Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Seismic assessments for scoured bridges with pile foundations T

a b a a,⁎
Lian-Gui He , Hsiao-Hui Hung , Che-Yi Chuang , Chang-Wei Huang
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan, Taiwan
b
National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering, Taipei, Taiwan

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: To accurately estimate the seismic performances of scoured bridges with pile foundations, an integrated per-
Seismic assessment formance-based seismic assessment method is proposed in this paper. Nonlinear deformations of piers and piles
Scoured bridge are taken into consideration by using the concentrated plastic hinges at the bottoms of piers and the distributed
Soil–structure interaction plastic hinges with softened elastic modulus along the piles, respectively. The interaction between soil and pile
Seismic performance index
foundation is modelled through four types of soil springs according to the design code. Seismic assessments of
multi-span bridges with pile foundations are performed for different scour depths and soil properties using
nonlinear static pushover analyses. Numerical results demonstrate that the seismic demands of bending moments
and the locations of maximum moments for piles vary significantly with increasing scour depth. Compared with
the fiber element method, the proposed distributed plastic hinges model with a softened elastic modulus can
efficiently and accurately estimate the nonlinear deformation of scoured bridges. In addition, in the case of loose
sand, the failure mechanism of a scoured bridge is transferred from the piers to the piles as the scour depth
increases over a critical value. Finally, seismic assessments demonstrate that the seismic performance indices of
scoured bridges increase with increasing scour depth with dense sand, while the seismic performance indices of
scoured bridges decrease with increasing scour depth with loose sand when the failure mechanism is transferred.
Although scoured bridges have better seismic performances, they may have stability problems.

1. Introduction overestimation of the foundation stiffness. Furthermore, to investigate

Many cross-river bridges have exposed foundations as a result of
scouring. This scouring may significantly reduce the bridge founda-
tion’s stiffness and strength, which could result in damage or even
collapse of the bridge during a natural disaster [1–3]. With respect to
bridge safety and stability considerations, if the critical level of foun-
dation exposure can be estimated in advance, an early warning can be
given and the necessary repair or retrofit works can be performed to
prevent bridge failure [4,5]. To this end, an increasingly important
issue is the development of a rational seismic assessment of scoured
bridges.
A rational seismic assessment for a bridge is based on an accurate
prediction of the seismic displacement demand and capacity. Recently,
nonlinear static pushover analysis has been considered as a suitable
standard method for the seismic evaluation of structures [6–10]. The
pushover analysis uses an incremental process to obtain the response of
a structure subjected to monotonically increasing lateral loads with a
pre-specified pattern. However, pushover analyses of bridges often as-
sume for convenience that bridges are fixed on rigid foundations. While
this assumption may minimize computation costs, it results in an
the influence of scour depth on pile foundations, soil–structure inter-
action (SSI) must be considered in the nonlinear analyses.
In recent years, many studies have been performed investigating the
influence of SSI on bridge deformation behavior [11–13]. However,
there has been limited research on the evaluation of the seismic per-
formance of scoured bridges with pile foundations [14,15]. In addition,
the influence of scour depth and soil properties on the seismic perfor-
mance of scoured bridges has not been thoroughly investigated.
The objective of this paper is to develop an integrated computa-
tional model to perform a seismic assessment of scoured bridges. A
complex three-dimensional finite-element model of a bridge that can
simulate the interaction between foundation piles and soil is con-
structed with lumped nonlinear soil springs. Apart from the soil flex-
ibility, concentrated plastic hinges (CPH), which are arranged at the
bottoms of the piers, are adopted to simulate the nonlinear deformation
in the piers. Distributed plastic hinges (DPH) are arranged along the
piles for consideration of plastic hinge distribution and plastic zone
spreading.
The proposed integrated computational model is verified through a
comparison of the pushover curve from a nonlinear static pushover

⁎
Corresponding author at: Department of Civil Engineering, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan 32023, Taiwan.
E-mail address: cwhuang@cycu.edu.tw (C.-W. Huang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110454
Received 4 October 2019; Received in revised form 18 January 2020; Accepted 28 February 2020
0141-0296/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L.-G. He, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454

(a) Lateral subgrade spring (b) Vertical subgrade spring

(c) Vertical shear subgrade spring (d) Lateral subgrade spring for pile cap Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the four soil springs.

Fig. 1. The elastic perfectly plastic behavior of typical soil springs. (a) Lateral
types and is equal to 3.0 for sandy soil; and pU is the passive soil
subgrade spring; (b) Vertical subgrade spring; (c) Vertical shear subgrade
pressure, which varies with depth x.
spring; (d) Lateral subgrade spring for pile cap.
Next, the vertical subgrade spring, which is attached to the end of a
pile, is used to simulate the bearing capacity of the soil. The initial
analysis using fiber elements with the results from the proposed model. stiffness of the vertical subgrade spring at the end of the piles, kV (N/
In addition, a comparison of the maximum lateral displacements ob- mm3), can be found by [17]:
tained from a nonlinear dynamic time history analysis using fiber ele-
ments and the proposed computational model is also performed. After B −3/4
kV = kV 0 ⎛ V ⎞ ,
that, a performance-based seismic assessment procedure is introduced ⎝ 300 ⎠ (3a)
based on the pushover curve from the proposed computational model.
kV 0 = (αE0)/300, and (3b)
Finally, a parametric study is then carried out to identify the effects of
scour depth and soil properties on the seismic assessments.
BV = AV , (3c)

2. Methodology where kV0 is the reference value of the vertical subgrade coefficient for
piles and can be obtained from Eq. (3b), BV is the width of the vertical
2.1. Soil spring equivalent load and is calculated according to Eq. (3c), and AV is the
cross-section area (mm2) at the ends of the piles. The ultimate vertical
The pile–soil system was modeled using the Winkler beam model. subgrade reaction force per unit area for the piles qb (N/mm2) can be
The piles were simulated by beam elements and the pile–soil interac- obtained by [17]:
tions were simulated by spring elements spread along the pile and in qb = 0.2943N , (4)
front of the pile cap. The elastic perfectly plastic (EPP) behaviors be-
tween the subgrade reaction force per unit area and the lateral dis- where N is the value from the SPT-N.
placement (also known as the p-y curve) are used to describe the The third soil spring, which is attached to the pile along the long-
properties of soil springs, as shown in Fig. 1. Four different soil springs, itudinal direction, is used to simulate the friction resistance between
utilized to simulate different interaction mechanisms between the soil the pile and the soil. The initial stiffness of the vertical shear subgrade
and the piles, as shown in Fig. 2, are introduced as follows. spring along the pile can be found using [17]:
The interaction between the pile and the soil in the horizontal di- kSV = 0.3kH , (5)
rection is defined by the lateral subgrade spring. The initial stiffness of
the lateral subgrade spring along the pile can be calculated from the where kH is given by Eq. (1). The ultimate vertical shear subgrade re-
lateral subgrade coefficient, kH (N/mm3), for the piles [16] as: action force per unit area (N/mm2) is [17]:
N
kH = 0.178(αE0)1.10D−0.31 (EI )−0.103, (1) fS = ⩽ 0.147.
305.8 (6)
where α is the subgrade reaction coefficient and is set as 2.0 during
Finally, the last soil spring, which is used to simulate the interaction
earthquake ground motions; E0 (N/mm2) represents the elastic modulus
between the pile cap and the surrounding soil in the horizontal direc-
of soil and is equal to 25N at which N is the value of the standard
tion, is attached to the front surface of the pile cap. The initial stiffness
penetration test (SPT-N); and D and EI are the diameter (mm) and
of the lateral subgrade spring in front of the pile cap, kHF (N/mm3), can
flexural rigidity (N-mm2) of the pile cross-section, respectively. The
be found from [17]:
ultimate lateral subgrade reaction force per unit area is given by [17]:
pHU = ηP αP pU B −3/4
(2) kHF = kH 0 ⎛ H ⎞ ,
⎝ 300 ⎠ (7a)
where ηp denotes the modification factor for group piles and equals 1.0
for sandy soil; αp represents the modification factor for different soil kH 0 = (αE0)/300, and (7b)

2
L.-G. He, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454

BH = Be ⩽ Be ·Le , (7c)

where kH0 is the reference value of the lateral subgrade coefficient in

front of the pile cap and can be obtained from Eq. (7b), BH is the width
of the horizontal equivalent load and is calculated according to Eq. (7c),
and Be and Le represent the effective width (mm) and effective buried
depth (mm), respectively, of the pile cap. The ultimate lateral subgrade
reaction force in front of the pile cap per unit area (N/mm2) is [17]:
pBU = αP pU , (8)

where αp is the modified ultimate value for the subgrade reaction

coefficient and can be obtained from:

1.0 for N ⩽2
αP = ⎧ .
⎩1.0 + 0.5(x /Be ) ⩽ 3.0 otherwise
⎨ (9)

It is worthwhile to note that other soil spring models, such as API

model [18], can also be utilized to simulate the soil-structure interac-
tion. The proposed computational framework is not affected by the soil Fig. 4. Determination of the performance point.
spring models. In this study, the perfectly elastic-plastic model just
provides a reference model since it is specified in the highway bridge
seismic design code [17].

2.2. Plastic hinges

To accurately estimate the displacement demand, the nonlinear

deformation of piers and piles must be taken into consideration in the
seismic assessments of scoured bridges. For piers, the CPHs are assumed
to be located near the bottoms of the piers, as shown in Fig. 3(a). The
moment–rotational angle curve of the plastic hinge at the pier is de-
termined by the envelope formed by the moment–rotational angle
curves based on flexural and shear failure criteria [19]. The equivalent
plastic hinge length, Lp, of the pier is defined by [20]:
Lp = 0.08L + 0.022f yl dbl ⩾ 0.044f yl dbl , (10)

where L is the pier length (mm), fyl is the yield strength of the long-
itudinal bars (N/mm2), and dbl represents the diameter of the long-
itudinal reinforcement (mm). Fig. 5. Seismic assessment for a bridge.
However, the CPH method is not suitable for the estimation of
nonlinear deformation in a pile–soil system. This is due to the un- calculated according to ATC-40 [23], it is worth noting that the plastic
certainties in the location and length of the plastic zone in piles after curvature has to be modified to obtain accurate plastic rotation in the
scouring. As a result, the DPH model [21] was adopted to simulate the DPH method, like so [21]:
nonlinear deformation of the piles. Many plastic hinges with length ldp,
M
as shown in Fig. 3(b), were set along the pile at the potential plastic ϕp = ϕ − ,
EIe (11)
zone region. As the lateral loading increases, the yielding of the plastic
hinges among the DPHs defines the actual plastic zone with length lp where the first and second terms on the right-hand side represent the
[22]. Although the plastic rotation of the plastic hinges can be total curvature and the elastic curvature, respectively. Then the plastic

(a) Pier (b) Pile

Fig. 3. The plastic hinges on RC piers and piles. (a) Pier; (b) Pile.

3
L.-G. He, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454

2.5 m

74-D32

D19@8cm

(a) Superstructure (b) Substructure

Fig. 6. The cross section of the reference bridge. (a) Superstructure; (b) Substructure.

(a) Without scouring (b) Scour depth of 8 m

Fig. 7. The considered bridge with different scour depths. (a) Without scouring; (b) Scour depth of 8 m.

(1) Step 1: Construction of the pushover curve. Pushover analysis is

a nonlinear static analysis in which the considered structure is sub-
jected to a constant vertical load and a monotonically increasing lateral
load. In this study, the lateral load has a uniform load distribution,
defined by [24]:

Fi = mi ζi (13)

where Fi and mi represent the lateral load and mass at node i, respec-
tively, and ξi is the shape factor defining the load distribution on the
considered structure, given by:

⎧1z for the deck

ζi = i ,
⎨ zp for the piers and piles (14)
⎩
where zi and zp represent the height of node i above the ground and the
Fig. 8. Pushover curves for the sample bridge with an 8 m scour depth. distance from the ground to the deck, respectively. The pushover curve
is constructed by plotting the total base shear versus the lateral dis-
placement at the monitoring point.
rotation is obtained by:
(2) Step 2: Transformation of the pushover curve to the equivalent
θp = ϕp ·lp. (12) capacity curve. The concept of the equivalent capacity curve is based on
the transformation of the multi-degree of freedom system to an
equivalent single degree of freedom system. The equivalent system
2.3. Seismic assessment displacement and acceleration, Sa,k and Sd,k, can be obtained by
[25,26]:
An integrated performance-based seismic assessment that was in-
Vb, k
cluded in the bridge design code in Taiwan [17] is briefly introduced Sa, k = ∗
,
Msys ,k g (15a)
here. The seismic assessment includes five fundamental steps.

4
L.-G. He, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454

the pushover cure is piecewise linear. To facilitate the following seismic

assessment, the capacity curve has to be transformed into a bilinear
curve using the equal area criterion to determine the yielding point on
the capacity curve.
(3) Step 3: Calculation of the effective peak acceleration (EPA) at
each increment. Firstly, the effective natural period at each increment is
calculated by:
2π 2π
Teff , k = = .
ωn, k Sa, k g
Sd, k (16)

Then the effective damping ratio of the considered bridge can be

obtained by:
0.637κ (Ay Sd, k − Δy Sa, k )
βeff , k = βbasic + ,
Sa, k Sd, k (17)

where κ the damping modification factor, depends on the energy dis-

sipation performance of the bridge. The value of κ can be taken as 1.0,
(a) SPT-N = 40
0.67, and 0.33 for good, moderate, and poor energy dissipation, re-
spectively. In addition, βbasic is the inherent damping ratio of the bridge
and in general is set to 0.05. Ay and Δy represent respectively the
equivalent acceleration and displacement corresponding to the yielding
point on the bilinear capacity spectrum curve. The EPA at each incre-
ment can be determined by the effective damping ratio.
Step 4: Determination of the performance point. A performance
curve must be constructed that describes the relationship between the
EPA and the equivalent system displacement (Sd). The intersection of
the performance curve and the horizontal line that represents
EPA = 0.4SII,S is the performance point, as shown in Fig. 4. SII,S is the
site-adjusted spectral response acceleration at short periods for a 475-
year return period, which can be found from the design code [17] for
different seismic zones. In this study, Nantou County, at which SII,S is
0.895 g, was chosen as the target.
(5) Step 5: Seismic assessment of the considered bridge. The per-
formance-based seismic design must ensure that the displacement de-
mand corresponding to the performance point is less than the pre-
specified displacement capacity according to the design code on the
(b) SPT-N = 10 capacity curve, as shown in Fig. 5. For a 475-year return period (level II
earthquake), the pre-specified displacement capacity is defined by:
Fig. 9. Maximum transverse displacement of the bridge deck. (a) SPT-N = 40;
(b) SPT-N = 10. Δu
ΔB = Δy + ,
3 (18)
Table 1 where Δu is the equivalent displacement corresponding to the limit
Computational efficiencies of the different methods under consideration. point on the bilinear capacity spectrum curve.
Analysis type Simulation type Elapsed time
3. Numerical models
Static DPH (Esoften = 1.0E) 31 s
DPH (Esoften = 0.7E) 36 s
Fiber element 58 s 3.1. Numerical models
Dynamic Fiber element 3058 s
A four-span continuous bridge with a pier height of 10 m was
adopted as the example used for model verification. The length of each
Sd, k = Δsys, k , (15b) span is 40 m and the total length is 160 m. The superstructure of the
reference bridge, shown in Fig. 6(a), consists of a concrete deck on top
∑ mi Δi2, k
i
of four continuous PCI girders with the unit weight of the super-
Δsys, k = , and structure equal to 15 tonf/m throughout the structure. The bearing
∑ mi Δi, k
i (15c) systems were assumed to be restrained in the transverse direction. In
the longitudinal direction, the bearing systems were assumed to be
∑ mi Δi, k hinge supports at the intermediate piers P2, P3, and P4, and roller
∗ i
Msys ,k = , supports at expansion joints P1 and P5. All piers are circular reinforced
Δsys, k (15d)
concrete (RC) columns with a diameter of 2.5 m. Additionally, all piers
where Vb,k and Δi,k denote the total base shear of the system and the have the same reinforcement details with 74-D32 longitudinal re-
lateral displacement of the node i at the k-th analysis increment. It is inforcing bars, as shown in Fig. 6(b), and are transversely reinforced
worth noting that Eq. (15) takes the displacement contributions from all with 19 mm bar hoops spaced at 8 cm. Each column of the bridge is
important nodes into consideration and can eliminate the dependence supported by nine piles, which are circular RC columns with a diameter
of the selection of the monitored point on the capacity curve. In addi- of 1.0 m, as shown in Fig. 7. All piles have a length of 18 m and have the
tion, the capacity curve obtained from Eq. (15) is piecewise linear since same reinforcement details with 24-D29 longitudinal reinforcing bars

5
L.-G. He, et al.
(a) Pile (SPT-N = 40)
(c) Pile (SPT-N = 10)
Fig. 10. Moment distributions along the central pile and middle pier for bridges with different scour depths. (a) Pile (SPT-N = 40); (b) Pier (SPT-N = 40); (c) Pile
(SPT-N = 10); (d) Pier (SPT-N = 10).
and 13 mm bar hoops spaced at 30 cm for transverse reinforcement.
For simplicity, it is assumed that the soil is uniform in the area
around the example bridge. The characteristics of the equivalent soil
springs can be determined using the results of the SPT-N as described in
Section 2.1. Fig. 7(a) and (b) demonstrate 3D bridge models that have
piles without scouring and those with a typical scour depth (ds = 8 m),
respectively.
3.2. Model verification
Fig. 8 presents the pushover curves of the scoured bridge with a
typical scour depth of 8 m for different soil properties (SPT-N). The
monitoring point was set at the node on top of the middle column and
at the superstructure level. From Fig. 8, it can be observed that the
initial slope and the maximum base shear, which represent the initial
lateral stiffness and the ultimate strength of the sample bridge, re-
spectively, decreased with the decreasing SPT-N. These phenomena
result from the reduced stiffness of loose sand providing lower re-
sistance to lateral forces.
To verify the accuracy of the DPH method, another finite element
models with fiber elements which are utilized to simulate nonlinear
deformation in piles during the pushover analyses are also constructed.
The results from the fiber element models are adopted as the
6
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454
(b) Pier (SPT-N = 40)
(d) Pier (SPT-N = 10)
benchmark solution to compare with those from the DPH models. From
Fig. 8, it can be observed that, for different soil properties, the initial
slope and the maximum base shear—which represent the initial lateral
stiffness and ultimate strength of the scoured bridge—of the pushover
curves from the DPH method with the original elastic modulus of
concrete (Esoften = 1.0E) in the piles are higher than those obtained
from the fiber element method. To consider initial cracks or the plastic
zone spreading in piles during nonlinear deformation, the use of a
softened (reduced) elastic modulus of concrete (Esoften) is proposed for
the DPH method. This softened modulus was set as 70% of the original
elastic modulus of concrete (0.7E). The numerical results demonstrate
that the pushover curves from the proposed softened elastic modulus
coincide well with those from the fiber element method for different
soil properties. As a result, the softened elastic modulus with the DPH
method was adopted in the following analysis.
In addition to the nonlinear static pushover analyses, nonlinear
dynamic analyses with fiber elements were also carried out to de-
termine the maximum transverse displacements. The ground motion is
defined by the acceleration time history and is applied on nodes which
are under the ground level (attached with soil springs) in the finite
element models. In addition, the transverse displacement at the deck
level from pushover analyses according to the spectral displacement at
the performance point for level II earthquake can be obtained for the
L.-G. He, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454

25000 4. Results and discussion

In this section, different combinations of N values and scour depths

20000
ds are used in the finite-element models to further investigate the effects
of soil types and scour depth on the seismic responses of the considered
Base Shear (kN)

15000 bridges. For simplicity, only the DPH method with the softened elastic
modulus will be discussed.
ds=0
ds m
10000 ds=2 4.1. Seismic demands for moments
ds m
ds=4
ds m
dds=6
s m Bridges with different scour depths subjected to a dead load and a
5000 ds=8
ds m design static seismic load, calculated using Taiwanese design codes, are
ds=10
ds m
ds=12
ds m
investigated through a linear elastic analysis. Fig. 10(a)–(d) present the
0
moment distributions along the central pile and middle pier for bridges
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 for dense sand and loose sand soil types. For the dense sand soil type, it
Displacement (m) can be observed that the location and values of the maximum negative
(a) SPT-N = 40
moment on the pile vary as the scour depth increases. The maximum
moment increases with increasing scour depth and occurs approxi-
20000 mately 2 m above the ground surface. Furthermore, the maximum
moment increases with increasing scour depth. However, the moment
distribution on the pier remains nearly constant with varying scour
depth.
15000
For loose sand, the maximum moment occurs on the ground surface
when the scour depth is less than 4 m; however, the maximum moment
Base Shear (kN)

occurs above the ground surface at approximately 2 m when the scour

10000 ds=0
ds m depth is greater or equal to 4 m. Furthermore, the maximum negative
ds=2
ds m moment increases until the scour depth reaches 6 m. Alternatively, the
ds m
ds=4 negative moment on the pier remains constant when the scour depth is
ds=6
ds m
5000
between 0 and 6 m; however, the negative moment on the pier de-
ds=8
ds m creases when the scour depth is greater than 6 m.
ds
ds=10 m
These phenomena demonstrate the unpredictable occurrence of
ds=12
ds m
plastic hinges in piles during pushover analyses. As a result, it is ne-
0 cessary to use the DPH method in piles in order to model nonlinear
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
deformation when the scour depth is increased.
Displacement (m)

(b) SPT-N = 10 4.2. Failure mechanism

Fig. 11. Pushover curves of bridges for different scour depths and soil prop-
erties. (a) SPT-N = 40; (b) SPT-N = 10.
considered bridges. The calculated transverse displacement profiles
from different methods, which include nonlinear static (based on fiber
elements and the DPH method with the softened elastic modulus), and
dynamic analyses are given in Fig. 9(a) and (b). It is worth noting that
the results of the nonlinear dynamic time history analyses are the
average displacements obtained by applying five code-compatible ar-
tificial earthquakes with peak ground acceleration scaled to 0.4SII,S
(0.358 g).
From Fig. 9, it can also be observed that, for the various soil
properties, the transverse displacements from the static pushover ana-
lyses using the DPH method are located between those obtained from
the static pushover analyses using fiber elements and the dynamic time
history analyses using fiber elements. In addition, the maximum
transverse displacements from the static pushover analyses are larger
than those from the nonlinear dynamic analyses, which imply that the
static pushover analyses provided conservative designs.
Table 1 lists the computation times for the different analyses. Evi-
dently, the proposed method (DPH with the softened elastic modulus)
reduces the computation time by approximately 38% as compared with
the fiber element method in the static pushover analyses. Compared
with the nonlinear dynamic time history analyses with fiber elements,
the proposed method reduces computation time by 99%. Therefore, the
proposed method is both efficient and accurate.
Fig. 11(a) and (b) show the pushover curves of scoured bridges for
different scour depths and soil properties. Similarly, the monitoring
point in pushover analyses is the node on top of the middle column and
at the superstructure level. The yielding base shear and the maximum
base shear increased with increasing scouring for scoured bridges with
dense sand (SPT-N = 40), as can be seen in Fig. 11(a). Alternatively,
the yielding base shear and the maximum base shear increased slightly
when the scour depth was less than 8 m for scoured bridges with loose
sand (SPT-N = 10), as seen in Fig. 11(b). For the loose sand soil type,
after the scour depth became larger than 8 m, the yielding base shear
and the maximum base shear decreased.
These results can be explained by the failure mechanisms of scoured
bridges. Fig. 12(a)–(d) demonstrate the failure mechanisms of the
bridge under consideration for different scour depths and soil proper-
ties. The color circles represent the deformation states of plastic hinges
while yellow circle and red circle represent the plastic hinge over the
peak moment (residual strength) and reaching the final failure state
(total failure), respectively. In addition, the pink circles in piles re-
present that these DPH are at the yielding state. For the bridge in dense
sand, the failure mechanism of the scoured bridge was mainly a result
of the plastic hinges at the piers, regardless of the presence of scouring.
This is because the dense sand surrounding the piles provide sufficient
stiffness to prevent the piles from entering into plastic state even
though scouring has occurred, and the piles provides additional trans-
verse strength to resist transverse loads. Therefore, the maximum base
shear of the pushover curves increase with increasing scour depth. Al-
ternatively, for the cases with loose sand, since the surrounding loos soil
cannot provide enough support to the piles when the scour depth
reaches 8 m, the failure mechanism transferred from the piers to the

7
L.-G. He, et al.
(a) SPT-N = 40 and ds = 0 m
(c) SPT-N = 10 and ds = 0 m
Fig. 12. Failure mechanisms of bridges for different scour depths and soil properties. (a) SPT-N = 40 and ds = 0 m; (b) SPT-N = 40 and ds = 8 m; (c) SPT-N = 10
and ds = 0 m; (d) SPT-N = 10 and ds = 8 m.
piles and the maximum base shear of the pushover curves decrease with
increasing scour depth from then on.
4.3. Seismic assessments
Following the introduced seismic assessment method, the spectral
displacement and acceleration at the level II performance point are
listed in Table 2. From Table 2, it can be observed that the spectral
acceleration at the performance point decreases with increasing scour
depth. The decrease of the spectral acceleration implies that the scoured
bridge suffers smaller seismic forces during earthquakes. These results
can be explained by the decrease of the transverse stiffness of the
scoured bridge, resulting in an increase in its fundamental period,
which corresponds to a smaller seismic force according to most design
codes.
However, it is not appropriate to use the spectral displacement or
8
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454
(b) SPT-N = 40 and ds = 8 m
(d) SPT-N = 10 and ds = 8 m
acceleration as an index for seismic assessments since the capacity
curve varies with the scour depth. To investigate the influence of scour
depth on seismic performance, a seismic performance index is proposed
and defined as:
ΔB − ΔII
μII = ,
ΔB − ΔA (19)
where ΔA, ΔB, and ΔII are defined as per Fig. 5. A seismic performance
index with a value greater than zero implies that the seismic perfor-
mance of the bridge under consideration is adequate for a 475-year-
return-period earthquake (level II earthquake). In addition, a larger
seismic performance index represents improved seismic performance.
Table 2 presents the seismic performance indices for different scour
depths and soil properties. For the dense sand soil type, the seismic
performance index increases with increasing scour depth. However, for
the loose sand soil type, the seismic performance index increases when
L.-G. He, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454

Table 2 displacement.
Spectral accelerations at the performance point and the corresponding ductility Notice that these conclusions are deduced from the proposed com-
ratios for different soil types and scour depths. putational framework without considering the soil liquefaction. The soil
SPT-N Scour depth (m) Sa, II (g) ΔA (m) ΔII (m) ΔB (m) μII liquefaction should be an important issue for bridges under earthquakes
and a further investigation is needed to understand the effects of the
40 0 0.44 5.48 8.67 15.31 0.68 soil liquefaction on the seismic performances of bridges.
2 0.45 5.64 8.61 15.49 0.70
4 0.46 6.25 9.02 16.29 0.72
6 0.45 7.13 9.74 17.40 0.75 CRediT authorship contribution statement
8 0.43 8.52 11.02 19.24 0.77
10 0.41 11.12 13.28 22.67 0.81 Lian-Gui He: Software, Writing - original draft. Hsiao-Hui Hung:
12 0.38 15.66 16.62 29.47 0.93
Methodology, Writing - review & editing. Che Yi Chuang: Software.
10 0 0.42 9.36 11.96 20.67 0.77 Chang-Wei Huang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - review
2 0.41 10.97 13.13 23.02 0.82 & editing.
4 0.42 18.50 18.42 34.50 1.00
6 0.39 20.59 19.29 39.07 1.07
8 0.33 19.94 20.55 32.79 0.95 Declaration of Competing Interest
10 0.27 20.31 22.43 34.42 0.85
12 0.22 21.82 24.75 37.75 0.82 The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
the scour depth is less than 8 m and decreases when the scour depth is
greater than or equal to 8 m. While these results may be surprising, the
Acknowledgement
increase of the seismic performance index may be explained by the
decrease of the required seismic demand, owing to the increase of the
The authors acknowledge the Ministry of Science and Technology of
fundamental period of the scoured bridge with dense sand. The seismic
the Republic of China (Taiwan) for the partial financial support under
performance index decreases for scour depths over 8 m, which can be
Grant number NSC 100-2221-E-033-057.
explained by the failure mechanism transferring from the piers to the
piles, thus decreasing the seismic performance of the scoured bridge.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Although the scoured bridge seems with better seismic performance
before the scoured depth reached a critical value, it should be noted
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
that the scoured bridge may suffer the stability problem because of the
doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110454.
larger transverse displacement after scouring [27,28].
References
5. Conclusions
[1] Avent RR, Alawady M. Bridge scour and substructure deterioration: case study. J
Scouring significantly affects the seismic performances of bridges. In Bridge Eng. 2005;10(3):247–54. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(1999)
4:4 (291).
this study, an integrated method that combined the concentrated plastic [2] Dong Y, Frangopol DM, Saydam D. Time-variant sustainability assessment of seis-
hinge (CPH) and the distributed plastic hinge (DPH) with a softened mically vulnerable bridges subjected to multiple hazards. Earthq Eng Struct D
elastic modulus was developed to consider nonlinear deformation in 2013;42(10):1451–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290010113.
[3] Wang Z, Dueñas-Osorio L, Padgett JE. Influence of scour effects on the seismic re-
static pushover analyses. A performance-based seismic assessment sponse of reinforced concrete bridges. Eng Struct 2014;76:202–14. https://doi.org/
method was utilized to determine the seismic performance of scoured 10.1016/S0141-0296(99)00071-1.
bridges. [4] Sung YC, Wang CY. A study on damage assessment of the scoured bridges. J Chin
Inst Eng 2013;36(8):994–1007. https://doi.org/10.1080/02533839.2004.9670925.
Numerical results demonstrated that the pushover curves obtained [5] Hung CC, Yau WG. Behavior of scoured bridge piers subjected to flood-induced
from the proposed method coincide well with those from the fiber loads. Eng Struct 2014;80:241–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(99)
element method. The initial lateral stiffness, yielding point, and ulti- 00071-1.
[6] Dicleli M. Integral abutment-backfill behavior on sand soil—Pushover analysis ap-
mate strength of the pushover curves for scoured bridges depend on the
proach. J Bridge Eng 2005;10(3):354–64. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-
scour depths and soil properties. For dense sand, the yield strength and 0702(1999) 4:4(291).
ultimate strength increased with the presence of scouring while the [7] Daniels J, Hughes D, Ramey GE, Hughes ML. Effects of bridge pile bent geometry
initial lateral stiffness decreased with the presence of scouring. For and levels of scour and P loads on bent pushover loads in extreme flood/scour
events. Pract Period Struct Des Constr 2007;12(2):122–34. https://doi.org/10.
loose sand, not only the initial lateral stiffness, but the yielding strength 1061/(ASCE)1084-0680(1996) 1:2(59).
and the ultimate strength decreased when the scour depth exceeded a [8] Pinho R, Casarotti C, Antoniou S. A comparison of single-run pushover analysis
critical value. These phenomena may be explained by the conservative techniques for seismic assessment of bridges. Earthq Eng Struct D
2007;36(10):1347–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290010113.
design of piles that provides sufficient stiffness to resist lateral loads [9] Aviram A, Mackie KR, Stojadinovic B. Effect of abutment modeling on the seismic
after scouring; however, the pile strength cannot well develop as ex- response of bridge structures. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 2008;7(4):395–402. https://doi.
pected for loose sand with significant scouring. org/10.1007/BF02857549.
[10] Paraskeva TS, Kappos AJ. Further development of a multimodal pushover analysis
Moreover, the seismic moment demands of piles increase with in- procedure for seismic assessment of bridges. Earthq Eng Struct D
creasing scour depth and the location of maximum moment varies with 2010;39(2):211–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290010113.
the scour depth. This implies the necessity of the DPHs in piles for [11] Kappos AJ, Sextos AG. Effect of foundation type and compliance on seismic re-
sponse of RC bridges. J Bridge Eng 2001;6(2):120–30. https://doi.org/10.1061/
nonlinear analyses. In addition, the failure mechanism transfers from (ASCE)1084 -0702(1999) 4:4(291).
the piers to the piles for scoured bridges with loose sand when the scour [12] Silva PF, Manzari MT. Nonlinear pushover analysis of bridge columns supported on
depth exceeds the critical value. Finally, the seismic performance index full-moment connection CISS piles on clays. Earthq Spectra 2008;24(3):751–74.
https://doi.org/10.1193/8755-2930-33.3.807.
increased with increasing scour depth before the scoured depth
[13] Kwon OS, Elnashai AS. Fragility analysis of a highway over-crossing bridge with
achieves a critical value for the dense sand soil type. For the loose sand consideration of soil–structure interactions. Struct Infrastruct E
soil type, the seismic performance index decreased with increasing 2010;6(1–2):159–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2014.897831.
scour depth when the failure mechanism transferred from the piers to [14] Alipour A, Shafei B, Shinozuka M. Reliability-based calibration of load and re-
sistance factors for design of RC bridges under multiple extreme events: scour and
the piles. While the scoured bridge may have better seismic perfor- earthquake. J Bridge Eng 2012;18(5):362–71. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
mance, it may suffer stability problems because of the larger transverse

9
L.-G. He, et al.
1084-0702 (1999) 4:4(291).
[15] Wang SC, Liu KY, Chen CH, Chang KC. Experimental investigation on seismic be-
havior of scoured bridge pier with pile foundation. Earthq Eng Struct D
2015;44(6):849–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290010113.
[16] Japan Road Association (JRA). Design specifications for highway bridges, Tokyo (in
Japanese); 1996.
[17] Ministry of Transportation and Communications (MOTC). Performance- based
seismic design specification for highway bridges (Draft). Taipei: MOTC (in Chinese);
2016.
[18] American Petroleum Institute. Recommended practice for planning, designing, and
constructing fixed offshore platforms; 2002.
[19] Sung YC, Liu KY, Su CK, Tsai IC, Chang KC. A study on pushover analyses of re-
inforced concrete columns. Struct Eng Mech 2005;21(1):35–52. 10.12989
/Sem.1997.5.4.451.
[20] Priestley MJN, Seible F, Calvi M. Seismic Design and Retrofit of Bridges. New York:
John Wiley & Sons; 1996.
[21] Chiou JS, Yang HH, Chen CH. Use of plastic hinge model in nonlinear pushover
analysis of a pile. J Geotech Geoenviron 2009;135(9):1341–6. https://doi.org/10.
1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1999) 125:7(543).
10
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110454
[22] Ko YY, Chiou JS, Tsai YC, Chen CH, Wang H, Wang CY. Evaluation of flood-resistant
capacity of scoured bridges. J Perform Constr Fac 2014;28(1):61–75. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(1998) 12:3(169).
[23] ATC-40. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Volume 1, Applied
Technology Council, California (in America); 1996.
[24] Commité European de Normalization. Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for
Earthquake Resistance - Part 2: Bridges. CEN Belgium; 2003.
[25] Kowalsky MJ. A displacement-based approach for the seismic design of continuous
concrete bridges. Earthq Eng Struct D 2002;31(3):719–47. https://doi.org/10.
1002/eqe.4290010113.
[26] Casarotti C, Pinho R. An adaptive capacity spectrum method for assessment of
bridges subjected to earthquake action. B Earthq Eng 2007;5:377–90. https://doi.
org/10.1023/A:1024847709545.
[27] Unger J, Hager WH. Down-flow and horseshoe vortex characteristics of sediment
embedded bridge piers. Exp Fluids 2007;42(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s003480050014.
[28] Song ST, Wang CY, Huang WH. Earthquake damage potential and critical scour
depth of bridges exposed to flood and seismic hazards under lateral seismic loads.
Earthq Eng Eng Vib 2015;14:579–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-015-0047-9.