Earthquakes and Structures

  • 제10권5호
  • /
  • Pages.1233-1251
  • /
  • 2016
  • /
  • 2092-7614(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2092-7622(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Contribution of local site-effect on the seismic response of suspension bridges to spatially varying ground motions

  • Adanur, Suleyman (Department of Civil Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University) ;
  • Altunisik, Ahmet C. (Department of Civil Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University) ;
  • Soyluk, Kurtulus (Department of Civil Engineering, Gazi University) ;
  • Dumanoglu, A. Aydin (Department of Civil Engineering, Canik Basari University) ;
  • Bayraktar, Alemdar (Department of Civil Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University)
  • 투고 : 2015.12.22
  • 심사 : 2016.03.03
  • 발행 : 2016.05.25
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

In this paper, it is aimed to determine the stochastic response of a suspension bridge subjected to spatially varying ground motions considering the geometric nonlinearity. Bosphorus Suspension Bridge built in Turkey and connects Europe to Asia in Istanbul is selected as a numerical example. The spatial variability of the ground motion is considered with the incoherence, wave-passage and site-response effects. The importance of site-response effect which arises from the difference in the local soil conditions at different support points of the structure is also investigated. At the end of the study, mean of the maximum and variance response values obtained from the spatially varying ground motions are compared with those of the specialised cases of the ground motion model. It is seen that each component of the spatially varying ground motion model has important effects on the dynamic behaviour of the bridge. The response values obtained from the general excitation case, which also includes the site-response effect causes larger response values than those of the homogeneous soil condition cases. The variance values calculated for the general excitation case are dominated by dynamic component at the deck and Asian side tower. The response values obtained for the site-response effect alone are larger than the response values obtained for the incoherence and wave-passage effects, separately. It can be concluded that suspension bridges are sensitive to the spatial variability of ground motion. Therefore, the incoherence, the wave-passage and especially the site-response effects should be considered in the stochastic analysis of this type of engineering structures.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Abdel-Ghaffar, A.M. and Rubin, L.I. (1982), "Suspension bridge response to multiple-support excitations", J. Eng. Mech., 108(2), 419-435.
  2. Adanur, S. and Dumanoglu, A.A. (2002), "Stochastic dynamic analyses of suspension bridges subjected to asynchronous ground motions", Fifth International Congress on Advances in Civil Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey.
  3. Ates, S., Atmaca, B., Yildirim, E. and Demiroz, N.A. (2013), "Effects of soil-structure interaction on construction stage analysis of highway bridges", Comput. Concrete, 12(2), 169-186. https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2013.12.2.169
  4. Ates, S., Bayraktar, A. and Dumanoglu, A.A. (2006), "The effect of spatially varying earthquake ground motions on the stochastic response of bridges isolated with friction pendulum systems", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 26(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2005.08.002
  5. Bhagwat, M., Sasmal, S., Novak, B. and Upadhyay, A. (2011), "Investigations on seismic response of two span cable-stayed bridges", Earthq. Struct., 2(4), 337-356. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2011.2.4.337
  6. Bi, K. and Hao, H. (2013), "Numerical simulation of pounding damage to bridge structures under spatially varying ground motions", Eng. Struct., 46, 62-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.07.012
  7. Bi, K., Hao, H. and Chouw, N. (2010), "Required separation distance between decks and at abutments of a bridge crossing a canyon site to avoid seismic pounding", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 39(3), 303-323. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.943
  8. Brownjohn, J.M.W. (1994), "Observations on non-linear dynamic characteristics of suspension bridges", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 23(12), 1351-1367. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290231206
  9. Callisto, L., Rampello, S. and Viggiani, G.M.B. (2013), "Soil-structure interaction for the seismic design of the Messina Strait Bridge", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 52, 103-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.05.005
  10. Clough, R.W. and Penzien, J. (1993), Dynamics of Structures, Second Edition, McGraw Hill, Inc., Singapore.
  11. Der Kiureghian, A. (1996), "A coherency model for spatially varying ground motions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 25(1), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199601)25:1<99::AID-EQE540>3.0.CO;2-C
  12. Der Kiureghian, A., Keshishian, P. and Hakobian, A. (1997), "Multiple support response spectrum analysis of bridges including the site-response effect and MSRS code", Report No. UCB/EERC-97/02, Berkeley (CA), Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California.
  13. Dong, H., Du, X. and Zhou, Y. (2015), "Pounding analysis of RC bridge considering spatial variability of ground motion", Earthq. Struct., 9(5), 1029-1044. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.9.5.1029
  14. Dumanoglu, A.A. and Severn, R.T. (1985), "Asynchronous seismic analysis of modern suspension bridges", Part 1: Free Vibration, Bristol (UK), Department of Civil Engineering, University of Bristol.
  15. Dumanoglu, A.A. and Severn, R.T. (1987), "Seismic response of modern suspension bridges to asynchronous vertical ground motion", Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineerings, Part 2, 83, 701-730. https://doi.org/10.1680/iicep.1987.196
  16. Dumanoglu, A.A. and Severn, R.T. (1989), "Seismic response of modern suspension bridges to asynchronous longitudinal and lateral ground motion", Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineerings, Part 2, 87, 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1680/iicep.1989.1454
  17. Dumanoglu, A.A. and Soyluk, K. (2002), "SVEM, A stochastic structural analysis program for spatially varying earthquake motions", TDV/KT 023-76, Turkish Earthquake Foundation, Istanbul.
  18. Ettouney, M. and Gajer, R. (2001), "Frequency-domain analysis of long-span bridges subjected to nonuniform seismic motions", J. Bridge Eng., 6(6), 577-586. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2001)6:6(577)
  19. Giaralis, A. and Spanos, P.D. (2012), "Derivation of response spectrum compatible non-stationary stochastic processes relying on Monte Carlo-based peak factor estimation", Earthq. Struct., 3(2), 581-609. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2012.3.3_4.581
  20. Harichandran, R.S. and Vanmarcke, E.H. (1986), "Stochastic variation of earthquake ground motion in space and time", J. Eng. Mech., 112(2), 154-174. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1986)112:2(154)
  21. Harichandran, R.S. and Wang, W. (1988), "Response of one-and two-span beams to spatially varying seismic excitation", Report to the National Science Foundation, MSU-ENGR-88-002, Michigan Satate University, Michigan.
  22. Harichandran, R.S., Hawwari, A. and Sweiden, B.N. (1996), "Response of long-span bridges to spatially varying ground motion", J. Struct. Eng., 122(5), 476-484. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1996)122:5(476)
  23. Li, B. and Chouw, N. (2014), "Experimental investigation of inelastic bridge response under spatially varying excitations with pounding", Eng. Struct., 79(15), 106-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.08.012
  24. Lin, J.H., Zhang, Y.H., Li, Q.S. and Williams, F.W. (2004), "Seismic spatial effects for long-span bridges, using the pseudo excitation method", Eng. Struct., 26(9), 1207-1216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.03.019
  25. Ni, Y.Q., Zhang, F.L., Xia, Y.X. and Au, S.K. (2015), "Operational modal analysis of a long-span suspension bridge under different earthquake events", Earthq. Struct., 8(4), 859-887. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.8.4.859
  26. Peric, D., Miletic, M., Shah, B.R., Esmaeily, A. and Wang H. (2016), "Thermally induced soil structure interaction in the existing integral bridge", Eng. Struct., 106(1), 484-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.032
  27. Rassem, M., Ghobarah, A. and Heidebrecht, A.C. (1996), "Site effects on the seismic response of a suspension bridge", Eng. Struct., 18(5), 363-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0296(95)00001-1
  28. Shrestha, B., Hao, H. and Bi, K. (2014), "Effectiveness of using rubber bumper and restrainer on mitigating pounding and unseating damage of bridge structures subjected to spatially varying ground motions", Eng. Struct., 79(15), 195-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.08.020
  29. Shrestha, B., Hao, H. and Bi, K. (2015), "Seismic response analysis of multiple-frame bridges with unseating restrainers considering ground motion spatial variation and SSI", Adv. Struct. Eng., 18(6), 873-892. https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.18.6.873
  30. Soyluk, K. and Sicacik, E.A. (2012), "Soil-structure interaction analysis of cable-stayed bridges for spatially varying ground motion components", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 35, 80-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.11.003
  31. TEC2007 Turkish Earthquake Code (2007), Specification for Buildings to be Constructed in Earthquake Areas, Government of Republic, Ankara, Turkey.
  32. Xie, X., Lin, G., Duan, Y.F., Zhao, J.L. and Wang, R.Z. (2012), "Seismic damage of long span steel tower suspension bridge considering strong aftershocks", Earthq. Struct., 3(5), 767-781. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2012.3.5.767
  33. Zhang, Y.H., Li, Q.S., Lin, J.H. and Williams, F.W. (2009), "Random vibration analysis of long-span structures subjected to spatially varying ground motions", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 29(4), 620-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2008.06.007

피인용 문헌

  1. Effectiveness of Soil–Structure Interaction and Dynamic Characteristics on Cable-Stayed Bridges Subjected to Multiple Support Excitation vol.18, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-018-0069-z
  2. Investigation of ground-motion spatial variability effects on component and system vulnerability of a floating cable-stayed bridge pp.2048-4011, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433219827238
  3. Wave-passage effect on the seismic response of suspension bridges considering local soil conditions vol.17, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-017-6010-z
  4. New site classification system and design response spectra in Korean seismic code vol.15, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.15.1.001