中美欧砌体结构设计与鉴定标准对比研究

吴乐乐; 唐曹明; 罗开海; 程绍革; 黄世敏

doi:10.13204/j.gyjzG21092702

中美欧砌体结构设计与鉴定标准对比研究

doi: 10.13204/j.gyjzG21092702

吴乐乐¹,
唐曹明^1,2,
罗开海^1,2,
程绍革^1,2,
黄世敏^1,2

1. 中国建筑科学研究院, 北京 100013;
2. 住房和城乡建设部防灾研究中心, 北京 100013

详细信息

作者简介:
吴乐乐,男,1990年出生,工学博士。电子信箱:wulelecabrtech@163.com

计量
- 文章访问数: 132
- HTML全文浏览量: 26
- PDF下载量: 3
- 被引次数: 21
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-09-27
- 网络出版日期: 2022-09-05

Comparisons of Design and Assessment Standards of Masonry Structures in China, the US and Europe

1. China Academy of Building Research, Beijing 100013, China;
2. Research Center for Disaster Prevention, Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, Beijing 100013, China

摘要

摘要: 分别对中、美、欧的砌体结构设计规范和鉴定标准进行了对比分析。结果表明:美国鉴定标准中不进行强度折减,欧洲鉴定标准明确了分项系数调整方法;在抗震鉴定中,美、欧标准均采用了基于性能的抗震鉴定方法,抗震鉴定过程中考虑了认知水平的影响,调整了重力荷载代表值和抗震承载力的计算方法;中国规范中,鉴定与设计承载力极限状态方程相同,对既有建筑结构安全性鉴定来说偏保守。建议今后相关鉴定标准修订时,可引入基于性能的鉴定方法,并通过可靠性理论对承载力极限状态方程的分项系数进行修正。
- 砌体结构 /
- 安全性鉴定 /
- 分项系数 /
- 承载力极限状态方程
Abstract: The design and assessment standards of masonry structures in China, the US and Europe were briefly compared. The results showed that the US standard did not reduce the strength, and the European standard defined the adjustment method of partial coefficients. In the seismic assessment, the US and European standards adopted performance-based assessment methods, considering the influence of cognitive level, the representative values of gravity load and the calculation method of seismic bearing capacity were adjusted. The ultimate limit state function of bearing capacity in Chinese assessment and design standards were the same, which was conservative for the safety assessment of existing building structures. It was suggested to introduce the performance-based methods in the future revision of the Chinese assessment standards and modify the partial factors of the ultimate expression of bearing capacity according to the reliability theory.
- masonry structures /
- safety assessment /
- partial factor /
- the ultimate limit state functions of bearing capacity

HTML全文

参考文献(23)

[1]	ELLINGWOOD B R, RELIAELLINGWOOD B R. Reliability-based condition assessment assessment and LRFD for existing structures[J]. Structural Safety, 1996, 18(2/3):67-80.
[2]	ASP O, LAAKSONEN A. Background of target reliability levels for existing structures[J]. Safety, IABSE Symposium Report,2013, 100(5):252-259.
[3]	STEENBERGEN R D J M, SýKORA M, DIAMANTIDIS D, et al. Economic and human safety reliability levels for existing structures[J]. Structural Concrete,2015,16(3):323-332.
[4]	顾祥林,许勇,张伟平.既有建筑结构构件的安全性分析[J].建筑结构学报,2004,25(6):117-122.
[5]	黄炎生,邓浩,罗仁志.基于分项系数法的既有框架结构可靠性评估[J].华南理工大学学报,2008,36(12):34-37.
[6]	李英民,周小龙,罗文文,等.基于可靠性理论的既有结构楼面活荷载取值研究[J].建筑结构,2014,44(17):83-94.
[7]	The Masonry Standards Joint Committee. Building code requirements and specification for masonry structures:ACI 530[S]. USA:Amer Society of Civil Engineers, 2008.
[8]	American Society of Civil Engineers. Minimum Design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures:ASCE 7-16[S]. USA:American Society of Civil Engineers, 2016.
[9]	American Concrete Institute. Building code requirements for structural concrete:ACI 318-19[S]. USA:American Concrete Institute, 2019.
[10]	American Society of Civil Engineers. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing building:ASCE 41-17[S]. USA:American Society of Civil Engineers, 2017.
[11]	International Code Council. International existing building code:IEBC[S]. USA:International Code Council. International, INC, 2017.
[12]	The Standards Policy and Strategy Committee. Eurocode 6-Design of masonry structures-Part 1-1:general rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry structures:BS EN 1996-1-1:2005[S]. UK:British Standards Institution, 2005.
[13]	The Standards Policy and Strategy Committee. Basis of structural design:BS EN 1990:2002[S]. UK:British Standards Institution, 2002.
[14]	The Standards Policy and Strategy Committee. General rules, seismic action and rules for buildings:BS EN 1998-1:2004[S]. UK:British Standards Institution, 2004.
[15]	International Organization for Standardization. Bases for design of structures-assessment of existing structures:ISO 13822[S]. Switzerland:International Organization for Standardization, 2010.
[16]	Nederlands Norm. Assessment of existing structures in case of reconstruction and disapproval:Basic Rules:NEN 8700[S]. Nederland:NEN, 2011.
[17]	The Standards Policy and Strategy Committee. Eurocode 8-design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 3:assessment and retrofitting of buildings:BS EN1998-3:2005[S]. UK:British Standards Institution, 2005.
[18]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 砌体结构设计规范:GB 50003-2011[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2011.
[19]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 建筑结构可靠性设计统一标准:GB 50068-2018[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2018.
[20]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 建筑抗震鉴定标准:GB 50023-2009[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2011.
[21]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部.民用建筑可靠性鉴定标准:GB 50292-2015[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2015.
[22]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 建筑结构荷载规范:GB 50009-2012[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2012.
[23]	上海市建设和交通委员会. 既有建筑物结构检测与评定标准:DG/TJ08-804-2005[S]. 上海:同济大学出版社, 2005.

施引文献

期刊类型引用(14)

1.	张友顺. 型钢混凝土抗拉柱侧向挠度研究. 长江工程职业技术学院学报. 2022(01): 1-3+8 . 百度学术
2.	张鹏，覃宣盛，邓宇，桂金洋，花东升. 低周反复荷载下预应力型钢混凝土偏心受拉构件延性分析. 工程抗震与加固改造. 2022(03): 47-55+64 . 百度学术
3.	张鹏，花东升，邓宇. 低周反复荷载下预应力CFRP筋-型钢/混凝土偏拉构件抗裂性能试验. 复合材料学报. 2022(08): 4017-4027 . 百度学术
4.	邓宇，孙仁中，张鹏，李真真. 拉-弯-剪复合作用下型钢混凝土柱抗震性能研究及损伤量化分析. 振动与冲击. 2021(04): 195-204 . 百度学术
5.	张鹏，桂金洋，邓宇，沈民合，孙飞，赵晓冬. 偏心受拉作用下预应力CFRP筋-型钢混凝土构件抗裂试验. 复合材料学报. 2021(03): 920-931 . 百度学术
6.	张鹏，桂金洋，邓宇，覃宣盛，花东升. SRC偏心受拉构件抗震性能试验研究. 工程抗震与加固改造. 2021(01): 69-75 . 百度学术
7.	张鹏，李真真，邓宇，孙仁中. 型钢混凝土柱在拉-弯-剪复合受力下的延性分析. 混凝土. 2021(03): 48-53+58 . 百度学术
8.	张友顺，张友敬，武曦睿. 基于ANSYS的SRC柱抗拉性能分析. 长江工程职业技术学院学报. 2021(02): 1-4 . 百度学术
9.	史红伟，李慧，王晓磊. 不同型钢翼缘宽度和型钢位置对SRC组合板承载力影响有限元分析. 邯郸职业技术学院学报. 2021(02): 36-41 . 百度学术
10.	张友顺，王立明，张友敬. 型钢混凝土抗拉柱裂缝研究. 工程建设. 2021(10): 61-65 . 百度学术
11.	邓宇，武晓彤，张鹏. 预应力型钢混凝土柱偏心受拉性能试验研究. 建筑结构学报. 2019(05): 115-123 . 百度学术
12.	陈晓菁，程少彬. 钢骨混凝土拉弯工况下承载力计算研究. 广东土木与建筑. 2019(06): 24-26 . 百度学术
13.	邓宇，武晓彤，张鹏. 无黏结预应力型钢混凝土偏拉构件裂缝控制试验研究及计算方法. 工业建筑. 2019(08): 185-189+16 . 本站查看
14.	吴帮，王泽曦，申波，马克俭，赵庆阳，张晓辉，赵啸峰. 型钢混凝土组合空腹夹层板结构静动力性能分析. 建筑结构. 2017(04): 81-86 . 百度学术