成零压力区即开裂深度,关于开裂深度问题一直没有得到很好解决。针对变分法求解黏性填土主动土压力中未考虑裂缝的情况,通过一个算例说明了黏性填土表面在主动土压力状态下会产生裂缝。采用折线简化摩尔?库仑强度包络线,利用实际的土体抗拉强度推导了墙背土体开裂深度的计算公式。根据滑裂面上端点的应力边界状态和几何边界条件,对土压力变分计算方法进行了改进,使主动土压力的不确定问题变成了确定性问题。分析了填土内摩擦角、黏聚力、抗拉强度对开裂深度的影响,结果表明,随着内摩擦角和内聚力的增大,土体开裂深度逐渐增加,滑裂面向墙背方法偏移,土压力减小;随着土体抗拉强度的增加,开裂深度逐渐减小,土压力减小,当抗拉强度大到足以抵抗土体的开裂破坏,墙后土体开裂深度为0,这时土压力不再受抗拉强度的影响。

关键词: 挡土墙, 主动土压力, 变分法, 开裂深度, 黏性土

Abstract: When cohesive soil behind a retaining wall is in active earth pressure state, cracks will appear behind the top of the retaining wall, which leads to a wide region of zero pressure, namely cracking depth. The problem of the cracking depth behind a retaining wall has not been solved well. In this study, an example is taken to illustrate that cracks can appear on the surface of filling, because the cracks are not taken into account in the variational method that is used to solve the active soil pressure of cohesive soil behind the retaining wall. The Mohr-Coulomb strength envelope is simplified by a broken line and the calculation formula of the cracking depth of the soil behind the wall is derived by the actual soil tensile strength. According to the stress boundary state and geometric boundary conditions of the upper points on the slip surface, the variational method to calculate the active earth pressure variation has been improved, and the uncertainly model of the active earth pressure is transformed into a deterministic issue. Also, the influence of internal friction angle, cohesion and tensile strength on the crack depth is analyzed. With the increase of internal friction angle and cohesion, the crack depth of soil increases and the soil pressure gradually decreases, and the slip surface shifts towards the wall back. With the increase of the tensile strength of the soil, the cracking depth and the soil pressure both gradually decrease. When the tensile strength is strong enough to resist the tension destruction of the soil, the cracking depth of the soil behind the wall becomes zero, and the soil pressure is no longer affected by the tensile strength.

Key words: retaining wall, active earth pressure, variational method, cracking depth, cohesive soil

中图分类号: TU432
[1] 马滨, 王丽艳, 吉文炜, 吴晗, 蔡晓光, 王炳辉, . 强震下返包胎面加筋挡土墙结构抗震性能模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(9): 2792-2804.
[2] 胡伟, 曾攀煜, 王辉, 刘顺凯, 陈秋南, PUIG DAMIANS I, . 黏性土地基中水平条形锚板上拔承载力计算方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(6): 1731-1744.
[3] 姚嘉楠, 徐长节, 迟民良, 王艳萍, 习跃来, 王伟锋, 冯国辉, 孙佳政, . RBT模式下刚性挡墙非极限主动土压力的离散元模拟及理论研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(2): 640-652.
[4] 张振光, 徐杰, 李海祥, . 考虑中间主应力的非饱和土竖井主动土压力滑移线解答[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(10): 3045-3053.
[5] 肖劲卿, 温松诚, 郭源, . 基于单孔冲刷测试的黏性土抗侵蚀性及各向异性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(1): 187-198.
[6] 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.
[7] 彭俊国, 黄宇豪. 非饱和边坡中锚托板锚固尺寸的新算法[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(4): 1003-1013.
[8] 陈成, 吴勋, 孙中华, 张先伟, 王勇, 张军杰, 余颂, . 基于弹黏塑性模型的部分排水柱孔扩张分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(11): 3259-3270.
[9] 桂跃, 谢正鹏, 高玉峰, . 有机质对黏性土热传导系数的影响与机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(S1): 154-162.
[10] 邹维列, 樊科伟, 张攀, 韩仲, . 土工泡沫减压膨胀土挡墙侧向压力及影响因素分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(9): 2537-2544.
[11] 张常光, 关港辉, 李海祥, 范家燊, 石晶, . 水位变化下含裂缝非饱和土挡墙的地震主动土压力研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(6): 1575-1584.
[12] 王丽艳, 吉文炜, 陶云翔, 唐跃, 王炳辉, 蔡晓光, 张雷, . 格栅条带式加筋废旧轮胎胎面挡土墙 抗震性能试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(4): 931-940.
[13] 樊科伟, 邹维列, 王柳江, 廖洁, 刘斯宏, . 土工合成材料缓冲层减压膨胀土挡墙侧向压力的实用预测方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(11): 3182-3190.
[14] 邓波, 杨明辉, 王东星, 樊军伟, . 刚性挡墙后非饱和土破坏模式及主动土压力计算[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(9): 2371-2382.
[15] 陈柏吉, 肖世国, . 考虑条间剪力的刚性挡墙静力与 地震主动土压力水平条分法[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(8): 2263-2276.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!