远距离爆炸荷载作用下城市连续梁桥的动力响应和破坏机理

李拓亨; 杨尚霖; 钟连; 郑小红; 姚小虎

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2025-0170

远距离爆炸荷载作用下城市连续梁桥的动力响应和破坏机理

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2025-0170

李拓亨^1,,
杨尚霖^{1, 2, ,},
钟连¹,
郑小红^1, ,,
姚小虎¹

1.
华南理工大学土木与交通学院，广东广州 510641
2.
广州地铁设计研究院股份有限公司，广东广州 510420

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金（12232006）

详细信息

作者简介:
李拓亨（2002－　），男，硕士研究生，202420107162@mail.scut.edu.cn

通讯作者:
杨尚霖（1993－　），男，博士，yangshanglin@dtsjy.com

郑小红（1978－　），女，博士，副教授，xhzheng@scut.edu.cn

中图分类号: O389
计量
- 文章访问数: 313
- HTML全文浏览量: 51
- PDF下载量: 69
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2025-06-10
- 修回日期: 2026-01-16
- 网络出版日期: 2026-01-21

Dynamic response and failure mechanism for urban continuous beam bridges under far-field blast loads

LI Tuoheng^1
,,
YANG Shanglin^{1, 2
, ,},
ZHONG Lian¹,
ZHENG Xiaohong^{1
, ,},
YAO Xiaohu¹

1.
School of Civil Engineering and Transportation, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, Guangdong, China
2.
Guangzhou Metro Design & Research Institute Co., Ltd, Guangzhou 510420, Guangdong, China

摘要

摘要: 为探究远距离爆炸荷载作用下城市连续梁桥的动力响应和破坏机理，首先采用LS-DYNA实现了远距离爆炸荷载的高效加载和爆炸流固耦合数值计算。基于典型连续梁桥结构，建立精细化数值计算模型，分析了不同爆炸场景下桥梁的响应过程和典型破坏模式，并进一步研究了爆炸距离、爆炸当量、冲击角度对结构响应和破坏的影响。结果表明：远距离爆炸荷载下连续梁桥呈现整体性的响应，上部结构抬升和桥墩倾斜是响应过程中的典型特征，上部结构抬升受爆炸荷载及桥梁空间几何特性影响，而桥墩倾斜则与冲击波直接作用和上部结构移位相关；正冲击下，连续梁桥发生湿接头破坏、箱梁弯曲变形、墩顶和墩底压溃以及盖梁弯曲开裂等典型破坏模式，并且斜冲击下，下部结构还发生墩柱扭转现象；冲击角度和比例距离减小，均将加剧桥梁结构的整体损伤程度。根据提出的加权损伤因子评价可知，相比于冲击角度变化，连续梁桥整体损伤程度对比例距离变化更敏感。
- 远距离爆炸 /
- 连续梁桥 /
- 动力响应 /
- 破坏机理
Abstract: Urban bridges are frequently exposed to blast threats arising from accidental explosions and terrorist attacks. However, existing studies on bridge responses under blast loading remain limited, particularly for far-field blast conditions. To investigate the dynamic response and damage mechanisms of urban continuous beam bridges subjected to far-field blast loading, LS-DYNA was employed to efficiently apply blast loads and perform numerical simulations accounting for blast-induced fluid–structure interaction. Based on a typical continuous beam bridge, a refined numerical model was developed to analyze the response process and representative damage modes of the bridge under different blast scenarios. Furthermore, the effects of blast distance, explosive charge weight, and impact angle on structural response and damage were systematically examined. The results indicate that, under far-field blast loading, the continuous beam bridge exhibits a global structural response, with uplift of the superstructure and tilting of the bridge piers being the dominant characteristics. The uplift of the superstructure is primarily influenced by the blast load and the spatial geometric characteristics of the bridge, whereas the tilting of the piers is associated with the direct action of the blast wave and the displacement of the superstructure. Under perpendicular impact, typical damage modes include wet joint failure, flexural deformation of box girders, crushing damage at the tops and bases of piers, and bending cracks in bent caps. Under oblique blast loading, torsional deformation of pier columns is additionally observed in the substructure. A decrease in the impact angle or the scaled distance results in an increase in the overall damage of the bridge structure. Evaluation based on the proposed weighted damage factor indicates that, compared with the impact angle, the overall damage of the continuous beam bridge is more sensitive to variations in the scaled distance. The findings of this study provide useful analytical approaches and mechanistic insights for understanding blast responses and guiding the blast-resistant design of bridge structures.
- far-field blast /
- continuous beam bridge /
- dynamic response /
- failure mechanism

HTML全文

图 1 远距离爆炸荷载加载方法示意图

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the far-field blast loading method

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 RC板模型（单位：mm）

Figure 2. RC slab model (unit: mm)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 测点P1、P2的压力曲线^[25]

Figure 3. Pressure histories at points P1 and P2^[25]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 RC板动态响应的模拟与试验结果^[25]的对比

Figure 4. Comparison of dynamic responses of RC slab between numerical simulation and experiment^[25]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 连续梁桥有限元模型（单位：mm）

Figure 5. Finite element model of continuous beam bridge (unit: mm)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 空气域网格收敛性分析

Figure 6. Mesh convergence analysis for the air domain

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 流体域有限元模型（单位：mm）

Figure 7. Finite element model of the fluid domain (unit: mm)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 远距离爆炸场景示意图（单位：m）

Figure 8. Schematic diagram of the far-field blast scenarios (unit: m)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 桥梁结构测点布置

Figure 9. Arrangement of measurement points on the bridge structure

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 场景1的结构动态响应过程

Figure 10. Structural dynamic response process for scenario 1

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 场景1典型时刻的速度场云图

Figure 11. Velocity field contour at typical moment in scenario 1

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 场景1压力时程曲线

Figure 12. Pressure time histories of Scenario 1

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 场景1测点时程曲线

Figure 13. Time histories of measurement points in Scenarios 1

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 场景1～4测点时程曲线

Figure 14. Time histories of measurement points in scenarios 1–4

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 场景1～4的破坏模式

Figure 15. Failure modes for scenarios 1–4

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 连续梁桥远距离爆炸破坏模式特征与桥梁地震破坏模式对比^{[14, 36-37]}

Figure 16. Comparison of failure mode characteristics of the continuous beam bridge under far-field blast and earthquake loading^{[14, 36- 37]}

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 17 桥墩和桥面测点位移时程曲线

Figure 17. Displacement histories of measurement points on piers and bridge deck

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 18 不同角度下盖梁侧面压力分布

Figure 18. Pressure distribution on the sides of bent caps under different impact angles

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 19 不同冲击角度下连续梁桥损伤云图

Figure 19. Damage contours of the continuous beam bridge under different impact angles

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 20 桥梁结构加权损伤因子对比

Figure 20. Comparison of the weighted damage factors for the bridge

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 C40混凝土的材料参数

Table 1. Mechanical properties of C40 concrete

密度/(kg·m⁻³)	泊松比	单轴抗拉强度/MPa	λ_m	a_0m	a_1m
2300	0.2	3.2	8.7×10⁻⁵	17.7	0.57

a_2m	a_0y	a_1y	a_2y	a_1r	a_2r
5.6×10⁻⁴	11.2	0.9	1.7×10⁻³	0.57	5.6×10⁻⁴

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 C30和C50混凝土的材料参数

Table 2. Mechanical properties of C30 and C50 a concretes

混凝土强度等级	单轴抗拉强度/MPa	λ_m	a_0m	a_1m	a_2m
C30	3.2	8.7×10⁻⁵	13.3	0.57	8.4×10⁻⁴
C50	4.2	8.7×10⁻⁵	22.1	0.57	5.0×10⁻⁴

混凝土强度等级	a_0y	a_1y	a_2y	a_1r	a_2r
C30	8.4	0.9	2.8×10⁻³	0.57	8.4×10⁻⁴
C50	14.0	0.9	1.4×10⁻³	0.57	5.0×10⁻⁴

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 各场景爆炸参数

Table 3. Blast parameters for each scenarios

场景	爆炸当量/kt	爆炸距离/m	比例距离/(m·kg^−1/3)	入射角度/(°)
1	1.0	180	1.8	0
2	1.0	220	2.2	0
3	1.0	260	2.6	0
4	1.5	220	1.92	0
5	1.0	220	2.2	30
6	1.0	220	2.2	60

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 不同工况参数

Table 4. Parameters for different cases

工况	爆炸当量/ kt	爆炸距离/ m	比例距离/ (m·kg^−1/3)	入射角度/ (°)	S点Z方向峰值位移/ mm	D₁	A2点总位移峰值/ mm	D₂
1	1	180	1.8	0	1020	1.00	1040	1.00
2	1	220	2.2	0	440	0.43	285	0.27
3	1	260	2.6	0	204	0.20	130	0.13
4	1	180	1.8	30	526	0.52	522	0.50
5	1	220	2.2	30	320	0.31	380	0.37
6	1	260	2.6	30	128	0.13	87	0.08
7	1	180	1.8	60	250	0.25	500	0.48
8	1	220	2.2	60	147	0.14	93	0.09
9	1	260	2.6	60	88	0.09	70	0.07

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(38)

[1]	LIN Z J, LI M, HE S, et al. Analysis on typical characteristics and causes of coal mine gas explosion accidents in China [J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2024, 31(43): 55475–55489. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-024-34890-7.
[2]	ÇALIŞKAN C, DAĞ N, KINIK K. Analysis of the medical consequences of global terrorist attacks in Turkic States in the last 50 years by weapon and attack type [J]. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 2023, 17: e514. DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2023.172.
[3]	ALSENDI A, EAMON C D. Observations of structural damage to girder bridges in Iraq caused by blast threats [J]. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2024, 38(6): 04024043. DOI: 10.1061/jpcfev.cfeng-4774.
[4]	ALSENDI A, EAMON C D. Quantitative resistance assessment of steel girder bridges subjected to blast loads [J]. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2024, 29(9): 04024069. DOI: 10.1061/jbenf2.beeng-6821.
[5]	张海鹏, 潘钻峰, 司豆豆. 二次爆炸作用下钢筋混凝土梁动力响应的数值模拟 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2024, 44(10): 101404. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2024-0021. ZHANG H P, PAN Z F, SI D D. Numerical simulation on dynamic response of reinforced concrete beams to secondary explosion [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2024, 44(10): 101404. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2024-0021.
[6]	周广盼, 林志成, 王明洋, 等. 钢筋混凝土箱梁近场爆炸响应的试验与数值模拟 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2023, 43(7): 072201. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2022-0468. ZHOU G P, LIN Z C, WANG M Y, et al. Test and numerical study on the near-field explosion response of reinforced concrete box girder [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2023, 43(7): 072201. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2022-0468.
[7]	马世鑫, 纪杨子燚, 钟明寿, 等. 接触爆炸作用下混凝土墩体的易损性研究 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2023, 43(7): 073201. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2022-0538. MA S X, JI Y Z Y, ZHONG M S, et al. Study on the vulnerability of concrete obstacle under contact explosion [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2023, 43(7): 073201. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2022-0538.
[8]	AZAR A B, SARI A. Failure analysis and structural resilience of a masonry arch Bridge subjected to blast loads: the case study, Halilviran Bridge [J]. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 2025, 32(17): 4041–4064. DOI: 10.1080/15376494.2024.2400245.
[9]	孙金山, 姚颖康, 吴亮, 等. 高架桥混凝土多室箱梁水压爆破破碎机理数值模拟 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2017, 37(2): 299–306. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2017)02-0299-08. SUN J S, YAO Y K, WU L, et al. Numerical simulation of water-pressure blasting mechanism in breaking viaduct box girder [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2017, 37(2): 299–306. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2017)02-0299-08.
[10]	LYU C, YAN Q S. Field test and fragility analysis of RC box girder bridges subjected to contact explosion [J]. Engineering Structures, 2025, 322: 119063. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2024.119063.
[11]	YI Z, AGRAWAL A K, ETTOUNEY M, et al. Blast load effects on highway bridges. Ⅰ: modeling and blast load effects [J]. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2014, 19(4): 04013023. DOI: 10.1061/(asce)be.1943-5592.0000547.
[12]	方秦, 杨石刚, 陈力, 等. 天津港“8·12”特大火灾爆炸事故建筑物和人员损伤破坏情况及其爆炸威力分析 [J]. 土木工程学报, 2017, 50(3): 12–18. DOI: 10.15951/j.tmgcxb.2017.03.002. FANG Q, YANG S G, CHEN L, et al. Analysis on the building damage, personnel casualties and blast energy of the “8·12” explosion in Tianjin port [J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2017, 50(3): 12–18. DOI: 10.15951/j.tmgcxb.2017.03.002.
[13]	RIGBY S E, LODGE T J, ALOTAIBI S, et al. Preliminary yield estimation of the 2020 Beirut explosion using video footage from social media [J]. Shock Waves, 2020, 30(6): 671–675. DOI: 10.1007/s00193-020-00970-z.
[14]	YANG S L, LIU Z C, WANG S F, et al. Dynamic response and failure analysis for urban bridges under far-field blast loads [J]. Engineering Structures, 2023, 285: 116043. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116043.
[15]	CANNON L, CLUBLEY S K. Structural response of simple partially-clad steel frames to long-duration blast loading [J]. Structures, 2021, 32: 1260–1270. DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2021.03.024.
[16]	MONK S, CLUBLEY S K. Experimental testing of structural arrangement on window response to long-duration blast [J]. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2021, 123: 105304. DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105304.
[17]	WANG Y H, ZHAI X M, LEE S C, et al. Responses of curved steel-concrete-steel sandwich shells subjected to blast loading [J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2016, 108: 185–192. DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2016.08.018.
[18]	KONG W M, YANG S L, WANG S F, et al. On dynamic response and damage evaluation of bridge piers under far-field explosion loads [J]. Structures, 2023, 51: 985–1003. DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2023.03.030.
[19]	YUAN S J, HAO H, ZONG Z H, et al. Numerical analysis of axial load effects on RC bridge columns under blast loading [J]. Advances in Structural Engineering, 2021, 24(7): 1399–1414. DOI: 10.1177/1369433220979443.
[20]	US Department of the Army. Fundamentals of protective design for conventional weapons: TM5-855-1 [R]. Washington: US Department of the Army, 1986.
[21]	周云波, 郭启涛, 佘磊, 等. 基于LBE方法的驾驶室防护仿真 [J]. 北京理工大学学报, 2016, 36(3): 237–241. DOI: 10.15918/j.tbit1001-0645.2016.03.004. ZHOU Y B, GUO Q T, SHE L, et al. Simulation of vehicle cabin protection based on load blast enhanced method [J]. Transactions of Beijing Institute of Technology, 2016, 36(3): 237–241. DOI: 10.15918/j.tbit1001-0645.2016.03.004.
[22]	HAN Y Z, LIU H B. Finite element simulation of medium-range blast loading using LS-DYNA [J]. Shock and Vibration, 2015, 2015(1): 631493. DOI: 10.1155/2015/631493.
[23]	GILSON L, ROEY J V, GUÉDERS C, et al. A simple coupling of ALE domain with empirical blast load function in LS-DYNA [J]. EPJ Web of Conferences, 2012, 26: 04018. DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/20122604018.
[24]	孙晓颖, 许伟, 武岳. 钝体绕流中的计算域设置研究 [C]//第十三届全国结构风工程学术会议论文集(下册). 大连: 中国土木工程学会桥梁与结构工程分会风工程委员会, 2007: 215–220.
[25]	SYED Z I, RAMAN S N, NGO T, et al. The failure behaviour of reinforced concrete panels under far-field and near-field blast effects [J]. Structures, 2018, 14: 220–229. DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2018.03.009.
[26]	黄晓莹, 陶俊林. 三种建筑钢筋材料高应变率下拉伸力学性能研究 [J]. 工程力学, 2016, 33(7): 184–189. DOI: 10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2014.12.1064. HUANG X Y, TAO J L. Tensile mechanical properties research of three construction steel bars in high strain rate [J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2016, 33(7): 184–189. DOI: 10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2014.12.1064.
[27]	ZAKRISSON B, WIKMAN B, HÄGGBLAD H Å. Numerical simulations of blast loads and structural deformation from near-field explosions in air [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2011, 38(7): 597–612. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2011.02.005.
[28]	WU Y C, CRAWFORD J E. Numerical modeling of concrete using a partially associative plasticity model [J]. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 2015, 141(12): 04015051. DOI: 10.1061/(asce)em.1943-7889.0000952.
[29]	LIU L, ZONG Z H, LI M H. Numerical study of damage modes and assessment of circular RC pier under noncontact explosions [J]. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2018, 23(9): 04018061. DOI: 10.1061/(asce)be.1943-5592.0001273.
[30]	KONG X Z, FANG Q, LI Q M, et al. Modified K&C model for cratering and scabbing of concrete slabs under projectile impact [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2017, 108: 217–228. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.02.016.
[31]	YIN X, LI Q H, CHEN B K, et al. An improved calibration of Karagozian & Case concrete/cementitious model for strain-hardening fibre-reinforced cementitious composites under explosion and penetration loadings [J]. Cement and Concrete Composites, 2023, 137: 104911. DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2022.104911.
[32]	SU Q, WU H, POH L H, et al. Dynamic behavior of UHPC-FST under close-in explosions with large charge weight [J]. Engineering Structures, 2023, 277: 115475. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115475.
[33]	YANG S L, ZHONG W, WANG S F, et al. On dynamic analysis and damage evaluation for bridge girders under high-energy air burst [J]. Structures, 2022, 41: 1488–1500. DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2022.05.088.
[34]	Department of the Army. Structures to resist the effects of accidental explosions: TM5-1300 [R]. Norfolk: Department of the Army, 1991.
[35]	司豆豆, 潘钻峰, 曾滨, 等. 爆炸荷载作用下大跨预应力混凝土框架动力响应分析 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2023, 43(11): 112201. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2023-0080. SI D D, PAN Z F, ZENG B, et al. Analysis of the dynamic response of prestressed concrete frame structures under blast load [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2023, 43(11): 112201. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2023-0080.
[36]	王东升, 郭迅, 孙治国, 等. 汶川大地震公路桥梁震害初步调查 [J]. 地震工程与工程振动, 2009, 29(3): 84–94. DOI: 10.13197/j.eeev.2009.03.004. WANG D S, GUO X, SUN Z G, et al. Damage to highway bridges during Wenchuan Earthquake [J]. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2009, 29(3): 84–94. DOI: 10.13197/j.eeev.2009.03.004.
[37]	LIU Z. Reconnaissance and preliminary observations of bridge damage in the great Wenchuan Earthquake, China [J]. Structural Engineering International, 2009, 19(3): 277–282. DOI: 10.2749/101686609788957883.
[38]	中华人民共和国交通运输部. 公路桥梁技术状况评定标准: JTG/T H21-2011 [S]. 北京: 人民交通出版社, 2011. Ministry of Transport of the People's Republic of China. Standards for technical condition evaluation of highway bridges: JTG/T H21-2011 [S]. Beijing: China Communications Press, 2011.