Soil-Structure Analyses of Cable-Supported Bridges under Multiple-Support Excitation

Abstract

In this study, it is intended to compare the dynamic behavior of suspension and cable-stayed bridges for equal center span lengths. For this purpose, a suspension and a cable-stayed bridge with center spans of 1000 m are designed so that a realistic comparison can be made. Then, uniform and multiple-support ground motions are applied to the bridges to determine their dynamic responses. Nonlinear time history analyses are carried out for cases where the soil-structure interaction is taken into account and ignored. The results show that the multiple-support excitation as well as the soil-structure interaction generally increase the structural responses for both bridge models. On the other hand, depending on the uniform and multiple-support motions, the sensitivity of each bridge model is explored.

Keywords

• Cable-stayed bridge
• suspension bridge
• multiple-support excitation
• soil-structure interaction
• Asma köprü
• eğik kablo askılı köprü
• mesnetlerinden farklı yer hareketi
• yapı-zemin etkileşimi

Mesnetlerinden Farklı Yer Hareketi Etkisindeki Kablo Destekli Köprülerin Yapı-Zemin Etkileşim Analizi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada eşit merkez açıklığa sahip asma ve eğik kablo askılı köprülerin dinamik davranışının karşılaştırılması amacıyla önce merkez açıklığı 1000 m olan bir eğik kablo askılı köprü ile bir asma köprü sistemi tasarlanmıştır. Tasarımı yapılan köprülerin dinamik davranışlarını incelemek için köprülere üniform ve mesnetlerinden farklı yer hareketi uygulanıp, yapı-zemin etkileşiminin dikkate alındığı ve ihmal edildiği durumlar için zaman-tanım alanında doğrusal olmayan analizler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda, mesnetlerinden farklı yer hareketi uygulamasının ve yapı-zemin etkileşiminin her iki köprü modelinde de yapısal tepkileri genel olarak arttırdığı gözlenmiştir. Bunun yanında, üniform ve mesnetlerden farklı yer hareketi uygulanmasına bağlı olarak hangi köprü sisteminin daha fazla etkilendiğine ilişkin değerlendirmelerde bulunulmuştur.

Keywords

• Cable-stayed bridge
• suspension bridge
• multiple-support excitation
• soil-structure interaction
• Asma köprü
• eğik kablo askılı köprü
• mesnetlerinden farklı yer hareketi
• yapı-zemin etkileşimi

References

1. Saadeghvaziri, M.A., Yazdani-Motlagh A.R., and Rashidi S., Effects of soil structure interaction on longitudinal seismic response of MSSS bridges. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 20 (1-4), 231-242, 2000.
2. Soneji B.B., Jangid R.S., Influence of soil–structure interaction on the response of seismically isolated cable-stayed bridge. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 28 (4), 245-257, 2008.
3. Liang F., Jia Y., Sun L., Xie W. and Chen H., Seismic response of pile groups supporting long span cable stayed bridge subjected to multi support excitations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 101, 182-203, 2017.
4. Zheng J. and Takeda, T., Effect of soil-structure interaction on seismic response of PC cable stayed bridge. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 14(6), 427-437, 1995.
5. Siddharth G., Chandresh H. and Jatin D., Effect of foundation depth on seismic response of cable stayed bridge by considering soil-structure interaction. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering, 3(2), 121-132, 2011.
6. Lyngs J., Kasper T., Bertelsen K., Modelling of soil-structure interaction for seismic anlyses of the İzmit Bay Bridge. A proceeding of the 18. International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris-Fransa, 763-768, 2013.
7. Miao F. and Tang D., 3-D seismic response of self-anchored cable-stayed suspension bridge under pile-soil-structure interaction. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, (20), 6, 2015.
8. Keshishian, P. G. Analysis of interconnected systems accounting for spatial variability of ground motions and soil-structure interaction. Doktora Tezi, Universty of California, Berkeley, 2001.

9. Khan, R. A., Ahmad, S., and Datta, T. K., Effect of soil-structure interaction on seismic risk of FAN type cable stayed bridges. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 6(2), 47-56, 2004.
10. Soyluk, K., and Sıcacık, E. A., Soil–structure interaction analysis of cable-stayed bridges for spatially varying ground motion components. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 35, 80-90, 2012.
11. Kuyumcu Z., and Ateş Ş., Effect of soil – foundation – bridge interaction subjected to spatially varying earthquake ground motion. 2nd International Balkans Conference on Challenges of Civil Engineering, Tirana, 2013.
12. Ateş Ş., Tonyalı Z., Soyluk K., Samberou S. M. A., Effectiveness of soil-structure ınteraction and dynamic characteristics on cable-stayed bridges subjected to multi support excitation. International Journal of Steel Structures, 18(2), 554-568, 2017.
13. Shiravand M.R., Parvanehro P., Spatial variation of seismic ground motion effects on nonlinear responses of cable stayed bridges considering different soil types. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 119, 104-117, 2019.
14. Tochaei E.N., Taylor T. and Ansari F., Effect of near-field ground motions and soil-structure interaction on dynamic response of a cable stayed bridge. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 133, 106-115, 2020.
15. Kartal H. ve Soyluk K., Kablo destekli köprülerin dinamik davranışlarının karşılaştırılması. 2. Türkiye Deprem Mühendisliği ve Sismoloji Konferansı, Hatay-Türkiye, 1-13, 25-27 Eylül, 2013.
16. Soyluk, K., Kartal, H. and Adanur, S. Comparison of Dynamic Behaviour of Long-Span Cable-Supported Bridges Vienna Congress on Recent Advances in Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics (VEESD 2013), Paper No: 224, 28-30 August, Vienna, Austria, 2013.
17. Soyluk K. ve Karaca H., Near-fault and far-fault ground motion effects on cable-supported bridges. X International Conference on Structural Dynamics, Rome-Italy, 3077-3082, 10-13 September, 2017.
18. Kartal H. ve Soyluk K., Asma köprülerin dinamik davranışına yapı-zemin etkileşiminin etkisi. 8. Uluslararası Çelik Yapılar Sempozyumu, Konya-Türkiye, 96-107, 24-26 Ekim, 2019.
19. Dumanoğlu, A. A., ve Adanur S., Asma köprülerin antisinkronize dinamik analizi. TMMOB İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası Teknik Dergi, 11(53), 2179-2197, 2000.
20. Kartal H. ve Soyluk K., Eğik kablo askılı köprülerin dinamik davranışına yapı-zemin etkileşiminin etkisi. 4. Köprüler ve Viyadükler Sempozyumu, Ankara-Türkiye, 51, 01-02 Kasım, 2019.
21. H. Kartal. Eşit merkez açıklığa sahip uzun açıklıklı asma ve eğik kablo askılı köprülerin dinamik davranışının karşılaştırılması. Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Türkiye, 2018.
22. SAP 2000 V19.1.0. Integrated finite elements analysis and design of structures, Computers and Structures, Inc, Berkeley, CA, 2015.
23. Troitsky M.S., Cable-stayed Bridges : Theory and design, BSP Professional Books, 2nd edition, 1988.
24. Wilson J.C., Gravelle W., Modelling of a cable‐stayed bridge for dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 20 (8), 707-721, 1991.
25. Kartal H. and Soyluk K., Design of a suspension bridge having 1000m center span length. International Civil Engineering and Architecture Conference, Trabzon-Turkey, Vol.1, 1457-1490, 17-20 April, 2019.
26. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. (2007). American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officals, 4.th Edition.
27. Hao, H., Bolt, B.A. and Penzien, J. (1989). Effects of spatial variation of ground motions on large multiply-supported structures. Reprot No: UCB/EERC-89/06); Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, California.
28. Harichandran, R.S. and Vanmarcke, E.H., Stochastic variation of earthquake ground motion in space and time. J. Eng. Mech. Div., ASCE 112: 154-174, 1986.
29. Clough, R.W. and Penzien, J., Dynamics of Structures. McGraw Hill, Inc., 1993.
30. Eurocode8. Design of structures for earthquake resistance. General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. Brussels, 2004.
31. Hashash Y., Musgrove M., Park D., Tsai C.C., Philips C., Groholski D.R. DEEPSOIL v7.0, 1-D Wave Propagation Program for Geotechnical Site Response, User Manual, University of Illinois at Urbana-Campaign, 2021.
32. FEMA 356, Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2000.
33. Professional Recommendatory Standard of the People’s Republic of China, Wind-resistant Design Specification for Highway, December, 2004.