1、 31 12 Vol.31 No.12 2012 12 Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering Dec. 2012 2012 05 04 2012 08 28 (41172267) (ZR2011EEM004) (2010TS044) (1975 ) 2006 E-mail ( 250061) T U 91 A 1000 6915(2012)12 2445 08 DIFFUSION LAW MODEL TEST AND NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF CEMENT FRACTURE GROUTING LIU Jian
2、 LIU Rentai ZHANG Xiao LI Shucai (School of Civil Engineering Shandong University Jinan Shandong 250061 China) Abstract Ordinary silicate cement grout is one of the most commonly used grouting materials of which transport and diffusion laws have become one of focus of geotechnical engineering fields
3、. Diffusion laws of cement grout in planar fracture were researched systematically by model experiment and numerical simulation. Based on the theory of fluid dynamics action mechanism of the grout diffusion patterns and pressure distribution laws influenced by movement of groundwater were analyzed.
4、Through comparing the experimental and numerical simulation data the transport and diffusion mechanism of cement grout in the hydrodynamic and hydrostatic conditions were studied. According to the study results under the hydrodynamic condition pressure of cement grout decreases rapidly from the grou
5、ting hole and the pressure decreases extremely at the direction opposite to water flowing. At the same time there are limits of diffusion space and distance opposite to the water flowing direction. Some suggestions were put forward to improve traditional grouting techniques. Key words underground en
6、gineering cement grout grouting diffusion morphology distribution law of pressure model test numerical simulation 1 200 1 2446 2012 2-4 3-4 B. Tirupati 5-9 10-12 12-15 2 2.1 (1) (2) (3) 2.2 5 1 1 Fig.1 Test table and grouting system 2 m4 m( ) ( 0.1 kPa) ( 0.1 m/s) ( 0.1 ) 1 mm 11 6 mm 2.3 W/C = 1 1
7、15 min 1.4 g/cm 3 0.05 m 22 L/min 0.2 m/s 60 s 6 mm 120 s 0.6 m/s 0.6 1.6 m/s 2.4 2.4.1 16-17 31 12 2447 18-20 2.4.2 5% 0 3 Comsol 2 3.1 1.8 m 3 m 1.0 m 0.9 m 0.05 m 2 2 Fig.2 Geometrical model and boundary condition 3.2 (1) T () () u uu p I u u gF t (1) (kg/m 3 ) u P g (m/s 2 ) F (N) (1) N-S (2) 0
8、u ( 2) 0 (3) (1 ) | IS u t (3) IS (Pa s) 3.3 1 0.6 1.6 m/s 1 Table 1 Calculation parameters of numerical model / (kg m 3 ) / Pa / (m s 1 ) / (m s 1 ) / (kg m 3 ) / (Pa s) 1 400 0 0.6 0.6 1.6 1 000 0.001 4 4.1 4.1.1 (1) 3 1.0 m 1.8 m 3.0 m 2448 2012 3 Fig.3 Slurry dispersion patterns of test under hy
9、drostatic condition (2) 4 4 Fig.4 Slurry dispersion patterns of calculation under hydrostatic condition (3) 15 s ( 0.9 m) 4.1.2 (1) U ( 5) 5 Fig.5 Slurry dispersion patterns of test under hydrodynamic condition (2) ( v) 0.6 m/s 1.6 m/s 6 (a) v = 0.6 m/s (b) v = 1.6 m/s 6 Fig.6 Slurry dispersion patt
10、erns of calculation under hydrodynamic condition (a) t = 0.5 s (b) t = 5.0 s (c) t = 10.0 s (d) t = 15.0 s t = 0.5 s t =10.0 s t = 20.0 s t = 40.0 s t = 0.5 s t = 6.0 s t = 12.0 s t = 20.0 s 31 12 2449 U (3) 7 (m) (a) v = 0.6 m/s (b) v = 1.6 m/s 7 Fig.7 Comparison of stable dispersion pattern betwee
11、n test and calculation results under hydrodynamic condition U v = 0.6 m/s 1.46 m 0.33 m 1.62 m 0.35 m v = 1.6 m/s 1.64 m 0.47 m 1.71 m 0.5 m 11% 4.2 4.2.1 (1) ( 8) 8 Fig.8 Pressure distribution curves of test under hydrostatic condition 8 (2) 9 9 ( kPa) Fig.9 Pressure field distributions of calculat
12、ion under hydrostatic condition(unit kPa) t = 0.5 s t = 1.5 s t = 3.0 s t = 4.5 s 2450 2012 (3) 10 ( ) t = 45 s 2.4 kPa 2.1 kPa t = 25 s 0.9 kPa 0.6 kPa 20% 10 Fig.10 Comparison of pressure distributions between test and calculation results under hydrostatic condition 4.2.2 (1) 11 11 (a) v = 0.6 m/s (b) v = 1.6 m/s 11 Fig.11 Pressure distribution curves of test under hydrodynamic condition 0 1 m 2 m (
