Abstract
In seismic design of extended multi-span bridges the question always arises whether using either natural or artificially generated earthquake records that are identical at all bridge supports is valid or not. It is likely that earthquake ground motion remarkably differs at the various support/pier locations in terms of amplitude, frequency content and arrival time, inducing under certain circumstances significant forces and deformations that would not develop if the assumption of synchronous excitation was adopted. This paper hence illustrates the impact of ground motion spatial variability on the seismic performance and vulnerability of extended continuous box girder bridges in both bridge orthogonal directions (longitudinal and transverse). For illustration purposes, a nine-span bridge with a total length of 430 m is adopted. Non-linear time history analyses are carried out using opensees software. The effects of the spatial variability in the ground motions at the different bridge supports are investigated using a set of 20 artificially simulated seismic ground motions generated using sim software developed in the mid-nineties, considering different degrees of loss in coherency and various soil types (i.e., frequency contents). Results of the non-linear time history analyses performed in an incremental dynamic analysis context are hence manipulated through a probabilistic analysis framework to generate fragility curves associated with various performance levels for the case study bridge. Fragility curves giving the conditional probability of exceeding various performance levels are then integrated with generated hazard curves defining the expected seismic hazard in Egypt. The outcome of this integration process results in values of mean annual frequency of exceeding pre-defined performance levels.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altoontash A (2004) Simulation and damage models for performance assessment of reinforced concrete beam–column joints. PhD Dissertation. Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, Stanford University
Clough RW, Penzien J (1975) Dynamics of structures, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
Cordova PP, Mehanny SSF, Deierlein GG, Cornell CA (2001) Development of a two-parameter seismic intensity measure and probabilistic assessment procedure. In: The 2nd US-Japan workshop on PBE engineering methodology for RC building structures, Sapporo, Hokkaido, pp 187–206
Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA (2002) Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines. ASCE J Struct Eng 128(4):526–533
Deierlein GG (2004) Overview of a comprehensive framework for earthquake performance assessment. PEER Rep 05:15–26
Der Kiureghian A, Keshishian P (1997) Effects of incoherence, wave passage and spatially varying site conditions on bridge response. In: Proceedings of the FHWA/NCEER workshop on the national representation of seismic motion, Technical Report, 97–0010; National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY, pp 393–407
El Howary HA, Mehanny SSF (2011) Seismic vulnerability evaluation of RC moment frame buildings in moderate seismic zones. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40(2):215–235
El Howary HA, Ramadan OMO, Mehanny SS (2013) Effect of spatially variable ground motions on the seismic fragility of box girder continuous bridges. In: 4th international conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, Kos Island, Greece, pp 12–14
El Howary HA (2014) Bridge vulnerability due to spatially asynchronous seismic ground motions. PhD thesis, Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Egypt
ECP 201 (2008) Egyptian Code of Practice no. 201 for determination of loads and forces for the structural and civil works. Research Centre for Housing and Construction, Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Planning, Cairo, Egypt. Final Draft 2009
Haselton CB (2006) Assessing seismic collapse safety of modern reinforced concrete moment frame buildings. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University
Ibarra LF, Krawinkler H (2005) Global collapse of frame structures under seismic excitations. Rep. No. TB 152, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
Ibarra LF, Medina RA, Krawinkler H (2005) Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34(12):1489–1511
Liao S (2006) Physical characterization of seismic ground motion spatial variation and conditional simulation for performance-based design. Ph.D. Thesis, Drexel University
Luco N, Cornell CA (2007) Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthq. Spectra 23(2):357–392
Mackie KR, Stojadinović B (2005) Fragility basis for California highway overpass bridge seismic decision making. PEER Report 2005/02. University of California, Berkeley, CA
Mehanny SSF (2009) A broad-range power-law form scalar-based seismic intensity measure. Eng Struct 31(7):1354–1368
Mehanny SSF, Deierlein GG (2001) Seismic damage and collapse assessment of composite moment frames. ASCE J Struct Eng 127(9):1045–1053
Mehanny SSF, Gendy AS, Seif SP (2003) Seismic assessment of bridges over the River Nile. In: fib Symposium on concrete structures in seismic regions, May 6–9, 2003, Athens, Greece
Mehanny SSF, Ramadan OMO, El Howary HA (2014) Assessment of bridge vulnerability due to seismic excitations considering wave passage effects. Eng Struct 70:197–207. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.04.010
Novak M, Ramadan OMO (1993) Soil–structure-interaction in large structures subjected to incoherent ground motions. In: Gulkan P, Clough RW (eds) Developments in dynamic soil–structure interaction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, pp 147–165
Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (Opensees) (2009) Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, University of California, Berkeley, http://opensees.berkeley.edu/
Ove Arup and Partners International (2002) Seismic hazard assessment for LNG project at Damietta port in Egypt. Ove Arup & Partners Intern, Ltd, London Operating Centre, London, UK, April 2002
Pitilakis K (2004) Chapter 5: Site effects. In: Ansal A (ed) Recent advances in earthquake geotechnical engineering and microzonation. Kluwer Publications, Dordrecht
Ramadan OMO, Novak M (1994) Simulation of multi-dimensional, anisotropic ground motions. J Eng Mech ASCE 120(8):1773–1785
Ramadan OMO, Novak M (1993) On the simulation of spatially incoherent random ground motions. J Eng Mech ASCE 119(5):997–1016
SAP2000 (2013) Structural and earthquake engineering software. Ver. 16.0.0, CSI, Computers and Structures Inc, Bekeley, CA
SEAOC Seismic design manual (2000) Structural Engineering Association of California
Sextos AG, Pitilakis KD, Kappos AJ (2003) Inelastic dynamic analysis of RC bridges accounting for spatial variability of ground motion, site effects and soil–structure interaction phenomena. Part 1: Methodology and analytical tools. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2003 32(4):607–627
Sextos AG, Kappos AJ, Pitilakis KD (2003) Inelastic dynamic analysis of RC bridges accounting for spatial variability of ground motion, site effects and soil-structure interaction phenomena. Part 2: Parametric study. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2003 32(4):629–652
Shome N, Cornell CA, Bazzurro P, Carballo JE (1998) Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses. Earthq Spectr 14(3):469–500
Shome N, Cornell, CA (1999) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Rep. No. 35, Reliability of Marine Structures Program, Dept. of Civil and Env. Engrg., Stanford University, CA
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(3):491–514
Taylor E (2007) The development of fragility relationships for controlled structures. Master of Science thesis, Washington University
Vamvatsikos D (2013) Derivation of new SAC/FEMA performance evaluation solutions with second-order hazard approximation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(8):1171–1188
Vamvatsikos D, Fragiadakis M (2010) Incremental dynamic analysis for estimating seismic performance sensitivity and uncertainty. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39(2):141–163
Wen YK, Ellingwood BR, Veneziano D, Bracci J (2003) Uncertainty modeling in earthquake engineering. MAE Center Project FD-2 Report. Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, USA
Wen YK, Ellingwood BR, Bracci J (2004) Vulnerability function framework for consequence-based engineering. MAE Center Project DS-4 Report. Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, USA
Zerva A (1992) Seismic ground motion simulations from a class of spatial variability models. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 21:351–361
Zerva A (1999) Spatial variability of seismic motions recorded over extended ground surface areas. In: Kausel E, Manolis GD (eds) Wave motion in earthquake engineering, volume in the series advances in earthquake engineering. WIT Press, Southampton
Zerva A (2009) In: Beranoya H (ed) Spatial variation of seismic ground motions: modeling and engineering applications (Advances in engineering series). CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, FL
Acknowledgments
The research reported here was supported by the European Union Project PIRSES-GA-2010-269222: Analysis and Design of Earthquake Resistant Structures (ADERS) of the FP7-PEOPLE-2010-IRSES, Marie Curie Actions. This support is gratefully acknowledged by the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ramadan, O.M.O., Mehanny, S.S.F. & Elhowary, H.A. Seismic vulnerability of box girder continuous bridges under spatially variable ground motions. Bull Earthquake Eng 13, 1727–1748 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9683-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9683-0