WO2021036751A1 - Procédé d'identification d'endommagement de poutre continue basé sur une courbure de ligne d'influence de réaction aux appuis - Google Patents

Procédé d'identification d'endommagement de poutre continue basé sur une courbure de ligne d'influence de réaction aux appuis Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2021036751A1
WO2021036751A1 PCT/CN2020/107843 CN2020107843W WO2021036751A1 WO 2021036751 A1 WO2021036751 A1 WO 2021036751A1 CN 2020107843 W CN2020107843 W CN 2020107843W WO 2021036751 A1 WO2021036751 A1 WO 2021036751A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
damage
curvature
continuous beam
influence line
degree
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/CN2020/107843
Other languages
English (en)
Chinese (zh)
Inventor
唐盛华
楚加庆
张学兵
秦付倩
罗承芳
简余
杨文轩
Original Assignee
湘潭大学
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by 湘潭大学 filed Critical 湘潭大学
Priority to GB2111170.3A priority Critical patent/GB2593851B/en
Publication of WO2021036751A1 publication Critical patent/WO2021036751A1/fr

Links

Images

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
    • G06F30/10—Geometric CAD
    • G06F30/13—Architectural design, e.g. computer-aided architectural design [CAAD] related to design of buildings, bridges, landscapes, production plants or roads
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
    • G06F30/20—Design optimisation, verification or simulation
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F2119/00—Details relating to the type or aim of the analysis or the optimisation
    • G06F2119/04—Ageing analysis or optimisation against ageing

Definitions

  • the invention belongs to the technical field of structural health monitoring, and specifically relates to a continuous beam damage identification method for the curvature of the bearing reaction force influence line of the beam structure non-destructive detection technology.
  • Structural damage identification is an important part of the bridge structure health monitoring system.
  • One is the damage identification method based on dynamic parameters, which is mainly judged by changes in the structure mode (vibration frequency and mode shape) Structural damage, such methods have higher requirements on the number of measuring points, sensor measurement accuracy, and modal parameter identification methods.
  • the other type of method is the damage identification method based on static parameters.
  • the structural damage identification method based on static parameters can effectively avoid the uncertain effects of quality, especially damping.
  • the purpose of the present invention is to provide a continuous beam damage identification method for the curvature of the bearing reaction force influence line in view of the deficiency that the existing bearing reaction force influence line method cannot identify the degree of structural damage.
  • the method for identifying damage to a continuous beam in which the reaction force of the support affects the linear curvature of the present invention has the following steps:
  • Each span of the continuous beam structure is divided into multiple elements, and each span includes intermediate elements and side elements;
  • step (2) the bearing reaction force influence line curvature X′′ is calculated by the center difference, and the calculation formula is as follows:
  • i denotes the measuring point number
  • X i is the load acting on the measuring point i Support reaction
  • step (2) the damage location index of the difference in curvature of the bearing reaction influence line is expressed as follows:
  • DI is the damage location index of the difference in the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line
  • DI i is the damage location index of the difference in the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line of the i-th measuring point
  • X′′ iu , X′′ id are the load acting on the i-th measuring point, respectively
  • n is the number of measuring points
  • No. 1 measuring point is arranged at one end of the beam structure
  • No. n measuring point is arranged at the other end of the beam structure.
  • the number of measuring points is continuous, starting from 1 Increase in sequence to n, i is greater than or equal to 2 and less than or equal to n-1;
  • step (3)(a) if it is a two-span continuous beam, the calculation method of the damage degree of the beam structure is as follows:
  • D e is the quantitative index of the damage degree of the beam structure
  • D ei is the damage degree of the beam structure identified by the i-th measuring point
  • the damage degree calculation formula is:
  • the damage degree calculation formula is:
  • step (3)(b) if it is a continuous beam with three spans or more, the calculation method of the damage degree of the beam structure is as follows:
  • D ea is the quantitative index of the damage degree of the continuous beam with three spans and above;
  • D eai is the damage degree of the beam structure identified by the i-th measuring point of the three-span and upper continuous beam;
  • the damage degree calculation formula is:
  • m is the number of supports involved in the calculation, m is greater than 2 and less than the number of spans+1, X" iuk , X" idk are the reaction force of the support before and after the damage of the load acting on the i-th measuring point k support beam structure The curvature of the influence line, k is greater than or equal to 1 and less than or equal to m;
  • the damage degree calculation formula is:
  • step (1) the location of the measuring points of the bearing reaction influence line test before and after the beam structure damage is the same, and the measuring points of the influence line are not less than 6 at each span.
  • step (3) when the damage degree of the undamaged position is a negative value, the damage degree value of the damaged position is subtracted from the damage degree value of the adjacent undamaged position to correct the damage degree.
  • one of the three supports of the two-span continuous beam can be arbitrarily selected to arrange measurement points to identify single damage and multiple damage of the structure. All working conditions.
  • step (3)(b) for a continuous beam with three spans and above, two supports can be selected at four or more supports of the continuous beam, and the two supports can be superimposed.
  • the curvature index of D e avoids the interference peak that appears in the undamaged part of the D e index, thereby obtaining the quantitative index D ea of the degree of damage to the beam structure.
  • the two supports used in the process of obtaining the quantitative index D ea of the beam structure damage degree are the two supports located at the two ends of the continuous beam on the two side spans; correspondingly; Ground, a measuring point is respectively arranged at the two side supports of the side spans of continuous beams of three spans and above to identify all the working conditions of all single damage and multiple damage of the structure.
  • the present invention takes the vertical support reaction force of the structure as the research object, and derives and proves that after the structure is damaged, there is an extreme value in the curvature difference of the support reaction force influence line at the damage position.
  • This feature can be used to effectively control the beam.
  • the damage location of the structure is carried out, and the damage degree of the beam structure is accurately quantified with the help of the curvature index.
  • the multi-damage conditions of the structure are analyzed, and the application value of the curvature index of the bearing reaction influence line in the beam structure damage identification is verified, and the beam structure damage location and Quantitative provides an effective new method.
  • Fig. 1 is a flowchart of the method of the present invention.
  • Figure 2 is a structural model diagram of a two-span continuous beam of the present invention.
  • Fig. 3 is a diagram of the bending moment per unit force of the B support of the basic structure of the simply supported beam of the present invention.
  • Fig. 4 is a diagram of the bending moment of the external load acting on the two-span continuous beam of the present invention.
  • Fig. 5 is a finite element model diagram of a two-span continuous beam according to an embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 6 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of single damage condition 1 in the first embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 7 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of single damage condition 2 in the first embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 8 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of single damage condition 3 in the first embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 9 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of single damage condition 4 in the first embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG 10 is a single degree of injury damage cases a quantitative index D e graph of an embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG 11 is a diagram of a single embodiment of the present invention, damage cases the degree of injury quantitative index D e 2 graph.
  • FIG 12 is a single degree of damage 3 damage cases quantitative index D e graph of an embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG 13 is a single degree of damage cases quantitative index D e 4 Injury graph of an embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 14 is a schematic diagram of damage degree correction in Embodiment 1 of the present invention.
  • FIG. 15 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of multi-damage working condition 1 in Embodiment 1 of the present invention.
  • FIG 16 is a multi-degree of injury damage cases a quantitative index D e graph of an embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 17 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of multi-damage condition 2 in the first embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG 18 is a multi-degree of damage cases quantitative index D e 2 injury graph of an embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 19 is a finite element model diagram of a continuous beam with two or three spans according to an embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG 21 is a single two damage cases a damage index D e Quantitative graph embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 22 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of single damage condition 2 in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 23 is a single embodiment of the present invention, damage cases # 21 support the degree of damage index D e quantitative graph.
  • Fig. 24 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D e of the damage degree of the single damage condition 2 2# bearing in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 25 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D e of the damage degree of the single-damage condition 2 3# bearing in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 26 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D e of the damage degree of the single-damage condition 24# bearing in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 27 is a diagram showing the curvature of the line of influence of the reaction force of the single-damage condition 2 #1 support in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 28 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 2 superimposed on 1# ⁇ 4# bearing damage degree in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 29 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 2 superimposed on the damage degree of 1# and 2# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 30 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 2 superimposed on the damage degree of 1# and 3# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 31 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 2 superimposed on the damage degree of 1# and 4# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 32 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 2 superimposed on the damage degree of 2# and 3# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 33 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 2 superimposed on the damage degree of 2# and 4# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 34 is a quantitative index D ea of the damage degree of single damage condition 2 superimposed on 3# and 4# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • 35 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of single damage condition 3 in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 36 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 3 superimposed on the damage degree of 1# and 3# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 37 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of single damage condition 3 superimposed on the damage degree of 1# and 4# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 38 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of multi-damage working condition 1 in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 39 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of the damage degree of the multi-damage working condition 1 superimposed on the 1# and 4# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • FIG. 40 is a graph of the damage location index DI curve of multi-damage condition 2 in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Fig. 41 is a curve diagram of the quantitative index D ea of the multi-damage condition 2 superimposed on the damage degree of 1# and 4# bearings in the second embodiment of the present invention.
  • Step 1 Apply moving loads to the continuous beams before and after the damage to obtain the measured bearing reaction influence line before and after the continuous beam damage;
  • Step 2 Find the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line before and after the continuous beam damage, and locate the damage through the difference in the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line;
  • Step 3 (a) If it is a two-span continuous beam, quantify the damage degree through the relative change of the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line before and after the continuous beam is damaged;
  • Application step 1 Theoretical analysis takes a two-span continuous beam as an example.
  • A, B, and C are three bearings on the left, center and right; the reaction force of the middle bearing B is the basic unknown quantity X,
  • the external force P moves from the left end to the right end, assuming that the displacement of the beam structure is only caused by the bending deformation of the structure.
  • the distance from the damage position to the support A is a
  • the damage length is ⁇
  • the distance from the moving load to the support A is
  • the span of the two spans is L
  • the stiffness of the undamaged part is EI
  • the stiffness of the locally damaged element is EI d .
  • the force method and graph multiplication method are used to derive the reaction force influence line of the intermediate support B.
  • the subscript "u" represents the undamaged state; Indicates that the moving load in the undamaged state acts on the distance support A as The reaction force of support B at the position.
  • the subscript "d" represents the damage state; Indicates that the moving load in the damaged state acts on the distance support A as The reaction force of support B at the position;
  • DI is the damage location index of the difference in curvature of the bearing reaction influence line
  • DI i is the damage location index of the difference in the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line of the i-th measuring point
  • X” iu , X” id are the load acting on the i-th measuring point, respectively
  • n is the number of measuring points
  • No. 1 measuring point is arranged at one end of the beam structure
  • No. n measuring point is arranged at the other end of the beam structure.
  • the number of measuring points is continuous, from 1 to n increases sequentially, i is greater than or equal to 2 and less than or equal to n-1;
  • step 3(a) the calculation method of the damage degree of the beam structure is:
  • D e is the quantitative index of the damage degree of the beam structure
  • D ei is the damage degree of the beam structure identified by the i-th measuring point
  • the damage degree calculation formula is as follows:
  • Equation (16) can be reduced to:
  • step (3)(b) for continuous beams with three spans and above, the calculation method for the damage degree of the beam structure is as follows:
  • D ea is the quantitative index of the damage degree of the continuous beam with three spans and above;
  • D eai is the damage degree of the beam structure identified by the i-th measuring point of the three-span and upper continuous beam.
  • the damage degree calculation formula is:
  • m is the number of supports involved in the calculation, m is greater than 2 and less than the number of spans +1, X" iuk , X" idk are respectively the load acting on the i-th measuring point k support before and after the structural damage Linear curvature, k is greater than or equal to 1 and less than or equal to m.
  • the damage degree calculation formula is:
  • step 1 the location of the measuring points of the bearing reaction influence line test before and after the beam structure damage is the same, and the measuring points of the influence line are not less than 6 at each span.
  • step 3 when the damage degree of the undamaged position is negative, the damage degree value of the damaged position is subtracted from the damage degree value of the adjacent undamaged position to correct the damage degree.
  • Example 1 Referring to Figure 5, a plexiglass plate model is used to simulate a two-span continuous beam with a span of 50+50cm and a unit of 5cm divided into a total of 20 units and 21 measuring points (the upper circle in the figure) The number is the unit number, the lower number is the support number, and the left and right measuring point numbers of unit i are i, i+1).
  • the material's elastic modulus is 2.7 ⁇ 10 3 MPa
  • the Poisson's ratio is 0.37
  • the density is 1200 kg/m 3 .
  • Damages in actual engineering structures such as cracks, material corrosion, or reduction of elastic modulus, generally only cause a large change in the stiffness of the structure, but have a small impact on the quality of the structure. Therefore, in the finite element calculation, it is assumed that the structural element damage only causes the decrease of the element stiffness, but does not cause the change of the element quality. The damage of the element is simulated by the decrease of the elastic modulus.
  • Step 1 Apply 120N moving load to the continuous beams before and after the damage to obtain the measured bearing reaction force influence line before and after the continuous beam damage.
  • Step 2 Find the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line before and after the continuous beam damage, and locate the damage through the difference in the curvature of the bearing reaction influence line.
  • the DI index recognition effect of support 1# ⁇ 3# in working condition 1 is shown in Fig. 6. There are different degrees of peaks at unit 1, indicating that unit 1 is damaged. The DI indicators of bearing 1# ⁇ 3# can accurately identify the damage. Because bearing 1# and 3# are symmetrical, the recognition effect is the same, and bearing 2# has the highest identification peak value.
  • the DI index recognition effect of working condition 2 is shown in Fig. 7. There is a peak value at unit 1. At this time, the DI index of each support can identify the damage of unit 1, and the DI index recognition peak value at support 2# is the highest.
  • the index recognition effect of working condition 3 is shown in Figure 8.
  • the DI index of support 1# ⁇ 3# has a peak value at unit 15, the recognition effect of support 1# and 3# is the same, and unit 15 is damaged.
  • the DI index recognition effect of working condition 4 is good.
  • the peak value of unit 15 shows that the unit 15 is damaged, and the peak value of the recognition index is the highest at support 2#.
  • Step 3 Quantify the damage degree through the relative change of the curvature of the bearing reaction force influence line before and after the continuous beam damage.
  • Condition D e discrimination index of 1 10, # 1 ⁇ # 3 can accurately identify the carrier lesion side unit 1, the same degree of damage indicators identified theoretical and the actual degree of damage, in this case Choose one of the measuring points at the support 1# ⁇ 3# to identify the damage of working condition 1, which greatly optimizes the sensor layout.
  • the D e index recognition effect of working condition 3 is shown in Figure 12.
  • the index recognition effect of bearing 1# ⁇ 3# is the same, and the theoretical damage degree is close to the actual damage degree. At this time, it is also at the bearing 1# ⁇ 3#. Damage can be identified by arranging a measuring point.
  • the damage degree identification index D e of working condition 4 is shown in Figure 13. The results show that the theoretical damage degree identified by working conditions 3 and 4 are all smaller than the actual damage degree, because the undamaged position De index is all negative and the value is large. In this case, the method shown in Figure 14 can be used.
  • the uncorrected damage degree identification values are 0.092 and 0.277, respectively, and the corrected values are 0.102 and 0.317 respectively. It can be seen that the damage degree after correction is closer to the actual value.
  • the DI indicators of bearing 1# ⁇ 3# can locate single damage, indicating that the DI indicator is more sensitive to single damage, and the theoretical damage degree identified by the De indicator is close to the actual damage degree, and there is a small error. , Is because in the theoretical derivation process, in order to simplify the calculation, the items that have less influence on the result are ignored, and the error caused by the approximate value is ignored, but it does not affect the actual damage recognition effect.
  • any measuring point can be arranged at the support 1# ⁇ 3# to identify the damage location and quantification, which greatly reduces the number and difficulty of sensor placement.
  • the DI indicator recognition of working condition 1 is shown in Fig. 15.
  • the edge unit 1 and unit 15 are obviously convex, and all damages can be well identified.
  • the identification of the damage degree index D e of working condition 1 is shown in Fig. 16.
  • Both edge unit 1 and unit 15 have peak values, and the D e indexes of the three supports can quantify the damage degree of unit 1 and unit 15 more accurately.
  • the reaction force curvature of the bearing at the measuring point 21 is set to zero, which leads to a bulge, and there is a small peak, which does not affect the actual recognition result.
  • the DI index still has a good recognition effect, as shown in Figure 17, the edge unit in the figure Peaks of different degrees appearing at 1 and unit 15 indicate that there is damage and there is no interference peak.
  • the identification effect of the damage degree De index is shown in Figure 18.
  • the theoretical damage degree is close to the actual damage degree.
  • the index recognition effect of bearing 1# ⁇ 3# is good, and all damages in the structure can be identified, located and quantified, and there is no damage missed judgment, so one can be selected at bearing 1# ⁇ 3#. All working conditions of single damage and multiple damage of the structure can be identified at the measuring point.
  • Example 2 A plexiglass plate model is also used to simulate a three-span continuous beam, as shown in Figure 19, the span is arranged as 50+75+50cm, 5cm is divided into a unit, a total of 35 units, 36 measuring points (in the figure)
  • the numbers in the upper circle are the unit numbers, the lower numbers are the support numbers, and the left and right measuring points of unit i are respectively i and i+1).
  • the section size and material parameters refer to the two-span continuous beam calculation example.
  • unit 1 is located near the 1# support at the left end of the first span
  • unit 18 is a mid-span unit
  • unit 26 is located near the 3# support at the left end of the third span where the negative bending moment is greatest.
  • the DI index of working condition 1 is shown in Figure 20.
  • the DI index of bearing 1# ⁇ 4# has obvious peaks at unit 1.
  • the DI index can accurately identify the small damage that occurs in the edge unit, and the De identification index is shown in the figure. 21, D e carrier index # 1 ⁇ # 4 is able to accurately identify the degree of injury.
  • the DI indicator of working condition 2 is shown in Figure 22.
  • the DI indicators of bearing 1# ⁇ 4# all have peaks at unit 18, indicating that the indicators can identify damage, and because unit 18 is located in the middle of the span, bearing 1 # ⁇ 4#'s DI index peak value is basically the same.
  • the identification effect of D ea index after superimposing the indexes of bearing 1# ⁇ 4# under working condition 2 is shown in Figure 28.
  • the identified theoretical damage degree is close to the actual damage degree without interference peak, but it needs to be at each bearing Layout of measuring points requires a lot of data to be processed, which is inconvenient for calculation. Therefore, considering the superimposition of as few indicators as possible to identify the degree of damage, the D ea indicator identification effect calculated by superimposing the indicators of support 1# and support 2# is shown in Figure 29. At this time, there is a small interference peak at measuring point 20 , And the Dea index of measuring point 17 and measuring point 18 are quite different, and the effect is poor.
  • the D ea index identification obtained by superimposing the index of bearing 1# and bearing 3# is shown in Figure 30.
  • the theoretical damage degree is close to the actual damage degree, and the effect is better.
  • the superimposed carrier # 1 and the carrier index # 4 D ea identification index shown in Figure 31 the vicinity of the measuring point occurs damage index D ea down unit, but the extent of damage after correcting the actual value is very close to 0.1015.
  • the D ea after the index of superimposed support 2# and support 3# is shown in Figure 32, and the effect is the same as superimposed support 1# and support 4#.
  • the D ea after the index of superimposed support 2# and support 4# is shown in Figure 33, and the effect is the same as superimposed support 1# and support 4#.
  • the DI index can identify single damage at all positions of the three-span beam unit, and the single damage identification index does not have any interference peaks.
  • Theoretical degree of damage in the discrimination index is very close to the actual degree of damage, not interfere with the peak occurring at D e damage indicators, indicators may simply by superimposing two abutment avoid impact, since the seat support 2 and # 3 #, support 3# and support 4# are close to each other, which is easy to produce peak concentration. Therefore, stacking support 1# and support 3#, support 1# and support 4#, support 2# and support can be used.
  • the index of bearing 4# optimizes the layout of sensors. Due to space limitations, only the indicators of superimposed support 1# and support 3#, support 1# and support 4# are used to identify the degree of damage in the following.
  • the DI index of working condition 3 is shown in Fig. 35, the peak appears at unit 26, and the DI index of bearing 1# ⁇ 4# can identify the damage.
  • the D ea identification results after superimposing the indicators of the superimposed support 1# and support 3#, support 1# and support 4# are shown in Figure 36 and Figure 37.
  • the curvature of the superimposed support 1# and support 3# before and after damage The D ea index of the indicator has a small peak at the measuring point 15.
  • the D ea index of the curvature index of the superimposed support 1# and support 4# before and after the damage is better, because the distance between the two side span supports is the largest.
  • the interference peaks are not concentrated, so the curvature indicators at the supports on both sides of the superposition can offset the interference peaks to the greatest extent without interference peaks, but the identified theoretical damage levels are slightly greater than the actual damage levels, and the error is +0.05.
  • all single damages can be identified by arranging one measuring point at the supports on both sides of the side span.
  • the three-span continuous beam multi-damage condition considers different degrees of damage to the elements 1, 18, and 26.
  • the damage condition is shown in Table 4.
  • the DI index of bearing 1# ⁇ 4# in working condition 1 is shown in Figure 38.
  • the damage identification index of bearing 1# ⁇ 4# has obvious peaks in units 1, 18, and 26, and all damages can be identified.
  • Condition # 1 the support 1 ⁇ # 4 is able to identify the damage index D e, but interference peaks appear, superimposed on the support case 1 and the carrier # 4 # curvature turn indicators indicators obtained new D ea, 39 As shown, the interference peak can be filtered out, the degree of damage can be accurately identified, and the D ea index at the unit 18 and unit 26 has an error of ⁇ 0.05.
  • the DI index of working condition 2 is shown in Figure 40. Units 1, 18, and 26 have obvious peaks, which can accurately identify the damage. Working condition 2 superimposes the index of support 1# and support 4# to get the new Dea index as shown in Figure 41.
  • the theoretical damage degree at unit 26 is slightly larger than the actual damage degree, but the error is small and can be more accurate. Identify the degree of damage.

Abstract

L'invention concerne un procédé d'identification d'endommagement de poutre continue basé sur une courbure de ligne d'influence de réaction aux appuis. Le procédé comprend les étapes suivantes consistant à : appliquer une charge mobile sur une poutre continue avant et après un endommagement, pour obtenir des lignes d'influence de réaction aux appuis réellement mesurées de la poutre continue avant et après l'endommagement ; calculer les courbures des lignes d'influence de réaction aux appuis de la poutre continue avant et après l'endommagement, et positionner l'endommagement au moyen d'une différence de courbure des lignes d'influence de réaction aux appuis ; quantifier le degré d'endommagement au moyen d'un changement relatif des courbures des lignes d'influence de réaction aux appuis de la poutre continue avant et après l'endommagement ; et si le nombre de portées de la poutre continue est supérieur à deux, quantifier le degré d'endommagement au moyen de la somme des valeurs absolues des courbures d'une pluralité de lignes d'influence de réaction aux appuis avant et après l'endommagement. La présente invention nécessite peu de points de test, ce qui réduit le nombre d'utilisation de capteurs de surveillance, peut positionner et quantifier avec précision les endommagements d'une structure de poutre continue, et est appliqué à une évaluation d'endommagement de la structure de poutre continue.
PCT/CN2020/107843 2019-08-28 2020-08-07 Procédé d'identification d'endommagement de poutre continue basé sur une courbure de ligne d'influence de réaction aux appuis WO2021036751A1 (fr)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
GB2111170.3A GB2593851B (en) 2019-08-28 2020-08-07 Damage Identification Method for Continuous Beam Based on Curvatures of Influence Lines for Support Reaction

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN201910800629.7A CN110502856B (zh) 2019-08-28 2019-08-28 支座反力影响线曲率的连续梁损伤识别方法
CN201910800629.7 2019-08-28

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2021036751A1 true WO2021036751A1 (fr) 2021-03-04

Family

ID=68588676

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/CN2020/107843 WO2021036751A1 (fr) 2019-08-28 2020-08-07 Procédé d'identification d'endommagement de poutre continue basé sur une courbure de ligne d'influence de réaction aux appuis

Country Status (3)

Country Link
CN (1) CN110502856B (fr)
GB (1) GB2593851B (fr)
WO (1) WO2021036751A1 (fr)

Cited By (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN113761626A (zh) * 2021-09-07 2021-12-07 湘潭大学 基于转角影响线Katz1分形维数的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN114048775A (zh) * 2021-11-10 2022-02-15 哈尔滨工业大学 线性相关结构损伤诊断指标的核函数显式映射重构方法
CN114993835A (zh) * 2021-05-28 2022-09-02 中铁第四勘察设计院集团有限公司 一种基于静动力响应的钢筋混凝土梁损伤识别方法
CN115203797A (zh) * 2022-07-13 2022-10-18 中国建筑西南设计研究院有限公司 一种智能识别结合人工复检对梁支座进行判断的方法
CN116343966A (zh) * 2023-03-27 2023-06-27 山东大学 基于延迟因子的概率乘累加结构损伤成像定位方法及系统
CN116579193A (zh) * 2022-12-20 2023-08-11 湘潭大学 挠度应变能等效的梁结构局部等效刚度计算方法
CN114993835B (zh) * 2021-05-28 2024-05-17 中铁第四勘察设计院集团有限公司 一种基于静动力响应的钢筋混凝土梁损伤识别方法

Families Citing this family (3)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN110502856B (zh) * 2019-08-28 2021-05-25 湘潭大学 支座反力影响线曲率的连续梁损伤识别方法
CN111721486B (zh) * 2020-06-22 2022-01-28 湘潭大学 基于支座反力影响线曲率差分的等截面连续梁损伤识别方法
CN113761627B (zh) * 2021-09-07 2024-03-22 湘潭大学 基于支座反力影响线Katz1分形维数的连续梁损伤识别方法

Citations (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN104750926A (zh) * 2015-03-27 2015-07-01 东南大学 基于节点曲率和小波分析的变截面梁损伤识别方法
US20160034621A1 (en) * 2014-08-04 2016-02-04 Livermore Software Technology Corporation Numerical Simulation Of Crack Propagation Due To Metal Fatigue
CN106446384A (zh) * 2016-09-14 2017-02-22 东南大学 一种桥式起重机主梁结构的损伤识别方法
CN107844622A (zh) * 2017-09-04 2018-03-27 湘潭大学 一种基于损伤状态均匀荷载面曲率的简支梁损伤识别方法
CN107957319A (zh) * 2017-11-17 2018-04-24 湘潭大学 均匀荷载面曲率的简支梁裂纹损伤识别方法
CN110502855A (zh) * 2019-08-28 2019-11-26 湘潭大学 损伤状态支座反力影响线曲率的等截面连续梁损伤识别方法
CN110502856A (zh) * 2019-08-28 2019-11-26 湘潭大学 支座反力影响线曲率的连续梁损伤识别方法

Family Cites Families (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20130197883A1 (en) * 2012-01-31 2013-08-01 Autodesk, Inc. Creating a system equilibrium via unknown force(s)
CN105136579A (zh) * 2015-08-25 2015-12-09 中铁十八局集团第四工程有限公司 一种管片的抗弯抗拔两用试验台及其试验方法
CN106680090B (zh) * 2017-01-19 2023-04-07 中国矿业大学 一种角钢交叉斜材稳定承载力试验装置及试验方法
CN209167040U (zh) * 2018-11-29 2019-07-26 中南大学 一种预应力混凝土梁疲劳损伤测试装置

Patent Citations (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20160034621A1 (en) * 2014-08-04 2016-02-04 Livermore Software Technology Corporation Numerical Simulation Of Crack Propagation Due To Metal Fatigue
CN104750926A (zh) * 2015-03-27 2015-07-01 东南大学 基于节点曲率和小波分析的变截面梁损伤识别方法
CN106446384A (zh) * 2016-09-14 2017-02-22 东南大学 一种桥式起重机主梁结构的损伤识别方法
CN107844622A (zh) * 2017-09-04 2018-03-27 湘潭大学 一种基于损伤状态均匀荷载面曲率的简支梁损伤识别方法
CN107957319A (zh) * 2017-11-17 2018-04-24 湘潭大学 均匀荷载面曲率的简支梁裂纹损伤识别方法
CN110502855A (zh) * 2019-08-28 2019-11-26 湘潭大学 损伤状态支座反力影响线曲率的等截面连续梁损伤识别方法
CN110502856A (zh) * 2019-08-28 2019-11-26 湘潭大学 支座反力影响线曲率的连续梁损伤识别方法

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
TANG SHENGHUA, BINJIAN SU, ZHI FANG, XUEBING ZHANG: "Structural Damage Identification Method Based on Polynomial Fitting of Uniform Load Surface Curvature Curve", WORLD EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, vol. 34, no. 1, 15 March 2018 (2018-03-15), pages 121 - 130, XP055787175, ISSN: 1007-6069 *

Cited By (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN114993835A (zh) * 2021-05-28 2022-09-02 中铁第四勘察设计院集团有限公司 一种基于静动力响应的钢筋混凝土梁损伤识别方法
CN114993835B (zh) * 2021-05-28 2024-05-17 中铁第四勘察设计院集团有限公司 一种基于静动力响应的钢筋混凝土梁损伤识别方法
CN113761626A (zh) * 2021-09-07 2021-12-07 湘潭大学 基于转角影响线Katz1分形维数的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN113761626B (zh) * 2021-09-07 2023-06-20 湘潭大学 基于转角影响线Katz1分形维数的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN114048775A (zh) * 2021-11-10 2022-02-15 哈尔滨工业大学 线性相关结构损伤诊断指标的核函数显式映射重构方法
CN114048775B (zh) * 2021-11-10 2022-07-05 哈尔滨工业大学 线性相关结构损伤诊断指标的核函数显式映射重构方法
CN115203797A (zh) * 2022-07-13 2022-10-18 中国建筑西南设计研究院有限公司 一种智能识别结合人工复检对梁支座进行判断的方法
CN115203797B (zh) * 2022-07-13 2023-11-28 中国建筑西南设计研究院有限公司 一种智能识别结合人工复检对梁支座进行判断的方法
CN116579193A (zh) * 2022-12-20 2023-08-11 湘潭大学 挠度应变能等效的梁结构局部等效刚度计算方法
CN116579193B (zh) * 2022-12-20 2024-03-19 湘潭大学 挠度应变能等效的梁结构局部等效刚度计算方法
CN116343966A (zh) * 2023-03-27 2023-06-27 山东大学 基于延迟因子的概率乘累加结构损伤成像定位方法及系统
CN116343966B (zh) * 2023-03-27 2023-11-17 山东大学 基于延迟因子的概率乘累加结构损伤成像定位方法及系统

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
GB202111170D0 (en) 2021-09-15
CN110502856A (zh) 2019-11-26
CN110502856B (zh) 2021-05-25
GB2593851A (en) 2021-10-06
GB2593851B (en) 2022-06-08

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
WO2021036751A1 (fr) Procédé d'identification d'endommagement de poutre continue basé sur une courbure de ligne d'influence de réaction aux appuis
CN110502855B (zh) 支座反力影响线曲率的等截面连续梁损伤识别方法
CN108280294B (zh) 一种基于模态参数的索拱结构损伤组合识别方法
CN110487576B (zh) 损伤状态倾角对称斜率的等截面梁损伤识别方法
CN105806203A (zh) 一种三维相对位移传感器
CN111707543A (zh) 基于转角影响线曲率差分的等截面梁结构损伤识别方法
CN110489916B (zh) 基于损伤状态倾角影响线曲率的等截面梁损伤识别方法
CN110472368B (zh) 基于剪力和倾角影响线曲率的简支梁损伤识别方法
CN110501127B (zh) 一种基于损伤状态倾角斜率的等截面梁损伤识别方法
CN110472369B (zh) 挠度曲率的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN113761626B (zh) 基于转角影响线Katz1分形维数的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN110489919B (zh) 索力影响线曲率的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN110487574B (zh) 基于倾角影响线曲率的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN110795779A (zh) 轨面映射模型的建立方法及装置
CN110487579B (zh) 一种基于倾角斜率的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN111707428B (zh) 基于位移影响线曲率差分的等截面梁结构损伤识别方法
CN111896200B (zh) 短索抗弯刚度测试方法
CN114722674A (zh) 一种基于响应面法的斜拉索力识别优化方法
CN110501177B (zh) 基于自由端倾角影响线曲率的悬臂梁损伤识别方法
CN113740010B (zh) 基于挠度影响线Katz1分形维数的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN110487577B (zh) 倾角对称斜率的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN113761627B (zh) 基于支座反力影响线Katz1分形维数的连续梁损伤识别方法
CN110487580A (zh) 一种基于支座反力和倾角斜率的梁结构损伤识别方法
CN115859733B (zh) 高斯过程回归的裂纹t梁单元损伤程度计算方法
CN114858323B (zh) 基于激光位移传感器的箱梁桥挠曲变形应力检测方法

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 20858111

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref document number: 202111170

Country of ref document: GB

Kind code of ref document: A

Free format text: PCT FILING DATE = 20200807

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: DE

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase

Ref document number: 20858111

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1