Experimental Investigations of Seismic Performance of Girder–Integral Abutment–Reinforced-Concrete Pile–Soil Systems

Integral abutment bridges (IABs) have been widely applied in bridge engineering because of their excellent seismic performance, long service life, and low maintenance cost. The superstructure and substructure of an IAB are integrally connected to reduce the possibility of collapse or girders falling during an earthquake. The soil behind the abutment can provide a damping effect to reduce the deformation of the structure under a seismic load. Girders have not been considered in some of the existing published experimental tests on integral abutment–reinforced-concrete (RC) pile (IAP)–soil systems, which may not accurately represent real conditions. A pseudo-static low-cycle test on a girder–integral abutment–RC pile (GIAP)–soil system was conducted for an IAB in China. The experiment’s results for the GIAP specimen were compared with those of the IAP specimen, including the failure mode, hysteretic curve, energy dissipation capacity, skeleton curve, stiffness degradation, and displacement ductility. The test results indicate that the failure modes of both specimens were different. For the IAP specimen, the pile cracked at a displacement of +2 mm, while the abutment did not crack during the test. For the GIAP specimen, the pile cracked at a displacement of −8 mm, and the abutment cracked at a displacement of 50 mm. The failure mode of the specimen changed from severe damage to the pile top under a small displacement to damage to both the abutment and pile top under a large displacement. Compared with the IAP specimen, the initial stiffness under positive horizontal displacement (39.2%), residual force accumulation (22.6%), residual deformation (12.6%), range of the elastoplastic stage in the skeleton curve, and stiffness degradation of the GIAP specimen were smaller; however, the initial stiffness under negative horizontal displacement (112.6%), displacement ductility coefficient (67.2%), average equivalent viscous damping ratio (30.8%), yield load (20.4%), ultimate load (7.8%), and range of the elastic stage in the skeleton curve of the GIAP specimen were larger. In summary, the seismic performance of the GIAP–soil system was better than that of the IAP–soil system. Therefore, to accurately reflect the seismic performance of GIAP–soil systems in IABs, it is suggested to consider the influence of the girder.