Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7

14th World Conference on Seismic Isolation,

Energy Dissipation and Active Vibration Control of Structures


September 9-11 2015 San Diego, Ca USA

TENSILE BEHAVIOR OF RUBBER BEARING ON


BRIDGE MODELS USING PROPOSED MODEL
BASED ON TENSILE FRACTURE EXPERIMENTS
Hirosato Iwamoto
Graduate School of Kyushu University, Department of Civil Engineering
Motooka744, Nishi-Ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan
iwamoto@doc.kyushu-u.ac.jp

Joon-Ho Choi
Graduate School of Kyushu University, Department of Civil Engineering
Motooka744, Nishi-Ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan
choi@doc.kyushu-u.ac.jp

Kensuke Ueda
Bridge Bearing Manufacture Corporation
Chuoku-Nihonbashi, 103-0027, Tokyo
ueda@mgb-gouda.co.jp

ABSTRACT - Japan has been known for earthquake country for many years and there have been a lot of
earthquakes including Hyogoken Nanbu Earthquake (1995) and Tohoku earthquake (2011). These
earthquakes seriously damaged the highway bridge structure systems. Many bearing supports were also
fractured and some of them were totally no longer usable by the disasters. Until the Hyogoken Nanbu
Earthquake (1995), steel bearings were widely utilized in a bearing support in a bridge structure system, and
most of them were damaged by the shake. Therefore, to prevent the damage in bridge structure system,
rubber bearing support has been developed for dispersing the seismic force of superstructure in bridge
structure system. Generally, the rubber bearing is known for highly resistant to horizontal and compressive
force subjected to earthquake loadings. On the other hand, resistance characteristic for tensile force of the
rubber bearing is still not be clarified because of few previous studies on the tensile characteristics and the
analytical model of it. However, when a great earthquake occurs, tensile force could be occurred in the
rubber bearing subjected to ground motion and undesirable damage could be occurred in bridge.
In this study, based on the previous experiments to clarify the tensile behavior of the rubber bearings,
the analytical model for the tensile characteristics of the rubber bearing was proposed and time series
analyses using the Proposed Model for a straight bridge model and horizontal curved bridge models which
the tensile force could be occurred in bearing support parts subjected to ground motion were carried out.
Furthermore, in order to clarify the difference of seismic response on bearing support, the comparable
analyses using the Current Model being generally utilized in bridge design and the Proposed Model. As a
results of analyses, the vertical reaction forces of rubber bearings using Proposed Model were smaller than
those using the current design model. From the difference of bearing behaviors between Current Model and
Proposed Model, authors tried to make the compact rubber bearing which could have the same seismic
capacity of bridge system based on Current Model. The volume of the rubber bearing support was able to
cut down adopting the Proposed Model.

Keywords: rubber bearing, tensile characteristics, analytical model, compactification

1
1 INTRODUCTION

On January 17th 1995, a great earthquake occurred on south of Hyogo prefecture in Japan and
many bridges which had steel bearings were damaged. After the huge earthquake, Seismic
Specification for Highway Bridges in Japan was revised and an earthquake-resistant design on
bridge structure system has become an urgent problem. Under these situations, rubber bearing
support has been developed for dispersing the seismic force in bridge structure system.
Generally, the rubber bearing is highly resistant to horizontal and compressive force.
However, there are few the previous studies for the resistance of tensile force of rubber bearing so
far. Therefore, in the current seismic design method of the bridge structure with the rubber bearing,
the dynamic analysis based on the analytical model (here in noted as Current Model) without taking
account of tensile characteristics of it is used. Furthermore, although a few researches for the tensile
characteristics of the rubber bearings based on experiments have been carried out, they have not
been applied to the design method.
In this study, based on the previous experiments which authors have done in past to clarify the
tensile behavior of the rubber bearing, the analytical model for the tensile characteristic of the
rubber bearing was proposed (here in noted as Proposed Model) and time series analyses using the
Proposed Model for a straight bridge model and horizontal curved bridge models which the tensile
force could be occurred in bearing support parts subjected to ground motion were carried out. The
purpose of this study is to clarify the differences of seismic responses on bridge structures in which
the rubber bearing supports equipped between in the Current Model and in the Proposed Model and
the compactification of the rubber bearing support by using Proposed Model.

2 BRIDGE MODEL

In this study, a 200 m length of 4 span continuous bridge was analysed. Fig. 1 shows the
analytical bridge model. The bridge model with all of rubber bearing supports and steel girders was
used. Fig. 2 shows the outline of superstructure. 5 Piers were made by reinforced concrete with 13m
height. Fig. 3 shows the section of piers.

200000

50000 50000 50000 50000

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5

E E E E E
13000
13000

13000

13000

13000

Figure 1 - Analytical bridge model


4000
200

900 Concrete plate deck

125 Steel box Steel box


900

girder girder

1950

Figure 2 - Superstructure Figure 3 - Section of piers


2
3 ANALYTICAL MODEL AND ANALYTICAL CONDITION

The Fig. 4 shows the analytical bridge model in this study. Girders and Piers were modelled
by beam elements and bearing supports were modelled by spring elements with 6 directions. In
dynamic analyses on bridge structure, generally, the height of bearing supports was not considered
on modelling to make simply it. However, in the bridge model whose the seismic behaviors of
superstructure were complicated subjected to earthquake loadings, the bending moments of
superstructure could be occurred. Since the bending moments of the superstructure could affect on
the vertical behaviors of bearing supports, it is need to make the bearing model able to evaluate the
vertical behaviors of bearing supports. Therefore, in this study, the height of the rubber bearing
supports was considered in the analytical model. Material non-linearity characteristics were
considered in only the pier members. In this study, foundations were not modelled because it could
not largely affect on the behaviors of the bearing supports in the bridge models.
3 types of input earthquake motions named as ‘TYPEⅡ’ defined as design earthquake waves
in Seismic Specification for Highway Bridges in Japan were used [Japan Road Association, 2012].
Fig. 5 shows the each time history of accelerations and the acceleration response spectrums of them.
Input wave direction was Z axis direction as shown in Fig. 4 which was same with transverse
direction on the strait bridge model.
Newmark-β (β=0.25) was used as numerical integration method. Damping matrixes of
bridge members were evaluated by Rayleigh Damping Method. Time interval of integration was
0.01 sec. The horizontal and the vertical stiffness of rubber bearings were evaluated by referring to
Highway Bridge Support Handbook in Japan [Japan Road Association, 2004].

3500
TYPEⅡ-Ⅱ-1
3000
acceleration response

TYPEⅡ-Ⅱ-2
2500
spectrum(gal)

TYPEⅡ-Ⅱ-3
P4 P5 2000
P3 Y 1500
X
1000
P2 Z
500
0
P1 0 2 4 6 8 10
period(s)
Figure 4 - Analytical bridge model
(a) Acceleration response spectrum
1000 1000 1000

500
acceleration(gal)

500 500
acceleration(gal)
acceleration(gal)

0 0 0

‐500 ‐500 ‐500

‐1000 ‐1000 ‐1000


0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
time(sec) time(sec) time(sec)

(b) TYPE Ⅱ-Ⅱ-1 (c) TYPE Ⅱ-Ⅱ-2 (d) TYPE Ⅱ-Ⅱ-3


Figure 5 - Input waves (by Seismic Specification for Highway Bridges in Japan)

4 TENSILE LOADING TESTS OF RUBBER BEARING SUPPORTS

In order to verify the tensile characteristics of rubber bearing support, the tensile loading tests
for rubber bearing supports were carried out before this study. Here in, the analytical model taken
account of the tensile characteristics based on the tensile loading tests were proposed.

4.1 Test method

3
Compressive 
stiffness
Tensile 
stiffness

(a) Test equipment and specimen (b) Load-displacement relation


(vertical direction)
Figure 6 - Test equipment and test result

Fig. 6 (a) shows the test equipment and the specimen of laminated rubber bearing support
used in the tests. 4 specimens with a shear modulus of 1.0 N/mm2 and 1.2 N/mm2 were used. Each
specimen size was 240 mm×240 mm×30 mm and the thickness of one layer was 5 mm. The
number of the rubber layer was six. Under the above test condition, tensile and compressive loading
tests of rubber bearing supports were carried out.

4.2 Test results

Fig. 6 (b) shows a load-displacement relation (vertical direction) of the rubber bearing. From
the result, it was clarified that the compressive stiffness of the rubber bearing was larger than it of
the tensile stiffness and the ratio of the tensile stiffness to the compressive stiffness was about 10 %.

5 CURRENT MODEL AND PROPOSED MODEL

Fig. 7 (a) shows the Current Model of rubber


bearing. The tensile stiffness was evaluated by the
compressive stiffness in current seismic design
model because of few previous studies on the tensile
characteristics of rubber bearings. From the results
of the tensile loading tests for the rubber bearing
supports, a new model which the tensile stiffness
was smaller than it of the compressive stiffness was
proposed. Fig. 7 (b) shows the Proposed Model. The (a) Current Model (b) Proposed Model
ratio of tensile stiffness to compressive stiffness was
10% based on the test results. Using both models of Figure 7 - Analytical models of rubber
the rubber bearing supports on the seismic analyses, bearing
the differences of the seismic responses of the
rubber bearings between Current Model and Proposed Model were clarified.

6 ANALYTICAL RESULTS

Before comparing the seismic responses between Current Model and Proposed Model, at first,
the rubber bearing supports sizes which meet current design criteria in Japan were designed using
Current Model. The design method was based on Seismic Specification for Highway Bridges in
Japan [Japan Road Association, 2012], in the specification, the 3 factors of tensile force,
4
8000 2000 300
6450kN 1620kN 250mm

shore displacement  (mm)
Compressive force  (kN)

250
6000 1500

Tensile force  (kN)
200

4000 1000 150

100
2000 500
50

0 0 0
Straight bridge Curved bridge Straight bridge Curved bridge Straight bridge Curved bridge

(a) Compressive force (b) Tensile force (c) Shear displacement


Figure 8 - Maximum responses of rubber bearing supports (900mm×900mm×100mm)

compressive force and shear displacement were defined for the design. In this study, those
responses which analysed by the dynamic analyses for the bridge models were compared with each
factor defined in the criteria. Multiple dynamic analyses were carried out until the minimum size of
rubber bearing support was determined.

6.1 Determination of rubber bearing supports size

From the multiple analyses based on Current Model, the rubber bearing support size was
determined as 900 mm×900 mm×100 mm in the straight bridge model and the curved bridge
model. Fig. 8 shows the maximum responses of the 3 factors of rubber bearing support. In the
bridge model used in this study, the tensile force was the critical factor on the determination of the
rubber bearing support, while in the compressive force and the shear displacement, it were enough
for the criteria. The reason of above results was based on the analytical bridge model which the
bending moments of superstructure could be easily occurred while subjected to earthquake loadings.

6.2 The comparison of vertical reaction forces of rubber bearing supports

Adopting the Proposed Model to the rubber bearing supports, here in, the vertical reaction
forces of the rubber bearing supports were compared with those based on Current Model. The size
of the rubber bearing supports were 900 mm×900 mm×100 mm which meet the criteria as
mentioned in 6.1. The ground motion of TYPEⅡ-Ⅱ-1 as shown in Fig. 5 was used in the analyses.
Fig. 9 shows the time history responses of the vertical reaction forces of the rubber bearing supports
on the P1 pier in the straight and curved bridge models based on Current Model and Proposed
Model, respectively.

Current Model Proposed Model


2500 2500
Historical reaction force(kN)
Historical reaction force(kN)

1500 1500

500 500

‐500 ‐500

‐1500 ‐1500
‐2500 ‐2500
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
time(sec) time(sec)
(a) Straight bridge (b) Curved bridge
Figure 9 - Historical reaction of rubber bearing (900 mm×900 mm×100 mm)

5
From the analytical results, the compressive and the tensile forces of the rubber bearing
supports were different between in Current Model and Proposed Model. The vertical reaction forces
of Proposed Model were smaller than those of Current Model in the both bridge models. In the
straight bridge model, the difference of the tensile direction force was 191 kN and the difference of
the compressive force was 311 kN. On the other hand, in the curved bridge model, the difference of
the tensile reaction force was 231 kN and the difference of the compressive force was 257 kN. The
reason of these results was caused from the tensile characteristics difference of the analytical model
of the rubber bearing supports. Since Proposed Model was with smaller tensile stiffness than that of
Current Model, the tensile reaction force of the rubber bearing support of Proposed Model shows
the smaller reaction force than that of Current Model. Furthermore, the response differences
between Current Model and Proposed Model were also revealed in the compressive reaction force,
which were caused from the difference of the analytical model of the rubber bearing supports.

7 COMPACTIFICATION OF RUBBER BEARING SUPPORT

From the above analytical results, it was clarified that the rubber bearing supports modelled
by Proposed Model show smaller vertical reaction force than the rubber bearing modelled by
Current Model. Considering the result, the compactification of rubber bearing support could be
possible if it would be designed by Proposed Model. In this study, a trial on the compactification of
the rubber bearing support was carried out in the straight and the curved bridge models.
Fig. 10 shows the analytical results of the maximum reaction forces of the minimum size of
the rubber bearing supports which met the design criteria in Japan. The result of these trial, in the
straight bridge model, the size of rubber bearing supports which were able to meet the criteria was
800 mm×800 mm×100 mm. On the other hand, in the curved bride model, the minimum size of it
was 750 mm×750 mm×100 mm. From the results, the ratios of the volume decrease of the rubber
bearing supports was 20 % in the straight bridge model and was 30 % in the curved bridge model.
1500 1500 1500
1280kN 1125kN 980kN
Tensile force (kN)

Tensile force (kN)
Tensile force (kN)

1000 1000 1000

500 500 500

0 0 0
Straight bridge Curved bridge Straight bridge Curved bridge Straight bridge Curved bridge

(a) 800mm×800mm×100mm (b) 750mm×750mm×100mm (c) 700mm×700mm×100mm


Figure 10 - Maximum Tensile force

8 CONCLUSIONS

In this study, an analytical model for rubber bearing support was proposed based on tensile
loading tests of it and the rubber bearing support size could be decreased by adapting the
analytical model on bridge models. Reviewed in this study are as follow.

(1) Considering the tensile characteristics of rubber bearing support, the vertical forces of the
rubber bearing supports using the Proposed Model show smaller reaction force than those of
Current Model.

(2) From the vertical force difference between Current Model and Proposed Model, authors tried to
make the compact rubber bearing support and the volume of the rubber bearing was able to cut
down (Straight bridge: 20%, Curved bridge: 30 %) adopting the Proposed Model.
6
References

Japan Road Association. [2012] Specifications of Highway Bridges, Japan.

Japan Road Association. [2004] Bearing Support Design Handbook, Japan.

Ueda, K. [2009] “Experiments on tensile characteristic of lead rubber bearing (in Japanese).” 65th
Annual Conference of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Japan.

Iwamoto, H, Choi, J.H, Ueda, K, [2015] “Tensile Behavior and Compactification of Rubber
Bearing on Bridge Model Using Analytical Model Based on Experiments on Tensile Characteristics
of Rubber Bearings,” Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Special Issue of Earthquake
Engineering, Vol.71 (scheduled to be published, in Japanese).

Вам также может понравиться