Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Investigation of seismic response of long-span bridges under spatially varying ground motions

  • Aziz Hosseinnezhad (Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili) ;
  • Amin Gholizad (Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili)
  • Received : 2021.05.21
  • Accepted : 2024.03.29
  • Published : 2024.05.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Long-span structures, such as bridges, can experience different seismic excitations at the supports due to spatially variability of ground motion. Regarding current bridge designing codes, it is just EC 2008 that suggested some regulations to consider it and in the other codes almost ignored while based on some previous studies it is found that the effect of mentioned issue could not be neglected. The current study aimed to perform a comprehensive study about the effect of spatially varying ground motions on the dynamic response of a reinforced concrete bridge under asynchronous input motions considering soil-structure interactions. The correlated ground motions were generated by an introduced method that contains all spatially varying components, and imposed on the supports of the finite element model under different load scenarios. Then the obtained results from uniform and non-uniform excitations were compared to each other. In addition, the effect of soil-structure interactions involved and the corresponding results compared to the previous results. Also, to better understand the seismic response of the bridge, the responses caused by pseudo-static components decompose from the total response. Finally, an incremental dynamic analysis was performed to survey the non-linear behavior of the bridge under assumed load scenarios. The outcomes revealed that the local site condition plays an important role and strongly amplifies the responses. Furthermore, it was found that a combination of wave-passage and strong incoherency severely affected the responses of the structure. Moreover, it has been found that the pseudo-static component's contribution increase with increasing incoherent parameters. In addition, regarding the soil condition was considered for the studied bridge, it was found that a combination of spatially varying ground motions and soil-structure interactions effects could make a very destructive scenarios like, pounding and unseating.

Keywords

References

  1. Adanur, S., Altunisik, A.C., Soyluk, K. and Bayraktar, A. (2016), "Multiple-support seismic response of Bosporus Suspension Bridge for various random vibration method", Case Stud. Struct. Eng., 5, 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csse.2016.04.001.
  2. Amjadian, M. and Kalantari, A. (2010), "An approximate method for dynamic analysis of skewed highway bridges with continuous rigid deck", Eng. Struct., 32, 2850-2860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.05.004.
  3. Anderson, T.W. (1971), The Statistical Analysis of Time Series, Wiley, New York, NY, USA.
  4. Apaydin, NM., Bas, S. and Harmandar, E. (2016), "Response of the Fatih Sultan Mehmet Suspension Bridge under spatially varying multi-point earthquake excitations", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 84, 44-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.01.018.
  5. Bas, S., Apaydin, N.M., Harmadar, E. and Catbas, N. (2018), "Multi-point earthquake response of the Bosphorus Bridge to site-specific ground motions", Steel Compos. Struct., 26(2), 197-211. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2018.26.2.197.
  6. Burdette, N.J., Elnashai, A.S., Lupoi, A. and Sextos, A.G. (2008), "Effect of asynchronous earthquake motion on complex bridges. I: Methodology and input motion", J. Bridge Eng., 13(2), 158-165. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2008)13:2(158).
  7. Cornell, C.A., Jalayer, F., Hamburger, R.O. and Foutch, D.A. (2002), "Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines", J. Struct. Eng., 128(4), 526-533. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:4(526).
  8. Der Kiureghian, A. and Konakli, K. (2011), "Simulation of spatially varying ground motions including incoherence, wave-passage and differential site-response effects", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 41(3), 495-513. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1141.
  9. Der Kiureghian, A. and Neuenhofer, A. (1992), "Response spectrum method for multi-support seismic excitations", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 21(8), 713-740. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290210805.
  10. El Haber, E., Cornou, C., Jongmans, D., Lopez-Caballero, F., Youssef Abdelmassih, D. and Al-Bittar, T. (2021), "Impact of spatial variability of shear wave velocity on the lagged coherency of synthetic surface ground motions", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 145, 10668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106689.
  11. Ghobarah, A. (2001), "Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: State of development", Eng. Struct., 23, 878-884. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00036-0.
  12. Gholizad, A. and Hosseinnezhad, A. (2020), "Investigating the effect of pseudo-static components on bridge structures under multiple support excitations using conditional simulated records", J. Rehabilitat. Civil Eng., 8(4), 173-196. https://doi.org/10.22075/jrce.2020.20195.1401.
  13. Gholizad, A. and Hosseinnezhad, A. (2022), "Fragility analysis of RC bridges considering spatially varying ground motions and SSI", Sci. Iran., 29(6), 2919-2939. https://doi.org/10.24200/sci.2022.58039.5533.
  14. Jeon, J., Shafieezadeh, A. and Des Roches, R. (2018), "Component fragility assessment of a long, curved multi-frame bridge: Uniform excitation versus spatially correlated ground motions", Struct. Eng. Mech., 65(5), 633-644. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2018.65.5.633.
  15. Kameda, H. and Morikawa, H. (1992), "An interpolating stochastic process for simulation of conditional random fields", Probab. Eng. Mech., 7, 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-8920(92)90028-G.
  16. Ketchum, M., Chang, V. and Shantz, T. (2004), "Influence of design ground motion level on highway bridge costs", Report No. Lifelines 6D01; Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  17. Kim, Y.S. (2015), "Pseudo 3D FEM analysis for wave passage effect on the response spectrum of a building built on soft soil layer", Earthq. Struct., 8(5), 1241-1254. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.8.5.1241.
  18. Konakli, K. and Der Kiureghian, A. (2011), "Simulation of spatially varying ground motions including incoherence, wave-passage and differential site-response effects", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 41(3), 495-513. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1141.
  19. Leger, P., Ide, I.M. and Paultre, P. (1990), "Multiple-support seismic analysis of large structures", Comput. Struct., 36(6), 1153-1158. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(90)90224-P.
  20. Liao, S. and Zerva, A. (2006), "Physically compliant, conditionally simulated spatially variable seismic ground motions for performance-based design", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35, 891-919. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.562.
  21. Luco, J.E. and Wong, H.L. (1986), "Response of a rigid foundation to a spatially random ground motion", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 14(6), 891-908. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290140606.
  22. McKenna, F. and Fenves, GL. (2000), "An object-oriented software design for parallel structural analysis", Proceedings of the 2000 Structures Congress & Exposition, Philadelphia, PA, USA, May.
  23. Papadopoulos, S.P. and Sextos, A.G. (2018), "Anti-symmetric mode excitation and seismic response of base-isolated bridges under asynchronous input motion", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 113, 148-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.06.004.
  24. Saxena, V., Deodatis, G. and Shinozuka, M. (2000), "Effect of spatial variation of earthquake ground motion on the nonlinear dynamic response of highway bridges", 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, January-February.
  25. Shiravand, M.R. and Parvanehro, P. (2019), "Spatial variation of seismic ground motion effects on nonlinear responses of cable stayed bridges considering different soil types", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 119, 104-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.01.002.
  26. Taucer, F., Spacone, E. and Filippou, F.C. (1991), "A fiber beam-column element for seismic response analysis of reinforced concrete structures", Report No. UCB/EERC-91/17; Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  27. Toki, K. and Yanabu, K. (1988), "Detection of apparent wave velocity in near surface ground with irregular profile by an array observation", Proceeding of 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, August.
  28. Tondini, N. and Stojadinovic, B. (2012), "Probabilistic seismic demand model for curved reinforced concrete bridges", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 10, 1455-1479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-012-9362-y.
  29. Tonyali, Z., Ates, S. and Adanur, S. (2019), "Spatially variable effects on seismic response of the cable-stayed bridges considering local soil site conditions", Struct. Eng. Mech., 70(2), 143-152. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2019.70.2.143.
  30. Vanmarcke, EH. and Fenton, GA. (1991), "Conditioned simulation of local fields of earthquake ground motion", Struct. Saf., 10, 247-264. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4730(91)90018-5.
  31. Veletsos, A.S. and Nair, V.D. (1975), "Seismic interaction of structures on hysteretic foundations", J. Struct. Div., 101(1), 109-129. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0003962.
  32. Wang, J.T., Jin, F. and Zhang, C.H. (2018), "Nonlinear seismic response analysis of high arch dams to spatially varying ground motions", Int. J. Civil Eng., 17, 487-493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-018-0310-3.
  33. Wolf, J.P. (1997), "Spring-dashpot-mass models for foundation vibrations", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 26(9), 931-949. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199709)26:9%3C931::AID-EQE686%3E3.0.CO;2-M.
  34. Yao, E., Wang, S., Miao, Y., Ye, L. and Zhu, L. (2020), "Simulation of fully non-stationary spatially varying ground motions considering nonlinear soil behavior", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 129, 105954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105954.
  35. Yurdakul, M. and Ates, S. (2018), "Stochastic responses of isolated bridge with triple concave friction pendulum bearing under spatially varying ground motion", Struct. Eng. Mech., 65(6), 771-784. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2018.65.6.771.
  36. Zerva, A. and Harada, T. (1994), "A site-specific model for the spatial incoherence of the seismic ground motions", Proceedings of the 5th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Chicago, IL, USA, July.
  37. 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.
  38. Zhao, L., Hao, H., Bi, K. and Li, X. (2018), "Numerical study of the seismic responses of precast segmental column bridge under spatially varying ground motions", J. Bridge Eng., 23(12), 04018096. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001319.
  39. Zhong, J., Jeon, J.S. and Ren, W.X. (2018), "Risk assessment for a long-span cable-stayed bridge subjected to multiple support excitations", Eng. Struct., 176, 220-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.08.107.