Method, system and data carrier for testing the water resistance of grouting materials

Abstract

The present application relates to the field of measurement test technology, especially to a grouting material water resistance test evaluation method, system and data carrier. The grouting material water resistance test evaluation method first obtains the post-period water resistance strength index by comparing the strength of standard curing and water curing test blocks; then obtains the water absorption consolidation strength index by simulating the water loss working condition of slurry through negative pressure suction filtration and setting the effective consolidation judgment as the premise of the veto condition; then obtains the underwater dispersion retention index by simulating the underwater dispersion of slurry and setting the retention rate threshold as the veto condition; finally, according to the target engineering environment, the three indexes are assigned weight coefficients and weighted summation, and the comprehensive water resistance index is obtained. The present application overcomes the defects of one-sidedness and engineering reality of the prior art, can comprehensively and accurately predict the actual situation of grouting material in complex water environment, and provides a scientific basis for engineering selection.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of measurement and testing technology, and in particular to a method, system, and data carrier for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials. Background Technology

[0002] Grouting is a widely used technology in civil engineering for soil and rock reinforcement, seepage prevention, and structural repair. This technology involves injecting fluid grout into the target stratum or structural fissures using a grouting pump. After solidification and hardening, the grout integrates with the surrounding medium, achieving the engineering goals of reinforcement and waterproofing. Currently, commonly used grouting materials mainly include traditional cement-based grouts, geopolymer-based grouts, and reactive polymer grouts. During the grouting process, the grout inevitably interacts with water in the stratum, and this interaction is a key factor affecting the grouting effect. However, the current industry's evaluation system for the water resistance of grouting materials still has significant shortcomings; a scientific, systematic, and practically applicable testing and evaluation method has not yet been established.

[0003] Currently, some local standards have put forward specific requirements for the performance of grouting materials, such as Shanghai's "Technical Specification for Road Grouting Reinforcement" (DG / TJ 08-2240-2017) and Henan's "Technical Specification for Trenchless Geopolymer Grouting Reinforcement Treatment of Roads" (DB 41 / T 1165—2015). However, these standards generally do not include water resistance as a core performance indicator. Even in some standards, such as Jiangsu's "Technical Specification for Modified Geopolymer Grouting Reinforcement of Urban Roads" (DGJ32 / TJ 225-2017), which specifies a water resistance test method, the method essentially involves immersing the hardened specimen in water and then measuring the strength retention rate, which has the following serious defects:

[0004] (1) Inconsistent curing age of test blocks: The total curing time of the two groups of test blocks used for comparison in this standard is different (one group is standard curing for 28 days, and the other group is standard curing for 28 days and then soaking in water for 28 days), which leads to inconsistent strength development process, lack of comparability of test results, and inability to truly reflect the influence of water environment on material performance.

[0005] (2) Ignoring the water resistance of the grout in the flow stage: Existing methods only focus on the performance stability of the hardened grout in still water, completely ignoring the interaction between the grout and the groundwater environment when it is in the flow state; however, most grouting failures in engineering, such as the grout being washed away, diluted, or losing water too early, happen precisely in this critical stage.

[0006] (3) Unable to simulate water loss conditions: When facing formations with low water content or high permeability, the slurry is prone to rapid water loss, which leads to the cessation of hydration reaction or loose structure of the solidified body. Existing evaluation methods cannot simulate the water loss process and therefore cannot evaluate the performance of materials under such conditions.

[0007] (4) Unable to simulate dilution or scouring conditions: In water-rich or dynamic water environments, the injected slurry faces the risk of being diluted and scouring away, making it difficult to effectively retain and solidify at the predetermined location; the existing static immersion test is completely inconsistent with this dynamic scouring condition and cannot provide any evaluation basis for anti-dispersion and anti-scouring capabilities.

[0008] In addition, although some patents (such as CN108863280A, CN105800979A, etc.) or building material standards mention water resistance, most of them rely only on the simple strength change rate after immersion (such as <10%) or short-term phenomenon observation (such as no abnormality after 96 hours) as the criterion. The evaluation indicators are single and lenient, and they are not linked to the actual hydrological conditions of the project.

[0009] In summary, existing technologies for evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials suffer from limitations such as bias, staticity, and detachment from practical engineering applications. They lack a systematic evaluation method that can simultaneously simulate both water loss and water abundance conditions, encompass the entire process of grout flow and hardening, and output quantifiable and designable indicators. This technological gap leaves the selection and application of grouting materials in complex aquatic environments without reliable guidance, creating risks to engineering quality and safety. Summary of the Invention

[0010] The technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials, in order to address the problems of one-sidedness, staticity and detachment from engineering practice in the evaluation of the water resistance of grouting materials in the prior art mentioned above. This method can simultaneously simulate water loss and water abundance conditions, cover the entire process of grout from the fluid state to the hardened state, and can output quantitative and designable indicators.

[0011] The technical solution adopted by this invention to solve its technical problem is: a method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials, comprising the following steps:

[0012] S1. Prepare the slurry to be tested according to the standard ratio;

[0013] S2. Prepare two sets of standard test blocks from a portion of the slurry, and cure them under standard conditions and in water to the predetermined age, respectively. Measure the compressive strength and calculate the later water resistance index. ;

[0014] S3. Divide a portion of the slurry into two parts. One part is cured under standard conditions to obtain the control compressive strength. The other part is filtered under constant negative pressure for a certain period of time to obtain a dewatered slurry cake. Effective consolidation is then assessed. If effective consolidation is achieved, test blocks are made and their compressive strength is measured. The water absorption consolidation strength index is then calculated. If it fails, the water absorption consolidation strength index will be... Record it as 0 directly;

[0015] S4. Prepare a certain mass of slurry and calculate the total mass of solid materials in it. Perform simulated underwater dispersion, solidification, and drying treatment on the slurry, measure the remaining mass, and calculate the underwater anti-dispersion retention index based on the two masses. And make an effective retention judgment, if the underwater anti-dispersion retention index <Preset threshold, then Record it as 0 directly;

[0016] S5. Based on the target engineering environment, determine the weighting coefficients of the above three indices as α, β, and γ, respectively, and calculate the final water resistance comprehensive index (WRI). The calculation formula is as follows:

[0017] ,

[0018] Where α+β+γ=1, the water resistance index WRI ranges from 0 to 100, and when there is a fundamental failure of the index, it is directly reduced to zero and participates in the weighting.

[0019] Furthermore, the effective consolidation judgment in step S3 and the effective retention judgment in step S4 are veto prerequisite judgment conditions.

[0020] When the conclusion of effective consolidation is that it is not effectively consolidated, the water absorption resistance consolidation strength index is directly defined. The value is 0, and subsequent strength testing and calculation steps are skipped;

[0021] When the conclusion of the effective retention assessment is that there is no effective retention, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index is directly defined. It is 0.

[0022] Furthermore, the water resistance index in the later stage of step S2 The testing methods include:

[0023] S21. Both the first and second groups of test blocks were demolded after being cured under standard conditions for 24 hours.

[0024] S22. The first group of test blocks was cured under standard conditions for another 28 days, and its first compressive strength was measured. ;

[0025] S23. Immediately transfer the second group of test blocks into water for curing for 28 days, and measure their second compressive strength. ;

[0026] Calculate the water resistance index in the later stage The calculation formula is:

[0027] .

[0028] Furthermore, the water absorption consolidation strength index in step S3 The testing methods include:

[0029] S31. Take the first portion of slurry to make several test blocks, and after standard curing for 28 days, measure the compressive strength of the control. ;

[0030] S32. Pour the second part of the slurry into the Buchner funnel, apply a constant negative pressure p, and continue to filter for a time t to simulate the water loss condition and obtain the dewatered slurry cake.

[0031] S33. Determine the quality of the dewatered pulp cake. If it is determined to be ineffectively consolidated, directly define the water absorption resistance consolidation strength index. =0;

[0032] S34. If the consolidation is deemed effective, the dewatered pulp cake is remixed and made into the same number of test blocks. After standard curing for 28 days, the consolidation compressive strength is measured. ;

[0033] S35. Calculate the water absorption and consolidation strength index. The calculation formula is:

[0034] .

[0035] Furthermore, in step S32, the range of the filtration negative pressure p is -0.03MPa to -0.07MPa, and the range of the filtration time t is 15 minutes to 60 minutes. The filtration negative pressure p and / or filtration time t are adjusted according to the permeability or water content of the target formation.

[0036] Furthermore, the method for determining the dehydrated pulp cake in step S33 is as follows:

[0037] If the dehydrated pulp cake is loose and cannot be bound into a clump, it is determined that it has not been effectively consolidated.

[0038] If it cannot be observed, the dehydrated pulp cake is remixed within 5 minutes and made into several verification test blocks. After standard curing for 7 days, its compressive strength is tested. If the compressive strength after 7 days is less than 5 MPa, it is determined that it has not been effectively consolidated.

[0039] Furthermore, the method for determining the dehydrated slurry cake in step S33 is as follows: the actual water-to-solid ratio of the dehydrated slurry cake is measured. If the water-to-solid ratio is lower than the minimum water-to-solid ratio required for complete hydration of this type of grouting material, it is determined to be ineffectively consolidated.

[0040] Furthermore, in step S4, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index The testing methods include:

[0041] S41. Prepare a certain mass of slurry and calculate the initial total mass of the solid material contained therein based on its proportions. ;

[0042] S42. The above-mentioned mass of slurry is injected at a fixed height below the water surface into a container containing a fixed amount of water at a uniform speed.

[0043] S43. Let stand for 24 hours to allow the slurry to solidify underwater and form a solidified body;

[0044] S44. Remove and dry the underwater solidified body to constant weight, and weigh it to obtain its final solid mass. ;

[0045] S45. Calculate the underwater anti-dispersion retention index. The calculation formula is:

[0046] ;

[0047] S46, Underwater anti-dispersion retention index If the value is below the preset threshold, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index is directly defined. =0.

[0048] Furthermore, in step S42, slurry is injected using a syringe or peristaltic pump. During injection, the water in the container is either static water or dynamic water with a set flow rate to simulate different scouring conditions.

[0049] A water resistance testing and evaluation system for grouting materials is also provided, comprising:

[0050] One or more processors;

[0051] Memory, used to store one or more programs;

[0052] When one or more programs are executed by one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials as described in the above scheme.

[0053] A data carrier storing a computer program is also provided, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials as described in the above scheme.

[0054] The beneficial effects of this invention are:

[0055] (1) This invention introduces an anti-water absorption consolidation strength index and underwater anti-dispersion retention index The performance of the slurry under conditions of water loss and water scouring was simulated, and compared with the traditional post-concentration water resistance index. By combining these methods, a testing and evaluation system covering the entire process from injection, coagulation to hardening is constructed, overcoming the static and one-sided nature of existing methods and making the test and evaluation results more comprehensive and scientific.

[0056] (2) Adjustable weighting coefficients α, β and γ allow users to flexibly adjust the emphasis of different performance indicators according to the specific hydrogeological conditions of the target project, enabling the test and evaluation method to select the most suitable material screening criteria for different engineering scenarios such as tunnels, dams and roadbeds, which significantly improves the pertinence, safety and economy of engineering selection.

[0057] (3) By simulating water loss conditions through negative pressure filtration and setting effective consolidation rejection conditions, the risk of material failure due to rapid water loss leading to failure to consolidate or sudden drop in strength can be identified in advance; by simulating dilution / flushing conditions through underwater injection and static solidification and setting effective retention rejection conditions, materials that are prone to loss and cannot form effective solidification in dynamic water environments can be effectively screened out; this highly simulated test makes the laboratory evaluation results highly correlated with the actual performance on site, greatly enhancing the engineering guidance value of the evaluation method;

[0058] (4) Pre-judgment of effective consolidation or effective retention can control the problem of material failure under certain high-risk working conditions. Once failure occurs, the corresponding sub-index is directly judged to zero. The result of the zero judgment is then used in the weighted calculation, thereby ensuring that materials with fatal defects cannot obtain high scores and avoiding the situation where mathematical weighting may cover up major engineering risks. At the same time, it allows materials to still obtain a certain score when they have excellent performance in other aspects. The evaluation results are more balanced and reasonable, which is in line with the risk management of weighing the pros and cons in engineering decision-making.

[0059] (5) By normalizing the three sub-indices and synthesizing them into a single water resistance comprehensive index (WRI), different formulations and different types of grouting materials have a water resistance performance data that can be directly quantified and compared. This provides clear and reliable data support for engineering technicians to screen materials and for R&D personnel to optimize formulations, avoiding the drawbacks of relying on qualitative descriptions or single indicators for judgment in the past. Attached Figure Description

[0060] The present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments.

[0061] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials of the present invention.

[0062] Figure 2 This is a flowchart of the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials of the present invention.

[0063] Figure 3 The water resistance index in the later stage of the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials of this invention is... The test method flowchart.

[0064] Figure 4The water absorption resistance consolidation strength index in the water resistance test and evaluation method of grouting materials of this invention is... The test method flowchart.

[0065] Figure 5 The underwater anti-dispersion retention index in the water resistance test and evaluation method of grouting materials of this invention is... The test method flowchart. Detailed Implementation

[0066] The present invention will now be described in further detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. These drawings are simplified schematic diagrams, illustrating only the basic structure of the invention, and therefore only show the components relevant to the invention.

[0067] Example 1

[0068] like Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown, a method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials includes the following steps:

[0069] S1. Prepare the slurry to be tested according to the standard ratio;

[0070] S2. Prepare two sets of standard test blocks from a portion of the slurry, and cure them under standard conditions and in water to the predetermined age, respectively. Measure the compressive strength and calculate the later water resistance index. ;

[0071] S3. Divide a portion of the slurry into two parts. One part is cured under standard conditions to obtain the control compressive strength. The other part is filtered under constant negative pressure for a certain period of time to obtain a dewatered slurry cake. Effective consolidation is then assessed. If effective consolidation is achieved, test blocks are made and their compressive strength is measured. The water absorption consolidation strength index is then calculated. If it fails, the water absorption consolidation strength index will be... Record it as 0 directly;

[0072] S4. Prepare a certain mass of slurry and calculate the total mass of solid materials in it. Perform simulated underwater dispersion, solidification, and drying treatment on the slurry, measure the remaining mass, and calculate the underwater anti-dispersion retention index based on the two masses. And make an effective retention judgment, if the underwater anti-dispersion retention index <Preset threshold, then Record it as 0 directly;

[0073] S5. Based on the target engineering environment, determine the weighting coefficients of the above three indices as α, β, and γ, respectively, and calculate the final water resistance comprehensive index (WRI). The calculation formula is as follows:

[0074] ,

[0075] Where α+β+γ=1, the water resistance index WRI ranges from 0 to 100, and when there is a fundamental failure of the index, it is directly reduced to zero and participates in the weighting.

[0076] It should be noted that this embodiment, by mandating the inclusion of three sub-indicators, ensures that the testing and evaluation system simultaneously covers the three key dimensions of "hardened water resistance," "fluid-state resistance to water loss," and "fluid-state resistance to dispersion," fundamentally overcoming the one-sidedness of existing standards that only focus on a single dimension. Steps S3 and S4 explicitly require negative pressure filtration and underwater injection tests on the fluid dynamics of the slurry, directly simulating the behavior of the slurry in the most intense and vulnerable flow stage with environmental water, thus addressing the deficiency of "completely ignoring key flow processes" pointed out in the background technology. By introducing adjustable weighting coefficients α, β, and γ, as well as the water resistance comprehensive index WRI, engineers can adjust the weighting coefficients according to the hydrogeological risks of specific projects, enabling the final comprehensive index WRI to more accurately predict the applicability of materials in specific scenarios, improving the engineering relevance and practicality of the evaluation results. For example, for arid and water-scarce strata, it can significantly improve the water absorption consolidation strength index. The weight β; for water-rich and dynamic water environments, it can significantly improve the underwater anti-dispersion retention index. The weight γ.

[0077] Specifically, the effective consolidation judgment in step S3 and the effective retention judgment in step S4 are veto prerequisite judgment conditions.

[0078] When the conclusion of effective consolidation is that it is not effectively consolidated, the water absorption resistance consolidation strength index is directly defined. The value is 0, and subsequent strength testing and calculation steps are skipped;

[0079] When the conclusion of the effective retention assessment is that there is no effective retention, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index is directly defined. It is 0.

[0080] It should be noted that by explicitly defining effective consolidation and effective retention as prerequisite veto conditions, a screening mechanism is added compared to the traditional calculation and comparison methods, preventing a seemingly passing overall score from being obtained due to high scores on other indicators.

[0081] Specifically, such as Figure 3 As shown, the water resistance index in the later stage of step S2 The testing methods include:

[0082] S21. Both the first and second groups of test blocks were demolded after being cured under standard conditions for 24 hours.

[0083] S22. The first group of test blocks was cured under standard conditions for another 28 days, and its first compressive strength was measured. ;

[0084] S23. Immediately transfer the second group of test blocks into water for curing for 28 days, and measure their second compressive strength. ;

[0085] Calculate the water resistance index in the later stage The calculation formula is:

[0086] .

[0087] It should be noted that the control group test blocks were demolded and started curing simultaneously, ensuring that the initial conditions of the two groups of test blocks were completely identical except for the curing environment. This solves the core defect pointed out in the background technology, namely the incomparable data caused by the "inconsistent curing age" of the Jiangsu provincial standard (one group was cured for 28 days, and the other for 56 days), which makes the water resistance index in the later stage completely consistent. The results are true, reliable, and scientifically comparable.

[0088] Specifically, such as Figure 4 As shown, the water absorption consolidation strength index in step S3 The testing methods include:

[0089] S31. Take the first portion of slurry to make 3 test blocks, and measure the compressive strength of the control block after 28 days of standard curing. ;

[0090] S32. Pour the second part of the slurry into the Buchner funnel, apply a constant negative pressure p, and continue to filter for a time t to simulate the water loss condition and obtain the dewatered slurry cake.

[0091] S33. Determine the quality of the dewatered pulp cake. If it is determined to be ineffectively consolidated, directly define the water absorption resistance consolidation strength index. =0;

[0092] S34. If the consolidation is deemed effective, the dewatered pulp cake is remixed and made into three test blocks. After standard curing for 28 days, the consolidation compressive strength is measured. ;

[0093] S35. Calculate the water absorption and consolidation strength index. The calculation formula is:

[0094] .

[0095] It should be noted that by applying a constant negative pressure p and a filtration time t using a Buchner funnel, the engineering scenario of rapid water absorption by the soil during slurry injection into low-water-content or high-permeability formations is accurately simulated. By introducing the "effective consolidation criterion," materials that will completely fail after water loss are identified before strength testing. Once determined to be ineffectively consolidated, the water absorption consolidation strength index is... =0 directly sets it to zero, enabling early identification of failures in actual engineering projects at the laboratory stage, avoiding major risks that mathematical calculations may mask, and deeply aligning with engineering safety logic.

[0096] Specifically, in step S32, the range of the filtration negative pressure p is -0.03MPa to -0.07MPa, and the range of the filtration time t is 15 minutes to 60 minutes. The filtration negative pressure p and / or filtration time t are adjusted according to the permeability or water content of the target formation.

[0097] It should be noted that limiting the range of negative pressure p and filtration time t provides a standard basis for operation, and both can be adjusted according to the permeability or water content of the target stratum. This allows laboratory tests to flexibly simulate the suction effect under different geological conditions, from loose sand to dense clay, greatly improving the accuracy of the test results for predicting specific target projects and their guiding value.

[0098] Specifically, there are two methods for determining the dehydrated pulp cake in step S33. The first method is:

[0099] If the dehydrated pulp cake is loose and cannot be bound into a clump, it is determined that it has not been effectively consolidated.

[0100] If it cannot be observed, the dehydrated pulp cake is remixed within 5 minutes and made into 3 verification test blocks. After standard curing for 7 days, its compressive strength is tested. If the compressive strength after 7 days is less than 5 MPa, it is determined that it has not been effectively consolidated.

[0101] It should be noted that the first step of the first judgment method is based on intuitive criteria from engineering experience, which facilitates the rapid screening of obviously failed samples; the second step involves making test blocks and requiring their 7-day strength to be ≥5MPa, introducing the engineering-recognized early strength threshold value (5MPa) as a criterion to ensure the objectivity and scientific nature of the judgment and prevent subjective misjudgment. It can also be appropriately adjusted according to the specific requirements of early strength for different projects.

[0102] The second method for judging dehydrated grout cake is to measure the actual water-to-solid ratio of the dehydrated grout cake. If the water-to-solid ratio is lower than the minimum water-to-solid ratio required for complete hydration of this type of grouting material, it is judged as not effectively consolidated.

[0103] It should be noted that by measuring the actual water-to-solid ratio of the dehydrated pulp cake and comparing it with the minimum water-to-solid ratio theoretically required for complete hydration of the material (e.g., 0.24 for cement), if the actual water-to-solid ratio is lower than the theoretical minimum, it can be determined from a chemical principle perspective that it cannot complete normal hydration. This judgment result is relatively reliable and is especially applicable to materials with complex compositions.

[0104] Specifically, such as Figure 5 As shown, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index in step S4 The testing methods include:

[0105] S41. Prepare a certain mass of slurry and calculate the initial total mass of the solid material contained therein based on its proportions. ;

[0106] S42. The above-mentioned mass of slurry is injected at a fixed height below the water surface into a container containing a fixed amount of water at a uniform speed.

[0107] S43. Let stand for 24 hours to allow the slurry to solidify underwater and form a solidified body;

[0108] S44. Remove and dry the underwater solidified body to constant weight, and weigh it to obtain its final solid mass. ;

[0109] S45. Calculate the underwater anti-dispersion retention index. The calculation formula is:

[0110] ;

[0111] S46, Underwater anti-dispersion retention index If the value is below the preset threshold, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index is directly defined. =0.

[0112] It should be noted that by injecting the slurry underwater into still or flowing water, the real environment of dilution and scouring encountered by the slurry in water-rich formations was simulated. By accurately measuring the initial and final retained solid phase mass, the material's ability to resist water scouring and dispersion loss was directly quantified, providing intuitive and reliable results. A second veto condition was established; if the calculated underwater anti-dispersion retention index... If the value is below a threshold (e.g., 10), it indicates that the material has been severely lost and cannot form an effective solidified body; this is the underwater anti-dispersion retention index. By directly resetting the system to zero, failures in actual engineering are identified in advance at the laboratory stage, avoiding major risks that may be masked by mathematical calculations, which is in line with the logic of engineering safety.

[0113] Specifically, in step S42, slurry is injected using a syringe or peristaltic pump. During injection, the water in the container is either static water or dynamic water with a set flow rate to simulate different scouring conditions.

[0114] It should be noted that the use of peristaltic pumps to inject and simulate dynamic water flow allows the test to not only simulate static water environments but also accurately reproduce dynamic water scouring conditions in engineering projects such as tunnels, rivers, and foundation pits with flowing groundwater, thus expanding the applicable scenarios of the test method and the accuracy of the evaluation.

[0115] To further illustrate the technical solution of this embodiment, three specific embodiments are described below. It should be understood that these embodiments are only for explaining this embodiment and do not constitute any limitation on its scope of protection. Three representative grouting materials were selected for comparative testing in the embodiments:

[0116] Material A: Ordinary cement-based grouting material, characterized by low cost, but poor water retention and anti-dispersion properties.

[0117] Material B: Modified polymer grouting material, characterized by high early strength and excellent water retention performance after special modification, but with average resistance to water erosion.

[0118] Material C: Underwater anti-dispersion polyurethane grouting material, characterized by rapid reaction upon contact with water, high viscosity, and excellent underwater anti-dispersion performance, but with high cost and potentially insufficient reaction in water-scarce environments.

[0119] Specific Implementation Example 1: Grouting Scenario for Compacted Road Subgrade

[0120] Engineering Environment: The roadbed is compacted, with a dense structure and typically low moisture content. The main risk of grouting is that the moisture in the grout is rapidly drawn away by the dry roadbed material, leading to water loss, solid-liquid separation, and ineffective consolidation. Simultaneously, this environment contains almost no flowing groundwater, so the risk of grout dilution or erosion is extremely low.

[0121] Weighting: Based on the above analysis, the evaluation should focus on the material's resistance to water absorption, followed by its long-term stability in water; its anti-dispersion ability need not be considered. Therefore, the weighting coefficients are set as follows: α=0.3, β=0.7, γ=0.

[0122] The experimental process and data are shown in the table below:

[0123]

[0124] Test data analysis: Materials A and C exhibited fundamental failure in the key risk item (water absorption resistance, weight 0.7). Material A (=0) significantly lowered its final score to around 30 points. Material B, on the other hand, performed exceptionally well in this category, achieving a WRI of 93.95, demonstrating a clear advantage. This calculation clearly shows that while materials A and C possess some long-term water resistance, they are completely unsuitable for this engineering scenario with a high risk of water loss.

[0125] Material B, with its excellent water retention, can still maintain 92% of its strength after simulated suction, demonstrating strong adaptability. The final calculated WRI is as high as 93.95, which intuitively proves that it is most suitable for this dry grouting scenario and overcomes the shortcomings of traditional methods in assessing water loss conditions.

[0126] Specific Implementation Example 2: Leakage sealing scenario in water-rich karst strata or underwater tunnels

[0127] Engineering environment characteristics: The scenario contains a large amount of still water or even flowing water. The main risk of grouting is that the grout will be diluted and washed away by the water, and will not be able to remain and solidify in the predetermined position; the risk of grout loss is negligible.

[0128] Weighting: The evaluation focuses entirely on underwater anti-dispersion capability and long-term stability. Therefore, the weighting coefficients are set as follows: α=0.3, β=0, γ=0.7.

[0129] The experimental process and data are shown in the table below:

[0130]

[0131] Test data analysis: Material A has extremely poor anti-dispersion properties ( Material C scored 0, receiving no points on the risk item with a weight as high as 0.7, resulting in a WRI of only 30, and was accurately classified as unsuitable. Material C, however, achieved the highest score of 97.18 due to its excellent anti-dispersion performance. This result accurately reflects the suitability of each material in a water-rich scouring environment, validating the effectiveness of the evaluation system.

[0132] It should also be noted that material B also received a high score. Considering that material C is expensive, material B is also a good choice in practical engineering applications.

[0133] By adjusting β=0 and γ=0.7, the evaluation system's focus was precisely shifted to the core engineering risk—erosion resistance. Under this weighting, material C, with its superior anti-dispersion capability, achieved the highest WRI=97.18 and was undisputedly selected as the optimal material. Material A, with the lowest score, was deemed unsuitable, fully demonstrating the originality and advanced nature of the evaluation system's selection based on the engineering scenario.

[0134] Specific Implementation Example 3: Crack Repair Scenario in Conventional Concrete Structures

[0135] Engineering Environment Characteristics: This project involves repairing cracks in concrete structures in dry environments. Concrete itself is largely non-absorbent, and situations without external water sources are rare. However, considering that concrete is primarily used for waterproofing water-facing surfaces, its underwater dispersion retention index must also be considered. Therefore, the main focus is on the long-term performance stability of the material after curing in potentially humid or immersion environments.

[0136] Weighting: The evaluation focus should be on the later-stage water resistance. A water absorption coefficient of 0 indicates a low risk of dispersion, which can be set to a minimum. Therefore, the weighting coefficients are set as follows: α=0.9, β=0, γ=0.1.

[0137] The experimental process and data are shown in the table below:

[0138]

[0139] Test data analysis: In this scenario, material A fails the anti-dispersion test. It is recorded as 0. Since this item has a weight of only 0.1, it has a very small impact on the total score, and the final WRI is 90. It accurately conveys the following information: Material A has a known defect (poor resistance to dispersion), but in the current scenario where this performance is hardly assessed, its overall applicability is still very high (90 points), only slightly inferior to materials B (96.05 points) and C (97.54 points) which do not have this defect. This evaluation result provides extremely detailed and reasonable data support for engineering decisions.

[0140] The three specific embodiments above collectively demonstrate that this embodiment, through a unified and adjustable framework, combines traditional indicators with innovative simulation experiments to construct a multi-dimensional dynamic evaluation system covering the entire process from "fluidization to hardening," simulating two core working conditions: "water loss" and "water abundance." It not only evaluates excellence but also identifies deficiencies and provides early warnings, offering an unprecedented scientific, accurate, and reliable material evaluation tool for grouting engineering.

[0141] Example 2

[0142] The grouting material water resistance testing and evaluation system of this embodiment includes: one or more processors; a memory for storing one or more programs; when one or more programs are executed by one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the grouting material water resistance testing and evaluation method of Embodiment 1.

[0143] It should be noted that by writing software programs to control the processor to execute the steps of the multidimensional dynamic test and evaluation method for the water resistance of grouting materials, an automated testing system or data analysis software can be built. This can reduce human error, improve testing efficiency, automatically calculate indices and generate reports, making this advanced evaluation method easier to promote and apply widely.

[0144] Example 3

[0145] This embodiment contains a data carrier storing a computer program. When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the steps of the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials in Embodiment 1.

[0146] It should be noted that the program can be stored on various media, such as USB flash drives, servers, and chips.

[0147] Based on the above-described preferred embodiments of the present invention, and through the foregoing description, those skilled in the art can make various changes and modifications without departing from the inventive concept. The technical scope of this invention is not limited to the contents of the specification, but must be determined according to the scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1. Prepare the slurry to be tested according to the standard ratio; S2. Prepare two sets of standard test blocks from a portion of the slurry. Cure the test blocks under standard conditions and in water to the predetermined age, respectively. Measure the standard compressive strength of the first set of test blocks and the water-cured compressive strength of the second set of test blocks. Calculate the ratio of the water-cured compressive strength to the standard compressive strength to obtain the later-stage water resistance index. ; S3. Divide a portion of the slurry into two parts. One part is cured under standard conditions to obtain the control compressive strength. The other part is filtered under constant negative pressure for a certain period of time to obtain a dewatered slurry cake, and its effective consolidation is judged. If effective consolidation is achieved, test blocks are made and their compressive strength is measured. The ratio of the consolidated compressive strength to the control compressive strength is calculated to obtain the water absorption consolidation strength index. If it fails, the water absorption consolidation strength index will be... Record it as 0 directly; S4. Prepare a certain mass of slurry and calculate the total mass of solid materials in it. Perform simulated underwater dispersion, solidification, and drying treatment on the slurry, measure the remaining mass, and calculate the underwater anti-dispersion retention index based on the two masses. And make an effective retention judgment, if the underwater anti-dispersion retention index <Preset threshold, then Record it as 0 directly; S5. Based on the target engineering environment, determine the weighting coefficients of the above three indices as α, β, and γ, respectively, and calculate the final water resistance comprehensive index (WRI). The calculation formula is as follows: ， Where α+β+γ=1, the water resistance index WRI ranges from 0 to 100, and when there is a fundamental failure of the index, it is directly reduced to zero and participates in the weighting.

2. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 1, characterized in that: The effective consolidation judgment in step S3 and the effective retention judgment in step S4 are veto prerequisite judgment conditions. When the conclusion of effective consolidation is that it is not effectively consolidated, the water absorption resistance consolidation strength index is directly defined. The value is 0, and subsequent strength testing and calculation steps are skipped; When the conclusion of the effective retention assessment is that there is no effective retention, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index is directly defined. It is 0.

3. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 1, characterized in that: Water resistance index in the later stage of step S2 The testing methods include: S21. Both the first and second groups of test blocks were demolded after being cured under standard conditions for 24 hours. S22. The first group of test blocks was cured under standard conditions for another 28 days, and its first compressive strength was measured. ; S23. Immediately transfer the second group of test blocks into water for curing for 28 days, and measure their second compressive strength. ; Calculate the water resistance index in the later stage The calculation formula is: 。 4. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 1, characterized in that: Water absorption consolidation strength index in step S3 The testing methods include: S31. Take the first portion of slurry to make several test blocks, and after standard curing for 28 days, measure the compressive strength of the control. ; S32. Pour the second part of the slurry into the Buchner funnel, apply a constant negative pressure p, and continue to filter for a time t to simulate the water loss condition and obtain the dewatered slurry cake. S33. Determine the quality of the dewatered pulp cake. If it is determined to be ineffectively consolidated, directly define the water absorption resistance consolidation strength index. =0; S34. If the consolidation is deemed effective, the dewatered pulp cake is remixed and made into the same number of test blocks. After standard curing for 28 days, the consolidation compressive strength is measured. ; S35. Calculate the water absorption and consolidation strength index. The calculation formula is: 。 5. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 4, characterized in that: In step S32, the range of the filtration negative pressure p is -0.03MPa to -0.07MPa, and the range of the filtration time t is 15 minutes to 60 minutes. The filtration negative pressure p and / or filtration time t are adjusted according to the permeability or water content of the target formation.

6. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 4, characterized in that: The method for determining the dehydrated pulp cake in step S33 is as follows: If the dehydrated pulp cake is loose and cannot be bound into a clump, it is considered to have not been effectively consolidated. If it cannot be observed, the dehydrated pulp cake is remixed within 5 minutes and made into several verification test blocks. After standard curing for 7 days, its compressive strength is tested. If the compressive strength after 7 days is less than 5 MPa, it is determined that it has not been effectively consolidated.

7. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 4, characterized in that: The method for determining the dehydrated slurry cake in step S33 is as follows: measure the actual water-to-solid ratio of the dehydrated slurry cake. If the water-to-solid ratio is lower than the minimum water-to-solid ratio required for complete hydration of this type of grouting material, it is determined that it has not been effectively consolidated.

8. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 4, characterized in that: underwater anti-dispersion retention index in step S4 The testing methods include: S41. Prepare a slurry of a certain mass and calculate the initial total mass of the solid material contained therein based on its proportions. ; S42. The above-mentioned mass of slurry is injected at a fixed height below the water surface into a container containing a fixed amount of water at a uniform speed. S43. Let stand for 24 hours to allow the slurry to solidify underwater and form a solidified body; S44. Remove and dry the underwater solidified body to constant weight, and weigh it to obtain its final solid mass. ; S45. Calculate the underwater anti-dispersion retention index. The calculation formula is: ； S46, Underwater anti-dispersion retention index If the value is below the preset threshold, the underwater anti-dispersion retention index is directly defined. =0.

9. The method for testing and evaluating the water resistance of grouting materials according to claim 8, characterized in that: In step S42, slurry is injected using a syringe or peristaltic pump. During injection, the water in the container is either static water or dynamic water with a set flow rate to simulate different scouring conditions.

10. A water resistance testing and evaluation system for grouting materials, characterized in that, include: One or more processors; Memory, used to store one or more programs; When one or more programs are executed by one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials as described in any one of claims 1 to 9.

11. A data carrier storing a computer program, characterized in that: When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the steps of the water resistance test and evaluation method for grouting materials as described in any one of claims 1 to 9.

Images