【摘要】：近些年來，為了適應跨越大型跨江工程以及跨海工程建設的需要，三塔四跨懸索橋方案在國內外大跨徑橋梁的初步設計階段被提了出來，現已作為鸚鵡洲長江大橋的建設方案投入到實際運用中。然而，對其結構特性的研究尚不完善，對其進行相關研究是客觀實踐的要求，也是橋梁理論發(fā)展的需要。 本文首先簡要介紹了懸索橋和三塔懸索橋的發(fā)展以及懸索橋計算理論的發(fā)展。而后根據實例利用專業(yè)有限元分析軟件Midas/civil建立了空間有限元模型，，分析對比了其不同工況下的靜動力性能，并且對比了相同工況下三塔四跨懸索橋和三塔兩跨懸索橋的靜力性能。最后對比研究了不同加勁梁約束體系的靜力性能的差異，提出了關于三塔四跨懸索橋加勁梁約束體系方案選擇的建議。 三塔四跨懸索橋基礎體系研究結果表明，外荷載作用下三塔四跨懸索橋的豎向最大位移發(fā)生在跨中靠近剛度較小的中塔位置，中塔變形以及受力較邊塔要大得多；三塔四跨懸索橋的主纜設計中，恒載起了控制作用，而溫度荷載對于索結構的設計不起控制作用。 三塔兩跨懸索橋和三塔四跨懸索橋計算結果對比表明，兩種橋的基本力學性能具有較好的一致性，即邊跨的設置對主跨各構件受力及變形影響并不顯著。但三塔四跨懸索橋邊跨的設置，增大了邊塔的塔頂位移和塔底最大彎矩，降低了中塔索鞍的抗滑安全系數，因此，三塔四跨懸索橋的設計中宜提高邊塔的剛度。 對不同加勁梁約束體系的研究結果表明，三塔四跨懸索橋采用中塔設置縱向約束或中塔固結這兩種約束體系可以有效地改善結構的靜力性能，且造成的不利影響較��；在跨中設置剛性中央扣或加勁梁在中塔處鉸接雖然能提高結構的剛度，但會提高活載作用下的主梁軸力增量，設計時應慎重使用；在邊塔處或三塔處均約束加勁梁的縱向位移會顯著地改善結構體系的變形，但對加勁梁的受力極其不利，故設計中不適宜采用。
[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.
【學位授予單位】：南京林業(yè)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：U448.25

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 焦�？�;李愛群;王浩;楊玉冬;吉林;;中央扣對三塔懸索橋地震反應的影響[J];東南大學學報(自然科學版);2010年01期

2 阮靜;馬如進;;三塔雙跨懸索橋動力特性分析[J];中國工程科學;2010年08期

3 司義德;逄煥平;王建國;;不同約束形式對三塔懸索橋活載響應的影響[J];工程與建設;2010年03期

4 孫勝江;劉書偉;;特大跨懸索橋動力特性及參數分析[J];公路;2007年11期

5 張新軍;趙孝平;;多塔懸索橋的研究進展[J];公路;2008年10期

6 王勝斌;朱宇;李建中;;馬鞍山三塔懸索橋抗震性能研究[J];公路交通科技;2009年12期

7 金增洪;21世紀日本的超長橋梁[J];中外公路;2001年06期

8 朱艷;;四跨懸索橋的結構特征及其可應用性[J];世界橋梁;2006年01期

9 吉林;韓大章;;泰州長江大橋設計[J];現代交通技術;2008年03期

10 周世忠;中國懸索橋的發(fā)展[J];橋梁建設;2003年05期

本文編號：2481918