深厚砂卵砾石透水坝基渗流控制方案研究
|
摘要
针对西南山区典型小河道深厚砂卵砾石地基渗流进行了系统研究和方案对比,结论如下:单位长度垂直防渗墙大于单位长度水平铺盖的渗流控制效果,4. 63 m水平铺盖长度相当于1 m防渗墙;采用联合防渗时,随着防渗墙深度增加,联合防渗中的水平铺盖长度对渗流量的影响逐渐降低;当联合防渗中水平铺盖长度超过3倍水头时,出逸坡降变化呈均匀下降; 10 m防渗墙的防渗效果等同于40 m水平铺盖+6 m防渗墙、30 m水平铺盖+8 m防渗墙、20 m水平铺盖+9 m防渗墙的联合防渗效果;山区小河道不建议采用封闭式垂直防渗,建议采用联合防渗。
The seepage of deep sand and gravel permeable dam foundation in typical small channels in southwest mountainous areas is studied and the seepage control schemes are compared. It is concluded that,( a) the seepage control effect of per unit length vertical cut-off wall is greater than that of per unit length horizontal blanket,and the length of horizontal blanket of 4. 63 m is equivalent to that of 1 m cut-off wall;( b) when the united seepage control is adopted,the influence of horizontal blanket length on seepage flow gradually decreases with the increase of the depth of cut-off wall;( c) when the length of horizontal blanket in united seepage control exceeds 3 times of water head,the change of escape slope drops evenly; and( d) the antiseepage effect of 10 m cut-off wall is equivalent to the combination of 6 m cut-off wall and 40 m horizontal blanket,8 m cut-off wall and 30 m horizontal blanket,and 9 m cut-off wall and 20 m horizontal blanket respectively. It is not recommended to use closed vertical anti-seepage scheme in small channels in mountainous areas,but the united seepage control scheme is recommended.
The seepage of deep sand and gravel permeable dam foundation in typical small channels in southwest mountainous areas is studied and the seepage control schemes are compared. It is concluded that,( a) the seepage control effect of per unit length vertical cut-off wall is greater than that of per unit length horizontal blanket,and the length of horizontal blanket of 4. 63 m is equivalent to that of 1 m cut-off wall;( b) when the united seepage control is adopted,the influence of horizontal blanket length on seepage flow gradually decreases with the increase of the depth of cut-off wall;( c) when the length of horizontal blanket in united seepage control exceeds 3 times of water head,the change of escape slope drops evenly; and( d) the antiseepage effect of 10 m cut-off wall is equivalent to the combination of 6 m cut-off wall and 40 m horizontal blanket,8 m cut-off wall and 30 m horizontal blanket,and 9 m cut-off wall and 20 m horizontal blanket respectively. It is not recommended to use closed vertical anti-seepage scheme in small channels in mountainous areas,but the united seepage control scheme is recommended.
引文
[1]王正成,毛海涛,龙顺江,等.流固耦合的多元结构深厚覆盖层透水地基的力学特性[J].土木建筑与环境工程,2017,39(3):151-159.
[2]ROBISON D.Successful foundation preparations in karst bedrock of the masonry section of Wolf Creek Dam[C]∥National Cave and Karst Research Institute Symposium.2015:595-604.
[3]KüLAHCI F,SEN Z.Multivariate statistical analyses of artificial radionuclides and heavy metals contaminations in deep mud of Keban Dam Lake,Turkey[J].Applied Radiation and Isotopes,2008,66(2):236-246.
[4]ELSAHABI M,NEGM A,EL TAHAN A H M H.Performances evaluation of surface water areas extraction techniques using landsat ETM+data:case study Aswan High Dam Lake(AHDL)[J].Procedia Technology,2016,22:1205-1212.
[5]EINSTEIN H H,SCHNITTER G.Selection of chemical grout for Mattmark Dam[J].Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,2007,96:2007-2023.
[6]ABID M,SIDDIQI M U R.Multiphase flow simulations through Tarbela Dam spillways and tunnels[J].Journal of Water Resource and Protection,2010,2(6):532-539.
[7]陈海军,任光明,聂德新,等.河谷深厚覆盖层工程地质特性及其评价方法[J].地质灾害与环境保护,1996(4):53-59.
[8]郑华康,张枫,李毅,等.卡拉水电站坝区渗流控制效应精细模拟与评价[J].岩土力学,2012,33(9):2743-2748.
[9]温立峰,范亦农,柴军瑞,等.深厚覆盖层地基渗流控制措施效果数值分析[J].水资源与水工程学报,2014,25(1):127-132.
[10]王大宇.管涌发展与悬挂式防渗墙作用机制研究[D].北京:清华大学,2015.
[11]毛海涛,何华祥,邵东国,等.无限深透水坝基上悬挂式防渗墙控渗试验研究[J].水利水运工程学报,2014(4):44-51.
[12]毛海涛,侍克斌,李玉建.无限深透水地基上土石坝坝基垂直防渗的保角变换渗流计算[J].水利水运工程学报,2008(4):71-77.
[13]贺如平.四川西部河谷覆盖层的抗渗特性研究[J].水电工程研究,1994(1):79-84.
[14]黄安邦.山区河谷深厚覆盖层多层结构坝基渗漏研究[D].成都:成都理工大学,2016.
[2]ROBISON D.Successful foundation preparations in karst bedrock of the masonry section of Wolf Creek Dam[C]∥National Cave and Karst Research Institute Symposium.2015:595-604.
[3]KüLAHCI F,SEN Z.Multivariate statistical analyses of artificial radionuclides and heavy metals contaminations in deep mud of Keban Dam Lake,Turkey[J].Applied Radiation and Isotopes,2008,66(2):236-246.
[4]ELSAHABI M,NEGM A,EL TAHAN A H M H.Performances evaluation of surface water areas extraction techniques using landsat ETM+data:case study Aswan High Dam Lake(AHDL)[J].Procedia Technology,2016,22:1205-1212.
[5]EINSTEIN H H,SCHNITTER G.Selection of chemical grout for Mattmark Dam[J].Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,2007,96:2007-2023.
[6]ABID M,SIDDIQI M U R.Multiphase flow simulations through Tarbela Dam spillways and tunnels[J].Journal of Water Resource and Protection,2010,2(6):532-539.
[7]陈海军,任光明,聂德新,等.河谷深厚覆盖层工程地质特性及其评价方法[J].地质灾害与环境保护,1996(4):53-59.
[8]郑华康,张枫,李毅,等.卡拉水电站坝区渗流控制效应精细模拟与评价[J].岩土力学,2012,33(9):2743-2748.
[9]温立峰,范亦农,柴军瑞,等.深厚覆盖层地基渗流控制措施效果数值分析[J].水资源与水工程学报,2014,25(1):127-132.
[10]王大宇.管涌发展与悬挂式防渗墙作用机制研究[D].北京:清华大学,2015.
[11]毛海涛,何华祥,邵东国,等.无限深透水坝基上悬挂式防渗墙控渗试验研究[J].水利水运工程学报,2014(4):44-51.
[12]毛海涛,侍克斌,李玉建.无限深透水地基上土石坝坝基垂直防渗的保角变换渗流计算[J].水利水运工程学报,2008(4):71-77.
[13]贺如平.四川西部河谷覆盖层的抗渗特性研究[J].水电工程研究,1994(1):79-84.
[14]黄安邦.山区河谷深厚覆盖层多层结构坝基渗漏研究[D].成都:成都理工大学,2016.