Vulnerability evaluation and strengthening criteria for R.C. bridges
P.E. Pinto e G. Monti (A cura di)
1 |
Introduction |
4 |
|
2 |
Bridge systems |
9 |
|
|
2.1 Analytical seismic assessment of the bridges on a highway system |
9 |
|
|
2.2 Screening of the bridges to be examined |
10 |
|
|
2.2.1 Hazard analysis |
11 |
|
|
2.2.2 Natural seismic resistance |
12 |
|
|
2.2.3 Final selection of bridges |
14 |
|
|
2.3 Evaluation of the bridges |
15 |
|
|
2.3.1 Outline of the procedure |
15 |
|
|
2.3.2 The data bank SAMOA |
16 |
|
|
2.3.3 Simulated design of the piers |
17 |
|
|
2.3.4 Evaluation procedure |
17 |
|
|
2.3.5 Quantification of risk |
19 |
|
|
2.3.6 Selacted results |
21 |
|
|
2.4 Acceptance criterion |
23 |
|
|
2.4.1 Calculation of f P for g A = 0.35g |
24 |
|
|
2.5 Results and conclusions |
26 |
|
|
2.6 References |
26 |
|
3 |
Important Phenomena affecting the bridge response |
27 |
|
|
3.1 Multi-support excitation |
27 |
|
|
3.1.1 Soil motion |
28 |
|
|
3.1.1.1 Spatial model for ground motion |
28 |
|
|
3.1.2 Convertional bridges |
36 |
|
|
3.1.2.1 Design of the bridges |
37 |
|
|
3.1.2.2 Elastic response |
39 |
|
|
3.1.2.3 Non linear response of bridges to multi-support excitation |
44 |
|
|
3.1.2.4 Bridges with non-synchronous design |
44 |
|
|
3.1.2.5 Bridges with synchronous design |
47 |
|
|
3.1.2.6 Conclusions regarding conventional bridges |
49 |
|
|
3.1.3 Isolated bridges |
52 |
|
|
3.1.3.1 Bridge model and equivalent stiffness and damping ratio of the isolator |
52 |
|
|
3.1.3.2 Equations of motion of the bridge |
53 |
|
|
3.1.3.3 Response of the isolators |
54 |
|
|
3.1.3.4 Treatment of damping |
55 |
|
|
3.1.3.5 Iterative procedure |
56 |
|
|
3.1.3.6 Design of the isolated bridge |
57 |
|
|
3.1.3.7 Results of the analyses |
58 |
|
|
3.1.4 References |
65 |
|
|
3.2 Soil-structure interaction |
68 |
|
|
3.2.1 Mechanical model and equation of motion |
71 |
|
|
3.2.1.1 Superstructure |
71 |
|
|
3.2.1.2 Foundation and foundation soil |
72 |
|
|
3.2.1.3 Effective damping of the soil-structure system |
74 |
|
|
3.2.1.4 Seismic input |
75 |
|
|
3.2.1.5 Equation of motion |
75 |
|
|
3.2.2 Cases examined |
76 |
|
|
3.2.3 Results |
79 |
|
|
3.2.4 Conclusions |
86 |
|
|
3.2.5 References |
86 |
|
|
3.3 Vertical oscillations |
88 |
|
|
3.3.1 The analyzed structures: geometry and dimensioning |
89 |
|
|
3.3.2 The numerical models for non-linear time-hystory analyses |
93 |
|
|
3.3.3 Results of non-linear analyses |
95 |
|
|
3.3.4 Simple mechanical model for axial vibrations |
101 |
|
|
3.3.5 Conclusions |
105 |
|
|
3.3.6 References |
106 |
|
4 |
Upgrading of bridge piers with FRP |
108 |
|
|
4.1 Properties and behavior of FRP-confined concrete |
108 |
|
|
4.1.1 Basis model for unconfined concrete |
108 |
|
|
4.1.2 Concrete model with elastic confinement |
110 |
|
|
4.1.3 Some considerations on modeling concrete confined with steel or FRP |
112 |
|
|
4.1.4 Comparison with experimental results |
116 |
|
|
4.1.4.1 Tests by Picher et al. (1996) |
117 |
|
|
4.1.4.2 Tests by Kawashima et al. (1997) |
118 |
|
|
4.1.4.3 Tests by Mirmiran and Shahawy (1997) |
119 |
|
|
4.1.5 Predictive equations of FRP-confined concrete properties |
121 |
|
|
4.1.6 Agreement with experiments |
122 |
|
|
4.2 Response of FRP-wrapped sections |
124 |
|
|
4.2.1 Assessment of FRP-confined section model |
128 |
|
|
4.2.2 Parametric study on FRP-confined sections |
130 |
|
|
4.3 Design criteria for upgrading through FRP wrapping |
134 |
|
|
4.3.1 Upgrading index of FRP-wrapped pier sections |
135 |
|
|
4.3.2 Mechanical Model of the Upgrading Index |
136 |
|
|
4.3.3 Considerations over the error functions E |
140 |
|
|
4.3.4 Comparison between analytical and numerical indices |
141 |
|
|
4.3.5 Use of the upgrading index for design of FRP jackets |
144 |
|
|
4.3.6 Design Example |
146 |
|
|
4.3.7 Ductility upgrading of piers in seismic regions |
146 |
|
|
4.4 Conclusions |
148 |
|
|
4.5 References |
149 |
TESTO (formato pdf)