中文摘要：

针对采用割线模量法进行沉降计算的结果偏小，导致工程上的不安全，通过对分层总和法和割线模量法的比较，分析了导致割线模量法计算结果在工程上偏于不安全的原因，指出主要是压缩应变定义的初始状态不同所致。此外，还对比分析了当假设压实黄土压缩应力一应变关系符合不同函数模型时的差异，指出假设的应力一应变关系函数模型也是影响地基沉降计算结果的主要原因之一。

英文摘要：

The commo marion method （LSM）. nly used analysis method of foundation settlement is the layer-wise sum- The specification method based on LSM continues to be a dominated method in foundation settlement calculation. The secant modulus method （SMM） is a new method which was proposed in engineering practice recently and considered to be more accurate and convenient to calculate foundation settlement. But some documents about settlement observation and calculation results of some actual projects show that settlement calculation results of SMM method are always smaller than those of LSM method to a certain extent, and this would cause insecurity in engineering. The method of LSM and SMM were compared and the reasons which would cause insecurity by SMM method were analyzed. It was pointed out that the unsafe results were caused by the different initial state in definition of compressive strain. In addition, the differences were also compared and analyzed when the function model hypothesis of compression stress--strain relationships of compacted loess was different. It was pointed out that the hypothesized function model of stress-strain relationships should also be one of the main reasons which impacted the settlement results of foundation.