复合岩层锚杆预应力扩散规律研究及应用
|
摘要
为了揭示预应力在复合岩层中的扩散规律,采用数值模拟的研究方法,分别对锚杆预应力在单一岩层、"软-硬"岩层、"硬-软-硬"岩层中的预应力传递规律进行了研究。研究结果表明:三种类型岩层中的预应力分布形态显著不同,单一岩层预应力扩散流畅,而"软-硬"岩层在岩层交界面有阻隔现象,尤其是在"硬-软-硬"岩层最为显著,三种岩层中0. 04MPa预应力场面积分别为1. 955m2,1. 429m2,1. 294m2,岩层组合类型对预应力场分布明显影响。井下试验结果表明,复合岩层试验巷道顶板下沉量仅7mm,两帮收缩量160m,巷道控制效果良好。
In order to reveal the diffusion mechanism of prestressing force in composite rock strata,the prestressing transfer law of bolt prestressing force in single rock stratum,soft-hard rock stratum and hard-soft-hard rock stratum was studied by numerical simulation. The results show that the prestressing distribution patterns of three types of strata are significantly different,and the prestressing diffusion of single strata is smooth,while the barrier phenomenon of soft-hard strata exists at the interface of strata,especially in hard-soft-hard strata. The 0. 04 MPa prestressing field area of three types of strata is1. 955 m2,1. 429 m2 and 1. 294 m2,respectively. The combination type of strata has obvious influence on the distribution of prestressing field. The results of the underground test show that the roof subsidence of the test roadway in composite strata is only 7 mm,and the shrinkage of the two sides is 160 m. The control effect of the roadway is favorable.
In order to reveal the diffusion mechanism of prestressing force in composite rock strata,the prestressing transfer law of bolt prestressing force in single rock stratum,soft-hard rock stratum and hard-soft-hard rock stratum was studied by numerical simulation. The results show that the prestressing distribution patterns of three types of strata are significantly different,and the prestressing diffusion of single strata is smooth,while the barrier phenomenon of soft-hard strata exists at the interface of strata,especially in hard-soft-hard strata. The 0. 04 MPa prestressing field area of three types of strata is1. 955 m2,1. 429 m2 and 1. 294 m2,respectively. The combination type of strata has obvious influence on the distribution of prestressing field. The results of the underground test show that the roof subsidence of the test roadway in composite strata is only 7 mm,and the shrinkage of the two sides is 160 m. The control effect of the roadway is favorable.
引文
[1]李桂臣.软弱夹层顶板巷道围岩稳定与安全控制研究[D].徐州:中国矿业大学,2008.
[2]王襄禹,张宏伟,李国栋.弱胶结富水顶板巷道围岩控制技术研究[J].煤炭科学技术,2018,46(1):88-92.
[3]马其华,姜斌,许文龙,等.复合顶板巷道围岩控制技术研究[J].煤炭工程,2016,48(5):47-49.
[4]刘安秀,曹朋,陈斌.典型锚杆支护巷道含软弱夹层顶板组合梁模型新研究[J].矿业安全与环保,2010,38(5):74-76.
[5]闫绪宇.软岩顶板巷道围岩控制技术[J].煤矿开采,2015,20(3):73-75.
[6]伍国军,陈卫忠,杨建平,等.基于软弱夹层损伤破坏模型的软岩巷道支护优化研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2011,30(S2):4129-4135.
[7]崔旭芳.高应力软弱夹层顶板大断面巷道三维一体化控制技术研究[J].煤炭工程,2017,49(6):36-39.
[8]黄庆享,赵萌烨,张强峰,等.含软弱夹层厚煤层巷帮外错滑移机制与支护研究[J].岩土力学,2016,37(8):2353-2358.
[9]崔希鹏,谷拴成,苏锋.煤巷复合顶板变形破坏机理及支护技术[J].煤炭科学技术,2013,41(11):56-59.
[10]康红普,王金华.煤巷锚杆支护理论与成套技术[M].北京:煤炭工业出版社,2007.
[11]王志玉.基于现场测试及数值模拟分析的坚硬顶板巷道支护参数设计[J].煤矿开采,2018,23(2):49-52.
[2]王襄禹,张宏伟,李国栋.弱胶结富水顶板巷道围岩控制技术研究[J].煤炭科学技术,2018,46(1):88-92.
[3]马其华,姜斌,许文龙,等.复合顶板巷道围岩控制技术研究[J].煤炭工程,2016,48(5):47-49.
[4]刘安秀,曹朋,陈斌.典型锚杆支护巷道含软弱夹层顶板组合梁模型新研究[J].矿业安全与环保,2010,38(5):74-76.
[5]闫绪宇.软岩顶板巷道围岩控制技术[J].煤矿开采,2015,20(3):73-75.
[6]伍国军,陈卫忠,杨建平,等.基于软弱夹层损伤破坏模型的软岩巷道支护优化研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2011,30(S2):4129-4135.
[7]崔旭芳.高应力软弱夹层顶板大断面巷道三维一体化控制技术研究[J].煤炭工程,2017,49(6):36-39.
[8]黄庆享,赵萌烨,张强峰,等.含软弱夹层厚煤层巷帮外错滑移机制与支护研究[J].岩土力学,2016,37(8):2353-2358.
[9]崔希鹏,谷拴成,苏锋.煤巷复合顶板变形破坏机理及支护技术[J].煤炭科学技术,2013,41(11):56-59.
[10]康红普,王金华.煤巷锚杆支护理论与成套技术[M].北京:煤炭工业出版社,2007.
[11]王志玉.基于现场测试及数值模拟分析的坚硬顶板巷道支护参数设计[J].煤矿开采,2018,23(2):49-52.