DOI: https://doi.org/10.9744/ced.14.3.127-138

Generalized Fragility Relationships with Local Site Conditions for Probabilistic Performance-based Seismic Risk Assessment of Bridge Inventories

Lau, D.T., Vishnukanthan, K., Waller, C.L., Sivathayalan, S.

Abstract


The current practice of detailed seismic risk assessment cannot be easily applied to all the bridges in a large transportation networks due to limited resources. This paper presents a new approach for seismic risk assessment of large bridge inventories in a city or national bridge network based on the framework of probabilistic performance based seismic risk assessment. To account for the influences of local site effects, a procedure to generate site-specific hazard curves that includes seismic hazard microzonation information has been developed for seismic risk assessment of bridge inventories. Simulated ground motions compatible with the site specific seismic hazard are used as input excitations in nonlinear time history analysis of representative bridges for calibration. A normalizing procedure to obtain generalized fragility relationships in terms of structural characteristic parameters of bridge span and size and longitudinal and transverse reinforcement ratios is presented. The seismic risk of bridges in a large inventory can then be easily evaluated using the normalized fragility relationships without the requirement of carrying out detailed nonlinear time history analysis.

Keywords


Bridges, concrete structures, fragility relationships, performance-based earthquake engineering, seismic risk and vulnerability.

Full Text:

PDF

References


  1. Berry, M. and Eberhard, M., Performance Model for Flexural Damage in Reinforced Concrete Columns, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 2003.
  2. Mackie, K. and Stojadinovic, B., Seismic Demand for Performance-Based Design of Bridges, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, University of California, Berkeley, 2003.
  3. Kunnath, Sashi, K., Application of the PEER PBEE Methodology to the I-880 Viaduct, PEER Report 2006/10, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, 2007.
  4. Jalayer, F. and Cornell, C., A Technical Framework for Probability-Based Demand and Capacity Factor Design (DCFD) Seismic Formats, PEER Report 2003/08 Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, College of Engineering, University of California Berkeley, 2003.
  5. Waller, C.L., A Methodology for Probabilistic Performance-Based Seismic Risk Assessment of Bridge Inventories, M.A.Sc Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, 2010.
  6. Waller, C.L. and Lau, D.T., Probabilistic Performance-Based Seismic Risk Assessment of Canadian Bridges A Pilot Study, Proc. 9th U.S. Natio-nal and 10th Canadian Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto, Ontario. No. 740, 2010.
  7. Mackie, K., Wong, J. M. and Stojadinovic, B., Integrated Probabilistic Performance-Based Evaluation of Benchmark Reinforced Concrete Brid-ges, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 2008.
  8. Cornell, C.A., Calculating Building Seismic Performance Reliability; a Basis for Multi-Level Design Norms, Proc. Eleventh Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, 1996.
  9. Kennedy, R.P. and Short, S.A., Basis for Seismic Provisions of DOE-STD-1020, UCRLCR-111478, Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1994. [CrossRef]
  10. Sewell, R.T., Toro, G.R. and McGuire, R.K., Impact of Ground Motion Characterization on Conservatism and Variability in Seismic Risk Estimates. Report NUREG/CR-6467, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D.C., 1991.
  11. Mackie, K., and Stojadinović, ., Fragility Basis for California Highway Overpass Bridge Seismic Decision Making, PEER Report 2005/02 Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center College of Engineering University of California, Berkeley, 2005.
  12. Lin L. and Adams J., Strong Motion Records of the Val-de-Bois, Quebec, Earthquake of June 23, 2010. Canadian Hazard Information Service Internal Report 2010-1.1, 20100625.
  13. Atkinson, G. and Beresnev, I., Compatible Ground-Motion Time Histories for New National Seismic Hazard Maps. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 1998, p. 305. [CrossRef]
  14. Adams J. and Halchuk S. Fourth Generation Seismic Hazard Maps of Canada: Values for over 650 Canadian Localities Intended for the 2010 National Building Code of Canada. Open File 6761, Geological Survey of Canada.
  15. Institute for Research In Construction (IRC), 2010. National Building Code of Canada, National Research Council of Canada, 2010.
  16. Proshake, Ground Response Analysis Program, EduPro Civil Systems, Inc. Redmond, Washington.
  17. Aviram, A., Mackie, K. and Stojadinovic, B., Guidelines for Nonlinear Analysis of Bridge Structures in California, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 2008.
  18. Panagiotakos, T. and Fardis, M., Deformation of Reinforced Concrete Members at Yielding and Ultimate, ACI Structural Journal, 98, No. 2. 2001.
  19. Shinozuku, M., Banerjee, S. and Kim. S.H., Fragility Considerations in Highway Bridge Design, Technical Report MCEER-07-0023, 2007.
  20. Berry, M.P., Parrish, M. and Eberhard, M.O., PEER Structural Performance Database User’s Manual, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 2004.
  21. Motazedian, D., Hunter, J.A., Pugin, A. and Crow, H., Development of a Vs30 (NEHRP) map for the City of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Can. Geotech. Journal, 48, 2011.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.9744/ced.14.3.127-138



CED is published by The Institute of Research & Community Outreach - Petra Christian University, Surabaya, Indonesia

©All right reserved 2016.Civil Engineering Dimension, ISSN: 1410-9530, e-ISSN: 1979-570X

View My Stats