Damage of Bridges due to the 2010 Maule, Chile, Earthquake

Kawashima, Koichiro; Unjoh, Shigeki; Hoshikuma, Jun-ichi; Kosa, Kenji

doi:10.1080/13632469.2011.575531

Cited by 152 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The damages related to pounding and unseating have been observed in many recent major earthquakes, e.g. the 2011 Christchurch earthquake , 2010 Chile earthquake (Kawashima, Unjoh, Hoshikuma, & Kosa, 2011), 2008 Wenchuan earthquake (Lin, Hung, Lou, & Chai, 2008), 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake (Elnashai , Kim, Yun, & Sidarta, 2006), 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake (EERI, 1999), 1995 Kobe earthquake (Kawashima & Unjoh, 1996) and 1994 Northridge earthquake (Hall, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Devices for protecting bridge superstructure from pounding and unseating damages: an overview

Shrestha

Hao

2016

Structure and Infrastructure Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous earthquakes have highlighted the seismic vulnerability of bridges due to excessive movements at expansion joints. This movement could lead to the catastrophic unseating failure if the provided seat width is inadequate. Moreover, seismic pounding is inevitable during a strong earthquake due to the limited gap size normally provided at the expansion joints. Various types of restrainers, dampers and other devices have been proposed to limit the joint movement or to accommodate the joint movement so that the damages caused by the excessive relative displacements could be mitigated. To select and design appropriate devices to mitigate the relative displacement induced damages on bridge structures during earthquake shaking, it is important that results from the previous studies are well understood. This paper presents an overview on the various pounding and unseating mitigation devices that have been proposed by various researchers. Based on an extensive review of up-to-date literatures, the merits and limitations of these devices are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Devices for protecting bridge superstructure from pounding and unseating damages: an overview

Shrestha

Hao

2016

Structure and Infrastructure Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the socioeconomic consequences of earthquake damage to bridges can be grave (human casualties, emergency response operation interruption, long-term economic cost due to the need for alternative transportation routes during repair, retrofit, or replacement), while the performance of bridges during recent strong earthquakes was found to be not fully satisfactory (e.g. Maule, Chile 2010 7 ), and the size of the bridge stock exposed to seismic risk is ever increasing. Hence, it is anticipated that 'non-conventional' technology for mitigating seismic risk to bridges will attract the interest of the engineering community in the years to come, inasmuch as it furnishes low-cost, reliable, and robust control systems with minimal energy requirements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semi-Active Control Systems in Bridge Engineering: A Review of the Current State of Practice

Gkatzogias

Kappos

2016

Structural Engineering International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. In view of the grave socioeconomic consequences of earthquake damage to bridge structures, along with their critical role in modern and older road and rail networks, this article attempts to identify and summarise the current trends in the use of semi-active control technology in bridge engineering, as an enhanced seismic response control solution, combining increased adaptability and reliability, compared to passive and active schemes. In this context, representative analytical and experimental studies, as well as some full-scale applications of semi-active control devices are first reviewed and a brief description of relevant benchmark studies is subsequently presented, with a view to serving as a point of reference for further research and development. A framework of performance-based control principles aiming at the aforementioned objectives is finally set forth. Permanent

show abstract

“…Highway bridges, critical components of transportation networks, have been recognized as among the most vulnerable structures to natural disasters, especially to earthquakes . Recent earthquakes have further shown the vulnerability of bridges and emphasized the importance of ensuring a satisfactory seismic performance of such structures in future earthquakes . Consequently, seismic protection systems, such as low‐damage and damage‐free resilient design strategies (eg, seismic isolation and self‐centering systems), have become attractive and popular technologies to mitigate the damaging effects of earthquakes on bridges and, therefore, enhance their seismic performance .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonlinear FE model updating and reconstruction of the response of an instrumented seismic isolated bridge to the 2010 Maule Chile earthquake

Astroza

Conte

et al. 2017

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Nonlinear finite element (FE) modeling has been widely used to investigate the effects of seismic isolation on the response of bridges to earthquakes. However, most FE models of seismic isolated bridges (SIB) have used seismic isolator models calibrated from component test data, while the prediction accuracy of nonlinear FE models of SIB is rarely addressed by using data recorded from instrumented bridges. In this paper, the accuracy of a state‐of‐the‐art FE model is studied through nonlinear FE model updating (FEMU) of an existing instrumented SIB, the Marga‐Marga Bridge located in Viña del Mar, Chile. The seismic isolator models are updated in 2 phases: component‐wise and system‐wise FEMU. The isolator model parameters obtained from 23 isolator component tests show large scatter, and poor goodness of fit of the FE‐predicted bridge response to the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule, Chile Earthquake is obtained when most of those parameter sets are used for the isolator elements of the bridge model. In contrast, good agreement is obtained between the FE‐predicted and measured bridge response when the isolator model parameters are calibrated using the bridge response data recorded during the mega‐earthquake. Nonlinear FEMU is conducted by solving single‐ and multiobjective optimization problems using high‐throughput cloud computing. The updated FE model is then used to reconstruct response quantities not recorded during the earthquake, gaining more insight into the effects of seismic isolation on the response of the bridge during the strong earthquake.

show abstract

Damage of Bridges due to the 2010 Maule, Chile, Earthquake

Cited by 152 publications

References 1 publication

Devices for protecting bridge superstructure from pounding and unseating damages: an overview

Devices for protecting bridge superstructure from pounding and unseating damages: an overview

Semi-Active Control Systems in Bridge Engineering: A Review of the Current State of Practice

Nonlinear FE model updating and reconstruction of the response of an instrumented seismic isolated bridge to the 2010 Maule Chile earthquake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About