论文部分内容阅读
本文主要研究土的分类与定名问题。从假塑性,阿太堡界限的适用性(?)力学性质的异常,沉桩、流砂、液化问题及现场签别等多方面讨论了I_p=10与7,肯定了I_p=10为粘性土与粉土的界限点是合适的;在叙述了粉土的特性后,从工程特性的突变点,与国际准标等效,四分法与兼容性等原则提出>0.05mm75%为粉土与砂土的界限点;讨论了粉土的再划分为两个亚类—砂质粉土和粘质粉土。从工程特性的变化、二分法的原则、以及试验误差的讨论给出>0.05mm50%为划分亚类的界限值。文中并建议以粉质粘的名称代替亚粘土。这些研究成果以可作为修订规范有关条文的依据,建议纳入规范,使地基上的分类更加科学和合理。为了便于比较,文中还评论了若干其它方案的优点和缺点。
This paper mainly studies the classification and naming of soil. From the aspects of pseudoplasticity, applicability of the boundary of Ataibao (?) mechanical properties, pile-sinking, quicksand, liquefaction and field signing, etc., I_p=10 and 7 were discussed, and I_p=10 was confirmed as cohesive soil. The boundary point of silt is appropriate; after describing the characteristics of silt, the principle of equivalence from engineering characteristics, international quasi-equivalent, quarantine and compatibility etc. proposed> 0.05mm 75% for silt and sand Soil boundary points; it is discussed that the silt soil is subdivided into two sub-categories: sandy silt and clay silt. From the discussion of changes in engineering characteristics, principles of dichotomy, and trial error, >0.05 mm50% is given as a sub-category limit value. The paper also proposes to replace the sub-clay with a silty-stick name. These research results can be used as the basis for revising the relevant provisions of the regulations, and it is recommended that they be incorporated into the regulations so that the classification on the foundation is more scientific and reasonable. For ease of comparison, the text also reviews the advantages and disadvantages of several other solutions.