Life Cycle Thinking–Based Decision Making for Bridges under Seismic Conditions. II: A Case Study on Bridges with Superelastic SMA RC Piers
This article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYPublication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 27, Issue 6
Abstract
Bridges reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys (SMAs) demonstrate improved performance under earthquake excitations. In general, the capital investment for a bridge reinforced with SMAs is higher due to their high cost and special workmanship requirement. However, when accounting for postearthquake repair and maintenance costs and environmental impacts, SMA-reinforced bridges can deliver significant economic and environmental advantages over conventional structures in the long run. Based on a life cycle thinking–based decision support framework developed in a companion paper, this study thoroughly evaluated the life cycle seismic performance of a bridge reinforced with an SMA considering three different reinforcement configurations. Fragility analyses were conducted for each reinforcement configuration of the SMA-reinforced concrete (RC) bridge to assess its seismic vulnerability. A life cycle cost (LCC) assessment was performed to determine the economic impacts during their service life. Additionally, cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) was done using SimaPro to assess the environmental impacts. Using the outcomes of the these assessments, the overall life cycle performance of the novel bridges was compared with a similar bridge reinforced with conventional steel. The results showed that the SMA-reinforced bridges presented a better seismic life cycle performance compared with a conventional RC bridge from a seismic performance and economic perspective. However, the conventional bridge showed a better overall score from an eco-friendly approach.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The financial contribution of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada through Discover grant to conduct this research is gratefully acknowledged.
References
Alam, M. S., M. Nehdi, and M. A. Youssef. 2009. “Seismic performance of concrete frame structures reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys.” Smart Struct. Syst. 5 (5): 565–585. https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2009.5.5.565.
Auricchio, F., and E. Sacco. 1997. “A superelastic shape-memory-alloy beam model.” J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 8 (6): 489–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X9700800602.
Billah, A. H. M. M., and M. S. Alam. 2015a. “Seismic fragility assessment of concrete bridge pier reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloy.” Earthquake Spectra 31 (3): 1515–1541. https://doi.org/10.1193/112512EQS337M.
Billah, A. H. M. M., and M. S. Alam. 2015b. “Seismic fragility assessment of highway bridges: A state-of-the-art review.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 11 (6): 804–832. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2014.912243.
Billah, A. H. M. M., and M. S. Alam. 2016a. “Performance-based seismic design of shape memory alloy–reinforced concrete bridge piers. I: Development of performance-based damage states.” J. Struct. Eng. 142 (12): 04016140. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001458.
Billah, A. H. M. M., and M. S. Alam. 2016b. “Performance-based seismic design of shape memory alloy–reinforced concrete bridge piers. II: Methodology and design example.” J. Struct. Eng. 142 (12): 04016141. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001623.
Billah, A. H. M. M., and M. S. Alam. 2016c. “Plastic hinge length of shape memory alloy (SMA) reinforced concrete bridge pier.” Eng. Struct. 117 (1): 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.02.050.
Billah, A. H. M. M., M. S. Alam, and M. A. R. Bhuiyan. 2013. “Fragility analysis of retrofitted multicolumn bridge bent subjected to near-fault and far-field ground motion.” J. Bridge Eng. 18 (10): 992–1004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000452.
Bruno, S., and C. Valente. 2002. “Comparative response analysis of conventional and innovative seismic protection strategies.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 31 (5): 1067–1092. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.138.
Cruz Noguez, C. A., and M. S. Saiidi. 2012. “Shake-table studies of a four-span bridge model with advanced materials.” J. Struct. Eng. 138 (2): 183–192. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000457.
Du, G., and R. Karoumi. 2013. “Life cycle assessment of a railway bridge: Comparison of two superstructure designs.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 9 (11): 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2012.670250.
Hale, D. 2018. Heavy construction costs with RS means data. 32nd ed. R S Means Co.
Hedayati Dezfuli, F., S. Li, M. S. Alam, and J.-Q. Wang. 2017. “Effect of constitutive models on the seismic response of an SMA-LRB isolated highway bridge.” Eng. Struct. 148: 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.06.036.
Li, S., J. Wang, and M. S. Alam. 2021. “Seismic performance assessment of a multispan continuous isolated highway bridge with superelastic shape memory alloy reinforced piers and restraining devices.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 50 (2): 673–691. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3353.
Li, S., F. Zhang, J. Wang, M. S. Alam, and J. Zhang. 2017. “Effects of near-fault motions and artificial pulse-type ground motions on super-span cable-stayed bridge systems.” J. Bridge Eng. 22 (3): 04016128. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001008.
Mander, J. B., M. J. N. Priestley, and R. Park. 1988. “Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete.” J. Struct. Eng. 114 (8): 1804–1826. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804).
Menegotto, M., and P. E. Pinto. 1973. “Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R. C. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending.” In Proc., Symp. on Resistance and Ultimate Deformability of Structures Acted on by Well Defined Repeated Loads, International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, 15–22. Zurich, Switzerland: International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering.
Naito, C. J., J. P. Moehle, and K. M. Mosalam. 2002. “Evaluation of bridge beam-column joints under simulated seismic loading.” ACI Struct. J. 99 (1): 62.
Saiidi, M. S., and H. Wang. 2006. “Exploratory study of seismic response of concrete columns with shape memory alloys reinforcement.” ACI Struct. J. 103 (1): 435–442.
Wei, H.-H., M. J. Skibniewski, I. M. Shohet, and X. Yao. 2016. “Lifecycle environmental performance of natural-hazard mitigation for buildings.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil 30 (3): 04015042. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000803.
Welsh-Huggins, S. J., and A. B. Liel. 2017. “A life-cycle framework for integrating green building and hazard-resistant design: Examining the seismic impacts of buildings with green roofs.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 13 (1): 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2016.1198396.
Xiang, N., X. Chen, and M. S. Alam. 2020. “Probabilistic seismic fragility and loss analysis of concrete bridge piers with superelastic shape memory alloy-steel coupled reinforcing bars.” Eng. Struct. 207: 110229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110229.
Zheng, Y., and Y. Dong. 2019. “Performance-based assessment of bridges with steel-SMA reinforced piers in a life-cycle context by numerical approach.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 17 (3): 1667–1688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0510-x.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 27 • Issue 6 • June 2022
Copyright
© 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 27, 2021
Accepted: Feb 27, 2022
Published online: Apr 15, 2022
Published in print: Jun 1, 2022
Discussion open until: Sep 15, 2022
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
- Can-Xing Qiu, Ai-Fang Zhang, Yuan-Zuo Wang, Xiu-Li Du, Study of Ultralow-Cycle Fatigue of Iron-Based SMA in Triaxial Stress States, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 10.1061/JMCEE7.MTENG-16115, 35, 10, (2023).