Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Influence of ground motion spatial variations and local soil conditions on the seismic responses of buried segmented pipelines

  • Bi, Kaiming (School of Civil and Resource Engineering, The University of Western Australia) ;
  • Hao, Hong (School of Civil and Resource Engineering, The University of Western Australia)
  • Received : 2012.08.22
  • Accepted : 2012.11.01
  • Published : 2012.12.10
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Previous major earthquakes revealed that most damage of the buried segmented pipelines occurs at the joints of the pipelines. It has been proven that the differential motions between the pipe segments are one of the primary reasons that results in the damage (Zerva et al. 1986, O'Roueke and Liu 1999). This paper studies the combined influences of ground motion spatial variations and local soil conditions on the seismic responses of buried segmented pipelines. The heterogeneous soil deposits surrounding the pipelines are assumed resting on an elastic half-space (base rock). The spatially varying base rock motions are modelled by the filtered Tajimi-Kanai power spectral density function and an empirical coherency loss function. Local site amplification effect is derived based on the one-dimensional wave propagation theory by assuming the base rock motions consist of out-of-plane SH wave or combined in-plane P and SV waves propagating into the site with an assumed incident angle. The differential axial and lateral displacements between the pipeline segments are stochastically formulated in the frequency domain. The influences of ground motion spatial variations, local soil conditions, wave incident angle and stiffness of the joint are investigated in detail. Numerical results show that ground motion spatial variations and local soil conditions can significantly influence the differential displacements between the pipeline segments.

Keywords

References

  1. Bi, K. and Hao, H. (2011), "Influence of irregular topography and random soil properties on coherency loss of spatial seismic ground motions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 40(9), 1045-1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1077
  2. Bi, K. and Hao, H. (2012), "Modelling and simulation of spatially varying earthquake ground motions at sites with varying conditions", Probab. Eng. Mech., 29, 92-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2011.09.002
  3. Bi, K., Hao, H. and Ren, W. (2010a), "Response of a frame structure on a canyon site to spatially varying ground motions", Struct. Eng. Mech., 36(1), 111-127. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2010.36.1.111
  4. Bi, K., Hao, H. and Chouw, N. (2010b), "Required separation distance between decks and at abutments of a bridge crossing a canyon site to avoid seismic pounding", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 39(3), 303-323.
  5. Clough, R.W. and Penzien, J. (1993), Dynamics of Structures, Second Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.
  6. Der Kiureghian, A. (1980), "Structural response to stationary excitation", J. Eng. Mech., 106(6), 1195-1213.
  7. Der Kiureghian, A. (1996), "A coherency model for spatially varying ground motions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 25(1), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199601)25:1<99::AID-EQE540>3.0.CO;2-C
  8. Dumanogluid, A.A. and Soyluk, K. (2003), "A stochastic analysis of long span structures subjected to spatially varying ground motions including the site-response effect", Eng. Struct., 25(10), 1301-1310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(03)00080-4
  9. Hadid, M. and Afra, H. (2000), "Sensitivity analysis of site effects on response spectra of pipelines", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 20(1-4), 249-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(00)00058-0
  10. Hao, H. (1993), "Arch responses to correlated multiple excitations", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 22(5), 389-404. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290220503
  11. Hindy, A. and Novak, M. (1979), "Earthquake response of underground pipelines", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 7(5), 451-476. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290070506
  12. Kuraoka, S. and Rainer, J.H. (1996), "Damage to water distribution system caused by the 1995 Hyogo-Ken Nanbu earthquake", Can. J. Civil Eng., 23(3), 665-677. https://doi.org/10.1139/l96-882
  13. Nelson, I. and Weidlinger, P. (1979), "Dynamic seismic analysis of long segmented lifelines", J. Press. Vess. T., 101, 10-20. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3454592
  14. O'Roueke, M.J. and Liu, X. (1999), Response of Buried Pipelines Subjected to Earthquake Effects, Multidisciplinary Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research, Monograph Series, No. 3.
  15. Sobczky, K. (1991), Stochastic Wave Propagation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
  16. Tang, A. et al. (2010), "Preliminary report on the 27 February 2010 Mw8.8 offshore Maule, Chile earthquake", The Earthquake Engineering Online Archive (NISEE e-library), available online: http://nisee.berkeley.edu/elibrary/Text/201104281.
  17. Tsai, J.S., Jou, L.D. and Lin, S.H. (2000), "Damage to buried water supply pipelines in the Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake and a preliminary evaluation of seismic resistance of pipe joints", J. Chin. Inst. Eng., 23(4), 395-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/02533839.2000.9670560
  18. Wolf, J.P. (1985), Dynamic Soil-structure Interaction, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA.
  19. Yuan, Y. and Sun, B. (2008), "General information of engineering damage of Wenchuan Ms 8.0 earthquake", J. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., 28, 1-114.
  20. Zembaty, Z. and Rutenburg, A. (2002), "Spatial response spectra and site amplification effect", Eng. Struct., 24(11), 1485-1496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00096-2
  21. Zerva, A., Ang, A. H.S. and Wen, Y.K. (1986), "Development of differential response spectra for lifeline seismic analysis", Probab. Eng. Mech., 1(4), 202-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-8920(86)90013-5
  22. Zerva, A., Ang, A. H.S. and Wen, Y.K. (1988), "Lifeline response to spatially variable ground motions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 16(3), 361-379. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290160306
  23. Zerva, A. and Zervas, V. (2002), "Spatial variation of seismic ground motions: an overview", Appl. Mech. Rev., 55(3), 271-297. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1458013

Cited by

  1. Shaking-Table Tests for Immersed Tunnels at Different Sites vol.2017, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2546318
  2. Probabilistic pounding analysis of high-pier continuous rigid frame bridge with actual site conditions vol.15, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.15.2.193
  3. Influence of Actual Site Soil Layers on Pounding of a High-Pier Bridge Occurred between Deck and Abutment vol.14, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1061/jhtrcq.0000717
  4. Practical coherency model suitable for near- and far-field earthquakes based on the effect of source-to-site distance on spatial variations in ground motions vol.73, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2020.73.6.651