论文部分内容阅读
作者在文中首先指出一般条分法计算精度和速度存有矛盾、计算方法中的一些近似假定存有缺陷,并进而提出用四边形块元法加以改进,这是一件创新革旧的大胆尝试.我们也曾对此加以评论过.但作者对沉抗土坝的稳定分析中,从原文表2所列计算结果来看,四边形块元法和条分法的安全系数相差甚微,未能说明条分法的精度问题,而在文字叙述中则总结为四边形块元法比条分法的精度提高了3-5％,自相矛盾,而且文中对精度的评价标准也未说明.
In the article, the author first points out that there are contradictions in the calculation accuracy and speed of the general slicing method, some approximation assumptions in the calculation method are flawed, and then proposes to use the quadrilateral block element method to improve. This is a bold attempt to innovate the old. We have also commented on this. However, in the author’s analysis of the stability of Shenba Earth Dam, from the calculation results listed in Table 2 above, the safety factor of the quadrilateral block element method and the slicing method differs little, failing to explain However, in the text description, it is summarized that the precision of the quadrilateral block-element method is improved by 3-5% from that of the grading method, which is self-contradictory, and the evaluation criteria for accuracy in the text have not been explained.