Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 11, Issue 6, pp 2387–2405 | Cite as

EUROCODE 8-Part 2, Bridges: time history presentation of seismic action for base isolated bridges

Original Research Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 228 Downloads

Abstract

The purpose of the investigations presented herein has been to show a developed and verified method for presentation of seismic action by a time history. These investigations are related to Eurocode 8, Part 2, Bridges, and have involved the use of recorded accelerogrammes obtained from occurred earthquakes. The method introduces optimization by which, for a period equal to the natural period of vibration of a structure, the ratio between the square root of the sum of squares of the spectra computed from both horizontal components of a single record—SRSS and the code spectrum is computed. While performing this task, pairs of horizontal components for which this ratio is equal or greater than 1.0 (up to a tolerance value) are selected for nonlinear dynamic analysis, provided that the scaling factor is limited. Verification of the method is given for a base isolated bridge on E-75 motorway, with a natural period of 1.4 s. Also, some important recommendations and discussions related to the presentation of the code spectrum by a time history are given.

Keywords

EUROCODE 8 Bridge Base isolation Seismic action  Time history Nonlinear dynamic analysis 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ambraseys NN, Bommer JJ (1992) On the attenuation of ground acceleration in Europe. In: Proceedings of the 10th World conference on earthquake engineering vol. 1, 675–678Google Scholar
  2. Ambraseys NN et al (1996) Prediction of horizontal response spectra in Europe. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 25:371–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ambraseys NN, Smit P, Berardi D, Rinaldis D, Cooton F, Berge C (2000) Dissemination of European strong-motion data, (CD -ROM Collection). European Commission, DGXII, Science, Research and Development, BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  4. Ambraseys NN, Douglas JD, Rinaldis D, Berge-Thierry C, Sohadolc P, Costa G, Sigbjornsson R, Smith P (2004) Dissemination of European strong-motion data, vol. 2., CD-Rom Collection, Engineering and Physical Science Research Council, UKGoogle Scholar
  5. Bazzurro P, Cornell AC (1999) Disaggregation of seismic hazard. BSSA 89(2):501–530Google Scholar
  6. Beyer K, Bommer JJ (2007) Selection and scaling of real accelerograms for bi-directional loading: a review of current practice and code provisions. J Earthq Eng 11-13-45 doi: 10.1080/136324607012280013
  7. Bommer JJ, Avecedo AB (2004) The use of real accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis. J Earthq Eng 8(Special Issue 1):43–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boore DM et al. (1993) A summary of recent results connecting for prediction of strong motion in Western North America. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on strong motion data, vol. 2, December 13–17, Menlo Park, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  9. Boore DM, Joyner WB (1982) The empirical prediction of ground motion. BSSA 72:S43–S60Google Scholar
  10. Campbell WK (1981) Near -source attenuation of peak horizontal acceleration. BSSA 71(6):2039–2070Google Scholar
  11. Dobry R, Idriss IM, Ng E (1978) Duration characteristics of horizontal components of strong-motion earthquake records. BSSA 68(5):1487–1520Google Scholar
  12. EUROCODE 8: design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures, part 2-bridges, (2005) EN 1998–2:2005, December 2005Google Scholar
  13. EUROCODE 8: design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures, seismic actions and general requirements for structures, (2004) EN 1998–1:2004, Stage 51, May 2004Google Scholar
  14. Hristovski V, Stamatovska S, Bickovski V, Petrovski D (April 1999) Detailed design of the upgrading of E-75 sections Demir Kapija-Udovo and Udovo-Gevgelija, earthquake engineering part 1: dynamic analysis of reinforced concrete viaduct ’Vodosirski’, PHARE project, IZIIS Report 99–18. SkopjeGoogle Scholar
  15. Hristovski V, Stamatovska S, Bickovski V, Petrovski D (May 1999) Detailed design of the upgrading of E-75 sections Demir Kapija-Udovo and Udovo-Gevgelija, earthquake engineering part 1: dynamic analysis of reinforced concrete overpass ‘Miletkovo’, PHARE project, IZIIS Report 99–19. SkopjeGoogle Scholar
  16. Idriss MI (September 1991) Selection of earthquake ground motion at rock sites. Report prepared for the structures division, building and fire research laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, DavisGoogle Scholar
  17. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1988) Measurement, characteristics and prediction of ground motion. In: Proceedings of earthquake engineering and soil dynamics division, ASCE, 1988, vol. 11 G.T., pp 43–102Google Scholar
  18. Joyner WB, Boore DM (1981) Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong-motion records including records from the 1979 imperial valley, California earthquake. BSSA 71(6):2011–2039Google Scholar
  19. Lervolino L, Maddaloni G, Conseza E (2009) A note on selection of time-histories for seismic analysis of bridges in eurocode 8. J Earthq Eng 138:1125–1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Naumovski N (1984) Determination of seismic design parameters for NPP—probabilistic approach. Ph.D. Thesis, IZIIS-UKIM, Skopje, R. MacedoniaGoogle Scholar
  21. Petrovski D, Talaganov K, Stamatovska S, Aleksovski D, Sesov V, Jurukovski D (1999) Phare project: detailed design of the upgrading of E-75 sections Demir Kapija-Udovo and Udovo- Gevgelija, earthquake engineering part 1—application of EC-8 in design of structures. Report IZIIS 99–14, January 1999, Skopje, R. MacedoniaGoogle Scholar
  22. Sabetta F, Pugliese A (1987) Attenuation of peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from Italian strong-motion records. BSSA 77(5):1491–1513Google Scholar
  23. Sabetta F, Pugliese A (1996) Estimation of response spectra and simulation of non-stationary earthquake ground motions. BSSA 86(2):337–352Google Scholar
  24. Sadigh KR (1993) A review of attenuation relationships for rock site conditions from shallow crustal earthquakes in an interplate environment. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on strong motion data, vol. 2, Menlo Park, California, December 13–17Google Scholar
  25. Sadigh KR et al. (1993) Specification of long-period ground motions: updates attenuation relationships for rock site conditions and adjustments factors for near- fault effects. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on strong motion data, vol. 2, Menlo Park, California, December 13–17Google Scholar
  26. Stamatovska S (1988) Probabilistic response of a single-degree-of-freedom system exposed to seismic effects. M.Sc. Thesis, Institute of earthquake engineering and engineering seismology, “Ss.Cyril and Methodius” University, Skopje, R. MacedoniaGoogle Scholar
  27. Stamatovska SG (2002) A new azimuth dependent empirical strong motion model for vrancea subduction zone. In: 12th European conference on earthquake engineering, paper reference 324, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  28. Stamatovska SG (2006) A new ground motion model—methodological approach. Acta Geod et Geophys Hung 41(3–4):409–423. doi: 10.1556/AGeod.41.2006.3-4.12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stamatovska S (2006) Important recommendations and discussion about application of Eurocode 8. Second fib Congress, Naples, 5–8 June 2006, Paper No. 0976Google Scholar
  30. Stamatovska SG (2008) Ground motion models—state of the art. Acta Geod et Geophys Hung 43(2–3):267–284. doi: 10.1556/AGeod.43.2008.2-3.14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stamatovska SG (2008) Seismic safety of structures-case study: probabilistic methodological approach to definition of seismic input. Acta Geod et Geophys Hung 43(2–3):337–348. doi: 10.1556/AGeod.43.2008.2-3.18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stamatovska SG (2012) In book: seismic waves, research and analysis. In: Masaki K (ed) ISBN 978-953-307-944-8. “The latest mathematical models of earthquake ground motion”, INTECH Open Access Publisher, Rijeka, 2012, pp 113-132. doi: 10.5772/28078. http://www.intechopen.com/articles/show/title/the-latest-mathematical-models-of-earthquake-ground-motion
  33. Stamatovska S, Petrovski D (1994) Nonlinear response spectra—probabilistic approach. In: Proceedings of the Fifth US National conference on earthquake engineering. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oacland, California, pp 323–332Google Scholar
  34. Stamatovska SG, Petrovski DS (1996) Empirical attenuation acceleration laws for vranchea intermediate earthquakes. 11 WCEE, Paper No.14, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  35. Stamatovska S, Petrovski D (2000) Determination of time histories for dynamic analysis of structures in accordance with Eurocode 8. In: Proceedings of 7th symposium on theoretical and applied mechanics, Struga, R. Macedonia, pp 28–30Google Scholar
  36. Stamatovska S, Paskalov A, Petrovski D (1998) Detailed design of the upgrading of E-75 sections Demir Kapija-Udovo and Udovo-Gevgelija. Earthquake engineering part 1, “Seismic hazard of the route section”, Report IZIIS 98–57, Skopje, R. MacedoniaGoogle Scholar
  37. Stamatovska S, Nastev M, Petrovski D (2006) Uniform hazard spectra. In: First European conference of earthquake engineering and seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 3–8 September, Paper No. 235Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering SeismologySs. Cyril and Methodius UniversitySkopjeRepublic of Macedonia

Personalised recommendations