抗拔桩与承压型囊式扩体锚杆性价比浅析  

Analysis on cost⁃performance ratio of anti⁃uplift pile and compression⁃type capsule⁃type expanded anchor rod

作　　者：党昱敬 程少振[2,3] 刘天翔 张义 高丹青 DANG Yujing;CHENG Shaozhen;LIU Tianxiang;ZHANG Yi;GAO Danqing(Beijing Geotechnical Anchorage Engineering Center,China Jingye Engineering Co.,Ltd,Beijing 100088,China;Central Research Institute of Building and Construction MCC,Beijing 100088,China;China Energy Digital Technology Group Co.,Ltd,Beijing 100044,China)

机构地区：[1]中国京冶工程技术有限公司北京市岩土锚固工程中心,北京100088 [2]中冶建筑研究总院有限公司,北京100088 [3]中能建数字科技集团有限公司,北京100044

出　　处：《建筑结构》2024年第10期145-150,155,共7页Building Structure

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目(52008412);国家重点研发计划(2017YFC0805406)。

摘　　要：对建(构)筑物抗浮工程两种常用锚固体钢筋混凝土抗拔桩和承压型囊式扩体锚杆设计计算理论进行了研究和梳理;并结合北京某一实际工程案例,对两种抗浮锚固体在设计中的可靠性、适用性和经济性进行对比分析。结果表明,在天然地基承载力满足基底压力要求,地基土层构成情况相同,两种抗浮锚固体提供相同抗力的条件下,承压型囊式扩体锚杆综合性价比优于钢筋混凝土抗拔桩,仅工程造价就可以节省20%左右,可为抗浮工程锚固设计时的锚固体方案比选提供借鉴与参考。The design and calculation theory of two kinds of commonly used anchor solids reinforced concrete anti-uplift piles and compression-type capsule-type expanded anchor rod in anti-floating engineering of building(structure)were studied and combed.Combined with an actual project case in Beijing,the reliability,applicability and economy of two kinds of anti-floating anchor solids in design were compared and analyzed.The results show that under the condition that the bearing capacity of natural foundation meets the requirements of foundation pressure,the composition of foundation soil is the same,and two kinds of anti-floating anchor solids provide the same resistance,the comprehensive cost-performance ratio of compression-type capsule-type expanded anchor rod is better than that of the reinforced concrete anti-uplift pile,and only the cost of the engineering can be saved by about 20%,which can provide reference for the anchor solid program selection for the design of anti-floating engineering anchorage.

关 键 词：抗浮工程 锚固体 钢筋混凝土抗拔桩 承压型囊式扩体锚杆 综合性价比 

分 类 号：TU470.3[建筑科学—结构工程]