《钢结构与钢-混凝土组合结构设计方法》的理解与应用——矩形钢管混凝土柱
摘要：截面高宽比h/b大于2.0的矩形钢管混凝土柱具有较好的外观优势，能避免室内出现凸柱现象，随着实际应用日渐增多，对其的研究也越发深入。根据《隐式钢管混凝土结构技术规程》(T/CECS 951—2021)和《矩形钢管混凝土结构技术规程》(CECS 159:2004)两本规范给出的条文对构件的计算结果及构造要求进行了对比。计算对比包括截面塑性发展能力、单向压弯荷载作用下的截面强度及单向压弯荷载作用下的平面内稳定承载力等三个方面。计算结果将再与多组实际试验结果进行对比，根据两者计算偏差判断规范公式的合理性。构造方面主要对比截面尺寸、长细比、宽厚比、轴压比及强柱弱梁验算公式和免除强柱弱梁验算的条件。结果表明，相比于CECS 159:2004,T/CECS 951—2021更接近实际试验结果，计算公式更合理，构造要求规定更全面。
关键词：矩形钢管混凝土柱；压弯承载力；轴压比；长细比；宽厚比；强柱弱梁；
尊敬的用户，本篇文章需要2元，点击支付交费后阅读
限时优惠福利：领取VIP会员
全年期刊、VIP视频免费!
全年期刊、VIP视频免费!
参考文献[1] 付波，童根树，洪奇，等．考虑整体和构件几何缺陷的隐式框架-支撑结构动力弹塑性二阶效应分析[J]．建筑结构，2020,50(3):5-12．
[2] 付波，程志书，贾树华，等．矩形钢管混凝土柱单向压弯承载力计算方法对比研究[J]．建筑钢结构进展，2022,24(5):27-39,72．
[3] 矩形钢管混凝土结构技术规程:CECS 159∶2004[S]．北京:中国计划出版社，2004．
[4] 组合结构设计规范:JGJ 138-2016[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2016．
[5] 钢管混凝土结构技术规范:GB 50936-2014[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2014．
[6] ZHANG L,MAO C X,LI X G,et al.Experimental study on CFNRST members under combined compression and bending[J].Journal of Constructional Steel Research,2020,167:105950．
[7] 童根树．钢结构与钢-混凝土组合结构设计方法[M]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2022．
[8] 隐式钢管混凝土结构技术规程:T/CECS 951-2021[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2021．
[9] 陶忠，韦灼彬．方钢管混凝土压弯构件力学性能及承载力的研究[J]．工业建筑，1998,28(10):10-14．
[10] 曲秀姝．矩形钢管混凝土柱共同工作组合力学性能研究[D]．天津:天津大学，2011．
[11] LIU D.Behaviour of high strength rectangular concretefilled steel hollow section columns under eccentric loading[J].Thin-Walled Structures,2004,42(12):1631-1644．
[12] 高层建筑混凝土结构技术规程:JGJ 3-2010[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2011．
[13] 高层民用建筑钢结构技术规程:JGJ 99-2015[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2016．
[14] Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings:ANSI/AISC 341-16[S].American Institute of Steel Construction,2016．
[15] 钢结构设计标准:GB 50017-2017[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2018．
[16] 建筑抗震设计规范:GB 50011-2010[S].2016年版．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2016.
[2] 付波，程志书，贾树华，等．矩形钢管混凝土柱单向压弯承载力计算方法对比研究[J]．建筑钢结构进展，2022,24(5):27-39,72．
[3] 矩形钢管混凝土结构技术规程:CECS 159∶2004[S]．北京:中国计划出版社，2004．
[4] 组合结构设计规范:JGJ 138-2016[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2016．
[5] 钢管混凝土结构技术规范:GB 50936-2014[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2014．
[6] ZHANG L,MAO C X,LI X G,et al.Experimental study on CFNRST members under combined compression and bending[J].Journal of Constructional Steel Research,2020,167:105950．
[7] 童根树．钢结构与钢-混凝土组合结构设计方法[M]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2022．
[8] 隐式钢管混凝土结构技术规程:T/CECS 951-2021[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2021．
[9] 陶忠，韦灼彬．方钢管混凝土压弯构件力学性能及承载力的研究[J]．工业建筑，1998,28(10):10-14．
[10] 曲秀姝．矩形钢管混凝土柱共同工作组合力学性能研究[D]．天津:天津大学，2011．
[11] LIU D.Behaviour of high strength rectangular concretefilled steel hollow section columns under eccentric loading[J].Thin-Walled Structures,2004,42(12):1631-1644．
[12] 高层建筑混凝土结构技术规程:JGJ 3-2010[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2011．
[13] 高层民用建筑钢结构技术规程:JGJ 99-2015[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2016．
[14] Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings:ANSI/AISC 341-16[S].American Institute of Steel Construction,2016．
[15] 钢结构设计标准:GB 50017-2017[S]．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2018．
[16] 建筑抗震设计规范:GB 50011-2010[S].2016年版．北京:中国建筑工业出版社，2016.
Understanding and application of the Design method for steel structures and steel-concrete composite structures——rectangular concrete-filled steel tube column
Abstract: The rectangular concrete-filled steel tube column with the height-width ratio h/b greater than 2.0 has better appearance advantages and can avoid the phenomenon of convex in the room. With the increasing of practical applications, the relevant research is getting deeper. The calculation results and construction requirements of components were compared according to the provisions given in Technical specification for structures with deep concrete-filled steel tubular members(T/CECS 951—2021) and Technical specification for structures with concrete-filled rectangular steel tube members(CECS 159:2004). The calculation includes three aspects, which are the section plastic development capacity, the section strength under one-way compression and bending load, and in-plane stability bearing capacity under one-way compression and bending load. The calculation results will be compared with the actual test results and the rationality of the standard formula will be judged according to the calculation deviation. In terms of structure, the comparison includes the section size, slenderness ratio, width-to-thickness ratio, axial compression ratio, and the calculation and exemption of strong columns and weak beams. The results show that compared to CECS 159:2004, T/CECS 951—2021 is closer to the actual test results, the calculation formula is more reasonable, and the construction requirements are more comprehensive.
Keywords: rectangular concrete-filled steel tube column; compression-bending capacity; axial compression ratio; slenderness ratio; width-to-thickness ratio; strong column and weak beam
1377
0
0