Stochastic seismic analysis of a concrete-filled steel tubular (CFST) arch bridge under tridirectional multiple excitations

Engineering Structures

Volumn 52, Issue , 2013, Pages 355-371

  Zhang, De Yi ^a   Li, Xi ^b   Yan, Wei Ming ^b   Xie, Wei Chau ^a   Pandey, Mahesh D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b BEIJING UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

Arch bridges; Local site effect; Model updating; Pseudo excitation method; Spatially varying ground motions; Stochastic vibration method; Structural health monitoring; Tridirectional ground motions

Indexed keywords

GROUND MOTIONS; LOCAL SITES; MODEL UPDATING; PSEUDO EXCITATION METHODS; SPATIALLY VARYING GROUND MOTION; STOCHASTIC VIBRATION;

CONCRETES; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; SEISMIC DESIGN; SEISMOLOGY; SHEAR WAVES; STOCHASTIC MODELS; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS; STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING; WAVE PROPAGATION;

ARCH BRIDGES;

BRIDGE; CONCRETE STRUCTURE; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; GROUND MOTION; P-WAVE; RESPONSE ANALYSIS; SEISMIC DESIGN; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SH-WAVE; SITE EFFECT; STOCHASTICITY; THEORETICAL STUDY; WAVE PROPAGATION;

EID: 84876344108     PISSN: 01410296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.01.031     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Chen B.C., Wang T.L. Overview of concrete filled steel tube arch bridges in China. Pract Period Struct Des Constr 2009, 14(2):70-80.
2. Wu Q., Yoshimura M., Takahashi K., Nakamura S., Nakamura T. Nonlinear seismic properties of the Second Saikai Bridge: a concrete filled tubular (CFT) arch bridge. Eng Struct 2006, 28(2):163-182.
3. Zerva A. Spatial variation of seismic ground motions: modeling and engineering applications 2009, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group.
4. CEN. Eurocode 8: Design provisions of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for building, EN 1998-1:2004. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels; 2004.
5. CEN. Eurocode 8: Design provisions of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 2: Bridges, EN 1998-2:2005. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels; 2005.
6. National Standard of The People's Republic of China. Code for seismic design of buildings, GB 50011-2010. Chinese Architectural Industry Press, Beijing; 2010.
7. Ministry of Communications of the People's Republic of China. Guidelines for seismic design of highway bridges, JTG/T B02-01-2008. China Communications Press, Beijing; 2008.
8. Hao H. Arch responses to correlated multiple excitations. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1993, 22(5):389-404.
9. Hao H. Ground-motion spatial variation effects on circular arch responses. J Eng Mech 1994, 120(11):2326-2341.
10. Harichandran R.S., Hawwari A., Sweidan B.N. Response of long-span bridges to spatially varying ground motion. J Struct Eng 1996, 122(5):476-484.
11. Kawashima K, Mizoguti A. Seismic response of a reinforced concrete arch bridge. In: 12th World conference on earthquake engineering. Auckland, New Zealand; 2000.
12. Zanardo G., Pellegrino C., Bobisut C., Modena C. Performance evaluation of short span reinforced concrete arch bridges. J Bridge Eng 2004, 9(5):424-434.
13. Soyluk K. Comparison of random vibration methods for multi-support seismic excitation analysis of long-span bridges. Eng Struct 2004, 26(11):1573-1583.
14. Su L., Dong S., Kato S. Seismic design for steel trussed arch to multi-support excitations. J Constr Steel Res 2007, 63(6):725-734.
15. Ates S., Bayraktar A., Dumanoglu A.A. The effect of spatially varying earthquake ground motions on the stochastic response of bridges isolated with friction pendulum systems. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2006, 26(1):31-44.
16. Dumanogluid A.A., Soyluk K. A stochastic analysis of long span structures subjected to spatially varying ground motions including the site-response effect. Eng Struct 2003, 25(10):1301-1310.
17. Konakli K., Der Kiureghian Simulation of spatially varying ground motions including incoherence, wave-passage and differential site-response effects. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2011, 41(3):495-513.
18. Bi K., Hao H. Modelling and simulation of spatially varying earthquake ground motions at sites with varying conditions. Probabilist Eng Mech 2012, 29:92-104.
19. Penzien J., Watabe M. Characteristics of 3-dimensional earthquake ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1974, 3(4):365-373.
20. Hadjian A.H. On the correlation of the components of strong ground motion - Part 2. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1981, 71(4):1323-1331.
21. ASCE. Seismic analysis of safety-related nuclear structures and commentary, ASCE Standard 4-98. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE); 1998.
22. Smeby W., Der Kiureghian A. Modal combination rules for multicomponent earthquake excitation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1985, 13(1):1-12.
23. Housner G.W. Characteristics of strong-motion earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1947, 37(1):19-31.
24. Lutes L.D., Sarkani S. Random vibrations: analysis of structural and mechanical systems 2004, Butterworth-Heinemann.
25. Lin Y.K. Probabilistic theory of structural dynamics 1967, McGraw-Hill, New York.
26. European Committee for Standardization. Eurocode 8, Structures in seismic regions-design Part 2: Bridge. Brussels, Belgium; 1998.
27. Lin J.H. A fast CQC algorithm of PSD matrices for random seismic responses. Comput Struct 1992, 44(3):683-687.
28. Lin J.H., Zhang Y.H., Li Q.S., Williams F.W. Seismic spatial effects for long-span bridges, using the pseudo excitation method. Eng Struct 2004, 26(9):1207-1216.
29. Bayraktar A., Sevim B.I., Altunisik A.C., Turker T. Effect of the model updating on the earthquake behavior of steel storage tanks. J Constr Steel Res 2010, 66(3):462-469.
30. Bayraktar A., Altunisik A.C., Sevim B., Turker T. Seismic response of a historical masonry minaret using a finite element model updated with operational modal testing. J Vib Control 2011, 1:129-149.
31. Bayraktar A., Sevim B., Can Altunisik A. Finite element model updating effects on nonlinear seismic response of arch dam-reservoir-foundation systems. Finite Elem Anal Des 2011, 47(2):85-97.
32. Farrar C.R., Worden K. An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philos Trans Roy Soc A: Math Phys Eng Sci 2007, 365(1851):303-315.
33. Wolf J.P. Dynamic soil-structure interaction 1985, Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey.
34. Rathje E.M., Kottke A.R., Trent W.L. Influence of input motion and site property variabilities on seismic site response analysis. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2010, 136(4):607-620.
35. Li W., Assimaki D. Site-and motion-dependent parametric uncertainty of site-response analyses in earthquake simulations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 2010, 100(3):954-968. 10.1785/0120090030.
36. Papadopoulos M., Garcia E. Sensor placement methodologies for dynamic testing. AIAA J 1998, 36(2):256-263.
37. Kohnke P. ANSYS theory reference-release 13.0. ANSYS Inc.; 2010.
38. Standard of Construction Standard Committee of China. Specification for design and construction of concrete-filled steel tubular structure, CECS28:90. The Statistic Power Publishing House, Beijing; 1990.
39. British Standard Institute. Concrete and composite bridge (Part 5) BS5400; 1983.
40. Rainieri C, Fabbrocino G, Cosenza E, Manfredi G. Implementation of OMA procedures using Labview: theory and application. In: 2nd International operational modal analyses conference. Copenhagen, Denmark; April 30-May 2, 2007.
41. Mottershead J.E., Friswell M.I. Model updating in structural dynamics: a survey. J Sound Vib 1993, 167(2):347-375.
42. Park Y.J. New conversion method from response spectrum to PSD functions. J Eng Mech 1995, 121(12):1391-1392.
43. Ni S.-H., Zhang D.-Y., Xie W.-C., Pandey M.D. Vector-valued uniform hazard spectra. Earthq Spectra 2012, 28(4):1549-1568.
44. Kerschen G., Worden K., Vakakis A.F., Golinval J.C. Past, present and future of nonlinear system identification in structural dynamics. Mech Syst Signal Process 2006, 20(3):505-592.
45. Hemez F.M., Doebling S.W. Review and assessment of model updating for non-linear, transient dynamics. Mech Syst Signal Process 2001, 15(1):45-74.
46. Foraboschi P. Behavior and failure strength of laminated glass beams. J Eng Mech 2007, 133(12):1290-1301.
47. Foraboschi P. Analytical solution of two-layer beam taking into account nonlinear interlayer slip. J Eng Mech 2009, 135(10):1129-1146.
48. Li W., Li Q., Jiang W., Jiang L. Seismic performance of composite reinforced concrete and steel moment frame structures-state-of-the-art. Compos Part B: Eng 2011, 42(2):190-206.
49. Der Kiureghian A. A coherency model for spatially varying ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1996, 25(1):99-111.
50. Oliveira C.S., Hao H., Penzien J. Ground motion modeling for multiple-input structural analysis. Struct Saf 1991, 10(1-3):79-93.
51. FEMA. Earthquake-resistant design concepts: an introduction to the NEHRP recommended seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures. FEMA P-749; 2010.
52. Kramer S.L. Geotechnical earthquake engineering 1996, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
53. Zhang D.-Y., Xie W.-C., Pandey M.D. Synthesis of spatially correlated ground motions at varying sites based on vector-valued seismic hazard deaggregation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2012, 41:1-13.