Study on Seismic Strengthening of Frame Structure of School Buildings

中国的中小学校舍几乎是目前世界上日常使用时间最长，人口密度最大的建筑物。而中小学生逃生能力较差，如果地震突发，容易造成很大的伤亡。在2008年汶川大地震中，中小学楼房垮塌严重，造成广大师生伤亡和巨大财产损失，在社会上影响很大。为了防御和减小地震灾害损失，研究既有中小学校舍建筑的抗震安全性能，寻找安全可靠、经济合理的加固方法具有重要现实意义。 本文在国内外相关研究理论和方法的基础上，综合相关的文献资料和工程实践经验，对现有中小学校舍做以下几个方面的研究： 首先对既有的中小学校舍进行抗震性能现状调查，归纳目前存在的中小学建筑结构形式以及震害特征，比较各种结构形式的抗震性能，对当前中小学抗震加固...The school building of China in use are almost the biggest density of population in the world every working day while if suffering earthquake emergency, it may cause calamitous disaster due to the weaker ability of primary and middle school students to escape. In the 2008 Wen-Chuan earthquake, school buildings collapsed seriously and lots of students and teachers loose lives, it also caused great ...学位：工学硕士院系专业：建筑与土木工程学院土木工程系_结构工程学号：2532008115180

厦门市不同时期典型砖混结构校舍抗震能力分析

通过对厦门市行政区域内公办中、小学校舍建筑抗震性能的摸底普查工作,进行分类统计,并初步摸清校舍建筑抗震性能的基本现状及存在的典型问题,结合鉴定工作对校舍现状进行了分析总结。为后续校舍建筑的抗震性能分析,找出校舍建筑抗震性能现状与现有规范之间的差距奠定基础;为有关部门作好校舍建筑防震减灾工作提供参考依据

利用加设钢支撑改变单跨框架结构体系的抗震加固效果研究

单跨框架结构大量存在于中小学建筑中,中小学建筑已提高到乙类设防,根据抗震鉴定标准GB50023-2009,框架结构不宜为单跨框架;乙类设防时,不应为单跨框架。单跨框架是一种抗震严重不利体系,缺乏冗余约束,易发生整体倒塌。若从构件加固层次提高建筑的抗震性能,不但造价高、施工复杂,而且效果也不明显。加设支撑是一种改变建筑结构体系的方法,本文结合工程实例,讨论了加设钢支撑后原结构性能变化以及加固过程中应该注意的问题。研究表明,利用支撑改变结构受力体系,可以明显改善结构性能,提高抗震能力

翼墙在中小学校舍抗震加固中的应用

翼墙加固是一种易用的改变结构体系的快速有效的加固方法,具有概念明确,施工方便,造价低廉,加固效果好的特点。探讨了翼墙加固原理和设计方法,通过一项实际工程,讲述该方法的应用过程和具体构造措施

基于Pushover的中小学框架校舍抗震性能研究

既有框架校舍由于所建年代不同,设计所依据的抗震规范不一样,因而其抗震性能好坏呈现年代性。Pushover方法是一种静力弹塑性分析方法,广泛应用于结构抗震性能分析,本文通过三个依据不同抗震规范设计的框架模型进行Pushover分析,研究不同时期框架校舍抗震性能的差异。研究结果表明,早期按TJ 11-78设计的框架校舍抗震性能较差,后来按GB J11-89设计的框架校舍抗震性能有较大提高,目前按GB 50011-2001设计的框架校舍抗震性能最好

翼墙加固单跨框架抗震性能研究

单跨框架结构是种严重抗震不利体系,缺乏冗余约束,易发生整体倒塌,在抗震设防要求提高情况下,需要进行加固。翼墙加固因布置方便、概念明确而得到广大推崇,但对其加固效果到底如何并不清楚。本文通过对一栋典型中学教学楼进行翼墙加固分析,探讨了各种翼墙尺寸及类型对加固效果的影响,提出翼墙加固时应注意的问题及建议

Transmission line patrols and examines running gear of robot

本实用新型属于输电线路巡检设备，具体地说是一种输电线路巡检机器人行走装置。包括基座、支架、剖分轮、剖分驱动装置、行走驱动装置、左连接板及右连接板，其中支架设置于基座上，所述剖分驱动装置设置于支架上、并与左连接板和右连接板连接，所述左连接板和右连接板通过剖分驱动装置的驱动向相反方向移动；所述剖分轮设置于左连接板和右连接板的端部，所述行走驱动装置设置于左连接板或右连接板上、并与剖分轮连接。本实用新型在剖分轮上线合拢后，行走机构形成一个封闭的空间结构，架空地线位于封闭空间之内，能够防止行走轮或输电线路机器人的脱线

Aripiprazole versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: In most western industrialised countries, second generation (atypical) antipsychotics are recommended as first line drug treatments for people with schizophrenia. In this review we specifically examine how the efficacy and tolerability of one such agent - aripiprazole - differs from that of other comparable second generation antipsychotics. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of aripiprazole compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (November 2011), inspected references of all identified studies for further trials, and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies, drug approval agencies and authors of trials for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing aripiprazole (oral) with oral and parenteral forms of amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. Where possible, we calculated illustrative comparative risks for primary outcomes. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for each included study. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 trials involving 6389 patients. Aripiprazole was compared to olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. All trials were sponsored by an interested drug manufacturer. The overall number of participants leaving studies early was 30% to 40%, limiting validity (no differences between groups).When compared with olanzapine no differences were apparent for global state (no clinically important change: n = 703, 1 RCT, RR short-term 1.00 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22; n = 317, 1 RCT, RR medium-term 1.08 95% CI 0.95 to 1.22) but mental state tended to favour olanzapine (n = 1360, 3 RCTs, MD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) 4.68 95% CI 2.21 to 7.16). There was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 529, 2 RCTs, RR 0.99 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59) but fewer in the aripiprazole group had increased cholesterol levels (n = 223, 1 RCT, RR 0.32 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54) or weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight (n = 1095, 3 RCTs, RR 0.39 95% CI 0.28 to 0.54).When compared with risperidone, aripiprazole showed no advantage in terms of global state (n = 384, 2 RCTs, RR no important improvement 1.14 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60) or mental state (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD total PANSS 1.50 95% CI -2.96 to 5.96).One study compared aripiprazole with ziprasidone (n = 247) and both the groups reported similar change in the global state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD average change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score -0.03 95% CI -0.28 to 0.22) and mental state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD change PANSS -3.00 95% CI -7.29 to 1.29).When compared with any one of several new generation antipsychotic drugs the aripiprazole group showed improvement in global state in energy (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), mood (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.77 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92), negative symptoms (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.82 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99), somnolence (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) and weight gain (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Significantly more people given aripiprazole reported symptoms of nausea (n = 2881, 3 RCTs, RR 3.13 95% CI 2.12 to 4.61) but weight gain (7% or more of total body weight) was less common in people allocated aripiprazole (n = 330, 1 RCT, RR 0.35 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64). Aripiprazole may have value in aggression but data are limited. This will be the focus of another review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Information on all comparisons are of limited quality, are incomplete and problematic to apply clinically. Aripiprazole is an antipsychotic drug with a variant but not absent adverse effect profile. Long-term data are sparse and there is considerable scope for another update of this review as new data emerges from the many Chinese studies as well as from ongoing larger, independent pragmatic trials