Influence of axial load and loading path on the performance of R.C. bridge piers
Source abstract
Abstract
Piers are the most vulnerable part of a bridge structure during an earthquake event. During Kobe earthquake in 1995, several bridge piers of the Hanshin Expressway collapsed for more than 600m of the bridge length. In this paper, the most important results of an experimental and analytical investigation of ten reinforced concrete bridge piers specimens with the same cross section subjected to constant axial (or variable) load and reversed (or one direction) cycling loading are presented. The objective was to investigate the main parameters influencing the seismic performance of reinforced concrete bridge piers. It was found that loading history and axial load intensity had a great influence on the performance of piers, especially concerning strength and stiffness degradation as well as the energy dissipation. Controlling these parameters is one of the keys for an ideal seismic performance for a given structure during an eventual seismic event. Numerical models for the tested specimens were developed and analyzed using SeismoStruct software. The analytical results show reasonable agreement with the experimental ones. The analysis not only correctly predicted the stiffness, load, and deformation at the peak, but also captured the post-peak softening as well. The analytical results showed that, in all cases, the ratio, experimental peak strength to the analytical one, was greater than 0.95.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Seismic Performance and Analysis · Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Structural Load-Bearing Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (25)
Show source-provided references
1. ACI Struct. J · 2012 · 109 · 531
2. Eng. Struct. · 2012 · 34 · 6910.1016/j.engstruct.2011.09.013 ↗
3. ACI Struct. J · 2008 · 105 · 123
4. J. Asian Architect. Build. Eng. · 2005 · 4 · 46710.3130/jaabe.4.467 ↗
5. J. Struct. Eng. · 2010 · 136 · 1210.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2010)136:1(12) ↗
6. J. Struct. Eng. · 2008 · 7 · 1235
7. ACI Struct. J. · 1990 · 87 · 630
8. ACI Struct. J · 1999 · 96 · 633
9. ACI Struct. J. · 1999 · 96 · 711
10. J. Struct. Mech. Earthq. Eng · 2000 · 640 · 71
11. Eng. Struct. · 2003 · 25 · 135310.1016/S0141-0296(03)00111-1 ↗
12. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. · 2013 · 12 · 43310.1007/s11803-013-0184-y ↗
13. J. Struct. Eng. · 2000 · 46A · 767
14. J. Struct. Eng · 1988 · 114 · 180410.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804) ↗
15. J. Struct. Eng. · 2013 · 139 · 56110.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000680 ↗
16. J. Struct. Eng. · 1985 · 111 · 72210.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(722) ↗
17. J. Struct. Eng. · 1985 · 111 · 74010.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(740) ↗
18. J. Struct. Eng. · 2002 · 48A · 735
19. Eng. Struct. · 1993 · 17 · 113
20. ACI Struct. J. · 2006 · 103 · 842
21. ACI Struct. J. · 1993 · 90 · 542
22. J. Struct. Div. · 1976 · 102 · 110.1061/JSDEAG.0004250 ↗
23. Int. J. Concrete Struct. Mater. · 2012 · 6 · 16510.1007/s40069-012-0015-y ↗
24. J. Struct. Eng · 1997 · 43A · 849
25. Appl. Mech. Mater · 2013 · 353 · 2028