UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Los Angeles

Modeling Axial-Shear-Flexure Interaction of RC Columns

for Seismic Response Assessment of Bridges

W
IE
A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the
EV
requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy

in Civil Engineering
PR

by

Shi-Yu Xu

2010
 UMI Number: 3462880

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

W
a note will indicate the deletion.

UMTIE
Dissertation Publishing
EV
UMI 3462880
Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
PR

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
 W
IE
EV
PR

© Copyright by

Shi-Yu Xu

2010
The dissertation of Shi-Yu Xu is approved.

W
IE
EV
PR

University of California, Los Angeles

2010

11
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS iii

LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF TABLES xi

ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION xvi

1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Axial-Shear-Flexure Interaction 3
1.3 Objectives 4

W
1.4 Organization 5

2. SEISMIC RESPONSE ASSESSMENT OF BRIDGES 8

IE
2.1 Performances of Highway Bridges in Past Earthquakes
2.2 Considerations for Bridge Response Simulation
2.2.1 Ground Motions
8
13
13
2.2.2 Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI) 16
EV
2.2.3 Structural Characteristics of Bridges 31
2.3 Concluding Remarks 35

3. COUPLED HYSTERETIC SHEAR-FLEXURE INTERACTION MODEL FOR

COLUMNS UNDER CONSTANT AXIAL LOAD 37
PR

3.1 Significance of Shear-Flexure Interaction (SFI) 37

3.2 Existing Models for Shear-Flexure Interaction 39
3.3 Methodology for Considering Shear-Flexure Interaction of Columns 43
3.4 Generation of Primary Curves 44
3.5 Hysteretic Rules 50
3.5.1 Description of Hysteretic Shear Model by Ozcebe and Saatcioglu
(1989) 51
3.5.2 Model Defects of Ozcebe and Saatcioglu's Model 53
3.5.3 Improved Shear and Flexure Hysteretic Models 54
3.6 Model Implementation in FEM 60
3.7 Model Calibration in Cyclic Tests 63
3.8 Model Calibration in Dynamic Shake Table Tests 71
3.9 Factors Affecting Shear-Flexure Interaction of Columns 81
3.9.1 Influences of Column Aspect Ratio on Total Primary Curve 81
3.9.2 Effects of Axial Load Variation on Total Primary Curve 83
3.10 Concluding Remarks 84

in
INELASTIC DISPLACEMENT DEMAND OF BRIDGE COLUMNS
CONSIDERING SHEAR-FLEXURE INTERACTION 86
4.1 Introduction 86
4.2 Existing Displacement Demand Models 88
4.3 Simulation Framework of Parametric Study 90
4.4 Pulse Representation of Near-fault Ground Motions 95
4.5 Dimensional Analysis of Nonlinear Structural Responses 98
4.6 Inelastic Displacement and Ductility Demand Considering SFI 101
4.6.1 Dominant Dimensionless Measures 101
4.6.2 Inelastic Displacement and Ductility Demand 106
4.7 Validation of the Proposed Model 110
4.8 Concluding Remarks 115

SEISMIC RESPONSE SIMULATIONS OF BRIDGES CONSIDERING

SHEAR-FLEXURAL INTERACTION OF COLUMNS 117
5.1 Introduction 117

W
5.2 Ground Motion Selection 118
5.2.1 Generation of Synthetic Earthquake Records 119
5.2.2 Ground Motion Selection and Re-scaling Criteria 120
5.3 Numerical Models of Prototype Bridges
IE 125
5.3.1 Modeling of Soil-Structural-Interaction (SSI) 125
5.3.2 Structural Modeling of Bridges 126
5.3.3 Nonlinear Modeling of Bridge Columns 129
EV
5.4 Nonlinear Time History Response Analysis of Bridges 130
5.5 Concluding Remarks 143

COUPLED HYSTERETIC SHEAR-FLEXURE INTERACTION MODEL FOR

RC COLUMNS UNDER VARIABLE AXIAL LOAD 145
PR

6.1 Introduction 145

6.2 Significance of ASFI 147
6.3 Parameterized Primary Curves under Variable Axial Load 148
6.4 Hysteretic Rules under Variable Axial Load 154
6.4.1 Stress Level Index 154
6.4.2 Two-stage Loading Approach 155
6.5 Model Implementation 156
6.6 Model Calibration 160
6.6.1 Model Calibration in Cyclic Results 161
6.6.2 Model Calibration in Dynamic Results 165
6.7 Limitation of Model 166
6.8 Factors Affecting ASFI 167
6.8.1 Arrival Time of Vertical Ground Motion 167
6.8.2 Vertical-to-Horizontal PGA Ratio 170
6.9 Response Simulation of Bridges with ASFI 173
6.10 Concluding Remarks 179

IV
7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTRUE WORK 182
7.1 Conclusions 182
7.2 Recommended Future Work 186

Appendix A : Modified Compression Field Theory 188

Appendix B : Implementation of the SFI and ASFI Models in ABAQUS 193
Appendix C : Existing Inelastic Displacement Demand Models 224
Appendix D : Structural Details of Prototype Bridges 234
D.l Plan, Elevation, and Cross Section of Intermediate Bents of Bridge #8 ... 234
D.2 Plan, Elevation, and Cross section of Box Girder of Bridge Mendocino ..236
D.3 Moment-Curvature Curve of Columns for Bridge #8 and Bridge Mendocino
237
Appendix E : Numerical Models for Prototype Bridges 238
E.l Sectional properties and Spring and Dashpot Constants of Bridge #8 238
E.2 Sectional properties and Spring and Dashpot Constants of Bridge
Mendocino 239

W
References IE 240
EV
PR

V
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1 Observed column failure in Northridge Earthquake (Seible and Priestley
1999) 10
Figure 2-2 Unseating span failure and column shear failure (Hsu and Fu 2004) 11
Figure 2-3 Minor repairable bridge damages 12
Figure 2-4 (left) Sketch of kinematic effects (Fan et al. 1991); (right) Kinematic
response factor of fixed-head 2x2 pile group in homogeneous soil
(Ep/Es=1000, L/d=20) 18
Figure 2-5 Normalized dynamic spring and radiation dashpot coefficients for vertical
and rocking motions of a square foundation on non-homogeneous soil with
S 0 =0.5 and Poisson's ratiov=0.3 (Vrettos 1999) 21
Figure 2-6 Pile group interaction as function of spacing (Bogard and Matlock 1983).
25

W
Figure 2-7 Normalized vertical dynamic impedance of a 2x2 fixed-head pile group in a
homogeneous halfspace, E/E = 1000, L/d =15 26
Figure 2-8 Modeling of Embankment (Zhang and Makris 2002a) 29
IE
Figure 2-9 Modulus reduction curves and damping curves (Zhang and Makris 2002a).
30
Figure 2-10 Plan, elevation, cross section of intermediate bents, and cross section of
columns of Bridge #4 36
EV

Figure 3-1 Model configurations and the major strengths and weaknesses of the
concentrated plastic hinge model and the fiber section model 40
PR

Figure 3-2 Analytical hysteretic responses using nonlinear Timoshenko beam and fiber
element for TP-021 41
Figure 3-3 Specimen and loading history details of the cyclic column test TP-021
(Yonedaetal. 2001) 41
Figure 3-4 Implementation of the SFI scheme 45
Figure 3-5 Applying MCFT (Vecchio and Collins 1986) to derive moment-curvature
and shear force-shear strain relationships 46
Figure 3-6 The primary curves for column specimen PEER-93 (P/Po=9.44%) derived
by MCFT: M/V ratio (a), shear force-shear strain (d) and moment-curvature
(e) relationships for each section along the column height; shear and flexural
contribution to total primary curve (b) and shear-to-total displacement ratio
(c) 47
Figure 3-7 Comparison of the theoretically derived total primary curves of column
specimen PEER-93 with the experimental hysteretic loops 49
Figure 3-8 Illustration of the shear hysteretic model by Ozcebe and Saatcioglu (1989).
51

VI
Figure 3-9 Examples of model defects in Ozcebe and Saatcioglu's shear hysteretic
model 55
Figure 3-10 (a) Comparison between revised and original unloading stiffness; (b)
reference stiffnesses 57
Figure 3-11 Hysteretic responses of PEER-94 (Kunnath et al. 1997) 57
Figure 3-12 Hysteretic responses of PEER-95 (Kunnath et al. 1997) 58
Figure 3-13 Hysteretic responses of PEER-96 (Kunnath et al. 1997) 58
Figure 3-14 Hysteretic responses of PEER-97 (Kunnath et al. 1997) 59
Figure 3-15 Remedies for the defects in shear hysteretic model 59
Figure 3-16 Implementation of proposed shear-flexure interaction model 60
Figure 3-17 Performance of proposed hysteretic flexure model for flexure dominated
columns 64
Figure 3-18 Performance of proposed hysteretic shear model for columns with
significant SFI 65
Figure 3-19 Hysteretic responses of PEER-93 assuming various shear-to-total
displacement ratios 67

W
Figure 3-20 Specimen and loading history details of the cyclic column tests TP-031 and
TP-032 (Sakai and Kawashima 2000) 69
Figure 3-21 Prediction of cyclic responses of columns under different axial loads 69
Figure 3-22 Shear and flexural hysteretic responses of columns TP-031 (left) and
IE
TP-032(right) 70
Figure 3-23 Predicted cyclic responses of columns with different aspect ratio 70
Figure 3-24 Shake table set up of column specimen 9F1 and 9S1 tested at the University
EV
of Nevada, Reno (Laplace et al. 1999 2001) 73
Figure 3-25 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ 0.33x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 74
Figure 3-26 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ 0.66x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 74
PR

Figure 3-27 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ l.Ox 1940 El Centro
earthquake 75
Figure 3-28 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ 1.5x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 75
Figure 3-29 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ 2.Ox 1940 El Centro
earthquake 76
Figure 3-30 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ 2.5x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 76
Figure 3-31 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ 3.Ox 1940 El Centro
earthquake 77
Figure 3-32 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9F1 @ 3.5x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 77
Figure 3-33 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9S1 @ 0.33x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 78
Figure 3-34 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9S1 @ 0.66x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 78

Vll
Figure 3-35 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9S1 @ l.Ox 1940 El Centro
earthquake 79
Figure 3-36 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9S1 @ 1.5x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 79
Figure 3-37 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9S1 @ 2.Ox 1940 El Centro
earthquake 80
Figure 3-38 Predicted dynamic responses of column 9S1 @ 2.5x 1940 El Centro
earthquake 80
Figure 3-39 (a) Variation of primary curve with aspect ratio; and (b) the normalized
primary curves of column 81
Figure 3-40 Primary curves of PEER-93 subjected to different level of axial loads 84

Figure 4-1 Basic concepts of three commonly used nonlinear static analysis procedures.
90
Figure 4-2 Bridge model in transverse, longitudinal directions and the idealized
numerical model 92

W
Figure 4-3 Total primary curves of columns with different axial load levels and aspect
ratios 93
Figure 4-4 Variation of shear-to-total displacement ratio up to peak lateral strength,
under different axial load ratios, reinforcement details, and aspect ratios... 93
IE
Figure 4-5 Flexure, shear and total primary curves of a column (Bridge #4, H/D=2.5,
P/Po=10%) (a) and its schematic bilinear approximation (b) 94
Figure 4-6 Elastic periods of columns in simulation 95
EV
Figure 4-7 Acceleration, velocity, and displacement time histories (top) and
pseudo-acceleration, pseudo-velocity, and displacement spectra (bottom) of
the ground motion recorded in the 1977 Bucharest Earthquake and its pulse
representation 98
Figure 4-8 Similar responses of bilinear SDOF systems subject to scaled
PR

Norwalk-Imperial Highway record of the 1987 Whittier Narrows

earthquake 100
Figure 4-9 Inelastic maximum displacement responses of columns represented in
dimensional (left) and dimensionless form (right) 102
Figure 4-10 Effect of normalized frequency n w on the inelastic displacement of columns.
104
Figure 4-11 Effect of normalized nonlinearity index n ^ on the inelastic displacement
of columns 104
Figure 4-12 Effect of aspect ratio H/D on the inelastic displacement of columns 105
Figure 4-13 Comparison of proposed drift demand model with the simulation results:
H/D=2.5 (left) and H/D=5.0 (right) 107
Figure 4-14 Comparison of proposed ductility demand model with the simulation results:
H/D=2.5 (left) and H/D=5.0 (right) 109
Figure 4-15 Comparison of computed maximum inelastic displacements with the
predictions by the proposed model and two published models in literature
for a column (H/D=3) 114

Vlll
Figure 5-1 Generation of synthetic earthquake record (Khan 1987) 119
Figure 5-2 Example attenuation relationship (Idriss 2005) 120
Figure 5-3 Mean hazard curves for various spectral periods for the LA Bulk Mail site.
121
Figure 5-4 Hazard curve for 50-year Poissonian probability of exceedance (Field 2001).
122
Figure 5-5 Dis-aggregation of hazard for three hazard levels at T=1.0 sec 123
Figure 5-6 (left) Mean uniform hazard spectra for the LA Bulk Mail site (Goulet et al.
2007); (right) Average acceleration spectrum of Bin4 earthquakes (scaled
and unsealed) 123
Figure 5-7 The numerical models for three prototype bridges built in ABAQUS 128
Figure 5-8 First two mode shapes and natural periods of three prototype bridges 128
Figure 5-9 Cross section and moment-curvature curves of columns for Bridge #4 (Pink
lines are moment-curvature curves for equivalent square sections w/ the
same area) 130
Figure 5-10 Max response quantities of Bridge #4 using nonlinear beam elements for

W
columns 132
Figure 5-11 Max response quantities of Bridge #8 using nonlinear beam elements for
columns 133
Figure 5-12 Max response quantities of Bridge Mendocino using nonlinear beam
IE
elements for columns 133
Figure 5-13 Max response quantities of Bridge #4 using SFI user elements for columns.
134
EV
Figure 5-14 Max response quantities of Bridge #8 using SFI user elements for columns.
134
Figure 5-15 Max response quantities of Bridge Mendocino using SFI user elements for
columns 135
Figure 5-16 Comparison of column drift and section force time histories in Bent 1 of
PR

Bridge #4, using nonlinear M-cp (Timoshenko beam) model and UEL model
under 1987 Whittier Narrows earthquake 136
Figure 5-17 Hysteretic loops in bent 1 of Bridge #4 adopting nonlinear M-cp and UEL
models 137
Figure 5-18 Shear and flexural responses in bent 1 of Bridge #4 using UEL model (in
longitudinal direction) 138
Figure 5-19 Comparison of column drift and section force time histories in Bent 3 of
Bridge #8, using nonlinear M-cp model and UEL model under 1987 Whittier
Narrows earthquake 139
Figure 5-20 Shear and flexural responses in Bent 3 of Bridge #8 using UEL model... 140
Figure 5-21 Response ratio of UEL model to nonlinear M-cp model of three prototype
bridges 140
Figure 5-22 Observed tensile axial forces in bent-column and in single-column design
bridges 142

IX
Figure 6-1 Critical points and total primary curves of columns under different axial
loads 149
Figure 6-2 Variation of critical points with respect to the applied axial load 149
Figure 6-3 Rules for mapping between primary curves 150
Figure 6-4 Rules for mapping between unloading and reloading branches 155
Figure 6-5 Illustration of constant lateral deflection (left) and constant axial load (right)
stages 156
Figure 6-6 Implementation of proposed ASFI model 158
Figure 6-7 Local equilibrium and the components of stiffness matrix of the ASFI-UEL.
158
Figure 6-8 Axial and lateral loading hystereses applied to specimens TP-033 and
TP-034 160
Figure 6-9 Hysteretic responses of specimens TP-031 and TP-032 predicted by the
proposed ASFI model 162
Figure 6-10 Prediction of the entire primary curve family from a reference primary curve.
163
Figure 6-11 Hysteretic responses of specimens TP-033 and TP-034 predicted by the

W
proposed ASFI model 163
Figure 6-12 Comparison of the simulated responses with the fiber section model 164
Figure 6-13 Examples of inconsistent deformation in shear and flexural springs
IE 167
Figure 6-14 Time histories of the transverse and vertical components of input
earthquakes 169
Figure 6-15 Variation of maximum base shear w.r.t. arrival times of vertical ground
EV
motion 169
Figure 6-16 Variation of maximum base moment w.r.t. arrival times of vertical ground
motion 170
Figure 6-17 Variation of maximum column tip drift w.r.t. arrival times of vertical ground
motion 170
PR

Figure 6-18 Variation of maximum axial force in column w.r.t. V/H ratio 172
Figure 6-19 Variation of maximum base shear w.r.t. V/H ratio 172
Figure 6-20 Variation of maximum base moment w.r.t. V/H ratio 172
Figure 6-21 Variation of maximum column tip drift w.r.t. V/H ratio 173
Figure 6-22 Hysteretic responses of the cases with selected V/H ratios 173
Figure 6-23 Seismic demands on Bridge #4 for the V+H case and the H only case 176
Figure 6-24 Hysteretic responses of the columns of imaginary Bridge #4 (H/D=2.5).
177
Figure 6-25 Variation of max possible shear force demand and shear capacity provided
by concrete 179

x
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 Parameters for SSI models of a rigid disk on homogeneous elastic half space
20
Table 2-2 Structural characteristics of the three prototype bridges 33
Table 2-3 Geometry, reinforcement, material properties, and axial load of prototype
bridges 33

Table 3-1 Geometry, reinforcement, material properties, and applied load of the columns
used to calibrate the flexure hysteretic rules (Kunnath et al. 1997) 58
Table 3-2 Geometry, reinforcement, material properties, and applied load of examined
columns 64

W
Table 4-1 Geometry, reinforcement, and material properties of the examined columns. 92
Table 4-2 Near-fault ground motions and corresponding pulse parameters used in this
study IE 97
Table 4-3 Near-fault ground motions and corresponding pulse parameters used in
validation 110
EV
Table 5-1 Bin4 ground motions selected for target period ofTi=0.5sec 124
Table 5-2 Bin4 ground motions selected for target period of Ti=1.5 sec 125
Table 5-3 Sectional properties of Bridge #4 (linear elastic model) 127
Table 5-4 Spring and dashpot constants for surface foundations of Bridge #4 127
PR

Table 5-5 Spring and dashpot constants for seated abutments of Bridge #4 127
Table 5-6 Moments, torsional moments and T/M ratios of different bridge models.... 141

Table 6-1 Geometry, reinforcement, and material properties of examined columns.... 149
Table 6-2 Applied axial loads in the experimental test program 159
Table 6-3 Near-fault ground motions used in this study. 174

XI
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Born in a small town in Taiwan, I had never thought that I would earn a Ph.D.

degree in a foreign country, not to mention receiving it from a prestigious university like

UCLA. I sincerely thank to all of those who helped me make the dream come true.

First of all, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my family for their

never-ending support. Without my parents, I would not have had the financial means to

afford my life in the US for the first couple years of my studies here, and I would not

W
have had the feeling of safety that no matter how I performed, there would always be a

place called home waiting for me to come back. Also, without my brothers taking care of
IE
my parents, I could not have had the peace in mind to focus on my studies while not

worrying about my parents. Therefore, I would like to dedicate this dissertation and all
EV
that I have accomplished during my Ph.D. studies to my beloved family.

Next I want to express my gratitude to my research advisor, Professor Zhang, for

PR

her invaluable guidance during my entire Ph.D. development and for her personal help, as

well as for her patience when I was going through difficult times and slow with my

research progress. She is not only a respectable and knowledgeable teacher but also a true

friend. I'm lucky to have her as the advisor. I also want to say thank you to the members

of the doctoral committee, Professor Ju, Professor Klug, and Professor Stewart for giving

precious advice and comments on my research. My thanks will be extended to all faculty

members whom I had ever taken classes with. Their instruction enriched my background

knowledge required for conducting a rigorous research work.

 I also want to thank two of the senior fellow students, Christine Goulet and

Yuchuan Tang, for providing me with the ground motion data, thus saving me much time

on deriving them myself. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to Sheng-Wei Chi,

Yili Huo, and all other peer students, friends, and roommates who had helped me,

accompanied me, and colored my life in the past five years.

This research was funded by National Science Foundation through the Network

for Earthquake Engineering Simulation Research Program, grant CMMI-0530737.

Financial support in the form of teaching assistantship, research assistantship, and tuition

waiver from the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering are also

W
appreciated.
IE
EV
PR

Xlll
 VITA

1975 Born, Taoyuan County, Taiwan

1997 B.S., Civil Engineering

National Taiwan University
Taipei, Taiwan.

2003 M.S,.Architecture
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan.

2005 - 2010 Graduate Student Researcher:

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

W
University of California, Los Angeles
Los Angeles, California

2006 - 2010 Teaching Assistant and Teaching Associate:

IE
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California, Los Angeles,
Los Angeles, California
EV
2009 Martin Rubin Scholarship
University of California, Los Angeles
Los Angeles, California
PR

PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

Xu, S.-Y. and Zhang, J. (2008). Seismic Simulation of Bridge Response under Combined
Actions. 2008 NSF CMMI Engineering Research and Innovation Conference, Knoxville,
TN. (student poster presentation)

Xu, S.-Y. and Zhang, J. (2008). Hysteretic Models for Reinforced Concrete Columns
Considering Axial- Shear-Flexural Interaction, 14th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Beijing, China.

Xu, S.-Y. and Zhang, J. (2010). Axial-Shear-Flexure Interaction Hysteretic Models for

XIV
Reinforced Concrete Bridge Columns under Combined Actions, 9 U.S. National and
10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto, Canada.

Xu, S.-Y. and Zhang, J. (2010). Hysteretic Shear-Flexure Interaction Model of Reinforced
Concrete Columns for Seismic Response Assessment of Bridges. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, (published online July 30, 2010, DOI:
10.1002/eqe.l030)

Zhang, J. and Xu, S.-Y. (2008). Seismic Response Simulation of Bridges Considering
Shear-Flexural Interaction of Columns, 4th International Conference on Advances in
Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Jeju, Korea.

Zhang, J. and Xu, S.-Y. (2008). Seismic Response Simulation of Bridges Considering
Shear-Flexural Interaction of Columns, Sixth National Seismic Conference on Bridges
and Highways, Charleston, SC.

Zhang, J. and Xu, S.-Y. (2008). Seismic Response Simulations of Bridges Considering

W
Shear-Flexural Interaction of Columns, Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 31(5):
545-566.

Zhang, J., Xu, S.-Y. and Tang, Y. (2010). Drift Demand Model for Bridge Columns
IE
Considering Shear-Flexure Interaction. Structure Congress'10, Orlando, FL.

Zhang, J., Xu, S.-Y. and Tang, Y. (2010). Inelastic Displacement Demand of Bridge
EV
Columns Considering Shear-Flexure Interaction. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, (published online September 30, 2010, DOI: 10.1002/eqe.l056)
PR

XV
 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION

Modeling Axial-Shear-Flexure Interaction of RC Columns

for Seismic Response Assessment of Bridges

by

Shi-Yu Xu

W
Doctor of Philosophy in Civil Engineering

University of California, Los Angeles, 2010

IE
Professor Jian Zhang, Chair
EV
PR

Reinforced concrete bridge columns exhibit complex hysteretic behavior owing to

combined actions of axial force, shear force and bending moment during earthquakes. To

efficiently simulate their nonlinear behavior for seismic assessment of bridges, a coupled

hysteretic model is first developed to account for the nonlinear shear-flexure interaction

(SFI) behavior under constant axial load. The proposed SFI model consists of coupled

flexure and shear springs, whose behavior are governed by the primary curves and a set

of loading/unloading rules to capture the pinching, stiffness softening and strength

deterioration of columns due to combined loads. The model is implemented in a

displacement-based finite element framework and calibrated against a large number of

column specimens from static cyclic to dynamic shake table tests.

Recognizing that the SFI may increase the inelastic displacement of bridge

columns, a simple demand model for estimating the inelastic displacement and ductility

is developed. Guided by the rigorous dimensional analysis, the inelastic displacement

responses of bridge columns considering SFI are presented in dimensionless form

showing strong correlation with the dimensionless parameters (e.g. structure-to-pulse

frequency, nonlinearity index, and aspect ratio). The proposed demand model is validated

to predict accurately the displacement directly from structural and ground motion

W
characteristics.
IE
Subsequently, the proposed SFI model is applied to evaluate the system level

seismic responses of three prototype bridges where the soil-structural interaction effects
EV
are also considered. Response quantities of bridges (e.g. drift, acceleration, section force

and section moment etc.) are derived and compared to evaluate the effects of structural
PR

characteristics and the SFI of columns.

Lastly, in order to account for the axial load fluctuation during earthquakes, a

coupled axial-shear-flexure interacting (ASFI) hysteretic model is developed. The ASFI

model utilizes a novel concept of normalization to parameterize the primary curves at

different axial load levels. An axial load independent stress level index is also developed

to enable the transition between different reloading and unloading branches at variable

axial load levels. The model is validated against the experimental data and allows for

efficient seismic response assessment of bridges under multi-directional ground motions.

XVI1
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Reinforced Concrete (RC) highway bridges constitute the majority of current

bridge inventory. As critical components in transportation system, their structural

integrity and functionality after major earthquakes are desired. RC columns are in general

the most critical components of highway bridges. They play very important roles in

overall structural performance of bridges and their failures often result in bridge collapse

W
or expensive repair cost. A significant number of bridges in current bridge inventory, built

and constructed before the introduction of modern seismic codes in 1970s, are vulnerable
IE
to damage and collapse during major earthquakes, as evidenced by the observed severe

damage and collapse of several bridges in recent earthquakes (Jennings and Wood 1971;
EV

Seible and Priestley 1999; Hsu and Fu 2004). One major deficiency of those older

columns is the insufficient transverse reinforcement which will result in degradation of

PR

shear and axial load capacity as well as impacting the nonlinear flexural behavior of

columns when subject to cyclic lateral loads (Priestley et al. 1996).

The bridge columns are normally under the complex load combinations of

bending, shear, axial load and torsion due to the multi-directional earthquake motions and

constraints of structural or geometric configurations (e.g. short columns, uneven spans,

skewed or curved bridges etc.). Under the combined loadings, the columns inevitably

experience considerable nonlinear inelastic behavior involving yielding, inelastic

deformation, strength and stiffness degradation etc. Therefore, the bridge responses need

1
to be evaluated more realistically with the consideration of the material damage

(including the strength deterioration and stiffness degrading due to increasing loading

cycles, as well as pinching behavior resulted from the crack opening and closing during

loading reversals) and the axial-shear-flexure interaction in columns since neglecting the

combined load effects will likely result in over-estimation of lateral load capacity and

underestimation of lateral deformation demand. However, current design and analysis

methods often treat the different failure mechanisms separately without considering the

effects of the combined actions, namely the coupling of axial, shear, flexural and

torsional responses in the columns.

W
Furthermore, the seismic design of new bridges and seismic evaluation of existing
IE
bridges can be improved if an accurate estimation on the lateral displacement of columns

can be achieved, since displacement instead of force is directly associated with the
EV
damage, structural stability, and the functionality of bridges. Since bridge is an

interconnected system, whose seismic response depends on the structural configuration,

PR

connection and foundation types etc., the seismic response assessment of bridges also

needs to consider the important soil-structure interaction (SSI) effects. Due to combined

actions on bridge columns, the bridge will typically experience higher displacement

demands, which in turn will cause higher interaction between the bridge superstructure

with foundation and abutments. Therefore, a system level approach is needed to evaluate

the seismic demand and capacity of highway bridges with considerations of combined

actions and complex dynamic behavior resulted from soil-structure interactions and

structural characterizations. The main objective of this research is to derive effective

2
simulation tools for considering the axial-shear-flexure interactive behavior of bridge

columns and to conduct accurate seismic response assessment of bridges to eventually

minimize the earthquake damages through improved design and analysis.

1.2 Axial-Shear-Flexure Interaction

Axial-shear-flexure interaction (ASFI) refers to the interactive nonlinear behavior

due to the coupling of axial, shear and flexure forces acting on structural elements. Field

evidences as well as laboratory tests have shown that the strength and ductility of RC

W
columns strongly depend on the combined effects of applied loads as strong interaction

exists between them (Saatcioglu and Ozcebe 1989). The presence of significant shear
IE
force in a RC element will modify the flexural response of the element from its pure

bending behavior, which is usually referred to as the shear-flexure interaction.

EV
Additionally, variation in the axial load of a RC element (i.e. due to vertical acceleration)

will participate in this kind of interactive relationship and entangles the problems even
PR

more. The complex axial-shear-flexure interaction in columns considerably changes the

strength, stiffness as well as the hysteretic responses resulting in various levels of

strength deterioration, stiffness degrading, and pinching behavior during loading

reversals.

The ASFI is prominent in stocky columns with small aspect ratios (i.e.

height-to-diameter ratio H/D). Under the constant axial load, the shear-flexure interaction

(SFI) phenomenon affects the column responses from three aspects. First, the shear and

flexure capacities of the column sections under combined shear forces and bending

3
moments are different from those of the pure bending cases. Second, the inelastic shear

behavior, such as degrading of shear load capacity (e.g. due to insufficient transverse

reinforcement), can impact the nonlinear flexural behavior of columns when subject to

cyclic lateral loads (Priestley et al. 1996). Furthermore, the shear displacement can be

significant even if a RC member is not governed by the shear failure (Ozcebe and

Saatcioglu 1989). Therefore, SFI acts in addition to the coupling between axial and

flexural behaviors and may introduce non-negligible shear deformation in columns as

well as shear-flexure or shear-dominated failure mode.

Various efforts have been made in the past 20 years to numerically simulate and

W
experimentally evaluate the axial-shear-flexure interaction of RC columns. A robust and
IE
computationally efficient model is still needed to include the ASFI effects into the

seismic analysis since many of the existing models are limited to either element-level or
EV
static analyses while some models are difficult to implement and computationally

expensive. Therefore, considering the ASFI in a transient analysis for 3D spatial structure
PR

is currently still an active research topic.

1.3 Objectives

This study investigates the influence of combined loadings on column behavior

and its impact on the seismic response of bridge systems. The goal of the study is to

develop a systematic analysis and design procedure that takes into account of the

combined loadings in bridge columns. Therefore, the objectives of this study are

threefold:

4
1. To develop an advanced simulation model considering the coupled

axial-shear-flexural interaction behavior and the accumulated material damage

(e.g. strength deterioration, stiffness degrading, and pinching behavior) in RC

bridge columns.

2. To develop a simplified displacement demand model for RC columns facilitating

the preliminary design of highway bridges. The model should take into account

the column structural properties (such as strength, initial and post-yield stiffness,

etc.), ground motion characteristics, accumulated material damage, and the effects

of combined loadings in columns.

W
3. To identify the factors that have great influences on the seismic response of
IE
highway bridges and to demonstrate a systematic approach of seismic demand

analysis for highway bridge systems considering site specific ground motions,
EV
soil-structural interaction, structural characteristics of the entire bridge system,

and the effects of combined loadings in columns.

PR

1.4 Organization

Chapter 1 of this dissertation gives a brief introduction of the research background

and the objectives.

Chapter 2 overviews the bridge damages observed in the past earthquakes to

stress the need for accurate seismic response assessment of bridges. The major

considerations in seismic response simulations of bridges are discussed, which include

the earthquake intensity measure and ground motion selection, soil-structure interaction