Damage of Bridges Resulting from Surface Rupture of Faults in the ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Acceleration (g) Acceleration (g) Acceleration (g) 0.6 Shikhkang (TCU068) 0.3 NS Max=-0.37G 0 -0.3 -0.6 0.6 0.3 0 -0.3 -0.6 0.6 0.3 0 -0.3 Shikhkang (TCU068) EW Max=0.51G Shikhkang (TCU068) UD Max=0.53G -0.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 Time (s) (a) Shikhkang (TCU068) Taichung (TCU082) 0.3 NS Max=0.19G 0 -0.3 0.3 0 -0.3 0.3 0 -0.3 0.6 0.3 0 -0.3 -0.6 0.6 0.3 0 -0.3 -0.6 0.3 0 -0.3 Taichung (TCU082) EW Max=-0.23G Taichung (TCU082) UD Max=-0.13G 0 10 20 30 40 50 Time (s) (b) Taichung (TCU082) Nantou (TCU076) NS Max=0.43G Nantou (TCU076) EW Max=-0.35G 0 10 20 30 40 50 Time (s) (c) Nantou (TCU076) Fig.14 Ground Accelerations, Chi-Chi Earthquake Nantou (TCU076) UD Max=-0.28G longitudinal displacement d LG ≈-4.5m was shorter than the amount of above-mentioned southward 182
2 Acceleration (g) 1.5 1 0.5 NS EW UD Acceleration (g) Acceleration (g) Photo 16 Lateral Movement of A2 and P2, Bei-Fong Bridge 0 0 1 2 3 Period (sec) 4 5 θ V = tan −1 ( d V l ) (5) (a) Shikhkang (TCU068) 2 NS 1.5 EW UD 1 0.5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Period (sec) (b) Taichung (TCU082) 2 NS 1.5 EW UD 1 0.5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Period (sec) (c) Nantou (TCU076) Fig.15 Response Acceleration with 0.05 Damping Ratio, Chi-Chi Earthquake 1 ∆l = (1 − cosθ V ) cosθ V (4) dislodgment of D13 at the north end (6.6m), however they were not too much different. It is interesting to note that the vertical upheaval might not be a serious cause of the dislodgment of decks from their supports. If one idealizes the upheaval of the right substructure relative to the left as shown in Fig. 20, the shortening of span length resulting from the upheaval, ∆l , may be written as in which θ V is an angle of tilting, and is given as in which l is the span length and d V is the amplitude of relative upheaval between two substructures. Assuming ∆l ≈ 25m and d V ≈ 3m, one obtains θ V =6.8 degree and ∆l =0.18m. Consequently, shortening of the span length resulting from the upheaval was shorter than the seat length. Based on the above facts, it appears that the collapse of the bridge was resulted from a large tilting of P11 in north direction, which was caused by fault movement as shown in Fig. 21. D12 dislodged from P11 first at its north end, followed by the dislodgment at south end. This resulted in the complete collapse of D12. D12 finally felt down on the sidewall of P11 at north end with the clockwise rotation resulting from the right-lateral fault rupture. The collapse of P11 resulted in the dislodgment of D11 at its south end. The south end of D11 thus finally felt down on the north end of D12. Increased distance between P12 and A2 resulted in the collapse of D13. (3) Collapse of Wu-Shi Bridge Wu-Shi Bridge was of a northbound bridge (upstream, east) and a southbound bridge (downstream, west) as shown in Fig. 22. They were of 17-span simply supported PC beam girders. Bridge axis was N20E. The abutments, piers and decks are numbered herein from north to south, and the northbound and southbound bridges are identified by putting E and W, respectively. The northbound bridge was constructed in 1983, while the southbound bridge was newer than the northbound bridge. As shown in Photo 17, the northbound bridge was supported by 8.5m x 3m wall piers, while the southbound bridge was supported by 5m x 2m rectangular reinforced 183
Page 1 and 2: Seismic Fault-induced Failures, 171
Page 3 and 4: Photo 1 4.3m Offset of a Concrete F
Page 5 and 6: Fig.7 Section of Piers, Arifiye Ove
Page 7 and 8: Acceleration (g) Acceleration (g) A
Page 9 and 10: Photo 9 Bolu Viaduct Photo 10 Girde
Page 11: Root 1 Expressway Root 13 Root 3 Fe
Page 15 and 16: D13 D12 D11 D10 S N About 25m D1 P1
Page 17 and 18: North Side South Side Root 3 N60E
Page 19 and 20: 4) Bogazici University Kandilli Obs

Damage of Bridges Resulting from Surface Rupture of Faults in the ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?