检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]中交路桥(河北)有限公司,石家庄050021 [2]河北交通职业技术学院,石家庄050091
出 处:《天津城市建设学院学报》2009年第3期173-175,共3页Journal of Tianjin Institute of Urban Construction
摘 要:以张石高速公路二期工程岔道一号隧道为实例,对三导洞法和中导洞法两种施工方法进行了数值模拟,分析比较了这两种施工方法在不同施工工序下的围岩位移场、围岩竖向应力场以及中隔墙竖向应力的变化,从而得出了在相同支护条件下,采用三导洞方案进行岔道一号双连拱隧道施工时,与中导洞方案相比围岩位移值小,竖向应力和中墙所受偏压力低,因而优于中导洞方案.The No. 1 tunnel at turnout of the second-stage highway project from Zhangjiakou to Shijiazhuang was taken as an example. Three-guiding-bole and two-guiding-hole excavation methods were analyzed by numerically simulation. The varieties of displacement field and vertical stress field on wall-rock and the vertical stress field on middle wall under two processes were compared. According to the result, the three-guiding-hole method is more suitable for this construction because their wall-rock displacement and vertical stress are smaller and the prejudicial stress of the middle wall is lower than the two-guiding-hole method.
关 键 词:双连拱隧道 三导洞法 中导洞法 数值模拟 竖向应力 围岩位移
分 类 号:U455[建筑科学—桥梁与隧道工程]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15