岩土力学 ›› 2022, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (12): 3249-3258.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2022.0137

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

饱和黏土中螺旋桩安装效应对抗拔承载力影响 的试验研究

周航1, 2,余昊1, 2,曾少华1, 2   

  1. 1. 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;2. 重庆大学 土木工程学院,重庆 400045
  • 收稿日期:2022-02-07 修回日期:2022-03-18 出版日期:2022-12-28 发布日期:2023-01-02
  • 作者简介:周航,男,1987年生,博士,研究员,博士生导师,主要从事软土地基处理及桩基础方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金面上项目(No.52278330)

Experimental study of the installation effect of helical piles in saturated clay on uplift resistance

ZHOU Hang1, 2, YU Hao1, 2, ZENG Shao-hua1, 2   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China; 2. College of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China
  • Received:2022-02-07 Revised:2022-03-18 Online:2022-12-28 Published:2023-01-02
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the General Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China (52278330).

摘要: 螺旋桩,因其施工方便、安装后即可承载、又可回收利用等优势,近年来得到广泛的关注。然而之前的研究主要是基于不考虑螺旋桩安装效应的前提下开展的,当考虑安装效应时,研究又主要聚焦在对砂土密实度的扰动程度上,对于黏土中安装效应的试验研究有限。针对这一问题,开展室内模型槽试验,获得30组不同类型螺旋桩的荷载−位移关系。结果表明:对于单叶片桩,是否考虑安装效应两种情况,极限承载力随埋深比增大的变化趋势基本相同,但与不考虑安装效应相比,考虑安装效应时极限承载力降低幅度明显;对于双叶片桩,当叶片间距大于2D后,单独承载量破坏发生,各叶片可单独发挥承载能力;增加叶片数量可使得承载力得到适当提高,但当破坏模式由单独承载量破坏过渡到圆柱剪切破坏后,承载力增加不再显著,此时临界间距比(S/D)cr在1.5~2.0之间;随后提出“扰动系数”的概念对由于螺旋桩安装引起的承载力降低现象进行量化评价,对于单叶片桩,当埋深比大于4D后,扰动系数在0.5~0.6之间变化;增大叶片间距会使得扰动系数呈现增长趋势,范围在0.20~0.45之间;对于多叶片,扰动系数处于0.4~0.6之间。

关键词: 螺旋桩, 安装效应, 抗拔承载力, 模型试验

Abstract: Helical piles have received extensive attention in recent years due to its advantages such as convenient construction, load-bearing capacity after installation, and recyclability. However, the previous research was mainly based on the premise of ignoring the installation effect. When the installation effect was considered, researches mainly focused on the degree of disturbance to the relative density of sand. The experimental study of the installation effect in clay is not enough. In response to this problem, a model test was carried out to obtain the load-displacement relationship curves of different types of helical piles. For the helical pile with a single plate, whether the installation effect is considered or not, the variation trends of the ultimate bearing capacity with the increasing of the embedment depth ratio are basically the same, but the ultimate bearing capacity decreases significantly when installation effect is considered. For double-plate pile, after the spacing is greater than 2D, the individual bearing model occurs, and each plate can play its bearing capacity independently. Increasing the number of plates can appropriately improve the bearing capacity, but when the failure model transitions from individual bearing model to cylindrical shear mechanism, the increase of bearing capacity is no longer obvious, and at this moment the critical spacing ratio (S/D)cr is between 1.5 and 2.0. Subsequently, a concept of “disturbance coefficient” is put forward to quantitatively evaluate the reduction of bearing capacity caused by helical pile installation. For the helical pile with a single plate, the disturbance coefficient varies from 0.5 to 0.6 when embedment depth ratio is greater than 4D, and increasing the spacing ratio will lead to an increase in disturbance coefficient ranging from 0.20 to 0.45. For multiple plates, the coefficient lies between 0.4 and 0.6.

Key words: helical piles, installation effect, uplift resistance, model test

中图分类号: TU447
[1] 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.
[2] 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.
[3] 王长虹, 蔡德雍, 胡子轩, 杨天笑. 扰动状态下束浆挤扩桩抗拔机制与计算方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(9): 2980-2994.
[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] 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.
[12] 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.
[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!