不同应力解除法地应力测试方法对比及工程应用
|
摘要
介绍了钻孔空心包体式应变计与孔壁切缝解除法地应力测试的基本原理和测试方法,同时对两种应力解除地应力测试方法的适用性进行对比分析。将两种应力解除法应用于锦屏一级导流洞边墙的地应力测试中,并就同一钻孔进行了对比测试。通过对测试结果的对比分析可知,两种方法的测试结果相符,应力量值误差均小于20%,钻孔横截面最大主应力方位误差也在20°以内。鉴于孔壁切缝解除法地应力测试方法可用于极高应力条件下的应力测量,对于西部的深埋高-极高应力条件下的地下工程来说,该方法非常行之有效。
We introduce basic principles and measuring procedures of two geo-stress measuring methods, the hollow package triaxial gauges and the borehole slotter. Meanwhile, comparative analysis of the applicability of two relieving stress testing methods was carried out. The two different stress relieving methods were applied to the in-situ stress test of the side wall in the diversion tunnel of Jinping-I hydropower plant, and comparative tests were carried out in the same borehole. The measuring results of both methods were consistent. The stress value error was less than 20%, and the maximum principal stress of cross section drilling azimuth error was 20 degrees. So the borehole slotter method can be used for high stress measurement of underground projects in western China that usually encounters the conditions such as deep buried tunnels and high or extremely high stress conditions.
We introduce basic principles and measuring procedures of two geo-stress measuring methods, the hollow package triaxial gauges and the borehole slotter. Meanwhile, comparative analysis of the applicability of two relieving stress testing methods was carried out. The two different stress relieving methods were applied to the in-situ stress test of the side wall in the diversion tunnel of Jinping-I hydropower plant, and comparative tests were carried out in the same borehole. The measuring results of both methods were consistent. The stress value error was less than 20%, and the maximum principal stress of cross section drilling azimuth error was 20 degrees. So the borehole slotter method can be used for high stress measurement of underground projects in western China that usually encounters the conditions such as deep buried tunnels and high or extremely high stress conditions.
引文
[1] Ljunggren C,Yanting Chang,Janson T,et al. An overview of rock stress measurement methods[J].International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences,2003,40:975-989.
[2] Sjoberg J,Christiansson R,Hudson A. ISRM suggested methods for rock stress estimation-part 2:overcoring methods[J].International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,2003,40(7/8):999-1010.
[3] 刘允芳,艾凯,尹健民,等.窄缝局部应力解除和窄缝弹性模量试验拓宽应用的研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2013,32(5):876-882.
[4] 艾凯,尹健民,刘元坤,等.极高应力条件下岩体开挖表面应力测量研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2012,31(S2):3974-3980.
[5] 葛修润,侯明勋.一种测定深部岩体地应力的新方法——钻孔局部壁面应力全解除法[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2004,23(23):3923-3927.
[6] 刘允芳,朱杰兵.空心包体式钻孔三向应变计地应力测量的研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2001,20(4): 448-453.
[7] Saati V,Mortazavi A.Numerical modelling of in situ stress calculation using borehole slotter test[J].Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology,2011(26):172-178.
[8] Sugawara.Rock stress measurement by means of the compact overcoring method[R].Tokoyo:Mining and Materials Processing Institute of Japan,1994.
[9] 刘允芳.岩体地应力与工程建设[M].武汉:湖北科学技术出版社,2000.
[10] 王士天,黄润秋,李渝生.雅砻江锦屏水电站重大工程地质问题研究[M].成都:成都科技大学出版社,1995.
[2] Sjoberg J,Christiansson R,Hudson A. ISRM suggested methods for rock stress estimation-part 2:overcoring methods[J].International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,2003,40(7/8):999-1010.
[3] 刘允芳,艾凯,尹健民,等.窄缝局部应力解除和窄缝弹性模量试验拓宽应用的研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2013,32(5):876-882.
[4] 艾凯,尹健民,刘元坤,等.极高应力条件下岩体开挖表面应力测量研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2012,31(S2):3974-3980.
[5] 葛修润,侯明勋.一种测定深部岩体地应力的新方法——钻孔局部壁面应力全解除法[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2004,23(23):3923-3927.
[6] 刘允芳,朱杰兵.空心包体式钻孔三向应变计地应力测量的研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2001,20(4): 448-453.
[7] Saati V,Mortazavi A.Numerical modelling of in situ stress calculation using borehole slotter test[J].Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology,2011(26):172-178.
[8] Sugawara.Rock stress measurement by means of the compact overcoring method[R].Tokoyo:Mining and Materials Processing Institute of Japan,1994.
[9] 刘允芳.岩体地应力与工程建设[M].武汉:湖北科学技术出版社,2000.
[10] 王士天,黄润秋,李渝生.雅砻江锦屏水电站重大工程地质问题研究[M].成都:成都科技大学出版社,1995.