Comparative Study on the Small Radius Curved Bridge and Simplified Models by Shaking Table Tests
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 26, Issue 7
Abstract
Three experimental structural models of a small radius curved bridge, which include a three-span small radius curved bridge model and its corresponding two different simplified models that are widely used (e.g., one mass simplified model and one single pier simplified model), will be constructed, and then three bridge structure–foundation soil system models will be designed to carry out shaking table tests. From the shaking table tests on the three models under different input motions, the dynamic soil–structure interaction effects on the dynamic characteristics, seismic response rules, and damage modes of the three models will be studied and compared. Before the test, the measured fundamental frequency of the single pier simplified model was minimum and that of the mass simplified model was maximum in the three test models. In the test, with an increase in the input motion peak ground acceleration (PGA), the soil disturbance and deformation increased gradually, and the foundation soil separated gradually from the model structures, and local damage to the structures occurred, and the fundamental frequency of the curved bridge model structure decreased most significantly in the three models. The test phenomena and measured results indicate that the single pier simplified model could be used to approximately simulate the acceleration and displacement responses of the fixed pier and corresponding pile of the curved bridge, and the single pier simplified model could be used to approximately simulate the strain response of the fixed pier and corresponding pile. The mass simplified model was not suitable to simulate the acceleration, displacement, and strain responses of the fixed pier and corresponding pile. It is not appropriate to use the mass simplified model and the single pier simplified model to simulate the pile–soil contact pressure of the fixed pier model. In addition, the single pier simplified model could not reflect the torsion characteristics of a curved bridge.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This research is supported by the Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation, China (No. ZR2020QE280), National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 51908338 and 51421005), and Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation (No. 8172049).
References
Abdelnaby, A. E., T. M. Frankie, A. S. Elnashai, B. F. Spencer, D. A. Kuchma, P. Silva, and C.-M. Chang. 2014. “Numerical and hybrid analysis of a curved bridge and methods of numerical model calibration.” Eng. Struct. 70: 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.04.009.
Amjadian, M., and A. K. Agrawal. 2016. “Rigid-body motion of horizontally curved bridges subjected to earthquake-induced pounding.” J. Bridge Eng. 21 (12): 04016090. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000962.
Chen, L. S. 2012. Response on highways’ damage in the Wenchuan earthquake. Beijing: China Communications Press.
Chen, Y. Q., X. L. Lu, P. Z. Li, and B. Chen. 2006. “Comparative study on the dynamic soil-structure interaction system with various soils by using shaking table model tests.” China Civ. Eng. J. 39 (5): 57–64.
Chinese Inspection delegation for Kobe earthquake. 1995. Kobe earthquake damage inspection of Japan. Beijing: Seismological Press.
Cubrinovski, M., R. Uzuoka, H. Sugita, K. Tokimatsu, M. Sato, K. Ishihara, Y. Tsukamoto, and T. Kamata. 2008. “Prediction of pile response to lateral spreading by 3-D soil-water coupled dynamic analysis: Shaking in the direction of ground flow.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 28 (6): 421–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.10.015.
Dai, G. L., W. S. Liu, and M. Zeng. 2012. “Dynamic response of a small-radius curved bridge under earthquake.” J. Vib. Shock 31 (2): 155–160.
Durante, M. G., L. Di Sarno, G. Mylonakis, C. A. Taylor, and A. L. Simonelli. 2016. “Soil-pile-structure interaction: Experimental outcomes from shaking table tests.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 45 (7): 1041–1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2694.
Fenves, G. L., and M. Ellery. 1998. Behavior and failure analysis of a multiple-frame highway bridge in the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Rep. No. PEER 98/08. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
Hamayoon, K., Y. Morikawa, R. Oka, and F. Zhang. 2016. “3D dynamic finite element analyses and 1 g shaking table tests on seismic performance of existing group-pile foundation in partially improved grounds under dry condition.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 90: 196–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.08.032.
Jiang, X. L., B. W. Xu, and Y. Jiao. 2010. “Analysis of shaking table test of large-scale soil-pile-complex structure interaction.” China Civ. Eng. J. 43 (10): 98–105.
Jiao, C. Y., Z. M. Lu, P. H. Long, X. Shi, and S. Hou. 2018. “Study on seismic behavior of curved bridge considering soil-abutment-superstructure interaction.” J. Vib. Shock 37 (8): 99–106.
Li, X., D. Y. Zhang, W. M. Yan, Y. J. Chen, and W. C. Xie. 2015. “Shake-table test for a typical curved bridge: Wave passage and local site effects.” J. Bridge Eng. 20 (2): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000643.
Liu, C. G., G. S. Sun, L. Han, J. Feng and Y. C. E. 2012. “Research and progress on shaking table test of pile-supported bridge structure with column.” J. China Foreign Highway 32 (1): 142–148.
Meng, J., Z. Liu, and J. D. Zhang. 2014. “Causation analysis of seismic failure for Huilan Flyover under Wenchuan earthquake.” J. Vib. Shock 33 (12): 99–105. https://doi.org/10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2014.12.017.
Meymand, P. 1998. Shake table scale model tests of nonlinear soil-pile-superstructure interaction in soft clay. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California.
Monzon, E. V., I. G. Buckle, and A. M. Itani. 2016. “Seismic performance and response of seismically isolated curved steel I-girder bridge.” J. Struct. Eng. 142 (12): 04016121. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001594.
Mylonakis, G., D. Papastamatiou, J. Psycharis, and K. Mahmoud. 2001. “Simplified modeling of bridge response on soft soil to nonuniform seismic excitation.” J. Bridge Eng. 6 (6): 587–597. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2001)6:6(587).
Shao, R. G., and G. Xia. 1994. Concrete curved bridge. Beijing: China Communications Press.
Soleimani, F., C. S. W. Yang, and R. DesRoches. 2017. “The effect of superstructure curvature on the seismic performance of box girder bridges with In-span hinges.” In Structures Congress 2017: Bridges and Transportation Structures, edited by J. G. Soules, 469–480. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Suzuki, H., K. Tokimatsu, and K. Tabata. 2014. “Factors affecting stress distribution of a 3×3 pile group in dry sand based on three-dimensional large shaking table tests.” Soils Found. 54 (4): 699–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2014.06.009.
Tafreshi, S. N. M. 2008. “Uncouple nonlinear modeling of seismic soil-pile-superstructure interaction in soft clay.” Int. J. Civ. Eng. 6 (4): 275–283.
Tang, L., X. Z. Ling, and P. J. Xu. 2010. “Shaking table test for seismic interaction of pile groups-soil-bridge structure with elevated cap in liquefiable ground.” China J. Highway Transp. 23 (4): 51–57.
Tondini, N., and B. Stoiadinovic. 2012. “Probabilistic seismic demand model for curved reinforced concrete bridges.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 10 (5): 1455–1479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-012-9362-y.
Wang, D. S., X. Gun, and Z. G. Sun. 2009. “Damage to highway bridges during Wenchuan earthquake.” Earthquake Eng. Eng. Vib. 3: 132–138.
Wei, X., L. C. Fan, and J. J. Wang. 2002. “Shaking table test on soil-pile-structure interaction.” China Civ. Eng. J. 35 (4): 91–97.
Wodzinowski, R., K. Sennah, and H. M. Afefy. 2018. “Free vibration analysis of horizontally curved composite concrete-steel I-girder bridges.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 140: 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.10.011.
Yan, L., Q. N. Li, J. H. Yin, and M. Cheng. 2016. “Experimental study on shaking table of irregular curved bridge.” World Earthquake Eng. 32 (4): 1–6.
Zhang, Z., X. J. Li, R. Q. Lan, and C. Song. 2019. “Shaking table tests and numerical simulations of a small radius curved bridge considering SSI effect.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 118: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.12.006.
Zhou, Y., and J. Chen. 2019. “Uniform dynamic similitude method and experimental study for the track-subgrade system.” J. Tongji Univ. 47 (6): 815–823.
Zhou, Y., and X. L. Lu. 2012. Method and technology for shaking table model test of building structures. Beijing: Science Press.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 26 • Issue 7 • July 2021
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jul 29, 2020
Accepted: Mar 5, 2021
Published online: May 12, 2021
Published in print: Jul 1, 2021
Discussion open until: Oct 12, 2021
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.
Cited by
- Kailun Zhang, Airong Liu, Jiyang Fu, Yonghui Huang, Jie Yang, Yuguo Yu, Mao Ye, Zhicheng Yang, Zixiang Zhang, Shaking table test of a new special-shaped arch bridge, Engineering Structures, 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116075, 286, (116075), (2023).
- Renda Zhao, Kaifeng Zheng, Xing Wei, Hongyu Jia, Xiaozhen Li, Qinghua Zhang, Guoji Xu, Yulin Zhan, Ruili Shen, Fang Zhang, Qianhui Pu, Hongye Gou, Chuanjin Yu, State-of-the-art and annual progress of bridge engineering in 2021, Advances in Bridge Engineering, 10.1186/s43251-022-00070-1, 3, 1, (2022).