This study performs seismic vulnerability assessment in the longitudinal direction of a three-span continuous highway bridge, restrained by shape memory alloy (SMA) bars and isolated with laminated rubber bearings. The analytical simulation method based on incremental dynamic analyses is used in evaluating the seismic fragility functions of the bridge components (pier and isolation bearing) and the system. A two-dimensional finite element model scheme with nonlinear force-displacement relationships is used for the bridge piers and bearings. This study shows that the bridge piers with SMA bars have led to relatively higher seismic vulnerability over the bridge piers without SMA bars, which is also reflected in the bridge system. The isolation bearings with SMA bars have revealed comparatively less seismic vulnerability than those without SMA bars. From the numerical results, it is recognized that the failure probability of the bridge system is dictated by the bridge pier over the isolation bearing.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbeM., YoshidaJ., and FujinoY., 2004. Multiaxial behaviors of laminated rubber bearings and their modeling. I: Experimental study, J. Struct. Eng. 130, 1119–1132.
2.
AliH. M., and Abdel-GhaffarA. M., 1995. Modeling of rubber and lead passive-control bearings for seismic analysis, J. Struct. Eng. 121, 1134–1144.
3.
American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2000. Guide Specification for Seismic Isolation Design, 2nd Edition, Washington D. C.
4.
ANSYS, Inc., 2010. ANSYS version 12.0. Canonsburg, PA.
5.
Applied Technology Council (ATC), 1985. Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California, Report No. ATC-13, Redwood City, CA.
6.
AuricchioF., and SaccoE., 1997. A superelastic shape-memory-alloy beam model, J. Intelligent Material Systems and Structures8, 489–501.
7.
AuricchioF., TaylorR. L., and LublinerJ., 1997. Shape-memory alloys: Macromodeling and numerical simulations of the superelastic behavior, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 146, 281–312.
8.
BasözN., KiremidjianA. S., KingS. A., and LawK. H., 1999. Statistical analysis of bridge damage data from the 1994 Northridge, CA, earthquake, Earthquake Spectra15, 25–53.
9.
BasozN., and ManderJ. B., 1999. Enhancement of the Lifeline Transportation Module in HAZUS, Report No. Draft #7, National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, D. C.
10.
BhuiyanA. R., OkuiY., MitamuraH., and ImaiT., 2009. A rheology model of high damping rubber bearings for seismic analysis: Identification of nonlinear viscosity, Intl. J. Solids Struct. 46, 1778–1792.
11.
BhuiyanA. R., 2009. Rheology Modeling of Laminated Rubber Bearings, Ph.D. Thesis, Saitama University, Japan.
12.
BillahA. H. M., AlamM. S., and BhuiyanA. R., 2010. Seismic performance of a multi-span bridge fitted with superelastic SMA-based isolator, Intl. Proc. IABSE-JSCE Joint Conference on Advances in Bridge Engineering-II, August 8–10, 2010, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
13.
BrandenbergS. J., ZhangJ., KashighandiP., HuoY., and ZhaoM., 2011. Demand Fragility Surfaces for Bridges in Liquefied and Laterally Spreading Ground, PEER Report 2011/01, 162 pp.
14.
BuckleI. G., and MayesR. L., 1990. Seismic isolation: History, application, and performance–a world view, Earthquake Spectra6, 161–201.
15.
ChaudharyM. T. A., AbeM., and FujinoY., 2001. Performance evaluation of base- isolated Yama-agé bridge with high damping rubber bearings using recorded seismic data, Engineering Structures23, 902–910.
16.
ChaudharyM. T. A., AbeM., FujinoY., and YoshidaJ., 2000. System identification of two base-isolated bridges using seismic records, J. Struct. Eng. 126, 1187–1195.
17.
ChoiE., DesRochesR., and NielsonB. G., 2004. Seismic fragility of typical bridges in moderate seismic zones, Engineering Structures26, 187–199.
18.
ChoiE., NamT.-H., and ChoB.-S., 2005. A new concept of isolation bearings for highway steel bridges using shape memory alloys, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineers32, 957–967.
19.
Dall'AstaA., and RagniL., 2006. Experimental tests and analytical model of high damping rubber dissipating devices, Engineering Structures28, 1874–1884.
20.
DesRochesR., and DelemontM., 2002. Seismic retrofit of simply supported bridges using shape memory alloys, Engineering Structures24, 325–332.
21.
DicleliM., and BaddaramS., 2006. Effect of isolator and ground motion characteristics on the performance of seismic-isolated bridges, Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn35, 233–250.
22.
DolceM., CardoneD., and MarnettoR., 2000. Implementation and testing of passive control devices based on shape memory alloys, Earthquake Engineering and Structure Dynamics29, 945–968.
23.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2003. HAZUS-MH Software, Washington, D.C.
24.
GhobarahA., and AliH. M., 1988. Seismic performance of highway bridges, Engineering Structures10, 157–166.
25.
GhobarahA., 1988. Seismic behavior of highway bridges with base isolation, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering15, 72–78.
26.
GraesserE.J., and CozzarelliF.A., 1991. Shape memory alloys as new materials for aseismic isolation, J. Eng.Mech, 117, 2590–608.
27.
HwangH., JerniganJ.B., and LinY.-W., 2000. Evaluation of seismic damage to memphis bridges and highway systems, J Bridge Eng5, 322–30.
28.
HwangH., LiuJ.B., and ChiuY.-H., 2001. Seismic fragility analysis of highway bridges, MAEC report: project MAEC RR-4. Urbana: Mid-America Earthquake Center.
29.
HwangJ.-S., WuJ.D., PanT.C., and YangG., 2002. A mathematical hysteretic model for elastomeric isolation bearings, Earthq. Eng.Struct. Dyn. 31, 771–789.
30.
ImbsenR.A., 2001. Use of isolation for seismic retrofitting bridges, J Bridge Eng6, 425–438.
31.
Japan Road Association (JRA), 2002. Specifications for highway bridges, Part V: Seismic design, Tokyo, Japan.
32.
KarimK.R., and YamazakiF., 2007. Effect of isolation on fragility curves of highway bridges based on simplified approach, Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng27, 414–426.
33.
KarimK.R., and YamazakiF., 2001. Effect of earthquake ground motions on fragility curves of highway bridge piers based on numerical simulation,. Earthquake. Eng Struct. Dyn30, 1839–1856.
34.
KellyJ.M., 1997. Earthquake resistant design with rubber, 2nd edition, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, New York.
35.
KikuchiM., and AikenI.D., 1997. An analytical hysteresis model for elastomeric seismic isolation bearings, Earthquake. Eng Struct. Dyn. 26, 215–231.
36.
MackieK. R., and StojadinovicB., 2007. Performance-based seismic bridge design for damage and loss limits States, Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn36, 1953–1971.
37.
MackieK. R, and StojadinovicB., 2004. Fragility curves for reinforced concrete highway overpass bridges, Proc. of 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Paper No. 1553.
NaeimF., and KellyJ., 1996. Design of seismic isolated structures, 1st edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
40.
NielsonB., 2005. Analytical Fragility Curves for Highway Bridges in Moderate Seismic Zones, Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
41.
NielsonB., and DesRochesR., 2007a. Seismic fragility curves for typical highway bridge classes in the Central and Southeastern United States, Earthquake Spectra23, 615–633.
42.
NielsonB.G., and DesRochesR., 2007b. Seismic fragility methodology for highway bridges using a component level approach, Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn36, 823–839
43.
OzbulutO.E., and HurlebausS., 2010. Evaluation of the performance of a sliding-type base isolation system with a NiTi shape memory alloy device considering temperature effects, Engineering Structures32, 238–249.
44.
OzbulutO.E., and HurlebausS., 2011a. Optimal design of superelastic-friction base isolators for seismic protection of highway bridges against near-field earthquakes, Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn40, 273–291.
45.
OzbulutO.E., and HurlebausS., 2011b. Seismic assessment of bridge structures isolated by a shape memory alloy/rubber-based isolation system, Smart Materials and Structures20, 015003.
46.
PadgettJ.E., and DesRochesR., 2008. Methodology for the development of analytical fragility curves for retrofitted bridges, Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 37, 157–174.
47.
PriestleyM.J.N., SeibleF., and CalviC. M., 1996. Seismic design and retrofit of bridges, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
48.
RobinsonW.H., 1982. Lead rubber hysteresis bearings suitable for protecting structures during earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 10, 593–604.
ShinozukaM., FengM. Q., LeeJ., and NaganumaT., 2000a. Statistical analysis of fragility curves, J. Eng Mech126, 1224–31
51.
ShinozukaM, FengM. Q., KimH.-K., and KimS.-H., 2000b. Nonlinear static procedure for fragility curve development, J.Eng Mech.126, 1287–1295.
52.
SkinnerR. I., RobinsonW. H., and McVerryG. H., 1993. An Introduction to Seismic Isolation, DSIR Physical Science, Wellington, New Zealand.
53.
WeiZ., MaH., and SunD., 2002. A mathematical model for pseudoelasticity of shape memory alloy and its application in passive control, Journal of Vibration and Control8, 41–49.
54.
WildeK., GardoniP., and FujinoY., 2000. Base isolation system with shape memory alloy device for elevated highway bridges, Engineering Structures22, 222–229.
55.
YamazakiF., MotomuraH., and HamadaT., 2000. Damage assessment of expressway networks in Japan based on seismic monitoring, Proc. of 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, CD-ROM, 2000, Paper No. 0551.
56.
ZhangY., HuX., and ZhuS., 2009. Seismic performance of benchmark base-isolated bridges with superelastic Cu-Al-Be restraining damping device, Structural Control and Health Monitoring16, 668–685.
57.
ZhangJ., and HuoY., 2009. Evaluating effectiveness and optimum design of isolation devices for highway bridges using the fragility function method, Engineering Structures31, 1648–1660.
