Application of the Incremental Modal Pushover Analysis to Bridges Subjected to Near-Fault Ground Motions
Source abstract
Abstract
Near-fault events can cause severe damage to civil structures, including bridges. Many studies have demonstrated that the seismic assessment is not straightforward. Usually, dealing with near-fault ground motion, the structural analysis is performed using Nonlinear Response-History Analysis (NRHA) but in the last years, many authors have tested existing pushover-based procedures originally developed and validated using far-field events. Between those procedures, the Incremental Modal Pushover Analysis (IMPAβ) is a pushover-based procedure specifically developed for bridges that, in this work, was applied to a case study considering near-fault pulse-like ground motion records. The records were analyzed and selected from the European Strong Motion Database. In the paper the results obtained with IMPAβ together with other standard pushover procedures, are compared with NRHA and incremental dynamic analyses; the vertical component of the motion has been also considered. Results obtained with the bridge case study demonstrate that the vertical seismic action has a minor influence on the structural response and that IMPAβ is confirmed as a very effective pushover-based method that can be applied also for near-fault events.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Seismic Performance and Analysis · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Architecture, Roma Tre University, 00153 Rome, Italy
College of Civil Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China
References (38)
Show source-provided references
1. Analytical and field evidence of the damaging effect of vertical earthquake ground motion10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199610)25:10<1109::AID-EQE604>3.0.CO;2-0 ↗
2. Bolt, B.A., and Abrahamson, N.A. (2003). 59 Estimation of strong seismic ground motions. International Geophysics, Elsevier BV. ATC, Applied Technology Council. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings; ATC 40 Report; ATC: Redwood City, CA, USA, 1996.10.1016/S0074-6142(03)80173-0 ↗
3. Somerville, P.G. (May, January 28). Characterizing near fault ground motion for the design and evaluation of bridges. Proceedings of the 3rd National Seismic Conference and Workshop on Bridges and Highways, Portland, OR, USA.
4. Rodriguez-Marek, A., and Cofer, W.F. (2007). Dynamic Response of Bridges to Near-fault, forward Directivity Ground Motions (No. WA-RD 689.1). United States, Federal Highway Administration.
5. Modification of Empirical Strong Ground Motion Attenuation Relations to Include the Amplitude and Duration Effects of Rupture Directivity10.1785/gssrl.68.1.199 ↗
6. A predictive model for fling-step in near-fault ground motions based on recordings and simulations10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.10.010 ↗
7. Gardoni, P. (2017). Generation of Non-synchronous Earthquake Signals. Risk and Reliability Analysis: Theory and Applications. Springer Series in Reliability Engineering, Springer Science and Business Media LLC.
8. Lavorato, D., Fiorentino, G., Bergami, A.V., Ma, H.-B., Nuti, C., Briseghella, B., Vanzi, I., Zhou, W.-D., Papadrakakis, M., and Fragiadakis, M. (2017, January 12–14). Surface Generation of Asynchronous Seismic Signals for the Seismic Response Analysis of Bridges. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, ECCOMAS, Rhodes Island, Greece.10.7712/120117.5560.18098 ↗
9. Fragility Analysis of Retrofitted Multicolumn Bridge Bent Subjected to Near-Fault and Far-Field Ground Motion10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000452 ↗
10. Equivalent linear analysis of seismic-isolated bridges subjected to near-fault ground motions with forward rupture directivity effect10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.04.004 ↗
11. Performance of a Seismically Isolated Bridge under Near-Fault Earthquake Ground Motions10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:6(861) ↗
12. Comparison of dynamic response of isolated and non-isolated continuous girder bridges subjected to near-fault ground motions10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.07.016 ↗
13. Incremental dynamic analysis10.1002/eqe.141 ↗
14. A Single-Run Dynamic-Based Approach for Pushover Analysis of Structures Subjected to Near-Fault Pulse-Like Ground Motions10.1080/13632469.2017.1326420 ↗
15. Assessment of Modal-Pushover-Based Scaling Procedure for Nonlinear Response History Analysis of Ordinary Standard Bridges10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000259 ↗
16. Proposal of an Incremental Modal Pushover Analysis (IMPA)
17. Bergami, A.V., Nuti, C., and Liu, X. (2015, January 23–25). Proposal and application of the Incremental Modal Pushover Analysis (IMPA). Proceedings of the IABSE Conference, Geneva 2015: Structural Engineering: Providing Solutions to Global Challenges—Report, Geneva, Switzerland.10.2749/222137815818359104 ↗
18. Bergami, A.V., Nuti, C., Lavorato, D., Fiorentino, G., and Briseghella, B. (2020). IMPAβ: Incremental Modal Pushover Analysis for Bridges. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10124287 ↗
19. Pushover analysis for the seismic response prediction of cable-stayed bridges under multi-directional excitation10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.03.059 ↗
20. Asynchronous earthquake strong motion and RC bridges response
21. Extension of modal pushover analysis to seismic assessment of bridges10.1002/eqe.582 ↗
22. Damage patterns in the town of Amatrice after August 24th 2016 Central Italy earthquakes10.1007/s10518-017-0254-z ↗
23. (2020, July 01). ReLUIS-INGV Workgroup. 2016. Preliminary Study on Strong Motion Data of the 2016 Central Italy Seismic Sequence V6. Available online: http://www.reluis.it.
24. Luzi, L., Puglia, R., Russo, E., and ORFEUS WG5 (2016). Engineering Strong Motion Database, stituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Observatories & Research Facilities for European Seismology. Version 1.
25. The Central Italy Seismic Sequence between August and December 2016: Analysis of Strong-Motion Observations10.1785/0220170037 ↗
26. Quantitative Classification of Near-Fault Ground Motions Using Wavelet Analysis10.1785/0120060255 ↗
27. Selection of Near-Fault Pulse Motions10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001129 ↗
28. SAP 2000 (2020). Integrated Software for Structural Analysis and Design, Version 21, Computers & Structures, Inc.
29. Equivalent Viscous Damping of Bilinear Hysteretic Oscillators10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001262 ↗
30. Aviram, A., Mackie, K.R., and Stojadinović, B. (2008). Guidelines for Nonlinear Analysis of Bridge Structures in California, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
31. Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for Confined Concrete10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804) ↗
32. Parameter identification of degrading and pinched hysteretic systems using a modified Bouc–Wen model10.1080/15732479.2018.1469652 ↗
33. Lavorato, D., Fiorentino, G., Pelle, A., Rasulo, A., Bergami, A.V., Briseghella, B., and Nuti, C. (2019). A corrosion model for the interpretation of cyclic behavior of reinforced concrete sections. Struct. Concr., 1–15.10.1002/suco.201900232 ↗
34. Paraskeva, T.S., and Kappos, A.J. (2008, January 16–17). Seismic Assessment of Complex Bridges using an Improved Modal Pushover Analysis Procedure. Proceedings of the Fifth European Workshop on the Seismic Behaviour of Irregular and Complex Structures, Catania, Italy.
35. Tran-Ngoc, H., Khatir, S., De Roeck, G., Bui-Tien, T., Nguyen-Ngoc, L., and Wahab, M.A. (2018). Model Updating for Nam O Bridge Using Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm and Genetic Algorithm. Sensors, 18.10.3390/s18124131 ↗
36. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (2011). Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design, AASHTO. [2nd ed.].
37. California Department of Transportation (2016). Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC), V1.7.
38. European Committee for Standardization (2005). Eurocode 8—Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance—Part 2: Bridges, European Committee for Standardization.