Tez 4

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing
from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
ProQuest Information and Learning

300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
NOTE TO USERS
Page(s) not included in the original manuscript

are unavailable from the author or university. The
manuscript was microfilmed as received.
283
This reproduction is the best copy available.
UMI'
A Computer Controlled System for Earthquake
Protection of Structures
By
Halit Kaplan
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(MECHANICAL ENGINEERING)
at the
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN -MADISON
2002
UMI Number 3049408
____ ________ (f t
UMI
UMI Microform 3049408
Copyright 2002 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
I his page is not to Iv liand-wiilten except loi
A dissertation entitled
A Computer C ontrolled System f o r Earthquake
P ro te c tio n of S tru c tu re s
subm itted to the G ra d u ate S chool of th e

University of W isconsin-M adison
Page.
in partial fulfillment of th e re q u irem en ts for th e

d e g re e of D octor of P hilosophy
Readeis
by
H a lit Kaplan
Date of Final Oral Examination: December 22, 1999

R e a d e rs ’ Page. This page is not lo he hand-written except lor the signatures
Month & Year Degree to be awarded: December May 2002 August
Approval Signatures of Dissertation Readers: Signature, Dean of Graduate School
A Computer Controlled System for Earthquake
Halit Kaplan
Under the Supervision o f Kaiser Professor Ali.A. Seireg
Abstract
The reported study investigates the feasibility o f developing an active system, the C.C.C-
B.S.M (Computer-Controlled-Concave-Ball Support Mechanism), fo r the protection o f
structures against earthquakes. The envisioned system is incorporated in a specially
designed supporting base. A computer simulation o f the system is utilized fo r selecting
the optimum design parameters o f the base and the supporting elements. The system is to
be controlled according to preprogrammed rules in order to minimize the forces
transmitted to the structure. The inputs to the controller are the signals from
appropriately placed o ff site seismic detectors.
The seismic structural response analysis o f single and multi degree offreedom buildings
fo r the rigidly supported and isolated cases is investigated An illustrative example shows
that the proposed system is implementable and can result in orders o f magnitude
reduction in the transmitted force to the structures.
It can also minimize the torsional effects o f non-symmetric buildings resulting from any
arbitrary distribution o f the mass. The potential application and the limitations o f the
proposed concept fo r the protection o f different types o f structures against catastrophic
damage by earthquakes are also investigated.
An active base isolation system fo r the protection o f bridges subjected to earthquakes is
also proposed The system incorporates spherical supports, cams and springs which can
be optimally designed to minimize the transmissibility o f the seismic disturbances to the
bridge structure. The considered examples show that the proposed design can provide an
order o f magnitude reduction in the maximum stress resulting from transverse or
longitudinal seismic waves.
Since the system performance is highly dependent on the rapid unlocking o f the cams in
the event o f a seismic disturbance, careful consideration should be given to the design o f
a reliable cam release control. This can be achieved by spring loading each cam such
that it would be normally unlocked. A hydraulic actuator would be used to force it rotate
to the locking position under flu id pressure which would be constantly maintained at the
design level during normal conditions. The actuator would be equipped with a quick
response release valve fo r rapidly releasing the pressure and consequently unlocking the
cam as soon as an earthquake is detected.
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
I would like to express my sincere thanks to my adviser. Professor Ali A. Seireg, for his
constant guidance, patience and encouragement during my graduate studies. It is indeed a
fortune to be his student.
I would like to thank my thesis committee members: Professors, W.D.Milestone,
M.E.Plesha, R.E. Rowlands and J.J. Uicker, for their review of the manuscript, patience,
resourceful discussions.
My parents and friends, who are the greatest source of my spiritual guidance, deserve
more thank all thanks and gratitude. Finally, I dedicate this thesis to the memory of the
Turkish earthquake victims lost their life in the earthquake in August 17, 1999.
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AASTRACX I
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................. IV
^ -II A __________________ ......WWMM..W..—.WW.M...W....W....W.....M.W.W....WWW..M.W.MW.1
1 LITERATURE REVIEW ON PASSIVE AND ACTIVE PROTECTION OF

STRUCTURES SUBJECTED TO EARTHQUAKES_______________________________1
1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... I
l .2 T he N ature of Earthquakes ............................................................................................ 4
1.3 T he Main Base Isolation S ystems to their Design Approaches ............................6
1.3.1 Rubber Bearings Reinforced by Steel Plates.................................................................. 6
1.3.2 Tuned Mass Dampers...................................................................................................... 8
1.3.3 Sliding and Rolling Systems.......................................................................................... 10
1.3.4 The dynamic equations o f the system ............................................................................ 11
1.3.4.1 Non-sliding phase..................................................................................................... 11
1.3.4.2 Sliding phase....................... ......................................................................................11
1.3.5 Suspension Isolation Systems (SPl)............................................................................... 16
1.3.5.1 TTie main advantages of the system are:...................................................................17
1.4 ACTIVE CONTROL SYSTEMS AND EARTHQUAKE PROTECTION OF STRUCTURES.............. 18
1.5 Early warning ( detection ) systems ............................................................................. 24
CHAPTER-II_________________ 26
2 A COMPUTER CONTROLLED SYSTEM FOR EARTHQUAKE PROTECTION

OF STRUCTURES .S...M...........................................M...................M.............................................26
2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 26
2.2 S ystem Mo d el ...................................................................................................................... 28
System Dynamic Equations:........................................................................................................ 31
2.3 ILLUSTRATIVE SYSTEM DESIGN............................................................................................33
2.3.1 Selection o f the design parameters fo r base with fla t surface and spherical balls ..34
2.3.1.1 Case- (1) -Unconstrained base motion ( x b —6 (r) < b or t < t a ) .........................34
2.3.1.2 Case- (2 )- Assuming that the base contacts the springs for the duration of the
shock wave:............................................................................................................................... 37
2.3.1.3 Case-(3>- Unconstrained Motion for r0=13 [sec] and spring constraint afterwards
41
2.4 ACTIVE CONTROL................................................................................................................... 42
2.5 S ystem D esign with C oncave Ball Support ................................................................44
2.6 G eometric Relationships and Effective Coefficient o f Rolling F riction for
C oncave S u ppo r t ..........................................................................................................................47
2.6.1 Dynamic Equations o f the base ..................................................................................... 49
2.6.2 The solution procedure o f the problem:........................................................................ 52
2.6.3 Case Illustration ..............................................................................................................52
2.6.3.1 Case-(4) Unconstrained base with balls support on concave surfaces.................. 52
V
2.6.3.2 Case-(5) Base with balls support on concave surfaces with continuous spring
constraint...................................................................................................................................52
2.6.3.3 Case-(6) Base with balls support on concave surfaces with spring constraints after
5 sec of unconstrained movement.......................................................................................... 53
2.7 C onclusion ..........................................................................................................................62
CHAPTER-III_____________ 63
3 SEISMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS OF MULTI DEGREE OF FREEDOM RIGID

AND ISOLATED BUILDINGS WITH COMPUTER CONTROLLED CONCAVE-BALL
SUPPORT MECHANISM (C.C.C-B.S.M) AND OPTIMUM DESIGN OF THE
MECHANISM 63
3.1 A bstract .............................................................................................................................. 63
3.2 T hree Storey Concrete Structure And rrs D ynamic Response Analysis to the
Earthquak e ...................................................................................................................................64
3.2.1 Dynamic equations o f the conventionally designed system model.......................... 65
3.2.2 The Seismic Response o f the Conventionally Designed three storey Concrete
Structure............................................................................................................................. 67
3.3 S ystem D esign by Using C omputer C ontrolled C oncave -Ball Support
Mechanism (C.C.C-B.S.M) and O ptimum D esign of the M echanism ................................ 71
3.3.1 System Model......................................................................................................... 7 /
3.3.2 Differential equations o f the isolated system...........................................................73
3.3.3 Design optimization........................................................................................................ 75
3.3.4 Decision variables................................................................................................. 76
3.3.5 Objective junction...................................................................................................77
3.3.6 Constraints............................................................................................................ 78
3.4 Summary and C omparison of the Response of the Rigid and Isolated C ases .89
3.5 O ptimum D esign of a Base Isolated S ystem for a high rise Steel Structure .92
3.5.1 Introduction........................................................................................................... 92
3.5.2 System Model......................................................................................................... 95
3.5.3 Differential equations o f the system....................................................................... 96
3.5.3.1 The mass matrix....................................................................................................... 97
3.5.3.2 The stiffness m atrix................................................................................................. 97
3.5.3.3 The damping matrix................................................................................................ 97
3.5.3.4 The forcing function................................................................................................ 98
3.5.3.5 The displacement vector..........................................................................................98
3.6 T he seismic response analysis of the structure rigidly attached to the
GROUND............................................................................................................................................ 99
3.6.1.1 Some remarks on the figures:..................................................................................99
3.7 System Design with Concave -Ball S upport and O ptimum Design of the Base
103
3.7.1 Differential equations o f the system...................................................................... 104
3.8 DESIGN OPTIMIZATION..........................................................................................................106
3.8.1 Decision variables................................................................................................ 106
3.8.2 Objective junction................................................................................................. 106
3.8.3 Constraints...........................................................................................................107
3.9 T he optimized seismic response of the system to the T aft Earthquake 109
3.9.1 The optimized seismic response o f the isolated system to the Taft and the El Centro
Earthquake....................................................................................................................... 114
3.10 C onsideration of the tilting m o m ent .......................................................................i 15
3.U Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 122
CHAPTER-IV_______________________________________
4 SEISM IC RESPONSE ANALYSIS O F THE SINGLE SPAN ISOLATED BRIDGES

USING COM PUTER CONTROLLED CONCAVE-BALL SUPPORT MECHANISM
(C.C.C-BJS.M) AND OPTIM UM DESIGN O F THE M ECHANISM ______________ 123
4 .1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................123
4.2 A SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM LUMP MASS MODEL AND SEISMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS
OF THE SYSTEM IN THE Y DIRECTION............................................................................................ 125
4.2.1 Properties o f the bridge:......................................................................................125
4.2.2 Deck dimensions:................................................................................................. 125
4.2.3 The equivalent system model:............................................................................... 126
4.2.4 Analysis in the z direction.....................................................................................129
4.2.5 Analysis in x direction..........................................................................................131
4.3 S ystem Design with C oncave Ball Support ............................................................. 134
4.3.1 Optimum Design o f Base Isolation Mechanism o f the Single Span Bridge in x
direction 136
4.3.2 Design Optimization:............................................................................................137
4.3.3 Decision variables................................................................................................139
4.3.4 Constraints......................................................................................................... 141
4.3.5 Dynamic Equations o f Base Isolated Single Span Bridge in y direction.................144
4.3.6 Design Optimization:............................................................................................145
4.3.7 Summary..............................................................................................................147
CHA P I’feR-V _________________ WWW<WWM»MM»»WMM«M— 148
5 SEISM IC RESPONSE ANALYSIS O F MULTI-SPAN CONVENTIONAL AND

BASE ISOLATED BRIDGES IN THE TRANSVERSE DIRECTION AND O PTIM UM
DESIGN O F T H E BASE 148
5.1 ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................................148
5.2 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 149
5.3 system M odel .................................................................................................................. 151
5.4 P roperties ofth e bridge : ............................................................................................... 154
5.4.1 Deck dimensions:..................................................................................................154
5.4.2 Pier dimensions:.................................................................................................. 155
5.5 E q u a tio n s o f M o tio n o f t h e lum ped m o d e l in t h e t r a n s v e r s e d i r e c t io n ........ 157
5.5.1 The Mass Matrix ................................................................................................. 160
5.5.2 Coordinate reduction.......................................................................................... 162
5.5.3 The Forcing Function...........................................................................................164
5.5.4 The Stiffness Matrix..............................................................................................165
5.5.5 Differential equation ofthe system in the matrixformat...................................... 168
5.6 T he seismic response in the transverse direction of the conventionally
DESIGNED SYMMETRIC SYSTEM MODEL....................................................................................... 169
Reproduced with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5.7 T he seismic response of the conventionally designed non -symmetric system
MODEL............................................................................................................................................. 182
5.8 T he seismic response of the conventionally designed , non -symmetric ,
SPATIALLY INPUT VARIABLE SYSTEM MODEL AND RESPONSE ANALYSIS IN THE TRANSVERSE
DIRECTION........................................................................................................................................197
5.8.1 The seismic response ofthe system model to the inputs...........................................199
5.9 seismic Response analysis of the Isolated Bridges by Using C omputer
C ontrolled C oncave -Ball S upport Mechanism (C.C.C-B.S.M) and O ptimum D esign
of the Mech a n ism ...................................................................................................................... 212
5.9.1.1 The lumped mass model o f the isolated bridge......................................................216
5.10 D ynamic EQUATIONS of the system ............................................................................. 219
5.11 T he seismic response of the system isolated with the C.C.C-B.S.M in the
transverse direction ................................................................................................................ 223
5.11.1 Some important considerations fo r the design optimization................................... 226
5.11.2 Design optimization.................................................................................................... 234
5.11.3 Decision variables...................................................................................................... 235
5.11.4 Objective Junction........................................................................................................236
5.11.5 Constraints.................................................................................................................. 240
5.12 T he results of the optimized seismic response of the symmetric bridge
SYSTEM TO THE TAFT EARTHQUAKE............................................................................................ 242
5.13 Comparisons of optimum conventional and Isolated base cases of the
SYMMETRIC BRIDGE SYSTEM TAFT EARTHQUAKE....................................................................... 256
5.14 T he seismic response of the non -symmetric system with C.C.C-B.S.M in the
TRANSVERSE DIRECTION................................................................................................................ 259
5.15 T he results of the optimized seismic response of the non -symmetric bridge
SYSTEM TO THE EL-CENTRO EARTHQUAKE..................................................................................261
5.16 COMPARISONS OF OPTIMUM CONVENTIONAL AND ISOLATED BASE CASES OF THE NON-
SYMMETRIC BRIDGE SYSTEM TO THE EL CENTRO AND TAFT EARTHQUAKE............................ 274
5.17 S um m ary ............................................................................................................................280
CHAPTER-VI__________________ 282
6 MULTI DEGREE O F FREEDOM MODEL FO R M ULTI SPAN BRIDGES AND

OPTIM UM SEISM IC DESIGN W ITH CONCAVE-BALL SUPPORTS UNDER
LONGITUDINAL DISTURBANCES 282
6.1 Abstract ............................................................................................................................282
6.2 Seismic Response Analysis of C onventionally designed Bridges and
O ptimum Desig n ...........................................................................................................................283
6.3 T he S eismic Longitudinal Response Analysis of the system M o d el .............. 285
6.3.1 NOMENCLATURE:.....................................................................................................287
6.3.2 Dynamic Equations ofthe System ...............................................................................289
6.3.3 Differential equation ofthe system in matrixformat................................................. 291
6.3.4 The system response fo r the considered earthquake disturbance:........................... 296
6.4 Seismic response analysis with restricted displacement and impact analysis
in the longitudinal direction ................................................................................................ 307
6.4.1 Impact Analysis ............................................................................................................ 308
6.5 T he seism ic re sp o n se o f t h e c o n v e n tio n a lly desig n ed n o n -sy m m etric sy ste m
MODEL.............................................................................................................................................320
viii
6.6 T he seismic response o f the conventionally designed , non -symmetric ,

SPATIALLY INPUT VARIABLE SYSTEM MODEL AND RESPONSE ANALYSIS IN THE LONGITUDINAL
DIRECTION........................................................................................................................................332
6.7 S eismic Response Analysis of the Isolated B ridges Using C omputer
C ontrolled C oncave -Ball S upport M echanism (C.C.C-B.S.M) and O ptimum D esign
o fth e M ech a n ism .......................................................................................................................343
6.7. / Dynamic Equations ofthe System ............................................................................... 346
6.7.2 Design optimization...................................................................................................... 349
6.7.3 Decision variables........................................................................................................ 350
6.7.4 Objective Junction......................................................................................................... 352
6.7.5 Constraints..................................................................... 355
6.8 T he results of the optimized seismic response of the symmetric bridge
system to the E l -C entro earthquake .................................................................................. 358
6.9 T he results of the optimized seismic response of the non -symmetric bridge
SYSTEM TO THE EL-CENTRO EARTHQUAKE.................................................................................. 374
6.10 C omparisons of optimum conventional and Isolated base cases of the
SYMMETRIC BRIDGE SYSTEM TO THE TAFT EARTHQUAKE..........................................................388
6.11 SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................395
C H A PTER-V n______________ 397
7 T H E SEISM IC RESPONSE ANALYSIS O F TH E CONVENTIONALLY

DESIGNED M ULTI SPAN BRIDGES IN TH E VERTICAL (Z) D IRECTIO N _________397
7.1 System M o d el .................................................................................................................... 397
7.1.1 The Equivalent Lumped Mass Model in the Vertical Directional Motion ofthe
System 399
7.2 D ynamic equations of the system m o d el ................................................................ 400
7.2.1 Equation o f Motion o f the system in matrix form at...................................................401
7.2.1.1 The Mass Matrix...................................................................................................... 401
7.2.1.2 The Equation o f Motion in the Matrix Format:.................................................... 408
7.3 T he results of the vertical seismic response of the symmetric and non-
symmetric bridge system to the vertical input in the longitudinal direction 409
7.4 T he results of the vertical seismic response of the symmetric and non
symmetric bridge system to the vertical input in the transverse direction 434
7.5 Sum m ary .............................................................................................................................. 445
C H A PT E R -V ni_____________ 446
8 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOM M ENDATIONS_________________ 446

8.1 S ummary and C onclusions :............................................................................................446
8.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 453
9 T H E FIN ITE ELEM ENT ANALYSIS AND FORCES, M OM ENTS AND STRESSES
IN EACH SECTIO N O F TH E TRANSVERSE DIRECTIONAL M OTIO N O F TH E
BRIDGE SYSJrfelM,W,MW,m<WWW,WWWWIIM,Mm,Wiii,WIWWiWiiWWiW,M,iiHiîlfHWmi,mWWW,liHill,Hlw 454
APPENDIX-fBI ..477
10 THE FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS AND FORCES, MOMENTS AND
STRESSES IN EACH SECTION OF THE LONGITUDINAL DIRECTIONAL MOTION
OF THE BRIDGE SYSTEM __ .................................................477
APPENDIX-[C]______________ 499
11 THE EQUIVALENT SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM LUMPED MASS

MODEL FOR THE CASES USED FOR THE DISCRETE MODEL OF BRIDGE
SYSTEMS: 499
11.1.1 Simply Supported Beam Case.............................................................................499
11.1.2 Fixed andfixed beam with end displacement......................................................501
11.1.3 Equivalent mass o f spring............................................................................... ..503
APPENDIX-[D]__________________ ....................................................................................505
12 DESIGN OF CAMS, SPRINGS AND BASE SUPPORTS.... ......................505

12.1 DESIGN O F CAMS...........................................................................................................................505
12.2 DESIGN O F THE SPRINGS FOR THE BASE....................................................................................506
12.3 D e s ig n o f t h e S u p p o r tin g B a l l s ......................................................................................... 509
BIBLIOGRAPHY 511
X
LIST OF FIGURES
F ig u r e 1.1 S e is m ic w a v e s ......................................................................................................................................................... 5
F ig u r e 1.2 T h e s y s t e m m o d e l o f s il ic o n r u b b e r b e a r in g u s e d a s a b a s e is o l a t o r .................................6
F ig u r e L.3 M a x im u m r e c o r d e d a c c e l e r a t io n d u r in g e a s t T o k y o e a r t h q u a k e ....................................... 7
F ig u r e 1.4 A s c h e m a t ic r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f T u n e d M a s s D a m p e r S y s t e m s .................................................. 9
F ig u r e 1.5 A s c h e m a t ic r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f a C o u l o m b F r ic t io n a l B a s e ................................................... 10
F ig u r e 1.6 A s c h e m a t ic r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f a R o l l e r F r ic t io n a l B a s e ........................................................ 13
F ig u r e 1.7 A s c h e m a t ic il l u s t r a t io n o f F r ic t io n a l P e n d u l u m S y s t e m in d e t a il . R e f .[ 101............. 15
F ig u r e 1.8 M o d e l o f t h e S u s p e n d e d P e n d u l u m Is o l a t io n S y s t e m ( S P I ) ......................................................16
F ig u r e 1.9 A c t iv e C o n t r o l o f P a s s iv e l y Is o l a t e d B u il d in g s w it h H y d r a u u c A c t u a t o r s R e f .[8]
........................................................................................................................................................................................................19
F ig u r e 1.10 A c t iv e F r ic t io n a l C o n t r o l a t t h e b a s e R e f .[6 ]..............................................................................2 0
F ig u r e 1.11 A C o m p u t e r C o n t r o l l e d H y b r id S y s t e m M o d e l R e f .[2 9 ].........................................................21
F ig u r e 1.12 S t r u c t u r e w it h a c t iv e b r a c in g s y s t e m R e f .[2 5 ] ............................................................................2 2
F ig u r e 1.13 S t r u c t u r e w it h a c t iv e b r a c in g a n d t e n d o n s y s t e m R e f .[ 2 6 ] ................................................ 23
F ig u r e 1.14 C o m p o n e n t d ia g r a m o f t h e s y s t e m R e f .[ 2 8 ] .....................................................................................2 4
F ig u r e 1.15 E a r l y w a r n in g s y s t e m R e f .[2 8 ]................................................................................................................ 25
F i g u r e 2.1 T h e p h y s ic a l m o d e l o f t h e s y s t e m ........................................................................................................... 2 9
F ig u r e 2 .2 T h e f o r c e d is p l a c e m e n t c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f t h e s p r i n g .............................................................. 30
F ig u r e 2.3 D ia g r a m m a t ic r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f t h e s p r in g c a m s y s t e m .......................................................... 30
F ig u r e 2 .4 E l -C e n t r o e a r t h q u a k e (S 0 0 E c o m p o n e n t ) .......................................................................................... 33
F ig u r e 2.5 System w it h b a l l s u p p o r t e d b a s e w it h o u t s p r in g c o n s t r a in t w it h = 0 .0 1 .
M b = 0 . 0 5 M S( c a s e - 1 ) ..................................................................................................................................................35
F ig u r e 2 .6 R ig id l y s u p p o r t e d s t r u c t u r e a n d its r e s p o n s e t o t h e e a r t h q u a k e (C a s e 0 ) ..................36
F ig u r e 2 .7 Pea k respo n se fo r b a l l s u p p o r t e d b a s e w it h c o n t in u o u s l y s p r in g c o n s t r a in t ( c a s e -
2) M b = 0 .0 5 A f , .............................................................................................................................................................. 38
F ig u r e 2 .8 R espo n se o f s y s t e m w it h s pr in g s in c o n t in u o u s l y c o n t a c t w it h t h e b a s e f o r t h e
DURATION OFTHE SHOCK-WAVE (CASE-2) WITH M b =0.05M s ,fl0 = 0 . 0 1 , Kb = 0 . 0 5 AT5 .......... 39

F ig u r e 2 .9 T im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e s e l e c t e d s y s t e m w it h s p r in g c o n s t r a in t a t t h e b a s e a f t e r
t0 = 13 [sec ] w rm fiQ = 0 .0 1 , Mb = 0 . 0 5 A / , ( c a s e - 3 ) .............................................................................. 4 0

F ig u r e 2 .1 0 E f f e c t o f c h a n g e o f c o e f f ic ie n t o f f r ic t io n o n t h e r e s p o n s e o f t h e s y s t e m w it h
ACTIVE CONTROL.....................................................................................................................................................................43
F ig u r e 2.11 M o t io n o f t h e b a s e o n t h e s p h e r ic a l b a l l s w it h t h e c o n c a v e s u p p o r t .......................... 4 6
F ig u r e 2 .1 2 M o t io n o f t h e b a s e a n d g e o m e t r ic r e l a t io n s h ip s ........................................................................ 4 7
F ig u r e 2 . 13 S y s t e m w r m b a l l s u p p o r t e d b a s e w it h o u t s p r in g c o n s t r a in t ( c a s e - 4 ) ...........................55
F ig u r e 2 .1 4 R e s p o n s e o f s y s t e m w it h s p r in g s in c o n t in u o u s l y c o n t a c t w it h t h e b a s e f o r t h e
d u r a t i o n o f t h e s h o c k w a v e (C a s e -5 ) Kb = 0 . 0 5 K s ....................................................................................57
F ig u r e 2 .1 5 T im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e s e l e c t e d c o n c a v e s y s t e m w it h s p r in g c o n s t r a in t a t t h e b a s e
AFTER tQ = 5 [SEC] (C A SE-6)............................................................................................................................................59

F ig u r e 3.1 L u m p e d m a s s m o d e l o f t h r e e f l o o r s c o n c r e t e b u il d in g t h a t c o n v e n t io n a l l y
ATTACHED TO THE GROUND.................................................................................................................................................6 4
F ig u r e 3 .2 N o r m a l iz e d M o d e S h a p e s fo r t h e t h r e e s t o r e y c o n c r e t e B u il d in g .....................................6 6
F ig u r e 3.3 M u l t i d e g r e e o f f r e e d o m a n d r ig id l y s u p p o r t e d s t r u c t u r e a n d it s s t r u c t u r a l
DYNAMIC RESPONSE TO THE EARTHQUAKE.................................................................................................................... 7 0
F ig u r e 3 .4 T h r e e S t o r y C o n c r e t e B a s e Is o l a t e d B u il d in g w r m S t e e l B a l l s a n d C o n c a v e B a s e
S u p p o r t s ...................................................................................................................................................................................7 2
F ig u r e 3.5 T h e m o t io n o f t h e b a s e a n d t h e p a r a m e t e r s o f t h e d e s ig n o p t im i z a t i o n ......................... 75
F ig u r e 3 .6 T h e f o r c e d is p l a c e m e n t c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f t h e s p r i n g ............................................................ 76
F ig u r e 3 .7 D ia g r a m m a t ic r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f t h e s p r in g c a m s y s t e m ........................................................ 76
F ig u r e 3.8 P e a k o p t im iz e d S h e a r F o r c e s f o r t h e d if f e r e n t c o n s t r a in t v a l u e s o n t h e r e l a t iv e
DISPLACEMENT........................................................................................................................................................................ 79
F ig u r e 3 .9 T h e A c c e l e r a t io n v e r s u s t im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e f l o o r s ............................................................. 82
F ig u r e 3 .1 0 T h e d is p l a c e m e n t v e r s u s t im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e f l o o r s ..............................................................83
F ig u r e 3.11 T h e r e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t - t im e r e s p o n s e b e t w e e n t h e f l o o r s ......................................... 84
F ig u r e 3 .1 2 T r a n s m it t e d F o r c e (S h e a r F o r c e ) v e r s u s t im e r e s p o n s e in t h e s t o r e y s .......................85
F ig u r e 3 .13 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k r e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t s b e t w e e n t h e f l o o r s ..................................... 86
F ig u r e 3 .1 4 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k r e l a t iv e a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e f l o o r s ................................................... 86
F ig u r e 3 .15 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ....................................................... 87
F ig u r e 3 .1 6 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k S h e a r F o r c e s (T r a n s m it t e d F o r c e s in t o t h e s t o r e y s )...................87
F ig u r e 3 .1 7 T h e e f f e c t iv e c o e f f ic ie n t o f r o l l in g f r ic t io n w r m t i m e ....................................................... 88
F ig u r e 3 .1 8 T h e V e r t ic a l a n d H o r iz o n t a l F o r c e s a t t h e B a s e ..................................................................... 88
F ig u r e 3 .1 9 C o m p a r is o n b e t w e e n r ig id a n d b a s e is o l a t e d s t r u c t u r a l d y n a m ic r e s p o n s e s o f t h e
CONSIDERED STRUCTURE TO THE EL CENTRO EARTHQUAKE FOR
the m a x |jc ft - <5(/)| < 0 . 1 5 [ m l c o n s t r a in t ........................................................................................................9 0
F ig u r e 3 .2 0 C o m p a r is o n b e t w e e n r ig id a n d b a s e is o l a t e d s t r u c t u r a l d y n a m ic r e s p o n s e s o f t h e
c o n s id e r e d s t r u c t u r e t o t h e T a ft ea r th q u a k e for
the m a x |x 6 - < 5 ( / ) | < 0 . 1 5 [ m ] c o n s t r a in t . ......................................................................................................91

F ig u r e 3 .2 1 S t e e l f r a m e d , c o n v e n t io n a l l y d e s ig n e d , m u l t i d e g r e e o f f r e e d o m s y s t e m w it h 40
f l o o r s a n d t h e e q u iv a l e n t l u m p e d m a s s m o d e l .............................................................................................. 95
F ig u r e 3 .2 2 T h e d is t r ib u t io n o f C o e f f ic ie n t o f S t i f f n e s s ..................................................................................96
F ig u r e 3 .23 N o r m a l iz e d m o d e s h a p e s ............................................................................................................................ 98
F ig u r e 3 .2 4 D is p l a c e m e n t - t im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e b a s e a n d f l o o r # 4 0 ......................................................... 100
F ig u r e 3 .2 5 T h e a c c e l e r a t io n - t im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e b a s e a n d f l o o r # 4 0 ............................................... 100
F ig u r e 3 .2 6 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e f l o o r s ........................................................................ 101
F ig u r e 3 .27 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e f l o o r s ........................................................................ 101
F ig u r e 3 .2 8 T h e a b s o l u t e r e l a t iv e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ................... 102
F ig u r e 3 .2 9 M a x im u m T r a n s m it t e d F o r c e s in t o t h e s t o r e y s ........................................................................ 102
F ig u r e 3 .3 0 S t e e l f r a m e d - b a s e is o l a t e d m u l t i d e g r e e o f f r e e d o m s y s t e m w it h 4 0 f l o o r s ......... 103
F ig u r e 3.31 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k S h e a r F o r c e s (T r a n s m it t e d F o r c e s in t o t h e s t o r e y s ).................. 108
F ig u r e 3 .3 2 T h e d is p l a c e m e n t - t im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e b a s e a n d f l o o r # 4 0 ................................................ 110
F ig u r e 3 .3 3 T h e a c c e l e r a t io n - t im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e b a s e a n d f l o o r # 4 0 ............................................... 110
F ig u r e 3 .3 4 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e f l o o r s ........................................................................ 111
F ig u r e 3 .3 5 T h e a b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e f l o o r s ........................................................................ 111
F ig u r e 3 .3 6 T h e a b s o l u t e r e l a t iv e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ................... 112
F ig u r e 3 .3 7 M a x im u m T r a n s m it t e d F o r c e s in t o t h e s e s t o r e y s ..................................................................112
F ig u r e 3 .38 T h e H o r iz o n t a l F o r c e a t t h e b a s e ...................................................................................................... 113
F ig u r e 3 .3 9 T h e n o r m a l iz e d V e r t ic a l F o r c e a t t h e b a s e ..................................................................................113
F ig u r e 3 .4 0 - A S c h e m a t ic R e p r e s e n t a t io n o f O v e r t u r n M o m e n t s .......................................................... 115
F ig u r e 3.41 L o a d d is t r ib u t io n o n t h e b a l l s l o c a t e d o n t h e x - a x is a t t h e m a x im u m t il t in g
MOMENT CONDITION............................................................................................................................................................ 117
F ig u r e 3 .4 2 P e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e f l o o r s ...................................................................................................... 117
F ig u r e 3 .4 3 C o m p a r is o n o f t h e a b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e f l o o r s ...................................... 1 18
F ig u r e 3 .4 4 C o m p a r is o n o f S h e a r F o r c e s a t t h e s t o r e y s b e t w e e n r ig id a n d b a s e is o l a t e d c a s e
OF THE CONSIDERED STRUCTURE TO THE T a f t EARTHQUAKE WITH THE
m a x |jc 6 - S(f )| < 0 . 1 5 [ m ] c o n s t r a i n t ............................................................................................................... 118
F ig u r e 3 .4 5 N o r m a l iz e d P e a k S h e a r F o r c e s o f s t o r e y s b e t w e e n r ig id a n d b a s e is o l a t e d c a se s
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................119
F ig u r e 3 .4 6 P e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e f l o o r s ...................................................................................................... 119
xii
F ig u r e 3.4 7 C o m p a r is o n o f t h e a b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e f l o o r s ...................................... 120

F ig u r e 3.4 8 C o m p a r is o n o f S h e a r F o r c e s a t t h e s t o r e y s b e t w e e n r ig id a n d b a s e is o l a t e d c a s e
OF THE CONSIDERED STRUCTURE TO THE EL CENTRO EARTHQUAKE WITH THE
m a x |jc 4 - « 5 ( f ) | < 0 . 1 5 [ m ] c o n s t r a in t ............................................................................................................... 120
F ig u r e 3 .4 9 N o r m a l iz e d P e a k S h e a r F o r c e s o f s t o r e y s b e t w e e n r ig id a n d b a s e is o l a t e d c a se s
121
F ig u r e 4.1 A C o n v e n t io n a l l y D e s ig n e d M u l t i S p a n b r id g e m o d e l ............................................................. 123
F ig u r e 4 .2 A M u l t i S p a n B r id g e w it h r u b b e r - s t e e l c o m p o s it e is o l a t io n s y s t e m ............................ 124
F ig u r e 4 .3 A s in g l e s p a n c o n v e n t io n a l l y d e s ig n e d b r id g e m o d e l ............................................................. 124
F ig u r e 4 .4 D e c k p r o p e r t ie s o f t h e b r id g e R e f .[ 2 5 - 2 6 ] ......................................................................................... 125
F ig u r e 4 .5 L u m p e d m a s s m o d e l o f t h e s y s t e m in y d i r e c t io n .......................................................................... 126
F ig u r e 4 .6 T h e e q u iv a l e n t s y s t e m m o d e l in y d i r e c t io n ...................................................................................126
F ig u r e 4 .7 T h e E l -C e n t r o e a r t h q u a k e (S 0 0 E c o m p o n e n t ) ............................................................................... 127
F ig u r e 4 .8 T h e s e is m ic r e s p o n s e in y d ir e c t io n t o t h e E a r t h q u a k e ............................................................ 128
F ig u r e 4 .9 L u m p M a s s M o d e l in z d i r e c t i o n ............................................................................................................. 129
F ig u r e 4 .1 0 T h e E q u iv a l e n t S y s t e m M o d e l in z d ir e c t io n ............................................................................. 129
F lG U R E 4 .ll SEISMIC STRUCTURAL DYNAMIC RESPONSE IN Z THE DIRECTION TO THE EARTHQUAKE 130
F ig u r e 4 .1 2 T h e E q u iv a l e n t L u m p e d S y s t e m M o d e l in t h e x d i r e c t i o n ................................................. 131
F ig u r e 4 . 13 T h e S e is m ic R e s p o n s e o f t h e L u m p e d S y s t e m M o d e l in t h e L o n g it u d in a l d ir e c t io n
....................................................................................................................................................................................................133
F ig u r e 4 .1 4 S id e - v ie w o f t h e 3 a s e Is o l a t e d S y s t e m ........................................................................................... 134
F ig u r e 4 .1 5 S id e a n d t o p v ie w d e t a il s o f t h e b a s e is o l a t io n m e c h a n is m ............................................... 134
F ig u r e 4 .1 6 T o p - v ie w o f t h e B a s e Is o l a t e d S y s t e m ............................................................................................ 135
F ig u r e 4 .1 7 F r e e B o d y D ia g r a m o f t h e B a s e I s o l a t e d S y s t e m .....................................................................135
F ig u r e 4 .1 8 L u m p e d M a s s M o d e l f o r b a s e is o l a t e d c a s e in x d ir e c t io n .................................................136
F ig u r e 4 .1 9 F o r c e - d is p l a c e m e n t c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f t h e s p r in g ................................................................. 139
F ig u r e 4 .2 0 D ia g r a m m a t ic r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f t h e s p r in g c a m s y s t e m .....................................................140
f'
F ig u r e 4.21 T h e o p t im iz e d s e is m ic r e s p o n s e in x d ir e c t io n w it h o p t im iz e d v a l u e s — — = 0.45.
d = 0 .0 9 [m ] a n d R = 4 [ m ] ............................................................................................................................... 143
F ig u r e 4 .2 2 L u m p e d M a s s M o d e l w it h S p h e r ic a l B a l l s -C o n c a v e B a s e S u p p o r t Is o l a t io n in y
DIRECTION.............................................................................................................................................................................. 144
F ig u r e 4 .2 3 T h e s e is m ic r e s p o n s e o f o p t im u m d e s ig n o f b a s e is o l a t e d s in g l e s p a n b r id g e in y
DIRECTION WITH OPTIMIZED VALUES — - = Cf = 0 . 0 1 . d = 0 . 0 7 [ m ] AND R = 4 [m] .............. 146
F ig u r e 5.1 A g e n e r a l m o d e l f o r a c o n v e n t io n a l l y d e s ig n e d b r id g e m o d e l ......................................152
F ig u r e 5 .2 L u m p e d m a s s m o d e l o f t h e b r id g e s y s t e m m o d e l . ........................................................................ 152
F ig u r e 5 .3 T h e f ir s t m o d e r e s p o n s e o f t h e s y s t e m in t h e t r a n s v e r s e d i r e c t io n .............................. 153
F ig u r e 5 .4 D e c k p r o p e r t ie s o f t h e b r id g e R e f .[4 0 .4 1 ]........................................................................................ 154
F ig u r e 5 .5 P ie r p r o p e r t ie s o f t h e b r id g e R e f .[ 4 0 ,4 1 ] ..........................................................................................155
F ig u r e 5 .6 T h e d is t r ib u t io n o f l u m p e d m a s s e s f o r t h e t r a n s v e r s e d ir e c t io n a l m o t i o n .............160
F ig u r e 5 .7 E l C e n t r o e a r t h q u a k e (S 0 0 E c o m p o n e n t ) ....................................................................................... 164
F ig u r e 5 .8 T h e s y m m e t r ic b r id g e m o d e l c o n s id e r e d f o r t h e s e is m ic r e s p o n s e a n a l y s is .............169
F ig u r e 5 .9 N o r m a l iz e d m o d e s h a p e s a n d r e s o n a n c e f r e q u e n c ie s in t h e t r a n s v e r s e d ir e c t io n a l
MOTION OFTHE SYMMETRIC SYSTEM MODEL.......................................................................................................... 169
F ig u r e 5 .1 0 a c c e l e r a t io n -t im e r e s p o n s e o f e a c h l u m p e d m a s s .................................................................. 172
F ig u r e 5 .U D is p l a c e m e n t -t im e r e s p o n s e o f e a c h l u m p e d m a s s .................................................................. 174
F ig u r e 5 .1 2 R e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ...............................................................176
F ig u r e 5 .1 3 A b s o l u t e p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ............................................................. 177
F ig u r e 5 .1 4 a b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ...............................................................177
F igure S. IS P eak relative displacements between the tw o lumped m asses ...................................178
F igure 5.16 P eak forces in the s id e s .............................................................................................................. 178
F igure 5.17 P eak forces in th e sections ....................................................................................................... 179
F ig u r e S.18 P eak moments in th e s id e s ...........................................................................................................179
F igure S. 19 P eak moments in th e sec tio n s ....................................................................................................180
F igure 5.20 P eak stresses in t h e s id e s ............................................................................................................180
FIGURE5.21 PEAK STRESSES IN THE SECTIONS..................................................................................................... 181
F igure 5.22 T he non -symmetric bridge model for the dynamic response a n a ly sis .................... 183
F igure 5.23 N ormalized mode shapes and resonance frequencies in th e tra nsverse direction
o f t h e non - symm etric m o d e l ..................................................................................................................... 184
F ig u re 5.24 6 : T h e g r o u n d d is p la c e m e n t o f E l- C e n tr o e a r t h q u a k e (S00E c o m p o n e n t) 184
F igure 5.25 acceleration response o f each lumped m a s s ..................................................................... 187
F igure 5.26 D isplacement o f each lumped mass during the earthquake ......................................... 189
F igure 5.27 R elative displacement between th e lumped m a ss e s ........................................................191
F igure 5.28 A bsolute peak accelerations o f the lumped m a ss e s .......................................................192
F igure 5.29 absolute peak displacements o f t h e lumped masses ........................................................192
F igure 5.30 P eak relative displacements between tw o lumped m asses ............................................193
F igure 5 .3 1 P eak transmitted forces in th e s id e s ..................................................................................... 193
F igure 5.32 P eak transmitted forces in the sections .............................................................................. 194
F igure 5.33 P eak moments in th e s id e s .......................................................................................................... 194
F igure 5.34 pea k moments in th e sec tio n s ................................................................................................... 195
F igure 5.35 P eak stresses in th e s id e s ........................................................................................................... 195
F igure 5.36 P eak stresses in th e sections .....................................................................................................196
F igure 5.37 T he spatially variable input in t h e transverse d ir ec tio n ............................................197
F igure 5.38 T he assumed spatially variable local ground displacements o f E l -C entro
EARTHQUAKE (S00E COMPONENT)..................................................................................................................198
F igure 5.39 T h e acceleration -tim e response o f the lumped m a sses ..................................................201
F igure 5.40 D isplacement -tim e response o f th e lumped m a sses .......................................................... 203
F igure 5.41 P eak relative displacements between th e two lumped m asses ................................... 205
F igure 5.42 P eak accelerations o f the lumped m asses ...........................................................................206
F igure 5.43 pea k displacements o f t h e lumped m a sses ...........................................................................206
F igure 5.44 T he peak relative displacements in the sections .............................................................. 207
F igure 5.45 P eak forces in th e s id e s .............................................................................................................. 207
F igure 5.46 P eak forces in the sections ........................................................................................................208
F igure 5.47 pea k bending moments in the s id e s ......................................................................................... 208
F igure 5.48 P eak bending moments in the sections ...................................................................................209
F igure 5.49 Absolute maximum stresses in th e sides ................................................................................209
F igure 5 JO absolute maximum stresses in th e sec tio n s ........................................................................210
F igure 5 .5 1 T h e dynamic response o f t h e conventional bridge system to the T a ft earthquake
IN THE TRANSVERSE DIRECTION....................................................................................................................... 211
F igure 5.52 Base isolated system model with the proposed m echanism ........................................... 213
F igure 5.53 T ransverse motion o f t h e (C .C.C-B.S.M ) base isolated bridge m o d e l ..................... 214
F igure 5.54 D etails o f t h e bridge base Isolation S ystem ....................................................................... 215
F igure 5.55 T h e lumped mass distribution o f t h e system m o d el ..........................................................216
F igure 5.56 E l -C entro earthquake (S00E component ) ............................................................................223
F igure 5.57 Force - displacement characteristics o f t h e spring ...........................................................224
F igure 5 J 8 D iagrammatic representation o f t h e spring cam system ................................................224
F igure 5.59 T h e considered symmetric bridge model and its different sections for the
response analysis ..........................................................................................................................................225
F igure 5.60 M otion o f t h e base isolated bridge model in the transverse d ir ec tio n ..................227
F igure 5.61 T he motion o f t h e system and decision param eters ..........................................................235
F igure 5.62 Acceleration versus tim e response o ft h e lumped m a s s e s ............................................ 245
F igure 5.63 D isplacement -tim e response o f th e lumped m a sses ........................................................... 247
F igure 5.64 Stress -tim e response in the sec tio n s .......................................................................................249
F igure 5.65 R elative displacement -tim e response between the lumped m asses ............................ 250
F igure 5.66 V ertical displacement -tim e response o f th e lumped masses M l0 and Afn .............. 251
F igure 5.67 P eak accelerations o f the lumped m a sses ............................................................................251
F igure 5.68 P eak displacement o f each lumped m a s s ...............................................................................252
F igure 5.69 A bsolute maximum relative displacements at th e ground lo cations ..................... 252
F igure 5.70 P eak forces in the s id e s ................................................................................................................253
F igure 5 .7 1 P eak moments in th e s id e s ........................................................................................................... 253
F igure 5.72 P eak moments in t h e sections .................................................................................................... 254
F igure 5.73 P eak stresses in t h e s id e s ............................................................................................................ 254
F ig u re 5.74 P e a k s t r e s s e s in t h e s e c tio n s w ith t h e optim ized v a l u e s K b - 0 .0 0 5 AT, [ N /m ] ,
b = 0 .0 5 [m ] a n d R = 3 [ m ] .................................................................................................................... 255
F igure 5.75 C omparisons o f th e dynamic responses o f th e symmetric bridge with base isolated
AND NON-KOLATED CASES TO THE TAFT EARTHQUAKE............................................................................... 258
F igure 5.76 T he considered non - symmetric isolated bridge m odel and its different sections
FOR THE RESPONSE ANALYSIS............................................................................................................................ 260
F igure 5.77 Acceleration -tim e response o f each lumped m a ss .......................................................... 263
F igure 5.78 D isplacement -tim e response o f each lumped m a s s .......................................................... 265
F igure 5.79 Stresses versus tim e in th e s e c t io n s .......................................................................................267
F igure 5.80 R elative displacement -tim e response at th e ground co n n ectio n s ............................ 268
F ig u re 5 .8 1 V e r t i c a l d isp la c e m e n t-tim e re s p o n se o f t h e lum ped m asses M [0 a n d M u ...............269
F igure 5.82 P eak acceleration of each lumped m a ss ............................................................................. 269
F igure 5.83 P eak displacement of each lumped m a s s ............................................................................. 270
F igure 5.84 P eak relative displacements a t th e ground co n nections ............................................. 270
F igure 5.85 P eak relative displacement betw een tw o lumped m a ss e s ............................................. 2 7 1
F igure 5.86 P eak forces in th e sections ......................................................................................................... 2 7 1
F igure 5.87 P eak moments in th e s id e s ........................................................................................................... 272
F igure 5.88 P eak moments in th e sec tio n s .................................................................................................... 272
F igure 5.89 P ea k moments in th e sec tio n s .................................................................................................... 273
F igure 5.90 P eak stresses in th e sections w ith the optimized values .................................................273
F igure 5.91 C omparisons o f dynamic response o f th e isolated and rigid cases with the
op tim ized d esig n p a r a m e te r s K b = 3 . 1 6 1C)5 [ N / m ] . b = 0 .0 5 [m ] AND R = 3 [m ] TO THE
E l C entro earthquake ...................................................................................................................................277
F igure 5.92 C omparisons o f dynamic response o f th e isolated and rigid cases with the
op tim ized d esig n p a r a m e te r s K b = 3 . 1 6 1C)6 [ N / m ] , b = 0 .0 5 [m ] a n d R = 3 [m ] t o T a f t
EARTHQUAKE.......................................................................................................................................................279
F igure 6.1 A G eneric T raditional D esigned B ridge M o d e l ..................................................................285
F ig u r e 6 2 Lum ped M ass M o d e l o f t h e S y s te m .......................................................................................... 285
F igure 6.3 T he symmetric system m odel and its longitudinal first mode m otion ........................286
F igure 6.4 T he symmetric bridge m odel considered for the seism ic response an alysis .............296
F ig u re 6 5 E l- C e n tr o e a r t h q u a k e (SOOE c o m p o n e n t).............................................................................297
F igure 6.6 A cceleration response o f each lumped m a s s ....................................................................... 300
F igure 6.7 D isplacement and rotation -tim e response o f each lumped mass ................................... 302
F igure 6.8 R elative displacement -tim e response o f structure ............................................................303
F igure 6.9 A bsolute rotational peak accelerations o f the lumped m a ss e s .................................. 303
F igure 6.10 Absolute translational peak accelerations o f t h e lumped m a s s e s ........................ 304
F igure 6.11 A bsolute peak rotations o f t h e lumped m asses .................................................................304
F ig u r e 6.12 P ea k moments in th e sec tio n s ....................................................................................................305
F igure 6.13 P eak moments in th e s id e s ...........................................................................................................305
XV
F igure 6.14 Peak stresses in t h e sec tio n s ......................................................................................................306

F igure 6. IS Peak stresses in t h e s id e s .............................................................................................................306
F igure 6.16 System model for th e longitudinal directional motion with im pa c t ......................307
F igure 6.17 T h e physical representation o f im pact m o d e l ...................................................................308
F igure 6.18 Acceleration response o f each lumped m a s s ......................................................................312
F igure 6.19 D isplacement and rotation -tim e response o f each lumped m a ss ................................ 314
F igure 6.20 Relative displacement -tim e response o f s t r u c t u r e ........................................................315
F igure 6.21 Absolute rotational peak accelerations o f th e lumped m a ss e s ............................... 315
F igure 6.22 a bsolu te translational pea k accelerations o f t h e lumped m a ss e s ........................ 316
F ig u r e 6.23 absolute peak rotations o f t h e lumped m asses ..................................................................316
F igure 6.24 Peak moments in t h e sec tio n s .....................................................................................................317
F igure 6.25 Peak moments in t h e s id e s ............................................................................................................317
F igure 6.26 Peak stresses in th e sec tio n s ......................................................................................................318
F igure 6.27 P eak stresses in th e s id e s .............................................................................................................318
F igure 6.28 Stress -time response a t the pier s id e s .....................................................................................319
F igure 6.29 T he non - symm etric bridge m odel and th e different sides o f t h e lumped mass
LOCATIONS............................................................................................................................................................ 322
F igure 6.30 Acceleration -tim e response o f each lumped m a s s ............................................................ 325
F igure 6.31 T ranslational displacem ent o f each lumped mass during th e ea r th q u a k e 326
F igure 6.32 R elative displacement -tim e response o f d e c k ....................................................................326
F igure 6.33 Absolute rotational peak accelerations o f th e lumped m a s s e s ............................... 327
F igure 6.34 a bsolute translational peak accelerations o f the lumped m a ss e s .........................327
F igure 6.35 Absolute peak rotations o f t h e lumped masses ..................................................................328
F igure 6.36 P eak moments in t h e sec tio n s .....................................................................................................328
F igure 6.37 P eak moments a t t h e s id e s .......................................................................................................... 329
F igure 6.38 Peak stresses in th e sec tio n s ......................................................................................................329
F igure 6.39 Peakstresses a t t h e s id e s ............................................................................................................330
F ig u r e 6.40 Stress -tim e response a t t h e pier locations w here maximum stresses o c c u r s 331
F igure 6.41 Non - symmetric system model w ith longitudinal spatial variable disturbances 332
F igure 6.42 T h e assumed spatial variable inputs o f t h e E l C entro earthquake in different
GROUND LOCATIONS OFTHE BRIDGE ................................................................................................................ 333
F igure 6.43 acceleration -tim e response o f each lumped m ass ............................................................. 336
F ig u r e 6.44 D isplacement tim e response o f t h e lumped m asses ............................................................ 337
F ig u r e 6.45 Relative displacement o f t h e structure to the g r o u n d .................................................337
F igure 6.46 Peak translational accelerations o f t h e lumped m asses ............................................. 338
F igure 6.47 P eak rotational accelerations o f t h e lumped m asses .................................................... 338
F igure 6.48 P eak rotations o f t h e lumped m a ss e s .....................................................................................339
F igure 6.49 Peak moments in t h e sec tio n s .....................................................................................................339
F igure 6.50 Peak moments in t h e s id e s ............................................................................................................340
F igure 6 3 1 P eak stresses in th e sec tio n s ......................................................................................................340
F igure 6 3 2 Peak stresses in th e s id e s .............................................................................................................341
F igure 6 3 3 Stress -tim e response a t th e pier lo c a tio n s ..........................................................................342
F igure 6 3 4 B ase isolated system model with t h e proposed m ech anism ........................................... 344
F igure 6 3 5 T he longitudinal motion o f th e base isolated system m odel with t h e proposed
MODEL....................................................................................................................................................................345
F igure 6 3 6 Force - displacement characteristics o f th e spring ...........................................................3 5 1
F ig u r e 6 3 7 D iagrammatic representation o f t h e spring cam system ................................................351
F ig u r e 6 3 8 T h e considered sym m etric bridge m odel and its different sections for the
response analysis ............................................................................................................................................ 357
F igure 6 3 9 R otational acceleration -tim e response o f lumped m asses ........................................... 360
F igure 6.60 Rotation and translation displacements o f t h e lumped m a s s e s ................. 362
F igure 6.61 R elative displacements -tim e response o f th e piers ...........................................................363
F igure 6.62 Abso lute rotational peak accelerations o f th e lumped m a ss e s ................................364
F igure 6.63 a bsolu te peak rotations o f t h e lumped masses ................................................................. 364
F igure 6.64 Peak moments at the s ec t io n s ................................................................................................... 365
F igure 6.65 P eak stresses a t th e sec tio n s .................................................................................................... 365
F igure 6.66 Peak moments at th e s id e s .......................................................................................................... 366
F igure 6.67 P eakstresses at th e s id e s ........................................................................................................... 366
F igure 6.68 Stress -time response at th e s id e s ............................................................................................ 367
F igure 6.69 C omparisons o f peak rotational accelerations ............................................................... 368
F igure 6.70 C omparisons of peak translation a cc elera tio n s ............................................................. 368
F igure 6 .7 1 C omparisons o f peak rotations .................................................................................................369
F igure 6.72 C omparisons of peak displacem ents ........................................................................................ 369
F igure 6.73 C omparisons of peak moments at th e s id e s .......................................................................... 370
F igure 6.74 C omparisons o f peak moments a t th e sectio ns ....................................................................370
F igure 6.75 C omparisons o f peak stresses a t t h e s id e s ........................................................................... 371
F igure 6.76 C omparisons o f peak stresses at th e sectio ns .....................................................................371
F igure 6.77 Normalized accelerations .........................................................................................................372
F igure 6.78 Normalized accelerations ......................................................................................................... 372
F igure 6.79 Normalized stresses a t t h e s id e s ............................................................................................ 373
F igure 6.80 Acceleration -tim e response o f lumped m a sses ...................................................................376
F igure 6 .8 1 D isplacements o f lumped m a ss e s ............................................................................................. 378
F igure 6.82 Relative displacement -tim e response at the pier lo ca tio n s .........................................379
F igure 6.83 Absolute peak accelerations o f t h e lumped m a ss e s ....................................................... 380
F igure 6.84 a b so l u t e pe a k d is pl a c e m e n t so ft h e l u m pe d m a ss e s ........................................................ 380
F igure 6.85 Peak moments in th e sec tio n s .................................................................................................... 381
F igure 6.86 Peak stresses in the sections a t t h e s id e s ............................................................................ 3 8 1
F igure 6.87 Peak stresses in th e s id e s ............................................................................................................ 382
F igure 6.88 Stress -tim e response a t t h e different sides o ft h e p ie r s ................................................ 383
F igure 6.89 C omparisons o f t h e peak displacements o f t h e lumped m asses .................................... 384
F igure 6.90 C omparisons o f t h e peak moments a t t h e s id e s ................................................................. 384
F igure 6.91 C omparisons o f t h e peak moments a t t h e sections .......................................................... 385
F igure 6.92 C omparisons o ft h e peak stresses at th e s id e s .................................................................. 385
F igure 6.93 C omparisons o f t h e peak stresses a t t h e sections ............................................................386
F igure 6.94 Normalized peak accelerations ...............................................................................................386
F igure 6.95 N ormalized peak accelerations ...............................................................................................387
F igure 6.96 Normalized peak str esses ........................................................................................................... 387
F igure 6.97 C omparison o f R igid and B a se Isolated C ases for th e seismic response o f the
SYMMETRIC SYSTEM MODEL WITH THE OPTIMIZED DESIGN PARAMETERS K b = 1 .0 1 1 0 3 [ N /m ] ,
b = 0 . 0 5 [ m ] a n d R = 3 [ m ] ...................................................................................................................... 391
F igure 6.98 - C omparison o f th e longitudinal seism ic response for rigidly supported and
ISOLATED BRIDGES.............................................................................................................................................. 394
F igure 7.1 A G eneral C onventional D esigned B ridge M o del and L umped M a ss Mo d el in the
VERTICAL (Z) DIRECTION....................................................................................................................................399
F ig u r e 1 2 T h e d is tr ib u tio n o f e q u i v a l e n t lu m p ed m asses f o r t h e g e n e r a l n o n -sy m m e tric
SYSTEM MODEL................................................................................................................................................... 402
F igure 7.3 T h e symmetric bridge m o d el considered for the seismic response a n a ly sis ............ 403
F igure 7.4 T h e input disturbance in t h e vertical dir ectio n ................................................................. 407
F ig u r e 15 T h e w a v e p ro p a g a tio n t r a v e l l i n g in t h e l o n g i tu d i n a l d ir e c tio n a n d a n a ly s is o f
MOTION OF A GENERAL CONVENTIONAL DESIGNED LUMPED MASS BRIDGE MODEL IN THE VERTICAL (Z)
DIRECTION............................................................................................................................................................ 409
F igure 7.6 Mo d e shapes and natural frequencies in th e vertical directional motion o f the
SYMMETRIC (A) AND NON-SYMMETRIC (B) SYSTEM MODEL.........................................................................411
F igure 7.7 Acceleration -tim e response o f each lum ped m a ss ..............................................................413
F igure 7.8 D isplacement -tim e response o f each lum ped m a s s ..............................................................415
F ig u r e 7 .9 R e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t - t im e r e s p o n s e b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ..................................417
F ig u r e 7 .1 0 A b s o l u t e p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ............................................................ 418
F ig u r e 7.11 A b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s .............................................................. 41 8
F ig u r e 7 .1 2 A b s o l u t e r e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ........................................4 1 9
F ig u r e 7 .1 3 A b s o l u t e m a x im u m F o r c e s .....................................................................................................................4 1 9
F ig u r e 7 .1 4 A b s o l u t e p e a k s t r e s s e s in t h e s e c t i o n s .........................................................................................4 2 2
F ig u r e 7 .1 5 N o r m a l iz e d a c c e l e r a t io n s ................................................................................................................... 4 2 2
F ig u r e 7 .1 6 N o r m a l iz e d p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ....................................................... 423
F ig u r e 7 .1 7 A c c e l e r a t io n - t im e r e s p o n s e o f e a c h l u m p e d m a s s ................................................................. 425
F ig u r e 7 .1 8 D is p l a c e m e n t - t im e r e s p o n s e o f e a c h l u m p e d m a s s ................................................................. 42 7
F ig u r e 7 .1 9 R e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t -t im e r e s p o n s e b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ...............................4 2 9
F ig u r e 7 .2 0 A b s o l u t e p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n o f e a c h l u m p e d m a s s ................................................................4 3 0
F ig u r e 7 .2 1 A b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t o f e a c h l u m p e d m a s s ................................................................. 4 3 0
F ig u r e 7 .2 2 A b s o l u t e r e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ........................................ 431
F ig u r e 7 .2 3 A b s o l u t e p e a k f o r c e s in t h e b r id g e s e c t io n s .............................................................................. 4 3 1
F ig u r e 7 .2 4 A b s o l u t e p e a k s t r e s s e s in t h e b r id g e s e c t i o n s .......................................................................... 43 2
F ig u r e 7 .25 N o r m a l iz e d p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f l u m p e d m a s s e s ................................................................ 4 3 2
F ig u r e 7 .2 6 N o r m a l iz e d p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f l u m p e d m a s s e s ................................................................4 33
F ig u r e 7 .2 7 T h e w a v e p r o p a g a t io n in t h e t r a n s v e r s e d i r e c t io n ...............................................................4 3 4
F ig u r e 7 .28 A c c e l e r a t io n - t im e r e s p o n s e o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ................................................................ 4 37
F ig u r e 7 .2 9 D is p l a c e m e n t - t im e r e s p o n s e b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s .................................................. 4 3 9
F ig u r e 7 .3 0 R e l a t iv e d is p l a c e m e n t -t im e r e s p o n s e b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ................................4 4 1
F ig u r e 7.31 A b s o l u t e p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n o f e a c h l u m p e d m a s s ..................................................................4 4 2
F ig u r e 7 .3 2 A b s o l u t e r e l a t iv e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s b e t w e e n t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ............................4 4 2
F ig u r e 7.33 A b s o l u t e p e a k f o r c e s in t h e b r id g e s e c t io n s ............................................................................... 443
F ig u r e 7 .3 4 A b s o l u t e p e a k s t r e s s e s in t h e b r id g e s e c t io n s .......................................................................... 4 4 3
F ig u r e 7 .3 5 a b s o l u t e p e a k s t r e s s e s in t h e b r id g e s e c t i o n s .......................................................................... 4 4 4
F ig u r e 7 .3 6 N o r m a l iz e d p e a k a c c e l e r a t io n s o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s ........................................................4 4 4
F ig u r e 7 .3 7 A b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e l u m p e d m a s s e s .............................................................. 445
F ig u r e 9.1 T h e d if f e r e n t s e c t io n s o f t h e s y s t e m in t h e t r a n s v e r s e d i r e c t io n ................................... 4 5 4
F ig u r e 9 .2 F o r c e s a n d m o m e n t s , a n d in s e c t io n - a ................................................................................................455
F ig u r e 9 .3 F o r c e s a n d m o m e n t s in s e c t io n - b ........................................................................................................... 4 5 7
F ig u r e 9 .4 F o r c e s a n d m o m e n t s in s e c t io n - c ........................................................................................................... 4 5 9
F ig u r e 9 .5 F o r c e s a n d m o m e n t s in s e c t io n - d ............................................................................................................ 4 6 1
F ig u r e 9 .6 F o r c e s a n d m o m e n t s in s e c t io n - * ............................................................................................................ 463
F ig u r e 9 .7 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - * ..................................................................................... 4 6 5
F ig u r e 9 .8 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - g .......................................................................................4 6 7
F ig u r e 9 .9 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - / / .......................................................................................4 6 9
F ig u r e 9 .1 0 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - / ......................................................................................4 7 1
F ig u r e 9 . 1 1 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - / ......................................................................................47 3
F ig u r e 9 .1 2 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - * .................................................................................... 475
F ig u r e 10.1 D if f e r e n t s e c t io n s o f t h e s y s t e m in t h e l o n g it u d in a l d ir e c t io n a l m o t io n w it h
IMPACT................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 7 7
F ig u r e 10.2 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - a .................................................................................... 4 7 8
F ig u r e 10.5 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - c .................................................................................... 4 8 4
F ig u r e 10.7 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - g .................................................................................... 4 8 9
F ig u r e 10.8 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - / / .................................................................................... 491
F ig u r e 10.9 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - c .................................................................................... 493
F ig u r e 10.10 f o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - / ................................................................................... 4 9 5
F ig u r e 10.11 F o r c e s , m o m e n t s a n d s t r e s s e s in s e c t io n - * .................................................................................. 4 9 7
xviii
F ig u r e 1 1.1 T h e e q u iv a l e n t l u m p e d m a s s m o d e l .................................................................................................... 4 9 9
F ig u r e 11.2 T h e E q u iv a l e n t S y s t e m m o d e l in y d i r e c t io n ................................................................................ 5 0 0
F ig u r e 11.3 T h e e q u iv a l e n t l u m p m a s s m o d e l f o r t h e s h o w n c a s e -( a ) ......................................................501
F ig u r e 11.4 T h e e q u iv a l e n t l u m p m a s s m o d e l o f t h e s p r in g .............................................................................503
F ig u r e 12.1 T h e d im e n s io n s o f t h e c a m s ......................................................................................................................5 0 5
F ig u r e 12.2- T h e d im e n s io n s o f t h e s u p p o r t s p r in g s .............................................................................................5 0 7
F ig u r e 12.3 - D im e n s io n s o f t h e S p r in g s ......................................................................................................................5 0 7
F ig u r e 12.4 S c h e m a t ic r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f s p h e r ic a l h o l l o w b a l l s ........................................................... 5 0 9
1
CHAPTER-I
1 Literature Review on Passive and Active Protection
of Structures subjected to Earthquakes
1.1 Introduction
It is understandable that a base isolated building will perform better than conventional
fixed base building in moderate or strong earthquakes. In the structures where this
approach has been used so far, the major benefit has been to reduce the effects of seismic
forces on the contents of the structure and its internal equipment which more than
justifies the increased cost of the isolated construction. The application of base isolation
to earthquake resistance is a radical departure from the traditional approaches used by
structural engineers. In conventional fixed base design, strengthening a structural system
to provide superior seismic performance leads to a stiffer structure which will transmit
more force to the structure and its contents. A fixed base building tends to amplify the
ground motion. To resist this amplification, the structural system must be extremely rigid
or incorporates high levels of damping. At best, rigidity causes the contents of the
building to experience ground accelerations, which still may be too high for sensitive
internal equipment and contents. High levels of damping in the structural system may
considerably increase its cost.
When a structure is built on an isolation system, it should have a fundamental frequency
that is lower than both fixed base frequency and the dominant frequencies of the ground
2
motion. The first mode of the isolated structure involves deformation in the isolation
system while the structure remains almost rigid. The accelerations transmitted to the
internal nonstructural components, contents and equipments can be also reduced [1],
Although the term "high performance" is commonly used in the automotive industry, few
people ever associate it with a building. Yet among building owners, developers,
architects and structural engineers, it is often used in conversations about the
survivability and ongoing operations of a building following a major earthquake.
"Essential" buildings (hospitals, critical high-tech facilities, communications facilities,
laboratories, data centers, historical structures, and bridges, over ground oil storage tanks)
are among the leading candidates for the application of base isolation technology.
The concept of base isolation is fundamentally simple, and it is perhaps the most elegant
solution to reduce the amount of earthquake energy going into a building. Less
earthquake energy transmitted to the building means less damage to the structure and its
contents. Base isolation devices, for both new construction and retrofit projects, separate
the ground motion from a building. Base isolation systems can also dissipate and dampen
the energy to minimize the shock associated with an earthquake.
Base isolation technology encompasses several devices, including high-damping
multilayered rubber and steel "absorbers," lead-core isolators that deform and re-form
while dampening the earthquake’s energy, and systems that rely on the friction between
steel surfaces to dissipate energy. With essential facilities, the need to ensure the
continuity of operations requires a significant reduction of the earthquake’s impact on a
3
structure. Base isolation can provide a much higher level of seismic performance than the
use of conventional, fixed-base, structural framing systems.
The decision to use base isolation technology is made on a case-by-case basis. In a
preliminary feasibility study, the owner, architect and structural engineer address the
cost-benefit relationship with its application. Initial costs, lifetime costs, the isolation
device options, impacts on other building systems and project scheduling are all
considered.
Costs for incorporating base isolation technology into structures vary, but generally this
technology adds S percent to 20 percent to the cost of a new conventional structure. That
could represent a relatively modest investment by the owner compared to downtime and
potential business losses. For a structure housing essential functions, the building owner
may find it worth the cost and effort. Base isolation is the best available high-
performance option for a building that must withstand earthquakes [21].
Finally, the use of seismic isolation has achieved a level of acceptance that will ensure its
continued use and its further development. This new and radical approach to seismic
design will be able to provide safer buildings at a relatively small extra cost as compared
to conventional design. Additionally, base isolation may play a major role in the future in
projects as diverse as advanced nuclear reactors and public housing in developing
countries [1].
4
1.2 The Nature of Earthquakes
Earthquakes are normally experienced as a series of cyclic movement of the earth’s
surface, and are the result of the fracturing or faulting of the earth’s crust. The source of
the vibratory energy is the release of the accumulating strain energy resulting from
sudden shear failures, which involve the slipping of the boundaries of large rock masses
tens even hundreds kilometers beneath the earth’s surface. On a global scale these large
rock masses are continental in size and comprise the so-called tectonic plates into which
the earth’s crust is divided. The failure of the crust gives rise to propagation of two types
of waves through the earth, pressure and shear waves, referred to as P and S waves. The P
wave travels faster than the S waves so that the waves arrive in alphabetical order. Thus
if the velocities of the two types of waves are known, the distance of the origin from a
local point of observation can be calculated. Once P and S waves reach the surface, a
surface wave is generated.
Figure (1-1) shows the principal geometrical terms used to describe earthquakes and the
travel paths of P and S waves.
P-wave
5
S-wave
Rayleigh wave
Figure 1.1 Seismic waves
Surface waves travels only on the surface of the earth. Seismic surface waves are divided
into two types, referred to as the Love wave and the Rayleigh wave. The motion of Love
waves is essentially the same as that of S waves with no vertical components. They move
from side to side on the earth’s surface, in a direction normal to direction of propagation.
The Rayleigh waves are like rolling ocean waves, in which the disturbed material moves
both vertically and horizontally in a vertical plane in the direction of the wave
propagation [22].
6
1.3 The Main Base Isolation Systems to their Design
Approaches
1.3.1 Rubber Bearings Reinforced by Steel Plates
Base isolation is a seismic design concept that affords high level of protection to a
structure from the damage caused by earthquakes. This is achieved by introducing some
type of flexible base support, usually at the foundation level, that moves the natural
period of the structure away from the predominant period of the ground motion. All
seismic isolation systems are intended to reduce the fundamental frequency of the
structure, or period lengthening. The stiffness of the isolation system has to be very low,
resulting in unacceptable relative displacement between the super structure and the
ground.
Rubber
Steel
plates
Figure 1.2 The system model of silicon rubber bearing used as a base isolator
Wu and Seidensticker [17] studied an isolation system consisting of six laminated high
rubber bearings in a test facility on the Thoku University site in Sendai, Japan. The
isolation system is designed to have a frequency of 0.7S Hz. This frequency, however, is
7
obtained only when there is a strong earthquake, resulting in significant horizontal
displacements. After installation of the system, In April, 1989, static and dynamic tests
were performed to obtain fundamental dynamic response properties of the system. The
day after these tests were completed, an earthquake of magnitude M = 4.9 occurred in
the area. The maximum acceleration experienced by the building was only about (0.03 g ) .
Response of the simulated model to this earthquake shows good agreement with the
recorded data at each floor of the isolated building.
OILES TECHNICAL CENTER

(BASE-ISOLATED BUILDING)
5F 4 3 .0 (0 /$ * )
~ i
RC2-STORY BUILDING
39.0(cVs*> (BASE-FIXED)
3F
2F 8 3 .4 (o /s * )
< ■■■ —»
4 l.7 (o /s * )
IF ♦♦
7 1 .7 ( c a /s * ) j|
mlffU
GL-4i U ffrrn
U BB
a t Base 6 1 .6 (o /s* ) \
’ L8B
37.2(ca/s*)
3 8 .0 (0 /8 * )
gl-15* rniutm
GL-20i mu
Figure 1-3 Maximum recorded acceleration during east Tokyo earthquake
(March 18th 1988) Ref .[17].
8
1.3.2 Tuned Mass Dampers
To reduce seismic effects in base isolated systems the use of vibration absorbers was
investigated by Palazzo and Petti [3]. The system combines the Tuned Mass Damping
Strategy with the isolation concept in order to obtain a new mixed system, which
principally attenuates the effects of the seismic excitation components with frequencies
close to the fundamental vibration. The system was analyzed in order to evaluate the
optimum parameters of the absorbers attached to Base Isolated Structures. As well
known, the effectiveness of the Base Isolated Systems depends on the filtering capacity
of the range of frequencies where the earthquake energy is strongest. But filtering action
has to be applied to an unpredictable excitation having a frequency content of an aleatory
nature. On the other hand, the first natural frequency can never shift out of the entire
frequency range of any type of excitation. The central problem of the Base Isolated
Structure strategy is that under certain excitations, systems suffer from large
displacements at the base. The aim of their study is to protect Base Isolation Systems
from the excitation components close to the natural vibration frequency of such systems,
by controlling the amplitude of the fundamental modal contribution. The results indicate
that the use of TMD has the advantage of absorbing the seismic energy without
contaminating the isolated effect. The TMD can control the fundamental vibration mode,
which is strongly dominant in Base Isolated Structures.
^ w w w -H H H w w w -
Figure 1.4 A schematic representation of Tuned Mass Damper Systems
10
1 3 3 Sliding and Rolling Systems
The response of multi degree of freedom systems (MDOF) structures with sliding
supports was studied by Yang, Lee and Tsai [19]. The problem of sliding structures is a
discontinuous one in that different sets of the equations of motions with varying force
functions are required for the sliding and non-sliding phases. The numerical difficulties
involved in this regard in an incremental finite segment analysis can be circumvented
through the introduction of a fictitious spring for the sliding support.
W r 'S/s ////,
l
l
Figure 1 3 A schematic representation of a Coulomb Frictional Base

Isolation model
11
13.4 The dynamic equations of the system
13.4.1 Non-sliding phase
By neglecting the structural damping effects ( C = 0 )
When M b ^ _+ Kb iXb _ J(,)) + K, (xb - x , ) <[iN ( 1. 1)

a t'
The equation in this case is:
xb = S(t) ( 1.2 )
13.4.2 Sliding phase
When
M b^ + K b(xb - S(t)) + K , (xb - x ,) > ftN (1.3)

a t'
Where
N = (M b + M , ) g (1.4)
The equation of motion in this condition can be written as:
M b^ + s g n ( ^ - ^ P - ) M ( { M b + M s)g) + Kb(xb -<*(/)) + K , ( x b - x , ) = 0 (1.5)

dt~ at at
( 1.6)
a t'
12
Mostaghel and Davis [9] investigated Coulomb friction effects for a sliding base and non
sliding base isolation systems. They assumed a rigid structure supported on a base
isolation system. The isolation system involves a restoring force, a viscous damping force
and a friction force. A mechanical model of the system is shown in Figure 1.5. The
system is able to move in any direction, the manufacturing cost of the system is relatively
low. A base isolation system using free rolling rods under the base was investigated by
Wu Lin and Hone [20]. Because of the efficiency of the isolation devices, the isolated
structure can remain elastic throughout major earthquakes. This device consists of two
sets of mutually orthogonal free rolling rods under the basement of the structure. Since
the coefficient of rolling friction of the rods is very small in practice, the structure can be
isolated excellently from the ground excitation. Isolators whose mechanism is rolling
friction (/u< 0.01) are found to be very effective in reducing the acceleration of the
structure. A possible implementation of an active structural control can be achieved by
adding a control force in the basement. The best objective is to minimize the absolute
displacement of the base. In this case, the control force is the rolling friction [20].
13
HnA ftmma
Ub
Mil
Mr.Jr'O H 7 n
U«
SOOmm «4
I OOmm
-L
1OOmm
1. Rod
2. B earing
3. Plate
Figure 1.6 A schematic representation of a Roller Frictional Base

Isolation model [20]
A computational model for the base isolated structures by using a ball system with
rolling friction on concave surfaces has also been studied by Zhou and Lu [11].
A frictional pendulum system subjected to earthquake ground motions was studied by
Almaz an and La Llera [10]. Although the vertical dynamics of the structures is given
special emphasis, other effects such as large isolator deformations and bidirectional-input
motion are also considered. Different structural models of FPS force-deformation
constitutive relationship are presented. Results show that global building responses can
be computed with % 20 error in the mean using a simplified model that ignores the
vertical motion of the building. However, structural member deformations and the forces
14
need to be computed using a model that considers such motion. This is of particular
importance when a correlation exists between the horizontal and the vertical components
of the ground motion. Results from this analysis show that local column responses may
very substantially depend on the stiffness of the isolation and the presence of a mass at
the isolation level. Such mass is capable of filtering the large increase in column shear
that results from the impact of the structure after uplift. The frictional isolation system is
a reliable device to reduce the earthquake demand on a structure. However, although
local effects such as the variation in normal contact forces, large deformations, and up lift
do not seem to affect considerably the global system response, they must be considered in
the isolation modeling and design. This is especially important for near-field earthquakes
with a strong initial acceleration pulse and for statistically correlated horizontal and
vertical ground motion components.
15
2 5 cm x 5 0 cm
□ bo <50
2 8 cm I BO
28
28
□ o o cm x e o
30 cm x 7 0
2 8 SOOcm
J
baanng maanal (p«a)
(a)
Figure 1.7 A schematic illustration of Frictional Pendulum System in detail. Ref.[10]
16
1.3.5 Suspension Isolation Systems (SPI)
Bakhshi, Araki and Suzuki [23] investigated the performance of a suspension isolation
system subjected to strong ground motions. The SPI (Suspension Isolation System)
system comprises a base- plate hung from circularly arranged bolts over a precast box so
that the whole suspended system oscillates as a simple pendulum, as shown in Figure 1.8.
Bolt(bar)
Pendulumbase
Supporter
Figure 1.8 Model of the Suspended Pendulum Isolation System (SPI)
17
1.3.5.1 The main advantages o f the system are:
1)-The natural frequency of the system can be controlled by changing the length of the
bolts.
2)-The weight of system acts as a restorative force. To control the displacement of system
a lead damper is mounted.
3)-Without any direction constraint the system works against any kind of base
disturbances.
4)-The use of the lead damper decreases displacement of system.
5)-The system is controlled passively.
The disadvantages of the system are:
1)-The manufacture and maintenance cost of the system is very high.
2)-After a strong shock, the system continues to oscillate.
18
1.4 Active Control Systems and Earthquake Protection of
Structures
In earthbound structures subjected to seismic excitations, active and passive vibration
control techniques are able to dampen and to restrain undesired vibrations. Utilization of
mass dampers (vibration absorber), methods of stiffness adjustment, or deflection
insertions are some of common various approaches to the vibration control problem.
One of the methods widely accepted and used for the vibration control of seismic
structures is the use of passive base isolation devices. As a result of their low stiffness in
the horizontal direction, these devices reduce the transmitted force to structure, which is
imposed by the earthquake induced horizontal displacements of the foundation. The
performance of the base isolation system is limited by the stiffness properties of the
devices and may not be sufficient under the ground motion created by strong earthquakes.
Moreover the communication facilities installed in modem buildings have to be protected
[8].
Jahilal and Utku [8] investigated the use of an active control mechanism (vibration
control of structures is deflection insertion) on passively isolated building by using
actuators. Their proposed system can minimize torsional displacements as well as
horizontal movements. In this approach, control is achieved by utilizing length adjustable
active members as actuators. The forces generated by the active members are self
balancing. Thus, it is possible to achieve the required performance level for the vibration
control by utilizing deflection inducing active members together with passive base
19
isolation devices, between the foundation and the structure. The earthquake induced
forces acting on the structure are firstly reduced by the passive base isolation mechanisms
and secondly by the active system. The deflection inducing actuators have to be hydraulic
piston type due to the high stroke requirements. Sensor technology for monitoring the
status of the structure and the processor technology necessary for the computation of the
actuator elongations are readily available.
Major part of the energy carried by the earthquake waves is in the frequency range of the
lower vibration modes of structures. Therefore it is more important to control the
vibration modes of the structure corresponding to lower frequencies, primarily the
fundamental vibration mode.
S o a c a m tR a i W id m A a m C a a a a t W i* A a m C a u o l
(•) (b) (c)
Figure 1.9 Active Control of Passively Isolated Buildings with Hydraulic Actuators
Ref.[8]
20
The active friction-control of sliding-base isolation systems was studied by Wang and
Reinhom [6]. Because of the low frictional interfaces, an additional mechanism was
suggested to control the relative motion of the base to the ground.
3
g i ——B u m p er Spring*
xfctipn .Pad*
Pra*tr***ing Ro<
Load Call*
Column Bo** (Typ)

C 3
mi Lateral Gulda*
(Typ)
B*am (Hyateratic Dompor)
Figure 1.10 Active Frictional Control at the base Ref.[6].
Control of the base relative motion can be obtained by increasing the friction at the
interface by an active controlled mechanism. Supporting springs can bring the system to
21
the original position. Addition of the hysteretic spring (damping) can enhance energy
dissipation and recentering.
A new approach to the earthquake protection of buildings, based on using a particular
combination of Base Isolation concept with Active Control methods was investigated by
Palazzo and Petti [29]. The new strategy is analyzing the hybrid system with control
forces acting only at the base according to some prescribed specifications. Using the
standard description of the seismic response in terms of state variables, a new scalar
performance index of the proposed Active Isolated System, which is minimized by the
control forces, takes into account the absolute accelerations, velocities and relative
displacements.
ACTUATO] ISOLATORS
TIME HISTORIES TIME HISTORIES
Figure 1.11 A Computer Controlled Hybrid System Model Ref.[29].
22
Another method using a control force from an active bracing system was presented by
Pantelides and Nelson [25] for reducing the dynamic response of the structures in the
inelastic material range. It is known that structural systems are designed to resist lateral
dynamic loads, such as earthquake-induced accelerations or wind induced pressures.
Passive, semi-active, or active control devices can be placed in civil structures such as
buildings and bridges to improve their performance under dynamic excitations.
According to full-scale experiments the system proved to be an implementable active
control system for control of seismic structures with existing technology.
SENSOR
COMPUTER
ACTIVE
■RACE
Figure 1.12 Structure with active bracing system Ref.[2S]
23
Floor Mu k
357.24 [WUfmJ
Floor S fftiw .
654.96 (MNAn)
Floor Domping:
6.15 (MFLaAn)
AdlvMaQing Syotam
Actvo Tondon Syotam
Figure 1.13 Structure with active bracing and tendon system Ref.[26]
a « i i « > 1 r 1 1 w 11 11 a « 11
Figure 1.1 Seismic response of the active bracing and tendon system Ref.[26]
24
1.5 Early warning (detection) systems

A new early warning system, “pre-arrival transmission system for earthquake
information,” was developed by Kanda, Kobori and Ikeda [28]. In the system, the
occurrence of an earthquake is first detected at an observation site near the epicenter. The
observed ground motion would then be analyzed quickly for the necessary information
such as the level of shaking, frequency contents and waveforms. If the system can supply
such information on an impending earthquake to a “dynamic intelligent” building with an
active structural response controller with an appropriate control algorithm and control
settings, more effective protection of the building will become possible. The early
warning information system is useful for issuing commands to activate the seismic
response control devices of buildings.
Figure 1.14 Component diagram of the system Ref.[28]
Earthquake detection stations are equipped with a seismometer, a workstation computer
and communication equipment The measured ground motions are digitized and analyzed
25
continually. If the threshold level on earthquake detection is exceeded, it concludes that
an earthquake is detected and this information is reported to the earthquake information
center immediately. The remote station also calculates the location of the hypocenter, the
magnitude of the earthquake and measured seismic intensity, and relays these parameters
and the seismic wave forms to the center. The predicted ground motion level is
transmitted to response controlled buildings by telephone lines.
Artificial Satellite
Earthquake
Information
Canter
Response
Control Talaphona
System Lina
Telephone Detection
Host Line Station
Computer
•sp
Dynamic
Intelligent
Buikfing
Wave Propagation Seismic

Source
Figure 1.15 Early warning system Ref.[28].
26
CHAPTER-H
2 A Computer Controlled System for Earthquake
2.1 Introduction
The use of active systems for the protection of structures subjected to earthquakes has
been the subject of numerous investigations in recent years. Some of the considered
design approaches for dealing with this important problem can be found in references [1]
and [2]. The effectiveness of active bottom or top vibration absorbers (called tuned mass
absorbers) was investigated by Palazzo and Petti [3] and the tuned column damper was
studied by Kareem [4]. Wang and Liu [S] simulated a hybrid control system for flat-
surface base isolation systems with Coloumb friction. The active friction-control of
sliding-base isolation systems was studied by Wang and Reinhom [6]. Because of the low
frictional interfaces, an additional mechanism was suggested to control the relative
motion of the base to the ground. A hybrid mass damper system (V-shaped) was
developed by Tamotsu and Tanida [7]. The V-shaped system permits easy tuning of the
natural period of the system.
Jahilal and Utku [8] investigated the use of an active control mechanism on passively
isolated building by using actuators. Their proposed system can minimize torsional
displacements as well as horizontal movements. Systems with Pure-Friction base
isolation and Laminated-Rubber Bearing base isolation system have been subject to a
27
good deal of research. Mostaghel and Davis [9] investigated Coloumb friction effects for
a sliding base. They assumed a rigid structure supported on the base isolation system that
incorporates a restoring force, a viscous damping force and a friction force. A Coloumb
frictional pendulum used as a passive base isolation system for vertical and horizontal
effects was analyzed by Almazan and La Llera [10]. The suggested a system which
consists of a spherical stainless steel surface and a lentil-shaped articulated slider covered
by a teflon-based bearing capacity composite materials. A computational model for the
base isolated structures by a ball system with rolling friction on concave surfaces has also
been studied by Zhou and Lu [11].
The system investigated in this study considers a base supported on spherical rollers and
equipped with cam devices to restrict the lateral motion of the base and provide a rigid
support under normal conditions. The cams are released when an earthquake signal is
detected to allow the base to move on the balls for a predetermined period before it
comes in contact with springs located around the base. The cams are reactivated after
shock wave ends to fully compress the springs and restore the base to its original
position. The process is repeated if any after shock is identified by the controlling
computer. The geometric design of the base is such that it minimizes any rotational
effects due to mass distribution of the structure.
28
2.2 System Model
A schematic representation of the systems is given in fig-(2.1). The structure is
represented by a mass Af, and a spring K t representing the lateral compliance of the
structure. For a multi-degree of freedom structure, Af, would represent the modal mass
for the fundamental mode and K s = M sw 2 where wn fundamental natural frequency of
the system. The geometric center of the base is designed to fall directly under the center
of the mass of the structure in order to minimize any torsional loads on the base. The
force-displacement characteristics for the spring used to limit the movement of the base is
illustrated in fig-(2.2-a) where it can be seen that it becomes active after the base is
displaced a distance b relative to the ground. The stiffness value K„ represents the
equivalent restoring force on the base as it contacts the springs which are placed radially
as shown in Figure (2.1). The spring function K b is not sensitive to the travel direction of
the shock wave for this type of spring arrangement. Figure (2.2) illustrates the restoring
function with an eight-spring arrangement for different directions of wave propagation. In
5
this case K b = ^ K { l i) 2 . Where AT is the stiffness of the individual springs and / is the
i=l
directional cosine for each spring relative the direction of the displacement.
29
mu mu
Mill mu
a-side view
b-top view
Figure 2.1 The physical model of the system
30
Accordingly K b = 2K for the considered case. A diagrammatic representation of the
spring cam system used to achieve the desired restoring force characteristics is given in
Figure (2.2).
left spring right spring
Figure 2.2 The force displacement characteristics of the spring
- Y W Y W T Y 'i \ /
Figure 2 3 Diagrammatic representation o f the spring cam system
31
System Dynamic Equations:
Assuming linear stiffness characteristics when the cams contact the springs, the system
equations can be written as:
When the base movement is unconstrained by the spring ( t < t a)
Afbxb + s g n ( - j(/))|//((A fb + M s)gl\ + C(xb - x, ) + Ks(xb - x s) = 0 (2.1)
Afsx s +C(xs - x b) + K s(xs - x b) = 0 (2.2)
Neglecting the structural damping effects ( C = 0 )
M bxb + sgn(jc6 - S (t))|//0((Af6 + A f,)s)| + KJ(xb - x , ) = 0 (2.3)
M , x s + K s(xt - x b) = 0 (2.4)
When the base contacts the foundation springs ( t > t a)
M bxb + sgn(i6 - S ( t ) p 0((Aft + Af, )g)| + Kb(xb - S(t)) + K , ( x b - x s) = 0 (2.5)
M sx s + K , ( x s - x b) = 0 (2 .6 )
Where
Af,: The total mass of the structure [kg]
Afb: The mass of the base [kg]
K, : The stiffness of the structure [N/m]
K b : The equivalent stiffness of the foundation spring [N/m]
xb : The absolute displacement of the base [mm]
xs : The absolute displacement of the structure [mm]
6 ( t ) : The input disturbance function [mm]
32
fi0 : The coefficient of rolling friction
d : Distance traveled before the foundation springs are fully compressed [mm]
ta: Time between the onset of the base movement and the induced cam contact with the
springs [sec]
33
2.3 Illustrative System Design
The case of a structure with mass Af, = 38500 [kg] and a natural frequency wn = 5.58
[rad/sec] is considered for illustrating the design optimization and control procedures.
This structure is considered in Ref.[12] and its base dimensions are estimated to be
A = B = 12 [m]. The earthquake signal considered for illustration is that of the El-Centro
earthquake (S00E component) shown in Figure (2.4).
4000
30C
200C ■
r T E_10(
I-100C
-200C
20 30
TIME [ U C ]
40 20 50
TIME [sec|
1501
100
UJ
ui 0
•50
-101
-15<£ 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [MC]
Figure 2.4 El-Centro earthquake (S00E component)
For simplification the effective spring stiffness is assumed constant and the design
parameters in this case are fi0 ,b , K b and d . The latter parameter merits consideration
34
only in situations when the displacement of the base causes any of the springs to be fully
compressed.
23.1 Selection of the design parameters for base with flat surface and
spherical balls
23.1.1 Case- (1) -Unconstrained base motion ( xb - 6 ( t ) < b o r t < ta)
In this case the only decision parameters are /i0 and M b. As would be expected the
response of the structure to the earthquake would decrease as fi0 decreases.
Consequently, juQ would be selected as the lowest achievable value. M b would be
selected as the allowable practical value. An illustration of the results in this case is given
in Figure (2.4) for fiQ = 0.01 and M b = 0.05 A f,. The corresponding response for the case
of the rigidly supported structure is given in Figure (2.6) for comparison (case-0).
35
(a)- ACCELERATION OF STRUCTURE 10« (bhSEISMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE
ui 0.8
5 100
P-1
ui-1
0-200 -
-250
40
TIME [sec| TIME [sac]
(chOISPLACEMENT OF STRUCTURE (d)-OISPLACEMENT OF BASE
01 A
ui A
2o ,1 .* A / A
'\ ■!\> 1 \
£
fc
' 1 j V
z
t- ! //
£-100 - Ui
2-
ui
1 i
If
i /
0 \ ;
o
[i V
5 -1 5 0 >
£to- n / I i
a \l
\J
-200 X
10 20 X 40 50
TIME (sec)
(e)-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (f)-RELATtVE DISPLACEMENT
x
-50 -
£ \x d ...4~-------- UI
2-150
UI
•250
40 X 40 60
TIME [aecl TIME [sec]
Figure 2.5 System with ball supported base without spring constraint w ith//0 = 0.01,
Af b = 0.05 Af, (case-1)
36
(*)-ACCELERATION OF STRUCTURE , 10» (bhSEISMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE

BOOOr
1 6000 “
“ 4000
2000 -
•2000 -
-4000 -
•8000*
20 60 X 40 X
TIME[mc] TIME [MCI
(C)-OISPLACEMENT OF STRUCTURE (dhRELATIVE DISPLACEMENT OF FLOORS
300)
“ 200 200
100 100
Ui
ui
co-1M-
5
Ui
p -200 ■
-300)j -300j
60
TIME [Mcl
Figure 2.6 Rigidly supported structure and its response to the earthquake (Case 0)
37
It can be seen from the figures that the peak transmitted force was reduced from 298460.0
[N] to 8770 [N] representing a reduction of 34 times in the transmitted force. However,
the system will be displaced a distance of 184 [mm] after 53 sec and may continue to
move further if it has a residual velocity after the end of the shock.
23.1.2 Case- (2>- Assuming that the base contacts the springs for the duration of
the shock wave:
In this case the base is constrained by the springs (6 = 0 ) for the entire duration of the
shock wave. The design parameters in this case are //0 and Kb. The mass of the base
M b is selected as its allowable value of 0.05 M s. Figure (2.7) gives an illustrative
summary of the results in this case for different value of fi0 and Kb.
Figure (2.7-a) and Figure (2.7-b) show the peak displacements [ x ,, (xb -<5(0)1 and die
peak transmitted force respectively for frictional coefficients between 0.01 and 0.1. Kb in
this case is Kb =0.05AT,. Figures (2.6-c), (2.6-d) and (2.6-e) show the effect of the
stiffness of the base restraint and coefficient of friction on the peak displacements and
peak transmitted force. It can be seen from the results in Figure (2.7) that a good practical
design can be achieved by selecting ft0 = 0.01,Kb =0.05 K s and M b =0.05M s . The
time response in this case is given in Figure (2.8).
38
(a>-PEAK DISPLACEMENT x 1 0 * (b)-PEAK TRANSM ITTED FO R C E

5.5|
Z 5"
ui
0 4 .5 -
u. 4
S5
5 3
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

CO EFFICIEN T O F FRICTION CO EFFICIENT O F FRICTION
(c)-PEA K DISPLACEM ENT O F STRUCTURE (3-RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT
1400r 1400
coef.of fric^=0.0l coef.of fric.s0.01
coef.of fric.s0.05 1200
coef.of fric.s0.05
coef.of fric.=0.l coef.of fric.s0.i
= 1000
& 800 80 0
z
ui 600 600
ui
2 400 400
<o
ui
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.25 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Kb/Ks
x io 4 (ehP E A K TRA N SM ITTED FO R C E
2.6
ui
O
Cc
U l4
coef.of frit=0.01
coef.of fric.=0.05
coef.of frlc.=0.i
0.05 0.1 0.15
Figure 2.7 Peak response for ball supported base with continuously spring constraint
(case-2) M b = 0.05M,
39
(ah ACCELERATION OF STRUCTURE (bhSaSMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE

_x10
S 200
EE
10 20
X 40 SO 60 20 X 40
TIME [sac] TIME [sec|
(chDISPLACEMENT OF STRUCTURE (d)-OISPLACEMENT OF BASE
i
A
tu 100
c 11<>
A
i
£o 1 A' i\ 50 I A A *~~rv •»\
3
£in
1 I\
. r j '11 ’i I/ i /A / i -
' i \
, / 1 1/ ifl A ' 1 ! l/i r
1 1
\ r
; ' i
i A \ i ij V
V
J
U 11 \i u
sJ
tu 11
1 1 \i
3a. l!II ! I i\i■
Q. *100 7 a-1-100 4
CO
a II V \J
TIME [sac) TIME [MC]
(•(-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (f(-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
150
100 -
P-100
-150 20 40 50 60 X X 40
TIME [sac)
Figure 2.8 Response of system with springs in continuously contact with the base for
the duration of the shock-wave (case-2) with M b = 0.05Af, , fi0 = 0.01, K b - 0.05AT,
40
(ah ACCELERATION OF STRUCTURE .*10 (bhSEISMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE

— 300 -T-
w-aoo
30 40 20 20 X
TIME [sec] TIME [sec]
(c)-OISPLACEMENTOF STRUCTURE (dhDISPLACEMENT OF BASE
1 lOOi
i A -i r\ Ay
uj 50 I \ A a
e i
i , 1i 1 i A
i
/ \ U ; ^ L 'V 1-
o 0 / \ l ...V V
n ^ v ' co
<
t 1 i 1 -/(y •
CD
\ ; !v
\; v/ w
‘ j •j ■I
r (\ 1 ft ;
^ ■ tL........*t
•*' 1
s -°° 1!
z 1 i
\
: i
I w' I
Z
UJ
2UJ
\
'
1i ’
•1 ; ’ \ !
w-100 .i i
i ! t o V
Ui 5CL \ ; i /
O \ i [1 i i
CO
-j-130 \
Q. !
t
i o* 1 1 i:
CO > j
o j I 1
•200
10 SO SO 10 20
X 40 SO X
(eJ-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (IhRELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
fV* A
% *
x
^50F $ L
UJ
2-IOOHsi:
§
M-ISOt-
o
UI
p-200
•250
10 20 X 40 SO 60 X X 40
Figure 2.9 Time response of the selected system with spring constraint at the base after
r0 = 13 [sec] with ft0 =0.01, M b = 0.05Ms (case-3)
41
2.3.13 Case-(3>- Unconstrained Motion for f0=13 [sec] and spring constraint
afterwards
In this case the cams are released to allow movement without spring constraints for 13
sec and then rotated to bring the base to contact the springs for the rest of the duration of
the shock wave. The system response in this case is shown in Figure (2.9). It can be seen
from the figure that the transmitted force in this case is reduced 34 times from 298460
[N] to 8770.2 [N]. The maximum displacement of the structure with the selected design
parameters is 185.75 [mm] which is approximately 0.6 of that for the case of a rigid base
support. A comparison of the results for cases 1 to 3 is given in table-(l). Note that the
peak transmitted force and peak displacement are identical for cases 1 and 3. However
the combination of free movement and spring constraint makes it possible to restore the
base to its original position when the disturbance ends.
42
2.4 Active Control

The design analysis undertaken in this study suggests that a relatively simple and robust
active control can be implemented to protect the structure. Sensors can be placed at
sufficient distance to allow time for the controller to release the positioning cams. Once
the signal is detected, the movement of the cam can be controlled based on pre
programmed information of the earthquake function to allow unconstrained motion of the
base which is best suited for the disturbance function. The cams can be controllably
rotated to keep the base in contact with the spring after a time ta from the onset of its
motion. When the shock wave departs, the control system would allow the actuators to
rotate the cams in order to restore the base to its original position with the springs fully
compressed. The controlling computer is then reset for the next event whenever it occurs.
Since the coefficient of friction may change with time, a simulation was run with the
effective coefficient of friction changing from 0.01 to 0.06 with flat base support. A
summary of the corresponding results is given in Fig-(10) for the peak transmitted force
as well as peak displacement of the base and structure respectively. It can be seen from
the figure that in the worst conditions for the peak displacement is 181 [mm] and the peak
transmitted force is 34000 [N], This is still a considerable improvement as compared to
299.81 [mm] and 298,460.0 [N] for the case of rigid base support.
43
(a)-PEAK DISPLACEMENT
190
180
j= 170
I-
§ 160
9150
120
110,
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION
x 104 (b)-PEAK TRANSM ITTED FO R C E
uj 5
<1
UJ
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

C O EFFICIEN T O F FRICTION
Figure 2.10 Effect of change of coefficient of friction on the response of the system
with active control.
44
2.5 System Design with Concave Ball Support
The previous design does not ensure the return of the supporting balls to their initial
position the disturbance ends. A design which guaranties this is shown in Figure (2.11).
In this case each ball is placed between concave surfaces which automatically tend to
restore the balls and the base to their original position even if the system undergoes some
rotational response. Another advantage is a reduction of the contact stresses as a result of
concave curvatures.
Assuming no slip, Figure (10) illustrates the movement of the base corresponding to a
ground displacement 6 (t). The geometric relationships and the effective coefficient of
friction n tff as a function of the ground displacement are given in the following section.
The system equations for this case can be written as:
(a)-When the base movement is unconstrained by the spring (t < ta)
Afbx b + Ks(xb - x , ) + C{xb - xs) + sgn(jc6 - S i t ) ) ^ ((Af, + Afb)(y6 + g ))= 0 (2.7)
Af ,x , + C (i, - xb) + K, (xs - xb) = 0 (2.8)
Neglecting the damping effects ( C = 0 )
Afbxb + Ks(xb - x s) + sgn(.r6 - S i t ) ) ^ ( ( M s + M b)('yb + g ))= 0 (2.9)
Where
r {xb - 8{t) ) ' (xb - S ( t ) ) ' (xb S ( t ) ) (xb - S ( t))

yb = 2 ( R -r ) sin (2.10)
' A
sinft + fi0 sgn(i6 - j(r))co sft] _
P'ff -
(cos 4>-fi0 sgn(i6 - S(t)) sin ft
(xb - S ( 0 ) (xb - 6 ( 0 ) (2.11)
sin + fi0 sgn(x6 -<£(r))cos
(x* -6(0) (xb - 6 ( 0 )

cos - Mo sgn(ifc -<5(f))sin
M sx s + K ,(x s - x b) = 0 (2.12)
Total horizontal force on the base:
(xb - S ( 0) (X. - 6 ( 0 )
sin +Mo sgn(.xfr - 6 ( t ))cos
H= (M ,+ M b)(g + yb) (2.13)
(xb - S ( 0 ) \(xbS(0)
cos -Mo sgn(i6 -<j(/))sin
Total vertical force on the base:
V = (M ,+ M b)(g + yb) (2.14)
(b)-When the base contacts the foundation springs ( t > t a)
M bxb + K ,(xb - x , ) + Kb(xb- 6 ( 0 ) + m A M * + M »Ky» + «)) = 0 (2.15)
M sx t + K s(xs - x b) = Q (2.16)
46
ATI iL
N2
Figure 2.11 Motion of the base on the spherical balls with the concave support
47
2.6 Geometric Relationships and Effective Coefficient of
Rolling Friction for Concave Support
"T / 6
Figure 2.12 Motion of the base and geometric relationships
0 =- (2.17)
Where (2.18)
' x b -S(t)
(2.19)
0= (2.20)
r xb -B{t)
0 = (2.21)
where
xb : Displacement of the base
6 (r): Displacement of the ground
( 2 .2 2 )
R R
i r xb - $ ( t )
0 = 0— = (2.23)
R
(2.24)
R R
Total horizontal force at the base
H = (nFMl cos0 + nFNl sin 0) (2.25)
Total vertical force at the base
V = (nFsl cos0 - nFMl sin 0) (2.26)
Where n = 25 the number of the spherical balls
(2.27)
1
nFNl =(MS + M b )(g + yb> • (2.28)
cos sgn(xft -<j(r))sin
The resultant horizontal force at the base becomes:

1
1
* §W'
(xfr
J*
sin +//„ sgn(x6 -<j(r))cos|

R
V
(2.29)
1
H =(Mt + M bXg + yby

\ x b -S (f)) ](xb - S ( t ) ) ‘
cos - V Qsgn(xb -<j(f))sin|
R J * J
49
By using fi0 = 0.01 for rolling friction from Ref [66]. Resultant approximated horizontal
force on the base becomes:
S (t)j S (t)j
fio sgn(x6 -S(t))co, (2.30)
H = (M ,+ M bXg +
n*N jp
2.6.1 Dynamic Equations of the base
x b = 6 (t ) + (R - r)sin 0 (2.31)
xb = S(t) + ( / ? - r)[0cos0)] (2.32)
xb = S(t) + (R - r ) [ 0 c o s 0 - 0 Zsin0] (2.33)
For \xb - S ( t ^ > b
M bxb + K s(xb - x s) + K b(xb - 6 ( t) ) + (nFMl cos0+ nFm sin0) = 0 (2.34)
For |jc& - J ( r ) | < b , there is no contact with Kb. The equation of motion can be written as
M bxb + K s (xb - x s) + (nF^ cos0 + nFm sin 0) = 0 (2.35)
yb = 2 (1 - c o s 0 ) { R -r ) (2.36)
yb = 2 0 (R -r )s in 0 (2.37)
yb = 2(R - r)[0 sin 0 + 0 2 cos< (2.38)
{-nF’, sin0 + nFm cos0 ) - ( M s + M b)g = ( M , + M b)y b (2.39)
50
1
nFNX =(MS + M b)(g + yby (2.40)
(xb - 8(t)) (xb -8 (t))
cos - f t sgnCr6 -S(t))sin
M bxb + K, (xb - x , ) + Kb(xb - S(t)) + nFVI( f t sgn(x6 - S(t)) cos0 - sin 0) = 0 (2.41)
Mbxb +K,(xb - x 3)+Kb(xb -S(t))+
+ f t sgn^ -<j(r))co:
jp v
(2.42)
(Ms +Mb)(g+yb> =o
|(x6-J(r)) . Hu* - m i
cos - f t sgn(c6 -S(t))si
/?
or this can be approximated as:
Mbxb+Ks(xb - x t )+Kb(xb -6(t))+

f (.td- f l/) ) T (2.43)
(M,+Mb)(g+'yb. f t sgn(c6 - j(r))coi =0
Jp 1 * JJ,
Where the first term represents the restoring "pendulum ” effect and the second term
represents the rolling “friction ” resistance.
Dynamic equations of the balls:
By neglecting the mass of the balls M s » ball
A *™ =0
—^bauXbaU
Xban =6 + (K -r)sin< (2.44)
Xbau = $(t) + 0(R-r)cos<l> (2.45)
X w = 8(f) + ( R - r)[0 cos p - f - sin^] (2.46)
51
F mi c o s# + FNl sin # - F m1 c o s # - FNZ s i n # =A fw,xM (2.47)
^ jF y —M ball y ball
ytall =<5 + ( l- c o s ^ ) (2.48)
ybau = S(t) + ( R - r ) # S in 0 (2.49)
vw/ = (0 + (R - r)# s i n # - # 1 cos #] (2.50)
Mball8 + FmI Sin# - FNl c o s # - F’ sin# + Fsz cos# = M batlybaU (2.51)
Fsz = FtNI (2.52)
r xb - S { t ) '
(2.53)
From the equation (2.53)
= ~ Fmz (2.54)
Total resultant horizontal force on the base
'(x* ~S(t))
sin + ^ 0sgn(i6 - j ( / ) ) c o s | ^ - ^ ^
H = (M s +M „Xg + yb> (2.55)
cos - / / 0sgn(x6 -<5(/))sinl |
Total vertical force on the base
V = (M s + M bKg + yb) (2.56)
52
2.63. The solution procedure of the problem:
1)- Take fi0 = 0.01 coefficient of rolling friction and use 4th order Runge-Kutta numerical
integration technique to solve these non-linear differential equation systems and find
new xb,
2)-From <5(0 and x b find new H , continue,
2.6.3 Case Illustration
The following cases demonstrate the effect of the concave supports on the system
response.
2.63.1 Case-(4) Unconstrained base with balls support on concave surfaces
The results in this case with M b = 0.05A/ 1 and /*„ = 0.01 are given in Figure (2.13).
Balls are used in this case with radius r =600 [mm]. The radius of the concave support
surfaces is R = 7 r .
2.63.2 Case-(5) Base with balls support on concave surfaces with continuous
spring constraint
The results in this case with M b =0.05M t Kb = 0 .0 5 /^ and fi0 =0.01 Ref.[66] are
given in Figure (2.14). The geometric dimensions for the balls and the concave surfaces
are the same as in case-4.
53
2.6.3.3 Case-(6) Base with balls support on concave surfaces with spring
constraints after 5 sec of unconstrained movement
The system in this case is the same as the previous case with the exception that the cams
allow the base to move unconstrained for ta =5 sec after which they are controlled to
provide continuous contact with all the springs. The results in this case are given in
Figure (2.15).
Table-(2.2) shows a summary of the results for cases 4 to 6 for comparison. It can be seen
from the tables 2.1 and 2.2 the best results can be achieved with the design (case-3) using
flat support for the base. However, this design would require providing means for
keeping the balls separated and returning them to their original position after the
departure of the shock wave. Accordingly case 6 is the best practical design and it
provides approximately 14.5 times of the transmitted force with rigid base support. It
should be noted also that the vertical transmitted forces resulting from the spherical
support of the balls are negligible in comparison to the weight of the structure.
54
(a)- ACCELERATION OF STRUCTURE x 104(b)-SElSMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE

600
200
1-200
-400
<-600 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac] TIME [sec]
(c)-OISPLACEMENT OF STRUCTURE (^DISPLACEMENT OF BASE
150( 150|
100 - 100
-100 I
-ZXf •200j
(ehRELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (O-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

_ ISO
S r-100
[
X *?10
m -
gUl
I
?
1 A ll A <\/\f \s*
X
Ul
V V
%
a.
CO
Q
V 1
U
>l !
11
1
1<E11
-1501 -20
10 20 30 40 50 60 20 30 40
TIME [seel TIME [sec]
55
(Oh EFFECTIVE COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION xlOr (h)-HOngONTAL FORCE (NJ

0.05i
£C 0.5
0-0.5
20 30 40 10 20
30 40 50 i
TIME [sec TIME [sec]
„ (i)-NORMALlZED VERTICAL FORCE ©-EFFECTIVE COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION
#4.02 0.05
51.01
20 30 40 10 15
TIME [sec] THETA
Figure 2.13 System with ball supported base without spring constraint (case-4)
56
(a)- ACCELERATIONOF STRUCTURE x i 0« (b)-SEISMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE

.1000)
aoo
cc 60C -
UJ
?o 400 -
2-
EE 200 *
Ui
u.
§I- -200
Ul
< -aoc
60
(O-OISPLACEMENT OF STRUCTURE ((^DISPLACEMENT OF BASE
i " ■ ■r " ■ 200
i
150
i
K
3
r A1
1 M 100
5 1' A, i\ A .
I 1
! T J'A /
CO i/1 ^ '■ ! '
V 1/
u- 1 ; i i '
O
Kz
\!
Ul. 1* \i 1!
sUl V
11
3* •1
«-
a -200,
10 30 20 40 so 60 30 40 60
(e)-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (f>RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
150
100
,20“
10 -
ui
•100
ui
= -2 0“
Ul
ft-aol
60 20
57
(Oh EFFECTIVE COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION ,* 1 0 (h)-HORIZONTAL FORCE [N]

0.06
r i f ' f r i
nr i
lL I iL AhJ uA aA A.
Mr-0.02
uj -0.04
>
S -0.0 6F
20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
(0-NORMAU2EO VERTICAL FORCE ©-EFFECTIVE COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION
T 0.06
2 1 .0 3
f t 0.04
u. 0.02 -
«*■
IT 0.99
uj -0.04
P0.96
20 M 40 SO 60 •20 -10
TIME [sec] THETA
Figure 2.14 Response of system with springs in continuously contact with the base for
the duration of the shock wave (Case-5) Kb = 0.05 K s
58
(a)- ACCELERATION OF STRUCTURE
U l
1.400 - 3I-c 5 ~j------------
<
U
cl O2OC 1 I ------- j----
200 ■! h-
(0
o 5 -j t f IW it k i
oE
-200 Q
:'1 W
£ 1 - —r------
2to -
z
< •600, £ : !
40 50 60 60
(c)-OISPLACEMENT OF STRUCTURE (dhOISPLACEMENT OF BASE
150| 150|
100 - 100 -
•J-100 1
8>
5 - 150 -
• 200* - 2001
(ehRELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (O-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

150
, I
100
1
1 1 1 i
2
ui
ui 2
ui ,1 J 1 K .U k MU A W
O * r
5a . f illI'll
(0 -50 • CO r !
o ] I
ui U J.
>
1
1
1 I
5 -
.......... 1 !{
Ul cc
U1
-150,
20 30 50 60 10 50 60
59
(eh EFFECTIVE COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION

0.05 2p“ _ ! T - |
2 I
5
£ 1 T
i i I I
6 i l . .. t! 1. i
K
Z
. d
UJ
o
E
UJ
° r ' m ■ i i l i l B B 11
w vF
1
UJ
>
o
cc
4I 1
f | i
1
it
III
-0.051
10 20 30 40 50
1 ! I
[ 1 _______

•3 (D-NORMAU2ED VERTICAL FORCE (O-EFFECTIVE COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION
">t.02r 0.05
51.01
0.99
20 30 40
TIME [sec] THETA
Figure 2.15 Time response of the selected concave system with spring constraint at the
base after t0 =5 [sec] (case-6)
60
Table -(2.1) Comparison of Results for Balls on the Flat Surface
Case Description Fig. Max Reduction Max Max Max Max

No No Trans. Ratio Str. Relative Base Relative
Force Disp. Disp. Disp. Disp.
=A
[N1 [mm] l x s - X „ l [mm] [xb -<5(r)]
Fca s.
[times] [mm] [mm]
0 Rigid base 5 298,460.0 1 299.8 252.6 115.1 0
support
1 Unconstrained
base on the 6 8737 33.58 185.7 7.28 184.1 210.4
balls
2 Spring
constrained 7 13050 22.87 143.3 10.8 143.6 132.7
base on the
balls
3 Spring
constrained 8 8770.6 34 185.75 7.3 184.12 210.4
base
after 13 sec
Table -(2.1) Comparison of Results for Balls on the Concave Surface
Case Description Max Reduction Max Max Max Max

No Fig. Trans. Ratio Str. Relative Base Relative
No Force [N] Disp. Disp. Disp. Disp.
=JL [mm] [mm] [x4 -<5(0]
[times] [mm] [mm]
0 Rigid base 298,460.0 1 299.8 252.6 115.1 0
support 5
4 Unconstrained
base on 11 20,037.0 14.89 153.2 16.6 152.2 143.7
the balls
5 Spring
constrained 12 35,202.0 8.47 168.8 16.4 169.0 136.3
base on the
balls
6 Base spring
constrained 13 2.0037e+4 14.89 153.26 16.6 152.2 143.7
after 15 sec
Table -(2.3)-Dimensions for design of the spring, cam and spherical balls
61
Ball radius 60 [cm]

Spring diameter 4.5 [cm]
Spring coil diameter 50 [cm]
Total number of coils 12 [-]
Free length of the spring 69 [cm]
Solid length of the spring 54 [cm]
xh minor axis of the cam 20 [cm]
l/2 major axis of the cam 55 [cm]
62
2.7 Conclusion
The investigation reported in this chapter suggests that considerable protection of
structures subjected to earthquakes can be achieved by the appropriate design of an
actively controlled base. Computer controlled cams are used to provide rigid support
under normal conditions, to free the base to move on specially designed ball supports for
a predetermined period and to keep the base in contact with the foundation spring
afterwards for the remainder of the disturbance. The proposed design which incorporates
25 steel bails and eight cams and springs can be readily implemented as shown in the
TabIe-(2.3). The computer simulation of the case illustration shows that a 14.5 times
reduction of transmitted force can be attained and that the system can be readily
repositioned for protection against future shocks.
63
CHAPTER-III_________________
3 Seismic Response Analysis of Muld Degree of
Freedom Rigid and Isolated Buildings with
Computer Controlled Concave-Ball Support
Mechanism (C.C.C-B.S.M) and Optimum Design of
the Mechanism
3.1 Abstract
In the previous Chapter (Ch.2) a base isolation system was proposed fo r earthquake
protection o f structures. The system incorporates spherical supports fo r the base, a
specially designed spring-cam system to keep the base rigidly supported under normal
conditions and to allow it to move fo r the duration o f the earthquake under the constraint
o f a spring with optimized stiffness characteristics. A single degree o f freedom structure
was considered to investigate the feasibility o f the concept. The simulation o f the system
response shows a 14.5 times reduction o f the transmitted force as a result o f using the
proposed design in the considered case. This Chapter (Ch.3) extents the previous study to
the case 3 and 40 structures subjected the Taft as well as El Centro earthquakes. A 17, 10
(for 3 floors) and 7.5 (for 40 floors) times reduction o f the maximum transmitted force
was achieved fo r the considered disturbances respectively without any adverse effects
due to the tilting moment which is inherent in this type o f base isolation.
64
3.2 Three Storey Concrete Structure And its Dynamic
Response Analysis to the Earthquake
The analysis of seismic response of the concrete structure three-storey real building (Ref.
12) shown in Figure (3.1) is considered. The system is modeled with three lumped
masses and three stiffness coefficients. Structural damping is neglected for safety. The
mass distributions of the floors by order are 79000, 58000 and 60000 [kg] and the
coefficients of the stiffness are 279 [ton/cm], 161 [ton/cm] and 151 [ton/cm]. The
dimensions of the building: are width 10, depth 6.5 and height 10 [m]. The first natural
second and third natural frequencies of the structure are: wnx = 1.3182, wn2 =3.3340 and
wn3 =4.6341 [Hz]. The corresponding mode shapes are shown in Figure (3.2). The
simulation results of the building to the El-Centro earthquake (given in Chapter n. Figure
2.4) are shown following Figure (3.3).
x, I FloorWS
% I Storey *3
x, I M F lo o r W lI
F loortl |
Storey*1
Figure 3.1 Lumped mass model of three floors concrete building that conventionally
attached to the ground
65
3.2.1 Dynamic equations of the conventionally designed system model
A/,*, +C,(jc, - ^ (f ) ) + C2( i , - x ,) + * ,(.* ,- S ( t ) ) ^ K z{x, - x 2) = 0 (3.1)
Af2Jt2 + C 2(.x2 -Jc,) + C3( i 2 - x 3) +AT2(jc2 - jc,) + AT3(j:2 - x 3) = 0 (3.2)
M j jc3 + C3( i 3 - x2) + AT3(jc3 - jc2) = 0 (3.3)
Differential equation of the system in matrix format:
Mi 0 0 A ■ ( C ,+ C 2) -c 2 0 X
0 m 2 0 *2 «+ -C2 (C2+C3) -c 3 x2
0 0 Af3 A 0 -c3 C3 A .
\ K x+ K 2) 0
(3.4)
-* 2 A c ,< * (f)+ * ,< * (')'
( K 2 + K 3) ► 3 4
0
-k 2 *2
0 -* 3 *3 . X . 0
[A /]{*)+[C ]fc }+ [*]{*}= {f } (3.5)
The mass matrix
0 0
[M]= 0 M, 0 (3.6)
0 0 m 3
The stiffness matrix
\ K X+K2) *2
[K]= - k2 (^+AT3 (3.7)
0 -^3 3 .
66
The damping matrix

(C, +C2) -C2 0
[C]= - C (C+ATj) -C , (3.8)
0 -Q C,
N O R M A L IZ E D M O D E S H A P E S
as
2.6
2.4
“■1.8
1.6
1.4 MODE #1
MODE #2
MODE #3
Figure 3.2 Normalized Mode Shapes for the three storey concrete Building
67
3.2.2 The Seismic Response of the Conventionally Designed three storey
Concrete Structure
The dynamic response of the structure to the El-Centro are given in the following figures:
Figures (3.3-[A-l], [A-2], [A-3]) show the acceleration-time response of the lumped
masses.
Figures (3.3-[B-l], [B-2], [B-3]) show the displacement-time response of the floors.
Figures (3.3-[C-l], [C-2], [C-3]) show the time history of the Transmitted Forces (Shear
Forces) into the three storeys.
Figures (3.3-[D-l]) shows the absolute peak accelerations of the floors.
Figures (3.3-[D-2]) shows the absolute peak displacements of the floors.
Figures (3.3-[D-3]) shows the absolute peak relative displacements between the lumped
masses.
Figures (3.3-[D-4]) shows the absolute peak Transmitted Forces (Shear Forces) into the
three storeys.
As seen from Figures (3.3-[D-4]) for the conventional rigid supported structure, the
maximum shear force occurs at the ground connection and the minimum shear force
occurs at the top of the structure. The maximum acceleration, occurring at the top of the
building, is approximately S times bigger than the ground acceleration.
DISPLACEMENT OF aOOR»2 |m] ACCELERATION OF FLOOR# 1 (mfeec2)
ACCELERATION OF FLOOR#3 (m/sec*)
S—
DISPLACEMENT OF FLOOR#3 |m) DISPLACEMENT OF FLOOR#1 |m] ACCELERATION OF FLOOR#2 (m/sec2]

, * i £ So *> A £ S o
69
(&2)-TTOINSMrTTB39C4R FORCE NTOSTOREVW
TIME [Me)
(D-1)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
3.5
25 “
2
1.5 ►
'o 10 20 X 40 50 60
TIME[Me) ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m/sec2]
(D-2VPEAK DISPLACEMENTS (D3)-ABSOLUTE RELATIVEPEAK DISPLACEMENT
28 -
28 ■
24
1.8
1.4
71.12 0.14 a i6 0.18 02 022 0.06 aOBI 0082 0063 0064 0066
PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF FLOORS [m] MAXtABSOVX^JM
70
[D-4)-MAXIMUM SHEAR FORCES BETWEEN FLOORS
2.8
2.6
2.4
UJ
1.6
1.4
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

SHEAR FORCE=Kn[MAX[ABS(Xn-Xrvl)]] [N1 x 1Q«
Figure 3 3 Multi degree of freedom and rigidly supported structure and its structural
dynamic response to the earthquake
71
3.3 System Design by Using Computer Controlled Concave-
Ball Support Mechanism (C.C.C-B.S.M) and Optimum
Design of the Mechanism
33.1 System Model
The physical model of the proposed isolated system is shown in Figure (3.4-a). In this
system the stiffness value K b represents the equivalent restoring force on the base as it
contacts the springs which are placed radially as shown in Figure (3.4-b). The spring
function Kbis not sensitive to the travel direction of the shock wave for this type of
spring arrangement. Figure (3.6) illustrates the restoring function with an eight-spring
5
arrangement for different directions of wave propagation. In this case Kb = ^ K(l, )2 .
1=1
Where K is the stiffness of the individual springs and / is the directional cosine for each
spring relative the direction of the displacement.
Accordingly Kb = 2K for the considered case. A diagrammatic representation of the
spring cam system used to achieve the desired restoring force characteristics is given in
Figure (3.7).
(b)
Figure 3.4 Three Story Concrete Base Isolated Building with Steel Bails and Concave
Base Supports
73
3.3.2 Differential equations of the isolated system
The dynamic equations of the system can be written as following:
when max|xA- S ( t ^ > b [m] (3.9)
Mbxb +Kl(xb —-tj) + C[(xb - x x)+ ntff((Ms +Mb)(yb +g))+Kb(xb - x , ) = 0 (3.10)
when max|x6 - £ (f)| <b [m] (3.11)
M bxb + K {(xb - x l)+Cl(xb - x t) + ^ ( ( A f , + M b)(yb +g))= 0 (3.12)
Af,Jc, + Cl(x1 - x ft) + C2(x, - x 2) + Art(x, - xb) + K 2(x, - x 2) = 0 (3.13)
Af,x2 + C 2( x , -x ,) + C 3( x 2 - x 3) + AT2( x 2 —Xj) + At3(x2 - x 3) = 0 (3.14)
A / 3x 3 + C 3( x 3 - x 2 ) + AT3( x 3 - x 2) = 0 (3.15)
Neglecting the damping effects ( CI23 = 0)
M s = M, + A/; + A/3 (3.16)
M b = M l +0.05Ms (3.17)
where
b : The free gap between the base and the base support stiffness [m]
M b: The mass of the base [kg]
r (xb ((xb -S(t))}

yb = 2(R —r) sm (3.18)
74
The effective coefficient of friction at the base:
'(x* - 8 ( 0 )
sm + //0sgn(x6 - j(r))cos
(3.19)
(xb - 8 ( 0 )
cos - Mo sgn(i6 -<j(r))sin
R R
Total horizontal force on the base:
(xb - 8 ( 0 ) - 8(0 )
sin + Mo sgn(i6 —8(t)) cos^—^ ^
H =(MS + M b)(g+'yb) (3.20)
cos
(xb - 8 ( 0 ) (x*- 8 ( 0 )
~Mo sgn(x6 —<5(r))sinl
R R
V = ( M , + M b)(g + yb) (3.21)
More information on the Concave-Ball Support Mechanism is given in Chapter II.
75
333 Design optimization
The decision parameters of the design optimization of the system are the parts of the
proposed base isolated mechanism where concave seats are supported by thehollow
spherical balls and the system is controlled actively by a spring-cam system. The
parameters of the mechanism can be written as:
R : the radius of the concave base support;
r : the radius of the hollow spherical balls;
Kb: the base stiffness;
b : the distance between the base and the base spring;
d : the distance between the base and the fully compressed spring;
M b: the base mass;
/i0 : the coefficient of rolling friction;
The main objective in this case is minimizing the shear forces occurring in the three
storeys by constraining the relative displacement of the structure to the ground.
4 -----1----- ► <5(r)
Figure 3.5 The motion of the base and the parameters of the design optimization
76
3.3.4 Decision variables
The M b,r and fi0 are set to their practical values based on geometric and material
considerations. The value of d is calculated from the optimum values of the b and the
dimensions of the springs based on the optimum value of Kb in order to insure that the
spring is not fully compressed.
R , K b and b
FORCE
nflhtspnng
Figure 3.6 The force displacement characteristics of the spring
Figure 3.7 Diagrammatic representation of the spring cam system
77
3.3.5 Objective function
The objective function is selected as the minimization of the maximum shear force in the
isolated structure normalized by the maximum shear force for the rigidly supported case.
This can be stated as::
^( m i n (m ax^C r^ —jc39)«|Xq}
maxJmaÂTjCx, - * J r|J,(ma*|F2(jr2 - x , ) r|), (maajF^Ct^ (3.22)
or
_ m a x fr^ .(F ,); .............. (F,)n}

max{(Fr^,(Fr)j............... (Fr)n) (3.23)
where
Fi : Peak transmitted shear force to each floor for the isolated case;
Fr : Peak transmitted shear forces for the rigidly supported case;
n = 1,2,3;
78
3.3.6 Constraints
The maximum displacement of the structure to the ground motion should be restricted by
a certain maximum allowable value to control the extent of the response to the
earthquake. For the different allowable peak values of the relative displacement, the
optimized stress values are given in Figure (3.8). As seen from the figure, the numerical
minimum stress can be achieved by allowing the base to be displaced 0.25 [m] relative to
ground. It can be seen also that an allowable relative displacement of 0.15 [m] also gives
an acceptable low Transmitted Force. The response in both cases is calculated for
comparison. The constraints in this case can be written as:
The constraint on the relative movement of the base:
max|xt -S(t)\ < 0.15 [m] (3.24)
The constraint on the radius of the concave curvature
2.5 < R < 4 [m] (3.25)
The constraint on the coefficient of the base stiffness
0<-^-<l [m] (3.26)

K,
The constraint on the free gap between the base and the support stiffness
0<fc<0.15[m ] (3.27)
79
where
xb: The absolute peak displacement of the base [m]
6 (t) : The ground motion [m]
The optimized peak Shear Force is the maximum of the Shear Forces in the structures
supporting the three stories. The are calculated as:
1Q»PEAKSHEAR FORCES ANDMAX-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
Was
25 -
1.5 ►
0.2
ALLOWABLEPEAK RELATIVE BASEDISPLACEMENT [m|
Figure 3.8 Peak optimized Shear Forces for the different constraint values on the
relative displacement
80
(a)- The optimized seismic response of the system to the El-Centro are given in the
following figures for the case of max|x6 -£ (r)| <0.15 [m] constraint. The design
parameters in this case are:
R = 4 [m]
K b = (0 .0 0 5 )* , [N/m]
b = 0.05 [m]
Figures (3.9-[A-l], [A-2], [A-3]) show the acceleration-time response of the lumped
masses.
Figures (3.10-[B-1], [B-2], [B-3]) show the displacement-time response of the floors.
Figures (3.1 l-[C -i], [C-2], [C-3]) show the relative displacement-time response between
the floors.
Figures (3.l2-[C-4], [C-5], [C-6]) show the time history of the Transmitted Forces (Shear
Forces) into three storeys.
Figures (3.13-[D-1]) show the absolute peak accelerations of the floors.
Figures (3.14-[D-2]) show the absolute peak displacements of the floors.
Figures (3.15-[D-3]) shows the absolute peak relative displacements between the lumped
masses.
Figures (3.16-[D-4]) shows the absolute peak Transmitted Forces (Shear Forces) into
storeys.
Figures (3.17) shows change of the effective coefficient of rolling friction with time.
Figures (3.18) shows Horizontal Force and normalized Vertical Force-time response at
the base.
81
As seen from Figure (3.16-[D-4]) for the conventional rigid supported structures, the
maximum shear force occurs at the ground connection and the minimum shear force
occurs at the top of the structures. The maximum acceleration, occurring at the top of the
building, is approximately S times larger than the ground acceleration.
(A-1)- ACCELERATION O F BASE (A-2)- ACCELERATION O F FLOOR#1
ACCELERATION OF BASE [m /sel]
17
10 20 30 40 50 10 20 30 40 50 60
(A-3)- ACCELERATION OF FLOOR#2 (A-4)- ACCELERATION O F FLOOR43
— 1.5
ACCELERATION OF FLOOR42 [m/sel]
•0.5
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
Figure 3.9 The Acceleration versus time response of the floors
83
(B-1)- DISPLACEMENT OF BASE \ (B-2)- DISPLACEMENT OF FLOOR#1

0.15) 0.15i
E,
0.1
*
cc
“j 0.05 j \ !)
8 '
/ \ i i f \ ■v r j \ /
I \
u. I
l ’ i j ! V \r V
i i i i i
I v
i ; i / ;! !1 i ‘ / i ■ \
4 /
V
Ul : i \
2LU , \
i
i
| ! ’j 1
I
O. \ \!
■0.15 J
i
-0 .2* 0 .2
•
40 10 20 30 40 50 60
(0-3)- DISPLACEMENT OF FLOOR#2 (B-4)- DISPLACEMENT OF FLOOR#3
0.15 0.15
3 3 I
I 0.1 E. o.i
CNI
rt
m j
I
A fii A il A
8 ' li ;? i i i; i ; i1 -\ i
0.05 0.05
8 1
u. 0 s1 i ' ! N v V
/ ;I / i i [ i 'j ■/“ 1
:
y
,
O /
1 !i / 1/ 1
>! V 1i ----- L - j , /
HI V
\!
O -01 \i' J
i
—T - f — I -0.1 :•' j 1/
V
5a. V
\i
j I' \
.
'j
- 0.2 ■0.2.
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
Figure 3.10 The displacement versus time response of the floors
84
(C-1)-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENTOF BASE TO THE GROUND * io J relative DISPLACEMENT

6
>? 0.1
■0.15
20 30 40
TIME [sec]
>10<» (C-3)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT ;1 q 3 (G-4)- RELATIVE DISPLACEKCNT
90
0 -2
5-4
30 50 60 20 30 40
TIME [sec] TINE [sec]
Figure 3.11 The relative displacement-time response between the floors
85
* (C-5)-TRANSMfTTED FORCE
20 30 40 SI
TIME [sec]
(C-6)-TRANSMrTTED FORCE
**0.5
2-0.5
20 30 40 SO
TIME [sec]
« (C-7)-TRANSMITTED FORCE
TIME [sec
Figure 3.12 Transmitted Force (Shear Force) versus time response in the storeys.
86
(D-I)-RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS

4*
3.5
1.5
0.05 0.1 0.2

ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT [m]
Figure 3.13 The absolute peak relative displacements between the floors
(D-2)-ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATIONS
2.5
0c
21.5
u.
0.5
.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2

ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m/sec2]
Figure 3.14 The absolute peak relative accelerations of the floors
87
(D-3)-ABS0LUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
2.5
§ 1'5
UL
0.5
C16 0.1605 0.161 0.1615 0.162

ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENT [m]
Figure 3.15 The absolute peak displacements of the lumped masses
(D-4)-MAX-TRANSMITTED FORCE BETWEEN FLOORS
2.8
2. 6 -
2.4
1.6 -
1.4 STOREY #1-K1*max(abs()(1-Xb))

STOREY #2-K2*max(abs(X2-X1))
STOREY HS^Tnaxtabsp^-Xg))
1.5
TRANSMITTED FO R CE^'M A jqA B SfX ,,-)^)] [N] x 1Qs
Figure 3.16 The absolute peak Shear Forces (Transmitted Forces into the storeys)
(E)- EFFECTIVE COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION
0.05
° 0.04 1
o
£ 0.03
u. (I i
0 0-02
1 001 1 S 1 1 ILi.lla 1 _____ 1 A _

__■
■
E 0
j i M i m m u i
-K
§ - 0.01 i ^ fW V
— ^ -
--
--
--
--
-
o
UJ-0.02 i i n m r
r [ : T
*.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
:
>
5-0-03
UJ i t 1
£ - 0 .0 4
UJ
-0.05.
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 3.17 The effective coefficient of rolling friction with time
»10* (F)-HORIZONTAL FORCE [N] (G)-NORMAUZED VERTICAL FORCE

.015)
g 1 1.01
HORIZONTAL FORCE |N)
•0.5
Ui
3 0.99 -
20 30 40 50 60 40
TIME [sec] TIME [sac]
Figure 3.18 The Vertical and Horizontal Forces at the Base
89
3.4 Summary and Comparison of the Response of the Rigid
and Isolated Cases
(a)- The absolute peak responses of the structure are given in the following figures for the
case with constraint
Figure (3.19-[A]> shows comparison of the absolute peak accelerations of the floors in
the two cases. The peak acceleration ratio o f the rigid to the isolated case is
approximately 15 times.
Figure (3.19-[B]) shows comparison of the absolute peak displacements of the floors in
the two cases rigid and isolated. While the peak displacement o f the rigid supported
structure approximately 21 [cm], the peak displacement o f the base isolated structure is
16 [cm].
Figure (3.19-[C]> shows comparison of the absolute peak relative displacements of the
floors of the rigid and isolated cases.
Figure (3.19-[D]) shows comparison of the absolute peak Transmitted Forces into
storeys. The maximum Shear Force in both cases (base isolated and rigidly supported)
occurs at the first storey and the isolated transmitted force in the storey is approximately
11.5 (to the El Centro) times less than the rigid peak response.
90
(AJ-ABSOLUTE PEAKACCELERATIONS (B)-ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
2.5
as ■ as -
RIGID RIGID
ISOLATED ISOLATED
0 .1 2 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22
ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [nVsec*! ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENT [m|
(C)-RELAT1VE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS (D)-MAX-TRANSMITTED FORCES
-€*- RIGID
ze -O - ISOLATED
2.6 -
2.4 -
* 2.2 -
>
Ui
1.6 -
♦ RIGID 12
-O - ISOLATED
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.5 1 15
ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT [m] SHEAR FORCES«K11*M
■MAX[ABS{X|
AX[ABS(X,n)-X|V
■' |)| [N]x 1Q*
(E)-NORMALIZED TRANSMITTED FORCES (F>ACCELERATIONS ACCELERATIONS OF FLOORS
2.5
1.5
_i
u.
0.5
12 13 14 15
NORMALIZED SHEAR FORCE NORMALIZED ACCELERATIONS
Figure 3.19 Comparison between rigid and base isolated structural dynamic responses
of the considered structure to the El Centro earthquake for
the max|jrfr -<£(r)| < 0.15 [m] constraint.
91
(AI-ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATIONS (B>-ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
25 -
1.5
u_
0.5 > 0.5 >

-O - RIGID -O - RIGID
ISOLATED -O - ISOLATED
20 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22

ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m/sac2] ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENT [m)
(C)-RELATtVE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS (DJ-MAX-TR4NSMTTEDFORCES
-o - n a o
28 ' -O- ISOLATED
26 •
24 •
£ 2H I- 21 ►
1.4 -
-O - RIGID
-O - ISOLATED 1.2 -
Q5 1 15 2
ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT [m| TRA/SEMTTTEDP0RCE=Kh*MA3qABS(Xn-XlvI)] [N^ 1Q*
(E)-NORMALIZED TRANSMITTED FORCES (F>ACCELERATIONS ACCELERATIONS OF FLOORS
28
25 -
2.6
2.4
0 ) 1.8
1.6
1.4
0.5
1.2
18 IS 20 22
NORMALIZED SHEAR FORCE NORMALIZED ACCELERATIONS
Figure 3.20 Comparison between rigid and base isolated structural dynamic responses
of the considered structure to the Taft earthquake for
themax|jr6 —<J(r)|<0.15 [m]constraint.
92
3.5 Optimum Design of a Base Isolated System for a high rise
Steel Structure
3.5.1 Introduction
In seismically critical regions, the use of base isolation systems has been considered as
means of minimizing the earthquake effects. These effects can be social as well as
economical. On the social side, the isolated structures would make people feel more
secure about their safety. On the economic side, they provide protection of lives and
property. Several active and passive isolation systems are currently used for seismic
protection of structures. The rubber-steel composite isolators, frictional pendulum
systems, active tendon mechanisms, roller and sliding systems, tuned mass, liquid
absorbers and suspension mechanism are some of the considered seismic isolation
systems.
The seismic protection of high-rise structures has been the subject of investigation by
several researchers. Youssef, Nuttali, Rahman and Hata [32] analyzed the response of the
32 floor, steel frame, 458 feet tall, Los Angeles City Hall with the use of a rubber
isolation bearing and supplemental damping in the high rise section of the building. The
study showed that the maximum storey acceleration for the base isolated building can be
reduced by 3 times under El Centro earthquake by incorporation of energy dissipaters at
the top. The optimum selection and distribution of high damping rubber dampers for
seismic response analysis of a 40 storey, 160 m tall, steel frame structure without base
isolation were studied by Satoshi and Furuya [33]. The results showed that the maximum
93
acceleration and displacement at the top can be reduced by a factor 35 % and 25 % from
their rigid responses by incorporating the rubber dampers. The active/passive control of
earthquake induced vibrations of mid-rise buildings was investigated by Shing and Dixon
[34]. An active bracing system and a hybrid mass damper both are considered as control
devices on a ten-storey steel frame building. Their results showed that the magnitude of
the maximum storey drift can be reduced significantly under El Centro earthquake by
incorporating the non-linear control of the active bracing and the mass damper. The
amount of reduction depends on the magnitude of the active control force. The use of a
combination of the active tendons and active bracing system for buildings is studied by
Matheu, Singh and Beathe [35]. A 10-storey building was considered in their study. They
found that the absolute maximum displacement and acceleration is reduced by a factor 6 6
% from the uncontrolled values. An active mass driver (AMD) system was proposed by
Kobori and Fujita [36] to suppress actively the response of a building to earthquake
excitations. A ten storey, actual office building was considered in their analysis. Their
system can minimize the torsional as well as lateral the responses. Under El Centro
earthquake the maximum acceleration and displacement of the 10 th floor can be reduced
from 16.3 to 8.9 [m /sec2] and from 0.45 to 0.17 [cm] respectively as a result of their
proposed system. Pandelides and Tzan [37] investigated the hybrid structural control
using viscoelastic dampers and active control systems. Two different 8 and 10 floor,
steel frame, mid-rise buildings were considered in their analysis. The maximum
displacement and velocity of their considered buildings due to the El Centro earthquake
can be reduced approximately from 0.18 to 0.13 [m] and from 1.0 to 0.75 [m/sec]
94
respectively as a result of using a combination of viscoelastic and active bracing system.
Seismic response analysis of heavily damped vibration absorbers was undertaken by
Villaverde [38]. The absolute maximum displacement of the 10 storey building, they
considered under El Centro earthquake, was reduced by approximately SO %.
95
3.5.2 System Model
The 40-storey structure described in Ref.(32) is considered for the analysis. Each floor
mass is 980000 kg and the stiffness distribution is trapezoidal as shown in Figure (3.22)
with the first floor 1.93 GN/m and fourth floor 963 MN/m as shown in Figure (3.22). The
building is 40 m wide and 160 m high. Structural damping is neglected as a safety factor.
The first, second and third natural frequencies are 0.25,0.704 and 1.166 Hz respectively.
The first, second and third mode shapes are shown in Figure (3.23). The responses of the
rigidly supported building to the El Centro earthquake are shown in the Figure (3.4).
Figure 3.21 Steel framed, conventionally designed, multi degree of freedom system
with 40 floors and the equivalent lumped mass model
96
CHANGINGOFCOEFFICIENT OFSTIFFNESS
S T O R E Y # n -K n |
x ►
25 ►
m20 ►
15
10 ►
5►
0.5 1 1.5 2
COEFFICIENT OF STIFFNESS OF STOREYS [N/m| x1Q"
Figure 3.22 The distribution of Coefficient of Stiffness
3.53 Differential equations of the system
A/,*, + C,(x, -<*(r)) + C 2 (x, - x , ) + £ , ( * , - S M + KziXt - x , ) = 0 (3.28)
M 2x 2 + C 2( x 2 - x , ) + C 3( x 2 - x 3) + K 2(x2 - x , ) +Af3(x 2 - x 3) = 0 (3.29)
Af3x 3 + C 3(x 3 - x 2) + C 4 (x 3 - x z) + K 3(x3 - x 2) + K x ( x 3 - x 4) = 0 (3.30)
Af 39X39 + C 39 (x 39 x38) + (x 39 xw) + K 39 (x 39 x3g) + K ^ (x 39 x^) 0 (3.31)
A/jjijQ "F (x ^ x39) + AfjQ(Xjj x39) 0 (3.32)
97
3.53.1 The mass matrix
Af, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 m 2 0
0 0 m 3 0 0
0
M= 0 0 (3.33)
0 0 0 Af39 0
0 0 0 0 M 40
3.S.3.2 The stiffness matrix
(AT, +IC,) 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0
-K z (K,+K2) - k,
0 - K, (K.+K,) - K ,
0 0 -AT.
K= (3.34)
0 0 0 (K„+Kn ) -k„
0 •39 (K J
3iS«3«3 The damping matrix
(C,+C2) -C; 0 0 0 0 0 0. . 0 0
-C , (C2+K3) -c 3
0 -C3 (C3+ C J -Q
0 0 -C 4
C= (3.35)
0 0 0 (C39+C38) -c'3, 9
0 o 0 -C39 (Q ,)
98
3 iJ .4 The forcing function
q Sw + K A t)
0
0
{F}= (3.36)
3 iJ i The displacement vector
*.
X,
{X}= (3.37)
*•40
Differential equation of the system in matrix format
[M ] £ }+ [C]{* }+ [K]{X }= {F} (3.38)
MODE SHAPES
30 >
20 «■
15 ►
10 ►
5► MODE #1(wn1=1.572 rad/sac)

MODE f2(wn2=4.4Z7 rad/sec)
MODE #3(wn3=7.328 rad/sac)
-10
NORMAUZED MODES
Figure 3.23 Normalized mode shapes
99
3.6 The seismic response analysis of the structure rigidly
attached to the ground
The structural dynamic response of the 40 floors steel framed building to the El-Centro
are given in the following figures:
Figure (3.24) show the acceleration-time response of the lumped masses.
Figure (3.25) show the displacement-time response of the floors.
Figure (3.26) show the absolute peak accelerations of the floors.
Figure (3.27) show the absolute peak displacements of the floors.
Figure (3.28) shows the absolute peak relative displacements between the lumped
masses.
Figure (3.29) shows the absolute peak Transmitted Forces (Shear Forces) into storeys.
3.6.1.1 Some rem arks on the figures:
1)-The maximum shear force occurs at the bottom of the structure and the minimum
shear force occurs at the top of the structure.
2)-The maximum acceleration occurs at the top of the building and its peak value is
approximately 3.8 times bigger than the peak ground acceleration.
3)-The maximum displacement occurs at the top of the building and its magnitude is
approximately 52 cm.
(A)- DISPLACEMENT OF THE GROUND (B)- DISPLACEMENT OF FLOOR#40
0.1Si 0.6
DISPLACEMENT OF THE GROUND [m]
0.1
0.0S
0.05
- 0.1
0.15 -
0.2 -0.8,
20 40
TIME [sac]
Figure 3.24 Displacement-time response of the base and floor #40
(C)- ACCELERATION OF THE GROUND (D>- ACCELERATION OF FLOOR#40
20 30 40 20 30 40
Figure 3.25 The acceleration-time response of the base and floor# 40
101
(E)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATIONS [m/sec*]
Figure 3.26 The absolute peak accelerations of the floors
(F)-ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS OF FLOORS
u.
10 ►
0 .3 0 .4 0 .5 0.6
PEAK DISPLACEMENTS [m]
Figure 3.27 The absolute peak displacements of the floors
102
(GVRELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF FLOORS [m]
Figure 3.28 The absolute relative peak displacements between the lumped masses
(H)-MAX-TRANSMtTTED FORCE
Ui
DC20
MAX-TRANSMITTED FORCE BETWEEN FLOORS [N] x1Q^
Figure 3.29 Maximum Transmitted Forces into the storeys
103
3.7 System Design with Concave-Ball Support and Optimum
Design of the Base

The base design for the system in this case Figure (3.30) is the same as that considered in
Ref.[l]. Structural details of the isolation mechanism are given in Appendix-[A]. The
base is supported by 25 hollow polymer coated steel spheres on concave polymer coated
steel spherical surfaces. A cam-spring system is designed to minimize the transmission of
the earthquake disturbance to the structure and to control the maximum displacement of
the base.
Floor#4Q
Storey #40
/
/ l
Floor #2 I
Storey# 2
f
Floor*\
Storey* I
7
Figure 3 JO Steel framed-base isolated multi degree of freedom system with 40 floors
The stiffness and the mass values for this case are the same as those given for the case
shown in Figure (3.21).
104
3.7.1 Differential equations of the system
In the analysis each floor is assumed to undergo x and y displacements only. The tilting
effect is neglected in order to simplify the formulation. However, the tilting moment is
calculated after the solution is obtained to insure that the simplification is acceptable and
that there is no separation of the spherical contacts at any time.
when m ax^ - >b [m] (3.39)
Mbxb + Kx(xb - x l)+Cx(xb -i,)+sgnfc 6 - j(f))/i,# ((Af, +Mb)(yb +gj)+Kb(xb - x x) =0 (3.40)
when max|jc* - J(r)| <b [m] (3.41)
M bx b + K x(xb - x x) + Cx(xb - i t )+sgn(ir 6 , + M b)(yb + g ) )= 0 (3.42)
M xx x + C , ( jc, - S(t)) + C , ( jc, - x z ) + K x( jc, - S(t)) + K z(xx- x z ) = 0 (3.43)
M zx z + C ,(.r, — jc, ) + C 3(xz - x 3) + K z(xz - x x)+ K3(xz - x 3) = 0 (3.44)
M 3Jc3 + C 3(jc 3 - i 2) + C 4 (jCj - x z) + K 3(x3- x z ) + K 4( x 3 - x i )=0 (3.45)
A / 3q X 3q + C 3Q (X 39 -Cjg) + C jQ (■^■39 •*Jo ) + ^ 3 9 ( x 39 (^ 3 9 ^40^ ® (3 .4 6 )
A f 40^40 ^ 4 (J (-^40 -*39) (^ 4 0 -*39) 0 (3 -4 T )
Neglecting the damping effects ( C ,, M = 0)
where
A f, = A f t + A f , + M „ (3 .4 8 )
M b = M X+ 0 .0 5 A f x ( 3 .4 9 )
105
\2
\ x b -S it)) jxb - S j t ) ) ix b - S i t ) ) f i x b -S it))'
yb = 2 ( R - r ) sin COS (3.50)
R
The effective coefficient of rolling friction at the base:
ixb - S it)) ‘(jc* - S i t ) ) '

sin + Mo sgn(x6 - S i t ) ) cos
A e ff =
(3.51)
ixb - S it)) ixb - S it ) )
cos - Mo sgnixb -<j(r))sin
R
The resultant horizontal force on the base can be formulated as:
ixb - S i t ) ) ixb - S i t ) )
sin + Mo sgn(.r6 - S i t ) ) cos
H = ( M , + M b X g + y>> (3.52)
ixb - S it) ) ixb -Sir))
cos - / / 0 sgn(it -<^(/))sin
V = i M , + M b)ig + yb) (3.53)
106
3.8 Design optimization
If the M b, r and fi0 are set to their practical values and d is calculated from the
optimum values of the Kb and b , the decision parameters in this case become:
R , Kb and b
The objective function is selected as the minimization of the maximum shear force in the
isolated structure normalized by the maximum shear force for the rigidly supported case.
This can be stated as:
Minimize:
. m a ^ m a ^ ,( x , - ^ ^ . ( m a ^ C t , .......
111111 m a x f t m a ^ t r , - ^ ^ . ( m a ^ C t , - * ; ) r |)2 ( m a ^ j o ^ -J c 39)r |)40} ( 3 -5 4 )
or
rrrmin\ - ..............
(Fr )n } (3.55)
where
Ft : Peak transmitted shear force to each floor for the isolated case;
Fr : Peak transmitted shear forces for the rigidly supported case;
n = 1.2....39: Storey numbers
107
3.83 Constraints
a certain maximum allowable value to control the maximum displacement of the
structure. The constraints for the case in the ground connections can be stated as:
The constraint on the relative movement of the base:
(a)- max|x6 - <?(r)J < 0.15 [m] (3.56)
The constraint on the radius of the concave curvature
2 .5 < R < 4 [m] (3.57)
The constraint on the coefficient of the base stiffness
0 , ^ , 1 [m] (3.58)
K,
The constraint on the free gap between the base and the support stiffness
0 < 6 <0.15 [m] (3.59)
108
where
xb : The absolute peak displacement of the base [m]
8 (/): The ground motion [m]
The optimized peak Shear Force is the maximum of the Shear Forces in the structures
supporting the three stories. These are calculated as:
v10’ PEAK SHEAR FORCES A W MAX-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

- l l
1.46 -
K 1.4 ►
q; 1.3 *
1.15 -
1.1
02 025
ALLCWABLEPEAK RELATIVE BASEDISPLACEMENT[m]
Figure 3.31 The absolute peak Shear Forces (Transmitted Forces into the storeys)
109
3.9 The optimized seismic response of the system to the Taft
Earthquake
(a)- The optimized parameters with the max|jtb - <J(r)j < 0.15 [m] constraint are:
R = 4 [m ], Kb = 0.001 K, and 6 = 0
The dynamic response of the system in this case is given in the following figures:
Figure (3.32) shows the displacement-time response of the floors.
Figure (3.33) shows the acceleration-time response of the lumped masses.
Figure (3.34) shows the absolute peak accelerations of the floors.
Figure (3.35) shows the absolute peak displacements of the floors.
Figure (3.36) shows the absolute peak relative displacements between the lumped
masses.
Figure (3.37) shows the absolute peak Transmitted Forces (Shear Forces) into storeys.
Figure (3.38) shows Horizontal Force-time response at the base.
Figure (3.39) shows normalized Vertical Force-time response at the base.
DISPLACEMENTOF BASE D ISPLA C EM EN T O F FLO O R#40
0.2 ■I ■■
I
!
\ •g- 0.15 —
/] i
ui ' f I
K 01
1
I i
A
C/3
1
2 1 \ I f 1 8 005
U-
O 0 * ^
s
(\j n / \ ,
11 I
/I
AX
V f\l S -0 .0 5 K
ui
UJ
i' 1 uj -o.i
§a . 1 2 L
M aJ -. 0 . 1 5 * -
a w
|V a ■o .2
-0.25.
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec] TIM E [sec]
Figure 3.32 The displacement-time response of the base and floor# 40
ACCELERATION O F BA SE ACCELERATION O F PL0O RS40

05|
g 0 .4 -
1 0.3 -
f 0.2 -
Ik
•0.15
20 30 40
TIM E [sec] TIME [sec]
Figure 3.33 The acceleration-time response of the base and floor# 40
I ll
PEAK ACCELERATIONS
40
35
30
25
920
Li-
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.5

Figure 3-34 The absolute peak accelerations of the floors
PEAK DISPLACEMENTS [m]

40
25
§
L i.
0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22

PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF FLOORS
Figure 3-35 The absolute peak displacements of the floors
112
RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS

I w
m ax(abs(X n-Xrvl))
S T O R E Y #0-m ax(abs(X b-5(t)))
S T O R E Y # 1 -m ax (ab s(X r Xb))
1— 1—
S T O R E Y #40-m ax(abs(X 40-X3g))
1
co
■
I
■
0 0.01 0 .0 2 0 .0 3 0 .0 4 0 .0 5 0 .0 6 0 .0 7
RELATIV E PEA K D ISPLA C EM EN T O F F L O O R S [m]
Figure 3.36 The absolute relative peak displacements between the lumped masses
MAX-TRANSMITTED FORCE
MAX-TRANSMITTED FORCE BETWEEN FLOORS [N]x 1Q«
Figure 3.37 Maximum Transmitted Forces into these storeys
113
NORMALIZED HORIZONTAL FORCE
0.02
0.01
u.
- 0.01
- 0.02
-0.03
-0.5 0 0.5 1.5
PENDULUM ANGLE = * [°]
Figure 3.38 The Horizontal Force at the base
NORMALIZED VERTICAL FORCE
1 .1.002
1.001
u_
0.999
UJ
0.998
0.997
20
TIME [sec]
Figure 3.39 The normalized Vertical Force at the base
3.9.1 The optimized seismic response of the isolated system to the Taft
and the El Centro Earthquake
A non-linear mathematical programming procedure was used to determine the design
parameters. The optimized parameters with the constraint on max|jt6 -<J(r)|< 0.15 [m]
are found to be:
/? = 4[m],A :6 =0.001 K, =l.93e + 6 [ N / m \ and b = 0
The dynamic response of the system in this case is illustrated in the following figures:
Figure (3.42) shows comparison of the peak displacements.
Figure (3.43) shows comparison of the peak accelerations.
Figure (3.44) shows comparison of the peak shear forces.
Figure (3.45) shows the normalized shear forces.
As can be seen from figure (3.43) the highest acceleration in both cases occurred at the
top floor and was reduced from 9.88 [m/sec2] to 0.46 [m/sec2]as a result of the base
isolation.
Figure (3.42) shows that the maximum displacement occurred also at the top floor and
was reduced from 48 cm to 22.5 [cm].
It can be seen from figure (3.44) that the maximum transmitted force in the isolated
structure occurred at storey#l and its value is 6.3227e+006 [N] whichis approximately
7.5 times lower than maximum value in the rigidly supported system which also occurred
at the first floor. Similar results were obtained for the response of the structure to the El
Centro earthquake and summarized in Table (1).
115
3.10 Consideration of the tilting moment
M Floor*40 I—X
rev #40
7
= I60[m]
/
x, jjf. Floor* 2 I
-y- (\ x‘ ) V w !8 Storey*2
► W ,x, Floor* 1 1
Srorey#!
lM '« Af
, «\ W
,1
♦ --1--►
* ^ r
Figure 3.40 - A Schematic Representation of Overturn Moments
The tilting moment ( M m) in the case of the Taft earthquake is calculated from the
dynamic response as follows:
Mm = | + + ......
(3.60)
- x 6 )(Af,g) + (Xj - xb)(Af2g) +.... + ex.*, -x ^ X A f ^ g ) } ^ =7.3e7 [N.m]
116
where
H U J0 are the heights of the different floors.
The maximum reaction force on the spherical balls induced by the tilting moment,
M L.
Qm«*=— ------ 7 -® =--------- ~ (3.61)
The reaction force on the spherical balls due to the weight of the building,
— = 1.6519e + 007 [N] » F raax

n
where
Qnax : The maximum reaction force on the concave support due to the tilting moment;
L\.2.3 : The distance of the spherical balls from the center of the base;
Ws : The total weight of the structure;
n : The number of the spherical balls;
A plot of the load distribution on the seven balls located on the x axis at the maximum
moment condition is given in fig. (3.40).
117
on
17e+6
Base
Figure 3.41 Load distribution on the balls located on the x-axis at the maximum tilting
moment condition
(A)-ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATIONS
- O - RIGID
- O - ISOLATED
Figure 3.42 Peak accelerations of the floors
118
(B)-ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
RIGID
ISOLATED
3.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Figure 3.43 Comparison of the absolute peak displacements of the floors
(C)-MAX-TRANSMITTED FORCE BETWEEN FLOORS

t
i
t
-O- RIGID
s ISOLATED
• L
i
1
B itt
B
:t |1
SHEAR FORCE^VMAXIABSPC^,)] [N]x 107
Figure 3.44 Comparison of Shear Forces at the storeys between rigid and base isolated
case of the considered structure to the Taft earthquake with the
max|jt6 - <5(r)| < 0.15 [m] constraint
119
(D)-NORMALIZED SHEAR FORCES
---------------- .—.........—.....
------------- ---- ---------------- .———------- ,
5 10 15 20 25
NORMALIZED SHEAR FORCES
Figure 3.45 Normalized Peak Shear Forces of storeys between rigid and base isolated
cases
(A)-ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATIONS
RIGID
ISOLATED
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [rrVsec2]
Figure 3.46 Peak accelerations of the floors
120
(B)-ABSOLUTE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS

40
-O - RIGID
-O - ISOLATED
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Figure 3.47 Comparison of the absolute peak displacements of the floors
(C)-MAX-TRANSMITTED FORCE BETWEEN FLOORS
RIGID
ISOLATED
SHEAR FORCE=Kn*MAX[ABS(Xn-Xrvl)] [N]x 10*
Figure 3.48 Comparison o f Shear Forces at the storeys between rigid and base isolated
case of the considered structure to the El Centro earthquake with the
max|jrb -£ (r)| < 0.15 [m] constraint.
121
(D)-NORMAUZED SHEAR FORCES
NORMALIZED SHEAR FORCES
Figure 3.49 Normalized Peak Shear Forces of storeys between rigid and base isolated
cases
122
Table -(3.1) Comparison of Results
El Centro Earthquake Taft Earthquake

Description Rigid Base Isolated Base Rigid Base Isolated Base
Support Support Support Support
Peak
Acceleration 13.13 1.78 9.88 0.46
[m/sec*]
Peak
Displacement 0.52 0.245 0.48 0.225
[m]
Peak
Transmitted 6.3e+7 1.03e+7 4.7e+7 6.32e+6
Force
[Afl
3.11 Conclusion
The application of the proposed base isolation system to a 40 storey steel structure was
found to reduce the maximum transmitted force into the structure due to the Taft
earthquake by a factor 7.5 in the considered example. The movement of the base relative
to ground did not exceed 0.15 [m] in the optimized system, and the restraining springs
were not fully compressed at any time during the disturbance. It should be noted that the
maximum induced vertical forces as a result of the proposed spherical base support were
found to be less that 1 % of the weight of the structure and, consequently, their effect on
the structure can be neglected in comparison with the shear forces. The dynamic response
was used to calculate the load distribution on the different spheres. The results show that
all spheres remain loaded for the duration of the disturbance and that the maximum
change in the load is approximately 3.4 % for the Taft earthquake.
123
CHAPTER-IY
4 Seismic Response Analysis of the Single Span
Isolated Bridges Using Computer Controlled
Concave-Bal! Support Mechanism (C.C.C-B.S.M)
and Optimum Design of the Mechanism
4.1 Introduction
Currently, there are two known base isolation systems used to protect bridges from
earthquakes. They are the rubber-steel composite isolation material and the frictional
pendulum system explained in Chapter I. In these systems the base isolation mechanism
are installed between the ground and the deck and the pier and the deck shown in Figure
(4.2).
Figure 4.1 A Conventionally Designed Multi Span bridge model
124
Figure 4.2 A Multi Span Bridge with rubber-steel composite isolation system
In order to evaluate the seismic response of bridge systems, we first will start with long
single span bridges. For simplification of this analysis, single span bridges can be
modeled as a one-degree of freedom lumped system as shown in Figure (4.1). In the
system M eff = — is the equivalent mass and Ktff y = is the equivalent stiffness of
2 £»
the lumped system model.
Side-view
• 1, - ■ i
' X
i X .* ■
[---------------------
K ,
Top-view
Figure 4 3 A single span conventionally designed bridge model
125
4.2 A single degree of freedom lump mass model and seismic
response analysis of the system in the y direction
4.2.1 Properties of the bridge:
The bridge considered in this investigation is described in Ref.(25,26). Its main
parameters are:
4.2.2 Deck dimensions:
10 m
x
0.6 5m
5m
y
Figure 4.4 Deck properties of the bridge Ref. [25-26]
Ad : Area of the deck
lad '■Area moment of inertia of the deck to the x-x axis
I ^ : Area moment of inertia of the deck to the y-y axis
md : Unit per mass of the deck
Ed : Elasticity modules of the deck material
Numerical values of the deck properties:
Ad =7.46 [n r]
126
/ , = 5 .2 6 [m 4l
ly y d = 8 7 . 2 4 [ m 4 ]
md = 22400 [^-]
m
E d — 3 4 .5 109 [-— ]
m'
4.23 The equivalent system model:
For the one degree of freedom system the effective mass is

M
(4.1)
2
And the equivalent stiffness
48E7.
(4.2)
l]
•ff t ^
Figure 4.5 Lumped mass model of the system in y direction
4 8 t/.
eff.y
Figure 4.6 The equivalent system model in y direction
127
The equation of motion can be written as
Mtf.y y + c *.y ( y - 8y (0) + .y(y ■- s y(0) = 0 (4.3)
where
Cejr y: Coefficient of structural damping of bridge
c *r..v = °
The earthquake signal considered for illustration is that of the El-Centro earthquake
(SOOE component) shown in Figure (4.7).
4000
300C > 30C >
200C >
E_10C
-I00C >-10C
•200C
20 40 50 60 20 40 50
TIME [seel
1501
IOC
- ,5 0 f 40
10 20 30 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 4.7 The El-Centro earthquake (SOOE component)
(a)-ACCELERATION OF BRIDGE x1Q7 (b)-SEISMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE
20 30 40 20 30 40
(c)-OISPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE
x ,q7(d)-SHEAR FORCE IN THE BRIDGE
0.3
¥
§0-2
2 0.1
►=-0.1
5.-0.3
-0.4
20 40 60 20 30 40
. 1Q7(e)-SHEAR FORCE IN THE BRIDGE
20 30 40
TIME [sec]
Figure 4.8 The seismic response in y direction to the Earthquake
129
4.2.4 Analysis in the z direction
Figures 4.9 and 4.10 show the lumped mass model and the equivalent mass model of the
long single span bridge model. The equivalent mass and stiffness can be found by using
the simple supported beam approach given in Appendix-D.
Figure 4.9 Lump Mass Model in z direction
Figure 4.10 The Equivalent System Model in z direction
The equation of motion of the system can be written as
M t f , z + C ^ z (z - S z (0) + K tff'Z(z - S z (0) = 0 (4.4)
The seismic structural dynamic responses of the system in the vertical direction to the
assumed vertical component of El-Centro earthquake, which are transmitted force,
acceleration and displacement, are given in Figure 4.10.
130
(ahACCELERATION OF BRIDGE x 1Q« (b)-SEISMIC TRANSMITTED FORCE
1.5 1.5
LU
0.5
ui
2-0.5 O-0.5
20 30 50 60 20 30 40
(O-OISPUCEMENT OF BRIDGE x 1Q« (tft-SHEAR FORCE IN THE BRIDGE
0.3f
m
q 0.1
[ffl
JS 0.5
0-0.5
-0.4
20 30 40
x 1Q« (e)-SHEAR FORCE IN THE BRIDGE
:i
20 30 40
TIME [seel
Figure 4.11 Seismic structural dynamic response in z the direction to the earthquake
131
4.2.5 Analysis in x direction
For the analysis of the longitudinal seismic response of the single span bridge by using a
lumped mass model we assume that the side A is pinned to he ground and the side B is
free to slide. The seismic disturbances excite the system from these two sides. The
M M
lumped masses in the model are distributed as — and — shown in Figure 4.12. The
equivalent connecting spring is subjected to compression or tension. The equation of
motion for this system model can be written as:
M xx x + ^ ( x x - S x(t)) + ^ - ( x x - S x(t)) + ^ - ( x x- x B) + - ^ ( x x- x B) = 0 (4.5)
M 2x 2 + z r ~ ( x 2 - x x) + ^ ( x 2 - x , ) + — = 0 (4.6)
where A/ = —
c
x,
* ►K l _ 2AE Kl 2,AE !-=►
•y £ 2 L
i i i
i i i
M j m - M_ \ ■ w - M
s.(I) 2 !
4! 1 4.'
I - i - - 3 1 - I sgn[<?,(r-Af)-xa
I I I
£ l_ Q -H
2 2
A B
Figure 4.12 The Equivalent Lumped System Model in the x direction
The seismic response of the system to the El Centro earthquake is given in Figure 4.13.
132
(a)-ACCELERATION OF MASSTI (b)-ACCELERAT10N OF MASS#2
| II
co n
3i! 1n v m n i
2 ” I ' | 'i'i' i
S-i a k ii i . n t d
I UlLilUL
U
o
1
10 20 X 40 50 60 0 20 30 40 50
(c)-LONGITUDINAL DISPLACEMENT (dH-CNGmjONALDISPLACEMENT
0.15 0.15i
u.
ui -0.05
^ -0.1
a.
co
a -0.15 - 5-0.15 ►
40 50
TIME [sec] TIME [seel
(ehRELATIVE DISPLACEMENT x 10-3 (f)-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
F
20 30 40 20 30 40
133
(OhTRANSMITTED FORCE (^TRANSMITTED FORCE
,-2
« o■
ui
40
TIME [seel TIME[secj
Figure 4.13 The Seismic Response of the Lumped System Model in the Longitudinal
direction
134
4.3 System Design with Concave Ball Support

The use of concave base support with spherical balls is investigated in this section for
earthquake protection of the long single span bridges. The mechanism shown in Figures
4.14 & 4 .IS has 6 specially designed cams and springs to keep the system rigid in normal
conditions. Whenever the sensors detect a disturbance, the cams rotate to let the system
free. The base springs are optimally designed for controlling the displacement of the
bridge. A diagrammatic representation of the bridge in the top view and its free-body
diagram are given in Figures 4.16 and 4.17 respectively.
Figure 4.14 Side-view of the Base Isolated System
Figure 4.15 Side and top view details of the base isolation mechanism
135
Figure 4.16 Top-view of the Base Isolated System
+aG-.’>
K „ (y-* » -a 0 t) I
M. ' x
Figure 4.17 Free Body Diagram of the Base Isolated System
136
4.3.1 Optimum Design of Base Isolation Mechanism of the Single Span
Bridge in x direction
The equivalent base isolated system model is shown in Figure 4.18. The equation of
motion in this case can be written as
Mx + m * M ( 8 + z)sgn(i - Sx(t)) + 2Kz(x - Sx(t)) = 0 (4.7)
2C,
/\ -
M X
'-/V
2K
/ / , / / /
/ y / / '/ /
m y/ -'.y. \
m
Figure 4.18 Lumped Mass Model for base isolated case in x direction
where,
1____ 1
1
1
si
'w'
* L
* i
sin + fi0 sgn(xb - j(/))co s

1_
1
(4.8)
i
\ x b-S(t))' (xb -< ?(!))'

cos - fiQsgn(i6 -<j(r))sin
R R J
f ( j c - £ x(0) (x -^ (Q ) ( ( x - S x(t))
yb = 2(R - r) sin C O S ---------------- (4.9)
R \ R
Details of the Concave base support mechanism with spherical steel ball bearings are
explained in Chapter II.
137
4 3 2 Design Optimization:
The decision parameters of the design optimization of the system are the specification of
for the components of the proposed base isolated mechanism using concave seats and
hollow spherical balls. The system is controlled actively by a spring-cam system. The
parameters of the mechanism can be written as:
Kb: the base stiffness;
b : the distance between the base and the base spring ;
d : the distance between the base and the fully compressed spring ;
M b: the base mass ;
: the effective coefficient of rolling friction ;
For the design of bridges in seismic sensitive regions some standards are generally used.
The segments of bridges in the piers and decks are conventionally designed to these
standards in order to keep the structural deformation in elastic region. To increase the
seismic resistance capacity of the conventional rigid structures (decrease the maximum
transmitted stress) the stiffness of the system are generally increased. As a result of
increasing the stiffness, the transmitted force into the structure and its components will be
high. Using an isolation mechanism at the base can decrease the energy input in the
structure. Therefore, a successfully designed base isolation mechanism will provide
138
minimum acceleration and displacement as a result of reducing the transmitted energy.
Accordingly the design objective can be written as:
Minimize U = max + w max (4.10)
where
xmu : Maximum Displacement of the Ground
a nox: Maximum Acceleration of the Ground
x ,: Displacement of the Structure
a , : Acceleration of the Structure
vv: Weighting factor
139
4 3 3 Decision variables
If the M b, r and fx are set to their practical values and d is calculated based on the
optimum value of the Kb and b , the decision parameters in this case become:
R = the radius of concave seats
Kb- the base support stiffness
b = the free gap distance
Here, M b represents additional base mass of the base isolation mechanism at different
locations. The design optimization parameters of the cam-spring system are shown in
Figures (4.19) and (4.20).
FORCE
DEFLECTION
Figure 4.19 Force-displacement characteristics of the spring
141
4.3.4 Constraints
For the best design the following should be taken into consideration:
1)-The constraints for the ground connections can be stated as:
structure. For the different allowable peak values of the relative displacement, the peak
Shear Forces will be different. The constraint on the maximum allowable relative
displacement can be expressed as:
maxjy, - S x(r)| < 0.20 [m] (4.11)
where
y x: The displacement of the lumped masses A/, [m]
6{t) : The ground motion [m]
2)-The constraint on the radius of the concave base support:
2.5 < K < 4 [m] (4.12)
3)-The constraint on the coefficient of the normalized base stiffness:
0 < — = c f <1 (4.13)

K. f
(4.14)
K b —cf K s [N/m] (4.15)
142
4)-Solid spring constraint:
After a certain relative displacement at the support locations, the base spring should
become solid to limit the relative displacement or displacement of the structure.
Accordingly,
when max|y, - <£t(0| ^ 0 .3 0 [m] (4.16)
the boundary conditions become:
x, = <5(f) and x x = - S ( t ) (4.17)
143
ACCELERATION OF BRIDGE (m/sw?) (a)- ACCELERATION OF BRIDGE X io* (b)-TRANSMITTEO FORCE TO BRIDGE
20 30 40 20 30 40
TIME [SflC] TIME [sac!
(c)- DISPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE[XJ (d)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT OF BASE TO THE GROUND

0.15 0.1
0.1
|m)
BRIDGE
0.05
•0.05 -0.05
• 0.1
5-0.15 uj
-0 .2, -0.15
20 50 60
Figure 4.21 The optimized seismic response in x direction with optimized values
= 0.45, d = 0.09 [m] and R = 4 [m]
144
4.3.5 Dynamic Equations of Base Isolated Single Span Bridge in y
direction
The isolated system model is shown in Figure 4.22. The equation of motion of the system
can be written as:
M
— yb + / ^ A f ( * + z6)sgn(y6 - S y(t)) + 2Kly(yb - S y(t)) + K tqy{yb - y . ) = 0 (4.18)
M ..
2
where
48E7.
Figure 4.22 Lumped Mass Model with Spherical Balls-Concave Base Support Isolation
in y direction
145
43.6 Design Optimization:
The main objective for the selection of the main elements of the isolation mechanism in
the y directional motion is minimizing acceleration and displacement response of the
bridge to the earthquake energy to the system and displacement of structure. The
objective function in this case is:
f \
Minimize U = max °2 + W max y z (4.20)
âax V
y max y
where
yaax: Absolute Maximum Displacement of the Ground
Oma: Absolute Maximum Acceleration of the Ground
y2: Absolute Displacement of the Structure
az : Absolute Maximum Acceleration of the Structure
w: Weighting factor
146
(a)- ACCELERATIONOF BRIDGE (b)-TRANSMITTED FORCE TO BRIDGE

0.8 1 x 10 t
*7 0.6 5 . 0.8
Ul
8 0.6 H Ift ft ft
IA . . . . .<. . , A | li !l !l
=. 0.4
a 0.4
0.2 g .
M M i! ' 1 i
Ul ; v II j i i ; i
go 0 n i i ( '
i 1
5 0.2-
l ! i ! i fi i i il m u
2 - 0.2
i" -0.4 ii j ’ '/ VJ J. 1
ii j..i! !i
! • ji j 'i
!- 0.6 ■ i
- 0.6 :-o.8
- 0.8
20
-1 10 20
. .
30 40
i 50. SO
TIME [sac]
(c)> DISPLACEMENT OF BASE \ (d)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT OF BASE TO THE GROLTO
0.15 0.06f
g- 0.04 1
\
6 01 ftI \ § 0 02
>
$ 0.06 .►. . . r[ 1 A !
nr,
\ ■
-r ‘C'
u.
O
i ’ A Tf vT '\r j -0.02 I N
li r' — '
1 i [I / T
1
5UJ■ / -0.04 \
1 ■
2 li
• 0.1 ii'/
'-I v S -0.06 ’t
i!
V
a.
co
1 0.1 -
1
1
- 0.2 - 0.12
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec] TIME [sac]
Figure 4.23 The seismic response of optimum design of base isolated single span bridge
in y direction with optimized values = cf = 0.01, d = 0.07 [m] and R = 4[m]
K.
147
4.3.7 Summary
A long span bridge system is considered. The equivalent lumped mass model of the
system is used for the uncoupled transverse, longitudinal and vertical response analysis.
The simulation results showed that the use o f the proposed optimized isolation
mechanism can reduce the peak accelerations approximately 15 and 20 in the transverse
and longitudinal directions respectively. Also, the maximum transmitted force in
transverse direction can be reduced approximately 25 times by incorporating the
isolation system.
148
CHAPTER-V
5 Seismic Response Analysis of Multi-Span
Conventional and Base Isolated Bridges in the
Transverse Direction and Optimum Design of the
Base
5.1 Abstract
The study reported in this Chapter 5 investigates the feasibility o f developing an active
base isolation system fo r the protection o f multi span bridges subjected to earthquakes.
The proposed system incorporates spherical supports, cams and springs which can be
optimally designed to minimize the transmissibility o f the seismic disturbances to the
bridge structure. The considered example shows that the proposed design is
implementable and can provide an order o f magnitude reduction (approximately 11.5
times in the considered symmetric model and 8 times in the considered non-symmetric
model in the critical pier locations) in the maximum stress resulting from transverse
seismic waves.
149
5.2 Introduction
Bridges are essential for railroad and highway transportation. When they are built in
seismic sensitive regions, their structural design requires special consideration. The latest
earthquakes, Kobe in Japan and California in U.S.A, attracted attention that some new
technologies need to be developed to protect such structures from the effect of strong
earthquakes. The event in Kobe showed that several base isolated structures could not
resist the earthquake.
The seismic response analysis and base isolation of bridges are studied by many
researchers. A displacement based conventional earthquake resistant design of multi
degree of freedom bridge systems was investigated by Calvi and Kingsley [40]. An
experimental study utilizing a Frictional Pendulum System (FPS) in bridge seismic
isolation was investigated by P. Tsopelas and M.C.Constantinou [41]. The isolation
mechanism is installed between the deck and the pier and ground connections. Their
experimental results showed that the transmitted inertia forces and displacements can be
substantially reduced by incorporation of the FPS. Another study by using the FPS for the
protection of bridges against earthquakes was done by Wang, Chung and W.Liao [42], A
three span bridge was considered for the analysis of the sliding supported structures
under harmonic and earthquake disturbances. The use of the Steel rubber composite
(High Damper Rubber Bearings) in bridge systems was investigated by RJankowski,
K.Wilde, YPujino[43]. For the response analysis, a non-linear five-degree of freedom
bridge model was considered in the Transverse and Longitudinal directions under
150
different ground excitations. They found that collision is a critic factor on the structural
response especially in the longitudinal direction and that the response depends on the gap
size between the segments. Active control of bridges with a hybrid control system under
seismic excitations was studied by Yang and Yu [44]. They showed that the use of a
combination of active control (actuators) and passive isolation systems (Rubber bearings
or Frictional Sliding Systems) can be beneficial bridges under strong earthquakes. Two
different combinations (rubber and actuators and rubber and sliding mechanism) were
considered and a Continuos Active Sliding Mode Control strategy was presented for the
seismic response analysis. Symans and Kelly [45] investigated the fuzzy logic control of
bridge structures using intelligent semi active seismic isolation systems. Their results
show that both passive and active isolation mechanisms with supplemental energy
dissipation devices can be effective in reducing the seismic response and that intelligent
semi active systems can control the maximum displacement of the decks. Fadali and El-
Zayyat [46] studied the disturbance rejection control of bridges under earthquake
excitations. The longitudinal motion was analyzed for seismic response. Their simulation
results show that the bridge deck displacements can be reduced to less than 0.015 m with
use of large control forces and the final design can be selected based on a compromise
between the magnitude of required forces and displacements. Other significant
contributions to this subject can be found in references 3-50.
151
5.3 System Model
A new system for improving the seismic protection of multi span bridges is proposed in
this chapter. A general model of the bridge is shown in the Figure (5.1) for the analysis of
highway and railroad bridges. The piers are rigidly attached to the ground. Also, the
decks are rigidly pinned to the piers. The system is assumed to be free to move in the
longitudinal (x) direction at the two ends. In order to formulate the dynamic equations,
the lumped mass model shown in the Figure (5.2) is used. The lumped mass distribution
of the system is given in the mass matrix format in equation 10. In this model, the system
is represented by 12 masses. The stiffness matrix given in Equation (5.13) is found by
using a finite element analysis as given in details in Appendix-C. For the input
disturbances the following considerations are made:
1)- The input forcing function is a spatial variable at the piers depending upon geological
and geometrical heterogeneities ( s f : Soil fa c to r), finite velocity of wave propagation
and wave source type (Ref.64) as well as considering the phase difference at the different
pier locations using the relationship:
M =- (5.1)
c
where I : The distance between piers
c : The velocity of the wave propagation
c = 1000 [m/sec] (Ref.52)
2)- The different directional seismic inputs in the in the transverse y and in the
longitudinal x direction are studied separately.
Lumped mass model of the bridge system model
Figure 5.2
154
5.4 Properties of the bridge:
The bridge considered in this investigation is described in Ref.(40,41). Its main
parameters are:
5.4.1 Deck dimensions:
iOm
x 1.23
0.6
3.75 m
y
Figure 5.4 Deck properties of the bridge Ref.[40,41]
Ad : Area of the deck
I ^ : Area moment of inertia of the deck to the x-x axis
I ^ : Area moment of inertia of the deck to the y-y axis
£,.2.3.4 : Span lengths
£ ,, 3 n = : Lengths of the decks between two lumped masses
Ed : Elasticity modules of the deck material
155
5.4.2 Pier dimensions:

4m
X 0.4 2 m,
Figure 5.5 Pier properties of the bridge Ref.[40,41]
Ap : Area of the pier
l^ p : Area moment of inertia of the pier to the x-x axis
1^ : Area moment of inertia of the pier to the y-y axis
m p: Unit per mass of the piers
H l z 3: Height of the piers
£ p: Elasticity modules of the pier material
Numerical values of the deck properties:
Ad =7.46 [m2]
= 13.58 [m4]
156
lyyd = 42[/n4]
md = 18650
m
L, = L, = Ly = L4: Span lengths = 75 [m]
£ d =34.5109 [ 4 r ]
m'
Numerical values of the pier properties:
A.p = 4.16[m J]
I jop = 0.67[m4]
/ w =7.39[m 4]
m . = 10400 [— ]
m
/ / li3 =14,21,14 [m]
E =34.510’ t-^ rJ
m"
157
5.5 Equations of Motion of the lumped model in the transverse
direction
The dynamic equations for the system response can be developed as follows:
.. Y2EA, l2E dl . 6EdI d . 6EdI d _

+ - = ^ - y , — = ^ - y 2 +^ = r ~ 0 t + ^ r - O z = 0 (5.2)
"i “i “i
24Edl d \2Edl d \2Edl d 6Edl d 6Edl d

+ — = i— yz — =i — — = 1 — ^3 + y r ~ °i — f 1 - 1 ” (5.3)
L, L, Ly L,
f 12E ,/, Y2Edl d l2EpI p N

**3*3 V - ™ iL y J J L L y J J E tL s
a ’ y> z;! * l 1 y‘ «,> ' (5.4)
v l2 ^ ' « v 12* A v , 6E^ Q 6£A Q -0 (5.5)

M*y*+- y*— zj~ — zj~ ~z7~ — TF~ -
f Y2Edl d , 12Edl d V2E?l p \ 12E ,/, Y2EdI d Y2E I
A/5y5 + + ■" — +
Lj3 f f , 3 y ’ — z r y‘ - — y’ — t r s »
(5.6)
Êdl d n 6EdI d 6Edl d a 6EdI d
A1 v v | ^ E dI d \2Edl d ^ E dI d _ &Edl d g —q (5.7)

M 6y6 — = j — y5 + - -3 y6 — f T - y 7 + r : — = r~
L} Lj L} Lj L}
'1 2 ^ 12£^ 12V ' l2 £ d/„ \2Edl d 12E l e

A f 7y 7 + r* 1 ' •» yi =3 ^ 6 ------=T “ y 8 ----- 771— °>*
L43 « 33 (5.8)
- ^ 4 ^ 0 1 + ^ r ~ 0 7 + ^ 4 L 0» = o
E.
158
~ . 2 4 E rf/ rf 12E dI d \2 E dl d . 6 E dl d „ 6E dl d „
A f8y 8 + - 3 - y g --------- f 3 = j * + “ = ^ 2 * 9 j T ~ Q1 = 0 (5.9)
L*^ X 1^4 1^4 1^4
\2 E dl d \2 E dI d 6 E dI d 6 E dl d
M 9y 9 +—=3— >9---- =-}— y* T*~ * T*~ 9 (5.10)
L, Ly Lx Lt
, x 6 E dId 6 E dId A E dI d „ 2E dl d „ „
I*, A + ^ = r - y i — = r - y z + - ^ H - 0* + ^ = ^ - 0 z = o ( 5 .1 1 )
.. 6 E dI d 6 E dl d 2 E dl d A E dI d 2 E dl d
my2 2 + > 1 --------- = 2 ^3 +~ f ------» l + ~ f ------° Z + f °Z (5.12)
L, L, 1-1 M
, * . 6 E ,/, 6 E ,/, . 6 E ,/, 6EdI d

1^ 93+-^f-yz
t»j
— X=M-y3
-|
+-fr~y
to
3— f r - ^ +
2 ^ * +i ^ , 3+ 1 ^ 03 +i ^ 03 = 0 ( 5 .1 3 )
t, I, Lj 3 L, * p H x 3
/ fl 1 ^ d^d v ^ dI d 2Erf/ rf - Ê dl d 2Erf/ rf ( 5 .1 4 )

my4 4 ~ l j ~ Z j ~ L, L, L ,~ ~
I
6 E J,
R I — <,‘ d v v
6” Êd Jl ,d
'myS6^ + ^ 2 >4---- =Y “ >5 + , f T ^v -------------- +
Ln2 to t-3
2 E ,/, „ 4 £ ,/, „ AEdl d 2 E dId „ 1 A & G
1 d f l , 4- - d 0, 4 i ‘' f t 4 — = M - 0 . 4 ---------- 2------9 , = 0 (5 .1 5 )
t, L, 3 t, 3 tj p H z '
x 6 E dl d 6 E dl d 2E dl d A E dl d 2 E dI d
my6 6 4 ■ — — >s = T “ + ~ T °5 + ~ f + f U1 (5.16)
L, L,
6E J 6 £„/ 6 E dJl d 6 E dJMd

lmyi91 + ^ V - y 6 - z^ T - y n + ^ = T - y i
2 E dI d a l AEdl d a ^ AE dl d _ 2E dl d Q ^ 1 A 9 ;G
4 _ (9 , 4 - ^ — g7 4 -J - a 4 07 =C (5.17)
t-2 E3 7 t, 7 t4 P « 3
159
I fi i ^ d^d v ^ d^d v I ^ dl d q 2E(f/ << (5.18)

/ m,80s + f — yn — y T ~ y * +~ t — 1 T— 8+ ^ r 9~
L4 La L.X L>4 L4
f a . Ê dl d Ê ^/j 4EdI d „ 2Edl d

‘ my? 9 + - 2 >8----- = T " ^ + —f 9 ~T 8 ~ (5.19)
L4 ^ 4 L4 4
^yl = ^l» &y2 = yiO»^y3 = ^ 1 1 >^y4 = ^ U ^ y S ~ ^9 (5.20)
where l d = 1 ^ and l p = l m
160
5.5.1 The Mass Matrix
Figure 5.6 The distribution of lumped masses for the transverse directional motion
Because of the nature of the connections between the ground and the bridge, the response
of the lumped masses M ,, M 9 , M I0, M ,, and M 12 will be same as the given El Centro
earthquake disturbance. The response of the lumped masses M z, M 3, M 4, M s , M 6, M-.
and M g is investigated for the given El-Centro earthquake. The mass matrix of the
system in this case can be expressed as:
M. 0 0 0 0 0 00 0
0 M, 0 0 0 0 00 0
0 0 m30 0 0 00 0
0 0 0 M4 0 0 00 0
0 0 0 0 Ms 0 00 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 m7 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mg 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M
161
The mass matrix of the system in the parametric format can be written as:
L, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
mA—
r \ \
0 m. L, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
V /
n n( L, H,
0 0 md — + mB—- + m ,— 0 0 0 0 0 0
V d4 p 2 d 4
( L, 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 mA
f L_: H, h. 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
md“4r +mP ^ f +m<1 4
( \3\
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2
L, H,
0 0 0 0 0 0 md —3 + «„ —- + m, — 0 0
4 p 2 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
L4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(5.22)
162
5.5.2 Coordinate reduction
By assuming that the lumped masses are point masses, the rotational mass moment inertia
can be neglected. The equivalent mass matrix of the system in the parametric format can
be written as:
^ myl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 ^ my1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 ^ myi 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 Any4 0 0 0 0 0
*my = 0 0 0 0 I my5 0 0 0 0 (5.23)

0 0 0 0 0 ^ my6 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 Any7 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ my% 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 / Tty 9
my! *^ my2’ Any3*f myi ’ AnyS »^ myft * my7 ’ ^myS ^ my9 (5-24)
The equation of motion of the system is:
[ M llK y M K n lM - [ * „ ] $ } = « (5.25)
L M + [K „]{*k £>} (5-26)
In the matrix format:
[Mil] |6] ' 1*1 [at.,1 [*r,J y

Jo. [i..l [0j .[«:,] [Tal e 0 (5.27)
Assuming that Imy = [o] for the lumped masses,

By using equation (5.27) the following coordinate reduction can be made:
(528)
163
By substituting into equation (5.27)
(5.29)
[M ll]{yM *]{y}={0} (5.30)
The corresponding numerical values for the stiffness matrix K for the considered system
can be written as:
1.0433- 0.3982-0.1099 0.0294-0.0077 0.0020-0.0005

-0.3982 2.0481-0.3666 -0.1224 0.0320-0.0085 0.0020
-0.1099 -0.3666 0.9169 -0.3640-0.1203 0.0320-0.0077
[ * L =(10ef009) 0.0294 -0.1224-0.3640 1.2543-0.3640-0.1224 0.0294 [N/m]
-0.0077 0.0320-0.1203 -0.3640 0.9169-0.3666-0.1099
0.0020 -0.0085 0.0320 -0.1224-0.3666 2.0481-0.3982
-0.0005 0.0020-0.0077 0.0294-0.1099-0.3982 1.0433
(5.31)
The corresponding numerical values of the lumped masses for this symmetric system
model in the matrix format can be written as:
699375 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 753455 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 699375 0 0 0 0
[ M llL , = 0 0 0 780495 0 0 0 [kg] (5.32)
0 0 0 0 699375 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 753455 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 699375
164
5.5.3 The Forcing Function
The seismic force transmitted to structures is a function of the properties of the
connecting parts to the ground. The input forcing vector in this case can be stated as:
12E„ld g
7*3 °yl
n E ’ 1 - x
~hT ”
0
(5.33)
3 yi
Hz
0
h ^ 3* y*
4
Hz
12Edl d
— t ^ ys
where,
S yl = 6 yl = <5y3 = <5y4 = 6 yS represent the Ei-Centro earthquake as given in Figure (5.7).
150i
100
UJ o
-10(3
-1 5 0 J
20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac]
Figure 5.7 El Centro earthquake (S00E component)
5.5.4 The Stiffness Matrix
[ 12^/J 0 0
V J>1 I v J
12£,/J |24tywl 12£,// 0 0 0 0
L V J*iL v \ » I V
0 0 0 0 0
V Li V V * Jj
r i^ // '2 4 E , / , ' _12
0 0
L v \h I V \ u
V
y 12^//
0 0 0 JJE iL '
0 0 0
/- h L ^ J
0 0 f \ 2*e M r ‘2^/j 0 0
J)> L V \ h L ^ J
0 0 0 0 0 [ fl2£,/, f l2£,/,,l2£,/,l f 12v*l
[ V \ >. C J. L L*
0 0 0 \ i2eM \ 24eM \ i2eM
. ^ .h L L! \h[ V
0 0 0 0 JJM .
i:
(5.34)
If the terms y , and y9 are chosen as the reference points of the system motion, the first row and column will drop.
cn
cn
166
in
rn
in
167
1
£1
ft? 1*? i- j
1fN 1
ft? l*J
<N _i 1r £1 -ia
-i£ *4“
ft?
ft? 1*? «S
1*4" “i£ 1Tj" 1
<N o
1 1
r ------1 a: r1 ** £1
O ° © °
1 1 a. ft? l*J*
ft? 1*4*
t
<N
1 1*4 * 1<N I
>v 5f
1 SS + ft? 1*4*
1 I ■*r
ft? 1*4* O f t? 1*4 *
i A1 a :’ Tf
1*4"
1
■*7 — ft. £
ft? i^ r as
”1 + 1
1rs ■
ft? i^r i^ r f t? 1*4" 1 1
tT ST fS
1 __ -i
1 £i + -h *4*
ta f t? 1*4"
cs
af i^r i-j* 1 ____1
1
Ai V ST 1 1
—< ft.
l* j- + £1
c*?
CN *«. 1
1 i 1*4* *4*
ft? i^r
Tt ft? f t? 1*4 *
£ + (N <N
1___ ___ 1
1 ■
*?
f t? 1*4* ft? 1*4 -
1----- " "1 1 Tf 1
H-
1*4*
CN f t? 1*4- i ss
i i n-
i ■
1
SH
I i Ai tsft? 1*4 -
1______ 1
1*4*
f t? 1*4-
r* 1 t n ____i
(5.36)
5.5.5 Differential equation of the system in the matrix format
The dynamic motion of the system model can therefore be written in the matrix format as follows:
yi
1
J*
AfjO 0 0 0 0 0" % *23 *24 *25 *26 *27 *28 ' V
H, *
0 M3 0 0 0 0 0 % *32 *33 *34 *35 *36 *37 *38 >3
0
0 0 M4 0 0 0 0 % *42 *43 *44 *45 *46 *47 *48 y4
0 0 0 M5 0 0 0 % •+ *52 *53 *54 *55 *56 *57 *58 >5 3 °yi
h2
0 0 0 0 M6 0 0 % (5.37)
*62 *63 *64 *65 *66 *67 *68 >6
0
00 0 0 0 m7 0 h *72 *73 *74 *75 *76 *77 *78 yi
12E J d
00 0 0 0 0 Mg *82 *83 *84 *85 *86 *87 *88 . y*. — ^3 6uy4
" 3
12E J d «
-3 u yS
(5.38)
where [C]: The structural damping matrix, [C] = 0

169
5.6 The seismic response in the transverse direction of the
conventionally designed symmetric system model

A symmetric conventionally designed bridge as shown in Figure (5.8) is considered for
illustration. In this case = L, = L ^ - Li =15 [m] and H x^ =14,21,14 [m] for the
system model. The first four natural frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes for
this system are given in Figure (5.9).

(SmanljL, i . {bnuanol.
^ Mi
Figure 5.8 The symmetric bridge model considered for the seismic response analysis
NORMALIZEDMOOE SHAPES
-m - MODE #1(wn1=21.5r/s)
- 4 - MODE #2(wnz=31.5 i/s)
- 0 - MODE #3(wn3=36.6 i/s)
Figure 5.9 Normalized mode shapes and resonance frequencies in the transverse
directional motion of the symmetric system model
170
Figure (S. 10) shows the acceleration response at the different masses in the system.
Figure (S. 11) shows the displacement-time response in the transverse (y) direction at the
9 lumped mass locations on the bridge.
Figure (S. 12) shows the time history of the relative displacements between the different
locations.
Figure (5.13) shows the absolute peak acceleration values at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figure (5.14) shows the absolute peak displacements at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figure (5.15) shows the magnitude of the peak relative displacement between the
different locations.
Figure (5.16) shows the calculated peak force values acting on the structural sides at the
Figure (5.17) shows the calculated peak force values acting on the structural sections at
the different locations.
Figure (5.18) shows the calculated peak bending moments acting at the different sides.
Figure (5.19) shows the calculated peak bending moments acting at the different sections.
Figure (5.20) shows the calculated maximum stresses at the different sides.
Figure (5.21) shows the calculated maximum stresses at the different sections.
171
(A-1yACCELERATIONOFMASSS1 (A-2)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#2
I ’ ] T H "! ■”
t
|
1.1 | i 1
Ii
Si . H I III Li u 1
co
co T l l l l l i i u i 11It .f lit
i
i byL*
u.
O
z ‘
o : r f m f
<'
cUJ.
LU 0 r i
o . 4 ” !... . t..........—r ......... -i
< 1 1 J _____
20 X 40
(A-3)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#3 (A-4y ACCELERATION OF MASS44
£.2
-6
20 60 30
(A-5)- ACCELERATION OF MASSDS (A-6)- ACCELERATION OF MASSK6
ij 1 1 1
! |
1 i
1 . 1
co m ii m,\ . I i kbi :
CO JUL Jill It i t illLIIL i ‘
-2 s
z-
2 H I|
t
t
I ::
| :
i :
oQ { I
I !
20 10 20 30 40 50 60
172
(A-7)- ACCELERATION OF MASS47 (A-8>- ACCELERATION OF MASS48
I j 'T — | ii![ 1! '

1.2 { j J
1
S i l l li I i 11. |
to 1
|
to
nr 1i j
~t| j i
.
20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 60
(A-9)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«9
Z0
Ui
50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 5.10 Acceleration-time response of each lumped mass
173
(B-1)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS*1 (B-2>- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«2

0.1& 0.15
0.1 — 0.1
S
« 0.05 CO 0.05
-0.05
o .0.1 O -0.1
2-0.15 co-0.15
- 0.2 - 0.2
20 30 40 50
(B-3)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS43 (B-4)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS*4
0.15 0.15i
t
1j
0.1
« 0.05 co
4
03 i /'rr-"*c /
!!; i
J
*
\
Y r-T -y "
' 1 ,
V
p
> i J
! /
5-0.05 Z -0.05
UJ
i\ \ i \ i
i l
O -0.1 ^ -0.1 W - ■ v
'!
co-0.15
30 40 10 3020 40 50 60
(B-5)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«S (B-6h DISPLACEMENT OF MASSM6
0.15i 0.15l
0.1 0.1
o> 0.05 - co 0.06 “
5-0.05
O -0.1 O -0.1
co -0.15 - co-0.15 -
50 50
174
(B-7>- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#7 (8-8)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#8

0.1 a 0.15)
(m]
0.1 •=• 0.1

DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«7
0.05 %005 "

u.
Z-0.05
• 0.1 O -0.1
<2-0.15
30 60
(B-9y DISPLACEMENT OF MASS49
0 . 15 |
i
M. o.i i
2 A
<o /! /i A r
<0 0.05 ! /
S \ L j , „ / ^ ...r..... ,
' ' i / u i'XT ]/
11 1
i i i / J
5-0.0
ui
zUi
o -o.i i \ U VI
0. i
1
i
0.2
■
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 5.11 Displacement-time response of each lumped mass
175
0.01
(C-1>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT mg; (C-2)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
-0.005
ui
UI
9;-0.005 •
u i -2
•0.01
Ui
•0.015
20 30 50
TIME [MCI TIME [ M C |
(C-3>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT «10 (CM)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0 .02|
S. 0.015 1 .2
ui
ui
Mb.<4*
-0.015
20 30 SO
TIME [ m c ] TIME[m c ]
„ 1QJ (C-5)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-6)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.0151
E. 1 0.01
> 0.005 -
Z
U
2I
ui
30. -0.005
ca
a
d -0.015
c
10 20 30 40 50 60 30 40 50
TIME[m c I TIME [seel
176
(C-8)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

»10' (0 7 )- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
0.015
1
0.01
0»
5 O.OOS
ui
in UI
i
a.
to
S
ui
>
§UI'
E
0.01
20 40 SO
■
10 20 X 40 50 60
TIME [s =l
(010)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
«10 (C-9)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
0.025
e. 0.02
- '0 .0 1 5
i
sUI L i |u
§
to -4 * FI1
Ui - 0.01
> •€-
: -0.015
' 1
-10< 40 SO 60 -0.025
10 20 X 40 X SO
TIME [a
„ 10-3 (C-11)■RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
ui
•€ “
-1(7
X
TIME [sac]
Figure S.12 Relative displacement between the lumped masses
177
(D-1VPEAK ACCELERATIONS
co
co
i
3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5

ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m/sec2!
Figure 5.13 Absolute peak accelerations of the lumped masses
(D-2J-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
0.114 0.116 0.118 0.12 0.122

PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF MASSES [m]
Figure 5.14 Absolute peak displacements of the lumped masses
178
(D*3)-ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT
10 -
z
o
h“
o
UJ
CO
0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025

MAXtABSO^-Y^)] [m]
Figure 5.15 Peak relative displacements between the two lumped masses
(D-4)-MAXIMUM FORCES
25
UJ
Q
co
MAXIMUM FORCES [N] x 10®
Figure 5.16 Peak forces in the sides
179
(D*5)*MAXIMUM FORCES
z
o
h
o
UJ
CO
MAXIMUM FORCES [N] .6

x 10
Figure 5.17 Peak forces in the sections
(D-6)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
UJ
a
CO
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.m] 7

x 10
Figure 5.18 Peak moments in the sides
180
z
o
►—
oUJ
CO

x 10
Figure 5.19 Peak moments in the sections
(D-8)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
20 ►
15-
UJ
g
CO
5 -
0.5 1.5
7
MAXIMUM STRESSES [N/m2] x 10
Figure 5.20 Peak stresses in the sides
181
(D-9)-MAXIMUM STR ESSES
Ui
0.5 1 1.5
MAXIMUM STRESSES [N/m2] x 10,7
Figure 5.21 Peak stresses in the sections
182
5.7 The seismic response of the conventionally designed non-
symmetric system model
A schematic representation of the system in this case is shown in Figure (5.22). It can be
seen that the nature of the site requires that the piers and the span lengths be constructed
in a non-symmetric manner in order to accommodate the topology. The dimensions and
the material properties of the piers and decks are the same as the previous symmetric case
except for the span lengths and the pier heights. The parameters for the discrete system
model are:The span lengths:
L, =10 [m]
L, = 72 [m]
^ = 7 4 [m]
Lx = 69 [m]
The pier heights:
= 21 [m]
H 2 = 17 [m]
H, = 19 [m]
The first four natural frequencies and the corresponding normalized mode shapes of this
system are given in Figure (5.23).
183
The corresponding numerical values of the lumped masses for the non-symmetric bridge
5275 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 7.4319 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 6.7140 0 0 0 0
Afu = l.0e + 005 0 0 0 7.4639 0 0 0 [kg] (5.39)
0 0 0 0 6.9005 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 7.4013 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 6.4342
The stiffness matrix for the non-symmetric bridge model can be written as:
1.2869 -0.4957 -0.1396 0.0348 -0.0088 0.0024 -0.0006

-0.4957 1.4321 -0.4085 -0.1384 0.0350 -0.0096 0.0025
-0.1314 -0.4087 1.0460 -0.4172 -0.1300 0.0355 -0.0093
Kn = 1.0e+009 0.0348 -0.1384 -0.4194 1.6258 -0.3727 -0.1327 0.0348 [N/m] (5.40)
-0.0088 0.0350 -0.1295 -0.3727 0.9493 -0.3670 -0.1287
0.0024 -0.0096 0.0354 -0.1327 -0.3670 1.5329 -0.5264
-0.0006 0.0025 -0.0093 0.0348 -0.1287 -0.5264 1.3460
Mx k1 L M -k h — M, — ^ M
|/ 4 2 ***■(■ 4 j , 4 ■!■ 2 4 A 4 -|. 2 ■!■ 4 A 4.]. ^
77 7 7 7 7 7 7
Figure 5.22 The non-symmetric bridge model for the dynamic response analysis
184
NORMALIZED MOOE SHAPES

MODE #1(wn)=21.58 t l s )
MODE #2(w(C=29.43 r/s)
a- - 0 - MODE #30*^=39.59 rfs)
•0.5 0 .5 1.5 as
Figure 5.23 Normalized mode shapes and resonance frequencies in the transverse
direction of the non-symmetric model
It is assumed that the input disturbances in this case are to be same all ground locations.
The system response for this analysis is calculated for the following earthquake
disturbance:
6 = 6 y l = 6 y2= 6 y3= 6 y i = 6 yS (5.41)
i50r
100
% -50
-10<
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 5.24 6 : The ground displacement of El-Centro earthquake (SOOE component)
185
The computed time history for the transverse accelerations, absolute displacements at the
different locations and the relative displacements between the masses in the sections are
given in Figures-5.25-36 respectively.
Figure (5.25) shows the acceleration response at the different masses in the system.
Figure (5.26) shows the displacement-time response in the transverse (y) direction at the
Figure (5.27) shows the time history of the relative displacements between the different
locations.
Figure (5.28) shows the absolute peak acceleration values at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figure (5.29) shows the absolute peak displacements at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figure (5.30) shows the magnitude of the peak relative displacement between the
186
(A-!)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#1 (A-2)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#2

t
! i
i
t
1 I
I f
*2 SI
to
<0
H --------- -
Z 0
i. i
UJ n !H t
\
0-2 UJ
o*
t
•1
o< \
i
30 40 60 10 X 20 40 50 60
(A-3)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#3 (A-4y ACCELERATION OF MASS#4
-2
CE-4
■€H-r
20 X 40 50
(A-5)* ACCELERATION OF MASS#5 (A-6 )- ACCELERATION OF MASS46
8 -------------.-------------
I I i
I
Xfi
m 6t 1
CO
CO 4ill 1
t f | | ■ [
Ll
1 :i 1 U I
1
(
i
L ^
IF ! 1
■ r, 1
i
$
i .. .
1 f
aUI.
o
o
1
1 * V 1|
10 20 30 40 50 60
187
(A-7>- ACCELERATION OF MASS*7 ( M y ACCELERATION OF MASS#8
~7 4
<-2
rr
UJ
20 40 20 30 40
TIME [MCI TIME [sec]
(A-9)- ACCELERATION OF MASS49 (A-10y ACCELERATION OF MASS«10
i
s
CO
co
1
s
1
oc » Ml
aui-
2
o 11'
<-3.
10 20 30 40 50 60 40 SO
(A-11)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«11 (A-12)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#12
—. 4j
3-
CM
CO
UL.
uj -2
< -3 < -3
20 30 60 30 50 60
TIME [soc] TIME [sec]
Figure 5.25 Acceleration response of each lumped mass
188
(B-1)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS*1 (B-2)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«2

0.15
0.1
8 <>.< /\ .
2 0.05 T ' 7
f fi
/ \> r
I J 4 -V f" V - V/. r J\
1/ \ V
-0.05 ZJ I
%
UI il
O -0.1
§
<0-0.15 §j-0.'
s
50 60 10 30
20 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
(B-3)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASSA3 (B-4)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS»4
0.15i 0.15|
— 0.1 — 0.1
5
2 0.05 2 0.05-
S -0.1 o -0.1
50 40 60
(8-5)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«5 (B-6V DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#6
0.15 0.15|
— 0.1 0.1
in
2 0.05 2 0.05-
Z-0.05 5-0.05
O -0.1 o -0.1
5)-0.15 35-0.15 -
-0.2 60 40 50 60
189
(B-7> DISPLACEMENT OP MASS#7 (B-fl)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASSM8

0.15 0.15|
£■ 0.1
0.05
s
to l\|\ A *
52 to
i 11 !S r
1 i \h r * .y rtf. ,
\f
*
Z-0.05 :-0.05
*UJ
1/ . / \ r V
§
CL
2 - 0 .1 5
10 20 30 40 50 60
(B-9)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASSS9
0.15
E 0.1
S I // A
I .! 1y •\ j!i \J/ .“M [/r
1
1
5 - 0 .0 1/
III 'J 'i
ui
2U J _
0.
-0.21 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [seel
Figure 5.26 Displacement of each lumped mass during the earthquake
190
(C-1)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT x1Q« (C-2)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.015)
0.01 ,6 -
tu Ui
2 2
-0.005
uj -0.01 -2 -
-0.015 “
•0.02
20
TIME [sec]
„ , q -3 (C -3h RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-4)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
001
"M.0.006
> 0.006
- 0.004
0.002
•0.004
5
£ -0 .0 0 8
50 60 20 30 40
TIME [sec]
(C-5)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-6)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
1 .0 .0 0 6
j
0.01
ti
0.01
1 .0 .0 0 6
-a
£-0.00* J 1 1 Ji
| Jl 0.002 LiiiJ s
ui
1
5 • n IPFH I
**—
i|| m • i 'ip Ii 3a .-
co
-0.0041
1 2-0.0041
5
£ -0 .0 0 6
r
IÎ |M
I £-o.c
-0.006
- L10 _____ _____

0.01
20 30 40 50 60
■0.01 »
10 20 X 40 50 60
191
«10' (C-7)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.02
_ 0.015
0.01
UJ UJ
2 0.005
O-t
-a u,-0.005 >
-0.015
20 40
time [seel
(C-Sh RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-10)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
0.02 0.015)
“ 0.015 0.01
•« 0.01
Z
UJ
0.005 UJ
UJ
3-0.005 ■
-0.005
2 0.01
-0.01 > -
-0.015 3-0.015
-0.02,
20 -0.02* 30
TIME [see] TIME [seel
0.015)
0.01
S. 0.005
^•0.005 j
—
S
> -001 "
3-0.015 -
S
-0.02 r 40 50 60
Figure 5.27 Relative displacement between the lumped masses
192
(D-1)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
*
<0
CO
ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [nVsec2!
(D-2)-PEAK DISPLACEM ENTS
co
co
<
2
0.116 0.118 0.12 22

PEAK DISPLACEMENT O F M A SSE
S SE S [m]
(D-3)-ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT
111 I “
0.005 0.015 0.02

M A X fA B SfY ^,)] [m]
Figure 5JO Peak relative displacements between two lumped masses
25
20
UJ
MAXIMUM FORCES [N] x 10®
Figure 531 Peak transmitted forces in the sides
194
S
g
UJ
CO
MAXIMUM FO R CES [N] .6

x 10
Figure 532 Peak transmitted forces in the sections
UJ

x 10
Figure 533 Peak moments in the sides
195
z
O
o
UJ
(0
14
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.m] ,7
x 10
(D-S)-MAXIMUM S T R E S S E S
......... w
............
UJ L.
Q
V) 1 ___
*.... - .....
^ I ;
............ 1 W
0.5 1.5 2.5

MAXIMUM S T R E S S E S [N/m2] x 10
Figure 5 3 5 Peak stresses in the sides
196
z
o
h
o
UJ
CO
0.5 1.5 2.5

.7
Figure 536 Peak stresses in the sections
197
5.8 The seismic response of the conventionally designed, non-
symmetric, spatially input variable system model and
response analysis in the transverse direction

In some cases, the input forcing function can be a spatial variable at the piers and the
deck connections depending upon geological and geometrical heterogeneities, finite
velocity of wave propagation and wave source type. A general system model for this
analysis is shown in Figure (5.37). The dimensions and material properties are the same
as those for the non-symmetric case except the input disturbances. In this case the input
disturbances in the locations (1,3, and 5) as given in Figure (5.38).
<*,. = '5,, =<5,5 <5-42)
Figure 5 3 7 The spatially variable input in the transverse direction
198
The inputs at the locations 2 and 4 as shown in Figure (5.38) have different
characteristics. The local disturbances at the locations 1,2,3,4 and 5 have the spatially
variable input disturbances shown in Figure (5.37).
GROUND DISPLACEMENTS GROUND DISPLACEMENT

0.15 0.15j
0.1
h
k / l\ 1 A K A
11
111 !\ ' I'D ..
1 / r ill 1' 1f \\ ! ] \Vj v ' r
y
/
JL
/ If / y J
1 \ !
J
;
JL
I'l V i -0.1 W
i
\i
*r i )
V
-o.: -0.2' 10 20 30 40 50 60
GROUND DISPLACEMENT
0.1
\
r
/ \1I 1!11v\ 1I1ft IV iV rj\1
0.05
.../
? °
°Vo5 i \ 1/ 1 / 1 i \\li
-0.1
If! V V
•0.15
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 538 The assumed spatially variable local ground displacements of El-Centro
earthquake (SOOE component)
199
5.8.1 The seismic response of the system model to the inputs

The seismic response of the system model to the inputs is given in the following figures:
Figure (S.39) shows the acceleration-time response at the considered 12 lumped mass
locations.
Figure (5.40) shows the displacement-time response in the transverse (y) direction at the
Figure (5.41) shows the time history of the relative displacements between the lumped
masses.
Figure (5.42) shows the peak acceleration values at the different lumped mass locations.
Figure (5.43) shows the absolute maximum displacements at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figure (5.44) shows the absolute magnitude of the maximum relative displacement
between two lumped masses.
200
(A-1)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#1 (A-2)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#2
*2
-2
10 20 30 40 50
TIME [sec] TIME[sec]
(A-3)- ACCELERATION OF MASSS3 (A-4)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«4
. (........
I I i1
III J j 1 '
L.A
m f r ^r
: I 1
aUI
UJ 1 1 ..... t ......
ii
8'r . . ;
30 40 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
(A-S)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#5 (A-6 H ACCELERATION OF MASS#6
. ! |
i 1
in $
«
<0 2 CD
m - (0 L.....J 1 i
i
1
r*
E — 1
< II | | j |
t
E . i■ ii i
uJ-4
aUJ t
i
t
\
O- II • i E
2 _____
30 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
201
(A-7)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«7 (A-8>- ACCELERATION OF MASS«8
8 3-
2-1
£-2
ui
30 40 40
TIME [SflCl TIME [sec]
(A-9)- ACCELERATION OF MASS49 (A-10)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#10
2 0
i—
40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40
(A-11)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#11
33
2 -
40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 539 The acceleration-time response o f the lumped masses
202
(A-12)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«12 (B-1 h DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«1

0.15
1! 0.1
I
co 0.05
e/> tii |
I
a
ui
O -0.1
c 30.
aUl. "2-0.15
§ 0.2
10 20 30 40 50 60
■
50
(B-2)* DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#2 (B-3h DISPLACEMENT OF MASSS3
0.15 0.15)
— 0.1 •i- 0.1

CM 2
co 0.05k
« 0.05 co ^
Tt tUrAl
u.
Z-0.05 Z-0.05 V
£
O -0-1 O -0.1
3 T
co-0.15 CO -0.15
O
- 0.2
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [S6C]
(B-4)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«4 (B-5)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS45
0.15 0.15|
— 0.1
co 0.05 -
LL.
5-0.05 Z-0.05
ui
O -0.1 O -0.1
c/j -0.15
20 30 40 20 30 60
203
(B-«)- DISPLACEMENT OP MASS46 (S-7Y DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«7
0.02
- 0.02
20 30 -0-1, 30
TIME [seel TIME [seel
(B-fl)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«8 (B-9h DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#9
0.1 0.15
0.1
0.05
co 0.05
u.
Z-0.05
Ui
o -0.1
<0-0.15
- 0.1
20 50
-0.2, 20 40
Figure 5.40 Displacement-time response of the lumped masses
204
(C-1)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT x 10-» (C-2)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.0151
0.01
> 0.006
Ui
O0
•0.006
uj - 0 .0 1
> -4
SJ-0.015 ►
0 .02' SO
20 30 40 SO 60 30 40 60
TIME [MCj TIME [sac]
x , 0-3 (C-3)- relative displacem ent (C-4)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
0.015
0.01
0.005
UJ 4
2ui
O 0. UJ
ui
0-0.005
U
>J
5UJ -0.01
UJ
-0.015
40 60 20 40
TIME [sac]
(OS)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (0 6 )- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.02 0.0151
I 0.015
0.01
• - 0.01
0.006
z 0.006
3-0.006
Q
UI
0-0.006
UJ
> -0.01
3-0.015
-0.02* 60 -0015
40 50 60
205
(C-7> RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-8)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.01
0.005
001
0» ui 0.006
2Ui .
Ui
0.01
■ •0.015
Ui
ce -ooe
-0.015,
30 40 50 60
•0.02S 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec] TIME
(C-9>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-10>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.0251 0.02
JS 0.02 - 0.015 r
>"0.015
0.01
K 0.01
^ 0.005
S 0.006
ui
ui -0.005
- 0.01
■ 0.01
S -0.015
•0 . 02* -0.015
40 50 60 40
TIME [MCI
0.0251
E 0.02
•0.015 -
20 40
TIME[MC|
Figure 5.41 Peak relative displacements between the two lumped masses
206
(D-I)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m /sec2]
Figure 5.42 Peak accelerations of the lumped masses
(D-2J-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
0.1 0.12 0 .1 4 0 .1 6
PEAK DISPLACEMENT O F M ASSES [m]
Figure 5.43 Peak displacements of the lumped masses
207
(D-3)-ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT
Bh
o
UJ
OT
0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0 .0 2 5

MAXtABSOrVY^,)] [m]
Figure 5.44 The peak relative displacements in the sections
*
UJ
Q
55
MAXIMUM FO R CES [N] ,8

x 10
208
Z
o
h
O
UJ
<n
MAXIMUM FORCES [N] x 10a
0.5 1 1.5
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.m] ,8
x 10
Figure 5.47 Peak bending moments in the sides
209
Z
o
K
o
ui
(/>
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.m] .8
x 10
Figure 5.48 Peak bending moments in the sections
(D-8)-MAXIMUM S T R E S S E S
UJ
9
co
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

.7
Figure 5.49 Absolute maximum stresses in the sides
210
10 ►
*
5
gUJ
CO
1 1.5 2.5
,7
Figure 5.50 Absolute maximum stresses in the sections
211
(A)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS (BJ-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
10 >
MASS #
i 2 Z5 3 3.5 0.8975 0.096 0.0985 0.099

ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m/sec2] PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF MASSES [m]
(C)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS (D)-MAXIMUM STRESSES

SIDE #
10 -
5 10 15
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [Njn] x1Q7 MAXIMUM STRESSES [N/m2] X106
Figure 5.51 The dynamic response of the conventional bridge system to the Taft
earthquake in the transverse direction
212
5.9 Seismic Response Analysis of the Isolated Bridges by Using
Computer Controlled Concave-Bal! Support Mechanism
(C.C.C-B.S.M) and Optimum Design of the Mechanism

The earthquake protection of bridges using the C.C.C-B.S.M is investigated in the
following. The considered model as shown in Figure (S.S2-53), utilizes the specially
designed support mechanism as shown in Figure (5.54). These actively controlled
mechanisms are placed between the bridge and the ground to minimize the earthquake
energy transmitted to the structure. The springs, cams, concave steel base support with
specially coated surfaces and hollow spherical balls, which are the main elements of the
mechanism, are described in detail Appendix-[D]. The active control is used to keep the
system rigidly connected to the ground in normal conditions. Whenever the sensors
detect an earthquake disturbance, the cams turn 90° to allow the system to move. After
the shock ends the cams return back to the original position. A symmetric bridge as
shown in Figure (5.55) is considered for illustration. In this case
Ll = L 1 = L J = L i = 75 [m] and =14,21,14 [m] for the system model. According
to the lumped mass modeling shown in the Figure (5.54) the equivalent system is
represented by 12 lumped masses. The general lumped mass matrix for this case is given
in Equation (5.44) and the corresponding mass distribution is shown in Figure (5.43). The
stiffness matrix given in Equation (5.28) is formulated by using the finite element
analysis given in Appendix-[B].
213
8
E
"2
VI
8.
2a .
u
1
E
D
ST
■3
"o
V9
<u
V9
«3
ffl
55
vi
£
.1
Esi
A f .,I *
y9 a /
lf r * - s yS0 )
Figure 5.53 Transverse motion of the (C.C.C-B.S.M ) base isolated bridge model
215
■ o o ■
■ ■
o
H
o o
Figure 5.54 Details of the bridge base Isolation System
216
5.9.1.1 The lumped mass model of the isolated bridge
The lumped mass distribution in this case is shown in Figure (S.SS). The discrete model
system has 12 masses in the different locations. The values of the masses are given in the
matrix format in Equation (5.44).
Figure 5.55 The lumped mass distribution of the system model
By assuming that the dimensions and material properties of the bridge are same in the
conventional system model, the corresponding numerical values of the lumped masses for
the system model are given in the following.
217
M, = 392340 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 m 2 =697500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 m 3 ==770300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 m 4 =697500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 Ms = 806700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 M6 = 697500 0 0 0 0 0 0
(5.43)
770300 0 0 0 0 0
ii
0 0 0 0
o
o
£
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M,, =697500 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 392340 0 0 0
o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M t0 ==81900 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mu = 122850 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 12 = 81900
The mass matrix as the parametric values of the system can be written as:
218
( mA L. k m, —L
L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d 4 d 8
U, V I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
v J
Af L, H. L,
0 0\ md — + m. —- + md —- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d 4 p 2 d 4
0 0 0
f mA L, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 f md -^2. + m -5=- + md — 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d 4 p 2 d 4
0 0 0 0 0 mA 0 0 0 0 0 0
[m U =
( f H I \
0 0 0 0 0 0 md — + ma —- + md — 0 0 0 0 0
d 4 p 2 d 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mA— - 0 0 0 0
( L4 l 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 md
“ — + md — - r -1 0 0 0
2 d 8
( 13H x H,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + — 0 0
35 d 4
' 13« ,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mrf + m. —=-
d 35 d 4
13H a \
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +m
35 4
(5.44)
The stiffness of the connection springs can be found by using the finite element analysis
given in Appendix-[A]. By using the same dimensions and the material properties as in
the conventional symmetric bridge model.
219
5.10 Dynamic equations of the system

The discrete parameter model used for the dynamic analysis has 12 degrees of freedom as
shown in Figure (S.43). The system dynamic equations can be written as:
.... .„ , ..x ~ „ 12Edl d 12Edl d

M xy, + HtffXM tt(g + zx) + Kb(y, S yl) + - y j - yx —— y 2 +
(5.45)
„ .. . 24Edl d 12Edl d 12Edl d 6 Edl d „ 6EdI d „

Mzy2+ - 3 - y; ------ y , ------------ f r - y j — f ^- 3 — r 5"- 1 (5.46)
L, I, L, L, L,
" l2E ,/„ l2Edl d 12y / 12E ,/, YlEdl d VIE I ff

Af3y 3 + >3 — = 1 — — fi-^ 4 — ^ t - ^ 2
A3 ^ ^, 3 Lj L, «,
(5.47)
6EJs 6EJJ +^6 iE±J s 0i +^6 Ea.I,
1jL 0 x = 0
iLj Z#2
„ K . 24EdId .. \2Edl d 12Edl d 6EdI d 6EdI d

” *y* + - YL>T ~ y * — L) — =Lii — ys+ TMi 0>— Ln
f 1 - 3“ (5.48)
r Y2Edl d l2Edl d 12E , Q 12 £ d/ rf 12 £ ,/, 12£ ,/, c

Msys +
vv L ,3 L,33 E , 3 >y' - - v - y‘ - - L r y ' — n r s »
(5.49)
+^ 4 ^ 0, + ^ 4 ^ - 0 , =o
L*i Li ^3 ^3
12Edt d 24Edl d \2Edl d 6Edl d 6EJd

by 6 f l — > 5 + — 7=1 > 6 ---------= 1 -V7 ----------f l - " + 7- 2 ^ - °
(5.50)
L3 Lj Lj Lj
'1 2 E ,/ , , \2Edl d , 1 2 E ,/, ^2.Edl d 12Edl d 12E ,/„

Af7y 7 + — = r " ^ y 6 — = r ^ y * — 7 r r ~ s y*
E, w E, (5.51)
~ ^ 4 ± e6 - ^ 4 ^ 0 , + ^ 4 ^ 0 7 =0
220
, . 24EdI d 12Edl d 12EdI d 6Edl 6Edl d

M *y8 + —7 1 — >8 — = i — y 7 — — y9 + -= 2 -*» — 7 (5.52)
^ ^
12E / 12E /
^ 9 ^ 9 + ^ i f 9 ^ e ( « - t'Z 9 ) + ^ ( 3 ' 9 ~ < ? y s ) + / 3 ' > 9 --------- f T ^ +
M M (5.53)
6 EdXd a„ d d a ^
—2 8 T2 5
L4- l4-
12E / 12E /
^ 10^10 + 771 * 0 771 ^3 —® (5.54)
1IF i \2E /
Mnyll+ ^ lAfc(g+zll)+^(yu-<^y3)+—TTT^-y..— 77T± ys=0 (5.55)
o 2 « ,
12E / 12E /
^ i z y 12 d ^-8 12 ~ ^ y * ^ 3 3^12 3 ^7 —® (5.56)
3 "3
s 6EdI d 6Edl d 4Edl d 2 EdI d _

l myl°\ + " r ; ‘ > 1 -----F T ” >2 + “ T 1 f ** _ U
(5.57)
l«i H m
, ^ 2+ +2^ , +i ^ , 2 =0 (5.58)
r •• 6 E ,/. 6 £ ./ d 6 £ ./ rf 6Erf/ rf
/ ^ 3 + ^ M - y 2 — =M -y 3 + - = ¥ - y 3 - - p r - y * +
L| L| /-*2 t ^2
+ ± ^ £ i ^ 3+ 1 ^ ^ =0 (5.59)
Z*| Lj ^2
/ fl I V ^*1* V I Êdl d Q Q . 2Edl d Q _ Q (5.60)

- 4 “ET " T 5- TT 3 ^ 4+^ ® ! ' °
/ j9 1 v . &EdId 6 Erf/ rf +
l my^ 5 + 7 - 2 y* f r ^ s + r : >5 +
Ln Ln
(5.61)
+ ¥ d ± o , + ^ d ± d 2 + ? £ i!± 9 x = 0
Li ' Li k t*
Af1212: The lumped masses [kg]
>1.2.3...ii: The displacements of the lumped masses in the transverse direction [N / m]
sgn : The sign function
K b: Stiffness of base support [N I m]
I d = 1 ^ : Moment area inertia of decks to the y-y axis [m*]
I p = l m : Moment area inertia of piers to the y-y axis [m4]
g : Gravitational acceleration of the ground [ml s z]
î.9.io.iu2 : The vertical accelerations in the different locations [m /sec 2 ]
222
c ,..
Cyu9 ,10.11.12 y l.9.10.11.12 (0) (3^1.9.10,11,12 ^ y l,9.10.11,12 it))]
2*1.9,10.1 W 2 — r )( sin
R
(5.66)
V
( ( y .,9 .10.11.12 ^ y 1.9.10,11.12 ( 0 ) ((3^1.9,10.11,12 ^yi.9.10.11.12(^))
cos )
^<#1.9.10.11.12: The effective coefficient of rolling friction in the different locations
. r (3^,9401112 ^ 5 .2 ^ 4 ( 0 )
sin
u2 ~
(^9 .1 0 1 U2 ^ L 5 .2 J.4 ^ ))
(5.67)
Weight distribution in different support locations coming onto the spherical balls:
W ajt.c.d.e ~ aJ) c d e ) g (5.68)
\ m= A f.bm------ "—
>
(5.69)
M a 1 0
A f , A f4 w
Af, = — - + — - + A f,3 +r (5.70)
2 2
M. A f-
Af c = — + - r - + A^s +Afn (5.71)
A/* A f ,
A f , = — - + — - + M-. + Af. (5.72)
4 2 2 7 1
Af = ^ + A f 5 (5.73)
2 5
223
5.11 The seismic response of the system isolated with the
C.C.C-B.S.M in the transverse direction
A symmetric bridge model shown in Figure (5.55) is considered to simplify the analysis.
The system has 3 piers and is dimensionally symmetric about its center. The highest pier
in the model is located in the middle of the bridge. The heights are H x = 14 [m],
H 2 = 21 [m], H j = 14 [m]. The dimensions and material properties of the system are the
same as in the previous conventional bridge model. The earthquake signal considered for
illustration is that of the El Centro earthquake (SOOE component) shown in Figure (5.56).
The input disturbances for this case are assumed to be the same at all ground support
locations as shown in Figure (5.56).
300C >1 30C >
200C
•ax
300$
40
IOC >
•sc
20 40 50
Figure 5.56 El-Centro earthquake (SOOE component)
224
The generic force-displacement characteristics of the spring are given in the following:
FORCE
DEFLECTION
226
5.11.1 Some important considerations for the design optimization
The most critical considerations for the selection of the optimum design parameters are
the absolute peak movements of each mass and stresses at each section given in Figure
(S.5S) of the system model. The optimum design will be based on minimizing the
absolute peak and relative displacements and stresses in the system. The objective in this
case can be written as the summation of the normalized maximum stresses with respect to
their corresponding values for the rigid support case in the different sections of the
system. Because the equations are solved by using the Matlab software package, the
equations are stated in the matrix format.
Some of relations used for design optimization of the system can be stated as:
Absolute maximum displacements of each mass
JW 2 _ I2 = * n a x |y i .3 _ « | ( 5 -7 4 )
Absolute maximum accelerations of each mass
y — a i - 1 2 = m a X |3 'l.2 _ .I2 | ( 5 -7 5 )
227
Figure 5.60 Motion of the base isolated bridge model in the transverse direction
228
Peak Relative displacements between two lumped masses in the matrix format
max|(y3 —y2)|
max|(y 3 - y l0)|
max|(y 4 - y3)|
max|(y 5 - y 4)|
max r.1.2.~ 11 max|(y 5 - y,,)| (5.76)
- y5)|
max|(y 7 - y 6)|
max|(y 7 “ yi2)|
“ ax|(y8 - y 7)|
max|Cy9—y8)| .
229
Maximum forces in each section
- y z) + ^ ^ - d x +^ Y T ~ 0 2)
F _ = max (5.77)
' U E dl d ' 6E ,/, 6 E„/„
L ,v ^ , /-i
't a g , / /
r;1
F ^ = maxi (5.78)
12g ,/, 6EJd 6EJ.
7" 3
z r e ’ " T
12 E .O
(y 3 - y , 0)
F™,,,
tnoxc = max^
(5.79)
12E-/
(>3 -^ lo )
L\ v-
Y2EA
|Cy3 - >4)+^=t ~0*+^yr-0*)
F ^ = max (5.80)
VIE A
b 4 -y 3 )-^ r-« 4 -^ & r-® 3 )
LV v /J
L2E./
|( y * - y s > + ^ r * * 4 + ^ r - » s )
F n u, <, = max^ (5.81)
12E ,/
230
Fmax/ = max; (5.82)
12Edl d
y 6) + ^ ^ - 0 5 + ^ ^ ~ 0 6)
Fmaxg = max] (5.83)
12E J
U v
\
Y2EA
y 7) + ^ - e 6 + ^ - e , )
^nax/t = (5.84)
VIE A
M x^>
/Jy
/,Z 12 £ / ^ )
(> 7 - >12)
= maxl
"»JJ (5.85)
| 12v , (> 1 2 “ y7)
12E,/
ôuxy = maxi (5.86)

\2 E s l 6 £„/„ „ 6 E ^L
- y 7 ) - ^ ^ - ^ 8 - ^ M - 0 7)
U ' L?
231
' U E dI d '
( y .- y .) + ^ r - ^ + ^ r - * .>
L** L-, L)
\ s (5.87)
^naxt = maxi
/ }2E<i< '
y-i
Maximum moments in each section
|cy i - ys) + ! & k * I + ^ - . 0 a)

“i
AT oiaM —maxi (5.88)
(y, - y2) ^•z^ f ±oz+ ^ ^ - 0 ,)

LV V yj
M°ma*jr = max (5.89)

6 £ J/
<y2 - y , ) + —~—
=r~^—Qz + ^ M - 0 2 )
A A /-i
Cy3 -y io )
Af maxr = m ax (5.90)
y i / . \
T * v
( y j- y io )
1 *.2 J /j
k y j-y 4 > + ^ ^ * 3 + ^ k * * >

M°aaxd = max (5.91)
< y , - y j + ^ t « 4 + ^ i «3)
L\ V
232
M°nmxe = M iaX (5.92)

y5) + l ^ - 0 5 + ^ - 0 4)
yj>
M ° aaxf = max (5.93)
M ° maxg = max (5.94)

±E I ~>E I
**3 ^3
- y 7) + ^ ^ - 0 6 + = ^ 0 7)
M°noxH = max (5.95)

- y 7) +^ - 0 1 + = S d ^ 0 6)
Lj Lj
\ v \
6 £ pDf pD
(y 7 -;yi2)
J (5.96)
M maxi — max \
\
( y 7 - y u )
y J-- v
233
Lx L,x
/ (5.97)
M ° m»A =max
(y 7 _ y l ) + i & k ^ + i & £ i t f 7)
*«4 ^4
\ /•J,
s
" 6 Erf/ /
(y t - y 9) + ± ^ 0 8 + ^ - 0 9)
V l4 l ,4
= max (5.98)
6 ^ / , ^ys - y q) + ^ ± 0 9 + ^ ^ 0 a)
( -d
w Lx Lx
/J
234
5.11.2 Design optimization

There are some regulations for the design of bridges in seismic sensitive regions. The
segments of bridges in the piers and decks are conventionally designed to these standards.
To increase the seismic resistance capacity of the conventional rigid structures the
stiffness of the system are generally increased. As a result of increasing the stiffness, the
transmitted force into the structure and its components will be high. A design
optimization based on displacement and stress can be done to find the optimum
dimensions of the different segments of the conventional bridge systems.
If a base isolation mechanism is installed at the support locations, the seismic transmitted
forces into the structure can be expected to be less than the rigidly supported case. For the
base isolated system analysis discussed in the chapter, the optimum dimensions of the
deck and pier selected for the conventional rigidly supported case are considered. The
decision parameters of the design optimization of the system are the specifications of for
the components of the proposed base isolated mechanism using concave seats and hollow
spherical balls. The system is controlled actively by a spring-cam system. The parameters
of the mechanism can be written as:
K b: the base stiffness;
d : the distance between the base and the fully compressed spring;
M b: the base mass ;
235
fieff : the effective coefficient of rolling friction ;
The main objective of the design is minimizing the stresses occurring at the different
sections.
If the Afb, r and //„ are set to their practical values and d is calculated based on the
R , Kb and b
Ii i ill
i i i i i
<-----1----- ► S(t)
i
Figure 5.61 The motion of the system and decision parameters
236
The objective function is selected as the minimization of the maximum stress in the
isolated structure normalized by the maximum stress for the rigidly supported case. Other
objective functions may be also used to express the desires of the designer. The objective
function selected for this illustration can be written as:
(/(min)
Minimize: (5.99)
where
o t : Peak stresses in the sections for the isolated case
o r : Peak stresses in the sections for the conventionally designed rigidly supported case
n = 1,23...... ,22: Side numbers
The finite element analysis of the system model is given in Appendix-[A]. From the
analysis, the absolute maximum stresses in the sections can be written in the matrix
format.
237
V >
'1 2 . 6Edl d _ 6EdI d _ . yd
|Cy. - y 2) + - = r - ® i + - = ^ 0 2)
V id
■J\ a j
o’™.- = max (5.100)

V \
' 6 ^ / / l y x- y J + t * j L - O z + lS d * -O x) Zi
E\ *n
LV v
-i\
(
/ ® £ i L - xi y i - y l) + ^ L . 0 2 + ^ L e A Z -l
i,2
^maxJ, = maXl (5.101)
6 EdJl d y*
b 2 - y 3) + ^ - 0 3 + ^ - 0 2)
n / 6 Ep ,pl '
I j l
( y j- y w )
H, Ip
O'nuxc = max] (5.102)
yj_
( y j- y .o ) i
11 J yj
Z*.
Id
Gunxd = max (5.103)
y±
/,
LV V
V \
y±
v '- , (5.104)
G'n**, = m axi
^ - y 5)+ *S±LL05 yrf
LV v
238
(y s-^ u ) If .
*P
O’n-x/ = ma^ (5.105)
p p If.
(ys - y n )
HS /„
LV J.
>jL
^ *-’3 /-
max;. = max^ (5.106)
If.
"J ^3 I,
If
*3 *3 h
*■«* = ma* (5.107)
^ 6 - y 7) + i & ^ t f 7 + ^ 4 . ® 6) If
*3 *3 L
Y 6EPr p } If.
(y7 - y u )
b r ) ip
a maxi
mT, = max1 (5.108)
n ' 6 Ep , pl ' If.
Cy7 ~ y u )
H 2 i
l\ '\ 3 / A
'6 £ d/ / i±
h
(5.109)
*Edl d i±
L4 La
240
5.11.5 Constraints
structure. For the different allowable peak values of the relative displacement, the.
optimized stress values are given in Figure (S.54). As seen from the figure, the minimum
stress can be achieved by allowing 0.20 [m] relative displacement.
The constraints fo r the ground connections can be stated as:
max|y, - <5, (r)| < 0.20 [m] (5.111)
max|y9 -<?s(r)| < 0.20 [m] (5.112)
max|y,0 -<J2(f)| ^ 0.20 [ml (5.113)
max|yn - <J3(r)| < 0.20 [m] (5.114)
max|y12 ~ ^ 4(t)j ^ 0.20 [m] (5.115)
where
y l 9I0UI2: The displacements of the lumped masses M l 9l0 lu2 [m]
<5(r), i34S: The ground motions at the different ground locations [m]
The constraints fo r the radius o f the concave base support:
2.5< R <3 [m] (5.116)
The constraints fo r the coefficient o f the base stiffness:
241
For simplification we assume that the base support stiffnesses are same in all support
locations. The constraint on the base stiffness normalized to the structural stiffness in
Q< ^ M-2-3-4--5 = ^ = c , < l (5.117)

K. K* .s
f
Ks = [N/m] (5.118)
H ,3
Kb = cf K s [N/m] (5.119)
Solid spring constraint:
After a certain relative displacement at the support locations, the base spring becomes
solid to control the relative displacement or displacement of the structure.
If m ax |y ,-J,(r)j >0.30 [m] (5.120)
max|y9 - ^ 5(r)| >0.30 [m] (5.121)
max|y10-<J,(f)| >0.30 [m] (5.122)
max|ytl - J 3(r)j >0.30 [m] (5.123)
max|y12 - J 4(r)| >0.30 [m] (5.124)
the boundary conditions are::
■*1.9.10.11.12 =<^(f) ar>d -*1.9,10.11.12 — ^(t) (5.125)
242
5.12 The results of the optimized seismic response of the
symmetric bridge system to the Taft earthquake

The results of the optimized seismic response of the system to the Taft earthquake are
given in the following figures:
locations.
Figure (S.63) shows the displacement-time response in the y direction at the 12 lumped
mass locations on the bridge.
Figure (5.64) shows the time history of the stresses.
Figure (5.65) shows the time history of the relative displacements between the lumped
masses.
Figure (5.66) shows the relative displacement-time response of the ground connections
Figure (5.67) shows the vertical displacement-time response of the lumped masses
AfI0andAflt
locations.
Figure (5.71) shows the peak relative displacement at the ground connections.
243
Figure (5.72-73) shows the calculated absolute peak force values acting on the structural
sections at the different sections.
Figure (5.73-74) shows the calculated maximum bending moments acting at the different
sections.
Figure (5.75-76) shows the calculated maximum stresses at the different sections.
(A -1)- A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S «1 (A -2 y A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S # 2
2* 0.2
IE-0.2
W -0 .3
10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50
TIM E [sac] T IM E [ s e c ]
(A -3)- A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S # 3 (A -4 y- A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S # 4
S3 0 .2
W -0 .4
" - 0 .3
20 30 40 20 30 40
T IM E [sa c ] T IM E [sa c ]
244
(A-5)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#5 (A-6)> ACCELERATION OF MASS46

- . 0.61 „ 0.4
“ I -0 .4
ui-0.6
20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50
T IM E [se c ] T IM E [ s e c ]
(A -7)- A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S 4 7 (A -8 )- A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S « 8
k 0.2 1.1 ilk i* « 0.2
3020
111 , 1
■
iM OC-0.2
fill
20 30 40 50 60 20 30 40
T IM E [se c ] T IM E [ s e c ]
245
(A-9)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«9 (A-10)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#10

— 0 .4
M
~ 0 .3
|
2 0.2
C/3
|0 .1 | | i ill
|| I it i jll iiJlil lill ii. i M 0 .5
’ ■
fe c
g-0.11 l'Wrfl r
LIB
L a
TP
g -0 -3
^ - 0 .4
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50
T IM E [s e c ] T IM E [se c ]
(A -1 1 )- A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S # 1 1 (A -1 2 y A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S # 1 2
1-5
« 0 .5 C/3
CO 0.5
W -1 .5
20 30 40 20 30 40
T IM E [se c ] T IM E [se c ]
Figure 5.62 Acceleration versus time response o f the lumped masses
246
(B-1>- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS*1 (B-2)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«2

0.1 0.1
( A i
0.05
A1
ill \\\ j w i \ I 1 !; \ V
SI
co
co
u.
v !1i't
O
i . /
K
|- 0 .0 5 ]
Ul
i\i!
0.
CO
5
V
-0.15. -0.15,
40 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
(B -3h DISPLACEMENT O F MASS43 (B-4>- DISPLACEMENT O F MASS44
0.1
0.05 /I
!
A A
co o.c
co 1 / 1 A / * \
i 1 \
i \A /\ ; \ !
1 ; | J
s 1/1 1 / ^ \i'J ' 1 1
1-0-05 V 11 »r
'J
zUi
' j
V
cl. 0 .1
§5
1
1
-0.15,
40 60
-0.2 10 20 30 40 50 60
(B-5)* DISPLACEMENT O F MASS#5 (B-6)- DISPLACEMENT O F M ASS#6
it
M. 0.1 1 r r
!
2 / "}
5- Ar
i
% 0.05 CO
A ■ \
1 ....... 1
CO
M
1 1 /v 'W \ i \
0 * "ft J u V ’
O
2 -0 .0 5 - S '/I. V ^ li \ l
Ui i ;
2ui
UI 11
Q -0.1
%
0 .
1 * J
CO
O '
£ 1
247
(B-7)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#7 (B-8)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«8

0.1
1} t
°, MA 1
f; i
|m]
0.05 -
sa
Ii
1 \ 1\ iA' i'
DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#7
\!\; \
<
ta
0J l",mm n i A ! V 1! \Vi
fc
h-
i 1
z i V '1 \ i
UI J 'J
-0.1 a.
M
!V;
a
•0.15,
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [seel TIM E [se c j
(B -9h DISPLACEM ENT O F M A SS #9

0.1
/I
’ 0 .0 5 ► -1
s) 1 j 1 h \
V t r\ i \ : \
\
/! 1 V \ i; ! l
11 w
i ; j
! /
\i r i I
Ul- , -4-U I i
Ui 'J
11
& -0.1 V
a
•0.15
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 5.63 Displacement-time response of the lumped masses
248
(C-1)- ST R E SS-T IM E R E S P O N S E X 10* (c ' 2 >- S T R E S S -T IM E R E S P O N S E
Q.
UJ
20 X 40 20 30 40
TIM E [sec] TIM E [sec]
_ , ffi (C-3)- ST R ESS-T IM E R E S P O N S E
■T~10l | ■ ■?■-------
I
II1 ll J J ii i/i
! ft II. lli
t ■ MSI UI Mr’ r-.i h r J
ui
CO
* Y V* i i J , ■
Ui
co " it.. H 1|i h‘iy 1
I
a.
co
f ;'1i
c
UI
CO
CO.
UI
EE.
10 20 X 40 50 CO 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec] TIM E [sec]
(C-5)- STRESS-TIM E R E S P O N S E x , Q« (C-6)- S T R E SS-T IM E R E S P O N S E

_ _x10'
$ 1.5
I
n
20 X 40 X X
TIME [sec]
249
(C-7 y S T R E S S -T IM E R E S P O N S E x10* (C -fl)-S T R E S S-T IM E R E S P O N S E
I i
1
ui
CO j | 1
Ui
CO
I (L III
i fl. IM1 I ’
i ,1 1
CO
Ui l & i tn
IE
T il /'Hi M
J . Ill i
r
co " jr V t I 1 •
ui i ; i
tn o 20 30 « o 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac] TIME [S8C]
(C-9>- STR ESS-TIM E R E S P O N S E x10« (C -10)-STR ESS-TIM E R E S P O N S E

— x 10'
» 1.5
M0.5 i*
I
III
p - 0 .5
20 X 40 30 40
TIME [MC| TIME [sac]
(C-11 )- STRESS-TIM E R E S P O N S E
20 30 40
TIME [sac]
Figure 5.64 Stress-time response in the sections
250
(D-1h RELATIVE displacement (D-2V*RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.06 0.06|
,£
0.04 —0.04K
>
m
0.02 ^ 0.021
in UI
Ui 2uj fll% k -l flA A-
y
3
252-0„0 2 5-0021
uj UI
>
5 * 0 .0 4 §■0.04
ui
oc
■0.06, 0.06
40 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIM E [sac] TIME [sacl
(D-3)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (D-*)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.08 0.06
Jf
s 0.06 st 0 06 i
-0 .0 4 04 -
if 0’
ui 0.02 S o. 02 -
Z
ui zUI
f* .
iCL o 4 | If* \ t
CO CO
0.02 w-0
> 02^
5 -0 .0 4
UI
c
0.06, -0.06
30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
(DO)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
s 0.04
11
£
ui 0.02 '! .
j;1 aA /A A ./
/ |V
3a. 0 " T T ’TT -1
\f y
i1h
>
M i
Q. h
U i'
>
p
4
1
f ...
Ui
ac
-0.06
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac]
Figure 5.65 Relative displacement-time response between the lumped masses
251
X 10* (E-1)- VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT , 10-» (E-2)- VEHTICAL DISPLACEMENT

1.2
0.9
VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT z.„[m )
z jnV
U a,B
5.6 -
0.6 -
5.4 -
5.3 -
0.1
30 40 60
TIME [seel TIME (sec)
Figure 5.66 Vertical displacement-time response of the lumped masses M l0and Af n
(F-I)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
46
CO
CO
<
2
0.5 1 1.5
Figure 5.67 Peak accelerations of the lumped masses
252
(F-2)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
co
0.11 0.111 0.112

[m]
PEAK DISPLACEMENT O F M ASSES [m]
Figure 5.68 Peak displacement of each lumped mass
(F-3H1ELAT1VE P E A K D IS PL A C E M E N T S A T T H E B A S E S U P P O R T LO C A T IO N S
10-
co
i
CO
0 .0 6 8 5 0 .0 5 9 0 .0 5 9 5 0 .0 6 0 .0 6 0 5 0061 0 .0 6 1 5
MAX[ABS(Yn-Ya(t)l[m |
Figure 5.69 Absolute maximum relative displacements at the ground locations
253
(F-4)-MAXIM UM FORCES
LU
MAXIMUM FORCES [N] ,5

x 10'
(F-5)-MAXIMUM FORCES
LU
MAXIMUM FORCES [N] ,5

x 10"
254
(F-7)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
0.5 1 1.5
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.m] x 10
(F-8)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
0.5 1 1.5 2
MAXIMUM STRESSES [N/m2] x10
255
(F-9)-MAXIMUM S T R E S S E S
z
o
h
oLU
CO
1 1.5 2 2.5
.6
MAXIMUM STRESSES [N/m2] x 10
Figure 5.74 Peak stresses in the sections with the optimized values
K b =0.005K, [N/m], b= 0.05 [m]and R = 3 [m]
256
5.13 Comparisons of optimum conventional and Isolated base
cases of the symmetric bridge system Taft earthquake

Comparison of the absolute peak response data of the conventional and base isolated
symmetric system is given in the following.
Figure (5.7S-A) shows the comparison of the peak acceleration response at the
considered 12 lumped mass locations.
Figure (S.75-B) shows the comparison of the peak displacement response at the
considered 12 lumped mass locations
Figure (5.75-C) shows the comparison of the peak relative displacement response
between two lumped masses in the different sections
Figure (5.7S-D) shows the comparison of the calculated absolute peak force values acting
on the structural sections at the different sections.
Figure (5.7S-E) shows the comparison of the calculated maximum bending moments
acting at the different sections.
Figure (5.75-F) shows the comparison of the calculated maximum stresses at the different
sections.
Figure (5.75-G) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum stresses at the
different sections of the two cases. It can be seen from the figure that the stresses at the
critical pier sections 3, 6 and 9 are reduced approximately 11.5, 11.0 and 11.5 and deck
section 13 times_respectively as a result of the proposed base isolation mechanism.
Figure (5.75-H) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum accelerations of
the 12 lumped masses. It can be seen from the figure the highest acceleration in the
257
conventional design, which occurs at mass#5, is reduced approximately 10 times
respectively by incorporating with the optimized isolated support.
(A)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS (B)-PEA K D ISPLA C EM EN TS

t r
-O - ISOLATED
-O - RIGID - m - ISOLATED
10 - - O - RIGID <
o ....... r-
< 1
<0 6 ' ....... r
*i i
i 1
2 ' .....
i
t
«
r
i\
A BSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [nVseC2] PE A K D ISPLA C EM E N T O F M A SSE S [m]
(Q -A B SO LU TE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEM ENT (D>-MAXIMUM FO RCE

ISOLATED ISOLATED
RIGID RIGID
m
UJ
0.005 0.01 0.015

MAX[ABS(YB-YB.,)l[m l MAXIMUM FO R C E S [N] x 10
258
(E-1(-MAXIMUMMOMENT (E-2>MAXIMUM MOMENT

pO -
ISOLATED
RIGID
ISOLATED
RIGID
20 -
IS
co
Tl * *
1 2 3 4 5
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.m] MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.ml
*107 x IO
(F-1 (-MAXIMUM STRESS (F-2(-MAXIMUM STRESS
-O - ISOLATED - O - ISOLATED
- O - RIGID - O - RIGID
Ui oZp
a o
Ui
MAXIMUM SR E SSE S [Nflm2] xIO« MAXIMUM SRESSES [N/m2] x 10

.a
(G-1 (-STRESS REDUCTION RATIOS (HJ-ACCELERATION REDUCTION RATIOS
20
15 -
Ui co
10 ►
NORMALIZED STR ESSES NORMALIZED ACCELERATIONS
Figure 5.75 Comparisons of the dynamic responses of the symmetric bridge with base
isolated and non-isolated cases to the Taft earthquake
259
5.14 The seismic response of the non-symmetric system with
C.C.C-B.S.M in the transverse direction

the material properties of the piers and decks are the same as the previous symmetric case
model are:
The span lengths:
L, = 70 [m]
L, = 72 [m]
L, = 74 [m]
Lx = 69 [ml
The pier heights:
H x = 21 [m]
H 2 = 17 [m]
H , = 19 [m]
261
5.15 The results of the optimized seismic response of the non-
symmetric bridge system to the El-Centro earthquake
locations.
Figure (S.78) shows the displacement-time response in the y direction at the 12 lumped
Figure (5.79) shows the time history of the relative displacements.
Figure (5.80) shows the relative displacement-time response of the ground connections
Figure (5.81) shows the vertical displacement-time response of the lumped masses
M l0andM ,,
locations.
Figure (5.85) shows the peak relative displacement at the ground connections.
Figure (5.86) shows the calculated absolute peak force values acting on the structural
Figure (5.87-88) shows the calculated maximum bending moments acting at the different
sections.
Figure (5.89-90) shows the calculated maximum stresses at the different sections.
262
(A-1 h ACCELERATION OF MASS*1 (A-2)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#2
1 °-‘
i $ 0.1
lo ,
go, c 11 I i! io.i
2 1
i o.; 4 iUL1 j i i So
lo.;
U.
1 ;! |
&
2o - I L l j l i l i
s i i T n f l l l I” ”-1 K #i
iy '. . 1 1 1 1
S'!" ii 1
i n 1 i
ui
g-°.< ni i 1 1 1
ui
o-
o
< -■ i
—
.
< -0.l
"_1
(A-3)- A C CELERA TIO N O F M A SS#3
1.5
(A -4h AC CELERA TIO N O F M A S S «4
m !
11
09
<0
LU
:rrIiIail11I„I
I
ij*iJi
ii,JHUi.1.iM
ikii i 1 g 0 .5 -
LU
o
s
°Hn1 lyH|i|§i T i —\
S' i' - i
11! 1 1 j I
' i i i.., 1
(A-S)- A C C ELER A TIO N O F M A SS#S (A-6)- AC CELERA TIO N O F M A S S #6

1.5
| 0.8
0 .5
-0.5
20 30 60 30 40 50
TIM E [sec] T IM E [sec]
263
8 0-8 -
—0.6 -
52 0.4
20 30 40 30 40 60
TIM E [sac] TIM E [sec]
(A-9)- A C CELERA TIO N O F M A SS«9 (A-10)- ACCELERA TIO N O F MASSIMO

I j
I
iI
s. 0.6 i I i
co 0 4
co I I T
i
111 i l l l l l J LiWLJ ^ t. j l t . Li i l l J ,
m I li
mi"]" y i
i l k . m i lil lIii Jii.iii III

I 1 HH' 1
SO 60
* -ij '
0
i
10
i2 0 e . i>
30 40 50 60
20 30 40
(A -11 y AC CELERA TIO N O F M A SS411 (A -12h A C CELERA TION O F M A SS«12

.5r—
A
2 --
C-ii.—
•5 1 r
CO i
1 j! i j i u u k ,iiiiiJiUj LUlJiL. II
.5rl ■ t"
m i y
oMUUfU
■ N K 1 ~
1 1 HT!
n if i 1 1i ____
20 30 40
264
(B-1)-DISPLACEMENT OF MASS»1 (B-2)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS42

0 .2 0.2
g O .1 5 IT 0.15
5 0.1 51 0.1
co co
£ 0.05 2 0.051-
TYt
2 0 \
Z -0.05 2 * 0 .0 5
I:
FT ¥ b*-
1 -0.1
§ • 0 .1 5
5 - 0.2
-0.25
40 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
(B-3)» D ISPLA CEM EN T O F M A SS43 (B-4)- D ISPLA CEM EN T O F M A SS44

0.2 ! " ■ 17-i -
■§■0.15 !|
5 0.1
CO
0.05 - CO
V II ! k \
' \
/| ! 1 \f*
o I ij : I i \ ! \ l
J
5 *0 . 0!
ui : - i i 'i
2
ui !
§- i/;
0.
CO
o
I
•0.25 •0.25
20 40 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIM E [seel TIM E [sec]
(B-5)- D ISPLA C EM EN T O F M A SS«5 (B-6)- D ISPLA C EM E N T O F M A SS46

0.2 0.2
I 1 0 .1 5
<g 0.1
co TT
g 0.051-
-h J— rJ\
-0.05 Z -0-05H - 11 \L
ui
ui -0-1 1 i -0.1
5 - 0.15 « 5 - 0 .1 5
0. CL
co CO .
5 -0.2 - q -0 2.
-0.25'
20 40 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
265
(B-7>- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«7 (B-6)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS48
0.05
£ -0 .0 5
g -0.1 $2 - 0.1
5 - 0 .1 5 5 - 0.15
a.
5 - 0.2
(0
Q -0.2
-0.25 •0.25
30 40 50
TIM E [sec] TIM E [m c ]
(B -9)- D ISPLA C EM E N T O P M A S S « 9
0 .2|-
g 0 .1 5 -
I
*2 0 .0 5 ►
60
TIM E [MC]
266
JT (C-1 h STRESS-TIME RESPONSE (C-2)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE

I i. ]
Cl n r 11
4' j Z 2* ........... t!
3• Q
w
o
Ui
o <! ■
Ui t i
! 1ti
CO
2 ':i -! CO R
I \ z
! i ,
,\ ui
CO
z
CO
z
-:!W' rV ^ iV' *M Mi -
1 TjTA t : i >AV ]ip ! r
o I
0. 2CO :« ■J
CO
UI ,I ; ' I I' i 'i LU ' 1
' •
cc
1 ' ■»' i t c 11
2• i 11i
2 —-■■■*-
CO
CO i- CO
<0
i1
Ui g -3
10 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
CO TIME [sec] TIME [sec]
x , 0« (C-3)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE x 10« (C-4>- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE
1.5
5 0.5
£-0.5 -
f=-3 -
co
20 60 20 40
x 1Q» (C-5)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE — x 10« (C-6)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE

i.
to
«
Z
2
O
ui
CO
z
I
ui II rA
CO
z r
O V
{2*0.5 ■ 1 *
CL
GC , »l» I I i
UI
?co *’ ! 1 M
co M i
LU
IE *
___ i___ 20____i___
30
i___50
40 60 20 30 40
10
co TIME [sec] TIME [sec]
267
STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SECTION #7 [Ntar]

X 105 ST R ESS-T IM E R E S P O N S E x 10« (C -e h S T R E S S -T IM E R E S P O N S E
S i i .
oZ
. i ■ iJ. ,lk
ui
CO i i
0 A , *u i .
ui
co t i n " t i 'i hi i W , ;
0. 1 ii1'
ti
CO
ui -1 ■V i'’; i t
-6 -
c ti
5 1 i
!
CO
CO
" I t
{t
.10* UI
£
TIM E [sec] CO TIM E [se e l
(C-10)- ST R E SS-T IM E R E S P O N S E
I
S
o |
z' A
HJ
I'Ml '
ui M oUI « 1 : %
co r',i i \r
Itjh L A i CO
i ,4 N A
UI ° p flft T fi UI i ■VvV
\
CO CO h** Hi
,1 I 117-I f • _ JL_,
CO
UI 22 .. *i--1 CO
UI.2 1
1 |! »
i1
i
i
cr
Ui if
CO
3. 3 T....
CO
CO CO i
Ui
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
<0 TIM E [sec] S °
CO TIM E [sec]
Z A......
ii i
O 1 i; ‘
ui
CO !/;
^ r. ■V A t.. .’J
•W
1 ivr-v
r*
UI
CO ‘i r » YJ - r 4<
f
CO H v
UI.Z ....
c
UI I
3« .- ti
CO
CO
E 0 10 20 30 40 SO 60
(0 TIME [MC]
Figure 5.79 Stresses versus time in the sections
268
(0-1)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (0-2)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

•=•0.151 _ 0.15
E,
S 0.1 » 0.1
>T0.05 >0.05 \ -
ft: A A ,
I > ,A
w -ViA
3-0.05
Ii 111/" 'iI
U
5a. -0.1 II
co If ' I
o I
lu-0. 15
I
UJ
oc
20 30 40 50 60 10 2030 40 50 60
(0-3)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (D-4)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
I 0-15
»
E,
ilii
S 0.1
>a
20.05
0.1
!i 1
t. IM'I 'Ji > '.j's A
£
uj-0.05
5
UJ
34
1l \l it 1, /V*
V
t -0.1 0.
eg CO
'J
2 -0.15
>
0.2
2^
> >J1
-
§UJ
GC
-0.25 -0.25
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [s TIME [sec]
(0-5)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
_.0.15|
S 0.1
>*
20.05
r o 1
UJ
3 - 0. 051" +
t
<n -0.1
2*0.15 *
>
§ -0-2|
UJ
CC-0.25
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [•
Figure 5.80 Relative displacement-time response at the ground connections
269
(E-1)- VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT (E-2>- VERTICALDISPLACEMENT

0.0141
I
fc; 0.01
UI j
£ 2
0.008 WO.C
S i1
gj 0.006 &0.C
Q
< 11
0.004 «■ O0.C !i
P
0.002 go.(
< m
10 40 50 60
Figure 5.81 Vertical displacement-time response of the lumped masses Af l0 and AT,,
(F-1 )-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
co
co
<
2
1 1.5 2 2.5
A B SO LU TE PEA K ACCELERATION [m /sec2]
Figure 5.82 Peak acceleration of each lumped mass
270
(F-2)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
*
co
CO
qI * ■■ * i i- - i i
0204 0.205 0.206 0.207 0.208 0.209 0.21
Figure 5.83 Peak displacement of each lumped mass
(F-3)-RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENTS AT THE BASE SUPPORT LOCATIONS
6►
0^245 0.225 0.2255 0. 0.2265 0.227 02275 0228 0.2285

MAX[ABS(Yn-Ya(t)][m]
Figure 5.84 Peak relative displacements at the ground connections
2 3 4 5
MAXtABSO^,)] [m] x1Q-
Figure 5.85 Peak relative displacement between two lumped masses
(F-4)-MAXIMUM F O R C E S
-1
1 -1
I I
Ui “ t
9
03 -1
I I
i
--------- -
k i
6 8 10 12 14
MAXIMUM F O R C E S [N] x 1Q.5
272

.7

.7
273
(F*8)-MAXIMUM ST R E SSES
1 2 3 4 5
MAXIMUM STRESSES [N/m2] x 10®
(F-9)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
MAXIMUM STRESSES [N/m2] x 10®
Figure 5.90 Peak stresses in the sections with the optimized values
K b =0.001 K s [N/m] and b =0.05[m]
274
cases of the non-symmetric bridge system to the El Centro
and Taft earthquake

Comparison of the absolute peak response data of the conventional and base isolated
symmetric system is given in the following.
Figure (5.91-A) shows the comparison of the peak acceleration response at the
Figure (5.91-B) shows the comparison of the peak displacement response at the
considered 12 lumped mass locations
Figure (5.91-C) shows the comparison of the peak relative displacement response
between two lumped masses in the different sections
Figure (5.91-D) shows the comparison of the calculated absolute peak force values acting
on the structural sections at the different sections.
Figure (5.91-E) shows the comparison of the calculated maximum bending moments
acting at the different sections.
Figure (5.91-F) shows the comparison of the calculated maximum stresses at the different
sections.
Figure (5.91-G) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum stresses at the
different sections of the two cases. It can be seen from the figure that the stresses at the
critical pier sections 3, 6 and 9 are reduced approximately 11.5, 11.0 and 11.5 and deck
section 13 times.respectively as a result of the proposed base isolation mechanism.
275
Figure (5.91-H) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum accelerations of
the 12 lumped masses. It can be seen from the figure the highest acceleration in the
conventional design, which occurs at mass#5, is reduced approximately 10 times
276
(A)-PEAKACCELERATIONS (B)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS

ISOLATED
-* > ■
-O - RIGID
10 - 10 -
8 -
co 6 -
4-
ISOLATED
-O - RIGID
0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22

ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m/sec2] PEAK DISPLACEMENT OP MASSES [mj
(Q-ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT (DH4AXIMUM FORCE
ISOLATED
RIGID
z
o
►-
o111
CO ISOLATED
RIGID
0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02

MAXlABSIY^.JItm!
(E-1>-MAXIMUMMOMENT (E-2)-MAXIMUM MOMENT
ISOLATED
RIGID
hi
ISOLATED
RIGID
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [N.m| x107 MAXIMUM MOMENTS (N.ml x 10

,7
277
(F-1 J-MAXIMUM S T R E S S (F-2)-MAXIMUM S T R E S S
ISOLATED -O - ISOLATED I
RIGID -O* RIGID
z
SIDE «
o
o
UJ
CO
1
0.5 1 1.5 2 ^
" i 2.5
MAXIMUM SRESSES [N/m2] x 1o7 MAXIMUM SRESSES [N/m2] x 10'7
(G-1>-STRESS REDUCTION RATIOS (G-2)-STRESS REDUCTION RATIOS
15 “
SIDE «
§UJ 6
10 >
NORMALIZED STRESSES NORMALIZED STRESSES

(H>ACCELERATION REDUCTION RATIOS
to
NORMALIZED ACCELERATIONS
Figure 5.91 Comparisons of dynamic response of the isolated and rigid cases with the
optimized design parameters K b = 3.16 106 [N/m], b - 0.05 [m] and R = 3 [m] to the El
Centro earthquake.
278
(A)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS (B)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS

-O - ISOLATED
-O - RIGID
10 -
co
<o co
co
i I
ISOLATED
RIGID
0.095 0.1 0.105 0.11 0.115 0.12
ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [rrVsec2] PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF MASSES [m|
(C)-ABSOLUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT (D)-MAXIMUM FORCE

ISOLATED
RIGID
10 -
ui
co ISOLATED
RIGID
0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012

MAXtABS(Yn-Yn.,)l[ml MAXIMUM FORCES [N]
(E-1)-MAXIMUM MOMENT (E-2>MAXIMUM MOMENT

ISOLATED
RIGID
10 "
p a-
10 ►
ISOLATED
RIGID
MAXIMUM MOMENTS [Mm] *10,7 MAXIMUMMOMENTS [Mm] k107
279
(F-D-MAXIMUMSTRESS (F-2J-MAXIMUM STRESS

12
ISOLATED . - ISOLATED 1
RIGID r
§ f f L f i : RIGID
10
! * —
8
i —1
O
ui
1 § —
co
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 4 6 8 10 12 14
MAXIMUM SRESSES [N/m2] x toa MAXIMUM SRESSES [N/m2] x 10'a
(G-D-STRESS REDUCTION RATIOS (G-2)-STRESS REDUCTION RATIOS
1
1
15 z
8o
Ui
10 > co
NORMAUZED STRESSES NORMALIZED STRESSES

(H)-ACCELERATION REDUCTION RATIOS
NORMALIZED ACCELERATIONS
Figure 5.92 Comparisons o f dynamic response of the isolated and rigid cases with the
optimized design parameters K b =3.16 106 [N/m], b = 0.05 [m] and R —3[m] to Taft
earthquake.
280
5.17 Summary
The transverse response of conventionally designed symmetric and non-symmetric
bridges to seismic inputs are investigating in this chapter. The bridges are modelled as a
discrete parameter system with 12 masses. The stiffness of the connecting springs is
evaluated by a finite element analysis.
A proposed base isolated system is used in conjunction with the conventional bridge
designs. The results for the seismic response of the symmetric bridge system in the
transverse direction are summarized in Figure (5.91). It can be seen from Figure (5.9I-F-
1) that the maximum stresses at the critical pier sections 3, 6 and 9 are reduced
approximately 11.5, 11.0 and 11.5 times and deck section 13 times respectively as a
result o f the proposed base isolation mechanism. Figure (5.91-H) shows the reduction of
the calculated maximum accelerations of the 12 lumped masses of the symmetric system
model. As can be seen from Figure (5.91-A), the highest acceleration in the conventional
design which occurs at mass#5 is reduced approximately 10 times by incorporating the
proposed isolation system.
The summary of the responses of the non-symmetric bridge model is given Figure (5.92).
It can be seen from Figure (5.92-F-l) that the stresses at the critical deck and pier
sections are reduced by a factor o f 15 (deck section) and 17 (pier section) respectively as
a result o f the proposed base isolation mechanism.
281
It can be seen also from Figure (5.92-A ) that the highest acceleration in the conventional
design which occurs at mass#6 is reduced 9.5 times by incorporating the proposed
isolation system.
282
CHAPTER-VI
6 Multi Degree of Freedom Model for Multi Span
Bridges and Optimum Seismic Design with Concave-
Ball Supports under Longitudinal disturbances
6.1 Abstract
The study reported in this Chapter investigates the feasibility o f developing an active
base isolation system fo r the protection o f multi span bridges subjected to earthquake
waves in the longitudinal direction. The proposed system incorporates spherical
supports, cams and springs which can be optimally designed to minimize the
transmissibility o f the seismic disturbances to the bridge structure. The considered
example shows that the proposed design is implementable and can provide an order o f
magnitude reduction (approximately 12 times in the considered symmetric model and 4
times in the considered non-symmetric model in the critical pier locations) in the
maximum stress resulting from longitudinal seismic waves.
284
traditionally designed system model the equivalent structural mass given in Equation
(6.13) moves as a single body in the longitudinal direction and each lumped mass (from
mass#l to 9 has its own rotation
The first second and third natural frequencies of the structure in this case are: wn1 =6.11,
wn2 =24.24 and vvn3 =25.03 [rad/sec]. The corresponding eigenvectors are given in
table-1.
The following considerations are made for the input disturbances:
1)- The input forcing function is a spatial variable at the piers depending upon geological
and geometrical heterogeneities ( s f : Soil fa c to r), finite velocity of wave propagation
and wave source type (Ref.20)
2)- The phase difference for the disturbances at the different pier locations is considered
using the relationship:
A/ = — (6.1)
c
where
/ : The distance between piers
c : The velocity of the wave propagation, c = 1000 [m/sec]
3)- The seismic response in the longitudinal direction is uncoupled from the other
directions and is studied separately.
285
Lumped Mass Model of the System

Figure 6.2
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
287
6.3.1 NOMENCLATURE:
x : Longitudinal displacement of bridge
a l 2 9 : Rotations of Lumped masses
M x : Total equivalent mass of bridge for the longitudinal motion
\Mxa\- Mass matrix
\_Kxa ]: Stiffness matrix
^ 1.2...12: Equivalent lumped masses for the discrete system model
: Rotational mass moment of inertia of lumped masses
/ : Area moment of inertia of the pier to the x-x axis
1yyp' Area moment of inertia of the pier to the y-y axis
m p: Unit per mass of the piers
/ / 123: Height of the piers
£ p: Elasticity modules of the pier material
Ed: Elasticity modules of the deck material
Ad : Crossection Area of the deck
Ap : Crossection Area of the pier
I ^ : Area moment of inertia of the deck to the x-x axis
1 ^ : Area moment of inertia of the deck to the y-y axis
288
Ly 2j A • Span lengths
-yj u
^1.2,3.. .n = — • Lengths of the decks between two lumped masses
Numerical values of the system properties:
Ad = 7.46 [m2]
= 13.58 [m4]
^ = 4 2 [ m 4]
mrf = 18650[— ]
m
Ll =Lz = L i = La : Span lengths = 75 [m]
L =^L. = is_ = i 2_ = ia_ =21rm l

H2.3_../» 2 2 2 2 2
£„ =34.510’ [ - ^ ]
m'
£ =34.5109 [ 4 t]
* m‘
A „= 4 .16[m 2]
= 0.67 [m4 ]
Iyyp =7.39 [m4]
m = 10400 [^ -]
m
# 1.2.3 = 14,21,14 [ml
289
6.3.2 Dynamic Equations of the System

The longitudinal response is considered to have rotational and translational components
for each lumped mass. Because of the high rigidity of the bridge in the longitudinal
direction, the displacements of the masses are assumed to be the same in the entire deck
structure. Therefore, equation (6.3) represents the translational motion of the lumped
masses in the x direction. The rotational motion of each lumped mass is formulated in
Equations (6.3-12).
fw v 12 £ / 12 V ,1 Y2EA VIE A . 12 £ /
M xx + X * ^x2 ^ a **x3 1 \
f f ,3 ff,3// 33 Hx / / ,3 Hz (6 .2 )
6 E9I 9 6£ / 6 EA 6E l 6 EA 6 EA a
«*,)+— *ji(,a5) +— p p p , „ ^+ p <L(an)+— 2_L(arII)= 0
H H
la (6.3)
11 A A '
, .. 2EdId 8E A , 2Edl d (6.4)

l za 2 +— + —1 d a 2 + 1 d a 2 = 0
A A A
I /V
6£_/„
pP ~ P _
p r
6£ pP~/ Pp X
IE I
, ^ d Ld
2EdI d AEAd AEdl d
3 3 2 2 „ a,„
U I0 + ± d a , + — — ar3 + - ± d a 3
h: h ; »i A ‘ A (6.5)
4 E ,/, 2 E ,/,
+ J d- a , + _ ■- - or. = 0
U L,
r .. 2£d/ rf 8 £ ,£ 2£ j / j
/ 4ar4 + -=M -<A +~ t r ~ as (6 .6 )
291
633 Differential equation of the system in matrix format

The lumped mass distribution in the matrix format can be expressed as:
Mx 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 /, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 h 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1* 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A
(6 . 12)
where, M x is the effective mass of the structure for the longitudinal motion.
\ f L, 13 „ L,
M ,= + mA + — f t i+ ~z‘ mA
I 4 " 35 1 d 4 2
13 13
m , —=~+ m„ — H-, + m, — + mA + md — + m a — H, + m. —
4 p 35 * d 4 } \ d 4 35 d 4
+ m. mA
(6.13)
292
Tf
—
N
vO
The parametric stiffness matrix of the system shown in Equation (6.14) is calculated by using a finite element analysis.
----
1
kT l-J*
04
c*T l-J
04
i-j r kl l-J
kl oo M kl-
•o kl* l-J
— I 04
-1
c*r l - J
04
kl i-T -J kl l - J
oo . kj aT w
i-r -j +
ki k? Sj
sO N
s--- kT l-J kl l - J 1 kT l-T
es
■
*T> kT l - J kj
> « oo kj l-J*
uT i-j 01
ki
so + l-J
Q. a* ^kl
l-J
til a:
o
+
o kT l-J ^
kT l - J
N
kT i- j 04
o»
a.
til i- j % l-J
kl kT l - J
oo M
kl a: % l-T ^ l-J
04 kl
■<T 04
a.
a.
kl kl kl
kl sO sO
04 sO
293
The corresponding numerical values of the lumped masses of the symmetric bridge
model can be written in matrix format:
0.58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4.42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 8.72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 8.99 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 8.72 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 9.32 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 8.72 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.99 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.72 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.42
(6.15)
The numerical values of the stiffness matrix of the discrete bridge model is given in the
following:
0.0023 0 0 0.0071 0 0.0031 0 0.0071 0 0

0 0.45 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0.25 1 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.0071 0 0.25 1.06 0.25 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0.25 1 0.25 0 0 0 0
0.0031 0 0 0 0.25 1.043 0.25 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0.25 1 0.25 0 0
0.0071 0 0 0 0 0 0.25 1.06 0.25 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.25 1 0.25
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.25 0.^
(6.16)
294
ft
9“
Q.
pt
Ui =5
CS
CN
+
O
ft.
Q. a. a.
r* *«• «
CN
5; t*J
n--- NO NO NO
*T o o + © o
The disturbance forcing function in this case can be written as:
* n
2
JSL it
kj
a.
■»» m
a.
3:
—»
a.
a.
s 9
CN s*J C*J •*
NO NO NO
v » _ _
a.
X
sS3
i
£*J E
n
I
UI
£
*0
a.
UI
u
C*J O
n C
o O
ii
ii
sr
©
«*
tC
<-3^ 2
2*
u
-e
£
295
where {X } is the displacement vector.
a,
(6.19)
Table -(6.1) Eigenvectors and natural frequencies in the longitudinal motion of the
symmetric system model for the first three modes
MODE 1 MODE MODE 3

2
wn (rad/sec) 6.1173 24.240 25.037
x [ml -0.9999 -0.1664 -0.0000
a x [rad] 0.0013 -0.3507 -0.4683
a 2 [rad] -0.0025 0.3365 0.4167
a 3 [rad] 0.0083 -0.3048 -0.2865
Q4 [rad] -0.0034 0.3230 0.1582
a s [rad] 0.0048 -0.3246 -0.0000
a 6 [rad] -0.0034 0.3230 -0.1582
a 7 [rad] 0.0083 -0.3048 0.2865
a t [rad] -0.0025 0.3365 -0.4167
a 9 [rad] 0.0013 -0.3507 0.4683
296
6.3.4 The system response for the considered earthquake disturbance:

The input disturbances are assumed to be the same at all ground locations with a phase
shift. The phase shift is calculated by A/ = — depending upon the wave propagation
c
velocity and span lengths of bridge.
<5x, (0 = &xZ(t - A/j) = 6 x3(/ - Af2) = 6 x4(t - A/3) = Sx5(r - A/4) (6.20)
A symmetric bridge model shown in Figure (6.4) is considered to simplify the analysis.
The system has 3 piers and is dimensionally symmetric about its center. The highest pier
in the model is located in the middle of the bridge. The heights are H l = 14 [m],
H 2 = 21 [m], = 14 [m] respectively. The dimensions and material properties of the
system are the same as in the previous conventional bridge model. The earthquake signal
considered for illustration is that of the El Centro earthquake (S00E component) shown in
Figure (6.3). The input disturbances for this case are assumed to be the same with a phase
shift at all ground support locations.
{ f r a v .n L , { fen v » R L . I ( f t r n o w { ftc tk m W L ., ■ [frq ia iw L . [fc i— n L , f ^
777T. 7!
M------------------------- ►
!
Figure 6.4 The symmetric bridge model considered for the seismic response analysis
297
Three components of the ground motion of the Imperial Valley earthquake which are
acceleration, velocity and displacement are used as the input disturbance function for the
seismic response analysis of the structure.
4000
300C > * ■>

200C >
I-100C >|
•200C -20C
10 20 30 40 60 20 40 50 60
150
IOC
-50
-101
15<o 20 30 40 50 60
T IM E [ n c |
Figure 6.5 El-Centro earthquake (SOOE component)
The computed time history for the longitudinal accelerations, absolute displacements at
the different locations and the relative displacement of the structure to the ground are
given in Figures (6,6-15) respectively.
Figure (6 .6 ) shows the acceleration-time response at the 9 lumped mass locations.
Figure (6.7) shows the displacement-time at the 9 lumped mass locations on the bridge.
Figure (6 .8 ) shows the time history of the relative displacement of structure to the
ground.
Figure (6.9) shows the peak rotational acceleration values at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figure (6.10) shows the peak translational acceleration values at the different lumped
mass locations.
Figure (6.11) shows the absolute maximum rotational displacements at the different
lumped mass locations.
Figure (6.12) shows the calculated maximum bending moments acting at the different
sections.
sides.
299
(A-1}~ LONGITUDINAL ACCELERATION (A-2)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F MASS41

8f 0.15|
r j
,l ill till! 1 llll ui >iti. ii 1k
5
QC ■
aUI
•1 pi "1 n
1 W
O
'
IE
0-8'
< 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac]
TIME [sec]
(A-3)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M ASS«2 (A-4)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M A SS#3
CM
0.081
— 0 .0 6
z
° 0 .0 4
| 0 02 |ji ,r,|r>
n' ' i mf ’i■' m(i *
O 0 0 - 0 .0 5
<
-1-0.02
ii i i u i , ...iiu iiiiL iS
0 - 0 .0 4
Sc
o
llillIHIIiiliklllHW
*F
m
cc T
Qfll T l*
•0 .0 8 i _ j ___ l 20 30 40
’0 10 20 X 40 50 60
TIME [seel TIM E [sac]
(A-S)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F MASS#4 (A-6)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M ASS45
0 .0 8 i __ 00.08»—
.0 8 |
| 0 .0 6 K 1 n n l oooeU
,
“ 0.0 ii ii iL “ °.°4l 1
g iiiftM im inm O
|0.02
I 0- i - 1 " i'i’ :n n i ' i p B
3UJ 2 0
a
<-0( til III i l l ! Ili ll ll ll
Q
<•0.02 i..1 1B
-I
S -0.041
IM illlililU l ;- 0 .0 4
Kiililiiuliiibiiii iiUIB
|'U
•0 .0 6 - - 0 .0 6
o
cc
-0.08 - 0 .0 8
0 10 SO 60
10 20 30 40 so 60 20 30 40
TIME [sac] TIME [seel
300
(A-7)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#6 (A-8)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#7

0.06|
< 0.05
< •0 .0 4
-o.oe
£ -0 .0 5
■0.06
0 10 20 30 40 50 ) 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [aw ] TIME [SW]
(A-9]-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M ASS#8 (A-10)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M ASS49
o.r
n
o.oel
£ 0 . 0 6 □ ii
i
0.04 hj tuiin hi jijL J1 i
.: iiuiilLJi ijii .i
II"|" W 'I 'W T I P B
aUi
uo
I ' 1 i 11' H Tllil™
s* ii!) .I'diiji
^ • 0 .0 4 iU ik iiiiiiS
*
i:w
.i— ,
iiiLittiiiiiii m m m m
i"°l
•0.08;
I1 I
1 § 1O m
1__
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [aw ] TIME [aw ]
301
(B-1>- TRANSLATIONAL MOTION
20 30 40
TIME [sec]
(B-2>- R O T A T IO N O F M A S S M (B -3)- R O T A T IO N O F M A S S 4 2
0.02| 0.031
0 .015 0.02
0.01
0.00!
S 7061
F
: -0.01
O
CC
-0.02
-0.015 -0.03
-0 .0 4
20 30 40 20 30 40 SO 60
T IM E [M C ] T IM E [ s a c
302
(B -4)- ROTATION O F M A SS#3 (B-5)-ROTATION O F M A SS04

0.1 0 .04)
0 .0 8
0 .0 3
0 .0 6
0.02
O— 0 .0 4
| 0.02
v-
•0.02 ■0.01
• 0 .0 4 -0.02
• 0 .0 6 -0 .0 3
-0 .0 8 , •0 .0 4 ,
40 SO 60
TIME [sac] T IM E [s a c ]
(B-7>- ROTATION O F M ASS46 ( W )- ROTATION O F M ASS47

0.04f 0.08|
0.06
0.04 ►
0.02 “
i- 0.02 -
-0.04 -
-0.04 -0.1
TIME [sec]
(B-9)- ROTATION O FM A SS48 (B-10)* ROTATION O F MASS49
a o is
-O.0E
-0 0 1 5
20 30 40 20 30 40
TIM E [sac] TIME [sec]
Figure 6.7 Displacement and rotation-time response of each lumped mass
303
(Cy RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT OP THE STRUCTURE TO THE GROUND
10
£2-0.05
20 30
TIM E [sec]
F igu re 6 .8 Relative displacement-time response of structure
(D-1)- ROTATIONAL PEAK ACCELERATIONS

0.14
" o 0.12
2. 0.1
0.02
M A SS#
Figure 6.9 Absolute rotational peak accelerations of the lumped masses
304
(D-2)-TRANSLATIONAL PEAK ACCELERATIONS
§ 5 .5
a-3.5
M ASS#
Figure 6.10 Absolute translational peak accelerations of the lumped masses
(E)-PEAK ROATIONS [°]

0.1
0.08
LU
CL
-J 0.06
£ 0 .0 2
M ASS#
Figure 6.11 Absolute peak rotations of the lumped masses
305
x10 (F-1)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
SECTION #
x10 (F-2)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
SIDE#
306
x to 8 (G-1)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
s .1 .
—11— 1----------
14- ----------
CO l i t • I 1
111 4
£0 1.
CO
Ui 1 1 ^ 1 1 l
£
CO _ k.-------- j J ----- L.
lo .
\ jj ----------
10 12
SECTION #
x10 (G-2)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
1.8
'V 1-6
1.4
C 0 1.2
CO
t-
0.2
25
SIDE#
6.4 Seismic response analysis with restricted displacement and impact analysis in the
longitudinal direction
In order to prevent from thermal expansion distortions of bridge systems in the longitudinal direction, there is a free gap between the
ground and bridge as shown in Figure 6.16. Under earthquake excitations, an impact may occur between deck and the ground.
,sv A/«)
(r-A/j)
Figure 6.16 System model for the longitudinal directional motion with impact
u>
o
308
6.4.1 Impact Analysis
Whenever the system exceeds a certain allowable relative displacement to the ground
|x - J(/)| > x g in the x direction, impact occurs at the ends of the bridge. In this case the
following equations apply.
x = 6(t) or x —<5(r) = 0 (6 .21 )
After impact occurs, the final velocity and displacement of the base is calculated by using
the principle of Conservation of Momentum.
Motion before impact,
= OO
Motion after impact,
Figure 6.17 The physical representation of impact model
309
By using the principle of conservation of momentum the equations can be written as
(Ref. 12).
M
—-£- = 0 (6.22)
M
S{t){\ + e) + (yb) \ - ^ - - e )
= ----------- ( Mjl#, ^ *------- (6 2 3 )

1+ ^ -
M.
\
therefore.
(vb)f = S m + e) + (vb), [-e] (6.24)
where,
S(t) : The ground velocity
.t : Displacement of structure
x g : Free gap distance before impact
(vb)f : Final velocity of bridge
(v6), : Initial velocity of bridge
e : Coefficient of restitution
M b: Total equivalent mass of bridge
M t : Ground mass
310
The computed time history for the transverse accelerations, absolute displacements at the
different locations and the relative displacements between the masses and the ground are
given in Figures (6.18-27) respectively.
Figure (6.18) shows the acceleration-time response at the considered 9 lumped mass
locations.
Figure (6.19) shows the displacement-time at the 9 lumped mass locations on the deck
Figure (6.20) shows the time history of the relative displacement of deck to the ground.
locations.
mass locations.
sections.
sides.
ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION |rad to ecz) ROTATIONAL ACCELERA TION (rad/sec* ) A C CELERA TIO N O F ST R U C T U R E [m /s e c 2]
Ptfi 6 p
O P
I °
o _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ia_ 0j i i i ii « s t b »
—4
-H o
>
n —
1 8
> d
Q £
5 1 Si
---------- 4
i *
OFMASS#4
----------- *
SO
60
ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION [rad /sec'] ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION (rad/sec ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION [rad/sec"
fb 6 6 6 6 o o o o 6 p
Ul
8
d
£
mu
I
£
8 fji
312
(A-7)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS46

1 (A-8)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#7
i-------- 1F ' T '[ |

illLILti i n 0.6 ^ -t-klr- f a * l _ -----1- . .
|0 4|
gj 0.2»
O Of
-0-5 |- 0 .4 | ..I,. . J k .J
If I 1’
^-o.or
*-0.6l
ooc rT
-1
0 10 20 X 40 SO 60
sJ 10 20
X 40 SO 60
(A-9)-HOTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS«8 (A-10)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#9
_
C*
1
l
“ 0.5
1 7
g 0.5
M l l l i i l i i l l
'P I ' f M ' I T ’ M T T f f T J j
3« al
U
§ 3 •
£-0.5 Hi > l
r rr M
I Ji.ll.UlnUUIll
i
10 20 X 40 50 60
s
0 10 X X 40
i 1 i 50 60
TIME [MC] TIME [sec]
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
313
(B-1)- TRANSLATIONAL MOTION (B-2)- ROTATION OF MASSS1

0.1
0.15
0.1 0.05
ilil
0.05
-0.05 o
X
■0.1 •0.05
-0.15
m v 'v irrr r 1
-0.10 10 20 30 40 50 60
40
TIME [sec] TIM E [seel
(B-3)- ROTATION O F M ASSS2 (B-4)- ROTATION O F M A SS43
!I ii., i 7 , I I I
0.04 M K m r n w m m 0.05
ill! " T iiiirri*
“I 0-
n i' ■
!O-0.C° i .
cc
■ O
c
-0.04 V .i . .u Mi -0.05 -
- 0.061 ILiikliUiliLUliJUIM
l
IUi
-o.oe; I
0 10 20 X 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [MCI TIM E [sec]
(B-5>ROTAT10N O F M A SS44 (B -6h ROTATION O F M ASSSS
o.aa
o°l I i
0.06
0.061 L illi l i h. Lu l l III!
0.04
i l f P " l ’| l' I 0.04J miniriPTifiiinii'iiififiiffifiiiiiiiHB
s~ | f ] ! l l ] ,| | r | , 1 , M | ! | n , | !| | l l f]l 1!| i | | B |
C0.02 r 0.02
r 111 f ' 1M ■
S
§-0.02• i >-0.02 li 1 ■
l„Lll,,.,. ill!! U l l l i a
-0.04 ILUlli i i i ii -0.04
■Uia11,1liiII<lililm
ti auiLiiliiukuUHi
muMiiiiui -0.06
•0.06
10 20 30 40 50 60
-0.1, 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [S id TIM E [sec]
314
(B-7>- ROTATION OF MASS46 (B-8)- ROTATION OF MASS#7

0 .0 6 |
—0.02
■0.04
10 20 30 40 50
T IM E s a c T IM E [s a c ]
(B -9 )- R O T A T IO N O F M A S S # 8 (B -1 0 )- R O T A T IO N O F M A S S « 9
)0 6 j- 1 0.081 | | |
o0 .0n6., 111 i l l „ . ■1.1 a -J _
0 .0 4
BmrwrnmmmnB
mmm* 1
0 .0 4
(ifi'ii" 'i' " “ j i r i ^ H 'f f ' ‘I*’" Mtgg
€Zo.c d 0.02
z
O r ■ i ■
i ■ § °h ■
§-0.< § -0.02
llliill i 11.11,, ,u i U .i B -0 .0 4
llJlMiL |i i l i t . 11111; 1 1
liiiiilitlliU J1UUB
•0 .0 4
- 0.061 it II
-oool •0 .0 8 I
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 X 40 SO 60
T IM E [s a c ] T IM E [sa c ]
Figure 6.19 Displacement and rotation-time response of each lumped mass
315
(C)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT OF THE STRUCTURE TO THE GROUND

0.1
0 .0 8
0 .0 6
Z 0.02
-0.1,
40
TIM E [sec]
Figure 6.20 Relative displacement-time response of structure

1.4
CM
1.2
12
MASS#
316
£30
25
_i
MASS#
Figure 6.22 Absolute translational peak accelerations of the lumped masses

0.1
0 0.08
“ 10.06
0 0 .0 4
0.02
MASS#
317
x 107 (F'1)-MAX!MUM MOMENTS
6.5
2 4 .5
3.5
2.5
SECTION #
x 10 (F-2)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
6.5
4.5
3.5
2.5.
20
SIDE#
318
x107 (G-I)-MAXIMUM STRESSES

1
ID
CO
CO
LU
E
CO
2
3
1
X
SECTION #
LD
co
co
ID
k k
20 25
SIDE#
319
»10* (H-1)-STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE «S , 10* (H-2)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE «6
0.8
0.8
0 .4
ui I
£-0.2 -
10
■0.4 -
•0.6 -
■0.8
20 30 40 20 30 40
TIME [SK] t im e [s k i
(H-3)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE S11 » IQ7 (H^)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE »12
I -2
-3
20 30 40
TIME (SK)
.« (H-Sh STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SI0E *17 , m a (H-6h STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE *18
I.5f » r T I I
os ■
20 30 40 SO 60 20 40 50 60
TIME [ncl
Figure 6.28 Stress-time response at the pier sides
320
6.5 The seismic response of the conventionally designed non-
symmetric system model

the material properties of the piers and deck are the same as the previous symmetric case
model are:
The span lengths:
L, = 70 [m]
L, = 72 [m]
L3 = 74 [m]
Lx = 69 [m]
The pier heights:
H\ = 21 [m]
H z = 17 [m]
H, = 19 [m]
The first four natural frequencies and the corresponding natural mode shapes of this
system are given in Table-6.2.
321
The corresponding numerical values of the lumped masses for the non-symmetric system
.5584 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3.6174 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 7.1173 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 8.0161 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 7.7339 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 8.1114 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 8.3854 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.0766 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.0156 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.5125
(6.25)
The corresponding numerical values of the stiffness of the discrete non-symmetric system
model can be written as:
0.0013 0 0 0.0031 0 0.0048 0 0.0038 0 0

0 0.5354 0.2677 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0.2677 1.0709 0.2677 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.0031 0 0.2677 1.1000 0.2603 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0.2603 1.0411 0.2603 0 0 0 0
0.0048 0 0 0 0.2603 1.0815 0.2532 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0.2532 1.0130 0.2532 0 0
0.0038 0 0 0 0 0 0.2532 1.0984 0.2716 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2716 1.0864 0.2716
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2716 0.5432
(6.26)
322
7 7 7 7 71
Figure 6.29 The non-symmetric bridge model and the different sides of the lumped
mass locations
Table -(6.2) Eigenvectors and natural frequencies in the longitudinal motion of the non-
symmetric system model for the first three modes
MODE L MODE MODE 3

2
w n (rad/sec) 6.8064 26.4328 28.0136
x [m] -1.0000 0.1132 -0.0016
a , [rad] 0.0006 0.2407 0.4703
Ctz [rad] -0.0011 -0.2541 -0.4419
Gtj [rad] 0.0038 0.3038 0.3754
CtA [rad] -0.0024 -0.3702 -0.2247
a 5 [rad] 0.0057 0.4085 -0.0005
Ct6 [rad] -0.0026 -0.4519 0.2319
a 7 [rad] 0.0045 0.3536 -0.3245
a % [rad] -0.0013 -0.2756 0.3388
a 9 [rad] 0.0007 0.2514 -0.3439
323
The system response is calculated for the El Centro earthquake disturbance shown in
Figure (6.7). The computed time history for the transverse accelerations, absolute
displacements at the different locations the relative displacements between the masses
and the ground are given in Figures (6.30-40) respectively.
locations.
Figure (6.31) shows the displacement-time at the 12 lumped mass locations on the
bridge.
Figure (6.32) shows the time history of the relative displacements of structure to the
ground.
Figure (6.33) shows the peak rotational acceleration values.
mass locations.
sections.
sides.
Figure (6.40) shows the time history of stresses at the different sides.
324
(A-1 y LONGITUDINAL ACCELERATION (A-2)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS»1

_ 40
M 1
N- *
l 30 I 08
8 , 0.6
Ul
§ 20 §0.4
h-
o 5 0.2 r'Kiinîi'iMTOmfmTTrai
(E 10
CO
cc
aUl 0 I i 1............. u
J I
O 0 Ifl
V O
£ - 0.2
^ -0.4 ■ lllilln J .M m iU U iL U lfli
5*1°
0.6
i l l 1 11° 11 T 1
1!
£ -
1
1-20 ,
1
U - 0.8
2•-so i
-1
0 10 20 30 40 SO 60 I 10 X 20 40 SO 60
TIME [seel TIME [seel
(A-3)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M A SS42 (A-4)-ROrATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M A SS«3
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0 .4
liI ,1i i . - 0 .4
Jin i,ill ,1,
| | r l||[p p ' 1'"’fin 'i’’"ftn
5 °'2 HI ' ■
3UJ 0
< - 0 .2 ! i a
§ -0 .4 b iiij
S ’0 -4 rm
:- 0.6
oE oE
-0 . 8, -0. 8”
10 30 20
40 so 60 10 X X 40 X X
TIME [seel TIM E [sec)
(A-5)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F M A SS44 (A-6)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O FM A SS#5
| 0-8
0. 6 ,
0.4
F I, ,
11> i ",
1
1.5
0.2 £0.5 1[.ill 1

mMj
Jil■ l i h l i Jl JL L. i l l
0
ui
- 0.2 8<
-j
-0.4 <
-0 -6 !
IKiii p -0 .5
-0.: 5
E w r
-1
10 20 X 40 SO 60 10 X X 40 X X
TIM E [seel TIME [seel
325
(A-7)-ROTATIONALACCELERATION OF MASSS6 (A-8HOTATIONALACCELERATION OF MASS*7
a_o.6 f ll. I
VII If
| 0.4
3 * 3o *
§-0-21 < - 0.2
■
^-0.4]
5-0.4
1.6
TT| j|J | 1 j
1*1.8
S-0. mI ..........
oc Xn
i *
-1 i 1 -0.81
10 20 30 40 SO 60 10 20 30 40 SO 60
TIME [sac] TME [SOC]
(A-9)-ROTATIONALACCELERATION OF MASSS8 (A-10)-ROTATtONALACCELERATION OF MASS49

O.81
! 0.6 0.8
it) £ 0.6
“ 0.4 tl; ji 1iii 1
2 |
%
2
0.2
IH
3 o* ui n
< ‘°-2|
*1
£ - 0.6|
>rT I W"
^■0.4 L
£ - 0.6 -
iiitiiiiiiiiiiitiiu iiu iiiiiil
a ll
O i - 0.8
<r
- 0.8
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 X 40 SO 60
TIME [SBC] TIME [sec]
Figure 6 3 0 Acceleration-time response of each lumped mass
326
(B-1)- TRANSLATIONAL MOTION

0 .2
0.15
0.1
| 0.05
iCO °
1-006
H
• 0.1
-0.15
- 0.2
20
TIME [sec]
Figure 6.31 Translational displacement of each lumped mass during the earthquake

0.1
0.08
*.0.04 -
jg 0.02
ui
-0.04
ui
-0.06
-0.08
20 60
TIME [tec]
Figure 6.32 Relative displacement-time response of deck
327

1.4
9 0 .4
UiO.2
MASS#
Figure 6 J 3 Absolute rotational peak accelerations of the lumped masses
CM
MASS#
Figure 6 3 4 Absolute translational peak accelerations of the lumped masses
328
30.05
LU
f 0.04
u.
So.03
z
F0.02
OC0.01
MASS#
x 10 (F-1 )-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
3.5
2.5
SECTION #
Figure 6 3 6 Peak moments in the sections
329
x -i o7 (F-2)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
I t w
E’4.5 I
z
CO
Z 4 a
UJ
V
5 3.5 .......0
3 J v M
1
X
i 3 A A P
*
]
2.5 \ l
10 15 20 25
SIDE#
Figure 6 J 7 Peak moments at the sides
x -io7 (G‘1)-MAXIMUM STRESSES

i f
CM
I,
co
Hi
CO
CO'
UJ
CC
5
3
1:
x
<
s
k
10 12
SECTION #
Figure 6 3 8 Peak stresses in the sections
330
x 10 (G-2)-MAXIMUM S T R E S S E S
CM
12
SIDE#
Figure 6 3 9 Peak stresses at the sides
331
« 107 (H-1>- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 46 „ 1Q> (H-2)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 46
Z. 1
0
UJ 0 '
-3
-3 -
40
TIME [ m c ]
„ 1Q> (H-3)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 411 „ 107(H-4)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 412
40 SO
TIME [sue)
, iq ' (H-5)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIOE 417 » 107 (H-8>- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 418
UJ UJ
-2
40 80 20 40
TIME [M C ]
Figure 6.40 Stress-time response at the pier locations where maximum stresses occurs
332
6.6 The seismic response of the conventionally designed, non-
symmetric, spatially input variable system model and
response analysis in the longitudinal direction

In some cases in different ground locations, the disturbances can have different
characteristics depending upon geological and geometrical heterogeneities, finite velocity
of wave propagation and wave source type. A general system model for this analysis is
shown in Figure (6.41). The dimensions and material properties are the same as those for
the non- symmetric case except the input disturbances. In this case the input disturbances
in the locations (1,3, and S) as given in Figure (6.42) are:
<5x l=<5x4=<5iS (6.27)
The inputs at the locations 2 and 3 are shown in Figure (42) have different characteristics.
* a.
Figure 6.41 Non-symmetric system model with longitudinal spatial variable

disturbances
333
GROUND DISPLACEMENT AT LOCATION 2 GROUND DISPLACEMENT AT LOCATION 3

0.1S 0.15
E 0.05
O -0.1
-0.15 -0.15
20 30 40
TIME[sec] TIME [seel
GROUND DISPLACEMENT AT LOCATION 4
0.15
i
0.05 I*
1' i i ■i
V it 1 ;
\ i 1 ! A \i
1' I
\
J %/
1
1
IS ft
i \ \I
V
V
0.1
- 110 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 6.42 The assumed spatial variable inputs of the El Centro earthquake in different
ground locations of the bridge
334
The system response is calculated for the El Centro earthquake disturbance shown in
Figure (6.42). The computed time history for the accelerations, absolute displacements
and absolute peak stresses at the different locations are given in Figures (6.43-52)
respectively.
locations.
Figure (6.44) shows the displacement-time at the 12 lumped mass locations on the
bridge.
Figure (6.45) shows the time history of the relative displacements of structure to the
ground.
locations.
Figure (6.47) shows the peak translational acceleration values.
sections.
sides.
Figure (6.53) shows the history of the calculated stresses at the different sides.
335
(A-1>- LONGITUDINALACCELERATION (A-2>-ROTATIONALACCELERATION OF MASS#!

jr*'
1
\
I
U
ocI
i
1
1
og t Iff11
|
I
£co
rn rA
1
il.
5
t
O i
2’
s 1
t
5- * 9 0 t
c
3-
iii
i
1
!
8-
(A-3)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#2 (A-4)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#3

• 0 .8 f
20 30 40 20 30 40 50 60
(A-5J-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#4 (A-6J-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#S

5 r ■
i [
i
i
0.5 - i
:
.y ■
j i L id i
<
cUJ
ui UJ
0 m il
j
8 -0 .5 -
o
S .5 1 i
i
n r i i i
I
!i !
i i
50 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [seel
336
(A-7)-ROTATIONALACCELERATION OF MASS46 (A-8)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS*7
20 30 40 20 30 40
(A-9J-ROTATIONAL. ACCELERATION OF MASS48 (A-10)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS49

—0.0
0.6
0.4
I 02 "M’r n n n
3 0
8*.
§-0.4
< - 0.6
2 - 0.8
10 20 30 40 50 60 20 30
337

0.1
0.05
2 - 0 .0 5
- 0.1
-0.15
30 40 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 6.44 Displacement time response of the lumped masses

0.15
•.0.05
UJ
UJ
■0.05 -
S -0.1
£-0.15
TIME [sec]
Figure 6.45 Relative displacement of the structure to the ground
338

1.4
1.2
MASS#
Figure 6.46 Peak translational accelerations of the lumped masses
(D*2)*TRANSLATIONAL PEAK ACCELERATIONS
230
MASS#
Figure 6.47 Peak rotational accelerations of the lumped masses
339
co (E)-PEAK ROATIONS [°]

UJ t ■ 8
co’
CO
---------
a 0.1
UJ
o.
io.08 —
UJ
X
0.06 * .......
O
*.........
o
I'
x
*
<
UJ 2 4 6 8 10 12
CL
MASS#
Figure 6.48 Peak rotations of the lumped masses
x 1()7 (F-I)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
E 10
SECTION #
340
E 10
SIDE#
107 (G-I)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
4 6 8
SECTION #
341
x 1o7 (G-2)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
... ......... .
► 1 1 ----- ...---------<
UJ
to
0)
UJ
£
(0
..... —
m~ —...... 1—-----------
20 25
SIDE#
342
107(H-1>- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 45 x 107(H-2)- STRESS-TIME RESPO N SE IN SIDE 46
co 0
CO
UJ
0■ 13
20 SO 60 40
10*(H-3>- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE «11 » »o*(H-4)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 412
0.5 0.5
-0.5
UJ
-1.5 -15 ►
50 20
TIME (sac)
, 107(H-5)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE »17 , 10?(H O - STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIOE 418
~=2
co 0 co
co 0
UJ
fe-2
•6► -6
20 40 50
Figure 6.53 Stress-time response at the pier locations
343
6.7 Seismic Response Analysis of the Isolated Bridges Using
Computer Controlled Concave-Ball Support Mechanism
(C.C.C-B.S.M) and Optimum Design of the Mechanism

The earthquake protection of bridges using the C.C.C-B.S.M is investigated in the
following. The considered model as shown in Figure (6.54), utilizes the specially
designed support mechanism as shown in Figure (6.55). These actively controlled
mechanisms are placed between the bridge and the ground to minimize the earthquake
energy transmitted to the structure. The springs, cams, concave steel base support with
specially coated surfaces and hollow spherical balls which are the main elements of the
mechanism are described in detail Appendix-[D]. The active control is used to keep the
system rigidly connected to the ground in normal conditions. Whenever the sensors
detect an earthquake disturbance, the cams turn 90° to allow the system to move. After
the shock ends the cams return back to the original position. A symmetric bridge as
shown in Figure (5.55) is considered for illustration. In this case
L1= L 2 = L j = L 4 = 7 5 [m]and / / 123 =14,21,14 [m] for the system model. According
to the lumped mass modeling shown in the Figure (6.55) the system has 12 lumped
masses. The general lumped mass matrix for this case is given in Equation (5.44) and the
corresponding mass distribution is shown in Figure (5.43). The connection stiffnesses are
calculated by using the finite element analysis given in Appendix-[B].
344
tV i!
E
(A
1.e
8
E
■oU
CO
a
2o.
u
■§
E
<D
CO
>s
CO
"O
a
O
CO
ffl
3
VO
22
.1
Efa
345
1
£
-auCfl
a
2Q.
O
I
£
B
Si
VI
>»
VI
■a
u
3
oV3
O
3
<u
o
e
o
o
E
T3
3
'5b
s
.o
«
JS
H
m
V)
\©
2
3d
346
6.7.1 Dynamic Equations of the System

It is assumed that there is no rotational motion of lumped masses 1,9,10,11, and 12. The
displacement of the lumped masses 1-9 and 10-12 are given in Equations (6.38-39). The
rotational motion of lumped masses 2-8 is shown in Equations (6.29-40).
12 Epl p 12 EpJ ,p | Y2Ep I p 12 E J , 12 E J , 12 E , l ,

Mxx+ X - " " X
-*■10 I 9 » r
11+*______ L, 3 i -12
1 , -*ll r
12
L h 3 h 3
6EJ 6EJa 6 EJ, 6E l 6 E l
p p-(^« ,)+
^. — V
p L<
^flf5>+-
w *> p_iaj)+— £ -i(ttl0)+— V -(« u )+ 6 E’ 1’ («,,)+ (6-28)
' H2 ' H2 Hf H2 H3
^ n ( M a)(s + z,) + Ew(x, - 6 d ( Me)(g + i 9 )sgn(r9 -<J«s(0)+tfw(jr, -<**>) = °
**1.9.10.11.12 “ 0
(6.29)
, .. 2E J d
/2ar, +—=M-or, + %EJd 2 «
1 ~ a 2 +—=M-or3 =0 (6.30)
6E/ 6E0/ 0 2EJd AEJa

l A — 5 E‘ x ~ l h L s * + -orI0 + --- “ g, +■ ■«, + i ^ L a .
H r, -
(6.31)
AEJd 2 Edl d
+ A d a , +■ A - - a . =0
Ly L,
r .. 2EJ, 8Edl d 2E. I,

(6.32)
*a * * ~ i ^ r a 3 + ^ r a * + —z ^ a 5 =
6£ p / p 6E J 2Edl d 2 E ,ld AE.l

d*d AEJ,
l 5a 5 - x-- H a„+ - a * + H or, + A - - a .
HS 5 £7 5
(6.33)
L, 5 L, 6
, „2Edl d SEJd 2Edl d

l 6d 6 + d -d a . + —= -4 -a 6 + - -1 d- a 1 =0 (6.34)
66 1^ 5 £3 £3
347
6£p/ p 6£p / p If,/, 2£ rf/ . 4£d/ d 4 £ ,/ ,

7 7 X ^ < * ,4 + — 4- —_f ' of. + —--------- U 7 + --=?
~l----- = ---- a-
rf u*
* H ' Z U H3 L3 (6.35)
A E J d 2E A ,
+ -l - d- a 7 + _ or8 = 0
^4
, .. 2 £ ,/ rf 8£rf/ , 2 £ ,/ ,
h at + y ai + - =l-4* - « g 4- L4
-? or9 = 0 (6.36)
L4
12£„/
p p
12£_/_
p p
ÎflXio + MefflO^b ( s + 210) 4- Al6(y,0 ^ ) 4- — *10“ 3 *3
//
6£ 0/„ 6£ /
^ 0 .0 = 0
(6.37)
12Erf/ rf
^n-*tt + /%iiA/c ) 4 Af6(.r,, <5^)4 ■*»“
H, 3 H,
6£„/
p p
a 5- 0,1=0
ff,2 »r
(6.38)
12£„/
p p 1 2 £ /,
^^12^12 ^ d (8 4"Zi2) (X,2 *^t4) "^ *12 '
//’
6£ / 6£ /
(6.39)
where
Af, r I2: The lumped masses [fcg]
a , 2j_ l2: The rotations of the lumped masses
O ,o .l M 2 = 0
348
sgn : The sign function
^ 61.9.10.11,12: Base support stiffnesses [ NI m]
l d = I ^ : Moment area inertia of decks to the y-y axis [m4]
I p = I ^ : Moment area inertia of piers to the y-y axis [m4]
g : Gravity acceleration [ m / 5 2]
z, 9 ,o.n.,2: The vertical displacements in the different locations [m]
^<^1.9.10.11.12: The effective coefficient of rolling friction in the different locations
fi0 : The coefficient of rolling friction
M’e fflS .m ill —

(-*1.9.1(11112 ^L5.13.4 m
(6.40)
Weight distribution in different support locations coming onto the spherical balls:
âM.cM.e ( ^ aJtxM.e^S (6.41)
(6.42)
10 (6.43)
—+ A/j + M u (6.44)
—+ Af7 + M i2 (6.45)
349
M = ——^- + Af, (6.46)

* 2 ’
zt9,0.11.12: The vertical accelerations in the different locations [m/sec2]
(■*1.9.10.11.12 ^ x l.9 ,1 0 ,1 1.12 ( ^ ) ) ^ (■*1.9.10.1 1.12 ^ x l.9 .1 0 .1 1.12 ( * ) )

^1.9.10.11.12 ~ 2(/? r)( sin
(6.47)
r ( ( * 1 .9 .10.11.12 ^xl.9.10.11.12 ( 0 ) N ( ( * 1 .9 .10.11.12 ^ x l.9 .1 0 .1 1 .1 2 (* ))
cos )
6.7.2 Design optimization

As we have mention before, there are some standards for the design of bridges in seismic
sensitive regions. The segments of bridges in the piers and decks are conventionally
designed to these standards. To increase the seismic resistance capacity of the
conventional rigid structures the stiffness of the system is generally increased. As a result
of increasing the stiffness, the transmitted force into the structure and its components will
be high. A design optimization based on displacement and stress can be done to find the
optimum dimensions of the different segments of the conventional bridge systems.
If a base isolation mechanism is installed at the support locations, the seismic transmitted
forces into the structure can be expected to be less than the rigidly supported case. For the
base isolated system analysis discussed in the chapter, the optimum dimensions of the
deck and pier selected for the conventional rigidly supported case are considered. The
decision parameters of the design optimization of the system are the specifications of for
the components of the proposed base isolated mechanism using concave seats and hollow
350
spherical balls. The system is controlled actively by a spring-cam system. The parameters
of the mechanism can be written as:
Kb: the base spring stiffness;
d : the distance between the base and the fully compressed spring ;
M b: the base support mass ;
H : the coefficient of rolling friction ;
The main objective of the design is minimizing the stresses occurring at the different
sections.
6.73 Decision variables
If the M b, r and fi 0 are set to their practical values and d is calculated based on the
R= the radius of concave seats
K b- the base support stiffness
b = the free gap distance
Here,Affr represents additional base mass of the isolation mechanism at different
locations. The design optimization parameters of the cam-spring system are shown in
Figures (6.56) and (6.57).
351
FORCE
DEFLECTION
right spring
352

The objective considered for optimization is the sum of the absolute maximum stresses as
normalized to the sum of the absolute maximum values for the rigidly supported case.
The objective function can be written as:
where
a ,: Peak stresses in the sections for the isolated case
a r : Peak stresses in the sections for the conventionally designed rigidly supported case
n = 1,2,3...... ,22: Side numbers
353
The finite element analysis of the system model is given in appendix-[A]. From the
analysis, the absolute maximum stresses in the sections can be written as:
Li 2 A iV
ov naxfl —max
^ (6.49)
ll
'L i A
^nuxi, = maxi (6.50)

4£ I ~>E I
( a -d-jL+ a^ ~ 1 “■)
3 ^ A
4£„/ 2V ,
10
<7maxc = max (6.51)
6£ / ^ 4£„/„ 2E,Ia
(x x10) + + or,
Hx Hv
Zi
l'-r (6.52)
= max
3^
y* ' '
o ^ ' —max) (6.53)

y*_
-*/
354
6E A AEJ 2E p / p
{ x - x n ) + a 5— u
H, H,
-x/ = maxi (6.54)
4E„I 2 E ,/,
^ | ( JC- x ll) + £rll — f -2 - + a s = p - )
//,
LV V
( a 5-4^^M/ ,- + a 6±2 E^J .) L l
5 5
O’
v max g = maxi
^
(6.55)
4 /^ /, 2EJ_,
(cr6- ^ - + a s ^ i )
5 5
Z -l
/,
= maxi (6.56)
LV
L\ 6 A
"6 E A . \ 4EJ
{ x - x v ) +a 1 ■ 12 2V p_
«3
o ^ , = maxi (6.57)
4EJ
(x-*,,) +or,. L l
H
LV. V
4 E ,/, 2EA
5
O’maxj, = max~
max (6.58)
4 E£ ,J/ , 2EJ
5
4 5 ,/, 2E A
5
O'oux* = maxi (6.59)
2EA
LV
355
6.7.5 Constraints
The maximum displacement of the structure relative to the ground should be restricted by
a certain maximum allowable value in order to control the maximum displacement of the
structure. The constraints for the ground connections can be stated as:
max|jt, - <y,,(/)| <0.20 [m] (6.60)
max|jt9 - £ xj(0| <0.20 [m] (6.61)
max|x,0 -<5x,(r)| <0.20 [m] (6.62)
max|xu — (r)| < 0.20 [m] (6.63)
max|jcl2 - J x4(r)| <0.20 [m] (6.64)
where
■* . . .
1 9 10 1 1.12 : The absolute peak displacements of the lumped masses A/I910.n.i 2 tml
<5(t) xi_2.3,o : The ground motions at the different ground locations [m]
The constraints for the radius of the concave base support:
2.5 < R <4 [m] (6.65)
The constraints for the coefficient of the base stiffness:
For simplification we assume that the base support stiffnesses are same in all support
locations. The constraint on the base stiffness normalized to the structural stiffness in
K = \ l E d l d [N/m] (6 66)
356
K „ = c f KM [N/m] (6.67)
0 < _ %K^ i 5 ,= c , < 1 (668)
Solid spring constraint:
After a certain relative displacement at the support locations, the base spring becomes
solid to control the relative displacement or displacement of the structure.
If max|y,-<yt(r)| >0.30 [m] (6.69)
max|y9 - <J5(f)| >0.30 [ml (6.70)
max|yl0 - J 2(r)|>0.30 [m] (6.71)
m ax^,, - <J3(r)| > 0.30 [m] (6.72)
max|y12-<y4(r)| >0.30 [m] (6.73)
the equations are:
•* 1. 9. 10. 11.12 = ^ ( ^ ) -^1,9,10.11.12 = ~ '£ (0 ( 6 .7 4 )
The constraint on the base stiffness normalized to the structural stiffness in different
locations.
o a *»i j j a 3 = c < i ( 6 .7 5 )
K '
358
6.8 The results of the optimized seismic response of the

The results of the optimized seismic response of the system to the El-Centro earthquake,
b = 0.05 and cf = 0.01, are given in the following figures:
locations.
Figure (6.60) shows the displacement-time response in the y direction at the 12 lumped
Figure (6.61) shows the time history of the relative displacements at the pier locations.
Figure (6.63) shows the absolute maximum rotations at the different lumped mass
locations.
sections.
sides.
359
(A-2)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS*1 (A-3)-ROTATIONALACCELERATION OF MASS«2
i
!
1
0.5 k l l i l U ! ll 1
I
ui
8-
< ■ f j i
‘ Ii !
' !
-0.5
O
= -1
I*-0.;
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac] TIME [see]
(A-4)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS43 (A-6)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#4
0.1
0.08]
£ 0.06
§0.04 I t
| 0.02 mi" i v m i i i i u n
3LU W 0
O 0.02 1.
-
. ii 1 11., i i f c l i l i U l l l i l j
^ -0.04I IL m J i i J i t t l l l U M M I
p-0.06
•0.08
2
- 0.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20
30 40 50 60
TIME [sec| TIME [see)
(A-6J-ROTATIONALACCELERATION OF MASS#5 (A-7HKJTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS46
0.1s
0.04
0 -0.08
c
20 30 40 50 20 30 40
TIME [see) TIME [seel
360
(A-By-flOTATlONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS47 (A-9J-R0TAT10NAL ACCELERATION O F MASS48

0 .1 5 |
Z 0.0S
-0 .06
-0.15
-0 .08
20 30
TIME [sec] T IM E [ s e c ]
(A -10)-R O T A T IO N A L A C C E L E R A T IO N O F M A S S 4 9
1
0.8
0.6
S 04
§Qm 0.2
Ul
^ 0^„ \
Ul
0 42
^■0.4
p-0.6
0 - 0.8
<c
10 20 30 40 50 60
T IM E [MC]
Figure 6.59 Rotational acceleration-time response of lumped masses
361
(B-1>- TRANSLATIONAL MOTION

0.15|
0.1
0.05 -
-0.1
•0.15 -
■0.2,
60
TIME [seel
(B-1y TRANSLATIONAL MOTION
0.151
0.1
]1
0.05 - i 1
L
TRANSLATION |m]
4ill Uik .L i l l
0.05
•0.1
M*l|l
-0.15 ■ * w __ j
!
■0.21 60
TIME [MCj TIME [mc|
,*10 (B-4)-ROTATION OF MASS*3 (B-5>ROTATION OF MASS44
-»10
" T I] f " n i'f f f m
II *. I M i i m M
20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [ssc] TIME [MCI
362
(B-6)- ROTATION O F MASS45

(B-7V ROTATION O F MASS46
0.01
0.006
0.006
— 0.002
-0.004
0.006
0.008
10 20 X 40 20 X 40 X 60
TIME [ M C l TIME [awl
_»1 0 (BO)- ROTATION OF MASS48
: i i i ni i 1 . I i
lrW ^ f T il —
' f I
1
j
I I I 10 X X 40 X 60 20 X 40 X
(B-10)- ROTATION OF MASS49
1
0.8
0.6
0/
—0.2
c 2
OO
0.4
0.6
0.8
10 X X 40 X X
TIME [sec]
Figure 6.60 Rotation and translation displacements of the lumped masses
363
(C-1>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT AT THE PIE R fl (C-2)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT AT THE PIER42
0.0151 u.uio
S 0.01 001
0.006 — 0.006
UJ
3 -0.006 3-0.006
-0.015 •0.015
20 30 40 60 20 30 40 60
TIME [M C ] TIME [sacl
(0 3 )- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT AT THE PIER43

0.0151
0.01
5 .0 .0 0 6 -
i-
2Ul
ui 0
5 -0 0 0 6
ui
■0.015
20 40
TIME [ M C |
Figure 6.61 Relative displacements-time response of the piers
364
(D)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14

ABSOLUTE ROTATIONAL PEAK ACCELERATIONS [rad/sec2]

1
CO
0)
0.5 1.5
PEAK ROATIONS OF THE LUMPED M A S S ^ q'*
365
x 10 (F-I)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
SECTION #
Figure 6.64 Peak moments at the sections
' t
I
A
lli
co
co
LU
CO
s I
I I .
IJ
10 12
SECTION #
Figure 6.65 Peak stresses at the sections
366
036
UJ
20
SIDE#
Figure 6.66 Peak moments at the sides
x 10
(G-2)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
CM
i
os
UJ
03
03
UJ
cc
b-
03
5
3
S
X
<
2
20 25
SIDE#
Figure 6.67 Peak stresses at the sides
367
107(H-1)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE INSIDE #5 , tn * (H-2)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE #6

1.51 T -
_ 0.5
UJ
•0.5
-1.5
20 30 40 50 50
TIME [MCI TIME [sac]
10* (H-3>- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE #11 110* <*•*>• STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE #12
_ 2
-2
20 40 50
TIME [ m c|
_ 107(H-5)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE #17

1.5| * I - ■ " I -------
1
1 My $
r fir ^r\j
i f f 8UJ o <4
e<0-0.: w
“ •OS ^“ n i
iI
10 50 60
TIME [MCI TIME [sac]
Figure 6.68 Stress-time response at the sides
368
(A)-PEAK ROTATIONAL ACCELERATIONS

1
-O - ISOLATED
RIGID
1
<0
Ui
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

PEAK ACCELERATIONS [rad/sec2]
Figure 6.69 Comparisons of peak rotational accelerations
(B)-PEAK TRANSLATIONAL ACCELERATIONS

-O - ISOLATED
-O - RIGID
J
* ▼
co Ki l l r
i i i
10 20 30 40
PEAK ACCELERATIONS [m/sec2]
Figure 6.70 Comparisons of peak translation accelerations
369
(C)-PEAK ROTATIONS
1
ISOLATED
RIGID
1
co
co
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

PEAK ROTATIONS OF MASSES [°]
Figure 6.71 Comparisons of peak rotations
(D)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
co
co
ISOLATED
RIGID
0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2
Figure 6.72 Comparisons of peak displacements
370
E \ /I A
Z ^ -------
0 cl 1
P
z
Ul .
S'
I -O - ISOLATED
-O- RIGID
i
SIDE#
Figure 6.73 Comparisons of peak moments at the sides
x 10 (E-2)*MAXIMUM MOMENTS
-O - ISOLATED
-&> RIGID
SECTION #
Figure 6.74 Comparisons of peak moments at the sections
371
. X 10
(F-1 )-MAXIMUM STRESSES
’ y ▼
1 - O - ISOLATED
1 RIGID
10 15 20
SIDE#
Figure 6.75 Comparisons of peak stresses at the sides
x 10 (F-2)*MAXIMUM STRESSES
12
1 ISOLATED
1 - O - RIGID
10
' 8
CO
ui 6
co
co
ui
tr.
K
CO
w0 2 4 6 8 10 12
SECTION #
Figure 6.76 Comparisons of peak stresses at the sections
372
(G)-ACCELERATION REDUCTION RATIOS
10 ►
Ui
Ui
1 1.5 2.5
NORMALIZED TRANSLATIONAL ACCELERATIONS
Figure 6.77 Normalized accelerations
NORMAUZED ROTATIONAL ACCELERATIONS
373
(M )-STRESS REDUCTION RATIOS
co 14
012
Ui
SIDE#
Figure 6.79 Normalized stresses at the sides
374
6.9 The results of the optimized seismic response of the non-

The results of the optimized seismic response of the system to the El-Centro earthquake,
the free gap distance b = 0.05 and the normalized stiffness cf = 0.001, are given in the
following figures:
locations.
Figure (6.82) shows the displacement-time response in the y direction at the 12 lumped
Figure (6.83) shows the time history of the relative displacements at the pier locations.
Figure (6.85) shows the absolute maximum rotations at the different lumped mass
locations.
sections.
sides.
Figure (6.90) shows the stress-time response at the different sides of the piers
375
(A-1)- LONGITUDINAL ACCELERATION
< -1 0
<-20
T IM E [s e c ]
(A-2)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS«1 (A-3)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS#2
1
£ . 0.02
8“
f= 0.01
i
3ui 0
o
o
< < 0.01
-J
l-M
O -0.03
£
§
-10 10 20 X 40 50 60
-0.04
0 10 20 30 40 SO 60
(A-4)-R0TATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASSS3 (A-5)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS44
0.06i 0.08
^ 0.06
! . 0.04
1
P 0.02Ir r in O T fflin n
Ij r f T' i 1' "■
3ui v0
o
9< - 0.02 I Ik*. 1 1 ! . *k 11 * , J
-0.04 Li Jiitiii
!-0.06
I
-0.08
20 X 40 10 20 X 40 X X
376
(A-6)-ROTATIONALACCELERATIONOF MASSSS (A-7)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS46

0.1
n i •r- o.oa
: in a
1 0.08
k
£ 004
0 2 r |^ H I | 0.02
$
aui o fe^ H
oo ua 0 ■ I, 14
.. i l l . Ui .A:.
<£•0.02 I I
1-0.04 I
0 2 [fl|
jftjiiLJitili
04 |! P 'l -0.06
1- f - 2 - 0 .0 8 J
f j
• 0.1
0 10 20 30 40 SO 60
(A-8)-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS*7 (A-9J-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION OF MASS48

0 .0 6
!
rr lllftll L iliLL i i I i L
oin m
01M R m m
j
-0.04 j IN i r ! f:
•0.06
20 30 40
TIME [ M C ] TIME [sac]
(A-1OJ-ROTATIONAL ACCELERATION O F MASS#9

1
0.8
b *
0.4
£ 02
yui 0
oo
<
-0.<
< - 0.6f-
2 0.8
-
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 6.80 Acceleration-time response of lumped masses
377

0 .2
0.15
0.1 ft
1
1 /
■g 0.05 j 1/' i T
I1 i j
I h il 1 W / •
P °
l ! 1 ; '■/ \l
5 T l j I;
I ! 1! J
1i i
/
i i V
J
2 *0 05
i
£ - 0.1 r
\ i \ !
V
-0.15 li \
V
- 0.2
-0.25
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
(B-2)- ROTATION OF MASS01 x10-» (B-3)- ROTATION OF MASS42

1
0.8
0.6
0..
| *|
02 —
ROTATION
0-
-02 —
•0.4 —
•0.6 —
-0.8 —
-1 10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50
TIME [ M C ] TIME (secj
*10' (B-*)- ROTATION OF MASS#3 (8-5)-ROTATION OF MASS44
TIME [aac] TIME [sacl
378
(B-6)- ROTATION OF MASS4S
0.01 0 11 1i
.I t 111 i
0.005 ■ | |L J [
ROTATION | °]
i
■0.006 T T T f ^71 fv r
•O,n.r"11
r
• 0.01
i
•0.015
20 30 40 SO 60
TIME [MCl TIME[SMl
(B-6)- ROTATION OF MASS«7
1
i
16 *-•—
»4- 3 i|i i 1
1
• ....i , . i
II ij . i k L
ML i, 1liit t Li
1 Hi I •
1 If i I M
!
1 I ' 1 1
IT11
1_
'
1’I ifr
TIME (m c ) TIME [n c ]
(B-10J- ROTATION OF MASSM
0.8
0.6
0.4
* - 0.2
I
g-o*
- 0.8
10 20 30 40 SO 60
TIME [MCl
Figure 6.81 Displacements of lumped masses
379
(C-1>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENTATTHE PIER#1 (C-Z>-RELATIVEDISPLACEMENTATTHE PIER#2

0.03| o.oa
• - 0.01 •. 0.01
Ui
0 ,-0 0 2
-0.03 ■0.03 -
-0.04 ■0.04
20 60
TIME [sec] TIME [sec)
(C-3)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT AT THE PIER43

0.03
0.02
'- 0.01
ui
ui 0.02
■
5-0.03
-0.04,
TIME [sec]
Figure 6.82 Relative displacement-time response at the pier locations
380
(D)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
1
CO
CO
0 0 .0 2 0 .0 4 0.1
0 .0 6 0 .0 8
ABSOLUTE ROTATIONAL PEAK ACCELERATIONS [rad/sec2]
(E)-PEAK ROATIONS f ]
co
CO
0 .5 1.5 2 2 .5
PEAK ROATIONS O F THE LUMPED M ASSESX
ASSESX1Q-*
10® (F-2)-M AXIMUM MOMENTS
16
14
1 ,2
1 10 ...............X 4 ----------4 — I — i— 1— I —
lli
O 8
2
3
2
X
<
2
i A i i
10 15 20 25
SID E #
x 10 (G-1)-MAXIMUM ST R E SSE S
2.5|
0.5 ►
SECTION *
Figure 6.86 Peak stresses in the sections at the sides
382
x 10 (G-2)-MAXIMUM ST R E S SE S
2.5i
0.5
25
SIDE*
383
X 107(H-1)- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE «S _ .fJ (H -2)- S T R E S S -T IM E R E S P O N S E IN S ID E 46

1.5)
as - 0.5
-1.5
40 20 30 40 50 60
TIM E (MCI TIM E [sac]
x 107(H-3>- STRESS-TIME RESPONSE IN SIDE 411 « iq 'I I ^ ) - S T R E S S -T IM E R E S P O N S E IN S ID E 412
1.5
0.5 0.5
i13-0.5°ii
-1.5 - -1.5 -
40
T IM E [s a c l
. m 7(N-5)- S T R E S S -T IM E R E S P O N S E IN S ID E 4 1 7 x 107(H -6 h S T R E S S -T IM E R E S P O N S E IN S ID E 4 1 8
1.5| '‘ I I ' ■— 1
0.5
•0.5 - -0.5
-1.5 - -1.5
20 40 60 20 30 40
T1ME[MC] TIM E [aac]
Figure 6.88 Stress-time response at the different sides of the piers
wO*V
(D)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
10 ►
M 6 -
I
- O - ISOLATED
- O - RIGID
0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22
Figure 6.89 Comparisons of the peak displacements of the lumped masses
. x 10
(E-1)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS
T*~5 ■
ISOLATED
RIGID
10 15
SIDE#
Figure 6.90 Comparisons of the peak moments at the sides
385
x 10 (E-2)-MAXIMUM M OMENTS
ISOLATED
4.5 RIGID
3.5
£ 2 .5
1.5
0.5
SECTION #
Figure 6.91 Comparisons of the peak moments at the sections
x 10 (F-I)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
-O - ISOLATED
- U - RIGID
LUO
20 25
SIDE#
Figure 6.92 Comparisons of the peak stresses at the sides
386
x 10 (F-2)-MAXIMUM STRESSES
ISOLATED
- O - RIGID
6►
u j3
SECTION #
Figure 6.93 Comparisons of the peak stresses at the sections
(G)-ACCELERATION REDUCTION RATIOS
10-
CO
co
i
3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

NORMALIZED TRANSLATIONAL ACCELERATIONS
Figure 6.94 Normalized peak accelerations
387
(O
<0
<
S
5 10 15 20
NORMALIZED ROTATIONAL ACCELERATIONS
Figure 6.95 Normalized peak accelerations
(MISTRESS REDUCTION RATIOS
20
ac 15
20 25
SIDE*
Figure 6.96 Normalized peak stresses
3 88
cases of the symmetric bridge system to the Taft
earthquake
The absolute peak response of the optimum designed conventional and base isolated
system is given in the following figures for the comparison of two cases.
Figure (6 .97-A) shows the comparison of the peak rotational acceleration response at the
Figure (6.97-B) shows the comparison of the peak translational acceleration response at
the considered 12 lumped mass locations.
Figure (6.97-C) shows the comparison of the peak rotation response at the considered 12
lumped mass locations. *
Figure (6.97-D) shows the comparison of the peak translational response at the
Figure (6.97-E) shows the comparison of the calculated maximum stresses at the different
sections.
Figure (6.97-F) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum translational
accelerations of the 12 lumped masses. It can be seen from Figure (6.79-B) that the
maximum translational acceleration in the conventional design is reduced approximately
7.5 times respectively by incorporating with the optimized isolated support.
Figure (6.97-G) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum rotational
accelerations of the 12 lumped masses. It can be seen from Figure (6.97-B) that the
3 89
rotational acceleration in the conventional design is reduced approximately 10 times
Figure (6.97-H) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum stresses at the
different sections of the two cases. It can be seen from Figure (6.97-E) that the maximum
stresses at the critical deck sections (sections 1 and 3) and at the critical pier sections
(section 6) are reduced approximately 19 and 11.5 times as a result o f the proposed base
isolation mechanism.
(A)-PEAK ROTATIONAL ACCELERATIONS (BJ-PEAK TRANSLATIONAL ACCELERATIONS

19 ISOLATED ISOLATED
RIGID RIGID
%
0) CO
0 .0 2 0.04 0.06 0 .06 0.1 0.12

PEAK ACCELERATIONS [rad/MC2] PEAK ACCELERATIONS [m /sec2]
(C>-PEAK ROTATIONS (D)-PEAK DISPLA CEM ENTS

ISOLATED
RIGID
CO
CO
2-
ISOLATED
RIGID
0.01 0.02 0.03 0 .04 0.05 0.1 0.11 0 .1 2 0 .13 0 .14 0.15
PEAK ROTATIONS O P M A SSE S n
[°] PEAK D ISPLA CEM ENT O P M A S S E S [m]
390
x 10 (E-1)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS x10' (E-2)-MAXIMUM MOMENTS

ISOLATED - O - ISOLATED
RIGID - O - RIGID
lit
25
S ID E * SECTIO N »
x 10 (F-I)-MAXIMUM S T R E S S E S (F-2)-MAXIMUM S T R E S S E S
x 10
O - ISOLATED ISOLATED
RIGID - O - RIGID
20
S ID E * SEC TIO N •
(GhACCELERATION REDUCTION RATIOS (H)-ACCELERATION REDUCTION RATIOS
10 “
co co
0.4 0 .5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0.6 0.8 1.2

NORMALIZED TRANSLATIONAL ACCELERATIONS NORMALIZED ROTATIONAL ACCELERATIONS
391
(M )-STR ESS REDUCTION RATIOS
co
LU
co
co
UJ
£CO
o
UJ
N
QC
O
z
SID E #
Figure 6.97 Comparison of Rigid and Base Isolated Cases for the seismic response of
the symmetric system model with the optimized design parameters K b =1.01 I0 3 [N/m],
b = 0.05[m] and R = 3[m\.
392
The response of the conventional and base isolated bridges to the Taft earthquake (Figure
3-a) is calculated for the considered longitudinal disturbance using the 4th order Runge
Kutta numerical integration.
The absolute peak longitudinal response of the two designs at the considered 12 locations
is given in the following figures for comparison between the two cases.
Figure (98-A) shows the peak rotational acceleration response.
Figure (98-B) shows the peak translational acceleration response.
Figure (98-C) shows the peak rotational response.
Figure (98-D) shows the peak translational displacement response.
Figure (98-E) shows the calculated maximum stresses at the different sections.
Figure (98-F) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum translational
accelerations of the 12 lumped masses.
Figure (98-H) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum rotational
accelerations of the 12 lumped masses
Figure (98-1) shows the reduction ratios of the calculated maximum stresses at the
different sections. It can be seen from the figure that the stresses at the critical pier
sections (6,9) are reduced approximately 6 and 6 .S times as a result of the proposed base
design.
393
(A)-PEAK ROTATIONAL ACCELERATIONS (B)-PEAK TRANSLATIONAL ACCELERATIONS

1f t
ISOLATED - O - ISOLATED
RIGID - O - RIGID
U
i
CO
0 .0 2 0.04 0.06 0.08

P E A K A C CELERA TIO N S [rad /sac2] PEA K A C CELERA TIO N S [nV sec2]
(C)-PEA K ROTATIONS (D)-PEAK D ISPLA C EM E N T S

1 ft ISOLATED
ISOLATED
RIGID RIGID
ft
C/)
CO
co
co
i I
0 .0 0 5 0.01 0 .015 0 .0 2 0 .0 25 0.03 0 .1 2 0 .1 4 0.16 0 .1 8 0.2

PE A K RO TA TIO N S O F M A S S E S [°] PEA K D ISPLA CEM EN T O F M A S S E S [m]
(E-1 (-MAXIMUM M O M EN TS xIO (E-2)-MAXIMUM M O M EN TS

x 10
- O - ISOLATED - O - ISOLATED
- O - RIGID 3.5 - O - RIGID
3.5 ►
;z5 ;25
1.5 1.5 ►
0.5
20
S ID E * SE C T IO N »
394
, 1Q7 (F-1)-MAXIMUM s t r e s s e s x 10 (F-2)-MAXIMUM STRESSES

ISO LATED ISOLATED
RIGID RIGID
co
ui
CO
UJ
Oo
25
SE C T IO N #
(G hA CC ELERA TIO N REDUCTION R A TIO S (H)-ACCELERATION REDUCTION RA TIOS
10 -
*
co
co
0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0.8 1.2 l.5 1 1.5 2.5

NORMALIZED TRANSLATIONAL A C CELERA TIO N S NORMALIZED ROTATIONAL ACCELERA TIO N S
(l-1 )-S T R E S S RE D U C TIO N R A TIO S
04
i3
2“
25
S ID E *
Figure 6.98 • Comparison of the longitudinal seismic response for rigidly supported and
isolated bridges.
395
6.11 Summary
The Longitudinal response of conventionally designed symmetric and non-symmetric
bridges to seismic inputs has been investigated in this chapter. The bridges are modelled
as a discrete parameter system with 12 masses. The stiffness of the connecting springs is
evaluated by a finite element analysis.
A proposed base isolated system is used in conjunction with the conventional bridge
designs. The results for the seismic response of the symmetric bridge system in the
longitudinal direction as compared to the corresponding peak values for the rigid support
cases are given in Figure (6.97). It can be seen from Figure (6.97-B) that the maximum
translational acceleration in the conventional design is reduced approximately 7.5 times
by incorporating the proposed isolated support. It can be seen also from Figure (6.97-H)
that the maximum rotational acceleration in the conventional design is reduced
approximately 10 times by incorporating the proposed isolation system.
Figure (6.97-F) shows the stresses at the critical deck section (section MI) are reduced
approximately 20 times and at the critical pier section 11.5 times respectively as a result
o f the proposed base isolation mechanism. It should be noted that the maximum stresses
occur at the pier locations in this case.
The summary results of the non-symmetric bridge analysis are given in Figure (6.80). It
can be seen from Figure (6.80-B) that the maximum translational acceleration of the
conventional design is reduced approximately 3.9 times by incorporating the proposed
support. It can be seen also from Figure (6.80-H) that the maximum rotational
acceleration in the conventional design is reduced approximately 22 times by
incorporating the proposed support. Figure (6.80-F) shows that the stresses at the critical
pier sections are reduced approximately 4.0 and deck sections 26 times as a result of the
proposed base isolation mechanism.
397
CHAPTER-VII
7 The Seismic Response Analysis of the Conventionally
Designed Multi Span Bridges in the Vertical (z)
Direction
7.1 System Model
When a seismic base isolation is used at the base to protect the structure in the
Longitudinal and Transverse directions of the Multi Span Bridges, the vertical seismic
response can be critical. Figure (7.1) shows a general illustration of a multi span bridge
system used in Highway and Railroad transportation. In this case four spans and three
piers are utilized to accommodate the site topology. In this system the two ends are
considered to be pinned the ground and the pier, deck and the ground connections are
assumed to be rigid. A discrete mass model is used for the dynamic response analysis.
The equivalent Lumped System Model shown in Figure (7.1) is represented by 12
Equivalent Lumped Masses at different locations in the system. The evaluation of the
equivalent lumped masses is given in Appendix E. The stiffness matrix of the system is
found by using a finite element analysis given in Appendix-[B,E]. The equivalent lumped
mass matrix in the parametric format is calculated in Equation (7.3). The Structural
damping is neglected as a safety factor. The Input Disturbing Function is given in
Equation (7.12). The system dynamic model is given in Equations (7.10-17). The First,
Second and Third mode natural frequencies of the system and corresponding mode
398
shapes are shown in Figure (7.4) and (7.5) for the two cases of symmetric and non-
symmetric topology. The dimensions and material properties of the system are the same
as those considered for the bridge model given in Chapter-V. Generally, it is assumed
that the vertical component of the El Centro Earthquake is approximately equal to 1/3-1/2
ratio of its horizontal component (Ref.69). The dynamic response of the system to the
input shown in Figure (7.4) is investigated in the following analysis.
7.1.1 The Equivalent Lumped Mass Model in the Vertical Directional Motion of the System
«----------- 2 ------------------ — U ------------- — ^------ H
K - s f 36 ( t - A t 2)
M , z} M 2 - Z2 ^ 3 -5^3 M ^ Z 4 ^ V * z7 ^ 8 ,-* l
3$
K = sf M t ) S 4 l = s f 4S ( t - A t 4)
6 2l = s f2S (t - A t i ) = sf3S (/ - A t 2) S 4 l =s f 2S (t - At 3)
Figure 7.1 A General Conventional Designed Bridge Model and Lumped Mass Model in the vertical (z) direction
399
400
7.2 Dynamic equations of the system model
The equation of motion of the system can be stated as:
Zl = 6 zl (7.1)
+
r 3Edl d ( 12Edl d 1 1Z3 f 3E ,/„ ^8 ., =0
1 2 E„C
(7.2)
(0.9E , ) 3 (l.lL j)3.
<•2
la-li,)3J [(0.9L, J )3
\
12E,/, t I2£d/ d t \ E , I 2 £ / , 'I fl2EAl fA £ ^
Af3 z3 + Z3 - Zj - 5. =0 (7.3)
[(1.1I,)3 £ ,3 H> y) [ ( l.li ,) 3 J \ )
Z*~
V 1 / z;3
H E dl d . 12 E rf/ / f 1 2 E ,/, ]
+ z, - z3- z5=0 (7.4)
L ^23 ^ .3 J L -, 3 \
L -, 3 J
\ J
\
12E(// << | 12Erf/ (f | f 12£ ,/„ 1 f 12^0
Afsz5 + ia = 0 (7.5)
V v y
z5-
? J
Z 4-
I ^
ti<r>___
J
1
I J
M jZg +
'12 Edl d \2E dl d f 1 2 Erf/ rf 1z5 - f l 2 E , / d \ z7 = 0 (7.6)
Zfi “
L ^ ^ \ J I ^ J
\
{ l2Edl d ) r \2Edi d 'i
Z7 - z6" \ A ' E A
*4 =0 (7.7)
77 ^ l.I L 43 / / 3 JJ { V J v. l .l l *43 > \ J y
r 3Erf/ d t Y2Edl d 1 f 12E

,/, ] 3 M , . 1^ 5 = 0
8^8 Z8 Z3 (7.8)
(0.9 E4 ) 3 (1.1LJ 3 [(1.1E4)3J [(0.9L4)3J
Z, = ^15 (7.9)
401
7.2.1 Equation of Motion of the system in matrix format

7.2.1.1 The Mass Matrix
Figure (7.2) shows the lumped mass model for the assumed non-symmetric, multi-span,
highway bridge system. The equivalent discrete parameter system is modelled by 12
lumped masses in this case. The evaluation of equivalent lumped masses is given in
Appendix-E for the different boundary and geometric conditions. In order to formulate
the effective equivalent masses at different locations, the following assumptions are
made:
1)- For the formulation of equivalent lumped masses at the two ends it is assumed that the
decks are rigidly attached to the piers and pinned to the ground. It is identified as pinned-
rigid case in Appendix-E. The maximum deflection in this case occurs at 0.9L, and
0.9L 4 from the left and right ends. The equivalent effective lumped mass distribution is as
shown in Figure (7.2).
2)- For the equivalent lumped mass of the piers the massless spring with maximum end
displacement as given in Appendix-[C] is considered. In this case the effective lumped
H UU
mass is equal to M {ff = mp —- —.
3)- By assuming the pier-deck connections between two piers are rigid the equivalent
5 3
lumped masses are distributed by the ratios — ( L j ^ J a n d —(1^,1^) and the maximum
16 8
deflection occurs at the middle as shown in Figure (7.2).
4 02
( 0 .2 2 5 ) /, ( 0 .4 5 ) /, ( 0 .3 2 5 ) /. [6 L, ( 0 .3 2 5 ) /, (0 .4 5 )/., ( 0 .2 2 5 ) /,
Figure 7.2 The distribution of equivalent lumped masses for the general non-symmetric
system model
Because the dynamic response of the lumped masses at the ground
c o n n e c t i o n s a n d M l2 will follow the input disturbance, the response of
the lumped massesA/2 ,M 3 ,A/ 4 ,Af5 ,Af 6 ,A/ 7 and M %only will be investigated for the
given El Centro earthquake.
The mass matrix of the system in this case can be expressed as:
M2 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 m3 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 M* 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 m5 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 M6 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 m7 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 M
4 03
(/n„ ( 0 .4 5 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H, 5 N—
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
V
p 3 “ '1 6 '
3Lj ^
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
v 8 ,
r 5 - H,
[a* L 8 = 0 0 0 0 I " ' 0 0 0
16
0 0 0 0 0 0 Lm 3^3 0 0
5 H
0 0 0 0 0 0 mi (— )L, + m - r - + md(0.325)L4
16' J p 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (md (0.45) L4 )
(7.11)
(frmontt}
cSxm19^
(Sxfliow
Figure 7 3 The symmetric bridge model considered for the seismic response analysis
and its different segments
The corresponding numerical values of the lumped masses for these two cases in the
matrix format can be written as:
The corresponding numerical values for the symmetric case:
6.2944 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 9.4024 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 5.2453 0 0 0 0
[ w L = 10s 0 0 0 9.4702 0 0 0 [kg] (7

0 0 0 0 5.2453 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 9.4024 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 6.2944
The corresponding numerical values for the non symmetric case:
5.8747 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 9.1671 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 5.0355 0 0 0 0
[A/La = 1 0 5 0 0 0 9.0984 0 0 0 [kg] (7.

0 0 0 0 5.1754 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 9.1537 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 5.7908
405
(7.14)
m i
•sT
- 's
o’
•d
'd
'3 si
i---- — i
■ft
m i^ r
a " | n7 _'
_i
i i
ij* •f\
—
a •fI
i
a
IJ*
CN I
*N
n
*7 tsj*- r»
H: <N
n
+ 1 1
1 i ■ft
a ------------- —
n
"ft ■«
m
a ' Ixf IS
a 5 l-J
a"
-■ i - —1
“N tI I
The stiffness matrix can be stated in the matrix format:
“1
ft* •-*1m
i^r
i 1 a"
+ rt _I
■o
i^ r 5CN' IJ*
i 1
a
+
§
i-r
■O- M
»sT * ft
■f §
a ' IJ*
InJ*
a i f
+
•ft ■d*
ri
'ST §
O'
406
The corresponding numerical values of the Stiffness Matrix for the symmetric case:
0.0117 -0.0080 0 0 0 0 0
-0.0080 1.0438 -0.0107 0 0 0 0
0 -0.0107 0.0213 -0.0107 0 0 0
= (1 0 10) 0 0 -0.0107 0.7048 -0.0107 0 0

[N/m] (7.15)
0 0 0 -0.0107 0.0213 -0.0107 0
0 0 0 0 -0.0107 1.0438 -0.0080

0 0 0 0 0 -0.0080 0.0117
The corresponding numerical values of the Stiffness Matrix for the non-symmetric case:
0.1435 -0.0985 0 0 0 0 0
-0.0985 7.0533 -0.1205 0 0 0 0
0 -0.1205 0.2410 -0.1205 0 0 0
0 0 -0.1205 8.6738 -0.1110 0 0 [N/m] (7.16)

[K: U
0 0 0 - 0 . 1 1 1 0 0 .2 2 2 0 - 0 . 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 -0.1110 7.7675 -0.1029

0 0 0 0 0 -0.1029 0.1498
The Forcing Function:
w here,
<5., = 6 zl = <5 .3 = <5. 4 = <5. 3 represent the El-Centro earthquake as given in Figure(7.4).
VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT
0 .0 4 s :
t |
I
ce .0 .0 3 1
t
t
1
a J ............ L ........... i ................
z 0.02 ■ I
3
o u a . I
(C 0.01 I I\ \ i i I -,
(9 \ i 1 i
UJ
O
M i
\
'
i 1
I
i
\
\
I
\
\
\ i
1 1 ,f \ f j \
i/
n
£ - 0.01
UJ
i
i f
1
i 11
* I /
2i- 0 .0 2 ■I 1
I « • :
§a ! -0 .0 3 J . . . . . . . . . . . . . j
1 li i
co . . . . 1. . . . . . j
il
5 <Y
-0 .0 4
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sec]
Figure 7.4 The input disturbance in the vertical direction
408
7.2.1.2 The Equation of Motion in the Matrix Format:
M2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z,z z2
•• Kn *22 * 2 . *22 *26 127 K 28 ApEps z2
0 A/, 0 0 0 0 0 0 h *3 H
•• Kn *22 *24 *22 *26 37
K 38
0 0 M4 0 0 0 0 0 Za4 *4 0
•• *22 *42 *44 *42 *46 K„ K 48
0 0 0 Ms 0 0 0 0 ZsJ z5
•+ AT22 * 2 2 k 21 ,
k 38 -J l j l s 3
•• *24 *22 *26
0 0 0 0 m6 0 0 0 Zk0 *6 //2 z3
(7.18)
*22 *62 *64 *62 *66
k 21 k ,68
00 0 0 0 i 0 0 z7I *7 0
*22 * 7 , *74 *72 *76 77
K.78
0 0 0 0 0 0 M .o 0 h *8 A PE P s
•• *22 * ., *64 *82 *86
K, 7 K,88 z4
00 0 0 0 0 0 m 9 V IV
1 2 ^ ,,
3 z5
V
(7.19)
409
7.3 The results of the vertical seismic response of the
symmetric and non-symmetric bridge system to the
vertical input in the longitudinal direction

The dynamic responses of structures to seismic disturbances are dependent the wave
propagation direction. In this chapter we consider two different cases for the vertical
dynamic response. The case discussed in this section assumes that the earthquake wave
propagates in the longitudinal direction. In this case, the phase shift becomes very
important and the vertical inputs are shifted by A/ = — as a function of distance and the
c
wave propagation speed in the ground (see Fig.7.5).
Figure 7.5 The wave propagation travelling in the longitudinal direction and analysis of
motion of a general conventional designed lumped mass bridge model in the vertical (z)
direction
410
The results of the natural modes and the seismic response of the symmetric an non-
symmetric system to the vertical input shown in Figure (7.4) are given in the following
figures:
Figures (7.7) and (7.17) show the acceleration-time response at the considered 12 lumped
mass locations.
Figures (7.8) and (7.18) show the displacement-time response in the y direction at the 12
lumped mass locations on the bridge. (7.22)
Figures (7.9) and (7.19) show the time history of the relative displacements between the
lumped masses.
Figures (7.10) and (7.20) show the peak acceleration values at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figures (7.11) and (7.21) show the absolute maximum displacements at the different
Figures (7.12) and (7.22) show the absolute magnitude of the maximum relative
displacement between two lumped masses.
Figures (7.13) and (7.23) shows the calculated absolute peak force values acting on the
structural sections at the different sections.
Figures (7.14) and (7.24) show the calculated maximum stresses at the different section
Figures (7.15) and (7.25) show the normalized peak acceleration values at the different
Figures (7.16) and (7.26) show the normalized peak displacement values at the different
411
MODE SHAPES
O.81
MODE #1 (wn1=13.57710 (r/s))
-m - MODE #2 ( w ^ 13.57711 (r/s))
0.6 ►
MODE #3 (W^l 9.9465 (r/s))
0.4 ►
-0.4
- 0.6
- 0.8
LUMPED MASS *
(a )
MOOE SHAPES
1.2 |
M O O E tl (wn| =.1554(1/8))
MOOE #2 (tojgsl&OO ((A))
MOOE <3 0 * ^ 3 0 .3 5 (t/a))
aa ►
i 0.6 -
ui
la.-
U
0.2 ►
-a?
LUMPED M A SS*
(b)
Figure 7.6 Mode shapes and natural frequencies in the vertical directional motion of the
symmetric (a) and non-symmetric (b) system model
412
(A-1)- ACCELERATION OF MASS*1 (A-2)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#2

1.5
* ill,,.!
17
| 0.5
a -0.5
60 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac] TIME [sac]
(A-3)- ACCELERATION OF MASSS3 (A-4)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#4
i l l !
-0.6
0-0.8
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [SOC]
(A-5)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#5 (A-6)- ACCELERATION OF MASSS6
T
I«
1 .0 .5 - I
in s 4
w
2~i
!
fc
!-2 -
<
Q C.
UJ
-I
UJ
o-
o r !
40 50 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [SOC] TIME [sac]
413
(A-7)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#7 (A-flh ACCELERATION OF MASSc3

0.8
0.6
I ] [
— 0.4 I I I
r*-
4*
co
co
qo j]Jli k i t . .1 I I '
!
i-0-2
I 1
I"
Uj-0.6 I I i
ui
8-0-8
1
-1 I I |
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50
(A-9)- ACCELERATION OF MASSH9 (A-10)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#10
1.5 1.5
0.5
a -0.5
20 40 60 20
(A-11y ACCELERATION OF MASS*11 (A-12)■ ACCELERATION OF MASSS12
1.5
CM
0.5
40 60 40 50 60
414
(B-1 y DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«1 (B-2>- DISPLACEMENT OF MASSS2

0.04
E 0.06
| 0.01
$-0.01
UJ
O
5 - 0.02
0.
CO
5-0.03 5-0.06
-0.04 -0.08
40 10 20 30 40 50 60
(B-3)* DISPLACEMENT OF MASS43 (B-4)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS44
0.04i- 0 .0 4r
1 0 .0 3 - •g- 0.03
8 0.02 -
0.01
-0.04
SO 60
(B-5)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS45
“ 0.04
« 0.02
2 -0.01
o
UJ
5 -0.02
a. cn-0.04
09
5-0.03
-0.04 -0.06
20 10 20 30 40 50 60
415
(B-7)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#7 (B-8>- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS48

0.04 0.05)
|m)
DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«7
52 0.02
0.01 0.01
-0.01
-0.04
-0.04 •0.05
SO 40 60
(B-9)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«9
0.04 '
f0 .0 3 I
nA
;i \
co t J
I■
0.01 /
I
f\ \
Hi \ i \ I y i\l /V\ \ S* \ t
2 -0.01
I !l| I
,
,
i
11 \ J
I
jiill t
I
1 1
I li
V
1
a.
m l : , i
tf
.....r™- i
"l
-0.04
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [sac]
416

(C-Z)-RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
0.04
0.051
£.0.04 “ 0.03
£ 0.01
r* 0.01
co 0 .0 1
q O.OI
>0.02
ui 0 .0 9
10 20 30 40 50 60 20 30 40

0.015
i
d
i?
C i°
Ill, , H
i L i im
51
°'jL M L
5
— $
oJ 0.005
f
T <
a2
j■ r
u
r »
0.01 Tr 1 s 01.1.. 1
u 0 .0 1 5
§ 1 T*
10 20 » 40 50 60
TIME [sac] TIME (sac)
(C-5)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (CO)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
£ 0.015 § . 0.015
0.005
<30005 52 0.005
2 0.01
0015
I F 2 0.01
a 0.015 IF
20 30 40
TIME [sac] TIME [sac]
417
(C-7>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-8)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

o.cei 0.03|
£ 0.015
30.02 -
« 0.01
2-0 .0 0 6
5-001
-0.015
20 X 40 20 X 40
(C-flh RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT x 1Q-» (C-9)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
0.03i
C i2
5-2
o -0.01
10 X X 40 X X
TIME [MC| TIME [sec]
0.015 0.021
6. 0.015 -
“ 0.01
0.005
aoi r
Z 0 006
ui ui
n
0-0.005
ui
a
2-0.006
UI
ui -0.01 2-0.015 -
-0.015
X X 40 X X X 40
TIME [Me] TIME [sec]
(D -I)-PEA K ACCELERATIONS
'0 2 4 6 8
(D-2)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
co
C/3
0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08

Figure 7.11 Absolute peak displacement of the lumped masses
419
(D-3)-ABS0LUTE RELATIVE PEAK DISPLACEMENT
ozh
o
UJ
CO
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05

MAX[ABS(Zn-Z(v1)]tm]
Figure 7.12 Absolute relative displacement between the lumped masses
1
1
ozh—
oUJ
CO
0.5 1.5
FORCES [N] .8
X 10
Figure 7.13 Absolute maximum Forces
420
Maximum forces in each section:
(max|(z2 - z, )|)
(max|(z3 - z2)|)
A3
(max|(z3 - z l0)|)
H
^ E dI d
(max|(z4 - z3)[)
L,3
12E„/„
(max|(zs - z 4)|)
L,3
v - /
(max|(z3 - zn )|)
flH A
(max|(z6 - z 5)|)
f l 2 £ A l (max|(z7 —z6)|)
a pe ^
(max|(z7 - z,2)|) (7.20)
l ">
' l2EdI d '
(max|(zg - z 7)|)
v ^
(max|(z9 - zg)|)
LV A 3
421
The finite element analysis of the system model is given in Appendix-[C]. From the
analysis, the absolute maximum stresses in the sections can be written in the matrix
format.
(E
(max|(z3 - zl0)|)
(max|(z4 - z 3)|)
p
(max|(z5 - z 4)|) L l
(max|(z5 - zu )|)
(max|(z6 - z 5)|)J^ -
(max|(z7 - z 6)|)J^ -
(max|(z7 —z,2)|)
(7.21)
(m ax |(z ,-z 7) |) |^ -
i
yd
(max|(z9 - Zs)|)J~
422
Z
o
c3
Ui
co
ABSOLUTE PEAK STRESSES [N/m2] x 10?
Figure 7.14 Absolute peak stresses in the sections
(D-6)-N0RMAUZED PEAK ACCELERATIONS
co
co
NORMALIZED PEAK ACCELERATIONS [m/sec2]
(D-7)-N0RMALIZED PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
NORMALIZED PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF MASSES [m]
Figure 7.16 Normalized peak displacements of the lumped masses
424
The vertical dynamic response o f the considered non-symmetric bridge model is given in
the following Figures (7.15-22).
(A-1)- ACCELERATION OF MASS*1 (A-2)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«2

i— r
0.5
IS-0.5
ui
20 40 20 30 40 50 60
(A-3)- ACCELERATION OF MASS»3 (A-4)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«4
if • Mr1
f ..ji
«SJ 2 T
|l
c; w
-0.5
IX
liM .i.i in
•i . 114. . iJ
r I r
0 -3
o
<
-1.5
20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [seel TIME [sac]
(A-5)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#5 (A-6)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«6

j
U k U 1
0.5
ia *
•0.5
ui i m m m m . ...
T f T _ 1 1 1
-1.5,
X 40 10 20 X 40 50 60
TIME [sacl TIME [sac]
425

1-
20 30 40 20 30 40
(A-9)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#9 (A-10)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«10

1.5
0.5
20 40 20 30 40
(A-11y ACCELERATION OF MASS«11 (A-12)- ACCELERATION OF MASS412

1.5 1.5<
0.5 0.5 I
40 50 60 30 40 SO 60
426
(B*1VDISPLACEMENT OP MASS*1 (B-2)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«2

0.06i
-1 . 1
2■ \
i
CO
CO
I
i
I
\
& / W f l Vi uV
,
f/
1 I
\lI j
I if I
UJ
i,
§-
a.
5Q-0.(
2jw 0 ! V
i
I
10 20 30 40 50 60 20 30 40 50
(B-3)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«3 (B-4)* DISPLACEMENT OF MASS44

0.04
E 0.03
.
s 2 — •A MU\ H
S 0.02
CO
CO
CO
1 .Ii ,
I 0.01
1 1 1I ' A M ii
UJ
i (If 1J
i j \\
Q
^L Lj li
a.
CO 1
-0.04 -0.05,
20 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [MC] TIME [M C]
(B-5)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS45 (B-6)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS46

0.04| 0.04
B 0.03 0.03
0.02
» 0.02
co
CO <£ 0.01
I 0.01
0-0.04
-0.04 •0.05
20 40 60 40
TIME [sec]
427
(B-7)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#7 (B-8>-DISPLACEMENT OF MASS08

0.04
[m]
0.02 0.02
DISPLACEMENT OF MASSS7
0.01
0.01
5-0.04
•0.04 -0.05
30 40 50
TIME [sac] TIME [sacl
(B-9)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASSM

0.04
g 0.03
2 0.02
0.01
•0.04,
60
TIME [sac]
428
(G-1>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-2)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.025 0.025
_ 0.02
M. n ■ w
--0.015 j j . 0.015
fcf 0.01 M. 0.01
I 0.006 n
111
I UI 0.006
UJ
i35-0.006i1 SS -0.006
5
ui -0.01 Ui. ui -0.01
5-0.015 Bill l J a : . it 1 5-0.015

ui
•01..02 ■
— 1»---------- f - e
iasl
-0.025 ■ - ■■^1 -0.025
10 20 30 40 SO 60 20 30 40
TIME[MC) TIME [ M C |
x10-» (C-3)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT i ! o'1 (C-4)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
E , .k lit 4J 1. .J 1
“ 6
f> P
m i 'i i f i ' 1
m » i 'T i 1
| 2l
| o|
, 111
«-2
IV
Q
l l U J k . .li
§-6
ui
W lftlii. .
oc
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 SO
TIME [MC] TIME [MC)
0.011- T "1--------------------
T T 0 .0 1 f "T T T T T
I QOO+
III
^>0.006
a . 0.004
ir rrniirr ? 0006f
et 0.00*
►-
II!' '"T T ’ m 0.002
3§-0.00201
ui-0.001 llll . Il l .lill.U k U L. Q ilili1 il. <.u!iii.k >4 k
kkl UlliiUillU ui-0.004
>
5 -0.006
UI-o.ooei-
IIII iJIUiHBMM
«-0.
-0.01L
10 20 30 40 SO 60 10 20 X 40 X 60
TIME [Mcl TIME [MC]
429

0.0151
E
~ 0.01 1
1 n
ilI
rvT ii i i
K 0.00 1Uli-fc Jl il J 0.00 <w i ■• h i ■ r
Ui
O
[r T : T | H S 7 T ' r« "• ■
09
111 . L i k i . I <3-0.006
i ' l l ii'uiiiiij k - u
0-0 .0 0 6 Q
>
Ui
P
3 -0.01 l I H I iiiiiM ftd l 3 f I
s jjj -0.015r
!-0.015*- -002~
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [MCl TIME [MCI

0.015)
1 I
il i 0.006 ii
1 1 111 Jf l 4 « U L d J
£
U
2uiI 1ui 1 1i l l A. a /' i ,
§■ 'if ' W 'if 3a. \ mn r Vt V w

a.
co
a f <o
5-
yl
U i‘
1
>
Ui
P
i f
U
S
I 1 Ui
c
-0.015
10 20 30 40 SO 60 10 20 30 40 SO 60
TIME [• TIME [MCI
(C-11>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.021-
1 ! 0.015 -
JE-0.015
-002 20 30 40
TIME [MCI
430
(D-I)-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
Figure 7.20 Absolute peak acceleration of each lumped mass
(D-2)-PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
(O
co
Ql I I t *
0 035 0.04 0.045 0.05 0.055 0.06
Figure 7.21 Absolute peak displacement of each lumped mass
431
ui
0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025

MAXlABSlZ^mm]
Figure 7.22 Absolute relative displacement between the lumped masses
co
FORCES [N] ,7
x10
Figure 7.23 Absolute peak forces in the bridge sections
432
12 l ! f f
ABSOLUTE PEAK STRESSES [N/m2] x iq 7
Figure 7.24 Absolute peak stresses in the bridge sections
(^•NORMALIZED PEAK ACCELERATIONS
"0 1 2 3 4 5
NORMAUZED PEAK ACCELERATIONS [m/sec2]
Figure 7.25 Normalized peak accelerations of lumped masses
433
(D-7)-N0RMALIZED PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
co
0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

NORMALIZED PEAK DISPLACEMENT OF MASSES [m]
Figure 7.26 Normalized peak displacements of lumped masses
434
7.4 The results of the vertical seismic response of the
symmetric and non symmetric bridge system to the
vertical input in the transverse direction

If the earthquake wave propagates in the transverse direction, the vertical disturbance
component of the wave is expected to be same in the different input locations of the
system model as shown in Figure (7.28).
=J/3<S(0
Figure 7.27 The wave propagation in the transverse direction
The results of the seismic response of the non-symmetric system to the vertical input
shown in Figure (7.4) are given in the following figures:
Figures (7.28) shows the acceleration-time response at the considered 12 lumped mass
locations.
435
Figures (7.29) shows the displacement-time response in the y direction at the 12 lumped
Figures (7.30) shows the time history of the relative displacements between the lumped
masses.
Figures (7.31) show the peak acceleration values at the different lumped mass locations.
Figures (7.32) shows the absolute maximum displacements at the different lumped mass
locations.
Figures (7.33) shows the absolute magnitude of the maximum relative displacement
Figures (7.34) shows the calculated absolute peak force values acting on the structural
Figures (7.35) shows the calculated maximum stresses at the different section
Figures (7.36) show the normalized peak acceleration values at the different lumped
mass locations.
Figures (7.37) show the normalized peak displacement values at the different lumped
mass locations.
436

"I
47
| 6
co 4 ■ n T r 1?
CO « O
i 051 r
o u
|-2 i
1 ,
L
UJ
k w lb i- a i J » .. L „ i.
—I
UJ .c l
i T
40
*« 10 20
30 40 50 60
(A-3)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«3 (A-4)* ACCELERATION OF MASS#4
£ 1
s co
co co
ui
_i
UJ
o
2 -5*
30 40 10 20
30 40 50 60
(A -S h ACCELERATION OF MASS4S (A-6)- ACCELERATION OF MASS46
I I
Im ! *
4k
CO
j i 0CsQ
1
«
I i
& I i
..... ft i..........
|
3-
ia-j 2U J
— J
U
oI
oUI I 1 f
3 I i i
50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
437
(A-7)- ACCELERATION OF MASS*7 (A-fl)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#8
1
!......
co
|
co
O
1'
5oc
tu C I
-t
UJ
oo
l
10 20 30 40 50 60 20 30 40 50
(A-9)- ACCELERATION OF MASS«9 (A-10)- ACCELERATION OF MASS410
r — i f—
co
co
1
u.
im L
£
U
aI i
a i
10 20 30 40 50 60
(A-11)- ACCELERATION OF MASS411
T*
“I -0.5
20 30 40
TIME [sac]
Figure 7.28 Acceleration-time response of the lumped masses
438
(A-12)- ACCELERATION OF MASS#12 (B-1)- DISPLACEMENTOF MASS»1

0.04i
» 0.02
CO
CO
co
co f 0.01
jjj
<
<T
a-
UJ
o
3
10 20 30 40 SO 60
TIME [M C] TIME [sec]
(B-2)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS«2 (B-3)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#3
0.06
I
E.0.1
32 ........ I \
8
CO
f\
/i \ 1iA»1
1 ■ -¥ -— [
“ ■
1 °*( I ;
s 0” "|.. i, :j i ' i! \r V \K
wr
A * ^4
5 -0.( ,
UJ
: i S'
1 ! •.1 1\li
«5-o.c
. / 1i
a.
o-0( Js
CO . .
1
ti
20 30 10 50 60
TIME [MC] TIME [sec]
(B-4)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#4 (B-5)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASSAS
0.04
g 0.03 - f I
j 0.02 - to
* J
co CO
CO
P / .\ rf\
*2 0.01 - 0.01
j/ ti ;/I'I i V
UI, i |/ I I i. I/1
UJ
i iI I!
11
3-
0. I
Q-0.04
CO
11 K
■0.05' -0.04
V
60 10 20 30 40 50 60
439
(B-6)-DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#6 (B*7)- DISPLACEMENT OF MASS#7

0.05 0.04
— 0.04 |? 0.03 -
0.03
S 0.02 -
%0.02 co
co
I 0.01 -
ui-0.01
a. -0.03
a -0.04
-0.04,
20 30
TIME [M C| TIME [sec]
(B-9h DISPLACEMENT OF MASS49
0.04 i
E- 0.03
— 0.04
2 0.02
co ri
<2 0.02 M A
5 0.01
►
z
-
ui 0.01
rf t
u j- 0 .0 2
2ui -
u
5 0.02
-
CO-0.04
0.
CO
5-0.03
t
-0.04
20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [MC] TIME [sac]
Figure 7.29 Displacement-time response between the lumped masses
440
(C-1)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-2>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.025| 0.025f
0.02
E,
— 0.01 j j , 0.015
N. 0.01 t£ 0.01
h
S 0.0061
3
ui
(A -0.006 y)-V.WD
u> -0.01
sui - 0.01
5-0.015
ui
cc - 0.02
-0.025 •0.025;
IUbLii4kLiuiikHI
20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 60
TIME [MC] TIME(MC]

0.01| 0.0151
_ 0.008
f r 'r w '
E.
-s.0 0 0 6
m m m m — 0.01
Cvf
» 0.004
■■H IT I 0.00
►-
2 0.002 ! ■
f f Iffff ■
| -0002 i I * J I I I
Q I ■ S*000®
1
U[-0.004 >
t i i. ii Jl
“ ■oooe
5-0.006
ui 5dc *0.01
U IL 4.
-0.01* •0.015
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 X 40 50 60
TIME [MC) TIME [MC]
(C-6)- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (C-6>- RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT

0.0151 0.01
,0.006 -
0.006 »
ui
ui
•0.005 -1
Q -0.006 -
If V T
ui
>
3ui -0.01
-0.0161 20 30 40 50 60
-0015
20 40 60
TIME [MCI TIME [MCI
441

OJ
TTl [ T L iK
o.cns
■ m' r
g* 0.0151
■ w m r •£ 0.01
ei |r
r r ' 1 2 0.009
ui
| -0.0061
ui
p -0.01 | -°011
tn -0.015
^ 1 UI
K -0.015
20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 50 80
TIME [MC] TIME [MC|
E 8
*i0.a
N
Ml
8
J i l l 11 1 1.I
[ j
I '
UJ ^ . 1 1
a.
co l i i ' l , M . . L i k i l—
5-21
ui
I I F ^
r......1 1
r i
UI
c-4 I
10 20 30 40 SO 80
TIME [MC] TIME [M C l
¥ a. j
|
*1
efo.4 Mi ...L i L l r ii., j
1 1. i n -U ---------
| 0J i « i him in n nn ' i n " n i w

UJ i l l HI’ III." ’ 1 ' ■
llflliU!l.i,lll II , ■
<0
o
ui-0.4
irilNllkJllllE.iLtUtJ.LH
3*0.6
S m
10 20 X 40 eo
TIME [MC]
Figure 7 JO Relative displacement-time response between the lumped masses
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m is s io n of t h e cop y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

442
(D-1J-PEAK ACCELERATIONS
co
co
<
S
ABSOLUTE PEAK ACCELERATION [m /sec2]
Figure 7.31 Absolute peak acceleration of each lumped mass
(D-2)-PEAK DISPLACEM ENTS
CO
co
0.035 0 .0 4 0.045 0.05 0.055 0.06

PEAK DISPLACEMENT O F M A S SE S [m]
Figure 7 3 2 Absolute relative peak displacements between the lumped masses
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

443

H 1
| i t
1 1
t |
1 1
----------- -------------------------------------- [----------------
; j _
Jl
0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
MAXtABS^-Z^,)] [ml
Figure 7 3 3 Absolute peak forces in the bridge sections
O
O
Ui
co
FORCES [N] x10®
Figure 7 3 4 Absolute peak stresses in the bridge sections
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

444
(D-5J-MAXIMUM STRESSES
Z
o
h
O
UJ
CO
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
ABSOLUTE PEAK STRESSES [N/mzl x 10®
Figure 73 5 Absolute peak stresses in the bridge sections
(D-6)*NORMALIZED PEAK ACCELERATIONS

1
co
co
i
NORMALIZED PEAK ACCELERATIONS [m/sec2]
Figure 7.36 Normalized peak accelerations of the lumped masses

445
(D-7)-NORMALIZED PEAK DISPLACEMENTS
0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

NORMAUZED PEAK DISPLACEMENT O F M A SSES [m]
Figure 73 7 Absolute peak displacements of the lumped masses
7.5 Summary
The vertical dynamic response of multi span bridges to vertical seismic disturbances is
investigated in this chapter. A three span bridge model for two different topologic cases
is exposed to the vertical seismic disturbance shown in Figure (7.4) and the response is
given in Figures (7.7-24). Figure (7.23) shows that the traditional system magnifies the
ground acceleration approximately 6 times. As shown from Figure (7.7) when the wave
propagates in the longitudinal direction, the maximum stresses occur at the pier
locations. When the wave propagation is normal to the longitudinal direction o f the
system, the maximum stress occurs at deck sections as different deck.

446
CHAPTER-V I I
8 Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations
8.1 Summary and Conclusions:
The study reported in this thesis can be summarized as follows:
1)* An active base isolation system called as the Computer Controlled Concave Base
Support Mechanism (C.C.C-B.S.M) for the seismic protection of structures is introduced
in Chapter 2. The proposed system incorporates specially designed concave base
supports, hollow spherical balls, base springs and cams. The Computer controlled cams
are used to provide rigid support under normal conditions, to free the base to move on
specially designed ball supports for a predetermined period and to keep the base in
contact with the foundation spring afterwards for the remainder of the disturbance.
In order to evaluate the seismic performance of the system, a single degree of freedom
structure is initially considered. Because of the geometric characteristics of the concave
supports, the dynamic equations become highly non-linear. By introducing an effective
coefficient of rolling friction ( p eff) to account for the movement of the spheres on their
supports, the mathematical model is simplified significantly.
The proposed system has two important features. The first is the self-restoring capacity of
the isolation mechanism, which allows the base to automatically return the original
position after the earthquake. The second is its ability to eliminate the torsional effects in
the case o f non-symmetric buildings.

447
The specially designed base support spring has a nonlinear force-displacement
characteristics as shown in Figure 2.2. A computer simulation is run for the selection of
the main design parameters. The results shows that the seismic protection efficiency (as
quantified by the maximum acceleration and transmitted shear force response) can be
improved 20 times by incorporating the isolation mechanism. As can be seen from the
results, the system is implementable fo r most structures by selecting appropriate design
parameters.
2)- The seismic response analysis o f multi degree o f freedom structures is discussed in
Chapter III. Two different cases are considered in this analysis. First, a three storey
concrete building isolated with Rubber Steel Composite Bearing which was built for
experimental purposes in Thoko University and tested during the Tokyo earthquake in
Japan. Using the C.C.C- B.S.M for the building, the optimum design parameters of the
isolation mechanism are evaluated. In the formulation of the optimization problem, the
considered objective is minimizing the summation of the normalized transmitted shear
forces to each storey. The considered design constraints are: the allowable relative
motion of the base and the minimum radius of the concave surfaces. The results are
summarized in Figures 3.29 and 3.30. As can be seen from the comparisons between the
rigid and isolated cases, the maximum acceleration and the maximum transmitted shear
force can be reduced by 9.5 and 14 times respectively by incorporating the proposed
base design.
The second analysis in Chapter III deals with a high rise multi degree o f freedom (40
storey) steel fram ed structure using the isolation system at the base. The results which

448
are given in Figures (3.60,61,62) show that the maximum transmitted force in the
isolated system model occurs at storey #8 and its value is approximately 6 times lower
than in the rigid case.
One of the most critical problems of multi degree of freedom isolated structures
(commonly using rubber steel bearing) is the control of stability (tip over problem). The
highest base isolated structure built in California is a historical tower with 25 storeys. For
the systems studied in this thesis, the problem can be eliminated by controlling the
motion of the support base between specially designed guides and selecting a wide base
geometry.
3)- The bridge isolation systems are discussed In Chapter IV. Two base isolation systems
(which are the rubber steel composite bearings and the sliding pendulum mechanism)
used in the current bridge systems are discussed. A long span bridge system is considered
for illustration. The equivalent lumped mass model of the system is used for the
uncoupled transverse, longitudinal and vertical response analysis. The simulation results
showed that the use o f the proposed optimized isolation mechanism can reduce the peak
accelerations approximately 15 and 20 times in the transverse and longitudinal
directions respectively. Also, the maximum transmitted force in transverse direction can
be reduced approximately 25 times by incorporating the isolation system.
4)- In Chapter V, a conventionally designed multi span bridge system shown in Figure
(5.1) used in highway or railroad transportation is considered for the seismic response
analysis. It has three piers and four deck spans which are built to accommodate the site

449
topology. The calculation of the equivalent lumped mass values is given in Appendix
[D]. The connection spring stiffnesses are evaluated by a finite element analysis as given
in Appendix [A].
Because the geometry of the structure is non-symmetric and earthquake disturbances
depend on the direction of the wave propagation, the response analysis can be based on
the worst case conditions. As known from the past earthquake damages (Kobe and
California highway bridges), highway bridges usually fail at the pier-ground connections
in the transverse direction [Ref.52]. Under these considerations, it can be assumed that
the critical shock wave propagates in the transverse direction of the system. Accordingly,
Chapter 5 focuses on the transverse wave propagation and the response in the transverse
direction of the conventionally designed and the base isolated bridges. Symmetric and
non-symmetric bridges are investigated in this analysis.
The results for the seismic response of the symmetric bridge system in the transverse
direction are summarized in Figure (5.91). It can be seen from Figure (5.91-F-l) that the
maximum stresses at the critical pier sections 3, 6 and 9 are reduced approximately 11.5,
11.0 and 11.5 times and deck section 13 times respectively as a result o f the proposed
base isolation mechanism. Figure (5.9 l-H) shows the reduction of the calculated
maximum accelerations of the 12 lumped masses of the symmetric system model. As can
be seen from Figure (5.91-A), the highest acceleration in the conventional design which
occurs at mass#5 is reduced approximately 10 times by incorporating the proposed
isolation system.

450
The summary of the responses of the non-symmetric bridge model is given Figure (5.92).
It can be seen from Figure (5.92-F-l) that the stresses at the critical deck and pier
sections are reduced by a fa ctor o f 15 (deck section) and 17 (pier section) respectively as
a result o f the proposed base isolation mechanism.
It can be seen also from Figure (5.92-A ) that the highest acceleration in the conventional
design which occurs at mass#6 is reduced 9.5 times by incorporating the proposed
isolation system.
5)- The seismic response analysis o f multi span bridges in the longitudinal direction is
discussed in Chapter 6. The discrete system model shown in Figures (6.2,3) is used and
the following assumptions are also made:
a) Because of the high rigidity between the lumped masses in the longitudinal direction,
the displacements of the lumped masses are assumed to be the same.
b) Because of the nature of the motion, the rotation of each lumped mass can be
significant. Accordingly, the mass moment of inertia of each lumped mass is not
neglected in this case.
c) Because of the free gap distance at the two ends, impact may occur between the
lumped masses Af I 9 and the ground and an energy loss can occur.
For the different boundary and geometrical conditions the calculation of the equivalent
lumped masses and the connecting springs between the masses are given in Appendix
[D]. In the formulation of the forcing function, two important considerations are made.
They are the phase shift between the different inputs. Depending on the span lengths (L)

451
between the piers and the wave propagation speed (c), the input phase shift (time delay,
A/ = —) becomes important. Also, the inputs may vary at the different ground
c
connections because of the different soil properties. In this analysis, we assume that the
wave propagates in the longitudinal direction and the vertical component is small
compared to the horizontal component. A traditionally designed bridge model is
considered in this analysis under two conditions. First, the system is assumed to be free to
move in the longitudinal (x) direction at the two ends without any constraint. Second, the
movement of the structure is constrained by a certain displacement and impact can occur
at the ends.
Also in Chapter 6, the use of the isolation mechanism (C.C.C-S.B.M) at the support
locations for the (symmetric and non-symmetric) bridges is investigated. In this case, the
considered design is minimizing the absolute peak stresses normalized to their peak
values in the rigid case.
The results for the seismic response of the symmetric bridge system in the longitudinal
direction as compared to the corresponding peak values for the rigid support cases are
given in Figure (6.79). It can be seen from Figure (6.79-B) that the maximum
translational acceleration in the conventional design is reduced approximately 7.5 times
by incorporating the proposed isolated support. It can be seen also from Figure (6.79-H)
that the maximum rotational acceleration in the conventional design is reduced
approximately 10 times by incorporating the proposed isolation system.
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n o f t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n proh ibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

452
Figure (6.79-F) shows the stresses at the critical deck section (section Ml) are reduced
approximately 20 times and at the critical pier section 11.5 times respectively as a result
o f the proposed base isolation mechanism. It should be noted that the maximum stresses
occur at the pier locations in this case.
The summary results of the non-symmetric bridge analysis are given in Figure (6.80). It
can be seen from Figure (6.80-B) that the maximum translational acceleration of the
conventional design is reduced approximately 3.9 times by incorporating the proposed
support. It can be seen also from Figure (6.80-H) that the maximum rotational
acceleration in the conventional design is reduced approximately 22 times by
incorporating the proposed support. Figure (6.80-F) shows that the stresses at the critical
pier sections are reduced approximately 4.0 and deck sections 26 times as a result of the
proposed base isolation mechanism.
6)- The vertical seismic response analysis o f multi span bridge systems is given in
Chapter VII. Two different wave propagation scenarios are assumed. First, the wave
propagates in the longitudinal direction and the inputs are shifted as a function of the
span lengths (L) between the piers and the wave propagation speed (c). The input phase
shift (time delay) At = — . In this case, as can be seen from Figure (7.23), the traditional
c
system magnifies the ground acceleration by approximately 6 times and the maximum
stresses in the pier locations are critical. In the second scenario, we assume that the
wave propagates normal to the longitudinal direction o f the bridge. In this case, the
maximum stress occurs at the deck sections.

453
8.2 Recommendations
1)- An experimental model test is necessary to verify the theoretical predictions of the
effect of the proposed isolation system in reducing the seismic response.
2)- Control of the torsional effects for non-symmetric buildings by using the isolation
mechanism and optimum design of the base should be investigated.
3)- A stability analysis should be undertaken for the isolated multi storey high rise
buildings. Optimizing the base design for stability should also be undertaken.
4)- A detailed cost analysis of the isolation mechanism in comparison to the alternative
base isolation mechanisms (such as rubber steel composite bearing and the frictional
pendulum mechanism) should be undertaken to appraise the economic aspects of the
proposed system.
5)- Instead of base isolation at the pier supports, the use of isolation mechanism between
the decks and piers (top isolation) should also be investigated.

Appendix-fAI________________________________
9 The Finite Element Analysis and Forces, Moments and Stresses in each section of
the Transverse Directional Motion of the Bridge System
Figure 9.1 The different sections of the system in the transverse direction
cn
•Ch
Figure 9.2 Forces and moments, and in section -a
^ , = 0 (9.1)
p _ A ^2Edl d
(9.2)
F —^ ^ d^d v ^2Edl d , Ê jld n . fj (9.3)

F« ' - ~ E T y ' ~ ~ z T y '- ~ c T ' ~ Z T '-
(9.4)
a“ ~ ^ r
Af —^ d^d -if d . - 2Edld n (9.5)

azl = j - ; ~ y t ---- 7^3— > 2 + —f 2 + —y
M M *1 M
fr = A ^ _ v (9.6)
ax2 T 2 7 1
M *1
l2Edl d U E dl d 6EdI d 6Edl d

*ay2 =3--->2------ =3------- t T ~ - ----- f T " " (9.7)
'6 £ A V _ 6 £ A v , , 2 E ,/ , If y / (9.8)
<r02 =
. z;2 * ^ a 2 a lJ U ,

456
£ f, = a m .
(9.9)
Ml%+lZl d,,d yl ~ n - ,! d y, + ^ 4 ±0< =° (9-io)
5 X ,= /, 0 ,
lA ^ T, - S £ L y , + ^ L o , , ^ . o (9.11)
L>i L\ M M

Figure 9 J Forces and moments in section -b
6E A , 6Edl d \ E dl d . 2Edl d „
MkZ =-=r~yz — -fr-yi + — = ^ * 2 + -= M -0 , (9.12)
Li Lt Li
r~ AdEd 2 AdEd AdEd

F bx 2 = — V " ^ x t + — = r " x 2 -------- r " ^ x 3 (9.13)
f =i ^ y + « £ t t - fl + «£tL L 9 (9.14)
w i;1 * z;! • r;: 1
< r,, = S . , -5 £ ik y +=Mi-g (9.15)

v - v 1s 5
6 E ,/, 6Edl d 4Edl d _ 2 E ,/rf „
= - = r - y i — = r * y 3 + - ^ - ^ 3 + - r A-oz (9.16)
Ei Li l*i L,
\2EdI d AdEd 12EAI

rf A
<f v x A</aEda , Adad Eva ifA aifE..
^3 = 3 -*10 t ->■* T T — «♦-» ~~ — ““ -
Hi Hi A Ej
(9.17)
_ 6 E ,/rf
' 1*10
/ /.- H i'
\2Edl d \2EdI d 6Edl d _ 6 £ , / , „

^ 3 = - r i - Vi T T - y i +^ F T - 0 2 H— (9.18)
6 E ,/ , 6Erf/ rf 4 £ „ /, ^ 2 £ ,/
^3 = = ^ > 3 + —= ^ 3 + 1jL l o T2 O (9.19)
M *1 \UJ

458
M . ^^d^d
■#2x•'2 H ^d^d
Z=-=~X2 ---- =-2-Xj = “ 2" ^ 3 =
r\
0 (9.20)
,, 2 4 F ,;, 1 2 E ,/. 12E,,/, 6E.1. „ 6 E ./, „

W ,y. + ■ n ' -' y , = t j !-2'i ----- = 7 ^ -)’! — = ^ - « j — =M -»i = 0
5 > „ 2= /A
, A 6 £ ,/, 6 E ,/, 2 £ ,/ rf - AEdI d „ 2Edl d n

/,0 , + _ V y . =77 ^- y 3 + —i - - <9, + J & + 1 d 0, = 0 (9.22)
‘ - ' Z,2 A 1 L, * L, 3

459
' cz3
cy3 cx3
cxlO
F
*c;10
Figure 9.4 Forces and moments in section - c
6E A a 6EJn 4 EA„ 2E A ,
M ai = - ^ > 3 — - h E~ y xo + - ± * - 0 * + = ^ L l f tto (9.23)
h ; h;
A0E 0 A £
F« 3 = - p-.p
r»
7 ---
*3
2-2-7
,, MO
(9.24)
1 2 E ,/, \ 2 EpJ p .. 6Epl„

p p a. , ~6~£p ~
„ p/r_ a
^2 = T 2- * " 3 * 0 + „ 2 3 ..2 10
(9.25)
6E P / P . . 6 E l .. ,
4EPI P a TE I
, ~ d d a
TI yvp "
<7c3 = — r > » - — ^ y , + — «= V , (9.26)
_ 6 E P. I P. 6EA„
.. 4EA„
P P .. P P a2E j I.j ~ L- d L d n
M a tO ~ „ 2 ^10 „ 2 ^ ri 10 + rr ^3 (9.27)
“ I “ i 1 **|
A£ AdE„
rFcI0 — ^ —M
7o — ^ 7*3 (9.28)

Figure 9.5 Forces and moments in section - d
,, _ „ 6EdId 4 Edld iEdld (9.31)

- ~ L T y' ‘ T T ’ T -
12EdI d 12Edl d
dxi = T- X 3 --------- = ^ * 4 (9.32)
1 2 £ ,/, 1 2 £ ,/, 6 £ ,/, „ 6 £ ,7 , „

(9.33)
= -= 4 ^ 3 +- ^ r - y* ~ ~ z f~ x
6 £ ,/, 6 EdI d 4Edl d 2 Edl d Yy /

<rd3 = (9.34)
~TtT ~^Tn~ J ttH iT ,
6 £ ,/„ 6 £ rf/ . 4 £ ,/, „ 2 £ , / rf „
a#** = - = ^ 4 x * ~ lT ' (9.35)
_ \2Edl d \2Edl d
(9.36)
F“ ' ~ Z — x‘ ~ ^ l T
\2Edl
a d
a .. 12£„/„
“ a • a .. 6£„/„
a a „ 6" “Ed,/“ a /a
dr-l 7=1— y * F I — ^3----F T " * * -----F I -1" (9.37)
6EdId 6E .I, 4EdI d „ 2EdI d „ Y v /

<^4 = - V y4 =^-3^3 + - " - - g4 + - J - 4 - 0 , (9.38)
Lj £3

462
mM .. , 2AdEd AdEd AdEd

Af,x, H — X , ?=-E-x-,---- = ——x. = 0 (9.39)
^2 A ‘ Li
' \2Edl d 12Edl d 12 12E ,/, p p s

M ,y,+
z;3 z ;3 * ,3 , y' - - L r y' - - L r y* - h ?
(9.40)
_ ^ ;_ ^ +^ 3+^ =o
£*i £>2 £o
E «.,='a
, /j . 6 E ,/, 6 E ,/, 6Ed/ d 6Edl d
l 30j + ~ ---- = 3 -^ 3 + “ ^ - > 3 -----=1“ ^ +
Lj L| l»2 t*2
2 £ f/ , . 4Edl d „ 4Edl d „ 2Edl d . I 40/ G
1 d 6, + —J - ^ 0 , + .f ' 0, +• -f g. + ------- 2— 0, = 0 (9.41)
L, • L, 3 L, 3 L, 4p ff, 3

y*
-iA
Figure 9.6 Forces and moments in section-e
6Edl d 6 Edl d 4 Edl d 2EdId

(9.42)
M-‘ — z T y 4 T 1- 5 “ E- 4+ _E_ *i
\.2EdI d \2Edl d
(9.43)
F“ 4 — E- 4 E~ 5
F = >2 £ < k y - I H i i L , + (9.44)

4 E,! y‘ V y! E 1 4 E ! !
6 E A .. 6Edl d 4Edl d 2EJd ] yd
(9.45)
r r r y‘ ~ ~ z T ~ i r 4~ 51 v
6Edl , 6E A , 4Edl d . 2 E ,/ rf .
m c5 = ^ ^ - y 5 — = n r y * + - = ^ - * 5 + - ^ - 0 * (9.46)
„ Y2Edl d 1 2 E ,/,
(9.47)
f“! — E- ! E-
_ I2 g ,/, \2E Jd 6Edl d „ 6Edl d „
(9.48)
V y
> v 4 v- 5 v- 4
[6 E ^ _ 6 E ^ + 4E f a +2 E ^ J ^
(9.49)
E, ,s JU U L, 4| l d

464
=«A
M A -4& -X , =0 (9.50)
L, ' L, 1 L, 1
,. , , 24EJd 12EdId \2 E dl d 6Edl d 6Edl d

M*y*+—= i— y*— = i— y*— t )— y* r: " — 3~ 0 (9.51)
2 M --/A
, «£„/,, 6 Edl d 2 EdI d 4Edl d 2 Edl d

tded+— y , +- %~e‘ +-ET9’ - ° (9.52)

465
cz5
cyS
M b zS
e<
cÎ I
c y 11
Figure 9.7 Forces, moments and stresses in section-/
6£ , / , 6E„ /, 2 E ,lp AEJd

M fits - y t ----77T~yu + ~ — s + —77—
; ~2 (9.53)
H{ H{
AE A f
F = p p? £_JL 7 (9.54)
*5 H, 25 //, 2,1
12£_/„ Y2EA 6EaI a 6£ / „

rf *-« = ___ £_£.
» v”3--------£_£.
rr 3 v H r»2—
2 3 ------„ 2 " l (9.55)
A5_ / / ,3 n, n, r/->
r 6 £ p/ «£/ 2 £ ,/ 4 £ ,/ T y /
^3 = (9.56)
6 £ 0/„ 6£ / 4£ / ^ 2 F ,/, „
- „ i yn „ 2 y*+ „ n+ fi 5 (9.57)
a •* fi'* a 1 •* i
A„£„ M1 c_
F
V f til
= _ £r j_ £ .?
Ml
•----r>
l7
*5 (9.58)
Wl H,

Figure 9.8 Forces, moments and stresses in section-g
_ 6Edl d 6EdId AEdl d 2E J d

M tz5 - T -2 > 5 --------- =
T~y6 5 + _ 7= 6
(9.61)
L, £3
r - 1 2 ^ ,, _ 1 2 ^ . (9.62)
z; * z;
\2Edl d l2Edl d 6EdId a 6EdId a
^5 = - j ^ - y 5 — = ^ - y 6 + -= M -* 5 + - f r - % (9.63)
^3 “J ^ V5
6 Edl
E dv 6EdId AEdl d 2EdId T y /
*MS = (9.64)
A/ — ^ ^ d^d v ^^^d v . fj ,-Ed^d ft (9.65)

M gz6 - 7 -2 > 6 --------- = r 3 '5 + ' 7 ^6 + f 5
^3 ^
_ \2Edl d Y2Edl d
* " — **<t r— *»< (9.66)
F - I ^ L V 12E,/rf 6E„/„ 6E ,/„ (9.67)

~ z;3 >6 z;3 * z;2 6 z;2 5
6EdI , 6 EdId AEdId a 2EdId a ~\ y
-~ ^ -y 6 =M -v, + —=M-0, h— JL-—0. - (9.68)
L? W ^ 1 1 ,d

468
£ F* = A f5*s
M jt + M ^ X M ^ . x 6 =0 (9.69)
55 L, U 6
' l2Et Id l2Edl d 12E,IP' 12E ,/, l2Edl d U E ,* , *

3 y
v ^ V ^ , y’ - — y* - z T y' ~ H,
(9.70)
&E<tld a Êdl d 6Edl d 6EdI d
— T^~ *— 5 r ; 5 ' 6~
/-»2 *-*3
, „■ . 6Edl d 6 F .J, 6£,/, 6£( /,,

s s + ^ = i-y* — rr-^ s + -72-^5 — r r y f +
L»2 Lj ^3 ^3
2 E ,/, „ 4£rf/ d „ 4Edl d n 2EdI d 1 40/ G
1 d 02 + 1 d fl3 + - A -d-fl3 + J * fl4 + -------— 0, =0 (9.71)
P

469
Figure 9.9 Forces, moments and stresses in section-A
6E J d 6EdId 4EdId 2 Edl d

M hz6 - j- i y& — = r~ y -i+ —f — 6 + —=— 7
*-3 ^3 ^3
_ 12E ,/, 12Erf/„

r b6 ~ T 6 T~ -*7
\2EAd \2Edl d 6Edl d a 6EdId .

hy6 = - ^ = r L y6 --------------- + “ = T ^ 6 + - = ¥ - * 7
^5 ^3 *T5 ^
U
^6 =
. V i ,- i, 7| I4 ,
r 12£ ,/„
——— rf'rf r 1'■-‘^dLd
2£7,
hxl T" • '7 7“ 6
_12£X Y2Edl d 6EdId 6EJd

r hy7 — J-3 J1 T -3 6 T "2 7 y -2 " is
^3 “3 ^3 *3
6Edl d6EdId 4Edl d _ I E , I , „ Y y

^7 = y7 — zS— y6 + - rf07•+• - ‘' f t z
_ ^ 2 v *3 d

470
.. 2 AdEd AdEd AdEd

M . x . + - ------X . --- =
d -*-x6 ---- dr = ^ - x , = 0 (9.72)
55 u 5 L ; 6 L ,
X f ,= w .y .
M sji6 - ^ f T ± y-’ - ^ y r - 0>+ ^ - 0 , = o (9.73)

L3 L, Lj Lj Lj
/ „ A + ^ 4 ± y> - ^ T - y i + ^ - 0 , y ^ - e * =0 (9 .74 )
t>3 ^ ^ ^ ^3
471
czl
ey~L M
bz 7
67
cx 12
cyl2
«12
1/ 6 E P0lP0. .
6 E P /P . .
2 £P. / Pd a 1 4 £ P. / .P a
(9.75)
w “s + ~ 0 i + ~ s r s '=
f L, (9.76)
" ff 3 ~5 H , 12
r ..«V ,r 12£„/p 6£,/ 6E/ (9.77)
6V , v 6V , v , 2V „ .*V , Ty (9.78)
_ « £ ,' , 6 £ ,/ , 4 £ ,/ 2£„/
(9.79)
Mw! — £ T y "- ~ ~ h T “ ~ 5
AE AE
F fpj p M~ 2 — JL-JL
— 7 (9.80)
r c I2 ^ i s
473
6E A d 6E A d 4E A , n 2EA, _
M r, 7 = ~ Y f L y 7 — y r - y * + - f j L 0-> + - j ^ - 0 a
L x L x L x L x
12Edl d \2Ei l i
jx i ~ T 1 7" 8
4 ^4
_ Y2Edl d\2Edl d 6Edl d 6EdI d

- “ f j > 7 ------- = 1 ^8 J" 2 7 + —£ ' 8
4 ^4 ^4 4
<*,7 =
_ L;■ ^ Z.4 L, L, J
♦ « & !< * ♦ ’S '* *

L x L x L x L x
Y2Edl d 12Edl d
jx% ~ T 8 T 7
4 4
12E,/., Y2Edl d 6Edl d n 6EdI d

i >8 ~ 7-"3 > 8 -------------------------- F T “ 0 8 --- f 1 - 7
4 *-4 ^4 4
6 £ rf/ rf 6E ,/, 4 E ,/ , 2 Erf/ rf Yy /

*V 8 =
T 5- ■ ~ t r 6' ~ M r
474
£ F<
. . .. AdEd AdEd
M 1x1 + l.- - . r 7 — =-^-x6 = 0 (9.83)
t, 7 L, ‘
J 2 E dl d n E pi p \ U E dI d 12E ,/, Y2E I

_— 21_ 2_H--------
1
2—2- +* -
— 1 y i — = T ^ y 6 — = 1- ^ - ^ - ■ —
L 33 l 43 W «33
W (9.84)
^ t El iJl * g ( 6 E ,/„ g [ 6E_dl d
=0
W V
5 > „ 7 = i A
, * . 6 Edl d 6Edl d , 6E ,/, 6Edl d

+ - = T j - 3 '6 — r & y -
i ^ e - , < + 7-1 y? — =^2 * +
Ei Lj Lj Lj
IE A , 4EAJ 4E J ; IE A d I 40 2G
- ' fl6 + 1 d Q1 + - ~ - - Q + - ± - d Q + - — 2— 0 = 0 (9.85)
U 6 L, 7 L, 7 Lt p H3
475
„ t M
-iA
Figure 9.12 Forces, moments and stresses in section-fc
_ 6 Edl d 6E J d 4EdI d 2Edl d

M kzs - — _ -V8 ------- = T “ -V9 + ------f ------ 8 + -----=--- 9 (9.86)
L4 L4 ^4 4
l2Edl d \2Edl d
ti8 7“ -* 8 T- 9 (9.87)
^4 ^4
F = i^ A L y _ l ^ v + 6£ ^ _
*y8 3 ”8 — 3 -V9 r ; a8 ^ ^ (9.88)
4 4 4
-</*</
6 E d i d „ v Ê d, l/ d
6 . 4Edl d 2Edl d y ,/'
'=r T ~ y 8 F T ~ - V9 + F # 8 + = 9 (9.89)
^ 42 ' 8 E, 4 4
u /
6E ,/, „ 6Edl d v , 4 E ,/ , 2Ed/ d

— — V o --- r r -;— V. H------- = ------c/q + — = — (9.90)
E4 E / '* Lx 9 E4
l2EdId 12 Edl d
kx9 ~ yL-4 9 T 8 (9.91)
F _ 12E , / , _ 6E ^ _ 6E ^
ty9 — 3 - 9 — 3 - 8 — 2 9 —3 I (9.92)
4 4 4 4
2^ / ,
f f ;9 = V9 = M -V 8 + — (9.93)
E4 E/ E4 E4 8lld
476
' Z F x = M , x s
M ,xt + - ^ - x , =0 (9.94)
L x L j L,
£ f , = « ,* ,
M ,x, =0 (9.95)
^ 4
, , 2 4 E ,/, I2 E A \2Edl d 6EJd 6E J d

M»y»+—=i— y8— ’4
=i— y7 —
£-4
— y, + —2
i ^4
7“ ( '
£ r ,= M ,y ,
, , . . 1 2 £ ,/, 12£ ,/„ «£„/„ 6 £„/„

M 9 y 9 + — j r 3— V9 = r y — Vg f T - 0 * ------ = T ~ ® 9 ~ 0 ( 9 -9 7 >
4 4 4 4
•• 6 E.,/., 6 E .,/, 2 E ./. %Ejl. I E A^

I*yA + ~ Y r ~ y i — y ^ y 9 + - + ± 0 ! + - f A - di + - = M - 0 9 = 0 (9.98)
L4 L a L x L x L a
£ m „ , = / ,0,
U 6 E d I d
L4
..
- ^Lr - y.. , + ^^ 4- » ,
^ E d l d
4
^ ^ E d l d a l - ^ d
4
h q _ q (9 9 9 )
476
M tx , + ^ i ^ - x , - ^ - x 1 - ^ - x , = 0 (9.94)
L 4 L 4 Z -4
E f . = M
M ,x ,+ ^ -x ,-^ & -x ,= 0 (9.95)

^4 ^4
IAE xI , YIEAx Y2EA, 6EA, „ 6EA,

w 8y g + (9.96)
L4 L4 L4 L4 L4
M ,)!, - ^ - 0, - ^ - 0 , =0 (9.97)
L4 L4 L4 L4
5 > „ = /.0 .
/„ ,0 , 4 ^ ^ - y , - ^ K v . A A d ± e , + 5 4 ^ -0 , + ^ L 0 , = 0 ( 9 .9 8 )
i-< t «4 4 4 4
X m ^ = / , 0,
( .,,0 , + ^ - y , - ^ y r - y , 4 ^ - 0 , + ^ - 0, = 0 (9.99)
L4 L4 ^ 4 4
A p p e n d ix - fB l
1 0 T h e F in ite E le m e n t A n a ly s is a n d F o rc e s , M o m e n ts a n d S tre s s e s in e a c h s e c tio n
o f th e L o n g itu d in a l D ire c tio n a l M o tio n o f th e B rid g e S y s te m
Figure 10.1 Different sections of the system in the longitudinal directional motion with impact
•p*
"4
■ «s|
478
Figure 10.2 Forces, moments and stresses in section-a
6 EdI d 6 Edl d 2Edl d 4EdI d

ay l ~ T 2 > 1 T T ~ y i ~ T ' J ---- 1
( 1 0 . 1)
M M n m
AdEd 12Edl d
( 10 . 2 )
F“ ' ~ :
12£ „ / , _ 12£ , / . . 6 £ ,/„ 6£ ,/,

(10.3)
^ 2 ~E T ~ ~ T T -
' 6 EdI d_r _ 6 E dI d_ r2Edl d 4EdId Y

<*ax = (10.4)
_ L y 1 "Z L C "x L x 1 L x ’I 1* ,
6 Edl d _
(10.5)
w "z V "
_ x, ( 1 0 .6 )
Lx ' 2
12EdI d . V * „ * E J d
(10.7)
*>Edl d _ _ * £ ,
< * a 2 = ( 1 0 .8 )
V A - | l d>
479
M , : i t + ^ - x t - ^ - x , = 0 (10.9)
L, L, -
S F y = M , 2,
. . , , 12Edl„ _ 12£ , / , . « £ ,/„ « £ ,/, ( 1 0 . 10 )

™ 1M + f l 2 l -------- = 3 ------* 2 + 7 - ~ a » 7" 2 2 ~ U
f j. , 6£ dC . _ . 4 £ y/ y 2£ y/ d _ q
/,« , + - 2 - 2 l ------= T - Z 2 + — = ----- <*1 + — = «2 - U ( 10. 11)
L, L, M M
480
Figure 10.3 Forces, moments and stresses in section- 6
6 Edl d _ 6EdI d 2Edl 4EdI

M b zi ■ f — 2— + ^ r — a t — a '-
( 10. 12)
F _ A d E d r A d E d r
(10.13)
„ 12Edl d _ 12Edl d _ 6 Edl d 6 EdI d

t b zI - — =3 - 2 --------= 1 ----- 3 f T ~ a - fT - a 3 (10.14)
k k k k
6Edl d
<r62 = S E d k _ (10.15)
L k z ~2 k'
_ 6Ed k _ SEdk (10.16)

k z 3 k~ k
AdEd _ AdEd _ (10.17)

5 3 A 2
12Edl d
(10.18)
V
6£ A 6 E ,7 , _ 2 E ,Z , 4Edl d If
*63 = (10.19)
k" k Z k k
481
= M z x z
M 2x 2 4- 2- ^ E- d- x z ~ ^ x x- ^ 5 ± x - = 0 (10.20)
£ F z = M 2z 2
24EdI , 12E , l d 12Edl d 6Edl , 6 Edl d

A f,Z , + - ^ -- = 7 ^ * 1 ----- = ^ - 2 3 ----- = M - « i ----= M - « 3 = ° ( l 0 -2 1 )
- - L,3 - L,3 A V LC
^ M o 2 = l , a 2
, .. 6£ . / . 6£ , / d 2 £ rf/ , 8£ d/ d 2 £ rf/ rf
/ ;or2 4- ' zt — z3 _ ' or, 4- —^— a 2 + ■ J -^ or3 = 0 ( 1 0 .2 2 )
£ , £ , £ 1 A A
482
*4
- 'A I F F± * ' T wF«4
-# A
Af f*Edl d 2Edl d 4Edl d no

M dzi = - f \ ^ ---- 24 ~ T — ^ 3 + —f — a x (10.23)
E y E y L y L y
- ^ - - h dO.24)
\2Edl d L2£rf/ rf_ 6 £ , / rf 6 E ,/,

<fc3 ~ =1 ^ 3 -------- = 1 ----- 4 f T ~ a i -------f T ~ a * ( l0 2 5 )
E \ E y L y L y
6Edl d 6EdI d 2E A d 4Edl d Y yd}

<*d 3 = - = M - z 3 ------ = ^ 2 4 + — = - x a 3 + - ^ - « 4 M p ( 1 0 .2 6 )
- A A A *-1 1<1 J
6EdId 6EdI d 2Edl d 4 Edl d

Af*4 = ~ Y T - z* ---- = M -2j +—f r ^ a 4 + - = - jL a , (10.27)
Ln L> £"2 ^2
Fm = ^ x‘ ~ ^ Z L x' < 10'2 8 )
1 2 E ,/rf \2Edl d 6Edl d 6 EdI d

= ^ - z 3 — y ^ ~ a d — Y~r~a i (10.29)
Lf L<> !-*->
6Edl d 6Edl d 2Edl d 4Edl d Y y . ^

<7*4 = ~^T~Zx =^^3 + j ax+ / <*3 f** (10.30)
483
w " ^ ~ E p l p A d E d 12£ / A ,£ ,
M jX j j Xjq — X ? + + - ^ - X 3
H », 3 A
(10.31)
AdEd AdEd 6£ „ /„ 6£ „ /
+ - ^ - j c 3 ------= - ^ - . r 4 + ------- — ar.r.
**10 + 2 3
L, 3 L, f f ,2 10
r l2£d/ , , l2Edl d , Ap£ p l 12E<tI d l2EdI d A,E,

A f 3z 3 + Z3 —3 *^2 —3 ,, MO
7*3
t,” z ,3 ^ £ .3
*> (10.32)
6 £ ,/ rf 6Edl d _ 6Edl d 6EdId
fi
L|
aZ JZ
Lj
~ a 3+ 7
i -*2
2 " 3 ■* = T " C
*-n
6£ _ / - 6£ /
___________ , 6E , / , _ 6£ ,/„ 6 £ rf/ , 6 £ rf7,
/ 3a 3 + __
ti 1
2 3
/» p
„
ti j
2 10 —2 7" 2 3 y-
£*2
2 3 —
L-2
2 ***
(10.33)
2EdI „ ^ 2 £ drf7(,d „ ^ 4 £ d,7 dlf a ^ + —
44 ££ ^. //. . 4 £ , / rf 2^ / .
+■— d d^"CJTjq +•— = r - ^ - a 2 + = r-*-a3 + £ * <ar3 + J d a x =(
77 A £,
484
cc3
c r lO
e x 10
Figure 10.5 Forces, moments and stresses in section-c
9 9 9 9
Of3 + a ,10 (10.34)
h ; " , " ,
AaE„ AaE„
F = _ £ _ £ . 7 ____ (10.35)
H, 1 H,
12£„7„
p p
12£„/
P P
6£ „ /„
P P „
6E ./d
9 9
3
x ,3 - - (10.36)
" , h r X i o ~ ~ t r a ' ~ ~ t r a i °
6V , 6£
p
/ p 2£„/„ 4£ / ]fy /
*3 - (10.37)
L " .2 10 //, 3 ff, ,0| l d
M
10 — „ 2 *10
6 E ' l >
r» I
r
3
, 2£^
—
g g (10.38)
« l « t ff, 10 ’ Hx ~3
A 0E . Arf£ a
£
r d z 10
—
rr
-7
MO
—
rt
. ? 7
M
(10.39)
i
485
1 2 E Jd U E d I d *Edl d 6 E d I d
F
* rfrin = ____
rfrio — —3
—
d * r __________ “__— r
-'■ 1 0 — 3 -* 3
________- __— n
— I M 10
---------- 2—= - / >
— 2 3
(10.40)
6E pI p 6 E p/ p 2E pl p 4 E pI p Y y, '
X, + ------------------+ ------ S - £ -O C j I — (10.41)
h : 3 H, Hx 3| l d
F ig u re 10.1 Forces, m om ents and stresses in sectio n -^
11 _ 6EdI d 6EdI d 2EdI d AEdl d

M rzi 7 ~~- ~ ' ------------------- 5 ~ T ----- * — T — 5 (1 0 .4 2 )
L n Li ^2 ^2
< l 0 '4 3 )
L> Ln (ia 4 4 )
<^4 =
Ln Ln Ln Ln _^ d J (I0 .45)
w _ 6Edl d _ 6 E ,/, _ 2Erf/„ AEdl d

ez5 = - 1- V Z5 Y T ~ Z* + T 5 + T= <*4 (1 0 .4 6 )
Lf Zo ^*2 ^
F ^ = ^ T r X s ~ ^ r r x ' ( ,0 47)
f„, = ^ ^ 5 - ^ r - « 5 (10. 48)

Li i>i Li Li
Ln~
- ^ 4 ^
Ln~
- z , + ^ S
Ln
d ^ a 5 + ^
Ln
^ a
Id J
4T ^ - l ( 1 0 .4 9 )
487
ex5
« , 2 E > ' " a , 4 £ - ' - ... (10.50)

H 5 f f ,! H : 5 H : “
AD£ D A F
F - P P 7 ------- P p . 7 (10.51)
^ H , 2s H , 2,1
F 12V - ,y 6 g >7 > a- 6 £ >/ > g (10.52)

“S~ /!'>
U 3 5 nW i3 11 H/ t i2 5 nH 12
-6 5 ^ 2^ 4 ^ U '
<7,5 = (10.53)
f f ,: ! H ,! H , 1 H , " |l a
M _ « V i.7 , 4 £ / , g , 2V , or,i t (10.54)

an~ H7 5 H7 H: 5 Hz
A„En AdE
F — p p 7 i £ .* (10.55)
r <fclt ^ ^11 ^
488
12E J d 12E dI d 6 E dl d _ 6 E dI d „
dxll = - 3
M
* 1 1 --------= r ^ X5 --------
4-0
J4=
^
T~aU -------
Zo
(10.56)
+ ^ i „ + f V f .a T ^ l (10.57)
f /:: 5 //,2 Mi « 2 5 « 2 “ | i d/
A f .X,
M r HI ~ ^ =d ----
^ d - tr , --------
^ d=^—d . t , ------A=f ^—
rf X%=_ a
U (10.58)
U £, Ly
M 4z4 5 =0 (10.59)
£o Zo Zo Z^-»
, .. 6 £ . / rf 6 £ ,/„ 2 £ ./d 8 £ d / rf 2 £ rf/ d

/ 4a 4 + - ^ - z 3 — + -= -^ < * 3 + - = - i a* + - = - i « 5 = 0 (10.60)
L y E y Ey Ly Ey
F ig u re 10.7 Forces, m om ents and stresses in section-g
6Edl d _ 6Edl d _ 2Edl d 4EdI d

M 'Z 5 y~~2 5 --------- = 1 — ^ 6 + 5 + ~ = -------« 6 (10.61)
E j L j
„ A d E d
KxS
—= ---JC6 (10.62)
r; * ^3
i2 £ A . 12Erf/ e 6 E , / rf 6 £ rf/ ,
*yS
.7
•“6
— — 2
ct5 — — 2
ct6 (10.63)
V " Lj L,
f \
~6EJd . *Edl d
I ^ uwc •
yd (10.64)
V " V 6 L j L j
JV u /
6EJd 4 E J ,
(10.65)
V '6 Q
AdEi r AdEd
**6
( 1 0 .6 6 )
z; 6 E, 5
_ 12E„/ ^ „ 6E ,/,
(10.67)
A
6E
E.d h . &Edl d _ 2Edl d 4Edl d Y y/
( 1 0 .6 8 )
^ ' ^ " Z5 “ 1 1. ,
490
' Z F , s = M 1xs
M ”
12E "JP ," P ^ Ax_dEx_d 12E pI p AdEd
5 5 — =— J r .,---- = -*-x± + -------------------- +
--------- — ~xs
H? " t, H ,J L,
(10.69)
A , Erf A,E„ 6£ A 6E /
+ _ “ x 5 --------+ 2 a ,5 = 0
^3 H 1
X /\-5 = * M
^ 12 £ A 1 2 E ,/, 12E ,/, _ A„EP

A fjZ j +
z;3 z;3 #2 z;3 z*z;3 6 «2 *" (10.70)
6EHlx 6EdIx 6EJd 6EdId
— = rr-« 4 — z ^ - a , + - _ rf, ' Of, h— z^r~ a 6 = 0
L ," V
/# 6E„/„
jf.-U lZ .-r 6E„/„
— p'p - , 6EJ<td _ &Edl d _ t 6EdI d _ 6Edl d
2 Xs „ 2 X1I + —2 Z|» — : ^5 + — 2 ^5 —2 **6
ri 2 n i Ln Ln Ln L^
(10.71)
2 E x I 2Edl d AExl 4 E J x
an + l a, + a. + - oc. + - ~ — a . + - “ <ar6 = 0
ff, “ Ln H, Ln '
F ig u re 10.8 Forces, m om ents and stresses in section-/i
6EdId _ 6Edl d _ 2EdI d 4 Edl d

M hze 2 6— r ^ 1 “ L Fy — 6 ~ T — 7
(10.72)
L y L y L y
F - Ad^ d x . Aj ^ d x (10.73)
M L y 6 Lj ' 7
\2Edl d \2Edl d 6£„/ 6 E ,/,

(10.74)
- - ^ r - * . ' “ E T ‘ ' T 3 - 7
6Ed/ rf _ 6Edl d _ ~LdI d 4EdI d ) yd '

0-/.6 = J?+ _ « , | Ia (10.75)
6EA. 6EA, 2EJ, 4£ , / ,

M *, — = ^ r-z 7 — = M -z, + - f jL « , + — jM - a , (10.76)
L y L y L y L y
r _ r A/£<< r
hxl - 7 --------= ---- *1 (10.77)
L y L y
,, l2EdI d _ l2EdI d _ 6Erf/ d 6Edl d

t kyl ~ T 3 * 7 -------- = 1 6 = T “ a 7 = T “ a 6 (10.78)
L y L y L y L y
6 £ rf/ rf . 6E „/d _ 2 £ rf/ rf 4 E ,/ , Yy/ (10.79)

G Hi =
. z;2 Z7~ ^ 6+ z; *7+ z; a‘j id>
492
Af r
M 6X 6 +
I “^d ^d r A.d E d
= ----- X S -------=f— X 6 ------ 7=
_ q
7 ~ U
(10.80)
L ,
J dFd = M i z,
„ ,. . ^ E J d .
M t zt + ^ - z s
1 2 £ ,/, .
- ^ - z d
l2 E dl d _ 6EJd
z,+ _ 2 « ,
6EJd
*, — (
( 1 0 .8 1 )
2 X * = 'A
6EJ, 6EdI d 2Edl d 8EdId 2EdI d

I 6a 6 + - J r r - z 5 -----rrr^ -z -T — ors + ^ + - = - i -a 1 = 0 ( 1 0 .8 2 )
Lj L3
493
u7
ci:
Figure 10.9 Forces, moments and stresses in section-c
6£ / 4 E „/. 2EJr
= - 2- ^ a i + ' -« r. (10.83)
- " H 32 27 ‘ H 3 «3
_ A_£.
P P
A_£„p
mmp — ^
'^7 (10.84)
F e i7 " //3 "7 ff3 H
V = X, - -
1*V , r 6V , g 6V , g (10.85)
// H > 12 W 2 ’ H 2 12
r6£ ^ _ 6£ ^ 2* ^ 4 * ^
<T,7 = ( 10.8 6 )
7 / / 32 U # 3 7 #3 ‘' I I„ ,
6 £ „ /„ 6 E „ /_ 2E ,/ p 4 £ /,
M
rcI2 —
_ P
rr •
P -
* __
P
7
P _
M2 *
,
-a 7 +- or, (10.87)
A„£_
f =_£_£_ 7 ____ ( 10.8 8 )
*“ //3 12 ff3 7
494
_ 12 E dI d 12 E dl d 6 E dl d 6 E dl d
r d ilZ ~ — 3 1 2 — 3 7 — i 1 2 — 2 7
(10.89)
Lj L, L, E,
6 E I/ , 6E / 2£ / 4 E ,/ ,
^ d l 2 ~
(10.90)
495
6E J a 6EJ; 2E A d 4EJ,
rr~y* 7 u o .9 i)
Lx Lx L x L x
= AdE± \2EdI d
r ixi T T (10.92)
L x L x
_ U E dI d _ 12Edl d _ 6Edl d 6EdI d

jy 7 ~ — 3 **7 — 3 *“8 “ i 7 u8 (10.93)
4
6 E ,/, 6Erf/ , 2 E ,/, 4 E ./. If y ,

^77 = y7 — -h - ar7 + --J?- a % — (10.94)
_ l; l: lx lx 8| i d
= 6EJ± 6EA r 2 £ ^ 4E^

iri g — r , £8 — *-7 * 7“ u g “ 7- u 7 (10.95)
^.4
F _ r A d E d _
7*8 - - ~ y ~ X * T — 7
(10.96)
L4 *-4
12Erf/ rf \2EdI d 6Erf/ 6 E ,/

(10.97)
;>8 - t-3 2«— f 1”- 7— f 1 - 8 — i n
L x L x L x L x
~ 7
6E J ^ 6EdI d _ 2EdI d AEdl d Y y ^

(10.98)
r/- 8 E4* 1 Lx * Lx 7| l d
496
' Z F x l = M 1x1
w A d E d ^ E p l p A d E d
A1 jX j ^ 10 ~~~ - ■» X -\ > — X x
h ; h * 3 ^
(10.99)
+ _ ^ x 4 + î5d4 ^ I0 + ^ 4 * - ^ 0
A/,2
« ,3 A/,2
£ ^ 7 =^7*7
12E„A„ 12E„A„ AEB 12 £ d / rf 12 E , / „ Ap E p

Af7z7 + ^7 - j Z j _ 3 Z g r r Z 12
A /, L *
( 10. 100)
6 Edl d 6 E ,/. 6 E ,/rf 6 E ./ ,
— ^ - a 6 — = M -« 7 + V r a 7 + - = V L« S = 0
^3 ^3 l; lx
5 > „ 7 = /7 « 7
r Ai i
6E P / P ^
6E P / P ~ i 6 E «, / «, • « « • ! 6 £ «rf/ “, • 6Erf/
« d _
<7^7 * •• 2 7 TT"! I- —2 6 —2 **7 ^ - 2 7 —2 -8
A/ AA, V ( 10 . 1 0 1 )
2EdId 2E J d 4EdI d 4Edl d 4EdId 2 EdI d
+ — Or,, + — = ^~ ceh + •— r r ^ a i + — 4 a i + " ~4 + 4 c t8 = 0
AA, AA, L *
497
Figure 10.11 Forces, moments and stresses in section-Jfc
tf _ 6Edl d 6Edl d 1Edl d 4 Edl d

M *y« y 2 f T “ y 9+ — = — <*8 + — = — a , ( 10. 102)
L4 L4 ^4 ^4
(10.103)
4 4
\2EdId \2EdI d 6EdI d 6Edl d

Ffyt = - y r ^ - Z8 — = 1 ^ - + - y r - a * — = V -« 9 ( l0-i04>
4 4 4 ^4
'« £ / , _ 6£ A 2£ A 4 £ ^
(10.105)
LL/ * r,= * + r, “!+ i, a’l i d
6 Edl d 6EdI d 2 Ed/ d AEdI d
A f b9 = - y y * , - - y z . + - y jL « , + - y jL * i (10.106)
L4 L4 ^4 4
_ A dEd_ AdEd
i*9 ~ T 9 r x8 (10.107)
4 4
1 M , 12E' 7' _ 6 E ,/„ 6EdI d (10.108)

_ 3 _ j Z g _ , M 9 — 2
4 4 ^4 ^4
6EdI d 6Edl d 2EdI d 4EdI d Y yd '

<T„ = J - d- z9 — =rr^-z8 + —=S-4-a„ 4-— a% (10.109)
v V Lx Lx 8| l d
498
X r, = U A
M>x , + ^ L x t - ^ - x 7 - ^ - x , = 0 ( 10. 110)

L4
X F. = « M ,
M , x , + ^ * - . x , - £ £ ‘- x ,= 0 ( 10. 111)
L, L4
X F= = M >j>
. . , , 24£d/j . \2Edl d _ 1 2 £ ,/, . 6EJd 6E„ld

M 82 g + — — — Zg =T3— Z7 — Z9 + —=rr ~ a 9 =rr— a 7 - U (1U.UZ)
-
Lx Lx Lx Lx Lx
M ,i, * l2t 4 -dz* - l2 - ‘‘, ld -■ - ^ r ° i - ^ - g . = 0 (10.113)

Z,4 L4 L4 L4
X M -« = / a
6Edl d 6Edl d 1EAd &EdI d 2 E dI d

/gag + - V r Lz’ — +- =- ^<*7 + - = - a « 8 + -= -^ -o f9 = o (io .ii4 )
L4 L4 ‘ 'I 4 4
> o9= / A
/ 9a 9 + ^ 4 - Zg + lS d * -a %=0 (10.115)
L4” L4* £>* 1>4
499
Appendix-[Cl
11 The equivalent single degree of freedom lumped
mass model for the cases used for the discrete model
of bridge systems:
11.1.1 Simply Supported Beam Case
S(n g g - <>.(*>
Figure 11.1 The equivalent lumped mass model
The boundary conditions can be written as:
y(0,t) = y(L,t) = 0 (11.1)
rtf.0 = y _ dl-2)
The displacement shape function carrying out the boundaries can be stated as:
y(x,t) = sin (~ ) (11-3)
And, the first time derivative of it
y(x,t) = y ^ sin (^ -) (11.4)
The total kinetic energy of the system is
500
_ If l M . 2 . 1fM . .
r = IJ _ , U „ s,n(T dx = ~ y nax- (11.5)
2 2
The maximum kinetic energy of the distributed case should be equal to the total kinetic
energy of the lumped mass system.
By equating these two cases
r„ = ~ (y „ ): Ui-«>
From the equation given the above the equivalent mass is
< n - 7 >
The equivalent stiffness in this case can be written as (Ref.20)
K ( 11.8)
tff-y ji
EI
<ff.y
Figure 11.2 The Equivalent System model in y direction
501
11.1.2 Fixed and fixed beam with end displacement
iJ .
(a) (b)
Figure 1 1 J The equivalent lump mass model for the shown case-(a)
Fig -11.3 illustrates a clamped- clamped beam motion. The displacement shape function
in this case in the y direction can be found by using the bound conditions. The boundary
conditions in this case are:
y(0,f) =0 *^£>=0 (11.9)

dr
(U A dy(H,t) ( 11.10)
y(H ,t) = y aax — —— = 0
The function fitting the four known boundary conditions can be stated as:
y ( x , t ) = yaax^ \ ' t ) ( 3 H x 2 - 2 x 3) (ii.ii)

H
502
The first time derivative of the function
yUO = ^ Lf 3 / / j c 2 - 2 x 3;
H
The total kinetic energy of the distributed system is
f Y iM ^
( 1 1 .1 3 )
\ j j fix - 3H - 2 f t * =j 35
And, the total kinetic energy one degree of freedom and lumped mass system
From the last two equations the equivalent lumped mass is:
(1 1 .1 5 )
35
503
11.1.3 Equivalent mass of spring
In the following figures. Figure 12.4-(a) shows a spring with distributed total mass
M and Figure 12.4-(b) shows the equivalent lumped mass model of the distributed case.
In this case we assume the spring is massless and the concentrated equivalent mass goes
to the end where the maximum displacement occurs.
? T ju = y ( tt.o max
y (x ,t) t
X
6 ( t)S ± -
(a) (b)
Figure 11.4 The equivalent lump mass model of the spring
The boundary conditions in this case as shown in figure 12.4
y(0,r)=0 (11.16)
y (H ,t) = (11.17)
From the boundary conditions the displacement function can be stated as:
y(x,t) = y ^ (11.18)
And, its first time derivative is
y(x,t) = (11.19)
11
504
The total kinetic energy of the distributed system is
rAf . H
eM( . x"
= < H -» )
The maximum kinetic energy of the distributed case should be equal to the total kinetic
energy of the concentrated mass modeled system.
By equating these two cases:
The equivalent concentrated mass
=%- <11-22)
505
Appendix-rDl
12 Design of Cams, springs and base supports
12.1 Design of Cams
The configuration and performance analysis of the proposed active isolation system are
given in reference [18]. The followings are some detailed design data for the system
components.
Figure 12.1 The dimensions of the cams
at t = 0 cam moves ccw 90°
at t = t o sec cam moves cw 6 c
After shock wave, cam moves cw 90 - 6 C return the system to its stationary state.
c —b = 5 [cm]
b = 20 [cm], c = 25 [cm],
a = 25 + 30 = 55 [cm]
506
12.2 Design of the springs for the base
For each spring
Kb = Q'00^ - 1-- = 0-75 10s [N/m]
where Ks = 3.0 107 [N/m]
When fully compressed force on each spring: Fi = (L, - L f )KB = 2.25 104 [N]
Number of turns: N =8
Deflection: & = 30 [cm]
c 64 R'NF, 64 0.253 8 ( 2.25 104) .

5 = ----- -— - = ---------- = 0.3 [m] ( 12. 1)
d*G d* 7 9 109
Wire diameter. d = 4 [cm]
, , 4 ^ i | 2 3 i l 0 ; ) 1 3 L05 ( 12.2)
5 rtd3 0.04
zs =470 [MPa]
C = — = 12.5 (12.3)
d
S p ti™
ft***®
,u\Pe
.OXAOWpTO’
vep’
f u ^ eV
O'M^'
0Uê
VfO'SiS'\°
' o
i
^ oduG<
508
&- Deflection of springs
N = Number of active turns
Nt = Total number of active turns
G = Shear modules of the wire material
R - Radius of main coil
d = Radius of wire
C = Spring index
Kst = Static stress correction factor
Ls= Solid length of spring
Lf = Free length of spring
509
12.3 Design of the Supporting Balls
Fig-(12.4) shows the configuration of the one of the supporting polymer coated steel balls
in the spherical seat formed in the polymer coated steel plates attached to the ground and
the base respectively. In this case assuming that 5 hollow spheres are used at each support
location for the design of bridge base isolation, the maximum contact stress is calculated
as:
Figure 12.4 Schematic representation of spherical hollow balls
(12.7)
=2.4 e -10 [— 1
6 . 2 109 6.210 N
The maximum contact pressure is:
510
p . =0.578 V r-^_ R— =0.578 =2.56e+8 [MPa] (12.8)
where
Er= Elasticity modules of spheres
E r= Elasticity modules of spherical seats
vr= Poission ratio of spheres
vR= Poission ratio of spherical seats
R = Radius of spherical seats
ro = 3rt = Outer Radius of spheres
rt = Inner Radius of spheres
pa= The maximum contact pressure
F - The contact force on each sphere
511
Bibliography
[1] J.M. Kelly, “The Implementation o f Base Isolation in the United States. ” PVP-vol.
256- 2, Seismic Engineering - V.2 ASME 1993.
[2] A. Martelli and M. Fomi, “ Developments o f Seismic Isolation Implementation in
Italy. ” PVP-vol. 256- 2, Seismic Engineering - V.2 ASME 1993.
[3] B. Palazzo, and L. Petti “ Seismic Response Control in Base Isolation Systems Using
Tuned Mass Dampers. ” First World Conference on Structural Control, 3-5 August 1994,
Los Angeles, California, USA.
[4] A. Kareem, “ The Next Generation o f Tuned Liquid Dampers.” First World
Conference on Structural Control, 3-5 August 1994, Los Angeles, California, USA.
[5] Y. P Wang, and C. J. Liu “Active Control o f Sliding Structures under Strong
Earthquakes." , FPl-23. First World Conference on Structural Control, 3-5 August 1994,
[6] Y. P. Wang, and A. M. Reinhjom, “ Motion Control o f sliding Isolated Structures.”
Seismic, Shock and Vibration Isolation-edited by H. Chung and T. Fujita,
vol 181, ASME (1989).
[7] Y. Koike, T. Murata,. “Development o f V-Shaped Hybrid Mass Damper and its
Applications to High-Rise Buildings.” , FA2-3. First World Conference on Structural
Control, 3-5 August 1994, Los Angeles, California, USA.
[8] P. Jahilal, S. Utku, “ Active Control In Passively Base Isolated Buildings Subjected to
Lower Power Excitations. ” Computer & Structures Vol 66, Nons 2-3, pp.
512
[9] N. Mostaghel, T. Davis, “ Representations o f Coloumb Friction fo r Dynamic
Analysis. " Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 26, 541-548 (1997)
[10] J. L. Almazan, J. C. De la Hera, “ Modelling Aspects o f Structures Isolated With the
Frictional Pendulum System.” Earthquake Engineering And Structural Dynamics 27,
845- 867 (1998)
[11] Q. Zhou, X. Lu, “ Dynamic Analysis on Structures Base Isolated by A Ball System
with restoring property. ” Earthquake Engineering And Structural Dynamics 27,773- 791
(1998)
[12] T. Kuroda, M. Saruta, “ Verification Studies on Base Isolation Systems by Full
scale Buildings.’’Seismic, Shock and Vibration Isolation-edited by H. Chung and T.
Fujita,
vol 181, ASME (1989).
[13] Ronalds L.Mayes, R Jones, G.Bukle, M.Eeri. “ Impediments to the implementation
of Seismic isolation.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[14] R. Olson, M.Eeri, W. Lambright. “What we need to know to diffuse this
technology.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[15] M. Kikuchi, I. D. Aiken “An analytical hysteresis model fo r elastomeric seismic
isolation bearings . ” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 26, 215-231
(1997)
[16] H. Ahmedi, A. H. Muhr, "Prediction o f performance o f base isolation systems
utilizing high damping natural rubber” PVP-vol. 256- 2, Seismic Engineering - V.2
ASME 1993.
513
[17] T.S. Wa and R.W. Seidensticker, “ Characterization of high damping bearings and
their responses to earthquake motion,”
[18] C.-C. Lin and C.- M. Hu., “ On The Seismic Effectiveness o f Passive Tuned Mass
dampers. ” PVP-vol. 237- 2, Seismic Engineering - V.2 ASME 1992.
[19] Y.-B. Yang, T. L. and I.- C. Tsai, “Response o f Multi Degree o f Freedom
Structures with Sliding Support. ” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol.
19,739-752 (1990).
[20] T. W. Lin and C. C. Hone “ Base Isolation by Free Rolling Rods Under Basement. ”,
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 22, 261-273 (1993).
[21] G. Varney and C Olson, associates at KPFF Consulting Engineers. “ Puget Sound
Business Journal ”, 1998.
[22] H.A. Buchholdt, “Structural Dynamics for Engineers.” ,1997
[23] Malhotra. K. Praveen, “New Methodfo r Seismic Isolation ofUquid- Storage Tank. ”
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 26,839-847 (1997).
[24] Lin,Wu Tsung, Chem, C. Chum, Hone C. Chao ,“Experimental Study o f Base
Isolation by free Rolling Rods." Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol.
24, 1645-1650 (1995).
[25] Bryan, B. J, Flanders,H- E, “The Effects o f friction on Component Dynamic
response. ” PVP-vol. 237-2, Seismic Engineering - V.2 ASME 1992.
[26] Mostaghel, N. and Davis, Todd, “Representations o f Coulomb friction for Dynamic
Analysis. ” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 26,541-548 (1997).
514
[27] Yeong-Bin Yang, Tzu-Ying Lee and I.-Chau Tsai, “Response o f Multi Degree of
Freedom Structures with Sliding Support.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics Vo!. 19, 739-752 (1990).
[28] Katsuhisa Kanda, Takuji Kobori Yoshiki Ikeda, “The Development o f a Pre-arrival
transmission System for earthquake Information Applied to Seismic Response Controlled
Structures ”, FP1-23, First World Conference on Structural Control, 3-5 August 1994,
[29] L. Petti, and B Palazzo," Hybrid Mass Dampers for Structural Control Against to
Wind and Earthquakes . ” TPI-110, First World Conference on Structural Control, 3-5
August 1994, Los Angeles, California, USA.
[30] H.Kaplan, A.Seireg, “A Computer Controlled System for Earthquake Protection of
Structures. ” Computers in Technology, special issue, 2000.
[31] James Kelly " Base isolation: Linear Theory and Design” Earthquake Spectra,
Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[32] N. Youssef, B.Nuttall, A Rahman, O. Hata,. “Passive control o f The Los Angeles
City Hall”, FP2-54. First World Conference on Structural Control, 3-5 August 1994, Los
Angeles, California, USA.
[33] S.Fujita, O. Furuya, T. Fujita. “Dynamic tests on high damping rubber damper for
vibration control of tall buildings . ”, FA2-3. First World Conference on Structural
Control, 3-5 August 1994, Los Angeles, California, USA.
515
[34] P. B. Shing, M. E. Dixon, N. Kermiche, R. Su, M. Frangopol. “ Control o f building
vibrations with active/passive devices. ” Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics Vol. 25,1019-1039 (1996).
[35] E. E. Matheu, M J*. Singh, C. Beathe. “ Output-Feedback Sliding-Mode Control with
Generalized Sliding Surface for Civil Structures under Earthquake Excitations.”
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 27,259-282 (1998).
[36] T. Kobori, N.Koshida, K, Yamada, Y, Ikeda. “ Seismic-Response-Controlled
Structure with Active Mass Driver System." Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics Vol. 20,133-149 (1991).
[37] S. R. Tzan, C.P. Pandelides. “Hybrid structural Control Using Viscoelastic
Dampers and Active Control Systems.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics
Vol. 23, 1369-1388 (1994).
[38] R.Villerde. “Reduction in Seismic Response with Heavily-Damped Vibration
Absorbers.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 13,33-42 (1985).
[39] H.Lee, M.Wieland, D.Chang. “ Dynamic response of a simple supported bridge
with rough surface.” Structural Engineering review Vol.4, No.2, pp. 125-137, 1992.
[40] G.M.Calvi, G.R.Kingsley, “Displacement based seismic design of multi degree of
freedom structures .” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol 24, 1247-66,
1995.
[41] M.Saidi, E Maragakis, D.O’Connor, “Seismic performance of the Madrone Bridge
during the Loma Prieta Earthquake.” Structural Engineering review Vol.7, No.3, pp. 219-
230,1995.
516
[42] Daniel H. Tobias, Douglos A.Foutch. “ Overview of a research program
investigating riveted railway bridges.” Structural Engineering review Vol.7, No.3, pp.
219-230,1995.
[43] Andrej F.Sokolik, Stefan Zemko, Milan Hric. “The effects of a superheavy highway
load on a bridge.” Structural Engineering review Vol.7, No.3, pp. 245-250, 1995.
[44] Jeffrey L. Shulz, Brett Commander, George G. Goble, Dan M. Frangopol. “Efficient
field testing and load rating of short and medium span bridges.” Structural Engineering
review Vol.7, No.3, pp. 181-194, 1995.
[45] Z. Zembaty A. Rutengerg. “ On the sensitivity of bridge seismic response with local
soil amplificaton.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics 27,1095-1099,
1998.
[46] M. Symans S.W.Kelly. “Fuzzy Logic Control of Bridge Structures using intelligent
semi active seismic isolation system.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics
28, 37-60, 1999.
[47] M.S. Fadali, K. Elzeyyat, E.Maragakis. “ Disturbance rejection control of bridge
response to earthquake excitation.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics
Vol. 25 291-302, 1996.
[48] K. Kawashima, S. Unjoh. “ Impact of Hanshin/Awaji earthquake on seismic design
strengthening of highway bridges.” Structural/Earthquake Engineering, JSCE, Vol. 13,
No.2, 211-240, Oct.1996.
[49] P.Tsopelas, M.C. Constantinou, “ Experimental study of FPS system in bridge base
isolation.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 25,65-78,1996.
517
[50] RJanskowski, K.Wilde,Y Fojino. “ Pounding of superstructure segments in isolated
elevated bridge during earthquakes. Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics
Vol. 27,487-502, 1998.
[51] G.R.McKay, H.E.Chapman, D.K.Kirkcaldei. “ Seismic isolationrNew Zeland
Applications.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[52] Amraseys, K.A.Simpson. “Influence of seismic waves spatially variability on
bridges: sensitivity analysis.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 25,
795-814, 1996.
[53] J.T. Chen, H.K. Hong, C.S. Yeh, S.W.Chyuan. “ Integral representations and
regularizations for a divergent series solution of beam subjected to support motions.”
Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 25,909-925, 1998.
[54] V.Zayas, S.Low, A.Mahin, M. Eeri. “A pendulum technique for achieving seismic
isolation.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[55] L.Sharpe, M. Eeri. “Independent engineer peer review for seismic isolation
projects.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[56] L. Mayes, M. Eeri, R. Jones, E. Kelly. “The economics of seismic isolation in
buildings.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[57] P.Tsopelas, M.C. Constantinou, “ Experimental study of FPS system in bridge base
isolation.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 25,65-78, 1996.
[58] Wang, Chung and W.Liao.“Seismic Response Analysis of Bridges Isolated with
Friction Pendulum.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol 27, 1069-93,
1998.
518
[59] RJanskowski, K.Wilde,Y Fojino. “ Pounding of superstructure segments in isolated
elevated bridge during earthquakes. Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics
Vol. 27,487-502, 1998.
[60] N. Yang, j. C. Yu. “Hybrid Control of Seismic-Excited Bridge Structures.”
Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol 24, 1437-51, 1995.
[61] M. Symans, S.W.Kelly. “Fuzzy Logic Control of Bridge Structures using intelligent
semi active seismic isolation system.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics
28, 37-60, 1999.
[62] M.S. Fadali, K. Elzeyyat, E.Maragakis. “ Disturbance rejection control of bridge
response to earthquake excitation.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics
Vol. 25, 291-302, 1996.
[63] Daniel H. Tobias, Douglos A.Foutch. “ Overview of a research program
investigating riveted railway bridges.” Structural Engineering review Vol.7, No.3, pp.
219-230, 1995.
[64] Jeffrey L. Shulz, Brett Commander, George G. Goble, Dan M. Frangopol. “Efficient
field testing and load rating of short and medium span bridges.” Structural Engineering
review Vol.7, No.3, pp. 181-194, 1995.
[65] Z. Zembaty A. Rutengerg. “ On the sensitivity of bridge seismic response with local
soil amplificaton.” Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics 27,1095-1099,
1998.
519
[66] K. Kawashima, S. Unjoh. “ Impact of Hanshin/Awaji earthquake on seismic design
strengthening of highway bridges.” Structural/Earthquake Engineering, JSCE, Vol. 13.
No.2. 211-240, Oct.1996.
[67] G.R.McKay, H.E.Chapman, D.K.Kirkcaldei. “ Seismic isolation:New Zeland
Applications.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[68] Ronalds L.Mayes, RJones, G.Bukle, M.Eeri. “ Impediments to the implementation
of Seismic isolation.” Earthquake Spectra, Vol.6, No.2, 1990.
[69] N.N. Amraseys, K.A.Simpson. “ Prediction of vertical response spectra in Europe.”
Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics Vol. 25,401-412, 1998. [53] N.N.
[70] A. Seireg,. “ Friction and Lubrication in Mechanical Design.", Mercel Dekker,
N.Y, 1998.
[71] A. Seireg, “Mechanical System Analysis.”, International textbook Co.,Scranton,
PA, 1969.
[72] M.E. Plesha, EMA 545 Mechanical Vibrations, Class Notes 1995.
[73] R.EngeIstand, ME 740 Structural Dynamics and Vibrations o f Mechanical
Components, Class notes, 1998.
[74] R.EngeIstand, ME 444 Dynamics Problems in Design, Class notes, 1998.

Tez 4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tez 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

ProQuest Information and Learning

Page(s) not included in the original manuscript

This reproduction is the best copy available.

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN -MADISON

ProQuest Information and Learning Company

A Computer C ontrolled System f o r Earthquake

subm itted to the G ra d u ate S chool of th e

in partial fulfillment of th e re q u irem en ts for th e

Date of Final Oral Examination: December 22, 1999

Month & Year Degree to be awarded: December May 2002 August

Approval Signatures of Dissertation Readers: Signature, Dean of Graduate School

Under the Supervision o f Kaiser Professor Ali.A. Seireg

B.S.M (Computer-Controlled-Concave-Ball Support Mechanism), fo r the protection o f

structures against earthquakes. The envisioned system is incorporated in a specially

designed supporting base. A computer simulation o f the system is utilized fo r selecting

be controlled according to preprogrammed rules in order to minimize the forces

appropriately placed o ff site seismic detectors.

reduction in the transmitted force to the structures.

proposed concept fo r the protection o f different types o f structures against catastrophic

damage by earthquakes are also investigated.

An active base isolation system fo r the protection o f bridges subjected to earthquakes is

be optimally designed to minimize the transmissibility o f the seismic disturbances to the

order o f magnitude reduction in the maximum stress resulting from transverse or

longitudinal seismic waves.

cam as soon as an earthquake is detected.

constant guidance, patience and encouragement during my graduate studies. It is indeed a

fortune to be his student.

I would like to thank my thesis committee members: Professors, W.D.Milestone,

^ -II A __________________ ......WWMM..W..—.WW.M...W....W....W.....M.W.W....WWW..M.W.MW.1

1 LITERATURE REVIEW ON PASSIVE AND ACTIVE PROTECTION OF

2 A COMPUTER CONTROLLED SYSTEM FOR EARTHQUAKE PROTECTION

3 SEISMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS OF MULTI DEGREE OF FREEDOM RIGID

4 SEISM IC RESPONSE ANALYSIS O F THE SINGLE SPAN ISOLATED BRIDGES

5 SEISM IC RESPONSE ANALYSIS O F MULTI-SPAN CONVENTIONAL AND

6 MULTI DEGREE O F FREEDOM MODEL FO R M ULTI SPAN BRIDGES AND

6.6 T he seismic response o f the conventionally designed , non -symmetric ,

7 T H E SEISM IC RESPONSE ANALYSIS O F TH E CONVENTIONALLY

8 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOM M ENDATIONS_________________ 446

11 THE EQUIVALENT SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM LUMPED MASS

12 DESIGN OF CAMS, SPRINGS AND BASE SUPPORTS.... ......................505

DURATION OFTHE SHOCK-WAVE (CASE-2) WITH M b =0.05M s ,fl0 = 0 . 0 1 , Kb = 0 . 0 5 AT5 .......... 39

t0 = 13 [sec ] w rm fiQ = 0 .0 1 , Mb = 0 . 0 5 A / , ( c a s e - 3 ) .............................................................................. 4 0

AFTER tQ = 5 [SEC] (C A SE-6)............................................................................................................................................59

the m a x |x 6 - < 5 ( / ) | < 0 . 1 5 [ m ] c o n s t r a in t . ......................................................................................................91

F ig u r e 3.4 7 C o m p a r is o n o f t h e a b s o l u t e p e a k d is p l a c e m e n t s o f t h e f l o o r s ...................................... 120

DIRECTION WITH OPTIMIZED VALUES — - = Cf = 0 . 0 1 . d = 0 . 0 7 [ m ] AND R = 4 [m] .............. 146

F igure 6.14 Peak stresses in t h e sec tio n s ......................................................................................................306

to earthquake resistance is a radical departure from the traditional approaches used by

structural engineers. In conventional fixed base design, strengthening a structural system

considerably increase its cost.

When a structure is built on an isolation system, it should have a fundamental frequency

architects and structural engineers, it is often used in conversations about the

survivability and ongoing operations of a building following a major earthquake.

"Essential" buildings (hospitals, critical high-tech facilities, communications facilities,

the energy to minimize the shock associated with an earthquake.

Base isolation technology encompasses several devices, including high-damping

continuity of operations requires a significant reduction of the earthquake’s impact on a

use of conventional, fixed-base, structural framing systems.