相同造价下几类方形截面桥墩抗震性能对比研究

李彪; 吕飞; 孙浩; 丁发兴; 蔡勇强; 张朝成

doi:10.13206/j.gjgS23063003

相同造价下几类方形截面桥墩抗震性能对比研究

doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS23063003

李彪¹,
吕飞¹,
孙浩^1, ,,
丁发兴¹,
蔡勇强¹,
张朝成²

1. 中南大学土木工程学院, 长沙 410075;
2. 浙江新瑞建设集团有限公司, 浙江温州 325000

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金面上项目(51978664，52008400)；湖南省自然科学基金项目(2022JJ40609)。

详细信息

作者简介:
李彪，博士研究生，教授级高级工程师，主要从事钢管混凝土组合结构研究。

通讯作者:
孙浩，博士研究生，主要从事钢管混凝土组合结构研究，sunhaoshine@csu.edu.cn。

计量
- 文章访问数: 13
- HTML全文浏览量: 1
- PDF下载量: 2
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-06-30
- 网络出版日期: 2024-03-29
- 刊出日期: 2024-01-25

Comparative Study on Seismic Performance of Several Types of Square Section Piers at the Same Cost

1. School of Civil Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China;
2. Zhejiang Xinrui Construction Engineering Co., Ltd., Wenzhou 325000, China

摘要

摘要: 强震下传统钢筋混凝土桥墩抗震性能不足，而钢管混凝土具有更好的抗震性能。钢管混凝土墩在公路、高速公路、城市快速路和高速铁路等领域具有广阔的应用前景，近年来在桥梁结构中逐步推广应用。为提高桥墩的抗震韧性，结合当前各类桥墩抗震研究现状，对方形截面钢筋混凝土墩、部分填充钢管混凝土墩、钢管混凝土墩以及端部拉筋钢管混凝土墩的极限抗震能力进行对比研究，并对钢筋混凝土、部分填充钢管混凝土、钢管混凝土与端部拉筋钢管混凝土墩的足尺有限元模型进行地震弹塑性和塑性大变形时程分析，探讨不同类型桥墩的抗震极限性能及其适用范围。分析中采用有限元软件ABAQUS建立实体-壳精细化有限元模型，模型中混凝土应力-应变关系采用参数确定性的混凝土三轴塑性-损伤模型，并引入裂缝插入技术；钢材应力-应变关系采用混合强化与韧性损伤模型，用已有单向拟静力、单向拟动力、双向拟动力和振动台加载下的钢筋混凝土、部分填充钢管混凝土、钢管混凝土与端部拉筋钢管混凝土桥墩抗震性能试验成果对有限元模型进行验证，最后采用位移响应、累积耗能和刚度损伤三个评价指标对相同造价下各类桥墩在不同地震动强度下的抗震韧性进行评价。分析结果表明： 1)上述墩柱实体-壳精细化有限元模型弹塑性和塑性大变形抗震计算方法合理反映了循环荷载下钢管混凝土桥墩的滞回曲线“捏拢”效应、塑性大变形阶段承载力退化现象以及动荷载作用下的位移响应； 2)当桥梁设防烈度要求为6~7度时，建议选用钢筋混凝土桥墩；当桥梁设防烈度要求为8度时，建议选用钢管混凝土桥墩；当桥梁设防烈度要求为9度及以上时，建议选用端部拉筋钢管混凝土桥墩。
- 钢筋混凝土 /
- 钢管混凝土 /
- 桥墩 /
- 拉筋 /
- 抗震性能 /
- 震后刚度损伤
Abstract: The seismic performance of the traditional reinforced concrete pier is insufficient under strong earthquakes, but the concrete filled steel tube (CFST) pier has better seismic performance. CFST pier has broad application prospects in highway, expressway, urban expressway and high-speed railway, and has been gradually popularized in bridge structure in recent years. In order to improve the seismic toughness of bridge piers, the ultimate seismic capacity of square section reinforced concrete piers, partially filled CFST piers, CFST piers and stirrup-confined CFST piers are compared and studied. Seismic elastoplastic and plastic large deformation time history analysis of full-size finite element models of square section reinforced concrete pier, partially filled CFST pier, CFST pier and stirrup-confined CFST pier were carried out, and the seismic limit performance and application range of different types of pier were discussed. In the analysis, the finite element software ABAQUS is used to establish a refined finite element model of solid shell. In the model, a parametric deterministic concrete triaxial plastic-damage model is adopted for the concrete stress-strain relationship, and crack insertion technology is introduced. The combined hardening-ductile damage model of steel stress-strain relationship was adopted, and the finite element model was verified by the existing experimental results of the seismic performance of reinforced concrete pier, partially filled CFST pier, CFST pier and and stirrup-confined CFST pier under unidirectional pseudo-static, unidirectional pseudo-dynamic, bidirectional pseudo-dynamic, and shake table loading test. Finally, three evaluation indexes: displacement response, cumulative energy dissipation and stiffness damage, are used to evaluate the seismic toughness of various piers under different ground motion intensity at the same cost. The analysis results show that: 1) the elastic-plastic and large deformation seismic calculation methods of the refined solid-shell FE model of CFST pier can reasonably reflect the “pinch” effect of hysteretic curve under cyclic load, the degradation of bearing capacity during large plastic deformation and the displacement response under dynamic load. 2) When the bridge fortification requirement is 6-7 degrees, it is recommended to choose reinforced concrete pier; when the bridge fortification requirement is 8 degrees, it is recommended to choose CFST pier. When the bridge fortification requirement is 9 degrees or above, it is recommended to choose the stirrup-confined CFST pier.
- reinforced concrete /
- concrete-filled steel tube /
- pier, stirrup /
- seismic performance /
- stiffness damage after earthquake /

HTML全文

参考文献(23)

[1]	魏凯, 赵文玉, 洪杰, 等. 卷破波斜向作用下方形桥墩砰击荷载研究[J]. 工程力学, 2023, 40(5):41-48.
[2]	丁发兴, 许云龙, 王莉萍, 等. 钢-混凝土组合结构抗震性能研究进展[J]. 钢结构(中英文), 2023, 38(12):1-26.
[3]	Ge H B, Susantha K A S, Satake Y, et al.Seismic demand predictions of concrete-filled steel box columns[J]. Engineering Structures, 2003, 25(3):337-345.
[4]	Ge H B, Usami T. Analytical study on ultimate strength and deformation of partially concrete-filled steel beam-columns of box section[J]. Structural Engineering and Earthquake Engineering, 1995, 513(31):77-88.
[5]	Morishita M, Aoki T, Suzuki M. Experimental studyon the seismic resistance performance of concrete-filled steel tubular columns[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2000, 46A:75-83.
[6]	Goto Y, Wang Q Y, Makoto O. FEM analysis for hysteretic behavior of thin-walled columns[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1998, 124(11):1290-1301.
[7]	臧华, 刘钊, 李红英, 等. 钢管混凝土桥墩抗震性能试验研究[J]. 防灾减灾工程学报, 2010, 30(4):442-446 , 451.
[8]	Yuan H H, Dang J, Aoki T. Experimental study of the seismic behavior of partially concrete-filled steel bridge piers under bidirectional dynamic loading[J]. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2013, 42(15):2197-2216.
[9]	孙浩, 徐庆元, 吕飞, 等. 动力荷载下钢管混凝土墩柱抗震性能极限分析[J]. 铁道学报, 2023, 45(3):97-108.
[10]	Ding F X, Fang C J, Bai Y, et al. Mechanical performance of stirrupconfined concrete-filled steel tubular stub columns under axial loading[J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 98:146-157.
[11]	Ding F X, Lu D R, Bai Y, et al. Comparative study of square stirrup-confined concrete-filled steel tubular stub columns under axial loading[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2016, 98:443-453.
[12]	丁发兴, 刘怡岑, 吕飞, 等. 拉筋接触方式对高轴压比钢管混凝土柱抗震性能影响试验研究[J]. 建筑结构学报, 2021, 42(9):62-72.
[13]	Luo L, Ding F X, Wang L P, et al. Plastic hinge and seismic structural measures of terminal stirrup-confined rectangular CFT columns under low-cyclic load[J/OL]. Journal of Building Engineering, 2021, 34[2021-02-09]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101908.
[14]	Sun H, Ding F, Wang L P, et al. Experimental and analytical study of thin-walled stirrup-confined CFST piers under pseudo-static loading[J/OL]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2023, 210[2023-08-01]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.108047.
[15]	张艺欣. 冻融损伤RC柱及框架结构抗震性能研究[D]. 西安:西安建筑科技大学, 2020.
[16]	Kang X, Zhang M, Qin H, et al. Experimental and numerical study on the earthquake damage of spherical bearings for chinese highspeed railway bridge[J/OL]. Shock and Vibration, 2022, 2022[2022- 12-02]. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8304408.
[17]	Goto Y, Ebisawa T, Lu X L. Local buckling restraining behavior of thin-walled circular CFT columns under seismic loads[J/OL]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2014, 140(5)[2014-06-18]. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000904.
[18]	丁发兴, 吴霞, 向平, 等. 多类混凝土和各向同性岩石损伤比强度准则[J]. 土木工程学报, 2021, 54(2):50-64 , 73.
[19]	Ding F, Cao Z Y, Lyu F, et al. Practical design equations of the axial compressive capacity of circular CFST stub columns based on finite element model analysis incorporating constitutive models for highstrength materials[J/OL]. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 2022, 16[2022-06-22]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01115.
[20]	孙浩, 徐庆元, 丁发兴, 等. 循环荷载下钢管混凝土墩柱塑性大变形分析[J]. 铁道科学与工程学报, 2023, 20(3):973-985.
[21]	Johansson M, Gylltoft K. Structural behavior of slender circular steel-concrete composite columns under various means of load application[J]. Steel and Composite Structuresl, 2001, 1(4):393-410.
[22]	中华人民共和国交通运输部. 公路桥梁抗震设计规范:JTG/T 2231-01-2020[S]. 北京:人民交通出版社, 2020.
[23]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 建筑抗震设计规范:GB 50011-2010[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2010.