Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회논문집)

Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Nonlinear Seismic Behavior Analysis of Skewed Bridges Considering Pounding Between Deck and Abutment

상판과 교대의 충돌을 고려한 사교의 비선형 지진거동 해석

  • 강승우 (동아대학교 토목공학과) ;
  • 최광규 (동아대학교 토목공학과) ;
  • 송시영 (동아대학교 토목공학과) ;
  • 손민규 (동아대학교 토목공학과)
  • Received : 2016.04.26
  • Accepted : 2016.06.29
  • Published : 2016.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

There are differences in seismic behavior between non-skewed bridges and skewed bridges due to in-plane rotations caused by pounding between the skewed deck and its abutments during strong earthquake. Many advances have been made in developing design codes and guidelines for dynamic analyses of non-skewed bridges. However, there remain significant uncertainties with regard to the structural response of skewed bridges caused by unusual seismic response characteristics. The purpose of this study is performing non-linear time history analysis of the bridges using abutment-soil interaction model considering pounding between the skewed deck and its abutments, and analyzing global seismic behavior characteristics of the skewed bridges to assess the possibility of unseating. Refined bridge model with abutment back fill, shear key and elastomeric bearing was developed using non-linear spring element. In order to evaluate the amplification of longitudinal and transverse displacement response, non-linear time history analysis was performed for single span bridges. Far-fault and near-fault ground motions were used as input ground motions. According to each parameter, seismic behavior of skewed bridges was evaluated.

Keywords

References

  1. Ghobarah AA, Tso WK. Seismic analysis of skewed highway bridges with intermediate supports. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 1973;2(3):235-248. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290020304
  2. Maragakis EA, Jennings PC. Analytical models for the rigid body motions of skew bridges. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 1987;15(8):923-944. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290150802
  3. Wakefield RR, Nazmy AS, Billington DP. Analysis of seismic failure in skewed RC bridge. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering. 1991 Mar;117(3):972-986. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1991)117:3(972)
  4. Meng JY, Lui EM. Seismic analysis and assessment of a skewed highway bridge. Engineering Structure. 2000 Nov;22(11):1433-1452. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(99)00097-8
  5. Meng JY, Lui EM. Refined stick model for dynamic analysis of skewed highway bridges. ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering. 2002 May; 7(3):184-194. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2002)7:3(184)
  6. Maleki S. Deck modeling for seismic analysis of skewed slab-girder bridges. Engineering Structures. 2002 Oct;24(10):1315-1326. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00066-4
  7. Shamsabadi A. Three-dimensional nonlinear seismic soil- abutmentfoundation- structure interaction analysis of Skewed bridges. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA. c2007.
  8. Abdel-Mohti A, Pekcan G. Seismic response of skewed RC box-girder bridges. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration. 2008 Dec;7(4):415-526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-008-1007-4
  9. Kaviani P, Zareian F, Taciroglu E. Seismic behavior of reinforced concrete bridges with skewed-angled seat-type abutments. Engineering Structures. 2012 Dec;45:137-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.06.013
  10. Kwon OS, Jeong SH. Seismic displacement demands on skewed bridge decks supported on elastomeric bearings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 2013 Apr;17(7):998-1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2013.791894
  11. Catacili SS. Displacement demands for performance based design of skewed bridges with seat type abutment. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. c2014.
  12. AASHTO. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Guide specifications for LRFD seismic bridge design. c2011.
  13. Caltrans. Seismic Design Criteria (v1.6). California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA. c2010.
  14. Shamsabadi A, Khalili-Tehrani P, Stewart JP, Taciroglu E. Validated simulation models for lateral response of bridge abutments with typical backfills. ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering. 2010 May;15(3):302-311. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000058
  15. MIDAS/CIVIL(2012)[Internet]. Midas Civil: Integrated solution system for bridge and civil engineering. MIDAS Information Technology Co., Ltd. (in Korean) Available from:www.midasuser.com
  16. Megally S, Silva PF, Seible F. Seismic response of sacrificial shear keys in bridge abutments. Report No. SSRP-2001/23, University of California, San Diego, CA. c2002.
  17. PEER. PEER Ground Motion Database(Beta)[Internet]. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley. 2010. Available from:http://peer.berkeley.edu/peer_ground_motion_database