中文摘要：

目的研究高烈度震区简支梁采用抗震体系对桥梁安全性和经济性的影响,为高烈度震区简支梁抗震设计提供依据.方法以雅万高铁32 m简支梁为例,采用非线性时程分析方法,对比采用延性抗震体系简支梁桥以及采用减隔震体系简支梁桥在抗震性能上的差异.并对两种方案工程造价上的差异进行对比分析.结果采用延性抗震体系的简支梁桥,虽然支座造价略便宜,但桩基长度和配筋均大于减隔震体系的简支梁桥,减隔震体系在造价上更优;同时,采用减隔震体系桥梁在罕遇地震下仅支座锚栓发生剪断,桥梁整体保持弹性,相比抗震性能更优.结论综合造价及抗震性能,推荐高烈度震区高速铁路简支梁桥优先采用减隔震体系.

英文摘要：

For high-speed railway,bridge proportion is high,and simply-supported bridge is often used for small and medium bridges. The earthquake resistance system is studied for the safety and economy of beam. The study can give reference to the seismic design of simply-supported beam under high-intensity seismic region. Take 32 m simply-supported beam in Djakarta-Bandung high speed railway as an example, two feasible earthquake resistance systems including ductile seismic system（ Common spherical bearing is adopted） and seismic mitigation and isolation system（ Hyperboloid spherical seismic mitigation and isolation bearing is adopted） are compared. The seismic performance and engineering costs are contrasted. The results show as follows： for the simply-supported beam using ductile seismic system, the pile length and the reinforcement rate are all larger than the system using seismic mitigation and isolation bearing. Although the bearing is a little cheaperthe overall costs are more expensive than the seismic mitigation and isolation system. Meanwhile,for the seismic mitigation and isolation system,although the bearing bolts are shear broken, the bridge is on the whole elastic. The seismic performance is better than the ductile system. Through the comparison between costs and seismic performance, the seismic mitigation and isolation system should be recommended in high-intensity region.