journal article·2021-12-09Open access

Dynamic Damage Mechanism and Seismic Fragility Analysis of an Aqueduct Structure

Xinyong Xu, Xuhui Liu, Li Jiang, Mohd Yawar Ali Khan

Applied Sciences· Volume 11· Issue 24

Abstract

The Concrete Damaged Plasticity (CDP) constitutive is introduced to study the dynamic failure mechanism and the law of damage development to the aqueduct structure during the seismic duration using a large-scale aqueduct structure from the South-to-North Water Division Project (SNWDP) as a research object. Incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) and multiple stripe analysis (MSA) seismic fragility methods are introduced. The spectral acceleration is used as the scale of ground motion record intensity measure (IM), and the aqueduct pier top offset ratio quantifies the limit of structural damage measure (DM). The aqueduct structure’s seismic fragility evaluation curves are constructed with indicators of different seismic intensity measures to depict the damage characteristics of aqueduct structures under different seismic intensities through probability. The results show that penetrating damage is most likely to occur on both sides of the pier cap and around the pier shaft in the event of a rare earthquake, followed by the top of the aqueduct body, which requires the greatest care during an earthquake. The results of two fragility analysis methodologies reveal that the fragility curves are very similar. The aqueduct structure’s first limit state level (LS1) is quite steep and near the vertical line, indicating that maintaining the excellent condition without damage in the seismic analysis will be challenging. Except for individual results, the overall fragility results are in good agreement, and the curve change rule is the same. The exceedance probability in the case of any ground motion record IM may be estimated using only two factors when using the MSA approach, and the computation efficiency is higher. The study of seismic fragility analysis methods in this paper can provide a reference for the seismic safety evaluation of aqueducts and similar structures.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Seismic Performance and Analysis · Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

School of Water Conservancy, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450045, China

Collaborative Innovation Center of Water Resources Efficient Utilization and Protection Engineering, Zhengzhou 450046, China

Department of Hydrogeology, Faculty of Earth Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program of China · National Natural Science Foundation of China · Henan Science and Technology Innovation Talent Program · Henan Province University Science and Technology Innovation Team Support Plan

References (50)

Show source-provided references
1. Quasi-Static Nonlinear Seismic Assessment of a Fourth Century A.D. Roman Aqueduct in Istanbul, Turkey10.3390/heritage4010025 ↗
2. Equivalent mechanical models of sloshing fluid in arbitrary-section aqueducts10.1002/eqe.1173 ↗
3. Study on dynamic performance of a three-dimensional high frame supported U-shaped aqueduct10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.08.017 ↗
4. Nonlinear random seismic response analysis of the double-trough aqueduct based on fiber beam element model10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106856 ↗
5. Sloshing of fluid in a baffled rectangular aqueduct considering soil-structure interaction10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.04.008 ↗
6. A numerical research on the aqueduct hydrodynamic pressure from earthquakes10.1080/19648189.2013.834596 ↗
7. Review of Liquid Sloshing Dynamics: Theory and Applications
8. Finite element analysis of the aseismicity of a large aqueduct10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.01.018 ↗
9. Resonance mechanism of wind-induced isolated aqueduct-water coupling system10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.09.014 ↗
10. Marefat M S. Seismic performance assessment of plain concrete arch bridges under near-field earthquakes using incremental dynamic analysis10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.104170 ↗
11. Evaluation of vertical seismic response for a large-scale beam-supported aqueduct
12. Deierlein, G.G., Krawinkler, H., and Cornell, C.A. (2003). A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering. Proceedings of 2003 Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Elsevier.
13. Porter, K.A. (2003, January 6–9). An overview of PEER’s performance-based earthquake engineering methodology. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering (ICASP9), San Francisco, CA, USA.
14. Moehle, J., and Deierlein, G.G. (2004, January 1–6). A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering. Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
15. Strength and deformation capacities of buildings under extreme environments
16. Incremental dynamic analysis10.1002/eqe.141 ↗
17. Jalayer, F., and Cornell, C.A. (2004). A Technical Framework for Probability-Based Demand and Capacity Factor Design (DCFD) Seismic Formats, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. PEER Report 2003/08.
18. On the collapse evaluation of existing RC bridges exposed to corrosion under horizontal loads10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104727 ↗
19. Crespi, P., Zucca, M., Longarini, N., and Giordano, N. (2020). Seismic Assessment of Six Typologies of Existing RC Bridges. Infrastructures, 5.10.3390/infrastructures5060052 ↗
20. Seismic fragility of typical bridges in moderate seismic zones10.1016/j.engstruct.2003.09.006 ↗
21. Probabilistic capacity models and seismic fragility estimates for RC columns subject to corrosion10.1016/j.ress.2006.12.015 ↗
22. Seismic fragility curves of shallow tunnels in alluvial deposits10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.11.004 ↗
23. Seismic fragility of LRC frames with and without masonry infill walls10.1080/13632469708962384 ↗
24. Jalayer, F. (2003). Direct Probabilistic Seismic Analysis: Implementing Non-Linear Dynamic Assessments. [Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University].
25. Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments10.1002/eqe.876 ↗
26. Efficient Analytical Fragility Function Fitting Using Dynamic Structural Analysis10.1193/021113EQS025M ↗
27. Yuan, C.-Y. (2017). Study on the Structure-BCS Intelligent Control Methods for Mitigating the Vibration of Large-Scale Wind Turbines. [Ph.D. Thesis, Dalian University of Technology].
28. Seismic performance assessment of a cemented material dam using incremental dynamic analysis10.1016/j.istruc.2020.12.015 ↗
29. Seismic acceleration demand and fragility assessment of storage tanks installed in industrial steel moment-resisting frame structures10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.107016 ↗
30. A plastic-damage model for concrete10.1016/0020-7683(89)90050-4 ↗
31. Simulation algorithm for spiral case structure in hydropower station
32. Hult, J., and Lemaitre, J. Description of Anisotropic Damage Application to Elasticity. Physical Non-Linearities in Structural Analysis, Proceedings of the IUTAM, Senlis, France, 27–30 May 1980, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-81582-9 ↗
33. Aseismatic analysis of aqueduct structure for South to North Water Transfer Project
34. He, J.-T. (2007). Fluid-Structure Dynamic Coupling’s Analysis of Large Scale Aqueduct. [Master’s Thesis, Xi’an University of Technology].
35. Zhou, Z.-G. (2014). Study on the Pile-Soil-Aqueduct Interaction by Pseudo-Dynamic Test and Computational Analysis. [Ph.D. Thesis, Hunan University].
36. Applied Technology Council (1978). Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for Buildings: A Cooperative Effort with the Design Professions, Building Code Interests and the Research Community, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards.
37. Water Pressures on Dams during Earthquakes10.1061/TACEAT.0004496 ↗
38. Nazri, F.M. (2018). Seismic Fragility Assessment for Buildings Due to Earthquake Excitation, Springer.10.1007/978-981-10-7125-6 ↗
39. Effects of Connection Fractures on SMRF Seismic Drift Demands10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2000)126:1(127) ↗
40. Kanai, K. (1983). Engineering Seismology, University of Tokyo Press.
41. Statistical Analysis of Fragility Curves10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2000)126:12(1224) ↗
42. Seismic fragility assessment of SMA-bar restrained multi-span continuous highway bridge isolated by different laminated rubber bearings in medium to strong seismic risk zones10.1007/s10518-012-9381-8 ↗
43. Seismic vulnerability assessment of historical masonry structural systems10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.01.031 ↗
44. Yu, X.-H. (2012). Probabilistic Seismic Fragility and Risk Analysis of Reinforce Concrete Frame Structures. [Ph.D. Thesis, Harbin Institute of Technology].
45. Dutta, A., and Mander, J. (2002). Rapid and Detailed Seismic Fragility Analysis of Highway Bridges, Technical Report for Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering.
46. American Society of Civil Engineers (2000). Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, FEMA. FEMA 356, Technical report for Federal Emergency Management Agency.
47. Seismic fragility analysis of composite frame structure based on performance10.1007/s11589-009-0049-7 ↗
48. Vamvatsikos, D. (2002). Seismic Performance, Capacity and Reliability of Structures as Seen Through Incremental Dynamic Analysis. [Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University].
49. (1999). FEMA: HAZUS99 Technical Manual, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
50. Probabilistic structural response assessment using vector-valued intensity measures10.1002/eqe.700 ↗