Study on the bearing characteristic and failure pattern of tunnel-type anchorage
WANG Dongying1，2，TANG Hua1，GE Xiurun1，YIN Xiaotao1，DENG Qin1
(1. State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering，Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics，Chinese Academy of Sciences，Wuhan，Hubei 430071，China；2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences，Beijing 100049，China)
Abstract：The wedge-shape geometry of tunnel-type anchorage makes the bearing behavior of the system of rock and anchor change with the engineering load. The ultimate bearing capacity varies with the failure modes of the anchor-rock system. To figure out problems mentioned above，the possible failure modes，the bearing behavior and the estimation formula of bearing capacity of tunnel-type anchorage in different loading stages are discussed in this paper. Then the evolution law of the anchor-rock system progressive failure process is revealed with the methods of numerical simulation analysis，the author edited programming and the 2-D laboratory model test. Meanwhile，the influences of the anchor plug geometry parameter，such as wedged angle and burial depth，on the failure surface shape，rupture angle and ultimate bearing capacity are analyzed as well. Main conclusions are draw as follows. (1) The failure mode of anchor-rock system revealed by numerical model test is trumpet-shaped. And it is verified by the 2-D laboratory model test. (2) The bearing behavior is distinctly divided into three stages. In the initial stage，the additional interfacial pressure is not generated. Then the pressure increases linearly with the increase of engineering load in the mid-term. At the later stage，the pressure decreases rapidly because the damage of surrounding rock. The mechanical mechanics of tunnel-type anchorage’ stage characteristic can be described as follows. The initial bearing capacity of tunnel-type anchorage only depends on the geometry parameters of anchor plug and it is generated by the gravity of anchor plug. But the ultimate bearing capacity depends on the influenced range of surrounding rock. So the ultimate bearing capacity is determined by the position，mode and rupture angle of failure surface. And the reasonability of the mechanical generalization model and stage division method is verified by the numerical model test results，which mainly conclude the interfacial pressure change law with engineering load and the plastic zone evolution process. Moreover，according to the wedged angle and burial depth sensitivity analysis results，we find that the failure mode tends to a circular table shape when the burial depth and wedged angle is large. But the failure mode tends to trumpet-shaped while the burial depth is between 35–45 meters and the wedged angle is 2–6 degree. While the burial depth is greater，the failure mode tends to interface failure. Notably，if the failure mode is trumpet-shaped，the narrow section?s rupture angle of failure surface is two to three times the wedged angle while the wide section angle ranges from 20 to 25 degree. Besides，the distance between the turning point and the back anchorage face is about 1/2 times the burial depths. (3) The burial depths have no influence on the initial bearing capacity. But the ultimate bearing capacity increases with the increase of burial depth. It is also to be known that the initial bearing capacity decreases gradually with the increase of wedged angle. And the ultimate bearing capacity increases first and then decreases with the increase of wedged angles. The above phenomenon indicates that there is optimal wedged angle for the tunnel-type anchorage.
王东英1，2，汤 华1，葛修润1，尹小涛1，邓 琴1. 隧道锚承载特性及其破坏模式探究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2019, 38(S2): 3374-3383.
WANG Dongying1，2，TANG Hua1，GE Xiurun1，YIN Xiaotao1，DENG Qin1. Study on the bearing characteristic and failure pattern of tunnel-type anchorage. , 2019, 38(S2): 3374-3383.
TERZAGHI K，PERK R B. Soil mechanics engineering practice[M]. New York：Wiley，1948：130–132.
[3]
肖本职，吴相超，彭朝全. 重庆鹅公岩大桥隧道锚碇围岩稳定性[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报，2005，24(增2)：5 591–5 597.(XIAO Benzhi，WU Xiangchao，PENG Chaoquan. Stability of the anchorage wall rock of tunnel for Chongqing Egongyan bridge[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering，2005，24(Supp.2)：5 591–5 597. (in Chinese))
[5]
胡 波，曾钱帮，饶 旦，等. 锚碇–围岩系统在拉剪复合应力条件下的变形规律及破坏机制研究——以坝陵河特大岩锚悬索桥为例[J]. 岩石力学工程学报，2007，26(4)：712–719.(HU Bo，ZENG Qianbang，RAO Dan，et al. Study of deformation law and failure mechanism of anchorage-surrounding rock system under tensile-shear complex stresses—Taking super-large suspension bridge on Baling river for example[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering，2007，26(4)：712–719.(in Chinese))
[7]
蒋昱州，王瑞红，朱杰兵，等. 伍家岗大桥隧道锚三维地质力学模型试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报，2016，35(增2)：4 103–4 113. (JIANG Yuzhou，WANG Ruihong，ZHU Jiebing，et al. Geo-mechanical model test on global stability for Wujiagang bridge tunnel-type anchorages[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering，2016，35(Supp2)：4 103–4 113.(in Chinese))
[2]
余家富，曹春明. 悬索桥隧道锚抗拉承载力公式探讨[J]. 交通科技，2015，(2)：21–24.(YU Jiafu，CAO Chunming. Research on the uplift capacity formula of tunnel-type anchorage of suspension bridge[J]. Transportation Science and Technology，2015，(2)：21–24.(in Chinese))
[6]
汤 华，熊晓荣，吴振君，等. 隧道锚抗拔作用机理的室内模型试验[J]. 上海交通大学学报，2015，49(7)：935–939.(TANG Hua，XIONG Xiaorong，WU Zhenjun，et al. Laboratory model test study of pull-out mechanism of tunnel anchorage[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University，2015，49(7)：935–939.(in Chinese))
[8]
张奇华，李玉婕，余美万，等. 隧道锚围岩抗拔机制及抗拔力计算模式初步研究[J]. 岩土力学，2017，38(3)：810–820.(ZHANG Qihua，LI Yujie，YU Meiwan，et al. Preliminary study of pullout mechanisms and computational model of pull out force for rocks surrounding tunnel-type anchorage[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics，2017，38(3)：810–820.(in Chinese))
[16]
ZHENG H，LIU D F，LI C G. Slope stability analysis based on elasto-plastic finite element method[J]. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering，2005，64(14)：1 871–1 888.
[9]
李栋梁，刘新荣，周火明，等. 下卧软弱夹层的软岩隧道式锚碇承载特性研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报，2017，36(10)：2 457–2 465. (LI Dongliang，LIUXinrong，ZHOUhuoming，et al. Bearing behavior of tunnel anchorage in soft rock with an underlying weak interlayer[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering，2017，36(10)：2 457–2 465.(in Chinese))
[10]
刘新荣，李栋梁，吴相超，等. 泥岩隧道锚承载特性现场模型试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报，2017，39(1)：161–169.(LIU Xinrong，LI Dongliang，WU Xiangchao，et al. Filed model test research on bearing behavior of mudstone tunnel anchorage[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering，2017，39(1)：161–169.(in Chinese))
[13]
沈华章，王水林，郭明伟，等. 应变软化边坡渐进破坏及其稳定性初步研究[J]. 岩土力学，2016，37(1)：175–184.(SHEN Huazhang，WANG Shuilin，GUO Mingwei，et al. A preliminary study of the progressive failure and stability of slope with strain-softening behavior[J]. Rock and Soil mechanics，2016，37(1)：175–184.(in Chinese))
[15]
孙冠华，郑 宏，李春光. 基于等效塑性应变的边坡滑面搜索[J]. 岩土力学，2008，31(5)：627–632.(SUN Guanhua，ZHENG Hong，LI Chunguang. Searching critical slip surface of three-dimensional slopesbased on equivalent plastic strain[J]. Rock and Soil mechanics，2008，31(5)：627–632.(in Chinese))
[17]
ZHENG HONG，THAM L G，LIU DEFU. On two definitions of the factor of safety commonly used in the finite element slope stability analysis[J]. Computers and Geo-technics，2006，33(3)：188–195.
[1]
张奇华，余美万，喻正富，等. 普立特大桥隧道锚现场模型试验研究——抗拔能力试验[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报，2015，34(1)：93–103. (ZHANG Qihua，YU Meiwan，YU Zhengfu，et al. Field model tests on pull-out capacity of tunnel-type anchorages of Pu-li bridge[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering，2015，34(1)：93–103.(in Chinese))
[4]
朱杰兵，邬爱清，黄正加，等. 四渡河特大悬索桥隧道锚模型拉拔试验研究[J]. 长江科学院院报，2006，23(4)：51–55.(ZHU Jiebing，WU Aiqing，HUANG Zhengjia，et al. Pulling test of anchorage model of Siduhe suspension bridge[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute，2006，23(4)：51–55.(in Chinese))
余美万，张奇华，喻正富，等. 基于夹持效应的普立特大桥隧道锚现场模型试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报，2015，34(2)：261–270.(YU Meiwan，ZHANG Qihua，YU Zhengfu，et al. Field model experiment on clamping effect of tunnel-type anchorage at Pu-li bridge[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering，2015，34(2)：261–270.(in Chinese))
2019, Vol. 38 
