地震研究

近断层脉冲型地震动作用下BRB框剪结构减震性能设计研究

于建¹,赵立财^1,2,3

(1.中铁十九局集团第五工程有限公司,辽宁大连 116100; 2.中铁十九局集团第三工程有限公司,辽宁沈阳 110136; 3.台湾科技大学营建工程系,中国台湾台北 10672)

Research on Damping Performance Design of BRB Frame-shear Structure by Near-fault Pulse-like Ground motions

YU Jian¹,ZHAO Licai^1,2,3

(1.China Railway 19th Bureau Group Fifth Engineering Co.Ltd.,Dalian 116100,Liaoning,China)(2.China Railway 19th Bureau Group Third Engineering Co.Ltd.,Shenyang 110136,Liaoning,China)(3.Construction Engineering,Taiwan University of Science and Technology,Taipei 10672,Taiwan,China)

Keywords：pulse-like ground motion; frame-shear structure; buckling restrained braces; damping performance

DOI: 10.20015/j.cnki.ISSN1000-0666.2023.0051

备注

摘要

全文

图/表

参考文献

在脉冲型及非脉冲型地震动作用下,对典型框剪结构及6个屈曲约束支撑(BRB)减震结构进行弹塑性动力时程分析,主要基于层间位移角、结构损坏程度及结构耗能指标,对比分析不同BRB框剪结构的减震性能。结果表明:①由于抗侧刚度的提高,增设BRB能有效降低脉冲型地震动下框剪结构整体的层间位移角响应,使其满足规范限值要求,减震率最高达到52.1%; ②相比布置于外周,BRB布置于内框架能更有效减轻脉冲型地震动作用下结构上部楼层梁构件的严重损坏,从结构整体而言使梁构件严重损坏程度占比从71%降至45%以下,同时有效减轻了竖向构件的中度及严重损坏; ③相比非脉冲型地震动,脉冲型地震动削弱了减震结构中BRB的塑性耗能能力; ④BRB布置于内框架,且其初始刚度和屈服强度按更多楼层区域划分、屈服后刚度比取较小的减震方案的结构在脉冲型地震动下具有较高的减震性能。

Pulse-like ground motions exert extremely strong destructive force on building structures.The elastic-plastic dynamic time-history analysis of the typical frame-shear structure and several buckling restrained braces(BRB)shock-absorbing design structures subjected to the pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions is carried out.Based on the story drift ratio,the structural damage degree,and the structural energy consumption index,the seismic performance of different BRB frame-shear structures is compared and analyzed.The analysis shows that,due to the improvement of lateral stiffness,the added BRB can help to effectively reduce the story drift ratio response of the frame-shear structure subjected to the pulse-like ground motions,and make the structure meet the limit requirement in the Code.Instead of being arranged on the periphery,the BRB arranged in the inner frame of the shock-absorbing structure can help to reduce more effectively the serious damage to the upper-floor beam members of the structure subjected to the pulse-like ground motions,and reduce the proportion of the serious damage to the beam members from 71% to less than 45% as a whole,and effectively reduce the moderate- and serious-damage to the vertical members.Pulse-like ground motions can weaken the plastic energy-dissipation capacity of BRB in shock-absorbing structures while the non-pulse-like ground motions cannot.In general,when the structure is arranged with BRB in the inner frame,and the structure's initial stiffness and yield strength are divided by more floor zones,the smaller post-yield stiffness ratio would show higher damping performance subjected to the pulse-like ground motions.

引言
1 框架-剪力墙结构数值模型
2 近断层脉冲型地震动作用下框剪结构响应分析
3 BRB减震方案设计
4 BRB框剪结构的减震性能分析
5 结论

图1 高层框剪结构模型结构构件首层平面布置图<br/>Fig.1 Layout plan of the first floor of the high-rise,frame-shear structure

图1 高层框剪结构模型结构构件首层平面布置图
Fig.1 Layout plan of the first floor of the high-rise,frame-shear structure

图2 PERFORM-3D高层框剪结构数值模型三维图<br/>Fig.2 3D digram of PERFORM-3D numerical model of the high-rise,frame-shear structure

图2 PERFORM-3D高层框剪结构数值模型三维图
Fig.2 3D digram of PERFORM-3D numerical model of the high-rise,frame-shear structure

表1 PERFORM-3D与YJK模型总质量及模态分析结果对比<br/>Tab.1 Comparison of total mass and modal analysis results between the PERFORM-3D model and the YJK model

表1 PERFORM-3D与YJK模型总质量及模态分析结果对比
Tab.1 Comparison of total mass and modal analysis results between the PERFORM-3D model and the YJK model

表2 14条地震波基本信息<br/>Tab.2 Basic information of 14 pieces of seismic wave

表2 14条地震波基本信息
Tab.2 Basic information of 14 pieces of seismic wave

图3 14条地震波反应谱与规范谱对比<br/>Fig.3 Comparison of 14 earthquake-wave response spectra and the design response spectrum

图3 14条地震波反应谱与规范谱对比
Fig.3 Comparison of 14 earthquake-wave response spectra and the design response spectrum

图4 CHICHI_TCU076(a)和DARFIELD_LINCN23E(b)地震波加速度和速度时程曲线<br/>Fig.4 Time-history curves of acceleration and velocity of CHICHI_TCU076 earthquake wave(a)and DARFIELD_LINCN23E earthquake wave(b)

图4 CHICHI_TCU076(a)和DARFIELD_LINCN23E(b)地震波加速度和速度时程曲线
Fig.4 Time-history curves of acceleration and velocity of CHICHI_TCU076 earthquake wave(a)and DARFIELD_LINCN23E earthquake wave(b)

图5 脉冲型与非脉冲型地震作用下高层框剪结构X方向(a)、Y方向(b)层间位移角响应<br/>Fig.5 Story drift ratio response in X direction(a)and Y direction(b)of the high-rise,frame-shear structure by the pluse-like and non-pluse-like ground motions

图5 脉冲型与非脉冲型地震作用下高层框剪结构X方向(a)、Y方向(b)层间位移角响应
Fig.5 Story drift ratio response in X direction(a)and Y direction(b)of the high-rise,frame-shear structure by the pluse-like and non-pluse-like ground motions

图6 BRB安装示意图
Fig.6 BRB installation

图7 BRB布置于外周(a)和内框架(b)的三维示意图<br/>Fig.7 3D diagrams of the arrangement of BRB on the periphery(a)and in inner frame(b)

图7 BRB布置于外周(a)和内框架(b)的三维示意图
Fig.7 3D diagrams of the arrangement of BRB on the periphery(a)and in inner frame(b)

表3 6种减震方案的结构模型参数<br/>Tab.3 BRB parameters of 6 damping structure models

表3 6种减震方案的结构模型参数
Tab.3 BRB parameters of 6 damping structure models

表4 原结构与6个减震结构模型自振周期对比<br/>Tab.4 Comparison of periods between the original structure and six damping structure models(单位:s)

表4 原结构与6个减震结构模型自振周期对比
Tab.4 Comparison of periods between the original structure and six damping structure models(单位:s)

表5 原结构与6个减震结构模型的基底剪力平均值<br/>Tab.5 Average base shears of the original structure and six damping structure models

表5 原结构与6个减震结构模型的基底剪力平均值
Tab.5 Average base shears of the original structure and six damping structure models

表6 脉冲型和非脉冲型地震动作用下6个减震结构的层间位移角减震率<br/>Tab.6 Damping ratios of the story drift ratio by the pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions

表6 脉冲型和非脉冲型地震动作用下6个减震结构的层间位移角减震率
Tab.6 Damping ratios of the story drift ratio by the pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions

图8 脉冲型(a)和非脉冲型(b)地震动作用下原结构与6个减震结构模型层间位移角对比<br/>Fig.8 Comparison of story drift ratios the original structure and six damping structure models by the pulse-like(a)and non-pulse-like(b)ground motions

图8 脉冲型(a)和非脉冲型(b)地震动作用下原结构与6个减震结构模型层间位移角对比
Fig.8 Comparison of story drift ratios the original structure and six damping structure models by the pulse-like(a)and non-pulse-like(b)ground motions

表7 基于应变的结构构件损坏程度判别标准<br/>Tab.7 Criterion for damage degree of structural members based on strain

表7 基于应变的结构构件损坏程度判别标准
Tab.7 Criterion for damage degree of structural members based on strain

表8 脉冲型和非脉冲型地震动作用下原结构与6种减震结构模型的能量结果对比<br/>Tab.8 Comparison of the energy dissipation of the original structure and six damping structure models by the pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions

表8 脉冲型和非脉冲型地震动作用下原结构与6种减震结构模型的能量结果对比
Tab.8 Comparison of the energy dissipation of the original structure and six damping structure models by the pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions

图9 脉冲型和非脉冲型地震动作用下梁构件损坏程度占比(a)、梁构件严重损坏程度随楼层分布占比(b)和竖向构件损坏程度占比(c)<br/>Fig.9 The proportion of beam damage(a),beam components severely damaged with floor changes(b) and vertical component damage(c)by the pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions

图9 脉冲型和非脉冲型地震动作用下梁构件损坏程度占比(a)、梁构件严重损坏程度随楼层分布占比(b)和竖向构件损坏程度占比(c)
Fig.9 The proportion of beam damage(a),beam components severely damaged with floor changes(b) and vertical component damage(c)by the pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions