岩土力学 ›› 2024, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (S1): 723-730.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2023.1195

• 数值分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

平板载荷试验数值分析及承载力判定标准研究

杨立   

  1. 深圳市房屋安全和工程质量检测鉴定中心,广东 深圳 518052
  • 收稿日期:2023-08-07 接受日期:2024-06-13 出版日期:2024-09-18 发布日期:2024-09-21
  • 作者简介:杨立,男,1965年生,硕士,教授级高级工程师,主要从事岩土工程试验研究等工作。E-mail: 1085710101@qq.com

Numerical analysis and bearing capacity determination criteria of field plate loading tests

YANG Li   

  1. Shenzhen Building Safety and Construction Quality Testing and Appraisal Center, Guangdong, Shenzhen 518052, China
  • Received:2023-08-07 Accepted:2024-06-13 Online:2024-09-18 Published:2024-09-21

摘要: 对于地基平板载荷试验,《建筑地基检测技术规范》(JGJ 340-2015)推荐的载荷板尺寸、现场检测惯用尺寸和基础实际尺寸之间往往存在明显差异,从而导致地基承载力判定存在分歧。基于现场试验成果,建立有限元模型并验证了其可靠性,分析了不同载荷板宽下均质土地基和双层土地基承载力和变形的尺寸效应以及现场试验用反力支墩的影响。针对按相对变形判定地基承载力时存在的问题,分析了载荷板宽度限值对承载力判定结果的影响。结果表明:不同载荷板宽下,均质土地基的承载力变化缓慢而沉降变化明显;上软下硬双层土地基的承载力随载荷板宽增加而提高,沉降量减小;支墩影响会使判定的承载力增大。现行检测规范按相对变形标准判定承载力时,限定板宽会使尺寸效应显著增加,板宽上限由2.0 m调整为3.0 m较为合理。

关键词: 平板载荷试验, 尺寸效应, 数值模拟, 地基承载力, 宽度修正

Abstract: In field plate loading tests for the ground, the recommended size specified in the Technical Code for Testing of Building Foundation Soils (JGJ 340―2015), the commonly used size, and the actual size of the foundation often differ significantly, leading to discrepancies in determining the ground bearing capacity. A finite element model was established based on the results of the field tests to validate its reliability. Subsequently, the model was utilized to study the size effect on bearing capacity and deformation of both homogeneous and double-layered soil foundations under loading plates of varying widths. Furthermore, the impact of the reaction pier employed in the field test was analyze. The results indicate that with varying widths of the loading plate, the bearing capacity of homogeneous ground undergoes gradual changes, accompanied by noticeable settlement increments. The bearing capacity of double-layered ground, with a soft upper layer and a hard lower layer, increases with the width of the loading plate, resulting in reduced settlement. The presence of the reaction pier enhances the determination of bearing capacity. In the current testing code, the bearing capacity determined by ground relative deformation shows a significant size effect when the loading plate width is limited. It is recommended to adjust the upper limit of the loading plate width from 2.0 m to 3.0 m.

Key words: field plate loading test, size effect, numerical simulation, ground bearing capacity, width correction

中图分类号: TU470
[1] 孙志亮, 邵敏, 王叶晨梓, 刘忠, 任伟中, 柏巍, 李朋, . 管道破损诱发地面沉降细观模拟与影响因素分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(S1): 507-518.
[2] 张奇, 王驹, 刘江峰, 曹胜飞, 谢敬礼, 成建峰, . 热-水-力多场耦合下高放废物处置库核心处置单元间距设计研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(8): 2626-2638.
[3] 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.
[4] 朱先祥, 张琦, 马俊鹏, 王永军, 孟凡贞, . 浆−水置换效应下含水砂层渗透注浆扩散机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(6): 1957-1966.
[5] 杨明云, 陈川, 赖莹, 陈云敏. 串联锚在黏土中的三向受荷承载力分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(2): 582-590.
[6] 张凌博, 孙宜松, 程星磊, 郭群录, 赵川, 刘京红. 基于损伤能量耗散的三维土体切削破坏面表征方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3626-3636.
[7] 张昕晔, 刘志伟, 翁效林, 李铉聪, 赵建崇, 刘小光. 上砂下黏复合地层隧道开挖面稳定性及破坏模式研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3637-3648.
[8] 吴迪, 陈嵘, 孔纲强, 牛庚, 缪玉松, 王振兴. 冷-热循环温度下桥梁能量排桩热-力响应特性现场试验与数值模拟[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3649-3660.
[9] 许国庆, 黄高翔, 王协康, 罗登泽, 李洪涛, 姚强, . 新型弧形聚能爆破作用下的岩石破裂演化机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(10): 3267-3279.
[10] 王帅, 王豫徽, 王玲, 李佳祺, 赵梓皓, 庞凯旋, . 基于晶体模型的岩石孔隙结构与矿物组成对裂纹扩展影响机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(10): 3289-3301.
[11] 尹敬涵, 盛谦, 崔臻, 张茂础, . 基于多尺寸结构面的循环剪切力学特性及其抗剪强度研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 405-414.
[12] 程家林, 张贵科, 邓韶辉, 黄习文, 周伟, 马刚, . 干湿循环对不同粒径堆石颗粒破碎强度的影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 95-105.
[13] 薛秀丽, 谢伟睿, 廖欢, 曾超峰, 陈宏波, 徐长节, 韩磊, . 邻近深埋地铁车站水−土阻隔效应及其对基坑抽水致沉的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(9): 2786-2796.
[14] 吕茂淋, 朱珍德, 周露明, 葛鑫梁, . 基于相场法的预制双裂隙岩体水力压裂扩展数值模拟研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(6): 1850-1862.
[15] 马登辉, 韩迅, 蔡正银, 关云飞, . 静压桩的桩侧土压力分布规律数值分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(6): 1863-1872.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!