偏心结构空间杆系模型与空间实体模型的对比分析研究
详细信息 本馆镜像全文    |  推荐本文 | | 获取馆网全文
摘要
分别用空间杆系模型和空间实体模型对偏心结构进行弹塑性时程分析,并比较两者的差别。研究发现,在结构刚进入塑性阶段时,采用空间杆系模型和空间实体模型得出的偏心结构塑性变形接近;而结构产生较大塑性变形时,采用空间实体模型得出的偏心结构塑性变形要比采用空间杆系模型得出的大许多。
A few eccentric structures are modeled with beam-column element and solid element respectively for comparison in this paper.Several nonlinear dynamic time-history analyses of the structures have been carried out with the two types of finite elements.The differences between the two finite elements are compared.It is found that the plastic deformations of the structures are close to each other at the beginning of plastic phase of the structures,but the plastic deformation obtained with the solid element is far larger than that obtained with the beam-column element when large plastic deformation is developed in the structures.
引文
[1]Chandler A K,Hutch in son G L.Torsional couplingeffects in the earthquake response of a symmetricbuildings[J].Engineering Structures,1986,8(3):222-236.
    [2]Hejal,Chopra A K.Earthquake response of torsion-ally coupled frame buildings[J].Journal of StructuralEngineering,1989,115(4):834-851.
    [3]Hejal,Chop ra A K.Lateral-torsional coupling inearthquake response of frame buildings[J].Journal ofStructural Engineering,1989,115(4):852-867.
    [4]李宏男,尹之潜.偏心结构在多维地震作用下扭转耦联反应分析[J].地震工程与工程振动,1988,8(4):45-53.Li HN,Yin Z Q.Torsion of eccentric structure undermulti-dimensional earthquake[J].Earthquake Engi-neering and Engineering Vibration,1998,8(4):45-53.
    [5]张洪信,赵清海.ANSYS有限元分析完全自学手册[M].北京:机械工业出版社,2008.Zhang H X,Zhao Q H.The Completely Self-taughtHandbook of ANSYS Analysis of Finite Element[M].Beijing:Machinery Industry Press,2008.
    [6]GB 50010-2002,混凝土结构设计规范[S].
    [7]张新培.钢筋混凝土抗震结构非线性分析[M].北京:科学出版社,2004.Zhang X P.The Non-linear Analysis of ReinforcedConconcrete Seismic Structures[M].Beijing:SciencePress,2004.

版权所有:© 2023 中国地质图书馆 中国地质调查局地学文献中心