三塔四跨悬索桥的静力性能研究
发布时间：2019-05-20 20:03
【摘要】：近些年来，为了适应跨越大型跨江工程以及跨海工程建设的需要，三塔四跨悬索桥方案在国内外大跨径桥梁的初步设计阶段被提了出来，现已作为鹦鹉洲长江大桥的建设方案投入到实际运用中。然而，对其结构特性的研究尚不完善，对其进行相关研究是客观实践的要求，也是桥梁理论发展的需要。 本文首先简要介绍了悬索桥和三塔悬索桥的发展以及悬索桥计算理论的发展。而后根据实例利用专业有限元分析软件Midas/civil建立了空间有限元模型，，分析对比了其不同工况下的静动力性能，并且对比了相同工况下三塔四跨悬索桥和三塔两跨悬索桥的静力性能。最后对比研究了不同加劲梁约束体系的静力性能的差异，提出了关于三塔四跨悬索桥加劲梁约束体系方案选择的建议。 三塔四跨悬索桥基础体系研究结果表明，外荷载作用下三塔四跨悬索桥的竖向最大位移发生在跨中靠近刚度较小的中塔位置，中塔变形以及受力较边塔要大得多；三塔四跨悬索桥的主缆设计中，恒载起了控制作用，而温度荷载对于索结构的设计不起控制作用。 三塔两跨悬索桥和三塔四跨悬索桥计算结果对比表明，两种桥的基本力学性能具有较好的一致性，即边跨的设置对主跨各构件受力及变形影响并不显著。但三塔四跨悬索桥边跨的设置，增大了边塔的塔顶位移和塔底最大弯矩，降低了中塔索鞍的抗滑安全系数，因此，三塔四跨悬索桥的设计中宜提高边塔的刚度。 对不同加劲梁约束体系的研究结果表明，三塔四跨悬索桥采用中塔设置纵向约束或中塔固结这两种约束体系可以有效地改善结构的静力性能，且造成的不利影响较小；在跨中设置刚性中央扣或加劲梁在中塔处铰接虽然能提高结构的刚度，但会提高活载作用下的主梁轴力增量，设计时应慎重使用；在边塔处或三塔处均约束加劲梁的纵向位移会显著地改善结构体系的变形，但对加劲梁的受力极其不利，故设计中不适宜采用。
[Abstract]:In recent years, in order to meet the needs of crossing large-scale cross-river projects and cross-sea projects, the scheme of three-tower and four-span suspension bridge has been put forward in the preliminary design stage of long-span bridges at home and abroad. At present, it has been put into practical application as the construction scheme of parrot Island Yangtze River Bridge. However, the study of its structural characteristics is not perfect, and the related research on it is not only the requirement of objective practice, but also the need of the development of bridge theory. In this paper, the development of suspension bridge and three-tower suspension bridge and the development of calculation theory of suspension bridge are briefly introduced. Then, according to the example, the spatial finite element model is established by using the professional finite element analysis software Midas/civil, and the static and dynamic performance of the model under different working conditions is analyzed and compared. The static performance of three-tower four-span suspension bridge and three-tower two-span suspension bridge under the same working conditions is compared. Finally, the differences of static performance of different stiffening beam restraint systems are compared and studied, and some suggestions on the scheme selection of stiffening beam constraint system of three-tower and four-span suspension bridge are put forward. The research results of the foundation system of the three-tower and four-span suspension bridge show that the vertical maximum displacement of the three-tower four-span suspension bridge under external load occurs in the middle of the span near the middle tower with less stiffness, and the deformation and force of the middle tower are much larger than those of the side tower. The constant load plays a controlling role in the design of the main cable of the three-tower and four-span suspension bridge, but the temperature load does not control the design of the cable structure. The comparison of the calculation results of three-tower two-span suspension bridge and three-tower four-span suspension bridge shows that the basic mechanical properties of the two bridges are in good agreement, that is, the setting of edge span has no significant effect on the stress and deformation of each component of the main span. However, the setting of the side span of the three-tower four-span suspension bridge increases the top displacement of the side tower and the maximum bending moment at the bottom of the tower, and reduces the anti-skid safety factor of the middle tower cable saddle. Therefore, the stiffness of the side tower should be improved in the design of the three-tower four-span suspension bridge. The results of different stiffening beam constraint systems show that the three-tower four-span suspension bridge with longitudinal constraints or medium tower consolidation can effectively improve the static performance of the structure, and the adverse effects are small. Setting rigid central buckle or stiffening beam in the middle of the span can improve the stiffness of the structure, but it will increase the axial force increment of the main beam under the action of live load, which should be used carefully in the design. The longitudinal displacement of the stiffened beam confined at the side tower or the three towers will significantly improve the deformation of the structural system, but it is extremely disadvantageous to the force of the stiffened beam, so it is not suitable to be used in the design.
【学位授予单位】：南京林业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：U448.25
本文编号：2481918
[Abstract]:In recent years, in order to meet the needs of crossing large-scale cross-river projects and cross-sea projects, the scheme of three-tower and four-span suspension bridge has been put forward in the preliminary design stage of long-span bridges at home and abroad. At present, it has been put into practical application as the construction scheme of parrot Island Yangtze River Bridge. However, the study of its structural characteristics is not perfect, and the related research on it is not only the requirement of objective practice, but also the need of the development of bridge theory. In this paper, the development of suspension bridge and three-tower suspension bridge and the development of calculation theory of suspension bridge are briefly introduced. Then, according to the example, the spatial finite element model is established by using the professional finite element analysis software Midas/civil, and the static and dynamic performance of the model under different working conditions is analyzed and compared. The static performance of three-tower four-span suspension bridge and three-tower two-span suspension bridge under the same working conditions is compared. Finally, the differences of static performance of different stiffening beam restraint systems are compared and studied, and some suggestions on the scheme selection of stiffening beam constraint system of three-tower and four-span suspension bridge are put forward. The research results of the foundation system of the three-tower and four-span suspension bridge show that the vertical maximum displacement of the three-tower four-span suspension bridge under external load occurs in the middle of the span near the middle tower with less stiffness, and the deformation and force of the middle tower are much larger than those of the side tower. The constant load plays a controlling role in the design of the main cable of the three-tower and four-span suspension bridge, but the temperature load does not control the design of the cable structure. The comparison of the calculation results of three-tower two-span suspension bridge and three-tower four-span suspension bridge shows that the basic mechanical properties of the two bridges are in good agreement, that is, the setting of edge span has no significant effect on the stress and deformation of each component of the main span. However, the setting of the side span of the three-tower four-span suspension bridge increases the top displacement of the side tower and the maximum bending moment at the bottom of the tower, and reduces the anti-skid safety factor of the middle tower cable saddle. Therefore, the stiffness of the side tower should be improved in the design of the three-tower four-span suspension bridge. The results of different stiffening beam constraint systems show that the three-tower four-span suspension bridge with longitudinal constraints or medium tower consolidation can effectively improve the static performance of the structure, and the adverse effects are small. Setting rigid central buckle or stiffening beam in the middle of the span can improve the stiffness of the structure, but it will increase the axial force increment of the main beam under the action of live load, which should be used carefully in the design. The longitudinal displacement of the stiffened beam confined at the side tower or the three towers will significantly improve the deformation of the structural system, but it is extremely disadvantageous to the force of the stiffened beam, so it is not suitable to be used in the design.
【学位授予单位】：南京林业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：U448.25
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 焦常科;李爱群;王浩;杨玉冬;吉林;;中央扣对三塔悬索桥地震反应的影响[J];东南大学学报(自然科学版);2010年01期
2 阮静;马如进;;三塔双跨悬索桥动力特性分析[J];中国工程科学;2010年08期
3 司义德;逄焕平;王建国;;不同约束形式对三塔悬索桥活载响应的影响[J];工程与建设;2010年03期
4 孙胜江;刘书伟;;特大跨悬索桥动力特性及参数分析[J];公路;2007年11期
5 张新军;赵孝平;;多塔悬索桥的研究进展[J];公路;2008年10期
6 王胜斌;朱宇;李建中;;马鞍山三塔悬索桥抗震性能研究[J];公路交通科技;2009年12期
7 金增洪;21世纪日本的超长桥梁[J];中外公路;2001年06期
8 朱艳;;四跨悬索桥的结构特征及其可应用性[J];世界桥梁;2006年01期
9 吉林;韩大章;;泰州长江大桥设计[J];现代交通技术;2008年03期
10 周世忠;中国悬索桥的发展[J];桥梁建设;2003年05期
本文编号：2481918
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/kejilunwen/jiaotonggongchenglunwen/2481918.html
