胡亚元：半透水边界砂井真空联合堆载预压Hansbo固结解 .791· 100 (尹培林，王新.真空联合堆载预压软基监测.水运工程 2015(3):61) 80 [5]Indraratna B,Rujikiatkamjorn C,Ameratunga J,et al.Perform- ance and prediction of vacuum combined surcharge consolidation at Port of Brisbane.J Geotech Geoenviron Eng,2011,137 11): ·一测试数据 40 一Indraratna等解网 1009 一一周琦等解】 [6]Mohamedelhassan E,Shang JQ.Vacuum and surcharge combined 20 +一本文解 one-dimensional consolidation of clay soils.Can Geotech /2002 39(5):1126 50 100 150 200250 [7]Dong ZL.Consolidation theory on heaped load vacuum preload- 时间/d ing of sand drain foundation.Port Waterway Eng,1992(9):I 图15实测固结度与理论预测值对比图 (董志良.堆载及真空预压砂井地基固结解析理论.水运工 Fig.15 Comparison diagram of the measured consolidation degree 程，1992(9)：1) and the theoretical predicting solution [8]Guo B,Gong X N.Lu MM,et al.Analytical solution for consoli- 得了真空联合堆载预压下砂井地基的Hansbo固结 dation of vertical drains by vacuum-surcharge preloading.Chin J Geotech Eng,2013,35(6):1045 解析解.理论分析了边界透水系数对真空预压和堆 (郭彪，龚晓南，卢萌盟，等.真空联合堆载预压下竖井地基 载预压沉降和固结度的影响，获得如下结论： 固结解析解.岩土工程学报，2013,35(6)：1045) (1)边界透水条件会影响真空预压的最终孔压 [9] Indraratna B,Rujikiatkamjorn C.Sathananthan I.Analytical and 分布，从而对真空预压的最终沉降产生影响.当下 numerical solutions for a single vertical drain including the effects 边界透水系数越大时，真空预压的最终沉降越小 of vacuum preloading.Can Geotech 2005,42(4):994 [10]Tran TA,Mitachi T.Equivalent plane strain modeling of vertical 下边界不透水时，上边界透水系数不会改变真空预 drains in soft ground under embankment combined with vacuum 压的最终沉降：下边界透水或半透水时，上边界透水 preloading.Comput Geotech,2008.35(5):655 系数越大，真空预压的最终沉降越大.边界透水条 [11]Zhou Q,Zhang C X,Wang YY,et al.Hansbo's consolidation 件不会对堆载预压的最终孔压和最终有效应力产生 solution for sand-drained ground under vacuum preloading.Chin 影响，因此也不会对堆载预压的最终沉降产生影响. J Rock Mech Eng.2010,29(Suppl 2):3994 (周琦，张功新，王友元，等.真空预压条件下的砂井地基 (2)不管是真空预压还是堆载预压，固结时间 Hansbo固结解.岩石力学与工程学报，2010,29（增刊2）： 因子相同时边界透水系数越大固结度越大 3994) (3)对于固结期间的地基沉降，当固结时间因 [12]Bao S F,Zhou Q,Chen PS,et al.Consolidation analysis for 子相同时，对于真空预压，下边界的透水系数越大， sand drains foundations with non-uniform distribution of negative 固结期间的沉降越小：上边界透水系数越大，固结期 pressure boundary condition.Port Waterway Eng,2015(3):12 间的沉降越大：对于堆载预压，不管是下边界还是上 (鲍树峰，周琦，陈平山，等.负压非均匀分布边界条件下砂 井地基固结解析.水运工程，2015(3)：12) 边界，透水系数越大，固结期间的沉降均越大 [13]Hansbo S.Consolidation of fine-grained soils by prefabricated drains /Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Soil 参考文献 Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.Stockholm,1981:677 [14]Liu J Y,Wu Z Y,Xi P.In-situ test study on performance of vac- [1]Gong X N.Ground Improvement Handbook.3rd Ed.Beijing:Ar- uum degree diffusion in SPB-1 PVD and GEODRAINL PVD. chitecture Building Press,2008 Port Waterway Eng,1990(12):1 (龚晓南.地基处理手册.3版.北京：中国建筑出版社， (刘佳有，吴正友，席平.国产SPB-1型和日本丸红GEOD- 2008) RAN-L型塑板真空度传递性能的现场试验研究.水运工 [2]Ming J P,Sun Z Y.Experimental study on deformation of soil un- 程，1990(12)：1) der vacuum unloading.Chin J Geotech Eng,2016,38(6):1081 [15]Xie K H,Zeng G X.Consolidation theories for drain wells under (明经平，孙振远。真空预压地基卸荷变形特性试验研究.。岩 equal strain condition.Chin J Geotech Eng,1989,11(2):3 土工程学报，2016,38(6)：1081) (谢康和，曾国熙。等应变条件下的砂井地基固结解析理论 [3]Kianfar K,Indraratna B.Rujikiatkamjom C,et al.Radial consol- 岩土工程学报，1989,11(2)：3) idation response upon the application and removal of vacuum and [16]Gao X,Wang C,Zhou X C,et al.Experiment of plane-strain fill loading.Can Geotech J,2015,52(12):2156 ground consolidation with drainage sand cushion.Nanjing Tech [4]Yin P L,Wang X.Analysis of observed data for soft soil founda- Univ Nat Sci Ed,2017,39(2):102 tion treatment by vacuum surcharge preloading method.Port Wa- (高翔，王创，周星辰，等.含排水砂垫层地基平面应变固结 tencay Eng,2015(3):61 试验.南京工业大学学报（自然科学版），2017,39(2)：胡亚元: 半透水边界砂井真空联合堆载预压 Hansbo 固结解 图 15 实测固结度与理论预测值对比图 Fig. 15 Comparison diagram of the measured consolidation degree and the theoretical predicting solution 得了真空联合堆载预压下砂井地基的 Hansbo 固结 解析解. 理论分析了边界透水系数对真空预压和堆 载预压沉降和固结度的影响,获得如下结论: (1) 边界透水条件会影响真空预压的最终孔压 分布,从而对真空预压的最终沉降产生影响. 当下 边界透水系数越大时,真空预压的最终沉降越小. 下边界不透水时,上边界透水系数不会改变真空预 压的最终沉降;下边界透水或半透水时,上边界透水 系数越大,真空预压的最终沉降越大. 边界透水条 件不会对堆载预压的最终孔压和最终有效应力产生 影响,因此也不会对堆载预压的最终沉降产生影响. (2) 不管是真空预压还是堆载预压,固结时间 因子相同时边界透水系数越大固结度越大. (3)对于固结期间的地基沉降,当固结时间因 子相同时,对于真空预压,下边界的透水系数越大, 固结期间的沉降越小;上边界透水系数越大,固结期 间的沉降越大;对于堆载预压,不管是下边界还是上 边界,透水系数越大,固结期间的沉降均越大. 参 考 文 献 [1] Gong X N. Ground Improvement Handbook. 3rd Ed. Beijing: Ar鄄 chitecture & Building Press, 2008 (龚晓南. 地基处理手册. 3 版. 北京: 中国建筑出版社, 2008) [2] Ming J P, Sun Z Y. Experimental study on deformation of soil un鄄 der vacuum unloading. Chin J Geotech Eng, 2016, 38(6): 1081 (明经平, 孙振远. 真空预压地基卸荷变形特性试验研究. 岩 土工程学报, 2016, 38(6): 1081) [3] Kianfar K, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C, et al. Radial consol鄄 idation response upon the application and removal of vacuum and fill loading. Can Geotech J, 2015, 52(12): 2156 [4] Yin P L, Wang X. Analysis of observed data for soft soil founda鄄 tion treatment by vacuum surcharge preloading method. Port Wa鄄 terway Eng, 2015(3): 61 (尹培林, 王新. 真空联合堆载预压软基监测. 水运工程, 2015(3): 61) [5] Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Ameratunga J, et al. Perform鄄 ance and prediction of vacuum combined surcharge consolidation at Port of Brisbane. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 2011, 137 ( 11 ): 1009 [6] Mohamedelhassan E, Shang J Q. Vacuum and surcharge combined one鄄dimensional consolidation of clay soils. Can Geotech J, 2002, 39(5): 1126 [7] Dong Z L. Consolidation theory on heaped load & vacuum preload鄄 ing of sand drain foundation. Port Waterway Eng, 1992(9): 1 (董志良. 堆载及真空预压砂井地基固结解析理论. 水运工 程, 1992(9): 1) [8] Guo B, Gong X N, Lu M M, et al. Analytical solution for consoli鄄 dation of vertical drains by vacuum鄄surcharge preloading. Chin J Geotech Eng, 2013, 35(6): 1045 (郭彪, 龚晓南, 卢萌盟, 等. 真空联合堆载预压下竖井地基 固结解析解. 岩土工程学报, 2013, 35(6): 1045) [9] Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Sathananthan I. Analytical and numerical solutions for a single vertical drain including the effects of vacuum preloading. Can Geotech J, 2005, 42(4): 994 [10] Tran T A, Mitachi T. Equivalent plane strain modeling of vertical drains in soft ground under embankment combined with vacuum preloading. Comput Geotech, 2008, 35(5): 655 [11] Zhou Q, Zhang G X, Wang Y Y, et al. Hansbo蒺s consolidation solution for sand鄄drained ground under vacuum preloading. Chin J Rock Mech Eng, 2010, 29(Suppl 2): 3994 (周琦, 张功新, 王友元, 等. 真空预压条件下的砂井地基 Hansbo 固结解. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2010, 29 (增刊 2): 3994) [12] Bao S F, Zhou Q, Chen P S, et al. Consolidation analysis for sand drains foundations with non鄄uniform distribution of negative pressure boundary condition. Port Waterway Eng, 2015(3): 12 (鲍树峰, 周琦, 陈平山, 等. 负压非均匀分布边界条件下砂 井地基固结解析. 水运工程, 2015(3): 12) [13] Hansbo S. Consolidation of fine鄄grained soils by prefabricated drains / / Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Stockholm, 1981: 677 [14] Liu J Y, Wu Z Y, Xi P. In鄄situ test study on performance of vac鄄 uum degree diffusion in SPB鄄鄄 1 PVD and GEODRAINL PVD. Port Waterway Eng, 1990(12): 1 (刘佳有, 吴正友, 席平. 国产 SPB鄄鄄1 型和日本丸红 GEOD鄄 RAIN鄄鄄L 型塑板真空度传递性能的现场试验研究. 水运工 程, 1990(12): 1) [15] Xie K H, Zeng G X. Consolidation theories for drain wells under equal strain condition. Chin J Geotech Eng, 1989, 11(2): 3 (谢康和, 曾国熙. 等应变条件下的砂井地基固结解析理论. 岩土工程学报, 1989, 11(2): 3) [16] Gao X, Wang C, Zhou X C, et al. Experiment of plane鄄strain ground consolidation with drainage sand cushion. J Nanjing Tech Univ Nat Sci Ed, 2017, 39(2): 102 (高翔, 王创, 周星辰, 等. 含排水砂垫层地基平面应变固结 试验. 南京工业大学学报( 自然科学版), 2017, 39 ( 2 ): ·791·