【摘要】 针对抗震设防9度区某教学楼，对比采用隔震结构“分部设计法”和“整体设计法”，并分别按照上部结构贴近规范限值和预留足够安全余量为目标进行了隔震结构设计，比较了4栋结构模型的整体指标以及配筋和造价的差异。进行了设防地震和罕遇地震水平下的弹塑性时程分析，对比了不同设计方法和设计目标下的结构地震响应。建立了结构地震易损性模型，从修复费用、修复时间和人员伤亡的角度进行了建筑抗震韧性评价，并探讨了不同结构地震时正常使用的性能。结果表明:采用不同设计方法进行常规设计的隔震结构模型，弹塑性层间位移角、楼面加速度时程以及抗震韧性评价结果差异不大，均能满足当前规范所定义的震时正常使用的要求，但抗震韧性评价等级较低。在满足规范层间位移角限值的基础上，设计预留更大的层间位移角安全余量，能进一步提升结构抗震韧性水平，有助于确保满足震时正常使用的要求。更多还原

【Abstract】 The “partial design method” and the “integral design method” of seismically isolated structures were compared in the design of a teaching building located in a high seismic region with seismic intensity 9,and the superstructure was designed either to approach the code limits or to retain a safety margin. The four structural models were compared in terms of overall performance indices,amount of reinforcement and cost. Elasto-plastic time-history analyses were carried out under design basis earthquakes and rarely occurred earthquakes,and the seismic responses of the structures designed using different methods and objectives were compared. Structural seismic fragility models were established,and the seismic resilience of the building was assessed in terms of restoration costs,repair time and casualties. The performance of the different structures in maintaining normal use during earthquakes was also discussed. The results show that the elasto-plastic interstory drift ratio,floor acceleration time histories and seismic resilience assessment results of the conventionally designed seismically isolated structural models obtained using different design methods are not significantly different. Both methods can satisfy the current code requirements for normal use during earthquakes,but the level of seismic resilience assessment remains relatively low. On the basis of satisfying the code limit for interstory drift ratio,reserving a larger safety margin for interstory drift ratio can further improve the seismic resilience of the structure and help ensure its normal use during earthquakes.更多还原