Mpressive strength and also the crush strain in the ECC material within the pier and also the rocking pile caps are 80.0 MPa and 1.2 , respectively. The maximum compressive strength and the crush strain of the conventional concrete material inside the pier and the rocking pile caps are 40.0 MPa and 1.0 , respectively. The diameters of the longitudinal reinforcement and stirrup utilized within the pier are 32 mm and 16 mm, of which the corresponding yielding strengths are 440.0 MPa and 300.0 MPa, respectively. A total of 72 reinforcing steels are uniformly arranged around the perimeter from the ECC-reinforced pier, resulting within a reinforcement ratio of 2.28 . The net thickness of your cover concrete or ECC material is 0.05 m. The stirrup interval is 0.1 m in the plastic hinge region and 0.15 m at elsewhere. The SMA washer set is modeled by a compression-only element with a self-centering material model and an Elastic-perfectly plastic material model in parallel. The self-centering material model is applied to model the superelasticity from the SMA washer set and also the elastic-perfectly plastic material model is employed to simulate the precompression by designated an proper initial deformation. As an Oprozomib manufacturer illustration, the maximum compressive deformation of each SMA washer set is 0.06 m, half of that is consumed to impose prestressed force on the rocking pier.Components 2021, 14,12 ofFigure 12. FE model in the resilient Leupeptin hemisulfate MedChemExpress bridge with SMA-based rocking pier.Two more traditional bridge systems as well as a resilient bridge system having a RC rocking pier are also considered to demonstrate the super resilience from the revolutionary bridge with an ECC-reinforced rocking pier. The main difference in between the standard bridge along with the resilient bridge is that the 10 m higher fixed pier inside the traditional bridge is replaced by an eight m high pier plus a two m rocking upper pile cap in height. The FE models with the other 3 bridge systems could be effortlessly adjusted from that shown in Figure 12 and are thus not elaborated. five.2. Earthquake Ground Motions A suite of ground motions getting compatible for the acceleration spectra (i.e., E1 and E2 levels) [51,52] are generated and each suite incorporates seven earthquake ground motions, as shown in Figure 13a,b, respectively. The exceedance probabilities of E1 and E2 level earthquakes inside a recurrence interval of 50 years are ten and two.five , respectively. The damping ratio with the acceleration spectra is 5 .Figure 13. Earthquake spectra with each other with earthquake motions. (a) E1 level; (b) E2 level.5.3. Comparison of Seismic Responses in between the Conventional and Resilient Bridges To evaluate the harm state with the RC and ECC-reinforced pier immediately after earthquake excitation, sectional characteristic analyses are performed prior to analysis of bridge system. The equivalent bending moments versus curvatures of your sections are shown inMaterials 2021, 14,13 ofFigure 14, exactly where the equivalent bending moments on the RC and ECC-reinforced sections are 19,230.0 kNm and 28,023.0 kNm, respectively, and the connected curvatures are 0.003 1/m and 0.0044 1/m, respectively. The figure indicates that the elastic stiffness along with the yield strength of your ECC-reinforced section are each considerably bigger than those from the RC section.Figure 14. Sectional analyses of bending moment vs. curvature. (a) RC; (b) ECC.The curvature ductility along with the drift ratio of your pier as well because the shear deformation of the bearing are often selected because the damage indicators for seismic efficiency assessment o.
