论文部分内容阅读
在《铁路工程技术规范第二篇桥涵(征求意见稿)》的桩基计算部分中,已列入了考虑土壤弹性抗力的计算方法(以下简称m法)。由于过去长期沿用安盖尔斯基计算法(以下简称K法),因而对两种方法在计算结果方面的实际差别是许多同志十分关心的问题。两种方法在理论方面的比较,“对铁路桥梁桩基计算的几点看法”〔1〕已作了较好的论述。此外也有过计算实例的比较,如“铁路桥梁高桩承台钻(挖)孔灌注桩基础设计算例”〔2〕曾就部分计算结果作了对比,从中可以看到两种方法的计算结果之间存在着值得注意的差距。近年来有些单位的同志已对K法提出过不少改进意见,
In the calculation of pile foundation of the second part of “Technical Specifications for Railway Engineering” (draft for comments), the calculation method of soil elastic resistance (hereinafter referred to as m method) has been included. Due to the long-term use of the Angarski method (hereinafter referred to as K method), the actual difference in the results of the two methods is a matter of great concern to many comrades. Comparison of the two methods in theory, “on the calculation of railway bridge pile foundation” (1) has made a good discussion. In addition, there have been calculated examples of comparisons. For example, the calculation example of “Design Calculation of Pile Foundation Drilling (Excavation) Pile Foundation for High-Speed Railway Bridge” (2) has made some comparison with some calculation results, from which we can see the results of two methods There is a notable gap between them. In recent years, some units of comrades have put forward many improvements to the K-Law,