基坑开挖对围护墙竖向变形的影响机理

doi:10.16183/j.cnki.jsjtu.2018.12.002

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用数值分析方法，研究开挖卸荷引起的基坑围护墙竖向变形机理.在有限差分软件中建立考虑土与结构共同作用的分析模型，采用理想弹塑性接触模型模拟墙土接触力学特性，对比分析了3种土体参数下墙体和墙底土体竖向位移、墙土相对位移和墙体两侧摩阻力分布特性.结果表明：墙体的竖向位移主要由墙底土体竖向隆起和墙土相对滑动共同决定；坑底土体位移主要受到土体卸荷回弹的影响，与土层参数关系较大；当黏聚力增大时，墙体的下沉量减小；砂土的摩擦角越大，墙体的竖向隆起量也越大；墙土相对滑动则受墙体两侧的摩阻力共同作用，而摩阻力受参数取值的影响；当接触属性变强时，坑内摩阻力上升的趋势将增强，墙体发生的竖向隆起量也显著增加.

关键词: 基坑, 地连墙, 竖向位移, 土与结构共同作用

Abstract: The numerical analysis method is adopted to study the vertical deformation mechanism of the retaining wall caused by unloading. A hypothetical model which considers the interaction between wall and soil, is established in the finite difference software. The ideal elastoplastic model is adopted to simulation the characteristics of contact property between soil and diaphragm wall. The vertical displacement of soil, the relative displacement of soil and wall and the distribution of friction under the 3 kinds of soil parameters are compared and analyzed. The results show that the vertical displacement of the wall can be divided into two parts the soil rebounded one and relatively sliding between subsoil and wall tips. The displacement of soil is mainly affected by unloading effect which is determined by soil parameter. The settlement of the wall decreases with the increase of soil cohesion. The uplift of the wall increases with the increase of friction angle. The relative sliding of wall tips and soil is governed by the frictional forces on two sides of the wall. With the increase of contact property, the frictional force increases and will lead to larger vertical displacements.

Key words: excavation, diaphragm wall, vertical displacement, soil-structure interaction

中图分类号:

TU 473

肖潇，李明广，陈锦剑，夏小和. 基坑开挖对围护墙竖向变形的影响机理[J]. 上海交通大学学报（自然版）, 2018, 52(12): 1552-1558.

XIAO Xiao，LI Mingguang，CHEN Jinjian，XIA Xiaohe. Vertical Deformation Mechanism of Diaphragm Wall Due to Unloading in Deep Excavation[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University, 2018, 52(12): 1552-1558.

参考文献

［1］WANG J H, XU Z H, WANG W D. Wall and ground movements due to deep excavations in shanghai soft soils［J］. Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2010, 136(7): 985-994. ［2］CHEN J J, ZHU Y F, LI M G, et al. Novel excavation and construction method of an underground highway tunnel above operating metro tunnels［J］. Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2015, 28(6): A4014003. ［3］贾坚, 谢小林. 上海软土地区深大基坑卸荷变形机理［J］. 上海交通大学学报, 2009, 43(6): 1005-1010. JIA Jian, XIE Xiaolin. Unloading deformation mechanism of deep-large excavat ion in Shanghai clay area ［J］. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2009, 43(6): 1005-1010. ［4］LI M G, CHEN J J, XU A J, et al. Case study of innovative top-down construction method with channel-type excavation［J］. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 2014, 140(5): 05014003. ［5］FINNO R J, ATMATZIDIS D K, PERKINS S B. Observed performance of a deep excavation in clay［J］. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1989, 115(8): 1045-1064. ［6］范巍, 王建华, 陈锦剑. 连续墙与土体接触特性对深基坑变形分析的影响［J］. 上海交通大学学报, 2006, 40(12): 2118-2121. FAN Wei, WANG Jianhua, CHEN Jinjian. The evaluation of deformation lnduced excavation considering the properties of diaphragm soil interface［J］. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2006, 40(12): 2118-2121. ［7］SHI J W, LIU G B, HUANG P, et al. Interaction between a large-scale triangular excavation and adjacent structures in Shanghai soft clay［J］. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2015, 50: 282-295. ［8］LIU G B, HUANG P, SHI J W, et al. Performance of a deep excavation and its effect on adjacent tunnels in Shanghai soft clay［J］. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2016, 30(6): 04016041. ［9］XIAO X, ZHANG Y Q, LI M G, et al. Responses of the strata and supporting system to dewatering in deep excavations［J］. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Science), 2017, 22(6): 705-711. ［10］TAN Y, LI M W. Measured performance of a 26 m deep top-down excavation in downtown Shanghai［J］. Revue Canadienne De Géotechnique, 2011, 48: 704-719. ［11］TAN Y, LI X, KANG Z J, et al. Zoned excavation of an oversized pit close to an existing metro line in stiff clay: Case study［J］. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2015, 29(6): 04014158. ［12］TAN Y, HUANG R, KANG Z J, et al. Covered semi-top-down excavation of subway station surrounded by closely spaced buildings in downtown Shanghai: Building response［J］. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2016, 30(6): 04016040. ［13］BURD H, DONG Y P, HOULSBY G T. Finite-element analysis of a deep excavation case history［J］. Géotechnique, 2016, 66(1): 1-15. ［14］Itasca Consulting Group Inc. Fast Lagrangian analysis of continua in 3 dimensions［M］. Minnesota: Itasca, 2016.

[1]	杨其润, 李明广, 陈锦剑, 吴航. 同步实施的相邻基坑相互作用机理[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2022, 56(6): 722-729.
[2]	冯国辉, 徐兴, 侯世磊, 范润东, 杨开放, 管凌霄, 徐长节. 基于Kerr地基模型的基坑开挖引起下卧既有隧道受力变形[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2022, 56(4): 474-485.
[3]	陈拴, 吴怀娜, 陈仁朋, 沈水龙, 刘源. 上方长距离基坑开挖引起的共线隧道变形研究[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2021, 55(6): 698-706.
[4]	肖朝昀, 李明广, 王大发, 陈锦剑. 降雨影响下残积土层中深基坑变形特性测试及分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2020, 54(8): 873-880.
[5]	高亿文, 李明广, 陈锦剑. 超载影响下围护结构非对称基坑的受力及变形特性分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2020, 54(6): 643-651.
[6]	范晓真, 许海明, 徐长节, 方焘, 谭勇. 非对称开挖砂性土基坑刚性支护结构解析解[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2020, 54(4): 397-405.
[7]	应宏伟, 许鼎业, 王迪, 章丽莎. 波动承压水下基坑底部弱透水层的非Darcy渗流分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2020, 54(12): 1300-1306.
[8]	李镜培，崔纪飞，李林，赵高文. 静压沉桩对邻近地下连续墙变形的影响[J]. 上海交通大学学报（自然版）, 2018, 52(12): 1580-1586.
[9]	应宏伟,梁文鹏. 方竖井基坑平动模式挡墙的主动土压力[J]. 上海交通大学学报（自然版）, 2018, 52(11): 1459-1466.
[10]	钟国强1,2，王浩1，张国华1，覃卫民1，王成汤1,2，熊俊峰1,2. 基于RS-MIV-ELM模型的基坑水平位移影响因素分析和预测[J]. 上海交通大学学报（自然版）, 2018, 52(11): 1508-1515.
[11]	肖潇, 李明广, 夏小和, 王建华. 基坑开挖对临近明挖暗埋隧道竖向变形的影响机理[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2018, 52(11): 1437-1443.
[12]	范凡, 章红兵, 王建华, 陈锦剑, 张毅鹏. 软土地区分隔型基坑群变形特性实测分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2018, 52(02): 133-140.
[13]	曾凡云, 李明广, 陈锦剑, 王建华. 基坑群监测数据与施工信息动态同步分析系统的开发与应用[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2017, 51(03): 269-276.
[14]	章红兵，范凡，胡昊. 基坑群施工对邻近隧道影响与隧道保护[J]. 上海交通大学学报（自然版）, 2016, 50(05): 803-809.
[15]	章红兵，范凡，胡昊. 考虑基坑开挖空间效应的邻近建筑物沉降预测方法[J]. 上海交通大学学报（自然版）, 2016, 50(04): 641-646.