• 검색 결과가 없습니다.

천연고무받침의 열 노화가 교량 내진성능에 미치는 영향

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "천연고무받침의 열 노화가 교량 내진성능에 미치는 영향"

Copied!
10
0
0

로드 중.... (전체 텍스트 보기)

전체 글

(1)

Received November 29 2012, Revised March 26 2013, Accepted April 26 2013

Copyright ⵑ 2013 by the Korean Society of Civil Engineers

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0)

 ǣŠ––’ǣȀȀ†šǤ†‘‹Ǥ‘”‰ȀͳͲǤͳʹ͸ͷʹȀ•…‡ǤʹͲͳ͵Ǥ͵͵Ǥ͵Ǥͺͷͷ ™™™Ǥ•…‡Œ‘—”ƒŽǤ‘”Ǥ”

㉚⮮ኞ⃲⇙㐦ⴖ#⮲#᜶㰒ᆾ#ጎᶇ#ᙲ⾂⛯ᡣ⮎#↶㐖ᡒ#⮿㭣

ૈச ȵ୨็ઽ

Oh, Ju*, Jung, Hie-Young**

Effects of Thermal Aging of Natural Rubber Bearing on Seismic Performance of Bridges

ABSTRACT

The dynamic characteristics of natural rubber bearings, which are used as isolator, are dependent on the main rubber's dynamic behaviors and nonlinear properties. Rubber materials tend to undergo an aging process under the influence of mechanical or environmental factors, so they inevitably end up facing damage. A main cause of aging like this is known to be oxidization, which occurs through the heat of reaction at high temperatures. Accordingly, in this study an accelerated thermal aging test was carried out in order to compare the characteristic values of the bearings before and after thermal aging occurs. As a result of this experiment, it was found that a thermal aging phenomenon could have some effects on shear stiffness, energy absorption, and equivalent damping coefficients of the bearings. Furthermore, a deterioration in the dynamic properties of the natural rubber bearings caused by the thermal aging was applied to an actual bridge and then the effects of such thermal aging on the seismic performance of the bridge were also compared and analyzed based on numerical analysis. As a result of this analysis, it was found that the changes in the basic properties of the natural rubber bearings caused by the thermal aging bring only a minor effect on the seismic performance of bridges.

Key words : Natural rubber bearing, Isolator, Thermal aging, Seismic performance

Ⅹಾ

ḡḥĊญᰆ⊹ಽᕽ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹࠺ᱢ✚ᖒᮡᵝᰍഭᯙŁྕ᮹࠺ᱢÑ࠺ŝእᖁ⩶ᖒḩᨱ᮹᳕⦹Łᯩ݅. ᩎ⦺ᱢᯕӹ⪹Ğᱢᯙᩢ⨆ᮝಽᯙ⧕

Łྕᰍഭᨱי⪵aḥ⧪ࡹŁđǎᨱ۵ᗱᔢᯕᇩa⦝⦹íၽᔾ⦹íࡽ݅. Łྕᰍഭ᮹י⪵ᨱᵝᬱᯙᮡ׳ᮡ᪉ࠥᨱᕽၹ᮲ᩕಽᯙ⦽ᔑ⪵ၹ᮲ ᮝಽ᦭ಅᲙ݅. ᯕᨱ঑௝⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᨱݡ⦽aᗮᩕי⪵ᝅ⨹ᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩍᩕי⪵ᱥ읆⬥ᨱݡ⧕ၼ⋉᮹✚ᖒsᮥᔢ⪙እƱ⦹ᩡ݅. ᝅ⨹đŝ

ᩕי⪵⩥ᔢᮡᱥ݉vᖒŝᨱթḡqᙁəญŁ॒aqᗭĥᙹᨱᩢ⨆ᯕᯩᮭᮥ᦭ᙹᯩᨩ݅. ੱ⦽ᩕי⪵ᨱ᮹⦽࠺ᱢ✚ᖒ᮹ᱡ⦹ෝᝅᱽƱప ᨱᱢᬊ⦹ᩍ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵aƱప᮹ԕḥᖒ܆ᨱၙ⊹۵ᩢ⨆ᮥᙹ⊹⧕ᕾᮥ☖⧕እƱᇥᕾ⦹ᩡ݅. əđŝ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᨱݡ⦹ᩍᩕ

י⪵ᨱ঑ෙʑᅙ✚ᖒᄡ⪵aƱప᮹ԕḥᖒ܆ᨱၙ⊹۵ᩢ⨆ᮡⓍḡᦫᮭᮥ᦭ᙹᯩᨩ݅.

áᔪᨕ ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉, Ċญᰆ⊹, ᩕי⪵, ԕḥᖒ܆

1. ᕽು

⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉(natural rubber bearing, NRB)ᮡŁྕ᪡Łྕᔍᯕᨱᅕvᬊv❱ᮥ⊖ᔢ⩶┽ಽᱢ⊖⦹ᩍᙹḢ⦹ᵲᨱݡ⧕ᕽ۵Łྕ᮹

᳭Ǖ⩥ᔢᮥႊḡ⦹ŁⓑᙹḢvᖒᮥᮁḡ⦹໑, ᙹ⠪ႊ⨆ᮝಽ۵Łྕ᮹ᮁᩑᖒᮥၽ⩥⦹۵ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ᮝಽᕽḡḥĊญၼ⋉᮹ᯝ᳦ᯕ݅.

ᯕ్⦽ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ᮝಽḡḥĊญᖅĥ᜽ၼ⋉᮹ᱥ݉vᖒŝᨱթḡᗭᔑ⬉ŝ۵ᵝᰍഭಽᔍᬊࡹŁᯩ۵Łྕᰍഭ᮹࠺ᱢÑ࠺᜽እᖁ⩶

–”—…–—”ƒŽ‰‹‡‡”‹‰ ĵܓėॡ

(2)

Table 1. Parameters of natural rubber bearing

Parameters Value Parameters Value

Steel plate diameter, D

s

259mm Rubber thickness, t

i

3mm Inner hole diameter, D

p

56mm Rubber layer, n 29 Total diameter, D 279mm Steel plate thickness, t

s

3mm 1

st

Shape factor, S

1

21.6 2

nd

Shape factor, S

2

2.98 Shear modulus, G 0.4MPa

¬

Î

á ć у

Ƈ

à 

Ǝ

, ¬

Ï

á ć ƌƒ 

Ƈ

Fig. 1. Cross section of natural rubber bearing

ᖒḩᨱ ᮹᳕⦹Ł ᯩ݅. ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᮥ ⡍⧉⦹ᩍ ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉

ᮡ໨aḡᩎ⦺ᱢ, ⪹Ğᱢᯙᩢ⨆ᮝಽŁྕᨱי⪵aḥ⧪ࡹŁ

đǎᨱ۵ᗱᔢᯕᇩa⦝⦹íၽᔾ⦹íࡽ݅. ᯝၹᱢᮝಽŁྕ۵

᪅ఌ࠺ᦩ᫙ʑᨱי⇽ࡹᨕᔍᬊ⦽ĞᬑĞ⪵⦹ᩍ⢽໕ᨱɁᩕᯕ

ၽᔾ⦹Ñӹ Łྕ⢽໕ᨱ ҩᱢᯥ ॒ᯕ ၽᔾ⦹໑, ᯕ zᮡ ⩥ᔢᮥ

י⪵(aging)௝Ł⦽݅. י⪵᮹ᵝᬱᯙᮡŖʑᵲ᮹ᔑᗭᨱ᮹⦽

ᔑ⪵᯲ᬊŝᩕ, ᪅᳕, ɩᗮᩝ॒ᯕŁᯕॅᮡŁྕ᮹י⪵ෝⅪḥ⦽

݅. Łྕי⪵᫵ᯙᵲᨱᕽᩕᨱ᮹⧕᪉ࠥa׳ᦥḡ໕ၹ᮲ᩕᯕ

ၽᔾ⦹ᩍᔑ⪵ၹ᮲᮹ḥ⧪ᗮࠥaⅪḥࡽ݅. Fitzgrald et al.(1992)

ᮡ Łྕᨱᕽ ၹᅖ᮲ಆᯕ ᯲ᬊ⧁ ভ ᪉ࠥa ׳ᮥᙹಾ ┥ᖒℕ᮹

ྜྷญᱢ ✚ᖒᯕ ᱡqࡹ۵ ॒ ᩕŝ ၹᅖ⦹ᵲᨱ ݡ⦽ ᔢššĥෝ

ၾ⩵݅. ੱ⦽Choi et al.(2000)ᮡᩕי⪵ᨱ঑ෙŁྕ᮹ᇥᯱǍ᳑

ᄡ⪵᮹ᩢ⨆ᮥᩑǍ⦹ᩡŁ, ᩕי⪵᜽eᯕ᷾a⧉ᨱ঑௝ᩑᗮᱢᯙ

Łྕa⫊᮹᷾aಽaƱၡࠥa᷾a⧉ᮥ᦭ᦥԩ݅. əญŁ⃽ᩑŁ

ྕෝ Ŗʑ᪡ ᩝᙹᨱ י⇽᜽┉ ᔢ┽ᨱᕽ ᪉ࠥෝ 60~120ⳃʭḡ

ᄡ⪵᜽⍽Łྕ᜽⠙᮹ᯙᰆ❭ƕᝅ⨹ᮥ⦹ᩡ݅. əđŝᩝᙹᅕ݅

ݡʑᵲஉÑᬕŖʑa޵ⓑᩢ⨆ᮥၙ⊹۵äᮝಽӹ┡ԍ݅(Mott et al., 2001). ᯕ⃹ౝ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᨱᕽ᮹ᩕי⪵(thermal aging) ۵׳ᮡ᪉ࠥ᪡zᮡ⪹ĞᨱšĥaᯩŁ, ᯕᨱ঑ෙ݅ෙ❭ƕ

ີ⍅ܩ᷹ᯕၽᔾ⧁a܆ᖒᯕᯩ݅. ƱపŝÕྜྷᨱᖅ⊹ࡽ⃽ᩑŁྕ

ၼ⋉ᯕ ᰆʑe ᩕ⪵ ⪹Ğᨱ י⇽ࡹᨕ י⪵a ၽᔾ⦹Ł, ḡḥŝ

zᮡ ᇩ⪶ᝅ⦽ ḥ࠺ᯕ ၽᔾ⦹۵ Ğᬑ Ǎ᳑ྜྷᨱ ᝍb⦽ ⦝⧕ෝ

Ⅹ௹⧁ᬑಅaᯩ݅. ə్အಽᩕי⪵ᔢ┽ᨱᕽ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹

࠺ᱢ✚ᖒᮡḡḥĊญǍ᳑ྜྷ ᖅĥ᜽ԕǍᖒ⊂໕ᨱᕽŁಅ⧕᧝

⧁᫵ᗭᵲ᮹⦹ӹᯕ݅. ੱʑ᳕᮹ฯᮡᝅ⨹ŝᩑǍෝ☖⧕ḡḥĊ ญᰆ⊹᮹⬉ŝa᯦᷾ࡹ໕ᕽ Ʊపᨱᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ŝzᮡḡḥ Ċญᰆ⊹᮹᜽Ŗᔍಡa᷾a⦹ŁᯩŁ, ᯕ్⦽ၼ⋉ᮥᱢᬊ⦽Ʊ ప᮹ԕḥᖒ܆⠪aၰ⨆ᔢᨱݡ⦽ᩑǍࠥฯᯕᙹ⧪ࡹŁᯩ݅

(Park et al., 2003; Han et al., 2004). ᝅᱽƱప᮹⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᮥ

ݡᔢᮝಽי⪵ᨱ঑ෙ✚ᖒᄡ⪵ෝᩑǍ⦹Łᩩ⊂⦹۵ᩑǍࠥᙹ

⧪ࡹᨩ݅(Kato et al., 1996; Itoh et al., 2009). ə్ӹḡḥĊญ

ၼ⋉᮹ י⪵ᨱ঑ෙ Ʊప᮹ ԕḥᖒ܆ᄡ⪵ᨱ ݡ⦽ ᩑǍ۵Ñ᮹

ᨧ۵ᝅᱶᯕ݅. ᯕᨱ঑௝ᅙᩑǍ۵⃽ᩑŁྕෝᯕᬊ⦽ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ

⋉᮹ᩕי⪵✚ᖒᮥ⠪a⦹ʑ᭥⧕aᗮᩕי⪵ᝅ⨹(accelerated thermal aging test)ᮥ ⦹Ł ᜽⨹ℕ᮹ ᩕ י⪵ ᱥ⬥᮹ ✚ᖒᮥ

ᝅᱽƱపᨱᱢᬊ⦹ᩍ Ǎ᳑⧕ᕾ⦹Ł⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹י⪵aƱ ప᮹ԕḥᖒ܆ᨱၙ⊹۵ᩢ⨆ᮥእƱᇥᕾ⦹ᩡ݅. ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵

⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᯕᖅĥᱢᬊࡽᝅᱽƱపᨱᕽእ໕ḥᔢ┽ᨱᕽŖɪ ᩎపŝᗭ᫵ᩎపᮝಽԕḥᖒ܆ᮥ⠪a⦹ᩡ݅. ᯕಽᇡ░ၼ⋉ᬊప ᯕᱢᱶᙹᵡᯥᮥ⪶ᯙ⦹Łᩕי⪵ᨱ঑ෙԕḥᖒ܆ᄡ⪵ෝá☁⦹

ᩡ݅.

2. ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ᩕי⪵ᝅ⨹ၰᇥᕾ

2.1 ਏ෠఼୪଀

᜽⨹ℕ᮹✚ᖒၰԕǍᖒᝅ⨹, ⠪a۵ISO22762(2010)ᨱ঑௝

✚ᖒᝅ⨹ᮥ ᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. ᔢʑ᮹ ȽĊᨱᕽ۵ ḡḥᮝಽᇡ░ Ʊప

⪚ᮡÕ⇶Ǎ᳑ྜྷᮥᅕ⪙⦹Łᯱᔍᬊ⦹۵ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉⩶┽᮹ḡ ḥĊญᰆ⊹ᨱݡ⦹ᩍᝅ⨹ႊჶŝᝅ⨹⠪aʑᵡᨱݡ⦹ᩍⅾ3ᇡᇥ ᮝಽ Ǎᖒࡹᨕᯩ݅. ⃽ᩑŁྕ۵ ┢ᬵ⦽ ┥ᖒ܆ಆŝ ᅖᬱ܆ಆᮥ

aḡŁᯩᨕḡḥĊญᰆ⊹ᨱ⡎մíᯕᬊࡹᨕ᪵݅. ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ

ᔍᬊࡽ᜽⨹ℕੱ⦽⃽ᩑŁྕ᮹Łᮁᖒḩᯙ┥ᖒᅖᬱ܆ಆᯕᯩ۵

⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉(NRB)ᮥᔍᬊ⦹ᩡ݅. ᜽⨹ℕ᮹ḢĞᮡ᫙ᇡŁྕࢱ

̹10mmෝ⡍⧉⦽äᮝಽԕᇡᱢ⊖Łྕ⦽⊖᮹ࢱ̹۵bb

3mmᯕ݅. Łྕ᮹ᱢ⊖ᙹ۵29⊖ᮝಽᱢ⊖⦹ᩡŁ, ᅕvv❱᮹

ࢱ̹۵3mmᯕ݅.

¬ Î

ᮡ⦽}᮹Łྕ⊖Ǎຮᮥ⡍⧉⦽ᯱᮁ⢽໕ᱢ ᨱݡ⦽⦹ᵲ໕ᱢ᮹እಽᕽ1₉⩶ᔢĥᙹ(primary shape factor) ᯕŁ,

¬ Ï

۵ԕᇡŁྕ᮹ⅾࢱ̹ᨱݡ⦽ᮁ⬉⡎᮹እᮉᮥӹ┡ԕ ۵2₉⩶ᔢĥᙹ(secondary shape factor)ᯕ݅. ᯱᖙ⦽᜽⨹ℕ᮹

ᱽᬱᮡTable 1ŝzŁ, Figure 1ᮡ᜽⨹ℕ᮹⩶ᔢၰ݉໕ᱽᬱᮥ

ӹ┡ԙ äᯕ݅. ᩕ י⪵ ✚ᖒᝅ⨹ᨱ ᔍᬊࡽ ᜽⨹ℕ۵ ᧞ 16֥

ᱥᨱᝅᱽƱపᨱᱢᬊࡽᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ŝ࠺ᯝ⦹íᖅĥࡽäᮝಽ

ᱥ݉ᄡ⩶ශ100%ᨱᕽᱥ݉┥ᖒĥᙹ0.4MPaᯙ⃽ᩑŁྕෝᔍᬊ

⦹ᩡ݅. ݡᔢ ၼ⋉ᮥ ⩥ᰍ᮹ Ʊపᖅĥʑᵡᨱ ঑௝ á☁⦽ đŝ

(3)

Table 2. Parameter of fatigue tester

Max. load Max. displacement Max. velocity Vertical

capacity ±2000kN ±100mm 100mm/sec Horizontal

capacity ±500kN ±200mm 250mm/sec

Fig. 2. Compression-shear fatigue tester (2,000kN)

Table 3. Result of compression test

Item Compression stiffness (kN/mm) Virgin Aged Change ratio(%)

NRB 195 191 -2.05

Fig. 3. Hysteresis curve of compression test

⩶ᔢĥᙹa ŝᗭ⦹í ᱽ᯲ࡹᨕ ⩥ᰍ ᖅĥʑᵡᨱ۵ ᇡᱢ⧊⦹݅.

ᯕ۵ ŝÑᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ᨱ ݡ⦽ ᖅĥ}ֱᯕ ᱶพࡹḡ ᦫᦥ⩥

ᖅĥʑᵡᮥ อ᳒⦹ḡ ༜⦹۵ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

2.2 ਓ෠୺Սրࢺ࣑

⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᜽⨹ℕ᮹✚ᖒᝅ⨹ᨱᔍᬊࡽ᜽⨹ʑ۵Table 2᪡

Figure 2ᨱӹ┡ӽၵ᪡zᮡᦶ⇶-ᱥ݉᜽⨹ʑಽ↽ݡᙹḢ⦹ᵲ

2,000kNᯕ໑, ↽ݡᙹ⠪⦹ᵲᮡ500kNᯕ݅. əญŁ↽ݡᙹ⠪ᗮࠥ

۵250mm/secᯕŁ, ᙹ⠪ႊ⨆↽ݡᄡ᭥۵±200mmᯕ݅. ᱢ⊖Ł

ྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥᮹ᱥ݉✚ᖒᮥእƱ⦹ᩍᩕי⪵ᨱ঑ෙ

ᦶ⇶ၰᱥ݉✚ᖒᮥ❭ᦦ⦹ᩡ݅. י⪵ᝅ⨹ᮡי⪵ᱥᨱᱥ݉✚ᖒ

ၰɚ⦽ᱥ݉✚ᖒᝅ⨹⦹Ł, י⪵᪅ቱᨱᕽ70ⳃ᮹᪉ࠥಽ168᜽

eי⪵᜽┉⬥ ᱥ݉✚ᖒᝅ⨹ŝɚ⦽ᱥ݉❭ƕᝅ⨹ᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ

݅. ɚ⦽ᱥ݉❭ƕᝅ⨹ᨱ۵ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥bb3}᮹᜽⨹ℕෝᔍᬊ

⦹Łᝅ⨹⬥ᨱ۵ᰍᔍᬊ⦹ḡᦫᦹ݅. ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽᔍᬊ⦽᜽⨹ℕ۵

⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉8}ෝᔍᬊ⦹ᩡ݅. b᜽⨹ℕ۵4}ᦊᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥

᜽⨹ℕಽǍᇥ⦹ᩡŁ, ᦶ⇶ၰᱥ݉✚ᖒᝅ⨹⬥ɚ⦽❭ƕᝅ⨹ᮥ

⦹ᩡᮝ໑, ၹᅖᰍ⦹✚ᖒᝅ⨹ᮡᄥࠥ᮹1}᮹᜽⨹ℕෝᔍᬊ⦹ᩍ

ᝅ⨹⦹ᩡ݅. ੱ᜽⨹ℕ᮹ᱽ᯲ᔢ᮹᪅₉ၰᝅ⨹ᵲၽᔾa܆⦽

᪅₉ෝᵥᯕʑ᭥⧕bᝅ⨹ᨱݡ⦽đŝ۵⠪Ɂsᮥ≉⦹ᩡ݅.

ʑⅩ✚ᖒᝅ⨹ᯙᦶ⇶-ᱥ݉✚ᖒᝅ⨹ᮡ࠺ᯝ᜽⨹ℕಽי⪵ᱥ⬥

ᨱᝅ᜽⦹ᩡŁ, ɚ⦽ᱥ݉✚ᖒᝅ⨹ࠥ᜽⨹ℕෝי⪵ᱥ⬥ಽbb

Ǎᇥ⦹ᩍ ᝅ⨹⦹ᩡ݅.

2.3 ਓ෠էրࢫंজ

2.3.1 ੺ౠ൉নਓ෠

ᝅ⨹᳑Õᨱ঑௝ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᜽⨹ℕෝᩕי⪵⬥ᦶ⇶✚ᖒ ᝅ⨹ᮥ☖⧕Table 3ŝzᮡđŝෝ᨜ᨩ݅. ᯕভᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᮹

ᖅĥ ᦶ⇶ಆᮡ 490kNᯕŁ, b ᝅ⨹ᮡ ᖅĥ ᦶ⇶ಆᮥ ʑᵡᮝಽ

±30%ᦊ3⫭ၹᅖᰍ⦹⦹ᩡ݅. əđŝᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᜽⨹ℕ᮹

י⪵ᱥᦶ⇶vᖒᮡ195kN/mmᩡᮝӹ, ᩕי⪵⬥ᦶ⇶vᖒᮡ

191kN/mmಽ᧞2%aపᱡ⦹ࡹᨩ݅. ᯕ۵Park et al.(2012)᮹

ᩑǍ᪡ ᮁᔍ⦽ đŝಽᕽ, ᔢʑ᮹ ᩑǍᨱᕽ۵ ԊŁྕၼ⋉(lead rubber bearing, LRB)ᮥݡᔢᮝಽ⦽݅۵ᱱᨱᕽᅙᩑǍ᪡݅෕ӹ

aᗮᩕי⪵᳑Õᯕ70ⳃ, 168hrᮝಽ࠺ᯝ⦹݅. ᔢʑ᮹ᩑǍđŝ ᨱ঑෕໕ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥ᦶ⇶vᖒᮡbb478kN/mm, 462kN/mm ಽᩕי⪵ᱥᨱእ⧕ᩕי⪵⬥᧞3.34% qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. ᩕי⪵

⬥ ⦹ᵲᄡ᭥ ᯕಆłᖁᮡ Figure 3ŝ zᮝ໑, b ᜽⨹ℕ ᳦ඹᄥ

ᄡ⩶łᖁᮥᅕ໕י⪵⬥ᦶ⇶ಆᮡי⪵ᱥᨱእ⧕᧞e᷾a⧉ᮥ

ᅝᙹᯩ݅. ᩕי⪵⬥ᙹḢᄡ᭥۵י⪵ᱥᨱᅕ݅qᗭ⦹۵ၹ໕ᨱ

ʑᬙʑ۵᷾a⦹۵Ğ⨆ᮥᅕᩡ݅. ᯕ۵ᩕי⪵ᨱ঑ෙŁྕ᮹

Ğࠥa ᷾a⧉ᨱ ঑௝ ᝁᰆශᯕ qᗭᨱ ঑ෙ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

2.3.2 ୢۚ൉নਓ෠

ᩕ י⪵ ᱥ⬥᮹ ᦶ⇶-ᱥ݉✚ᖒᝅ⨹ đŝ۵ Table 4᪡ zᯕ

ᱥ݉vᖒᮡי⪵ᱥ⬥bb0.196kN/mm, 0.195kN/mmಽᱡ⦹ࡹ

ᨕ᧞0.5% qᗭࡹᨩ݅. əญŁ॒aqᙁእ۵י⪵ᱥ7.56%ᨱᕽ

י⪵⬥7.35%ಽ᧞0.27%aపqᙁእaᱡ⦹ࡹᨩ݅. ᯕđŝ۵

Park et al.(2012)᮹ᩑǍđŝ᪡ᮁᔍ⦽đŝಽᕽaᗮᩕי⪵

(4)

Table 4. Result of compression-shear test

Item Shear stiffness (kN/mm)

Equivalent damping ratio (%)

Virgin 0.196 7.56

Aged 0.195 7.35

Change ratio(%) -0.51 -0.27

Fig. 4. Hysteresis curve of compression-shear test

(a) Shear stiffness

(b) Equivalent damping ratio Fig. 5. Physical properties of cycle test

ᱥ⬥ᱥݚvᖒᮡ᧞4.10% qᗭࡹᨩ݅. Figure 4۵⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉

᜽⨹ℕᨱ ݡ⦽ ᩕ י⪵ ᱥ⬥ ᦶ⇶-ᱥ݉ ᯕಆłᖁᮥ እƱ⦹ᩍ

ᅕᯙ äᯕ݅.

2.3.3 ࢱ୍࣫෇൉নਓ෠

ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᮹י⪵ᱥ⬥᮹ၹᅖᰍ⦹✚ᖒᮥ❭ᦦ⦹ʑ᭥⦹

ᩍᦶ⇶-ᱥ݉ᝅ⨹ᮥ50⫭ၹᅖᰍ⦹⦹ᩡ݅. bb᮹᜽⨹ℕෝᖅ⊹

⦹Ł, ᖅĥ໕ᦶᮝಽᙹḢᦶಆᮥa⦹ᩍ0.5Hz᮹ᱶ⩥❭ಽᖅĥᱥ

݉ᄡ᭥ಽᙹ⠪ᰍ⦹⦹ᩡ݅. b᜽⨹ℕ᮹ၹᅖᰍ⦹ᙹ᷾aᨱ঑ෙ

ᱥ݉vᖒŝ॒aqᙁእ᮹ᄡ⪵ᮉᮡ3, 5, 10, 30, 50⫭ᱥ݉aಆ

⬥bb⊂ᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. b᜽⨹ℕ᮹ၹᅖᰍ⦹ᨱ঑ෙbᔍᯕⓕᄥ

ᱥ݉vᖒŝ ॒aqᙁእ᮹ ᄡ⪵۵ Figure 5ᨱ ӹ┡ԕᨩ݅. ʑ᳕

ᩑǍᨱ᮹⦹໕50⫭ၹᅖᰍ⦹ᝅ⨹᮹ĞᬑⅩʑ1~3ჩṙ᝙ᯕⓕᨱ ᕽ᮹ᱥ݉vᖒŝ॒aqᙁእ᮹ᄡ⪵۵እƱᱢⓑäᮝಽӹ┡ԍ ḡอ, əᯕ⬥ၹᅖ⫭ᙹᇡ░۵ᄡ⪵⡎ᯕᱱ₉qᗭ⦹۵᧲ᔢᮥ

ӹ┡ԕᨩ݅(Oh et al., 2010). ᩕי⪵ᨱ঑ෙᱥ݉vᖒ᮹ᄡ⪵۵

י⪵ ᱥ 0.194kN/mmᨱᕽ י⪵ ⬥ 0.187kN/mm ᄡ⪵⦹ᩍ ᩕ

י⪵ᱥ⬥᧞3.6% ᱡ⦹ࡹᨩ݅. ॒aqᙁእᄡ⪵᮹Ğᬑ7.5%ᨱ ᕽ6.68% qᗭ⦹ᩍ᧞10.9% qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. ᩍʑᕽ, ᱥ݉vᖒŝ

॒aqᙁእ᮹ᄡ⪵ᮉᮡb᜽⨹ℕ᮹ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥bb50⫭ၹᅖᰍ

⦹ᝅ⨹ đŝෝ ⠪Ɂ⦽ sᮥ እƱ⦹ᩍ ӹ┡ԙ äᯕ݅.

2.3.4 ּ෉ୢۚ൞֏ਓ෠

ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥ᱥ݉ᄡ⩶ᖒ܆ᮥ❭ᦦ⦹ʑ᭥⦹ᩍɚ⦽ᱥ݉❭ƕ ᝅ⨹ᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. 1}᮹᜽⨹ℕෝᖅ⊹⦹ᩍᝅ⨹ᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡᮝ

໑, Łᗮᮝಽᝅ⨹ᮥᙹ⧪⧁Ğᬑ᜽⨹ℕ᮹ᱥ݉ᄡ⩶܆ಆᯕŝݡ⦹

í⠪aࢁᙹᯩʑভྙᨱᗮࠥ0.52 mm/secᯙᱡᗮ᮹ᱶᗮ❭ಽ

↽ݡᄡ⩶ශʭḡᙹ⠪ᄡ᭥ෝaಆ⦹ᩡ݅. ᜽⨹ℕෝᖅ⊹⦽⬥↽ݡ

ᖅĥᦶ⇶ಆᮥᰍ⦹⦹Ł, ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᜽⨹ℕa❭ƕᨱᯕ෕ࠥಾ

⦽἞ႊ⨆ᮝಽᱥ݉ᄡ᭥ෝa⦽݅. ᯕভ⦹ᵲᯕ↽ݡᱱᮥḡӹɪĊ

⯩ ᱡ⦹ࢁ ভʭḡ ᝅ⨹ᮥ ĥᗮ⦹Ł, ∊ᇥ⯩ ❭ƕᨱ ᯕ෕ౡ݅Ł

❱݉ࢁভᝅ⨹ᮥ᳦ഭ⦹ᩡ݅. ɚ⦽ᱥ݉❭ƕᝅ⨹⬥᜽⨹ℕ᮹❭

ƕ༉᜖ᮡFigure 7ŝzᮝ໑, ᜽⨹ℕ݉ᇡᨱᕽᱥ݉❭ƕaၽᔾ⦹

ᩡ݅. bb᮹᜽⨹ℕᨱݡ⦽ᝅ⨹đŝ۵Figure 6ŝTable 5᪡

z݅. ⪶ᝅ⦽Łྕ᮹ᄡ⩶Ğ⪵⩥ᔢᮡӹ┡ӹḡᦫᦹḡอᱥ݉ᄡ

᭥ ᧞ 100mm ᇡɝᮥ ḡӹ໕ᕽ ӹ┡ӹʑ ᜽᯲⦹ᩡŁ, 150mm ᯕᔢᮥḡӹ໕ᕽ❭ƕaၽᔾ⦹ʑ᜽᯲⦹ᩡ݅. ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥᮹

ɚ⦽ᱥ݉❭ƕᝅ⨹đŝי⪵ᱥᅕ݅י⪵⬥ᱥ݉❭ƕᄡ᭥aq ᗭ⦹ᩡŁ, ⠪Ɂᱢᮝಽ᧞6.8%aపᱥ݉ᄡ⩶ශᯕqᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. ə

్ӹᝅ⨹đŝ᪡ʑ᳕ᩑǍđŝෝእƱ⦽ĞᬑእƱᱢᱥ݉ᄡ⩶

ශᯕԏᮡ⠙ᯕ݅. Jung et al.(2002)᮹ᩑǍᨱ᮹⦹໕⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉

᮹ɚ⦽ᱥ݉❭ƕ۵ᱥ݉ᄡ⩶ශ467%ᨱᕽ❭ƕࡹᨩᮝ໑, ᅙᝅ⨹

đŝᨱ እ⧕ ᧞ 3႑aప ⓑ ᄡ⩶ශᨱᕽ ❭ƕࡹᨩ݅. ᯕ᪡ zᮡ

ᱥ݉ᄡ⩶ශ᮹₉ᯕ۵⩶ᔢĥᙹ᮹ᩢ⨆ᨱ᮹⦽äᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅.

(5)

(a) before thermal aged (b) after thermal aged Fig. 6. Hysteresis curve of ultimated failure test

Table 5. Result of ultimated failure test

Items Shear strain (mm) Shear strain ratio (%)

Virgin

#1 157.96 170

#2 159.03 171

#3 155.51 167

Aged

#4 148.10 159

#5 143.85 155

#6 150.51 162

Fig. 7. Shape the ultimated failure of NRB

ᔢʑᩑǍ᪡ᅙᝅ⨹ᨱᕽᔍᬊࡽŁྕ᮹ʑᅙྜྷᖒᮡ࠺ᯝ⦹Ł

⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹1₉⩶ᔢĥᙹ(

¬ Î

)۵28ᯕ໑, 2₉⩶ᔢĥᙹ(

¬ Ï

)۵

7ᯕ݅. ə్ӹᅙ ᝅ⨹ᨱᕽ᮹ ᜽⨹ℕ۵ 2₉⩶ᔢĥᙹa 2.98ಽ

ᔢݡᱢᮝಽԏ݅. Yasaka et al.(1991)ŝOh(2011)᮹ᩑǍᨱᕽ۵

⩶ᔢĥᙹෝᄡᙹಽ⦹ᩍᱢ⊖Łྕ᮹⦽ĥ✚ᖒᝅ⨹đŝ2₉⩶ᔢĥ ᙹa᯲ᮥᙹಾݡᄡ⩶᜽ᱥ݉ಆŝᱥ݉ᄡ⩶ශᯕ⩥ᱡ⯩ԏᦥḡŁ,

✚⯩2₉⩶ᔢĥᙹa4 ᯕ⦹ᯙĞᬑ┥ᖒᅖᬱಆᯕᱡ⦹ࡹ۵࠺᜽ᨱ

ݡᄡ⩶᜽᳭Ǖ❭ƕaၽᔾ⦹ᩡ݅. ᯕ۵ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ᮹ᝅ⨹đŝ᪡

ᮁᔍ⦽ đŝᯕ݅.

2.3.5 ਓ෠էրंজ

aᗮᩕי⪵ᨱ঑ෙ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹✚ᖒᄡ⪵ෝᝅ⨹ᮥ☖⧕

ࠥ⇽⦽đŝᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵ᩕי⪵ᱥᨱእ⧕ᩕי⪵⬥ᦶ⇶vᖒᮡ

2.05% qᗭ⦹ᩡŁ, ᱥ݉vᖒၰ॒aqᙁእ۵bb0.51%, 0.27%

qᗭ⦹۵ đŝa ࠥ⇽ࡹᨩ݅. ᯕ۵ Park et al.(2012)ŝ KTRI (2011)᮹ᩑǍ᪡ᮁᔍ⦽đŝᯕ݅. ᔢʑࢱᩑǍ۵ᝅ⨹ݡᔢᮝಽ

ԊŁྕၼ⋉(lead rubber bearing, LRB)ᮥᔍᬊ⦽݅۵ᱱᨱᕽᅙ

ᩑǍ᪡₉ᯕaᯩᮝӹᩕי⪵᳑Õᯕ70ⳃ, 168hrᮝಽ࠺ᯝ⦹݅.

Park et al.(2012)᮹ᩑǍᨱ᮹⦹໕࠺ᯝ⦽ᩕי⪵᳑Õᨱᕽᦶ⇶v ᖒᮡ3.34% qᗭ⦹ᩡŁ, ᱥ݉vᖒᮡ2.7%, ॒aqᙁእ۵1.9%

qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. ੱ⦽KTRI(2011)᮹ᩑǍᨱ঑෕໕ᩕי⪵⬥ᱥ݉v ᖒᮡ 1.5% ᷾a⧩ᮝӹ, ॒aqᙁእ۵ 0.6% qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅.

ə్ӹNakamura et al.(1991)᮹ᩑǍᨱ᮹⦹໕⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉

(NRB)ᮥ100ⳃ, 239days ࠺ᦩᩕי⪵⬥ᝅ⨹⦽đŝᦶ⇶vᖒᮡ

17%, ᱥ݉vᖒᮡ15% əญŁ॒aqᙁእ۵3.2% ᷾a⦹ᩍᅙ

ᩑǍŝᔢၹࡽđŝᩡ݅. ၹ໕ᨱHiroyuki et al.(1989)᮹ᩑǍᨱ

঑෕໕Nakamura et al.(1991)᮹ᩑǍ᪡࠺ᯝ⦹í⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉

(NRB)ᯕŁ, ᩕי⪵᪉ࠥa100ⳃಽ࠺ᯝ⦹໑ᩕי⪵ෝ318hr ᝅ᜽⬥ᝅ⨹⦽đŝᦶ⇶vᖒŝᱥ݉vᖒᮡbb2.0%, 0.8%

qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. Nakamura et al.(1991)ŝHiroyuki et al.(1989)᮹

ᩑǍ᳑ÕᮥእƱ⧕ᅕ໕᜽⨹ℕ۵⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᯕŁaᗮᩕי⪵

᪉ࠥ۵100ⳃಽ᳑Õᯕ࠺ᯝ⦹ḡอ, ᩕי⪵᜽eᯕbb238days (5,712hr)ŝ318hrᮝಽⓑ₉ᯕaᯩ݅. ᷪ࠺ᯝ⦽aᗮᩕי⪵᳑Õ ᨱᕽࠥ ᩕ י⪵ʑeᨱ ঑௝ ⓑ ᄡ⪵a ᯩᮭᮥ ᦭ ᙹ ᯩ݅.

3. Ʊప᮹ԕḥᖒ܆⠪a

3.1 ೶ন஺஼ߚॺ୨

3.1.1 ֗߆୪଀

ḡḥ1Ǎᩎᨱ᭥⊹⦽2@2Ğeᩑᗮᜍ௹ቭƱಽᕽݡᔢƱపᱽ ᬱၰƱb݉໕✚ᖒᮡFigure 8 ၰTable 6, Table 7ŝz݅. ԕ

(6)

Fig. 8. Bridge dimensions

Table 6. Parameter of bridges

Length [email protected]=60.0m Year 1995

Rating 1 Design load DB-24

Superstructure Substructure

Bridge type RC SLAB Abutment type T-type

Bridge with 9.00m Pier type 쩏-type

Slab Ƅ

ƁƉ

27MPa Footing type Steel Pile Girder Ƅ

Ɨ

400MPa Concrete Ƅ

ƁƉ

24MPa

Table 7. Properties of Pier

Items Properties

Column dimension, D Circle type, 1.1m Column section š

ƅ

, ¢

ƅ

1.131m

2

, 0.07187m

4

Reinforced yield stress ( Ƅ

Ɨ

) 300 MPa (SD30) Concrete strength ( Ƅ

ƁƉ

) 24 MPa

Longitudinal reinforcement D22×25EA(=96.775cm

2

), 쩐=1.02%

Hoop reinforcement D16(=1.986cm

2

), s=125mm

Concrete cover 100mm

Fig. 9. Analysis model

Items Moment (kN·m) Curvature (1/m) Crack

Yield (Initial) Yield Yield (Ideal.)

Ultimate

1700.8 1579.8 1971.6 1903.5 2016.7

0.003116 0.002572 0.006091 0.003099 0.007597 Fig. 10. Curve of ¦à ŋ

Table 8. Pier of the axial force due to the weight

Items Pier top (kN) Pier lower (kN) Remarks

P1 2147.7 2286.3 Fixed

P2 1445.7 1598.4 Move

P3 2147.7 2286.3 Fixed

ḥ⧕ᕾ᳑Õᮡԕḥ1॒ɪᮝಽaᗮࠥĥᙹ۵0.154ᯕŁḡၹĥᙹ ۵ 1.2ᯕ݅.

3.1.2 ֗߆ැজࡦ܄ࢫ֗Ԩౠߚॺ୨

⧕ᕾݡᔢ Ʊప᮹ ᔢᇡǍ᳑۵ ❱᫵ᗭಽ Ʊbᮡ ⥥౩ᯥ᫵ᗭಽ

༉ߙย ⦹ᩡ݅. ḡၹ᮹ ᩢ⨆ᮡ ᯦ಆḡḥ ⦹ᵲᨱ ၹᩢ⦹Ł Ʊb

⦹ᇡ۵ Łᱶ݉ᮝಽ ༉ߙย ⦹ᩡ݅. ᝅᱽÑ࠺ŝ ᯝ⊹ࡹࠥಾ NL Linkෝᔍᬊ⦹ᩍၼ⋉ᮥ༉ߙย⦹ᩡ݅. Ǎ᳑ྜྷᯱᵲᮡ⥥ಽəఉᨱ ᕽ ᯱ࠺ĥᔑࡹࠥಾ⦹ᩡᮝ໑⡍ᰆ॒ʑ┡ᯱᵲᮥ༉ࢱŁಅ⦹ᩡ݅.

Ǎ᳑⧕ᕾ༉ߙᮡFigure 9᪡zŁᯱᵲ⧕ᕾᨱ᮹⦽Ʊb᮹⇶ಆᮡ

Table 8ŝ z݅.

(7)

Fig. 11. Design response spectrum

Table 9. Seismic forces of Pier and period vibration

Items Axial Vertical axial

Upper axial force © (kN) 2146.8 Lower axials force ©

‰

(kN) 2263.2 Upper displacement Ģ

†

(mm) 96.27 10.07 Upper shear force ¯

†

(kN) 800.2 553.3 lower shear force ¯

‰

(kN) 808.2 571.1

Effective height ¡

ƃ

(m) 6.10 6.80 Period vibration ­ (sec) 1.2769 0.3864

Table 10. Stiffness and ductility of Pier

Items Axial Vertical axial Unit

Ÿ

Ɨ

á ¦

Ɨ

î¡

ƃ

312.0 279.9 kN

Ÿ

Ƅ

á ¦

Ɠ

î¡

ƃ

330.6 296.6 kN

Ģ

Ǝ

á Þ ć ¦ ¦

ƗƓ

à Î ß Ģ

Ɨ

âľ

ƎÞ

¡

ƃ

à ¥

Ǝ

îÏ

ß

0.0188 0.0229 m

Ģ

Ɠ

á Ģ

Ɨ

âĢ

Ǝ

0.0572 0.0706 m

łĢ

Ɓ

á Ģ

Ɠ

îĢ

Ɨ

1.488 1.478

¯

ƌ

á ¯

Ɓ

â¯

Ƒ

â¯

Ǝ

1,877.7 1,871.7 kN

Table 11. Pier supply capacity

Items Axial Vertical axial Remark Bending strength Ÿ

ƌ

(kN) 330.6 272.0

Shear strength ¯

ƌ

(kN) 1,877.7 1,871.7 Yield displacement Ģ

Ɨ

(m) 0.0384 0.0478

Ultimate displacement Ģ

Ɓ

(m) 0.0572 0.0706 łĢ

Ɓ

Z Ģ

Ɨ

Ductility łĢ

Ɓ

1.488 1.478

Ÿ

ƌ

á Ÿ

Ɨ

â ć Ģ

Ɓ

à Ģ

Ɨ

Ÿ

Ƅ

à Ÿ

Ɨ

ÞĢ

Ɓ

à Ģ

Ɨ

ß

3.1.3 ֗Ԩۚ࡟ැজ

Ʊb᮹ ݉໕vࠥ, ᙹ⠪ᄡ᭥ ၰ ᮁ⬉vᖒᮥ ᔑᱶ⦹ʑ ᭥⦹ᩍ

ᔢʑᨱ⇶ಆ᮹⬉ŝෝŁಅ⦹ᩍ༉ູ✙-łශ(

¦àŋ

)⧕ᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹

ᩡ݅. Ʊb݉໕✚ᖒᮡTable 7ŝzŁ⎹Ⓧญ✙۵Kent&Park

༉ߙᮥ ᔍᬊ⦹Ł, ℁ɝᮡ Menegotto-Pinto ༉ߙᮥ ᔍᬊ⦹ᩡ݅.

¦àŋ

⧕ᕾđŝ۵Figure 10ŝzᮝ໑ᬱ⩶݉໕ᮝಽƱ⇶ႊ⨆ŝ

Ʊ⇶Ḣbႊ⨆ᮡ࠺ᯝ⦹݅. ᯕভ݉໕vࠥෝ⠪a⦹ʑ᭥⦽༉ູ✙

۵ᯕᔢ⪵ࡽ

¦à ŋ

łᖁ᮹⧎ᅖၰɚ⦽᜽łශᨱ⧕ݚ⦹۵sᮥ

ᔍᬊ⦽݅.

¦à ŋ

⧕ᕾᨱ᮹⧕Ǎ⦽⧎ᅖ༉ູ✙

¦

Ɨ᪡⧎ᅖłශ

ŋ

Ɨ

ᮥ ᯕᬊ⦹ᩍᮁ⬉vᖒ

ޞ

Ɓ

ƃƄƄ

ß á

Þ

¦

Ɨ

îŋ

Ɨßᮥᔑᱶ⦹Ł, ᯕෝ☖

⧕ ᇶƕႊḡᙹᵡᨱ ݡ⦽ ┥ᖒḡḥಆ ᔑᱶ᜽ ᱢᬊࡹ۵ ᮁ⬉݉

໕2₉༉ູ✙

¢

ƃƄƄ

á Þ¦

Ɨ

îŋ

Ɨ

ßî

Þ

ž

Ɓ

ƅß=0.022761m

4

ᯕ݅. ᩍʑᕽ,

ž

Ɓ

á ÕìÒ×× ö

Ð

ć Ƅ

ƁƉ

âÕ

(MPa)ᯕ݅.

3.1.4 ஺஼ැজ઩ଭ෉೶ন஺஼ߚॺ୨

Ʊb᮹݉໕⧕ᕾᨱᕽᔑᱶࡽᮁ⬉vᖒᮥǍ᳑⧕ᕾ༉ߙᨱᱢ ᬊ⦹ŁݡᔢƱప᮹ԕḥ⧕ᕾ᳑Õᨱ᮹⦽Figure 11᮹ᖅĥ᮲ݖᜅ

⟺✙ౝᮥ⦹ᵲᮝಽḡḥ⧕ᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. Łᮁ⊹⧕ᕾᮥ☖⧕

ḥ࠺༉ऽ᮹٥ᱢḩపₙᩍᮉᯕ90%ᯕᔢᯕࡹࠥಾ༉ऽᙹෝᖁᱶ

⦹ᩡŁ, ᵝ᫵༉ऽ⩶ᔢᮡFigure 13ŝz݅. ḡḥ⦹ᵲႊ⨆ᄥ30%

Ƚᱶᮥᱢᬊ⦹ᩍ┥ᖒḡḥಆᮥᔑᱶ⦹ᩡᮝ໑, Łᱶ݉Ʊb᮹᳑⧊

ḡḥಆ ၰ ḥ࠺ᵝʑ۵ Table 9᪡ z݅.

3.2 ֗Ԩଭٛ஼নۇඌԧ

3.2.1 ۚ࡟Գܑࢫվׂ઴নܑॺ୨

݉໕vࠥ۵ ᙹ⠪⦹ᵲᨱݡ⦽ᇡᰍ᮹↽ݡᱡ⧎܆ಆᮥั⦹໑, ᯕভ⦹ᵲ᯲ᬊᱱ᮹׳ᯕ۵Ʊ⇶ႊ⨆ᨱݡ⧕ᕽ۵Ʊb᮹ᔢ݉ᮝಽ, Ʊ⇶Ḣbႊ⨆ᨱݡ⧕ᕽ۵ᔢᇡǍ᳑ḩప᮹ᵲᝍ׳ᯕಽ⦽݅. ݉໕ vࠥၰŖɪᩑᖒࠥĥᔑŝᱶᮡTable 10ŝz݅. ᯕᨱ঑௝Łᱶ݉

ƱbP1᮹ŖɪᩎపᮡTable 12᪡zᮝ໑, ⮉❭ƕᨱᯕෝভʭḡ

ᱥ݉❭ƕaၽᔾ⦹ḡᦫᮝအಽ⧕ݚƱbᮡ⮉❭ƕ༉ऽᨱ᮹⧕

ḡ႑ࢉᮥ᦭ᙹᯩ݅. ┥ᖒḡḥ༉ູ✙۵P-쨣 ⬉ŝෝŁಅ⦹Ł☖ᱽ ᵝʑʑᵡᨱ᮹⦽ᔢšĥᙹ

Ł «

ᨱ᮹⦹ᩍᔑᱶࡽᗭ᫵ᄡ᭥ᩑᖒࠥ

۵Table 13ŝz݅. Ʊ⇶ႊ⨆᮹Ğᬑᄡ᭥ᩑᖒࠥaᗭ᫵=2.498

> Ŗɪ=1.488ᮝಽԕḥᖒ܆ᯕᇡ᳒⦹໑Ʊ⇶Ḣbႊ⨆᮹Ğᬑᗭ᫵

=0.686 < Ŗɪ=1.478ᯕအಽ┥ᖒᩢᩎᔢᨱᕽÑ࠺⧉ᮥ᦭ᙹᯩ݅.

ᯕᨱ঑௝Ʊ⇶ႊ⨆ԕḥᖒ܆⨆ᔢᨱᵝ༊⦹ᩍእƱᇥᕾ⦹ᩡ݅.

(8)

Table 12. Capacity of Pier

Items Axial Vertical Remark

¦

ƌ

á Ÿ

ƌ

ƃ

2,016.7 1,849.3 Nominal moment

«

Ƒ

á ¦

ž ìƎƂ

î¦

ƌ

2.498 0.780 Strength ratio

Ł

«

1.0 0.880

Table 13. Properties before and after thermal aging

Items Virgin Aged

Shear stiffness ¤

Ɣ

(kN/m) 195,233.9 190,983.3 Effective stiffness ¤

ƃƄƄ

(kN/m) 194.13 186.7

Fig. 12. Artificial seismic wave used in analysis

(a) Non-isolated

(1.277) (b) before aged

(2.822) (c) after aged (2.772) Fig. 13. Primary Mode shape and natural period

4. ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥ԕḥᖒ܆

4.1 ֜୺ැজࡦ܄ࠫ

እᖁ⩶ ᜽eᯕಆ⧕ᕾᮥ ᙹ⧪⦹ʑ ᭥⧕ ࠥಽƱᖅĥʑᵡ᮹ ⢽ ᵡᖅĥ᮲ݖᜅ⟺✙ౝᨱ᮹⦽ԕḥᖅĥ᳑ÕᮝಽᯙŖḡḥ❭ᔾᖒ⥥

ಽəఉSIMQKEෝᔍᬊ⦹ᩍ4}᮹ᯙŖḡḥᮥ᯲ᖒ⦹ᩡ݅. ᔍᬊ

ࡽḡḥ❭᜽eᯕಆၰḡḥᜅ⟺✙ౝᮡFigure 12᪡z݅. ⧕ᕾ༉ߙ

ᮡFigure 9᪡࠺ᯝ⦹ӹ༉ुၼ⋉ⅾ24}ෝ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᮝಽ

Ʊℕ⦹ᩡ݅. NL Link۵⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹✚ᖒᮥ⧕ᕾ⧁ᙹᯩ۵

Isolator1 ᫵ᗭෝᔍᬊ⦹ᩍ༉⩶⪵⦹ᩡ݅. Isolator1ᨱᔍᬊࡽၼ⋉

᮹ᱽᬱᮡTable 1ŝzŁ, ᔢʑᝅ⨹ᨱ᮹⦽ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥᮹

ᵝ᫵ ✚ᖒsᮡ Table 13ŝ z݅.

4.2 ැজէր

4.2.1 ࡦ݁෴ঃࢫճକச׆

ݡᔢ Ʊపᨱ ݡ⦽ ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ ᩕ י⪵ ᱥ⬥᮹ Ʊ⇶ႊ

⨆ᵝ᫵༉ऽ⩶ᔢᮡFigure 13ŝz݅. ⧕ᕾđŝእ໕ḥƱప᮹

Łᮁᵝʑ(T) 1.277secᅕ݅༉ࢱʙíӹ┡ӹḡḥĊญᰆ⊹aᱢᬊ

ࡽƱప᮹✚ᖒᮥ᯹ᅕᯕŁᯩᨩ݅. ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥

᮹Łᮁᵝʑ۵bb2.822sec᪡2.772secಽᩕי⪵⬥1.79%

qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. ᯕ۵ Łྕ᮹ י⪵ᨱ ঑ෙ ✚ᖒᔢ ᜽eᯕ ḡԁᙹಾ

ŁྕaĞ⪵ࡹᨕ┥ᖒᮡqᗭ⦹Ł, Ğࠥ۵᷾a⦹ʑভྙᯙäᮝಽ

❱݉ࡽ݅.

4.2.2 ֗Ԩଭଦۢ

Ʊb⦹݉᮹ᱥ݉ಆᯕ௡Ʊb᮹ʑࣆŝ⪶ݡʑⅩaᱲ⦹۵ᇡ ᇥ᮹ᱥ݉ಆᮥ᮹ၙ⦹໑ၼ⋉ᮥ☖⧕ᱥݍࡹ۵ᔢᇡǍ᳑ྜྷᯱᵲ

ᨱ᮹⦽šᖒಆŝʑࣆᯱℕ᮹šᖒಆᯕ᳑⧊ࡹᨕӹ┡ӽ݅. ੱ⦽

Ʊb⦹݉᮹༉ູ✙௡ၼ⋉ᮥ☖⧕ᱥݍࡹ۵ ᔢᇡǍ᳑ྜྷᯱᵲᨱ

᮹⦽šᖒಆŝʑࣆᯱℕ᮹šᖒಆᨱݡ⦽ʑࣆʙᯕ᮹Œᯕ᳑⧊ࡹ

ᨕӹ┡ӽ݅. ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥ᨱݡ⦽⧕ᕾđŝ۵Table 14᪡zᮝ໑,

(9)

Fig. 14. Response ratio of P1

Table 14. Response of before and after thermal aging

Items Thermal aged changed ratio

before after (%) Moment

(Pier, kN·m)

P1 1,186.0 1,166.2 -1.70

P2 2,267.8 2,163.4 -4.83

Shear force (Pier, kN)

P1 200.52 195.36 -2.64

P2 328.83 319.9 -2.77

Displacement (Pier, mm)

P1 23.79 23.47 -1.36

P2 53.72 51.25 -4.81

Displacement (Bearing, mm)

P1 134.9 136.9 +1.59

P2 134.9 137.0 +1.59

Table 15. Seismic performance of before-after thermal aging

Items Period

(sec)

Shear force (kN)

Displacement (mm)

Supply capacity - 330.6 57.2

Non-isolated 1.277 808.2 96.27

Before aged 2.772 200.5 23.79

After aged 2.822 195.4 23.47

Changed ratio (%) -1.79 -2.64 -1.36

ᱥℕᱢᯙĞ⨆ᮡእ໕ḥƱపᨱᕽ۵P1ᨱḲᵲࡹ۵ၹ໕⃽ᩑŁ

ྕၼ⋉ᮥᖅ⊹⦽Ğᬑᝁ⇶ᯕᮭᇡᯕŁၼ⋉}ᙹa2႑ᯙP2᮹

᮲ݖᯕⓍíӹ┡ԍ݅. ᩕי⪵⬥⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᮡᩕי⪵ᱥᨱ

እ⧕ᱥ݉ಆᮡ2.77% qᗭ, ༉ູ✙۵4.83% qᗭ, Ʊbᔢ݉ᄡ᭥۵

4.81% qᗭ⦹۵ äᮝಽ ӹ┡ԍ݅. ᄡ⪵᮹ ᱶࠥ۵ Ⓧḡ ᦫḡอ

ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥ၼ⋉᮹᮲ݖᨱᕽ᦭ᙹᯩॐᯕᄡ᭥᮲ݖ᮹᷾a۵

ၼ⋉ᯕᇡݕ⦹۵ᨱթḡ᮹ ᷾aෝ᮹ၙ⦹ŁđŝᱢᮝಽƱb᮹

ᱥ݉ಆ qᗭಽ ӹ┡ԍ݅.

4.2.3 ࢲಅଭଦۢ

⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᄡ᭥۵ ᩕי⪵ᱥᨱእ⧕↽ݡ1.59% ᷾a

⦹ᩡ݅. ၼ⋉᮹ᱥ݉ಆᮡĞᱽᖒŝᩑ݉Ñญၰ⩶⦹Ł॒ŝၡᱲ⦽

šĥෝw۵݅. ၼ⋉᮹ᱥ݉ಆᮡᙹḢᬊప༜ḡᦫíၼ⋉᮹Ⓧʑᨱ

ᩢ⨆ᮥᵝ۵᫵ᗭᯕ໑ᄡ᭥ᬊపŝšಉࡽᱥ݉ಆᯕ⍅ḩĞᬑ݉᭥

Ⓧʑ᷾aᨱ঑ෙᯱᰍእᔢ᜚ශᮡɪĊ⯩⍅ḡ۵Ğ⨆ᯕᯩ݅(Oh et al., 2008). ə్ӹḡḥĊญ᮹Ğᬑᱥ݉ಆᨱݡ⦽ᦩᱥᮉᯕ

ᅕ☖2 ᯕᔢ⪶ᅕࡹအಽၼ⋉᮹י⪵ᨱ঑ෙᄡ᭥᷾a۵ྕ᜽⧁

อ⦽ ᙹᵡᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

4.2.4 ැজէրंজ

ᩕ י⪵ࡽ ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ᮥ Ʊపᨱ ᱢᬊ⦹ᩍ ⧕ᕾ⦽ đŝ۵

Figure 14 ၰTable 14, Table 15᪡z݅. ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕ

י⪵ᨱ঑ෙŁᮁᵝʑ۵ᩕי⪵ᱥᨱእ⦹ᩍᩕי⪵⬥1.79%

qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. Ʊb᮹ᱥ݉ಆᮡ2.77% qᗭ⧩Ł, ༉ູ✙۵4.83%

qᗭ, Ʊbᔢ݉ᄡ᭥۵4.81% qᗭ⦹۵äᮝಽӹ┡ԍ݅. ၼ⋉

᮹ᄡ᭥۵ᩕי⪵ᱥᨱእ⧕1.59% ᷾a⦹ᩡ݅. ᯕ᪡zᮡđŝ۵

Kitahara(2008)᮹ᩑǍđŝ᪡ᮁᔍ⦽đŝᯕ݅. Kitahara᮹ᩑǍ ᨱᕽ۵ḡḥᯕᝅᱽၽᔾ⧩޹ḡᩎᨱᕽŁྕၼ⋉᮹י⪵abb

50֥, 100֥ᔢݚḥ⧪ࡽĞᬑ᮹vᖒᄡ⪵ෝŁಅ⦹ᩍRC Ʊప

ᮥݡᔢᮝಽԕḥ⧕ᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. əđŝ100֥ᔢݚ᮹י⪵a

ၽᔾ⦽Ğᬑ᮹Ʊbᨱᕽ᮹༉ູ✙᪡ᱥ݉ಆᮡbb0.8%, 1.2%

qᗭ⧩݅. ࢱᩑǍđŝෝᇥᕾ⦽đŝᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵۵

Ʊపᱥℕ᮹Ǎ᳑ĥᨱ۵ⓑᩢ⨆ᮥၙ⊹ḡᦫᮡäᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅.

5. đು

ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ෝaᗮᩕי⪵⦹ᩍᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥

᮹✚ᖒᮥᇥᕾ⦹Ł, ၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵aƱప᮹ԕḥᖒ܆ᨱၙ⊹۵

ᩢ⨆ᮥ እƱ⦹ᩍ ݅ᮭŝ zᮡ đುᮥ ᨜ᨩ݅.

(1) ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥ᦶ⇶✚ᖒᝅ⨹ၰᦶ⇶-ᱥ݉✚ᖒ ᝅ⨹đŝᩕי⪵⬥ᦶ⇶vᖒᮡ᧞2.05% qᗭ⦹ᩡŁ, ᱥ݉v ᖒŝ॒aqᙁእ۵bb0.51%, 0.27% qᗭ⦹ᩡ݅. ੱ⦽࠺ᯝ

᳑Õᨱᕽ50⫭ၹᅖᰍ⦹ᝅ⨹⦽đŝᱥ݉vᖒᮡ⠪Ɂ3.6%a పqᗭ⦹ᩡŁ, ॒aqᙁእ۵10.9% qᗭ⦹ᩡŁ, ᩕי⪵ᱥ

⬥ɚ⦽ᱥ݉❭ƕᝅ⨹đŝᨱᕽࠥᱥ݉ᄡ⩶ශᯕי⪵⬥qᗭ⦹

ᩡ݅.

(2) ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵ᱥ⬥᮹ᝅ⨹ᨱ᮹⦽✚ᖒ⊹ෝᱢᬊ⦹

ᩍ RCƱప᮹ ԕḥᖒ܆⧕ᕾᮥ ᙹ⧪⦽ đŝ ḡḥĊญᰆ⊹ෝ

ᖅ⊹⦽Ʊప᮹✚ᖒᯕ᯹ӹ┡ԍ݅. ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵

ᱥ⬥ᨱ঑ෙŁᮁᵝʑ۵ᩕי⪵ᱥᨱእ⧕ᩕי⪵⬥1.79%

qᗭ⦹ᩡŁ, Ʊbᱥ݉ಆ, ༉ູ✙ၰƱbᔢ݉᮹ᄡ᭥۵bb

2.77%, 4.83%, 4.81% qᗭ⦹۵äᮝಽӹ┡ԍ݅. ၼ⋉᮹ᄡ᭥

۵ᩕי⪵ᱥᨱእ⧕1.59% ᷾a⦹ᩡ݅. ၼ⋉᮹ᬊపၰ႑

⊹॒ᨱ঑௝Ʊప᮹ԕḥᖒ܆ᯕ݅ᗭᄡ⪵ࢁäᯕӹᅙݡᔢ

᜽⨹ℕӹƱప᳑Õᨱᕽ۵⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵✚ᖒᄡ⪵ᨱ

(10)

঑ෙ Ʊప᮹ ԕḥᖒ܆᮹ ᄡ⪵۵ Ⓧḡ ᦫᮭᮥ ᦭ ᙹ ᯩᨩ݅.

ၼ⋉ᖅĥᦩᱥᮉᮥŁಅ⦹໕ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵۵Ʊప

ᱥℕ᮹ Ǎ᳑ĥ᮹ ⓑ ᩢ⨆ᮥ ၙ⊹ḡ ᦫᮥ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

(3) ⃽ᩑŁྕၼ⋉ŝ zᮡ ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉ᨱ ݡ⦽ ᩕ י⪵ᨱ ݡ⦽

ᩑǍ۵ᯝၹᱢᮝಽaᗮᩕ᪉ࠥ᳑ÕᨱⅩᱱᯕ฿∑Კᯩ݅.

ə్ӹᅙᩑǍ᪡ᖁ⧪ᩑǍෝእƱᇥᕾ⦽đŝי⪵᪉ࠥa

࠺ᯝ⦽ Ğᬑ י⪵᳑Õᨱᕽ ᰆ᜽e י⇽ࢁᙹಾ Łྕ᮹ Ğ⪵

ᗮࠥaዉ௝ᲙŁྕ᮹vᖒᯕ᷾a⦹íࡹᨕᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᮹

ᩕ י⪵ ✚ᖒᯕ ᯹ ӹ┡ԁ äᮝಽ ᩩ⊂ࡽ݅.

(4) ᱢ⊖Łྕၼ⋉᮹ᩕי⪵ᨱ᮹⦽✚ᖒᩢ⨆ŝᩕי⪵aƱప᮹

ԕḥᖒ܆ᨱၙ⊹۵ᩢ⨆ᮥᅕ݅໦⪶⦹íࠥ⇽⦹ʑ᭥⧕ᕽ۵

aᗮᩕ᪉ࠥၰי⪵᜽eᮥᅕ݅a⪚⦽᳑Õᨱᕽᝅ⨹⧁

⦥᫵aᯩ݅. ੱ⦽, ᰆ᜽eݡʑ᪉ࠥᔢ┽ᨱᕽၹᅖᱢᯙ᪉ࠥᄡ

⪵ᨱ ঑ෙ ᩢ⨆ࠥ Łಅ⧕᧝ ⧁ ⦥᫵a ᯩ݅.

qᔍ᮹ɡ

ᅙᩑǍ۵2011֥ࠥᕽᬙ᜽พݡ⦺ƱƱԕ⦺ᚁᩑǍእḡᬱᨱ᮹

⧕ ᙹ⧪ࡹᨩ᜖ܩ݅.

References

Park, K. S., Jung, H. J., Kim, W. H., Lee. I. N. (2003). “Aseismic performance evaluation of base isolation systems for bridge.” J.

of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 23, No. 3A, pp. 457-460 (in Korean).

Park, S. K., Oh, J. (2012). “Influence of aging of lead rubber bearing on seismic performance of bridges.” J. of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 32, No. 2A, pp.109-116 (in Korean).

Oh, J., Jung, H. Y. (2010). “Effects of accelerated thermal aging on dynamic properties of laminated rubber bearings.” J. of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 30, No. 5A, pp. 417-424 (in Korean).

Oh, J., Hyeun, G. H., Park, Y. S., Park, S. K. (2008). “A study on aseismatic performance of base isolation systems using resilient friction pot bearing.” J. of K SMI, KSMI, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.

127-134 (in Korean).

Oh, J. (2011). An evaluation of physical characteristics and seismic performance of laminated rubber bearings being used in bridges, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Seoul, pp. 150-173 (in Korean).

Cho, W. J., Choi, S. Y., Yu, J. S. (2000). “Basic of rubber enginee- ring.” Korea Institute of footwear and leather technology, pp.

233-235 (in Korean).

Jung, G. Y., Ha, D. H., Park, K. N., Kim, D. H. (2002). “Experi- mental study on characteristics of low hardness rubber bearing.”

J. of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 22, No. 6A, pp. 1295-1307 (in Korean).

Han, K. B., Kim, M. G., Park, S. K. (2004). “Improvement of seismic performance of existing bridges using isolation.” J. of EESK, EESK, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 9-17 (in Korean).

Korea Testing and Research Institute (2011). Performance evaluation test report of Lead Rubber Bearing, Unison e-tech R&D center, pp. 52-54 (in Korean).

Yasaka, A., Mizukoshi K. (1991). “Failure test of laminatsd rubber bearing evaluating effect of shape factor on ultimate behaviour- part 1 restoring force characteristics.” Summaries of technical papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.

599-600 (in Japanese).

Hiroyuki, H., Jiro, Y., Teruchika, K., Shinichi, I. (1989). “The development of nishimatsu construction base isolation system-part 2:experimental study.” Report of the Engineering Research Laboratory, Nishimatsu co. ltd, Vol. 12, pp. 34-42 (in Japanese).

Nakamura, T., Okada, H., Seki, M., Sugiyama, K., Teramura A.

(1991). “Development of base isolation system for earthquakes and micro-vibrations using laminated thick rubber bearings.”

(Part 1). Characteristics tests for laminated thick rubber bearings, Report of the Engineering Research Laboratory, Ohbayashi-Gumi, Ltd., No. 42, pp. 15-22 (in Japanese).

Choi, S. S. (2000). “Influence of rubber composition on change of crosslink density of rubber vulcanizates with EV cure system by thermal aging.” J. of Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 75, pp.

1378-1384.

Chou, H. W. and Huang J. S. (2008). “Effects of cycle compression and thermal aging on dynmic properties of neoprene rubber bearing.” J. of Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 107, pp. 1635-1641.

Itoh, Y. and Gu, H. S. (2009). “Prediction of aging characteristics in natural rubber bearings used in bridges.” J. of Bridge Engin- eering, ASCE, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 122-129.

John J. Fitzgerald, Arthur C. Martellock, Paul L. Nielsen and Robynn V. Schillace. (1992). “The effect of cyclic stress on the physical properties of a poly elastomer.” Polymer Engineering &

Science, Vol. 32, pp. 1350-1357.

Kato, M., Watanabe Y., Yoneda, G., Tanimoto, E., Hirotani, T., Shirahama, K., Fukushima, Y., Murazumi, Y. (1996). “Investigation of aging effects for laminated rubber bearings of Pelham Bridge.”

Eleventh World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No.1450.

Kitahara, T. (2008). “Seismic performance of RC bridge piers considering aging of base isolated rubber.” Proceeding of 4th International ASRANet Conference.

Mott, P. H. and Roland, C. M. (2001). “Aging of natural rubber in air and seawater.” Rubber Chemistry and Techology, Vol. 74, pp. 79-88.

Takafumi Fujita, Katsuhiko Ishida, Toshikazu Yoshizawa, Ichiro Nishikawa, Yoshitaka Muramatsu. (1995). “Study for the predic- tion of the long-term durability of seismic isolators.” Seismic Shock and Vibration Isolation, ASME, Vol. 319, pp. 197-203.

ISO 22762 (2010). Elastomeric seismic protection isolators part-1 : Test Methods.

ISO 22762 (2010). Elastomeric seismic protection isolators part-2 : Applications for bridge- specifications.

AASHTO (2010). Guide specifications for seismic isolation design,

Washington D. C.

수치

Table 1. Parameters of natural rubber bearing
Table 2. Parameter of fatigue tester
Fig. 4. Hysteresis curve of compression-shear test
Table 5. Result of ultimated failure test
+5

참조

관련 문서