基于时程分析法的综合管廊抗震性能研究

楚雄师范学院学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (3): 122-127.

基于时程分析法的综合管廊抗震性能研究

冯宇韬^1,2, 李维滨^1,2,*

1.东南大学混凝土及预应力混凝土结构教育部重点实验室,江苏南京 210096;
2.东南大学土木工程学院,江苏南京 210096

收稿日期:2022-05-13 出版日期:2023-05-20 发布日期:2023-08-07
通讯作者: * 李维滨（1963–）,男,博士,教授,博导,研究方向为结构工程、抗震。E-mail：liwbseu@vip.163.com
作者简介:冯宇韬（1995–）,男,博士研究生,研究方向为抗震。E-mail：281713764@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目（No. 51778143）,江苏高校优势学科建设工程（No.CE02-1-51）

Research on Seismic Performance of Utility Tunnel Based on Time-History Analysis

FENG Yutao^1,2, LI Weibin^1,2

1. Key Laboratory of Concrete and Prestressed Concrete Structures of Ministry of Education, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province 210096;
2. School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province 210096

Received:2022-05-13 Online:2023-05-20 Published:2023-08-07

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 提高地下综合管廊工程抗震能力对城市可持续发展意义重大。以实际工程为背景,建立了地下综合管廊的不同长度结构-土体三维模型,在模态分析的基础上,采用Rayleigh阻尼方法对模型进行时程分析。采用相关性热力图方法分析模型长宽比对模型计算精度的影响,研究了壁厚对结构力学性能的影响。研究结果表明：①当长宽比小于1∶1时,模型刚度较小,导致误差很大;模型长宽比为1∶1~10∶1时,分析结果比较稳定;当长宽比达到12∶1时,模态分析结果以刚性位移为主。②对于仅需要得到结构最大响应的分析模型,长宽比宜为1∶1。③结构应力的主要受到弯矩的控制,结构弯矩主应力最大区域集中于四周角点区域,在实际工程中应当加强角点区域。④随着壁厚的增加,结构所受地震荷载均有所增大,但同时最大主应力和层间位移角则有所减小,综合考虑安全经济两方面因素,壁厚宜选择250mm。

关键词: 综合管廊, 地下结构抗震, 模态分析, 时程分析法

Abstract: Improving the seismic capacity of the underground utility tunnel project is of great significance to the sustainable development of the city. Taking the actual engineering as the background, a three-dimensional structure-soil model of the underground utility tunnel with different lengths is established. Based on the modal analysis, the Rayleigh damping method is used to analyze the time history of the model. The correlation method is used to analyze the influence of the model's aspect ratio on the calculation accuracy of the model and the influence of the wall thickness on the mechanical properties of the structure is studied. The research results show that: 1) When the aspect ratio is less than 1:1, the stiffness of the model is small, resulting in large errors; when the aspect ratio of the model is 1:1~10:1, the analysis results are relatively stable; when the aspect ratio reaches 12:1, the modal analysis result is dominated by rigid displacement; 2) For the analysis model that only needs to obtain the maximum response of the structure, the aspect ratio should be 1:1; 3) The structural stress is mainly controlled by the bending moment; the largest area of the main stress of the structural bending moment is concentrated in the surrounding corner areas; in actual engineering, the corner areas should be strengthened; and 4) As the wall thickness increases, the seismic load on the structure increases, but at the same time the maximum principal stress and the inter-story displacement angle decrease. Taking into consideration both safety and economic factors, the wall thickness should be 250mm.

Key words: utility tunnel, seismic resistance of underground structure, modal analysis, time-history analysis

中图分类号:

TU352.11

冯宇韬, 李维滨. 基于时程分析法的综合管廊抗震性能研究[J]. 楚雄师范学院学报, 2023, 38(3): 122-127.

FENG Yutao, LI Weibin. Research on Seismic Performance of Utility Tunnel Based on Time-History Analysis[J]. Journal of Chuxiong Normal University, 2023, 38(3): 122-127.

参考文献

[1] 岳庆霞,李杰.地下综合管廊地震响应研究[J].同济大学学报(自然科学版). 2009,37(03):285-290.
YUE Q X, LI J.Research on utility tunnel seismic response[J]. Journal of Tongji University (Natural Science), 2009, 37(03):285-290.
[2] WAND T, TAN L, XIE S, et al. Development and applications of common utility tunnels in China[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2018, 76: 92-106.
[3] Hunt D V L, Nash D, Rogers C D F. Sustainable utility placement via Multi-Utility Tunnels[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2014, 39: 15-26.
[4] 钱七虎. 科学利用城市地下空间,建设和谐宜居、美丽城市[J.]隧道与地下工程灾害防治. 2019,1(01):1-7.
QIAN Q H.Scientific use of the urban underground space to construction the harmonious livable and beautiful city[J]. Hazard Control in Tunnelling and Underground Engineering, 2019,1(01):1-7.
[5] CHEN J, JIANG L, LI J, et al. Numerical simulation of shaking table test on utility tunnel under non-uniform earthquake excitation[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2012, 30:205-216.
[6] 蒋录珍,李杰,陈隽.非一致地震激励下综合管廊接头响应数值模拟[J].世界地震工程. 2015,31(02):101-107.
JIANG L Z, LI J, CHEN J.Numerical simulation of utility tunnel joint effects under non-uniform earthquake excitation[J]. World Earthquake Engineering, 2015,31(30): 205-216.
[7] 滨田政则. 地下结构抗震分析及防灾减灾措施[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2016.
BIN T Z Z. Seismic Analysis and Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Measures of Underground Structure [M]. Beijing: China Construction Industry Press, 2016.
[8] 住房和城乡建设部公告2018年第262号.GB/T51336-2018: 地下结构抗震设计标准[S].北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2018.
Ministry of housing and urban-rural development of the People's Republic of China ( MOHURD ). GB/T51336-2018: standard for seismic design of underground structures [S]. Beijing: China Construction Industry Press, 2018.
[9] 中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. GB50838-2015:城市综合管廊工程技术规范[S]. 北京:中国计划出版社,2015.
Ministry of housing and urban-rural development of the People's Republic of China ( MOHURD ). GB50838-2015:technical code for urban utility tunnel engineering [S].Beijing; China Planning Press,2015.
[10] 刘前,刘瑜,梁建文,等.基于反应位移法的复杂软土盾构隧道横断面抗震分析[J].地震工程学报. 2020,42(05):1217-1224.
LIU Q, LIU Y, LIANG J W, et al. Seismic transverse analysis of shield tunnels in complex soft soil through response deformation method[J]. China Earthquake Engineering Journal, 2020,42(05): 1217-1224.
[11] 刘恒,田敬博. 拱形断面地铁车站结构-地基系统地震反应时程分析[J].地震工程与工程振动,2013, 33(06):26-32.
LIU H, TIAN J B.Time history analysis of seismic responses of subway station structures with arched cross section[J]. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Dynamics, 2013, 33(06)：26-32.
[12] CHEN J, SHI X, LI J.Shaking table test of utility tunnel under non-uniform earthquake wave excitation[J]. Soll Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2010, 30(11): 1400-1416.
[13] 杨喻声,禹海涛,袁勇.地下结构抗震分析中若干土层模拟方法对比研究[J].防灾减灾工程学报,2019,39(02):244-249+257.
YANG Y S, YU H T, YUAN Y.comparative study on several soil ground simulation schemes in seismic analysis of underground structure [J]. Journal of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Engineering, 2019, 39(02)： 244-249+257.