海上浮动堆稳压器抗冲击分析方法的比较
|
摘要
目的对海上浮动堆的撞船工况进行模拟计算,并基于不同处理方法下的冲击载荷,对稳压器简化模型进行计算和对比分析。方法基于海上浮动堆撞船工况的仿真计算,获得稳压器支承基座位置在船长、船宽、船高三个方向的冲击加速度数据,并对时程数据进行反应谱处理。使用ANSYS软件,分别用等效静力法、反应谱分析法和时程分析法的输入载荷,计算稳压器的支承反力与顶端位移,并对三种方法的计算结果进行对比研究。结果等效静力法计算的支承轴力、剪力、弯矩三分量分别为1.25×10~6 N、6.97×10~5 N和2.08×10~9N·mm。反应谱分析法计算的支承轴力、剪力、弯矩三分量分别为1.90×10~5N、2.63×10~5N和1.10×10~9N·mm。时程分析法计算的支承轴力、剪力、弯矩三分量分别为2.03×10~5N、3.54×10~5N和1.15×10~9 N·mm。结论验证了撞船冲击数值模拟计算方法的可行性。对于不同的撞船冲击载荷处理方法,海上浮动堆稳压器的响应也不同,在本分析案例中,等效静力法计算结果大于反应谱分析法和时程分析法,反应谱分析法计算结果与时程分析法基本一致。
Objective To simulate and calculate the ships collided condition of floating nuclear reactor,calculate and compare the simplified models of pressurizers based on different treatment methods.Methods Based on simulating calculation on ships collided condition of floating nuclear reactor,the length,width and height directions acceleration of pressurizer supporting were obtained,and response spectrum treatment of time history was completed.Through the input loads of equivalent static analysis,spectrum analysis and time-history analysis by ANSYS,the support loads and top displacement of pressurizer were calculated,and the three kinds of results were compared.Results The axial force,shear force and bending moment of pressurizer support calculated by equivalent static analysis were 1.25×10~6 N,6.97×10~5 N and 2.08×10~9 N·mm.The axial force,shear force and bending moment of pressurizer support calculated by spectrum analysis were 1.90×10~5 N,2.63×10~5 N and 1.10×10~9 N·mm.The axial force,shear force and bending moment of pressurizer support calculated by time-history analysis were 2.03×10~5 N,3.54×10~5 N and 1.15×10~9 N·mm.Conclusion It proves that the method of calculating ships collided condition is feasible in the paper.For different input loads dispose methods,the structure response is different.For analysis case in this paper,the static analysis results are larger than spectrum analysis results,and the spectrum analysis results are approximately equal to time-history analysis results.
Objective To simulate and calculate the ships collided condition of floating nuclear reactor,calculate and compare the simplified models of pressurizers based on different treatment methods.Methods Based on simulating calculation on ships collided condition of floating nuclear reactor,the length,width and height directions acceleration of pressurizer supporting were obtained,and response spectrum treatment of time history was completed.Through the input loads of equivalent static analysis,spectrum analysis and time-history analysis by ANSYS,the support loads and top displacement of pressurizer were calculated,and the three kinds of results were compared.Results The axial force,shear force and bending moment of pressurizer support calculated by equivalent static analysis were 1.25×10~6 N,6.97×10~5 N and 2.08×10~9 N·mm.The axial force,shear force and bending moment of pressurizer support calculated by spectrum analysis were 1.90×10~5 N,2.63×10~5 N and 1.10×10~9 N·mm.The axial force,shear force and bending moment of pressurizer support calculated by time-history analysis were 2.03×10~5 N,3.54×10~5 N and 1.15×10~9 N·mm.Conclusion It proves that the method of calculating ships collided condition is feasible in the paper.For different input loads dispose methods,the structure response is different.For analysis case in this paper,the static analysis results are larger than spectrum analysis results,and the spectrum analysis results are approximately equal to time-history analysis results.
引文
[1]杨能仁,钦军伟,刘攀.核电厂稳压器抗震分析方法研究[J].核动力工程,2011,32(S1):90-92.
[2]中国船级社.海上浮式装置入级规范[K].北京:中国船级社,2014.
[3]中国船级社.内河双壳液货船耐碰撞评估指南[K].北京:中国船级社,2012.
[4]毛庆,曾忠秀,王伟.秦山核电二期工程反应堆主冷却剂系统与辅助系统力学分析[J].核动力工程,2003,24(z1):114-117.
[5]胡志强,徐嗣华.核电汽轮机抗震分析方法的发展和应用[J].热力透平,2015,44(4):290-295.
[6]周文建,陈宏,闻邦椿.核电站反应堆冷却剂泵的地震响应分析[J].振动与冲击,2006,25(1):32-35.
[2]中国船级社.海上浮式装置入级规范[K].北京:中国船级社,2014.
[3]中国船级社.内河双壳液货船耐碰撞评估指南[K].北京:中国船级社,2012.
[4]毛庆,曾忠秀,王伟.秦山核电二期工程反应堆主冷却剂系统与辅助系统力学分析[J].核动力工程,2003,24(z1):114-117.
[5]胡志强,徐嗣华.核电汽轮机抗震分析方法的发展和应用[J].热力透平,2015,44(4):290-295.
[6]周文建,陈宏,闻邦椿.核电站反应堆冷却剂泵的地震响应分析[J].振动与冲击,2006,25(1):32-35.