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
机构地区:[1]同济大学建筑工程系,上海市200092 [2]上海电力设计院有限公司,上海市200063
出 处:《电力建设》2014年第2期57-61,共5页Electric Power Construction
摘 要:通过分析对比中国、英国和欧洲输电线路相关规范关于单角钢输电塔构件轴心压杆稳定计算的规定,比较3本规范之间的不同.重点对比计算长细比、稳定系数和强度折减系数规定的不同及其对构件整体稳定计算的影响,并通过对90 kV转角塔和直线塔的工程实际计算,得出结论:按英国规范设计的塔质量与按中国规范设计的塔质量基本相同,而塔腿主材规格变大;而按欧洲规范设计的塔质量将比按中国规范设计的塔质量减轻6%~10%,而塔腿主材规格不变.This paper analyzes and compares the differences of stability calculation on axis pressure bar for angle steel transmission tower, which are relative standards of China, British and Europe, especially the calculations of slenderness ratio, stability factor, strength reduction factor, as well as their impacts on the overall stability calculation of components. Through the practical engineering calculations of 90 kV angle tower and tangent tower, it is showed that the weights of these transmission towers calculated in British standard are the same with those calculated in Chinese standard, while the sectional dimensions of leg members calculated in British are larger; on the other hand, the towers' weights calculated in European standard are 6% - 10% less than those calculated in Chinese standard, while the sectional dimensions of leg members are the same.
分 类 号:TM75[电气工程—电力系统及自动化]
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:3.143.247.141