钢结构与钢筋混凝土结构抗震优势比较.doc

钢结构与钢筋混凝土结构抗震优势比较一、材料分析比较“地震力”是惯性力，混凝土结构质量大，惯性力大；钢结构质量 小，惯性小所以在相同的地震作用下，混凝土结构受到很大的力， 钢结构受到的力小这是外因内因，钢结构材料强度高，耗能强，是延性材料，有屈服台阶，通过 包络曲线来耗能而混凝土是脆性材料！钢结构所用的是钢材最低是用Q235，大部分的钢结构材料用的都 是Q345钢结构的阻尼比一般在之间，钢筋混凝土结构 的阻尼比一般在0.03 - 0.08之间阻尼比小，在地震力作用下，变 形大，因为钢结构韧性好，通过变形消耗地震能量，且容易恢复钢 结构较为柔软主要通过弹塑性变形吸收能量，较混凝土而言脆断的可 能性低得多，一般认为10层以下的钢结构建筑物基本不会发生倒塌 事故二、结构设计计算方式分析钢结构采用弹性理论设计的，其构件能够在地震小幅度变形后再恢 复；而钢筋混凝土结构是刚性理论设计的，不能变形，就不能吸收地 震的能量跨度越大越实惠，可回收，环保符合绿色建筑理念由于钢材塑性、韧性好，可有较大变形，能很好地承受动力荷载， 其次钢材匀质性和各向同性好，属理想弹性体，最符合一般工程力学的基本假定，因此，钢结构的抗震性能比钢筋混凝土结构的抗震性能 好。

三、模型分析荷载表格2层梁恒载2层楼板活 荷载2层楼板恒荷载屋顶板活荷载屋顶板横荷载屋顶梁恒载10KN/M23KN/M23KN/M23KN/M25KN/M25KN/M21、钢结构在荷载作用下的位移变形节点对象0 )09193.362E-04j -田节点位移-0.15746J00U0UT rans Rotn节点单元-C 0 5702.1U9E-042、混凝土在相同荷载作用下的位移变形节点对象0.003(^3.326E-04田节点位檢T rariF Rotn0.152550.0C节点单元2O.OOSi 93.326E-04PLQbj： 3 PI F|m;3U1 二.009以上结构为钢结构和钢筋混凝土结构模型，两种结构在相同的荷载 作用下，钢结构沿1、2、3轴的位移分别是0.00919mm、-0.00570 mm、 -15746 mm钢筋混凝土沿1、2、3轴的位移分别是0.00909mm、—0.00909 mm、-0.15255mm从模型位移分析里看，加上钢结构震后快速恢复的 特点，而混凝土结构属于刚性结构，变形后不可恢复原形，从而钢结 构在抗震的方面要优于钢筋混凝土结构四、综合分析从两种结构的材料分析和设计计算方式比较，模型分析比较，能很明确的知道钢结构建筑从抗震和结构稳定性来看，都优于钢筋混凝土结构建筑,这也是欧美发达国家50%以上的建筑为钢结构建筑的原因。

The Earthquake adva ntage of steel frame structure andcon crete structure1、 The material analysisSeismic force is the in ertia force, the quality of con crete structures is biggest tha n steel frame structure ;so the in ertia forces of con crete structures is biggest tha n the steel frame structures. in the same earthquake , con crete structure subject to con siderable force , the steel structure is smaller . this is external reason .steel frame structure have high strength steel materials , ductile materials, energy con sumpti on is fast , yield steps is ben efit to en ergy con sumptio n . But Con crete structure is a brittle material.Steel structure with the minimum of steel Q235, most of the steel materials used are of Q345 . The steel structure of the damp ing ratio is gen erally betwee n 0.01-0.02 , the damping of reinforced concrete structures than the average between 0.03-0.08 . The damping ratio smaller, the seismic force have large deformation , the steel toughness is good, the seismic energy consumption by deformation , so easy to restore . The steel structure is relatively soft ; absorb energy through elastic-plastic deformation than the con crete , the possibility of brittle fracture is much lower , gen erally below the 10-floor steel build ings do not collapse accide nt occurred .2、 The analysis comparison of two structural design calculationsSteel structure designed using the theory of elasticity its components can recovery after earthquake deformatio n , rein forced con crete structure is rigid desig n theory can not be deformed, it can not absorb the energy of the earthquake, so Span bigger and more affordable, recyclable , en vir onmen tal protectio n and meet the gree n build ing con cept。

Steel ductility, tough ness , large deformatio n , can well withsta nd the dyn amic loads, and Steel homogeneous and isotropic , is an ideal elastomerConform with basic assumption of the general engineering mechanics , so the seismic performanee of steel structures is better tha n con crete structures .3、Structural model analysisLoad formfirst floor beamdead loadfirst floorslab Live loadfirst floor slabdead loadroof floor slablive loadroof slabdead loadroof beamdead load10KN/M23KN/M23KN/M23KN/M25KN/M25KN/M2(1)、Displacement deformation of the steel structure in the loads(2)、Displacement deformation of the concrete structure in the same loadsThe above structure of steel and rein forced con Crete structural model Two structures in the same loads, The steel structure along the 1,2,3 axis displacement is: 0.00919mm、 -0.00570 mm、-15746 mm。

Rein forced con crete along the 1,2,3 axis displaceme nt is 0.00909mm、-0.00909 mm、-0.15255mmthe displacement analysis from the model analysis , and the characteristics of fast recovery in the steel structure after the earthquake, the concrete structure is a rigid structure, deformation can not restore after the prototype , steel structures is superior to rein forced con crete structure in seismic areaso4、 A comprehensive analysisMaterials analysis and design method of calculation model analysis and comparison , the two structures is very clear that we know the steel con structio n of seismic and structural stability , superior to rein forced con crete structures , which is the developed coun tries in Europe and the Un ited States more tha n 50 perce nt of the con structi on of steel o that is reason.。