Influence of different drill pipe diameters on the blow count of SPT
-
摘要: ϕ50钻杆越来越广泛地应用于标准贯入试验中，然而，在进行岩土体工程特性判别时，ϕ50钻杆得到的标贯击数N值是否需要换算以及如何换算，规范中未提供明确的指导。在湛江市某场地开展不同杆径标准贯入试验对比研究，对相关数据进行统计分析，结果表明：标贯击数的大小与杆径之间存在显著的相关关系，且不同杆径间标贯击数的比值与岩土类别、测试深度有关。砂土地层中ϕ42钻杆的标贯击数小于ϕ50钻杆，整体上二者比值为0.89，不同深度下二者比值为0.83～1.01，随着试验深度的增加，击数比值呈现先增加后减小的趋势；黏性土地层中ϕ42钻杆的标贯击数大于ϕ50钻杆，整体上二者比值为1.14，不同深度下二者比值为1.11～1.20，随着试验深度的增加，击数比值基本不变。研究成果可为地区经验积累和工程实践提供参考。Abstract: The ϕ50 drill pipe is increasingly being used in standard penetration tests. However, there is no clear guidance in the specifications on whether and how to convert the blow count N value of the standard penetration tests obtained by the ϕ50 drill pipe when distinguishing the characteristics of rock and soil engineering. A comparative study was conducted on standard penetration tests with different drill pipe diameters at a site in Zhanjiang City. Statistical analysis was conducted on the relevant data, and the results showed that there was a significant correlation between the blow count of standard penetration tests and the drill pipe diameter, and the ratio of blow counts between different drill pipe diameters was related to the soil type and test depth. The blow counts of the ϕ42 drill pipe in sandy soil formations is less than that of the ϕ50 drill pipe, with an overall ratio of 0.89. The ratio of the two at different depths ranges from 0.83 to 1.01. As the test depth increases, the ratio of the blow counts shows a trend of first increasing and then decreasing. The blow counts of the ϕ42 drill pipe in the cohesive soil layer is greater than that of the ϕ50 drill pipe, and the overall ratio of the two is 1.14. The ratio of the two at different depths is 1.11~1.20. As the test depth increases, the ratio of the blow counts remains basically unchanged. The research results can provide reference for regional experience accumulation and engineering practice.
-
表 1 测区场地主要地层条件
地层代号 岩性 状态及密实度 ①1 杂填土 松散 ①2 素填土 松散 ⑤1 淤泥 流塑 ⑤2 淤泥质黏土 软塑 ⑤3 淤泥质粉质黏土 软塑 ⑤4 粉质黏土 可塑—硬塑 ⑤5 黏土 软塑—硬塑 ⑤13 泥炭质土 ⑤6 粉细砂 松散—密实、饱和 ⑤7 中砂 松散—中密、饱和 ⑤8 粗砂 松散—密实、饱和 ⑤9 砾砂 松散—密实、饱和 
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 各类土层标贯次数统计
统计项目 砂土 黏性土 ϕ42 ϕ50 比值 ϕ42 ϕ50 比值 试验个数 445 439 488 634 最小值 3 2 3 4 最大值 38 51 31 50 平均值 17.98 20.22 0.89 13.73 12.02 1.14 变异系数 0.45 0.49 0.42 0.49 标准值 17.32 19.41 0.89 13.29 11.62 1.14
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 不同杆径标贯击数统计结果及对比
土层类别 统计项目 试验深度0～10 m 试验深度10～20 m 试验深度20～35 m ϕ42 ϕ50 比值 ϕ42 ϕ50 比值 ϕ42 ϕ50 比值 砂土 试验个数 133 94 113 142 199 203 最小值 3 2 7 7 8 7 最大值 23 36 33 40 38 51 平均值 9.48 11.49 0.83 17.94 17.81 1.01 23.68 25.96 0.91 变异系数 0.40 0.50 0.30 0.33 0.27 0.39 标准值 8.92 10.48 0.85 17.08 16.96 1.01 22.92 24.73 0.93 黏性土 试验个数 124 185 173 211 191 238 最小值 3 4 5 4 7 4 最大值 23 18 26 23 31 50 平均值 9.04 7.51 1.20 12.46 11.27 1.11 17.92 16.20 1.11 变异系数 0.43 0.41 0.35 0.39 0.28 0.37 标准值 8.44 7.13 1.18 11.90 10.74 1.11 17.31 15.55 1.11
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 姜仁利, 王国敬, 谭海军. 标准贯入试验操作中影响因素的探讨[J]. 港工技术, 2010, 195(8): 55-57. (JIANG R L, WANG G J, TAN H J. Discussion on affecting factors of standard penetration test[J]. Port Engineering Technology, 2010, 195(8): 55-57. (in Chinese)JIANG R L, WANG G J, TAN H J. Discussion on affecting factors of standard penetration test[J]. Port Engineering Technology, 2010, 195（8）: 55-57. (in Chinese) [2] 袁 钟, 李思源, 申伯熙. 标准贯入试验的应用及贯入击数的影响因素[J]. 港工技术, 2002, 4(12): 50-52. (YUAN Z, LI S Y, SHEN B X. Application of standard penetration test and influence factor of number of blows[J]. Port Engineering Technology, 2002, 4(12): 50-52. (in Chinese)YUAN Z, LI S Y, SHEN B X. Application of standard penetration test and influence factor of number of blows[J]. Port Engineering Technology, 2002, 4（12）: 50-52. (in Chinese) [3] 曹永生, 刘裕华. 标准贯入试验的优缺点分析与改进思路探讨[J]. 中国水运, 2013, 3(3): 272-274. (CAO Y S, LIU Y H. Analysis on advantages and disadvantages of standard penetration test and discussion on improvement[J] China Water Transport, 2013, 3(3): 272-274. (in Chinese)CAO Y S, LIU Y H. Analysis on advantages and disadvantages of standard penetration test and discussion on improvement[J] China Water Transport, 2013, 3(3): 272-274. (in Chinese) [4] 杨文卫, 岳中琦. 世界各地标准贯人试验比较和共同问题[J]. 工程勘察, 2008, 12(1): 5-15. (YANG W W, YUE Z Q. Comparison and common problemsof standard penetration tests in the world[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2008, 12(1): 5-15. (in Chinese)YANG W W, YUE Z Q. Comparison and common problemsof standard penetration tests in the world[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2008, 12(1): 5-15. (in Chinese) [5] 卢坤玉, 李兆焱, 袁晓铭, 等. 国内外标准贯入测试影响因素研究[J]. 地震研究, 2020, 43(3): 582-591. (LU K Y, LI Z Y, YUAN X M, et al. Influence factors of standard penetration test in China and over the world[J]. Journal of Seismological Research, 2020, 43(3): 582-591. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-0666.2020.03.022LU K Y, LI Z Y, YUAN X M, et al. Influence factors of standard penetration test in China and over the world[J]. Journal of Seismological Research, 2020, 43（3）: 582-591. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-0666.2020.03.022 [6] 徐光大, 徐光黎, 李俊杰. 日本标准贯人试验方法及其N值在岩土工程中的应用[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2011(4): 33-38. (XU G D, XU G L, LI J J. Application of SPT and N-value to geotechnical engineering in Japan[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2011(4): 33-38. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1556.2011.04.009XU G D, XU G L, LI J J. Application of SPT and N-value to geotechnical engineering in Japan[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2011（4）: 33-38. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1556.2011.04.009 [7] 中华人民共和国建设部. 岩土工程勘察规范[2009年版]: GB 50021—2001[S]. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2004. (Ministry of Construction of the People’s Republic of China. Code for investigation of geotechnical engineering: GB 50021—2001[S]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2004. (in Chinese))Ministry of Construction of the People’s Republic of China. Code for investigation of geotechnical engineering: GB 50021—2001[S]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2004. (in Chinese)) [8] 国家铁路局. 铁路工程地质原位测试规程: TB 10018-2018[S]. 北京: 中国铁道出版社, 2018. (National Railway Administration. Code for in-site testing of railway engineering geology: TB 10018-2018[S]. Beijing: China Railway Press, 2018. (in Chinese)National Railway Administration. Code for in-site testing of railway engineering geology: TB 10018-2018[S]. Beijing: China Railway Press, 2018. (in Chinese) [9] 《工程地质手册》编委会. 工程地质手册(第五版)[M]. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2018. ((Editorial Board of Geological Engineering Handbook. Geological engineering handbook[M]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2018. (in Chinese)(Editorial Board of Geological Engineering Handbook. Geological engineering handbook[M]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2018. (in Chinese) [10] 张立丽. 利用标准贯入试验估算土体抗剪强度指标[J]. 工程勘察, 2022(8): 22-27. (ZHANG L L. Estimation of shear strength indexes of soil by standard penetration tests[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2022(8): 22-27. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1433.2022.8.gckc202208005ZHANG L L. Estimation of shear strength indexes of soil by standard penetration tests[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2022（8）: 22-27. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1433.2022.8.gckc202208005 [11] 张占荣, 刘庆辉, 赵 勇. 基于标贯试验特性的土体力学参数估计[J]. 勘察科学技术, 2010(6): 18-21. (ZHANG Z R, LIU Q H, ZHAO Y. Estimation of soil mechanical parameters based on standard penetration test characteristics[J]. Site Investigation Science and Technology, 2010(6): 18-21. ( in Chinese) (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3946.2010.06.004ZHANG Z R, LIU Q H, ZHAO Y. Estimation of soil mechanical parameters based on standard penetration test characteristics[J]. Site Investigation Science and Technology, 2010（6）: 18-21. ( in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3946.2010.06.004 [12] 沈 振, 屈鹏飞, 孟轲荆, 等. 旁压试验和标准贯入试验与砂土变形模量的相关性[J]. 岩土工程技术, 2021, 35(6): 416-419. (SHEN Z, QU P F, MENG K J, et al. Correlation between pressuremeter test and standard penetration test on sand deformation modulus[J]. Geotechnical Engineering Technique, 2021, 35(6): 416-419. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-2993.2021.06.013SHEN Z, QU P F, MENG K J, et al. Correlation between pressuremeter test and standard penetration test on sand deformation modulus[J]. Geotechnical Engineering Technique, 2021, 35（6）: 416-419. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-2993.2021.06.013 [13] 赵倩玉. 我国规范标贯液化判别方法的改进研究[D]. 中国地震局工程力学研究所, 2013. (ZHAO Q Y. Improvement of liquefaction discrimination method based on surveys of the standard penetration test data in Chinese code[D]. Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, 2013. (in Chinese)ZHAO Q Y. Improvement of liquefaction discrimination method based on surveys of the standard penetration test data in Chinese code[D]. Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, 2013. (in Chinese) [14] 朱国祥, 金 淮, 周玉凤, 等. 现行不同规范中标贯法液化判别结果的对比分析[J]. 工程勘察, 2012, 40(10): 32-37. (ZHU G X, JIN H, ZHOU Y F, et al. Comparison of the results of liquefaction evaluation by using blow counts of standard penetration in current codes[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2012, 40(10): 32-37. (in Chinese)ZHU G X, JIN H, ZHOU Y F, et al. Comparison of the results of liquefaction evaluation by using blow counts of standard penetration in current codes[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2012, 40（10）: 32-37. (in Chinese) [15] 范建好. 对标贯击数杆径换算的探讨[J]. 工程勘察, 2014, 1(S1): 36-40. (FAN J H. Discussion on diameter conversion of standard pentration test hit number[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2014, 1(S1): 36-40. (in Chinese)FAN J H. Discussion on diameter conversion of standard pentration test hit number[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2014, 1（S1）: 36-40. (in Chinese) [16] 裴 文, 彭功勋, 李承海. 广州某工程标准贯入击数与钻杆杆径关系的研究[J]. 广东土木与建筑, 2008(11): 25-27. (PEI W, PENG G X, LI C H. Research for relationship between standard penetration number and drill pipe diameter of the engineering in Guangzhou[J]. Guangdong Architecture Civil Engineering, 2008(11): 25-27. (in Chinese)PEI W, PENG G X, LI C H. Research for relationship between standard penetration number and drill pipe diameter of the engineering in Guangzhou[J]. Guangdong Architecture Civil Engineering, 2008（11）: 25-27. (in Chinese) [17] 聂庆科, 贾向新, 秦禄盛, 等. 钻杆直径对标准贯入试验N值影响的试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2017, 39(S1): 53-58. (NIE Q K, JIA X X, QIN L S, et al. Field tests on the effects of diameter of drill pipe on number N of SPT[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2017, 39(S1): 53-58. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE2017S1011NIE Q K, JIA X X, QIN L S, et al. Field tests on the effects of diameter of drill pipe on number N of SPT[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2017, 39（S1）: 53-58. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE2017S1011 [18] 刘晓静. 两种杆径对砂层标准贯入试验击数的影响[J]. 城市勘测, 2013(6): 174-176. (LIU X J. The influence of two kinds of stem diameters on the standard pentration test (SPT) hit-numbers[J]. Urban Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2013(6): 174-176. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-8262.2013.06.053LIU X J. The influence of two kinds of stem diameters on the standard pentration test (SPT) hit-numbers[J]. Urban Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2013（6）: 174-176. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-8262.2013.06.053 [19] 刘 坦, 韩 非, 王瑞永. 北京地区钻杆直径对标准贯入试验击数的影响研究[J]. 工程勘察, 2023, 51(4): 25-30. (LIU T, HAN F, WANG R Y. Study on the influence of drill pipe diameter to blow number of SPT in Beijing area[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2023, 51(4): 25-30. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1433.2023.4.gckc202304006LIU T, HAN F, WANG R Y. Study on the influence of drill pipe diameter to blow number of SPT in Beijing area[J]. Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2023, 51（4）: 25-30. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1433.2023.4.gckc202304006 -
图(10) / 表(4)
计量
- 文章访问数: 43
- HTML全文浏览量: 11
- PDF下载量: 9
- 被引次数: 0
