Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators

Descripción del Articulo

The notable performance of seismically isolated bridges in South America during the last two major seismic events has been reflected in the increase in the use of base insulators in this type of infrastructure. In this work, a multi-span non-isolated bridge was retrofitted to achieve continuous func...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Trejo-Rodriguez, Cristopher Manuel, Melchor Placencia, Carlos Javier
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2022
Institución:Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
Repositorio:Revistas - Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:oai:revistas.uni.edu.pe:article/1399
Enlace del recurso:https://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/1399
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:seismic isolation
seismic response
nonlinear dynamic analysis
bridge
system protection seismic
Aislacion sismica
respuesta sismica
analisis dinamico no lineal
diseño puentes
sistemas de proteccion sismica
id REVUNI_3f55770faacd25854574a95434f402b4
oai_identifier_str oai:oai:revistas.uni.edu.pe:article/1399
network_acronym_str REVUNI
network_name_str Revistas - Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
repository_id_str
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
Comparación del desempeño sísmico de un puente continuo utilizando aisladores del tipo elastomérico y friccional deslizante
title Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
spellingShingle Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
Trejo-Rodriguez, Cristopher Manuel
seismic isolation
seismic response
nonlinear dynamic analysis
bridge
system protection seismic
Aislacion sismica
respuesta sismica
analisis dinamico no lineal
diseño puentes
sistemas de proteccion sismica
title_short Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
title_full Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
title_fullStr Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
title_sort Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolators
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Trejo-Rodriguez, Cristopher Manuel
Melchor Placencia, Carlos Javier
author Trejo-Rodriguez, Cristopher Manuel
author_facet Trejo-Rodriguez, Cristopher Manuel
Melchor Placencia, Carlos Javier
author_role author
author2 Melchor Placencia, Carlos Javier
author2_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv seismic isolation
seismic response
nonlinear dynamic analysis
bridge
system protection seismic
Aislacion sismica
respuesta sismica
analisis dinamico no lineal
diseño puentes
sistemas de proteccion sismica
topic seismic isolation
seismic response
nonlinear dynamic analysis
bridge
system protection seismic
Aislacion sismica
respuesta sismica
analisis dinamico no lineal
diseño puentes
sistemas de proteccion sismica
description The notable performance of seismically isolated bridges in South America during the last two major seismic events has been reflected in the increase in the use of base insulators in this type of infrastructure. In this work, a multi-span non-isolated bridge was retrofitted to achieve continuous functionality by adopting seismic isolation devices. In order to carry out a comparative evaluation, the bridge was analyzed using elastomeric and sliding type isolation devices. In this case study, the Lead Core Elastomeric Insulator (LRB) and the Triple Pendulum Frictional Insulator (TFPB) were chosen as representative models. For the design of both insulators, it was considered that the values ​​of the isolated periods, the post-yield stiffness and the yield force were similar. This criterion was adopted in order to compare the unique effects of each type of isolator on the seismic response of the bridge. A series of nonlinear dynamic analyzes were performed considering the two components of horizontal ground motion to perform a comparative evaluation. Numerical models were adopted that consider the bidirectional response and describe the different stages of movement of the insulators. Upper and lower limit analyzes were considered to obtain a complete understanding of the response induced by each insulation system. From the results, it is concluded that the LRB system induces a more uniform distribution of seismic forces in the substructure; but experiences greater displacements compared to the TFPB system.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-08-08
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
TECNIA Special Issue on Earthquake Engineering
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/1399
10.21754/tecnia.v32i2.1399
url https://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/1399
identifier_str_mv 10.21754/tecnia.v32i2.1399
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/1399/1989
https://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/1399/2202
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv Derechos de autor 2022 TECNIA
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Derechos de autor 2022 TECNIA
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/xml
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv TECNIA; Vol. 32 No. 2 (2022): Earthquake Engineering; 138-146
TECNIA; Vol. 32 Núm. 2 (2022): Edición Especial: Ingeniería Sísmica; 138-146
2309-0413
0375-7765
10.21754/tecnia.v32i2
reponame:Revistas - Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
instname:Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
instacron:UNI
instname_str Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
instacron_str UNI
institution UNI
reponame_str Revistas - Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
collection Revistas - Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1838636207091744768
spelling Comparison of the seismic performance of a continuous bridge using elastomeric and sliding friction type isolatorsComparación del desempeño sísmico de un puente continuo utilizando aisladores del tipo elastomérico y friccional deslizanteTrejo-Rodriguez, Cristopher ManuelMelchor Placencia, Carlos Javierseismic isolationseismic responsenonlinear dynamic analysisbridgesystem protection seismicAislacion sismicarespuesta sismicaanalisis dinamico no linealdiseño puentessistemas de proteccion sismicaThe notable performance of seismically isolated bridges in South America during the last two major seismic events has been reflected in the increase in the use of base insulators in this type of infrastructure. In this work, a multi-span non-isolated bridge was retrofitted to achieve continuous functionality by adopting seismic isolation devices. In order to carry out a comparative evaluation, the bridge was analyzed using elastomeric and sliding type isolation devices. In this case study, the Lead Core Elastomeric Insulator (LRB) and the Triple Pendulum Frictional Insulator (TFPB) were chosen as representative models. For the design of both insulators, it was considered that the values ​​of the isolated periods, the post-yield stiffness and the yield force were similar. This criterion was adopted in order to compare the unique effects of each type of isolator on the seismic response of the bridge. A series of nonlinear dynamic analyzes were performed considering the two components of horizontal ground motion to perform a comparative evaluation. Numerical models were adopted that consider the bidirectional response and describe the different stages of movement of the insulators. Upper and lower limit analyzes were considered to obtain a complete understanding of the response induced by each insulation system. From the results, it is concluded that the LRB system induces a more uniform distribution of seismic forces in the substructure; but experiences greater displacements compared to the TFPB system.El notable comportamiento de los puentes sísmicamente aislados en Sudamérica durante los dos últimos grandes eventos sísmicos, se ha visto reflejado en el aumento del uso de aisladores de base en este tipo de infraestructuras. En este trabajo, un puente no aislado de varios tramos fue reacondicionado para alcanzar una funcionalidad continua mediante la adopción de dispositivos de aislamiento sísmico. Con el objetivo de realizar una evaluación comparativa, se analizó el puente utilizando dispositivos de aislación del tipo elastomérico y deslizante. En este caso de estudio se escogió el aislador Elastomérico con Núcleo de Plomo (LRB) y el aislador Friccional de Triple Péndulo (TFPB) como modelos representativos. Para el diseño de ambos aisladores, se consideró que los valores de los periodos aislados, la rigidez post-fluencia y la fuerza de fluencia sean similares. Este criterio se adoptó con el fin de comparar los efectos únicos de cada tipo de aislador en la respuesta sísmica del puente. Se realizaron una serie de análisis dinámicos no lineales considerando las dos componentes del movimiento horizontal del suelo para realizar una evaluación comparativa. Se adoptaron modelos numéricos que consideran la respuesta bidireccional y describan las diferentes etapas de movimiento de los aisladores. Se consideraron análisis de límites superiores e inferiores para obtener una comprensión completa de la respuesta inducida por cada sistema de aislamiento. De los resultados, se concluye que el sistema LRB induce una distribución más uniforme de las fuerzas sísmicas en la subestructura; pero experimenta mayores desplazamientos en comparación con el sistema TFPB.Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería2022-08-08info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionTECNIA Special Issue on Earthquake Engineeringapplication/pdfapplication/xmlhttps://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/139910.21754/tecnia.v32i2.1399TECNIA; Vol. 32 No. 2 (2022): Earthquake Engineering; 138-146TECNIA; Vol. 32 Núm. 2 (2022): Edición Especial: Ingeniería Sísmica; 138-1462309-04130375-776510.21754/tecnia.v32i2reponame:Revistas - Universidad Nacional de Ingenieríainstname:Universidad Nacional de Ingenieríainstacron:UNIspahttps://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/1399/1989https://revistas.uni.edu.pe/index.php/tecnia/article/view/1399/2202Derechos de autor 2022 TECNIAhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:oai:revistas.uni.edu.pe:article/13992025-07-15T00:09:59Z
score 13.391154
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).