applied
sciences
Article
Seismic Response Analysis of a Curved Bridge under
Near-Fault and Far-Field Ground Motions
Peng Su 1,2 , Xiaoyi Zhu 2, *, Yanjiang Chen 3 , Bing Xue 2 and Bing Zhang 2
Citation: Su, P.; Zhu, X.; Chen, Y.;
Xue, B.; Zhang, B. Seismic Response
Analysis of a Curved Bridge under
Near-Fault and Far-Field Ground
Motions. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
app12168349
Academic Editor: Guoshan Xu
Received: 2 August 2022
Accepted: 19 August 2022
Published: 21 August 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12168349
1 Earth Sciences and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210008, China
2 Institute of Earthquake Forecasting, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100036, China
3 Engineering and Structural Retrofit, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100024, China
* Correspondence: zxy_bj2008@126.com; Tel.: +86-151-1001-3007
Abstract: To study the influence of near-fault and far-field (FF) ground motions on a curved girder
bridge, a 1:10 scale curved bridge shaking table test model was constructed. Three types of ground
motions, namely, near-fault pulse (NP), near-fault non-pulse (NN), and FF ground motions, were
selected and employed in the test model. The test results indicated that the seismic response of
the curved bridge in the excitation of NP ground motion is significantly higher than that in the
excitation of NN and FF ground motions, and is destructive to the curved bridge. The displacement
of the curved bridge has spatial characteristics in the excitation of NP ground motions. The rotation
generated by the curved bridge is easy to cause bearing shedding or girder falling at the low pier.
The amplification of pier height increases the displacement response at the high pier.
Keywords: curved bridge; shaking table; near-fault ground motion; far-field ground motion; seismic
analysis
1. Introduction
A number of investigations have indicated that near-fault earthquakes around the
world have brought heavy losses to human life and property. Many earthquakes show
that near-fault earthquakes have a great impact on the response of building structures,
such as the Los Angeles Northridge earthquake in the USA in 1994, the Hyogo-Ken Nanbu
earthquake in Japan in 1995, and the Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan in 1999, all of which
caused great disasters and losses; consequently, near-fault earthquakes have attracted the
attention of many scholars [1–3]. In many near-fault earthquakes, near-fault pulse (NP)
ground motions have a significant velocity pulse and capacity for destruction, which result
in the damage of building structures [4–7].
To study the characteristics of near-fault earthquakes, researchers have artificially
synthesized NP ground motions. For example, Ghahari et al. [8] synthesized NP seismic
waves from long-period pulse and high-frequency non-pulse components by using the
moving average filtering method. The effectiveness of the method was verified using the
wavelet method, and it was applied to the seismic response analysis of engineering struc-
tures. Jian et al. [9] synthesized near-fault ground motions with local pulse characteristics
by using the S transform method, which proved that the synthesized near-fault ground
motions agree well with the parent ground motions and code for the seismic design of
buildings in China. Pitarka et al. [10] synthesized near-fault ground motions by using the
hybrid Green’s function, which can reflect the source, wave path, and local site, and verified
the effectiveness of the method by comparing the empirical formulas with the recorded
ground motions. Amiri et al. [11] used the continuous wavelet transform to extract the
pulse component and generated the non-pulse component through the wavelet-based
nonstationary model. Lastly, the discrete wavelet transform was used to reconstruct the
two components to synthesize NP ground motions, which were compared with actual
records to verify the accuracy of the method.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 2 of 13

Many researchers have used numerical analyses to study the seismic performance
of bridges, analyzed the influence laws of near-fault and far-field (FF) ground motions,
and achieved considerable research results. For instance, Li et al. [12] analyzed a simply
supported bridge with finite element software. The results showed that the bearing is
more likely to be damaged in the excitation of NP ground motions, and the impact of
NP ground motions on the bridge pier displacement is more significant than that of FF
ground motions. Cai et al. [13] established a new composite tall pier bridge model by
using midas Civil 2019 finite element software and found that the seismic performances of
the new composite bridge for NP ground motion were significantly smaller than those of
traditional bridges, indicating better seismic resilience. Mohseni et al. [14] established a
reinforced arch bridge finite element model, discussed the seismic response characteristics
for near-fault and FF ground motions, and determined that the response of the bridge
structure was greater under NP ground motion. Li et al. [15] conducted a numerical analysis
on a super-span cable-stayed bridge and found that a near-fault earthquake was highly
unfavorable to the structure, especially the high-frequency components of NP ground
motion. Zheng et al. [16] established an asymmetrical suspension bridge model and found
that NP ground motion is considerably unfavorable to the structure.
With the improvement of shaking table equipment and experimental technology, many
scholars have carried out experimental research on the seismic performance of bridges
under near-fault earthquakes. Specifically, Sideris et al. [17] established a novel segmental
single-span simply supported beam bridge model with a scale of 1:2.39 and analyzed
the structural response characteristics under near-fault and FF ground motions. They
found that structural displacement increases significantly in the excitation of near-fault
ground motion, and vertical seismic action is obvious. Liu et al. [18] analyzed the seismic
characteristics of a long-span steel box arch bridge for near-fault spatial seismic excitation
by a shaking table test. The study showed that the structural response is significantly
affected by the spatial change in near-fault ground motions and should be taken seriously.
Chen et al. [19] analyzed the seismic response law of a tall pier bridge in the excitation
of NP ground motions with different pulse periods and numbers through shaking table
tests. They determined that the seismic fragility of the pier is correlated with pulse period
and pier height, while the pulse number is not obvious. Xie et al. [20] established a soil–
cable-stayed bridge model with a similarity ratio of 1:70, analyzed the structural response
characteristics in the excitation of near-fault and FF ground motions, and compared the
model with numerical methods. They found that NP ground motions can increase the
structural displacement and the failure probability of the bridge tower. Lin et al. [21]
established a 1/10-scale model of three-span steel–concrete composite rigid-frame bridge
and carried out a series of shaking table experiments. They identified that NP ground
motions can increase structural response, and numerical analysis proved that the steel–
concrete composite rigid-frame bridge has enhanced seismic performance. Jiao et al. [22]
established a 1:25 curved bridge collision model, analyzed the collision characteristics
of the curved bridge under NP, near-fault non-pulse (NN), and FF ground motions, and
found that the collision response under NP ground motions was more significant and more
unfavorable to the curved bridge.
According to the above literature, the seismic response of bridges is greatly affected
by near-fault and FF ground motions. At present, most studies on curved bridges with
longitudinal slopes used numerical analyses. Thus, the authors conduct a shaking table
test on a 5% longitudinal slope curved bridge with a ratio of 1:10. The main purpose of this
paper is to study the seismic performance of continuous curved bridges in excitations of
near-fault and FF ground motions by analyzing the dynamic characteristics, mid-span dis-
placement, pier displacement, beam end displacement, and bearing deformation; the results
can provide some guidance and data reference for the seismic analysis of curved bridges.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 13

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 results can provide some guidance and data reference for the seismic analysis of curved
3 of 13
bridges.

2. Design of Shaking Table Test Model

2. Design of Shaking Table Test Model
2.1. Overview of the Prototype Bridge
2.1. Overview of the Prototype Bridge
TheTheresearch
researchobject
objectisisaacontinuous
continuouscurved
curved bridge
bridge with three spans;
with three spans; each
eachspan
spanisis40
40m,
m,and
andthethelongitudinal
longitudinalslopeslopeisis5%.
5%. The
The radius
radius of curvature is 50 m. The main girderis is
of curvature is 50 m. The main girder
composed of a single-box, two-chamber
composed of a single-box, two-chamber reinforced reinforced concrete
concrete girder,
girder,which
which uses
uses concrete
concrete
with a strength of C50. The girder height is 2 m, the girder bottom
with a strength of C50. The girder height is 2 m, the girder bottom width is 7.5 m, the width is 7.5 m,flange
the
flange
widthwidth
is 2.25ism,
2.25 m,the
and andwebthe height
web height
is 1.55ism 1.55 m (Figure
(Figure 1a).substructure
1a). The The substructure
consistsconsists
of four
ofdouble-column
four double-column piers, the pier heights are 15, 17, 19, and 21 m, and
piers, the pier heights are 15, 17, 19, and 21 m, and the pier diameter the pier diam- is
eter
1.5 is
m.1.5
The m.pier
Thetoppier top is equipped
is equipped with a capwithbeam,a capwhich
beam,uses
which uses with
concrete concrete with aof
a strength
strength of C30 and the elastic modulus is
4 3.45 × 10 4 MPa. The reinforcement rate of the
C30 and the elastic modulus is 3.45 × 10 MPa. The reinforcement rate of the longitudinal
longitudinal
reinforcement reinforcement
is 3.554%, and is 3.554%, and the reinforcement
the reinforcement rate of is
rate of the stirrup the stirrup is 2.264%.
2.264%.
120
1200
10
15

200 10 10 20 20 20 20 10

5
45
0.5
50 0.5

18

19
200
20
225 50 50

0.5
155
750 0.5
81.5

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure1. 1.
Section parameters
Section of main
parameters girder
of main (unit:(unit:
girder cm): (a)
cm):Girder dimensions
(a) Girder of the reinforced
dimensions con-
of the reinforced
crete girder; (b) Girder dimensions of the steel girder.
concrete girder; (b) Girder dimensions of the steel girder.

2.2.
2.2. Design
Design of of Similarity
Similarity Ratio
Ratio
In accordance
In accordance with the with theprinciple
principle of of structural similarity
similarity[23][23]and
andininconsideration
considerationofof the
theoutput
output capacity
capacity (maximum
(maximum acceleration,
acceleration, 1.51.5
g) g)
andandsize
size × ×1 1m)m)ofofthe
(1 (1 theshaking
shaking table, the
table,
thescale
scale ofof
thethe
curved
curvedbridge
bridgemodel
model is regarded
is regardedas 1:10 andand
as 1:10 thethe
equivalent
equivalent mass density
mass is set
density
is to
set2.toTo2.make
To make the test
the model comparable
test model comparable to the
toprototype bridge,
the prototype the shaking
bridge, table table
the shaking model
model is made of the same materials as the prototype; i.e., the material properties are re-as
is made of the same materials as the prototype; i.e., the material properties are regarded
1, which
garded can
as 1, ensure
which canthe consistency
ensure between between
the consistency the shaking the table
shakingmodel
table and the prototype,
model and the
prototype, and both will be destroyed at the same time. When the shaking tableismodel
and both will be destroyed at the same time. When the shaking table model damaged,is
the prototype
damaged, bridge will
the prototype also be
bridge willdamaged. On the basis
also be damaged. On ofthethe known
basis of thesimilar
known parameters,
similar
the similarthe
parameters, parameters of other physics
similar parameters of othercan be determined.
physics Table 1 shows
can be determined. Table 1the similarity
shows the
relationship between each physical quantity.
similarity relationship between each physical quantity.
Table 1. Similarity relation of the curve bridge test model.
Table 1. Similarity relation of the curve bridge test model.
Parameter Type Physical Quantity Similarity Similarity Coefficient
Parameter Type Physical Quantity Similarity Similarity Coefficient
Geometric prop- Size, l Size, l Sl Sl 0.1
0.1
Geometric properties
Displacement, x S x = Sl 0.1
erties Displacement, x S x = Sl 0.1
Strain, ε Sε
Material Strain, ε Sε 11
Elastic modulus, E
Material SE 1
properties Elastic SE
Equivalent mass density, ρe modulus, E Sρe 12
properties ρp Sρ
Time,Equivalent
t mass density, e
St = Sl Sρe /SE e 2
0.141
Dynamic
Frequency, f Time, t S f = 1/SS tt = S l S ρ / S E e 0.141
7.071
characteristics DynamicAcceleration, a Frequency, f S a = S E S ρ eS f = 1 / S t 5
7.071
characteristics S = S S
Acceleration, a a E ρ e 5
2.3. Design of the Curved Bridge Test Model
2.3. Design of the Curved
In previous Bridge Test
earthquakes, theModel
main girder was rarely damaged and usually showed
In previous
rigidity, earthquakes,
so a steel girder was theused
maininstead
girder of
wasanrarely damaged
RC girder (Figureand1b).
usually showed
Owing to the
rigidity,
qualityso a steel girder
difference was the
between usedtwoinstead of an artificial
materials, RC girder (Figure
mass 1b). i.e.,
is used; Owing to the
a total qual-
of 4.3 tons
ityofdifference
artificial mass is arranged
between the twoinmaterials,
the shaking table model.
artificial The
mass is piers
used; area double-column
i.e., total of 4.3 tonspiers,
of
which achieve
artificial mass is aarranged
5% longitudinal slope oftable
in the shaking the curved
model.bridge by setting
The piers different pier piers,
are double-column heights.
The piers are numbered from pier 1 to pier 4, are arranged symmetrically, and their heights
are 1.5, 1.7, 1.9, and 2.1 m (Figure 2a). The longitudinal reinforcement and stirrup adopt the
same reinforcement ratio as the prototype structure: the longitudinal reinforcement adopts
 which achieve a 5% longitudinal slope of the curved bridge by setting different pie
heights. The piers are numbered from pier 1 to pier 4, are arranged symmetrically, an
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 their heights are 1.5, 1.7, 1.9, and 2.1 m (Figure 2a). The longitudinal reinforcement 4 of 13 an
stirrup adopt the same reinforcement ratio as the prototype structure: the longitudina
reinforcement adopts an HRB335-grade reinforcement with a diameter of 10 mm, the sp
ral stirrup
an HRB335-grade adopts an R235-grade
reinforcement reinforcement
with a diameter withthe
of 10 mm, a diameter of 6 mm,
spiral stirrup adoptsandan the spacin
between the stirrups is 5 cm. The 28-day average compressive
R235-grade reinforcement with a diameter of 6 mm, and the spacing between the stirrups strength of concrete mate
rial is determined to be 35.16 MPa. Pier 2 is installed
is 5 cm. The 28-day average compressive strength of concrete material is determined to with fixed pot bearing
(GPZ(II)0.8MN-GD),
be 35.16 MPa. Pier 2 is installed and thefixed
with other
pot piers are (GPZ(II)0.8MN-GD),
bearings installed with sliding and pot
the bearing
(GPZ(II)0.8MN-DX). The parameter of the bearings is shown in
other piers are installed with sliding pot bearings (GPZ(II)0.8MN-DX). The parameter of Figure 3. To prevent th
impact
the bearings of concrete
is shown cracking
in Figure 3. Tobetween
prevent thethe concrete
impact ofplatform
concreteand the shaking
cracking between table cause
the concrete platform and the shaking table caused by vibration on the test results, thetable wit
by vibration on the test results, the concrete platform is fixed on the shaking
channel steel
concrete platform andonh the
is fixed bolts (Figuretable
shaking 4e). with
The installed curved
channel steel andbridge
h boltsshaking
(Figuretable
4e). model i
shown in Figure 4a.
The installed curved bridge shaking table model is shown in Figure 4a.

1200
400 400 400
5%
Main girder
15

210
15

190
170
150

15 15
Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4
Z

X
Table A Table B Table C Table D
(a)
Fixed pot
bearing Sliding pot bearing

Pier 3 Sliding pot

Pier 2 centerline bearing
Sliding pot centerline R500
bearing

Pier 4
Pier 1
centerline
centerline
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13
(b)
Figureof
Figure 2. Layout 2. the
Layout of the
bridge bridge
model model
(Unit: cm):(Unit: cm):
(a) Side (a) Side
view; view;
(b) Plan (b) Plan view.
view.

cover plate PTFE plate A-A steel plate

A-A
cover plate
75
75

B B
B B

rubber plate rubber plate

B-B Bottom bearing
Bottom bearing 250 B-B
315
210 220
displacement direction
210/2
250/2

280/2
320/2

A A A A
250/2
210/2

230/2
265/2

210 180
250 265

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure3.3.Details
Detailsof
ofbearing
bearingparameters
parameters(unit:
(unit:mm):
mm):(a)
(a)Fixed
Fixedpot
potbearing;
bearing;(b)
(b)Sliding
Slidingpot
potbearing.
bearing.
 230/2
250/
210/

265/2
displ
210 180
250 265
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 5 of 13
(a) (b)
Figure 3. Details of bearing parameters (unit: mm): (a) Fixed pot bearing; (b) Sliding pot bearing.

(a)

(b) (c) (d) (e)

Figure 4. Photograph for curved bridge test model: (a) Assembled bridge model; (b) Artificial
Figure 4. Photograph for curved bridge test model: (a) Assembled bridge model; (b) Artificial masses;
masses; (c) Sliding pot bearing; (d) Fixed pot bearing; (e) Piers fixed to the shaking table.
(c) Sliding pot bearing; (d) Fixed pot bearing; (e) Piers fixed to the shaking table.

3. Design
3. of Shaking
Design of Shaking Table
Table Tests
Tests
3.1. Sensor Arrangement
This test is carried out using a shaking table array system, and the test instruments
mainly include acceleration (measuring range, ±5 g; accuracy, 0.01 g), displacement (mea-
suring range, ±200 mm, accuracy, 0.4 mm), and pull-wire displacement (measuring range,
0~500 mm, accuracy, 0.01 mm) sensors. The acceleration and displacement sensors are
arranged at the fulcrum and mid-span of the main girder, as well as the roof and bottom of
the pier, to record the acceleration and displacement at the crucial positions of the main
girder and piers. The bridge model is equipped with 16 acceleration and 16 displacement
sensors, and 6 pull-wire displacement meters are arranged at the unidirectional sliding pot
bearings to record the deformation of the bearings. The signals of all sensors are collected
using an IMC dynamic system with a sampling frequency of 1000 Hz.

3.2. Selection of Seismic Waves

NP seismic waves characteristically have significant velocity pulses and high ampli-
tudes, which are significantly destructive to building structures. To avoid different seismic
mechanisms affecting the analysis’ results, seismic waves in the same earthquake are se-
lected from the PEER ground motion database [24]. The Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake in
1999, with a magnitude of Mw = 7.6, was located on a north–south directional thrust fault.
The source was on the east side of the Chelongpu fault, creating an 80 km surface rupture
zone. A total of 21 seismic waves in three groups of NP, NN, and FF ground motions are
selected from the Chi-Chi earthquake as test seismic waves. The parameters of selected
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 6 of 13

seismic waves are presented in Table 2. Figure 5 shows the time histories of typical NP, NN,
and FF seismic waves, for which the NF seismic records have significant velocity pulses.
Table 2. Parameters of selected seismic waves.

PGA (g)
Site NGA NO. Station Name Drup (km) Tp (s)
EW NS
1489 TCU049 3.76 10.22 0.28 0.24
1491 TCU051 7.64 10.381 0.16 0.24
1492 TCU052 0.66 11.956 0.36 0.45
NF ground motions 1510 TCU075 0.89 4.998 0.33 0.26
1511 TCU076 2.74 4.732 0.34 0.43
1515 TCU082 5.16 8.099 0.23 0.19
1529 TCU102 1.49 9.632 0.30 0.17
1488 TCU048 13.53 - 0.12 0.18
1490 TCU050 9.49 - 0.15 0.13
1494 TCU054 5.28 - 0.15 0.19
NN ground motions 1497 TCU057 11.83 - 0.11 0.1
1499 TCU060 8.51 - 0.2 0.1
1527 TCU100 11.37 - 0.11 0.11
1533 TCU106 14.97 - 0.16 0.12
1221 CHY065 82.78 - 0.12 0.09
1325 ILA031 83.31 - 0.06 0.08
1340 ILA052 82.74 - 0.03 0.04
FF ground motions 1404 PNG 110.3 - 0.03 0.03
1458 TAP098 106.11 - 0.06 0.06
1572
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW TTN018 71.72 - 0.04 0.027 of 13
1468 TCU010 82.27 - 0.09 0.07

NP ground motion NN ground motion FF ground motion

Displacement(cm) Velocity(cm/s) Acceleration(g)

0.38 0.2 0.16

Displacement(cm) Velocity(cm/s) Acceleration(g)

Displacement(cm) Velocity(cm/s) Acceleration(g)

EW−direction EW−direction EW−direction

NS−direction NS−direction NS−direction

0 0 0

-0.38 -0.2 -0.16

0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
100 50 20
EW−direction EW−direction EW−direction
NS−direction NS−direction NS−direction

0 0 0

-100 -50 -20

0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
120 50 15 EW−direction
EW−direction EW−direction
NS−direction
NS−direction NS−direction
0 0 0

-120 -50 -15

0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
T(s) T(s) T(s)
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 5. Time histories of typical seismic waves: (a) TCU102; (b) TCU106; (c) CHY065.
Figure 5. Time histories of typical seismic waves: (a) TCU102; (b) TCU106; (c) CHY065.

To analyze
To analyzethe
thespectral
spectralcharacteristics
characteristicsofofnear-fault
near-faultand
andFFFF ground
ground motions,
motions, thethe ac-
accel-
celeration
eration response
response spectrum
spectrum of of selected
selected seismic
seismic wavesisiscalculated,
waves calculated,and
andthe
thecurves
curvesofof the
the
acceleration response
acceleration response spectrum
spectrum in in each
each group
group are
are obtained.
obtained. Given
Given two
two mutually
mutually perpen-
perpen-
dicular components
dicular components inin seismic
seismic waves,
waves, the
the acceleration
acceleration spectra
spectra of
of EW
EW and
and NS
NS component
component
seismic waves are provided in Figure 6. For the EW component, the acceleration
seismic waves are provided in Figure 6. For the EW component, the acceleration response response
spectrum of NFNF seismic
seismic waves
waves hashas the
the largest
largest spectral
spectral value,
value, and the
the FF
FF seismic
seismic waves
waves
the smallest
have the smallest spectral
spectral value.
value. For the NS component, when the period value of the the
system is greater than 1.1 s, the acceleration spectrum of NP seismic waves is the largest.
NP seismic waves have obvious long-period characteristics.

1.2 0.8
NP NP
NN 0.7 NN
1 FF FF
(g)

0.6
)
 To analyze the spectral characteristics of near-fault and FF ground motions, the ac-
celeration response spectrum of selected seismic waves is calculated, and the curves of the
acceleration response spectrum in each group are obtained. Given two mutually perpen-
dicular components in seismic waves, the acceleration spectra of EW and NS component
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 seismic waves are provided in Figure 6. For the EW component, the acceleration response 7 of 13
spectrum of NF seismic waves has the largest spectral value, and the FF seismic waves
have the smallest spectral value. For the NS component, when the period value of the
systemisisgreater
system greaterthan
than1.1
1.1s,s,the
theacceleration
accelerationspectrum
spectrumofofNPNPseismic
seismic waves
waves is
is the
the largest.
largest.
NPseismic
NP seismicwaves
waveshave
haveobvious
obviouslong-period
long-periodcharacteristics.
characteristics.

1.2 0.8
NP NP
NN 0.7 NN
1 FF FF

Acceleration Spectrum(g)
0.6
Acceleration Spectrum(g)

0.8
0.5

0.6 0.4

0.3
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.1

0 0
0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15
Period(s) Period(s)

(a) (b)
Figure6.6.Acceleration
Figure Accelerationspectrum
spectrumofofselected seismic
selectedggseismic waves
waves. (a). (a) Acceleration
Acceleration response
response spectrum
spectrum of
of the EW component; (b) Acceleration response spectrum of the NS component.
the EW component; (b) Acceleration response spectrum of the NS component.

3.3.Design
3.3. DesignofofTest
TestCases
Cases
Theprototype
The prototypebridgebridgeisisassumed
assumedto tobe
belocated
locatedin inaasite
sitecategory
categoryof ofclass
classII,
II,aaseismic
seismic
fortificationintensity
fortification intensityofof degree
degree VII.
VII. TheThe China
China Seismic
Seismic Design
Design CodeCode
JTG/T JTG/T B 02-01-2008
B 02-01-2008 [25]
stipulates that the
[25] stipulates thatPGA is 0.1isg.0.1
the PGA Theg. seismic records
The seismic contain
records two two
contain mutually
mutuallyperpendicular
perpendic-
components.
ular components.In accordance with the
In accordance withsimilar relationship
the similar in Table
relationship in 1, the EW
Table component
1, the EW compo- is
scaled
nent istoscaled
0.5 g. Meanwhile, the NS component
to 0.5 g. Meanwhile, is scaled according
the NS component is scaledtoaccording
the actualtoratio
the of the
actual
two
ratiocomponents. The influenceThe
of the two components. of the input direction
influence of the inputof the seismicof
direction wave on the structure
the seismic wave on
response is also considered. In Case 1, when the connecting direction of
the structure response is also considered. In Case 1, when the connecting direction of the the two abutments
istwo
theabutments
same as the is EW-direction,
the same as the XPEW-direction,
and XP + YS are usedXto
XP and P +represent
YS are used unidirectional
to representand uni-
bidirectional seismic inputs, respectively. In Case 2, when
directional and bidirectional seismic inputs, respectively. In Case 2, when the the connecting direction
connectingof
the two abutments is the same as the NS-direction, YP and XS + YP are used to represent
unidirectional and bidirectional seismic inputs, respectively.

4. Test Results
4.1. Dynamic Characteristic Analysis
White noise from 0.1 Hz to 50 Hz is input along the Xp-direction and Yp-direction
in the curved bridge test model, and stochastic subspace identification is used to identify
the dynamic characteristics of the curved bridge model. Figure 7 shows that the first
four-order modal information of the bridge model is identified, and the first fourth-order
frequencies are 2.55, 3.31, 5.70, and 13.52 Hz, respectively. The first-order mode shape
of the bridge model is that the full bridge moves in the connection direction of the two
abutments, the second- and fourth-order mode shapes are transversely symmetric with the
axis of symmetry, and the third-order mode shape is transversely antisymmetric vibration.
In addition, there were no obvious cracks and damages in the bridge model during the test,
and no significant changes in the dynamic characteristics, indicating that the cumulative
damage of the structure was small, and it is still in the elastic stage, which has little influence
on the seismic performance of the structure.

4.2. Displacement of Mid-Span

Figure 8 shows the mid-span displacement of the curved bridge in the excitation of
near-fault and FF ground motions. When the connecting direction of the two abutments is
the same as the EW-direction, the second span produces the largest mid-span displacement
in the excitation of XP , while the third span has the smallest mid-span displacement. Given
that fixed pot bearings are arranged at pier 2, the curved bridge rotates in the plane while
moving horizontally, and the seismic force increases the displacement at the first mid-span
through the fixed pot bearings. The mid-span displacement of the curved bridge in the
 represent unidirectional and bidirectional seismic inputs, respectively.

4. Test Results
4.1. Dynamic Characteristic Analysis
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 White noise from 0.1 Hz to 50 Hz is input along the Xp-direction and Yp-direction in
8 of 13
the curved bridge test model, and stochastic subspace identification is used to identify the
dynamic characteristics of the curved bridge model. Figure 7 shows that the first four-
order modal
excitation information
of NP of the bridge
and NN ground motionsmodel is identified,
increases by 82.4% and the firstdisplacement)
(tangential fourth-order and fre-
quencies are 2.55, 3.31, 5.70, and 13.52 Hz, respectively. The first-order
22.8% (radial displacement) compared with that in the excitation of FF ground motions. mode shape of the
bridge model is that the full bridge moves in the connection direction
When the NP ground motion is excited by XP + YS , the tangential mid-span displacement of the two abut-
ments,
is the second-
significant in the and
first fourth-order
span. Meanwhile,mode under
shapesthe areNN
transversely symmetric
and FF ground with the
motions, the
axis of symmetry,
displacement andinthe
is larger thethird-order
third span. mode shapeindicates
This result is transversely
that theantisymmetric vibra-
bidirectional seismic
tion. In addition,
excitation there were
of NP seismic recordsno stimulates
obvious cracks and damages
the in-plane in the
rotations bridge
of the bridgemodel during
model. The
mid-span displacement of the curved bridge for NP and NN ground motions increasescu-
the test, and no significant changes in the dynamic characteristics, indicating that the by
mulative
135.6% damage of
(tangential the structureand
displacement) was small,
17.9% and it is still
(tangential in the elastic
displacement) stage, which
compared has
with that
little
for FFinfluence on the seismic performance of the structure.
ground motions.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 7. Mode shapes of the shaking table test model: (a) First mode, f1 = 2.55 Hz; (b) Second mode,
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
  Figure 7. Mode shapes of the shaking table test model: (a) First mode, f1 = 2.55 Hz; (b) Second9 mode,
of  13 
f2 = 3.31 Hz; (c) First mode, f3 = 5.70 Hz; (d) First mode, f4 = 13.52 Hz.
f2 = 3.31 Hz; (c) First mode, f3 = 5.70 Hz; (d) First mode, f4 = 13.52 Hz.

4.2. Displacement of Mid-Span Bidirectional input(Xp+Ys)

Unidirectional input(Xp) Unidirectional input(Xp) Bidirectional input(Xp+Ys)
Tangential displacement(mm)

Tangential displacement(mm)

12
16 NP Figure 8 shows the mid-span 20 displacement of the curved
6 NP bridge in the excitationNN NPof Radial displacement(mm)
Radial displacement(mm)

NP
NN NN NN FF
near-fault and FF ground FFmotions. When the connecting
FF FF direction of the two abutments
12 15
is the
4 same as the EW-direction, the second span produces the 8largest mid-span displace-

8 ment in the excitation of XP, while 10 the third span has the smallest mid-span displacement.
Given2 that fixed pot bearings are arranged at pier 2, the curved4bridge rotates in the plane
4 while moving horizontally, and the 5 seismic force increases the displacement at the first
mid-span
0
through the fixed pot bearings. The mid-span displacement 0
of the curved bridge
0 1st span 2nd span 3rd span   0 1st span 2nd span 3rd span  
1st span 2nd span 3rd span   in the excitation of NP and NN ground 1st span motions 3rd span  by 82.4%
2nd span increases (tangential displace-
ment) and 22.8% (radial displacement) (a)  compared with that in the excitation of FF ground
Bidirectional input(Yp) Bidirectional input(Yp)
Unidirectional  input(Yp) motions. When the NP ground motion is excited by XP + YS, the tangential mid-span dis-
Bidirectional input(Xs+Yp)
15 15
Tangential displacement(mm)

12 NP 15
Radial displacement(mm)

NP
NN placement is significant in NN the first span. Meanwhile, under the NN and FF ground mo-
NP
Radial displacement(mm)

NP
NN
Radial displacement(mm)

NN
FF FF FF FF
tions, the displacement is larger in the third span. This result indicates that the bidirec-
8 10
tional 10
seismic excitation of NP seismic records stimulates the 10 in-plane rotations of the

bridge model. The mid-span displacement of the curved bridge for NP and NN ground
4 motions
5 increases by 135.6% (tangential5 displacement) and 17.9% 5 (tangential displace-
ment) compared with that for FF ground motions.
0 0 0 0
1st span 2nd span 3rd span   1st span 2nd span 3rd span   1st span 2nd span 3rd span  
1st span 2nd span 3rd span  
(b) 
Figure 8. Mid‐span displacement response in the excitation of near‐fault and FF ground motions: 
Figure 8. Mid-span displacement response in the excitation of near-fault and FF ground motions:
(a) Mid‐span displacement response in case 1; (b) Mid‐span displacement response in case 2. 
(a) Mid-span displacement response in case 1; (b) Mid-span displacement response in case 2.

When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the NS‐direction, 
When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the NS-direction,
the mid‐span displacements of the third span in the excitation of Y
the mid-span displacements of the third span in the excitation of P and XS + YP are larger 
YP and XS + YP are
than those of the first span. The seismic input in the transverse bridge direction (Y‐direc‐
larger than those of the first span. The seismic input in the transverse bridge direction
tion) makes the curved bridge mainly move horizontally, resulting in a smaller plane ro‐
(Y-direction) makes the curved bridge mainly move horizontally, resulting in a smaller
tation. rotation.
plane Compared  with  the with
Compared mid‐span  displacement 
the mid-span of  the  curved 
displacement of thebridge 
curvedfor  FF  ground 
bridge for FF
motions,  the  mid‐span  displacement  in  the  excitation  of  YP  is  increased  by  112.9%  and 
29.6% (tangential displacement) for NP and NN ground motions, respectively; in the ex‐
citation of XS  + YP, the mid‐span displacement increases by 90.6% and 17.1% (tangential 
displacement), respectively. 
When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the EW‐direction, 
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 9 of 13

ground motions, the mid-span displacement in the excitation of YP is increased by 112.9%

and 29.6% (tangential displacement) for NP and NN ground motions, respectively; in the
excitation of XS + YP , the mid-span displacement increases by 90.6% and 17.1% (tangential
displacement), respectively.
When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the EW-direction,
the motion state of the main girder has a spatial effect due to the excitation of ground
motions. In the excitation of XP , the curved bridge generates rotation in the plane; in
the excitation of XP + YS , especially the NP ground motion excitation, the curved bridge
rotation in the plane can also be stimulated. When the connecting direction of the two
abutments is the same as the NS-direction, the whole curved bridge is mainly translational,
indicating that the motion state of the main girder is related to the excitation mode of the
seismic waves. The mid-span displacement in the excitation of NP and NN ground motions
increases significantly. Particularly, it increases the most in the excitation of NP ground
motions, implying that the NP ground motions are more destructive.

4.3. Displacement of Beam End

Given that the tops of piers 1, 3, and 4 are installed with a unidirectional sliding
pot bearing, the bearing only produces tangential relative displacement, so the tangential
displacement of the beam end is discussed in this part. Table 3 shows the beam end
displacement of the curved bridge in the excitation of near-fault and FF ground motions.
The beam end displacement is the largest in the excitation of NP ground motions and the
smallest in the excitation of FF ground motions.
Table 3. Peak value of beam end displacement (mm).

XP -Directional Excitation XP + YS -Directional Excitation YP -Directional Excitation XS + YP -Directional Excitation

Position
NP NN FF NP NN FF NP NN FF NP NN FF
1# beam end 11.58 6.51 6.38 15.94 8.30 7.06 8.23 5.16 4.68 11.62 7.54 7.16
4# beam end 10.05 5.55 5.43 13.10 9.61 8.97 8.99 7.29 6.60 12.43 9.35 8.33

When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the EW-direction,
due to the rotation of the curved bridge in the excitation of XP , the first beam end has a
large displacement. The beam end displacement in the excitation of NP and NN ground
motions is 1.85 and 1.02 times that in the excitation of FF ground motions, respectively. In
the excitation of XP + YS , the curved bridge rotates significantly in the excitation of NP
ground motions, resulting in a large displacement at the first beam end. In the excitation of
NF and FF ground motions, the displacement of the fourth beam end is significant. The
displacement of beam end in the excitation of NP and NN ground motions is 2.26 and
1.18 times that in the excitation of FF ground motions, respectively.
When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the NS-direction,
the curved bridge produces a small rotation in the plane, and the whole bridge model
is mainly translational. Owing to the amplification effect of pier height, the beam end
displacement at pier 4 is increased. In the excitation of YP , the beam end displacement
for NP and NN ground motions is 1.76 and 1.10 times that for FF ground motions. In the
excitation of XS + YP , the beam end displacement for NP and NN ground motions is 1.62
and 1.12 times that under FF ground motions, respectively.
The analysis shows that the motion state of the curved bridge affects its beam end
displacement. Owing to the rotation generated by the curved bridge, the beam end of
the curved bridge produces a large displacement at the lower pier, which increases the
risk of the beam falling and a collision between the beam end and abutment. Anti-falling
and anti-collision measures should be taken to reduce the damage caused by NP ground
motions on curved bridges.

4.4. Deformation of Bearing

Figure 9 illustrates that the bearing deformation in the excitation of NP ground motions
is the largest. When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the EW-
 end
4# beam
10.05 5.55 5.43 13.10 9.61 8.97 8.99 7.29 6.60 12.43 9.35 8.33
end

4.4. Deformation of Bearing

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 10 of 13
Figure 9 illustrates that the bearing deformation in the excitation of NP ground mo-
tions is the largest. When the connecting direction of the two abutments is the same as the
EW-direction (Figure 9a), the rotation generated by the curved bridge in the excitation of
direction (Figure 9a), the rotation generated by the curved bridge in the excitation of X
XP makes the bearing deformation of pier 1 larger. Compared with FF ground motions,P
makes the bearing deformation of pier 1 larger. Compared with FF ground motions, NP
NP and NN ground motions increase by 185.5% and 18.0%, respectively. In the excitation
and NN ground motions increase by 185.5% and 18.0%, respectively. In the excitation of XP
of XP + YS, the bearing deformation of pier 1 is the largest under NP ground motion exci-
+ YS , the bearing deformation of pier 1 is the largest under NP ground motion excitation,
tation, while the bearing deformation is the largest at pier 4 under NF and FF ground
while the bearing deformation is the largest at pier 4 under NF and FF ground motion
motion excitation.
excitation. The is
The reason reason is that
that the the curved
curved bridge rotates
bridge rotates under
under the XP +the
YSXexcitation
P + YS excitation
of NP
of
ground motions, and it mainly moves within the plane under the excitation of NN andNN
NP ground motions, and it mainly moves within the plane under the excitation of FF
and
groundFF motions.
ground motions.
ComparedCompared with motion
with FF ground FF ground motion
excitation, NPexcitation, NP and
and NN ground NN
motion
ground motion
excitations excitations
increase increase
by 140.1% by 140.1%
and 20.7%, and 20.7%, respectively.
respectively.

Unidirectional input(Xp) Bidirectional input(Xp+Ys)

Bearing displacement(mm)
16
Bearing displacement(mm)

NP 20
NP
NN NN
12 FF 15 FF

8 10

4 5
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13
0 0
1#A 1#B 3#A 3#B 4#A 4#B 1#A 1#B 3#A 3#B 4#A 4#B

(a)

Unidirectional input(Yp) Bidirectional input(Xs+Yp)

Bearing displacement(mm)

12 16
Bearing displacement(mm)

NP NP
NN NN
FF FF
12
8
8
4
4

0 0
1#A 1#B 3#A 3#B 4#A 4#B 1#A 1#B 3#A 3#B 4#A 4#B
(b)
Figure
Figure 9.
9. Bearing
Bearing deformation:
deformation: (a)
(a) Bearing
Bearing deformation
deformation in
in case
case 1;
1; (b)
(b) Bearing
Bearing deformation
deformation in
in case
case 2.
2.

When
When the the connecting
connecting direction
direction of
of the
the two
two abutments
abutments is is the
the same
same asas the
the NS-direction
NS-direction
(Figure 9b), the curved bridge is mainly translational. The higher the
(Figure 9b), the curved bridge is mainly translational. The higher the pier is, thepier is, the greater
greater the
the amplifying
amplifying effect
effect of bearing
of bearing deformation
deformation is, resulting
is, resulting in theinmaximum
the maximumbearingbearing defor-
deformation
mation
at pier 4.atCompared
pier 4. Compared with FFmotion
with FF ground ground motion excitation,
excitation, NP and NNNP and NN
seismic seismic
records rec-
increase
ords increase
by 81.0% and by 81.0%
20.4%, and 20.4%,under
respectively, respectively, under seismic
unidirectional unidirectional seismic
excitation and by excitation
142.0%
and by 142.0%
33.8%, and 33.8%,
respectively, respectively,
under under
bidirectional bidirectional
seismic seismic excitation.
excitation.
In summary, bearing deformation is closely related to the motion state of the curved
bridge. Owing
Owing to the
the rotation
rotation of the curved
curved bridge, the bearings at the lower lower pier produce
produce
a large deformation, which increases the risk of bearing shedding.

4.5. Displacement
4.5. Displacement of
of Pier
Pier
As illustrated
As illustrated in
in Figure
Figure 10,
10, the
the pier
pier of
of the
the curved
curved bridge
bridge has
has the
the largest
largest displacement
displacement
under NP ground motion excitation and the smallest displacement
under NP ground motion excitation and the smallest displacement under FF ground under FF ground
mo-
motion
tion excitation.
excitation. Thedisplacement
The pier pier displacement
under under unidirectional
unidirectional excitation
excitation (XP) of NP(XPand
) of NN
NP
and NN ground motions is 1.83 and 1.19 times that of FF ground motions,
ground motions is 1.83 and 1.19 times that of FF ground motions, respectively. Mean- respectively.
Meanwhile,
while, thedisplacement
the pier pier displacement
under under bidirectional
bidirectional seismicseismic excitation
excitation (XP + YS(X + Yand
) ofP NP S ) ofNN
NP
and NN ground motions is 2.39 and 1.15 times that of FF ground motions,
ground motions is 2.39 and 1.15 times that of FF ground motions, respectively. The pier respectively.
The pier displacement
displacement under unidirectional
under unidirectional excitationexcitation (YPand
(YP) of NP ) of NP
NNand NN ground
ground motionsmotions
is 1.75
and 1.16 times that of FF ground motions, respectively. The pier displacement under bi-
directional seismic excitation (XS + YP) of NP and NN ground motions is 2.39 and 1.15
times that of FF ground motions, respectively.
 As illustrated in Figure 10, the pier of the curved bridge has the largest displacement
under NP ground motion excitation and the smallest displacement under FF ground mo-
tion excitation. The pier displacement under unidirectional excitation (XP) of NP and NN
ground motions is 1.83 and 1.19 times that of FF ground motions, respectively. Mean-
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 while, the pier displacement under bidirectional seismic excitation (XP + YS) of NP and 11 NN
of 13
ground motions is 2.39 and 1.15 times that of FF ground motions, respectively. The pier
displacement under unidirectional excitation (YP) of NP and NN ground motions is 1.75
and 1.16and
is 1.75 times
1.16that of FF
times ground
that of FF motions, respectively.
ground motions, The pier displacement
respectively. under bi-
The pier displacement
directional seismic seismic
under bidirectional excitation (XS + YP(X
excitation ) of
S +NP
YP )and NN
of NP andground motions
NN ground is 2.39isand
motions 2.39 1.15
and
times that of
1.15 times FFofground
that motions,
FF ground respectively.
motions, respectively.

Unidirectional input(Xp) Unidirectional input(Xp) Bidirectional input(Xp+Ys) Bidirectional input(Xp+Ys)

Tangential displacement(mm)
Tangential displacement(mm)

12 6 12 12

Radial displacement(mm)
Radial displacement(mm)
NP NP NP NP
NN NN NN NN
FF FF FF FF

8 4 8 8

4 2 4 4

0
Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4
0
Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4 0 Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4
0 Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4

(a)
Unidirectional input(Yp) Bidirectional input(Xs+Yp)
Tangential displacement(mm)

Unidirectional input(Yp) Bidirectional input(Xs+Yp)

Tangential displacement(mm)
4 12

Radial displacement(mm)
Radial displacement(mm)

NP 12 NP NP 12 NP
NN NN NN NN
FF FF FF FF
3
8 8 8
2
4 4 4
1

0 0 Pier 1 0 Pier 1 0
Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4 Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4
Pier 1 Pier 2 Pier 3 Pier 4

(b)

Figure 10. Pier displacement response: (a) Pier displacement in case 1; (b) Pier displacement in case 2.

Piers 1 to 4 are symmetrically distributed. The height of pier 4 is higher than that of
pier 1, and as a result the seismic response at pier 1 is less than that at pier 4. The stiffness
of the double-column pier in the radial direction is relatively large, and a fixed pot bearing
is installed on pier 2. Hence, the pier and the main girder move synchronously. Most
of the seismic force of the main girder is transferred to the pier to make the tangential
displacement most significant at pier 2.
In summary, the pier displacement is more significant under NP ground motion
excitation, which has a certain amplification effect. Regardless of the relationship between
the seismic input direction and the curved bridge, the tangential displacement of the fixed
pier is significant, while the radial displacement of the pier is related to the pier height.

5. Conclusions
This work was devoted to studying the seismic performance of a curved bridge
shaking table test model in the excitation of near-fault and FF ground motions. A 1/10 scale
bridge model was established, and three types of ground motions were used to conduct
shaking table tests. The following conclusions were drawn:
(1). The seismic performance of the curved bridge is more significant under NP ground
motion excitation, which is more destructive than that under FF ground motion
excitation. Therefore, paying attention to the impact of NP ground motions on curved
bridges in seismic design is necessary.
(2). The displacement of the curved bridge has spatial characteristics. The curved bridge
moves horizontally and rotates in the plane at the same time in unidirectional seismic
excitation(XP ). NP ground motions in bidirectional excitations (XP + YS ) are easy to
excite the rotation effect of curved bridges.
(3). The displacement of the beam end and the bearing is significantly affected by the
motion state of the curved bridge. The in-plane rotations of the curved bridge likely
stimulate the displacement of the beam end and the bearing at the lower pier, which
increases the risk of girder unseating and bearing shedding.
(4). The fixed piers produce large tangential displacements under seismic action, are
considerably sensitive to seismic action, are detrimental to the structure, and should
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 12 of 13

be paid attention to. The height of piers has a certain amplification effect on the pier
displacement, and a larger displacement is more likely to occur at the higher pier.

Author Contributions: Writing—original draft, P.S.; methodology, X.Z.; investigation, Y.C.; supervi-
sion, B.X. and B.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by the Beijing Natural Science Foundation (8224087) and Cen-
tral Public-interest Scientific Institution Basal Research Fund (CEAIEF20220206, CEAIEF2022030100).
The support is gratefully acknowledged.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Guo, W.; Gao, X.; Hu, P.; Hu, Y.; Zhai, Z.; Bu, D.; Jiang, L. Seismic damage features of high-speed railway simply supported
bridge–track system under near-fault earthquake. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2020, 23, 1573–1586. [CrossRef]
2. Zhou, Y.G.; Xia, P.; Ling, D.S.; Chen, Y.M. A liquefaction case study of gently sloping gravelly soil deposits in the near-fault region
of the 2008 M(w)7.9 Wenchuan earthquake. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2020, 18, 6181–6201. [CrossRef]
3. Pai, C.H.; Tien, Y.M.; Teng, T.L. A study of the human-fatality rate in near-fault regions using the Victim Attribute Database. Nat.
Hazards 2007, 42, 19–35. [CrossRef]
4. Zhang, J.; Wei, K.; Pang, Y.; Zhang, M.; Qin, S. Numerical Investigation into Hydrodynamic Effects on the Seismic Response of
Complex Hollow Bridge Pier Submerged in Reservoir: Case Study. J. Bridge Eng. 2019, 24, 05018016.05018011–05018016.05018013.
[CrossRef]
5. Yazdani, Y.; Alembagheri, M. Seismic vulnerability of gravity dams in near-fault areas. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2017, 102, 15–24.
[CrossRef]
6. Liao, W.I.; Loh, C.H.; Wan, S. Earthquake responses of RC moment frames subjected to near-fault ground motions. Struct. Des.
Tall Build. 2001, 10, 219–229. [CrossRef]
7. Akkar, S.; Yazgan, U.; Gulkan, P. Drift estimates in frame buildings subjected to near-fault ground motions. J. Struct. Eng. ASCE
2005, 131, 1014–1024. [CrossRef]
8. Ghahari, S.F.; Jahankhah, H.; Ghannad, M.A. Study on elastic response of structures to near-fault ground motions through record
decomposition. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2010, 30, 536–546. [CrossRef]
9. Jian, F.; Ping, D. Simulation of artificial near-fault ground motions based on the S-transform. In Proceedings of the Cisp 2008:
First International Congress on Image and Signal Processing, Sanya, China, 27–30 May 2008; Volume 5, pp. 518–522.
10. Pitarka, A.; Somerville, P.; Fukushima, Y.; Uetake, T.; Irikura, K. Simulation of near-fault strong-ground motion using hybrid
Green’s functions. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 2000, 90, 566–586. [CrossRef]
11. Amiri, G.G.; Rad, A.A.; Hazaveh, N.K. Wavelet-Based Method for Generating Nonstationary Artificial Pulse-Like Near-Fault
Ground Motions. Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2014, 29, 758–770. [CrossRef]
12. Li, X.L.; Dou, H.J. Study on seismic safety for simple-supported bridge subjected to near-fault earthquake ground motions. Prog.
Saf. Sci. Technol. Parts A B 2005, 5, 1501–1506.
13. Cai, Z.; Wang, Z.; Lin, K.; Sun, Y.; Zhuo, W. Seismic Behavior of a Bridge with New Composite Tall Piers under Near-Fault
Ground Motion Conditions. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7377. [CrossRef]
14. Mohseni, I.; Lashkariani, H.A.; Kang, J.; Kang, T.H.K. Dynamic Response Evaluation of Long-Span Reinforced Arch Bridges
Subjected to Near- and Far-Field Ground Motions. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1243. [CrossRef]
15. Shuai, L.; Fan, Z.; Jing-quan, W.; Alam, M.S.; Jian, Z. Effects of Near-Fault Motions and Artificial Pulse-Type Ground Motions on
Super-Span Cable-Stayed Bridge Systems. J. Bridge Eng. 2017, 22, 04016128. [CrossRef]
16. Zheng, S.-x.; Shi, X.-h.; Jia, H.-y.; Zhao, C.-h.; Qu, H.-l.; Shi, X.-l. Seismic response analysis of long-span and asymmetrical
suspension bridges subjected to near-fault ground motion. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2020, 115, 104615. [CrossRef]
17. Sideris, P.; Aref, A.J.; Filiatrault, A. Experimental Seismic Performance of a Hybrid Sliding-Rocking Bridge for Various Specimen
Configurations and Seismic Loading Conditions. J. Bridge Eng. 2015, 20, 04015009. [CrossRef]
18. Liu, Z.; Zhang, S. Influence of strong spatially varying near fault ground motion on steel box arch bridge. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2021,
19, 5439–5469. [CrossRef]
19. Chen, X.; Xiang, N.; Li, J.; Guan, Z. Influence of Near-fault Pulse-like Motion Characteristics on Seismic Performance of Tall Pier
Bridges with Fragility Analysis. J. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 2020, 3, 2001–2022. [CrossRef]
20. Xie, W.; Sun, L. Experimental and numerical investigations on transverse seismic responses of soil-cable-stayed-bridge system
subjected to transverse near-fault ground motions. Eng. Struct. 2021, 226, 111361. [CrossRef]
21. Lin, Y.; Bi, K.; Zong, Z.; Hao, H.; Lin, J.; Chen, Y. Seismic Performance of Steel-Concrete Composite Rigid-Frame Bridge: Shake
Table Test and Numerical Simulation. J. Bridge Eng. 2020, 25, 04020032. [CrossRef]
22. Jiao, C.; Liu, W.; Wu, S.; Gui, X.; Huang, J.; Long, P.; Li, W. Shake table experimental study of curved bridges with consideration
of girder-to-girder collision. Eng. Struct. 2021, 237, 112216. [CrossRef]
23. Wang, T.W. Structural Testing of Civil Engineering; Wuhan University of Technology Press: Wuhan, China, 2006.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8349 13 of 13

24. PEER. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center. Available online: http://ngawest2.berkeley.edu (accessed on 18 March 2022).
25. JTG/T B02-01-2008; Guidelines for Seismic Design of Highway Bridges. People’s Transportation Press: Beijing, China, 2008.