岩土力学 ›› 2021, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (12): 3249-3259.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2020.1598

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

挡土墙后EPS颗粒混合轻量土填料静止土压力 特性模型试验研究

侯天顺,杨凯旋   

  1. 西北农林科技大学 水利与建筑工程学院,陕西 杨凌 712100
  • 收稿日期:2020-10-26 修回日期:2021-01-24 出版日期:2021-12-13 发布日期:2021-12-14
  • 作者简介:侯天顺,男,1981年生,博士,副教授,主要从事岩土力学、地基基础工程与地质灾害防治方面的教学与科研工作。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(No.51509211);中国博士后基金(No.2016M602863);陕西省留学人员科技活动择优资助项目(No.2018031);陕西省博士后基金项目(No.2017BSHYDZZ50);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(No.2452020169)。

Model test on earth pressure at rest of light weight soil mixed with EPS particles behind a retaining wall

HOU Tian-shun, YANG Kai-xuan   

  1. College of Water Resources and Architectural Engineering, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China
  • Received:2020-10-26 Revised:2021-01-24 Online:2021-12-13 Published:2021-12-14
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51509211), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation(2016M602863), the Excellent Science and Technology Activities Foundation for Returned Overseas Teachers of Shaanxi Province(2018031), the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province(2017BSHYDZZ50) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities(2452020169).

摘要: 为确定EPS(发泡聚苯乙烯,expandable polystyrene)颗粒混合轻量土在挡土墙后的静止土压力特性,通过对素土和轻量土开展室外挡土墙模型试验,探究加卸载条件下土体在挡土墙后静止土压力、静止土压力系数、竖向沉降量的分布规律,揭示轻量土填料在挡土墙工程中的减压机制和沉降变形机制。结果表明:在加卸载之前,素土和轻量土的竖向土压力、侧向土压力随着填土深度的增加近似呈线性增加趋势,其理论值和实测值间的相对误差不大于26.35%。荷载对素土竖向土压力和侧向土压力的影响随着填土深度的增加而逐渐减小。轻量土养护成型后具有自立性,荷载对其影响深度有限,试验中轻量土的荷载影响区深度大致为H/2(H为墙高)。当填土深度小于H/2时,随着荷载的逐级增减,轻量土竖向土压力、侧向土压力增加和减小较为明显;当填土深度大于H/2时,竖向土压力、侧向土压力随着荷载的逐级增减逐渐出现收敛,变化幅度较小。素土与轻量土静止土压力系数在挡土墙后呈非线性分布,分别处于0.27~0.74和0.33~0.44范围内。由Jaky公式计算的轻量土静止土压力系数理论值基本大于试验实测值,但差值较小。素土的竖向沉降变形随填土深度的增加而逐渐减小,总体介于0~21.5 mm。而养护成型的轻量土在荷载的作用下,竖向沉降量变化不明显,总体介于0~2.8 mm。相比素土而言,由于EPS颗粒的缓冲作用以及水泥的固化作用,使养护成型的轻量土具有良好的缓冲性和自立性,可对竖向应力进行更有效的吸收和分散。轻量土可大大减小静止土压力、静止土压力系数和竖向沉降量,满足挡土墙工程中对填料减重增强的要求。

关键词: 轻量土, 挡土墙, 静止土压力, 静止土压力系数, 模型试验

Abstract: To determine the earth pressure at rest of light weight soil mixed with expandable polystyrene(EPS) particles behind a retaining wall, the model tests are conducted for remolded soil and light weight soil respectively. The distribution laws of earth pressure at rest, coefficient of earth pressure at rest and vertical settlement deformation of the filler behind retaining wall are explored under loading and unloading processes, and the mechanisms of pressure reduction and settlement deformation of light weight soil are clarified. The results show that the vertical earth pressure and lateral earth pressure of remolded soil and light weight soil increase linearly with the increasing of filling depth before loading and unloading, and the relative errors between theoretical values and measured values for vertical earth pressure and lateral earth pressure are no more than 26.35%. The effect of load on vertical earth pressure and lateral earth pressure decreases with the increase of filling depth for remolded soil. After curing, light weight soil has self-supporting property, thus the influencing depth of load on light weight soil is limited. In this test, the load influencing area depth of light weight soil is about 50% of the wall height. In the process of loading and unloading, when the filling depth is less than 50% of the wall height, the vertical earth pressures and lateral earth pressures of light weight soil increase or decrease obviously with the gradual load increasing or decreasing. When the filling depth is greater than 50% of the wall height, the vertical earth pressures and lateral earth pressures gradually converge with the gradual load increasing or decreasing, but the change range is smaller. The measured coefficients of earth pressure at rest of remolded soil and light weight soil are non-linear distribution behind the retaining wall, which are in the range of 0.27?0.74 and 0.33?0.44, respectively. The theoretical values of the coefficient of earth pressure at rest calculated by Jaky formula are basically larger than the measured values, but the difference is smaller. The vertical settlement deformation of remolded soil decreases with the increasing of filling depth, which is approximately 0?21.5 mm. The vertical settlement of light weight soil after curing has no obvious change under load, which is approximately 0?2.8 mm. Compared with remolded soil, light weight soil after curing has good buffering and self-supporting capacity, which can more effectively absorb and disperse the vertical pressure, due to the buffering effect of EPS particles and the solidification effect of cement. Light weight soil can greatly reduce the earth pressure at rest, the coefficient of earth pressure at rest and vertical settlement deformation, and meet the requirements of filling load reduction in retaining wall engineering.

Key words: light weight soil, retaining wall, earth pressure at rest, coefficient of earth pressure at rest, model test

中图分类号: TU413
[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] 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] 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!