长大深埋隧道工程区地应力状态预测与实例分析

王成虎; 邢博瑞; 陈永前

doi:10.11779/CJGE201405021

长大深埋隧道工程区地应力状态预测与实例分析 English Version

1. 中国地震局地壳应力研究所（地壳动力学实验室）,北京 100085; 2. 中国地质大学（北京）,北京 100083

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金面上基金项目（41274100，51038009）; 中央级科研院所基本科研业务专项项目(ZDJ2012-20)

详细信息

作者简介:
王成虎(1978- ),男,陕西定边人,从事地应力测试及其在地质科学中的应用研究。E-mail: huchengwang@163.com。

中图分类号: TU459.3
计量
- 文章访问数: 381
- HTML全文浏览量: 12
- PDF下载量: 379
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2013-09-16
- 发布日期: 2014-05-20

Prediction of stress field of super-long deep-buried tunnel area and case analysis

1. Key Laboratory of Crustal Dynamics, Institute of Crustal Dynamics, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100085, China; 2. School of Engineering and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China

摘要

摘要: 深埋隧道工程区地应力场的预测一直是工程技术人员所需迫切解决的难题。针对此问题提出了解决方案,即利用世界应力图、中国大陆地壳应力环境数据库以及前人研究成果可获得工程区应力场方向的初步认识,同时还可以利用Anderson断层力学理论分析工程区可能的主应力方向。在获得原地应力实测资料后,利用较为翔实的工程地质资料基于Hoek-Brown强度理论估算工程区范围内的岩体强度,然后利用修正Sheorey模型和数值模拟手段开展工程区深埋区域的地应力状态的预测分析。某水电站工程区位于青藏高原西缘。3个钻孔的水压致裂原地应力实测数据显示三向主应力之间的关系为S_H>S_h>S_V或S_H>S_V>S_h,表明最大水平主应力占主导地位,水平构造作用力明显。实测所得到的测区最大水平主应力方向为NEE向（N70.3°—89°E）；而世界应力图给出的区域应力场方向为NE向。通过修正Sheorey模型对深埋引水隧洞沿线的工程区应力状态进行了预测,结果显示,埋深最大的地方,最大最小水平应力值分别为56.70,40.14 MPa。
- 应力场预测 /
- 修正Sheorey模型 /
- 世界应力图 /
- 应力测量 /
- 青藏高原西缘
Abstract: The prediction of stress field of deep-buried tunnel area is a tough problem that many scientists and engineers have to face with. Herein, a solution is put forward for this problem. The databases from the WSM and the Crustal Stress Environment of China Mainland and the previous research findings can offer indications of stress orientations of an engineering area; at the same time, the Andersonian theory can be used to analyze the possible stress orientation of an engineering area. After the limited in-situ stress measurements are obtained, the Hoek-Brown criterion can be used to estimate the strength of rock mass in the engineering area by utilizing the geotechnical investigation data, and then the modified Sheorey model can be employed to predict the stress field of areas without stress data by taking the existing in-situ stress measurements as input parameters. One planned hydroelectric power plant is located on the western edge of Tibet Plateau. Three hydro-fracturing stress measurement campaigns indicate that the stress state of the engineering area is S_H>S_h>S_Vor S_H>S_V>S_h. The measured orientation of S_H is NEE (N70.3°—89°E), and the regional orientation of S_H from WSM is NE, which may imply that the stress orientation of shallow crust may be affected by landforms. The modified Sheorey model is utilized to predict the stress state along the water sewage tunnel for the plant. The predicted results indicate that the maximum and minimum horizontal principal stresses of the place with the greatest burial depth are up to 56.70 and 40.14 MPa, to which the relevant organizations pay more attention. According to the application case, the proposed method works well.
- prediction of stress field /
- modified Sheorey model /
- world stress map /
- stress measurement /
- western edge of Tibet Plateau

HTML全文

参考文献(14)

[1]	王艳华, 崔效锋, 胡幸平, 等. 基于原地应力测量数据的中国大陆地壳上部应力状态研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 2012, 55(9): 3016-3027. (WANG Yan-hua, CUI Xiao-feng, HU Xing-ping, et al. Study on the stress state in upper crust of China main land based on in-situ stress measurement[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2012, 55(9): 3016-3027. (in Chinese))
[2]	AMADEI B, STEPHANSSON O. Rock stress and its measurement[M]. London: Chapman & Hall, 1997.
[3]	ZANG A, STEPHANSSON O. Stress field of the earth’s crust[M]. London & New York: Springer, 2010.
[4]	ZOBACK M D. Reservoir geomechanics[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
[5]	MCCUTHEN W R. Some elements of a theory for in-situ stress[J]. International Journal Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts, 1982, 19: 201-203.
[6]	SHEOREY P R. A theory for in-situ stress in isotropic and transversely isotropic rock[J]. International Journal Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts, 1994, 31(1): 23-34.
[7]	王成虎, 郭啟良, 丁立丰, 等. 工程区高地应力判据研究及实例分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2009, 30(8): 2359-2364. (WANG Cheng-hu, GUO Qi-liang, DING Li-feng, et al. High in-situ stress criteria for engineering area and a case analysis [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2009, 30(8): 2359-236. (in Chinese))
[8]	王成虎, 张彦山, 郭啟良, 等. 工程区地应力场的综合分析法研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2011, 33(10): 1562-1568. (WANG Cheng-hu, ZHANG Yan-shan, GUO Qi-liang et al, New integrated analysis method to analyze stress regime of engineering area[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2011, 33(10): 1562-1568. (in Chinese))
[9]	HAIMSON B C. The effect of lithology, inhomogeneity, topography, and faults, on in situ stress measurements by hydraulic fracturing, and the importance of correct data interpretation and independent evidence in support of results [C]// Rock Stress and Earthquakes. London: Taylor & Francis Group, 2010.
[10]	谢富仁, 陈群策, 崔效锋, 等. 中国大陆地壳应力环境研究[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2003: 39-47. (XIE Fu-ren, CHEN Qun-ce, CUI Xiao-feng, et al. Crustal stress in China[M]. Beijing: Geological Publishing House, 2003: 39-47. (in Chinese))
[11]	HAIMSON B C, CORNET F H. ISRM suggested methods for rock stress estimation—Part 3: Hydraulic fracturing (HF) and/or hydraulic testing of pre-existing fractures (HTPF) [J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 2003, 40(7/8): 1011-1020.
[12]	SJÖBERG J, CHRISTIANSSON R, HUDSON J A. ISRM suggested methods for rock stress estimation—Part 2: Overcoring methods[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 2003, 40(7/8): 999-1010.
[13]	SHEOREY P R, MURALIMOHAN G, SINHA A. Influence of elastic constants on the horizontal in situ stress[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 2001, 38(8): 1211-1216.
[14]	HOEK E, DIEDERICHSB M S. Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 2006, 43(1): 203-215.