钢结构梁柱节点弯矩-转角曲线极限承载力确定方法

左凌霄; 易伟同; 祝磊; 吕冬霖; 孙海林

doi:10.13206/j.gjgS22031101

钢结构梁柱节点弯矩-转角曲线极限承载力确定方法

doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS22031101

左凌霄^1,2,3,
易伟同^1,2,3, ,,
祝磊^1,2,3,
吕冬霖^1,2,3,
孙海林⁴

1. 北京未来城市高精尖创新中心, 北京建筑大学土木与交通工程学院, 北京 100044;
2. 北京建筑大学工程结构与新材料北京市高等学校工程研究中心, 北京 100044;
3. 北京建筑大学北京市建筑结构与环境修复功能材料重点实验室, 北京 100044;
4. 中国建筑设计研究院有限公司, 北京 100044

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目(51778035)。

详细信息

作者简介:
左凌霄,男,1997年出生,硕士研究生。

通讯作者:
易伟同,ywt09312@163.com。

计量
- 文章访问数: 480
- HTML全文浏览量: 71
- PDF下载量: 23
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2022-03-11

Methods for Determining Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Steel Beam-Column Joints Based on Moment-Rotation Curves

Lingxiao Zuo^1,2,3,
Weitong Yi^{1,2,3
, ,},
Lei Zhu^1,2,3,
Donglin Lyu^1,2,3,
Hailin Sun⁴

1. Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Future Urban Design, School of Civil and Transportation Engineering in BUCEA, Beijing 100044, China;
2. Beijing Higher Institution Engineering Research of Civil Engineering Structure and Renewable Material in BUCEA, Beijing 100044, China;
3. Beijing Key Laboratory of Advanced Functional Materials for Building and Environment in BUCEA, Beijing 100044, China;
4. China Architecture Design & Research Group, Beijing 100044, China

摘要

摘要: 对于钢结构的梁柱节点,弯矩-转角曲线是判断其承载力的重要依据,也是工程设计重要的参考指标。一般情况下,节点的弯矩-转角曲线具有上升段和下降段,因而极限承载力可直观得出,即为弯矩-转角曲线的峰值点。而对少数曲线,则只具有上升段,即随着转角的增大,弯矩一直增加,因而不具有峰值点。对于这类曲线,承载力的确定方法需要进一步深入研究,因而将讨论节点弯矩-转角曲线的位移限值取值方法,用于决定节点的承载力。
首先总结了现有规范及相关研究中,钢管结构梁柱节点极限位移的取值方法。主要包括两类,一是通过主管位移取值,另一是通过支管位移取值。通过主管位移取值的方法主要有:CIDECT法,即以主管变形量为其直径的3%时作为极限状态;Lu方法,对 CIDECT法进行改进,即引入了主管变形量为其直径 1%时对应的荷载,将该荷载与 3%所对应的荷载进行比较,当 3%对应荷载大于 1%对应荷载的 1. 5倍时,取 1%对应荷载的 1. 5倍作为极限荷载,反之则取 3%对应荷载作为极限荷载;二倍刚度法(TEC),即过原点作斜率为初始刚度一半的直线,其与曲线的交点即为极限点。通过支管位移取值的方法主要有 Yura法,该方法将支管看作施加均布荷载的简支梁,以梁跨中处应变达到材料屈服应变的 4倍时作为极限状态。其次,针对 Yura方法未在规范中采用的情况,通过圆钢管节点试验和有限元模拟进行该方法的验证。最后以方钢管柱-工字梁节点为例探究了以上 4种不同取值方法的应用效果,设计了 4组试验并进行了相应的有限元模拟。在比较试验和模拟结果以确定模拟的可靠性后,基于有限元模拟结果对以上不同方法的极限转角取值进行分析。
结果表明:Yura方法在钢管柱-工字梁节点中应用具有可行性;对于钢管柱 -工字梁节点,Lu方法得出的结果相对保守,且操作复杂;二倍刚度法需要节点具有完整的弯矩 -转角曲线,且同样操作复杂,并容易出现误差,因而适用性有限;CIDECT和 Yura方法相对而言操作简便,只要确定主管或支管的直径即可估算出极限位移,且这两种方法得出的极限转角差异较小。因而,建议用这两种方法计算其各自对应的极限转角,取其中较小的转角来确定极限承载力。
- 钢结构 /
- 梁柱节点 /
- 弯矩-转角曲线 /
- 极限承载力 /
- 极限转角
Abstract: For beam-column steel joints,the moment-rotation curve is an important criterion of the ultimate bearing capacity,as well as an essential criterion for the design of joints.Generally,the moment-rotation curve of a joint has both ascending and descending range,therefore,the ultimate bearing capacity of the joint can be captured intuitively by the peak point of the curve.However,for some curve which is monotone increasing without an obvious peak point,the detemination of the ultimate bearing capacity needed to be further studied.Based on this issue,methodology of deformation limit will be discussed,in order to determine the ultimatate capacity.
Firstly,current codes as well as corresponding researches on methods of displacement limit calculation are summarized.These methods can be classified in two types,one is through the displacement of the chord,and another is through the brace.CIDECT method belongs to the type of chord,which takes the value of chord deformation in 3% of chord diameter as the ultimate deformation limit.Lu's method,as an improvement of CIDECT method,considering the relationship of load between the deformation of 1% and 3% of chord diameter,when the load of 3% is higher than 1.5 times load of 1%,and then the value of 1.5 times load of 1% is taken as the ultimate bearing capacity,otherwise,the value of 3% is taken as the ultimate point.TEC (Twice Elastic Method) is also belongs to the type of chord,which draws a straight line that the slope is half of the initial stiffness through the origin,and the intersection between the line and the curve is the ultimate point.Yura's method belongs to the type of brace,in which the brace is regarded as a simply supported beam with uniform load,when the strain in the middle of the beam span is 4 times the yield strain of the material,it is considered to reach the limit.Secondly,in view of situation that Yura's method is not adopted in codes,a series of steel circular tubular joint tests as well as finite element analysis are carried out to verify the method.Finally,the application of methods above were explored by taking the example of joints with square steel tubular column and H-shaped beam.Four groups of tests were designed and corresponding finite element simulation was carried out.After comparing the experimental and simulation results which verified the reliability of the simulation,the ultimate rotation angles of the above different methods are evaluated based on the finite element simulation results.
Results indicated that the application of Yura's method for joints of steel tubular column and H-shaped beam is feasible.The results obtained by Lu's method are relatively conservative and the operation is complicated.TEC method requires complete moment-rotation curves of joints,and is also complex to operate and prone to errors,so its applicability is limited.CIDECT and Yura's methods are relatively easy to operate,as the ultimate deformation can be estimated as long as the diameter of the chord or brace is determined,and the difference of the ultimate rotation obtained by these two methods is minor.Therefore,this research suggests to use these two methods to calculate the corresponding ultimate rotation,and take the smaller as the ultimate limit.
- steel structure /
- beam-column joint /
- moment-rotation curve /
- ultimate bearing capacity /
- ultimate rotation angle

HTML全文

参考文献(24)

[1]	强旭红,陈欢,姜旭,等.高强钢端板连接节点弯矩-转角曲线数学模型[J].同济大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 48(4):471-480.
[2]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部.建筑抗震试验规程:JGJ/T 101-2015[S].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2015.
[3]	AISC. An American national standard specification for structural steel buildings:ANSI/AISC 360-10[S]. Chicago:American Institute of Steel Construction, 2010.
[4]	AISI. Connections for Use with the 2012 North American cold-formed steel specification[S]. Washington D C:American Iron and Steel Institute, 2012.
[5]	BSI. Design of composite steel and concrete structures:Eurocode 4[S]. London:British Standard Institute, 1994.
[6]	AISC. Cold-formed steel structures code:[S]. Sydney:Australian Institute of Steel Construction, 1988.
[7]	CIDECT. The strength and behaviour of statically loaded welded connections in structural hollow sections, monograph No. 6.:[S]. Corby:CIDECT, 1986.
[8]	Lan X Y, Chan T M, Young B. Testing, finite element analysis and design of high strength steel RHS T-joints[J]. Engineering Structures, 2021, 227.DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111184.
[9]	Cai Y C, Chan T M, Young B, Strength predictions of circular hollow section T-joints of steel grade 1100 MPa[J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2022,188.DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.107003.
[10]	BSI. Guide to methods for assesing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures:BS 7910[S]. London:British Standard Institute, 2019.
[11]	ASME. Rules for construction of pressure vessels:[S]. New York:American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998.
[12]	高超.基于损伤的N型钢管节点静力与滞回性能研究[D].北京:北京交通大学, 2010.
[13]	薛彦涛.带转换层型钢混凝土框架-核心筒混合结构试验与设计研究[D].北京:中国建筑科学研究院, 2007.
[14]	Lu L H,Puthli R S,Wardenier J. Ultimate deformation criteria for uniplanar connections between I-beams and RHS columns under in-plane bending[C]//Proceedings of the 4th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference. Osaka:1994.
[15]	Zhao X L,Hancock G J. T-joints in rectangular hollow sections subject to combined actions[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1992, 118:2639-2640.
[16]	Koral R M,Mizara F A. Finite element analysis of RHS T-joints[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1982, 108(9):2081-2098.
[17]	Yura J A,Zettlemoyer N A,Edwards I F. Ultimate Capacity equations for tubular joints[C]//Proceedings of the Annual Offshore Technology Conference.Houston:1980:3690.
[18]	Xu F,Chan T M,Chen J. Punching shear based design of concrete-filled CHS T-joints under in-plane bending[C]//12th International Conference on "Advances in Steel-Concrete Composite Structures" ASCCS 2018. Valencia:2018.
[19]	Lie S T,Li T,Shao Y B, et al. Plastic collapse load prediction of cracked circular hollow section gap K-joints under in-plane bending[J]. Marine Structures, 2016, 50:20-34.
[20]	Zhao X L. Deformation limit and ultimate strength of welded T-joints in cold-formed RHS sections[J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2000, 53(2):149-165.
[21]	Lie S T, Vipin S P, Li T. New reduction factor for cracked square hollow section T-joints under axial loading[J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2015, 112:221-227.
[22]	Lie S T,Yang Z M,Gho W M. Validation of BS7910-2005 failure assessment diagrams for cracked square hollow section T-, Y-and K-joints[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2009, 86(5):335-344.
[23]	Wan C,Bai Y,Ding C, et al. Mechanical performance of novel steel one-sided bolted joints in shear[J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2020, 165:1-13.
[24]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部.钢结构设计标准:GB 50017-2017[S].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2018.