土压盾构施工顺序和土仓压力对铁路路基的沉降影响

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.S2.0007

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (S2): 58-65.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.S2.0007

土压盾构施工顺序和土仓压力对铁路路基的沉降影响

吕计瑞¹(), 崔明², 蔡清池³, 赵原野², 李庆文⁴^,^**()

¹ 中交隧道工程局有限公司项目部, 北京 100024
² 中交一公局集团有限公司技术中心, 北京 100024
³ 宁德师范学院机电工程学院, 福建宁德 352100
⁴ 北京科技大学资源与安全工程学院, 北京 100083

收稿日期:2025-06-10 出版日期:2026-02-04
通信作者:
**李庆文(1986—),男,辽宁朝阳人,博士,教授,主要从事岩土工程安全与稳定性控制相关研究。E-mail:qingwenli@ustb.edu.cn。
作者简介:
吕计瑞 (1987—),男,河北衡水人,本科,高级工程师,主要从事地下工程和盾构隧道施工技术管理工作。E-mail:547271972@qq.com。
崔明教授级高级工程师
蔡清池讲师
赵原野高级工程师
李庆文教授
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划(2017YFC0805305); 云南省重点研发计划(202403AA080022)

Influence of EPB construction sequence and soil chamber pressure on railway subgrade settlement

LYU Jirui¹(), CUI Ming², CAI Qingchi³, ZHAO Yuanye², LI Qingwen⁴^,^**()

¹ Project Department, CCCC Tunnel Engineering Company Limited, Beijing 100024, China
² Technology Center, China First Highway Engineering Group Co., Ltd., Beijing 100024, China
³ College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Ningde Normal University, Ningde Fujian 352100, China
⁴ School of Resources and Safety Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China

Received:2025-06-10 Published:2026-02-04

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究盾构下穿铁路路基过程中施工顺序和土仓压力的耦合影响及路基微变形控制,以哈尔滨轨道交通3号线土压平衡盾构(EPB)下穿哈牡高铁等多股铁路为背景,采用数值模拟、理论计算和现场实测等方法,研究双线隧道不同施工顺序及土仓压力设置对地层变形的影响。数值结果表明:当相向2台EPB在铁路路基正下方交汇时,较在两侧相遇沉降量增加0.4 mm,增幅达12.86%;土仓压力设置为220、200和180 kPa时,最大沉降分别为3.50、5.14和7.92 mm;现场掘进参数相关性分析发现螺旋输送机转速和推进速度的比速与土仓压力呈负相关,皮尔逊相关系数为-0.49,该地层比速宜控制在90.98 r/m,土仓压力波动范围为-20~25 kPa。采用朗肯静止土压力加20 kPa储备压力(抵消压力波动)作为土仓压力计算值,控制比速值后的实测值(196~227 kPa)与公式计算值(180~222 kPa)吻合良好;采用隧道监测预警平台实时监测沉降速率和累计沉降并及时反馈调整,最终铁路路基沉降控制在3.41 mm,满足不超过6 mm的安全要求。

关键词: 施工顺序, 土仓压力, 路基沉降, 数值模拟, 比速, 微变形控制

Abstract:

To research the coupling effect of construction sequence and soil chamber pressure, as well as the subgrade micro-deformation control during the process of shield tunneling under railway subgrades, the earth pressure balance (EPB) shield of Harbin Rail Transit Line 3 passing under multiple railway tracks, including the Harbin-Mudanjiang High-Speed Railway, was taken as the background. Methods such as numerical simulation, theoretical calculation, and on-site measurement were adopted to investigate the influence of different construction sequences of double-line tunnels and soil chamber pressure settings on stratum deformation. The numerical results show that when two EPB shields advancing towards each other meet directly below the railway subgrade, the settlement increases by 0.4 mm compared with meeting on both sides, with an increase rate of 12.86%. When the soil chamber pressure is set to 220, 200, and 180 kPa, the maximum settlements are 3.50, 5.14, and 7.92 mm, respectively. The correlation analysis of on-site tunneling parameters reveals that the ratio of screw conveyor rotating speed to tunneling speed is negatively correlated with soil chamber pressure, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.49. The specific speed value of this stratum should be controlled at 90.98 r/m, and the fluctuation of soil chamber pressure should range from -20 kPa to 25 kPa. When the Rankine earth pressure at rest plus a 20 kPa reserve pressure (to offset pressure fluctuations) is used as the calculated value of soil chamber pressure, the measured values (196-227 kPa) after controlling the specific speed value are in good agreement with the formula-calculated values (180-222 kPa). By using the tunnel monitoring and early warning platform to monitor the settlement rate and cumulative settlement in real time, and adjust in time based on feedback, the final settlement of the railway subgrade is controlled at 3.41 mm, which meets the safety requirement of not exceeding 6 mm.

Key words: construction sequence, soil chamber pressure, subgrade settlement, numerical simulation, specific speed, micro-deformation control

中图分类号:

X947

吕计瑞, 崔明, 蔡清池, 赵原野, 李庆文. 土压盾构施工顺序和土仓压力对铁路路基的沉降影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(S2): 58-65.

LYU Jirui, CUI Ming, CAI Qingchi, ZHAO Yuanye, LI Qingwen. Influence of EPB construction sequence and soil chamber pressure on railway subgrade settlement[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(S2): 58-65.

图/表 19

图1

图2

图3

表1

表2

表3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

表4

图11

图12

图13

图14

图15

参考文献 11

[1]	杨林松, 刘继国, 舒恒, 等. 超大直径盾构隧道下穿铁路施工的离心机模型试验研究[J]. 现代隧道技术, 2021, 58(4):170-177,184.
	YANG Linsong, LIU Jiguo, SHU Heng, et al. Centrifugal model test on construction process of a super large diameter shield tunnel passing under existing railway[J]. Modern Tunnelling Technology, 2021, 58(4): 170-177,184.
[2]	孙国茹, 孟卫杰, 孙津津, 等. 砂土地区盾构下穿铁路股道变形影响分析[J]. 粉煤灰综合利用, 2025, 39(2):124-130.
	SUN Guoru, MENG Weijie, SUN Jinjin, et al. Analysis of the effect of deformation of shield tunnel under railway strand in sandy soil area[J]. Fly Ash Comprehensive Utilization, 2025, 39(2): 124-130.
[3]	娄洪峻, 苏栋, 林星涛, 等. 超大直径盾构下穿高铁路基的沉降数值分析[J]. 深圳大学学报:理工版, 2024, 41(3):377-386.
	LOU Hongjun, SU Dong, LIN Xingtao, et al. Numerical simulation analysis of settlement for super-large diameter shield tunneling undercrossing high-speed railway subgrade[J]. Journal of Shenzhen University:Science and Engineering, 2024, 41(3): 377-386. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1249.2024.03377
[4]	陈明江, 路小民, 陆帅, 等. 超大直径泥水盾构下穿运营铁路沉降因素分析及控制方法[J]. 工程机械, 2024, 55(7):225-232,16-17.
	CHEN Mingjiang, LU Xiaomin, LU Shuai, et al. Analysis of settlement factors and control methods for large-diameter slurry shield passing beneath active railways[J]. Construction Machinery and Equipment, 2024, 55(7): 225-232, 16-17.
[5]	马相峰, 王立川, 龚伦, 等. 砂卵石地层双线地铁盾构下穿铁路路基变形及地层注浆加固研究[J]. 隧道建设:中英文, 2021, 41(增1):181-189.
	MA Xiangfeng, WANG Lichuan, GONG Lun, et al. Deformation and grouting reinforcement for railway subgrade crossed by a double-track metro shield tunnel in sandy-cobble strata[J]. Tunnel Construction, 2021, 41(S1): 181-189.
[6]	林家桢. 地铁盾构下穿高速铁路路基的变形控制方案研究[J]. 水利与建筑工程学报, 2025, 23(1):93-101.
	LIN Jiazhen. Deformation control scheme for high-speed railway subgrade when subway shield tunneling under-passing[J]. Journal of Water Resources and Architectural Engineering, 2025, 23(1): 93-101.
[7]	孙铁成, 王爱玉, 张岩俊, 等. 囊袋式注浆对盾构下穿高速铁路路基沉降的控制效果[J]. 铁道建筑, 2024, 64(9):120-126.
	SUN Tiecheng, WANG Aiyu, ZHANG Yanjun, et al. Control effect of capsuled grouting on settlement while shield tunneling underpass high speed railway subgrade[J]. Railway Engineering, 2024, 64(9): 120-126.
[8]	吴贤国, 冯宗宝, 刘俊, 等. 基于RF-NSGA-Ⅱ的盾构施工地表沉降安全控制多目标优化[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(8): 45-51. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.08.2702
	WU Xianguo, FENG Zongbao, LIU Jun, et al. Multi-objective optimization of surface settlement safety control during shield construction based on RF-NSGA-Ⅱ[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(8): 45-51. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.08.2702
[9]	吴贤国, 刘俊, 苏飞鸣, 等. 基于CatBoost-MOEAD的大直径泥水盾构施工多目标预测优化[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(6): 57-64. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.06.1734
	WU Xianguo, LIU Jun, SU Feiming, et al. Multi-objective prediction optimization for large-diameter slurry shield tunneling construction based on CatBoost-MOEAD[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(6): 57-64. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.06.1734
[10]	贾剑青, 贾超, 赖远明, 等. 高速铁路路基加固效果及稳定性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(6):50-56. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.06.008
	JIA Jianqing, JIA Chao, LAI Yuanming. et al. Reinforcement effect and stability analysis of high speed railway roadbed[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(6): 50-56. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.06.008
[11]	刘博. 盾构机土仓压力控制模型参数辨识方法研究[D]. 大连: 大连理工大学, 2011.
	LIU Bo. Model parameters identification procedure of chamber pressure control in shield tunneling[D]. Dalian: Dalian University of Technology, 2011.

地层	杂填土	粉质黏土	细砂	中粗砂
泊松比μ	0.38	0.33	0.26	0.23
天然密度γ/(kg·m^-3)	17.85	18.30	18.25	20.15
割线模量${E}_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{d}}^{\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{f}}$/MPa	15	25	69	52
切线模量${E}_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{d}}^{\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{f}}$/MPa	15	25	69	52
卸荷弹模${E}_{\mathrm{u}\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{f}}$/MPa	45	75	207	156
有效黏聚力C/kPa	30.3	18.5	0	0
有效内摩擦角Φ/(°)	13.8	21.5	38.7	42.2
剪胀角Ψ/(°)	0	0	10.1	12.2
参考压力σ^ref/kPa	100	100	100	100
孔隙比e	0.69	0.58	0.49	0.45
破坏比R_f	0.9	0.9	0.9	0.9
静止土压力系数K₀	0.64	0.59	0.41	0.35
幂指数m	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5

结构	厚度/mm	密度/(g·cm^-3)	弹性模/MPa	泊松比
管片	350	2.5	34 500	0.2
等代层	200	2.3	4	0.35

掘进参数	推进速度	推力	刀盘扭矩	刀盘转速	土仓压力	比速
推进速度	1
推力	-0.66^**	1
刀盘扭矩	0.55^**	-0.23	1
刀盘转速	-0.56^**	0.40^**	-0.94^**	1
土仓压力	0.13	-0.02	-0.37^**	0.04	1
比速	-0.64^**	0.43^**	-0.54^**	0.51^**	-0.29^*	1

[1]	孙伟, 孟姝池, 丁永红, 史安忠. 拉力分散型锚杆支护剪应力分布特征对比研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(S2): 103-109.
[2]	郭维强, 兰天伟, 路凯翔, 李柱, 姚新宇, 冯伟. 厚煤层覆岩破坏规律及突水致灾机制分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(S2): 110-117.
[3]	杜文秀, 闫路. 露天采场边坡稳定性研究:以巴润矿为例[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(S2): 196-202.
[4]	李磊, 吴迪, 杨官鼎. 废石胶结充填料浆流特性和管道输送研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(S2): 29-35.
[5]	温经林, 尹永明, 于正兴, 王一帆, 卢新爱. 不同工况下矿区边坡受力变形及破坏特征研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(S2): 66-72.
[6]	张禹, 赵蒙, 王飞宇, 王瑞鑫. 哈尔乌素露天煤矿采场风流分布特征研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(S1): 130-136.
[7]	曹卫平, 肖涵楠, 罗龙平, 吕品, 赵敏. 双排斜直桩基坑支护工作机制及稳定性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(6): 60-69.
[8]	栾婷婷, 黄俊, 杨国梁, 任常兴, 吕鹏飞. 混合气体爆炸极限和爆炸压力影响因素研究进展[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(6): 79-87.
[9]	吴飞阳, 陈东梁, 尹彩虹, 吕庭玮, 沙彦杉, 陈士. 基于Fluent的储罐沸溢过程介质转化特性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(4): 158-164.
[10]	薛希龙, 李佳乐, 武拴军, 张晓, 刘斌, 张钦礼. 下向进路采场内炮烟的扩散特征及通风参数确定[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(4): 76-84.
[11]	张嘉勇, 吕祖欣, 崔啸, 郭立稳, 武建国, 付京斌. 正断层影响下采空区注CO₂防灭火数值模拟研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(4): 9-17.
[12]	李聪, 何泽群, 杨高豪, 许文博, 王悦朋. 灭火弹爆炸过程及灭火剂抛洒特性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(3): 107-114.
[13]	朱宇龙, 曹卫平, 吕品, 王悦, 赵敏. 黄土湿陷对输电塔斜桩基础承载性状的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(3): 169-178.
[14]	李青蔚, 朱烨瑞, 杨智翔, 吕自琦, 康付如, 任立峰. 温度对受限空间锂电自行车燃烧特性的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(3): 99-106.
[15]	梁庆华, 刘恩杰, 陈素贞, 王伟娜, 王春源. 地铁隧道软硬不均地层瞬变电磁场数值模拟及响应特征[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(12): 36-43.

土压盾构施工顺序和土仓压力对铁路路基的沉降影响

Influence of EPB construction sequence and soil chamber pressure on railway subgrade settlement

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 19

参考文献 11

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价