岩土力学 ›› 2021, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (10): 2705-2712.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2021.0116

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

注入位置对化学电渗法加固软黏土 效果影响试验研究

任连伟1,曹辉1,孔纲强2   

  1. 1. 河南理工大学 土木工程学院,河南 焦作 454000;2. 河海大学 岩土力学与堤坝工程教育部重点实验室,江苏 南京 210024
  • 收稿日期:2021-01-20 修回日期:2021-07-26 出版日期:2021-10-11 发布日期:2021-10-18
  • 通讯作者: 孔纲强,男,1982年生,博士,教授,主要从事能源岩土工程等方面的教学与研究工作。E-mail: gqkong1@163.com E-mail: renhpu@163.com
  • 作者简介:任连伟,男,1980年生,博士,副教授,主要从事地基处理新技术与能量桩等方面的教学与科研工作
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(No. U1810203,No. 51478165)

Experimental study on the effect of injection position on soft clay reinforcement by chemical electroosmosis

REN Lian-wei1, CAO Hui1, KONG Gang-qiang2   

  1. 1. School of Civil Engineering, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, Henan 454000, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education for Geomechanics and Embankment Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210024, China
  • Received:2021-01-20 Revised:2021-07-26 Online:2021-10-11 Published:2021-10-18
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (U1810203, 51478165).

摘要: 电渗法是低渗透软黏土地基加固的有效方法之一。然而,传统电渗法也存在耗电量大、加固效果不均匀等方面的不足。在电渗加固软基后期注入硅酸钠(Na2SiO3)及氯化钙(CaCl2)溶液,可提高软基加固均匀性、缩短电渗时间从而降低耗电量;开展化学电渗法加固软黏土模型试验,实测电渗及化学电渗过程中排水量、排水速率等,着重分析试剂注入位置对土样电阻、电流等能耗系数,以及含水率、土样强度等加固效果的影响规律;结合电镜扫描(SEM)和电感耦合等离子体质谱检测(ICP-MS),初步探讨化学电渗法加固土样微观机制。研究结果表明:本文试验条件下,在土样阳极和中间同时注入化学试剂CaCl2溶液与Na2SiO3溶液,化学电渗排水和加固效果相对最优;与传统电渗相比,排水量增加了25.5%,抗剪强度值提高了168.8%,且同时一定程度上改善了传统电渗法存在的加固效果不均匀的弊端。

关键词: 地基处理, 化学电渗法, 软黏土, 注入位置, 模型试验

Abstract: Electroosmotic reinforcement of low-permeability soft clay is one effective soft soil foundation reinforcement technique. However, excessive power consumption and uneven reinforcement effect limit its application. Chemical electroosmosis is an advanced technique which can improve the uniformity of the treated soft ground and reduce the electroosmosis time and power consumption by injecting sodium silicate (Na2SiO3) and calcium chloride (CaCl2) solutions in the late stage of electroosmosis. Model tests on chemical electroosmosis of soft ground were carried out. The overall water discharge and drainage rate during electroosmosis and chemical electroosmosis processes were measured. The energy consumption factors (such as, soil sample resistance, current, etc.) and reinforcement effects (such as, water content, soil sample strength, etc.) influenced by injection positions were analyzed in detail. Combined with scanning electron microscope (SEM) and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), the microscopic mechanisms of reinforced soil sample were discussed. The results show that the relative optimal way of chemical electroosmosis is that CaCl2 solution and Na2SiO3 solution are injected simultaneously into the anode and middle of the soil sample. Compared with traditional electroosmosis method, the water discharge of chemical electroosmosis increases 25.5%, and the shear strength value increases 168.8% under the experimental conditions. The disadvantages of traditional electroosmosis such as uneven water content of the anode and cathode soil after drainage can be improved.

Key words: ground improvement, chemical electroosmosis, soft clay, injection position, model test

中图分类号: TU 472
[1] 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.
[2] 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.
[3] 黄大维, 卢文剑, 罗文俊, 余珏, . 盾构隧道同步注浆对砂土地层竖向位移与周围土压力影响试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(9): 2837-2846.
[4] 宋伟涛, 张佩, 杜修力, 林庆涛, . 土性对浅埋盾构隧道施工地层响应影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(7): 2179-2188.
[5] 梁庆国, 李景, 张崇辉, 刘彤彤, 孙志涛, . 基底均匀膨胀作用下黄土−泥岩复合地层隧道衬砌力学响应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(6): 1811-1824.
[6] 杨柏, 覃超, 张银海, 王威, 肖世国, . 下伏溶洞的高嵌岩比基桩承载特性模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(6): 1839-1850.
[7] 刘红帅, 杨健生, 宋东松, 孙强强, . 近场脉冲和非脉冲地震动作用下干砂场地响应的离心振动台模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(5): 1429-1441.
[8] 石湛, 章铁军, 李美香, 陶司记, 伯音, 李云波, . 泥水平衡盾构仓内水平冻结温度场的模型试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(5): 1534-1544.
[9] 柴红涛, 文松霖, . 组合荷载作用下桩基承载力屈服包络线特性离心模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(5): 1556-1562.
[10] 任一青, 陈保国, 任国卿, 杨振忠, 徐方. 涵顶-涵侧减载条件下高填方箱涵施工期受力特性[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(4): 1153-1162.
[11] 裴媛媛, 龙建辉, 郭师苡, 安成纪, 翁杭雨, 张吉宁, . 不同荷载作用下折角式加筋土挡墙应力-应变特征模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(2): 539-550.
[12] 吴学震, 夏亚歆, 李大勇, 游先辉, 单宁康, 肖贞科, 陈祥, . 新型劲性水泥土组合桩内界面抗剪强度试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(2): 467-478.
[13] 王兵, 胡小波, 孔楠楠. 真空联合电渗加固超细颗粒疏浚土试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3523-3533.
[14] 刘文静, 邓辉, 周昕. 地震作用下含双层韧性剪切带高陡岩质边坡动力响应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3534-3548.
[15] 陈怀林, 杨涛, 饶云康, 张哲, 吴红刚, 谢江伟, 滕汉卿. 基于分段式滑面应力测试系统的滑面应力计算方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3562-3573.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!