外文翻譯---邊坡穩(wěn)定性非線性破壞的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)

1、<p><b>　　附錄一 外文文獻(xiàn)</b></p><p>　　Slope Stability Analysis with</p><p>　　Nonlinear Failure Criterion</p><p>　　Introduction</p><p>　　The determination of

2、the slope stability is a very important issue to geotechnical engineers. Many researchers have attempted to develop and elaborate the methods for slope stability evaluation. The proposed methods in the past for stability

3、 analysis may be classi?ed into the following four categories: ~1! the limit equilib-rium including the traditional slices method, ~2! the characteristic line method,~3!the limit analysis method including upper and<

4、/p><p>　　lower bound approaches, and~4! the ?nite element or ?nite difference numerical techniques. Among them, the slices method has almost dominated the geotechnical profession for estimating the stability o

5、f soil and rock slopes. This is due to the fact that the slices method is very simple, cumulated on the use of the method, and the method is the most</p><p>　　known and widely accepted by practicing engineer

6、s.</p><p>　　Until now, a linear MC failure criterion is commonly used in the limit analysis of stability problems. The reason is probably that a linear MC failure criterion can be expressed as circles. This

7、characteristic makes it possible to approximate the circles by a failure surface, which is a linear function of the stresses in the stress space for plane strain problems. Thus, based on the upper</p><p>　　a

8、nd lower bound theorems, formulations of the stability or bearing capacity problems are linear programming problems.</p><p>　　However, experiments have shown that the strength envelope of geomaterials has th

9、e nature of nonlinearity ~Hoek 1983; Agaret al. 1985; Santarelli 1987!. When applying an upper bound theorem to estimate the in?uences of a nonlinear failure criterion on bearing capacity or stability, the main problem,

10、which many researchers have encountered, is how to calculate the rate of work done by external forces and the rate of energy dissipation along</p><p>　　velocity discontinuities. Suitable methods for solving

11、this problem can be mainly classi?ed into two types. The ?rst type of method is using a variational calculus technique. Baker and Frydman ~1983! applied the variational calculus technique to derive the governing equation

12、s for the bearing capacity of a strip</p><p>　　footing resting on the top horizontal surface of a slope. Zhang and Chen~1987!converted the complex differential equations obtained using the variational calc

13、ulus technique into an initial value problem and presented an effective numerical procedure, called an inverse method, for solving a plane strain stability problem using a general nonlinear failure criterion. They gave n

14、umerical results of stability factors of a simple in?nite homogenous slope without surcharge. The second type of method </p><p>　　failure surfaces which are tangent to an exceed the actual nonlinear failure

15、surface, together with utilizing the previously calculated linear stability factors, NL, given by Chen ~1975!.</p><p>　　This paper develops an improved method using a ‘‘generalized tangential’’ technique. Th

16、is method employs the tangential line ~a linear MC failure criterion!, instead of the actual nonlinear failure criterion, to formulate the work and energy dissipation.</p><p>　　A ‘‘Generalized Tangential’’ T

17、echnique</p><p>　　A limit load computed from a linear failure surface, which always circumscribes the actual nonlinear failure surface, will be an upper bound value on the actual limit load ~Chen 1975!. This

18、 is due to the fact that the strength of the circumscribing the actual nonlinear failure surface is equal to or larger than that of the actual failure surface. In the present analysis, a tangential line to a nonlinear fa

19、ilure criterion at point M is used and shown in Fig.</p><p>　　It can be seen that the strength of the tangential line equals or exceeds that of a nonlinear failure criterion at the same normal stress. Thus,

20、the linear failure criterion represented by the tangential line will give an upper bound on the actual load for the material, whose failure is governed by a nonlinear failure criterion.In fact, many researchers~Lymser 19

21、70; Sloan 1989; Sloan andKleeman 1995; Yu et al. 1998; Kim et al. 1999, 2002! Have adopted this approach in their limit analyses.</p><p>　　Upper Bound Solutions with a Nonlinear Failure Criterion</p>

22、<p>　　In an upper bound limit analysis, solutions depend on the choices of kinematically admissible velocity ?elds. To obtain better solutions ~lower upper bounds!, work has to be done for trial kinematically admiss

23、ible velocity ?elds, as many as possible. Rotational failure mechanisms have been considered when using an upper bound approach ~Chen 1975!. In the stability analysis of a slope, comparing with different translational fa

24、ilure mechanisms,Chen ~1975! concluded that a rotational failure mechan</p><p>　　rotational failure surface for a perfect-plastic body collapse must be a log-spiral surface ~log-spiral line for plane strain

25、problems!.Basic ideas in Chen ~1975! on the rotational log-spiral surfacesare adopted in the method of the paper.</p><p>　　Conclusions</p><p>　　An improved method using a ‘‘generalized tangentia

26、l’’ technique approximating a nonlinear failure criterion is developed based on the upper bound theorem of plasticity and is used to analyze the stability of slopes in this paper. For a slope as shown in Fig. without sur

27、charge, the values of the stability factor calculated using the proposed upper bound method are almost equal to those obtained by Zhang and Chen~1987!For a translational failure mechanism of the vertical cut slope iden

28、tical solu</p><p><b>　　附錄二 中文文獻(xiàn)</b></p><p>　　邊坡穩(wěn)定性非線性破壞的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)</p><p><b>　　介紹：</b></p><p>　　邊坡穩(wěn)定對(duì)于土質(zhì)工程來(lái)說(shuō)是一個(gè)非常重要的問(wèn)題。許多研究人員試圖開(kāi)發(fā)并且詳盡闡述邊坡穩(wěn)定評(píng)估的方法。對(duì)于所提

29、出的方法概括起來(lái)可分為四個(gè)類別：</p><p><b>　　1 傳統(tǒng)切片方法</b></p><p><b>　　2 特征線方法</b></p><p>　　3 上部和下部固定途徑的限制分析方法。</p><p>　　在他們之中，切片方法幾乎控制了土壤和巖石邊坡的穩(wěn)定土質(zhì)技術(shù)的行業(yè)。因?yàn)閭鹘y(tǒng)的切

30、片方法比較簡(jiǎn)單且貼近現(xiàn)實(shí)。通過(guò)眾多的實(shí)踐證明并被廣泛采用。直到現(xiàn)在，這個(gè)判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)仍然被大家普遍采用于對(duì)穩(wěn)定問(wèn)題的極限分析。原因是線形MC判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可以被表示為一個(gè)圓。將穩(wěn)定性這個(gè)問(wèn)題表達(dá)成一個(gè)線形函數(shù)在二維空間的平面變形問(wèn)題，更加形象的解決非線形穩(wěn)定問(wèn)題。</p><p>　　然而，在1983年，實(shí)驗(yàn)證明有關(guān)于非線形穩(wěn)定性的問(wèn)題本質(zhì)；Agaretal.1985年；Stantarelli 1987年。當(dāng)應(yīng)用一個(gè)最高界

31、面時(shí)要估計(jì)在非線形故障判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的承受能力或穩(wěn)定性時(shí)，許多研究員遇到了同一個(gè)問(wèn)題；如何計(jì)算外力完成的工作率和消能率速度的斷性。解決的這問(wèn)題適當(dāng)?shù)姆椒?，可以分為兩個(gè)類型。</p><p>　　1 使用一個(gè)變化微積分技術(shù)。Baker和Frydman-1983!申請(qǐng)了變化微積分技術(shù)與非劈裂小條的承受能力的治理的等式基于傾斜的頂面水平面的立足處。張和陳與1987！轉(zhuǎn)換了復(fù)雜微分方程，使用變化微積分技術(shù)反縣一個(gè)初值問(wèn)題和提出

32、一個(gè)有效的數(shù)字做法，叫一個(gè)相反方法，解決的一個(gè)平面變形穩(wěn)定問(wèn)題使用一般非線形問(wèn)題的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。他們給了數(shù)字剛性 的結(jié)果一簡(jiǎn)單在沒(méi)有額外費(fèi)的finite同源傾斜。</p><p>　　2 使用一個(gè)“tangen-tial”技術(shù)。Drescher和Christopoulos.Colins等與1988提出更加簡(jiǎn)單的供選擇的“正切”技術(shù)評(píng)估剛性系數(shù)。</p><p><b>　　“廣義正切

33、”技術(shù)</b></p><p>　　從先行失敗表面計(jì)算的極限負(fù)載，總是包圍實(shí)際非線性失敗表面，講師在實(shí)際極限負(fù)載的最高界面價(jià)值-Chen 1975年！ 這歸結(jié)于事實(shí)包圍實(shí)際非線性鼓掌判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的一條正切線在點(diǎn)M在圖1使用并且顯示。能看到正切線的力量總和和超出非線性故障判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)在同一個(gè)正應(yīng)力。實(shí)際上，許多研究員Lymser 1970年；Sloan 1989年；Sloan和Lleeman 1995年；Yu等

34、1998年；金等1999年2002年！也采取了在他們的極限分析的這種方法。</p><p>　　非線性穩(wěn)定最高界面解答</p><p>　　在一個(gè)最高界面極限分析，解答取決于運(yùn)動(dòng)學(xué)上可接受速度范圍的選擇。獲得更好的土路基最高界面！工作必須在實(shí)驗(yàn)可接受速度范圍內(nèi)完成，越多越好?；贑hen(1975)失效機(jī)理最高界面方法。在對(duì)傾斜的穩(wěn)定性分析，和不同的平移失效機(jī)理相比，陳1975.認(rèn)為一個(gè)旋

35、轉(zhuǎn)的失效機(jī)理是一個(gè)E-F降低重要高度或剛性系數(shù)的平移失效機(jī)理。在 最高界面，定理要求完善塑料身體崩潰的旋轉(zhuǎn)的失敗表面必須是平面問(wèn)題的一條螺旋線，這個(gè)思想最終被相關(guān)人員認(rèn)可并采取。</p><p><b>　　結(jié)論</b></p><p>　　在可塑性最高界面定理和使用分析邊坡穩(wěn)定時(shí)，對(duì)于一個(gè)邊坡沒(méi)有額外費(fèi)，使用提出的最高界面方法計(jì)算的剛性系數(shù)的價(jià)值與張和陳獲得的那些是