地震下高墩刚构桥桥台背土相互作用分析方法对比
CSTR:
作者:
基金项目:

交通运输部应用基础研究计划(2014319814210);重庆市基础与前沿研究计划(cstc2015jcyjA30014);山区桥梁与隧道工程国家重点实验室培育基地开放基金(CQSLBF-Y14-2);国家自然科学基金(51408089)


Comparison of analytical methods for the abutment-backfill interaction of a rigid frame bridge with high piers under seismic loading
Author:
  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献 [11]
  • | | | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    针对重力式U型桥台背土相互作用,结合现行抗震规范,提出了4种分析模型及其力学本构关系和计算式。采用非线性时程法对比研究了某在建高墩双薄壁连续刚构桥的桥台背土相互作用效应。结果表明:只有弹簧模型可以求得与精细模型基本一致的高阶弹性模态;在纵桥向,滚轴模型和支座模型的结果都比精细模型小,弹簧模型相对精细模型的计算误差最小,关键内力误差不超过20%;在横桥向,支座模型的内力最接近精细模型,而弹簧模型和滚轴模型的结果都偏保守;桥台刚度对关键地震内力的影响幅度低于10%,而桥台有效参与质量的影响幅度也低于15%。综合考虑分析精度和计算成本,弹簧模型在抗震设计中更值得推荐。

    Abstract:

    Four analytical models are proposed for examining the effect of gravity abutment-backfill interaction based on current seismic design codes from home and abroad. The mechanical constitutive relationships as well as computing formulas are presented. Nonlinear time history method is applied to comparatively study the effect of abutment-backfill interaction on a rigid frame continuous bridge with double thin-walled piers, which is currently under construction. The results showed that only the spring model can obtain the closest higher-order elastic modes to those of the refined model. In the longitudinal direction, the results from the roller model and the bearing model are both much smaller than that of the refined model. The error of the spring model, compared with the refined model, is the smallest with the critical internal force errors not exceeding 20%. In the transverse direction, the bearing model is the closest to the refined model in calculating the internal forces, and both the spring model and the roller model predict conservative results with respect to that of the refined model. The influences of the abutment stiffness and effective participating mass on the critical seismic internal forces are smaller than 10% and 15%, respectively. Hence by comprehensively taking the prediction accuracy and computational cost into consideration, the spring model is the most suitable choice in seismic design of bridges.

    参考文献
    [1] 中华人民共和国交通运输部.公路桥梁抗震设计细则:JTG/T B02-01-2008[S]. 北京:人民交通出版社,2008. Ministry of Transport of the People's Republic of China. Guidelines for seismic design of highway bridges:JTG/T B02-01-2008[S]. Beijing:China Communications Press, 2008. (in Chinese)
    [2] KIRUPAKARAN K. Soil-structure interaction studies for understanding the behavior of integral abutment bridges[D]. Oklahoma:University of Oklahoma, 2013.
    [3] CALTRANS S D C. Caltrans seismic design criteria version 1.7[S]. California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, California, 2013.
    [4] AASHTO. Guide specifications for LRFD seismic bridge design[S]. 2nd Edition, 2012 Interim revisions. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D C, 2012.
    [5] WILSON J C, TAN B S. Bridge abutment:Formulation of simple model for earthquake response analysis[J]. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 1990, 116(8):1828-1837.
    [6] MITOULIS S A. Seismic design of bridges with the participation of seat-type abutments[J]. Engineering Structures, 2012, 44(6):222-233.
    [7] PÉTURSSON H, KEROKOSKI O. Monitoring and analysis of abutment-soil interaction of two integral bridges[J]. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2013, 18(1):54-64.
    [8] DAVID T, FORTH J, YE J. Superstructure behavior of a stub-type integral abutment bridge[J]. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2014, 19(6):54-64.
    [9] 李悦,宋波,川岛一彦. 考虑土、上部结构和桥台相互作用的桥台抗震性能研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2009,28(6):1162-1168. LI Y, SONG B, KAWASHIMA K. Research on abutment aseismic performance considering interaction of soil, superstructure and abutment[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2009, 28(6):1162-1168. (in Chinese)
    [10] AVIRAM A, MACKIE K R, STOJADINOVIC B. Effect of abutment modeling on the seismic response of bridge structures[J]. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2008, 7(4):395-402.
    [11] MACKIE K, STOJADINOVIC B. Bridge abutment model sensitivity for probabilistic seismic demand evaluation[C]//Proceedings of the 3rd National Seismic Conference & Workshop on Bridges & Highways, Portland, Oregon, USA, 2002.
    相似文献
    引证文献
    网友评论
    网友评论
    分享到微博
    发 布
引用本文

徐略勤,乔万芝,何路平,向中富,刘津成.地震下高墩刚构桥桥台背土相互作用分析方法对比[J].土木与环境工程学报(中英文),2016,38(6):105-112. Xu Lueqin, Qiao Wanzhi, He Luping, Xiang Zhongfu, Liu Jincheng. Comparison of analytical methods for the abutment-backfill interaction of a rigid frame bridge with high piers under seismic loading[J]. JOURNAL OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING,2016,38(6):105-112.10.11835/j. issn.1674-4764.2016.06.014

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:1098
  • 下载次数: 1487
  • HTML阅读次数: 474
  • 引用次数: 0
历史
  • 收稿日期:2016-05-10
  • 在线发布日期: 2016-12-02
文章二维码