Earthquakes and Structures

  • 제9권6호
  • /
  • Pages.1153-1179
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2092-7614(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2092-7622(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Seismic response prediction and modeling considerations for curved and skewed concrete box-girder bridges

  • Ramanathan, Karthik (AIR Worldwide) ;
  • Jeon, Jong-Su (Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology) ;
  • Zakeri, Behzad (Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California) ;
  • DesRoches, Reginald (Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology) ;
  • Padgett, Jamie E. (Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rice University)
  • 투고 : 2015.01.08
  • 심사 : 2015.10.30
  • 발행 : 2015.12.25
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This paper focuses on presenting modeling considerations and insight into the performance of typical straight, curved, and skewed box-girder bridges in California which form the bulk of the bridge inventory in the state. Three case study bridges are chosen: Meloland Road Overpass, Northwest Connector of Interstate 10/215 Interchange, and Painter Street Overpass, having straight, curved, and skewed superstructures, respectively. The efficacy of nonlinear dynamic analysis is established by comparing the response from analytical models to the recorded strong motion data. Finally insights are provided on the component behavioral characteristics and shift in vulnerability for each of the bridge types considered.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Abdel-Mohti, A. and Pekcan, G. (2008), "Seismic response of skewed RC box-girder bridges", Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., 7(4), 415-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-008-1007-4
  2. ACI (2008), "Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-08) and commentary", American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.
  3. Basoz, N. and Kiremidjian, A. (1998), "Evaluation of bridge damage data from the Loma Prieta and Northridge, California earthquakes", Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Research, University at Buffalo, NY, Technical Report MCEER-98-0004.
  4. Bignell, J.L., LaFave, J.M. and Hawkins, N.M. (2005), "Seismic vulnerability assessment of wall pier supported highway bridges using nonlinear pushover analyses", Eng. Struct., 27(14), 2044-2063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.06.015
  5. Bjornsson S., Stanton L. and Eberhard M. (1998), Seismic response of skew bridges", 6th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, WA.
  6. Buckle, I.G., Friedland, I., Mander, J., Martin, G., Nutt, R. and Power, M. (2006), "Seismic retrofitting manual for highway structures: Part 1-bridges", Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Research, University at Buffalo, NY, Technical Report MCEER-06-SP10.
  7. Caltrans (2010), "Seismic design criteria version 1.6", California Department of Transportation, Division of Engineering Services, Office of Structure Design, Sacramento, CA.
  8. Choi, E. (2002), "Seismic analysis and retrofit of Mid-America bridges", Ph.D. Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
  9. DesRoches, R. and Fenves, G.L. (1997), "Evaluation of recorded earthquake response of a curved highway bridge", Earthq. Spectra, 13(3), 363-386. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585953
  10. Dimitrakopoulos, E.G. (2010), "Analysis of a frictional oblique impact observed in skew bridges", Nonlinear Dyn., 60, 575-595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-009-9616-7
  11. Douglas, B.M. and Richardson, J. (1984), "Maximum amplitude tests of a highway bridge", 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA.
  12. Douglas, B.M. Maragakis, E A., Vrontino, S. and Douglas, B.J. (1990), "Analytical studies of the static and dynamic response of the Meloland Road Overcrossing", 4th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1, Palm Springs, CA.
  13. Fenves, G.L., Filippou, F.C. and Sze, D.T. (1992), "Response of the Dumbarton Bridge in the Loma Prieta earthquake", Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, Report No. UCB/EERC-92/02.
  14. Fenves, G.L. and Ellery, M. (1998), "Behavior and failure analysis of a multiple-frame highway bridge in the 1994 Northridge earthquake", Pacific Earthquake Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, Report No. PEER 98/08.
  15. Gates, J.H. and Smith, M.J. (1982), "Verification of dynamic modeling method by prototype excitation", California Department of Transportation, Office of Structures Design, Sacramento, CA, Report No. FHWA/CA/SD-82/07.
  16. Goel, R.K. and Chopra, A.K. (1997), "Evaluation of bridge abutment capacity and stiffness during earthquakes", Earthq. Spectra, 13(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585929
  17. Haddadi, H., Shakal, A., Stephens, C., Savage, W., Huang, M., Leith, W., Parrish, J. and Borcherdt, R. (2008), "Center for Engineering Strong-Motion Data (CESMD)", 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.
  18. Huang, M.J. and Shakal, A.F. (1995), "CSMIP strong-motion instrumentation and records from the I10/215 interchange bridge near San Bernardino", Earthq. Spectra, 11(2), 193-215. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585811
  19. Kaviani, P., Zareian, F. and Sarraf, M. (2010), "Comparison of seismic response of skewed bridges to near vs. far field motions", 7th International Conference on Urban Earthquake Engineering & 5th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, Japan.
  20. Kwon, O.-S. and Elnashai, A.S. (2008), "Seismic analysis of Meloland Road Overcrossing using multiplatform simulation software including SSI", J. Struct. Eng., 134(4), 651-660. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2008)134:4(651)
  21. Liu, W.D., Kartoum, A., Dhillon, S., Chen, X. and Imbsen, R.A. (1996), "Implications of the strong-motion records from a retrofitted curved bridge on seismic design and performance", SMIP96 Seminar on Seismological and Engineering Implications of Recent Strong-Motion Data, California Geological Survey, pp. 71-88.
  22. Ljung, L. (1987), "System identification", Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
  23. Lupoi, A., Franchin, P., Pinto, P.E. and Monti, G. (2005), "Seismic design of bridges accounting for spatial variability of ground motion", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 34(4-5), 10-25.
  24. McCallen, D.B. and Romstad, K.M. (1994), "Dynamic analyses of a skewed short-span, box-girder overpass", Earthq. Spectra, 100(4), 729-755.
  25. Ma, Y. and Deng, N. (2000), Deep foundations, in Bridge Engineering Handbook, eds., W.-F. Chen and L. Duan, CRC Press LLC.
  26. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N. and Park, R. (1988), "Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete", J. Struct. Eng., 114(8), 1804-1826. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)
  27. Maroney, B., Romstad, K. and Chajes, M. (1990), "Interpretation of Rio Dell freeway response during six recorded earthquake events", 4th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1, Palm Springs, CA.
  28. Maroney, B., Kutter, B., Romstad, K., Chai, Y.H. and Vanderbilt, E. (1994), "Interpretation of large scale bridge abutment test results", 3rd Annual Seismic Research Workshop, Sacramento, CA.
  29. McKenna, F., Scott, M.H. and Fenves, G.L. (2010), "Nonlinear finite-element analysis software architecture using object composition", J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 24(1), 95-107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000002
  30. Medina, R.A. and Krawinkler, H. (2003), "Seismic demands for nondeteriorating frame structures and their dependence on ground motions", John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, CA, Report No. 144.
  31. Megally, S.H., Silva, P.F. and Seible, F. (2002), "Seismic response of sacrificial shear keys in bridge abutments", Dept. of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, CA, Report No. SSRP-200l/23.
  32. Meng, J.Y. and Lui, E.M. (2000), "Seismic analysis and assessment of a skew highway bridge", Eng. Struct., 22(11), 1433-1452. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(99)00097-8
  33. Moehle J., Fenves, G., Mayes, R., Priestley, N., Seible, F., Uang, C.-M., Werner, S. and Aschheim, M. (1995), "Highway bridges and traffic management", Earthq. Spectra, 11(S2), 287-372. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585851
  34. Naeim, F. and Kelly, J.M. (1999), Design of seismic isolated structures: from theory to practice, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
  35. Muthukumar, S. and DesRoches, R. (2006), "A Hertz contact model with non-linear damping for pounding simulation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35(7), 811-828. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.557
  36. Oppenheim, A.V. and Schafer, R.W. (1989), Discrete-time signal processing, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
  37. Padgett, J.E. and DesRoches, R. (2008), "Methodology for the development of analytical fragility curves for retroffited bridges", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 37(8), 1157-1174. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.801
  38. Pandit, S.M. (1991), Modal and spectrum analysis, John Wiley, New York.
  39. Priestley, M.J.N., Seible, F. and Calvi, G.M. (1996), Seismic design and retrofit of bridges, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
  40. Priestley, M.J.N., Seible, F., Xiao, Y. and Verma, R. (1994), "Steel jacket retroffiting of reinforced concrete bridge columns for enhanced shear strength-Part 1: theoretical considerations and test design", ACI Struct. J., 91(4), 394-404.
  41. Ramanathan, K., DesRoches, R. and Padgett, J.E. (2010), "Analytical fragility curves for multispan continuous steel girder bridges in moderate seismic zones", J. Trans. Res. Board, 2202(3), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.3141/2202-21
  42. Ramanathan, K., DesRoches, R. and Padgett, J.E. (2011), "A comparison of pre-and post-seismic design considerations on moderate seismic zones through the fragility assessment of multispan bridge classes", Eng. Struct., 45, 559-573.
  43. Romstad, K., Kutter, B., Maroney, B., Vanderbilt, E., Griggs, M. and Chai, Y.H. (1995), "Experimental measurements of bridge abutment behavior", University of California, Davis, CA, Report No. UCD-STR-95-1.
  44. Shamsabadi, A., Khalili-Tehrani, P., Stewart, J.P. and Taciroglu, E. (2010), "Validated simulation models for lateral response of bridge abutments with typical backfills", J. Bridge Eng., 15(3), 302-311. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000058
  45. Stewart, J.P., Taciroglu, E., Wallace, J.W., Ahlberg, E.R., Lemnitzer, A., Rha, C., Tehrani, P.K., Keowan, S., Nigbor, R.L. and Salamanca, A. (2007), "Full scale cyclic testing of foundation support systems for highway bridges. Part II: Abutment backwalls", University of California, Los Angeles, CA, Report No. UCLA-SGEL-2007/02.
  46. Sweet, J. and Morrill, K.B. (1993), "Nonlinear soil-structure interaction simulation of the Painter Street Overcrossing", 2nd Annual CALTRANS Seismic Research Workshop, Sacramento, CA.
  47. Werner, S.D., Beck, J.L. and Levine, M.B. (1987), "Seismic response evaluation of Meloland Road Overpass using 1979 Imperial Valley earthquake records", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 15(2), 249-274. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290150207
  48. Wilson, J.C. and Tan, B.S. (1990a), "Bridge abutments: formulation of simple model for earthquake response analysis", J. Eng. Mech., 116(8), 1828-1837. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1990)116:8(1828)
  49. Wilson, J.C. and Tan, B.S. (1990b), "Bridge abutments: assessing their influence on earthquake response of Meloland Road Overpass", J. Eng. Mech., 116(8), 1838-1856. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1990)116:8(1838)
  50. Yashinsky, M. and Ostrom, T. (2000), "Caltrans' new seismic design criteria for bridges", Earthq. Spectra, 16(1), 285-307. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586112
  51. Zhang, J. and Makris, N. (2002), "Seismic response analysis of highway overcrossings including soil structure interaction", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(11), 1967-1991. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.197

피인용 문헌

  1. Seismic performance of single pier skewed bridges with different pier-deck connections vol.10, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.6.1467
  2. Impact of Spatial Variability Parameters on Seismic Fragilities of a Cable-Stayed Bridge Subjected to Differential Support Motions vol.22, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001046
  3. Skew Adjustment Factors for Fragilities of California Box-Girder Bridges Subjected to near-Fault and Far-Field Ground Motions vol.24, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001338
  4. Fragility characteristics of skewed concrete bridges accounting for ground motion directionality vol.63, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2017.63.5.647
  5. Design of bridges with skewed abutments for a target tolerable seismic loss vol.164, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.02.020
  6. Response of Skew Bridges with permutations of geometric parameters and bearings articulation vol.17, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.17.5.477
  7. Studying the Effect of Fundamental Structural Period on the Seismic Fragility Curves of Two-Span Integral Concrete Box Girder Bridges vol.44, pp.suppl1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-019-00312-9
  8. Ground Motion-Dependent Rapid Damage Assessment of Structures Based on Wavelet Transform and Image Analysis Techniques vol.146, pp.11, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0002793
  9. Effect of various aspects on the seismic performance of a curved bridge with HDR bearings vol.19, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2020.19.6.427
  10. Semantic Neural Network Ensemble for Automated Dependency Relation Extraction from Bridge Inspection Reports vol.35, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000961