Original Research

Advances in Structural Engineering

2019, Vol. 22(1) 126–140
Influencing factors of residual drifts of Ó The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
precast segmental bridge columns with sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1369433218780545

energy dissipation bars journals.sagepub.com/home/ase

Zhong-Kui Cai1,2,3 , Zheng Zhou4 and Zhenyu Wang1,2,3

Abstract
The energy dissipation bar has been proven to be an effective way to improve the lateral strength and the seismic capacity of the pre-
cast segmental bridge column. To date, however, investigations on how the main design parameters affect the residual drift of such
bridge columns are quite limited. Focusing on this research gap, a novel numerical simulation method was proposed in this article to
investigate the influencing factors of residual drift of precast segmental bridge columns with energy dissipation bars. First, the refined
fiber element model was developed based on the OpenSees software package, considering the bond slip phenomenon at the column
end and the boundary condition at the interface between the two adjacent segments. Then, the proposed numerical model was vali-
dated by comparing the simulated hysteretic behavior of the precast segmental bridge columns with available experimental data. After
that, cyclic analyses were performed on 288 precast segmental bridge column models with different design parameters. Four impor-
tant influencing factors were investigated, including the post-tensioning force, gravity load, energy dissipation bar ratio, and shear span
ratio. According to the analysis results, some suggestions were provided for the practical design procedure of the energy dissipation
bar reinforced precast segmental bridge columns.

Keywords
cyclic analysis, design suggestions, energy dissipation bars, precast segmental bridge columns, residual drift

Introduction suitable for areas of moderate or high seismicity, vari-

Precast segmental bridge columns (PSBCs) are con-
structed by assembling precast concrete segments with
post-tensioned tendons. PSBCs have distinct advan-
tages over the conventional cast-in-place (CIP) col-
umns, such as short onsite construction time, low
environmental impact, and small post-earthquake resi-
dual drift (Billington et al., 1999). The residual drift is
critical to the post-earthquake functionality and repar-
ability for lifeline structures (Liossatou and Fardis,
2015). For example, after the Kobe Earthquake in
1995, more than 100 CIP bridge columns were demol-
ished because of the large residual drift ratios that ren-
dered them unusable or irreparable (Kawashima et al.,
1998). Here, the residual drift ratio is defined as the
ratio of the post-earthquake residual displacement to
the height of a bridge column.
Although PSBCs have many attractive characteris-
tics, their applications are mostly limited to regions of
low seismicity, owing to the concern about their seis-
mic performance, especially the low energy dissipation
(ED) capacities (Dawood et al., 2012; Hewes and
Priestley, 2002). In order to develop PSBCs that are
ous measures aiming to improve the ED capacities of
PSBCs have been investigated (Billington and Yoon,
2004; ElGawady and Sha’Lan, 2011; Ou et al., 2010a;
Sideris et al., 2014). Among these methods, reinforcing
the PSBCs with bonded steel bars which are continu-
ous across the segment joints (referred to as ED bars)
has been extensively studied. Ou et al. investigated the
seismic performance of ED bar reinforced PSBCs
through both finite element (FE) cyclic analysis
(Ou et al., 2007) and quasi-static tests (Ou et al.,
1
Key Lab of Structures Dynamic Behavior and Control of the Ministry of
Education, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China
2
Key Lab of Smart Prevention and Mitigation of Civil Engineering
Disasters of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology,
Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China
3
School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin,
China
4
School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China
Corresponding author:
Zhenyu Wang, School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of
Technology, Harbin 150001, Heilongjiang, China.
Email: zhenyuwang@hit.edu.cn
Cai et al.
2010a). It was found that with increase in the ED bar
reinforcement ratio, the lateral strength and hysteretic
ED increased significantly. Large-scale ED bar rein-
forced PSBCs were also tested by Wang et al. (2008)
under combined axial load and lateral cyclic displace-
ment excursions. The objective of their research was to
develop PSBCs with high ED capacities and lateral
strength, while the self-centering capability was not
concerned. The test results showed that the PSBCs
demonstrated ductile behavior, high hysteretic ED
capacity, and lateral strength after the use of ED bars.
Bu et al. (2012, 2016) reported numerical and experi-
mental investigations on ED bar reinforced PSBCs.
The results indicated that the seismic performance of
ED bar reinforced PSBC was superior to that of the
counterpart without ED bars and was even compara-
ble to that of the CIP reference column. To sum up, a
significant body of research has confirmed that the
seismic performance of PSBC can be effectively
improved by reinforcing with the ED bars, thus mak-
ing the ED bar reinforced PSBCs a promising alterna-
tive to traditional CIP bridge columns.
In the displacement-based design procedure of the
ED bar reinforced PSBC, both the maximum drift
response and the post-earthquake residual drift ratio
should be quantified for a certain design level earth-
quake. Hence, both the PSBC seismic performance
(such as the lateral strength, displacement ductility, and
ED capacity) and its residual drift should be determined
(Lee and Billington, 2010; Roh et al., 2012). To date,
however, studies on the ED bar reinforced PSBCs have
mainly focused on the improvement of seismic perfor-
mance. Investigations on how the main design para-
meters affect the residual drift capability of such bridge
columns are quite limited. One of the main reasons for
this situation is that there are very few numerical simu-
lation methods which can efficiently predict the hystere-
tic responses of PSBCs. Valuable cyclic analyses were
carried out by Bu et al. (2012), Kwan and Billington
(2003), and Kim et al. (2015), respectively. Whereas in
these three FE analyses, the opening–closure behavior
of the segment joints, which has a significant influence
on the behavior of the PSBCs, was not explicitly simu-
lated, Ou et al. (2007) proposed a detailed three-
dimensional (3D) micro-FE model for ED bar rein-
forced PSBCs using the general-purpose FE software,
ABAQUS. Behaviors of segment joints were explicitly
modeled by surface-to-surface contact algorithms. The
models were loaded with only one cycle of lateral dis-
placement. The reason might be the case owing to time-
consuming building and running of 3D micro-FE mod-
els, as pointed out by Bu et al. (2012).
To bridge the above research gap, the primary
objective of this article is to develop a novel simulation
method to investigate the influence of different factors
127
on the self-centering capability of the ED bar rein-
forced PSBCs. The main content of this study is orga-
nized into four parts: (1) A new FE model that
considers the segment joint opening–closing behavior,
bond slip phenomenon at the column end, strength
degradation of ED bars due to repetitive loading, and
concrete damage mechanism was developed based on
the OpenSees software package (Mazzoni et al., 2009).
(2) Then, the efficiency of the proposed FE model was
validated by comparing the predicted hysteretic curves,
joint opening width, and post-tensioning tendon strain
responses with the quasi-static test results of six PSBC
specimens available in the open literature. (3) After
that, cyclic analyses on 288 PSBC models were con-
ducted to investigate the influence of the post-
tensioning force, gravity load, ED bar reinforcement
ratio, and shear span ratio on the inherent self-
centering capability of the ED bar reinforced PSBCs.
(4) Finally, since the residual drifts after cyclic analyses
(referred to as quasi-static residual drifts) can be
regarded as the upper limit of the post-earthquake resi-
dual drifts (Kawashima et al., 1998; Ke and Chen,
2016; MacRae and Kawashima, 1997), some useful
suggestions are provided for the practical design proce-
dure of the ED bar reinforced PSBC according to the
cyclic analysis results in this study.
FE modeling method
General description of the fiber element model
The typical configuration of an ED bar reinforced
PSBC is shown in Figure 1(a). Un-bonded post-
tensioned tendons are incorporated to provide the
clamping force for the segments and the re-centering
force as well. The discrete fiber element model of the
PSBC is illustrated in Figure 1(b). Each segment is
modeled by one ForceBeamColumn element in
OpenSees (Mazzoni et al., 2009), while each joint is
modeled with one ZeroLengthSection element. The
fiber sections for the segment and the joint are shown
in Figure 1(c) and (d), respectively. In addition, the
post-tensioned tendons are modeled with a CorotTruss
element in OpenSees. In the following, the definition
of the properties of the uniaxial material, modeling of
the bond-slip phenomenon and the segment joint
behavior, and selection of the appropriate elements are
explained in detail.
Material model
The Concrete02 material model in OpenSees (Mazzoni
et al., 2009), proposed by Yassin (1994), is used for the
concrete fibers in this study. The compressive backbone
curve of Concrete02 is based on the uniaxial Kent–
128
Figure 1. General description of the developed fiber element model: (a) schematic of the PSBC, (b) discrete fiber element model,
(c) fiber section for the segment, and (d) fiber section for the joint.
Scott–Park (Scott et al., 1982) concrete model and the
cyclic stress–strain relationship is illustrated in Figure
2(a). In the validation of the developed fiber model,
two kinds of concrete confinement scenarios are
involved. Mander’s model (Mander et al., 1988) is used
to determine the material properties of the concrete
confined by spirals or hoops, and the confinement
effect provided by a circular steel tube is considered
according to the model proposed by Han (Han et al.,
2004). Furthermore, the tensile behavior of Concrete02
is modeled with a linear ascending branch, followed by
a linear softening branch. The tensile strength of
unconfined or confined concrete is defined as (Yassin,
1994)
pffiffiffiffiffi
ft = 0:6228 fcp (ft and fcp in MPa)
which is the cylinder compressive strength of uncon-
fined concrete at 28 days.
The ReinforcingSteel material model in OpenSees
(Mazzoni et al., 2009) is selected to simulate both the
ED bars and the non-ED bars in segments. Here, the
non-ED bars refer to the vertical bars that are posi-
tioned inside the segment but discontinuous through
the segment joints. The ReinforcingSteel material is
based on the uniaxial steel model proposed by Chang
and Mander (1994). As illustrated in Figure 2(b), the
monotonic constitutive curve of the ReinforcingSteel
consists of the elastic branch, yield plateau, strength
hardening branch, and strength degradation branch.
Advances in Structural Engineering 22(1)
By contrast, the commonly used Steel02 material mode
uses a linear ascending branch to represent the stress–
strain behavior of the steel after yielding. Furthermore,
differing from Steel02, the ReinforcingSteel material
takes into consideration the strength degradation of
the steel bar due to plastic strain reversals, buckling
under compression and rupture under tension.
Therefore, the ReinforcingSteel can predict the damage
state of the longitudinal reinforcement more accurately
compared to Steel02. According to the study of Jeong
et al. (2008), ReinforcingSteel material model is more
accurate than the Steel02 material proposed by
Menegotto and Pinto (1973), in terms of simulating
the residual displacement of bridge columns.
The Bond_SP01 material model is employed to
ð1Þ simulate the bond slip of the ED bars due to strain
penetration effects. This material was developed by
Zhao and Sritharan (2007) to capture bond slip for
longitudinal steel bars with adequate anchorage length
and such slip resulted from the strain penetration
effect. They found that ignoring the strain penetration
at the column to footing intersection will overestimate
structural lateral stiffness and ED capacities and
underestimate the cracking width at the fixed end
(Sritharan et al., 2000; Zhao and Sritharan, 2007). As
illustrated in Figure 2(c), this material expresses the
reinforcing bar stress versus loaded-end slip relation-
ship. The fy and fu in this figure are the yield strength
and ultimate strength of the steel bar, respectively,
while sy and su are the bar slip corresponding to the
Cai et al.
Figure 2. Constitutive models for concrete and steel bars adopted in this study: (a) Concrete02 material, (b) ReinforcingSteel
material, and (c) Bond_SP01 material.
yield and ultimate points, respectively. The efficiency
and accuracy of the Bond_SP01 material model in
simulating the bond slip of steel bars due to strain
penetration effects have also been verified by He et al.
(2016) and Paolacci and Giannini (2012).
Elastic-perfectly plastic (EPP) material model in
OpenSees (Mazzoni et al., 2009) is adopted for the
unbonded post-tensioned tendons. The prestress force
can be imposed by defining the initial strain condition
of the EPP material. The loss in prestress due to elastic
shortening of the RC segments can be calculated. In
addition, prestress losses caused by anchorage slip,
friction along the tendons, shrinkage and creep of con-
crete, and relaxation of the tendons can be indirectly
accounted for by adjusting the initial strain of the EPP
material.
Section properties
As observed in Figure 1(c) and (d), different cross sec-
tions are used in the FE model to simulate the segment
129
and the joint. The differences among them are: (1)
there are no fibers for non-ED bars in the joint fiber
section, (2) the concrete fibers in the joint sections can-
not transfer tensile force, hence the tensile strength of
these fibers is 0 (i.e. ft = 0), and (3) the Bond_SP01
material is used for the ED bar fibers at the column to
footing intersection (section ‘‘Comparisons of model
predictions with test results’’) in order to account for
the strain penetration effects.
Element selection
In the proposed FE model, the NonlinearBeam
Column element in OpenSees is adopted to simulate
the column segments. Previous test results showed that
under seismic excitations, the relative rotational beha-
vior between two adjacent segments, accounts for part
of the deformation for PSBCs either with or without
ED bars (Hewes and Priestley, 2002; Wang et al.,
2008). Therefore, a ZeroLengthSection element (sec-
tion ‘‘Material model’’ and in Figure 1) is added
130 Advances in Structural Engineering 22(1)

Table 1. Specimen details for model validation.

Reference Specimen Section type L (mm) lR rED (%) NP (kN) NG (kN)

Hewes and Priestley (2002) JH1 Circular 3683 6.0 0.0 2689 890
Hewes and Priestley (2002) JH2 Circular 3683 6.0 0.0 2151 890
Ou et al. (2010a) C0C Hollow square 4030 4.7 0.0 1141 1456
Ou et al. (2010a) C5C Hollow square 4030 4.7 0.5 985 1456
Ou et al. (2010a) C5C-1 Hollow square 4030 4.7 0.5 304 1456
Ou et al. (2010a) C8C Hollow square 4030 4.7 1.0 1039 1456

L: column effective height; lR : column shear span ratio; rED : ED bar ratio; NP: applied post-tensioning force; NG: axial load modeling superstructure
gravity.

between two adjacent segment elements to simulate
the joints in the column. Furthermore, at the column
end, one ZeroLengthSection element (section
‘‘Comparisons of model predictions with test results’’
in and Figure 1) is incorporated to simulate the bond
slip phenomenon of the ED bars (Fahmy et al., 2010;
He et al., 2016; Iranmanesh and Ansari, 2014; Teng
et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2013; Zhao and Sritharan,
2007).
The sliding between two adjacent precast segments
is restricted in the fiber model. This is done for the fol-
lowing reason. Earlier quasi-static tests, dynamic tests
and numerical analysis have shown that, since the fric-
tion shear resistance is larger than the lateral strength
of the PSBC, there is no or negligible sliding at seg-
ment joints (Chou and Chen, 2006; Dawood et al.,
2012; Hewes and Priestley, 2002; Motaref et al., 2014;
Ou et al., 2010a, 2010b).
To preserve the restoring force and the clamping
force needed to hold the segments together, yield
should be prevented for the post-tensioned tendons of
the PSBCs. From this perspective, the unbonded post-
tensioned tendons are more suitable for the PSBC than
bonded ones (Bu and Ou, 2013; Ou et al., 2007) and
are thus adopted in this study. The CorotTruss ele-
ment in OpenSees (Mazzoni et al., 2009), which can
include geometric nonlinearity, is used to model the
un-bonded post-tensioned tendons.
Modeling method validation
Experiment database for model validation
The accuracy and efficiency of the proposed FE model
for the PSBCs is validated by available cyclic test
results of six specimens reported in the literature. The
main details of these specimens are summarized in
Table 1. The shear span ratio lR in the table is defined
as the ratio of the effective height (from the lateral
loading point to the top of the footing) to the diameter
or the height of a cross-section. Three of the six speci-
mens are reinforced with ED bars. The ED bar ratio
rED in Table 1 is defined as the ratio of ED bar area to
the cross-sectional area of the specimen. Un-bonded
post-tensioning tendons are used for all the specimens.
For the other design details of the specimens in
Table 1, please refer to the original studies of Hewes
and Priestley (2002) and Ou et al. (2010a).
Key parameters of the numerical models
The key parameters that cannot be directly obtained
from the experiment database are calculated in accor-
dance with the material models illustrated in Figure 2
and by referring to other studies listed in Table 2. For
detailed information about each parameter, please
refer to the references listed in this table.
Comparisons of model predictions with test results
The six specimen models are analyzed under axial com-
pression and incrementally increasing lateral displace-
ment reversals. Figure 3 shows the lateral load versus
displacement–hysteretic curves obtained from the fiber
model and the test data. As can be seen from the fig-
ure, the predicted hysteretic curves generally compare
well with the test results of six specimens. Besides, as
shown in Figure 4, the simulated joint opening widths
and the prestressing tendon strain responses for speci-
mens JH1, C5C and C8C have also been compared
with the experimental results to further validate the
fiber model. As indicated in this figure, good agree-
ments are also obtained. From the above two parts of
comparisons shown in Figures 3 and 4, the accuracy of
the proposed modeling method in predicting both glo-
bal and local responses of PSBCs have been validated.
Parametric analysis
Based on the developed fiber element modeling
method, the major influencing factors of the residual
drift responses of the ED bar reinforced PSBCs were
investigated through cyclic analysis. According to the
pushover analyses (Bu and Ou, 2013; Ou et al., 2007),
Cai et al.
Table 2. Summary of parameters used for numerical models.
Material Parameter Equation
Concrete02 l l = 0:1
Et Et = ft =0:002
ReinforcingSteel fu fu = 1:35fy
Esh Esh = Es =100
eh eh = 3fy =Es
eu eu = 0:1
lsr lsr = Lp =db ; Lp = 0:08L + 0:022fy db ø 0:011fy db
Bond_SP01 sy  pffiffiffiffiffi 1=a
sy = 2:54 db fy 3(2a + 1)=(8437 fcp )
su su = 35sy
l: ratio between unloading slope at ecu and initial slope; Et : tension softening stiffness; fu : ultimate stress of reinforcement; Esh : slope at strain
hardening; eh and eu : strain at initial hardening and ultimate strain, respectively; lsr : slenderness ratio; sy and su : bar slip at column to footing interface
under yield stress and fracture strength, respectively.
the post-tensioning force, gravity load, ED bar ratio,
and shear span ratio have significant influences on the
backbone curves of PSBCs. Therefore, hysteretic anal-
yses were conducted to investigate the effects of these
four factors on the residual drift responses of PSBCs.
Design of prototype PSBCs
As shown in Figure 5, the prototype PSBCs analyzed
in this article are cantilever circular columns. Each
PSBC consists of a rigid footing and 6–12 precast seg-
ments. The diameter and the height of the precast seg-
ment are both 1.5 m. Therefore, for the prototype
PSBC with shear span ratios of 6, 8, 10, and 12, the
numbers of segments are 6, 8, 10, and 12, respectively,
and the bridge column heights are 9, 12, 15, and 18 m,
respectively. In addition, there is a duct with a diameter
of 200 mm in the center of the segment for passage of
the unbonded post-tensioned tendons. The segment is
laterally confined by f14 mm spirals with a space of
50 mm, which resulted in a hoop reinforcement volu-
metric ratio of 0.9%. The spirals are positioned by
eight f20 mm steel bars which are discontinuous at the
segment joints and thus are referred to as non-ED bars.
The yield strength of the spirals, non-ED bars, and ED
bars are 400 MPa and the axial compressive strength
of the unconfined concrete fc0 is 35 MPa.
The variation in the post-tensioning force NP , grav-
ity load NG , ED bar ratio rED , and shear span ratio l
is shown in Table 3. In this table, nP and nG are the
normalized post-tensioning force and normalized grav-
ity load, respectively, and they are defined as
NP
nP =
f 0c A
NG
nG =
f 0c A
131
Reference
Ko and Phung (2014)
Ko and Phung (2014)
Priestley et al. (2007)
Susantha et al. (2001)
Susantha et al. (2001)
Priestley et al. (2007)
Ko and Phung (2014)
Zhao and Sritharan (2007)
+ 0:34;a = 0:4
Zhao and Sritharan (2007)
where A is the cross-sectional area of the segment. As
shown in Table 3, there are six normalized post-
tensioning forces, three normalized gravity loads, four
ED bar ratios, and four shear span ratios. Therefore,
there are 6 3 3 3 4 3 4 = 288 models analyzed in this
parametric analysis.
The maximum drift ratio response of a bridge col-
umn could be about 4.0% under the maximum credible
earthquake (Priestley et al., 2007). Therefore, in the
cyclic analyses, the PSBC models are subjected to lat-
eral load reversals consisting of one cycle at drift ratios
from 0.5% to 4.0% and with the increment interval of
0.5%. Here, the drift ratio is defined as the ratio of col-
umn tip displacement to column height. The residual
drift ratio that can represent structural self-centering
capabilities is defined as follows
dr last P + dr last N
dr last = ð4Þ
2
where dr last P and dr last N are the residual drift ratios
in the positive and negative directions in the last hys-
teretic loop, respectively.
It should be noted that the residual drift ratios after
cyclic loading are not numerically equal to those after
seismic excitations. In the cyclic analysis, the residual
drift of a column is obtained by directly unloading
from the peak drift; however, under earthquake excita-
tions, after the peak drift response is reached, the col-
umn still oscillates with smaller amplitudes and
eventually comes to rest. As a result, the post-
earthquake residual drift is not obtained by directly
unloading from the peak drift. According to the
research by MacRae and Kawashima (1997),
Kawashima et al. (1998), Ke and Chen (2016), and
ð2Þ
Baiguera et al. (2016), the quasi-static residual drift
can be taken as the maximum possible post-earthquake
ð3Þ residual drift. Therefore, it is of significance to
132
Figure 3. Comparison of predicted hysteretic curves with test results of specimens (a) JH1, (b) JH2, (c) C0C, (d) C5C, (e) C5C-1,
and (f) C8C.
investigate and decrease the quasi-static residual drifts
of the ED bar reinforced PSBCs.
Effects of post-tensioning force
The effects of the normalized post-tensioning force nP
on the residual drift dr last are shown in Figure 6. The
results of 96 models with normalized gravity load
Advances in Structural Engineering 22(1)
nG = 0:1 are given in this figure. As illustrated in
Figure 6(a), for PSBCs with the ED bar ratios
rED = 0:5%, the residual drift keeps increasing with
nP . As for PSBCs with rED = 1:0%, 1:5%, and 2:0%,
it is found from Figure 6(b) to (d) that, while nP keeps
increasing, the residual drift decreases at first but then
increases once nP exceeds the threshold values nP cr .
Cai et al. 133

Figure 4. Comparison of predicted results with test results of column-footing joint opening width v and post-tensioned tendon
strain increment ePT : (a) v of specimen JH1, (b) ePT of JH1, (c) v of C5C, (d) ePT of C5C, (e) v of C8C and (f) ePT of C8C.

The nP cr for PSBCs in Figure 6(b) to (d) are 0.10,
0.15, and 0.20, respectively. Actually, a threshold value
nP cr of 0.05 can also be defined for PSBCs in Figure
6(a). These results indicate that although the post-
tensioning force is the source of the PSBC’s self-
centering capacity, increasing nP will result in larger
residual drifts once nP is larger than a certain threshold
value nP cr . This is owing to the fact that the increase
in the normalized post-tensioning force increases the
total axial compression ratio of the column, thus lead-
ing to the decrease in ductility and the increase in dam-
age level. Hence, the normalized post-tensioning force
should be no larger than the nP cr to maintain small
residual drifts. Please note that this nP cr is suggested
as the upper limit on the normalized post-tensioning
force nP . In practical design of the ED bar reinforced
134
Figure 5. Dimension of the prototype PSBC analyzed in this article.
Table 3. Design parameters of PSBC models in cyclic analysis.
nP 0.05 0.10
nG 0.05 0.10
rED (%) 0.5 1.0
l 6 8 10
np : normalized post-tensioning force; nG : normalized gravity load; rED : ED bar reinforcement ratio; l: shear span ratio.
PSBCs, the nP can also be smaller than the nP cr for
smaller total axial load and better ductility.
Furthermore, the determination method of the
threshold value nP cr is discussed as follows. First, it is
found in Figure 6 that the threshold value nP cr is inde-
pendent of the shear span ratio. To further investigate
the effects of the ED bar ratio and the normalized
gravity load on the nP cr , the nP cr –rED curves for
PSBCs with the normalized gravity load nG =
0:05, 0:10, and0:15 are summarized in Figure 7. As
indicated in this figure, nP cr = 0:05 for all the PSBC
models with rED = 0:5%, when the ED bar ratio
rED .0:5%, the nP cr increased linearly with rED while
it decreased linearly with the normalized gravity load
nG . Therefore, based on the results shown in Figure 7,
the function of nP cr can be expressed as follows
 the effects of nG on the residual drifts are insignificant.
0:05, rED = 0:5%
nP cr = ð5Þ
10rED  nG + 0:1, 0:5%\rED ł 2:0%
Accordingly, equation (5) can be used to determine
the upper limit of the post-tensioning force in the
design procedure of the ED bar reinforced PSBCs.
Advances in Structural Engineering 22(1)
0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.15 / / /
1.5 2.0 / /
12 / /
Effects of gravity load
Figure 8 shows the effects of the normalized gravity
load nG on the residual drift ratio dr last for PSBC
models with shear span ratios of 6. To avoid severe
interlacing of the result curves and for ease of inspect-
ing the effects of the gravity load, only the results for
PSBC models with normalized post-tensioning forces
nP = 0:05, 0:10, and0:15were presented in this figure.
Please note that the results corresponding to
nP = 0:20, 0:25, and0:30 indicate the same trends as the
results presented in Figure 8. The following two con-
clusions can be drawn from Figure 8: (1) the residual
drift ratio of the PSBC increases with the normalized
gravity load and (2) the PSBC with a smaller ED bar
ratio is much more sensitive to the increase in the nor-
malized gravity load, and for PSBCs with rED ø 1:5%,
The mechanical explanations for the above conclu-
sions are presented as follows. The increase in the
gravity load causes severer damages, lower ductility,
and hence larger residual drift ratios for the PSBCs.
On the other hand, the increase in the ED bar ratio
Cai et al. 135

Figure 6. Effects of nP on residual drift ratios for PSBCs having nG = 0:10 and rED = (a)0:5% , (b) 1.0%, (c) 1.5%, and (d) 2.0%.

Effects of ED bar ratio

The residual drift ratio dr last versus the ED bar ratio
rED curves for the PSBC models with the normalized
gravity load nG = 0.1 are shown in Figure 9. For the
sake of clarity, only the results for PSBC models with
normalized post-tensioning forces nP = 0:05,
0:10, and0:15 were presented in this figure. The results
corresponding to nP = 0:20, 0:25, and 0:30 indicate the
same trends as the results presented in Figure 9. As
observed in this figure, the residual drift ratio of a
PSBC increases significantly while the ED bar ratio
increases from 0.5% to 1.0%. However, the increase
rate of the residual drift ratio slows down significantly
once the ED bar ratio is larger than 1.0%. In other
Figure 7. Effects of rED and nG on the threshold values nP cr .
words, the increase in the ED bar ratio only has a
slight influence on the residual drift ratios when the
ED bar ratio rED ø 1:0%. The mechanical explana-
within some range is beneficial in improving the displa-
tions for the above conclusions are as follows. The cyc-
cement ductility of the PSBC and relieving the com-
lic analysis results of this study and the quasi-static
pressive stresses in concrete, which further contributes
test results of Ou et al. (2010a) permit the following
to decreasing the damage and residual drift. Therefore,
two observations: (1) for PSBCs of which the ED bar
the adverse impact of the increase in gravity loads is
ratios rED are 0.5% or less, the PSBCs perform like
more significant for PSBCs with smaller ED bar ratios
rocking columns and exhibit flag-shaped hysteretic
(i.e. lower ductility).
models, and the plastic hinge regions generally do not
136 Advances in Structural Engineering 22(1)

Figure 8. Effects of nG on residual drift ratios for PSBCs having l = 6 and rED = (a) 0.5%, (b) 1.0%, (c) 1.5%, and (d) 2.0%.

Figure 9. Effects of rED on residual drift ratios for PSBCs having nG = 0:10 and l = (a) 6, (b) 8, (c) 10, and (d) 12.
Cai et al.
Figure 10. Effects of l on residual drift ratios of PSBCs having nG = 0:10 and rED = (a) 0.5%, (b) 1.0%, (c) 1.5%, and (d) 2.0%.
form; (2) however, for PSBCs with rED ø 1:0%, the
columns can form evident plastic hinge regions, exhibit
plump hysteretic curves and have cyclic behavior simi-
lar to monotonic columns. Therefore, with ED bar
ratio increases from 0.5% to 1.0%, the cyclic behavior
and hysteretic model of the PSBC changed dramati-
cally. But when rED continues increasing from 1.0%,
the changes in the cyclic behavior and hysteretic model
are not so evident. As a result, the residual drift ratio
of the PSBC is very sensitive to rED when rED \1:0%,
and much less sensitive when rED ø 1:0%.
Effects of shear span ratio
Figure 10 shows the relationship between the dr last
and the shear span ratio l for the PSBC models with
the normalized gravity load nG = 0:1. For the sake of
clarity, only the results for PSBC models with normal-
ized post-tensioning forces nP = 0:05, 0:10, and0:15
were presented in this figure. Please note that the
results corresponding to nP = 0:20, 0:25, and0:30 indi-
cate the same trends as the results presented in Figure
10. It is found that with the shear span ratio increasing
from 6 to 12, the PSBCs tend to be more ductile and
the hysteretic loops become thinner. As illustrated in
137
Figure 10, the residual drift ratio decreases generally
proportionally with the increase of shear span ratio.
This result indicates that the unloading path and
unloading stiffness of the PSBC are closely related to
the shear span ratio. Accurate and quantitative expla-
nations for the above result can be obtained by devel-
oping the simplified hysteretic model of the ED bar
reinforced PSBC. However, such hysteretic model is
outside the scope of this study and can be developed in
the future by using the efficient modeling method pro-
posed in this article. According to the results shown in
Figure 10, it can be concluded that the PSBC with a
larger shear span ratio has a higher self-centering capa-
bility. It is suggested that priority should be given to
PSBCs with larger shear span ratios in practical design
from the viewpoint of improving the post-earthquake
reparability.
The residual drift ratio versus loading drift curves
are further illustrated in Figure 11. As indicated in this
figure, the residual drift ratio generally increases with
the loading drift ratio in the form of exponential func-
tions. Such increase rate gets smaller as the shear span
ratio increases. According to the Seismic Design Code
of Highway Bridges of Japan (Japan Road Association
(JRA), 2012), the residual drift ratio for bridge
138
Figure 11. Residual drift ratio to drift ratio relationships for PSBCs having l = (a) 6, (b) 8, (c) 10 and (d) 12.
columns should be no larger than 1.0% so that the
structures can be repaired. In addition, according to
the research by MacRae and Kawashima (1997) and
Kawashima et al. (1998), the quasi-static residual drifts
of columns can be taken as the maximum possible resi-
dual drifts after earthquake excitations. Therefore,
according to Figure 11, for the PSBCs with
l = 6, 8, 10, and 12, the recoverability can be guaran-
teed if the drift ratios are smaller than 2.6%, 3.0%,
3.5%, and 3.9%, respectively. This can be used as a
conservative and simplified criterion for the allowable
drift ratio response in the design of the PSBC to main-
tain good recoverability. It is important to recognize
that this article studies the self-centering behavior of
the PSBCs by quasi-static analyses, but the residual
drift ratios after cyclic loading are not numerically
equal to those after seismic excitations.
Conclusions
The influencing factors of residual drifts of the ED bar
reinforced PSBCs have seldom been investigated,
which could be attributed to that the commonly used
micro-scale numerical models for PSBCs are inefficient
in cyclic analyses. Considering this, a novel fiber ele-
ment modeling method was first proposed, then
Advances in Structural Engineering 22(1)
detailed cyclic analyses were carried out to research
the influences of major factors on the residual drift
responses of the PSBCs. The main findings and con-
clusions of this study are summarized as follows:
1. The proposed fiber element model for the
PSBC considered the joint opening behavior
between two adjacent segments, the bond slip
phenomenon at the column end, and the com-
bined damage mechanisms of reinforcing steel
and concrete materials. The simulated force-
drift hysteretic responses, joint opening beha-
vior, and the post-tensioned tendon strain
responses compared favorably with test results.
2. If the normalized post-tensioning force nP was
larger than a certain threshold value nP cr , the
increase in nP would result in larger residual
drifts. This nP cr increased with the ED bar ratio,
decreased with the normalized gravity load, and
was generally independent of the shear span
ratio of the PSBC. Furthermore, an equation
(equation 5) was developed to determine the
nP cr , which can be employed as the upper limit
of nP in the practical design of the PSBC.
3. The residual drift of the PSBC increased with
the normalized gravity load nG , since larger
Cai et al.
gravity loads cause severer damages and lower
ductility. Moreover, the effect of nG is more
significant for the PSBC with an ED bar ratio
rED ł 1:0% than that with rED ø 1:5%. This is
principally due to the fact that the decrease in
the ED bar ratio results in lower ductility of
the PSBC and higher compressive stresses of
the concrete.
4. For the parametric combinations studied
herein, the residual drifts of a PSBC increased
significantly while the ED bar ratio rED
increased from 0.5% to 1.0%. However, for
PSBCs with rED ø 1:0%, the increase in rED
had an insignificant effect on the PSBC residual
drifts.
5. With the increase in the shear span ratio l, the
residual drifts of the ED bar reinforced PSBC
decreased significantly. According to the para-
metric combinations studied in this article, for
the PSBCs with l = 6, 8, 10, and12, the post-
earthquake reparability can be guaranteed if
the maximum drift ratio responses are smaller
than 2.6%, 3.0%, 3.5%, and 3.9%, respec-
tively. And this can be used as a conservative
and simplified criterion for the allowable drift
ratio response in the design of the PSBC.
The study presented herein research of the residual
drift responses of ED bar reinforced PSBCs through
cyclic analyses, since the quasi-static residual drifts can
be taken as the maximum possible post-earthquake
residual drifts. Using the computationally efficient
modeling method, further studies can be devoted to
developing a seismic design method that uses both
maximum drift response and post-earthquake residual
drift as performance indexes.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: The authors are grateful for the financial support
received from the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (Grant No. 51478143, 51278150). Experimental data
provided by Dr Yu-Chen Ou and Dr Joshua Hewes is also
greatly appreciated.
ORCID iD
Zhong-Kui Cai https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9427-2514
139
References
Baiguera M, Vasdravellis G and Karavasilis TL (2016) Dual
seismic-resistant steel frame with high post-yield stiffness
energy-dissipative braces for residual drift reduction. Jour-
nal of Constructional Steel Research 122: 198–212.
Billington SL and Yoon JK (2004) Cyclic response of
unbonded posttensioned precast columns with ductile
fiber-reinforced concrete. Journal of Bridge Engineering 9:
353–363.
Billington SL, Barnes RW and Breen JE (1999) A precast
segmental substructure system for standard bridges. PCI
Journal 44: 56–73.
Bu ZY and Ou YC (2013) Simplified analytical pushover
method for precast segmental concrete bridge columns.
Advances in Structural Engineering 16: 805–822.
Bu ZY, Ding Y, Chen J, et al. (2012) Investigation of the seis-
mic performance of precast segmental tall bridge columns.
Structural Engineering and Mechanics 43: 287–309.
Bu ZY, Ou YC, Song JW, et al. (2016) Cyclic loading test of
unbonded and bonded posttensioned precast segmental
bridge columns with circular section. Journal of Bridge
Engineering 21: 04015043.
Chang GA and Mander JB (1994) Seismic energy based fati-
gue damage analysis of bridge columns: part 1—evaluation
of seismic capacity (NCEER). Report No. NCEER-94-
0006. New York: National Center for Earthquake Engi-
neering Research.
Chou CC and Chen YC (2006) Cyclic tests of post-tensioned
precast CFT segmental bridge columns with unbonded
strands. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics
35: 159–175.
Dawood H, ElGawady M and Hewes J (2012) Behavior of
segmental precast posttensioned bridge piers under lateral
loads. Journal of Bridge Engineering 17: 735–746.
ElGawady MA and Sha’Lan A (2011) Seismic behavior of
self-centering precast segmental bridge bents. Journal of
Bridge Engineering 16: 328–339.
Fahmy MFM, Wu Z, Wu G, et al. (2010) Post-yield stiff-
nesses and residual deformations of RC bridge columns
reinforced with ordinary rebars and steel fiber composite
bars. Engineering Structures 32: 2969–2983.
Han LH, Yao GH and Zhao XL (2004) Behavior and calcu-
lation on concrete-filled steel CHS (Circular Hollow Sec-
tion) beam-columns. Steel and Composite Structures 4:
169–188.
He R, Yang Y and Sneed LH (2016) Post – repair seismic
assessment of RC bridges damaged with fractured column
bars – A numerical approach. Engineering Structures 112:
100–113.
Hewes JT and Priestley MJN (2002) Seismic design and per-
formance of precast concrete segmental bridge columns.
Report No. UCSD/SSRP-2001/25. San Diego, CA: Uni-
versity of California, San Diego.
Iranmanesh A and Ansari F (2014) Energy-based damage
assessment methodology for structural health monitoring
of modern reinforced concrete bridge columns. Journal of
Bridge Engineering 19.
Jeong ILH, Sakai J and Mahin AS (2008) Shaking table tests
and numerical investigation of self-centering reinforced
140
concrete bridge columns (PEER). Report No. PEER 2008/
06. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
Japan Road Association (JRA) (2012) Design specifications
of highway bridges, part V: seismic design (JRA). Techni-
cal report, JRA-2012. Tokyo, Japan: Japan Road
Association.
Kawashima K, MacRae GA, Hoshikuma J, et al. (1998)
Residual displacement response spectrum. Journal of
Structural Engineering 124: 523–530.
Ke K and Chen YY (2016) Seismic performance of MRFs
with high strength steel main frames and EDBs. Journal
of Constructional Steel Research 126: 214–228.
Kim DH, Moon DY, Kim MK, et al. (2015) Experimental
test and seismic performance of partial precast concrete
segmental bridge column with cast-in-place base. Engi-
neering Structures 100: 178–188.
Ko Y and Phung C (2014) Nonlinear static cyclic pushover
analysis for flexural failure of reinforced concrete bridge
columns with combined damage mechanisms. Acta
Mechanica 225: 477–492.
Kwan W and Billington S (2003) Unbonded posttensioned
concrete bridge piers. I: monotonic and cyclic analyses.
Journal of Bridge Engineering 8: 92–101.
Lee WK and Billington SL (2010) Modeling residual displa-
cements of concrete bridge columns under earthquake
loads using fiber elements. Journal of Bridge Engineering
15: 240–249.
Liossatou E and Fardis MN (2015) Residual displacements
of RC structures as SDOF systems. Earthquake Engineer-
ing & Structural Dynamics 44: 713–734.
MacRae GA and Kawashima K (1997) Post-earthquake resi-
dual displacements of bilinear oscillators. Earthquake
Engineering & Structural Dynamics 26: 701–716.
Mander JB, Priestley MJN and Park R (1988) Theoretical
stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Struc-
tural Engineering 114: 1804–1826.
Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott HM, et al. (2009) Open Sys-
tem for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (Opensees)
Command Language Manual. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earth-
quake Engineering Research Center (PEER), University
of California, Berkeley.
Menegotto M and Pinto PE (1973) Method of analysis for
cyclically loaded RC plane frames including changes in
geometry and non-elastic behavior of elements under
combined normal force and bending. In: Proceeding of
IABSE symposium on resistance and ultimate deformability
of structures acted on by well defined repeated loads, inter-
national association for bridge and structural engineering
(IABSE), Zurich, 22–24 January. Zurich: International
Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering
(IABSE).
Motaref S, Saiidi MS and Sanders D (2014) Shake table stud-
ies of energy-dissipating segmental bridge columns. Jour-
nal of Bridge Engineering 19: 186–199.
Ou YC, Chiewanichakorn M, Aref AJ, et al. (2007) Seismic
performance of segmental precast unbonded
Advances in Structural Engineering 22(1)
posttensioned concrete bridge columns. Journal of Struc-
tural Engineering 133: 1636–1647.
Ou YC, Tsai MS, Chang KC, et al. (2010b) Cyclic behavior
of precast segmental concrete bridge columns with high
performance or conventional steel reinforcing bars as
energy dissipation bars. Earthquake Engineering & Struc-
tural Dynamics 39: 1181–1198.
Ou YC, Wang PH, Tsai MS, et al. (2010a) Large-scale
experimental study of precast segmental unbonded post-
tensioned concrete bridge columns for seismic regions.
Journal of Structural Engineering 136: 255–264.
Paolacci F and Giannini R (2012) An experimental and
numerical investigation on the cyclic response of a portal
frame pier belonging to an old reinforced concrete via-
duct. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 41:
1109–1127.
Priestley MJN, Calvi GM and Kowalsky MJ (2007) Displa-
cement-Based Seismic Design of Structures. Pavia: IUSS
Press.
Roh H, Reinhorn AM and Lee JS (2012) Modeling and cyc-
lic behavior of segmental bridge column connected with
shape memory alloy bars. Earthquake Engineering and
Engineering Vibration 11: 375–389.
Scott BD, Park R and Priestley MJN (1982) Stress-strain
behavior of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at
low and high strain rates. ACI Structural Journal 79:
13–27.
Sideris P, Aref AJ and Filiatrault A (2014) Quasi-static cyclic
testing of a large-scale hybrid sliding-rocking segmental
column with slip-dominant joints. Journal of Bridge Engi-
neering 19: 04014036.
Sritharan S, Priestley MJN and Seible F (2000) Nonlinear
finite element analyses of concrete bridge joint systems
subjected to seismic actions. Finite Elements in Analysis
and Design 36: 215–233.
Susantha K, Ge HB and Usami T (2001) Uniaxial stress-
strain relationship of concrete confined by various shaped
steel tubes. Engineering Structures 23: 1331–1347.
Teng JG, Lam L, Lin G, et al. (2015) Numerical simulation
of frp-jacketed rc columns subjected to cyclic and seismic
loading. Journal of Composites for Construction 20:
04015021.
Wang J, Ou Y, Chang K, et al. (2008) Large-scale seismic
tests of tall concrete bridge columns with precast segmen-
tal construction. Earthquake Engineering & Structural
Dynamics 37: 1449–1465.
Yassin MHM (1994) Nonlinear Analysis of Prestressed Con-
crete Structures Under Monotonic and Cyclic Loads. Ber-
keley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
Zhang Y, Harries KA and Yuan W (2013) Experimental and
numerical investigation of the seismic performance of hol-
low rectangular bridge piers constructed with and without
steel fiber reinforced concrete. Engineering Structures 48:
255–265.
Zhao J and Sritharan S (2007) Modeling of strain penetra-
tion effects in fiber-based analysis of reinforced concrete
structures. ACI Structural Journal 104: 133–141.