Design Formulations For Supplemental Viscous Dampers To Highway Bridges

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2005; 34:1627–1642

Published online 26 July 2005 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/eqe.508
Design formulations for supplemental viscous dampers

to highway bridges
Jenn-Shin Hwang1; 2; ∗; †; ‡; §; ¶ and Yi-Shane Tseng1;

1 Department of Construction Engineering; National Taiwan University of Science and Technology;
Taipei; Taiwan
2 National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering; Taipei; Taiwan
SUMMARY
Design formulas for supplemental viscous dampers to building structures are readily available in FEMA
provisions and MCEER research reports. However, for the design of supplemental viscous dampers cor-
responding to a desired system damping ratio of highway bridges, there exist, if any, few design guide-
lines. This is particularly true if the bridge components such as elastomeric bearings, piers and abutment
possess dierent damping ratios, stinesses, and lumped masses. In this paper, the design formulas for
supplemental viscous dampers to highway bridges have been derived based on the concept of ‘composite
damping ratio’. The design formulas can be used to determine the damping coecients of the dampers
corresponding to a desired system damping ratio of the bridge in which dierent component damping ra-
tios may be assumed for the elastomeric bearings, piers and abutments. The proposed design formulas are
numerically validated by comparing the seismic responses of a three-span bridge equipped with viscous
dampers with those of the same bridge without viscous dampers but with an assigned inherent system
damping ratio equal to the target system damping ratio. Copyright ? 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS: viscous damper; damper design; highway bridges; seismic design; seismic response
INTRODUCTION
Various types of energy dissipation devices have been readily available for practical ap-
plications to the seismic response control of structures [1, 2]. Among these devices, vis-
cous dampers that do not possess storage stiness when the excitation frequency is within
∗ Correspondence to: Jenn-Shin Hwang, 200, Section 3, Sin-Hai Road, Taipei, Taiwan.
† E-mail: jshwang@ncree.gov.tw
‡ E-mail: JSH@mail.ntust.edu.tw
§ Professor.
¶ Deputy Director.
Graduate Research Assistant.
Contract=grant sponsor: National Science Council of Taiwan; contract=grant number: NSC-93-2211-E011-019
Received 1 October 2004

Revised 7 April 2005
Copyright ? 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 21 April 2005
1628 J.-S. HWANG AND Y.-S. TSENG
a low-frequency range, e.g. 0–3 Hz [3], have shown certain advantage for a simple design
procedure. The incorporation of viscous dampers to a building structure corresponding to
an additional damping ratio, e.g. 5–15%, introduces negligible inuence on the fundamental
natural period of the structure. In addition, since there exists a 90◦ phase angle between the
damper force and damper displacement, the incorporation of viscous dampers to a building
structure is less likely than the yielding type dampers to induce a signicant additional force
to other structural elements such as the columns adjacent to the dampers. Therefore, the design
procedure of supplemental viscous dampers is relatively simpler [4–7].
The force–velocity relationship of a viscous damper is described by
Fd = cd |u̇| sgn(u̇) (1)
where Fd is the damper force, cd is the damping coecient, u̇ is the relative velocity between
the two ends of the damper, is the damping exponent, and sgn(u̇) = 1 when u̇¿0 and
sgn(u̇) =−1 when u̇ ¡ 0. The damper with = 1 is called a linear viscous damper while the
dampers with smaller than 1 is called a non-linear viscous damper.
For the design of supplemental linear viscous dampers to building structures, FEMA273
[4] and FEMA 356 [5] have provided some convenient design formulas. Besides, the de-
sign of non-linear viscous dampers may follow the formulations given in the research report
of the Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER) [6]. These
design formulations have provided very convenient tools to practical engineers in determin-
ing the damping coecients of the supplemental viscous dampers corresponding to an added
damping ratio to the building structures. In the current design practices provided by FEMA
and MCEER, the equivalent damping ratio of building structure with supplemental viscous
dampers is written as
e = 0 + d (2)
where e is the equivalent damping ratio of the structure, 0 the inherent viscous damping
ratio of the structure which is often assumed to be equal to 5% by most design codes, and d
the added damping ratio to the structure attributed to the supplemental viscous dampers. It is
worthy of noting that the separation of the damping ratio d attributed to viscous dampers from
the inherent viscous damping ratio 0 possessed by the structure has greatly simplied the
design formulations of viscous dampers. This is particularly true for those structures in which
the structural elements possess various element damping ratios. According to the currently
available design provisions for building structures, the additional damping ratios attributed to
the linear and non-linear viscous dampers are, respectively, given by

T j cj cos2 j 2rj
d = (3)
4 i mi 2i
and

T 2− j j cj cos1+ j 1+
rj
d = 3− 1−
2
(4)
(2) A i mi i
where rj is the rst mode relative displacement between the ends of the devices j in the
horizontal direction, T the fundamental natural period of the structure, cj the damping coef-
cients of the dampers at the jth storey, j the inclination angle of the dampers in the jth
Copyright ? 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2005; 34:1627–1642
DESIGN FORMULATIONS FOR VISCOUS DAMPERS 1629
Bearing offset
Figure 1. Damage mechanism at bridge bearings of a then newly constructed highway bridge
during the 1999 Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake.
storey, the damping exponent, j the number of identical dampers with the same cj in each
storey, A the roof response amplitude corresponding to the modal displacement j normalized
to a unit value at the roof, and is a parameter given by
2 (1 + =2)
= 22+ (5)
(2 + )
in which is the gamma function.
Learning from the bridge performance during the 1999 Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake, the
elastomeric bearings located between the superstructure and substructure have behaved as
a structural ‘fuse’. The damage at the bearings (or the o-set between the superstructure
and substructure) has reduced the inertia force transmitted to the substructure during the
ground shaking, and thus prevented the bridge piers from severe damages. An example of
this type of damage mechanism is shown in Figure 1. From the damage mechanism, it is
realized that the ductile inelastic behaviour of bridge columns implied or expected in the
seismic design code for reducing the elastic seismic design force does not occur. The ductile
behaviour of well detailed substructures can only be expected if the bearings are designed
with a sucient strength together with some appropriate connection details such as dowel
connections or bolt connections. In addition, shear keys or stoppers with an appropriate thermal
displacement tolerance and a seismic displacement response for a moderate earthquake may
also be necessary so that the shear keys or stoppers can engage into transmitting the inertia
force to the pier when a major earthquake occurs. As an alternate to the conventional seismic
design concept which counts greatly on the ductility and strength of the substructure, the
implementation of viscous dampers to the bridge bearing system may greatly reduce the
seismic demand on the bridge responses. It is therefore the attempt of this study to derive the
design formulas for the damping coecients of supplemental viscous dampers.
For the applications of viscous dampers to bridge structures, some practical construction ex-
amples are shown in Figure 2. For the 91/I-5 overcrossing of California shown
in Figure 2(a), numerical study has been made to simulate the seismic responses of the
(a) (b)
Figure 2. Examples of applications of viscous dampers to bridges: (a) 91/I5 Anaheim overcrossing in
California; and (b) a bridge located at Yen-Chou in Taiwan.
bridge [8, 9]. For the bridges with various component stinesses, lumped masses and damp-
ing ratios, it may not be realistic to separate the added damping ratio of the dampers from
the inherent damping ratio of the structure as given by Equation (2). Therefore, the concept
of ‘composite damping ratio’ [10] may be applied to deriving the design formulas of the
dampers. For the damping ratios of bridge components, the Japanese seismic isolation de-
sign specications [11] has stated that a 3–5% damping ratio and a 5–10% damping ratio
may, respectively, be assigned to the superstructure and substructure of bridges. In this paper,
the design of supplemental viscous dampers to bridge structures, in particular the continuous
highway bridges over elastomeric bearings will be derived based on the concept of composite
damping ratio [10] through the eigenvalue analysis [12]. The design formulas will be partic-
ularly useful for the bridge in which dierent damping ratios, stinesses and lumped masses
are assigned to various bridge substructure components. Numerical analysis is also made to
verify the accuracy of the design formulas in capturing the desired system damping ratio.
DESIGN FORMULATIONS FOR BRIDGES WITH LINEAR VISCOUS DAMPERS
For a bridge installed with viscous dampers as shown in Figure 2(b), it may be represented
by a simplied model shown in Figure 3 in the direction of consideration. In the simplied
model, the exibility of superstructure and the soil–structure interaction eect are not included
in this study. Corresponding to the simplied bridge model, the equation of motion is given
by
mb xb + cb (ẋb − ẋs ) + cd |(ẋb − ẋs )| sgn(ẋb − ẋs ) + kb (xb − xs ) = − mb xg
(6)
ms xs − cb (ẋb − ẋs ) − cd |(ẋb − ẋs )| sgn(ẋb − ẋs ) + cs ẋs − kb (xb − xs ) + ks xs = − ms xg
where xb , ẋb , xb are, respectively, the relative displacement, velocity and acceleration time
histories of the superstructure to the ground, xs , ẋs , xs are, respectively, the relative displace-
ment, velocity and acceleration of the pier cap to the ground, xg the ground acceleration
time history, mb the mass of the superstructure, kb the horizontal stiness of the elastomeric
Superstructure
mb
kb
cd or ξd cb or ξ b
ms
Viscous Pier top
Damper
ks
c s or ξs
Figure 3. A simplied bridge model with viscous damper and various element properties.
bearing, cb the damping coecient of the elastomeric bearing, ms the lumped mass at the pier
cap, ks the horizontal stiness of the bridge substructure, cs the damping coecient of the
bridge substructure, cd the damping coecient of the viscous damper, the damping exponent
of the non-linear viscous damper; sgn(ẋb − ẋs ) = 1 when (ẋb − ẋs )¿0 and sgn(ẋb − ẋs ) = − 1
when (ẋb − ẋs ) ¡ 0.
When linear viscous dampers ( = 1:0) are applied, Equation (6) can be simplied to the
form of

mb 0 xb cb + c d −cb − cd ẋb kb −kb xb
+ +
0 ms xs −cb − cd cb + cd + cs ẋs −kb kb + ks xs

mb 0 1
=− xg (7)
0 ms 1
or
[M ]{x} + [C]{ẋ} + [K]{x} = − [M ]{r }xg (8)
where [M ] is the mass matrix of the system, [K] the stiness matrix of the system, [C]
the damping matrix of the system. Corresponding to Equation (8), the undamped natural
frequencies and mode shapes in the direction of consideration are given by
([K] − !n2 [M ]){n } = 0; n = 1; 2 (9)
and

nb
{ n } = (10)
ns
where {n } is the modal vector of the nth mode, nb the modal displacement of the super-
structure, and ns the modal displacement at the pier cap. Substituting Equation (10) into
Equation (9), the following is obtained

−mb !n2 nb + kb (nb − ns ) = 0 (11)
and
−ms !n2 ns + (kb + ks )ns − kb nb = 0 (12)
Dening the following element properties:
!b2 = kb =mb (13)
!s2 = ks =(mb + ms ) (14)
= ms =(ms + mb ) (15)
Equations (11) and (12) are rewritten as
(!b2 − !n2 )nb − !b2 ns = 0 (16)
(1 − )!b2 nb + [!n2 − (1 − )!b2 − !s2 ]ns = 0 (17)
From Equations (16) and (17), the characteristic equation is obtained as

!n4 − (!b2 + !s2 )!n2 + !b2 !s2 = 0 (18)
Dening the stiness ratio Rs = kb =ks and using Equations (13), (14) and (15), one can obtain
!b2 RS
= (19)
!s2 (1 − )
Substituting Equation (19) into Equation (18), it is solved for the natural frequencies
1 − (1 + (RS =(1 − ))) ∓ [(1 + (RS =(1 − )))2 − 4(RS =(1 − ))]1=2 2
!1;2 2 = !b (20)
RS 2
From Equation (16), the following is obtained:
(!b2 − !n2 ) n
ns = b (21)
!b2
Substituting Equation (21) into Equation (10), the normalized mode shape vectors are then
determined as

1
{ 1 } = (22)
1 − 1

1
{ 2 } = (23)
1 − 2
where 1 = !12 =!b2 , 2 = !22 =!b2 . Adopting concept of the approximate procedure proposed by
Veletsos and Ventura [13], the damping matrix is assumed to be diagonalized when trans-
forming to modal coordinates, i.e. the o-diagonal terms of {ni }T [C]{nj } are neglected. The
generalized mass and damping coecient matrices are then written as

m∗11 m∗12 mb + (1 − 1 )2 ms 0
∗
[M ] = = (24)
m∗21 m∗22 0 mb + (1 − 2 )2 ms
∗ ∗
c11 c12 (cb + cd )12 + (1 − 1 )2 cs 0
∗
[c ] = = (25)
∗ ∗
c21 c22 0 (cb + cd )22 + (1 − 2 )2 cs
The modal damping ratios are then obtained by

∗
c11 (cb + cd )12 + (1 − 1 )2 cs
1 = ∗ = (26)
2m11 !1 2!1 [mb + (1 − 1 )2 ms ]
∗
c22 (cb + cd )22 + (1 − 2 )2 cs
2 = ∗ = (27)
2m22 !2 2!2 [mb + (1 − 2 )2 ms ]
Substituting the component damping coecients cb = 2mb b !b , cd = 2mb d !b , cs = 2(mb + ms )

s !s into Equations (26) and (27), the modal damping ratio is rewritten as

d+b 12 (1 − ) + s ((1 − )=Rs )(1 − 1 )2
1 = √ (28)
1 [(1 − ) + (1 − 1 )2 ]

d+b 22 (1 − ) + s ((1 − )=Rs )(1 − 2 )2
2 = √ (29)
2 [(1 − ) + (1 − 2 )2 ]
where s is the damping ratio of the bridge pier, b the damping ratio of the elastomeric
bearing, d the supplemental damping ratio of the linear viscous damper, and d+b = d + b
is the combined damping ratio of the elastomeric bearing and viscous damper. For the prelim-
inary design of the damping coecient of the damper, it may be acceptable that the equivalent
system damping ratio (or desired system damping ratio) is approximated by the rst modal
damping ratio, i.e. e = 1 . Thus, corresponding to a target system damping ratio of the bridge,
the required combined damping ratio of the linear viscous damper and elastomeric bearing is
determined by
√
e 1 [(1 − ) + (1 − 1 )2 ] − s ((1 − )=Rs )(1 − 1 )2
d+b = (30)
12 (1 − )
For the design of the linear viscous damper shown on the bridge model of Figure 3, the
component damping ratio of the damper is given by
cd
d = (31)
2mb !b
Substituting Equation (31) into Equation (30), the damping coecient of linear viscous
damper corresponding to a desired system damping ratio of the bridge is obtained by
√
e 1 [(1 − ) + (1 − 1 )2 ] − s ((1 − )=Rs )(1 − 1 )2
cd = 2mb !b − b (32)
12 (1 − )
From Equation (32), it is realized that the damping coecients of the dampers installed at
dierent piers or abutments may not be the same due to the fact that the parameters such
as , Rs , 1 and s at dierent piers and abutments may not be identical. Nevertheless, for
the simplicity of practical design, average damping coecients may be used, respectively,
for piers and abutments if a rational engineering judgment can be made for a regular and
symmetric highway bridge.
DESIGN FORMULATIONS FOR BRIDGES WITH NON-LINEAR

VISCOUS DAMPERS
For a bridge structure implemented with supplemental non-linear viscous dampers, the dynamic
0 ẋ+Cd |ẋ | sgn+Kx = − M xg in which C0 is the inherent damping

equation is written as M x+C

coecient matrix of the structure and Cd is the damping coecient matrix of the non-linear
viscous dampers, as can be easily realized from Equation (6). However, this equation can
only be solved using the dynamic step-by-step integration time history analysis that may be
required only in the nal stage of the design process. For the preliminary design of non-
linear viscous dampers, the concept of equivalent linear damping is often used to approach
the maximum seismic response of the structure by analysing an equivalent linear system
described by M x + (C + Ceq )ẋ + Kx = − M xg , in which Ceq is the equivalent linear damping
matrix to the non-linear viscous damping matrix. For the equivalent linearization, there have
been two approaches, respectively, using the equal energy dissipation [6] and the equal average
power consumption [14]. However, it should be noted that both methods are an approximation
rather than an exact solution to the maximum seismic responses of the structures equipped
with supplemental non-linear viscous dampers. The accuracy of the two approaches may be
sensitive to the characteristics of structures and ground motions.
In this study, the equal energy concept is used for the derivation of the design formula
of non-linear viscous dampers. The work done by a non-linear viscous damper in one cycle
of vibration is equated to the energy dissipated by a linear viscous damper. For a non-linear
linear viscous damper subjected to one cycle of sinusoidal excitation, ud = u0 sin !t, the energy
dissipated by the damper is calculated by

2=!
2=!
2=!
1+
Wd = Fd dud = Fd u̇d dt = cd |u̇d |1+ dt = cd |!u0 cos !t | dt (33)
0 0 0
Let !t = 2, dt = (2=!) d

2
Wd = cc (!u0 )1+ |sin1+ 2| d
! 0

=2
= 22+ cd ! u01+ 2 sin1+ cos1+ d
0
2 (1 + =2)
= 22+ cd ! u01+ = cd ! u01+ (34)
(2 + )
The equivalent linear damping ratio of the non-linear viscous damper can be calculated
by substituting Equation (34) into the denition of linear viscous damping ratio given by
d = Wd =4Ws in which Ws is the elastic strain energy. According to the bridge model of
Figure 3, the equivalent linear viscous damping ratio of the non-linear viscous damper is
determined by
cd !b (xb − xs )1+ cd !b−2 (xb − xs )−1
d = = (35)
2kb (xb − xs )2 2mb
Recognizing
xb
x b − xs = (36)
1 + Rs
and using Equation (36), the damping coecient of the non-linear viscous damper is expressed
as
2mb (1 + Rs )−1 d
cd = (37)
!b−2 D−1
where D = xb is the relative displacement of the superstructure to the ground. Recognizing
d+b = b + d and substituting Equation (31) into Equation (37), one can obtain
√
2mb (1 + Rs )−1 e 1 [(1 − ) + (1 − 1 )2 ] − s ((1 − )=Rs )(1 − 1 )2
cd = − b
!b−2 D−1 12 (1 − )
(38)
Similar to the case of linear dampers, the non-linear viscous dampers to be designed at dierent
piers and abutments may have dierent damping coecients if the parameters of Equation (38)
at the piers or abutments are not the same. In addition, since Equation (38) has indicated that
the damping coecients are dependent on the maximum displacement of the superstructure, the
damping coecient of the damper is also dependent on the ground motion used for the design.
NUMERICAL VALIDATION
Free vibration response

In order to verify the proposed formulas, the simplied bridge model of Figure 3 is subjected
to a ground acceleration pulse shown in Figure 4. The design damping ratio of the model
is set to 15% in this study. The elastic response time histories are calculated for two sys-
tems. The rst system is composed of various bridge elements together with a linear viscous
Acceleration (m /sec 2)
1
-1
-2
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (sec)
Figure 4. A ground acceleration impulse.
damper. For the bridge elements, various component damping ratios and other structural prop-
erties such as stiness and mass are assigned. The damping coecient of the damper is then
calculated using Equation (33) corresponding to a desired system damping ratio of 15%. The
second system consists of various structural elements without linear viscous dampers. The
system is assigned an inherent damping ratio of 15% regardless of the component damping
ratios. The response time histories of the two systems are compared to investigate the delity
of the proposed design formula for linear viscous dampers in predicting the damping ratio of
the system. Corresponding to the desired system damping ratio of 15% for the bridge model
with a linear viscous damper, two sets of structural member properties are presumed. In the
rst set of element properties the component damping ratios of the pier and the bearing are
set to be the same while two dierent component damping ratios are assigned to the pier
and the bearing in the second set of element properties. The rst set of element properties
are mb = 100 kN s2 =m, ms = 10 kN s2 =m, kb = 9810 kN=m, ks = 98 100 kN=m, b = 5%, s = 5%.
Corresponding to a 15% system damping ratio, the damping coecient of the linear viscous
damper is determined from Equation (33) to be cd = 246 kN s=m. The second set of ele-
ment properties are mb = 600 kN s2 =m, ms = 60 kN s2 =m, kb = 78 480 kN=m, ks = 392 000 kN=m,
b = 3%, s = 10%. Again, from Equation (33), cd is calculated to be 2180kN s=m with respect
to the same system damping ratio.
The analytical results are summarized in Figure 5. From the gure it can be seen that the
responses of the bridge model with a linear viscous damper designed using Equation (33)
almost coincide with the responses of the bridge model with an assigned inherent damping
ratio of 15%. For both systems with the two sets of parameters listed above, the damping ratios
identied from the decay of the free vibration responses are all equal to 15%. Therefore, it is
shown that the proposed design formula of the linear viscous damper can predict an accurate
system damping ratio of the bridge with dierent damping ratios at various bridge components.
Seismic response
In addition to the aforementioned validation, the seismic responses of a three-span continu-
ous highway bridge shown in Figure 6 are calculated to further validate the proposed design
formulas. The element properties in the longitudinal direction of the bridge are listed in Fig-
ure 6 for which it is worthy of noting that the damping ratios assigned for the elastomeric
0.015
Inherent Damping
0.01 Proposed Formula
Displacement (m)
0.005
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
(a)
0.015
Inherent Damping
0.01 Proposed Formula
Displacement (m)
0.005
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
0 1 2 3 4
(b) Time (sec)
Figure 5. The comparison of free vibration responses between the bridges, respectively, with designed
viscous dampers and with assigned inherent system damping ratio: (a) the bridge with rst set of
assigned parameters; and (b) the bridge with the second set of assigned parameters.
3@40m
Abutment: Pier:
m b = 500 kN − sec 2 / m m b = 1000 kN − sec 2/m

ms = 15 kN − sec 2/m m s = 30 kN − sec 2/m
kb = 68670 kN/ m k b = 68670 kN/m
k s = 2352000 kN / m k s = 294300 kN/m
ξb = 3 % ξb = 3 %
ξs = 10 % ξs = 7%
Figure 6. A three-span continuous highway bridge with various element properties.
0.06
Displacement (m)
El Centro Proposed Formula
0.04 Inherent Damping
0.02
0
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
0 4 8 12 16 20
(a)
5.00
Acceleration (m/s2)
gr2 El Centro Proposed Formula

Inherent Damping
2.50
0.00
-2.50
-5.00
0 4 8 12 16 20
(b)
0.18
Displacement (m)
Kobe Proposed Formula

0.00
-0.09
-0.18
5 10 15 20 25
(c)
15.00
Acceleration (m/s2)

0.00
-7.50
-15.00
5 10 15 20 25
(d)
0.10
Displacement (m)
Chi-Chi Proposed Formula

0.00
-0.05
-0.10
20 30 40 50 60
(e)
8.00
Acceleration (m/s2)

0.00
-4.00
-8.00
20 30 40 50 60
(f ) Time (sec)
Figure 7. Comparison of seismic response time histories between the bridges, respectively, with designed
linear viscous dampers and with assigned inherent system damping ratio.
Table I. The damping coecients of non-linear viscous dampers corresponding

to dierent ground excitations.
N-S JMA Station TCU 065
Earthquake 1940 El Centro 1995 Kobe 1999 Chi-Chi
Maximum displacement D (cm) 4.63 17.05 7.44

Damping exponent, 0.4 0.4 0.4
Parameter, 3.582 3.582 3.582
Damping coecient at pier, cd
(kN s=m)0:4 ) 1177.5 2575.5 1565.5
Damping coecient at abutment, cd
(kN s=m)0:4 ) 1025.0 2242.1 1362.9
bearings, bridge piers and abutments are, respectively, 3, 7 and 10%. In addition, the masses
and stinesses at the piers and abutments are not the same. Substituting the element prop-
erties into Equation (33), the damping coecient of the linear viscous dampers at the each
pier and abutment corresponding to a desired system damping ratio of 15% are calculated to
be, respectively, equal to 243.3 and 172.0 kN s/m. Three recorded earthquake ground motions,
the 1940 El Centro, 1995 Kobe and 1999 Chi-Chi (TCU065 station), are input to the bridge
in the longitudinal direction. The bridge is assumed to remain elastic. The seismic displace-
ment and acceleration response time histories at the superstructure of the bridge are shown in
Figure 7. Besides, the seismic responses of the bridge without dampers but with an assigned
inherent system damping ratio of 15%, regardless of the various component damping ratios,
are also given in Figure 7. From the response comparison shown in Figure 7, it is obvious
that all the responses of the bridge equipped with dampers are almost the same as the re-
sponses of the bridge without dampers but with an assigned inherent system damping ratio of
15%. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed design formula of linear viscous dampers
is valid again in predicting the system damping ratio of the bridge with dierent element
properties.
For the validation of the design formula of non-linear viscous dampers given by Equa-
tion (39), the same three-span bridge is used for the numerical study. However, since the
damping coecient of the non-linear viscous dampers is displacement dependent, the maxi-
mum displacement responses at the superstructure of the bridge subjected to the three ground
motions should be determined before the damping coecients of the dampers can be calcu-
lated. For doing so, the bridge without dampers but with an assigned 15% inherent damping ra-
tio is subjected to the three ground acceleration time histories in the longitudinal direction. The
bridge is assumed to remain elastic, and the maximum displacement responses are calculated
and summarized in Table I. The corresponding damping coecients with a prescribed damping
exponent = 0:4 of the non-linear viscous dampers are then determined using Equation (39).
These damping coecients of the dampers located at each pier and abutment are listed in
Table I. The seismic responses of the bridge with dampers are then calculated and compared
in Figure 8 with the responses of the bridge without dampers but with the same system
damping ratio of 15%. From the gure it is seen that the bridge responses with the non-linear
viscous dampers designed by the proposed design formula approximate very well to the re-
sponses of the bridge without dampers but with the same system damping ratio. In particular,
the maximum responses of the bridge are well captured. Therefore, it is concluded that the
0.06
Displacement (m)
0.02
0
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
0 4 8 12 16 20
(a)
5.00
Acceleration (m/s2)

Inherent Damping
2.50
0.00
-2.50
-5.00
0 4 8 12 16 20
(b)
0.18
Displacement (m)

0.00
-0.09
-0.18
5 10 15 20 25
(c)
15.00
Acceleration (m/s2)

0.00
-7.50
-15.00
5 10 15 20 25
(d)
0.10
Displacement (m)

0.00
-0.05
-0.10
20 30 40 50 60
(e)
8.00
Acceleration (m/s2)

0.00
-4.00
-8.00
20 30 40 50 60
(f) Time (sec)
Figure 8. Comparison of seismic response time histories between the bridges, respectively, with designed
non-linear viscous dampers and with assigned inherent system damping ratio.
design formula of non-linear viscous dampers derived from the concepts of the equivalent
linear viscous damping and the composite damping ratio is appropriate for the practical ap-
plications.
CONCLUSIONS
Design formulas for both supplemental linear and non-linear viscous dampers to bridge struc-
tures have been derived in this study. The damping coecients of the dampers are determined
based on the concept of composite damping ratio in which the bridge components such as
rubber bearings, piers and abutments may have dierent stinesses, lumped masses and damp-
ing ratios. The design formulas have been numerically validated. In addition to the validation
using a two degree of freedom simplied bridge model, a three-span bridge model is also used
for the seismic response analysis. The responses of the bridge with viscous dampers designed
with respect to a desired system damping ratio are calculated. In addition, the responses are
also determined for the same bridge which is not equipped with viscous dampers but with a
system damping ratio the same as the desired system damping ratio. The good agreement be-
tween the seismic responses of the two bridge models has suggested that the proposed design
formulas be ready for practical applications.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was supported by the National Science Council of Taiwan under grant number NSC-93-
2211-E011-019. The support is acknowledged.
REFERENCES
1. Constantinou MC, Soong TT, Dargush GF. Passive Energy Dissipation Systems for Structural Design and
Retrot, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Bualo,
New York, 1999.
2. Soong TT, Constantinou MC. Passive and Active Structural Vibration Control in Civil Engineering. Springer:
New York, 1994.
3. Constantinou MC, Symans MD. Experimental and analytical investigation of seismic response of structures with
supplemental uid viscous dampers. Report No. NCEER-92-0032, National Center for Earthquake Engineering
Research, State University of New York at Bualo, New York, 1992.
4. FEMA 273/274. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Washington, DC, 1997.
5. FEMA 356. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2000.
6. Seleemah AA, Constantinou MC. Investigation of seismic response of buildings with linear and nonlinear uid
viscous dampers. Report No. NCEER-97-0004, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State
University of New York at Bualo, New York, 1997.
7. Hwang JS, Huang YN, Yi SL, Ho SY. Modication on design formulas for structures with supplemental
viscous dampers. Report No. NCREE-04-0009, National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering,
Taipei, Taiwan, 2004.
8. Makris N, Zhang J. Seismic response analysis of a highway overcrossing equipped with elastomeric bearings
and uid dampers. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2004; 130(6):830–845.
9. Zhang J, Makris N, Delis T. Structural characterization of modern highway overcrossings—case study. Journal
of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2004; 130(6):846–860.
10. Hwang JS, Chang KC, Tsai MH. Composite damping ratio of seismically isolated regular bridges. Engineering
Structures, The Journal of Earthquake, Wind and Ocean Engineering 1997; 19(1):55–62.
11. Manual for Seismic Isolation Design of Highway Bridges, Public Works Research Institute, Ministry of
Construction, Tsukuba City, Japan, 1992.
12. Kelly JM. Earthquake Resistant Design with Rubber. Springer: London, 1997.
13. Veletsos AS, Ventura CE. Modal analysis of non-classically damper systems. Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics 1986; 14:217–243.
14. Pekcan G, Mander JB, Chen SS. Design and retrot methodology for building structures with supplemental
energy dissipating systems. Report No. MCEER-99-0021, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering
Research, State University of New York at Bualo, New York, 1999.

Design Formulations For Supplemental Viscous Dampers To Highway Bridges

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

Design Formulations For Supplemental Viscous Dampers To Highway Bridges

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2005; 34:1627–1642

Design formulations for supplemental viscous dampers

Jenn-Shin Hwang1; 2; ∗; †; ‡; §; ¶ and Yi-Shane Tseng1;

Contract=grant sponsor: National Science Council of Taiwan; contract=grant number: NSC-93-2211-E011-019

Received 1 October 2004

DESIGN FORMULATIONS FOR BRIDGES WITH LINEAR VISCOUS DAMPERS

Equation (9), the following is obtained

!b2 = kb =mb (13)

!s2 = ks =(mb + ms ) (14)

Equations (11) and (12) are rewritten as

(!b2 − !n2 )nb − !b2 ns = 0 (16)

(1 − )!b2 nb + [!n2 − (1 − )!b2 − !s2 ]ns = 0 (17)

From Equations (16) and (17), the characteristic equation is obtained as

The modal damping ratios are then obtained by

Substituting the component damping coecients cb = 2mb b !b , cd = 2mb d !b , cs = 2(mb + ms )

DESIGN FORMULATIONS FOR BRIDGES WITH NON-LINEAR

Let !t = 2, dt = (2=!) d

Free vibration response

Figure 4. A ground acceleration impulse.

m b = 500 kN − sec 2 / m m b = 1000 kN − sec 2/m

Figure 6. A three-span continuous highway bridge with various element properties.

gr2 El Centro Proposed Formula

Kobe Proposed Formula

Kobe Proposed Formula

Chi-Chi Proposed Formula

Chi-Chi Proposed Formula

Table I. The damping coecients of non-linear viscous dampers corresponding

Maximum displacement D (cm) 4.63 17.05 7.44

El Centro Proposed Formula

Kobe Proposed Formula

Kobe Proposed Formula

Chi-Chi Proposed Formula

Chi-Chi Proposed Formula

You might also like

(1 − )!b2 nb + [!n2 − (1 − )!b2 − !s2 ]ns = 0 (17)