Failure mode and residual bearing capacity of steel truss bridge under contact explosions
-
摘要: 钢桁梁桥通常由大量细长杆件构成，是铁路桥梁的主要形式之一，在服役过程中面临由无人机爆炸袭击引发的整桥倒塌破坏威胁。针对铁路钢桁梁桥在接触爆炸作用下的破坏模式及剩余承载力劣化规律开展了数值模拟分析。首先，通过模拟加劲钢板与钢箱拱的爆炸试验以及工字钢柱爆炸后的剩余承载力，对比验证了数值分析方法的可靠性；其次，对接触爆炸下上弦杆构件的损伤破坏和整桥剩余承载力的数值模型开展了网格敏感性分析；然后，明确了典型钢桁梁桥的最不利杆件以及爆炸当量对剩余承载力的影响规律；最后，探讨了多点爆炸作用下整桥损伤破坏演变机制。结果表明：接触爆炸作用下钢桁梁桥以杆件局部损伤为主要破坏形式，在100 kg炸药当量工况下，上弦杆侧面与顶面爆炸下整桥承载力分别降低了29.8%和18.0%，上弦杆侧面爆炸为最不利工况；随着上弦杆侧面爆炸炸药当量由25 kg增加至150 kg，整桥剩余承载力降幅由8.8%扩大至33.4%，以承载力损失与完好桥梁极限承载力之比为损伤因子，建立了整桥损伤因子-炸药当量定量关系；多点爆炸工况下的损伤因子增大至0.452，结构冗余度与剩余承载性能较单点爆炸工况显著降低。Abstract: Steel truss bridges are typically composed of a large number of slender members and represent one of the primary structural forms of railway bridges, facing the threat of overall collapse caused by explosions from unmanned aerial vehicles. Numerical simulation analysis was conducted on the failure mode and residual bearing capacity degradation law of railway steel truss bridges subjected to contact explosions. Firstly, the reliability of the numerical simulation method was verified by existing explosion tests on stiffened steel plates and steel box arches, as well as the residual bearing capacity of I-shaped steel column after explosion. Subsequently, mesh sensitivity analyses were performed for the damage and failure of upper chord member under contact explosions and for the residual bearing capacity of the entire bridge. Then, the most critical member of the bridge was identified by evaluating its residual performance under 100 kg TNT equivalent explosions at different locations. Furthermore, the variation of the residual bearing capacity with explosion yield was investigated. Finally, the evolution mechanism of damage and failure of the entire bridge under multi-point explosions was discussed. The results show that, (i) under contact explosions, steel truss girder bridges are mainly characterized by localized member damage. For an explosive charge of 100 kg, the overall bridge bearing capacity decreases by 29.8% and 18.0% when the explosion occurs on the side and top surfaces of the upper chord member. The side explosion on the upper chord is the most unfavorable scenario. (ii) As the charge weight for side explosion on upper chord increases from 25 kg to 150 kg, the reduction in residual bearing capacity of the entire bridge increases from 8.8% to 33.4%. Taking the ratio of bearing capacity loss to the ultimate bearing capacity of intact bridge as the damage index, a quantitative relationship between the entire bridge damage index and the explosive charge weight is established. (iii) Under multi-point explosion scenarios, the damage factor increases to 0.452, indicating the structural redundancy and residual bearing capacity are significantly reduced compared with those under single-point explosion conditions.
-
图 1 钢桁梁桥有限元模型（单位：mm）
Figure 1. Finite element model of the steel truss girder bridge (Unit: mm)
图 4 标准试件与Ｖ型缺口夏比冲击试验示意图（T1）
Figure 4. Schematic of standard specimen and V-notch Charpy impact test（T1）
图 5 U肋加劲钢爆炸试验布置图（T2、T3）
Figure 5. Layout of the U-rib stiffened steel explosion test (T2、T3)
图 13 不同网格上弦杆处爆炸损伤云图对比
Figure 13. Comparison of explosion damage nephograms at the top chord under different meshes
图 14 不同网格钢桁梁桥剩余承载性能对比
Figure 14. Comparison of residual bearing capacity of steel truss girder bridges with different meshes
图 15 不同爆炸位置下爆炸的钢桁梁桥损伤云图
Figure 15. Damage contour of the steel truss girder bridge under different blast locations
图 16 不同位置爆炸后钢桁梁桥剩余承载性能
Figure 16. Residual bearing capacity of the steel truss girder bridge after explosions at different locations
图 17 准静态加载下钢桁梁桥损伤云图
Figure 17. Damage of the steel truss girder bridge under quasi-static loading
图 18 不同当量下上弦杆的损伤云图
Figure 18. Damage nephogram of the top chord under different charge equivalents
图 20 不同当量爆炸后的剩余承载性能和损伤因子
Figure 20. Residual bearing capacity and damage factor after explosions of different yields
下载: 导出CSV
密度/(kg·m−3) 弹性模量/GPa 泊松比 抗拉强度/MPa 7 800 210 0.3 500
下载: 导出CSV
密度/(kg·m−3) 抗压强度/MPa 泊松比 2 500 35/40/60 0.2
下载: 导出CSV
密度/(kg·m−3) E0/(kJ·m−3) C0, C1, C2, C3, C6 C4 C5 1.29 200 0 0.4 0.4
下载: 导出CSV
密度/(kg·m−3) DCJ/(km·s−1) pCJ/GPa A/GPa B/GPa R1 R2 ω E0/(kJ·m−3) 1 630 6.930 21 371.2 3.231 4.15 0.95 0.3 7
下载: 导出CSV
名称 研发国家 当量/kg 名称 研发国家 当量/kg Griffin 美国 15.6 JAGM 美国 50 蝎子 美国 16 阻尼 欧洲 48.5 前哨-R 俄罗斯 20 见证者-136 伊朗 50 UJ-22 乌克兰 20 TB-2 土耳其 55 LOCAAS 美国 40.8～45.4 猎户座 俄罗斯 60 手术刀 美国 45 S-71 俄罗斯 120 海尔法 美国 45.4～49.4 赫尔墨斯-9000 以色列 250
下载: 导出CSV
表 7 爆炸工况参数
Table 7. Explosion scenario parameters
工况编号 爆炸位置 爆炸当量/kg 爆炸类型 S0 − − − S1 a—上弦杆侧面 100 单点/接触 S2 b—上弦杆顶面 100 单点/接触 S3 c—斜腹杆中心 100 单点/接触 S4 d—节点板侧面 100 单点/接触 S5 a—上弦杆侧面 25 单点/接触 S6 a—上弦杆侧面 50 单点/接触 S7 a—上弦杆侧面 150 单点/接触 S8 a、f—上弦杆侧面 100 两点/接触 S9 a、e—上弦杆侧面和上平联斜杆中心 100 两点/接触 S10 a、e、f—上弦杆侧面和上平联斜杆中心 100 三点/接触
下载: 导出CSV
表 8 剩余承载性能结果
Table 8. Results of residual bearing capacity
工况编号 爆炸位置 爆炸当量/kg 剩余承载力/MN·m 损伤因子 S0 - - 1169 - S1 a—单点爆炸 100 821 0.298 S2 b—单点爆炸 100 958 0.180 S3 c—单点爆炸 100 1142 0.023 S4 d—单点爆炸 100 1140 0.025 S5 a—单点爆炸 25 1066 0.088 S6 a—单点爆炸 50 986 0.157 S7 a—单点爆炸 150 779 0.334 S8 a、f—两点爆炸 100 679 0.419 S9 a、e—两点爆炸 100 802 0.314 S10 a、e、f—三点爆炸 100 641 0.452
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 张江平. 视频曝光!俄媒: 俄军打击乌克兰一座桥, 系乌军“重要物流枢纽” [EB/OL]. 环球网(2025-09-07)[2025-12-21]. https://world.huanqiu.com/article/4OEDvkUwOmy.ZHANG J P. Video exposed! Russian media: Russian forces strike a bridge in Ukraine, a key logistics hub for Ukrainian armed forces [EB/OL]. Huanqiu. com(2025-09-07)[2025-12-21]. https://world.huanqiu.com/article/4OEDvkUwOmy. [2] 金钰, 谷全祥. 2024年国外军用无人机装备技术发展综述 [J]. 战术导弹技术, 2025(2): 16–31. DOI: 10.16358/j.issn.1009-1300.20250025.JIN Y, GU Q X. Overview of foreign military UAV systems and technology development in 2024 [J]. Tactical Missile Technology, 2025(2): 16–31. DOI: 10.16358/j.issn.1009-1300.20250025. [3] 黄得刚, 杜晨慧, 徐志强, 等. 国外无人机机载空面轻型弹药发展现状及趋势分析 [J]. 飞航导弹, 2021(4): 63–67. DOI: 10.16338/j.issn.1009-1319.20200840.HUANG D G, DU C H, XU Z Q, et al. Development status and trend analysis of foreign UAV-borne air-to-surface light ammunition [J]. Aerodynamic Missile Journal, 2021(4): 63–67. DOI: 10.16338/j.issn.1009-1319.20200840. [4] 张君彪, 吴静, 赵飞, 等. 俄乌冲突中无人机作战运用情况及启示 [J]. 现代防御技术, 2025, 53(6): 37–45. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-086x.2025.06.005.ZHANG J B, WU J, ZHAO F, et al. Application and enlightenment of UAV in the Russia-Ukraine conflict [J]. Modern Defence Technology, 2025, 53(6): 37–45. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-086x.2025.06.005. [5] 娄凡. 预应力混凝土连续T梁的抗爆性能试验研究 [D]. 南京: 东南大学, 2018: 1–113.LOU F. Experimental study on blast resistance of prestressed concrete continuous T beams [D]. Nanjing: Southeast University, 2018: 1–113. [6] 院素静, 宗周红, 娄凡, 等. 预应力混凝土连续梁桥桥面爆炸损伤试验研究 [J]. 中国公路学报, 2022, 35(11): 160–170. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2022.11.015.YUAN S J, ZONG Z H, LOU F, et al. Experimental study on damage of prestressed concrete continuous girder bridge subjected to explosions above the deck [J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2022, 35(11): 160–170. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2022.11.015. [7] MA L L, WU H, FANG Q. Damage mode and dynamic response of RC girder bridge under explosions [J]. Engineering Structures, 2021, 243: 112676. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112676. [8] 王子国, 孔祥佳, 彭永, 等. 爆炸作用下RC T型梁桥桥面局部损伤快速评估 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2025, 45(11): 113901. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2024-0273.WANG Z G, KONG X J, PENG Y, et al. Rapid assessment of local damage in reinforced concrete T-beam bridge decks under blast loading [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2025, 45(11): 113901. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2024-0273. [9] 李家辉. 爆炸荷载下钢桁架桥梁生存能力评估研究 [D]. 绵阳: 西南科技大学, 2017: 1–70.LI J H. Study on survivability evaluation for steel truss bridge under blast loading [D]. Mianyang: Southwest University of Science and Technology, 2017: 1–70. [10] 王万月. 近爆作用下钢桁梁桥结构及构件的动态响应及损伤研究 [D]. 太原: 中北大学, 2021: 1–63. DOI: 10.27470/d.cnki.ghbgc.2021.001154.WANG W Y. Dynamic response and damage state research on steel truss bridge structures and components under near-field explosion loads [D]. Taiyuan: North University of China, 2021: 1–63. DOI: 10.27470/d.cnki.ghbgc.2021.001154. [11] LI H H, AGRAWAL A, CHEN Q, et al. Numerical simulation of a long-span steel truss bridge subjected to blast loads [J]. International Journal of Bridge Engineering, Management and Research, 2025, 2(1): 21425009. DOI: 10.70465/ber.v2i1.17. [12] REYES-SUÁREZ J C, BUITRAGO M, BARROS B, et al. Latent resistance mechanisms of steel truss bridges after critical failures [J]. Nature, 2025, 645(8079): 101–107. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-09300-8. [13] REMENNIKOV A M, UY B. Explosive testing and modelling of square tubular steel columns for near-field detonations [J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 101: 290–303. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.05.027. [14] 余洋, 纪冲, 周游, 等. 侧向局部爆炸荷载下钢质方管的损伤破坏及影响因素研究 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2018, 37(15): 191–198. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2018.15.027.YU Y, JI C, ZHOU Y, et al. Damage and failure of steel square tubes under lateral local explosion loading and their influencing factors [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2018, 37(15): 191–198. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2018.15.027. [15] 白志海. 正交异性钢桥面板恐怖爆炸破坏机理研究 [D]. 长沙: 国防科学技术大学, 2010: 1–77.BAI Z H. Investigation of failure mechanisms of orthotropic steel bridge decks under terror blast loading [D]. Changsha: National University of Defense Technology, 2010: 1–77. [16] 《中国公路学报》编辑部. 中国桥梁工程学术研究综述·2024 [J]. 中国公路学报, 2024, 37(12): 1–160. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.12.001.Editorial Department of China Journal of Highway and Transport. Review on China’s bridge engineering research: 2024 [J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2024, 37(12): 1–160. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.12.001. [17] 张宇, 李国强, 陈可鹏, 等. 桥梁结构抗爆安全评估研究进展 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2016, 36(1): 135–144. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2016)01-0135-10.ZHANG Y, LI G Q, CHEN K P, et al. Research advances of safety assessment of bridges under blast load [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2016, 36(1): 135–144. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2016)01-0135-10. [18] 宗周红, 甘露, 院素静, 等. 桥梁结构抗爆安全防护研究综述 [J]. 中国公路学报, 2024, 37(5): 1–37. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.05.001.ZONG Z H, GAN L, YUAN S J, et al. Review on anti-blast resistance and safety protection of bridge structures [J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2024, 37(5): 1–37. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.05.001. [19] ZHANG C W, GHOLIPOUR G, MOUSAVI A A. Blast loads induced responses of RC structural members: state-of-the-art review [J]. Composites Part B: Engineering, 2020, 195: 108066. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108066. [20] HUANG J X, LIU P, YU Z W, et al. Damage of CRTS III type ballastless track-32 m simply supported girder structural system under long-term deformation effects [J]. Engineering Structures, 2023, 295: 116814. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116814. [21] 张东阳. 普通钢筋混凝土CRTSⅢ型板式无砟轨道结构优化设计 [D]. 成都: 西南交通大学, 2019: 1–47. DOI: 10.27414/d.cnki.gxnju.2019.000752.ZHANG D Y. Optimization design of ordinary reinforced concrete CRTSⅢ slab ballastless track structure [D]. Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University, 2019: 1–47. DOI: 10.27414/d.cnki.gxnju.2019.000752. [22] Livermore software technology corporation (LSTC). LS-DYNA keyword user’s manual [M]. Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2022. [23] 林莉, 黄博, 肖新科, 等. Q355B钢动态材料性能研究 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2020, 39(18): 231–237. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2020.18.031.LIN L, HUANG B, XIAO X K, et al. Behavior of dynamic material Q355B steel based on the Johnson-Cook model [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2020, 39(18): 231–237. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2020.18.031. [24] 徐小东, 李华良, 张涛. 基于夏比冲击试验的材料失效模型参数 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2016, 36(1): 57–63. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2016)01-0057-07.XU X D, LI H L, ZHANG T. Parameters for the material failure model based on Charpy impact test [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2016, 36(1): 57–63. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2016)01-0057-07. [25] YAO S J, ZHANG D, LU F Y, et al. Fast prediction method of failure modes for steel box structures under internal blast loading [J]. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2021, 120: 104919. DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104919. [26] 赵春风, 何凯城, 卢欣, 等. 弧形双钢板混凝土组合板抗爆性能数值研究 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2022, 42(2): 025101. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2021-0205.ZHAO C F, HE K C, LU X, et al. Numerical study of blast resistance of curved steel-concrete-steel composite slabs [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2022, 42(2): 025101. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2021-0205. [27] GAN L, ZONG Z H, LIN J, et al. Damage difference analysis of steel plates under cuboid and cylinder charge explosions [J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2024, 222: 108947. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2024.108947. [28] 甘露, 宗周红. 装药形状对爆炸作用下钢桥面板损伤的影响研究 [J]. 中国公路学报, 2024, 37(5): 80–93. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.05.004.GAN L, ZONG Z H. Investigation of the influences of explosive shapes on the damage of steel bridge decks [J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2024, 37(5): 80–93. DOI: 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.05.004. [29] GAN L, ZONG Z H, LIN J, et al. Influence of U-shaped stiffeners on the blast-resistance performance of steel plates [J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2022, 188: 107046. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.107046. [30] GAN L, ZONG Z H, GAO C, et al. Influence of shape of cuboid explosives on response of plates subjected to blast loads [J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2022, 174: 109077. DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2022.109077. [31] SHAN Y L, ZONG Z H, RICHARD L J Y, et al. Damage modes and mechanism of steel box arch ribs under contact explosion [J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2025, 224: 109115. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2024.109115. [32] MOMENI M, HADIANFARD M A, BEDON C, et al. Numerical damage evaluation assessment of blast loaded steel columns with similar section properties [J]. Structures, 2019, 20: 189–203. DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2019.04.002. [33] 马亮亮, 吴昊. 爆炸作用下预应力RC梁桥的损伤评估 [J]. 工程力学, 2025, 42(11): 159–172. DOI: 10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2023.05.0378.MA L L, WU H. Damage assessment of prestressed RC girderbridge under explosion [J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2025, 42(11): 159–172. DOI: 10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2023.05.0378. [34] 陈长海, 朱锡, 侯海量, 等. 近距空爆载荷作用下固支方板的变形及破坏模式 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2012, 32(4): 368–375. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2012)04-0368-08.CHEN C H, ZHU X, HOU H L, et al. Deformation and failure modes of clamped square plates under close-range air blast loads [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2012, 32(4): 368–375. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2012)04-0368-08. -
图(21) / 表(8)
计量
- 文章访问数: 304
- HTML全文浏览量: 17
- PDF下载量: 67
- 被引次数: 0