十字形多腔组合轻型钢管混凝土柱轴压试验及承载力计算

AXIAL COMPRESSION TEST AND BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATION OF CROSS-SHAPED MULTI-CAVITY COMPOSITE LIGHT-WEIGHT CONCRETE-FILLED STEEL TUBULAR STOCKY COLUMNS

  • 摘要: 该文开展了7根试件的轴心受压试验,包括6根十字形多腔组合钢管混凝土短柱与1根普通十字形钢管混凝土短柱,重点考察了截面构造方式、宽厚比以及翼缘高厚比对构件受压性能的影响规律。结果表明:试件主要发生中下部局部鼓曲破坏;十字形多腔组合钢管混凝土柱的刚度、极限承载力和对核心混凝土的约束效果均优于含钢率相同的普通十字形钢管混凝土柱;试件的压缩刚度随着截面宽厚比的增加而减小;试件的极限承载力随着截面宽厚比的增加而减小,随着翼缘高厚比的增加而增加,但是增加幅度都是逐渐减小。研究表明:现行国内外规范规程对十字形多腔组合轻型钢管混凝土短柱轴压承载力的计算结果普遍偏保守。基于统一理论,该文提出了两种该柱型的简化轴压承载力计算公式。试验验证表明:计算结果与试验值吻合良好,平均相对误差在2%以内。

     

    Abstract: Axial compression tests were conducted on seven specimens, comprising six cross-shaped multi-cavity composite concrete-filled steel tubular (CFST) stub columns and one conventional cross-shaped CFST stub column. The investigation focused on examining the influence of section form, width-to-thickness ratio, and flange height-to-thickness ratio on the compressive performance of the specimens. The test results showed that the columns presented local buckling damage at their middle and lower parts. The rigidity, ultimate bearing capacity and restraint effects on core concrete of cross-shaped multi-cavity composite concrete-filled steel tubular columns were better than those of ordinary cross-shaped concrete-filled steel tubular columns with the same steel ratio. The compressive stiffness of the specimen decreased with the increase of section width-thickness ratio. The ultimate bearing capacity of specimens increased with the decrease of sectional width-thickness ratios, and with the increase of height-thickness ratio of flange, but the increase amplitude was gradually reduced. Studies have shown that current domestic and international codes generally yield conservative calculations for the axial compressive capacity of cross-shaped multi-cavity composite lightweight CFST stub columns. Based on the Unified Theory, this paper proposes two simplified formulas for calculating the axial compressive capacity of such columns. Experimental verification demonstrates that the calculated results agree well with experimental values, with an average relative error within 2%.

     

/

返回文章
返回