中欧(英)边坡极限状态设计方法差异研究  

Study on Differences in Limit State Design Methods for Slopes in China and Europe

作　　者：孟振华[1] 郭海强[1] 张文生 李炼 杨泉[1] MENG Zhenhua;GUO Haiqiang;ZHANG Wensheng;LI Lian;YANG Quan(China Railway Eryuan Engineering Group Co.,Ltd.,Chengdu 610031,China;Harbin Institute of Technology(Shenzhen),Shenzhen 518055,Guangdong,China)

机构地区：[1]中铁二院工程集团有限责任公司,成都610031 [2]哈尔滨工业大学(深圳),广东深圳518055

出　　处：《路基工程》2024年第5期7-14,共8页Subgrade Engineering

基　　金：国家重点研发计划(2022YFE0104600)。

摘　　要：针对边坡极限状态设计问题,分别根据现行中、欧岩土设计标准,从极限状态设计标准体系、边坡可靠性分析方法、边坡极限状态设计方法等方面进行对比分析。结果表明:中、欧岩土工程设计的力学与数学原理基本一致,但相关标准的工程设计体系却存在显著差异;在边坡极限状态法的分项系数制定上,中国采用的水准Ⅱ方法较欧洲的历史经验法更为先进;中、欧边坡稳定性计算所采取的计算方法存在差异,进行铁路边坡极限状态设计算例对比无意义。Aiming at the slope limit state design problem,according to the current geotechnical design standards in China and Europe,the limit state design standard system,slope reliability analysis method and slope limit state design method are compared and analyzed.The findings reveal that the mechanical and mathematical principles underlying soil and rock engineering design are largely consistent between China and Europe.However,notable disparities exist in the engineering design frameworks outlined in the respective standards.Concerning the formulation of partial factors for the slope limit state method,China's adoption of the Level II method appears more progressive than Europe's reliance on historical empirical methods.Moreover,differences in the calculation methods for slope stability between China and Europe render a direct comparison of limit state design examples for railway slopes impractical.

关 键 词：边坡设计 欧洲标准 设计原理 全过程对比 表达式 可靠指标 分项系数 极限状态 

分 类 号：U213.13[交通运输工程—道路与铁道工程]