See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/343046649

Seismic performance of bridge piers

Article in IOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · July 2020
DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

CITATIONS READS

5 410

3 authors, including:

Mohammed S. Shamkhi
Wasit University
78 PUBLICATIONS 214 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammed S. Shamkhi on 18 July 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Seismic performance of bridge piers

To cite this article: Hussam K. Al-Aayedi et al 2020 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 870 012069

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 185.181.53.133 on 17/07/2020 at 19:13

ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Seismic performance of bridge piers

Hussam K. Al-Aayedi, Asad H. Aldefae* and Mohammed S. Shamkhi

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Wasit, Wasit, Kut, Iraq.

[email protected]

Abstract. The bridges that constructed in earthquake-prone areas perhaps subjected to sudden
earthquake through their construction and service period. So, attentions should be pushed during
bridge design specially, as they are one of the main civil infrastructures. The bridge piers are the
main parts of bridges whether they are built across river or even as an express highway projects.
This paper presented an experimental study of seismic performance of concrete bridge piers.
Several important parameters have been studied such as acceleration response, seismic
displacements, the bridge pier model settlement and the failure mechanism. Principles of
physical modeling are used to fabricate two bridge pier models and shaking table (1-g tests) were
performed under 0.82g waveform (i) Chamfered bridge pier built on saturated cohessionless soil
(test-1) (ii) Oblong bridge pier built on saturated cohessionless soil(test-2). The output results
included the acceleration response in term of the time acceleration and acceleration response
spectra, failure mechanism during shacking, seismic displacement of the bridge pier model. The
results show that the amplification in the acceleration is increases significantly at the top of the
bridge pier. The seismic displacement is suddenly increased sharply due to strong motion.
Overturning failure mechanism about the heel of the bridge pier has been observed in test-1 and
test-2.
Keywords: Acceleration, Bridge pier, Earthquake, Earth pressure, Seismic performance.

1. Introduction
Very risk effects on infrastructures, highways and bridges are noticed around the world due to
earthquakes. As the earthquakes quickly impacted on infrastructures, leading to sudden building
breakdown, destruction of highways, bridges collapse, fires and severe floods, thus tens of dollars have
been spend by government post-earthquakes during the rehabilitations of the infrastructures. Many
destructive earthquakes in last years occurred which were reasons of thousands of death tolls with
millions homeless and injured. Socio-economic development is strongly influenced by such disaster due
to spread of diseases as well as the psychological effects in societies for many years. Many researches
are conducted to investigate how the earthquakes effect on the structural elements of infrastructures, the
long rise building and the structural bridges parts (i.e. girder, decks, piles and piers) and this is not
surprising why authors used different small scale model to improve the knowledge and understanding
the earthquakes scientific comprehension and the structural dynamic responses. The bridges that
constructed in earthquake-prone areas perhaps subjected to earth shake through their construction and
service period. So, attentions should be paid to bridge piers in particular, as they are the main parts of
the bridge’s structural elements. The structure response for the earthquake effect relies on the loading
characteristics with the material behavior of the structural component itself. The concrete material action
under the reinforced concrete structure is so complex and it has been investigated with many research
studies and executed for the models to simulate it.

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Several shaking table tests were conducted for evaluation the performance of bridge structures. Johnson
et. al., 2008 [1] at the University of Nevada studied soil-foundation-structure interaction where the
bridge was exposed to low intensity and high intensity earthquake excitation. Chen et al. 2018 [2]
investigated the shaking table tests on two 1/7 scale, tall-pier models on the long mode effects to show
the importance of long model effect on the seismic performance of concrete bridges piers also they
found that correlation were weak between curvature at the pier base and displacement at the pier top ,so
that the results refer that displacement not reliable damage to tall pier also the results found that
contribution long model may lead formation region of plastic on the mid height of piers. Tubaldi et. al.,
2014 [3] through analytical method, the authors studies the effect of higher order models on the dynamic
response and seismic performance of slender bridge piers and could overcome some of limitation on the
models that used in the last studies, also the study show some of important evident for dynamic behavior
of bridge piers that required a lot of investigation. Chen et. al., 2016 [2] discussed both of initial yielding
and ultimate state through dynamic analysis for tall piers model by using fiber beam elements. The
results showed that seismic response of tall piers with design displacement lead to higher errors. Loli et
al. 2014 [4] conducted a pilot study through a series of dynamic centrifugal experiments on 1:50 bridge
piers models with a realistic representation of soil behavior in order to demonstrate the concept of
unconventional design that makes concrete bridge piers safe under intense seismic excitement.
Neaz et. al., 2012 [5] identified the local damage parameter for the bridge piers. Such damage parameters
however may indicate the bridge seismic damage states as supported only via piers. As described by
Wang et. al., 2005 [6], the bridge pier is replaced in the seismic bridge structure design with the elastic
system possessed effective damp for the analysing its nonlinear seismic response. It is termed as
“substitute structure technique” and proposed seismic design displacement technique for the RC bridge
pier. Dong 2006 [7] checked the pier shear strength with the utilization of the capacity design concept
for avoiding the brittle shear failure. Palermo et. al., 2005 [8] researched the execution of the "cross
breed" controlled shaking framework connected to connect docks and the worldwide reaction of this
framework with customary and sporadic wharf designs. Results demonstrate improved execution of
shaking frameworks when contrasted with regular malleable enumerating. This examination will
additionally explore the seismic reaction of shaking span docks. There are various reasons for bridge
pier failures which include concrete and steel. Bridge failure causes due to earthquakes are mainly
overall results in affecting around 5 percent of the bridge failure in the United State [9]. In spite of the
critical earthquakes did not happen near extensions over the last three decades, disappointment still rise
because that the failure of principle fortifications was not perceived up to this point. It was first perceived
in 1978 Miyagi-ken-oki earthquake when a few scaffolds endured harm at their docks. It was again
perceived in 1982 Urakawa-oki seismic tremor when Sizunai Bridge endured broad harm at their docks
[Asanuma]. The structure code was improved in 1980 by lessening the admissible shear worry of
concrete and improving the advancement of fundamental bars. Different examinations have been led for
assessment of the seismic hazard and retrofit of the untimely shear disappointment [10].
Due to the lack of the failure mechanism of the bridge piers during earthquakes, this paper focuses on
investigation this failure mechanism and the dynamic response of such important elements (i.e. bridge
piers) under semi-sinusoidal waveform under 1-g shaking table tests. A serious of shaking table tests
are conducted using different cross-sectional bridge piers area (shape) to assess the seismic behavior
and structural dynamic response of bridge piers as well as the dynamic earth pressure in front of the face
and along the bridge piers underneath the ground surface.

2. Experimental methods
2.1 Materials
2.1.1 Soil Properties
The soil used as a foundation in the physical model is a sandy soil of golden yellow manifestation (silica
sand). The properties of the sand which used in the actual study are cohessionless soil which was very

2
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

close to the HST95 silica sand’s properties, ordinarily used by researchers in various laboratories about
the world [11, 12].
First of all, the sand was dried .Then; it was sieved on #10 seive to remove the particles that are large in
size and save in a dry place to be used in the model preparation using pluviation techniques. The air
pluviation technique is widely used around the world for sandy soil preparation. To use the same density
characteristics, specifications and the behavior of cohesionless soils that will be used as a foundation for
the bridge pier model, some necessary steps should be taken in the laboratory. In order to achieve this
purpose, the soil specimen must be reconstituted to its natural state. Sample preparation techniques can
be influenced on fabric and stress-strain response of the soil particles. The air pluviation method is used
extensively for preparation of large, uniform repeatable sand bed of desired densities for laboratory
studies in order to achieve in-situ conditions and get suitable results which are highly reliable. The
mechanical pluviator which manufactured by Aldefae et al, 2018 [13] consist of v-shape movable
container and has pulley wheels and moving back and forth on frictionless bar’s guide and the soil
(sandy soil) falling down from an opening (slot) in the bottom of the contained (hopper). As the relative
density of the cohessionless soil is strongly influenced by the falling height, thus the pluviator contained
a designed rope crane and attached to the main frame so that the container can be raised up and down to
achieve the desired height. This mechanical pluviator can achieve uniformly sandy layer with relative
densities vary from 28% to 71% and this range represents threshold of loose to dense state of the sand.
The details of this v-shape container; the pluviator with the rope crane of mechanical movement are
shown in figure 1.

3
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Figure 1. (a) Pictorial view of mechanical pluviator; (b) Schematic view of pluviator; (c) V-shape
container and (d) Mechanical chain and rope lever [13].
2.1.2 Concrete properties
The materials in the synthesis of the concrete blending, in which used in the preparing the bridge piers
models consist of ordinary Portland cement, fine aggregates, coarse aggregates and water. The
specification of concrete blend design is Ww = 210 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3, Wc = 300 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3, Ws = 450 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 Wagg=
900 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 (i.e. C/R 1:1.5:3)
Firstly, the coarse aggregate was crushed .Then, it was passed on # 6 sieve and retaining from # 30 sieve
and the fine aggregate passed on # 6 sieve. The result of compressive strength tests appeared that the
rate compression strength of concrete is 22 MPa for 28 days age of samples. Figure 2 shows the details
of the procedure followed in concrete preparation.

Figure 2. Crashed coarse aggregate, sieve fine aggregate, mixture casting and compression test of
concrete cylindrical specimens
2.2 Bridge pier modeling
In this study, laboratory physical models were performed as shown in figure 3 which simulates existing
bridge piers sections in reality, proportional to the size of shacking table machine. There are six kinds
were prepared for an extensive experimental study to investigate the seismic performance and dynamic
response of bridge piers. Only two kinds were tested in this paper that will explain later in next section.

4
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Figure 3. The bridge pier models sections

2.2.1 Preparing of small scale bridge piers
The cork framework molds were manufactured from cork block with (3cm) thickness that resembles the
shape of the bridge piers that will be casted. A steel plate with (2mm) thickness was used in order to fix
screws which are bearing the deck slab. Once the formworks are intended, the casting using the concrete
mixture was done. The molds must be placed on the vibration machine to assure that the concrete
mixture arrives all parts of the molds as illustrative in figure 4.

Figure 4. Casting of the concrete bridge piers models

2.3 Shaking test model preparation
The bridge pier models were left for 28 days curing time before using them in the model. A uniaxial
earthquake simulator was used in the model testing under strong motion and pluviator machine was used
for sand model production using air pluviation technique. Test the bridge piers under strong shaking in
case of fully saturated (i.e. as in situ or prototype scale) including many types of sensors were performed.
MEMS accelerometers for recording the respond acceleration, the earth pressure two linear variable
differential transducers, LVDTs. Five Accelerometers (ACC) Which are distributed in different places
in the soil and at the top of the bridge pier, three dynamic soil pressure sensors in front of the bridge pier
face and two displacement transducers (LVDTs) in the vertical and horizontal direction as illustrative
in figure 5.

5
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Figure 5. Shaking table model layout with instruments, all dimensions in cm.

He loads in the prototype scale above the bridge pier model were simulated and represented in the
models scale, which came from the weight of the deck, girders, cross beam as well as the live load with
a total load q = 5 kg.

3. Experimental results.
This study is conducted to investigate the dynamic response of concrete bridge pier built on saturated
sandy soil. The model was prepared in a medium dense state using the pluviation technique. The
thickness of the sandy layer was 55 cm. All instruments were fixed after the airing of the sand in the
container that was design previously for this shaking table. The saturation process takes two days and
the water moves from base of the model to the surface (i.e. small valve is made close the bottom of the
container and external water tank is used and the water moves slowly through small tube from the tank
to the model for 48 hrs.). In this case, the saturation does not effect on the initial stresses of the soil body
and simulate the real saturation phenomenon for soil layers.
Figure (6) shows the front view of the bridge pier-soil model before the test with the distributed
instruments in the model. It can be seen clearly the saturated sandy soil in the container and all the
distributed transducer’s positions.

Figure 6. The saturated bridge pier-soil model.

3.1 The input motion

To accredit the input motion for all the two shaking table tests, one of the accelerometer was fixed at
the base of the container and the recorded wave is used as an input motion for the model. Thought the

6
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

shaking table is designed to produce only the sine wave form, but it was observed from the measured
value of the accelerometer at the base of the contained that there are tens other frequencies appeared
during the shaking. In fact, these frequencies are very useful for representation the actual or real
earthquake. Real earthquakes have hundreds of frequencies and the simulation of this need to use a
geotechnical centrifuge apparatus. So, it was fortunately to capture many frequencies during the shaking
tests as shown in figure 7.

Figure 7. Time-acceleration and frequency domain of the input motion.

4. Results and discussions.

4.1 The dynamic response
The dynamic response of the bridge pier-foundation model is assessed from the measured acceleration
for both the soil (as a foundation for the bridge pier) and the bridge pier itself. Figure (8&9) shows the
measured accelerometers in these tests. The Acc.1 refers to the input motion (the accelerometer at the
base of the container). Acc.2 was fixed beneath the bridge pier. Acc.3 was fixed at the left side face of
the bridge pier. Acc.4 was fixed far away from the bridge pier at the left side (close to the ground surface)
while Acc.5 is tagged at the bridge pier model crest.

7
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Figure 8. The acceleration response of the aerofoil bridge pier-foundation system

It was clearly shown from figure 6 that the measured acceleration from Acc 2, 3 and 5 in which they
were very close to the pier are exited due to cyclic movement of the pier during motion and there were
a positive permanent amplitude at the end of the shaking. This can be attributed to the inclination of the
instruments as they are for uniaxial measurement and this behavior due to accelerometers deviation
because of the rising up of water pressure. This shaking leads to liquefaction phenomenon and it was
very clear in the failure mechanism that will be explained next section.
There was no large difference in the measured acceleration for model 2 (using chamfered bridge pier)
as shown in figure 8. High amplification at the top of the bridge pier and attenuation is noticed for the
accelerometers in which they fixed close to the pier. It could be worth to calculate the spectral
acceleration (besides the frequency domain motion) as it was very difficult to see how the waveform
effect on the piers using the time-domain, so, the spectral acceleration will be discussed next section.

8
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Figure 9. The acceleration response of the chamfered bridge pier-foundation system

4.2 Seismic displacement

Two linear variable differential transducers (LVDTs) are used distributed as shown in figure 5; one to
measure the settlement of the bridge pier at shaking, during and post shaking stage while the other to
measure the cyclic horizontal displacement during the shaking (which they were connected to the data
logger). The lvdts were fixed to measure the settlement and the horizontal displacement of the bridge
pier during the shaking. Wooden bars are used, where they are fixed at the long direction of the container
where the lvdts were connected to prevent any undesirable movement of the lvdts particularly during
the shaking. The seismic displacement for the bridge pier was assessed from the measured vertical
(settlement) from the lvdts fixed on the crest of the bridge pier model. As shown in figures (10, 11), the
settlement of the bridge pier model is strongly influenced by the effected shaking intensity. The
maximum limits of the lvdt is 10 mm (i.e. from t=0 to t=1.7 s). The bridge pier model starts to settle
after the exited time, 1s. During the shaking test, the effected shaking time is just around 1.7 second and
during this time, the bridge pier is sunk down in the soil. Moreover, the bridge pier model at (t=1.7s) is
turned over and because the length of the lvdt’s needle is only 10 mm, it was very hard to measure the
vertical movement (i.e. the settlement) at the remaining time (i.e. from 2s to the end of the shaking
time).The horizontal cyclic displacement is measured also using the second lvdt. It was clearly shown
that the cyclic behavior of the horizontal displacement followed the similar shape of the settlement
except the limit of the lvds was 50mm. The peak cyclic horizontal displacement was picked up when
very close to the time when the bridge pier model started shaking (i.e. t=0) and due to an excessive

9
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

applied motion that applied to the model, the bridge pier model needs only 2 seconds to be overturned
and completely failure.

Figure 10. The settlement and the horizontal cyclic displacement of the aerofoil bridge pier

Figure 11. The settlement and the horizontal cyclic displacement of the chamfered bridge pier

4.3 The failure mechanism

The failure mechanism for the bridge pier model during the shaking test is inspected carefully. Figures
(12,13) shows the subsequent consecutive image which were taken from time t=0 to time t=12 second
(represents the exited motion that made the model fails). It should be noticed that the concrete aerofoil
bridge pier model failure exactly similar the chamfered bridge pier failure. However, the bridge pier
dived down after 1 second from the beginning of the shaking. This can be attributed to the pore water
pressure generation which leads to occurring of the liquefaction phenomenon. Sudden drop in the
strength and the stiffness for the soil underneath the bridge piers due to high rising of the pore pressure
is the major reason of such failure.

10
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

Figure 12. Sequences of pictures during the exited motion of the aero foil bridge pier model

Figure 13. Sequences of pictures during the exited motion of the chamfered bridge pier model

11
ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

5. Conclusions.
This paper included investigating the seismic behavior of concrete bridge pier model under strong
shaking waveform by performing of two shaking models test on concrete bridge pier model while the
seismic response and displacement of the bridge pier model were inspected during shaking. The main
conclusions are summarized below:
• The amplification of the seismic waves is greatly increased from the base of the bridge pier to its
crest, where the maximum amplification occurring at the crest region of the bridge pier model,
Therefore, the design of this part of the concrete bridge pier requires great care and accuracy.
• The liquefaction phenomenon (because the rapid increasing in the pore water pressure due to
cyclic loading) is generated when the bridge pier is founded on medium saturated soil which leads
to specific failure underneath the bridge pier model.
• The failure mechanism in both test-1 and test-2 was overturning about one of the heels of the
bridge pier.
• In the experimental data for both vertical and horizontal displacement curves, it has been observed
that the reading of the instruments (i.e. LVDTs) have been reached to the maximum limits 2
seconds after the motion starting due to limited.

Acknowledgement
The Authors would like to thank the geotechnical engineering staff of the laboratories at the Engineering
faculty, Wasit University and all the technical staff for their assistance durng model preparation and
testing performing. The first author would like also to thank the head of civil engineering department
for his partial financial support for this project to be done.

References

[1] Jefferson, A. D., (2003). Craft, a plastic-damage-contact model for concrete. Part I – Model theory
and thermodynamics. International Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol. 40, No. 22, 5973-5999.
[2] Chen X, Guan Z, Li J, Spencer Jr BF. Shake Table Tests of Tall-Pier Bridges to Evaluate Seismic
Performance. Journal of Bridge Engineering. 2018 Jun 19;23(9):04018058.
[3] Tubaldi E, Tassotti L, Dall'Asta A, Dezi L. Seismic response analysis of slender bridge piers.
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. 2014 Aug;43(10):1503-19.
[4] Loli M, Knappett JA, Brown MJ, Anastasopoulos I, Gazetas G. Centrifuge modeling of rocking‐
isolated inelastic RC bridge piers. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics. 2014
Dec;43(15):2341-59.
[5] Neaz Sheikh M., Legeron F. & Hing-Ho Tsang. (2012). Seismic Performance of Bridges Designed
According to AS 5100. The Australian Earthquake Engineering Society Annual Conference
Tweed Ultima, Tweed Heads, Gold Coast, Australia.
[6] Wang DS, Ai QH, Li HN, Si BJ, Sun ZG. Displacement based seismic design of RC bridge piers:
Method and experimental evaluation. InThe 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Beijing, China 2008.
[7] Dong Sheng weng. (2006). Displacement-based seismic design method of RC bridge piers.
[8] Palermo, A., Pampanin, S., and Calvi, G. M., (2005). “Concept and development of hybrid
solutions for seismic resistant bridge systems.” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 9(6), 899-
921.
[9] Wardhana, K. and F.C. Hadipriono. (2003). Analysis of recent bridge failures in the United States.
Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2003. 17(3): p. 144-150. 33.
[10] Kawashima K, Sasaki T, Matsumoto T, Watanabe G, Nagata S, Ukon H, Kajiwara K. Failure
mechanism of column components and systems of bridges. In Structural Engineering Research
Frontiers 2007 (pp. 1-16).

12
 ICEAT 2020 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 870 (2020) 012069 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/870/1/012069

[11] Al-Defae, A.H. and Knappett, J.A., 2014. Centrifuge modeling of the seismic performance of
pile-reinforced slopes. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
140(6),p.04014014.
[12] Bertalot D, Brennan AJ, Villalobos FA. Influence of bearing pressure on liquefaction-induced
settlement of shallow foundations. Géotechnique. 2013 Mar 21;63(5):391.
[13] Aldefae, A.H., Shamkhi, M.S. and Khalaf, T., 2019. Design and manufacturing of geotechnical
laboratory tools used in physical modeling. Cogent Engineering, 6(1) p.1637622.

13

View publication stats