Abstract
The findings of numerous analytical/computational studies, tests, and in-situ observations have highlighted the importance of the deck-abutment-backfill interaction on the seismic response of bridges. These findings have allowed various researchers to develop models for the nonlinear behaviour of the abutment-backfill system. Such models have been extensively used in research, and the simpler among them have been adopted by modern seismic codes and guidelines and have also been incorporated in programs for the nonlinear analysis of structures.
Although large-scale tests have captured the behaviour of the abutment-backfill system subsequent to the attainment of peak strength, this critical phase of the response has neither been studied to a sufficient extent from the analysis point of view, nor included in the constitutive models of available nonlinear analysis programs. The softening region of the response of the backfill has been addressed using a number of hardening/softening plasticity models that are rarely used in practical analysis wherein simpler models (like Winkler springs) are typically preferred. Capturing the post-peak range of the abutment-backfill response is very significant in seismic fragility analysis of bridges for the definition of limit states close to failure.
In the above context, the main aim of the work presented herein is to introduce a new model capturing this range of the backfill response; it is an extended version of the ‘Hyperbolic Gap’ ‘material’ in OpenSees, named ‘Hyperbolic Gap Softening’ material, which allows the user to define a set of parameters that describe the softening branch of the backbone curve of an abutment-backfill system. In addition to tests of the new model using a simple structural configuration, results of response history analyses of a case-study bridge with different abutment-backfill properties are also reported, with a view to verifying the applicability of the proposed model and assessing the importance of capturing the post-peak abutment-backfill behaviour on the assessment of the seismic response of a bridge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Avşar Ö, Yakut A, Caner A (2011) Analytical fragility curves for ordinary highway bridges in Turkey. Earthquake Spectra, 27 (4): 971–996. SAGE Publications Sage UK: London, England
Bozorgzadeh A, Ashford SA, Restrepo JI, Nimityongskul N (2008) Experimental and Analytical Investigation on Stiffness and Ultimate Capacity of Bridge Abutments, Report No. SSRP–07/12. UC San Diego, CA, USA
Caltrans (2019) Seismic Design Criteria (version 2.0). CA, USA
Cardone D (2014) Displacement limits and performance displacement profiles in support of direct displacement-based seismic assessment of bridges. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 43(8):1239–1263
CEN (2005) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels
Chen X, Li C (2020) Seismic performance of tall pier bridges retrofitted with lead rubber bearings and rocking foundation. Eng Struct 212(November 2019):110529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110529. Elsevier
Cole RT, Rollins KM (2006) Passive earth pressure mobilization during cyclic loading. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 132 (9): 1154–1164. American Society of Civil Engineers
Dryden GM, Fenves GL (2009) The integration of experimental and simulation data in the study of reinforced concrete bridge systems including soil-foundation-structure interaction. Rep. PEER 2009/03. University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
Duncan JM, Chang C-Y (1970) Nonlinear analysis of stress and strain in soils. Journal of the soil mechanics and foundations division, 96 (5): 1629–1653. American Society of Civil Engineers
Duncan JM, Mokwa RL (2001) Passive earth pressures: theories and tests. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127 (3): 248–257. American Society of Civil Engineers
Ghotbi AR (2014) Performance-based seismic assessment of skewed bridges with and without considering soil-foundation interaction effects for various site classes. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 13(3):357–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-014-0248-7
Khalili-Tehrani P, Shamsabadi A, Stewart P, Taciroglu (2016) Backbone curves with physical parameters for passive lateral response of homogeneous abutment backfills. Bull Earthq Eng 14(11):3003–3023 Springer Netherlands
Kim S-H, Feng MQ (2003) Fragility analysis of bridges under ground motion with spatial variation. Int J Nonlinear Mech 38(5):705–721 Elsevier
Kim S-H, Shinozuka M (2003) Effects of Seismically Induced pounding at expansion joints of concrete bridges. J Eng Mech 129(11):1225–1234
Lemnitzer A, Ahlberg ER, Nigbor RL, Shamsabadi A, Wallace JW, Stewart JP (2009) Lateral performance of full-scale bridge abutment wall with granular backfill. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 135 (4): 506–514. American Society of Civil Engineers
Maragakis EA, Jennings (1987) Analytical models for the rigid body motions of skew bridges. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 15(8):923–944 Wiley Online Library
Maragakis EA, Siddharthan R (1989) Estimation of inelastic longitudinal abutment stiffness of bridges. Journal of Structural Engineering, 115 (9): 2382–2398. American Society of Civil Engineers
McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL (2010) Nonlinear finite-element analysis Software Architecture using object composition. J Comput Civil Eng 24(1):95–107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000002. American Society of Civil Engineers
Mikes IG, Kappos AJ (2021) Simple and complex modelling of seat-type abutment-backfill systems. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Streamed from Athens, Greece, 5266–5282.
Mikes IG, Kappos AJ (2023) Optimization of the seismic response of bridges using variable-width joints. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 52(1):111–127
Mikes IG, Kappos AJ, Giaralis A (2022) Effect of abutment-backfill limit state definition on the assessment of seismic performance. Proceedings of the International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure, Athens, Greece
Mitoulis SA (2012) Seismic design of bridges with the participation of seat-type abutments. Eng Struct 44:222–233 Elsevier
Mylonakis G, Nikolaou S, Gazetas G (2006) Footings under seismic loading: analysis and design issues with emphasis on bridge foundations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 26(9):824–853
Omrani R, Mobasher B, Liang X, Gunay S, Mosalam KM, Zareian F, Taciroglu E (2015) Guidelines for Nonlinear Seismic Analysis of Ordinary Bridges: Version 2.0. Caltrans Final Report No. 15-65A0454, (December): 168
Qiu Z, and Elgamal A (2020) Three-dimensional modeling of strain-softening soil response for seismic-loading applications. J Geotech GeoEnviron Eng 146(7):04020053
Rankine WJM (1856) On the Stability of Loose Earth. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 185–187. JSTOR
Shamsabadi A, Ashour M, Norris G (2005) Bridge abutment nonlinear force-displacement-capacity prediction for seismic design. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental engineering, 131 (2): 151–161. American Society of Civil Engineers
Shamsabadi A, Rollins KM, Kapuskar M (2007) Nonlinear soil–abutment–bridge structure interaction for seismic performance-based design. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental engineering, 133 (6): 707–720. American Society of Civil Engineers
Shamsabadi A, Khalili-Tehrani P, Stewart JP, Taciroglu E (2010) Validated simulation models for lateral response of bridge abutments with typical backfills. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 15 (3): 302–311. American Society of Civil Engineers
Stefanidou SP, Sextos AG, Kotsoglou AN, Lesgidis N, Kappos AJ (2017) Soil-structure interaction effects in analysis of seismic fragility of bridges using an intensity-based ground motion selection procedure. Engineering Structures, 151: 366–380. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.08.033
Wang Y, Ibarra L, Pantelides C (2016) Seismic retrofit of a three-span RC bridge with buckling-restrained braces. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 21 (11): 4016073. American Society of Civil Engineers
Wilson P, Elgamal A (2008) Full Scale Bridge Abutment Passive Earth Pressure Tests and Calibrated Models. 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China
Wilson P, Elgamal A (2010) Large-scale Passive Earth pressure load-displacement tests and Numerical Simulation. J Geotech GeoEnviron Eng 136(12):1634–1643. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0000386
Xiang N, Alam MS (2019) Comparative seismic fragility assessment of an existing isolated continuous bridge retrofitted with different energy dissipation devices. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 24 (8): 4019070. American Society of Civil Engineers
Zheng Q, Yang CW, Xie Y, Padgett J, DesRoches R, Roblee C (2021) Influence of abutment straight backwall fracture on the seismic response of bridges. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 50 (7): 1824–1844. Wiley Online Library
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Mikes, I.G., Kappos, A.J. Modelling of the post-peak response of abutment-backfill systems: a new hysteretic model for OpenSees. Bull Earthquake Eng 22, 2723–2737 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-024-01870-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-024-01870-8