‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﻋﻠﻤﯽ‪-‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ "ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻲ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ"‬

‫ﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ ،١٣٨٦‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ‪ ٤٧‬ﺗﺎ ‪٥٤‬‬

‫‪Iranian Journal of Mining Engineering‬‬
‫‪Vol. 2, No. 4, 2008, pp. 47-54‬‬ ‫)‪(IRJME‬‬

‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻱ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‬

‫ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﺷﻢ‬
‫‪۳‬‬
‫ﻣﺮﺗﻀﻲ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻱ‪ ،*۱‬ﻛﺎﻣﺮﺍﻥ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﺳﺒﻲ‪ ،۲‬ﺭﺿﺎ ﺭﺷﻴﺪﻱ‬

‫‪ .۱‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻣﺪﺭﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻜﺪﻩ ﻓﻨﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‪moahmadi@modares.ac.ir ،‬‬

‫‪ .۲‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻣﺪﺭﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻜﺪﻩ ﻓﻨﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‪،‬‬
‫‪ .۳‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻣﺪﺭﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻜﺪﻩ ﻓﻨﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‪Rrashidi59@gmail.com ،‬‬

‫)ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ‪ ١٩‬ﺁﺑﺎﻥ ‪ ، ١٣٨٦‬ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ‪ ٤‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪( ١٣٨٧‬‬

‫ﭼﻜﻴﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺗﺮﺯﺍﻗﻲ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻃﺒﻖ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺍﻭ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎﻱ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻫﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻭﻱ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺣﺠﻢ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺭﻻ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺠﻤﻦ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻦﺍﻟﻤﻠﻠﻲ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﻴﮏ ﺳﻨﮓ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﺷﯽ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺸﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﺑﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﻧﻞﻫﺎ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﻤﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﻭ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﯼ‪ -‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﯽ ﺍﺭﺍﻳﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﻴﻨﮓ‪ ،‬ﮔﻮﺋﻞ‪ ،‬ﺟﺘﻮﺍ ﻭ ﻫﻮﻙ‪ -‬ﻣﺎﺭﻳﻨﻮﺱ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﺍﻻﺣﺪﺍﺙ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﺷﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺮﺽ ‪ ۱۲‬ﻣﺘﺮ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ ۹‬ﻣﺘﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺟﺎﺩﻩ ﻫﺮﺍﺯ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺁﺑﻬﺎﻱ ﺯﻳﺮﺯﻣﻴﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﮕﻲﻫﺎ ﻭ ﮔﺴﻞﻫﺎ ﺭﻳﺰﺵ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺷﻴﻞﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺭﺥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻲﻫﺎﻱ ﺯﻣﻴﻦﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﺹ ﮊﺋﻮﻣﮑﺎﻧﻴﮑﻲ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻭﻗﻮﻉ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺷﺪﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺣﺎﻛﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻴﻞ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﺷﻤﺸﮏ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﺭﻳﺰﺵ ﺭﺥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺭﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻻﻳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﮑﻲ ﻭ ﺳﻨﮓ‬
‫ﺁﻫﮏ ﺿﺨﻴﻢ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮎ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻴﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻱ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺟﺘﻮﺍ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﻴﻨﺎﻧﻪﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬

‫ﮐﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﮐﻠﻴﺪﻱ‬

‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻨﮓ ﺷﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻻﺣﺪﺍﺙ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩ ﻫﺎﺷﻢ‬

‫*‬
‫ﻋﻬﺪﻩﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﻜﺎﺗﺒﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ -‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺗﻀﻲ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻣﺮﺍﻥ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﺳﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﺿﺎ ﺭﺷﻴﺪﻱ‬

‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۱‬ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻱ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ– ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﯽ]‪.[۷‬‬ ‫‪ -۱‬ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ‬

‫ﺑﺎﺭﻻ‬ ‫‪ISRM‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻨﺶﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺩﭼـﺎﺭ ﭘﺪﻳـﺪﻩ‬
‫‪σ cm / P0‬‬ ‫‪σ θ / σ cm‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺬﺷـﺖ ﺗـﻮﺩﻩ ﺳـﻨﮓ ﺍﺯ ﻇﺮﻓﻴـﺖ‬
‫‪>۱‬‬ ‫‪<۱‬‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺭﺑﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺟﺎﺭﻱ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳـﻒ ﻋﻠﻤـﻲ‬
‫‪۰/۴-۱‬‬ ‫‪۱-۲‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻢ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺗﺮﺯﺍﻗﻲ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷـﺪ‪ .‬ﻃﺒـﻖ‬
‫‪۰/۲ -۰/۴‬‬ ‫‪۲-۴‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺍﻭ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎﻱ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻫﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺑـﻪ‬
‫‪۰</۲‬‬ ‫‪>۴‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻭﻱ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﮑـﻪ ﺣﺠـﻢ ﺁﻧﻬـﺎ ﺑـﻪ ﻃـﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ]‪ .[۱‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺭﻻ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺠﻤـﻦ ﺑـﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻠـﻲ‬
‫‪ -۲‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‬ ‫ﻣﮑﺎﻧﻴﮏ ﺳﻨﮓ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﺷﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﺷﯽ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ‬
‫‪ -۱-۲‬ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧـﺪ ﮐـﻪ ﺑﺎﻋـﺚ ﺣﺮﻛـﺖ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣـﻮﻥ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ ﺑـﻪ ﺳـﻤﺖ ﺩﺍﺧـﻞ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻱ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻲ ﺳﻨﮓ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ]‪.[۲‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑـﺎ ﻭﺟـﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻨﻜـﻪ ﻣـﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞﺳـﺎﺯﻱ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺣﻔﺮﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺣﺪﺍﺙ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﮓ ﻣـﺴﺘﻌﺪ ﺭﻓﺘـﺎﺭ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻭﻳﮋﻩﺍﻱ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﻜﻦ ﺗﺎﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻗﻄﻌﻴﺖﻫـﺎﻳﻲ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞﻫﺎﻱ ﺑﺰﺭﮒ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﻘﻄـﻊ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺣﺘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﮐﻒ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﮑﻞﻫـﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻳـﮏ ﺩﻭﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻃﻮﻻﻧﻲ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈـﻮﺭ ﺟﻠـﻮﮔﻴﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺍﻣـﻪ ﺍﻳـﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﻪ ‪ ۳۹‬ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺗﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺟﻤﻊﺁﻭﺭﻱ ﺷـﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻱ ‪ Q‬ﻭ ﺭﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ )‪ ،(H‬ﺳﻴﻨﮓ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭﺍﻥ )‪ (۱۹۹۲‬ﻳـﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﮓﻫـﺎ ﺳـﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻣﺘـﺪﺍﻭﻝ‬
‫ﺧﻂ ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻴـﺎﺭ ﺟﺪﺍﺳـﺎﺯﻱ ﺑـﻴﻦ ﺳـﻨﮓ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻏﻴـﺮ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐـﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻨـﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵﻫـﺎﻱ ﺗﺠﺮﺑـﻲ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﻤـﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑـﻲ ﻭ‬
‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻂ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍﺑﻄـﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ – ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳـﻪ ﺩﻭ ﭘـﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺳـﻲ‬
‫‪ ۱‬ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ]‪.[۳‬‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻱ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳـﻨﮓ )‪ (Q‬ﻭ ﻋﻤـﻖ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ )‪ (H‬ﻣـﻲﺑﺎﺷـﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺷـﺎﻣﻞ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺳـﻴﻨﮓ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﮔﻮﺋـﻞ‬
‫]‪H = 350Q1 / 3 [m‬‬ ‫)‪(۱‬‬
‫ﺍﺳــﺖ]‪ .[۳‬ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺵﻫــﺎﻱ ﻧﻴﻤــﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑــﻲ ﺍﺣﺘﻤــﺎﻝ ﻓــﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑــﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﮑﻞﻫﺎﻱ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﻧﺘﻈﺎﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻃﺮﺍﻑ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻳـﮏ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﻫﻴﺪﺭﻭﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﺳــﺎﺩﻩ ﺗﺠﺮﺑــﻲ ﺩﻳﮕــﺮ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺷــﻲ ﺍﺳــﺖ ﻛــﻪ ﺗﻮﺳــﻂ ﮔﻮﺋــﻞ ﻭ‬
‫ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﮎ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻧﻴﻤﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ ﻓـﺎﮐﺘﻮﺭ ﺻـﻼﺣﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻜـﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳـﺎﻝ ‪ ۱۹۹۵‬ﺑـﺮ ﭘﺎﻳـﻪ ﻋـﺪﺩ ﺗـﻮﺩﻩ ﺳـﻨﮓ )‪ (N‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﮏ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻩ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ‬
‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻱ ‪ Q‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷـﺪﻩ ﺍﺳـﺖ ﮐـﻪ‬
‫ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺑﮑﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺟﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺟﺘﻮﺍ ]‪ [۴‬ﻭ ﻫﻮﮎ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻳﻨﻮﺱ ]‪ [۵‬ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪N = QSRF =1‬‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ– ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺳﺎﺩﮔﻲ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺸﮕﻴﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺛـﺮ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮﻫـﺎﻱ ﻧﺎﻣـﺸﺨﺺ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮﻫﺎﻱ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺣﻞ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺷﺎﺧﺺ ‪ ،Q‬ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ ‪ SRF‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﻓـﺮﺽ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻧـﺪ‪ .‬ﺑـﺎ ﻓـﺮﺽ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﭼﺴﺒﻨﺪﮔﻲ‪ ،‬ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﮑﺎﮎ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻲ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻖ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ‪ ،H‬ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ‪ B‬ﻭ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳـﻨﮓ ‪،N‬‬ ‫ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﻭ ﭘﺴﻤﺎﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﻭﻝ ﻳﺎﻧﮓ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﭘﻮﺁﺳﻮﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﺭﺳــﻲ ‪ ۹۹‬ﻣﻘﻄــﻊ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‪،‬ﮔﻮﺋــﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻜــﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺎﻝ ‪۱۹۹۵‬‬ ‫ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺍﺗﺴﺎﻉ ﻭ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻧﻲ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻟﮕﺎﺭﻳﺘﻤﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ ‪ N‬ﻭ ‪ H * B 0/1‬ﺭﺍ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻋﻤﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺑﺎﺭﻻ ]‪ [۶‬ﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ‬
‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۱‬ﺭﻭﺵ ﺳﻴﻨﻚ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ‪۲‬‬
‫‪ ISRM‬ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ]‪ .[۷‬ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ ۱‬ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻱ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﮔﻮﺋﻞ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ – ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ σ θ ،۱‬ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺗﻨﺶ ﻣﻤﺎﺳﻲ‪ σ cm ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﮏ‪-‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻩ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ ﻭ ‪ P0‬ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﺟﺎ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬

‫‪۴۸‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ -‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻱ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﺷﻢ‬

‫ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ :۱‬ﺭﻭﺵ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺳﻴﻨﮓ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭﺍﻥ]‪.[۳‬‬

‫ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ :۲‬ﺭﻭﺵ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﮔﻮﺋﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭﺍﻥ]‪.[۳‬‬

‫‪۴۹‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ -‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺗﻀﻲ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻣﺮﺍﻥ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﺳﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﺿﺎ ﺭﺷﻴﺪﻱ‬

‫‪ -۳-۲‬ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ – ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ ۲‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳـﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵﻫـﺎﻱ ﺗﺠﺮﺑـﻲ ﺍﺭﺍﺋـﻪ ﺷـﺪﻩ ﻓـﻮﻕ‪،‬‬
‫ﺁﻳﺪﺍﻥ ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪﺍﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﻪ ﺗﻮﻧﻞﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﺩﺭ ﮊﺍﭘﻦ ﻛـﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﻫﻤﮕﺮﺍﻳﻲ )ﻛﺎﻫﺶ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ( ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴـﺰﺍﻥ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻧـﺸﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺑﻜﺮ )‪ (σci‬ﺑﺎ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺭﻭﺑـﺎﺭﻩ )‪ (γH‬ﻣﻄـﺎﺑﻖ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ]‪.[۳‬‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ‪ ۴‬ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ]‪.[۸‬‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۲‬ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ]‪.[۳‬‬

‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﻚ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻱ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺑﻜـﺮ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﮕﺮﺍﻳﻲ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳـﻨﮓ ‪ σcm‬ﺑﺮﺍﺑـﺮ ﺑﺎﺷـﺪ‪ .‬ﺷـﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻫﻨﮕـﺎﻣﻲ ﺭﺥ‬ ‫ﻗﻄﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ‪ σ c / γ H‬ﻛﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ‪ ۲‬ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪۱–۳ %‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﻼﻳﻢ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺻﻠﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﺑـﺮ ﭘﺎﻳـﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻳـﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳـﺦ ﺗـﻨﺶ – ﻛـﺮﻧﺶ‬ ‫‪۳–۵ %‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﺳﻨﮓ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺗﻨﺶ ﻣﻤﺎﺳﻲ– ﻛـﺮﻧﺶ ﻣﻤﺎﺳـﻲ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫‪>۵ %‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬

‫ﺍﻃﺮﺍﻑ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﮐﺮﻧﺶ ﻧﺮﻣـﺎﻝ ﺷـﺪﻩ‬
‫‪ η p‬ﻭ ‪ η s‬ﻭ ‪ η f‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺯﻳﺮ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ]‪.[۸‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﻪ ﺧﻂ ﻣﺮﺯﻱ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫‪εp‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ‪ ۲‬ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪:‬‬
‫= ‪ηp‬‬ ‫‪= 2σ ci −0.17 ,‬‬ ‫‪H = (275N 0.33 )B−1‬‬ ‫)‪(۲‬‬
‫‪εe‬‬
‫‪ε‬‬
‫‪ηs = s = 3σ ci −0.25 ,‬‬ ‫)‪(۴‬‬ ‫‪ -۲-۲‬ﺭﻭﺵ ﻧﻴﻤﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ‬
‫‪εe‬‬
‫‪ε‬‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﻧﻴﻤــﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑــﻲ ﺷــﺎﺧﺺﻫــﺎﻳﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑــﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻌﻴــﻴﻦ ﭘﺘﺎﻧــﺴﻴﻞ‬
‫‪ηf = f = 5σ ci −0.32‬‬
‫‪εe‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣـﻲﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨـﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨـﻴﻦ ﺑـﺎ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﺭﻭﺵﻫـﺎ ﻭ‬
‫‪ εs ،εp‬ﻭ ‪ εf‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻛﺮﻧﺶ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﻭ ‪ εe‬ﻛﺮﻧﺶ ﺣـﺪﻱ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻳـﻚ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ ﺩﺍﻳـﺮﻩﺍﻱ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻴﻚ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻱ ﻫﻴﺪﺭﻭﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ‬
‫ﻫﻮﮎ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻳﻨﻮﺱ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﻗﺒﻠـﻲ ﻣﺤﻘﻘـﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﻧـﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﺨﻤﻴﻦ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﻓﻀﺎﻱ ﺍﻃﺮﺍﻑ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ ﻭ ﻧﻴـﺮﻭﻱ ﺩﺍﺧﻠـﻲ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺑـﺮ‬
‫‪ σcm‬ﺑﻪ ‪ p 0‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺷـﺎﺧﺺ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬـﺖ ﺗﻌﻴـﻴﻦ ﭘﺘﺎﻧـﺴﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻧﮕﻬـﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺑﺪﺳـﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺍﺯ ﭘـﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ ﻛﻤـﻲ‬
‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﻧﻞﻫﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑـﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﺭﮎ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻲ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻮﺍﻧـﺎﻳﻲ ﺟـﺴﻢ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻧﺤﻮﻩ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻃﺮﺍﻑ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ]‪.[۵‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﻚ ﻣﺤـﻮﺭﻱ ﺳـﻨﮓ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻛﺮﻧﺶ ﺷﻌﺎﻋﻲ ﺟﺪﺍﺭﻩ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨـﻴﻦ ﻛـﺮﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﺟﺎ )ﻧﺎﺷﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﺑﺎﺭﻩ( ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳـﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺟﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺟﺒﻬﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟـﻪ ﺑـﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫـﺎﻱ ﺩﺍﺧﻠـﻲ ﻣﺨﺘﻠـﻒ‬ ‫ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﺘﻮﺍ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ ۱۹۸۴‬ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑـﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﻚ ﻣﺤـﻮﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ‪ ۳‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺳﻨﮓ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﺳﻢ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪σ‬‬ ‫‪σ‬‬ ‫)‪(۳‬‬
‫‪N c = cm = cm‬‬
‫‪σZ‬‬ ‫‪γH‬‬
‫ﻫﻮﻙ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤـﻚ ﺗﺤﻠﻴـﻞﻫـﺎﻱ ﺍﺟـﺰﺍﻱ ﻣﺤـﺪﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺭﺳـﻲ ﻃﻴـﻒ‬
‫‪ σcm‬ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﻚ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻱ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ‪ H ،‬ﻋﻤـﻖ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻭﺳﻴﻌﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳـﻲ ﺗـﻨﺶﻫـﺎﻱ ﺑﺮﺟـﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻴـﺮﻭﻱ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺑـﺮ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ‪Po،‬ﺗﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﺟﺎ‪ γ ،‬ﻭﺯﻥ ﻣﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻱ )‪ (Pi‬ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﻫﺎﻱ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﻲ ‪ ۵‬ﻭ ‪ ۶‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ ۳‬ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻱ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑـﺮ ﺍﺳـﺎﺱ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺟﺘـﻮﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋـﻪ‬
‫ﻛﺮﻧﺶ ﺟﺪﺍﺭﻩ )‪( εt‬ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻪ ﮐﺎﺭ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ )‪ (εf‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ]‪:[۵‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ]‪.[۴‬‬
‫) ‪σ cm − (3 P / P +1) / (3.8 P / P + 0.54‬‬
‫) ‪ε t (% ) = 0.15(1 − Pi / P0‬‬
‫‪i‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪i‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬

‫)‪(۵‬‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۳‬ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪﻱ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ ﺟﺘﻮﺍ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﺭﺍﻥ]‪.[۴‬‬

‫‪P0‬‬
‫‪Nc‬‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻉ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ‬
‫) ‪σ cm − (3 P / P +1)/ (3.8 P / P + 0.54‬‬ ‫‪<۰/۴‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬
‫) ‪ε f (% ) = 0.1(1 − Pi / P0‬‬
‫‪i‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪i‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬

‫‪P0‬‬ ‫)‪(۶‬‬ ‫‪۰/۴ -۰/۸‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ‬

‫‪۰/۸ -۲‬‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﻼﻳﻢ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ‪ εt‬ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ ۳‬ﻭ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑـﻪ ‪ εf‬ﺩﺭ ﺷـﻜﻞ‬
‫‪>۲‬‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬
‫‪ ۴‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬

‫‪۵۰‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ -‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻱ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﺷﻢ‬

‫]‪.[۵‬‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ :۳‬ﻛﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﺍﺭﻩ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ‪ ε t‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ‪ σ cm / po‬ﻭ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻲ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻱ ‪p i‬‬

‫]‪.[۵‬‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ :۴‬ﻛﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺒﻬﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ‪ ε f‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ‪ σ cm / po‬ﻭ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻲ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻱ ‪p i‬‬

‫‪ -۲‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﮐﻠﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺗﻨﺶ – ﻛﺮﻧﺶ‬
‫ﺳﻨﮓ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳـﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻭ ﭘﺎﺳـﺦ ﺗـﻨﺶ – ﻛـﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻃـﺮﺍﻑ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻃﻼﻋـﺎﺕ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳـﺸﮕﺎﻫﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺧـﺼﻮﺹ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺩﻗﺖ ﮐﺎﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳـﻦ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ – ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ ﺑـﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﺨﻤـﻴﻦ ﻣﻘـﺪﺍﺭ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑـﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻻﻳﻞ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻧﻤﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -۱‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺳـﻨﮓ ﺑﮑـﺮ ﺑـﺎ ﺗـﻮﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺳﻨﮓ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﭼﻨـﻴﻦ ﻓﺮﺿـﻲ ﺑـﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﻧﻤﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬

‫‪۵۱‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ -‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺗﻀﻲ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻣﺮﺍﻥ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﺳﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﺿﺎ ﺭﺷﻴﺪﻱ‬

‫ﮐﻠﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻴﻞﻫﺎ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺍﺳـﺖ(‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯﺍﻟـﺖ ﻭ ﺩﻭﻟﻮﻣﻴـﺖ]‪ .[۹‬ﺩﺭ ﻣـﺴﻴﺮ‬ ‫‪ -۳‬ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﮔﻴﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺑﺮﭘﺎﻳﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺣﻞ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻧــﻞ ﻣﻨﻄﻘــﻪ ﮔــﺴﻠﻲ ﻧﻴــﺰ ﻗــﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺟــﺪﻭﻝ ‪ ۴‬ﺍﻃﻼﻋــﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ ﺳـﻄﺢ ﻛـﺮﻧﺶ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺯﻣﻴﻦﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺣﻔـﺮ ﺷـﺪﻩ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ ﻭ ﻭﺿـﻌﻴﺖ ﻛﻴﻔـﻲ ﺗﻐﻴﻴـﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺩﺍﻳﺮﻩﺍﻱ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺗﻨﺶ ﻫﻴﺪﺭﻭﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻲ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺍﺭﺍﻳﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺑـﺎ ﻣﻘﻄـﻊ ﻧﻌـﻞ ﺍﺳـﺒﻲ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻧﻤﻲ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺑـﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﺨﻤـﻴﻦ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‬
‫‪ -۲-۳‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﮐﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺟﻬﺖ ﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺑﻜﺎﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﻨﮕﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺣﻔﺮ‬
‫‪ -۳‬ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻱ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﮐﻴﻔﻲ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺭﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﺍﻻﺣﺪﺍﺙ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩ ﻫﺎﺷﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﻝ ‪ ۳۲۸۰‬ﻣﺘﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣـﺴﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻞ ﺣﻔﺮ‪ ،‬ﻋﺮﺽ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ ﮊﺋﻮﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻲ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺑﻜﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﺟﺎﺩﻩ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ -‬ﺁﻣﻞ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺑﻬﻤﻦﮔﻴﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎ ﺗﻬﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮﻫﺎﻱ ﺛﺎﻧﻮﻳﻪ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻫﺶ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪ ﺭﻓﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻣﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣـﺎﻝ ﺍﺣـﺪﺍﺙ‬
‫ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ]‪ .[۹‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ ﻃﺮﻑ ﻭﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺧﺮﻭﺝ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﺳـﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ ﺑـﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺁﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﺪﺳﺖ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪﺍﻱ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ‬
‫ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ‪ ۱۳۷۰‬ﻣﺘﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺣﻔﺎﺭﻱ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘـﺎﻃﻊ ﻣـﺸﺨﺺ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﻨﮕﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩﮔﻴﺮﻱ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷـﻜﻞﻫـﺎ ﺍﻗـﺪﺍﻡ ﺑـﻪ ﻧـﺼﺐ ﺍﺑـﺰﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﮕﺮﺍﻳﻲﺳﻨﺞ ﺷـﺪﻩ ﺍﺳـﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴـﻖ ﺭﻭﺵﻫـﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠـﻒ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵﻫــﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠــﻒ ﺍﺭﺍﻳــﻪ ﺷــﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺌــﻮﺭﻱ‪-،‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠ ـﯽ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺣـﻴﻦ ﺣﻔـﺮ ﺑـﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﻳـﻦ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ ﻣـﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﻪﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺣﺎﺻـﻞ‬
‫ﺗﻨﺶﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﻤﺎﺳﻲ ﻭ ﺷﻌﺎﻋﻲ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻟﺬﺍ ﺍﺳـﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻧـﺸﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳــﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵﻫــﺎﻱ ﺗﺠﺮﺑــﻲ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺳــﻴﻨﮓ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺋــﻞ ﺍﻧﺘﺨــﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﺭﺍﻳﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻱ ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ‬ ‫‪ -۱-۳‬ﺯﻣﻴﻦﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﻭ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﮊﺋﻮﺗﮑﻨﻴﮑﻲ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ‬
‫‪ ۱‬ﻭ ‪ ۲‬ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌـﻪ ﺗﻌﻴـﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺣﻔـﺎﺭﻱ ﻣـﻲﺷـﻮﺩ ﮐـﻪ ﺑـﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴـﺐ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ ۵‬ﺍﺭﺍﻳﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻧﻲ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ‪ :‬ﺷﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﮏ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ )ﮐﻪ ﺑـﻪ ﻃـﻮﺭ‬

‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۴‬ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﻭ ﮊﺋﻮﺗﮑﻨﻴﮑﻲ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ]‪.[۹‬‬

‫ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﺍﺕ ﻋﻴﻨﻲ‬
‫‪σ cm‬‬ ‫‪σci‬‬ ‫‪γ‬‬ ‫‪Q‬‬ ‫‪H‬‬
‫ﻧﺎﻡ ﻭ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻣﺖ‬
‫)‪(MPa‬‬ ‫)‪(MPa‬‬ ‫)‪(MN/m3‬‬ ‫)‪(m‬‬ ‫ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺘ ﹰﺎ‬
‫‪۵/۶۵‬‬ ‫‪۷۲‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲۷‬‬ ‫‪۲/۸۷‬‬ ‫‪۳۵۰‬‬ ‫ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﮏ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮎ‬ ‫‪Cm1, 2 b‬‬
‫ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺘ ﹰﺎ‬
‫‪۲/۲۶‬‬ ‫‪۶۱/۴‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲۷‬‬ ‫‪۱/۱۳‬‬ ‫‪۲۹۵‬‬ ‫ﺁﻫﮏ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮎ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻻﻳﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻧﻲ‬ ‫‪Cm1 a‬‬
‫ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫‪۶/۴۱‬‬ ‫‪۸۱/۸‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲۷‬‬ ‫‪۱/۹۳‬‬ ‫‪۳۸۵‬‬ ‫ﺁﻫﮏ ﺿﺨﻴﻢ ﻻﻳﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮎ‬ ‫‪Cml1, 2‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻛﻢ‬ ‫‪۶/۲۷‬‬ ‫‪۱۰۵‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲۶‬‬ ‫‪۱/۸۳‬‬ ‫‪۱۷۰‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﮐﻮﺍﺭﺗﺰﻱ ﺷﻤﺸﮏ‬ ‫‪Jss‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫‪۲/۱۴‬‬ ‫‪۵۸/۲‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲۶‬‬ ‫‪۱/۰۵‬‬ ‫‪۱۵۰‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﻭ ﺷﻴﻞ ﺷﻤﺸﮏ‬ ‫‪Jssh‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‬
‫‪۰/۴۵‬‬ ‫‪۲۵‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲۵‬‬ ‫‪۱/۰۱‬‬ ‫‪۲۷۰‬‬ ‫ﺷﻴﻞ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺷﻤﺸﮏ‬ ‫‪Jsh‬‬
‫ﺯﻳﺎﺩ)ﺭﻳﺰﺵ(‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‬
‫‪۰/۴۵‬‬ ‫‪۲۵‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۲۵‬‬ ‫‪۱/۰۱‬‬ ‫‪۲۰۵‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻻﻳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﮑﻲ‬ ‫‪Cmm‬‬
‫ﺯﻳﺎﺩ)ﺭﻳﺰﺵ(‬

‫‪۵۲‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ -‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻱ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﺷﻢ‬

‫ﺳﭙﺲ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻫﻮﻙ ﻭ ﻣـﺎﺭﻳﻨﻮﺱ ﻣـﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳـﻲ ﻗـﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓـﺖ‪ .‬ﺑـﺮ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۵‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺳﻴﻨﮓ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺋﻞ‬
‫ﺍﺳــﺎﺱ ﺍﻃﻼﻋــﺎﺕ ﻣﻮﺟــﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﺑــﻂ ‪ ۴‬ﻭ ‪ ۵‬ﻭ ﺷــﻜﻞﻫــﺎﻱ ‪ ۳‬ﻭ ‪،۴‬‬ ‫ﮔﻮﺋﻞ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﮓ‬ ‫‪N‬‬ ‫‪Po‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮﻫـﺎﻱ ‪ εt‬ﻭ ‪ εf‬ﻣﺤﺎﺳـﺒﻪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺟـﺪﻭﻝ ‪ ۷‬ﺍﺭﺍﻳـﻪ ﺷـﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪۴۱۷‬‬ ‫‪۴۹۷‬‬ ‫‪۷/۵‬‬ ‫‪۹/۵‬‬ ‫‪Cm1, 2 b‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ‬ ‫‪۲۸۱‬‬ ‫‪۳۰۷‬‬ ‫‪۲/۳‬‬ ‫‪۷/۷‬‬ ‫‪Cm1 a‬‬
‫‪ ۸‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪۳۶۰‬‬ ‫‪۴۷۹‬‬ ‫‪۴/۸‬‬ ‫‪۱۰/۵‬‬ ‫‪Cml1, 2‬‬
‫‪۳۵۴‬‬ ‫‪۲۰۸‬‬ ‫‪۴/۶‬‬ ‫‪۴/۳‬‬ ‫‪Jss‬‬
‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۷‬ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺪﺍﺭﻩ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻪ ﮐﺎﺭ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ‬ ‫‪۲۷۰‬‬ ‫‪۱۵۲‬‬ ‫‪۲‬‬ ‫‪۳/۷۵‬‬ ‫‪Jssh‬‬
‫ﻫﻮﮎ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻳﻨﻮﺱ‬ ‫‪۱۹۰‬‬ ‫‪۲۶۸‬‬ ‫‪۰/۷‬‬ ‫‪۷‬‬ ‫‪Jsh‬‬
‫‪εf‬‬ ‫‪εt‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ‬ ‫‪۱۹۰‬‬ ‫‪۲۰۳‬‬ ‫‪۰/۷‬‬ ‫‪۵/۱۳‬‬ ‫‪Cmm‬‬
‫‪۰/۲۶‬‬ ‫‪۰/۴‬‬ ‫‪Cm1,2 b‬‬
‫‪۰/۹۷‬‬ ‫‪۱/۴۵‬‬ ‫‪Cm1a‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻧﻴﻤﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺟﺘﻮﺍ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ‬
‫‪۰/۲۵‬‬ ‫‪۰/۳۸‬‬ ‫‪Cml 1, 2‬‬
‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﻃﻼﻋـﺎﺕ ﻣﻮﺟـﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄـﻪ ‪ ،۳‬ﻣﻘــﺪﺍﺭ ‪NC‬‬
‫‪۰/۰۵‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۸‬‬ ‫‪Jss‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻻﻳﻪﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣـﺸﺨﺺ ﺷـﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺟـﺪﻭﻝ ‪ ۶‬ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮﻫـﺎﻱ‬
‫‪۰/۲۸‬‬ ‫‪۰/۴۳‬‬ ‫‪Jssh‬‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘـﺪﺍﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺑـﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺟﺘـﻮﺍ‬
‫‪۱۶/۱۲‬‬ ‫‪۲۴/۱۷‬‬ ‫‪Jsh‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪۹/۰۶‬‬ ‫‪۱۳/۶‬‬ ‫‪Cmm‬‬
‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۶‬ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺗﺨﻤﻴﻦ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺣﻔﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷـﻜﻞﻫـﺎﻱ ﺍﻳﺠـﺎﺩ ﺷـﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺟﺘﻮﺍ‪.‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﻔـﺮ ﻭ ﺭﻳـﺰﺵﻫـﺎﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘـﺎﻁ ﻣـﺸﺨﺺ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ ﻭﺿـﻌﻴﺖ‬ ‫‪Nc‬‬ ‫‪Po‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ‬
‫ﻓــﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣــﺸﺨﺺ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﺍﺳــﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤــﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﮐــﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟــﺪﻭﻝ ‪۸‬‬ ‫‪۰/۶‬‬ ‫‪۹/۵‬‬ ‫‪Cm1, 2 b‬‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﻴﻨﮓ ﻭ ﻛﻮﺋﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﻧـﻞ‬ ‫‪۰/۳‬‬ ‫‪۷/۷‬‬ ‫‪Cm1a‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑـﻪ ﺩﻟﻴـﻞ ﺗﺠﺮﺑـﻲ‬ ‫ﺭﺥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﺎﻣ ﹰ‬ ‫‪۰/۶۱‬‬ ‫‪۱۰/۵‬‬ ‫‪Cml 1, 2‬‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻧﻴﻤـﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑـﻲ ﺟﺘـﻮﺍ ﻭ‬ ‫‪۱/۴۶‬‬ ‫‪۴/۳‬‬ ‫‪Jss‬‬
‫ﮔﻮﺋﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻧﻤﻲﺧـﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺘـﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﺪﺳـﺖ ﺁﻣـﺪﻩ ﺑـﺎ‬ ‫‪۰/۵۷‬‬ ‫‪۳/۷۵‬‬ ‫‪Jssh‬‬
‫ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻧﻲ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫‪۰/۰۶۴‬‬ ‫‪۷‬‬ ‫‪Jsh‬‬
‫‪۰/۰۸۸‬‬ ‫‪۵/۱۳‬‬ ‫‪Cmm‬‬

‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ‪ :۸‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‪.‬‬

‫ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﺍﺕ ﻋﻴﻨﻲ‬ ‫ﻫﻮﮎ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻳﻨﻮﺱ‬ ‫ﺟﺘﻮﺍ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﺋﻞ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﮓ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓ‬

‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺘ ﹰﺎ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Cm1, 2 b‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺘ ﹰﺎ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻢ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Cm1 a‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Cml1, 2‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻛﻢ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﻼﻳﻢ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Jss‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Jssh‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ)ﺭﻳﺰﺵ(‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Jsh‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ)ﺭﻳﺰﺵ(‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Cmm‬‬

‫‪۵۳‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ‪ -‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﯽ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﯽ ﻣﻌﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺗﻀﻲ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻣﺮﺍﻥ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﺳﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﺿﺎ ﺭﺷﻴﺪﻱ‬

‫‪[7] Barla, G.; 2001; "Tunneling under squeezing rock‬‬ ‫‪ -۵‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﻴﺮﻱ‬
‫‪conditions"; Department of Structural and‬‬
‫‪Geotechnical Engineering, Politechnico di Torino.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻴﻞ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﺷﻤﺸﮏ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ ﺑـﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨـﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺗﺎﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺷـﺪﻩ ﺍﺳـﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪[8] Aydan Ö., Akagi T., Kawamoto T.; 1993; "The‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻻﻳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﮑﻲ ﻭ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﮏ ﺿﺨﻴﻢ ﻻﻳﻪ ﺳـﺎﺯﻧﺪ‬
‫‪squeezing potential of rock around tunnels: theory‬‬
‫‪and prediction"; Rock Mechanics and Rock‬‬ ‫ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮎ ﺑﻌـﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺷـﻴﻞ ﺷﻤـﺸﮏ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻱ ﺑﻴـﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪Engineering, 2, pp. l37-163.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﮏ ﻭ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫـﮏ ﺑـﺎ ﻣﻴـﺎﻥ ﻻﻳـﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺭﻧﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮎ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻱ ﻓـﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳـﻂ ﻫـﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﮐـﻪ‬
‫]‪ [۹‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺷﺎﺕ ﺷﺮﮐﺖ ﻣﺸﺎﻭﺭﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‬
‫ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﺭﻳﺰﺵ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻫﺎ ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ ﻳﮏ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﺰﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﺷﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﮐﻮﺍﺭﺗﺰﻱ ﺷﻤﺸﮏ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﮓ ﻭ ﺷﻴﻞ ﺷﻤﺸﮏ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻓﺸﺎﺭﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧـﺎﻃﺮ ﻋﻤﻠﻴـﺎﺗﻲ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﺣﻔﺎﺭﻱ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷـﺪ ﺑـﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗـﺐ‬
‫ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻱﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﺣﻔﺎﺭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻡ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟـﻪ ﺑـﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳـﻲﻫـﺎﻱ ﺍﻧﺠـﺎﻡ ﺷـﺪﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻱ ﺻـﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘـﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻔـﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺰﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﺗﻔـﺎﻕ ﺍﻓﺘـﺎﺩﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﮕـﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺣﻔﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ‪ ،‬ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺟﺘﻮﺍ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻱ ﻭﺍﻗـﻊ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻨﺎﻧﻪﺗﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺩﻩ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑـﻪ ﺳـﺎﺯﻧﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﮔﻴﺮﻧـﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -۶‬ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ‬

‫‪[1] Bieniawski Z.T.; 1989; "Engineering rock mass‬‬

‫‪ Rotterdam.‬ك‪classifications". John Wiley‬‬

‫;"‪[7] Kovari, K.; 1998; "Tunneling in squeezing Rock‬‬

‫‪Elsevier Science Ltd.‬‬

‫‪[3] Singh B. and Goel R.K.; 1999; "Rock mass‬‬

‫‪classification: a practical approach in Civil‬‬
‫‪Engineering"; Elsevier Science Ltd. U.K.‬‬

‫‪[4] Jethwa J.L., and Singh B.; 1984; "Estimation of‬‬

‫‪ultimate rock pressure for tunnel linings under‬‬
‫;"‪squeezing rock conditions-a new approach‬‬
‫‪Design and Performance of Underground‬‬
‫‪Excavations, ISRM Symposium, Cambridge, E.T.‬‬
‫‪Brown and J.A.Hudsoneds., pp. 231-238.‬‬

‫‪[5] Hoek, E.; 2000; "Big Tunnels in Bad Rock"; Draft of‬‬
‫‪paper to be submitted for publication in the ASCE‬‬
‫‪Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental‬‬
‫‪Engineering, Terzaghi Lecture, Seattle.‬‬

‫‪[6] Barla, G.; 1995 ; "Squeezing rocks in tunnels"; ISRM‬‬

‫‪News Journal, 3 / 4 , pp. 44 − 49 .‬‬

‫‪۵۴‬‬