双曲面球型减隔震支座曲线连续梁桥的减隔震
|
摘要
针对某3跨门式桥墩轨道交通曲线连续梁桥,采用其桥址《地震安全性评价报告》提供的3条地震动时程曲线,应用SAP2000有限元软件,分析未隔震和双曲面球型减隔震支座隔震条件下的罕遇地震响应,进行双曲面球型减隔震支座曲线连续梁桥的减隔震研究。研究结果表明,曲线连续梁桥各桥墩的内力响应受响应内力方向与地震动输入方向夹角的影响;仅固定墩切向隔震时,固定墩的切向内力大幅减少,弯矩和剪力分别减小约70%和50%,但各墩的径向内力均有增加,最大增幅约达10%,不能满足桥梁的抗震要求;固定墩切向和径向双向、滑动墩径向隔震时,固定墩的切向和径向内力均大幅减少,弯矩和剪力分别降低约73%和49%,同时各滑动墩的径向内力也大幅降低40%～60%,减震效果明显。
The FEA model of a 3-span rail transit curved continuous bridge with twin-legged portal pier is established by SAP2000.By using three earthquake time history waves provided by Seismic Safety Evaluation Report,the calculation of isolation and non-isolation seismic responses of curved continuous bridge with and without double spherical aseismic bearing under rarely-occurred earthquake is carried out.By comparison,the results show that the internal force responses of each pier of the curved continuous bridge are influenced by the angle between the response internal force direction and the earthquake input direction.When using double spherical aseismic bearing on braking pier in tangential direction, the seismic responses of the bending moment and the shearing force of braking pier in tangential direction decrease about 70% and 50% respectively while the seismic response of each pier in radial direction increases to a maximum of 10%,which can't meet the seismic requirements of the bridge.When putting double spherical aseismic bearing on braking pier both in tangential and radial direction and on sliding pier in radial direction,the internal forces of the bending moment and the shearing force of braking pier in tangential direction decrease about 73% and 49% respectively,and the internal forces of each pier in radial direction decrease about 40%～60% as well.It can be concluded that the isolation effect of the double spherical aseismic bearing is obvious.
The FEA model of a 3-span rail transit curved continuous bridge with twin-legged portal pier is established by SAP2000.By using three earthquake time history waves provided by Seismic Safety Evaluation Report,the calculation of isolation and non-isolation seismic responses of curved continuous bridge with and without double spherical aseismic bearing under rarely-occurred earthquake is carried out.By comparison,the results show that the internal force responses of each pier of the curved continuous bridge are influenced by the angle between the response internal force direction and the earthquake input direction.When using double spherical aseismic bearing on braking pier in tangential direction, the seismic responses of the bending moment and the shearing force of braking pier in tangential direction decrease about 70% and 50% respectively while the seismic response of each pier in radial direction increases to a maximum of 10%,which can't meet the seismic requirements of the bridge.When putting double spherical aseismic bearing on braking pier both in tangential and radial direction and on sliding pier in radial direction,the internal forces of the bending moment and the shearing force of braking pier in tangential direction decrease about 73% and 49% respectively,and the internal forces of each pier in radial direction decrease about 40%～60% as well.It can be concluded that the isolation effect of the double spherical aseismic bearing is obvious.
引文
[1]KELLY T E.Base Isolation of Structures-Design Guidelines[R].Wellington:Hol mes Consulting Group Ltd,2001.
[2]范立础,王志强.桥梁减隔震设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社,2001.
[3]范立础,卓卫东.桥梁延性抗震设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社,2001.
[4]TSOPELAS P,CONSTANTINOU MC,KI MYS,et al.Experi mental Study of FPS Systemin Bridge Seismic Iso-lation[J].Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,1996,25(1):65.
[5]ABDEL S M N,HEINS C P.Seismic Response of Curved Steel Box Girder Bridges[J].ASCE,1988,114(SE12):2790-2800.
[6]朱东生,虞庐松,刘世忠.不规则桥梁地震动输入主方向的研究[J].兰州铁道学院学报:自然科学版,2000(6):37-40.(ZHU Dongsheng,YU Lusong,LI U Shizhong.The Study of Earthquake Input Principal Direction for IrregularBridges[J].Journal of Lanzhou Rail way University:Natural Sciences,2000(6):37-40.in Chinese)
[7]李剑,陈岱林.地震作用最大方向的确定[J].建筑科学,2005(6)16-20.(LI Jian,CHEN Dailin.Determination of the Direction of Maxi mum Seismic Response[J].Building Science,2005(6)16-20.in Chinese)
[8]张贞阁.铁路连续梁桥的减隔震性能研究[D].北京:北京交通大学,2003.
[9]中华人民共和国铁道部.GB 50111—2006铁路工程抗震设计规范[S].北京:中国计划出版社,2006.
[10]California Depart ment of Transportation.Seismic Design Caltrans Version 1.4[S].Sacramento,California:Tech-nical Publications,2006.
[2]范立础,王志强.桥梁减隔震设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社,2001.
[3]范立础,卓卫东.桥梁延性抗震设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社,2001.
[4]TSOPELAS P,CONSTANTINOU MC,KI MYS,et al.Experi mental Study of FPS Systemin Bridge Seismic Iso-lation[J].Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,1996,25(1):65.
[5]ABDEL S M N,HEINS C P.Seismic Response of Curved Steel Box Girder Bridges[J].ASCE,1988,114(SE12):2790-2800.
[6]朱东生,虞庐松,刘世忠.不规则桥梁地震动输入主方向的研究[J].兰州铁道学院学报:自然科学版,2000(6):37-40.(ZHU Dongsheng,YU Lusong,LI U Shizhong.The Study of Earthquake Input Principal Direction for IrregularBridges[J].Journal of Lanzhou Rail way University:Natural Sciences,2000(6):37-40.in Chinese)
[7]李剑,陈岱林.地震作用最大方向的确定[J].建筑科学,2005(6)16-20.(LI Jian,CHEN Dailin.Determination of the Direction of Maxi mum Seismic Response[J].Building Science,2005(6)16-20.in Chinese)
[8]张贞阁.铁路连续梁桥的减隔震性能研究[D].北京:北京交通大学,2003.
[9]中华人民共和国铁道部.GB 50111—2006铁路工程抗震设计规范[S].北京:中国计划出版社,2006.
[10]California Depart ment of Transportation.Seismic Design Caltrans Version 1.4[S].Sacramento,California:Tech-nical Publications,2006.
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