Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Simplified method for the assessment of the seismic response of motorway bridges: longitudinal direction—accounting for abutment stoppers

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of abutment stoppers on the seismic response of motorway bridges in the longitudinal direction. A rigorous 3D finite element model of a representative overpass bridge, including the entire bridge–foundation–abutment–soil system, is developed and used as a benchmark. The effect of abutment stoppers is shown to be significant, and must therefore be considered for proper simulation of the seismic response of such bridges. Subsequently, the resistance mechanism of abutments triggered when the bridge deck collides on the stoppers is examined. The model is first validated against theoretical solutions. The abutment cantilever wall is subjected to slightly—but crucially—different loading when the deck collides on the stoppers: the loading is applied at the top of the abutment without any rotational restraint. To gain insights on the key parameters affecting the abutment resistance to such passive loading at the top, a dimensionless analysis and a comprehensive parametric study are conducted, employing an equivalent 2D model of the abutment. The latter is validated against the results of a rigorous 3D model. Based on the results of the parametric study, a simplified model accounting for the effect of abutment stoppers is developed. Its efficiency is assessed on the basis of slow-cyclic pushover and nonlinear dynamic time history analyses, using the full 3D model as a benchmark. Overall, the extended simplified model is shown to offer a reasonable approximation (excellent for cohesive soil) of the seismic performance of typical motorway bridges in the longitudinal direction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ABAQUS 6.13. (2013) Standard user’s manual. Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp, Providence

    Google Scholar 

  • Anastasopoulos I, Kontoroupi Th (2014) Simplified approximate method for analysis of rocking systems accounting for soil inelasticity and foundation uplifting. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 56:28–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anastasopoulos I, Georgarakos T, Georgiannou V, Drosos V, Kourkoulis R (2010) Seismic performance of bar-mat reinforced-soil retaining wall: shaking table testing versus numerical analysis with modified kinematic hardening constitutive model. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(10):1089–1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anastasopoulos I, Gelagoti F, Kourkoulis R, Gazetas G (2011) Simplified constitutive model for simulation of cyclic response of shallow foundations: validation against laboratory tests. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 137(12):1154–1168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anastasopoulos I, Loli M, Gelagoti F, Kourkoulis R, Gazetas G (2012) Nonlinear soil–foundation interaction: numerical analysis. In: Proceedings 2nd international conference on performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering, Taormina, Italy, 28–30 May 2012

  • Anastasopoulos I, Anastasopoulos PC, Agalianos A, Sakellariadis L (2015a) Simple method for real-time seismic damage assessment of bridges. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 78:201–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anastasopoulos I, Sakellariadis L, Agalianos A (2015b) Seismic analysis of motorway bridges accounting for key structural components and nonlinear soil–structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 78:127–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argyroudis SA, Mitoulis SA, Pitilakis KD (2013) Seismic response of bridge abutments on surface foundations subjected to collision forces. In: COMPDYN 4th international conference in computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, Kos, Greece, 12–14 June 2013

  • Arias A (1970) A measure of earthquake intensity. In: Hansen RJ (ed) Seismic design for nuclear power plants. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 438–483

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilotta E, Lanzano G, Madabhushi SPG, Silvestri F (2014) A numerical round robin on tunnels under seismic actions. Acta Geotech 9:563–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransby MF, Randolph MF (1998) Combined loading of skirted foundations. Géotechnique 48(5):637–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CalTrans (2013) Seismic Design Criteria, version 1.7. California Department of Transportation, Sacramento

  • Codermatz R, Nicolich R, Slejko D (2003) Seismic risk assessments and GIS technology: applications to infrastructures in the Friuli–Venezia Giulia region (NE Italy). Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 32:1677–1690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crouse CB, Hushmand B, Martin GR (1987) Dynamic soil–structure interaction of a single span bridge. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 15:711–729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan JM, Mokwa RL (2001) Passive earth pressures: theories and tests. ASCE J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 127(3):248–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdik M, Fahjan Y, Ozel O, Alcık H, Mert A, Gul M (2003) Istanbul earthquake rapid response and early warning system. Bull Earthq Eng 1(1):157–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdik M, Şeşetyan K, Demircioğlu MB, Hancılar U, Zülfikar C (2011) Rapid earthquake loss assessment after damaging earthquakes. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31(2):247–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadre AD, Dobry R (1998) Centrifuge modeling of cyclic lateral response of pilecap systems and seat-type abutments in dry sand. Report MCEER-98-0010, Rensselaer Institute, Civil Engineering Department, Troy, New York

  • Gajan S, Kutter BL (2009) Effects of moment-to-shear ratio on combined cyclic load–displacement behavior of shallow foundations from centrifuge experiments. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 135(8):1044–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gazetas G (1983) Analysis of machine foundation vibrations: state of the art. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2:2–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazetas G, Anastasopoulos I, Adamidis O, Kontoroupi T (2012) Nonlinear rocking stiffness of foundations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 47:83–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerolymos N, Gazetas G (2005) Seismic response of yielding pile in non-linear soil. In: Proceedings of the 1st Greece–Japan workshop on seismic design, observation, retrofit of foundations, Athens, Greece, pp 25–37

  • Gerolymos N, Zafeirakos A, Karapiperis K (2015) Generalized failure envelope for caisson foundations in cohesive soil: static and dynamic loading. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 78:154–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giannakos S, Gerolymos N, Gazetas G (2012) Cyclic lateral response of piles in dry sand: finite element modeling and validation. Comput Geotech 44:116–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourvenec S (2007) Shape effects on the capacity of rectangular footings under general loading. Géotechnique 57(8):637–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heiner L, Rollins KM, Gerber TM (2008) Passive force-deflection curves for abutments with MSE confined approach fills. In: 6th National seismic conference on bridges and highways, Charleston, SC

  • Housner GW (1952) Spectrum intensities of strong motion earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on earthquake and blast effects on structures, EERI, Oakland, CA, pp 20–36

  • Ishibashi I, Zhang X (1993) Unified dynamic shear moduli and damping ratios of sand and clay. Soil Found 33(1):12–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishihara K (1996) Soil behaviour in earthquake geotechnics. Oxford engineering science series. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Karavasilis TL, Makris N, Bazeos N, Beskos DE (2010) Dimensional response analysis of multi-storey regular steel MRF subjected to pulse-like earthquake ground motions. J Struct Eng ASCE 136(8):921–932

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotsoglou A, Pantazopoulou S (2007) Bridge–embankment interaction under transverse ground excitation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36(12):1719–1740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kourkoulis R, Anastasopoulos I, Gelagoti F, Kokkali P (2012) Dimensional analysis of SDOF systems rocking on inelastic soil. J Earthq Eng 16(7):995–1022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KSC_RC (2013) Moment–curvature, force–deflection, and axial force–bending moment interaction analysis of reinforced concrete members. Kansas State University, USA

  • Langhaar HL (1951) Dimensional analysis and theory of models. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanzano G, Bilotta E, Russo G, Silvestri F, Madabhushi SPG (2012) Centrifuge modeling of seismic loading on tunnels in sand. Geotech Test J 35(6):854–869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemnitzer A, Ahlberg E, Nigbor R, Shamsabadi A, Wallace J, Stewart J (2009) Lateral performance of full-scale bridge abutment wall with granular backfill. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 135(4):506–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makris N, Black CJ (2004a) Dimensional analysis of bilinear oscillators under pulse-type excitations. J Eng Mech ASCE 130(9):1019–1031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makris N, Black CJ (2004b) Dimensional analysis of rigid-plastic and elastoplastic structures under pulse-type excitations. J Eng Mech ASCE 130(9):1006–1018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makris N, Psychogios T (2006) Dimensional response analysis of yielding structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35:1203–1224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makris N, Vassiliou MF (2010) The existence of ‘complete similarities’ in the response of seismic isolated structures subjected to pulse-like ground motions and their implications in analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40(10):1103–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maroney B, Chai YH (1994) Bridge abutment stiffness and strength under earthquake loading. In: Proceedings 2nd international workshop on the seismic design of bridges, Queenstown

  • Maroney B, Romstad K, Chai YH, Vanderbilt E (1994) Interpretation of large-scale bridge abutment test results. In: Proceedings 3rd annual seismic research workshop, CALTRANS. Sacramento, CA

  • Meyerhof GG (1953) The bearing capacity of foundations under eccentric and inclined loads. In: 3rd International conference of soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Zurich, vol 1, pp 440–445

  • Mitoulis SA (2012) Seismic design of bridges with the participation of seat-type abutments. Eng Struct 44:222–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmeri A, Makris N (2008) Response analysis of rigid structures rocking on a viscoelastic foundation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37:1039–1063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitilakis D, Makris N (2010) Dimensional analysis of inelastic systems with soil–structures interaction. Bull Earthq Eng 8:1497–1514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potyondy JG (1961) Skin friction between various soils and construction materials. Géotech Lond 11(1):339–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powrie W (2013) Soil mechanics: concepts and applications, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Priestley MJN, Seible F, Calvi GM (1996) Seismic design and retrofit of bridges. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rankine W (1857) On the stability of loose earth. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 147:9–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rollins KM, Cole RT (2006) Cyclic lateral load behavior of a pile cap and backfill. ASCE J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132(9):1143–1153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siddharthan RV, El-Gamal M, Maragakis A (1997) Stiffnesses of abutments on spread footings with cohesionless backfill. Can Geotech J 34:686–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tegou SD, Mitoulis SA, Tegos IA (2010) An unconventional earthquake resistant abutment with transversely directed R/C walls. Eng Struct 32(11):3801–3816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurston SJ (1986a) Load displacement response of a rigid abutment wall translated into sand backfill. Report 5-86/1, Central Laboratories, Ministry of Works and Development, Lower Hutt

  • Thurston SJ (1986b) Rotation of a rigid abutment wall into dense backfill. Report 5-86/3, Central Laboratories, Ministry of Works and Development, Lower Hutt

  • Thurston SJ (1987) Translation of a rigid abutment wall into dense backfill. Report 5-87/1, Central Laboratories, Ministry of Works and Development, Lower Hutt

  • Tsinidis G, Pitilakis K, Trikalioti AD (2014) Numerical simulation of round robin numerical test on tunnels using a simplified kinematic hardening model. Acta Geotech 9:641–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vucetic M, Dobry R (1991) Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. J Geotech Eng (ASCE) 117(1):89–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson P, Elgamal A (2009) Full-scale shake table investigation of bridge abutment lateral earth pressure. Bull NZSEE 42(1):39–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JC, Tan BS (1990) Bridge abutments: assessing their influence on earthquake response of Meloland Road Overpass. J Eng Mech 116(8):1838–1856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood JH (2009) Waiwhetu stream bridges at Wainui and Seaview roads: detailed seismic assessment. Report to Hutt City Council. Draft, 6 Jan 2009

  • Wood JH, Chapman HE, Kirkcaldie DK, Gregg GC (2007) Seismic assessment and retrofit of the Waikanae and Pakuratahi River bridges. In: Proceedings NZSEE annual conference

  • Zafeirakos A, Gerolymos N (2016) Bearing strength surface for bridge caisson foundations in frictional soil under combined loading. Acta Geotech 11:1189–1208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J, Makris N (2002a) Kinematic response functions and dynamic stiffnesses of bridge embankments. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31:1933–1966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J, Makris N (2002b) Seismic response analysis of highway overcrossings including soil–structure interaction. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31:1967–1991

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Τhe financial support for this paper has been provided by the research project “SYNERGY 2011” (Development of Earthquake Rapid Response System for Metropolitan Motorways) of GGΕΤ–ΕΥDΕ–ΕΤΑΚ, implemented under the “EPAN ΙΙ Competitiveness & Entrepreneurship”, co-funded by the European Social Fund (ESF) and national resources. The authors are grateful to the Coordinator of the project, Professor George Gazetas, for his kind support, and encouragement.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland

    A. Agalianos, L. Sakellariadis & I. Anastasopoulos

Authors
  1. A. Agalianos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Sakellariadis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. I. Anastasopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. Anastasopoulos.

Additional information

A. Agalianos and L. Sakellariadis: formerly University of Dundee and National Technical University of Athens. I. Anastasopoulos: formerly University of Dundee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agalianos, A., Sakellariadis, L. & Anastasopoulos, I. Simplified method for the assessment of the seismic response of motorway bridges: longitudinal direction—accounting for abutment stoppers. Bull Earthquake Eng 15, 4133–4162 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0127-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0127-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation