You are on page 1of 25

UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA

Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering

Different Approaches to the Seismic Analysis


of Bridges
T. Isaković
Two Basic Design Approaches

Direct Displacement Based


Strength Based Design (SBD) Design (DDBD)
FE
Fy = FE/Rm
Du = m Dy

Force
Fy
Force

m = Du/Dy
Dy Du Dy Du
Displacement Displacement

Equal displacement rule


Long and medium periods Rm = m
Peak ground acceleration ag = 0.35g
h1 = h3 = 14 m Strength
Soil type A
Based Design
h2 = 21 m
4 x 50 m = 200 m
i=1 2 3 ... 15 16 17

h1 h2 h3

Plastic hinge
0.4m
Properties of plastic hinges
column My [kNm] y strain hardening 3.2m 4.0m
h1, h3 46700 3,07·10-3 0,07
k=?
h2 35800 3,72·10-3 0,06
0.4m
20
18 0.4m 1.2m 0.4m
16
Sa(TC) = 14.7 m/s2
Acceleration Sa

2.0m
14
12
S10a
8
6 Sa(TD) = Sa(TD)5% = 3.68 m/s2
4
2
TB = 0.15s TC = 0.5s TD = 2s
0
0 1 2 3 4
T
Period T
Strength Based Design

FE=mSa

Fy = mSa/q
Force

Dy Du
Displacement
Direct displacement based design

• Yield displacement is estimated:


2.25𝜀𝑦 𝜙𝑦 (𝐻 + 𝐿𝑠𝑝 )2
𝜙𝑦 = Δ𝑦 =
𝐷 3
• Ultimate displacement is defined based on Dy and
chosen ductility m or maximum drift (e.g. 3,0%)

Fy
Du = mDy
Force

ksec
keq

Dy Du Displacement
Direct displacement based design

0.7

0.6
Sd(TD)5% x = 5%
Displacement Sd

0.5
Sd(TD)xeq xeq
0.4
Du
0.3

0.2

0.1
Tsec TD
0
0 1 2 3 4

Period T
DDBD

Fy

Force

ksec
keq

Dy Du Displacement
Two Basic Design Approaches – Are they different?

- No: For structures, which can be represented


by SDOF models and when the same
assumptions and the input data are taken into
account
- Typically different assumptions are used and
the input data can be also different
- Main sources of differences:
- DDBD does not take into account equal
displacement rule
- Estimation of the initial equivalent (pre-
yielding) stiffness in the SBD
Traditional Representation of the
Equal Displacement Rule
Ieff ≠ Igross

FE

Fy1 Rm = 1.5
Force

Fy2 Rm = 3.0

Dy2 Dy1 Du

Displacement
Yield displacement Dy

140

120

100

Moment [kNm]
80

Circular columns 60

40

20

Priestley et al., 1997 0


0 0,05 0,1

curvature [1/m]

Approximately the same Dy displacements for columns


with the same geometry and quality of steel
Traditional Representation of the
Equal Displacement Rule
Ieff ≠ Igross

Same diameter: D = 2.1 m


FE Same mass: m = 800 t

Fy1 Rm = 1.5
Force

Fy2 Rm = 3.0

H3
H2
H1
Dy2 Dy1 Du

Displacement H1 = 7.5 m H2 = 10.6 m H3 = 13.0 m


m1 = 0.5% m2 = 3.0% m3 = 6.5%
Equal displacement rule –
the same structure, different strength reduction

Fe1 Essentially elastic


response
Fe2

Fy2 DCM
Force

Fe3

Fy3 DCH

D2 D3
Dy1 ≈ Dy2 ≈ Dy3 Displacement
Two oscillators with the same pre-yielding stiffness and mass
have the same ultimate displacements
Effective stiffness keff – SDOF systems

Constant velocity region of the acceleration spectrum

Fe 0.4 Sd(TD)
0.35

Displacement Sd
0.3
Force

0.25
Du
0.2
Fy
0.15
0.1
0.05
Teq TD
keq Dy Du 0
0 1 2 3 4

Period T
Displacement

𝒎 ⋅ 𝒄𝟐𝒂 𝒂𝟐𝒈 𝑻𝟐𝑪


𝒌𝒆𝒒 =
𝟒𝝅𝟐 (𝑹𝝁 𝚫𝒚 )𝟐
2.25𝜀𝑦 𝜙𝑦 (𝐻 + 𝐿𝑠𝑝 )2
𝜙𝑦 = Δ𝑦 =
𝐷 3
𝒎 ⋅ 𝒄𝟐𝒂 𝒂𝟐𝒈 𝑻𝟐𝑪
𝒌𝒆𝒒 =
𝟒𝝅𝟐 (𝑹𝝁 𝚫𝒚 )𝟐
The strength - SBD
SBD versus DDBD

SBD

Equal displacement
rule
DDBD

Empirical
expression
DDBD and the equal displacement rule

Empirical
expression

Equal displacement rule


Comparison of reduction coefficients

1.20
1.00
Coefficient

0.80
cr
cr
0.60
cr1
cr1
0.40
Cr2(a = 5%)
cr2(a=5%)
0.20
Cr2(a = 10%)
cr2(a=10%)
0.00
1 2 3 4 5
Ductilty m
The ratio of the strength

1.4

1.2

1
Cr12/Cr2
cr12/cr2

0.8
Ratio

2 2
Cr2 (a = 5%)/Cr
cr22(a=5%)/cr2
0.6

0.4 Cr22(a = 10%)/Cr2


cr22(a=10%)/cr2
0.2

0
1 2 3 4 5
Ductilty m
Numerical example

m = 815 t Cross-Section
7m

1.8 m

fsy = 500 MPa; esy = 0.0025; Es = 200 GPa


fck = 30 MPa, fcm = 38 MPa; Ec = 30 GPa
Rm = m = 3.5
Eurocode 8/2 spectrum, Soil B, PGA = 0.5g
Eurocode 8/2 spectrum, Soil B, ag = 0,5g
20
18
16
Sa(TC) = 14.7 m/s2

Acceleration Sa
14
12
10
8
6 Sa(TD) = Sa(TD)5% = 3.68 m/s2
4
2
TB = 0.15s TC = 0.5s TD = 2s
0
0 1 2 3 4

Period T

0.7
Sd(TD) = Sd(TD)5% = 37.27 cm
0.6
Displacement Sd

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2
Sd(TC) = 9.3 cm
0.1
TB = 0.15s TC = 0.5s TD = 2s
0
0 1 2 3 4

Period T
Standard SBD and DDBD procedures
SBD DDBD

Assumed pre-yielding stiffness

The stiffness corresponding to My


Modified SBD and DDBD procedures
SBD DDBD

Assumed pre-yielding stiffness

The stiffness corresponding to My


Numerical example - Overview

Method FR [kN] Du [cm] Dy [cm] Cr


SBD 2608 12.25 3.50 -
(Ieff = 50% Igross)

DDBD 2560 17.86 5.10 0.640


Modified
1786 17.86 5.10 0.535
SBD

Modified
1786 17.86 5.10 0.535
DDBD
Conclusions

• The main sources of differences between SBD and DDBD:


– Estimation of the equivalent pre-yielding stiffness in SBD
– Equal displacement rule is not taken into account in DDBD
• When these differences are eliminated the results for SDOF
systems are the same
• The pre-yielding stiffness of SDOF systems can be estimated
based on the estimated yield displacement
• The evaluation of the response using the nonlinear analysis is
strongly recommended for structures with very different
components
• In structures, where the influence of the higher modes are
important the multimode nonlinear static methods or nonlinear
response history analysis is strongly recommended