Seismic fragility curves for greek bridges: methodology and case studies

Moschonas, Ioannis F.; Kappos, Andreas J.; Panetsos, Panagiotis; Papadopoulos, Vissarion; Makarios, Triantafyllos K.; Thanopoulos, Pavlos

doi:10.1007/s10518-008-9077-2

Cited by 111 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bridge-specific fragility curves are calculated for each bridge (for the longitudinal and transverse direction separately) and the results are discussed, highlighting the importance of the bridge-specific approach in assessing a bridge inventory. The bridges of the inventory are initially classified into categories according to the classification scheme presented in [3] and summarised in Table 2. A code number is defined for each bridge according to the pier, deck and the pierto-deck connection type.…”

Section: Software Development For Bridge-specific Fragility Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this context, numerous methodologies have been developed for the seismic vulnerability assessment of bridges for different levels of seismic hazard using fragility curves; analytical [1][2][3] as well as empirical [4] procedures have been put forward. In most cases, bridges within a road network have different structural and geometric properties depending on the site topography, the selected structural system and construction method, and the foundation soil.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In most cases, bridges within a road network have different structural and geometric properties depending on the site topography, the selected structural system and construction method, and the foundation soil. In the literature [1,3,5,6,7] bridges are classified into different categories, while, under the assumption that the seismic performance of bridges within the same class is similar, fragility curves of the representative -of each category-bridge are typically used for the seismic assessment of the bridge stock. The number of spans, number of columns (single or multicolumn bents), skewness, deck type, pier type and the pier-to-deck connection, are some of the parameters considered in classification schemes available in the literature [1,3,5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Software for Bridge-Specific Fragility Analysis

Paraskevopoulos¹

2017

MOJCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bridges within a road network have different geometries, structural systems and member properties, mainly due to differences in the site topography and the construction method selected; therefore, the use of the same seismic fragility functions for all bridges of a certain class, neglecting the specific characteristics of their key components and of the seismic demand (that also varies with the site) is in principle inconsistent, albeit commonly done in loss assessment projects. To gain more insight into this, this paper focuses on the software development for the application of a recently proposed methodology and the derivation of bridge-specific fragility curves. Using the fully parameterized ad-hoc software, component-specific threshold values are calculated, whereas bridge system analysis is performed for the estimation of demand at component control point and the calculation of component and system fragility curves. Uncertainty in seismic capacity and demand are additionally calculated. All input data necessary for bridge-specific fragility analysis are discussed and the application of the software for the assessment of a bridge inventory is presented. Keywords:

show abstract

Section: Software Development For Bridge-specific Fragility Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Software for Bridge-Specific Fragility Analysis

Paraskevopoulos¹

2017

MOJCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In both cases the correlation of capacity and demand is made using the capacity spectrum technique (capacity and demand plotted on the same diagram depicting spectral acceleration vs. spectral displacement of an equivalent SDOF system), which has been used for quite some time for buildings following the publication of the ATC-40 Manual (Council 1996). Figure 7.11 shows an example application of this procedure; the demand spectra can be either overdamped elastic spectra as suggested in ATC-40, or proper inelastic spectra as in the figure (Moschonas et al 2009). It is clear from the figure that the bridge capacity is represented by a single curve, while assessment can be carried out for multiple levels of seismic demand, which is an essential feature of PBD procedures.…”

Section: Brief Overview Of Available Assessment Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance-Based Seismic Design and Assessment of Bridges

Kappos

2015

Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current trends in the seismic design and assessment of bridges are discussed, with emphasis on two procedures that merit some particular attention, displacement-based procedures and deformation-based procedures. The available performance-based methods for bridges are critically reviewed and a number of critical issues are identified, which arise in all procedures. Then two recently proposed methods are presented in some detail, one based on the direct displacementbased design approach, using equivalent elastic analysis and properly reduced displacement spectra, and one based on the deformation-based approach, which involves a type of partially inelastic response-history analysis for a set of ground motions and wherein pier ductility is included as a design parameter, along with displacement criteria. The current trends in seismic assessment of bridges are then summarised and the more rigorous assessment procedure, i.e. nonlinear dynamic response-history analysis, is used to assess the performance of bridges designed to the previously described procedures. Finally some comments are offered on the feasibility of including such methods in the new generation of bridge codes.

show abstract

“…Such a classification is performed herein following the corresponding classification schemes of ATC-13 [1985], NBI [FHWA 1995], HAZUS [FEMA-NIBS 2004], and the work of Argyroudis et al [2003], Nielson & DesRoches [2007], and Moschonas et al [2009]. A comprehensive review of the state of the art on the subject can be found in and .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic analysis of motorway bridges accounting for key structural components and nonlinear soil–structure interaction

Anastasopoulos

Sakellariadis

Agalianos

2015

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seismic analysis of motorway bridges accounting for key structural components and nonlinear soil-structure interaction Anastasopoulos, Ioannis; Sakellariadis, L.; Agalianos, A. Sakellariadis, L., & Agalianos, A. (2015). Seismic analysis of motorway bridges accounting for key structural components and nonlinear soil-structure interaction. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 78, 127-141. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2015 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in Discovery Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from Discovery Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain.• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. provided by the deck and the abutment bearings is not at all negligible and should be taken into account. The simplified model is extended to account for nonlinear soil-structure interaction, replacing the soil-foundation system with horizontal, vertical, and rotational springs and dashpots. While the horizontal and vertical springs and dashpots are assumed elastic, the nonlinear rotational spring is defined on the basis of non-dimensional momentrotation relations. The simplified model compares well with the full 3D model of the bridgeabutment-foundation-soil system, and is therefore considered a reasonable approximation.

show abstract

Seismic fragility curves for greek bridges: methodology and case studies

Cited by 111 publications

References 15 publications

Software for Bridge-Specific Fragility Analysis

Software for Bridge-Specific Fragility Analysis

Performance-Based Seismic Design and Assessment of Bridges

Seismic analysis of motorway bridges accounting for key structural components and nonlinear soil–structure interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About