本文關(guān)鍵詞： 空心板 T梁橋 校驗(yàn)系數(shù) 橋面鋪裝 防撞護(hù)欄　出處：《重慶交通大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：本文以跨徑20m的預(yù)應(yīng)力空心板橋和跨徑35m的預(yù)應(yīng)力T梁橋?yàn)橐劳?運(yùn)用Midas有限元軟件建立梁格模型進(jìn)行結(jié)構(gòu)計(jì)算,通過(guò)與荷載試驗(yàn)結(jié)果的對(duì)比分析,研究橋面鋪裝和防撞護(hù)欄對(duì)上述兩類梁橋靜載試驗(yàn)校驗(yàn)系數(shù)的影響。分別建立了以下四個(gè)模型:模型一考慮10cm的混凝土現(xiàn)澆層參與結(jié)構(gòu)受力,模型二把鋪裝層作為外加荷載施加,模型三考慮防撞護(hù)欄參與結(jié)構(gòu)受力,模型四把防撞護(hù)欄作為外加荷載施加模擬。通過(guò)實(shí)測(cè)數(shù)據(jù)和計(jì)算結(jié)果的對(duì)比分析,得出了以下主要結(jié)論:(1)對(duì)跨徑20m橋?qū)?m的6塊預(yù)應(yīng)力空心板橋,模型一的應(yīng)變校驗(yàn)系數(shù)范圍為0.72~0.78,撓度校驗(yàn)系數(shù)范圍為0.91~0.96,計(jì)算值較模型二和模型四更接近實(shí)測(cè)值,更能反應(yīng)橋梁的實(shí)際受力狀況,而模型三的部分梁板的校驗(yàn)系數(shù)大于1.0,因此,模型一的建模方式更合理。(2)對(duì)跨徑35m橋?qū)?m的4片預(yù)應(yīng)力T梁橋,模型一的應(yīng)變校驗(yàn)系數(shù)范圍為0.74~0.91,撓度校驗(yàn)系數(shù)范圍為0.82~0.94,計(jì)算值較模型二和模型四更接近實(shí)測(cè)值,更能反應(yīng)橋梁的實(shí)際受力狀況,而模型三的部分梁板的校驗(yàn)系數(shù)大于1.0,因此,模型一的建模方式更合理。(3)通過(guò)與7塊板橋?qū)?.25m及8塊板橋?qū)?0.5m的空心板橋的對(duì)比分析發(fā)現(xiàn),這兩個(gè)橋?qū)挼男ｒ?yàn)系數(shù)的變化趨勢(shì)與6塊板橋?qū)?m基本一致。(4)通過(guò)與5片梁橋?qū)?0.06m及6片梁橋?qū)?2.12m的T梁橋的對(duì)比分析發(fā)現(xiàn),這兩個(gè)橋?qū)挼男ｒ?yàn)系數(shù)的變化趨勢(shì)與4片梁橋?qū)?m基本一致。(5)考慮防撞護(hù)欄全部參與受力的模型三,其撓度和應(yīng)變的校驗(yàn)系數(shù)多數(shù)大于1.0,不能采用這種建模方式。
[Abstract]:Based on the prestressed hollow slab bridge with span of 20m and the prestressed T-beam bridge with span of 35m, the structure calculation is carried out by using Midas finite element software. The results are compared with the load test results. This paper studies the influence of deck pavement and collision barrier on the check coefficient of static load test of these two kinds of beam bridges. The following four models are established respectively: model 1. The concrete cast-in-situ layer of 10cm is considered to participate in the structural stress. The second model takes the pavement as the applied load, the third considers the anti-collision barrier to participate in the structural force, and the model four takes the anti-collision barrier as the external load to be simulated. The comparison and analysis of the measured data and the calculated results are carried out. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) for 6 prestressed hollow slab bridges with span 20m bridge width of 8m, the strain check coefficient of model one is 0.72m0.78. The range of deflection check coefficient is 0.91g 0.96. The calculated value is closer to the measured value than the model two and model four, and can reflect the actual force condition of the bridge more effectively. However, the check coefficient of some beams and slabs in model 3 is greater than 1.0, therefore, the modeling method of model one is more reasonable. 2) for 4 prestressed T-beam bridges with a span of 35 m and a width of 8 m. The range of strain check coefficient and deflection check coefficient of model one is 0.74 / 0.91 and the range of deflection check coefficient is 0.82n0.94, which is closer to the measured value than that of model two and model four. It is more able to reflect the actual stress of the bridge, and the check coefficient of some beams and plates of model 3 is greater than 1.0, so. Model 1 is more reasonable. (3) by comparing with 7 slab bridges with 9.25m width and 8 hollow slab bridges with 10.5m width. The change trend of the check coefficient of the two bridges is basically the same as that of the six slab bridges with a width of 8m. 4) through the comparison and analysis of the T-beam bridges with the width of 5 beam bridges 10.06 m and 6 beams bridge width 12.12 m. The change trend of the check coefficient of the two bridges is basically the same as that of the four beam bridges with a width of 8m. (5) the model 3 which takes all the anti-collision guardrail into account, the check coefficients of deflection and strain are mostly greater than 1.0. This method of modeling cannot be used.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：U446.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 于明策;李金亮;;基于MIDAS應(yīng)變與撓度校驗(yàn)系數(shù)的對(duì)比分析[J];現(xiàn)代交通技術(shù);2013年06期

2 夏超;黃福偉;張曉東;楊勝;;20m預(yù)應(yīng)力混凝土簡(jiǎn)支空心板橋的結(jié)構(gòu)校驗(yàn)系數(shù)統(tǒng)計(jì)分析[J];西南科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2013年04期

3 李勝;魏科;;荷載橫向分布系數(shù)分析與梁格分析的比較[J];公路交通科技(應(yīng)用技術(shù)版);2012年10期

4 石雄偉;王開(kāi)明;蔣姣;柯亮亮;馬毓泉;雷丹;;基于新舊設(shè)計(jì)規(guī)范的橋梁荷載試驗(yàn)加載效率研究[J];公路交通科技(應(yīng)用技術(shù)版);2012年09期

5 許國(guó)平;;空心板橋橋面鋪裝對(duì)主梁受力性能影響分析[J];公路工程;2012年03期

6 李紅鴿;;基于校驗(yàn)系數(shù)的橋梁承載能力評(píng)估標(biāo)準(zhǔn)研究[J];國(guó)防交通工程與技術(shù);2012年02期

7 趙俊偉;;預(yù)應(yīng)力混凝土簡(jiǎn)支空心板梁橋靜載校驗(yàn)系數(shù)分析[J];內(nèi)蒙古公路與運(yùn)輸;2012年01期

8 張建春;劉利軍;;梁橋荷載試驗(yàn)評(píng)定結(jié)果的影響因素分析[J];建材世界;2011年03期

9 劉又佳;季云峰;;淺析荷載試驗(yàn)校驗(yàn)系數(shù)[J];城市道橋與防洪;2011年03期

10 吳穎恒;張俊平;;橋面鋪裝對(duì)簡(jiǎn)支空心板橋受力行為的影響研究[J];廣州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(自然科學(xué)版);2011年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1493806