Influence of Structural Pseudo-Static Components on Seismic Responses of Low-Medium Speed Maglev Vehicle-Bridge System

doi:10.16183/j.cnki.jsjtu.2020.381

Abstract

Abstract:

Unlike the traditional seismic analysis on bridge engineering which mainly concerns the relative motion, the seismic analysis of vehicle-bridge system focuses more on the absolute motion of the vehicle system, where the pseudo-static components need to be considered. In order to study the effect of structural pseudo-static components on the seismic responses of low-medium speed maglev vehicle-bridge system, the discussion relying on a typical low-medium speed maglev line was implemented. Considering the vehicle-bridge coupling relationship based on the proportional integral derivative (PID) active suspension control, two dynamic models for the low-medium speed maglev vehicle-bridge system subjected to earthquake were relatively established in the relative coordinate and the absolute coordinate, and the seismic forces were correspondingly solved by employing the relative motion method and the direct solution method. A case study was subsequently conducted, where the effect of structural pseudo-static components on dynamic responses of the vehicle-bridge system, including the maglev gap, the vehicle system and the bridge was further analyzed. The results show that the influence of pseudo-static components on the dynamic responses of the vehicle system is quite significant. Ignoring the pseudo-static components could seriously undervalue the dynamic responses of the vehicle system, of which the difference could be as high as 447%. Compared to the vehicle system, the influence of pseudo-static components on the vertical and transversal displacement responses of the bridge is fairly limited. Therefore, it is suggested that the absolute displacement method which takes the pseudo-static components into account should be adopted to deal with the seismic excitation in the maglev vehicle-bridge system.

Key words: low-medium speed maglev transport, vehicle-bridge system, PID active control, seismic responses, structural pseudo-static components

CLC Number:

U24
TB123

HUANG Fenghua, CHENG Bin, TENG Nianguan. Influence of Structural Pseudo-Static Components on Seismic Responses of Low-Medium Speed Maglev Vehicle-Bridge System[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2022, 56(4): 486-497.

Figures/Tables 16

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Tab.1

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10

Tab.2

Fig.11

Fig.12

Fig.13

Fig.14

References 20

[1]	耿杰, 王党雄, 李小珍, 等. 中低速磁浮列车-简支梁系统耦合振动试验研究[J]. 铁道学报, 2018, 40(2): 117-124.
	GENG Jie, WANG Dangxiong, LI Xiaozhen, et al. Experimental study on coupled vibration of low-medium speed maglev train and simply supported girder system[J]. Journal of the China Railway Society, 2018, 40(2): 117-124.
[2]	LI X Z, WANG D X, LIU D J, et al. Dynamic ana-lysis of the interactions between a low-to-medium-speed maglev train and a bridge: Field test results of two typical bridges[J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2018, 232(7): 2039-2059. doi: 10.1177/0954409718758502 URL
[3]	HU J X, MA W H, LUO S H. Coupled dynamic analysis of low and medium speed maglev vehicle-bridge interaction using SIMPACK[J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2021, 235(3): 377-389. doi: 10.1177/0954409720925676 URL
[4]	HUANG F H, CHENG B, TENG N G. A numerical model to predict three-dimensional interaction dynamic of low-medium-speed maglev vehicle-guideway bridge system[J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2021, 235(10): 1249-1267. doi: 10.1177/0954409721996553 URL
[5]	KIM K J, HAN J B, HAN H S, et al. Coupled vibration analysis of maglev vehicle-guideway while standing still or moving at low speeds[J]. Vehicle System Dynamics, 2015, 53(4): 587-601. doi: 10.1080/00423114.2015.1013039 URL
[6]	MIN D J, JUNG M R, KIM M Y, et al. Dynamic interaction analysis of maglev-guideway system based on a 3D full vehicle model[J]. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics, 2017, 17(1): 1750006. doi: 10.1142/S0219455417500067 URL
[7]	XIA H, HAN Y, ZHANG N, et al. Dynamic analysis of train-bridge system subjected to non-uniform seismic excitations[J]. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2006, 35(12): 1563-1579.
[8]	王少林, 翟婉明. 地震作用下高速列车-线路-桥梁系统动力响应[J]. 西南交通大学学报, 2011, 46(1): 56-62.
	WANG Shaolin, ZHAI Wanming. Dynamic responses of high-speed train-track-bridge system under seismic excitations[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2011, 46(1): 56-62.
[9]	户东阳, 陈克坚, 李聪林, 等. 近场地震作用下高速铁路简支梁桥行车安全性影响研究[J]. 铁道标准设计, 2021, 65(3): 99-105.
	HU Dongyang, CHEN Kejian, LI Conglin, et al. Research on driving impact on high-speed railway simply supported beam bridges under near-field earthquakes[J]. Railway Standard Design, 2021, 65(3): 99-105.
[10]	ZENG Q, DIMITRAKOPOULOS E G. Seismic response analysis of an interacting curved bridge-train system under frequent earthquakes[J]. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2016, 45(7): 1129-1148.
[11]	PARASKEVA T S, DIMITRAKOPOULOS E G, ZENG Q. Dynamic vehicle-bridge interaction under simultaneous vertical earthquake excitation[J]. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2017, 15(1): 71-95. doi: 10.1007/s10518-016-9954-z URL
[12]	BORJIGIN S, KIM C W, CHANG K C, et al. Nonlinear dynamic response analysis of vehicle-bridge interactive system under strong earthquakes[J]. Engineering Structures, 2018, 176: 500-521. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.09.014 URL
[13]	杜宪亭, 夏禾, 余竹. 车桥耦合动力分析中地震动输入模式的研究[J]. 中国铁道科学, 2011, 32(6): 34-40.
	DU Xianting, XIA He, YU Zhu. Study on the input patterns of seismic ground motion in the dynamic interaction analysis of train-bridge system[J]. China Railway Science, 2011, 32(6): 34-40.
[14]	杜宪亭, 乔宏, 夏禾, 等. 地震作用下结构拟静力分量对车桥系统动力响应的影响分析[J]. 振动与冲击, 2016, 35(16): 6-11.
	DU Xianting, QIAO Hong, XIA He, et al. Influence of structure quasi-static components on the dynamic response of train-bridge systems during earthquakes[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2016, 35(16): 6-11.
[15]	雷虎军, 李小珍. 拟静力分量对列车-轨道-桥梁系统地震响应的影响[J]. 西南交通大学学报, 2015, 50(1): 124-130.
	LEI Hujun, LI Xiaozhen. Effects of structural quasi-static components on seismic responses of train-track-bridge system[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2015, 50(1): 124-130.
[16]	BRZEZINA W, LANGERHOLC J. Lift and side forces on rectangular pole pieces in two dimensions[J]. Journal of Applied Physics, 1974, 45(4): 1869-1872. doi: 10.1063/1.1663505 URL
[17]	张耿, 李杰, 杨子敬. 低速磁浮轨道不平顺功率谱研究[J]. 铁道学报, 2011, 33(10): 73-78.
	ZHANG Geng, LI Jie, YANG Zijing. Estimation of power spectrum density track irregularities of low-speed maglev railway lines[J]. Journal of the China Railway Society, 2011, 33(10): 73-78.
[18]	王济, 胡晓. MATLAB在振动信号处理中的应用[M]. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社, 知识产权出版社, 2006.
	WANG Ji, HU Xiao. Application of MATLAB in vibration signal processing[M]. Beijing: China Water Conservancy and Hydropower Press, Intellectual Property Press, 2006.
[19]	李小珍, 王党雄, 耿杰, 等. F轨对中低速磁浮列车-桥梁系统竖向耦合振动的影响研究[J]. 土木工程学报, 2017, 50(4): 97-106.
	LI Xiaozhen, WANG Dangxiong, GENG Jie, et al. Study on the influence of F-rail in vertical coupling vibration of low-medium speed maglev train-bridge system[J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2017, 50(4): 97-106.
[20]	ZHANG L, HUANG J Y. Dynamic interaction analysis of the high-speed maglev vehicle/guideway system based on a field measurement and model updating method[J]. Engineering Structures, 2019, 180: 1-17. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.11.031 URL

符号	名称及单位	数值
M_c	车体质量/kg	2.0×10⁴
M_b	悬浮侧架质量/kg	1000
J_αc	车体转动惯量 (点头)/(kg·m²)	3.85×10⁵
J_βc	车体转动惯量 (摇头)/(kg·m²)	3.88×10⁵
J_γc	车体转动惯量 (侧滚)/(kg·m²)	2.21×10³
J_αb	悬浮架转动惯量 (点头)/(kg·m²)	1150
J_βb	悬浮架转动惯量 (摇头)/(kg·m²)	1200
K_sy	二系悬挂系竖向刚度/(N·m^-1)	8.0×10⁴
C_sy	二系悬挂系竖向阻尼/(N·s·m^-1)	5.0×10³
K_sz	二系悬挂系横向刚度/(N·m^-1)	1.5×10⁵
C_sz	二系悬挂系横向阻尼/(N·s·m^-1)	2.25×10³

车速/ (km·h^-1)	悬浮系统				车辆系统		轨道梁跨中
车速/ (km·h^-1)	悬浮间隙波动幅值	导向间隙	悬浮电磁力波动幅值	导向电磁力	沉浮加速度	偏航加速度	竖向位移	横向位移
60	19.2	111.9	-5.7	143.2	368.3	61.1	3.7	-1.5
70	23.4	216.5	7.3	118.1	394.1	61.2	0.8	0.2
80	16.3	153.6	6.3	110.6	449.1	50.5	2.1	1.2
90	7.3	219.1	4.7	113.8	322.9	44.3	2.2	0.2
100	22.5	192.4	-5.1	82.3	323.0	46.7	-0.3	2.0
110	26.7	205.8	9.2	89.0	309.1	56.2	-0.4	1.0
120	34.8	171.2	0.97	101.4	366.9	47.2	-0.2	-1.5