Seismic Retrofit of Truss Bridges

A Pilot Training Course

December 12-14, 2005
St. Louis, Missouri

Seismic Analysis of Steel

Truss Bridges
Roupen Donikian, P.E.
Sr. Associate, T.Y. Lin International

Contents
‹ General
– Overall Approach for the Analysis of Truss Bridges
– Analysis Objectives
– Seismic Performance Measures
– Analysis Types

‹ Types & Methods of Analysis

– Demand
– Capacity

‹ Modeling Guidelines
– Global Models
– Local Models

1
Overall Approach

Analysis Complexity

Seismic Hazard Level

Truss Bridge Category Low Moderate High

Seismically Standard (SS) Simplified Spectral Time-History

Elastic & Inelastic

Seismically Complex (SC) Spectral Time-History Time-History

Elastic & Inelastic Inelastic

Analysis Objectives

‹ Three Phases
– Phase 1: Seismic Vulnerability Assessment
– Phase 2: Retrofit Strategy
– Phase 3: Final Retrofit Design

‹ Seismic demand on overall system (D)

C / D ratios
‹ Capacity of structural subsystems (C)
– Strength
– Ductility
Performance
Evaluation

2
Major Factors Affecting Analytic Effort

‹ Moderate to large-scale multiple spans

– Superstructure with numerous truss members

‹ Physical condition of existing structure

‹ Alignment-variable soil profile & ground motions

– Multiple-support input motions

Global Strategy

‹ Deep foundations in soft soils

– Soil-foundation-interaction effects

‹ Site-specific seismic hazard

– Design spectra
– Spectrum-compatible ground motions

‹ Geotechnical site investigation program

– Soil profile
– Site response analyses

3
Global Strategy (cont’d)

‹ Local (Subsystem) models for Capacity Assessment

– Foundations
– Piers
– Steel Towers
– Superstructure
• Members & Components
• Portal & Sway Frames

Superstructure Portals

4
Global Strategy (cont’d)

‹ Tractable Global model for Demand Evaluation

– Manageable model size
– Manageable nonlinearities
– Multi-support motions
– Soil Foundation Interaction

‹ Spatial Variation of Motions

– Incoherence
– Wave Passage
– Site Response

Vbridge = Vapparent / Sin θ

Vapparent

Wave Passage Time Delay

Between Stations K and L
∆t = dKL / Vbridge

5
 Incoherency

Gu..K..uL (iω) Cross Spectral Density

γKL(iω) = Gu.. ..u (iω) .. .. Between Stations K & L
[ KK GuLuL (iω) ]1/2
L
− ω dKL / vapp(ω)
(Wave Passage)
Transfer Fn.
i θKL(ω)
= γ KL(ω) e
WP SR
(Site Resp).

[ θKL(ω) + θKL(ω) ]

e −(α/vs) dKL ω
2
(Lagged Coherency)

Alignment Variable Motions

1 2 3 4
Support-Specific
Ground Motions
• Incoherence
• Wave Passage
• Site Response

Support-Specific
Spectra

6
 Site Response

6m
1
Clay (Stratum 5) 4.5 m
2
Outcrop Motion
(Synthesis)
0.40
0.30 .
20 m
Acceleration (g)

0.20
0.10 .
0.00
-0.10 Clay (Stratum 6) .
-0.20
-0.30
-0.40
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Clay (Stratum 9) 2.5 m
Time (sec)
Silty Clay (Stratum 11) 2m
Sand w/ Gravel (Stratum 12A) 2m
1.00
Sand w/ Gravel (Stratum 12)
Bedrock 8m
0.75
Dense Sand/Gravel (NEHRP) 21
Dense Sand/Gravel Outcrop
S (g)

Base Dense Sand/Gravel

0.50
a

0.25

0.00
0.01 0.1 1

Period (sec)
10
BEDROCK ?

Layer 1
1.00 Layer 4
Layer 8
Layer 10
Layer 13
Layer 16
Layer 18
Rock ARS
0.75 Dense Sand/Gravel (NEHRP)
Dense Sand/Gravel Outcrop (Synthesis)
Dense Sand/Gravel Interface Motion
S a (g)

0.50

0.25

0.00
0.01 0.1 1 10
Period (sec)

7
Phase 1: Vulnerability Study
‹ Diagnostic Phase
– Identify deficiencies
– Assess reliability of load paths

‹ Global model
– Manageable, flexible, & sufficiently refined
• For parametric studies
• Multiple-support motions, if applicable
– Limited non-linearities
• Essential (geometric): expansion joint (gap / impact)
• Plastic hinges with inadequate capacities lead to false sense of
performance

‹ Study preliminary retrofit concepts

Phase 2: Strategy
‹ Examine
– Viable retrofit measures
– Alternative strategies

‹ Refined models
– Site response analyses & SFSI, as applicable
– Multiple-support motions, if applicable
– Non-linearities
• Geometric non-linearities (gap / impact)
• “Engineered ”
– Plastic hinges in flexural members
– Ductile structural frames
– RMDs (isolators, dampers, shock-transmission units)

8
Strategy Development Process Example
Foundation
Sub-system Foundation
+ Pier + Tower
Concrete
Piers
CAPACITY
Steel Towers Pier + Tower
ANALYSES
Trusses As-Built
DEMAND
ANALYSES
RMDs Retrofit

Local Member & Sub-System Overall Global System

Performance Performance
RETROFIT
STRATEGY

Phase 3: Final Design

‹ Select viable alternative
– Robust performance
• Meets applicable performance level criteria (PL1, PL2, PL3)
• Low sensitivity to variations in uncertainties
– Constructibility review
– Relative cost in view of performance requirements

‹ Finalize models
– Further refinement
– Validation (QA & Independent Check)

‹ Analyses of record

9
Seismic Performance Measures
‹ Strength-based: Components
– Connections
– Bearings
– Rigid frames

‹ Ductility-based: Subsystems expected to sustain large deformations

– Towers
– Bents
– Portal Frames
– Foundation pile groups

‹ Displacement-based
– Bearing seats
– P-Delta effects

Deformation measures
Truss Racking Drift

Tower Drift

Double-Deck
Truss Bridge

Pier Shaft Drift

Foundation Drift

10
Performance measures

Performance Measure Category

Components & Sub-systems Strength- Displacement- Ductility-
Based Based Based
Superstructure Members:
Verticals X - X*
Diagonals X - -
Chords X - X
Eye-bars X - -
Stringers X - -
Floor Beams X - -
Horizontal Bracing (wind) - - X*
Superstructure Sub-systems:
Portal Frames - - X
Sway Frames - - X

Performance measures (cont’d)

Performance Measure Category

Components & Sub-systems Strength- Displacement- Ductility-
Based Based Based
Superstructure Components:
Gusset Plates X - -
Eye-bar Pins X - -
Truss Shoes and Pins X - -
Support Components:
Fixed Bearings X - -
Roller Bearings X X -
Rocker Bearings X X -
Eye-bar Hangers X X -
Expansion Joints (Seats) - X -

11
Performance measures (cont’d)

Performance Measure Category

Components & Sub-systems Strength- Displacement- Ductility-
Based Based Based
Towers:
Braced Steel Towers - - X
Steel Split Bents (expansion) - X -
Concrete shafts - - X
Substructure:
Concrete Columns - - X
Multi-column Bents - - X
Rigid Piers & Abutments X - -

Performance measures (cont’d)

Performance Measure Category

Components & Sub-systems Strength- Displacement- Ductility-
Based Based Based
Steel-Concrete Connections:
Steel Tower Base X - -
Bearing Anchorages X - -
Foundations:
Rock-bearing caissons X - -
Pile groups - - X

12
Component (member) Ductility

Force

µ = δ / δyield

δyield δ Deformation
δult

Demand: µ demand = δ / δyield

C / D = µ avail / µ demand
Capacity: µ avail = δult / δyield

System Ductility

13
Retrofit Strategy Studies
‹ Member & component strengthening

‹ Seat extenders

‹ Enhance system ductility

– Towers
– Portal frames
– Foundation pile groups (collars)

‹ Load control devices (RMDs)

– Maintain truss superstructure essentially elastic

‹ Period tuning

Foundation Drift Control Collar

Existing Retrofitted

14
Foundation Drift Control

Existing Foundation Retrofitted Foundation

T-Drift (m)

L-Drift (m) L-Drift (m)

Analysis Types

‹ Seismic Demand
– Conventional RSA
– Time-history
• Linear-elastic model
• Inelastic model

‹ Capacity
– Analytic (semi-manual) models
– Static push-over (displacement control)

15
Conventional RSA

‹ Modal extraction
– Vibration frequencies and mode shapes

‹ Modal superposition principle (multi-mode)

– Peak values of modal responses combined
• SRSS (Square Root of Sum of Squares)
• CQC (Complete Quadratic Combination)

‹ Load directional combination

– SRSS
– “30% rule”

Modal Response Combinations

Sa ARS CQC Modal Combination
Sai
Qp = { ΣiΣj ρij Qp,iD Qp,jD }1/2
where:
Qp,iD = ΨiDφp,i Soscill(ωi,ζi) Mean value of
fi = ωi / 2π f peak response in
mode i

Modal Properties ρij = ρij (ωi,ωj,ζi,ζj) Correlation

coefficient between
ω1, ω2, …, ωn Frequencies modes i & j
φ1, φ2, …, φn Modal vectors

Modal Participation Factors

SRSS Modal Combination
Ψ1D , Ψ2D , …, ΨnD ; D=X,Y,Z CQC with ρij = 1 for i = j
= 0 for i = j

16
Time-History Analysis

‹ Linear-Elastic System
– Governing Differential Equations of Motion (GDE)

‹ Finite-element models
– Multi-degrees-of-freedom (MDOF)
– Soil-foundation stiffness matrices
– Effective input motions

SFSI

‹ Soil Profile

‹ ID typical soil columns

‹ Site response analyses

– Free-field motions

‹ Multi-support motions
– In-coherency

17
SFSI (cont’d)

‹ Mathematical sub-structuring
– Drilled shafts, pile groups, caissons

‹ Soil-foundation stiffness matrices and

corresponding effective input motions

Linear-Elastic System GDE

18
 Global Substructured System

Sub-Structure No. 1
na dof system

SFSI
vb Gbb
Sub-Structure No. 2
nb dof system

SFI

Soil-Foundation-Interaction

Soil-Foundation System xki(t)

Substructure
Massless Cap
θki(t)
M(t)
F(t)
Xki
Gbb
cp , cs D*bb

19
Depth-variable excitation of soil-pile system

Pile-head Drift Could directly

implement in
global model for
Depth-variable foundations with
Free-field
few piles in group.
Motions

Lateral soil resistance

(p-y) spring Pile element

fH Impractical to
Side-shear soil implement in
(t-z) spring global models in
fV
x case of numerous
piers and piles –
Q z z must condense.
Tip soil resistance
(Q-z) spring

Foundation Stiffness

x . . . x .
Pile cap mass
x. x . .
x . . .
x . .
x.
x
6x6

SFI Analyses FSFI (t)

• SASSI (equiv. linear soil) x . . . x .

KSFI =
x. x . .
• Non-linear soil resistance (p-y, t-z, Q-z) x . . .
x . .
x.
x
6x6

20
Inelastic System GDE
Viscous fluid dampers
Ductile Frames, Friction Dampers, Isolators

Incremental Equations

Solution Algorithms
‹ Numerical method depends upon
– Presence of non-linearities
– Model size
– Special phenomena: SFI, multiple-support input

‹ Modal superposition
– Linear-elastic models
– Transformation of GDE required

‹ Direct Integration
– No transformation of GDE required
– Linear and nonlinear systems

21
Numerical Integration for Nonlinear Systems

‹ Implicit Codes
– Unconditionally stable solutions
– Small time step size for accuracy: ∆t = 1/20 Tco

‹ Explicit Codes
– Conditionally stable
– Time step size part of stability criterion: ∆t < ∆tcr = Tn/ π

‹ Iteration for convergence

– Newton-Raphson

Some Rules of Thumb

Modal
Damping damping, ζ Rayleigh damping with
parameters α & β
ζα,β
ζα,β = 1/2 α (1/ω) + 1/2 βω

ζ = 2.5 % for steel

= 5% for concrete ω1 ω2 Frequency, ω

Selection of Integration Time Step Size

1. Cutoff frequency: ωco = 4ωu ; ωu = highest frequency content
in ground motion
2. ∆t = 1/20 Tco ; Tco = 2π / ωco

22
Directional Combinations for THA

‹ Statistically independent (SI) motion components

– Simultaneous application of triaxial input
• Linear system
• Nonlinear system
– Use results directly for evaluation

‹ SRSS of results: Q = [ Σi(Qi)2 ]1/2 ; i = X, Y direction

‹ 30% rule: Q = max {(Q1.0X+Q0.3Y), (Q0.3X+Q1.0Y)}

Capacity Analyses

‹ Load-Based
– Component stress analyses
– Local buckling limit states

‹ Displacement-Based
– Push-over analyses
– Yield and ultimate limit states

23
Push-over Analysis

DW DW
Racking Drift Racking Drift
Plastic
Hinge

Buckled
Brace

Base
Rotation

Applied Racking Displacement Applied Displacement Profile

Load and Displacement Control

Displacement Control

Load

Unique F3
Load F2
values F1

δ1 δ2 δ3 Deformation
δyield
Specified Deformations

24
Load and Displacement Control

Load Control

Load

Specified F3
Loads F2
F1

δ1 ? δ2 ? δ3? Deformation
δyield
Wide variation

EBF Ductility

25
Modeling Issues

26
P-Delta Effect on Columns
Q (δ) = (3EI / L3) (1 – P/Pcr) δ

δ P KCANT Pcr = π2 EI / (2L)2

(Euler Buckling Load)

Q Q (δ) = [KCANT – 1.22 P/L ] δ ; δ < δyield

L Q
E,I w/o P-D
Vp
w/ P-D

V=Q

M = QL + Pδ δyield δ

P-Delta Effect on Towers

‹ P-Delta Effect on columns

– Reduction of lateral stiffness by “Geometric Stiffness”
• Effective stiffness: KEFF = KCANT − KG
• Geometric Stiffness: KG = 1.22 P/L

‹ P-Delta Effect on Towers

– Geometric stiffness Æ Reduction of tower lateral stiffness
– Effective tower stiffness matrix:

KEFF = K – KG ; KG = geometric stiffness

– Buckling caused by compressive load vector when KGEOM = K

27
Code Requirements on P-Delta Effects

ATC-32
P δult < 0.25 VEQ H
δult VEQ

H
P = Wo
V1 V2 V3 V4
Vo
(Collector)

Steel Truss Bracing Member Plasticity

(tension)
Force

FY
2FY (Kinematic Hardening)

∆
Stiffness
degradation

(compression)

28
Plastic Hinges in Concrete Piers

Plastic Hinges

29
Plastic Hinges

0.0300
Hinge Rotation
0.0200
Rotation (rad)

0.0100

0.0000

-0.0100

-0.0200

-0.0300
Transverse Bending
0 20 40 60 80 Moment
Hinge 100
30,000
Time (sec)
20,000
Moment (kN-m)

10,000
0
Plastic Hinge -10,000
-20,000
-30,000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time (sec)

Pier No.2 30,000

20,000
Moment (kN-m)

10,000
0
-10,000
-20,000
-30,000
-0.030 -0.020 -0.010 0.000 0.010 0.020
Rotation (rad)

30
 Expansion Joint Nonlinearities

Joint Opening
Displacement

Joint Closure
Impact

Girder
Cantilever

Careful With Nonlinearities !

‹ Could be major source of errors

‹ Capture essence of load-limiting aspects

‹ Keep models tractable – avoid undue complications

Source: F. Moon, Chaotic Vibrations

31