• Proceedings of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2001.09a
• /
• pp.295-301
• /
• 2001

For the seismic analysis of typical roadway bridges provisions are given in most codes for analysis models, which describes however only fundamental modelling methods according to the basic theories of structural dynamics. In practice even conventional non-seismic analysis models, separate super- and substructure models, are applied, which are not adequate because of neglecting connection elements. In this study three typical roadway bridges, a Steel box bridge, a PC beam bridge and a PC box bridge are selected and simple models integrating super- and substructure as well as connection elements are given. The simple models are composed with frame elements with lumped masses representing stiffness and mass characteristics of the selected bridges. To check the properness of the simple models, analysis results with the simple models are compared with those obtained with detailed models in view of bridge failure mechanisms. It is proved that the simple models can be used in the preliminary design phase fur the determination of failure mechanisms of typical roadway bridges.

• Journal of the Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.185-189
• /
• 2017

The purpose of earthquake resistant design for typical bridges is the 'No Collapse Design' allowing emergency vehicles just after earthquakes. The Roadway Bridge Design Code provides design provisions to carry out such 'No Collapse Design' with a ductile mechanism and response modification factors given for connections and substructure play key role in this procedure. In case of response modification factors for substructure, the Roadway Bridge Design Code provides values considering ductility and redundancy. On the other hand, 'AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications' provides values considering additionally an artificial factor according to the bridge importance categories divided into critical, essential and others. In this study, a typical bridge with steel bearing connections and reinforced concrete piers is selected and different response modification factors for substructure are applied with design conditions given in the Roadway Bridge Design Code. Based on the comparison study of the design results, supplementary measures are suggested required by applying different response modification factors for substructure.

• Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea
• /
• v.6 no.4
• /
• pp.1-6
• /
• 2002

The structural safety required in general design is to be proved with safety factors provided for structural members in elastic range. But, for the safety requirement in the earthquake resistant design, a specific ductile failure mechanism in plastic range should be verified according to the structural configuration. Therefore such verifications should be done in the preliminary design stage by comparing various design alternatives. In the main design stage only a confirmation of the ductile failure mechanism is required. In this study typical roadway bridges are selected and analysis models are presented for the preliminary and main design. For the two models, vibration periods and mode shapes are compared and the multi-mode spectrum method is applied to determine failure mechanisms. The failure mechanisms obtained with the two models are compared to check the properness of the model used for the preliminary design, which may well be used as an earthquake resistant analysis model in practice.

• Proceedings of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 1998.10a
• /
• pp.103-112
• /
• 1998

The earthquake resistant design for roadway bridges introduced in 1992 is conducted according to the "Standard Specification for Roadway Bridges", Division V, Seismic Design and the first revision of the Standard was done in 1996. However, dur to different concepts of the earthquake resistant design from those of the other designs, the provisions given in the Standard are still not applied appropriately. In this paper the verification of the earthquake resistant capacity of a bridge with typical configurations, 5-span steel box girder bridge, is carried out based on the application rules of the present Standard in order to provide clear understandings about the earthquake resistant verification and the earthquake resistant design as well.n as well.

• Journal of the Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.49-57
• /
• 2013

Structural elements of typical bridges are superstructure, connections, substuctures and foundations and earthquake resistance is decided with the failure mechanism formed by substuctures and connections. Therefore earthquake resistant design should be carried out in the basic design step where design strengths, e.g. design sections for structural elements are determined. The Earthquake Resistant Design Part of Korean Roadway Bridge Design Code provides two basic design procedures. The first conventional procedure applies the Code-provided response modification factors. The second new procedure is the ductility-based earthquake resistant design, where designer can determine the response modification factors. In this study, basic designs including the two design processes are carried out for a typical bridge and supplements are identified in view of providing earthquake resistance.

• Journal of the Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.163-172
• /
• 2014

The purpose of earthquake resistant design for typical bridges is the No Collapse Design and the Earthquake Resistant Design Part of Roadway Bridge Design Code provides a design process to construct the Ductile Failure Mechanism for the bridge structure. However, if it is not practical to provide the Ductile Failure Mechanism due to structure types or site conditions, the Brittle Failure Mechanism is an alternative way to get the No Collapse Design. As well as the existing design process constructing the Ductile Failure Mechanism, the Earthquake Resistant Design Part provides a ductility-based design process as an appendix, which is prepared for bridges with reinforced concrete piers. According to the new design process, designer determines a required response modification factor for substructure and transverse reinforcement for confinement therefrom. In this study, a typical bridge with steel bearing connections and reinforced concrete piers is selected for which the existing as well as the ductility-based design processes are applied and different results from the two design processes are identified. Based on the results, an earthquake resistant design procedure is proposed in which designers should consider the two design processes.

• Journal of the Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.187-192
• /
• 2016

While structures are designed within elastic range by other designs, plastic behavior of structures should be verified and controlled in order to prevent structural collapse by the earthquake resistant design. No Collapse Requirement for typical bridges is to avoid falling down of superstructure by way of plastic behavior of certain structural elements and to operate emergency vehicles after earthquake. Such plastic behavior is restricted to connections or pier columns and appropriate measures are required for each case. Earthquake Resistant Design part of Roadway Bridge Design Code provides design processes for Ductile Collapse Mechanism by forming plastic hinges at pier columns. Also for bridges with reinforced concrete piers ductility-based design processes are provided as an appendix constructing Brittle Collapse Mechanism with connection yielding. In this study, a typical bridge with steel bearing connections and reinforced concrete piers is selected and No Collapse Design procedure considering both Ductile and Brittle Collapse Mechanism is proposed together with revisions required for the Earthquake Resistant Design part.