Handouts - 07.09.2019

Indian Association of Structural Engineers
Refresher Course on
"Application of New Seismic Code for Highway
Bridges - IRC:SP:114-2018"
07 September 2019
PHD House, New Delhi
Handouts of the Presentations

Sponsor
Sanfield (India) Ltd

07 September 2019
Lecture 7 General Design Provisions (Chapter 6)

09:00 AM - 11:00 AM Mr. Aditya Sharma, Director (Highway &
Structures), Ramboll India
Lecture 8 Seismic Isolation Devices (Chapter 10)

11:15 AM to 01:15 PM Mr. Vinay Gupta, Director & CEO - Tandon
Consultants Pvt Ltd
HANDOUTS OF THE PRESENTATIONS
Mr. Aditya Sharma

Director (Highway & Structures), Ramboll India
Indian Association of Structural Engineers
(IAStructE)
SEMINAR ON “INTRODUCTION TO NEW

SEISMIC GUIDELINES ON HIGHWAY
BRIDGES (IRC:SP:114-2018)”
ON 7TH SEPTEMBER 2019
CHAPTER -6
GENERAL DESIGN PROVISIONS
Presented By :- Aditya Sharma
CONTENTS OF CHAPTER 6
• 6.1 General
• 6.2 Basic Design Principles
• 6.3 Seismic Design Aspects
• 6.4 Design Provisions
• 6.5 Long span bridges
• 6.6 Special Types of Bridges

CHAPTER -6- GENERAL DESIGN PROVISIONS
 The contents of this chapter deals with general

provision adopted for seismic design of bridges.
 Strong beam and week column concept is

followed and plastic hinges are allowed to form
in bridge piers at predetermined locations.
 A strength based design approach amalgamating

the force based approach and capacity design
principle for seismic design has been detailed in
this chapter.
CHAPTER -6- GENERAL DESIGN PROVISION
SEISMIC DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES
 Forced based Design / Capacity based Design
 Displacement based Design
 Performance based Design
 Energy based Design

6.1 GENERAL -FORCE BASED DESIGN -FBM
 This is the most common seismic design approach

adopted presently.
 It is based on providing the structure with the

minimum lateral strength to resist seismic loads
assuming the structure will behave adequately in
non linear range.
 Design forces for a structural component are

obtained by dividing forces computed using
elastic dynamic analysis by “Response reduction
factor” to account for inelastic behavior.
 For this reason simple construction detailing rules

are needed to be satisfied
6.1 - FORCE-BASED METHOD (FBM)
6.3 SEISMIC DESIGN ASPECTS
6.3.1 Strength, Ductility And Energy Dissipation
Seismic Design Aspects
• Force based method has its drawback when stiffness of substructure vary along
length of bridge
Drawback- The base shear is distributed between structural members in

proportion to the elastic stiffness of each member.
This has three undesirable effects.
 Allocating more flexural strength to the short piers will increase their
elastic flexural stiffness even further, with respect to the more lightly
reinforced longer piers
 Allocating a large proportion of the total seismic design force to the

short piers increases their vulnerability to shear failure
 The displacement capacity of the short piers will clearly be less than
that of the longer piers. The displacement capacity of heavily
reinforced columns is reduced as the longitudinal reinforcement ratio
increases, and hence the force-based design approach will tend to
reduce the displacement capacity.
6.1 GENERAL -DISPLACEMENT BASED DESIGN
 The objective of this approach is to ensure that the bridge

structure system and its components have enough
displacement capacity to withstand the deformation
imposed by the design earthquake.
 Uses displacement as a measure of seismic demand and also

as an indicator of damage in the structure.
 Lateral strength of the system (size and reinforcement of

the substructure sections) is assumed at the beginning of
the process.
6.1 GENERAL -DISPLACEMENT BASED DESIGN –
CONTD.
 Elastic peak displacements are converted to peak inelastic

displacements using an equal displacement approximation
with modification for short period structures.
 Once the displacement demands are estimated, the

procedure requires the verification of the displacement
capacity of each structural element by means of a pushover
analysis.
 Finally, the substructure sections and protected elements

are designed and detailed according to Capacity design
principles.
DISPLACEMENT-BASED METHOD (DBM)
FBM VS DBM- ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES
• In FBM- Force-based loadings: familiar to • DBM is applicable to a class of

designers, easier to understand. Solid basis: bridges only, i.e. those that can be
Equilibrium (if met, we are not too far off) reasonably approximated by an
equivalent single-degree-of-
• It is assumed that strength and stiffness are
freedom (SDOF) system for
independent, which is not very appropriate
calculating seismic demand
assumption
• In DBM, there has been difficulty in
• Response reduction factors (R) are used
reaching consensus as to the
assuming that the ductility demand will be the
appropriate definition of yield and
same for each type of structure.
ultimate displacements.
• R factors are given generally for a single level

• IN DBM Difficulty in proper
“no-collapse” design. Multi-level design would
assessment of the displaced shape
require the specification of different R values.
of the bridge and the target
displacement as higher modes play
• Bridges with Dual Load Paths, in case of
an important role in transverse
unequal pier heights in a particular bridge
response of bridge and requires
repeated iterations
PERFORMANCE BASED DESIGN
 Its an extension to displacement based design

concept
 Design to reliably achieve performance objectives.
 Each performance objective is defined by a single

pairing of a structural performance level and a seismic
demand level.
 The structural capacity for each performance level is

related to a specific state of damage or required repair
and is quantified using one or more engineering limit
states
 Designer needs to define acceptable deformation/

displacement based on post-performance requirement
and available deformation capacity
PERFORMANCE BASED DESIGN –CONTD.
• Three categories of performance are addressed by the fib

2010 Model Code ( fib, 2012):
• Serviceability: the ability of the bridge and its structural

components to perform, with appropriate levels of
reliability, adequately for normal use after or even during
seismic actions expected during its service life.
• Structural safety: the ability of the bridge and its structural

components to guarantee the overall stability, adequate
deformability and ultimate load-bearing resistance,
corresponding to occasional, extreme or exceptional
seismic actions with appropriate levels of reliability for the
specified reference periods.
• Sustainability: the ability of the bridge to contribute

positively to the fulfilment of the present needs of
humankind with respect to nature, society and people,
without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their needs in a similar manner.
6.1 GENERAL - ENERGY BASED DESIGN
 This is the most promising and futuristic

approach of earthquake resistant design
 In this approach it is assumed that total energy

input is collectively resisted by kinetic energy ,
the elastic strain energy and energy dissipated
through plastic deformations and damping
 Research is still going on this approach and it will

take some time before it is implemented in
international design codes
APPLICATION OF -DISPLACEMENT BASED
DESIGN.- NON –LINEAR ANALYSIS
BASIC PROJECT PARAMETERS
• Formation Level – RL 65.5m
• High Flood Level- RL 52.00m
• Bottom of Pile Cap – RL 43.50m
• Scour Level – RL 5.97m
• Discharge - 92000 Cum/Sec
• Foundation Level RL (-) 10m
• Pile Diameters 1.9m
• Pier Renforcement 1.02%
• Pier Concrète M50
• Pile Renforcement 1.76%
• Pile Concrete - M40

6.1 APPLICATION OF -DISPLACEMENT BASED
DESIGN.- NON –LINEAR ANALYSIS
 Non-linear analysis of the Pile foundation and substructure

was performed for Bridge on Ganga in order to investigate
the buckling and second order bending effects.
 The model consists of linear shell elements for the pier cap
and pile cap, as these elements are relatively stiff and will
not deflect significantly under the applied loads.
 The columns and piles have been modelled as non-linear

beam elements, and therefore the non-linear material
properties of the concrete and reinforcing steel are
considered for these elements.
 The structure of the foundation and substructure has been

modelled in 3D using Sofistik
6.1 APPLICATION OF -
DISPLACEMENT BASED DESIGN.- NON –LINEAR
ANALYSIS
 The non-linear analysis is carried out by defining a ULS
combination load case, and gradually increasing in steps
of 10% & the proportion of this load that is applied until
there is a failure,
 The analysis of 110% of the load is used to show that the

section is not reaching critical load at 100% of the ULS
load, to allow for additional effects such as creep and
initial deformation.
 An SLS analysis has also been undertaken to verify the

stresses are within the acceptable range and to calculate
the SLS displacements at underside of bearings.
 The magnitude of the movements at ULS due to the

second order effects are significant, and therefore SLS
movement values due to these second order effects in
both the bearings and expansion joints are considered.
NON LINEAR ANALYSIS-SOFISTIK MODEL
NON –LINEAR ANALYSIS - DEFLECTED SHAPE
6.2 BASIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 The superstructure, substructure- piers and abutments,

bearings, expansion joints, backfill in abutments, bridge
approach, foundation and founding soil are vulnerable to
damage due to vibratory effects of earthquake motion.
 The earthquake resistant design measures shall consider

these effects on the bridge components arising due to three
orthogonal components of ground motions in order to
minimize damage.
 In this section „Basic Design Principles‟ for seismic design

of various bridge components are laid down.
SEISMIC EFFECTS ON BRIDGES
 Seismic forces on bridges are the inertial forces from three

directions, longitudinal, transverse and vertical
 Substructures forces from earthquake
Three components:
 Forces resulting from the movement of the deck
 Forces resulting from the movement of the substructure
 Forces resulting from the action of soil, water, etc. … on
the substructure (except the global acceleration)
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ON THE SEISMIC
BEHAVIOUR: EXAMPLES OF DAMAGE
 The destructive impacts of earthquakes Direct impacts (linked to
natural events)
Landslides and rock slides

Ground motion Surface Fault failure
Tsunamis Soil Liquefaction

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ON THE SEISMIC
BEHAVIOUR: EXAMPLES OF DAMAGE
Main reasons of bridge collapse
 Deck – piers connection

 Substructure Failure (Piers, Abutments,)
 Insufficient anchorage of the longitudinal reinforcement

 Buckling of the longitudinal reinforcement bars (too high
spacing of the transverse reinforcement)
 Failure of compressed concrete under bending moment
(lack of transversal confinement reinforcement)
 Liquefaction of soil
 Unseating of deck
 Bearing failure
MAIN REASONS OF BRIDGE COLLAPSE :
UNSEATING OF DECK
Kobe (Japan, 1995)

San Fernando USA, 1971)
i. The beneficial effect of bridge flexibility, damping characteristics,
energy dissipation and isolation by using seismic protection /
isolation devices and ductility in seismic response reduction should
be duly accounted in seismic analysis and design.
ii. The seismic design of the bridge is achieved by providing adequate

strength and ductility in the members resisting seismic action
under design earthquake motion. The horizontal strength and
stiffness of substructure should not vary significantly along the
bridge length.
iii. The likely location of plastic hinge regions in the event of major
earthquakes should be pre identified.
iv. Unless external seismic isolation /protection devices are used to

reduce the seismic demand on structure, the majority of energy
dissipation in the structure takes place due to inelastic action in
plastic hinges occurring in major earthquakes. The ductility
provisions in plastic hinge regions should therefore be ensured as
required by seismic codes.
v. The capacity protected regions of substructure can be designed

elastically without ductility provisions.
Basic requirement
IRC SP 114 as well as Eurocode 8 aim at fulfilling two basic
requirement for seismic design.
1. No-collapse (ultimate limit state)
a) After occurrence of the design seismic action, the bridge shall

retain its structural integrity and adequate residual resistance
although parts of the structure is allowed to get damaged.
b) The bridge should be damage-tolerant when design seismic

action has action has sufficient probability of exceedance within
design life of bridge.
c) Plastic hinges formed at predetermined location – Flexural

yielding of hinges allowed when no seismic isolation provided.
d) No damage in superstructure except secondary elements such

as expansion joints- formation of plastic hinge in superstructure
are not allowed.
e) The capacity protected regions of substructure can be designed

elastically without ductility provisions.
2. Minimization of damage (serviceability limit state)
 Indirectly implicitly met as Only secondary components and

those parts of the bridge intended to contribute to energy
dissipation during the design life of the bridge should incur
minor damage during earthquakes with a high probability of
occurrence.
 Although largely requirements of Eurocode 8 and IRC SP 114

are compliant with one another there are certain differences.
 Relaxation in certain cases on damage when the design seismic action

has low probability of exceedance within the design life of bridge. The
seismic action may be considered as an accidental action and hence
relaxation can be provided. It depends upon the return period and type
of relaxation to be provided
 Intended seismic behavior- Degree of ductility. Bridge shall be
designed so that its behavior under design seismic action is either
ductile or limited ductile depending on seismicity of the site.
Ductility classes - Eurocode

Different possibilities for earthquake design
Choice between :
 Elastic design (IE or E)
 Limited ductility design (LD)
 Ductile design (D)
 Seismic isolation or use of dampers
Seismic Behavior
• IRC doesn't give a choice on the ductility class unlike Eurocode.

• All structures in seismic zone 3 and above to be designed for ductility
• Energy dissipation is through plastic hinge formation at predetermined location
or by providing seismic isolation devices.
Ductile Behavior
• In regions of moderate to high Seismicity it is usually preferable, both for
economic and safety reasons, to design a bridge for ductile behaviour, i.e.
to provide it with reliable means to dissipate a significant amount of the
input energy under severe earthquakes. This is accomplished by providing
for the formation of an intended configuration of flexural plastic hinges or
by using isolating devices in accordance with Chapter 10.
• Bridges of ductile behaviour shall be designed to achieve stable partial or

full mechanism in the structure through the formation of flexural plastic
hinges. These hinges normally form in the piers and act as the primary
energy dissipating component
• The bridge deck shall remain within the elastic range. However, formation
of plastic hinges (in bending about the transverse axis) is allowed in
flexible ductile concrete slabs providing top slab continuity between
adjacent simply-supported precast concrete girder spans
• When non-linear static or dynamic analysis is performed, plastic hinge

rotation demands shall be checked against available rotation capacities of
the plastic hinges
Ductile Behavior
• Plastic hinges shall not be formed in reinforced concrete sections where
the normalised axial force exceeds 0.08.
• IRC :- SP-114, does not contain rules for provision of ductility in

prestressed or post-tensioned members.
• Flexural plastic hinges need not necessarily form in all piers. However the
optimum post-elastic seismic behaviour of a bridge is achieved if plastic
hinges develop approximately simultaneously in all piers.
• The capability of the structure to form flexural hinges is necessary, in

order to ensure energy dissipation and consequently ductile behaviour.
The deformation of bridges supported exclusively by simple low damping
elastomeric bearings is predominantly elastic and does not lead in to
ductile behaviour.
• Supporting members connected to the deck through sliding or flexible

mountings (sliding bearings or flexible elastomeric bearings) should, in
general, remain within the elastic
Strength Verification
• In bridges designed for ductile behaviour the regions of plastic hinges

shall be verified to have adequate flexure strength to resist the design
seismic action effects.
• The shear resistance of the plastic hinges, as well as both the shear and
flexural resistances of all other regions, shall be designed to resist the
"capacity design effects".
• In bridges designed ductile behaviour, all sections should be verified to

have adequate strength to resist the design seismic action effects
• Structure to be designed for the appropriate limit state and combination

for seismic loads as per IRC 6.
 Strong beam weak column concept
 Energy dissipation is through predetermined location in the substructure .
 These are areas where there is a concentration of forces (bending

moment)
The plastic hinge regions are to be detailed as per Chapter 17 of IRC

112 and chapter 9 of IRC SP 114.
Areas where plastic hinges are susceptible to be formed :
 Areas where there is a concentration of forces (bending moment)
 Extremities of beams and piers
 Areas with reduced sections
 Soil interfaces with different soil modulus (deep foundations) .

6.3.2 Capacity Design
• Force demands for essentially elastic components adjacent to
plastic hinges components should be determined by capacity-
design principle,
• Considering Joint-force equilibrium conditions; plastic hinge

capacity at hinge location is multiplied by over strength factor.
• The over strength factors should not be used where plastic hinges
are not likely to be formed.
• Force demands calculated from linear elastic analysis should not be

used in capacity protected regions.
Principle
 Capacity design develops a hierarchy of strength within the structure
 Ensure that energy dissipation takes place in dissipative zones and not
in 'brittle' ones.
 All 'brittle' structural elements or components are protected against

failure.
 potential plastic regions within the structure are clearly defined and
designed to have dependable strengths
 potentially 'brittle' regions or those components not suited for

stable energy dissipation are protected, by ensuring that their
strength exceeds the demands originating from the plastic regions
To Summarize- Three basic steps.
 Identify the yielding elements and calculate their capacities.
 Design and detail these elements so that they will continue to resist
the applied loading with little or no degradation – Detail for ductility
 Develop a complete load path in the bridge whereby other elements

of the structure will not be damaged before the yielding elements
reach their maximum resistance ( capacity).
Advantages
Plastic deformations can occur only at pre-determined
locations.
Mechanism of suitable energy dissipation chosen by designer
Hierarchy in required strength across elements is

established.
Limitations for locations where special detailing is required.

6.3.3 OVERSTRENGTH FACTOR - BACKGROUND
• The overstrength, is specified as member or structural

capacity, is usually defined using overstrength factor.
The figure represents a pushover capacity curve
• Ve : elastic base shear, Vy : yield base shear,
• V1 : Base shear at first plastic hinge
• Vd : design base shear
• Ductility factor = Ve/ Vy, is defined as a ratio of elastic

base shear to yield base shear
• Overstrength factor = Vy/ V1 is defined as the ratio of

maximum base shear in actual behavior to first
significant yield strength in structure
• The overstrength factor, is meant to take into account

the uncertainty in material strengths and the
hardening of the section between yielding and ultimate
strength.
6.3.3 Overstrength Factor
• The over strength factor is a multiplying factor to plastic moment

capacity at hinge location.
This factor represents various sources of over strength such as :-

• post-yield strain hardening,
• unintentional increase in material properties
• rounding off dimension of members and providing excess
reinforcement than required.
6.3.4 Ductility Capacity and Demand
• The global displacement capacity of structure should not be less

than the estimated displacement demands under a design
earthquake and local displacement capacity of its individual
members.
• The ductility capacity should be greater than ductility demand.

Ductility and Response reduction Factor
 Ductility is defined as the ability of the structure or parts of it to

sustain large deformations beyond the yield point without breaking.
 The ductility is expressed in terms of demand and availability.
 The ductility demand is the maximum ductility level that the structure
can reach during a seismic action, that is a function of both the
structure and the earthquake
 The available ductility is the maximum ductility that the structure can
sustain without damage and it is an ability of the structure
 Ductility demand must be less than Ductility capacity or the available

ductility.
 In case Force Based Design is followed and specific rules of ductile

detailing as per chapter 9 are conformed, the ductility capacity &
demand is deemed to be satisfied and no explicit checks are required.
• Ductility
The capacity of ductility in curvature of a section is defined by the

implemented structural detailing
 Quantity of longitudinal rebars,
 Quantity of transverse rebars and their position,
 Cross-section geometry,
 Mechanical properties of materials.

6.4 DESIGN PROVISIONS
6.4.1 Superstructure
i. The superstructures with simply supported spans on

bearings are vulnerable to damage because these are
prone to being unseated or toppled from their supporting
sub-structures due to either shaking or differential support
movement associated with ground motion.
i. In such cases, provision such as larger seat widths, using

unseating prevention devices, holding-down devices or
interlinking of spans by linkages should be made to
prevent spans dislodgement off their supports.
ii. The superstructure should remain elastic even when the

plastic hinge location in columns/piers reach their plastic
moment capacity.
iii. In order to ensure elastic behaviour in superstructure

capacity design principle shall be adopted.
6.4.1 Superstructure
• Superstructure shall be capacity protected and shall be designed
to remain elastic (strong beam- weak column concept)
• Under simultaneous vertical and horizontal accelerations the

superstructure shall be checked for equilibrium in accordance with
table B1 of IRC 6.
• A deck supported on a pier or abutment via a horizontally movable

device (guided bearing, elastomeric bearing etc) should be
prevented from dropping off.
To counteract un-seating failures the following countermeasures are

suggested:
• Provide adequate support lengths for superstructure on pier/abutment
cap.
• Provide “reaction blocks” or other types of seismic restrainers for
preventing dislodgement of superstructure at pier/abutment cap level.
• By holding down devices or interlinking of span by linkages
• Design and construct “Integral” bridges whereby the substructure and
superstructure can be made monolithic.
6.4.2 Substructure
i. Plastic hinges should develop in columns rather than in
capping beams or superstructures under seismic
conditions. The locations of potential plastic hinges in piers
should be pre-selected so as to ensure their accessibility
for inspection and repair.
ii. The shear failure in columns should be avoided by ductile

design and detailing practice. The pier shall be capable of
resisting shear corresponding to over strength plastic
moment developed in plastic hinge region. This shall be
ensured by ductile design and detailing practices.
iii. The number of piers and abutments that will resist seismic
force in longitudinal or transverse directions should be
pre-selected.
6.4.2 Substructure
• The number of supporting members (piers and abutments)
that will be used to resist the seismic forces in the
longitudinal and transverse directions should be decided.
• In general bridges with continuous deck behave better

under seismic conditions than those with many movement
joints.
• The optimum post-elastic seismic behaviour is achieved if

plastic hinges develop simultaneously in as many piers as
possible.
• A balance should be maintained between the strength and

the flexibility requirements of the horizontal supports. High
flexibility reduces the magnitude of lateral forces induced
by the design seismic action but increases the movement at
the joints and moveable bearings may lead to high second
order effects.
6.4.2 Substructure
• To avoid a brittle shear failure of the column, capacity design shear force Vc for
pier shall be based on overstrength moment capacity of plastic hinges given by:
Vc= ΣMo/h
ΣMo = Sum of the overstrength moment capacities of the hinges.
Mo=γo MRd, h is the clear height of the column.
MRd = is the design flexural strength of the section, in the selected direction
and sign, based on the actual section geometry, including reinforcement, and
material properties.
γo = overstrength factor 1.35 for concrete members and 1.25 for steel
members. This also depends on normalized axial force.
For single cantilever pier this hinge should be at one location in the bottom.
For portal piers this would be the sum of overstrength moment capacities at top
and bottom of column
• Detailed procedure of capacity design is explained in chapter 7 of this Code

6.4.3 Bearings and Expansion Joints …
• The inertia forces generated on superstructure due to seismic

effects should preferably be transferred to piers/abutments
through fixed bearings capable of withstanding horizontal
loads.
• Wherever the fixed bearings are used, they shall be designed for
the design seismic action determined through capacity design.
Alternatively linkages shall be used to withstand seismic action.
• The out of phase motion between two piers due to various causes
such as different soil properties under pier foundations, wave
travel time effect in longer spans and different stiffness of piers
due to unequal heights or cross sectional dimensions shall be
considered in working out design seismic displacement in
bearings & expansion joints.
• Wherever movable bearings are used, they shall allow seismic

displacements due to possible out of phase motion of piers.
Additionally these bearings should be provided with displacement
limiting devices such as stoppers, linkages etc.
6.4.3 Bearings and Expansion Joints .. ..
• In case, in-plane horizontal seismic forces are to be transmitted

using elastomeric bearings, they shall be checked using minimum
dynamic frictional value and minimum vertical loads, including
combined effect of vertical and horizontal components of
earthquake.
• In such cases suitable devices for preventing dislodgement of

superstructure shall be provided.
• Where high damping elastomeric bearings are used to resist

seismic action, these may be designed to act as seismic isolation
bearing for which Chapter-10 shall be referred.
• The Connections between supporting and supported members

shall be designed in order to ensure structural integrity and avoid
unseating under extreme seismic displacements
• The gap between expansion to be worked out under seismic with

ultimate limit state where as the expansion joint shall be designed
for seismic Serviceability limit state
• In case elastomeric bearing is used as Seismic Isolation devices as

covered in chapter 10, It should be ensured that fundamental time
period „T‟ of the structure without incorporation of seismic isolation
devices shall be less or equal to 1.0 sec as isolation devices are
permitted to be used for comparatively rigid structure.
• In the case of Type III soft soil, seismic isolation devices shall be
avoided.
• Other than monolithic construction the most efficient way to transfer

horizontal seismic force is through fixed bearing.
• Fixed bearings can prevent unseating and drop of the deck, as well as large
residual displacements, therefore facilitating restoration of full
functionality of the bridge
• Means for mobilizing ductility and energy dissipation capacity of pier.
• Guided bearings are fixed in one direction and allows movement in other
Typical arrangement of decks on fixed and guided bearings

• Fixed bearings should be dimensioned in the seismic design situation for
capacity design effects.
• In seismic design, the fixed bearing shall be checked for full seismic
force along with braking / tractive force, ignoring the relief due to
frictional forces in other free bearings.
• These shall be designed for horizontal forces that is corresponding to the

formation of plastic hinge in the substructure or for R=1. whichever is
lesser.
• The above condition is relaxed when bearings can be easily replaced and
are supplemented with seismic links that are capacity-designed to
provide the required horizontal resistance (that is when the seismic links
are capacity protected)
• When seismic links are provided as stated above the bearings can be
designed using the actual analysis result that is for the same response
reduction factor/behaviour factor as that of the substructure
• Owing to the spatial variability of the seismic motion the seismic waves
exhibit an apparent velocity in the horizontal direction, causing out-of-
phase motions along the bridge, even when the amplitude remains the
same.
• The seismic displacement due to such out of phase movement of pier

shall be accounted in calculating the minimum seating widths , bearing
movements and expansion gap to be provided.
• The minimum overlap width at abutment is given in chapter 8 (cl

8.5.2.5).
 Expansion joints are allowed to

get damaged in Earthquake
event but the gap must be
maintained to avoid pounding of
deck.
 This gap shall be calculated by

taking into account the seismic
displacement in the event of out
of phase movement of piers.
 Where there are two

components of earthquake
Figure showing Pounding between two movement which may be out of
adjacent bridge spans, due to inadequate phase, the earthquake
expansion gap Surajbadi Highway Bridge. component of the overlap
requirements may be based on
the square root of the sum of
the squares approach.
Elastomeric bearing
• Elastomeric Bearings can be used with following possible arrangements:
1. Elastomeric Bearings provided on individual supports to transfer vertical loads

and non seismic lateral loads and to accommodate imposed deformations and
translations. Seismic actions are transferred to substructure by lateral
connections (monolithic or through pin bearings/guided bearings) of the deck
to other supporting members (piers or abutments)
2. On all or individual supports, with the same function as in (i) above, combined
with seismic links / seismic stoppers which are designed to resist seismic
actions.
3. On all supports to resist both seismic as well as non-seismic actions. In this

case the seismic response of substructure and Superstructure shall remain
essentially elastic and therefore response reduction factor for design shall be
considered as 1.
Elastomeric bearing
• In case of Elastomeric Bearing use with arrangements as in 1 and 2
above, the normal low damping elastomeric bearings are used. (ref
code : IRC 83 part 2 -2015)
• For bearings type 3, these bearings shall be designed as isolation

bearings. High damping bearings shall be used for this type. Design
provisions as per chapter 10 of this code shall follow. Low damping
bearings conforming to IRC 83 can also be used for isolation but with
specific checks mentioned in chap 10
6.4.4 Foundation
• Bridge foundations shall not be intentionally used as
sources of hysteretic energy dissipation and therefore
shall, as far as practicable, be designed to remain elastic
under the design seismic action
• Soil Structure interaction shall be assessed where

necessary.
• Force demands on foundations should be based on capacity

design principle that is, plastic capacity of bases of
columns/piers multiplied with an appropriate over strength
factor.
• Foundation elements should be designed to remain

essentially elastic.
• In case of well and pile foundations, the foundations should

be taken deeper into soil layers where liquefaction is not
likely to occur.
6.4.4 Foundation
• Spread foundations such as footings, rafts, box-type
caissons, piers etc., shall not enter the plastic range under
the design seismic action, and hence do not require special
detailing reinforcement
• Pile foundations may experience limited inelastic
deformations; in such cases these should be designed and
detailed for ductile behaviour. Ductile behaviour shall be
ensured by detailing the following locations as potential
plastic hinges
• At the pile heads adjacent to the pile cap, when the rotation of the pile
cap about a horizontal axis to the seismic action is restrained by the
large stiffness of the pile group
• At the depth where the maximum bending moment develops in the pile.
This depth should be estimated by an analysis that takes into account
the effective pile flexural stiffness, the lateral soil stiffness and the
rotational stiffness of the pile group at the pile cap
DESIGN OF PILE FOUNDATION- AS EXAMPLE
• A classical example where inelastic deformation at foundation cannot be

avoided is shown below.
• This is a five span integral bridge resting on hollow rectangular pier with pile
foundation. Free Bearings are provided at expansion joint piers. The pier size is
3.5x2.5 m with 500mm wall thickness. This is resting on pile foundation with 4
piles of 2m diameter at each support location.
• The piles are having long unsupported length as the pile cap is placed at
HFL/HTL coupled with considerable scour depth.
• For exact collapse mechanism and identification of hinge locations, a full scale
nonlinear static pushover analysis is necessary
• w
However from the mode shape of vibration we can get a fair idea about
the response of such a system.
Mode shapes for vibrations in longitudinal direction

• The mode shape shows that the behavior of the system is dominated by
the response of the piles
• The majority of the displacement and the bending occurs in the

unsupported length of the piles and not in the pier.
• As such it can safely concluded that the plastic hinge will form in pile
and not in pier.
• For such cases the designer is left with the following choices.
1. Design and detail the foundation for ductility. The likely location of plastic
hinges in piles has to be protected by confining reinforcement. The detailing
rules off such foundations is outlined in section 17.2.3 of IRC 112
2. Design the whole structure as elastic even for seismic case, in case formation
of plastic hinge is not allowed for inaccessible regions.
3. Change the articulation arrangement and introduce seismic isolation in the

bridge deck through low or high damping elastomeric bearings or LRB with or
without viscous dampers to reduce the seismic demand on substructure and
foundation .
6.5 LONG SPAN BRIDGES
• Long span bridges like cable stayed, suspension bridges, or the
bridges crossing nonhomogeneous soil formations can be affected
by spatial and temporal variations in ground motions.
• The number and location of intermediate joints should be decided

duly considering the above effects.
• The different piers are subjected to different ground motions at any

one time, because seismic waves take time to travel from one pier
to another.
• Detailed seismic studies considering multi-support excitation shall

be necessary to determine earthquake effects on such bridges.
6.5 LONG SPAN BRIDGES
• The spatial variability of the input ground motion at the supporting
foundations plays a key role in the structural response of flexible long
span bridges such as cable-stayed and suspension bridges
• The spatial variation effects should be included in the analysis and

design of effective vibration control systems for such horizontally
extended structures.
• The control of long-span bridges represents a challenging problem,

with many complexities in modelling, control design and
implementation, the control system should be designed not only to
mitigate the dynamic component of the structural response but also to
counteract the effects of the pseudo-static component of the response.
• The feasibility and efficiency of seismic control systems for the

vibration control of cable-stayed bridge under multiple support
excitations shall be investigated.
• The assumption of uniform earthquake motion along the entire bridge

could be unrealistic for long span bridges since the differences in
ground motion among different supports due to travelling seismic
waves may result in quantitative and qualitative differences in seismic
response as compared with those produced by uniform motion at all
supports.
6.5 SPECIAL TYPES OF BRIDGES
• These bridges shall be designed for site-specific spectrum for
which no separate importance factor shall be specified.
• The site specific spectrum, time history of design earthquakes, DBE

and MCE shall be specified for seismic design.
• For Design of Bridge under MCE, partial safety factor for seismic
ULS check shall be considered as 1
6.5 SPECIAL TYPES OF BRIDGES
• For special bridges, site specific spectra shall be used instead of the
generalized spectra in the code.
• The following two general approaches for developing site-specific

response spectra are used.
• DSHA- In this approach, often termed a deterministic seismic hazard analysis,

or DSHA, site ground motions are deterministically estimated for a specific,
selected earthquake, that is, an earthquake of a certain size on a specific
seismic source occurring at a certain distance from the site
• PSHA- In the probabilistic approach, often termed a probabilistic seismic hazard

analysis, or PSHA, site ground motions are estimated for selected values of the
probability of ground motion exceedance in a design time period or for selected
values of annual frequency or return period for ground motion exceedance
• Site specific spectra gives acceleration coefficients for both DBE and MCE
seismic events
• No need to consider importance factor as the spectra is site specific.

THANK YOU
Mr. Vinay Gupta
Director & CEO - Tandon Consultants Pvt Ltd
VINAY GUPTA
DIRECTOR & CEO
TANDON CONSULTANTS PVT LTD
NEW DELHI
BASICS OF SEISMIC ISOLATION
• Seismic energy propagates from from ground to structure
• Isolation device placed between substructure and superstructure
• Isolation devices help reduce seismic response
• Permitted where “T” <= 1 Sec without isolators
• “T” with isolators not to exceed 4 Sec

MECHANICS OF SEISMIC ISOLATION
• Lengthening of time period: increases displacements
• Increasing the damping: reduces displacement
• Combination of both
• Dissipation of energy
ENERGY DISSIPATION
• By hysteretic loop
• By viscous action
• By friction
TYPES OF ISOLATION DEVICES
(HDR)
(LRB)
BASE ISOLATION &
ENERGY DISSIPATION
HIGH DAMPING RUBBER BEARING
(HDR)
HIGH DAMPING ELASTOMER RUBBER-

STEEL PLATE SANDWHICH
BOLT HOLE FOR CONNECTION

TO SUPERSTRUCTURE
STEEL PATE
LEAD RUBBER
BEARING (LRB)
ELASTOMER-STEEL
PLATE SANDSHICH
LEAD PLUG
ACTION OF
FLUID VISCOUS DAMPER
THREE CHAMBER CONSTRUCTION,

TOTALLY ENCLOSED VISCOUS FLUID
SHOCK FORCES THE PISTON TO

COMPRESS FLUID IN CENTRAL CHAMBER.
THIS FORCES THE FLUID INTO THE FIRST
AND THIRD CHAMBER THROUGH THE
NARROW ORIFICES. THE OPPOSITE
HAPPENS WHEN PISTON MOVES BACK,
THUS ABSORBING SEISMIC ENERGY.
ATTRIBUTES : NO LEAKAGE, NO AGEING OF FLUID
: NO MAINTENANCE DURING LIFE OF STRUCTURE
HYDRAULIC DAMPERS
TYPICAL RANGE OF DAMPING RATIO
• Low damping elastomer: 5% to 6% (IRC 83: P2)
• High damping elastomer: 10% to 20%
• Lead rubber bearing: 30%
• Hydraulic viscous damper: 60%
• Friction damper: 30%

VARIABILITY OF PROPERTIES
Properties of isolators vary due to ageing, temperature,

loading history, contamination, wear, etc.
UBDP: Upper Bound Design Properties &

LBDP: Lower Bound Design Properties should be used
These variations are different for different types of isolators

FUNCTIONS OF ISOLATORS
• Elastomeric isolators: vertical load as well as lateral
• Hydraulic viscous dampers: energy dissipation
• Friction dampers: hysteretic & friction (take vertical load)
• Lead plug: higher restoring capability (take vertical load)

Bilinear hysteretic force – displacement behaviour
(LDR= slender; HDR= use linear hysteretic loop)
EC8
Fig 7.1
BILINEAR APPROXIMATON OF HYSTERETIC
FORCE – DISPLACEMENT BEHAVIOUR
(GENERAL METHOD: USED FOR RUBBER BEARINGS)
(Plastic) EC8
Bilinear hysteretic loop for LRB
EC8
Friction force – displacement behaviour
Fig 7.3
EC8
Damping of spherical sliding surface
Friction dissipates energy
EC8
Viscous force – displacement behaviour
Fig 7.2
EC8
Damping of fluid viscous damper
Viscosity dissipates energy
EC8
LATERAL RESTORING CAPABILITY
The isolating system should possess self restoring capability

in order to avoid cumulative build of displacements
7.19 Dealing with amplification of design displacement
EC8
EC8
Value of drm for different ranges
EC8
DESIGN CONCEPT FOR STRUCTURES WITH
ISOLATION DEVICES
• Same response spectra as in chapter 5
(for 5% damping)
• R = 1 (structure with isolators does not possess ductility)
ELASTIC SEISMIC ACCELERATION METHOD
For damping ratio =< 0.30 or
distance > 10km from known
seismically active fault zone
• Single degree of freedom system
• Use effective stiffness (isolator plus structure)
• Use effective damping
For elastomeric bearing: Equivalent horizontal elastic stiffness = G x A/Tq

G= shear modulus, A= plan area, Tq= elastomer thickness
Stiffness to be increased by 30% as per IRC: 83 (P-II)
Assume dcd and carry out an
iterative procedure for
dcd from Table 10.1, last column
Viscous damping is a derivative

of energy dissipation per cycle
dcd: between superstructure and ground
dC: between superstructure and substructure
NOTE: Se is like Sa/g x Z, values in above table are similar to Chapter 5 figure
(same as Sa)
from Eq 10.1
Se = Sa
For all practical purposes, effective flexibility of the structure is equal to that
of isolators and effective damping equal to that of the isolators, as the same
is much larger than that of the rest
EFFECT OF PLAN ECCENTRICITY
Superstructure displacement over pier i
Combinations of component motions as per Chapter 4

ELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM METHOD
For damping ratio > 0.30 and distance of
seismically active fault zone < 10km
• Vertical seismic need not be considered for component combinations
• as per Eq 10.1 to be used for modes with T higher than 0.8 Teff only
• For other modes, damping ratio of structure without isolators to be used

Lower bound values of displacement & shear force
Comparison between Response Spectrum method

and Elastic Seismic Acceleration method
dcf and Vf are calculated by fundamental mode spectrum analysis

for the values of Eq 10.3
TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS
Applicable to all conditions
EXAMPLE OF ELASTOMERIC ISOLATORS
Superstructure Details:
Width of Superstructure 34.00 m

Span of Superstructure 40.00 m
Effective Span of the Bridge 37.70 m
C/C of Bearings Longitudinal Direction 2.30 m
C/C of Bearings Transverse Direction 6.500 m
Depth of Superstructure 2.750 m
Total Seismic Mass (DL+SIDL) on one pier 24530 kN

Substructure Details:
Pier Size 3.0 x 2.5m

No of Piles 13
Dia of Pile 1.2m
Depth of Fixity 9m
Seismic coeff without isolators:
T = 0.41 Sec (Long direction)

T – 0.43 Sec (Trans direction)
Seismic Coeff = 0.36/3.0 = 0.12

Bearing Details:
Diameter of Bearing 1100 mm

Total thickness of Elastomer 306 mm
Shear Modulus of Elastomer 1.15 N/mm2
Stiffness of Bearing 3.6 kN/mm
(k = GA/t = 1.15*3.14*1100^2/4/306/1000)
30% increase taken during the analysis
Loads & Displacement Summary:
Maximum Vertical Load on the 16787 kN

Bearing (Single) (DL + LL + Wind Comb)
Corresponding Long & Trans 168 mm & 65 mm
Displacement of Bearing respectively
Maximum Longitudinal 296 mm

Displacement of Bearing (Seismic Long. Comb)
Maximum Transverse Displacement 204 mm

of Bearing (Seismic Trans. Comb)
Calculation of Horizontal Seismic Effects for Various
Pier Heights:
Note:
1. The complete stiffness is the combination of the stiffness of
pier, foundation and bearing.
2. The stiffness of the pier is calculated as 3 EI/L3 (for cantilever)
3. Stiffness of one pile is calculated as 12 EI/L3 (for fixed head)

Stiffness of pile group is n*12 EI/L3 (where n is the total number of
piles)
4. No of bearings on pier top, carrying Long / transverse forces = 4 Nos.

Total Horizontal stiffness of all bearings =4x3.6 = 14.4 kN/mm
5. Fundamental natural period of pier along horizontal direction (as

per cl. 5.2.1 of IRC:SP:114)
Typical Section (Cutting Bolts at One Side only)
Isometric View of Circular Elastomeric Bearing
Details of Elastomeric Bearing
No of 18 mm thick int layers= 17; No

No of 5mm thick int plates = 16
2 outer plates of 20mm
Advantage of circular bearing:
1. reduced quantities
2. Ease of vulcanisation
3. Improved shape factor
EXAMPLE OF A FRICTION PENDULUM
DAMPER (FPS): ELASTIC SEISMIC
ACCELERATION METHOD
INPUT DATA
• Seismic Mass Wd = 36751 kN
• Dynamic Friction d = 0.051 (supplier)
• Radius of Curved Surface Rb = 1.83m (supplier)
• Assumed Design Displacement dcd
for the first iteration = 0.15m
• Effective Yield Displacement Dy = 0.005m (supplier)
• Assumption: Piers Fixed at Pier Base
• Contribution of Flexibility of Pier ignored in comparison with
that of Isolation Device
- Effective Stiffness Keff (Piers ignored)
Keff = F/dcd = Wd  [d + dcd/Rb] / dcd
= 36751  [0.051 + 0.15/1.83] / 0.15
= 32578 kN/m.
- Effective Time Period of Isolation Teff (Eq. 10.2)
(Divided by 9.81)
𝑊𝑑 36751 / 9.81 to get mass)
Teff = 2π = 2π
𝐾𝑒𝑓𝑓 32578
= 2.13 sec
- Dissipated Energy per cycle ED (EC8)
ED = 4  Wd  d  (dcd – Dy)
= 4  36751  0.051  (0.15 – 0.005)
= 1087.09 kNm.
- Effective Damping eff (Eq. 10.1)
eff = ෍ 𝐸𝐷,𝑖 / 2π × 𝐾𝑒𝑓𝑓 × 𝑑𝑐𝑑 2
= 1087.09 / [2  π  32578  0.152 ]

= 0.236
neff = 0.10/(0.05 + eff ) = 0.591 (Eq. 10.5)
Hence, Design Displacement dcd (Eq. 10.4)
0.625
𝑑𝑐𝑑 = × 𝑎𝑔 × S × 𝑛𝑒𝑓𝑓 × 𝑇𝑒𝑓𝑓 × 𝑇c
𝜋2
S : Foundation Type Factor = 1.2 (assumed)
Tc : from fig. 10.2

0.625
𝑑𝑐𝑑 = × 0.4 × 9.81 × 1.2 × 0.591 × 2.13 × 0.50
𝜋2
(assumed ag = 0.4, multiplied by 9.81)
= 0.188m (different from the assumed value 0.15m)

Take dcd = 0.188 m and repeat
finally converged at dcd = 0.22m These are
Now Keff = 28602 kN/m Interdependent
Teff = 2.27 Sec values

ED = 1611.90 kN/m
eff = 0.652
dcd = 0.22 m (Hence, converged)

Spectral Acceleration
𝑇𝑐
Se = 2.5 neff ag.S
𝑇eff
0.5
= 2.5 × × 0.652 × 0.4 × 1.2
2.24
= 0.172 g (The factor is high because Z is not divided
by 2 in Euro)
Earthquake Shear Vd = Keff  dcd
= 28602  0.22 = 6292 kN
(same as Se X Wd)
BRIDGE FOR JAMMU UDHAMPUR RAIL LINK
EXPANSION JOINT
REACTION BLOCK FOR

LONGITUDINAL EARTHQUAKE
REACTION BLOCK FOR

TRANSVERSE EARTHQUAKE
SHEAR KEY
DETAILS AT RESTRAINED BEARING (ABUTMENT)

JAMMU UDHAMPUR RAIL LINK PROJECT
VETICALLY POSITIONED
ELASTOMERIC BEARINGS
VINAY GUPTA
DIRECTOR & CEO
TANDON CONSULTANTS PVT LTD
NEW DELHI SAR 4 Y2k

Handouts - 07.09.2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handouts - 07.09.2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indian Association of Structural Engineers

Handouts of the Presentations

Sanfield (India) Ltd

Lecture 7 General Design Provisions (Chapter 6)

Lecture 8 Seismic Isolation Devices (Chapter 10)

Mr. Aditya Sharma

SEMINAR ON “INTRODUCTION TO NEW

• 6.2 Basic Design Principles

• 6.3 Seismic Design Aspects

• 6.4 Design Provisions

• 6.5 Long span bridges

• 6.6 Special Types of Bridges

 The contents of this chapter deals with general

 Strong beam and week column concept is

 A strength based design approach amalgamating

 Forced based Design / Capacity based Design

 Displacement based Design

 Performance based Design

 Energy based Design

 This is the most common seismic design approach

 It is based on providing the structure with the

 Design forces for a structural component are

 For this reason simple construction detailing rules

Drawback- The base shear is distributed between structural members in

This has three undesirable effects.

 Allocating a large proportion of the total seismic design force to the

 The objective of this approach is to ensure that the bridge

 Uses displacement as a measure of seismic demand and also

 Lateral strength of the system (size and reinforcement of

 Elastic peak displacements are converted to peak inelastic

 Once the displacement demands are estimated, the

 Finally, the substructure sections and protected elements

• In FBM- Force-based loadings: familiar to • DBM is applicable to a class of

• R factors are given generally for a single level

 Its an extension to displacement based design

 Design to reliably achieve performance objectives.

 Each performance objective is defined by a single

 The structural capacity for each performance level is

 Designer needs to define acceptable deformation/

• Three categories of performance are addressed by the fib

• Serviceability: the ability of the bridge and its structural

• Structural safety: the ability of the bridge and its structural

• Sustainability: the ability of the bridge to contribute

 This is the most promising and futuristic

 In this approach it is assumed that total energy

 Research is still going on this approach and it will

• Formation Level – RL 65.5m

• High Flood Level- RL 52.00m

• Bottom of Pile Cap – RL 43.50m

• Scour Level – RL 5.97m

• Discharge - 92000 Cum/Sec

• Foundation Level RL (-) 10m

• Pile Diameters 1.9m

• Pier Renforcement 1.02%

• Pier Concrète M50

• Pile Renforcement 1.76%

• Pile Concrete - M40

 Non-linear analysis of the Pile foundation and substructure

 The columns and piles have been modelled as non-linear

 The structure of the foundation and substructure has been

 The analysis of 110% of the load is used to show that the

 An SLS analysis has also been undertaken to verify the

 The magnitude of the movements at ULS due to the

 The superstructure, substructure- piers and abutments,