考虑流固耦合作用的拱式渡槽隔震分析  

Analysis of seismic isolation effect of an arch aqueduct considering fluid-structure interaction

作　　者：韩钟骐 张兴凯 王海深 辜文兰 曾显志 苏宇坤[1] 潘鹏[1,4] HAN Zhongqi;ZHANG Xingkai;WANG Haishen;GU Wenlan;ZENG Xianzhi;SU Yukun;PAN Peng(Department of Civil Engineering,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China;Central Yunnan Water Diversion PhaseⅡEngineering Co.,Ltd.,Kunming 650000,China;Central Yunnan Water Diversion Engineering Co.,Ltd.,Kunming 650000,China;Key Laboratory of Civil Engineering Safety and Durability of Ministry of Education,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China)

机构地区：[1]清华大学土木工程系,北京100084 [2]云南省滇中引水二期工程有限公司,昆明650000 [3]云南省滇中引水工程有限公司,昆明650000 [4]清华大学土木工程安全与耐久教育部重点实验室,北京100084

出　　处：《东南大学学报(自然科学版)》2025年第1期194-202,共9页Journal of Southeast University:Natural Science Edition

基　　金：国家重点研发计划资助项目(2022YFC3803000);云南省重大科技专项计划资助项目(202102AF080001)。

摘　　要：拱式渡槽是引水工程中的重要输水结构形式,确保其地震安全是保障引水工程正常工作的关键,但目前对于拱式渡槽的抗震及减隔震性能研究较少。本文采用大型通用有限元软件ABAQUS,通过内置非线性单元与用户子程序单元准确模拟拱式渡槽结构中的流固耦合作用,考虑支座、止水带和钢筋混凝土的非线性行为,对比分析了拱式渡槽抗震及减隔震效果。针对盆式支座抗震渡槽(S1)、摩擦摆支座隔震渡槽(S2)、仅端跨布置黏滞阻尼器的摩擦摆隔震渡槽(S3)和全跨设置黏滞阻尼器的摩擦摆隔震渡槽(S4)四个方案,开展了地震弹塑性时程分析,对比了不同方案与不同水深情况下下部结构内力与止水带变形的差异。分析结果表明:S1方案下部结构在地震作用下易发生屈服,隔震方案(S2~S4)均未发生屈服,其横槽向拱座基底反力比S1小50%以上,顺槽向小13%以上。S1方案止水带顺槽向变形较大,槽身碰撞最严重,通过布置摩擦摆支座可减轻槽身碰撞,配置黏滞阻尼器可进一步控制支座及止水带变形。S4方案结构内力与止水带变形均较小,隔震性能最佳。Arch aqueduct is an important building form in water diversion engineering.It is important to en-sure the seismic safety of arch aqueduct in water diversion engineering.However,the researches in seismic re-sistance and isolation of arch aqueduct are rare.The seismic response of bearings,waterstops,concrete and fluid-structure interaction in aqueduct are modelling by ABAQUS.The nonlinear elements and user subroutine are used.To compare the seismic and isolation effects of arch aqueducts,four schemes are established:the aq-ueduct with pot-type elastomeric pad bearings(PEPBs)is named S1,the aqueduct with friction pendulum sys-tems(FPSs)is named S2,the aqueduct with FPSs and two viscous fluid dampers(VFDs)installed at aque-duct’s ends is named S3 and the aqueduct with FPSs and VFDs is named S4.The substructure and waterstops are compared in different scheme and depth of water through seismic elastoplastic time history analysis.The re-sults are as follows:the rebars in substructure of S1 undergo yielding,while the rebars in isolation schemes S2,S3 and S4 remain elastic under all conditions;the transverse forces of the base in isolation schemes are 50%smaller than those in S1 or less;the longitudinal forces of the base in isolation schemes are 13%smaller than those in S1 or less;the aqueduct’s body of S1 collides with each other and causes large deformation of the waterstops;the aqueduct’s body collisions can be reduced by installing FPSs;the bearings deformation can be reduced by installing VFDs.In summary,S4 has minimal force magnitude of sections and deformation magni-tude of the waterstops.S4 has the best seismic isolation performance.

关 键 词：渡槽 有限元模拟 隔震 流固耦合 

分 类 号：TV672.3[水利工程—水利水电工程] TV312