Title:
Seismic Fragility Assessment of Shape Memory Alloy Reinforced Concrete Bridge Piers under Long Duration and Near-Fault Ground Motions
Author(s):
Maher AL-Hawarneh, AHM Muntasir Billah, and M. Shahria Alam
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
341
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
131-159
Keywords:
Seismic fragility, Shape memory alloy, Long duration motion, Maximum drift, Residual drift, Bridge pier
DOI:
10.14359/51727028
Date:
6/30/2020
Abstract:
In recent years, shape memory alloys (SMA) have drawn significant attention and interests among researchers and structural engineers for diverse civil engineering applications. Superelasticity, shape memory effect, and hysteretic damping are the three major characteristics of SMAs that make them appropriate for bridge engineering applications in high seismic zones. Recent earthquake events have shown the most devastating earthquake loading that structures could experience are the near-fault ground motions. On the other hand, the ground motion duration effect on structural response has attracted a lot of interest over the last decade. This study aims to evaluate the comparative seismic fragility of concrete bridge piers reinforced with SMA rebars and steel rebars in the plastic hinge region under long duration and near-fault earthquakes. The bridge pier is assumed to be part of a lifeline bridge located in Western Canada and has been designed following a performance-based design approach. Fragility analysis has been conducted considering uncertainty in the material properties and the seismic hazard of the site location. Fragility curves are developed using suits of long duration and near-fault motions where each suite contains 20 ground motions. The vulnerability of the SMA-RC bridge piers and steel-RC bridge piers has been evaluated in terms of maximum drift and residual drift as the demand parameters. The outcome of this study indicates how the performance of the SMA-RC bridge pier and steel-RC bridge pier are affected by the duration of ground motion and fault location.
Related References:
1. Worldwide, A., "Study of impact and the insurance and economic cost of a major earthquake in British Columbia and Ontario/Québec" Prepared for Insurance Bureau of Canada. 2013.
2. Cruz Noguez, C.A. and Saiidi, M.S., "Shake-table studies of a four-span bridge model with advanced materials" Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 138, No. 2. 2011, pp. 183-92.
3. Kawashima, K., MacRae, G.A., Hoshikuma, J i. and Nagaya, K., "Residual displacement response spectrum" Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 124, No. 5. 1998, pp. 523-30.
4. Kwan, W.P. and Billington, S.L., "Unbonded posttensioned concrete bridge piers. I: Monotonic and cyclic analyses" Journal of Bridge Engineering, V. 8, No. 2. 2003, pp. 92- 101.
5. Sakai, J., "Analytical investigations of new methods for reducing residual displacements of reinforced concrete bridge columns," PEER-2004/02. 2004.
6. Youssef, M. A., Alam, M.S., and Nehdi, M., "Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys" Journal of Earthquake Engineering, V. 12, No. 7. 2008, pp. 1205-22.
7. Saiidi, M.S., O'Brien, M. and Zadeh, M.S., "Cyclic Response of Concrete Bridge Columns Using Superelastic Nitinol and Bendable Concrete" ACI Structural Journal, V. 106, No. 1. 2009.
8. Carreras, G., Casciati, F., Casciati, S., Isalgue, A., Marzi, A. and Torra, V., "Fatigue laboratory tests toward the design of SMA portico-braces" Smart Structures and Systems, V. 7, No. 1. 2011, pp. 41-57.
9. Saiidi, M.S. and Wang, H., "Exploratory study of seismic response of concrete columns with shape memory alloys reinforcement" ACI Materials Journal, V. 103, No. 3. 2006, pp. 436.
10. Billah, A.H.M.M., and Alam, M.S., "Seismic fragility assessment of concrete bridge pier reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloy" Earthquake Spectra, V. 31, No. 3. 2015, pp. 1515-41.
11. Hancock, J. and Bommer, J.J., "A state-of-knowledge review of the influence of strongmotion duration on structural damage" Earthquake spectra, V. 22, No. 3. 2006, pp. 827-45.
12. Chandramohan, R., Baker, J., Deierlein, G. and Lin, T., "Influence of ground motion spectral shape and duration on seismic collapse risk." 2013.
13. Ou, Y.C., Song, J., Wang, P.H., Adidharma, L., Chang, K.C. and Lee, G.C., "Ground motion duration effects on hysteretic behavior of reinforced concrete bridge columns" Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 140, No. 3. 2013, pp. 04013065.
14. Somerville, P.G. "Characterizing near fault ground motion for the design and evaluation of bridges" Proceedings of the Third National Seismic Conference and Workshop on Bridges and Highways. Vol. 137148. MCEER Buttalo, 2002.
15. Billah, A.H.M.M., Alam, M.S. and Bhuiyan, A.R., "Fragility analysis of retrofitted multicolumn bridge bent subjected to near-fault and far-field ground motion" Journal of Bridge Engineering, V. 18, No. 10. 2012, pp. 992-1004.
16. Billah, A.H.M.M., Kabir, M. and Alam, M.S., "Comparative Collapse Performance Assessment of Bridge Pier under Near-Fault and Long Duration Ground Motions." 16th world conference on earthquake engineering, Santiago, Chile. 2017.
17. Iervolino, I., Manfredi, G. and Cosenza, E., "Ground motion duration effects on nonlinear seismic response" Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics, V. 35, No. 1. 2006, pp. 21-38.
18. Arias, A., "A measure of earthquake intensity: seismic design for nuclear power plants," Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1970.
19. Hachem, M.M., Moehle, J.P. and Mahin, S.A., "Performance of circular reinforced concrete bridge columns under bidirectional earthquake loading." Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center Berkeley, 2003.
20. Association, C.S., "Canadian highway bridge design code (CAN/CSA S6-14)," Toronto, Ontario. 2014.
21. Billah, A.H.M.M., and Alam, M.S., "Probabilistic seismic risk assessment of concrete bridge piers reinforced with different types of shape memory alloys" Engineering Structures, V. 162. 2018, pp. 97-108.
22. Bimschas, M., " Displacement based seismic assessment of existing bridges in regions of moderate seismicity". Diss. ETH Zurich, 2010.
23. Billah, A.H.M.M., and Alam, M.S., "Performance based seismic design of concrete bridge pier reinforced with Shape Memory Alloy-Part 1: Development of Performance-Based Damage States" ASCE J Struct Eng. 2016.
24. Auricchio, F., & Sacco, E. “A superelastic shape-memory-alloy beam model." Journal of intelligent material systems and structures, 1997, pp.489-501.
25. SeismoSoft, 2018. SeismoStruct - A computer program for static and dynamic nonlinear analysis offramed structures, online., available from URL: www.seismosoft.com
26. Pinho, R., Casarotti, C. and Antoniou, S., "A comparison of single‐run pushover analysis techniques for seismic assessment of bridges" Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics, V. 36, No. 10. 2007, pp. 1347-62.
27. Madas, P. and Elnashai, A., "A new passive confinement model for transient analysis of reinforced concrete structures" Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, V. 21, No. 5. 1992, pp. 409-31.
28. Menegotto, M., and Pinto, P.E. "Method of analysis for cyclically loaded RC plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending." Proc. of IABSE symposium on resistance and ultimate deformability of structures acted on by well defined repeated loads. 1973.
29. Filippou, F.C., Popov, E.P. and Bertero, V.V., "Modeling of R/C joints under cyclic excitations" Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 109, No. 11. 1983, pp. 2666-84.
30. Fragiadakis, M., & Papadrakakis, M. “Modeling, analysis and reliability of seismically excited structures: computational issues.” International journal of computational methods, 2008, pp.483-511.
31. Fugazza, D. Shape-memory alloy devices for earthquake engineering: Mechanical properties, constitutive modeling and numerical simulations. Master's Thesis, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy, 2003.
32. Alam, M.S., Youssef, M.A., and Nehdi, M., "Analytical prediction of the seismic behaviour of superelastic shape memory alloy reinforced concrete elements" Engineering Structures, V. 30, No. 12. 2008, pp. 3399-411.
33. Billah, A.H.M.M., and Alam, M.S., "Seismic performance of concrete columns reinforced with hybrid shape memory alloy (SMA) and fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) bars." Construction and Building Materials, V. 28, No. 1. 2012, pp. 730-42.
34. Aviram, A., Mackie, K.R. and Stojadinović, B., "Guidelines for nonlinear analysis of bridge structures in California." Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center; 2008.
35. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). HAZUS-MH software. Washington DC; 2003.
36. Hwang, H., Liu, J.B. and Chiu, Y.H., "Seismic fragility analysis of highway bridges" Mid-America Earthquake Center CD Release 01-06. 2001.
37. Porter, K., Kennedy, R. and Bachman, R., "Creating fragility functions for performancebased earthquake engineering" Earthquake Spectra, V. 23, No. 2. 2007, pp. 471-89.
38. Billah, A.H.M.M., and Alam, M.S., "Seismic fragility assessment of highway bridges: a state-of-the-art review" Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, V. 11, No. 6. 2015, pp. 804-32.
39. Rojahn, C. and Sharpe, R.L., "Earthquake damage evaluation data for California." Applied technology council, 1985.
40. Basoz, N.I., Kiremidjian, A.S., King, S.A. and Law, K.H., "Statistical analysis of bridge damage data from the 1994 Northridge, CA, earthquake" Earthquake Spectra, V. 15, No. 1. 1999, pp. 25-54.
41. Yamazaki, F., Motomura, H., and Hamada, T. ''Damage assessment of expressway networks in Japan based on seismic monitoring.'' In Proceedings of the 12th world conference on earthquake engineering,2000.
42. Alam, M.S., Bhuiyan, A.R. and Billah, A.H.M.M., "Seismic fragility assessment of SMAbar restrained multi-span continuous highway bridge isolated by different laminated rubber bearings in medium to strong seismic risk zones" Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, V. 10, No. 6. 2012, pp. 1885-909.
43. Nielson, B.G. and DesRoches, R., "Analytical seismic fragility curves for typical bridges in the central and southeastern United States" Earthquake Spectra, V. 23, No. 3. 2007, pp. 615-33.
44. Nielson, B.G. and DesRoches, R., "Seismic fragility methodology for highway bridges using a component level approach" Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, V. 36, No. 6. 2007, pp. 823-39.
45. Bhuiyan, A.R. and Alam, M.S., "Seismic vulnerability assessment of a multi-span continuous highway bridge fitted with shape memory alloy bars and laminated rubber bearings" Earthquake Spectra, V. 28, No. 4. 2012, pp. 1379-404.
46. Ramanathan, K., DesRoches, R. and Padgett, J.E., "A comparison of pre-and post-seismic design considerations in moderate seismic zones through the fragility assessment of multispan bridge classes" Engineering Structures, V. 45. 2012, pp. 559-73.
47. Kwon, O.S. and Elnashai, A.S., "Fragility analysis of a highway over-crossing bridge with consideration of soil–structure interactions" Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, V. 6, No. 1-2. 2010, pp. 159-78.
48. Shinozuka, M., Feng, M.Q., Kim, H.K., and Kim, S.H., "Nonlinear static procedure for fragility curve development" Journal of engineering mechanics, V. 126, No. 12. 2000, pp. 1287-95.
49. Zhang, J. and Huo, Y., "Evaluating effectiveness and optimum design of isolation devices for highway bridges using the fragility function method" Engineering Structures, V. 31, No. 8. 2009, pp. 1648-60.
50. Cornell, C.A., Jalayer, F., Hamburger, R.O. and Foutch, D.A., "Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines" Journal of structural engineering, V. 128, No. 4. 2002, pp. 526-33.
51. Gardoni, P., Mosalam, K.M. and Kiureghian, A., "Probabilistic seismic demand models and fragility estimates for RC bridges" Journal of earthquake engineering, V. 7, No. spec01. 2003, pp. 79-106.
52. Baker, J. W., and Cornell, C. A. ''Vector-valued ground motion intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand analysis'' Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California Berkeley,2006.
53. Padgett, J.E., " Seismic vulnerability assessment of retrofitted bridges using probabilistic methods.'' Diss. Georgia Institute of Technology, 2007.
54. Porter, K., Kennedy, R., and Bachman, R. "Creating fragility functions for performancebased earthquake engineering." Earthquake Spectra, 2007,pp. 471-489.
55. Baker, J.W., Lin, T., Shahi, S.K. and Jayaram, N., "New ground motion selection procedures and selected motions for the PEER transportation research program" Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, PEER Report, No. 2011/3. 2011.
56. Caltrans. “Seismic Design Criteria 1.1.” Sacramento: California Department of Transportation, 2004.
57. Bommer, J.J. and Martinez-Pereira, A., "The effective duration of earthquake strong motion" Journal of earthquake engineering, V. 3, No. 02. 1999, pp. 127-72.
58. Giovenale, P., Ciampoli, M., and Jalayer, F. “Comparison of ground motion intensity measures using the incremental dynamic analysis.” Proc., Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, Millpress, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2003, pp1483–1491.
59. Mackie, K. R., and Stojadinović, B. “Performance‐based seismic bridge design for damage and loss limit states.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2007,pp. 1953-1971.
60. Padgett, J.E. and DesRoches, R., "Methodology for the development of analytical fragility curves for retrofitted bridges" Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, V. 37, No. 8. 2008, pp. 1157-74.
61. Kabir, M. R., Billah, A.H.M. M., and Alam, M. S., "Seismic fragility assessment of a multispan RC bridge in Bangladesh considering near-fault, far-field and long duration ground motions". Structures ,Vol. 19, 2019, pp. 333-348.