請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/83214
標題: | 含鋼板阻尼器構架最佳化設計與軟體 Optimal Design of Steel Panel Damper in MRF and Optimal Design Software |
其他標題: | Optimal Design of Steel Panel Damper in MRF and Optimal Design Software |
作者: | 詹也影 Ye-Ying Jan |
指導教授: | 蔡克銓 Keh-Chyuan Tsai |
關鍵字: | 鋼板阻尼器,含鋼板阻尼器構架,耐震設計,最佳化,自動化設計,軟體開發,雲端計算, Steel Panel Damper,SPD-MRF,Seismic Design,Optimization,Automatic Design,Software Development,Web Service, |
出版年 : | 2022 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 三段式鋼板阻尼器(Steel Panel Damper, SPD)設置於抗彎構架(Moment-Resisting Frame, MRF)中能增加構架的勁度、強度與消能能力。SPD中間為非彈性核心段(Inelastic Core, IC),上下兩段為彈性連接段(Elastic Joint, EJ),當構架受地震力產生層間位移時,藉由核心段反覆剪力塑性變型消能。在核心段配置加勁板,能有效延緩鋼板剪力挫曲,使SPD穩定消能。
傳統以試誤法進行SPD-MRF尺寸設計,無法保證設計出最經濟的尺寸,因此前人提出十字子構架模型,在給定設計SPD降伏強度下,滿足所有耐震設計以及側向勁度為條件,找出最少用鋼量的尺寸。本研究改良前人使用的混合式演算法,使用SLSQP非線性規劃法,將最佳化計算時間減少約96%,只須1秒以內即可得到結果。此即時計算的效率有助於將程式推廣給工程師使用,因此作者將最佳化程式開發成雲端服務,工程師透過網頁輸入欲設計的構架資訊,便可取得尺寸最佳化結果。本研究所開發的軟體可設計MRF含單、雙十字型SPD與梁接之子構架,上下SPD可具不同降伏強度,SPD可不在中心(單十字型)或三等分點(雙十字) 位置的偏心設計,並可給予尺寸的上下界限制。 本研究最佳化的子構架例包含單十字型以及雙十字型。分別進行設計滿足耐震設計的最小用鋼量尺寸的「基本設計」,以及以此為基準1.5倍勁度的「1.5×K設計」。「基本設計」中,單十字構架的SPD最佳化深度約在700~1200mm,而雙十字構架單一支SPD則是500~800mm,可視為以兩根較小的SPD換取梁中間的立面使用空間。而單十字構架的最佳化邊界梁深度在700~1100mm,雙十字構架則是600~800mm,雙十字構架可得比單十字構架較淺的梁設計,尤其是在大噸位SPD(1500kN)情況下,梁深可少300mm。欲將單、雙十字構架從「基本設計」提升勁度到「1.5×K設計」時,尺寸比例增加最多的前三名是:連接段腹板厚、邊界量深、邊界梁腹板厚,增加上述三種構件尺寸對提升子構架勁度較有效率。 本研究針對垂直載重效應、上下SPD設計強度不同、偏心設計以及已知邊界梁尺寸情況對SPD-MRF構架影響作探討。當考慮15%的垂直載重效應係數,對邊界梁重量及尺寸影響不大,建議在使用最佳化計算時可考慮0%至15%的垂直載重效應係數,可在增加少量成本的情況下考慮垂直載重效應。本研究也探討下與上SPD降伏強度比1.2及1.4倍的情況。在下與上強度比1.4倍情況下限制SPD相同深度僅約增加5%SPD重,因此工程師若不想在交會區設計斜的連續板連接不同深度SPD,可以以相同深度做設計並不會增加太多重量。以0倍、0.1倍、0.2倍梁跨長三種偏心距離探討偏心對SPD構架的影響,本研究發現 8公尺(短梁跨)中,0.2倍梁跨偏心距離下,產生的SPD軸力將超過EJ段的0.15軸壓容量,因軸彎互制,過大軸力會使EJ段彎矩容量減少,為避免此情況發生,偏心距離建議以0.2倍的梁跨長為限。實務中工程師常先決定邊界梁再設計SPD,本研究以兩組給定邊界梁的設計例,分別為小構架(RH708x302x15x28邊界梁跨8公尺)、大構架(RH800x300x14x26邊界梁跨12公尺)。在大構架情況,只有雙十字型可承受1200kN以上的SPD設計強度,因此建議在大構架、大噸位時採用雙十字型構架。在給定邊界梁的情況下只能靠增加SPD的翼板、EJ段腹板厚來增加子構架勁度。在大構架中,單十字構架因SPD翼板過厚僅能設計至0.0046的降伏層間位移角的勁度,而雙十字構架可設計至0.003降伏層間位移角,表示在給定邊界梁的長梁跨構架中,雙十字型設計較能有效提升構架勁度。 Incorporating a steel panel damper (SPD) into a moment resisting frame (MRF) can increase the stiffness, strength, and energy dissipation ability of the MRF. SPD is composed of one inelastic core (IC) segment in the middle and two elastic joint (EJ) segments in two sides. When the structure is subjected to an earthquake, the IC segment can absorb energy by undergoing cyclic inelastic shear deformations. Attaching web stiffeners to the IC segment, IC can stably dissipate seismic energy. It is common to use the trial-and-error approach in designing an SPD-MRF. However, this approach may not result in the most economical design. Hence, previous research proposed a single-cruciform subassembly model, which contains two identical SPDs and a boundary beam, to find an optimal design that uses the least steel weight to meet the seismic design specifications and stiffness requirements. This research improves the optimization algorithm by using SLSQP nonlinear programming algorithm. The chosen algorithm saves 96% of the previous computation time, and takes less than one second to compute the optimization. Thus, this time-efficient algorithm helps the author to develop the optimization software, and make it into a web service to users. It allows the practicing engineers to conduct the SPD-MRF designs through the web service by input the structure information and get the minimum steel weight design results from web pages. This research contains the optimization of single-cruciform (SC) and double-cruciform (DC) types of SPDs-to-beam subassembly. Each SC or DC type has “Basic Design (BD)” and “1.5 times stiffened Design (1.5KD)”. In the BD, the optimal depth of SPD in SC type is around 700~1200mm, and that in DC type is around 500~800mm. The optimal beam depth of SC type is around 700~1100mm and that of DC type is around 600~800mm. The DC type can save up to 300 mm less beam depth than the SC type for the large SPD strength (1500kN) design. Comparing the BD with the 1.5KD for both the SC and DC type subassemblies, the top three largest increases of dimensions are web thickness of the EJ section, boundary beam depth, and boundary beam web thickness. This suggests it is more cost-effective to increase these structural dimensions than the others to increase the structural stiffness. This research also investigates the gravity load effect on the SPD-MRF, unequal strength of upper and lower SPDs, eccentric SPD design, and the optimal SPD designs for the given boundary beams. Defining a gravity load effect coefficient , it’s suggested that engineers can use up to 0.15 of gravity load effect coefficient to consider the gravity load effect in the optimization without much cost. This research uses the lower to upper SPDs’ strength ratio of 1.2 and 1.4 to study their effects. In the strength ratio of 1.4 case, it only costs an extra 5% SPD weight when the same-depth of the upper and lower SPDs restriction is turned on. This suggests that engineers should consider using the same depth of two SPDs of different strength in the SC type design without increasing much extra weight. The research investigates the effect of three different eccentricities of the SPD location, namely 0, 0.1, and 0.2 times the boundary beam length. In the case of an 8-meter boundary beam (short beam) with an eccentricity of 0.2 times the beam span, the induced SPD axial force would exceed 0.15 times of compression yield capacity of the EJ segment. It would decrease the moment capacity of the EJ section. To avoid this, it is recommended that the eccentricity be limited to less than 0.2 times the beam length. For practical application purposes, this research uses two cases in which boundary beam sizes are given first. It’s found that the DC type designs are more efficient in increasing structural stiffness than the SC type designs for the SPD-MRFs with long-span beams. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/83214 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202203639 |
全文授權: | 未授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 土木工程學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-2009202213495400.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 9.75 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。