US 0925A Laminated Elastomeric Bearings Aaef

jMarch 2007
Translate June 2009
Technical guide
Laminated elastomeric bearings

Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
The Technical Department for Transport, Roads and Bridges Engineering and Road Safety (Service d'tudes techniques des routes et autoroutes - Stra) is a technical department within the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. Its field of activities is the road, the transportation and the engineering structures.
The Stra supports the public owner

The Stra supplies State agencies and local communities (counties, large cities and urban communities) with information, methodologies and tools suited to the specificities of the networks in order to: improve the projects quality; help with the asset management; define, apply and evaluate the public policies; guarantee the coherence of the road network and state of the art; put forward the public interests, in particular within the framework of European standardization; bring an expertise on complex projects.
The Stra, producer of the state of the art

Within a very large scale, beyond the road and engineering structures, in the field of transport, intermodality, sustainable development, the Stra: takes into account the needs of project owners and prime contractors, managers and operators; fosters the exchanges of experience; evaluates technical progress and the scientific results; develops knowledge and good practices through technical guides, software; contributes to the training and information of the technical community.
The Stra, a work in partnership

The Stra associates all the players of the French road community to its action: operational services; research organizations; Scientific and Technical Network (Rseau Scientifique et Technique de l'Equipement RST), in particular the Public Works Regional Engineering Offices (Centres d'tudes techniques de l'Equipement CETE), companies and professional organizations; motorway concessionary operators; other organizations such as French Rail Network Company (Rseau Ferr de France RFF) and French Waterways Network (Voies Navigables de France - VNF); Departments like the department for Ecology and Sustainable Development The Stra regularly exchanges its experience and projects with its foreign counterparts, through bilateral co-operations, presentations in conferences and congresses, by welcoming delegations, through missions and expertises in other countries. It takes part in the European standardization commissions and many authorities and international working groups. The Stra is an organization for technical approval, as an EOTA member (European Organisation for Technical Approvals).
Technical guide
Laminated elastomeric bearings

Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
This document is the translation of the work "Appareils dappui en lastomre frett Utilisation sur les ponts, viaducs et structures similaires" published in March 2007 under the reference 0716.
This guide has been written by a working group comprising: Jean-Franois Derais, Stra/CTOA Michel Fragnet, Stra/CTOA Gilles Lacoste, Stra/CTOA Yvon Meuric, Stra/CTOA Ludovic Picard, DREIF Yves Picard, Consultant Denis Davi, Stra/CTOA The following provided advice and observations: M. Dauvilliers (DREIF/LROP) H. Gurard (EGIS-SCETAUROUTE) P. Kirschner (SECOA) C. Nant (ETIC) G. Wattiaux (ETIC) P. Xercavins (PX-DAM Consultants)
The drawings were prepared by Jean-Pierre Gilcart (Stra) and the CETE of Lyon.
This guide cancels and replaces the technical guide entitled "Appareils d'appui en caoutchouc frett Utilisation sur les ponts viaduc et structures similaires" of September 2000 (reference: F0032)
O=================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Contents
Forew ord ............................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 1 - Introduction ......................................................................................... 7 1.1 Why replace the 2000 guide? ......................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Scope and content .......................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Application of the standard NF EN 1337-3 in the French national context ..................................... 8 1.4 Scope .............................................................................................................................................. 8 1.5 Notations and symbols .................................................................................................................... 8 C h a p t e r 2 - C o m p o s it i on and description ................................................................ 9 2.1 General principles of composition ................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Component parts........................................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Manufacturing methods................................................................................................................. 14 Chapter 3 Behaviour and dime nsioning .............................................................. 15 3.1 - Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 The characteristics of bearings ..................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Dimensioning bearings.................................................................................................................. 19 3.4 Dimensioning verifications............................................................................................................. 22 C h a p t e r 4 D e s ig n p r i n c i p le s f or a structure w ith bearings .................................. 31 4.1 General points The regulatory context ....................................................................................... 31 4.2 - Dimensioning ................................................................................................................................. 33 4.3 Calculating horizontal force on support heads on a structure with standard bearings ................... 3 4.4 - Calculating horizontal force on a structure with sliding bearings ..................................................... 6 Chapter 5 - Controls ............................................................................................ 14 5.1 General principles ......................................................................................................................... 14 5.2 Production controls prior to CE marking ....................................................................................... 14 5.3 Controls on reception .................................................................................................................... 17 5.4 Controls on installation .................................................................................................................. 17 5.5 Controls of behaviour in service.................................................................................................... 18 Chapter 6 The pre-dimensioning and ve rification program.................................. 20 A p pe nd i x 1 C a lc u la t i on s f o r l a m i nat e d e l ast o mer ic be ar in gs f or use i n s e is m ic zones .................................................................................................................. 22 A1-1 Regulatory framework................................................................................................................. 22 A1-2 Design combinations and direction accumulation ...................................................................... 23 A1-3 - Dynamic calculation model.......................................................................................................... 24 A1-4 Using a behaviour factor............................................................................................................. 26 A1-5 - Recommendations....................................................................................................................... 26 A1-6 Further construction measures................................................................................................... 27 A p pe nd i x 2 T he d ur ab i l it y o f l a m i nat e d e l ast o mer ic be ar in gs w it h a slid i ng p la ne3 2 A2-1 The characteristic quantity of the functioning of a sliding bearing.............................................. 32 A2-2 Measures to be taken at the design stage.................................................................................. 32 A2-3 Measures to be taken at the manufacturing stage ..................................................................... 33 A2-4 Measures to be taken as part of the monitoring process ........................................................... 33
Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
A2-5 - Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 33 A p p e n d i x 3 - T a b le of dimensions ........................................................................ 34 A p p e n d i x 4 A s s i s it a n c e w it h d r a f t in g Pa r t ic u la r T e chnical Clauses (CCTP) ......... 36 A4.1 - Examples of clauses to be included in the chapter "quality of materials" ................................... 36 A4.2 - Examples of clauses to be included in the chapter "design principle....................................... 37 A4.3 - Examples of clauses to be included in the chapter "implementation" ....................................... 38 Bibliograph y .......................................................................................................... 40 General documents ................................................................................................................................ 40 Standards ............................................................................................................................................... 40 Bibliography specific to Appendix 1 ....................................................................................................... 41
Q================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Foreword
Bearings are important elements of a structure for which the notion of wear and durability is not inferior to that of the structure, as, in that case, they would be regarded as consumables. For this reason, particular care needs to be taken over their choice, quality, design and implementation. This is all the more true in that the cost of the product itself is disproportionate in comparison to that involved in interventions to raise the structure and repair the bosses: a ratio of 1 to 50 is considered the minimum. A study carried out by the Stra as to the causes of interventions on structures to repair bearings (of all types) revealed that that there were three completely equal origins: Defects arising from poor product quality (such as corrosion or de-bonding). Concerning this matter, the publication of the standard NF EN 1337 (after the French standards) regarding product specifications and CE marking for laminated elastomeric bearings are giving rise to improvement. Installation defects. Following the specifications of the guide "Environnement des appareils d'appui en caoutchouc frett" ("The environment of laminated elastomeric bearings" cf. Bibliography) is a sine qua non condition for improvements in this area. This guide does not cover installation. This is covered in the guide entitled "Environnement des appareils d'appui en caoutchouc frett ("The environment of laminated elastomeric bearings"). We do however stress the importance of including the specifications described in this document in Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP) and in the QAP (Quality Assurance Plans) and of ensuring their application. Problems arising from errors in dimensioning (a slide plate that is too short, an insufficient number of elastomeric laminations, insufficient plan dimensions, etc.). It is this third section that this guide intends to examine, as regards laminated elastomeric bearings. We would also like to highlight the importance of designing the deck, bearings and supports as an INDISSOCIABLE whole. It is from this perspective that the present guide has been drafted. Laminated elastomeric bearings (LEB) and pot bearings (PB) represent over 90 % of bearing used on bridges in France. Although at the extremities of the field of use, the reasons for choosing one type of bearing over another are quite obvious, they are less easy to discern in borderline cases. The choice of bearing type depends on a number of factors, including the load path, maximum rotation, horizontal displacement, durability, cost, the type of structure, the environment and structural arrangements. For this reason, it is difficult to determine the respective field of use of one method over another. For reactions of under 12 MN (calculated at ULS) on supports, laminated elastomeric bearings are wholly suitable. This value corresponds to plan dimensions of around 700 x 700 mm. Above 20 MN, pot bearings are preferable as they limit the bulk of the device. Between these two values, LEBs can be used, either by increasing the dimensions to 900 x 900mm for large structures, or by joining two smaller bearings. The latter solution is only easy to implement on box bridges and concrete slab bridges due to the space required for the bearings. They cannot easily be envisaged for girder bridges (composite or of prestressed concrete). However, in the event of large bearing rotations, LEBs may be suitable, but the thickness of the elastomer needs to be greatly increased, thus posing other problems. As regards horizontal displacement, the slide systems of PBs offer better quality and, therefore, higher durability. It is thus the displacement criteria that influence the choice. In any event, manufacturing constraints (mainly the size of presses) mean that the largest size of LEBs is currently limited to around 1000 x 1000 x 300mm as regards French manufacture (abroad, dimensions of 1200 x 1200 x 300mm can be reached). The cost of LEBs is lower than that of PBs. However, it must not be forgotten that the cost of bearings is a small percentage of that of the structure. In seismic areas, even for heavy load paths, LEBs are the preferred choice. In the absence of a fixed point, and taking into account the flexibility offered by LEBs, the overall behaviour of a structure in the event of moderate seismic activity is better. In the event of a strong earthquake, the LEBs would tear and replacing them would be less costly than for PBs.
`~=N=J=Introduction
1.1 Why replace the 2000 guide?
The guide that was published in 2000 was based on projected European standards or on those being drafted, which were, in any event, difficult to obtain directly from AFNOR. This explains the ambiguity of the document that was based on future standards at preparation stage, on structure design documents that had not been finalized either and on French standards regarding the verification of the bearing characteristics. This situation has now been clarified by the publication of all sections of the standard NF EN 1337 (except part 8 Guide bearings and blocked bearings) and the design standards (the Eurocodes used in this guide, at least). Furthermore, the publication of the sections of NF EN 1337 will, after the coexistence period (i.e. 31.12.2006), lead to the suppression of French standards on the same subject, in particular XP T 47.815. For these reasons, we deemed it necessary to revise the 2000 guide, to provide project designers with advice guidelines that take into account the most recent publications.
1.2 Scope and content

The aim of this guide is to explain the standards in force at the time of writing (cf. Bibliography). It gives additional information regarding these standards, in particular giving details of some important specifications for use on bridges. This guide includes the following: A brief description of this type of product and any equipment related to it. The main core regulations and standards. The dimensioning criteria to be found in the standards drafted by the CEN1. The principle of controls based on certification by the CE marking. Design methodology in a bridge project with examples of application. Information about the Stra NEOP programme with a preliminary design for this bearing. A series of appendixes completes the guide, including in particular: Appendix 1, giving information about the design of this bearing in seismic areas, based on the latest seismic standards. Appendix 2, focusing on the durability of laminated elastomeric bearings in conjunction with a slide plane. And appendix 4, giving examples of articles to include in Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP).
CEN: European Committee for Standardization
1.3 Application of the standard NF EN 1337-3 in the French national context

EN standards do not set all characteristics, leaving it up to each member country to specify them for their use on structures by means of a national application document. This application document is the subject of a technical information note issued by the Stra 2 (the content of which was partly drafted by the T47A Standardisation Commission). The contents of this document are not detailed here and readers are invited to consult it and read it in parallel with the standard.
1.4 Scope
The rules set out in this technical guide are for the use of Bearings composed of elastomeric plates. These rules are only applicable to Bearings made of at least two elastomeric laminations bonded by vulcanization to metal plates (although the standard authorizes the use of bearings composed of a single lamination between two coated plates) (type B of the NF EN 1337-3) and if required, completed by sliding elements 3 (type D or E of the NF EN 1337-3) Anti-slipping or anti-lifting elements 4 (type C of the NF EN 1337-3).
1.5 Notations and symbols

The notations used in this guide are those of the NF EN 1337-3 as regards the design of laminated elastomeric bearings. We draw the readers attention to this document, in particular to chapter 3. We have not copied out these notations and symbols in order to avoid any copy errors and also because we believe the reader cannot use this guide without having the standard to hand. The notations and symbols concerning seismic calculations are given in appendix 1. The notations and symbols pertaining to combinations of actions are those defined in the Eurocodes and can be found in chapter 4.
2 3 4
available for download on Stra sites cf. appendix 2 cf. chapter 2
U================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
`~=O=J=Composition and description

Readers interested in the background of these products, together with the manufacturing technology, design principles, durability and quality control, may like to consult the document entitled "Appareils d'appui en caoutchouc" (Rubber bearings), published in July 1994 by the AFPC in partnership with the Stra, cf. Bibliography).
2.1 General principles of composition

A laminated elastomeric bearing is a "block of vulcanized elastomer () reinforced internally by one or several steel plates, chemically glued (bonded) during vulcanization. (). Elastomer is a macromolecular material that regains its shape and initial dimensions approximately after being submitted to significant deformation under the influence of a low stress variation" 5.
Figure 2.1: typical composition of a laminated elastomeric bearing The base material is obtained by subjecting the raw material, mixed with various inert or reinforcing fillers, to a series of transformations. After treatment, the product is in the form of sheets a few millimetres thick. These are stacked with metal plates, which have previously been sanded and treated, in moulds, the dimensions of which match those of the product to be obtained. It is then compressed and vulcanized (by heating).
Figure 2.2: release from the mould on the press (photo SNAC) According to the amount of freedom authorized, a laminated elastomeric bearing is, as regards the elementary block, a mobile bearing. As well as the bearing rotations, displacements are accommodated in two directions. It is possible either to increase displacement capacity by adding a slide plane, or to prevent distortions using metal plates, thus making a fixed bearing. The scope of the standard (NF EN 1337-3, 1) specifies that only bearings of plan dimensions of under (1200 x 1200mm) are concerned.
NF EN 1337-3, 3.1
2.2 Component parts

2.2.1 - Composition
The various parts comprising a laminated elastomeric bearing are defined in figure 2.3.
Figure 2.3: typical composition of a type B bearing according to the standard NF EN 1337-3 (fig. 2)
2.2.2 The elastomeric material

Rubber used in the composition of bearings can be either natural or of vegetal origin, latex, in which case it is an isoprene polymer (polyisoprene or NR for "Natural Rubber" in the standard), or synthetic, in which case the compound is generally a chloroprene polymer (polychloroprene or CR pour "Chloroprene Rubber" in the standard. There are a number of formulas, which have market brand names, such as Neoprene (Du Pont of Nemours), Butachlor (Ugine), etc. Wha t are the criteria for choosing one o r ig in o ver ano ther? Natural rubber (with the appropriate formulation) provides good resistance to traction, excellent failure strain and performs well with dynamic loads and in the cold, although it does tend to crystallize. On the other hand, it is highly gas permeable, its resistance to oils and solvents is quite poor and its susceptibility to aging must be compensated by the use of antioxidant and anti-ozone6. France, along with many other European countries, has chosen polychloroprene which, among other qualities, provides excellent resistance to aging, a very low load-bearing creep rate and good tear resistance. This makes it perfectly suitable for the requirements of bearings. The scope of the standard ( 1) specifies that only rubbers described in 4.4.1 of the standard are covered. Certain short-term economic considerations may result in a decision to turn to natural rubber. This means taking a longterm risk on the performance of the bearing that is not justified by the difference in price in relation to the cost of change on a structure in service. This explains why the national application document of the standard NF EN 1337-3, only accepts polychloroprene (or CR) for use in France. As regards ozone resistance, the national application document of the standard NF EN 1337-3 ( 4.3.6) only accepted the single level intended for CR, which is suitable for service conditions on a bridge. For our part, we suggest that you do not define the material but, for bearings to be used on bridges and similar structures, we suggest setting a maximum ozone resistance specification (i.e. 50 ppcm). The minimum thickness of a sheet, in accordance with NF EN 1337-3 ( 5.3.2), may in no circumstance be under 5 mm, or over 25 mm.
cf. "Rubber bearings". 3.3.1. See Bibliography.
NM================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
2.2.3 Steel plates

These are systematically made of S 2357 steel or of steel with an equivalent minimum failure strain (cf. complement at 3.2.3). The thickness of the plates may in no circumstance be under 2 mm (NF EN 1337-3, 4.4.3.1).
2.2.4 Sliding elements that may be required

2.2.4.1 - Composition
The most commonly used configuration in France at the moment is described below, but there are other systems. These sliding elements include a PTFE8 perforated plate fixed on the top of the elastomeric bearing, either on the external elastomer coating (type D bearing according to NF EN 1337-3), or on an outside steel sheet (type E bearing according to NF EN 1337-3). A polished stainless steel sheet (the grade of which is defined in NF EN 1337-2, 5.4.1), connected to a higher S235 steel plate, slides onto the PTFE plate (NF EN 1337-3, 3.1.7). The slide sheet is a single piece of austenitic steel. For a thin austenitic steel plate, two methods are used to fix the stainless steel sheet onto the low carbon steel support plate. The first method involves cold gluing the stainless steel sheet by means of a resin film (epoxydic or other). It is advisable to request a screw or peripheral welding fixation, as shown in the diagram in figure 2.4. In the second method, the stainless steel plate and the support plate are attached by the interposition of a thin sheet of special high-hardness elastomer. The bonding of the complex is then obtained by vulcanization.
Figure 2.4: further lateral types of fixation on stainless steel slide plates
The upper part (or slide plate) can be fixed to the part of the structure in contact with the bearing. So as to follow displacements and to allow for checks during civil engineering inspections, these slide plates have a measuring rule. It is essential that the rule be positioned on the side where the inspector will probably take place. Furthermore, it is also highly recommended that the rules are set consistently within a same structure to ease operations. (cf. figure 2.5). To prevent them from being soiled during installation and service, these bearings must be fitted with a device that protects the slide plane (in all normal service circumstances). This device must be easily removable so that the bearing can be inspected and monitored. All these elements are defined in NF EN 1337-2, standardised through part 3.
7 8
NF EN 10025. The standard does not specify the part concerned, but it is parts 1 and 2. PolyTetraFluoro Ethylene or Teflon .
NN
Figure 2.5: an example of rule to monitor displacement (vertical bearing in an seismic-resistant stop) (photo Stra)
2.2.4.2 Horizontal force

Bearings fitted with sliding elements are designed to accommodate significant horizontal displacements. Horizontal force ranges from 3 to 8 % (for respective average pressure of 30 to 5 MPa) of vertical force. The bearing can always deform by compression and rotation. This type of bearing is very advantageous for the launch of the structure. The standard (NF EN 1337-3, 4.4.4) limits the use of type D sliding bearings (cf. figure 3.1) in cases of irreversible movements (creep, shrinkage, etc.). This limit does not extend to type E. The National Application Document regarding part 3 authorizes a wider use than in the provisional phase, but great care needs to be taken as regards the durability of this type of device and for use in service. Appendix 2 gives information about the durability of these devices and advice for their use.
2.2.4.3 Slide plate dimensions

There should be no hesitation in over-sizing the length of the slide plates, even though their dimensions are at ULS. This allows compensation for the many consecutive imprecisions regarding factory pre-settings, design hypotheses, the actual date of installation and, therefore, the temperature on installation. The text of the standard (cf. NF EN 1337-1, 5.4) is remarkably unclear, so the National Application Document needs to be consulted. This specifies that it should be interpreted as follows: "Displacements should be increased in both directions by 20mm. Furthermore, the minimum displacement to take into account is 50mm in the principle direction of displacement resulting from the structure".
2.2.5 Anti-slipping and anti-lifting devices

When there is a risk of slipping in a laminated elastomeric bearing (cf. NF EN 1337-3, 5.3.3.6, non-sliding condition), stops can be fitted. These devices must only stop the slipping, without preventing or hampering the deformations: compression, distortion and rotation. In particular, the stops must be in contact with a plate (or external reinforcement) the thickness of which must be at least equal to the height of the stop (type C bearings of NF EN 1337-3). In no case should the stop be placed on an elastomeric sheet (cf. figure 2.6).
Figure 2.6: the principle of an anti-slipping device
NO================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Anti-slipping bearings -with lugs (With type C bearings). NB: except in particular cases, lugs are only needed on one side. See also the device of figure 2.6. - glue-mounted (not shown) for low tangential forces (with type C bearings).
- with anchors.
- using chequered plates (for low tangential forces).
Limited distortion or blocked bearings
Anti-lifting system bearings
Figure 2.7: design drawings of "fixed" bearings The drawing of the bearing with the anti-lifting system, copied from the standard, raises the following points: the drawbars must allow for rotations and it is advisable to position them in the axis of this rotation. The device must not hinder any displacement. It should not therefore be copied as is. It may be necessary to avoid distortion of the bearings. This is the case, in particular, when a line of fixed bearings needs to be created. The laminated elastomeric bearings are then fitted with a rigid metal structure that prevents horizontal travel of the deck whilst allowing the compression and rotation of the bearing. Figure 2.7 gives several examples of devices that may be suitable. These are, however, devices that are not often used and should be avoided as a solution with a type C bearing is preferable.
NP
Figure 2.8: an example of a limited distortion or blocked bearing (photo Stra)
2.3 Manufacturing methods

In order to manufacture a fully coated laminated bearing, it has to be placed in a mould and only one size can be manufactured per mould. There are, therefore, as many moulds as there are sizes of bearing. So as to limit the number of moulds and to rationalize manufacture, it is therefore preferable to choose a bearing size that falls within a range, an example of which is given in NF EN 1337-3, table 3 and which offers the advantage for the project designer of typical dimensions that can facilitate the preliminary design. However, this presentation of a range in the form of a table does not comply with the spirit of the standard, the approach of which consists of justifying each bearing in accordance with the loads to which it is subject. This approach therefore clearly disfavours a standardisation of dimensions as has been the practice up to now. However, the absence of a standard range could pose problems for project designers who then have to work "blindly" in their repeated search for a bearing that satisfies the criteria they have defined. Indeed, as we will see in chapter 4, they have to define a bearing that suits and then proceed by iteration until they find the right dimension. They therefore need to know the main dimensions manufactured. This is why for information purposes, a table can be found, in addition to the table of the standard, that gives the most commonly used plan dimensions in France (cf. appendix 3). It is up to the project designer to check that the product conforms to the requirements of the standard. Moreover, large dimensions (over 700 x 700 mm) should be used with precaution as with these bearings, uniform stress distribution calls for particular care when creating bosses. For decks with high rotations, dimensions need to be chosen so that the b/a ratio is of between 1.5 and 2. For decks with high displacements, it is better to use square shapes (a = b). For structures with significant rotations in both directions, diskshaped is best, although the manufacture of this type of bearing is more costly and difficult.
NQ================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
`~=P==Behaviour and dimensioning

3.1 - Introduction
This chapter details the geometric and mechanical characteristics of laminated elastomeric bearings, together with the rules for dimensioning and verification. The behaviour of the bearings such as it is described in the following paragraphs is not enough to carry out a complete verification. Indeed, in a structure, the deck, bearings, piers and abutments form a system in which the various parts interact. A balance of the whole structure needs to be found, under the combined effect of horizontal loads and deformations due to temperature, shrinkage, creep, etc. The interactions between the structure and the bearing are dealt with in chapter 4 of this document. This chapter only deals with the performance and the dimensioning of the bearing itself, together with the contact areas with the structure. NF EN 1337-3 ( 5.3.2)9 applies to six types of bearing, as defined in the table in figure 3.1:
Figure 3.1: table showing the different types of laminated elastomeric bearings according to NF EN 1337-3
Henceforth in this chapter, the reference of the paragraph concerned from NF EN 1337-3 will be specified in brackets in bold italics.
NR
Readers are reminded that this guide only deals with bearings of type B to E. Type A bearings (single reinforcement) or type F (non reinforced or strip bearing) are not used in civil engineering structures.
NF EN 1337-3 defines the geometric characteristics of the most widely used bearings. On a plan view, bearings are square, rectangular or circular in shape, although elliptic and octagonal shapes are also tolerated. The rules given in this document are for rectangular bearings. Please consult the standard as regards other shapes. Among type B bearings (multi-plated and coated on all sides, cf. figure 3.1), the following can be distinguished, in accordance with NF EN 1337: a) type B bearings defined in table 3 NF EN 1337-3. They include n+1 metal plates and n elastomeric laminations of a constant thickness. Their perimeter is coated with elastomer at least 4 millimetres thick and the upper and lower faces with a nominal 2.5mm thickness of elastomer (with a 0. + 2 mm tolerance). b) other type B bearings that include "active external half-laminations (cf. the table in appendix 3 of this guide). These are different in that the upper and lower elastomeric coatings are thicker. These are no longer simple protection coatings, but rather a half-lamination, the thickness of which is taken into account in the calculations defined in article 5.3.3.1 of NF EN 1337-3. It is suggested that they are designated with the number of intermediate laminations, mentioning the two external half-laminations or the external coatings. This gives the following example of a bearing designation: a x b; n(ti + ts); 2 e e.g. 200 x 300; 2 (10 + 3); 2 x 5, 400 x 500; 4 (12 + 4); 2 x 6, 700; 5 (16 + 5); 2 x 8 for a circular bearing. Figure 3.2 summarizes the characteristics of these bearings defined in NF EN 1337-3. Type B defined in table 3 of the standard With e = passive coating Type B With e = a half-lamination (examples of plan dimensions in appendix 3)
e = 2,5 mm e = ti / 2 Tb ts ti
Tb = 3 (ti + ts) + ts + 5mm n = 3 intermediate laminations, assuming that the coatings are not part.
ts Tb
Tb = 2 (ti+ ts) + ts + 2 ti/2 n = 2, the half-laminations can be taken into account in the calculation.
ti
Figure 3.2: the characteristics of the bearings described in this chapter
NS================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
3.2 The characteristics of bearings

3.2.1 Geometric definition
The geometric definition of a type B bearing of NF EN 1337-3 ( 5.3.2) is given in figure 3.3, in which a, b, a', b are the dimensions of rectangular shaped bearings and D and D' are the diameters of circular bearings. a and a' always designate the smallest plan dimensions of the bearing if it is rectangular.
e ts Tb ti
a' , b' ou D' a , b ou D

Figure 3.3: the geometric definition of a bearing
> 4 mm
According to the n number of intermediate laminations, three thicknesses required for dimensioning can be defined: Total nominal thickness of the bearing: Total nominal thickness of the elastomer: Average total initial thickness of the shear elastomer, including the upper and lower coatings. Tb = n (ti + ts) + ts + 2 e Te = n ti + 2 e Tq = n ti + 2 e Tq = n ti if e > 2.5 mm if e 2.5 mm
Indeed, if the nominal thickness of the coating is higher than 2.5mm, it must be taken into account in the design. Below that, it can be disregarded (EN 5.3.3).* * The advantage of a coating lamination of between 0.5 and 0.7 times the intermediate lamination is to ensure the same functions as the intermediate laminations and to better adapt them to the surface defects on the supports, without deforming the nearby plates. A thin coating lamination cannot absorb translation or almost any rotation and any defect in the flatness of the support can lead to localised slipping.
3.2.2 The characteristics of elastomer

(EN 4.4.2) The main physical parameter of elastomer that is involved in the dimensioning of a bearing is its conventional shear modulus G. Unless specified otherwise, the nominal value G of the conventional shear modulus is de 0.9 MPa. It is this value that has to be introduced into calculations (cf. 1.3).
NT
Under dynamic effects, the standard recommends increasing the calculation value of the elastomer modulus (EN 5.3.3 note 2). Under the horizontal effect of operating loads10, we recommend a Gdyn modulus taken to be equal to 1.8 MPa in calculations. For seismic activity, please see appendix 1 of this document. There is a low temperature modulus G. In view of the climatic conditions of metropolitan France, it does not appear necessary to take it into account, as the National Application Document specifies. This would only be valid for ambient temperature of 25C and below, at which point the polychloroprene begins to crystallize. Some Nordic countries, Finland in particular, include a low temperature modulus G in their calculations, but only in regions with temperatures of below 30C.
3.2.3 The characteristics of internal plates

(EN 4.4.3.1) The thickness of the plates must equal or be above 2 mm. S235 steel must be used or steel with an equivalent failure strain (in this case, it is advisable to obtain a certificate from the manufacturer, certifying a failure strain at least equal to that of S235 steel). The yield strength to use in calculations is therefore 235 MPa (thickness of less than 16mm in NF EN 10025).
3.2.4 The characteristics of external plates

(EN 4.4.3.2) For type C bearings, the thickness of the external plates is 15mm for elastomeric laminations with a thickness of 8 mm and under, and 18 mm for thicknesses above. S235 steel or an equivalent is also used.
3.2.5 The characteristics of slide plates

(EN 4.4.4) The characteristics of sliding planes are given in NF EN 1337-2. Sliding systems generally consist of a stainless steel plate lying on a side of the bearing on which a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) sheet is bonded (cf. le 2.2.4 of this guide). These are type D and E bearings. The minimum thickness of the support plate is provided by the formula (EN 6.9.3): t b = Max 10 mm ; 0,04 a b 2 + b b 2 With a b and b b the width and length of the support plate in mm. The friction coefficient d of perforated PTFE steel is provided in table 11 of NF EN 1337-2. This table has been drawn up using the following formula (EN 1337 - 2 - Appendix B): 1,2 k max = 10 + p with k = 1 for austenitic steel (stainless steel) p contact pressure on the PTFE in MPa These values vary from 3 to 8 % according to usual contact pressure. Furthermore, the average pressure on the block (surface A) is limited to 30 MPa (for a modulus G of 0.9 MPa and k = 1, cf. 5.6 of NF EN 1337-3). It is specified that the values given are a function of p. For a given load path, the friction coefficient is calculated using the ULS stress. We would like to point out the notable variation of the friction coefficient in accordance with the compression stress on the PTFE. To simplify, the 2/3 corrective factor does not need to be taken into account, except in specially justified cases and for application in overseas departments and territories where the effective bearing temperature does not fall below - 5C.
10
For the vertical dynamic effects of operating loads, the modulus G should be used.
NU================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Verification of the deformation of slide plates (NF EN 1337-2 6.9.2) is only justified for difficult or specific applications (e.g. for type E bearings). In other cases, only the orders of magnitude need to be verified.
3.3 Dimensioning bearings

3.3.1 - Principles
The dimensioning principle defined in NF EN 1337-3 consists of justifying each bearing according to its loads. Consequently, the dimension tables (table 3 of the standard or the table in appendix 3 of this guide) are only starting points in the calculation of bearing dimensions and are only given, therefore, for information purposes. The rules for dimensioning and verification of the bearings are intended to restrict their total horizontal distortion at Ultimate Limit State, by the effect of vertical and horizontal loads and horizontal or angular deformations applied to the bearing. For type B bearings, NF EN 1337-3 differentiates between: Recommended size bearings, as defined in table 3 of NF EN 1337-3; Other types of bearings, in particular those with two external half-laminations. In compliance with NF EN 1337-3, four types of verification at Ultimate Limit State must be carried out for laminated elastomeric bearings of whatever type: Maximum total distortion of any point of the bearing must be restricted The thickness of the plates must be sufficient to resist the traction to which they are subjected The stability of the bearing must be ensured as regards rotation, buckling and sliding Actions exerted by the bearing on the rest of the structure must be checked (the direct effect of the bearing on the structure and the indirect effect due to deformation of the support).
3.3.2 Bearing behaviour

N.B: NF EN 1337-3 takes the external lamination into account in the calculation when its thickness is strictly over 2.5 mm. In practice, for France, the thickness of the external layers is often half of that of the internal laminations. There will therefore be maximum distortion on these internal laminations.
3.3.2.1 Behaviour under axial force
Fz
Under normal centred force Fz, a linear distribution of the distortion c is noted, linked to the shear in a layer of elastomer. Maximum distortion occurs at the middle of the large side b of the bearing. It is given by the formula (EN 5.3.3.2): N = 1,5 FZ c= G G Ar S
Fz
In this formula: G designates the conventional modulus of elastomer ( 3.2.2) with G = 0.9 MPa and Ar is the effective plan surface.
a
Figure 3.4: distortion of a bearing under axial force. To calculate Ar, the nominal lateral coating needs to be removed to obtain A1 (equal to the surface of plates A' reduced by the holes if there are any) and the horizontal deformations vx and vy need to be taken into account, that are caused by the horizontal force concomitant with the vertical force FZ.
NV
vx
a'
Figure 3.5: a surface reduced due to the effect of horizontal deformation.
We thus have
vy v avec A'= a'b' (if the plates do not have holes) A r = A' 1 - x a ' b'
The calculation of deformations vx and vy is relatively complex. As a first approach, we could often disregard the effect of vy and use the maximum value of vx. S is the form coefficient of the layer i in question:
avec l p = 2 (a '+b') et pour les feuillets des couches internes te = ti t e = 1,4 t i pour les feuillets des couches externes
For a rectangular bearing we have:
A' S= lp t e
The standard also gives the means of estimating the total deformation vZ due to a vertical force FZ (EN 5.3.3.7):
vz = Fz t i A' 1 1 5G S 2 + E d b 1
With Eb = 2000 MPa S1: the form coefficient of the thickest lamination A' = a' x b': surface of the plates
This formula can be simplified as follows: v c = Fz T0 / A [1 / (5 G S12) + 1 / E b] This, however, is not logical insofar as, in the presence of external laminations, it is said that Si should be applied instead of S of these external laminations in their settlement calculation. The following formula would be more rational: Fz t i 1 1 vz = 5G S 2 + E avec E b = 2000 MPa A' d i b
Let us remember that in this formula, S designates the form coefficient of lamination "i" and that, in the event of a halflamination, the value of S is worth 2/1.4 times that of the intermediate lamination. The values obtained with this formula are slightly lower than those of the standard, thus making for a safer verification of the rotation stability (Cf. 3.4.1.3 below) and limiting any losses in contact with the support under the effect of rotations. Generally speaking, settlements obtained with these formulas are far too high in relation to the actual behaviour of the bearing, if we disregard the adaptation movements between 0 and 3 MPa. As an example, during tests, variations in pressure of between 5 and 15 MPa gave the following settlements:
OM================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Settlements Dimensions 200 x 300; 2 (8 + 2); 2 x 4 300 x 400; 3 (10 + 3); 2 x 5 400 x 500; 4 (12 + 3); 2 x 6 during tests 0.5 mm 0.6 mm 0.75 mm following the formula in the standard 1.16 mm 1.49 mm 1.93 mm following the modified formula above 0.98 mm 1.32 mm 1.76 mm
The standard specifies that the vertical deformation is only more or less proportional to the load after an initial settlement that we can estimate to be 2 mm. This value appears too high, especially when positioned on metal plates. Besides, a close look at a number of settlement tests reveals a very wide dispersion of results and this dispersion is difficult to explain. In fact, the calculated settlement value according to the standard indicates the maximum value obtainable on a compliant bearing. In some tests, settlement values can be observed that are twice as small as those of the normative calculation up to 8 Mpa and above 15 Mpa, they can be 3 times less than the calculated value. Consequently, bearing in mind this incertitude (together with note 2 of 5.3.3.7 of NF EN 1337-3), to ensure that the loading on bearings on the same line is uniform, it is highly advisable to plan for a combined installation (cf. 3.4.1.3). In the event of hyperstatic and highly rigid structures, testing is recommended in order to estimate the actual deformations of the bearings.
3.3.2.2 Behaviour under a horizontal force

Under a horizontal force, a uniform distribution of the distortion q is noted, linked to the shear in the elastomer.
Fx
H
Fx
Under displacement vx or a horizontal force Fx, distortion is given by the formula (EN 5.3.3.3):
q =
vx F = x Tq G a b
q =tg
a
Figure 3.6: distortion of the bearing under a horizontal force In these formulas, the modulus G shall be taken as equal to 0.9 MPa for static loads and 1.8 MPa under dynamic effects (cf. 3.2.2). For simplification, for non-exceptional structures, displacements caused by wind are only considered at a static state. Furthermore, the project designer must compose the longitudinal and transversal forces vectorially, following the combinations of actions given in chapter 4 of this document (to obtain a force Fxy) when the case occurs.
ON
3.3.2.3 Behaviour under a horizontal axis rotation
Mt
The value of the distortion , under the effect of the rotations a et b of the perpendicular axis on sides a and b of the bearing, is given by (EN 5.3.3.4):
(a'2 a + b'2 b ) t i =
2
t3 i
Mt
The distribution of the distortions is given in figure 3.7.
a
Figure 3.7: distortion of the bearing under a horizontal axis moment The restoring moment Mt is obtained according to the rotation by (EN 5.3.3.7):
Mt= G a'5 b' n t 3 KS i
In this formula, is the axis rotation parallel to side b of the bearing and n represents the number of internal laminations. Ks is given in the following table (cf. NF EN 1337-3, table 4): b/a Ks 0.5 137 0.75 100.0 1 86.2 1.2 80.4 1.25 79.3 1.3 78.4 1.4 76.7 1.5 75.3 1.6 74.1 1.7 73.1 1.8 72.2 1.9 71.5 2 70.8 2.5 68.3 10 61.9 60
Figure 3.8: values of Ks for a rectangular bearing
The following approximate formula can also be used:
K s = 26,2 e
b 1, 2785 ln a
+60
3.4 Dimensioning verifications

3.4.1 Basic verification
3.4.1.1 Limiting distortion
Total distortion at any point of the bearing is limited at Ultimate Limit State (EN 5.3.3): = KL ( c + q + ) < 7 In this formula: KL is a coefficient equal to 1.00 in general. This coefficient can be extended to 1.5 in the case of railway structures under rolling loads only.
c, q and are the distortions calculated respectively under vertical force, horizontal force or displacements and deck rotations.
Moreover, the standard (EN 5.3.3.3) limits the distortion under horizontal force or displacements to 1: q < 1.
OO================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
This limitation concerns force and displacements of both short and long duration. Furthermore, the load cases to be considered include concomitant force and displacement in two perpendicular directions that need to be composed vectorially for this verification. It should be noted that there is no limitation for c alone or Fz (other than that regarding buckling).
3.4.1.2 - Traction in the metal plates

The plates must be at least 2 mm thick. The standard also requires the minimum thickness of the metal plates at Ultimate Limit State be verified. For bearings without perforations (not drilled), which have laminations of constant thickness ti, the minimum thickness ts of the plates is defined by (EN 5.3.3.5 simplifying the formula for this hypothetical case):
ts = m
with: Fz fy m
2,6 Fz ti Ar fy
Maximum applied vertical force, Yield strength of the steel of which the plates are composed (i.e. 235 MPa for S235 steel); Partial factor, the value of which is 1 in the National Application Document (cf. 1.3).
For bearings with varying thicknesses of elastomer layers or with plates that include holes, this formula is no longer valid and the standard should be consulted (EN 5.3.3.5, general formula). N.B: in cases where the bearings have high rotation requirements or are close to the buckling limit, it is advisable, for b'/a' < 1.24 ratios, to increase the thickness ts by 5 to 10 %.
3.4.1.3 Rotation limit condition

The rotation stability of the bearing is checked at Ultimate Limit State. The following needs to be verified (EN 5.3.3.6): ( a' a + b' b ) vz Kr with: a et b Kr Rotations of perpendicular axis on sides a and b of the bearing Coefficient equal to 3 The sum of the vertical deformations calculated as per paragraph 3.3.2.1 of this guide.
Let us not forget that rotations a and b must include installation defects. These depend largely on care taken over the installation and the precision of deformation calculations during installation, but also on the extent of homogeneity inside the bearing. Wherever possible, an installation method that combines the surfaces should be used, for example with a mortar bed, caulking or the deck concrete cast-in-place. NF EN 1337-3 ( 7.1.4) is not clear about the values to adopt for installation defects, or about the way to take them into account. The following nominal values are therefore suggested:

0.003 radian in the case of combining methods 0.010 radian for structures placed directly onto the bearings.
This installation defect needs to be added to the largest of the rotations, a or b.
3.4.1.4 Buckling stability

Buckling stability needs to be checked at Ultimate Limit State in the following conditions (EN 5.3.3.6): Fz 2 G a' S1 < Ar 3 Te
OP
This formula is to be applied with the maximum reaction of the basic combination that has the highest Fz/Ar ratio and with a modulus of 0.9 MPa.
3.4.1.5 Non-slip condition

The non-slip verification is carried out, in the absence of anti-slipping device, if (EN 5.3.3.6):
Fxy e Fz et Fz,Gmin Ar 3 MPa
with: Fz,Gmin Minimum reaction under permanent load The most unfavourable concomitant vertical and horizontal force reaction
Fz and Fxy
Friction coefficient between the bearing and the structure.
N.B: except in cases where the bearing never returns to a position of zero displacement (vxy =0), the surface Ar must be taken equal to A to check the condition m 3 MPa. For the calculation of Fxy, we vectorially compose the horizontal force coming from all the concomitant actions and combinations of actions presented in chapter 4 of this document. Fxy is therefore composed of permanents or variable force applied directly to the deck (wind and breaking affects) and permanent or variable force from imposed deformations or distortions (temperature, shrinkage, creep, difference in level, etc.). The coefficient e is imposed by the standard in most cases: 1,5 K f F e = 0,1 + avec m = Z (en MPa) m Ar
K f = 0,60 pour le bton K f = 0,20 pour les autres surfaces y compris mortier en rsine
N.B: attention is drawn to the fact that most special mortars are not considered to be resin mortars. This coefficient may however have values below those given above. This is the case, for example, with bearings placed on painted metal sheets or on certain resins.
3.4.1.6 Pressure on the contact planes

Although the standard does include verification of the contact pressure between the bearing and the structure, it only gives the principle, indicating that this pressure may not be uniform (EN 5.3.3.7), cf. table 4.4 in chapter 4. For a preliminary design, we could take the usual value of average stress on the surface of the plates of around 20 to 25 MPa at ULS (less for small blocks and a little more for large dimensions), it being understood that the final average stress will result from the overall formula of 5.3.3 of NF EN 1337-3. If there is a risk of heaving, the final stress should be recalculated. For large-size bearings, higher pressures are possible, as for other types of high-pressure bearings (pot bearings, for example). When designing the supports, it is essential to take into account the possibility of the load path spreading on its reduced surface. As regards bearings positioned on concrete bosses, the bosses and the pier crosshead can be checked at Ultimate Limit State, according to the rules in article 6.7 of Eurocode 2 (NF EN 1992-1-1). Stress on the concrete can be calculated by taking an evenly-loaded reduced surface and by taking into account not only the translation distortion, but also the rotation and any hardening of the elastomer according to the average pressure. A calculation example is given in 3.4.2 with the research method into possible heaving at support level.
OQ================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
In conclusion, the verifications to carry out at ULS, under basic combinations, are summarized in the table of figure 3.9. Verification Limitation of distorsion Traction in the plates ULS Basic combinations = KL (c + q + ) < 7 et q < 1
ts= 2,6 Fz ti Ar fy a + b' b ) Kr
Limit in rotation
vz
( a'
Buckling stability
Fz 2 G a' S1 < Ar 3 Te
Fxy e Fz et Fz,Gmin A' 3 MPa
Non-slip
Figure 3.9: synthesis of verifications to be conducted
3.4.2 Assessment of actual contact surfaces and pressure to be distributed in the supports
3.4.2.1 Experimental results
All limitations given by NF EN 1337-3 are based on a shear modulus deduced from pure shear tests. However, the behaviour of a bearing in simple compression is more complex. The modulus varies in different points of the elastomer and is not consistent in accordance with the stress applied. Rotation further complicates shear distribution. This could be the cause of a number of heavings that have been noted on bearings in situ, under the effect of rotations applied to the deck. Indeed, even with a correctly-sized bearing, extreme rotations may cause decompression higher than the effect of the centred vertical load on the edge of a bearing. This decompression may well cause deterioration in the bearings. Experimental studies11 have enabled limit heaving curves to be established according to the rotation and the compression = Fz / A. These curves are given in figure 3.10, to illustrate the phenomenon observed in relation to the theoretical calculation. They justify the use of an adjustment coefficient Ka which represents the relation between the distortion due to compression c and distortion due to rotation , when heaving occurs. In theory, this coefficient is 1.00, but experience has shown that it can vary between the two values Ka min and Ka max (the maximum value Ka max varies from 2 to 2.75 respectively for an average pressure Fz/Ar of 0 to 50 MPa). As explained in 3.3.2.1 (as well as in note 2 of 5.3.3.7 of NF EN 1337-3), the wide dispersion of test results only allows for an approximate assessment of the minimum contact surface using calculation.
11
In particular tests carried out at as part of research at the LROP (West Paris Regional Laboratory).
OR
m = Fz / A r (MPa) 50
= F z / A' K a max en fonction de m Courbe scuritaire reprsentative des essais compression-rotation la limite du soulvement
K a min
40
30 m = 23,84 20
Limite normative
10 - Tassement - Possibilit de rotation sans soulvement K a max = n s 1

valeur scuritaire d'aprs les essais
K a max = 2,47
thorique
Figure 3.10: compression-rotation behaviour prior to heaving. Determination of the adjustment factor Ka max.
3.4.2.2 The assessment method proposed

3.4 .2.2.1 - Introduction The standard stipulates verifying that the average stress on the reduced surface is compatible with the strength of the base materials. This justification is sufficient for materials other than concrete or mortars. Regulations involving concrete (such as Eurocodes and BAEL) consider a more complex verification, comprising the diffusion of a force uniformly distributed over a reduced contact surface. In accordance with these regulations, it is therefore advisable to check the uniform contact pressure and the possibility of this force dispersing into the mass, and to design the thickness and the density of the plate steel. We propose the carrying out of a further, more precise, assessment of contact surfaces between the bearing and its support. This method is a security calculation of the minimum contact surface using a Ka max coefficient given by figure 3.10. It takes into account the interactions between the form coefficient, distortion, settlement and the restoring moment of the standard. As all these relations have been simplified compared to the exact calculation model12, there is not a perfect consistency between all these relations and it cannot therefore be claimed to be a particularly rigorous calculation. The aim was above all to find a simple method (without iterations) to obtain the order of magnitude of the pressure to be distributed on the supports and to determine any contact loss of the elastomeric block in the case of a production with maximum settlement stiffness. The calculation to determine the surfaces submitted to uniform pressure is made in accordance with the informative appendix A of NF EN 1337-2. The simplified pressure diagrams are shown in table 4.4 of chapter 4.
12
cf. theories of F. Conversy and M. Topaloff and notes of J. Rajade
OS================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
3.4 .2.2.2 The design p rincip le for determin ing th e unifo rm p ressure and a possib le risk of h ea v ing (N.B: for simplification, only one rotation a of the axis parallel to side b is envisaged). Calculation according to the standard of the distortion criteria, Calculation according to the standard of the pressure m on the surface Ar, Determination of Ka max according to m (cf. figure 3.10), Calculation of the restoring moment, taking into account the maximum stiffness of the elastomer:
Mt =
G a'5 b' K a max n' t 3 K S i
If the 2 coating laminations are active, take n = n + 2 (e/ti)3, if not, take n' = n number of internal laminations. If the installation is combined, take = a 0.003. The value 0.003 rad corresponds to the "internal" precision of combined laying, a feature present in observations made during unsticking tests. Otherwise, take for the theoretical ULS value of calculations, increased by the installation precision (to be multiplied by 1.35 to obtain a ULS value). Calculation of the off-set of the result of the forces: excmax = Mt/Fz. a) If the value excmax is below a/6, they is no risk of heaving. There may however be contact loss without any real unsticking in the event of distortion coming from the displacement vx.
In this event, by simplifying, the value of the uniform pressure on the most stressed support is: unif = Fz / Aunif That is, on a surface of uniform pressure, Aunif = (a - 2 excmax - vx ) b The surface thus defined is that which should be taken into account for the diffusion of force in the supports (cf. table 4.4 of chapter 4). b) If the value excmax is above a/6, there is a risk of heaving.
In this case, an approximate calculation needs to be made of a coefficient Krs of reduction in surface contact by rotation using compression and rotation distortion values with the formula:
c
K rs =
3
K a max
(value still < 1)
represents the rotation distortion under an angle . The factor Ka max is given is the following table (as well as in figure 3.10): m (MPa) Ka max m (MPa) Ka max 0 - 10 2.00 32.5 2.62 12.5 2.05 35 2.64 15 2.17 37.5 2.67 17.5 2.29 40 2.69 20 2.38 42.5 2.71 22.5 2.44 45 2.72 25 2.50 47.5 2.74 27.5 2.55 50 2.75 30 2.58
Figure 3.11: table giving the values of adjustment factor Ka max according to the average stress m = Fz/Ar. The value of the new reduced surface is Krs (a - vx) b, from which m = Fz/Krs (a - vx) b and the minimum surface of uniform distribution is worth 2/3 of the preceding, therefore a uniform pressure of: unif = 3 Fz / 2 Krs (a - vx) b = 1.5 m The surface 2/3 Krs (a - vx) b is that which should be taken into account for the diffusion of force in the supports (cf. table 4.4 of chapter 4). In fact, we advise against the use of bearings in partial unsticking position under maximum loads. However, a contact loss of around 10% in service under basic combinations can be tolerated for small and medium-sized bearings. Under minimal loads, or in a provisional phase, a slightly higher unsticking can be envisaged. Obviously, the possibility of load diffusion in the supports will be checked.
OT
It is always preferable to add a lamination, so long as the non-buckling condition is still observed. N.B: in the case of a rotation in both directions of the bearing, the reduced surface in calculated in 2 steps, using the same method.
3.5 Layout on supports

3.5.1 In a single bearing line, bearings must be of the same type (susceptible of having, in particular, the same settlement), although their translation possibilities do not necessarily have to be the same (figure 3.12 & 3.13). 3.5.2 Lengthwise, it is inadvisable to juxtapose several bearings that are intended to form a single load transfer point (upper part of figure 3.12). This restriction does not apply to split bearings, where the distance between the axis is generally around 2m or above.
Figure 3.12: examples of authorized and highly inadvisable layouts lengthwise.
N.B: in the above example, this layout makes rotations difficult, which should be taken into account in the design.
Figure 3.13: examples of authorized and highly inadvisable layouts transversally.
OU================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
3.5.3 Crosswise, several bearings that are intended to form a single point of support can be juxtaposed (figure 3.12 upper part). These bearings must be identical in composition and size. It must be remembered that such layouts should be justified, taking into account in particular rotations resulting from installation defects that are likely to exist crosswise. Generally speaking, it is inadvisable to place bearings that do not have the same dimensions perpendicular to the same point of support, due to differences in stiffness (figure 3.12). In the case of a skew bridge, with a number of girders, it is generally preferable to lay in the same line identical bearings, the size of which corresponds to that of the most stressed bearing, but paying attention to the minimum stress of the least stressed bearing in order to avoid slipping. 3.5.4 When bearings exert high compression stress on the supports, special precautions need to be taken. When the supports are made of reinforced concrete, allow for a minimum clearance of 10 to 15 cms in order to ensure correct stress distribution, the installation of the plates and their anchorages (figure. 3.14). In all cases, the recommendations relating to reinforced concrete constructions should be followed. 3.5.5 Care should be taken to position, insofar as is possible, the lower face of the bearing above the highest known water level or the hundred-year flood. 3.5.6 Bearing markings The position on the structure, the size and direction of any pre-settings, together with the installation direction must be clearly indicated on the bearings. 3.5.7 Replacing bearings In the case of a change of bearings on a bridge in service, as with any repair, when a replacement bearing is sized, this sizing will be a compromise between the calculation rules of the present document and the possibilities on the existing structure (available height, plan dimensions, etc.). To assess the adjustments to the present rules, contact the design department of the technical network offices.
Figure 3.14: an example of a construction layout, highlighting the necessity of plating perpendicular to the jacking location.
OV
`~=Q==Design principles for a structure with bearings

4.1 General points The regulatory context
The design principles for laminated elastomeric bearings have been outlined in the previous chapter. However, a certain number of measurable variables - deformations and longitudinal force in particular arise from an interaction between the bearings and the structure due to the flexibility of the supports. The exact dimensioning of a bearing therefore requires the dimensions to be pre-determined prior to introducing the characteristics of flexibility (vertical, horizontal and rotation) throughout the structure (deck and piers) in order to obtain the force and horizontal displacements that allow for verification that the dimensioning correctly respects the limits set out in the previous chapter. If it is not the case, iteration is neccessary. In NF EN 1337-3, the calculation of bearings is only made at Ultimate Limit State. Combinations to be used are therefore basic combinations in which, aside from permanent action, actions occur that are due to road loads, the effects of temperature (uniform and thermal gradient) and the wind. These verifications should be completed by accidental combinations if the piers of the structure are likely to suffer from impacts from boats or trucks and combinations under seismic actions if the structure is subject to these. Finally, in some specific cases, other verifications should be carried out, for example, for a beam laid during construction on its definitive bearings. For the calculations given hereafter, we have used the combinations provided by the following texts: NF EN 1991-1-5: this standard specifies the values to be used for uniform temperature actions TN and thermal gradient actions TM. It also specifies the way in which these actions should be combined to account for their simultaneity and obtain the characteristic overall effect Tk Appendix A2 of NF EN 1990: this appendix defines the combinations to be used in particular for the calculations of supports and bearings. Firstly, we can apply the basic combinations given in table 4.1:
N + 1.35 {UDLk +TSk + q fk,comb} + 1.5 min{FW* ; 0.6 FWk} + 1.35 {UDLk + TSk + q fk,comb } + 1.5 {0. 6 Tk} + 1.35 gr1b + 1.35 gr2 1.35 Gk,sup + Gk,inf + P + S + C + 1.35 {gr3 ou gr4} + 1.5 {0.6 Tk} + 1.35 gr5 + 1.5 FWk + 1.5 Tk + 1.35 { 0.4 UDLk + 0.75 TSk + 0.4 q fk,comb} 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4
(1)
Table 4.1: list of basic combinations
(1) including braking
PN
In the calculation example, to simplify, we will only consider the UDL, TSk and qfk loads, together with the braking loads, which give table 4.2.
N + 1.35 {UDLk + TSk + q fk,comb } + 1.5 {0. 6 Tk} 1.35 Gk,sup + Gk,inf + P + S + C + 1.35 gr2 + 1.5 Tk + 1.35 {0.4 UDLk + 0.75 TSk + 0.4 q fk,comb} 2 4 8
Table 4.2: the combinations chosen for the example Horizontal force that intervenes in the preceding combinations is to be calculated using the following methods: For braking: NF EN 1991-2 defines the breaking force to be applied to the deck as a fraction of the maximum load that can be put on the busiest lane of the load model 1 (NF EN 1991-2 4.4.1). These fractions are 10% for UDL distributed load and 60% for TS concentrated loads. If we take a class 2 structure, the main lane of which is 3 metres wide, the total braking force, in characteristic value, for a deck of length L is given by:
H K = 324 +1,89 L with L in metres and HK in kN.

The breaking force varies from around 340 to 400 kN for smaller structures 10 to 50 metres long and reaches the maximum value of 900kN for structures 350 metres long between expansion joints. This value is far higher than those normally used in former regulations (300kN for the braking of a Bc truck, for example). As regards structures on laminated elastomer, the breaking force is spread over all the deck bearings, which should not cause problems for the pier reinforcements. However, for large structures with fixed bearings that take nearly all the horizontal force, the sizing of the piers can be complicated with such high breaking values. If the structure has high, flexible piers, it is advisable to have several fixed bearings. Otherwise, the fixed bearing should be put on a short pier, or even on an abutment, which may lead to difficulties in sizing the expansion joints (and the slide plates) on the abutment located at the other end of the structure. This maximum breaking force will most probably be reduced in the National Annex as NF EN 1991-2 allows for this. The maximum breaking force could then be brought down to 500 kN, except if the structure carries military loads that comply with the STANAG (Char Mc 120) standardisation agreements. For thermal force: The effects of temperature are defined in section 4 of NF EN 1991-1-5. Temperature differences Te, max and Te, min in characteristic values are to be calculated according to the material from which the deck is made and the region in which the structure is built. These temperatures are to be determined using maps supplied in the National Annex 13 of NF EN 1991-1-5. In the meantime, the following values, found is the National Annex, can be used:
Te, min Deck material Brittany Provence Cte d'Azur Centre North South-West East - Alps -20 C -20 C -30 C Concrete -10 C -15 C Composite -10 C -15 C Steel -20 C -25 C Concrete Te, max Composite Steel
40 C
45 C
55 C
Temperature variations resulting from these maximum and minimum temperatures can be calculated according to a temperature T0 which is taken as equal to 10 C in the absence of any specification on the project. To calculate the positioning of bearings or their slide plates, NF EN 1991-1-5 recommends that a supplement be added to this temperature variation range. This supplement is 20 C, or 10 C if the installation temperature is specified. The
13
At the time of writing, the National Appendix is being updated in view of future publication.
PO================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
interpretation that we give to this recommendation is that if the bearing is loaded at a temperature close to + 10C (equilibrium temperature), the supplement will be 10C. The coefficients of expansion provided for in the Eurocode are 1 x 10-5/C for concrete decks and 1.2 x 10-5/C for steel bridges (NF EN 1991-1-5 Appendix C). For decks of composite structures, NF EN 1994-2 specifies in paragraph 5.4.2.5 (3) that this coefficient must be taken as equal to 1.2 x 10-5/C for the calculation of expansion, and 1 x 10-5/C for the calculation of thermal gradients. We should also specify, even though the Eurocodes do not indicate it explicitly, that the calculation of forces distribution in the various bearings, and therefore the forces in the piers, should be carried out using the instantaneous modulus of concrete.
4.2 - Dimensioning
4.2.1 - Introduction
The best way to understand the procedure for calculating the dimensions of bearings is to use an example (which is not a real case and is only used to illustrate the procedure). We shall consider the dimensioning of laminated elastomeric bearings of a structure made of prestressed concrete cast-inplace (PSI-DP). The structure in question has 3 spans and an overall length of 62 m. The width of the slab is 12.30 m for a thickness of 0.90 m.
Figure 4.1: lengthwise section of the structure Each bearing line has two bearings. The forces and deformations imposed are summarized in table 4.3 (forces for a single bearing to basic ULS for the abutment C0. These forces are the result of a general dimensioning calculation of the structure (a computer calculation completed by manual notes that supposes a uniform distribution of forces on each bearing in a same line).
PP
V (MN)
(10 rad)
-3
Vx* (m)
Hx (MN)
Comb N
Maxi 1.35 Gsup + Gmin + S + C + 1.35 LMcara + 1.5 (0.6T) Mini Maxi 1.35 Gsup + Gmin + S + C + 1.35 gr2 + 1.5 (0.0T) Mini Maxi 1.35 Gsup + Gmin + S + C + 1.5 T + 1.35 LMfreq Mini Gmin (at service start date of the bearings)
4.50 0.71 3.75 0.79 3.82 0.75 0.89
5.7 3.3 4.9 1.8 6.7 3.3
0.070 0.068 0.061 0.059 0.080 0.078
0.055 0.055 -
2 2 bis 4 4 bis 8 8 bis 9
N.B:
S refers to shrinkage, C to creep, P to pre-stressing. breaking force (Hx).
Vx* refers to displacement without the effect of
Table 4.3: calculated force and deformations The following calculations correspond to the recommended procedure for dimensioning a bearing.
4.2.2 The area of the bearing

Except in the case of particular recommendations (for example, provisional bearings of a launched bridge) and subject to added justifications, the average compressive stress must be between 20 and 25 Mpa on the surface A' following the dimension of the bearing. In our example, we are taking a value from the upper end of the range: 25 MPa. For the maximum vertical reaction (combination n 2 of table 4.3), we therefore obtain: A' >
4,50 25
= 0.1800 m2, that is, 1800 cm2
4.2.3 The net height of the elastomer

The generally predominant condition is that of q linked to maximum horizontal displacement. This is essentially due to the displacement imposed by the uniform temperature on the structure, as well as, in some cases, displacement due to the breaking force. We therefore have combinations n 4 and 8 of table 3 to check: q = Combination n 4 of table 4.3:
vx Tq
with
vx = v1 + v2
v1 = maximum horizontal displacement due to temperature and shrinkage. v2 = maximum horizontal displacement due to breaking. vx = v 1 + v2 = v +
1
H x x Tq 2G a b
= 0,061 +
0,055 Tq 2 x 0,9 0,1800
= 0.061 + 0.170 Tq
from which Tq 0.073 m
PQ================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Combination n 8 of table 4.3:
v1 = maximum horizontal displacement due to temperature and shrinkage. v2 = 0 vx = v1 = 0.080 m from which Tq 0.080 m For information, combination n 2 of table 4.3 gives us: Tq 0.070 m
We can choose 6 intermediate laminations of 12mm and 2 coatings of 6 mm, i.e. Te = 84 mm.
4.2.4 Plan dimensions

We can thus chose a bearing from the product range available, following the minimum surface given in 4.2.2, but preserving a minimum average pressure of 3 MPa under minimum permanent load (combination n 9 of table 3). We thus determine a maximum surface: The dimensions are therefore: 350 x 400 400 x 500 400 x 600 450 x 600 500 x 600 A'
0,89 3
= 0.2967 m2 , that is 2967 cm2
A' A' A' A' A'
= = = = =
0.1326 0.1911 0.2301 0.2596 0.2891
m2 m2 m m m
(not chosen because insufficient: A' < 0.18) (not chosen for this example) chosen
N.B: the surface A' is calculated taking into account a total coating of 2 x 5 = 10 mm. A bearing is generally chosen that is rectangular in shape, and with the smallest side a, parallel to the longitudinal axis of the structure, so as to allow maximum rotation (a < b). These leads to the choice of a bearing of 400 x 600. That is, with values a' = 390 mm b' = 590 mm and A= 2301 cm.
0,055 0,084 2 x 0,9 0,2301
The new total displacement calculation for combination n 4 (with actual A) is: v1 = 0,061 m v2 = = 0,011 m
vx = v1 + v2 = 0.061 + 0.011 = 0.072 m We therefore choose vx = max(0.070; 0.072; 0.080) = 0.080 m (combination n 8) Ar = The bearing is suitable. For information, combinations n 2, 4 and 8 of table 4.3 give us: Ar (comb 2) = 0.1888 m Ar (comb 4) = 0.1875 m Ar (comb 8) = 0.1829 m2 (see the example above)
0, 080 2 2 ( 0, 2301) 1 = 0.1829 m > 0.1800 m 0, 39
PR
4.2.5 Buckling stability

Once the plan dimensions and the height of the elastomer have been determined, it is important to check the stability of the bearing as regards buckling. The form coefficient, for the thickest lamination, is: S1 = S =
0,39 x 0,59 a' b' = = 9.783 2 t (a' + b' ) 2 x 0,012 ( 0,39 + 0,59 )
The value of the vertical force is: Vmax = 4.50 MN corresponding to combination n 2 of table 4.3. (N.B: the combination of the maximum vertical load is not always preponderant). Average pressure of m =
Vmax Ar
4, 50 Ar
= 23.835 MPa
with Ar = 0.1888 m
The total thickness of the elastomer is Te = 7 x 0.012 = 0.084 m (Te was given in chapter 3). limit pressure lim = from which
2 x 0,39 x 0,9 x 9,783 2 a' G S1 = = 27.253 MPa 3 Te 3 x 0,084
lim = 27.253 MPa > m = 23.835 MPa
condition checked
If this condition has not been checked, in particular due to the significant height of the elastomer needed to take the longitudinal displacement, sliding bearings or larger surface bearings should be used. For information, combinations n 4 and 8 of table 4.3 give us respectively: Ar = 0.1875 m m = 19.997 MPa Ar = 0.1829 m m = 20.886 MPa The preceding condition has been checked for these two combinations. lim = 27.253 MPa lim = 27.253 MPa
4.2.6 Respecting the deformation limit

We then need to check the total elastomer deformation limit for the various load cases: Case n 1 Maximum vertical force with displacement due to thermal effects (combination n 2 of table 4.3). cd + qd + d < 7 cd =
1, 5 4, 50 1,5 Fz = = 4.061 G Ar S 0, 9 0,1888 9, 783
With S = S1 as the verification is made on the thickest internal lamination. vx = 0.070

2
qd =
0,39 x 0,0087 x 0,012
0, 070 0, 084
= 0.833
2 x 6 x 0,012 + 2 x 0,006
= 0.735 ( = 0.0087 = 0.0057 + 0.0030 installation defect) condition checked
from which cd + qd + d = 4.061 + 0.833 + 0.735 = 5.629 < 7
Case n 2
Vertical force with displacement due to thermal effects and breaking (combination n 4 of table 4.3).
PS================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
cd =
1, 5 Fz
1, 5 3, 75 0, 9 0,1875 9, 783
= 3.407
G Ar S
vx = 0.072
2
qd =
0, 072 0, 084
= 0.857
d =
0, 39 0, 0079 0, 012 2 6 0, 012 + 2 0, 006

3
= 0.668 ( = 0.0079 = 0.0049 + 0.0030 installation defect) condition checked
from which Case n 3
cd + qd + d = 3.407 + 0.857 + 0.668 = 4.932 < 7
Vertical force with max. rotation (combination n 8 of table 4.3).

1, 5 Fz G Ar S
cd =
1, 5 3, 82 0, 9 0,1829 9, 783
= 3.558
0, 080 0, 084
vx = 0.080
2
qd =
= 0.952
d =
0, 39 0, 0097 0, 012 2 6 0, 012 + 2 0, 006

3
= 0.820 ( = 0.0097 = 0.0067 + 0.0030 installation defect)
from which
cd + qd + d = 3.558 + 0.952 + 0.820 = 5.330 < 7 condition checked
4.2.7 Rotation stability

We then ensure that the rotation stability is checked on the bearing. The determining load assumption is generally that which gives the maximum rotation. In our case this is combination n 8 of table 4.3. max = 6.7 x 10-3 that is, with the initial rotation defect of 3 x 10-3, a value of a = 9.7 x 10-3 for Vmax = 3.82 MN, we calculate the settlement of 7 laminations of 12 mm. Theoretical settlement: (with the form coefficient for a 12 mm lamination, S1 = 9.783)
vz =
1 1 Fz ti 1 1 3,82 x 7 x 0,012 + = 0.00393 m, that is, 3.93 mm 5GS 2 + E = A' 0,2301 b 5 x 0,9 x 9,783 2000 1
2
Rotation stability value:

a 'a + b 'b Kr
vc =
0,390 x 0,0097 + 0,590 x 0,0 3

1
= 0.00126 m, that is, 1.26 mm
Fz t i A'
1 5G S
2 1
Eb
a 'a + b 'b Kr
condition checked
PT
For information, combinations n 2 and 4 of table 4.3 give us respectively: Vz = 4.63 mm

a 'a + b 'b Kr
= 1.13 mm
Vz = 3.86 mm
a 'a + b 'b Kr
= 1.03 mm
The preceding condition has been checked.
4.2.8 - Verifying the non-slip condition

We also need to check the non-slip condition, which, generally speaking, presents no difficulties. It is therefore the braking load assumption, combined with the uniform temperature that is in principle determinant under Vmin. In our case it is combination n 4 bis of table 4.3.
0,059 2 Ar = (0,2301) 1 = 0.19529 m 0,39
NB: the value 0.07 is obtained by adding V1 (0.059 of table 4.3) and V2 (0.011) calculated for combination 4 of 4.2.4. min =
Vmin Ar
0,79 = 4.187 MPa 0,1887
e = 0.1 +
1, 5 K f
= 0.1 +
1,5 0,6 = 0.315 4,187
(Kf = 0.6 for concrete)
Fx = (
0, 059 0, 084
x 0.9 x 0.39 x 0.59) + 0.055 = 0.200 <
e Fd = 0.315 x 0.79 = 0.249 MN
Condition checked For information, combinations n 2 bis and 8 bis of table 4.3 give us respectively: Ar = 0.1900 m Ar = 0.1841 m min = 3.737 Mpa min = 4.074 Mpa e = 0.341 e = 0.321 Fx = 0.168 MN e Fd = 0.242 MN Fx = 0.192 MN e Fd = 0.241 MN
The preceding condition has been checked.
4.2.9 Plate dimensioning

The condition to be checked for the plates is ts
2, 6 Fz t i
where 2.6 ti = Kp (t1+t2) (Cf. NF EN 1337-3 for S235 steel
Ar f y
plates, with an yield strength of fy = 235 MPa). We then arrive at the value of minimum thickness, generally speaking, under maximum vertical force: ts =
2, 6 4, 50 0, 012 0,1888 235
= 0.00316 m
For a bearing of 400 x 600, we will choose 4 mm thick plates.
PU================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
4.2.10 Determining pressure on supports

Important: in order to highlight the various pressures, the rotation has been artificially increased.
4.2.10.1 A fully compressed bearing

Verification of an elastomer block: 400 x 600; 6 (12 + 4); 2 x 6 Combination to be checked: Fz = 4.500 MN vx = 0.070 m Results of bearing verifications: S = 9.783 Hxy = 0 A= 0.2301 m2 vy = 0 b = 0
a = 0 .015 rad
2
Ar = 0.1888 m m = 23.84 MPa
Distorsions:
c = 4.061 q = 0.833 < 1 = 1.268 t = 6.162 < 7

ts = 3.16 < 4 mm vz = 4.64 > 1.95 mm m = 23.84 < 27.25 MPa Ka max = 2.47
Plating Rotation stability Buckling stability
= a 0.003 as the faces are presumed to be combined n' = n + 2 (6/2)3 = 6 + 0.25 = 6.25 Mt = 2.47 [0.9 (0.015 0.003) x 3905 x 590)] / (6.25 123 75.3) = 174.6 MN.mm excmax = Mt / Fz = 174.6 / 4.500 = 38.8 mm The uniform pressure surface is a rectangle: 6 excmax = 232.8 < a = 390 mm OK. No risk of heaving
a = 390 ( 38.8 2) 70 = 242 mm b = 590 mm, do Aunif = 143013 mm2
The intensity of the pressure unif is 4500000/143013 = 31.47 Mpa The new average pressure is distributed according to a triangular diagram on a width a: a = 242 x 1.5 = 363 mm, that is, a surface of 363 x 590 and an average pressure of 4500000/363 x 590 = 20.98 MPa < 27.253 MPa (non-buckling condition).
PV
4.2.10.2 The case of a partial unsticking

Taking the same assumptions, but with a rotation a = 0 .024 rad (that is, = 0.021): Results of bearing verifications: Ar = 188800 mm2 m = 23.84 MPa
Distorsions
c = 4.061 q = 0.833 < 1 = 2.028 = 1.775 for = 0.021 t = 6.922 < 7

ts = 3.16 < 4 mm vz = 4.64 > 3.12 mm m = 23.84 < 27.253 MPa Ka max = 2.47
Plating Rotation stability Buckling stability
Mt = 2.47 [0.9 (0.024 0.003) 3905 590] / (6.25 123 75.3) = 305.6 MN.mm excmax = Mt / Fz = 305.6 / 4.500 = 67.9 mm Krs = ( c / Ka max: 6 excmax = 407.4 < a = 390 mm NO
)1/3 =
( 4.0601 / 2.47: 1.775)1/3 = 0.975
(A heaving risk on around 2.5 % of the surface, without taking into account the horizontal displacement) The uniform pressure surface is a rectangle: a = 2/3 Krs ( a - vx ) = 2/3 0.975 (390 70) = 208 mm b = 590 mm, do Aunif = 122705 mm2
The intensity of the pressure unif is 4500000/122705 = 36.67 MPa The new average pressure is distributed according to a triangular diagram on a width a: a = 208 1.5 = 312 mm, that is, a surface of 312 590 and a pressure of 4500000/312 x 590 = 24.45 MPa < 27.25 MPa The buckling stability is thus verified for the most critical face of the bearing. If this was not the case, we would need to recheck this condition, making the average of the average stresses on the 2 interfaces. One of the interfaces is not subjected to any decompression, the other can be subject to heaving on the width a, de (390 312) = 78 mm, that is 23.6 % of the interface surface. By adding a lamination, there remains only a loss of contact that is mainly due to horizontal movements as shown by the study of the previous case. If 2 laminations are added, the buckling stability is not respected. A bearing 450 600; 5 (16 + 4); 2 8 meets the requirements of loads in this case without any risk of heaving and with the least pressure on the interfaces.
QM================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Table 4.4: the breakdown of pressure diagrams according to the type of load
42 ===============Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
4.3 Calculating horizontal force on support heads on a structure with typical bearings
4.3.1 General points
As was mentioned above, the horizontal force exerted on the deck (such as breaking and wind) depends on the characteristics of the supports themselves. In particular, if there is dissymmetry, this force is not distributed identically, which can be a reason for dimensioning different bearings. The same applies to force developed by the deck in accordance with the displacement imposed by deformations of the structure (such as shrinkage, creep and temperature). The forces are distributed according to the rigidity of each support. The rigidity R of a support is, by definition: 1 R = , being the displacement of the support head under the effect of a horizontal force unit. This displacement = 1 + 2 + 3 comes from the distortion of the bearing, the deformation of the body of the support and, finally, from the deformation of the foundation (figure 4.2). It should be noted that the stiffnesses R1 and R2 of a bearing are to be calculated for both cases indicated above: slow deformations and dynamic force. The Eurocode recommends using the instantaneous modulus of the concrete for the pier. However, as regards elastomer, its instantaneous modulus is to be used for dynamic force (cf. 3.3.2.2, Gdyn = 2 x 0.9 = 1.8 MPa) and its reference modulus (0.9 MPa) for slow deformations (such as shrinkage, creep and temperature).
4.3.2 Determining force on support heads

We shall consider that it is a rectilinear, and not a skew, bridge.
4.3.2.1 - Deformation
The data represent variations of lengths l i of each span of a continuous deck. We thus know the relative displacement of bearing "i" in relation to bearing "1" situated on the far left: i - 1 =
li
1
i 1
= di
Figure 4.2: deformation of the bearings
From the relations H1,i = k1,i i and
H1,i
1
= 0 we can deduce
1 =
R
1
n
1,i
di
R
1
1,i
Knowing 1 , we can determine i = 1 + di and Hi = R1,i (1 + di)
43 ================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
4.3.2.2- Breaking force (dynamic)

When a force H2 is applied to the deck, the displacements i of the support heads are the same and we can deduce that with: H2,i = i R2,i and
2, i
= i
2, i
= H2
H2,i = H2
R2, i
2, i
Note that these formulas also apply to centrifugal force.
4.3.2.3 Digital application

4.3 .2.3.1 D ig ita l da ta We presume that the structure has been built symmetrically. The abutments are identical and are fitted with two bearings of: 350 x 450; 3 (12 + 3); 2 x 6 The piers have different mechanical characteristics and are fitted with two bearings of: 600 x 600; 2 (16 + 4); 2 x 8 The calculations have given the following shortenings per span: End spans (1) and (3) mm Shrinkage/creep Uniform temperature Total 7.6 7.6 15.2 Central span (2) mm 10.6 10.6 21.2
Figure 4.3: elevation of the structure used as an example The support head displacement is as follows: Abutments: the abutments are presumed to be infinitely rigid, only the bearings distort. Taking into account two bearings per line, we therefore have: - under static force - under dynamic force: : u1 =
1 Te 2 Gab
1 2
0,048 0,9 x 0,35 x 0,45
= 0.1693 m/MN
u2 = 0.0847 m/MN
We presume that the abutments lie on very high-quality soil and that the foundation deformation is therefore negligible. Piers: all displacement caused by rotations and displacement of the foundation is shown in the table below. The displacement caused by the bearings is calculated as for that of the abutments. 4Q================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Abutment (1) and (4) stat Bearing Foundation + shaft Total Ri = 1

i
Pier (2) stat 0.0741 0.0091 0.0832 12.02 dyn 0.0370 0.003 0.040 25.0 stat
Pier (3) dyn 0.0370 0.0143 0.0513 19.48
dyn 0.0847 0.0847 11.81
0.1693 0.1693 5.91
0.0741 0.0431 0.1172 8.53
N.B: for illustration purposes, we have taken highly dissymmetrical values for the flexibility of the supports. It must be remembered that the flexibility of the piers must be taken in consideration of the instantaneous modulus of the concrete for dynamic loads and daily effects of temperature. The attention of the project designer is drawn to the fact that the bearing calculation must take into account the maximum instantaneous stiffness of the soil, whilst it is the minimum time dependent stiffness that is taken for the calculation of the foundations. 4.3 .2.3.2 Ho r izo n ta l fo rc e d ue to linea r var ia tion s of the d eck The relative displacements di of the supports in relation to the left-hand support are: Displacement support 2 = - 0.0152 = - 0.015 m Displacement support 3 = - 0.0152 - 0.0212 = - 0.036 m Displacement support 4 = - 0.0364 - 0.0152 = - 0.052 m
R
1
1, i
di = - (0.015 x 12.02 + 0.036 x 8.53 + 0.052 x 5.91) = - 0.798
R
1
1, i
= 5.91 x 2 + 12.02 + 8.53
= 32.37
and so i= -
R
1 n 1
1, i
di
0,798 = 0.0247 m 32,37
1, i
2 = - 0.015 + 0.0247 = 0.0065 m 3 = - 0.036 + 0.0247 = - 0.0117 m 4 = - 0.052 + 0.0247 = - 0.0269 m 4.3 .2.3.3 Ca lc ula ting the d istributio n of a break ing force The preponderant case is that of breaking force. The force is 0.60 MN14. The forces on the support heads will thus be: 11,81 = 0.60 x = 0.104 MN for the abutments H2,1 = H2,4 68,10 H2,2 H2,3 = 0.60 x = 0.60 x
25,0 = 0.220 MN for pier 2 68,10 19,48 = 0.172 MN for pier 3 68,10
We can check that: 2 x 0.104 + 0.220 + 0.172 = 0.60 MN
14
Readers are reminded that the value suggested by the national annex to NF EN 1991-2 is 0.5 MN (cf. 4.1).
45
4.3 .2.3.4 - Summa ry The following table represents the deformations and forces calculated for a single bearing. It can be noted that differences in displacement are quite low, but the same does not apply to breaking force. These values are summarized in the table below (forces for one bearing). In this column, the calculation presumes a fixed point in the middle of the structure and uniform distribution of breaking on the 4 bearings. With the flexibility of the supports and the chosen bearings: Abutment 1 1 deformation (m) breaking (MN) 0.026 0.045 0.027 0.031 0.011 0.045 Pier 2 0.012 0.066
In this case, to simplify, as this is a common engineering structure, we will put the initial-size bearings on the abutments and piers. When all the calculations are completes, force on the abutments is slightly reduced in the event of breaking, but in an insufficient proportion to modify the bearings. Consequently, it is often of little use, in common cases, to make complex calculations taking into account this flexibility. Instead, more care should be taken over the initial dimensioning, not forgetting a combination load that may affect the size. These thus remain 350 x 450; 3 (12 + 3); 2 x 6 on abutments.
4.4 - Calculating horizontal force on a structure with sliding bearings

4.4.1 General points
As mentioned above, in cases where there is significant horizontal displacement, in particular on the abutments, the number of laminations required for these deformations risks being incompatible with the buckling stability of the bearing. In this case, sliding bearings may be required instead of ordinary bearings. Combining these two types of bearings is quite complex to design, as the flexibility needs to be taken into account of the supports themselves, as well as of the ordinary bearings and the friction coefficient of the slide bearings. However, the presence of a certain number of ordinary elastomeric bearings gives flexibility to the whole structure. This is a highly positive point, especially if seismic calculations need to be carried out for the structure. A slide bearing can function in various ways: For a flexible support, under the effect of a variation in length, the horizontal force is gradually mobilized up to the slippage threshold. Once this value H is reached, slippage occurs. A new state of balance is established, bringing the horizontal force back to a value lower than H. For a very stiff support, such as an abutment, displacement of the deck instantaneously mobilizes the horizontal force at its threshold value H. Finally, in the case of a very flexible support, the slippage threshold may not be reached and the bearing functions the same as an ordinary bearing.
4S================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
For the verification of an isolated bearing, the relation between the mobilizable force H and the concomitant vertical force is expressed: H = ( + PP + PL) V in which is the friction coefficient of the bearing for the vertical load V. PP is the installation precision of the bearing, corresponding to any defect in horizontality (PP is positive in the formula above). PL is any gradient voluntarily given to the sliding plane. PP and PL are positive in the preceding formula. In the calculation of the distribution of horizontal force, the installation precision PP is ignored, as it has already been accounted for by the weighting of the friction coefficient (a and r) from which H = ( + PL) V. It should be noted that any force due to breaking on the deck must be wholly assumed by the non-slide bearings. (cf. 4.4.1.4).
4.4.1.1 Numerical design values

The values of the friction coefficient are given in chapter 3: d =
1,2 k with k = 1 for stainless steel and p contact 10 + p
pressure on the PTFE, that we will take equal to Fz/A for type D bearings. We will take into account the actual surface of PTFE for E type bearings. Furthermore, pressure must be limited to 30 MPa.
4.4.1.2 Operating loads to be applied for the calculation of horizontal force

As with sliding pot bearings, we will consider a simplified calculation in which the extreme horizontal force (at ULS) will be determined from extreme vertical loads of corresponding combinations. This has a positive impact on safety without significantly increasing the actions. Readers are invited to consult the document on pot bearings15 for more detailed explanations regarding this simplification.
4.4.1.3 - Friction coefficient for sliding bearings

We refer here to NF EN 1337-1 "General design rules" for bearings. In our case, the friction coefficients that apply to sliding bearings are the following: a = 0.5 max (1 + ) r = 0.5 max (1 - ) max the maximum friction coefficient for a sliding bearing taken individually. a the friction coefficient to be applied if the friction is unfavourable in relation to the effect studied. r the friction coefficient to be applied if the friction is favourable in relation to the effect studied. the degression coefficient depending on "n", the number of sliding bearings intervening in the balance of the structure. n 4 4 < n < 10 10 1 (16-n)/12 0.5
E.g. a 4-span structure with two ordinary bearings on central piers and two sliding bearings on each of the abutments: n= 4 from which = 1 a = 0.5 max (1 + 1) = max = 5.3 % (taking into account the pressure p = 12.65 MPa) r = 0.5 max (1 - 1) = 0
15
cf. Bibliography
4T
4.4.1.4 - Horizontal force due to breaking

According to paragraph 6.7 of NF EN 1337-2, sliding bearings should not play a part in assuming horizontal breaking force. In theory, these forces are therefore assumed entirely by the non-sliding bearings. This hypothesis is pessimistic as sliding bears do actually play a part in assuming these forces, but in a non-quantifiable proportion.
4.4.2 Example of a calculation

4.4.2.1 Characteristics of the structure.
This is a four-span pre-stressed structure, built as balanced cantilever method, with the main dimensions as shown on figure 4.4.
Figure 4.4: the main dimensions of the studied structure The load paths are summarized in the following table: For a pier (2 bearings) C0 and C4 Permanent loads V max (MN) V min (MN) max rot (10-3 rad) min rot Traffic loads V max (MN) V min (MN) concom rot Vmax concom rot Vmin Thermal gradient V (MN) Rot (10-3 rad) (10-3 rad) (10-3 rad) 2.98 2.87 1.1 0.8 1.57 -0.56 -2.0 1.3 0.29 0.6 P1 and P3 17.88 17.76 -0.5 -0.8 3.74 -0.66 -0.5 0.2 -0.40 0.3 P2 18.34 18.32 -0.2 -0.2 3.78 -0.54 0 0 0.22 0
We show here the linear compressions taken into account for each span, as with the preceding case: End spans (1) and (4) Shrinkage/creep Uniform temperature Total 10.4 mm 20.8 mm 31.2 mm Central spans (2 and 3) 15.6 mm 31.2 mm 46.8 mm
The displacements are calculated as in paragraph 4.3. If there are sliding bearings, the difficulty lies in the fact that these bearings work up to a certain threshold. Below the sliding force, their flexibility is the same as if they were not sliding. Above, their flexibility is "infinite". An initial calculation thus needs to be made, taking them as non-sliding bearings and then, if the force corresponding to the displacement goes beyond the threshold, their flexibility needs to be replaced by a corresponding limit force and the balance of horizontal force needs to be recalculated.
4U================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
4.4.2.2 Pre-dimensioning bearings

To do this, an initial dimensioning of the bearing needs to be carried out, mainly from vertical force and rotations (that are not dependent on horizontal force). The following force is obtained for a bearing: C0 and C4 V max (MN) V min (MN) | max rot | (10-3 rd) | min rot | (10-3 rd) 2.35 1.16 2.4 1.0 P1 and P3 10.71 8.39 1.2 0.6 P2 11.12 8.87 2.1 1.5
We choose (thereby verifying the maximum stress of 30 MPa on the concrete): C0 and C4 1 bearing of 400 x 500 P1 - P2 - P3 2 bearings of 700 x 600*
* the values calculated for maximum and minimum reactions on piers takes into account a difference in stiffness of 15 % for each twinned bearing (cf. note of 5.3.3.7 of NF EN 1337-3).
Figure 4.5: the lay-out of pier bearings. For horizontal displacements, calculations are greatly simplified if we consider a point 0 in the geometric centre of the structure. In this case, the maximum displacements to take into account will be: C0 and C4 P1 and P3 P2 unit vi max 78 47 0 mm
This calculation immediately shows that abutment bearings of small size must be sliding as it would be impossible to stack enough layers of elastomer to absorb the displacement. With the principles of paragraph 4.2, we arrive at: C0 and C4 1 bearing of 400 x 500; 3 (12 + 3); 2 x 6 P1 - P2 -P3 2 bearings of 700 x 600; 6 (16 + 4); 2 x 8
4V
4.4.2.3 Horizontal force for sliding bearings

We calculate the flexibility of these bearings, all considered as non-sliding. Static On an abutment: a line of 2 bearings of 400 x 500; 3 (12 + 3); 2 x 6 1 0,048 flexibility = = 0.1333 m/MN 2 0,9 x 0,4 x 0,5 On a pier: a line of two times 2 bearings of 700 x 600; 6 (16 + 4); 2 x 8 1 0,112 = 0.0741 m/MN flexibility = 4 0,9 x 0,6 x 0,7 For dynamic (breaking), flexibility is divided by 2.
(static)
(static)
Sliding bearings on abutments have a friction coefficient of around 5.3 % on maximum load. Taking into account a maximum vertical force of 2.33 MN (for one bearing), the maximum limit sliding force per abutment is: Hlim = 0.053 x 2 x 2.33 = 0.25 MN
4.4.2.4 - Horizontal force for non-sliding bearings

4.4 .2.4.1 Force due to linea r varia tions of th e d e ck 1 s t itera tio n An initial calculation is carried out in a similar way to that of paragraph 4.3. Abutments 0 and 4 stat Bearing Foundation + shaft Total Ri = 1/ 0.1333 0.1333 7.502 Pier 1 stat 0.0741 0.0091 0.0832 12.019 Piers 2 and 3 stat 0.0741 0.0431 0.1172 8.532
For maximum deformation, taken as equal to 6 x 10-4 (CP and uniform temperature), the relative displacements di of the bearings in relation to the left-hand support are: Displacement of support 1 = - 0.031 = - 0.031 m Displacement of support 2 = - 0.031 - 0.047 = - 0.078 m Displacement of support 3 = - 0.078 - 0.047 = - 0.125 m Displacement of support 4 = - 0.125 - 0.031 = - 0.156 m
R1,i di = -3.276
R
1
1, i
= 44.09
and therefore
0 = -
R
1 n 1
1, i
di
3,276 = 0.074 m 44,09
1, i
1 = - 0.031 + 0.074 = 0.043 m 2 = - 0.078 + 0.074 = - 0.004 m 3 = - 0.125 + 0.074 = - 0.051 m 4 = - 0.156 + 0.074 = - 0.082 m
5M================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
Point 0 is therefore located at the distance x0 =
0,074 260,00 = 123.83 m 0,156
The corresponding horizontal force can be deduced: C0 displacement H Hlim M MN 0.074 0.56 0.25 P1 0.043 0.52 P2 -0.004 -0.03 P3 -0.051 -0.43 C4 -0.082 -0.61 0.25
We can confirm that the bearings C0 and C4 slide. 2 n d itera tion Sliding bearings have zero stiffness. We replace the values of Ri for C0 and C4 by 0. The calculations gets more complicated, however, as we have to successively study three case scenarios, namely: The sliding bearings all have the same friction. Those of the supports situated on the left of the point 0 have a value equal to the minimum value ( 4.4.1.3), and maximum for thus situated on the right. And the opposite, namely the maximum values for the supports on the left and the minimum for those on the right. There are 4 sliding bearings on the full number of bearings. The friction coefficients are therefore ( 4.4.1.3): minimum a = max = 5.3 % maximum r =0
Case 1 the same friction coefficient value on the left and the right
In this case, we replace the value of the product Ri x di by the limit value of H for the supports C0 and C4. The calculation becomes: C0 Ri Sum Ri Ri x di or Hlim Sum Hi point 0 displacement H Hlim -2.105 120.65 0.072 0.25 0.25 0.041 0.50 -0.006 -0.05 -0.052 -0.45 -0.084 0.25 0.25 29.084 -0.235 -0.375 -0.666 -1.065 0.235 0 P1 12.019 P2 8.532 P3 8.532 C4 0
5N
Case 2 - friction coefficient on the left 0 % and on the right 5.3 %

We obtain the following table: C0 Ri Sum Ri Ri x di or Hlim Sum Hi point 0 displacement H Hlim -1.870 107.18 0.064 0 0.25 0.033 0.40 -0.014 -0.12 -0.060 -0.52 -0.092 -0.25 0.25 29.084 0 -0.375 -0.666 -1.065 0.235 0 P1 12.019 P2 8.532 P3 8.532 C4 0
Case 3 - friction coefficient on the left 5.3 % and on the right 0 %

We obtain the following table: C0 Ri Sum Ri Ri x di or Hlim Sum Hi point 0 displacement H Hlim -2.340 134.11 0.080 0.24 0.24 0.049 0.59 0.002 -0.02 0.049 m 0.014 m 0.060 m in P 1 in P 2 in P 3 0.014 m 0.001 m 0.017 m -0.044 -0.38 -0.076 0 0.24 29.084 -0.235 -0.375 -0.666 -1.065 0 0 P1 12.019 P2 8.532 P3 8.532 C4 0
We conclude that the maximum displacement in P 1 can be in P 2 in P 3 Under only permanent loads, the displacements are:
N.B: it must be understood that the presence of sliding bearings transforms the structure into a non-linear system. Strictly speaking, it is not therefore possible to superimpose the forces and displacements of each of these actions to combine them. However, that would lead to complicated calculations that are quite useless in relation to the differences in the values to be calculated. We could therefore simply consider that the displacement value due to the uniform temperature is the difference between the calculation with the maximum linear compression (here 6.10-4) and the linear compression due to permanent loads (2.10-4).
5O================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
4.4 .2.4.2 Ca lc ula ting the d istributio n of a braking fo rce As regards breaking, it is presumed to be distributed only on non-sliding bearings. The value of the force assumed by the support is directly proportional to the stiffness of the bearing. We obtain: Pier 1 v1 Bearing Foundation + shaft Total Ri = 1
v
Piers 2 and 3 v1 0.0370 0.0143 0.0514 19.474
0.0370 0.003 0.040 24.969
The sum of the stiffnesses is equal to 63.92. For a breaking force of 0.36 MN, the distribution is thus: 24,97 - pier 1 H1 = = 0.391 HT = 0.14 MN 64,92 - piers 2 and 3 H2 =
19,47 = 0.305 HT = 0.11 MN 64,92
4.4 .2.4.3 The in cidence on b earing ca lcula tions When verifying bearings, the preceding calculations give rise to a slight over-sizing of bearings on the piers, with those on the abutments having been correctly dimensioned from the start. When all the calculations have been completes, so as to adapt as precisely as possible to the forces and deformations applied to bearings, we could reduce the number of laminations. C0 and C4 1 bearing of 400 x 500 3 x (12 + 3); 2 x 6 (unchanged) 4 x (16 + 4); 2 x 8 P1 P2 2 bearings of 700 x 600 3 x (16 + 4); 2 x 8 6 x (16 + 4); 2 x 8 (unchanged) P3
As the bearings on the piers have been modified, we need to recalculate the distribution of forces. This calculation proves that the bearings on the piers are suitable.
4.4.3 - Conclusion as regards calculations on structures with sliding bearings

As with the conclusion of paragraph 4.3.2.3.4, we draw attention to the balance between the calculations and material economies that can be made on bearings. The preceding example was deliberately chosen with a significant difference between the flexibility of the piers, so as to exaggerate the variations that can result from the dimensioning of bearings. Even in this case, it shows a very modest saving on the total volume of these bearings (4 and 5 laminations instead of 7 on pre-dimensioning) an economy that becomes marginal in relation to the overall cost of the structure. Moreover, the cost of the studies needed to optimize these bearings needs to be taken into account. If we add to that the (not insignificant) risk of an error in installation between very similar bearings (e.g. with 5 laminations instead of 4, etc.) an error far more harmful for the functioning of the supports than the conceivable savings we strongly recommend simplicity in the determination of bearings. It is far preferable to pay the utmost attention to the careful installation of these bearings, as this is the price to pay for durability.
5P
`~=R==Controls
5.1 General principles
Bearings are important elements of structures, such as bridges and viaducts, ensuring that they operate correctly. The durability of the structure depends on their quality, as does it remaining in a state of service. We can appreciate the need for quality bearings by the financial consequences of any failure on their part. Indeed, the costs incurred by having to change a failed bearing are out of all proportion in relation to the supply cost. The ratio is around 50 to 1 and is sometimes much higher. The life expectancy of bearings is the result both of their intrinsic qualities and of the care taken over this implementation. Together with the rational choice of the different types of bearings, the quality and the consistency of their manufacture also needs to be assured. The quality of these products depends on expertise in the manufacturing process. Quality Assurance provisions should enable you to: convey the quality required in terms of manufacturing methods obtain the quality required check that it has been reached justify subsequently that it has been reached and checked. As well as the general quality aspect, laminated elastomeric bearings have certain particularities: their manufacture and marketing requires equipment and investments that are prerogative of specialized companies their technology necessitates long and costly analyses and laboratory tests that can only be conducted on each construction site. The full range of these considerations has lead to the implementation of a certification procedure to assess compliance with the essential requirements defined by the Directive on products of construction (known as the DPC of 21/12/88) and which is validated by a level 1 CE marking (there is level 3 CE marking on bearings, which is not used on bridges). This CE marking depends on the standardised part of NF EN 1337-3.
5.2 Production controls prior to CE marking

5.2.1 The content of the CE certification
In order to obtain level 1 CE marking, the corresponding task distribution between the manufacturer and the notified body is as follows: a) the manufacturer must have production control implemented in the factory must perform supplementary tests on samples taken in the factory in accordance with a prescribed test programme b) the third-party organisation (or notified body) performs the initial standard tests carries out an initial inspection of the factory and the factory production controls conducts continuous monitoring, an assessment and acceptation of factory production controls. It should be noted that, contrary to the voluntary NF quality certification label, there are no annual control tests performed by a third-party organisation. This constitutes a lowering in the level of quality, particularly when we know the production monitoring defects that these tests bring to light.
5Q================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
This question remains open and negotiations are underway to try to implement a quality label that brings back this aspect of a regular annual control, in addition to the CE marking.
5.2.2 Test methods

These define the methods for measuring the fitness for use of the finished product. They allow the product to be judged according to the following four aspects ( 5.2.2.1 5.2.2.4):
5.2.2.1 Behaviour to short-term effects

These are the fundamental tests that assess aptitude to fulfil three degrees of freedom: a) Shear behaviour Determination of the shear modulus G in accordance with appendix F of NF EN 1337-3 The modulus G is determined using two bearings that are inserted between three plates. The sides of the upper and lower plates are fixed solidly to the press platens, while a horizontal force is applied on the middle plate (figure 5.1). To prevent the bearings from slipping, a constant load is also applied during the test.
Figure 5.1: a distortion test to determine the modulus G and the shear strength. (photo Stra)
Figure 5.2: an example of a shear modulus determination curve
NR
Determination of shear bond in accordance with appendix G of NF EN 1337-3
Following the preceding test, the horizontal force is increased, at the same time as the vertical load is increased until a deformation is obtained corresponding to = 2.0. b) Compression behaviour in accordance with appendix H of NF EN 1337-3 The deformation of a test specimen is continually measured up to a pre-determined compressive stress. c) Rotation behaviour under an eccentric load in accordance with appendix J of NF EN 1337-3 The test consists: Either of measuring the rotation angle and any contact surface loss of the test specimen under an increasing and eccentric compressive force of a predetermined value Or of finding the eccentricity limit corresponding to a predetermined contact surface, under a fixed compressive force.
5.2.2.2 - Behaviour to long-term effects

a) Determination of creep in compression in accordance with standard T 47.806 Under the following conditions: at an ambient temperature 23C 2C during a minimum test period of one month, under a compressive stress of 25 MPa, the following results should be obtained: The creep index /1 must be lower than 0.2 No defects accepted: bond, small cracks, larger cracks, breakdown, breakage, etc.
b) Determination of stress relaxation in shear with standard XP T 47.807 Under the following conditions: at an ambient temperature 23C 2C during a minimum test period of three months, under a compressive stress of 6 MPa and a distortion of tg = 0.7, the following results should be obtained: Rcst 20 %. DRC 23 C, C 25 % No defects accepted: bond, small cracks, larger cracks, breakdown, breakage, etc. These evaluations have not been chosen for the assessment for CE marking. However, French standards are maintained and it is possible to perform evaluation tests for specific situations.
5.2.2.3 Behaviour to environmental influences

a) Determination of ozone resistance in accordance with appendix L of NF EN 1337-3 Cf. 1.3 on the choice of ozone concentration. b) Accelerated ageing or heat resistance The change in mechanical characteristics after artificial ageing or heat resistance involves the appendixes F, G and H of NF EN 1337-3. c) Determination of salt fog resistance in accordance with XP T 47.813 d) Determination of the non-slip condition in accordance with XP T 47.811 Under test conditions, at an ambient temperature of 23C 2C with a modulus G = 0.9 MPa 0.1 MPa, the following results should be obtained: Vertical stress, in MPa Elastomer/concrete Elastomer/painted steel 5 0.3 0.12 10 0.25 0.06 15 0.20 0.04
NS================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures
e) Other standards, applicable to vulcanized elastomer and not to the finished product, enable any physical variations to be assessed and the results to be measured. It is the case, for example, with the standard NF ISO 1817: "determination of the effect of liquids (form oils)".
5.2.2.4 Behaviour to dynamic effects

This involves the behaviour to accidental dynamic effects, such as impacts, cyclonic winds and earthquakes. As regards behaviour to seismic effects, readers may refer to the specific tests defined in the prEN 15129 on anti-seismic devices, or, failing that, to appendix K of NF EN 1998-2 (EC8-2).
5.2.3 Compliance to the standard

The situation for construction managers is very simple: there must not be any products without CE marking on the market. They must therefore check that the CE marking is clearly visible on the product and that the accompanying documents give all necessary information about this marking and the correct adaptation of the product to the field of use, in particular that the product has a level 1 compliance certificate (there is indeed a level 3 for bearings that only gives a declaration of compliance: cf. le 5.1 above).
0123-CPD-0001 10 Company X Ltd Figure 5.3: example of a CE marking.
There is, however, nothing to stop you checking compliance by the performing of controls on reception. If the CE marking and the specifications of the standard have not been respected, the anti-fraud service should be informed. However, for a specific application, constructions managers are completely free to define a product that will be specific to the structure and will be manufactured solely for it. In this case, they should ensure, based on the standards NF EN and/or simply on national standard (cf. 5.2.2.2 and 5.2.2.3 of the test standards not taken up at European level in the EN standard) that the product is market-compliant. As regards the National Application Document of NF EN 1337-3, we recommend that construction managers use the examples of Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP) that are to be found in appendix 4.
5.3 Controls on reception

These shall be restricted to the following actions: verification of the presence of the marking (CE) and the compliance of the accompanying documents visual verification to ensure there are no defects or damage control of the compliance of the actual dimensions with the dimensions featuring on the construction plans of the structure if necessary, the performance of compliance control tests.
5.4 Controls on installation

For details regarding the controls on installation, it is useful to refer to the corresponding sheet in the Memoar guide (see bibliography). The construction manager must ensure the existence of the following documents:
5T
5.4.1 The drafting of prior documents

5.4.1.1 The existence of specific procedures
the construction method of the bosses the installation of the bearings any rebalancing of deformations by distortion of the bearing, taking into account, in particular, the thermal conditions at the time of year of construction16.
5.4.1.2 The provisional operating state of bearings

A summary of the forces (vertical and horizontal) and provisional deformations (distortion, rotation) for permanent loads, operating loads and thermal effects: when the bearings are loaded for the finished structure after creep and shrinkage deformation.
5.4.2 Controls during construction

Prior to installing the bearings, the construction tolerances of the bosses needs to be controlled (cf. the guide "the environment of laminated rubber bearings", 1.3.2.3, cf. Bibliography). This control is a HOLD POINT. Once in place, the correct positioning of the bearing will be controlled by checking the compliance of the bearing type in relation to its location provided for on the plans. Check that there are no wedging defects, especially at the level of the higher boss, and that the sliding bearings are perfectly adjusted. These controls are to be performed: if possible, at the earliest moment after loading before and after operations to liberate, by jacking, deformation that has occurred during construction before the structure is put into service (the point 0 defined below) periodically, according to general or specific instructions. It must be remembered to determine the point 0 of all the bearing on reception of the bridge (distortion, rotation, boss defects, etc.).
5.5 Controls of behaviour in service

This aspect is dealt with in specific section 13 "bearings"17 of the second part of "Instruction Technique sur la Surveillance, l'Entretien et la Rparation des Ouvrages d'Art" (Technical Instructions for the Monitoring, Maintenance and Repair of Engineering Structures), a circular of 19 October 1979, revised on 26.12.95.
16 17
This operation is performed by jacking and can avoid the use of sliding bearings on the abutments. A Stra publication - reference F0230 and LCPC FASC13.
`~=S==The pre-dimensioning and verification program

There is program for pre-dimensioning laminated bearings, called the NEOP program, which is part of the Stra software catalogue (available on order from the sales office). This program sizes bearings according to the rules defined in NF EN 1337-3 and in this document. The application enables users to process the complete structure by entering the definitions of the lines of supports and the bearings of each line, together with the definition of the spans. It has several independent modules, depending on if the user is interested in the whole structure or just in a particular bearing. As regards the structure, two tools are available: The quick pre-dimensioning of the bearings of each line of support, based on the minimum and maximum load paths and the horizontal force and displacement. The calculation of horizontal force and displacement under the effect of horizontal force applied to the deck (breaking force, for example) or a rapid or slow expansion of the deck. This module requires the value of the overall bearing flexibility and of its foundation in which it automatically integrates the bearing flexibility that has been predimensioned or imposed by the user. The results are then entered into the pre-dimensioning module to refine it. By choosing a specific bearing, the user can: Choose the geometry in a typical range of rectangular or circular bearings, or else define it manually Define the various combinations and calculation options Create a precise pre-dimensioning of the bearing and choose one from the list of propositions made by the application Perform a complete verification of the bearing as per NF EN 1337-3 Modify certain design parameters (installation defects, shear modulus, etc.). In all cases, the results can be printed or integrated into a Word calculation sheet. The NEOP program works on a Pentium-type PC or the equivalent, using the interface Windows 98, 2000 or XP. It comes in a pack with an installation CD, a protection disc and documentation. The PRD network (regional distribution centres) can provide information regarding the distribution and use of this program. The PRD network has one correspondent per CETE (Technical research centre).
^=N==Calculations for laminated elastomeric

bearings for use in seismic zones A1-1 Regulatory framework
In France, it is now obligatory to take seismic risk into account when building a bridge, as defined in the following laws: Law n87-565 of 22 July 1987 as regards (...) the prevention of major risks Decree n91-461 of 14 May 1991 as regards the prevention of seismic risk Decree of 15 September 1995 as regards the classification and regulations of seismic-resistant construction applicable to bridges in the category normal risk. This last decree specifies that these verifications must be performed in compliance with one of the following documents: The guide AFPS 92 for the seismic-resistant construction of bridges The National Application document of the ENV, 1998 - Part 2: Eurocode 8 The design and dimensioning of structures for their resistance to seismic activity - Part 2: Bridges. As the NF EN 1998-2 standard is due for publication soon, this guide refers to it. Each of these documents contains specifications for laminated elastomer bearings. Indeed, the high flexibility of elastomer enables the natural mode periods of the structure to be increased and to thus avoid the most critical frequency bands. For this reason, the use of laminated elastomeric bearings is a simple and effective way of obtaining seismic resistance. Of the two authorized regulations, (AFPS 92 and Eurocode 8), the Eurocode is that which has calculation methods closest to those of NF EN 1337-3. It is therefore logical that we refer to them here. In order to facilitate the joint application of Eurocode 8 and NF EN 1337-3, table A.1 specifies the notations of the two documents: Shear modulus under seismic activity Axial stress Vertical force Plate width Plate length Thickness of a current layer: Form coefficient Form coefficient of the thickest layer Reduced area Total elastomer thickness Distortion due to horizontal force Total nominal distortion Gdyn Rated Gb = 1.1 Gg in l'EC8-2 7.5.2.3.3 (2) m Fz,d a' b' ti S S1 Ar (at 1 order) Te Rated te in l'EC8-2 7.5.2.3.3 (2) q,d t,d
Table A.1: notations of Eurocode 8 and NF EN 1337-3
The EC8 puts elastomeric bearings into two classes: special elastomeric bearings and simple elastomeric bearings. The so-called special elastomeric bearings have to be tested according to a detailed procedure (EC8-2 appendix K and prEN 15129) that is relatively extensive and is applicable to all seismic-resistant insulation devices. Elastomeric bearings that have not undergone these tests on prototypes are called simple. The vast majority of laminated elastomeric bearings used in France today fall into the simple category. For this reason, this appendix deals with simple laminated elastomeric bearings.
A1-2 Design combinations and direction accumulation

A1-2.1 Seismic action
The seismic effect on a structure is normally calculated separately according to three directions in space X, Y and Z. For a straight bridge, these directions are the longitudinal, transversal and vertical axis of the deck. This last component of seismic movement has to be taken into account for the verification on the bearings (NF EN 1998-2, article 4.1.7 (3) P). We thus have three seismic forces acting on the bearing: Fx: horizontal force that creates longitudinal distortion Fy: horizontal force that creates transversal distortion Fz: vertical force that causes the load path to become heavier or lighter The concomitance of these three forces has to be taken into account. Among the two options proposed by NF EN 1998-2 to combine the effects calculated in each direction, the most practical one to apply to laminated elastomeric bearings consists of three weighted linear combinations, as shown in the diagram of figure A.1 (NF EN 1998-2, article 4.2.1.4(2)).
0,3 Fy Fx 0,3 Fz
Fy 0,3 Fx 0,3 Fz
0,3 Fy 0,3 Fx 0 3 Fx Fz
Figure A.1: combinations of seismic directions.
A1-2.2 - Combinations with other load cases

Seismic action must be cumulated with (NF EN 1998-2, articles 6.6.2.3(2) and 7.6.2(2)): Permanent loads, in characteristic values The effects of shrinkage and creep for concrete decks 50 % of displacements due to temperature variations (more specifically, the values to take into account are equal to 50 % of those used for the design of bearings excluding seismic combinations). For urban bridges carrying heavy traffic, i.e. those of class 1 of NF EN 1991-2, 20 % (30 % for railway bridges) also needs to be added to normal operating loads (to be specified in the Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP) on the basis of the National Annex of NF EN 1998-2).
6P
A1-3 - Dynamic calculation model

A1-3.1 - Shear modulus G
The flexibility of elastomeric bearings is inversely proportional to the shear modulus. This modulus, however, depends on the speed or frequency of the excitation. For example, the effects of breaking are normally calculated with a modulus twice as high as the value corresponding to quasi-static loads (cf. 3.2.2). Under seismic activity, the Eurocode proposes the use of a shear modulus Gb = 1.1 Gg for common bearings (NF EN 19982, 7.5.2.3(5)). According to the regulations of the AFPS (French Seismic Engineering Association), the value of G used for seismic calculation should be between 0.8 and 1.2 MPa. This is based on tests carried out during the construction of nuclear power stations in regions subject to seismic risk. In view of incertitude over the estimation of the value of G, particularly in connection with the ageing of elastomer and the ambient temperature, it is not desirable to unrealistically complicate calculation methods. For this reason, we recommend estimating seismic effects with a shear modulus of 1.2 MPa. Moreover, this proposition has been included in the AFPS 92 guide. It is difficult to define a more precise law of behaviour without knowing the formulation of the elastomer that varies depending on the supplier. Obviously, a different value of shear modulus could be adopted if the manufacturer provided the necessary justifications (NF EN 1998-2, appendix J).
A1-3.2 - Modelling of bearings
Figure A2: mass beam design model When a deck lies on laminated elastomeric bearings, it is the bearings that provide the most flexibility to the structure. It is therefore essential that they are taken into account in the dynamic model that enables the natural periods to be calculated. In theory, the bearing should be modelled by a multi-directional spring that functions both in traction-compression and rotation, that is, by six stiffnesses (figures A2 and A3).
Figure A.3: modelling using springs The stiffnesses should be calculated as shown in table A.2 (NF EN 1337-3, 5.3.3.7). In the vast majority of cases, the bearing can be considered as infinitely rigid in a vertical direction and infinitely flexible in rotation, resulting in the simplified formulation of the third column. Stiffness Kx and Ky Kz Complete formulae according to the notations of NF EN 1337-3 A.Gb / Te
1
Simplified formulae A.Gb / Te
ti 1 1 + 2 E b A 5 G b S1
K rectangular
Gb Gb
a 5 b n ti Ks D' 6 512 n t i
3 3
K circular
Kz
Table A.2: calculation of stiffnesses Ks is a tabulated parameter according to the relation b/a (NF EN 1337-3, article 5.3.3.7, table 4).
6R
A1-4 Using a behaviour factor

A1-4.1 The two seismic design methods
When the seismic design of a structure is such that the main part of the energy transmitted by the ground to the structure can de dispelled by damage to the piers, it is routine practice to reduce the forces obtained by an elastic calculation. The reduction works by dividing the effects of the action by a behaviour factor that depends on the construction material and the shape of the piers. This is then referred to as a ductile design or the plastic hinge method. On the other hand, choosing ductile seismic behaviour (q > 1.5) leads to significant complexity of design that we are unable to detail here (reinforcement of the plastic hinges confinement, coherence criteria, capacity design, etc.). Interested readers may refer to Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings by Paulay and Priestley (Wiley & Sons 1992). The other method consists of designing the structure so that damage is greatly reduced under the seismic calculation, as is generally done under normal loads: the essentially elastic or restricted ductility design. This does not mean that necessary measures should not be taken to ensure a minimum of ductility in the structure. It is, moreover, permissible to take cracking in the supports into account, preferably by an iterative calculation method that ensures coherence between the forces calculated and the inertia used. These two design methods apply whenever elastomeric bearings are used, either on all or part of the supports.
A1-4.2 Elastomeric bearings on all the supports

Structures with decks that lie solely on laminated elastomeric bearings are flexible and their natural vibration periods are beyond the range that is the most prone to seismic activity. In general, this flexibility is sufficient for the seismic resistance of the structure and consequently a behaviour factor limited to 1.5 may be used (NF EN 1998-2, article 7.3.2(2)P). This is then an essentially elastic (or restricted ductility) design.
A1-4.3 - Elastomeric bearings on part of the supports

For certain structures, it may be beneficial to have elastomeric bearings on just some of the supports. In that case, the overall verification of the bridge can be carries out according to one of the following methods: By dividing the elastic forces by a behaviour factor appropriate to each pier (cases of irregular bridges, NF EN 1998-2, article 4.1.8). In this case, laminated elastomeric bearings must be calculated in capacity, that is, for the level of force that ensures the formation of the plastic hinges provided for in the fixed piers by the project designer. Without using a behaviour factor. If there is a risk of load transfers to the elastomeric bearings, care should be taken to get as close as possible to the actual flexibility of the piers not supporting elastomeric bearings (cracking, plastification of steel and significant displacements). For this, an iterative calculation may be performed using a buckling programme (such as PYLOSTAB from the Stra), or, if not, cracked inertia may be used as defined in appendix C of NF EN 1998-2.
A1-5 - Recommendations
Generally speaking, verifications to be performed are the same as for other loads. No heaving is permitted perpendicular to elastomeric bearings. Recommendations under seismic load combinations are detailed below (NF EN 1998-2, article 7.6).
A1-5.1 Maximum distortion

These verifications involve total distortion and distortion coming solely from horizontal force.
A1-5.1.1 Total distortion

Typical elastomeric bearings need to be checked in accordance with the regulations of 5.3.3 of NF EN1337-3, using the value KL=1 in the expression (5.1) of NF EN 1337-3 (NF EN 1998-2, 7.6.2(5)).
The value given to m in the expression (5.2) of NF EN 1337-3 will be set by the national application document. The value currently recommended in NF EN 1998-2, is m = 1.15. Furthermore, the seismic calculation displacement must be allocated a reliability coefficient IS=1, 50 (recommended value, to be set in the National Annex of NF EN 1998-2).
A1-5.1.2 - Distortion due to horizontal force

Distortion resulting solely from authorized seismic horizontal force is twice as high as the value permitted for other loads (1.0):
q ,d 2,0
The distortion calculation takes into account the deformations imposed as specified above (cf. A.1.2).
A1-5.2 - Buckling
As for other loads, seismic combinations are used for verification:
Fz ,d Ar A1-5.3 - Slippage
2 a Gb S 3 Te
Here also, the same verifications are to be performed as for normal loads, but taking into account the seismic effect. However, the friction coefficient to use is that of the Service Limit State.
K Fxy,d 0,1 + f Fz,d m
where
m =
Fz,d Ar
and
m 3,0 MPa
Contrary to the specifications of NF EN 1337-3, this last clause is not to be checked under permanent loads, but rather under the most unfavourable seismic combination (probably when there is an upward vertical seism). In most cases, it will not be possible to check non-slip conditions in a seismic zone and anti-slipping devices will have to be implemented.
A1-6 Further construction measures

The environment of laminated elastomeric bearings (visibility, jacking potential, etc.) must be supplemented by measures for seismic action. These measures mainly involve extreme displacements between a deck and its supports, as highlighted during recent earthquakes, such as those in Kobe (Japan 1996) and Loma Prieta (California 1989). These displacements are of a very different amplitude to that foreseeable by means of calculations. Further measures therefore need to be taken to ensure the integrity of the structure. The following cases can be distinguished: Elastomeric bearings that take up seismic force Elastomeric bearings that are supplemented by a blocking device that takes up the seismic force Elastomeric bearings in conjunction with a sliding device. Moreover, in certain cases, it needs to be checked that the cover between the element supported and the support is sufficient (minimum support rest).
A1-6.1 Elastomeric bearing that take up seismic forces

When the laminated elastomeric bearing transmits forces due to excitation of the deck mass to the supports, the project designer can choose between the two following options (NF EN 1998-2, article 6.6.2.3): Design bearings that take up the entire calculation seismic force, plus 50 % (NF EN 1998-2, 7.6.2) Supplement the bearing with a stop (also known as seismic coupling).
6T
A1-6.1.1 Seismic couplings as safety stops

In some cases, it can be beneficial to supplement elastomeric bearings with seismic couplings that act as safety stops. This is particularly the case lengthwise for the upgrading of existing bridges perpendicular to the mobile end supports between the deck and the abutment or the pier, when the requirements for minimum support rest have not been fulfilled (NF EN 1998-2, 6.6.3.1(2)c). These couplings need to be designed with appropriate clearance or margins so as they remain inactive during the calculation seismic action, and only intervene at the limit of the bearing. In the AFPS rules, this measure is proposed in accordance with both horizontal directions: longitudinal and transversal. It is then recommended that a part of the thermal effects and all the time dependent effects be taken into account in the clearance calculation:
d S = d G + 0,40 d T + d + dE diff - dG: displacement due to the long-term effects of permanent and quasi-permanent actions - dT: calculation displacement due to thermal movements - ddiff: displacements due to time dependenteffects - dE: calculation seismic displacement
The clearance must not be greater so as to limit the impact effects resulting from the movement of the deck, and the stop is designed to take up a force H equal to 40 % of the seismic design force. Figure A.4 shows one possible arrangement. This involves a reinforced concrete stop integral with the pier shaft. This stop penetrates into a recess made in the underside of the deck at a height of around 10 cm, sufficient for the transmission of force H. Seismic coupling thus constituted works equally well transversally and longitudinally.
Figure A.4: example of a stop Seismic couplings should be calculated according to the regulations adapted to their material. Verifications are to be performed at Ultimate Limit State with the nominal value of the weight taken up by the support concerned (in other words, Q will not be weighted by 1.35). The safety coefficients applicable to the materials are those corresponding to the basic combinations (EC8-2 DAN article 5.2). For reinforced concrete stops, the part of NF EN 1992-2 (EC2) that deals with short corbels can be applied. Care must be taken so as the stops do not bring about modifications that could adversely affect the life on the bearings (water discharge, jacking potential, hindering thermal expansion, etc.).
A1-6.1.2 Elastomeric bearings supplemented by a blocking device taking up seismic forces

In some cases, it is useful to block the functioning of bearings in one of the two horizontal directions, for example, to preserve the integrity of the equipment (such as expansion joints or restraint systems) or else because we do not wish to design bearings for seismic design force. Obviously, the dynamic calculation model must take account of this block. The device can be the same as the seismic coupling described above, the difference being that the clearance is reduced to a value not exceeding 15 mm. This measurement is a compromise between: The on-site construction tolerances A clearance required to leave deformations free in the direction perpendicular to the blockage A clearance not to be exceeded so as to avoid the effects of impacts. In this case, seismic coupling must be designed to resist the calculation effects arising from the principle of capacity design (forces resulting from the plastification level being exceeded in the underlying pier). For uncommon or specific structures, specialized devices can also be designed. For example, a laminated elastomeric bearing placed vertically in conjunction with a sliding device. However, the project designer and the manager must bear in mind that the more sophisticated the system, the more likely it is cease functioning due to ageing and the more it will cost to maintain.
A1-6.1.3 Elastomeric bearings in conjunction with a sliding device

It is obvious that such bearings do not take up seismic forces. However, it must be designed to support, without damage, the calculation seismic displacement (NF EN 1998-2, article 7.6.2): dEd = IS dE + dG 0,50 . dT
A1-6.2 Minimum support rest

As well as the construction measures outlined above, it is essential to check that the cover between the deck and its support is sufficiently long. The value of the minimum support rest defined in the Eurocode is calculated using the following formula (NF EN 1998-2, article 6.6.4):
lov = lm + d eg + d es
The first term, lm, represents the minimum length of the support cover allowing the transmission of loads. A value lower than 40 cm should not be used. The last two terms represent the relative displacement between the deck and its support under seismic activity. It has two parts: des is the displacement calculated under seismic excitation (NF EN 1998-2, article 6.6.4 (3) A); deg is the actual displacement between two parts resulting from differential ground displacement (cf. figure A.6). It enables the relative difference between the foundations of the two supports to be taken into account, a factor that is not considered in the dynamic calculation of the structure (giving des). It must be assessed in accordance with the specifications of laws defining seismic action (NF EN 1998-2, 6.6.4 (3) and appendix D or guide AFPS 92). Verification should be carried out, for example, of the support rest when the longitudinal stops are unilateral devices placed on the crossheads of the abutments. It needs to be ascertained that the overhang of the bearing shelf is sufficient for the deck not to fall in the event of a relative variance between the two abutments. Similarly, for decks that are relatively rigid in design and for short structure, it can be sufficient to put transversal seismic couplings on the abutments. It then needs to be ascertained that the support rest is sufficient for the various piers.
6V
Figure A.5: determination of support rests
Figure A.6: differential ground displacement
^=O==The durability of laminated elastomeric

bearings with a sliding plane
Although the durability of laminated elastomeric bearings is satisfactory, thanks mainly to the certification process that relies on a series of tests, some of which are to examine resistance to environmental conditions, the same does not apply to the combination comprising a couple of laminated elastomeric bearings featuring a sliding plane (sliding bearings). In this case, the qualities of one and the other cannot be accumulated in fact, the disadvantages need to be added together. The result is that the durability of sliding bearings is far more random. This appendix is a reminder of the main measures that need to be taken to attain devices with a more satisfactory durability. These measures are to be applied throughout from manufacture through to the design and installation phases, as well as to monitoring and maintenance.
A2-1 The characteristic quantity of the functioning of a sliding bearing

The friction coefficient is the characteristic quantity generally chosen for the functioning of a sliding bearing. Statistical knowledge of the probability of obtaining the defined value of this coefficient would be the most accurate way of characterizing the functioning of a sliding bearing. In the current state of technical knowledge, no-one is able to affirm, with known probability, that the value of this coefficient will be reached or exceeded during a given length of service. For this reason, we resort to empirical methods, which are to be implemented at the following stages: the design of the structure construction maintenance
A2-2 Measures to be taken at the design stage

As a general rule, preference should be given to elements with a robust design that are not sensitive to installation and environmental conditions. From this viewpoint, sliding bearings are doubtless one of the construction products that are particularly sensitive to installation conditions, bad weather and ageing. Sliding bearings should therefore only be resorted to when other possibilities have been excluded. Loads, together with displacements affecting the structure, are to be taken at maximum value, in the following decreasing order of priority: the flexibility of the supports. If some supports are too rigid, pendulum supports or roller bearings can be used, which are relatively high in relation to the expected displacement the distortion capacity of the laminated elastomeric bearings when the two previous solutions are deemed insufficient, sliding bearings of a mechanical design, with parts machined from thick sheet metal. This type of sliding bearing is commonly incorporated into pot bearings. The installation for these products is stricter than for sliding laminated elastomeric bearings. Similarly, quality controls during production are more rigorous and precise. Laminated elastomeric bearings with a sliding plane are to be used in the following conditions: - the taking up of differed deformations (shrinkage-creep) solely by the sliding plane - the taking up of other actions (temperature, breaking, etc.) by distortion of the laminated elastomeric part. N.B: jacking after construction and before acceptance, can avoid having to bring in sliding planes and restrict their use to standardised laminated elastomeric bearings.
A2-3 Measures to be taken at the manufacturing stage

Only type D or E bearings of NF EN 1337-3 are suitable for the addition of a sliding plate. Lubrication pockets for oiling the sliding plane, along with an appropriate protection against dirt on the structure, need to be designed. The combination of the sliding plane and the elastomeric block needs to be delivered as a monolithic part, for handling and installation reasons. Once installed, it should be easy to separate the sliding plan from the elastomer block.
A2-4 Measures to be taken as part of the monitoring process

In order to prevent disorders that are specific to sliding bearings, regular monitoring is required. Risks specific to mechanical bearings need to be distinguished from those made of laminated elastomer. Laminated elastomeric bearings with a sliding plane are highly deformable products. They frequently have noticeable distortions from the first year of service. By recording the distortion on-site, and with knowledge of the dimensions together with an estimation of the bearing load, a friction coefficient can be deduced. This assessment of the non-slip coefficient is a default value of the sliding coefficient, as the bearing is yet to slide. A value can be found of around 10 %, which justifies the restriction of the duration of use of the products previously mentioned.
A2-5 - Conclusion
Whatever measures have already been taken, or will be taken at European Standardisation level, as far as the manufacture of sliding bearings is concerned, the risk and the gravity of disorders have to be assessed, along with the cost of replacing the bearings throughout the entire service life of the structure, as from the project stage.
7P
^=P=J=Table of dimensions
Type B bearing with e = half-sheet
Coating by 2 half-sheets, Tq < a'/3 and Tb max < 300 mm Dimensions a 100 100 150 150 150 200 200 200 200 200 250 250 250 250 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 350 350 350 b 150 200 200 250 300 200 250 300 350 400 250 300 350 400 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 350 400 450 6 x x x x Sheet thickness in mm 8 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 10 12 16 20 Dimensions 350 350 350 400 400 400 400 400 450 450 450 500 500 500 500 500 600 600 600 700 700 700 800 800 900 500 550 600 400 450 500 550 600 500 550 600 500 550 600 650 700 600 650 700 700 800 900 800 900 900 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Sheet thickness in mm x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
^=Q==Assistance with drafting Particular Technical

Clauses (CCTP)
The appendix offers examples of clauses to be integrated into Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP), both for reasons of consistency and so that they include the advice given in this guide. For applications in seismic zones, engineers are requested to supplement these clauses based on appendix 1. The propositions of articles contained in this appendix concern technical aspects. Their application must, however, take account of the rules defined in the Procurement Contract Code
A4.1 - Examples of clauses to be included in the chapter "quality of materials"

Relevant article of the guide Example of clause The laminated elastomeric bearings shall comply with the standard NF EN 1337, parts 1 and 3 (and part 2*) and with the National Application Document. This compliance shall be certified by level 1 CE marking. 2.2.2 In compliance with 4.4.1 of the standard NF EN 1337-3, the bearings are to be made of polychloroprene (CR). In compliance with 4.3.6 of the standard NF EN 1337-3, the concentration of ozone for the bearing ozone resistance test is 50 ppcm. Comments *To be added in the case of bearings with a sliding plane. See in particular the precision given by the National Application Document relating to the standard NF EN 1337-3, 4.4.4, for the use of this type of bearing.
2.2.2
Article in the event of using laminated elastomer bearings with sliding planes A2.3 Bearing with sliding planes are to include perforations in the PTFE with lubrication and an appropriate protection of the sliding plane (cf. 7.3 and 7.4 of NF EN 1337-2). Note that the 5th paragraph of 4.4.4.3 of NF EN 1337-3 does not exclude the use of non-perforated PTFE sheets for type D bearings, if the structure designer has so specified.
A4.2 - Examples of clauses to be included in the chapter "design principle

Relevant article of the guide Example of clause Comments
3.3 et 3.4 The bearings shall be justified as indicated in 5.3.3 of the standard NF EN 1337-3, supplemented by the indications of 3.3 et 3.4 of the Stra guide, taking the following into account: - the external half-sheets that can be taken into account in the calculation - sheets of See Appendix 3 of the guide 10 mm are possible - The thickness of the plates, which can be taken as equal to at least 2 mm (cf. formula 12 of 5.3.3.5 of the standard NF EN 1337-3). 3.2.2 Under the application of 4.3.1.1 "Shear modulus at nominal temperature" of the standard NF EN 1337-3, the value of modulus G = 0.9 is applicable. The requirements under clause 4.3.1.3 of the standard NF EN 1337-3 "Shear modulus at very low temperature" are not applicable. Under the application of clause 4.3.3 "Compression stiffness" of the standard NF EN 1337-3, test 3 level is not a requirement*. Under the application of clause 4.3.5 "Static rotation capacity (and table 7)" of the standard NF EN 1337-3, only the test described in clause 4.3.5.2: "Eccentric loading test" is required. In the present Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP), the 3rd paragraph of the requirements is required Under eccentricity equal to 1/6 of the smallest plan dimension of the test sample, no defect shall be accepted ( defects, cracks, etc.) for a rotation angle of 0.025 rad". In the event of the angle not being reached, pressure shall be limited to 3.5 Gd * A' * S/1.5. In compliance with 4.3.7 of the standard NF EN 1337-3, the PTFE/elastomer shear bond test (and table 7) is required. Friction coefficient: 4.4.4 of the standard NF EN 1337-3 If using bearings with sliding planes. * Because these are manufactured parts containing polychloroprene (cf. 2.2.2 of this guide and the National Application Document). Except for a detailed, specific requirement that will then be included in this article.
In normal cases, to simplify, the correcting factor of 2/3 shall not be taken into account. Otherwise, take it into account in cases of specific justification and for applications in overseas departments and territories (DOM-TOM) where the effective bearing temperature does not drop below 5 C.
3.4.1.4
Under the application of 5.3.3.6 of the standard NF EN 1337-3 regarding the limit conditions for buckling stability, it is stipulated that, for simplification purposes, we shall, in formula (15) apply the maximum reaction under a basic combination and with a modulus G = 0.9. In compliance with 5.3.3.a of the standard NF EN 1337-3, the value of m = 1 is applicable to the present Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP). For applications corresponding to the scope of the present Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP), only the value of KL = 1.0* is to be taken into consideration.
*cf. Appendix C of the standard NF EN 1337-3
7T
Relevant article of the guide
Example of clause In compliance with 5.3.3.4 of the standard NF EN 1337-3 "Design strain due to angular rotation", verification under rotation angles is to be performed at ULS. In compliance with 5.3.3.5 of the standard NF EN 1337-3 "Reinforcing plate thickness", the value of m = 1 is applicable to the present Particular Technical Clauses (CCTP).
Comments
3.4.1.3
The rotations a and b must include installation defects of a value equal to: To be completed following the instructions opposite This installation defect shall be added to the larger of the rotations a or b.
This depends greatly on care taken during installation. The standard NF EN 1337-3 ( 7.1.3) is not clear on the values to be adopted for installation defects, or on how they should be taken into account. The following standard values are therefore 0.003 radian in the case of combining proposed: 0.010 radian for structures placed directly on methods the bearings. For a specific application, constructions managers are completely free to define a product that will be specific to the structure and will be manufactured solely for it. In this case, they should ensure, based on the standards NF EN and/or simply on national standard (cf. 5.2.2.2 and 5.2.2.3 of the test standards not taken up at European level in the EN standard) that the product is market-compliant.
5.2.3
2.2.4.1 and 2.2.4.3
The fixing method used for the stainless steel sliding plates on the supports steel shall be submitted to the construction manager for approval. The position of the measuring devices, together with the dirt protection method shall be submitted to the construction manager for approval. As regards the dimensioning of the sliding plates, displacements shall be increased in both directions by 20 mm. Furthermore, the minimum displacement to be taken into account is 50 mm in the principal direction of the displacements resulting from the structure.
A4.3 - Examples of clauses to be included in the chapter "implementation"

Relevant article of the guide 5.4.2 Hold points: - acceptance of bearing bosses - acceptance on delivery of the bearings - acceptance of the installation of the bearings (adjustments and installation). Example of clause Comments
_~
General documents
Environnement des appareils d'appui en lastomre frett. Recueil des rgles de l'art. Stra /LCPC 10/1978. Rf. F 7810. The environment of laminated elastomeric bearings. A best practice guide. Stra /LCPC 10/1978. Ref. F 7810. Les appareils d'appui pot. Utilisation sur les ponts, viaducs et structures similaires. Guide technique. Stra. Aot 2007 - Rf. 0734 Annule et remplace le guide "Les appareils d'appui pot de caoutchouc dit en septembre 1999". Pot bearings. Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures. Technical guide. Stra. August 2007 ref. 0734 Cancels and replaces the guide Rubber pot bearings, published in September 1999. Appareils d'appui en caoutchouc. Documents scientifiques et techniques. AFPC. 07/1994. Rubber bearings. Scientific and technical documents. AFPC. 07/1994. Instruction technique pour la surveillance et l'entretien des ouvrages d'art. Seconde partie: Fascicule 13 "appareils d'appui". Stra / LCPC. 2002. Rf. 0230 Technical instruction for the monitoring and maintenance of civil engineering structures. Part two: section 13 bearings. Stra / LCPC. 2002. Ref. 0230 MMOAR (Mmento pour la mise en uvre sur ouvrages d'art). MEMOAR (Implementation guide for civil engineering structures) See in particular the following: VIII-1: Appareils d'appui en lastomre frett Laminated elastomeric bearings VIII-3: Bossages des appareils d'appui Bearing bosses VIII-4: Vrinage/Calage Jacking/Wedging Note d'information technique n 27 sur l'application nationale de la norme NF EN 1337 (appareils d'appui structuraux). Stra. Dcembre 2006. The technical information note no. 27 on the National Application of the standard NF EN 1337 (structural bearings). Stra. December 2006.
Standards
NF EN 1337-1 Structural bearings. Part 1: General design rules NF EN 1337-2 - Structural bearings. Part 2: Sliding elements NF EN 1337-3 - Structural bearings. Part 3: Elastomeric bearings NF EN 1991-2 - Eurocode 1: Actions on structures - Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges and its National Annex (to be published) NF EN 1992-1-1: Eurocode 2 Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: Common rules and rules for buildings NF EN 1993-2: Eurocode 3 Design of steel structures - Part 2: Steel bridges (to be published) NF EN 1991-1-5: Eurocode 1 Actions on structures - Part 1-5: General actions Thermal actions NF EN 1990: Structural Eurocodes: Basis of structural design and NF EN 1990/A1: Appendix A2 (application to bridges)
Rubber bearing series: T 47.806 - Dtermination du fluage en compression Determination of creep in compression Determination of shear stress relaxation Determination of the non-slipping condition Determination of salt fog resistance Determination of apparent Shore A hardness using a pocket durometer XP T 47.807 - Dtermination de la relaxation de contrainte en cisaillement. XP T 47.811 - Dtermination de la condition de non-glissement XP T 47.813 - Dtermination de la rsistance au brouillard salin XP T 47.814 - Dtermination de la duret apparente Shore A au moyen d'un duromtre de poche
Bibliography specific to Appendix 1

Loi n 87-565 du 22 Juillet 1987 relative (...) la prvention des risques majeurs. Law no. 87-565 of 22 July 1987 regarding () the prevention of major risks. Dcret n 91-461 du 14 Mai 1991 relatif la prvention du risque sismique. Decree no. 91-461 of 14 May 1991 regarding the prevention of seismic risk. Arrt du 15 septembre 1995 relatif la classification et aux rgles de construction parasismique applicables aux ponts de la catgorie dite " risque normal". Decree of 15 September 1995 regarding the classification and regulations for seismic-resistant construction applicable to bridges of the category labelled at normal risk. Guide AFPS 92 pour la protection parasismique des Ponts. The AFPS 92 guide for the seismic protection of bridges. NF EN 1998-2: Eurocode 8 Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 2: Bridges (to be published) and its National Annex (to be published). PrEN 15129 Seismic devices
8N
This technical guide is mainly intended for bridge designers. The contents should enable them to design laminated elastomeric bearings with a view to using them on bridges, viaducts and similar structures. The documents principally includes the following: A brief description of the various types of laminated elastomeric bearings and any specific related equipment The main regulations and standards The design criteria based on draft regulations drawn up by the CEN (European Committee for Standardization) The principle of controls for the CE marking A design methodology for a bridge project with application examples Lastly, it is supplemented by a series of appendixes on the design of this type of bearing in seismic zones, on the durability of laminated elastomeric bearings with sliding planes and examples of clauses to be included in performance specifications.
Service d'tudes sur les transports, les routes et leurs amnagements

46 avenue Aristide Briand BP 100 92225 Bagneux Cedex France Phone: 33 (0)1 46 31 53 Fax: 33 (0)1 46 11 33 55 This document is awailable and can be downloaded on Stra website: http://www.setra.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/
The Stra belongs to the scientific and technical network of the French Public Work Ministry (RST)
Reference : 0925A
This document may not be reproduced even partially without Stra's prior consent. 2009 Stra ISRN No. : EQ-SETRA--09-ED09--FR+ANG

US 0925A Laminated Elastomeric Bearings Aaef

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

US 0925A Laminated Elastomeric Bearings Aaef

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

jMarch 2007

Translate June 2009

Laminated elastomeric bearings

The Stra supports the public owner

The Stra, producer of the state of the art

The Stra, a work in partnership

Laminated elastomeric bearings

O=================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

Q================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

1.2 Scope and content

CEN: European Committee for Standardization

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

1.3 Application of the standard NF EN 1337-3 in the French national context

1.5 Notations and symbols

available for download on Stra sites cf. appendix 2 cf. chapter 2

U================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

`~=O=J=Composition and description

2.1 General principles of composition

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

2.2 Component parts

2.2.2 The elastomeric material

cf. "Rubber bearings". 3.3.1. See Bibliography.

NM================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

2.2.3 Steel plates

2.2.4 Sliding elements that may be required

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

2.2.4.2 Horizontal force

2.2.4.3 Slide plate dimensions

2.2.5 Anti-slipping and anti-lifting devices

Figure 2.6: the principle of an anti-slipping device

NO================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

- using chequered plates (for low tangential forces).

Limited distortion or blocked bearings

Anti-lifting system bearings

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

Figure 2.8: an example of a limited distortion or blocked bearing (photo Stra)

2.3 Manufacturing methods

NQ================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

`~=P==Behaviour and dimensioning

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

Figure 3.2: the characteristics of the bearings described in this chapter

NS================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

3.2 The characteristics of bearings

a' , b' ou D' a , b ou D

3.2.2 The characteristics of elastomer

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

3.2.3 The characteristics of internal plates

3.2.4 The characteristics of external plates

3.2.5 The characteristics of slide plates

NU================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

3.3 Dimensioning bearings

3.3.2 Bearing behaviour

3.3.2.1 Behaviour under axial force

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

For a rectangular bearing we have:

OM================Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

3.3.2.2 Behaviour under a horizontal force

Laminated elastomeric bearings Use on bridges, viaducts and similar structures

3.3.2.3 Behaviour under a horizontal axis rotation

The distribution of the distortions is given in figure 3.7.

Figure 3.8: values of Ks for a rectangular bearing

The following approximate formula can also be used: