|
|||||
|
|
| 同场地扩底桩和直桩的对比研究 | |
| 引用本文： | 高广运,蒋建平,顾宝和.同场地扩底桩和直桩的对比研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2005,24(3):502-506. |
| 作者姓名： | 高广运 蒋建平 顾宝和 |
| 作者单位： | 1. 同济大学,地下建筑与工程系,上海,200092 2. 上海海事大学,交通运输学院,上海,200135 3. 建设部综合勘察研究设计院,北京,100007 |
| 基金项目： | 上海市重点学科(岩土工程)建设资助项目 |
| 摘 要： | 研究了4个场地的4组扩底桩与直桩的竖向静荷载对比试验。结果表明,场地1中桩身直径、桩长相同,桩顶沉降30mm时,扩底桩的桩顶荷载为直桩的5.5倍,桩顶荷载都为2700kN时,扩底桩顶沉降仅为直桩的1/22,扩底桩每多用1m3混凝土,极限承载力就提高1746kN;场地2中(短直桩桩长和扩底桩相当,长直桩比扩底桩长1.65m),桩顶沉降10mm时,扩底桩的桩顶荷载为短直桩的3.58倍,为直桩的1.70倍(虽然长直桩所处的持力层土性较强);场地3中各桩桩长相当,直桩直径较大,虽然直桩的混凝土用量为扩底桩的2.09倍,且刚开始加荷时直桩桩顶沉降比扩底桩大,但总的来说,扩底桩比直桩的承载力大,沉降小;场地4中如要充分发挥2桩桩长、直径相当,扩底桩底有0.2m厚的沉渣,两桩的荷载–沉降曲线很靠近,单桩承载力几乎相同,因此,扩底桩的高承载力就必须减小桩底沉渣。 |
| 关 键 词： | 土力学 地基基础 对比试验 扩底桩 直桩 |
| 文章编号： | 1000-6915(2005)03-0502-05 |
| 收稿时间： | 2003-7-16 |
| 修稿时间： | 2003-8-11 |
COMPARATIVE STUDY ON BELLED AND EQUAL-DIAMETER PILES |
|
| GAO Guang-yun,JIANG Jian-ping,GU Bao-he.COMPARATIVE STUDY ON BELLED AND EQUAL-DIAMETER PILES[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2005,24(3):502-506. | |
| Authors: | GAO Guang-yun JIANG Jian-ping GU Bao-he |
| Affiliation: | GAO Guang-yun1,JIANG Jian-ping2,GU Bao-he3 |
| Abstract: | Four groups of vertical loading tests were performed on belled piles and equal-diameter piles at four sites to make comparative study. The results are shown as follows. At site 1,the shaft diameter and length of the two piles are the same. With a 30 mm settlement,the peak load of the belled pile is 5.5 times that of the equal-diameter pile. When the peak load is 2 700 kN,the settlement of the belled pile is only 1/22 of that of the equal-diameter pile. When the concrete quantity of the belled pile is increased by 1 m3,the peak load of the equal-diameter pile can be increased by 1 746 kN. At site 2,the length of the shorter equal-diameter pile is almost the same as that of the belled pile,and the longer equal-diameter pile is 1.65 m longer than the belled pile. With a 10 mm settlement,the peak load of the belled pile is 3.58 and 1.70 times as that of the shorter and longer equal-diameter piles,respectively. This indicates that the effect of belled pile in shallow and weak soil layer is better than that of the equal-diameter pile in deeper and stronger soil layer. At site 3,the lengths of all piles are almost the same,and the shaft diameter of the equal-diameter pile is 1.0 m larger than that of others. The volume of equal-diameter pile is 2.09 times as that of the belled pile,and the bearing capacity of the equal-diameter pile is larger than that of the belled pile when the settlement is less or equal to 5 mm. However,the ultimate bearing capacity of the belled pile is larger than that of the equal-diameter pile. At site 4,the shaft diameters and lengths of two piles are the same,respectively,and there is 0.2 m thick residue at the bottom of the belled pile. The load-settlement curves of two piles are very close,which indicates that the bearing capacity of two piles are almost equal. This demonstrates that the residue at the bottom of the belled pile should be removed in order to fully mobilize large bearing capacity of the belled pile. |
| Keywords: | soil mechanics soil foundation comparative study belled pile equal-diameter pile |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ | |
| 点击此处可从《岩石力学与工程学报》浏览原始摘要信息 | |
| 点击此处可从《岩石力学与工程学报》下载全文 | |
