武山群众体育馆抗震性能分析与研究

发布时间：2018-04-11 06:57

本文选题：网架结构 + 反应谱法　；参考：《兰州交通大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：武山群众体育馆主馆和副馆屋盖由两个高低错落的独立平板网架结构组成,支承结构为一个横纵相连在一起的整体钢筋混凝土框架结构。由于体育馆支承结构的特点形成了楼板大开洞及斜梁,造成体育馆结构形式十分复杂,武山群众体育馆主馆和副馆屋盖高低错落又支承在同一结构使得该结构形式更为复杂,因此有必要对其进行较系统的抗震分析。本文通过Midas/gen有限元软件分别建立了主馆网架结构(刚性铰接支座和弹性支座)、支承结构单独分析有限元模型以及网架与下部支承结构整体有限元模型,采用反应谱方法和弹性时程分析方法分别对4个模型进行抗震性能分析,并将屋盖和支承结构单独分析结构与整体分析结构进行对比分析,得出如下结论:(1)主馆网架刚性铰接支座模型和弹性支座模型,自振周期基本相同,两者相差较小,前六阶的振型基本一致,反应谱分析中两种模型网架结构构件(上弦杆、下弦杆、腹杆)内力存在一定差别,在2%~13%范围之内,说明二者之间的差异较小。(2)支承结构的前两个振型为平动,第三振型为扭转振型,第一扭转振型周期与第一平动振型周期之比为0.54,小于0.85,满足抗震规范的要求。最大层间位移角X方向为1/587,Y方向为1/560,小于1/550,满足抗震设计规范的要求,说明支承结构刚度分析比较合理。(3)弹性时程分析中,支承结构的层剪力和层位移反应峰值与地震波峰值之间均存在一定的相位差,即不发生在同一时间,存在滞后的现象。(4)网架与下部支承结构整体模型和支承结构简化模型的前十个自振周期比较接近,表明支承结构简化模型在一定程度上较好的反映了网架的影响。(5)支承结构简化模型的层剪力和层位移均大于网架与下部支承结构整体模型的层剪力和层位移,两者的层剪力和层位移差值在2%~11%范围之内。支承结构简化模型计算结果普遍偏大,偏于安全。(6)支承结构的层剪力从上往下呈增大趋势,最大值出现在B1层,层位移从下往上呈增大趋势,最大值出现在F3层,层间位移满足抗震规范的限值要求,层间位移角满足1/550的抗震设计规范要求。
[Abstract]:The main and secondary pavilions of Wushan Mass Sports Museum are composed of two independent flat grid structures, and the supporting structure is a whole reinforced concrete frame structure connected horizontally and longitudinally.Because of the characteristics of the supporting structure of the gymnasium, the large opening of the floor and the inclined beam form the structure of the gymnasium, and the structure form of the stadium is very complicated, and the roof height and height of the main and deputy pavilions of the Wushan Mass Sports Museum are also supported in the same structure, which makes the structure form more complicated.Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a more systematic seismic analysis.In this paper, the Midas/gen finite element software is used to establish the space structure of the main pavilion (rigid hinged support and elastic support respectively). The supporting structure is separately analyzed by the finite element model and the overall finite element model of the space frame and the lower supporting structure.Response spectrum method and elastic time history analysis method are used to analyze the seismic behavior of the four models, and the roof and supporting structure are analyzed separately and compared with the whole analysis structure.The conclusions are as follows: (1) the natural vibration period of rigid hinge bearing model and elastic support model of the main space truss is basically the same, the difference between them is small, the first six modes are basically the same, and the two kinds of model grid structure members (upper chord) in response spectrum analysis,The internal force of the lower chord and the web bar is different to a certain extent. Within the range of 13%, the difference between them is smaller. The first two modes of the supporting structure are translational and the third mode is the torsional mode.The ratio of the first torsional mode period to the first translational mode period is 0.54, less than 0.85, which meets the requirements of seismic code.The maximum interstory displacement angle X direction is 1 / 560, less than 1 / 550, which meets the requirements of the seismic design code. It shows that the stiffness analysis of the supporting structure is more reasonable in the elastic time history analysis.There is a certain phase difference between the peak value of story shear force and layer displacement response and the peak of seismic wave of the supporting structure, that is, it does not occur at the same time.The phenomenon of lag is that the grid structure is close to the first ten natural vibration periods of the whole model of the lower supporting structure and the simplified model of the supporting structure.It shows that the simplified model of supporting structure reflects the influence of grid structure to a certain extent.) the story shear force and floor displacement of the simplified model of supporting structure are both larger than that of the whole model of space frame and lower supporting structure, and the layer displacement of the simplified model of supporting structure is larger than that of the whole model of space frame and lower supporting structure.The difference between the floor shear force and floor displacement is within the range of 2 / 11%.The calculation results of simplified model of supporting structure are generally larger, and the shear force of support structure is increasing from top to bottom, the maximum value appears in B1 layer, the layer displacement is increasing from bottom to up, and the maximum value appears in F3 layer.The interstory displacement meets the limit requirement of seismic code and the interstory displacement angle meets the requirement of 1 / 550 seismic design code.
【学位授予单位】：兰州交通大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：TU352.11

【参考文献】