raybet体育在线 院报 ›› 2025, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (6): 154-161.DOI: 10.11988/ckyyb.20240480

• 岩土工程 • 上一篇    下一篇

地下结构抗浮设计研究进展

王胜利1(), 董淑卿1, 黄瑜1, 宋枳含2, 吴桐1, 郑山锁2,3()   

  1. 1 中国能源建设集团陕西省电力设计院有限公司,西安 710054
    2 西安建筑科技大学 土木工程学院,西安 710055
    3 西安建筑科技大学 结构工程与抗震教育部重点实验室,西安 710055
  • 收稿日期:2024-05-09 修回日期:2024-07-09 出版日期:2025-06-01 发布日期:2025-06-01
  • 通信作者:
    郑山锁(1960-),男,陕西渭南人,教授,博士,主要从事工程结构抗震的研究。E-mail:
  • 作者简介:

    王胜利(1966-),男,陕西富平人,正高级工程师,主要从事地下结构抗浮研究。E-mail:

  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划项目(2019YFC1509302); 国家自然科学基金项目(52278530); 陕西省重点研发计划项目(2021ZDLSF06-10)

Research Progress on Anti-floating Design of Underground Structures

WANG Sheng-li1(), DONG Shu-qing1, HUANG Yu1, SONG Zhi-han2, WU Tong1, ZHENG Shan-suo2,3()   

  1. 1 China Energy Engineering Group Shaanxi Electric Power Design Institute Co.,Ltd.,Xi’an 710054, China
    2 School of Civil Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an 710055, China
    3 Key Laboratory of Structural Engineering and Earthquake Resistance of Ministry of Education, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an 710055, China
  • Received:2024-05-09 Revised:2024-07-09 Published:2025-06-01 Online:2025-06-01

摘要:

为优化地下结构抗浮性能、提升工程应用价值,在综述国内外地下结构抗浮性能的理论与试验方法基础上,梳理水浮力计算方法、地下结构浮力模型试验、地下结构抗浮措施的研究进展,总结了当前地下结构抗浮性能研究中存在的一些共性科学难题和技术瓶颈。结果表明:抗浮力与抗浮设防水位、土层条件、渗流因素有关,尤其要重视竖向渗流的影响;砂性土体中地下结构浮力数值较明确,而黏性土体中地下结构的浮力计算有争议,相关文献建议数值折减,但折减系数尚无统一结论;地下结构抗浮措施分为主动抗浮式和被动抗浮式,主动抗浮措施适用性更广,在工程建设中,需要结合结构物特点、地质条件与经济性分析,选择最佳处理措施。

关键词: 水浮力计算, 抗浮设防水位, 浮力折减系数, 浮力模型试验, 抗浮措施

Abstract:

With the acceleration of urbanization and continuous expansion of underground space, anti-floating design has become a core issue in ensuring the safety of underground structures. Based on a review of theoretical and experimental methods for the anti-floating performance of underground structures both domestically and internationally, we systematically summarize the research progresses on water buoyancy calculation methods, buoyancy model testing of underground structures, and anti-floating measures for underground structures. We also review the common scientific challenges and technical bottlenecks in current studies on the anti-floating performance of underground structures. The results show that: (1) the selection of anti-floating water levels requires comprehensive consideration of hydrogeological conditions and monitoring data, while there is currently no unified standard for multi-layer groundwater conditions. Anti-floating design for slope buildings is more complex due to significant differences in upstream-downstream water levels. Additionally, seepage significantly impacts buoyancy, particularly the overflow effect of confined water caused by vertical seepage, which can increase buoyancy to more than twice the hydrostatic pressure. Considering seepage effects, nine water buoyancy calculation models for different aquiclude structures were established based on Darcy’s law and seepage equilibrium equations, providing theoretical support for buoyancy calculations under complex geological conditions. (2) Researchers worldwide have derived buoyancy reduction coefficients for specific conditions through theoretical analysis, numerical simulation, and model box testing. Water buoyancy in sandy soils requires no reduction, while in cohesive soils, the reduction coefficient ranges from 0.41 to 0.85. (3) Anti-floating measures for underground structures can be divided into passive and active anti-floating types, with five common measures and their applicable conditions summarized. Passive anti-floating mainly increases the self-weight of the structure or the anchoring force, including methods of anti-floating (uplift) piles and anti-floating anchors (cables). Among these, floating beam capping and counterweight methods are widely used due to their convenient construction and simple operation. Anti-floating piles are suitable for deep excavations but have higher costs, while anti-floating anchors offer economic and flexible solutions but require leakage prevention at connections. Active anti-floating measures reduce water levels through interception and drainage decompression, offering quick results and low cost, though excessive drainage may cause ecological issues and foundation settlement. Practical engineering requires comprehensive consideration of geological conditions, structural characteristics, and cost-effectiveness to achieve balance between safety and efficiency.

Key words: water buoyancy calculation, anti-floating water level, buoyancy reduction coefficient, buoyancy model test, anti-floating measures

中图分类号: 

Baidu
map