论文部分内容阅读
李振富(天津大学): (一)原文指出:“对于拱坝而言,可作为圆柱壳体来进行动力分析”.笔者认为,这种说法是不确切的.对于龙羊峡大坝这样的重力拱坝,近似地按圆柱壳体进行动力分析是可以的,而对其他型式的拱坝,例如双曲拱坝,也作为圆柱壳体,将会引起难以估计的误差,甚至会导致错误的结果. (二)在原文的式(15)中,引用了符号~4,并给出~4=~4/z~4+2/R·~4/z~2θ~2+1/R·~4/θ~4,看来有误,应为~4=~4/z~4+2/R~2·~4/z~2θ~2+1/R~4·~4/θ~4,否则式(15)中的第3式等号两端量纲将不一致,因而不能成立,也不能导出式(16)中的各项比尺. (三)原文表4给出的是柱坐标系下振型振幅值,表5给出的是柱坐标系下的振型应变值.按照原文的叙述可知,原文作者首先求出的是振幅分量dx,dy,dz,再按照式(20)转换成柱坐标系下的振幅分量,然后依照式(11)-(13)则可求得ε_w,ε_θ及ε_(θz)。 原文作者并给出计算应变的公式(14).
Li Zhenfu (Tianjin University): (1) The original pointed out: “For the arch dam, it can be used as a cylindrical shell for dynamic analysis.” The author believes that this statement is inaccurate. For the gravity of the Longyangxia Dam Arch dams can be approximated by cylindrical shells for dynamic analysis, while arch dams of other types, such as double arch dams, also serve as cylindrical shells, which will cause inaccurate errors and may even lead to erroneous results. (2) In the formula (15) of the original text, the symbol ~4 is quoted, and ~4=~4/z~4+2/R·~4/z~2θ~2+1/R·~ is given. 4/θ~4, it seems to be wrong, it should be ~4=~4/z~4+2/R~2~~4/z~2θ~2+1/R~4~~4/θ~4 , otherwise the equation at the two ends of equation 3 in equation (15) will not agree, and thus cannot be established, nor can the scales in equation (16) be derived. (3) The original table 4 gives the cylindrical coordinates. The amplitude value of the lower vibration mode is given in Table 5. The vibration mode strain values in the column coordinate system are given in Table 5. According to the description in the original text, the original authors first find the amplitude components dx, dy, and dz, and then follow the equation (20). The amplitude components in the cylindrical coordinate system are converted, and then in accordance with (11)-(13), ε_w, ε_θ and ε_(θz) can be obtained. The original author gives the formula for calculating the strain (14).