落石冲击下地面混凝土垫层对埋地管道的防护作用

刘天豪; 蒋楠; 周传波; 姚颖康; 杨锋; 吕国鹏

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2024-0474

落石冲击下地面混凝土垫层对埋地管道的防护作用

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2024-0474

刘天豪^{1, 2,},
蒋楠^2, ,,
周传波¹,
姚颖康²,
杨锋^{1, 2},
吕国鹏^{1, 2}

1.
中国地质大学（武汉）工程学院，武汉 430074
2.
江汉大学精细爆破国家重点实验室，武汉 430056

基金项目: 湖北省自然科学基金杰出青年项目（2024AFA092）、湖北省重点研发计划项目（2021BAD004）、武汉市重点研发计划项目（2024050802030155）、国家自然科学基金资助项目（42102329、52478525）

详细信息

作者简介:
刘天豪（2001－　），男，硕士研究生，liutianhao@cug.edu.cn

通讯作者:
蒋　楠（1986－　），男，博士，教授，jiangnan@cug.edu.cn

中图分类号: O383
计量
- 文章访问数: 360
- HTML全文浏览量: 56
- PDF下载量: 72
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2024-12-04
- 修回日期: 2025-06-05
- 网络出版日期: 2025-06-06

Study on the protective effect of ground concrete bedding layer on buried pipelines under the rockfall impact

LIU Tianhao^{1, 2
,},
JIANG Nan^{2
, ,},
ZHOU Chuanbo¹,
YAO Yingkang²,
YANG Feng^{1, 2},
LYU Guopeng^{1, 2}

1.
Faculty of Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China
2.
State Key Laboratory of Precision Blasting, Jianghan University, Wuhan, 430056, China

摘要

摘要: 为探究地面混凝土垫层对于用于输水的埋地管道的防护机制，通过全尺寸企口式混凝土管道落石冲击现场试验（埋深2 m）结合DH8302动态应变系统与LS-DYNA数值模拟精细化建模，揭示了管道动应变分布规律及垫层参数的影响机制。研究结果表明：在埋深2 m的工况下，受落石冲击时，管身裂缝失稳扩展更易导致企口式混凝土管道发生泄漏；管身峰值拉应变随垫层厚度与强度增大呈非线性减小，垫层厚度需超过临界值（15 cm）方可显著耗能，且存在强度最优区间（C30~C35），过度提高强度反而会降低防护效能；垫层厚度的防护效能贡献占比达74%，防护设计应遵循“几何优先于材料”原则，建议采用C30~C35强度、厚度不低于0.2 m的混凝土垫层，可大幅降低管道冲击破坏风险。
- 埋地混凝土管道 /
- 落石冲击 /
- 混凝土垫层 /
- 动力响应
Abstract: To investigate the protective effect of ground concrete cushion layers on buried pipelines used for water transmission, field rockfall impact tests were conducted by pre-burying multi-section bell-and-spigot concrete pipelines and casting in-situ concrete cushions on the ground. Combined with the DH8302 dynamic strain testing system, the spatial distribution characteristics of dynamic strain in the pipeline body and the variation law of earth pressure at the bell-and-spigot joints were analyzed. The LS-DYNA numerical simulation software was used to establish a detailed model of the rockfall impact test, and the reliability of the numerical model was verified by comparing simulation results with test results. By increasing the impact energy of rockfalls, the failure characteristics of buried bell-and-spigot concrete pipelines were studied. The influence mechanism of concrete cushion parameters (thickness and strength) on the protective effect was further analyzed by varying these parameters. The results show that: (1) Under the condition of a burial depth of 2 m, unstable crack propagation in the pipeline body is more likely to cause leakage of bell-and-spigot concrete pipelines under rockfall impact; (2) The peak tensile strain in the pipeline body decreases nonlinearly with the increase of cushion thickness and strength. The cushion thickness must exceed a critical value (15 cm) to significantly dissipate energy, and there is an optimal strength range (C30-C35) – excessive strength enhancement will reduce protective efficiency; (3) Cushion thickness accounts for 74% of the protective effect contribution, indicating that the design principle of "geometry prior to material" should be followed. It is recommended to use a concrete cushion with a strength of C30-C35 and a thickness of ≥0.2 m, which can significantly reduce the risk of pipeline impact damage and provide a quantitative design basis for pipeline protection in mountainous areas.
- buried concrete pipeline /
- rockfall impact /
- concrete bedding /
- dynamic response

HTML全文

图 1 模型试验设计示意图

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the model test design

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 钢筋混凝土球制作过程

Figure 2. Production process of reinforced concrete ball

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 现场试验准备流程

Figure 3. Field test preparation process

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 高速摄像机测速原理及现场布置

Figure 4. High-speed camera speed measurement principle and site layout

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 测试点位布置

Figure 5. Layout of test point

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 测试点编号

Figure 6. Test point number

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 混凝土垫层破坏情况

Figure 7. Concrete bedding destruction

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 实测截面A、B应变曲线

Figure 8. Measured A and B section strain curve

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 实测峰值应变沿管道轴向分布图

Figure 9. Measured peak strain distribution along the axial direction of the pipe

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 现场落石冲击试验数值模型示意图

Figure 10. Schematic diagram of the numerical model of the field rockfall impact test

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 数值模拟与现场试验有效应力对比

Figure 11. Comparison of effective stress between numerical simulation and field test

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 管道顶部、底部土压力验证

Figure 12. Verification of earth pressure at top and bottom of pipeline

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 企口管偏转角计算示意

Figure 13. Schematic calculation of the deflection angle of the tongue and groove pipe

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 峰值拉应变、峰值有效应力、相对位移和偏转角的冲击能关系曲线

Figure 14. Relationship curves between impact energy and peak tensile strain, peak effective stress, relative displacement, and deflection angle

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 管道峰值拉应变与垫层厚度拟合曲线

Figure 15. Peak tensile strain versus bedding thickness curve

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 管道峰值拉应变与垫层混凝土强度拟合曲线

Figure 16. Peak tensile strain versus bedding concrete strength curve

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 17 不同混凝土强度下峰值拉应变与垫层厚度关系曲线

Figure 17. Peak tensile strain versus bedding thickness curve for different concrete strength

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 土壤的物理力学参数

Table 1. Physical and mechanical parameters of the soil

地层	土质	泊松比	密度/(g·cm⁻³)	黏聚力/kPa	内摩擦角/°
1	杂填土	−	1.80	4	18
2	粉质黏土	0.3	1.90	34	13.8

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 单节管道参数

Table 2. Parameter of a single section of the pipe

管道内径/ mm	管道壁厚/ mm	混凝土用量/m³	钢筋用量/ kg	管道重量/ kg	裂缝荷载/ (kN·m⁻¹)	破坏荷载/ (kN·m⁻¹)
1500	150	1865	55.6	1920.6	100	150

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 混凝土垫层参数

Table 3. Concrete bedding parameter

密度/ ( g·cm⁻³)	弹性模量/ MPa	泊松比	抗压强度/ MPa	抗拉强度/ MPa
2.5	30 000	0.2	20.1	2.01

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 粉质黏土材料参数

Table 4. Parameters of powdery clay material

材料	密度/ (g·cm⁻³)	弹性剪切模量/MPa	泊松比	内摩擦角/°	凝聚力/ kPa
粉质黏土	1.9	39	0.35	13	20

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 混凝土垫层参数

Table 5. Concrete bedding layer parameters

材料	密度/ (g·cm⁻³)	弹性模量/ GPa	泊松比	屈服强度/ MPa	切线模量/ MPa
混凝土	2.5	30	0.2	30	22500

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 管道相关材料参数

Table 6. Parameters of pipe-related materials

材料	密度/(g·cm⁻³)	弹性模量/ GPa	剪切模量/MPa	切线模量/MPa	泊松比	屈服应力/MPa
混凝土	2.4	32.5	—	—	0.2	—
钢筋	7.8	200	—	1500	0.3	350
橡胶	1.2	—	9.2	—	0.495	—

下载: 导出CSV

表 7 冲击体刚体材料参数

Table 7. Parameters of impact body rigid material

材料	密度/(g·cm⁻³)	弹性模量/GPa	泊松比
钢筋混凝土	2.43	30	0.3

下载: 导出CSV

表 8 数值模拟与现场试验有效应力对比误差

Table 8. Comparison error of effective stress between numerical simulation and field test

测点	有效应力/MPa		误差/%	测点	有效应力/MPa		误差/%	测点	有效应力/MPa		误差/%
测点	试验	模拟	误差/%	测点	试验	模拟	误差/%	测点	试验	模拟	误差/%
Y1	0.566	0.586	3.47	Y5	0.310	0.329	5.75	Y9	0.300	0.324	7.45
Y2	0.274	0.284	3.48	Y6	0.349	0.367	4.91	Y10	0.088	0.098	10.39
Y3	0.157	0.164	4.10	Y7	0.387	0.399	3.09	Y11	0.100	0.110	9.08
Y4	0.275	0.290	5.33	Y8	0.214	0.233	8.13

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(30)

[1]	马国凯, 魏定勇, 刘爱友, 等. 浅层地震技术在南水北调中线工程PCCP管道缺陷探测中的应用 [J]. 物探与化探, 2022, 46(2): 525–530. DOI: 10.11720/wtyht.2022.2467. MA G K, WEI D Y, LIU A Y, et al. Application of shallow seismic exploration technique in defect detection of PCCP used in the middle route of the South-to-North Water Transfer Project [J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2022, 46(2): 525–530. DOI: 10.11720/wtyht.2022.2467.
[2]	赵怀珠, 金鑫, 温高峰, 等. 水平定向钻穿越南水北调总干渠关键技术研究 [J]. 中国给水排水, 2022, 38(18): 94–100. DOI: 10.19853/j.zgjsps.1000-4602.2022.18.018. ZHAO H Z, JIN X, WEN G F, et al. Research on key technology of horizontal directional drilling across the main canal of South-to-North Water Diversion Project [J]. China Water & Wastewater, 2022, 38(18): 94–100. DOI: 10.19853/j.zgjsps.1000-4602.2022.18.018.
[3]	赵勇, 王浩, 邓铭江, 等. 黄河几字弯水网: 南水北调西线配套东延工程构想 [J]. 水利学报, 2023, 54(9): 1015–1024. DOI: 10.13243/j.cnki.slxb.20220393. ZHAO Y, WANG H, DENG M J, et al. Jiziwan water network in the Yellow River Basin: conceptualizing the east extension project of the west route of the South-to-North Water Diversion [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2023, 54(9): 1015–1024. DOI: 10.13243/j.cnki.slxb.20220393.
[4]	VOLKWEIN A, SCHELLENBERG K, LABIOUSE V, et al. Rockfall characterisation and structural protection-a review [J]. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2011, 11(9): 2617–2651. DOI: 10.5194/nhess-11-2617-2011.
[5]	LAMBERT S, BOURRIER F. Design of rockfall protection embankments: a review [J]. Engineering Geology, 2013, 154: 77–88. DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2012.12.012.
[6]	钟冬望, 龚相超, 涂圣武, 等. 高饱和黏土中爆炸波作用下直埋聚乙烯管的动力响应 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2019, 39(3): 033102. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2017-0334. ZHONG D W, GONG X C, TU S W, et al. Dynamic responses of PE pipes directly buried in high saturated clay to blast wave [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2019, 39(3): 033102. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2017-0334.
[7]	赵珂, 蒋楠, 贾永胜, 等. 爆破地震波作用下法兰接口燃气管道动力失效机制 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2021, 41(9): 095101. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0320. ZHAO K, JIANG N, JIA Y S, et al. Dynamic failure mechanism of gas pipeline with flange joint under blasting seismic wave [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2021, 41(9): 095101. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0320.
[8]	张玉琦, 蒋楠, 周传波, 等. 爆破地震荷载作用下承插式HDPE管道动力失效机制 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2022, 42(12): 125101. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2021-0492. ZHANG Y Q, JIANG N, ZHOU C B, et al. Dynamic failure mechanism of HDPE pipelines with a gasketed bell and spigot joint subjected to blasting seismic load [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2022, 42(12): 125101. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2021-0492.
[9]	刘奇, 刘先峰, 李建国, 等. 锚索肋板式拦石墙结构稳定性及动力响应研究 [J]. 振动工程学报, 2023, 36(2): 427–434. DOI: 10.16385/j.cnki.issn.1004-4523.2023.02.014. LIU Q, LIU X F, LI J G, et al. Structural stability and dynamic response of anchor cable ribbed rockfall embankments [J]. Journal of Vibration Engineering, 2023, 36(2): 427–434. DOI: 10.16385/j.cnki.issn.1004-4523.2023.02.014.
[10]	贺咏梅, 彭伟, 阳友奎. 边坡柔性防护系统的典型工程应用 [J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2006, 25(2): 323–328. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2006.02.017. HE Y M, PENG W, YANG Y K. Typical cases of slope flexible protection system [J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2006, 25(2): 323–328. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2006.02.017.
[11]	叶四桥, 唐红梅, 祝辉. 基于落石运动特性分析的拦石网设计理念 [J]. 岩土工程学报, 2007, 29(4): 566–571. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-4548.2007.04.016. YE S Q, TANG H M, ZHU H. Design conception of safe net system based on analysis of motion trace of rockfall [J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2007, 29(4): 566–571. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-4548.2007.04.016.
[12]	李巧珍, 罗敏, 石宗奇, 等. 球状落体冲击条件下埋地管道力学响应行为 [J]. 天然气工业, 2021, 41(12): 138–145. DOI: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2021.12.015. LI Q Z, LUO M, SHI Z Q, et al. Dynamic response behaviors of buried line pipes subjected to the impact of spherical falling objects [J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2021, 41(12): 138–145. DOI: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2021.12.015.
[13]	MA C H, TU Y, ZHOU Y L, et al. Dynamic response of PCCP under the rockfall impact based on the continuous-discontinuous method: a case study [J]. Water, 2024, 16(6): 801. DOI: 10.3390/w16060801.
[14]	叶四桥, 陈洪凯, 唐红梅. 基于落石计算的半刚性拦石墙设计 [J]. 中国铁道科学, 2008, 29(2): 17–22. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-4632.2008.02.004. YE S Q, CHEN H K, TANG H M. Design of semi-rigid rockfall barrier wall based on rockfall simulation [J]. China Railway Science, 2008, 29(2): 17–22. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-4632.2008.02.004.
[15]	吴建利, 胡卸文, 梅雪峰, 等. 落石冲击混凝土板与缓冲层组合结构的动力响应 [J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2021, 48(1): 78–87. DOI: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.202004029. WU J L, HU X W, MEI X F, et al. Dynamic response of RC slab with cushion layer composed of sandy soil to rockfall impact [J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2021, 48(1): 78–87. DOI: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.202004029.
[16]	CALVETTI F, DI PRISCO C. Rockfall impacts on sheltering tunnels: real-scale experiments [J]. Géotechnique, 2012, 62(10): 865–876. DOI: 10.1680/geot.9.p.036.
[17]	夏宇磬, 蒋楠, 姚颖康, 等. 粉质黏土层预埋承插式混凝土管道对爆破振动的动力响应 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2020, 40(4): 043302. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0207. XIA Y Q, JIANG N, YAO Y K, et al. Dynamic responses of a concrete pipeline with bell-and-spigot joints buried in a silty clay layer to blasting seismic waves [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2020, 40(4): 043302. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0207.
[18]	翟科杰, 方宏远, 张冲博, 等. PCCP管承插口力学性能与失效模式仿真分析 [J]. 中国给水排水, 2020, 36(20): 10–18. DOI: 10.19853/j.zgjsps.1000-4602.2020.20.002. ZHAI K J, FANG H Y, ZHANG C B, et al. Mechanical properties and failure mode simulation analysis of joints in PCCP [J]. China Water & Wastewater, 2020, 36(20): 10–18. DOI: 10.19853/j.zgjsps.1000-4602.2020.20.002.
[19]	方迎潮, 汤明高, 葛华, 等. 崩塌落石冲击埋地油气管道的动力响应机理研究 [J]. 工程地质学报, 2022, 30(2): 589–598. DOI: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2021-0603. FANG Y C, TANG M G, GE H, et al. Study on dynamic response mechanism of rockfall impacting buried oil and gas pipeline [J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2022, 30(2): 589–598. DOI: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2021-0603.
[20]	国家市场监督管理总局, 国家标准化管理委员会. GB/T 11836-2023 混凝土和钢筋混凝土排水管 [S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2023. State Administration for Market Regulation, National Standardization Administration. GB/T 11836-2023 Concrete and reinforced concrete sewer pipes [S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2023.
[21]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部, 中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. GB 50010-2010 混凝土结构设计规范 [S]. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2011. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China. GB 50010-2010 Code for design of concrete structures [S]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2011.
[22]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部, 中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. GB 50268-2008 给水排水管道工程施工及验收规范 [S]. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2009. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China. GB 50268-2008 Code for construction and acceptance of water and sewerage pipeline works [S]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2009.
[23]	朱斌, 蒋楠, 周传波, 等. 粉质黏土层直埋铸铁管道爆破地震效应 [J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2021, 55(3): 500–510. DOI: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-973x.2021.03.010. ZHU B, JIANG N, ZHOU C B, et al. Blasting seismic effect of buried cast iron pipeline in silty clay layer [J]. Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science), 2021, 55(3): 500–510. DOI: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-973x.2021.03.010.
[24]	鲁稳, 潘卫东. Drucker-Prager系列屈服准则在稳定分析中的应用研究 [J]. 汕头大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 29(1): 73–80. LU W, PAN W D. Application study of Drucker-Prager yield criteria to stability analysis [J]. Journal of Shantou University (Natural Science Edition), 2014, 29(1): 73–80.
[25]	LIN S C, LI D, YANG B. Experimental study and numerical simulation on damage assessment of reinforced concrete beams [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2019, 132: 103323. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2019.103323.
[26]	SHA Y Y, HAO H. Laboratory tests and numerical simulations of barge impact on circular reinforced concrete piers [J]. Engineering structures, 2013, 46: 593–605. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.09.002.
[27]	JOO J, YOON J W. The potential of rubber materials as an inhibitor to suppress jet formation of the shaped charge warhead [J]. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 2024, 38(3): 1329–1340. DOI: 10.1007/s12206-024-0227-5.
[28]	FAN W, YUAN W C. Ship bow force-deformation curves for ship-impact demand of bridges considering effect of pile-cap depth [J]. Shock and Vibration, 2014, 2014(1): 201425. DOI: 10.1155/2014/201425.
[29]	HE S M, YAN S X, DENG Y, et al. Impact protection of bridge piers against rockfall [J]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2019, 78(4): 2671–2680. DOI: 10.1007/s10064-018-1250-5.
[30]	王东源, 李朝, 王洪波, 等. EPS垫层对落石区油气管道的防护效果 [J]. 油气储运, 2019, 38(12): 1425–1431. DOI: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2019.12.017. WANG D Y, LI C, WANG H B, et al. Protective effect of EPS cushion on oil and gas pipelines in rockfall areas [J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2019, 38(12): 1425–1431. DOI: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2019.12.017.