| 郝雨,尹益辉,万强,黎启胜.土工离心机风阻计算方法的对比研究[J].装备环境工程,2018,15(3):61-66. HAO Yu,YIN Yi-hui,WAN Qiang,LI Qi-sheng.Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Wind Resistance of Geotechnical Centrifuges[J].Equipment Environmental Engineering,2018,15(3):61-66. |
| 土工离心机风阻计算方法的对比研究 |
| Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Wind Resistance of Geotechnical Centrifuges |
| 投稿时间：2017-09-24 修订日期：2018-03-15 |
| DOI：10.7643/ issn.1672-9242.2018.03.013 |
| 中文关键词: 土工离心机 风阻 流场 随流比 |
| 英文关键词:geotechnical centrifuge wind resistance flow field air following flow ratio |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金（No. 11702279）；中国工程物理研究院总体工程研究所统筹项目（No. TCGH041607） |
|
|
| Author | Institution |
| HAO Yu | Institute of Engineering Physics, China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang 621999, China |
| YIN Yi-hui | Institute of Engineering Physics, China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang 621999, China |
| WAN Qiang | Institute of Engineering Physics, China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang 621999, China |
| LI Qi-sheng | Institute of Engineering Physics, China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang 621999, China |
|
| 摘要点击次数: |
| 全文下载次数: |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 评估不同土工离心机风阻功率估算方法的效果和优缺点，为工程应用及未来研究发展方向提出建议。方法 重点以土工离心机为例，总结几种有代表性的计算方法，系统分析不同方法之间的共性和差异。通过一个算例，同时结合以往离心机的设计经验，对各种方法的效果进行对比。结果 法国方法、美国方法、中国工程物理研究院方法和CFD仿真方法在精度上依次增大，但复杂性依次升高，后两种方法不需借助试验来确定参数。结论 对于中低速土工离心机，中国工程物理研究院方法具有较大的优势。随着土工离心机向着高速、大规模方向发展，经典解析方法的适用性尚未得到充分验证，基于CFD的高置信度仿真是一种较好的解决方案。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To evaluate effects and pros-and-cons of different estimation methods for wind resistance of geotechnical centrifuges, and provide suggestions on engineering application and future research. Methods Geotechnical centrifuge was mainly taken as example to introduce several typical calculation methods and systematically analyze commonness and difference among the methods. The effects of different methods were compared by a classical example combined with design experience on centrifuges. Results French Methods, US Method, CAEP Method and CFD Simulation had a successively increasing accuracy with a successively increasing complexity. Meanwhile the later two did not depend on experimenting data in determination of parameters. Conclusion For geotechnical centrifuges working at low-to medium speeds, the CAEP method has an advantage over others in engineering practice. But as the development of geotechnical centrifuges to the direction of large scales and high speeds, the validity of traditional analytical methods is still not examined. High fidelity methods based on CFD seems a good option. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
