不同方法在液塑限试验数据处理中应用及对比研究

详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

英文篇名：Comparative Study of Different Data Process Methods for the Atterberg Limits Determination 作者：郭佳朋 ; 陈志涛 英文作者：GUO Jiapeng;CHEN Zhitao;College of Earth Science and Engineering,North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power; 关键词：液塑限试验 ; 数学解析式法 ; Excel ; AutoCAD 英文关键词：atterberg limits;;analytical method;;excel spreadsheet;;AutoCAD 中文刊名：土工基础 英文刊名：Soil Engineering and Foundation 机构：华北水利水电大学地球科学与工程学院; 出版日期：2019-04-15 出版单位：土工基础 年：2019 期：02 基金：国家自然科学基金青年基金项目(51704120) 语种：中文; 页：89-92 页数：4 CN：42-1151/TU ISSN：1004-3152 分类号：U231

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。
        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.

引文

[1]彭慈德,常留成.数学解析法在液塑限试验中的判别式研究[J].路基工程,2018(1):16-19+24.
    [2]冯朝辉,彭意.联合测定法中液塑限含水率的求取[J].湖南理工学院学报(自然科学版),2006(2):85-87.
    [3]高明军,余湘娟.EXCEL在液塑联合测定成果整理中的应用[J].土工基础,2002(4):76-77.
    [4]范孟华.解析法和Excel在液塑限试验中的应用[J].路基工程,2011(2):80-81+84.
    [5]张胜,敖大华.液塑限联合试验数据Excel快速处理方法[J].土工基础,2013,27(5):76-78.
    [6]张廷雷.液塑限联合测定法数据处理的程序设计[J].高速铁路技术,2014,5(4):61-66.
    [7]张向东,刘家顺,王长江.Excel和MATLAB在液塑限联合测定试验数据处理中的应用[J].工业建筑,2010,40(S1):659-662.
    [8]王俭,孙秀丽,周太全,等.基于MATLAB的土力学实验数据处理新方法[J].建筑科学,2012,28(9):84-86+97.
    [9]俞莉.Origin在液塑限联合测定试验制图中的应用[A].中国土木工程学会土力学与岩土工程分会、中国工程院土木、水利与建筑工程学部.第十一届全国土力学及岩土工程学术会议论文集[C].中国土木工程学会土力学与岩土工程分会、中国工程院土木、水利与建筑工程学部:,2011:5.
    [10]罗会,刘尊平.运用Excel和AutoCAD联合绘制土工试验曲线[J].岩土工程技术,2008,22(6):308-311.
    [11]贺涛,杜勇立.液塑限试验精度分析及其数据处理新方法[J].公路与汽运,2009(3):104-106.
    [12]土工试验方法标准(GBT 50123-1999)[S].