With the introduction of assembly construction into China,this construction method has been widely used in the construction of large sea bridge.Relevant experts have also carried out extensive theoretical analysis and experimental studies,which show that segmental pier structures are better than the whole cast-in-place pier in terms of hysteretic performance and self-recovery ability,but most of the studies are focused on highway Bridges.In this paper,based on the male Ann high-speed railway co.,LTD.,the horizontal topic "prefabricated bridge structure performance test(JXJC-1905-X),with high speed railway prefabricated bridge as the research object,using the same size and reinforcement methods established prefabricated pier with cast-in-place pier size entity model,assembly pier with grouting sleeve connection,on both test block quasi static load,the comparative study of both fracture distribution,hysteretic performance,energy dissipation capacity,residual displacement and curvature distribution of the content,the use of the finite element software ANSYS simulation test,and improve the accuracy of the test results,further argument On the basis of the test model,the bridge pier model,the bridge pier plus pile model and the two-span continuous beam model are respectively established for further analysis.The main work contents and conclusions are as follows:(1)the same size and reinforcement methods established prefabricated pier with cast-in-place pier size entity model,assembly pier with grouting sleeve connection,on both test block quasi static load until the test pier,comparative study of both fracture distribution,hysteretic performance,energy dissipation capacity,residual displacement and curvature distribution of the content,the main conclusion is: In the actual test process,when the horizontal load is about 3.75 times of the braking force on the bridge,the assembly pier and the cast-in-place pier crack almost at the same time,and the crack development damage process and failure mode are similar,but the assembly pier has no obvious crack within the range of the height of the grouting sleeve,which makes the position of the traditional plastic hinge move up one sleeve height.The cross-section curvature of two test piers is larger near the pier bottom,among which,the grouting sleeve range of assembly piers is significantly smaller than that of cast-in-place piers,and the curvature of other piers is larger under the same load grade.(2)using ANSYS finite element models of the two test block,the same low cycle loading,nonlinear analysis,through the finite element simulation to demonstrate,with perfect experiment results obtained by finite element calculation data of the residual displacement hysteresis curves,skeleton curves,and hysteretic energy dissipation analysis,found the assembly block the hysteresis curve of the cast-in-place pier full,The finite element calculation results show that the hysteretic energy consumption is 10.6% less than that of the cast-in-place pier,and the linear displacement coefficient is 15.8% less than that of the cast-in-place pier.The initial stiffness of the assembled pier and the cast-in-place pier is close to the flexure stiffness,and the equivalent stiffness of the two piers decreases with the increase of load grade.(3)in the test block model was established on the base of the pier model and the model of bridge piers and piles,quasi static loading,the results show that the two models of hysteresis curve,ultimate bearing capacity,etc.The results are basically identical,the data got from the finite element,make the hysteresis curves,skeleton curves,etc were analyzed,due to the stiffness of bridge pier model than single pier pier is large,Therefore,the hysteresis curve consumes more energy;The stiffness and frequency of natural vibration of the bridge pier plus pile model and the bridge pier without pile model were analyzed after considering the pile-soil effect.At the same time,the assembled pier model and the cast-in-place pier model of the completed bridge are established,and the input of the same seismic load is exactly the same.The results show that the seismic performance of the two models is basically the same under the seismic load,and their ductility performance can meet the requirements of the code. |