Thick-wall shear wall anti-seismic property evaluation method

Abstract

The invention provides a thick-wall shear wall anti-seismic performance evaluation method, and relates to the technical field of wall anti-seismic performance evaluation, and the method specifically comprises the steps: carrying out the vibration test of a wall, obtaining a modal shape value of the wall, deducing the mass distribution characteristics of the wall, generating a mass distribution uniformity index, and carrying out the calculation of the mass distribution uniformity index; meanwhile, defect detection is conducted on concrete in the wall through the ultrasonic technology, and a defect index is generated; performing a dynamic load test on the wall to generate a dynamic response index; combining the dynamic response index, the mass distribution uniformity index and the defect index to generate an anti-seismic performance evaluation model, and generating a comprehensive anti-seismic performance evaluation value of the to-be-evaluated thick-wall shear wall by using the anti-seismic performance evaluation model; the comprehensive anti-seismic performance evaluation value is compared with the preset anti-seismic threshold value, the anti-seismic performance grade of the thick-wall shear wall is divided according to the comparison result, the anti-seismic performance of the shear wall is evaluated according to the anti-seismic performance grade, and the accuracy and applicability of evaluation are improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to the technical field of wall seismic performance evaluation, and in particular to a method for evaluating the seismic performance of a thick-wall shear wall. Background Art

[0002] As an important load-bearing structure of modern high-rise buildings, thick-walled shear walls are widely used due to their good seismic performance and structural stability. However, with the increase in building height and the increase in the frequency of seismic activity, thick-walled shear walls face many challenges in actual use. Traditional seismic design and evaluation methods are mainly based on empirical formulas and static analysis, which results in the inability to fully reflect the true performance of the structure under complex seismic loads. Especially in the design stage, the material defects and uneven mass distribution inside the wall are often ignored. Due to factors such as construction technology and material aging, there may be defects such as cracks and voids inside the wall, but traditional detection methods mostly rely on external visual inspections and static tests, lacking effective identification of internal defects, which can easily lead to a serious underestimation of the structural bearing capacity when an earthquake occurs.

[0003] In addition, existing technologies also have deficiencies in the analysis of dynamic response characteristics. Although some studies have begun to introduce dynamic load experiments and modal analysis, the measurement of the dynamic and damping characteristics of the wall is still not comprehensive enough. When conducting seismic performance evaluation, the lack of systematic and comprehensive analysis methods has limited the reliability of the evaluation results. In particular, the lack of understanding of the mass distribution of each part of the wall makes it difficult for the evaluation to adapt to complex actual working conditions. Therefore, the introduction of more accurate detection technology and comprehensive evaluation methods in seismic performance evaluation can effectively solve the deficiencies of current technology in identifying internal defects of the wall and analyzing dynamic response characteristics, thereby improving the seismic safety of the overall structure.

[0004] The above information disclosed in this Background section is only for enhancement of understanding of the background of the present disclosure and therefore it may contain information that does not constitute the prior art that is already known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Summary of the invention

[0005] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a method for evaluating the seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls to solve the problems raised in the above-mentioned background technology.

[0006] To achieve the above object, the present invention provides the following technical solutions: A method for evaluating the seismic performance of thick shear walls, comprising the following specific steps: Step 1: Perform vibration test on the thick shear wall to obtain its modal vibration value, thereby deriving the mass distribution characteristics of the wall and generating a mass distribution uniformity index. At the same time, ultrasonic technology is used to detect defects in the concrete inside the wall and generate a defect index. Step 2: Perform a dynamic load test on the wall to obtain dynamic response data of the wall, wherein the dynamic response characteristics are the natural frequency of the wall and the damping ratio of the entire vibration system, and perform correlation analysis on the natural frequency and the damping ratio to generate a dynamic response index; Step 3: Combine the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index to generate the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value of the thick-wall shear wall to be evaluated, and the weights of the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index in the calculation of the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value are determined based on the hierarchical analysis method; Step 4: Compare the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value with the preset seismic threshold value. According to the comparison result, determine the seismic performance level of the thick-walled shear wall to be evaluated, and optimize the design of the thick-walled shear wall to be evaluated based on the seismic performance level.

[0007] Furthermore, a vibration test is performed on the wall to obtain its modal vibration value, thereby deriving the mass distribution characteristics of the wall. The mass distribution characteristics refer to the local mass of the wall, and the specific logic is as follows: The side of the wall is evenly divided into several grids, and the center of each grid is used as a monitoring node. The wall is subjected to vibration test, and the vibration response and acceleration of each monitoring node are recorded; Using modal analysis method, the modal vibration value of the wall is determined through vibration response, and the local mass of each grid is determined based on the modal vibration value and acceleration; ; in, For the The quality of the grid, is the first mode at position The modal vibration value is used to characterize the position in this mode. The relative displacement of It's location The acceleration at is the total mass of the wall, obtained from the wall design drawing, Indicates The grid center of the grid; The mass of each mesh is normalized so that the sum of all mesh masses equals the total mass of the entire wall: ; In the formula, Represents the normalized The quality of the grid, is the index of the grid, is the total number of grids, is the total mass of the wall.

[0008] Furthermore, the specific method for determining the modal vibration value of the wall through vibration response is: The wall was subjected to vibration test, and the acceleration response data at different positions and heights of each grid was recorded. The collected time domain acceleration signal was converted into a frequency domain signal using fast Fourier transform, and the frequency characteristics of the wall were identified. Modal analysis was performed using MATLAB, and the vibration mode values ​​under different modes were identified based on the results of the modal analysis.

[0009] Furthermore, the mass distribution uniformity index is generated based on the following formula: ; In the formula, is the mass distribution uniformity index, Represents the normalized The quality of the grid, is the index of the grid, is the total number of grids, is the average quality of each mesh.

[0010] Furthermore, ultrasonic technology is used to detect defects in concrete in the wall, based on the following specific logic: At each monitoring node, the propagation time of the ultrasonic wave passing through the shear wall perpendicular to the wall surface is obtained, and the average propagation time is calculated. The average propagation speed of the ultrasonic wave is calculated based on the average propagation time: ; In the formula, is the average propagation speed, Represents the distance between the ultrasonic transmitter and the receiver, represents the average propagation time; Get the sound wave propagation velocity of normal concrete, the sound wave propagation velocity and average propagation velocity of normal concrete After dimensionless processing, the defect index is calculated: ; In the formula, is the defect index, represents the sound wave propagation speed in normal concrete, is the average propagation speed.

[0011] Furthermore, the specific logic for obtaining the natural frequency of the wall is as follows: A continuous variable frequency dynamic load is applied to the wall in a direction perpendicular to the wall, and the time domain signal of the acceleration at the center of the wall perpendicular to the wall is recorded in real time. The frequency characteristics are extracted from the frequency domain signal using fast Fourier transform to find the frequency with the largest amplitude, which is the natural frequency of the wall. ; The specific logic for collecting the damping ratio of the entire vibration system is as follows: apply an impact load to the wall, then record its free vibration response, use an accelerometer to record its vibration signal, that is, the acceleration response signal generated by the wall after the impact load is applied, analyze the vibration signal, and observe the attenuation of acceleration over time. For each group of two adjacent peaks, calculate its damping ratio by calculating the acceleration ratio of adjacent peaks: ; in, For the The damping ratio corresponding to the peak value is and is the acceleration between two adjacent peaks, is the index of the peak, and , The total number of recorded peak values ​​is the average value of the damping ratios obtained for all groups, which is taken as the damping ratio of the entire vibration system and recorded as ; The formula for generating the dynamic response index is as follows: ; In the formula, is the dynamic response index, is the natural frequency of the wall, The preset scale factor is is the damping ratio, is its preset proportionality factor, and .

[0012] Furthermore, the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index are combined to generate a comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, which is expressed as follows: ; In the formula, is the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, is a natural constant, is the mass distribution uniformity index, is the defect index, is the dynamic response index, , and are the weights of dynamic response index, quality distribution uniformity index and defect index, respectively, which are determined according to the analytic hierarchy process; The specific logic of determining weights through the hierarchical analysis method is: The three indicators of dynamic response index, quality distribution uniformity index and defect index are marked, and the relative importance values ​​between them are determined by the nine-scale method to construct a judgment matrix, in which the dynamic response index is marked as 1, the quality distribution uniformity index is marked as 2, and the defect index is marked as 3. The constructed judgment matrix is: ; in, , denotes the index of the index, and , , Indicates that the index is The index relative to the index is The index importance of , the importance is scaled from 1 to 9, and The larger the value, the higher the index. The index is compared to the index The greater the importance of the index, , ; Each element value in the judgment matrix is ​​divided by the sum of its columns to obtain a normalized judgment matrix. The mean of the element values ​​in each row of the normalized judgment matrix is ​​calculated, and the mean of the element values ​​in the first row is used as the weight of the dynamic response index, the mean of the element values ​​in the second row is used as the weight of the quality distribution uniformity index, and the mean of the element values ​​in the third row is used as the weight of the defect index. With the constraint that the sum of the scaled values ​​is equal to 1, the three weights are scaled in equal proportions, and the scaled weights are used as the proportional coefficients of the corresponding indexes.

[0013] Furthermore, the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value is compared with the preset seismic threshold value. According to the comparison result, the seismic performance level of the thick-walled shear wall is divided, and the seismic performance of the shear wall is evaluated accordingly. The specific logic is as follows: when When the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value of the current shear wall is judged to be far below the preset seismic threshold, the wall cannot withstand the design load in an earthquake, and there is a serious structural safety risk. The shear wall should be fully redesigned or reinforced immediately; when When the shear wall is judged to have a certain seismic resistance, but the performance level is average, the safety margin is low, and there is a risk of structural damage under a strong earthquake, so the shear wall design is optimized; when When the seismic performance of the current shear wall is better than the basic requirements of the design code, it can provide reliable seismic safety under common earthquakes; in, is the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, It is the preset earthquake resistance threshold.

[0014] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects: The present invention improves the accuracy of seismic performance evaluation of thick-walled shear walls by combining vibration testing and ultrasonic testing technology. First, modal analysis enables the acquisition of modal frequencies and vibration modes of the wall, the derivation of the mass distribution characteristics of the wall, and the quantification of its dynamic response under different load conditions. This detailed analysis can effectively identify the mass heterogeneity of the wall and provide a scientific basis for seismic design. Secondly, ultrasonic technology is used for defect detection of concrete inside the wall, which can detect tiny cracks or cavities in real time, which are often ignored in traditional detection. By generating a defect index, the data support of the evaluation model is further enriched. Combining the dynamic response index, the mass distribution uniformity index and the defect index, the weight is determined by the hierarchical analysis method, and the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value formed can more comprehensively and accurately reflect the actual seismic capacity of the thick-walled shear wall. In addition, by comparing the comprehensive evaluation value with the preset seismic threshold, the seismic performance level of the wall can be clarified, thereby identifying potential structural safety risks at an early stage, and providing reliable decision support for engineers in building design and safety assessment in earthquake-prone areas. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0015] Figure 1 It is a schematic diagram of the overall method flow of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0016] In order to make the objectives, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention more clearly understood, the present invention is further described in detail below in conjunction with specific embodiments.

[0017] It should be noted that, unless otherwise defined, the technical terms or scientific terms used in the present invention should be understood by people with ordinary skills in the field to which the present invention belongs. The words "first", "second" and similar words used in the present invention do not indicate any order, quantity or importance, but are only used to distinguish different components. "Include" or "comprise" and similar words mean that the elements or objects appearing before the word include the elements or objects listed after the word and their equivalents, without excluding other elements or objects. "Connect" or "connected" and similar words are not limited to physical or mechanical connections, but may include electrical connections, whether direct or indirect. "Up", "down", "left", "right" and the like are only used to indicate relative positional relationships. When the absolute position of the described object changes, the relative positional relationship may also change accordingly.

[0018] Example: See also Figure 1 , the present invention provides a technical solution: A method for evaluating the seismic performance of thick shear walls, comprising the following specific steps: Step 1: Perform vibration test on the thick shear wall to obtain its modal vibration value, thereby deriving the mass distribution characteristics of the wall and generating a mass distribution uniformity index. At the same time, ultrasonic technology is used to detect defects in the concrete inside the wall and generate a defect index. In this embodiment, a vibration test is performed on the wall to obtain its modal vibration shape value, thereby deducing the mass distribution characteristics of the wall. The specific logic is as follows: the side of the wall is evenly divided into a number of grids, each grid center is used as a monitoring node, and the wall is subjected to a vibration test to record the vibration response and acceleration of each monitoring node; the modal vibration shape value of the wall is determined by the vibration response using a modal analysis method, and the local mass of each grid is determined based on the modal vibration shape value and the acceleration; ; in, For the The quality of the grid, is the first mode at position The modal vibration value is used to characterize the position in this mode. The relative displacement of It's location The acceleration at is the total mass of the wall, obtained from the wall design drawing, Indicates The grid center of the grid; The mass of each mesh is normalized so that the sum of all mesh masses equals the total mass of the entire wall: ; In the formula, Represents the normalized The quality of the grid, is the index of the grid, is the total number of grids, is the total mass of the wall; The specific method for determining the modal vibration value of the wall through vibration response is: The wall was subjected to vibration test, and the acceleration response data at different positions and heights of each grid was recorded. The collected time domain acceleration signal was converted into a frequency domain signal using fast Fourier transform, and the frequency characteristics of the wall were identified. Modal analysis was performed using MATLAB, and the vibration mode values ​​under different modes were identified based on the results of the modal analysis.

[0019] The mass distribution uniformity index is generated based on the following formula: ; In the formula, is the mass distribution uniformity index, which indicates the unevenness of the mass distribution of the wall. When , it means that the mass of the wall is completely evenly distributed. The larger it is, the more uneven the mass distribution is; Represents the normalized The quality of the grid, is the index of the grid, is the total number of grids, is the average quality of each mesh.

[0020] The specific logic of using ultrasonic technology to detect defects in concrete in the wall is as follows: the propagation time of the ultrasonic wave passing through the shear wall is obtained at each monitoring node, and the average propagation time is calculated. When setting the ultrasonic transmitter and receiver, the two are on the same horizontal line. The transmitter sends an ultrasonic signal with a frequency of 50kHz. The signal propagates through the wall to the receiver. The average propagation speed of the ultrasonic wave is calculated based on the average propagation time: ; In the formula, is the average propagation speed, Represents the distance between the ultrasonic transmitter and the receiver, represents the average propagation time; among them, 50 kHz is selected as the ultrasonic frequency, which can effectively detect defects in concrete while maintaining good penetration ability and appropriate resolution.

[0021] The sound wave propagation velocity of normal concrete is obtained by looking up the table, and the sound wave propagation velocity and average propagation velocity of normal concrete are calculated. After dimensionless processing, the defect index is calculated: ; In the formula, is the defect index, The higher the value, the greater the difference between the average propagation speed and the ideal state, indicating that the degree of internal defects in the concrete is more serious; if A value close to zero indicates that the state of the concrete is close to normal and has few internal defects; represents the sound wave propagation speed in normal concrete, is the average propagation speed.

[0022] The advantage of step 1 is that by evenly dividing the side of the wall into multiple grids, combined with vibration testing and ultrasonic testing, the modal frequency, vibration mode and internal defect information of the wall can be systematically obtained. This meticulous method makes the evaluation not limited to the overall performance of the wall, but can go deep into the local quality and its distribution characteristics, thereby ensuring a more accurate seismic performance analysis. Compared with the existing technology, traditional methods often ignore the tiny defects inside the wall, which may lead to an underestimation of the safety of the structure. Therefore, the introduction of step 1 improves the scientificity and reliability of seismic performance evaluation.

[0023] In this solution, the adoption of step 1 can lay a solid data foundation for the subsequent dynamic load test and comprehensive performance evaluation model. Through the accurate acquisition of mass distribution uniformity index and defect index, the dynamic response index generated in the subsequent steps will be more representative and accurate. This systematic data collection and analysis method can effectively improve the credibility of the seismic performance evaluation model, and then provide a reliable basis for structural design optimization and safety assessment, thereby significantly improving the safety and effectiveness of thick-walled shear walls in seismic design.

[0024] Step 2: Perform a dynamic load test on the wall to obtain dynamic response data of the wall, wherein the dynamic response characteristics are the natural frequency of the wall and the damping ratio of the entire vibration system, and perform correlation analysis on the natural frequency and the damping ratio to generate a dynamic response index; In this embodiment, the natural frequency of the wall is obtained based on the following specific logic: a continuous variable frequency dynamic load is applied to the wall in a direction perpendicular to the wall, and the time domain signal of the acceleration at the center of the wall perpendicular to the wall is recorded in real time. The frequency characteristics are extracted from the frequency domain signal by fast Fourier transform, and the frequency with the largest amplitude is found, which is the natural frequency of the wall. ; The specific logic for collecting the damping ratio of the entire vibration system is as follows: apply an impact load to the wall, then record its free vibration response, use an accelerometer to record its vibration signal, that is, the acceleration response signal generated by the wall after the impact load is applied, analyze the vibration signal, and observe the attenuation of acceleration over time. For each group of two adjacent peaks, calculate its damping ratio by calculating the acceleration ratio of adjacent peaks: ; in, For the The damping ratio corresponding to the peak value is and is the acceleration between two adjacent peaks, is the index of the peak, and , The total number of recorded peak values ​​is the average value of the damping ratios obtained for all groups, which is taken as the damping ratio of the entire vibration system and recorded as ; The formula for generating the dynamic response index is as follows: ; In the formula, is the dynamic response index, is the natural frequency of the wall, The preset scale factor is is the damping ratio, is its preset proportionality factor, and This is because the natural frequency directly reflects the stiffness characteristics of the system, while the damping ratio mainly affects the characteristics of the dynamic response and energy dissipation. Comprehensive consideration of these two parameters can more comprehensively evaluate the dynamic performance of the wall, but in terms of the direct impact of stiffness, the natural frequency is more critical; using the natural logarithm form, the dynamic response index can be converted into a relative scale, making the results easier to interpret and compare. The logarithmic characteristics allow small changes to be amplified, thereby better reflecting the impact in the dynamic response index; the use of cube roots can smooth the response under the influence of different parameters, avoid over-amplification of the impact of a certain item, and make the index more stable.

[0025] when When it increases, it indicates that the structure has stronger stiffness, which is beneficial to the bearing capacity and seismic performance. Increase; when When the damping ratio increases, the system's response to dynamic loads decays faster. A high damping ratio can reduce the duration of vibration and reduce potential damage to the structure. Therefore, the dynamic response index Increase; that is, , Dynamic Response Index There is a positive correlation.

[0026] Step 2 obtains the dynamic response data of the shear wall in a vibration environment, including the natural frequency and the damping ratio of the entire vibration system, by conducting a dynamic load test on the wall, and performs a correlation analysis to generate a dynamic response index. This method significantly improves the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the evaluation. Compared with the traditional evaluation method based only on static performance parameters, the dynamic load test can more realistically reflect the dynamic characteristics of the shear wall under actual seismic loads. In addition, the natural frequency and damping ratio, as key dynamic parameters for measuring the seismic characteristics of the structure, can effectively characterize the vibration characteristics and energy dissipation capacity of the wall. This enables the collection and analysis of this step to make up for the lack of dynamic characteristics research in traditional evaluations.

[0027] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of step 2 are mainly reflected in: by combining the correlation analysis of natural frequency and damping ratio, a dynamic response index is generated, which can more intuitively quantify the seismic performance of the shear wall. This analysis method based on dynamic test data overcomes the limitation of poor applicability of traditional static evaluation methods under seismic loads. At the same time, through technical means such as accelerometers and fast Fourier transforms, dynamic characteristic data can be extracted efficiently and accurately, which improves the efficiency and accuracy of the evaluation and provides key support for the all-round analysis of seismic performance. In this scheme, step 2 provides key dynamic response parameters for the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation, supplements the deficiencies of static evaluation, and makes the seismic performance evaluation of the shear wall more comprehensive and scientific. The dynamic response index, stiffness influence index, and energy dissipation capacity index together constitute an important part of the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, which directly affects the final evaluation result. By adding dynamic response data, not only the credibility of the evaluation model is improved, but also the model can better adapt to complex seismic environments, providing a more accurate reference basis for optimizing design and seismic reinforcement.

[0028] Step 3: Combine the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index to generate the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value of the thick-wall shear wall to be evaluated, and the weights of the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index in the calculation of the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value are determined based on the hierarchical analysis method; In this embodiment, the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value of the thick-wall shear wall to be evaluated is generated based on the following calculation formula: ; In the formula, is the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, is a natural constant, is the mass distribution uniformity index, is the defect index, is the dynamic response index, , and are the weights of dynamic response index, quality distribution uniformity index and defect index, respectively, which are determined according to the analytic hierarchy process; The value of can reflect the overall performance and safety of thick shear walls in terms of earthquake resistance. The value indicates that the wall has strong seismic resistance under earthquake action and can effectively withstand the design load; when When it increases, it indicates that the vibration characteristics of the structure have been improved. For example, by adding damping and shock-absorbing equipment, adjusting the structural natural frequency, optimizing the mass distribution and other measures, the dynamic response of the structure is more ideal. will also increase; The larger the value, the greater the unevenness of the wall mass distribution, which may lead to insufficient local stiffness or decreased seismic performance. When increasing, will decrease; when When it increases, it means that the degree of concrete defects increases, the speed of sound wave propagation decreases, and the seismic performance of the wall will be adversely affected. will decrease; that is, and There is a positive correlation, , and There is a negative correlation.

[0029] The specific logic of determining weights through the hierarchical analysis method is: The three indicators of dynamic response index, quality distribution uniformity index and defect index are marked, and the relative importance values ​​between them are determined by the nine-scale method to construct a judgment matrix, in which the dynamic response index is marked as 1, the quality distribution uniformity index is marked as 2, and the defect index is marked as 3. The constructed judgment matrix is: ; in, , denotes the index of the index, and , , Indicates that the index is The index relative to the index is The index importance of , the importance is scaled from 1 to 9, and The larger the value, the higher the index. The index is compared to the index The greater the importance of the index, , ; Each element value in the judgment matrix is ​​divided by the sum of its columns to obtain a normalized judgment matrix. The mean of the element values ​​in each row of the normalized judgment matrix is ​​calculated, and the mean of the element values ​​in the first row is used as the weight of the dynamic response index, the mean of the element values ​​in the second row is used as the weight of the quality distribution uniformity index, and the mean of the element values ​​in the third row is used as the weight of the defect index. With the constraint that the sum of the scaled values ​​is equal to 1, the three weights are scaled in equal proportions, and the scaled weights are used as the proportional coefficients of the corresponding indexes.

[0030] The advantage of step 3 is that by combining the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index, a comprehensive seismic performance evaluation index is generated. This method can comprehensively consider the importance and interrelationship of each evaluation index, making the evaluation of seismic performance more comprehensive and scientific. Compared with the existing technology, traditional evaluation methods often rely only on a single index or a simple linear combination, which is difficult to fully reflect the true seismic performance of the structure. Step 3 determines the weight of each index through the hierarchical analysis method, thereby improving the objectivity and accuracy of the evaluation results, and providing a more reliable evaluation basis for the seismic performance of thick-walled shear walls.

[0031] In this solution, the adoption of step 3 can effectively integrate various key indicators to form a systematic seismic performance evaluation framework. This framework not only improves the accuracy of the evaluation, but also provides a scientific basis for the subsequent seismic performance classification. The generated comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value can quickly and accurately determine the seismic capacity of the wall, thereby providing practical decision support for engineers during the design and reinforcement process. This systematic evaluation method will push the construction industry to move towards higher standards in seismic design and safety assessment, and ultimately improve the safety and reliability of buildings in earthquakes.

[0032] Step 4: Compare the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value with the preset seismic threshold value, determine the seismic performance level of the thick-walled shear wall to be evaluated according to the comparison result, and optimize the design of the thick-walled shear wall to be evaluated based on the seismic performance level; In this embodiment, the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value is compared with the preset seismic threshold value, and the specific logic is as follows: when When the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value of the current shear wall is judged to be far below the preset seismic threshold, the wall may not be able to withstand the design load in an earthquake, and there is a serious structural safety risk. The shear wall should be fully redesigned or reinforced immediately; when When the shear wall is judged to have a certain seismic resistance, but the performance level is relatively general, the safety margin is low, and there may be a risk of structural damage under a strong earthquake. Try to optimize the shear wall design; when When the seismic performance of the current shear wall is better than the basic requirements of the design code, it can provide reliable seismic safety under common earthquakes; in, is the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, It is a preset seismic resistance threshold, and its specific value is determined according to the performance requirements for specific building types and seismic fortification categories in the current seismic codes.

[0033] Step 4 compares the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value with the preset seismic threshold value to achieve a seismic performance grading assessment based on quantitative data. Its advantage is that it uses a clear numerical threshold standard to intuitively and objectively divide the seismic performance level of the shear wall. This logical threshold-based grading method avoids the shortcomings of subjective judgment in traditional seismic performance evaluation and provides a clear decision-making basis for subsequent design optimization, reinforcement plan formulation and construction acceptance.

[0034] Compared with the existing technology, the beneficial effect of step 4 is that it introduces the comparison logic between the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value and the seismic threshold, making the evaluation more scientific and standardized. Traditional methods usually rely on experience or a single indicator for rough judgment and lack a unified quantitative standard. This method compares the comprehensive indicators generated by integrating multiple key parameters with the preset standards, making the evaluation results more comprehensive and engineering guiding significance. In addition, by setting the grading standard, a clear classification and subsequent processing suggestions are provided for different seismic performance levels. In this scheme, step 4 is the summary link of the entire evaluation method. Through quantitative comparison and grading, the seismic performance status of the shear wall is clarified. It converts complex seismic performance analysis results into executable classification conclusions, providing a direct basis for design optimization, structural reinforcement and construction decisions. At the same time, the introduction of step 4 makes the expression of the evaluation results easier to understand and apply, enhances the practicality and engineering implementation of the overall evaluation scheme, and makes the entire scheme more systematic and scientific, providing a key guarantee for improving the seismic safety of the shear wall.

[0035] The above formulas are all dimensionless and numerical calculations. The formula is a formula for the most recent real situation obtained by collecting a large amount of data and performing software simulation. The preset parameters in the formula are set by technicians in this field according to actual conditions.

[0036] The above embodiments may be implemented in whole or in part by software, hardware, firmware or any other combination thereof. When implemented by software, the above embodiments may be implemented in whole or in part in the form of a computer program product. Those skilled in the art may appreciate that the units and algorithm steps of each example described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein may be implemented by electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are performed by hardware or software methods depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution.

[0037] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, and may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0038] The above description is only a specific implementation manner of the present application, but the protection scope of the present application is not limited thereto. Any technician familiar with the technical field can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed in the present application, which should be included in the protection scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the seismic performance of thick shear walls, characterized in that: The specific steps include: Step 1: Perform vibration test on the thick shear wall to obtain its modal vibration value, thereby deriving the mass distribution characteristics of the wall and generating a mass distribution uniformity index. At the same time, ultrasonic technology is used to detect defects in the concrete inside the wall and generate a defect index. Step 2: Perform a dynamic load test on the wall to obtain dynamic response data of the wall, wherein the dynamic response characteristics are the natural frequency of the wall and the damping ratio of the entire vibration system, and perform correlation analysis on the natural frequency and the damping ratio to generate a dynamic response index; Step 3: Combine the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index to generate the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value of the thick-wall shear wall to be evaluated, and the weights of the dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index in the calculation of the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value are determined based on the hierarchical analysis method; Step 4: Compare the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value with the preset seismic threshold value. According to the comparison result, determine the seismic performance level of the thick-walled shear wall to be evaluated, and optimize the design of the thick-walled shear wall to be evaluated based on the seismic performance level.

2. A method for evaluating the seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls according to claim 1, characterized in that: Vibration test is performed on the wall to obtain its modal vibration value, so as to deduce the mass distribution characteristics of the wall. The mass distribution characteristics refer to the local mass of the wall. The specific logic is as follows: The side of the wall is evenly divided into several grids, and the center of each grid is used as a monitoring node. The wall is subjected to vibration test, and the vibration response and acceleration of each monitoring node are recorded; Using modal analysis methods, the modal vibration value of the wall is determined through vibration response, and the local mass of each grid is determined based on the modal vibration value and acceleration; ； in, For the The quality of the grid, It is Modal in position The modal vibration value of is used to characterize the position in this mode. The relative displacement of It's location The acceleration at is the total mass of the wall, obtained from the wall design drawing, Indicates The grid center of the grid; The mass of each mesh is normalized so that the sum of all mesh masses equals the total mass of the entire wall: ； In the formula, Represents the normalized The quality of the grid, is the index of the grid, is the total number of grids, is the total mass of the wall.

3. A method for evaluating the seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls according to claim 2, characterized in that: The specific method for determining the modal vibration value of the wall through vibration response is: The wall was subjected to vibration test, and the acceleration response data at different positions and heights of each grid was recorded. The collected time domain acceleration signal was converted into a frequency domain signal using fast Fourier transform, and the frequency characteristics of the wall were identified. Modal analysis was performed using MATLAB, and the vibration mode values ​​under different modes were identified based on the results of the modal analysis.

4. A method for evaluating seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls according to claim 2, characterized in that: The mass distribution uniformity index is generated based on the following formula: ; In the formula, is the mass distribution uniformity index, Represents the normalized The quality of the grid, is the index of the grid, is the total number of grids, is the average quality of each mesh.

5. A method for evaluating seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls according to claim 2, characterized in that: The specific logic for using ultrasonic technology to detect defects in concrete in walls is as follows: At each monitoring node, the propagation time of the ultrasonic wave passing through the shear wall perpendicular to the wall surface is obtained, and the average propagation time is calculated. The average propagation speed of the ultrasonic wave is calculated based on the average propagation time: ； In the formula, is the average propagation speed, Represents the distance between the ultrasonic transmitter and the receiver, represents the average propagation time; Get the sound wave propagation velocity of normal concrete, the sound wave propagation velocity and average propagation velocity of normal concrete After dimensionless processing, the defect index is calculated: ； In the formula, is the defect index, represents the sound wave propagation speed in normal concrete, is the average propagation speed.

6. A method for evaluating seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls according to claim 1, characterized in that: The specific logic for obtaining the natural frequency of the wall is as follows: A continuous variable frequency dynamic load is applied to the wall in a direction perpendicular to the wall, and the time domain signal of the acceleration at the center of the wall perpendicular to the wall is recorded in real time. The frequency characteristics are extracted from the frequency domain signal using fast Fourier transform to find the frequency with the largest amplitude, which is the natural frequency of the wall. ; The specific logic for collecting the damping ratio of the entire vibration system is as follows: apply an impact load to the wall, then record its free vibration response, use an accelerometer to record its vibration signal, that is, the acceleration response signal generated by the wall after the impact load is applied, analyze the vibration signal, and observe the attenuation of acceleration over time. For each group of two adjacent peaks, calculate its damping ratio by calculating the acceleration ratio of adjacent peaks: ； in, For the The damping ratio corresponding to the peak value is and is the acceleration between two adjacent peaks, is the index of the peak, and , The total number of recorded peak values ​​is the average value of the damping ratios obtained for all groups, which is taken as the damping ratio of the entire vibration system and recorded as ; The formula for generating the dynamic response index is as follows: ； In the formula, is the dynamic response index, is the natural frequency of the wall, The preset scale factor is is the damping ratio, is its preset proportionality factor, and .

7. A method for evaluating seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls according to claim 1, characterized in that: The dynamic response index, mass distribution uniformity index and defect index are combined to generate a comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, which is expressed as follows: ； In the formula, is the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, is a natural constant, is the mass distribution uniformity index, is the defect index, is the dynamic response index, , and are the weights of dynamic response index, quality distribution uniformity index and defect index, respectively, which are determined according to the analytic hierarchy process; The specific logic of determining weights through the hierarchical analysis method is: The three indicators of dynamic response index, quality distribution uniformity index and defect index are marked, and the relative importance values ​​between them are determined by the nine-scale method to construct a judgment matrix, in which the dynamic response index is marked as 1, the quality distribution uniformity index is marked as 2, and the defect index is marked as 3. The constructed judgment matrix is: ； in, , denotes the index of the index, and , , Indicates that the index is The index relative to the index is The index importance of , the importance is scaled from 1 to 9, and The larger the value, the higher the index. The index is compared to the index The greater the importance of the index, , ; Each element value in the judgment matrix is ​​divided by the sum of its columns to obtain a normalized judgment matrix. The mean of the element values ​​in each row of the normalized judgment matrix is ​​calculated, and the mean of the element values ​​in the first row is used as the weight of the dynamic response index, the mean of the element values ​​in the second row is used as the weight of the quality distribution uniformity index, and the mean of the element values ​​in the third row is used as the weight of the defect index. With the constraint that the sum of the scaled values ​​is equal to 1, the three weights are scaled in equal proportions, and the scaled weights are used as the proportional coefficients of the corresponding indexes.

8. A method for evaluating seismic performance of thick-wall shear walls according to claim 7, characterized in that: The comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value is compared with the preset seismic threshold value. According to the comparison result, the seismic performance level of the thick-walled shear wall is divided, and the seismic performance of the shear wall is evaluated accordingly. The specific logic is as follows: when When the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value of the current shear wall is judged to be far below the preset seismic threshold, the wall cannot withstand the design load in an earthquake, and there is a serious structural safety risk. The shear wall should be fully redesigned or reinforced immediately; when When the shear wall is judged to have a certain seismic resistance, but the performance level is average, the safety margin is low, and there is a risk of structural damage under a strong earthquake, so the shear wall design is optimized; when When the seismic performance of the current shear wall is better than the basic requirements of the design code, it can provide reliable seismic safety under common earthquakes; in, is the comprehensive seismic performance evaluation value, It is the preset earthquake resistance threshold.

Images