Critical load of slender elastomeric seismic isolators: An experimental perspective

Embed Size (px)

Text of Critical load of slender elastomeric seismic isolators: An experimental perspective

  • ic

    asparinacegiopradieh, ras ohis

    2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

    onsistd, to parge dlators wbrationory dretc.) gs accoors, w

    displacements. The critical buckling load of elastomeric seismicisolators is expressed as:

    Pcr;0 2 PE1

    1 4p2 EIeffGAseff L2

    s 1EIeff ErI

    Lte

    4

    where te is the total thickness of the rubber layers and Er is the elas-tic modulus of the rubber bearing evaluated based on the primaryshape factor S1 and rubber Youngs modulus E0 as:

    Er E01 0:742 S21 5The primary shape factor S1 is dened as the ratio between theloaded area of the bearing and the area free to bulge of the singlerubber layer (S1 D/4ti for circular bearings, whereD is the diameter

    Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0971205054.E-mail addresses: donatello.cardone@unibas.it (D. Cardone), giuseppe.perr@

    Engineering Structures 40 (2012) 198204

    Contents lists available at

    g

    lsealice.it (G. Perrone).reduce their axial load capacity [14].The earliest theoretical approach for the evaluation of the critical

    axial load of rubber bearingswas introduced by Haringx [5], consid-ering themechanical characteristics of helical steel springs and rub-ber rods. Same assumptions have been made later by Gent [6]considering multilayered rubber compression springs. Basically,the Haringxs theory is based on a linear one-dimensional beammodel with shear deformability, within the hypothesis of small

    and bottom connecting steel plates.Various authors proposed different relations to evaluate the

    effective shear and exural rigidity of laminated rubber bearings.In this paper, reference to the formula derived by Buckle and Kelly[1], Koh and Kelly [2] has been made:

    GAseff Gdyn As Lte

    31. Introduction

    An elastomeric isolation bearing cand steel layers mutually vulcanizethe vertical direction together with lizontal direction. The elastomeric isoening the fundamental period of vireducing the seismic effects (interststresses in the structural members,structure. However, this reduction izontal displacements in the isolat0141-0296/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. Adoi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.02.031s of a number of rubberrovide high stiffness ineformability in the hor-ork like a lter length-of the structure, thus

    ifts, oor accelerations,enerated in the super-mpanied by large hori-hich may signicantly

    in which: GAseff and EIeff are the effective shear rigidity and effec-tive exural rigidity, respectively, of the elastomeric isolators, com-puted based on the bending modulus (E) and dynamic shearmodulus (Gdyn) of rubber, moment of inertia of the bearing aboutthe axis of bending (I) and bonded rubber area (As);

    PE is the Euler load for a standard elastic column:

    PE p2 EIeff

    L22

    L is the total height of rubber layers and steel plates excluding topBuckling elastomeric seismic isolators, since they underestimate their critical load capacity at moderate-to-largeshear strain amplitudes.Critical load of slender elastomeric seism

    Donatello Cardone , Giuseppe PerroneDiSGG, University of Basilicata, Via Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy

    a r t i c l e i n f o

    Article history:Received 27 July 2011Revised 31 January 2012Accepted 5 February 2012Available online 28 March 2012

    Keywords:Seismic isolationElastomeric bearingsCritical loadShear strain

    a b s t r a c t

    One of the most importantlarge shear strains. The beincreasing horizontal displcially in high seismicity replacements are a commonon the Haringx theory, moIn this paper the critical b

    different strain amplitudescompared to the predictionThe main conclusion of t

    Engineerin

    journal homepage: www.ell rights reserved.isolators: An experimental perspective

    ects of the seismic response of elastomeric isolators is their stability underg capacity of elastomeric isolators, indeed, progressively degrades whilement. This may greatly inuence the design of elastomeric isolators, espe-ns, where slender elastomeric isolators subjected to large horizontal dis-ctice. In the current design approach the critical load is evaluated baseded to account for large shear strains by approximate correction factors.avior of a pair of slender elastomeric devices is experimentally evaluated atnging from approximately 50% to 150%. The experimental results are thenf a number of semi-empirical and theoretical formulations.study is that current design approaches are overly conservative for slender

    SciVerse ScienceDirect

    Structures

    vier .com/locate /engstruct

  • [12,1,3,4,13]. In this paper, the critical load of a couple of slender(low shape factors) elastomeric bearings is experimentally evalu-ated. Test set-up and experimental program are presented rst indetail. Then, the experimental results are compared with the pre-dictions of the theoretical formulations presented in the previousparagraph.

    2. Experimental tests

    2.1. Test specimens

    Test specimens are a couple of 1:2 scaled circular elastomericbearings with 200 mm diameter and 10 rubber layers with 8 mmthickness. Bearing geometrical properties are summarized inTable 1.

    The mechanical properties of the specimens have been derivedfrom a number of standard cyclic tests, performed in accordancewith the test procedure prescribed in the Italian seismic code[10] for the qualication of elastomeric bearings. The static shearmodulus (Gstat), in particular, has been derived from a quasi-statictest consisting of ve cycles at 0.1 Hz frequency of loading and100% shear strain amplitude. According to the NTC 2008 [10], Gstat

    h

    PF

    (a)

    Table 1Elastomeric bearings details.

    Outer diameter De (mm) 200Inner diameter D (mm) 180Rubber layer thickness ti (mm) 8Number of rubber layers nti 10Steel shim thickness ts (mm) 2Number of steel shims nti 9Total height of rubber t (mm) 80

    ring Structures 40 (2012) 198204 199of the isolator and ti the thickness of a single rubber layer). The rub-ber Youngs modulus E0 is usually taken equal to 3.3 Gdyn to 4 Gdyn.

    The Haringxs theory has been later applied by Naeim and Kelly[7], with a series of simplied assumptions, for commercial elasto-meric seismic isolators. According toNaeimandKelly [7], the criticalbuckling load of elastomeric seismic isolators can be expressed intermsof theprimary and secondary shape factors S1 and S2, the latterbeing dened as the ratio between the maximum dimension of thecross section of the isolator and the total height of rubber. For circu-lar elastomeric isolator, for instance, Naeim and Kelly [7] provides:

    Pcr;0 p2

    2

    p GAseff S1 S2 6

    Subsequently, Kelly [8] derived a more rened formulation of thebuckling load of elastomeric isolator:

    Pcr;0 p2

    3

    p GAseff 0:742 E0

    G

    r S1 S2 7

    The secondary shape factor S2 is dened as the ratio between thebearing maximum dimension and the total thickness of all the rub-ber layers (S2 D/te for circular bearings, where te is the total thick-ness of all the rubber layers). It is interesting to note that the criticalbuckling load capacity evaluated considering the expressions (6)and (7), differs by 1020%, depending on the value (between 3.3Gand 4G) assumed for the rubber Youngs modulus.

    Lanzo [9] modied the Haringxs expression by taking into ac-count the axial stiffness of the rubber bearing (EA)eff:

    Pcr;0 2 PE

    11 4p2 EI eff

    EA eff L2 EI eff

    GAs eff L2

    s 8

    where EAeff is the effective axial stiffness of the rubber bearing,evaluated as:

    EAeff Er A Lte

    9

    In Italy, the current design approach [10] refers to a formulation ofthe critical load similar to (but more conservative than) that ini-tially proposed by Naeim and Kelly [7] (see Eq. (6)):

    Pcr;0 Gdyn As S1 S2 10where Gdyn is the dynamic shear modulus derived from the quali-cation tests of the elastomeric isolator.

    More recently, a less conservative variant of the Naeim andKelly formulation has been adopted in the new European StandardEN11529 [11]:

    Pcr;0 1:3 Gdyn As S1 S2 11For all the above mentioned formulations, the buckling load at thetarget shear displacement (u) is evaluated as a function of the ratiobetween the effective area of the inner shim plate (A) and the over-lap area of the displaced bearing (Ar) (see Fig. 1):

    Pcr Pcr;0 ArA 12

    For circular bearings, for instance, the overlap area at the targetdisplacement is given by:

    Ar u sinu D2

    413

    with

    u 2arccos u

    14

    D. Cardone, G. Perrone / EngineeDSeveral experimental studies of the buckling behavior of elasto-meric seismic isolators have been carried out in the pastu

    Fig. 1. (a) Schematic deformed shape of an elastomeric bearing subjected to shearand compression; (b) effective cross section area as a function of sheardisplacement.u

    P

    Ar

    D(b) e

    Primary shape factor S1 5.63Secondary shape factor S2 2.25

  • ring(a)

    (b)

    200 D. Cardone, G. Perrone / Engineeis dened as the slope of the shearstrain curve between 27% and58% shear deformation with reference to the third cycle of the test(see Fig. 2a). In the case under consideration, a value of Gstat =0.113 MPa has been obtained. The dynamic shear modulus (Gdyn)and the equivalent damping (neq) have been derived from adynamic test consisting of ve cycles at 0.5 Hz frequency of loadingand 100% shear strain amplitude with reference to the third cycleof the test (see Fig. 2b). According to the NTC2008 [10], Gdyn isdened as the secant stiffness to the origin of the axis of the cycleof maximum strain amplitude, neq is evaluated as the ratio betweenthe energy dissipated in one complete cycle (equal to the areaenclosed in the cycle) and the strain energy stored at the maximumstrain