CALCULATIONS

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

Ghazvin - Rashat - Anzaliy Railway Bridge

DESIGN OF LEAD RUBBER BEARINGS

STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS
Revision 4 (ALP)

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

SUMMARY OF CALCULATIONS ........................................................................................... 4

1.1
CHANGES IN REVISION ................................................................................................... 4
1.2
EFFECT OF INCREASED RUBBER SHEAR MODULUS ...................................................................... 4
1.2.1
ISOLATION SYSTEM DISPLACEMENTS AND FORCES ............................................................. 4
1.2.2
DYNAMIC PROPERTIES AND DAMPING ........................................................................... 5
1.2.3
TEST CONDITIONS .................................................................................................. 5

2.

PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................... 7

2.1
2.2

3.

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 7
DESIGN CONDITIONS..................................................................................................... 7

PROCEDURES USED FOR BEARING DESIGN.......................................................................... 9

3.1
DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................ 9
3.2
CALCULATION OF EQUIVALENT SHEAR STRAINS ..................................................................... 10
3.3
LIMITING STRAIN CRITERIA ............................................................................................... 11
3.3.1
AASHTO LIMITING STRAIN CRITERIA........................................................................... 11
3.4
VERTICAL LOAD STABILITY ................................................................................................ 11
3.4.1
AASHTO VERTICAL LOAD STABILITY ............................................................................ 11
3.5
AASHTO LATERAL RESTORING FORCE ................................................................................ 13
3.6
LATERAL STIFFNESS PARAMETERS FOR BEARING ....................................................................... 13
3.7
SYSTEM PROPERTY MODIFICATION FACTORS ......................................................................... 15
3.7.1
AGE CHANGE IN PROPERTIES ................................................................................... 16
3.7.2
TEMPERATURE CHANGE IN PROPERTIES ......................................................................... 17
3.7.3
MODIFICATION FACTORS USED FOR DESIGN ................................................................. 17

4.

BEARING DESIGN CALCULATIONS.................................................................................... 19

4.1
ANALYSIS RESULTS USED FOR ISOLATION SYSTEM DESIGN ......................................................... 19
4.2
DESIGN LOADS ........................................................................................................... 20
4.3
MATERIAL PROPERTIES .................................................................................................... 20
4.4
BEARING SHAPE .......................................................................................................... 20
4.5
BEARING DIMENSIONS .................................................................................................. 21
4.6
BEARING PROPERTIES..................................................................................................... 22
4.7
LIMITING STRAIN CALCULATIONS ...................................................................................... 23
4.7.1
AASHTO CRITERIA ............................................................................................... 23

4.7.1.1
4.7.1.2
4.7.1.3
4.8

AASHTO Equation 25 ............................................................................................................. 23

AASHTO Equation 26 ............................................................................................................. 24
AASHTO Equation 27 ............................................................................................................. 24

VERTICAL LOAD STABILITY ................................................................................................ 25

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

4.8.1
AASHTO REQUIREMENTS ....................................................................................... 25
4.9
RESTORING FORCE ....................................................................................................... 26
4.10
EFFECTIVE STIFFNESS AND DAMPING .............................................................................. 27

CALCULATIONS

1.

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

SUMMARY OF CALCULATIONS

Holmes Consulting Group have been retained by Robinson Seismic Limited, a manufacturer and supplier
of lead rubber bearings, to prepare structural calculations and documentation for supply of isolation
bearings for the Ghazvin Rashat Anzaliy Railway Bridge, Iran
The preliminary design defines the model properties and the isolators are then checked, and the design
adjusted as necessary, using the maximum forces and deformations obtained from the analysis. This
however allows for the tuning of the isolator to the response and performance of the sub-structure.
At the time of writing the time history & response spectrum analysis has not been undertaken, so the
isolator design has been limited to a preliminary status.
1.1

CHANGES IN REVISION

Highlighted yellow
Revised Qd, and Fy to reflect final design
Reduction in Total Displacements to reflect 1.5MCE (Kelly et al) in test procedure.
Minor adjustments to report, misc.
1.2
1.2.1

EFFECT OF INCREASED RUBBER SHEAR MODULUS

ISOLATION SYSTEM DISPLACEMENTS AND FORCES

For the design of the isolators we have used a rubber shear stiffness mid-range value of 0.75 MPa. This is
lower that the original information supplied to us and gives a lower overall displacement, while having a
nominal increase in force capacity.
Table 1-1 lists the maximum displacements and the maximum force in the isolators. As expected the
increased hardness reduced displacements but increased forces. The reduction in displacements was
greater at the MDE level but the increase in forces was a maximum under MPE loads. The analysis
results, described in the following section, provide a more accurate assessment of the effects on forces.

TABLE 1-1 DESIGN DISPLACEMENTS AND FORCES

S800x800 Displacement DBE(mm)

S800x800 Force (kN) @ DBE disp.
C650 Displacement (mm)
C650 Force (kN)

G= 0.75MPa
132
887
134
513

CALCULATIONS

1.2.2

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

DYNAMIC PROPERTIES AND DAMPING

Table 1-2 lists the calculated damping and effective period for the two isolator types used in this design.
Both Isolators types use a lead core targeting a damping of approx 30%. The core size varies due to the
isolator shape, and limiting the core size to approx 10%-11% of the overall isolator area.
TABLE 1-2 DYNAMIC PROPERTIES

TRANSVERSE LONGITUDINAL
Displacement (mm)
134
114.5
Damping (% of critical)
35.6%
25.7%
Damping B Factor
1.82
1.62
Effective Period (Seconds)
1.15
1.34
1.2.3

TEST CONDITIONS

Table 1-3 summarizes the calculation of the isolator capacity under the critical load condition, MPE
displacement with maximum DL + LLs + E(DBE). This assumes that peak vertical earthquake load and
peak vector displacement occur contemporaneously. :

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

TABLE 1-3 TEST CONDITION CAPACITY (UNITS KN, MM)

Max [DL+1.0LL]
Max [DL+1.0LL+E(dbe)]
Min [0.85DL-E(dbe)]
Max [DL+1.0LL+E(mce)]
Max [DL+1.0LL-E(mce)]
MPE (DBE) Displacement
Offset Displacement
Factor on MPE Displacement
Applied Displacement (MPE/MCE)
Compression Stiffness
Design Shear Force at MPE (DBE) displ
Design Area of Hysteresis Loop at MPE
(DBE) displ.
Shape Factor, Si
MPE (DBE) Compressive Shear Strain, esc
MPE (DBE) Displacement Shear Strain, esh
MPE (DBE) Total Strain
MPE (DBE) Allowable Strain
MPE (DBE) Buckling Load, Pcr (reduced)

S800x800
7548
12703
259
16828
4343
132
0
1.5
198
5537
887
255377

C650
2844
4592
605
5990
2175
134
0
1.5
201
1772
513
160856

19.5
1.98
0.81
3.83
4.5
56886

15.4
2.01
0.83
3.52
4.5
14191

CALCULATIONS

2.
2.1

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
REFERENCES

Design parameters were provided for the seismic isolation system. The design followed the procedures
of the AASHTO 1999 Guide Specifications and all of the isolators comply with the AASHTO conditions.
The design was checked to ensure that it also complied with the requirements of this document.

2.2

[1]

American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide

Specifications for Seismic Isolation, 1999.

[2]

Mondkar, D.P. and Powell, G.H., 1979, ANSR II Analysis of Non-linear Structural Response
User's Manual, EERC 79/17, University of California, Berkeley, July.

DESIGN CONDITIONS

Table 2-1 lists the preliminary bearing design requirements as supplied by the client for the Ghazvin
Rashat Anzaliy Railway Bridge. The requirements included maximum bearing dimensions, vertical
loads and maximum longitudinal displacements in the bearings. Preliminary sizes were provided, along
with MDE (DBE) and MPE earthquake accelerations.
1 LRB 650 Dia (#16)
Total rubber thickness = 126mm (without steel thickness)
Each rubber thickness = 9mm
G = 14 kg/cm2
Damping ratio = 30%
Horizontal displacement = 250mm
2 LRB 800x800 (#32)
Total rubber thickness = 108mm (without steel thickness)
Each rubber thickness = 9mm
G = 14 kg/cm2
Damping ratio = 30%
Horizontal displacement = 250mm
MDE
Horizontal Acceleration = 0.37g
Vertical Acceleration = 0.30g

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

This provided recommended, rather than required, stiffness and strength properties. As the computer
model was developed there were some refinements to bridges loads and the actual bearing design
conditions, as used in Section 4 of these calculations, vary slightly from the values in Table 2-1.

CALCULATIONS

3.

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

PROCEDURES USED FOR BEARING DESIGN

These calculations relate to lead-rubber bearings designed to meet the project specification described
above in Table 2-1 and Figure 2-1. The bearing design used the definitions and procedures described in
this section. Generally, the procedures follow the guidelines published by the American Association of
State Highway Officials (AASHTO) except where the project specifications are more restrictive.
Some adjustments are made to calculated properties to include empirical adjustments as a result of our
extensive experience in lead-rubber bearing design. These are to ensure that test properties will match
those developed as part of this design procedure.
3.1

DEFINITIONS

B
ti
n
Tr
tsh
Tpl
tsc
Ag
Ab
Ar
p
G
E
K
u
f
Si
P

Kr
Kv
Kvi
Fm
Keff

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

Overall plan dimension of square bearing or Overall diameter of circular bearing

Rubber layer thickness
Number of rubber layers
Total rubber thickness
Thickness of internal shims
Thickness of load plates
Thickness of side cover
Gross area of bearing, including side cover
Bonded area of rubber
Reduced rubber area (overlap area at displaced configuration)
Bonded perimeter
Shear modulus of rubber (effective modulus at shear strain )
Elastic modulus of rubber (approximately 4G)
Material constant (varies depending on elastomer used)
Minimum elongation at break of rubber
Factor applied to elongation for load capacity
Shape factor for layer i
Applied vertical load
Applied lateral displacement
Lateral stiffness
Vertical stiffness of bearing
Vertical stiffness of layer i
Force in bearing
Effective Stiffness
Equivalent viscous damping

CALCULATIONS

Ah
3.2

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

10

Area of hysteresis loop

CALCULATION OF EQUIVALENT SHEAR STRAINS

The load capacity of elastomeric bearings is governed by the total shear strain in the elastomer due to
applied loads and deformations. The strain for a given load or deformation depends on the internal
construction of the bearing.
The shape factor of an internal layer, Si, is defined as the area free to bulge, that is, the perimeter times
the layer thickness:
Si =

B
4t i

for square and circular bearings

The vertical stiffness of an internal layer is calculated as

K vi =

E Ar
1 + 2KSi2
ti

In this equation the reduced area of rubber, Ar, is calculated based on the overlapping areas between the
top and bottom of the bearing at a displacement, , as follows:

A r = A b 1
B

for square bearings

A r = 0.5B 2 sin 1
B

where

(B 2 2 )

for circular bearings

When the effective compressive modulus Ec = E[1+2KS2] is large compared to the bulk modulus E
(between 1000 and 2000 MPa) then the vertical deformation due to the bulk modulus is included by
dividing Ec by 1 + (Ec /E).
AASHTO also requires that the bulk modulus effect be included in strain calculations for bearings of
large shape factor. The shear strain due to compression, sc, is a function of the maximum shape factor:

c =

3SP
2 Ar G (1 + 2kS 2 )

For S 15, or..............................................................(AASHTO Equation 20)

CALCULATIONS

c =

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

11

3P (1 + 8GkS 2 / E )
4GkSAr

for S > 15. ............................................................(AASHTO Equation 21)

If the bearing is subjected to applied rotations the shear strain due to a rotation is:

r =

B2
2t iT

The shear strain due to a lateral displacement of is

s =
3.3
3.3.1

Tr

LIMITING STRAIN CRITERIA

AASHTO LIMITING STRAIN CRITERIA

From the AASHTO Guide Specifications, three limiting strain criteria are to be satisfied:
c
2.5 .......................................................................................(AASHTO Equation 25)
c + s,s + r
5.0........................................................................................(AASHTO Equation 26)
c + s,eq + 0.5 r 5.5........................................................................................(AASHTO Equation 27)

The component strains are calculated for compressive loads, lateral displacements and rotations from the
equations presented above.

3.4
3.4.1

VERTICAL LOAD STABILITY

AASHTO VERTICAL LOAD STABILITY

AASHTO also requires that the isolators have a factor of safety of 3.0 under DL+LL and a factor of
safety of 1.0 under 1.1 times MCE displacements (plus offset displacement). For bearings with a high
rubber thickness relative to the plan dimension the elastic buckling load may become critical. The
buckling load is calculated using the Haringx formula as follows:
Moment of inertia, I is calculated as

CALCULATIONS

I=

I=

B4
12

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

12

for square bearings

B4

for circular bearings

64

The height of the bearing free to buckle, that is the distance between load plates, is
H r = (N t i ) + (N 1)t sh

An effective buckling modulus of elasticity is defined as a function of the elastic modulus and the shape
factor of the inner layers:
E b = E(1 + 0.742Si2 )

Constants T, R and Q are calculated as:

T = EbI

R=

Q=

Hr
Tr

GA g Tr
Hr

Hr

From which the buckling load at zero displacement is:

Pcr0 =

R
4TQ 2
1+
1

2
R

For an applied shear displacement the critical buckling load at zero displacement is reduced according to
the effective "footprint" of the bearing in a similar fashion to the strain limited load but at a slower rate:

0
Pcr
= Pcr

Ar

Ag

CALCULATIONS

3.5

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

13

AASHTO LATERAL RESTORING FORCE

The AASHTO sets to criteria which must be satisfied to demonstrate that the bearings are configured to
provide sufficient restoring force:
1. The period based on the tangent stiffness alone for displacements up to the design
displacements must be less than 6.0 seconds. For lead rubber bearings the tangent stiffness is
W
defined as the yielded stiffness and so the period calculated as Tr = 2
must be less than
gK r
6.0 seconds.
2. The restoring force at the design displacement must be greater than the force at one-half the
W
design displacement by at least W/80. That is, F F0.5 >
80

3.6

LATERAL STIFFNESS PARAMETERS FOR BEARING

Lead rubber bearings, and elastomeric bearings constructed of high damping rubber, have a nonlinear
force deflection relationship. This relationship, termed the hysteresis loop, defines the effective stiffness
(average stiffness at a specified displacement) and the hysteretic damping provided by the system. A
typical hysteresis for a lead-rubber bearing is as shown in Figure 3-1.
FIGURE 3-1 : LEAD RUBBER BEARING HYSTERESIS

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

14

For design and analysis this shape is usually represented as a bilinear curve with an elastic (or unloading)
stiffness of Ku and a yielded (or post-elastic) stiffness of Kd. The post-elastic stiffness Kd is equal to the
stiffness or the elastomeric bearing alone, Kr. The force intercept at zero displacement is termed Qd, the
characteristic strength Q d = y A pl

The theoretical yield level of lead, y, is 10.5 MPa but the apparent yield level is generally assumed to be 7
MPa to 8.5 MPa, depending on the vertical load and lead core confinement.
The post-elastic stiffness, Kd, is equal to the shear stiffness of the elastomeric bearing alone:

Kr =

G A r
Tr

The shear modulus, G, for a high damping rubber bearing is a function of the shear strain , but is
assumed independent of strain for a lead-rubber bearing manufactured from natural rubber and with
standard cure.
For relatively tall bearings, where the axial load is a significant fraction of the buckling load, the shear
stiffness is adjusted based on the ratio of average dead load to the zero displacement buckling load:
2

P

K *r = K r 1

P 0 cr

The elastic (or unloading) stiffness is defined as:

Ku = Kr
for elastomeric bearings
12A pl
K u = 6.5K r 1 +
Ar

for lead-rubber bearings

The shear force in the bearing at a specified displacement is:

Fm = Q d + K r
An effective stiffness can be calculated as:

K eff =

Fm

The sum of the effective stiffness of all bearings allows the period of response to be calculated as:

Te = 2

W
gK eff

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

15

Seismic response is a function of period and damping. High damping and lead rubber bearings provide
hysteretic damping. For high damping rubber bearings, the hysteresis loop area is measured from tests
for strain levels, , and the equivalent viscous damping calculated as given below. For lead rubber
bearings the hysteresis area is calculated at displacement level m as:

A h = 4Q d m y

from which the equivalent viscous damping is calculated as:

1
2

Ah

2
K eff

The isolator displacement can be calculated from the effective period, equivalent viscous damping and
spectral acceleration as:
2

m =

S a Te
4 2 B

where Sa is the spectral acceleration at the effective period Te and B is the damping factor, a function of
which is obtained from AASHTO as listed in Table 3-1.
TABLE 3-1.DAMPING FACTORS

Damping (percentage of critical)

2
5
10
20
30
40
50
B 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.50 1.70 1.90 2.00
The formula for m includes Te and B, both of which are a function of m. Therefore, the solution for
maximum displacement includes an iterative procedure.
When the time history method of analysis is used the non-linear properties of the bearing are modelled
explicitly and the response of these elements incorporated the hysteretic damping so the effective period
and equivalent viscous damping formulations are not required.
3.7

SYSTEM PROPERTY MODIFICATION FACTORS

AASHTO defines maximum and minimum properties as a function of system modification factors, , as
follows:
Kd,max=Kd x max,Kd
Kd,min=Kd x min,Kd
Qd,max=Qd x max,Qd

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

16

Qd,max=Qd x max,Qd
The lambda factors for the effects of (1) temperature (2) aging (3) change in friction coefficient with
velocity (4) travel (wear) (5) contamination in sliding systems and (6) effects of scragging (elastomeric
systems).
Effects (3), (4) and (5) apply only to sliding systems and so need not be considered here. Item (6) refers
to the change in stiffness and damping in elastomeric bearings after a number of high amplitude cycles.
These changes are significant in high damping rubber bearings (HDRB) which rely on the elastomer
properties to provide system effective stiffness and damping. For lead rubber bearings (LDRB) the
scragging effect is considered to be minor and AASHTO recommends a factor for scragging of 1.0.
Therefore, the two factors which affect LDRB are aging and temperature. The AASHTO
recommendations for these are:
1. For aging, the modification factors are 1.1 for low damping natural rubber (as used in these
bearings) and 1.0 for the lead core.
2. For temperature, modification factors of 1.0 at 21C increasing to 1.3 on Qd and 1.1 on Kd at
0C.
The AASHTO recommendations are for the modification factors for the minimum values to be unity.
Therefore, the design values effectively form the lower bound value. This is because aging effects tend
to increase stiffness, not decrease it, and properties are relatively insensitive to increases in temperature
(less than 10% change in effective stiffness at 49C).
As the factors are equal to or greater than 1.0, the effect is to reduce isolator displacement and increase
isolator forces. Therefore, the modification factors do not govern in isolator design but do govern
substructure design forces.
3.7.1

AGE CHANGE IN PROPERTIES

The rubber tests on compounds used for LDRB show an increase in hardness by up to 3 Shore A after
heat aging. This increase in hardness is equivalent to an increase in shear modulus of 10% which would
increase Kd by a factor of 1.1.
In service, the change in hardness for bearings would be limited to the outside surface since the cover
layer prevents diffusion of degradants such as oxygen into the interior. Therefore, average effects would
be less than the 10% value. For unprotected natural rubber in service over 100 years (for example, Rail
Viaduct in Melbourne, Australia) the deterioration was limited to approximately 1.5 mm (0.06 inches)
from the exposed surface.
There is not a great database of information on direct measurement of the change in stiffness properties
with time of loaded elastomeric bearings. One example was machine mountings manufactured in 1953
and in service continuously in England. In 1983, after 30 years, two test bearings which had been stored

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

17

with the machine were tested again and were found to have increased in stiffness by 15.5% and 4.5%. A
natural rubber bearing removed from a freeway bridge in Kent showed an increase in shear stiffness of
about 10% after 20 years service.
Since the time that the bearings above were manufactured, considerable advances have been made in
environmental protection of the bearings. It is predicted that changes in stiffness of the elastomer will be
no more than 10% over the design life of the isolators.
3.7.2

TEMPERATURE CHANGE IN PROPERTIES

Elastomeric bearings are usually compounded from natural rubber and so are subjected to temperature
constraints typical to this material. The upper operating range of service temperature for natural rubber,
without special compounding, is 60C and so the upper limit of the design temperatures for most projects
will not cause any problems.
The stiffness of natural rubber is a function of temperature but within the range of -20C to 60C the
effect is slight and not significant in terms of isolation performance. Below -20C the stiffness gradually
increases as the temperature is lowered until at about 40C it is double the value at 20C. The variation
in stiffness is reversible as temperature is increased.
1. The founder of RSL (Dr W Robinson) invented the lead-rubber bearing and as part of the
development tested completed bearings under dynamic displacements. Compared to the
benchmark results at a temperature of 18C, at -15C the effective stiffness increased by 20%
and at -35C the effective stiffness increased by 40%. When the temperature was increased to
45C the effective stiffness decreased but only by -10%.
2. The Hitec test program tested DIS bearings at -26 C and recorded a 23% increase in effective
stiffness and Skellerup bearings at -30 C and recorded a 56% increase in effective stiffness. In
both cases, the bearings were maintained at these temperatures for 2 days before testing. The
Hitech program also tested the bearings at an elevated temperature of 49C and the changes in
effective stiffness were relatively small, -9% for DIS bearing and -5% for the Skellerup bearing.
The AASHTO factors of 1.3 on Qd and 1.1 on Kd for 0C increase the effective stiffness by 19% at MCE
displacements. This is seen to be conservative as this increase was measured at a colder temperature of 15C
3.7.3

MODIFICATION FACTORS USED FOR DESIGN

The discussion above shows that the factor of 1.1 on Kd is reasonable for LDRB and so this factor is
used in the isolation system design and analysis.
The AASHTO factors are conservative for the 0C condition as the changes in rubber properties are
small until the temperature is below -20C. The average daily temperature at the site is understood to be
greater than 0C even in mid-winter and so the bearings are unlikely to be affected as much as suggested

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

18

by AASHTO. Therefore, on the basis that the MCE is a very low probability event, and the probability
that this occurs at a time of sustained sub-zero temperatures is negligible:
1. The factors for DBE are taken as 1.3 on Qd and 1.21 on Kd (combination of aging and low
temperature).
2. The factors for MCE are taken as 1.0 on Qd and 1.1 on Kd (aging only).

CALCULATIONS

4.
4.1

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

19

BEARING DESIGN CALCULATIONS

ANALYSIS RESULTS USED FOR ISOLATION SYSTEM DESIGN

Table 4-1 summarises the results from the EXCEL spreadsheet based on the design procedures.
TABLE 4-1 RESULTS

Average
of
Isolators
Maximum Design EQ (MDE/DBE)
Transverse, T
Longitudinal, L
Maximum Probable EQ (MPE/MCE)
Transverse, T
Longitudinal, L

114.5
134
172
201

Design conditions for the bearings are expanded from Table 4-1 as follows:
The design load conditions (DBE/MCE) on the isolators are summarised in tables: 1-3.
1. The Total design displacement is the Max MDE displacement = 134 mm
2. The maximum displacement is the MPE displacement = 201 mm (1.5 time MDE)
AASHTO does not require that the earthquake records includes vertical components but rather specifies
maximum loads as 1.20 times dead load , where the 1.20 factor included vertical earthquake effects,
uncertainty in DL plus axial loads due to earthquake overturning.

CALCULATIONS

4.2

PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

20

DESIGN LOADS

The design conditions for each location are as listed in Table 4-2. These are extracted from the contract
documents and from Table 4-1 above.
TABLE 4-2 DESIGN CONDITIONS

Average DL + LL (kN)
Maximum DL + LL (kN)
Design Displacement (mm)
Maximum Displacement (mm)

4.3

5009 From spreadsheet

7548
134 MDE (DBE max. disp.)
201 MPE (MCE max. disp.)

MATERIAL PROPERTIES

The detailed design of the isolation system was performed using an EXCEL spreadsheet based on the
design procedures given in Section 3 of these calculations. The properties of the materials used were as
listed in Table 4-3.
TABLE 4-3 MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Shear Modulus (MPa)

Ultimate Elongation
Material Constant, k
Elastic Modulus, E (Mpa)
Bulk Modulus (Mpa)
Lead Yield Strength (Mpa)
4.4

0.75
6.0
0.65
3.0
287000
9.0

BEARING SHAPE

The original lead rubber bearings invented by Dr. Bill Robinson were based on standard elastomeric
bridge bearings, which were either square or rectangular in plan shape. All the original development and
testing, including low temperature tests and fatigue tests, was performed on square bearings with lead
cores inserted. The first isolation projects using lead rubber bearings in New Zealand, for both buildings
and bridges, used a square or rectangular bearing shape. As the number of isolation projects expanded,
other manufacturers began manufacturing circular lead rubber bearings and these are now the most
common shape for building projects. For bridge projects, both rectangular and circular shapes are used.
For bridges, there are a number of reasons the square or rectangular shape is often preferred over
circular:

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

21

1. The maximum plan dimension is smaller for the same shear area. This smaller dimension tends
to be more important for bridges than buildings because the bearings are located on piers of
fixed dimensions.
2. Non-seismic displacements due to thermal movement, creep and shrinkage are applied in the
longitudinal direction and so the bearing is oriented with these displacements applied along a
principal axis.
3. The shear strain due to rotation is proportional to B2, where B is the plan dimension normal to
the axis of rotation. As rotations are usually uni-directional, rectangular bearings can be used tor
reduce the strain due to applied rotations by orienting the smaller dimension in the longitudinal
direction.
Because earthquake displacements are omni-directional, there is a perception that a circular shape is more
effective in resisting these displacements. The stiffness of an elastomeric bearing is based on the shear
area and so is the same in all directions so any advantage of the circular shape compared to rectangular
would be due to a more uniform stress distribution. Although intuitively this would appear to be true, we
are not aware of any finite element studies which confirm it and extensive testing of square bearings has
not revealed any failure which could be related to be bearing shape.
One are where a square or rectangular bearing may have disadvantages over circular shapes would be in
that the corners of the internal shims would apply a point load to the elastomer and possible cause a
stress concentration. To avoid this, the corners of the internal shims are rounded. Robinson Seismic
manufacturing specifications require a minimum radius of 15 mm for all end shims and internal shims.
There are also a few circular bearings used in this project particularly those bridge decks requiring seismic
joints. Circular bearings are ideal for maximizing space.
4.5

BEARING DIMENSIONS

The bearing sizes and construction details which meet the project criteria are listed in Table 4-4. These
are 800mm square bearings and 650mm circular bearings with a height of 256mm.
TABLE 4-4 BEARING DIMENSIONS (UNITS MM)
STAGE 1

Overall Bearing Size (Rectangular)

800x800
Overall Bearing Size (Circular)
650
Layer Thickness
9
Number of Layers
18
Lead Core Size (for the Rectangular Bearing) 4-140
Lead Core Size (for the Circular Bearing)
4-110
Side Cover
10

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

22

Internal Shim Thickness

Load Plate Thickness (top and bottom)
Total Height

2
20.0
256

It is preferable to use a square bearing so that the area reduction factor is similar in both directions else
the bearing will have a much lower load capacity in the shorter direction for a given displacement. The
average displacements are similar in both directions so it is preferable to have a similar capacity.
Note that the final shim thickness is 20mm which adjusts this height from previous report. Additionally
the croe has been separated into multiple cores of smaller diameter. The Area of the core is of an
equivanlent size so the isolator performance is the same.
4.6

BEARING PROPERTIES

Table 4-4 lists the bearing properties calculated using the procedures described in Section 3 of these
calculations. These properties are used to calculate the load capacity of the bearings and also to define
the hysteresis shape.
TABLE 4-5 BEARING PROPERTIES (UNITS KN/ MM)
S800X800 RECTANGULAR BEARING

Gross Area, Ag
640000
Bonded Dimension
780
Bonded Area
608400
Plug Area
61575
Net Bonded Area
546825
Total Rubber Thickness
162
Bonded Perimeter
3120
Shape Factor
19.5
Characteristic Strength, Qd 554.2
Shear Modulus (50%)
0.000707
Yielded Stiffness Kr
2.52
Elastic Stiffness Ku
38.5
Yield Force
593
Yield Displacement
15.38
C650 CIRCULAR BEARING

Gross Area, Ag
Bonded Dimension
Bonded Area
Plug Area

331831
630
311725
38013

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

23

Net Bonded Area

273711
Total Rubber Thickness
162
Bonded Perimeter
1979
Shape Factor
15.4
Characteristic Strength, Qd 342.1
Shear Modulus (50%)
0.000701
Yielded Stiffness Kr
1.27
Elastic Stiffness Ku
22.0
Yield Force
363
Yield Displacement
16.47

4.7

LIMITING STRAIN CALCULATIONS

4.7.1
4.7.1.1

AASHTO CRITERIA
AASHTO EQUATION 25

For maximum vertical loads with zero lateral displacement or rotation the total strain is required to be less
than 2.0. Calculations for this limit state are listed in Table 4-6.
TABLE 4-6 CAPACITY UNDER MAXIMUM VERTICAL LOADS (ZERO DISPLACEMENT) (UNITS KN, MM)
S800X800

Applied Vertical Load

Elastic Modulus, E
Compressive Modulus, Ec
Reduced Area
Compressive Shear Strain, esc
Total Strain
Allowable Strain
Buckling Load, Pcr (Reduced)
Vertical Stiffness Calculation
Kvi
Kv

7548
0.003
1.5
608400
0.98
0.98
2.00
41227
99668
5537

C650

Applied Vertical Load

Elastic Modulus, E
Compressive Modulus, Ec
Reduced Area

2844
0.003
0.9
311725

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

24

Compressive Shear Strain, esc

Total Strain
Allowable Strain
Buckling Load, Pcr (Reduced)
Vertical Stiffness Calculation
Kvi
Kv

4.7.1.2

0.81
0.81
2.00
7766
31895
1772

AASHTO EQUATION 26

Table 4-7 checks the capacity under vertical loads with service load lateral displacements and service
rotations, as required by AASHTO Equation 26 which limits the total strain is required to 3.0.
TABLE 4-7 CAPACITY UNDER NON-SEISMIC DISPLACEMENTS (UNITS KN, MM)
S800X800

Max Vertical Load

Compressive Shear Strain, esc
Displacement Shear Strain, esh
Rotational Shear Strain, esr
Total Strain
Allowable Strain

7548
0.98
0.29
1.04
2.31
3.00

C650

Max Vertical Load

Compressive Shear Strain, esc
Displacement Shear Strain, esh
Rotational Shear Strain, esr
Total Strain
Allowable Strain
4.7.1.3

2536
0.81
0.48
0.68
1.97
3.00

AASHTO EQUATION 27

Table 4-8 checks the capacity under vertical loads with MDE (DBE) lateral displacements and one-half
service rotations, as required by AASHTO Equation 27 which limits the total strain is required to 4.50.
TABLE 4-8 CAPACITY UNDER MDE (DBE) DISPLACEMENTS (UNITS KN, MM)
S800X800

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

25

Max Vertical Load

MDE Displacement
Compressive Shear Strain, esc
Displacement Shear Strain, esh
Rotational Shear Strain, esr
Total Strain
Allowable Strain

12703
132
1.98
0.81
1.04
3.83
4.50

C650

Max Vertical Load

MDE (DBE) Displacement
Compressive Shear Strain, esc
Displacement Shear Strain, esh
Rotational Shear Strain, esr
Total Strain
Allowable Strain

4.8
4.8.1

4592
134
2.01
0.83
0.68
3.52
4.50

VERTICAL LOAD STABILITY

AASHTO REQUIREMENTS

AASHTO Clause 12.3 requires that the bearings be stable at a displacement of 1.1 times the MCE
displacement plus one-half the non-seismic displacement under a vertical load of 1.2 DL+SLL. Table 49 lists the assessment of the bearings under two conditions, (1) maximum displacement with concurrent
earthquake load and (2) maximum earthquake load with concurrent displacement (Table 4-2).
For this design we have applied a displacement factor of 1.5 MPE in accordance with recommendations
made in isolator design for structural engineers T.Kelly for locations with a high MPE design
acceleration (>0.19g) Vertical earthquake loads have additionally been factored by 1.7 to represent
predicted MPE events. MDE vertical accelerations were supplied see section 2.2
TABLE 4-9 CAPACITY UNDER MPE DISPLACEMENTS (UNITS KN, MM)
S800X800

Max Vertical Load

MDE (DBE) Displacement
Factor on MCE Displacement
MPE (MCE) Displacement
Compressive Shear Strain, esc

Maximum
Displacement
16828
132
1.5
198
2.62

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

26

Displacement Shear Strain, esh

Rotational Shear Strain, esr
Total Strain
Allowable Strain

1.22
1.04
4.89
6.00

C650

Max Vertical Load

MDE (DBE) Displacement
Factor on MCE Displacement
MPE (MCE) Displacement
Compressive Shear Strain, esc
Displacement Shear Strain, esh
Rotational Shear Strain, esr
Total Strain
Allowable Strain

4.9

Maximum
Displacement
5990
134
1.5
201
3.19
1.24
0.68
5.11
6.00

RESTORING FORCE

AASHTO requires that the isolators meet two criteria related to the minimum restoring force. The
calculations are listed in Table 4-10:
TABLE 4-10 RESTORING FORCE CALCULATIONS (UNITS KN, MM)
S800X800

Tangent Stiffness Kt 2.52 from Table 4-6

Qd
554 from Table 4-5
Seismic Weight
3966
Period at Kt
1.38 Calculated, OK < 6 Seconds
Displacement di
132 DBE Displacement
F at di
887 Qd+Ktdi
F at 0.5di
720 Qd+Ktdi/2
Difference
167 OK > W/80
W/80
49.6
C650

Tangent Stiffness Kt 1.27 from Table 4-6

Qd
342.1 from Table 4-5
Seismic Weight
1259
Period at Kt
1.38 Calculated, OK < 6 Seconds
Displacement di
134 DBE Displacement

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

27

F at di
F at 0.5di
Difference
W/80

513 Qd+Ktdi
427.2 Qd+Ktdi/2
85.8 OK > W/80
15.74

4.10 EFFECTIVE STIFFNESS AND DAMPING

Figure 4-1 shows the hysteresis loop calculated from the properties listed above with the maximum
displacement equal to the 250 mm.
The equivalent viscous damping plot in included in Figure 4-2 demonstrates how the damping varies with
displacement amplitude. These particular bearings provide over 30% damping for displacements between
30 mm and 201 mm but damping reduces slightly with increased displacements, reaching a value of 26% 30% at the MPE displacement of 201 mm.

CALCULATIONS
PROJECT NAME:

Ghazvin- Rashat - Anzaliy Railway bridge

Isolation Bearings

PROJECT NUMBER:
CALCULATIONS BY:
DATE:

107347
Ernesto De Peralta.
26 October 2011

PAGE NUMBER:

28

FIGURE 4-1 EQUIVALENT DAMPING