Numerical and hybrid analysis of a curved bridge and methods of numerical model calibration

被引:36
作者
Abdelnaby, Adel E. [1 ]
Frankie, Thomas M. [2 ]
Elnashai, Amr S. [2 ]
Spencer, Billie F. [2 ]
Kuchma, Daniel A. [2 ]
Silva, Pedro [3 ]
Chang, Chia-Ming [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Memphis, Dept Civil Engn, Memphis, TN 38152 USA
[2] Univ Illinois, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Urbana, IL 61801 USA
[3] George Washington Univ, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Washington, DC 20052 USA
[4] Guangzhou Univ, Earthquake Engn Res & Test Ctr, Guangzhou 510405, Guangdong, Peoples R China
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Curved bridge; Hybrid simulation; Numerical model calibration; Combined actions; Multi-directional loading; SHEAR-FLEXURE INTERACTION; CONCRETE MEMBERS; COLUMNS; SIMULATION; BEHAVIOR;
D O I
10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.04.009
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Reinforced concrete (RC) bridge piers are subjected to combined loading conditions resulting from complex earthquake ground motions coupled with irregular geometry and asymmetry of the bridge structure. Furthermore, the influence of the assumptions and simplifications made in modeling irregular and curved bridges on the reliability of their resulting response data is still not fully known. For that purpose, in this paper a hybrid simulation test is conducted on a curved four-span bridge. This test accounts for the three-dimensional (3D) system-level interaction between the three experimental piers in two testing facilities with the numerical models of the deck, restraints and abutments. Prior to the hybrid simulation, a detailed numerical finite element, fiber-based model of the whole bridge system is established. The analytical predictions of this model are then used for comparison with the hybrid simulation test results. Discrepancies between the numerical and experimental results of the bridge piers response are highlighted and deficiencies in the numerical model assumptions are discussed. A rigorous numerical model calibration procedure is then followed to adjust for the initial modeling assumptions and improve the bridge model overall response. This study has proven that some modeling assumptions that are widely used in seismic analysis of bridge structures are unrealistic and therefore may lead to inaccurate results. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:234 / 245
页数:12
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
Abdelnaby A, 2013, J SYST CYBERN INFOR, V11, P48
[2]  
*AM ASS STAT HIGHW, 2009, AASHTO LRFD BRIDG DE
[3]  
Applied Technology Council and the Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, 2002, 472 NCHRP
[4]  
Belarbi A, 2010, AM CONCRETE I, V271-05, P79
[5]  
Belarbi A, 2009, STRUCT ENG MECH, V33, P137
[6]   alpha-Operator Splitting time integration technique for pseudodynamic testing - Error propagation analysis [J].
Combescure, D ;
Pegon, P .
SOIL DYNAMICS AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 1997, 16 (7-8) :427-443
[7]  
Elnashai A.S., 2002, Zeus NL - a system for inelastic analysis of structures
[8]  
Frankie T., 2013, THESIS U ILLINOIS UR
[9]  
Gencturk B, 2012, ASCE STRUCT C CHIC I
[10]  
Hindi RA, 2011, ACI STRUCT J, V108, P139