检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:陈隽[1,2,3] 叶艇[2,3] 彭怡欣[2,3]
机构地区:[1]同济大学土木工程防灾国家重点实验室,上海200092 [2]同济大学建筑工程系 [3]安徽省建筑设计研究院有限责任公司,上海200092
出 处:《振动与冲击》2012年第18期55-59,共5页Journal of Vibration and Shock
基 金:国家自然科学基金(51178338);上海市自然科学基金(11ZR1439800);光华同济大学土木工程学院基金资助
摘 要:通过混凝土板振动响应对比分析,比较了按步频、步行时间、双支撑阶段时长、双支撑阶段时长比例等4种方法拓展步行荷载时程与基准时程的差异。并分析了步频、步行时间和双支撑阶段时长比例对拓展时程的影响。结果表明:在有准确的步频或步行时间值时,按步频或步行时间拓展时程比较合理,否则,按双支撑阶段时长比例拓展时程比较合理。The effectiveness and applicability of four methods for expanding a single foot-falling load curve into a continuous time history curve were investigated by comparing the calculated vibration responses of a square concrete slab. The four methods were walking rate, gait period, double support time and double support time proportion. The influence of computation parameters on the four methods was also discussed. The results showed that when the exact value of walking rate or gait period is known, the expansion methods using the two parameters are better than others; otherwise, the expansion method based on double support time proportion is recommended.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.249