中美公路旧桥承载力评定方法的比较

发布时间：2018-04-29 12:43

本文选题：承载能力 + 评定　；参考：《长沙理工大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：目前世界上最常用的评定方法为基于结构分析的桥梁承载力评定法,且其评定结果较为准确且评定成本相对较低。同时,由于车辆超载及长期服役引起的老化等原因,不少桥梁结构出现病害,破损,甚至发生较严重的质量事故,公路桥梁的承载能力鉴定及安全问题不容忽视。根据1988年中国交通运输部门颁布的《公路旧桥承载能力评定方法》(试行)阐述了关于旧桥承载力评定推荐方法,该法被称为试行法并曾作为我国桥梁承载力评定规范,指导我国的桥梁承载力评估工作。而后,随着桥梁检测技术的不断发展,交通部又颁布了《公路桥梁承载能力检测评定规程》作为新的公路旧桥评估规范法。1994年,美国AASHTO《桥梁状况评估手册》提出了基于荷载因子设计法的评定方法,而后又与2011年出版了《桥梁评估手册》中,提出了荷载抗力系数评估法用于美国各州的桥梁评定。本文根据研究中国和美国两国的桥梁承载能力评定理论,通过比较其评定方法在评定程序步骤、评定公式表达、评定参数的取值及桥梁评定分级等方面的异同,并对国内三座实桥进行检测、数据采集及理论分析,并指出中美桥梁承载能力评定结果的异同。将中国规范中的试行法与JJTG法对比研究表明：后者的桥梁承载能力评定数值总体上要小于前者,说明新的规程将有利于桥梁安全保证,但亦将增加维修养护成本。将美国的LRFR和LFR方法对比研究表明,LRFR评定法比LFR法桥梁评价结果数值,下降幅度在17%-44%之间。美国桥梁承载力评价趋势与中国一致,亦将更加追求桥梁的安全性。采用中国JTG法和美国LRFR规范方法计算的桥梁承载能力评定结果较为吻合,但比较而言,中国方法估算的桥梁承载能力值较美国法偏高,美国法桥梁评定有着更为严格的评估过程。最后,本文对中美桥梁评估理论方法和应用研究方面存在的问题和有待进一步深入研究方向进行几点分析。
[Abstract]:At present, the most commonly used assessment method in the world is the bridge bearing capacity assessment method based on structural analysis, and its evaluation results are relatively accurate and the evaluation cost is relatively low. At the same time, due to the aging caused by vehicle overload and long-term service, many bridge structures appear diseases, breakage, and even serious quality accidents, so the identification of the bearing capacity and safety problems of highway bridges should not be ignored. According to the "method for evaluating the bearing capacity of Old Highway Bridges" promulgated by China's Communications and Transportation Department in 1988 (for trial implementation), this paper expounds the recommended method for evaluating the bearing capacity of old bridges. This method is called the trial method and was used as the criterion for the assessment of the bearing capacity of bridges in China. To guide the assessment of bridge bearing capacity in China. Then, with the continuous development of bridge detection technology, the Ministry of Communications issued the "Highway Bridge bearing capacity Test and Evaluation procedures" as a new highway old bridge evaluation code. 1994, The evaluation method based on load factor design method was proposed by AASHTO in USA, and the load resistance coefficient evaluation method was put forward in the "Bridge Evaluation Manual" published in 2011. Based on the study of the theory of bridge bearing capacity assessment in China and the United States, this paper compares the differences and similarities of the evaluation methods in the evaluation procedure, the expression of the evaluation formula, the value of the evaluation parameters and the bridge evaluation classification. Three real bridges in China are tested, data collected and analyzed theoretically, and the similarities and differences of the evaluation results of bridge bearing capacity between China and America are pointed out. The comparison between the trial method in Chinese code and the JJTG method shows that the evaluation value of bridge bearing capacity of the latter is generally smaller than that of the former, indicating that the new regulation will be beneficial to the bridge safety assurance, but will also increase the maintenance and maintenance cost. A comparative study of LRFR and LFR methods in the United States shows that the value of LFR bridge evaluation method decreases by between 17% and 44%. The evaluation trend of bridge bearing capacity in the United States is consistent with that in China, and the safety of bridges will be pursued more. The evaluation results of the bridge bearing capacity calculated by the Chinese JTG method and the American LRFR code method are in good agreement, but compared with the American method, the bridge bearing capacity estimated by the Chinese method is higher than that of the American method. There is a more rigorous assessment process for bridge evaluation in the United States. Finally, this paper analyzes the problems in the theoretical methods and applied research of bridge evaluation in China and America, and the further research direction.
【学位授予单位】：长沙理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：U446

【参考文献】