Pretest analysis of shake table response of a two-span steel girder bridge incorporating accelerated bridge construction connections

Abstract

This paper presents pretest analysis of a shake table test model of a 0.35-scale, two-span, steel plate girder bridge. The objective of pretest analysis was to obtain an insight on the seismic response of the bridge model during the shake table tests. The bridge included seat type abutments, full-depth precast deck panels, and a two-column bent in which columns were pinned to the footing and integral with superstructure. Six accelerated bridge construction connections were incorporated in the bridge model. An analytical model was developed in OpenSees and was subjected to ten input bi-directional earthquake motions including near-fault and far-field records. The overall seismic response of the bridge was satisfactory for all the earthquake records at 100%, 150%, and 200% design level. All connections and capacity-protected components remained elastic, and the average ductility capacity surpassed the ductility demand even at 200% design level. Using experimental fragility curves developed for RC bridge columns, it was predicted that there was a probability of 45% that columns would undergo the imminent failure in the last run and a probability of 30% for their failure.

Keywords

shake table test / accelerated bridge construction / steel girder bridge / OpenSEES / UHPC / simple for dead continuous for live

References

[1] Matsumoto E E, Waggoner M C, Sumen G, Kreger M E. Development of a Precast Bent Cap System. FHWA Report No. FHWA/TX-0-1748-2. 2001

[2] Restrepo J I, Tobolski M J, Matsumoto E E. Development of a Precast Bent Cap System for Seismic Regions. NCHRP Report 681. 2011

[3] Tazarv M, Saiidi M. Next Generation of Bridge Columns for Accelerated Bridge Construction in High Seismic Zones. Report No. CCEER-14-06. 2014

[4] Motaref S, Saiidi M, Sanders D. Seismic Response of Precast Bridge Columns with Energy Dissipating Joints. Report No. CCEER-11-01. 2011

[5] Mehrsoroush A, Saiidi M. Cyclic response of precast bridge piers with novel column-base pipe pins and pocket cap beam connections. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2016, 21(4): 04015080

[6] Mehraein M, Saiidi M. Seismic Performance of Bridge Column-Pile-Shaft Pin Connections for Application in Accelerated Bridge Construction. Report No. CCEER-16-01. 2016

[7] Mehrsoroush A, Saiidi M, Ryan K. Development of Earthquake-Resistant Precast Pier Systems for Accelerated Bridge Construction in Nevada. Report No. 555-14-803. 2017

[8] Mohebbi A, Saiidi M, Itani A. Development and Seismic Evaluation of Pier Systems w/Pocket Connections, CFRP Tendons, and ECC/UHPC Columns. Report No. CCEER-17-02, 2017

[9] Marsh M L, Stanton J F, Eberhard M O, Haraldsson O, Khaleghi B.A Precast Bridge Bent System for Seismic Regions. Technical Report DTFH61-09. 2010

[10] Sadeghnejad A, Taghinezhadbilondy R, Azizinamini A. Seismic performance of a new connection detail in an SDCL steel bridge system. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2019, 24(10): 04019094

[11] Badie S S, Tadros M K. Full-Depth Precast Concrete Bridge Deck Panel Systems. Report 584 by National Cooperative Highway Research Program. 2008

[12] Shrestha G, Itani A, Saiidi M. Seismic Performance of Precast Full-Depth Decks in Accelerated Bridge Construction. Report No. CCEER-17-05. 2017

[13] Graybeal B. Behavior of Field-Cast Ultra-High Performance Concrete Bridge Deck Connections under Cyclic and Static Structural Loading. Report No. FHWA-HRT-11–023. 2010

[14] Graybeal B. Design and Construction of Field-Cast UHPC Connections. Federal Highway Administration Publication No. FHWA-HRT-14-084. 2014

[15] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design. Washington, D.C.: AASHTO, 2014

[16] Caltrans. Seismic Design Criteria (SDC). Version 1.7. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Transportation, 2013

[17] Sadrossadat-Zadeh M, Saiidi M. Analytical Study of NEESR-SG 4-Span Bridge Model Using OpenSees. Report No. CCEER-07-03. 2007

[18] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 6th ed. Washington, D.C.: AASHTO, 2012

[19] United States Geological Survey (USGS). U.S. Seismic Design Maps. Reston, Virginia, , 2016

[20] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design. Washington, D.C.: AASHTO, 2009

[21] Saiidi M S, Cheng Z Y, Sanders D. Experimental study of two-way reinforced concrete column hinges under seismic loads. ACI Structural Journal, 2009, 106(3): 340-348

[22] Taghinezhadbilondy R, Yakel A, Azizinamini A. Extending Use of Simple for Dead Load and Continuous for Live Load (SDCL) Steel Bridge System to Seismic Areas. Miami, FL: Florida International University, 2016

[23] CSiBridge. V19.2.2. CSI Computer & Structures Inc. Integrated 3-D Bridge Analysis, Design, and Rating. Berkeley, CA: Computer & Structures, Inc., 2016

[24] McKenna F, Fenves G, Scott M. Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OpenSees). Berkeley, California: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, 2000

[25] Amirihormozaki E, Pekcan G, Itani A. Analytical modeling of horizontally curved steel girder highway bridges for seismic analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2015, 19(2): 220–248

[26] Hambly E C. Bridge Deck Behaviour. 2nd ed. New York: CRC Press, 1990

[27] Carden L P, Itani A, Buckle I G. Seismic Load Path in Steel Girder Bridge Superstructures. Report No. CCEER-05-03. 2005

[28] Mander J B, Priestley M J, Park R. Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1988, 114(8): 1804–1826

[29] Alavi B, Krawinkler H. Consideration of near-fault ground motion effects in seismic design. In: Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Auckland, 2000

[30] Japan Road Association. Design Specifications for Highway Bridges, Part Seismic Design (English edition), Tokyo, 2000

[31] Benjumea J, Saiidi M, Itani A. Experimental and Analytical Seismic Studies of a Two-Span Bridge System with Precast Concrete Elements and ABC Connections. Report No. CCEER-19-02. 2019

[32] Vosooghi A, Saiidi M S. Experimental fragility curves for seismic response of reinforced concrete bridge columns. ACI Structural Journal, 2012, 109(6): 825–834

[33] Shoushtari E, Saiidi M, Itani A, Moustafa M. Design, construction, and shake table testing of a steel girder bridge system with ABC connections. ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2018, 24(9): 04019088

[34] Shoushtari E. Shake table studies of a steel girder bridge system with ABC connections. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Reno: University of Nevada-Reno, 2019, 129–167

Acknowledgement

The study presented in this article was supported by the Accelerated Bridge Construction University Transportation Center (ABC-UTC) at the Florida International University (FIU). This study would not have been possible without the assistance and advice of the UNR Earthquake Engineering Laboratory staff Dr. Patrick Laplace, Chad Lyttle, Todd Lyttle, and Mark Lattin. The support and advice of ABC-UTC director, Dr. Atorod Azizinamini, is greatly appreciated. Thanks are due to Mojtaba Alian, Jose Benjumea Royero, Jared Jones, Amir Sadeghnezhad, Dr. Alireza Mohebbi, and Dr. Ali Mehrsoroush. The authors would like to thank Lafarge North America Inc. for donating UHPC material, C&K Johnson Industries for donating corrugated metal ducts, Reno Iron Works for fabrication of steel girders at a reduced cost, and NSBA for donating steel material for the girders, cross frames, and other accessories.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2019 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature