岩土力学 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (S1): 347-354.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2019.0832

• 数值分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

桩承式路堤土拱效应三维离散元分析

鲍宁1,魏静1,陈建峰2   

  1. 1. 北京交通大学 土木建筑工程学院,北京 100044;2. 同济大学 地下建筑与工程系,上海 200092
  • 收稿日期:2019-05-08 修回日期:2019-08-22 出版日期:2020-06-19 发布日期:2020-06-09
  • 通讯作者: 魏静,女,1973年生,博士,副教授,主要从事路基与岩土工程的科研与教学工作。E-mail: jingwei@bjtu.edu.cn E-mail:17121184@bjtu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:鲍宁,男,1994年生,硕士研究生,主要从事路基工程方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(No.41772289)。

Three dimensional discrete element analysis of soil arching in piled embankment

BAO Ning1, WEI Jing1, CHEN Jian-feng2   

  1. 1. School of Civil Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China; 2. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
  • Received:2019-05-08 Revised:2019-08-22 Online:2020-06-19 Published:2020-06-09
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(41772289).

摘要: 为探究桩承式低路堤的空间土拱效应演化规律,采用PFC3D软件建立了3种不同高度低路堤三维活动门颗粒流模型。将试验结果与既有解析解进行对比,分析路堤内部竖向土压力分布特点、土拱发展模式和土体的沉降变形规律。研究结果表明, 桩土荷载分担比达到稳定状态时4桩顶部形成力链球状拱结构,构成荷载传递路径,应力拱拱高随填土高度的增加表现出先增加后稳定的变化;挡板不同位置土拱率 的变化特点显示土压力分布不均匀,呈现出4桩中心大于2桩中心大于2桩中心两侧的分布特点,土拱率 稳定值处于0.2~0.4内;从变形的角度来看,依据土体竖向沉降量沿高度的分布可判断等沉面高度约为1.2B(B为桩净间距),等沉面以下桩间土上部沉降量大于桩顶上部土体,随埋深的增加差异沉降不断增大,总体呈现下凸状;土体的滑裂面形状存在三角形扩展式和等沉面式,在等沉面破坏模式中土体内部滑裂面呈现为穹顶状。

关键词: 桩承式路堤, 土拱效应, 三维离散元, 土拱率, 土体变形

Abstract: To explore the evolution law of the spatial arching effect of pile-supported low embankment, three kinds of three- dimensional movable gate particle flow models with different heights and low embankments were established by PFC3D software. Comparing the test results with the existing analytical solutions, the distribution characteristics of vertical earth pressure inside the embankment, the development mode of soil arches, and the settlement and deformation law of soil are analyzed. The results show that the spherical arch structure, which forms the path of load transfer, is composed of force chains at the top of piles after the pile-soil load sharing ratio reaches a steady state. The height of stress-arch increases first and then stabilizes as the filling height increases. Stable soil arching rate ? is in the range of about 0.2-0.4 at various positions on the trapdoor, which reflects the uneven earth pressure distribution. The vertical stress at the center of four piles is higher than that between two piles, and also larger than that at adjoining two-pile-centers. From the perspective of deformation, it can be judged that the height of equal settlement plane is about 1.2B times the net spacing of piles(B represents pile clear spacing) from the pile top, based on the contour of vertical displacement at different filling heights. The differential settlement, between particles above the pile top with larger settlements and particles above subsoil, grows with the increase of buried depth and presents an overall convex shape. As the settlement deepens, two different patterns of the external slip surface are observed according to surface deformation: triangular expansion pattern and equal settlement pattern. Particularly, the internal slip is dome-shaped under equal settlement plane.

Key words: piled embankment, soil arching effect, three-dimensional discrete element method, soil arching ratio, soil deformation

中图分类号: TU473
[1] 张雨坤, 张恒, 李大勇, 项乾, . 桩靴贯入及拔出对邻近吸力基础运动规律和水平承载力的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(8): 2325-2338.
[2] 芮瑞, LIN A H, 杨俊超, 杨硕, . 被动活动门试验中的土拱效应演化规律[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(6): 1657-1666.
[3] 孙珊珊, 贾世文, 梁忠旭, 刘墨林, 张常光. 基于填土荷载传递二项式分布模式的沟埋式涵洞竖向土压力[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(5): 1501-1510.
[4] 王洪涛, 刘容利, 赵晓东, 赵耀辉, 赵万里, . 钢管桩-灌注桩复合支护下桩间土拱力学效应分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(4): 1228-1239.
[5] 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.
[6] 周光远, 干飞, 郑刚, 周海祚, 王宏, 毕靖, 刘彪, 张元胤, . 基于土体变形的端承桩负摩阻力计算方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(3): 930-942.
[7] 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.
[8] 陕耀, 董雅丞, 张旭辉, 姚西平, . 双层地下连续墙土压力的现场实测研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 507-516.
[9] 季慧, 彭宇, 吴则祥, 涂冬媚, . 砂土中吸力筒基础抗拔数值模拟研究: 系泊深度效应[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(7): 2187-2194.
[10] 张昕, 董浩, 徐迎迎, 王柳月, . 竖向循环荷载作用下砂土中单桩承载特性模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(3): 673-684.
[11] 王家全, 陈家明, 林志南, 唐毅, . 基于三角形滑移面的地基松动土压力研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(3): 697-707.
[12] 郭景琢, 郑刚, 赵林嵩, 潘军, 张宗俊, 周强, 程雪松, . 多排孔注浆引起土体变形与孔压规律试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(3): 896-907.
[13] 郭凯丰, 张仪萍. 双层地基中气体聚集与土体变形机制的试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(1): 99-108.
[14] 钟卫, 张 帅, 贺拿. 基于相对变形方法的桩后土拱模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(S2): 315-326.
[15] 戴天毅, 肖世国, . 考虑路堤−加固区相互作用的刚性桩复合 地基沉降算法[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(S1): 479-489.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!