钢筋混凝土梁斜截面受剪承载力的对比分析  

COMPARATIVE ANANLYSIS OF SHEAR CAPACITY FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS

作　　者：王峥[1] 史庆轩[2] 

机构地区：[1]西安铁路职业技术学院土木工程系,西安710600 [2]西安建筑科技大学土木工程学院,西安710055

出　　处：《工业建筑》2013年第7期105-109,138,共6页Industrial Construction

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目(51178380;50978215);教育部高等学校博士学科点专项科研基金项目(20116120110004)

摘　　要：通过对比分析中国规范(GB 50010—2010)、美国规范(ACI318—08)和欧洲规范(EN 1992-1-1∶2004)无预应力有腹筋钢筋混凝土梁斜截面受剪承载力计算方法,研究混凝土强度、剪跨比和配箍率对抗剪强度的影响,根据国内外219个集中荷载作用下有腹筋简支梁受剪承载力的试验结果,对各国规范受剪承载力的计算值与试验值进行了对比分析;比较了各国最小、最大配箍率。结果表明:欧洲规范受剪承载力最大,中国居中,美国最小;欧洲规范最小配箍率大于中国和美国,美国最低。通过比较,得出中国规范尚有不足之处,需进一步完善。A comparison of shear capacity calculation method of non-prestressed reinforced concrete beams with stirrups was carried out among GB 50010 -2010, ACI318M -08 and EN1992 -1 -1：2004. The effects of the concrete strength, shear-span ratio, longitudinal reinforcement ratio on the shear strength were also Studied. According to domestic and interuationa 219 experimental results under pointload of the shear capacity of simply supported reinforced concrete beams, the calculation and experimental values of the standard shear capacity are compared and analysed among different countries. The minimum or maximum stirrup ratios were comparatively analyzed. The results show that shear capacity for reinforced concrete beams with stirrups designed according to European code is greater than Chinese code, but ACI code is the smallest. For the minimum ratios of stirrups, European code is greater than Chinese code and ACI code,ACI code is the smallest. According to the comparison, it is indicated that there are some unreasonable problems for shear capacity calculation in Chinese code, and the modification should be further adopted.

关 键 词：钢筋混凝土梁 受剪承载力 对比分析 最大配箍率 最小配箍率 

分 类 号：TU375.1[建筑科学—结构工程]