基于墙趾真实约束条件的模块式加筋土挡墙数值模拟

doi:10.11779/CJGE201409010

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (4225 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要墙趾约束条件对硬质墙面加筋土挡墙性状影响显著。基于混凝土模块与级配碎石土直剪试验剪应力和剪切位移关系曲线,建立一非线性双曲线界面模型,并通过FLAC有限差分程序分析刚性地基上3.6 m高聚丙烯土工格栅加筋土挡墙在工作应力下的墙趾界面剪切特性、墙面和墙趾位移以及墙趾和筋材承担的荷载,得出在挡墙填筑过程中墙趾界面剪应力-剪切位移曲线呈上凹型;墙趾界面上的正应力、界面剪切刚度及墙趾和筋材承担的荷载随挡墙填筑高度而增大,在挡墙填筑至3.6 m时,其界面正应力是墙面模块自重应力的1.7倍,墙趾承担约87%的作用在墙背上的总水平荷载;在挡墙填筑初期由于界面剪切刚度较小,墙面和墙趾位移增大显著。较挡墙模型试验及以往数值模拟采用的墙趾恒定约束刚度,论文采用的双曲线界面模型可更好地反映挡墙墙趾与地基土真实剪切性状。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	陈建峰

关键词 ：加筋土挡墙, 模块, 双曲线界面模型, 直剪试验, 数值模拟

Abstract：The toe restraint has a significant effect on the behaviour of hard facing reinforced soil retaining walls (RSWs). A non-linear hyperbolic interface model is established based on shear stress-displacement curves from modular block-grading gravel interface shear tests. A 3.6 m-high polypropylene geogrid reinforced soil wall on rigid foundation is simulated under working stress conditions using FLAC incoperated with the interface model. The shear properties of the toe interface, the horizontal displacements of the wall facing and toe block as well as the loads carried by the toe and reinforcements are then analyzed. The results show that the shear stress-dispalcement curve of the toe interface exhibits concave during wall construction. The interface normal stress, interface shear stiffness and loads carried by the toe and reinforcements increase with the wall height during construction. When the wall is constructed up to 3.6 m in height, the interface normal stress is 1.7 times the self-weight of wall facing blocks and approximately 87% of the total loads are carried by the toe. The displacments of the wall facing and toe block increase apparently during the initial stage of wall construction due to less shear stiffness of the toe interface. Compared to the constant toe restraint stiffness used in the former laboratory tests and numerical modeling of RSWs, the hyperbolic interface model can better reflect shear properties of the toe and foundation soils.

Key words： reinforced soil retaining wall segmental block hyperbolic interface model direct shear test numerical simulation

收稿日期: 2013-10-18

TU472

基金资助:国家自然科学基金项目（41072200）

作者简介: 陈建峰(1972- ),男,浙江余姚人,教授,工学博士,主要从事加筋土结构与边坡支护、岩体力学与工程等方面的教学与研究工作。E-mail: jf_chen@tongji.edu.cn。

引用本文:

陈建峰. 基于墙趾真实约束条件的模块式加筋土挡墙数值模拟[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2014, 36(9): 1640-1647. CHEN Jian-feng. Numerical modeling of reinforced soil segmental retaining walls under real toe restraint conditions. Chinese J. Geot. Eng., 2014, 36(9): 1640-1647.

链接本文:

http://manu31.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_ytgcxb/CN/10.11779/CJGE201409010 或 http://manu31.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_ytgcxb/CN/Y2014/V36/I9/1640

[1] AASHTO. LRFD bridge design specifications[S]. 5th ed. Washington D C: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2010.
[2] NCMA. Design manual for segmental retaining walls[S]. 5th ed. BERNARDI M, HERNDON Va. National Concrete Masonry Association, 2012.
[3] BSI. British Standard BS8006. Code of practice for strengthened/reinforced soil and other fills[S]. Milton Keynes: British Standards Institution, 2010.
[4] GB 50209—98 土工合成材料应用技术规范[S]. 1998. (GB 50209—98 Technical standard of application of geo- synthetics[S]. 1998. (in Chinese))
[5] BATHURST R J, ALLEN T M, WALTERS D L. Reinforcement loads in geosynthetic walls and the case for a new working stress design method[J]. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 2005, 23(4): 287-322.
[6] BATHURST R J, MIYATA Y, NERNHEIM A, et al. Refinement of K-stiffness method for geosynthetic reinforced soil walls[J]. Geosynthetics International, 2008, 15(4): 269-295.
[7] BATHURST R J, WALTERS D, VLACHOPOULOS N, et al. Full scale testing of geosynthetic reinforced walls[C]// ZORNBERG J, CHRISTOPHER B R, eds. ASCE Special Publication No. 103, Advances in Transportation and Geoenvironmental Systems using Geosynthetics. Denver, ASCE, 2000: 201-217.
[8] HUANG B, BATHURST R J, HATAMI K. Influence of toe restraint on reinforced soil segmental walls[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2010, 47(8): 885-904.
[9] HATAMI K, BATHURST R J. Development and verification of a numerical model for the analysis of geosynthetic reinforced soil segmental walls under working stress conditions[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2005, 42(4): 1066-1085.
[10] HATAMI K, BATHURST R J. A numerical model for reinforced soil segmental walls under surcharge loading[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 2006, 132(6): 673-684.
[11] HUANG B, BATHURST R J, HATAMI K. Numerical study of reinforced soil segmental walls using three different constitutive soil models[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 2009, 135(10): 1486-1498.
[12] ASTM D6916—03 Standard test method for determining shear strength between segmental concrete units (modular concrete blocks)[S]. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2958 USA.
[13] Results of design PRO LANDSCAPE block direct sliding capacity testing[R]. Bathurst: Clarabut Geotechnical Testing, Inc, 2007.
[14] CLOUGH G W, DUNCAN J M. Finite element analyses of retaining wall behavior[J]. J Soil Mech Found Div, ASCE, 1971, 97(SM12): 1657-1673.
[15] BOSCARDIN M D, SELIG E T, LIN R S, et al. Hyperbolic parameters for compacted soils[J]. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 1990, 116(1): 343-375.
[16] ROWE K R, HO S K. Continuous panel reinforced soil walls on rigid foundations[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 1997, 123(10): 912-920.
[17] DAMIANS I P, BATHURST R J, JOSA A, et al. Vertical facing loads in steel reinforced soil walls[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 2013, 139(5): 1419-1432.