nav emailalert searchbtn searchbox tablepage yinyongbenwen piczone journalimg journalInfo journalinfonormal searchdiv qikanlogo popupnotification paper paperNew
2025, 04, v.33 44-51+107
基于有限元的粉土区综合管廊位移研究
基金项目(Foundation): 山东省交通科技创新计划项目(2022B17)
邮箱(Email): 1327920748@qq.com;
DOI:
摘要:

为研究地下水位变化对粉土区综合管廊位移的影响,采用有限元软件PLAXIS 3D构建埋地综合管廊数值模型,为验证综合管廊数值模型的可靠性,根据相似定理建立埋地综合管廊缩尺模型,缩尺比例为1∶20;通过改变地下水位、河道水位和埋深,模拟分析综合管廊位移的变化情况。结果表明:1)缩尺模型试验验证了数值模型的渗流参数设置合理,可用于分析不同地下水位变化对综合管廊位移的影响。2)随地下水位垂直下降幅度增大,竖直方向距综合管廊越远,路表的沉降越大;地下水位垂直下降5~7 m时,综合管廊上方路表与两侧无管廊区域路表的沉降差逐渐减小;地下水位垂直下降8 m时,综合管廊上方路表的沉降明显高于两侧无管廊区域路表的沉降。随地下水位垂直上升幅度增大,水平方向距综合管廊越远,路表的位移越小,综合管廊区域的路表与两侧无管廊区域路表的最大位移差越大;综合管廊底部所处平面地基的最大位移差增大,明显大于同一地下水位高度时的路表最大位移差。3)综合管廊的竖向位移和侧向位移随河道水位变化呈周期性变化,枯水期河道水位下降,综合管廊的沉降增大,侧向位移增大,丰水期河道水位上升,综合管廊回归原位,临近河道和路表一侧的位移受河道水位升降的影响较大。4)随地下水位下降,综合管廊埋深越浅,沉降越大,浅埋管廊的位移受地下水位变化的影响较大。在综合管廊实际工程应用中,高水位地区不宜采用浅埋方式。

Abstract:

To study the impact of groundwater level changes on the displacement of a comprehensive utility tunnel in loess areas, a numerical model of the buried comprehensive utility tunnel is constructed using the finite element software PLAXIS 3D. To verify the reliability of the numerical model, a scaled model of the buried comprehensive utility tunnel is established according to similarity theory, with a scale ratio of 1:20. By varying the groundwater level height, river channel water level, and burial depth, the changes in the displacement of the comprehensive utility tunnel are simulated and analyzed. The results indicate: 1) The scaled model tests can validate the reasonableness of the seepage parameters set in the numerical model, which can be used to analyze the impact of different groundwater levels on the displacement of the comprehensive utility tunnel. 2) As the vertical drop of the groundwater level increases, the further away the road surface is from the comprehensive utility tunnel in the vertical direction, the greater the settlement of the road surface; when the vertical drop of the groundwater level is 5-7 m, the settlement difference between the road surface above the comprehensive utility tunnel and that of the adjacent non-tunnel areas gradually decreases; when the vertical drop of the groundwater level is 8 m, the settlement of the road surface above the comprehensive utility tunnel is significantly higher than that of the adjacent non-tunnel areas. As the vertical rise of the groundwater level increases, the further away the road surface is from the comprehensive utility tunnel in the horizontal direction, the smaller the displacement of the road surface, and the greater the maximum displacement difference between the road surfaces in the comprehensive utility tunnel area and the adjacent non-tunnel areas; the maximum displacement difference of the plane foundation at the bottom of the comprehensive utility tunnel increases, which is significantly greater than the maximum displacement difference of the road surface at the same groundwater level height. 3) The vertical and lateral displacements of the comprehensive utility tunnel exhibit periodic changes with variations in the river channel water level; during the dry season, the river channel water level decreases, which leads to increased settlement and lateral displacement of the comprehensive utility tunnel, while during the wet season, the river channel water level rises, causing the comprehensive utility tunnel to return to its original position, with the displacement near the river channel and road surface being significantly affected by the fluctuations in the river channel water level. 4) As the groundwater level decreases, the shallower the burial depth of the comprehensive utility tunnel, the greater the settlement; the displacement of shallow-buried tunnels is significantly affected by changes in the groundwater level. In practical engineering applications of comprehensive utility tunnels, shallow burial is not advisable in high water level areas.

参考文献

[1] WANG T Y,TAN L X,XIE S Y,et al.Development and applications of common utility tunnels in China[J].Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology,2018,76:92-106.

[2] ZHANG X H,GUAN Y X,FANG Z,et al.Fire risk analysis and prevention of urban comprehensive pipeline corridor[J].Procedia Engineer,2016,135:462-467.

[3] CANTO-PERELLO J,CURIEL-ESPARZA J,CALVO V.Strategic decision support system for utility tunnel′s planning applying A′WOT method[J].Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology,2016,55:146-152.

[4] 梁宁慧,兰菲,庄炀,等.城市地下综合管廊建设现状与存在问题[J].地下空间与工程学报,2020,16(6):1622-1635.

[5] 刘天书.地下水对土体物理特性和地基承载力的影响研究[J].建材技术与应用,2019(4):12-15.

[6] 陈云娟,刘梦悦,尹福强,等.富水地层管廊基坑开挖变形及损伤演化分析[J].山东建筑大学学报,2024,39(4):8-15.

[7] 蔡直言,伍毅敏,许鹏,等.溶槽水位波动对隧道衬砌的力学影响模拟分析[J].中国岩溶,2023,42(6):1270-1281.

[8] BHATTACHARYA P,DUTTA P.Stability of rectangular tunnel in Hoek-Brown rocks under steady-state groundwater flow[J].Geotechnique Letters,2020,10(4):524-534.

[9] 雷炳霄,邢立亭,董亚楠,等.地铁建设对地下水环境的影响:以济南市经十路为例[J].科学技术与工程,2023,23 (31):13273-13280.

[10] WANG H T,WANG L G,LI S C,et al.Roof collapse mechanisms for a shallow tunnel in two-layer rock strata incorporating the influence of groundwater[J].Engineering Failure Analysis,2019,98:215-227.

[11] 刘创.水位变动条件下综合管廊的力学性状研究[D].长沙:中南林业科技大学,2021.

[12] 张亮.地下综合管廊降雨分析及土体接触数值模拟与试验研究[D].兰州:兰州理工大学,2018.

[13] 徐健,谢忠球,吴敬龙.交通荷载下预制综合管廊受力特性研究[J].振动、测试与诊断,2021,41(2):377-384.

[14] 施有志,阮建凑,林树枝,等.机动车动荷载对地下综合管廊的影响分析[J].地震工程与工程振动,2022,42(3):62-71.

[15] 万飞,黎忠灏,赖金星,等.车辆荷载下综合管廊应力响应及疲劳损伤分析[J].科学技术与工程,2022,22 (22):9830-9839.

[16] 张福麟.机动车荷载作用下装配式综合管廊力学特性及疲劳损伤分析[D].成都:西南交通大学,2018.

[17] 李奉庭,罗涛,孙占勇,等.地下管廊深基坑回填土层沉降特征研究[J].交通科学与工程,2024,40(3):82-90.

[18] 邓博团,申超凡,郑谢缙,等.黄土地基不均匀沉降对现浇管廊影响的试验研究[J].西安建筑科技大学学报(自然科学版),2024,56(2):212-219.

[19] 董志磊,刘辉,李鑫,等.黄土湿陷对预制管廊受力性能影响的试验研究[J].西安建筑科技大学学报(自然科学版),2023,55(5):704-711.

[20] 段旭,刘武超,邹愈,等.车辆动荷载作用下黄土地区浅埋综合管廊动力响应试验研究[J].铁道科学与工程学报,2022,19(6):1716-1725.

[21] 杨钊,李勇智,杨睿.现浇成型综合管廊不均匀沉降裂缝分析:以福州东南快速通道综合管廊为例[J].隧道建设(中英文),2021,41(12):2098-2105.

基本信息:

DOI:

中图分类号:TU990.3

引用信息:

[1]郭培培,季宏宇,王胜利,等.基于有限元的粉土区综合管廊位移研究[J].山东交通学院学报,2025,33(04):44-51+107.

基金信息:

山东省交通科技创新计划项目(2022B17)

检 索 高级检索

引用

GB/T 7714-2015 格式引文
MLA格式引文
APA格式引文