土工基础

›› 2019, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (2): 187-190.

• 工程实录 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同方法在液塑限试验数据处理中应用及对比研究

郭佳朋，陈志涛   

  1. （华北水利水电大学地球科学与工程学院，郑州 450046）
  • 收稿日期:2018-11-13 修回日期:2018-11-21 出版日期:2019-04-20 发布日期:2019-04-22
  • 作者简介:郭佳朋（1992-），男，研究生在读，研究方向为土的基本力学性质等。
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金青年基金项目（51704120）

Comparative Study of Different Data Process Methods for the Atterberg Limits Determination

GUO Jiapeng, CHEN Zhitao   

  1. （College of Earth Science and Engineering, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450046）
  • Received:2018-11-13 Revised:2018-11-21 Online:2019-04-20 Published:2019-04-22

摘要： 以郑州地铁粉质黏土为研究对象介绍了液塑限试验数据处理的具体操作流程，总结了已有的数学解析和Excel软件数据处理法，并着重介绍了一种利用AutoCAD软件快速作图确定液塑限的新方法。经过对比分析，三种方法中，数学解析法需要在Excel中输入公式建立计算表格，过程较为繁琐，但一旦建立好表格，即可做到重复使用；AutoCAD作图法完美地替代了手工作图法，更为方便精确、直观易懂，但每次新试验需重新作图；Excel作图法则介于两者之间，较为直观，但拟合式联立求交点的过程仍需人工操作。以数学解析法所得液塑限结果为基础，除Excel作图法中塑限与其相差0.2%外，其余数据与其误差均为0.1%。可知，三种方法均能满足液塑限试验数据处理的要求。

关键词: 液塑限试验, 数学解析式法, Excel, AutoCAD

Abstract: The process of Atterberg Limit determination of Zhengzhou silty cohesive soils is first demonstrated in this paper. The existing data processing methods of analytical method and Excel spreadsheet method are briefly introduced and a new method that using the AutoCAD method for the graphical Atterberg Limit solutions is also presented. After the comparative study, following conclusions could be made: The analytical method requires establishing formulas in Excel spreadsheet and the initial process is relatively tedious. However, it can be repetitively used after the initial establishment; the AutoCAD graphical method is more straight forward more accurate and easier to understand, compared with the hand drawing method. However, this method has no repetitive and new graphics are need each time. The graphical method within the Excel spreadsheet is just between the above methods. The manual operation is still necessary for the intersect point established by the regression method. Based on the results of Atterberg Method obtained by the analysis method, except for the difference of 0.2% between the plastic limit and that obtained by the Excel graphical method, the remaining data and its error are within 0.1%. It is concluded that three data processing methods can meet the precision requirements.

Key words: atterberg limits, analytical method, excel spreadsheet, AutoCAD