中美高层钢筋混凝土框架—核心筒结构抗震设计与评估

发布时间：2018-01-11 06:08

本文关键词：中美高层钢筋混凝土框架—核心筒结构抗震设计与评估　出处：《清华大学》2015年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：钢筋混凝土(RC)框架-核心筒结构是中美两国高层建筑广泛采用的结构形式之一,对比研究两国钢筋混凝土框架-核心筒结构的抗震设计方法以及抗震性能,对进一步完善我国高层建筑抗震设计具有重要的意义。本文系统研究了两组中美典型钢筋混凝土框架-核心筒对比案例的抗震设计及其抗震性能,主要成果如下:(1)总结归纳中美两国基于性能抗震设计规范的发展及现状,介绍了各现行基于性能抗震设计规范的主要成果,以及下一代基于性能抗震设计方法。(2)选取了两组中美高烈度区RC框架-核心筒结构的对比案例,完成了案例一之中的中国方案抗震设计,并详细对比了各组案例中美设计结果的差异。结果表明,在相同地震危险性条件下(案例一),由中国规范反应谱计算的设计地震作用较大,且中国规范对结构层间位移角的限制比较严格,二者共同导致中国方案的材料用量显著高于美国方案;在相同设计基底剪力条件下(案例二),美国方案部分构件的截面较大,剪力墙边缘构件的约束范围及边缘构件的总纵筋面积和箍筋体积配箍率均较大,并且框架柱的体积配箍率也比中国方案大,因而美国方案主要承重构件的材料用量略大于中国方案。(3)建立了案例结构的三维有限元模型,采用弹塑性时程分析方法评估了两组案例、四个结构在三种地震强度下的抗震性能,并研究了结构的抗地震倒塌能力。结果表明,在相同地震危险性条件下(案例一),中国方案的抗震性能及抗倒塌能力略好于美国方案;在相同设计基底剪力条件下(案例二),美国方案的抗震性能及抗倒塌能力均好于中国方案。(4)采用下一代基于性能抗震评估方法——FEMA P58方法评估对比了两组研究案例各结构方案在三种地震强度作用下的损失情况(修复费用、修复时间和人员伤亡)。结果表明,非结构构件的修复费用及修复工日均占总费用、总工日的绝大部分;除结构倒塌外,可能引起人员伤亡的易损集合主要是天花板和电梯。在相同地震危险性条件下(案例一),三种地震强度下,中国方案的修复费用均小于美国方案;在多遇地震和设防地震下,中国方案的修复工日小于美国方案,而在罕遇地震下中国方案修复工日略大。在相同设计基底剪力条件下(案例二),三种地震强度下,美国方案的修复费用和修复工日均小于中国方案。
[Abstract]:Reinforced concrete (RC) frame core tube structure is one of the most widely used structure form two high-rise buildings, the seismic design method of comparison of two reinforced concrete frame core wall structure and seismic performance, it has important significance to further improve the seismic design of high-rise buildings in our country. The seismic design and seismic performance of this system on the two group of typical reinforced concrete frame core tube between case, the main results are as follows: (1) summarizes the two performance based seismic design code development and the present situation, introduced the current main achievements performance based on seismic design code, as well as the next generation of performance based seismic design method. (2) the comparative case the two group of Sino US high intensity zone RC core structure, China scheme of seismic design completed in one case, and a detailed comparison of each case The difference between the design results. The results show that under the same seismic hazard conditions (one case), by China standard response spectrum seismic design calculation and specification of large Chinese structure interlayer displacement angle of more stringent restrictions, the two common cause China scheme the amount of material was significantly higher than that of America in the same design scheme; base shear conditions (case two), the program component of the larger, bound shear wall edge member and edge member longitudinal reinforcements and stirrups stirrup ratio are larger, and the column volume stirrup ratio than the Chinese scheme, so the United States scheme of the main load-bearing components of materials the amount is slightly larger than the Chinese scheme. (3) the establishment of a three-dimensional finite element model of case structure, the elastic-plastic time history analysis method to evaluate two groups of cases, four in three kinds of earthquake intensity structure under seismic performance, And to study the seismic collapse resistance of the structure. The results show that under the same seismic hazard conditions (one case), seismic performance and collapse resistant capacity Chinese scheme is slightly better than the U.S. program; in the same design base shear conditions (two cases), seismic performance and collapse resistant capacity were better than the U.S. Chinese. (4) the next generation of performance based seismic evaluation method, FEMA P58 method to assess the loss of contrast group two cases each model under three kinds of earthquake intensity under the action (repair cost, repair time and casualties). The results show that the repair costs and repair work of non structural components are the total cost of most of the total days; in addition to the structure collapse, may cause casualties of the vulnerability is mainly set ceiling and elevator. In the same seismic hazard conditions (one case), three kinds of earthquake intensity, China. The repair costs are less than the case; in the earthquake and the earthquake intensity, repair work Chinese scheme is less than the United States, and under rareearthquake Chinese scheme slightly. On the same day to repair the design base shear conditions (two cases), three kinds of earthquake intensity, the scheme and repair costs the repair work is less than China scheme.

【学位授予单位】：清华大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：TU973.17

【相似文献】