考虑吊杆系统性失效的多跨下承式系杆拱桥强健性设计

范冰辉; 孙绮; 陈宝春; 陈康明

doi:10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2025.02.013

考虑吊杆系统性失效的多跨下承式系杆拱桥强健性设计

doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2025.02.013

范冰辉¹,
孙绮²,
陈宝春^{1, 3, ,},
陈康明¹

1.
福州大学土木工程学院，福建福州 350108
2.
中南大学土木工程学院，湖南长沙 410075
3.
福建理工大学土木工程学院，福建福州 350118

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目 52078137

福建省自然科学基金项目 2024J01355

详细信息

作者简介:
范冰辉(1982-)，男，福建永泰人，福州大学副教授，工学博士，从事桥梁评定与维护研究

通讯作者:
陈宝春(1958-)，男，福建罗源人，福州大学教授，工学博士

中图分类号: U448.22
计量
- 文章访问数: 1427
- HTML全文浏览量: 372
- PDF下载量: 129
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2024-02-18
- 刊出日期: 2025-04-28

Robustness design of multi-span through tied-arch bridge considering systemic hanger failure

1.
School of Civil Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, Fujian, China
2.
School of Civil Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, Hunan, China
3.
School of Civil Engineering, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, Fujian, China

Funds:

National Natural Science Foundation of China 52078137

Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province 2024J01355

More Information

Corresponding author: CHEN Bao-chun (1958-), male, professor, PhD, baochunchen@fzu.edu.cn

Article Text (Baidu Translation)

摘要

摘要: 为研究吊杆系统性失效对下承式系杆拱桥产生的动力冲击效应，首先采用3种数值计算方法(LS-DYNA重启动法、生死单元法、全动力分析法)模拟吊杆断索效应，并与吊杆破断试验的动力响应数据进行对比，以选择最优的吊杆系统性失效模拟方法；其次，为加强多跨下承式系杆拱桥结构的强健性和防连续性垮塌性能，提出先简支后连续结构、刚性整体式系杆拱结构2种形式的结构体系，采用失效模拟方法分析对比了结构改造前后吊杆系统性失效下剩余结构的动力响应，并利用Simple-Johnson-Cook模型对桥梁破坏过程进行仿真，获取结构最终破坏形态；在此基础上，探讨了吊杆系统性失效下结构的连续性垮塌破坏机理。研究结果表明：LS-DYNA重启动法的模拟结果与试验数据误差较小，能够更好地模拟吊杆瞬时破坏时的工况；先简支后连续结构在吊杆系统性失效下桥道系的最终破坏损伤程度最小，传力路径更长，可以有效地延缓结构的破坏历程，减小发生连续性垮塌事故的风险，为交通疏散争取时间；而刚性整体式系杆拱结构由于初始刚度较高，易引发应力集中，导致桥道系局部过早失效。因此，先简支后连续结构可适用于新建的多跨下承式系杆拱桥的设计，或可通过在墩顶设置可更换式节点，从而将其便捷地应用于既有桥梁的强健性改造中。
- 桥梁工程 /
- 多跨下承式系杆拱桥 /
- 损伤失效模型 /
- 吊杆系统性失效 /
- 强健性设计 /
- 先简支后连续结构 /
- 刚性整体式系杆拱结构
Abstract: To investigate the dynamic impact of systemic hanger failure on the multi-span through tied-arch bridge, firstly, three numerical calculation methods were employed to simulate the effects of hanger breakage: the LS-DYNA restart method, the element birth and death method, and the full-dynamic analysis method. The simulated effects were then compared with dynamic response data of the hanger breakage test to identify the optimal method for modeling systemic hanger failure. Secondly, to enhance the robustness and prevent progressive collapse in multi-span through tied-arch bridge structures, two structural systems were proposed: the simply-supported continuous structure and the rigid integral tied-arch structure. The failure simulation method was employed to compare the dynamic response of the remaining structure under systemic hanger failure before and after structural transformation. Additionally, the Simple-Johnson-Cook model was utilized to simulate the damage process of the bridge and determine the final damage mode of the structure. On this basis, the progressive collapse and damage mechanism of the structure under systemic hanger failure was further investigated. Research results show that the error between the simulation results and the test data of the LS-DYNA restart method is relatively small, enabling better simulation of conditions when the hanger experiences instantaneous damage. For the simply-supported continuous structure, in the event of systemic hanger failure, the final damage extent of the bridge system is the lowest, and the force transmission path is extended, effectively delaying the damage process of the structure, reducing the risk of progressive collapse accidents, and providing additional time for traffic evacuation. However, for the rigid integral tied-arch structure, due to the high initial stiffness, stress concentration may occur, leading to premature local failure of the bridge system. Consequently, the simply-supported continuous structure can be utilized in the design of newly constructed multi-span through tied-arch bridges or readily applied to enhance the robustness of existing bridges through the installation of replaceable joints on pier tops.
- bridge engineering /
- multi-span through tied-arch bridge /
- damage and failure model /
- systemic hanger failure /
- robustness design /
- simply-supported continuous structure /
- rigid integral tied-arch structure

HTML全文

图 1 三种加载方法示意

Figure 1. Schematic of three loading methods

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 试验模型总体布置(单位: cm)

Figure 2. General layout of experimental model (unit: cm)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 断索试验装置

Figure 3. Test device of hanger breaking

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 有限元模型

Figure 4. Finite element model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 工况一：1^#吊杆发生破断

Figure 5. Condition 1: hanger 1^# breaks

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 工况二：6^#吊杆发生破断

Figure 6. Condition 2: hanger 6^# breaks

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 实桥照片

Figure 7. Photo of actual bridge

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 防连续性垮塌体系

Figure 8. Anti-progressive collapse systems

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 防连续性垮塌体系的有限元模型

Figure 9. Finite element models of anti-progressive collapse systems

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 改造前后拱肋竖向位移动力时程曲线对比

Figure 10. Comparison of time-history curves of arch rib vertical displacement before and after renovation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 改造前后桥道系竖向位移动力时程曲线对比

Figure 11. Comparison of dynamic time-history curves of bridge system displacement before and after renovation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 改造前后拱肋应力动力时程曲线对比

Figure 12. Comparison of dynamic time-history curves of arch rib stress before and after renovation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 改造前后桥道系应力动力时程曲线对比

Figure 13. Comparison of dynamic time-history curves of bridge system stress before and after reconstruction

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 两种体系的最终破坏形态

Figure 14. Final failure modes of two systems

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 吊杆失效下先简支后连续结构受力机制

Figure 15. Stress mechanism of simply-supported continuous structure under systematic failure of hangers

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 试验构件设计

Table 1. Test component design

构件	材料	截面尺寸
吊杆	Φ12.7预应力钢绞线	98.7 mm²
拱肋、横撑	Q235	Φ325×9 mm、 Φ168×6 mm
纵梁、横梁(内部钢筋)	C50(HRB400)	32 mm×18 mm、 46 mm×23 mm

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 试验数据与数值方法分析结果对比

Table 2. Comparison of experimental data and numerical analysis results

参数	1^#吊杆破断		6^#吊杆破断		最大误差/%(LS-DYNA重启动法/生死单元法/全动力分析法)
参数	试验数据	数值计算(LS-DYNA重启动法/生死单元法/全动力分析法)	试验数据	数值计算(LS-DYNA重启动法/生死单元法/全动力分析法)	最大误差/%(LS-DYNA重启动法/生死单元法/全动力分析法)
纵梁位移/mm	7.02	7.06/6.91/7.37	15.32	15.40/16.08/14.40	4.40/7.60/6.00
拱肋位移/mm	0.41	0.41/0.45/0.39	1.51	1.51/1.64/1.62	2.90/8.70/7.00
吊杆轴力/kN	35.68	31.20/29.51/36.61	38.14	37.60/34.49/36.23	12.50/21.00/7.90
纵梁应力/MPa	4.14	3.92/3.73/3.89	10.95	10.40/9.85/10.71	6.00/11.20/6.60
拱肋应力/MPa	-35.41	-34.56/-33.37/-37.15	-50.16	-51.34/-54.86/-53.55	6.00/11.20/6.60

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 材料参数

Table 3. Material properties

材料模型	参数	取值
*MAT_098	密度/(kg·m^-3)	7.8×10³
	弹性模量/MPa	2.06×10⁵
	泊松比	0.3
	破坏应力/MPa	420
	失效应变	0.002

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 改造前后对比分析

Table 4. Comparative analysis before and after transformation %

位置和指标	体系	左拱脚处	1/4桥向	1/2桥向	3/4桥向	右拱脚处
拱肋竖向位移	先简支后连续结构	-52.34	-32.24	-26.68	-22.93	-3.26
拱肋竖向位移	刚性整体式系杆拱结构	18.69	-10.25	-7.23	-7.41	-45.70
桥道系横梁竖向位移	先简支后连续结构	-9.02	7.40	15.32	-7.39	-41.81
桥道系横梁竖向位移	刚性整体式系杆拱结构	-0.82	-0.40	32.60	50.60	3.93
拱肋应力	先简支后连续结构	-75.50	34.50	-49.30	28.80	-54.10
拱肋应力	刚性整体式系杆拱结构	-1.47	0.88	0.61	-3.38	-1.46
桥道系应力	先简支后连续结构	-52.39	364.29	479.15	430.86	-77.97
桥道系应力	刚性整体式系杆拱结构	-6.83	-89.69	-259.00	-86.42	49.15

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(31)

[1]	SUN J P, TAN Z H, ZHANG J J, et al. Parameter sensitivity study on static and dynamic mechanical properties of the spatial y-shaped tied arch bridge[J]. International Journal of Steel Structures, 2023, 23(2): 458-479. doi: 10.1007/s13296-022-00705-z
[2]	ZHANG Z Y, LONG P H. Calculation and analysis of through concrete filled steel tubular tied arch bridge[J]. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2022, 2148(1): 012064. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2148/1/012064
[3]	FAN C C, ZHENG Y X, WANG B L, et al. Damage identification method for tied arch bridge suspender based on quasi-static displacement influence line[J]. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2023, 200: 110518. doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.110518
[4]	FAN B H, WANG G, CHEN B C, et al. Robustness-based condition evaluation framework for through tied-arch bridge[J]. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2023, 37(2): 06023001. doi: 10.1061/JPCFEV.CFENG-4048
[5]	绍兴市越城区政府办公室. 杭绍台高速城区段在建桥梁局部垮塌事件通报[EB/OL]. 浙江政务服务网, (2021-05-08)[2024-02-18]. http://www.sxyc.gov.cn/art/2021/5/11/art_1228990952_59033371.html. Yuecheng District Government Office of Shaoxing City. Local collapse event of bridge under construction in urban section of Hang-Shao-Tai Expressway[EB/OL]. Zhejiang Government Service Network, (2021-05-08)[2024-02-18]. http://www.sxyc.gov.cn/art/2021/5/11/art_1228990952_59033371.html.
[6]	FAN B H, SU J Z, Chen B C. Condition evaluation for through and half-through arch bridges considering robustness of suspended deck systems[J]. Advances in Structural Engineering, 2021, 24(5): 962-976. doi: 10.1177/1369433220945835
[7]	邓海斌, 陈文, 王晓明. 基于AP法的无背索斜拉桥强健性分析[J]. 石家庄铁道大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 29(3): 13-20. DENG Hai-bin, CHEN Wen, WANG Xiao-ming. Research on structural robustness for cable-stayed bridge without back-stays[J]. Journal of Shijiazhuang Tiedao University(Natural Science Edition), 2016, 29(3): 13-20.
[8]	FAN B H, WANG S G, CHEN B C. Dynamic effect of Tie-bar failure on through tied arch bridge[J]. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2020, 34(5): 04020089. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001492
[9]	沈锐利, 房凯, 官快. 单根吊索断裂时自锚式悬索桥强健性分析[J]. 桥梁建设, 2014, 44(6): 35-39. SHEN Rui-li, FANG Kai, GUAN Kuai. Robustness analysis of self-anchored suspension bridge with loss of a single sling[J]. Bridge Construction, 2014, 44(6): 35-39.
[10]	吴庆雄, 余印根, 陈宝春. 下承式钢管混凝土刚架系杆拱桥吊杆断裂动力分析[J]. 振动与冲击, 2014, 33(15): 144-149. WU Qing-xiong, YU Yin-gen, CHEN Bao-chun. Dynamic analysis for cable loss of a rigid-frame tied through concrete-filled steel tubular arch bridge[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2014, 33(15): 144-149.
[11]	SOPHIANOPOULOS D S, MICHALTSOS G T, CHOLEVAS H I. Static and dynamic responses of suspended arch bridges due to failure of cables[J]. Archive of Applied Mechanics, 2019, 89(11): 2281-2312. doi: 10.1007/s00419-019-01576-3
[12]	陈宝春, 刘君平. 世界拱桥建设与技术发展综述[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2020, 20(1): 27-41. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2020.01.002 CHEN Bao-chun, LIU Jun-ping. Review of construction and technology development of arch bridges in the world[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2020, 20(1): 27-41. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2020.01.002
[13]	陈宝春, 黄福云, 薛俊青, 等. 无伸缩缝桥梁研究综述[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2022, 22(5): 1-40. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2022.05.001 CHEN Bao-chun, HUANG Fu-yun, XUE Jun-qing, et al. Review on research of jointless bridges[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2022, 22(5): 1-40. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2022.05.001
[14]	郑小博, 赵煜, 贺拴海, 等. 双塔钢桁斜拉桥结构强健性计算方法[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2017, 17(5): 27-38. http://transport.gfscw.cn/article/id/0aacfb04-6864-496e-b9c5-34e4e6105ecd ZHENG Xiao-bo, ZHAO Yu, HE Shuan-hai, et al. Calculating method of structural robustness of double-tower cable-stayed bridge with steel truss girder[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2017, 17(5): 27-38. http://transport.gfscw.cn/article/id/0aacfb04-6864-496e-b9c5-34e4e6105ecd
[15]	BONTEMPI F. Elementary concepts of structural robustness of bridges and viaducts[J]. Journal of civil structural health monitoring, 2019, 9(5): 703-717.
[16]	陈宝春, 范冰辉, 余印根, 等. 钢管混凝土拱桥强健性设计[J]. 桥梁建设, 2016, 46(6): 88-93. CHEN Bao-chun, FAN Bing-hui, YU Yin-gen, et al. Robustness design of concrete-filled steel tube arch bridges[J]. Bridge Construction, 2016, 46(6): 88-93.
[17]	范冰辉, 陈宝春, 吴庆雄. 考虑强健性的中、下承式拱桥技术状况评定[J]. 桥梁建设, 2018, 48(5): 64-68. FAN Bing-hui, CHEN Bao-chun, WU Qing-xiong. Technical condition evaluation of half-through and through arch bridges considering robustness[J]. Bridge Construction, 2018, 48(5): 64-68.
[18]	陈康明, 吴庆雄, 罗健平, 等. 中、下承式拱桥悬吊桥面系强健性加固试验[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2022, 22(6): 95-113. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2022.06.006 CHEN Kang-ming, WU Qing-xiong, LUO Jian-ping, et al. Test on robustness strengthening for suspended deck system in half-through and through arch bridges[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2022, 22(6): 95-113. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2022.06.006
[19]	贺果蒙, 朱世峰, 刘昂, 等. 悬吊式桥面系吊杆拱桥的梁桥体系改造技术[J]. 桥梁建设, 2022, 52(6): 147-154. HE Guo-meng, ZHU Shi-feng, LIU Ang, et al. Transforming a suspended deck system to a continuous girder system for basket-handle arch bridge[J]. Bridge Construction, 2022, 52(6): 147-154.
[20]	WU W Q, WANG H, ZHU Y J. New hanger design approach of tied-arch bridge to enhance its robustness[J]. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 2018, 22(11): 4547-4554.
[21]	YUN G J, LIU C G. Nonlinear dynamic analysis of the deep-water bridge piers under combined earthquakes and wave actions[J]. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 261: 112076.
[22]	陈宜言, 汤国栋, 廖光明. 拱式桥梁破损安全吊杆及其系统研究[J]. 四川大学学报(工程科学版), 2008(1): 44-50. CHEN Yi-yan, TANG Guo-dong, LIAO Guang-ming. Study on failure safety suspender systems of arch bridges[J]. Journal of Sichuan University (Engineering Science Edition), 2008(1): 44-50.
[23]	ALEX S, LUKAS E, ANDREA F. Modelling progressive collapse of timber buildings[J]. Structures, 2024, 62: 106279.
[24]	STAROSSEK U. Progressive collapse of structures: nomenclature and procedures[J]. Structural Engineering International, 2006, 16(2): 113-117.
[25]	GHOSN M, MOSES F, FRANGOPOL D M. Redundancy and robustness of highway bridge superstructures and substructures[J]. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2010, 6(1/2): 257-278.
[26]	PÉREZ-CLAROS E, ANDRAWES B. Concrete bridge deck reinforced with textured and nontextured epoxy-coated bars[J]. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2023, 28(6): 04023023.
[27]	NAVABIAN N, BESKHYROUN S. Investigation on dynamic behaviour of a full-scale reinforced concrete bridge subjected to strong earthquakes using an automated analysis platform[J]. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2019, 15(4): 504-523.
[28]	郑颖人, 叶海林, 肖强, 等. 基于全动力分析法的地震边坡与隧道稳定性分析[J]. 防灾减灾工程学报, 2010, 30(增1): 279-285. ZHENG Ying-ren, YE Hai-lin, XIAO Qiang, et al. Stability analysis of seismic slopes and tunnels based on full dynamic analysis method[J]. Journal of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Engineering, 2010, 30(S1): 279-285.
[29]	陈康明, 吴庆雄, 罗健平, 等. 考虑吊杆断裂动力作用的钢管混凝土拱桥等效静力计算方法[J]. 土木工程学报, 2023, 56(6): 63-74. CHEN Kang-ming, WU Qing-xiong, LUO Jian-ping, et al. Equivalent static calculation method for concrete filled steel tubular arch bridges considering dynamic effect of suspenders fracture[J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2023, 56(6): 63-74.
[30]	FAN B H, WANG S G, CHEN B C. Robustness assessment framework for through tied-arch bridge considering tie-bar failure[J]. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2022, 27(5): 04022028.
[31]	钟波. 爆炸作用下钢筋混凝土结构损伤破坏与连续倒塌分析高效数值模型研究[D]. 天津: 天津大学, 2017. ZHONG Bo. Study on Effective Numerical model for damage and progressive collapse analysis of RC structures under blast loading[D]. Tianjin: Tianjin University, 2017.