Effects of Spatially Varying Ground Motions on Short Bridges
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 124, Issue 8
Abstract
The effects of non-uniform excitation on short bridges were studied by computing the response of an idealized bridge to a suite of earthquake ground motions. The ground motions for each support were developed from seven measured ground motions and from idealizations of wave passage and coherency loss effects. For each set of support motions and for a range of bridge lengths and periods, the maximum support reactions were compared with the reactions calculated for coherent motions. For variable support motion, the contribution of the antisymmetric modes tended to increase, whereas the contribution of the symmetric modes generally decreased. Consequently, the dynamic component of the end support reaction computed using coherency loss excitation exceeded the response to coherent excitation for 62% of the bridges considered, varying from 75–180% of the coherent response. In contrast, the dynamic component of the central support reaction, which is affected only by symmetric modes, was unconservatively predicted in only 20% of the cases. Based on these observations, a method that relies on modifying the modal participation factor was developed for incorporating the effects of multisupport excitations into coherent response calculations.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Abdel-Ghaffar, A. M., and Rubin, L. I.(1982). “Suspension bridge response to multiple-support excitations.”J. Engrg. Mech. Div., ASCE, 108(2), 419–435.
2.
Abrahamson, N. A. (1985). “Estimation of seismic wave coherency and rupture velocity using the SMART1 strong-motion array recordings.”Rep. UCB/EERC-85/02. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
3.
Abrahamson, N. A.(1992). “Generation of spatially incoherent strong motion time histories.”Proc., 10th World Conf. on Earthquake Engrg., A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 10, 845–850.
4.
Abrahamson, N. A. (1993). “Spatial variation of multiple support inputs.”Proc., 1st U.S. Seminar, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Steel Bridges, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
5.
Berrah, M., and Kausel, E.(1992). “Response spectrum analysis of structures subjected to spatially varying motions.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 21, 461–470.
6.
Der Kiureghian, A.(1996). “A coherency model for spatially varying ground motions.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 25, 99–111.
7.
Der Kiureghian, A., and Neuenhofer, A. (1991). “A response spectrum method for multiple-support seismic excitations.”Rep. UCB/EERC-91/08. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
8.
Dumanoglu, A. A., and Severn, R. T.(1990). “Stochastic response of suspension bridges to earthquake forces.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 19, 135–152.
9.
Dusseau, R. A., and Dubaisi, H. N. (1993). “Natural frequencies of concrete bridges in the Pacific Northwest.”Transp. Res. Rec. 1393, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 119–132.
10.
Hall, J. H. (ed.). (1995). “Northridge earthquake reconnaissance report. Volume 1.”Earthquake Spectra, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, Calif., 11 (Supplement C), 515–523.
11.
Hao, H., Oliviera, C. S., and Penzien, J.(1991). “Multiple-station ground motion processing and simulation based on SMART1 array data.”Nuclear Engrg. and Design, 111, 293–310.
12.
Harichandran, R. S.(1991). “Estimating the spatial variation of earthquake ground motions from dense array recordings.”Struct. Safety, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 10, 219–233.
13.
Harichandran, R. S., and Vanmarcke, E. H.(1986). “Stochastic variation of earthquake ground motion in space and time.”J. Engrg. Mech., ASCE, 112(2), 154–174.
14.
Harichandran, R. S., and Wang, W.(1988). “Response of simple beam to spatially varying earthquake excitation.”J. Engrg. Mech., ASCE, 114(9), 1526–1541.
15.
Harichandran, R. S., and Wang, W.(1990). “Response of indeterminate two-span beam to spatially varying seismic excitation.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 19, 173–187.
16.
Humar, J. L. (1990). Dynamics of structures. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
17.
“Improved seismic design criteria for California bridges: provisional recommendations.” (1996). Rep. ATC-32, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, Calif.
18.
Katayama, T., Yamazaki, F., Nagata, S., Lu, L., and Türker, T. (1990). “Development of strong motion database for the Chiba Seismometer Array.”Rep. 90-1(14). Earthquake Disaster Mitigation Engineering, Institute of Industrial Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
19.
Luco, J. E., and Wong, H. L.(1986). “Response of a rigid foundation to a spatially random ground motion.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 14, 891–908.
20.
Mahmoodzadegan, B., Mander, J. B., and Chen, S. S.(1994). “Simplified seismic evaluation for a class of slab-on-girder bridge.”Proc., 5th U.S. National Conf. on Earthquake Engrg., Earthquake Engrg. Res. Inst., Oakland, Calif., 1, 521–530.
21.
Nazmy, A. S., and Abdel-Ghaffar, A. M.(1992). “Effects of ground motion spatial variability on the response of cable-stayed bridges.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 21, 1–20.
22.
O'Rourke, M. J., Bloom, M. C., and Dobry, R.(1982). “Apparent propagation velocity of body waves.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 10, 283–294.
23.
O'Rourke, M. J., and El Hmadi, K.(1988). “Analysis of continuous buried pipelines for seismic wave effects.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 16, 917–929.
24.
Price, T. E., and Eberhard, M. O. (1996). “Response history analyses of short bridges subjected to spatially-varying ground motion.”SGEM Rep. No. 96-3. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash.
25.
Spudich, P. (1994). “Recent seismological insights into the spatial variation of earthquake ground motions.”New developments in earthquake ground motion estimation and implications for engineering design practice. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, Calif., 13.1–13.31.
26.
Werner, S. D., Beck, J. L., and Nisar, A.(1990). “Dynamic tests and seismic excitation of a bridge structure.”Proc., 4th U.S. National Conf. on Earthquake Engrg., 1, 1037–1046.
27.
Yamamura, N., and Tanaka, H.(1990). “Response analysis of flexible MDF systems for multiple-support seismic excitations.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 19, 345–357.
28.
Zerva, A.(1990). “Response of multi-span beams to spatially incoherent seismic ground motions.”Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 19, 819–832.
29.
Zerva, A. (1991). “Effect of spatial variability and propagation of seismic ground motions on the response of multiply supported structures.”Probabilistic Engrg. Mech., Essex, U.K. 6, 212–221.
30.
Zerva, A.(1992). “Seismic loads predicted by spatial variability models.”Struct. Safety, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 11, 227–243.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 124 • Issue 8 • August 1998
Pages: 948 - 955
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Aug 1, 1998
Published in print: Aug 1998
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.