应力‒渗流耦合作用下含软弱夹层砂岩渗透特性与力学行为研究

宋勇军, 王双龙, 李蕾蕾, 谢丽君, 卢云龙, 孙银伟, 安旭晨

工程科学与技术 ›› 2026, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (04) : 192 -205.

PDF (8856KB)
工程科学与技术 ›› 2026, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (04) : 192 -205. DOI: 10.12454/j.jsuese.202400435
水利与土木工程

应力‒渗流耦合作用下含软弱夹层砂岩渗透特性与力学行为研究

    宋勇军1, 王双龙1, 李蕾蕾2, 谢丽君3, 卢云龙1, 孙银伟1, 安旭晨1
作者信息 +

Study on Permeability and Mechanical Behavior of Sandstones with Weak Interlayers Under Stress‒Seepage Coupling

    Yongjun SONG1, Shuanglong WANG1, Leilei LI2, Lijun XIE3, Yunlong LU1, Yinwei SUN1, Xuchen AN1
Author information +
文章历史 +
PDF (9068K)

摘要

为研究含软弱夹层砂岩在应力‒渗流耦合作用下的力学行为和渗透特性,开展完整岩样和含软弱夹层岩样三轴渗流声发射试验,研究了不同渗透压下不同夹层倾角砂岩的宏观力学特性、渗透特性和破裂演化与声发射特征参数之间的关系。结果表明:1)与完整岩样相比,相同渗透压下含软弱夹层砂岩峰值强度均有不同程度降低且随着软弱夹层倾角的变化呈“U”形分布,随着渗透压等级(0、1.0、1.5和2.0 MPa)的提高,岩样峰值强度呈线性衰减;2)岩样的破坏模式分为沿软弱夹层滑动破坏和竖向剪切破坏,随着渗透压的增大含软弱夹层岩样重力‒倾角效应增强;3)各渗透压下完整岩样和0°、30°倾角夹层岩样渗透率均经历下降、平稳、骤升骤降和上升4个阶段,作为主要透水通道的软弱夹层在应力渗流耦合作用下持续被压缩,导致45°和60°倾角夹层岩样渗透率整体处于下降趋势,软弱夹层破碎前后渗透率出现短暂性波动,但全过程渗透率均低于初始渗透率,90°倾角夹层岩样渗透率经历降低、骤升骤降和上升3个阶段;4)相同渗透压等级下,岩样的初始渗透率随倾角的增加而提升,随着渗透压的增强,各岩样的初始渗透率均呈现不同程度的增长,且夹层倾角越大初始渗透率增幅越显著;5)整个加载过程声发射计数活动分为3个阶段,分别为平稳期、快速增长期和峰后发展期,声发射峰值计数随夹层倾角呈增—减—增的“N”形变化趋势。

Abstract

Objective This study aims to comprehensively investigate the mechanical response and permeability properties of sandstone containing weak interlayers in complex and variable geological environments, with particular focus on the unique behavioral characteristics of such rock masses under the coupled effects of stress and seepage. With the continuous expansion of underground engineering fields, such as hydropower projects, deep tunnels, and large-scale mines, the issue of weak interlayers becomes increasingly prominent and serves as a crucial factor affecting engineering stability and safety. Therefore, this research directly targets this core challenge and seeks to accurately assess the mechanical strength, failure modes, and permeability characteristics of sandstone with weak interlayers. The ultimate goal is to provide a solid scientific basis and effective technical support for the design and construction of underground engineering. This study highlights their significant role in ensuring underground engineering safety and improving resource extraction efficiency, and promotes the development of the interdisciplinary field of rock mechanics and seepage mechanics by thoroughly analyzing the mechanical behavior patterns and permeability evolution mechanisms of such rock masses. Methods This study employed an advanced triaxial seepage acoustic emission test system to achieve the research objectives, which integrated high-precision stress control, seepage simulation, and acoustic emission monitoring into a single platform and provided robust technical support for comprehensively revealing the mechanical and seepage characteristics of sandstone with weak interlayers. During the experiments, carefully selected intact sandstone samples and sandstone samples containing weak interlayers with varying dip angles (0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90°) were used as research objects. A near-realistic stress‒seepage coupling test environment was established by precisely controlling the confining pressure, which was set at 3.0 MPa to simulate the actual stress environment in underground engineering, and the seepage pressure, which was set at 0,1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 MPa to investigate the rock mass response under different seepage conditions. During the loading process, acoustic emission monitoring technology was utilized to capture and record the microcrack evolution process and acoustic emission characteristic parameters within the rock samples in real time, including the number of acoustic emission events and energy release rates. These valuable data provided a solid foundation for the subsequent in-depth analysis of the failure mechanisms and permeability properties of the rock samples. Results and Discussions A detailed analysis of the experimental results revealed the complex behavior characteristics of sandstone with weak interlayers under the coupled effects of stress and seepage. First, in terms of mechanical strength, sandstone samples containing weak interlayers exhibited significant strength degradation under the same seepage pressure conditions, and their peak strengths were much lower than those of intact samples. As the dip angle of the weak interlayer varied, the peak strength of the samples exhibited a unique U-shaped distribution pattern, with relatively higher strengths at dip angles of 0° and 90° and significantly reduced strengths at intermediate dip angles, such as 30°, 45°, and 60°. This finding indicated that the dip angle of the weak interlayer had a crucial impact on the mechanical properties of the rock mass. Second, in terms of permeability properties, this study found that increased seepage pressure significantly affected the permeability characteristics of the rock samples. As the seepage pressure increased, the peak strengths of all samples exhibited a linear decreasing trend, indicating that seepage intensified the damage and failure processes within the rock mass. Simultaneously, the failure modes of the samples also varied with changes in seepage pressure and primarily manifested as sliding failure along the weak interlayer and vertical shear failure. As the seepage pressure increased, the gravity-dip angle effect gradually intensified, leading to more complex and variable failure modes in the samples. Regarding permeability evolution, this study found that the permeability processes of intact samples and samples with interlayers at different dip angles exhibited distinct characteristics. The permeability of intact samples and samples with 0° and 30° dip angle interlayers underwent multiple stages, including decline, stabilization, sharp rise and fall, and subsequent rise, reflecting the complex microstructural changes within the samples during loading. In contrast, samples with 45° and 60° dip angle interlayers exhibited an overall decreasing trend in permeability due to the continuous compression of the weak interlayer, with only transient fluctuations occurring before and after interlayer failure. The permeability of samples with 90° dip angle interlayers underwent relatively simpler changes, primarily including decline, sharp rise and fall, and subsequent rise. In addition, the study indicated that the initial permeability of the samples increased with the dip angle. As the seepage pressure intensified, the initial permeability of all samples increased, with more significant growth observed in samples with larger interlayer dip angles. Conclusions This study utilized systematic triaxial seepage acoustic emission tests to reveal the complex mechanical behavior and permeability characteristics of sandstone containing weak interlayers under the coupled effects of stress and seepage. The results indicate that weak interlayers not only significantly reduce the mechanical strength of sandstone but also strongly affect its failure modes and permeability properties. As seepage pressure increases, the mechanical stability of the specimens further decreases, while the permeability characteristics exhibit complex variations. These findings provide important theoretical foundations and experimental data to support the stability assessment and permeability prediction of rock masses with weak interlayers. They also provide valuable references and guidance for the design and construction of underground engineering projects. At the theoretical level, this study deepens the understanding of rock mass behavior under complex geological conditions and promotes the development of the interdisciplinary field of rock mechanics and seepage mechanics. At the application level, the research outcomes contribute to improving the safety and economic benefits of underground engineering and provide robust support for the sustainable development of hydropower, tunnel engineering, and mineral resource extraction. Future research should further examine the factors influencing the mechanical and seepage properties of rock masses and their interaction mechanisms, providing additional scientific support for the safe construction and efficient operation of underground engineering projects.

引用本文

引用格式 ▾
宋勇军, 王双龙, 李蕾蕾, 谢丽君, 卢云龙, 孙银伟, 安旭晨. 应力‒渗流耦合作用下含软弱夹层砂岩渗透特性与力学行为研究[J]. 工程科学与技术, 2026, 58(04): 192-205 DOI:10.12454/j.jsuese.202400435

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

本刊网刊
随着能源交通、水利水电、隧道工程和库岸边坡开挖等工程的开展,不可避免地遇到一系列岩石与水相互作用、相互影响并且相互制约的耦合作用[1‒2]。一方面,外部荷载改变了岩石的孔隙尺寸和裂隙开度,影响了岩石的渗透特性[3];另一方面,渗透特性的改变,致使岩石的渗透压力和有效应力重新分布,影响了岩石的受荷能力[4]。此外,岩石是一种复杂的天然介质,内部有大量软弱夹层存在[5],具有强度低、易变形和水软化等特点,使岩石的力学性能和渗透特性与完整岩块有很大差异[6]。因此,深入研究应力‒渗流耦合作用下含软弱夹层砂岩的力学行为和渗透特性,对岩质边坡工程可靠性评价和防灾减灾均具有重要的理论和现实意义。
近年来,众多学者在岩石应力‒渗流耦合方面开展了大量工作。对完整岩石的应力‒渗流耦合研究多集中在岩石的力学行为特征[7]、变形与渗透率的关系[8]和岩石的劣化[9]方面。如:张培森等[10]开展三轴压缩条件下的渗流试验,研究了红砂岩在应力‒渗流耦合作用下的力学性质和渗流特性。张俊文等[11]进行无水和排水条件下的应力渗流耦合试验,分析了岩石变形全过程的力学行为特征和渗透特性。徐启钟等[12]开展玄武岩的水力耦合声发射试验,通过声发射的特征值揭示了岩石的劣化机制。Zhao等[13]开展三轴压缩‒渗透试验,研究了灰岩在耦合作用下的力学行为、渗透性和破坏模式。Nguyen等[14]通过理论与试验研究,对Cobourg石灰岩试件的渗透率演化过程进行测量,建立了渗流‒应力耦合模型。Wang等[15]采用室内试验和数值模拟相结合的方法,研究了红砂岩在应力‒渗流耦合作用下的损伤特性。然而,自然界中的岩石往往含有大量的天然裂隙,学者对含裂隙岩石的应力‒渗流耦合研究多从裂纹扩展[16]、能量演化[17]、渗流动态演化规律[18]和破坏特征[19]等角度开展。赵程等[20]采用石膏预埋薄片法制作裂隙岩石,分析了水力耦合作用下裂隙岩石的裂纹扩展规律。赵延林等[21]运用了流体力学和损伤力学等理论,建立了裂隙岩石渗流‒损伤‒断裂耦合模型。Du等[22]通过裂隙充填研究了裂隙岩石的力学特性、断裂特性和渗透性演化规律。尽管岩石的应力‒渗流耦合方面已经取得较为丰硕的研究成果,但软弱夹层这一关键因素在现有的岩石应力‒渗流耦合研究体系中仍被忽略,而上述问题对于岩质边坡工程稳定性评价具有重要意义,亟需进一步深入研究。
此外,在含软弱夹层岩石的研究方面,国内外学者通过常规的单轴试验[23]、三轴试验[24]和剪切试验[25]进行研究,研究内容主要聚焦于宏观力学分析[26]和破坏机制[27]。陈鑫等[28]采用不同厚度的单夹层水泥土试样进行单轴压缩试验,建立了软弱夹层与荷载耦合作用下的损伤本构模型。刘波等[29]通过研究不同夹层倾角的冻结红砂岩,得到夹层岩样的峰值强度随倾角增加成非线性衰减的结论。赵宏刚等[30]研究了软弱夹层的厚度对夹层岩石力学特性的影响。Luo等[31]对含薄弱节理的岩石进行剪切试验,发现岩石峰值抗剪强度随着充填度的提高,先降低后趋于稳定。Zhang等[32]基于软弱夹层土的剪切破坏特征和黏土损伤理论,提出了一种新的剪切破坏模式。在多数实际工程中,含软弱夹层岩石的破坏往往伴随着水的参与,然而,目前国内外的研究尚未充分关注渗流作用对含软弱夹层岩石破坏和渗透特性的影响。
基于以上考虑,本文对5种不同倾角含软弱夹层砂岩进行不同渗透压下的三轴应力‒渗流耦合声发射试验,分析应力‒应变关系、全过程渗透率及渗透压变化规律和声发射特征,对比研究得到含软弱夹层砂岩在应力‒渗流耦合作用下的宏观力学特性、渗透特性,破坏模式和破裂演化与声发射特征参数之间的关系,以期为岩土工程的安全与稳定性评价提供参考。

1 试验设备及方法

1.1 试样制备与试验仪器

试验采用灰砂岩试样,选择川渝地区某水利工程为取样地,现场采集岩块。每组试样在同一岩块上钻取,且按照同一方向加工成φ50 mm×H100 mm的标准圆柱体岩样,两端不平行度小于0.05 mm。采用声波探测仪测定试样的纵波波速,剔除外观和波速差异较大者,确保岩样的均质性。然后,采用线切割的方式将岩样进行切割后填充,并确保切割面粗糙度系数(JCR)相似,切割角度α(软弱夹层轴线与水平面的夹角)分别为0°、30°、45°、60°、90° 5个角度。

鉴于水泥砂浆与天然岩石的相似性,经过试验对比选定M10砂浆作为填充材料[33],依据《砌筑砂浆配合比设计规程》(JGJ/T 98—2010)和《建筑砂浆基本性能试验方法标准》(JGJ/T 70—2009),M10砂浆配合比为水泥∶河沙∶水=1.00∶5.27∶1.16;基本物理参数:单轴抗压强度为11.88 MPa,密度为2.076 g/cm3,稠度为58 mm,孔隙率为20.256%,弹性模量为1.58 GPa。制作过程:1)将完整岩样按照设计角度进行切割,两次切割间隔厚度为4 mm;2)将切割好的岩样按照切割前的位置对齐,并固定在夹具上;3)采用M10砂浆对切缝处填充,后放入模具中,1 d后拆模,在恒温恒湿箱中养护28 d形成试验所需岩样,如图1所示。

将制作好的岩样置于105°恒温箱干燥48 h,待其冷却后测得干密度。随后,将岩样放入真空饱和仪饱和24 h,并测得孔隙率和纵波波速(与声发射参数相互印证),岩样基本物理参数均值如表1所示。根据夹层角度和物理参数相近原则将岩样分为6组,并对各渗透压下的每组岩样均进行3次平行应力‒渗流耦合试验[19]。岩样编号规则:W为完整岩样,A表示0°倾角夹层岩样,B表示30°倾角夹层岩样,C表示45°倾角夹层岩样,D表示60°倾角夹层岩样,E表示90°倾角夹层岩样。试验前对岩样进行饱和处理。

试验采用TAW‐1000型微机控制岩石力学试验机、RIST‐208型渗流控制系统和美国PAC公司生产的Express‐8型声发射实时监测系统配合进行。试验系统轴向最大轴压ε1为1 000 kN,最大围压ε3为100 MPa,最大渗透压P为60 MPa,计算机控制系统实时记录数据。试验采用耐高温高压耐油的LVDT轴向传感器、径向传感器和RT‐50 AE高温高压一体传感器,其中:轴向传感器测控范围为0~10 mm,分辨率为0.000 1 mm;声发射传感器工作频率为60~400 kHz。试验系统如图2所示。

1.2 试验原理及方案

采用稳态法测试岩样的渗透率K,该方法基于流体在多孔介质中稳定流动时的基本物理规律而设计[9,22]。稳态渗流法求取岩石渗透率以达西渗流定律为基本控制方程,表达式如下:

K=μLΔQAΔPΔt

式中:K为岩石渗透率,m2;μ为流体的黏滞系数,本文取值为1.005×10-3 Pa·s;L为渗流长度,m;ΔQ为流体通过试样横截面A的流量,m3;ΔP为水力梯度,本文指渗透压的压差,Pa;Δt为流过ΔQ所用时间,s。

由于本次试验计算渗透率要用到黏滞系数等参数,且部分参数与温度密切相关,所以在试验过程中始终保持环境温度和水的温度为20 ℃[10],围压σ3取3.0 MPa,渗透压P取0、1.0、1.5和2.0 MPa[4,15]。试验步骤如下:1)将饱和好的岩样按照规范步骤装样后放入压力室内,检查各传感器是否正常;2)设置声发射监测系统,AE信号采样率为2 MHz,AE阈值为45 dB,前置放大器设置为40 dB,4个RT‐50 AE探头依次布置在岩样周边(图2(a));3)轴压和围压上升至3.0 MPa稳定后(保持偏应力为0),将渗透压以0.1 MPa/min的速率提升至目标值,在该状态下维持4 h,确保水在岩样中为稳态渗流,测得此时岩样的渗透率为初始渗透率;4)试验采用变形控制模式加载,加载速率设定为0.05 mm/min,试验全过程由计算机同步采集并实时记录试验数据。

2 试验结果与分析

2.1 含软弱夹层砂岩力学特征

2.1.1 变形特征

完整岩样和含软弱夹层岩样在不同渗透压下的应力‒应变曲线如图3所示。

由图3可以看出,0、1.0、1.5和2.0 MPa渗透压下完整岩样和含软弱夹层岩样的应力‒应变曲线变化趋势基本一致,可大致分为5个阶段:

1)压密阶段。完整岩样和90°倾角夹层岩样的变形主要是岩块压密而产生的非线性变形;0°和30°倾角夹层岩样除上述变形之外,还包括填充材料的变形;45°和60°倾角夹层岩样由于夹层倾角较大,在未产生明显压密阶段时,试样已经沿夹层上下端面破坏。

2)弹性变形阶段。完整岩样和90°倾角夹层岩样在该阶段曲线基本重合,其他角度夹层岩样曲线斜率均小于二者,说明除90°倾角夹层岩样外其他夹层岩样弹性模量较小,更容易产生变形。

3)裂隙稳定发展阶段。完整岩样、0°倾角夹层岩样和90°倾角夹层岩样在该阶段的曲线斜率与弹性阶段相同;30°、45°和60°倾角夹层岩样在该阶段的斜率显著小于弹性阶段,反映在曲线上表现为明显的下压趋势。

4)非稳定破裂发展阶段。随着夹层倾角的逐渐增大,该阶段的持续时间呈增长趋势,同时斜率逐渐减小。达到峰值强度时含软弱夹层岩样的峰值强度均小于完整岩样。

5)峰值强度后阶段。完整岩样与0°、30°和90°倾角夹层岩样均表现出脆性破坏特征;45°和60°倾角夹层岩样呈现出延性破坏特征。

另外,不同渗透压下完整岩样与含软弱夹层岩样变形有如下特点:

1)完整岩样和90°倾角夹层岩样的宏观变形主要来自岩块的压缩,0°、30°、45°和60°倾角夹层岩样的宏观变形,除了岩块变形外还有充填材料的变形。充填材料易变形,导致含软弱夹层岩样的轴向变形、径向变形和体向变形均大于完整岩样。

2)以渗透压为0为例,各倾角夹层岩样的轴向应变与完整岩样轴向应变之比为1.014~2.585,表明不同倾角夹层岩样在峰值强度时的变形程度均大于完整岩样。在2 MPa渗透压下,45°和60°倾角夹层岩样在峰值强度时的轴向应变相较渗透压为0时分别减小45.21%和52.38%,说明提高渗透压能有效减少含软弱夹层岩样破坏时的变形量,促使试样由延性破坏向脆性破坏转变。

3)在0、1.0、1.5和2.0 MPa渗透压下,各组岩样体积应变均表现出先增大后减小的变化趋势,且岩样受压时体积先压缩后膨胀,随着渗透压的增加各岩样体积膨胀量增大,压缩量减小。

4)随着夹层倾角的增大,低渗透压下岩样体积压缩表现出先增后减的趋势,高渗透压下夹层岩样的体积压缩则趋于无序。各渗透压下含软弱夹层岩样的残余应变表现出先增后减的变化规律。

2.1.2 强度特征

天然岩石中含有的夹层和岩石赋存环境(水、地应力)等因素对岩石的强度和裂纹发展具有重要影响[35],因此,研究夹层倾角和渗透压对岩样强度的影响具有极其重要的现实意义。含软弱夹层岩样的受力示意图如图4所示。图4中,σ1为轴向力,τα 为剪切应力,σα 为法向应力,f为摩擦力。各组岩样峰值强度与夹层倾角和渗透压等级的关系如图5所示。

由图4可知,含软弱夹层岩样峰值强度由岩块和软弱夹层共同调控[6],当夹层倾角处于较低水平(低于30°)或接近垂直状态时,法向应力σα 在剪切应力τα 尚未超过软弱夹层强度与界面摩擦力之和前,便已率先达到了岩块自身的强度极限,进而引发了岩样沿竖向的贯通性破坏[30]。在此情况下,岩样强度主要由岩块自身强度来决定。

然而,当夹层倾角超过30°时,剪切应力τα先于法向应力σa达到岩块强度之前超过了软弱夹层强度与摩擦力f的总和,导致岩样沿夹层倾角方向发生剪切破坏[25]。结果表明,在较大倾角条件下,岩样的强度行为更多地受制于软弱夹层的性质。

由图5(a)可知:1)含软弱夹层岩样的峰值强度,在不同渗透压梯度下均随软弱夹层倾角呈“U”形变化,即包括缓降—陡降—陡升3个阶段;峰值强度最小值均出现在60°倾角夹层岩样上,最大值均出现在夹层倾角为90°倾角夹层岩样上。2)随着渗透压等级的提高,45°倾角夹层岩样峰值强度降幅最大。3)随着夹层倾角的增大,0°到60°倾角夹层岩样的峰值强度降幅逐渐增大。

由图5(b)可知:1)不同渗透压下(0、1.0、1.5、2.0 MPa),0°、30°、45°、60°和90°倾角夹层岩样峰值强度均小于完整岩样,分别降低至24.47%~95.04%、16.45%~90.64%、13.80%~90.56%和11.59%~90.32%。2)与完整岩样相比,0°、30°、45°、60°和90°倾角岩样随渗透压(0、1.0、1.5、2.0 MPa)的升高,峰值强度呈线性降低趋势,分别降低至88.30%~89.20%、85.96%~88.18%、37.49%~52.60%、11.59%~24.47%和90.32%~95.04%;渗透压对45°和60°倾角夹层岩样峰值强度影响较大,对90°倾角夹层岩样峰值强度影响最小。3)夹层岩样的渗透压‒峰值强度曲线斜率绝对值呈降—增—降—增的“W”形变化趋势,表明渗透压对夹层岩样峰值强度的影响随着夹层倾角而变化。

2.1.3 破坏特征

含软弱夹层砂岩在不同渗透压下的破坏形态如图6所示,从图6可以看出,不同倾角软弱夹层和渗透压P的存在对岩样的破坏形态影响显著。

由图6(a)可知:0°倾角夹层岩样在低渗透压下表现出明显的剪切破坏,但随着渗透压的增大破坏模式转变为剪切破坏与拉伸破坏共存。低渗透压下软弱夹层发生坍缩后,仍能与岩块保持较为完好的整体性,而高渗透压下软弱夹层被水流带走,岩样整体性下降,破碎程度提高。

由图6(b)可知:30°倾角夹层岩样在不同渗透压下的整体破坏形态与0°倾角夹层岩样相似。低渗透压下软弱夹层只产生明显的挤出效应,而高渗透压下砂岩上下岩块产生了部分滑移,这是水对软弱夹层和岩块上下端面的弱化造成的结果。

由图6(c)可知:45°倾角夹层岩样未产生明显的宏观剪切裂纹。在0和1.0 MPa渗透压下,软弱夹层在坍缩的过程中上下岩块沿夹层倾角发生滑移。在1.5和2.0 MPa渗透压下,岩样沿软弱夹层中间发生剪切破坏,且在滑移过程中上端夹层被切碎。

由图6(d)可知:60°倾角夹层岩样在不同渗透压下岩样上下块均发生明显错动,并与45°岩样相似,但软弱夹层并未被挤出。高渗透压下,软弱夹层破裂后上下块呈现滑动脱开现象。

由图6(e)可知:90°倾角夹层岩样在0和1.0 MPa渗透压下发生整体剪切破坏,但未贯穿夹层。在1.5 MPa渗透压下,发生贯穿夹层的剪切破坏。在2.0 MPa渗透压下发生拉剪复合破坏,原因是高渗透压使得岩样破坏模式由延性转变为脆性。

综上,随着渗透压的增大,各倾角夹层岩样的破坏程度均呈现加剧趋势,同时软弱夹层普遍出现泥化现象。此外,随着夹层倾角的增大,夹层宏观破坏模式由挤出效应转变为剪切破坏,并最终演变为拉裂破坏。表明渗透压和夹层倾角共同决定了砂岩的破坏特征。

2.2 含软弱夹层砂岩渗透特性

含软弱夹层岩石的渗透性主要取决于软弱夹层的特性、分布和组合规律等,但也与岩石所处应力环境密切相关。因此,岩石渗透率是一个随应力环境动态变化的参数[36]。因篇幅所限,选用渗透压为1.5 MPa的典型岩样进行渗流特性分析。渗透率‒偏应力‒渗透压与轴向应变之间的关系如图7所示。

图7中,将渗透压纵坐标进行放大处理,以便更好地观察渗透压变化,并建立渗透压细微变动与渗透率动态演变之间的紧密联系与映射关系[9]。

由图7(a)可知:完整岩样在渗透率演化的第Ⅰ阶段渗透率整体处于缓慢降低状态,试样中的微小裂缝在轴向应力和围压的共同作用下逐渐闭合,导致起始阶段渗透率下降速率较大,此阶段渗透率的变化对渗透压并无影响;渗透率降低到最低点0.099 2×10-16 m2后,进入第Ⅱ阶段,此时岩样处于非稳定破裂发展阶段,该阶段裂纹开始逐渐贯通,渗透率进入快速增长期;当岩样形成宏观裂隙后,岩样内部形成大空腔,为高压水流提供主要通道和储存空间,此时渗透率出现快速上升—快速回落—再次上升的变化特点。渗透率的快速增大是由于高压水快速侵入空腔,并不能真实反映岩样的渗透率。渗透压则出现快速下降、快速上升、平稳的变化特点。

由图7(b)和(c)可知:0°和30°倾角夹层岩样初始渗透率变化与完整岩样相似,但渗透压均在第Ⅰ阶段出现了先上升后下降的波动,原因是饱和后软弱夹层中存储着的大量水分在压缩过程中析出。

由图7(d)可知:45°倾角夹层岩样初始渗透率是完整岩样的近12倍,主要渗流路径已经不再是岩块的微小裂纹,而是软弱夹层。第Ⅰ阶段初期软弱夹层被快速压密,渗透率急速下降渗透压出现先上后下的波动,后期渗透率缓慢降低渗透压趋于平稳。当软弱夹层坍缩时,夹层中水被大量挤出,渗透压出现快速上升后快速下降的大幅波动,渗透率有微小上浮后快速下降直至最低点。

由图7(e)可知:60°倾角夹层岩样初始渗透率大幅增加到38.692 5×10-16 m2,大倾角夹层岩样储水能力强,受压后孔隙持续闭合,夹层中饱和水不断被挤出,导致渗透率快速下降、渗透压快速提升。软弱夹层沿中心或胶结面的剪断滑动暂时增大了界面处孔径,致使渗透率出现上下波动,渗透压则出现快速下降后快速上升的波动。峰值强度后,岩样一直处在软弱夹层被压密和沿界面摩擦滑动的动态平衡中,泥化的夹层被不断挤出,造成渗透率持续微降,渗透压则稳步上升后趋于平稳。

由图7(f)可知:90°倾角夹层岩样的初始渗透率波动完全由软弱夹层引起,第Ⅰ阶段夹层被持续压缩,渗透率缓慢下降渗透压缓慢上升。岩样达到非稳定破裂发展段后,夹层与岩块胶结面被拉裂,胶结面处形成较大空腔。高压水快速涌入空腔,渗透率出现极假值,快速下降后呈倒抛物线稳步上升后趋于平稳。渗透压经历快速下降—快速上升阶段后呈抛物线稳步下降,最终趋于平稳。

综上分析,不同渗透压下砂岩初始渗透率与软弱夹层角度的关系如图8所示。从图8可知:随着渗透压的增大,含软弱夹层砂岩初始渗透率均呈现不同程度的增加,并且增幅在扩大:0°、30°、45°、60°和90°倾角夹层岩样的渗透率范围分别为1.236×10-16~6.086×10-16、2.041×10-16~10.087×10-16、11.195×10-16~37.896×10-16、23.501×10-16~55.732×10-16和38.048×10-16~89.146×10-16 m2。显然45°、60°和90°倾角夹层岩样,受渗透压影响更为显著。

随着软弱夹层倾角的增加,岩石的初始渗透率逐渐上升,夹层倾角小于45°时增幅相对缓慢,45°时初始渗透率产生跃升,大于45°时增幅较大。0°、20°、40°、60°、80°倾角夹层砂岩的初始渗透率(以渗透压1.5 MPa为例)分别为3.320×10-16、4.144×10-16、22.720×10-16、38.693×10-16和60.024×10-16 m2,与完整岩样相比,大倾角软弱夹层岩样对初始渗透率影响较大。

2.3 含软弱夹层砂岩破裂演化特征

在岩石失稳预警领域,声发射事件的活动性评价多采用振铃计数作为重要评价标准,振铃计数急剧攀升后骤然回落或出现相对平静期常被视为失稳的前兆[37]。结合图6中不同倾角岩样的破坏形态,能够系统地归纳出不同夹层倾角岩样的裂纹演化规律。考虑到整个加载过程中不同渗透压下声发射行为特征具有相似性,每个倾角夹层岩样选取渗透压为1.5 MPa的典型试样进行破裂演化特征分析。含软弱夹层砂岩偏应力‒振铃计数‒累积振铃计数与时间的关系和岩石破裂演化示意图如图9所示。

对图9分析可知:声发射活动过程可分为平稳期、快速增长期和峰后发展期3个阶段。从图9(a)可知,完整岩样声发射活动过程的3个阶段较为明显,且声发射参数与偏应力有较好的对应关系。平稳期声发射计数较少裂纹刚刚萌生,累积计数缓慢增加、斜率较小。岩样达到非稳定破裂发展阶段时,小裂纹快速贯通形成宏观裂隙,计数进入快速增长期,累积计数斜率较平稳期有较大增长。峰后发展阶段,计数迅速降低伴随着累积计数斜率变缓,大型宏观裂纹已经形成,这一阶段计数活动主要来自岩样断裂面之间的摩擦和水在渗透通道的运动。

从图9(b)和(c)可知:0°和30°倾角夹层岩样平稳期占据整个加载过程的近70%,主要因为软弱夹层在受压后持续变形,并且不能激发较高的声发射计数活动。软弱夹层的裂隙产生和水在裂隙中的运动致使声发射异常响应,声发射计数进入起始高峰期,累积计数呈现出一种快速上升趋势,随后进入平稳过程。软弱夹层坍缩后计数进入快速增长期,岩样产生宏观裂隙计数达到峰值,随后进入峰后发展期,这两个阶段的计数特征与完整岩样基本一致。

从图9(d)和(e)可知:45°和60°倾角夹层岩样表现出明显的塑性破坏特征,平稳期声发射计数较大,是由剪切软弱夹层与岩块交界面小凸起和压缩软弱夹层产生的竖向裂纹引起的。此阶段45°倾角夹层岩样已经沿夹层倾角发生滑移。进入快速增长期,计数迅速达到峰值,60°倾角夹层岩样在峰后有两种破坏模式:破坏模式Ⅰ与45°倾角夹层岩样类似,破坏模式Ⅱ为贯通夹层上下块分离破坏。随着轴向应力的增加和渗透压的作用,软弱夹层与岩块之间反复寻求应力平衡,导致峰后发展期计数一直维持较高水平但信号离散性较大。

从图9(f)可知:90°倾角夹层岩样平稳阶段的较多声发射计数,持续时间达到近200 s,此时由于岩块和夹层的变形差异较大,受压时两侧岩块产生应力拱效应,胶结面处产生拉力,造成胶结面处裂纹不断萌生。夹层和岩块开始分离时,计数进入快速增长期,岩石渗透率达到假极值。计数峰值后岩样发生宏观剪切破坏,极大提高水流通过能力,界面的摩擦和水流的通过,造成峰后发展期声发射计数一直处于高位。

含软弱夹层岩样除60°倾角夹层岩样外,峰值计数均大于完整岩样的6 500个。随着倾角的增加峰值计数呈增—减—增的“N”形趋势,各倾角夹层岩样峰值计数依次为20 517、31 683、10 314、3 432和18 667个。45°和60°倾角夹层岩样峰值计数处于较低水平,是由于破坏时均未产生宏观裂隙,且60°倾角夹层岩样破坏时软弱夹层并未出现坍缩。随着渗透压的增加,各倾角夹层岩样的峰值计数逐渐增大。渗透压从0增加到2.0 MPa,各倾角夹层岩样峰值计数分别从18 594、21 770、7 516、2 372和11 456个,增加到21 136、34 121、11 263、4 224和21 326个。显然,渗透压对45°倾角夹层岩样的峰值计数影响最为显著。

3 结 论

为描述受荷载作用的岩质边坡渐进失稳行为,本文开展含软弱夹层砂岩在不同渗透压下的三轴渗流声发射试验,系统地探究了试验过程中含软弱夹层岩样的变形行为、强度特性、破坏模式、渗流特性及声发射响应特征,结论如下:

1)同一渗透压下,与完整试样相比含软弱夹层砂岩的峰值强度均有不同程度的降低且峰值强度随夹层倾角变化呈“U”形分布。此外,随着渗透压等级的提高,夹层岩样的峰值强度呈线性降低。

2)夹层岩样的破坏机制依据夹层与岩块强度的相对关系可分为两类:一是由软弱夹层强度控制的滑移破坏;二是由岩块强度控制的贯穿破坏。具体而言,0°、30°和90°倾角夹层岩样主要受岩块强度控制,表现出脆性破坏;而45°和60°倾角夹层岩样受软弱夹层强度控制,表现出延性破坏特征。

3)渗透率的变化模式因夹层倾角而异。在各渗透压条件下,0°和30°倾角夹层岩样渗透率经历了先降后稳、再快速上升后快速下降,最终再次上升的过程。相反,45°和60°倾角夹层岩样渗透率总体呈下降趋势,仅在夹层破碎时出现短暂波动。90°倾角夹层岩样则表现出更为复杂的渗透率变化,包括降低、快速上升后快速下降,并最终趋于稳定。值得注意的是,除45°和60°倾角夹层岩样外,其余岩样破坏后的渗透率均高于其初始值。

4)初始渗透率与软弱夹层倾角及渗透压均成正相关关系。在同一渗透压条件下,初始渗透率随夹层倾角的增加而增大;而在不同渗透压条件下,随着渗透压的增加,各岩样的初始渗透率均有所增大,且倾角越大的岩样增幅越显著。

5)声发射活动可划分为3个阶段:平稳期、快速增长期和峰后发展期。除60°倾角夹层岩样外,其余倾角岩样的声发射峰值计数均高于完整岩样,并随倾角变化呈“N”形趋势。此外,随着渗透压的增加,各倾角夹层岩样的声发射峰值计数均有所增加,反映了岩样内部损伤活动的加剧。

参考文献

[1]

Zhou Chuangbing, Chen Yifeng, Jiang Qinghui,et al.On generalized multi-field coupling for fractured rock masses and its applications to rock engineering[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2008,27(7):1329‒1340. doi:10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2008.07.005

[2]

周创兵,陈益峰,姜清辉,等.论岩体多场广义耦合及其工程应用[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2008,27(7):1329‒1340. doi:10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2008.07.005

[3]

Liu Quansheng, Liu Xuewei.Research on critical problem for fracture network propagation and evolution with multifield coupling of fractured rock mass[J].Rock and Soil Mechanics,2014,35(2):305‒320.

[4]

刘泉声,刘学伟.多场耦合作用下岩体裂隙扩展演化关键问题研究[J].岩土力学,2014,35(2):305‒320.

[5]

Zhang Ying, Li Peng, Guo Qifeng,et al.Research progress of deformation and failure mechanism in fractured rock mass under hydromechanical coupling[J].Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology,2020,52(6):21‒41.

[6]

张英,李鹏,郭奇峰,等.水力耦合裂隙岩体变形破坏机制研究进展[J].哈尔滨工业大学学报,2020,52(6):21‒41.

[7]

Liang Jin, Wang Qiang, Hu Xinli,et al.Experimental study on mechanics and permeability characteristics of Jurassic red sandstone under hydro‒mechanical coupling[J].Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology,2023,42(1):52‒61.

[8]

梁劲,王强,胡新丽,等.渗流‒应力耦合下侏罗系红砂岩力学及渗透特性试验研究[J].地质科技通报,2023,42(1):52‒61.

[9]

Zhong Zhuoxi, Sheng Jianlong, Hu Bin,et al.A seepage model for slopes with soft interlayers in consideration of equivalent fracture surfaces[J].Journal of Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute,2023,40(7):118‒124.

[10]

钟卓希,盛建龙,胡斌,等.考虑等效裂隙面的含软弱夹层边坡降雨渗流模型[J].长江科学院院报,2023,40(7):118‒124.

[11]

Zhang Liang, Jing Hongwen, Meng Yaoyao,et al.Experimental study on the damage characteristics and fracture behaviour of rock-like materials with weak interlayer zones[J].KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering,2022,26(9):4157‒4167. doi:10.1007/s12205-022-2367-4

[12]

Chai Zhaoyun, Wu Xiaoling, Liu Xiangyu,et al.Study on evolution law of mechanics and permeability of sandy mudstone during full stress‒strain loading[J].Journal of China Coal Society,2024,49(S2):772‒781.

[13]

柴肇云,武小玲,刘向御,等.全应力‒应变加载过程中砂质泥岩力学与渗透性演化规律研究[J].煤炭学报,2024,49(S2):772‒781.

[14]

Yu Jin, Li Hong, Chen Xu,et al.Triaxial experimental study of associated permeability-deformation of sandstone under hydro‒mechanical coupling[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2013,32(6):1203‒1213.

[15]

俞缙,李宏,陈旭,等.渗透压‒应力耦合作用下砂岩渗透率与变形关联性三轴试验研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2013,32(6):1203‒1213.

[16]

Zhang Peisen, Xu Daqiang, Yan Wei,et al.Study on the influence of cyclic confining pressure on rock deterioration and seepage characteristics under different initial damage degrees[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2023,42(9):2109‒2124.

[17]

张培森,许大强,颜伟,等.不同初始损伤程度下循环加卸围压对岩石劣化及渗流特性的影响研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2023,42(9):2109‒2124.

[18]

Zhang Peisen, Zhao Chengye, Hou Jiqun,et al.Experimental study on seepage characteristics of deep sandstone under temperature‒stress‒seepage coupling conditions[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2020,39(10):1957‒1974.

[19]

张培森,赵成业,侯季群,等.温度‒应力‒渗流耦合条件下红砂岩渗流特性试验研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2020,39(10):1957‒1974.

[20]

Zhang Junwen, Song Zhixiang, Fan Wenbing,et al.Experimental study on mechanical behavior and permeability characteristics of sandstone under stress‒seepage coupling[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2019,38(7):1364‒1372.

[21]

张俊文,宋治祥,范文兵,等.应力‒渗流耦合下砂岩力学行为与渗透特性试验研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2019,38(7):1364‒1372.

[22]

Xu Qizhong, Yu Xinkai, Tang Daming,et al.Experimental study on acoustic emission characteristics of basalt under hydro‒mechanical coupling condition[J].Engineering Journal of Wuhan University,2023,56(5):542‒548.

[23]

徐启钟,于新凯,汤大明,等.水‒力耦合条件下玄武岩声发射特征试验研究[J].武汉大学学报(工学版),2023,56(5):542‒548.

[24]

Zhao Chengxing, Liu Jianfeng, Cheng Lyu, et al. Investigation on the mechanical behavior, permeability and failure modes of limestone rock under stress‒seepage coupling[J].Engineering Failure Analysis,2022,140:106544. doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.106544

[25]

Nguyen T S, Li Zhenze, Su G,et al.Hydro‒mechanical behavior of an argillaceous limestone considered as a potential host formation for radioactive waste disposal[J].Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering,2018,10(6):1063‒1081. doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2018.03.010

[26]

Wang Qiang, Hu Xinli, Zheng Wenbo,et al.Mechanical properties and permeability evolution of red sandstone subjected to hydro‒mechanical coupling:Experiment and discrete element modelling[J].Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering,2021,54(5):2405‒2423. doi:10.1007/s00603-021-02396-0

[27]

Li Tingchun, Du Yiteng, Zhu Qingwen,et al.Experimental study on strength properties,fracture patterns,and permeability behaviors of sandstone containing two filled fissures under triaxial compression[J].Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,2021,80(7):5921‒5938. doi:10.1007/s10064-021-02286-3

[28]

Lin Chun, Yu Jin, Chen Xu,et al.Mesoscopic numerical simulation on crack expansion and energy evolution of sandstone with prefabricated joint under hydro‒mechanical coupling condition[J].Journal of Huaqiao University(Natural Science),2018,39(4):538‒544. doi:10.11830/ISSN.1000-5013.201801012

[29]

林春,俞缙,陈旭,等.水力耦合条件下预制节理砂岩裂纹扩展和能量演化细观数值模拟[J].华侨大学学报(自然科学版),2018,39(4):538‒544. doi:10.11830/ISSN.1000-5013.201801012

[30]

Chen Xu, Yu Jin, Tang Chun’an,et al.Experimental and numerical investigation of permeability evolution with damage of sandstone under triaxial compression[J].Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering,2017,50(6):1529‒1549. doi:10.1007/s00603-017-1169-3

[31]

Kou Miaomiao, Liu Xinrong, Wang Zaiquan,et al.Laboratory investigations on failure,energy and permeability evolution of fissured rock-like materials under seepage pressures[J].Engineering Fracture Mechanics,2021,247:107694. doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.107694

[32]

Zhao Cheng, Xing Jinquan, Niu Jialun,et al.Experimental study on crack propagation of precast fractured rock samples under the combined action of water and force[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2019,38(S1):2823‒2830.

[33]

赵程,幸金权,牛佳伦,等.水‒力共同作用下预制裂隙类岩石试样裂纹扩展试验研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2019,38(S1):2823‒2830.

[34]

Zhao Yanlin, Cao Ping, Ma Wenhao,et al.Coupling model of seepage‒splitting‒damage of rock mass fractures and its application[J].Journal of Central South University(Science and Technology),2017,48(3):794‒803.

[35]

赵延林,曹平,马文豪,等.岩体裂隙渗流‒劈裂‒损伤耦合模型及应用[J].中南大学学报(自然科学版),2017,48(3):794‒803.

[36]

Du Yiteng, Li Tingchun, Wang Binxu,et al.Experimental study on mechanical characteristics and permeability evolution during the coupled hydromechanical failure of sandstone containing a filled fissure[J].Acta Geotechnica,2023,18(8):4055‒4075. doi:10.1007/s11440-023-01816-5

[37]

Liu Hongyan, Huang Yushi, Li Kaibing,et al.Test study of strength and failure mode of pre-existing jointed rock mass[J].Rock and Soil Mechanics,2013,34(5):1235‒1241.

[38]

刘红岩,黄妤诗,李楷兵,等.预制节理岩体试件强度及破坏模式的试验研究[J].岩土力学,2013,34(5):1235‒1241.

[39]

Ding Enli, Liu Yue, Wu Jimin,et al.Triaxial test study on the mechanical properties of soft-hard interbedded rocklike specimens[J].Chinese Journal of Underground Space and Engineering,2020,16(S1):39‒46.

[40]

丁恩理,刘越,吴继敏,等.软硬互层状类岩石试样力学特性的三轴试验研究[J].地下空间与工程学报,2020,16(S1):39‒46.

[41]

Zhang Zelin, Wang Tao, Wu Shuren,et al.Study on shear mechanical properties of mudstone with weak intercalation[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2021,40(4):713‒724.

[42]

张泽林,王涛,吴树仁,等.泥岩中软弱夹层的剪切力学特性研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2021,40(4):713‒724.

[43]

Wu Daoyong, Chen Fan, Tang Lin,et al.Influence of weak interlayer filling state on the failure patterns of natural rock joints[J].International Journal of Geomechanics,2022,22(7):04022086. doi:10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.0002410

[44]

Yi Ting, Tang Jianxin, Wang Yanlei.Effect of fracture dip angle and number on mechanical properties and failure modes of rock mass[J].Chinese Journal of Underground Space and Engineering,2021,17(1):98‒106.

[45]

易婷,唐建新,王艳磊.裂隙倾角及数目对岩体强度和破坏模式的影响[J].地下空间与工程学报,2021,17(1):98‒106.

[46]

Chen Xin, Zhang Ze, Li Dongqing,et al.Study on the influence of weak interlayer on uniaxial compression behaviors of cement soils[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2020,39(2):398‒412.

[47]

陈鑫,张泽,李东庆,等.软弱夹层对水泥土单轴压缩影响研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2020,39(2):398‒412.

[48]

Liu Bo, Liu Nian, Li Dongyang,et al.Strength test on frozen cracked red sandstone combined with ice[J].Journal of China Coal Society,2016,41(4):843‒849.

[49]

刘波,刘念,李东阳,等.含冰软弱面的冻结裂隙红砂岩的强度试验[J].煤炭学报,2016,41(4):843‒849.

[50]

Zhao Honggang, Zhang Dongming, Jiang Changbao,et al.Mechanical response and failure characteristics of rock mass considering the thickness of weak interlayer[J].Rock and Soil Mechanics,2022,43(4):969‒980.

[51]

赵宏刚,张东明,蒋长宝,等.考虑软弱夹层厚度的岩体力学响应及破坏特征研究[J].岩土力学,2022,43(4):969‒980.

[52]

Luo Zhanyou, Zhang Yufan, Du Shigui,et al.Experimental study on shear performance of saw-tooth rock joint with weak interlayer under different moisture contents and filling degrees[J].Frontiers in Earth Science,2023,10:982937. doi:10.3389/feart.2022.982937

[53]

Zhang Zelin, Wang Tao.Failure modes of weak interlayers with different dip angles in red mudstone strata,Northwest China[J].Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,2023,82(5):156. doi:10.1007/s10064-023-03165-9

[54]

Zhang Xing, Lin Hang, Yin Xiangjie,et al.Mechanical characterization of intermittent weak interlayer based on DIC and acoustic emission technique[J].Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics,2023,127:104097. doi:10.1016/j.tafmec.2023.104097

[55]

Liu Weitao, Du Yanhui, Yu Shijian,et al.Research on permeability and acoustic emission characteristics of karst collapsed column skeleton sandstone under triaxial compression[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2021,40(8):1580‒1590.

[56]

刘伟韬,杜衍辉,于师建,等.陷落柱骨架砂岩三轴压缩渗流特性及声发射特征试验研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2021,40(8):1580‒1590.

[57]

Song Yanqi, Li Ming, Liu Jiang,et al.Experimental test on marble containing natural weak interlayer of different angles[J].Journal of China University of Mining & Technology,2015,44(4):623‒629.

[58]

宋彦琦,李名,刘江,等.含不同倾角天然软弱夹层的大理岩破坏试验[J].中国矿业大学学报,2015,44(4):623‒629.

[59]

Liu Xinyu, Chai Zhaoyun, Xin Zipeng,et al.Mechanics and permeability evolution mechanism of bedded sandy mudstone under fluid‒solid coupling action[J].Journal of Taiyuan University of Technology,2024,55(6):1000‒1011.

[60]

刘新雨,柴肇云,辛子朋,等.水‒力耦合作用下层状砂质泥岩力学与渗透性演化机理[J].太原理工大学学报,2024,55(6):1000‒1011.

[61]

Li Zhenlei, Li Na, Yang Fei,et al.Applying Mel-frequency cepstral coefficient of acoustic emission for analyzing fracture and failure of sandstone specimens[J].Journal of China Coal Society,2023,48(2):714‒729.

[62]

李振雷,李娜,杨菲,等.声发射梅尔倒谱系数在砂岩破裂分析的应用[J].煤炭学报,2023,48(2):714‒729.

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF (8856KB)

0

访问

0

被引

详细

导航
相关文章

AI思维导图

/

〈 〉