Open Issues in the Seismic Design and Assessment of Bridges

  • Paolo E. Pinto
  • Paolo Franchin
Part of the Geotechnical, Geological, and Earthquake Engineering book series (GGEE, volume 17)


The chapter presents an overview of recent research on the seismic assessment/retrofit and design of bridges, focussing on some of the aspects which are still not adequately covered in the codes. These are: The level of protection to be provided when upgrading an existing bridge, and in particular whether this should be differentiated between new designs and retrofit of existing bridges; The appropriate methods of analysis and modelling, with emphasis on the scope of nonlinear static methods and to the problems related to the selection of the input for dynamic analysis; Soil-foundation-structure interaction and non uniform support input, representing two controversial issues that may be mature for an inclusion in routine bridge analysis.


Ground Motion Plastic Hinge Seismic Isolation Average Shear Wave Velocity Uniform Hazard Spectrum 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. ATC, Applied Technology Council (1983) Seismic retrofitting manual for highway bridges, Report ATC6-2Google Scholar
  2. Badoni D, Makris N (1996) Nonlinear response of single piles under lateral inertial and seismic loads. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 15:29–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker J, Cornell CA (2006) Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 35:1077–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biskinis D, Roupakias G, Fardis MN (2003) Cyclic deformation capacity of shear-critical RC elements. In: Proceedings of the fib 2003 symposium: concrete structures in seismic regions, Athens, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  5. Calvi GM, Pinto PE (1996) Experimental and numerical investigation on the seismic response of bridges and recommendations for code provisions. ECOEST-PREC8 Report No 4, LNEC, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  6. CEN (2005) European committee for standardization: Eurocode 8 design of structures for earthquake resistance Part 2. Bridges, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  7. Ceresa P, Petrini L, Pinho R (2007) Flexure-shear fiber beam-column elements for modeling frame structures under seismic loading – state of the art. J Earthquake Eng 11:46–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cornell CA (2005) On earthquake record selection for nonlinear dynamic analysis. In: Proceedings of the Luis Esteva symposium, Mexico City, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  9. Der Kiureghian A (1996) A coherency model for spatially varying ground motions earthquake. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 25:99–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Der Kiureghian A, Neuenhofer A (1992) Response spectrum method for multi-support seismic excitations. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 21:713–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dobry R, Gazetas G (1988) Simple method for dynamic stiffness and damping of floating pile groups. Géotechnique 38:557–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. EAEE, European Association of Earthquake Engineering (2010) Task Group 11: inelastic methods for seismic design and assessment of bridges (Draft)Google Scholar
  13. El Naggar MH, Novak M (1996) Non linear analysis for dynamic lateral pile response. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 15:233–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elgamal A, Yan L, Yang Z, Conte JP (2008) Three-dimensional seismic response of humboldt bay Bridge-Foundation-Ground System. J Struct Eng 134:1165–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Faccioli E, Villani M (2009) Seismic hazard mapping for Italy in terms of broadband displacement response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 25:515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fajfar P (2000) A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthquake Spectra 16:573–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. FHWA, Federal Highway Administration (1995) Seismic retrofitting manual for highway bridges, Publ. No. FHWA-RD-94 052Google Scholar
  18. FHWA-MCEER, Federal Highway Administration and Multi-disciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (2006) Seismic retrofitting manual for highway structures. Part 1 – Bridges, FHWA-HRT-06-032Google Scholar
  19. fib, International Federation of Structural Concrete (2007) Seismic bridge design and retrofit – structural solutions, Bulletin 39Google Scholar
  20. Franchin P, Pinto PE (2009) Allowing traffic over mainshock-damaged bridges. J Earthquake Eng 13:585–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gerolymos N (2009) Seismic soil-structure interaction: New Approaches in Performance Based design of Foundations, Earthquake Engineering by the Beach Workshop, July 2–4, 2009, Capri, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  22. Gerolymos N, Gazetas G (2006) Development of a Winkler model for static and dynamic response of caisson foundations with soil and interface nonlinearities. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 26:363–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goel RK, Chopra AK (2002) A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 31:561–52Google Scholar
  24. Iervolino I, Galasso C, Cosenza E (2009) REXEL: computer aided record selection for code-based seismic structural analysis. Bull Earthquake Eng. 8:339–362. doi 10.1007/s10518-009-9146-1Google Scholar
  25. Klar A (2003) Model studies of seismic behaviour of piles in sands. PhD thesis, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, IsraelGoogle Scholar
  26. Kowalsky M, Priestley MJN (2000) Improved analytical model for shear strength of circular reinforced concrete columns in seismic regions. ACI Struct J 97:388–396Google Scholar
  27. Luco JE (1982) Linear soil-structure interaction: a review. Earthquake ground motion effects struct. ASME, AMD 53:41–57Google Scholar
  28. Lupoi A, Franchin P, Monti G, Pinto PE (2005) Seismic design of bridges accounting for spatial variability of ground motion. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 34:327–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mackie KR, Stojadinovic B (2005) Fragility basis for California highway overpass bridge seismic decision making. Technical Report 2005-02, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  30. Makris N, Gazetas G (1991) Dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction. Part I: Analysis of axial vibration. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 20:115–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Makris N, Gazetas G (1992) Dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction. Part II: Lateral and seismic response. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 21:145–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McKenna F, Fenves GL, Scott MH (2007) OpenSees: open system for earthquake engineering simulation., Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  33. MI, Ministero delle Infrastrutture (2008) Decreto Ministeriale del 14/1/2008 recante Nuove norme tecniche per le costruzioni (Decree 14/1/2008, New technical norms for constructions)Google Scholar
  34. Monti G, Pinto PE (1998) Effects of multi-support excitation on isolated bridges. In: Proceedings of the US–Italy workshop on seismic protective systems for bridges, Technical Report MCEER-98-0015, 225–247Google Scholar
  35. Mylonakis G (1995) Contributions to static and seismic analysis of piles and pile-supported bridge piers. Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York, Buffalo, NYGoogle Scholar
  36. Mylonakis G, Nikolaou A, Gazetas G (1997) Soil-Pile-Bridge seismic interaction: kinematic and inertial effects, Part I: Soft soil. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 26:337–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Paraskeva Th, Kappos AJ (2009) Further development of a multimodal pushover analysis procedure for seismic assessment of bridges. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 39:211–222Google Scholar
  38. Pecker A (2006) Enhanced seismic design of shallow foundations: example of the rion-antirion bridge. In: Proceedings of the 4th Athenian lecture on geotechnical engineering, AthensGoogle Scholar
  39. Pinho R, Casarotti C, Monteiro R (2007) An adaptive capacity spectrum method and other nonlinear static procedures applied to the seismic assessment of bridges. In: Proceedings of the 1st US–Italy workshop on seismic design and assessment of bridges, Pavia, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  40. Pinto PE, Franchin P (2010) Issues in the upgrade of Italian highway structures. J Earthquake Eng 14Google Scholar
  41. Pinto PE, Franchin P, Lupoi A (2009) Seismic assessment and retrofit of existing bridges (in Italian). IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  42. Priestley MJN, Seible F, Calvi GM (1996) Seismic design and retrofit of bridges. Wiley, New York, NYCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sextos AG, Kappos AJ, Pitilakis KD (2003b) Inelastic dynamic analysis of RC bridges accounting for spatial variability of ground motion, site effects and soil–structure interaction phenomena. Part 2: Parametric study. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 32:629–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sextos AG, Pitilakis KD, Kappos AJ (2003a) 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. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 32:607–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sezen H (2008) Shear deformation model for reinforced concrete columns. Struct Eng Mech 28:39–52Google Scholar
  46. Sezen H, Moehle JP (2004) Shear strength model for lightly reinforced concrete columns. J Struct Eng 130:1692–1703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Taherzadeh R, Clouteau D, Cottereau R (2009) Simple formulas for the dynamic stiffness of pile groups. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 38:1665–1685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. TEE, Technical chamber of Greece (2007) National greek retrofit code (draft version)Google Scholar
  49. Unjoh S, Terayama T, Adachi Y, Hoshikuma J (2000) Seismic retrofit of existing highway bridges in Japan. Cement Concr Compos 22:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wolf JP (1991) Consistent lumped-parameter models for unbonded soil: physical representation. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 20:12–32Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural and Geotechnical EngineeringUniversity of Roma “La Sapienza”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations