The 3rd International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Disaster Mitigation 2016 (ICEEDM-III 2016)

Sliding Isolation Pendulum as the Seismic Mitigation Strategy

Study Case: Holtekam Steel Arch Bridge
Tri Suryadia, Demson Sihalohoa, Zdenek Fukara*
a
PT. Waagner Biro Indonesia, Jl. Let. Jen. T.B. Simatupang Kav. 22-26, Jakarta – 12430, Indonesia

Abstract
Holtekam Bridge as a big monumental structure is located on a very severe seismic area in Indonesia. The steel arch
bridge is geometrically described as 400m length and 23m width structure, and shall be able to serve 4 lanes traffic at its
service condition.
The bridge was originally designed with fixed-roll conventional spherical bearings. Due to a very big earthquake load
imposed on the conventional bridge structure, a Seismic Isolation System is introduced and used as the most possible
mitigation strategy. Among all the Seismic Isolation Devices, Sliding Isolation Pendulum Bearings are chosen to replace
the Conventional Spherical Bearings. The Pendulum Bearing provides two different mechanisms that can reduce the
imposed seismic force on the superstructure and substructure. An Isolation and Energy Dissipation mechanisms on a
Pendulum Bearing are described in this presentation.
A non-linear time history analysis is used to simulate the structural responses due to the design earthquake. The
acceleration-time responses on the bridge deck and the hysteresis curves of the pendulum bearings will be presented to
observe the performance and behavior of the bridge structure.
Keywords: steel arch bridge; seismic isolation system; sliding isolation pendulum bearing; seismic mitigation strategy; non-linear
time history analysis; acceleration-time response; hysteresis curve.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Holtekam Bridge, located in Jayapura-Papua Island comprises a continuous steel arch main bridge and PCI girder
approach bridges. The main bridge is designed as continuous span steel arch bridge with the concrete deck suspended by
PPWS (Prefabricated Parallel Wire Strand) hangers. The main components of the main steel bridge are box-shaped steel
arch and I-shaped tied beams, which will be connected using welds and bolts. The arch boxes are inclined about 7
degrees inward and the upstream and downstream arch boxes will be connected by lateral box frames.
The main bridge has a total length of 400m, comprising span distribution of 50m + 150m + 150m + 50m. As a 4 lanes
traffic bridge, the total width of the concrete deck is 21m (2.25m + 8m + 0.5m + 8m + 2.25m). The total width from axis
to axis of the steel superstructure is about ± 23.5m

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +62 21 7592 4335; Fax.: +62 21 7592 4358.
E-mail address: zdenek@ptwbi.co.id
 A
B

Fig. 1. Holtekam Bridge – Side View and Cross Section

Jayapura city where this bridge is located, is classified as one of the most prone area to seismic hazard in Indonesia.
The fact that the bridge will be constructed on relatively flexible substructures due to the soft soil condition and
liquefaction potential makes the seismic consideration in this bridge even more important (seismic load requirement is
indicated on figure 2). As per Indonesian Bridge Design Code, the bridge must be designed for a 100 years structural life-
time. Therefore, the seismic load characteristic is taken from a 1000-years return period seismic map (10% exceeding
probability in 100 years life-time). Site-Specific Response Analysis was performed on the location, and resulting
following response spectrum curve:

BRIDGE DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM CURVES

1.20

Holtekam SSRA
1.00
SHEAR COEFFICIENT (C)

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00
PERIOD (T)

Fig. 2. Holtekam Bridge Design Response Spectrum

 The bridge was originally designed with conventional spherical bearings as the superstructure support mechanism (see
below figure). There were 3 fixed spherical bearings placed on the main spans (150m) and some one-directional and
multi-directional spherical bearings on the other support locations to make sure that the bridge elongation on lateral and
longitudinal directions still can be accommodated.

1-TGA 3-TGE 5-TGE 7-TGE 9-TGA

2-TGE 4-TF 6-TF 8-TF 10-TGE

X

NOTES:
ONE DIRECTIONAL
FIXED BEARING MULTI DIRECTIONAL BEARING
GUIDED BEARING

Fig. 3. Spherical Bearing Scheme – Original Design

Fixed bearings on 3 different locations were placed to distribute the EQ force so that the total horizontal force is not
accumulated in one bearing location. However, this type of bearing scheme makes the superstructure becomes pretty
rigid and therefore it absorbs huge horizontal EQ forces. From the modal analysis, it shows that the 1 st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th
mode shapes are at 1.5 sec, 1.4 sec, 1.2 sec, and 0.9 sec. By plotting the natural period of each dominant mode shape to
the response spectrum curve (figure 2), we will obtain shear coefficient factors of 0.88g, 0.94g, 1.1g, and 1.1g (from
mode 1-4). In average, we can say that the shear coefficient factor for this bridge will be around 1.0g in both longitudinal
and lateral directions. Of course a huge horizontal force is implied with this factor.
With the fact that the total dead load and 30% live load portion of the bridge is around 170.000 kN and 10.000kN, by
having an absolute summation modal combination, we can imagine that the total excitation EQ force will be roughly
around 180.000 kN (1.0g x 180.000kN). Massive spherical bearings are needed to remain elastic for this force, not
mentioning the effect of this huge EQ force to the superstructure and substructure.

Fig. 4. Structural Mode Shapes – Bridge with Conventional Bearings

2. SEISMIC MITIGATION STRATEGY: SLIDING ISOLATION PENDULUM BEARING (SIP)

Seismic mitigation is the art of protecting the structure against earthquake damage by limiting the seismic actions
through the use of appropriate devices properly inserted into the structure. The term of “limiting the seismic actions”
plays a significant role in this definition, because this doesn’t mean to strengthen the structure to be able to resist huge
seismic forces, but to mitigate the seismic actions through these mechanisms:
 Seismic Isolation
 Energy Dissipation
 Combination of both Seismic Isolation and Energy Dissipation
Seismic isolation can be achieved by increasing the lateral flexibility between the substructure and the superstructure.
The natural period is increased and will reduce the spectral acceleration and hence the seismic forces. Energy dissipation
is achieved by increasing the damping coefficient of the structure, which will decrease the spectral acceleration as well.
The combination of these two mechanisms is found to be a better solution for seismic mitigation strategy.
Seismic isolators may generally be classified in two main categories: isolators that use elastomeric rubber components
and isolators that use sliding components. Both categories provide capability to lengthen the natural period of the
structure and to dissipate the seismic energy. For the energy dissipation mechanism, elastomeric isolators utilize the
rubber properties with or without the led core inside the elastomeric, while the sliding isolators use the friction between
sliding plates. The selection of seismic isolation devices or isolators is an important decision that should involve careful
considerations of following factors:
 Required axial load or vertical reaction to be carried (sliding isolator generally provides greater axial load capacity
than elastomeric based isolator)
 Displacements allowance of the isolated structure
 Isolators re-centering capability
 Service loads to be resisted by the isolators (wind load, braking load, thermal effect, creep and shrinkage, etc.)
 Isolators reliability (stability of the material mechanical properties under site conditions over long periods of time)
SIP bearing which is a sliding-based isolator is then used as the seismic mitigation strategy in the Holtekam Bridge.
The Pendulum Bearings have a better vertical reaction capacity compared to the elastomeric rubber based isolator, they
provide better displacements capacity with relatively big damping coefficient (20-35% damping), they are self-centering
after seismic event, the friction coefficient is properly designed to resist the service loads, and the material of Pendulum
components are expected to have a life time over 40-50 years.
As it is shown in below picture, the main components of this Pendulum Isolator are top anchor plate (1), main sliding
surface (2), sliding material (3), rotation element (4), rotation sliding surface (5), and the bottom anchor plate (6).

1 4 1 3
3

4 6
2

5 6

(a) (b)

Fig. 5. Components of Single Pendulum Bearing (a); Double Pendulum Bearing (b)
 As per above illustration, main anchor plates (1) are concave-shaped steel plates that make the sliding bearings are
described by the same equation of motion as a conventional pendulum system which the period of vibration is directly
proportional to the radius of curvature of the concave surface. The larger its radius of curvature, the longer period shift
may be obtained. Friction between rotation element (4) and the main sliding surfaces (2) dissipates energy and the weight
of structure acts as a restoring force due to the curvature of sliding surface. The bigger its friction coefficient, the bigger
energy dissipation or damping it may obtained. But on the other hand, the shorter period shift will be resulted due to
bigger friction coefficient. Basically these two factors of radius of curvature and friction coefficient are the most
important parameters in obtaining effective mitigation strategy using SIP Bearings.

Fig. 6. Force Acting in Single Sliding Pendulum Bearing

2.1. Formulation of Sliding Isolation Pendulum Bearing (SIP)

The horizontal force resistance of the SIP bearing is provided by two different mechanisms. The first mechanism is the
frictional resistance (Ff), which generated at the interface between the rotation element and the concave-shaped main
plate. This force is equal to the product of the dynamic friction coefficient (μ) and the component of the normal weight in
the SIP bearing (W). Thus:

F f  W cos (1)

The second resistance mechanism comes from the restoring force generated by the tangential component of the weight
acting on the SIP bearing. This force is formulated as:

F f  W sin 
(2)

If the displacement (D) is relatively small compared to the radius of curvature (R), then:

cos  1 (3)

and

D
sin   (4)
R
Substituting equations (3) and (4) into equations (1) and (2) and summing up the results, the total horizontal force
resistance of the SIP bearing on a given displacement (D) is obtained by:

W
F  W  D (5)
R

The term W/R in equation (5) is the lateral stiffness of the SIP bearing produced by the tangential component of the
weight. Using this stiffness and the weight acting on the bearing, the period while sliding (Td) is given by:

R
Td  2 (6)
g

From the above equation, it is clear that the sliding period is the function of radius of curvature alone (R). The idealized
force-displacement hysteresis curve of an SIP bearing is shown in following figure:

Force

F
µW 1
W/R

Keff
1 Displacement
D

Fig. 7. Idealized Force-Displacement Hysteresis Curve of a Pendulum Bearing

As it is shown in the above idealized force-displacement hysteresis curve, Keff is obtained by dividing the horizontal
force (F) by the corresponding SIP bearing displacement (D):

W W
K Eff   (7)
D R

Therefore, the effective period of single degree of freedom system with W/g mass and stiffness Keff at displacement D is
given by following expression:

W
TEff  2 (8)
gK Eff

By substituting equation (7) into equation (8), we will obtain another expression of Teff as follow:

RD
TEff  2 (9)
g D  R 
 From the expression in equation (9), it is clear that for a Sliding Isolation Pendulum Bearing, the effective natural
period at displacement D is independent from weight factor (W). The effective vibration period depends only on the
friction coefficient (μ) and the radius of curvature (R) of the sliding plate.
Effect of damping produced by friction between the sliding couple can be taken into account by means of effective
viscous damping ratio (ξEff) as per following definition:

2 area of hysteresis loop

 Eff  (10)
 4 K Eff D 2

Area of hysteresis loop is defined as 4μWD. By substituting this definition and equation (7) into equation (10), the
effective viscous damping ratio (ξEff) is given by following expression:

2 R
 Eff  (11)
 D  R 

From the equation, the effective damping depends only on maximum SIP bearing displacement (D), friction coefficient
(μ), and radius of curvature (R).

3. NUMERICAL MODELING OF HOLTEKAM BRIDGE

MIDAS Civil is used to observe the behavior of the bridge under seismic event. Due to the non-linear behavior of the
SIP bearing, a nonlinear time history analysis is used for the observation and design. Each conventional bearings are
replaced by nonlinear pendulum bearings through the option of general link – friction pendulum system isolator boundary
feature. An integrated model of steel superstructures and substructures is used for a better understanding of the structural
behavior. The substructure consists of reinforced concrete bored piles and pile caps, each bored piles are restraint with
multi-linear spring constant which represent the soil-structure interaction. Pendulum bearings are placed in between
superstructure and substructure according to following model:
Pendulum Bearing

Pendulum Bearing
Pendulum Bearing
Multi-linear Spring Constants

Multi-linear Spring Constants

FIXED SUPPORT

Vertical Restraint Support

Vertical Restraint Support

Fig. 8. Structural Modeling Strategy in MDAS Civil

 Since the SIP bearings can move in both longitudinal and lateral directions, a special type of expansion joint shall be
provided to accommodate these movements. A typical modular expansion joint that allows movement in longitudinal
direction only certainly not appropriate for this system. Therefore, a special seismic expansion joint is to be used on both
ends of the main steel superstructure at the location of P1 and P5 (please refer to figure 1). On the structural modeling,
these supporting
ISOLATION systems are modeled as per following scheme:
SYSTEM SCHEME:
SEISMIC EXPANSION JOINT

SEISMIC EXPANSION JOINT

Y

1-SIP 5-SIP 9-SIP 7-SIP 3-SIP

2-SIP 6-SIP 10-SIP 8-SIP 4-SIP

X

NOTES:

SLIDING ISOLATION PENDULUM BEARING SEISMIC EXPANSION JOINT

Fig. 9. Bearing and Expansion Joint Scheme

Due to the symmetrical geometry and installation easiness of the main steel superstructure, the SIP bearings are
classified into 3 different types. Each type of SIP bearings is modeled with 6 meter radius of curvature (R) and 8% of
friction coefficient (μ).
 SIP-A : 1-SIP, 2-SIP, 3-SIP, and 4-SIP
 SIP-B : 5-SIP, 6-ISP, 7-SIP, and 8-SIP
 SIP-C : 9-SIP and 10-SIP
To evaluate the structural responses under different seismic characteristics, there are 4 input of seismographs used in
the seismic analysis. Each ground motion consists of 3 directional components (X, Y, and Z). The ground motions are
artificially generated so that the SRSS combination of each pair of horizontal components is matched at a certain period
of design spectra. Time history 1 (TH-1 and TH-2) is matched to 1.0sec and TH-3 and TH-4 are matched to 2.0sec.
MATCHING SPECTRA ACCELERATION SUMMARY
2.5

TH-1 SRSS T=1.0sec Matched TH-2 SRSS T=1.0sec Matched

2.0 TH-3 SRSS T=2.0sec Matched TH-4 SRSS T=2.0sec Matched

Spectra Acceleration (g)

Design Spectra

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Period (sec)

Fig. 10. Matching Spectra Acceleration Summary

4. EVALUATION OF THE SLIDING ISOLATION PENDULUM (SIP) BEARING

It is often mentioned that flexible structures may not be suitable for seismic isolation. This statement implies that,
while the use of an isolation system increases the fundamental period, the increase for structures that are already flexible,
may not be sufficient to affect the dynamic response in a significant way. As it was described before, due to a relatively
soft soil properties and the liquefaction potential on the top soil layers, the substructure on Holtekam Bridge can be
classified as flexible substructure. Particularly for bridges, the above statement may be true, but not to the same extent.
The outcome depends on the ratio of the isolator flexibility to the substructure flexibility. If this ratio is greater than
unity, favorable response should be found when using isolation. If it is less than unity, the benefit of isolation will be
negligible. For typical bridge situations, this ratio is almost always greater than unity.
An instant change of the structural behavior is shown once the conventional spherical bearings are replaced with SIP
bearings. The natural period of the structure changed significantly as per following figure. The 1st Longitudinal and
Lateral modes are now at 3.33sec and 3.24sec. Compared to the structural behavior with conventional bearings, the
structural natural period has shifted from about 1sec to be about 3sec. The use of SIP Bearing activates a bigger effective
viscous damping factor of the structure. With the current bearing parameters, the effective viscous damping could be
increased up to 25-30%.

1st Longitudinal Mode 1st Lateral Mode

3.33 sec 3.24 sec

(a) (b)

Fig. 11. Isolated Structure Natural Period Longitudinal Direction (a); Lateral Direction (b)

The effect of this period shifting and damping increase which called isolation and energy dissipation mechanisms on
Holtekam Bridge is illustrated on below figure. The seismic acceleration is effectively reduced up to 75-80% by using
Sliding Isolation Pendulum Bearings.

ACCELERATION RESPONSE SPECTRUM

1.20
5% Damping
10% Damping
1.00
15% Damping
20% Damping
ACCELERATION (G)

0.80 25% Damping

0.60

0.40

Increasing Damping
0.20 (Energy Dissipation Mechanism)

0.00
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00
PERIOD (SEC)

Fig. 12. Isolation and Energy Dissipation Mechanisms Illustration on Holtekam Bridge
 For the evaluation purpose, nodal accelerations on the main deck are recorded for all the time history cases.
Acceleration records on the main deck from structure with Conventional Bearings and Sliding Isolation Pendulum
Bearings are taken for the comparison. In both directions, structural model with SIP Bearings gives pretty significant
reductions on the deck accelerations. This indicates smaller internal forces on the deck and steel superstructure compared
to a model with conventional spherical bearings.
Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison
15 10

10
5
Acceleration (m/s2)

Acceleration (m/s2)
5
0
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 -5
-5

-10 -10

-15 -15
Time (sec) Time (sec)

TH-1-X_CONVENTIONAL TH-1-X_SIP BEARING TH-2-X_CONVENTIONAL TH-2-X_SIP BEARING

Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison

20 10
15 8
6
10
4
Acceleration (m/s2)

Acceleration (m/s2)
5 2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
-5
-4
-10
-6
-15 -8
-20 -10
Time (sec) Time (sec)

TH-3-X_CONVENTIONAL TH-3-X_SIP BEARING TH-4-X_CONVENTIONAL TH-4-X_SIP BEARING

Fig. 13. Acceleration Time Response on Bridge Deck Comparison (Longitudinal Direction)

Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison

10 25
20
5 15
Acceleration (m/s2)
Acceleration (m/s2)

10
0
5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
-5
-5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

-10 -10
-15
-15 -20
Time (sec) Time (sec)

TH-1-Y_CONVENTIONAL TH-1-Y_SIP BEARING TH-2-Y_CONVENTIONAL TH-2-Y_SIP BEARING

Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison Acceleration on Bridge Deck Comparison

15 10

10
5
Acceleration (m/s2)

Acceleration (m/s2)

5
0
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -5
-5

-10 -10

-15 -15
Time (sec) Time (sec)

TH-3-Y_CONVENTIONAL TH-3-Y_SIP BEARING TH-4-Y_CONVENTIONAL TH-4-Y_SIP BEARING

Fig. 14. Acceleration Time Response on Bridge Deck Comparison (Lateral Direction)
 STRUCTURE WITH CONVENTIONAL BEARINGS

Un-Symmetrical Lateral Bending Moment

Max = 737.057 kNm
Min = 1.021.390 kNm

Fig. 15. Resulted Lateral Bending Moment on Concrete Deck (Model with Conventional Bearing)

STRUCTURE WITH SIP BEARINGS

Symmetrical Lateral Bending Moment

Max = 245.037 kNm
Min = -241.046 kNm

Fig. 16. Resulted Lateral Bending Moment on Concrete Deck (Model with SIP Bearing)

As it is shown on above figures, the resulted lateral bending moment on the concrete deck is effected significantly after
the conventional spherical bearings are replaced with the Sliding Isolation Pendulum (SIP) bearings. The resulted
moments are reduced significantly from maximum absolute value of 1.021.390 kNm to be 245.035 kNm only. These two
values comparison gives already a reduction of 76%. Another effect is on the bending moment distribution. As it is
indicated from the mode shapes (fig. 4 and fig. 11), compared to model with conventional bearings, the use of SIP
bearings equalize the concrete deck movement more uniformly. And therefore, it eliminates the un-symmetrical resulted
bending moment diagram due to the un-symmetrical substructure condition.
Another interesting evaluation will be on the nonlinear behavior of the SIP bearings. The performance of the SIP
bearings is represented on the resulted hysteresis curves at each time history cases. The hysteresis curves are the force-
displacement relation in each time step and the maximum resulted displacement shall not exceed the movement capacity
of the designed pendulum bearings. It shall be noted that the SIP bearing hysteresis curve is a vertical reaction –
dependent behavior. As indicated on the equation (5), the horizontal force on SIP bearing is the function of the weight (or
vertical reaction on the bearing) at a given time. Therefore, it is normal if the resulted hysteresis curve is not smooth
because the vertical reaction on the bearings is changing during the earthquake.
For simplicity, hysteresis curve from 4-SIP, 8-SIP, and 10-SIP will be used to represent the three types of the
pendulum bearings in Holtekam Bridge (SIP-A, SIP-B, and SIP-C). Hysteresis curves will be drawn in both longitudinal
and lateral directions for a better understanding. Maximum capacity of the designed SIP bearing will be plot together in
the diagram to show that the maximum displacement during strong earthquake still can be accommodated.
 SIP-A PENDULUM HYSTERESIS CURVE SIP-A PENDULUM HYSTERESIS CURVE
1000 1000

800 800

600 600

400 400
FORCE [kN]

FORCE [kN]
200 200

0 0
-600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600
-200 -200

-400 -400
Capacity TH1-X Capacity TH1-Y
-600 -600
TH2-X TH3-X TH2-Y TH3-Y
-800 -800
TH4-X TH4-Y
-1000 -1000
DISPLACEMENT [mm] DISPLACEMENT [mm]

SIP-B PENDULUM HYSTERESIS CURVE SIP-B PENDULUM HYSTERESIS CURVE

5000 5000

4000 4000

3000 3000

2000 2000
FORCE [kN]

FORCE [kN]
1000 1000

0 0
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400
-1000 -1000

-2000 -2000
Capacity TH1-X Capacity TH1-Y
-3000 -3000
TH2-X TH3-X TH2-Y TH3-Y
-4000 -4000
TH4-X TH4-Y
-5000 -5000
DISPLACEMENT [mm] DISPLACEMENT [mm]

SIP-C PENDULUM HYSTERESIS CURVE SIP-C PENDULUM HYSTERESIS CURVE

8000 8000

6000 6000

4000 4000

2000 2000
FORCE [kN]

FORCE [kN]

0 0
-500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
-2000 -2000

-4000 -4000
Capacity TH1-X Capacity TH1-Y
TH2-X TH3-X TH2-Y TH3-Y
-6000 -6000
TH4-X TH4-Y
-8000 -8000
DISPLACEMENT [mm] DISPLACEMENT [mm]

(a) (b)

Fig. 17. Hysteresis Curve of SIP-A, SIP-B, and SIP-C in Longitudinal Direction (a); Lateral Direction (b)

Maximum values of the output displacements are used to determine the required SIP Bearing. As the summary, the
designed SIP Bearings are pendulum with 8% friction coefficient, 6 meter of effective radius, and movement capacity of
500mm for SIP-A, 350mm for SIP-B, and 400mm for SIP-C.

5. CONCLUSION

The use of Sliding Isolation Pendulum (SIP) Bearings in Holtekam Bridge reduces the earthquake demand
significantly through its isolation and energy dissipation mechanisms. Induced forces on superstructure and substructure
are greatly decreased when we compared this isolation system with the conventional system. On the other hand, the
displacement implication shall be taken of carefully. When a bridge is seating on a pendulum system, a big movement
during earthquake is expected to happen. Therefore, the bridge shall be equipped with a proper expansion joint system
that makes the structure able to move in both longitudinal and lateral directions.
 An isolation system shall be properly designed on the structure so that no failures happened on the structural
components. With the use of SIP bearing, a minimum to no repair on structural components after strong earthquake
approach can be accommodated. Since the most important component on the SIP bearing is the sliding material, a regular
inspection and maintenance shall be made to make sure the SIP bearing works properly.

REFERENCES

[1] National Highway Institute – U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, “LRFD Seismic
Analysis and Design of Bridges – Reference Manual”, FHWA-NHI, 2014, Washington, D.C.
[2] National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, “NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings
and Other Structures (FEMA P-750)”, Building Seismic Safety Council, 2009, Washington, D.C.
[3] European Committee for Standardization (CEN), “European Standard EN 15129 : 2009 – Anti Seismic Devices”,
2009, Brussel.
[4] Medeot, R., “Re-centering Capability Evaluation of Seismic Isolation Systems Based on Energy Concepts”, 13 th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper no. 3106, 2004, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
[5] Buckle, I., Al-Ani, M., and Monzon, E., “Seismic Isolation Design Examples of Highway Bridges”, NCHRP 20-7 /
Task 262 (M2), 2011.
[6] Braun, C., “The Sliding Isolation Pendulum – an Improved Re-centering Bridge Bearing”, Ernst & Sohn – Steel
Construction 2, 2009, Berlin.
[7] Marioni, A., “The Use of Sliding Pendulum Isolators for the C.A.S.E. Project in L’Aquila”, Alga SpA, 2009,
Milano, Italy.
[8] Fujita, R., Mori, A., Kanaji, H., and Izuno, K., “A Study on the Seismic Performance of A Sliding Typed Seismic
Isolation System Applied for Bridges”, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper no. 800, 2004,
Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
[9] Morgan, T.A., Mahin, S.A., “The Use of Base Isolation Systems to Achieve Complex Seismic Performance
Objectives”, PEER Report 2011/06, 2011, California.
[10] Gimenez, J.L., Himeno, T., Shinmyo, H., and Hayashikawa, T., “Seismic Response of Bridges with Sliding and
Elastomeric Isolation Bearings”, IABSE-JSCE Joint Conference on Advance in Bridge Engineering-III, 2015,
Bangladesh.