18-06-2021

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROORKEE

EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN

OF BRIDGES: PRINCIPLES
Yogendra Singh
Professor, Railway Bridge Chair
Department of Earthquake Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
Roorkee, India

What is Earthquake ?

IIT ROORKEE
2

1
 18-06-2021

Which Earthquake to Design for ?

IIT ROORKEE
3

EARTHQUAKE RESISTNAT
DESIGN: CHARACTERISTICS
OF EARTHQUAKE GROUND
MOTIONS

IIT ROORKEE
4

2
 18-06-2021

Earthquake Parameters

Magnitude: Indicator of total energy

released during the rupture
 most popular scale is Richter Scale

Intensity: Indicator of the severity or

damage potential of ground shaking at a
site
 subjective intensity scales MMI & MSK
 instrumented intensity
 accelerograms and seismograms

IIT ROORKEE
5

Intensity of a Ground Motion

Intensity is Damage Potential of the Ground Motion

Characteristics of earthquake ground motions governing the
damage potential:

1. Amplitude of the shaking  Peak Ground acceleration (PGA),

Peak Ground velocity (PGV), Peak Ground Displacement (PGD),
etc.

2. Frequency Content  Distribution of amplitude with frequency

of motion

3. Duration  How long the shaking lasts. Shaking for longer

duration  more inelastic damage

3
 18-06-2021

Response Spectrum
response action
 Used in earthquake engineering maximum value

(exclusively) earthquake impact

 Describes the maximum response

of a SDOF system to the given
input motion
 Dependent on damping ratio 
(usualy 5 %)
Sa,2
Sa,3

Spectral acceleration Sa
 Response spectra reflect the Response
spectrum:
maximum response of simple Sa,1 Sa,4

structures (SDOF) Sa,5

 Numerically quite challenging: Sa,6

Time history analysis for each Sa,7

SDOF system with varying period

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7
Period T
7

Typical Response Spectrum

IIT ROORKEE
8

4
 18-06-2021

Typical Response Spectrum

EPGA or ZPA

IIT ROORKEE
9

Response Spectrum – Effect of Source and Site

Coburn & Spence (1992) IIT ROORKEE

10

5
 18-06-2021

Local Site Effects

Impact of local soil conditions on ground motion characteristics:
 the Mexico City example: - only moderate damage in the vicinity of the epicenter
- extensive damage in 350 km distant Mexico City

Kramer (1996)

IIT ROORKEE
11

Local Site Effects

Impact of local soil conditions on ground motion characteristics:
 the Mexico City example:
 recording station UNAM: PGA ~ 0.03 – 0.04g rock conditions
 recording station SCT: PGA ~ 0.20g very soft soil conditions

SCT:
- predominant period Ts = 2 sec
( Sa 10 times higher than UNAM)

4  H 4  37.5m
Ts    2.0 sec
vs 75 m s

with: H - sedimentary thickness [m]

vs - average shear-wave velocity [m/s2]

Kramer (1996) IIT ROORKEE

12

6
 18-06-2021

Design Response Spectra- IS-1893:2016

IIT ROORKEE
13

Design Response Spectra- IRS – SDC - 2020

IIT ROORKEE
14

7
 18-06-2021

Effect of Damping

IIT ROORKEE
15

Acceleration vs. Displacement Spectra

0.8 0.3

0.25
T2
0.6 Sd  Sa
0.2 4 2
Sa [g]

Sd [m]

0.4 0.15

0.1
0.2
0.05

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Period [s] Period [s]
Spectral Acceleration Spectrum Spectral Displacement Spectrum

Seismic Zone IV

16

8
 18-06-2021

Acceleration vs. Displacement Spectra

0.8 0.6
0.5
0.6
0.4

Sd [m]
Sa [g]

0.4 0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Period [s] Period [s]
Code spectrum

0.8 0.6
0.5
0.6
0.4

Sd [m]
Sa [g]

0.4 0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Period [s] Period [s]
Actual spectrum Spectral Displacement
Zone IV Spectral acceleration
17

Levels of Hazard

Probability of Mean Return Seismic Hazard

Exceedance Period (years) Level

50%/30 years 43
50%/50 years 72 SE
20%/50 years 225 BSE-1E
10%/50 years 475 DBE
5%/50 years 975 BSE-2E
2%/50 years 2,475 MCE/BSE-2N
7%/75 Years 1000 AASHTO DESIGN
EQ

18

9
 18-06-2021

MCE in DSHA (ASCE 7-2016)

“21.2.2 Deterministic (MCER) Ground Motions.

The deterministic spectral response acceleration
at each period shall be calculated as an 84th-
percentile 5% damped spectral response
acceleration in the direction of maximum
horizontal response computed at that period. The
largest such acceleration calculated for the
characteristic earthquakes on all known active
faults within the region shall be used….”

IIT ROORKEE
19

MCE in DSHA (ASCE 7-2005)

“21.2.2 Deterministic MCE. The deterministic

MCE response acceleration at each period shall
be calculated as 150 percent of the largest
median 5 percent damped spectral response
acceleration computed at that period for
characteristic earthquakes on all known active
faults within the region….”

IIT ROORKEE
20

10
 18-06-2021

Design Load Combinations – AASHTO-2017

21

Design Load Combinations - ASCE 7-2016

2.3 LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR STRENGTH

DESIGN

1/1.5
2.4 LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR ALLOWABLE
STRESS DESIGN

IIT ROORKEE
22

11
 18-06-2021

Design Load Combinations – IRS SDC - 2020

1/1.5

IIT ROORKEE
23

SE, DBE and MCE in Indian Codes

1. The Zone Factor, Z in IS 1893 is median
EPGA (also known as Zero Period
Acceleration, ZPA) obtained from DSHA
2. 1.5xZ is equivalent to 84 percentile and
represents the MCE level hazard
3. 1.5xZ/2 represents the DBE used for
strength/ULS/Limit state design in Building
and Bridge Codes
4. Z/2 represents the SE used for Working
Stress/SLS design in Building and Bridge
Codes
IIT ROORKEE
24

12
 18-06-2021

SE, DBE and MCE in Indian Codes

x 1.5 Z  MCE
x 0.75 Z  DBE
x 0.5 Z  SE
Sa/Z

IIT ROORKEE
25

Components of Ground Motion - Imperial Valley (1940), M- 6.95

H1

H2

IIT ROORKEE
26

13
 18-06-2021

Imperial Valley (1940), M- 6.95 Velocity Time History

H1

H2

IIT ROORKEE
27

Imperial Valley (1940), M- 6.95 Displacement Time History

H1

H2

V
V

IIT ROORKEE
28

14
 18-06-2021

Imperial Valley (1940), M- 6.95 Response Spectra

H1

H2

IIT ROORKEE
29

SeismicZonation

Seismic EPGA
Zone = ZPA
(Z)
II 0.10
III 0.16
IV 0.24
V 0.36

IIT ROORKEE
30

15
 18-06-2021

Site Specific Design Spectrum

IRS-SDC-2020

IRC-SP-114-2018

IIT ROORKEE
31

Site Specific Design Spectrum

IRC-SP-114-2018

IIT ROORKEE
32

16
 18-06-2021

Site Specific Design – Rishikesh-Karnaprayag line

IIT ROORKEE
33

Site Specific Design – Rishikesh-Karnaprayag line

IIT ROORKEE
34

17
 18-06-2021

Site Specific Design – Chandrabhaga bridge

0.8
Design Response Spectrum (Rock outcrop)
UHS (Rock Outcrop)
0.6
Sa (g)

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 1 2 3 4
Period (s)

IIT ROORKEE
35

Site Specific Design – Chandrabhaga bridge

1.5
Design Response Spectrum (Rock outcrop)
1.2 UHS (Rock Outcrop)

0.9
Sa (g)

0.6

0.3

0.0
0 1 2 3 4
Period (s)
IIT ROORKEE
36

18
 18-06-2021

Site Specific Design – Chandrabhaga bridge

Rock Outcrop
For 475 Years For 2475 Years
Sa ( g )  0.245(1  15T) 0.00s  T  0.10s Sa ( g )  0.448(1  15T) 0.00s  T  0.10s

Sa ( g )  0.612 0.10s  T  0.268s Sa ( g )  1.120 0.10s  T  0.290s

Sa ( g )  0.164 / T 0.268s  T  4.00s Sa ( g )  0.325 / T 0.290s  T  4.00s

Z = 0.448/1.5 = 0.30

IIT ROORKEE
37

Site Specific Design – Chandrabhaga bridge

475 years – Soil Surface

0.8 Envelope
GMPE
0.6
Sa (g)

0.4

0.2

0.0

0 1 2 3 4
Period (s)
IIT ROORKEE
38

19
 18-06-2021

Site Specific Design – Chandrabhaga bridge

2475 years – Soil Surface

1.8
Envelpoe
1.5
ASCE 7-16
1.2 GMPE
Sa (g)

0.9

0.6

0.3

0.0
0 1 2 3 4
Period (s)
IIT ROORKEE
39

Site Specific Design – Chandrabhaga bridge

Soil Surface
For 475 Years For 2475 Years
Sa ( g )  0.303(1  15T) 0.00s  T  0.10s Sa ( g )  0.512(1  15T) 0.00s  T  0.10s

Sa ( g )  0.758 0.10s  T  0.426s Sa ( g )  1.280 0.10s  T  0.524s

Sa ( g )  0.323 / T 0.426s  T  4.00s Sa ( g )  0.671/ T 0.524s  T  4.00s

Z = 0.512/1.5 = 0.34

IIT ROORKEE
40

20
 18-06-2021

Site Specific Design – Shivpuri bridge

Soil Surface
For 475 Years For 2475 Years
Sa ( g )  0.378(1  15T) 0.00s  T  0.10s Sa ( g )  0.662(1  15T) 0.00s  T  0.10s

Sa ( g )  0.946 0.10s  T  0.353s Sa ( g )  1.656 0.10s  T  0.402s

Sa ( g )  0.334 / T 0.353s  T  4.00s Sa ( g )  0.666 / T 0.402s  T  4.00s

Z = 0.662/1.5 = 0.44

IIT ROORKEE
41

EARTHQUAKE RESISTNAT
DESIGN: HOW THE
STRUCTURES RESIST
EARTHQUAKES ?

IIT ROORKEE
42

21
 18-06-2021

Linear Elastic Behaviour

P
Δ1 P 
Δ2
Δn

Load removal

Load reversal

43

Non-Linear Inelastic Behaviour

P
Δp
Δ1 P
Δ2

Δp Δ

Load removal

Load reversal

44

22
 18-06-2021

Inelastic Cyclic Behaviour

Structural Steel
45

Inelastic Cyclic Behaviour

Reinforced Concrete
46

23
 18-06-2021

Cyclic Backbone Curve (ASCE 41-2017)

Backbone curve
47

Ductility

Effective Elastic Limit

Actual Resistance

ry
Actual Yield
Point Effective Yield
Resistance

Level
Useful Limit of
Displacement

um= uy

O uy Displacement um

IIT ROORKEE
48

24
 18-06-2021

Role of Ductility
Seismic Force Fe
m 
  e R
y y
Elastic

R
Fy m

y e
Displacement

IIT ROORKEE
49

Response Reduction Factors – Buildings

1. Ordinary RC Moment resisting frames : 3.0

2. Special RC moment resistant frames : 5.0
3. Steel frames with concentric braces : 4.0
4. Steel frames with eccentric braces : 5.0
5. Ordinary RC shear walls : 3.0
6. Ductile shear walls : 4.0

IIT ROORKEE
50

25
 18-06-2021

Building vs. Bridge Structure – Role of Redundancy

IIT ROORKEE
51

Response Reduction Factors – IRS Seismic Code 2020

IIT ROORKEE
52

26
 18-06-2021

Response Reduction Factors – IRC-SP-114

IIT ROORKEE
53

Response Reduction Factors – AASHTO-2017

IIT ROORKEE
54

27
 18-06-2021

DUCTILITY IN RC MEMBERS:
HOW TO MAKE RC MEMBERS
SDUCTILE?

Behaviour of Steel

IIT ROORKEE
56

28
 18-06-2021

Behaviour of Concrete

IIT ROORKEE
57

Behaviour of Concrete

IIT ROORKEE
58

29
 18-06-2021

Behaviour of Concrete

IIT ROORKEE
59

Behaviour of Concrete

IIT ROORKEE
60

30
 18-06-2021

Behaviour of Concrete

IIT ROORKEE
61

Behaviour of Confined Concrete

IIT ROORKEE
62

31
 18-06-2021

Confining of Concrete in Structures

IIT ROORKEE
63

Different Methods of Confinement

IIT ROORKEE
64

32
 18-06-2021

Effectiveness of Confinement

IIT ROORKEE
65

Confirming of concrete

IIT ROORKEE
66

33
 18-06-2021

Confining Reinforcement
As per IRS Seismic Code 2020
Confining reinforcement for circular section

Ash- area of cross-section of circular hoop

S-spacing of hoops
Dk- Diameter of core measured from outside of hoop
fck- compressive strength of concrete
fy- yield strength of steel
Ag- gross area of column cross-section
Ac- area of concrete core
IIT ROORKEE
67

Confining Reinforcement
As per IRS Seismic Code 2020
Confining reinforcement for rectangular section

h- longer dimension of the rectangular confining (<300mm)

Ak-area of confined core concrete

IIT ROORKEE
68

34
 18-06-2021

Confining Reinforcement
As per IRC 112 Where,
• Confining reinforcement for rectangular section

Ac-area of gross concrete section

Acc- confined concrete area from outside of hoop
k- Normalised axial force
L- reinforcement ratio of the longitudinal reinforcement

• Confining reinforcement for circular section

IIT ROORKEE
69

Reinforcement Detailing in Piers

IIT ROORKEE
70

35
 18-06-2021

Reinforcement Detailing in Piers

IIT ROORKEE
71

Reinforcement Detailing in Piers

IIT ROORKEE
72

36
 18-06-2021

Earthquake and Bridges – Good Performance

1500 mm diameter
hexagonal column section
with 45 mm longitudinal
reinforcement and 16 mm
spiral reinforcement at 90
mm spacing. The column
was designed and
constructed in the 1970s.
During the 1994 Northridge
earthquake, the cover
concrete spalled off.
However, this kind of
damage is anticipated and
considered acceptable in a
strong earthquake.
IIT ROORKEE
73

COMMONLY IGNORED
COMPONENT: DETAILING OF
JOINTS IN BRIDGE
STRUCTURES

37
 18-06-2021

Shear and Torsion Failure of Joints

Weak “knee” joints like the connection

to this outrigger on the China Basin
Viaduct are subject to large opening
and closing moments as the bridge
moves back and forth.
IIT ROORKEE
75

Forces in Knee Joint

IIT ROORKEE
76

38
 18-06-2021

Reinforcement Detailing in Knee Joint

IIT ROORKEE
77

Reinforcement Detailing in Knee Joint

IIT ROORKEE
78

39
 18-06-2021

Reinforcement Detailing in Tee Joint

IIT ROORKEE
79

Reinforcement Detailing in Tee Joint

IIT ROORKEE
80

40
 18-06-2021

Reinforcement Detailing in Tee Joint

IIT ROORKEE
81

Forces in Foundation

IIT ROORKEE
82

41
 18-06-2021

Reinforcement Detailing in Foundation

IIT ROORKEE
83

THANK YOU !

42