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
作 者:方玉树[1,2] Fang Yushu
机构地区:[1]后勤工程学院,重庆401311 [2]岩土力学与地质环境保护重庆市重点实验室,重庆401311
出 处:《重庆建筑》2020年第7期60-63,共4页Chongqing Architecture
摘 要:在水泥土挡墙抗倾覆稳定性计算中,墙面水压力和墙底水压力的定位有过三种不同方法,即:(1)前者为抗力,后者为作用;(2)前者为抗力,后者为负的抗力;(3)前者为负的作用,后者为负的抗力。有的学者对危岩抗倾覆稳定性计算中不同方向水压力的定位也建议采用第三种方法。分析表明,这些方法都违背了水力学基本规律。为此提出了水泥土挡墙和危岩不同方向水压力定位的不同主张。In the calculation of the anti-overturning stability of cement-soil retaining walls,there are three different methods to locate the water pressure on the wall surface and the water pressure on the bottom of the wall.That is:(1)resistance and effect;(2)resistance and negative resistance;(3)negative effect and negative resistance.Some scholars also suggest the third method for the positioning of water pressure in different directions in the calculation of the anti-over-turning stability of dangerous rocks.Analysis shows that these methods violate the basic laws of hydraulics.To this end,different proposals were made for the positioning of water pressure in different directions for cement-soil retaining walls and dangerous rocks.
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:216.73.216.204