• 全国中文核心期刊
  • 中国科技核心期刊
  • 美国工程索引(EI)收录期刊
  • Scopus数据库收录期刊
吴九江, 程谦恭, 文华, 曹建磊. 软土地基格栅式地下连续墙与群桩桥梁基础竖向承载性状对比模型试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2014, 36(9): 1733-1744. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201409022
引用本文: 吴九江, 程谦恭, 文华, 曹建磊. 软土地基格栅式地下连续墙与群桩桥梁基础竖向承载性状对比模型试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2014, 36(9): 1733-1744. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201409022
WU Jiu-jiang, CHENG Qian-gong, WEN Hua, CAO Jian-lei. Vertical bearing behaviors of lattice shaped diaphragm walls and group piles as bridge foundations in soft soils[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2014, 36(9): 1733-1744. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201409022
Citation: WU Jiu-jiang, CHENG Qian-gong, WEN Hua, CAO Jian-lei. Vertical bearing behaviors of lattice shaped diaphragm walls and group piles as bridge foundations in soft soils[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2014, 36(9): 1733-1744. DOI: 10.11779/CJGE201409022

软土地基格栅式地下连续墙与群桩桥梁基础竖向承载性状对比模型试验研究

Vertical bearing behaviors of lattice shaped diaphragm walls and group piles as bridge foundations in soft soils

  • 摘要: 在软基上修建高速铁路,其桥梁墩台须采取必要的加固措施,以满足轨道线路对沉降的严格要求,而新型桥梁基础——格栅式地下连续墙(以下简称:格栅式地连墙)为解决这一问题提供了新的技术方案。为分析软土地基高铁格栅式地连墙桥梁基础的承载性状,对采用相近材料用量的3种基础形式(群桩与单室、两室格栅式地连墙)进行了两组对比模型试验,结果表明:相同荷载下,单室与两室格栅式地连墙的沉降量相近,群桩基础的沉降量较大,单室与两室的极限承载力分别为群桩的116.7%与120.4%;群桩侧摩阻力呈“L”形分布,格栅式地连墙外摩阻力呈不对称“M”形分布,其土芯侧摩阻力的发挥主要集中在墙体端部以上约占墙体深度1/4的部位;3种基础形式的承台土反力及侧摩阻力的荷载分担百分比均较小,基础承载特性均表现为摩擦端承墙(桩);相同荷载下,群桩的单位端阻力大于格栅式地连墙基础,而相同单位端阻力下,群桩的沉降量亦大于格栅式地连墙基础;在软土地基,当不能利用土体共同承担上部荷载时,采用地下连续墙基础替代群桩将会起到提高基础承载力,减少沉降量等的作用。

     

    Abstract: In order to investigate the vertical bearing behaviors and applicability of LSDWs as bridge foundations of high-speed railway in deep soft soils, three foundation modes (LSDWs with a single chamber and two chambers as well as group piles, respectively) with similar material quantity are studied through model tests. It is found that the settlements of LSDWs with a single chamber and two chambers are quite similar, while those of group piles are relatively large under the same loads. Compared to those of group piles, the ultimate bearing capacities of LSDWs with a single chamber and two chambers are increased by 16.7% and 20.4% respectively considering the settlement limits. The distribution of the skin friction for group piles appears to be an “L” shape, while that of the outer skin friction for LSDWS shows an “M” shape; and the inner skin friction of LSDWs is mainly aroused at the bottom of the wall. The most part of loading is shared by the tip resistance, which shows that the three modes are friction and end-bearing foundations. Both the loading sharing ratio of skin friction and soil resistance under caps of three modes are relatively small, which turns them out to be frictional end-bearing foundations. The unit tip resistance of group piles is larger than that of the LSDWs when subjected to the same loads, and the settlement of pile groups is also larger than that of LSDWs with the same unit tip resistance. For a practical bridge foundation, the bearing capacity and the settlement will be improved by using LSDWs instead of group piles in soft soils.

     

/

返回文章
返回