灌砂法与环刀法在检测地基压实度中的对比研究

土工基础 ›› 2022, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (1): 70-73.

灌砂法与环刀法在检测地基压实度中的对比研究

谷立强1，刘朋1，张开伟1,2，李朝1

（1.河北双诚建筑工程检测有限公司，石家庄 051130；2.河北建设勘察研究院有限公司，石家庄 050031）

收稿日期:2020-07-16 修回日期:2020-07-31 出版日期:2022-02-28 发布日期:2022-03-09
作者简介:谷立强（1992-），男，助理工程师，研究方向为工程物探与工程检测等。

Comparative Study of Sand Cone and Cutting-Ring Methods in Determining Degrees of Compaction of Foundation Soils

GU Liqiang1, LIU Peng1, ZHANG Kaiwei1,2, LI Zhao1

(1.Hebei Shuangcheng Construction Engineering Testing Co. Ltd., Shijiazhuang 051130;
2.China Hebei Construction & Geotechnical Investigation Group Co. Ltd., Shijiazhuang 050031)

Received:2020-07-16 Revised:2020-07-31 Online:2022-02-28 Published:2022-03-09

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 桩间土回填碾压地基压实度的检测，往往根据换填材料的不同选择不同的检测方法，松散性的材料通常不宜使用环刀法，而灌砂法却适用于多种换填材料的压实度检测。通过桩间土压实度检测试验，对灌砂法和环刀法试验数据开展对比研究，分析两种方法的优点和缺点，找出影响试验数据的因素，针对各因素提出对策，并采取相应的措施，提高压实度检测效果，改进并完善检测方法，从而得到真实的检测数据。最后结合实际工程，通过分析现场检测数据，合理选择压实度检测方法，规范操作步骤，消除影响试验准确性的因素，提高现场检测工作效率，保障工程质量。

关键词: 灌砂法, 环刀法, 压实度

Abstract: In the evaluation of degree of compaction of soils surrounding piles, the unit weight testing method usually varies with different backfill materials. The sand cone method is usually applied in various soil materials, the cuttingring method is not usually applicable to loose granular materials. When the target soil is suitable for both testing methods, the comparative testing using both methods is conducted and the advantages as well as disadvantages of each testing method are summarized so that the most appropriate test method can be applied in the site specific conditions and soils.

Key words: sand cone method, cutting-ring method, degree of compaction

中图分类号:

TU411

谷立强, 刘朋, 张开伟, 李朝. 灌砂法与环刀法在检测地基压实度中的对比研究[J]. 土工基础, 2022, 36(1): 70-73.

GU Liqiang, LIU Peng, ZHANG Kaiwei, LI Zhao. Comparative Study of Sand Cone and Cutting-Ring Methods in Determining Degrees of Compaction of Foundation Soils[J]. Soil Engineering and Foundation, 2022, 36(1): 70-73.