Soil and rock mixture M e Determination of methods and stress-strain response prediction models and methods

Abstract

This invention relates to a soil-rock mixture M e This paper presents a method for determining the mixing uniformity of soil-rock mixtures and a method for predicting the stress-strain response of such mixtures, taking into full account the mixing uniformity. The method for determining the mixing uniformity of soil-rock mixtures can reasonably reflect the local segregation state and overall homogeneity of the mixture, providing scientific theoretical guidance for the construction of subgrade soil-rock mixtures and possessing high engineering application value. The prediction method comprehensively considers the influence of mixing uniformity and confining pressure on the stress-strain response characteristics of subgrade soil-rock mixtures, establishing a normalized model that can preliminarily describe the stress-strain response relationship of subgrade soil-rock mixtures. This model has clear physical meaning and a simple structure, greatly reducing experimental time and difficulty. It provides significant engineering convenience for subgrade soil-rock mixtures with various mixing uniformity combinations and for field units lacking experimental conditions, and has high market promotion value.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of road engineering technology, specifically to a method for improving the uniformity of soil-rock mixture mixing (M). e The determination method and a stress-strain response prediction model and method for soil-rock mixture considering the mixing uniformity are presented. Background Technology

[0002] During operation, roadbeds are often affected by natural factors (such as heavy rainfall infiltration and groundwater upwelling) and human factors (such as heavy loads, overloading, and speeding). The axial pore water pressure gradient in the soil-rock mixture gradually exerts a "pumping" effect on the pore water, which in turn induces particle displacement and structural reorganization within the mixture, leading to various defects in the pavement structure such as cracking and differential settlement. Therefore, as an essential step in evaluating the service performance of roadbeds, studying the stress-strain response characteristics of roadbed soil-rock mixtures that consider the influence of particle distribution (mixing uniformity) is of significant engineering importance.

[0003] Currently, researchers primarily obtain the stress-strain response characteristics of roadbed soil-rock mixtures through simple and inexpensive direct shear tests. Additionally, vane shear apparatuses, suitable for field testing of special soil types, are also used. However, these methods cannot accurately control the confining pressure on the fill material during the test, limiting the application of test results in practical engineering. While triaxial tests, which reflect the influence of confining pressure, are increasingly adopted, their high cost, complex operation, and time-consuming nature make it difficult to obtain the stress-strain response characteristics of the fill material and are not readily accepted by frontline construction workers. Therefore, establishing a method for predicting the stress-strain response of soil-rock mixtures that considers the influence of mixing uniformity is highly desirable. Summary of the Invention

[0004] To address the aforementioned problems, this invention provides a method for predicting the stress-strain response of soil-rock mixtures considering mixing uniformity, which can preliminarily describe the confining pressure and M. e The stress-strain response relationship of roadbed soil-rock mixture fill material under comprehensive influence, including strain hardening and strain softening types, breaks through the bottleneck of existing methods that rely on expensive static triaxial apparatus and have a complex and time-consuming experimental process.

[0005] This application first provides a method for determining the mixing uniformity of soil-rock mixtures, as follows:

[0006] (7)

[0007] Where: M e For uniformity of mixing, For p layers (greater than) The corresponding local stone mass percentage, For q layers (less than) The corresponding local stone mass percentage, j is the number of layers where the local stone mass percentage is greater than the overall stone mass percentage, and n is the total number of sample layers. This represents the percentage of the total stone mass of the sample.

[0008] This application also provides a stress-strain response prediction model for soil-rock mixtures that comprehensively considers confining pressure and mixing uniformity, as follows:

[0009]

[0010] Among them, M e The uniformity of the soil-rock mixture; For axial strain; It is the third principal stress; For M e =i is the deviatoric stress corresponding to the same axial strain; e is a mathematical constant, 2.718; Pa is atmospheric pressure, usually taken as 101.3 kPa; M e The method for determining M is as described in claim 1. e The method for determining it.

[0011] The above model is constructed using the following method:

[0012] (1) Select the soil and stone materials used in the soil-rock mixture, and determine the basic physical performance parameters corresponding to different mixing uniformity conditions through basic physical performance tests;

[0013] (2) Prepare samples with different mixing homogeneity and conduct static triaxial tests to obtain the stress-strain response relationship of the samples under different working conditions;

[0014] (3) Based on the results of the static triaxial test, the above-mentioned normalized model that comprehensively considers the effects of confining pressure and mixing uniformity is established.

[0015] The beneficial effects of this invention are:

[0016] 1. The novel method for determining the uniformity of mixing in this application has a clear physical meaning and simple structure in the formula, which reasonably reflects the local segregation state and overall uniformity of the soil-rock mixture, providing scientific theoretical guidance for the construction of roadbed soil-rock mixture filler, and has high engineering application value.

[0017] 2. This application comprehensively considers the influence of physical state (mixing homogeneity) and stress state (confining pressure) on the stress-strain response characteristics of roadbed soil-rock composite fill, and establishes a normalized model that can preliminarily describe the stress-strain response relationship (including strain hardening and strain softening types) of roadbed soil-rock composite fill. This model has clear physical meaning and a simple structure, greatly reducing experimental time and difficulty. It provides significant engineering convenience for roadbed soil-rock composite fill with various mixing homogeneity combinations and for field units lacking experimental conditions, and has high market promotion value. Attached Figure Description

[0018] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0019] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the sample layering in Example 1;

[0020] Figure 2 There are five types of M e Operating condition diagram;

[0021] Figure 3 It is a different M e Stress-strain curves corresponding to different confining pressures are plotted.

[0022] Figure 4 It is M e When =1, E1 and E tan , Relationship diagram;

[0023] Figure 5 It is M e When =1, E1 and Relationship diagram;

[0024] Figure 6 It is a different M e Figure showing the results of the deviatoric stress difference of the specimen under the working condition;

[0025] Figure 7 It is M e When <1, ∆E1 and ∆E tan , Relationship diagram;

[0026] Figure 8 Different confining pressures, M e R under operating conditions v Value results graph;

[0027] Figure 9 This is a graph showing the robustness verification results of the established model;

[0028] Figure 10 It is a different M e Results of elastic modulus under confining pressure conditions;

[0029] Figure 11 It is a different M e Failure strength results under confining pressure conditions;

[0030] Figure 12 It is a different M e Results of internal friction angle and cohesion under confining pressure conditions. Detailed Implementation

[0031] The technical solutions of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0032] Example 1

[0033] For qualitative and quantitative analysis M e Regarding the influence of soil-rock mixture on the strength characteristics of roadbed fill, this application proposes a new M... e The method for determining this is as follows:

[0034] Assuming that fine-grained material (soil) and coarse-grained material (stone) are uniformly distributed within a region, then within any infinitesimal volume: And the percentage of stone mass is constant. If the soil and stone are not evenly distributed, then the percentage of stone mass... It is a coordinate function, that is:

[0035]

[0036] Meanwhile, the calculation method for the degree of segregation I within the infinitesimal volume is set as follows:

[0037] ① When this area hour

[0038]

[0039] In the formula, I represents the degree of segregation, I∈[0,1], when When I = 1, I = 1 (indicating complete segregation, meaning the area contains only stone); when = When I=0 (indicating a non-segregated state, meaning the soil and rock in the area are uniformly mixed); when Its value represents an intermediate state. This represents the percentage of the total stone mass of the sample. This represents the percentage of stone mass in a specific area of ​​the sample.

[0040] At this point, the segregation weight of this region within the total volume can be expressed as:

[0041]

[0042] ②When this area hour

[0043]

[0044] In the formula, I∈[0,1], when When I = 0, I = 1 (indicating complete segregation, meaning the area contains only soil); when = When I=0 (indicating a non-segregated state, meaning the soil and rock in the area are uniformly mixed); when When its value is retrieved, it represents an intermediate state.

[0045] Similarly, the segregation weight of this region within the total volume can be expressed as:

[0046]

[0047] The region to be evaluated is divided into two parts: Ω1 (evaluation region 1) and Ω2 (evaluation region 2). Ω1 contains... ,Ω2 Then M e for:

[0048]

[0049] At this point, the mass percentage of the stone, w = w(x,y,z), is a continuous function of the coordinates. The smaller the value of its infinitesimal volume, the more accurate the calculation of M using equation (6) becomes. e The more precise the value, the better. However, soil and rock particles have a certain actual volume, and their infinitesimal volume values ​​have a lower threshold. Therefore, we assume that the soil and rock are uniformly distributed on the xy plane, and only consider their variation in the depth direction (z plane). Then, the sample is divided into n layers along the z direction (e.g., ...). Figure 1 As shown), the mass percentage of coarse particles corresponding to each layer is: , ,..., The height is ℎ= When uniformly distributed, the coarse particle content .Will Medium to large The renumbering is , ,..., Less than The renumbering is , ,..., Combining equation (6), we can obtain the corrected M. e The calculation formula is shown in equation (7). It can be seen that M... e The calculation range of the index is [0,1], and the formula has a clear physical meaning and simple structure. It reasonably reflects the local segregation state and overall uniformity of the soil-rock mixture, providing significant engineering convenience for the construction of roadbed soil-rock mixture filler, and has high engineering promotion value.

[0050] (7)

[0051] Where: M e For uniformity of mixing, For p layers (greater than) The corresponding local stone mass percentage, For q layers (less than) The corresponding local stone mass percentage, j is the number of layers where the local stone mass percentage is greater than the overall stone mass percentage, and n is the total number of sample layers. This represents the percentage of the total stone mass of the sample.

[0052] Example 2

[0053] This application also provides a method for predicting the stress-strain response of soil-rock mixtures that comprehensively considers confining pressure and mixing uniformity. The method for determining the mixing uniformity of the soil-rock mixtures used in this method is the method in Example 1.

[0054] (a) Determine the basic physical performance parameters corresponding to different mixing uniformity conditions through basic physical performance tests;

[0055] The soil-rock mixture used in this invention is prepared from basalt and silt from the Changsha area. The stone particle size ranges from 2.36 to 4.75 mm, and the clay particle size ranges from less than 1.18 mm. Sand accounts for 47.3%, silt for 46.0%, and clay for 6.7%. The specific gravity is 2.69, the liquid limit is 23.0%, the plastic limit is 15.4%, and the plasticity index is 7.6. It is classified as low liquid limit silt. Furthermore, to fully cover the potential M... e This study is based on the M established in step a. e The calculation index is set for 5 operating conditions (i.e., M). e Samples were prepared using 1, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, and 0, as detailed below. Figure 2As shown in Table 1. Meanwhile, considering the specimen size requirements for triaxial testing and the particle size range of the material, a specimen diameter of 10 cm, a height of 20 cm, a compaction degree of 94%, and an optimum moisture content were selected.

[0056] Table 1 Five types of M e Operating condition test parameters

[0057]

[0058] Note: The sample consists of 4 layers, with a total soil-to-stone mass ratio of 1:1. A1 represents the stone mass ratio in the upper region (layers 1-2) of the sample; A2 represents the stone mass ratio in the lower region (layers 3-4) of the sample; B1 represents the soil mass ratio in the upper region (layers 1-2) of the sample; and B2 represents the soil mass ratio in the lower region (layers 3-4) of the sample. Maximum dry density; This is the optimal moisture content.

[0059] (b) Prepare specimens with different mixing homogeneity and conduct static triaxial tests to obtain the stress-strain response relationship of the specimens under different working conditions;

[0060] For different M e The specimens underwent static triaxial (UU) tests with confining pressures of 30 kPa, 60 kPa, and 90 kPa and a loading rate of 0.8% / min. The tests were stopped when the axial strain of the specimens reached 15%. Different M... e Stress-strain curves corresponding to different confining pressures are as follows: Figure 3 As shown in the figure, it is easy to see that increasing the confining pressure level has a beneficial effect on the interlocking ability between particles inside the sample. Therefore, its stress-strain curve gradually transitions from a strain softening type to a strain hardening type curve with increasing confining pressure, and the deviatoric stress required to generate the same axial strain gradually increases. Simultaneously, the distribution state of soil and rock particles inside the sample changes with M... e The decrease in strain causes the strain curve to gradually change from a uniformly mixed state to a completely segregated state, which in turn causes the strain curve to gradually change from a strain hardening type to a strain softening type, and the deviatoric stress required to produce the same axial strain gradually decreases.

[0061] (c) Based on the results of the static triaxial test, a normalized model that comprehensively considers the effects of confining pressure and mixing uniformity is established:

[0062] M e Research on the normalization model when =1

[0063] Depend on Figure 2 (a) It can be seen that the roadbed soil-rock mixture filler is in M eUnder the condition of σ = 1, its stress-strain curve exhibits a clear strain hardening type. Therefore, this application selects the Duncan-Chang model (as shown in Equation 8) for its fitting analysis, and the results are shown in Table 2. It can be seen that the model has high accuracy and strong applicability, but it cannot well reflect the influence of confining pressure on stress-strain response (i.e., for different levels of confining pressure, the corresponding model parameters need to be calculated separately), which undoubtedly increases the difficulty and complexity of the model.

[0064]

[0065] In the formula, For axial strain, The first principal stress, The third principal stress is given, where a and b are experimental constants, and 1 / a is the initial tangent modulus E. tan 1 / b is the ultimate deviatoric stress intensity .

[0066] Table 2 M e Duncan-Chang model fitting results when =1

[0067]

[0068] To address the aforementioned problems, this application provides for M e The Duncan-Zhang model under the condition of =1 is modified as follows:

[0069] First, add a normalization factor N to both sides of equation (8) to obtain equation (9).

[0070]

[0071] Then, by analyzing and comparing the results of the static triaxial test, it can be seen that M e The elastic modulus E1 and E under condition =1 tan , The relationship satisfies the normalization function condition, such as Figure 4 As shown. Therefore, by selecting the elastic modulus E1 as the normalization factor N and substituting it into equation (9), we can obtain equation (10).

[0072]

[0073] At the same time, establish the relationship between the elastic modulus E1 and the confining pressure, such as Figure 5 As shown in equation (11).

[0074]

[0075] Finally, combining equations (10) and (11), we can obtain equation (12), which can then describe M. e Stress-strain curve under the condition of 1.

[0076]

[0077] M e Normalization model study when <1

[0078] Depend on Figure 2 From (b)-(e), it can be seen that the roadbed soil-rock mixture filler at M e Under the conditions of M = 0.75, 0.5, 0.5, and 0, the stress-strain response basically exhibits a strain-softening curve. However, the Duncan-Chang model cannot reasonably describe the strain-softening stress-strain relationship. Therefore, a new variable (i.e., due to M) is introduced. e The analysis is performed on the difference in deviatoric stress caused by the change, as defined in equation (13). The results of the difference in deviatoric stress under different working conditions are as follows: Figure 6 As shown.

[0079]

[0080] In the formula, This represents the difference in deviatoric stress. and M respectively e =1 and M e =i is the deviatoric stress corresponding to the same axial strain.

[0081] Depend on Figure 6 It can be seen that M e The stress-strain curves corresponding to the conditions of 0.75, 0.5, 0.5, and 0 are introduced... It then basically transforms into a stress-hardening type. Therefore, based on the above, equation (14) can be derived, and the results are shown in Table 3.

[0082]

[0083] In the formula, 1 / c is The corresponding initial tangent modulus ΔE tan 1 / d is Corresponding ultimate deviatoric stress strength .

[0084] Table 3 M e Duncan-Chang model fitting results when <1

[0085]

[0086] As discussed in Section 3.1, to clarify the normalization relationship between the deviatoric stress difference and axial strain, the normalization factor needs to be related to ΔE. tan , All exhibit a good linear relationship. It can be observed that the difference in elastic modulus ΔE1 satisfies this condition, as shown in the results. Figure 7 As shown.

[0087] Choosing △E1 as the normalization factor, we can obtain equation (15).

[0088]

[0089] To eliminate intermediate variables, this application proposes the rate of change of elastic modulus (R0). v ), defined as shown in equation (16). Different confining pressures and M e R corresponding to the working condition v Value evolution law as follows Figure 8 As shown, their relationship is as shown in equation (17).

[0090]

[0091] Combining formulas (11)-(17), and taking into account confining pressure and M... e The normalized model for the roadbed soil-rock mixture fill is shown in equation (18). When M e When =1, equation (18) can be completely transformed into equation (12), indicating that equation (18) is applicable to the mixed uniform state, segregation state and complete segregation state of roadbed soil-rock mixture.

[0092]

[0093] Furthermore, to determine the applicability of the stress-strain response prediction method for soil-rock mixtures considering mixing uniformity proposed in this embodiment of the invention, working condition ① (M) was selected. e =1、 Operating Condition ② (M) e =0.8、 ), Working condition ③ (M) e =0.6、 The robustness of the established model was verified using triaxial test data. A scatter plot of robustness verification was plotted with the measured deviatoric stress value on the x-axis and the predicted value on the y-axis. The results are shown below. Figure 9 As shown in the figure, it can be seen that most of the scattered points are concentrated around the line y=x, R 2 =0.86, indicating a good fit. The normalized model (18) established in this application can preliminarily describe the confining pressure and M. e The stress-strain response relationship of the roadbed soil-rock mixture fill material under comprehensive influence, including strain hardening and strain softening types, is presented, and its predicted values ​​are highly representative and meet engineering requirements.

[0094] The elastic modulus is an important indicator reflecting the stability and deformation of the roadbed. This application sets the stress-strain curve to be linear within the 1.0% axial strain range, and defines the slope at this point as the elastic modulus value, as shown in formula (19):

[0095] (19)

[0096] In the formula: E is the elastic modulus; 1.0% axial strain Corresponding deviatoric stress; and These represent initial stress and strain, respectively. (Reference: Liu HB, Sun S, Wei HB, et al. Effect of freeze-thaw cycles on static properties of cement-stabilized subgrade silty soil[J]. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 2021, 27(2):159-167.)

[0097] Figure 10 The soil-rock mixture samples were shown at different M... e The test results of the elastic modulus under different conditions (i.e., 1, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, 0) and confining pressures (30 kPa, 60 kPa, 90 kPa) are presented. As shown in the figure, the elastic modulus of the specimen under static load gradually increases with increasing confining pressure, and the increase is within the range of M... e =1, 0 are relatively large. M e Taking the zero-pressure condition as an example, the elastic moduli of the specimens after static loading with confining pressures of 30 kPa, 60 kPa, and 90 kPa are 30.5 MPa, 36.8 MPa, and 43.1 MPa, respectively. The elastic moduli increase by 20.6% and 41.3% compared to the 30 kPa confining pressure. This is because the increase in confining pressure leads to a stronger lateral constraint on the specimen, resulting in a gradual increase in the elastic modulus with increasing confining pressure. This phenomenon is consistent with existing research results.

[0098] Furthermore, under confining pressure, the elastic modulus and M e There is a negative correlation. For example, analysis shows that M e The elastic moduli for M values ​​of 1, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, and 0 are 47.5 MPa, 45.9 MPa, 42.4 MPa, 37.5 MPa, and 30.5 MPa, respectively. It can be seen that under the same confining pressure, the elastic modulus varies with M... e =1 to M e When M = 0.75, the attenuation is relatively small, accounting for only 9.5% of the total attenuation; e =0.25 to M eWhen the coefficient of variation (C=0) is 0, the attenuation is relatively large, reaching 41.3% of the total attenuation. The main reason for this is that the soil-rock mixture sample at M... e =1 to M e When M = 0.75, its internal structural state begins to transition from a skeleton-dense structure to a skeleton-porous structure, and when M... e =0.25 to M e When the particle size distribution is equal to 0, the local discontinuous gradation has been completely transformed into a single particle size distribution (i.e., the upper half is plain soil, and the lower half is a skeleton-pore structure). This is reflected at the macroscopic level in the sample's elastic modulus at M0. e The attenuation is greater when the value is smaller.

[0099] Failure strength is an important indicator characterizing the bearing capacity of subgrade soil. This application, based on the "Specifications for Geotechnical Testing of Highways" (JTG 3430-2020), determines that: for strain-hardening curves, the deviatoric stress corresponding to 15% axial strain is selected as the failure strength; for strain-softening curves, the deviatoric stress corresponding to the peak value of the curve is selected as the failure strength. Figure 11 It can be seen that the failure strength of the specimen under static load gradually increases with the increase of confining pressure. Taking M as an example... e Taking the 0.25 condition as an example, the failure strengths of specimens under static loading with confining pressures of 30 kPa, 60 kPa, and 90 kPa are 87 kPa, 111.3 kPa, and 126.3 kPa, respectively. These failure strengths are 1.28 times and 1.45 times greater than those under a confining pressure of 30 kPa. This is because the greater the confining pressure, the greater the constraint force that causes particle displacement under stress, which is reflected macroscopically as the failure strength of the specimen gradually increases with increasing confining pressure.

[0100] In addition, by Figure 11 It is easy to see that the failure strength of the specimen under static load increases with M. e It gradually decays as it decreases, and in M e =1 to M e The attenuation is greatest when M = 0.75, reaching over 40% of the total attenuation. Taking a 90 kPa confining pressure condition as an example, analysis shows that M... e The failure strengths under the conditions of 1, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, and 0 are 193.2 kPa, 163.2 kPa, 142.8 kPa, 126.3 kPa, and 115.6 kPa, respectively. When M... e As the strength decreased from 1 to 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, and 0, the destructive strength decreased by 15.5%, 26.1%, 34.6%, and 40.1% respectively compared to when it was 1. This is due to M eWhen M=1, the sample has an integral skeleton-dense structure, with coarse particles (stone) playing the main load-bearing role under static load. As M... e As the strength of the sample gradually decreases, the local structure transforms from a skeleton-dense structure to a skeleton-void structure and then to a suspended-dense structure, which in turn causes the failure strength of the sample under static load to decrease with M. e It gradually weakens as it decreases.

[0101] Different M e The relationship curves between the cohesion and internal friction angle of the soil-rock mixture sample under the working conditions are shown in the figure below. Figure 12 As shown in the figure. It can be seen that its cohesion and internal friction angle both increase with M. e It gradually decays as M decreases. e When the coefficients are 1, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, and 0, the cohesive forces are 41.6 kPa, 32.3 kPa, 27.8 kPa, 25.1 kPa, and 23.9 kPa, respectively, and the internal friction angles are 19.1°, 18.3°, 17.1°, 15.8°, and 14.2°, respectively. The main reason is: M e =1 The operating condition is smaller than other conditions with a lower M. e Under certain working conditions, the good interlocking, interlocking, and friction of the soil and rock particles result in a relatively large contact area between the particles, leading to a relatively large internal friction angle. Simultaneously, with M... e As the concentration of M gradually decreases, the soil and stone gradually separate, and the sample changes from an overall skeleton-dense structure to a local skeleton-void and local suspended-dense structure. Internally, there is more stone-stone contact and soil-soil contact. This is reflected at the macroscopic level by the overall cohesion of the sample decreasing with M. e It gradually weakens as it decreases.

[0102] The above description is merely a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention are included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for constructing a stress-strain response prediction model for soil-rock mixtures that comprehensively considers confining pressure and mixing uniformity, characterized in that, The model is as follows: Among them, M e The uniformity of the soil-rock mixture; For axial strain, % This is the third principal stress, expressed in kPa. For M e =i is the deviatoric stress corresponding to the same axial strain, in kPa; e is a mathematical constant, 2.718; Pa is atmospheric pressure, taken as 101.3 kPa; M e The method for determining it is as follows: (7) Where: M e For uniformity of mixing, This represents the local stone mass percentage corresponding to layer p. Greater than ; This represents the percentage of local stone mass corresponding to layer q. Less than j represents the number of layers where the percentage of local stone mass is greater than the percentage of total stone mass, and n represents the total number of sample layers. This represents the percentage of the total stone mass of the sample. The method is as follows: (1) Select the soil and stone materials used in the soil-rock mixture, and determine the basic physical performance parameters corresponding to different mixing uniformity conditions through basic physical performance tests; (2) Prepare samples with different mixing homogeneity and conduct static triaxial tests to obtain the stress-strain response relationship of the samples under different working conditions; (3) Based on the results of the static triaxial test, the above-mentioned normalized model that comprehensively considers the effects of confining pressure and mixing uniformity is established.

2. A method for predicting the stress-strain response of soil-rock mixtures considering mixing uniformity, characterized in that, The model constructed using the construction method described in claim 1 predicts the stress-strain response relationship of the corresponding soil and stone materials under different working conditions.

Images