拟静力法与时程分析法计算液化场地桩基地震响应的差异研究

详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

英文篇名：Differences between quasi-static method and time-history method in calculating seismic response of piles in liquefiable sites 作者：叶海霞 ; 王康达 ; 杨万勇 ; 童立元 ; 李洪江 英文作者：YE Haixia;WANG Kangda;YANG Wanyong;TONG Liyuan;LI Hongjiang;Nanjing SEU Geotechnical Engineering Technology Co.,Ltd.;Institute of Geotechnical Engineering,Southeast University;Jiangsu Construction Engineering Construction Drawing Audit Center; 关键词：抗震设计 ; 拟静力法 ; 时程分析法 ; 土层变位 ; 修正系数 英文关键词：seismic design;;quasi-static method;;time-history method;;soil displacement;;correction factor 中文刊名：ZRZH 英文刊名：Journal of Natural Disasters 机构：南京东大岩土工程技术有限公司;东南大学岩土工程研究所;江苏省建设工程施工图中心; 出版日期：2018-12-15 出版单位：自然灾害学报 年：2018 期：v.27 基金：国家自然科学基金项目(41572273,51878157);; 江苏省自然科学基金项目(BK20181282);; 江苏省建设系统科技计划项目资助(2014ZD66)~~ 语种：中文; 页：ZRZH201806021 页数：7 CN：06 ISSN：23-1324/X 分类号：168-174

摘要

桩基抗震设计与验算历来是工程建设中的难题,拟静力法与时程分析法是抗震设计中常用的两种计算方法。本文依托废黄河泛滥区江苏宿迁典型桩基工程实例,对比和分析了二者计算地震作用下桩基动态响应的异同。计算结果表明,二者的计算思路存在着明显差异,由于拟静力法未考虑土层变位对桩基的影响导致其计算结果偏小,而时程分析法因考虑了桩-土-结构之间的相互作用,其计算结果更加符合工程实际,但较拟静力法会消耗更多计算时间。根据时程分析法的计算结果,进一步对拟静力法的桩头弯矩计算公式进行了修正,并给出了修正系数。
        Seismic design and calculation of piles has always been a difficult problem for construction project. Quasi-static method and time-history method are two methods which are commonly used in seismic design. Based on a construction project in Suqian,this paper compared and analyzed differences between the two methods in calculating dynamic response of piles. It shows that the result of time-history method corresponds more to the reality,but the result of quasi-static method is relatively small due to the ignorance of soil displacement. However,the timehistory method would cost more time compared to quasi-static method. According to the result of time-history method,a correction factor of the formula of calculating bending moment on pile tip in quasi-static method is proposed.

引文

[1]冯永,谢飞亚,李旭光.地震荷载下边坡抗滑桩桩土机理的三维模拟分析[J].地震工程学报,2017(1):32-38.FENG Yong,XIE Feiya,LI Xuguang. Three dimensional simulation of pile-soil interaction mechanism of anti-slide piles under seismic loads[J].China Earthquake Engineering Journal,2017,39(1):32-38.(in Chinese)
    [2]黄明,付俊杰,陈福全,等.桩端荷载与地震耦合作用下溶洞顶板的破坏特征及安全厚度计算[J].岩土力学,2017,38(11):3154-3162.HUANG Ming,FU Junjie,CHEN Fuquan,et al. Damage characteristics of karst cave roof and its safety thickness calculation under the coupling effect of pile-tip load and seismic wave[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics,2017,38(11):3154-3162.(in Chinese)
    [3]李明广,陈锦剑,辛庆胜,等.考虑土体小应变特性的桩基动刚度拟静力计算方法[J].中国水利水电科学研究院学报,2015(3):217-221.LI Mingguang,CHEN Jinjian,XIN Qingsheng,et al. Quasi-static calculation method for dynamic stiffness of pile foundation considering the smallstrain stiffness behavior of soil[J]. Journal of China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research,2015(3):217-221.(in Chinese)
    [4]黄茂松,马昊,李森,等.软黏土中水平受荷桩的静力和循环p-y曲线[J].岩土工程学报,2017,39(增刊2):9-12.HUANG Maosong,MA Hao,LI Sen,et al. Static and cyclic p-y curves for laterally loaded piles in soft clay[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,2017,39(S2):9-12.(in Chinese)
    [5] Zhang C,White D,Randolph M. Centrifuge modeling of the cyclic lateral response of a rigid pile in soft clay[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,2010,137(7):717-29.
    [6] GB 50011—2010建筑抗震设计规范[S].北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2010.GB 50011—2010 Code for Seismic Design of Buildings[S]. Beijing:China Architecture&Building Press,2010.(in Chinese)
    [7] JGJ 94—2008建筑桩基技术规范[S].北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2008.JGJ 94—2008 Technical Code for Building Pile Foundations[S]. Beijing:China Architecture&Building Press,2008.(in Chinese)