Factors affecting the seismic behavior of segmental precast bridge columns

doi:10.1007/s11709-014-0264-8

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.

2014, Vol. 8

Issue (4) : 388-398 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-014-0264-8

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Factors affecting the seismic behavior of segmental precast bridge columns

Haitham DAWOOD¹,Mohamed ELGAWADY^2,^*(

),Joshua HEWES³

1. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0002, USA
2. Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla MO 65409, USA
3. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff AZ 86011, USA

Download: PDF(1285 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

This manuscript discusses the design parameters that potentially affect the lateral seismic response of segmental precast post-tensioned bridge piers. The piers consist of precast circular cross section segments stacked one on top of the other with concentric tendons passing through ducts made in the segments during casting. The bottommost segments of the piers were encased in steel tubes to enhance ductility and minimize damage. An FE model was used to investigate different design parameters and how they influence the lateral force – displacement response of the piers. Design parameters investigated included the initial post-tensioning stress as a percentage of the tendon yield stress, the applied axial stresses on concrete due to post-tensioning, pier aspect ratios, construction details, steel tube thicknesses, and internal mild steel rebar added as energy dissipaters. Based on the data presented, an initial tendon stress in the range of 40%-60% of its yield stress and initial axial stress on concrete of approximately 20% of the concrete’s characteristic strength is appropriate for most typical designs. These design values will prevent tendon yielding until lateral drift angle reaches approximately 4.5%. Changing the steel tube thickness, height, or a combination of both proved to be an effective parameter that may be used to reach a target performance level at a specific seismic zone.

Keywords finite element analysis concrete precast units bridges

Corresponding Author(s): Mohamed ELGAWADY

Online First Date: 22 September 2014 Issue Date: 12 January 2015

Cite this article:

Haitham DAWOOD,Mohamed ELGAWADY,Joshua HEWES. Factors affecting the seismic behavior of segmental precast bridge columns[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2014, 8(4): 388-398.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-014-0264-8
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2014/V8/I4/388

Fig.1 Detailed dimensions for (a) standard pier and (b) pier B

Fig.2 A typical mesh and applied loads and displacements for the SPPT pier.

Tab.1 Different values assigned to each design parameter in the study

Fig.3 The effects of changing the initial post-tensioning stress in the tendons while keeping the same stress on concrete

Fig.4 Drifts of different pier vs. the stresses in the post-tensioning tendons normalized by its yield stress

Fig.5 The effects of changing the initial post-tensioning stress in the tendons for squat piers

Fig.6 Drift of squat piers vs. the stresses in the post-tensioning tendons normalized by their yield stress

Fig.7 The effects of increasing the axial stresses due to post-tensioning forces on concrete segments

Fig.8 The increase in the post-tensioning stresses vs. the standard piers lateral drifts

Fig.9 The effects of increasing the axial stresses on concrete segments for Pier B

Fig.10 The increase in the post-tensioning stresses vs. piers type B lateral drifts

Fig.11 Layout of the piers having different aspect ratios

Fig.12 The effect of changing the piers’ aspect ratio on the backbone curves

Fig.13 The mechanism of deformation for slender and squat piers

Fig.14 Configuration of each pier of CON series

Fig.15 The effects of the different configurations on the backbone curves

Fig.16 The effects on the backbone curves of the different confinement thicknesses for (a) the lower segment only, and (b) the lower two segments

Fig.17 The effects of the IED on the backbone curves

Fig.18 High tensile strain concentrations in the segments at the end of the internal energy dissipation bars. (a) The bars between the first segment and the base; (b) the bars between the first two segments

Fig.19 The effects of different IED rebar diameters on normalized stresses on the rebar

1	Gee K W. A new way of doing business. Journal of Public Roads, 2003, 67(2): 1–2
2	Bonzon W S. Thermal gradients in segmentally constructed hollow box bridge piers. Master Thesis. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin, 1996
3	Kalra R, Lam J. Improving Traffic Flow on the West Gate Freeway Through Innovative Structural Design. May 26–29, 7th Austroads Bridge Conference, Auckland, NZ, 2009
4	Hewes J T. Seismic design and performance of precast concrete segmental bridge columns. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. San Diego, La Jolla, California: University of California, 2002
5	Chang K C, Loh C H, Chiu H S, Hwang J S, Cheng C B, Wang J C. Seismic behavior of precast segmental bridge columns and design methodology for applications in Taiwan, Taiwan Area National Expressway Engineering Bureau, Taipei, Taiwan, China, 2002 (in Chinese)
6	Ou Y C, Chiewanichakorn M, Aref A J, Lee G C. Seismic performance of segmental precast unbonded posttensioned concrete bridge columns. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2007, 133(11): 1636–1647
7	Marriott D, Pampanin S, Palermo A. Quasi-static and pseudo-dynamic testing of unbonded post-tensioned rocking bridge piers with external replaceable dissipaters. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2009, 38(3): 331–354
8	ElGawady M, Booker A, Dawood H M. Seismic behavior of post-tensioned concrete filled fiber tubes. Journal of Composites for Construction, 2010, 14(5): 616–628
9	ElGawady M A, Sha’lan A. Seismic behavior of self-centering precast segmental bridge bents. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2011, 16(3): 328–339
10	ElGawady M A, Ma Q, Butterworth J W, Ingham J. Effects of interface material on the performance of free rocking blocks. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2011, 40(4): 375–392
11	Dawood H, ElGawady M A, Hewes J. Behavior of segmental precast posttensioned bridge piers under lateral loads. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2012, 17(5): 735–746
12	ElGawady M A, Dawood H. Finite element analysis of self-centering bridge piers. Engineering Structures, 2012, 38: 142–152
13	Ichikawa S, Zhang R, Sasaki T, Kawashima K, ElGawady M, Matsuzaki H, and Yamanobe S. Seismic performance of UFC segmental columns. Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineering A1, 68(4), 533–542, 2012 (in Japanese)
14	Dawood H, ElGawady M A. Performance-based seismic design of unbonded precast post-tensioned concrete filled GFRP tube piers. Composites. Part B, Engineering, 2013, 44(1): 357–367
15	Ichikawa S, Nakamura K, Matsuzaki H, ElGawady M, Kanamitsu Y, Yamanobe S, Kawashima K. Enhancement of the seismic performance of bridge columns using ultra high strength fiber reinforced concrete segments. Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers A1, 69(4), 2013, ISSN: 2185–4653
16	ASTM A779 / A779M – 05. Standard Specification for Steel Strand, Seven-Wire, Uncoated, Compacted, Stress-Relieved for Prestressed Concrete
17	ASTM A569/A569M–98. Standard Specification for Steel, Carbon (0.15 Maximum, Percent), Hot-Rolled Sheet and Strip Commercial
18	ABAQUS Software and Documentation. Version 6.8–2. ? Dassault Systèmes, SIMULIA, 2008
19	Lee J, Fenves G L. Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete structures. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 1998, 124(8): 892–900
20	Lubliner J, Oliver J, Oller S, O?ate E. A plastic-damage model for concrete. Int J Solids Struct, 25(3), 299–326, 1998.
21	Priestley M J N, Calvi G M, Kowalsky M J. Displacement Based Seismic Design of Structures. Pavia, Italy: IUSS Press, 2007, 720
22	Wang J C, Ou Y C, Chang K C, Lee G C. Large-scale seismic tests of tall concrete bridge columns with precast segmental construction. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2008, 37(12), 1449–1465

[1]	Subhasis PRADHAN, Shailendra KUMAR, Sudhirkumar V. BARAI. Understanding the behavior of recycled aggregate concrete by using thermogravimetric analysis[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1561-1572.
[2]	Fulin Qu, Wengui Li, Xiaohui Zeng, Zhiyu Luo, Kejin Wang, Daichao Sheng. Effect of microlimestone on properties of self-consolidating concrete with manufactured sand and mineral admixture[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1545-1560.
[3]	Mohammad Reza AZADI KAKAVAND, Ertugrul TACIROGLU. An enhanced damage plasticity model for predicting the cyclic behavior of plain concrete under multiaxial loading conditions[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1531-1544.
[4]	Harun TANYILDIZI, Abdulkadir ŞENGÜR, Yaman AKBULUT, Murat ŞAHİN. Deep learning model for estimating the mechanical properties of concrete containing silica fume exposed to high temperatures[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1316-1330.
[5]	Fangyu LIU, Wenqi DING, Yafei QIAO, Linbing WANG. An artificial neural network model on tensile behavior of hybrid steel-PVA fiber reinforced concrete containing fly ash and slag power[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1299-1315.
[6]	Luisa PANI, Flavio STOCHINO. Punching of reinforced concrete slab without shear reinforcement: Standard models and new proposal[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(5): 1196-1214.
[7]	Masoud RANJBARNIA, Milad ZAHERI, Daniel DIAS. Three-dimensional finite difference analysis of shallow sprayed concrete tunnels crossing a reverse fault or a normal fault: A parametric study[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(4): 998-1011.
[8]	Chunfeng ZHAO, Xin YE, Avinash GAUTAM, Xin LU, Y. L. MO. Simplified theoretical analysis and numerical study on the dynamic behavior of FCP under blast loads[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(4): 983-997.
[9]	Divahar RAVI, Aravind Raj PONSUBBIAH, Sangeetha Sreekumar PRABHA, Joanna Philip SARATHA. Experimental, analytical and numerical studies on concrete encased trapezoidally web profiled cold-formed steel beams by varying depth-thickness ratio[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(4): 930-946.
[10]	Wei HUANG, Minshan PEI, Xiaodong LIU, Ya WEI. Design and construction of super-long span bridges in China: Review and future perspectives[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(4): 803-838.
[11]	Luthfi Muhammad MAULUDIN, Chahmi OUCIF, Timon RABCZUK. The effects of mismatch fracture properties in encapsulation-based self-healing concrete using cohesive-zone model[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(3): 792-801.
[12]	Feng YU, Cheng QIN, Shilong WANG, Junjie JIANG, Yuan FANG. Stress-strain relationship of recycled self-compacting concrete filled steel tubular column subjected to eccentric compression[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(3): 760-772.
[13]	Alireza ARABHA NAJAFABADI, Farhad DANESHJOO, Hamid Reza AHMADI. Multiple damage detection in complex bridges based on strain energy extracted from single point measurement[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(3): 722-730.
[14]	Rwayda Kh. S. AL-HAMD, Martin GILLIE, Safaa Adnan MOHAMAD, Lee S. CUNNINGHAM. Influence of loading ratio on flat slab connections at elevated temperature: A numerical study[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(3): 664-674.
[15]	Luthﬁ Muhammad MAULUDIN, Chahmi OUCIF. Computational modeling of fracture in concrete: A review[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(3): 586-598.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed