Seismic design of bridges with the participation of seat-type abutments

Engineering Structures

Volumn 44, Issue , 2012, Pages 222-233

  Mitoulis, Stergios A ^a  

^a ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI   (Greece)

Author keywords

Backfill; Bridge; Participation; Reduction; Seat type abutment; Seismic; Seismic design

Indexed keywords

ABUTMENT BRIDGES; BACKFILL; COMPARATIVE STUDIES; DESIGN CONDITION; DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS; DESIGN PARAMETERS; EARTHQUAKE EXCITATION; INTEGRAL ABUTMENT BRIDGE; NON-LINEAR DYNAMICS; PARTICIPATION; SEISMIC; SEISMIC DEMANDS; SEISMIC FORCES; TOTAL LENGTH;

ABUTMENTS (BRIDGE); EARTHQUAKES; PIERS; REDUCTION; SEISMIC DESIGN; STREAM FLOW;

BRIDGES;

BACKFILL; BRIDGE; DISPLACEMENT; EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; RETAINING WALL; SEISMIC DESIGN; SEISMIC RESPONSE;

EID: 84863521181     PISSN: 01410296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.05.033     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. AASHTO HB-17. Standard specifications for highway bridges. 17th ed. American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials; 2002.
2. Al-Gahtani H.J. Optimum design of buried pipeline block anchors. ASCE Pract Periodical Struct Des Constr 2009, 14(4):190-193.
3. Anagnostopoulos S.A. Equivalent viscous damping for modeling inelastic impacts in earthquake pounding problems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2004, 33(8):897-902.
4. Arockiasamy M., Butrieng N., Sivakumar M. State-of-the-art of integral abutment bridges: design and practice. ASCE J Bridge Eng 2004, 9(5):497-506.
5. Arockiasamy M., Sivakumar M. Design implications of creep and shrinkage in integral abutment bridges. ACI Spec Publ 2005, 227:85-106.
6. Aviram A., Mackie K.R., Stojadinovic B. Effect of abutment modeling on the seismic response of bridge structures. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 2008, 7(4):395-402. 10.1007/s11803-008-1008-3.
7. Aviram A, Mackie KR, Stojadinovic B. PEER 2008/03 Guidelines for Nonlinear Analysis of Bridge Structures in California; 2008.
8. CalTrans, Seismic Design Criteria, version 1.6. California Department of Transportation, Sacremento, CA; 2010.
9. Chopra A.K. Dynamics of structures, theory and applications to earthquake engineering 1995, Prentice Hall Inc.
10. Computers and Structures Inc. SAP 2000. Nonlinear version 14.2.0, user's reference manual, Berkeley, California; 2010.
11. Dicleli M. Integral abutment-backfill behavior on sand soil-pushover analysis approach. ASCE J Bridge Eng 2005, 10(3):, 354-364.
12. EN 1991-1-5:2003. Eurocode 1: actions on structures - Part 1-5: general actions - thermal actions; 2003.
13. EN 1998-1:2004. Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, DRAFT No. 3; 2004.
14. EN 1998-2:2005. Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 2: bridges; 2005.
15. Gloyd C.S. Seismic movement at bridge abutments. ACI Spec Publ 1996, 164(15):273-288. SP164-15.
16. Goel R.K., Chopra A. Evaluation of bridge abutment capacity and stiffness during earthquakes. Earthq Spect 1997, 13(1):1-23.
17. Inel M., Aschheim M.A. Seismic design of columns of short bridges accounting for embankment flexibility. ASCE J Struct Eng 2004, 130(10):1515-1528.
18. Jankowski R., Wilde K., Fujino Y. Pounding of superstructure segments in isolated elevated bridge during earthquakes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1998, 27(5):487-502.
19. Jankowski R., Wilde K., Fujino Y. Reduction of pounding effects in elevated bridges during earthquakes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2000, 29(2):195-212.
20. Kappos AJ, Potikas P, Sextos AG. Seismic assessment of an overpass bridge accounting for non-linear material and soil response and varying boundary conditions. In: ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering. Crete, Greece; 2007.
21. Kappos AJ, Sextos AG. Seismic assessment of bridges accounting for nonlinear material and soil response, and varying boundary conditions. In: NATO science for peace and security series c: environmental security, vol. III. 2009. p. 195-208. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-2697-2_15.
22. Kappos AJ. RCCOLA-90. A microcomputer program for the analysis of the inelastic response of reinforced concrete sections. Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece; 2002.
23. Kotsoglou A., Pantazopoulou S. Response simulation and seismic assessment of highway overcrossings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2010, 39(9):991-1013.
24. Lemnitzer A., Ahlberg E.R., Nigbor R.L., Shamsabadi A., Wallace J.W., Stewart J.P. Lateral performance of full-scale bridge abutment wall with granular backfill. ASCE J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2009, 135(4).
25. Mackie K, Stojadinovic B. Bridge abutment model sensitivity for probabilistic seismic demand evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd national seismic conference & workshop on bridges & highways, April 28-May 1 2002. Portland; 2002.
26. Mitoulis S.A., Tegos I.A., Stylianidis K.C. Cost-effectiveness related to the earthquake resisting system of multi-span bridges. Eng Struct 2010, 32(9):2658-2671.
27. Mitoulis S.A., Tegos I.A. Connection of bridges with neighbour-hooding tunnels. J Earthq Eng 2010, 14(3):331-350.
28. Mwafy A., Elnashai A., Yen W.H. Implications of design assumptions on capacity estimates and demand predictions of multispan curved bridges. ASCE J Bridge Eng 2007, 12(6):710-726.
29. Naeim F., Kelly J.M. Design of seismic isolated structures, from theory to practice 1999, John Wiley and Sons Inc.
30. NCHRP 12-49. Comprehensive specification for the seismic design of bridges, revised LRFD design specifications, (seismic provisions), third draft of specifications and commentary; 2001.
31. NCHRP 472. Comprehensive specification for the seismic design of bridges, national cooperative highway research program, transportation research board, ATC/MCEER joint venture redwood city. CA and Buffalo, NY; 2002.
32. Purvis PER, NCHRP 319. Bridge deck joint performance, a synthesis of highway practice. Project 20-5, (Topic 30-08); 1998.
33. Sextos A, Mackie K, Stojadinovic B, Taskari O. Simplified P-y relationships for modelling embankment abutment systems of typical California bridges. In: 14th world conference on earthquake engineering. Beijing, China; 2008.
34. Shamsabadi A., Rollins K.M., Kapuskar M. Nonlinear soil-abutment-bridge structure interaction for seismic performance-based design. ASCE J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2007, 133(6):707-720.
35. Shamsabadi A., Tehrani P.K., Stewart J.P., Taciroglu E. Validated simulation models for lateral response of bridge abutments with typical backfills. ASCE J Bridge Eng 2010, 15(3):302-311.
36. Siddharthan R, El-Gamal M, Maragakis EA. Nonlinear bridge abutment stiffnesses: formulation verification and design curves. NDOT Research Report: RDT95-012; 2001.
37. Stewart JP, Taciroglu E, Wallace JW, Ahlberg ER, Lemnitzer A. Full scale cyclic testing of foundation support systems for highway bridges. Part II: abutment backwalls, department of civil and environmental engineering. University of California, Los Angeles; 2007 [UCLA - SGEL Report 2007/02].
38. Tegos IA, Stylianidis KC, Mitoulis SA, The influence of the design seismic action on the structural cost of Egnatia Highway Bridges. Chapter in aseismic design and construction in Egnatia Odos, the highway connecting Epirous through Macedonia to Thrace and the eastern border of Greece. Hellenic Society for Earthquake Engineering, Ziti Publications, Thessaloniki, Geece; 2010 [ISBN: 978-960-99529-0-3].
39. Zhang J., Makris N. Kinematic response functions and dynamic stiffnesses of bridge embankments. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2002, 31(11):1933-1966.
40. Wilson P, Elgamal A. Bridge-abutment-backfill dynamic interaction modeling based on full scale tests. In: Proceedings of the 9th US National and 10th Canadian conference on earthquake engineering. Paper No 777, Toronto, Canada; 2010.
41. Wilson P., Elgamal A. Full-scale bridge abutment passive earth pressure experiment and simulation. ASCE J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2010, 136(12):1634-1643.