负压排水法处理工程泥浆的室内模型试验

doi:10.11988/ckyyb.20230665

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

现有传统处理工程泥浆的方法存在耗时、耗能、昂贵等缺点,而负压排水法具有绿色节能、施工简单、有效提高排水速率等特点。进行了负压排水法处理工程泥浆的室内模型试验研究,对其可行性进行讨论分析。通过使用自制试验箱和负压虹吸装置进行试验,并在虹吸管内连接测压表对装置负压实时监测。试验结果表明:在排水管内径为4 mm的前提下,负压排水能长期稳定进行;负压大小、排水效率都与排水高差呈正相关,且负压排水法处理小厚度泥浆效果较好,处理大厚度泥浆效果则会稍差。用该方法处理工程泥浆高效且免动力,可运用于实际。

关键词: 工程泥浆处理, 负压排水法, 室内模型试验, 4 mm管径

Abstract:

Traditional methods for treating engineering slurry are usually time-consuming, energy-intensive, and costly. In contrast, the negative-pressure drainage method is environmental friendly, easy to operate and efficient. Indoor model test was conducted to assess the feasibility of the negative-pressure drainage method for treating engineering mud. The test was performed in a self-developed test chamber equipped with a negative pressure siphon device, with the siphon tube connected to a pressure gauge for real-time monitoring of the negative pressure. The results indicate that stable negative pressure drainage can be achieved using a drainage pipe with a 4 mm inner diameter. Furthermore, both the negative pressure and drainage efficiency are positively correlated with the height difference of the drainage. This method proves more effective for treating mud with small thicknesses but is less effective for thicker mud. Overall, the negative-pressure drainage method is efficient and does not require external power, making it suitable for practical applications.

Key words: treatment of engineering mud, negative-pressure drainage method, indoor model test, 4 mm tube diameter

中图分类号:

TU41土工试验

储兆微, 余世杰, 李幸阳, 卢星宇, 王旭, 罗睿, 王天龙. 负压排水法处理工程泥浆的室内模型试验[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2024, 41(9): 114-122.

CHU Zhao-wei, YU Shi-jie, LI Xing-yang, LU Xing-yu, WANG Xu, LUO Rui, WANG Tian-long. Indoor Model Test of Negative Pressure Drainage Method for Treatment of Engineering Mud[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 2024, 41(9): 114-122.

图/表 17

图1 试验装置示意图

Fig.1 Schematic diagram of the test device

图2 现场试验装置

Fig.2 Field test devices

表1 试验泥浆的物理性质

Table 1 Physical properties of the test mud

密度/ (g·cm^-3)	含水率/%	土粒相对密度	液限/ %	塑限/ %	粉粒含量/%	黏粒含量/%
1.12	478	2.72	58.7	24.9	39	42

图3 颗粒级配累积曲线

Fig.3 Accumulation curve of particle gradation

表2 试验方案设计

Table 2 Design of test scheme

试验组别	试验编号	排水高差/m	泥浆厚度/mm	排水内径/mm	备注
内径大小流态试验	P-1-1	1.0	100	6	负压排水, 中途重新启动
内径大小流态试验	P-1-2	1.0	100	4	负压排水
排水高差与泥浆厚度对比试验	F-1-1	0	100	4	重力排水
	F-1-2	0.5	100	4	负压排水
	F-1-3	1.5	100	4	负压排水
	F-1-4	2.0	100	4	负压排水
	F-2-1	0	300	4	重力排水
	F-2-2	0.5	300	4	负压排水
	F-2-3	1.0	300	4	负压排水
	F-2-4	1.5	300	4	负压排水
	F-2-5	2.0	300	4	负压排水

图4 不同内径负压排水法处理泥浆试验透水空腔内前24 h压强变化

Fig.4 Variation of pressure in the permeable cavity in the first 24 h of the mud test treated by negative pressure drainage method with varied internal tube diameter

图5 排水高差对透水空腔内负压的影响

Fig.5 Effect of drainage height difference on negative pressure in the permeable cavity

图6 泥浆厚度对透水空腔内负压的影响

Fig.6 Effect of mud thickness on negative pressure in permeable cavity

图7 不同泥浆厚度在重力排水和0.5 m排水高差负压排水量随时间变化对比

Fig.7 Comparison of time-history of discharge volume between gravity drainage and negative pressure drainage with 0.5 m drainage height difference for varied mud thickness

图8 负压排水法处理前后泥浆形态示意图

Fig.8 Mud morphology before and after treatment by negative pressure drainage method

图9 不同排水高差负压排水试验排水量对比

Fig.9 Comparison of drainage volume by negative pressure drainage method with varied drainage height difference

图10 低厚度泥浆试验取样点位置横断面示意图

Fig.10 Cross-section of sampling location for small-thickness mud

表3 不同排水高差下负压排水处理后低厚度泥浆试样含水率测定

Table 3 Moisture content of small-thickness mud specimens after negative pressure drainage treatment

排水高差/m	试样编号	含水率/%	排水高差/m	试样编号	含水率/%
0.5	1-A	85.63	1.5	3-A	72.64
0.5	1-B	84.32	1.5	3-B	70.68
1.0	2-A	74.21	2.0	4-A	69.59
1.0	2-B	72.41	2.0	4-B	68.21

图11 300 mm厚度泥浆试验取样点位置横断面示意图

Fig.11 Cross-section of sampling location for mud specimens with 300 mm thickness

表4 不同排水高差下负压排水处理高厚度泥浆不同位置泥浆含水率

Table 4 Moisture content of mud at different positionsof thick mud specimens treated by negative pressuredrainage method with varied drainage height difference

排水高差/m	试样编号	含水率/%	排水高差/m	试样编号	含水率/%
0.5	1-A1	203.08	1.5	3-A1	145.71
	1-A2	125.76		3-A2	125.71
	1-A3	105.60		3-A3	98.50
	1-B1	193.75		3-B1	132.73
	1-B2	112.50		3-B2	104.00
	1-B3	93.14		3-B3	77.36
	1-C1	173.33		3-C1	125.00
	1-C2	110.45		3-C2	80.00
	1-C3	90.00		3-C3	66.67
1.0	2-A1	151.58	2.0	4-A1	139.78
	2-A2	123.57		4-A2	126.40
	2-A3	101.43		4-A3	97.06
	2-B1	166.74		4-B1	121.45
	2-B2	118.85		4-B2	101.62
	2-B3	92.43		4-B3	66.26
	2-C1	150.60		4-C1	94.32
	2-C2	99.53		4-C2	67.34
	2-C3	85.71		4-C3	60.23

图12 不同排水高差下不同横向位置泥浆含水率随深度变化曲线

Fig.12 Variation of moisture content versus depth at different lateral positions under varied drainage height difference

图13 不同负压排水高差下高厚度泥浆试验模型箱底部固态泥浆形态

Fig.13 Solid mud morphology at the bottom of test model box for thick mud specimens with varied drainage height difference