Abstract
A nonlinear static analysis methodology for the derivation of a set of pushover curves for any angle of incidence of the seismic action (multidirectional pushover curves) for bridges is developed, wherein the interaction between axial force and biaxial moments at critical pier sections or biaxial shear forces at the bearings is taken into account. Dynamic pushover curves (base shear vs. peak deck displacement) for arbitrary angle of incidence of the excitation, are derived for both unidirectional (single-component) and bidirectional (dual-component) ground motion. It is found that neglecting the minor horizontal component leads to underestimation of bridge response, especially along the bridge principal directions and that the angle of incidence of bidirectional excitation affects bridge response, but to a lesser extent than in the case of unidirectional excitation. The proposed procedure is then applied to a straight symmetric bridge, its results are checked against those from response-history analysis, and is found to be sufficiently accurate for practical application. Using the derived results it is also found that the design of the selected bridge is safe since for the design bidirectional earthquake the bridge starts to behave inelastically (the first plastic hinge forms), while its failure occurs for about four times the design seismic action.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ambraseys N, Smit P, Berardi D, Rinaldis D, Berge-Thierry C (2000) Dissemination of European strong-motion Data. CD-ROM Collection, European Council, Environment and Climate Research Programme
CEN Techn. Comm. 250 / SC8 (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings (EN1998-1). Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels
CEN Techn. Comm. 250 / SC8 (2005) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 2: bridges (EN 1998-2). Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels
Chiou B, Darragh R, Gregor N, Silva W (2008) NGA project strong-motion database. Earthq Spectra 24(1): 23–44
CSI (2009) CSI analysis reference manual for SAP2000®, ETABS®, and SAFE®. Computers & Structures Inc., Berkeley
Fajfar P, Gašperšič P (1998) A simplified nonlinear method for seismic evaluation of RC bridges. In: CD-ROM proceedings of the 6th US national conference on earthquake engineering, Seattle, May 31-June 4, 1998, Paper no. 23
FEMA-NIBS (2003) Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology—HAZUS-MH MR4: earthquake model technical manual. Federal Emergency Management Agency (under a contract with the National Institute of Building Sciences), Washington
Kappos AJ, Goutzika ED, Stefanidou SP, Sextos AG (2011) Problems in pushover analysis of bridges sensitive to torsion. In: Papadrakakis M, Fragiadakis M, Lagaros ND (eds) Computational methods in earthquake engineering. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 99–122
Kappos AJ, Paraskeva TS (2008) Nonlinear static analysis of bridges accounting for higher mode effects. In: Proceedings of workshop on nonlinear static methods for design/assessment of 3D structures, May 5–6, 2008, Lisbon, pp 123–139
Kappos AJ, Potikas P, Sextos AG (2007) Seismic assessment of an overpass bridge accounting for non-linear material and soil response and varying boundary conditions. In: CD-ROM proceedings of 1st international conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering (COMPDYN 2007), Rethymno, June 13–16, 2007, Paper no. 1580
Katsanos EI, Sextos AG, Notopoulos T (2011) ISSARS: an integrated system for structural analysis and earthquake record selection. In: CD-ROM proceedings of 3rd international conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering (COMPDYN 2011), Corfu, Greece, May 25–28, 2011, Paper no. 224
Kubo T, Penzien J (1979) Analysis of three-dimensional strong ground motions along principal axes, San Fernando earthquake. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 7(3):265–278
López OA, Hernández JJ, Bonilla R, Fernández A (2006) Response spectra for multicomponent structural analysis. Earthq Spectra 22(1): 85–113
Mackie KR, Cronin KJ, Nielson BG (2011) Response sensitivity of highway bridges to randomly oriented multi-component earthquake excitation. J Earthq Eng 15(6): 850–876
Mwafy AM, Elnashai AS (2001) Static pushover versus dynamic collapse analysis of RC buildings. Eng Struct 23(5): 407–424
Panagopoulos G, Kappos AJ (2009) Bilinear idealisation of force—deformation diagrams. In: CD-ROM Proceedings of 16th hellenic conference on concrete, Paphos, Oct 21–23, 2009, Paper no. 121105 (in Greek)
Paraskeva TS, Kappos AJ (2010) Further development of a multimodal pushover analysis procedure for seismic assessment of bridges. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39(2): 211–222
Paraskeva TS, Kappos AJ, Sextos AG (2006) Extension of modal pushover analysis to seismic assessment of bridges. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35(10): 1269–1293
Penzien J, Watabe M (1974) Characteristics of 3-dimensional earthquake ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 3(4): 365–373
Reyes JC, Chopra AK (2011) Three-dimensional modal pushover analysis of buildings subjected to two components of ground motion, including its evaluation for tall buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40(7): 789–806
Song B, Pan JS, Liu Q (2008) Study on critical angle to the seismic response of curved bridges based on pushover method. In: CD-ROM Proceedings of 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, Oct 12–17, 2008, Paper no. 14-0120
Taskari O, Sextos AG, Kappos AJ (2008) 3D finite element modeling of a highway bridge considering the effect of soil and foundation. In: CD-ROM proceedings of 6th GRACM international congress on computational mechanics, Thessaloniki, June 19–21, 2008, Paper no. 1114
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moschonas, I.F., Kappos, A.J. Assessment of concrete bridges subjected to ground motion with an arbitrary angle of incidence: static and dynamic approach. Bull Earthquake Eng 11, 581–605 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-012-9395-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-012-9395-2