Effect of cumulative seismic damage and corrosion on the life-cycle cost of reinforced concrete bridges

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 38, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 887-905

  Kumar, R ^a   Gardoni, P ^a   Sanchez Silva, M ^b  

^a Texas AandM University   (United States)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE LOS ANDES   (Colombia)

Author keywords

Corrosion; Cumulative seismic damage; Life cycle cost; Low cycle fatigue; Monte Carlo simulation; Reinforced concrete bridges

Indexed keywords

BUILDING MATERIALS; CHLORINE COMPOUNDS; CONCRETE BRIDGES; CONCRETE BUILDINGS; CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION; CORROSION; CORROSION FATIGUE; COSTS; DETERIORATION; FATIGUE DAMAGE; LARGE SCALE SYSTEMS; LIFE CYCLE; MONTE CARLO METHODS; OCEAN STRUCTURES; RAILROAD BRIDGES; REINFORCED CONCRETE; REINFORCEMENT; SEISMOLOGY;

ACCUMULATED DAMAGE; BRIDGE DESIGN; CHLORIDE INDUCED CORROSION; CORROSION INITIATION; CORROSIVE ENVIRONMENT; COST OF REPAIRS; CUMULATIVE SEISMIC DAMAGE; DESIGN PARAMETERS; DETERIORATION PROCESS; ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS; EXISTING BRIDGE; EXPECTED COSTS; FICK'S SECOND LAW; GROUND MOTION PARAMETERS; INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE; LIFE-CYCLE COST; LIFECYCLE COSTS; LOW CYCLE FATIGUES; LOW-CYCLE FATIGUE; MONTE-CARLO SIMULATION; OPTIMAL DESIGN PARAMETERS; PROBABILISTIC APPROACHES; SEISMIC DAMAGE; SEISMIC DEMANDS; SEISMIC REGIONS;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

BRIDGE; BUILDING; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CORROSION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE; FATIGUE; GROUND MOTION; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; OPTIMIZATION; PARAMETERIZATION; PROBABILITY; REINFORCED CONCRETE; RELIABILITY ANALYSIS; SAFETY; SEISMIC DESIGN; STEEL; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 68149149843     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: 10969845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.873     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Upkeep costs rises as USA's bridges age. Available from: http://www.usatoday.com (15 April 2007).
2. Kong JS, Frangopol DM. Cost-reliability interaction in life-cycle cost optimization of deteriorating structures. Journal of Structural Engineering 2004; 130(11):1704-1712.
3. Wen YK. Reliability, performance-based design. Journal of Structural Engineering 2001; 23(4):407-428.
4. Chang SE, Shinozuka M. Life-cycle cost analysis with natural hazard risk. Journal of Infrastructure Systems 1996; 3(2):118-126.
5. Stewart MG, Val DV. Multiple limit states and expected failure costs for deteriorating reinforced concrete bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering 2003; 8(6):405-415.
6. Li CQ. Life-cycle modeling of corrosion affected concrete structures-initiation. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 2003; 15(6):594-601.
7. Mori Y, Ellingwood BR. Maintaining reliability of concrete structures. I: role for inspection/repair. Journal of Structural Engineering 1994; 120(3):824-845.
8. Mori Y, Ellingwood BR. Maintaining reliability of concrete structures. II: optimum inspection/repair. Journal of Structural Engineering 1994; 120(3):846-862.
9. Kong JS, Frangopol DM. Life-cycle reliability-based maintenance cost optimization of deteriorating structures with emphasis on bridges. Journal of Structural Engineering 2003; 129(6):818-828.
10. Kunnath SK, El-Bahy A, Taylor AW, Stone WC. Cumulative seismic damage of reinforced concrete bridge piers. NISTIR 6075, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, U.S.A., 1997.
11. Choe D, Gardoni P, Rosowsky D, Haukaas T. Probabilistic capacity models and seismic fragility estimates for RC columns subject to corrosion. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2007; 93:383-393.
12. Gutenberg B, Richter CF. Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1944; 34(4):185-188.
13. Earthquake probabilities in the San Francisco bay region: 2000 to 2030 - a summary of findings. Available from: http://wrgis.wr.usgs.gov/ open-file/of99-517/of99-517.pdf (18 March 2007).
14. Campbell K. Empirical near-source attenuation relationship for horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and pseudo-absolute acceleration response spectra. Seismological Research Letters 1997; 68(1):154-197.
15. Kunnath SK, Chai YH. Cumulative damage-based inelastic demand spectrum. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2004; 33(4):499-520.
16. Vidic T, Fajfar P, Fischinger M. Consistent inelastic design spectra: strength and displacement. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1994; 23(5):507-521.
17. Chai YH, Fajfar P, Romstad K. Formulation of duration-dependent inelastic seismic design spectrum. Journal of Structural Engineering 1998; 124(8):913-921.
18. Trifunac MD, Brady AG. A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1975; 65(3):581-626.
19. Gardoni P, Mosalam KM, Kiureghian AD. Probabilistic seismic demand models and fragility models for RC bridges. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2003; 7(1):79-106.
20. Chopra AK, Goel RK. Capacity-demand-diagram methods for estimating seismic deformation of inelastic structures: SDF systems. Report Number PEER-1999/02, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 1999.
21. Das S, Gupta VK, Srimahavishnu V. Damage based design with no repairs for multiple events and its sensitivity to seismicity model. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 36(3):307-325.
22. Coffin LF Jr. A study of the effects cyclic thermal stresses on a ductile metal. Transactions of the ASME 1954; 76:931-950.
23. Manson SS. Behavior of materials under conditions of thermal stress. Heat Transfer Symposium, University of Michigan Engineering Research Institute, 1953; 9-75.
24. Mander JB, Panthaki FD, Kasalanati A. Low-cycle fatigue behavior of reinforcing steel. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 1994; 6(4):453-468.
25. Tsuno K, Park R. Prediction method for seismic damage reinforced concrete bridge columns. Journal of Structural Mechanical Earthquake Engineering 2004; 21(2):97-111.
26. Miner MA. Cumulative damage in fatigue. Journal of Applied Mechanics (ASME) 1945; 12:A159-A164.
27. Boulfiza M, Sakai K, Banthia N, Hidenori Y. Prediction of chloride cons ingress in uncracked and cracked concrete. ACI Materials Journal 2003; 100(1):38-48.
28. Dura-Crete. Statistical quantification of the variables in the limit state functions. Report No. BE95-1347/R7, The European Union Brite EuRam 3 contract BRPR-CT95-0132 Project BE95-1347, 2000.
29. Vu KAT, Stewart MG. Structural reliability of concrete bridges including improved chloride-induced corrosion models. Structural Safety 2000; 22(4):313-333.
30. Wen YK, Kang YJ. Minimum building life-cycle cost design criteria. I: methodology. Journal of Structural Engineering 2001; 127(3):330-337.
31. Onoufriou T, Frangopol D. Reliability-based inspection optimization of complex structures: a brief retrospective. Computers and Structures 2002; 80(12):1133-1144.
32. Mander JB, Dhakal RP, Mashiko N, Solberg KM. Incremental dynamic analysis applied to seismic financial risk assessment of bridges. Engineering Structures 2007; 29(10):2662-2672.
33. Ellis H, Jiang M, Corotis RB. Inspection, maintenance, and repair with partial observability. Journal of Infrastructure Systems 1995; 1(2):92-99.
34. 2006 contract cost data - a summary of cost by items for highway construction projects. Available from: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/ awards/2006CCDB/2006ccdb.pdf (14 August 2007).